Amended local agreement for Joint Facility PlanningInterlocal Agreement for
Public School Facility Planning
TABLE OF CONTENTS
STATUTORY BASIS AND INTENT
SECTION 1 INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTATION &
REVIEW COMMITTEE
SECTION 1.1 ILA Team
SECTION 1.2 Joint Planning Committee
SECTION 2 COORDINATION AND CONSISTENCY
SECTION 2.1
SECTION 2.2
SECTION 2.3
SECTION 2.4
SECTION 2.5
Joint Meetings
Public Input and Oversight
Resolutions of Disputes
Coordination and Sharing Information
Student Enrollments, Population Projections, Growth and
Development Trends
SECTION 3 PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITY SITING AND
DEVELOPMENT COORDINATION
SECTION 3.1
SECTION 3.2
SECTION 3.3
School and Public Facility Site Analysis
Supporting Infrastructure
Joint Use
SECTION 4 COORDINATE LAND USE AND SCHOOL CAPACITY
SECTION 4.1
SECTION 4.2
Comprehensive Plan Amendments, Rezonings,
and Development Approvals
Educational Plant Survey
SECTION 5 IMPLEMENTATION OF SCHOOL CONCURRENCY
SECTION 5.1
SECTION 5.2
SECTION 5.3
SECTION 5.4
SECTION 5.5
SECTION 5.6
SIGNATURE PAGES
Procedure
Level of Service (LOS) Standards
Concurrency Service Areas (CSAs)
Applicability and Capacity Determination
Process for Determining School Concurrency
Proportionate Share Mitigation
MAP1a — School Concurrency Service Areas — Elementary Schools
MAP1b — School Concurrency Service Areas — Middle Schools
MAP1c — School Concurrency Service Areas — High Schools
2
3
3
4
5
5
5
5
6
7
8
8
10
10
11
11
13
13
13
14
16
17
18
19
24
30
31
32
REVISED 2008
Page 1 of 32
AMENDED INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT FOR
PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITY PLANNING
This agreement is entered into between the City Council of the Consolidated City of
Jacksonville (hereinafter referred to as "Jacksonville"), the City Commission of the City of Atlan-
tic Beach (hereinafter referred to as "Atlantic Beach"), the Town Council of the Town of Baldwin
(hereinafter referred to as "Baldwin"), the City Council of the City of Jacksonville Beach (herein-
after referred to as "Jacksonville Beach"), and the City Council of the City of Neptune Beach
(hereinafter referred to as "Neptune Beach"), which are hereinafter collectively referred to as
the "Cities"; and the Duval County School Board and administrative staff of the School District,
hereinafter referred to as Duval County Public Schools or "DCPS" .
WHEREAS, this Interlocal Agreement was initially executed on April 2, 2003, and has
been updated to reflect changes in the state concurrency legislation relating to public schools as
provided in Laws 2005, c. 2005-290 (Senate Bill 360), which became effective July 1, 2005; and
WHEREAS, the Cities and the DCPS recognize the benefits that flow to the citizens and
students of the communities by more closely coordinating their comprehensive land use and
school facilities planning programs: namely (1) better coordination of new schools in time and
place with land development, (2) greater efficiency for the Cities and the DCPS by the reduction
of student travel times and the placement of schools to take advantage of existing and planned
roads, water, sewer, and parks, (3) improved student access and safety by coordinating the
construction of new and expanded schools with the road and sidewalk construction programs of
the Cities, (4) the location and design of schools so that they serve as community focal points,
(5) the location and design of schools with parks, active recreation facilities, libraries, and other
community facilities to take advantage of joint use opportunities, (6) the location of new
schools and expansion and rehabilitation of existing schools so as to reduce pressures contribut-
ing to urban sprawl and support existing neighborhoods, and (7) the coordination on a multi -
jurisdictional basis as to the location of new schools, and closure of existing schools, so as to
effectively serve municipalities that may not have a school located within their jurisdiction; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the Consolidated City of Jacksonville and the School
Board, in June 1998, established a Joint Planning Committee to serve as an advisory body to
the City Council and School Board, and charged said Joint Planning Committee to assist Jack-
sonville and the DCPS in carrying out many of the public school facility planning responsibilities
subsequently mandated in Sections 1013.33(1), 163.31777, and 163.3180(13) Florida Statutes;
and
WHEREAS, Section 1013.33(10), Florida Statutes, requires that the location of public
education facilities shall be consistent with the comprehensive plans and implementing land de-
velopment regulations of the appropriate Cities; and
WHEREAS, Sections 163.3177(6)(h)1 and 2, Florida Statutes, requires each local gov-
ernment to adopt an intergovernmental coordination element as part of its comprehensive plan
that states principles and guidelines to be used in the accomplishment of the adopted compre-
hensive plan with the plans of the school boards, and describe the processes for collaborative
planning and decision making on population projections and public school siting; and
REVISED 2008
Page 2 of 32
WHEREAS, Section 163.3177(6)(h)2, Florida Statutes, further requires each county,
which in this instance is the Consolidated City of Jacksonville and all of the municipalities within
Duval County, and the DCPS to establish by interlocal or other formal agreement executed by
all affected parties, the joint processes described above consistent with their adopted intergov-
ernmental coordination elements; and
WHEREAS, the DCPS and the Cities enter into this agreement in fulfillment of the statu-
tory requirements and in recognition of the benefits accruing to their citizens and students de-
scribed above; and
WHEREAS, the Cities and the DCPS have mutually agreed that coordination of school
facility planning and comprehensive land use planning is in the best interest of the citizens of
the Cities; and
WHEREAS, the Cities have jurisdiction for land use and growth management decisions,
including the authority to approve and deny comprehensive plan amendments, rezonings, or
the development orders that generate students and impact the school system, and the Cities
have similar jurisdiction within their boundaries; and
WHEREAS, the DCPS has the statutory and constitutional responsibility to provide a
uniform system of free and adequate public schools on a countywide basis; and
WHEREAS, the Cities and the DCPS agree that they can better fulfill their respective
responsibilities by working in close cooperation to ensure that adequate public school facilities
are available for the residents of Duval County; and
WHEREAS, the parties are authorized to enter into this Interlocal Agreement pursuant
to Section 163.01, Section 163.3177(6)(h)2, Section 163.3180(13)(9), Section 1013.33(2)(a)
and, Section 163.31777, Florida Statutes.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it mutually agreed between the School Board, the City Council
of the Consolidated City of Jacksonville, the Town Council of the Town of Baldwin, the City
Commission of the City of Atlantic Beach, the City Council of the City of Jacksonville Beach, and
the City Council of the City of Neptune Beach that the following requirements, criteria, site
standards, and procedures will be utilized to better coordinate public school facilities planning
and land use planning:
Section 1 Interlocal Agreement (ILA) Implementation and Review Committee
Section 1.1 ILA Team
The ILA team is comprised of members representing the Duval County Public Schools, the City
of Jacksonville Planning and Development Department, the Office of General Counsel, represen-
tatives from the Cities of Atlantic, Neptune and Jacksonville Beaches and the Town of Baldwin.
The ILA Team shall be responsible for the review and development of the annual updates to
this Interlocal Agreement, which is mandated by Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. The ILA Team
will meet as often as needed during the planning and implementation of the school concurrency
program.
REVISED 2008
Page 3 of 32
Section 1.2 Joint Planning Committee
The Joint Planning Committee, including both elected and citizen members, is an advisory body
to the DCPS and the governing bodies of the Cities. The Joint Planning Committee shall be
composed of nine members as follows:
• One member appointed by the DCPS from among its membership;
• One member appointed by the City Council from among its membership;
• Three lay members appointed by the Superintendent of Schools;
• Two lay members appointed by the Mayor;
• One lay member appointed by the City Council President; and
• One lay member appointed jointly by the Mayor, the City Council President, the Chair of
the DCPS and the Superintendent of Schools
The Joint Planning Committee will review and coordinate the activities covered under this Inter-
local Agreement. As outlined in Resolution 2001-65-A of the City Council of Jacksonville and the
companion Resolution of the DCPS approved on March 7, 2001, the Joint Planning Committee is
charged with the following responsibilities:
• Review future growth patterns of Duval County;
• Review existing sites and identify future sites and facility needs for schools, libraries,
parks and community centers;
• Consider future site -compatible community facilities; and
• Review the annual update of the Interlocal Agreement.
The Joint Planning Committee shall be assisted by the ILA Team during the planning and im-
plementation of the school concurrency program. In addition, representatives from the list be-
low may also participate with the ILA Team on an "as needed" basis:
• Jacksonville Department of Public Works, including Traffic Engineering,
• Jacksonville Recreation Department and Community Services,
• Jacksonville Library System,
• First Coast Metropolitan Planning Organization,
• Jacksonville Electric Authority,
• Jacksonville Transportation Authority,
• Florida Department of Transportation,
• School Advisory Committee,
REVISED 2008
Page 4 of 32
• PTA Member,
• CPAC Chair(s),
• Jacksonville Department of Finance.
Section 2 Coordination and Consistency
Section 2.1 Joint Meetings
2.1.1 The DCPS and the Cities will meet on an as needed basis, but at a minimum of twice per
year, and discuss issues regarding coordination of land use and school facilities plan-
ning, including population and student growth, development trends, school sitings,
school needs, the implementation of school concurrency, co -location and joint use op-
portunities, and ancillary infrastructure improvements needed to support the schools and
ensure safe student access. The DCPS will be responsible for making meeting arrange-
ments and notifications, and developing an agenda based on input from the City Coun-
cil, city managers or their designees. Additional joint workshop sessions may be held as
needed to carry out the provisions of this agreement.
2.1.2 The legislative bodies of the Cities and the DCPS will meet every year in a joint work-
shop or meeting sessions. The joint workshop sessions will be opportunities for the Cit-
ies and the DCPS to set direction, discuss issues and reach agreements concerning is-
sues of mutual concern regarding coordination of land use and school facilities planning,
including population and student growth, in -county migration, development trends,
school needs, off-site improvements, school concurrency, and joint use opportunities.
The DCPS will be responsible for making meeting arrangements, developing an agenda
with input from the Joint Planning Committee, the City of Jacksonville Planning and De-
velopment Department and from all city managers, and providing notification.
2.1.3 The Joint Planning Committee will meet as often as needed to meet their charge as set
forth in Section 1.2.
Section 2.2 Public Input and Oversight
2.2.1 Each of the Cities and the DCPS shall hold at least one public hearing before the adop-
tion of this agreement and before approving any amendments to this agreement. The
public hearing(s) shall be held, after notice is given according to the law, following the
normal rules and procedures of each of the Cities. The public may provide both written
and oral comments on the agreement at the scheduled public hearing(s).
2.2.2 A copy of this Interlocal Agreement will be posted on the City of Jacksonville and DCPS
websites; and, if applicable, the websites of the other Cities.
Section 2.3 Resolution of Disputes
2.3.1 If the parties to this agreement fail to resolve any conflicts related to the adoption or
implementation of this agreement, such dispute will be resolved in accordance with the
REVISED 2008
Page 5 of 32
governmental conflict resolution procedures outlined in Chapters 164 or 186, Florida
Statutes.
Section 2.4 Coordination and Sharing Information
2.4.1 The Cities shall coordinate and share data with the DCPS as follows:
2.4.1.1 On or about May 30th of each year, City of Jacksonville Planning and Develop-
ment Department will provide the DCPS with copies of the Annual Statistical
Package, which includes information on population, residential building and
demolition permits by type and general location, and economic statistics. The
data will be current as of December of the previous year. This package will
cover the cities of Jacksonville, Jacksonville Beach, Neptune Beach, Atlantic
Beach, and the Town of Baldwin. Jacksonville Beach, Neptune Beach, Atlantic
Beach, and Baldwin will provide information to the City of Jacksonville Planning
and Development Department on development permits as required by the City
of Jacksonville Comprehensive Plan.
2.4.1.2 When considering a District Vision Plan, a Community Redevelopment Area
(CRA), or similar plans, the Cities will provide a draft copy of these plans to the
DCPS for comment. City of Jacksonville Planning and Development Department
will provide to the DCPS land use maps showing the boundaries of the CRAs,
Neighborhood Plans and District Vision Plans. These will be updated as needed.
2.4.1.3 An inventory of reserved capacity that existed prior to the effective date of the
Cities' School Concurrency Ordinances and a projection of the number of those
residential units that are anticipated to receive a certification of occupancy ap-
proval in the next three years.
2.4.1.4 The identification of any development orders issued which contain a require-
ment for the provision of a school site as a condition of the development ap-
proval.
2.4.2 The DCPS shall coordinate and share information with the Cities as follows:
2.4.2.1 Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan: Within 30 days of the approval of the Five -
Year Capital Facilities Plan, the DCPS shall submit a copy of the adopted Plan
to each of the chief planning officials of the Cities. The plan will contain exist-
ing and projected student enrollment, existing education facilities, their loca-
tions, the number of portables in use at each school, and projected needs. The
plan will contain the DCPS approved Capital Improvement Plan including
planned facilities and capital projects and funding for the next five years. The
plan will also provide data for each individual school concerning school capacity
based on Department of Education criteria and enrollment of each individual
school based on actual counts. The plan will show the generalized locations in
which new schools will be needed and planned renovations, expansions and
closures of existing schools for the next 10 and 20 years. The plan will indicate
properties the DCPS has already acquired through developer donation, or
properties that a developer is obliged to provide to the DCPS at the School
Board's discretion, or properties acquired through other means that are poten-
REVISED 2008
Page 6 of 32
tial school sites. The DCPS officially adopted Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan will
be forwarded to all parties as appropriate.
2.4.2.2 Within 90 days of approval of a significant renovation that affects capacity,
school closure, or change in school attendance zones, the DCPS shall notify the
appropriate City in which the school is located and the City of Jacksonville
Planning and Development Department, and DCPS shall propose a strategy on
how the adopted level of service will be maintained in the affected concurrency
service area.
Section 2.5 Student Enrollment, Population Projections, Growth and Development
Trends
2.5.1 A consistent method for projections of the amount, type, and distribution of population
growth and student enrollment shall be achieved as follows:
2.5.1.1 In fulfillment of their respective planning duties, the Cities and the DCPS shall
coordinate their plans to ensure that projections of the amount, type and dis-
tribution of population growth and student enrollment are consistent. The
methodology to be used to determine school enrollment projections to be used
in preparing the DCPS 5 Year Capital Plan shall be Cohort projections matched
to the Department of Education COFTE projection totals by school type. The
methodology to be used to determine school enrollment and capacity to be
used in concurrency testing shall also be included in the Interlocal Agreement,.
Five-year population and student enrollment projections shall be revised annu-
ally to ensure that new residential development and redevelopment information
provided by the Cities is reflected in the updated projections. Longer term pro-
jections will be produced as part of the State -mandated Evaluation and Ap-
praisal Report (EAR) preparation, and as needed.
2.5.1.2. The DCPS shall utilize the Florida Department of Education (FDOE) five-year
countywide student enrollment projections, as expressed in terms of Full Time
Equivalents (FTE). The DCPS may make a request to the FDOE to adjust its
projections to reflect actual enrollment and development trends not anticipated
in the FDOE projections. In formulating such a request, the DCPS shall coordi-
nate with the Cities regarding future population projections and growth. These
projections will be shared with the chief planning official for the Cities. If the
DCPS and any of the chief planning officials for the Cities believe that adjust-
ments are needed to reflect data that the FDOE may have overlooked such in-
formation shall be prepared and submitted to the DCPS and Cities for review
and approval prior to submittal to FDOE.
2.5.1.3 The Cities will use information on County growth and development trends, such
as census information on population and housing characteristics, persons -per -
household figures, historic and projected growth rates, and the information de-
scribed in Section 2.4.2 to project residential units in the Concurrency Service
Areas (CSAs). The CSAs will be established by mutual consent of the DCPS and
Cities staff, pursuant to Section 5.3 .and shall be included in the Data and
Analysis for the Public School Facilities Element. The allocation of residential
REVISED 2008
Page 7 of 32
units by type and CSA will be provided by the Cities to the DCPS annually.
When anticipating student enrollment projections, building permits may reflect
potential for student growth but other mitigating factors must come into play
such as: Cohort survival projecting- including Live Birth Data and 10 -Year His-
toric Enrollment; Land Saturation Analysis; Regression Forecasting; and Permit-
ting Trends.
2.5.1.4 The DCPS will evaluate the planning projections by CSAs prepared by the Cit-
ies. DCPS will apply the student generation rate as provided in Section
5.6.1(a), for residential units by type and projected student station require-
ments of each school type (elementary, middle and high school), considering
past trends in student enrollment within a specific CSA in order to project stu-
dent enrollment. Such projections shall be consistent with the planning projec-
tions prepared by the Cities. This student enrollment will be included in the
Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan provided to the Cities each year as specified in
subsection 5.1.1.3 of the agreement.
2.5.1.5 The Cities and the DCPS shall maintain the data needed for both short term
(five years or less) and long term (more than five year) planning efforts.
2.5.2 Population Projections: Coordination regarding the update of the Cities' population pro-
jections, their allocation into CSA, and conversion into projected student enrollment will
occur on an annual basis at an ILA Team meeting described in Section 1.1 of this Agree-
ment.
2.5.3 Growth and Development Trends: On a regular basis, the Cities will provide the DCPS
with data, including information regarding the type, number, and location of residential
units which have received zoning approval, site plan approval, a building permit, or a
Certificate of Occupancy and a draft Capital Improvements Plan (CIP) with the final ver-
sion of the CIP to be submitted by each local government to the DCPS after official
adoption. Information regarding the conversion or redevelopment of housing or other
structures into residential units that are likely to generate new students shall be pro-
vided.
Section 3 Public School Facility Siting and Development Coordination
Section 3.1 School and Public Facility Site Analysis
3.1.1 The DCPS will be responsible for reviewing and recommending potential sites for new
schools, proposed school closings, and significant school expansion projects to maximize
school capacity usage; and making recommendations to the Superintendent. The Joint
Planning Committee will provide an advisory recommendation to DCPS for pending site
proposals.
3.1.2 The Cities will provide a list of needs for potential park, library, and community center
sites to the ILA Team and then present to the Joint Planning Committee for considera-
tion in formulating a recommendation concerning co -location and/or joint use.
REVISED 2008
Page 8 of 32
3.1.3 The following issues, in addition to others not listed here, may be considered by the
DCPS and the Cities when evaluating potential public facility sites:
3.1.3.1 The location of public facility sites that will provide logical focal points for
community activities and serve as the cornerstone for innovative urban design
standards, including adequate public facilities and opportunities for joint use
and co -location of school facilities and, if appropriate, emergency shelters.
3.1.3.2 Whether existing public facilities can be expanded or rebuilt to accommodate a
school facility.
3.1.3.3 Consistency of the proposed new school site or school closing with the adopted
Comprehensive Plans of the Cities and any neighborhood or district plan
adopted by the Cities.
3.1.3.4 Schools shall be an allowable land use in all future land use categories, with
the exception of heavy industrial and conservation, subject to the following cri-
teria:
(a) In the planning, land acquisition, and development, new school sites, or
significant renovations, expansions and potential closures of existing
schools, the City will evaluate the following factors:
1) Whether the area contains or will contain a student population
density sufficient to support the school;
2) Whether a school in that location would be consistent with sound
facility planning, including consideration of overall costs and de-
sign;
3) Whether the school site is of sufficient size to accommodate the
required parking and circulation of vehicles;
4) Whether anticipated unacceptable impacts to the environment
and significant environmental constraints would preclude a school
on the site;
5) Whether development of the school would result in unacceptable
impacts on archeological or historic sites listed in the National
Register of Historic Places or designated by the City as locally sig-
nificant;
6) Whether the location of a school site is located within the area of
velocity flood zone or floodway, as delineated on pertinent maps
identified or referenced in the City's comprehensive plan or land
development regulations;
7) Whether or not the proposed location lies within an area regulated
by Section 333.03(3), F.S., regarding the construction of public
facilities in the vicinity of an airport;
8) As to elementary school sites, whether the site is proximate to
and within walking distance of the residential neighborhoods it is
intended to serve, thereby encouraging the use of elementary
schools as focal points for neighborhoods.
REVISED 2008
Page 9 of 32
9) As to middle and high school sites, whether the site is conven-
iently located to the residential neighborhoods it is intended to
serve, and has access to major roads;
10) Whether the new schools site, significant renovation, expansion or
potential closure will support community redevelopment and revi-
talization;
11) Whether the new school site, significant renovation, expansion or
potential closure will increase or diminish the current and pro-
jected level of service within the concurrency service area, and
contiguous concurrency service areas.
(b) The facility shall be of a design, intensity, and scale to serve the sur-
rounding neighborhood and be compatible with the surrounding land uses
and zoning.
3.1.4 The Cities shall advise the DCPS as to the consistency of the proposed closure, renova-
tion, or new site with the local comprehensive plan and any neighborhood or district
plan adopted by the Cities during site reviews.
3.1.5 The Cities and the DCPS shall coordinate with local and surrounding governments and
Regional Council, with DCPS and ILA Team involvement, in evaluating closures, renova-
tions, and new site selection for development occurring within close proximity to
neighboring county lines or other local government boundaries.
Section 3.2 Supporting Infrastructure
3.2.1 In conjunction with the site selection determination, the DCPS and the Cities will jointly
determine the need, responsibility for providing, and timing of any on- or off-site infra-
structure improvements necessary to support a new school. To the extent that the pro-
posed action affects on or off-site infrastructure improvements, the same determination
shall be made for the proposed renovation or expansion of an existing school.
Section 3.3 Joint Use
3.3.1 Joint use of facilities is important to the DCPS, the Cities, and the public. The DCPS and
the Cities will continue to explore opportunities for joint use of existing and proposed
school sites, public parks, and libraries. The DCPS will consider joint use when preparing
its Educational Plant Survey and the Cities will consider joint use when preparing their
Comprehensive Plan's schedule of capital improvements. For example, opportunities for
joint use will be considered for libraries, parks, recreation facilities, community centers,
auditoriums, learning centers, museums, performing arts centers, and stadiums. In addi-
tion, where applicable, the joint use of school and governmental facilities for health care
and social services will be considered.
3.3.2 The DCPS and the Cities will utilize a matrix that exhibits which sites are available for
joint and/or public use. This matrix will be updated on a yearly basis and made readily
available to the public. The DCPS and the Cities will have the final decision as to any
joint use of their respective facilities.
REVISED 2008
Page 10 of 32
3.3.2.1 Each joint use site will have a Memorandum of Understanding. The Memoran-
dum of Understanding will include specific details of the agreement. These de-
tails may include such topics as:
(a). Legal liabilities of the parties;
(b). Use by neighborhood associations, public entities, and athletic groups;
(c). User fee charges, operating, and maintenance costs;
(d). Hours available for use;
(e). Staffing requirements, including facility supervision and timely clean up
and maintenance plans;
(f). Requirements for liability insurance to be provided, if appropriate;
(g). Responsibilities for ensuring the facilities or property are properly ready
for the site owner's primary use following use by others, including dispute
resolution procedures;
(h). Dispute resolution, appeals, cancellation or dissolution agreements, in-
cluding issues related to past financial expenditures; and
(i).
Any other issues that may arise from joint use.
3.3.2.2 It is the responsibility of the second party user to satisfy the property or facility
owner, via the Memorandum of Understanding, that the primary functions in-
tended for the property or facility are not adversely affected by the second
party's use. Such primary use purposes will be satisfactorily sustained as a
condition of continuing operations under the terms of the Memorandum of Un-
derstanding.
3.3.3 The emergency management officials of the Cities shall work with the DCPS facilities
staff to identify schools, both existing and proposed, which can serve as emergency
shelter sites, as well as identify and make available to the DCPS any grants or other
monies for use in preparing a structure as an emergency shelter site.
3.3.4 Jacksonville will work with the DCPS to ensure that the shelter bed fee described in Poli-
cies 7.2.5, 7.2.6, and 7.2.7 of the Conservation Element of Jacksonville's Comprehensive
Plan are enforced.
Section 4 Coordinate Land Use and School Capacity
Section 4.1 Comprehensive Plan Amendments, Rezonings, and Development Ap-
provals
4.1.1 The Cities agree to provide an electronic copy, or otherwise make available electroni-
cally, to the DCPS, copies of all land use applications for development and redevelop-
ment pending before them that may affect student enrollment, enrollment projections,
REVISED 2008
Page 11 of 32
or school facilities. This requirement applies to amendments to the comprehensive plan,
future land use map amendments, rezonings, developments of regional impact, final
subdivision approvals or plats, and site plans.
4.1.2 Within 14 days after receipt of the application documents from the local government,
the DCPS staff shall advise, in writing, the affected local government of the school en-
rollment, student transportation, or other school -related impacts anticipated to result
from the proposed land use or development applications and whether sufficient school
capacity exists at the affected schools to accommodate the impacts. This evaluation
process shall be expressed in terms of the adopted level of service, and shall be coordi-
nated with the concurrency management system.
4.1.3 In reviewing and approving land use applications, rezoning requests and development
application, which may affect student enrollment or school facilities, the Cities will con-
sider the following issues where applicable and appropriate in the context of a develop-
ment application:
(a) Providing school sites and facilities within planned neighborhoods;
(b) .Insuring the compatibility of land uses adjacent to existing schools and
reserved school sites;
(c) The co -location of parks, recreation and community facilities with school
sites;
(d) The linkage of schools, parks, libraries and other public facilities with
bikeways, trails, and sidewalks;
(e) Insuring the development of traffic circulation plans to serve schools and
the surrounding neighborhood;
(f) Providing off-site signalization, signage, access improvements and side-
walks to serve all schools;
(g) The inclusion of school bus stops and turnarounds in new developments;
(h) Encouraging the private sector to identify and implement creative solu-
tions to developing adequate school facilities in residential developments;
(i) DCPS comments on comprehensive plan amendments and other land -use
decisions;
(j) Available school capacity or planned improvements to increase school ca-
pacity; and
(k) Whether the proposed development location is consistent with any local
government's school design and planning policies.
4.1.4 In formulating community development plans and programs, the Cities will consider the
following issues:
REVISED 2008
Page 12 of 32
(a) Targeting community development improvements in distressed neighbor-
hoods near schools;
(b) Understanding the importance of scheduling City programs and capital
improvements that are consistent with and meet the capital needs identi-
fied in the DCPS school facilities plan;
(c) Encouraging developments or property owners to provide incentives in-
cluding, but not limited to, donation of site(s), reservation or sale of
school sites at pre -development prices, construction of new facilities or
renovation to existing facilities, and providing transportation alternatives;
(d) Resolving multi -jurisdictional public school issues; and
(e) Determining whether the proposed location is consistent with any local
government's school design and planning policies.
Section 4.2 Educational Plant Survey
4.2.1 At least one year prior to the preparation of the Educational Plant Survey update, the
ILA Team established in Section 1.1 of this Agreement will assist the DCPS in an advi-
sory capacity in the preparation of the update. The ILA Team will share analysis regard-
ing the location and need of new or improvements to, existing educational facilities con-
sistent with the Cities' comprehensive plans.
Section 5 Implementation of School Concurrency
Section 5.1 Procedure
5.1.1 This section establishes the mechanisms for coordinating the development, adoption and
amendment of DCPS capital facilities plan, as well as the public school facilities element,
the intergovernmental coordination and capital improvements elements of the Cities'
comprehensive plans, in order to implement a school concurrency system as required by
law.
5.1.1.1 No later than January 1, 2008, the Cities in coordination with the DCPS will
adopt Comprehensive Plan amendments to address school concurrency mat-
ters, including:
(a) A Public Schools Facilities Element, pursuant to Sections 163.3177(12)
and 163.3180 Florida Statutes;
(b) Changes to the Intergovernmental Coordination Element necessary to ef-
fectuate school concurrency methodologies and processes, as provided in
Section 163.3177 (6)(h)(1) and (2); and
(c) Changes to the Capital Improvements Element necessary to effectuate
school concurrency methodologies and processes, consistent with the re -
REVISED 2008
Page 13 of 32
quirement of Section 163.3177 (3), Florida Statutes, and Rule 9J-5.016,
Florida Administrative Code.
5.1.1.2 Following the amendment of the Cities' Comprehensive Plans, as provided
herein, the Cities will adopt land development regulations to implement school
concurrency consistent with their Comprehensive Plans, State laws (Sections
163.3180 and 163.3202, Florida Statutes), and the terms of this Agreement to
be in place and effective by January 1, 2008.
5.1.1.3 Adoption of Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan: No later than October 1 of each
year, the DCPS Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan must be adopted by the Duval
County School Board. One month prior to adoption of the Five -Year Capital Fa-
cilities Plan, the DCPS will provide the proposed annual update of the Five -Year
Capital Facilities Plan, which identifies those items that increase capacity to the
Mayors of the Cities, with a copy to each chief planning official. The chief plan-
ning officials will respond to the DCPS regarding any inconsistencies that are
identified with this agreement and the adopted Comprehensive Plans of each of
the Cities. Local governments shall provide written comments, if any, to the
DCPS within 14 days following receipt of the proposed work program.
5.1.1.4 Amendment of the Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan: Prior to the adoption of
amendments to the Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan that affect school capacity
for concurrency, the DCPS shall identify those items that increase capacity and
coordinate with the Cities to provide them an opportunity to comment on the
consistency of the amendment with this agreement and the Cities' Comprehen-
sive Plans.
5.1.1.5 Capital Improvements Element (CIE): Annually, following the adoption of this
Agreement, but no later than December 1st, the Cities will consider an amend-
ment to their CIE in order to incorporate the DCPS adopted Five -Year Capital
Facilities Plan.
Section 5.2 Level of Service (LOS) Standards
5.2.1 The DCPS and Cities agree to the following principles for school concurrency in Duval
County:
5.2.1.1 Level of Service (LOS) Standards: Pursuant to Section 163.3180(13)(b), F.S.,
the LOS standards set forth herein shall be applied consistently among the Cit-
ies in Duval County for the purpose of implementing school concurrency, in-
cluding determining whether sufficient school capacity exists to accommodate
a particular development application, and determining the financial feasibility of
the Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan.
5.2.1.2 The uniform LOS standards for all public schools including magnets and all in-
structional facility types shall be 105% of the permanent Florida Inventory of
School House (FISH) capacity plus portables, based on the utilization rate as
established by the State Requirements for Educational Facilities (SREF).
REVISED 2008
Page 14 of 32
(a) The implementation of long term concurrency management shall be
monitored to evaluate the effectiveness of the implemented improve-
ments and strategies toward improving the level of service standards for
middle schools in CSA 5 over the 10 -year period.
(b) The City shall adopt DCPS' Long Range Capital Improvements Plan as the
10 -year long-term schedule of improvements for the purpose of correct-
ing existing deficiencies and setting priorities for addressing backlogged
facilities within CSA 5. The Tong -term schedule includes capital improve-
ments and revenues sufficient to meet the anticipated demands for back-
logged facilities within the 10 -year period. The long-term schedule im-
proves interim level of service standards for backlogged facilities and en-
sures uniform LOS, as established in policy above, is achieved by 2018.
The long-term schedule will be updated by December 1st of each year, in
conjunction with the annual update to the DCPS Five -Year Capital Facili-
ties Plan and the City's Capital Improvements Element.
(c) The City's strategy, in coordination with DCPS, for correcting existing de-
ficiencies and addressing future needs includes:
1) Implementation of a financially feasible Five Year Capital Facilities
Plan to ensure level of service standards are achieved and main-
tained;
2) Implementation of interim level of service standards within designated
concurrency service areas with identified backlogged facilities in con-
junction with a long-term (10 -year) schedule of improvements to cor-
rect deficiencies and improve level of service standards to the district -
wide standards;
3) Identification of adequate sites for funded and planned schools; and
4) The expansion of revenues for school construction.
5.2.1.3 The LOS standards shall be adopted in the Cities' Public School Facilities Ele-
ment and Capital Improvements Elements.
5.2.1.4 If there is a consensus to amend the LOS, it shall be accomplished by the exe-
cution of an amendment to this Interlocal Agreement by all Cities and DCPS
and the adoption of amendments to each local government's Comprehensive
Plan, following an advisory review by the ILA Team and the Joint Planning
Committee. The amended LOS shall not be effective until all plan amendments
are effective and the amended Interlocal Agreement is fully executed. No level
of service shall be amended without showing that the LOS is financially feasi-
ble.
5.2.1.5 It is the intent of the DCPS that new schools be designed and constructed in
conformance with the following design capacities:
REVISED 2008
Page 15 of 32
TYPE OF SCHOOL
New Elementary (K-5)
New Middle (6-8)
New K-8
New High (9-12)
MINIMUM DESIGN STANDARDS
788 students
1,200 students
1,200 (800 ES, 400 MS) students
2,200 students
Section 5.3 Concurrency Service Areas (CSAs)
5.3.1 The CSAs shall be Tess than district wide and shall be divided into Concurrency Service
Areas established for Duval County elementary and high schools, and Concurrency Ser-
vice Areas for middle schools. These CSAs shall be adopted in each of the Cities' public
school facilities elements, as shown on maps attached hereto and incorporated herein
by this reference. The boundaries of the CSAs shall be documented in the data and
analysis provided in each local government Public School Facilities Element.
5.3.2 The following CSAs are considered adjacent to each other:
Elementary and High Schools:
CSA 1 is adjacent to CSA 2, 7, 8, and 9
CSA 2 is adjacent to CSA 1, 8, and 9
CSA 3 is adjacent to CSA 4, 5, and 9
CSA 4 is adjacent to CSA 3, 5, and 9
CSA 5 is adjacent to CSA 3, 4, 6, and 9
CSA 6 is adjacent to CSA 5 and 9
CSA 7 is adjacent to CSA 1 and 9
CSA 8 is adjacent to CSA 1 and 2
CSA 9 is adjacent to CSA 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7
Middle Schools:
CSA 1 is adjacent to CSA 2, 7, and 8
CSA 2 is adjacent to CSA 1, 7, and 8
CSA 3 is adjacent to CSA 4, 5, and 8
CSA 4 is adjacent to CSA 3, 5, and 8
REVISED 2008
Page 16 of 32
CSA 5 is adjacent to CSA 3, 4, 6, and 8
CSA 6 is adjacent to CSA 5 and 8
CSA 7 is adjacent to CSA 1 and 2
CSA 8 is adjacent to CSA 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6
5.3.3 CSAs shall be subsequently modified to maximize available school capacity and make
efficient use of new and existing public school facilities in accordance with the LOS stan-
dards set forth in this agreement, taking into consideration the following criteria:
(a) Maximization of school facilities;
(b) Minimize transportation costs;
(c) Limiting student travel time;
(d) Requirements of court -approved desegregation plans;
(e) Achieving socioeconomic, racial, and cultural diversity objectives; and
(f) Recognizing capacity commitments resulting from local governments' de-
velopment approvals for the CSA and contiguous CSAs.
5.3.4 If there is a consensus to amend the CSAs, it shall be accomplished by the execution of
an amendment to this Interlocal Agreement by all Cities and DCPS, following an advisory
review by the ILA Team and Joint Planning Committee. The amended CSAs shall not be
effective until the amended Interlocal Agreement is fully executed.
Section 5.4 Applicability and Capacity Determination
5.4.1 Except as provided in subsection 5.4.1.4 below, school concurrency applies only to resi-
dential uses that generate demands for public school facilities and are proposed or es-
tablished after the effective date of the School Concurrency Ordinance.
5.4.1.1 The uniform methodology for determining whether capacity is available shall be
determined by the DCPS and adopted into the Cities' public school facilities
elements. Capacity is defined as:
(a) Number of total student stations, which is permanent Florida Inventory of
School Houses (FISH), plus portables; and
(b) Proposed changes to permanent FISH I capacity as a result of construc-
tion, rehabilitation, or other changes in school capacity which will com-
mence in the first three (3) years of the Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan.
(c) The following steps shall be used for school concurrency testing:
1) Q1: Is there current capacity in the CSA and adjacent CSAs?
REVISED 2008
Page 17 of 32
2) Q2: Will adequate facilities be in place or under actual construction
within 3 years after the issuance of final subdivision or site plan ap-
proval?
3) Q3: Are there facilities in the approved CIE scheduled for construction
in year 4 or later of the CIE that can be accelerated into the first 3
years of the CIE, and the developer is willing to enter into a binding,
financially guaranteed agreement with the school district to construct
the accelerated facility within the first 3 years, and the cost of the fa-
cility is equal to or grater than the development's proportionate
share?
4) Q4: Are there capacity improvements in the 5 year CIE to provide an
adequate a facility to satisfy the demands created by the develop-
ment, and the developer is willing to pay a proportionate share miti-
gation contribution?
5) Q5: What other mitigation can be worked out?
5.4.1.2 The capacity determination methodology shall be reviewed by the City and the
DCPS annually, prior to the readoption or amendment of this ILA. The assump-
tions for the formula within the methodology shall be revisited and updated
annually to address changing circumstances, including inflation, construction
and land costs, and policy issues including the magnet and private school sys-
tems.
5.4.1.3 Available Capacity will be defined as a factor to be used to determine school
concurrency that is determined by current permanent FISH capacity plus port-
ables, plus planned additional permanent seats, plus portables over the appli-
cable testing period according to the CIE Tess current student enrollment (for
testing in the current year) or projected enrollment (for testing in year 3)
based on State COFTE, adjusted to remove students generated by projected
new housing stock (see Section 2.5.1.1).
5.4.1.4 The following residential uses shall be considered exempt from the require-
ments of school concurrency:
(a) Developments which have received and hold a valid concurrency reserva-
tion for capacity issued prior to the effective date of the Cities' School
Concurrency Ordinance.
(b) Developments of Regional Impact for which a development order has
been issued prior to July 1, 2005, the effective date of Chapter 2005-290,
Laws of Florida, or for which a DRI application has been submitted prior
to May 1, 2005.
(c) A proposed residential development application which does not increase
the number of residential units will be credited with the number of resi-
dential units at the time of adoption of the appropriate City's School Con-
currency Ordinance.
REVISED 2008
Page 18 of 32
(d) Other uses as provided for in the School Concurrency Ordinance.
(e) Any residential development within a fairshare or development agreement
which was submitted prior to the effective date of the School Concur-
rency Ordinance.
(f)
(g)
Any residential development vested under Cities concurrency system.
Any development with a de minimus impact defined as any residential
development of 20 units or less, subject to land development regulation
aggregation criteria.
Section 5.5 Process for Determining School Concurrency
5.5.1 In evaluating a proposed residential development for concurrency, any relevant im-
provements which are committed or planned in the Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan and
the Capital Improvement Plan, shall be considered available capacity for the project and
factored into the level of service analysis. Any relevant improvements which will com-
mence construction after the 3rd year of the Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan shall not be
considered available capacity for the project unless either: (i) funding and a schedule to
accelerate the improvement into the first three years is assured through DCPS; (ii) fund-
ing for the improvements which are scheduled to commence in years four or five is pro-
vided through proportionate share mitigation; (iii) the developer and the DCPS agrees to
accelerate the construction and funding of the facility to be moved into first three years;
or (iv) some other means. Also, any projected reduction in the number of students en-
rolled in the CSA or adjacent CSA will be considered as additional available capacity. The
City shall not deny an application for site plan, final subdivision approval, or the func-
tional equivalent for a development or phase of a development authorizing residential
development for exceeding the adopted level of service, where adequate school facilities
will be in place or under construction within three years after the issuance of final subdi-
vision or site plan approval, or the functional equivalent.
5.5.2 The Cities will approve final development orders for residential projects, only after the
applicant has complied with the terms of the City's School Concurrency Ordinance.
5.5.3 The Cities will transmit the application to DCPS for a determination of whether there is
adequate school capacity, for each level of school (elementary, middle, and high
school), to accommodate the proposed development, based on the LOS standards,
CSAs, and other standards set forth herein and the Cities' School Concurrency Ordi-
nances. The Cities shall process school concurrency determinations in a manner consis-
tent with their other concurrency procedures.
5.5.4 Within a reasonable time from the date of the initial transmittal as prescribed in the Cit-
ies' School Concurrency Ordinance and consistent with the respective Cities development
review process, the DCPS will review the completed application, and, report in writing to
the appropriate City, whether adequate school capacity exists for each level of school
(elementary, middle and high), based on the LOS standards set forth in this Agreement.
5.5.5 If sufficient school capacity is not available as described in Section 5.5.1 above, the
DCPS shall specify in the Five- Year Capital Facilities Plan how it proposes to meet the
REVISED 2008
Page 19 of 32
anticipated student enrollment demand; alternatively, the DCPS, affected City, and de-
veloper may collaborate to find means to ensure sufficient school capacity will exist to
accommodate the development, such as proportionate share mitigation, developer con-
tributions, project phasing, and required facility improvements.
5.5.6 If the DCPS and the appropriate local government determine that adequate capacity
does not exist but that mitigation will be an acceptable alternative, the development ap-
plication will remain active pending the conclusion of the mitigation negotiation period,
pursuant to Section 5.6.
5.5.7 The Cities will issue a School Concurrency Determination only upon:
(a) DCPS written determination that adequate school capacity to serve the
development (or anticipated phase(s) of the development which will be
constructed in the first three years) will be in place or under actual con-
struction within 3 years after the issuance of final subdivision or site plan
approval, or the functional equivalent; or
(b) The execution of a legally binding mitigation agreement between the ap-
plicant, the DCPS, and appropriate local government (s), as provided in
Section 5.6.
5.5.8 Where a proportionate share agreement is required, capacity shall be reserved as spe-
cifically defined by an approved mitigation agreement between DCPS, the developer and
the local government that includes a performance schedule and phased payments. In
no case shall capacity be reserved longer than 10 years.
Section 5.6 Proportionate Share Mitigation
5.6.1 The DCPS shall establish within the Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan, as annually updated,
the following standards for the application of proportionate share mitigation:
(a) Student Generation Rate shall be calculated for each school type by divid-
ing the total number public school students actually enrolled in that
school type in Duval County by the number of total housing units for the
same year. On or about June 30th, the Student Generation Rate shall be
recalculated, using the most recent count for actual student enrollment as
reported by DCPS to the FDOE, and the most recent copy of JPDD's An-
nual Statistical Package for the number of total housing units in Duval
County as of December 31st for the same year. Total housing units is
calculated by taking the most recent decennial census' total housing units
and adding the number of new residential units permitted since the last
decennial census, and subtracting the number of demolitions permitted
since the last decennial census. Should an applicant believe special cir-
cumstances apply; the applicant may provide a site or use specific Stu-
dent Generation Rate study acceptable to DCPS and request approval of
DCPS and the city for a project -specific Student Generation Rate. These
standards shall be defined in the Concurrency Handbook.
REVISED 2008
Page 20 of 32
(b) Cost per Student Station shall be based on the following: Multiplying the
number of deficient student stations needed to serve the proposed devel-
opment or redevelopment by the cost estimates for resolving such defi-
ciencies in affected school type. Such estimates shall include all costs of
providing instructional and core capacity facilities as published in the
Educational Specifications, State Requirements for Educational Facilities
(SREF), Florida Building Code and designed using the standards listed in
the Facilities Services Design Guidelines developed by the School District,
including school facility construction cost, hurricane hardening of struc-
tures, required on and off-site infrastructure costs including land, profes-
sional fees for architects, engineers, construction managers, design,
DCPS athletic costs, buildings, equipment, furniture, and site improve-
ments. Should the DCPS own a suitable school site in the impacted CSA,
or should a suitable school site and/or facilities be committed to be pro-
vided in an approved agreement or development order, the cost of any
such land will not be included in the student station cost.
(c) The cost of ancillary facilities that generally support the DCPS and capital
costs associated with the transportation of students shall not be included
in the cost per student station used for proportionate share mitigation.
(d) Within 90 days of the execution of this agreement by all parties, the
DCPS shall submit to the ILA Team and Joint Planning Committee the
Cost per Student Station to be used upon the implementation of school
concurrency, together with supporting data and analysis. The supporting
data and analysis shall include: current FDOE student station cost esti-
mates for the corresponding school type; historical cost data for DCPS
school facilities, including cost breakdowns for school facility construction
costs, hurricane hardening of structures, required on and off-site infra-
structure costs, land, professional fees, athletics, buildings, equipment,
furniture, and site improvements; and historical cost data and current
comparable values for land. The Cost per Student Station will be re-
viewed annually in coordination with Section 5.6.1 (a) above by the ILA
Team and Joint Planning Committee.
5.6.2 In the event that there is not sufficient capacity in the affected or adjacent CSA to ad-
dress the impacts of a proposed residential development, the following steps shall apply:
(a) If the applicable Capital Improvement Plan demonstrates that adequate
facilities to serve the development will be in place or under actual con-
struction in the applicable CSA or adjacent CSAs within three years after
the issuance of final subdivision or site plan approval, then school concur-
rency will be deemed satisfied (see s. 163.3180(13)(e)); or
(b) If facilities in the approved CIE scheduled for construction in year 4 or
later of the CIE are accelerated into the first 3 years of the CIE, and the
developer is willing to enter into a binding, financially guaranteed agree-
ment with the DCPS to construct the accelerated facility within the first 3
years, and the cost of the facility is equal to or greater than the develop -
REVISED 2008
Page 21 of 32
ment's proportionate share, then school concurrency will be deemed sat-
isfied. (see s. 163.3180(13)(e)4); or
(c) If capacity improvements in the applicable five year Capital Improvement
Plan would provide adequate facilities to satisfy the demands created by
the development, school concurrency will be deemed satisfied pursuant
to sections 163.3180(13)(e) and 163.3180(13)(e)3, Florida Statutes,
provided that: (i) those improvements are scheduled for years four and
five of the Capital Improvement Plan; (ii) the developer is willing to pay a
proportionate share mitigation contribution; and (iii) the developer exe-
cutes a legally binding commitment to provide mitigation proportionate to
the demand for public school facilities to be created by actual develop-
ment of the property; or
(d) If approval of the development order is conditioned upon phasing the
project's impacts such that development orders shall be delayed to a date
when capacity enhancement and LOS can be assured; or
(e) If other statutorily acceptable mitigation is offered and accepted; or
(f) The project shall not be approved.
5.6.3 As approved in Section 5.6.2, residential developers may pay proportionate share miti-
gation to offset costs to the DCPS of the proposed development or redevelopment, in
the event concurrency is not available in the affected or adjacent CSA for a particular
school type (elementary, middle, high school). A separate calculation shall be made for
each school type where capacity is not available in order to offset the impacts of a pro-
posed development.
5.6.4 Mitigation shall be allowed where feasible, for those developments that cannot meet the
adopted LOS as set forth in Section 5.2.1. The applicant shall initiate in writing a mitiga-
tion negotiation period with the DCPS and the City in order to establish an acceptable
form of mitigation, pursuant to Section 163.3180(c), Florida Statutes, the Cities' School
Concurrency Ordinance, and this agreement. Mitigation shall be negotiated and agreed
to by the DCPS and the City and shall be sufficient to offset the demand for public
school facilities projected to be required by the development.
Acceptable forms of mitigation shall include but not be limited to:
(a) The donation, construction, or funding of school facilities sufficient to off-
set the demand for public schools created by the proposed development
under a mitigation agreement satisfactory to the DCPS and the city. Im-
provements to existing schools will only be acceptable if they add student
station and associated core space capacity.
(b) Land acquisition or contribution such as: a developer signs a development
agreement or is subject to a conditional zoning requiring donation of land
satisfactory to the DCPS and the City. Land must be demonstrated to
contain the minimum number of buildable acres determined by the DCPS
as required for a particular school type, as evidenced by a report by a li-
censed environmental consultant acceptable to the DCPS.
REVISED 2008
Page 22 of 32
5.6.5
(c) Expansion of existing permanent school facilities subject to the expansion
being consistent with DCPS standards for a school of the same category;
(d) Establishment of a Charter School with facilities constructed in accor-
dance with the State Requirements for Educational Facilities (SREF);
(e) Mitigation banking within designated areas based on the construction of a
public school facility in exchange for the right to sell capacity credits. Ca-
pacity credits shall be sold to developments within the same CSA or adja-
cent CSA, as may be provided in Cities' School Concurrency Ordinance;
(f) Proportionate Share mitigation as set forth in section 163.3180(13)(e),
Florida Statutes.
Proposed mitigation must be directed toward school capacity improvement identified in
the DCPS financially feasible Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan, which satisfies the de-
mands created by the proposed development.
Relocatable classrooms will not be accepted as mitigation.
The following
CSAs:
(a)
methodology shall be used to determine proportionate share within the
The number of proposed housing units, multiplied by the Student Genera-
tion Rate by affected school type , multiplied by the Cost per Student Sta-
tion by affected school type.
(b) Applicable credits shall be deducted to determine the proportionate share
mitigation amount.
Applicable credits are:
1) Cities' contributions to address co -locations with other public facili-
ties or hurricane shelter provision.
2) Valorem Tax Credits— The present value of 50% of that portion of
the 2 mils collected by Duval County and distributed. The two mils
collected shall be based on the median appraised value per housing
unit. The term shall be 25 years. The discount shall be equal to the
current rate for DCPS Certificates of Participation (COPs). The result
of this present value shall be multiplied by the number of seats miti-
gated.
3) Residential units existing on the site at the time for proportionate
share mitigation is proposed, which will be replaced by the pro-
posed project.
4) Project phasing considerations.
5.6.6 If within 90 days of the date the applicant initiates the mitigation negotiation period, the
applicant, DCPS and the City are able to agree to an acceptable mitigation, a legally
binding mitigation agreement shall be executed prior to the issuance of the final devel-
opment order. This development agreement will set forth the terms of the mitigation,
REVISED 2008
Page 23 of 32
including such issues as the amount, nature and timing of donations, construction, or
funding to be provided by the developer, and any other matters necessary to effectuate
mitigation in accordance with this Interlocal Agreement. In this development agreement,
DCPS must commit to place the improvement required for mitigation in its Five -Year
Capital Facilities Plan and the Cities' Capital Improvements Element. This development
agreement shall include the land owner's commitment to continuing renewal of the de-
velopment agreement until the mitigation is completed as determined by DCPS and the
City. Successfully meeting the requirements of this section shall allow the development
to proceed subject to all other rules and regulations of the Cities.
5.6.7 The DCPS may grant two (2) 90 -day extensions to the mitigation negotiation period, af-
ter which the applicant will have to reapply.
5.6.8 Proportionate share mitigation options will be specified in the Cities' public school facili-
ties elements and School Concurrency Ordinances.
5.6.9 The DCPS and Cities shall use the processes and information sharing mechanisms out-
lined in this Agreement to adopt the initial public school capital facilities program and
public school facilities elements, and to ensure that the school concurrency system is
updated, the DCPS capital facilities plan remains financially feasible in the future, and
any desired modifications are made. Updated public school capital facilities programs
will be adopted by reference into the Cities' Capital Improvement Element no later than
December 1st of each year.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Interlocal Agreement has been executed by and on be-
half of the DCPS of Duval County, on this Ire, day of , 2009.
Attest:
By:
THE DCPS OF DUVAL COUNTY, FLORI. A
Duval County S • • • I Board
W.E. Pratt-Dannals
Superintendent of Schools
And Ex -Officio Secretary to the Board
Approved by the Board on December 8. 2008
Form Ap� �- for Duval C hoot Board
By: ,
Men
eputy General Counsel
State of Florida, County of Duval
WITNESS my hand and official sea, l this Z'`o- of Febrvrr,, , A.D. 2009
�T'ARY SCAM
Print Name < N�� S. �e.�bre
My Commission Expires 't-13-0�
By: G-‘
mmy Hazo
(CORPORATE SEAL)
Linda S. DeAbreu
Commission # DD475989
Expires November 23, 2009
'•..Pili ; s Bored Troy Fain- Insu1ence,1ac 800-3857019
REVISED 2008
Page 24 of 32
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Interlocal Agreement has been execud by and on be-
half of the Consolidated City of Jacksonville, on this ::">,A day of=�-,.Q,1Oe .rc.4
2009.
THE CONSOLIDATED CITY OF JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA:
ATT
By:
CITY pFt1ACKSONAIILLE
By:
rporation Secreta
117 West Duval Str
Jacksonville, FL 32
(CORPORATE SEAL)
Form Approved:
Bv:
Assistant General Counsel
State of Florida)
County of Duval)
On this5acla of u 009, fore e, the un • ersigned notary public
appeared 1 . ' ■r .�(1 _ and ft ). , whose titles are
Mayor and Corporation ecretary, respectively, for the Consolidated City of Jackson-
ville, Florida, a party to the foregoing Interlocal Agreement, and acknowledging that
they, being authorized to do so, executed said foregoing Interlocal agreement, in behalf
of the Consolidated City of Jacksonville, Florida, for the purposes therein contained.
Mayor
117 West Duval Street
Jacksonville, FL 32202
Kerri Stewart
Deputy Chief Administrative Officer
For: Mayor John Peyton
Under Authority of:
Executive Order No. 07-12
Kerri Stewart
Deputy Chief Administrative Officer
/ For: Mayor John Peyton
Under Authority of:
xecutive Order No. 07-12
Such persons did not take an oath and were personally known to me,
a current Florida driver's license or identification; or produced
identification. I^ /
WITNESS my hand and official seal this 3�f 1 )i MCAD.-((, A.D. 2009.
Print Name 1\/4—`�lf`"
My Commission Expires
IVY L. DWYER-FRAZEE
'1,•Commission DD 809402
x. 'I 1*; Expires July 28, 2012
'? , : Bonded lhru Troy Fain Immo 800-39557019
produced
as
REVISED 2008
Page 25 of 32
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Interlocal Agreement has been executed by and on be-
half of the City of Atlantic Beach, on this 25-m day of Anal use' , 2008.
THE CITY OF ATLANTIC BEACH, FLORIDA:
By:
Jim Hann, City Manager
(CORPORATE SEAL)
ATTEST:
42,),7 V444
Donna
Rruc CMC
City Clerk, City of Atlantic Beach
On this 2844'day of Aug ltsf , 2008, before me, the undersigned notary public
appeared matin Mese-v& and Jim Ha1.So/1 , whose titles are
Mayor and City Manager, respectively, for the City of Atlantic Beach, Florida, a party to
the foregoing Interlocal Agreement, and acknowledging that they, being authorized to
do so, executed said foregoing Interlocal agreement, in behalf of the City of Atlantic
Beach, Florida, for the purposes therein contained.
Such persons did not take an oath and /were personally known to me, produced
a current Florida driver's license or identification; or produced as
identification.
WITNESS my hand and official seal this 28' 'of
Lonna L. &-/e
Print Name
My Commission Expires Ivlar-cl' 3D, 26191
, A. D. 2008.
..............DONNA L BARTLE
MY COMMISSION # DD 796097
.0:077o;' EXPIRES: March 30, 2009
' RGntiV Bonded ifru Notary Public underwriters
Adopted August 25, 2008 as EXHIBIT A to City of Atlantic Beach Resolution 08-10 WISED 2008
PAGE 26 OF 32
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Interlocal Agreement has been executed by and on be-
half of the Town of Baldwin, on this qday of De( ('rh Ix' Y- , 2008.
THE TOWN OF BALDWIN, FLORIDA:
ATTEST: TOWN OF BALDWIN
By: •5-y-,.4 0-r.43
Town Clerk Mayor
(CORPORATE SEAL)
State of Florida)
County of Duval)
On this ,30•day of tej e, - , 2008, before me, the undersigned notary public
appeared '‘‘.A0._ and 5\'O rr , whose titles are
Mayor and City Manager, respectively, for the Town of Baldwin, Florida, a party to the
foregoing Interlocal Agreement, and acknowledging that they, being authorized to do so,
executed said foregoing Interlocal agreement, in behalf of the Town of Baldwin, Florida,
for the purposes therein contained.
Such persons did not take an oath and were personally known to me, produced
a current Florida driver's license or identification; or produced as
identification.
WITNESS my'hand
and official seal this 301-)%` of n.iry_ ,✓ , A.D. 2008.
Print Name • (° -Cc A G�
My Commission Expires Jij/Vlaa1/
�;,y`F,,,, KYLE D. CRAIG
•24,;, �.: MY COMMISSION # DD 734460
�� EXPIRES: November 14 2011
o C,? ,, Banded Thru Notary Public Underwntars
REVISED 2008
Page 27 of 32
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Interlocal Agreement, as amended, has been executed by and
on behalf of the City of Jacksonville Beach, on this 17th day of November, 2008.
THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE BEACH, FLORIDA:
ATTEST:
By: A- 0, /() `) By:
City Manager Mayor
�PGKsoa��
�c',,,
<<tt;
i:Jr t
.�ORIOP.•
CITY OF JACKSONBEACH
/7
(CORPORATE SE
State of Florida)
County of Duval)
On this q day of ,(% ' it�'x_ , 2008, before me, the undersigned notary public appeared
A�vr� Sw*€ P and Ce -c , whose titles are Mayor and City
Manager, respectively, for the City of Jacksonville Beach, Florida, a party to the foregoing
Interlocal Agreement, and acknowledging that they, being authorized to do so, executed said
foregoing Interlocal agreement, in behalf of the City of Jacksonville Beach, Florida, for the
purposes therein contained.
Such persons did not take an oath and t/were personally known to me, produced a current
Florida driver's license or identification; or produced as identification.
WITNESS my hand and official seal this jr Lof Aleve -f ra .A.D. 2008.
(AFFIX OTA
Print Name //A'iGp r eyA.
,777
My Commission Expires Allo r'• 14 2,0 //
lg'1 NANCY J. PYATTE
`1Commission DD 735559
ki Expires November 18, 2011
i,`°Z Badrd Thor Troy Fein Murano) 800366fi19
REVISED 2008
PAGE 28 OF 32
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Interlocal Agreement has been executed by and on be-
half of the City of Neptune Beach, on this 3 day of . b , 200g.
THE CITY OF NEPTUNE BEACH, FLORIDA:
ATTEST: CITY OF NEPTUNE BEACH
By:
City Ma
er
(CORPORATE SEAL)
State of Florida)
County of Duval)
By: Jc,P--�----
`7�
Mayor
On this 3 day of Fe h , 2000, before me, the undersigned notary public
appeared /-1-Arne+ Fr ve t+ -e and , whose titles are
Mayor and City Manager, respectively, for the City of Neptune Beach, Florida, a party to
the foregoing Interlocal Agreement, and acknowledging that they, being authorized to
do so, executed said foregoing Interlocal agreement, in behalf of the City of Neptune
Beach, Florida, for the purposes therein contained.
Such persons did not take an oath and were personally known to me, produced
a current Florida driver's license or identification; or produced as
identification.
WITNE
y hanO and official seal this 3 of --e b , A.D. 2008.
Print Name
My Commission Expires
,tlY a USA VOLPE
�
•* MY COMMISSION # DD 627607
* ami * EXPIRES: February 27, 2011
d'+rf a Ftsf61. Bonded Thru Budget Notary Services
REVISED 2008
Page 29 of 32
Map 1a - School Concurrency Service Areas
DCPS - 9 ES Concurrency Management Area Scenario
us
Aern.
8
0
3
6
12
1
6
5
4
k
Miles r:? Concurency Management Areas LI •
18
Page 30 of 32
Map lb - School Concurrency Service Areas
DCPS - 8 MS Concurrency Management Area Scenario
23
2
22i
tteJi I (1
0
3
6
12
113
Miles
18
7
)
Concurency Management Areas •
4:5‘
Page 31 of 32
Map lc - School Concurrency Service Areas
DCPS - 9 HS Concurrency Management Area Scenario
8
1
0
3
6
12
111
Miles
18
5
sanrille
Concurency Management Areas El •
e(„co 4,co -2•6' •`§
0."
Page 32 of 32