Bill Text: FL S0972 | 2013 | Regular Session | Introduced
NOTE: There are more recent revisions of this legislation. Read Latest Draft
Bill Title: Transportation Development
Spectrum: Slight Partisan Bill (? 2-1)
Status: (Introduced - Dead) 2013-04-25 - Laid on Table, companion bill(s) passed, see CS/CS/CS/HB 319 (Ch. 2013-78) [S0972 Detail]
Download: Florida-2013-S0972-Introduced.html
Bill Title: Transportation Development
Spectrum: Slight Partisan Bill (? 2-1)
Status: (Introduced - Dead) 2013-04-25 - Laid on Table, companion bill(s) passed, see CS/CS/CS/HB 319 (Ch. 2013-78) [S0972 Detail]
Download: Florida-2013-S0972-Introduced.html
Florida Senate - 2013 SB 972 By Senator Hukill 8-01029A-13 2013972__ 1 A bill to be entitled 2 An act relating to transportation development; 3 amending s. 163.3180, F.S.; providing that local 4 governments that implement transportation concurrency 5 must allow an applicant for a development agreement to 6 satisfy transportation concurrency requirements if 7 certain criteria are met; providing that a local 8 government may accept contributions from multiple 9 applicants for a planned improvement if it maintains 10 such contributions in a separate account; providing 11 that a local government that repeals transportation 12 concurrency may not deny a development based on the 13 adoption of an alternative transportation system if 14 the developer agrees to enter into an agreement to pay 15 for identified impacts of the proposed development; 16 establishing certain requirements of such alternative 17 transportation system; amending s. 163.3182, F.S.; 18 expanding the types of transportation projects that a 19 transportation development authority may undertake or 20 carry out; amending s. 190.006, F.S.; modifying the 21 method for filling positions within the board of 22 supervisors; providing an effective date. 23 24 Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida: 25 26 Section 1. Subsection (5) of section 163.3180, Florida 27 Statutes, is amended to read: 28 163.3180 Concurrency.— 29 (5)(a) If concurrency is applied to transportation 30 facilities, the local government comprehensive plan must provide 31 the principles, guidelines, standards, and strategies, including 32 adopted levels of service to guide its application. 33 (b) Local governments shall use professionally accepted 34 studies to evaluate the appropriate levels of service. Local 35 governments should consider the number of facilities that will 36 be necessary to meet level-of-service demands when determining 37 the appropriate levels of service. The schedule of facilities 38 that are necessary to meet the adopted level of service shall be 39 reflected in the capital improvement element. 40 (c) Local governments shall use professionally accepted 41 techniques for measuring levels of service when evaluating 42 potential impacts of a proposed development. 43 (d) The premise of concurrency is that the public 44 facilities will be provided in order to achieve and maintain the 45 adopted level of service standard. A comprehensive plan that 46 imposes transportation concurrency mustshallcontain 47 appropriate amendments to the capital improvements element of 48 the comprehensive plan, consistent with the requirements of s. 49 163.3177(3). The capital improvements element mustshall50 identify facilities necessary to meet adopted levels of service 51 during a 5-year period. 52 (e) If a local government applies transportation 53 concurrency in its jurisdiction, it is encouraged to develop 54 policy guidelines and techniques to address potential negative 55 impacts on future development: 56 1. In urban infill and redevelopment, and urban service 57 areas. 58 2. With special part-time demands on the transportation 59 system. 60 3. With de minimis impacts. 61 4. On community desired types of development, such as 62 redevelopment, or job creation projects. 63 (f) Local governments are encouraged to develop tools and 64 techniques to complement the application of transportation 65 concurrency such as: 66 1. Adoption of long-term strategies to facilitate 67 development patterns that support multimodal solutions, 68 including urban design, and appropriate land use mixes, 69 including intensity and density. 70 2. Adoption of an areawide level of service not dependent 71 on any single road segment function. 72 3. Exempting or discounting impacts of locally desired 73 development, such as development in urban areas, redevelopment, 74 job creation, and mixed use on the transportation system. 75 4. Assigning secondary priority to vehicle mobility and 76 primary priority to ensuring a safe, comfortable, and attractive 77 pedestrian environment, with convenient interconnection to 78 transit. 79 5. Establishing multimodal level of service standards that 80 rely primarily on nonvehicular modes of transportation where 81 existing or planned community design will provide adequate level 82 of mobility. 83 6. Reducing impact fees or local access fees to promote 84 development within urban areas, multimodal transportation 85 districts, and a balance of mixed-use development in certain 86 areas or districts, or for affordable or workforce housing. 87 (g) Local governments are encouraged to coordinate with 88 adjacent local governments for the purpose of using common 89 methodologies for measuring impacts on transportation 90 facilities. 91 (h) Local governments that implement transportation 92 concurrency must: 93 1. Consult with the Department of Transportation when 94 proposed plan amendments affect facilities on the strategic 95 intermodal system. 96 2. Exempt public transit facilities from concurrency. For 97 the purposes of this subparagraph, public transit facilities 98 include transit stations and terminals; transit station parking; 99 park-and-ride lots; intermodal public transit connection or 100 transfer facilities; fixed bus, guideway, and rail stations; and 101 airport passenger terminals and concourses, air cargo 102 facilities, and hangars for the assembly, manufacture, 103 maintenance, or storage of aircraft. As used in this 104 subparagraph, the terms “terminals” and “transit facilities” do 105 not include seaports or commercial or residential development 106 constructed in conjunction with a public transit facility. 107 3. Allow an applicant for a development-of-regional-impact 108 development order, a rezoning, a development agreement, or other 109 land use development permit to satisfy the transportation 110 concurrency requirements of the local comprehensive plan, the 111 local government’s concurrency management system, and s. 380.06, 112 when applicable, if: 113 a. The applicant offers to enterentersinto a binding 114 agreement to pay for or construct its proportionate share of 115 required improvements. 116 b. The proportionate-share contribution or construction is 117 sufficient to accomplish one or more mobility improvements that 118 will benefit a regionally significant transportation facility. 119 4. Comply with the following: 120 a. A local government may accept contributions from 121 multiple applicants for a planned improvement if the local 122 government maintains contributions in a separate account 123 designated for that purpose. 124c.(I) The local government has provided a means by which125the landowner will be assessed a proportionate share of the cost126of providing the transportation facilities necessary to serve127the proposed development.128 b. An applicant mayshallnot be held responsible for the 129 additional cost of reducing or eliminating deficiencies. 130 c.(II)When an applicant contributes or constructs its 131 proportionate share pursuant tothissubparagraph 3., a local 132 government may not require payment or construction of 133 transportation facilities whose costs would be greater than a 134 development’s proportionate share of the improvements necessary 135 to mitigate the development’s impacts. 136 (I)(A)The proportionate-share contribution shall be 137 calculated based upon the number of trips from the proposed 138 development expected to reach roadways during the peak hour from 139 the stage or phase being approved, divided by the change in the 140 peak hour maximum service volume of roadways resulting from 141 construction of an improvement necessary to maintain or achieve 142 the adopted level of service, multiplied by the construction 143 cost, at the time of development payment, of the improvement 144 necessary to maintain or achieve the adopted level of service. 145 (II)(B)In using the proportionate-share formula provided 146 in this subparagraph, the applicant, in its traffic analysis, 147 shall identify those roads or facilities that have a 148 transportation deficiency in accordance with the transportation 149 deficiency as defined in paragraph (j)sub-subparagraph e. The 150 proportionate-share formula provided in this subparagraph shall 151 be applied only to those facilities that are determined to be 152 significantly impacted by the project traffic under review. If 153 any road is determined to be transportation deficient without 154 the project traffic under review, the costs of correcting that 155 deficiency shall be removed from the project’s proportionate 156 share calculation and the necessary transportation improvements 157 to correct that deficiency shall be considered to be in place 158 for purposes of the proportionate-share calculation. The 159 improvement necessary to correct the transportation deficiency 160 is the funding responsibility of the entity that has maintenance 161 responsibility for the facility. The development’s proportionate 162 share shall be calculated only for the needed transportation 163 improvements that are greater than the identified deficiency. 164 (III)(C)When the provisions of this subparagraph have been 165 satisfied for a particular stage or phase of development, all 166 transportation impacts from that stage or phase for which 167 mitigation was required and provided shall be deemed fully 168 mitigated in any transportation analysis for a subsequent stage 169 or phase of development. Trips from a previous stage or phase 170 that did not result in impacts for which mitigation was required 171 or provided may be cumulatively analyzed with trips from a 172 subsequent stage or phase to determine whether an impact 173 requires mitigation for the subsequent stage or phase. 174 (IV)(D)In projecting the number of trips to be generated 175 by the development under review, any trips assigned to a toll 176 financed facility shall be eliminated from the analysis. 177 (V)(E)The applicant shall receive a credit on a dollar 178 for-dollar basis for impact fees, mobility fees, and other 179 transportation concurrency mitigation requirements paid or 180 payable in the future for the project. The credit shall be 181 reduced up to 20 percent by the percentage share that the 182 project’s traffic represents of the added capacity of the 183 selected improvement, or by the amount specified by local 184 ordinance, whichever yields the greater credit. 185 (i)d.This subsection does not require a local government 186 to approve a development that is nototherwisequalified for 187 approval pursuant to the applicable local comprehensive plan and 188 land development regulations for reasons other than 189 transportation impacts. 190 (j)e.As used in this subsection, the term “transportation 191 deficiency” means a facility or facilities on which the adopted 192 level-of-service standard is exceeded by the existing, 193 committed, and vested trips, plus additional projected 194 background trips from any source other than the development 195 project under review, and trips that are forecast by established 196 traffic standards, including traffic modeling, consistent with 197 the University of Florida’s Bureau of Economic and Business 198 Research medium population projections. Additional projected 199 background trips are to be coincident with the particular stage 200 or phase of development under review. 201 (k) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a local 202 government that repeals transportation concurrency may not use 203 the adoption of an alternative transportation system as a basis 204 for denial of a development if the developer offers to enter 205 into an agreement to pay for existing or projected impacts of 206 the proposed development. In accordance with subparagraph (h)4., 207 the local government’s alternative transportation system must 208 provide for a mechanism to assess potential impacts of the 209 proposed development and to avoid imposing on new development 210 the responsibility of funding existing transportation 211 deficiencies. 212 Section 2. Paragraph (b) of subsection (3) of section 213 163.3182, Florida Statutes, is amended to read: 214 163.3182 Transportation deficiencies.— 215 (3) POWERS OF A TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY.—Each 216 transportation development authority created pursuant to this 217 section has the powers necessary or convenient to carry out the 218 purposes of this section, including the following powers in 219 addition to others granted in this section: 220 (b) To undertake and carry out transportation projects for 221 transportation facilities designed to relieve transportation 222 deficiencies within the authority’s jurisdiction. Transportation 223 projects may include transportation facilities that provide for 224 alternative modes of travel including sidewalks, bikeways, and 225 mass transit which are related to a deficient transportation 226 facility. Transportation projects may also include projects 227 within and outside the designated deficiency area to relieve 228 deficiencies identified by the transportation deficiency plan. 229 Mass transit improvements and service may extend outside a 230 deficiency area to an existing or planned logical terminus of a 231 selected improvement. 232 Section 3. Paragraph (a) of subsection (3) of section 233 190.006, Florida Statutes, is amended to read: 234 190.006 Board of supervisors; members and meetings.— 235 (3)(a)1. If the board proposes to exercise the ad valorem 236 taxing power authorized by s. 190.021, the district board shall 237 call an election at which the members of the board of 238 supervisors will be elected. Such election shall be held in 239 conjunction with a primary or general election unless the 240 district bears the cost of a special election. Each member shall 241 be elected by the qualified electors of the district for a term 242 of 4 years, except that, at the first such election, three 243 members shall be elected for a period of 4 years and two members 244 shall be elected for a period of 2 years. All elected board 245 members must be qualified electors of the district. 246 2.a. Regardless of whether a district has proposed to levy 247 ad valorem taxes, commencing 6 years after the initial 248 appointment of members or, for a district exceeding 5,000 acres 249 in area,orfor a compact, urban, mixed-use district, or for a 250 transit-oriented development, as defined in s. 163.3164, 251 exceeding 25 acres in area, 10 years after the initial 252 appointment of members, the position of each member whose term 253 has expired shall be filled by a qualified elector of the 254 district, elected by the qualified electors of the district. 255 However, for those districts established after June 21, 1991, 256 and for those existing districts established after December 31, 257 1983, which have less than 50 qualified electors on June 21, 258 1991, sub-subparagraphs b. and d.shallapply. If, in the 6th 259 year after the initial appointment of members, or 10 years after 260 such initial appointment for a districtdistrictsexceeding 261 5,000 acres in area,orfor a compact, urban, mixed-use 262 district, or for a transit-oriented development, as defined in 263 s. 163.3164, exceeding 25 acres in area, there are not at least 264 250 qualified electors in the district, or for a district 265 exceeding 5,000 acres,orfor a compact, urban, mixed-use 266 district, or for a transit-oriented development, as defined in 267 s. 163.3164, exceeding 25 acres in area, there are not at least 268 500 qualified electors, members of the board shall continue to 269 be elected by landowners. 270 b. After the 6th or 10th year, once a district reaches 250 271 or 500 qualified electors, respectively,thenthe positions of 272 two board members whose terms are expiring shall be filled by 273 qualified electors of the district, elected by the qualified 274 electors of the district for 4-year terms. The remaining board 275 member whose term is expiring shall be elected for a 4-year term 276 by the landowners and is not required to be a qualified elector. 277 Thereafter, as terms expire, board members shall be qualified 278 electors elected by qualified electors of the district for a 279 term of 4 years. 280 c. Once a district qualifies to have any of its board 281 members elected by the qualified electors of the district, the 282 initial and all subsequent elections by the qualified electors 283 of the district shall be held at the general election in 284 November. The board shall adopt a resolution if necessary to 285 implement this requirement when the board determines the number 286 of qualified electors as required by sub-subparagraph d., to 287 extend or reduce the terms of current board members. 288 d. On or before June 1 of each year, the board shall 289 determine the number of qualified electors in the district as of 290 the immediately preceding April 15. The board shall use and rely 291 upon the official records maintained by the supervisor of 292 elections and property appraiser or tax collector in each county 293 in making this determination. Such determination shall be made 294 at a properly noticed meeting of the board and shall become a 295 part of the official minutes of the district. 296 Section 4. This act shall take effect July 1, 2013.