| 1 | Representative Cannon offered the following: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 | Amendment |
| 4 | Remove line(s) 876-940 and insert: |
| 5 | as provided for in paragraph subsection (12)(b) or a vehicle- |
| 6 | miles-traveled or people-miles-traveled methodology or an |
| 7 | alternative methodology, identified by the local government |
| 8 | ordinance provided for in paragraph (a), that ensures that |
| 9 | development impacts on transportation facilities are mitigated |
| 10 | but that future development is not responsible for the |
| 11 | additional cost of reducing or eliminating backlogs. |
| 12 | (a) By December 1, 2006, Each local government shall adopt |
| 13 | by ordinance a methodology for assessing proportionate fair- |
| 14 | share mitigation options. By December 1, 2005, the Department of |
| 15 | Transportation shall develop a model transportation concurrency |
| 16 | management ordinance with methodologies for assessing |
| 17 | proportionate fair-share mitigation options. |
| 18 | (b)1. In its transportation concurrency management system, |
| 19 | a local government shall, by December 1, 2006, include |
| 20 | methodologies that will be applied to calculate proportionate |
| 21 | fair-share mitigation or a vehicle-miles-traveled or people- |
| 22 | miles-traveled methodology or an alternative methodology, |
| 23 | identified by the local government ordinance provided for in |
| 24 | paragraph (a). A developer may choose to satisfy all |
| 25 | transportation concurrency requirements by contributing or |
| 26 | paying proportionate fair-share mitigation if transportation |
| 27 | facilities or facility segments identified as mitigation for |
| 28 | traffic impacts are specifically identified for funding in the |
| 29 | 5-year schedule of capital improvements in the capital |
| 30 | improvements element of the local plan or the long-term |
| 31 | concurrency management system or if such contributions or |
| 32 | payments to such facilities or segments are reflected in the 5- |
| 33 | year schedule of capital improvements in the next regularly |
| 34 | scheduled update of the capital improvements element. Updates to |
| 35 | the 5-year capital improvements element which reflect |
| 36 | proportionate fair-share contributions may not be found not in |
| 37 | compliance based on ss. 163.3164(32) and 163.3177(3) if |
| 38 | additional contributions, payments or funding sources are |
| 39 | reasonably anticipated during a period not to exceed 10 years to |
| 40 | fully mitigate impacts on the transportation facilities. |
| 41 | 2. Proportionate fair-share mitigation shall be applied as |
| 42 | a credit against impact fees to the extent that all or a portion |
| 43 | of the proportionate fair-share mitigation is used to address |
| 44 | the same capital infrastructure improvements contemplated by the |
| 45 | local government's impact fee ordinance. |
| 46 | (c) Proportionate fair-share mitigation includes, without |
| 47 | limitation, separately or collectively, private funds, |
| 48 | contributions of land, and construction and contribution of |
| 49 | facilities and may include public funds as determined by the |
| 50 | local government. Proportionate fair-share mitigation may be |
| 51 | directed toward one or more specific transportation improvements |
| 52 | reasonably related to the mobility demands created by the |
| 53 | development and such improvements may address one or more modes |
| 54 | of travel. The fair market value of the proportionate fair-share |
| 55 | mitigation shall not differ based on the form of mitigation. A |
| 56 | local government may not require a development to pay more than |
| 57 | its proportionate fair-share contribution regardless of the |
| 58 | method of mitigation. Proportionate fair-share mitigation shall |
| 59 | be limited to ensure that a development meeting the requirements |
| 60 | of this section mitigates its impact on the transportation |
| 61 | system but is not responsible for the additional cost of |
| 62 | reducing or eliminating backlogs. |