Florida Senate - 2013                              CS for SB 972
       By the Committee on Community Affairs; and Senator Hukill
       578-02815-13                                           2013972c1
    1                        A bill to be entitled                      
    2         An act relating to transportation development;
    3         amending s. 163.3180, F.S.; providing that local
    4         governments that implement transportation concurrency
    5         must allow an applicant for a development agreement to
    6         satisfy transportation concurrency requirements if
    7         certain criteria are met, and must provide the basis
    8         upon which landowners will be assessed a proportionate
    9         share of the cost of addressing certain transportation
   10         impacts; encouraging a local government that repeals
   11         transportation concurrency to adopt an alternative
   12         mobility funding system that is subject to certain
   13         requirements; amending s. 163.3182, F.S.; expanding
   14         the types of transportation projects that a
   15         transportation development authority may undertake or
   16         carry out; amending s. 190.006, F.S.; modifying the
   17         method for filling positions within the board of
   18         supervisors; providing an effective date.
   20  Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:
   22         Section 1. Paragraph (h) of subsection (5) of section
   23  163.3180, Florida Statutes, is amended, and paragraph (i) is
   24  added to that subsection, to read:
   25         163.3180 Concurrency.—
   26         (5)
   27         (h)1. Local governments that continue to implement a
   28  transportation concurrency system, whether in the form adopted
   29  into the comprehensive plan before July 1, 2011, or as
   30  subsequently modified, must:
   31         a.1. Consult with the Department of Transportation when
   32  proposed plan amendments affect facilities on the strategic
   33  intermodal system.
   34         b.2. Exempt public transit facilities from concurrency. For
   35  the purposes of this sub-subparagraph subparagraph, public
   36  transit facilities include transit stations and terminals;
   37  transit station parking; park-and-ride lots; intermodal public
   38  transit connection or transfer facilities; fixed bus, guideway,
   39  and rail stations; and airport passenger terminals and
   40  concourses, air cargo facilities, and hangars for the assembly,
   41  manufacture, maintenance, or storage of aircraft. As used in
   42  this sub-subparagraph subparagraph, the terms “terminals” and
   43  “transit facilities” do not include seaports or commercial or
   44  residential development constructed in conjunction with a public
   45  transit facility.
   46         c.3. Allow an applicant for a development-of-regional
   47  impact development order, development agreement, a rezoning, or
   48  other land use development permit to satisfy the transportation
   49  concurrency requirements of the local comprehensive plan, the
   50  local government’s concurrency management system, and s. 380.06,
   51  when applicable, if:
   52         (I)a. The applicant in good faith offers to enter enters
   53  into a binding agreement to pay for or construct its
   54  proportionate share of required improvements in a manner
   55  consistent with this subsection.
   56         (II)b. The proportionate-share contribution or construction
   57  is sufficient to accomplish one or more mobility improvements
   58  that will benefit a regionally significant transportation
   59  facility. A local government may accept contributions from
   60  multiple applicants for a planned improvement if it maintains
   61  contributions in a separate account designated for that purpose.
   62         d.c.(I)Provide the basis upon which The local government
   63  has provided a means by which the landowners landowner will be
   64  assessed a proportionate share of the cost of addressing the
   65  transportation impacts resulting from a providing the
   66  transportation facilities necessary to serve the proposed
   67  development.
   68         2. An applicant may shall not be held responsible for the
   69  additional cost of reducing or eliminating deficiencies.
   70         (II) When an applicant contributes or constructs its
   71  proportionate share pursuant to this paragraph subparagraph, a
   72  local government may not require payment or construction of
   73  transportation facilities whose costs would be greater than a
   74  development’s proportionate share of the improvements necessary
   75  to mitigate the development’s impacts.
   76         a.(A) The proportionate-share contribution shall be
   77  calculated based upon the number of trips from the proposed
   78  development expected to reach roadways during the peak hour from
   79  the stage or phase being approved, divided by the change in the
   80  peak hour maximum service volume of roadways resulting from
   81  construction of an improvement necessary to maintain or achieve
   82  the adopted level of service, multiplied by the construction
   83  cost, at the time of development payment, of the improvement
   84  necessary to maintain or achieve the adopted level of service.
   85         b.(B) In using the proportionate-share formula provided in
   86  this subparagraph, the applicant, in its traffic analysis, shall
   87  identify those roads or facilities that have a transportation
   88  deficiency in accordance with the transportation deficiency as
   89  defined in subparagraph 4 sub-subparagraph e. The proportionate
   90  share formula provided in this subparagraph shall be applied
   91  only to those facilities that are determined to be significantly
   92  impacted by the project traffic under review. If any road is
   93  determined to be transportation deficient without the project
   94  traffic under review, the costs of correcting that deficiency
   95  shall be removed from the project’s proportionate-share
   96  calculation and the necessary transportation improvements to
   97  correct that deficiency shall be considered to be in place for
   98  purposes of the proportionate-share calculation. The improvement
   99  necessary to correct the transportation deficiency is the
  100  funding responsibility of the entity that has maintenance
  101  responsibility for the facility. The development’s proportionate
  102  share shall be calculated only for the needed transportation
  103  improvements that are greater than the identified deficiency.
  104         c.(C) When the provisions of subparagraph 1. and this
  105  subparagraph have been satisfied for a particular stage or phase
  106  of development, all transportation impacts from that stage or
  107  phase for which mitigation was required and provided shall be
  108  deemed fully mitigated in any transportation analysis for a
  109  subsequent stage or phase of development. Trips from a previous
  110  stage or phase that did not result in impacts for which
  111  mitigation was required or provided may be cumulatively analyzed
  112  with trips from a subsequent stage or phase to determine whether
  113  an impact requires mitigation for the subsequent stage or phase.
  114         d.(D) In projecting the number of trips to be generated by
  115  the development under review, any trips assigned to a toll
  116  financed facility shall be eliminated from the analysis.
  117         e.(E) The applicant shall receive a credit on a dollar-for
  118  dollar basis for impact fees, mobility fees, and other
  119  transportation concurrency mitigation requirements paid or
  120  payable in the future for the project. The credit shall be
  121  reduced up to 20 percent by the percentage share that the
  122  project’s traffic represents of the added capacity of the
  123  selected improvement, or by the amount specified by local
  124  ordinance, whichever yields the greater credit.
  125         3.d. This subsection does not require a local government to
  126  approve a development that is not otherwise qualified for
  127  approval pursuant to the applicable local comprehensive plan and
  128  land development regulations for reasons other than
  129  transportation impacts.
  130         4.e. As used in this subsection, the term “transportation
  131  deficiency” means a facility or facilities on which the adopted
  132  level-of-service standard is exceeded by the existing,
  133  committed, and vested trips, plus additional projected
  134  background trips from any source other than the development
  135  project under review, and trips that are forecast by established
  136  traffic standards, including traffic modeling, consistent with
  137  the University of Florida’s Bureau of Economic and Business
  138  Research medium population projections. Additional projected
  139  background trips are to be coincident with the particular stage
  140  or phase of development under review.
  141         (i) If a local government elects to repeal transportation
  142  concurrency, it is encouraged to adopt an alternative mobility
  143  funding system that uses one or more of the tools and techniques
  144  identified in paragraph (f). An alternative mobility funding
  145  system may not be used to deny, time, or phase an application
  146  for site plan, plat approval, final subdivision approval,
  147  building permit, or the functional equivalent of such approvals
  148  if the developer agrees to pay for the development’s identified
  149  transportation impacts using the funding mechanism implemented
  150  by the local government. The revenue from the funding mechanism
  151  adopted in the alternative system must be used to implement the
  152  needs of the local government’s plan which serve as the basis
  153  for the fee imposed. A mobility-fee-based funding system must
  154  comply with the dual rational nexus test applicable to impact
  155  fees. An alternative system that is not mobility-fee-based may
  156  not be applied in a manner that imposes upon new development any
  157  responsibility for funding existing transportation deficiencies
  158  as that term is defined in paragraph (h).
  159         Section 2. Paragraph (b) of subsection (3) of section
  160  163.3182, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
  161         163.3182 Transportation deficiencies.—
  163  transportation development authority created pursuant to this
  164  section has the powers necessary or convenient to carry out the
  165  purposes of this section, including the following powers in
  166  addition to others granted in this section:
  167         (b) To undertake and carry out transportation projects for
  168  transportation facilities designed to relieve transportation
  169  deficiencies within the authority’s jurisdiction. Transportation
  170  projects may include transportation facilities that provide for
  171  alternative modes of travel including sidewalks, bikeways, and
  172  mass transit which are related to a deficient transportation
  173  facility. Transportation projects may also include projects
  174  within and outside the designated deficiency area to relieve
  175  deficiencies identified by the transportation deficiency plan.
  176  Mass transit improvements and service may extend outside a
  177  deficiency area to an existing or planned logical terminus of a
  178  selected improvement.
  179         Section 3. Paragraph (a) of subsection (3) of section
  180  190.006, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:
  181         190.006 Board of supervisors; members and meetings.—
  182         (3)(a)1. If the board proposes to exercise the ad valorem
  183  taxing power authorized by s. 190.021, the district board shall
  184  call an election at which the members of the board of
  185  supervisors will be elected. Such election shall be held in
  186  conjunction with a primary or general election unless the
  187  district bears the cost of a special election. Each member shall
  188  be elected by the qualified electors of the district for a term
  189  of 4 years, except that, at the first such election, three
  190  members shall be elected for a period of 4 years and two members
  191  shall be elected for a period of 2 years. All elected board
  192  members must be qualified electors of the district.
  193         2.a. Regardless of whether a district has proposed to levy
  194  ad valorem taxes, commencing 6 years after the initial
  195  appointment of members or, for a district exceeding 5,000 acres
  196  in area, or for a compact, urban, mixed-use district, or for a
  197  transit-oriented development, as defined in s. 163.3164,
  198  exceeding 25 acres in area, 10 years after the initial
  199  appointment of members, the position of each member whose term
  200  has expired shall be filled by a qualified elector of the
  201  district, elected by the qualified electors of the district.
  202  However, for those districts established after June 21, 1991,
  203  and for those existing districts established after December 31,
  204  1983, which have less than 50 qualified electors on June 21,
  205  1991, sub-subparagraphs b. and d. shall apply. If, in the 6th
  206  year after the initial appointment of members, or 10 years after
  207  such initial appointment for a district districts exceeding
  208  5,000 acres in area, or for a compact, urban, mixed-use
  209  district, or for a transit-oriented development, as defined in
  210  s. 163.3164, exceeding 25 acres in area, there are not at least
  211  250 qualified electors in the district, or for a district
  212  exceeding 5,000 acres, or for a compact, urban, mixed-use
  213  district, or for a transit-oriented development, as defined in
  214  s. 163.3164, exceeding 25 acres in area, there are not at least
  215  500 qualified electors, members of the board shall continue to
  216  be elected by landowners.
  217         b. After the 6th or 10th year, once a district reaches 250
  218  or 500 qualified electors, respectively, then the positions of
  219  two board members whose terms are expiring shall be filled by
  220  qualified electors of the district, elected by the qualified
  221  electors of the district for 4-year terms. The remaining board
  222  member whose term is expiring shall be elected for a 4-year term
  223  by the landowners and is not required to be a qualified elector.
  224  Thereafter, as terms expire, board members shall be qualified
  225  electors elected by qualified electors of the district for a
  226  term of 4 years.
  227         c. Once a district qualifies to have any of its board
  228  members elected by the qualified electors of the district, the
  229  initial and all subsequent elections by the qualified electors
  230  of the district shall be held at the general election in
  231  November. The board shall adopt a resolution if necessary to
  232  implement this requirement when the board determines the number
  233  of qualified electors as required by sub-subparagraph d., to
  234  extend or reduce the terms of current board members.
  235         d. On or before June 1 of each year, the board shall
  236  determine the number of qualified electors in the district as of
  237  the immediately preceding April 15. The board shall use and rely
  238  upon the official records maintained by the supervisor of
  239  elections and property appraiser or tax collector in each county
  240  in making this determination. Such determination shall be made
  241  at a properly noticed meeting of the board and shall become a
  242  part of the official minutes of the district.
  243         Section 4. This act shall take effect July 1, 2013.