1 / 10

Growth Management Legislation: TRANSPORTATION-RELATED CHANGES

technical ADVISORY committee JuLY 28 , 2011. Growth Management Legislation: TRANSPORTATION-RELATED CHANGES. Calculation of Transportation Proportionate Share. Existing roadway deficiencies are responsibility of local government and not subject to proportionate share contributions.

maitland
Download Presentation

Growth Management Legislation: TRANSPORTATION-RELATED CHANGES

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. technical ADVISORY committee JuLY28, 2011 Growth Management Legislation:TRANSPORTATION-RELATED CHANGES

  2. Calculation of Transportation Proportionate Share • Existing roadway deficiencies are responsibility of local government and not subject to proportionate share contributions. • Project does not need to be in Capital Improvements Element to be eligible for proportionate share contribution. • May not require payment or construction of transportation facilities where cost is greater than development’s proportionate share • Applicant can satisfy mitigation requirements with proportionate share payment • Projects must receive credit for impact fee payments.

  3. Policy Implications • If funds are not available to correct road deficiencies, then there is a potential for further traffic congestion on these roads. • Need to revise Land Development Code to reflect change legislative changes. • FDOT Recommendations to the Legislature (December 2011)

  4. Transportation Concurrency • No longer a state-mandated requirement • If transportation concurrency implemented: • Encouraged to assign a secondary priority to vehicular mobility – greater emphasis on walkability and access to transit • Projects may proceed to development if proportionate-share payment is made (“pay-n-go”) • Transportation Element is still required to address long-term mobility

  5. Policy Implications: • Potential infrastructure gap • Need for common standards • Flexible highway standards

  6. Level of Service Standards – Strategic Intermodal System • Local governments no longer required to adopt the Florida Department of Transportation’s (FDOT) Level of Service for Strategic Intermodal System (SIS). • If local government implements concurrency, it must consult with FDOT regarding impact of plan amendments on SIS.

  7. Strategic Intermodal System In most cases, minimum operating standard is level of service (LOS) “C.”

  8. Policy Implications: • Need to preserve mobility on SIS • Common local standards • Lower highway standards in • transit corridors

More Related