Public Hearings D10, E11, F12 March 26, 2013

1. Board of County Commissioners Public Hearings D10, E11, F12 March 26, 2013

2. Today’s Public Hearings

3. Board of County Commissioners 2013-1-C-TRAN-2 Adoption Public Hearing March 26, 2013

4. Presentation Outline • Background • Request • Analysis • Action Requested

5. Presentation Outline • Background • Request • Analysis • Action Requested

6. Background • 2009 Comprehensive Plan Update • Established Alternative Mobility Area (AMA) – transportation concurrency exception area • Established policies for projects that promote public transportation • Today’s request is to update these policies

7. Presentation Outline • Background • Request • Analysis • Action Requested

8. Request

9. Presentation Outline • Background • Request • Analysis • Action Requested

10. 2013-1-C-TRAN-2Analysis • Projects That Promote Public Transportation • Amends Objective T2.8 and associated policies • Promotes projects that directly affect public transit facilities, including Transit Oriented Development (TOD) projects

11. 2013-1-C-TRAN-2Analysis • Alternative Mobility Area • Amends Transportation Objective T2.3 and associated policies (AMA) • Clarifies transportation • study requirements • Deletes requirement for • individual mobility plans/ • mobility strategies • Reflects Transportation • Impact Fee update and • County’s regulatory • streamlining

12. 2013-1-C-TRAN-2Analysis • Alternative Mobility Area • Deletes language regarding Planning Context Assessment Study and mitigation strategies • Off-Site • intersection improvements • bus shelters • sidewalks • bicycle lanes • trails • On-Site • pedestrian walkways • pedestrian-scale lighting • bicycle parking Transportation Impact Fee Update Chapter 38, Code (Public Hearing F.12)

13. Presentation Outline • Background • Request • Analysis • Action Requested

14. Action Requested Staff Recommendation: Adopt LPA Recommendation: Adopt Make a finding of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan; Determine that the amendment is in compliance; and ADOPT Amendment 2013-1-C-TRAN-2, text amendments to the Transportation Element, and an Ordinance – consistent with today’s actions – approving the proposed Comprehensive Plan text amendments.

15. Board of County Commissioners 2013-1-C-TRAN-1 TransmittalPublic Hearing March 26, 2013

16. Presentation Outline • Background • Request • Analysis • Action Requested

17. Presentation Outline • Background • Request • Analysis • Action Requested

18. Background • 2013-1-C-TRAN-1 – Transmittal • Addresses challenges in funding and advancing large scale capital projects • Cleans up concurrency policies after 2011’s HB 7207 • Future Chapter 30 (Concurrency) amendments are anticipated to follow • May 2013 – CRC, AMA, proportionate share • Late 2013 – Overall update for all concurrency services

19. Presentation Outline • Background • Request • Analysis • Action Requested

20. Request

21. Presentation Outline • Background • Request • Analysis • Action Requested

22. 2013-1-C-TRAN-1Analysis • Revises Transportation Element policies to update levels of service and policies relating to constrained, backlogged, and Long-Term Transportation Concurrency Management System (LTTCMS) roadways • Updates Capital Improvements Element policies addressing impact fees and concurrency

23. Presentation Outline • Background • Request • Analysis • Action Requested

24. Action Requested Staff Recommendation: Transmit LPA Recommendation: Transmit Make a finding of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan; Determine that the amendment is in compliance; and TRANSMITAmendment 2013-1-C-TRAN-1, text amendments to the Transportation Element and Capital Improvements Element related to transportation capacity, transportation concurrency, and impact fees

25. Board of County Commissioners Chapter 38 Code Changes For Pedestrian/Bicycle Standards And the Alternative Mobility Area Ordinance Public Hearing March 26, 2013

26. Presentation Outline • Background • Request • Analysis • Action Requested

27. Presentation Outline • Background • Request • Analysis • Action Requested

28. Background • Chapter 38 Code – Adoption • Supports multi-modal development within AMA • Pedestrian walkways • Pedestrian-scale lighting • Bicycle parking

29. Background • Proposing new/revised pedestrian circulation and bicycle parking standards • Would apply countywide and in the Alternative Mobility Area (AMA) • Ordinance affects PD, P-O, C-1, C-2 and C-3 zoning districts • Developed with Zoning, Transportation • Planning, Building, Planning, and Legal • staff

30. Background • Proposed standards would apply to new development and redevelopment, if commercial site plan required • For existing development, new standards would apply to building additions, building expansions, other site development • Would not apply to change of use • or interior alterations

31. Presentation Outline • Background • Request • Analysis • Action Requested

32. Request Pedestrian Circulation (Sec. 38-808, 38-833, 38-858, 38-883, and 38-1235, OCC) Clarifying standards countywide for pedestrian connections in commercial and office districts For PDs, removing “where appropriate/practicable” from existing standards PD could request waivers from DRC For the AMA, would require pedestrian-scale lighting and connections between adjacent commercial/office, if physical conditions permit

33. Request Bicycle Parking—Countywide(Sec. 38-1484 and 38-1485, OCC) Changes would require 2 bicycle parking spaces, if fewer than 10 vehicle spaces required Maximum of 8 required bicycle spaces—no maximum in PDs Standards for equipment and installation of bicycle racks

34. Request Bicycle Parking—AMA(Sec. 38-1484 and 38-1485, OCC) Changes would require 2 bicycle parking spaces, if fewer than 10 vehicle spaces required Maximum of 12 required bicycle spaces—no maximum in PDs

35. Presentation Outline • Background • Request • Analysis • Action Requested

36. Analysis If Changes are Proposed to Existing Development Staff reviews site plan to determine if it has: • Crosswalks/pavement markings in parking areas; • Adequate landscaping along sidewalks; and • Enough bike parking (would require minimum of one rack).

37. Analysis If Changes are Proposed to Existing Development in the AMA Staff reviews site plan to determine if it has: • Ability to make additional pedestrian connections or if “prevented by physical limitations;” • Additional cross-access where practicable on parcels over 660’ deep; • Adequate pedestrian-scale lighting; and • Enough bike parking (would require minimum of one rack).

38. Analysis • Consistency of Proposed Ordinance • Goal T1: A safe, convenient, efficient and financially feasible multimodal system which minimizes environmental impacts • Obj T2.3: Establishment of the AMA to promote infill development, redevelopment, and public transportation • Policy T2.3.1: Development and redevelopment in the AMA supporting alternative modes of transportation

39. Presentation Outline • Background • Request • Analysis • Action Requested

40. Action Requested Revision Staff is recommending deletion of the following in the Feb. 4th draft:  • “Bricks or pavers may edge walkways but shall not be used to construct the five (5) foot primary surface of the pedestrian walkway.” This draft language would be deleted in the following locations: • pg. 2, lines 50-52 (for the P-O district); • pg. 4, lines 118-20 (for the C-1 district); • pg. 6, lines 187-89 (for the C-2 district); and • pg. 8, lines 257-59 (for the C-3 district). 

41. Action Requested Staff Recommendation: Adopt LPA Recommendation: Adopt Ordinance Make of finding of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan and adopt an Ordinance – as amended consistent with today’s actions – approving the proposed Code Amendments.

42. Board of County Commissioners Chapter 38 Code Changes For Pedestrian/Bicycle Standards And the Alternative Mobility Area Ordinance Public Hearing March 26, 2013