5/11/1999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Fr -7 BOOK FAU ., Since inception of the traffic impact fee program in 1986, fees have been collected, with the proceeds deposited in the appropriate benefit district's trust fund. Although a number of road improvement projects have been funded or partially funded with traffic impact revenues, there are fund balances in each of the benefit districts. Some of these fund balances are substantial. In conjunction with the reduction in benefit districts, the traffic impact fee report recommends that the trust fund accounts established for each of the original nine benefit districts remain until the funds collected in each district under the current ordinance have been exhausted. When expended, those funds must be spent only in the district from which they were collected. Impact fee funds collected under the revised ordinance will be deposited into the three new trust fund accounts corresponding to the new benefit districts. Attachment 4, the FY 1999/00-2003/04 Traffic Impact Fee ('TIF) Capital Improvement Program (CIP), identifies how the fund balances in each of the existing nine districts will be expended. For each existing TIF benefit district, the attached CIP indicates the projects that are to be completely or partially funded with TIF revenues collected under the current ordinance. The CEP also compares projected TIF expenditures with available revenues. As indicated in the CIP, projected TIF expenditures for each district equal, and in most cases exceed, projected revenues during the next five years. This indicates that, overall, the amount of TIF revenues collected under the current ordinance will be insufficient to fund all of the transportation improvement projects programmed during the next five years. Formula The final report concluded that no changes are needed to the structure of the current traffic impact fee formula. The report, however, did reassess the values of each of the variables of the three formula components. As part of the study, the values of all of the variables comprising the current impact fee formula were examined. With respect to the demand component of the formula, the three principal variables examined were trip rate, trip length, and percent new trips. As indicated in the report, the values in the current formula for each of those variables for many land uses were found to be out-of-date. Consequently, the report recommends updating those values using two principal sources - the latest edition of the Institute of Traffic Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual or Florida Studies. For the cost component of the formula, the report recommends changing the cost per lane mile of roadway construction. Based upon detailed analysis of recent construction projects and analysis of planned projects, an updated cost per lane mile of $837,860 is recommended. This cost per lane mile would apply countywide as opposed to the current situation where a different cost per lane mile is used in each of the nine benefit districts. The final component addressed was the credit component. Based upon new data, including revised projections of state and federal transportation revenue for the next twenty years as well as new estimates of the percentage of local gas tax money that will be used for capacity producing transportation capital improvements over the next twenty years, the credit value was updated. As indicated in the report, the recommendation is to apply a credit of 11.8 cents to reflect the other funds available for transportation capital improvements. The proposed changes in the values for the formula variables significantly affect the impact fee rate by land use category. Generally, some land use category traffic impact fee rates will increase, while others will decline. Since one set of countywide impact fee rates will apply, fees will increase in the current districts where rates are now low. Those are generally the districts in the west part of the county. Fee Schedule The third component reviewed was the impact fee schedule of the county's traffic impact fee program. The current fee payment schedule lists fifty-four different land uses. As structured, the traffic impact fee report recommends adding seven land uses to the fee schedule and deleting eight land uses from the fee schedule. In addition, the report recommends modifying the unit measure of certain land uses. Table 1 provides a comparison of current impact fee rates and proposed impact fee rates. In table 1, values in the current rate column are shown as a range, since nine traffic impact fee districts currently exist, and each district has a different impact fee rate. The report indicates that the same impact fee rate should be applied in all three proposed districts. Therefore, the proposed rate column displays the rate that would be applied to that specific land use regardless of the location of the project. MAY 119 1999 28