City of Tampa Transportation Concurrency Exception Area Update Tampa Bay Applications Group August 21, 2008.

City of TampaCity of TampaTransportation Transportation Concurrency Exception Concurrency Exception Area UpdateArea Update

Tampa Bay Applications GroupTampa Bay Applications Group

August 21, 2008August 21, 2008

Presentation OverviewPresentation Overview

Background & TCEA Update Background & TCEA Update ObjectivesObjectives

Data & AnalysisData & Analysis Policy ApproachPolicy Approach

Background & Background & ObjectivesObjectives ConcurrencyConcurrency Concurrency Exception AreasConcurrency Exception Areas

– RationaleRationale– Risks/IssuesRisks/Issues

Tampa’s TCEA (1998 – 2008)Tampa’s TCEA (1998 – 2008) TCEA Update ObjectivesTCEA Update Objectives

Concurrency - Concurrency - DefinitionDefinition Adequate public facilities must be Adequate public facilities must be

in place at the time development in place at the time development impacts occur.impacts occur.

– LOS Standards Adopted by local LOS Standards Adopted by local government (except SIS/TRIP)government (except SIS/TRIP)

Concurrency - Concurrency - DefinitionDefinition Adequate public facilities must be Adequate public facilities must be

in place at the time development in place at the time development impacts occur.impacts occur.

– Oh Brother!Oh Brother! 3 years – old school concurrency3 years – old school concurrency 5 years – proportionate fair share5 years – proportionate fair share 10 or even 15 years – long term CMS10 or even 15 years – long term CMS Never – improvements which Never – improvements which

“significantly benefit the impacted “significantly benefit the impacted transportation system”transportation system”

Seems Reasonable… Except:Seems Reasonable… Except:– Roads aren’t sewersRoads aren’t sewers

Quality of Life

Health, Safety, & Welfare

Transportation Transportation Concurrency Exception Concurrency Exception AreaArea Another way to say it:Another way to say it:

– CountervailingCountervailing planning and public planning and public policy goals may come into conflict policy goals may come into conflict with the requirement that adequate with the requirement that adequate public [transportation] facilities and public [transportation] facilities and services be available concurrent services be available concurrent with the impacts of development.with the impacts of development.

What’s a What’s a Countervailing Goal?Countervailing Goal?

New Development

Revenue

Capital and Operating

Countervailing Goals…Countervailing Goals…

Operations

Constrained RoadsConstrained Roads– CostCost– LivabilityLivability

Create Multimodal “Habitat”Create Multimodal “Habitat” Apply Latent InfrastructureApply Latent Infrastructure

– UtilitiesUtilities– SchoolsSchools– ParksParks

Preserve Greenspace/SustainabilityPreserve Greenspace/Sustainability

Concerns/RisksConcerns/Risks

Impact to SIS/Regional Impact to SIS/Regional Transportation System and Transportation System and EconomyEconomy– Dynamic equilibrium or Malthusian Dynamic equilibrium or Malthusian

dilemma?dilemma?– In the valley…In the valley…

Density

Time

Roadway NetworkCarrying Capacity

Transit/MultimodalSupportive Density

Concerns/RisksConcerns/Risks

Development not paying fair Development not paying fair shareshare

Development getting out of handDevelopment getting out of hand

Tampa TCEA 1998 - Tampa TCEA 1998 - 20082008 Evolution of Areawide DRIs & Evolution of Areawide DRIs &

1985 Comprehensive Plan (Tiered 1985 Comprehensive Plan (Tiered LOS)LOS)

Concern over FIHS FacilitiesConcern over FIHS Facilities Pay (Impact Fee) and Go!Pay (Impact Fee) and Go! Endeavor to Persevere!Endeavor to Persevere!

– Encourage, promote, etc…Encourage, promote, etc…

Tampa TCEA 1998 - Tampa TCEA 1998 - 20082008 CriticismsCriticisms

– Impact to low density neighborhoodsImpact to low density neighborhoods– Does not do enough to focus growthDoes not do enough to focus growth– Lack or clear mass transit planLack or clear mass transit plan– Gandy Boulevard…Gandy Boulevard…

TCEA Update TCEA Update ObjectivesObjectives Provide Mechanisms to Focus GrowthProvide Mechanisms to Focus Growth

Statutory RequirementsStatutory Requirements– Justify size and areaJustify size and area– Document multimodal mobility optionsDocument multimodal mobility options– Document SIS impacts/mitigation strategiesDocument SIS impacts/mitigation strategies– Develop policy linkage between urban Develop policy linkage between urban

form, mobility plan, and concurrency form, mobility plan, and concurrency exemptions exemptions

Data and AnalysisData and Analysis

– Justify size and areaJustify size and area– Document multimodal mobility Document multimodal mobility

optionsoptions– Document SIS impacts/mitigation Document SIS impacts/mitigation

strategiesstrategies

Size and AreaSize and Area

Florida Administrative Code 9J-5.0055Florida Administrative Code 9J-5.0055– Less Than 10% Vacant LandLess Than 10% Vacant Land– At Least 5 Dwelling Units / Gross At Least 5 Dwelling Units / Gross

Residentially Developed AcreResidentially Developed Acre

Compared to Hillsborough Urban Compared to Hillsborough Urban Services Boundary Services Boundary (2000 TBRPM Z Data)(2000 TBRPM Z Data)

– 15% of Acreage15% of Acreage– 33% of Dwelling Units33% of Dwelling Units– 50% of Employment50% of Employment

SIS ImpactsSIS Impacts

SIS Demand Select Zone AssignmentSIS Demand Select Zone Assignment– 40% E : E 40% E : E (Trips Pass Through TCEA)(Trips Pass Through TCEA)– 49% E : I 49% E : I (One Trip-End in TCEA)(One Trip-End in TCEA)– 11% I : I 11% I : I (Both Trip-Ends in TCEA)(Both Trip-Ends in TCEA)

Plan to MitigatePlan to Mitigate– Make Surface Street Traffic Ops and Capacity Make Surface Street Traffic Ops and Capacity

Improvements (where cost feasible)Improvements (where cost feasible)– Concentrate new development within existing Concentrate new development within existing

business centers or along “Primary” transit corridorsbusiness centers or along “Primary” transit corridors– Encourage Development Within Urban Services Encourage Development Within Urban Services

BoundaryBoundary

Overall Roadway Overall Roadway ConditionsConditions

2005

2015

2025

Mobility Options/NeedsMobility Options/Needs

No Specific Guidance for TCEAsNo Specific Guidance for TCEAs Used Multimodal Transportation District (MMTD) Used Multimodal Transportation District (MMTD)

MeasuresMeasures– Appropriate Scale of Development Appropriate Scale of Development – Complementary Mix of Uses Complementary Mix of Uses – Land Uses Promoting Multimodal UsageLand Uses Promoting Multimodal Usage– Acceptable Separation of Land UsesAcceptable Separation of Land Uses– Appropriate Density and Intensity of Use Appropriate Density and Intensity of Use – Appropriate Organization of Land UsesAppropriate Organization of Land Uses – Regional Intermodal Connectivity Regional Intermodal Connectivity – Interconnected Multimodal NetworkInterconnected Multimodal Network – Acceptable Level of Service for Each Mode Acceptable Level of Service for Each Mode – Acceptable Areawide Quality of Service for Each Acceptable Areawide Quality of Service for Each

ModeMode

Organization of Land Organization of Land Uses (With Respect to Uses (With Respect to Transit)Transit)

85 % of Dwelling Units & 91% of 85 % of Dwelling Units & 91% of Employees Served by TransitEmployees Served by Transit

Total Dwelling

Units

Total Employees

Dwelling Units Served by a

Transit Route

% of Dwelling Units Served by a Transit Route

Employees Served by a

Transit Route

% of Employees Served by a

Transit Route

TCEA 125,900 316,300 106,900 85% 287,800 91%

InterconnectInterconnected Networked Network

Average of 100 Average of 100 Blocks/Square MileBlocks/Square Mile

50 Blocks/Mile is 50 Blocks/Mile is AdequateAdequate

River & Interstates River & Interstates Are Main Are Main Connectivity Connectivity BreaksBreaks

Areawide Q/LOSAreawide Q/LOS

Level of Service x Population ServedLevel of Service x Population Served For Transit Acceptable Q/LOS is:For Transit Acceptable Q/LOS is:

– LOS “C” for 70% of Jobs and PopulationLOS “C” for 70% of Jobs and Population

For Current Transit Service & Year For Current Transit Service & Year 2000 Z-Data LOS “C” Service Applies 2000 Z-Data LOS “C” Service Applies to:to:– 37% of Employees37% of Employees– 17% of Dwelling Units17% of Dwelling Units

Needs:Needs:

HART Transit HART Transit Emphasis Corridor Emphasis Corridor Plan (or Similar Plan (or Similar Investment)Investment)

$125 - $200m over $125 - $200m over 20 years20 years

$1500 - $4000 per $1500 - $4000 per new Unit of new Unit of DevelopmentDevelopment

Policy ApproachPolicy Approach

Comprehensive Plan Policies Comprehensive Plan Policies EnableEnable Variation in Sub-Area Review and Mitigation Variation in Sub-Area Review and Mitigation ProceduresProcedures

Sub-Area Policies Consider:Sub-Area Policies Consider:– Magnitude of Project ImpactsMagnitude of Project Impacts– Planned Mass Transit SystemPlanned Mass Transit System– Urban Form StandardsUrban Form Standards

Procedural Details to be Established in Land Procedural Details to be Established in Land Development CodeDevelopment Code

Downtown Downtown RevitalizationRevitalization– Downtown & Downtown &

Channel District Channel District CRAsCRAs

– Downtown Downtown Areawide DRIAreawide DRI

Downtown Downtown RevitalizationRevitalization

Urban Urban RedevelopmentRedevelopment– Westshore DRIWestshore DRI– TIATIA– Drew Park CRADrew Park CRA– USFUSF– Heights, Central Heights, Central

Park, Ybor CRAsPark, Ybor CRAs– Port AuthorityPort Authority

Downtown Downtown RevitalizationRevitalization

Urban Urban RedevelopmentRedevelopment

Mixed-Use Mixed-Use Corridor VillagesCorridor Villages– Major Commercial Major Commercial

CorridorsCorridors– Concurrency Concurrency

Exemption Exemption Dependent on Dependent on Cost Affordable Cost Affordable Transit PlanTransit Plan

Downtown Downtown RevitalizationRevitalization

Urban Urban RedevelopmentRedevelopment

Urban InfillUrban Infill– Remainder South Remainder South

of Fletcherof Fletcher

All Development Required to:All Development Required to:– Be Consistent with Comprehensive PlanBe Consistent with Comprehensive Plan– Mitigate Site Traffic ImpactsMitigate Site Traffic Impacts– Pay Standard Assessment (i.e. Impact Fee)Pay Standard Assessment (i.e. Impact Fee)

Review and Mitigation Review and Mitigation FrameworkFramework

InfillArea

DowntownCore

OutsideTCEA

Redev.Area

RoadwayMitigationRequirements

Mixed-UseCorridor

Exempt from Roadway Mitigation if;Exempt from Roadway Mitigation if;– Consistent with Urban Form/CodeConsistent with Urban Form/Code

1

InfillArea

DowntownCore

OutsideTCEA

Redev.Area

RoadwayMitigationRequirements

Mixed-UseCorridor

1

Exempt from Roadway Mitigation if;Exempt from Roadway Mitigation if;– Consistent with Urban Form/CodeConsistent with Urban Form/Code– Served by Planned Mass Transit InfrastructureServed by Planned Mass Transit Infrastructure– Large Project Site Impacts (Potentially Extending Large Project Site Impacts (Potentially Extending

to Adjacent Signals) are Addressedto Adjacent Signals) are Addressed

2

InfillArea

DowntownCore

OutsideTCEA

Redev.Area

RoadwayMitigationRequirements

Mixed-UseCorridor

2

Exempt from Roadway Mitigation if;Exempt from Roadway Mitigation if;– Consistent with Urban Form/CodeConsistent with Urban Form/Code– Served by Planned Mass Transit InfrastructureServed by Planned Mass Transit Infrastructure– Large Project Site Impacts (Potentially Extending to Large Project Site Impacts (Potentially Extending to

Adjacent Signals) are AddressedAdjacent Signals) are Addressed– Neighborhood Traffic Impacts MitigatedNeighborhood Traffic Impacts Mitigated

3

InfillArea

DowntownCore

OutsideTCEA

Redev.Area

RoadwayMitigationRequirements

Mixed-UseCorridor

3

Exempt from Roadway Mitigation ifExempt from Roadway Mitigation if– Roadway System Impacts are De MinimusRoadway System Impacts are De Minimus– Moderate and Large Projects Must Offset Impacts:Moderate and Large Projects Must Offset Impacts:

Construct ImprovementsConstruct Improvements Proportionate Fair Share and/or Proportionate Fair Share and/or Neighborhood Traffic ManagementNeighborhood Traffic Management

4

InfillArea

DowntownCore

OutsideTCEA

Redev.Area

RoadwayMitigationRequirements

Mixed-UseCorridor

4

5

Not Exempt from Concurrency; Not Exempt from Concurrency; – However, Most Development Vested by Prior Dev However, Most Development Vested by Prior Dev

OrdersOrders– Any New Development Agreements ShouldAny New Development Agreements Should

Restore Cost Affordable LOS StandardRestore Cost Affordable LOS Standard Prop Share at City’s DiscretionProp Share at City’s Discretion

5

InfillArea

DowntownCore

OutsideTCEA

Redev.Area

RoadwayMitigationRequirements

Mixed-UseCorridor

Land Development Code Land Development Code Concepts:Concepts: Mass Transit Service AreaMass Transit Service Area Alternative LOS MeasuresAlternative LOS Measures

– Cut-line or sub-area system Cut-line or sub-area system performanceperformance

– Duration of CongestionDuration of Congestion Neighborhood MitigationNeighborhood Mitigation

– Traffic CalmingTraffic Calming– Bike & Pedestrian FacilitiesBike & Pedestrian Facilities

Implement TOD/TND Form-Based Implement TOD/TND Form-Based CodeCode

Infrastructure Infrastructure Planning:Planning: Update Transportation Impact FeeUpdate Transportation Impact Fee Identify Roadway/Intersection Identify Roadway/Intersection

ImprovementsImprovements– Impact Fee Project ListImpact Fee Project List– Remaining Projects Eligible for PFSRemaining Projects Eligible for PFS

Coordinate w/ HART for “Primary” Coordinate w/ HART for “Primary” Transit Corridor networkTransit Corridor network

Contact:Contact:

Jean Dorzback, P.E.Jean Dorzback, P.E.

Transportation Planning ChiefTransportation Planning Chief

City of Tampa, Transportation DivisionCity of Tampa, Transportation Division

[email protected]@tampagov.net

Demian Miller, AICPDemian Miller, AICP

Sr. Project ManagerSr. Project Manager

Tindale Oliver & Assoc. IncTindale Oliver & Assoc. Inc

[email protected]@tindaleoliver.com