Alternative Funding for Mobility in Florida Karen E. Seggerman, AICP Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida 4202 E. Fowler Ave., CUT100, Tampa, Florida 33620 Phone: (813) 974-5723, E-mail: [email protected]Kristine M. Williams, AICP Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida 4202 E. Fowler Ave., CUT100, Tampa, Florida 33620 Phone: (813) 974-9807, E-mail: [email protected]Arthur C. Nelson, Ph.D., FAICP Presidential Professor and Director of Metropolitan Research University of Utah 375 S 1530 E, Salt Lake City, Utah 84112-0370 Phone: (801) 581-8253, E-mail: [email protected]James C. Nicholas, Ph.D. Emeritus Professor of Law and Urban and Regional Planning University of Florida 126 SW 165 Street, Newberry, FL 32669 Phone: (352) 472-4045, E-mail: [email protected]Pei-Sung Lin, Ph.D., P.E., PTOE Center for Urban Transportation Research University of South Florida 4202 E. Fowler Ave., CUT100, Tampa, Florida 33620 Phone: (813) 974-4910, E-mail: [email protected]Aldo Fabregas Center for Urban Transportation Research University of South Florida 4202 E. Fowler Ave., CUT100, Tampa, Florida 33620 Phone: (813) 974-3296, E-mail: [email protected]ABSTRACT During Florida’s 2008 legisl ative session, considerable interest was expressed in the concept of a mobility fee, yet varying interpretations surrounded the nature and composition of such a fee. In June 2009, the Florida Legislature enacted the Community Renewal Act, requiring the State of Florida to evaluate and consider implementation of a mobility fee to replace the transportation concurrency system and setting forth certain objectives for the fee. This paper reports on research conducted for the Florida Department of Community Affairs and the Florida Department of Transportation in support of this legislative directive. It explores
17
Embed
Alternative Funding for Mobility in Florida - AgEcon …ageconsearch.umn.edu/bitstream/207092/2/2012_58_Alt_Funding...Alternative Funding for Mobility in Florida ... transportation
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Alternative Funding for Mobility in Florida
Karen E. Seggerman, AICP
Center for Urban Transportation Research, University of South Florida
NTF: New travel factor. Percentage of a development’s net new travel excluding
pass-by trips and internal capture
ATL: Average trip length by planning area
MSAuto: Modal split. Percentage of vehicle trips
Note: Multiplying by ½ divides the trip between each end resulting in net new
one-way trips thus allocating responsibility to the development at each end. For
ATL, include travel on the freeway system. Although impact fee calculations
often exclude travel on the freeway system from thi s value, an accurate estimation
of all new development VMT is essential to the mobility fee program and fees
collected from freeway travel may be spent on reliever projects .
2.2. Calculate credits per vehicle mile of travel (DPVMT)
Interviews with impact fee practitioners indicate that credits per vehicle mile of
travel for motor fuel taxes and other fees for transportation typically represent
about 20-30% of the fee.
Where, GT: Gas tax. Capacity-expanding funding for roads per gallon of motor fuel consumed
(include all other fees collected for transportation such as sales tax, license fees, etc.) MPG: Average fuel efficiency (miles per gallon) 365: Factor to convert daily VMT in annual VMT NPVF: Net present value factor representing the life cycle for a road expansion project
2.3. Calculate mobility fee (MF) for road consumption
The fee rate is determined by subtracting the cost of providing transportation
facilities and services minus credits the new development is expected to produce
through existing revenue sources.
Seggerman, Karen E., Kristine M. Williams, Arthur C. Nelson et al. 7
This equation may be expressed as:
)
Where, MFAuto: Mobility fee rate for road consumption (auto use) PVMT: Project vehicle miles of travel CPVMT: Cost per vehicle mile of travel DPVMT: Credit per vehicle mile of travel
Using equations from the previous steps, the resulting equation follows:
Where, MFAuto: Mobility fee rate for road consumption (auto use) TGR: Trip generation rate (per ITE Trip Generation) NTF: New travel factor. Percentage of a development’s net new travel excluding pass-
by trips and internal capture ATL: Average trip length by planning area, including travel on the freeway system MSAuto: Modal split. Percentage of vehicle trips CPLM: Cost of adding one lane mile of capacity VPD: Vehicles per day GT: Gas tax. Capacity-expanding funding for roads per gallon of motor fuel consumed
(include all other fees collected for transportation facilities such as sales tax, license fees, etc.)
MPG: Average fuel efficiency (miles per gallon) NPVF: Net present value factor representing the life cycle for a road expansion project
3. Optional: Calculate mobility fee for road consumption by planning areas
Planning areas may have different quality/level of service standards for transportation
facilities and services. In this case, the fee rate may vary by planning area. In this case,
the projected VMT would be split by the percentages of vehicle miles of travel in each
planning area. This may be determined by individual travel demand model runs for each
development or estimated in a table using model averages. The mobility fee (before
credits) would be calculated as follows:
Where, PVMT: Projected vehicle miles of travel CPVMT: Cost per vehicle mile of travel PA: Planning area VMT: Vehicle miles of travel
Improvements-based Fee Example. The improvements-based method pro-rates the cost of
planned improvements in the countywide and local mobility plans across development
anticipated during the planning period. To ensure that development provides mitigation
(mobility fee) for its impacts on the transportation in approximate proportionality to those
impacts, the fee should not exceed the amount that would be charged for a consumption-
based fee. Planned improvements in adopted mobility plans that address all modes of
transportation serve as the cost basis for the fee. Below are steps for calculating the fee
under the improvements-based approach.
.
Seggerman, Karen E., Kristine M. Williams, Arthur C. Nelson et al. 8
1. Calculate the target funding level (TFL) for the mobility fee
The target funding level (TFL) is the amount of funding that the fee will need to
generate to fund planned mobility improvements unfunded by other committed revenue
sources. These include motor fuels taxes, local option taxes, development agreements,
and general revenue. The portion of planned projects that will address existing
backlogs, rather than new capacity, should be treated separately to remove concerns
that new development is being charged for existing backlogs. The target funding level
is calculated using the following equation:
Where Committed revenue = gas tax revenue, revenue from pre-existing
development agreements, etc.
2. Estimate VMT growth
Estimate the expected growth in vehicle miles of travel within the planning area
between the base year and the planning horizon year using a travel demand model
(FSUTMS/CUBE). This application of FSUTMS/CUBE can be readily accomplished in
areas that have an established travel demand model and corresponding long range
transportation plan (LRTP). The difference between VMT estimates for the plan ning
horizon and the base year represents the growth in VMT. A correction factor is applied
to account for growth in background traffic and pass -by trips. This number may be from
20-40% of the estimated VMT growth.
Where, New VMT Growth = Increased VMT within the planning horizon attributable to new development VMTHorizon Year = Estimated vehicle miles of travel in the planning horizon year VMTBase Year = Estimated vehicle miles of travel in the base year
CF = Correction factor in percent VMT attributable to new development discounts background traffic and pass-by trips
3. Establish the mobility fee rate
The target funding level (TFL) and the new growth in vehicle miles of travel (VMT) are
used to calculate the average mobility fee rate. Because it is clo sely tied to the planned
land use scenario and corresponding transportation system, the mobility fee rate should
be recalculated every time mobility plans are amended or updated.
This mobility fee rate is a fixed rate that relies solely on vehicle miles of travel as the
controlling factor. The same rate is charged for each estimated vehicle mile of travel
regardless of the development’s location. The rate is calculated by dividing the target
funding level (TFL) by total VMT growth within the planning hori zon as follows:
Where, New VMT Growth = Increased VMT within the planning horizon attributable to new development TFL = Target mobility fee funding level
Seggerman, Karen E., Kristine M. Williams, Arthur C. Nelson et al. 9
4. Determine the improvements-based mobility fee for a new development
To determine the mobility fee for a new development, the mobility fee rate is multiplied
by the estimated vehicle miles traveled of a proposed new development.
ADAPTED TRANSPORTATION UTILITY FEE APPROACH
Another approach considered in the study is an adapted transportation utility fee aimed at all
users within a specified district. This type of fee (sometimes known as a street maintenance fee
or street utility fee) is similar to other types of utility fees and may be used for capital facilities,
maintenance, operations, and administration. Like other utility fees, all property within an
established district is assessed a fee in accordance with estimated use of the utility which, in this
case is the transportation system. Fees are determined by land use and placed in an enterprise
fund.
This fee could be adapted for application as a mobility fee through the use of service
areas similar to impact fee districts. Fees could be developed using an adopted mobility plan for
each service area. This fee also provides two ways to consider facility demand – VMT and
functional population. The VMT-based method would use property tax assessor records and land
use codes to determine the appropriate fee for each property based on the VMT associated with
that land use. The functional population method establishes a fee based on the estimated number
of people occupying the service area within the course of a day and the plan for alternative
modes, as explained further below.
The adapted transportation utility fee offers a new approach to funding transportation
mobility by treating transportation as a utility and providing revenue to address maintenance and
operation, as well as capital improvement needs. The result is a stable, ongoing revenue stream
that may be used to fund all aspects of transportation mobility. Application through a rate scale
tied to transportation facility use is equitable to all fee payers. Implementation of the fee may be
somewhat complex, particularly initial studies and system set-up through the property tax
assessor’s office. Administration beyond that point would involve routine invoicing, collection,
and distribution of revenue. This type of fee is expected to have some impact on reducing VMT
and fostering compact, mixed use development by increasing modal alternatives within urban
centers.
Although popular in some states, such as Oregon, the transportation utility fee is not
currently used in Florida. The City of Orlando considered the approach a number of years ago
and Port Orange, Florida adopted a TUF in the early 1990’s that was later struck down by the
Florida Supreme Court (State of Florida, v. The City of Port Orange, Florida, 650 So.2d 1, 19
FLW S563, 1994 Fla. SCt 8286). The Court found the fee to be a tax not authorized by general
law. Enactment of such a fee would therefore require legislation defining transportation facilities
as a utility or otherwise addressing this concern.
Calculating the Adapted Utility Fee
The adapted transportation utility fee program for mobility fees could have two principal
elements: capital and operations (including maintenance and administration). Because the nature
of demand for transportation facilities varies by facility, facility demand would be calculated in
different ways. Two approaches are recommended to calculate demand: VMT or functional
Seggerman, Karen E., Kristine M. Williams, Arthur C. Nelson et al. 10
population. VMT calculations are commonly used to apportion road capital costs among
different land uses. Florida is a national leader in developing and applying these kinds of
methodologies. A generalized approach using this method is shown in Table 1. Here, the costs
are apportioned to a service area, which may for this purpose be called an assessment district.
Where impact fees are used to generate revenue for transportation it may be advisable to use
those service area boundaries.
TABLE 1 VMT-Based Utility Fee Approach for Mobility Fees
Expenditure Amount
Capital Costs (net of nonlocal, impact fee, and other dedicated revenue) $1,000,000
Operating Costs (net of nonlocal and other dedicated revenue) $2,000,000