Concurrency

• Revises the definition of “financial feasibility” to provide that a local comprehensive plan is financially feasible for purposes of transportation and school concurrency “if it can be demonstrated that the level-of-service standards will be achieved and maintained by the end of the planning period even if in a particular year such improvements are not concurrent.” The bill also provides that funding of improvements that “significantly benefit” an impacted transportation facility will satisfy the concurrency requirement regardless of the failure of concurrency on other impacted facilities.

• Establishes that financial feasibility applies to the 5-year planning period, except for long-term transportation or school concurrency management systems, in which case a 10-year or 15-year period applies.

• Extends the deadline by one year, to December 1, 2008, for local governments to begin the annual process of updating their capital improvements schedule. Under current law, if the annual update to the capitol improvements schedule is not in compliance, DCA must notify the Administration Commission. This requirement is deleted in the bill.

• Provides that a comprehensive plan is financially feasible and will be deemed to have achieved and maintained level-of-service standards with regard to transportation facilities if, at a local government’s discretion, a plan amendment is supported by a developmentof-regional impact (DRI) development order condition that addresses proportionate fairshare mitigation, or a binding agreement that addresses proportionate fair-share mitigation and the property subject to the amendment is located in an area designated as urban infill, urban redevelopment, downtown revitalization, or urban service area, and the agreement is based on the maximum amount of development identified in the future land use element.

• Expands areas that are appropriate for a transportation concurrency exception area (TCEA), provided certain conditions are met, and revises some criteria for how such areas are to be reviewed.

• Allows counties or municipalities, under certain circumstances, to establish “transportation concurrency backlog authorities;” which will adopt and implement plans to eliminate all identified transportation backlogs within a designated area, an allowing tax increment financing to be used for that purpose.

• Allows a development to proceed, regardless of inadequate classroom capacity, if there are accelerated facilities in an approved capital improvements element scheduled for year four or later that will, when built, mitigate the proposed development, or if the developer enters into a binding financially guaranteed agreement with the school board to construct an accelerated facility within the first 3 years of an approved capital improvement plan and the cost of the school facility is equal to or greater than the development’s proportionate share. The bill also provides that when the completed school is transferred to the school district, that the developer receives impact fee credits usable in the zone where the constructed or any attendance zone contiguous with or adjacent to it.

• Extends for an additional 3-years all phase, buildout, and expiration dates for DRIs under “active construction” as of July 1, 2007, regardless of any prior extension, and provides that the additional 3 years is not a substantial deviation, is not subject to further DRI review, and may not be considered when determining whether a subsequent extension is a substantial deviation.

• Extends the maximum duration of a development agreement to 20 years, from the current 10.

• Current law provides that “[w]hen authorized by a local comprehensive plan,” a multiuse DRI may satisfy transportation concurrency requirements by payment of a proportionate-share contribution for local and regionally significant traffic effects, as well as other criteria. The bill eliminates the discretion of the local governments, by deleting the language in quotation marks above.

• Limits proportionate-share mitigation to ensure that a development is required to mitigate the impacts of that development on the transportation system, but not any additional costs of reducing or eliminating backlogs.

• Allows proportionate fair-share mitigation to be used for “pipelining” or multiple transportation improvements reasonably related to the development and those improvements may address one or more modes of travel.

• Creates a pilot program for Pinellas and Broward Counties, and the municipalities within those counties (unless they opt out by a supermajority vote), and Jacksonville, Miami, Tampa, and Hialeah, that significantly reduces the level of DCA oversight over the local comprehensive plans within those areas. Under the pilot program, comprehensive plan amendments will transmitted to DCA, the appropriate RPC, water management district, DEP, the Department of State, DOT, the county (for municipal plans), FWCC, DACS, and (for amendments that impact schools) the Commissioner of Education, and any local government that has requested copies in writing. The agencies may make comments (the scope of areas on which certain entities may comment are limited) but there will be no finding prior to adoption regarding whether the amendments are in compliance; rather, the agency may file a petition for an administrative hearing about the amendments (as may any interested person). If a hearing is requested, the bill sets forth a procedure for how the decisions are reached by the hearing officer, DCA, or the Administration Commission. The bill also prescribes a report regarding the pilot program to be provided to the Governor, the President of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House, by December 1, 2008.

• Provides that conservation easements will survive the issuance of a tax deed.

• Allows local governments to use tax increment financing to acquire or preserve conservation lands.

• Excludes “airport passenger terminals and concourses, air cargo facilities, and hangars for the maintenance or storage of aircraft” from concurrency requirements.

• Provides that failure of a local government to adopt Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) amendments is not a limitation on adoption of a plan amendment to integrate a port master plan with the coastal management element if the port master plan or proposed amendment do not cause or contribute to the local government’s failure to comply with EAR requirements.

• Revises the definition of “urban redevelopment” to include Community Redevelopment Areas.

• Names the Community Workforce Housing Innovation Pilot Program after Representative Mike Davis.