SB 360 and Multi-Modal Impact Fees & Efficiently Managing a Street Lightning System.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
York Viva Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Concept image along Davis Drive.
Advertisements

New Public Transit Alliance (NuPTA) RIPEC Study: Transportation at a Crossroads (2002) Growing Smart with Transit: A Report of the Transit 2020 Working.
General Update March Background As the region grows, increased travel demand on our aging Metro Highway System will continue to create additional.
Pinellas by Design: A Blueprint for Updating the Countywide Plan Pinellas Planning Council May 18, 2011.
Missoula Planning Summit Milestone 14 August, 2008 Missoula, Montana.
Getting Started with Congestion Pricing A Workshop for Local Partners Federal Highway Administration Office of Operations.
The National Context for Smart Mobility John V. Thomas, PhD US EPA Smart Growth Program.
Background Why Plan For Transportation? Facts You Should Know Expectations Projects and Costs Conclusions/ Next Steps.
Transportation’s Relation to Growth Management `.
Mobility COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (CPA 01-09) TO EFFECTIVELY LINK LAND USE & TRANSPORTATION.
Ormond Beach Mobility Strategy and Fee Transportation Workshop League of Women Voters March 23, 2013.
 City of Mesa Council Presentation October 23, 2014.
CARI ROTH Bryant Miller Olive CLAY COUNTY TRANSPORTATION FUNDING.
Capital Region Transportation Planning Agency Regional Mobility Plan Capital Region Transportation Planning Agency Regional Mobility Plan.
21 st Century Committee Report Recommendations NC 73 Council of Planning Annual Meeting January 22, 2009.
1. 2 VIA Long Range Plan  Vision for High-Capacity Transit across VIA service area by 2035  From extensive public and stakeholder input  Prioritization.
Funding Your Journey Florida Transportation Economics 101 Howard Glassman Executive Director MPOAC.
1 Multi-Sector Approach to Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the Metropolitan Washington Region Land Use and Transportation Strategies Prepared for:
Multimodal Corridor Plan BCC Discussion Item Transportation Planning Division August 19, 2014.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT Working With Transportation Concurrency Management Systems Florida Department of Transportation Companion to the Booklet “Working with.
Collaboration Collaboration Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Housing choices and opportunities Housing choices and.
Funding Your Journey Florida Transportation Economics 101 Presenter’s Name Organization.
Freight Issues in the Report of the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission Transportation for Tomorrow.
MnDOT-ACEC Annual Conference March 5,  Capital planning and programming at MnDOT  Major considerations  A more transparent and collaborative.
Compact for a Sustainable Ventura County A project of the Ventura County Civic Alliance and the Ventura Council of Governments.
Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations.
BPAC. “Congestion management is the application of strategies to improve transportation system performance and reliability by reducing the adverse impacts.
PTIS Project Update October 26 – 28, PTIS Project Objective Recommend transit investments and land use strategies for urban and rural Fresno County.
MOBILITY FEES, SMART GROWTH AND FUNDING July 11, 2012.
Alachua County Future Traffic Circulation Corridors Map Project July 10 th, 2007.
Jeff’s slides. Transportation Kitchener Transportation Master Plan Define and prioritize a transportation network that is supportive of all modes of.
Green Transport Dr Lina Shbeeb Minister of Transport. Jordan.
Presentation to ***(group) on ***(date) 1.  Cities - 11  Highway districts – 3  Ada and Canyon Counties  School districts – 2  Valley Regional Transit.
California’s Strategic Growth Plan Ken De Crescenzo Federal Liaison California Department of Transportation.
2030 Mobility Plan City of Jacksonville Planning and Development Department January 2011.
North Central Texas Council of Governments Transportation Department Summary Presentation January 2004 MOBILITY 2025: THE METROPOLITAN.
The Alachua County Mobility Plan:
Convergence of Transportation Policy and RFID Enabler of Future Transportation Policy Chris Body Mark IV Vice President, Business Development.
1 Transit and Climate Change April 10, 2008 Deborah Lipman Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority.
Healthy Places: The Community of Tomorrow. USA Population 2000 –275 million people –Median age: 35.8 yrs 2030 –351 million people –Median age: 39 yrs.
On the Road to a New Metropolitan Transportation Plan Spokane Regional Health District Board of Health April 25, 2013.
PROJECT UPDATE PUBLIC OPEN HOUSE #3 OCTOBER 17 4:30 PM – 6:30 PM Dakota County Northern Service Center.
Comprehensive Plan Update Kevin O’Neill Seattle Bicycle Advisory Board September 2, 2015.
Creating the 2040 Regional Transportation Plan. Today’s Presentation Now Developing the Next RTP  Very Early Stages of Development  Website: 2040Plan.org.
Kissimmee Vine Street Vision Implementation Chamber of Commerce Workshop December 15, 2010.
Alachua County Mobility Plan Springhills Transportation Improvement District and Santa Fe Village Developer’s Agreement October 28, 2014.
Blueprint for Good Growth Adequate Public Facilities Implementation Capacity LOS Capital Plan Demand Unintended consequence slides adapted from presentation.
Session Two Perspectives on Smart Growth. American Planning Association Core Principles of Smart Growth A.Recognition that all levels of government, and.
JUNE 27, 2013 ARB INFORMATIONAL UPDATE: ASSOCIATION OF BAY AREA GOVERNMENTS’/ METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION’S DRAFT SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES STRATEGY.
Growth Management Legislative Discussion: Transportation Concurrency April 24, 2012 Growth Management Legislative Discussion: Transportation Concurrency.
Analyzing the Mobility Impacts of TOD Level of Service in Transit Oriented Districts Service for Who?
What is a TSP? Provides City with guidance for operating and improving a multimodal transportation system Focuses on priority projects, policies, and programs.
Regional Transportation & Land Use IREM / BOMA Real Estate Forecast Breakfast 2009 Rich Macias, Director Regional & Comprehensive Planning Southern California.
2040 LONG RANGE PLAN UPDATE 2040 LRTP Update – Needs Plan Development October 6, 2015 City of Lynn Haven.
Regional Transportation Council Mobility Plan Workshop North Central Texas Council of Governments November 12, 2015.
Defining Alternative Scenarios MTC Planning Committee and ABAG Administrative Committee May 13, 2011.
What Part Does Transportation and Land Use Play in Tackling Climate Change & Greenhouse Gas Emissions? Gordon Garry Director of Research and Analysis,
The 2006 Constrained Long-Range Transportation Plan: Plan Performance Ronald F. Kirby Director of Transportation Planning October 18, 2006 Item #7.
Regional Mobility Plan I. Introduction This process for creating a regional mobility plan is designed for geographic areas with a small to medium sized.
Mobility Strategy Update Work Session November 17, 2009 Mobility Strategy Update Work Session November 17, 2009.
A Strategic Agenda for Pinellas County’s Future Growth Whit Blanton, FAICP Pinellas Planning Council & Pinellas Metropolitan Planning Organization August.
Revenues Sources for Transportation Financing Jeffery A. Richard Foster Pepper & Shefelman.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE MEETING 2 – TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT 12/12/2013.
DESTINATION 2030 Regional Local Personal Adopted May 24, 2001.
Monica Bansal Department of Transportation Planning Presentation to the TPB CAC November 13, 2008 Progress on “CLRP Aspirations” & “What Would it Take?”
21st Century Transportation Committee Finance Subcommittee
Transportation Impact Fees and Funding
Mayors’ Commission on Climate Change
Mayors’ Commission on Climate Change
Presentation transcript:

SB 360 and Multi-Modal Impact Fees & Efficiently Managing a Street Lightning System

SB 360 and Multi-Modal Impact Fees November 17, 2010 Amelia Island Plantation, Florida

SB 360 Setting the Stage Multi-Modal Impact Fees Summary Presentation Overview

SB 360 Pre-1985, local government ordinances protect health, safety, & general welfare based on community values Growth Management Act requires local government to implement concurrency (makes them do #1) SB 360 and 2007 legislation requires / allows proportionate share & thereby waters down # SB 360 says that most urban cities and a few big counties don’t have to do #2 if they don’t want to. 4 3

SB 360 With 2009 SB 360 Maintain local Home Rule authority to regulate and assess fees No State concurrency requirement for DULA cities/counties

SB 360 Before 2009 SB 360 Maintain local Home Rule authority to regulate and assess fees No State concurrency requirement for DULA cities/counties

SB 360 TCEA Statutory Requirements Before 2009 SB 360 Justify size and area Data & analysis, density, vacant land, infill development Develop policies to integrate land-use and transportation to ensure financial feasibility, including alternative modes Coordination with FDOT required for SIS impacts Infrastructure Plan/CIE must be financially feasible

SB 360 TCEA Statutory Requirements With 2009 SB 360 Justify TCEA size and area Meet DULA Qualifications Data & analysis, density, vacant land infill Meet DULA Qualifications Develop policies to integrate land use and transportation strategies and ensure financial feasibility to support and fund mobility within the exception area, including alternative modes

SB 360 TCEA Statutory Requirements With 2009 SB 360 Coordinate with FDOT not required for SIS impacts Infrastructure Plan/CIE must be financially feasible

SB 360 Conclusion Still need to do sound planning, with or without 2009 SB 360 Without 2009 SB 360 can still implement TCEA, just a little more cumbersome With or without 2009 SB 360, can convert existing Transportation Impact Fee to Mobility Fee or implement new Mobility Fee

SB 360 Setting the Stage Multi -Modal Impact Fees Summary Presentation Overview

Setting the Stage Digging out of a hole…. Needs vs. Investment Gap Widening Current Federal Fuel Tax Not Enough Source: Paying Our Way: A New Framework for Transportation Finance (2009) – No adjustment for inflation – Cumulative loss of 33% since last increase (1993) – Highway Trust Fund going broke

Setting the Stage

How Does Europe Deal With These Issues? Higher Fuel Taxes Emphasis on Transit/Dedicated Lanes User-Fees – Congestion pricing, managed lanes, and tolls

U.S. Europe 2010 Avg. = $ = $0.477 Gap= $3.86 Total Fuel Tax Per Gallon of Gas (Europe vs. U.S.) Setting the Stage

No single funding solution Need a balanced revenue plan Funding burden shifted to local governments Must balance “who pays” in a fair and equitable manner” Setting the Stage

SB 360 Setting the Stage Multi-Modal Impact Fees Summary Presentation Overview

Right Development, Right Place, Right Time Pay and Go and Protected Areas Growth Rates and Impact /Mobility Fee Credits The Mobility Fee Concept Buy Down of TIF and Mobility Fees Multi-Modal Impact Fees

Pay and Go Targeted Growth Districts o Pay-and-Go o Expedited Review Requirements Pay and Go Plan Implementation, Comp. Plan Amendments, Code Changes and Fee Ordinance City of Tampa Strategic Vision Flexibility Pay and Go and Protected Areas

Pay-and-Go (or) Reduced Review Requirements Pay and Go Bus Rapid Transit Corridors Streetcar Service Area Transit Centers Bus Transfer Centers Flexibility City of Tampa Strategic Vision Plan Implementation, Comp. Plan Amendments, Code Changes and Fee Ordinance Major Transit Corridors o Pay-and-Go o Expedited Review Requirements Pay and Go and Protected Areas

Protected Neighborhoods Protected Areas o Stringent Review Requirements o Must Meet Concurrency Plan Implementation, Comp. Plan Amendments, Code Changes and Fee Ordinance City of Tampa Strategic Vision Pay and Go and Protected Areas

Right Development, Right Place, Right Time Pay and Go and Protected Areas Growth Rates and Impact/Mobility Fee Credits The Mobility Fee Concept Buy Down of TIF and Mobility Fees Multi-Modal Impact Fees

Impact Fee = (Cost of New Growth) – (New Growth Revenue) Impact Fee = (Demand in VMT x Unit Cost) – (Credit) Credit = (New Growth Revenue) Growth Rates and Impact Fee/ Mobility Credits

Impact Fee = (Cost of New Growth) – (New Growth Revenue) Impact Fee = (Demand in VMT x Unit Cost) – (Credit) Credit = ((New Growth Revenue) + (Existing Development Revenue Credit X Policy Adjustment Factor)) Growth Rates and Impact Fee/ Mobility Credits

100 Existing Homes Generates $10,000 per year ($100/home) = $10,000 Mobility Fee 1% Growth = 1 new home County can buy down 100% of fee for the 1 new home Buy-Down Example: 1% Growth

2% Growth = 2 new homes County can buy down 50% of fee for each new home Buy-Down Example: 2% Growth

3% Growth = 3 new homes County can buy down 33% of fee for each new home Buy-Down Example: 3% Growth

Right Development, Right Place, Right Time Pay and Go and Protected Areas Growth Rates and Impact Fee Credits The Mobility Fee Concept Buy Down of TIF and Mobility Fees Multi-Modal Impact Fees

Flexibility Combine each mode –Roads –Bicycle & Pedestrian –Transit Transportation Assets Today Roads Bicycle & Pedestrian Transit Transitioning from Road to Mobility Fees Mix of Capital Assets (roadways, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit) and Differential Fees and Benefit Districts

Flexibility Combine modes Blend assets Person miles of travel Allocate revenues based on “Strategic Vision” Roads Bicycle & Pedestrian Transit Future Transportation Investment Transitioning from Road to Mobility Fees Mix of Capital Assets (roadways, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit) and Differential Fees and Benefit Districts

City of Orlando Expanded Downtown Mobility District City of Orlando Multi-Modal Transportation Impact Fee Study o Mix of Assets o Expanded Downtown Mobility District o Differential Fees Transitioning from Road to Mobility Fees Mix of Capital Assets (roadways, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit) and Differential Fees and Benefit Districts

How to Create the Rural/Urban Differential? 1.Exemptions/Credits/“Buy-Downs” Countywide Geographic sub-area Most favored land uses (Traditional Neighborhood Development, Mixed Use, Transit Oriented Development) 2.Different Level of Service Standards 3.Different Credits, Demand and Cost Transitioning from Road to Mobility Fees Mix of Capital Assets (roadways, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit) and Differential Fees and Benefit Districts

Right Development, Right Place, Right Time Pay and Go and Protected Areas Growth Rates and Impact Fee Credits Funding Infrastructure Buy Down of TIF and Mobility Fees Multi-Modal Impact Fees

Buy-down Incentives: Helps Direct Development and Fund Plan “Right Place - Right Time” Concept Buy-down Must be Affordable Buy-down Subsidized by Other Revenue Sources Buy Down of Mobility Fees

Example Buy-Down Concept Total Fee = $11,800 Existing Creditable Sources = $2,600 Net Fee = $9,200 South/West Market Area – Mixed-Use/TOD Land Use DRAFT

Example Buy-Down Concept Total Fee = $11,800 Existing Creditable Sources = $2,600 Net Fee = $8,600 South/West Market Area – Mixed-Use/TOD Land Use MSBU (new) = $600 DRAFT

Example Buy-Down Concept Total Fee = $11,800 Buy Down (100%) = $8,600 Net Fee = $0 South/West Market Area – Mixed-Use/TOD Land Use Existing Creditable Sources = $2,600 MSBU (new) = $600 DRAFT

SB 360 Setting the Stage Multi Modal Impact Fees Summary Presentation Overview

SB 360 Conclusion Still need to do sound planning, with or without 2009 SB 360 Without 2009 SB 360 can still implement TCEA, just a little more cumbersome With or without 2009 SB 360, can convert existing Transportation Impact Fee to Mobility Fee or implement new Mobility Fee

A Balanced Funding Program No single funding solution Need a balanced revenue plan Funding burden shifted to local governments Must balance “who pays” in a fair and equitable manner

Flexibility Combine modes Blend assets Person miles of travel Allocate revenues based on “Strategic Vision” Roads Bicycle & Pedestrian Transit Future Transportation Investment Transitioning from Road to Mobility Fees Mix of Capital Assets (roadways, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit) and Differential Fees and Benefit Districts

Example Buy-Down Concept Total Fee = $11,800 Buy Down (100%) = $8,600 Net Fee = $0 South/West Market Area – Mixed-Use/TOD Land Use Existing Creditable Sources = $2,600 MSBU (new) = $600 DRAFT

How Do We Get There? Do it Like Europe? If Florida adopted an additional $1 of gas tax, it has the potential to generate ~ $10B per year for transportation* *Assumed annual revenue per penny generated is $1.6M

Questions or Comments? SB 360 and Multi-Modal Impact Fees November 17, 2010 Amelia Island Plantation, Florida