by David Chapman
Staff Writer
The fair share agreements used to fund new development infrastructure aren’t so fair, according to one City director.
The Florida Legislature is amending longstanding legislation to remove state-mandated transportation concurrency requirements in designated areas.
Because of that, officials have come up with a new plan, called a mobility fee system, and are presenting it around town.
Bill Killingsworth, City Planning and Development director, presented the proposed system Thursday as part of a broader discussion of the Greater Jacksonville Mobility Plan to the Urban Land Institute North Florida.
He was joined in the discussion by T.R. Hainline, a Rogers Towers attorney and chair of the City Mobility Plan Task Force; lawyer Tom Ingram of Ingram & Van Rooy; and Alex Coley of Hallmark Partners.
Killingsworth framed the discussion by explaining the proposed measure would replace a “patently unfair” fair share system with a mobility fee system that he believes is more predictable, fair and efficient.
Under current fair share agreements, the City assesses developers a fee for transportation improvements that their developments would require.
Killingsworth said that system is inefficient and created urban sprawl, while the proposed mobility fee system would create incentives for “smart growth.”
The new fee system would divide the city into five development areas and would base fees on vehicle miles traveled.
Those miles measure the level of travel on the roadway system in the areas. There is a formula to determine the fees.
The fees for each zone would be used to pay for transportation improvement projects for that particular zone and provide incentives for infill development rather than sprawl.
Hainline chaired the nine-month task force last year and called it an enormously complex issue.
He said the task force had three objectives: to ensure the fee is based on data and is not subjective; the results of the task force would be gradable by others; and the policies instituted would not explicitly or implicitly favor owners based on the location of their land.
“Everyone agrees to this over fair share,” said Hainline.
Coley, principal of Hallmark Partners, a commercial real estate development company, said he applauded the proposed system.
He said it would be more transparent in how fees are assessed. He said his company has been assessed fair share fees “in the seven figures.”
Killingsworth provided two examples of developments that would see fees drop from more than $1 million each to less than $200,000 each under the plan.
The legislative amendment passed in 2009. Under it, the City is required to implement a mobility fee system by July 8.
356-2466