USF Libraries
USF Digital Collections

Development incentives that support transit

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Development incentives that support transit
Physical Description:
Book
Language:
English
Creator:
University of South Florida. Center for Urban Transportation Research
Publisher:
Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR)
Place of Publication:
Tampa, Fla
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Railroads--Management
Railroads--Florida--Cocoa Beach--Management   ( lcsh )
Genre:
letter   ( marcgt )

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of South Florida Library
Holding Location:
University of South Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
usfldc doi - C01-00008
usfldc handle - c1.8
System ID:
SFS0032131:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

Develaprnent Incentives that Support Transit

PAGE 2

DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVFS TifA T SUPPORT lRANSIT Prepared for: Tri-County Commuter Rail Authority By: Center for Urban Transportation Research College of Engineering University of South Florida June 1994

PAGE 3

PREFACE Under contract with the Tri-County Commuter Rail Authority (Tri-Rail), the Center for Urban TransPQrtation Research (CUTR), College of Engineering of the University of South Florida, has reviewed the transportation concurrency management systems for selected cities and counties within the Tri-Rail service area. The purpose of this study was to identifY options for making local concurrency management systems better able to balance the need for expanded roadway capacity with the State growth management p olicy of directing transportation investments to promote efficient urban development. Tills study c larifies the appropriate application of highway concurrency evaluation with regard to public transit facilities and identifies options for incorporating non-a uto travel modes into the measurement of transportation level of service. CUTR has drawn upon expertise gained from conducting prior research for Tri Rail. CUTR is currently completing the Transit Development Plan for Tri-Rail. Other recent studies include ridership surveys for use in long-range planning and market assessments of TriRail service expansion options Additionally, CUTR has conducted related research for other state and local agencies addressing concurrency management systems and joint development. CUTR is currently completing Phase I of the State Transportation Policy Initiative, which examines state and local land use and transportatio n planning processes within the context of the federal Interrnodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) and the Floiida Enviroilmental Land Management Study (ELMS m) amendments to growth management legislation. The following CUTR staff assisted in conducting the analysis and in the preparation of this report: Project Manager: Sara J. Hendricks, AICP Research Associate Project Director: Steven E. Polzin, P .E., Ph.D, Deputy Director for Policy Analysis Research Assistance: Kristine Williams, AICP Research Associate Tony Rodriguez, Graduate Research Assistant Janet Becker, Program Assistant CUTR Director: Gary L. Brosch ll

PAGE 4

TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I Study Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Organization of the Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 An Overview of Tri-County Commuter Rail Authority . . . . . . . . . . 3 TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT ISSUES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Rail Station Development .... ........................ . . . . . 7 Land Development SUJTOunding Rail Stations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 PLANNING AND REGULATORY CLIMATE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II Development of the Local Comprehensive Planning Process . . . . . . . II Recent Changes to the State Legislative Framework . . . . . . . . . . 12 Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Projects That Promote Public Transportation . . . . . . . 14 Regional and Local Goals and Policies Framework . . . . . . . . . 15 Palm Beach County Planning and Regulatory Climate . . . . . . . . . 16 Urban Forms Conference. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Land Use Considerations for Mass Transit. . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Land Development Regulations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVES THAT SUPPORT TRANSIT . . . . . . . . . 23 Transportation Concurrency Application to Public Transit Facilities . . . . . 23 Transportation Concurrency Exception For Transit-Oriented Development . . . 26 Alternatives To Incorporating Trans it Into Concurrency Evaluation . . . . . 29 Varying the Level of Service Standard . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Measuring Level of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Trip Generation Of New Development .. .................... : . 32 Toward A More Comprehensive Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 CONCURRENCY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS: EXISTING PRACTICES IN SOUTH FLORIDA . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 City Of Miami Concurrency Management System . . . . . . . . . . 39 Dade County Concurrency Management System . . . . . . . . . . . 3 9 New County LOS Standards That Incorporate Transit . . . . . . . . 42 Broward County Concurrency Management System . . . . . . . . . 43 Palm Beach County Concurrency Management System . . . . . . . . . 43 Ill

PAGE 5

URBAN AREAS OUTSIDE FLORIDA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Montgomery County, Mary l and . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 Policy Area Transportation Review (PA TR) . . . . . . . . . . 50 Local Area Transportation Review (LA TR) . . . . . . . . . . . 54 New Methods Under Review .. .". . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Use of Total Transportation Level of Service for PATR . . . . . . . 55 Computing Transit LOS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 Measuring Non-Auto Level of Service for LA TR . . . . . . . . . 58 CONCLUSION ............................ .". . . . . . . . . . . 61 APPENDIX A: ELMS III Legislative Changes to Florida Growth Management Laws . 63 APPENDIX B: Process for Local Comprehensive Plan Amendment Adoption . . . 68 APPENDIX C: Regional and Local Goals and Policies Framework . . . . . . . 69 APPENDIX D: List of Individuals Contacted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 BIBLIOGRAPHY .......................... ..................... . 91 IV

PAGE 6

Table 1: Table 2 : Table 3 : Table 4: Table 5: Tab l e 6 : T able 7: Table 8: T able 9 : Tab le 10: IJST OF TABLES Tri-Rail Sta tion Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Journey-To -Work Flows Within the Tri-County Service Corridor . . . . 5 Characteristics of Local Governme nt Concurrency Management Systems Comparative Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 Dade County LOS Standards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Test 1 -Link/Buildout Test Palm Beach C ounty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Test 2 --Model Test Palm Beach County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5 Areawide LOS Standards Based On Transit Availability Montgomery, Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 Transit LOS Measures Use d To Detennine Group Assignment Montgomery County, Maryland ........ . .............. 5 4 Reductions App lied to Vehicle Trips Generat e<\ by Office Buildings Montgomery County, MD Local Area Transportation Review . . 57 Consid ered LOS Measures Relating to Overall Transit Trip Montg omery County, Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 . v

PAGE 7

VI

PAGE 8

EXECUTIVE SUMMA RY The Tri-Co unty Commuter Rail Authority (Tri-Rail) operates the only regional commuter rail system in Florida. The system connects major metropolitan areas within one of the most urbanized regions in the state. Tri-Rail's success during its brief history indicates a growing need and desirability for travel alternatives to the automobile. As Tri-Rail works to meet the region's transportation needs, difficulties have occurred as the expansion of rail stations has come under scrutiny for their impact upon the adjacent street network Because Florida's growth management laws require that public facilities be subject to concurrency, the possibility existS that a rail station expartSion may be impeded because more motorists driving to the rail s tati on contribute enough ll!fditional localized traffic to existing congestion conditions that the roadway level of service standards are violated. Tri-Rail requested that the Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR) examine the regulatory environment under which commuter rail station facilitie s and compl ementary adjacent land are developed within the framewor k of the growth management system of Florida. This study investigated ways to enable and facilitate public transit station and station area development The work program included a review of land use regulation and station area development activities of Palm Beach ; B roward and Dade Counties and selected municipalities, in addition to those of other urban areas across the nation that use adequate public faciliti es ordinances comparable to Florida's concurrency reqwrements The system used by Montgomery County Maryland is particularly informative and is described in this report. The evaluation of transit infrastructure for concurr ency and the provision of incentives to encourage the cre a t io n of transi tori ented developm ent are the focus of this report The study resulte d in a number of specific recommendations and ip.forrnation, in clud ing: a recommendation for modifying the Florida Statutes to exempt public transit station development from roadway concurrency requirements; a recommendation to modify the Florida Statutes to offer a station area development conc urrency exemption for transit-oriented development; a discussion of alterna tive ways that l ocal governm ents can incorporate transit c onsiderati ons into their conc urrency management syste ms, including the use of level of service definitions and measurements that can encourage the development of rail stations and transit-oriented development; and a general discussion of current practices of land use planning that can support transit oriented development vii

PAGE 9

As part of the current local government roadway concurrency review, difficulties arise when public mass transit facilities, such as commuter rail stations, bus park-and-ride facilities and transit terminals are evaluated as traffic generators. While the auto trips made by those motorists seeking to ride a rail line are removed from those roadways leading to the destination and redistributed onto local roadways accessing the rail station, the rail station itself generates few, if any JieW trips. The net effect of the rail service is a reduction in total vehicle miles traveled. Therefore, one recommendation of the study is that public mass transit facilities should not be evaluated for roadway concurrency but rather should be exempt. The legitimate concern over traffic impacts of a transit station would continue to be addressed by the existing planning process. For example, transit station development is subject to consistency requirements with the local comprehensive plan, local zoning, design standards driveway permitting and oth er applicable local regulations. A second major issue addressed by this study concerns the extent to which development regulation supports or inhibits station area development. Because it has been demonstrated that the success of public transit can be enhanced by improving its accessibility to patrons the concept of transit-oriented development has gained widespread attention The purpose of transit oriented development is to create land development of appropriate density and design, combining complementary land uses in close proximity to transit stations in order to free citizens from !he need for an auto and enable them to travel effectively by transit. In order for the concept to be used successfully by communities that are served by transit, the necessary incentives to enable and support transit-oriented development should be available. In addition to the above proposed changes clarifying that a transportation concurrency exception should automat ic ally apply to public mass transit facilities, we recommend that Chapter 163.3180(5)(b) F.S. be further amended to add a fourth local government roadway transportation concurrency exception area option. 1his new option would be consistent with the other three exception options currently provided: urban infill development, urban redevelopment and downtown revitalization, in that they all apply to some defined geographic area, rather than to a specific development project, as the fourth exception option in the legislation is currently written. Criteria s hould be established to require local governments to defme the geographic boundaries for the exception area as well as list transit-oriented site design features for use in evaluating the proposed development. The above recommendations are intended to clarify the appropriate application of transportation concurrency and to provide concurrency exceptions to transit-oriented development on an areawide basis. These exceptions would provide important incentives for rail transit development and the surrounding private land development to be mutually supporting . In addition to the concurrency exemption and the use of a transportation concurrency exception area option, this study has also described aspects of concurrency management systems presently viii

PAGE 10

in use that have the effect of incorporating transit considerations into the roadwa y concurrency evaluation. These aspects include the manner in which the roadway LOS standard is varied, the manner in which the roadway level of service is measured, and thirdly, the manner in which trip generation of the new develop ment is calculated. While these incentives would strongly contribute to development conditions supportive of transit, they are probably not sufficient to achieve conditions necessary for effective and successful transit service. It is urged that other mechanisms be used in concert with the recommended refinements to the local government concurrency management systems. These might include some co mbination of station area master plans, transit district overlays or mixed-use zoning, reduced parking for private development surrounding the transit stations, and flexible development financing These development tools are beginning to be used in other urban areas in Florida and in other states. As incentives to development that support public transit are incorporated into the planning and regulatory framework of growing communities, public transit will be able to provide an increasingly effective travel alternative to the automobile. IX

PAGE 11

X

PAGE 12

IN'IRODUcnON The Tri-County Commuter Rail Authority (Tri-Rail) requested that the Center for Urban Transportation ResearcH (CUTR) examine the regulatory environment under which commuter rail station facilities and complementary adjacent land is developed within the framework of the growth management system of Florida. This framework includes state, regional and local goals and policies that guide planning as well as state requirements for the preparation of local government comprehensiv e plans 1bis development context also includes requi red local land development regulations, such as concurrency management ordinances, which implement the local comprehensive plans. Concurrency is the enforcement keystone of growth management in the state of Florida. The purpose of a concurrency management system, as adopted by each local government, is to establish an ongoing mechanism that ensures tha t public facilities and services needed to support development, including transportation facilities, are available concurrent with the impacts of such development. 1 Despite the intention of roadway concurrency evaluation, the results have included new land development at densities lower than the maximum allowed and sprawling land development directed outwards to the fringe of urban areas where existing roadway capacity still exists. These two land development qualities--sprawling development and lower densitiesincrease auto travel dependency while inhibiting successful use of public transportation. Higher-density, compact development, on the other hand, produces more trips within a smaller geographic area than local roads can handle without congestion. Because many roadway concurrency evaluation systems have precluded compact, higher density development in areas where roadway facilities are constrained, they also have precluded the conditions necessary to establish successful high capacity public transportation, such as commuter rail. In light of the recent legislative changes to Florida growth management laws, this study serves as a timely review of the transportation conclll'lCDCy management systems for selected cities and counties within the Tri-Rail service area. It ideoti1ies options for improving local regulatory systems, including ways to recognize the contribution of rail transit in roadway concurrency evaluation While focused on Tri-Rail. the findings from this study also may be useful to those municipalities that may be served by future commuter rail systems in other regions in Florida. The new emphasis upon multimodlism and intermodalism since the passage of the federal lnterrnodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991 has focused more interest nationwide upo n proper land development design and regulations to optimize transportation alternatives and accessibility. Recent amendments to Florida's system of growth management legislation and programs now recognize the need for coordination between transportation and land use planning and regulations. As a result, renewed attention has been given to "transit-oriented 1 Florida Administrative Code 91-5.0055.

PAGE 13

development" (TOO) This includes a range of integrated land uses within some specified radius of a transi t station, carefully designed to enable mobility for daily activities without the use of a car The results of this study are intended to assist Tri-Rail in its goal to plan and construct needed rail stations and enhancements under equitable and appropriate compliance with concurrency. In order to facilitate the achievement of transportation and mobility goals promoted by growth management efforts at the state, regional and local levels, this study al s o reviews and makes recommendations for plaruting policies and practices that enable and encourage transit-supportive land development. Study Methodology Information was compiled through a review of p l anning documents of Palm Beach, Broward and Dade counties and selected municipalities, including Boynton Beach, Boca Raton and Pompano Beach. The most current literature on the subject of concurrency was also reviewed. A list of references is included at the end of this report. Additionally, visits to the planning offices of the municipalities listed above were made to interview transportation and land use planning staff Phone interviews also were conducted with officials from other states, including staff of departments of transportation transit authorities and city and county governments A list of interviewees is included in Appe n dix 0 of this report As an example of alternative methods for evaluating transportation .level of service, the Montgomery County, Maryland concurrency management system was reviewed in depth. of the R eport This report first presents an overview of the facilities and services provided by Tri-Rail, as well as its plans for service expansion. "Transit Development Issues" describes two issues relat i ng to transportation concurrency that challenge the development of regional commuter rail i n South Florida. To provide historical context, "Planning and Regulatory Climate" briefly summarizes the of comprehensive plaruting in the state since the 1970s, the development of concurrency as a hallmark of Florida's growth management system, and the opportunities created by the most recent legislative amendments. The evolving planning framework of Palm Beach County is highlighted as an example of transportation planning at the local level. "Development Incentives That Support Transit" presents arguments in support of recommendations for revisions to the application of transportation concurrency to public transit facilities as prescribed by state law. In addition to these recommendations, this section also presents other alternatives for incorporating transit considerations into concurrency. Concluding remarks raise the point that refmements to the local government concurrency management systems are just one means to encourage the development of public transit and the development of land use patterns that enable public transit to be a more effective transportation alternative 2

PAGE 14

Ultimately, as Palm Beach County has in their recent planning efforts, a more comprehensive approach is needed for achieving these goals. "Concurrency Management Systems: Existing Practices" and "Urban Areas Outside Florida" contain summaries describing existing concurrency management systems in selected South Florida municipalities as weU as one particularly instructive example from outside Florida. Finally, "Urban Areas Outside Florida" is followed by several appendices containing supporting information. AD 0.-erview of Tri-Collllly Commuter Rail Autborily The Tri-County Commuter Rail Authority, as created by the state legislature in Chapter 343, F S ., owns and maintains the only operational conunuter rail system in the state of Florida. The rail system, C0!15isting of 15 existing stations and six proposed stations, runs along 67 miles of the CSX railroad line (owned by FOOT) parallel to 1 -95 and serves municipalities and unincorporated areas in Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties. Table I summarizes Tri-Rail Station development Since the beginning of rail service operations in Januaey 1989, Tri-Rail ridership has grown steadily each year, with an average daily ridership exceeding 10,000 during the peak season in 1993.1 Table 2 shows the magnirude of total commuting trips among Broward, Dade, and Palm Beach counties. 1bis amount of regional travel illustrates potential commuter rail ridership. Although Tri-Rail was originally a temporary demonstration project during the reconstruction 9f I-95, the Florida Legislature in 1991 provided Tri-Rail with longterm funding after 199 4, securing the commuter rail line as a permanent part of the regional transportation system of South Florida. Tri-Rail service will continue to play an important regional transportation role because of the increasiilgly limited of developable land available for road construction to serve the narrow corridor between the Atlantic Ocean and the environmentally sensitive lands to the west. Tri-Rail provides weekday, late-evening, Saturday and Sunday rail service, as well as shuttle buses that circulate through sunoWlding business and residential areas to lllllke Tri-Rail more accessible to adjacent communities. bus service connects with two Tri-Rail stations and free transfers can be made from Tri Rail to Dade County's Metrorail/Metromover system. The Corridor Master Plan for the Southeast Florida Rail Corridor was completed in February 1992 calling for reconstruction of the rail corridor and a second main line track parallel to the existing line. A computerized signal system will greatly improve on-time performance. Service expansion considerations includ e extending the northern tern>inus to the new Veterans Administration Medical Center. At the south end of the Tri-Rail corridor in Dade County, there 1 Center for Urban Transportation Research, "Tri Rail On-Board Survey Analysis Final Report" (July 1993 ): 6. 3

PAGE 15

TABLE I Tri-Rail Station Development Station Name Sl8tut Location Notes VA Hospital Propoocd Bee Line Hwy. Palm Beacb SWion ExisliDc Blvd. Palm Blinl Hillsboro Blvd. Conoi' cxpoasi Pompano Beacb Slllion Exislinl Sample Rd.IN. W. 8th Ave. ldcnlifled for perldQa cxpoasi C)'l>mS Creek Swion Exisrin1 C)'l>mS Cr
PAGE 16

are discussions concerning a new Tri-Rai l station for the City of Opa Locka, and plans are under way for relocating the Miami Airport Station into the proposed multi-modal center at the Miami International Aiiport. In the longer term, Tri-Rail is also considering an extension northward to Jupiter along the Florida East Coast Railroad right-of-way. TABLE 2 JourneyTo-Work Flows within the Tri-County Service Corridor County or County or Employllleld Brow ani na Palm Beacb Broward 471,595 77,285 31,809 Dade 31,561 844,722 2,909 Palm Beach 25,462 3,483 343,100 Soun:c: Center for Urban Tronsponalion Rescaroll, Florida O.MogJ'qJirk=>
PAGE 17

6

PAGE 18

TRANSlf DEVELOPMENT JSSUES Rail Station Development Due to steady ridership growth, station parking needs have increased. In recognition that attracting new riders partly depends upon adequate station parking, Tri-Rail has pursued property acquisitions at several station sites including those in Boynton Beach, Pompano Beach and Boca Raton, to enable parking expansion. Because of the original temporary nature of Tri-Rail, no new land was acquired. Planners knew that there would be insufficient parking if the rail system were a success. Both the Boynton Beach and Boca Raton Stations suffer from parking shortages. A swvey of parking usage recently conducted by CliTR, indicates that all 31 regular parking spaces at the Boynton Beach Station were used and 44 cars were parked illegally on the day of the swvey. Similarly, at the Boca Raton Station, all 53 regular parking spaces were occupied and 10 cars were illegally parked on the day of the survey.' Parking capacity problems have been observed at several other stations. As Tri-Rail service attracta more riders, vehicle trips are taken off the regional road network and redistributed along roadways tha t lead to the rail stations. While diminished highway level of service may result in localized areas surrounding rail stations, positive effects accrue to the regional throughways resulting from Tri-Rail service. In an attempt to develop and eicpand facilities at cammuter rail stations, Tri-Rail has encoi,mtered the roadway concUITeDcy review requirements of local governments. A survey of local governments in the Tri-Rail service corridor indicates the following: In Palm Beach County, Tri-Rail parking lots have been treated as traffic generators for roadway concurrency evaluation purposes. 4 In Dade County, parking Jots and garages for use by transit facilities are not evaluated for concurrency. If the land use is not listed in the !TE Trip Generation Manual, then it is not reviewed for concurrency.' Center for U rban Transportation Research, "Tri-Rail Transit Development Plan, Draft" (December 1993). 4 Discussion with Dan Weisberg, P.E., Senior Engineer, Traffic Division Engineering and Public Works, Palm Beach County, October 2g, 1993. Discussion with Mark Woerner, Transportation Planner, Metropolitan Dade County Planning Department, November 17, 1993. 7

PAGE 19

For the Pompano Beach Station parking expansion, Broward County did not consider parking facilities as a use that generates traffic for the purpose of assessing road impact fees or performing traffic concunency analysis. 6 However, to satisfy the concurrency requirements of the City of Pompano Beach, the additional proposed parking was evaluated as a traffic generator.' Because Tri-Rail plans to expand the existing supply of parking at rail stations to accommodate Tri-Rail patrons, questions have arisen about the appropriate evaluation of rail station development for roadway concunency. Land Developmeat Sumnmcting Rail SIIICions A major policy issue identified during the preparation of the Tri-Rail Transit Development Plan was the need for station area complementary land use combinations and opportunities for joint development' Tri-Rail proposes to replace the existing Boca Raton at Yamato Road with a Boca North Station at Congress Avenue to serve Arvida Park of Commerce, IBM and other industrial development in that area. To the south of the existing station, a new Boca South Station is proposed to be located at Glades Road, where Tri-Rail can serve a higher potential ridership from several developments, including: High density residential and office development along Military Trail; Crocker Center, a mixed-use facility; Town Center, the second largest regional shopping mall in South Florida, employing over 5000 employees; and Florida Atlantic University, which is projected to serve over 30,000 students and which plans to build an on-site research and development park. Close proximity of the station site to these developments creates a potential for reducing roadway traffic congestion. The vicinity of the Boca Raton Station was identified as one of four locations with the greatest market potential in tenns of ridership and real estate development, particularly 6 Letter of Elliot Auerbabn, Acting Director, Department of Strategic Planning and Growth Management, Broward County, to Cathy Sweetapple, Director of Transportation Planning, Keith and Scbnars, P.A., January 28, 1993, conceming concurrency evaluation relating to Tri-Rail parking and programmed roadway improvements. 7 Discussion with Cynthia Bertscbinger, Planning Director, City of Pompano Beach, October 27, !993. 8 Center for Urban Transportation Research, "Tri-Rail Transit Development Plan, Draft" (December 1993). 8

PAGE 20

as a model for high-density mixed-use development where it will have the least traffic impact on the community .9 Tri-Rail has completed an Environmental Assessment as a prerequisite for receiving a FY 94 Section 9 FTA grant, which will be used to acquire 12 acres of a 20-acre site. The 12 acres are planned to contain the new Tri-Rail Station and a parking facility. In order for rail transit to maximize its ability to provide transportation service to the most people, land development must be designed to enable-patrons to access the station easily. Transit officials are concerned not only with an existing lack of transit-oriented development near rail stations but also the lack of local regulatory mechanisms to encourage or ensure that appropriate development takes place These rwo development issues -the evaluation of transit infrastructure for concurrency and the provision of incentives to encourage the creation of transit-oriented development-are the focus of this report. 9 Goodkin Research Corporation, memorandum to the Tri-County Commuter Rail Authority Board, April 1 0, 1991. 9

PAGE 21

10

PAGE 22

PLANNING AND REGULATORY CLIMATE Given the issues identified above, CUTR reviewed the most recent changes to the state growth management legislation and summarized those aspects that affect public ttansit and related development. Regional and local goals, objectives and policies were also reviewed, with a closer look at planning initiatives in Palm Beach County, to determine the receptivity to transit and supporting development. DevelopmeDt of the Local Colllpftbemive Proces.t In 1975, Chapter 163, F.S. was enacted by the Florida Legislature. Also known as the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, it requires local governments to establish and implement local comprehensive plans and processes in order to guide and control future development. All public and private land developmen t must conform to the local government comprehensive plan of the jurisdiction within which it is located. Due to a lack of effectiveness, Chapter 163 F.S. was amended in 1985, in a bill known as the Growth Management Act, which requires local government comprehensive plans to be consistent with the newly adopted State Comprehensive Plan. The amendments also established concurrency, which requires that specified public facilities and services needed to support new development must be available concurrent with the impacts of that development. Rule 9J-5 F A.C., established minimum criteria for the preparation, review and detcTmination of compliance of comprehensive plans pursuant to Chapter 163, F.S., including criteria for the establishment of concurrency manag=ent systcTns. 10 Beginning in 1988 and according to a staggered schedule of submission dates, all counties and municipalities were required to submit their comprehensive plans, revised to conform to the new requirements, to the Department of Community Affairs for a detennination of compliance with the provisions of Chapter 163, F.S. This process is now largely compl ete. One additional provision in Chapter 163, F.S. of potential interest to the discussion of compliance with concurrency is the use of development agreements, as provided by Chapter 163.3220, F.S., the Florida Local Government Development Agreement Act. This Act was created with !he intent to ensure that concurrency requirements are met while providing flexibility in the development process and minimizing the economic cost of development. Any local government may adopt an ordinance establishing procedures for entering into a development agreement wilh a land developer, which must be consistent with the local government comprehensive p l an and must not exceed five years. Requirements of a development agreement must include a description of public facilities that will serve the development, the name(s) of the provider of the 10 9J-5.0055, Concurrency Management System. 11

PAGE 23

facilities the dale of construction and a schedule to assure that public facilities are available concurrent with the impaciS of the development. Deve lopment agreeme nts have rarely been used. For example, Metro-Dade County has provisions in its Service Conc urrency Management Program for the use of development agreements but to date, no developmen t agreements have been employed as an alternativ e to meeting concurrency requirements for land development at MetroR.ail stations. 11 A review of the use of development agreements was pursued in reference to questions regarding whether Metro Dade County has previously issued concurrency credits to development at MetroR.ail stations as part of a development agreement. According to the Coocunency Administration Office at Metro Dade County, no such credits have ever been issued. -R.eceat C'hllages to tbe Sllllle Legbl.ttve Fnmework In 1991, the third Environmental Land Management Study Commi ttee (ELMS Ill) was assembled by Governo r Lawton Chiles to review several issues regarding the stale's planning and growth management framework. The ELMS III Committee's recommendations were presented before the Florida State Legislature as CSIHB 2315 and passed into law in Spring 1993. In the long term, these amendments may have a poSitive effect upon development opportunities as they relate to the provision of public transportation. Appendix A summarizes those aspects of the ELMS amendments that will affect the way state, regional and local traDSportation and land use planning is carried out with regard to public transit facilities and related land development. A brief overview is provided here. Chapte r 186, F S., which governs state and regional planning, was amended to require the state comprehensiv e plan to contain strategic guidance for growth management, including guidelines for the appropriate location of urban growth and transportation corridors. Regional policy plans must also contain recommendations for minimum density guidelines for development along public transportation corridors While several sections of the Florida StatuleS were changed by the ELMS bill, including Chapler 186, F.S most of the amendmen ts to Florida's system of growth mmagement were made to Chapler 163, F.S., the Local Government Comprehensive Pluming Act. Local governments are now encouraged to fonnulate a "vision" of the future appearaoce and quality of their communiti es, using the Evaluation and Appraisal Repon (EAR) process as a staning point. The EAR must assess the success or failure of the local government comprehensive plan in accordance with 9J-S.OOS3, F.A.C., including a review of how well policies were implemented and the achievement of goals and objectives. The EAR must also address any development problems that the community has experienced, including issues relating to concumncy and the l ocation of development relative to public infrastructure. The EAR process provides an Phone discussion with Mark Woerner, Metro-Dade County November 17, 1993. 12

PAGE 24

opportunity for planning program refinements. It will also be an opportunity to focus attention on the land use/transit service relationship. Local planning agencies must submit draft EARs to the Department of Community Affairs 90 days prior to a submission schedule set forth in 9J-33, F.A.C. The schedule for counties in the Tri-County corridor is as follows: Dade County, November I, 1995 Broward County, March I, 1996 Palm Beach County, June I, 1996 Local governments may submit their EARs prior to the due dates. Any comprehensive plan amendments subsequent to the transmittal of the EARs must be consistent with the recommendations of the EARs. 12 EAR recommendations in the form of plan amendments must be adopted within one year of the adoption of the EAR. While the EAR is subject to a sufficiency determination that all review requirements of Chapter 163.3191, F.S. have been met, comprehensive plan amendments are subject to a compliance review. As part of their respective comprehensive plans, all local governments located within an urban area served by an MPO must combine the traffic circulation element, the mass transit element and other transportation-related elements into a new transportation element that addresses all modes. The amended Rule 91-5, F.A.C., which implements Chapter 163, F.S., became effective March 23, 1994. It requiles policies relaring to land use and building design standards that enhance accessibility to public transit corridors. 13 The amendments to Chapter 163, F .S. also allow greater time flexibility for the achievement of transportation concurrency. Prior to the amendments to Chapter 163, F .S. and 91-5, F.A.C., the existing law and implementing regulations allowed local governments the option of adopting transportation concurrency management areas (TCMA). A TCMA is a geographically compact area that contains multiple, viable alternative travel paths or modes for common trips. They are to be used to direct mixed-use land development into more intensive patterns and to promote public transit and management of traffic congestion. The TCMA option requires the development of a transportation mobility eletnent as a means to meet minimlJID level of service criteria. The ELMS III amendments to Chapter 163, F.S. and 91-5, F.A.C. has attempted to simplify the use of the TCMA option, which had been rarely used by local governments. 12 Chapter 163.3187(5), F .S. 13 Rule 9J-5.019(4Xc)9, F.A.C. 13

PAGE 25

In addition to the existing option allowing local governments to designate TCMAs, the amendments create a numbe1' of new options, such as the provision for the creation of long-tenn transportation concurrency manag<:ment systems to be established in areas with severe transportation backlogs, and the allowance to use areawide level of service averaging, which is discussed on page 30. Most significant to this study is the new provision requiring all public facilities to be subject to concurrency and the creation of the transportation concurrency exception area option for local governments, which allows exception areas to be defined for projects that promote public transportation. One of the most promising changes to Chapter 163, F.S. is the creation of the optional Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas. 14 Representative Steven Geller ofBroward County originally sponsored CSIHB 503, which contained the draft language for the transportation concurrency exceptions. Representative Gellet's concerns stemmed from the threat of moratoria in Broward County due to congested roadways and the recognition that the fonner concurrency requirements tended to promote sprawl by forcing development projects out to less developed areas where roadway capacity still existed. Developments that qualify as exceptions from the transportation concurrency requirement were identified in the legislative amendments in order to resolve the conflict between unintended effects of transportation concurrency and the state goals of achieving compact urbal) growth patterns and developilig public transportation. The intent is ... to provide flexibility for concurrency milnagement in order to encourage the application of a wide range of planning strategies that correspond with local circumstances of a specific geographic area."" A local government may grant an exception from transportation concurrency to projects that are otherwise consisten t with the local government comprehensive plan and are located in geographic areas designated by the comprehensive plan for urban infill development, urban redevelopment, or downtown revitalization. The exception applies to all land uses and development and types of facilities within expressly excepted areas. 16 Projects That Promote Public Tt'OIISpOrtation. A fourth exception from transportation concurrency may also be granted to projects that promote public transportation. Such projects are defined in Chapter 163.3164(28), F.S. as: Chap. 163.3180(5), F.S. Rule 91-5. 0055(6), F.A .C. 16 Definitions for downtown revitalization, urban redevelopment and urban infill were added to Chap. 163.3164 F.S. 14

PAGE 26

... those projects that directly affect the provisions of public transit, including transit terminals, transit lines and routes, separate lanes for the exclusive use of public transit services, transit stops (shelters and stations), and office buildings or projects that include fixed rail or transit tenninals as part of the building. Rule 91-5.0055(7), F.A.C. requires that local governments must establish how a project qualifies as one that promotes public transportation through the establishment of guidelines and/or policies for granting the exception When creating exception areas, local governments also must demonstrate through supporting data and analysis that consideration has been given to the impact of the projects on the Florida Intrastate Highway System." Tri-Rail station development projects should not experience difficulty with this criterion, considering that the original purpose of Tri-Rail was to provide congestion relief to 1 -95 during its reconstruction. Tri-R.ail continues to function today as a transportation alternative to l-95. Appendix B outlines the process required by the state, for adopting a local government plan amendment, which must be done in order to establish a transportation concurrency exception area. Plan amendments may be made no more than twice per year. Regional aDd l..oall Goals aDd Policies Framework Goals and policieS of jurisdictions and planning areas within the TriRail service area, as contained in the regional policy plans and the local government comprehensive plans were reviewed to evaluate the planning climate for development that supports transit While the legislative amendments to the state growth management laws now require that regional po licy plans contain recommendations for minimum density guidelines for development along public transportation corridors, the South Florida Regional Planning Council has not yet begun to develop these guidelines Their target date for preparation of a draft Strategic Regional Policy Plan for the South Florida region is Spring 1995.11 Appendix C lists selected transit-related goals and policies of the two planning regions and three counties served by Tri-Rail, including the Treasure Coast Region, which contains Palm Beach County and the South Florida Region, which contains Broward and Dade Counties The review 17 Rule 91-5.0055(7) F.A.C 11 Phone discussion with Tim Murphy, Deputy Director, South F l orida Regional Planning Council., December I 0, 1993 15

PAGE 27

indicates that there is consistency between the regional and local level goals and that a generally positive policy framework is presently in place at the local level for supporting transit-oriented development These include policies promoting the use of compatible and complementary land use mixes, compact land development to suppon transit usage, transponation corridor right-ofway protection, the promotion of travel demand management methods to reduce auto use, policies to suppon multi-modal system planning for greater integration and ease of transfer, and policies to increase transit ridership and to coordinate with Tri-Rail. A survey of planning staff representing local governments in the Tri-Rail corridor indicates that local governments are now considering comprehensive plan amendments that incorporate the use of transportation concurrency exception options under the newly adopted guidelines contained in 91-5, F .A.C. For example, Palm Beach County, described in detail below, has initiated comprehensive plan amendments in order to malce use of the transponation concurrency exception area option. Metro-Dade County has also drafted amendments to their comprehensive development master plan (CDMP). If no objections are raised by the Department of Community Affairs about the language of the amendments, Metro-Dade County may adopt the amendments in the fall of 1994. These policy amendments will establish as the highest funding priority, capacity improvements to roadways and transit services to relieve congestion on the Florida Intrastate Highway System. Draft amendments to the concurrency management program of Metro-Dade County include a revision that prohibits denial of a concurrency approval for transportation facilities, provided that the proposed development directly and significantly promotes public transponation by incorporating within the development, a bus tetminal that serves multiple routes or a rail station or an office or residential development located within 114 mile of such facilities. The complete text of relevant portions of the proposed amendment is included in Appendix C. Palm Beach CoUifly Plarurilrg and Reguliltory C/JmQU Palm Beach County's interest in public transit stems from a recognition of the potential benefits of a developed system as well as the problems that public transit can help solve.'9 This study has focused upon the planning and regulatory climate of Palm Beach County due to the specific interest ofTri-Rail in the conditions affecting the future development of the proposed Boca Nonh and South Stations, located within Palm Beach County. The Land Use Element of the Palm Beach County Comprehensive Plan, adopted in October 1992. contains several county long-tenn planning "directions" that are used as the basis for County goals, objectives and policies. The directions include an emphasis on urban design to guide physical development, the encouragement of infill in urban areas to take advantage of existing 19 Palm Beach County Department of Planning, Zoning & Building, "Mass Transit and Land Use Options: A Vision for Palm Beach County, Draft" (June 1993): 19. 16

PAGE 28

public facilities and the concept of land use compatibility to ensure that densities and intensities of land uses are not in conflict with those of surrounding areas. Higher density mixed land uses near transit nodes such as rail stations have not been promoted due to the concern that higher densities may not be compatible with the existing development. The Traffic Circulation Element of the Palm Beach County Comprehensive Plan addressed issues and opportunities relating to the use of the Traffic Perfo11111Ulce Standards that contain the transportation level of service requirements of new development The Element cited density reductions imposed on projects as a means to reduce potential traffic impacts.'" Changes to Rule 91-S, F.A.C. were finalized in March I 994, subsequent to the ELMS legislative amendments to Chapter 163, F S., creating guidelines for transportation concurrency exception area options. Since then, the Planning and Traffic Engineering Division staff of Palm Beach County have determined that a 100 percent transportation facilities concurrency exception provision with strictly limited application should be created as a new policy to the Traffic Circulation Element of the local comprehensive plan. To fulfill internal consistency requirements, the Mass Transit Element is proposed to contain an identical new policy. Palm Beach County has scheduled the adoption of these amendments to plan elements on July 18, 1994 as a means to support the efforts ofTri-R.ail and <::oTran to improve public transit in the County. The Traffic Circulation Element would also contain guidelines and standards to be used in granting the exception. The complete text of the proposed policy and guidelines are contained in Appendix C. The Planning and Traffic Divisions have interpreted the standard defined in Chapter 163.3 I 64(28), F .S. for projects that promote public transportation to mean that a project qualifies for the exception if it is directly related to or contributes to the progress of public transportation. The staff recommended a more restrictive standard that required by state law. This more restrictive standard requires that projects must be "integrally related" to the public transportation system. This more restrictively defined standard is intended to extend the exception option only to projects of Tri-R.ail and CoTran. Projects that are eligible for an exception are those that are consistent with the County comprehensive plan and applicable municipal comprehensive p l an. The project developer must also be a government agency, or a quasi-government agency with mass transit authority. Eligible projects are specifically defined as: ... local bus terminals, commuter rail terminals, and intermodal facilities terminals, but excluding ports and aviation terminals; 20 Palm Beach County Comprehensive Plan, Traffic Circulation Element (adopted December 16, 1991): 39-TC. 17

PAGE 29

transit passenger amenities, ... including shelters, stations and their parking facilities, fringe parking and park-and-ride lots; and ancillary maintenance, repair and office facilities serving public transportation.21 Prior to the proposed policy described above, Palm Beach County bad considered a previous policy draft, in which transportation concurrency exceptions could be granted to projects that fall under two categories, expressly eligible projecta and implied eligible projects. Those projects meeting the qualifying criteria to be considered expressly eligible would receive a 100 percent exemption and those projecta meeting the qualifications as implied eligible projects would be given a partial exemption from the transportation concurrency requirements. Implied eligible projecta would have included: I. park-and-ride lots; 2. commuter rail station parking lots; 3. employer-based transportation management programs; 4. area-wide ridesbare programs, such as carpool matching programs, etc.; S. parking management programs, such as preferential parking for high occupancy vehicles; 6. bicycle and pedestrian programs; 7. mixed use developments; 8. other elements integral to a multimodal transportation system; 9 high density (at least 6 dwelling units per acre) residential developmenis with at least I 00 dwelling units, and 10. transit oriented developments.22 Due to recommendations of the Traffic Division staff, office buildings and projecta that include fixed rail or transit terminals have not been included at this time as eligible for an exception. While the proposed policy that is scheduled for adoption by Palm Beach County does not provide for extending transportation concurrency exceptions to transit-oriented development, it does address Tri-Rail's most inlmediate concern, by exempting Tri-Rail station parking facilities from concurrency. 21 Palm Beach County Department of Planning, Zoning and Building, Text Amendments for 94-1, Section IX. Transportation Concurrency Exception Amendments (June 1994): 94100. 22 Palm Beach County, Department of Planning, Zoning and Building, "Transponation Concurrency Exception Amendments to the Traffic Circulation Element, Draft Number I" (January 26, 1994). 18

PAGE 30

Urban Forms Conference. As part of an implementation policy for carrying out the Land Use Element, a growth management/urban form study began in 1990 to develop threshold criteria for future urban service areas and urban expansion areas in order to minimize urban sprawl and provide efficient provision of facilities. In August 1993, Palm Beach County held the Northern Palm Beach County/Southern Martin County Planning Forum as part of the Urban Form Study for the pwpose of engaging local citizens and community leaders in disc:ussion and to set direction guiding urban form and development patterns. Three alternative development patterns were reviewed by Forum participants. These included a suburban/dispersed growth scenario, a major centers that concentrates growth in a few locations, and a corridor/multi-center scenario. The third was preferred by the majority for the futwe growth pattern of the county The corridor/multi-center scenario would include mixed-use development in numerous medium-sized urban centers. Higher levels of service for public facilities would be provided in the centers and along transit lines. 23 A Policy Statement was developed from the Forum, which summ.arizes identified strategies for accomplishing the preferred urban form. These include a transfer of development rights (TDR) program, which currently operates as an Interim Program of phased growth. TOR sends development rights from environmentally sensitive areas in the west part of the County to the receiving areas in the east, where urban development already exists. This will have the beneficial effect of further increasing densities, which is a condition for successful transit operation. Other identified strategies include developing and maintaining effective public/private partnerships, streamlining the permitting and approval process, and improving and diversifying infrastructure and the transportation system. The Policy Statement also recognized thai in order to concentrate development in the eastern corridor, an extension ofTri-Rail should serve the Northern Palm Beach County/Southern Martin County area and an east-west feeder transit system should be established to connect rail stations with activity nodes. It was recognized that the pursuit of the modified corridors/multi-centers form of urban development could also be supported by flexible concurrency requirements that do not inhibit concentration of development in activity centers. The Policy Statement also supports using community design approaches thai provide for access to transit in the futwe, allowing for higher densities and mixed uses within the community activity centers where transit access will be necessary, and revising Palm Beach County's Transportation Performance Standards to reflect preferences in urban form. 23 Palm Beach County, "Background Paper, Northern Palm Beach County/Southern Martin County Planning Forum," coordinated by The Florida Atlantic University/Florida International University Joint Center for Environmental and Urban Problems and The Florida Atlantic University Institute of Government. (August 26-28, 1993): 24 19

PAGE 31

Land Use Considerations for Mass Transit. The recent draft publication of "Mass Transit and Land Use Options: A Vision for Palm BeaA:h County" by the Palm BCaA:h County Department of Planning, Zoning and Building also indicates favorable consideration of public transportation and what is required to make it work. Not only does "Mass Transit .. cite the benefits of mass transit, but also concludes that land use strategies must be part of Palm Beach County's transit plan to promote mass transit. 14 Specific recommendations included the designation of land uses surrounding the statioolstop =a with appropriate intensities and densities that would support mass transit, and the encouragement of compact, mixed use, transit-oriented development with improved pedestrian connections. While density reductions have proven useful to reduce auto traffic congestion to satisfy roadway level of service standards, increased densities in certain =as, such as in the vicinity of rail stations, may contribute to the success of public transportation. These recent planning efforts of Palm BCaA:h County, in addition to an earlier study conducted for Palm Beach County by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, "Transportation Options for Palm Beach County"'-', will provide a good foundation for addressing the requirements for the new transportation element of the local government comprehensive plan, as created by the ELMS amendments. Land Developmenl Reguloticns. Beyond the planning policy framework, it is the set of land development regulations that controls development on a project by project basis and that subsequently implements the plans . Some land development regulations, such as land subdivision, sign regulation, and concurrency management ordinances are examples of locally adopted regulations that are required by Chapter 163 F .S. to be consistent with and implement the local comprehensive plans. The adoption of land development regulations by a local government is legislative in nature and must be compiled within a unified land development code. Although the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) must see to it that local governments adopt the required land development regulations, DCA does not review the regulations for compliance with Chap 163, F.S. or for consistency with the local comprehensive plan. Local governments use their home rule prerogative to ensure that regulations carry out the policies in the plans. Chapter 163.3213, 14 Palm Beach County Department of Planning, Zoning & Building, Planning Division, "Mass Transit and Land Use Options: . A Vision for Palm Beach County Draft", (June 1993): 10. Recommendations of the Institute of Transportation Engineers Symposium, Prepared for Palm Beach County, March 1988. 20

PAGE 32

F.S. also contains provisions for "subs1a11tially affected persons" to challenge land development regulations that are deemed inconsistent with the local comprehensive plan. Unless a regulation is challenged, the possibility eltists that some regulations are inconsistent and may actually impede the plan. CUTR is currently studying the relationship between local land use regulations and the comprehensive plans for selected areas in the stale as part of Phase II of the State Transportation Policy Initiative. Land development regulations can be amended by a local government at any time, provided there is adherence to the required local administrative procedures and a public bearing process. Other types of land development regulations are optional in the stale of Florida. For example, a general zoning code is optional, provided that the local government adopt a set of land development regulations that meet the requirements of Chapter 163, F .S. However, zoning is among the most widely used types of land development regulations. In September 1991, Palm Beach County added a Traditional Neighborhood Zoning District (TND) to its Land Development Code to provide alternative development patterns that are residentially based and to require the integration of residential uses with commercial and industrial uses. The uses must be coordinated with recreation and open space systems to reduce infrastructure impacts. While the TND land use category encourages mixed-use, compact development, it does not encourage increased densities within or adjacent to the TND. Traditional neighborhoods are described as pedestrian-oriented, allowing residents to walk to the neighborhood center within five minutes, including a mix of horizontally and vertically integrated residential commercial and employment, recreation and civic land uses to provide for residents' daily needs, with a hierarchy of streets to serve pedestrians and motorists equitably.26 A TND must be spaced 10 miles from any other TND and provide a minimum of 51 percent residential development A concurrency management ordinance is a required land development regulation that provides the administration and technical process for implementing locally adopted level of service standards as contained in the comprehensive plan. The next section of this report examines concurrency management systems as they relate to the new ELMS legislation and as they provide incentives to development that, by their location, can benefit from public transit. 16 Palm Beach County Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Element (adopted October 30. 1992): 45. 21

PAGE 33

22

PAGE 34

DEVELOPMENT INCENTIVF.S THAT SUPPORT TRANSIT The previous sections have provided an overview of the comprehensive planning framework at the state, regional and local levels. Palm Beach County was highlighted to describe several planning initiatives that provide a generally positive planning climate within which commuter rail and other forms of public tni!ISit can develop. However, two issues remain, not only for Palm Beach County but also for tbe other municipalities served by Tri-Rai l. The first issue concerns the evaluation of station facilities for concurrency. The second issue concerns the need for complementary land use combinations and design in tbe vicinity of public transit stations that maximize opportunities to use transit This section presents several alternative solutions TraDSportatioa CoDC:UMDq Applieatioa 10 Public Tmlsit Facilities As part of the current local government roadway concurrency review, public mass transit facilities, such as commuter rail stations, bus park-and-ride facilities and transit terminals can be evaluated as traffic generators. The legislative amendments define land development categories that are eligible as exceptions to the transportation concurrency evaluation. 163.3164 Definitions. Amended Concurrency Provisions Florida Statutes (28) "Projects that promote public transportation" mean projects that directly affec.t the provisions of public transit, including transit terminals, transit lines and routes, separate lanes for the exclusive use of public transit services, transit stops (shelters and stations), and office buildings or projects that include fixed-rail or transit terminals as part of the building. 163.3180 Concurrency. ( 4) The concurrency requirement as implemented in local comprehensive plans applies to state and other public facilities and development to the same extent that it applies to all other facilities and development, as provided by law. (SXa) The Legislature finds that under limited circumstances dealing with transportation facilities, countervailing planning and public policy goals may come into conflict with the requirement that adequate public facilities and services be available concurrent with the impacts of such development The Legislature further finds that often the unintended result of the concurrency requirement for transportation facilities is the discouragement of urban infill development and 23

PAGE 35

redevelopment. Such unintended results directly conflict with the goals and policies of the state comprehensive plan and the intent of this part Therefore, exceptions from the concurrency requirement for transportation facilities may be granted as provided by this subsection. (b) A local government may grant an exception from the concurrency requirement for transportation facilities if the proposed development is otherwise consistent with the adopted local government comprehensive plan and is a project that promotes public transportation or is located within an area designated in the comprehensive plan for: I. Urban infill development, 2. Urban redevelopment, or 3 Downtown revitalization. By including aansit facilities in the definition of projects that promote public transportation for the purpose of applying a concurrency evaluation, the legis lation implies that without local exemption policies, these facilities are subject to concurrency review. The overlooked fact in the roadway concurrency evaluation process is that public mass aansit facilities such as bus and rail stations are as much a part of the urban transportation system as are interchange entrance and exit ramps of limited access highway facilities. Therefore, public mass aansit facilities should not be evaluated for roadway concurrency but rather should be completely exempt. For example, while the auto trips made by those motorists seeking to ride a rail line will be removed from those roadways leading to the destination and redistributed onto local roadways accessing the rail station, the rail station itself does not generate new trips. The net effect of the rail service is a reduction in vehicle miles traveled. Part of the problem is that present statutory language pertaining to transportation concurrency in Chapter 163, F.S. addresses transportation facilities exclusively in terms of roadway facilities and it defines transportation concurrency in terms of highway level of service. For example, the ttansportation concurrency exception areas, which are new options created by the ELMS legislation, pertain to development projects under which roadway concurrency exceptions may be granted. To describe the flawed logic in the present application of roadway concurrency evaluation to public transit facilities, we can compare the similar transportation function of various rail and highway facilities, yet see concurrency application disparities. For example highway links between intersections operate in the same way as the line haul portion of a rail facility. Similarly, interchanges of limited access highway facilities function in much the same way as rail stations. The creation of an interchange results in the redistribution of traffic on adjacent streets directly accessed, in much the same way that traffic is redistributed due to the placement of a rail station. Although the rail station is just as much a part of the rail system as an 24

PAGE 36

interchange is part of the limited access highway, rail stations are currently evaluated for roadway concurrency while highway interchanges are not. Given that both ttansit and highways provide transportation service, why is ttansit treated as a cause of congestion, rather than as a congestion mitigator? If transit facilities are evaluated for roadway concurrency, it might also be argued that a consistent application of roadway concwrency would mean that roadway projects should also be evaluated for their impact upon adjacent road segments. For example, the installation of new traffic signals, while solving safety problems, almost invariably increases traffic delay. Should an impact fee be assessed for the new signal? The North Suncoast Highway in west central Florida, when built, can be shown to degrade the level of service on such crossroads as SR 52 and SR 54. If it can be demonstrated that the redistributed traffic onto SR 52 and SR 54 will cause a violation of their LOS standards, should the North Suncoast Highway project be held accountable for mitigation measures for those roads? What about toll road entrance and exit ramps or park and ride lots for express bus service? The contradictions in the application of concurrency in these examples illustrate that roadway concurrency evaluation should not be applied to other transportation facilities, whether they be highway or mass ttansit facilities. This conclusion is consistent with the original intent of transportation concurrency, to ensure that transportation facilities are available to address the impact of land development projects, such as commercial, industrial and residential development. Roadway concurrency evaluation should be revised to recognin that public mass ttansit facilities such as bus stations, bus park-and-ride facilities, rail stations and ttansit depots are part of the roadway traffic congestion solution, not part of tl)e problem. The legitimate concern over traffic impacts of a transit station would still be addressed in the planning process just as are traffic issues associated with demands created by the addition of new roadway interchanges. For example, ttansii station development is subject to consistency requirements with the local comprehensive plan, local zoning. design standards, driveway permitting and other applicable local regulations. The present exception applies only if local governments exercise their option to establish a ttansportation concurrency exception area. The existence of the exception option for projects that promote public transportation, as presently defined, implies that public mass ttansit should be evaluated for concurrency. Therefore, the statutory language pertaining to exceptions to transportation concurrency in Chapter 163.3180, F.S. should be clarified to exempt all public mass ttansit facilities from transportation concurrency. Chapter 163.3180( 4), F.S. contains the new requirement that concurrency must apply to state and other public facilities. This new requirement recognizes that government facilities such as hospitals and universities use service capacity of other public facilities subject to concurrency, such as water, sewer and transportation. H owever, this amendment may cause confusion about whether ttansportation concurrency evaluation should be applied to public ttansportation facilities It is recommended that subsection ( 4) be clarified to exempt public ttansportation facilities from ttansportation concurrency requirements: 25

PAGE 37

163.3180 Concurrency. (4) The concurrency requirement as implemented in local comprehensive plans applies to state and other public facilities and development to the same extent that it applies to all other facilities and development, as provided by law. Howeyer. transportation facilities such as roadways. toll mads, jntcrcbangq. stations. tennjnals, inteanndnl centers, :;tation parkin a. park .. and-rides lots. and other elements jntcamJ to a multimndal trarumortation system are not subject to transpomtion concurrency requirements. Tnmsportldion Concumncy For Tram it-Oriented Developmellt Because it has been demonstrated that the success of public transit can be enhanced by improving its accessibility to patrons, the concept of transit-oriented development has gained widespread attention. The purpose of transit-oriented development is to aeate land development of appropriate density and design, combining complementary land uses in close proximity to transit stations, in order to free citizens from the need to use an auto and enable them to travel effectively by transit. In order for the concept to be used successfull y by communities that are served by transit, the necessaey incentives to enable and support transit-oriented development should be available. In addition to the above proposed amendments c larifying that a transportation concurrency exception should automatically apply to public mass transit facilities, Chapter 163.3180(5)(b), F .S. should be ameitded further to add projectS that promote public transportation as a fourth local government roadway transportation concurrency exception area option. (SXa) The Legislature finds that under limited circumstances dealing with transportation facilities, countervailing planning and public policy goals may come into conflict with the requirement that adequate public facilities and services be available concurrent with the impacts of such development. The Legislature further finds that often the unintended result of the concurrency requirement for transportation facilities is the discouragement of urban infill development and redevelopment. Such unintended results directly conflict with the goals and policies of the state comprehensive plan and the intent of this part. Therefore, exceptions from the concw-rency requirement for transportation facilities may be granted as provided by this subsection. (b) A local government may grant an exception from the concurrency requirement for transportation facilities if the proposed development is otherwise consistent with the adopted local government comprehensive plan and is a pl'ejeet tllet 26

PAGE 38

ptemetes llanlpeAaliea er i s located within an area designated in the comprehensive plan for: I. Urban intill development, or 2. Urban redevelopment, or 3. Downtown revitalintion, or Projects that pcomgtc public ttanspgmnjon. This additional exception option would be available for a development
PAGE 39

163, F S.; however, it was also felt that the narrow interpretation gives little leeway for use of the exception.'' It was also recognized by authors of Rule 9J-5, F.A .C. that the definition of projects that promote public transportation as the law presently defines them, differs from the other exception categories in that it is project-related, while the categories of downtown revitalirntion, urban infill and urban redevelopment are all defined as geographic areas. Because of this, Rule 9J, F.A.C. has set projects that promote public transportation apart from the other three exceptions in terms of implementation requirements. The definition for projects that promote public transportation was made intentionally narrow by the original drafters of the statutory amendments due to the concern that a broad definition would cause confusion over which developments qualify for the exception and would create subsequent potential for abuse of the exception." However, an overly narrow definition precludes the use of this exemption option for transit-oriented development, a concept that is being tried in other parts of the nation and which demonstrates great potential. It is not impossible to draft criteria in 91, F.A.C. to determine exception area qualification. The recommended fourth exception area option for projects that promote public transportation should be l ocated within some defined radius surrounding rail stations and any other permanent transit station directly serving rail passengers. This new option would be coDSistent with the other exception optioiiS currently provided-urban infill development, urban redevelopment and downtown revitali7l!tion-in that they all apply to some defined geographic area, rather than to a specific development projec t, as the fourth option in the legislation is currently written. Rule 9 J -5 would then require revision to reflect that the transportation concurrency exception area option for projects that promote public transportation is based on a geographic area and therefore should be subject to the same criteria as the other exception area options. This can be done by incorporating Subsection (7), "Concurrency Exception For Projects That Promote Pub li c TraiiSportation," into Subsection (6), "TraDSportation Concurrency Exception Areas" to place projects that promote public transportation as a fourth category of geographically defined exception areas: 9J-5.005S(6)(a) 4. A specific iCOmPbic area or am111 delineated in the local aovemment comprehensive plan for prgjecls that promote public uansportation pwsnant to Section 163.3164(28). F,S. The local comprehensive plan shall contain objectives and policies which specjflr actions and proifliUlS to promote 11 Phone discussion with Dale Eacker, Department of Community Affairs, December 8, 1993. Phone discussion with Gail Schwartz, Staff to State Representative Steven Geller Broward County, December 9, 1993. 28

PAGE 40

projects that promote public transportation. The must establish how a project will qualify as a prgject that promotes publjc transportation. The "projects that promote public transportation" option could then be established by local governments according to additional criteria defined in 9J-S, F.A.C. These criteria should require local governments to define the geographic boundaries for the exception area as well as list public transit supportive site design features for use in evaluating the proposed development. These may include: I. distance from the development entrance to the permanent transit station; 2. provision of feeder transit stops and shelters with seating and other amenities; 3. provision of walkways that provide direct access; 4. provisions for direct, sheltered accessways to the transit station; S. reduced parking supply standards and availability of bike and high occupancy vehicle parking; 6. Aesthetic amenities, and 7. Programs, actions or commitments that support transit, such as subsidized transit passes, and provision of passenger support services, shelter and security. Close proximity of a proposed development to a rail station should be a necessary but not a sufficient condition for granting a concurrency exception. In order to make the concurrency exception for projects that promote public transportation useful by extending the definition to include private land development within some radius of the rail statioil, an attempt should be made t!) craft a definition of projects that promote public transportation, so as to allow transit oriented development to occur but at the same time prevent arbitrary and .uneven interpretation and application of the exception. Altemalives To IDcorpondiJIC Tnasit Into Evallllllion In addition to the recommendations for a concurrency exemption for public transit facilities and the creation of a Transportation Concumncy Exception Area option for transit-oriented development, as defined by the recommended revised definition of projects that promote public transportation, the discussion below describes other measures presently exercised by local governments that incorporate transit considerations into the roadway concurrency evaluation. These methods could be used in addition to the above recommendations. The following discussion summarizes the basic concepts and refers the reader to a more complete summary of the concurrency management systems presented in a later section of the report. Three concurrency management systems are highlighted. These include those for Metro-Dade County, for the City of Miami and one example from another state, Montgomery County, Maryland. All three use different methods to incorporate transit into roadway concurrency evaluation, based upon the manner in which: 29

PAGE 41

I. the roadway LOS standard is varied, or 2. the roadway LOS is measured, or 3. trip generation of the new development is calculated In 1995, Metro-Dade County will lower the LOS standards for roadways serving development that is located within the urban development boundaty and the urban infill area and within 1/2 mile of transit service Roadway LOS standards will be the lowest in areas provided with extraordinary transit" service, namely express bus and rail services. A more detailed discussion of the concurrency management system of Metro-Dade County is presented later with a table that outlines the change in roadway LOS standards as a development is located closer to the urban infi.ll area. In Montgomery County, Maryland, the LOS standard is set on an areawide basis and becomes less stringent based upon that area's "Group designation. Groups are defined according to the level of transit coverage, frequency, accessibility and usage. As the quality of transit service increases, the roadway LOS standard becomes less stringent The Montgomery County system differs from the Metro-Dade system in that the level of transit service is defined more explicitly, incorporating pedestrian and bicycling measures. A more detailed discussion of the concurrenc y management system of Montgomery County, Maryland is presented later, with tables that detail the areawide roadway LOS standards based upon transit availability and the "bundle" of measures used to comprise an overall transit service measUre. Measuring Level of Service In addition to altering the LOS standard, transit considerations can also be incorporated into the roadway traffic impact evaluation by changing the way level of service is measured. Presently, the concurrency management systems of most local governments in Florida measure and set standards for roadway level of service on a roadway link by link basis. One alternative is areawide LOS measures that enab l e those roadway links operating below the LOS standard to "borrow" service capacity from links operating above the standard within the same area. Areawide l evel of service averaging would allow for a higher tolerance of localized traffic congestion if excess service capacity still exists in other parts of the defined area. The use of areawide level of service averaging is now officially sanctioned by Florida's growth management law. The ELMS amendments to Chapter 163, F.S. enhance concurrency flexibility by allowing local governments to establish areawide level of service averaging, applied within a transportation concurrency management area. 30

PAGE 42

This areawide approach must be justified based upon a demonstration that its use promotes urban infill development, redevelopment or public transit19 Rule 91-5 F.A.C does not specify the basis for averaging; however, it does specify that level of service averages will be computed for facilities with similar functions serving common origins and destinations. >O The use of areawide averaging in Florida did not begin with the ELMS amendments. Lee County averages the level of service of roadways within designated Traffic Districts to detennine a districtwide surplus or deficiency in roadway service capacity. This approach was established by settlement agreement with DCA in 1990 as an interim measure to enable Lee County to eliminate service deficits on backlogged facilities over time. The approach of the City of Orlando includes the use of Transportation Management Areas, within which 85 percent of the lane mites must meet LOS standards. This system of aggregation was the basis for the state's original adoption of a TCMA policy in 9J-5 0057, F.A.C. Orlando's TMAs are compact geographic areas that offer higher density, mixed-use development and alternative modes of transportation. This flexible approach enables Orlando to target transportation improvements in order to advance long-tenn congestion management goals and support higher densities in activity centers.l' Areawide LOS measures can also be used to incorporate transit by aggregating facilities across modes for the determination of LOS. The City of Miami Concurrency Management System uses this approach, as described later. The effect is that roadway LOS can drop if transit LOS remains high for a resultant average LOS that satisfies the standard. In the ll_leasurement of level of service, the City of Miami combines transit and highway service capacity as an aggregate LOS measure for a transportation corridor. This puts transit on a more even playing field with highway improvements and may reduce the priority of investment in roadway facilities if transit captK:ity is still available Miami's Transportation Corridors concept aggregates people-moving capacities across parallel rail, bus and highway facilities that are located in the same corridor. Montgomery County, Maryland is presently studying the possibility of adopting a measure of total transportation level of service (TTLOS) that incorporates all modes within defined areas. The net effect of both Miami's Transportation Corridors approach and Montgomery County's proposed TTLOS approach is that, as long as an overall transportation LOS is maintained by whatever combination of service across modes the community chooses, the LOS of any one mode, such as roadway, may be permitted to deteriorate. The LOS standard will not be violated 29 Chap. 163.3180(7), F.S. 30 Rule 9J-5.0055(5)(a), F.A.C Center for Urban Transportation Research, "City of Tampa Traffic Circulation Elemem Update, Alternative Methods for Calculating Level of Service" (May 1993). 31

PAGE 43

even if roadway congestion increases because excess capacity still exists in the other modes. A remaining question in the use of this approach is how to determine a proper balance of service among travel modes. A more detailed description of the Miami Transportation Corridors concept is presented in a later discussion. A description of Montgomery County's consideration of the use of a TIL OS measure is also presented later with a table that details a variety of transit LOS measures being considered by Montgomery County. These measures evaluate not only the transit trip itself, but also the quality of the access and egress trips from transit which may be made by auto, bicycle or on foot. While use of the Transportation Concurrency Exception Area is an ideal option as a development incentive that supports transit, the use of measures and methods considered by Montgomery County may have application to transit stations as an alternative to those local governments who choose not to exercise the TCEA option. Trip Gnwralion Of New A third way to incorporate transit considerations into roadway LOS evaluation is the method of quantifying trips generated by the development under review. Transportation concurrency evaluation includes the analysis of traffic impact of a new development, which is panly determined by the number of trips generated. Montgomery County reduces its calculation of trips generated by new development based upon some percentage as determined by distance from a rail station. Montgomery County estimates the percentage of trips generated by the development that will use transit, based upon distance from a rail station. Special trip generation rates arc given for general office development located outside the Beliway and within I 000 feet of a MetroRail station. For the AM peak period, a 50 percent reduction in estimated trips is used in the evaluation of impact of a new development. For the PM pe3k period, the percent reduction applied is based upon the distance of the development from the MetroRail station. This is further described later with a table that illusttates the reduction applied to vehicle trips generated by office buildings. Metro-Dade County has considered the use of modifying trip generation estimate5: Peak trip generation assumptions may be moderated if it is demonstrated that effective measures will be employed by the applicant which will cause the peak traffic generation characteristics of the proposed development to be significantly lower than the normal project of the same type on which the peak trip generation factors arc based." 12 Metro-Dade County, A.O. 4-85, Traffic Circulation, "Methods for Evaluating Development Impacts, Pan F" (June 1992). 32

PAGE 44

Inquiries to the Metro-Dade Planning Department indicate that the above clause has never been employed for proposed developments for the purpose of demonstrating that rail station area development may generate less auto trips due to a greater number of trips taken by rail transit. However, this clause might be useful for this purpose. Toward A More Compn:beosive Approach This study has focused upon remedies for regulatory bamers that exist within local government transportation concummcy management systems to encourage the development of transit and transit-oriented development. However, the concurrency JDMagement system should be j ust one facet of a strategic planning program of compatible land development regulations that might include zoning, parking caps or reductions of the minimum number of required parking spaces provision of floor area bonuses, and the use of travel demand management measures. Provided below are a few brief examples of bow this can be done These examples are drawn from diverse areas of the country, including Metro-Dade County Orlando, Portland and San Diego. Strategic planning for transit stations and surrounding areas is not new to South Florida. In 1978, Metro-Dade County adopted a Fixed-Guideway Rapid Transit System Development Zone for the purpose of creating comprehensive development master plans to guide land development at fixed rail stations The capability of a transportation network, acting in conjunction with other urban services to establish general development trends, is well recognized. A maximum coordination of transportation and land use policy decisions is therefore essential to the role of transportation as a potent tool for implementing the desired patterns of metropolitan development'' The County designated a rapid transit zone, which included all station sites, parking areas, and yard and maintenance sbop facilities. The Code lists permitted land uses within the rapid transit zone, including parking lots and parking structures, and commercial, office and residential uses. A joint Municipal-County program for station area design and development bad prepared a set of development standards for review and adoption by the affected municipality. A rapid transit developmental impact committee was established to review the proposed development standards and prepare a report for review and adoption by the municipality and the County as the land use plan for developments within the rapid transit development impact zone. While the master plans for the rail stations were created in the early 1980s, they have since been folded into the Metropolitan Dade County Comprehensive Development Master Plan. The relationship between land use density, mix, and configuration and the success of rail transportation bas long been demonstrated. As the use of rail increases, more people will travel Metro-Dade County Ordinance No. 78-74, adopted October 17 1978. 33

PAGE 45

to the station. One way to minimize auto traffic to the station is to provide residential, commercial, office, and other complementary uses at higher densities within walking distance of the rail station. The Miami MPO recently completed the "Metromover-Bayside Pedestrian Ptomenade Concept and Master Plan." It describes land use and design concepts to increase pedestrian activity and improve coMections between transit, local businesses and the community college .34 The C i ty of Orlando serves as an example of a Florida community that has actively implemented a variety of mechanisms, in addition to its Transportation Management Area approach to transpOrtation concurrency, to encourage development that benefits from public transit. To provide for mixed-use land development where high levels of mass transit service aie available or programmed, Orlando has established a High Intensity Mixed-Use Corridor District (MU-2) as part of their zoning code. This is appropriate for areas of mixed residential and office uses along and oriented to (at a minimum) arterial and four-lane collectors at high intensities. Commercial, public recreational, and institutional uses and conservation uses are also consistent as part of mixed use development, subject to appropriate limitations, conditions, and safeguards. In concern for ensuring mixed-use compatibility with adjacent residential neighborhoods, Orlando has also established a Medium Intensity Mixed-Use Corridor District (MU-1) where mass transit service is available or programmed. Floor area bonuses are provided in Mixed-Use Corridors to encourage multiple family residential and moderate cost housing as part of the mixed-use development. This increases potential mass transit ridership residing on the corridor. Orlando also provides for three Activity Center Districts in locations where a combination of arterials and four lane collectors and mass transit services are available to provide access to other activity centers. The Community Activity Center District (AC-1) is for concentrated urban and community service areas at higher densities than in surroUDding neighborhoods. The Urban Activity Center District (AC-2) is for concentrated mixed-use areas serving major subregions and at significantly higher intensities than neighborhood service areas. The Metropolitan Activity Center District (AC-3) is for large concentrated mixed-use service areas serving the entire metropolitan area and at higher intensities than normally found outside the downtown area. Floor area bonuses are also provided for Activity Center Districts if the development provides three or more land uses. Additional floor area bonuses are provided for the provision of multi family housing. Bonuses are further awarded as an incentive for developers who provide at least one percent of the total construction cost of development of access to mass transit. This one percent set-aside may be reduced or waived if the developer provides part or all of the necessary 34 Miami Urbanized Area Metropolitan Planning Organization "The Metromover-Bayside Pedestrian Promenade Concept Master Plan," prepared by Bennello, Ajamil and Partners. 34

PAGE 46

transit access fadlities. The reduction in set.aside is equal to the cost of the provided improvements The City' of Orlando has also established parking caps (maximums) in the downtown and in activity centers in order to promote transit However, excess parking spaces up to 25 percent more than the maximum pennitted for nonresidential uses downtown and in activity centers, are allowed in exchange for a contribution to the City Mass Transit Facilities Fund The Mass Transit Administration (MfA) of the Maryland Department of Transportation has recognized the need for developers to give early design consideration to transit service access MT A initiated the Access by Design Program, which includes a developer's manual containing transit vehicle access requirements and design guidelines. Detailed information is provided to developers on transit vehicle specifications, transit stop design, signage, pedestrian walkways, transit shelter standards, and location criteria and roadway geometric design standards for intersections entrances, and driveways and site sele(;tion guidelines for park and ride facilities. u On the West Coast, a national demonstration project is presently underway, known as "Making the Land Use Transportation Air Quality Connection" (LliTRAQ), the result of which is the development of alternative suburban land use patterns and design standards to increase mobility foster a sense of community, and reduce air pollutants, energy consumption, and auto dependency. This is the first time that a land use design is being considered in an Environmental Impact Study as an alternative to an expressway facility. Sponsored by I 000 Friends of Oregon with assistance from Oregon Department ofTransportation and funding from FHW A and other public agencies and private enterprises, LliTRAQ used the proposed Bypass freeway in Portland as a case study for developing transportation alternatives based upon the concept of transit .oriented development While their market research indicates the need for densities no higher than several existing developments in the study area, the crucial emphasis is on land use location and site design to reduce substantially auto demand and increase transit use as a means to addrliss long range transportation needs. The LliTRAQ project includes the identification of study area land use and transportation opportunities and constraints and an evaluation of the land use and transportation modeling system for the study area, in comparison to modeling practices in other U.S. urban areas as well as modeling practices. The results of this research enable the improvement of the study area modelling system in order to measure more accurately the three alternatives reviewed in the Environmental Impact Study: the no action alternative, the Western Bypass freeway alternative; and Mass Transit Administration, Maryland Department of Transportation, "Access by Design: Transit's Role i n Land Development, A Developer's Manual" (Septembet 1988). 35

PAGE 47

the LUTRAQ alternative. The LUTRAQ alternative consists of transit service and facility expansion, alteration of area land uses, densities, and development design standards, and changes in land use policies and other policies relating to travel demand management. 36 The San Francisco Bay area, served by three major rail transit systems, is beginning to experience residential proximity to transit as a positive marketing factor for new development. Addressing a housing shortage in a region that suffers chronic road congestion, most Bay Area transit-based housing projects have sold at the market rate. From the success of housing near rail stations, a new land use pattern, the transit village, is beginning to emerge. A transit village is characterized by concentrated development within a quarter-mile radius of a station, as well as by other features that make the area attractive to residents: easy pedestrian access to the station, mixed-use development, a plua or open space around the station, and a sense of place." Interest in this concept has spread as several Bay Area cities, including Hayward, Pleasanton, and Oakland, are conunissioning station area designs. In 1992, the City of San Diego adopted Transit-Oriented Development Design Guidelines, which are now being incorporated into their Municipal Code. The work of the Land Guidance Subconunittee of San Diego's Mobility Planning Advisory Conunittee and the result of extensive citizen outreach, this ordinance complements their travel demand management ordinance, which was adopted in 1989. The Subcommittee worked with the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) to coordinate with the regional growth strategy. The guidelines specifically encourage TODs to be incorporated into redevelopment and infill areas. To prevent infringement of inappropriate uses upon existing neighborhoods, the TOO guidelines specify different development patterns for Urban TODs and Neighborhood TODs Single-family residential development that is too dispersed to be adequately served by transit is to be developed no further than one mile from a transit stop. Multiple street and bikeway connections also are to be provided from these areas to a TOD.n 36 1000 Friends of Oregon, "Making the Land Use Transportation Air Quality Connection, The LUTRAQ Alternative/ Analysis of Alternatives, An Interim Report," prepared by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. (O.:tober 1992). Michael Bernick, "The Bay Area's Emerging Transit-Based Housing," Urban Land. (July 1993): 38-41. '' Judith Corbett, "San Diego Gets a Grip on Gridlock: City Ordinance Helps Region Manage Growth," Surface Transportation Policy Project ResoUJ'Ce Guide, CllSe Studies, n.d. 36

PAGE 48

Recent research suggests that where market conditions are favorable, rail transit has a positive impact on station area office markets. While it is too early to determine the degree of success and impacts of residential transit-oriented development, 40 such projects built in the last six years have been identified across the country that conne<:t the development to rail transit through pedestrian or shuttle access. 39 Experience on both west and east coasts for station area development indicates the importance of station area plans, early community involvement, the participation of local government and redevelopment agencies to successful project financing arrangements, the provision of shuttle access to peripheral areas, and reduced parking requirements. The state of Florida has recognized that transportation concurrency, as customarily implemented by local governments, may unintentionally discourage those development conditions necessary for the success of public transportation alternatives. A3 recommended in this repon, the state law for transportation concurrency should be further clarified to exempt appropriately all public transit facilities from being evaluated fo r roadway impacts for transportation concurrency pwposes. The law should also be further refined to include projects that promote public transportation as a fourth areawide option to local governments for transportation concurrency exception areas. Beyond state action, it is the responsibility of local governments to make full use of the transportation concurrency exception area option by adopting criteria for their establishment Local government should also consider other alternatives for incorporating transit considerations into the transportation evaluation. Finally, local governments should look strategically at the opportunities of the transit and land use relationship by considering the implementation of complementary policies lhat will encourage the most appropriate station area development that supports transit so. that, in turn, transit can most ably provide an effective transportation alternative to more citizens. 37 Michael Bernick and Robert Cervero, "Transit-Based Development in the United States," UC Berkeley National Transit Access Center, Survey of Transit Based Development," Passenger Transpo11 (January 10, 1994): 7. 37

PAGE 49

38

PAGE 50

CONCURRENCY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS: EXISTING PRACDCF.S IN SOUTII FLORIDA This section contains a summary of the features of concurrency management systems of selected urban areas in southeast Florida. These include those for the City of Miami, Dade County, Broward CoWlty, and Palm Beach County. In addition, a review of practices in urban areas of other states was Wldertaken 10 identify practices of possible use 10 Florida metropolitan areas. One out-of-state example, Montgomery County, Maryland, has been higblighted. Table 3 summarizes selected aspects of the concurrency management systems under review. City Of Miami CoDCWftocy Managemeut Syslem The most progressive concurrency management systems in the state of Florida for incorporating transit considerations are those used by the City of Miami and Metro-Dade CoW!ty. The City of Miami evaluates the adequacy of its transportation facilities by aggregating the service capacities of panllel highway and transit facilities in designated corridors. Instead of measuring service capacity by bow many vehicles can be accommodated by the system, service capacity is measured by bow many person-trips can be made within the designated peak period. For example, if a highway within one of the corridors is operating at capacity but few people are riding MetroRail, then the aggregated measure of the level of service will indicate that capacity is still available within that corridor. No other local government in Florida evaluates their transportation system in this way. This method shifts some of the emphasis away from highwllys.40 The concurrency management system of Metro-Dade County will also incorporate transit considerations into their assessment of adequate transportation facilities. However, instead of achieving this by their method of measuring level of service, Metro-Dade CoWlty will incorporate transit considerations through their application of level of service standards based upon proximity to existing urban development and proximity to public transit service. Generally, the level of service standards become less stringent as one travels toward the urban core. Outside of the urban development boundary in Dade County, the level of service for all coW!ty roads, state principal arterials, and freeways is LOS C; for state minor arterials, the level of service is D. 40 City of Miami Planning Department, "Transportation Corridors; Meeting the Challenge of Growth Management in Miami" (September, 1990). 39

PAGE 51

Nm a-to Couaty 810wanl COGDty Dlde Couaty Oty of Miami MoDIIOIIIOI)' Couaty. 1\Wylmld TABLE 3 Characteristics of Local Government ConcWTency Management Systems Comparative SUiliJIIlU}' Uait of Ro_., COD
PAGE 52

TABLE4 Dad e Coun ty LOS Standards Pri o r to 1/1/95 B eglnn iag 1 /1195 Outs ide C: Same as prior to UDB County roads 111/95 State princ. arterials Freeways 1-95 D : State minor arterial s las ide E: D: UDB All roads at LOS E No Trans i t or above All roads except SUMA (State urban minor arterials) E: No Transit SUMA I 0% over year 1989 E: existing traffic Transit volume f o r roads within 112 mi. operating below 20 min. hdwy. LOSE 129"/o capacity: Commuter rail Express bus within 112 mi Ias l de UIA E: E: All roads at LOS E No T ransit o r above 15% over y ear 1989 120% capacity: existing traffic Transit volume for roads within 112 mi operating below 20 min hdwy LOSE 150% capacity : Commuter rail Express bus within 112 mi. ourc:e : M: nan l:oW! Adntlnlstra.Uve ...,, ...... etrOpO ty mce Concurrency Fee Schedule, Standards, Evaluation Metho
PAGE 53

Within the urban development boundary but outside the urban infill area, the level of service is E for all roads presently operating at LOS E or above. For roads operating be low LOS E, roadway traffic is pennined to increase 10 percent over the 1989 existing traffic volumes. Within the urban infill area, the level of service is E for all roads presently operating at LOS E or above. For roads operating below LOS E, roadway traffic is pennined to increase IS percent over the 1989 existing traffic volumes. New Colllfly LOS StiZNiards T1tttt lncorpoiTIIe Tl'llllfit Beginning January I, 1995, proximity to transit service will determine the level of service standard. For example, within the urban development boundary where no transit exists, state urban minor arterials must operate at LOS E. All other roads must operate at LOS D. If transit service operates at 20-minute headways within 112 mile of the proposed development, then road facilities may operate at LOS E If "extraordinaey" transit service such as passenger rail or express bus service exists within 112 mile of the proposed development, then roadways may operate at 120 percent of capacity. Within the urban infill area where no transit service exists, roadways must operate at LOS E. However, if transit service does exist and operates at 20-minute headways within 112 mile of the proposed development, then road facilities may operate at 120 percent of capacity If passenger rail or express bus service exists within 112 mile of the proposed development, then roadways may operate at ISO percent of capacity." Outside of the urban development boundary, the standards are to be kept the same as prior to January I, 1995; however, the recent growth management legislative amendments requiring local governments to adopt the level of service as established by FOOT for the Florida Intrastate Highway System may require some revisions to these local standards in the future Development is evaluated for impact on the nearest roadways in the traffic network accessed by the subject development If the development accesses more than one roadway, projected trips generated by the development are assigned to roadways in accordance with standard traffic engineering principles. <1 41 Metropolitan Dade County, Administrative Order 4-85, "Service Concurrency Fee Schedule, Standards, Evaluation Methods, Criteria, and Policies and Procedures," effective June 1992 4 1 Metro-Dade County, A.O. 4-85, ''Traffic Circulation, Methods for Evaluating Development Impacts, Part A" (June, 1992). 42

PAGE 54

County Concumocy Management System Broward County does not calculate an average areawide roadway level of service, but measures level of service on a roadway link by link basis, which is the method most frequently used by localities in Florida. Applicable roadway level of service standards vary according to the degree of urbanization surrounding a development under evaluation and according to roadway type LOS maximum volumes for a given level of service, as designated by FOOT, are assigned according to the functional classification of the roadway. Broward County developed the TRIPS computer model, which adds together the existing trips, measured in annually updated average daily traffic, plus committed trips from approved development The sum total of these trips are distributed by the TRIPS model, with resulting totals compared aglli.tiot the FOOT Generalized Maximum Volumes Tables to detennine the level of service. Apart from the concurrency evaluation, the TRIPS model was originally developed to assess impact fees by distributing the trips that will be placed on the regional roadway network by development of platted property. Those areas eligible for reduced levels of highway service are those identified by Broward County as urban core and designated redevelopment areas. Urban core and designated redevelopment areas are considered to be developing activity centers, which will require higher levels of public traiiSit service One of Broward County's objectives for achieving the goal of providing and maintaining a balanced multi-modal traiiSpOrtation system (Goall, Traffic Cin:. Element) is to give increasing priority to public traiiSportation (Obj. 4) by developing a long-range traiiSit overlay to the year 2010 Highway Network which will include the identification of high-priority tninsit corridors.43 Broward County has undertaken a study of transit and highway needs of downtown Fort Lauderdale to analyze the effects of lowered level of service standards on the ability to travel within the downtown and analyze options for improving downtown circulation and traiiSit access. The result of this study will be the adoption of a comprehensive plan amendment implementing selected strategies for addressing the lowered level of service on roadways serving the urban core. Broward County does not conduct traffic concurrency analysis for parking facilities, as these facilities are not considered a use which generates traffic. Palm Beach County CoDCumocy Management System Palm Beach County evaluates roadway level of service on a link by link basis and has devised a concurrency management system that includes the application of a Traffic Performance '' Broward County, "Comprehensive Plan 1989, Volume 2, Adopted Components Traffic Circulation Element," Goal I, Objective 4, Policy 14: 4-6. 43

PAGE 55

Standard to all major thoroughfares which may be affected by traffic generated by a proposed development project Two tests are applied using the Traffic Performance Standard. Test 1 requires that traffic from the proposed development project at build-out, when added to existing traffic plus background traffic growth, does not exceed the adopted LOS standard on roads within the maximum radius of development influence. The maximum radius of development influence is measured in road miles from the point at which the proposed project enters a major thoroughfare. This test is applied for both average annual daily traffic (AAD'D and average peak hour traffic. The evaluation includes 1-95 if the net trips are greater than one percent of the LOS D AADT volume. Table S describes how the traffic impact area is defined in Test I. If the maximum radius of development influence is greater than 0.5 mile, then the proposed project must evaluate only those links beyond the 0.5 mile radius where net trips are greater than one percent of the LOS D AADT volume of the affected link. If the LOS standard is violated on a link, an alternate test may be employed to evaluate the link's peak hour, peak season volume. If the alternate test shows that the standard is not violated, then a detailed analysis of affected signalized intersections must further show that the critical volume does not exceed the standard for peak hour, peak season operation, in order for a development order to be granted. Net Trip Gene radon 1-200 201-500 501-1000 1001 5001,000 10,00 1 -20,000 20,001 -up TABLE 5 Test 1-Link/Buildol!t Test Palm Beach County Maximum RadiJB of Developmeat Jilfluence Address first acc:essed link only directly 0.5 mi. I mi. 2 mi. 3 mi. 4 mi. s mi. Source: Palm Beach County Seclion 7.9, Traffic Perfonnonce Slarldards, Land Developmcm Code, adopccd Ju.nc: 16. 1992. 44

PAGE 56

Detailed analysis o f the critical vohune in an intersection may also be required when the net trips from a project contribute I 0 percent or greater to the AADT volume on a link that connects to a major intersection within the project' s maximum radius of deve l opment influence. Selected roadway links that are operating below the standard LOS D may exceed the LOS D AADT volume by five percent provided that the standard is maintained for the average peak hour This excess five percent is allocated on a first-come-first-served basis. No project may use more than one-fifth of the excess five pm:ent on any link. A second test (Test 2) is applied using tbe Traffic Performance Standard method. Test 2 requires that the adopted LOS standard not be exceeded by the total model traffic within the model maximum radius of development influence Total model traffic includes existing traffic net trips from the proposed project, and background traffic growth, that have been estimated and assigned to the major thoroughfare system, representing all approved projects and expressed as average annual daily traffic. Table 6 describes how the traffic impact area is defined for Test 2. Net Trip Geaendion 1-50 51:1000 1001-4000 4001-8000 8001-12,000 12,001-20,000 20,001-up TABLE 6: Test 2..:.Model Test Palm Beach County Ma:d-RadiiB of Development IDflaeace Address first directly accessed major thoroughfare only I mi. 2 mi. 3 mi. 4 mi. 5 mi Source: Palm Bad! COWlty Sec. 7 9 Traffic Perform1nce Stondlrds. Land Development Code, adopted June 16, 1992. Land development represented in the Mode l Plan is the basis for the Test 2 analysis. The AADT for use in Test 2 is established by the FSUTMS modeling process. If net trips of a proposed 45

PAGE 57

project cause the AADT on any link within the model maximum radius of development influence to exceed the LOS standard, then no development order would be issued. Selected links may exceed LOS D by five percent. For example, a list of selected links in Section 7.9, Traffic Performance Standards, includes Glades Road between Butts Road and Perimeter Road. This excess five percent is allocated to proposed development projects on a basis, provided that no one development uses more than one fifth of the five percent excess available on the directly accessed link or three fifths of the five percent excess available on any other link within the model radius of development influence. The Palm Beach County traffic engineer computes trip generation rates for local conditions and applies these instead of the trip rates established by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. In determining the trip generation of non-residential trips of a proposed project, pass-by trips are recogniud and credited against the trip generation of the proposed project, as approved by the county engineer. For example, for general commercial development, a formula is used: Pass-By% 45.1 0.022S(A) where A is the area in 1,000 gross square feet of leasable area. Use of this formula results in pass-by trip rates, reduced by the following percentages, for general commercial retail of these sizes: 45% 10,000 sq. ft. 44% 50,000 sq. ft. 43% I 00,000 sq. ft. 34% 500,000 sq. ft. 23% 1,000,000 sq ft. .. Percentage credit is also given for a number of specific uses such as day care centers (I 0 percent), fast food restaurant (30 petcent) and convenience store (45 percent). Credit proposed to be taken in excess of that given in Section 7.9 must be satisfactorily justified in the required traffic impact study. Factors considered in determining a modified pass-by rate include type and siu of land use, location with respect to the service populatioD, location with respect to competing land uses, location with respect to the surrounding major thoroughfare system, and existing and projected traffic volumes. Palm Beach County also exercises the use of geographic areas of exception (GAE) from roadway concurrency, which include three types: Downtown Core, Special Project and Community 44 Palm Beach County Land Development Code, Section 7.9 Traffic Performance Standards (adopted June 16, 1992): 7-145. 46

PAGE 58

Redevelopment. While the Downtown Core GAE allows for lowered LOS standards on designated links and intersections, the principle of the GAE is similar to the concept of the transportation concurrency exception areas Downtown core GAEs may be established by local governments as a means to balance competing goals objectives and policies, such as the need to meet roadway level of service standards versus promoting alternative transportation and promoting urban intill Downtown Core GAEs may be established only east ofl95. An application to create a Downtown Core GAE must specify the area boundaries, the affected links and intersections, and the Test I and Test 2 LOS standards to be applied. Only areas that have or are proposed to have urban downtown character may be approved as a downtown core GAEs. Several criteria are used to determine the extent of an area's downtown urban character, including street pattern, structllles built to front and side property lines, pedestrian orientation. building scale, compactness of development, and a sense of place and organization. 47

PAGE 59

48

PAGE 60

URBAN AREAS OUTSIDE FLORIDA Several other states were investigated for transit-supportive policies and programs. These included Washington, California, Oregon, New Jersey, and Maryland. Because the development climate in Florida is profoundly influenced by concummcy, exercised elsewhere through the use of adequate public facilities ordinances (APFOs), a closer look was given to those states that provide enabling legislation for local governments to adopr APFOs. While Maryland, California, and Oregon have state legislation allowing local governments to adopt APFOs, only Florida and Washington require local governments to adopt them. The state of New Jersey bas no state enabling legislation to allow local governments to adopt APFOs. Several municipalities in Washington, such as the City ofBeUevue the City of Seattle, and King County, are presently developing ttansportation adequacy measures. This is a multi-modal approach, using a system of ratings and weights to detennine the ttansportation adequacy of zones. For example, the City of Bellevue's Mobility Management System establishes perfonnance standards, known as mobility indicators, which are set separately for each of five modes, including auto, transit, bicycling, walking and ridesbaring. Their areawide auto level of service measure is actually a composite measure because it takes into account the availability and effectiveness of other modes. The City of Seattle uses travel time to compare the competitiveness of transit to single-occupant vehicle travel for various categories of trip origins and destinations. Their auto level of service measure establishes acceptable travel times along arterial corridors. The City is considering adding fuel cost, P.8fking supply and expense to the aut o LOS standard. It was observed that growth management goals differ among the various states and localities surveyed. For example, in California, a major thrust of its growth management efforts is balancing the supply of middle-income housing with j obs. A two-hour commute from a job to an affordable residential area is not uncommon in some wban areas in California. On the other hand, Florida is more concerned with providing public facilities and finding the means to pay for them. As a result, the various techniques used bY other states were studied, keeping in mind that these techniques might be inappropriate unless otherwise tailored for use bY Florida. Momgomety County Muylaad Montgomery County, Maryland, bas been highlighted in this repon because its planning staff has been fine-tuning the County's concurrency management system for the past 20 years. Not only has Montgomery County experienced the problems of rapid growth, as have Florida communities. but at the same time, transit has played a serious role its development. As a result, existing methods and new methods currently under consideration by Montgomery County may be of interest to Florida communities. 49

PAGE 61

Montgomery County adopted its adequate public facilities ordiJ1811ce (APFO) in 1973 as part of its county subdivision A summary is presented llere to describe some alternatives for including transit into the evaluation of transportation level of service. This summary includes a brief description of the County's existing concurrency management system as it rela!es to transit considerations in the measurement of roadway LOS. A summary of proposed changes currently under consideration by Montgomery County planning S1aff is also presented. To implement the APFO, the County llas adopted an annually updated Annual Growth Policy (AGP) that identifies public facilities needs aDd provides a mechanism to balance the amount of private subdivision approvals with the availability of public facilities. The AGP controls the timing, or staging, of development but does not control the location, amount, type, or Dilit of land development. Development applications must pass two transportation tests for plan approval: a Policy Area Transportation Review (P A TR) for all proposed development generating more than five trips, and a Local Area Transportation Review (LA TR) for proposed development generating more than 50 trips. Polky Tfllllfpottlllioll Review (PATR) The goal of the PA TR is to maintain an overall transportation level of service within each of 25 transportation "policy areas" in the county. The policy areas an: derived from 292 traffic zones and an: delinealed by physical fearures (e.g., rivers) and grouped by $imilarities in transportation characteristics Like the concwm1cy mMagement systems of municipalities in Florida, Montgomery County conipares estimated traffic impacts to the availability of transportation facilities However, unlike Florida, a "staging ceiling" is established for each policy area, which defines the number of jobs and the number of housing units that can be accommodated by the established roadway an:awide average level of service standard for that policy area. A computerized traffic simulation model computes a balanced relationship between a programmed set of transportation facilities and a geographical paaern of jobs aDd housing. based upon market forecasts, to determine an appropriate staging ceiling." The Montgomery County Council sets the an:awide roadway level of service standards based upon transit availability and service. Their approach essentially allows tradc-offs between auto and transit modes by enabling improvements in transit service to warrant a lower roadway LOS, thereby allowing more congestion. This trade-off approach is considered more financially feasible than setting separate minimum LOS standards for both auto and transit travel. The LOS standards an: represented by six Groups, ranging from Group 1, which describes rural policy areas with little transit service, to Group VI, which describes a policy area like the Silver Spring central business district (CBD) that provides the highest level of transit, consisting of Metro Rail Montgomery County Council, FY 94 Annual Growth Policy (July I 1993): 6 so

PAGE 62

and expanded bus service Table 7 describes areawide roadway LOS assigned to pol icy areas based upon transit availability. As a special case, the jobs and housing ceilings for the Silver Spring policy area are based upon several specific guidelines such as achieving commuting goals for transit, auto occupancy rates, and implementing parking constraints. The measure of transit service is actually based upon a "bundle" of measures, inchufing the degree of coverage of the area, frequency accessibility and use as assessed by specific measures... These measwes enable policy areas to be assigned to a Group requiring attainment of a particular roadway LOS standard. Tab l e 8 describes these measures This present method considers trans it and auto modes as the only available modes. Walking and bicycling are included as pan of the transit accessibility measures Proposed development in a Metro Station Policy Area undergoes alternative review procedwes. These applicants are not required to conduct a LA TR if they enter into a contract with the County Planning Board and the County DOT to make their best effort to meet established mode share goals, join a transportation management organization (TMO), pay an annual contribution to fund the TMO, and pay a development approval payment (DAP) over a multi -year period starting when the building pennit is issued and indexed to reflect inflation in construction costs." .. The Montgomery County Planning Board, M-NCPPC FY 94 Annual Growth Policy (December 1992): 5 I. "FY 94 Annual Growth Policy, Guidelines for Administration of the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance and Growth Capacity Ceilings for FY 94," adopted by the Montgomery County Council, J uly I 1993. 51

PAGE 63

tee Public way Tronsport lot Group A.llcmalives 10 "' Cla.ssifi AUIOO>Obilc lllds cations Travd I Mu&inal II l illliud Ill Moderammunily 8nd lA Otc:up611 a sySitiD of poN ride lou S()(J ro 1,1SO CommRaiiOf I itbc Rail 4 AveneeF,_y otCoaun-Rlil AMPeakH-(TtGru Mll&inal llliOWll of &he IRA is within walkac.ass Limiled part/ride access lAd walk -J IIJ6 M-portioa walk M:teSS wi&h sy.....,lraOSI'ers 6
PAGE 64

gc Public "Y Tronsport oC Group Allemalivts 10 e Classifi Automobile vds Travtl IV v Full VI ExjiOildcrl Transit Servius Available or Proarammed Aul() Oeptodcal Bus Bast Fixed Guideway Systems and/or SysterN __ Systems Com"""'ily -Regional Pvlv'Ride Expreu --conunush O Measures 2. Avtntae Bus Fn>quenclcs Ia AM Peak Hoor oa ComhincdRouces (1 .. ., p
PAGE 65

TABLE 8 Transit LOS Measures Used To Determine Group Assignment Montgomery County, Maryland Covenge I. Percent of households within 1/4 mile of bus stops within 112 mile of rail stations 2. Percent of jobs within 1/4 mile of bus stops within 112 mile of rail stations I. Average bus frequency 2. Average train frequency Aecessibillty I. Ratio of sidewalk miles to street miles 2. Ratio o f bikeway miles to street miles 3. Number of sccur'e bicycle patking spaces 4. Number of park-and-ride Use I. Percent of non-auto driver work origin 2. Percent non-auto driver work destination 3. Percent walk/bike to Metro Stations Soun:e: The MOiitaomY COWl!)' P._ial 8oeM. M-NCPPC, FY 94 Annual Growdl Policy (December 1992): 5I. The LA TR test is used to eDS\ft that proposed development will not cause unacceptable roadway congestion at intersec:tioos. In the traffic impact analy s is, the county estimates the pm:entage of trips generated by the development that will use transit Special trip generation rates are given for general office development located outside the Beltway and within 1000 feet of a Metro Rail station. For the AM peak period, a SO percent reduction in estimated trips is used in the evaluation of impact of a new development. For the PM peak period. the pm:ent reduction applied is based upon the distance of the development from the MetroR.ail station. This is calculated using the formula: 54

PAGE 66

Percent trip deduction= 4(1000)1100, where D is the straightline distance to the MetroRail station in feet. Using this formula for a sample of distances yields a percentage reduction as listed in Table 9. New Methods Under Review The Montgomery County Council recently asked its Planning Board to study some issues concerning the methods used for evaluating level of service. These included investigating alternatives for changing the level of service standards for LA TR and PA TR to be more sensitive to ridesharing, transit, and non-motorized transportation alternatives. The present method of assigning an areawide level of service standard is to put policy areas into one of six Groups based upon transit availability, as described in Table 7. The problem with the Groups is that small improvements in transit service may not result in elevating a policy area to the next Group with a less stringent roadway LOS standard because each Group represents a large range of transit levels of service. It was originally proposed, but ultimately not recommended, that this might be remedied by further dividing the six Groups into nine, to recogni:n: smaller improvements in transit. Use oj Total Transpol'tlllion Level of Servke for PA TR An alternative to the groups method has also been reviewed and recommended by the Montgomery County Planning Board. This involves the establishment of a countywide standard for acceptable total transportation level of Service (TTLOS). The total transportation level of service would be measured for each policy area. Unlike the Group system, improvements in either auto or transit LOS would result in proportionate increases in !aging ceilings for housing units and/or jobs. An average LOS for the entire transportation system countywide could be calculated by combining both auto and transit LOS measures, weighted by mode share: TILOS = (auto LOS auto MS) + (transit LOS transit MS) where TTLOS is Total Transportation Level of Service and MS is Mode Share. This approach represents a direct relationship between modes rather than an inverse relationship represented by the Groups method described above While the Groups method also achieves a 55

PAGE 67

generally constant overall level of transpanation service, it is not as explicitly defined as the mos method. The use of a mos approach is another means of making a trade-off between auto and transit modes. As a long as the mos standard is maintained, a transit service better than the standard could allow the auto service to be worse than the standard or vice versa. The mode share would govern the extent to which congestion would be permitted to get better or worse. The peak-period work-trip mode shares to be used could either be a targeted mode share or be based on the land use and transportation network in place in the AGP model database. Compllliltr Ttrllffit LOS In order to better quantify and account for small improvements in trall3it service, Montgomery County planning staff reviewed a number of transit level of service measurements, including those that measure opportunity, peak frequency, coverage, and volume/capacity. Staff recommended that transit LOS be based on Regional Transit Accessibility, a measure of opportunity that indicates the ease of commuting from home to work by trall3it. This measure considers all jobs in each traffic zone within all policy areas in the region and is deemed advantageous because it relates transit to land use patterns and comprises all non-auto travel, including rail, bus, wallting, and bicycling. This measure is in the form of an accessibility index that is ralcd highest for a policy area that connects the most houses to the most jobs in the least time by transit. This trall3it LOS measure is considered easy to compute for the CBD and the Sector Plan Metro Stations. Accessibility is measured for each traffic zone and is calculated by using the number of jobs in each of the other traffic zones in Montgomery County, multiplied by a distance factor. The distance factor is measured by transit travel time estimated from travel surveys, giving greater weight to close jobs, than to distant jobs. These measures are computed at the traffic zone level for both jobs and households, then averaged to obtain policy area scores, which represent regional transit accessibility to jobs and households. A composite transit level of service is then computed as the weighted average of household and jobs accessibility. Transit LOS a I golic;y area composite transit accessihi1iG' composite transit accessibility denominator The equation is used to transform transit accessibility to a level of service scale The transit LOS scale would apply specifically to Montgomery County conditions. The Transit Accessibility Denominator is that computed for the policy area with the high composite transit level of service. 56

PAGE 68

TABLE 9 Reductions Applied to Vehicle Trips Generated by Office Buildings Montgomery County, MD Local Area Transportation Review Slni&ht UDe Dbllllee (Ia feet) tD MetnlRall Ptrteld Radaolloa Ia Velllde Tripe Slllloe AMI'alll'triod PMI'alll'trio4 0 50 40 50 50 3 1 100 so 36 150 so 34 200 so 32 250 so 3 0 300 so 21 350 so 26 400 so 24 4SO so 22 soo so 20 -550 so II -600 50 16 650 so 14 100 so 12 1$0 so 10 BOO 50 B ISO 50 6 900 50 4 950 so 2 1000 so 0 Montaom
PAGE 69

Measuring Nott-AII/0 Level of Set'Vke for LA TR Aside from consi dering the TrLOS method versus the Groups method of trading off auto LOS with non -auto LOS, Montgomery County has also been considering the development of measures o f non auto LOS and possible applications of these measun:s. Montgomery County is considering the use of a broader "transportation impact study" as a use for incorporating non-auto Opportllltlty: c""""'" RdltlbiJity : Comfott: Dltft#wsr : ;teem: Parlllrf: S/Uwollt IWio: Cltr:ldly: CIHIMcttvlly: Hctr4: Blk""IIY ffllltJ : l'rri/Jrr. TABLE 1 0 Considered LOS Measures Relating to Overall Transit Trip Montgomery Counry, Maryland Me.lftS of Qulllty of T-it Trip lhc aumber of destiDalions reochable from 1111 oriaiD witbin a cenain time. headway of transit service along a route. of bulldlnp of persons in 1111 area widliD a cenain welkin& distance of a transit route. on time of transit service. depee of c:rowdlna 11114 oppommity to s!L overall nvel pme Me.uns of Qulllty of Auto AccesS to tu.lt ..,cess to a pultlllld-ridc loL availability aad cor1. Malof Qalliy of Pedestria Access 10 n..tt l'1ll:io of sidewalk mila to stnet miles oomperisoo of>"-sidewalk lniVel petb widl straight l ine distance from origin to lraiUit stalion. the number of cross -per linear mile. av.,.e stopped delay of a pedestriall at a intcnectioa. pedestriall accident ratiOS within a defined area. Me.uns of Qulllty of Bicycle 10 TJ..it ratio of bike routes to miles in an area. pmence of secure bicycle parking facilities at a nnsit s talion Source: The Maryland National Capiw Park and Planaing Commi s sion Montgomery Couaty Planning Board. "FY 94 AMual Growth Pol icy, Final Onlft," Marylaad 1992): 6 7 -70. co

PAGE 70

LOS measures, in place of the traditional traffic impact srudy in the LA TR. Presently, the critical lane volume (CL V) method is the main measure for the LA TR, in which traffic volumes for conflicting turning movements measure the level of congestion of the interseCtion as a whole. Staff recommended that a "bundle" of measures be used for measuring non-auto transportation level of service, similarly to that now used for transit LOS for the PATR. It was recognized, however, that the use of other measures besides auto LOS for an overall transportation impact study would require consideration of wlw is an appropriate balance of modes. Several supply measures for level of service that are under consideration include those for the quality of the transit trip and the quality of the access trip to transit by driviug, bicycling and walking These could be applied as a bundle of measures. Table 10 describes these measures. Application of some combination of these measures is being considered for use in the LA TR for various sizes of geographic analysis areas. The system cwtently used applies the critical lane volume method to determine roadway intersection LOS. The LOS standards applied to the interseCtion differ by group according to transit availability. An alternative option is to establish separate measures and standards for non-auto LOS around transit stations for use as a trade-off to allow increased auto congestion in LA TR process Identified advantages of incorporating the use of a non-auto LOS in the LA TR is that it would encourage non-auto modes of travel and promote planned development. 41 On an even smaller scale, a point system for measuring non-auto LOS could be applied to transit oriented sites, improved non-auto LOS would allow for worsened auto LOS.. A final altemative under consider&tion i s to eliminate the LA TR test altogether in certain areas such as transit station areas. The Montgomery County Planning Board, M -NCPPC "FY 94 Annual Growth Policy" (December 1992): 66-71. 59

PAGE 71

60

PAGE 72

CONCLUSION In addressing the concerns of Tri-Rail as they develop rail facilities and services, this report has found that problems have resulted from a lack of clarity about the appropriate application of transportation concurrency to transit facility expansion This report recommends modifying Chapter 163.3180(4}, F.S. to explicitly exempt transit facilities from roadway concurrency evaluation. This report also recommends modifying the Florida Statutes to revise the definition of projects that promote public transportation to be an areawide exception option applied to transit-oriented development The effectiveness of the transportation concurrency exception area option as it presently exists in the Florida Starutes will begin to be tested as local governments in the Tri-Rail service corridor adopt local comprehensive plan amendments for its application. While the use of the transportation concurrency exception area option may prove to be an ideal development incentive that supports transit, the use of other methods described in this report may provide alternatives to be used instead of or in addition to the exception area option. For example, three concurrency management systems were highlighted in this report, in which methods are used to incorporate consideration of transit into the roadway concurrency evaluation. Detennining the traffic impact of a new development includes quantifying the number of trips generated by that new development For those areas in proximity to transit service, estimations could be made of the percentage of generated trips that could be served by transit, thus reducing the overall number of estimated new auto trips using available roadway capacity. This might allow increased development opportunity in locations easily accessed by tranSit and delay the point at which roadway LOS standards will be violated. Another approach is to lower the roadway LOS standard in corridors where transit service provides an effective alternative to the automobile or where it is desired to create conditions conducive to successful transit A lower LOS standard might also be applied on an areawide basis in defined urban infill areas or dowritown locations. Another alternative is to measure roadway level of service on an areawide basis instead of on a link by link basis in order to allow a higher tolerance of localized roadway congestion. particularly in areas of higher density, mixed use development where conditions can be created to make transit more effective. This method can promote transportation projects that address long term congestion management goals while at the same time deemphasizing spot improvements that are often the result of link by link LOS measuring. At a time when increased emphasis is being placed upon intermodalism and the overall effectiveness of the transportation system, planners in metropolitan areas within Florida and outside the state are now considering the quality of the entire trip from origin to destination rather than the level of service of one roadway or transit trip link. While the complex concurrency management system of Montgomery County, Maryland that was reviewed i n this report is probably not wholly suitable for counties and municipalities in Florida, aspects of the 61

PAGE 73

methods used to determine the adequacy of the transpOrtation system may be worth exploring. These might include: the use of a "bundle" of measures to evaluate tranSit service; the application of guidelines for achieving commuting goals for transit, auto occupancy rates and parking constraints; the development of a total transportation level of service evaluation; and the development of LOS measures relating to the quality of the transit trip and the quality of auto, pedestrian and bicycle access to transit. Finally, it is emphasized that while this report has focused upon concurrency management systems, a comprehensive approach should be used to promote development incentives that support transit A concurrency management system designed to allow a balance between transit and auto levels of service can be complemented by appropriale use of zoning, parking management, station area plans and other options described in this report. 62

PAGE 74

APPENDIX A ELMS m Legislative Cballges to Florida Growth Management Laws State planning requirements will now integrate land use planning and nonauto transportation alternatives into the transportation planning process. Chapter 186, F.S., which governs state and regional planning, has been amended requiring a growth management portion to be included in the state comprehensive plan in order to give more strategic guidance in the form of goals, objectives and policies. Several purposes were identified, including : integrating future growth policies a.S they relate to transportation and land development providing guidelines for the appropriate location of urban growth, and providing guidelines for state transportation corridors and public transportation corridors. The Governor's Growth Management Plan Advisory Committee has rec:onunended that the new growth management portion be devised after the necessary data and analyses have been completed and as part ofa complete revision of the State Comprehensive Plan. Regiolllll Guidei!Des for Minimum Densities On the regional planning level, Chapter 186.507, F.S., has been amended so that the comprehensive regional policy plans give strategic direction. The regional transportation component of the Strategic Regional Policy Plan will address several items including the one below In addressing regional transportation; the council may recommend minimum density guidelines for development along designated public transportation corridors and identify investment strategies for providing transportation infrastructure where growth is desired, rather than focusing primarily on relieving congestion in areas where growth is discquraged. (Chapter 186.507(12), F.S.) "Findings & Recommendations of the Governor's Growth Management Plan Advisory Committee for the Growth Management Ponion of the State Comprehensive Plan. October ll. 1993. 63

PAGE 75

New Local Colllpftbcmive Trampcntllioa Elemeat Chapter 163, F .S. was amended to include the requirement that for all local governments within an urbanized area served by an MPO, a transportation element must be prepared in lieu of a separate traffic circulation element, a mass transit element and other transportation-related elements. The new transportation element must address all modes of travel and must identify land use densities, building intensities, and transportation management programs to promote public transportation systems in designated public transportation corridors so as to encourage population densities sufficient to support Sll(:h systems. 10 The element must also contain one or more policies for the establishment of land use, site and building design standards for development in exclusive public transit corridors to assure the accessibility of new development to public transit." Loc:lll Govemmeat Asses5meDt of PJanniDg Program Success Local governments must amend their comprehensive plans through their evaluation and appraisal reports (EAR) to reflect changes in the state comprehensive plan, the minimum criteria of Rule 91-S, F.A.C., and the appropriate strategic regional policy plan. The latest amendments to Chapter 163 also encourage local governments to articulate an overall "vision'' of the future physical appearance and qualities of its community as a part of its local comprehensive plan, using the evaluation and appraisal report proceSs as a starting poinl for determining the v i sion. These evaluation and appraisal reports must be prc:pued no la1er than seven years after the adoption of the local government comprehensive plan. Requirements for the EAR include an evaluation of the degree of success in achieving local government cOmprehensive plan goals and objectives and the implenientation of the plan's policies. n The EAR must address major problems of development including: the effect of concurrency requirements; the maintenance and/or achievement of adequate Level of Service Standards; coordination with development over the provision of public facilities and services; consideration of the location of development with regard to existing infrastructure; and consideration of the location of development in relation to where development was anticipated in the adopted plan, such as within areas designated for urban growth. ,. Chapter 163.3177(6)(j)8, F S. Rule 9J-S.OI 9(4)9, F.A.C. Rule 9J-5.00S3(2)b, F.A.C. 64

PAGE 76

Grearer Time Fle:Libility to Acbieve Previous to the amendments to the concurrency requirements of Chapter 163, F.S., minimum requirements for receiving a development order were met when the necessary facilities and services are i n p lace or under construction when the development order is issued or at the time impacts from the development occur. A new subsection to Cbapter 163, F S., was created to afford greater time flexibility for the provision of transportation facilities. It states that transportation facilities needed to serve new development shall be in place or under actual construction no more than three years after issuance by the local government, of a certificate of occupancy (Chapter 163.3180(2)(c), F S ) Coucumacy Applies to An Stue The concurren<:y requirement of local governments now applies to all state and other public facilities and development (Chapter 163. 3 1 80(4) F.S. ) An incentive is provided by the revisions to Chapter 163, F.S., for urban redevel opment. Within the existing urban service area, 110 percent of the actual transportation impact caused by a previously existing development must be reserved for the proposed urban redevelopment, even if it results in the reduction of level of service below the adopted standards (Chapter 1 63.3180(8). F.S.) Long-Tenn Trm!polialion Coucumacy Mamtgemeat Systemt I n designated districts where significant transportation service backlogs exist, a local government may adopt within its plan a long-term transportation concurrency management system with a p l anning period of up to ten years. The system must be designed to correct the deficiencies and may include interim level of service standards. For areas with severe deficiencies, a 1 S-year plan may be developed (Chapter 163. 3180(9), F S.) LOS StaDdanb for Stue Roadl The amendments to Cbapter 163, F S also establish that while local governments must adopt the level of service standard for facilities on the Florida Intrastate Highway System as established by FOOT, the local governments may adopt their own standards for all other state roads (Chapter 163. 3180(10), F.S.) 65

PAGE 77

Developmellll of Regioual lmpld Statewide guidelines and standards for developments of regional impact (DRI) were also amended during the 1993 legislative session. In order to redUA:e barriers to infill, encowage a higher proportion of residential development in mixed use projects and to promote compact development, thresholds for determining whether a development project qualifies as a DRI were raised for those located in urban central business districts and in regional activity centers. 13 The Depar1ment of Conununity Affairs amended Rule 9JS, F.A.C. to revise the definitions of those areas that qualify as urban CBDs and regional activity tenters.,.. AIH'Wide Level of Service StaManlt The amendments to Chapter 163, F.S. attempt to simplify the use of optional lr.II!Sportation concurrency management areas (TCMA). TCMAs are geographically compact areas that contain multiple, viable alternative travel paths or modes for common trips. The amendments enhance concurrency flexibility by allowing local governments to establish an areawide level of service standard applied within a TCMA. An areawide l evel of service standard must be justified based upon a demonstration that its use promotes urban infill development, redevelopment or public transit." Rule 9J-5, F.A.C. does not presently specify the basis for averaging; however, it doet specify that level of service averages will be computed for facilities with similar functions serving common origins and destinations.,. . Trmspoltlllion ConelllftDC)' Exeepeion Aleat Developments that qualify as exceptions from the transportation COIICUI'miCY requirement were identified in the legislative amendments in order to resolve the conflict between unintended effects of transportation contlllmlt)' and the state goals of achieving colllpiiCt urban growth patterns and developing public transportation. The intent was ... to provide flexibility for concurrency management in order to encowage the application of a wide 111118C of planning 13 Chapter 380.06(2)(e), F.S. ,.. According to Rule 9JS.003(11), F.A .C., a central business district is a single urban core area of a municipality with a population of 25,000 or greater, wbich is located within an urbanized area as identified by the 1990 Census. The land use intenSities for this area are consistent with those on the lcx:al government comprehensive plan furure land use map and this area contains high density, multi-use development. "Chapter 163.3180(7), F.S. l 4 Rule 9J-S.OOSS(S)(a), F.A.C. 66

PAGE 78

strategies that correspond with local circwnstances of a s pecific geographic an:a ." A l ocal government may grant an exceptio n from transponation concurrency to projects that an: otherwise consistent with the local government comprehensive plan and are located in geographic areas designated by the comprehensive plan for urban infill development, urban redevelopment, or downtown revitalization. The exception applies to all l and uses and deve l opment and types of facilities within expressly excepted areas. 51 A fourth exception from transportation concurrency may also be granted to projects that promote public tranSportation. Projects that promote public tranSportation are defined in Chapter 163.3164(28) F.S. as: ... those projects that directly affect the provisions of public transit, including tranSit term.inals, transit lines and routes, sep8lllte lanes for the exclusive use of public transit services, transit stops (sbelters and stations), and office buildings or projects that include fixed rail or transit terminals as part of the bui l ding. To es1ablish transportation concurrency exception areas for development that p:Omotes public transportation, Rule 91.0055(7), F .A. C requires that l ocal governments must: I. Establish how a project qualifies as a project that promotes public transportation through the establishment of guidelines andfor policies for granting the exceptions. 2. Demonstrate through supporting data and analysis that consideration has been given to the impact of the projects on the Florida Intrastate Highway System. 11 Rule 91-5.0055(6) F.A.C. 11 Deflnitions for downtown revitalization, urban redevelopment and urban inful were adde d to Chapter 163.3164, F.S. 67

PAGE 79

APPENDIX B Process for Local Comprehensive Plan Amendment Adopeioa The summary below outlines the process for adopting a local government plan amendment, which must be done in order to establish a transportation concurrency exception aru. The ELMS amendments to Chapter 163.3184, F.S., have changed the process oflocal government transmittal of their comprehensive plan amendments for state agency determination of compliance to include review by FOOT. I The local government prepares its comprehensive plan amendments, abiding by the minimum criteria in Rule 9J-S, F.A.C., for compliance with Chapter 163, F.S. 2. The local government must present the proposed plan amendment at an advertised public hearing. 3. The local government must transmit a copy of the proposed plan amendment and other materials specified by 9J-S, F.A.C., to its regiooal planning council and water management district, the state Department of Environmental Protection, the state Department of Transportation and any other state or local agency that requests to review it. 4. A process of intergovernmental review follows in which the reviewing agencies provide written comments to the Department of Community Affairs within 30 days. 5. The Department of Community Affairs will review comments, objections and suggestions for modifications from agencies within 30 days of receipt DCA will also review the proposed local comprehensive plan amendment at its discretion or if requested to do so by another agency. 6. Upon receipt of comments, recommendations and objections from the Department of Corrununity Affairs, the local government has 60 days to adopt the amendment, adopt the amendment with changes, or not adopt the amendment, during a public hearing. 7. Upon adoption of a plan amendment, the local government submits five copies of the atnendment and amended plan to the Department of Community Affairs. 8. The Department of Community Affairs has 45 days to determine if the amended plan is in compliance with Chapter 163, F.S. 9. The local government comprehensive plan may be determined not in compliance only if there is a preponderance of evidence to support this finding. I 0. If the plan atnendment is determined not in compliance, the Division of Administrative Hearings of the Department of Administration shall specify remedial actions that would bring the plan atnendment into compliance. Sanctions, such as the withholding of funds. may also be specified, if the local government proceeds to make the amendment effective. notwithstanding a determination of noncompliance. II. If the amended plan is determined to be in compliance, the plan amendments become effective when the Department of Community Affairs issues a fioal order determining the adopted amendment to be in compliance. 68

PAGE 80

APPENDIX C Regiooal aad Local Goals and Policies Framework A review of transit-related goals and policies of jurisdictions within the TriRail service area was undertaken to gain an understanding of the present framework for guiding the direction, magnitude and characteristics for future growth at the regional and local levels. Specifically, the regional policy plans for the Treasure Coast and South Florida regions and the comprehensive p lans for Palm Beach, Broward and Dade Counties were =icwed. Goals and policies having some relevance to setting the groundwork for providing a positive climate for development that supports transit are compiled below A brief discussion about this policy framework i s also provided in the section Planning and Regulatoey Climate of this report Treasllft Coast Region The following selected transit-related goals and policies for the Treasure Coast Region were compiled from the Regional Comprehensive Policy Plan, Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council" April, 1987 GOAL 16.1.2: To provide for a balanced, well planned, compatible: mix of land uses which are appropriately located. Policies: 16.1.2.7 16.1.2.8 16.1.2.9 Changes which increase land use intensities associated with the rap i d rail terminals should be encouraged to the extent consistent with State, regional, and local goals and policies. Rapid rail terminals shall only be located iii areas capable of being supported by levels of service required for such intensely developed land use activity Development shall not occur in future rights-of-way designated in local, regional, or Florida Department of Transportation thoroughfare right-of-way protection maps. GOAL 19.1.1: To provide for the safe and efficient movement of people and goods at a reasonable cost and at minimal detriment to the environment. 69

PAGE 81

Policies: 19.1.1.1 19.1.1.2 19.1.1.4 19.1.1.5 19.1.1.8 To maximum extent consistent with regional interests, per capita use of private automobiles shall be minimized within the Region through a combination of the following: I. provision of public: transportation alternatives; 2. provision of housing opportunities in proximity to employment opportunities; 3. provision of essential services in proximity to demand; and 4. concentration of commercial and other essential services. A comprehensive and fully integrated transportation system shall be developed which as a minimum includes the following components : I. two commercial seaports linked to and developed in coordination with Water Port System Plan; 2. at least two regular service commercial airports linking the region to major business centers within the State and outside of Florida consistent with Continuing Florida Aviation System Planning Process; 3. rapid rail service with stations serving the region; 4. a regional mass transit system linking rapid rail stations, major commercial airports, and principal urban areas within the Region; S. urban bus and sbunle service linked to each regional mass transit system station; 6. a road system designed to complement and supplement the core mass transit system; 7 adequate pedestrian and bicycle cotmeetions; and 8. land use and density changes necessary to support such a system. The expansion of mass transit service in the Treasure Coast Region shall be supponed by assisting local governments in applying and qualifying for federal assistance funding where consistent with other regional policies. Public: policy governing parking requirements and rates in high density a.:tivity areas should be reviewed and where necessary atnended to support "transit first policies". Parking requirement shall be designed to promote public transit as a viab l e alternative in high density areas and central business districts. Implementation of Transportation Systems Management (TSM) objectives that reduce the number of single occupant auto trips shall be encouraged. 70

PAGE 82

Palm Beach County The following selected transit-related goals and policies for Palm Beach County were compiled from the "1989 Comprehensive Plan for Palm Beach County, Florida," revised October, 199 2. Land Use GOAL: Objective 1: Polley 1-c:: Policy 1-k: Policy lp: It is the GOAL of Palm Beach County to provide for a distribution of land use by type and by density and intensity that balances the physical, social, cul!UI'al, environmental and economic needs of the c:wrent and fUture resident and tourist population in a manner that protects and improves the quality of the na!UI'al and manmade environment and ensures the timely, cost-effective provision of public f acilities and services while retaining the unique variety of lifestyles and quality of life. Implememadon U pon adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, al l public and private activities concerning the use, development and redeve l opment of land and provision of urban services and facilities shall be consistent with the future uses provided by the Official Land Use P l an Map and section entitled "Implementation of the Land U se Element". The "Implementation of the Land Use Element section is designed to encourage the elimination or reduction of uses inconsistent with the County s diverse character and future land uses. The Traditional Neighborhood Development Land Use Category provides for innovative and alternative development patterns that are residentially based and require the integration of residential uses with commercial and industrial uses. These uses must be coordinated with recmuion and open space systems in order to provide opportunities for a variety of lifestyle arrangements and experiences, and to reduce inftastructure impacts The Traditional Neighborhood Development Category is defined in the section entitled "Implementation of the Land Use Element." By September 1991, Palm Beach County shall add provisions for a TND Zoning District to the Land Development Code. By October, 1990, Palm Beach County shall begin a Growth Mllllagemen t/U rban Form Study. The conceptional framework of the study shall be completed by June, 1 992. The study shall seek to identify a land use form that minimizes urban sprawl and provides for the most efficient provision of servi c es and facilities. Transferable Development Rights shal l be an i ntegral part of the Urban Form Study. The Urban Form Study shal l : 71

PAGE 83

investigate and designate sending and receiving areas; assign densities within the sending areas on an equitable basis, based on the parcel's location, development potential and value to the community; investigate and establish, if feasible, a Countywide TDR program; and investigate an overall County density cap which would require that densities no longer be granted above the CIUTetlt Comprehensive Plan designation (to be revised or updated on a five year basis). Densities within the County would remain constant overall; however, density/intensity may be shifted or transferred from one location to another. PoUcy 1-v: Within the time frame provided by 163.3202(1), F.S., Palm Beach County shall amend its Land Development Codes to include innovative land development regulations, including: Incentives for planned unit developments. and Criteria for mixed use planned developments. Objective 3: Balmced GroW111 Within the time frame provided by \63.3202(1), F S., Palm Beach County shall asSIUI: balanced growth throughout the County by designating an adequate number of acres for residential, commercial, industrial and other appropriate land uses while maintaining agricultural activities and rural environments. The Land Use Plan Map and the Implementation section of this Land Use Element shall be used to review developments' iin.pacts on: the natural environment, including topOgraphy, soils and other resources; the availability of facilities and services; the availability of suitable land for utility facilities; the economy; the coordination of coastal population densities with the Regional Hurric:ane Evacuation Srudy; and the proliferation of urban sprawl. PoUcy 3-m: For the followina reasons, the County sball not approve densities higher than eight units per acre as amendments to the Comprehensive Plan unless such densities are pursuant to Policy lk (Urban Form/Growth Management) of the Land Use Element or within a designated community redevelopment area (CRA): Policy 7-a of the Land Use Element provides that Land Use Plan amendments are not necessary for affordable housing developments, under certain conditions; and Densities higher than 8 units per acre are not compatible with unincorporated area development and do not further the County's desire to direct growth to the coastal communities, and promote development in those areas. 72

PAGE 84

Capital Improvements GOAL: It is the GOAL of Palm Beach County to utilize a capital improvements program to coordinate the timing and to prioritize the delivery of public facilities and other capital projects; a project that supports the growth management Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the Palm Beach County Comprehensive Plan and encourages efficient utilization of its public facilities and financial reso=s. Objective 11: Aclequatt Funding to Asstlft Multi-MocW Mobility Within 36 months after the adoption of Comprehensive Plan amendment round 92-2, the CIE sball be amended to include a schedule of capital projects needed to ensure that a multi-modal transportation system is adequately funded. To the maximum extent possible, the County shall consider non-capital projects implementation strategies necessary in order to achieve a safe, convenient and energy efficient multi modal transportation mobility system. Polley 11-a: The County shall consider the existing revenue: source and funding mechanisms available for funding a multi-modal, multi-optiolllll transportation system Policy 11-IK The County shall consider the establishment of an impact fee, and/or an in lieu of fee, for funding the multi-modal mobility system. Moss Transit Element GOAL: It is the GOAL of Palm Beach County to provide a public traDsportation system that will increase utilization of mass transit oppol'lllllities, to provide a more viable a!tenialive to the automobile user, and to improve service to the non driving public including the transportation disadvantaged. Objective 1: UPCnMioe tbe M.s liwDit PIOpm Palm Beach shall improve and expand public transportation and paratransit services increasing ridership five percent from 1988 totals by Januaty 1995. Policy 1-b: Increase the transit presence in the County to achieve a 3/4 of one percent modal split by 199S through modification of the existing route system and increased service in areas with high propensity for transit use. Policy 1-c: Palm Beach County, through the MPO, shall conduct feasibility srudies for the proposed construction of a downtown West Palm Beach multi-modal transit transfer station, with loop shuttle service connecting the major downtown employment centers to selected park and-ride facilities. Policy 1-d: Palm Beach County shall provide express and feeder service to the Tri-County Commuter Rail, High Speed Rail, and major employment centers in the County. 73

PAGE 85

Policy 3-d: Objective 5 : Polley 5-a: Policy 5-b: Polley 5-c:: Po licy 5-d: Objective 6: Polley 6-a: P o licy 6-b: MadGetiac Propm Palm County shall design and implement a comprehensive marketing program to orient and familiariu the County's residents on the Corrao syste m and alternative transit modes by October, 1990. The County shall promote information on the use of alternati v e means of travel (i e Tri-County Co mmuter Rail). AJtenllldve Model The County shall design and implement a program to encourage the use of alternativ e modes of travel by 1992. The County shal l develop a program of incenti ves to increase ridership on the Tri-County Commuter Rai l and other public transportation systems through the use of promotional malerial, special events and lo w-cost parking. The County mall review ridership, revenues and costs, and UJer characteristics relative to the operatio!IS of the Tri-County Rail tbrou&h Deceuiber, 1990, to delermiDe the feasibility of e xpanded servi ce The County shall coordinate land use and transportation services p lanning with the Flori da High Speed Rail franchisee to CIISUI'e coDJimn<:y of this traDJportation mode with the County 's Com prehensive P l an and to eDJure an HSR stop in the Central County. The County shall encourage the use of alternative traDJportation means, such as ridesharing, car / vanpool, bicycles, rail and parlc-aod-ride proarams, to reduce overall roadway demand and improve air quality tbrou&h the provision of incentives for tbosc using other modes and disincentives for individual auto users Pba Coord!D'd'IID. The County shal l provide for the coordination of mass transit plans and programs among the appropriate implementing o rganimtioDJ on a continuing basis Mass transit pl&DJ shall be coordinated with the land use pl&DJ to reflect the demand created by existing and anticipaled development. Th e County shall investigate the use of transit services to promote more efficient urban deve.lopment through i ncreased services in the coaslal communities. 74

PAGE 86

Policy 6-e: The County shall coordinate any mass transit plans with the MPO Transit Development Program and the FOOT Five-Year Work Program through the MPO planning process. Policy 6-d: The provision of exclusive lanes and separate rights-of-way in the expansion or extension of major transportation corridors shall be identified and protected in the Thoroughfare Right-of-Way Plan. Triffic Circulation GOAL: It is the GOAL of Palm Beach County to provide a safe, efficient. convenient and economical traffic circulation network which has sufficient capacity to efficiently, conveniently and safely move people, goods, and services throughout the County with minimal adverse impact to the natural environment. Objective 4: Level of S.rvice Staadards By 20 I 0, the countywide roadway network shall operate at the adopted Level of Service standard. Policy 4-k: Wholly owned and operated government facilities identified in the Future Land Use Element and Capital Improvements Element of a local government s Comprehensive Plan shall be measured against level of service D standard for State Principal arterials, level of service E standard for State minor arterials, and one-hundred and ten percent (I ro percent) of revel of service E standard for all otlier major thoroughfare roadways. If the wholly owned and operated government facility does not satisfy the requirements of Policy 4-1, it shall satisfy level of service D standards for the 2010 Interim Transportation Plan unless as of December 31, 1990, the property has been acquired by the local government, or a contract has been entered into for the acquisition of the property, for the government facility. If the l evel of service standards cannot be satisfied, wholly owned and operated government facilities identified in the local govemmen(s FutUre Land Use Element and Capital Improvements Element of its Comprehensive Plan may receive a lower leve l of service standard by a specific amendment to this element. Dnft laaguage: Proposed DeW Polley 4-k The Boad of County Commissionen finds thd under certain limited circumstances dealing with transportation facilities, countervailing planning and public policy gools may come into conflict with the requirement rhat adequaze public facilities be available concumnt with the impacts of such development. Oftentimes rhe unintended consequences of rhe transportation facilities concumncy requirement is the redirection of growth and development from rhe 75

PAGE 87

urban area to the suburban, exurban and rural arear, thereby discouraging urban infill development, urban redevelopment, and downtown revitalizaticn. Consequently, this policy provides for an exception from the transportation facilities concurrency requirements of the Comprehensive Plan and Unified Land Developme111 Code for a project that is: 1. Internally consistenl wllh the Cowuy's Comprehensive Plan. and if the project is located within a municipality, consistenl with the County and with the municipa/iJy's Comprehensive Plan; and 2. Integrally related to the provision of public transportation. The specific guidelines for granling a total exception from the transportation facilities concwrency requirements punuant to this policy are detailed in Part Ill. Existing Conditions, Section J., Projects lnlegra/ly Related to Public Trr:rnsportaticn. Proposed aew Subseetlo11 Sectio11 JD, Exbtlnc Coadltlo J. PROJECTS INTEGRALLY RELATED TO PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION Policy 4-k of the Traffic Circulation Element Is lntentkd to be construed and applied along with the imp/emenlation provisions conlained herein. I. E1itibk projecu. A project shall be eligible for an exception from the transportation facilities concwrency requiremenl oF the local government comprehensive plan provided the project is consistenl with the County Comprehensive Plan and. if applicable. municipal Comprehensive Plan and provided the project is inlegra/ly related to the provision of public transportation. Eligible projects ar used here shall include: a transil terminds, which shall include local bus terminds. commuter rml terminals. and lntermodolfacilitks terminals but excluding port and aviation terminals: b. transit passenger amenities, which shall include she/ten, stations and their parlcing facilities, fringe ptriing. and peri-and-ride lots; and c. ancillaty maintenance, repair and office facilities serving public transportation. 76

PAGE 88

2. Guide/inn for grrmting the exception. These guidelines en intended to serve a:r a means for detennining whether on otherwise eligible project shall quality for an exception from the transportation facilities concummcy requirement. E1igibk projt.s. Eligible projects shall quaiily for a I 00 percent exception from the transportation facilities concurrency requirements provided the supporting dda and analysis affinnatvely demonstrates: a the project developer is a government entity or qua:ri-government entity with IIWVJI6.wfi9N ma:rs transit authority: and b. the project does not cause the level-of-service standard established by the Department of Transportation for transpOrtation facilities on the Florida Intrastate Highway System a:r defined in section JJ8.001 .. F.S. to be exceeded Soutb Florida Region The following selected transit-related goals and policies for the South Florida region were compiled from the "Regional Plan for South Florida," August 1991. GOAL 20.1: By 19 95, eDhanc:e the regional transportation system's role in strengthening the process toward a more compact, efficient development pattern to improve the overall quality of life. Policies: 20.1.1 20.1.2 Encolll'll8e and support multimodal transportation system planning coordinated with land use planning to enhance a more compact. efficient development pattern. Continue the development of the urban core concept and criteria in order to: a) provide incentives for high density urban centers; b) allow for flexibility in the expenditure of transportation system capital funds to create a more balanced mix of highways and transit; and 77

PAGE 89

20.1.3 20.1.4 20.\.S 20. 1.6 20.1.7 20.1.8 20.1.10 20.1.12 20.1.13 c) identify areas and comdors and high quality transit service in which transportation level of service standards may be based on person trips rather than vehicle trips Encourage high density, mixed use land development patterns in urban core areas and adjacent travel comdors. Transportation improvement should be used as a tool to guide development toward locations more suitable for urban development and away from environmentally sensitive areas. First priority for improved accessibility should be given to the presently developed areas of the Region and major travel comdors. Promote measures to enhance the existing and continuing operation of the Tri-County Commuter Rail service to support a compact development pattern in the Region Encourage the use of transportation demand management strateg ies to reduce congestion and to maximize the use of existing transportation facilities. Promote measures to ettbance the intermodallinkages among the ground transportation system, airports and seaports in the Region. Identify and support the use of new, stable and adequate funding sources at the local and state level to meet the Region's transportation needs. Promote the participation of the private sector in transportation p l anning and enswe that public and private responsibilities for transportation improvements are determined equitably and on a fair share basis. Local governments should adopt or amend ordinances to protect or preserve transportation corridors and rights-of-way ide n tified in local government comprehensive p lans or in State and regional plans. 78

PAGE 90

20 1.14 20.1.15 20.1.16 State and regional agencies will give priority in programming public facility improvements to local governments which adopt local right-of-way protection ordinances Encourage cost-effective operation and maintertance practices for the Region's transportation system and provision of transportation services. The High Speed Rail or similar service and its associated development should be used as a tool to encourage compact and efficient urban growth patterns, and in coordination with the local planning process, to promote an effective multi-modal transportation system. Specifically, it should also achieve the following: a) promote redevelopment and urban infill; b) promote mixed-use development; and c) promote the integration and usage of the Region's transit system. GOAL 20.3: By 1995, transit's share of total person trips in the Region will be increased by 50 percent during the peak hour and 30 percent during the off-peak hours from PoUcies: the 1986 levels. 20.3.1 20.3.2 20.3.3 20.3.4 20.3.5 The Region's mass transit system should be designed and expanded to function as an alternative to the automobile. Mass transit planning should ensure availability of the system to a majority of the population. Encourage high density, mixed use land development patterns in urban core areas and adjacent to urban transit corridors. Coordinate among state, regional, and local governments on the identification and development of future transit corridors and services to create a more integrated tranSit system in the Region. Encourage the coordination of existing transit services to improve the system efficiency. Mass transit facilities should incorporate provisions to enhance ease of transfer with other modes. Promote the use of mass transit through incentives, site design and public education. 79

PAGE 91

20.3.6 20.3.7 20.3.8 20.3.9 20.3.10 20.3.11 Encourage the appropriate use of lransponation impact fees for improvement of the ll'lUlSit system when deemed as a more effective long term tool to enhance mobility. Promote measures to enhance the existing and continuing operation of the Tri-County Commuter Rail service. Future developments should provide transit amenities (shelters, route information, and schedules) and incentives whenever transit use is assumed or required to maintain acceptable roadway level of service. Improve transit information systems and fare structures to make the transit system more easily understood and usable by the public. Provide incentives to improve public transportation and increase the availability of ll'lUlSponation modes. Local governments are encouraged to adopt a balanced ll'lUlSponation policy governing parking requirements and rates in high density areas with the goal of complementing automobile and transit modes. GOAL 20.4: By 1995, the ll'lUlSportation disadvantaged, (including persons who are elderly and persons wbo are handicapped) in the Reaion will have access to the same level of transit services as available to the general public. Policies: 20.4.1 20.4.2 20.4.3 20.4.4 Provide regular and/or specialiud transit services to those areas of the Region whose residents have limited transportation options. Para-transit services (taxis, limousines, and jitneys) for the ll'lUlSportation disadvantaged and other groups should be considered when appropriate in the development of local plans for the ll'lUlSportation disadvantaged. Local comprehensive plans should explicitly include the objectives of lowering public and private costs of accessibility. Establish a coordinated system for the ll'lUlSportation disadvantaged in all counties of the Region and assure 80

PAGE 92

. coordination of service delivery between the transportation disadvantaged and the public transit system. GOAL 20.5: By 1995 all regional activity will be linked to public transportation systems. Policies: 20.5.1 2 0.5.2 20. 5 3 EllSIIle the provision of efficient inter activity center transit service Transit routes and information should facilitate and encolll'llge tourist ridership connecting transportation tenninals and heavily developed hotel areas with popular tourist destinations Local government should consider policies which facilitate the provision of transit or para-transit services. Browanl County The following selected transit-related goals and policies for Broward County were compiled from the "1989 Comprehensive Plan for Broward County, Florida, Volume 2," revised December 1992. L .and Use GOAL: Objective 8: Maintain a growth management system for the Unincorporated Area of Broward County which insures that development and redevelopment will only be penni ned in areas where adequate pub l ic t'Kilities and services are available concurrent with the impact of development while protecting, enhancing or restoring identified natural and historical resources. Policy 36: The Plan Implementation Division shall recommend against proposed land use plan amendments which increase the density and/or intensity of land uses when sufficient v acant acreage exists in proximity to the proposed amendment to accommodate the projected population. Objective 10: Provide innovative land development regulations which encourage planned unit and mixed-use developments Policy 38: The Plan Implementation Division shal l maintain and recommend amendments. as necessary to land use categories which permit mixed land use developments. 81

PAGE 93

Traffic Circulation GOAL: Provide and maintain a balanced multi-modal transportation system with a mixture of highway and public transit services, which coordinates transportation system development with the planned, orderly growth of Broward County, and which fosters a cooperative approach to provide safe and efficient operating conditions on the roadway network throughout Broward Counl}'. Objective 4: Give increasing prioril}' to public transportation in the development of the county's long range transportation plans so that the county will increasingly attract ridership by choice. Polley 14: Within one (I) year of plan adoption, Broward County, in cooperation with Broward County MPO, will develop, test, and adopt a long range transit overlay to the 20 I 0 Highway Network which will identify priority transit corridors, general system charal:teristics, and potential ridership in accordance with the goal objectives, and policies of the Mass Transit Element of the Comprehensive Plan and the anticipated technical and financial support of the Florida DOT Objcedve S: Make all reasonab l e efforts to protect, reserve and acquire rights of way for identified transportation corridors in a timely llliiDilCf so as to preclude encroachment by incompatible land uses. Upon plan adoption, immediate emphasis wil l be placed on protecting the integrity of the adopted 2010 Highway Network. Poliey lSB: In the preparation and update of the transit system overlay, Broward County recOgnizes those urban core and redevelopment areas which arc identified and mapped in the Broward County Land Use Plan and therefore eligible for reduced level of highway service, to be developing activity centers which will require higher levels of public transit service and an increasing investment by the private sector in the sharing of the costs of maintaining such higher levels of service. Polley lSC: Broward County sball actively participate in a cooperative program with the State of Florida, the City of Ft. Lauderdale, the Downtown Development Authority (DDA), and the private sector to incrementally improve transit service to the downtown Ft. Lauderdale Urban Core, including the following elements: Participate with the City of Ft. Lauderdale and DDA in the implementation of a downtown trolley service. Immediately initiate a monitoring program of actual traffic conditions. including level of service, on arterial roadways approaching the downtown. By the end of 1993, Broward County shall complete a comprehensive evaluation of downtown transit and traffic service on the ability of people to circulate to and within the urban core. 82

PAGE 94

Mars Transit GOAL: Objective 1: PoUcy 4: Objective 2: PoUcy 9: Policy 11: Objecave 6: This evaluation shall evaluate a variety of options, including but not limited to: I. expanded feeder bus service (mcluding Saturday and Sunday service) connecting downtown Ft. Lauderdale to Tri-Rail, 2. preferential ll'e8tment of buses entering or exiting the new downtown county transit passenger terminal, 3. improved pedestrian access to transit passenger facilities within the urban c:ore, 4. incorporation of private sector transportation initiatives as mobilized by DDA in cooperation with state and local government, 5. minimum thresholds in highway level of service degradation which require institution of transit service improvements. Develop and maintain a level of transit service which will meet existing and future demand, and which provides safe, economical, efficient, and convenient travel for all people. Increase the level of annual BCT ridership to 16.4 million linked trips (20 million unlinked) by 1995, and 20.4 million linked trips (25 million unlinked) by 2000. Broward County supply its employees with a subsidized buslrail tranSit pass option nuher than subsidized parking only, and encourage other employers in areas with limited parking to do similarly. Establish higher levels of public transportation service, considering all potential modes, and provide for the protection of existing and future rights-of way, in priority transit corridors and economic centers as greater service becomes n--r to increase corridor capacity and enhance traffic circulation. Through the development pennitting process, initiate procedures whereby up to SO parking spaces are allocated towards potential park-and-ride usage in commercial developments at appropriate locations. Support the Tri-Rail service by ensuring the provision of adequate feeder and distributor bus service for Broward County stations. Ensure consistency among locally applicable mass transit plans and plans for transportation disadvantaged people through coordination with the Broward County Mass Transit Division. the Metropolitan Planning Organization. the 83

PAGE 95

Policy 19: Tri-County Commuter Rail Organization, and the Florida Department of Transportation. Through the Technical Coordinating Committee and by direct contact, involve the various agencies in the development and review process for all applicable transportation plans, in order to ensure compatibility regarding the establishment of locally desired level of service standards. MetropolitaD Dade Cowrty The following selected transit-related goals and policies for Metropolitan Dade County were compiled from the "Comprehensive Development Master Plan for Metropolitan Dade County, Florida, revised July, 1992. Land Use GOAL: Objective 3: Polley 3A: PoUcy 38: Objective 7: Policy 7A: Provide the best possible distribution of land use, by type and density, to meet the physical, social, cultwal and economic needs of the present and future resident and tourist population in a manner that will maintain or improve the quality of the natwal and man-made environment and amenities, and ensure the timely and efficient provision of services. The location and configuration of Dade County's urban growth from 1989 through the year 2010 shall emphasize concentration around centers of activity renewal and rehabilitation of blighted aireas, and contiguous urban expansion when warranted, rather than sprawl. High intensity, well designed activity centers shall be facilitated by Metro Dade County at locations having high county-wide multimodal accessibility. Land in the vicinity of public mass transit stations shall be planned and developed in a manner that is compatible with, and supports the transit system. Beginning in 1989 Dade County shall maintain a process for periodic amendment to the Land Use Plan map, consistent with the adopted Goals, Objectives, and Policies of this Plan, which will provide that the Land Use Plan Map accommodates urban expansion at projected countywide rates. Activity Centers, industrial complexes, regional shopping centers, large-scale office centers and other concentrations of significant employment shall be recognized as potential strUcturing elements of the Metropolitan area and sltall 84

PAGE 96

be sited on the basis of metropolitan-scale considerations at locations with good county-wide, multi-modal accessibility. Trr(fic Circulation GOAL: Develop, operate, and maintain a safe, efficient, and economical traffic circulation system in Metropolitan Dade County that provides the ease of mobility to all people and for all goods, is consistent with desired land use panems, conserves energy, and protects the natural environment. Objective 1: It is desinlble that all roadways in Dade County operate at level of service (LOS) C or better. By the year 2000 no roadways in Dade County should operate at a level of service lower than the base level. of service stan
PAGE 97

ObjectiVe 6: Policy 6E: Mass Transit GOAL: Objective 4: Florida StatuJes. and is located in an existing urban service area inside the UDB ; or 4 The proposed development is located inside the UDB and directly and significantly promotes public tTall$pol'1dicn by inco1p0rating within the developmenJ a Metrorail, Metromover or TriRaiJ station, or a Metrobus terminal for multiple Metrobus routes, or is on office or residenrial deve/opmenr located within OM-qut7ter mile of a Metrorail, Metromover or TriRail station, or a Metrobus te rminal for multiple Metrobus routes; and 5. If the project would result in an increare in peale-period /riffle volume on an FIHS roaiway tha is operating below the CDMP-adcpted LOS standard, which increare would exceed 5 perr;enr of the cqxrity of the roalway at the CDMP-odopted LOS standard, the County shall require the developer and successors to implemenJ and mainrain trip reduction measuns to reduce trove/ by single-occupant vehicles so tha the resultant increare in trr(ftce volume does not exceed 5 perr:enr. Dade County shall include in its cofiCIIIftncy manogemenJ program ordinance or administrative rules appropriae criteria and methodologies to implement the exceplicns authorized in foregoing JKI'Cl8fff'hs 1 through 5, consistent with requirements of Chapter 163, Ptn 2, florida StaUles. . Plan and develop a transportation system that preserves environmentally sensitive areas, conserves energy and natural resources and promotes community aeslhetic values. The County shall pursue and support transportation programs (e.g ., rapid transit, express buses, bigh occupancy vehicles (HOY], bikeways) that will help to maintain or provide necessary improvement in air quality and wbich help conserve eilergy. Maintain, operate, and develop a mass transit system in Metropolitan Dade County that provides efficient, convenient and affordable service to all residents and tourists. Provide convenient, acc:essible, and affordable mass transit serv1ces and facilities. 86

PAGE 98

Policy 4A: Policy 4B: Policy 4C: Objedive 6: Policy 68: Policy 6D: Objective 7: Policy 78: Polley 7C: Objective 8: Policy SA: Dade County, with private sector assistance, shall provide mass transit service appropriate for the mix and intensity of development of activity centers identified in the Land Use Element Dade County, with appropriate private sector contributions shall provide a network of regular and/or special services to facilitate access to major centers of employment, commercial medical, educational, governmental, and recreational activity. Dade County, with assistallce from the Florida Department of Transportation (FOOl), shall provide service that is competitive with automobile travel in terms of reliability and overall travel time and cost. Continue to coordinate Dade County's Mass Transit Element, and the plans and programs of the State, region and local jurisdictions. Dade County shall coordinate with FOOT in its efforts to develop intrastate transit systems, in<:luding regional transit systems and a high speed intrastate rail system linking Tampa, Orlando, and Miami . Where appropriate, Dade County shall coordinate its mass transit plans and programs with those of adjacent counties to ensure regional mobility in major travel corridors I niruue, by 1990, protection sirategies for Mass Transit rights-of-way and exclusive transit corridors. Dade County sba1l investigate and adopt strategies for the preservation of planned mass transit rights-of-way and exclusive corridors, including consideration of railroad and utility rights-of-way which may be appropriate or cost effective in the coostnletion of rapid transit lines, express bus lanes, or high oc:cupaDCy vehicle (HOV) lanes Dade County will include provision for high capacity transit modes in planned highway improvements in congested urban corridors. Encoungc the case of transfer between mass transit and all other modes, where it improv es th e functioning of the transportation network. Mass transit facilities shall i ncorporate provisions to enhance ease of transfer with other modes (e.g., park-ride garages and lots bicycle lockers and racks, pedestrian walkways, taxi and jitney stands) 87

PAGE 99

lntergovemmentoi Coordindion GOAL: Objedive 1 : Polley IJ: Use intergovemmental coordination as a major means of ensuring consistency among local, county, and regional government plans and policies and of implementing Dade County's comprehensive development plan. Maintain and improve coordination of planning, development and impact assessment among governmental entities with applicable responsibilities within Dade County's area of concern. Dade County shall increase interaction between its Metropolitan Planning Organization and those of Browud, Monroe, and Palm Beach Counties and with Dade municipalities to improve intraregional and intracounty transportation coordination. 88

PAGE 100

APPENDIX D List of Individuals Contacted City of Boca Raton John Reilly, Transponation Analyst Suzanne Page, Economist/Planner Michael Strasser Land Development Coordinator City of Boynton Bea:h Michael Rumpf, Senior City Planner City of Pompano Bea:h Cynthia Bertschinger, Planning Director Metropolitan Dade County Thomas Spehar, Principal Planner Development Divisio n Mark Woerner, Planning Department Howard Williams Planning Department Helen Brown Fogaros, Concurmte}' Administration Broward County Martin Berger, DeVelopment Management, Department of Strategic Planning and Growth Management Palm Bea:h County Dan Weisberg, P .E., Senior Engineer, Traffic Division Earl Hahn, IJewtment of Planning, Zoning & Building Holland & Knight Fon Lauderdale, FL Sue Delegal, Attorney . State of California, Department of Transponation Philip Simpson, AICP, Chief, Office of System Performance City of Cansbad, Califomia Donald Rideout, Director, Growth Management Program National Transit Access Center, University of Californ i a at Berkeley Michael Bernick, Co-Director 89

PAGE 101

Bay Area Rapid T1't111Sit Jeff Ordway, Manager of Property Development AMTRAK Bill Negron, Project Manager, Asset Management, Real Estate Division Bob Bums, Manager, Station Development, Real Estate Division King County Washington David Hull, Transportation Planner City of Bellevue. Washington Christine Dreaney, Planner New Jersey State Depa17nent of TI'CifiSpOrtation J. Neil Longfield. Supervising Planner, Bureau of Statewide Planning Helene Rubin, Authorities Coordination and Local Transportation Planning Unit Los Angeles County Metropolitan T1't111Sportation Authority James Amis, Senior Manager, !oint Development Bay A rea Rapid T1't111Sit, San Froancisco, Califomia !effiey Ordway, Manager of Property Development Montgomery County, Maryland David Levinson, Transportation Planner, The MarylandNational Capital Palk &: Planning Commission Prince George's County, Maryland George Cardwell, AICP, Transportation and Public Facilities Planoing Division, The Maryland National Capital Palk & Planning Commission 90

PAGE 102

BmUOGRAPHY Bernick, Michael, and Robert Cervero. "Transit-Based Development in the United States Passenge' Tronsport (January 10, 1 994) : 7. --"The Bay Area's Emerging Transit-Based Housing" Urban Land (July 1993): 38-41. Cambridge Systematics, Inc. et al. Making the Land Use Tronsportatlon A;, Quality Connection, The LUTRAQ Altemative/Analysis of Altematives, An Interim Report. Prepared under sponsorship of I 000 Friends of Oregon, October 1992. City of Boca Raton. 1989 Comprehensive Plan. Traffic Circulation Element. Concunency Management System Administrative Manual for the City of Boca Raton, Florida. January 23, 1991. City of Boynton Beach. City of Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan Traffic Circulation Element. October 1989. ___ Chapter 19, Code of Ordinances, Article VI, Concunency Requirements. Broward County. Comprehensive Plan 1989, Volume 2, Adopted Components. Revised December, 1992. . Comprehensive Plan 1989, Volume 4, Support Documents. Amended December 18, 1990. Center for Urban Transportation Resean:h. Florida and ./()umey to Worl:: A County Data Book. Tampa: University of South Florida, May 1993. "TriRail On Board Survey Analysis, Final Report." Tampa: University of South Florida, July 1993. ___ "TriRail Transit Development Plan. Draft." Tampa: University of South Florida. June 1994. City of Columbus, Ohio. "Survey Study of Adeqwue Public Facilities Ordinances. Prepared by LOR International, Inc., Columbia, Maryland. October, 1992. Committee on Transportation, Florida House of Representatives "The Status of the Florida I ntrastate Highway System, Draft." Tallahassee: December 6 1993. 91

PAGE 103

Florida Administrative Code. Chapter 9J-S, "Minimum Criteria for Review of Local Government Comprehensive Plans and Detennination of Compliance." Tallahassee: Florida Department of Commwrity Affairs, April 1992. The Governor's Growth Management Plan Advisory Committee. Findings & Recommendaions of the Governor's Growth Management Plan Advisory Comminee fo, the Growth Management Po11ion of the State Comprehensive Plan. Tallahassee: October II, 1993. Institute of Transportation Engineers. Transportation Options for Palm Beach County." Recommendations of the Institute of Transportation Engineers Symposium, March, 1988. Laws of Florida. 1993 Regular Session. Chapter 93-206, Planning and Growth Management. Amendments to Sections 163.3164, F.S., and 163.3180, F.S., Concurrency. Maryland Department of Transportation, Mass Transit Administration. Access By Design: Tl't111Sit's Role in Land Developmenl. A Developer's Manual. September 1988. Metropolitan Dade County. Administrative Order 4-85. Traffic Cilculation, Methods for Evaluating Development Impacts. June, 1992. Comprehensive Development Master Plan for Metropolitan Dade County, Florida. Revised July, 1992. -'-:---: Ordinance No. 78-74. Fixed-Guideway Rapid Transit System-DeVelopment Zone Adopted October 17, 1978 City of Miami Planning Department "Transportation Corridors: Meeting the Challenge of Growth Management in Miami." Excerpted from the Transportation Element of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan 1989-2000. Revised September 1990. Montgomery County, Maryland. "FY 94 Annual Growth Policy." Adopted by the Montgomery County Council, July I, 1993. -:---:-"FY 95 Annual Growth Policy. Staff Draft." Prepami by the Montgomery County Planning Board, The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission (M-NCPPC), November 7, 1993. Planning Department, M-NCPPC. "Local Area Transportation Review Guidelines, Specific Guidelines of the Montgomery County Planning Board for the Administration of the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Adopted October 4, 1990 92

PAGE 104

Palm Beach County "Background Paper and Policy Statement, Northern Palm Beach County/Southern Martin County Planning Forum: A Vision for the Future Coordinated by The Florida Atlantic University/Florida International University Joint Center for Environmental and U rban Problems and The Florida Atlantic U niversity Institute of Government, August 26-28 1993. --L and Development Code. Section 7 .9, "Traffic Perfonnance Standards." Adopted June 16, 1992. --Department of Planning, Zoning and Building. "Mass Transit and Land Use Options, A Vision for Palm Beach County, Draft." June, 1993. Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Element. Adopted Oc:tober 30, 1992. Comprehensive Plan, Traffic Circulation Element. Adopted December 16, 1991. Paaswell Robert E., Nagui Rouphail and T .C. Sutaria, eds. "Site Impact Traffic Assessment, Prob l ems and So l utiou." American Society of Civil Engineers, Proceedings of the Conference, Chicago, Illinois, June 8-10, 1992. Pelham, Thomas G Adequate Public Facilities Requirements: Reflectiou on Florida's Concurrency System for Managing Growth" Florida State Law Review 19(973): 9731052. City of Pompano Beach. City of Pompano Beach Comprehensive Plan. Volumes 1 and 2 June 1989. Savage, Joseph P., Jr., "LOS Leaders. Planning (January 1 993): 16-19. South Florida Regional Planning Council. "Regional Plan for South Florida. Hollywood, F l orida. August 1991. Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council. Regional Comprehensive Policy Plan. April 1 987. Tri-County CommUlel' Rail Authority. 1 991-1992 Annual Report. Fort Lauderdale, F lorida. Goals and Objectives Worksheet. FY 1993/94. Marketing Plan, FY 1992193. Strategic Plan, Final Report. Prepared by Gibbs & Hills Inc., January 1990. 93


xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
record xmlns http:www.loc.govMARC21slim xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.loc.govstandardsmarcxmlschemaMARC21slim.xsd
leader ntm 22 Ka 4500
controlfield tag 008 s flunnn| ||||ineng
datafield ind1 8 ind2 024
subfield code a C01-00008
040
FHM
049
FHmm
2 110
University of South Florida. Center for Urban Transportation Research
0 245
Development incentives that support transit
260
Tampa, Fla
b Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR)
c 1994 June
4 610
Tri-County Community Rail Authority (Tri-Rail)
650
Railroads--Management
Railroads--Florida--Cocoa Beach--Management
1 773
t Center for Urban Transportation Research Publications [USF].
856
u http://digital.lib.usf.edu/?c1.8