Hillsborough Metropolitan Planning Organization

601 E Kennedy Boulevard, 18th Floor, Tampa, Florida, 33602 · 813-272-5940 · hillsboroughmpo.org

Meeting of the Technical Advisory Committee th Property Appraiser’s Conf. Room, County Center 15 floor

Commissioner Lesley “Les” Miller, Jr. Monday, July 20, 2015 at 1:30 P.M. Hillsborough County MPO Chairman I. Call To Order Councilman Harry Cohen City of Tampa Public Comment (3 minutes per speaker, please) MPO Vice Chairman II.

III. Approval of Minutes (June 15, 2015)

Paul Anderson Tampa Port Authority IV. Action Items

Commissioner Kevin Beckner Hillsborough County A. Transportation Improvement Program Priorities (Rich

Clarendon, MPO Staff) HART

Mayor Frank Chillura V. Status Reports Temple Terrace

Derek Doughty A. Selmon Greenway Master Plan (Bob Frey, THEA) The Planning Commission B. Temple Terrace Multimodal Transportation District, Commissioner Ken Hagan Comprehensive Plan & Complete Streets (Tony LaColla, Hillsborough County Planning Commission Staff) Joe Lopano Hillsborough Co. Aviation Authority C. Florida & Tampa/Highland Corridor Study (Gena Torres, MPO Staff) Mayor Rick A. Lott City of Plant City D. Transportation Resiliency Video (Allison Yeh)

Councilman Guido Maniscalco City of Tampa VI. Old Business & New Business

st Councilwoman Lisa Montelione A. Next Meeting: September 21 at 1:30pm Recess in City of Tampa August Commissioner Sandra Murman Hillsborough County Adjournment VII. Joseph Waggoner Expressway Authority VIII. Addendum

Commissioner Stacy R. White HART Transit Development Plan Public Open House Hillsborough County A. Schedule

B. SIS August Workshop Flyer

C. Joint Certification – Comments and Signed Statement

The full agenda packet is available on the MPO’s Beth Alden, AICP Executive Director website, www.planhillsborough.org, or by calling (813) 272-5940.

Hillsborough County Metropolitan Planning Organization In accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and other P.O. Box 1110 601 E. Kennedy, 18th Floor nondiscrimination laws, public participation is solicited without regard to Tampa, Florida 33601-1110 race, color, national origin, age, sex, religion, disability or family status. P 813/272-5940 F 813/301-7172 http://www.planhillsborough.org Cooperative Comprehensive Multi-Modal Transportation Planning for Hillsborough County, Florida e-mail: [email protected]

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the materials attached are provided here for research and educational purposes, and are distributed without profit to MPO Board members, MPO staff, or related committees or subcommittees the MPO supports. The MPO has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of attached articles nor is the MPO endorsed or sponsored by the originator. Persons wishing to use copyrighted material for purposes of their own that go beyond ‘fair use’ must first obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Cooperative Comprehensive Multi-Modal Transportation Planning for Hillsborough County, Florida

HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING OF JUNE 15, 2015 MINUTES

CALL TO ORDER

Vice Chair Mike Williams called the meeting to order at 1:32 pm. The meeting was held in the Property Appraiser’s office on the 15th Floor of the County Center Building.

Members present: Mike Williams; Tony Garcia(arrived at 1:34 pm); John Patrick (proxy for Charles White); Calvin Thornton; Melanie Calloway; Steve Griffin (arrived at 1:34 pm); Jeff Sims; Tony Mantegna (proxy for Alice Price); Heather Eblin-Crowe (proxy for Donna Wysong); Amber Wheeler; Bob Gordon (arrived at 1:34 pm); Christina Caputo.

Members excused: Charles White; Bob Frey; Jeanie Satchel

Others present: Gena Torres, Rich Clarendon, Beth Alden, Lisa Silva, Sarah McKinley, Michele Ogilvie, Linda Ferraro, MPO staff; Jennifer Bartlett, FDOT; Mit Patel; Bob Agrusa, HDR.

PUBLIC COMMENT

Mr. Mit Patel introduced himself as a citizen who is interested in transportation in the area.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES (May 18, 2015)

Ms. Melanie Calloway made a motion to approve the May 20, 2015 minutes. The motion was seconded by Mr. Calvin Thornton and carried.

STATUS REPORTS A. Regional Priorities Update

Ms. Beth Alden, MPO Executive Director updated the members on the regional priorities for the 8-county region and 3-county metro area. For the eight-county region, the list includes projects from the Transportation Regional Incentive Program (TRIP) and the Multi Use Trails. For the 3-county region or TMA, the list includes major projects and Transportation Alternative Program projects.

TAC Minutes June 15, 2015

To be eligible for TRIP funds 1. The project must be included in the Chairs Coordinating Committee 2025 Regional Long Range Transportation Plan 2. Be Consistent with SIS 3. Be included in the local CIP 4. The local government must adopt, at a minimum, the State’s level of service on the facility. 5. The local government must demonstrate commitment of matching funds

In Hillsborough County, the TRIP projects include upgrades to the City’s ATMS including Downtown Tampa; Kennedy Boulevard/Hyde Park/Dale Mabry and the University Area/Busch Boulevard area. Other projects are along Bruce B. Downs Boulevard with the newest project of North Dale Mabry ATMS from Sligh Avenue to Van Dyke Road.

The top five major projects that will be requested include: TBX Phase I; Westshore Multimodal Center and Connections to Downtown Tampa; US 41 CSX Rail Corridor Joint Use; Regional Farebox and Duke Energy Trail.

Major projects to be considered next year will be: SR 54/56 Corridor; US 19 in northern Pinellas County; Ridge Road Extension; New Tampa East-West Road and the Rapid Bus Connection to beaches.

B. Selmon Greenway Master Plan – Deferred

C. Tampa-Hillsborough Greenways and Trails Update

Ms. Jennifer Bartlett stated that this project will update the County’s Greenways Master Plan (2000) and identify connections to the regional trail network. It will also update the County’s Greenways Master Plan by integrating the various recent pedestrian, bicycle, and multi‐use trail projects and planning efforts into the Plan. The update will also identify trail and facility connection opportunities to further enhance the city and county trail network and identify connections to the regional trail network.

The next steps include: • Plans review Technical Memorandum • Fine tune working maps • Committee presentations in June/July • Develop prioritization criteria • Fieldwork

TAC Minutes June 15, 2015

• Greenways and Trails workshop to identify additional opportunities and priorities • Workshop to identify possible connections • Working group meetings

Mr. Griffin asked if they were looking and land use and transportation so that the trails could be used as an alternate route for commuting and not just for recreation. She agreed that that would be a very good thing to consider.

D. Vulnerability Assessment (Video)

Ms. Torres showed a video clip from the Discovery Channel’s “Innovations by Ed Begley, Jr.” exploring innovated approaches to extreme weather risk and resilience in the transportation sector. The MPO’s Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation Pilot Project and MPO Chairman Commissioner Miller were featured in the video.

OLD BUSINESS/NEW BUSINESS A. Next Meeting: July 20, 2015

ADDENDUM

Ms. Torres pointed out that one of the addendum items included the draft of the MPO’s Level of Service Report which has since been updated since the agenda packet was sent out and is available for review and comment.

ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 2:09 pm.

Hillsborough Metropolitan Planning Organization

601 E Kennedy Boulevard, 18th floor, Tampa, Florida, 33601 · 813-272-5940 · planhillsborough.org

Board & Committee Agenda Item

Agenda Item: Transportation Improvement Program Priorities Annual Update

Presenter: Rich Clarendon, MPO Staff Summary: The Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) identifies, prioritizes and allocates anticipated state and federal funding to projects over the next five years. Every year the MPO must affirm its funding priorities for the coming year. That action, tied to the development of the TIP, normally occurs during a public hearing held in September. This year, however, due to the legislative session starting next January, the public hearing has been moved up to August. In response to the priorities adopted last year by the MPO Board, FDOT funded several projects that were seeking federal support. These are shown in the attached Table 1. With the funding of these projects, other projects still remain on the priority list as candidates for future federal funding. These are shown in the attached Table 2. Staff has coordinated with local jurisdictions and agencies to identify their priority projects. In addition, the adoption of the Imagine 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan last year has led staff to revamp the priority list this year. These revisions are also shown in Table 2 and include: • Updating information and status for previous candidates not currently funded; • Categorizing candidate projects into programs and prioritizing them by performance measures called for in the 2040 Plan. These categories include: o Preserve the system o Reduce crashes and vulnerability o Minimize congestion for drivers & shippers o Real choices when not driving, including trails/sidepaths and expanded transit service o Major investments for economic growth; and • Updating the list of regional projects to reflect regional priorities recently adopted by the MPO Chairs Coordinating Committee (CCC) and the Transportation Management Area (TMA) Leadership Group.

Recommended Adopt priorities for the 2015/2016 Transportation Action: Improvement Program.

Prepared By: Rich Clarendon, AICP Attachments: List of priority projects for the FY 16/17 TIP: Table 1 – Existing Priorities Funded for Construction Table 2 – Candidates for New Funding

DRAFT Hillsborough MPO List of Priority Projects 2016/2017 Transportation Improvement Program Table 1: EXISTING PRIORITIES FUNDED FOR CONSTRUCTION LRTP Project Status in FDOT 5 Year Tentative FPN Project Project Limits Project Description Project Status in 2015/2016 TIP Sponsor Work Program1 Number Widen 2 lanes to 6 lanes County / 415489 3 H1865 US HWY 301 FROM SR 674 TO BALM RD Construction Programmed 2016 divided FDOT BRUCE B DOWNS BLVD FROM BEARSS AVE TO Widen 4 lanes to 8 lanes 405492 5 H300 County Construction to Start January 2015 PALM SPRINGS divided BRUCE B DOWNS BLVD FROM PEBBLE CREEK DR Widen 4 lanes to 6 lanes 405492 4 H310 County Construction Programmed 2015 TO COUNTY LINE RD divided CROSS CREEK BLVD FROM CORY LAKE ISLES TO Widen 2 Lanes to 4 Lanes 420625 1 H460 Tampa Construction Programmed 2014 MORRIS BRIDGE RD Divided Widen 2 lanes to 4 lanes 257862 3 H1550 SAM ALLEN RD FROM SR 39 TO PARK RD FDOT Construction Programmed 2018 divided Widen 4 lane to 6 lane 408459 3 H855 I‐75 FROM N OF BB DOWNS BLVD TO S OF SR 56 FDOT Under Construction freeway 410909 2 ITS90 I‐75 FROM FOWLER AVE TO I‐275 ITS Freeway Management FDOT Under Construction I‐75 FROM S OF FOWLER AVE TO N OF BB DOWNS Widen 4 lanes to 6 lane 408459 2 H852 FDOT Under Construction BLVD freeway Widen 6 lanes to 8 lane 258399 2 H746 I‐275 FROM HIMES AVE TO HILLSBOROUGH RIVER FDOT Under Construction freeway I‐275 FROM SR 60 (MEMORIAL HWY) TO HIMES Widen 6 lanes to 8 lane 258398 5 H742 FDOT Under Construction AVE freeway 258398 3 ITS70 I‐275 FROM HIMES AVE TO HILLSBOROUGH RIVER ITS Freeway Management FDOT Under Construction US HWY 301 FROM TAMPA BYPASS CANAL TO Widen 2 lanes to 4 lanes 255793 1 H1890 FDOT Under Construction FOWLER AVE divided BAYSHORE BLVD FROM ROME AVE TO BAY TO BAY 413092 2 ORB170 Re‐Stripe for Bike Lane Tampa Construction Programmed 2014 BLVD ‐ PHASE II BAYSHORE BLVD FROM BAY TO BAY BLVD TO 413092 3 ORB170 Re‐Stripe for Bike Lane Tampa Construction Programmed 2017 GANDY BLVD ‐ PHASE III 413086 1 ORT10 UPPER TAMPA BAY TRAIL PHASE IV Multi‐Use Trail County Phase IV‐C Funded for Construction 430175 1 T28 MAINTAIN CURRENT VANPOOLS Vanpool Vehicles TBARTA Program funded in 2015, 17, 18 & 19 REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION DEMAND Public Outreach & 408205‐2 T25 TBARTA Funding Added in 2019 MANAGEMENT Education Widen 4 lanes to 6 lanes 405525 2 H1730 SR 60 FROM US HWY 301 TO FALKENBURG RD FDOT Construction Programmed 2017 divided Widen 2 Lanes to 4 Lanes 255893 2 H1675 SR 574 FROM HIGHVIEW RD TO PARSONS AVE FDOT Under Construction Divided Widen 2 lanes to 4 lanes 255893 3 H1680 SR 574 FROM PARSONS AVE TO KINGSWAY FDOT Construction Programmed 2016 divided

Page 1 Printed: 7/2/2015 DRAFT Hillsborough MPO List of Priority Projects 2016/2017 Transportation Improvement Program Table 1: EXISTING PRIORITIES FUNDED FOR CONSTRUCTION LRTP Project Status in FDOT 5 Year Tentative FPN Project Project Limits Project Description Project Status in 2015/2016 TIP Sponsor Work Program1 Number Widen 2 lanes to 4 lanes 255893 4 H1690 SR 574 FROM KINGSWAY TO MCINTOSH RD FDOT Construction Programmed 2018 divided 428214 2 PEC290 FLETCHER AVE FROM I‐275 TO 56TH ST Pedestrian Enhancement County Under Construction 422904‐2 & I‐275 HOWARD FRANKLAND BRIDGE EASTBOUND Replacement & Support H810 FDOT Design‐Build Added in 2019 422904‐4 SPAN Transit I‐75 FROM MANATEE COUNTY TO BLOOMINGDALE 410909 6 ITS85 ITS Freeway Management FDOT Construction Programmed 2014 Design‐Build in 2018 & 2019 AVE HILLSBOROUGH RIVER GREENWAY KENNEDY 257805 5 ORT275 RIVERWALK ‐ MACDILL PARK TO CURTIS HIXON Multi‐Use Trail Tampa Under Construction PARK HILLSBOROUGH RIVER GREENWAY DOYLE 257805 6 ORT277 CARLTON RIVERWALK ‐ STRAZ CENTER TO WATER Multi‐Use Trail Tampa Under Construction WORKS PARK NEBRASKA AVE (or alt rte Fla) from FOWLER AVE 429077 1 ORB520 Re‐Stripe for Bike Lane FDOT Resurfacing programmed in 2015 to FLORIDA/NEBRASKA COURTNEY CAMPBELL CSWY FROM PINELLAS 424507‐2 ITS20 ITS FDOT Construction Programmed in 2019 Design‐Build advanced to 2017 COUNTY TO VETERANS EXPY. 406151 1 / VETERANS EXPWY FROM MEMORIAL HWY TO Widen to 6 lanes to 8 lane 406152 1 / H1960 FTE Under Construction GUNN HWY freeway 431275 1 SELMON GREENWAY TRAIL FROM HILLSBOROUGH Funded through 2012 TIGER Grant and Completed; see Table 2 for 257805 7 ORT370 Multi‐Use Trail THEA RIVER TO 19TH ST FDOT resurfacing projects. connectivity extensions $100k Design in 2017; $880k 435141 1 T23 MAINTAIN CURRENT STREETCAR Capital Maintenance HART Construction in 2019 432715 1 ORB290 BOUGAINVILLEA AVE FROM 30TH ST TO 46TH ST Pedestrian / Bicycle Safety Tampa Construction Programmed 2017 Construction advanced to 2016

413407 2 / PD&E, Dale Mabry to Nebraska, BUSCH BLVD FROM ARMENIA AVE TO FLORIDA Landscaping, Pedestrian 435908‐1 / ‐ Tampa Construction Programmed 2014 2017; Intersection project, AVE Enhancement 437044‐1 Busch @ Armenia CYPRESS CORRIDOR FROM U‐PATH TO 432714 1 ORB470 Pedestrian / Bicycle Safety Tampa Construction Programmed in 2015 WESTSHORE BLVD 432716 1 ORB1 PALM AVE FROM N. BLVD TO NEBRASKA AVE Pedestrian / Bicycle Safety Tampa Construction Programmed 2015

432717 1 ORB1 WILLOW AVE FROM SWANN AVE TO MAIN ST Pedestrian / Bicycle Safety Tampa Construction Programmed 2017

Reduce EAST HILLSBOROUGH AVE FROM NEBRASKA AVE Ped crossing construction 2015. 432584 1 CMP / Crash Mitigation MPO Crashes TO 56TH STREET Resurfacing programmed 2018.

Page 2 Printed: 7/2/2015 DRAFT Hillsborough MPO List of Priority Projects 2016/2017 Transportation Improvement Program Table 1: EXISTING PRIORITIES FUNDED FOR CONSTRUCTION LRTP Project Status in FDOT 5 Year Tentative FPN Project Project Limits Project Description Project Status in 2015/2016 TIP Sponsor Work Program1 Number Feasibility study completed Reduce FOWLER AVENUE FROM NEBRASKA AVE TO BRUCE 429077 2 CMP / Crash Mitigation MPO Resurfacing Programmed 2016 through MPO's CMP ‐ Design Crashes B DOWNS BLVD needed DOWNTOWN ATMS PROJECT Ph 2 (South of Scott Minimize Added PE to 2017 & Constr to 424213 3 Street, East of Hillsborough River, West of 93 191 Signals Tampa Traffic 2020 (191 signals, Ph 2) Channelside Drive) Minimize KENNEDY/HYDE PARK/DALE MABRY ATMS 424213 4 44 142 Signals Tampa Traffic PROJECT Ph 3 (Incl. Bayshore, Kennedy, Hyde Park) Added PE to 2017 & Constr to SOUTH TAMPA/DALE MABRY ATMS PROJECT 2020 (142 signals, Ph 3) ITS10 (Includes South Dale Mabry, Gandy and 78 Signals Tampa Westshore) Minimize UNIVERSITY AREA/BUSCH BLVD ATMS PROJECT Ph Added PE to 2017 & Constr to 424213 6 40 119 Signals Tampa Traffic 4 (Includes Busch Blvd and Fowler Ave) 2020 (119 signals, Ph 4) Real Tampa Coordination underway with FDOT ‐ Additional funding may be 257805 1 TAMPA RIVERWALK ‐ KENNEDY BOULEVARD Elevator / Stairs Choices Priority #4 $1,015,844 $305,000 needed to complete project

Notes 1 As of 1/28/15 FDOT dashboard & 4/7/15 tentative work program.

Page 3 Printed: 7/2/2015 DRAFT 07.03.2015 Hillsborough MPO List of Priority Projects 2016/2017 Transportation Improvement Program Table 2: CANDIDATES FOR NEW FUNDING New projects in green

2015 2040 LRTP Project Status / Request for 2017 Action taken last year (if FPN Project Limits Project Description Project Sponsor Candidate for Funding Type Priority Project/ Ref Priority any)

2040 Plan Annual Funding Est. ($m) Metropolitan Transportation Planning Federal Metro Funds 0.62 Systems & Corridor Ongoing planning need: $400,000 per 1 259285 1 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING MPO SU Added $400,000 in FY20 Planning year District 7 Travel Ongoing survey efforts: $196,000 per 2 METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING FDOT SU Behavior Surveys year 2040 Plan Annual Funding Est. ($m) Goals by 2040 Federal Metro Funds Resurface major roads every 14‐17 years, State Highways 49.6 Preserve the System local roads every 20‐25 years TRIP Replace buses every 10‐12 years Fuel Tax Rev ‐ Local 14.0 Replace deficient bridges Other Local Rev Transit Funds 6.4

Preserve $16.4 million requested for FY21; $4 3 414963 2 MAINTAIN CURRENT BUS SERVICE Bus Replacement HART Priority #7 SU Added $4 million in FY20 System million recommended

Goals by 2040 2040 Plan Annual Funding Est. ($m) Reduce crashes 21‐50%, to levels Federal Metro Funds 3.3 comparable to peer cities State Highways 11.9 Reduce Crashes & Vulnerability Protect low‐lying major roads from flooding, TRIP Fuel Tax Rev ‐ Local 16.4 cutting recovery time in half Other Local Rev 4.6 Transit Funds 1. Stowers Elem ‐ $155,000 437243 1 2. Summerfield Elem ‐ $164,000 Sidewalks and 437244 1 Reduce SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL CANDIDATE 3. Eisenhower Middle ‐ $227,000 1‐5 are Elig & Feas for TA; all were 4 Intersection County Priority 437247 1 Crashes PROJECTS, HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY 5. Cypress Crk, Shields ‐ $170,000 prioritized by TMA Improvements 437248 1 6. Nelson Elem ‐ $83,000 7. Riverview Elem ‐ $112,000 Reduce COLUMBUS DRIVE FROM NEBRASKA AVE $99,000 needed for design and Elig & Feas for TA; prioritized 5 436639 1 Walk/Bike Safety Tampa Crashes TO 14TH STREET $556,000 for construction by TMA Reduce 46TH STREET FROM BUSCH BLVD TO $77,000 needed for design and Elig & Feas for TA; prioritized 6 437246 1 Walk/Bike Safety Tampa Crashes FOWLER AVE $442,000 for construction by TMA Impact on historic district Reduce ROME AVE FROM KENNEDY BLVD TO $213,000 needed for design and 7 437243 1 Walk/Bike Safety Tampa under review; prioritized by Crashes COLUMBUS DR $1,223,000 for construction TMA

Adopted:______Page 4 Printed: 7/2/2015 DRAFT 07.03.2015 Hillsborough MPO List of Priority Projects 2016/2017 Transportation Improvement Program Table 2: CANDIDATES FOR NEW FUNDING New projects in green

2015 2040 LRTP Project Status / Request for 2017 Action taken last year (if FPN Project Limits Project Description Project Sponsor Candidate for Funding Type Priority Project/ Ref Priority any)

Reduce FLORIBRASKA AVE FROM FLORIDA AVE $77,000 needed for design and Elig & Feas for TA; prioritized 8 436640 1 Walk/Bike Safety Tampa Crashes TO NEBRASKA AVE $441,000 for construction by TMA Sidewalk Improvements at Bryan Reduce TA Application received, needs 9 Elem/Tomlin MS, Jackson Elem, Lincoln Walk/Bike Safety Plant City $1.663M requested Crashes typ sec, ROW map Elem, & Wilson Elem Reduce Morris Bridge Rd Bike Lanes/Paved 10 Walk/Bike Safety FDOT (tent.) Temple Terrace request Operations Crashes Shoulders, Fowler to Fletcher GREEN SPINE: PH 1 CASS ST FROM Reduce HOWARD TO RIVER, PH 2 NUCCIO PKWY Walk Bike Emphasis $300,000 requested for PD&E 11 Tampa Priority #3 SU Crashes FROM NEBRASKA TO PALM, PH 3 15TH Corridor ($2,454,197 total cost estimate) ST FROM PALM TO 21ST Reduce SR 39 / S COLLINS STREET FROM Merrick Complete Street $690,000 requested for streetscaping & 12 Plant City Priority #1 SU Crashes St to E Laura St Enhancements lane re‐config. 2040 Plan Annual Funding Est. ($m) Goals by 2040 Federal Metro Funds 0.8 Traffic flow 17% better on non‐freeways State Highways 3.0 Minimize Congestion for Drivers TRIP 0.2 with ATMS and 640 intersections improved Fuel Tax Rev ‐ Local 8.5 & Shippers Traffic flow 10% better on freeways Other Local Rev 4.5 Plus truck quick fixes & RR overpasses Transit Funds

Minimize DALE MABRY HWY FROM SLIGH TO VAN $2.8 Million for design and TRIP with SU match; needs 13 ATMS ‐ Signalization County Priority Traffic DYKE RD implementation TRIP application Minimize US 301 FROM I‐75 TO SELMON Operational Port Tampa Bay request 14 FDOT (tent.) Operations Traffic EXPRESSWAY Improvements Minimize US 41 FROM CAUSEWAY BLVD TO I‐4Operational Port Tampa Bay request 15 FDOT (tent.) Operations Traffic Improvements Minimize Interchange Funding needed to add EB left turn lane 16 Big Bend Rd @ I‐75 FDOT SU, SIS Traffic Improvements & NB entrance lane Minimize Interchange Funding needed to extend SB dual left 17 Gibsonton Dr @ I‐75 FDOT SU, SIS Traffic Improvements turn lanes Minimize Intersection 18 Alexander St @ SR 39 Plant City Priority #3 $2M for construction SU Traffic Improvements Minimize Intersection 19 Alexander St @ Jim Johnson Rd Plant City Priority #7 $2M for construction SU Traffic Improvements Minimize Intersection 20 S Park Rd @ Coronet Rd Plant City Priority #8 $2M for construction SU Traffic Improvements

Adopted:______Page 5 Printed: 7/2/2015 DRAFT 07.03.2015 Hillsborough MPO List of Priority Projects 2016/2017 Transportation Improvement Program Table 2: CANDIDATES FOR NEW FUNDING New projects in green

2015 2040 LRTP Project Status / Request for 2017 Action taken last year (if FPN Project Limits Project Description Project Sponsor Candidate for Funding Type Priority Project/ Ref Priority any)

2040 Plan Annual Funding Est. ($m) Goals by 2040 Federal Metro Funds 9.4 Wide paved trails & sidepaths within walking State Highways distance of 1/4 of residents TRIP 0.2 Frequent bus service within walking distance of Real Choices When Not Driving Fuel Tax Rev ‐ Local 12.4 nearly half of people & jobs Other Local Rev 19.0 Outside bus service area, Sunshine Line services Transit Funds 71.4 grow with senior population growth

Real New Expanded 21 EAST‐WEST METRORAPID HART (Priority #1) $30 million construction New Starts, Small Starts Choices Transit Service 1. TIA/ Kennedy Blvd ‐ $2.5 m 2. Brandon‐Downtown ‐ $2.5 m Real PD&E/ Design Phase for an additional New Expanded HART Priorities 22 3. New Tampa‐USF ‐ $1.5 m SU Choices MetroRapid Corridor Transit Service #2‐4, 6 4. Dale Mabry/ MacDill ‐ $3.5 m 5. Busch Blvd/ Gunn Hwy ‐ $2.5 m Real UPPER TAMPA BAY TRAIL (UTBT) PHASE $2,582,000 to construct A Prioritized by CCC; Elig & Feas 23 Multi‐Use Trail County Choices IV‐A and IV‐B $1,562,000 to construct B for TA; Alignment TBD Prioritized by CCC; 2013 TA Real SOUTH TAMPA GWY FROM MAN‐ $50,000 requested for PD&E 24 Multi‐Use Trail Tampa Priority #12 application needs cost est, Choices HATTAN AVE TO PICNIC ISL. PARK ($1,800,000 total cost estimate) ROW doc, typ sec, LAP ltr Prioritized by CCC; TA Real TAMPA BYPASS CANAL TRAIL from 25 Multi‐Use Trail County Priority $1M requested for design application needs ROW doc, Choices Harney Rd to Flatwood Trailhead eng cost est Real TAMPA BYPASS CANAL TRAIL from Prioritized by CCC; TA ‐ need 26 Multi‐Use Trail Temple Terrace Choices Harney Rd to US 301 application Real UTBT CONNECTOR: LUTZ LAKE FERN $84,250 needed for design and Elig & Feas for TA 27 436713‐1 Sidewalk County Choices SIDEWALK construction 1) $329,602 ‐ Trailhead constr Selmon Greenway Next Phases ‐ SR 60 Real 2) $138,614 ‐ Safety & Sec Signage 28 between 19th St & Channelside Dr, Multi‐Use Trail THEA TA application received Choices 3) $214,338 ‐ Constr Connection to extension to Nuccio Pkwy Nuccio Pkwy Real WEST RIVER GWY ‐ BAYSHORE BLVD TO $132,000 requested for Design TA 2013 application needs 29 Multi‐Use Trail Tampa Priority #11 Choices MLKING RECREATION COMPLEX ($982,000 total cost estimate) ROW, typ sec, cost est Real I‐275 GWY EXTENSION FROM WEST OF 30 Multi‐Use Trail FDOT (tent.) Feasibility study of pedestrian overpass Planning Choices DALE MABRY TO MACFARLANE PK Real SOUTH COAST GREENWAY (PHASES I and Funding needed for PD&E and Design Ph I designed & seeking 31 Multi‐Use Trail County Choices III‐VI) for Ph III‐IV local funds Real TA application received, need 32 McIntosh Tract Trail Off‐Road Bicycle Trail Plant City $105,500 for des & const Choices typ sec

Adopted:______Page 6 Printed: 7/2/2015 DRAFT 07.03.2015 Hillsborough MPO List of Priority Projects 2016/2017 Transportation Improvement Program Table 2: CANDIDATES FOR NEW FUNDING New projects in green

2015 2040 LRTP Project Status / Request for 2017 Action taken last year (if FPN Project Limits Project Description Project Sponsor Candidate for Funding Type Priority Project/ Ref Priority any)

Major Investments for Economic Growth

Tampa Bay Express (TBX) Phase 1 ‐ New express lanes with dynamic pricing 412531‐2 1002, 1093 I‐275 @ SR 60 INTERCHANGE Modify Interchange FDOT Funding needed for construction SIS; prioritized by TMA ROW 2016, PE 2019 Funding needed for design and 258643 1 1003 I‐275 FROM SR 60 TO NORTH BLVD TBX with Exp. Bus FDOT SIS; prioritized by TMA PD&E underway construction Funding needed for des & constr, + n/a I‐275 FROM 4TH ST TO GANDY BLVD TBX with Exp. Bus FDOT SIS; prioritized by TMA PD&E underway PD&E for Gateway Transit Center I‐275 @ I‐4 (DOWNTOWN Funding needed for design and PD&E underway, ROW 433821 2 1005 Modify Interchange FDOT SIS; prioritized by TMA 33 INTERCHANGE) construction 2016, PE 2018 I‐275 FROM JEFFERSON/ORANGE ST TO Funding needed for des & constr, + 431821 2 1006 TBX with Exp. Bus FDOT SIS; prioritized by TMA PD&E underway N OF BEARSS AVE PD&E for Fletcher Transit Center I‐4 FROM I‐4/SELMON CONNECTOR TO Funding needed for design and 431746 1 1008 TBX with Exp. Bus FDOT SIS; prioritized by TMA PD&E underway POLK PKWY construction Funding needed for design and 415235 3 1010 I‐75 FROM FOWLER AVE TO US 301 TBX with Exp. Bus FDOT SIS; prioritized by TMA PD&E complete construction Funding needed for design and 419235 2I‐75 FROM SR 674 TO US 301 TBX with Exp. Bus FDOT SIS; prioritized by TMA PD&E complete construction Westshore Multimodal Center and Connections to Downtown & Airport WESTSHORE REGIONAL INTERMODAL Funding needed for ROW, design & 415348 183 Intermodal Center FDOT SIS; prioritized by TMA ROW negotiations CENTER construction 34 CONNECTION TO AIRPORT PEOPLE 62 Transit Connection FDOT/Aviation Auth No request this year Feas. Study complete MOVER Funding needed for design to extend to FDOT transit programs; 61 MODERN STREETCAR EXTENSION Transit Connection Tampa PD&E funded Marion Transit Center prioritized by TMA Funding needed for corridor FDOT transit programs; CSX‐FDOT MOU agrmt 35 60 US 41 RAIL CORRIDOR JOINT USE Commuter Transit FDOT study/PD&E prioritized by TMA pending Preserve Regional Farebox Rev. Collection & Inter‐ Regional Transit Fare Partially funded; balance of $8.9M TRIP, TIGER, FDOT transit; $3.7M allocated in FY18 36 436677 1 HART Priority #8 System Jurisdictional Mobility Collection needed prioritized by TMA & FY19 Partially funded; funding needed for 37 n/a Duke Energy Trail ‐ North & South Gaps Multi‐Use Trail Pinellas County TIGER; prioritized by TMA design and construction Grade Separated 38 1100 US 41 @ Causeway Blvd FDOT (tent.) Port Tampa Bay request Other Arterials, Intermodal Intersection US 92 FROM GARDEN LANE (US 301/I‐4) Widen 2 lanes to 4 39 435749 1 1043 FDOT Funding needed for design Other Arterials PD&E 2016 TO CR 579 lanes divided FDOT; Plant City 40 435749 1 1045 US 92 from Park Rd to Polk County Widen to 4LD Funding needed for design Other Arterials PD&E 2016 Priority #4 W Sam Allen Rd from N Alexander St to 41 E+C Widen to 4LD Plant City Priority #2 $2.464M for Construction SU SR 39

Adopted:______Page 7 Printed: 7/2/2015 DRAFT 07.03.2015 Hillsborough MPO List of Priority Projects 2016/2017 Transportation Improvement Program Table 2: CANDIDATES FOR NEW FUNDING New projects in green

2015 2040 LRTP Project Status / Request for 2017 Action taken last year (if FPN Project Limits Project Description Project Sponsor Candidate for Funding Type Priority Project/ Ref Priority any)

Davis Rd Ext from Harney Rd to Maislin 42 9996 New 2LU Rd Temple Terrace $300,000 for PD&E / Design SU Dr SAM ALLEN RD FROM PARK TO POLK 43 1038, 1040 New 4 Lane roadway Plant City Priority #6 $4.5M request for PD&E SU COUNTY Minimize Grade Separated 44 US 41 @ SR 60 FDOT (tent.) Port Tampa Bay request Other Arterials Traffic Intersection Minimize Grade Separated 45 US 41 @ CSX 'A' LINE TO CSX 'S' LINE FDOT (tent.) Port Tampa Bay request Other Arterials Traffic Intersection Need 46* beyond Rice Rd from Coronet Rd to Polk Co New 2LU Rd Plant City Priority #5 $3.757M requested for PD&E SU 2040 *Project not listed in the Cost‐Affordable Long Range Transportation Plan

Denotes new project

Adopted:______Page 8 Printed: 7/2/2015 Hillsborough Metropolitan Planning Organization

601 E Kennedy Boulevard, 18th floor, Tampa, Florida, 33601 · 813-272-5940 · planhillsborough.org

Committee Agenda Item

Agenda Item: Selmon Greenway Master Plan

Presenter: Bob Frey, Tampa-Hillsborough Expressway Authority Summary: As part of the Selmon Greenway project, which was built with the 2012 TIGER grant funds procured with the City of Tampa, THEA has created a “Conceptual Master Plan”. The “Master Plan” identifies areas along the Selmon Greenway that CAN be developed as pocket parks and amenities for users of the trail.

The “Master Plan” is the first step in completing a design effort to create the vision for what the Selmon Greenway will ultimately become over the next several years. After the Master Plan is approved by the THEA Board of Directors, the next step will be to design the amenity areas for future build- out, as partners and funds become available.

Additionally, in March 2015 the THEA Board approved funding in the amount of $49,000 for Selmon Greenway Project – Design/Build Support Services for additional services. A portion of those will be used on the following tasks.  Greenway Lighting Support - $15,815  Greenway Landscape/Amenity Support - $13,371  Greenway Signing Support - $10,661  TIGER Grant Close Out Support- $ 7,542

Recommended None; for information only. Action:

Prepared By: Lisa K. Silva, AICP, PLA Attachments: PDF of presentation

Trail Heads and Pocket Parks Map

2 Location A: West Trailhead and Plaza

3 Location A: West Trailhead and Plaza

Location A Current Conditions Location A Conceptual Amenities

4 Location 1: S Florida Avenue and E Brorein Street

5 Location 1: S Florida Avenue and E Brorein Street

Location 1 Current Conditions Location 1 Conceptual Amenities

6 Location 2: S Jefferson Street and E Brorein Street

7 Location 2: S Jefferson Street and E Brorein Street

Location 2 Current Conditions Location 2 Conceptual Amenities

8 Location 3: S Jefferson Street and Selmon Expressway Underpass

9 Location 3: S Jefferson Street and Selmon Expressway Underpass

Location 3 Current Conditions Location 3 Conceptual Amenities

10 Location 4: E Kennedy Boulevard and Selmon Expressway Underpass

11 Location 4: E Kennedy Boulevard and Selmon Expressway Underpass

Location 4 Current Conditions Location 4 Conceptual Amenities

12 Location 5: N Raymond Street (Bell Channelside Apartments)

13 Location 5 Conceptual View: N Raymond Street (Bell Channelside Apartments) 14 Location 5: N Raymond Street (Bell Channelside Apartments)

Location 5 Current Conditions Location 5 Conceptual Amenities

15 Location 6: Selmon Expressway Underpass East of Channelside Drive

16 Location 6: Selmon Expressway Underpass East of Channelside Drive

Location 6 Current Conditions Location 6 Conceptual Amenities

17 Location 7: Intersection of Adamo Drive and Channelside Drive

18 Location 7: Intersection of Adamo Drive and Channelside Drive

Location 7 Current Conditions Location 7 Conceptual Amenities

19 Location 8: South of Adamo Drive at Channelside Drive

20 Location 8: South of Adamo Drive at Channelside Drive

Location 8 Current Conditions Location 8 Conceptual Amenities

21 Location 9: North of Ybor Channel

22 Location 9: North of Ybor Channel

Location 9 Current Conditions Location 9 Conceptual Amenities

23 Location 10: South of Adamo Drive at Mural

24 Location 10: South of Adamo Drive at Mural

Location 10 Current Conditions Location 10 Conceptual Amenities

25 Location B: East Trailhead

26 Location B: East Trailhead

Location B Current Conditions Location B Conceptual Amenities

27 Hillsborough Metropolitan Planning Organization

601 E Kennedy Boulevard, 18th floor, Tampa, Florida, 33601 · 813-272-5940 · planhillsborough.org

Committee Agenda Item

Agenda Item: Temple Terrace Comprehensive Plan Update

Presenter: Tony LaColla, Planning Commission Staff Summary: The Planning Commission embarked on an ambitious goal of simultaneously updating the Comprehensive Plans for unincorporated Hillsborough County and its three cities, in coordination with the update of the MPO’s Long Range Transportation Plan. The Temple Terrace Comprehensive Plan supports their commitment to enhance the quality of life for residents, with particular attention to multimodal travel, natural resources, and economic development. Of particular interest to the MPO committees are policies to encourage development of Complete Streets and the designation of the entire city as a Multimodal Transportation District, the first in the state of Florida. As new development occurs, there are requirements in place to mitigate traffic impacts by first emphasizing safe walking, cycling, and transit access. A list of eligible projects has been updated and included in the Comprehensive Plan. The Temple Terrace Comprehensive Plan is on schedule to be adopted by December 2015.

Recommended None; for information only. Action:

Prepared By: Gena Torres Attachments: 1. Temple Terrace Vision Map 2. Concurrency Manual Update

!"b$

IS RR P O AM M R MORRIS - E N I75 N-MORRIS G BRIDGE RAMP BRIDGE RD 5 D I 7

I R

B MORRIS BRIDGE RD I75 N Vision Map for the

University MORRIS Community BRIDGE RD City of Temple Terrace, Florida Hospital

I75 S-MORRIS BRIDGE RAMP D

BRUCE B DOWNSBRUCEB BLVD R GE RID S B RRI MO MORRIS FLETCH I75 S-MORRIS E ER AVE E FLETCHER AVE E FLETCHER AVE BRIDGE RD BRIDGE RAMP M

I75 S O R R I S S R B R A I M D P G E - I 7 5

James A Haley Veteran's Hospital ®

I75 N

BRUCE B Shriners DOWNSBLVD Hospitals for Children All Children's Specially Care of Tampa I75 S N56TH ST Central Business District Northside Mental Health Center Inc

USF/PATEL 5

I75 S-FOWLER E FOWLER-I75

R GRECO I PIZZO 7 ER E RAMP N RAMP L 5 OW L ELEM MIDDLE -F W N Major Activity Center N P I75 AM O P Rotary R -F M SCHOOL S A Park 5 R I7 01 E FOWLER AVE Y 3 E FOWLER AVE E FOWLER AVE WA MOSI PARTNERSHIP E FOWLER AVE E FOWLER AVE E FOWLER E FOWLER IGH E FOWLER AVE S H AVE E AVE E FOWLER AVE E FOWLER AVE E FOWLER AVE N U ELEMENTARY FO I75 S W S L E R E F A R N O M - W I7 R P L 5 A TERRACE E

I COMMUNITY 7

SCHOOL 5

R Gillette E Sports E L Linwod Complex F M.O.S.I. Park O W S W O L F R - Scenic Views A E R N M - P I7 5 7 5 I I75 N

W P

O M

F A -

R N Family LEWIS 5

Recreation 7 Complex ELEMENTARY I TempleTerraceTrail Omar K Lightfoot Senior Center/Whiteway TempleTerraceTrail Tennis Courts Railway Park Proposed Annexation Area

N US HIGHWAY 301

T Serena S Temple Terrace Service Area Park

Adventure Island T

6 5

N30TH ST N Residential Areas

Bonnie Brae Park

University Townhomes Youth Sports Park Complex

Ben Transportation Cooridors Lomond HARNEY RD Park Busch Gardens Fairmont Circle Multimodal Corridors

Riverfront Preserve

Ridgedale Sports Complex Billy Graham Gardens Vandenberg Airport

Woodmont Park USF TEMPLE TERRACE ELEM VILLAGE OF Parks E BUSCH BLVD E BUSCH BLVD EXCELLENCE TEMPLE TERRACE HWY BULLARD PKWY

HARNEY RD Bullard Pond

JENNINGS MIDDLE k County Schools SCHOOL

Overlook Park

I75 S Fire Stations

I75 N

cÆ Libraries

Biltmore Major Medical Facilities Park RIVERHILLS v® ELEM

Riverhills Park

N US HIGHWAY 301

River-Canal Connector

Tampa By-Pass Canal Trail

Riverhills T Park Addition West River S - Scout Park Preserve

Hillsborough River Trail ROBLES ELEM SCHOOL

KING HIGH SCHOOL

I 4

- I 7

TAMPA BAY P SHEEHY I75 N ELEMENTARY TECHNICAL HIGH SCH SCHOOL 0 1,000 2,000 4,000

I75 S-I4 W RAMP Feet

CARL SAGAN ACADEMY Vandenberg I75 S Copyright The Hillsborough County City-County Planning Commission Airport This map (G:\gisroot\Projects\Steve\TempleTerraceConceptMap.mxd) ORIENT RD was produced on 8/21/2008 at 8:01:17 AM I4 W-I75 I75 S-I4 W RAMP I75 N-I4 W RAMP S RAMP

I75 N DATA SOURCES : Basemap, roads, water from Hillsborough County I4 W E City-County Planning Commission. Parcel Lines and data from Hillsborough I4 I75 S-I4 E RAMP County Property Appraiser. Wetlands from SWFWMD, Significant Wildlife I75 N-I4 Habitat from Planning and Development Management, based on satellite W RAMP MP N RA -I75 I4 E I4 E-I75 imagery. Only wetlands greater than 40 acres depicted. N RAMP

N US I4 REPRODUCTION : This sheet may not be reproduced in part or full for S E R -I HIGHWAY 301 I4 W A 7 I4 E M 5 sale to anyone without specific approval of the Hillsborough County P City-County Planning Commission. E US HWY 92-US QUEST HWY 301 S RAMP NORTH TAMPA I75 S ALTERNATIVE MIDDLE ACCURACY : It is intended that the accuracy of the basemap comply US HWY SCHOOL SCHOOL 301-HILLSB ORO RAM with U.S. National Map accuracy standards. However, such accuracy PEPIN US HWY W-E US P I4 W-E US I4 HWY 92 RAMP 92 RAMP Y is not gauranteed by the Hillsborough County City-County Planning ACADEMY OF E HILLSBOROUGH 301-HILLSBORO RAMPHWY E HW HOPE PREPARATORY E U I4 W-E US U US MP BRANDON E HILLSBOROUGH AVE E HILLSBOROUGH AVE E HILLSBOROUGH AVE AVE S H 4 Y I4 W-E US 92 S H E RA E HILLSBOROUGH AVE W -I W P E US -I4 W E TAMPA 92-I4 Y 1 H M HWY HWY 92 RAMP W Y -I4 Commission. This map for illustrative purposes only. For the most current ACADEMY E R 0 US A Y HWY 92 RAMP R 92 ALTERNATIVE AM 3 E R HW 92-I4 E RAM I4 AM D P Y P 4 W US MP P W P R M -I S E RA data and information, see the appropriate source. W A 92 -E U I4 E E US H HWY Y H R I4 E MP 92- I4 E-US HWY WY E US E US HIGHWAY 92 E RA I4 E E US HIGHWAY 92 S W 92 301 RAMP 92-I4 E RAMP 92-I4 E RAMP CARVER TAMPA N U WY P R H AM R N US A 301 HIGHWAY 301

N 56TH ST TRANSITIONAL N 40TH ST H Y EXCEPTIONAL ORIENT RD HW -US CENTER SCHOOL I4 E

!"`$

CITY OF TEMPLE TERRACE

TRAFFIC CIRCULATION AND MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY POLICIES AND PROCEDURES MANUAL

City of Temple Terrace Community Services Department 11250 N 56th Street Temple Terrace, Florida 33617

Prepared By:

On Behalf Of:

Revised – June 2015

Table of Contents

1.0 General ...... 1

2.0 Transportation Concurrency Review Process ...... 5

3.0 Application Requirements ...... 8

4.0 Proportionate Fair-Share ...... 13

5.0 Miscellaneous Provisions...... 20

List of Appendices

Appendix A Multimodal Transportation Improvements Summary ......

Appendix B FDOT Inflation Factor Table......

Appendix C Concurrency Applications ......

Appendix D Concurrency Management System (CMS) Information ......

Appendix E Multimodal Transportation Concurrency Ordinance......

City of Temple Terrace Traffic Circulation and Multimodal Transportation Concurrency Policy and Procedures Manual Acronyms

AADT Average Annual Daily Traffic ADT Average Daily Traffic CIE Capital Improvements Element CIP Capital Improvements Program CMS Concurrency Management System CRA Community Redevelopment Area DRI Development of Regional Impact FAC Florida Administrative Code FDOT Florida Department of Transportation FLUE Future Land Use Element HART Hillsborough Area Regional Transit ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers LOS Level of Service MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization MTD Multimodal Transportation District PD Planned Development SIS Strategic Intermodal System SRPP Strategic Regional Policy Plan TAZ Traffic Analysis Zone TBRPM Tampa Bay Regional Planning Model TCEA Transportation Concurrency Exception Area TRIP Transportation Regional Incentive Program TTMTD Temple Terrace Multimodal Transportation District

City of Temple Terrace Traffic Circulation and Multimodal Transportation Concurrency Policy and Procedures Manual

1.0 General

1.1.0 Authority

This document shall be known as the Traffic Circulation and Multimodal Transportation Concurrency Policy and Procedures Manual, as referenced in the “Transportation Concurrency Ordinance of the City of Temple Terrace, Florida” and as stated in Policy 2.1.12 of the Mobility Element of the Comprehensive Plan.

1.2.0 Purpose

The purpose of this Traffic Circulation and Multimodal Transportation Concurrency Policy and Procedures Manual is to define the Concurrency requirements of the Comprehensive Plan. The Manual outlines the requirements and procedures that must be followed by Applicants for new Developments in order to satisfy Transportation Concurrency. Finally, the Manual outlines the procedures to be followed by staff in maintaining the Concurrency Management System (CMS).

1.3.0 Definitions

1.3.1 Applicant (for Development Approval) – Any person, firm, corporation or other entity that submits plans or other required information to the City of Temple Terrace to obtain approval of a proposed, planned or contemplated Development activity.

1.3.2 Capacity – The potential or suitability for holding, storing or accommodating, at a defined Level of Service.

(a) Existing Capacity – The Capacity of the facility at the present time.

(b) Programmed Capacity – The Capacity of a facility at some future time after improvements.

(d) Available Capacity – The Capacity of a facility available for use by the Demand from new Development. Available Capacity is equal to the existing (or programmed) Capacity minus the existing Demand minus the committed Demand.

1.3.3 Certificate of Concurrency – A statement, related to a specified Development project, that Concurrency is satisfied and that a specified amount of facility Capacity is reserved for a specified period of time.

1.3.4 Comprehensive Plan – The City of Temple Terrace Comprehensive Plan adopted pursuant to the requirements of Section 163, Fla. Stat.

1.3.5 Concurrency – That the necessary public facilities and services to maintain the adopted Level of Service standards are available when the impacts of Development occur.

1.3.6 Concurrency Management System (CMS) - The procedures and/or process the City utilizes to assure that Development Orders and permits are not issued unless the necessary facilities and services are available concurrent with the impacts of Development.

1.3.7 Concurrency Review – The process to determine if there is adequate available Capacity to accommodate the impact of a new Development project at or above the adopted Level of Service (LOS).

1.3.8 Concurrency Roadway Network – All streets and roads classified as Limited Access, Principal Arterial, Minor Arterial, Major Collector or Minor Collector on the "Functional Classification Maps" of the City of Temple Terrace Comprehensive Plan Mobility Element.

(a) Limited Access Facility – A roadway especially designed for through traffic that provides uninterrupted flow at relatively high speeds. Freeways and expressways usually control access through grade-separated interchanges.

(b) Arterial Road – A roadway carrying relatively continuous and relatively high traffic volume. Trip length is long and operating speed is high. Arterials serve major through movements between important centers of activity in a metropolitan area and serve a substantial portion of trips entering or leaving the area. Every U.S. numbered highway (e.g., U.S. 301) is an arterial road.

(c) Collector Road – A roadway carrying relatively moderate traffic volume. Trip length and operating speed are moderate. Collector roads are facilities that connect and augment the arterial system. Collector roads distribute traffic to geographic areas smaller than those served by arterials and place more emphasis on land access.

1.3.9 Consistency – The Development project is compatible with and furthers the goals, objectives and policies of the City of Temple Terrace Comprehensive Plan and the City of Temple Terrace Land Development Code.

1.3.10 Demand – The requirements or burden placed on public facilities at the present time or projected into the future.

(a) Existing Demand – The Demand on a public facility that is attributable to existing Development and to the current population.

(b) Committed Demand – The Demand on a public facility that is expected to occur due to unbuilt, approved Development projects.

(c) Proposed Project Demand – The Demand on a public facility that is expected to occur due to a Development project that is under consideration.

(d) Total Demand – The Demand on a public facility that is expected to occur due to existing, committed and proposed projects.

1.3.11 De Minimis Development – As defined pursuant to Section 163.3180(6), Fla. Stat.

1.3.12 Development –As defined pursuant to Section 163.3221, Fla. Stat.

1.3.13 Development Order – An order issued by the City Council authorizing a specific use and Development and further authorizing the subsequent issuance of necessary permits under the provisions of Section 380, Fla. Stat.

1.3.14 Development Agreement – A Local Government Development Agreement, as defined in Section 163.3220 through 163.3243, Fla. Stat., or other enforceable agreement between the City and a Developer for the purpose of enforcing the provisions of the Concurrency Management Ordinance.

1.3.15 Exempt – The requirement for Concurrency Review shall not be applicable to Developments located within that portion of the City of Temple Terrace identified in Policy 3.2.9 of the Future Land Use Element, so long as impacts are mitigated using the procedures set forth in Policies 1.1.10 and 1.1.11 and in Goal 2 and its related Objective and Policies, as applicable, of the Mobility Element.

1.3.16 Level of Service (LOS) – An indicator of the extent or degree of service provided by, or proposed to be provided by a facility based on and related to the operational characteristics of the facility as established in the City’s Comprehensive Plan. Level of Service shall indicate the Capacity per unit of Demand for each public facility.

(a) MTD LOS Standard – The adopted LOS standard for state, county, and municipal roadways located inside the MTD as specified in Goal 1 of the Mobility Element of the Comprehensive Plan.

(b) Non-MTD LOS Standard – The adopted LOS standard for state and county roadways in the City of Temple Terrace as specified in the Mobility Element of the Comprehensive Plan.

1.3.17 Maximum Service Volume – The maximum number of vehicles at which a roadway segment can function at the adopted Level of Service.

1.3.18 Multimodal Transportation District (MTD) – A specific area, as defined in the Comprehensive Plan, where secondary emphasis is placed on automobile mobility and primary emphasis is placed on providing a safe, comfortable, and attractive environment for pedestrians and bicyclists, with convenient access to reliable transit services.

1.3.19 Schedule of Capital Improvements – Concurrency facility improvements included in the Capital Improvements Element (CIE) of the Comprehensive Plan or the long-term Multimodal Transportation Improvements shown in Appendix A.

1.3.20 Temple Terrace Multimodal Transportation District (TTMTD) – Pursuant to the provisions of Goal 2 of the Mobility Element of the Comprehensive Plan, the City of Temple Terrace is a Multimodal Transportation District (MTD), where secondary emphasis is placed upon automobile mobility and primary emphasis is placed on providing a safe, comfortable and attractive environment for pedestrians and bicyclists with convenient access to reliable transit services, thereby encouraging the use of multiple modes of transportation and leading to a reduction in automobile use and vehicle miles traveled.

1.3.21 Transportation Concurrency – That the necessary transportation facilities and services to maintain the adopted Level of Service standards are available when the impacts of Development occur.

1.3.22 Vested – A completed Development Order application that is paid in full, conforms to the provisions set forth in the City of Temple Terrace Land Development Code, and meets the intensity and density per the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Element (FLUE) and is consistent with the underlying zoning as of the effective date of the Multimodal Transportation Concurrency Management ordinance (also known as the Concurrency Management System); or, has been issued a Development Order by the City prior to the adoption of said ordinance.

2.0 Transportation Concurrency Review Process

2.1.0 Concurrency Review

(1) In order to satisfy Transportation Concurrency, all proposed Development, except that Development found to be Vested or Exempt under the provisions of Policy 3.2.9 of the Future Land Use Element of the City of Temple Terrace Comprehensive Plan, shall undergo a Transportation Concurrency Review prior to issuance of a building and/or infrastructure permit.

(2) The Concurrency Review shall determine if there is adequate available Capacity in each of the concurrent facilities to accommodate the impact of the proposed new Development, consistent with Policy 6.4.5 of the Future Land Use Element and Policy 2.1.6 of the Mobility Element of the City of Temple Terrace Comprehensive Plan.

(3) The City shall maintain a Concurrency Management System (CMS) that consists of an inventory of facility Capacity and a Demand accounting database that reflects the current status of Transportation Concurrency facilities. Information contained in the database will be updated regularly to reflect newly approved Development and recent traffic counts.

(4) Based on the results of the Concurrency Review, Public Works shall issue a Certificate of Concurrency, issue a conditional Certificate of Concurrency, or deny a Certificate of Concurrency.

(5) The Applicant shall have the right to appeal denials of Certificates of Concurrency.

2.2.0 Initial Test for Concurrency

(1) A Transportation Concurrency application, including the Initial Test for Transportation Concurrency Worksheet (Appendix C), must be submitted concurrently with the application for final site plan or preliminary plat/subdivision plan approval or other Development order.

(2) Public Works shall review the Initial Test for Transportation Concurrency Worksheet (Appendix C) prepared and submitted by the Applicant. Staff shall have ten (10) business days to review the Worksheet for completeness according to the following criteria.

(a) The Development is Exempt or Vested, (defined in Section 1.3.15 and 1.3.22);

(b) The Development is subject to a valid Certificate of Concurrency issued with a prior Development Order; or

(c) The impact to the link or links adjacent to the Development access point or points is less than 1% of the Maximum Service Volume at the adopted non-MTD LOS standard. In this instance, the impact shall be considered De Minimus except in instances where the roadway Capacity of existing plus committed trips would exceed 110% of the Maximum Service Volume at the adopted non-MTD LOS standard, or if the impact would cause a designated hurricane evacuation roadway to exceed its Maximum Service Volume at the adopted non-MTD LOS standard.

2.3.0 Formal Concurrency Review

(1) Once the Initial Test is complete and it has been determined that the Applicant shall undergo a formal Concurrency Review, the Applicant is required to submit the documents listed in Section 3.2.0 pursuant to the procedures set forth in Section 3.1.0.

(2) Based on the results of the formal Concurrency Review, the Public Works Department shall issue a Certificate of Concurrency, issue a conditional Certificate of Concurrency, or deny a Certificate of Concurrency pursuant to Section 3.0. The Applicant shall have the right to appeal denials of Certificates of Concurrency pursuant to Section 5.1.0.

(3) No final site plan, final plat or other Development Order can be approved by the Temple Terrace City Council or Subdivision Plan or Preliminary Plat can be approved by Public Works without a Certificate of Concurrency being issued, or a binding Proportionate Fair-Share Agreement.

2.4.0 Certificate of Concurrency

(1) A Certificate of Concurrency shall apply to a specified Development project, with a specified use, density, and intensity.

(2) The issuance of a Certificate of Concurrency shall serve to reserve Capacity adequate to accommodate the proposed Development project for the term of the Certificate. The reservation of Capacity shall occur on a first-come, first-served basis.

(3) A Certificate of Concurrency shall have a term equivalent to the term of the related Development Order or Proportionate Fair-Share Agreement, unless a different term is agreed to by the City and specified in a Development Agreement.

(4) In order to be issued a Certificate of Concurrency, the Certificate of Concurrency application fees must be received by the City of Temple Terrace.

(5) Any fees paid to reserve Capacity that are not utilized upon expiration of a Certificate of Concurrency shall not be refunded unless otherwise specified in a Development Agreement. Any fees paid to reserve Capacity for a project that is unable to proceed due to the inability to secure subsequent Development Orders for the project or to reserve Capacity that is unused because of modifications required to the project as part of subsequent Development reviews, shall be refunded upon written request prior to the expiration of the Certificate.

(6) The issuance of a Certificate of Concurrency does not relieve an Applicant from complying with all other requirements necessary to obtain a Development Order and does not provide Vesting with the right to obtain subsequent Development Orders for the same project. A Certificate of Concurrency only certifies that the Development project, as specified, satisfies the Transportation Concurrency provisions of the City of Temple Terrace Comprehensive Plan.

2.5.0 Concurrency Review Committee

The Concurrency Review Committee is a committee comprised of technical staff from City departments; and if required, agencies from Hillsborough County and the State of Florida responsible for the various transportation facilities in Temple Terrace. The function of the Concurrency Review Committee is to review pending Certificates of Concurrency, and to provide comments from their technical perspective. The City’s Concurrency Review Committee may be comprised of staff from the City’s Development Review Committee.

3.0 Application Requirements

3.1.0 Application Procedure for Formal Transportation Concurrency Review

(1) Prior to submittal of an application for a final site plan, preliminary plat, subdivision plan, final plat or other Development Order, the Applicant shall schedule a pre-application conference to discuss Transportation Concurrency issues.

(2) Concurrent with the submittal of an application for a final site plan, preliminary plat, subdivision plan, final plat or other Development Order, the Applicant shall submit an application for Transportation Concurrency Review as specified in Section 3.2.0.

(3) The application for Transportation Concurrency Review shall be filed with the City of Temple Terrace Public Works Department.

(4) The application for Transportation Concurrency Review shall be reviewed for completeness and either accepted, or returned within twenty (20) business days for corrections or request for additional information. The City will utilize transportation engineering consultants at part of the review.

(5) The required application for Transportation Concurrency Review fee shall be due at the time of filing of the initial Concurrency application. If a formal Transportation Concurrency Review is necessary, any additional review fees will be borne by the Applicant.

(6) All applications shall be logged as to the date accepted by City of Temple Terrace Staff.

(7) An application for a Development Order with an application for Transportation Concurrency Review that seeks to utilize future Capacity that is unavailable at the time of application, have the option of being placed on a waiting list, in first- come, first-served order for future Capacity as it becomes available. Alternatively, Applicants can agree to pay a Proportionate Fair-Share of the costs for future Capacity, as outlined in Section 4.0.

3.2.0 Application Data

(1) The application shall, at a minimum, include the following information for the proposed new Development project:

(a) Location Map (b) Site Plan (c) Proposed Development parameters (land use, number of units, square feet). (d) Planned or expected date of construction and occupancy.

(2) The application shall also include a traffic analysis using the following criteria:

(a) Trip Generation: Estimated proposed Development trip generation shall be established through the use of the latest edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook. Where available, equations shall be utilized to assess trip generation. For single office uses less than 25,000 square feet the average rate may be utilized to assess trip generation. The number of trips generated in the P.M. peak hour shall be assessed for concurrency review and management of the CMS. The Average Daily Traffic (ADT) generated shall be used in the Proportionate Fair-Share calculation inside the MTD. Alternately, trip generation figures can be based on data collected from related Development, if the data is sufficiently documented and is agreed upon by the City.

(b) Internal Capture and Pass-by Trips: If applicable, the percentage and the number of total trips internally captured and the percentage and number of pass-by trips shall be documented. Any credits for internal capture and pass-by should follow appropriate ITE and FDOT methodologies.

(c) Pursuant to Section 163.3180(8), Fla. Stat., redevelopment projects requiring less than 110% of the previously existing Capacity shall not be prohibited due to the reduction of transportation below the adopted Levels of Service standards. However, these projects will still be responsible for providing an analysis and payment of all application fees to the City of Temple Terrace. Additionally, these projects are required to undergo the Development Review process in order to receive City Development permits.

(d) Trip Distribution: Applicants may distribute generated trips manually or apply the latest version of the Tampa Bay Regional Planning Model (TBRPM). The Applicant shall provide the City with peak hour distribution diagrams of project traffic. These diagrams shall illustrate project trip distribution on the impacted roadway segments and intersections within the traffic impact area.

(e) Traffic Impact Area: Project traffic shall be distributed to the roadway network and impacts shall be evaluated as follows:

Project Trips Area of Impact

One-Half mile, or to all roadway links where project trips are equal to Less than 25 net new PM Peak or greater than 3% of the generalized Hour trips Maximum Service Volume for the roadway at LOS D, whichever is greater.

One mile, or to all roadway links where project trips are equal to or 25 - 100 net new PM Peak greater than 3% of the generalized Hour trips Maximum Service Volume for the roadway at LOS D, whichever is greater.

Two miles, or to all roadway links where project trips are equal to or More than 100 net new PM greater than 3% of the generalized peak Hour trips Maximum Service Volume for the roadway at LOS D, whichever is greater.

(f) For Developments outside the MTD, the Applicant will still be subject to a Concurrency Review to ensure adequate Capacity on the roadways within the Area of Impact. Project impacts will be determined by the Applicant, using the methodologies outlined above. The methodology and project impacts will be reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. A Certificate of Concurrency will be issued if capacity is available. If not, the application will be denied.

3.3.0 Application Procedure for Non-MTD Proportionate Fair-Share

(1) Prior to submitting an application for a Proportionate Fair-Share Agreement outside the MTD, a pre-application meeting may be held to discuss eligibility, application submittal requirements, potential mitigation options, and related

issues. If the impacted facility is on the Strategic Intermodal System (SIS), then the FDOT will be notified and invited to participate in the pre-application meeting.

(2) The Public Works Department shall review the application and certify that the application is sufficient and complete within twenty (20) business days. If application is determined to be insufficient, incomplete or inconsistent with the general requirements of the Proportionate Fair-Share Program as indicated in Section 4.0, then the Applicant will be notified in writing of the reasons for such deficiencies within twenty (20) business days of submittal of the application. If such deficiencies are not remedied by the Applicant within thirty (30) days of return receipt of the written notification, then the application will be deemed abandoned. The City Council may, in its discretion, grant an extension of time not to exceed sixty (60) days to cure such deficiencies, provided that the Applicant has shown good cause for the extension and has taken reasonable steps to affect a cure.

(3) Pursuant to Sections 163.3180(15)(a) and 163.3180(16)(e), Fla. Stat., proposed Proportionate Fair-Share mitigation for Development impacts to facilities on the Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) requires the Concurrency of the FDOT. The Applicant shall submit evidence of an agreement between the Applicant and the FDOT for inclusion in the Proportionate Fair-Share Agreement.

(4) When an application is deemed sufficient, complete, and eligible, the Applicant shall be advised in writing and a proposed Proportionate Fair-Share obligation and binding Agreement will be prepared by the City or the Applicant with direction from the City and delivered to the appropriate parties for review, including a copy to the FDOT for any proposed Proportionate Fair-Share mitigation on a Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) facility, no later than sixty 60 days from the date at which the Applicant received the notification of a sufficient application and no fewer than fourteen 14 days prior to the City Council meeting when the agreement will be considered.

(5) The City shall notify the Applicant regarding the date of the City Council meeting when the agreement will be considered for final approval. No Proportionate Fair- Share Agreement will be effective until approved by the City Council.

(6) The City shall maintain a consolidated list of all Proportionate Fair-Share Agreements and prepare a biennial report showing all currently valid agreements, agreement approvals and expiration dates, application names, impacted roadway segments and intersections, dollar amounts of improvements, fiscal year the funding of the improvement is anticipated to be used, and cross-references to the applicable transportation facility improvement in the Schedule of Capital Improvements.

3.4.0 Application Fees

Applicants who submit a transportation analysis for formal Concurrency Review by the City of Temple Terrace shall be required to pay an application review fee. The Transportation Concurrency application fee shall be as follows:

Formal Concurrency Review (Exclusive of Transportation Engineering Consultant Fees, if necessary): $600

4.0 Proportionate Fair-Share

4.1.0 Proportionate Fair-Share Program

Consistent with Policy 2.1.6 of the Mobility Element of the Temple Terrace Comprehensive Plan and as required by Section 163.3180, Fla. Stat., the City has implemented a Transportation Concurrency and Proportionate Fair Share Program based on projected Development and a financially feasible plan of long-range improvements through 2025.

The City Council finds that transportation Capacity is a commodity that has a value to both public and private sectors. The City Proportionate Fair Share Program:

(1) Provides a method by which the impacts of Development on transportation facilities can be mitigated by the cooperative efforts of the public and private sectors;

(2) Allows developers to proceed under certain conditions, notwithstanding the failure of Transportation Concurrency, by contributing their Proportionate Fair- Share of the cost of a transportation facility;

(3) Contributes to the provision of adequate public facilities for future growth and promotes a strong commitment to comprehensive facilities planning, thereby reducing the potential for moratoria or unacceptable levels of traffic congestion;

(4) Maximizes the use of public funds for adequate transportation facilities to serve future growth, and may, in certain circumstances, allow the City to expedite transportation improvements by supplementing funds currently allocated for transportation improvements in the Capital Improvements Element (CIE);

(5) Is consistent with Section 163.3180(15)(c), Fla. Stat., and supports policies in the following Objectives of the City of Temple Terrace Comprehensive Plan: Objective 2.1 of the Mobility Element Objective 6.1 of the Future Land Use Element Objective 6.4 of the Future Land Use Element

As such, the City establishes a Proportionate Fair-Share Assessment Program for all collector and arterial roadways, based on the expected costs and transportation benefits of programmed improvements, and the expected impacts of the proposed Development.

4.2.0 Applicability

(1) The Proportionate Fair-Share Program shall apply to all Developments in the Temple Terrace Multimodal Transportation District (TTMTD) regardless of their

ability to satisfy Transportation Concurrency on a transportation facility in the City’s Multimodal Transportation Concurrency Management System (CMS). The Proportionate Fair Share Program does not apply to existing Developments of Regional Impact (DRIs) in the City or to Developments Exempted from Concurrency as provided in Policy 1.1.10 of the Mobility Element and Policy 3.2.9 of the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. At the discretion of the City of Temple Terrace, the Proportionate Fair-Share Program may also apply to Developments outside the TTMTD if they are not able to satisfy Transportation Concurrency on a transportation facility in the City’s Multimodal Transportation Concurrency Management System (CMS). Funds collected as part of the Proportionate Fair-Share Program may be used for transportation improvement projects within the city limits, inside or outside the TTMTD boundary.

4.3.0 General Requirements

(1) An Applicant may choose to satisfy the Transportation Concurrency requirements of the City by making a Proportionate Fair-Share contribution, pursuant to the following requirements:

(a) The proposed Development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and applicable Land Development Regulations; and

(b) The contribution is for a project listed in the five-year Schedule of Capital Improvements in the City of Temple Terrace Capital Improvements Element (CIE) or the long-term Schedule of Capital Improvements that, upon completion, will satisfy the requirements of the City’s multimodal transportation CMS. The provisions of subsection (2) below may apply if a project or projects needed to satisfy Concurrency are not presently contained within the local government CIE or an adopted long-term Schedule of Capital Improvements.

(2) The City may choose to allow an Applicant to satisfy Transportation Concurrency through the Proportionate Fair-Share Program by contributing to an improvement that, upon completion, will satisfy the requirements of the City multimodal transportation CMS, but is not contained in the five-year Schedule of Capital Improvements in the CIE or the long-term Schedule of Capital Improvements outlined in Appendix A, where the following apply:

(a) The City adopts, by resolution or ordinance, a commitment to add the Improvement to the five-year Schedule of Capital Improvements in the CIE or the long-term Schedule of Capital Improvements shown in Appendix A no later than the next regularly scheduled update. To qualify for consideration under this section, the proposed improvement must be reviewed by the City Council, and determined to be financially feasible pursuant to Section 163.3180(15)(c), Fla. Stat., consistent with the

comprehensive plan, and in compliance with the provisions of this ordinance.

(b) If the funds allocated for the five-year Schedule of Capital Improvements in the CIE are insufficient to fully fund construction of a transportation improvement required by the Concurrency Management System, the City may still enter into a binding Proportionate Fair-Share Agreement with the Applicant authorizing construction of that amount of Development on which the Proportionate Fair-Share is calculated if the proportionate fair share amount in such agreement is sufficient to pay for one or more improvements which will, in the opinion of the governmental entity or entities maintaining the transportation facilities, significantly benefit the impacted transportation system. To qualify for consideration under this Section, the proposed improvements must be contained in a financially feasible five-year or long- term plan or program adopted by the City, Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), FDOT and/or a local or regional transit agency.

(c) Proposed improvements not reflected in an adopted plan or improvement program, but that would significantly reduce access problems and increase mobility by addressing congestion or trips on a major transportation corridor, including but not limited to new or improved roads, service roads, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, improved network development and connectivity, transit facilities and/or operations, ridesharing programs and trip reduction measures, or a combination thereof, may be considered at the discretion of the City. The improvements funded by the Proportionate Fair- Share component must be adopted into the five-year Capital Improvements Schedule of the Comprehensive Plan at the next annual Capital Improvements Element update or be contained in the long term Schedule of Capital Improvements outlined in Appendix A.

(3) If the proposed Development is not located within the TTMTD and there is not adequate available Capacity in the facilities, the developer may choose to delay the project until Capacity becomes available, mitigate for any deficiencies in the facilities, or participate in the Proportionate Fair-Share Program.

(4) Any improvement project proposed to meet the developer’s fair-share obligation must meet design standards of the City or County for locally maintained roadways and those of the FDOT for the state highway system.

4.4.0 Intergovernmental Coordination

Pursuant to Policy 2.1.20 of the Mobility Element and policies in the Intergovernmental Coordination Element of the City of Temple Terrace Comprehensive Plan, as well as applicable policies in Tampa Bay Regional

Planning Council Strategic Regional Policy Plan (SRPP), the City shall coordinate with FDOT regarding mitigation to impacted state facilities.

4.5.0 Determining Proportionate Fair Share Obligation

(1) TTMTD Proportionate Fair Share mitigation for Concurrency impacts may include, without limitation, separately or collectively, private funds, contributions of land, construction and contribution of facilities, and funding of transit or rideshare vehicles and/or operations, provided that the City determines that the proposed mitigation adequately addresses transportation Demands generated by the proposed Development by maintaining or achieving adopted Levels of Service for within the TTMTD.

(2) For proposed Development occurring outside the TTMTD boundary, Proportionate Fair Share mitigation must maintain the adopted Levels of Service for all roadways not included in the TTMTD boundary. Mitigation may include, but not limited to roadway improvements such as addition of turn lanes, travel lanes, installation of traffic signals, etc.

(3) A Development shall not be required to pay more than its Proportionate Fair- Share. The fair market value of the Proportionate Fair-Share mitigation for the impacted facilities shall not differ regardless of the method of mitigation. A Development’s required Proportionate Fair-Share shall be calculated pursuant to this Section.

(4) Proportionate Fair-Share mitigation for Concurrency impacts may include, without limitation, separately or collectively, private funds, contributions of land, construction and contribution of facilities, and funding of transit or rideshare vehicles and/or operations, provided that the City determines that the proposed mitigation adequately addresses transportation Demands generated by the proposed Development, lying within TTMTD or outside the TTMTD boundary, by maintaining or achieving adopted Levels of Service.

(a) Proportionate Fair-Share inside the TTMTD shall be calculated as follows:

Proportionate Fair-Share inside TTMTD= [(Total Development Trips) / (Total TTMTD Trips)] X Cost

Definitions for terms listed above. Development Trips = The total number of net new person trips, after accounting for internal capture and pass-by credits;

Total TTMTD Trips = The total number of net new person trips for the TTMTD in 2030 based upon a reasonable build-out analysis,

Cost = Adjusted cost of the needed mobility improvements within the TTMTD accounting for inflation, using the factors shown in Appendix B.

(b) Proportionate Fair-Share outside the TTMTD shall be calculated as follows:

Proportionate Fair-Share outside TTMTD = (Cost of Improvement X Project Trips) / Increase in Service Volume

Definitions for terms listed above. Cost of Improvement = Cost of construction, at the time of developer payment, of an improvement necessary to maintain the adopted Level of Service. Construction costs includes all improvement associated costs, including engineering design, right of way acquisition, planning, engineering, inspection, and other associated physical Development costs directly required and associated with the construction of the improvement, as determined by the government agency having maintenance authority over the roadway.

Project Trips = Person trips from the stage or phase of the project under review that are assigned to a roadway segment and have triggered a deficiency based upon comparison to the adopted LOS.

Increase in Service Volume = The change in peak hour Maximum Service Volume of the roadway resulting from construction of the improvement necessary to maintain the adopted Level of Service.

(5) For the purposes of determining Proportionate Fair-Share obligations, the City shall determine improvement costs based upon the information contained in Appendix A.

(6) Mobility improvements shall include all roadway, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit improvements needed to ensure mobility as outlined in Appendix A. Costs shall include all improvements and associated costs, such as design, right-of-way acquisition, planning, engineering, inspection, stormwater facilities, turn lanes, traffic control devices, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities, and physical development costs directly associated with construction. Costs will be calculated based on the anticipated cost in the year it will be incurred, consistent with inflation factors shown in Appendix B.

(7) If the City has accepted an alternative improvement project proposed by the Applicant, then the value of the improvement shall be determined using one of the methods provided below:

(a) An analysis by the City of costs by cross-section type that incorporates data from recent projects and is updated annually and approved by the

City Council or appropriate entity. In order to accommodate increases in construction material costs, projected improvement costs shall be adjusted by the inflation factors shown in Appendix B; or the average annual rate of increase in the Construction Cost Index over the three years preceding execution of the Proportionate Fair-Share Agreement; or

(b) The most recent issue of FDOT Transportation Costs, as adjusted based upon the type of cross-section (urban or rural); locally available data from recent projects on land acquisition, drainage, and utility costs; and significant changes in the cost of materials due to unforeseeable events. Cost estimates for state road improvements not included in the adopted FDOT Work Program shall be determined using this method in coordination with FDOT District Seven.

(8) If the City has accepted right-of-way dedication for the Proportionate Fair-Share payment, credit for the dedication of the non-site related right-of-way shall be valued on the date of the dedication at 120% of the most recent assessed value by the Hillsborough County property appraiser or, at the option of the Applicant, by fair market value established by an independent appraisal approved by the City at no expense to the City. The Applicant shall supply a drawing and legal description of the land and a certificate of title or title search of the land to the City at no expense to the City. If the estimated value of the right-of-way dedication proposed by the Applicant is less than the City estimated total Proportionate Fair-Share obligation for that Development, then the Applicant must also pay the difference. Prior to purchase or acquisition of any real estate or acceptance of donations of real estate intended to be used for the Proportionate Fair-Share, public or private partners should contact the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) for essential information about compliance with federal law and regulations.

4.6.0 Execution of Proportionate Fair Share Agreement

(1) Upon execution of a Proportionate Fair-Share Agreement the Applicant shall receive a City Certificate of Concurrency approval. Should the Applicant fail to apply for a building permit within six (6) months or the timeframe provided in the execution of the Agreement, then the Agreement shall be considered null and void, and the Applicant shall be required to reapply.

(2) Payment of the Proportionate Fair-Share contribution is due in full prior to issuance of the infrastructure or building permit or as set forth in a Development Agreement or recording of the final plat and shall be nonrefundable.

(3) Dedication of necessary right-of-way for facility improvements pursuant to a Proportionate Fair-Share Agreement must be completed prior to issuance of the

infrastructure or building permit, recording of the final plat, or other final Development Order.

(4) Any requested change to a Development project subsequent to a Development Order may be subject to additional Proportionate Fair-Share contributions to the extent the change would generate additional traffic that would require mitigation.

(5) Applicants may submit a letter to withdraw from the Proportionate Fair-Share Agreement at any time prior to the execution of the Agreement. The application fee and any associated advertising costs to the City will be nonrefundable.

4.7.0 Appropriation of Fair-Share Revenues

(1) Proportionate Fair-Share revenues shall be placed in the appropriate project account for funding of scheduled improvements in the CIE, or as otherwise established in the terms of the Proportionate Fair-Share Agreement. Proportionate Fair-Share revenues may also be used as the 50% local match for funding under the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Transportation Regional Incentive Program (TRIP).

(2) In the event a scheduled facility improvement is removed from the CIE or the Multimodal Transportation Improvement list contained in Appendix A, then the revenues collected for its construction may be applied toward the construction of another improvement within the TTMTD that would mitigate the impacts of the Development.

(3) Where an impacted regional facility has been designated as a regionally significant transportation facility in an adopted regional transportation plan as provided in Section 339.155, Fla. Stat., then the City may coordinate with other impacted jurisdictions and agencies to apply Proportionate Fair-Share contributions and public contributions to seek funding for improving the impacted regional facility under the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Transportation Regional Incentive Program (TRIP). Such coordination shall be ratified by the City through an interlocal agreement that establishes a procedure for earmarking of the developer contributions for this purpose.

5.0 Miscellaneous Provisions

5.1.0 Appeals

Should an appeal be necessary, it shall be submitted, to the City Manager within ten (10) business days of the determination or decision being appealed. The City Manager shall: (a) affirm the decision; (b) remand the matter to the appropriate agency for further proceedings; or (c) reverse the decision within fifteen (15) business days of receipt of the appeal by the City.

Should a further appeal be necessary, it shall be submitted, to the City Clerk within thirty (30) business days of the determination of the City Manager. Appeals shall be heard by the Temple Terrace City Council on the earliest available agenda following the submittal of the written request to City Council. The Applicant also shall have the opportunity to present the reason for appeal and evidence in support of the appeal to the City Council. The Temple Terrace City Council shall: (a) affirm the decision of the City Manager; (b) remand the matter to the City Manager for further proceedings; or (c) reverse the decision. Decisions of the Temple Terrace City Council may be challenged in a court of competent jurisdiction in accordance with applicable law.

5.2.0 Development Agreements

Development Agreements shall be developed, between the Applicant and the City Manager, based upon the individual needs of the Development and will be submitted to the City Council for final approval. These agreements may be, but are not required to be, defined as 163 Development Agreements as described in Section 163.3227, Fla. Stat.

Appendix A Multimodal Transportation Improvements Summary

APPENDIX A: 10 YEAR LONG-TERM SCHEDULE OF CAPITAL AND SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS FOR MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT L.O.S. STANDARDS

Total Cost Project # Years Annual Cost Estimate Fund per CIP FY 15-16 FY 16-17 FY 17-18 FY 18-19 FY 19-20 2021-2030 Transit Network Projects [1] *Transit Service on Busch Blvd, Fowler Ave, Ad valorem to 56th St, and (north of Fowler Ave) 50th St $677,540 $10,163,100 $677,540 $677,540 $677,540 $677,540 $677,540 $6,775,400 HART (Routes 6, 39, 57, 23X) [2] Temple Terrace Flex Route, Demand- $486,158 $4,861,580 Mobility Fee $4,861,580 Responsive Circulator Service [3] Capital Impprovements for MetroRapid East- $5,556,000 Mobility Fee $5,556,000 West Route (Temple Terrace only) [4] Route 57 - 30 Minute Frequency on Weekdays $4,595,225 Mobility Fee $1,610,515 $2,984,710

Temple Terrace Park and Ride Lot $4,000,000 Mobility Fee $4,000,000

Route 39 ‐ 20/30 weekday frequency $5,535,810 Mobility Fee $2,253,740 $3,282,070

Route 57 ‐ Sunday Service $729,235 Mobility Fee $729,235

$10,163,100 Ad valorem $25,277,850 Mobility Fee $0 CIT $35,440,950 Total Street Connectivity Projects [6] Pleasant Terrace Phase 2 $150,000 Gas tax 33-683 $150,000 Pavement Management Plan/Structural Resurfacing Projects $1,500,000 Gas tax 33-xxx $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 Miscellaneous Pavement Marking/Signage $150,000 Gas tax 33-xxx $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 Sleepy Hollow area $432,000 Gas tax 33-722 $432,000 South of Bullard Area $806,000 Gas tax 33-723 $197,000 $609,000 $3,038,000 Gas tax Sidewalks [7,8] North Side of Riverhills, Glen Arven to Sunnyside $37,000 Gas tax $37,000 East Side of Sunnyside, Riverhills to Fern Cliff $4,500 Gas tax $4,500 North Side of Belle Terre, Sunningdale to Ridgedale $19,960 Gas tax $19,960 Both Sides of Broxburn, West River to Riverhills Park $6,140 Gas tax $6,140 West Side of Montrose, Bannockburn to Riverhills $25,510 Gas tax $25,510 West Side of Belle Meade, West River to East River and East River, $35,900 Gas tax 34-637a $35,900 Richlyne, Whiteway to Tennis Court $4,600 Gas tax $4,600 Sidewalks, Ramps, Curbs, & ADA Transition Plan $250,000 Gas tax 34-659 $100,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 61st Street, Liberty to 112th Ave $12,400 Gas tax $12,400 112th Ave, 61st Street to 63rd Street $17,715 Gas tax $17,715 *78th St, Harney to Temple Terrace Hwy $70,000 Gas tax 34-670 $70,000 St. Augustine, Sunnyside to Pinehurst $173,120 Gas tax $173,120 Riverhills, Glen Arven to Vanderbaker $142,825 Gas tax $142,825 Vanderbaker, Riverhills to East River $151,480 Gas tax $151,480 West River, Vanderbaker to Broxburn $203,415 Gas tax $203,415 Mission Hills, 53rd St to 55th St $47,610 Gas tax $47,610 Glen Arven, Bannockburn to North Riverhills $190,430 Gas tax $190,430 Sleepy Hollow, Glen Arven to Bannockburn $86,560 Gas tax $86,560 Serena Drive, 52nd St to 56th St $108,650 Gas tax $108,650 *Gillette, Fowler to N City Limits $43,280 Gas tax $43,280 *56th St, Fowler to Fletcher, east side $398,300 Gas tax $398,300 *56th St, Fowler to Fletcher, west side, including channelized $1,798,425 Gas tax $1,798,425 *Fletcher Ave, 52nd St to Morris Bridge Rd $851,830 Gas tax $851,830 *Fowler Ave, Riverhills to E City Limits, both sides $650,550 Gas tax $650,550 *Gadsden, Okeechobee to Renald $21,640 Gas tax $21,640 Morris Bridge Road, Davis Rd to Extended Stay Hotel, west/south $175,000 Grants & other $175,000 side revenue $5,351,840 Gas tax $175,000 Grants & other revenue Pedestrian Enhancement Corridors Grove Hill Rd, 56th St to W City Limits $590,500 Grants & other $590,500 revenue $590,500 Grants & other revenue Pedestrian Crossings of Major Roads [9] Signalization as intersection of Grovehill and 56th Street $250,000 Gas tax 30-103 $250,000 *Fowler/ Morris Bridge Rd Intersection $118,100 Gas tax $118,100 *56th St/ Whiteway Intersection (including Golf Cart crossing) $93,990 Gas tax $93,990 *56th St/ Fletcher Intersection $33,165 Gas tax $33,165 *56th St/ 127th Ave Intersection & Pedestrian Signal $400,250 Gas tax $400,250 *Temple Terrace Hwy/ 78th St Intersection & Pedestrian Signal $350,050 Gas tax $350,050 *Traffic Signal at Busch and Overlook $300,000 Gas tax 30-005 $300,000 $1,545,555 Gas tax Multi-Use Trails [10,11] *Temple Terrace Trail, from Temple Terrace Hwy to Hillsborough $1,618,265 Grants & other $1,618,265 River revenue *Temple Terrace Trail Bridge over Hillsborough River $1,653,400 Grants & other $1,653,400 revenue North-South Trail from Arbor Isle to Temple Terrace Trail (TECO $72,680 Gas tax $72,680 *North-South Trail (Gillette Ave ext.) Bridge over Hillsborough River $885,750 Grants & other $885,750 revenue

Calculating a Mobility Fee Contribution (inside the TTMTD) Total Cost of Multimodal Long-Term Improvement Program $52,379,465 Vehicle Trips Generated in Temple Terrace TAZ’s, 2030 270,400 Multimodal Cost Per Trip (Daily Trips) $194

Fair Share of Existing Development Vehicle Trips Generated in Temple Terrace TAZ’s, 2015* 237,319 Total Cost of Trips Generated By Existing Development $45,971,310 Total Cost of Trips Generated By New Development $6,408,155

Sample Calculation for New Single Family Residential Development Proposal: 100 single family units (ITE 210) Net new external daily vehicle trips** 952 Net new external daily person trips*** 1190 Proportionate share of multimodal program $230,516

Sample Calculation for New Multi-Family Residential Development Proposal: 300 aparments (ITE 220) Net new external daily vehicle trips** 1995 Net new external daily person trips*** 2494 Proportionate share of multimodal program $483,067

Sample Calculation for New Retail Development Proposal: 75,000 s.f. shopping center (ITE 820) Net new external daily vehicle trips** (34% retail pass-by reduction) 2114 Net new external daily person trips*** 2643 Proportionate share of multimodal program $511,881

Sample Calculation for New Mixed-Use Development Proposal: 250 apartments (ITE 220), 150 room hotel (ITE 310), 50,000 s.f. retail (ITE 820) Net new external daily vehicle trips** (10% internal capture & 34% retail pass-by reduction) 3506 Net new external daily person trips*** 4383 Proportionate share of multimodal program $848,939

* Estimated using the adopted Tampa Bay Regional Planning Model. 2015 trips estimated based on assumption of constant growth on average from 2010 to 2030. ** Based on average trip rates from ITE Trip Generation, 9th Edition *** Estimated using average auto occupancy rates from the adopted Tampa Bay Regional Planning Model Hillsborough Metropolitan Planning Organization

601 E Kennedy Boulevard, 18th floor, Tampa, Florida, 33601 · 813-272-5940 · planhillsborough.org

Committee Agenda Item

Agenda Item: Florida & Tampa/Highland Corridor Study

Presenter: Gena Torres, MPO Staff Summary: At the City of Tampa’s request and working closely with FDOT, the MPO has kicked off a study to evaluate various design options for the one way pairs of Florida Avenue and Tampa/Highland Street. The study area is roughly from I-275 north to Hillsborough Avenue. The evaluation of the alternatives will include how each provides safe access between Downtown and surrounding neighborhoods for transit users, walkers and cyclists; how the corridors would function as a “main street” and commercial district; if the alternatives allow them to continue to function as a regional transportation corridor; and how well the configurations contribute to the City’s public realm.

A project advisory group of local and state representatives have reviewed the evaluation criteria and at the end of July 2015 will look over an Existing Conditions memo that includes, among other things, current and future volumes. Stay tuned for more on this exciting project when the alternatives are identified and an evaluation of each is conducted. The study plans to be wrapped up by the end of October 2015.

Recommended None; for information only. Action:

Prepared By: Gena Torres Attachments: None

Hillsborough Metropolitan Planning Organization

601 E Kennedy Boulevard, 18th floor, Tampa, Florida, 33601 · 813-272-5940 · planhillsborough.org

Committee Agenda Item

Agenda Item: Vulnerability Assessment on the Innovations Television Series

Presenter: VIDEO Summary: The MPO’s Federal Highway Administration Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation Pilot Project was recently featured as a part of Innovations, an award-winning television series hosted by Ed Begley, Jr. The segment explores innovative approaches to extreme weather risk and resilience in the transportation sector. The full program can be viewed at: http://innovationstelevision.com/videos/

The MPO Pilot Project report is available on the MPO website: http://www.planhillsborough.org/hillsborough-transportation- vulnerability-assessment-pilot-project/

Recommended None; for information only. Action:

Prepared By: Allison Yeh, AICP, LEED GA Attachments: None

Transit Development Plan OPEN HOUSE

The HART Transit Development Plan (TDP) is a plan to serve the mobility needs of residents, employees and visitors. It also guides the allocation of funding to transit services and projects that are most needed. Your ideas are key to this planning process. Join HART at an open house, and let us know if we are on the right path. SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS OPEN HOUSE

Thursday, July 23, 2015 • 5 pm - 7 pm Wednesday, August 5, 2015 • 11 am - 2 pm Brandon Chamber of Commerce Mayor’s Food Truck Fiesta 330 Pauls Dr. in Brandon Lykes Gaslight Park, in Downtown Tampa Tuesday, July 28, 2015 • 5 pm - 7 pm Tuesday, August 11, 2015 • 5 pm - 7 pm Ragan Park Community Center New Tampa Community Center 1200 E. Lake Ave. in Tampa 17302 Commerce Park Blvd. in Tampa Thursday, July 30, 2015 • 5 pm - 7 pm Thursday, August 13, 2015 • 3 pm - 6 pm Cordelia B. Hunt Community Center University Area Transit Center 4810 N. Himes Avenue in Tampa 13110 N. 27th St. in Tampa Monday, August 3, 2015 • 9 am - Noon Thursday, August 27, 2015 • 4 pm - 7 pm Greater Temple Terrace Chamber of SouthShore Regional Service Center Commerce at the Bank of America Building 410 30th St. S.E. in Ruskin 9385 North 56th St. in Temple Terrace September 4-6, 2015 • 11 am - 3 pm Tuesday, August 4, 2015 • 5 pm - 7 pm Tampa Home Show - Florida State Fairgrounds Town ‘N Country Regional Public Library 4800 US Hwy. 301 N. in Tampa 7606 Paula Dr., #120 in Tampa TDP Comments [email protected] • (813) 563-8707 • www.facebook.com/HillsboroughTransit • www.twitter.com/goHART

In Coordination with Join the conversation...

Florida Transportation Plan Strategic Intermodal System Policy Plan

Tuesday, August 11, 2015 Regional Workshops Panama City Gulf Coast State College Florida’s transportation system Student Union East Conference Room supports the nation’s 4th largest 5230 West U.S. 98 rd Panama City, FL 32401 economy and 3 largest 1:30 PM - 4:30 PM population, provides 540,000 jobs, • Wednesday, August 26, 2015 and directly affects our daily lives. Vero Beach In previous workshops, we have Indian River State College - Mueller Campus asked ‘where do we want to go?’ Richardson Center It’s now time to talk about 6155 College Lane Vero Beach, FL 32966 how we get there. 1:30 PM - 4:30 PM • Tuesday, September 1, 2015 Please join us to share your Miami thoughts about Florida’s FDOT District 6 Auditorium long-range transportation policy, 1000 N.W. 111 Avenue Miami, Florida 33172 goals, and objectives. 1:30 PM - 4:30 PM • Wednesday, September 2, 2015 Hosted by Tampa FDOT District 7 Auditorium 11201 N. Malcolm McKinley Drive Tampa, Florida 33612 1:30 PM - 4:30 PM

For more information and to register: www.FloridaTransportationPlan.com FTP SIS Florida Transportation Plan Strategic Intermodal System

Public participation is solicited without regard to race, color, national origin, age, sex, religion, disability, or family status. Persons who require special accommodations under the American with Disabilities Act or persons who require translation services (free of charge) should contact Paula San Gregorio at Toll Free 1-866-374-3368, extension 4800 or 850-414-4811 at least seven days prior to the meeting.