Complete Street Boards 1_2 (Read-Only)

COMPLETE STREETS
What is a “Complete Street”?
What do Complete Street policies do?
Complete Streets are streets for everyone. They are
designed and operated to enable safe access for
pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and public
transporta on users of all ages and abili es.
Complete Streets make it easier to cross the street,
walk to shops, and bicycle to work. They allow
buses to run on me and make it safer for people
to walk throughout the city.
Are there many types of Complete Streets?
There is no single design applica on for Complete
Streets; each one is unique and responds to its
community context. A Complete Street in a
suburban neighborhood looks very different from
one in an urban downtown. The common theme of
all Complete Streets is that they address the
mobility needs of all users.
What do different Complete Streets look like?
How are Complete Streets being considered
in the Citywide Mobility Plan?
The Citywide Mobility Plan is upda ng the City’s
Engineering Design Criteria Manual (EDCM) to
consider Complete Street cross‐sec ons that
complement the surrounding land use pa erns and
mobility goals of various areas within the city.
Suburban—Tampa, Florida
 Center
turn lanes/medians
 Bicycle
paths and sidewalks
General Urban—Charlo e,
North Carolina
Urban Core—Brooklyn, New York
 Balanced
 On‐street
 Limited
approach for all modes
right‐of‐way
 High
concentra on of residen al
 Priority
parking
for bicycles, pedestrians,
and parking
COMPLETE STREET CONTEXT AREAS
What is the City’s current Complete Street
policy?
Requirements for Complete Streets are
documented in the City’s Engineering Design
Criteria Manual (EDCM).
Prior to the Citywide Mobility Plan, specific
Complete Street cross‐sec ons were developed for
“Type A” streets within only the downtown area.
The Complete Street component of the Citywide
Mobility Plan complements the exis ng downtown
Type A street cross‐sec ons by developing cross‐
sec ons for Type B streets in the downtown, as
well as Complete Streets cross‐sec ons for the
remaining areas of the city (iden fied as Complete
Street Context Areas in the map to the right).
How do the Complete Context Areas relate
to the Mobility Districts?
The Complete Street Context Areas, and
subsequent cross‐sec ons developed for each
context area, align with the mobility goals of each
mobility district.
Rela onship Between Mobility Districts and
Complete Street Context Areas
Mobility District Type
Downtown Core
Complete Street Context Area
Urban Core (T‐6)
Town Center
Neighborhood Center
Urban Center (T‐5)
Mobility Enhancement Center
Downtown Edge
Urban Neighborhood
General Urban (T‐4)
Mobility Enhancement Corridor
Single‐Use Area
Suburban (T‐3)
N/A
Industrial
HOW DOES DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTE?
Citywide Mul modal Fee
Improvements funded with a road impact fee
What is an impact fee?
An impact fee is a one‐ me fee new development pays to cover the cost of its impact
to public infrastructure, such as roads, schools, parks, fire, and police. Impact fees can
be used only to expand capital facili es; they cannot be used for replacement of
exis ng infrastructure or to fund maintenance/opera onal expenses.
Sarasota County currently administers a road impact fee that new development within
the city pays based on its an cipated impact to the road network. Under the exis ng
structure, road impact fee revenue that is collected may be spent only to construct
new roads or expand exis ng roads.
Projects that construct new roads or that add travel capacity (such as road expansion
or roundabouts) are eligible road impact fee expenditures.
Improvements funded with a mulƟmodal impact fee
Why is a mulƟmodal fee being proposed?
As part of the Citywide Mobility Plan and in conjunc on with Sarasota County, the City
is examining the feasibility of conver ng the road impact fee currently collected
within the city limits to a mul modal fee.
A mul modal fee differs from a road impact fee in that a mul modal fee considers the
impact that new development places on bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facili es, in
addi on to roads. While the fee levels of a mul modal fee are generally consistent
with those of a road impact fee, the conversion allows more flexibility in how the
revenue can be spent.
Mul modal fee revenues are a tool to help make Complete Streets, since mul modal
impact fee revenue can be spent on mul modal transporta on improvements for
roadways, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facili es.
In addi on to road expansion projects, mul modal fee revenue can be used to
construct new bicycle lanes, sidewalks, and transit facili es (for example, shelters),
as well as to purchase new buses.
Improvements not funded with impact fees
Transporta on facility maintenance, such as road resurfacing, or
landscaping cannot be funded with impact fees, as these types of
projects do not add capacity to the mul modal transporta on
system.
HOW DOES DEVELOPMENT CONTRIBUTE?
Assessment of Development Impacts
How are development impacts currently assessed?
What do small, medium, and large projects look like?
Large‐Scale Project—Former Proscenium Site
As with many ci es and coun es in Florida, the City of Sarasota has a transporta on
concurrency process in which a technical study is required to quan fy the impacts of a
proposed development’s traffic on the city’s road network. This technical study is used to
determine if, upon approval, traffic generated by the development will reduce the level of
service on impacted roadways below their adopted standards.
If traffic from a proposed development will cause impacts to the exis ng road network,
the cost of needed improvements is determined and the development’s “propor onate
share” of the cost is calculated.
Large‐scale projects, such as Proscenium, would be
required to analyze roadway opera onal condi ons
in their vicinity and contribute to short‐term needs
related to their impacts.
Medium‐Scale Project—Broadway Promenade
What changes are being proposed?
Under the current process, developments of all sizes (unless extremely small and referred
to as “de minimis”) must undergo a technical study that quan fies their projected
impacts to the road network. These studies add cost and me to the development
approval process. Under the Citywide Mobility Plan, it is proposed that modifica ons be
made to the thresholds for which a technical study is required so that only large‐scale
projects are required to conduct a technical traffic study. The thresholds are proposed to
vary by mobility district to recognize the varying mul modal poten al and development
scale desired within different areas of the city.
Small‐ and medium‐size projects that generate trips lower than the threshold would
mi gate their impacts by paying a mul modal transporta on impact fee and addressing
site access and site design requirements. In addi on to these requirements, larger‐scale
developments would be required to analyze roadway opera onal condi ons in their
vicinity and contribute to short‐term needs related to their impacts.
Medium–scale projects, such as Broadway
Promenade, would fall below the threshold for
requiring a technical study in certain mobility
districts where compact mixed‐use development is
desired.
Small‐Scale Project—Citrus Square
Small–scale projects, such as Citrus Square, would
mi gate their impacts by paying a mul modal
transporta on impact fee so long as the
development addresses its site access and
site design requirements and meets all
other land use and zoning regula ons.
GROWTH AND PUBLIC SERVICES
How does density impact public services?
Public Schools: The need for
new schools is dependent on
the demographics of growth
but, generally, addi onal
school capacity is expected
as popula on growth occurs.
Higher density does not
effect the cost of building
and staffing schools, but does
reduce bus transporta on
costs by making bike and
pedestrian access to school
feasible for more students. UƟliƟes: As a rule, higher
densi es increase the
u liza on of exis ng u lity
infrastructure, thereby
reducing pro rata costs.
The efficiency of storm
water, potable water, and
sewer infrastructure
generally increases with
density since the cost of
these facili es are driven by
impervious surface and the
linear cost of water and
sewer lines. Fire ProtecƟon: Response
me for fire protec on is
generally a func on of
distance. As such, higher
densi es within the same
coverage area increases the
u liza on of exis ng fire
facili es and staff without
impac ng response me,
resul ng in rela vely lower
pro‐rata costs. Addi onal
fire facili es may be
needed depending on
where growth occurs.
TransportaƟon System:
Higher densi es generally
increases automobile
conges on levels, especially
when the cost of urban right‐
of‐way makes roadway
widening cost‐prohibi ve.
However, higher densi es
o en reduce the distance
people need to drive and
increase the effec veness of
public transporta on and
allow more des na ons to be
accessed by walking/biking. TransportaƟon is but one aspect of public infrastructure that is impacted by growth. When
considering whether and how to grow, a community should consider the posiƟve and negaƟve
impacts of growth on the full range of public infrastructure and services. Law Enforcement: While
higher densi es increase
the u liza on of exis ng
law enforcement facili es,
in most cases, the cost of
officers’ salaries increases
in a linear fashion with
growth. As such, the per‐
capita cost of providing law
enforcement is not affected
posi vely or nega vely by
density. Parks and RecreaƟon:
Growth and higher densi es
may increase the u liza on
of parks; addi onal park
facili es may be needed
depending on the level and
demographic characteris cs
of the growth that occurs.
Higher densi es in proximity
to park sites increases the
likelihood that ci zens can
walk or ride their bikes to
park facili es. CITYWIDE MOBILITY PLAN
What it the City Wide
Mobility Plan?
Sarasota’s Citywide Mobility Plan is an initiative to develop
land use and transportation strategies that further the goal
of “moving people, not vehicles,” which was established
during the 2008 update of the Sarasota City Plan.
To accomplish this, the Citywide Mobility Plan must consider
the symbio c rela onship between transporta on and land
use and how providing enhanced connec ons to and from
key loca ons within the city can reduce dependence on the
automobile and encourage responsible redevelopment.
The City’s Comprehensive Plan recognizes that a “one size
fits all” approach to growth and redevelopment is not
feasible. To recognize the varia on in land use and mobility
levels in different areas of the city, mobility district
typologies (illustrated on the map to the right) have been
iden fied as part of the Citywide Mobility Plan.
Mobility Plan Districts
CITYWIDE MOBILITY PLAN
What it the City Wide
Mobility Plan?
Sarasota’s Citywide Mobility Plan is an initiative to develop
land use and transportation strategies that further the goal
of “moving people, not vehicles,” which was established
during the 2008 update of the Sarasota City Plan.
To accomplish this, the Citywide Mobility Plan must consider
the symbio c rela onship between transporta on and land
use and how providing enhanced connec ons to and from
key loca ons within the city can reduce dependence on the
automobile and encourage responsible redevelopment.
The City’s Comprehensive Plan recognizes that a “one size
fits all” approach to growth and redevelopment is not
feasible. To recognize the varia on in land use and mobility
levels in different areas of the city, mobility district
typologies (illustrated on the map to the right) have been
iden fied as part of the Citywide Mobility Plan.
MOBILITY PLAN DISTRICTS
Downtown Core
 Highest
mul modal poten al
 Mix of land uses
 Grid street network
 Employment focal center
 Highest densi es/intensi es
 Central transit sta on
 High level of pedestrian
ac vity
Downtown Edge
 Transi
onal area between
downtown & neighborhoods
 Served by transit
 Mix of uses land uses
 Grid street network
Town Center
 Major
urban/ac ve hubs
outside of downtown
 Mix of land uses
 Served by high‐capacity
transit
 Walkable & bikable
Mobility Corridor
 Provide
connec ons
between districts
 Poten al for high level of
transit
 Higher concentra on & mix
of non‐residen al uses is
feasible
The 5 D’s—Land Use &
Urban Design
The urban environment is made up of a combina on of variables
that contribute to the availability of mobility op ons. Increased
use of alterna ve modes is achieved through a balance of these
variables, referred to as the “5 D’s.”*
DENSITY—Land use density (and its non‐residen al counterpart,
“intensity”) creates an economy of scale that supports cost‐
effec ve and efficient delivery of transporta on services.
Urban Neighborhood
 Transi
onal area between
downtown & neighborhoods
 Compact, primarily
residen al uses
 Pedestrian friendly
 Limited non‐residen al in
scale with neighborhood
DIVERSITY—Land use diversity is needed to create a balanced,
sustainable land use mix at high‐enough concentra ons
(densi es and intensi es) to make mul modal travel op ons
viable solu ons.
DESIGN—Sustainable land use design at all levels (regional,
sub‐area, neighborhood/project level) is cri cal to incorporate
appropriate transit and bicycle/pedestrian friendly op ons
through:

DISTANCE—Travel distance (and its analog, me) helps
form the basis for trip‐making decisions.

DESTINATION ACCESSIBILITY—Des na on accessibility, or
the ease of access to the trip a rac on, also influences
trip‐making decisions.
Neighborhood Center
 Smaller‐scale
retail & service
hubs that serve the
surrounding community
 Walkable & bikable
 Served by transit
 Smaller & less dense than
town centers
*Reid Ewing and Robert Cervero, 2010, “Travel and the Built Environment,”
Journal of the American Planning AssociaƟon 76(3): 265–294.
CONNECTING SARASOTA STRATEGIES
1. Access to Downtown
 Downtown Sarasota currently serves as a hub for
5. Use Trails as Connec ons
 A mul ‐use recrea onal trail (MURT) can be used to
employment, entertainment, tourism, and culture.
Because it is built at a higher density, it is more
conducive to a mul modal environment.
 If transit and mul modal systems are well‐connected
and efficient, residents and tourists can access
downtown without a car, which can increase
ridership and create a mixed‐use environment that is
required of placemaking.
connect the city grid in cases where roads cannot be
built so cyclists and pedestrians can efficiently travel
throughout the city.
 This improves overall connec vity in a city where
trails, shared paths, bike lanes, and enhanced
sidewalks can work together to create a network.
 These trails can also be used recrea onally,
 This can allow the downtown to become an even
encouraging more ac ve behavior required of a
mul modal city.
more a rac ve des na on.
2. Access to Transit/Corridors
 Transit ridership can increase if people can easily
6. Connect Exis ng Infrastructure
 Some roads have bike lanes and others do not, which
means gaps can exist throughout the city. By filling in
these gaps with cycle facili es (lanes, shared arrows,
shared‐use paths), a complete bicycle network can be
completed.
reach sta ons/stops from adjacent neighborhoods.
 Physical improvements for cyclists and pedestrians
along connec ng streets can allow people to reach
the corridor more efficiently.
 If transit is easily accessible, it can run on more
 This will allow cyclists to more easily, safely, and
efficient and direct routes.
efficiently access the city.
 With more pedestrians on corridors, there can be a
more ac ve public realm that can encourage more
mixed‐use and commercial development.
3. Pedestrian Safety/Mobility
 Pedestrians o en jaywalk between pedestrian
crosswalks on wide corridors such as US‐41. Median
refuge islands integrated within the shared turn lane
reduce crossing distance and allow for mid‐block
crossings.
 Adding a bike/pedestrian crossing at exis ng
intersec ons increases safety and encourages
pedestrian behavior.
 With safer choices for pedestrians, more efficient
routes will be available.
4. Design for a Narrow Right‐of‐Way
 In older areas of the city, right‐of‐ways usually are too
narrow to provide dedicated lanes for different
modes of transporta on. Therefore, roads are
oriented towards cars instead of pedestrians and
cyclists.
 “Shared arrows,” where the cyclist shares the same
travel lanes as automobiles, allows for a dedicated
cyclist route and bicycle networks to con nue
through the city.
 Because drivers know they aware they are sharing a
lane with cyclists, they can o en drive more safely.
7. Complete a Street
 Crea ng a Complete Street that expands the sidewalk
and minimizes travel lanes can include moving the
curb, which is a costly project. Instead, crea ng a
repaving program that delineates spaces for bike
lanes and on‐street parking is an easy and cost‐
efficient way to provide more mul modal routes.
 Over me, as roads are repaved, a connected bicycle
network will result.
 This will create safer routes that connect with transit.
In turn, this can support more cyclist behavior.
8. Downtown Circulator
 A Downtown Circulator will allow people to easily and
efficiently access the most popular des na ons in the
city center.
 Transit and suppor ve land
uses can allow a reduc on in
parking, which otherwise can
use highly valued land.
 A larger suppor ve transit
network can allow people
to be non‐reliant on a car.
GROWTH AND REVENUE
What is the city’s share of growth?
Historically, the popula on of Sarasota County has grown at a faster rate than the popula on of
the city. The city’s popula on is currently 13.7% of the countywide popula on. To maintain this
percentage in the future, the city will need to grow at an average rate of 1% per year, consistent
with Sarasota County.
600,000
Sarasota County
How can growth impact City revenues?
Ad valorem taxes fund a significant por on of the City of Sarasota’s annual budget. If taxable
values do not increase at a rate that meets or exceeds cost increases (due to infla on, etc.), then
the City must reduce services or supplement the revenue shor all. Growth in the taxable value
of exis ng proper es is o en limited by State statutes (such as limita ons on taxable value
increases from “Save Our Homes”) or by market trends. In ci es where vacant land is limited,
redevelopment o en plays an important role in the con nued growth of their tax base.
City of Sarasota
500,000
What would a 1% annual
growth rate look like?
400,000
Population
Average of 1%
annual growth
from 2010–2040
300,000
1% Growth Rate =
Average of 300 dwelling units
200,000
(500 people) per year, citywide
100,000
2040
2035
2030
2025
2020
2015
2010
2000
1990
1980
1970
0
Source: Historical U.S. Census data and BEBR Sarasota County populaƟon
projecƟons. City populaƟon projecƟons beyond 2010 assume that the city will
maintain 13.7% of the countywide populaƟon.
What are some examples of redevelopment?
Broadway Promenade
Citrus Square
2004 Taxable Value $330,000
2012 Taxable Value $6.5M
Local redevelopment project that converted three single‐family homes to a mixed‐use
(residen al and commercial) development.
2004 Taxable Value $1M
2012 Taxable Value $35.5M
Local redevelopment project that converted miscellaneous low‐intensity
commercial to a mixed‐use (residen al and commercial) development.