§ 62-618. Cross jurisdictional impacts.

(a)

In the interest of intergovernmental coordination and to reflect the shared responsibilities for managing development and concurrency, the county may enter an agreement with one or more adjacent local governments to address cross jurisdictional impacts of development on regional transportation facilities. The agreement shall provide for application of the methodology in this section to address the cross jurisdictional transportation impacts of development.

(b)

A development application submitted to the county subject to a transportation concurrency determination meeting all of the following criteria shall be subject to this section:

(1)

All or part of the proposed development is located within one mile of the area which is under the jurisdiction, for transportation concurrency, of an adjacent local government; and

(2)

Using its own concurrency analysis procedures, the county concludes that the additional traffic from the proposed development would use five percent or more of the adopted peak hour LOS maximum service volume of a regional transportation facility within the concurrency jurisdiction of the adjacent local government ("impacted regional facility"); and

(3)

The impacted regional facility is projected to be operating below the level of service standard, adopted by the adjacent local government, when the traffic from the proposed development is included.

(c)

Upon identification of an impacted regional facility pursuant to section 62-618 (b)(1)—(3), the county shall notify the applicant and the affected adjacent local government in writing of the opportunity to derive an additional proportionate fair-share contribution, based on the projected impacts of the proposed development on the impacted adjacent facility.

(1)

The adjacent local government shall have up to 90 days in which to notify the county of a proposed specific proportionate fair-share obligation, and the intended use of the funds when received. The adjacent local government must provide reasonable justification that both the amount of the payment and its intended use comply with the requirements of F.S. § 163.3180(16). Should the adjacent local government decline proportionate fair-share mitigation under this section, then the provisions of this section would not apply and the applicant would be subject only to the proportionate fair share requirements of the county.

(2)

If the subject application is subsequently approved by the county, the approval shall include a condition that the applicant provides, prior to the issuance of any building permit covered by that application, evidence that the proportionate fair-share obligation to the adjacent local government has been satisfied. The county may require the adjacent local government to declare, in a resolution, ordinance, or equivalent document, its intent for the use of the concurrency funds to be paid by the applicant.

(Ord. No. 06-60, § 1, 11-14-06)