Print

Email story

Comment

Email editor

No classrooms, no subdivision?

To combat school overcrowding, the county may adopt a new method for approving residential building projects.

By MICHAEL VAN SICKLER
Published September 28, 2005

TAMPA - Overcrowding in Hillsborough schools is so dire that county growth management officials recently recommended denial of four new subdivisions, the first time they have done so because of a classroom shortage.

Yet this week, when a school district planner learned of that recommendation, based on his findings that there weren't enough area classrooms, he told county staff it was "premature" to delay projects because of overcrowding.

Why is the same district that says school overcrowding is at crisis levels questioning the county's first-ever attempt to ease congestion through zoning?

The school planner, John Bowers, said there are no regulations or policies the district could use to tell rejected developers what they can do to improve the situation in neighborhoods with crowded schools.

"It's not a system we have in place at this time," he said.

School officials have known about the growing classroom deficit for at least three years. During this period, more than 35,000 housing permits have been approved in Hillsborough County.

While Bowers insists it's premature to delay rezonings because of a lack of capacity, Orange County already does it . Its assistant county attorney, Vivien Monaco, said Hillsborough's method is a legitimate way to control growth.

"I don't see any legal reason why a decision to deny rezoning based on school overcrowding would be a problem in Hillsborough County," Monaco said. "It's very similar to the one that we have and that has already been upheld in court."

Hillsborough County Attorney Renee Lee did not respond to requests for comment. She told county planners she needs more time to review the legality of the new practice.

Hillsborough school superintendent MaryEllen Elia said school procedures for turning down developers will not be ready for at least nine months.

"We're not in a position to say no to any developers," she said. "It's not our role to recommend one way or the other on this. We've never done that.

"I'm not reticent about the county at all. I'm just saying I can't do it. They can."

* * *

This latest statement from school officials on growth follows a period in which school leaders have repeatedly warned that the district faces a $364-million deficit in its five-year construction plan. They say drastic measures, such as year-round schools and boundary shifts, may soon be needed.

However, district officials have been reluctant to ask county commissioners for a higher school impact fee, which, at $196, is the lowest in the state.

In addition, a St. Petersburg Times analysis of 188 county rezonings between 2003 and July showed that the school district flagged only 14 subdivisions for exceeding classroom capacity. The other 93 percent, representing more than 32,000 proposed homes and 13,000 projected students, passed without objection from school officials.

For at least four months last year, the district failed to even file reviews of subdivisions. That violated a 2003 pact with the county where district officials agreed to evaluate whether there was available classroom space for new homes.

Recently, though, Bowers, the school planner, has filed reviews that more frequently warned county planners that housing projects did exceed school capacity. Over a two-day span in late August, Bowers flagged four projects for being in areas without an adequate number of classrooms, one more than the number of projects the district flagged during all of 2004.

Until recently, however, there wasn't much county officials could do with the reviews.

When state lawmakers passed growth legislation aimed at curbing sprawl in 1985, they didn't include schools as infrastructure required before new homes get built. Because of that, commissioners usually have been told they can't take schools into account when considering residential zoning.

"Commissioners are kind of in a Catch-22 because they start to talk about schools, and their attorneys stop them and say, "No, no, no, no, you can't talk about that,"' said Lorraine Duffy, a manager with the Hillsborough Planning Commission.

But after school officials in Orange County urged action, officials there decided to deny residential projects if there weren't enough classrooms. Developers didn't like the decision, and hired the Tampa law firm of Bricklemyer, Smolker & Bolves to challenge it, but an appeals court upheld it in 2002.

So when Hillsborough County planners received the latest reports from Bowers that there weren't enough schools for the four projects, they concluded they could so something similar.

They adopted language county commissioners approved last year in the land use code requiring officials to "manage the timing of new development to coordinate with adequate school capacity, as determined by the school district."

"This is the only tool we have to manage school capacity," said Bruce McClendon, the county's planning and growth director. "We're using this as a timing device. Is the land ripe for development? If there aren't enough schools, then no. This is a zoning technique that's used across the country."

McClendon should know. He helped write the Orange County method when he was that county's planning director.

In effect, planners are using the practice in two ways. One is to approve a project on the condition that its final construction plan not be okayed until the school board assures the county there are enough schools. The second is a flat denial of the project based on the lack of school space.

It has only been in the last week that planners have begun using the practice. It isn't drawing raves from developers.

"This has been handled extremely unprofessionally," said attorney Judith James in an e-mail to county attorneys after learning of the recommended denial on her project of 82 townhomes along U.S. 301.

At a zoning hearing Tuesday night, a 91-townhome project in Seffner was approved on the condition that the developer either show there is enough school capacity, or provide ways to ease overcrowding, such as donating land, to the school district.

Another project of 122 homes in Apollo Beach had its denial changed to an approval after Bowers, the school planner, reversed himself. He initially said schools were inadequate for the project, the n said there was enough classroom space.

The developer of the project is represented by attorney Biff Craine, the law partner of Keith Bricklemyer, husband of school board member Carolyn Bricklemyer. It was his firm, Bricklemyer, Smolker & Bolves, that challenged Orange County's attempt to ease overcrowding.

Craine said he alerted Bowers on Monday, hours before the zoning hearing, about a decision in 1990 that allowed the developer to build 92 homes. Craine said legally, he needed approval only for 30 new homes beyond the ones already approved. That is below the threshold for which the school board usually issues a recommendation. So Craine said the project shouldn't have been a concern.

Bowers said the discussion had nothing to do with his changed recommendation.

He said he initially marked the project as inadequate before realizing his boss changed the location of a new middle school, which meant it would provide relief for an overcrowded school near the townhome project.

Bowers said he alerted county officials to this Aug. 25 through a fax but for some reason, they didn't get it. Computer records support his account.

He denied being swayed by the developer's attorney.

"I'd had no discussions with them when I turned it in," Bowers said.

Craine said he didn't hesitate to speak with Bowers about his project, even though his partner's wife is an elected official who oversees the school district, and ultimately Bowers.

"I've been doing this for 20 years, and I've never asked anybody to do something that wasn't right," Craine said.

Bowers' reversal made it easy sailing for the project, which was approved Monday night at a zoning hearing. But Craine said he still doesn't like the county staff's plans for limiting overcrowding.

"I don't think anyone wants what Orange County did here in Hillsborough," Craine said. "It's poor public policy. There are a couple of issues that need to be fleshed out before you start denying projects because of a lack of schools.

"It seems to me that Hillsborough is a shining example for planning for schools," he said. "We're already far far ahead of the eight ball compared to the other big counties."

--Times staff writer Melanie Ave contributed to this report.

[Last modified September 28, 2005, 02:30:38]