Mobility Strategy Update Work Session November 17, 2009

1. Board of County Commissioners Mobility Strategy Update Work Session November 17, 2009

2. Presentation Outline • Purpose • Policies • Senate Bill 360 • Issues • Options • Summary • Next Steps

3. Presentation Outline • Purpose • Policies • Senate Bill 360 • Issues • Options • Summary • Next Steps

4. Purpose • Explain how concurrency is addressed in the County’s Comprehensive Plan • Discuss the relationship between concurrency and mobility • Review options for addressing mobility

5. Presentation Outline • Purpose • Policies • Senate Bill 360 • Issues • Options • Summary • Next Steps

6. Policies Comprehensive Plan – existing goal Goal 2 A concurrency management system and mobility strategy that ensure that transportation facilities are available to support land use

7. Policies Objectives covered by Goal 2 Objective 1 Levels of Service (LOS) Objective 2 Concurrency Management System Objective 3 Alternative Mobility Areas

8. Policies Objective 2: Concurrency Management System Ensures that transportation facilities needed to support development are available concurrent with the impacts of such development • Establishes procedures • Addresses constrained and backlogged roads • Provides for proportionate fair share

9. Policies Objective 3: Alternative Mobility Areas • Establishes 4 Alternative Mobility Areas • Exempts Alternative Mobility Areas from concurrency • Establishes procedures for addressing mobility

10. Policies Objective 3: Alternative Mobility Areas • Policy 16. The Alternative Mobility Area objective and policies shall apply to any Transportation Concurrency Exception Area designated within Orange County’s jurisdiction.

11. Policies Transportation Concurrency

12. Policies Alternative Mobility Areas

13. Policies Alternative Mobility Areas

14. Presentation Outline • Purpose • Policies • Senate Bill 360 • Issues • Options • Summary • Next Steps

15. Senate Bill 360 Provisions of the law • Plan amendments and rezonings • Permit extensions • Dense urban land areas • Developments of regional impact • Transportation concurrency exception areas (TCEAs)

16. Senate Bill 360 Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas • State designated dense urban land areas as transportation concurrency exception areas • Became effective in July • Requires adoption of a Mobility Plan within 2 years • Current statutory requirements do not apply to newly designated areas

17. Senate Bill 360 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area designated under SB 360

18. Senate Bill 360 Mobility plan requirements • Land use and transportation strategies to support and fund mobility • Include alternative modes of transportation • Transmit plan by January 2011 – adopt by July 2011

19. Senate Bill 360 Status • Legal challenge • Single subject rule • Unfunded mandate • Differing interpretations of the law • Legislature – TCEAs are automatic • DCA – Local governments have to amend comprehensive plan for TCEAs to take effect

20. Senate Bill 360 Status • Mayor put SB 360 implementation on hold pending: • Court case resolution • Next legislative session – clarification of legislation

21. Presentation Outline • Purpose • Policies • Senate Bill 360 • Issues • Options • Summary • Next Steps

22. Issues • Alternative Mobility Area objective and policies were developed to encourage infill and redevelopment in urban areas • Mobility guidelines were drafted to meet concurrency exception area requirements before SB 360 • A policy was included to make mobility guidelines applicable in any area designated a TCEA

23. Issues • As written, policies are more suitable for urban infill areas – not as applicable to the rest of the County

24. Issues Current mobility policies • Development required to meet mobility standards • Number of standards required is based on traffic impact • Mobility standards • Intersection and/or signalization modifications • Dedicated turn lanes • Bus facilities, bus pass programs, increased bus service • Bicycle lanes • Construction or widening of sidewalks • Ride sharing or van pooling programs • Park and ride facilities

25. Issues Current mobility policies • Mobility standards (cont.) • Streetscaping and landscaping that increase walkability • Shading and weather protection over sidewalks • Additional bicycle parking • Removal of impediments to pedestrian movement • Enhancement of County’s greenways, bike paths and trails • Participation in a transportation demand management program • Roadway projects that increase transportation network connectivity and/or provide alternate routes to reduce congestion • Additional roadway lanes

26. Presentation Outline • Purpose • Policies • Senate Bill 360 • Issues • Options • Summary • Next Steps

27. Option 1

28. Option 2

29. Option 3

30. Presentation Outline • Purpose • Policies • Senate Bill 360 • Issues • Options • Summary • Next Steps

31. Summary Summary of options • Option 1: No change • Option 2: Remove policy making mobility strategies applicable to any designated TCEA • Option 3: Amend mobility strategies to be more applicable in the Urban Service Area

32. Summary With all options • Concurrency remains in place unless the Legislature eliminates the concurrency requirement • Mobility policies are an interim measure • Policies will be superseded by Mobility Plan in 2011

33. Presentation Outline • Purpose • Policies • Senate Bill 360 • Issues • Options • Summary • Next Steps

34. Next Steps • Concurrency and mobility • 2010 Legislative session • Mobility Plan • Comprehensive Plan amendment • LPA in December • Discussion with DCA • BCC transmittal in January

35. Board of County Commissioners Mobility Strategy Update Work Session November 17, 2009