Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
CPA2009-07001
C~ 2Q~-Q7QQ1 ' ~ ~''~ ~ ~~ ~ a . S o 88 - o AN ORDINANCE OF Ti"tE CITY OF C'LEAa-c`?/ATEU.. FLORIDA, MAi~ING A~ENDMEi~TTS TO THE COMPREHEI`TSI VE PLAN OF T~~E CITY AS . ~'_fOPTE:v 01_~ MAY 18, 2000 AND SU~SEc~LiEi~LY A_?~~E'NDED; EY AMENDiivG TI-IE ~:~~~I~ ~,.~ ~l~'~~'~~~''~•I~~~I~T~'~ ~~~l~~i~'~' ~~~~1 r • r-~ F ,~ ~~~ ~~~ r "~ _ T • - - • ~~~a~ ORDINANCE NO. 8088-09 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY AS ADOPTED ON MAY 18, 2000, AS SUBSEQUENTLY AMENDED, AMENDING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT, MAKING CORRECTIONS AND MODIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO THE UPDATED. SCHEDULE. OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER'S. FY2009/10 THROUGH FY2014/15 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET ADOPTED ON SEPTEMBER 17, 2009, AND UPDATING THE.REFERENCE IN POLICY 1.1:1.2 TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT'S FIVE-YEAR WORK PROGRAM FOR' FY2009/10 THROUGH 2013/14 AS ADOPTED BY THE .SCHOOL BOARD ON SEPTEMBER .15, 2009; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING ~. AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of Florida empowers and requires the City Council of the City of Clearwater to plan for the future development and growth : of the City, and to .adopt and periodically .amend the Comprehensive. Plan, including elements and portions thereof; and WHEREAS, the City of Clearwater adopted a Comprehensive Plan on May 18, 2000 by Ordinance Number 6522-00, subsequently amended;' and WHEREAS, certain amendments are. statutorily required, and others are advisable in order to harmonize the Comprehensive Plan with state law and good planning practice; and WHEREAS, amendments to the Comprehensive Plan of the City have been prepared in accordance with the applicable requirements of law, after conducting the appropriate planning analysis, and public participation through public hearings, opportunity for written comments, open discussion and the consideration of public and official comments; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Board, serving as ,the designa#ed Local Planning Agency for the City, has held a public hearing on the proposed amendments and has recommended adoption of the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments; and Ordinance No. 8088-09 i ~ WHEREAS, per provisions of Florida Statutes Chapter 163, it is necessary to annually adopt an ordinance amending and updating the Capital Improvements Element of the Comprehensive Plan to maintain a financially feasible minimum 5-year schedule of capital improvements consistent with the plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds it necessary, desirable and proper to adopt the amendments to the objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan in order to reflect changing conditions; now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER,.FLORIDA: Section 1. Amendments to the text of the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan attached hereto as Exhibit "A" are hereby adopted. Section 2. If any section, provision, clause, phrase; or application of this Ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional or ,invalid for any reason by a court. of competent jurisdiction; the remaining .provisions shall be deemed severable therefrom and shaA remain in full force and effect. Section 3. This ordinance. shall become effective when the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) .issues a final order determining the adopted amendment to be in compliance, or the Administration Commission issues .a final ostler determining the adopted amendments to. be in compliance, in accordance. with Section 163.3177, 163:3178, 163.3184, 16.3.3187, 163.3189 or 163.3.189 F.S., as amended. PASSED ON FIRST READING November 5, 2009 .PASSED ON SECOND AND FINAL November 17, 2009 READING AND ADOPTED ~_~,/..~c.~ Frank Hibbard - Mayor Approved as to form: Leslie K. D g II-Sides Assistant Ci ttomey Attest: 2 Ordinance No. 8088-09 . ORDINANCE 8088-09 EXHIBIT A AMENDMENT 1 -CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT SUMMARY Amend Capital Improvements Element Needs Summary of the Plan on Page I-1 as follows: Capital Improvements Element Needs Summary: . The following summarizes several . of the current capital improvement projects .and funding sources proposed for public. facilities supported in the other Com. prehensive Plan Elements and as specified ''in the City's six-year schedule of the Capifal Improvement Program (CIP}.that is .updated and adopted annually by the Gity Council: traveled Bayshore Boulevard. Funding is Penny .for Pinellas III. .. • The: City's Streets and `Sidewalks Program is currently budgeted- .for. $15.28342 million_on the six-year CIP.schedule with a funding source of road miilage: • The City proposes a total. of $43:845 444 million of improvements within the City's Storrnwater Infrastructure Program over the six-year CIP period. The' funding sources 'for this project are the Stormwater Fund and a future bond issue. • The $1.602 ,~ million: Commercial Container Acquisition CIP project is planned through Solid Waste funds. • The $19.627 X866 million Reclaimed Water Distribution System CIP project is being funded through: , $17.112 million from future bond. issue, $0.986 million 4~ from Sewer Revenue, and $1.529 million from Utility Renewal and Replacement. AMENDMENT 2 =CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES Amend Policy 1.1.1.2 of Objective 1.1.1 of Goal 1.1. on page I-2 as follows: **xx* 1.1.1.2 The City shall be permitted to amend the Schedule of Capital Improvements two times during any calendar year and as allowed for emergencies, developments of regional impact and certain small-scale development activities pursuant to Florida Statutes 163.3187. The annual update of the plan is hereby incorporated by reference and is located following policy 1.1.7.6 as the. FY2009/10 Annual Update to the Capital 3 Ordinance No. 8088-09 • r Improvements Element. ***** AMENDMENT 3 -CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES Amend Policy 1.1.7: 6 of Objective 1.1.7 of Goat I.1 on page l-~2 as follows: *,.,~* 1.1:7.6 The City hereby adopts. by reference the School. District's Five-Year. Work Program for FY 2009/10 €~98t~/A8 through 2.013/14 28~1~, as adopted by the School Board on September 15. 20098~9A6. AMENDMENT'4 -CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES Remove CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT SCHEDULE.!-A CAPITAL . IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FY2008/09 commencing on page I-12 and including Schedule l: A Pages 1-49 following page 1-12, and replace as follows: FY2009/10 ANNUAL UPDATE TO:THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT . The intent .of.this annual update is to evaluate capacity and demand for concurrence- approved and planned development over a 5-vear period. The City's Capital Improvement Program Budget FY2009/10 is used as the basis for this It PROJECTIONS The followin tcL ables provide the capacity and demand for each of the City's respective public facilities projected over the next 5 years. There are no projected deficiencies. Report is based on 2008 population: 110.831 Proiected 2018 population (Future Land Use Element): 120 028 SOLID WASTE: 4 Ordinance No. 8088-09 _ • • -- Current Capacity: 7.12 Ibs per capita per day Current Demand: 5.19 Ibs per capita per day ..Solid Waste LOS .Standard:.. 7..12 Ibs per capita . per . Current capacity":. .... Total Solid Waste capacity (in tons): 143;906 Pounds of Solid Waste per capita per day: 7'.12 Current demand:. Total Solid Waste Generated by the Citv in 2008 (in tons): 104;898 Current Pounds of Solid Waste per capita per day: 5:19 *The current capacity is based on the City's LOS standard: CaaacitY is actually POTABLE WATER: Current .Capacity: 25 MGD Current Demand: 12.2 MGD Fiscal Year Proiected Demand Proiected Capacity at Surplus (Deficit) max. End of FY min: 2009/10 12.0 MGD 25.0 MGD 13.0 MGD 2010/11 12.1 MGD 25.0 MGD 12.9 MGD 2011/12 12.1 MGD 25.0 MGD 12.9 MGD 2012/13 12.2 MGD 25.0 MGD 12.8 MGD 2013/14 12.2 MGD 25.0 MGD 12.8 MGD Totals 2013/14 12.2 MGD 25.0 MGD 12.8 MGD Fiscal Proiected Demand _Proiected Capacity at Surplus Year (Ibs per capita per da End of FY {Ibs per ca ita er da Deficit 2009!10 5.19 7.12 1.93 2010/11 5.19 7.12 1.93 2011 L12 5.19 7.12 1.93 2012!13 5.19 7.12 1.93 2013/14 5.19 7.12 1.93 Totals . 2013/14 5.19 7.12 1.93 MGD =million gallons per day: Projections as per the City's Water Master Plan 5 Ordinance No. 8088-09 of the land fill to the years 2085 to 2090. • Potable Water LOS Standard: 120 gallons per capita per dav Current capacfir: Total Potable Water Available per day in gallons: 25.000.000 (25.0 MGD) Gallons available per capita per day: 225.56 Current demand: Total Potable Water Consumption per day in gallons: 12,000,000 (12.0 MGD) Gallons consumed:per capita per dav: 108.27 STORM WATER: Current Capacity: 10-year LOS standard Current Demand: 10-year LOS standard Fiscal Year. Projected Demand Projected Ca pacity at Surplus (Deficit) End of FY 2009/10. 10-Year .LOS .Min 10-Year LOS Min N/A*. 20.10/11 10-Year LOS Min 10-Year LOS Min N/A* . 2011112 10-Year LOS Min 10-Year LOS Min N1A* 2012/13 10-Year.LOS Min 10-Year LOS Min N/A* 2013/14 10-Year. LOS Min 10-Year LOS. Min N/A* Totals 201.3/14 10-Year..LOS (Min) 10-Year. LOS- ( Min) N/A* Stormwater LOS Standard: . Design storm: 10-yeear storm frequency for all new street development using the rational design method Current Capacity: 10-year . LOS standard (Min.)* Current Demand: 10-year LOS . standard (Min.)* Total: 10-year _ LOS standard Min. *Stormwater management is reviewed on apermit-bv-permit basis. The City only approves if a proposed development meets the LOS standards for stormwater management facilities listed above. SANITARY SEWER: Current Capacity: 257 gallons per capita ger dav 6 Ordinance No. 8088-09 ~ • Current Demand: 127 gallons per capita per day Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Capacity at Surplus (Deficit) max. End of FY min. 2009/10 14.1 MGD 28.5 MGD 14.4 MGD 2010/11 14.2 MGD 28.5 MGD 14.3 MGD 2011/12 14.2 MGD 28.5 MGD 14.3 MGD 2012/13 14.3 MGD 28.5 MGD 14.2 MGD 2013/14 14.3 MGD 28.5 MGD 14.2 MGD Totals 2013/14 14.3 MGD 28.5 MGD 14.2 MGD. MGD =million gallons per..day; Projections as per the City's Water Pollution Control jWPC) Master Plan Sanitary Sewer LOS Standard: .. 127 gallons per capita per day 14 .Current Demand: 14.100.000 Gallons available per capita'per day 127.22 PARKLAND: Current Capacity: 13.31 acres per 1..000 people Current Demand: 4 acres per 1.000 people Fiscal Projected Demand Projected Capacity at . Su rplus (Deficit) Year max. End of FY min: 2009/10 4 er 1 000. 13.31 er 1 000 9.31 er 1 000 2010/11 4 er 1 000. 13.31 er 1 000 9.31 er 1 000 2011/12 4 er 1 000 13.31 er 1 000 9.31 er 1 000 2012/13 4 er 1 000 13.31 er 1 000 9.31 er 1 000 2013/14 4 er 1 000 13.31 er 1 000 9.3.1 er 1 000 Totals 4 er 1 000. 13.31 er 1 000 9.31 er 1 000 Parkland LOS Standard: 4 acres per 1.000 people Current capacity (Parkland Acres As of 05/13/09): 1.475 acres Ca)_ 13.31 per 1.000 eo le Current demand: 440 acres (a~ 4 per 1.000 people ep ople 7 Ordinance No. 8088-09 • ROADS: Add the following table • _ City Ten Year COrtioa Imprisve111e11t Plan FY 200&2018 Fv 2ooe-2o16 ~ r ~ ~ ~ ~ .. ~~ ~ _ ~~ ~ J ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ G' < }r~ ~ .~~ o~(~ Z $~ (~ ~ cp (7 8 ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ §§j4 O g ~ 11~~ ~ BAd Draw yt. San MaEro Rdootee R Sa 2,400 6 14,400 1440.000 2.0 '1,600 5/3,9]4 1.937 934 RY 11!12 C D C 1 Cart SEree1 IlUC Av Stnte 41.D b 6lD t' S0 21 30000 S 000 000 2.0 ~ 2 S00 267 674 3 974 FY 09/10 F D ~ D 2 Drt~rBted sAr. 4t.Ub4lD 1,690 6 10,140 1Q14,000 1.3 . 2,S3S 271.4 1,295,422 FY 10111 D 0 C 3 01uI6Rob Marti4on .5.19 Mna 1,600 /2 19,200 1920.000 1.0 1600 171111 091.911 FYtf/12 D 0 C 4 Areroe ~ Pt Union 3t ~ 2W p 2l0 2 670 ~ 6 ~. 16009 1602 000 1,0 2 670 205 6 1667 876 F1Y~ 14fl5 D :. D C T Ro4A FI Nrrhon WuaKi . 41U121. b 400 0 rwna 1.0 4,200 449 M9,693 iY 13114 D D C 6 ~Ar ~ 61 ' ~ Rd ~ ~ 2t.U b21D 10 SSO ~ 6 60 000 6110 OOD 1.0 10550 ~ 1 129 T 459 SOS FY 12!13. ~ D D ~ C S tow /6.s9s.49s jRemainderof pac Le is intentially left blank]' 8 Ordinance No. 8088-09 • -- FY2009110 Caaital Improvement Program Budgeted Expenditures and Revenues: Add the following table _... . CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009/10 I. _...:.. ... ......... ......__ _ .... ;:.. .:._.: ~_..__._ ...----_ _---...... .. . Budgeted....... ... - Revenues GENERAL SOURCES:. 2009/10 .. _. General Operating Revenue . 1',470,990 General Revenue/County Coop F---.._ ._.- ....-_._.. .... ----- ....-. _.. 635,310 . Road Millage ' . - 2,>j90,670 _.. ~,_ Penny toc Pinellas ...... _. . ___ .. 6,225,000 ;__Transportation impact Fee - 290,000 Local Option Gas Tax. __ - ... _ 1,720,000 - Special Development Fund _ 950,000 i Special Program Fund . ,_ , - . _. 30,000 Grants -Other Agencies 2,900,000 ` ~_, Donations ..---..;:_..900,000; ......:.. a_...~.__.,.. .:.. SELF SUPPORTING FUNDS: : Marine Revenue ,. ~... ... 50,p00 :Downtown Boat Sli s Revenue ..___._... - ----. F . ... .. .__ . 15,000 ~. Aviation Revenue .. 10,000 Parking Revenue 260,000 Utility System: __.^__ .:. . . Water Impact Fees ~ . _ ... 250,000 , Sewer Impact-Fees. 500,000 Utilit R 8~ R _..y_ ..... . . . . ....._....._ - _.. ..... ... .. - -- ; . 3,050,490 ._.. . StonnwaterUtility.Revenue ,_. .,..-- 5,652,800 Gas Revenue 5,340,000 Solid Waste Revenue 350,000 ;INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS: ..., . - ... . :Garage Revenue _ 119,400 Administrative Services Revenue ...... _ - 150,000 ;BORROWING - S0.F SUPPORTING FUNDS: Lease Purchase -Water 42,540 Lease Purchase - Stormwater .--- .. 300,000 . Lease Purchase -Solid Waste 170,000 ` Lease Purchase -Recycling 220,000 Bond Issue -Water & Sewer 15,665,240 /BORROWING -INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS: ._.._ Lease Purchase -Garage 2,312,300 :.Lease Purchase -Administrative Services 400,000 :TOTAL ALL FUNDING SOURCES: 652,069,740 9 Ordinance No. 8088-09 • _ r Add the following table r CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009110 _.. _.~.__. ................ __ Budgeted ____... ... _.__..---___-. Expenditures _ _ FUNCTION: . 2009110 -- - '. Police .Protection 150,000 Fire Protection -- --- . _ ^..- . 678,490 Major Street Maintenance ~ 3,645,670 Intersections 435,000 ~Paricing.._.._~_ ......_ __~__....... ~.. _ __ ' 250,000 . . -_ ~Misc Engineering ... : .....:.. .. 35,000.., .. ... ;Parks Development ~ 5, 837, 500 ;Marine Facilities; 4;315,000 Airparte Facilities 10,000 :Libraries 635, 310 :Garage . .. .. . .. 2, 716,700 . . . ;Maintenance ofBuildingsu 277,930 ;General Public City Building & Equipmerit - ,950;000, Miscellaneous 640,000 Stormwater Utility _. .. .....:.....:: .. ~ ~ 5,.945,000;..: . ;Gas System---. >_.:_:..::.:. _:. 5;310,000,. ~ : ;Solid Waste _ _ .. . ' S2A;000. ;Utilities Miscellaneous _ ... 26,000 ' Sewer S stem ... Y......:._ .:_.._...:. .. .. .. .. ~ 9,772,590 . Water S stem .. 9,699;550. . _ . - +Rec clip ;.... Y- -.. 9:. - - --.. . ,. 220, 000 L...._: _.. _. ~._.__... TOTAL PROJECT EXPENDITURES. ~ __.--- ... ._._._ _. -.._.__.....- X52,069,740 10 Ordinance No. 8088-09 s Add the following table f . _ ... CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM.D(PENDITURESOMMARY BY FUNCTION FY 2009-2010 THROUGH FY 20142015 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND _~...... CITY OF CLEARWATER Functlon 2009H0 2010H1. Z011H2 201?/13 2013H4 2014J15 Total , ~, , ~ --- ` 'Police Protection ~. l . .. _-----~- 150,000: --..._.. - .._ - 150 OOU -I. ' . ._ ~Fire Protection ~ 678,490 1,153,400 _..__ 1,089,490; - 2,515,270' - 4,244,860 - ~ 1,555,400 -- 11,236,910 ; _ 'New Street Construction ! " - i 2.500.000 , - _ . 2.500,000; . Major Street Maintenance 3,645,670' 3,497,430 _ 4,057,430+ _ 4,107,430! 4,107,430 ,... . 4,032,430: _ - .T 23 ,447,820; i Sidewalk and Bike Trails +; ' - 472,000' _ _.. _._.~ 472,000! krtersections .: l i . _ 435,000 .435,000 _ . :435,000' _ 435:000 435.000 435.000( _... _.. ... 2,610,000;;: ._... _ . .. ._ .. ;Parking _ ~ - - 250.000 _ . 225,000: .. 200,000. 200.000. 225.000. 225,000 _. ....1,325;000' i -1 ;Miscellaneous E. ineeri . ~ ~ ; 35.000 8.,035,000: 35.000 35.000 . - 35.000 35,000 8,210;000; . _. Parks De~eloprnent I 5.837,500 4,622,500 907,500 1,147,500 9,967,500. 982,500.. 23,465,000' (Marine Facilities• ~ ~- 4,315,000 ~ 275,000: 413;000 413,000. 413,000 413,000 6,242,000` Airpark Facilities 10,000 10,000; 10,000 .10,000 10,000 10,000 60,000 ' 'Libraries . 635,310': 635,310` 10,635,310 639,740. 665,310 685,270. 13,896,250 G _ ~....aro9?:. ___._.:..... --- - 2.716,7_00: .2,798,200 _ .. 2,882,150 .2,968,610 3,057,670 3,149,410 " 17,572,740 ~ Maintenance otBuiktings 277,930 299,800. 1,108,650 420,560. . .452,530; - 379,560:. --- " ~ 2,939,030 . -- ;Gen Public City Bldg 8 Equi. 950,000;.: ~ . ` . ~ 7,000,0001 7;950,000: ;Miscellaneous ~ 640,000; . _. _ 640,000' .620,000 5.420,000' .._. . 645,000 .. 645,000:.. 8.610,000; . i -.. ,r ~-~Stormwater Utility. - - ... :. _....~,. .5.945,000' __ 8,800,000. 7.200.000 7,100:000; _ 7,400,000 7,400,000; .......,._. , . ......_ 43,84b,000 j ' 'Gas.System = _ 5,310,000 5,600,000 _.. 5,800,000 6,100,000! 5;900,000' . 6,145,000: _ -.. . .34,855,000! '' Solid Waste .. i 520,000.. _:...595,000; 755,000 713,000 735,000 746,000; . 4,064,000: . Utilities Miscellarreoru j 26,000 30,000: 26.000. 26,000;. 30.000. 26,000 _»164,000:, .._ SeweiSystem -.._._'. - 9,772,590 ~ .~9,073,990 .12,108,380 7,351,3601 .:11,776,590 _25,617,4001 " - 75,700,310 ,. -- - WaterSystem ~ ._ 9,699,550_ _ 12,913,120 17,928,910. 18,125,340; 11;251,410 6,917,790 76,836,120. -" Recyclirg __..:_.... ".:_. ..__220,000' 290.000 290,000' 386,000 400,000: 410,0001.. ~ .....1.996,000 . _. . Total 52,069,740:. 59,926.,750 66,501,820 60,613,810: 61,751,300 67,281,7601 368,147,180' t Remove the entire CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT SCHEDULE I-A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM f=Y2008/09. Schedule I-A Pages 1-49 11 Ordinance No. 8088-09 • • ORDINANCE NO. 8088-09 4 I ~ ~ ,~~~ ~ ~ ~ t~ v AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY AS ADOPTED ON MAY 18, 2000, AS SUBSEQUENTLY AMENDED, AMENDING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT, MAKING CORRECTIONS AND MODIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO THE UPDATED SCHEDULE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER'S FY2009/10 THROUGH FY2014/15 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET ADOPTED ON SEPTEMBER 17, 2009, AND UPDATING THE REFERENCE IN POLICY 1.1.1.2 TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT'S FIVE-YEAR WORK PROGRAM FOR FY2009/10 THROUGH 2013!14 AS ADOPTED BY THE SCHOOL BOARD ON SEPTEMBER 15, 2009; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of Florida empowers and requires the City Council of the City of Clearwater to plan for the future development and growth of the City, and to adopt and periodically amend the Comprehensive Plan, including elements and portions thereof; and WHEREAS, the City of Clearwater adopted a Comprehensive Ptan on May 18, 2000 by Ordinance Number 6522-00, subsequently amended; and WHEREAS, certain amendments are statutorily required, and others are advisable in order to harmonize the Comprehensive Plan with state law and good planning practice; and WHEREAS, amendments to the Comprehensive Plan of the City have been prepared in accordance with the appiicabie requirements of taw, after conducting 'the appropriate pianning analysis, and public participation through public hearings, opportunity for written comments, open discussion and the consideration of public and official comments; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Board, serving as the designated Local Planning Agency for the City, has held a public hearing on the proposed amendments and has recommended adoption of the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments; and WHEREAS, per provisions of Florida Statutes Chapter 163, it is necessary to annually adopt an ordinance amending and updating the Capital Improvements Element of the Comprehensive Plan to maintain a financially feasible minimum 5-year schedule of capital improvements consistent with the plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds it necessary, desirable and proper to adopt the amendments to the objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan in order to reflect changing conditions; now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA: Section 1. Amendments to the text of the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan attached hereto as Exhibit "A" are hereby adopted. Page 1 Ordinance 8088-09 • :~ Section 2. If any section, provision, clause, phrase, or application of this Ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional or invalid for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions shall be deemed severable therefrom and shall remain in full force and effect. Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective when the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) issues a final order determining the adopted amendment to be in compliance, or the Administration Commission issues a final order determining the adopted amendments to be in compliance, in accordance with Section 163.3177, 163.3178, 163.3184, 163.3187, 1.63.3189 or 163.3189 F.S., as amended. PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING AND ADOPTED Approved as to form: Leslie K. Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney Page 2 Frank Hibbard Mayor-Councilmember Attest: Cynthia E. Goudeau City Clerk Ordinance 8058-09 • • ORDINANCE 8088-09 EXHIBIT A AMENDMENT 1 -CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT SUMMARY Amend Capital Improvements Element Needs Summary of the Plan on Page I-1 as follows: Capital Improvements Element Needs Summary: The following summarizes several of the current capital improvement projects and funding sources proposed for public facilities supported in the other Comprehensive- Plan Elements and as specified in the City's six-year schedule of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) that is updated and adopted annually by the City Council: The $2.5 million Bayshore Boulevard Realignment Project is planned in FY2012/13. This project will eliminate a dangerous curve just north of Drew Street on heavily traveled Bayshore Boulevard. Funding is Penny for Pinellas III. • The City's Streets and Sidewalks Program is currently budgeted for $15.2834-~2 million on the six-year CIP schedule with a funding source of road millage. • The City proposes a total of $43.845 48:44 million of improvements within the City's Stormwater Infrastructure Program over the six-year CIP period. The funding sources for this project are the Stormwater Fund and a future bond issue. • The $1.602 a-b-52 million Commercial Container Acquisition CIP project is planned through Solid Waste funds. • The $19.627 2~--966 million Reclaimed Water Distribution System CIP project is being funded through: , $17.112 a3-84~ million from future bond issue, $0.986 million 4:-8-3-8 from Sewer Revenue, and $1.529 million from Utility Renewal and Replacement. AMENDMENT 2 -CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES Amend Policy 1.1.1.2 of Objective 1.1.1 of Goal 1.1, on page I-2 as follows: ***** 1.1.1.2 The City shall be permitted to amend the Schedule of Capital Improvements two times during any calendar year and as allowed for emergencies, developments of regional impact and certain small-scale development activities pursuant to Florida Statutes 163.3187. The annual update of the plan is hereby incorporated by reference and is located following policy 1.1.7.6 as the FY2009/10 Annual Update to the Capital Improvements Element. T,--"~e-~c-h~d~l,~-af R~ irlno} is ir~r~nrnnrn}off nc Qnhoe-7i Flo I_4 of }hic (`~r~i}~I Imnrnvomon}c Glomon} test*** Page 1 Ordinance 3088-09 • • AMENDMENT 3 -CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES Amend Policy 1.1.7.6 of Objective 1.9.7 of Goal 1.1 on page 1-12 as follows: ***** 1.1.7.6 The City hereby adopts by reference the School District's Five-Year Work Program for FY 2009/10 F~~88S/93 through 2013/14 29-3, as adopted by the School Board on September 15, 2009 9983. AMENDMENT 4 -CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES Remove CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT SCHEDULE I-A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FY2008/09 commencing on page I-12 and including Schedule 1-A Pages 1-49 following page 1-12, and replace as follows: FY2009/10 ANNUAL UPDATE TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT The intent of this annual update is to evaluate capacity and demand for concurrency-related public facilities (solid waste potable water stormwater sanitary sewer parks and roads}, to determine that LOS standards are being met and that they will service approved and planned development over a 5-year period. The City's Capital Improvement Program Budget FY2009/10 is used as the basis for this update. It ensures that future public facility needs will be met based upon existing approved, and planned development that will require public services in the 5-year planning horizon. It summarizes the timing location and funding of capital improvement program construction projects to meet future ..i..i:_ t,.,,:l:a:..., ..t,.......,...,.1 ~.JU UIII. IAI.I II IICJ UCIIIQI IU. PROJECTIONS The following tables provide the capacity and demand for each of the City's respective public facilities projected over the next 5 years. There are no projected deficiencies. Report is based on 2008 population: 110,831 Projected 2018 population (Future Land Use Element): 120,028 SOLID WASTE: Current Capacity: 7.12 Ibs per capita per day Current Demand: 5.19 Ibs per capita per day Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Capacity at End of Sur lus Ibs er ca ita er da FY Ibs er ca ita er da Deficit 2009/10 5.19 7.12 1.93 2010/11 5.19 7.12 1.93 2011/12 5.19 7.12 1.93 2012/13 5.19 7.12 1.93 2013/14 5.19 7.12 1.93 Totals 2013/14 5.19 7.12 1.93 Page 2 Ordinance 80S8-09 • • Solid Waste LOS Standard: 7.12 Ibs per capita per day Current capacity": Total Solid Waste capacity (in tons): 143,906 Pounds of Solid Waste per capita per day: 7.12 Current demand: Total Solid Waste Generated by the City in 2008 (in tons): 104,898 Current Pounds of Solid Waste per capita per day: 5.19 "`The current capacity is based on the City's LOS standard. Capacity is actually greater since the City's Solid Waste Department is able to dispose of all waste produced within the city, as it works with Pinellas County on waste disposal. Garbage is taken to the Pinellas County Waste to Energy Plant where most is incinerated. Anv material that is not incinerated is "land filled". The most recent projections take the life of the land fill to the years 2085 to 2090 POTABLE WATER: Current Capacity: 25 MGD Current Demand: 12.2 MGD Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Capacity at End Surplus (Deficit) max. of FY min. 2009/10 12.0 MGD 25.0 MGD 13.0 MGD 2010/11 12.1 MGD 25.0 MGD 12.9 MGD 2011/12 12.1 MGD 25.0 MGD 12.9 MGD 2012/13 12.2 MGD 25.0 MGD 12.8 MGD 2013/14 12.2 MGD 25.0 MGD 12.8 MGD Totals 2013/14 12.2 MGD 25.0 MGD 12.8 MGD MGD =million gallons per day; Projections as per the City's Water Master Plan Potable Water LOS Standard: 120 gallons per capita per day Current capacity: Total Potable Water Available per day in gallons: 25,000,000 (25.0 MGD) Gallons available per capita per day: 225.56 Current demand: Total Potable Water Consumption per day in alb 12,000,000 (12.0 MGD) Gallons consumed per capita per day: 108.27 STORM WATER: Current Capacity: 10-year LOS standard Current Demand: 10-year LOS standard Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Ca pacity at End of Surplus (Deficit) FY 2009/10 10-Year LOS Min 10-Year LOS Min N/A` 2010/11 10-Year LOS Min 10-Year LOS ( Min) N/A* 2011/12 10-Year LOS Min 10-Year LOS Min N/A" 2012/13 10-Year LOS Min 10-Year LOS Min N/A" 2013!14 10-Year LOS Min 10-Year LOS Min N/A" Totals 20f 13/14) 10-Year LOS (Min) 10-Year LOS ( Min) N/A" Page 3 Ordinance 8088-09 • • Stormwater LOS Standard: Design storm: 10-year storm frequency for al( new street development using the rational design method Current Capacity 10-year LOS standard (Min.)* Current Demand 10-vear LOS standard (Min.)* Total 10-vear LOS standard (Min.)* `Stormwater management is reviewed on a permit-by-permit basis The City only approves if a proposed development meets the LOS standards for Stormwater management facilities listed above. SANITARY SEWER: Current Capacit~257 gallons per capita per day Current Demand: 127 gallons per capita per day Fiscal Year Proiected Demand Projected Capacity at End Surplus (Deficit) max. of FY (min.} 2009!10 14.1 MGD 28.5 MGD 14.4 MGD 2010/11 14.2 MGD 28.5 MGD 14.3 MGD 2011/12 14.2 MGD 28.5 MGD 14.3 MGD 2012/13 14.3 MGD 28.5 MGD 14.2 MGD 2013/14 14.3 MGD 28.5 MGD 14.2 MGD Totals 2013/14 14.3 MGD 28.5 MGD 14.2 MGD MGD =million gallons per day' Projections as per the City's Water Pollution Control (Wf'C) Master Dian Sanitary Sewer LOS Standard: 127 gallons per capita per day Current Capacity~in gallons): 28 500,000 Gallons available per capita per day 257.14 Current Demand 14,100,000 Gallons availabie per capita per day ~i 27.22 PARKLAND: Current Capacity: 13.31 acres per 1,000 people Current Demand: 4 acres per 1,000 people Fiscal Year Proiected Demand Protected Capacity at End Surplus (Deficit) max. of FY min. 2009/10 4 er 1 000 13.31 er 1 000 9.31 er 1 000 2010/11 4 er 1 000 13.31 er 1 000 9.31 er 1 000 2011 /12 4 er 1 000 13.31 er 1 000 9.31 er 1 000 2012/13 4 er 1 000 13.31 er 1 000 9.31 er 1 000 2013/14 4 er 1 000 13.31 er 1 000 9.31 er 1 000 Totals 4 er 1 000 13.31 er 1 000 9.31 er 1 000 Parkland LOS Standard: 4 acres per 1,000 people Current capacity (Parkland Acres As of 05/13/09) 1 475 acres ~ 13.31 per 1 000 people Current demand 440 acres ~ 4 per 1 000 people Total (Acres /Per Thousand People) 1 475 acres C~ 13.31 per 1,000 people Page 4 Ordinance 8088-09 • • ROADS: Add the following table ~~ yrty Ten Ye~rCCrrTldw Improvement Plan FY 2CElrs-201p FY ~0~-?Gi~ M E ~ r E ~ .-. ~ - y V a M o ~ Y a ~ ~ ~ a ~ o ;.. rr u v q ~ ~ a 0 C ~ ~ .. b~ .~ 4 q `. 3 J C C C U o ~ O ~ L O 7 a O O O c &°, sFioia; Etvd Drt`mrSt. San rista0 C6t r7GlOC&feR)O S81~1y 2,?GO ~ 5 i?,?Ob 1,4?0000 2.0 5,80u Si3,53? t.953 ~3- Ctn,~>t F`! 1ir12 C D ~ C Cvua St=sci A,hssawi :r.LR=.v S4a`.e 41.:D *a BLD u.ari*; 1;25Jj 2d '_•G,Gi~) 3~J<Y10^0 ;„ ~, ~OJ ,~. -r~r41 32e7.E7.: tUesian FY O'3,if0 - r D ~ D 2 Dr.rrStreet O.^.•C.r'Ol.r t,4~7ticNt Cpl d~l)f04LD Caurcit^ ;a90} 6 Ib,l?b 1.Oi~.bOb i.5 `c.5°s5 Zl,?22 1.285<22 Besian FYiCf11 D D ~ v 3 Pri¢then t+~rr, rJn.iARp~i FfllasrlsUn f).$.19 Cr L?nes ~~ CiT 1.6Cb ?2 tg.2bb 7.920.006 1.0 1.600 tT1.31t 2.091.3i1 6esi~n fYf1112 D D C d tir.~hl5nti ,vaerr.:? Srn=,rt F't Union St City 2Lll .a 2L'D "? ycis; 2,570 n if,C20 -i,60?.<000 'I.0 2,670 4 °'5 i,98T 87F D~esi n F6Y f d115 D D '' e e•.n?vr Raac1 F Nisri~;an. n#is::cwri Ca ~ btU~~laoFLC~ Grfrecif ?,rGS f ~ J ~ inr~r! 0 1.u L.20~5 aa9.691 de9;6?3 ~e;i:rn FY t3:rfd D D ~ C~ o !6= n p tCf h"en7 iiv Drew St i3elie~;r nd Ca 2l~U ;e 2lG Ca aci~• ir.,~0 7 53,3UG E,330.000 1.0 10,550 x,129,585 7:A5J,555 1?esin FY i2r13 G D C 5 -- --- Tar: 18:395 eat jRemainder of page is intentially left blankl Page 5 Ordinance 8088-09 FY2009/10 Capital Improvement Program Budgeted Expenditures and Revenues:- Add the following table CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009/10 Budgeted Revenues GENERAL SOURCES: 2009!10 General Operating Revenue 1,470,990 General Revenue/County Coop 635,310 Road Millage 2,090,670 Penny for Pinellas 6,225,000 Transportation Impact Fee 290,000 Local Option Gas Tax _. 1,720,000 Special Development Fund 950,000 Special Program Fund 30,000 Grants -Other Agencies 2,900,000 _ Donations 900,000 ... .... SELF SUPPORTING FUNDS: Marine Revenue 50,000. Downtown Boat Slips Revenue 15,000 Aviation Revenue 10,000 Parking Revenue 260,000 Utility System: Water Impact Fees 250,000 Sewer Impact Fees 500,000 iitiiii'y' R c°n R 3,050,490 Stormwater Utility Revenue 5,652,800 Gas Revenue 5,340,000 Solid Waste Revenue 350,000 INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS: Garage Revenue 119,400 Administrative Services Revenue 150,000 BORROWING -SELF SUPPORTING FUNDS: Lease Purchase -Water 42,540 Lease Purchase - Stormwater 300,000 __ Lease Purchase -Solid Waste 170,000: Lease Purchase -Recycling 220,000- Bond Issue -Water & Sewer 15,665,240 .BORROWING -INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS: _. _. Lease Purchase -Garage 2,312,300 Lease Purchase -Administrative Services 400,000 TOTAL ALL FUNDING SOURCES: $52,069,740 Page 6 Ordinance 8088-09 Add the following table CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009/10 FUNCTION: Budgeted Expenditures 2009/10 Police Protection Fire Protection Major Street Maintenance Intersections Parking Misc Engineering Parks De~,elopment Marine Facilities Airpark Facilities Libraries Garage Maintenance of Buildings General Public City Building & Equipment Miscellaneous Stormwater Utility Gas System Solid Waste Utilities Miscellaneous Sewer System Water System Recycling TOTAL I~ROJECT EXPENDITURES Page 7 150, 000 678,490 3,645,670 435, 000 250, 000 35, 000 5, 837, 500 4, 315, 000 10, 000 635, 310 2, 716, 700 277, 930 950, 000 640, 000. S, 945, 000. 5, 310, 000 520, 000 26, 000 9,772,590 9, 699, 550 220, 000 $52,069,740 Ordinance 3085-09 Add the following table _. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM EXPENDITURE SUMMARY BY FUNCTION FY 2009-2010 THROUGH FY 20142015 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND CITY OF CLEARWATER Schedule of Planned Expenditures Function 2009/10 2010111 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Total Police Protection Fire Protection New Street Construction Major Street Maintenance Sidewalk and Bike Trails Intersections Parking Miscellaneous Engineering -Parks De~,elopment Marine Facilities Airpark Facilities Libraries .Garage Maintenance of Buildings Gen Public City Bldg & Equip Miscellaneous Stormwater Utility -Gas System Solid Waste Utilities Miscellaneous Sewer System Water System Recycling Tota I 150,000 150,000 678,490 1,153,400. 1,089,490 2,515,270 4,244,860 1,555,400 11,236,910 2,500,000 2,500,000 3,645,670 3,497,430' 4,057,430 4,107,430 4,107,430 4,032,430 23,447,820 472,000 472,000 435,000 435,000- 435,000 435,000 435,000 435,000 2,610,000 250,000 225,000 200,000 200,000 225,000 225,000 1,325,000 35,000 8,035,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 8,210,000 5,837,500 4,622,500 _ __ 907,500 1,147,500 9,967,500 982,500 23,465,000 4,315,000 275,000 413,000- 413,000 413,000 413,000 6,242,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 60,000 635,310 635,310 10,635,310 639,740 665,310 685,270 13,896,250 2,716,700 2,798,200. __. 2,882,150': 2,968,610 3,057,670 3,149,410 17,572,740 277,930 299,800 1,108,650 420,560 452,530 379,560 2,939,030 950,000 7,000,000 7,950,000 640,000 640,000 620,000'. 5,420,000 645,000 645,000 8,610,000 5,945,000 8,800,000 7,200,000: 7,100,000 7,400,000 7,400,000 43,845,000 5,310,000 5,600,000' 5,800,000' 6,100,000 5,900,000 6,145,000 34,855,000 520,000 595,000 755,000' 713,000 735,000 746,000. 4,064,000 26,000 30,000': 26,000' 26,000 30,000 26,000 164,000 9,772,590 9,073,990' 12,108,380 7,351,360 11,776,590- 25,617,400 75,700,310 9,699,550 12,913,120' 17,928,910- 18,125,340 11,251,410 6,917,790 76,836,120 220,000 290,000 290,000'. 386,000 400,000 410,000 1,996,000 52,069,740 59,928,750 66,501,820 60,613,810 61,751,300 67,281,760 368,147,180 Remove the entire CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT SCHEDULE I-A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FY2008109, Schedule I-A Pages 1-49 Page 8 Ordinance 5033-09 .,~~... Ll. ~" O il. } ~ ~r~a e~ ~_ U CONSENT AGENDA COMMiJNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD Date: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 Time: 1:00 p.m. Place: 112 South Osceola Street, 3`a Floor, Clearwater, Florida, 33756 (City Hall Council Chambers) Revised 10/16/2009 Welcome the City of Clearwater Community Development Board (CDB) meeting. The City strongly supports and fully complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Please advise us at least 72 hours prior to the meeting if you require special accommodations. Assisted listening devices are available. An oath will be administered swearing in all participants in public hearing cases. If you wish to speak please wait to be recognized, then state and spell your name and provide your address. Persons speaking before the CDB shall be limited to three minutes unless an individual is representing a group in which case the Chairperson may authorize a reasonable amount of time up to 10 minutes. Kindly refrain from conducting private conversations, using beepers, cellular telephones, etc. as they are distracting during the meeting. Florida Statue 286.0105 states: Any person appealing a decision of this Board must have a record of the proceedings to support such appeal. Community Development Code Section 4- 206 requires that any person seeking to: personally testify, present evidence, argument and witness, cross-examine witnesses, appeal the decision and speak on reconsideration requests should request party status during the case discussion. Party status entitles parties to: personally testify, present evidence, argument and witnesses cross-examine witnesses, appeal the decision and speak on reconsideration requests. If you have questions or concerns about a case, please contact the staff presenter from the Planning Department listed at the end of each agenda item at 727-562-4567. www.myclearwater.com/gov/depts/planning Community Development Board Consent Agenda -October 20, 2009 -Page 1 of 4 A. CALL TO ORDER IlV~CATION PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE > > B. ROLL CALL: Chair Fritsch, Vice Chair Coates, Members Adelson, Barker, Behar, Dame, DiPolito, Alternate Member Carlough, City Staff C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING: September 15, 2009. D. CONSENT AGENDA: The following are not contested by the applicant, staff, neighboring pro erty owners, etc. and will be approved by a single vote at the beginning of the meeting (Items 1. Case: HIS2009-00001 - 401 Cleveland Street Level Three Application Owner/Applicant: City of Clearwater Agent: Ivan A. Rodriguez, Heisenbottle Architects, P.A. (2199 Ponce De Leon Blvd, Suite 400, Coral Gables, FL 33134; phone: 305-446-7799; fax: 305-446-9275). Location: 0.065 acres located on the southeast corner of Cleveland Street and Osceola Avenue. Atlas Page: 286B Zoning: Downtown (D) District. Request: Historic designation of 401 Cleveland Street (Parcel Number 16-29-15-20358-002-0071) under the provisions of Section 4-607.F. Existing Use: Office Neighborhood Association(s): Downtown Development Board, Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition. Presenter: Gina L. Clayton, Assistant Planning Director. 2. Case: HIS2009-00002 - 405 Cleveland Street Level Three Application Owner/Applicant: City of Clearwater Agent: Ivan A. Rodriguez, Heisenbottle Architects, P.A. (2199 Ponce De Leon Blvd, Suite 400, Coral Gables, FL 33134; phone: 305-446-7799; fax: 305-446-9275). Location: 0.1444 acres located on the south side of Cleveland Street approximately 50 feet east of Osceola Avenue. Atlas Page: 286B Zoning: Downtown (D) District. Request: Historic designation of 405 Cleveland Street (Parcel Number 16-29-15-20358-002-0070), under the provisions of Section 4-607.F Existing Use: Theater Neighborhood Association(s): Downtown Development Board, Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition. Presenter: Gina L. Clayton, Assistant Planning Director. 3. Case: LUZ2009-07002 - A Portion of 1980 Kings Highway, Level Three Application Owner/Applicant: Clearwater Village LLC/City of Clearwater Agent: Michael Delk, Community Development Coordinator (100 South Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756; phone: 727-562-4567). Location: 2.21 acres located on the west side of Kings Highway approximately 112 feet south of Woodlawn Terrace. Atlas Page: 251B. Zoning: Medium Density Residential (MDR) District. Request: Application from The City of Clearwater for Future Land Use Plan amendment approval for a portion of one parcel located at 1980 Kings Highway (Parcel Number 03-29-15-55548-000-0091), to add the Transportation/Utility Overlay and Drainage Feature Overlay categories to the existing Residential Medium (RM) land use. Type of Amendment: Small scale. Proposed Use: Vacant. Neighborhood Association(s): Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition. Presenter: Cate Lee, Planner II. Community Development Board Consent Agenda -October 20, 2009 -Page 2 of 4 ~ • 4. Case: TA2009-03006 Amendments to the Community Development Code and the Code of Ordinances Level Three Application Applicant: City of Clearwater, Planning Department. Request: Amendments to the Community Development Code and the Code of Ordinances to implement EAR-Based Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, to bring consistency between the Countywide Plan Rules and the Community Development Code, to increase the maximum height from 36 inches to 48 inches for non-opaque fences in waterfront yards, and to address other minor editorial changes. Neighborhood Association(s): Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition. Presenter: Sandra E. Herman, Planner III. 5. Case: CPA2009-07001 Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Level Three Application Applicant: City of Clearwater, Planning Department. Request: Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan to update the Capital Improvements Element consistent with the City's FY2009/10 CIP Budget and the reference to the School District's Five-Year Work Program of FY2009/10 through 2013/14 as proposed for adoption by the School Board on September 15, 2009. Type of Amendment: Separate submittal to State DCA - exempt from large-scale submittal process Neighborhood Association(s): Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition. Presenter: Sandra E. Herman, Planner III. E. LEVEL TWO APPLICATIONS (Items 1. Case: FLD2009-08024 - 25020 U.S. Highway 19 North Level Two Application Owner/Applicant: U. S. 19 Group, LLC; Linda P. Windham. Agent: Kelly Puttonen, Rent First Realty Inc. (P.O. Box 272670, Tampa, FL 33688-2670; phone: 813- 629-0255). Location: 1.58 acres located on the west side of U.S. Highway 19 North approximately 3,100 feet north of the intersection of Sunset Point Road and U.S. Highway 19 North. Atlas Page: 243B. Zoning: Commercial (C) District. Request: Flexible Development approval to permit a change of use from retail sales and services to animal grooming and boarding within the Commercial (C) District within an existing 18,022 square foot shopping center with 82 off-street parking spaces and no changes to the building height, structure setbacks or building, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Community Development Code Section 2-704.C. Proposed Use: Animal Grooming and Boarding. Neighborhood Association(s): Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition. Presenter: A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III. 2. Case: FLD2009-08025 - 490 Mandalay Avenue Level Two Application Owner/Applicant: Mary G. Realty, Inc; North Beach Wine & Spirits, Inc. Agent: Katherine Cole, Esq., Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LLP. (911 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, FL 33756; phone: 727-461-1818). Location: 0.40 acres located at the southwest corner of Mandalay Avenue and Baymont Street. Atlas Page: 267A. Zoning: Tourist (T) District. Request: Flexible Development approval to permit a change of use from restaurant to alcoholic beverage sales within the Tourist (T) District within an existing 6,254 square foot shopping center with 26 off-street parking spaces and no changes to the building height, structure setbacks, or building as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Community Development Code Section 2-803.C. Community Development Board Consent Agenda -October 20, 2009 -Page 3 of 4 Pro osed Use: Alcoholic Bevera a Sales. P g ' Neighborhood Association(s): Clearwater Coalition. Presenter: A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III. F. CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL (Item 1): • Beach Association and Clearwater Neighborhoods 1. Case: APP2009-00006 - 2325 Stag Run Blvd Owner/Appellant: Gerald Mitchell (2325 Stag Run Blvd, Clearwater, FL 33765; phone: 727-724- 6453). Location: 0.234 acres located on the southeast side of Stag Run Boulevard, approximately 670 feet southwest of Wetherington Road. Atlas Page: 272A. Zoning: Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District. Request: An appeal from a Level One (Tree Removal Permit) denial decision pursuant to Community Development Code Section 4-SO1.A.4, that a request to remove one laurel oak tree in conjunction with the construction of a swimming pool and deck does not meet the removal criteria set forth in Community Development Code Section 3-1205 B.2.a. Existing Use: Detached Dwelling. Neighborhood Association(s): Coachman Ridge Homeowners and Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition. Presenter: Richard J. Albee, Land Resource Specialist. G. DIRECTOR'S ITEMS: (Items 1 - 2): 1. Time Extension - FLD2007-06024 - 1200 Rogers Street 2. Holiday Luncheon H. ADJOURNMENT S: (Planning DepartmentlC D B1Agendas DRC & CDBICDB12009V 0 October 20, 20091CDB Consent Agenda October 20, 2009.docx Community Development Board Consent Agenda -October 20, 2009 -Page 4 of 4 • CPA2009-07001 • Ordinance number: 8088-09 Agenda item: E-2 • • CDB Meeting Date Case #: Ordinance #: Agenda Item: October 20, 2009 CPA2009-07001 8088-09 E.2 CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS REQUEST: Clearwater Comprehensive Plan Amendments related to the 2009 Annual Update to the Capital Improvements Element (CIE) referencing the City's adopted FY09/10 Capital Improvement Program Budget and the School District's adopted Five-Year Work Program of FY2009/10 through 2013/14. INITIATED BY: City of Clearwater Planning Department TYPE OF AMENDMENT: Large-scale -Exempt BACKGROUND INFORMATION: This item involves amendments to the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan to update the Capital Improvements Element (CIE) related to the City's adopted F Y09/10 Capital Improvement Program Budget as well as the School District's Five-Year Work Program of FY2009/10 through 2013/14. These amendments are made annually pursuant to Florida Statutes. The fundamental purpose of the Capital Improvements Element is to ensure that the City is able to fund the public facilities supported in the Comprehensive Plan Elements. These amendments bring the comprehensive plan into alignment with the City's Six-Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Budget. By Statute, these amendments are due by December 1 each year, are exempt from the twice-a-year limitation for large-scale amendments and require transmittal to the State Department of Community Affairs (DCA). ANALYSIS: The four proposed amendments are refinements to existing needs summary, schedule and policies contained in the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan which are made pursuant to Florida Statutes (F.S.) Section 163.3177(2), Section 163.3177(3)(b) 1., and Florida Administrative Code section 9J-5.011. The most important change is the replacement of "Schedule 1-A" with "FY2009/10 Annual Update to the Capital Improvements Element". This change adds information required by the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA), including adopted Level of Service standards (LOS), capacity and demand of public facilities subject to concurrency. Page - 1 CPA2009-07001 ~ • The proposed amendments are: Amendments -CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT: (pages are given from Comprehensive Plan): • Capital Improvements Element Needs Summary (page I-1): Updates examples of CIP projects to reflect the FY 2009/10 CIP Budget adopted by Ordinance No. 8101-09 on September 17, 2009. • Policy I.1.1.2 (page I-2): Updates terminology referencing the annual update from FY2008/09 Capital Improvement Program Budget to FY2009/10 Annual Update to the Capital Improvements Element. • Policy I.1.7.6 (page I-12): Changes dates to reflect current year relative to the School District's Five-Year Work Program. • FY2008/09 CIE Schedule I-A (Schedule 1-A Pages 1 - 49): Deletes FY2008/09 CIE Schedule I-A, Pages 1 through 49 and replaces it with FY2009/10 Annual Update to the Capital Improvements Element. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW Pursuant to Community Development Code Section 4-603(F) no amendment to the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan shall be approved unless it complies with the following standards: 1. The amendments will further implementation of the comprehensive plan consistent with the og als, policies and objectives contained in the plan. The proposed amendments to the Capital Improvements Element of the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan are consistent with and will further the implementation of the goals, objectives, and policies (GOPs) in the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan by ensuring that statutory requirements are reflected in the Capital Improvements Element. 2. The amendments are not inconsistent with other provisions of the comprehensive plan. The proposed amendments are consistent with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. They update the CIE to reflect changes in the City's six-year CIP which are supported in other elements of the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The available uses if applicable to which the property may be put are appropriate to the propert} in questions and compatible with existing and planned uses in the area. Page - 2 CPA2009-07001 • • The proposed amendments are text amendments that are not directly related to a specific property. 4. Sufficient public facilities are available to serve the property. The proposed amendments are text amendments that are not directly related to a specific property. 5. The amendments will not adversely affect the natural environment. The proposed amendments seek to provide consistent and coordinated efforts pursuant to the City's CIP projects as identified within the elements of the City's Comprehensive Plan. No projects adversely affect the natural environment, while some projects positively affect it. An example of the latter is the CIP project for the Reclaimed Water Distribution System. 6. The amendments will not adverselyimpact the use of property in the immediate area. The proposed amendments are text amendments that are not directly related to a specific property. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The proposed text amendments meet state statutes and rules by making corrections and modifications to the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan Capital Improvements Element. These amendments are made pursuant to the City of Clearwater's FY2009/10 through FY2014/15 Capital Improvement Program Budget (adopted on September 17, 2009) and the Pinellas County School District's Five-Year Work Program FY2009/10 through 2013/14 (adopted by the School Board on September 15, 2009). The Planning Department recommends APPROVAL of Ordinance No. 8088-09 that amends the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan. Prepared by Planning Department Staff: ~~. Sandra E. Herman Planner III ATTACHMENT: Ordinance No. 8088-09 Page - 3 CPA2009-07001 • • RESUME SANDRA E. HERMAN Telephone: (727) 562-4586 I00 South Myrtle Avenue sandra.herman cr mYclearwater.com Clearwater, FL 33756 PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE City of Clearwater -January 1986 to Present (Starting from current position) Planner III -Planning Department • Primary responsibilities: Advanced professional level planning work of a difficult and responsible nature in connection with growth and orderly development of the City in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan and other statutes, ordinances and regulations related to land use. Administrative Sacpport Manager (previoacsly titled Special Projects Manager) -Development and Neighborhood Services Department • Primary responsibilities: Annual Department Budget -research for initiatives proposals, preparation and maintenance of the Budget for the department under the approval of the department director - FY07 $4.136M Budget / 54.5 FTE's / $4.046 Revenues Projected; Primary supervision of administrative support employees and their priorities including all financial work for the department, payroll, customer service, code enforcement casework input into the Tidemark Permit Plan system, and all other administrative support functions; Backup for the director and other managers in the supervision of department employees, and attendance in city meetings; Preparation and submittal of all City Council Agenda Items for the department; and special projects such as the City's Development Guides -Residential and Commercial (initial research, meetings, preparation, distribution -hard copy books, CD's and on the Internet, and periodic updates). Planning Administrator /Assistant to the Department Head - Central Permitting Department (included Planning and Development Services) • Primary responsibilities: Assistant to the Department Head: Directing and supervising planners, zoning staff, and staff assistants involved with all planning functions -current and long range, including development plans in accordance with the land development regulations and the City's Comprehensive Land Use Plan; preparation of reports and agencies including the City Commission, Planning and Zoning Board, Development Code Adjustment Board, Pinellas Planning Council, Countywide Planning AuthorityBoard of County Commissioners, the State Department of Community Affairs and the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council. Member of the administrative team for large redevelopments including the "Sunshine Mall" project. Coordinator for development reviews, working closely with developers, attorneys, architects, engineers and citizen groups. Permits Manager -Central Permitting Department (included Planning and Development Services) • Primary responsibilities: Supervision of permits counter staff working with occupational licenses and building permits; lead planner for the State mandated Occupational License Equity Commission project -successfully increasing occupational license fees and revenues • • by 10% ($140,000); supervision of planning staff and functions as listed above. Report preparation and presentation of cases to the City Commission and advisory boards. Senior Planner -Planning and Development Department • Primar~re~onsibilities: Lead planner for the City in the 5-year Countywide Pinellas Planning Council Land Use Plan Consistency Program, and City representative and Chairperson for the Pinellas Planning Council's Planners Advisory Committee. Report preparation and presentations to the City Commission and advisory boards. Development Planner II -Planning and Urban Redevelopment Department • Primary responsibilities: Lead planner responsible for site plan reviews and subdivision plat reviews. Worked closely with applicants, attorneys, engineers and architects. Report preparation and presentation of cases to the City Commission and advisory boards. City of St. Petersburg -October 1974 -January 1986 Planner II -Planning Department • Primary responsibilities: Lead planner responsible for site plan reviews, special exceptions, and subdivision plat reviews. Worked closely with applicants, attorneys, engineers and architects. Report preparation and presentation of cases to the City's Environmental Development Commission and the City Council. Planner I -Planning Department • Primary responsibilities: Provide information and interpretation on zoning code regulations to developers, architects, attorneys, and the general public; preparation of notices for public hearings; and preparation of reports for vacations of rights-of--way and minor adjustments to ciihrliViS?On plate. Draftsman -Traffic Engineering Department • Primary responsibilities: Engineering drafting of street and intersection plans in coordination with state and county plans, and graphic presentations for Traffic Engineering projects. EDUCATION Bachelor of Science, Visual Arts /Communications, Florida State University, 1974 Associate of Arts, St. Petersburg Junior College, 1972 PROFESSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS Florida Planning and Zoning Association, Inc. since 1982 American Planning Association, since 1986 • • ORDINANCE NO. 8088-09 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY AS ADOPTED ON MAY 18, 2000, AS SUBSEQUENTLY AMENDED, AMENDING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT, MAKING CORRECTIONS AND MODIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO THE UPDATED SCHEDULE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER'S FY2009/10 THROUGH FY2014/15 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET ADOPTED ON SEPTEMBER 17, 2009, AND UPDATING THE REFERENCE IN POLICY 1.1.1.2 TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT'S FIVE-YEAR WORK PROGRAM FOR FY2009/10 THROUGH 2013/14 AS ADOPTED BY THE SCHOOL BOARD ON SEPTEMBER 15, 2009; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of Florida empowers and requires the City Council of the City of Clearwater to plan for the future development and growth of the City, and to adopt and periodically amend the Comprehensive Plan, including elements and portions thereof; and WHEREAS, the City of Clearwater adopted a Comprehensive Plan on May 18, 2000 by Ordinance Number 6522-00, subsequently amended; and WHEREAS, certain amendments are statutorily required, and others are advisable in order to harmonize the Comprehensive Plan with state law and good planning practice; and WHEREAS, amendments to the Comprehensive Plan of the City have been prepared in accordance with the applicable requirements of law, after conducting the appropriate planning analysis, and public participation through public hearings, opportunity for written comments, open discussion and the consideration of public and official comments; and WHEREAS, the Community Development Board, serving as the designated Local Planning Agency for the City, has held a public hearing on the proposed amendments and has recommended adoption of the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments; and WHEREAS, per provisions of Florida Statutes Chapter 163, it is necessary to annually adopt an ordinance amending and updating the Capital Improvements Element of the Comprehensive Plan to maintain a financially feasible minimum 5-year schedule of capital improvements consistent with the plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds it necessary, desirable and proper to adopt the amendments to the objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan in order to reflect changing conditions; now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA: Section 1. Amendments to the text of the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan attached hereto as Exhibit "A" are hereby adopted. Page 1 Ordinance 8088-09 • • Section 2. If any section, provision, clause, phrase, or application of this Ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional or invalid for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions shall be deemed severable therefrom and shall remain in full force and effect. Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective when the Department of Community Affairs (DCA} issues a final order determining the adopted amendment to be in compliance, or the Administration Commission issues a final order determining the adopted amendments to be in compliance, in accordance with Section 163.3177, 163.3178, 163.3184, 163.3187, 1.63.3189 or 163.3189 F.S., as amended. PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED ON SECOND AND FINAL READING AND ADOPTED Approved as to form: Leslie K. Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney Frank Hibbard Mayor-Councilmember Attest: Cynthia E. Goudeau City Clerk Page 2 Ordinance 8088-09 • • ORDINANCE 8088-09 EXHIBIT A AMENDMENT 1 -CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT SUMMARY Amend Capital Improvements Element Needs Summary of the Plan on Page I-1 as follows: Capital Improvements Element Needs Summary: The following summarizes several of the current capital improvement projects and funding sources proposed for public facilities supported in the other Comprehensive Plan Elements and as specified in the City's six-year schedule of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) that is updated and adopted annually by the City Council: The $2.5 million Bayshore Boulevard Realignment Project is planned in FY2012/13. This project will eliminate a dangerous curve lust north of Drew Street on heavily traveled Bayshore Boulevard. Funding is Penny for Pinellas III. TT"n Q~ ~~ million n.,,i,~ on-„~ • The City's Streets and Sidewalks Program is currently budgeted for $15.283472 million on the six-year CIP schedule with a funding source of road millage. • The City proposes a total of $43.845 48:+44 million of improvements within the City's Stormwater Infrastructure Program over the six-year CIP period. The funding sources for this project are the Stormwater Fund and a future bond issue. • The $1.602 a-~5i~ million Commercial Container Acquisition CIP project is planned through Solid Waste funds. • The $19.627 ~1-A~f million Reclaimed Water Distribution System CIP project is being funded through: , $17.112 43:~ million from future bond issue, $0.986 million 4:-83 from Sewer Revenue, and $1.529 million from Utility Renewal and Replacement. AMENDMENT 2 -CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES Amend Policy 1.1.?.2 of Objective 1.1.1 of Goal 1.1. on page /-2 as follows: ***** 1.1.1.2 The City shall be permitted to amend the Schedule of Capital Improvements two times during any calendar year and as allowed for emergencies, developments of regional impact and certain small-scale development activities pursuant to Florida Statutes 163.3187. The annual update of the plan is hereby incorporated by reference and is located following policy 1.1.7.6 as the FY2009/10 Annual Update to the Capital Improvements Element. T"° °^"°~'~ ~'° ^{ ***** Page 1 Ordinance 8088-09 • • AMENDMENT 3 -CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES Amend Policy 1.?.7.6 of Objective 1.1.7 of Goal l.? on page I-12 as follows: ***** 1.1.7.6 The City hereby adopts by reference the School District's Five-Year Work Program for FY 2009/10 €~88~/99 through 2013/14 28~-2~, as adopted by the School Board on September 15, 2009 X998. AMENDMENT 4 -CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES Remove CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT SCHEDULE l-A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FY2008/09 commencing on page 1-12 and including Schedule l-A Pages 1-49 following page 1-12, and replace as follows: FY2009/10 ANNUAL UPDATE TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT The intent of this annual update is to evaluate capacity and demand for concurrence-related public facilities (solid waste, potable water, stormwater, sanitary sewer, parks and roads), to determine that LOS standards are being met and that they will service approved and planned development over a 5-year period. The City's Caoital Improvement Program Budget FY2009/10 is used as the basis for this update It ensures that future public facility needs will be met based upon existing, approved, and planned development that will require public services in the 5-year planning horizon. It summarizes the timina. location and fundina of capital improvement program construction projects to meet future ublic facilities demand PROJECTIONS The following tables provide the capacity and demand for each of the City's respective public facilities projected over the next 5 years. There are no projected deficiencies. Report is based on 2008 population: 110,831 Projected 2018 population (Future Land Use Element): 120,028 SOLID WASTE: Current Capacity: 7.12 Ibs per capita per day Current Demand: 5.19 Ibs per capita per day Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Capacity at End of Sur lus Ibs er ca ita er da FY Ibs er ca ita er da Deficit 2009/10 5.19 7.12 1.93 2010/11 5.19 7.12 1.93 2011/12 5.19 7.12 1.93 2012/13 5.19 7.12 1.93 2013/14 5.19 7.12 1.93 Totals 2013/14 5.19 7.12 1.93 Page 2 Ordinance 8088-09 • • Solid Waste LOS Standard: 7.12 Ibs per capita per day Current capacity": Total Solid Waste capacity din tons): 143,906 Pounds of Solid Waste per capita per day: 7.12 Current demand: Total Solid Waste Generated by the City in 2008 (in tons): 104,898 Current Pounds of Solid Waste per capita per day: 5.19 "The current capacity is based on the City's LOS standard. Capacity is actually greater since the City's Solid Waste Department is able to dispose of all waste produced within the city, as it works with Pinellas County on waste disposal. Garbage is taken to the Pinellas County Waste to Energy Plant where most is incinerated. Anv material that is not incinerated is "land filled". The most recent proiections take the life of the land fill to the years 2085 to 2090 POTABLE WATER: Current Capacity: 25 MGD Current Demand: 12.2 MGD Fiscal Year Proiected Demand Proiected Capacity at End Surplus (Deficit) max. of FY min. 2009/10 12.0 MGD 25.0 MGD 13.0 MGD 2010/11 12.1 MGD 25.0 MGD 12.9 MGD 2011/12 12.1 MGD 25.0 MGD 12.9 MGD 2012/13 12.2 MGD 25.0 MGD 12.8 MGD 2013/14 12.2 MGD 25.0 MGD 12.8 MGD Totals 2013/14 12.2 MGD 25.0 MGD 12.8 MGD MGD =million gallons per day; Projections as per the City's Water Master Plan Potable Water LOS Standard: 120 gallons per capita per day Current capacity: Total Potable Water Available per day in gallons: 25,000,000 (25.0 MGD) Gallons available per capita per day: 225.56 Current demand: Total Potable Water Consumption per day in gallons: 12000,000 (12.0 MGD) Gallons consumed per capita per da rL: 108.27 STORM WATER: Current Capacity: 10-year LOS standard Current Demand: 10-year LOS standard Fiscal Year Proiected Demand Proiected Capacity at End of Surplus (Deficit) FY 2009/10 10-Year LOS Min 10-Year LOS Min N/A"' 2010/11 10-Year LOS Min 10-Year LOS Min N/A* 2011/12 10-Year LOS Min 10-Year LOS Min N/A* 2012/13 10-Year LOS Min 10-Year LOS Min N/A"` 2013!14 10-Year LOS Min 10-Year LOS Min N/A* Totals 2013/14 10-Year LOS (Min) 10-Year LOS (Min) N/A' Page 3 Ordinance 8088-09 • • Stormwater LOS Standard: Design storm: 10-vear storm freauency for all new street development using the rational design method Current Capacity: 10-vear LOS standard (Min.)" Current Demand: 10-year LOS standard (Min.)" Total: 10-vear LOS standard (Min.)' 'Stormwater management is reviewed on a permit-by_permit basis. The City only approves if a proposed development meets the LOS standards for Stormwater management facilities listed above. SANITARY SEWER: Current Capacity: 257 gallons per capita per day Current Demand: 127 gallons per capita per day Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Capacity at End Surplus (Deficit) max. of FY min. 2009/10 14.1 MGD 28.5 MGD 14.4 MGD 2010/11 14.2 MGD 28.5 MGD 14.3 MGD 2011/12 14.2 MGD 28.5 MGD 14.3 MGD 2012/13 14.3 MGD 28.5 MGD 14.2 MGD 2013/14 14.3 MGD 28.5 MGD 14.2 MGD Totals 2013/14 14.3 MGD 28.5 MGD 14.2 MGD MGD =million gallons per day; Projections as per the City's Water Pollution Control (WPC) Master Plan Sanitary Sewer LOS Standard: 127 gallons per capita per daY Current Capacity (in gallons): 28,500,000 Gallons available per capita per day 257.14 Current Demand: 14,100,000 Gallons available per capita per day 127.22 PARKLAND: Current Capacity: 13.31 acres per 1,000 people Current Demand: 4 acres per 1,000 people Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Capacity at End Surplus (Deficit) max. of FY min. 2009/10 4 er 1 000 13.31 er 1 000 9.31 er 1 000 2010/11 4 er 1 000 13.31 er 1 000 9.31 er 1 000 2011/12 4 er 1 000 13.31 er 1 000 9.31 er 1 000 2012/13 4 er 1 000 13.31 er 1 000 9.31 er 1 000 2013/14 4 er 1 000 13.31 er 1 000 9.31 er 1 000 Totals 4 er 1 000 13.31 er 1 000 9.31 er 1 000 Parkland LOS Standard: 4 acres per 1,000 people Current capacity (Parkland Acres As of 05/13/09): 1,475 acres ra'~. 13.31 per 1,000 people Current demand: 440 acres c(D. 4 per 1,000 people Total jAcres /Per Thousand People): 1,475 acres ~ 13.31 per 1,000 people Page 4 Ordinance 8088-09 • ROADS: Add the foilowing table • City Ten Year Corridor Irrtprgvament PEan FY 2008,2!118 _.. ~ 2g48ao18 ` ~ ~p a~ 4C ,.a. ~ L } ~ ,_ d " ~ ~ O «~ M~ ~ _ N N C ~ ~ 1 fy E ~ a a c a mti mac ~ V Et a e~' ~~ 'w t4 ~ e ~ $ ~` t- ~ n~ n~ d~ ro~~ ~zaw ~ ~~ b~ aV 3 ~ ra ~ ~ ~ . ~ sts~se @N6 Dtew 5t. 6a~ M1,1lafeo Ca Relaeate Rao &ate 2,4LM1 6 i 4 4qq 1,440.OOD 2:0 4,840 513 a34 1.953.934 C~ns1 F'! 11r12 C D C 1 Gour[Street Flissnuri t.51XAa Stake 4LDio8Lt7 Ca cia I2~`E 24 30,C2nG 3.Ogfl,OGO 2.0 3:00 26i,6iA 3,2€i;674 Desi n FY0~10 F D D 2 grewr Street Osceola ) rtie Av Ci 4t.V to dtD Ca ei. 1,640 6 t 0,idq 1.014,1700 '1:5 2,535 271 472 1.285:422 DesiAr~ fY t0r11 D D C 3 eriglheri t:~m DruidRnad F111a£risun US. 19 C>. !arses Ca cIP 1,600 12 t9.20G 1,920:000 1.0 1.600 171,311 2.091,311 D2sion FYl1f12 D D C 4 Highi5t~i1 Avam:e ~ ~~ Surwe Rt LEnion St C` ' 2t,U to?.LA __ Ca zsci, 2,fi70 6 76 62G 1,642;400 __ 1 0 7.,670 235,376 1,847,8'8 Deli F1Y 1d115 D D C 7 evsavr Read Fd Htsrrisai p43ssaurf Ci 4CUs~L 10 2LD C~ tscil 4,20~J 0 {nes?e7 0 1.0 4.200 49,643 449,643 I1esi :i FY t1ti4 D D C 6 :. rt It i f i4fl Av Drevf St 8etfeair Rd Ca 2Lt3 to 2t.~3 Ca cia • tG 550 5 63 3a~0 fi 334,000 1.0 1G,550 1,128 X85 7.4`9,585 £lesi FY i 2ri3 D D C 5 Totat 18,395.495 LRemainder of page is intentially left blank! Page 5 Ordinance 8088-09 • • FY2009/10 Capital Improvement Program Budgeted Expenditures and Revenues: Add the following table 1, 470, 990' 635, 310'. _Y 2, 090, 670 _.~_ 6,225, 000 .............................................._...: 290, 000' ~_.__.., 1, 720, 000 __ _ _ 950, 000: 30,000;. _ .._ 2,900,000; 900, 000 ._ _. _.._. .~.__.__ _...~.~ , .. ~ _ SELF SUPPORTING FUNDS: m ._...__. Marine Revenue 50,000'; _ __ _ __ Downtown Boat Slips Revenue _.... 15,000': .. _..._... .... .. __m _..._...___ Aviation Revenue 10,000: __._ Parking Revenue 260,000' Utility System: ____ Water Impact Fees 250,000 Sewer Impact Fees 500,000- Utility R & R 3,050,490' Stormwater Utility Revenue 5,652,800- Gas Revenue 5,340,000 ___ Solid Waste Revenue 350,000 'INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS: _ Garage Revenue ~ 119,400' ._ Administrative Services Revenue 150,000' :BORROWING -SELF SUPPORTING FUNDS: ___ Lease Purchase -Water 42,540 Lease Purchase - Stormwater ~ 300,000: _. Lease Purchase -Solid Waste 170,000: . . ._; _...._____..~ _.. ..,_.._ . y 9 _..__._m.. _, _____.___ _ Lease Purchase - Rec clin __ ._____ ~_~__ ~.~ 220,000: Bond Issue -Water & Sewer 15,665,240: BORROWING -INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS: Lease Purchase -Garage 2,312,300! Lease Purchase -Administrative Services 400,000' TOTAL ALL FUNDING SOURCES: $52,069,740!. Page 6 Ordinance 8088-09 • • Add the following table __ CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009/10 _______.~. ~~_ Budgeted _ ... Expenditures FUNCTION: 2009/10 _ Police Protection 150,000 Fire Protection 678,490 _..... _ Major Street Maintenance 3,645,670 Intersections 435, 000 _ _._ _ __ _ 'Parking Misc Engineering .Parks Development :Marine Facilities Airpark Facilities Libraries ~ ~. ~~ __ Garage Maintenance of Buildings _. . General Public City Building & Equipment .Miscellaneous _._.. __ 'Stormwater Utility _____ Gas System Solid Waste Yi4rvm~ ~ - ___.~__ __ Utilities Miscellaneous Sewer System ., ___..~ Water System Recycling TOTAL PROJECT EXPENDITURES Page 7 $52,069,740 Ordinance 8088-09 Add the following table __.... __ _..... . CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM EXPENDITURE SUMMARY BY FUNCTION FY 2009-2010 THROUGH FY 20142015 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND CITY OF CLEARWATER __ _._ Schedule of Planned Expenditures Function 2009!10 2010!11 2011/12 2012113 2013!14 2014/15 ', Total Police Protection Fire Protection _ New Street Construction .Major Street Maintenance Sidewalk and Bike Trails _._... __ Intersections „_ Parking Miscellaneous Engineering Parks De~,elopment __ Marine Facilities Airpark Facilities _._ Libraries __ - -- Garage Maintenance of Buildings __ .. Gen Public City Bldg & Equi Miscellaneous _. Stormwater Utility Gas System _. .._ Solid Waste :.Utilities Miscellaneous Sewer System Water System Recycling Tots I 150,000 150,000 . - _. 678,490 1,153,400 1,089,490 2,515,270- 4,244,860 1,555,400- 11,236,910 2,500,000 2,500,000 ` 3,645,670 3,497,430` 4,057,430 4,107,430 4,107,430 4,032,430 23,447,820 _:._ 472,000 472,000 435,000. 435,000' 435,000 435,000 435,000 435,000.. 2,610,000. 250,000 225,000 200,000~! µ 200,000 225,000 225,000 1,325,000 35,000 8,035,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000' 8,210,000 __ - _ _ 5, 837, 500 4, 622, 500: 907, 500: 1,147, 500 9, 967, 500 982, 500' 23, 465, 000: 4,315,000 275,000: 413,000 413,000 413,000 413,000 6,242,000' __ _; 10,000 10,000' 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000' 60,000 635,310' 635,310 10,635,310: 639,740 665,310 685,270 13,896,250 .._ _. 2,716,700 2,798,200- 2,882,150; 2,968,610 3,057,670 3,149,410. 17,572,740 277,930 299,800; 1,108,650 420,560 452,530 379,560; 2,939,030 j 950,000 ' 7,000,000; 7,950,000 640,000 640,000 620,000 5,420,000 645,000 645,000. 8,610,000: __ 5,945,000 8,800,000 7,200,000 7,100,000 7,400,000 7,400,000 43,845,000.. 5,310,000- 5,600,000 5,800,000. 6,100,000 5,900,000 6,145,000- 34,855,000 520,000 595,000; 755,000 713,000 735,000 746,000: 4,064,000. 26,000 30,000 26,000' 26,000 30,000 26,000 164,000 9,772,590 9,073,990' 12,108,380 7,351,360 11,776,590 25,617,400' 75,700,310 9,699,550! 12,913,120. 17,928,910: 18,125,340 11,251,410- 6,917,790'. 76,836,120 220,000' 290,000:. 290,000: 386,000 400,000 410,000. 1,996,000 52,069,740 59,928,750 66,501,820 60,613,810 61,751,300 67,281,760': 368,147,180 Remove the entire CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT SCHEDULE I-A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FY2008109, Schedule I-A Pages 1-49 Page 8 Ordinance 8088-09 • • ~~gp[.P`,y~i a f_ ~ ~ DF ry. y~+ ` ~rl;r<o ~L~ •, 1B ~e 1 ' ITY OF LEARWATER }{~~~~1~1 F p~ y~ q~,_,._ .... ~ ~, :,~ := :- - ~ ~S POS'C OFFICE Box 4748, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748 °~'~? ~'~>' . ~ ,,,,~~~~,~~ MUNICIPAL SERVICES BI1[I.pING, 100 SOUTH MrRTLEAVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33756 ~q~Y~"~'~~~~~~ TELEPHONE (727) 562-4567 FAx (727) 562-4865 PLANNING DEPARTMENT November 25, 2009 Mr. Ray Eubanks Florida Department of Community Affairs Bureau of Local Planning Division of Community Planning Plan Processing Team 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100 RE: Adopted Comprehensive Plan amendment package for the City of Clearwater's Capital Improvements Element (CIE); Case CPA2009-07001 (Ordinance No. 8088-09). Dear Mr. Eubanks: Please find attached three copies of the City of Clearwater's adopted comprehensive plan amendment package for the annual update of the Capital Improvements Element. This transmittal letter conforms to the requirements of Rule 9J-11.006(1)(a), F.A.C., "Submittal Requirements for Proposed Local Government Comprehensive Plan Amendments" as follows: • CPA2009-07001 -The adopted amendment to the Capital Improvements Element of the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan (Ordinance Number 8088-09). 9J-11.006(1)(a)1: The Clearwater Community Development Board (CDB), as the Local Planning Agency, held a public hearing meeting on October 20, 2009 for CPA2009-07001 (Ordinance Number 8088-09). • The CDB recommended approval to the City Council. 9J-11.006 1)(a)2: The Clearwater City Council, as the local governing body, held a public hearing transmittal meeting on November 5, 2009 for CPA2009-07001 (Ordinance No. 8088- 09). • The City Council approved CPA2009-07001 on November 5, 2009 at first reading of Ordinance No. 8088-09. ~~EQUAL EMPLOYMENT AND AFFIRMATfVE ACTION EMPLOYER • • November 25, 2009 Ray Eubanks Page 2 of 5 9J-11.006(l~a)2: The Clearwater City Council, as the local governing body, held an adoption public hearing meeting on November 17, 2009 for CPA2009-07001 (Ordinance No. 8088-09). • The City Council approved the adoption of CPA2009-07001 on November 17, 2009 at second reading of Ordinance No. 8088-09. There were no requests for information or objections raised by citizens at the LPA public hearing, the first public hearing of the City Council, or the adoption hearing of the City Council. Attached are the Comprehensive Plan Citizen Courtesy Information List sheets that include "none" at the adoption hearing for this amendment package (Section 163.3184(15), F.S.). Contained within this Plan amendment package are the following: (1) Three copies of the LPA Review and Recommendation (LPA No. CPA2009-07001) for the Capital Improvements Element. (2) Three copies of the amended Capital Improvements Element as adopted by Ordinance No. 8088-09. (3) Three copies of the adopted ordinance No. 8088-09 to amend the Capital Improvements Element related to the adopted FY09/10 City Capital Improvement Program Budget (Ordinance No. 8101-09). 9J-11.006(1)(a~3: The following is the summary of the plan amendment package that the City of Clearwater requests the department to review: • CPA2009-07001 -The amendment to the Capital Improvements Element of the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan (Ordinance Number 8088-09) relative to CIE schedule. 9J-11.006(1 (~4: Ordinance No. 8088-09 -The amendment was adopted on November 17, 2009. 9J-11.006(1)(a)5: The proposed plan amendment package does not pertain to an area of critical state concern. 9J-11.006(1LL The plan amendment package is not within Orange, Lake or Seminole Counties. 9J-11.006(1)(a)7h: The proposed plan amendment package is an exception to the twice-a-year limit of amendments for an amendment related to the CIE schedule pursuant to Section 163.3187(1)(f), F.S. and Section 163.3177(3)(b), F.S. 9J-11.006 l)(a)8: Copies of the completed adopted Clearwater Comprehensive Plan, and any amendments to said plan, have been submitted to the following agencies: the Pinellas County Planning Department, the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council, the Southwest Florida • November 25, 2009 Ray Eubanks Page 3 of S • Management District, the Department of State, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Education, and the Department of Environmental Protection. City Ordinance No. 8088-09 -Three copies of the amendment to the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan are included with this letter. Copies have also been transmitted to the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council, the Southwest Florida Water Management District, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Education and the Department of Environmental Protection under separate cover on same date. 9J-11.006(1L)9: The plan amendment package was not adopted under a joint planning agreement. 9J-11.006(1Za)10: Sandra E. Herman Planner III P.O. Box 4748 Clearwater, FL 33758-4748 Telephone: 727-562-45 86 Fax: 727-562-4865 sandra.herman@myclearwater.com If you need further assistance, please contact Sandra Herman. Thank you for your help in this matter. Sincerely, . j~~~ ~~ Michael Delk, AICP~~~~ Director of Planning City of Clearwater November 25, 2009 Ray Eubanks Page 4 of 5 November 25, 2009 Pinellas County Planning Department Attn: Brian Smith, AICP, Director 600 Cleveland Street, Suite 750 Clearwater, FL 33755 Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council Attn: Jessica White, Principal Planner 4000 Gateway Centre Boulevard, Suite 100 Pinellas Park, FL 33782 Southwest Florida Water Management District Attn: Ray Mazur, Executive Director 2379 Broad Street Brooksville, FL 34604-6899 Florida Department of State Bureau of Historic Preservation Attn: Ms. Susan Harp R.A. Gray Building 500 South Bronough Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250 Florida Department of Transportation District Seven Attn: Carol M. Collins, LGCP & CMS Coordinator 11201 North McKinley Drive Mail Station 7-500 Tampa, FL 33612-6456 Department of Environmental Protection Attn: Jim Quinn, Environmental Manager Office of Intergovernmental Programs 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard, Mail Station 47 Tallahassee, FL 32399-3000 • Clearwater RE: Adopted Comprehensive Plan amendment package for the City of Clearwater's Capital Improvements Element; Case CPA2009-07001 (Ordinance No. 8088-09) To whom it may concern: Pursuant to Rule 9J-11.009(6) of the Florida Administrative Code, the City of Clearwater is submitting this plan amendment adoption package to the aforementioned organizations. i.J November 25, 2009 Ray Eubanks Page 5 of 5 Also, enclosed is a copy of the transmittal letter sent to the Department of Community Affairs. If you need further assistance, please contact Sandra Herman, Planner III at 727-562-4586. Thank you for your courtesy in this matter. Sincerely, . 6 ~~ Michael Delk, AICP Director of Planning City of Clearwater cc: David Healey, Pinellas Planning Council Tracey D. Suber, Educational Consultant-Growth Management Liaison, FDOE, 325 W. Gaines Street, Tallahassee, FL 32399-0400 • Herman, Sandra From: Bertels, Paul Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 8:54 AM To: Herman, Sandra Subject: RE: Updated Corridor Improvement Plan • Court Street was eliminated due to lack of funding for a state highway. • Drew from Myrtle to Ft. Harrison was eliminated due to need for additional right of way and lack of funding. • Highland went away because further analysis indicated it was working at a good LOS C the way it is now and did not need widening. • Lakeview went away due to the fact that the existing four lane configuration is working better than the two lane divided scenario would work in light of our new lane configuration at Lakeview/Myrtle. Paul Bertels Manager Traffic Operations Division Paul, bertels(c~~nyclearwater, com 727-562-4794 ~~ ~r http://www.myclearwater.com/green/index.asp From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Monday, November 02, 2009 8:39 AM To: Bertels, Paul Subject: RE: Updated Corridor Improvement Plan Paul, Hi. Please let me know the changes and the reasons so I can put it in the file for next time. Thanks, Sandy From: Bertels, Paul Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 4:25 PM To: Herman, Sandra Subject: Updated Corridor Improvement Plan «File: corridorimp with Utility Impacts.xls» Updated VerSlOn. Paul Bertels Manager Traffic Operations Division Paul, b ertels(~myclearwater. com 727-562-4794 T~,1.1[~,le' 6~~Y.~ http://www.myclearwater.com/green/index.asp s ~~ PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOLS November 11, 2009 William Horne, City Manager Clearwater City Hall, 3`d Floor 112 S. Osceola Avenue, PO Box 4748 Clearwater, FL 33756 Dear Mr. Horne, ADMINISTRATION DUILDING 3Di fourth St. SW P.O. Box 2942 Largo, FL 33779-2942 Ph. (7271588-6000 Fax p271560-6202 SCHOOL DOARO OF PINEIIAS COUNTY, ftOAIDA Chairperson Peggy L. O'Shea ~'~ Vice Chairperson Janet R. Clark Mary L. Tyus Brown Carol J. Cook Nina Hayden Linda S. Lerner Robin L. Wilde On November lOtt', the School Board approved an amendment to the Tentative Five-Year Facilities Work Program for 2009110 through 2013/14. The original Work Program was Board approved on September 15, 2009 and per the Interlocal Agreement, your office received a copy. The only change is the addition of a project at Lynch Elementary. During routine maintenance work at this school, structural deficiencies were discovered. In several of the buildings water intrusion has breached the structural integrity of the building support system. Repairs have been made which have temporarily con~ected the structural issues; however, the long term solution is the demolition and rebuilding of the effected structures. This amendment provides the necessary budget to accomplish the project in multiple phases so as to minimize the impact on the learning environment. The current Work Program has sufficient carry forward balances to fund this estimated $15,440,000 project. Attached are the revised pages of the Work Program. Sincerely, ~.t' Fred Matz, Assistant Superintendent Finance and Business Services Enclosure cc: Dr. Julie M. Janssen, Superintendent Lansing K. Johansen, Chief Business Officer Michael Bessette, Facilities & Operations The SchoDl Board of Pinellas County, Florida, prohibits any and all farms of discriminatiorisnd harassment based on race, color, sex, religion„ national origin, marital status, age, sexual orientation or disability in any of its programs, services or activities. deceived • Nov ~ ~ zoos City Manager's Office C~~~~~ ~l ~ NOV 2 3 ZQ09 I. __~J ~ PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CITY OF CLEARWATER Superintendent Julie M. Janssen, Ed.D. Five Year Work Plan- Capacity Project Schedules 2009 - 2010 PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT ~.~~ P~3'e~De~scri~'ti'on x.~ ~ ' I _~llon "a "".: .,n1F"_}~kofkC~f~&~'~borris=_ - ~~'"16z~ t2010=24"1"~` ~ "2~~1-20'..;, ? 0 ~'?._ ^ G l3:°" '; x'241`3 ~ ;~ ~....._...3T"bt~l`""`r,~. Additional classrooms for dass size PALM HARBOR UNIVERSITY SENIOR HIGH Planned Cost: $3,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,500,000 Yes Student Stations: 125 0 0 0 0 125 Total Classrooms: 5 0 0 0 0 5 ~ ~'°`°"f'i3.~°~ ...tiort .-' ' •-: ;_~ fio"n""~a: ^.` ' Gross S Ft: 'w.c°N~iintie~ofL~ta"s~i~ottts.: 6 250 i:»~2CRl9i:'2016'` 0 :20:10--'249,1° 0 ;20 : 01~ 0 :~t>`~2203~: 0 .- 01 6 250 .~ ..~. - ~"; . Iden district relocatables Location not s ec fiied Planned Cost: 500 000 0 0 0 0 500 000 Yes Student Stations: 175 0 0 0 0 175 Total Classrooms: 7 0 0 0 0 7 ``" o"'~" Bon ' ~ ` ~ ?. .Loca6o~:,.,~„r_ : Gross S Ft: ~.Numbero'~rGta~siuo x 6 048 ;:R~10F]9-.2010. 0 ~'20$Ik,~.2O1fi., 0 t0~`I11'2 0 ~U~~r 0 '' 8E!° 6.048 '~"otaC - ~ 1 PailiaCschdol retiurld . , LYbtCHELEMENTARY ,_ ., Planned Cost: " . .$3520'000 .-: 572D 000 ' _.$6 200000 :_.__ 0 ::.. D M 15446000 « Ye5<:;:,.:_ '. ,:"... _. :... r ;:: Stiiderit;StA6ons: 0 ',... .: 744 ,_...::.. 0 0 ;... ~ , .'.:. 0 : . -::, _ 744 '..:,:':::.'_: .: _:. TotaGClassrodmsa : 0 s : `., -3 >,. , .; . .'D r .:. '0 '. 0 -3 .'.... <. :: .. . _ Gross S 'Ft :' , 0 :::.; ;93 581 (4. ...`,: 0 D ... 0 :, . 93581 .. ` :;` : Planned Cost: 7 520 000 5 720 000 6 200 000 0 0 19440 000 Student Stations: 300 744 0 0 0 1 044 Total Classrooms: 12 3 0 0 0 9 Gross S Ft: 12 298 93 561 0 0 0 105 879 Five Year Work Plan- Local 1.50 Mill Expenditure For Maintenance, Repair and Renovation 2009 - 2010 PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT " ~ ~It" :~~-`, ,, ..~ , . ~. s~ . "`2009-'20'f"ORcfual ' 1 Bud et _ _~_-_ _ _ .~.t i 20;10 =201~`Pfo~ecEetl; ~ . ~ -. ~: ~ _ e..... p .201.1~2012~P~ojected1 _ _, _ ;2,012 ZO~l3 rojecf~d .~~ _ _ _ _ ~ 2013~"ZO~f:4"Ir~olecf , _ F:. 't Remaining Maint and Re air from 1.5 Mills $45,252,754 $42,182,369 $38,903,269 ~ $38,287,355 $37,154,074 $201,779,821 Maintenance/Repair Salaries $2,671,500 $2,671,500 $2,671,500 $2,671,500 $2,671,500 $13,357,500 School Bus Purchases $370,353 $370,353 $370,353 $370,353 $0 $1,481,412 Other Vehicle Purchases $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Capital Outlay E ui ment $17,881,900 $19,000,000 $19,000,000 $19,000,000 $19,000,000 $93,881,900 Rent/Lease Payments $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 COP Debt Service $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Rent/Lease Relocatables $2,269,674 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,269,674 Premiums for Property Casualty Insurance - 1011.71 (4a,b) $8,200,000 $8,200,000 $8,200,000 $8,200,000 $8,200,000 $41,000,000 Contin enc $5 000 000 $5 000 000 $5 000 000 $5 000 000 $5 000 000 $25 000 000 ea :'.?over $4=809'353 : _ $6 690-301' $13=209'027 :. ` ._.;< ;$29°830 931 ~ $53=039"781' ~ ' :' '"$107'579'393 Safe initiative $4 500 000 $4 500 D00 $4 500 000 $4 500 000 $4 500 000 $22 500 000 Instructional e ui ment transfer $4,000,000 $4,000,000 $4,000,000 $4,000,000 $4,000,000 $20,000,000 Site ac uisltion $100 000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100 000 95 055 534 92 614 523 95 854149 111 860 139 133 565 355 528 949 700 Five Year Work Plan- Additional Revenue Source 2009 - 2010 PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT ~ Y .,. [~""~ 7 U~~~ ~~~~C value rr2010, ~C`tTSPro"ecietl'~ 2~o-1'1.:r201%22'Proectetl° ~261=«"201~'Pro ecfeel ~201~'=~2 ~ eefed .o ~' ,.,.. ,. ... Interest, Including $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $12,500,000 Profit On Investment Revenue from Bonds $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 pledging proceeds from 1 cent or 1/2 cent Sales Surtax Total Fund Balance $0 $4;809;353 . $6;690;301 $13,209,027 $29;830,931; " $54;539;6"12 Carried: Fororard_ .. ... General Capital $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Outlay Obligated Fund Balance Carried Forward From Total Fund Balance Carried Forward Special Facilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Construction Account One Cent - 1/2 Cent $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Sales Surtax Debt Service From Total Fund Balance Carried Forward Capital Outlay $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Projects Funds Balance Carried Forward From Total Fund Balance Carried Forward 2 500 000 7 309 353 9 190 301 15 709 027 32 330 931 67 039 612 {~\ 0~ " \ ~~ \\\/// PiNEILAS COUNTY SCHOOLS November 11, 2009 William Horne, City Manager Clearwater City Hall, 3rd Floor 1 12 S. Osceola Avenue, PO Bo:c 4748 Clearwater, FL 33756 Dear Mr. Horne, ~ ~ ~ ---_~ AOMINISifiATION BUILDINf '0: Fourth $(. $lN ?.0. Rox 2942 Large.Fi 337792942 Fh 1727;5868000 Fax p27i 588-6202 SCHOOL BOAAD OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA Chairperson Peggy L O'S`ea Vrce Chairperson. Jarat;; ~:a:F. Carol J. Cook Nina Hayden Linda S. Lerner Rohin L. Wikle On November 10`h, the School Board approved an amendment to the Tentative Five-Year Facilities Work Program for 200911 G through 20lii 14. The original Work Program was Board approved on September 15, 2009 and per the Interlocal Agreement, your office received a copy. The only change is the addition of a project at Lynch Elementary. During routine maintenance work at this school, structural deficiencies were discovered. In several of the buildings water intrusion has breached the structural integrity of the building support system. Repairs have been made which have temporarily corrected the structural issues; however, the long term solution is the demolition and rebuilding of the effected structures. This amendment provides the necessary budget to accomplish the project in multiple phases so as to minimize the impact on the learning em"ironment. The current Work Program has sufficient carry forward balances to fund this estimated $15,4.40,000 project. Attached are the revised pages of the Work Program. Sincerely, '' ~~ j`~ ~~ Fred Matz, Assistant Superintendent Finance and Business Services Enclosure cc: Dr. Julie M. Janssen, Superintendent Lansing K. Johansen, Chief Business Officer Michael Bessette, Facilities & Operations ':he Schoel 9oard o(Pinellas County, Florida, prohihis any and all forms of discriminarcri anal harassment cased en race, color, sex, reiigien, national ergir~, marital status, age, sexual orientation ar disabiliP; in any o(its programs, services Or activities. ~~, deceive y~~ 1 ~ Z~Q~s ~;ity Manager's Office Superintendent Julie NS Janssen, Ed.~. S 1 _ , ~; l i -----_ -----i I i I l ~ ;,~r>, ~ ~ 20'9 ~ ~ ...-~~ ,, .,~ r~ PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOLS November 11, 2009 City of Clearwater Michael Delk, Planning Director 112 S. Osceola Avenue P.O. Box 4748 Clearwater, FL 33756-4748 Dear Mr. Delk, On November lOt", the School Board approved an amendment to the Tentative Five-Year Facilities Work Program for 2009/10 through 2013/14. The original Work Program was Board approved on September 15, 2009 and per the Interlocal Agreement, your office received a copy. The only change is the addition of a project at Lynch Elementary. During routine maintenance work at this school, structural deficiencies were discovered. In several of the buildings water intrusion has breached the structural integrity of the building support system. Repairs have been made which have temporarily corrected the structural issues; however, the long term solution is the demolition and rebuilding of the effected structures. This amendment provides the necessary budget to accomplish the project in multiple phases so as to minimize the impact on the learning environment. The current Work Program has sufficient carry forward balances to fund this estimated $1.5,440,000 project. Attached are the revised pages of the Work Program. Sincerely, Fred Matz, Assistant Superintendent Finance and Business Services Enclosure cc: Dr. Julie M. Janssen, Superintendent Lansing K. Johansen, Chief Business Officer Michael Bessette, Facilities and Operations ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 301 Fourth St. SW P.O. Box 2942 Largo, FL 33779-2942 Ph. 17271588-6000 Fax 17271588-6202 SCHOOL ROARO OF PINEIIAS COUNTY, FLORIDA Chairperson Peggy L. O'Shea Vice Chairperson Janet R. Clark Mary L. Tyus Brown Carol J. Cook Nina Hayden Linda S. Lerner Robin L. Wlkle I ~ ~_~~ ~ ~, ~ ~ r ~~ NOV 13 20Q9 ~~ i PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CITY OF CLEARWATER , Superintendent Julie M. Janssen, Ed.D. The School Board of Pinellas County, Florida, prohibits any and all forms of discriminatiori and harassment based on race, color, sex, religion, national origin, marital status, age, sexual orientation or disability in any of its programs, services or activities. r/7~j • ,. < ~. Five Year Work Plan- Capacity Project Schedules 2009 - 2010 PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT _ P[a ectOeseri tion Location Numhec. of Gla~,v~, u~.~ :,.,2000-2011- X010-2011 <011-2012 2012-2013 013-2014 ~7otal. Fund -- Additional Gassrooms for lass size PALM HARBOR UNIVERSITY SENIOR HIGH Planned Cost: $3,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,500,000 Yes Student Stations: 125 0 0 0 0 125 Total Classrooms: 5 0 0 0 0 5 Gross S Ft: 6.250 0 0 0 0 6.250 n~ P,ro ,~t Lescri ~tien ... _.._: _Locaton Niimoer ~t Gla~~io0fl75'. 2009- 2016.. :2010-2011 [011 -2012,. ,.~'(," ,~-2013 '. ~ 2013-2U1d . Tfltal `. n <- Iden' district rolocatables Location not s ecified Planned Cost: 50u 000 0 0 0 0 500 000 Yes Student Stations: 175 0 0 0 0 175 Total Classrooms: 7 0 0 0 0 7 Gross S Ft: 6 048 0 0 0 0 6 048 Pm ect Desch hon Location Number of Classrooms.. 2009:.- 2010, 2010. 2411 .2071.- 2012 2012 -2D13 2013:- 2n 14 Total Funded' Partial school rebuild LYNCH EI EMENTARY Planned Cost: $3-520 000 5 720 OOD 6 200 000 0 0 - 15410 GOO Yes t Student"Stations' 0 ' 744 0 0 0 744 - Total Classrooms: ' D ~ p 0 . ,0 .3 ..... , , ,-'GrossS..Ft: . A 93'584 0 0 0 _ 93b81 Planned Cost: 7 520 000 5 720 000 6 200 000 0 0 19440 000 Student Stations: 300 744 0 0 0 1 044 Total Classrooms: 12 ~ 0 0 0 9 Goss S Ft: 12 298 93 561 0 0 0 105 879 <. _; • • Five Year Work Plan- Local 1.50 Mill Expenditure For Maintenance, Repair and Renovation 2009 - 2010 PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT Item 24Q9 - 2010 Actual Bu et 2010 - 2011 Projected' 2011 - 2x'12 Projected 2012 - 2013 Projected= 2013 - 2014"Projected Total Remaining Maint and Re air from 1.5 Mills $45,252,754 $42,182,369 $38,903,269 $38,287,355 $37,154,074 $201,779,821 Maintenance/Repair Salaries $2,671,500 $2,671,500 $2,671,500 $2,671,500 $2,671,500 $13,357,500 School Bus Purchases $370,353 $370,353 $370,353 $370,353 $0 $1,481,412 Other Vehicle Purchases $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Capital Outlay E ui ment $17,881,900 $19,000,000 $19,000,000 $19,000,000 $19,000,000 $93,881,900 RenULease Payments $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 COP Debt Service $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 RenULease Relocatables $2,269,674 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,269,674 Premiums for Property Casualty Insurance - 1011.71 (4a,b) $8,200,000 $8,200,000 $8,200,000 $8,200,000 $8,200,000 $41,000,000 Contin enc $5 000 000 $5 000 000 $5 000 000 $5 000 000 $5 000 000 $25 000 000 ca .over .. ` ' $4`809 353 ? $6 690 301' $13 209 Q27 . '.."; $29 830 931 _ $53°039 78`1 " 107`579393 Safe initiative $4 500 000 $4 500 000 $4 500 000 $4 500 000 $4 500 000 $22 500 000 Instructional e ui ment transfer $4,000,000 $4,000,000 $4,000,000 $4,000,000 $4,000,000 $20,000,000 Site ac uisition $100 000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100 000 95 055 534 92 614 523 95 854149 111 860139 133 565 355 528 949 700 • i 1 ~~ Five Year Work Plan- Additional Revenue Source 2009 - 2010 PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT ~~ item _ ~ ~ F2009~r2010~Actua}kValue7 ~20:10'.~201,1€P_ro eeted~ ~201a~2012#P,rti~eeted#~ ~2092'?20.13tP.ro~eotedl~ . 01~3'~20.1;4,~Pro ecte ~ ,"' Interest, Including $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $12,500,000 Profit On Investment Revenue from Bonds $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 pledging proceeds from 1 cent or 1/2 cent Sales Surtax Total Fund Balance $0 $4,809,383 $6;690;301 $13,209;027 $29,830;931 $54.,539;612 Carved -Forward ~. General Capital $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Outlay Obligated Fund Balance Carried Fonnrard From Total Fund Balance Carried Forward Special Facilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Construction Account One Cent - 1/2 Cent $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Sales Surtax Debt Service From Total Fund Balance Carried Fonnrard Capital Outlay $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Projects Funds Balance Carried Fonnard From Total Fund Balance Carried Fonnrard 2 500 000 7 309 353 9 190 301 15 709 027 32 330 931 67 039 612 ~f,. • a ~ Herman, Sandra From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Monday, October 19, 2009 10:14 AM To: Bertels, Paul Subject: FW: Capital Improvements Element (CIE) Update Attachments: Ordinance 8088-09 CIE Update 09 CDB 102009.docx; CPA2009-07001 CDB Staff Report CIE Update09 REVperCP100909.docx; CDB Agenda October 20, 2009.docx Paul, I wanted to forward you a copy of the staff report and ordinance for the CIE update that is going to the Community Development Board (CDB) meeting on October 20, 2009 (next Tuesday) at 1 pm. It includes your corridor plan spreadsheet -see page 5 of ord. 8088-09. Also, attached is the CDB agenda (this case is item #E-2 - it has now been placed on consent agenda as there are no comments coming in from the public). It is then scheduled to go to City Council on Nov. 5, 2009 with 2"d ordinance reading scheduled on Nov. 17, 2009 (State Statutes require it for all communities to be adopted prior to Dec. 15` each year -following adoption of the annual CIP budget). While I do not anticipate any unusual questions, please feel free to attend the meetings in case there are any particular questions about the Road Table or LOS projections. If you have any questions, please call me. Thanks again, Sandy x4586 ~ • Herman, Sandra From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 4:54 PM To: 'cmettler@pinellascounty.org' Subject: FW: CIE Update and EAR-based LDRs Attachments: Ord 8070-09 CDB 102009 CC1 111709 No DRAFT rev100709.docx; Ordinance 8088-09 CIE Update 09 CDB 102009.docx From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 4:50 PM To: 'cmettler@pinellascounty.org' Subject: FW: CIE Update and EAR-based LDRs Chris, Hi. I received your letters regarding these two cases and that there are no concerns with them. Thank you. As I said I would send you the updated documents, here are the two documents for the Community Development Board on October 20, 2009. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thanks, Sandy Herman Planner III City of Clearwater 562-4586 • w 101409RE Ord. 8070-09 clearance of awnings.txt From: Herman, Sandra sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 1:48 PM To: Porter, Catherine Subject: RE: Ord. 8070-09: clearance of awnings :) thanks From: Porter, Catherine Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 1:47 PM To: Herman, Sandra subject: RE: ord. 8070-09: clearance of awnings Thanks and :). Good attention to details. From: Herman, Sandra sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 12:28 PM To: Porter, Catherine subject: Fw: ord. 8070-09: clearance of awnings fyi From: Herman, Sandra sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 12:27 PM To: Clayton, Gina subject: RE: ord. 8070-09: clearance of awnings thanks From: Clayton, Gina sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 11:57 AM To: Herman, Sandra Subject: RE: ord. 8070-09: clearance of awnings In working with the architect that ED hired to develop retail design guidelines this issue came up and the more typical height clearance is 8'. Based on that and mine and Michael's experiences, 8' was the standard for communities we had worked in as well. From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Wednesday, October 14, 2009 9:52 AM To: Clayton, Gina subject: ord. 8070-09: clearance of awnings Gina, Hi. I am getting my presentation points together for CDB and CC for my two cases for ordinances 8070-09 and 8088-09. I have the background for the EAR-based amendments. To be prepared for what might come up: one question I have is regarding the amendment to decrease the awning clearance from 9 to 8 feet as we have said in the report as being "typical for many awnings" - what if z am asked about the basis for this amendment? should I say that it has been identified during our planning development reviews or from records from the Building Division or CRT? Thanks, sandy Page 1 ~ . • Herman, Sandra From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 2:27 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: RE: Ordinance 8088-09 CIE Update 09 DRAFT Rev100809.docx thanks From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 1:58 PM To: Herman, Sandra Subject: RE: Ordinance 8088-09 CIE Update 09 DRAFT Rev100809.docx Both look good. From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 10:18 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: FW: Ordinance 8088-09 CIE Update 09 DRAFT Rev100809.docx I just found my note that I also sent you the revised draft of 8070-09 on 10-08-09. From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 9:36 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: FW: Ordinance 8088-09 CIE Update 09 DRAFT Rev100809.doac Hi Leslie, We are getting our staff reports ready to send to CDB for the meeting next week (October 20, 2009). Two items on the agenda are ordinances 8088-09 (CIE update) and 8070-09 (EAR-based LDR). Both final drafts are attached. I sent you this latest 8088-09 last week. When I talked to you last week I wasn't sure that you had the most recent 8070-09. It is consistent with the ad that was approved. We had used your revised ordinance (8-24-09} as the base. Additional changes were made as recommended by Catherine Porter, Gina Clayton and Michael Delk as follows: • Section 1-108 -reformatted (see page 3 of attached 8070-09) • Removed proposed working waterfront uses {Section 2-801.2 and definition) • Renumbered the footnotes for IRT Section 2-1303 so that they will be in numerical order (except for Retail Sales and Services -had to keep it in alphabetical order for the list -see pages 3-5 of attachment) • Changes were made to Section 3-804 -there were redundancies and it was thought to be confusing so we are deleting the graphics and creating new subsection 3-804.6.1.c to address the requirement for waterfront lots in text only -the Sight visibility triangle for Section 3-904 covers the fence height in graphic form (see pages 5, 6 of attachment} • Changes were made to Section 3-1805 (see page 7 of attachment) -Gina asked for this format change to make it simpler/shorter 1 just wanted to make sure you are ok with the revised ordinance before we send it out (Sherry will be starting to copy the reports/ordinances for the CDB packets tomorrow morning to mail out on Thursday). Thanks, Sandy • ___ • From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 4:45 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: Ordinance 8088-09 CIE Update 09 DRAFT Rev100809.docx Leslie, Revised draft of ordinance 8088-09 -here are the few changes that we made highlighted in yellow. Thanks, Sandy • • Herman, Sandra From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 1:58 PM To: Herman, Sandra Subject: RE: Ordinance 8088-09 CIE Update 09 DRAFT Rev100809.docx Both look good. From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 10:18 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: FW: Ordinance 8088-09 CIE Update 09 DRAFT Rev100809.doac I just found my note that I also sent you the revised draft of 8070-09 on 10-OS-09. From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Tuesday, October 13, 2009 9:36 AM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: FW: Ordinance 8088-09 CIE Update 09 DRAFT Rev100809.docx Hi Leslie, We are getting our staff reports ready to send to CDB for the meeting next week (October 20, 2009). Two items on the agenda are ordinances 8088-09 (CIE update) and 8070-09 (EAR-based LDR). Both final drafts are attached. I sent you this latest 8088-09 last week. When I talked to you last week I wasn't sure that you had the most recent 8070-09. It is consistent with the ad that was approved. We had used your revised ordinance (8-24-09) as the base. Additional changes were made as recommended by Catherine Porter; Gina Clayton and Michael Delk as follows: • Section 1-108 -reformatted (see page 3 of attached 8070-09) • Removed proposed working waterfront uses (Section 2-801.2 and definition) • Renumbered the footnotes for IRT Section 2-1303 so that they will be in numerical order (except for Retail Sales and Services - had to keep it in alphabetical order for the list -see pages 3-5 of attachment) • Changes were made to Section 3-804 -there were redundancies and it was thought to be confusing so we are deleting the graphics and creating new subsection 3-804.B.1.c to address the requirement for waterfront lots in text only -the Sight visibility triangle for Section 3-904 covers the fence height in graphic form (see pages 5, 6 of attachment) • Changes were made to Section 3-1805 (see page 7 of attachment) -Gina asked for this format change to make it simpler/shorter I just wanted to make sure you are ok with the revised ordinance before we send it out (Sherry will be starting to copy the reports/ordinances for the CDB packets tomorrow morning to mail out on Thursday). Thanks, Sandy From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 4:45 PM To: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Subject: Ordinance 8088-09 CIE Update 09 DRAFT Rev100809.dooc Leslie, Revised draft of ordinance 8088-09 -here are the few changes that we made highlighted in yellow. • • Thanks, Sandy Herman, Sandra From: Dougall-Sides, Leslie Sent: Monday, September 21, 2009 12:58 PM To: Porter, Catherine Cc: Herman, Sandra; Clayton, Gina Subject: A04-01420: RE: Draft CIE Ordinance 8088-09 Minor comments: Page 6, paragraph 3. [asterisk para.], line 3: "our" should be "hour"; Page 7, Road Table: Column heading "pri-ority", remove dash; Bayshore row, states "e Road"-should there be more?; Highland Avenue row, Date column-remove "f". From: Porter, Catherine Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 3:21 PM To: Clayton, Gina; Dougall-Sides, Leslie Cc: Herman, Sandra Subject: Draft CIE Ordiance 8088-09 Attached is a draft of this ordinance. We are aware that the formatting will need to be changed, but since Sandy and I are leaving shortly, we ask that you look at it for content at this time. Sandy will clean up the formatting as well as the column titles on the Roads table next week. Catherine W. Porter, AICP Long Range Planning Manager City of Clearwater Planning Department 100 S. Myrtle Avenue - P.O. Box 4748 Clearwater, FL 33758-4748 727-562-4626 -FAX 727-562-4865 Catherine. porterCc~myclearwater.com • A 101909Fw Capital Improvements Element (CIE) update.txt From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 11:05 AM To: Rice, Scott; Fahey, Robert; Gloster, Earl; Pittman, John; Leonard, Felicia Subject: Fw: Capital Improvements Element (CIE) update Attachments: ordinance 8088-09 CIE update 09 CDB 102009.docx; CPA2009-07001 CDB staff Report CIE update09 REVperCP100909.docx; CDB Agenda October 20, 2009.docx Scott, Rob, Earl, John, Felicia, Thank you for your Los figures that we used to prepare the ordinance for the annual update to the Capital Improvements Element (cIE) of the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan. The information is per your direction from our email and phone conversations and some is based on the information provided to sate Lee, Planner II, in her LOS tracking summary that she put together in July. I wanted to forward you a copy of the staff report and ordinance that is going to the community Development Board (CDB) meeting on October 20, 2009 (next Tuesday) at 1 pm. Also, attached is the CDB agenda (this case is item #E-2). It is then scheduled to go to City Council on Nov. 5, 2009 with 2nd ordinance reading scheduled on Nov. 17, 2009 (state statutes require it for all communities to be adopted prior to Dec. lst each year - following adoption of the annual CIP budget). while I do not anticipate any unusual questions, please feel free to attend or send a representative to the meetings in case there are any particular questions about the projections for your respective areas. If you have any questions, please call me. Thanks again, Sandy Herman 562-4586 Page 1 • • RE solid waste projections for state annual report.txt From: Pittman, John Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 8:15 AM To: Herman, Sandra Cc: Gloster, Earl subject: RE: solid waste projections for state annual report Sandy, It is okay to move forward and report the 5.19 lbs per capita per day as current demand. If you have any more questions please do not hesitate. Thanks John Pittman Assistant Director City of Clearwater solid waste/General Services Department tel: (727) 562-4936 cell:(727-224-7382 From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 3:45 PM To: Pittman, John subject: solid waste projections for state annual report John, Thank you so much for calling me back to discuss this with me today. I spoke with planner Cate Lee in our office and she said she calculated the "5.19 lbs per capita per day" as follows: 104,898 tons (2008 demand figure as provided by Debbie Moore to Cate Lee) x 2000 (to convert to lbs) _ 209,796,000 / 365 (days in a year) = 574,783 / 110,831 (2008 population) = 5.19 lbs per capita per day I have been asked by my manager to please run this by Earl on Monday when he gets back and see if he would allow us to report the 5.19 lbs per capita per day as current demand. My manager's thought is that the state will ask us why we are projecting to process the same amount of solid waste with a projected increase in population in the next 5 years. Then please let me know if Earl is ok with us diving the information as follows: SOLID WASTE: Current Capacity: 7.12 lbs per capita per day Current Demand: 5.19 lbs per capita per day (estimate for 2008) Fiscal Year Projected Demand (max.) Projected Capacity at End Of FY Surplus (Deficit) 2009/10 7.12 lbs per capita, per day 7.12 lbs per capita, per day N/A 2010/11 7.12 lbs per capita, per day 7.12 lbs per capita, per Page 1 • • RE Solid waste projections for state annual report.txt day N/A 2011/12 7.12 lbs per capita, per day 7.12 lbs per capita, per day N/A 2012/13 7.12 lbs per capita, per day 7.12 lbs per capita, per day N/A 2013/14 7.12 lbs per capita, per day 7.12 lbs per capita, per day N/A Totals (2013/14) 7.12 lbs per capita, per day 7.12 lbs per capita, per day N/A solid waste cos standard: lbs per capita per day Current capacity: Total solid waste capacity (in tons): 143,906 Pounds of solid waste per capita per day: 7.12 current demand: Total solid waste Generated by the City in 2008 (in tons): 104,898 current Pounds of Solid waste per capita per day: 5.19 7.12 The city's Solid waste Department is able to dispose of all waste produced within the city, as it works with Pinellas County on waste disposal. Garbage is taken to the Pinellas County Waste to Energy Plant where most is incinerated. Any material that is not incinerated is "land filled". The most recent projections take the life of the land fill to the years 2085 to 2090. Thanks, Sandy Page 2 ~, • 092309 email Ray A BUDGET CIP Exh A B.txt From: Alequin, Ray R. sent: Wednesday, September 23, 2009 4:30 PM To: Herman, Sandra subject: CIP Exh A & B Per your request Ray R. Alequin City of Clearwater Management & Budget Sr. Accountant Page 1 • • t 090109 Email Ray A BUDGET RE Comprehensive Plan Objective.txt From: Alequin, Ray R. Sent: Tuesday, September O1, 2009 11:14 AM To: Herman, Sandra Cc: Wilson,. Tina Subject: RE: Comprehensive Plan objective Sandra, please see attached. From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Tuesday, September O1, 2009 10:18 AM To: Alequin, Ray R. Subject: RE: Comprehensive Plan objective May I get the "preliminary" in word as you have it now? From: Alequin, Ray R. Sent: Tuesday, September O1, 2009 10:08 AM To: Herman, Sandra subject: RE: Comprehensive Plan Objective Hi Sandra Tina is thinking mid to late October, but will keep you posted. From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Tuesday, September O1, 2009 10:00 AM To: Alequin, Ray R. subject: Fw: comprehensive Plan objective Hi Ray, when will you have the final draft for the "2009/2010 Preliminary Annual operating and capital Improvement budget document"? I am going to need to get it in word format to use in preparing the ordnance for our annual update to the Capital Improvements Element (Comprehensive Plan). This is something I did last year and Tina sent it to me to use for the ordinance (refer to ord. #8016-08). Please check with Tina for emailing the document to me. I have to get it ready to go to CDB on Oct. 20, CCl on Nov. 5 and then CC2 on Nov. 17. Then I'll be sending it to DCA after the ordinance is signed ( er state statutes must get this done by Dec. 1st each year). Thanks, sandy From: Herman, Sandra sent: Friday, August 21, 2009 3:07 PM To: Alequin, Ray R. Cc: Porter, Catherine subject: RE: Comprehensive Plan objective Ray, Page 1 • • 090109 Email Ray A BUDGET RE Comprehensive Plan Objective.txt Hi. I have reviewed the preliminary FY09/10 CIP with Catherine Porter, Long Range Planning Manager. overall, a fine job done! We have only a few comments that are attached. I will be out of office on vacation all next week. If you 'have any questions next week, please contact Catherine at x4626. Thank you for giving us this opportunity. sandy Herman « File: 082109 Planning Review of Fv09-10 CIP Budget References to Goes (Autosaved).docx » From: Alequin, Ray R. sent: Thursday, 7uly 30, 2009 4:27 PM To: Porter, Catherine; Herman,. Sandra Cc: Wilson, Tina Subject: Comprehensive Plan objective Good afternoon can you please review for correctness, the subject matter in our 2009/2010 Preliminary Annual operating and Capital Improvement budget document. The document can be located on the Intranet/office of Management & Budget. The CIP portion starts on page 167 in the budget book or page 240 on the intranet file. If at all possible, I will need this done by the end of August 09. Thanking you in advance for your assistants. Ray R. Alequin city of Clearwater Management & Budget Sr. Accountant Page 2 Exhibit A • CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009/10 Budgeted Revenues GENERAL SOURCES: 2009/10 General Operating Revenue 1,470,990 General Revenue/County Coop 635,310 Road Millage 2,090,670 Penny for Pinellas 6,225,000 Transportation Impact Fee 290,000 Local Option Gas Tax 1,720,000 Special Development Fund 950,000 Special Program Fund 30,000 Grants -Other Agencies 2,900,000 Donations 900,000 SELF SUPPORTING FUNDS: Marine Revenue 50,000 Downtown Boat Slips Revenue 15,000 Aviation Revenue 10,000 Parking Revenue 260,000 Utility System: Water Impact Fees 250,000 Sewer Impact Fees 500,000 Utility R & R 3,050,490 Stormwater Utility Revenue 5,652,800 Gas Revenue 5,340,000 Solid Waste Revenue 350,000 INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS: Garage Revenue 119,400 Administrative Services Revenue 150,000 BORROWING -SELF SUPPORTING FUNDS: Lease Purchase -Water 42,540 Lease Purchase -Stormwater 300,000 Lease Purchase -Solid Waste 170,000 Lease Purchase -Recycling 220,000 Bond Issue -Water & Sewer 15,665,240 BORROWING -INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS: Lease Purchase -Garage 2,312,300 Lease Purchase -Administrative Services 400,000 TOTAL ALL FUNDING SOURCES: $52,069,740 Ordinance No. 8101-09 Exhibit A CAPITAL IMPROVE7~ENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 200 , Budgeted Expenditures FUNCTION: 2009110 Police Protection Fire Protection Major Street Maintenance Intersections Parking Misc Engineering Parks Development Marine Facilities Airpark Facilities Libraries Garage Maintenance of Buildings General Public City Building & Equipment Miscellaneous Stormwater Utility Gas System Solid Waste Utilities Miscellaneous Sewer System Water System Recycling 150,000 678,490 3,645,670 435,000 250, 000 35, 000 5,837,500 4,315,000 10,000 635,310 2,716,700 277,930 950,000 640,000 5,945,000 5,310,000 520,000 26,000 9,772,590 9,699,550 220,000 TOTAL PROJECT EXPENDITURES $52,069,740 Ordinance No. 8101-09 • • Exhibit B CAPITAL IMP ROVEMENT PROGRAM EXPENDITURE SUM MARY BY FUNCTION FY 2009-2010 THROUGH FY 2014-2015 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND CITY OF CLEARWATER Schedule of Planned Expenditures Function 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012113 2013114 2014115 Total Police Protection 150,000 150,000 Fire Protection 678,490 1,153,400 1,089,490 2,515,270 4,244,860 1,555,400 11,236,910 New Street Construction 2,500,000 2,500,000 Major Street Maintenance 3,645,670 3,497,430 4,057,430 4,107,430 4,107,430 4,032,430 23,447,820 Sidewalk and Bike Trails 472,000 472,000 Intersections 435,000 435,000 435,000 435,000 435,000 435,000 2,610,000 Parking 250,000 225,000 200,000 200,000 225,000 225,000 1,325,000 Miscellaneous Engineering 35,000 8,035,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 8,210,000 Parks Development 5,837,500 4,622,500 907,500 1,147,500 9,967,500 982,500 23,465,000 Marine Facilities 4,315,000 275,000 413,000 413,000 413,000 413,000 6,242,000 Airpark Facilities 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 10,000 60,000 Libraries 635,310 635,310 10,635,310 639,740 665,310 685,270 13,896,250 Garage 2,716,700 2,798,200 2,882,150 2,968,610 3,057,670 3,149,410 17,572,740 Maintenance of Buildings 277,930 299,800 1,108,650 420,560 452,530 379,560 2,939,030 Gen Public City Bldg & Equip 950,000 7,000,000 7,950,000 Miscellaneous 640,000 640,000 620,000 5,420,000 645,000 645,000 8,610,000 Stormwater Utility 5,945,000 8,800,000 7,200,000 7,100,000 7,400,000 7,400,000 43,845,000 Gas System 5,310,000 5,600,000 5,800,000 6,100,000 5,900,000 6,145,000 34,855,000 Solid Waste 520,000 595,000 755,000 713,000 735,000 746,000 4,064,000 Utilities Miscellaneous 26,000 30,000 26,000 26,000 30,000 26,000 164,000 Sewer System 9,772,590 9,073,990 12,108,380 7,351,360 11,776,590 25,617,400 75,700,310 Water System 9,699,550 12,913,120 17,928,910 18,125,340 11,251,410 6,917,790 76,836,120 Recycling 220,000 290,000 290,000 386,000 400,000 410,000 1,996,000 52,069,740 59,928,750 66,501,820 60,613,810 61,751,300 67,281,760 368,147,180 Ordinance No. 8101-09 • • 081309 Paul Bertels Fw I spoke with Bernard Piawah from DCA today.txt From: Bertels, Paul Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 9:19 AM To: Herman, Sandra Subject: Fw: I spoke with Bernard Piawah from DCA today Importance: High I updated both charts. There is a star in the date column for the ones I changed. The only changes were dates of either design or construction. Paul Bertels Manager Traffic operations Division paul.bertels@myclearwater.com 727-562-4794 From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 12:34 PM To: Bertels, Paul subject: Fw: I spoke with Bernard Piawah from DCA today Importance: High Paul, Hi. You said to send this chart to you again to see if you need to update it. May I please have it by end of week to prepare the staff reports. Thanks. sandy From: Bertels, Paul Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 3:36 PM To: Herman, Sandra Subject: RE: I spoke with Bernard Piawah from DCA today Importance: High Sandra, this is the final chart. Also the "20.0" is a typo and I have corrected in this attachment. Lets get together next week. .lust stop by. with regard to the Lakeview question it is actually a combination of 4LU/2L to 2LD. only a small part is 4 Lu most of it is 2L. I have changed the attachment to show that. Paul Bertels Manager Traffic operations Division paul.bertels@myclearwater.com 727-562-4794 -----original Message----- From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 2:50 PM To: Bertels, Paul Subject: I spoke with Bernard Piawah from DCA today Paul, Hi Catherine Porter had asked me to give Bernard Piawah a call and discuss what they Page 1 w • 081309 Paul Bertels Fw I spoke with Bernard Piawah from DCA today.txt are looking for in our next annual CIE update (by Dec. 1, 2009). This is especially with regard to our tables. Please recall this attached table that you prepared for us. Also, when we sent it to DCA, we had added a column for "current LOS". « File: corridorimp with Utility Impacts.xls » this is from my telephone conversation with Bernard today: Bernard asked to explain "capacity". How does each project improve capacity? Bernard would like to know the meaning of "20.0" in second row under "no. of lanes to construct" column? Is it 20 lanes? Is this a typo? Bernard said this is a good table - keep for reference. what he really needs from us for the CIE update this year is a table - we'll need to make a new one - that shows only 5 years out (2009/10-2013/14) with the following: explain what "future LOS" means - is this when the project is completed? Give projections - provide "future" date when a project will be completed and how it affects the Los. The table should deal only w/Los standard conditions and projected for next 5 years (year by year: 2009/10, 2010/11, 2011/12, 2012/13 and 2013/14). At what point does the road start to fail or improve - show this. Provide demonstration if those improvements are done: "Los will be _". Provide anticipated dates for improvements. Conditions w/o improvement 2013/14, LOS Conditions w/anticipated improvements 2013/14, LOS Bernard questions the project in table for Lakeview rtoad from Ft. Harrison to Missouri with proposed improvement: 4LU to 2LD (he says this will "raise eyebrows" because the lanes are being reduced). He would like to know how this project is improving Los. I said I would discuss it further with our Traffic Engineer and get back with him on it. would you have some time next week to get together to discuss Bernard's comments? Thanks. sandy Sandra E. Herman Planner III Planning Department city of Clearwater, Florida 100 south Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756-5520 PO Box 4748, 33758-4748 Telephone: (727) 562-4586 Fax: (727) 562-4865 sandra.herman@myclearwater.com Page 2 City Ten Year Corridor Improvement Plan FY 2008-2018 FY 2008-2018 e ment rom o Juris- dic- tion roposed Im rovement Reason for Improve- ment Lane Length LF Addl'I ROW Width Needed FT Add'I ROW Area Needed SF OW Cost No. Lanes to Con- struct Lane-feet to Construct onstruction Cost otal Cost tatus ate urrent Los dopted Los uture Los ri- oirt Ba shore Blvd Drew St. San Mateo Cit Relocate Roa Safet 2,400 6 14,400 $ 1,440,000 2.0 4,800 $ 513,934 $ 1,953,934 Const FY 11/12' C D C 1 Court Street Missouri MLK Av State 4LD to 6LD Ca acit 1,250 24 30,000 $ 3,000,000 2.0 2,500 $ 267,674 $ 3,267,674 Desi n FY 09/10 F D D 2 Drew Street Osceola MyrtleAv Cit 4LU to 4LD Ca acit 1,690 6 10,140 $ 1,014,000 1.5 2,535 $ 271,422 $ 1,285,422 Desi n FY 10/11 D D C 3 Druid Road Ft Harrison U.S. 19 City Lengthen turn lanes Ca acit 1,600 12 19,200 $ 1,920,000 1.0 1,600 $ 171,311 $ 2,091,311 Desi n FY 11/12 D D C 4 Hi hland Avenue Sunset Pt Union St City 2LU to 2LD Ca acit 2,670 6 16,020 $ 1,602,000 1.0 2,670 $ 285,876 $ 1,887,876 Desi n FfY 14/15 D D C 7 Lakeview Road Ft Harrison Missouri Cit 4LU/2L to 2LD Ca acit 4,200 0 none $ - 1.0 4,200 $ 449,693 $ 449,693 Desi n FY 13/14 D D C 6 Martin Luther Kin Av Drew St Belleair Rd Cit 2LU to 2LD Ca acit 10,550 6 63,300 $ 6,330,000 1.0 10,550 $ 1,129,585 $ 7,459,585 Desi n FY 12/13 D D C $ 18,395,495 Lane Width FT 12 ROW cost er SF $ 100.00 Construction cost er 12' wide lane $ 107.07 Need to construct 2LU to 2LD New divider (1/2 lane) + new 1/2 lane = 1 lane 4LU to 4LD New divider (1/2 lane) + new 1/2 lane = 1 lane 4LD to 6LD 2 new lanes = 2.0 lanes 4LU to 2LD New divider (1/2 lane) + remove 2 lanes (1 lane equiv.) = 1.5 lanes Lengthen tum 1 new lane Prioirt 1 $ 1,953,934 Prioirt 2 $ 3,267,674 Prioirt 3 $ 1,285,422 Prioirt 4 $ 2,091,311 Prioirt 5 $ 7,459,585 Prioirt 6 $ 449,693 Prioirt 7 $ 1,887,876 $ 18,395,495 Note: Blue denotes design phases, Green denotes construction and Red denotes completion of project. • Printed 10/20/2009 10:23 AM Page 1 of 1 r~ PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOLS ~~ ~ ~ck.1,x. F'l+..w ~~w~.a«~ ~,~,,c 0" - ~ ~a !-..ta+a~ C~.~ ""° ~'~e.t-tom Y r~~ William Horne, City Manager a ,~' Clearwater City Hall, 3`d Floor 112 S. Osceola Avenue, PO Box 4748 Clearwater, FL 33756 August 6, 2009 Dear Mr. Horne, ~ Received AUG 13 2009 Cifij Mcsrtc~er's ®lfice ADMINISTRATION BUILOINO 307 Fourth St. SW P.O. Box 2942 Largo, FL 33779-2942 Ph 17271588-6000 Fax 17271588-6202 SCHOOL BOARD OF PINELLAS COUNTY, FLORIDA Chairperson Peggy L. O'Shea Vice Chairperson Janet R. Clark Mary L. Tyus Brown Carol J. Cook Nina Hayden Linda S. Lerner Robin L. Wikle Superintendent Julie M. Janssen, Ed.D. The Florida Legislature enacted Section 163.31777 Florida Statutes (2002) (also known as S.B. 1906) requiring that the county and the non-exempt municipalities within that county enter into an Interlocal Agreement with the School Board to establish jointly the specific ways in which the plans and processes of the school district and local governments are coordinated. This latest Interlocal Agreement between the School. Board and your City was Board approved on December 12, 2006. Please find attached for your review the Tentative Five-Year Facilities Work Program for 2009/10 thru 2013/14. The Program is based on the Educational Plant Survey (EPS) that was approved by the School Board on March 9t", 2004 and approved on May St", 2004 by the Florida Department of Education (FDOE. The newest EPS was approved at the April 21St, 2009 School Board meeting; however, due to additional requirements, the timeline for RDOE validating the required data involved more staff time than anticipated and FDOE was unable to scrutinize and pass judgment on this material. Therefore, the School Board on June 16d', 2009 approved the re-adoption for another year of the current EPS. The School Board will be asked to adopt the Tentative Facilities Work Program at the September 1St" Board Meeting (5:00 p.m.). The final Work Program will be included in the Capital Outlay budget that is to go to the Board for adoption at the Second Public Hearing scheduled for later that evening at 7:00 p.m. Both the Board Meeting and Public Hearing are to be held in the Conference Hall at the School Administration Building, 301 4`" Street, SW, Largo. Please forward any comments and recommendations concerning the plan to my attention. I can be reached at 588-6172. Sincerely, ~r red Matz, Assistant uperintendent Finance and Business Services Enclosure cc: Dr. Julie M. Janssen, Superintendent Lansing K. Johansen, Chief Business Officer Michael Bessette, Facilities & Operations The School Board of Pinellas County, Florida, prohibits any and all forms of discrimination and harassment based on race, color, sex, religion, national origin, marital status, age, sexual orientation or disability in any of its programs, services or activities. n ~~~J~1~ lam./ AUG 182009 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CITY OF CLEARWATER • ' PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan INTRODUCTION The 5-Year District Fadlities Work Program is a very important document. The Department of Education, Legislature, Governor's Office, Division of Community Planning (growth management), local governments, and others use the work program information for various needs including funding, planning, and as the authoritative source for school facilities related information. The district's fadlities work program must be a complete, balanced capital outlay plan that is financially feasible. The first year of the work program is the districts capital outlay budget. To determine if the work program is balanced and financially feasible, the "Net Available Revenue" minus the "Funded Projects Costs" should sum to zero for "Remaining Funds". If the "Remaining Funds" balance is zero, then the plan is both balanced and financially feasible. If the "Remaining Funds" balance is_negatiye, then the plan is neither_balanced nor.feasible. __ _ .. _ If the "Remaining. Funds" balance is greater than zero, the plan may be feasible, but it is not balanced. . Summary of revenue/expenditures available for new construction and remodeling projects only. 2009 - 2010 2010 - 2011 2011 - 2012 2012 - 2013 2013 - 2014 Five Year Total Total Revenues $4,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,000,000 Total Project Costs $4,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,000,000 Difference (Remaining Funds) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 District PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT Fiscal Year Range CERTIFICATION By submitting this electronic document, we certify that all information provided in this 5-year district facilities work program is accurate, all capital outlay resources are fully reported, and the expenditures planned represent a complete and balanced capital outlay plan for the district. The district Superintendent and Chief Financial Officer have approved the information contained in this 5-year district facilities work program, and they have approved this submission and certify to the Department of Education, Office of Educational Facilities, that the information contained herein is correct and accurate. We understand that any information contained in this 5-year district facilities work program is subject to audit by the Auditor General of the State of Florida. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER DISTRICT POINT-OF-CONTACT PERSON JOB TITLE PHONE NUMBER E-MAIL ADDRESS Page 1 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM ~ D PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan Expenditures Expenditure for Maintenance, Repair and Renovation from 1.50-Mills and PECO Annually, prior to the adoption of the district school budget, each school board must prepare a tentative district facilities work program that includes a schedule of major repair and renovation projects necessary to maintain the educational and ancillary facilities of the district. _, .. { _,_ , :-_ _ - '° - - w_:.. ~ ,. , ... ---- ... _ _ _ 2b~9 - ?090 ,4etaat 9udgel 20'60 - 201.1. ~ - _Prejepted ~ ~ 2011- 20~bc~- f?rojecEed 2f#72 - 2(593 Projec/ed X93 - X14 Prdjected- " i _ d -, HVAC $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Locations: No Locations for this expenditure. Flooring $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Locations: No Locations for this expenditure. Roofing $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Locations: No Locations for this expenditure. Safety to Life $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Locations: No Locations for this expenditure. Fencing $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Locations: No Locations for this expenditure. Parking $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Locations: No Locations for this expenditure. Electrical $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Locations: No Locations for this expenditure. Fire Alarm $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Locations: No Locations for this expenditure. Telephone/Intercom System $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Locations: No Locations for this expenditure. Closed Circuit Television $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Locations: No Locations for this expenditure. Paint $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Locations: No Locations for this expenditure. Maintenance/Repair $39,500,000 $39,500,000 $39,500,000 $39,500,000 $39,500,000 $197,500,000 Page 2 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM • PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT • 2009 - 2010 Work Plan Locations: 49TH STREET BUS COMPOUND, ANONA ELEMENTARY, AREA 1 SUPERINTENDENTS OFFICE, AZALEA ELEMENTARY, AZALEA MIDDLE, BARDMOOR ELEMENTARY, BAUDER ELEMENTARY, BAY POINT ELEMENTARY, BAY POINT MIDDLE, BAY VISTA FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY, BAYSIDE HIGH, BEAR CREEK ELEMENTARY, BELCHER ELEMENTARY, BELLEAIR ELEMENTARY, BERNICE JOHNSON STUDENT SERVICES CENTER, BLANTON ELEMENTARY, BOCA CIEGA SENIOR HIGH, BROOKER CREEK ELEMENTARY, CALVIN HUNSINGER EXCEPTIONAL STUDENT EDUCATION CTR, CAMPBELL PARK ELEMENTARY, CENTER FOR PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION, CLEARWATER INTERMEDIATE, CLEARWATER SENIOR HIGH, CLEVELAND BUS COMPOUND, COUNTRYSIDE SENIOR HIGH, CROSS BAYOU ELEMENTARY, CURLEW CREEK ELEMENTARY, CURTIS FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY, CURTIS FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY (OLD), CYPRESS WOODS ELEMENTARY, DISSTON GIFTED PROGRAM, DIXIE M HOLLINS SENIOR HIGH, DOUG JAMERSON ELEMENTARY, DRUID COMPLEX, DUNEDIN ELEMENTARY (NEW), DUNEDIN HIGHLAND MIDDLE, DUNEDIN SENIOR HIGH, EAST LAKE SENIOR HIGH, EISENHOWER ELEMENTARY, ENTERPRISE VILLAGE, GUS A. STAVROS INSTITUTE, EUCLID CENTER, FAIRMOUNT PARK ELEMENTARY, FOREST LAKES ELEMENTARY, FRONTIER ELEMENTARY FUGUITT , ELEMENTARY GARRISON-JONES ELEA~ENTARY GIBBS_SENIOR HIGH, GULFP~RT_ELEMENTARY, HAMILTON-DISST'ON S E D CENTER,H_ARRIS TIPS CENTER, HIGH POINTELEMENTARY_(NEW), HIGII.POINT ELEMENTARY (~LD)~ HIGH P-OMIT SERVICE CENTER, HIGHLAND LAKES ELEMENTARY, JAMES SANDERLIN ELEMENTARY, JOHN HOPKINS MIDDLE, JOHN M SEXTON ELEMENTARY, JOSEPH L CARWISE MIDDLE, KENNEDY MIDDLE, LAKE SAINT GEORGE ELEMENTARY, LAKEVIEW FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY, LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY, LAKEWOOD SENIOR HIGH, LARGO MIDDLE, LARGO SENIOR HIGH, LEALMAN AVENUE ELEMENTARY, LEALMAN BUS COMPOUND, LEALMAN INTERMEDIATE, LEILA DAVIS ELEMENTARY, LYNCH ELEMENTARY, MADEIRA BEACH ELEMENTARY, MADEIRA BEACH MIDDLE, MARJORIE KINNAN RAWLINGS ELEMENTARY, MAXIMO ELEMENTARY, MCMULLEN-BOOTH ELEMENTARY, MEADOWLAWN MIDDLE, MELROSE ELEMENTARY, MILDRED HELMS ELEMENTARY, MORGAN FITZGERALD MIDDLE, MOUNT VERNON ELEMENTARY, NEW HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY, NINA HARRIS EXCEPTIONAL STUDENT EDUCATION CENTER, NORTH SHORE ELEMENTARY, NORTH WARD SECONDARY SCHOOL, NORTHEAST SENIOR HIGH, NORTHWEST ELEMENTARY, NORWOOD SECONDARY SCHOOL, OAK GROVE MIDDLE, OAKHURST ELEMENTARY, OLDSMAR ELEMENTARY, OLDSMAR SCHOOL SERVICE CENTER, ORANGE GROVE ELEMENTARY, OSCEOLA MIDDLE, OSCEOLA SENIOR HIGH, OZONA ELEMENTARY, PALM HARBOR MIDDLE, PALM HARBOR UNIVERSITY SENIOR HIGH, PASADENA FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY, PAUL B STEPHENS EXCEPTIONAL STUDENT EDUCATION CTR, PERKINS ELEMENTARY, PINELLAS CENTRAL ELEMENTARY, PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, PINELLAS PARK ELEMENTARY, PINELLAS PARK MIDDLE, PINELLAS PARK SENIOR HIGH, PINELLAS SECONDARY SCHOOL, PINELLAS VOCATIONAL-TECHNICAL INSTITUTE, PLUMB ELEMENTARY, PONCE DE LEON ELEMENTARY, RICHARD L SANDERS SCHOOL, RIDGECREST ELEMENTARY, ROBINSON SCHOOL SERVICE CENTER, SAFETY HARBOR ELEMENTARY, SAFETY HARBOR MIDDLE, SAFETY HARBOR SECONDARY SCHOOL, SAN JOSE ELEMENTARY, SANDY LANE ELEMENTARY, SAWGRASS LAKE ELEMENTARY, SEMINOLE ELEMENTARY, SEMINOLE MIDDLE, SEMINOLE SENIOR HIGH, SEMINOLE VOCATIONAL EDUCATION CENTER, SEVENTY-FOURTH STREET ELEMENTARY, SHORE ACRES ELEMENTARY, SKYCREST ELEMENTARY, SKYVIEW ELEMENTARY, SOUTHERN OAK ELEMENTARY, ST PETERSBURG SENIOR HIGH, ST PETERSBURG VOCATIONAL-TECHNICAL INSTITUTE, STARKEY ELEMENTARY, SUNSET HILLS ELEMENTARY, SUTHERLAND ELEMENTARY, TARPON SPRINGS BUS GARAGE, TARPON SPRINGS ELEMENTARY, TARPON SPRINGS FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY, TARPON SPRINGS MIDDLE, TARPON SPRINGS SENIOR HIGH, THURGOOD MARSHALL ^ FUNDAMENTAL MIDDLE, TITLE ONE CENTER, TOMLINSON ADULT LEARNING CENTER, TYRONE ELEMENTARY, TYRONE MIDDLE, WALSINGHAM ELEMENTARY, WALTER POWNALL SERVICE CENTER, WESTGATE ELEMENTARY, WOODLAWN ELEMENTARY Sub Total: ;39,500,000 x39,500,000 $39,500,000 x39,500,000 x39,500,000 x197,500,000 PECO Maintenance Expenditures $2,232,246 $5,302,631 $8,581,731 $9,197,645 $10,330,926 $35,645,179 1.50 Mill Sub Total: $45,252,754 $42,182,369 ,$38,903,269 $38,287,355 $37,154,074 $201,779,821 - 9 _ 0 . t' . ~.~.. . , e 1 .gt,-~_: o. ~~n..... PaL4?1>>~....,_ Pw.Je. e,: Infrastructure $7,985,000 $7,985,000 $7,985,000 $7,985,000 $7,985,000 $39,925,000 Page 3 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM ~ OO PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan Locations 49TH STREET BUS COMPOUND, ANONA ELEMENTARY, AREA 1 SUPERINTENDENTS OFFICE, AZALEA ELEMENTARY, AZALEA MIDDLE, BARDMOOR ELEMENTARY, BAUDER ELEMENTARY, BAY POINT ELEMENTARY, BAY POINT MIDDLE, BAY VISTA FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY, BAYSIDE HIGH, BEAR CREEK ELEMENTARY, BELCHER ELEMENTARY, BELLEAIR ELEMENTARY, BERNICE JOHNSON STUDENT SERVICES CENTER, BLANTON ELEMENTARY, BOCA CIEGA SENIOR HIGH, BROOKER CREEK ELEMENTARY, CALVIN HUNSINGER EXCEPTIONAL STUDENT EDUCATION CTR, CAMPBELL PARK ELEMENTARY, CENTER FOR PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION, CLEARWATER INTERMEDIATE, CLEARWATER SENIOR HIGH, CLEVELAND BUS COMPOUND, COUNTRYSIDE SENIOR HIGH, CROSS BAYOU ELEMENTARY, CURLEW CREEK ELEMENTARY, CURTIS FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY, CURTIS FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY (OLD), CYPRESS WOODS ELEMENTARY, DISSTON GIFTED PROGRAM, DIXIE M HOLLINS SENIOR HIGH, DOUG JAMERSON ELEMENTARY, DRUID COMPLEX, DUNEDIN ELEMENTARY (NEW), DUNEDIN HIGHLAND MIDDLE, DUNEDIN SENIOR HIGH, EAST LAKE SENIOR HIGH, EISENHOWER ELEMENTARY, ENTERPRISE VILLAGE, GUS A. STAVROS INSTITUTE, EUCLID CENTER, FAIRMOUNT PARK ELEMENTARY, FOREST LAKES ELEMENTARY, FRONTIER - - - ENTARY FUGU17"~ELEMEN-TARY,-GARRISON-aIONES-ELEMENTARYrG1BBS-SENIOR-HIGH, GULFPDRTELEMENTARY, HAMILTON DISSTON S-€ D CENTER, HARRIS TIPS CENTER,-HIGH POINT.ELEMENTARY (NE-W), HIGH POINT ELEMENTARY (OLD), HIGH POINT SERVICE CENTER, HIGHLAND LAKES ELEMENTARY, JAMES SANDERLIN ELEMENTARY, JOHN HOPKINS MIDDLE, JOHN M SEXTON ELEMENTARY, JOSEPH L CARWISE MIDDLE, KENNEDY MIDDLE, LAKE SAINT GEORGE ELEMENTARY, LAKEVIEW FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY, LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY, LAKEWOOD SENIOR HIGH, LARGO MIDDLE, LARGO SENIOR HIGH, LEALMAN AVENUE ELEMENTARY, LEALMAN BUS COMPOUND, LEALMAN INTERMEDIATE, LEILA DAVIS ELEMENTARY, LYNCH ELEMENTARY, MADEIRA BEACH ELEMENTARY, MADEIRA BEACH MIDDLE, MARJORIE KINNAN RAWLINGS ELEMENTARY, MAXIMO ELEMENTARY, MCMULLEN-BOOTH ELEMENTARY, MEADOWLAWN MIDDLE, MELROSE ELEMENTARY, MILDRED HELMS ELEMENTARY, MORGAN FITZGERALD MIDDLE, MOUNT VERNON ELEMENTARY, NEW HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY, NINA HARRIS EXCEPTIONAL STUDENT EDUCATION CENTER, NORTH SHORE ELEMENTARY, NORTH WARD SECONDARY SCHOOL, NORTHEAST SENIOR HIGH, NORTHWEST ELEMENTARY, NORWOOD SECONDARY SCHOOL, OAK GROVE MIDDLE, OAKHURST ELEMENTARY, OLDSMAR ELEMENTARY, OLDSMAR SCHOOL SERVICE CENTER, ORANGE GROVE ELEMENTARY, OSCEOLA MIDDLE, OSCEOLA SENIOR HIGH, OZONA ELEMENTARY, PALM HARBOR MIDDLE, PALM HARBOR UNIVERSITY SENIOR HIGH, PASADENA FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY, PAUL B STEPHENS EXCEPTIONAL STUDENT EDUCATION CTR, PERKINS ELEMENTARY, PINELLAS CENTRAL ELEMENTARY, PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BUILDING, PINELLAS PARK ELEMENTARY, PINELLAS PARK MIDDLE, PINELLAS PARK SENIOR HIGH, PINELLAS SECONDARY SCHOOL, PINELLAS VOCATIONAL-TECHNICAL INSTITUTE, PLUMB ELEMENTARY, PONCE DE LEON ELEMENTARY, RICHARD L SANDERS SCHOOL, RIDGECREST ELEMENTARY, ROBINSON SCHOOL SERVICE CENTER, SAFETY HARBOR ELEMENTARY, SAFETY HARBOR MIDDLE, SAFETY HARBOR SECONDARY SCHOOL, SAN JOSE ELEMENTARY, SANDY LANE ELEMENTARY, SAWGRASS LAKE ELEMENTARY, SEMINOLE ELEMENTARY, SEMINOLE MIDDLE, SEMINOLE SENIOR HIGH, SEMINOLE VOCATIONAL EDUCATION CENTER, SEVENTY-FOURTH STREET ELEMENTARY, SHORE ACRES ELEMENTARY, SKYCREST ELEMENTARY, SKYVIEW ELEMENTARY, SOUTHERN OAK ELEMENTARY, ST PETERSBURG SENIOR HIGH, ST PETERSBURG VOCATIONAL-TECHNICAL INSTITUTE, STARKEY ELEMENTARY, SUNSET HILLS ELEMENTARY, SUTHERLAND ELEMENTARY, TARPON SPRINGS BUS GARAGE, TARPON SPRINGS ELEMENTARY, TARPON SPRINGS FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY, TARPON SPRINGS MIDDLE, TARPON SPRINGS SENIOR HIGH, THURGOOD MARSHALL FUNDAMENTAL MIDDLE, TITLE ONE CENTER, TOMLINSON ADULT LEARNING CENTER, TYRONE ELEMENTARY, TYRONE MIDDLE, WALSINGHAM ELEMENTARY, WALTER POWNALL SERVICE CENTER, WESTGATE ELEMENTARY, WOODLAWN ELEMENTARY Total: $47,485,000 547,485,000 547,485,000 547,485,000 547,485,000 3237,425,000 Local 1.50 Mill Expenditure For Maintenance, Repair and Renovation Anticipated expenditures expected from local funding sources over the years covered by the current work plan. Item 2005.2010 ActOal Budget 2010 n 2011 PtOjected 2011' - 2012 ! proj8cted s 2012 - 2013 Proj9Gted , L04 3 - 2014 Rto)eated 'total' Remaining Maint and Repair from 1.5 Mills $45,252,754 $42,182,369 $38,903,269 $38,287,355 $37,154,074 $201,779,821 Maintenance/Repair Salaries $2,671,500 $2,671,500 $2,671,500 $2,671,500 $2,671,500 $13,357,500 School Bus Purchases $370,353 $370,353 $370,353 $370,353 $0 $1,481,412 Other Vehicle Purchases $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Capital Outlay Equipment $17,881,900 $19,000,000 $19,000,000 $19,000,000 $19,000,000 $93,881,900 RenULease Payments $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 COP Debt Service $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 RenULease Relocatables $2,269,674 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,269,674 Environmental Problems $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 s.1011.14 Debt Service $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Special Facilities Construction Account $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Page 4 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM • PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT :7 2009 - 2010 Work Plan Premiums for Property Casualty Insurance - 1011.71 (4a,b) $8,200,000 $8,200,000 $8,200,000 $8,200,000 $8,200,000 $41,000,000 Contingency $5,000,000 $5,000,000 $5,000,000 $5,000,000 $5,000,000 $25,000,000 carry over $8,329,353 $15,930,301 $28,649,027 $45,270,931 $68,479,781 $166,659,393 Safety initiative $4,500,000 $4,500,000 $4,500,000 $4,500,000 $4,500,000 $22,500,000 Instructional equipment transfer $4,000,000 $4,000,000 $4,000,000 $4,000,000 $4,000,000 $20,000,000 Site acquisition $100,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $100,000 Local Expenditure Totals: 598,575,534 6101,854,523 5111,294,149 5127,300,139 5149,005,355 $588,029,700 Revenue 1.50 Mill Revenue Source Schedule of Estimated Capital Outlay Revenue from each currently approved source which is estimated to be available for expenditures on the projects included in the tentative district facilities work program. All amounts are NET after considering carryover balances, interest earned, new COP's, 1011.14 and 1011.15 loans, etc. Districts cannot use 1.5-Mill funds for salaries except for those explicitly associated with maintenance/repair projects. (1011.71 (5), F.S.) " "' item `; Fupd'°, 20Q9 - ~b.10 '2Q10.2t)11 ~ 2011 - 2012 20] 21.2013' ~ • 2013 201As ' - .=A..,, ` ~ Total ~. ~` Aclu~I,Va(up _ ProJ~:_ . __ ~ oj~,_ ` - _Pr, j~~ted-. _.p~p~~~~_ t (1)Non-exempt property $69,846,303,858 $63,495,170,966 $64,572,218,810 $66,242,752,610 $68,319,753,280 $332,476,199,524 assessed valuation (2) The Millege projected for 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 discretionary capital outlay per 6.1011.71 (3) Full value of the 1.50-Mill $116,119,480 $105,560,722 $107,351,314 $110,128,576 $113,581,590 $552,741,682 discretionary capital outlay per s.1011.71 (4) Value of the portion of the 1.50 370 $99,530,983 $90,480,619 $92,015,412 $94,395,922 $97,355,648 $473,778;584 -Mill ACTUALLY levied (5) Difference of lines (3) and (4) $16,588,497 $15,080,103 $15,335,902 $15,732,654 $16,225,942 $78,963,098 PECO Revenue Source The figure in the row designated "PECO Maintenance" will be subtracted from funds available for new construction because PECO maintenance dollars cannot be used for new construction. , .Item . .. ~_ ;1. ti _ -~ - - Fund ,~, .~ ~~ ~ 2009 2d9 Q Actual Butlgei~, " 2010 - 20'1 i _ PiojeGted 20 .- 2012 Projected 201-2 = 2013 ; ~`~QC9je,Fted. ~ 2013 - 2014.: ' PI'djecled. Tothl . PECO New Construction 340 $0 $0 $303,885 $1,210,639 $3,334,225 $4,848,749 PECO Maintenance Expenditures $2,232,246 $5,302,631 $8,581,731 $9,197,645 $70,330,926 $35,645,179 $2,232,246 55,302,631 $8,885,616 $10,408,284 $13,665,151 $40,493,928 CO 8~ DS Revenue Source Revenue from Capital Outlay and Debt Service funds. ~i' ~ ,, Iterrj- ` ~ Fund 2009 201;11F 2Q10 - 2D11 `~Oj - 2012 201 2 2013 2p13 - 2014 ~ ~ Tofal ~ ' ~-~, ~,Q,ctual Budg~1 , Projected `~tqj° coed,- , Proyected , Projected• CO & DS Cash Flow-through 360 $503,313 $503,313 $503,313 $503,313 $503,313 $2,516,565 Distributed Page 5 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM ~ ~ PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan CO 8c DS Interest on Undistributed CO 360 $41,238 $41,238 $41,238 $41,238 $41,238 $206,190 5544,551 $544,551 $544,551 $544,551 $544,551 :2,722,755 Fair Share Revenue Source All legally binding commitments for proportionate fair-share mitigation for impacts on public school facilities must be included in the 5-year district work program. Nothing reported for #his section: - -- --- - --- -- - -- - Sales Surtax Referendum Specific information about any referendum fora 1-cent or %cent surtax referendum during the previous year. Did the school dlstrict hold a surtax referendum during the past fiscal year 2008 - 2009? No Additional Revenue Source Any additional revenue sources ., e. Item _ ~ 2009- 2010 2010 - 2011 _ 201'1 - 2012 ~ _ ~ 2012 - 201.3 ' _. _,_. ? 2013.2014 • ,_ _ _ _- '; 7afal ActualV~lue ;__ Projected _ Projected Projected _' ; Projected '. Proceeds from a s.1011.14/15 F.S. Loans $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 District Bonds -Voted local bond $o $o $o $o $o $o referendum proceeds per s.9, Art VII State Constitution Proceeds from Special Act Bonds $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 Estimated Revenue from CO 8~ DS Bond $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Sale Proceeds from Voted Capital $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Improvements millage Other Revenue for Other Capital Projects $o $o $o $o $o $0 Proceeds from 1/2 cent sales surtax $o $o $o $o $o $o authorized by school board Proceeds from local governmental $0 $o $o $0 $0 $0 infrastructure sales surtax Proceeds from Certificates of $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 Participation (GOP's) Sale Classrooms First Bond proceeds amount $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 authorized in FY 1997-98 Classrooms for Kids $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 District Equity Recognition $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Federal Grants $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Proportionate share mitigation (actual $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 cash revenue only, not in kind donations) Page 6 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM • PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT • 2009 - 2010 Work Plan Impact fees received $o $o $0 $o $0 $o Private donations $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Grants from local governments or not-for- $0 $o $o $0 $o $0 profit organizations Interest, Including Profit On Investment $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $2,500,000 $12,500,000 Revenue from Bonds pledging proceeds $o $0 $0 $o $0 $o from 1 cent or 1/2 cent Sales Surtax Total Fund Balance Carried Forward $0 $8,329,353 $15,930,301 $28,649,027 $45,270,931 $98,179,612 General Capital Outlay Obligated Fund $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $o Balance Carried Forward From Total Fund Balance Carried Forward Special Facilities Construction Account $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 One Cent - 1/2 Cent Sales Surtax Debt $o $0 $0 $o $0 $0 Service From Total Fund Balance Carried Forward Capital Outlay Projects Funds Balance $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Carried Forward From Total Fund Balance Carried Forward Subtotal $2,500,000 $10,829,353 $18,430,301 ;31,149,027 $47,770,931 $110,879,612 Total Revenue Summary ~~ ) _' ~ '1(am Name, t { 2009 ~~i0` 2 .10 2011 ~ 20131 2012 20'~~2i 201'3 ~~13 2014''.. ~ Fiye Ye~,r.T~t~(` Budge~$ ~~o~j~c~Sf~ ~P~oJec>»ed ; ~'~oJ~et~~~ F~ect~d~ Local 1.5 Mill Discretionary Capital Outlay $99,530,983 $90,480,619 $92,015,412 $94,395,922 $97,355,648 $473,778,584 Revenue PECO and 1.5 Mitl Maint and Other 1.5 ($98,575,534) ($101,854,523) ($111,294,149) ($127,300,139) ($149,005,355) ($588,029,700) Mill Expenditures PECO Maintenance Revenue $2,232,246 $5,302,631 $8,581,731 $9,197,645 $10,330,926 $35,645,179 Available 1.50 Mlll for New $955,449 ($11,373,904) ($19,278,737) ($32,904,217) ($51,649,707) ($114,251,116) Construction ItemName ~~,T 2009 .2010:.1 '=,Budget _ '201,0 - 2011 iProj'ected 201'1-= 2012 Prole,~ted;_ ~ '2012-- 2043 ~ Projected - 2013 20:1'4: RPolect~~_ t~ive Yea,~sTotal ;° ..._~,. CO 8 DS Revenue $544,551 $544,551 $544,551 $544,551 $544,551 $2,722,755 PECO New Constnlction Revenue $0 $0 $303,885 $1,210,639 $3,334,225 $4,848,749 Other/Additional Revenue $2,500,000 $10,829,353 $18,430,301 $31,149,027 $47,770,931 $110,679,612 Total Additional Revenue $3,044,551 $11,373,904 $19,278,737 532,904,217 $51,649,707 $118,251,116 Total Available Revenue $4;O1)l);000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,000,000 Project Schedules Page 7 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM 0 0 PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan Capacity Project Schedules A schedule of capital outlay projects necessary to ensure the availability of satisfactory classrooms for the projected student enrollment in K-12 programs. _ ' t~nQjeet Oascription Loeaeion ~ 2009 - 2b10 '21,10 - 2(711 2011 - 2012 ` ~ ~ 2.012 -20:13. _. `201,3;-:2014 .: `Total Fundi~d Additional classrooms for class size PALM HARBOR UNIVERSITY SENIOR HIGH Planned Cost: $3,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,500,000 Yes Student Stations: 125 0 0 0 0 125 Total Classrooms: 5 0 0 0 0 5 Gross Sq Ft: 6,250 0 0 0 0 6,250 Identify district relocatables Location not specified Planned Cost: $500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $500,000 Yes Student Stations: 175 0 0 0 0 175 Total Classrooms: 7 0 0 0 0 7 Gross Sq Ft: 6,048 0 0 0 0 6,048 Planned Cost: $4,000,000 SO $0 $0 SO 54,000,000 Student Stations: 300 0 0 0 0 300 Total Classrooms: 12 0 0 0 0 12 Gross Sq Ft: 12,298 0 0 0 0 12,298 Other Project Schedules Major renovations, remodeling, and additions of capital outlay projects that do not add capacity to schools. Nothing reported for this section. Additional Project Schedules Any projects that are not identified in the last approved educational plant survey. Nothing reported for this section. Non Funded Growth Management Project Schedules Page 8 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM • PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT • 2009 - 2010 Work Plan Schedule indicating which projects, due to planned development, that CANNOT be funded from current revenues projected over the next five years. Nothing reported for this section. Page 9 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM o ~ PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan 7'racl~ing Capacity Tracking Lac'~fion - ... . _ . . 200$~,-~„ _._ AG7,itAL .. .. ,4t ttta(.. # Class , Actual ,.,_ .;-:_A~tUat _ , ~ t~ti~uv __ ry!~w P~lected Projected ' Pi-q~eCted _ .,. ~ ..::_ . -.T,„,._... _ 201D..Satls.. ~.2009.:w,.. ---:200$ :~.. Roo¢ns.. .. Av~[age,~ 20 9 _,. P =-., Stu,. _- _ Rooms to, _,, 201.3--..-- 201 - ~T ~... . ,,.~0'~~.- Stu: Sta. ' 2010 FISH 2009 2009 2010 Capacity be 2014 2014 , 201A Class: Capacit3r. COFTE 2010 Class Utitiz.atian Addedtt2e COFTE UUlizateon Size Sue ' moved ANONA ELEMENTARY 423 423 418 23 18 99.00 % 0 0 397 94.00 % 17 AZALEA ELEMENTARY 686 686 571 37 15 83.00 % 0 0 542 79.00 % 15 AZALEA MIDDLE 1,499 1,349 1,193 63 19 88.00 % 0 0 1,133 84.00 % 18 BARDMOOR 647 647 584 19 31 90.00 % 0 0 554 86.00 % 29 ELEMENTARY LARGO MIDDLE 1,123 1,011 1,045 49 21 103.00 % 0 0 992 98.00 % 20 BAUDER ELEMENTARY 798 798 736 17 43 92.00 % 0 0 698 87.00 % 41 BAY POINT 771 771 662 41 16 86.00 % 0 0 628 81.00 % 15 ELEMENTARY BAY POINT MIDDLE 1,585 1,427 1,264 66 19 89.00 % 0 0 1,200 84.00 % 18 BAY VISTA 619 619 643 33 19 104.00 % 0 0 610 99.00 % 18 FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY BEAR CREEK 576 576 527 31 17 91.00 % 0 0 500 87.00 % 16 ELEMENTARY BELCHER ELEMENTARY 723 723 646 37 17 89.00 % 0 0 613 85.00 % 17 BELLEAIR ELEMENTARY 507 507 584 27 22 115.00 % 0 0 554 109.00 % 21 BLANTON ELEMENTARY 692 692 587 38 15 85.00 % 0 0 557 80.00 % 15 BOCA CIEGA SENIOR 2,025 1,924 1,717 81 21 89.00 % 0 0 1,629 85.00 % 20 HIGH CAMPBELL PARK 638 638 614 35 18 96.00 % 0 0 582 91.00 % 17 ELEMENTARY JOSEPH L CARWISE 1,475 1,328 1,303 62 21 98.00 % 0 0 1,237 93.00 % 20 MIDDLE CLEARVIEW AVENUE 468 468 400 24 17 85.00 % 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 ELEMENTARY PAUL B STEPHENS 307 307 213 30 7 69.00 % 0 0 202 66.00 % 7 EXCEPTIONAL STUDENT EDUCATION CTR CLEARWATER SENIOR 2,323 2,207 1,993 94 21 90.00 % 0 0 1,892 86.00 % 20 HIGH COUNTRYSIDE SENIOR 2,613 2,482 2,199 110 20 89.00 % 0 0 2,087 84.00 % 19 HIGH CROSS BAYOU 772 772 548 41 13 71.00 % 0 0 520 67.00 % 13 ELEMENTARY CURLEW CREEK 594 594 600 30 20 101.00 % 0 0 570 96.00 % 19 ELEMENTARY Page 10 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM :] PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan ROBINSON SCHOOL 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 SERVICE CENTER DISSTON GIFTED 30 0 0 3 0 0.00 % 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 PROGRAM HAMILTON DISSTON S E 299 299 125 29 4 42.00 % 0 0 119 40.00 % 4 D CENTER LEILA DAVIS 857 857 759 28 27 89.00 % 0 0 720 84.00 % 26 ELEMENTARY DIXIE M HOLLINS 2,285 2,171 1,717 96 18 79.00 % 0 0 1,630 75.00 % 17 SENIOR HIGH CURTIS FUNDAMENTAL .. 526- 526 464 27- - 17 88.00 % 0 0 440 84.00 °h 16 ELEMENTARY DUNEDIN SENIOR HIGH 1,843 1,751 1,765 75 24 101.00 % 0 0 1,675 96.00 % 22 DUNEDIN HIGHLAND 1,482 1,334 1,073 64 1.7 80.00 % 0 0 1,019 76.00 % 16 MIDDLE EISENHOWER 792 792 705 43 16 89.00 % 0 0 670 85.00 % 16 ELEMENTARY FAIRMOUNT PARK 723 723 599 39 15 83.00 % 0 0 569 79.00 % 15 ELEMENTARY JOHN M SEXTON 880 880 713 46 15 81.00 % 0 0 676 77.00 % 15 ELEMENTARY MORGAN FITZGERALD 1,662 1,496 1,166 69 17 78.00 % 0 0 1,106 74.00 % 16 MIDDLE FUGUITT ELEMENTARY 762 ~ 762 596 41 15 78.00 % 0 0 566 74.00 % 14 LYNCH ELEMENTARY 791 791 570 40 14 72.00 % 0 0 541 68.00 % 14 PERKINS ELEMENTARY 731 731 552 38 15 76.00 % 0 0 524 72.00 % 14 GARRISON-JONES 678 678 684 37 18 101.00 % 0 0 649 96.00 % 18 ELEMENTARY GIBES SENIOR HIGH 2,451 2,328 1,898 98 19 82.00 % 0 0 1,802 77.00 % 18 GULF BEACHES 428 428 296 22 13 69.00 % 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 ELEMENTARY GULFPORT 579 579 488 31 16 84.00 % 0 0 463 80.00 % 15 ELEMENTARY HARRIS TIPS CENTER 22 22 85 1 85 386.00 % 0 0 81 368.00 % 81 HIGHLAND LAKES 641 641 658 34 19 103.00 % 0 0 625 98.00 % 18 ELEMENTARY CALVIN HUNSINGER 294 294 127 29 4 43.00 % 0 0 121 41.00 % 4 EXCEPTIONAL STUDENT EDUCATION CTR HIGH POINT 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 ELEMENTARY (OLD) KENNEDY MIDDLE 986 887 537 43 12 60.00 % 0 0 509 57.00 % 12 KINGS HIGHWAY 555 555 409 27 15 74.00 % 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 ELEMENTARY LAKEVIEW 406 406 346 17 20 85.00 % 0 0 328 81.00 % 19 FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY LAKEWOOD 651 651 511 35 15 79.00 % 0 0 485 75.00 % 14 ELEMENTARY LAKEWOOD SENIOR 1,904 1,809 1,446 77 19 80.00 % 0 0 1,372 76.00 % 18 HIGH LARGO CENTRAL 462 0 0 22 0 0.00 % 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 ELEMENTARY Page 11 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM ~ ~ V PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan LARGO SENIOR HIGH 2,840 2,698 1,929 121 16 72.00 % 0 0 1,831 68.00 % 15 LEALMAN AVENUE 631 631 443 33 13 70.00 % 0 0 420 67.00 % 13 ELEMENTARY SAFETY HARBOR 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 SECONDARY SCHOOL MADEIRA BEACH 509 509 403 27 15 79.00 % 0 0 382 75.00 % 14 ELEMENTARY MADEIRA BEACH 1,284 1,156 1,008 56 18 87.00 % 0 0 957 83.00 % 17 MIDDLE MAXIMO ELEMENTARY 719 719 612 39 16 85.00 % 0 0. 581 81.00 % 15 MEADOWLAWN MIDDLE 1,424 1,282 1,217 61 20 95.00 % 0 0 1,156 90.00 % 19 MELROSE 552 552 394 28 14 71.00 % 0 0 374 68.00 °k 13 ELEMENTARY MILDRED HELMS 802 802 664 43 15 83.00 % 0 0 630 79.00 % 15 ELEMENTARY TOMLINSON ADULT 402 603 0 23 0 0.00 % 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 LEARNING CENTER MOUNT VERNON 517 517 451 28 16 87.00 % 0 0 428 83.00 % 15 ELEMENTARY NINA HARRIS 409 409 225 37 6 55.00 % 0 0 213 52.00 % 6 EXCEPTIONAL STUDENT EDUCATION CENTER NORTHEAST SENIOR 2,033 1,931 2,015 82 25 104.00 % 0 0 1,913 99.00 % 23 HIGH NORTH SHORE 466 466 452 25 18 97.00 % 0 0 429 92.00 % 17 ELEMENTARY NORTH WARD 36 36 294 2 147 816.00 % 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 ELEMENTARY (CLEARWATER) NORTH WARD 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 SECONDARY SCHOOL NORTHWEST 721 721 684 38 18 95.00 % 0 0 649 90.00 % 17 ELEMENTARY NORWOOD 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 SECONDARY SCHOOL OAK GROVE MIDDLE 1,263 1,137 1,124 53 21 99.00 % 0 0 1,067 94.00 % 20 OAKHURST 771 771 689 39 18 89.00 % 0 0 654 85.00 % 17 ELEMENTARY OLDSMAR 579 579 548 31 18 95.00 % 0 0 520 90.00 % 17 ELEMENTARY ORANGE GROVE 349 349 374 19 20 107.00 % 0 0 355 102.00 % 19 ELEMENTARY OSCEOLA SENIOR HIGH 2,066 1,963 1,504 84 18 77.00 % 0 0 1,428 73.00 % 17 OSCEOLA MIDDLE 1,356 1,220 1,169 58 20 96.00 % 0 0 1,109 91.00 % 19 OZONA ELEMENTARY 705 705 698 38 18 99.00 % 0 0 663 94.00 % 17 CURTIS FUNDAMENTAL 365 0 0 19 0 0.00 % 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 ELEMENTARY (OLD) PALM HARBOR 430 430 371 23 16 86.00 % 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 ELEMENTARY PALM HARBOR MIDDLE 1,601 1,441 1,414 67 21 98.00 % 0 0 1,342 93.00 % 20 RICHARD L SANDERS 343 343 120 33 4 35.00 % 0 0 114 33.00 % 3 SCHOOL Page 12'of 39 8/11 /2009 4:33:04 PM PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT r: 2009 - 2010 Work Plan PASADENA 456 456 462 24 19 101.00 % 0 0 439 96.00 % 18 FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY CLEARWATER 694 625 371 31 12 59.00 % 0 0 352 56.00 % 11 INTERMEDIATE PINELLAS CENTRAL 638 638 613 35 18 96.00 % 0 0 582 91.00 % 17 ELEMENTARY SEMINOLE 227 227 106 14 8 47.00 % 0 0 100 44.00 % 7 VOCATIONAL EDUCATION CENTER PINELLAS PARK - - - -------71T - 71 - ~3 3fi - ~-- - -- ~$ 92.00 % 0 0 629 88.00 % 17 ELEM€NTARY - PINELLAS PARK MIDDLE 1,318 1,186 995 56 18 84.00 % 0 0 945 80.00 % 17 PINELLAS PARK 2,250 2,138 2,076 97 21 97.00 % 0 0 1,971 92.00 % 20 SENIOR HIGH PLUMB ELEMENTARY 828 828 775 45 17 94.00 % 0 0 736 89.00 % 16 PONCE DE LEON 793 793 716 42 17 90.00 % 0 0 680 86.00 % 16 ELEMENTARY RIDGECREST 665 665 711 36 20 107.00 % 0 0 675 102.00 % 19 ELEMENTARY RIO VISTA 444 444 346 24 14 78.00 % 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 ELEMENTARY RIVIERA MIDDLE 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 SAFETY HARBOR 718 718 656 39 17 91.00 % 0 0 622 87.00 % 16 ELEMENTARY SAFETY HARBOR 1,651 1,486 1,315 69 19 89.00 % 0 0 1,249 84.00 % 18 MIDDLE SAWGRASS LAKE 695 695 606 37 16 87.00 % 0 0 575 83.00 % 16 ELEMENTARY ST PETERSBURG 2,055 1,952 2,140 100 21 110.00 % 0 0 2,032 104.00 % 20 SENIOR HIGH ST PETERSBURG 1,443 1,732 86 68 1 5.00 % 0 0 81 5.00 % 1 VOCATIONAL- TECHNICAL INSTITUTE SAN JOSE 645 645 441 34 13 68.00 % 0 0 419 65.00 % 12 ELEMENTARY SANDY LANE 581 581 538 32 17 93.00 % 0 0 510 88.00 % 16 ELEMENTARY SEMINOLE 733 733 688 31 22 94.00 % 0 0 653 89.00 % 21 ELEMENTARY SEMINOLE SENIOR 2,436 2,314 2,028 95 21 88.00 % 0 0 1,925 83.00 % 20 HIGH SEMINOLE MIDDLE 1,378 1,240 1,206 61 20 97.00 % 0 0 1,145 92.00 % 19 SEVENTY-FOURTH 678 678 509 37 14 75.00 % 0 0 483 71.00 % 13 STREET ELEMENTARY SHORE ACRES 695 695 644 37 17 93.00 % 0 0 611 88.00 % 17 ELEMENTARY JOHN HOPKINS MIDDLE 1,642 1,478 1,274 67 19 86.00 % 0 0 1,209 82.00 % 18 SKYCREST 647 647 655 36 18 101.00 % 0 0 622 96.00 % 17 ELEMENTARY SKYVIEW ELEMENTARY 665 665 545 35 16 82.00 % 0 0 518 78.00 % 15 SOUTHSIDE 44 40 603 2 301 1,507.00 % 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 FUNDAMENTAL MIDDLE SOUTH WARD ELEMENT 0 0 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 Page 13 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan STARKEY ELEMENTARY 701 701 649 38 17 93.00 % 0 0 616 88.00 % 16 MARJORIE KINNAN 712 712 675 38 18 95.00 % 0 0 640 90.00 % 17 RAWLINGS ELEMENTARY TARPON SPRINGS 731 731 489 39 13 67.00 % 0 0 464 63.00 % 12 ELEMENTARY TARPON SPRINGS 1,965 1,867 1,771 81 22 95.00 % 0 0 1,681 90.00 % 21 SENIOR HIGH PINELLAS VOCATIONAL- 925 1,110 75 57 1 7.00 % 0 0 71 6.00 % 1 TEOHNICAt-tNSTiTUTE - _ -- - -- _ __ _ _ _ _ _ TARPON SPRINGS 1,363 1,227 1,146 60 19 93.00 % 0 0 1,088 89.00 % 18 MIDDLE TYRONE ELEMENTARY 938 938 295 48 6 31.00 % 0 0 280 30.00 % 6 TYRONE MIDDLE 1,132 1,019 909 50 18 89.00 % 0 0 864 85.00 % 17 TARPON SPRINGS 254 254 256 13 20 101.00 % 0 0 243 96.00 % 19 FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY WALSINGHAM 677 677 654 26 25 97.00 % 0 0 621 92.00 % 24 ELEMENTARY WESTGATE 742 742 644 39 17 87.00 % 0 0 611 82.00 % 16 ELEMENTARY WOODLAWN 684 684 537 36 15 78.00 % 0 0 510 75.00 % 14 ELEMENTARY EAST LAKE SENIOR 2,176 2,067 2,226 92 24 108.00 % 0 0 2,113 102.00 % 23 HIGH SOUTHERN OAK 590 590 565 31 18 96.00 % 0 0 536 91.00 % 17 ELEMENTARY CYPRESS WOODS 799 799 710 43 17 89.00 % 0 0 674 84.00 % 16 ELEMENTARY SUTHERLAND 623 623 552 33 17 89.00 % 0 0 523 84.00 % 16 ELEMENTARY LAKE SAINT GEORGE 687 687 586 37 16 85.00 % 0 0 556 81.00 % 15 ELEMENTARY DRUID COMPLEX 258 258 29 14 2 11.00 % 0 0 27 10.00 % 2 MCMULLEN-600TH 765 765 708 40 18 93.00 % 0 0 672 88.00 % 17 ELEMENTARY PALM HARBOR 1,875 1,781 2,255 76 30 127.00 % . 300 12 2,141 103.00 % 24 UNIVERSITY SENIOR HIGH BROOKER CREEK 623 623 590 33 18 95.00 % 0 0 560 90.00 % 17 ELEMENTARY FRONTIER 777 777 721 42 17 93.00 % 0 0 684 88.00 % 16 ELEMENTARY COACHMAN 621 559 564 27 21 101.00 % 0 0 0 0.00 % 0 FUNDAMENTAL MIDDLE FOREST LAKES 802 802 712 44 16 89.00 % 0 0 676 84.00 % 15 ELEMENTARY DOUG JAMERSON 673 673 571 36 - 16 85.00 % 0 0 542 81.00 % 15 ELEMENTARY JAMES SANDERLIN 579 579 499 31 16 86.00 % 0 0 474 82.00 % 15 ELEMENTARY THURGOOD MARSHALL 1,268 1,141 749 53 14 66.00 % 0 0 711 62.00 % 13 FUNDAMENTAL MIDDLE SUNSET HILLS 597 597 574 32 18 96.00 % 0 0 545 91.00 % 17 ELEMENTARY Page 14 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT • 2009 - 2010 Work Plan BAYSIDE HIGH 759 607 307 32 10 51.00 % 0 0 291 48.00 % 9 PINELLAS SECONDARY 649 584 182 28 6 31.00 % 0 0 172 29.00 % 6 SCHOOL LEALMAN 579 521 415 25 17 80.00 % 0 0 394 76.00 % 16 INTERMEDIATE HIGH POINT 731 731 619 39 16 85.00 % 0 0 587 80.00 % 15 ELEMENTARY (NEW) DUNEDIN ELEMENTARY 749 749 612 40 15 82.00 % 0 0 581 78.00 % 15 (NEW) NEV11 HEIGTiTS-- -_--- - -- --~ ~9 47 6 35.00 % 0 0 279 33.00 % 6 ELEMENTARY 123,339 118,343 101,040 5,826 17 85.38 % 300 12 92,792 78.21 % 16 The COFTE Projected Total (92,792) for 2013 - 2014 must match the Official Forecasted COFTE Total (92,792) for 2013 - 2014 before this section can be completed. In the event that the COFTE Projected Total does not match the Official forecasted COFTE, then the Balanced Projected COFTE Table should be used to balance COFTE. Relocatable Replacement Number of relocatable classrooms clearly identified and scheduled for replacement in the school board adopted financially feasible 5-year district work program. _: oC a 20Q9 1"0 20011 201 20 2 01:2 - 01~ 13 .: '4 Y$"ar~5 To ANONA ELEMENTARY 0 1 0 0 0 1 BARDMOOR ELEMENTARY 0 3 0 0 0 3 LARGO MIDDLE 0 3 0 0 0 3 BAY POINT ELEMENTARY 0 3 0 0 4 7 BLANTON ELEMENTARY 0 12 0 0 0 12 BOCA CIEGA SENIOR HIGH 0 0 0 19 0 19 JOSEPH L CARWISE MIDDLE 0 4 0 0 0 4 COUNTRYSIDE SENIOR HIGH 0 0 0 6 0 6 CURLEW CREEK ELEMENTARY 0 2 0 0 0 2 LEILA DAVIS ELEMENTARY 0 3 0 11 0 14 DUNEDIN SENIOR HIGH 0 3 0 0 0 3 LYNCH ELEMENTARY 0 11 0 0 0 11 Page 15 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM ~ ~ PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan KENNEDY MIDDLE 0 2 0 0 0 2 LAKEVIEW FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY 0 8 0 0 0 8 LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 2 0 2 LAKEWOOD SENIOR HIGH 0 0 0 3 0 3 MADEIRA BEACH ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 6 0 6 MAXIMO ELEMENTARY 0 3 0 0 8 11 NORTHEAST SENIOR HIGH -- -- - - -- ----. .-- --- -- - -0 -- -2 - _ 0 0 b - 2 OAKHURST ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 4 0 4 OSCEOLA SENIOR HIGH 0 0 0 4 0 4 PALM HARBOR MIDDLE 0 0 0 12 12 24 PONCE DE LEON ELEMENTARY 0 4 0 0 0 4 SAFETY HARBOR ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 11 0 11 ST PETERSBURG SENIOR HIGH 0 0 0 0 6 6 SEMINOLE ELEMENTARY 0 3 0 0 0 3 SEMINOLE SENIOR HIGH 0 2 0 0 0 2 JOHN HOPKINS MIDDLE 0 18 0 0 0 18 SKYCREST ELEMENTARY 0 9 0 0 0 9 SKYVIEW ELEMENTARY 0 5 0 0 0 5 STARKEY ELEMENTARY 0 5 0 0 0 5 TARPON SPRINGS SENIOR HIGH 0 1 0 0 0 1 TARPON SPRINGS MIDDLE 0 6 0 0 0 6 WESTGATE ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 3 0 3 CYPRESS WOODS ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 3 0 3 MCMULLEN-BOOTH ELEMENTARY 0 5 0 0 .0 5 PALM HARBOR UNIVERSITY SENIOR HIGH 5 0 0 0 28 33 BROOKER CREEK ELEMENTARY 0 1 0 0 4 5 FOREST LAKES ELEMENTARY 0 4 0 0 0 4 DOUG JAMERSON ELEMENTARY 0 3 0 0 0 3 Total Relocatable Replacements: 5 126 0 84 62 277 Charter Schools Tracking Information regarding the use of charter schools. Location-7 ype # Reltacatabte Owner Year Started or ' Student Students YearB In Total Charter units br Scheduled Stations Enrolled Contract Students permanent projected for classrooms. ~ 1 . 3013 - 2014 Academic DaVinci-Elem 9 LEASE RENT 1997 116 116 12 118 Page 16 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM • PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT C, 2009 - 2010 Work Plan Plato Academy-Middle 10 LEASE PURCHASE 2004 232 232 5 256 St. Pete Collegiate-High 109 LEASE RENT 2004 209 185 7 200 Athenian Academy-Elem&Middle 13 LEASE RENT 2000 276 276 9 276 Life Skills Center-High 7 LEASE RENT 2004 650 450 7 600 Pinellas Prep-Middle 23 LEASE RENT 2002 375 374 7 396 Life Skills North 7 LEASE RENT 2008 300 250 2 250 Alfred Adier 6 LEASE RENT 2008 51 5i 2 _- 102 Imagine Center 19 LEASE RENT 2008 434 333 2 750 Imagine Middle 12 LEASE RENT 2009 220 47 1 220 215 2,863 2,314 3,168 Special Purpose Classrooms Tracking The number of classrooms that will be used for certain special purposes in the current year, by facility and type of classroom, that the district will, 1), not use for educational purposes, and 2), the co-teaching classrooms that are not open plan classrooms and will be used for educational purposes. c~ ~ i°~~re fEll ~:i a-+.x^-..-T°.c 1r ~~r~~ ~;~X. ?~~y~ ~~~ t sm..;.. 1 r._ a.: . ~.q,... p ~ 'I `` ~~7r~yylr~fi~l~7471r ~~ ,+~)~:.1C~~ f „dL8~1Ri; [._~ e•d~~ ~ EEE ;~az :~ 9 ~~` Y ~s Y ~~ ~A~.~) }¢ ° `~} ~ 9 ~~ ` i xL~i' ... e ell ~ ~ 'F ~'",'~{!~/a~idl~~. ~ i ~.~~tl ^R ~~ :. ~~Y.~ ~••~~. +;,~~'~~.%,~'ll~x . .._. ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .. . PASADENA FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching rrl 1 C 0 S O S• 0 CO 3 0 O S 4 PINELLAS CENTRAL ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 26 17 0 0 0 43 PINELLAS PARK ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 9 7 0 0 0 16 PINELLAS PARK SENIOR HIGH Co-Teaching 0 0 9 0 0 9 PLUMB ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 4 4 0 0 0 8 PONCE DE LEON ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 15 7 0 0 0 22 SAFETY HARBOR ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 9 6 0 0 0 15 SAFETY HARBOR MIDDLE Co-Teaching 0 9 0 0 0 9 SAWGRASS LAKE ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 4 5 0 0 0 9 ST PETERSBURG SENIOR HIGH Co-Teaching 0 0 38 0 0 38 SAN JOSE ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 17 9 0 0 0 26 SANDY LANE ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 12 6 0 0 0 18 SEMINOLE ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 14 16 0 3 0 33 ANONA ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 1 1 0 0 0 2 AZALEA ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 0 0 0 2 0 2 AZALEA MIDDLE Co-Teaching 0 12 0 0 0 12 BARDMOOR ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 2 7 0 0 0 9 Page 17 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM ~ ~ PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan BAUDER ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 0 0 0 3 0 3 BAY POINT MIDDLE Co-Teaching 0 24 0 0 0 24 BAY VISTA FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 17 11 0 0 0 28 BEAR CREEK ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 4 7 0 0 0 11 BELCHER ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 2 4 0 0 0 6 BELLEAIR ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 8 9 0 0 0 17 BOCA C1EGA SENIOR HtPH Co-Teaching -0 0 52 0 0 52 CAMPBELL PARK ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 4 3 0 0 0 7 JOSEPH L CARWISE MIDDLE Co-Teaching 0 21 0 0 0 21 CLEARWATER SENIOR HIGH Co-Teaching 0 0 10 0 0 10 COUNTRYSIDE SENIOR HIGH Co-Teaching 0 0 3 0 0 3 CROSS BAYOU ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 7 8 0 0 0 15 CURLEW CREEK ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 9 6 0 0 0 15 LEILA DAVIS ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 7 2 0 0 0 9 DIXIE M HOLLINS SENIOR HIGH Co-Teaching 0 0 9 0 0 9 DUNEDIN SENIOR HIGH Co-Teaching 0 0 1 0 0 1 DUNEDIN HIGHLAND MIDDLE Co-Teaching 0 5 0 0 0 5 EISENHOWER ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 32 34 0 0 0 66 FAIRMOUNT PARK ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 8 3 0 0 0 11 JOHN M SEXTON ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 16 17 0 5 0 38 MORGAN FITZGERALD MIDDLE Co-Teaching 0 20 0 0 0 20 FUGUITT ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 5 4 0 0 0 9 LYNCH ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 14 8 0 0 0 22 GARRISON-JONES ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 6 2 0 6 0 14 GIBBS SENIOR HIGH Co-Teaching 0 0 55 0 0 55 HIGHLAND LAKES ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 9 8 0 0 0 17 LAKEVIEW FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 0 0 0 5 0 5 LAKEWOOD SENIOR HIGH Co-Teaching 0 0 13 0 0 13 LEALMAN AVENUE ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 5 2 0 0 0 7 MADEIRA BEACH ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 0 4 0 0 0 4 MADEIRA BEACH MIDDLE Co-Teaching 0 16 0 1 0 17 MAXIMO ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 24 12 0 0 0 36 MEADOWLAWN MIDDLE Co-Teaching 0 1 0 0 0 1 MOUNT VERNON ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 18 14 0 0 0 32 NORTHEAST SENIOR HIGH Co-Teaching 0 0 4 0 0 4 Page 18 of 39 8!11!2009 4:33:04 PM r~ PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT • 2009 - 2010 Work Plan NORTH SHORE ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 0 2 0 0 0 2 NORTHWEST ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 10 9 0 0 0 19 OAK GROVE MIDDLE Co-Teaching 0 2 0 0 0 2 OAKHURST ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 10 6 0 0 0 16 OLDSMAR ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 7 4 0 0 0 11 ORANGE GROVE ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 10 2 0 0 0 12 -SCEOLAIOIIDDLE - -- ~o-TeacTiing-- - -- -- - _ - ~ --- . _ ..... - - - 1 -- ... - - ~ . _- _ 0 - . _- 0 --- - 1 OZONA ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 4 9 0 0 0 13 PALM HARBOR MIDDLE Co-Teaching 0 15 0 0 0 15 RICHARD L SANDERS SCHOOL Co-Teaching 0 0 0 3 0 3 SEMINOLE SENIOR HIGH Co-Teaching 0 0 18 0 0 18 SEMINOLE MIDDLE Co-Teaching 0 25 0 0 0 25 SEVENTY-FOURTH STREET ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 7 9 0 0 0 16 SHORE ACRES ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 11 7 0 0 0 18 JOHN HOPKINS MIDDLE Co-Teaching 0 50 0 0 0 50 SKYCREST ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 18 6 0 0 0 24 SKYVIEW ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 18 11 0 0 0 29 STARKEY ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 9 4 0 0 0 13 MARJORIE KINNAN RAWLINGS ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 2 1 0 0 0 3 TARPON SPRINGS ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 4 3 0 0 0 7 TARPON SPRINGS SENIOR HIGH Co-Teaching 0 0 8 0 0 8 TARPON SPRINGS MIDDLE Co-Teaching 0 17 0 0 0 17 TYRONE MIDDLE Co-Teaching 0 23 0 0 0 23 TARPON SPRINGS FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 4 3 0 0 0 7 WESTGATE ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 0 2 0 0 0 2 EAST LAKE SENIOR HIGH Co-Teaching 0 0 4 0 0 4 SOUTHERN OAK ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 10 18 0 0 0 28 CYPRESS WOODS ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 10 8 0 0 0 18 SUTHERLAND ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 3 6 0 0 0 9 LAKE SAINT GEORGE ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 19 10 0 0 0 29 MCMULLEN-BOOTH ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 5 3 0 0 0 8 PALM HARBOR UNIVERSITY SENIOR HIGH Co-Teaching 0 0 19 0 0 19 BROOKER CREEK ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 4 2 0 0 0 6 FRONTIER ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 4 2 0 0 0 6 Page 19 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM ~ ~ PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan FOREST LAKES ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 8 4 0 0 0 12 DOUG JAMERSON ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 2 8 0 0 0 10 JAMES SANDERLIN ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 3 5 0 0 0 8 THURGOOD MARSHALL FUNDAMENTAL MIDDLE Co-Teaching 0 1 0 0 0 1 SUNSET HILLS ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 5 10 0 1 0 16 HIGH POINT ELEMENTARY (NEWL Co-Teaching_ _ _ _ 34 11 0 0 .. 0 45 DUNEDIN ELEMENTARY (NEW) Co-Teaching 12 5 0 6 0 23 NEW HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY Co-Teaching 10 5 0 0 0 15 Total Co-Teaching Classrooms: 552 660 243 38 0 1,493 Infrastructure Tracking Necessary offsite Infrastructure requirements resulting from expansions or new schools. This section should Include infrastructure information related to capacity project schedules and other project schedules (Section 4). Stormwater conveyance, sanitary, potable and reclaimed water, electrical, and data bandwidth Proposed location of planned facilities, whether those locations are consistent with the comprehensive plans of all affected local governments, and recommendations for.infrastructure and other improvements to land adjacent to existing facllities. Provisions of 1013.33(12), (13) and (14) and 1013.36 must be addressed for new facilities planned within the 1st three years of the plan (Section 5). Largo High School replacement, Paim Harbor University High classroom addition, St. Pete High selective building replacement, Lynch Elem replacement Consistent with Comp Plan? Yes Net New Classrooms The number of classrooms, by grade level and type of construction, that were added during the last fiscal year. List the net new classrooms added in the 2008 - 2009 fiscal year. List the net new classrooms to be added in the 2009 - 2010 fiscal year. "Classrooms" is defined as capacity carrying classrooms that are added to increase capacity to enable the district to meet the Class Size Amendment. Totals for fiscal year 2009 - 2010 should match totals in Section 15A. _ _. _ . toocation 2008 - 2008 # Permanent _ 2008 - 2005 # ' Modular 200$ - 2003 # Relocatafile .. 206i3 - 2009° Total 2009 - 20'10 # Permanent 2009 - 2010-# ' Modular ~ 2009- 2010 # Relocatabl~ 200.9.2010 Total: Elementary (PK-3) 0 0 30 30 0 0 0 0 Middle (4-8) 0 0 11 11 0 0 0 0 High (9-12) 0 0 0 0 5 0 7 12 0 0 41 41 5 0 7 12 Relocatable Student Stations Number of students that will be educated in relocatable units, by school, in the current year, and the projected number of students for each of the years in the workplan. Page 20 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT • 2009 - 2010 Work Plan LEALMAN INTERMEDIATE 88 88 88 88 0 70 ANONA ELEMENTARY 97 151 151 151 0 110 AZALEA ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 0 0 AZALEA MIDDLE 0 88 132 132 0 70 BARDMOOR ELEMENTARY 22 0 0 0 0 4 LARGO MTDDLF-- 0 --- --- 132 -. - 132- 66 -9- - -- - -6fi BAUDER ELEMENTARY 140 149 149 149 0 117 BAY POINT ELEMENTARY 134 139 84 84 0 88 BAY POINT MIDDLE 132 154 88 44 0 84 BAY VISTA FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY 40 76 0 0 0 23 BEAR CREEK ELEMENTARY 136 198 198 198 198 186 BELCHER ELEMENTARY 259 66 66 66 66 105 BELLEAIR ELEMENTARY 62 0 0 0 0 12 BLANTON ELEMENTARY 67 220 220 220 220 189 BOCA CIEGA SENIOR HIGH 250 425 425 375 0 295 GIBBS SENIOR HIGH 10 0 0 0 0 2 GULF BEACHES ELEMENTARY 86 0 0 0 0 17 GULFPORT ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 0 0 HARRIS TIPS CENTER 22 44 44 44 0 31 HIGHLAND LAKES ELEMENTARY 18 18 18 18 0 14 CALVIN HUNSINGER EXCEPTIONAL STUDENT EDUCATION CTR 0 25 25 25 0 15 HIGH POINT ELEMENTARY (OLD) 0 0 0 0 0 0 KENNEDY MIDDLE 88 0 0 0 0 18 KINGS HIGHWAY ELEMENTARY 18 0 0 0 0 4 LAKEVIEW FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY 138 144 144 144 144 143 LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY 72 54 54 22 0 40 LAKEWOOD SENIOR HIGH 245 245 220 200 0 182 LARGO CENTRAL ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 0 0 LARGO SENIOR HIGH 120 0 0 0 0 24 LEALMAN AVENUE ELEMENTARY 33 33 33 33 0 26 SAFETY HARBOR SECONDARY SCHOOL 0 0 0 0 0 0 MADEIRA BEACH ELEMENTARY 143 152 152 152 0 120 MADEIRA BEACH MIDDLE 22 22 22 22 0 18 MAXIMO ELEMENTARY 112 202 202 172 0 138 Page 21 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan MEADOWLAWN MIDDLE 208 164 164 164 0 140 MELROSE ELEMENTARY 84 147 147 147 0 105 MILDRED HELMS ELEMENTARY 256 64 54 54 0 86 TOMLINSON ADULT LEARNING CENTER 0 0 0 0 0 0 PINELLAS PARK ELEMENTARY 80 120 120 120 0 88 PINELLAS PARK MIDDLE 0 0 0 0 0 0 PlA1€LLAS PARK SENIOR HIGH 0 0 0 0 0 0 PLUMB ELEMENTARY 73 145 110 110 0 88 PONCE DE LEON ELEMENTARY 184 54 54 54 54 80 RIDGECREST ELEMENTARY 18 72 72 72 72 61 RIO VISTA ELEMENTARY 54 0 0 0 0 11 RIVIERA MIDDLE 0 0 0 0 0 0 SAFETY HARBOR ELEMENTARY 186 54 54 0 0 59 SAFETY HARBOR MIDDLE 132 0 0 0 0 26 SAWGRASS LAKE ELEMENTARY 73 127 127 127 0 91 ST PETERSBURG SENIOR HIGH 250 250 175 150 0 165 ST PETERSBURG VOCATIONAL-TECHNICAL INSTITUTE 0 25 25 25 0 15 SAN JOSE ELEMENTARY 69 51 36 36 0 38 SANDY LANE ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 0 0 SEMINOLE ELEMENTARY 76 . 94 94 94 0 72 SEMINOLE SENIOR HIGH 250 250 125 125 0 150 SEMINOLE MIDDLE 120 88 88 88 88 94 SEVENTY-FOURTH STREET ELEMENTARY 23 5 5 5 0 8 SHORE ACRES ELEMENTARY 102 102 102 102 0 82 JOHN HOPKINS MIDDLE 262 0 0 0 0 52 SKYCREST ELEMENTARY 109 132 132 132 132 127 SKYVIEW ELEMENTARY 67 0 0 0 0 13 DRUID COMPLEX 0 0 0 0 0 0 MCMULLEN-BOOTH ELEMENTARY 62 0 0 0 0 12 PALM HARBOR UNIVERSITY SENIOR HIGH 125 900 900 0 0 385 BROOKER CREEK ELEMENTARY 62 106 88 88 0 69 FRONTIER ELEMENTARY 90 108 108 108 0 83 COACHMAN FUNDAMENTAL MIDDLE 110 0 0 0 0 22 FOREST LAKES ELEMENTARY 108 72 36 36 0 50 SUNSET HILLS ELEMENTARY 18 0 0 0 0 4 Page 22 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM • PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan PINELLAS SECONDARY SCHOOL 0 0 0 0 0 0 HIGH POINT ELEMENTARY (NEW) 0 0 0 0 0 0 DUNEDIN ELEMENTARY (NEW) 0 25 25 25 0 15 DOUG JAMERSON ELEMENTARY 94 94 66 66 0 64 JAMES SANDERLIN ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 0 0 THURGOOD MARSHALL FUNDAMENTAL MIDDLE 0 0 0 0 0 0 --- - - BAYSIDE HIGH__ _ _ 0 _ 0 . 0 -- 0 A - _p CAMPBELL PARK ELEMENTARY 59 168 168 132 132 132 JOSEPH L CARWISE MIDDLE 88 22 22 0 0 26 CLEARVIEW AVENUE ELEMENTARY 18 0 0 0 0 4 PAUL B STEPHENS EXCEPTIONAL STUDENT EDUCATION CTR 0 0 0 0 0 0 CLEARWATER SENIOR HIGH 290 290 290 290 0 232 COUNTRYSIDE SENIOR HIGH 150 125 125 125 0 105 CROSS BAYOU ELEMENTARY 33 43 43 43 0 32 CURLEW CREEK ELEMENTARY 0 44 44 44 44 35 ROBINSON SCHOOL SERVICE CENTER 0 0 0 0 0 0 DISSTON GIFTED PROGRAM 0 0 0 0 0 0 HAMILTON DISSTON S E D CENTER 0 0 0 0 0 0 LEILA DAVIS ELEMENTARY 208 66 66 66 66 94 DIXIE M HOLLINS SENIOR HIGH 0 75 75 75 0 45 CURTIS FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 0 0 DUNEDIN SENIOR HIGH 200 125 125 125 0 115 DUNEDIN HIGHLAND MIDDLE 22 0 0 0 0 4 EISENHOWER ELEMENTARY 72 22 22 22 22 32 FAIRMOUNT PARK ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 0 0 JOHN M SEXTON ELEMENTARY 190 230 230 230 0 176 MORGAN FITZGERALD MIDDLE 0 0 0 0 0 0 FUGUITT ELEMENTARY 78 44 44 44 44 51 LYNCH ELEMENTARY 115 0 0 0 0 23 PERKINS ELEMENTARY 0 36 36 36 0 22 GARRISON-JONES ELEMENTARY 63 139 139 139 0 96 MOUNT VERNON ELEMENTARY 137 159 159 159 0 123 NINA HARRIS EXCEPTIONAL STUDENT EDUCATION CENTER 0 0 0 0 0 0 NORTHEAST SENIOR HIGH 175 225 225 225 0 170 NORTH SHORE ELEMENTARY 36 76 76 110 0 60 Page 23 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM ~ ~ PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan NORTH WARD ELEMENTARY (CLEARWATER) 36 0 0 0 0 7 NORTH WARD SECONDARY SCHOOL 0 0 0 0 0 0 NORTHWEST ELEMENTARY 18 62 62 44 0 37 NORWOOD SECONDARY SCHOOL 0 0 0 0 0 0 OAK GROVE MIDDLE 0 132 132 132 0 79 OAKHURST ELEMENTARY 151 18 18 18 0 41 OLDSMAR ELEMENTARY 0 18 18 18 18 14 ORANGE GROVE ELEMENTARY 117 194 194 194 0 140 OSCEOLA SENIOR HIGH 400 425 325 325 0 295 OSCEOLA MIDDLE 0 0 0 0 0 0 OZONA ELEMENTARY 18 108 108 108 0 68 CURTIS FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY (OLD) 57 0 0 0 0 11 PALM HARBOR ELEMENTARY 84 0 0 0 0 17 PALM HARBOR MIDDLE 228 0 0 0 0 46 RICHARD L SANDERS SCHOOL 0 0 0 0 0 0 PASADENA FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY 80 98 98 116 0 78 CLEARWATER INTERMEDIATE 0 44 44 44 0 26 PINELLAS CENTRAL ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 0 0 SEMINOLE VOCATIONAL EDUCATION CENTER 0 175 175 175 0 105 SOUTHSIDE FUNDAMENTAL MIDDLE 44 0 0 0 0 9 SOUTH WARD ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 0 0 STARKEY ELEMENTARY 40 0 0 0 .0 8 MARJORIE KINNAN RAWLINGS ELEMENTARY 80 102 102 102 0 77 TARPON SPRINGS ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 0 0 TARPON SPRINGS SENIOR HIGH 40 25 25 0 0 18 PINELLAS VOCATIONAL-TECHNICAL INSTITUTE 25 18 18 18 0 16 TARPON SPRINGS MIDDLE 164 164 164 164 0 131 TYRONE ELEMENTARY 51 0 0 0 0 10 TYRONE MIDDLE 142 0 0 0 0 28 TARPON SPRINGS FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY 22 66 66 44 44 48 WALSINGHAM ELEMENTARY 54 72 72 72 0 54 WESTGATE ELEMENTARY 62 40 40 0 0 28 WOODLAWN ELEMENTARY 54 0 0 0 0 11 EAST LAKE SENIOR HIGH 75 75 75 75 0 60 SOUTHERN OAK ELEMENTARY 44 44 22 22 0 26 CYPRESS WOODS ELEMENTARY 58 58 58 58 0 46 Page 24 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM • PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan SUTHERLAND ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 0 0 LAKE SAINT GEORGE ELEMENTARY 0 10 10 10 0 6 NEW HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 0 0 x Total students in relocatables by year. 9,977 9,911 9,269 7,937 1,344 7,688 Total number of COFTE students projected by year. 98,284 96,272 94 731 93,952 ____ 92 792 __ _ _.95,206 e~erit in r=e ocatables 5y year'. _" - 10 % - -- 10 % - 10 % 8 % 1 °~ 8 Leased Facilities Tracking Exising leased facilities and plans for the acquisition of leased facilities, including the number of classrooms and student stations, as reported in the educational plant survey, that are planned in that location at the end of the five year workplan. ANONA ELEMENTARY 5 79 ModSpace 0 0 AZALEA ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 AZALEA MIDDLE 0 0 0 0 BARDMOOR ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 LARGO MIDDLE 0 132 0 0 BAUDER ELEMENTARY 2 37 ModSpace 0 0 BAY POINT ELEMENTARY 3 50 ModSpace 0 0 BAY POINT MIDDLE 3 132 0 0 BAY VISTA FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY 2 40 ModSpace 0 0 BEAR CREEK ELEMENTARY 5 103 ModSpace 0 0 BELCHER ELEMENTARY 3 58 ModSpace 0 0 BELLEAIR ELEMENTARY 3 282 Williams Scotsman 0 0 BLANTON ELEMENTARY 2 27 ModSpace 0 0 BOCA CIEGA SENIOR HIGH 2 50 ModSpace 0 0 CAMPBELL PARK ELEMENTARY 3 54 ModSpace 0 0 JOSEPH L CARWISE MIDDLE 4 88 ModSpace 0 0 CLEARVIEW AVENUE ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 PAUL B STEPHENS EXCEPTIONAL STUDENT EDUCATION CTR 0 0 0 0 CLEARWATER SENIOR HIGH 8 200 ModSpace 0 0 COUNTRYSIDE SENIOR HIGH 0 275 0 0 CROSS BAYOU ELEMENTARY 1 18 ModSpace 0 0 CURLEW CREEK ELEMENTARY 0 120 ModSpace 0 0 Page 25 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM ~ ~ PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan ROBINSON SCHOOL SERVICE CENTER 0 0 0 0 DISSTON GIFTED PROGRAM 0 0 0 0 HAMILTON DISSTON S E D CENTER 0 0 0 0 LEILA DAVIS ELEMENTARY 10 180 Williams Scotsman/ModSpa 3 54 DIXIE M HOLLINS SENIOR HIGH 0 0 0 0 EURTtS fUN© i'ARY---- ---- -- - _ - adSpaee _ 0 - 0 DUNEDIN SENIOR HIGH 4 100 Williams Scotsman/ModSpa ce 0 0 DUNEDIN HIGHLAND MIDDLE 0 0 0 0 EISENHOWER ELEMENTARY 3 50 Williams Scotsman/ModSpa ce 0 0 FAIRMOUNT PARK ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 JOHN M SEXTON ELEMENTARY 7 168 ModSpace 1 22 MORGAN FITZGERALD MIDDLE 0 0 0 0 FUGUITT ELEMENTARY 2 27 ModSpace 0 0 LYNCH ELEMENTARY 4 64 Williams Scotsman/ModSpa ce 0 0 PERKINS ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 GARRISON-JONES ELEMENTARY 3 45 ModSpace 2 23 GIBES SENIOR HIGH 0 0 0 0 GULF BEACHES ELEMENTARY 5 86 ModSpace 0 0 GULFPORT ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 HARRIS TIPS CENTER 0 0 0 0 HIGHLAND LAKES ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 CALVIN HUNSINGER EXCEPTIONAL STUDENT EDUCATION CTR 0 0 0 0 HIGH POINT ELEMENTARY (OLD) 0 0 ModSpace 0 0 KENNEDY MIDDLE 2 88 ModSpace 0 0 KINGS HIGHWAY ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 LAKEVIEW FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY 7 138 ModSpace 3 58 LAKEWOOD ELEMENTARY 4 72 ModSpace 0 0 LAKEWOOD SENIOR HIGH 3 75 ModSpace 0 0 LARGO CENTRAL ELEMENTARY 0 0 ModSpace 0 0 LARGO SENIOR HIGH 0 0 Modspace 0 0 LEALMAN AVENUE ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 SAFETY HARBOR SECONDARY SCHOOL 0 0 0 0 Page 26 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM • PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan MADEIRA BEACH ELEMENTARY 4 94 ModSpace 1 18 MADEIRA BEACH MIDDLE 1 22 ModSpace 0 0 MAXIMO ELEMENTARY 3 58 ModSpace 0 0 MEADOWLAWN MIDDLE 2 44 0 0 MELROSE ELEMENTARY 1 18 ModSpace 0 0 MILDRED HELMS ELEMENTARY 8 158 ModSpace 0 0 TOT71L1NS-OtTADULTl-EAR IN~1 G CENTER ---- ..----0 0 . - 0 MOUNT VERNON ELEMENTARY 4 76 Williams Scotsman/ModSpa ce 0 0 NINA HARRIS EXCEPTIONAL STUDENT EDUCATION .CENTER 0 0 0 0 NORTHEAST SENIOR HIGH 6 150 ModSpace 0 0 NORTH SHORE ELEMENTARY 1 18 ModSpace 0 0 NORTH WARD ELEMENTARY (CLEARWATER) 1 36 0 0 NORTH WARD SECONDARY SCHOOL 0 0 0 0 NORTHWEST ELEMENTARY 1 128 ModSpace 0 0 NORWOOD SECONDARY SCHOOL 0 0 0 0 OAK GROVE MIDDLE 0 0 0 0 OAKHURST ELEMENTARY 2 40 ModSpace 0 0 OLDSMAR ELEMENTARY 0 18 Williams Scotsman 0 0 ORANGE GROVE ELEMENTARY 5 90 ModSpace/William s Scotsman 5 90 ' OSCEOLA SENIOR HIGH 0 0 0 0 OSCEOLA MIDDLE 0 0 0 0 OZONA ELEMENTARY 1 18 ModSpace 0 0 CURTIS FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY (OLD) 3 57 ModSpace 0 0 PALM HARBOR ELEMENTARY 3 62 ModSpace 0 0 PALM HARBOR MIDDLE 4 88 ModSpace 0 0 RICHARD L SANDERS SCHOOL 0 0 0 0 PASADENA FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY 3 62 ModSpace 0 0 CLEARWATER INTERMEDIATE 0 0 0 0 PINELLAS CENTRAL ELEMENTARY 0 54 ModSpace 0 0 SEMINOLE VOCATIONAL EDUCATION CENTER 0 0 0 0 PINELLAS PARK ELEMENTARY 2 66 ModSpace 0 0 PINELLAS PARK MIDDLE 0 0 0 0 PINELLAS PARK SENIOR HIGH 0 0 0 0 PLUMB ELEMENTARY 4 73 ModSpace 0 0 Page 27 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM ~ ~ PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan PONCE DE LEON ELEMENTARY 9 256 ModSpace/William s Scotsman 0 0 RIDGECREST ELEMENTARY 1 72 ModSpace 1 18 RIO VISTA ELEMENTARY 2 94 Williams Scotsman/ModSpa ce 0 0 RIVIERA MIDDLE 0 0 0 0 SAFETY HARBOR ELEMENTARY 4 - 85 Williams Ssetsaian/ModS a 0 0 - - -- -- - ----- - -- - - - p ee SAFETY HARBOR MEDDLE 6 132 Modspace 0 0 SAWGRASS LAKE ELEMENTARY 0 0 Williams Scotsman 0 0 ST PETERSBURG SENIOR HIGH 4 100 ModSpacelWilliam s Scotsman 0 0 ST PETERSBURG VOCATIONAL-TECHNICAL INSTITUTE 0 0 0 0 SAN JOSE ELEMENTARY 1 18 Williams Scotsman 0 0 SANDY LANE ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 SEMINOLE ELEMENTARY 2 36 ModSpace 0 0 SEMINOLE SENIOR HIGH 10 250 ModSpace 0 0 SEMINOLE MIDDLE 5 98 ModSpace 0 0 SEVENTY-FOURTH STREET ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 SHORE ACRES ELEMENTARY 5 102 ModSpace 3 62 JOHN HOPKINS MIDDLE 0 0 0 0 SKYCREST ELEMENTARY 1 41 Williams Scotsman/ModSpa ce 0 0 SKYVIEW ELEMENTARY 2 23 ModSpace 0 0 SOUTHSIDE FUNDAMENTAL MIDDLE 2 44 ModSpace 0 0 SOUTH WARD ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 STARKEY ELEMENTARY 2 40 ModSpace 0 0 MARJORIE KINNAN RAWLINGS ELEMENTARY 2 44 ModSpace 1 22 TARPON SPRINGS ELEMENTARY 0 0 ModSpace 0 0 TARPON SPRINGS SENIOR HIGH 0 0 0 0 PINELLAS VOCATIONAL-TECHNICAL INSTITUTE 0 0 0 0 TARPON SPRINGS MIDDLE 8 164 Williams Scotsman 5 110 TYRONE ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 TYRONE MIDDLE 3 88 ModSpace 0 0 TARPON SPRINGS FUNDAMENTAL ELEMENTARY 1 22 ModSpace 1 22 WALSINGHAM ELEMENTARY 3 54 ModSpace/William s Scotsman 0 0 WESTGATE ELEMENTARY 1 18 ModSpace 0 0 Page 28 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM • PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan WOODLAWN ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 EAST LAKE SENIOR HIGH 3 75 Williams Scotsman/ModSpa ce 0 0 SOUTHERN OAK ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 CYPRESS WOODS ELEMENTARY 3 58 ModSpace 0 0 SUTHERLAND ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 K!= SAtN T G€OR E ------ ----- ----- -- - - - 6 -ELEMEPETAR~------------ 0 DRUID COMPLEX 0 0 Williams Scotsman 0 0 MCMULLEN-BOOTH ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 PALM HARBOR UNIVERSITY SENIOR HIGH 3 275 ModSpace/William s Scotsman 0 0 BROOKER CREEK ELEMENTARY 2 88 Williams Scotsman 0 0 FRONTIER ELEMENTARY 4 72 ModSpace 0 0 COACHMAN FUNDAMENTAL MIDDLE 5 110 Williams Scotsman/ModSpa ce 0 0 FOREST LAKES ELEMENTARY 6 108 ModSpace 0 0 DOUG JAMERSON ELEMENTARY 4 72 ModSpace 0 0 JAMES SANDERLIN ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 ~ 0 THURGOOD MARSHALL FUNDAMENTAL MIDDLE 0 0 0 0 SUNSET HILLS ELEMENTARY 1 18 ModSpace 0 ~ 0 BAYSIDE HIGH 0 0 0 0 PINELLAS SECONDARY SCHOOL 0 0 0 0 LEALMAN INTERMEDIATE 4 88 ModSpace 0 0 HIGH POINT ELEMENTARY (NEW) 0 0 0 0 DUNEDIN ELEMENTARY (NEW) 0 0 0 0 NEW HEIGHTS ELEMENTARY 0 0 0 0 268 7,013 26 499 Failed Standard Relocatable Tracking Relocatable units currently reported by school, from FISH, and the number of relocatable units identified as 'Failed Standards'. Location " ActUal~# of Units in Owner ~ L Student ~ npt Meeting #'.of untts~ projected Projected Year' n whtch~:~ll=~ I . X009 - 2010 ~ Stat(ons $tandardsfor use to be in .use fn {increase/decrea's Long te~r>a~ a as classroom 2013 - 2Q14 ~ e) In# units 6y relocatabl~s which' - . ~ ,. ,.: - , ,pace: r s ; ; ~ 2013 - 2014 _ . " wlltbe Usedas ..: , - classrooms uviN` ~, ~ ,. g:: ~. , : ; .. ._ _ ___ N. ~ mil stan,3~fi ANONA ELEMENTARY 3 SCHOOL BOARD 18 2 3 0 2012 LARGO MIDDLE 6 LEASE RENT 0 6 3 -3 2014 C: Page 29 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM o PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan BEAR CREEK 5 SCHOOL BOARD 33 3 3 -2 2014 ELEMENTARY BELLEAIR 1 FEDERAL 0 1 0 -1 ELEMENTARY BLANTON 8 FEDERAL 40 5 0 -8 ELEMENTARY BOCA CIEGA SENIOR 15 SCHOOL BOARD 200 7 0 -15 HIGH CLEARVIEW AVENUE 3 SCHOOL BOARD 18 2 0 -3 ~LEMEWTARY-- - - - . - ---- --- - ------- -- - ---- - -- CLEARVIEW AVENUE 1 FEDERAL 0 1 0 -1 ELEMENTARY CROSS BAYOU 2 SCHOOL BOARD 15 1 2 0 2014 ELEMENTARY JOHN M SEXTON 8 LEASE RENT 146 1 8 0 2014 ELEMENTARY JOHN M SEXTON 1 FEDERAL 0 1 1 0 2014 ELEMENTARY GULF BEACHES 1 SCHOOL BOARD 0 1 0 -1 ELEMENTARY CALVIN HUNSINGER 2 SCHOOL BOARD 0 2 2 0 2014 EXCEPTIONAL STUDENT EDUCATION CTR KENNEDY MIDDLE 4 LEASE RENT 44 2 2 -2 2014 MADEIRA BEACH 5 LEASE RENT 76 1 5 0 2014 ELEMENTARY MADEIRA BEACH 6 SCHOOL BOARD 67 2 6 0 2014 ELEMENTARY MELROSE 8 FEDERAL 66 5 8 0 2014 ELEMENTARY MOUNT VERNON 2 SCHOOL BOARD 18 1 2 0 2014 ELEMENTARY NORTHEAST SENIOR 3 SCHOOL BOARD 25 2 1 -2 2014 HIGH NORTH SHORE 4 SCHOOL BOARD 18 3 4 0 2014 ELEMENTARY NORTH WARD 2 LEASE RENT 18 1 0 -2 ELEMENTARY (CLEARWATER) OLDSMAR 1 LEASE RENT 0 1 1 0 2010 ELEMENTARY ORANGE GROVE 4 SCHOOL BOARD 22 3 4 0 2014 ELEMENTARY OSCEOLA SENIOR 17 SCHOOL BOARD 400 1 17 0 2014 HIGH PALM HARBOR 2 SCHOOL BOARD 22 1 0 -2 ELEMENTARY SEMINOLE 2 SCHOOL BOARD 0 2 2 0 2014 VOCATIONAL EDUCATION CENTER PINELLAS PARK 3 LEASE RENT 44 1 3 0 2014 ELEMENTARY PONCE DE LEON 14 LEASE RENT 166 2 3 -11 2014 ELEMENTARY RIO VISTA 5 LEASE RENT 36 3 0 -5 ELEMENTARY Page 30 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT • 2009 - 2010 Work Plan RIO VISTA 5 SCHOOL BOARD 0 5 0 -5 ELEMENTARY RIO VISTA 4 FEDERAL 18 3 0 -4 ELEMENTARY SAFETY HARBOR 5 LEASE RENT 67 1 1 -4 2014 ELEMENTARY SAFETY HARBOR 2 SCHOOL BOARD 18 1 2 0 2014 ELEMENTARY SEMINOLE 4 SCHOOL BOARD 18 3 1 -3 2014 ELEMENTARY ~EMINA6€~AI9DL€- -- -- -- - ------- 1 S6HOOL BOARD- - - - ----- _- -- -- -_ ---- 1- -- --- - - -- 1 .. -.... -- ----... -0 - _ _2014 JOHN HOPKINS 12 SCHOOL BOARD 240 1 2 -10 2014 MIDDLE SKYCREST 3 LEASE RENT 5 2 0 -3 ELEMENTARY SKYCREST 8 SCHOOL BOARD 76 4 6 -2 2014 ELEMENTARY SKYCREST 4 FEDERAL 28 2 0 -4 ELEMENTARY STARKEY 1 SCHOOL BOARD 0 1 0 -1 ELEMENTARY STARKEY 1 FEDERAL 0 1 0 -1 ELEMENTARY PINELLAS 2 SCHOOL BOARD 25 1 2 0 2014 VOCATIONAL- TECHNICAL INSTITUTE TYRONE MIDDLE 4 LEASE RENT 66 1 0 -4 TYRONE MIDDLE 10 SCHOOL BOARD 44 7 0 -10 TYRONE MIDDLE 3 FEDERAL 32 1 0 -3 WOODLAWN 2 FEDERAL 18 1 2 0 2014 ELEMENTARY MCMULLEN-BOOTH 3 SCHOOL BOARD 40 1 0 -3 ELEMENTARY PALM HARBOR 11 LEASE RENT 75 8 4 -7 2014 UNIVERSITY SENIOR HIGH PALM HARBOR 22 SCHOOL BOARD 50 20 22 0 2014 UNIVERSITY SENIOR HIGH BROOKER CREEK 4 LEASE RENT 44 2 4 0 2014 ELEMENTARY 249 2,356 131 127 -122 Planning Page 31 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM ~ o PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan Class Size Reduction Planning Plana approved by the school board that reduce the need for permanent student stations such as acceptable school capacity levels, redistricting, busing, year-round schools, charter schools, magnet schools, public-private partnerships, multitrack scheduling, grade level organization, block scheduling, or other altematlves. The Pinellas County School Board has reduced the need for permanent student stations in our district through a variety of initiatives. Several new charter schools have been approved. During the 2007-08 school year, the distriG began a high school partnership Early College Program in cooperation with St. Petersburg College. The Early College Program was expanded to two additional college sites for 2008-09 and enrollment at those sites will increase in 2009-10. Students in grades 11 and 12 may enroll full time in dual credit college courses on the Clearwater Campus, Seminole Campus or Tarpon Springs Campus of SPC in order to simultaneously meet their graduation requirements and earn college credits. The school distriG is-currently-ins-period of detaining-enrollment.. Busing patterns have been changed and. the distriG has Gosed six elementary. schools..and bvo middle schools in preparation for 2009-10. The school district has also established its own virtual school for grades 6-8 to begin in the 2009-10 school year. School Closure Planning Plans for the closure of any school, Including plans for disposition of the facility or usage of facility space, and anticipated revenues. The projected enrollment for Pinellas County Schools is for a steady decline through 2014. With eight elementary school Gosures in the last two years and the consolidation of four middle schools Into two schools, the district has begun to address the number of seats on inventory. With the onset of mandated high school career academies, the by class requirement for the class size amendment, a plan to reduce the number of leased relocatables, over the next four to five years, PCS hopes that no additional schools will need to be closed. In addition, there is a mandate to increase the level of virtual school offerings which will have an impact on space needs. Page 32 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM . • PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan Long Range Planning Ten-Year Maintenance District projects and locations regarding the projected need for major renovation, repair, and maintenance projects within the district in years 6-10 beyond the projects plans detailed in the five years covered by the work plan. Ten-Year Capacity Schedule of capital outlay projects projected to ensure future 5 years beyond the 5-year district facilities work p ~, f :~~~~_ ~ ~~ ~ ~ t Tyrone Middle (Replacement) the availability of satisfactory student stations for rogram. .ca n South County the projected student enrollme o $46,000,000 nt in K-12 programs for the Lynch Elem (Replacement) South County $35,000,000 Safety Harbor Elem (Replacement) North County $31,000,000 Largo Sr (Replacement) North County $84,000,000 Pinellas Park Middle, Construct South County $35,000,000 Bauder Elem, Construct South County $1,000,000 San Jose Etem (Replacement) North County $1,000,000 Mount Vemon Elem, Construct South County $1,000,000 North Shore Elem, Construct South County $1,000,000 Skyview Elem (Replacement) South County $1,000,000 Blanton Elem, Construct South County $1,000,000 Ponce De Leon Elem (Replacement) North County $1,000,000 Countryside High, Construct North County $1,000,000 Sutherland Elem, Construct North County $407,211 Page 33 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan Palm Harbor Univ High, Construct North County $1,000,000 Madeira Beach Middle (Replacement) South County $1,000,000 Orange Grove Elem, Construct South County $1,000,000 S242,407,211 Ten-Year Planned Utilization Schedule of planned capital outlay projects identifying the standard grade groupings, capacities, and planned utilization rates of future educational facilities of the district for both permanent and relocatable facilities. _.. C3rade Level Projections FtSH:, Actuaii_2#31~8 - .. Actual , Acluai 2008 - x(309 . Actuai 1009. - 20113 / 20't$ - 2019 new Projsryted 2018 - Protected 201:8 ~' StudQdt 2009„ FISH 200.8 - Utilization Student Capacity to tae added/removed 2019 COFTE , 2019 Utilization Stations Capaaty 2009 COF~ Elementary -District 54,726 54,726 45,620.94 83.36 % -8,397 40,292 86.97 Totais Middle -District Totals 27,824 25,045 22,690.58 90.60 % -3,276 20,040 92.06 High -District Totals 37,649 35,586 31,539.02 88.63 % -2,129 27,855 83.26 Other -ESE, etc 8,552 5,604 1,189.35 21.22 % -1,488 1,049 25.49 128,751 120,961 101,039.89 83.53 % -15,290 89,236 84.45 Ten-Year Infrastructure Planning Proposed Location of Planned New, Remodeled, or New Additions to Facilities in O6 thru 10 out years (Section 28). TBD Plans for closure of any school, including plans for disposition of the facillty or usage of facility space, and anticipated revenues in the 06 thru 10 out years (Section 29). None Twenty-Year Maintenance District projects and locations regarding the projected need for major renovation, repair, and maintenance projects within the district in years 11-20 beyond the projects plans detailed in the five years covered by the work plan. Project 2018 - 2019 ~ 2028 •2029 Proieciad Cost General Maintenance & Repair $474,850,000 $474,850,000 Twenty-Year Capacity Page 34 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT ,] 2009 - 2010 Work Plan Schedule of capital outlay projects projected to ensure the availability of satisfactory student stations for the projected student enrollment in K-12 programs for the future 11-20 years beyond the 5-year district facilities work program. Seminole Vocational Center, Construct South County $7,441,417 St Petersburg High, Construct South County $13,799,282 eminote Nigh~onstruct South County $24,926,339 Cross Bayou Elem (Replacement) South County $20,000,000 Osceola High, Construct South County $16,147,014 Lealman Ave Elem, Construct South County $5,043,020 Lakeview Fund Elem South County $4,926,808 Belleau Elem, Construct North County $4,281,828 Safety Harbor Secondary, Construct North County $642,475 PTEC Clearwater, Construct North County $24,339,733 Mildred Helms Elem, Construct North County $2,680,106 Anona Elem, Construct North County $3,695,856 PTEC St Pete, Construct South County $26,401,949 Curtis Fund Elem, Construct North County $1,716,058 Lakewood High, Construct South County $15,409,210 Azalea Elem, Construct South County $5,016,847 Madeira Beach Elem (Replacement) South County $20,000,000 Bay Vista Fund Elem South County $2,469,636 Belcher Elem, Construct North County $7,564,078 Garrison Jones Elem, Construct North County $455,405 Sawgrass Lake Elem, Construct South County $314,342 Page 35 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM ~ ~ PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan Seminole Elem, Construct South County $3,815,601 Tomlinson Adult, Construct South County $63,500 Pinellas Park High, Construct South County $3,278,242 Palm Harbor Middle, Construct North County $6,872,712 Sandy Lane Elem, Construct North County $853,285 Northwest Elem, Construct South County $292,100 Oakhurst Elem, Construct North County $1,212,738 Fitzgerald Middle, Construct North County $19,532,962 Skycrest Elem, Construct North County $3,032,232 Ridgecrest Elem, Construct North County $811,505 Kennedy Middle, Construct North County $283,045 Pinellas Park Elem, Construct South County. $1,943,330 Northeast High, Construct, Construct South County $17,678,711 East Lake High, Construct North County $1,000,000 Clearwater High, Construct North County $60,000,000 Rawlings Elem, Construct South County $10,000,000 Seventy-Forth St. Elem, Construct South County $3,966,005 Westgate Elem, Construct South County $39,900 Clearwater Intermediate, Construct North County $887,673 Tarpon Springs Middle, Construct North County $7,918,394 Fuguitt Elem, Construct North County $3,377,187 Plumb Elem, Construct North County $2,053,741 Pinellas Central Elem, Construct South County $2,035,141 Osceola Middle, Construct South County $240,398 Page 36 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM • PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan Highland Lakes Elem, Construct North County $165,495 Woodlawn Elem, Construct South County $752,102 Bardmoor Elem, Construct South County $19,950,000 Carwise Middle, Construct North County $500,000 Leiia 15av'is em, onstruct - North County _ ------------- - __ $7,920,688 Seminole Middle, Construct South County $3,221,816 Dixie Hollins High, Construct South County $2,063,287 Largo Middle, Construct North County $500,000 Melrose Elem, Construct South County $1,082,186 Bear Creek Elem, Construct South County $1,253,323 Frontier Elem, Construct North County $2,384,183 Oldsmar Comm, Construct North County $5,000,000 Tarpon Springs High, Construct North County $20,000,000 Forest Lakes Elem, Construct North County $203,187 Southern Oak Elem, Construct North County $266,779 Walsingham Elem, Construct North County $34,750,000 Lakewood Elem, Construct South County $63,312 Curlew Creek Elem, Construct North County $376,939 Pasadena Fund Elem, Construct South County $2,422,574 Meadowlawn Middle, Construct South County $919,835 Calvin Hunsinger Center, Construct South County $211,769 Bay Point Elem, Construct South County $52,175 Bay Point Middle, Construct South County $500,000 Maximo Elem, Construct South County $500,000 Page 37 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM ~ ~ PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan McMullen Booth Elem, Construct North County $227,346 Lake St George Elem, Construct North County $200,178 John Hopkins Middle, Construct South County $500,000 Dunedin High, Construct North County $500,000 Brooker Creek Elem, C~nstruet- - - North County $2,958,559 Cypress Woods Elem, Construct North County $410,834 Eisenhower Elem, Construct North County $8,022,573 Oldsmar Elem, Construct North County $2,196,894 Ozona Elem, Construct North County $172,217 Sanderlin Elem, Construct South County $1,437,549 Sexton Elem, Construct South County $25,013 Azalea Middle, Construct South County $500,000 Campbell Park Elem, Construct South County $500,000 Dunedin Middle, Construct North County $500,000 Fairmount Park Elem, Construct South County $210,103 Gulfport Elem, Construct South County $500,000 Perkins Elem, Construct South County $1,806,596 Hamilton Disston Center, Construct South County $5,097,963 Jamerson Elem, Construct South County $71,000 Area I, Construct South County $1,268,472 Richard Sanders Center, Construct South County $689,924 Stephens ESE Center, Construct North County $500,000 Nina Harris Center, Construct South County $500,000 Administration Bldg, Construct North County $8,690 Page 38 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM s PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT 2009 - 2010 Work Plan Walter Pownall Service Center, Construct North County $4,058,200 High Point Service Center, Construct South County $524,016 Clearvvater Bus Compound, Construct North County $11,795,514 Lealman Bus Compound, Construct North County $2,638,425 - -- ~a 3 _. North Coun tY $7,268,422 Area 2 North County $1,268,472 E513,876,445 Twenty-Year Planned Utilization Schedule of planned capital outlay projects identifying the standard grade groupings, capacities, and planned utilization rates of future educational facilities of the district for both permanent and relocatable facilities. Grade"Level~~rojections '; % ' (/~Shl ~' St d t 'Actual-200 ' 20p8 FISH , .A~~ ah ~' ' 08 •~ ~Actua~~2Q08,- 2009 ' ~ i t ~ ` Actui31;21)09 - 20101 ~Q28 20~9•new ` ~ t ' t d Pto/ecfed 2028'- FT P joj~~ ~2fE)"28~~: ~ f:.x _ ,~~ Y u en . .20 - ~ Util ion za -Capaci y Stud:en td be a ded/resmoved- 2029 C.O E 2029 i;~atib~~ . ~ ~ ~ ~' .Stations Capacity ~OQ9 ~ ~ ~ ~ - - CO,FTE,~ .. .~ - Elementary -District 54,726 54,726 45,620.94 83.36 % -8,575 40,292 87.30 Totals Middle -District Totals 27,824 25,045 22,690.58 90.60 % -3,431 20,040 92.72 High -District Totals 37,649 35,586 31,539.02 88.63 % -2,473 27,855 84.12 Other -ESE, etc 8,552 5,604 1,189.35 21.22 % -1,516 1,049 25.66 128,751 120,961 101,039.89 83.53 % -15,995 89,236 85.01 Twenty-Year Infrastructure Planning Proposed Location of Planned New, Remodeled, or New Additions to Facilities in 11 thru 20 out years (Section 28). TBD Plans for closure of any school, Including plans for disposition of the facility or usage of facility space, and anticipated revenues in the 11 thru 20 out years (Section 29). None s Page 39 of 39 8/11/2009 4:33:04 PM • • 071609 Rob Fahey RE Stormwater Drainage regulations.txt From: Fahey, Robert Sent: Thursday, ]uly 16, 2009 1:47 PM To: Herman, Sandra subject: RE: Stormwater / Drainage regulations You asked it just fine. There is no ordinance. From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Thursday, )uly 16, 2009 11:26 AM To: Fahey, Robert subject: FW: Stormwater / Drainage regulations Rob, I apologize for not asking it correctly, is there an ordinance? Thanks, Sandy From: Porter, Catherine Sent: Thursday, ]uly 16, 2009 11:18 AM To: Herman, Sandra Subject: RE: stormwater / Drainage regulations Is there an ordinance? I didn't ask about the plan. From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2009 11:16 AM To: Porter, Catherine Subject: RE: stormwater / Drainage regulations Cathy, Respectfully, in below message, Rob says that it is not in our reclaimed master plan. As per your direction, I will change it to SWFWMD's wording. You had me change "development" to "subdivision" in first draft because you said a development could be of any size. shall I still place the new wording below in the subdivision section as was proposed? sandy From: Porter, Catherine Sent: Thursday, ]uly 16, 2009 11:05 AM To: Herman, Sandra Cc: Clayton, Gina Subject: RE: Stormwater / Drainage regulations I had asked you whether the city had an ordinance with language we could use. Rob implies that we do. Again, please find out because we could use the same language for consistency. If not, I believe that as it is stated by SFWMD is better than what we have now: "All new developments within the city of Clearwater that will be receiving reclaimed water within 7 years will be required to install dual distribution lines (reclaimed and potable) as part of the development." Page 1 • • 071609 Rob Fahey RE stormwater Drainage regulations.txt I think we could change our language to something along these lines: D. In all new developments within the City of Clearwater that will be receiving reclaimed water within 7 years, the developer shall provide internal reclaimed water systems that are constructed to City specifications. However, the Comp Plan refers only to subdivisions. Gina, do we want to stipulate subdivisions as written in Comp Plan policy below, or just say developments? From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Thursday, duly 16, 2009 9:12 AM To: Porter, Catherine subject: Fw: stormwater / Drainage regulations Cathy, Rob recommends to go with the language as proposed. sandy From: Fahey, Robert Sent: Wednesday, 7uly 15, 2009 3:54 PM To: Herman, Sandra Cc: Rice, Scott Subject: RE: stormwater / Drainage regulations Hi Sandy, There is not language in our reclaimed master plan. It is a requirement of the Southwest Florida water Management District (SWFWMD) that is included in our Cooperative Funding Agreements. I've included an excerpt from one such grant document: ordinance/code requiring dual distribution lines in new developments within reclaimed water service areas. * The city developed and passed an ordinance/code stating all new developments within the City of Clearwater that will be receiving reclaimed water within 7 years will be required to install dual distribution lines (reclaimed and potable) as part of the development." The language you have below looks like what Gina and I agreed on for the comp Plan, if you can use it that would be great. From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Wednesday, 7uly 15, 2009 12:32 PM To: Fahey, Robert subject: Fw: Stormwater / Drainage regulations Rob, Hi Cathy Porter has asked me to check with you to see what the exact wording is in the Reclaimed water Plan for the proposed CDC "reclaimed water will be available within 7 years" requirement below. I told her that I recalled you and Gina working on Page 2 • • 071609 Rob Fahey RE Stormwater Drainage regulations.txt language for the comp Plan Policy D.5.5.8..on this subject. Is there something specifically written in your reclaimed plan about this? z am trying to get the DRAFT ordinance to Gina Clayton on Friday for her review. Please advise on this one. Thanks, Sandy X4586 Section x. That Article 3, "Development Standards", Division 19, "subdivision Design standards", section 3-1910, "same-water supply facilities", of the community Development code, be, and the same is hereby amended to read as follows: D. when subdivisions are being developed or redeveloped, at locations where reclaimed water will be available within seven (7) years, the developer shall provide internal reclaimed water systems that are constructed to City specifications. From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Wednesday, 7uly 01, 2009 2:44 PM To: Rice, Scott Subject: RE: Stormwater / Drainage regulations Scott - see my responses below in purple and attached are the proposed changes. Please review and let me know what you think. Thanks. sandy « File: ord 8070-09 Proposed Engineering sections.docx » From: Rice, Scott Sent: Monday, Tune 29, 2009 2:33 PM To: Herman, Sandra cc: Fahey, Robert; Quillen, Michael subject: RE: Stormwater / Drainage regulations sandy, z am sorry it has taken me so long to get back with you on these. we finished up the Engineer of Record presentations last Friday and I am now trying to catch up. on the following items: D.1.3.2 - To document this it may be best be handled in the Development Code (sections 3-911 and 3- 1911?). Currently if an individual parcel wishes to have sanitary service Engineering evaluates and determines a cost. If the cost is agreeable to the property owner they annex and bear the cost of the sanitary modifications. Although in my time with the City we have not had an entire Page 3 • • 071609 Rob Fahey RE Stormwater Drainage regulations.txt development do this, it would follow the same path. zt would seem that this could best be handled in the code. The definition of "development" in the CDC does include subdivisions as well as construction or alteration of a structure or land, change of use, etc. Gina Clayton has advised to ask you all to include in your ordinance/manual. Is this going to work out ok for you? D.5.5.8 - Again as this is development related it probably would be best handled in the Code (sections 3-911 and 3-1901?). Proposed 3-1910 new "D" (see in attachment) F.2.1.10 - At this point the encouragement would be only verbal (unless Planning wants to offer increased density) and again it would seem that the code (sections 3-914 and 3-1912?) is the best place for it. The state is working on a new Stormwater Rule scheduled to be implemented in mid 2010. until we see the new rule we are not in a position to change our requirements. Proposed 3-914 new "C" (see in attachment) 1.1.3.2 - The City has excess permitted capacity for water and sewer to support foreseeable development. The fire department requires fire flow calculations that exceed domestic water needs for a development. At DRC review, we indicate to the applicant that any infrastructure modifications would be at their expense. The water supplier for a project is the City. root sure the best way to handle this, but it would seem that a sentence in the Code would suffice (zn Concurrency Management?). As per Gina, Engineering should include in their ordinance/manual (she didn't feel it should be included in the CDC). Does this work for you? z would be glad to work on these with you if you need the D. Scott Rice, P.E. Assistant Engineering Director City of Clearwater (727) 562-4781 From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Monday, Tune 15, 2009 4:27 PM To: Rice, Scott; Fahey, Robert Subject: Fw: Stormwater / Drainage regulations Scott, Rob, Hi. we are now taking care of the wellhead Protection ord. (to include in our ord. 8070-09) - shown as green highlighted in attachment. Page 4 • • 071609 Rob Fahey RE Stormwater Drainage regulations.txt For the yellow highlighted policies, are we to assume that these will be covered in your manual or ordinance and/or that they will be taken care of administratively without requiring an amendment to the Community Development Code? Please let me know on these as I am working on the ordinance this week. Thank you. Sandy « File: EAR LDRS Updated 05-20-09 Rice Fahey comments Portrait (3).docx » From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Monday, June 01, 2009 11:09 AM To: Rice, Scott; Fahey, Robert subject: RE: Stormwater / Drainage regulations Scott, Hi. FYI - The EAR based comprehensive plan amendments were adopted by ord. 7993-08 on December 18, 2008. Regarding Comp. Plan Policies A.1.1.2 and D.5.7.3 pertaining to the wellhead Protection ordinance, is there a new tentative date for the wellhead ordinance to go forward to City Council? For Policies D.1.3.2, D.5.5.8, F.2.1.10 and 1.1.3.2, are we to assume that these will be covered in your manual or ordinance and /or that they will be taken care of administratively without requiring an amendment to the Community Development Code? Gina Clayton doesn't feel we need to include any of the above in the community Development Code unless you advise otherwise. so she asked me to check with you. Thank you for your time on this. Sandy « File: A04-01420 A04-00046 wellhead Protection Code Amendment.oft » « File: EAR LDRS updated 05-20-09 Rice & Fahey comments Portrait.doc » From: Rice, Scott sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2009 11:03 AM To: Herman, Sandra Cc: Fahey, Robert Subject: RE: Stormwater / Drainage regulations Sandy, see notes on your spreadsheet. « File: EAR LDRS updated 05-19-09 (3).doc » « File: A04-01420 A04-00046 wellhead Protection code Amendment.oft » D. Scott Rice, P.E. Assistant Engineering Director Page 5 • 071609 Rob Fahey RE stormwater Drainage regulations.txt City of Clearwater (727) 562-4781 From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2009 10:20 AM To: Rice, Scott Subject: stormwater / Drainage regulations Scott, Hi. z am now working on an ordinance to amend the Community Development Code to include the changes pursuant to the 2008 amendments to the comprehensive Plan as a result of the Evaluation and Appraisal Re ort. Please take a quick look at the yellow highlighted goals, objectives or policies and let me know if these are already covered by your ordinance - make notes under "other Comments" please. Thanks. Sandy « File: EAR LDRs updated 05-19-09.doc » Page 6 • s City of Clearwater CIE Update zoog/1o The following tables provide the capacity and projected demand for each of the respective public facilities projected over the next 5 years. There are no projected deficiencies. SOLID WASTE: Current Capacity Current Demand Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Ca acity at End of FY Surplus/Deficit zoog/10 2010/„ 2011/12 zou/13 zo13114 Total POTABLE WATER: Current Capacity zS MGD Current Demand 1~GD Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Capacity at End of FY Surplus/Deficit zoog/1o 1z.o MGD 25.o MGD 13.o MGD 2010/11 1z.1 MGD 25.o MGD 12.g MGD 2o11/1z 12.1 MGD z5.o MGD 12.g MGD 2o1z/13 1z.z MGD 25.o MGD 12.8 MGD zo13/14 1z.2 MGD z5.o MGD 1z.8 MGD Total N/A N/A N/A STORM WATER: Current Capacity 1o-Year LOS Min Current Demand 1o-Year LOS (Min) Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Capacity at End of FY Surplus/Deficit zoog/1o 1o-Year LOS Min 1o-Year LOS Min N/A zolo/11 1o-Year LOS Min 1o-Year LOS' Min N/A 2o11/1z 1o-Year LOS Min 1o-Year LOS Min N/A zolz/13 1o-Year LOS Min 1o-Year LOS Min N/A 2013114 1o-Year LOS Min 1o-Year LOS Min N/A Total 1o-Year LOS Min) 1o-Year LOS Min N/A SANITARY SEWER: Current Capacity z8.s MGD Current Demand 1a.o MGD Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Capacity at End of FY Surplus/Deficit zoog/1o 14.1 MGD 28.5 MGD 14.4 MGD zolo/11 14.z MGD z8.5 MGD 14.3 MGD 2011/12 14.2 MGD z8.5 MGD 14.3 MGD zo12/13 14.3 MGD z8.5 MGD 14.z MGD zo13114 14.3 MGD z8.5 MGD 14.2 MGD Total N/A N/A N/A u:\cie\cie2009\cie update 2009 projections tables.docx ~ • Herman, Sandra From: Lee, Catherine Sent: Friday, August 21, 2009 10:42 AM To: Herman, Sandra Subject: LOS The first doc is the summary (Phase II Report); the second has more detail to show how I arrived at those numbers. f Phase II LOS Tracking Report.doc Summary.doc Cate Lee i?lax~x~cA.~~ I PI<~~ni.t~t; De~f?a~~Emc~xat C.itF' cif C:lc~r~.t~~~-z~t~~r ':I': l2i.5C~2.~5~% F+ 7 { ~7~ < ` ' 1 D~~ I ~X Zcvv - ~ d~74~~ ooU r'D/ 0 3 (~ oP) = Jam. 10 ~o C~pr ~-~~ ~~~~-I Concurrency Management System Phase II Report Prepared By Cate Lee Memo To: Michael Delk, Gina Clayton, Catherine Porter, Robert Tefft From: Cate Lee Date: 7/20/09 Re: Concurrency Management System Phase II Report Attached is a report detailing Phase II (Implementation) of the City's Concurrency Management System. This Phase consisted of: • Consulting with staff from affected City departments to determine current methods of ensuring Concurrency. • Consulting with Lydia Moreda to determine capabilities of the current Tidemark system in coordinating Concurrency reviews. • Outlining possible implementation methods to ensure that new development is either an exception (Section 4-901.B) or issued a Certificate of Concurrency. • Outlining application form choices. • Outlining possible communication methods to affected City staff on the new implementation system. A summary of the results of this phase is included at the end as a bulleted list of decisions that need to be made before the system can be implemented. - - - ~ _ __ ~ a ~ nc~ ~~`_ ~G~~-c (.~e'C bs-2r-o9 ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ j~5 ~~~ v ~~~ ~ Page I of 6 C:\Documents and Settings\Sandra.Herman\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.0utlook\OKYHH3Y1\Phase II Report.doc • • Concurrency Management System Phase II Report Prepared By Cate Lee Concurrency Management System Phase II Report Options There are two implementation options. Option one includes a concurrency sign off from the department staff of each of the public facilities listed in the Community Development Code Section 4-903.A. After the project receives approval from each department, the Planning Department staff issues the Certificate of Concurrency. See chart below. ~`~~'~ Option One ~ ~, f ~.?_( I L' ~3 Step 1 Application received by Planning '`~-._ &Development .,} ~~ ~, 1;~ Step 2 iii~~ ;+ (~ ..-~ a ~~zs~-z° •Physical application routed to ~. / fir' ~ f the Engineering department for ~..;_.:.~'~ ~;~ ~ sign-off on: ~ ~ i~ la ai`~s •;. •Sanitary Sewer ~~,~ <~ , uCsi:~ •POtable Water •Storm Water ~ ~~- ~~~ •Traffic Operations ~~~ t,, ~ ~`"~ ~ ~ '~ ~`~'> •Tidemark sign-off for the ~ ""-~ -`Z+ % 1~ ~r~~r f following departments: ~ _ ~ / ~°" rr •Parks & Recreation ' •Solid Waste ~' '':1ta?3rt+? Step 3 Routed back to Planning & `'"^--^-"" Development for issuance of Certificate of Concurrency Sign off indicating that current or proposed public facilities can meet the impacts of the development Application routed from Planning &Development to each Department = (the Engineering Department receives two physical copies, other departments are notified via BPRC log) Option two includes a concurrency sign off from the department staff for Traffic Operations, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Water. Based on discussions and e-mails with potable water, solid waste, and parks and recreation, there is no danger of the LOS in these public facilities being exceeded anywhere in the City for years to come (see Table 1: LOS Tracking). So, for these departments, instead of a sign-off on each permit, Planning Department staff would succinctly summarize the condition of each of these public facilities in a brief annual report. After the project receives approval from Traffic Operations, Potable Water, and Storm Water, the Planning Department staff issues the Certificate of Concurrency. See chart below. Page 2 of 6 C:\Documents and Settings\Sandra.Herman\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.0utlook\OKYHH3Y1\Phase II Report.doc • Concurrency Management System Phase II Report Prepared By Cate Lee Option Two 4t~~~;• Step 1 ~r~~~~e~~i_+= Application received by Planning ~~ ,.% °~~L_'^ i f & Development ~ , ,rte ~-7 Step 2 ~LIt' JVL Application routed to ~"'...•,-,., departments that review LOS on apermit-by-permit basis •Sanitary Sewer (Public Utilities) ~~CT~tT~ti;?(~~ j •Storm Water (Engineering) L=~;-~'~~t~:ifr •Traffic Operations (Engineering) '"~_~~ ~ ~~"-~ Step 3 ~' Routed back to Planning & '~''~ "A ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ "'' Developmentforissuanceof -~''~~ ~ ~° A°'~ Certificate of Concurrency ~~ ~,,~~;~ Step 4 Annual Report indicating availability of public facilities not reviewed on apermit-by-permit basis (Potable Water, Parks & Recreation, Solid Waste) Sign off in computer and on application indicating that current or proposed .public facilities can meet the impacts of the development Application routed from Planning & Developmentto Engineering = Table l: LOS Tracking Public Facili Amount 2008 LOS Standard LOS Achieved* ~ Solid Waste 104,898 tons (generated) 7 12 pounds per capita per day 5.19 pounds per capita per day Potable Water 25,000,000 gallons (available) 120 gallons per capita er day 225.57 gallons per j ca ita er day Parks and Recreation 1,475 parkland acres (available) 4 acres per 1,000. people 13.31 acres per 1,000 people *Based on o ulation of 110,831 (2008) ' Both of these options would use Tidemark as the coordinating program between departments as is currently done for permits. Until the new Automation program is introduced, the concurrency review can be added to the review drop-down options in Tidemark (see page 4). Each department can approve, add conditions, deny, or enter not applicable (if the project is one of the exceptions listed in Section 4-901.B). Under the current Tidemark system it isn't possible to have a menu of the exceptions to pick from, but under the new Automation program this will be possible. The planner will have to manually enter the exception in the "Notes" field when they enter "NTAP" into the system (see page 4 for example). After one of the two options is chosen, there are additional issues to be addressed. These are outlined in the following paragraphs. Page 3 of 6 C:\Documents and Settings\Sandra.Herman\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.0utlook\OKYHH3Y1\Phase II Report.doc Concurrency Management System Phase II Report Prepared By Cate Lee '~;~'_ Nr J m ~ 0~ it ti .. T+wu er+ +, ..n5-._ _a... r_ _a ..., as. -..~ N 0 0:".TIER __ ~..~_ - _....___'~~_ 41Cmse: 1217 Fl+IF`liuUD FVE ActrnC/. II70 Oest. Zoning Revkw Vpda1N. 111 711 0 0 9 CLL pRJ= ~6:.F20L>7-0'0]1~ RcjKl LREECH. KI0.HH O:sco.lm rt.-.P + . _....._ Dins ~- ' C Fon :;'III LP`~G FENCE HIGH. I3Z LOIl~ ,___ _.. C[IGEar Tag ~E v. ~ ' -LF:IICS'.F:Pllh; FEOt, FEC F+cc ued ~ _l04 Date j ReFgt Tay -~ 3 InniM Rend pal ' S C]l14 ~~ T+c«c(PM t _.._. _.__.. _.... __. ,P Da C Dl 2n1i5- Do .8 :_.lN ~1H i i Jr. t k_1es Sciw_dulW 6v IM"~e a-^sorJ :xu :.::. ° ....~-- , ..~.,a___..._ __~. Recd rA:ial~ rlenal .._.. .._ Mclp ~ ..3 ~ II ..' F tmG.U.e ~~ ,. -182 Fainil P s.Jen~e - u Hlowsod ite ~° ,.a3e6 raxk- ~ 182E ~,a F d n..Y' : w-~-nre~ •: I y I Crm «x s'u x r*s ~+ i.~ weem {~... .,- CTRL•Ato Add, CTRL*Cl In Deble CTRL-Vnr peilUb{IICF to view d nA nnai E ..1 value RewH Code ReidL r _. L _ _ BCP1fA90]DI 609 S : 1 B[P2[®0)121 1115 ;B[P1009DTR5 1600 1 B[P10W0)153 632P}{~ 1 B[P20D90]01/ 1)36 t(j 1 !BCP2016DT~ 211)Ej NTAP (Not Applicable) Enter exception in "Notes" field iBCP2[IG407219 11111~1j1'GCITY'CT""""""-'""' T-•t ~ E 'sBCP2009O]fM2 22285E000IA DR T•ROFF EA'; EftO ROOF w:%REO,Ptf ul:~:!C YEAR 09FEIKCNSI SE--":G:E+LS 1Ci3<,t •`BCP CMP '' i8CP211f9Ol1B3 1056 [HARLE6 ST ~•R OFF EaS: HO ROOF a.•!%REFL•~s i, ~:0•F:3c BKNO:J:9 OYCR •TlAS 9•SE =L tOti BCP AR '., iBCP2C09O]M7 32305E000W DR wROFF E):5'1:.^.R.^,u?W:.R:Pwr~Yii"".OhF TEeB'-aLnE'.CYEhn FLa lul]:.I w:%':cc B[P CMP '.. iBLP20090)IBI 125lEEWARD ISL ::AR OFF EAS'I10 RCC?4'::x'n00?irri r'.aMO~'rFD S~'nOOFNG SYSTEV FL:],]`IGF,.:9W ACT ''. iBCP2fIO9DT2B1 Ti6 MANDAIAYAVE :}.40FF E.~-5'!L^v 5Y?:~L'c R00F P40 iW_"y!:R`i GtF'gt5ER'JL 3B YEPi S!!3:Div ROD BCP ALT '', BCP2016D/[W 1271 MAGNOLN DR .,L4OFF RDCF9:D'DM1't00D ZRAr. AND aENAt t5 5EDED 3l~`ra=L!:SY.K Ftf'a%::BW CMP iBCP20090]O31 2261 BANYAN DR ^'PPO?sFR rroLE BCP CMP iBCP20.BOT]B 306]ASHLAND IERR !k .c!nco-: ~C33C.Ca. ccM!:c: eceC&033B03 BCP ALi BCP2lU)07323 3060 COUNTRYSIDE BLVD I] ,..:!:ROItE RE4CD?!:DA RY,i C.-0?30.93 BCP ACT '. e[P2E090]E6] 111 HOBAAi AVE L~SY.CSC".:>:^'.C OeY%ERU^^ELaCNO BTAVCtiRE is 9RE 3E4ULMMCDt:OC'nn. h:IBCP REC jBCP10090TPL1 1203NGARDENAVE L`:SAfE CAS VNSY.G3...1.=_RE?:ACE 3~:i:DCYrS.RE>.ArCPk~REGL~IE ~:: BRD'r_!:BCP AR ' jBLP30090]1~ 1]20 CAPLISLE SI JRGRAOE Be_RVKE TC 3CC AF.'P BCP ACi jBCP200307013 ]03 HARBOPISIAND vh^'C =-uCE iXtt. A+<D+iSi il3?SE~Yi~: BCP ACT ~ jB~ 1150 CLEVELAND ST roc. e.»ex ua6i9 _. ~ BCP ACi V /AddAe '-s _ ~.. _ _ i'Y CJ t. o. _ ® C; i ; ~ '1 J w u R7 I ~ L - nem ?aa~rJr$mua re~s,~FL, ~ IPI.M,rLG2C150 P'j1 STEVEUS CREEK SJBDIVISIOt! - 1,_~., •„ ~pasf~~~Fl tl C Ism FG IIOF I ~ ~~- ~ b _ ~~ C ln.l htn nca .lCF 3 ^Il nas nthc Lt I nLer~tyF sd -0D ^OGi<el ,-S ._ A• -mot aNS r ~ B -B C i Bt:f<..s A Ch .}a »e II FI el III r~73nni:q SI ,us Con G~..-1e L Lill { MYlef n 'fII <n5 3^.~Oi3 J'f '3 `. Pralea l'aNm ~~ 5. ic0 vU0 R eel"9 CO% 2 c3 3 L 9iGeft i k 9 .; 12 ~9 '13+1i y . ~ xfa Re. tr: E~ ' S ~.`:P .cs $f FFFh .1 irn F d R 'm BCCS .3 Cn:r YE t Cnn plcLS Lode I-l ~s E_ .ak<r L!esY Re~r+~9:12 R 4r' E J!,c_63 1'.JS ',:1.20:5 .2]!: DRCD :'s W'E !A D a letl d~-1 t h9E a 91 3Y'12_93 YaVII ~ n CGG 02: SL 1 Y..S tVL2 _ ,.,~„ IR k ~.Aa ieE~ ~ e. ~rnnn.5 c a_net .~-er.l.e e.rn n. ~.la APEi 1688N BE11YLN GtnSrriery Re!FVre E1-ut r~LC'vec~hr 92!.ecnrJ ~]'.>el-3a (!e'e'.M:o F~C2~C9-:301.: CMP 188BN BETTY LN O.-eSror: n. veaE:;tel!1-9 Heme~Vi'u) CMP 1BBBN BE77Y LN Terror-~.^. VDI 1888 ... .. _. C~ .J ... ?20C9 `OY 5 + - `..i~30C5 Jt' Yt 513~2CD9 L Y,hY 52Dfi00i .Ol.. ,it' S'.D•'2CCi LDIi; 1~sY r ~ 622009 ;Ol:E YfX ----- -- . Dt BJ A_s BI.P ary_r3005 O JFK _I BCP 3..J3CCS ~D1 '! L BCP OLO R A NANDEZ BCP 'i-~IC05 - ~ - OLB BCP 32•ncc9 ~N t: EZJR B~ i~ L1.EARWATER HOUSING AUTH HOU STEVENS CREEK BUBDMERONAIDE SPDOR PLT FLD2 VACANT LOT CLEARWATER HOUSINGAUTH PNU CLEARWATER HOUSING Al17H PNU UNS >..,. ... ^.. ned s _ ~T., m9R,e~, fe~laad . -er Ent Revler _ = eo-eenal Reiea• SSM -;Yesle Rrs'x'rc ?e4dRte0.eree: iae-.R w.. rs Review . _ Hdy '. }CSZRnuev: ~ QROe '.. Review Drop-down Concurrency would be added to list of possible reviews Page 4 of 6 C:\Documents and Settings\Sandra.Herman\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.0utlook\OKYHH3Y1\Phase II Report.doc • i Concurrency Management System Phase II Report Prepared By Cate Lee Issues Forms A prototype form had been developed by previous staff, but never implemented. The end form product will depend on which of the above options is chosen. A traditional paper application has been developed, but it is also worth exploring a paperless application. Section 4-902.A simply says that "An application for a certificate of concurrency/capacity shall be filed with the community development coordinator as part of an application for development approval." Since there is no additional information the applicant needs to provide staff (other than what is already needed for an application for development approval) is it even necessary to have a paper application? The existing development approval forms could simply be edited to include a phrase of acknowledgement that the applicant is also applying for a certificate of concurrency. Prototypes are included at the end of this report. Code Section 4-903.A.6 outlines the requirement for road concurrency and references Section 4-803.C, which requires a traffic study for every project. Currently, Traffic Operations only requires a traffic impact study if the total generated net new trips meet one or more of the following conditions: 1. Proposal is expected to generate 100 or more new trips in any given hour (directional trips, inbound or outbound on the abutting streets) and/or 1000 or more new trips per day. 2. Anticipated new trip generation degrades the level of service as adopted in the City's Comprehensive Plan to unacceptable levels. 3. The study area contains a segment of roadway and/or intersection with (5) reportable accidents within a prior (12) month period, or the segment and/or intersection exists on the City's annual list of most hazardous locations, provided by the City of Clearwater Police Department. 4. The Traffic Operations Manager or their designee deems it necessary to require such assessment in the plan review process. Examples include developments that are expected to negatively impact a constrained roadway or developments with unknown trip generation and/or other unknown factors. They also may require a study if the proposal is located on or near a constrained or failing roadway. Presumably, we don't want to require a traffic impact study for every project, given the current economic situation and legislation at the state level (e.g., Senate Bill 360). But the current practice by Traffic Operations isn't in the Code. Therefore, a text amendment needed. There are two possibilities, outlined below. • Amend Section 4-903.A.6 to reference Section 4-801.C (instead of 4-803.C) to include a seventh exception (e.g., 7. If the traffic engineer has determined a study in unnecessary according to the following standards [list four items from Himanshu]). ' Page 5 of 6 C:\Documents and Settings\Sandra.Herman\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.0utlook\OKYHH3Y1\Phase II Report.doc Concurrency Management System Phase II Report Prepared By Cate Lee • Amend Section 4-903.A.6 to reference Section 4-802 (instead of 4-803.C) to include a fourth procedure which excepts projects that don't trip the four net new trips conditions listed above and isn't located on or near a constrained or failing roadway. Consulting with Traffic Operations will be necessary to determine the preferred amendment. Decisions The following decisions need to be made prior to the implementation of the Concurrency Management System: • Which option? 1. Concurrency sign off from the department staff for Traffic Operations, Sanitary Sewer, Storm Water, Potable Water, Parks and Recreation. 2. Concurrency sign off from the department staff for Traffic Operations, Sanitary Sewer, and Storm Water. Annual report showing LOS levels for Solid Waste, Potable Water, Parks and Recreation. • What kind of form? (See attached) A. Long form, include list of exceptions B. Long form, don't include list of exceptions C. Small acknowledgement text box added to existing BCP application • Code amendment? o Exempt certain projects from providing traffic study ^ Amend Section 4-903.A.6 to reference Section 4-801.C (instead of 4-803.C) to include a seventh exception. ^ Amend Section 4-903.A.6 to reference Section 4-802 (instead of 4- 803.C) to include a fourth procedure. • How to coordinate with other departments? o Meeting with appropriate staff o Letter from Michael o Both Page 6 of 6 C:\Documents and Settings\Sandra.Herman\Local Settings\Temporary Internet ` Files\Content.0utlook\OKYHH3YI\Phase II Report.doc • • Public Facility LOS Tacking Summary Sanitary Sewer • 9J-5.0055(3)(a) Requirements: (a) For sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, and potable water facilities, at a minimum, a local government shall meet the following standards to satisfy the concurrency requirements: 1. A development order or permit ~s issued subject to the condition that, at the time of the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent, the necessary facilities and services are in place and available to serve the new development; or 2. At the time the development order or permit is issued, the necessary facilities and services are guaranteed in an enforceable development agreement, pursuant to Section l 63.3220, F.S., or an agreement or development order issued pursuant to Chapter 380, F.S., to be in place and available to serve new development at the time of the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent. [Section 163.3180(2)(a), F.S.] • City of Clearwater Tracking Method Summary: Sanitary sewer is tracked by Engineering (see a-mail from Rob Fahey dated 5.19.2009 and Excel spreadsheet from Tom Robertson). The Excel spreadsheet from Tom shows the overall capacity for each plant-the existing availability and then after each development, the impact with a running total to ensure capacity exists. Excerpts from the Excel spreadsheet are shown below, followed by a summary table. The LOS standard in the Comprehensive Plan is 127 gallons per capita per day. Currently, the City can provide about 257 gallons per capita per day (see LOS table below). Marshall Street Plant Capacity Table (excerpt from Excel spreadsheet received in a-mail from Tom Robertson) arshall Street APCF DEP Facilit Permit #: L0021857-01 x .Date: 10/12/2011 a aci = 10 MGD ro'ect ermit No. ate o ulation ail Av . Flowrat umulative Flowrate (GPD) (MGD aseline 8/03 8.0 i bland Glen OS-21 10/21/05 9,24 8.05 ]earwater Centre OS-25 12/28/0 177.5 24,395 8.0 arrison Villa e 06-02 01/27/0 895 90,823 8.1 oodlawn Oaks W06-OS 03/08/0 33 3,30 8.17 enetia Cove 06-06 03/08/0 2 2,40 8.1 ontclair Cove 06-07 03/15/0 4 8,00 8.18 aters Ede 06-09 04/11/0 459 49,00 8.23 arold Court Villas II W06-12 06/27/0 1 1,60 8.23 onair Street W06-18 10/10/0 78 7,80 8.2 our Seasons Grande 06-19 12/27/0 14 5,585 8.2 o'ect ermit No. ate o ulation ail Av .Flowrate umulative Flowrate GPD MGD aBella Vista 07-01 03/05/0 5 5,40 8.25 esidence Inn W07-OS 2/20/2007 16,715 8.2 ]earwater Villa e Ph 2 W07-06 4/9/2007 27 2,70 8.27 Sunset S uare CVS 07-07 4/9/2007 10,081 8.28 al-Mart Hi bland Store 4667 07-13 8/20/2007 2,16 8.28 ]earwater Gardens Condominiums 07-16 8/29/2007 45 4,50 8.28 ]earwater Ba front Promenade 08-02 2/14/2008 2,16 8.2 ualea 08-03 3/7/2008 45 29,50 8.3 1573 Ft Harrison Office 08-OS 6/23/2008 5,463 8.32 8.32 C: (Documents and SettingslSandra.HermanlLocal SettrngslTemporary Internet Fi/eslContent.0utlooklOKYHH3Y11LOS Tracking Summary.doc Fast Plant Capacity Table (exce;~rom Excel spreadsheet received in ` ?ail from Tom Robertson) ast APCF DEP Facilit Permit #: L0021865-01 x .Date: 3/18/2012 a aci = 5 MGD ro~ect ermit No. ate o ulation ail Av .Flowrate umulative Flowrate GPD) MGD) aseline 6/03 3.4 learwater Mall Phase II OS-23 1 ]/29/05 N/A 1,55 3.4 reeto s II W06-16 09/15/0 78 7,80 3.4 ulf to Ba Plaza W06-17 09/27/06 N/A 8,75 3.48 VS Pharmac 07-10 05/17/0 N/A 1,29 3.48 a side Arbors 08-04 06/10/08 20 20,00 3.5 3.5 Northeast Plant Ca aci Table excer t from Excels readsheet received in a-mail from Tom Robertson) FDEP Facility Permit Capacity = ]3.5 Northeast APCF #: FL0128937 Ex .Date: 3/18/2012 MGD Si ned ro~ect ermit No. ate o ulation aily Avg. lowrate umulative Flowrate (GPD (MGD) aseline 8/04 8.1 enaissance Oaks WOS-20 09/28/05 150.5 15,05 8.1 osta Verde WOS-21 10/17/05 60 60,00 8.2 oun side Christian 06-01 02/09/0 750 8.2 ro ress Ener 06-03 03/03/0 N/A 0 8.2 al reen -Safe Harbor W06-08 03/30/0 N/A 1,455 8.2 ake Chautau ua II W06-11 06/05/0 25 2,50 8.23 arborside Subdivision - Safe Harbor W06-13 07/12/0 10.5 1,10 8.23 ark Place Office W06-15 08/04/0 85.8 8,60 8.2 akeside Offices at Park Place W07-02 03/26/07 127.5 12,75 8.25 a ri Mobile Home Park 07-03 03/28/0 15 15,60 8.2 learwater To ota W07-04 03/30/0 6,71 8.27 ire Station #48 Training acili 07-] 1 05/18/0 1,33 8.2 Sherwood Yard W08-06 08/11/08 8.2 eila Davis Elementary School ddition W09-O1 01/30/0 29 2,95 8.28 ver reen Manor W09-02 02/13/0 3.5 35 8.28 a1Mart Supercenter #2081- 5 W09-03 OS/O1/0 40,222 4,02 8.28 len Oak Ave. N. W09-04 04/24/09 31.5 3,15 8.28 Sherwood Yard W09-OS 04/27/0 43 8.28 8.28 Summary Table ]ant Ca aci MGD Currently Used MGD emaining Capacity MGD East Plant 5.00 3.50 1.50 Marshall Street 10.00 8.32 1.68 E Plant 13.50 8.28 5.22 C:IDocuments and SettingslSandra.HermanlLocal SettingslTemporarylnternet FileslContent.OutlooklOKYHH3Y11LOS Tracking Summary.doc ~~ ~~ ~ s~ `{~ ~- ~~ ~~ ~ ~ C 1 ~ ~c-~' ~ ~ w~c ,~~~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ S~- ~ ~ ~~ ~~-~~=~ ~~~a~~~m~ ~wa~~) u Totals 28.50 20.10 8.40 • LOS Table anitary Sewer Available Per Day (In Gallons, As of 5.20.09 o ulation 2008 Gallons Available Per Capita Per a 28,500,000.00 110,831.00 257.15 *LOS Standard is l2~ allons er erson er da Solid Waste • 9J-S.0055(3)(a) Requirements: _.. _ _ (a) For sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, and potable water facilities, at a minimum, a local government shall meet the following standards to satisfy the concurrency requirements: 1. A development order or permit is issued subject to the condition that, at the time of the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent, the necessary facilities and services are in place and available to serve the new development; or 2. At the time the development order or permit is issued, the necessary facilities and services are guaranteed in an enforceable development agreement, pursuant to Section 163.3220, F.S., or an agreement or development order issued pursuant to Chapter 380, F.S., to be in place and available to serve new development at the time of the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent. [Section 163.3180(2)(a), F.S.] • City of Clearwater Tracking Method Summary: According to the Pinellas County Comprehensive Plan, Solid Waste and Resource Recovery Element, due to interlocal agreements between Pinellas County and each municipality, the County is responsible for the disposal of all municipal solid waste (see attached element, page 2-4). In addition, in 2008 the City produced 5.19 pounds per capita per day (see e-mail from Debbie Moore and LOS Table below for calculation), which is well below the LOS of 7.12. LOS Table Solid Waste Generated b the Cit in 2008 in tons Po ulation 2008 Pounds of Solid Waste Generated Per Ca ita Per Da 104,898.00 110,831.00 5.19 *LOS Standard is 7.12 ounds er ca ita er da Drainage • 9J-5.0055(3)(a) Requirements: (a) For sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, and potable water facilities, at a minimum, a local government shall meet the following standards to satisfy the concurrency requirements: 1. A development order or permit is issued subject to the condition that, at the time of the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or _._ _ __ its functional equivalent, the necessary facilities and services are in place and available to serve the new development; or 2. At the time the development order or permit is issued, the necessary facilities and services are guaranteed in an enforceable development agreement, pursuant to Section 163.3220, F.S., or an agreement or development order issued pursuant to Chapter 380, F.S., to be in place and available to serve new development at the time of the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent. [Section 163.3180(2)(a), F.S.] • City of Clearwater Tracking Method Summary.• In a phone conversation with Phuong Vo on 1.28.2009, she indicated that Stormwater reviews drainage requirements on a permit-by- permit basis. Staff doesn't sign off on a permit unless the development meets the LOS given in the Comprehensive Plan (see below). Stormwater Management Facilities Design storm 10 -year storm frequency for all new street development using the rational design method. 25 -year storm frequency with positive outfall for major storm systems with basin time of intensities controlling the duration. 50 -year storm frequency when no outfall and discharge is to street right-of--way. 100 -year storm frequency when no outfall and discharge is across private property. C: (Documents and SettingslSandra.HermanlLoca! SettingslTemporary Internet FileslContent.0utlooklOKYHH3Y/ IGOS Tracking Summary.doc * Design standards for stormwater quality treatment/storage quantity shall conform to the current SWFWMD requirement [Presently being the SCS Unit Hydrograph design method, using the design storm frequency and a twenty four (24) hour duration for sites ten (10) acres or more, and the rational design method for sites under ten (10) acresJ. Potable Water • 9J-S.0055(3)(a) Requirements: (a) For sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, and potable. water facilities, at a minimum, a local government shall meet the following standards to satisfy the concurrency requirements: 1. A development order or permit is issued subject to the condition that, at the time of the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent, the necessary facilities and services are in place and available to serve the new development; or 2. At the time the development order or permit is issued, the necessary facilities and services are guaranteed in an enforceable development agreement, pursuant to Section 163.3220, F.S., or an agreement or development order issued pursuant to Chapter 380, F.S., to be in place and available to serve new development at the time of the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent. [Section 163.3180(2)(a), F.S.] • City of Clearwater Tracking Method Summary: Current capacity of the City's three water treatment plants cumulatively tota125 million gallons per day (see Rob Fahey a-mail dated 5.19.2009). The LOS standard in the Comprehensive Plan is 120 gallons per capita per day. Currently, the City can provide about 226. gallons per capita per day (see LOS Table below for calculation). t nc T~~ip Potable Water Available Per Day (In Gallons, As of 5.20.09 Po ulation 2008 Gallons Available Per Ca ita Per Da 25,000,000.00 110,831.00 225.57 *LOS Standard is 120 allons er ca ita er da Parks and Recreation • 9J-5.0055(3)(b) Requirements: (b) For parks and: recreation facilities, at a minimum, a local government shall meet the following standards to satisfy the concurrency requirement: __. 1. At the time the development order or permit is issued, the necessary facilities and services are in place or under actual construction; or 2. A development order or permit is issued subject to the condition that, at the time of the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent, the acreage for the necessary facilities and services to serve the new development is dedicated or acquired by the local govemment, or funds in the amount of the developer's fair share are committed; and a. A development order or permit is issued subject to the conditions that the necessary facilities and services needed to serve the new development are scheduled to be in place or under actual construction not more than one year after issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent as provided in the adopted local government 5-year schedule of capital improvements; or b. At the time the development order or permit is issued, the necessary facilities and services are the subject of a binding executed agreement which requires the necessary facilities and services to serve the new development to be in place or under actual construction not more than one year after issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent; or c. At the time the development order or permit is issued, the necessary facilities and services are guaranteed in an enforceable development agreement, pursuant to Section 163.3220, F.S., or an agreement or development order issued pursuant to Chapter 380, F.S., to be in place or under actual construction not more than one year after issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent. [Section 163.3180(2)(b), F.S.] • City of Clearwater Tracking Method Summary: In a phone conversation with Felicia Leonard, she stated that as of 5.13.09 there are 1,475 acres of parkland in the City. The LOS standard in the Comprehensive Plan is 4 acres per 1,000 people. Currently, the City provides 13.31 acres per 1,000 people (see LOS Table below for calculation). C: (Documents and SettingslSandra.HermanlLocal SettingslTemporary Internet FileslContent.OutlooklOKYHH3Y11LOS Tracking Summary.doc • • LOS Table Parkland Acres As of 5.13.09 Po ulation 2008 Acres Per Thousand 1,475.00 110,831.00 13.31 *LOS Standard is 4 acres er 1,000 eo le Transportation Note: Senate BiII 360 makes the City of Clearwater a Transportation Concurrency Exception Area, which makes 9J-5.0055(3)(c)1.-4., F.A.C. not applicable. • 9J-5.0055(3)(c) Requirements: (c) For :transportation facilities (roads and mass transit designated in the adopted local government comprehensive plan), at a minimum, a local government shall meet the following standards to satisfy the Concurrency requirement, except as otherwise provided in subsections (4)-(7) of this section. 1. At the time a development order or permit is issued, the necessary factlrties and services are in place or under construction; or _.. 2. A development order or permit is issued subject to the conditions that the necessary facilities and services needed to serve the new development are scheduled to be in place or under actual construction not more than three years after issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent as provided in the adopted local government five-year schedule of capital improvements. The schedule of capital improvements may recognize and include transportation projects included in the first three years of the applicable, adopted Florida Department of Transportation five year work program. The Capital Improvements Element must include the following policies: a. The estimated date of commencement of actual construction and the estimated date of project completion. b. A provision that a plan amendment is required to eliminate, defer, or delay construction of any road or mass transit facility or service which is needed to maintain the adopted level of service standard and which is listed in the five-year schedule of capital improvements; or 3. At the time a development order or permit is issued, the necessary facilities and services are the subject of a binding executed agreement which requires the necessary facilities and services to serve the new development to be in place or under actual construction no more than three years after the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent; or 4. At the time a development order or permit is issued, the necessary facilities and services are guaranteed in an enforceable development agreement, pursuant to Section 163.3220, F.S., or an agreement or development order issued pursuant to Chapter 380, F.S., to be in place or under actual construction not more than three years after issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent. [Section 163.3180(2)(c), F.S.] 5. For the purpose of issuing'a development order or permit, a proposed urban redevelopment project located within a defined and mapped Existing Urban Service Area as established in the local government comprehensive plan pursuant to Section 163.3164(29), F.S., shall not be subject to the Concurrency requirements of subparagraphs 9J-5.0055(3)(c)1.-4., F.A.C., of this chapter for up to 110 percent of the transportation impact generated by the previously existing development. For the purposes of this provision, a previously existing development is the actual previous built use which was occupied and active within a time period established in the local government comprehensive plan. [Section 163.3180(8), F.S.] 6. For the purpose of issuing a development order or permit, a proposed development may be deemed to have a de minimis impact and may not be subject to the Concurrency requirements of subparagraphs 9J-5.0055(3)(c)1.-4., F.A.C., only if all of the conditions specified in subsection 163.3180(6), F.S., are met. [Section 163.3180(6), F.S.] 7. A development order or permit within a designated multimodal transportation district may be issued provided the planned community design capital improvements are included in a financially feasible long range schedule of improvements for the development or redevelopment time-frame for the district, without regard to the period of time between development or redevelopment and the scheduled construction of the capita] improvements as specified in Section 163.3180(IS)(c), F.S. • City of Clearwater Tracking Method Summary.• SB 360 Stuff: Himanshu said Traffic Operations hasn't had any meetings regarding it; he did bring it up in staff meeting as possibly having an impact on requirements. Is there a counter bill to 360 being proposed? C: (Documents and SettingslSandra.HermanlLocal SettingslTemporary Internet FileslContent.OutlooklOKYHH3Y11LOS Tracking Summary.doc .7 Spoke with Sheri Coven on 5.21.09-she said there are no counter bills to SB 360 she is aware of. She did refer me to three bills that deal with transportation-she wasn't sure if anything regarding transportation concurrency was in them or not. The three bills are HB 1021, HB 5013 and SB 2080. HB 1021 does mention transportation concurrency backlog plans (only applies if you have such a plan in your jurisdiction, which Clearwater does not). The other two bills do not contain anything about concurrency. Are there changes to the TCEA requirements as well? Yes, but none that aren't in SB 360. 360 changes the defmition of TCEAs and the main change is that within 2 years after the TCEA becomes exempt, the jurisdiction must adopt into its comprehensive plan land use and transportation strategies to support and fund mobility within the exception area. 360 doesn't set forth specific standards that have to be met-as long as something is adopted in the comp plan. Do we want to keep our road LOS the way it is, regardless of the looser state requirements? De minimis info: Himanshu and Ben are keeping track of de minimis development. The table below is excerpted from an Excel spreadsheet sent by Himanshu on 5.11.09. City of Clearwater De Minimis Records for 2009 2640 Feet Radius or 1/2 a mile Date Entered Subdivision Address Estimated Peak Hour Trips State Roads Impacted v/c Ra 5/11/2009 Lake Chautau ua 2691 Lakebreeze Ln 9.570 US 19 1.44 5/11/2009 Lake Chautau ua 2676 3rd Ave 9.570 US 19 1.44 5/11/2009 1201 Palm Bluff Preserve Dr 9.570 Alt US 19 0.27 5/11/2009 1200 Palm Bluff Preserve Dr 9.570 Alt US 19 0.27 5/11/2009 1204 Palm Bluff Preserve Dr 9.570 Alt US 19 0.27 5/11/2009 300 Palm Bluff St 9.570 Alt US 19 0.27 C: (Documents and SettingslSandra.HermanlLoeal SettingslTemporary Internet FileslContent.0utlooklOKYHH3Y1lLOS Tracking Summary.doc ~, • From: Porter, Catherine Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 4:00 PM To: Herman, Sandra Subject: RE: Solid Waste Capacity YW From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 3:55 PM To: Porter, Catherine Subject: RE: Solid Waste Capacity It is good for backup materials. Thanks Cathy. From: Porter, Catherine Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 1:59 PM To: Herman, Sandra Subject: FW: Solid Waste Capacity FYI---Could this help with CIE? From: Clayton, Gina Sent: Thursday, August 20, 2009 1:45 PM To: Porter, Catherine; Lee, Catherine Subject: F11V: Solid Waste Capacity r FYI -for your concurrency study. From: Glenn, Tom Sent: Tuesday, July 26, 2005 1:12 PM To: Clayton, Gina Cc: Downes, Tom Subject: RE: Solid Waste Capacity • Gina The Solid Waste Department will be able to handle any and all waste produced within the city, being a unified utility we have the ability to grow with the community (city). All garbage is taken to the Pinellas County Waste to Energy Plant where it is incinerated, any material that is not is land filled. The most recent projections now with the expansion of the landfill raising it's height to 150 feet take it's life to the years 2085 to 2090. • Hope this was helpful Tom Glenn Solid Waste Program Coordinator 727-562-4930 cell 727-224-7388 -----Original Message----- From: Clayton, Gina Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 10:05 AM To: Glenn, Tom Subject: Solid Waste Capacity Tom, • We have a land use plan amendment pending Dept. of Community Affairs approval. They have asked me what is the capacity of our Solid Waste system? Our staff reports indicate there is excess capacity and solid waste can serve this property. Can you help me with this? If not -can you direct me to the write person? Thanks. FYI - we estimate the tons a development will generate and we need to demonstrate that we have capacity at the dump, etc. to handle. thanks. Gina L. Clayton Assistant Planning Director City of Clearwater aina.clnvton@mvclearwater.com 727-562-4587 • • City of Clearwater CIE Update zoog/1o The following tables provide the capacity and projected demand for each of the respective public facilities projected over the next 5 years. There are no projected deficiencies. SOLID WASTE: Current Capacity Current Demand Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Capacity at End of FY Surplus/Deficit zoog/1o zolo/11 zo11/1z zolz/13 zo13114 Tota I POTABLE WATER: Current Capacity z5 MGD Current Demand 1z.z MGD Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Capacity at End of FY Surplus/Deficit zoog/1o 1z.o MGD z5.o MGD 13.o MGD zolo/11 1z.1 MGD z5.o MGD 1z.9 MGD zo11/1z 1z.1 MGD z5.o MGD 1z.9 MGD zolz/13 1z.z MGD z5.o MGD 1z.8 MGD zo13114 1z.z MGD z5.o MGD 1z.8 MGD Total N/A N/A N/A STORM WATER: Current Capacity io-Year LOS Min Current Demand 1o-Year LOS Mini Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Capacity at End of FY Surplus/Deficit zoo9110 1o-Year LOS (Min) 1o-Year LOS Min) N/A zolo/11 1o-Year LOS (Min) 1o-Year LOS Min) N/A zo11/1z 1o-Year LOS Min 1o-Year LOS Min) N/A zolz/13 1o-Year LOS (Min 1o-Year LOS Min) N/A 2013114 1o-Year LOS (Min 1o-Year LOS Min N/A Total 1o-Year LOS Min 1o-Year LOS Min) N/A SANITARY SEWER: Current Capacity z8._5 MGD Current Demand ia.o MGD Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Capacity at End of FY Surplus/Deficit zoog/1o 14.1 MGD z8.5 MGD 14.4 MGD zolo/11 14.z MGD z8.5 MGD 14.3 MGD 2011/12 14.z MGD z8.5 MGD 14.3 MGD zolz/13 14.3 MGD z8.5 MGD 14.z MGD zo13114 14.3 MGD z8.5 MGD 14.z MGD Total N/A N/A N/A u:\cie\cie2009\cie update 2009 projections tables.docx ~ ~ pc~ ~~c ~ Z~-.- a~~ ~~ ~~ w~ ~~ .. • Herman, Sandra From: Valerie.James@dca.state.fl.us Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2009 5:08 PM To: Herman, Sandra Subject: RE: CIE tables Attachments: CIE Update 2009 Projections Tables REVISED.docx , Hello Sandra, The revised tables look good. Thank you. Valerie James, Planner Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100 Telephone: (850) 922-1803 SunCom: 291-1803 Fax: (850) 488-3309 E-mail: valerie.james(a~dca.state.fl.us The Department of Community Affairs is committed to maintaining the highest levels of service and values your feedback. Please take a few moments to complete our Customer Service Survey by visiting http://www.dca.state.fl.us/CustomerServiceSurvey/. Thank you in advance for letting us know what you think. The Florida Discount Drug Card is designed to lower the cost of prescriptions for certain Florida residents. To learn more, visit http://www.FloridaDiscountDrugCard.com or call toll-free 1-866-341-8894 or TTY 1-866-763-9630. Florida has a broad public records law and all correspondence, including email addresses, may be subject to disclosure. <Sandra. HermanCaamvC leanxater.com> 06/30/2009 04:28 PM To <Valerie.JamesCa?dca.state.fl.us> cc Subject RE: CIE tables Valerie, Hi. See revised tables (attached). Are these revisions what you were looking for? If not, please call me to discuss. Thank you, Sandy Herman Planner III City of Clearwater 727-562-4586 From: Valerie.JamesCa>dca.state.fl.us [mailto:Valerie.)amesCa>dca.state.fl.usl Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 11:40 AM To: Herman, Sandra • • Subject: CIE tables Good Morning Sandra, Bernard and I have looked at the CIE tables that you had provided to him for review. He wanted me to let you know that in general the tables look good; however, there should be two additional rows added to each of them. One row should indicate a "Total". The totals are derived from the figures that would be shown in the Projected Demand column and the Projected Capacity at end of FY column. The other row should indicate the Surplus/Deficit which is derived at the end of the FY. Thank You. Valerie James, Planner Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100 Telephone: (850) 922-1803 SunCom: 291-1803 Fax: (850) 488-3309 E-mail: valerie.iames(a~dca.state.fl.us The Department of Community Affairs is committed to maintaining the highest levels of service and values your feedback. Please take a few moments to complete our Customer Service Survey by visiting http://www.dca.state.fl.us/CustomerServiceSurvey/. Thank you in advance for letting us know what you think. The Florida Discount Drug Card is designed to lower the cost of prescriptions for certain Florida residents. To learn more, visit http://www.FloridaDiscountDrugCard.com or call toll-free 1-866-341-8894 or TTY 1-866-763-9630. Florida has a broad public records law and all correspondence, including email addresses, may be subject to disclosure. • • 04/24/09 Notes from telephone conversation this day with Bernard Piawah and Valerie James Jenkins Started conversation with a discussion on the table called "Data and Analysis for Determination of Future Transportation Projects 2008-2018" (from Paul Bertels). Bernard said to explain capacity. How does each project improve capacity? Bernard would like to know the meaning of "20.0" in second row under "no. of lanes to construct" column? Is it 20 lanes? Is this a typo? Bernard said this is a good table -keep for reference. What he really needs is a table -we'll need to make a new one - that shows only 5 years out (2oog/1o-2013/14) with the following: explain what "future LOS" means - is this when the project is completed? Give projections -provide "future" date when a project will be completed and how it affects the LOS. The table should deal only w/LOS standard conditions and projected for next 5 years (year by year: 2oog/1o, 2010/11, 2011/12, 2012/13 and 2013/14). At what point does the road start to fail or improve -show this. Provide demonstration if those improvements are done: "LOS will be _". Provide anticipated improvements. Conditions w/o improvement 2013/14, LOS Conditions w/anticipated improvements 2013/14, LOS Bernard questions the project in table for Lakeview Road from Ft. Harrison to Missouri with proposed improvement: 4LU to 2LD (he says this will "raise eyebrows" because the lanes are being reduced). He would like to know how this project is improving LOS. I said I would discuss it further with our Traffic Engineer and get back with him on it. Bernard said that he does not need to see our Data and Analysis Table for Six-Year Major Capital Improvement Projects. Basically, he said to make our submittal for CIE update simple. Such as for water, show: Current capacity of Current demand of Projected demand in the next 5 years Break out for each of the 5 years (show we have adequate capacity at end of each of the 5 years): 201o capacity 2011 capacity 2012 capacity 2013 capacity 2014 capacity Give projections, what demand will be, capacity, supply to match demand. What DCA wants to know is at what point of time will there be deficiencies. Bernard will be happy at any time to review our proposed tables. • • City of Clearwater CIE Update zoo9110 The following tables provide the capacity and projected demand for each of the respective public facilities projected over the next 5 years. There are no projected deficiencies. SOLID WASTE: Current Capacity Current Demand Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Capacity at End of FY Surplus/Deficit zoo9110 zolo/11 zo11/1z zolz/13 zo13h4 Total POTABLE WATER: Current Capacity Current Demand Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Capacity at End of FY Surplus/Deficit zoog/1o zolo/11 2011/12 zolz/13 zo13114 Tota I STORM WATER: Current Capacity Current Demand Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Capacity at End of FY Surplus/Deficit zoo9110 zolo/11 2011/12 zolz/13 zo13/14 Tota I SANITARY SEWER Current Capacity Current Demand Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Capacity at End of FY Surplus/Deficit zoo9110 zolo/11 zo11/1z zolz/13 zo13/14 Total u:\cie\cie2009\cie update 2009 projections tables.docx • 03-09-09 RE: CIE update for FY09/10 (this year) Spoke with DCA: Bernard Piawah and Valerie James Jenkins Bernard said make it simple -tables, etc. Further he said: "Write it out in a few paragraphs: Population projections for 2009-2013. How we project into the future, such as how many gallons of potable water do we need and have (capacity) for the projected populations? In writing, compare to supply /capacity. How many people are you going to provide water to? What is LOS standard per person per day? What will supply be /how will we do it? In writing, put what you can into and what you can into a table." He likes the LOS tables from Winter Haven, FL -good examples. Valerie will fax to me. ~ • City of Clearwater CIE Update zoo9/10 The following tables provide the capacity and projected demand for each of the respective public facilities projected over the next 5 years. There are no projected deficiencies. SOLID WASTE: Current Capacity Current Demand Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Capacity at End of FY Surplus/Deficit zoo9110 zolo/11 2011/12 zolz/13 zo13114 Total POTABLE WATER: Current Capacity z5 MGD Current Demand 1z.z MGD Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Capacity at End of FY Surplus/Deficit zoo9110 1z.o MGD z5.o MGD 13.o MGD zolo/11 1z.1 MGD z5.o MGD 1z.g MGD zo11/1z 1z.1 MGD z5.o MGD 1z.g MGD zolz/13 1z.z MGD z5.o MGD 1z.8 MGD zo13/14 1z.z MGD z5.o MGD 1z.8 MGD Total NIA NIA N/A STORM WATER: Current Capacity 1o-Year LOS (Min) Current Demand 1o-Year LOS Min) Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Capacity at End of FY Surplus/Deficit zoo9110 1o-Year LOS Min) 1o-Year LOS (Min) N/A zo1o111 1o-Year LOS (Min) 1o-Year LOS (Min) N/A zo11/1z 1o-Year LOS (Min) 1o-Year LOS (Min) N/A zolz/13 1o-Year LOS (Min) 1o-Year LOS (Min) N/A zo13/14 1o-Year LOS (Min) 1o-Year LOS (Min N/A Total 1o-Year LOS (Min) 1o-Year LOS (Min) N/A `` SANITARY SEWER: Current Capacity z8.5 MGD Current Demand 14.0 M_GD ---~ ~' Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Capacity at End of FY Surplus/Deficit zoo9/10 14.1 MGD z8.5 MGD 14.4 MGD zolo/11 14.z MGD z8.5 MGD 14.3 MGD zo11/1z 14.z MGD z8.5 MGD 14.3 MGD zolz/13 14.3 MGD z8.5 MGD 14.z MGD zo13114 14.3 MGD z8.5 MGD 14.z MGD Total N/A N/A N/A u:\cie\cie2009\cie update 2009 projections tables.docx • • Herman, Sandra From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 11:05 AM To: Rice, Scott; Fahey, Robert; Gloster, Earl; Pittman, John; Leonard, Felicia Subject: FW: Capital Improvements Element (CIE) Update Attachments: Ordinance 8088-09 CIE Update 09 CDB 102009.docx; CPA2009-07001 CDB Staff Report CIE Update09 REVperCP100909.docx; CDB Agenda October 20, 2009.docx Scott, Rob, Earl,lohn, Felicia, Thank you for your LOS figures that we used to prepare the ordinance for the annual update to the Capital Improvements Element (CIE) of the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan. The information is per your direction from our email and phone conversations and some is based on the information provided to Cate Lee, Planner II, in her LOS tracking summary that she put together in July. I wanted to forward you a copy of the staff report and ordinance that is going to the Community Development Board (CDB) meeting on October 20, 2009 (next Tuesday) at 1 pm. Also, attached is the CDB agenda (this case is item #E-2). It is then scheduled to go to City Council on Nov. 5, 2009 with 2"d ordinance reading scheduled on Nov. 17, 2009 (State Statutes require it for all communities to be adopted prior to Dec. 1~ each year -following adoption of the annual CIP budget). While I do not anticipate any unusual questions, please feel free to attend or send a representative to the meetings in case there are any particular questions about the projections for your respective areas. If you have any questions, please call me. Thanks again, Sandy Herman 562-4586 l • Herman, Sandra From: Pittman, John Sent: Thursday, October 08, 2009 8:15 AM To: Herman, Sandra Cc: Gloster, Earl Subject: RE: Solid Waste projections for state annual report Sandy, It is okay to move forward and report the 5.19 Ibs per capita per day as current demand. If you have any more questions please do not hesitate. Thanks John Pittman Assistant Director City of Clearwater Solid Waste/General Services Department tel: (727} 562-4936 cell:(727-224-7382 From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Wednesday, October 07, 2009 3:45 PM To: Pittman, John Subject: Solid Waste projections for state annual report John, Thank you so much for calling me back to discuss this with me today. I spoke with planner Cate Lee in our office and she said she calculated the "5.19 Ibs per capita per day" as follows: 104,898 tons {2008 demand figure as provided by Debbie Moore to Cate Lee} x 2000 (to convert to !bs} = 209,796,000 / 365 (days in a year) = 574,783 / 110,831 (2008 population) = 5.19 Ibs per capita per day I have been asked by my manager to please run this by Earl on Monday when he gets back and see if he would allow us to report the 5.19 Ibs per capita per day as current demand. My manager's thought is that the state will ask us why we are projecting to process the same amount of solid waste with a projected increase in population in the next 5 years. Then please let me know if Earl is ok with us giving the information as follows: SOLID WASTE: Current Capacity: 7.12 Ibs per capita per day Current Demand: 5.19 Ibs per capita per day (estimate for 2008) Fiscal Year Proiected Demand (max.) Proiected Capacit y at End Suralus (Deficit) of FY 2009/10 7.12 Ibs per capita, per 7.12 Ibs p er capita, per day N/A da 2010/11 7.12 Ibs per capita, per 7.12 Ibs per ca pita, per N/A da da 2011/12 7.12 Ibs per capita, per 7.12 Ibs per capita, per N/A da da 2012/13 7.12 Ibs per capita, per 7.12 Ibs per ca pita, per N/A da da 2013/14 7.12 Ibs per capita, per 7.12 Ibs per capita, per N!A da da Totals 7.12 Ibs p er capita, per day 7.12 Ibs p er capita, per day N/A 2013/14 • Solid Waste LOS Standard: 7.12 Ibs per capita per day Current capacity: Total Solid Waste capacity (in tons): 143,906 Pounds of Solid Waste per capita per day: 7.12 Current demand: Total Solid Waste Generated by the City in 2008 (in tons): 104.898 Current Pounds of Solid Waste per capita per day: 5.19 The City's Solid Waste Department is able to dispose of all waste produced within the city as it works with Pinellas County on waste disposal Garbage is taken to the Pinellas County Waste to Energy Plant where most is incinerated. Any material that is not incinerated is "land filled". The_most recent projections take the life of the land fill to the years 2085 to 2090. Thanks, Sandy Herman, Sandra • From: Porter, Catherine Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 2:01 PM To: Herman, Sandra Subject: RE: CIE tables xThis_message h_as.been archived. View the oriainai item ~h Yippee! From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 12:02 PM To: Porter, Catherine Subject: FW: CIE tables Cathy, Sounds like a winner! I'll update the tables with the additional rows and then I'll send you and Gina a copy. Sandy From: Valerie.James dca.state.fl.us jmailto:Valerie.James@dca.state.fl.usl Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 11:40 AM To: Herman, San 1 RE: CIE- Enterprise Vault Armed Item ~ Page 1 of 1 From Porter, Catherine To Herman, Sandra Cc Subject RE: CIE Date Tuesday, June 02, 2009 2:13:58 PM Sounds good. We can talk more as soon as we can get the final SB 360 and look it over. From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Tuesday, June 02, 2009 1:45 PM To: Porter, Catherine Subject: CIE Cathy, I have sent Bernard some simple tables for the Dec. 2009 CIE update that are based on the conversation I last had with him in April. am waiting to hear from him on the format then I will pass the information on to you. am sending Paul Bertels an email to get with him on the revisions to the table for the 5 year corridor improvements (instead of 10 years as previously recommended by Bernard), keeping in mind that this part of the submittal might very well change as per SB 360. Sandy Sandra E. Herman Plnnner III Planning Department City of Clearwater, Florida 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756-5520 PO Box 4748, 33758-4748 Telephone: (727) 562-4586 Fax: (727) 562-4865 snndra.hermnn@myclenrwater.com http://evault.Clearwater-fl.com/EnterpriseVault/ViewMessage.asp?VaultId=1 FE8D7DDE... 10/ 19/2009 ~~' ~~` i ~ ~ • • COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING MINUTES CITY OF CLEARWATER October 20, 2009 DRAFT Present: Nicholas C. Fritsch Chair Thomas Coates Vice Chair Jordan Behar Board Member Frank L. Dame Board Member Richard Adelson Board Member Brian A. Barker Board Member Norma R. Carlough Acting Board Member Absent: Doreen DiPolito Board Member Also Present: Gina Grimes Attorney for the Board Leslie Dougall-Sides Assistant City Attorney Michael L. Delk Planning Director Gina Clayton Assistant Planning Director Patricia O. Sullivan Board Reporter The Chair called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. at City Hall, followed by the Invocation and Pledge of Allegiance. To provide continuity for research, items are in agenda order although not necessarily discussed in that order. C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING: September 15, 2009 Member Behar moved to approve the minutes of the regular Community Development Board meeting of September 15, 2009, as recorded and submitted in written summation to each board member. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. D. CONSENT AGENDA: The following cases are not contested by the applicant, staff, neighboring property owners, etc. and will be approved by a single vote at the beginning of the meeting: (Items 1-8) 1. Case: FLD2009-08025 - 490 Mandalay Avenue Level Two Application Owner/Applicant: Mary G. Realty, Inc; North Beach Wine & Spirits, Inc. Agent: Katherine Cole, Esq., Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LLP. (911 Chestnut Street, Clearwater, FL 33756; phone: 727-461-1818). Location: 0.40 acre located at the southwest corner of Mandalay Ave. and Baymont St. Atlas Page: 267A. Zoning: Tourist (T) District. Request: Flexible Development approval to permit a change of use from restaurant to alcoholic beverage sales within the Tourist (T) District within an existing 6,254 square-foot shopping center with 26 off-street parking spaces and no changes to the building height, structure setbacks, or building as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Community Development Code Section 2-803.C. Proposed Use: Alcoholic Beverage Sales. Community Development 2009-10-20 • • A Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Beach Association and Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition. Presenter: A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III. See Exhibit: Staff Report FLD2009-08025 2009-10-20. Member Dane moved to approve Case FLD2009-08025 on today's Consent Agenda based on evidence in the record, including the application and the Staff Report, and hereby adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stated in the Staff Report, with conditions of approval as listed. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 2. Pulled from Consent Agenda Case: FLD2007-06024 - 1200 Rogers Street Level Two Application Owner/Applicant: John H. Meek, Jr. Agent: Renee Ruggiero, Northside Engineering Services Inc. (300 S. Belcher Road, Clearwater, FL 33765; phone: 727-443-2836; fax: 727-446-8036). Location: 0.154 acre located on the east side of Missouri Avenue at the northeast corner of Rogers Street and Missouri Avenue. Atlas Page: 2966. Zoning District: Commercial (C) District. Request: Extend the time frame of the Development Order. Proposed Use: Off Street Parking Lot. Presenter: A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III. See Exhibits: Staff Letter FLD2007-06024 2009-10-20 and Staff Report FLD2007-06024 2009-10-20. Member Coates moved to accept Scott Kurleman as an expert witness in the fields of zoning, site plan analysis, planning in general, landscape ordinance, tree ordinance, and code enforcement. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. In response to a question, Planner III Scott Kurleman said Findings of Facts 6 contained a typo; the project will provide public parking, not beach parking. That Findings of Fact will be amended In the Development Order. Acting Member Carlough moved to recommend approval of Case FLD2007-06024 based on the evidence and testimony presented in the application, the Staff Report and at today's hearing, and hereby adopt the Conclusions of Law stated in the Staff Report and Findings of Facts, with an amendment to Fact 6 that replaces the reference to beach parking with a reference to public parking. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 3. Pulled from Consent Agenda Level Three Application Case: TA2009-03006 Amendments to the Community Development Code and the Code of Ordinances Applicant: City of Clearwater, Planning Department. Request: Amendments to the Community Development Code and the Code of Ordinances to implement EAR-Based Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan, to bring consistency between the Countywide Plan Rules and the Community Development Code, to increase the maximum Community Development 2009-10-20 2 • • height from 36 inches to 48 inches for non-opaque fences in waterfront yards, and to address other minor editorial changes. Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition. Presenter: Sandra E. Herman, Planner III. See Exhibit: Staff Report TA2009-03006 2009-10-20. It was recommended that North Ward School be added to the City's list of historic structures. Assistant Planning Director Gina Clayton said staff is working with the Pinellas County School Board regarding the historic preservation of North Ward School and hopes the School Board will apply for its historic designation. Acting Member Carlough moved to recommend approval of Case TA2009-03006 based on the evidence and testimony presented in the application, the Staff Report and at today's hearing, and hereby adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stated in the Staff Report and recommend that application be made to designate North Ward School a historic structure. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. 4. Level Three Application Case: CPA2009-07001 Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan Applicant: City of Clearwater, Planning Department. Request: Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan to update the Capital Improvements Element consistent with the City's FY2009/10 CIP Budget and the reference to the School District's Five-Year Work Program of FY2009/10 through 2013/14 as proposed for adoption by the School Board on September 15, 2009. Type of Amendment: Separate submittal to State DCA -exempt from large-scale submittal process Neighborhood Associations: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition. Presenter: Sandra E. Herman, Planner 111. See Exhibit: Staff Report CPA2009-07001 2009-10-20. See page 4 for motion to recommend approval. 5. Case: HIS2009-00001 - 401 Cleveland Street Level Three Application Owner/Applicant: City of Clearwater Agent: Ivan A. Rodriguez, Heisenbottle Architects, P.A. (2199 Ponce De Leon Blvd, Suite 400, Coral Gables, FL 33134; phone: 305-446-7799; fax: 305-446-9275). Location: 0.065 acre located on the southeast comer of Cleveland Street and Osceola Avenue. Atlas Page: 2866 Zoning: Downtown (D) District. Request: Historic designation of 401 Cleveland Street (Parcel Number 16-29-15-20358-002- 0071)under the provisions of Section 4-607. F. Existing Use: Office Neighborhood Associations: Downtown Development Board, Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition. Presenter: Gina L. Clayton, Assistant Planning Director. Community Development 2009-10-20 3 • • See Exhibit: Staff Report HIS2009-00001 2009-10-20. See below for motion to recommend approval. 6. Case: HIS2009-00002 - 405 Cleveland Street Level Three Application Owner/Applicant: City of Clearwater Agent: Ivan A. Rodriguez, Heisenbottle Architects, P.A. (2199 Ponce De Leon Blvd, Suite 400, Coral Gables, FL 33134; phone: 305-446-7799; fax: 305-446-9275). Location: 0.1444 acre located on the south side of Cleveland Street approximately 50 feet east of Osceola Avenue. Atlas Page: 2866 Zoning: Downtown (D) District. Request: Historic designation of 405 Cleveland Street (Parcel Number 16-29-15-20358-002- 0070), under the provisions of Section 4-607.F Existing Use: Theater Neighborhood Associations: Downtown Development Board, Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition. Presenter: Gina L. Clayton, Assistant Planning Director. See Exhibit: Staff Report HIS2009-00002 2009-10-20. The City was thanked for saving this important historic structure. See below for motion to recommend approval. 7. Case: LUZ2009-07002 - A Portion of 1980 Kings Highway Level Three Application Owner/Applicant: Clearwater Village LLC/City of Clearwater Agent: Michael Delk, Community Development Coordinator (100 South Myrtle Avenue, Clearwater, FL 33756; phone: 727-562-4567). Location: 2.21 acres located on the west side of Kings Highway approximately 112 feet south of Woodlawn Terrace. Atlas Page: 251 B. Zoning: Medium Density Residential (MDR) District. Request: Application from The City of Clearwater for Future Land Use Plan amendment approval for a portion of one parcel located at 1980 Kings Highway (Parcel Number 03-29-15- 55548-000-0091), to add the Transportation/Utility Overlay and Drainage Feature Overlay categories to the existing Residential Medium (RM) land use. Type of Amendment: Small scale. Proposed Use: Vacant. Neighborhood Association: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition. Presenter: Cate Lee, Planner II. See Exhibit: Staff Report LUZ2009-07002 2009-10-20. Acting Member Carlough moved to recommend approval of Cases CPA2009-07001, HIS2009-00001, HIS2009-00002, and LUZ2009-07002 on today's Consent Agenda based on evidence in the record, including the applications and the Staff Reports, and hereby adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stated in the Staff Reports. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Community Development 2009-10-20 4 • • E. LEVEL TWO APPLICATION: (Item 1) 1. Case: FLD2009-08024 - 25020 U.S. Highway 19 North Level Two Application Owner/Applicant: U. S. 19 Group, LLC; Linda P. Windham. Agent: Kelly Puttonen, Rent First Realty Inc. (P.O. Box 272670, Tampa, FL 33688-2670; phone: 813-629-0255). Location: 1.58 acres located on the west side of U.S. Highway 19 North approximately 3,100 feet north of the intersection of Sunset Point Road and U.S. Highway 19 North. Atlas Page: 243B. Zoning: Commercial (C) District. Request: Flexible Development approval to permit a change of use from retail sales and services to animal grooming and boarding within the Commercial (C) District within an existing 18,022 square-foot shopping center with 82 off-street parking spaces and no changes to the building height, structure setbacks or building, as a Comprehensive Infill Redevelopment Project, under the provisions of Community Development Code Section 2-704.C. Proposed Use: Animal Grooming and Boarding. Neighborhood Association: Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition. Presenter: A. Scott Kurleman, Planner III. See Exhibit: Staff Report FLD2009-08024 2009-10-20. Member Behar moved to accept Scott Kurleman as an expert witness in the fields of zoning, site plan analysis, planning in general, landscape ordinance, tree ordinance, and code enforcement. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Mr. Kurleman said this item was pulled from the Consent Agenda upon receipt of Angelo and Julia Battel's letter, opposing dog boarding at this location. Mr. Kurleman said he spoke to the Battels and advised them that the application is only for grooming, not boarding. The Battels, who are out of town, retracted their opposition but lacked the means to rescind their written opposition prior to today's meeting. Member Coates moved to approve Case FLD2009-08024 based on the evidence and testimony presented in the application, the Staff Report and at today's hearing, and hereby adopt the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stated in the Staff Report with conditions of approval as listed. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. F. CONSIDERATION OF APPEAL: (Item 1) 1. Case: APP2009-00006 - 2325 Stag Run Blvd Owner/Appellant: Gerald Mitchell (2325 Stag Run Blvd, Clearwater, FL 33765; phone: 727-724-6453). Location: 0.234 acre located on the southeast side of Stag Run Boulevard, approximately 670 feet southwest of Wetherington Road. Atlas Page: 272A. Zoning: Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR) District. Request: An appeal from a Level One (Tree Removal Permit) denial decision pursuant to Community Development Code Section 4-501.A.4, that a request to remove one laurel oak tree Community Development 2009-10-20 5 • • in conjunction with the construction of a swimming pool and deck does not meet the removal criteria set forth in Community Development Code Section 3-1205 B.2.a. Existing Use: Detached Dwelling. Neighborhood Associations: Coachman Ridge Homeowners and Clearwater Neighborhoods Coalition. Presenter: Richard J. Albee, Land Resource Specialist. See Exhibit: Staff Report APP2009-00006 2009-10-20. Member Coates moved to accept Rick Albee as an expert witness in the fields of tree protection in relation to construction, tree appraisal, inventory/assessments, regulate erosion and sediment control ordinance. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. Land Resource Specialist Richard J. Albee said homeowner Gerald Mitchell had submitted the tree removal and pool permit applications together. Mr. Albee presented a copy of the plan, noting the tree is 18 feet from the proposed pool decking and 29 feet from the proposed pool. The subject tree is 33 inches in circumference and approximately 30 years old. The Laurel Oak, a protected species with a life span of 50 to 70 years, is healthy, shows no sign of disease, and poses no hazard. After reviewing the plans and health of the tree, he determined that the tree would not affect the construction of the pool nor meet Code criteria for removal and denied the tree removal request. He said removing the tree to construct the pool is not justified. Property owner Gerald Mitchell said his research indicates that Laurel Oaks become dangerous when they reach the latter part of their life span. He expressed concern that the large tree is a safety hazard. He said he was not concerned about the Laurel Oak in his front yard as it leans away from his house and is farther away. He said neighbors had been granted permission to remove Laurel Oaks. He said he had purchased his house after reviewing the City's website and not finding anything indicating that he could not remove the tree when he installed a pool. He said he was willing to replace the tree with a wind resistant species. He said he does not want to cage the pool and tree debris will make it difficult to keep the pool clean. He said the tree will block sunlight on the pool. In response to a question, Mr. Mitchell said he also wants green space for his dogs. He felt the Code is subjective regarding tree removal. He said the liability would be tremendous if the tree falls. Mr. Albee said Mr. Mitchell had never mentioned safety concerns. In response to questions, Mr. Albee said he would have recommended the pool be moved to its logical location next to the covered lanai and not issued a permit to remove the tree had the property owner submitted an application proposing to locate the pool where the tree is. He reviewed research that indicates the pool/deck should be at least 8 to 13 feet from the tree. He said the property owner did not provide proof that the tree is diseased. The City had denied the previous home owner's 2006 application to remove the two oaks. Discussion ensued with a suggestion that the property owner trim the tree as permitted by Code. Board members discussed limits to their authority to overturn staff decisions. It was stated that staff had not misconstrued nor incorrectly interpreted provisions of the development code. Community Development 2009-10-20 6 • • Member Behar moved to deny the appeal, Case APP2009-00006, and affirm the Staff's development order denying the application based on the evidence and testimony presented in the application, the Staff Report and at today's hearing, and hereby adopt the Staff's Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law stated in the Staff Report. The motion was duly seconded and carried unanimously. F. DIRECTOR'S ITEM: (Item 1) Holiday Luncheon Administrative Analyst Sherry Watkins said the Holiday Luncheon is scheduled for December 15, 2009, prior to the 1:00 p.m. meeting. She will email board members with restaurant suggestions and requested that members email her with their top choices. Consensus was to support Community Pride as the board's holiday charity. G. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 1:57 p.m. Chair Community Development Board Attest: Board Reporter Community Development 2009-10-20 7 • ~ CDB Meeting Date: October 20, 2009 Case #: CPA2009-07001 Ordinance #: 8088-09 Agenda Item: E.2 CITY OF CLEARWATER PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS REQUEST: Clearwater Comprehensive Plan Text Amendments related to the 2009 Annual Update to the Capital Improvements Element (CIE) related to the City's adopted FY09/10 Capital Improvement Program Budget and updates referencing the School District's adopted Five-Year Work Program of FY2009/10 through 2013/14. INITIATED BY: City of Clearwater Planning Department TYPE OF AMENDMENT: Separate submittal to State DCA -exempt from large-scale submittal process. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: This item involves an amendment to the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan to update the Capital Improvements Element (CIE) related to the City's adopted F Y09/10 Capital Improvement Program Budget pursuant to Florida Statutes (F.S.) Section 163.3177(3)(b) 1., and Florida Administrative Code section 9J-5.011. The fundamental purpose of the Capital Improvements Element is to ensure that the City is able to fund the public facilities supported in the Comprehensive Plan Elements. These amendments bring the comprehensive plan into alignment with the City's Six-Year Capital Improvements Program (CIP) Budget. By Statute, these amendments are due by December 1 each year, are exempt from the twice-a-year limitation for large-scale amendments and require transmittal to the State Department of Community Affairs (DCA). As required by Section 163.3177(2), F.S., this amendment package also includes the update to the Capital Improvements Element regarding the reference in Policy I.1.7.6 to the School District's Five-Year Work Program of FY2009/10 through 2013/14 as adopted by the School Board on September 15, 2009. ANALYSIS: Four amendments are proposed to the text of the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan in Ordinance No. 8088-09 as follows: Page - 1 CPA2009-07001 • • Amendments -CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT: (pages are given from Comprehensive Plan): • Capital Improvements Element Needs Summary (page I-1): Examples of CIP projects have been updated to reflect the FY 2009/10 CIP Budget adopted by Ordinance No. 8101-09 on September 17, 2009. • Policy I.1.1.2: Remove Schedule I-A, Pages 1 through 49, and add the FY2009/10 ANNUAL UPDATE TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT. • Policy I.1.7.6 (page I-12 relative to the School District's Five-Year Work Program) changes dates to reflect current year. STANDARDS FOR REVIEW Pursuant to Community Development Code Section 4-603(F) no amendment to the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan shall be approved unless it complies with the following standards: 1. The amendments will further implementation of the comprehensive plan consistent with the o.. awls, policies and objectives contained in the plan. The proposed amendments to the Capital Improvements Element of the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan are consistent with and will further the implementation of the goals, objectives, and policies (GOPs) in the Comprehensive Plan elements by ensuring that statutory requirements are reflected in the Capital Improvements Element. 2. The amendments are not inconsistent with other provisions of the comprehensive plan. The proposed amendments are consistent with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan. They update the CIE to reflect changes in the City's CIP six-year projects which are supported in other elements of the Comprehensive Plan. 3. The available uses, if applicable, to which the property may be put are appropriate to the property in questions and compatible with existing and planned uses in the area. The proposed amendments are text amendments that are not directly related to a specific property. 4. Sufficient public facilities are available to serve the property The proposed amendments are text amendments that are not directly related to a specific property. Page - 2 CPA2009-07001 • 5. The amendments will not adversely affect the natural environment. The proposed amendments seek to provide consistent and coordinated efforts pursuant to the City's CIP projects as identified within the elements of the City's Comprehensive Plan. No projects adversely affect the natural environment, while some projects positively affect it. An example is the CIP project for the Reclaimed Water Distribution System. 6. The amendments will not adversely impact the use of property in the immediate area. The proposed amendments are text amendments that are not directly related 'to a specific property. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: The proposed text amendments meet state statutes and rules by making corrections and modifications in the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan Capital Improvements Element. These amendments are made pursuant to the City of Clearwater's FY2009/10 through FY2014/15 Capital Improvement Program Budget (adopted on September 17, 2009) and the Pinellas County School District's Five-Year Work Program FY2009/10 through 2013/14 (adopted by the School Board on September 15, 2009). The Planning Department recommends APPROVAL of Ordinance No. 8088-09 that amends the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan. Prepared by Planning Department Staff: ATTACHMENT: Ordinance No. 8088-09 Sandra E. Herman Planner III Page - 3 CPA2009-07001 c ,~ ~ ~:. ~ PINELLAS PLANNING COUNCIL COUNCIL MEMBERS 600 Cleveland Street, Suite 850 • Clearwater, Florida 33755-4160 Telephone 727.464.8250 • Fax 727.464.8212 • www.pinellasplanningcouncil.org \ , r ., October 20, 2009 .' ~ ; ~ ~ CC I ~.~ ~ ~^-". ~ ` } i P `~ i Sandra E. Herman ~ ~ "'~ ~'; iE OCT 3~ Planner III I ~ ` ` 2 ~ ~ ` ~~~ City of Clearwater Municipal Services Building 100 S. Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756 PLP,NNIPIC f~ C~~%ELOPtvSEN7 s~R~~lc~-s CITY OF CLE,+G`^d+~"fER Mayor Beverley Billiris, Chairman Vice-Mayor Jerry Knight, Vice-Chairman Mayor Pat Gerard, Secretary Commissioner John Morroni, Treasurer Vice-Mayor Nina Bandoni Councilmember Sandra L. Bradbury Commissioner Dave Carson Councilmember John Doran Councilmember Jim Kennedy School Board Member Linda S. Lerner Commissioner Stephanie Oddo Mayor Jim Ronecker Mayor Patricia J. Shontz David P. Healey, AICP Executive Director RE: Review of Revisions to Proposed Amendments to the City of Clearwater's Land Development Regulations (LDRs) (Ordinance No. 8070-009) and Comprehensive Plan (Ordinance No. 8088-09) for Consistency with the Countywide Rules Dear Sandra: We are in receipt of your email dated October 19, 2009, regarding the revisions to the proposed amendments to the City's LDRs and Comprehensive Plan referenced above. The first drafts were reviewed in letters dated October 8th (Ord. No. 8088-09) and October 12~' (Ord. No. 8070-09). Pursuant to Division 3.3 of the Rules Concerning the Administration of the Countywide Future Land Use Plan (Countywide Rules), Council staff has reviewed the proposed amendments for consistency with the Countywide Rules as follows: • The proposed revisions to Ordinance Nos. 8070-009 and 8088-09 are either consistent with the Countywide Rules or are not governed by the consistency criteria of the Countywide Rules and therefore are not subject to the consistency provisions. Thank you for forwarding the revisions for review. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 464-8250. Sincerely, C~ Christopher M. Mettler Program Planner cc: Councilmember John Doran, PPC Representative PLANNING FOR THE PINELLAS COMMUNITY ~ PINELLAS PLANNING COUNCIL COUNCIL MEMBERS 600 Cleveland Street, Suite 850 • Clearwater, Florida 33755-4160 Mayor Beverley Billiris, Chairman Tele hone 727.464.8250 • Fax 727.464.8212 • www. inellas tannin councilor Vice-Mayor Jerry Knight, Vice-Chairman P P P g g Mayor Pat Gerard, Secretary Commissioner John Morroni, Treasurer Vice-Mayor Nina Bandoni October 8 2009 Councilmember Sandra L. Bradbury ~ Commissioner Dave Carson Councilmember John Doran Councilmember Jim Kennedy Sandra E. Herman School Board Member Linda S. Lerner Commissioner Stephanie Oddo Planner III Mayor Jim Ronecker City of Clearwater Mayor Patricia J. Shontz Munici al Services Buildin David P. Healey, AICP p g Executive Director 100 S. Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756 RE: Review of Proposed Amendments to the City of Clearwater's Comprehensive Plan (Ordinance No. 8088-09) for Consistency with the Countywide Rules Dear Sandra: We are in receipt of your letter dated September 29, 2009, regarding the proposed amendments to the City's Comprehensive Plan referenced above. Pursuant to Division 3.3 of the Rules Concerning the Administration of the Countywide Future Land Use Plan (Countywide Rules), Council staff has reviewed the proposed amendments for consistency with the Countywide Rules as follows: • The proposed amendments to the Capital Improvements Element are not governed by the consistency criteria of the Countywide Rules and therefore are not subject to the consistency provisions. Thank you for forwarding the proposed amendments for review. If you have any questions, please feel free to call me at 464-8250. Sincerely, C-~ Christopher M. Mettler Program Planner cc: Councilmember John Doran, PPC Representative D ~~ . p`~tiN~ ~co~ ~ Cif, SER ~FG F~ ~ r o,~ o ~ oes op,~,`~~T / ~. #~+~ `~'~w ~Z? PLANNING FOR THE PINELLAS COMMUNITY • s _ ~Em~~ ~~°~~. ai ~~~a~°F'"F~ = :~M CITY OF CLEARWATER ~~=„+ a~`~~~ POST OFFICE BOX 4748, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA 33758-4748 `"~ ~ `, .~ r,~~~~e MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING, 100 SOUTH MYRTLE AVENUE, CLEARWATER, FLORIDA. 33756 ~~~'~~'~.. ~,~~ TELEPHONE (727) 562-4567 FAx (727) 562-4865 PLANNING DEPARTI,4ENT ~~ September 29, 2009 ~~ Mr. David Healey, AICP Executive Director Pinellas Planning Council, Suite 850 600 Cleveland Street Clearwater, F133755 Re: Draft Ordinance No. 8088-09 (ITEM NO.: TA2009-07001) Dear Mr. Healey: Pursuant to Div.3.2 CONSISTENCX.REQUIREMENT of The Countywide Plan Rules, the City of Clearwater is submitting a set of proposed amendments to the City of Clearwater Community Development Code for your receipt and for consistency review. These proposed amendments are scheduled for a public hearing by the local planning agency on October 20, 2009. The City Council first reading ,date is scheduled for November 5, 2009, and second reading date is scheduled for November 17, 2009. Please note that the proposed code amendments are still in review and revision stage by City staff, as the ordinance as a whole is a draft document. This draft will be finalized for distribution to the Community Development Board by October 15, 2009. At that time the updated document will be provided to you. Sincerely, VI ~ / Sandra E. Herman Planner III cc: Gina Clayton, Assistant Planning Director Catherine Porter, Long Range Planning Manager Attachment: DRAFT Ordinance 8070-09 nF,M IA 1. FMPI (1VMFNT ANn AFFIR NATIVE A!"nllN FMPI f1YFR~~ • • Revised 09-28-09 ORDINANCE NO. 8088-09 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY AS ADOPTED ON MAY 18, 2000, AS SUBSEQUENTLY AMENDED, AMENDING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT, MAKING CORRECTIONS AND MODIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO THE UPDATED SCHEDULE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER'S FY2009/10 THROUGH FY2014/15 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET ADOPTED ON SEPTEMBER 17, 2009, AND UPDATING THE REFERENCE IN POLICY 1.1.1.2 TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT'S FIVE-YEAR WORK - PROGRAM FOR - FY2009/10 THROUGH 2013/14 AS ADOPTED BY THE SCHOOL EOARD ON SEPTEMBER 15, 2009; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE`:.. WHEREAS, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act of Florida empowers and requires the City Council of the City of Clearwater to plan for the future development and growth of the City, and to adopt and periodically amend the Comprehensive Plan, including elements and portions ti~~=reof; and WHEREAS, the City of Clearwater adopted a Comprehensive Plan on May 18, 2000 by Ordinance Numh?r 622-00, subsequently amend?d~ grid ` \fVl-IEPEt;~`C ;yr±aln amenr~l~-ngntg ark ct ~t~tnniy rcq"ijr"nr~ anal nthars are adVlSahla in order to harmonize the Comprehensive Plan with, state law and good planning practice; and WHEREAS. amendments to tl~e Ggmprehensive Plan of the City have been prepared in accordance with the .applicable requirements of ;,law;` after conducting the appropriate planning analysis, and publi,: participation through public hearings, opportunity for written comments, open discussion and the consideration of `public and official comments; and W"HEREAS, the Coi~i~r~unity Development Board, serving as the designated Local Planning Agency for the City.. has held a public hearing on the proposed amendments and has recommended adoption of the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments; and WHEREAS. per provisions of Florida Statutes Chapter 163, it is necessary to annually adopt an ordinance amending and updating the Capital Improvements Element of the Comprehensive Plan to ~i~aintain a financially feasible minimum 5-year schedule of capital improvements consistent with the plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds it necessary, desirable and proper to adopt the amendments to the objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan in order to reflect changing conditions; now, therefore, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA: Page 1 Ordinance 8088-09 • • Section 1. Amendments to the text of the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan attached hereto as Exhibit "A" are hereby adopted. Section 2. If any section, provision, clause, phrase, or application of this Ordinance shall be declared unconstitutional or invalid for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions shall be deemed severable therefrom and shall remain in full force and effect. Section 3. This ordinance shall become effective when the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) issues a final order determining the adopted amend"ment to be in compliance, or the Administration Commission issues a final order determining the adopted amendments to be in compliance, in accordance with Section 163.3177, 163.3178; 163.3184, 163.3187, 163.3189 or 163.3189 F.S., as amended. ~, `~ , 4~. PASSED ON FIRST READING PASSED ON SECOND AND FINAL ~~.. READING AND ADOPTED ~'. ` '- ~, "Frank Hibbard Mayor-Councilmember Approved as to form: Attest: _ ~~ } '~,;.: Leslie K. Dougall-Sides. Cynthia; E. Goudeau Assistant City Attorney ~ City Clerk h ~,_ ~ ~,~ ~~ - .`~: ~~ ,, ~" Page 2 Ordinance 3038-09 ORDINANCE 8088-09 EXHIBIT A AMENDMENT 1 -CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT SUMMARY Amend Capital Improvements Element Needs Summary of the Plan on Page l-1 as follows: Capital Improvements Element Needs Summary: The following summarizes several of the current capita( improvement projects and funding sources proposed for public facilities supported in the other Comprehensive Plan Elements and as specified in the City's six-year schedule of the CapitaE:lmprovement Program (CIP) that is updated and adopted annually by the City Council • The $2.5 million Bayshore Boulevard Realignment Project is planned in FY2012/13. This project will eliminate a dangerous curve just' north of Drew Street on heavily traveled Bayshore Boulevard. Funding is Penny: 'for Pinellas III. Th° Q~ ~~ miuinn nr„i,~ "^°,~ of +h° Din°II Tr-.il frnm (`I°n !l-,Lc D-+rL to }{i•° • The City's Streets and Sidewalks Program is currently budgeted for $15.28347-2 ,million on the six-year CIP schedule with a funding source of road m~llage. -.. The City proposes a total of $43.845 4$~4 million of improvements within the City's Stormwater Infrastructure Program over the six-.year-CIP period The funding sources for this project are the S`ormwater Fund and a future bond issue. • The $1.602 ~~~ million Commercial Container. Acquisition, CFP project is planned through Solid Waste funds. • The $19.627 ~~ niiflion Reclaimed Water~Distribution System CIP project is being funded through: ~8~'~-4.90-~~--1=Y" '~~-6a~~d~ss~-e- $17.112 x-844 million from future bond issue, ~.' $0:986 million 4-83 from Sewer Revenue;-and $1.529 million from Utility Renewal and .Replacement. ~., AMENDMENT 2 -CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES , Amend Policy 1.7.1.2 of Objective 1.1.1 of Goal 1.1, on page I-2 as follows: ***** ,, ~; 1.1.1.2 The City shall be`permitted to amend the Schedule of Capital Improvements two times during any calendar year:and as allowed for emergencies, developments of regional impact and certain small-scale development activities pursuant to Florida Statutes 163.3187. The annual update of the plan is hereby incorporated by reference and is located following policy 11.7.6 as the FY2009/10 Annual Update to the Capital Improvements Element. Th° °^"°,~. ~'° of ****:~ Page 1 Ordinance 8088-89 • • AMENDMENT 3 -CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES Amend Policy 1.1.7.6 of Objective 1,1.7 of Goal 1.1 on page 1-12 as follows: ***** 1.1.7.6 The City hereby adopts by reference the School District's Five-Year Work Program for FY 2009/10 €~88~F89 through 2013/14 ~2/~-3, as adopted by the School Board on September 15, 2009 ~;-299`.'°- ~" AMENDMENT 4 -CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT,SCHEDULE I-A Amend CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT SCHEDULE.1-~4.,CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FY2008/09 pages "Schedule l-A Page'"~1"~ throcigh "Schedule 1-A Page 49" (following page I-12), as follows: ~~`- ~~ ~ ~~ _~ ,,~ ~ FY2009/10 ANNUAL UPDATE TO THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS EL-EMENT The intent of this annual update'is to evaluate capacity~_ai public facilities (solid waste, potable water, stormwater; sa determine that LOS standards are'~being~met and that they development over a 5-year period. ~ ti .~ ~" ~., '~`°`~ ,w The City's Capital Improvement Program~wBudget FY2009/10, It ensures that future public facility needs will be met`based <u~ development that will require public services. inuthe 5-year p timinq location and fundin_~G ~ J bl~ facilities demand- ram a~`aemana ror concurrence-reiatea iitary sewer, parks and roads), to will.. service approved and planned `,1 '~ s used as the basis for this update. ~on_existing approved, and planned annin`q horizon. It summarizes the ~oristr•uction oroiects to meet future pu is "'~,, ,~ PROJECTIONS:,,,, ~, ~, ~ The followinq tables provide the capacity grid demand for each of the City's respective public 'facilities projected over the nexfi5 years. There are no projected deficiencies. ., ~., ~ ~~, Report is based on 2008 poi~ulation: _ _ 110,831 Projected 2018 population (t-uture Lana u~ x.:44"~.~ SOLID WASTE:.:': C'i irrent ('anacity®'7:12'ibS nee CaDlta per d nt Demand: 5.19 Ibs per capita per Fiscal Year Protected Demand (max.) Projected Cap acity at End Surplus (Deficit) of FY min. 2009/10 7.12 Ibs er ca ita er da 7.12 Ibs er ca ita er da N/A 2010/11 7.12 Ibs er ca ita er da 7.12 Ibs er ca ita er da N/A 2011/12 7.12 Ibs er ca ita er da 7.12 Ibs er ca ita er da N/A 2012/13 7.12 Ibs er ca ita er da 7.12 Ibs er ca ita er da N/A 2013/14 7.12 Ibs er ca ita er da 7.12 Ibs er ca ita er da N/A Totals 7.12 Ibs per ca pita, p er day 7.12 Ibs per ca pita, per day N/A 2013/14 LOS Standard i. i~ ios per capita per aay Page 2 Ordinance 8088-09 • Current capacity: Total Solid Waste capacity (in tons): 143,906 Pounds of Solid Waste per capita per day: 7.12 Current demand: Total Solid Waste Generated by the City in 2008 (in tons): 104 898 Current Pounds of Solid Waste per capita per day: 5.19 • The Solid Waste Department will be able to dispose of all waste produced within the city. being a unified utility the city has the ability to grow with the community (city). All .garbage is taken to the Pinellas County Waste to Energy Plant where it is incinerated any material that is not is "land filled". The most recent protections take the life of the land fill to the years 2085 tg=2090::~ ,..._..... . ,s POTABLE WATER: Current Capacity: 25 MGD .~~ ' Current Demand: 12.2 MGD ' f` ~, Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Capacity at End 'Sur`plus (Deficit) max. ~--. of~FY min. ~*~ .~ ~.. 2009/10 12.0 MGD 25.0 MGD ~ 13.0 MGD. '` 2010/11 12.1 MGD 25.0 MGD 12.9 MGD 2011/12 12.1 MGD ~-> 25.0 MGD 12.9 MGD .~% 2012/13 12.2 MGD 25.0 MGD ` ~, 12.8 MGD 2013/14 12.2 MGD > , , '25.0°MGD 12.8 MGD Totals 2013/14 12.2 MGD 25.0 MGD., ~ 12.8 MGD = million aal LOS Standard: r .. Current Ca aClt`~: Total Potable Water Ava Gallons -available per ca .f`a •-~- Gurrent•demand. ~ *- Total Potable Water<Coi' ay; I'rolections as per the City's Water Master Nlan ~, ~~ ~° ~ ~ 120~galbns: per capita per day k ale per,day` in g allons: ~ 25,000,000 ( 25.0 MGD ;per dad 225.56 w ° ~ -. -~;. 'nption per day in gallons , ~~~; 12,000,000 ( 12.0 MGD cations consumea per<capita per day: .~ 108.27 STORM'WATER: `~ :`~ `.. *~` Current Capacity: 10-year LOS standard ~'~. 1 Current Demand: 10-year LOS standard .~, ~ ~ Fiscal Year ~ Projected demand Projected Ca pacity at End Surplus (Deficit) ~ ~ of FY 2009/10 10-Year LOS (Min)* 10-Year LOS Min * N/A 2010/11 10-Year LOS (Min)im 10-Year LOS Min'' N/A 2011/12 10-Year LOS (Min)'` 10-Year LOS Min * N/A 2012/13 10-Year LOS Min'` 10-Year LOS Min " N/A 2013/14 10-Year LOS Min * 10-Year LOS Min " N/A Totals 2013/14 10-Year LOS (Min) 10-Year LOS ( Min) N/A LOS Standard: Design storm: 10-dear storm frequency for all new street development using the rational design method Page 3 Ordinance 8088-09 • ~ 25-year frequency with positive outfall for major storm systems with basin time of intensities controlling the duration'` 50-year storm frequency when no outfall and discharge is to street right-of-way'` 100-year storm frequency when no outfall and discharge is across private property" '`Design standards for stormwater quality treatment/storage quantity shall conform to the current SWFWMD requirement (Presently being the SCS Unit Hydrograph design method using the design storm frequency and a twenty-four (24) hour duration for sites ten (10) acres or more and the rational design method for sites under ten (10} acresl. Current Capacity 10-year LOS standard (Min.)'" Current Demand: 10-year-.LOS standard (Min.)** Total: X10-year LOS standard (Min.)"" *~Stormwater management is reviewed on a permit-by-permif basis.. The City only approves if a orooosed development meets the LOS standards for stormwater management facilities listed above. ~° ~ ~~> i SANITARY SEWER: ,' ~, ` Current Capacity: 257 gallons per capita per daV.,. ;w ' ..~ Current Demand: 127 gallons per capita per day ~ ``~, Fiscal Year Projected Demand Projected Capacity at;End Surplus(Deficit) max. of FY min. ~..% 2009/10 14.1 MGD 28.5 MGD 14.4 MGD 2010/11 14.2 MGD ~ •. '=28.5`MGD 14.3 MGD 2011/12 14.2 MGD 28`5.MGD_ 14.3 MGD 2012/13 14.3 MGD ' ,; 28.5 MGD ~ °~, '~ 14.2 MGD 2013/14 14.3 MGO--~., ,28:5 MGD``-~~ ~.:~,, '14.2 MGD Totals 2013/14 14.3 MGD '`>t 28.5,MGDm~ `' '~~. ~, '~ . 14.2 MGD MGD =million gallons per day Projections as per the C(ty's LOS Standard: ~~ ~ ~ 127 gallon Currenf: Capacity ~. (in gallons): ~~ `~ : ~ °x,28,500;000 Gallons available peg capita per day ~. 257.14 `.. ,~ `Current Demand: ``~ ~ 14 100,000 Gal[oris.available per capita per day '~ 127.22 . PARKLAND: _. , ; \~: ~ ``~ Current Capacity: ~ 13.31 acres per-1,000 , people Current Demand'~4 acres per 1 000 peo ple .~s . . ,,, Master Fiscal Year ``~Proected Demand Protected Capacity at End Surplus (Deficit) ~' max. of FY min. 2009/10 4 er 1 000 .e' 13.31 er 1 000 9.31 er 1 000 2010/11 4 per 1,000 13.31 er 1 000 9.31 er 1 000 2011/12 4 er 1 000 13.31 er 1 000 9.31 er 1 000 2012/13 4 er 1 000 13.31 er 1 000 9.31 er 1 000 2013/14 4 er 1 000 13.31 er 1 000 9.31 er 1 000 Totals 4 er 1 000 13.31 er 1 000 9.31 er 1 000 LOS Standard: 4 acres per 1,000 people Current capacity (Parkland Acres As of 05/13/09): 1 475 acres Cad 13.31 per 1 000 people Current demand: 440 acres (~ 4 per 1,000 people Total (Acres /Per Thousand People): 1,475 acres Cad 13.31 per 1,000 people Page 4 Ordinance 8088-09 • • ROADS: Add the following table ~iifi Ten `(€2r Cc-~iccr Imprc<~em-nt Phn FY 2~8&2818 ~ 2aas-zc:~ O y~ ~ O ~ t' ~ O J O~ O O U O V O ~ - O Jr O J O O J « D / i " u ~ C V r ~ ... J ~~ J ~`~ C 7 u 2 3 ., U .. C 5 ~ s a J ~ N O ~ ~ 7 rG ~ J _ r Z -1 U (';u431!t~f< REvtl rjrt. .riL n,n ~,l•:Iev !.! ~ ;?eiocaSc %?ua, $+.c lv 2.3CaG ~ 5 ~ is e,00 1,440.l1+Ji) i'.0 430 5i3.534j 1.953 S1ai Ct,n,[ FY f s+i% v U ~ C Cori Stresi R,lisx>uri 1,4LK ;;+ date <LO :c SLO Cz ~_i?r 1.25'1 2+ 30.1]06 3.0OO,OC~O 2G <.s00 2oi,57A 267.6:< 3esian FY .1ai10 F D ~ D 2 Oi..+,.tr?~t C,,,eolu Uprtl~;/+v Gery 4L:1tcAL0 r..{>,ciiv 1.o9J~ 5 ~ tD.144' 1.0'14.060 1.5 2,55 2i'1.322 1..2G?5.~22f iie5i9:7 FlSf~t' D Cl ~ C i LrrtNthnn h.un ~ ~ " € Or~idRa:d FiHSnVwi 'v3.19 Gly t.r,@g ;xp•'srip! t.506~ 19.200 1.921:0u9 l.u I,b00 i7t.11i ZJ3?.'.-i1 ~ %~Slp', FYi1'12 D D ( i 4 Filgtlldlt+i I ~ ~ ~ Ruenue Sure? Pt .. ni,?n St CtN '.;1,7 to r4,s C. :9a~i 2,oi 0 j 6 toa",G20 1,60x.000 1.0 2;610 2.95.3?6 I:SS':8;6 0e~a n F,W 11~'1i D D C .evsev+ ~ ^ P.cs'i F Fia.tison '.tttssurf Cal 4L~3i2L `+O?LD Csw,riEy 4.20J 6 {,-u:u;j 0 'f .0 t,2dti 149,591 4=9,69' u^.:au'1 FY tat4 D D [ C o a' !Yi LU. yet t Ktri~7 Hv Dr=rr St Belleair Fcd C~fy 2LJv2LD Ca aciv 10;55-0~ 6 63,_'^7G 63c7,000 I.0 iC,550 r12.s.585 ........... ?,459.5-RS D~esinn F'l 72r1~3 D D C 5 Tct~i t 13,395.~?5 jRemainder of page is intentially left blanks `` ~, `2 ~ 't 1, .. t ~,, ` 7 t Page 5 Ordinance 8088-09 • • FY2009110 Capital Improvement Program Budgeted Expenditures and Revenues: Add the following table CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009/10 Budgeted Revenues GENERAL SOURCES: ~' 2009/10 ~~ General Operating Revenue ~ 1,470,990 ~'~~ General Revenue/County Coop 635,310 Road Millage _ 2,090,670 ~ ~ Penny for Pinellas ~'t~. 6,225,000 ^, -~~'~ Transportation Impact Fee 290,000 Local Option Gas Tax ' 1,720,000 Special Development Fund ~ X950,000 Special Program Fund ~-~ 30;000 Grants -Other Agencies 2,900,000 Donations 900,000 SELF SUPPORTING FUNDS: Marine Revenue 50,000 Downtown Boat Slips Revenue ~~~-~,, 15,000 Aviation Revenue -. ~ 10,000 Parking Revenue ~ !'~ 260,000 Utility System: - Water Impact Fees ~ 250,000 ~ Sewer Impact Fees.. ~ ~' 500,000 Utility R & R _ 3,050,490 Stormw.ater Utility F ~uwnue , ,__ 5,652,800 Gas Revenue -. ~ 5,340,000 F Solid Waste Re~nue # ~ 350,000 iNTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS: `, Garage Revenue 119,400 Administrative Services Revenue >~ _ f: 150,000 BORROWING -SELF SUPPORTING FUNDS: Lease Purchase -Water 42,540 Lease Purchase--_Stormwater 300,000 Lease Purchase - Solid~Waste• 170,000 Lease Purchase -Recycling 220,000 Bond Issue -Water & Sewer 15,665,240 BORROWING -INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS: Lease Purchase -Garage 2,312,300 Lease Purchase -Administrative Services 400,000 TOTAL ALL FUNDING SOURCES: $52,069,740 Page 6 Ordinance 8088-09 • Add the following table • CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FOR FISCAL YEAR 2009/10 Budgeted Expenditures FUNCTION: 2009/10 Police Protection Fire Protection Major Street Maintenance Intersections Parking Misc Engineering Parks De~,elopment Marine Facilities 6` .' Airpark Facilities Libraries ~~' . ~, Garage Maintenance of Buildings ~' General Public City Building & Equipment Miscellaneous Stormwater Utility • ~ `, Gas System Solid Waste ''. Utilities Miscellaneous -- Sewer System ' Water System r. 150, 000 678,490 3, 645, 670 435, 000 250, 000 35, 000 5, 837, 500 4, 315, 000 10, 000 635, 310 2, 716, 700 277, 930 950, 000 `~ 640, 000 5, 945, 000 5, 310, 000 520, 000 26, 000 > 9, 772, 590 9, 699, 550 220, 000 $52, 069, 740 Page 7 Ordinance 8088-09 • Add the following table CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM EXPENDITURE SUMMARY BY FUNCTION FY 2009-2010 THROUGH FY 20142015 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND CITY OF CLEARWATER Schedule of Planned Expenditures Function 2009110 2010111 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014!15 Total Police Protection Fire Protection New Street Construction Major Street Maintenance Sidewalk and Bike Trails Intersections Parking Miscellaneous Engineering Parks De~lopment Marine Facilities Airpadc Facilities Libraries Garage Maintenance of Buildings Gen Public City Bldg & Equi; Miscellaneous Stormwater Utility Gas System Solid Waste Utilities Miscellaneous Sewer System Water System Recycling Tota I 435,000 435,000 435,000 435,000' '"435,000 435,000 2,610,000 250,000 225,000 200,000 200,000: ~ 225,000 225,000 1,325,000 35,000 8,035,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 35,000 8,210,000 5,837,500 4,622,500 907,500 1';14T500 9,967,500 982,500 23,465,000 4,315,000 275,000 413,000 413,000 413,000` 413,000 6,242,000 10,000 10,000 10.000 10,000 10,000 10,000 60,000 635,310 635,310 10,635,310," 639,740 665,310`'" {685,270 13,896,250 2,716,700 2,798,200 2,882,150 2,968,610 3,057,670 3,149,410 17,572,740 277,930 299,800 1,108,650 420,560 452,530 379,560 2,939,030 950,000 " 7,000,000 ~' ~. 7,950,000 640,000 640,000 620,000' 5.420,000' '645,000 645,000 ~ `8,610,000 5,945,000 8.800,000 7,200,000 ' 7,100,000 7,400,000 7,400,000 ~ ;43,845,000 5,310,000 g",5600,000 5,800,000 6,100,000 .'5,900,000 6,145,000 34:855,000 520,000 `" 5~J5,000 755,000 713,000 735,000 746,000 4,064,000 26,000 ~ 30;000 ~'` ,26,000 26,000'"-, 30,000 26,000 164,000 9,772,590 9,073,990`12,108,380 7,351,360 11,776,590 25,617,400 75,700,310 9,699,550 12,913;120 17,928,910-.; 18,125,340'11,251,410 6,917,790 76,836,120 220,000 290;000,.. 290,000, .386,000 400,000 410,000 1,996,000 ~` 52,069,740 59,928,750' 66,501,820,` 60,613,810..61,751,300 "67,281,760 368,147,180 150,000 150,000 678,490 1,153,400 1,089,490 2,515,270 4,244,860 1,555,400 11,236,910 2,500,000 2,500,000 3,645,670 3,497,430 4,057,430 4,107,430 ,~` 4,107-,430 4,032,430 23,447,820 472,000 472,000 .~ Delete entire ezisi .~` PITAL IMPROVEMENT ~~"~- ~-SCHEDULE l-A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FY2( °f (Schedule)=A page ~ throu_gf-Schedule I-A Pape 49). ,'. , " '\ ,~ , I \ `.~ Page 8 Ordinance 8088-09 • • Comprehensive Plan Citizen Courtesy Information List CPA2009-07001 (Ordinance No. 8088-09) Local Government: City of Clearwater Hearing Date: October 20, 2009 Type Hearing: Community Development Board Hearing DCA Amendment Number: Please Print Clearly (DCA Official Use) By providing your name and address you will receive information concerning the date of publication of the Notice of Intent by the Department of Community Affairs. Over for more spaces • • Comprehensive Plan Citizen Courtesy Information List CPA2009-07001 (Ordinance No. 8088-09) Local Government: City of Clearwater Hearing Date: November 5, 2009 Type Hearing: City Council Public Hearing Meeting (1St Reading of Ordinance) DCA Amendment Number: Please Print Clearly (DCA Official Use) By providing your name and address you will receive information concerning the date of publication of the Notice of Intent by the Department of Community Affairs. ~ Check Appropriate Identify Address, City, State, ` Box 3 Amendment Citizen Name Zip Code .._._ ._.. _.._ __..._........ _._. _._......._... _~........~ which is of ~ [, Written Spoken Comment Comment Interest i j(F F E Over for more spaces • :7 Comprehensive Plan Citizen Courtesy Information List CPA2009-07001 (Ordinance No. 8088-09) Local Government: City of Clearwater Hearing Date: November 17, 2009 Type Hearing: City Council Meeting (2nd Reading of Ordinance DCA Amendment Number: Please Print Clearly (DCA Official Use) By providing your name and address you will receive information concerning the date of publication of the Notice of Intent by the Department of Community Affairs. ~ i Check Appropriate ~ Identify . Address, City, State, ~ Box ~ Amendment i Citizen Name Zip Code .~~~_.____..__........_..__...__......._._.._....__._............_.....~ which is of i ~ Written Spoken Interest Comment Comment i i Over for more spaces ~ ~ WORK SESSION AGENDA Council Chambers -City Hall 11/2/2009 - 9:00 AM 1. Presentations 1.1 Service Awards Attachments 2. Economic Development and Housing 2.1 Revise the 2008 Affordable Housing Inventory List pursuant to requirements of Chapter 166.0451, Florida Statutes, adopt Resolution 09-41 and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. Attachments 2.2 Adopt a policy for the disposition of city-owned real property for the purposes of workforce or affordable housing to meet Florida Statutes Chapter 166.0451 and City Charter provision 2.01(d)(5). (consent) Attachments 3. Gas System 3.1 Accept a three part Gas Main and Utilities Easement containing a total of 7,036 square feet, more or less, to encumber a portion of Tracts 34, 35 and 37 of the TAMPA AND TARPON SPRINGS LAND COMPANY'S SUBDIVISION, Pasco County, Florida, conveyed by Ramco-Gershenson Properties Limited Partnership, given in consideration of receipt of $10.00 and the benefits to be derived therefrom. (consent) (~ Attachments 4. Parks and Recreation 4.1 Approve additional waiver of fees in the amount of $11,864 for the Ironman 2009 event, to cover the cost of potential lost parking revenue to the parking fund for use of additional lots on Clearwater Beach. (consent) Attachments 5. Police 5.1 Appoint Paul E. Maser to the Board of Trustees, Clearwater Police Supplementary Pension Fund for a two year term from November 1, 2009 through October 31, 2011. (consent) Attachments 6. Solid Waste/General Support Services 6.1 Approve a Contract (Blanket Purchase Order) to Fleet Products Inc. of Tampa, FL in the amount of $160,000 for the purchase of replacement vehicle parts used by all City Departments during the contract period December 1, 2009 through August 11, 2010 in accordance with Sec. 2.564(1)(d), Code of Ordinances -City of Tampa Bid 410051205 and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (consent) Attachments 6.2 Award a contract (Purchase Order) for $412,960.00 to Duval Ford of Jacksonville, FL for 16 Ford Crown Victoria Police Cruisers in accordance with Sec 2.564(1)(d), Code of Ordinances -Other governmental bid, authorize lease purchase in the amount of $180,670.00 under the City's Master Lease Purchase Agreement and authorize the appropriate officials to execute same. (consent) Attachments 7. Engineering C 7.1 Accept a Blanket Water Main and Utilities Easement over, under and across a portion of the Northwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 17, Township 29 South, Range 16 East conveyed by Island In The Sun Co-Op, Inc., a Florida not-for-profit cooperation, in consideration of receipt of $10.00 and the benefits to be derived therefrom. (consent) Attachments 7.2 Approve the applicant's request to vacate the south 5 feet of a 10-foot drainage and utility easement lying along the north property line of Lot 122, Replat of Willow Ridge, (AKA 1932 Hastings Lane), less the West 10 feet and the East 5 feet thereof, and pass Ordinance 8129-09 on first reading. (VAC2009-06 Evans) (~ Attachments 8. Planning 8.1 Approve amendments to the Capital Improvements Element (CIE) of the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan making modifications pursuant to the City of Cleazwater's Capital Improvement Program budget adopted on September 17, 2009 and updating the reference to the School District's Five-Yeaz Work Program for FY2009/10 through 2013/14 as adopted by the School Board on September 15, 2009, and pass Ordinance 8088-09 on first reading. (CPA2009-07001) Attachments 9. City Manager 9.1 Approve agreement with Matrix C G, Inc d/b/a Matrix Consulting Group, Ltd in the amount of $89,000, to perform an efficiency review of the Clearwater Fire Department, in accordance with Code Section 2.564(d), other governmental Bid (Seminole County RFP-1187-06/TRJ, Fire/Rescue/EMS Comprehensive System Assessment issued October 4, 2006), funding to be provided out of General Fund unappropriated retained earnings, and authorize the appropriate officials to execute the same. (consent) (~ Attachments l0.Official Records and Legislative Services 10.1 Proposed Local Bill for 2010 State Legislative Session -Clearwater Working Waterfront, removing reverter clause. I~ Attachments 11. Legal 11.1 Adopt Ordinance 8098-09 on second reading, amending the Community Development Code to allow outdoor automobile, boat, and recreational vehicle shows and provide standazds for such shows. Attachments 11.2 Adopt Ordinance 8110-09 on second reading, annexing certain real property whose post office address is 1408 Citrus Street, together with the abutting right of way of Citrus Street, into the corporate limits of the city and redefining the boundary lines of the city to include said addition. Attachments 11.3 Adopt Ordinance 8111-09 on second reading, amending the future land use plan element of the Comprehensive Plan of the city to designate the land use for certain real property whose post office address is 1408 Citrus Street, together with the abutting right of way of Citrus Street, upon annexation into the city, as Residential Low (RL). (~ Attachments 11.4 Adopt Ordinance 8112-09 on second reading, amending the Zoning Atlas of the city by zoning certain real property whose post office address is 1408 Citrus Street, together with the abutting right of way of Citrus Street, upon annexation into the city, as Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR). I~ Attachments 11.5 Adopt Ordinance 8113-09 on second reading, annexing certain real property whose post office address is 1876 Sylvan Drive into th~porate limits of the city and redefining t~oundary lines of the city to include said addition. (~ Attachments 11.6 Adopt Ordinance 8114-09 on second reading, amending the future land use plan element of the Comprehensive Plan of the city to designate the land use for certain real property whose post office address is 1876 Sylvan Drive, upon annexation into the city, as Residential Urban (RU). L~ Attachments 11.7 Adopt Ordinance 8115-09 on second reading, amending the Zoning Atlas of the city by zoning certain real property whose post office address is 1876 Sylvan Drive, upon annexation into the city, as Low Medium Density Residential (LMDR). Attachments 11.8 Adopt Ordinance 8120-09 on second reading, rescinding Ordinance 8085-09 and vacating the east five feet of the ten-foot drainage easement lying east of and adjacent to the west property line of Lot 5, Block V, Hibiscus Gardens. (~ Attachments 11.9 Authorize the City Attorney's Office to institute a civil action on behalf of the City against Advanced Communications, LLC, whose employees broke a water main near the intersection of Bertland Way and Chenango Avenue, Clearwater, washing out the roadway and resulting in damage to a City vehicle. (consent) L4 Attachments 11.10 Authorize a civil action on behalf of the City against Florida Power Corporation, and Florida Power Corporation d/b/a Progress Energy Florida, Inc., to seek to recover costs and expenses incurred during the construction of improvements on the Cleveland Street Streetscape Project and authorize a separate civil action on behalf of the City against Florida Power Corporation, and Florida Power Corporation d/b/a Progress Energy Florida, Inc., to seek to recover costs and expenses incurred during the construction of improvements on the Beach Walk -Coronado Drive project. (consent) [~ Attachments 12. City Manager Verbal Reports 12.1 City Manager Verbal Reports Attachments 13. Council Discussion Items 13.1 Offshore Oil Drilling -Hibbard (~ Attachments 13.2 Countywide School Zone Improvement Program - Cretekos Attachments 13.3 Parking Garage Update (~ Attachments 14.Other Council Action 14.1 Other Council Action Attachments 15. Adjourn 16. Presentation(s) for Council Meeting 16.1 Ironman Triathlon -Kevin Dunbar, Parks and Recreation Director Attachments 16.2 Jazz Holiday ~ • k~ Attachments 16.3 World Planning Day Proclamation Attachments • Work Session Council Chambers -City Hall SUBJECT /RECOMMENDATION: Service Awards SUMMARY: 5 Years of Service Adriana Topel Mitchell Moen Brian Munoz Natalia Illich-Gejo James Reilly James Stanley Debra Siegel-Furlin Nathaniel Bowne Charles Scrivens Gretchen Wolber 10 Years of Service Library Parks and Recreation Police Police Police Solid Waste/General Services Library Parks and Recreation Parks and Recreation Police Elliot Shoberg Engineering Donald Packer Gas Alfred Basore Public Services Gina Clayton-Ghomshe Planning William Stringfellow Engineering Harold Sanders Solid Waste/General Services 15 Years of Service Brian "Jay" Ravins Finance Cheryl Ford Finance David G. Stoner, Jr. Library Ann Kennedy-Brown Police 20 Years of Service Gregory Stewart Police Robert Kinchen Police Terence Kelly Police John Schmalzbauer Police Reina Carbajal Library Catherine Yellin Marine and Aviation Jan Nickols Library Aundra Williams Solid Waste/General Services 25 Years of Service Scott Bennett Solid Waste/General Services 35 Years of Service John Oswald Gas James Beardsley Parks and Recreation Review Approval: 1) Clerk Meeting Date:l 1/2/2009 Cover Memo Item # 1 ~1-L•m J Clearwater' City Council orK session Item #: `~L ~ - o Agenda Cover Memorandum Final Agenda Item # ~ -~_ O 9'~lyA~~~~. Meeting Date: 11-05-09 SUBJECT/RECOMMENDATION: APPROVE amendments to the Capital Improvements Element (CIE) of the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan making modifications pursuant to the City of Clearwater's Capital Improvement Program budget adopted on September 17, 2009 and updating the reference to the School District's Five-Year Work Program for FY2009/10 through 2013/14 as adopted by the School Board on September 15, 2009, and PASS Ordinance No. 8088-09 on first reading. (CPA2009-07001) ^ and that the appropriate officials be authorized to execute same. SUMMARY: The Planning Department is recommending amendments to the Clearwater Comprehensive Plan in order to meet statutory requirements that an annual update be developed which incorporates both the Capital Improvement Program Budget and the School District's Five-Year Work Program. The fundamental purpose of the Capital Improvements Element is to ensure that the City is able to fund the public facilities supported in the Comprehensive Plan Elements. These amendments bring the comprehensive plan into alignment with the City's Six-Year Capital Improvements Program (CIP) Budget as adopted on September 17, 2009. By Statute, these amendments are due by December 1 each year, are exempt from the twice-a-year limitation for large-scale amendments and require transmittal to the State Department of Community Affairs (DCA). The proposed amendments are: (pages are given from Comprehensive Plan): • Capital Improvements Element Needs Summary (page I-1): Updates examples of CIP projects to reflect the FY 2009/10 CIP Budget adopted by Ordinance No. 8101-09 on September 17, 2009. • Policy I.1.1.2 (page I-2): Updates the reference to the annual update from FY2008/09 Capital Improvement Program Budget to FY2009/10 Annual Update to the Capital Improvements Element. • Policy I.1.7.6 (page I-12): Changes dates to reflect current year relative to the School District's Five-Year Work Program. • FY2008/09 CIE Schedule I-A (Schedule 1-A Pages 1 - 49): Deletes FY2008/09 CIE Schedule I-A, Pages 1 through 49 and replaces it with FY2009/10 Annual Update to the Capital Improvements Element. Attached is a copy of the staff report and Ordinance No. 8088-09, which contains further analysis and information on the proposed amendment. The Community Development Board (CDB) will review the proposed amendment at its regularly scheduled meeting on October 20, 2009. The Planning Department will report the recommendations of the CDB at the City Council meeting. Reviewed by: Originating Dept.: Costs Legal Info Srvc N/A PLANNING DEPARTMENT Total Sandra E. Herman Budget N/A Public Works N/A User Dept.: Funding Source: Purchasing N/A DCM/ACM Planning ~ Current FY CI Risk Mgmt N/A Other Attachments: Ordinance OP 8088-09 CDB STAFF REPORT Other Submitted by: Appropriation Code: Ci Mana er ^ None • r Herman, Sandra From: Bertels, Paul Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 9:19 AM To: Herman, Sandra Subject: FW: I spoke with Bernard Piawah from DCA today Importance: High I updated both charts. There is a star in the date column for the ones I changed. The only changes were dates of either design or construction. Paul Bertels Manager Traffic Operations Division Paul.bertels a(~.-nyclearwater.com 727-562-4794 From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 12:34 PM To: Bertels, Paul Subject: FW: I spoke with Bernard Piawah from DCA today Importance: High Paul, Hi. You said to send this chart to you again to see if you need to update it. May I please have it by end of week to prepare the staff reports. Thanks. Sandy From: Bertels, Paul Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 3:36 PM To: Herman, Sandra Subject: RE: I spoke with Bernard Piawah from DCA today Importance: High -`J ~.' corridorimp with Utility Impac... Sandra, this is the final cha attachment. Lets get together next week. actually a combination of 4LU/2L to 2LD. the attachment to show that. Paul Bertels rt. Also the "20.0" is a typo and I have corrected in this Just stop by. With regard to the Lakeview question it is Only a small part is 4 LU most of it is 2L. I have changed Manager Traffic Operations Division .. , • paul.bertels(a~myclearwater.com 727-562-4794 -----Original Message----- From: Herman, Sandra Sent: Friday, April 24, 2009 2:50 PM To: Bertels, Paul Subject: I spoke with Bernard Piawah from DCA today Paul, Hi. Catherine Porter had asked me to give Bernard Piawah a call and discuss what they are looking for in our next annual CIE update (by Dec. 1, 2009). This is especially with regard to our tables. Please recall this attached table that you prepared for us. Also, when we sent it to DCA, we had added a column for "current LOS". « File: corridorimp with Utility Impacts.xls » this is from my telephone conversation with Bernard today: Bernard asked to explain "capacity". How does each project improve capacity? Bernard would like to know the meaning of "20.0" in second row under "no. of lanes to construct" column? Is it 20 lanes? Is this a typo? Bernard said this is a good table -keep for reference. What he really needs from us for the CIE update this year is stable -we'll need to make a new one -that shows only 5 years out (2009/10-2013114) with the following: explain what "future LOS" means - is this when the project is completed? Give projections -provide "future" date when a project will be completed and how it affects the LOS. The table should deal only w/LOS standard conditions and projected for next 5 years (year by year: 2009110, 2010/11, 2011/12, 2012/13 and 2013/14). At what point does the road start to fail or improve -show this. Provide demonstration if those improvements are done: "LOS will be _". Provide anticipated dates for improvements. Conditions w/o improvement 2013/14, LOS Conditions w/anticipated improvements 2013/14, LOS Bernard questions the project in table for Lakeview Road from Ft. Harrison to Missouri with proposed improvement: 4LU to 2LD (he says this will "raise eyebrows" because the lanes are being reduced). He would like to know how this project is improving LOS. I said I would discuss it further with our Traffic Engineer and get back with him on it. Would you have some time next week to get together to discuss Bernard's comments? Thanks. Sandy Sandra E. Herman Planner III Planning Department City of Clearwater, Florida 100 South Myrtle Avenue Clearwater, FL 33756-5520 PO Box 4748, 33758-4748 Telephone: (727) 562-4586 Fax: (727) 562-4865 • • sandra.hermanC~myclearwater.com City Ten Year Corridor Improvement Plan FY 2008-2018 FY 2008-2018 Addl'I Add'I No. Reason ROW ROW Lanes Juris- for Lane Width Area to Lane-feet dic- Proposed Improve- Length Needed Needed Con- to Construction Current Adopted Future Pri- Se ment From To tion Im rovement ment LF FT SF ROW Cost struct Construct Cost Total Cost Status Date Los Los Los of Ba shore Blvd Drew St. San Mateo Cit Relocate Roa Safet 2,400 6 14,400 $ 1,440,000 2.0 4,800 $ 513,934 $ 1,953,934 Desi n FY 10/11 C D C 1 Lengthen turn Druid Road Ft Harrison U.S. 19 Cit lanes Ca acit 1,600 12 19,200 $ 1,920,000 1.0 1,600 $ 171,311 $ 2,091,311 Desi n FY 09/10 D D C 4 Martin Luther Kin Av Drew St Belleair Rd Cit 2LU to 2LD Ca acit 10,550 6 63,300 $ 6,330,000 1.0 10,550 $ 1,129,585 $ 7,459,585 Desi n FY 12/13 D D C 5 Lane Width (FT) 12 ROW cost per SF $ 100.00 Construction cost per 12' wide lane $ 107.07 Need to construct 2LU to 2LD New divider (1/2 lane) + new 1/2 lane = 1 lane 4LU to 4LD New divider (1/2 Zane) + new 1/2 lane = 1 lane 4LD to 6LD 2 new lanes = 2.0 lanes 4LU to 2LD New divider (1/2 lane) + remove 2 lanes (1 lane equiv.) = 1.5 lanes Lengthen tum 1 new lane $ 11,504,831 ~J Prioirty 1 $ 1,953,934 Prioirty 2 #REFi Prioirty 3 #REF! Prioirty 4 $ 2,091,311 Prioirty 5 $ 7,459,585 Prioirty 6 #REF! Prioirty 7 #REF! #REF! Note: Blue denotes design phases, Green denotes construction and Red denotes completion of project. • Printed 11/2/2009 8:29 AM Page 1 of 1 • ~ Herman, Sandra From: Bertels, Paul Sent: Friday, October 30, 2009 4:25 PM To: Herman, Sandra Subject: Updated Corridor Improvement Plan corridorimp with Utility Impac... Updated version. Paul Bede/s Manager Traffic Operations Division Paul. bertels(a~myclearwater. com 727-582-4794 http://www.myclearwater.com/green/index.asp City Ten Year Corridor Improvement Plan FY 2008-2018 FY 2008-2018 e ment rom o Juris- dic- lion roposed Im rovement Reason for Improve- ment Lane Length LF Addl'I ROW Width Needed FT Add'I ROW Area Needed SF OW Cost No. Lanes to Con- struct Lane-feet to Construct onstruction Cost otal Cost tatus ate urrent Los dopted Los uture Los ri- oirt Ba shore Blvd Drew St. San Mateo Cit Relocate Road Safet 2,400 6 14,400 $ 1,440,000 2.0 4,800 $ 513,934 $ 1,953,934 Const FY 11/12* C D C 1 Court Street Missouri MLKAv State 4LD to 6LD Ca aci 1,250 24 30,000 $ 3,000,000 2.0 2,500 $ 267,674 $ 3,267,674 Desi n FY 09/10 F D D 2 Drew Street Osceola M rtle Av Cit 4LU to 4LD Ca aci 1,690 6 10,140 $ 1,014,000 1.5 2,535 $ 271,422 $ 1,285,422 Desi n FY 10/11 D D C 3 Druid Road Ft Harrison U.S. 19 Ci Lengthen turn lanes Ca aci 1,600 12 19,200 $ 1,920,000 1.0 1,600 $ 171,311 $ 2,091,311 Desi n FY 11/12 D D C 4 Hi hland Avenue Sunset Pt Union St Ci 2LU to 2LD Ca aci 2,670 6 16,020 $ 1,602,000 1.0 2,670 $ 285,876 $ 1,887,876 Desi n FtY 14/15 D D C 7 Lakeview Road Ft Harrison Missouri Ci 4LU/2L to 2LD Ca aci 4,200 0 none $ - 1.0 4,200 $ 449,693 $ 449,693 Desi n FY 13/14 D D C 6 Martin Luther Kin Av Drew St Belleair Rd Ci 2LU to 2LD Ca aci 10,550 6 63,300 $ 6,330,000 1.0 10,550 $ 1,129,585 $ 7,459,585 Desi n FY 12113 D D C $ 18,395,495 Lane uVdth (FT) 12 Need to construct ROW cost per SF $ 100.00 2LU to 2LD New divider (1/2 lane) + new 1/2 lane = 1 lane Construction cost per 12' wide lane $ 107.07 4LU to 4LD New divider (1/2 lane) + new 1/2 lane = 1 lane 4LD to 6LD 2 new lanes = 2.0 lanes 4LU to 2LD New divider (1/2 lane) + remove 2 lanes (1 lane equiv.) = 1.5 lanes Lengthen tum 1 new lane Prioirty 1 $ 1,953,934 Prioirty 2 $ 3,267,674 Prioirty 3 $ 1,285,422 Prioirty 4 $ 2,091,311 Prioirty 5 $ 7,459,585 Prioirty 6 $ 449,693 Prioirty 7 $ 1,887,876 $ 18,395,495 Note: Blue denotes design phases, Green denotes construction and Red denotes completion of project. • Printed 11/2/2009 8:30 AM Page 1 of 1 City Ten Year Intersection Improvement Plan FY 2008-2018 ntersection urisdiction roposed Improvement Reason for Improve- ment No. Ap- proach- es to Widen Lane Length (LF) Addl'I ROW Width Needed (FT) Add'I ROW Area Needed (SF) OW Cost Lane-feet to Construct onstruo- lion Cost otal Cost tatus ate ource of Project urrent Los dopted -Los uture Los riority Belcher Rd and Cleveland St Ci /Coun Mast arms Survivabili None $ 150,000 Desi n Pendin Traffic O s Poli E D D 3 Belcher Rd and Druid Rd Ci /Coun Mast anus Survivabili None $ 150,000 Desi n Pendin Traffic O s Poli E D D 3 Belcher Rd and Oak Neck Coun /ci Mast arms Survivabili None $ 250,000 Desi n Pendin Traffic O s Poli E D D 4 Belcher Rd and Sunset Pt Coun /ci Mast anus Survivabili None $ 200,000 Desi n Pendin Traffic O s Polic E D D 2 Belcher Rd and Vir inia La Coun /ci Mast anus Survivabili None $ 100,000 Desi n Pendin Traffic O s Poli E D D 4 Belleair Rd and Hi hland Av Ci Mast arms Survivabili None $ 100,000 Desi n Pendin Traffic O s Poli E D D 4 Belleair Rd and M.L. Kin Ave Ci Mast arms Survivabili None $ 100,000 Desi n Pendin Traffic O s Polic E D D 4 Drew St and McMullen Booth Coun /Ci Mast arms Survivabili None $ 250,000 Connt "* FY 09/10 Traffic O s Polic F D D 1 Drew St and Osceola Avenue City Mast arms Survivability None $ 250,000 Complete FY 07/08 Traffic Ops Poli D D D 1 Druid Rd and Hi hland Ave Ci /Coun Mast arms Survivabili None $ 150,000 Desi n Pendin Traffic O s Poli D D D 3 Druid Rd and Keene Rd Ci /Coun Mast anus Survivabili None $ 150,000 Connt FY 09/10 Traffic O s Polic F D D 1 Druid Rd and Lake Dr Ci Mast anus Survivabili $ 150,000 Connt FY 09/10 Traffic O s Polic D D D 1 Druid Rd and M.L. Kin Ave Ci Mast arms Survivabili None $ 150,000 Desi n Pendin Traffic 0 s Poli D D D 3 Druid Rd and Myrtle Ave City Mast anus Survivability None $ 150,000 Complete FY 06/07 Traffic Ops Policy D D D Eastland Blvd and McMullen Ci /coun Mast anus Survivabili None $ 200,000 Desi n Pendin Traffic O s Polic E D D Hi hland Ave and Lakeview Rd Ci /Coun Mast arms Survivabili None $ 150,000 Desi n Pendin Traffic O s Polic E D D Hi hland Ave and Union St Ci /Coun Mast anus Survivabili None $ 150,000 Desi n Pendin Traffic O s Poli D D D 3 Jeffords St and M rtle Ave City Mast anus Survivability None $ 150,000 Complete FY 06/07 Traffic Ops Policy D D D 3 Lakeview Rd and M.L. King Ci Mast anus Survivabili None $ 150,000 Desi n Pendin Traffic O s Policy D D D 3 Lakeview Rd and Myrtle Ave City Mast anus Survivability None $ 150,000 Complete FY 07/08 Traffic Ops Policy D D D 3 McMullen Booth and Eckerd Coun /Ci Mast arms Survivabili None $ 150 000 Desi n Pendin Traffic 0 s Policy D D D 4 Belcher Rd and Druid Rd Ci /Coun Len then Druid turns Ca aci 4 800 12 9600 $ 960,000 800 $ 85,656 $ 1,045,656 Desi n***CI FY 09/10 Staff E D C 2 Belleair Rd and Hi hland Av Ci Widen all a roaches Ca aci 4 800 12 9600 $ 960,000 800 $ 85,656 $ 1,045,656 Desi n Pendin Staff E D C 7 Belleair Rd and M.L. Kin Ave Ci Widen all a roaches Ca aci 4 800 12 9600 $ 960,000 800 $ 85,656 $ 1,045,656 Desi n Pendin Staff E D C 16 Count side Blv and Villa a Ci Si nalization Ca aci 0 0 0 0 $ 0 $ 250,000 Desi n Pendin Staff E D D 4 Court St and Ft. Hanison Ave State/Ci Add SB RT Lane Ca aci 1 200 12 2400 $ 240,000 200 $ 21,414 $ 261,414 Connt FY 09/10 Staff F D C 5 Drew St and Ft. Hanison Ave City/State Widen Drew Street Ca aci 2 400 12 4800 $ 480,000 400 $ 42,828 $ 522,828 Desi n Pendin Staff E D C 15 Drew Stand M.L. King Ave Ci /State Add MLK turn lanes Ca aci 2 400 12 4800 $ 480,000 400 $ 42,828 $ 522,828 Desi n Pendin Staff E D C 14 Drew Stand McMullen Booth Coun /Ci Tum lanes Ca aci 2 400 12 4800 $ 480,000 400 $ 42,828 $ 522,828 Connt'* FY 09/10 Staff F D D+ 6 Drew St and M rtle Ave State Reali n Lanes E/W Safe 1 200 12 2400 $ 240,000 200 $ 21,414 $ 261,414 Desi n Pendin Staff F D C 1 Druid Rd and Ft. Harrison Ave Ci Add WB left turn lane Ca aci 1 200 12 2400 $ 240,000 200 $ 21,414 $ 261,414 Com lete FY 06/07 Staff D D C 13 Druid Rd and Hi hland Ave City/Coun Len then Druid turns Ca aci 4 800 12 9600 $ 960,000 800 $ 85,656 $ 1,045,656 Desi n'*"CI FY 09/10 Staff D D C 2 Druid Rd and Keene Rd Ci /Coun Len then Druid turns Ca aci 4 800 12 9600 $ 960,000 800 $ 85,656 $ 1,045,656 Desi n**"CI FY 09/10 Staff D D C 2 Druid Rd and M.L. Kin Ave Ci Widen all a roaches Ca aci 4 800 12 9600 $ 960,000 800 $ 85,656 $ 1,045,656 Desi n*`"CI FY 09/10 Staff D D C 2 Druid Rd and Missouri Ave Ci /State Widen Druid Rd Ca aci 2 400 12 4800 $ 480,000 400 $ 42,828 $ 522,828 Desi n*'*CI FY 09/10 Staff D D C 2 Ft. Hanison Ave and Jeffords Ci Add ENV thru lanes Ca aci 2 400 12 4800 $ 480,000 400 $ 42,828 $ 522,828 Desi n Pendin Staff E D C 3 Ft. Harrison Ave and Pierce State/Ci Add EAN thru lanes Ca aci 2 400 12 4800 $ 480,000 400 $ 42,828 $ 522,828 Desi n Pendin Staff E D C 8 Ft. Hanison Ave and Pinellas Ci Add EB thru lane Ca aci 1 200 12 2400 $ 240,000 200 $ 21,414 $ 261,414 Desi n '""" FY 09/10 Staff E D C 1 Greenlee Dr and Hi hland Ave Hi hland Ave and Lakeview Rd Ci Ci /Coun Widen side street approaches Widen all a roaches Ca aci Ca aci 2 4 400 800 12 12 4800 9600 $ 480,000 $ 960,000 400 800 $ 42,828 $ 85,656 $ 522,828 $ 1,045,656 Desi n Desi n Pendin Pendin Staff Staff E E D D C C Hi hland Ave and Palmetto Ci Widen Palmetto Ca aci 2 400 12 4800 $ 480,000 400 $ 42,828 $ 522,828 Desi n Pendin Staff E D C 11 Hi hland Ave and Sunset Pt Ci /Coun Widen Sunset Pt Ca aci 2 400 12 4800 $ 480,000 400 $ 42,828 $ 522,828 Desi n Pendin Staff E D C 9 Hi hland Ave and Union St Ci /Coun Widen Union St Ca aci 2 400 12 4800 $ 480,000 400 $ 42,828 $ 522,828 Desi n Pendin Staff D D C 10 $ 17,243,524 Note: Blue denotes design; Green denotes construction; Red denotes conglE9~rM Work by County; `*` Design by Druid Rtl Trail; "'`'Design by MFPlant Hospital Printed 11/2/2009 8:34 AM Page 1 of 2 City Ten Year Intersection Improvement Plan Addl'I Add'I No. Ap- ROW ROW Reason for proach- Lane Width Area Proposed Improve- es to Length Needed Needed Intersection Jurisdiction Improvement ment Widen (LF) (FT) (SF) Approach length (FT) 200 Lane Width (FT) 12 ROW cost per SF $ 100.00 Construction cost per 12' wide lane-foot $ 107.07 Notes on Assumed Costs ROW costs can vary widely Owners often donate needed ROW for free. Commercial ROW costs are generally higher than for residential ROW. One or many entire properties may have to be purchased if the ROW needed is too close to an existing building. Construction costs Costs are from the awarded bid for Myrtle Av Roadway and Drainage Improvements project (00-0034-EN) Costs are recent: October 2003 Costs are local: Clearwater ExGuded costs Stormwater, water, gas and IT Restoration of Pierce St. and Jones St. Jones RR crossing InGuded costs Roadway, curbs, sidewalk and ITS MOT, field office, mobilization, insurance and 10 % contingency Non-construction costs were inGuded. Note: Blue denotes design phases, Green denotes construction and Red denotes completion of project. FY 2008-2018 Lane-feet to Construo- Construct lion Cost Total Cost Priori Total Cost 1 $ 1,322,828 2 $ 5,105,451 3 $ 2,022,828 4 $ 950,000 5 $ 261,414 6 $ 522,828 7 $ 1,045,656 8 $ 522,828 9 $ 522,828 10 $ 522,828 11 $ 522,828 12 $ 1,045,656 13 $ 261,414 14 $ 522,828 15 $ 522,828 16 $ 1,045,656 17 $ 522,828 18 $ - 19 $ 20 $ 21 $ na $ 522,828 $ 17,766,352 Current I Adopted I Future Status Date Source of Project Los Los Los Note: Btue denotes design; Green denotes construction; Red denotes corrtp84fidrt Work by County; "` Design by Druid Rd Trail; ""'Design by MFPlant Hospital Printed 11/2/2009 8:34 AM Page 2 of 2 -~~ CITY OF CLEARWATER NOTICE OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT The City of Clearwater proposes to adopt the following ordinance: ORDINANCE NO. 8088-09 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY AS ADOPTED ON MAY 18, 2000, AS SUBSEQUENTLY AMENDED, AMENDING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT, MAKING CORRECTIONS AND MODIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO THE UPDATED SCHEDULE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER'S FY2009/10 THROUGH FY2014/15 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET ADOPTED ON SEPTEMBER 17, 2009, AND UP-DATING THE REFERENCE IN POLICY 1.1.1.2 TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT'S FIVE-YEAR WORK PROGRAM FOR FY2009/10 THROUGH 2013/14 AS ADOPTED BY THE SCHOOL BOARD ON SEPTEMBER 15, 2009; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The proposed ordinance will affect the land area shown on the map in this advertisement: (INSERT MAP HERE) Schedule of Public Hearings: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 before the Community Development Board, at 1:00 p.m. Thursday, November 5, 2009 before the City Council (1St Reading), at 6:00 p.m. Tuesday, November 17, 2009 before the City Council (2"d Reading), at 6:00 p.m. (or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard) The public hearings will be heard in the City Council Chambers, 3~d floor of City Hall, 112 South Osceola Avenue, Clearwater, Florida. Any person who decides to appeal any decision made by the Board or Council, with respect to any matter considered at such hearings, will need a record of the proceedings and, for such purpose, 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 per Florida Statute 286.0105. Michael Delk Cynthia E. Goudeau, MMC Planning Department City Clerk City of Clearwater P.O. Box 4748, Clearwater, FL 33758-4748 A COPY OF THIS AD IN LARGE PRINT IS AVAILABLE IN THE OFFICIAL RECORDS AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES DEPT. ANY PERSON WITH .A DISABILITY REQUIRING REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING, SHOULD CALL THE OFFICIAL RECORDS AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES DEPT. WITH THEIR REQUEST AT (727) 562-4093. To learn more about presenting to Clearwater boards and City Council, go to http://cearwater.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=11 and click on "Resident Engagement Video." You can also check the informational video out from any Clearwater public library Ad: 10/8/09 8~ 11/6/09 Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners 315 Court Street, 5th Floor Clearwater, FL 33756 CPA2009-07001 . Clearwater Neighborhood Assoc. Shelly Kuroghlian, President 1821 Springwood Circle S Clearwater, FL 33763 _. Y Pinellas County Board of County Commissioners 315 Court Street, 5th Floor Clearwater, FL 33756 TA2009-03006 .Clearwater Neighborhood Assoc. Shelly Kuroghlian, President 1821 Springwood Circle S Clearwater, FL 33763 ~~y ~. ~~ • NOTICE OF AMENDMENT TO THE CLEARWATER COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE The City of Clearwater proposes to adopt the following ordinance: ORDINANCE NO. 8070-09 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, MAKING AMENDMENTS TO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ADOPT LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, TO FURTHER THE CONSISTENCY BETWEEN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND TO MAKE OTHER MINOR EDITORIAL CHANGES BY AMENDING ARTICLE 1, "GENERAL PROVISIONS", SECTION 1-108, "COUNTYWIDE CONSISTENCY", TO RENAME THE SECTION AS "FUTURE LAND USE MAP" AND TO MAKE "COUNTYWIDE CONSISTENCY" INTO A NEW SUBSECTION 1-108.A, AND TO ADD A NEW SUBSECTION 1-108.6 "MAP ADJUSTMENTS", TO PROVIDE FOR CRITERIA FOR MAP ADJUSTMENTS FOR WATER/DRAINAGE FEATURE, PRESERVATION, AND RECREATION/OPEN SPACE CATEGORIES, AND AMENDING SECTION 1-109, "ZONING ATLAS", TO ADD A NEW SUBSECTION 1-109.E, "ADJUSTMENTS TO THE ZONING ATLAS", TO SPECIFY CERTAIN ADJUSTMENTS TO THE ZONING ATLAS TO BE MADE BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR; BY AMENDING ARTICLE 2, "ZONING DISTRICTS", SECTION 2-1303, "TABLE 2-1303", TO LIMIT AUTOMOBILE SERVICE STATION, MAJOR VEHICLE SERVICE, RETAIL SALES AND SERVICE USES AND OUTDOOR RECREATION/ENTERTAINMENT USES IN THE IRT ZONING DISTRICT; BY AMENDING ARTICLE 3, "DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS", SECTION 3-804, "SETBACK AND HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS", TO ADD A NEW SUBSECTION 3-804.B.1.c.,TO INCREASE THE ALLOWABLE HEIGHTS OF NON-OPAQUE FENCES FROM 36 INCHES TO 48 INCHES ON WATERFRONT LOTS AND TO DELETE SUBSECTION 3-804.C AND TO DELETE GRAPHICS; AMENDING SECTION 3-904, "SIGHT VISIBILITY TRIANGLE", SUBSECTION 3-904.8, TO INCREASE FROM 36 INCHES TO 48 INCHES THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT FOR NON-OPAQUE FENCES PERMITTED WITHIN THE SIGHT VISIBILITY TRIANGLE FOR WATERFRONT LOTS AND TO REPLACE THE EXISTING GRAPHIC; AMENDING SECTION 3-908, "PERMITTED ENCROACHMENTS INTO SETBACKS AND OVER STREET RIGHTS-OF-WAY", SUBSECTION 3-908.A.1, TO DECREASE THE CLEARANCE REQUIRED FOR AWNINGS FROM NINE FEET TO EIGHT FEET; AMENDING SECTION 3-914, "STORMWATER DETENTION FACILITIES", TO ADD A NEW SUBSECTION 3-914.C, TO ADD THE USE OF "LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT" TECHNIQUES FOR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, AND AMENDING SECTION 3-1202, "GENERAL LANDSCAPING STANDARDS", SUBSECTION 3- 1202.B.3, TO ADD "FLORIDA-FRIENDLY PLANT MATERIALS" TO THOSE PLANT MATERIALS THAT ARE "NATIVE TO CENTRAL FLORIDA"; AMENDING SECTION 3-1805, "SIGNS PERMITTED WITHOUT A PERMIT", TO DELETE SUBSECTION 3-1805.U, TO ELIMINATE SANDWICH BOARD SIGNS IN THE DOWNTOWN DISTRICT, AND TO RE- LETTER THE REMAINING SUBSECTIONS, AMENDING SECTION 3-1910, "SAME-WATER SUPPLY FACILITIES", TO ADD A NEW SUBSECTION 3-1910.D, TO REQUIRE DEVELOPERS OF NEW SUBDIVISIONS TO PROVIDE INTERNAL RECLAIMED WATER SYSTEMS IF THE DEVELOPMENT IS LOCATED WHERE RECLAIMED WATER WILL BE AVAILABLE WITHIN SEVEN (7) YEARS; BY AMENDING ARTICLE 4, "DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND OTHER PROCEDURES", SECTION 4-607 "HISTORIC DESIGNATION", SUBSECTION 4-607.8, TO PERMIT THE CITY TO INITIATE AN APPLICATION FOR HISTORIC DESIGNATION, AND AMENDING SECTION 4-901, "AUTHORITY AND APPLICABILITY", SUBSECTION 4-901.C.6., TO ADD "TRANSPORTATION" TO "PUBLIC FACILITIES; BY AMENDING ARTICLE 8, "DEFINITIONS AND RULES OF CONSTRUCTION", SECTION 8-102, "DEFINITIONS", TO REPLACE THE DEFINITION FOR "COASTAL HIGH HAZARD AREA" WITH A NEW DEFINITION FOR "COASTAL STORM AREA"; AND MAKING AMENDMENTS TO THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, CHAPTER 24, ARTICLE III, WELLHEAD PROTECTION, SECTION 24.63 PERMIT-REQUIRED AND SECTION 24.64 PERMIT REQUIREMENTS, TO MODIFY THE REQUIREMENTS FOR A WELLHEAD PROTECTION PERMIT AND A PROTECTION-CONTAINMENT PLAN, INCLUDING AN INCREASE IN THE DISTANCE FROM 500 FEET TO 1,000 FEET REQUIRED FROM A WELL FOR POTENTIAL EXPANSION/CHANGE OF AN EXISTING USE WITH CONTAMINATING MATERIALS; CERTIFYING CONSISTENCY WITH THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND PROPER ADVERTISEMENT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. ,~ . ~ ~ The proposed ordinance will affect the land area shown on the map in this advertisement: (INSERT MAP HERE) Schedule of Public Hearings: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 before the Community Development Board, at 1:00 p.m. Tuesday, November 17, 2009 before the City Council (1St Reading), at 6:00 p.m. Thursday, December 3, 2009 before the City Council (2"d Reading), at 6:00 p.m. All public hearings on the ordinances will be held in the City Council Chambers, in City Hall, 3rd floor, 112 South Osceola Ave, Clearwater, Florida. TA2009-03006 Additional information is available in the Planning Department at the Municipal Services Building, 100 South Myrtle Ave, Clearwater, Florida. Florida Statute 286.0105 states: Any person appealing a decision of this board must have a record of the proceedings to support such an appeal. A person making an appeal will need to ensure that a verbatim record, including testimony and evidence, is made. The inclusion of this statement does not create or imply a right to appeal the decision to be made at this hearing if the right to an appeal does not exist as a matter of law. Citizens may appear to be heard or file written notice of approval or objection with the Planning Director or the City Clerk prior to or during the public hearing. A COPY OF THIS AD IN LARGE PRINT IS AVAILABLE IN THE OFFICIAL RECORDS & LEGISLATIVE SERVICES DEPT. ANY PERSON WITH A DISABILITY REQUIRING REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING SHOULD CALL OFFICIAL RECORDS & LEGISLATIVE SERVICES WITH THEIR REQUEST AT (727) 562-4093. City of Clearwater Cynthia E. Goudeau, MMC P.O. Box 4748 City Clerk Clearwater, FI 33758-4748 To learn more about presenting to Clearwater boards and City Council, go to http://Clearwater.granicus.comNiewPublisher.phg?view id=11 and click on "Resident Engagement Video." You can also check the informational video out from any Clearwater public library: Ad: 10/8/09 & 11/20/09 CITY OF CLEARWATER NOTICE OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT The City of Clearwater proposes to adopt the following ordinance: ORDINANCE NO. 8088-09 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE CITY AS ADOPTED ON MAY 18, 2000, AS SUBSEQUENTLY AMENDED, AMENDING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT, MAKING CORRECTIONS AND MODIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO THE UPDATED SCHEDULE OF THE CITY OF CLEARWATER'S FY2009/10 THROUGH FY2014/15 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET ADOPTED ON SEPTEMBER 17, 2009, AND UPDATING THE REFERENCE IN POLICY 1.1.1.2 TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT'S FIVE-YEAR WORK PROGRAM FOR FY2009/10 THROUGH 2013/14 AS ADOPTED BY THE SCHOOL BOARD ON SEPTEMBER 15, 2009; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The proposed ordinance will affect the land area shown on the map in this advertisement: (INSERT MAP HERE) Schedule of Public Hearincts: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 before the Community Development Board, at 1:00 p.m. Thursday, November 5, 2009 before the City Council (15i Reading), at 6:00 p.m. Tuesday, November 17, 2009 before the City Council (2"d Reading), at 6:00 p.m. (or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard) The public hearings will be heard in the City Council Chambers, 3~d floor of City Hall, 112 South Osceola Avenue, Clearwater, Florida. Any person who decides to appeal any decision made by the Board or Council, with respect to any matter considered at such hearings, will need a record of the proceedings and, for such purpose, 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 per Florida Statute 286.0105. Michael Delk Cynthia E. Goudeau, MMC Planning Department City Clerk City of Clearwater P.O. Box 4748, Clearwater, FL 33758-4748 A COPY OF THIS AD IN LARGE PRINT IS AVAILABLE IN THE OFFICIAL RECORDS AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES DEPT. ANY PERSON WITH A DISABILITY REQUIRING REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS MEETING, SHOULD CALL THE OFFICIAL RECORDS AND LEGISLATIVE SERVICES DEPT. WITH THEIR REQUEST AT (727) 562-4093. To learn more about presenting to Clearwater boards and City Council, go to http://cearwater.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=11 and click on "Resident Engagement Video." You can also check the informational video out from any Clearwater public library Ad: 10/8/09 8~ 11/6/09 • • 'O 1' 1 ~ ~- ~1 ~~ ~~ m< ~m ~~ C~ 03/09/2009 11:43 8504883309 COMM PLANNING y PAGE 01/04 .~ $tRTE OF ~I.ORIDA DEPARTMENT CAF DC~MMI~N~TY AF~A-IR~ "Dedicated to makirFg Florida a better place to call haute" CHARLIE CR19T THOMAS Q PELNAM Governor 9ecreMry Facsimile Transnnittal Cover Sheet I r Division/Uni#: Ta: ~ ~!I'GI ~~f Fax #: ~ ~- ! . ~ ' "~ ~~~ From: ~a ~~ C ~ '~' ~ ~ ~ Phone #: Re#urn Fax # Email: , Os#e: ~/ ~'~ ~~ # of Pages; (including cover page) Message: 8~ ~z~• l~'~~ please call ~ at if you have questions. o3jwp~ 'j)'1iS itu~,f 2556 $NUMItRO OAF4 BOULEVARD 1'Al.LAHASSEE, FLORFDA 32389-2100 Pfione; 850.488-8488 Websile: www .„,~rtf..stata.f~.us 03/09f2009 11:43 8504883309 COMM PLANNING PAGE 02104 65.1 ~/S ~ ~ / ' ' PrQjG'Cted LE'VeI Of SerViCe De~icierlCfeS 209-2073 Pro'ected U1~aterlSewer Level of Service (Vote: These numbers utilize the population for the entirevservice'arxc. The total treatment capacity of the pity's water treatment plants is 39.367 MGM?. The total capacity of the City's wastewater trey#ment plants is 13,7 MGD, P ion Level of Service a v m ro m w d w z z J a 0 j m m m m 00 _ v m eta m v ,~-~ ,~ - m m m N O", rD m m . , ~' R Recrea#ian l~evef ofi Service _ • - - 9: =:. _ :::2. 04 _- .~ nn ~t'~~'~ - - } ~t9 p, do~ _ ,t ':~'::_ ~.Sta ~acTi~~ty:` ~ai? n '= ~ ~ _ c ~ ~ : ~ _ Fa~ifst~~, Po- ulaii4n N ~ Park 13 115 04Q Community 1 )15,000 3 Park pla raurtids 1 ! 2,504 10 Baseball 1 ! 5,404 16 i^ield Saftpall Field 11 1 ! 5,004 ~ootballf i f G,fl40 7 Sack geld 11 lienrusCourt i f x,040 Saslceiball 1 1 , p40 10 Gaui ~t - ____ Shuffleboard 1 f 3.400 24 Court Racquetball 1 ! 10,p40 6 Court Golf Course 1 1 ! 100,Op0 Swimming i 125,000 2 Raa1 Boat Rart s t ! 5,400 11 *Par resident _ ~e.7 _ _ 'fie . 70' - - r: _ - :~~. - - - _ - : ~.. _ :<« ~ _ - y f. - 'e _ - _ ~ _ ~: ';~: ~~::, - -- 1 : ~: U TwtQ - ~ ~4Q ; _ . _ '~.~: _ - z - ~ . - _ - - .. :1<d ~: . ~ . 35,739 . 35,471 15 1 t 2,749 14 1 ! 2,605 1 ('11,913 4 119.118 5 1 ! 3,574 12 1 13,039 12 1 ! 2,234 i6 1 12,279 21 113,249 11 i 13,316 11 1 r 5,106 i~ ~ r 3,G47 13 i ! 3,249 27 _ 1 1 1,351 27 i 13,574 10 1 13,647 10 911,489 24 111,520 24 1 ! 5,J57 6 1 18,079 6 i 1 35.739 1 1 f 36,471 ~ 1! 17,874 2 1 1 'i $,236 2 1 f 3,249 11 i 13,316 i2 =~2 ~~ p _ _ ~-~ - ~ Y S~~ •=L0 ~,. ~.; ;__. - - -. fE: 'Q r ..s` .~ . ::. ~:-:;::: _ 38 24 37,Ofi5 15 37,655 510 1 12, 15 1 ! 2549 1 12.471 5 53.1 117 6 917,648 1 17,41 3 , 1 f 3,©89 92 1!3,138 12 1/3,187 i t 1,785 21 1 f '1,793 2i 11 1,821 i 13,370 ~ i i f 3,423 19 i ! 3 476 851 1!2 13 i 12,897 13 i ! 2,942 , 373 ~1 ! 1 29 i 19 29ff 29 i~19 , 1 ! 3, 747 12 i 13,138 ~____ 12 - ______~~ 1 13,187 ~.. -~_ • 1 ! i ,544 -- 24.".^ '~ 1 11,5G9 24 1 ! 1,593 17$ i 16 6 i 16,276 6 1 P 6,374 . i 137 065 1 1 t 37 658 1 i 138 241 533 1 ! 18 ~ 2 1 ! 18,828 2 1 ! 19,121 , ~ 13,ae9 12 1 ! 3, 138 12 i 13 187 _03109/2009 11:43 8504883309 COMM PLANNING rovements Schedule Supporting Capital imp projections population PAGE 04!04 ec#ions are from the Water Supply plan adopted by then e~ Population prof Haven Gity Commission an June 9, 2008. A GUIDE TO THE ANNUAL UPDATE OF THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS ELEMENT FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS August 16, 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS Pale I. Introduction ~ II. Process for Annual Adoption and Review A. Frequency of Adoption 2 B. Public Hearing 2 C. Optional Review Process 2 D. Changes Not Requiring a Plan Amendment 3 E. Changes Requiring a Plan Amendment 3 F. Action by Local Governments with no Capital Improvements 3 G. Consequences of Not Adopting an Annual Update 4 III. General Components of the Schedule A. .Fiscal Responsibility 4 B. Time Period 5 C. Project Description and General Location 5 D. Consistency with other Elements 5 E. Projects and Costs 6 F. Revenue Sources 6 IV. Projects to be Included in the Schedule A. General 8 B. Projects to Reduce Existing Deficiencies 9 C. Replacement Projects 9 D. Projects to Meet Future Demand 10 E. Capital Planning in the CIE Beyond the Five-Year Schedule 18 V. Financial Feasibility A. Supporting Data and Analysis 19 B. Demonstration of Financial Feasibility 20 VI. Compliance Considerations 21 Attachments 1. SB 360 CIE-Related Implementation Dates 23 2. An Example of aFive-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements 24 3. Statutory and Rule Citations 26 4. CIE Step by Step Template 28 Note to Reader This Guide may be updated from time-to-time and the latest version of the Guide will be maintained on the DCA website at l~ttts://~v~vw.dt~a,steate..fl.us/Growt1i11rT~inagement2t)05/. In addition, answers to frequently asked question will be posted on this website. Questions regarding this Guide should be directed via email to Bill Pable, Community Planning Policy Administrator in the Division of Community Planning, at bill.pable@dca.state.fl.us. ii I. INTRODUCTION Every year local governments must update their Capital Improvements Element (CIE), including the Five-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements (Schedule). See s.163.3177(3)(b)1., Florida Statutes (F.S.) and Rule 9J-5.016(5), Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.). This guide discusses the annual update process and reflects the statutory changes adopted in 2005 in Senate Bill 360 (Chapter 2005-290, Laws of Florida). Chapter 2005-290, Laws of Florida, became effective on July 1, 2005. Some of the statutory changes became effective immediately, while others become effective in 2006, 2007 or 2008. Attachment 1 lists the effective dates of the new provisions pertaining to the CIE included in SB 360. The purpose of the C1E and the Schedule is to identify the capital improvements that are needed to implement the Comprehensive Plan and ensure that adopted Level of Service (LOS) Standards are achieved and maintained for concurrency related facilities (sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, potable water, parks and recreation, schools, and transportation facilities, including mass transit, where applicable). Attachment 4 provides a step by step template of how the CIE process can be implemented locally. if the LOS Standards are not met, concurrency management requires a local government to deny applications for development orders and permits until the deficiency is addressed. In order to assure that facilities will be in place to maintain LOS standards in a timely manner and prevent a concur ency moratorium, the Schedule must address deficiencies and be financially feasible. This Guide is intended only to help the reader understand the general nature of the annual CIE update amendment. It is not a substitute for, or expansion of, any statutory or rule provisions nor is it a rule. The specific content of any amendment should reflect specific local circumstances. The CIE and the local government's Capital Improvements Program (CIP) are often confused. The CIE is a required element of the Comprehensive Plan that is adopted and updated to reflect the timing and funding of capital projects to meet or maintain adopted LOS standards or implement the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The CIP is a schedule of all capital projects to be undertaken by a local government, including non-LOS items such as equipment purchases and government facilities and buildings. In'some cases, the first year of the CIP may represent a portion of or the entire annual budget of a local government. Many of the projects listed in the CIP will also be included in the CIE if they address LOS standards or the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan. II. PROCESS FOR ANNUAL ADOPTION AND REVIEW A. Frequency of Adoption: The process for updating the CIE is established in Section 163.3177(3)(b), F.S. The element must be updated "on an annual basis." The adopted update amendment must be received by the Department of Community Affairs (Department) by December 1 of each year. The annual update amendment is exempt from the twice-per-year limitation on plan amendment adoptions, pursuant to s.163.3187(1)(f), F.S. The statute allows a local government to amend the CIE up to three times per year: one time as the annual update; and two times as part of the ordinary twice-per-year large scale amendment packages. Note that the Schedule and CIE may also be changed as part of an amendment that is adopted as an exception to the two times per year ]imitation; for example, as part of a DRI-related amendment (see s.163.3187, F.S.). B. Public Hearin: The CIE annual update amendment may be adopted by a local government with only one public hearing. See s.163.3177(3)(b)2., F.S. Under this expedited process, the local government does not transmit the annual update as a proposed amendment and the Department does not issue an Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report. Instead, the local government simply adopts the CIE annual update amendment at a duly noticed public hearing, sends the adopted amendment to the Department, and the Department publishes a Notice of intent after conducting a compliance review. A local government may utilize the expedited adoption process during any of the three primary opportunities to amend the CIE discussed in section A, above. Thus, for the ordinary twice-per-year amendment packages, a local government may add CIE-related amendments into the adopted amendment package, even if those CIE-related amendments were not included in the proposed amendment package. C. Optional Review Process: A local government may elect to submit the annual update as a proposed amendment for review just like other large scale amendments. Comments received from state and regional review agencies may help avoid potential Compliance issues. If this optional review process is selected, the proposed amendment should be submitted early enough to ensure its adoption by December 1St of every year. 2 D. Changes Not Requiring a Plan Amendment: The following changes can be made to the Schedule outside the required annual update amendment process. See s.I63.3I77(3)(b)1., F.S. A local government may adopt any of these changes by local ordinance, which is to be transmitted to the Department for record keeping purposes only. 1. Corrections and modifications concerning costs of a project already included in an adopted Schedule; 2. Corrections and modifications concerning revenue sources (for example, the Schedule might identify "Bonds" as a revenue source for a facility; this source could be changed to another source, such as "Developer Dedication",without amending the Schedule; and 3. Acceptance of facilities pursuant to dedications, which are consistent with the plan. For example, a developer may choose to address development impacts through right-of--way dedication; such dedication can be accepted and included in the Schedule without a plan amendment. E. Changes Requiring a Plan Amendment: The annual update to the CIE is an amendment to the plan. At a minimum, the update amendment will add a new fifth year to the Schedule. In addition, a plan amendment is required to: 1. Add a new project(s) to the Schedule; 2. Eliminate a project(s) from the Schedule; or 3. Defer or delay the date of construction of a particular project(s) already included in the Schedule. F. Action by Local Governments with no Capital Improvements: Local governments with no scheduled improvements must still annually review and revise, as necessary, the CIE. Any goals, objectives and policies required by Rule 9J- . 5.016, F.A.C., and Chapter 163, Part II, F.S., which are out-of--date, should be revised during the annual review process. If the annual review establishes that no capital improvement projects need be included in the Schedule, then the annual update should demonstrate that LOS Standards will be maintained during the next five-year planning period and, thus, no capital improvements need be scheduled. For example, the annual update plan amendment should include current and projected traffic volumes showing that roadways subject to concun ency are operating consistent with the adopted LOS Standards and that the LOS Standards will be maintained during the next five years. The CIE would then include a Schedule with no capital projects. This "blank" Schedule will serve as a placeholder into which projects can be added, as necessary, during future annual updates. If the annual update demonstrates that LOS standards will not be met within the 5-year schedule, then the local government must adopt either a long term concurrency management system or planning strategies in the CIE to address these deficiencies. G. Conse uences of Not Adopting an Annual Update: Effective December 1, 2007, if the adopted annual CIE update amendment is not received by the Department by December ls` of each year, the local government is prohibited from adopting Future Land Use Map changes, except for amendments to meet new statutory requirements and emergency amendments, until the update amendment is submitted to the Department. See s.163.3177(3)(b)1., F.S. This prohibition on future amendments also applies to small scale amendments. Also effective December 1, 2007, if the annual update is not adopted or if the update amendment is found not in compliance, then the Department of Community Affairs is obligated to notify the Administration Commission (AC). The AC may impose sanctions on the local government pursuant to s.163.3184(11), F.S. See s.163.3177(3)(c), F.S. III. GENERAL COMPONENTS OF THE SCHEDULE Rule 9J-5.016(4)(a), F.A.C., specifies the general components of the Schedule. These components are discussed below and a sample Schedule is included in Attachment 2. A. Fiscal Responsibility: In general, the Schedule must include those capital improvement projects for which the local government has fiscal responsibility. Local governments must also include in the Schedule some projects, such as school facilities, for which they do not have fiscal responsibility; water supply facilities, for which they may or may not have such responsibility; certain transportation facilities for'which the local governr'nent does not have fiscal responsibility; and privately funded projects necessary to ensure that adopted Level of Service Standards are achieved and maintained. These projects are discussed in Section IV, below. 4 B. Time Period: The Schedule must be sub-divided into five one-year (fiscal year) periods. Thus, if the Schedule is adopted in December 2007 (which is during FY 2007-08), it must address projects for FYs 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 on a year by year basis. The Schedule may also be required to address more than afive-year period. For example, if the local government has adopted along-term (] 0- or 15-year period) transportation concurrency management system [see Section IV D(5)(b)(3), below), then the Schedule must address transportation facilities within the long-term concurrency management area for either the 10- or 15-year period. A local government that has adopted an urban service boundary, pursuant to s.163.3177(14), F.S., must adopt a 10- year facilities plan for that area within the CIE [see Section IV D(5)(d), below: C. Project Description and General Location: A brief, general description of each project should be included in the Schedule. Usually a project is identified by a short title. The description must be specific enough to demonstrate that the project is consistent with the facility needs identified in the other elements of the plan. For transportation projects, the description should include the name of the facility being improved (or constructed), the limits of the projects (From .... To ....), the type of improvement (new roadway, widening, tum lanes, signals, etc.) and phase (right-of--way acquisition, PD&E, constniction). The Schedule should indicate the location of the project. Indicating the location of each project helps identify the project since the Schedule may include many, for example, water supply projects. Numbering each project in the Schedule and then displaying these numbers on a map or by including in the Schedule a description of the location of the project may accomplish this. The purpose of such a map or other location description is to inform the community and landowners of where infrastructure improvements are scheduled. D. Consistency with other Elements: The Schedule must include a demonstration of consistency with the individual elements of the comprehensive plan. See Rule 9J-5.016(4)(a)l.b., F.A.C. One way to demonstrate consistency is by citing the page number, table or policy in which the project is identified in another element of the plan as a deficiency, replacement project or designed to meet a future need. The sample Schedule in Attachment 2 includes a column 5 labeled "Consistency with Other Plan Elements" where references can be inserted demonstrating that the projects are consistent with the other elements of the comprehensive plan. It will likely be periodically necessary to amend another element of the Comprehensive Plan to ensure its consistency with the Capital Improvements Element. Section 163.3187(1)(f), F.S. provides guidance for such circumstances as follows: "(f) Any comprehensive plan amendment that changes the schedule in the capital improvements element, and any amendments directly related to the schedule, may be made once in a calendar year on a date different from the two times provided in this subsection when necessary to coincide with the adoption of the local government's budget and capital improvements program. E. Projects and Costs: A local government has discretion in establishing the types of projects that will be included in the Schedule. Rule 9J-5.003(12), F.A.C., defines "capital improvement" as physical assets "which are large scale and high in cost ...generally nonrecurring and may require multi-year financing." As one possible solution, the definition of capital improvement for the purposes of the Schedule might be relative to the size of the total community budget. For a large community with hundreds of capital projects every year, the minimum maybe, say, $100,000; while in a small community with few improvements the minimum may be, say, $10,000. The minimum amount should be explicitly stated in the plan (perhaps as a footnote to the Schedule or adopted as a policy in the C[E). Projects costing less than the minimum need not be included in the Schedule. The CIE must also identify projects identified elsewhere in the Plan as projected needs regardless of cost. The Schedule must identify the cost for each project. For roadway facilities, the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) is preparing guidelines for local governments to use in estimating costs. Local governments may develop and use their own cost estimates. Locally developed estimates must be justified and, in the case of state roads, coordinated with FDOT. When reviewing the Schedule, FDOT will verify the reasonableness of the costs. Note that funding for right-of--way acquisition and PD&E studies is not acceptable to meet concurrency because neither acquisition nor studies provide actual capacity. Only programmed construction phases will satisfy concurrency. F. Revenue Sources: The revenue sources that will be used to fiend each project must be indicated in the Schedule. The supporting data and analysis identify "existing funding sources" [see Rule 9J-5.016(1)(c), F.A.C.] and include a projection of the amount of revenue expected to be 6 collected from existing sources and "other revenue sources" [see Rule 9J-5.016(2)(f)4., F.A.C.]. The revenue sources included in the Schedule should be consistent with the sources described in the supporting data and analysis. That is, the data and analysis should include a projection of the amount of expected revenue for all sources included in the Schedule. Revenue sources include any source that can be used to fund capital projects, including ad valorem taxes, bonds, state and federal funds or grants, tax revenues, impact fees, and developer contributions. For Transportation Regional Incentive Program (TRIP) facilities, the Schedule must show both revenue sources (50% state and 50% local match) and the local match must be from a committed funding source if the project is included in the first three years of the Schedule. See s.339.2819(4)(a), F.S. In order for the Schedule to be financially feasible, the supporting data and analysis must demonstrate that sufficient revenues are currently available or will be available from "committed funding sources" to fund the projects included in the first three (3) years of the Schedule. Projects in years 4 and 5 may be funded from sources that are either "committed" or "planned" [see x.163.3164(32), F.S.]. Although any project included in the Schedule represents a pledge by the local government to pursue its implementation, plaruiing for projects included in the first three years of the Schedule must be sufficiently advanced that funding from a committed source is allocated to the project. The distinction between "planned" and "committed" revemie sources is discussed below. 1 Committed Funding~Sources: A committed funding source is one which is available for and dedicated to financing capital improvements included in the Schedule and is based on expected revenues from an existing source. Rule 9J-5.003(29), F.A.C., notes that a currently available revenue source is "...an existing source and amount of revenue presently available to the local government. It does not include a local government's present intent to increase the future level or amount of a revenue source which is contingent on ratification by public referendum." A specific revenue source, such as ad valorem taxes, may be used to fund either capital projects or to fiend other government expenditures. Thus, "committed funding source" means that expected revenues from an existing revenue source have been dedicated to funding the capital improvements included in the Schedule. A developer's contribution becomes a committed funding source when it is included in a legally binding agreement. 2) Planned Funding Sources: A planned funding source is one that is not currently available to the local government to use to fund capital projects included in the Schedule. As stated in s.163.3177(3)(a)5., F.S., a planned revenue source is one which requires ".... referenda or other actions to secure the revenue source." Once the referendum passes or the other action occurs (such as, the grant is awarded), then the planned source is secured and becomes a committed sources that can be used to fund projects in the first three years of the Schedule. 7 A local government can demonstrate that a source is planned by adopting in the CIE a reasonable strategy that will be pursued to secure the revenue source and which coordinates land use decisions and fiscal resources with capital projects to maintain adopted LOS Standards (see Rule 9J-5.016(3)(b)3., F.A.C.). For example, the strategy could commit the local government by a date certain to initiate the referendum process or submit a specific grant application. The plan must identify other existing revenue sources that will be used to fund the capital projects or otherwise amend the plan to ensure financial feasibility in the event the referenda are not passed or the other actions (such as approval by a grantor) do not secure the planned revenue. See s.163.3177(3)(a)5., F.S. Thus, the Schedule should identify the other existing revenue source, and, of course, the Schedule must be financially feasible using the other existing revenue source. Alternatively, the plan could include a policy stating that the project will not be undertaken if the grant is not obtained; however, the plan must still ensure that LOS Standards are maintained. 3 Grants: Projects may be funded entirely or in part by grants. The Schedule must identify the specific grant program to be used, the amount of the grant and the funding source of any required local match. Grants may be either a committed or planned funding source. Grants which have been approved or committed by the grantor are considered a "committed funding source" and may be used to fund projects during any of the five years of the Schedule. Grants which have not been approved are considered a "planned funding source" and may be used to fund projects in years 4 and 5 of the Schedule, but not in years 1, 2 or 3. IV. PROJECTS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE SCHEDULE The Schedule must include capital projects necessary to achieve and maintain LOS standards, reduce existing deficiencies, provide for necessary replacements, and meet future demand during the time period covered by the Schedule. See Rule 9J-5.016(1)(a), F.A.C. A. General: The Schedule must address the facility needs iderttified in the other elements of the plan, for which LOS Standards must be adopted; these are the facilities for which concurrency is required. The concurrency facilities are: (1) sanitary sewer; (2) solid waste; (3) drainage; {4) potable water; (5) parks and recreation; (6) schools (beginning December 1, 2008); and (7) transportation facilities, including mass transit. See s.163.3180(1)(a), F.S. and s.163.3177(3)(a)5., F.S. The Schedule may include other facilities related to locally approved concurrency. In addition, the Schedule may include other facilities identified in the plan as desirable, but not required to address either state-required or locally approved concurrency. fn general, the Schedule need only include projects for which the local government has fiscal responsibility. However, the Schedule must include certain public and privately- funded projects for which the local government does not have fiscal responsibility. These privately-funded projects include: 1. Water supply projects (see Section D(2)(c), below); 2. Public schools (see Section D(4)(e), below); and 3. Those included in the Metropolitan Planning Organization's Transportation Improvement Program (see Section D(5)(b)(1), below). 4. Projects that will be funded by the developer and needed to maintain LOS Standards. See s.163.3177(3)(a)5., F.S. The Capital Improvements Element is based upon the public facility needs identified in the other elements of the comprehensive plan. See Rule 9J-5.016(1)(a), F.A.C. The annual update of the CIE must demonstrate that the comprehensive plan contains adequate strategies for achieving and maintaining adopted LOS Standards. The annual update should include an assessment of the current operating conditions of the seven (7} concurrency-related facilities to identify current deficiencies and a projection of future operating conditions to identify needed capital improvements. This supporting data and analysis must demonstrate that the Schedule addresses existing and projected future needs. B. Projects to Reduce Existing Deficiencies: A deficiency is a facility or service that does not meet (is operating below) the adopted LOS Standard. The Schedule must include any projects that "reduce existing deficiencies." The supporting data and analysis of the pertinent element(s) should include a list of identified deficiencies. If the annual update demonstrates that LOS standards will not be met within the 5-year schedule, then the local government must adopt either a long term concurrency management system or planning strategies in the CIE to address these deficiencies. The Schedule should include all projects needed to maintain the adopted LOS Standard during the five-year period covered by the schedule. C. Replacement Projects: The Schedule must include projects that are needed as "replacement" for facilities that wear out or are obsolete. Such projects might include, for example, replacing a bridge that has deteriorated to such an extent that lane closure (to reduce weight) has resulted in 9 a reduction of roadway capacity and, thus, the roadway is no longer able to meet the LOS Standard. D. Projects to Meet Future Demand: The Schedule must include projects to "meet future demand." Such projects should be identified in the data and analysis section of each element. The basic concurrency requirement included in the statute [s.163.3202(2)(g), F.S.] simply states that facilities must be "available when needed." The exact definition of "available when needed" varies from facility to facility. The function of the Schedule is to time the construction of projects so that they are available when needed. If construction of a project results in sufficient capacity in the system such that the adopted LOS Standard is maintained, then the local government will be able to avoid denying an application for a concurrency certificate. The following discussion defines "available when needed" for each type of concurrency facility and identifies the type of projects that must be included in the Schedule. ])Sanitary sewer, solid waste and drainage [see Rule 9J-5.0055(3)(a), F.A.C.}: (a) At the time of issuance of a certificate of occupancy (CO), the necessary facilities are in place, or (b) At the time of issuance of a DO or DP, the necessary facilities are guaranteed in an enforceable development agreement or a 380 agreement or DO to be in place at the time of issuance of CO. 2) Potable water [see Rule 9J-5.0055(3}(a), F.A.C.]: (a) Potable water facilities must be available as described in 1, above, and prior to approving a building permit the local government must check with its water supplier to verify that adequate water supplies will be available no later that the anticipated date of issuance of a CO. See s.163.3180(2)(a), F.S. (b) If the local government is located in an area for which the water management district (WMD) has prepared a regional water supply plan (RWSP), the Potable Water Sub-element must incorporate the water supply projects chosen by the local. government from those identified in the RWSP or proposed by the local government to meet projected demand within the area served by the local government. 10 In addition, the Potable Water Sub-element must include a 10-year water supply facilities work plan for building needed facilities. The first five years of the adopted work plan must be included in the Schedule. The work plan is to include public, private and regional water supply facilities needed to serve existing and new development. Also, the work plan is not limited to just new or expanded potable water facilities, but includes conservation and water reuse facilities. The work plan is to be updated within 18 months after the WMD revised its RWSP. Therefore, in order for the Schedule to be current, the work plan must be current. If the work plan includes multi jurisdictional projects, then the Schedule must include the local government's share of the costs of such facilities. See s.163.3177(6)(c), F.S. 3) Parks and recreation: The statute distinguishes between open space and outdoor recreation acreage and the actual facilities constructed on such land. See 163.3180(2)(b). (a} Before a local government can issue a CO, the acreage for needed park and recreation facilities must be dedicated or acquired by the local government. If developer fair share funds are to be used to acquire the acreage, then these funds must be committed before the local government can grant approval to begin construction. (b) The actual facilities needed to serve new development must be in place or under actual construction no later than one (1) year after the local government issues a CO. The Schedule should be constructed so that the local government is able to meet both these tests and avoid denying COs. The list of park and recreation facilities in the Schedule must be consistent with the supporting data and analysis in the Open Space and Outdoor Recreation Element. 4) Schools: Beginning December 1, 2008, the CIE must address public school facilities needed to ensure concurrency. (a) General: Unless exempt, local governments must adopt public school facilities elements on a phased schedule, but no later than December 1, 2008. The specific schedule may be found on the Department's website. The following items must be submitted as an amendment to the CIE at the same time as the submittal of the school element: public school LOS Standards per s.163.3180(13)(b)2., F.S.; and a financially feasible public school capital facilities program per s.163.3180(13)(d)1., F.S. (b) ConcurrencYTest: Adequate school facilities must be in place or under actual construction within three (3) years after issuance of final subdivision approval or site plan approval. See s.163.3180(l3}(e), F.S. (c) Supporting Data and Analysis and Goals, Objectives and Policies: The supporting data and analysis and the goals, objectives and policies in the public school facilities element (see ss.163.3177(12)(c) and (i), F.S., and Rule 9J-5.025, F.A.C.) must address correction of existing deficiencies and ensure adequate school capacity for the five-year and long-range planning timeframes and include options for proportionate-share mitigation of impacts on public school facilities. (d) Fundin In addition to the traditional state and local sources of funding, school facilities can be funded by developer contributions through a proportionate share mitigation program, if the developer executes a legally binding commitment to provide such proportionate share mitigation. (e) List of School Projects: Since the Schedule must address facilities for which concurrency standards have been adopted, the Schedule must include the projects in the School District's 5-year Work Plan. This can be done through incorporation by reference. When incorporated by reference, the local government must supply a copy of the Work Plan to the Department, consistent with Rule 9J-5.005(2)(8), F.A.C. Funds collected under the proportionate share program must be directed to school facilities included in the School District's 5-year District Work Plan. See s.163.3180(l3)(e)3., F.S. (f) Long-Range School Planning: A local government may adopt along- range (up to 10 years) school concurrency management system within a specifically designated area or areas where significant backlogs exist. The 10-year schedule must be adopted and include projects to correct existing deficiencies and address backlogged schools. See s.163.3180(9)(a), F.S. A local government may adopt a l5-year school concurrency management system with the concurrence of the Department as provided for in s.163.3180(9)(b), F.S. In this case, the schedule would be for 15 years. (g) Proportionate Share: S.163.3180(l3)(e), F.S., contains a proportionate share provision that applies to public school facilities: "Any proportionate- sharemitigation must be directed by the school board toward a school capacity improvement identified in a financially feasible 5-year district work plan and which satisfies the demands created by that development in accordance with a binding developer's agreement." Since the 12 proportionate-share mitigation must be in a financially feasible 5-year district work plan, it must also be in the Capital Improvements Element per s.163.3180(13){d)1., F.S. 5) Transportation facilities (including mass transit): (a) concurrency Test: Transportation facilities needed to serve new development must be in place or under actual construction within three (3) years after the local government issues a building permit. See s.163.3180(2)(c), F.S. (b) List of Projects: The Schedule must include projects on which the local government has relied or intends to rely for concurrency purposes. The Schedule need not include costs related to project planning and design since this phase of a project does not add roadway capacity and cannot be used to satisfy concurrency. Right-of--way acquisition projects can be included in the Schedule as one component of the total cost of a project. If aright-of--way acquisition project is included in the Schedule, the Schedule must also include the construction phases of the project. (1) Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPOZProjects: The Schedule must include transportation improvements included in the first five years of the applicable MPO's Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) adopted pursuant to s.339.175(7), F.S., to the extent that such improvements are relied upon to ensure concurrency and financial feasibility. See s.163.3177(3)(a)6., F.S., and s.339.155, F.S. The Schedule must also be coordinated with the applicable MPO's long-range transportation plan adopted pursuant to s.339.175(6), F.S. See s.163.3177(3)(a)6., F.S. (2) Transportation Concurrence Management Area (TCEA and Multimodal Transportation District (MMTD) Projects: The Schedule must include mobility projects within TCEAs [see s.163.3180(5)(e), F.S.] and MMTDs [see s.163.3180(15), F.S.],. consistent with the provisions of the comprehensive plan and the purpose of the exception area, even though development within these areas is exempt from concurrency. The Schedule must include the community design feature projects intended to provide an adequate level of mobility within amulti-modal district. The 13 Schedule must be financially feasible over the timeframe of the district. Funding sources must be currently available or reasonably expected to be available over the planning period. See s.163.3180(15)(c), F.S., and Rule 9J-5.016(4)(a)4., F.A.C. (3) Long-Term Concurrenc~gement Area Projects: If the local government has adopted along-term concurrency management system pursuant to s.163.3180(9)(a), F.S., then, pursuant to s.163.3177(3)(d), F.S., the Schedule must address either a 10- or 15-year period [see s.163.3180(9)(b), F.S.]. The Schedule must include projects to correct existing deficiencies on a priority basis. Projects in the first five years of the long range (10- or 15-year) schedule should also appear in the five-year Schedule. Because the definition of financial feasibility specifies that the first three years of funding must be committed and years four and five may be planned revenue sources, it follows that the outer years (beyond the third year) of the long-term concurrency management system may include planned revenue sources. For the ordinary five-year Schedule, projects scheduled in years 4 and 5 would advance by at least one year towards the committed funding category and the annual CIE update amendment would add a new fifth year. In the case of. a 10- or I S-year schedule, projects in the outer years would also advance by at least a year when the annual CIE update amendment is adopted, but new years would not be added at the end of the long-term schedule. (4) Strategic Intermodal S sy tem (SISLjects: The local govemment must adopt LOS Standards for SIS facilities that are consistent with the FDOT standards. See s.163.3180(10), F.S. Projects needed to maintain the Standard must be included in the Schedule. MPOs are required to update their TIP every summer (July 1) and to include all regional/county projects in the new five- yearwork plan. (c) Proportionate-Share: The last sentence of the definition of "financial feasibility" [see s.163.3164(32), F.S.] notes that, "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." The reference to proportionate-share in this section applies only to transportation concurrency. As detailed in 163.3180(16)(b)1., "A 14 developer may choose to satisfy all transportation concurrency requirements by contributing or paying proportionate fair-share mitigation if transportation facilities or facility segments identified as mitigation for traffic impacts are specifically identified for funding in the 5-year schedule of capital improvements in the capital improvements element of the local plan or the long-term concurrency management system or if such contributions or payments to such facilities or segments are reflected in the 5-year schedule of capital improvements in the next regularly scheduled update of the capital improvements element." (emphasis added) In short, by using the proportionate-share process, transportation concurrency can be met if a project pays its fair-share for transportation projects that are identified as mitigation and that have funding in the Schedule or the long-term concurrency management system, or if the fair- share contribution is included in the Schedule in the next regularly planned update of the CIE. A developer will need the proportionate fair-share option if the proposed development has been denied a concurrency certificate. Proportionate fair-share funds collected in such an instance maybe used only to fund improvements to deficient roadways (that is, roads or segments that are operating below the adopted LOS Standard). If the Schedule proposes to use proportionate share contributions to fund a transportation facility, the local government does not need to demonstrate that the proportionate share contribution will, in fact, immediately result in an improvement that will maintain the LOS Standard for that roadway. Note that a local government's proportionate share process must be consistent with ss.163.3180(12) and (16), F.S., which list specific criteria that must be met. Typically, the roadways impacted by a proposed development are identified first and then the developer's proportionate share for each identified roadway is computed. Proportionate share funds must be applied to a roadway(s) in the Schedule or added to the Schedule at the next update. If several roadway segments are impacted and if sufficient funding is not available to construct all the required improvements, the local government and developer may enter into an agreement to construct one or more of the needed improvements. See s.163.3180(16)(f), F.S. -ln the event the agreed upon improvements} is not in the current Schedule, then the improvement(s) should be added to the Schedule at the next annual update. If the local government projects that sufficient funds will be available within 10 years to improve the deficient roadway(s) impacted by a proposed development, the roadway(s) should be added to years 4 or 15 5 of the Schedule at the next annual update; alternatively, a policy could be added to the CIE clarifying that the deficiency will be corrected within a specified timeframe or in a long-term schedule and the policy should be supported by adequate data and analysis. Proportionate-share funds will probably not be sufficient to fund the entire project. In that case, the Schedule must also include the local government costs used to fund the remaining portion of the cost of the entire project. See x.163.3180(12), F.S. The projection of future revenues required by Rule 9J-5.016(2)(f)4., F.A.C., must demonstrate that sufficient revenues will be available to fund these projects. Additionally, local governments should track projects for which they have collected proportionate share contributions, but are not yet fully funded in the Schedule. The data and analysis supporting the Schedule should include a separate table identifying the transportation facilities for which proportionate share contributions have been collected. This table should identify the name of the facility, segment (from - to; total segment, not individual links), source of revenues (name of project/developer), amount of funds collected and date of collection. The table should reference, perhaps using a footnote, the policy(s) authorizing the local government to collect proportionate share funds. Here is an example of such a table: PROJECT NAME SOURCE FUND TOTAL DATE OF CONTRIBUTION SR 99: CR 135 to Omega _ Davis Rd; pave International and reconstruct to Builders-Prop Streets $7,853,955 6/15/2008 6 lanes (1) Share _ Notes: (1 See CIE Polic 6.5.3 The annual update of the CIE should demonstrate that proportionate share projects are being advanced over time into and within the Schedule. Once a proportionate share project is constructed, both the Schedule and the proportionate share table should be updated by deleting the appropriate entries. The CIE must include strategies to address deficient roadway facilities. Funding a transportation improvement through the proportionate fair-share process does not relieve the local government from addressing any LOS deficiencies on any remaining links identified as deficient. The local government's strategies to address any such deficiencies must be incorporated in the comprehensive plan. These strategies may include adding projects to the Five-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements or 16 longer term solutions such as long term concurrency management systems, transportation concurrency exception areas, multimodal transportation districts, transportation concurrency management areas, strategies in the CIE to be implemented over the planning timeframe, or other innovative solutions. Updates to the CIE which reflect proportionate fair-share contributions may not be found not incompliance based on x.163.3177(3), F.S., (which is the requirement for the CIE) and s.163.3164(32), F.S., (which is the definition of financial feasibility) if additional contributions, payments or funding sources are reasonably anticipated during a period not to exceed 10 years to fully mitigate impacts on the transportation facilities. See s.163.3i80(16)(b), F.S. Thus, the annual update to the CIE should demonstrate that the impacted transportation facility will meet the LOS Standard within 10 years through funding sources thal are reasonably anticipated. For additional details regarding proportionate share, please see the Model Ordinance for Proportionate Fair-Share Mitigation of Development Impacts on Transportation Corridors, February 14, 2006, prepared by the Center for Urban Transportation Research under contract to the Florida Department of Transportation. This report may be found at http://www.dca.state.fl.us/fdcp/dcp/transportation/model-ordinance.pdf (d) De Minimis Report Requirement: If local governments opt to allow exceptions for de minimis impacts, such local governments must comply with the reporting requirements described below. Section 163.3180(6), F.S., recognizes that certain types of development have a de minimis impact on level of service. A de minimis impact is an impact that affects no more than 1 % of the maximum service volume at the adopted LOS Standard. Development which causes only a de minimis impact is not subject to traffic concurrency. However, total traffic volume should not exceed 110% of the maximum service volume at the adopted LOS Standard. Local governments must maintain records to ensure that the 110% criterion is not exceeded. Local governments need not maintain a record of de minimis impacts on roadways that are operating below 100% of the maximum service volume. Exceptions to concurrency for de minimis impacts are allowed only when a roadway is operating between 1.00% and 110% of the maximum service volume. When aroadway - reaches l 10%, a local government must stop granting de minimis concurrency exceptions. A summary of these records must be submitted with the annual update of the CIE. Note that the impact of a single family home on an existing lot of record will always constitute a de minimis 17 impact regardless of the level of deficiency of the affected roadway even if the l 10% threshold is exceeded. The annual update of the CIE must demonstrate that the 110% criterion has not been exceeded or, if it has been exceeded, that the impacted roadway is scheduled for improvement in the Schedule. No de minimis exceptions maybe granted on roadways where the 110% criterion is exceeded until such time as the volume of the roadway is reduced below 110%. Rule 9J-11.011(5)0, F.A.C., requires that, after December 1, 2007, adopted plan amendment packages that contain a future land use map amendment must include a statement indicating the date that the annual capital improvement element update was adopted and submitted along with the summary of de minimis impact records. Rule 9J-11.011(8)(b), F.A.C., specifies that if an adopted amendment is the annual CIE update amendment or is an amendment to eliminate, defer, or delay the construction for any facility listed in the Schedule, then pursuant to Section 163.3177(3)(b), F.S., the local government must submit a copy of the executed ordinance, the amendment in strike thru and underline format, and a summary of the de minimis impact records pursuant to Section 163.3180(6), F.S. 6) Urban Service Boundary: If a local government has designated an urban service boundary pursuant to s.163.3177(14), F.S., then it must demonstrate that the area within the boundary is served or is planned to be served with adequate public facilities and services by adopting a 10-year facilities plan in the CIE. This 10-year plan must be financially feasible and updated on an annual basis along with the rest of the element. E. Capital Planning in the CIE Beyond the Five-Year Schedule Local governments will occasionally receive applications for future land use map amendments for proposed developments which, due to their size or intensity, are planned to be built out over an extended period. For example, a local government may intend to approve a large map amendment for a planned development that will be developed in phases over twelve years. This development will have infrastructure impacts over this entire build-out, some of which will occur outside the five years covered by the adopted Schedule. In such an instance, the local government will need to explain in the CIE how the infrastructure impacts for all twelve years will be addressed, including the seven years that are beyond the Schedule. 18 Additionally, a local government may come to the conclusion that long-term infrastructure deficiencies will occur based on development under the currently-adopted future land use map without any further amendments. Just as when a particular map amendment is projected to cause long-term deficiencies,. the local government will have to address these projected deficiencies in the CIE. Planning for these long-term needs differs from the adoption of the five-year Schedule in several manners. Perhaps most importantly, the definition of "financial feasibility" in Section 163.3164(32}, Florida Statutes, applies only to the Schedule and not to long-term planning in the CIE. The long-term planning strategies in the CIE need not be accompanied by a demonstration that funding for projected needs is currently available or is available from planned funding sources, as is necessary for the Schedule. Rather, these strategies should be embodied in policies that, as with others in the comprehensive plan, spell out "the way in which programs and activities are conducted to achieve an identified goal." Rule 9J-5.003(90), F.A.C. As their goal is to correct projected deficiencies, the policies should set forth the programs the local government intends to pursue to address these needs. For instance, the local government may plan for mass and multi-modal transit as part of its strategy to address transportation facility deficiencies. A local government may also plan for new funding sources to expand capital facilities, or may pursue conservation measures to lessen the demand on facilities such as water and sewer. Capital improvements that are needed beyond the next five years should also be reflected in the corresponding element from the comprehensive plan. The capital improvements element must demonstrate the local government's ability to provide or require provision of the needed improvements identified in the other elements of the plan. The future infrastructure maps should also be amended to reflect all capital improvements for both the short and tong range. V. FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY T'he Schedule must be demonstrated to be financial feasible. The statute allows a local government to use any professionally acceptable method to demonstrate that its Schedule is financially feasible. See s.163.3177(2), F.S. In general terms, the Schedule is financially feasible if committed revenues are projected to be sufficient to pay for the projects included in the first three years of the Schedule, and planned revenues are sufficient to pay for projects in years 4 and 5. A. Supporting data and analysis: The annual update of the CIE must include an update of the data and analysis, as required by Rule 9J-5.016(1) and (2), F.A.C. This supporting information is used to demonstrate that the Schedule is financially feasible. 19 1) As explained in Rule 9J-5.016(1)(a), F.A.C., the CIE is based on the public facility needs identified in the other elements of the comprehensive plan. As part of the CIE annual update, other elements of the plan may need updating to provide support for and justification of new projects included in (or deleted from) the revised CIE and to maintain consistency of the elements of the plan, as required by s.163.3177(2), F.S. 2) The forecast of expenditures included in the supporting data and analysis should include the cost of the capital projects listed in the Schedule. See Rule 9J- 5.016(2)(f), F.A.C. Also, the update should include an analysis of the costs of needed capital improvements and an explanation of the basis of the cost estimates. See Rule 9J- 5.016(2)(c), F.A.C. 3) The data and analysis should address the sources of revenue that will be used to fund the projects included in the Schedule: (a) An inventory of existin revenue sources. See Rule 9J-5.016(1)(c), F.A.C. (b) A forecast of revenues for the next five years. For roadway and schools, the analysis must include a forecast of revenues from proportionate share contributions from developers. See Rule 9J- 5.016(2)(f), F.A.C. A projection of impact fee revenue should be based on consideration of: a) past trends in impact fee revenues b) reasonable estimates of future building permit activities c) estimates of entitlements that have been approved, but not yet permitted, and Note: The Schedule may include new (not currently existing) revenue sources; in which case these revenue sources would not be included in the Rule 9J-5.016(1)(c), F.A.C., inventory, but any new revenue sources would be included in Rule 9J-5.016(2)(f), F.A.C., forecast of revenues. B. Demonstration of Financial Feasibility: For a Schedule to be financially feasible it must meet the definition of financial feasibility [see x.163.3164(32), F.S.]: 20 1) The assessment required by Rule 9J-5.016(2)(f), F.A.C., must demonstrate that sufficient funds are currently available or will be available from committed sources to fund all the identified capital improvements during the first three years of the Schedule. The projected expenditures (see Rule 9J-5.016(2)(f)1., F.A.C.) should include the costs of the capital improvements in the Schedule. If, after subtraction of all the other expenses of the local government, projected revenues exceed projected expenditures, then sufficient funds are available. 2) Sufficient funds must also be available to fund the projects scheduled for construction in years 4 and 5 of the Schedule. However, such funds may include lp armed (reasonably estimated to be available from an anticipated revenue source) as well as committed sources of funds. If the Schedule includes planned revenue sources that require referenda or other action to secure the revenue source, the plan must identify alternative revenue sources that will be used to fund the project (or otherwise amend the plan) in the event the referenda are not passed or other actions to secure the planned revenue source do not succeed. See s.163.3177(3)(a}5., F.S. The considerations discussed above also apply if the Schedule is fora 20- or 15- yearperiod. 3) For capital improvements that will be funded by a developer, financial feasibility shall be demonstrated by being guaranteed in an enforceable development agreement or interlocal agreement pursuant to s. l 63.3177(10)(h), F.S., or other enforceable development agreemen/. See s.163.3177(3}(a)5., F.S. VI. COMPLIANCE CONSIDERATIONS The Department of Community Affairs will evaluate the updated CIE and determine if it addresses the requirements of the law pertaining to completeness of the Schedule, the adequacy of the supporting data and analysis, and whether or not the Schedule is financially feasible. Some possible issues that may warrant compliance discussions by the Department are: 1. The Financial Feasibility of the Schedule. Schedules not demonstrated to be financially feasible would warrant compliance discussions. To be financially . feasible, it has to be demonstrated through relevant and professionally accepted data and analysis that there are sufficient funds currently or will be available from committed sources to pay for the improvements identified during the first three years of the schedule. That is, the projections of revenues and expenditures have to show that there are sufficient funds to pay for the improvements. 21 2. Use of Planned Sources: Use of planned sources for the outer years to demonstrate financial feasibility that require other actions in order to secure the money, without identifying the alternative sources incase the actions do not materialize would warrant compliance discussions. 3. Funding by Developers: Funding during years 1, 2 or 3 by developers without an accompanying enforceable developer agreement will warrant compliance discussions. 4. Not Schedulin for Improvements the Projects Needed to Maintain Adopted LOS Standards: The primary purpose of the CIE update and the Schedule is to stay abreast of the facility needs of the community and to ensure that the deficiencies as well as the improvements identified in the other elements of the comprehensive plan as necessary to support the growth of the community are programmed and the deficiencies corrected accordingly over time. A compliance discussion is warranted if the annual updates and long term planning strategies do not reflect these needs. 5. Lack of Commitment to Fund the Needed Capital Improvements: If the updates do not demonstrate the local government's commitment to regularly update the plan and schedule the necessary improvements to stay abreast of needed improvements to support the growth of the community, that would warrant a compliance discussion. For example, if a project was slated for year 5 of the Schedule, and that particular project does not progress during successive annual updates, which is an indication of the lack of commitment to update the plan that would warrant compliance discussion. 22 Attachment 1 SB 360 CIE-Related Implementation Dates A. After 7/1/2005 (the effective date of SB 360), the following provisions are effective: 1. The annual CIE update is adopted under an expedited process with a single public adoption hearing and compliance review by DCA. Section 163.3177(3)(b)2., F.S. 2. New definition of financial feasibility (will not be able to use planned revenue sources for first three years of the Schedule). Section 163.3164(32), F.S. 3. The Schedule must include the MPO's TIP to the extent that such improvements are relied upon to ensure concurrency and financial feasibility. Section 163.3177(3)(a)6., F.S. 4. A summary of de minimis records must be submitted with the annual CIE update amendment. Section 163.3180(6), F.S. 5. A plan amendment is required to change the scheduled date of construction of a project (previously this change could be done by adopting a local ordinance). Section 163.3177(3)(b)1., F.S. 6. If a planned revenue source is used, plan must include existing revenue sources that will be used if the referendum or other action does not secure the planned source (previously this was only encouraged in the rule). Section 163.3177(3)(a)5., F.S. B. On 12/1/2006, the annual update of the CIE must address the following provision: 1. The Schedule must reflect proportionate fair-share projects for transportation. Section 163.3180(16)(b)1., F.S. C. On 12/1/2007, the following provisions of SB 360 become effective: 1. The Schedule must incorporate water supply projects 18 months after the WMD updates the RWSP. Section 163.3177(6)(c), F.S. 2. Failure to adopt annual update results in a prohibition on adopting future ]and use amendment. Section 163.3177(3)(b)1., F.S. 3. Failure to adopt may result in sanction by the Administration Commission. Section 163.3177(3)(c), F.S. D. On 12/1/2008, the following provisions are effective: ]. The CIE must include school projects consistent with the school district's work plan, a public school facilities LOS Standard, identify the concurrency service areas, and must identify proportionate fair-share projects for schools. Section 163.3180(13)(d)1., F.S. 23 Attachment 2 An Example of a Five-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements Project Project FY FY FY FY FY Total Consistency with Number Name 2007-08 2008-09 2009- 2010- 2011- Project Other Plan 10 2011 2012 Cost Elements Transportation 1 12` St. $100,000 $300,000 $500,000 See from ls` (GT)t (GT) Transportation Ave. to $100,000 Policy 4.3.2 Su' (O) Ave.; add two lanes (1/2 mile) 2 CR 790 $50,000 $50,000 $100,000 See at Oak (I) (I) Transportation Street, Policy 4.5.4 add turn lanes Transportation $200,000 ~ $350,000 $50,000 $600,000 Total Sewer __ I Replace $25,000 $50,000 See 2"d (RB) ]nfrastructure Avenue $25,000 Element, Table 4 Pump (A) Station Sewer Tota! $50,000 _____ $50,000 ____._ TOTAL ALL $250,000 $350,000 $50,000 $650,000 CATEGORIES Notes for Revenue Sources: (A) Special (EB) Environmental (O) One Cent Local (R&R) Renewal and Assessments Lands Bond Option Sales Tax Replacement Fund (C) Capacity (G) Grants (PM) Private Mitigation (T) Transportation Charges (GT) Gas Tax Funds (TT) Tourist Tax (D) Disposal User (I) Impact Fees (R) Road and Bridge (U) Stormwater Fees Improvement Fund Utility Charges Revenue (LG) Ad Valorem Taxes (RB) Revenue Bond 24 Five-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements Summary by Functional Category' Category FY 2007- 2008 FY 2008- 2009 FY 2009- 2010 FY 2010- 2011 FY 2011- 2012 Total (1) sanitary sewer $50,000 $50,000 (2) solid waste ~ (3) drainage 4) otable water _ (5) parks and recreation __ (6) trans ortation $200,000 $350,000 $50,000 $600,000 TOTAL $250,000 $350,000 $50,000 $650,000 Five-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements Summary by Revenue Source' Source FY 2007- 2008 FY 2008- 2009 FY 2009- 2010 FY 2010- 2011 FY 2011- ~ 2012 ~ Total (I) Impact Fees $50,000 $50,000 $100,000 (O) One Cent Local Option Sales Tax $ l 00,000 ___ $100,000 (A) Special Assessments $25,000 $25,000 (GT) Gas Tax $100,000 $300,000 $400,000 _ (RB) Revenue Bond $25,000 _ $25,000 ETC. TOTAL $250,000 $350,000 $50,000 $650,000 ~ In addition to this summary table, the annual update must include an assessment of the local government's ability to finance the capital improvements included in the Schedule. This assessment must include a forecast of revenues and expenditures for five years; a projection of debt service obligations for currently outstanding bond issues; projections of ad valorem tax base assessment ratio and millage rate; projections of other tax bases and other revenue sources used to fund capital projects listed in the Schedule; a projection of operating cost considerations; and a projection of debt capacity. See Rule 9J-5.06(2)(f), F.A.C., and Section V of this Guide. 25 Attachment 3 Statutory and Rule Citations Statutory citations: 163.3164(32): definition of "financial feasibility" 163.3177(2): requires the comprehensive plan to be "financially feasible" 163.3177(3): specifies content requirements for the Capital Improvements Element 163.3177(3)(a)5.: requirement for Schedule; developer funding; planned revenue sources requiring referenda or other actions 163.3177(3)(a}6.: coordination of Schedule with MPO plans 163.3177(3)(b)1.: annual update process and prohibition of Future Land Use Map amendment 163.3177(3)(b)2.: single public hearing 163.3177(3)(c}: sanctions by the Administration Commission 163.3177(3)(d): capital improvements schedule for long-term concurrency management system 163.3177(6)(c}: requires water supply facilities work plan for certain local governments 163.3177(10)(h}: general concunrency requirement 163.3177(12)(c): requires public school facility element to include goals, objective and policies 163.3177(12)(g)4.: requires infrastructure to support public schools 163.3177(14): requires infrastructure to be available within designated urban service areas 163.3180: addresses concurrency requirements for infrastructure. 163.3180(1)(a): list of required concurrency facilities 163.3180(2)(a}: concurrency requirement of sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, adequate water supply and potable water facilities 163.3180(2)(b): concurrency test for parks and recreation facilities 163.3180(2)(c): concurrency test for transportation facilities 163.3180(5)(e): TCEAs 163.3180(6): de minimis reporting requirement 163.3180(9)(a): long-term transportation and school concurrency management systems l 63.3180(9)(b): long-range schedule of capital improvements for backlogged transportation and school facilities 163.3180(10): Strategic Intermodal System and Intrastate Highway System 163.3180(12): proportionate-share contribution within multiuse DRIB 163.3180(13)(b)2: public school facility concurrency requirement 163.3180(13)(c): public school facility service areas 163.3180(13)(d)1.: CIE amendment required when adopting school concurrency 26 163.3180(13)(e}: concurrency test for schools 163.3180(15}: multi-modal districts 163.3180(15)(c): capital improvement to promote community design within multi- modal districts 163.3180(16): proportionate fair-share mitigation for roadways 163.3180(16)(b)1.: adopt fair-share ordinance by December 1, 2006 163.3184(11): sanctions by Administration Commission 163.3187(l)(f): exemption from twice per year limitation of adoption of amendments 163.3202(2)(g): concurrency requirement 339.175(6): MPO's long-range transportation plan 339.175(7): MPO's TIP 339.155: FDOT transportation planning 339.2819: requires projects to be funded by the Transportation Regional Incentives Program to be included in the Five-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements. Rule Citations: 9J-5.003(12): definition of capita) improvement 9J-5.003(29): definition of currently available revenue sources 9J-5.005(2)(g}: incorporation by reference 9J5.0055: requirements for the Concurrency Management System 9J5.0055(3)(a): definition of "available when needed" for concurrency facilities 9J-5.016: requirements for the CIE 9J-5.016(1)(a): CIE is based on needs identified in other elements of the plan 9J-5.016(1)(c): identification of existing funding sources 9J-5.016(2)(c): analysis of the cost of capital improvements 9J-5.016(2)(f)1.: projected expenditures 9J-5.016(2)(f)4.: projection of revenue from other revenue sources 9J-5.016(3)(b)3.: use of CIE to address capital improvement needs 9J-5.016(4)(a): requirements for capital improvements implementation 9J-5.016(4)(a)1.: general components of the Schedule 9J-5.016(4)(a)4.: multi-modal districts 9J-5.016(5): requirements for Five-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements 27 Attachment 4 CIE Step by Step Template 28 ~r~~-~tr~~icsr~ Asststr~r~~ ~~~ ~'crr 1C~C ~~r°~:~~~"arrat ~e5:liv+e~;abl~es ~~ Walker Banning Administrator, State Planning Initiatives Florida Department of Community Affairs Division of Community Planning This document contains suggestions to assist those contrnun?ties that have receivc„ct direct grant funding with thrs development pf contracted submissipn5 tp the f)epartment of Comrnunily Affairs. 'this material dpeS not constitute a legar opinion, does not provide an official statement of Qeparlment of Community Affairs postian, and should not tae relied upon for those purposes. ~+~r°~t~ ,~~~:~~.+~~ ua~~ fe~ir ~~,~. I[~i~°r~~ +~ra:r~zt ~1~v~~^3~1+~ Preparing the Five-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements Walker Banning, Administrator, State Planning Initiatives Florida Department of Community Affairs Background The Five-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements (Schedule) is one component of the Capital Improvements Element in the local comprehensive plan. (For more information on the other required components of the element, please see the CIE Guidelines). The Schedule is updated every year through an amendment to the comprehensive plan. The amendment must be adopted and transmitted to the Department of Community Affairs for review by December 1 of every year. The Schedule includes all capital improvements scheduled for construction within the community during the next five years. Capital improvements are purchased or constructed physical assets which are large in scale and high in cost. Generally the cost is non-recurring and may require multi-year financing. The capital improvements that are required to be included in the Schedule are related to the facilities for which a Level of Service Standard has been adopted. These must include the facilities for which concurrency is required- (A community may also adopt a level of serve standard for its other facilities and services). The facilities for which concurrency must be maintained are: (1) Sanitary sewer (2) Solid waste (3) Drainage (4) Potable water (5) Parks and recreation (6) Schools (beginning December 1, 2008) (7) Transportation facilities, including mass transit. The Level of Service Standards must be included in the Capital Improvement Element. A priority for your capital program will be ensuring that your facilities currently meet these adopted standards and that they will continue to do so in the future as growth occurs or other conditions change. A projection of future population is necessary, along with analysis that predicts where this population will be located. You will need to compare the actual level of service at which these facilities are operating against the adopted standard. These data should be available through other parts of your local government or from state agencies, such as FDOT. If an outsjde entity provides some of these services (potable water, for example), the service provider should be able to provide current and projected level of service. As you compare current and future level of service against the standard, take note of areas where deficiencies or shortfalls are occurring or may occur in the future. This document contains suggestions to assist those communities that have received direct grant funding with the development of contracted submissions to the Department of Community Affairs. This material does not constitute a legal opinion, does not provide an official statement of Department of Community Affairs position, and should not be relied upon for those purposes. 2 ~'r~~+~sr~ti~sn ~+,ssi~~~rnr,~ ~asiad~ f'~ar ~±~~- lair~a~t +~r~r~t 1C~+~1ier+~r~lblles Providing funding for capital projects that will enable you to continue to meet the established level of service will need to be a priority as you thoughtfully allocate anticipated revenues against future needs. The Schedule cannot be prepared until the local government has first identified the capital improvements that should be constructed to meet current and future needs. To identify these facilities, planners first prepare a public facilities capacity analysis to identify those facilities where demand exceeds capacity and those facilities where capacity exceeds demand. This analysis should address the current year and all future years through the long-range planning timeframe (at least 10 years). The analysis should consider the demand created by development that has been approved by the local government even if that development has not yet been constructed. If the analysis identifies facilities that do not have enough capacity to meet existing or projected demand, projects that will increase capacity should be identified (alternatively, steps might be taken to reduce demand). Projects should be constructed in time to avoid issues with insufficient capacity. The plan amendment support document submitted with the annual update amendment should demonstrate that proposed capital improvements will maintain the adopted Level of Service Standards. For those facilities where the backlog of needed projects is greater than the local government's ability to fund all the improvements in the five year schedule, include a long-term system or long-term planning strategies in the element that will address these deficiencies. The location of development within the community should be examined to be sure that projects are targeted to the appropriate locations. Completing this analysis will result in knowing what facilities are needed, when they are needed, and where they are needed. The only other information that is needed to complete the Schedule is the estimated cost of each project and the source(s) of funds that will be used to finance the construction of each project. Once this information is prepared, the following steps may be applied: Step 1 -List Your Facility Needs That Are Identified in the Comprehensive Plan Step 2 -List Your Facility Needs That Are Not Identified in the Comprehensive Plan Step 3 -Identify Revenue Sources Step 4 -Use of Fund Account System (if applicable) Step 5 -Forecast Your Future Revenues Step 6 -Expenditure Projections for Currently Scheduled Capital Improvements Step 7 -Project Debt Service Funding Requirements for Current Capital Projects Step 8 -Cost of New Capital Improvements Step 9 -Project Your Increase in Operating Costs Step 10 - Conduct a Fiscal Assessment Step 11 -Deal with Revenue Shortfalls Step 12 -Construct the Schedule of Capital Improvements This document contains suggestions to assist those communities that haue received direct grant funding v~ith the developfnent of contracted submissions to the Department of Community Affairs. Thds material does not constitute a legal opinion, does not provide an official statement of Department of Community Affairs position, and should not be relied upon (or those purposes. 3 "a~~a.~ ~x~~ar'te s~e~~a~~ ~.se+~ ~If- ~ ~na-~~t ~re~tt 3cl~s~r~bl~ Step 1 -List Your Facility Needs That Are Identified in the Comprehensive Plan The Schedule must include the facility needs identified in the other elements of the comprehensive plan. Planners need to review each element of the plan and make a list of all the facilities that are identified as needed to be constructed during the next five years. Very often, these facilities may be identified in the comprehensive plan's data and analysis or in its goals, objectives and policies section. Make a note of the section of the plan where the facility is identified as needed (page number, objective or policy number). Also make a note about when the facility must be completed in order to maintain the adopted Level of Service. Organize this information into a table. Include in the table the estimated cost of each capital improvement, and the construction start and finish dates. Example of the product prepared as a result of completing Step 1: Table 1: Capital Improvement Needs Identified in the Comprehensive Plan Project Number LOS Facility T e Description Target Dates Estimated Cost Source 1 Transportation Widen 12 Begin: $500,000 Transportation Street 2007 Element, Finish: Table 4.6 2 008 _ 2 Transportation ._ Turn lanes _ Begin: $100,000 Transportation '. on CR 790 2{707 Element, Finish: Policy 3.2.1 2008 This document contains suggestions to assist those communities that have received direct grant funding with the development of contracted submissions to the Department of Community Affairs. This material does not constitute a legal opinion, does not provide an official statement of Department of Community Affairs position, and should not be relied upon for those purposes. 4 rs;~t-~ia~tra As~i~.~ar~+c u6~ fx~r i~t~A. &,+j'Air~ tpr~xr~ Ca~~rv~r~-~a1~s Step 2 -List Your Facility Needs That Are Not Identified in fhe Comprehensive Plan In preparing the list from Step 1, you are likely to notice that certain capital improvements which are needed are not mentioned in the comprehensive plan. Make a list of any missing improvements which are necessary (from a concurrency perspective) for the local government to have in place or under construction during the next five years. Include a short justification or reason why each improvement is necessary. Also make a list of the capital projects that the local government is currently funding (under construction or scheduled for construction). Make a note of whether these projects are consistent with the comprehensive plan {if they are not, the plan element should be revised). Organize this information into a table. Example of the product prepared as a result of completing Step 2: Table 2: Other Needed Capital Improvements Project ~ LOS ` Description Target Estimated Source Number Facility Type_ Dates Cost 1 Sanitary Pump Begin: ~ $50,000 Special study Sewer Station 2008 completed in Finish: July 2006 2008 This document contains suggestions to assist those communities that have received direct grant funding with the development of conUacted submissions to the Department of Community Affairs. This material does not constitute a legal opinion, does nol provide an official statement of Department of Community Affairs position, and should not be relied upon for those purposes. cJ "rtatr~a.~i+t~l~a .,~~x~a~~ ~~ +~. ti~°~ a~ 3a~liar~li~ll~ Step 3 -Identify Revenue Sources Make a list of all the sources of revenue that your local government has available for financing capital improvements. Revenue sources include any source that can be used to fund capital projects. This list may include such revenue sources as property (ad valorem) taxes, public utility or user charges, general obligation bonds, revenue bonds, grants, gas taxes, enterprise funds, tax increment financing, developer contributions and impact fees. Fvr each source indicate the amount actually collected during the past fiscal year. (Although they do not need to be listed, you will want to use the revenue level of several recent previous years in the course of projecting future revenues). Example of the product prepared as a result of completing Step 3: Table 3: Local Government Revenue Sources _........~...~......~ ............._.~...~...... REVENUE SOURCE DOR Code COLLECTIONS DURING FY t)5-06 Ad Valorem Taxes ~ 311000 $ Local Communications Services Tax ~~~~~_ $ Local Occu ational i,icense Taxes $ Local O lion Taxes 312100 A. General Local O lion Sales Surtaxes I _ _ Charter Coun Transit S stem Surtax $ Local Government Infrastructure Surtax $ .....Small Count~Tax ~ ..~.W_~-..__ ~.._r__..,._~,~n.~ School Ca itap I Outlay Surtax __ .__.._...~ ..... _.e.._.,~...,....~~__ _ _..~ _. ~... .........__............._..... __ _.._... $ _~,.~ _....._._ _ $ B. Local O lion Fuel Taxes 312400 Count Local O lion Fuel Tax 6 max. _ $ Count Local O lion Motor Fuel Tax (~ max. _.__..._ ~~ _ _ ~~ $ - Ninth Cent Fuel Tax 32300 _.....,,__~.. ~_._.__ $ ~_~..~............__..-...__..w..__ - ----. C. Discretiona Surtax on Documents $ State Revenue Shared with Local Governments A.'/~ Sales Tax Cities and Counties 335180 $ B. Munici al Revenue Sharin $ _v..~.~.._~...... C. Coun Revenue Sharin $ __ Im act Fees $ Stormwater Assessment $ ~..~._. Stormwater Utility Fee _ ..........................._ __ _ _ ~.~~.~ Public Service Tax . ......_.......__..._.._......._.__.._.........._...... .. .~..~~ _.~ ..~._..__w.......~..~..__.~...... _ $ ~.....,.............._..............___.._._....__................._.................... $ _ w. ..~..._.. __ ___...~_._... Franchise Fees $ Private Fundin A. Pro ortionate Share Contribution $ _ B. Other Developer Contribution . $ _~..._. C. Other s eci ~_ Grants s eci A. Federal speci . , _......,.m~...,.....~,.__~..~_ __ m _ ~ . 331390 ~ --._.. $...._........_.__~_._. B. State (specif ry 334100 ____ $ __ Other s eci _~ $ TOTAL $ Note: 'Name changed to Local Business Tax by Legislafure in 2006. This document contains suggestions to assist those communities that stave received direct grant funding with the development of contracted submissions to the Department of Community Affairs. This material does not constitute a legal opinion, does not provide an official statement of Department of Community Affairs position, and should not be relied upon for those purposes. 6 tPr>Ppairatt:iiear~ ,A~s~tx~~.rttc+~ ~tuid fcar C3~C.ic1 t~ir+c~ C~rargt I€~~iev~rabll+es Step 4 -Use of Fund Account System (if applicable) The accounting system employed by most local governments record financial transactions in individual accounts which are called "funds." Records for each fund provide a complete accounting of fund assets, liabilities, reserves, equities, revenues and expenditures. Prepare a table listing the fund accounts used by your local government. Take the revenue sources listed in Table 3 and place them in the appropriate account and add the current revenues from Table 3. Example of the product prepared as a result of completing Step 4: Table 4: Fund Accounts Funds and Revenue Sources DOR Code FY 05-06 (current budget) General Fund ~~ Appropriate revenue sources from Table 3 $ FUND TOTAL _ $ Ca ital Im rovement Fund ~ Appropriate revenue sources _from Table 3 ~ $ FUND TOTAL ~ $ Transportation Improvement Fund Appropriate revenue sources from Table 3 $ FUND TOTAL $ Enter rise Funds _ Sanitary Sewer _ . ____ _..._......._..._..._...__._. .. ...... __.v._...M.m __.._ .__ __._ ............... $ _._ _ _. Appropriate revenue sources _from Table 3 fUNDTOTAL -..._..._.._.._.._.._....... . ....--- ...............__............................._..........-----..........-- . $ --------.._._._~.. Solid Waste $ Appropriate revenue sources from Table 3 ~~~ $ FUND TOTAL _ $ Potable Water ~ $ Appropriate revenue sources from Table 3 __ _ FUND TOTAL $ Stormwater Draina e _ Appropriate revenue sources from Table 3 _ ~~~-~~~ - $ . FUND TOTAL $ TOTAL $ Note: All figures in millions. This document contains suggestions to assist those communities that leave received direct grant funding with the development of contracted submissions to the Department of Community Affairs. This material does not constitute a legal opinion, does not provide an official statement of Department of Community Affairs position, and should not be relied upon for those purposes. '~ '1ra~~ ~~~ €._t.~" "~ ~° if~~~. ~r ~rrx-t~ 1~tarN:a~ Step 5 -Forecast Your Future Revenues Take the fund accounts and associated revenue sources prepared in Step 4 and for each revenue source, project how much revenue you anticipate will be collected by that source for each of the next five years. For each forecast, write down the assumptions used in preparing the projection. It is likely that in some cases you will need to make estimates by looking at current levels and determining how local or economic trends will affect them- For example, the amount of revenues that will be collected through ad valorem taxes will depend on the assessed value of property within the community (tax base), the assessment ratio and the millage rate. Make a note of the assumptions regarding these three variables that are used when preparing the forecast of ad valorem revenues. In a similar fashion, keep good notes on the assumptions used to forecast each revenue source and the calculations used. The assumptions may change from year-to-year; for example, property values may be climbing one year and be relatively static the next. When updating the Schedule every year, it is important to know what assumptions were used to prepare the previous Schedule of Capital Improvements. As a result of completing this step, you will have a forecast of expected revenues, by revenue source, for each fund for each of the next five years and extensive notes regarding the assumptions used to prepare the forecast. Example of the product prepared as a result of completing Step 5: Table 5: Revenue Projections Affecting Capital Improvements FUND DOR FY 05-06 FY 06-0T FY 07-08 FY 08-09 FY 09-10 CODE pud tt e _ _ Same as Table 4 TOTAL $ $ $ $ $ Notes: (1) All figures in millions. (2) The forecast of ad valorem revenue is based on the following assumptions: Tax Base FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 FY 09-10 Taxable Value 5.456 6.002 6,602 7.262 7.988 ...._...._...o......~..:._...._...._.._. _..._... Notes: All figures in billions. Projection assumes 10 /o growth rate per year for in the taxable value of property. FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 ~ FY 08-09 FY 09-10 Ad Valorem Tax Yields 33.609 36.852 4(}.409 44.316 48.626 Notes: (1) All figures in billions. (2) Projection assumes a constant millage rate. This document contains suggestions to assist those communities that have received direct grant funding with the development of contracted submissions to the Department of Community Affairs. This material does not constitute a legal opinion, does not provide an official statement of Department of Community Affairs position, and should not be relied upon For those purposes. 8 E'rt par~tilorr .Assasta-r~~c ts~.n~d ~~a~ C>C l~i;w~~t ~r~nt I@+e1ii~~r~tbl+rv~ Step 6 -Expenditure Projections for Current/y Scheduled Capifat Improvements If your local government is currently financing some capital improvement projects, it is necessary to subtract the projected expenditures for these improvements from the total projected revenue in order to determine what fund has enough projected revenue to fund the new capital improvements listed in Tables 1 and 2. First determine the cost of the currently scheduled capital improvements (called Scheduled Capital Costs in Table 6}. Product prepared as a result of completing Step 6: Table 6: Expenditure Projections for Scheduled Capital Improvements FUND FY 05-06 FY 06-07 ~FY 07-08 FY OS-09 FY 09-10 (current bud et Same as Table 4 $ $ $ $ $ 70TAL $ $ $ $ $ Notes: (1) All figures in millions. Step 7 -Project Debt Service Funding Requirements for Current Capital Projects Project for the next five years the amount of revenue that will be used to meet your current debt payments for current bond issues or loans. These bonds probably relate to the capital projects currently being funded by the local government and which are included in the list of projects prepared during Step 6 or for past capital improvements that have already been completely constructed (and thus do not appear in Table 6). Example of the product prepared as a result of completing Step 7: Table 7: Loan and Bond Payments Source of Funds to Pay FY 05-06 FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY OS-09 FY 09- Total Debt Service t~°~"t 10 bud et Same as Table 4 $ $ ~~ $ . . $ $ $ TOTAL $ $ _. ~ ...~.. . . $ $ $ Note: All figures in millions. This document contains suggestions to assist those communities that have received direct grant funding with the development of contracted submissions to the Department of Community Affairs. This material does not constitute a legal opinion, does not provide an official statement of Department of Community Affairs position, and should not be relied upon for those purposes. 9 a-iF•~-~z = ~ ~t:~ ~~istw/ ~ ~ ~~> f~t~~_**~.~: c-.a~~ ti~:s~+r~ri~ Step 8 -Cost of New Capital Improvemenfs The direct costs of the needed capital improvements included in Tables 1 and 2 represent additional costs the local government must incur in order to maintain adopted Level of Service Standards under projected growth conditions. These costs can be brought forward and displayed in a summary table by facility type. Example of the product prepared as a result of completing Step 8: Table 8: Needed Capital Improvements Facility Type FY 05-06 (current bud et FY 06-07 FY o7-08 FY 08-09 FY 09-10 Sanitary Sewer $ $ $ $ $ Solid Waste $ $ $ $ $ Stormwater Management $ $ $ $ $ Potable Water $ ,, $ 1.5 1.0 1.9 _ Parks and Recreation $ $ 0.065 $ $_~ Schools $ $ $ $ $ Mass Transit Traffic Circuiation TOTAL $ $ _... $ __...... $ $ . _.~ .~..~ ~ ..................._... $ $ 1.565 $ $ _ ................. 1.0 $ ~ $ ........_......._.._......_.. . 1.9 I Notes: (1) Cost data derived from Tables 1 and 2. (2) All figures in millions. This document contains suggestions to assist those communities that have received direct grant funding with the development of contracted submissions to the Department of Community Affairs. This material does not constitute a legal opinion, does not provide an official statement of Department of Community Affairs position, and should not be relied upon for those purposes. 1 ~ Pr~satr~ti~ri r4,~si~r~~ >~axi~ fir i~~,~4 lt~irte~t~ C,~r~:ntt ~3+e~i~r~trablcs Step 9 - Project Your Increase in Operatin_g Costs The capital improvement projects needed by the local government (Tables 1 and 2) have not only direct construction costs, but will also increase the tota{ operating costs of the local government in order to maintain and operate these new facilities. Since these operation and maintenance costs are cumulative over time, as each new operating cost is incurred (following completion of the capital improvement) this operating cost must be carried forward and added to the costs incurred in successive years to assess the impact on total local government's operating costs. Prepare a projection of future operating costs based on the list of capital improvements prepared in Steps 1 and 2. Example of the product prepared as a result of completing Step 9: Table 9: Cumulative Operating Cost Increase Due to New Capital Improvements Facility Type FY 05-06 (current bud et ...y.., FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 FY 09-10 ,__._ Roadways $ __ ~ $ ~~ $ $ $ Sanitary Sewer $ $ $ $ $ Solid Waste $ ~ $ $ _ $ _ __ $ Draina e $ $ $ $ $ Potable Water $ $ $ 0.102 0.869 Recreation $ $ $ 0.003 0.006 Mass Transit $ $ $ $ $ Total $ $ $ $ $ Note: All figures in millions. This document contains suggestions to assist those communities that have received direct grant funding with the development of contracted submissions to the Department of Community Affairs. This material does not constitute a legal opinion, does not provide an official statement of Department of Community Affairs position, and should not be relied upon for those purposes. 11 Step 10 - Conducf a Fiscal Assessment In order to pay for new capital improvements, sufficient revenues must be available during each of the next five years included in the Schedule. To see if there will be sufficient revenues, it is necessary to first determine how much the local government will spend for all non-capital improvement expenses. These expenses would be the sum of general government expenses (salaries, etc., Table 9), expenditures from currently funded capital projects (Table 6) and debt service on existing capital projects (Table 7). This sum can be subtracted from the projected fund revenues shown in Table 5. Table 8 summarizes the results of this process. To prepare Table 8, take the forecasts of revenues prepared in Table 5 and subtract from each fund the amount that will be used for: (1) Non-capital improvement expenses (2) Cost of currently funded capital projects (from Table 6) (3) Debt service expenditures (from Table 7) (4) The cost of-the capital improvements (Table 8). (5) Increased operating costs (Table 9) and Before these subtractions can take place, a forecast of these non-capital improvement expenses (general local government operating expenses) will have to be prepared; this forecast is for the next five years, by year. The result of subtracting these expenses from total revenue for each revenue source is the balance of funds from each revenue source. This will show whether sufficient revenues are forecast to be collected from each revenue source to • Fund general government expenses, • Pay for current projects, • Repay outstanding debt, and • Fund the needed capital improvements. Thus, the balance for each revenue source indicates the difference between the projected revenues and expenditures. A negative balance indicates a revenue shortfall for that year. Table 10: Product prepared as a result of completing Step 10. An identification of any projected revenues shortfalls. This document contains suggestions to assist those communities that have received direct grant funding with the development of contracted submissions to the Department of Community Affairs. This material does not constitute a legal opinion, does not provide an official statement of Department of Community Affairs position, and should not be relied upon for those purposes. 12 F'"r~ts~r~tc>x°>, Assi~tat°~~~ tC~~.aii~~ f~~° IwsCA [fir^~+ct ~Gr~nt C')~li~~tr^~bl~s TABLE 10: Fiscal Assessment FUND FY 05-06 (current bud et FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 FY 09-10 General Fund Revenues $ $ $ $ $ -Non-Capital Expenses _._.-.._____~....~_._.._.. _.w...~...._ ............................. - Debt Payments $ _............................................._._. $ $ ....._._..........__._..__..._....... ___ $ $ ....__. _. _. $ ~ $ $ $ $ --Operating Cost Increase $ $ $ $ $ - Capital Improvements $ $ $ $ $ Balance ^_--~ +/-$ +/-$ +/-$ +/_$ +/-$ Ca ital Im rovements Fund Revenues $ $ $ $ $ -Non-Ca ital Ex enses $ $ $ $ $ -Debt Pa ments $ $ $ $ $ - Operatin~c Cost Increase - $ _ $ $ $ $ Ca itallm rovements - $ $ $ $ $ Balance +/-$ +/-$.._.......... +/-$ +/-$ +/-$ And so on for all funds used to finance capital _improvements. Note: All figures in millions. rievenues are from Table 4. Expenditures are the sum of Table 5 and all non- capital improvement related expenditures (general operating expenditures, etc.) Sfep 11 -Deal With Revenue Shortfalls If Table 10 reveals a negative balance during any year for any funding source, it is necessary to determine the cause and possible cure for the shortfall. Possible solutions include moving the scheduled capital improvement to another year, stretching the project over more years (phasing), collecting more funds from the revenue source used to fund the improvement, funding the capital improvement with revenue from additional available revenue sources, and securing new revenue sources. If new revenue sources are being considered, it is important to note that these new sources are considered to be "planned" revenue sources and can be used only to fund projects listed in the fourth and fifth years of the Schedule. Projects in years 1, 2 and 3 must be funded from existing revenue sources. Example of the product prepared as a result of completing Step 11: A revision to Table 10 where there are no negative balances. This document contains suggestions to assist those communities that have received direct grant funding wish the development of contracted submissions to the Department of Community Affairs. This material does not constitute a legal opinion, does not provide an official statement of Department of Community Affairs position, and should not be relied upon for those purposes. 13 r-~~:a~-'rt~r~ ~~~~~r~ tao~~ t'~ I~~ ~tr~: ~-~ I~te~*~~ka~ Step 12 -Construct the Schedule of Capita! Improvements As a result of Step 11 there is sufficient projected revenue to fund the capital improvements and the Schedule is financially feasible with existing revenue sources used to fund the projects in any year of the Schedule and planned sources used only to the extent necessary in years 4 and 5. Example of the product prepared as a result of completing Step 12: A Five-Year Schedule of Capital Improvement. Table 12: Five-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements FY 05-06 Total Project Number Project Name (current FY 06-07 FY 07-08 FY 08-09 FY 09-10 Project bud et _~ Cost TRANSPORTATION _ 1 12 Street _ $100,000 $300,000 $500,000 from 151 (A)t (C) Avenue to 5"' $100,000 (B) Avenue; add two lanes (1/2 mile _ 2 CR 790 at _ $50,000 (D) $50,000 $100,000 Oak Street, (D) add turn Panes .._.....__...._-.._... ._. _._..__.._...._..... _~.,_ _..~~~..._...m.-.~ ___m___. ~._ ._ .............._..__.._. Transportation Total ......._...._..........--- -_.__._e ~ _._ _._.. _$250,000 __ .. ~ $350,000 ___.. ~~ .$600,000 SEWER ~~ 1 Elevate 2" ~ ~~~~~~ ~~~ ~~~ - $25,000 $50,000 Avenue Pump (E) Station $25,000 F Sewer Total $50,000 $50,000 _._... TOTAL ALL $250,000 _ $350,000 $50,000 $650,000 CATEGORIES Note: The funding sources (A through F) and the funds shown in Tables 4 and 10. This document contains suggestions to assist those communities that have received direct grant funding with the development of contracted submissions to the Dep~ariment of Community Affairs. This material does not constitute a legal opinion, does not provide an official statement of Department of Community Affairs position, and should not be relied upon for those purposes. 14 Capital Improvements Element Training Workshop Sponsored by the Florida Department of Community Affairs and Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council August 29, 2007 .,., . _- .... -M.: 1. T ixmy:x &ry ~lorrcrl '~'7:xrrra~np~ Courrcir ~ Agenda ~. What is the CIE? 2. Florida Statutes 3. CIE Update Process 4. Next Steps s. Best Practices Manual What is the CIE? ^ Capital Improvements Element (CIE) is part of the Comprehensive Plan ^ The CIE identifies capital projects needed to maintain adopted Level of Service (LOSS standards ^ The CIE includes policies and projects to reduce existing LOS deficiencies What is the CIE? ^ CIE Identifies a schedule for construction of necessary improvements and expansions to accommodate new growth. ^ It includes estimates of the cost of public improvements ^ It demonstrates the ability to finance and construct those improvements What is the CIE? ^ The CIE coordinates infrastructure with the land use plans of a community ^ It outlines financial policies to guide the funding and construction of public improvements ^ It requires an adequate Concurrency Management System (LOS Standards) What is the difference between the 7 Annual Budget, Capital Improvements Program and CIE? ^ Annual Budget - Includes 1St Year Capital Projects but also annual O&M costs (salaries, insurance, maintenance etc) ^ Capital Improvements Pro ram (CIP) - Contains all capital projects that address Level of Service standards or goals of the Comprehensive Plan (road widening, water plant, lift station etc.) - Also non-LOS capital projects (government buildings, police vehicles etc.) - CIE projects essentially a subset of CIP Relationship between CIE, CIP, and Annual Budget ^ While preparing CIP and Annual Budget, a local government must review CIE to ensure that capital facility projects funded are consistent with the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. ^ Local government should finalize and adopt CIE (including CIE 5-Year Schedule of Improvements) after adoption of the Annual Budget and CIP (typically Sept 30) to allow for late budget changes. Agenda ~. What is the CIE? 2. Florida Statutes 3. CIE Update Process 4. Next Steps s. Best Practices Manual Background ^ In 1985, the Growth Management Act required each County and municipality to adopt Local Government Comprehensive Plans to guide future growth and development. ^ In 2005, Senate Bill 360 (SB 360) amended requirements of growth management laws. ^ In 2007, Statutes were amended by House Bill 7203 (HB 7203) Statutory Requirements ^ There is an expedited CIE adoption process with a single public adoption hearing; no transmittal hearing required. (Sec. 163.3177(3)(b)2., F.S.) ^ A CIE amendment is required to change the scheduled date of construction of a project (Sec. 163.3177(3)(b)1., F.S.) Statutory Requirements ^ New definition of financial feasibility (Sec. 163.3164(32), F.S.) - ~~ Sufficient re venues are currently a vailable or wi/l be a vailable from committed funding sources for the f rst three (3) years, or wil/ be available from committed or p/armed funding sources for years 4 and 5, of a 5-year capital impro vement schedule for financing capital improvements." ~i~~a~a~or~9 G3c~gaurrc~~roQn~g a Financial Feasibility: - Committed funding sources (Years 1-3): o Existing revenue sources: Ad valorem taxes, approved bonds, state and federal funds, tax revenue, impact fees, and enforceable developer agreements. - Planned funding sources (Years 4-5): o Grants not secured, proposed bonds, or other potential sources that require a referendum or are not presently secured. Statutory Requirements ^ Financial Feasibility applies to the 5-Year planning period of the CIE ^ If a local government has adopted a long term transportation or school Concurrency Management System, financial feasibility must be demonstrated fora 10-year or 15-year period ^ The loca I government must demonstrate that the level-of-service standards will be achieved and maintained by the end of the 5-year planning period, even if in a particular year such improvements are not concurrent ~~~a~a~o~ G3Qq~urrc~rroQ~i~~ o The CIE must include they are relied upon t including: externally funded pro'ects if ~ satisfy LOS standar~s, - Water Management District WMD) regional water supply projects (Sec. 163.3177(6)(c~, F.S.); - Proportionate fair share projects for transportation (Sec. 163.3180(16)(b)1., F.S.); - Metropolitan Planning Or anization (MPO Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) Sec. 163.3177( )(a)6., F.S.); - Local school district projects (Sec. 163.3180(13)(d)1., F.S.) Statutory Requirements ^ Effective December 1, 2008, failure to adopt annual update to the CIE results in a prohibition on the local government adopting future land use amendments. (Sec. 163.3177(3)(b)1., F.S.) Agenda ~. What. is the CIE? i. Florida Statutes 3. CIE Update Process 4. Next Steps s. Best Practices Manual CIE Update Steps 1. Create CIE Update Schedule and Program 2. Distribute Capital Project Request Forms 3. Review Project Request Forms 4. Review Existing CIE 5. Prioritize Projects 6. Update CIE 5-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements c~~~ ~p~~t~~ ~~~~~ Qc~o~~o~ 7. Adopt FDOT and MPO Transportation Capital Improvements by reference 8. Adopt loca I School District 5-Year District Faci I ities Work Plan by reference 9. Adopt VVMD V~later Supply Projects 10. Summary of De Minimis Impact Records 11. Make Adjustments to CIE 12. Adopt CIE at a Single Public Hearing 13. Submitted to DCA Adopted CIE Step 1: Create CIE Update Schedule and Program ^ "The relevant question is not simply what shall we do tomorrow, but rather what steal/ we do today to get ready for tomorrow." Peter F. Drucker, Leading in a Time of Change ^ Approximately 10 month process Recommended Best Practice 1 Task__ __ _ __ __ _ _ 'AN FEB MAR APR MAY. JUN -UL AUG SEF OCI' NOV DEC Ca ital Pro'ect xe uest forms distributed with instructions De artments submit CIP ro'ect re uest forms to Plannin and Bud etin Coordination worksho for Plannin ,Bud etin ,Public Works, etc. External coordination with a encies DOT, MI'O, school district, WMD, etc . Plannin and Bud etin Staff review existin CIE to rioritize ro'ects for new CIP and bud et Prioritize ro'ects in 5-Year Schedule of Ca ital Im rovements Review and U date Existin CIE Ado t FDOT and MPO Trans ortation Ca ital Im rovments b reference Bud et Hearin for Local Plannin A enc First Readin of ro osed Bud et at Local Government ublic hearin Ad'ustments to Bud et b Staff Ado t local School District 5-Year District Facilities Woxk Plan b reference Final Bud et is ado ted at Local Governement ublic hearin Ad'ustments made to CIE to account for Bud et/CIP modifications U dated CIE is ado ted at a sin le ublic hearin Ado ted CIE is submitted to DCA no later than December 1 Create CIE Update Program ^ Create and distribute written instructions - `Bullet point" outline - Internal memorandum - Full text manual (Best Practice!) ^ Describe the duties of each staff position or department with a role in the CIE process; ^ Provide a timeline and description for each step of the CIE update process Recommended Best Practice Table of Gantents .................................................................................. 3 Course dbjectives :.....................................................................3 The hnportance of the Capital [tnprovements Program ....:...........3 Different Roles ar~d Responsibilities in the Process ......................4 C1P Administrator ......................................................:................ d Requesters of Capital Projects ................................................... 4 Administration and Finance DepartmenU`Bud'get Division.......... 4 Public Works Department .......................................................... b Planning and Development Department .................................... 5 The Planning Cot~rnission .......................................................... 6 GIP Scoring Cofnt~ittee .............................................................. G Chief Administrative {~fficer ........................................................ 6 General Counci.I ...................................... City Council' ............................................ Project Cost f=actors to Consider .............. Introduction Comprehensive P'I'art ................................. The State of Florida Growth Manageme Forms .....................................A.................. Project Information S:heet ....................... Departmental Prioritization Matrix .......... G1P' Scoring Committee Prioritization Iv1~ Approval Process ...................................... Alr€endrnent Procedures ..................>..,..... Tho Capdal Improvomonts Program is a rnul6•yoar forocast of major capital buildings, 6mfrastructuros, and oquipment neods. The City of Jacks~rnitlo has adoptod in Chaptor is Part I Section 106.106 Fispl Rosponsiblllty a'Ftve Year Capital Imprcrvomonts Plan that Is deslgnod to bo financially fxmslt+lo and. providos tho hording sourw and am stmt of funding for tho capital costs of oach projoct, and tho furxling sours and amount of fuadir~ fortho anticipaWd post•constnrction operation costs of oath projoot. Tho Ftvo Year Capital dnprovomont3 Plam shall bo filed aid approved oath fiscal year concurr>intty with the annual twdgot. Course Objectives: I. Understand the importance of the Capital Imprrn,•ernents Program. 2. Understand the process for approval of a Capital Impn7vemonts Program request and each department's nee Ym the process. 3. Understard how to oomplote the Capftal ImprovemwtCs Program Project Information 5hoet and Priorit¢ation r~latrix forms. CIE Update Program ^ Describe the approval process, including the roles and duties of public boards; ^ A description of the types of projects that must be included in the CIE; ^ A description of the project priority scoring or ranking criteria; and ^ Sample capital project request forms and instructions on how to correctly enter the data needed for processing. Recommended Best Practice Step 2: Project Request Forms ^ Prepare and distribute Capital Project Re uest Forms to departments i n February of eac year. - Send Request forms to: ^ Planning ^ Economic Development ^ Community Development ^ Public Works ^ Budget & Finance ^ Parks and Recreation ^ Engineering ^ Utilities Department ^ Others Recommended Best Practice SAMPLE CAPITAL PRO ECT REQUEST FORM PRO ECT NAME PRO ECT ACCOUNT NUMBER DATE PRI~PARED CONTACT PERSON RE VESTING DEPARTMENT COMPI2EHENSTVE FLAN REFE1tENCE PROJECT DESCRIPTION: LOS-Facili ? (Y/N) EXPLAIN HOW THIS PROJECT ADDRESSES AN EXISTING OR FUTURE LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFICIENCY OR IMPLEIv1ENTS GOALS OF TI-IE COMP1tE1-IENSIVE PLAN: ESTIMATED PROJECT COST FY o6/0~ AMOUNT FY o~/os AMOUNT FY os/o~ AMOUNT FY o~/lo AMOUNT FY oio/ii AMOUNT YEARS 6-10 LAND AC UISI"TION PROFESSIONAL SERVICES a PRE-DESIGN b DESIGN c ENGINEERING d OTIIER TOTAL PROF.SERVICES CONSTRUCTION CONSTRUCTION MGMT. OTHER MAINTENANCE TOTAL - - - - COMMENTS: ~~r~o~c~c~~ ac~gac~~~~ ~or~~~ o Describe how the project achieves or maintains LOS, or how it will implement the Comprehensive Plan. - This will help the local government determine if a project must be incl ud ed in t he CI E 5-Year Sched ul e o Include a detailed cost analysis, including estimated costs for design, construction, land acquisition, and annual operating and maintenance costs. Recommended Best Practice Step 3: Review Project Request Forms ^ Considerations for reviewing new project requests: - Does the new project achieve and maintain adopted LOS standards for concurrency-related public fac~l~ties? ^ Roads; ^ Drainage; ^ Potable water; ^ Sanitary service; ^ Parks and recreation; ^ Solid waste; ^ Public schools (beginning in 2008); and ^ Public transit (if applicable) Recommended Best Practice Review Project Request Forms ^ Considerations for reviewing new project requests: - Does the new project achieve and maintain adopted LOS standards for o tp Tonal Comprehensive Plan Elements? ^ Example: emergency response time for fire/rescue vehicles, consistent with a Public Safety Element Recommended Best Practice Review Project Request Forms ^ Considerations for reviewing new project requests: - Does the new project generally implement the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan? ^ Example: maintenance services for historic buildings or laying brick streets, consistent with an Urban Design Element Recommended Best Practice ~c~e~oc~~~~ I~~~c~~c~v ~c~c~e~c~~~ f~o~~~ o Considerations for revie~nring nevv project requests: Is the new project required support the achievement of the LOS for concurrency related services? o Example: multi-modal transportation improvements within a Transportation concurrency Exception Area. ~~ . -.r= - ``~~~ ~'~ ; ti }t y ~~,~ to Recommended Best Practice Review Project Request Forms ^ Schedule an worksh pin internal CIE update coordination e Spring of each year. ^ Include Staff from: - Planning - Economic Development - Community Development - Public Works - Budget & Finance - Parks and Recreation - Engineering - Utilities Department - Others ^ Discuss LOS and concurrency-related concerns to ensure that new projects are planned to address these issues ^ Review Public Works and other capital projects to determine if these projects will address LOS deficiencies. Recommended Best Practice ~~~~ ~o ~c~e~o~e~~~ G~~~~o~C~o~ ~~~ o Do the Goals, Objectives, and Policies still meet the needs of the community? o Is the CIE consistent vuith the Comprehensive Plan? o Do Level of Service standards need to be modified? o Have capital projects recently been completed? If so, remove from 5-Year Schedule Requirement: Sec. 163.3177(3)(b)1., F.S. Step 5: Prioritize Projects ^ The CIE must address the "relative priority of need among facility types" Requirement: (Chapter 9J-5.016(2)(b), F.A.C.) -~, ~. J ^ Prioritize through a ranking system: - Public health or safety concerns; - Current LOS deficiencies; - Projects used to meet concurrency or support approved development; - Location; - Available funding; - Public support; and - Consistency with goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Projects that receive the highest composite scores should be prioritized early in the 5-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements when possible. Recommended Best Practice a C~O~~ C~oa~~~ pr~oor~of~o~~~oo~ o Facility is required to eliminate health or safety hazard (1,000 points). o Facility is required to remedy existing capacity deficiency (300 points). o Impact of resulting increases in operating costs on Clay County General Operating Budget (300 points). o Priority location of project based on the future land use designation. - Hi4h PrioritX Locations (300 points) o Rural Fringe or Commercial that is adjacent to Rural Fringe. - Lower Priority Locations (75 points) o Facility is necessa to accommodate new development and redevelopment service demands (~00 points). o Facility is consistent and compatible with the plans of state aggencies, including the Florida Department of Transportation, and the St. Johns River Water Management District (100 points). Strategies for Unfunded Projects ^ Adopt long-term Comprehensive Plan strategies to address unfunded needs; ^ Adopt along-term (10 or 15-year) Transportation and/or School Concurrency Management System (CMS); ^ Enter into proportionate fair-share mitigation agreement; ^ Approve other projects that create additional capacity; and ^ Regulate the pace at which development is approved in the future. Recommended Best Practice Step 6: Update CIE 5-Year Schedule of Improvements ^ Include both publicly-funded and privately-funded projects Requirement: (Sec. 163.3177(3)(a)5., F.S.) ^ Schedule must be financiall~r feasible ^ The 5-Year Schedule is a balance sheet - Revenues must be equal to or greater than expenditures ^ Ensure that revenue is sufficient to fund the total cost of projects in the 5-year schedule Requirement: Sec. 163.3164(32), F.S. Balance Sheet (Ex. 1) Capital Improvements Element Balance Sheet Community Name: Fiscal Year: Infrastructure Cate o 2007/2008 2008/2009 2009/2010 2010/2011 2011/2012 (eg. roads, drainage, potable water, etc.): ROADS Committed Funds Committed Funds Committed Funds Committed Funds Planned Funds Committed Funds Planned Funds REVENUE General/S ecial/Debt Funds $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $50.00 $50.00 New Debt Borrowin s/Bonds $200.00 $200.00 $200.00 $0.00 $0.00 Im act Fees and Develo er $ $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $0.00 $0.00 All Other Revenue $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $0.00 $0.00 Grants $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.00 $0.00 $300.00 New Revenue Re uirin Voter A royal $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $150.00 $0.00 $150.00 Planned + Committed ears 4 & 5 Onl $500.00 $500.00 Revenues Total $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 EX PENDITURES Pro~ect Name: Main Street widenin $400.00 $400.00 $150.00 $0.00 $0.00 Pro~ect Name: Subdivision traffic calmin $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $50.00 $50.00 Pro~ect Name: Brid ere lacement $0.00 $0.00 $250.00 $450.00 $450.00 Expenditures Total $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 AN NUAL BALANCE $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 5 YEAR PLANNING PERIOD BALANCE $0.00 Financially Feasible: Revenues are greater than or equal to expenditures for the Five Year Planning Period ~~D~,~v~~ ~~~~~ Q~~o ~~ Capital Improvements Element Balance Sheet Community Name: Fiscal Year: Infrastructure Cate o 2007/2008 2008/2009 2009/2010 2010/2011 2011/2012 (eg. roads, drainage, potable water, etc.): LOADS Committed Funds Committed Funds Committed Funds Committed Funds Planned Funds Committed Funds Planned Funds REVENUE General/S ecial/Debt Funds $250.00 $100.00 $100.00 $50.00 $200.00 New Debt Borrowin s/Bonds $200.00 $200.00 $200.00 $0.00 $0.00 Im act Fees and Develo er $ $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $50.00 All Other Revenue $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $0.00 $0.00 Grants $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $300.00 $0.00 $300.00 New Revenue Re uirin Voter A roval $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $150.00 $0.00 $150.00 Planned + Committed ears 4 & 5 Onl $600.00 $700.00 Revenues Total $650.00 $500.00 $500.00 $600.00 $700.00 EX PENDITURES Pro'ect Name: Main Street widenin $400.00 $600.00 $150.00 $0.00 $0.00 Pro'ect Name: Subdivision traffic calmin $100.00 $100.00 •$100.00 $50.00 $50.00 Pro'ect Name: Brid ere lacement $0.00 $0.00 $400.00 $600.00 $400.00 Expenditures Total $500.00 $700.00 $650.00 $650.00 $450.00 AN NUAL BALANCE $150.OU -$200.00 -$150.00 -$50.00 $250.00 5 YEAR PLANNING PERIOD BALANCE $0.00 Financially Feasible: Revenues are greater than or equal to expenditures for the Five Year Planning Period Balance Sheet (Ex. 3) Capital Improvements Element Balance Sheet Community Name: Fiscal Year: Infrastructure Cate o 2007/2008 2008/2009 2009/2010 2010/2011 2011/2012 (eg. roads, drainage, potable water, etc.): KOADS Committed Funds Committed Funds Committed Funds Committed Funds Planned Funds Committed Funds Planned Funds REVENUE General/S ecial/Debt Funds $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $50.00 $50.00 New Debt Borrowin s/Bonds $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $0.00 $0.00 Im act Fees and Develo er $ $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $0.00 $0.00 All Other Revenue $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $0.00 $0.00 Grants $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $200.00 $0.00 $200.00 New Revenue Re uirin Voter A royal $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $150.00 $0.00 $150.00 Planned + Committed ears 4 & 5 Onl $400.00 $400.00 Revenues Total $400.00 $400.00 $400.00 $400.00 $400.00 EX PENDITURES Pro'ect Name: Main Street widenin $400.00 $400.00 $150.00 $0.00 $0.00 Pro'ect Name: Subdivision traffic calmin $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $50.00 $50.00 Pro'ect Name: Brid ere lacement $0.00 $0.00 $250.00 $450.00 $450.00 Expenditures Total $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 $500.00 AN NUAL BALANCE -$100.00 -$100.00 -$100.00 -$100.00 -$100.00 5 YEAR PLANNING PERIOD BALANCE -$500.00 Not Financially Feasible: Revenues are less than expenditures for the Five Year Planning Period ~o~~ ~3c~dc~~ac~ ~arnr~rn~~r~ o Include all bonds (approved and proposed) o Approved Bonds (Committed): List approval or adoption date, purpose, and value. a Proposed Bonds (Planned): List anticipated approval date, purpose and value. o Summary to help the local government and DCA determine if a bond is a committed or tanned revenue source . Recommended Best Practice Sam le Bond Revenue Summa p rY r', Capital Improvements Element $and Revenue Summary _ _.. Community Name: Fiscal Year: Bond Revenue b Year Ty=pe of Bond Planned or Date Issued Project Narne Description 2006!2007 2007/2008 2008!2009 .2009!2010 2010/201.1• Committed? General Obligation Committed April 28, 2006 Central Park Bond issued to fund acquisition of 20 acquisition acres of new County parkland. This acquisition will maintain LOS standard C~' $2,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 Proposed General Planned Estimated issue Main Street widening Bond to be issued to widen Main Street Obligation September 1, from 2 lanes to 4 lanes between 1st St. and 2009 2nd St. This project will maintain LOS standard 'D' $0 $0 $0 $7,000,000 $0 Proposed General Planned Estimated issue Sewage Plant Bond to be issued to increase sewage Obligation October 1, 2009 expansion treatment capacity $3,000,000 TOTAL BOND REVENUE $2,000,000 $0 $0 $10,000,000 $0 Private Funding of Public Facilities ^ Include privately funded projects with executed and enforceable development and interlocal agreements if relied upon to satisfy LOS standards or meet concurrencv Requirement: Sec. 163.3177(3)(a)5., F.S. Private Funding of Public Facilities ^ Summary should include: - Name of the private entity; - Date of agreement; - Expiration date; - Agreement amount; - Purpose of the private funding Recommended Best Practice ^ If applicable, the summary should state if the private funding source is subject to a DRI Development Order or a binding agreement that addresses proportionate-share mitigation for transportation facilities (if used to demonstrate financial feasibility of the Comprehensive Plan) Requirement: Sec. 163.3177(3)(e), F.S. Pravate Funding f Publ~~ ~~~e~at~e~ Capital Improvements Element Private Funding Agreement Summary Community Name: Fiscal Year: Name of Private Entity Agreement Amount Date of Agreement Expiration Date Project Name Purpose and Description DRI Development Order? (Y/N) Proportionate Fair Share? (Y/N) Land Development LLC $3,000,000 4/28/2006 4/28/2016 Walker School Fee simple acquisition of new school site for subdivision No No Clarendon, Inc. $1,500,000 9/1/2006 9/1/2011 Clarendon Hills New traffic turn lane outside of subdivision No Yes Proportionate Fair-Share Projects ^ Transportation concurrency requirements may be satisfied by paying the proportionate fair-share to transportation facilities or facility segments identified in the CIE ^ New rojects must be added to the CIE i the local government, at its discretion, intends for them to be funded in total or in part by the Proportionate Fair-Share Program. 'Nadel Ordinance for Propntli4nate Fair-Share Mitigation of Development Impacts On Transpw•t.atian ~'arridars Final Edition Februat}~ ly, 2i~3b • State olFtot{da Depas tutcar of Ttausportodon ~fl5 Su:eauure Sweet Tallahassee, FL 3335' fDOT Clk]7tl3LY 1V~0. B}35.,4: RP;~~13:?t Gettter for Urbon Tt•anspnrtntion Aeee~rch tsnii°ersity of Sontls Fta~.i, Caikge ofEuguseerine aim ~. ~fl~•~t ~,~~.. G'JT1fl0 Tratpa, FL 3>6?4-33?5 0813}9;4-3124 xx-a•.c:r.~:tufeBu Requirement: Sec. 163.3180(16)(b)1., F.S. http:,[Jwww.dot.state.fl.us~plannina/am/pfso/default.htm ~~c~~ ~ o G~c~o~g ~~G~`~OP~'~~%C C~~c~~c~~~ ~~ G~~~~~°~wc~c~ o Must review FDOT and MPO capital plans: - FDOT 5-Year District Work Plan - MPO Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) o Adopt specific projects by reference if the local government is relying on these projects to ensure concurrency. o ~~ovup~~~ f~~06~}y: "The (local government) hereby adopts by reference the 5-Year Schedu/e oflmprovements as formal/y adopted b the (local FDOT district or local MPO) on ate) into the (local government) 5-Year Schedu/e of Capital Improvements: " Requirement: Sec. 163.3177(3)(a)6., F.S. Step 8: Adopt School District 5- Year Facilities Plan ^ All local governments are required to adopt a Public School Facilities Element beginning in 2008 ^ The school district is required to annually update its 5-year work plan and submit it to the Department of Education by October 1st of each year. ^ The local government must adopt the local school district's entire 5-year district facilities work plan by reference if relying on projects to meet school concurrency. ^ Adoption by reference into CIE should occur after October 1 Requirement: Sec. 163.3180(13)(d)1., F.S. ~oc~~~ ~c~~oo~ D°o~~rroc~ C~p6i~~ B~rnprrodc~~roc~~t~ o Do not modify the School District projects or adopt portions of the School Plan - Local governments may provide input through an interlocal agreement. o ~~~p~U~ Po~oc~~o °°The (local governments hereby adopts by reference the 5-Year district facilities work plan as forma//y adopted by the (loca/school districts on (dated into the 5-Year Schedule of Capital Impro vements, " Requirement: Sec. 163.3180(13)(d)1., F.S. Step 9: Adopt Water Supply Projects ^ Adopt Water Management District (WMD) water supply projects by reference if needed to maintain concurrency ^ Adopt projects within 18 months of the update to the WMD Regional Water Supply Plan (RWSP). Requirement: Sec. 163.3177(6)(c), F.S. '~~ ~c~~oor~~G @~!'~~~rr ~~~~~~ ° ~6~eti G~c~o~~cor G~~~~ o Northwest Florida WMD: January 25, 2007 - (Adopt projects by July 2008) o South Florida WMD: July 12, 2006 - (Adopt projects by January 2008) o Southwest Florida WMD: December 1, 2006 - (Adopt projects by June 2008) o St Johns River WMD: February 7, 2006 - (Adopt projects by August 2007) o Suwannee River WMD: n/a - (current water supply sources in the region are sufficient to meet projected needs for the next 20 years) Step 10: Summary of De Minimis Records Report ^ Submit a summary of de minimis records to DCA with the annual CIE update Requirement: Sec. 163.3180(6), F.S. ^ 'An impact that wou/d not affect more than 1 percent of the maximum vo/ume at the adopted level of service of the affected transportation facility as determined by the /oca/government. " aW~«~~~ ~ ~~~~.~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~ - Example: A single family home on an existing lot ~D c~ ~'~oc~o~ir~o~ ~~~c~or~c~~ o Summary should include: - Definition and approval process of developments having de minimis impact; - Existing conditions and deficient road links; - De minimis trip activity on all applicable road links; and - Planned improvements included in the local government's CIE that resolve existing deficiencies. 0 her it Requirement: Sec. 163.3180(6), F.S. Each local Qovernment determines wh should allow de minimis exceptions. Sample Summary of De Minimis Records Community Name: Fiscal Year: Sample Summary of De Minimis Records Table ~ Y o 0 Total I I-I PD Anal sis 110 /0 110 /~ Service Existing PH Approved De Minimis Committed LOS Service Service Service Volume Link # Road Name From / To PD Volume Trips Trips PH PD'I'rips Standard Volume Volume Volume Exceeded? Step 11: Adjustments to CIE ^ Annual Budget typically adopted by September 30 (before new fiscal year) - Budget may be modified by at adoption hearings ^ After final adoption of budget, planning staff should adjust and finalize CIE in October or November (if necessary) Recommended Best Practice Step 12: Adopt CIE at single public hearing ^ The CIE Amendment is exempt from the normal biannual Comprehensive Plan Amendment cycle - If the annual CIE update requires updates ~ other Comprehensive Plan Elements, they be amended at the same time ^ No Transmittal Hearing, only Adoption Hearin to may Requirement: Sec. 163.3177 3)(b)2., F.S. and Sec. 163.3187(1)( , F.S. ~c~o~~ ~~~ ~t~ ~o~g~Q pa[~Goc~ o All CIE updates must be adopted and submitted to DCA no later than December 1 of each year. o Schedule a public adoption hearing for either ®~~®[~~~ or o If local regulations require two hearings for adoption, then allot extra time to ensure adequate public notice. o Coordinate with the Local Planning A ency (LPA) to schedule a ~~special" CIE amendment hearing i necessary. Requirement: Sec. 163.3177(3)(b)2., F.S. Step 13: Submit Adopted CIE to DCA ^ Submit copy of adoption ordinance to DCA no later than December 1 of each year ^ Failure to adopt annual update results in a prohibition on adopting future land use amendments. Requirement: Sec. 163.3177(3)(b)1., F.S. What are the potential :.J sanctions? ^ Failure to meet obligations identified in the CIE may result in sanctions by the Administration Commission. -Ineligibility for grants, including: ^ Florida Small Cities Community Development Block Grant Program ^ Florida Recreation Development Assistance Program ^ State Revenue Sharing Requirement: Sec. 163.3177(3)(c), F.S. and Sec. 163.3184(11), F.S. Submit Adopted CIE to DCA ._r. ^ Include Su bm itta I Checklist ~~~ .~ ~,h ~~ -`r: - Verify that annual CIE update requirements have been completed. - Helps local government to track internal progress Recommended Best Practice Capital Improvements Element Best Practices Checklist Name: Fiscal Year: Instructions: Place a checkmaxk in the box next to each item to verify that the .~ I following steps were taken in the CIE update process Date Completed V The CIE update process has been coordinated with the annual Budget and Capital Improvements Program update process ^ A CIE Update Training Manual was distributed to departments that request new capital facility projects ^ Staff from Planning, Budgeting, Public Works and other key staff participated in an internal CIE coordination workshop ^ The local government held coordination workshops with external agencies (FDOT, WMD, MPO, etc) regarding capital projects in its jurisdiction ^ A growth and development report was created to monitor annual growth, capacity, and adopted LOS standards ^ Capital Improvement Project Request Sheets were prepared and distributed to departments. Detailed cost estimates are provided ^ A Weighted Ranking System was used to prioritize projects in the 5-Year Schedule ^ of Ca ital Im ovements Strategies to develop unfunded projects with low priorities in the 5-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements have been identified ^ FDOT and Local MPO 5-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements adopted by reference ^ Local School District 5-Year District Facilities Work Plan adopted by reference The local comprehensive plan and concurrency management system are consistent with the implementation of proportionate fair-share, as codified in the ^ locally adopted ordinance An internal coordination procedure to record the approval of de minimis impacts has been utilized (if de minimis impacts are allowed) ^ Long-term planning strategies and policies to address long-term infrastructure needs outside of the 5-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements have been adopted ^ A Balance Sheet approach was used to demonstrate financially feasibility (Committed Funds in Yxs.1-3, Planned Funds in Yrs. 4-5 only) ^ Bond Revenue Summary Chart included (if applicable) p Private Funding of Public Facilities Summary Chart included (if applicable) ^ The CIE was adopted as an Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan ^ Agenda ~. What is the CIE? 2. Florida Statutes 3. CIE Update Process 4. Next Steps s. Best Practices Manual G~c~~~ ~~c~~~~ For smaller communities: o Develop internal procedures and protocols for the annual update. Document as written instructions o Develop along-term strategy for funding capital improvements needed to accommodate growth. If backlogs exist, it may be appropriate to also develop aIon -term Concurrency Management System (CMS o Contact the local Regional Planning Council or DCA for assistance. Recommended Best Practices Next Steps ^ For larger communities: - Develop internal procedures and protocols for the annual update. Document into written instructions - Create an annual Growth and Development report - If backlogs exist, it may be appropriate to also develop a computer-based long-term Concurrency Management System (CMS). ^ Provide up to date information on capacity and LOS to each department. ^ Identify areas that are reaching maximum capacity. Recommended Best Practices Annual Growth & Development Report CITY OF ORL.4ND0 C~PAC`IT~' ~~'~ILaBILITY REPORT ~U~s~ ~, ~oa~ Eronoanic De~-etopsneut Department Cin• Piauuinp Dt~-ision Annual Growth & Development Report ^ Re uest capacity data for concurrency-related public faci ities from each permitting department ^ Evaluate capacity available for concurrency-related public facilities (e.g. roads, potable water, parks, etc.); ^ Evaluate whether LOS standards are being met, and if they will service approved and planned development over a 5- year period. ^ Determine future public facility needs, based u on existing, ap roved, and planned development which wil require pu lic services in the 5-year planning horizon; ^ Consider timing and location of construction to meet future public facilities demand. PURPOSE This tepert has Veen pl"epared iu accordsnce kith Section. ~9.?42 of the City s Caiicutreuc}- h•4auagetileut Re<gtilatit;us rEChaptel i9 t.+f the C'it~= Code) for the htrel:•e-uicuth period begiusliug Jult~= 1. 2445 and eudux~ Julie 34. ?046. The report suuiularizes the impact that developrrleut has had ou the provision of ttie fO11C31adui~ putilir services and facilities: roads, mass transit;. ei~aste~.vater, potable tivater, solid ryaste; pat3cs anti stolxtiwater: The r~epflrt also evaluates ttie ilxtpact That e~:istillg and ile~t~ de~~e:lcpuxeut ha~~ had ou adoptted. L,e~~~el of Ser-~•ice (LOS) standards and sliot~ s the aiuotlut of capacity a .-arable for Enna a growth. Roads The City leis adapted 15 Transpanatiou areas (T~s}. The houudaties of each TA are depicte3 en Figure 1. Tlie City uses Tas to tueasatte the perfoixuaitce of ilia adopted LOS standards in ~i~o tR~ays. through iuiplentetiiarion of the Trip Allocatiaa Progi:uu clad through auuw~+l monitoring using ilia C:ity`s Trat•e[ Demand lfadel. Trip :~lloration Program. As a# June 34. ?40b. the remaiiiine capacity iri the 200b-2005 Trip .allocation Ptvgrant U3= TA m~as as follow---=s: v Capacitr• Remaining in Trip ~liocation Program bti- Transportation ~xea Julie 30, 2006 SL-!1It=IARI" t7F DE~'ELC)P1•TE1T 3CTRTTY This et=altzatsou of LOS aad capacit}~ availability- refletrts net developuietit dulYUg tYie ttielve- uxoiith periad begintxug Jul}° 1, 244: and ending Jttne 34, 2G4tS. Ceitificares of occupancy issued acid deulolitiolts petxilitted during this time tx~eie used to determilie the amattut of dE~•elopment acfiz-itw. The iiet cittautity of dez,elopuxeut b}= lwd use tar t11e period begiuuiua Jut}~ 1, 2445 and etlitiug June 34, 2446 vas as folloaxcs: `ket Dex•elopxnetit Based ea C:el•t'icates at Occupancf and Demolitions July 1, 2445 throueJl Juue 34, ?(106 Laud tlse L>tuts~ 5nuare Feet Stugle. Faltiily R@Sidentlal 98$ Uli1t5 ~;ittlti-Fauait}~ Residential 2;3tt~ Units f-Iafel 4 R~aoliis Coniuiercial 16.4'3 scl. t3. Office 694.9?3 sq. it. Iuclustrial ?69,364 scl. ft. Go',=eixxtneixt+Ilisrittitiouat ?3;273 sal. ft. l3t~Sl3tal 4?4,'4~J SCI. ft. 5a*;;1•ce: City ~Zit3i~.anso, Office of FRars.i~,:~ Satt~ices Fenttit Fla» ,S3 teiii ?;ote: ~Fet caI1Li1£irial de~~2$optxieitt s Irty dtiz to at-er 125;4G4 :gttar~e fear cf denalition, iu ^~a DxviYtatty to inil;e ixtaelt fro: lede~rela}Yitient, zud deuurlitiou of approvn:ately $4,044 s~aare feet in t_'ke reniantder of the Litt'. Futtue ye..i: will refe:t additional dati eta~sssa::t :a. certificate; of oc~~paaics• are isrued. 2pttb Pl7PLZ,.~TIO Fcr put~pases of evaluating the impact of increased papulatioli au public facilities, the City Laa1d L=.e Database ;vas used to project the City's poptilaticu_ The Cirott-th ~4ai><~getrlelit Divisiau has estiui<lted that the C:ity's population is 223,645 as of July 1, 2046. Sconce: tao6 Zao7 2nae ~,. i _5,175 1ff,ib6 _~,~:.6 TA 2 65,323 5,215 6,215 TA 3 3;,36$ 4, 3 fi,'_23 a 5, 55i ~ o TA 5 SL, ~f~ ~, ~~~ 4,i~Y7 R'A 6 Lam, 555 ZaY L34• ?'A 7 3e,~6'a 1,5'e7 ;,58"~ ?A 8 525,~7.J2 7,Oo5 ?,~55 3'A 9 _GG,3f6 1"3, 3:a 13,3EJ TA xo 1~1, =! 5 z, zba , 253 TA ri E~,152 ~3 ?2s Tao Z2 36,cc'Q 3,6c7 3,bt~~ Tll i3 55, 55fi 5, G' i1 5, J~11 TA as 153,77. 1?,€37 =7,E3"? TA x5 2a,~~s =25 z,EZS 1,806,026 87,570 87,570 ueFrnte Bt 3reakt, t:encturetucp lvSasw~emxnt Secfian ~~'astet}atet• Tha C;it}~`s A+aske~t=titer Bateau operates three G~,~aste:vater treatment facilities. The Cirp• myiiitars LOS ~• the a~•ailability of treatment plant capacity, measured in nliUion gallons per day (hfGD). The. follaih~iug table shot1•s that surplus i`~astetx=titer capacitor teas avaitabla at. each tx~astet~~atex ireatiuent facility, as of 'sLxy 31, 2406. The ~~•astetc°ater lei°el of setttice is i5°b of the pipes' capacity. All lutes atr opts<ztiug iu a supply capacity crniditiou. The tT~'aste~i~ater Dti-ision ~:i11 ccutinue to iuouitor these facilities. ii'xstert:tter Caparitp• Arai3aiilitJ~ (rflian Callous per Daz•) .July 1; 2405 rluouslt t~Qay 31, 2406 Capacih,~ i.'rsed Capacity Capati37~ "xt:xi%aUiiity Repwt ,august 1, 20t;~ Fael ai'fltt ' Ca43aC1tV t12 Y910 a["~~ :'Yat`aflal)le coti~et~>1 ?.500 4.76 z.7~3 Consetti-I1 35.040 15.51? 9.488 Ii•ou Bridge 40.040 2x.437 12.963 Sconce: Tecljttical St:pgatt Section Clrazt:uater l)i~tisioa Agenda ~. What is the CIE? z. Florida Statutes 3. CIE Update Process 4. Next Steps s. Best Practices Manual Best Practices Manual ^ Exa m p I es of ~~ Best ~ a ~ -~ ,~~,~ o -~- ~~;~ ~ r Practices" currently ~a~-~a- 4-~ G ~-~=-~'~ ~~~~~ used by FL communities - --~: ~ - -~--~ ~. ^ A resource for ~ ~ ..~ completing the CIE ~ ~ ~. ~~~ ~{~ h_~ update - ~ .~~ _ ~_. ~. r~. ~~ ^ wi I I be available on the ~Y h ~~: ~.~.a: f ., ~~~ DCA website Contact: ~- - ~~~ ..J ^.,^ '~ q~ p i ~'_ ~ ~_ _ d s ~ ~-~ Capital Improvements Element Best Practices Checklist Communi Name: Fiscal Year: Instructions: Place a checkmark in the box next to each item to verify that the ,~ I following steps were taken in the CIE update process Date Completed v The CIE update process has been coordinated with the annual Budget and Capital Improvements Program update process ^ A CIE Update Training Manual was distributed to departments that request new capital facility projects ^ Staff from Planning, Budgeting, Public Works and other key staff participated in an internal CIE coordination workshop ^ The local government held coordination workshops with external agencies (FOOT, WMD, MPO, etc) regarding capital projects in its jurisdiction ^ A growth and development report was created to monitor annual growth, capacity, and adopted LOS standards ^ Capital Improvement Project Request Sheets were prepared and distributed to departments. Detailed cost estimates are provided ^ A Weighted Ranking System was used to prioritize projects in the 5-Year Schedule + ^ of Ca ital Im ovements Strategies to develop unfunded projects with low priorities in the 5-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements have been identified ^ FOOT and Local MPO 5-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements adopted by reference ^ Local School District 5-Year District Facilities Work Plan adopted by reference ^ Water Management District Regional Water Supply Plan projects adopted by reference ^ The local comprehensive plan and concurrency management system are consistent with the implementation of proportionate fair-share, as codified in the p locally adopted ordinance An internal coordination procedure to record the approval of de minimis impacts has been utilized (if de minimis impacts are allowed) ^ Long-term planning strategies and policies to address long-term infrastructure needs outside of the 5-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements have been adopted p A Balance Sheet approach was used to demonstrate financially feasibility (Committed Funds in Yrs.1-3, Planned Funds in Yrs. 4-5 only) ^ Bond Revenue Summary Chart included (if applicable) ^ Private Funding of Public Facilities Summary Chart included (if applicable) ^ The CIE was adopted as an Amendment to the Comprehensive Plan ^