Transportation Site Impact Handbook - April - 2014

TRANSPORTATION
SITEHANDBOOK
IMPACT
EstimatingtheTransportationImpactsofGrowth
STATEOFFLORIDA
DEPARTMENTOFTRANSPORTATION
SYSTEMSPLANNINGOFFICE
605SUWANNESTREET,MS19
TALLAHASSEE,FLORIDA323990450
www.dot.state.fl.us/planning
Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
We have tried to have the most up to date information. However, due to changes in
legislation and acceptable practices, we recommend you check with the links in this handbook. |2
Contents Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
Contents
1 Introduction................................................................................................................................................7
1.1 Purpose of Handbook ...................................................................................................................7
1.2 Background ..................................................................................................................................9
1.2.1 Why is a Transportation Impact Analysis Needed? ................................................................... 11
1.2.2 The FDOT Reviewers Role ......................................................................................................... 12
1.3 About this Handbook..................................................................................................................13
1.4 Updates to this Handbook ..........................................................................................................15
1.4.1 State Transportation Facilities and Concurrency ...................................................................... 16
2 The Transportation Impact Process ............................................................................................................17

2.1 Introduction ...............................................................................................................................17
2.1.1 Considerations for the Components of a Transportation Impact Study ................................... 19
2.2 Methodology Development .......................................................................................................21
2.2.1 Study Area Requirements .......................................................................................................... 21
2.2.2 Time Horizons Analysis Years ................................................................................................. 23
2.2.3 Travel Adjustment Factors......................................................................................................... 25
2.2.4 Standard K Factors ................................................................................................................. 29
2.3 Existing Conditions Analysis and Data Collection .........................................................................30
2.3.1 Data Collection .......................................................................................................................... 30
2.3.2 Proposed Site Development Characteristics ............................................................................. 31
2.3.3 Existing Transportation System Data......................................................................................... 31
2.3.4 Traffic Counts and other Transportation Data .......................................................................... 33
2.3.5 Land Use and Demographic Data for Large Scale Models ......................................................... 36
2.4 Trip Generation of the New Development ...................................................................................38
2.4.1 Trip Generation Data ................................................................................................................. 38
2.4.2 Use of Trip Generation Rates or Equations ............................................................................... 41
2.4.3 Trip Types .................................................................................................................................. 41
2.4.4 Explanation of the 10 Percent of the Adjacent Street Traffic ................................................... 44
2.4.5 Pass-by Trips and Model Volumes ............................................................................................. 46
2.4.6 Limitations of Trip Generation Data .......................................................................................... 48
2.4.7 Internal Capture Rates for Multi Use Developments ................................................................ 50
2.4.8 Community Capture .................................................................................................................. 55
2.5 Projecting Future Conditions.......................................................................................................59
2.5.1 Projecting Future Background Traffic ........................................................................................ 59
2.5.2 The Growth Rate/Trend Method for Projecting Background Traffic ........................................ 60
2.5.3 Build-Up Method ....................................................................................................................... 66
2.5.4 Model Methods Using FSUTMS to Distribute Trips for Developments ..................................... 66
2.6 Trip Distribution .........................................................................................................................70
2.6.1 Different Types of Manual Methods for Trip Distribution ........................................................ 70
2.7 Mode Split/Alternative Travel Forecasts .....................................................................................72
2.8 Trip Assignment .........................................................................................................................73

2.8.1 General Considerations ............................................................................................................. 73
2.8.2 Manual Methods of Trip Assignment ........................................................................................ 75
2.8.3 Traffic Attenuation with Manual Traffic Assignment ................................................................ 76
2.8.4 Model Methods of Trip Assignment .......................................................................................... 77
2.8.5 Trip Assignment at Intersections ............................................................................................... 80
2.8.6 Documentation of Trip Assignment........................................................................................... 80
2.9 Access Management, Site Access, and Internal Circulation...........................................................81
2.10 Mitigation and Future Transportation Needs .............................................................................83
2.10.1 LOS Analysis Tools ................................................................................................................... 84
2.10.2 Bicycle & Pedestrian LOS Analysis ........................................................................................... 84
2.10.3 Detailed Transit and Multimodal Quality of Service Tools ...................................................... 85
2.11 Multimodal References.............................................................................................................86
3 Local Government Comprehensive Plan Reviews .......................................................................................87

3.1 Comprehensive Plans and Plan Amendments ..............................................................................87
3.1.1 Introduction to Growth Management and Comprehensive Plans ............................................ 87
3.2 The Comprehensive Plan Amendment Process ............................................................................90
3.2.1 Expedited State Review Process ................................................................................................ 90
3.2.2 State Coordinated Review Process ............................................................................................ 91
3.2.3 Small Scale Amendment Process ............................................................................................... 93
3.2.4 Future Land Use Map (FLUM).................................................................................................... 93
3.2.5 Agency Roles .............................................................................................................................. 94
3.3 Review of Future Land Use Map (FLUM) Amendments ................................................................95
3.3.1 Legal Authorities ........................................................................................................................ 96
3.3.2 Review Procedure ...................................................................................................................... 96
3.4 Review of Text Amendments .................................................................................................... 100
3.4.1 Review Procedures .................................................................................................................. 100
3.5 Future Land Use Element .......................................................................................................... 101
3.5.1 Review Procedure .................................................................................................................... 101
3.6 Transportation Element ............................................................................................................ 103
3.6.1 Review Procedures .................................................................................................................. 103
3.7 Capital Improvements Element ................................................................................................. 105
3.8 Transportation Concurrency-Related Amendments ................................................................... 106
3.8.1 Requirements Governing Optional Transportation Concurrency Program............................. 106
3.8.2 Concurrency Alternatives ........................................................................................................ 108
3.9 Other Local Government Comprehensive Plan Reviews ............................................................. 109
3.9.1 Evaluation and Appraisal of the Comprehensive Plan ............................................................ 109
3.9.2 Development of Regional Impact-based Amendments .......................................................... 110
3.9.3 Sector Plans ............................................................................................................................. 110
3.9.4 Rural Land Stewardship Areas ................................................................................................. 113
3.9.5 Planning Innovations ............................................................................................................... 117
3.10 Resource Guide. Legal Authority for Department Review......................................................... 118

3.10.1 Florida Statutes (F.S.) ............................................................................................................. 118
3.10.2 Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.): .................................................................................... 119
3.10.3 FDOT Policies/Procedures ..................................................................................................... 119
3.10.4 Publications: Online Guidance............................................................................................... 120
3.11 Resource Guide. FDOT Online Resources ................................................................................. 121
3.12 Resource Guide. DEO Online Resources ................................................................................... 122
3.13 Resource Guide. LGCP FLUM Amendment Review Checklist ..................................................... 124
4 Developments of Regional Impact ........................................................................................................... 125

4.1 Introduction to Development of Regional Impact Review .......................................................... 125
4.1.1 DRI Review Process.................................................................................................................. 125
4.1.2 Resources in This Document ................................................................................................... 127
4.1.3 Incorporating Transit and Other Multimodal Considerations ................................................. 129
4.1.4 RPC and Local Government Participation in the DRI Review Process .......................................... 129
4.1.5 DRI Process .............................................................................................................................. 130
4.1.6 DRI Review Procedures ............................................................................................................ 131
4.1.7 Other review types .................................................................................................................. 132
4.2 Review Requirements for Proposed DRIs/Substantial Deviations ............................................... 134
4.2.1 Transportation Methodology Development ........................................................................... 136
4.2.2 Pre-application Conference/Transportation Methodology..................................................... 142
4.2.3 Application for Development Approval Process...................................................................... 143
4.2.4 ADA Review/1st Sufficiency Determination/1st Request for Additional Information .............. 145
4.2.5 2nd Sufficiency Determination/2nd Request for Additional Information .................................. 147
4.2.6 Review of Applicant Response to 2nd Request for Additional Information ............................. 149
4.2.7 Recommendations and Conditions Development................................................................... 151
4.2.8 RPC Assessment Report (73C-40.024) ..................................................................................... 152
4.2.9 DRI Draft Development Order Review .................................................................................... 152
4.2.10 Rendered Development Order Review.................................................................................. 153
4.3 Modification of Approved DRIs ................................................................................................. 154
4.4 DRI Reporting ........................................................................................................................... 157
4.4.1 Annual or Biennial Reports ...................................................................................................... 157
4.4.2 Transportation Monitoring Studies ......................................................................................... 157
4.4.3 Transportation Monitoring and Modeling Studies (M & M) ................................................... 158
4.4.4 Community Capture Monitoring ............................................................................................. 159
DRI Pre-Application Checklist ............................................................................................ 160
DRI Checklist 1 | Methodology Meeting ........................................................................... 165
DRI Checklist 2 | ADA Sufficiency Review ............................................................................... 169
DRI Checklist 3 | ADA Review ............................................................................................ 171
DRI Checklist 4 | DO Review ..................................................................................................... 177
DRI Checklist 5 | Project Monitoring & Report Review ................................................ 179

DRI Checklist 6 | Conceptual Site Access Review ................................................................... 181
DRI Checklist 7 | Notice of Proposed Changes ........................................................................ 183
5 Mitigation ............................................................................................................................................... 185

5.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 185
5.1.1 Context-Sensitive Solutions (CSS) ............................................................................................ 191
5.1.2 Development or Land Use Changes......................................................................................... 192
5.2 Strategies ................................................................................................................................. 194
5.3 Three Basic Categories of Mitigation Strategies ......................................................................... 196
5.3.1 Enhancing Operational Efficiency on Existing Transportation System .................................... 196
5.3.2 Increasing Other Modal Options ............................................................................................. 202
5.3.3 Increasing System Capacity ..................................................................................................... 204
5.4 Other Mitigation Strategies: ..................................................................................................... 207
5.4.1 Transportation Concurrency and Alternatives (TCEAs, TCMAs, and MMTDs) ........................ 207
5.4.2 Transportation Sufficiency Plans ............................................................................................. 208
5.4.3 Funding of Mitigation Improvements...................................................................................... 209
5.4.4 Proportionate Share (DRI) Mitigation...................................................................................... 213
5.4.5 Proportionate Share (Sub-DRI) Mitigation .............................................................................. 214
Appendix A FDOT Review Participation Reference Chart by DRI Stage ......................................................... 216
Appendix B Questions 10 & 21 ................................................................................................................... 217
Question 10 General Project Description .............................................................................................. 217
Question 21 Transportation ................................................................................................................. 223
Appendix C FDOT District 2 Generic Transportation Impact Analysis Methodology .................................... 226
I. Project Trip Generation ......................................................................................................................... 226
II. Existing Conditions ............................................................................................................................... 227
III. Future Years Analysis........................................................................................................................... 228
IV. Proportionate Share Analysis .............................................................................................................. 231
Appendix D Sample Proposed Transportation Methodology Comments ...................................................... 232
Appendix E Sample Proposed Transportation Methodology Comments ....................................................... 234
Appendix F FDOT District 4 Example: OMD Multimodal Sufficiency Comments ............................................ 238
Appendix G Examples of Multimodal NOPC ................................................................................................ 241
Appendix H Glossary .................................................................................................................................. 243
Appendix I FDOT Transportation Site Impact Handbook Website and Document URLs ................................. 254
INTRODUCTION | 1.1 Purpose of Handbook Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
1 Introduction
1.1 Purpose of Handbook

The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) has developed these
guidelines to assist FDOT staff in their review of developments. While this
handbook is primarily for FDOT staff, it is available to local governments and
other transportation partners in an effort to communicate the FDOTs
guidance for reviewing various documents. This update has been titled
Transportation Site Impact Handbook to reflect the broader scope of work
including local government comprehensive plans, growth management
responsibilities, and multimodal transportation rather than simply traffic
analysis. This handbook is designed to reflect legislative and other changes
that have taken place over time.
The inclusion of Site Impact in this title is to reflect the first version of this
Handbook and to differentiate it from the Traffic Analysis Handbook also
published by FDOT. For purposes of this document and in professional
practice, the terms Transportation Impact Analysis and Site Impact Analysis
both refer to the process of analyzing the multimodal impacts of
development on the transportation system.
INTRODUCTION | 1.1 Purpose of Handbook Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
Since the 2010 update to the handbook, there have been significant changes
to state legislation which impacts the guidelines presented in this edition of
the handbook. Throughout this handbook, we will be referencing these
legislative changes that occurred within 2011, 2012, and 2013. These
legislative changes have affected several state agencies and programs that
pertain to development and transportation systems. These changes have
revised the focus of these agencies and programs including changes to their
duties and guidance.
We have tried to make this handbook as current as possible; however

growth management may go through even more changes into the future.
For this reason, please check with the Florida Department of Economic
Opportunity (DEO), in which the state land planning agency is located, for
any updates. Information on future updates can be at DEOs website,
www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-development*.
*Please note, if this link does not work, please check the Transportation Site Impact Handbook
website at fdottransportationimpacthandbook.com for an updated link.
INTRODUCTION | 1.2 Background Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
1.2 Background
Transportation A major part of FDOTs role in growth management involves reviewing

Impact Analysis proposed developments, comprehensive plan amendments, land
An analysis that development code amendments, capital improvement budgets, provision of
estimates and quantifies public facilities, proportionate share agreements, Development of Regional
the specific
Impact (DRI) agreements, Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) based
transportation-related
impacts of a development amendments, and other local government actions that are identified for
proposal state review. Since these local government decisions provide the basis for
development approvals, they often incorporate land use changes and
impacts to the transportation network. As such, transportation impact
analyses are conducted to evaluate how the transportation network would
function once the proposed land use change or development takes place.
Depending upon the anticipated impacts, several state and regional
agencies will have inputs on these approvals. Significant impacts on regional
or statewide transportation facilities are reviewed by the FDOTs District
Growth Management staff to ensure that the adopted performance
standards are achieved and maintained.
Transportation In accordance with Sections 163.3184, 334.044, and 380.06(6), Florida

Concurrency Statutes (F.S.), the FDOT is responsible for reviewing and providing
The optional growth comments on local government comprehensive plan amendments and
management concept Development Orders as they relate to transportation impacts on state and
intended to ensure that
regional multimodal facilities. The types of reviews and the associated
the necessary
transportation facilities statutory and regulatory basis for these reviews are summarized on Exhibit
are available concurrent 1. The two main categories of reviews are:
with the impacts of
development Local government plan reviews
Development of regional impact (DRI) reviews
PDF
As indicated on Exhibit 1, various actions related to planning documents
QLOS Handbook require coordination between the FDOT District Growth Management
Coordinators and local governments or developers. Local government
comprehensive plan (LGCP) amendment reviews are just one type of
review. The DRI review steps shown on Exhibit 1 have been sequentially
ordered to serve as a frame of reference. Regardless of the type of review,
the FDOT reviewer should work with the local government staff and
applicants to identify opportunities to integrate multimodal networks into
the planning process and create strategies for making communities ready
for transit in the future.
The FDOTs latest Quality/ Level of Service Handbook and the Guidelines and
Performance Measures to Incorporate Transit and Other Multimodal
Considerations into the FDOT DRI Review Process both provide guidance for
incorporating transit considerations into the planning process and
quantifying multimodal transportation network in the analysis of impacts.
Exhibit 1
Examples of Review Types
Local Government Reviews DRI Reviews
DRI ADA Pre-Application

Evaluation and Appraisal
LGCP DRI Amendments Binding Letters & Transportation
Reports (EARs)
Methodology Meetings
Corridor Management Proportionate Share Preliminary Development Development Orders/

Plans Agreements Agreements (PDAs) Ordinance Adoption
Long-Term Transportation Notices of Proposed

Sector Plans Concurrency Management Change (NOPCs)/ Annual Reports
Systems (LTTCMS) Deviation Determinations
Modeling and Monitoring
Transit Oriented Rural Land Stewardship
Schedules/ Annual Traffic
Developments (TODs) Areas (RLSA)
Monitoring Reports
The FDOT Office of Policy Planning (OPP) coordinates with the FDOT District
Please direct your Growth Management Coordinators and the State Land Planning Agency
questions and concerns to (SLPA) within the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) in developing
your local FDOT office or policies, procedures, and guidelines to assist the Districts and other review
Gary Sokolow
agencies with the assessment of transportation impacts associated with
[email protected]
growth and development. Increasing coordination between FDOT, SLPA,
PDF and local governments will be necessary as communities identify desirable
How We growth patterns through strategic regional visioning efforts such as How
Shall Grow Shall We Grow, appropriate mixtures of development, and complementary
multimodal transportation networks. To effectively protect and maintain
the transportation network, all professionals will need to work
cooperatively to respond to growth management issues, protect quality of
life, and maximize the use of limited funding.
legislation and acceptable practices, we recommend you check with the links in this handbook. | 10
When conducting an analysis, professionals will need to be familiar with the

following :
Local and adjacent comprehensive plans
Metropolitan planning organization long-range transportation plans
Transit development plans
Transportation disadvantaged service plans
Transportation demand management resources
Commuter assistance programs
Bicycle and pedestrian plans
Capital Improvement and Transportation Elements with
comprehensive plans
Proposed comprehensive plan amendments
Existing transportation concurrency exception areas (TCEAs),
transportation concurrency management areas (TCMAs),
multimodal transportation districts (MMTDs) as previously defined
in the Florida Statutes
Existing or proposed developments of regional impact (DRIs), as well as the
potential impacts to the statewide and regional multimodal transportation
network.
1.2.1 Why is a Transportation Impact Analysis Needed?

The FDOTs role is to protect the integrity of the transportation system for
the general public and to minimize degradation of both the regional and
local transportation networks. There are a number of additional reasons for
the FDOT to perform a transportation impact review:
Provide public agencies with a mechanism for managing
transportation impacts of land development within the context of
metropolitan transportation planning, local government
comprehensive planning, and concurrency
Provide applicants with recommendations for effective site
transportation planning
Provide public agencies with a method for analyzing the effects of
development on transportation
Establish a framework for the negotiation of mitigation measures
for the impacts created by development
Coordinate with local governments when a state facility will be
impacted by a proposed development
Promote multimodal transportation systems where appropriate
1.2.2 The FDOT Reviewers Role

This handbook is intended to guide the FDOT in reviewing LGCP elements,
DRIs and other land use approvals that may impact the State Highway
System (SHS), in particular facilities designated under the Strategic
Intermodal System. In addition, this handbook is intended to offer guidance
to transportation partners at all levels of government to enhance
coordination in the existing review processes.
In order to sustain a professional and constructive review process, FDOT

reviewer comments should be:
Professional
Concise
Provide suggested action by the applicant to address specific
comments
Reference FDOT procedures, manuals and handbooks in the
methodology agreement, where applicable, including any District
procedures, Florida Statutes and Administrative Rules
The FDOT reviews of LGCPs are focused on the relationship between
transportation, land use, intergovernmental coordination, and capital
improvements elements of the LGCP, as identified in Chapter 163, Part II,
F.S. The FDOT reviewer should focus on impacts to important state
transportation resources and facilities.
INTRODUCTION | 1.3 About this Handbook Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
1.3 About this Handbook

This handbook was designed as an electronic desktop preference for the
FDOT reviewer. Hyperlinks to other resources which address specific issues
in greater detail are included throughout the handbook. In addition, a
comprehensive List of Resources is provided to allow for further research.
The handbook has been organized in this manner to facilitate practical use.
It consists of five Chapters and Appendices as follows:
Chapter 1 Introduction: This Chapter provides an overview of the

Transportation Site Impact Handbook and summarizes the
legislative and the changes in state law that has occurred since the
last edition of the handbook.
Chapter 2 The Transportation Impact Process: This Chapter discusses
standard components for the completion of transportation impact
analyses and reviews. Chapter 2 should be utilized in conjunction
with other chapters that describe the various types of FDOT reviews.
Chapter 3 Local Government Comprehensive Plan Reviews: This
Chapter describes how the FDOT assists local governments with
development project reviews. It describes the different types of
LGCP amendments and land development reviews as well as FDOTs
roles and responsibilities during these processes. Four (4) Resource
Guides are included at the end of the chapter.
Chapter 4 Developments of Regional Impact: This Chapter addresses
the transportation impact analyses related to DRIs, as required by
Florida Statute. Checklists are included at the end of the chapter.
Chapter 5 Mitigation: This Chapter provides information on mitigation
processes and options for mitigating transportation impacts to the
TSIH SHS.
Appendices: The Appendices include:
Glossary Appendix A) DRI Stages of Review
Appendix B) Questions 10 (General Project Description)
and 21 (Transportation)
Appendix C) Sample Transportation Impact Methodology (District 2)
Appendix D) Samples Proposed Transportation Methodology Comments
Appendix E) Sample Proposed Transportation Methodology Comments
Appendix F) District 4 Example
Appendix G) Examples of Multimodal Notice of Proposed Change
Appendix H) Glossary
Appendix I) Document URLs
INTRODUCTION | 1.3 About this Handbook Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
The Transportation Site Impact Handbook and many of the linked

resources are available online. Given the changing nature of laws and
professional practice, keeping the information within this handbook up
to date has been an ambitious undertaking. The Transportation Site
Impact Handbook will always be a work in progress with updates and
clarifications being added as necessary.
Introduction | 1.4 Updates to this Handbook Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
1.4 Updates to this Handbook

Legislative Updates State law pertaining to transportation has changed significantly since the
Transportation Impact Handbook was updated in 2010.
Some major transportation-related changes include:

Statutory regulations governing transportation concurrency was made
optional for local governments
Repeal of the statutory requirement that LOS standards on the SIS be
consistent with FDOT standards
WEB Repeal of Rules 14-94 and 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.),
which previously governed statewide minimum LOS standards for the
DEO FAQs SHS and growth management laws respectively, in coordination with
laws established in the Florida Statutes. Portions of Rule 9J-5, F.A.C., as
well as repealed Rule 9J-11.023, F.A.C., were incorporated in Chapter 163,
WEB Reorganization Part II, F.S.
Chapter 163,
New requirement that local governments with transportation
Part II, F.S.
concurrency regulations must consult with FDOT when a proposed
development will affect SIS facilities
Repeal of statutory provisions for the designation of transportation
concurrency exception areas (TCEAs), transportation concurrency
management areas (TCMAs), and multimodal transportation districts
(MMTDs)
Revisions to regulations governing the contribution of proportionate
share mitigation for transportation projects
Repeal of statutory provisions for proportionate fair-share mitigation
for transportation projects
Requirements for monitoring transportation and expressway
authorities
Establishment of transportation deficiency authorities and
transportation sufficiency plans, a county or municipal system created
to plan and finance identified transportation deficiencies
Creation of the definition for transportation deficiency
New exemptions as well as revisions to thresholds, substantial
deviation and essentially built out criteria were made to regulations
governing DRIs
Revisions to regulations governing Dense Urban Land Areas (DULA) for
the purposes of DRIs
Creation of two comprehensive plan amendment review process,
Expedited State Review and State Coordinated Review, which replace
the primary comprehensive plan amendment review process
Introduction | 1.4 Updates to this Handbook Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
Redefining the roles of reviewing agencies including DEO, serving as

the SLPA. Legislation provides that review of local government
comprehensive plan amendments and other identified actions must
focus on important state resources and facilities
Revisions to provisions governing the Sector Plan and Rural Land
Stewardship Area Programs
1.4.1 State Transportation Facilities and Concurrency

Legislative changes to state law including revisions to Chapters 163, Part II, and
380, F.S., significantly transformed the landscape of growth management and
transportation planning in Florida. As identified above, these changes have
refocused the duties of the FDOT, SLPA, and other reviewing agencies and
reduced or expanded several governing provisions which impact decision-
making and planning at the local level. Of these governing provisions, the
elimination of the state requirement for transportation concurrency at the local
level as well as changes to the application of level of service standards by the
FDOT and proportionate share mitigation has caused a reassessment of the
identification, analysis, and mitigation of transportation impacts by proposed
development.
As these and other changes are discussed in more detail throughout the
Handbook, it is essential for the FDOT reviewer to understand the new role of
the agency. As local governments now have more authority over planning
decisions, FDOT and other reviewing agencies will take on a more collaborative
role with local governments. In addition to providing technical assistance as
requested, FDOT and reviewing agencies will focus on providing aid and
guidance during identification and analysis, while focusing on mitigation
measures for facilities of statewide significance.
Transportation Impact Process | 2.1 Introduction Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
2 The Transportation Impact Process
2.1 Introduction
This chapter provides technical guidance for reviewing transportation impact
studies. Emphasis is placed on providing guidance to allow for an understanding
of regional variations rather than a one size fits all approach for the review of a
Throughout this chapter transportation impact study. The objectives of a transportation impact study
and in national practice, that a reviewer should be able to identify during their review should include the
transportation impact following:
study may also be
referred to as Assessment of the impacts of the proposed development on the
transportation impact transportation system
analysis Assessment of the need for improvements to achieve a safe and
or traffic study
efficient transportation system to meet established acceptable level of
service standards
Provision of a forum for stakeholder discussion
Assessment of the needs of all reasonable users and modes impacted
by the development
Adapted from: Transportation Impact Analysis for Site Development, ITE 2005
Exhibit 2 illustrates a typical framework for transportation impact analysis and

its review. In general, transportation impact analyses and their reviews should
follow this general set of basic procedures.
Exhibit 2 Methodology Development

Basic Framework 1.Study Area
of a Transportation 2.Time Horizons
Impact Analysis 3.General transportation factors
Existing Conditions Analysis
1.Data Collection
2.Traffic Counts
3.Transportation System
4.Land use/demographic
Future Conditions Analysis
1. Background Traffic
2. Development traffic projection
without development
3. Trip Generation
4. Trip Distribution
5. Multimodal Evaluation
6. Assignment of trips to network
Mitigation Analysis
1. Improvements necessary
Typical traffic studies reviewed by FDOT are associated with:
Developments of Regional Impact (DRIs)
Corridor planning studies where developments will impact the
roadway design and/or operations (medians, signals, turn lane
analysis)
Local Government Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Local Concurrency reviews if applicable
Access permit studies
Courtesy reviews at the request of local governments for impacts to
state facilities
As FDOT reviewers evaluate studies including those identified above,
presentation of the summary of findings including any associated
recommendations for mitigation, should be presented in a clear and concise
manner. The following example from Mike on Traffic provides an outline
for organizing a transportation study review memo or report; indicating the
three major components as well as additional tips for conducting the review
itself.
Some wisdom on reviewing a traffic study from Mike on Traffic Views From a Licensed Engineer
WEB This blog provides tips from a seasoned professional engineer. The text below
has been adapted from the blog. The outline below provides a clear memo
format for city staff who hired an independent consultant to perform the traffic
study.
Section 1 Introduction/ Give a brief description of the traffic study and the purpose of the memo. State
Purpose who prepared the traffic study and their qualifications.
Section 2 - Conclusions/ State whether the traffic study is sufficient or if further study is needed. If
Recommendations further study is needed, list what needs to be covered and purpose of covering
those items. If the traffic analysis was done properly but you disagree with the
conclusions/recommendations, clearly state why you disagree and what you
recommend.
Section 3 - Technical Visit the development site to make sure all of your comments will be
Review credible.
Go through each component of the traffic study and state whether or
not you agree with the study. If the city/county/state has written
policies or standards related to traffic studies, they should be cited and
inconsistencies should be identified.
When flagging an issue or disagreement, clearly identify whether it is a
minor issue that wouldn't affect the conclusions/recommendations of
the traffic study or if they are a major issue that warrants further
analysis.
2.1.1 Considerations for the Components of a Transportation Impact Study

The size, location, and type of development, as well as jurisdictional
requirements, will influence the type and level of detail required for each
component of the transportation impact study.
Methodology Methodology Development is an essential component in any transportation

Development impact analysis. During this phase, the local government policies for traffic
analysis play a very important role. This process should define the data,
techniques, practices, and assumptions that will be used while preparing a
transportation impact analysis. The parties should reach agreement regarding
the data to be considered and the basic factors to be used in the study.
Analyses of existing and future conditions should be based on the standards
adopted by the local government. This component can be helpful to set the
stage for integrating the consideration of transit and multimodal services into
the analysis. Once a methodology has been defined and accepted, the technical
analyses can begin.
Existing Conditions An Existing Conditions analysis is developed to assess current conditions and
establish a basis for comparison to future conditions. In addition to the roadway
network the study should analyze the following: the transit network (not just
the routes but frequency and other measures of transit quality), bicycle, and
pedestrian facilities.
Future Conditions Future Year Conditions for a future horizon year (that does not include the
proposed development) are forecast to develop future background conditions.
The background conditions assessment then serves as the basis for a
comparison to future conditions with the proposed site development.
The future conditions analysis is where the future impacts of a proposed
development or amendment are assessed. Once the trips (auto or other) are
assigned to the network, measures of effectiveness, such as a Quality/Level of
Service analysis are calculated. The anticipated multimodal services identified
should be taken into consideration and reflected in the future condition analysis.
Mitigation When a transportation impact analysis indicates that the transportation system
will operate at an undesirable level of service as compared to the local adopted
level of service (LOS) standards, mitigation measures to reduce transportation
impacts should be undertaken. Mitigation can be in the form of enhancing
operational efficiency, reducing demand or increasing system capacity. Mitigation
can also reduce level of development or phase development impacts with capital
improvements. Mitigation should be relative to the size of the transportation
impact expected. When adverse transportation impacts are expected on Strategic
Intermodal System (SIS) facilities, FDOT should work with local governments and
other transportation agencies to identify and agree upon mitigation measures.
This is important even when FDOT comments are only advisory.
Importance of There are opportunities for including multimodal considerations at each stage
Multimodal of the transportation impact analysis. Some of the best references that both
Considerations applicants and reviewers should be knowledgeable of regarding multimodal
considerations include:
Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition (TCQSM)
NCHRP Report 616 Multimodal Level of Service Analysis for Urban Streets
2010 Highway Capacity Manual
The remainder of this chapter provides a more detailed discussion of each of
the previously mentioned components in the transportation impact analysis
process; describing key study elements both applicants and reviewers should
consider when preparing and reviewing a transportation impact analysis.
Summary checklists for the overall site impact analysis process are provided in
Checklists this handbook. These checklists can serve as a tool to help ensure that the site
impact process is properly executed by both the applicant and the reviewer.
Standard Process | 2.2 Methodology Development Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
2.2 Methodology Development
The Methodology Development process usually begins when the applicant

(developer or other party) contacts the local government, Regional Planning
Council (RPC), FDOT or other agency to discuss a proposed development. A
formal methodology development process is required for some types of
developments, such as a Development of Regional Impact (DRI). Many local
governments have adopted official methods they require for development
related traffic studies. Even if no formal process is required, it is good practice for
participating agencies to agree to a methodology before requesting the applicant
to perform a transportation impact analysis.
Part of methodology development is for the applicable authorities to agree on

Establish responsibilities
and analyses that will be
the level of transportation analysis required and acceptable tools to use for this
performed analysis. The use of various tools and their appropriate application is described
throughout this chapter. In some cases the reader is referred to other FDOT
publications which explain these tools in more detail.
Regional Planning Pursuant to revisions to Section 163.3184, F.S., Regional Planning Council (RPC)
Council (RPC) review and comments shall be limited to adverse impacts on regional resources
or facilities identified in the strategic regional policy plan and extra jurisdictional
impacts that would be inconsistent with the comprehensive plan of any
affected local government within the region. A RPC may not review and
comment on a proposed comprehensive plan amendment prepared by such
council unless the plan amendment has been changed by the local government
subsequent to the preparation of the plan amendment by the RPC.
Developments of New thresholds in Section 380.06, F.S., automatically apply for projects and
Regional Impact (DRI) supersede any comprehensive plan requirements or agreements that would
apply a stricter DRI threshold or require a DRI if now exempt.
2.2.1 Study Area Requirements

The applicant and FDOTs reviewer should consult with the appropriate
agencies to identify applicable policies and criteria in defining the study area
Adjustments to the study because these policies vary (see Exhibit 3). The study area is sometimes
area boundaries may be
referred to as the traffic impact area or simply the impact area. Local
needed to account for site
specific circumstances criteria for defining the study area typically involve a comparison of project
traffic to thresholds of the percentage of the maximum service flow rate at an
established LOS standard. Typically in the case of DRIs, the study area includes
all roadways where traffic generated by the proposed development is
equivalent to 5 percent of the maximum service volume at the adopted LOS
standard for the facility.
Exhibit 3
Example Study Area
Many local governments have adopted procedures that prescribe the

methodology used in defining the study area for traffic studies used to support
comprehensive plan amendments or development concurrency reviews if
applicable. The FDOT reviewer should be familiar with the local ordinances and
how they apply to the review process. Pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S.,
comments from reviewing agencies, including FDOT, on plan amendments are
limited to adverse impacts on important state resources and facilities, which is
currently undefined. In general, FDOT is limited to issues within the FDOTs
jurisdiction as it relates to transportation facilities and resources for a particular
site. The FDOT reviewer may include technical guidance in their review.
Distance from Site Another method of establishing a study area for mitigation analysis is by
defining as a given distance based on the number of trips generated by a
development. For example, the study area will encompass a radius of 0.5 miles
for developments generating 50 peak hour external trips. Some local
governments have adopted a tiered approach to determining a study area.
For example, a small scale analysis might be required for developments

generating between 50-100 trips with a study area radius of .5 miles, and a
large scale study might be required for developments of greater than 100 trips
with a 3 mile study radius. Due to the potential for varying methodologies
among local governments, FDOT reviewers should pay particular attention to
trips that cross jurisdictional boundaries. Adjustments to the study area
boundaries may be needed to account for site specific circumstances. The
Transportation Concurrency Best Practices Guidebook (DCA 2007) has detailed
descriptions of these methods of determining impact areas.
Exhibit 4 shows an example of the traffic impact area using a radius from the
development based on trip generation.
Exhibit 4
Example of Traffic
Impact Area or
Study Area
Source: Transportation
Concurrency Best Practices
Guide, DCA 2007
2.2.2 Time Horizons Analysis Years

In general, the analysis years should include:
The existing year
The opening date of the proposed development
Completion of major phases in a multi-year development
In some cases, it may be needed to take into account:
Long-range transportation plans or Local Government
Comprehensive Plan (LGCP) horizons,
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) prepared Transportation
Improvement Program horizons or other significant transportation
network changes
Corresponding local governments Transportation and Capital
Improvement Elements (CIE)
Analysis years should be clearly defined in the report (i.e., 2010 Existing
Conditions instead of just Existing Conditions) and agreed to during the
methodology process.
A change in the proposed development phasing (notice of proposed change in

the DRI process see Chapter 4) may require a new analysis year be considered
suggests study horizons as a function of the type of site impact review.
Exhibit 5
Suggested Study Horizons
Local Existing, short-term (5-year), and long-term (10-year
Government minimum or greater) analyses are required for
Comprehensive Plans comprehensive plan elements.
Developments The year that the first phase of development begins,
of Regional the anticipated opening year of each major phase of
Impact (DRI)
the development (assuming build out and full
occupancy of each phase) and the final build-out year
(or year of complete development assuming full
occupancy) should be considered for all DRI type
analyses.
Concurrency Typically these developments occur in a single phase.
Reviews Therefore, the anticipated opening year of the
DOC development assuming build out and full occupancy is
14-96 the only horizon year required. Local government
Access Permits requirements should be reviewed.
Access Permits Depends on the size and scope of the development.
Many will be studied only for the opening year, and
larger developments may have longer time horizons.
For information on driveway connection permits,
please refer to Rule 14-96, Florida Administrative Code.
Under Section 163.3177, F.S., a comprehensive plan must be based on a

planning period of at least 10 years with a Five-Year Schedule of Capital
Improvements located within the CIE. Additional planning periods for specific
plan components, elements, land use amendments, or projects are allowed.
The Five-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements must identify facilities and any
associated funding necessary to meet adopted LOS during a 5-year period;
however there is no requirement that the CIE prove the schedule is financially
feasible. Listed facility improvements must be identified as either funded or
unfunded and given a level of priority for funding.
Legislative changes in 2011 eliminated mandatory transportation concurrency

requirement for local governments. Local governments may choose to repeal
concurrency and establish other approaches such as mobility-fee based
systems. Pursuant to Section 163.3180(5)(h)1., F.S., local governments should
consult with FDOT whenever a SIS facility is expected to be impacted by a
comprehensive plan amendment. There are stipulations if a local government
chooses to continue using transportation concurrency.
2.2.3 Travel Adjustment Factors

Analysis Periods K Transportation impact analyses are usually based on a peak-hour analysis. The
Factor analysis period should be related to the expected peaking patterns on the
roadway and anticipated development traffic.
WEB Selecting a proper time period to analyze is crucial for planning and designing
FDOT transportation facilities. For example, the K factor, which is described in more
Standard K Factor detail under Chapter 2.2.4, is the ratio of the peak hour traffic volume being
analyzed to the Annual Average Daily Traffic for a specific facility which is an
important component in selecting a proper time period. Detailed discussion of
the K factors and analysis period are found in the FDOT Quality/Level of Service
(QLOS) Handbook and website.
The analysis period selected should be the period that has the highest
combination of development and background traffic. This is referred to as the
critical hour. To illustrate this concept, typical critical hours for selected land
uses are illustrated in .
PDF The analysis period to be used should be clearly stated in the methodology. The
Project Traffic FDOT reviewer should check that appropriate factors have been applied to field
Forecasting collected data so that the appropriate analysis period is being used. Detailed
information about the application of adjustment factors to collected traffic
counts is found in the FDOT Project Traffic Forecasting Handbook.
Exhibit 6
Typical Critical Hour Analysis Period for Various Types of Developments
Weekday Street
Peak Hour
Development AM PM Other
Residential X X
Office X X
Shopping Center X (including freestanding Discount Superstores)
Intersection capacity X
Access Design X Saturday 11:00-15:00
Restaurants Fast Food X 11:00-13:00
Dinner Trade X
Industrial Industrial Plant shifts may precede typical
X X
commuter adjacent street peak hour
Hotel/Motel X
Schools Grade X 14:30-15:30
High X 14:30-15:30
College X X
Medical Hospitals X X 6:30-8:00 14:30-15:30
Doctors offices X 9:00-10:00 16:00-18:00
Convenience
X X
Markets/Gas
Sports/Recreational Peak entry/exit of particular events
Adapted From: ANALYSIS OF TRAFFIC IMPACT FOR NEW DEVELOPMENTS

PAUL C. BOX, Skokie, Illinois Public Works Magazine: February 1981
Trip Generation and Trip generation is the process by which the number and type of trips associated
Adjustments with a given land use is estimated. Trip generation may be the most critical
element of the transportation impact analysis because it estimates the amount of
vehicular travel associated with a specific land use or development. An estimate
of trip generation from the development using FDOT approved trip generation
methods, such as Institute of Transportation Engineer (ITE)s Trip Generation
Manual 9th Edition, is required in all analyses.
Due to the amount of guidance on the subject on trip generation, we have put
most of the trip generation guidance under Chapter 2.4.
PDF If there is no land use code in the Trip Generation Handbook

for a specific development, a local government may require the
Best Practices
applicant to either use the equations or rates of a similar land
use or conduct trip generation studies at sites with
characteristics similar to those of the proposed development.
Source: Transportation Concurrency Best Practices, DCA,

2007
When dealing with adjustments to trip generation that are made to lower the
gross trip generation (for example internal capture percentages for mixed-use
projects, transit oriented development, pass-by capture rates for retail land
uses, etc.) they should be accompanied by sufficient logical justification and/or
empirical data early in the process. This should be a major item of discussion
during the Methodology Development phase.
Use of Manual Future conditions for impact assessments can be estimated using manual
Methods and Travel methods, travel demand forecasting models, or a combination of the two. For
Demand Forecasting the purposes of this handbook, Manual Methods are those methods of trip
Models for Future generation NOT done with large scale travel demand models, such as Florida
Conditions Standard Urban Transportation Model Structure. The most common examples
of Manual Methods are trip generation estimation done through the use of
trip generation rates or equations, and background traffic growth calculation
done using growth factors or adding known trips from other developments to
the surrounding road system.
In addition to trip generation, trip distribution is needed to determine the travel

patterns (origins and destinations) of the trips generated which is described in
more detail under Chapter 2.6. The method to be used to project trip
distribution will often depend on the size and scope of the project, as well as
the availability of a travel demand model for the study area. The method to be
used should be determined as early as possible in the process through
coordination with FDOT and local agencies.
In many cases, a hybrid approach can be used that uses elements of both
manual and model methods. For example, background conditions and trip
generation might be estimated using manual methods while trip distribution
and assignment might be based on large scale model methods. In another
example, if the FDOT reviewer questions the distribution and assignment of
trips generated by a development analyzed using a manual method, the
component potentially could be compared with the results of an assignment
made with a travel demand model.
Other Major Major committed developments are developments that have an approved
Committed Development Order (DO) or an approved concurrency management certificate.
Developments and These should be considered in the transportation impact analysis. These trips
Redevelopment are known as Vested Trips. Vested Trips are taken into account when
analyzing transportation deficiencies. Pursuant to Section 163.3180, F.S., the
term "transportation deficiency" means a facility or facilities on which the
adopted level-of-service standard is exceeded by the existing, committed, and
Other major committed vested trips, plus additional projected background trips from any source other
developments should be than the development project under review, and trips that are forecast by
considered in any site
established traffic standards, including traffic modeling, consistent with the
impact analysis
University of Florida's Bureau of Economic and Business Research medium
population projections. Additional projected background trips are to be
coincident with the particular stage or phase of development under review.
For additional guidance, please see Sections 163.3177(1)(f), 163.3180, and
163.3184, F.S.
The traffic from these developments is part of the background traffic and is
addressed in greater detail in Chapter 2.5. The manner in which committed
development will be accounted for in the analysis should be determined as
early as possible in the process through coordination with FDOT and local
agencies.
Redevelopment Sites If a new development is being proposed on a site that previously generated a
significant amount of traffic, the reviewer should determine, in advance, the
treatment of the traffic that was generated on that site.
How to account for
previous traffic from site
In order to encourage in-fill development, some local governments and other
that is being redeveloped
agencies discount the older site developed traffic and treat it as part of the
Background Traffic. This will depend on local government practices, and other
considerations such as, the time the property was vacant and existing traffic
conditions around the site.
2.2.4 Standard K Factors

The ratio of peak hour to Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) factor (K) is used
in the Department's planning through design phases. It is one of the most
critical factors in transportation analysis.
In an effort to simplify the confusion around the K factor, FDOT transitioned

into using a standard peak factor for most planning level analysis in 2012. Its
called the Standard K. Originally the term K was developed for the practice
of converting daily volumes to the 30th highest hourly volume of the year. This
became K30, commonly referred to as the "design hour". Over time the practice
of using K30, K100, peak to daily ratios or other approaches has created confusion
throughout the state on the most appropriate K factor to use. During peak
travel hours many Florida roadways are oversaturated or constrained: travel
demand exceeds the capacity of the roadways to handle it. Using measured K
factors for oversaturated roads distort how roadways should be planned and
designed. Measured volumes simply cannot exceed a roadway's capacity even
during peak hours. Especially problematic is the determination of appropriate K
values in large urbanized areas. Exhibit 7 displays the following standard K
factors below.
Exhibit 7 Facility Type Standard K

Area
Factors
Standard K Factors (Population) [Examples]
(%AADT)
Freeways 8.0-9.0
Large Urbanized Areas with Core Freeways
(1,000,000+) [Jacksonville, Miami] Arterials 9.0
Other Urbanized Areas Freeways 9.0

(50,000+) [Tallahassee, Ft. Myers] Arterials 9.0
Transitioning to Urbanized Areas Freeways 9.0

(Uncertain) [Fringe Development Area] Arterials 9.0
Urban Freeways 10.5

(5,000-50,000) [Lake City, Key West] Arterials 9.0
Freeways 10.5
Rural
Highways 9.5
(5,000) [Chipley, Everglades]
Arterials 9.5
Please go to the FDOT Website on this issue at:
WEB
FDOT www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/programs/sm/transition/information/default.shtm
Standard K Factor bit.ly/1gq5dpP
Standard Process | 2.3 Data Collection Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
2.3 Existing Conditions Analysis and Data Collection

The existing traffic information (year, adjustment factors regarding peak
season, daily and peak hour traffic) should be discussed during the
Transportation Methodology component and accepted by the reviewing
agencies before conducting traffic counts.
This analysis establishes a basis for comparison of the proposed development.

The basic analysis should consist of identifying the operational and physical
characteristics of the transportation system using professionally accepted
PDF
practices. FDOTs guidelines for data collection found in the most current FDOT
QLOS Handbook Quality/Level of Service Handbook, This Handbook also addresses measuring
the quality of service for transit, and non-motorized travel.
2.3.1 Data Collection

Types of data generally required for the study area are discussed below.
summarizes the data collection and existing conditions requirements.
Exhibit 8 Proposed Site Development

Characteristics
Common Data Needs
for Site Impact Site locations, boundaries and development
Anticipated area of influence
Analysis
Transportation
Systems Data
Transportation Network
(# lanes, facility type, area type
Transit Service Data
(Routes Headways, etc.)
Transportation Management Organizations
Pedestrian & Bicycle Facilities
Planned & Programmed Transportation
Improvements
Traffic Control Data
(signals, signing, etc.)
Transportation
Demand Data
Traffic Volume & Turning Movement Counts

Traffic Characteristics
Transit Service Ridership
Pedestrian & Bicycle Usage
Land Use and

Demographic Data
Existing & Future Land Use

Comprehensive Plan Requirements
Socioeconomic Data & Forecasts
Other Approved Developments & Commitments
2.3.2 Proposed Site Development Characteristics

The proposed site development characteristics will identify the location of the
proposed development, site boundaries and other site related characteristics.
The proposed land uses
This information should be presented based on the following guidance:
should be identified by
intensity and A site plan or master plan should be provided that clearly indicates
classification consistent the location of proposed land uses and intensities, and internal
with ITEs Trip roadways
Generation Manual
The proposed land uses should be identified by intensity and
classification consistent with ITEs Trip Generation Manual as much
as possible
The proposed traffic signals, median openings, major driveway and
access locations serving the site should be identified
The required study area or anticipated area of influence for the
proposed development should be identified with site development
characteristics
2.3.3 Existing Transportation System Data

The existing transportation system data will include the physical and functional
characteristics of the transportation system. Required data to be provided
include:
Geometric data such as the number of lanes, locations of

intersections and signals (see example below)
Required data
The access management classification and jurisdiction responsible

for the facility (state, county or local) for all facilities within the area
of influence
The area type (rural, transitioning, urban or urbanized area)
Identification of transit, bicycle, and pedestrian routes
Crash information for all modes, including pedestrian crashes. This
may point out problem areas for future remediation
Identification of programmed improvements on state highways and

significant regional, local (city or county) roads
Transit facilities and services within the next three years or through
each major phase of the proposed development
Identification of planned improvements that are reported in the
MPO long-range transportation plan
Identification and review of multimodal information, data, and
considerations with appropriate agencies
Data Considerations When considering potential transit services, the density, diversity, and distance
for Future Transit factors associated with a proposed development should all be considered.
Service Specifically, transit needs should be assessed in the context of the types of
housing, mixture of land uses, density and intensity of development, as well as
walking distance to transit stops.
As the need for transit services is reviewed, the focus of the analysis should
extend outward from development projects and activity nodes to consider the
potential for modifying existing transit service.
The study area should not be restricted in terms of walking distance; rather the
reviewer should consider, in consultation with the transit provider, whether it is
desirable to extend service a modest distance to serve new development.
The transit development plan (TDP) may be reviewed and the transit agency
serving the area should be contacted to determine the current and committed
service in the area.
PDF
Framework Additional transit-related tools and resources are available to assist reviewers,
for TOD including Guidance for Producing a Transit Development Plan, and A Framework
for Transit Oriented Development in Florida.
2.3.4 Traffic Counts and other Transportation Data

Existing transportation demand data will include current and historical traffic
volumes, turning movement counts, traffic characteristics such as peak and
directional factors, ridership data, bicycle and pedestrian activity. All traffic
analysis summaries and reports should clearly identify the specific year of
analysis.
Exhibit 9
Example of Existing
Intersection Counts
Numbers in parenthesis are PM Peak
and without are AM Peak
Where FDOT data is not available, the applicant is responsible for collecting
data in accordance with review agency guidance and procedures. Data from
years when significant transportation network changes occurred or major
phases of related developments were opened to traffic should be noted and
possibly excluded if they could skew the trend analysis.
For a planning analysis of existing conditions, FDOT recommends calculating

roadway traffic volumes and specific traffic factors based on 3-day counts. This
would be 72-hours of consecutive counts taken within the time frame of
Monday afternoon through Friday morning in urbanized, transitioning and
urban areas. For rural areas, 7-day counts are usually recommended. Weekend
counts may be necessary for some developments (sport/recreational land use
activities such as theme parks and stadiums).
For DRIs and other larger developments, the last five years of historical data
WEB
should be collected (if available). FDOTs existing Annual Average Daily Traffic
FTI Request Form (AADT) counts, classification counts, and Automated Telemetry Recorder (ATR)
sites (sometimes called Permanent Count Stations) could be a prime source for
historical traffic data.
This data is stored in the traffic characteristics inventory (TCI) and roadway
characteristics inventory (RCI) databases maintained by FDOT. The
Transportation Statistics Office provides a graphical interface, Florida
Transportation Information (FTI) application available in DVD format which
provides access to traffic data collected at over 15,000 traffic count locations.
WEB FDOT Traffic Counts also available on-line at:

Florida Traffic www2.dot.state.fl.us/FloridaTrafficOnline/viewer.html
Online
PDF The two major sources for guidance on data collection and use are:
FDOT Quality/Level of Service Handbook
QLOS Handbook
FDOT Project Traffic Forecasting Handbook
PDF Collected data is critical but it should be backed up by a good knowledge of the
Project Traffic area only gained through field visits. Moving once again to good advice from
Forecasting the Mike on Traffic blog. This entry is pertinent to both applicants and
reviewers to ensure the accuracy of the assessment for the existing
transportation system that would be impacted by a project.
Top 9 Things to Review with a Field Visit
Why do you need to go out in the field when everything is right

The aerials are not there on the aerial? First, because the aerials arent always
always right right.
The aerials may not be up to date. You may need to adjust your data collection
to account for reality. If a traffic study is based on an obsolete road network it
would have zero credibility.
Field Review of The second reason to go out to the site is that there are a lot of important
Physical Features details you cant always see on an aerial. In addition to verifying the
information on your hand sketches is correct, add the following details to them
while you are in the field:
There are a lot of Transit Stops
important details you
cant always see on an
Traffic Signal Operations (Protected Left Turn Phasing,
aerial. Protected/Permitted Left Turn Phasing, etc.).
No Turn on Red Restrictions
Parking Restrictions
Speed Limits
Road construction in the area that would impact normal traffic
counts
Construction or signs for new developments near the site
Excessive grades or slopes that make widening a road/
intersection difficult
Any objects on corners of intersections that block a clear view of
oncoming traffic or pedestrians
Take plenty of pictures While you are at the site, take photographs. Get one photo of each
approach to each study intersection. A smartphone can be a useful field
tool with its maps, camera, stopwatch, etc). Keep a log of the photos to
identify them later. These pictures may save you from future field visits.
Field Review of In addition to documenting the existing conditions of the environment,

Traffic Operations you should observe how traffic operates in your study area during peak
hours. Things to look for include:
Do shoulders get used by cars as separate right turn lanes?

Do the traffic signals along a corridor seem to be coordinated so
through traffic moves down the corridor smoothly?
Using a stop watch to perform a few spot checks of each traffic
signal cycle.
Are there any queues that back up out of turn lanes into the
through lane or do queues extend back from one intersection
blocking the upstream intersection?
Is it difficult to turn onto a major street from a cross street which
is controlled by a stop sign?
Consider the routes traffic will take to get to or leave your site.
These firsthand observations can add credibility with the

Top 9 Things public. If you have been out there during peak hour, you can
WEB to Review respond to comments with personal experience and how these
observations were incorporated into your recommendations.
A field visit is a good part of the quality control process to ensure the details in
your traffic study are correct.
Source: Mike on Traffic - Mike Spack - www.mikeontraffic.com/top-9-things-to-

review-with-a-field-visit/
WEB Heres a link to another link to a useful article from Mike Spack at Mike on
Top 11 Items Traffic 11 Items to Get From Aerials When Preparing for a Field Visit
from Aerials
www.mikeontraffic.com/11-items-to-get-from-aerials-when-preparing-for-a-
field-visit/
2.3.5 Land Use and Demographic Data for Large Scale Models
Land use and demographic data will include future land use classification,
intensity, population, employment, comprehensive plan information. If a large
scale transportation model will be used in the analysis, the transportation
See Exhibit 15 analysis zones (TAZ) representing the location of the proposed development
for guidance on
should be identified. The socioeconomic data contained in the ZDATA files of the
converting employment
data into business square model should be verified for accuracy and reasonableness within the study area.
footage. Pursuant to Section 163.3177(1)(f)3., F.S., demographic data for comprehensive
plans must be based upon permanent and seasonal population estimates and
projections, which shall either be those provided by the University of Floridas
Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) or generated by the local
government based upon a professionally acceptable methodology. For land use,
local governments must provide a minimum amount needed for land uses
based upon BEBR midrange for a 10 year planning period. However, need must
be more than just population projections and must provide adequate supply for
real estate market. For areas designated as Areas of Critical State Concern, as
defined under Section 380.05, F.S., associated administrative rules shall apply.
Other committed developments should also be identified, within the area of
influence. Also document adopted amendments to the comprehensive plan or
other development agreements. The extent of data required for other committed
development should be agreed upon during the methodology meeting.
Model Data When considering the use of large scale transportation model data, it is
Considerations important to understand the model application and the base data. Traffic
projections from fringe areas of a travel demand model are often considered
less reliable and should be carefully evaluated.
Level of Service FDOT has adopted a level of service policy and procedure in 2012. The Policy
Analysis statement is the following:
It is the Departments intent to plan, design and operate the State

Highway System at an acceptable level of service for the traveling
public. The automobile mode level of service standards for the State
Highway System during peak travel hours are (D) in urbanized
PDF
areas and (C) outside urbanized areas. See Procedure No. 525-000-
LOS Procedure
525-000-006-a 006, Level of Service Standards and Highway Capacity Analysis
for the State Highway System for more information. No specific
level of service standards are established for other highway modes
(e.g., bus, pedestrian, bicycle). Quality/level of service for these
modes is determined on a case by case basis.
The complete procedure can be found at:

http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/programs/sm/los/pdfs/LOS%20Procedure.pdf
PDF LOS determinations should be based on methodologies consistent with the

latest Highway Capacity Manual , the latest FDOT Quality/Level of Service
QLOS Handbook Handbook or a methodology determined by FDOT as being comparable.
For existing conditions, Level of Service analysis should be performed along
each segment of the roadway system identified in the methodology component
within the area of influence. These facilities will include the major roadways
and intersections within the study area.
Critical intersections for analysis may be identified based on the importance of
the roadways or the volume of development traffic using the intersection.
Although arterial facility LOS is stressed in highway LOS standards, detailed
analyses at selected intersections may be necessary to evaluate specific
movements. Both facility LOS and intersection analysis are appropriate to
determine impacts from proposed developments.
The procedures in the latest version of the FDOT Quality/Level of Service
Handbook may be sufficient to perform existing condition analyses at the
facility level.
If a freeway interchange is affected by the proposed development, additional
freeway segment, ramp and weave analysis procedures from the latest
WEB Interchange approved software may be required. A more detailed description of the FDOT
Access Request Level of Service analysis tools are near the end of this chapter under Chapter
Users Guide 2.10.1.
For more information on interchange analysis you may refer to the Interchange
Access Request Users Guide and the Traffic Analysis Handbook. These are
expected to be completed in 2014. To check on their availability at:
www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/programs/sm/intjus/default.shtm.
Standard Process | 2.4 Trip Generation Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
2.4 Trip Generation of the New Development

Trip generation is the process by which the number and type of trips associated
with a given land use is estimated. Trip generation may be the most critical
element of the transportation impact analysis reviewed by FDOT because it
estimates the amount of vehicular travel associated with a specific land use or
development. An estimate of trip generation from the development using FDOT
and professionally accepted methods should be required in impact studies even
when the model method is used.
A/V Adjustments to trip generation that are made to lower the gross trip generation
Trip Generation (such as internal capture percentages for mixed-use projects, pass-by capture
Basics and Pitfalls rates, etc.) should be accompanied by sufficient logical justification or empirical
data early in the process. FDOT suggests this be a major item of discussion
during Methodology Development and during the ongoing analysis.
(Note this presentation was made when the 7th Edition of Trip Generation was the most current.
However it still covers the important concepts)
2.4.1 Trip Generation Data

To understand trip generation, it is first necessary to define a trip end. For the
A trip end either begins
purposes of this handbook, a trip end is a single or one-direction vehicle
or ends in the movement with either the origin or the destination (entering or exiting
development movement) inside the study site and one origin or destination external to the
land use.
To avoid confusion, all trips in this section of the handbook (regarding Manual
Methods of Trip Generation) will be vehicle movements. The term person-
One of the most
trips will be used when the number of people traveling is referred to. Person
recognized and
trips are usually a term used in the model calculations of trip generation. For
comprehensive
compilations of trip example, a family of four traveling from home to school would represent one
databases available vehicle trip and four person-trips.
PDF ITE Trip generation databases have been developed over time and can be used to
Trip Generation estimate the number of trips likely to be associated with a given land use. One
Manual of the most recognized and comprehensive report of trip generation data
available is the ITEs Trip Generation Manual. It is comprised of data collected
nationally. A wide variety of land uses are represented in The Trip Generation
Manual, though users should exercise judgment in selecting and applying trip
rates for their situation. http://www.ite.org/tripgeneration/trippubs.asp
Source: ITE Trip Generation, 8th Edition, Ite.org
Data Applicability The Trip Generation Manual contains a tremendous amount of data; however,
that data is not necessarily appropriate in all situations. The Trip Generation
Manual users should carefully review the data available and consider its
Evaluate whether the trip
generation data is applicability in the context of each projects circumstances.
applicable to the specific Some key items to consider in assessing the usefulness of The Trip Generation
project Manual data for a particular application include:
Selection of the land use closest to that being assessed is critical
(Read the land use description about where and when sites were
studied). Many land uses in ITE may sound similar but have very
different trip generation rates.
The number of data points available: some of the ITE data is very
limited in terms of sample size and/or number of analysis periods
Trip patterns change from suburban to urban areas (most of the
data in The Trip Generation Manual reflects suburban development
settings with free parking and limited transit service
Trip patterns may evolve over time (for example, drive-in bank trip
generation rates have steadily decreased over the last decade due to
the evolution of the banking industry and the introduction of direct
Collect additional deposit, web-based banking, automatic teller machines , etc.)
empirical data when
needed.
ITE encourages users, when practical, to collect local data to
supplement the ITE data; particularly in situations where data
samples are small or other conditions warrant
It will sometimes be necessary to collect additional empirical data or document
other supplemental studies in the absence of sufficient comprehensive data
from The Trip Generation Manual or other resources.
Exhibit 10
ITE Trip Generation Manual Page Example
Land Use
ITE Land Use Code
Independent Variable
Time Period
Sample Size Percent of total trip

Average Size of ends entering and
Independent exiting the site during
Variable indicated time period
Weighted Trip Generation Rate: Minimum and maximum trip The standard deviation
The weighted average number generation rates from the estimates the difference among
of trip ends per one unit of entire range of studies the trip generation rates in all
independent variable reported studies for a land use and
e.g. Dwelling Unit independent variable
Dependent
Variable
Independent
Variable
Best fit regression equation; expresses the optimal Measure of correlation between 2
mathematical relationship between two or more variables, expressed on a scale of
related variables. If the variables are related 0 to +1. The closer to +1 the R2 is,
linearly, the equation will be : T=aX+b. the better the correlation
In a non-linear relationship: Ln(T)=aLn(X) + b. between the variables
2.4.2 Use of Trip Generation Rates or Equations

The average rates provided in ITEs The Trip Generation Manual are given, but
you should look at the range of data selected and the number of sites sampled.
ITEs Trip Generation
Manual Trip generation equations are also provided in ITEs The Trip Generation Manual
(section 3.4) provides that can provide better estimates of trip generation under certain conditions. In
guiding principles for general, the fitted equations tend to reflect a decreasing trip rate as building
selecting equations or
size increases. This is particularly true with large shopping centers and office
average rates
developments.
Many of the land use categories in The Trip Generation Manual provide both an
average trip rate and an equation to estimate the number of trips for that use.
FDOT often applies the guidance in ITEs Trip Generation Manual for selecting
regression equations or average rates. The ITE Trip Generation Manual only
provides equations where their national committee felt there was sufficient
data. This does not always mean that the equation is always the best choice.
Section 3.4 of the Trip Generation Handbook, Second Edition contains a detailed
method for determining the choice of average rate or equation. However,
sometimes a plainly numerical approach as suggested in the Trip Generation
Handbook is inadequate. The professional will look at the size and type of
development they are proposing and see where it fits in the graph provided.
The professional should look at the number of similar size developments before
recommending the trip generation method.
2.4.3 Trip Types

PDF ITE After the number of trips has been estimated, the type of trips should also be
Trip Generation addressed. The Trip Generation Manual 9th Edition defines three basic types of
Manual trips generated by a development: primary, pass-by and diverted. Exhibit 11
illustrates the types of trips from the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition
illustrates the trip types.
PRIMARY SITE Origin/Destination

Exhibit 11 TRIPS
Types of Trips
Source: ITE SITE
PASS-BY
Origin Destination
TRIPS
DISCOUNT
OUTLET MALL
DIVERTED
TRIPS Origin Destination
INTERSTATE
Primary Trips Primary trips are trips made for the specific purpose of visiting the generator.
The stop at the generator is the primary reason for the trip ITE Trip Generation
Manual, 9th Edition. Primary trips are new trips on the network.
Pass-by trips Pass-by trips are trips that are currently on the roadway system and pass
With pass-by trips, the total directly by a generator on the way to the primary destination. These trips are
driveway volumes are not involved in a trip chain of destinations with neither the origin or the final
reduced. destination of the primary trip being in the development. Pass-by trips can be
convenience-oriented; for example stopping to refuel a vehicle during a
commute from work. Pass-by trips are applied only to retail-oriented land uses
and would have traveled on the roadway adjacent to the retail land use even if
the retail was not present.
Diverted trips Diverted trips, like pass-by trips, are not new to the system. However, diverted
trips are now using a segment of the roadway system that they previously were
not. Facilities that receive diverted trips may require analysis of the impacts of
With diverted trips, the
total driveway volumes the development trips.
are not reduced.
In most situations, no reduction is made for diverted trips because they tend to
be difficult to account for. Reviewers may allow consideration of diverted trip
impacts on a case-specific basis when there is a clear reason for doing so and
Diverted trips are
the diversion can be reasonably estimated. For example, a reasonable case
counted as new trips
where they travel on might be made for considering diverted trips in the analysis of a large
segments required to commercial development proposed to be located adjacent to an Interstate
reach the site where they interchange. If use of diverted trips were to be justified and supported by FDOT
previously did not travel in a situation such as the example above, then the diverted trips would be
treated similar to pass-by trips. However, their impact to the development
access points and signals is important.
In all cases, pass-by and diverted trip rates should be justified by the applicant,
and clearly documented in the analysis.
Estimating the The Trip Generation Manual 9th Edition provides pass-by and diverted trip data
Number of Pass-by & for several different retail land uses as well as guidance on the process for
Diverted Trips estimating pass-by trips.
A/V The A/V presentation provides examples of pass-by trips, works the example of
10% of Adjacent Street traffic on page 44 and additional examples.
Pass By Trips
Pass-by Trip Impacts Properly estimating the number of pass-by trips is important because even
though they do not add extra trips to the surrounding roadway system, they do
impact the traffic at the driveways and all the turning movements expected at
these driveways.
The percentage of trips that can be classified as pass-by for a site will
The number of pass-by vary by the type of land use, time of day, type and volume of traffic
trips is calculated after carried on the adjacent street, and the size of development;
accounting for internal Credit for pass-by trips is usually only allowed for retail and some
trips
commercial land uses such as fast-food restaurants with drive-
through windows, service stations, and drive-in banks; and
The number of pass-by trips is calculated after accounting for
internal trips (Total Site Trip Generation Internal Trips = External
Trips; apply pass-by reduction to External Trips).
Pass-by rates should be In all cases, pass-by rates should be justified by the applicant and approved by
approved by the lead the reviewing agency. The pass-by trips estimated in the trip generation
reviewing agency
component are preliminary.
2.4.4 Explanation of the 10 Percent of the Adjacent Street Traffic

Final pass-by trips are estimated following trip assignment when the number of
pass-by trips considered can be compared with the total traffic on the facility.
Proper application of pass-by trips requires that the following check for a
reasonableness or common sense check, involving a comparison of the
number of pass-by trips and assuring that they do not exceed 10 percent of the
adjacent street traffic volume during the peak hour. Explanation is provided in
the next section.
The FDOT-approved methodology for determining the 10 percent

reasonableness check divides the total pass-by trip reduction by the adjacent-
street traffic volume. This process ensures the resulting pass-by volume is less
than 10 percent of the adjacent street traffic. The calculation would become
more complex when the development is served by more than one arterial
roadway. Another consideration is the availability of median openings directly
serving the property. This 10 percent value is a rule-of-thumb and not a
statistically studied factor and should only be used as a measure of
reasonableness.
Historically, some applicants and reviewers determined the maximum allowable

pass-by trips by taking 10 percent of the adjacent-street traffic and allowing this
number of trips to enter and then exit the retail development. FDOT does not
accept this method because it results in up to 20 percent of adjacent street
traffic to be subtracted from the base trip generation as pass-by trips.
Example Proposed: 500,000 gross square feet of shopping

1,811 peak-hour generation (7th Edition Trip Generation)
A/V
869 entering, 942 exiting (48%/52% split from Trip Generation)
Pass By Trips 24% pass-by reduction (Trip Generation Handbook)
= 435 pass-by trip ends (209 entering, 226 exiting)
Adjacent street traffic volume (peak-hour two-way): 3,000
10% of adjacent street traffic = 300
Because the calculated number of pass-by trips (435) exceeds 10 percent of the
adjacent street traffic (300), the number of pass-by trips should be reduced to
300 and the directional split re-applied. Exhibit 12 illustrates the correct
methodology. This same method can be used for more than one roadway and
also take into account medians which redistribute left turns into properties,
only the calculations will be more complex.
Exhibit 12
10% Pass-by Trip Example
Application of for a 500K ft2 Shopping Center
10 Percent Pass- Peak hour two-way traffic = 3000 v/hr
by Trips
Initial Correct
ITE Trip Generation peak hour trips 1811 1811 10% of 3000 =
Pass-by rate = 24% pass-by trips - 435 - 300 300 maximum
New trips generated 1379 1511 pass-by trips
WRONG CORRECT
Shopping Center Shopping Center

500K ft2 500K ft2
pass-by trips pass-by trips pass-by trips pass-by trips

226 Exit 209 Enter 156 Exit 144 Enter
Peak hour two-way traffic = 3000 v/hr 10% of 3000 = 300 maximum pass-by trips
Adjust pass-by trips to equal 300
Pass-by Trip Pass-by trips are assigned to the developments driveways based on local
Assignment knowledge of expected trip patterns and traffic volumes. When considering
pass-by trips, the distribution of driveway volumes may change and be related
to the street traffic. The analysis of pass-by trips should occur in two steps:
First, determine the number of new trips and pass-by trips for the site, then
assign the pass-by trips in proportion to the street traffic and the driveways,
and then assign the new trips in accordance with standard trip distribution
procedures. Once the number of pass-by trips is determined, their assignment
should be prepared in a way that reflects local travel patterns.
The following section requires some knowledge of large scale regional

transportation planning models. In Florida, the most popular modeling
framework is the Florida Standard Urban Transportation Model Structure
(FSUTMS). This section will be using technical terms. For more information on
FSUTMS, see Chapter 2.5.4 and the FSUTMS website.
2.4.5 Pass-by Trips and Model Volumes

Travel demand models such as FSUTMS are sometimes used to develop traffic
estimates. Because site trips will tend to displace non-site trips when
comparing a with and without site trip modeling process, special generator
Special generators modeling using FSUTMS should be based on total external trip generation
modeling using FSUTMS
before any pass-by trip reduction. Trip assignments are run with and without
should be based on total
external trip generation site development (identifying total and development related trips on all links).
before any pass-by trip Pass-by trips can then be deducted from the site development volumes on the
reduction highway network links (though the pass-by trips should remain at the site
driveways). In all cases, pass-by and diverted trip rates should be justified by
the applicant and approved by the lead review agency.
Model Method of The model method of site impact analysis typically uses an adopted regional
Analysis for Trip travel demand model for development generated trips. Model trip generation
Generation estimations of the site being studied should be adjusted to match estimations
from ITEs Trip Generation Manual or other approved method. Trip generation
should be calculated off line using ITEs Trip Generation Manual or other
approved method. Model trip generation estimations should be adjusted to
match estimations from ITEs Trip Generation Manual or field data. The
following summarizes the steps required to estimate trip distribution and
internal capture using regional travel demand models:
1. Develop a new transportation analysis zone (TAZ) for the development
and provide connectors from this zones centroid to the
transportation network. The connectors should be coded consistently
with other centroid connectors in the model (facility type, area type
and number of lanes). The connections should be made to a facility that
is appropriate to the intensity and type of land uses associated with the
development and is consistent with the preliminary site access plan.
Residential and nonresidential land uses should be modeled in separate
TAZs unless they will be located in a single mixed-used site.
Socioeconomic data consistent with the development program should
be coded within ZDATA 1 and ZDATA 2 files.
Model trip generation 2. Conduct initial model run to:
estimations of the site
Obtain initial person trip generation outputs to extract the trip
being studied should be
purpose percentages.
adjusted to match
estimations from ITEs Extract total vehicle trips from the development zones using the
Trip Generation Manual O-D matrix output.
or other approved 3. Estimate site trip generation by using ITEs Trip Generation Manual.
method
Although preliminary estimates of pass-by and diverted traffic may be
estimated using information contained in ITEs Trip Generation Manual,
pass-by and diverted trips cannot be calculated when using the model
method and may therefore be ignored.
4. Compare vehicle trip generation obtained manually to the large scale
transportation planning model. If the difference is greater than 5
percent for any given land use, the total external site trip generation
obtained using the planning model should be adjusted until
convergence occurs with manually estimated trip generation using the
following methodology. Identify any difference in vehicle trips between
manual and model calculations.
Convert vehicle trip difference to person trips by using vehicle
occupancy factors coded within the model.
Insert person trip difference values in the ZDATA3 file. Trip
purpose percentages obtained from Step 2 should be assigned to
person trips entered into the ZFDATA3 file.
Rerun the model and repeat Steps 2 through 4 until convergence
is obtained between the manual and model vehicle trip values.
Note: Later iterations may be required to reach a level of
convergence that satisfies the lead reviewing agency. A rule of
thumb of a maximum difference of 5 percent between the
manually generated and model generated vehicle trips for the
project is commonly used. A table comparing the trip generation
based on ITEs Trip Generation Manual and the model-generated
trips should be provided for each development TAZ.
Note: If the model being used contains transit and highway
networks, the total of automobile trip making (single-occupant,
and HOV) should be compared to the ITE-based trip generation
reduced for the estimated transit usage approved by FDOT.
5. Estimate internal capture using the guidelines contained in ITEs Trip
Generation Manual or other mutually agreed to method.
6. Calculate internal capture using the planning model. Internal capture is
estimated by planning models as trips originating and arriving within
project TAZs. The inclusion of intrazonal trips (trips that never leave a
project TAZ) in internal capture estimations are subject to approval by
FDOT. Model internal capture could be conducted based on the
calculation methodology presented with FDOT approval.
7. If trips are anticipated to have an origin or destination external to the
models study area, ZDATA4 files should be adjusted. For instructions
on distributing See Chapter 2.5.4.
Redevelopment/ If a redevelopment project is being analyzed, the analysis should consider the
Existing Trips traffic associated with the existing (or previously existing) development for
comparison purposes. If trip generation, distribution or assignment of trips
associated with the new development is anticipated to be significantly different
Consider the number of
trips associated with the from the existing development, then existing site traffic data should be carried
existing use through the entire analysis in parallel to the new development to determine the
resulting traffic impacts created by redevelopment. All documentation of
development review trip generation estimates should clearly identify both
existing and FSUTMS projected future trip generation associated with a
particular property. Local land development regulations should also be
consulted for specific requirements.
2.4.6 Limitations of Trip Generation Data

While offering the most comprehensive national trip database available, the
Trip Generation Manual does not offer data for all situations. Some of the key
limitations of The Trip Generation Manual include:
Floridas unique
demographic makeup
Not all land uses are represented in the Trip Generation Manual
and the influence of database
tourism on travel in Most data collected for ITEs The Trip Generation Manual were
Florida may require collected in suburban locations with free parking and little or no
variances from these transit service
national averages for
Much of the data was collected long ago and may not reflect the
certain land use types
current trip generation of development
Due to data availability and the need to understand site specific conditions,
professional judgment is required.
Neo-Traditional Neo-traditional developments seek to reduce the need for driving by providing
Developments a mix of land uses to serve residential needs and by providing a community
design that supports walking and alternative modes of travel. Developments
where neo-traditional concepts are proposed should be carefully reviewed to
understand the trip making characteristics of the area. Discussions should take
place to agree on the best method to quantify trip reduction, if any.
Transit-Oriented As defined in Section 163.3164(46), F.S., Transit-Oriented Developments (TODs)

Developments are compact, moderate to high intensity and density, mixed use areas that are
interconnected with other land uses which support multimodal transportation
options. These areas are usually within one half mile of a transit stop or station
WEB that is designed to maximize walking trips and access to transit. They also are
characterized by streetscapes and an urban form oriented to pedestrians to
www.fltod.com
promote walking trip to stations and varied other uses within station areas. One
quarter-mile and one-half mile distances represent a 5 to 10 minute walk time,
which is the amount of time most people are willing to walk to a destination.
PDF The most intense and dense development is typically located within the one
quarter mile radius (transit core). Developments' intensities and densities
Accessing Transit gradually decrease out to the one-half mile radius (transit neighborhood) and
the one mile radius (transit supportive area).
FDOT is interested in the development of TOD strategies and guidance to
promote land use policies and designs to leverage statewide investments in
WEB
multimodal transportation systems.
FDOT Public
Transit website Additional information about FDOT transit initiatives and resources can be
found at the FDOT Public Transit Office website.
Special or Unusual When a proposed development cannot be adequately described by The ITE Trip
Generators Generation Manual, new trip generation data may be required based on the
type, intensity and timing of trips to be generated. Judgment may be used to
recommend trip generation characteristics that are appropriate for the
The reasoning and data
development. However, the reasoning and data used to support these estimates
used should be
documented and should be documented and approved prior to use. Examples of special or
approved by FDOT prior unusual generators include unique places like outdoor bazaars, a motorcycle
to use sales shop, and other uses not well represented by data contained in ITEs Trip
Generation Manual are theme parks, and venues with special events.
Below are examples of recent FDOT research to address the trip generation
characteristics of selected land uses. These research efforts aim to analyze
unique, under-studied land uses such as those listed above, as well as those
believed to have different rates than those found in ITE guidance.
In 2011, FDOT studied the following land uses:
Discount Superstores, such as Super Wal-Mart and Super Target

Home Improvement Superstores, such as the largest Lowes and Home
Depots
Major Single Owner Distribution Centers these can be over one
million square feet and serve one retailer, such as Wal-Mart or Winn
Dixie
Small Box Stores, such as Family Dollar and Dollar General
After 2011, FDOT has studied other land uses such as:
Large Convenience/Gas Station stores, many of these have over 12
fueling positions and over 2,000 square feet of retail space. Some
feature specialty food and beverage centers
Student Suite Apartments, where each bedroom has a bathroom and
the bedrooms join a common living, eating, and cooking area.
Alternatives to ITE Trip Given these limitations, it is sometimes necessary to adjust trip rates to reflect
Generation Data documented local conditions and/or develop additional trip generation
procedures. First, a review should be conducted to determine if other
applicable data is available. Trade publications such as ITE Journal, university
Local trip data should be
studies, government studies, and studies by other recognized parties are made
collected in accordance
with ITEs Trip available from time to time and often serve as an interim guidance until
Generation Manual , incorporated into a future edition of The Trip Generation Manual.
Chapter 4 requirements
and at least three Lacking any published data, a common alternative to using data from ITEs Trip
different sites are Generation Manual is to collect data from other developments of similar use
required
and size. Local trip data should be collected in accordance with ITEs Trip
Generation Manual (Chapter 4), requirements, and three or more sites may be
required.
2.4.7 Internal Capture Rates for Multi Use Developments

Estimating an internal capture rate for a mixed use development is often one of
the most debated and challenging steps in the overall site transportation
impact assessment process. Internal capture rates vary by the mix of land uses,
size, and location context. Location context consists of factors such as
remoteness, presence of competing retail, and job destinations.
Because there are so many factors, FDOT cannot recommend just one method
or one set of internalization factors to be used for all mixed use developments.
Research done in the past provides guidance on the best way to estimate
internal capture. Whatever is the chosen method will need to be discussed and
agreed to by the people and agencies involved in the analysis.
The Importance of the latest FDOT Research on Internal Capture
The most recent research done by FDOT shows that the internalization rates
will vary greatly depending on the type of mixed use development is being
studied. FDOT studied multi-use developments in suburban areas, and those in
dense transit oriented areas. The research shows that the factors you would
use, lets say between on-site residential and on-site retail would be very
different in a true transit oriented, tightly integrated development, than a
mixed use development which is auto oriented, single family residential
oriented, and has a standard shopping center at its entrance.
The FDOT study, Trip Internalization in Multi Use Developments BDK84 977-10,
is expected to be complete by April 2014. You can check for updates or the
final report at:
www.dot.state.fl.us/research-center/documents.shtm
The ITE Trip Generation Handbook contains a method where three major land
uses are used to balance trips between the three uses (residential, retail, and
office). Examples of this method can be found below from the Trip Generation
Handbook. For more readable versions, use the links found under each exhibit.
Exhibit 13
Internal Capture
Example
3 land uses
PDF
Internal Capture
View a full page version of internal capture for 3 land uses in Exhibit 13.
Exhibit 14
Internal Capture
Example
4 land uses
XLS
Internal Capture
This spreadsheet shows internal capture for 4 different land uses. Open
the spreadsheet for Exhibit 14.
Some General In evaluating a proposed internal capture rate, the following general guidance
Considerations should be considered:
Separate land uses within Shopping Centers (ITE code 820) are
generally not considered a mixed-use development because of the
way shopping center data has been collected. Historically shopping
center trip generation data was collected for the entire site, such as
restaurants and movie theaters. Even trips from gas stations and
restaurants (on-site, but not physically connected to the shopping

center) have been counted. Therefore, internal trips have already
been taken into account in those studies.
Sites having a mix of residential and nonresidential components
have the highest potential for internal capture trips. Mixes of
nonresidential land uses are less likely to have a significant internal
capture rate unless a hotel or motel is contained within the site.
Internal capture rates should only be used for communities that
have income compatible residences and employment centers. The
design of the internal roadway system/site circulation system of the
development may impact internal capture. A well-designed
development with good internal connectivity and pedestrian/bicycle
facilities will make it more convenient for trips to stay on site.
If there are ample nearby substitutes for internal capture trips, the
internal capture rate may need to be adjusted. For example, if a
mixed-use development is located near other large retail
development, the internal capture rate may be adjusted downward
to reflect these nearby competing destinations.
Internal capture rates should be calculated for each phase of a
multiuse development. If development plans change during the
review process, all internal capture calculations should be updated
and the site impact assessment should be submitted for additional
review. Other methods and techniques have been studied and
proposed for internal trip capture estimates.
A/V Internal Capture Presentation (Audio/Visual Presentation)

What is Internal This presentation on Internal capture is shown using the ITE Trip Generation
Capture? Handbook 2001 version. However, important concepts can be gained by
viewing.
National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 684

Enhancing Internal Trip Capture Estimation for Mixed-Use Developments
In 2011, the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP)
completed a study on enhancing trip internalization estimates especially for
modern emerging land uses served by transit and well integrated land uses.
The report and technique now recognizes three more land uses than the ITE
method of three land uses. In addition to the original residential, retail, and
office, they added restaurant, cinema, and hotel.
Using the Latest NCHRP Report 684 Internal Capture Estimation Techniques
The FDOT has not fully evaluated the use of the new NCHRP technique.
Therefore the agency has no hard-and-fast guidance on the use at this time. It
is different than the technique found in the 2001 ITE Trip Generation Handbook.
It has included new land uses such as movie theaters, Restaurants, and Hotels
and allows adjustments based on walking distances between land uses.
WEB
FDOT Research FDOT is currently studying more developments in Florida to add to the
Documents professional knowledge of the issue, especially for use in Florida. The study,
Trip Internalization in Multi Use Developments BDK84 977-10, is expected to
be complete in 2014. You can check for updates or the final report at:
http://www.dot.state.fl.us/research-center/documents.shtm
Any proposed methodology used to estimate internal capture should be clearly

documented by the applicant and agreed to by the applicable reviewing
agencies prior to the initiation of the study. It is recommended that the
applicant go beyond simply stating how internal capture will be calculated and
provide actual preliminary adjustment factors and sample calculations. This way,
agencies can provide general comments early in the process.
In evaluating a proposed internal capture rate, the following general guidance
should be considered:
The ITE land use Shopping Centers (ITE code 820) is generally not
considered a mixed-use development because of the way shopping
center data has been collected. Therefore, internal capture rates
should not be used to forecast trips when data from ITE code 820 is
used. Sites having a mix of residential and nonresidential
components have the highest potential for internal capture trips.
Mixes of nonresidential land uses are less likely to have a significant
internal capture rate unless a hotel or motel is contained within the
site.
Internal capture rates should only be used for communities that
have income compatible residences and employment centers. The
design of the internal roadway system/site circulation system of the
development may impact internal capture. A well-designed
development with good internal connectivity and pedestrian/bicycle
facilities will make it more convenient for trips to stay on site.
If there are nearby developments, the internal capture rate may
need to be adjusted. For example, if a mixed-use development is
located near other large retail development, the internal capture
rate may be adjusted downward to reflect these nearby competing
destinations.
When using the ITE procedure, sites with multiple residential

components (single-family houses, apartments, condos, etc.) should
compute the trip generation for each residential type separately but
record the trip generation value as only a single land use on the ITE
worksheet. These residential trips would be documented as
separate for all other purposes, other than internal capture.
Internal capture rates should be calculated for each phase of a
multiuse development. If development plans change during the
review process, all internal capture calculations should be updated
and the site impact assessment should be submitted for additional
review.
Site specific data is needed to estimate a reasonable internal capture rate.

Internal capture rates can have a major impact on the outcome of the analysis.
The use of rules of thumb regarding minimum or maximum values is
discouraged. What is needed is significant supporting analysis from the
applicant.
Cautions on Using the Since the FDOT has not full evaluated the use of the new NCHRP technique,
Latest NCHRP Report caution should be exercised. The three new locations used by the NCHRP team
684 Internal Capture were all in town and well served by transit. They were considered neo-
Estimation Techniques traditional developments. None were new towns as encountered throughout
the state.
NCHRP Report 684 Enhancing Internal Trip Capture Estimation for Mixed-Use
WEB Developments links
NCHRP 684 Summary

http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/165014.aspx
The report
http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_684.pdf
XLS
The spreadsheet model
NCHRP 684 The resulting methodology of the research is incorporated into a spreadsheet
model, which is available online for download.
http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_684.xlsx
2.4.8 Community Capture

Community Capture is the reduction in the number of external vehicle trips
A Definition of
generated by a large, mixed-use development reducing the overall impact of
Community Capture the proposed community on the transportation system outside of the
development. Community Capture occurs due to the combined land-use,
location, design, and multimodal characteristics of the development. Internal
Capture, as accepted by the professional transportation community, recognizes
that a portion of the total trips for a multi-use development may be satisfied
within the development. The concept of Community Capture extends the
application of internal capture to include potential trip interactions and
reductions within the boundaries of large scale New town style, multi-use
developments. In these large-scale cases, internal capture trips would be a
wholly contained subset of community capture trips. While Community
Capture and Internal Capture are different, some of the research and
applications associated with Internal Capture may apply to Community Capture.
Where May Community Capture can be applied to a large, self-standing development, such
Community Capture as a new community or town, with a balanced mix of uses that may fulfill a
Be Applied? significant portion of the communitys needs within the development. Section
163.3164 (32), F.S., defines New town as an urban activity center and
community designated on the future land use map of sufficient size, population,
and land use composition to support a variety of economic and social activities
consistent with an urban area designation. New towns shall include basic
economic activities; all major land use categories, with the possible exception
of agricultural and industrial; and a centrally provided full range of public
facilities and services that demonstrate internal trip capture. These
communities may be separated by travel-time, design, or distance from other
major land use concentrations. They provide a wide range of internal services,
which may satisfy a significant portion of their needs within the community.
The community would make many off-site trips unnecessary by being of
sufficient size to provide a balance of land uses, including a range of housing
types and values, neighborhood and community retail centers, entertainment
facilities, offices, and employment. The community would also provide a range
of support services such as schools, civic institutions, houses of worship, public
parks, and government facilities. Larger communities may have several town
centers or villages, which embrace connectivity within, and between, each center
and village with a transportation system of all modes, including pedestrian paths,
bicycle facilities, and shuttles. Although the potential for Community Capture
rates may be high before build-out, there may be an extreme imbalance of
income compatible jobs such as high number of professionals but limited
professional activity center uses within the community to employ them.
Numerical Factors for Because each free standing community will have unique characteristics, FDOT
Community Capture will not recommend minimum nor maximum values for Community Capture.
Reasonable analysis of proposed developments will be used and will be verified
by substantial and ongoing monitoring programs. Ideally, over time,
agreement should occur on some ranges and measurement criteria. However,
because this is an emerging topic, many of the early estimates will be negotiated,
based on best professional judgment and verified with monitoring agreements.
Justification of The justification will need to include summaries showing the numbers and
Community Capture percentages of trips served within the proposed development. For example,
Values depending on the development, it could read like this,
X % of the entering shopping trips expected in the PM peak hour makes up
Y% of the total exiting shopping trips from homes within the community.
As a Development of Regional Impact (DRI), the proposed community will
include the standard Map H, development program summary, and build-out
schedule as laid out in Chapter 4. Additionally, there must be information
provided in sufficient detail to clearly support and explain the process used to
determine a proposed Community Capture value.
This analysis should be done for each phase, with an agreed upon monitoring
program.
Using the Right Tools No single tool for determining Community Capture currently exists. While
for Community refinements to existing tools, such as the modeling methodology described
Capture below, are currently under development, no one procedure has been
demonstrated to provide a final Community Capture value. Until there is more
PDF
Community experience and knowledge regarding Community Capture, reasonable analysis
Capture and negotiations, supported by substantial and detailed monitoring
requirements will be used.
Commitment to Traffic Expanded traffic monitoring beyond the current basic requirements of the DRI
Monitoring annual/biennial report might be a required provision in accepting Community
Capture rates. While the detailed needs of the traffic monitoring program will
be determined through the traffic study process, elements such as origin and
destination studies, trip generation studies, and an evaluation of land use mixes
in the community and surrounding the community will usually be included in
the monitoring program. Monitoring will probably be necessary before the
development enters a new phase. If appropriate, trip characteristic
assumptions and impact mitigation requirements will be revised, based on the
monitoring.
The Factors Impacting Community Capture will go beyond Internal Capture, accounting for the unique
Community Capture trip making aspects of a large, self-standing development with a balanced mix
of uses such as a new community or town. The concept focuses on:
Land Use Characteristics: A balance of land uses where form and function
result in trips being satisfied within the development must exist for
significant Community Capture to occur. Some of these factors are:
Income Compatible Uses: Residence and employment centers should
be income compatible so residents have ample employment
opportunities in the community. Employment centers should
attract a reasonable amount of the workforce from within the
community.
Type of Community: Is this a community planned for all age groups
with job opportunities, or is it a retirement community? Is the new
community primarily recreational? These issues can have an
important impact on Community Capture.
Community Design: The design features of the community can affect
both the number of external vehicle trips, as well as the internal
trips using major roadways. For example, a well-designed
development with good internal connectivity will make it more
convenient for trips to stay on site. By providing alternative
connections internal to the site, the number of vehicle trips needing
to use a major roadway to traverse the site can be reduced. Internal
capture is facilitated by a high level of connectivity and short travel
distances between complimentary land uses.
Development Maturity: The projects fullest Community Capture may not occur
until the complementary land uses mature. This may occur late in the
development program. This will depend on the quantity and balance
between complementary land uses. However, each phase or increment
must mitigate the cumulative impacts to the regional network resulting
from the current phase or increment and previously approved phases or
increments.
Location Context: The location context of large, mixed-use developments may

impact Community Capture in the following ways:
Remote Locations: For a remote location with a balance of
complementary land uses, high trip capture may occur. For the trips
not captured on site, longer external trip lengths will result because
there would be few opportunities for trips to end near the site.
Competing External Opportunities: If there were ample nearby
destinations (shopping, jobs, or entertainment) outside of the
community, the Community Capture rate would likely be lower. For
example, if a mixed-use development is located near other large
developments, the Community Capture rate may be reduced.
Trip Generation of Isolated Communities: Discussion is ongoing

regarding the trip generation characteristics of isolated
communities. One assumption proposed is if a community is
isolated, and a trip cannot be satisfied on site, some discretionary
trips are less likely to occur. While not making a trip can be an
option for some trips, such as shopping, it is not an option for work-
based trips, which have the highest impact during the peak hours.
Multimodal Elements (Encouragement of transit, walking and cycling): The
provisions of on-site transit circulators and integrated systems of bicycle,
golf cart, and pedestrian paths may have an impact on vehicle trip
generation and vehicle trip capture. Such amenities make it easier for trips
to remain on site and may reduce the need for vehicle trips to occur.
Using large scale Currently, large-scale transportation models, such as FSUTMS, are not
transportation models specifically designed for Community Capture purposes. It may be insensitive to
to estimate some of the factors expected to affect Community Capture. To address some of
community capture the limitations associated with using travel demand models to estimate
capture, a methodology has been proposed based on the following
modifications:
Consider land use categories in place of or in addition to traditional
trip purposes. Within the model, use an increased selection of
housing types (single-family, multifamily, rental apartments) and
categories (high cost employed, retired, seasonal, medium cost
employed, and low cost employed) and a trip purpose table for the
expanded housing categories which can be used to create a
residential trip generation and trip purpose profile to better match
the development plan;
Consider land use categories at trip attraction ends, such as
retail/restaurant price levels to better match with residential
income/price category. Also, consider for income/price category.
Summarize the potential attractions within the community, based
on the marketing plan, to better account for income differences;
Create transportation analysis zones (TAZs) for each land use along
with more detailed coded networks; and
Carefully use travel-time friction factors within the model to make
reasonable adjustments to the trip distribution patterns within the
community and to the trip lengths external to the community.
While this methodology addresses some of the limitations of traditional travel
demand models in determining community capture rates, a methodology like
this needs to be tested to gain a better understanding of the sensitivity of the
model to the proposed variables.
Standard Process | 2.5 Projecting Future Conditions Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
2.5 Projecting Future Conditions

2.5.1 Projecting Future Background Traffic
Future Background Traffic serves as the base condition in determining the
impacts of development on the transportation system in future years.
Background traffic is comprised of two elements:
The expected increase from overall growth in through traffic (traffic
movements through the study area that do not have an origin or
destination in the study area)
Traffic from other developments in the study area (other than the
project being analyzed). For example, major committed
developments defined as developments that have an approved
development order (DRIs) or concurrency management certificate
should be included in background traffic
Future Background (non-site) Traffic is typically estimated using one of three
methods based on local area needs and conditions:
1) Growth rate/trend methods relying on historic trends. The growth rate
(trends) and build-up methods are often referred to as manual, even if
done with a computer. This method is typically appropriate in
applications for:
Small projects that will be built within one or two years
Areas with at least five years of data showing stable growth and
expected to remain stable
2) Build-up methods that use specific development information. This
method is typically appropriate in applications for:
Areas experiencing moderate growth
Areas where multiple projects will be developed during the same
period
Project horizon years of 5 years or less
Locations where there is thorough documentation of development
approvals
3) Model methods involve the use of a large scale travel demand model,
such as FSUTMS. Model methods are typically appropriate in
applications for:
High growth areas
Large regional projects that may have multiple build-out phases
Locations where there is sufficient information available to calibrate
the model to current and future conditions
Special Note on Using Modeling is a complex practice involving knowledge, experience, and particular
Large Scale understanding of the geographic area. The following discussion is meant to
Transportation provide broad guidance. The practices in your area may vary. All modeling
Models decisions should be made with regular contact with the transportation modeling
staff of the appropriate FDOT District.
Considerations for selecting the appropriate method for a given situation
include; the type of development project, the development within the study
area, available data, horizon year, and agency requirements. It is possible that
the applicant may be requested to document growth assumptions using more than
one method. For example, rates based on using the growth rate (trends) method
and the model method may be requested so that comparisons can be made.
2.5.2 The Growth Rate/Trend Method for Projecting Background Traffic

These methods are typically performed using trend or growth rate analysis of
historic traffic data. The process of adding vested development traffic into
background traffic is known as the Build-up Method and is described in further
detail below.
Growth Rate/Trends The Growth Rate/Trends Method is the most basic approach for developing
Method future growth projections (Reference: ITE Transportation Impact Analyses for
Site Development), because the growth rate method reflects historical trends.
Growth rates based on The estimates using this approach will be dependent upon how the historical
trends are the most basic
trend reflects the horizon year traffic. Traffic volumes should be used in
approach to developing
future growth developing growth trends and should be based on at least five years of data.
projections However, care should be exercised in using data beyond five years as the results
may over-emphasize past trends. For example, an area that has remained rural
for many years may have recently changed to a booming growth area. In this
case, the use of many past year counts will significantly under-predict future
traffic. Note also that peak hour growth patterns do not necessarily follow daily
traffic growth patterns.
The ITEs Transportation Impact Analysis for Site Development has this caution:
The growth rate method is often insensitive to localized changes. It should not be
used in cases where other extensive nearby development will occur during the
study period, or where growth rates are unstable. Sizable errors could develop.
Furthermore, growth in average daily traffic does not always parallel growth in
peak-hour traffic, and most historical data are for average daily traffic. This
method should also not be used where substantial transportation system
changes (infrastructure changes) will alter traffic patterns within the study
area, unless an accurate redistribution step is included.
Growth Rate/Trend When using either traffic growth/change or a related demographic characteristic
Analysis Techniques for forecasting background traffic, the following steps should be followed:
Identify the data that is required based on the study area and the
sources of relevant data
A/V Obtain the historic traffic-count data for the existing locations(s) or
Background Traffic
demographic data
and Trends
Perform a growth trend analysis using one of three growth forms
identified below and plot the patterns of traffic growth rates for the
existing location(s)
Growth rate trend analysis is the method of fitting a mathematical curve that will
adequately describe a trend in data for projection purposes. Three growth forms
are used for site impact analysis:
1. linear
2. exponential
3. decaying exponential
Further details and an example application of each of these methods are
presented in the following sections.
FDOT Trends Spreadsheet Program

XLS FDOT developed and maintains a software analysis tool that can be used to
Traffic Trends prepare trend analysis. Traffic Trends Analysis Tool is an Excel-based tool that
Analysis Tool allows an analyst to use the Florida Traffic Information count database, select a
Allows an analyst to traffic count station data set (from a database of count locations organized by
estimate future traffic County), and then prepare future trend analysis. The software allows for a
based on the historical comparison of results using all three growth techniques. The automated analysis
data collected by process provides the analyst with opportunities to select the range of historic
FDOT.
data to be included and consider multiple future projection years.
Exhibit 15
Example Application The following example is provided to
of Trend Analysis and illustrate the use of the three equation Historical Volumes
(Seminole County site 0040)
the Trends based models for forecasting traffic
volumes on a roadway (US 17/92) in Year Volume (AADT)
Spreadsheet
Seminole County. Information 1998 21,000
regarding the applicability of the three 1999 21,500
2000 19,000
growth trend techniques is also
2001 21,500
presented. Exhibit 15 summarizes the
2002 25,500
historical AADT on the roadway facility. 2003 25,000
2004 25,000
2005 21,500
2006 23,000
2007 25,000
Linear Growth Linear growth predicts the future traffic based on a straight line developed from
historic traffic growth. This model assumes a constant amount of growth in each
year and does not consider a capacity restraint. The mathematical model for
Linear growth assumes
linear growth is as follows:
a constant amount of
growth in each year and
Future Volume = (Linear Growth Rate * Number of Years) + Base Year
does not consider a
Volume
capacity restraint
VolumeFY = GLinear * N + VolumeBY
Where: GLinear = Linear growth rate

N = Years beyond the base year
VolumeFY = Future year
VolumeBY = Base year
Exhibit 16
Linear Growth
Projects Using
Traffic Trends
Using the Seminole County example data, the results of the linear growth rate
estimated an average growth of 418 vehicles per year as shown in Exhibit 16.
The software allows users to select three analysis horizon years per evaluation
run. In this example, an opening year of 2009 was evaluated along with a mid-
year of 2016, and a long-term horizon of 2026.
Exponential Growth Exponential growth predicts the future traffic based on a percentage of growth
from the previous year. This model is most applicable where there is rapid
growth and capacity available. The mathematical form of exponential growth is
as follows:
Exponential growth is
Future Volume = Base Year Volume (1 + Growth Rate)Number of Years
most applicable where
there is rapid growth VolumeFY = VolumeBY * (1 + Gr)(FY-BY)
and capacity available
Where: GGeometric = Geometric growth rate
VolumeFY = Future year
VolumeBY = Base year
Exhibit 17
Exponential Growth
Projects Using
Traffic Trends
Decaying Exponential Decaying Exponential Growth is used to project future traffic in areas with a
Growth declining rate of growth over the analysis period. This model form is
recommended for site impact analysis in more built out areas.
Decaying Exponential FY X X
VolumeFY = VolumeBY *
FY
Growth is used to project BY FY BY BY FY BY

future traffic in areas
with a declining rate of Where: X = Normal straight line growth from trend data
growth over the analysis VolumeFY = Future year
period VolumeBY = Base year
Exhibit 18
Decaying
Exponential Growth
Projects Using
Traffic Trends
A/V Exhibit 18 illustrates application of a decaying exponential growth project to the

Background Traffic Seminole County data.
and Trends
The Presentation link contains a step-by-step illustration of the use of the
software on these three examples shown in Exhibits 16 through 18.
What if the In the event that an area has a decline in traffic, the probable cause must be
Background Traffic determined. Analysis should be done to decide if the decline is a long term
Has Declined? trend. Some local governments and other agencies use a minimum growth rate
guide. In these cases the FDOT reviewer must join the discussion with all parties
to arrive at an acceptable agreement.
Since 2006 the United States has seen some decreases in traffic on some
facilities. This leads us to the situation when some professionals argue a zero
growth rate to be used for future background traffic. Traffic can fall for a few
reasons such as; the addition of a reliever roadway; or declining economic
activity as seen from 2006 through 2012.
Note the figure from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) shows the
drop and plateau in between the years of 2008-2012.
Exhibit 19
Nov. 2012 Traffic
Volume Trends
When a smaller than usually used growth rate is suggested, there should be
some discussion of the underlying low, or zero, growth rate. There should also
be multiple indications to support this low, zero, or negative growth.
Figure from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/travel_monitoring/tvt.cfm
2.5.3 Build-Up Method

The build-up method of traffic involves the identification of the trips associated
The build-up method =
with approved developments in the study area, assigning those trips to the study
vested developments area transportation system, and then adding the background through traffic. The
+ background build-up method of projecting background traffic is appropriate when other area
through traffic developments are proposed that will affect local area traffic patterns during the
same horizon period.
Considerations for using the build-up method are outlined below.
Assess impacts of committed system improvements
Work with local and state agency staff to identify a subarea

Identify committed transportation projects and probable travel
pattern changes within the subarea.
Identify and add approved development traffic
Confirm committed projects and phasing within the subarea with

local and state agency staff
Obtain trip assignment associated with approved projects (desirably
including documentation of trip generation, trip distribution, and trip
assignment)
Double counting of development generated trips may occur when estimating the
other background traffic. Checks for reasonableness should be made. If the
Check for
build-up method is used, a lower traffic growth rate than a direct trend analysis
reasonableness
may be used.
2.5.4 Model Methods Using FSUTMS to Distribute Trips for

Developments
The FDOT and some regional agencies typically maintain travel demand models
that incorporate large planning areas. These models are typically calibrated to a
A/V base year and include a long-term future horizon year for the corresponding
Modeling Methods
transportation system. Travel demand models can be used to assist in the
for Impact Analysis
identification of traffic patterns and needs associated with site development.
The model method of transportation impact analysis typically uses an MPO-

adopted regional travel demand model to forecast. There are two general
methods for using a FSUTMS model for distributing and assigning ITE-generated
trips during a traffic impact analysis: the special generator method and the link
volume factor method.
Note: in the examples below, care can be taken to avoid over estimating
internal trips, as the models trip tables already provide some intra-zonal trips.
Special Generator Develop a new transportation analysis zone (TAZ) or set of zones for the
Method: development and code in connectors from the new zone centroids to the
transportation network.
Connection points should be consistent with the preliminary site access plan
WEB Code socioeconomic data consistent with the development program into the
models ZONEDATA file
Modeling Basics Identify appropriate ITE vehicle trip rate(s) and estimate site trip generation
manually using ITEs Trip Generation Manual
Identify appropriate trip purposes for commercial properties based on
prevailing land use type (e.g., shopping center would be predominantly
home-based shopping trips)
Identify reasonable auto occupancy rates for each trip purposes. Look for
consistency with the Cube Catalog keys. Apply auto occupancy rates to ITE
trips by purpose to calculate person trips and sum for residential and non-
residential uses in each development TAZ
1) Enter person trips by zone and trip purpose into SPECGEN file
2) Set up model to execute using script files that isolate development trips
from other background trips
3) Conduct initial model run with a select link analysis on all centroids for
zones comprising the project to
4) Obtain initial vehicle trip distribution patterns of site-generated trips
5) Compare vehicle trip generation obtained manually and with the
planning model
6) If the model-derived number of vehicle trips is less than the manual
calculation for any given land use, the total external site trip generation
obtained using the planning model should be adjusted until the modeled
number of trips is greater than or equal to the manually estimated
trip(most likely for non-residential uses)
Identify any difference in vehicle trips between manual and
model calculations
Adjust number of trips in SPECGEN file by a similar ratio
Rerun the model
Identify any remaining difference in vehicle trips between
manual and model calculations
Continue steps 3 and 4 until model calculations are greater than
or equal to manual calculations
7) Convert site-generated trips to PM peak period or other, as directed by
local concurrency ordinances
8) Estimate internal capture using the previously approved methods
9) Adjust trips to commercial properties on site to account for agreed upon
pass-by trip percentages
Link Volume Factor Develop a new transportation analysis zone (TAZ) or set of zones for the
Method development and code in connectors from the new zone centroids to the
transportation network. Connection points should be consistent with the
preliminary site access plan.
1) Code socioeconomic data consistent with the development program within
the ZONEDATA file (e.g., single-family homes in development = single-family
dwelling units in FSUTMS).For land use types not found in the ZONEDATA
file, use rates for land use types that are comparable to FSUTMS land uses
and acceptable to review agencies (Example land use conversion rates are
shown in Exhibit 20)
2) Take supplemental demographic data (persons per dwelling units, percent
automobile ownership, percent of dwelling units vacant, etc.) from zones in
the ZONEDATA file that contain land use and population characteristics that
are expected to be similar to the character of the project site (Example land
use conversion rates are shown in Exhibit 20)
3) Set up model to execute using script files that isolate development trips
from other background trips (Selected Link Analysis on centroids)
4) Identify cordon line around the proposed development
5) Estimate internal capture using the previously approved methods
6) Calculate the total number of external trips (i.e., those crossing the proposed
development cordon line)
7) Calculate the percent distribution of external project trips (link distribution
percentages) by dividing the number of project trips on each link of the
network by the total number of external project trips
8) Identify appropriate ITE vehicle trip rate(s) and estimate site trip generation
manually using ITEs Trip Generation
9) Factor the total number of ITE external project trips by the link distribution
percentages calculated earlier for each link in the loaded network
10) Resulting ITE trips times link distribution percentages can be plotted link by link
11) Adjust trips to commercial properties on site to account for agreed upon
pass-by trip percentages
12) Factor the total number of ITE external trips (with Internal Capture and Pass
by subtracted) by the link distribution percentages)
Land Use Conversion Rate*

Exhibit 20 Single-Family Dwelling Unit 3 persons per DU
Land Use Multi-Family Dwelling Unit 2 persons per DU
Conversion Rates
Office 4 service employees per 1,000 sq ft
for Traffic Impact
Assessments Hospital 3 service employees per 1,000 sq ft
Retail <200k sq ft 2 - 3 commercial employees per 1,000 sq ft
Large Retail 1.5 - 2 commercial employees per 1,000 sq ft
Industrial 2 industrial employees per 1,000 sq ft
Warehousing 1 industrial employee per 1,000 sq ft
Hotel .5 - 1 service employee per room
*This data is a compilation of Rules of Thumb and calculations using the ITE Trip Generation
Manual. These conversion rates should only be considered when local data, FDOT District
guidance or more specific knowledge is not available.
Justification and
Model methods are commonly used with manual assignment processes when
documentation of all
adjustments to the model determining distribution percentages of vehicles. However, for large networks,
generated distribution model assignments may be a more desirable method for determining the
should be included in the minimum time path between transportation analysis zones. A blended
traffic analysis methodology (using manual adjustments to model trip assignments) should be
approved by FDOT or another reviewing agency prior to use.
A/V
Modeling Methods Manual trip distribution results and model outputs can be compared to provide
for Impact Analysis
reasonableness checks. Model methods may be used to determine an initial trip
distribution and then manual adjustments may be made based on engineering
judgment and familiarity with the transportation network. Justification and
documentation of all adjustments to the model generated distribution should be
included in the traffic analysis.
Understand the models It is essential that the model user has a thorough understanding of a given
strengths and models analysis strengths and limitations so that model output can be properly
limitations interpreted and used.
ZDATA Interpolation In addition to forecasting AADT volumes directly, the applicant may be required
to develop FSUTMS model inputs (ZONEDATA) for years that are not major
horizon years in the model used in the site impact analysis. When the duration
between model horizon years is less than five years, it may be appropriate to
interpolate the ZONEDATA using a linear regression equation, for example
between 2015 and 2020. For years where significant transportation network
changes are anticipated to occur or major phases of related developments are
proposed to open interpolation of ZONEDATA files should be discouraged.
Standard Process | 2.6 Trip Distribution Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
2.6 Trip Distribution

Another component in the site impact analysis is trip distribution. The purpose
of trip distribution is to determine the final destination and origin transportation
analysis zones of the traffic studied in the impact analysis.
Trip distribution can be estimated using a number of different methodologies
reflecting either large scale model or manual methods. FDOT and any
participating local review agencies should approve of the trip distribution
methodology selected.
Whether a manual or large scale modeling method is used, trip distribution
should be performed in each analysis year and documented and summarized in a
figure that illustrates the percentage of total site trip generation. The figure
should clearly show that the distribution of external trips from the site adds up
to 100%.
Exhibit 21
Major Directions of
Trip Distribution
from site
Trip distribution should

be summarized in a
figure that clearly shows
the distribution of
external trips from the
site.
Source: KHA from a traffic study of a Miami Wal-Mart Circa 2005
2.6.1 Different Types of Manual Methods for Trip Distribution

Manual methods of trip distribution provide the analyst with a basic
understanding of the travel patterns and market areas associated with the
development. When performing manual methods of traffic distribution, good
judgment is essential to conduct a proper evaluation. Key assumptions should be
clearly documented for the reviewers. Exhibit 22 provides a visual example of
the manual distribution method.
Standard Process | 2.6 Trip Distribution Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
Exhibit 22
Manual
Distribution
Example
The manual distribution and assignment of trips

Source: Site Impact Evaluation Handbook FHWA 1985
Analogy The analogy method derives the trip distribution of a proposed development
Method/Origin- based on existing data collected at sites that are similar to the subject
Destination Studies development. Typically, traffic count and turning movement data are used in the
analogy method. Other data sources include conducting a license plate origin-
destination survey or a driver response survey, summarizing traveler home zip
codes (for employment centers), or using other methods defining distribution of
travelers to and from the site. Applications of the analogy method include (ITE:
Transportation and Land Development, p. 54):
Fast-food restaurants where a competing establishment is near the

site
Service stations where traffic volumes on the adjacent streets are
similar to those forecasted at the site
Motel sites near an existing motel
Residential developments on the fringe of an urban area
Sites to be developed in residential use where the tract is one of the
few vacant parcels in a developed area
Occupied buildings located in an office complex being developed by
phases adapted from the ITE Transportation and Land Development.
Standard Process | 2.7 Mode Split Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
2.7 Mode Split/Alternative Travel Forecasts

Mode split is the process of estimating the number of travelers between zones
that are anticipated to use modes other than automobiles in transportation
impact analysis. This process estimates how many people travel to and from a
site by auto, transit, and other modes such as by bicycle or walking. In some
cases, the mode split portion of the typical four-step modeling process will not
be sufficient for corridor or site specific transit forecasting.
For example, a Transit Oriented Development (TOD) is an area that requires

special modal study based on more detailed considerations.
The level of analysis will be made in coordination with FDOT

and local agencies, including transit providers
Transit Mode Split The applicant should provide justification on any transit, bicycle, or pedestrian
Assessment Methods adjustment reducing vehicle trips. The justification will usually consist of a
special study prepared to better understand the impact of existing or proposed
transit service, levels of walking and bicycling and necessary commitments to
needed infrastructure, or funding to support the existing or planned transit
service in the area.
The Transit Boardings The FDOTs Transit Office has developed the transit analysis tool TBEST (The
Estimation Tool Transit Boardings Estimation and Simulation Tool) that may be used in transit
(TBEST) assessments.
This tool is a comprehensive transit analysis and ridership forecasting model that
is capable of simulating transit travel demand while accounting for factors such
as sidewalk coverage, network connectivity, bus headways, transfers, time-of-
WEB day variations, and route competition. The tool simulates transit ridership in a
way that allows it to provide detailed information regarding ridership estimates
www.tbest.org
at individual stops. The tool can also be used to obtain route level, segment
level, location-based, or system level measures through the stop-level outputs.
By simulating ridership at the level of the individual stop, the model can provide
a strong framework for modeling transit ridership.
More detailed The use of TBEST for impact assessments should be discussed by the applicant
information about and review agencies (including transit agencies) and a clear methodology should
TBEST and its use can be
be defined. It is recognized that TBEST may not be applicable in all cases. The
reviewed on-line at
TBEST.ORG. tool provides users with a specialized transit planning model to supplement or to
replace the use of the more standard travel tools.
Standard Process | 2.8 Trip Assignment Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
2.8 Trip Assignment

Trip assignment involves determining the amount of traffic that will use each
route on the roadway network. Trip assignment determines the number of site-
generated turning and through movements at each intersection, as well as the
roadway segment of the study area network.
Trip distribution and assignment are two related but distinct activities. Trip
distribution determines where trips wish to go. Assignment is when the trips are
Trip distribution and
assignment are two
placed on the network to reach their desired destination.
related but distinct
The products of the assignment component are traffic volumes appropriate for
activities
use in the analysis of operating conditions. It is important to note that traffic
factors will usually need to be applied to both field collected data and model
derived volumes. For example, Model Output Conversion Factors (MOCF) by the
FDOT are used to convert Peak Season Weekday Average Daily Traffic (PSWADT)
PDF volumes assigned by travel demand forecasting models to estimated AADT
Project Traffic volumes. Even when using FDOT approved adjustments, care must be taken to
Forecasting
see if the output is reasonable. A full description of the MOCF as well as other
adjustments can be found in the Project Traffic Forecasting Handbook.
2.8.1 General Considerations

Several important general considerations are involved in preparing trip
assignment. These considerations are highlighted below, followed by detailed
discussion of specific modeling techniques and analysis procedures.
Trip assignment should begin by identifying multiple paths between origins and
destinations. The potential for using these paths can then be evaluated on a
comparative basis using the following considerations:
Driver tendencies and local patterns in developing logical travel

routes.
o For example, drivers often will use the first convenient
driveway they reach to access a site with multiple driveways.
o Driver characteristics reflecting the proposed land use (will
drivers tend to use back roads/local connections or are they
new to the area and will tend towards major travel routes
that are well signed).
The design of the internal circulation systems and the location of

residential land uses;
o The outbound trips tend to be more evenly distributed among
multiple exits than the inbound trips;
Available roadway capacities
o Identify known capacity constraints and assess how
constraints may impact alternative evaluation/routing.
o Turn movement capacity and restrictions; particularly for left-
turns.
Relative travel times.
o The proposed land use may impact driver needs and
tendencies for example, the differences between a daily
commute trip and a recreational tourist exploration trip.
o Horizon years and corresponding conditions at the time.
o Planned improvements or network changes could result in
changes to trip assignment compared to current conditions or
when evaluating multiple horizon years.
o Travel paths may vary by time of day.
Assignment percentages typically apply to two-way trips
(arriving and departing).
o While generally oriented the same way, individual routes may
defer to reflect multiple access and egress options and turn
movements will likely be different or reversed between an
entering and exiting trip.
o One-way streets may influence assignment patterns.
The presence of on/off ramps at interchanges.
o Pass-by trips enter from adjacent streets and typically exit to
the same street to continue on their original path.
Adapted from: Transportation Impact Analyses for Site Development, ITE
2005
2.8.2 Manual Methods of Trip Assignment

Manual trip assignment often assigns site traffic based on existing or anticipated
future turning and through movement percentages. The assignment may reduce
site volumes along roadway segments using attenuation factors (see Chapter
If the access plan is 2.2.3) to account for intervening opportunities for the trip to end. In simple
modified, the terms, this means trips may be added and subtracted to the roadway network
assignment process may between major intersections and corridors to reflect local area origins and
have to be repeated until destinations. Manual assignments for each analysis period should be made for
a logical assignment is
each analysis year. Multiple paths should be assigned between origins and
achieved for the network
destinations based on experience and judgment to achieve realistic estimates.
The assignment process may be performed numerous times during a typical
analysis based on the number of site access and internal circulation alternatives
and traffic impact mitigation alternatives considered. If the access plan is
modified during subsequent reviews or permitting, the assignment process may
have to be repeated and alternative site access and circulation plans considered
until a logical assignment is achieved for the network.
Exhibit 23
Manual Assignment
Example
Source: NCHRP 187 Quick Response Urban Travel Estimation Techniques and
Transferable Patterns. TRB 1978
Recommended Pass-by trips in the network should be analyzed carefully. The following
Procedure for Manual procedure is based, in part, on the recommendations of ITEs Transportation
Trip Assignment Impact Analyses for Site Development when pass-by trips are involved in the
When Pass-by Trips assignment.
are Present 1. Apply the trip reduction factors for internal capture and pass-by traffic, and
then assign volumes to each roadway segment. Illustrate in a map the
assignment of development trips and provide a corresponding table.
2. In addition to estimating a normal distribution, estimate a trip distribution

for pass-by and diverted trips.
Perform separate trip assignments using the individual distribution patterns
for primary, pass-by and diverted trips. Pass-by trips and diverted trips
should be evaluated carefully considering the location of the driveway and
the total traffic on the adjacent roadway links. The assignment should
consider the unique turn movement patterns of pass-by and diverted trips
and should account for the subtraction of existing turn movements related
to the pass-by trips that are no longer made.
For example, a pass-by trip assignment might require that an
eastbound through trip be removed and replaced with an eastbound
right-turn and companion northbound right-turn at a site driveway.
Diverted trips are not subtracted from the roadways and access
points they are added to. They are new trips on the roads they divert
to.
Applicants should assign trips to the network such that the primary, pass-by and
diverted trips are distinguishable and can be easily reviewed.
3. Consider the effects of traffic diversion by existing traffic to other facilities

as result of the site-generated traffic, if appropriate.
4. Check the assignment for reasonableness. Generally, pass-by traffic should
not exceed 10 percent of traffic on adjacent streets. For an explanation of
the 10 percent of adjacent street traffic for pass-by traffic, see Chapter
2.4.4.
2.8.3 Traffic Attenuation with Manual Traffic Assignment

As the distance that traffic from a specific site travels, the number of those site
generated trips drop. The trips drop (or attenuate) because as longer distance is
traveled, more and more people reach their final destinations. In order to reflect
this reality in a manual traffic assignment, it is necessary to use something called
traffic attenuation. It determines what percentages of trips are satisfied at various
No more than 10 percent distances from the originating site. In evaluating trip assignment alternatives, a
of trips should attenuate commonly used guideline by FDOT is that no more than 10 percent of trips should
per segment
dissipate (or attenuate) per study segment of roadway unless there is a cross street
or some major land use that could attract a large number of trips from the usual
flow.
Another method for establishing traffic attenuation is the use of the trip length
frequency curves of the urban area or a similar area. These may be available as
part of an areas large scale transportation model.
Exhibit 24
Traffic Attenuation
Example
View presentation
describing this method
(begin slide 9)
A/V
Manual
Distribution
Traffic Attenuation
2.8.4 Model Methods of Trip Assignment

Large scale travel demand models such as FSUTMS use a capacity restrained
routine, known as user equilibrium, to perform the final highway assignment.
The model decreases speeds on congested roadways and shifts traffic between
routes after each iteration of the assignment until equilibrium is achieved. At
that point, all trips in the model area have found the least congested, shortest-
time path to their destination such that no other adjustment can be made to
traffic without increasing travel times.
Selected Zone The preferred technique for transportation impact analysis trip assignment is
Analysis called selected zone analysis. Selected zone analysis allows for review of
The preferred technique
network-wide trip assignment associated with a single or multiple
is the Selected Zone Transportation Analysis Zone(s) (TAZ). Analysts are encouraged to confer with
Analysis tool existing model development documents and users guides for models they are
currently working with to determine the appropriate way for conducting a
selected zone analysis.
Should a model not currently be set up to perform selected zone analyses, the
analyst may need to modify the models highway assignment script. The
preferred method is to have the model create a path file with data restricted to
just the nodes and links being analyzed. The proper syntax for this process may
be found in the Cube Voyager Reference Guide. The Cube software is the current
engine inside FSUTMS. This information is also available in the Cube interactive
help. The analyst should coordinate with staff at the agency responsible for
maintaining the model, typically someone at either the FDOT District office or
the Metropolitan Planning Organization, to ensure that any modifications made
to the model in order to perform selected zone analyses are acceptable.
Analysts should NOT attempt to evaluate traffic by running two separate model
scenarios in which one scenario has the data corresponding to the development
included and the other scenario has had the data corresponding to the
development removed. The resulting estimate derived from subtracting the
volumes of the scenario with the development data from the scenario without
the development data, a technique commonly known as the Net Impact or the
Do Not run a strict With and Without method, DOES NOT directly represent the site-generated
with and without trip assignment impact. This is because the equilibrium highway assignment
analysis process that drives the model diverts trips, often resulting in virtually no change
in traffic volumes. This is a subtle but critical point. Judicial precedent in Florida
has established that the DRI process must account for ALL trips caused by
development, NOT the net impact resulting from displacing existing trips to
other roadways (Reference: Westinghouse Gateway Communities, et al. v. Lee
County Board of County Commissioners Case).
WITH WITHOUT
TAZ1 TAZ4 TAZ1
Exhibit 25 100 Res 100 Res TAZ4
SITE SITE
With or Without 200 Jobs 10,000 Res 200 Jobs
0 Res
Modeling Method 10,000 Jobs 0 Jobs
TAZ2 TAZ3 TAZ2 TAZ3
200 Res 200 Res 200 Res 200 Res
1,000 Jobs 500 Jobs 1,000 Jobs 500 Jobs
The appropriate use of the selected zone analysis is to identify the pattern of site
trip assignment by roadway link and, in turn, use that pattern to prepare the
actual assignment of site-generated traffic using other model or manual
methods. The model assignment should NOT be used to calculate internal
capture, background traffic, or turning movements. There are two appropriate
methods for using travel demand models for traffic impact analysis:
Special Generator Method

Link Volume Factor Method
These methods are discussed in Chapter 2.5.4.
FSUTMS Modeling of At a conceptual level, five key steps are taken to perform a trip assignment.
Assignment 1. Input proposed developments land use into zonal data and/or adjust
the models special generators
PDF 2. Run FSUTMS
3. Display traffic that enters/exits development zone(s) on the loaded
NCHRP 255 network using the traffic assignment path file
4. Save development traffic as a new link attribute for further analysis (a
new attribute may need to be created in the network for this purpose if
one does not already exist)
5. Check for reasonableness
NCHRP 255 should be
In some circumstances, such as at the fringe of a model, manual adjustments
used by the applicant
unless another may be necessary. If post assignment adjustments are made, the process should
procedure has been be clearly justified and documented. National Cooperative Highway Research
approved by FDOT. Program (NCHRP) Report No. 255, Highway Traffic Data For Urbanized Area
Project Planning And Design, identifies some procedures for adjusting link
volumes and arriving at design traffic and turn movements. Even though
published in the 1980s, the principles inside are still relevant.
A/V The model output volumes from FSUTMS typically represent the Peak Season
NCHRP 255 Weekday Average Daily Traffic (PSWADT) condition. These volumes must be
Webinar converted to AADT and then to peak hour volumes using conversion factors. This
process is described in the FDOT Project Traffic Forecasting Handbook. All
adjustments and conversion factors should be documented, reviewed and
approved by FDOT. Some models may represent AADT by default or may
automatically convert model PSWADT to AADT during the model process. The
analyst is encouraged to reference all available model documentation and
Webinar with an entire coordinate with the appropriate professional staff if there is a question
segment on the use of concerning the units of the model output volumes.
NCHRP 255
September 2008
2.8.5 Trip Assignment at Intersections

The operational analysis of individual intersections is often required as part of a
transportation impact assessment. The trip assignment at intersections should
be compared to the assignment shown at the facility level so that both analyses
are using consistent values. It is also noted that the background volumes used in
a detailed intersection assessment should be compared to the background
volumes used in the facility analysis. For example, the sum of a specific approach
(left turn movements plus through movements plus right turn movements) at an
intersection should reasonably match the approach volume used in the facility
analysis.
XLS
FDOT has also developed an Excel spreadsheet tool called TURNS5" which may
Turns 5 be useful. Instructions for the use of this spreadsheet are found in Chapter 7 of
the FDOT Project Traffic Forecasting Handbook.
PDF
Project Traffic
Forecasting
2.8.6 Documentation of Trip Assignment

Trip assignment, by nature, will reflect driver tendencies behavior, and in part
becomes a case study of personal preferences. Because the process can reflect a
complex decision process, it is important to document the basis for making an
Proper documentation
will allow for careful assumed trip assignment. Proper documentation of the assumptions and
and thoughtful review of decisions made in developing the trip assignment will allow for review of the
the assignment assignment. Applicants are encouraged to work with FDOT and other local
agencies to ensure trip assignment assumptions are reasonable and reflective of
local conditions.
Standard Process | 2.9 Access Management Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
2.9 Access Management, Site Access, and Internal Circulation

The proper application of access management and basic site planning principles
is essential to all transportation impact analysis. This process involves the review
of proposed site plans and expected improvements. During this stage, the
reviewer assesses the impact of the project on traffic movements and evaluating
safety and operations at, and near the access points (driveways or roadways).
The level of detail of the site plans associated with the impact assessment will
vary based on the purpose of the study and what level of approval is being
sought. For example, DRI applicants should provide approximate locations of
major driveways and new roads, and address overall internal and external
network connectivity.
The design of site circulation, parking, and access should also easily
accommodate bus and pedestrian movements for existing or future bus services.
Having a safe and well-marked pedestrian path to the entrance of the
development is one important aspect of good design. In addition, bicycle access
WEB and parking should be included.
FDOT Public
Transit website The FDOT Transit Office has produced several publications that discuss
pedestrian and transit-friendly design in greater detail and can be found at the
FDOT Transit Office website.
Site impact design issues include identifying an appropriate design vehicle (the
largest vehicle that will typically use the roadway), speeds, and multimodal
accommodations. Most site plans should include the following information, at a
minimum:
Median opening locations and spacing

Sufficiently detailed drawing of access, circulation and parking
Landscaping details for analysis of sight distances
Location of proposed multimodal accommodations
Access Management FDOT has developed numerous standards, guidelines, policies and
Standards recommended practices in the areas of corridor access management and site
access planning. These standards are provided in Rule 14-96, Florida
Administrative Code (F.A.C.), (driveway permitting) and Rule 14-97, F.A.C.
DOC
Rule 14-96 F.A.C. (access management standards).
Driveway Permit
Rule 14-96, F.A.C.: bit.ly/1nNTDhH
DOC
Rule 14-97 F.A.C.
AM Standards Rule 14-97, F.A.C.: bit.ly/1jfQ8ia
Standard Process | 2.9 Access Management Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
All driveways associated with a new or expanded development will need to be

permitted through the process described in the Rule Chapter 14-96, State
Highway System Connection Permits. Directions for traffic studies for access
permits are located under Rules 14-96.005(3) and (4), F.A.C.
The application of these principles to roadway and corridor design features are
discussed in greater detail in a number of FDOT publications such as:
PDF
Driveway Driveway Information Guide
Information Guide dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/programs/sm/accman/pdfs/
driveway2008.pdf
PDF
Median Handbook The Median Handbook is undergoing a re-write
and a newer version should be available in 2014. Check the FDOT
Median Handbook Access Management Page for updates.
dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/programs/sm/accman/default.shtm
WEB The FDOT also maintains an extensive on-line collection of technical

FDOT Access
resources on access management on the FDOT Systems Planning
Management
Access Management webpage.
Standard Process | 2.10 Mitigation Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
2.10 Mitigation and Future Transportation Needs

The future conditions analysis determines if the transportation system will
operate acceptably with the additional site-generated trips. If not, one must
determine what mitigation may be required. The reviewer should have a clear
understanding of the evaluation method used.
This section assumes that an evaluation methodology is based on the most

recent generally accepted professional practice. In some instances, local
governments may use a different methodology or performance measure. The
Future conditions
analysis determines applicant should clearly document and justify the methodology used and confirm
what mitigation may be all methodology assumptions and analysis requirements with FDOT.
required
FDOT provides guidance on using LOS analysis to assess the operating conditions
on the State Highway System (SHS). This section from the Procedure explains
how FDOT can use LOS standards in the planning and permitting processes and
how a transportation impact analysis can determine adverse impacts to the SHS.
Use of Departments LOS standards and guidance on

acceptable highway capacity and LOS methods (including
software) apply to all appropriate Department reviews and
assessments of proposed developments directly impacting the
SHS. In the review of plans and designs of other entities directly
impacting the SHS, the Department recommends the adoption
and use of the Departments LOS standards. Regardless of
adoption or use by non-Department entities, the Department
will use the LOS standards for the review of actions directly
affecting the SHS for all its planning and permitting processes.
The Department can modify a connection permit based on
adverse impacts to operational, LOS or safety issues as part of a
transportation impact assessment. - FDOTs LOS Procedure,
Topic No. 525-000-006-a
Intersections Although arterial facility LOS is stressed in highway level of service standards,
detailed volume-to-capacity analyses at selected intersections may be necessary
to evaluate specific projects. Both facility LOS and intersection volume-to-
Both facility LOS and
intersection v/c are capacity ratio criteria are to determine impacts from proposed developments.
appropriate to Additional information about intersection assessments is provided in the FDOT
determine impacts Quality/LOS Handbook.
2.10.1 LOS Analysis Tools

There are several tools that are available for LOS analysis for a particular
location. The Q/LOS Handbook provides several tools for determining LOS for all
PDF modes of transportation including automobile, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian.
LOS can be determined by using either by the latest Highway Capacity Manual
QLOS Handbook
(HCM) and/or software (HCS), FDOT Quality/Level of Service (Quality/LOS)
Handbook, or a methodology determined by FDOT as having comparable
reliability. The Q/LOS Handbook offers to sets of tools, generalized service
volume tables and FDOTs LOSPLAN software. FDOTs LOSPLAN software
includes ARTPLAN, FREEPLAN, and, HIGHPLAN which are further described under
Section 12 of the Q/LOS Handbook. For transit, pedestrian, and bicycle capacity
and LOS analyses, the Q/LOS Handbook indicates the following tools listed below
for planning applications:
Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual, supplemented by

FDOTs Transit LOS software;
Pedestrian LOS Model; and
Bicycle LOS Model.
2.10.2 Bicycle & Pedestrian LOS Analysis

Bicycle and Pedestrian LOS assesses bicycling and walking conditions from the
bicyclists and/or and pedestrians point-of-view. As with automobiles, levels of
service are used to quantify bicycle and pedestrian quality of service.
FDOT has adopted the 2010 HCM as the basis for its multimodal planning
methodology. Because it is an operational model, FDOT, in cooperation with the
model developers have made some simplifying assumptions for incorporating it
into the FDOT Quality/LOS Handbook and accompanying software.
The bicycle level of service component is based primarily on five variables listed
by relative importance:
Average effective width of the outside thru lane
Motorized vehicle volumes
Motorized vehicle speeds
Heavy vehicle (truck) volumes
Pavement condition
The pedestrian level of service component is based on four variables listed by
relative importance:
Existence of a sidewalk
Lateral separation of pedestrians from motorized vehicles
Motorized vehicle volumes

Motorized vehicle speeds
These models may be used in multimodal analysis requirements of FDOT and
other local agencies. Guidelines for use of the models should be confirmed with
FDOT on a project-specific basis. Specific details about the models are available
in the FDOT Quality/LOS Handbook, NCHRP Report 616 and the 2010 Highway
Capacity Manual.
2.10.3 Detailed Transit and Multimodal Quality of Service Tools

Transit quality of service assesses transit performance from the passenger point-
of-view. As with other travel modes, levels of service are used to quantify transit
quality of service. Techniques for evaluating transit quality of service continue to
be developed and refined. The three national resource documents most
frequently used to assess transit LOS are the Transit Capacity and Quality of
Service Manual, 3rd Edition (TCQSM), the National Cooperative Highway
Research Program (NCHRP) Report 616: Multimodal Level of Service Analysis for
Urban Streets and the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual.
At a state level, the latest FDOT Quality/LOS Handbook summarizes the planning
level methodologies developed by FDOT to assess transit (currently limited to
scheduled fixed route bus service), provides guidance on the application and
limitations of existing FDOT transit assessment methodologies, and includes
generalized planning applications to assess transit LOS (included as part of the
generalized tables that are typically used for roadway assessments).
The Transit Capacity The Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual, 3rd Edition (TCQSM)
and Quality of Service
The TCQSM is the transit counterpart to the HCM. Published by the
Manual (TCQSM)
Transportation Research Board (TRB) as the Transit Capacity and Quality of
PDF Service Manual, 3rd Edition, the TCQSM is a nationally recognized document
that provides standard procedures for measuring transit capacity and quality of
NCHRP 616
service along with the 2010 Highway Capacity Manual.
NCHRP Report 616 Multimodal Level of Service Analysis for Urban Streets
The TRB National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 616:
Multimodal Level of Service Analysis for Urban Streets and the 2010 Highway
NCHRP 616 offers a Capacity Manual offer a method for assessing how well an urban street serves
method for assessing the needs of multiple modal users. This method provides four models for
how well an urban street
estimating auto, bus, bicycle, and pedestrian LOS, respectively, on an urban
serves the needs of
multiple users street. The models use a combination of readily available data and data normally
gathered by an agency to assess auto and transit LOS.
Standard Process | 2.11 References Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
2.11 Multimodal References

A/V There are opportunities for including multimodal considerations at each stage of
Standard Site the transportation impact analysis. Some of the best references on these
Impact multimodal considerations are listed below. Even though some of the linked
documents in this chapter list statutory and agency requirements that are no
longer needed, the technical guidance is still valuable.
Expanded Transportation Performance Measures to Supplement

PDF
Performance Level of Service (LOS) for Growth Management and Transportation
Measures Impact Analysis FDOT Contract BDK77-977-14, October 2013
Guidelines and Performance Measures to Incorporate Transit and Other

Multimodal Considerations into the FDOT DRI Review Process. Though
much has changed in with DRI requirements in 2011-2013, this
document still has much useful information on how to incorporate
multimodal improvements into the mix. State of Florida Department of
PDF
Transportation Public Transportation Office, 2008
Transit Guidelines Multimodal Trade-Off Analysis in Traffic Impact Studies, State of
Florida Department of Transportation, Office of Systems Planning,
2003
PDF
Multimodal
Guidelines
LGCP Reviews | 3.1 Introduction Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
3 Local Government Comprehensive Plan

Reviews
3.1 Comprehensive Plans and Plan Amendments
3.1.1 Introduction to Growth Management and Comprehensive Plans

During the 2011 Regular Session, the Florida Legislature enacted significant
changes to the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land
Development Regulation Act - also known as Florida's Growth Management Act
(Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes). House Bill 7207 (Ch. 2011-139)
redesignated this act as the Community Planning Act and implemented a
number of revisions to Floridas long-standing growth management program.
This legislation focuses the states role in the growth management process to
protecting important state resources and facilities while providing local
governments with greater control over planning decisions that affect the growth
of their communities. In addition to House Bill 7207, other legislative changes
were implemented in 2012 and 2013.
The act requires all local governments to adopt Local Government

Comprehensive Plans (LGCP) that guide future growth and development.
Comprehensive plans contain chapters or "elements" that address future land
use, housing, transportation, infrastructure, conservation, recreation and open
space, intergovernmental coordination, coastal management (coastal areas) and
capital improvements. Comprehensive plans may also include optional elements
that are consistent with statutory requirements.
Comprehensive Plans Comprehensive plans and plan amendments are key components of the
framework for growth management in Florida. FDOT provides comments to
Pursuant to Section local governments and the Department of Economic Opportunity (DEO) in
163.3184, (F.S.), FDOTs
reviewing changes that affect important state transportation resources and
review is limited to
facilities. DEO is responsible for the overall review process and is the agency
adverse impacts on
important state with statutory authority to challenge whether plan amendments are consistent
transportation or not consistent with state law. Reviews of plan amendments by FDOT are
resources. submitted to the local government and DEO for their consideration. Pursuant to
Section 163.3184, Florida Statutes (F.S.), FDOTs review is limited to adverse
impacts on important state transportation resources.
PDF FDOT procedure 525-010-101-d states that FDOT District plan amendment
Procedure reviews will focus on the transportation, land use, intergovernmental
525-010-101-d coordination, and capital improvements elements of the comprehensive plan.
These elements, together with the Future Land Use Map and Future
Transportation Map, coordinate land use patterns, transportation systems, and
capital improvements projects needed to support development of a community.
Changes to an adopted comprehensive plan may impact the transportation
network, including the multimodal components of the network.
The elements of a LGCP must be coordinated and consistent with Sections

163.3177, 163.3178 (coastal areas), 163.3180, 163.3191, 163.3245, and
163.3248, F.S. For example, the Future Land Use Element includes goals,
objectives and policies and a Future Land Use Map (FLUM) that implement the
Future Land Use and jurisdictions desired land use pattern. Likewise, goals, objectives and policies
Transportation creating the jurisdictions transportation system are delineated in the
Elements must be Transportation Element, and the Future Transportation Map identifies those
consistent transportation facilities necessary to accommodate and serve existing
development and the future growth depicted on the FLUM. The Capital
Improvements Element and associated Five-Year Schedule of Capital
Improvements (which specify projects as either funded or unfunded and include
a level of priority for funding unfunded transportation projects and other public
projects required to meet established Levels of Service) must also be consistent
with the Future Land Use and Transportation elements. The Intergovernmental
Coordination Element identifies the agencies and organizations with which the
local government will coordinate its planning activities and outlines the
coordination mechanisms that will be used. Pursuant to Section 163.3168, F.S.,
local governments are encouraged to apply innovative planning tools, including,
but not limited to, visioning, sector planning, and rural land stewardship area
designations to address future new development areas, urban service area
designations, urban growth boundaries, and mixed-use, high density
development in urban areas.
DEO is directed to help communities find creative solutions which foster vibrant,
healthy communities, while protecting the functions of important state
resources and facilities. Similarly, state and regional agencies such as FDOT may
use various means to provide direct and indirect technical assistance within
available resources. If plan amendments may adversely impact important state
resources or facilities, upon request by the local government, DEO is required
to coordinate multi-agency assistance, if needed, in developing an amendment
to minimize impacts on such resources or facilities.
LGCP Reviews | 3.2 The Amendment Process Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
3.2 The Comprehensive Plan Amendment Process

A citizen, property owner, or the local government itself may initiate an
amendment to the local comprehensive plan. Amendments often involve
changing the future land use designation of property to another designation that
allows a different (usually greater) amount of residential development. Future
Land Use Map (FLUM) changes may alter the intensity of allowed non-residential
development or the types of land uses allowed on the property. In addition to
such FLUM amendments, changes to the comprehensive plans goals, objectives
and policies (text) may be requested.
The amendment application is first considered by the local planning agency.
Pursuant to Section 163.3174, F.S., the local planning agency (usually the
planning board or the local governing body) is responsible for preparing the
comprehensive plan and plan amendments, as well as oversee the evaluation
and appraisal review (see below). After a public hearing, the local planning
agency makes a recommendation to the governing body regarding the requested
plan amendment.
There are three separate processes that govern the review of comprehensive plan
amendments. An expedited state review process, based on the previous Section
163.32465(2), F.S., pilot program, is added. All plan amendments must follow this
expedited process, except in the following cases: in an area of critical state
concern; amendments that propose a rural land stewardship area or a sector plan;
amendments that update the comprehensive plan based on a Section 163.3191,
F.S., evaluation and appraisal; or that are for a new plan for a newly incorporated
municipality. The exceptions must follow the state coordinated review process
established in Section 163.3184(4), F.S. Finally, the small scale amendment plan
review authorized under Section 163.3187, F.S., is reserved for relatively small
amendments that may be adopted without state review.
The long standing restriction limiting the number of comprehensive plan
amendments to no more than two per year was repealed in 2011.
3.2.1 Expedited State Review Process

Statutory Authority: Section 163.3184(3), F.S.
Flowchart: Expedited State Review

After receiving a recommendation from the local planning agency, the local
governing body may transmit the requested plan amendment, with or without
changes, to DEO and review agencies. A flow chart illustrating the comprehensive
plan amendment process can be accessed by clicking on the PDF link.
PDF The reviewers must transmit their comments so they are received by the local
Expedited Sate government no later than 30 days from the date the reviewer received the
Review proposed plan amendment and must also send a copy of their comments to
DEO. Reviewing state agencies may only comment on important state resources
and facilities that would be adversely impacted by the amendment and must
specifically state how the plan amendment will adversely impact an important
state resource or facility, identifying measures the local government may take to
eliminate, reduce, or mitigate the adverse impacts. Such state agency comments,
if not resolved, may result in a challenge by DEO to the plan amendment. FDOT
must limit its comments to issues within the agencys jurisdiction related to
transportation resources and facilities of state importance.
An adopted plan amendment, along with the supporting data and analysis, must
be transmitted within 10 working days after the second public hearing to the
DEO and any reviewers who commented in a timely manner at the proposed
stage. The transmitted amendment package must be complete. To be
complete, an amendment must contain:
In the case of a text amendment, a full copy of the amended language in

legislative format with new words inserted in the text underlined, and words
deleted stricken with hyphens;
In the case of a future land use map amendment, a copy of the future land
use map clearly depicting the parcel, its existing future land use designation,
and its adopted designation; and
A copy of any data and analyses the local government deems appropriate.
DEO must notify the local government of any deficiencies within five working
days after the receipt of the amendment package. An amendment adopted
under this process that is not challenged, in a timely manner, becomes effective
31 days after DEO notifies the local government that the plan amendment
package is complete.
3.2.2 State Coordinated Review Process

Statutory Authority: Section 163.3184(4), F.S.
Flowchart: State Coordinated Review

All comprehensive plans or plan amendments that are not reviewed under the
expedited or small-scale review process are reviewed through this process. DEO
is responsible for plan review, coordination, and the preparation and
transmission of comments to the local government for this type of review.
PDF State Within 10 working days following the first public hearing on a proposed
Coordinated comprehensive plan or plan amendment under this process, the local
Review government must transmit the plan amendment, clearly identified as being
under this type of review, to the reviewing agencies and any other unit of local
government or government agency in the state that has so requested by written
request.
The reviewing agencies comments and any other commenter (except the DEO)
are to be made in the same manner and with the same restrictions as for the
expedited state review process except any comments must be sent by the
agencies to the DEO within 30 days after DEO received the complete proposed
plan or plan amendment from the local government.
If the DEO elects to review a plan or plan amendment submitted through this
process, the agency must issue a report giving its objections, recommendations,
and comments (ORC report) within 60 days after the receipt of the complete
plan or plan amendment. DEO, in conducting its review of local plans or plan
amendments, may make objections, recommendations, and comments
regarding whether the plan amendment is in compliance with the provisions of
Chapter 163, Part II, F.S. and whether the amendment will adversely impact an
important state resource or facility. Any objection finding that the plan or plan
amendment will adversely impact an important state resource or facility must
specify how the important state resource or facility will be impacted and
identify measures the local government may take to eliminate, reduce, or
mitigate the adverse impacts.
Upon receipt of the report from the DEO, the local government must hold the
second public hearing, to adopt or not adopt the plan or plan amendment,
pursuant to the provisions of Section 163.3184(11), F.S. Except plan
amendments processed pursuant to the DRI process, if the hearing is not held
within 180 days after receipt of the state land planning agencys report, the
amendments will be deemed withdrawn, unless extended by agreement.
All comprehensive plan amendments adopted by the governing body, along with
the supporting data and analysis, must be transmitted within 10 working days
after the second public hearing to the DEO and any other agency or local
government that provided timely comments at the proposed stage. DEO must
notify the local government of any completeness deficiencies within 5 working
days after receipt of a plan or plan amendment package. After DEO determines
the amendment package complete, the agency has 45 days to determine if the
plan or plan amendment is in compliance with the Community Planning Act.
3.2.3 Small Scale Amendment Process

Statutory Authority: Section 163.3187, F.S.
A small-scale amendment is a future land use map amendment for a site-specific
small scale development activity of 10 acres or less, where the annual
cumulative acres of small scale amendments by that local government is not in
excess of 120 acres and the amendment property is not located within an area of
critical state concern (with limited exceptions). A text change that relates directly
to the small scale land use map amendment may be adopted simultaneously
following the small-scale amendment process.
Small-scale amendments require only one public hearing. The 10 acre limit is
doubled in a rural area of critical state concern as defined in Section
288.0656(2)(d), F.S., as long as the amendment can be certified to further the
economic objectives under Section 288.0656(7), F.S., and meets all concurrency
requirements and applicable federal, state, and local environmental permit
requirements. Any affected person may file a petition to challenge the
compliance of a small scale amendment within 30 days following adoption of the
amendment. The local governments compliance determination is subject to the
fairly debatable standard and the DEO may not intervene in a small scale
amendment challenge.
3.2.4 Future Land Use Map (FLUM)

While FDOT reviewers should be familiar with all aspects of the comprehensive
plan amendment process, amendments to the FLUM warrant close attention.
FLUM amendments and text changes to the Future Land Use Element and the
Traffic Circulation or Transportation Elements should be supported or justified
System must have
by a transportation impact analysis included in the amendment package. The
sufficient capacity for
proposed development analysis should provide information that will allow a determination of whether
the transportation system has sufficient capacity to accommodate the impacts
of the proposed level of development and whether mitigation is needed. Many
local governments have established thresholds for when an amendment must
include a transportation impact analysis, so that amendments which are below
the threshold do not need such a supporting analysis.
The comprehensive plan amendment process is time sensitive with specific

limitations on review periods. The FDOT reviewer should thoroughly understand
state statute and rule requirements regarding comprehensive plan
amendments. The applicable statutory authority, existing guidance and
suggested review procedures are provided in the resources at the end of this
section.
3.2.5 Agency Roles

Comments from agencies on plan amendments are limited to adverse
impacts on important state resources and facilities (for state agencies) and
regional resources and facilities (for Regional Planning Councils, or RPCs).
However, the DEO has expanded comment authority under State
Coordinated Review Process only. For Expedited Review, the DEOs review is
limited to important state resources and facilities outside the jurisdiction of
other agencies and is directed to balance objectives of amendments against
potential adverse impacts to important state resources and facilities. For the
State Coordinated Process, the DEO deals with issues in ORC reports and
makes a compliance finding similar to the former process. FDOT is limited to
issues within the agencys jurisdiction. The Department of Environmental
Protection is limited to air and water pollution, solid waste, sewage, drinking
water, state parks, greenways and trails, state-owned lands and conservation
easements, wetlands and other surface water bodies as well as Everglades
Restoration. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission is
limited to fish and wildlife habitat, listed species and their habitat, while the
applicable Water Management District is limited to wellfields, regional water
supply plan, wetlands and other surface water bodies, flood protection and
floodplain management. The applicable RPC is limited to adverse effects on
regional resources or facilities in the Strategic Regional Policy Plan and extra
jurisdictional impacts inconsistent with comprehensive plan of any affected
local governments in the region.
LGCP Reviews | 3.3 Review of FLUM Amendments Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
3.3 Review of Future Land Use Map (FLUM) Amendments

The Future Land Use Element and the accompanying FLUM implement a
jurisdictions vision for its future. Each future land use category must be defined
in terms of uses allowed, and must include standards to be followed in the
control and distribution of population densities and building and structure
intensities. The proposed distribution, location, and extent of the various
categories of land use are depicted on the FLUM and supplemented by goals,
measurable objectives, and policies.
The element must designate for future land uses at least the minimum amount
of land required to accommodate the medium projections of the University of
Floridas Bureau of Economic and Business Research for at least a 10-year
planning period unless otherwise limited under Section 380.05, F.S., including
related rules of the Administration Commission.
The proposed distribution, extent, and location of the following uses must be
shown on the future land use map: residential, commercial, industrial,
agricultural, recreational, conservation, educational, and public. The following
areas must also be shown on the future land use map:
Historic district boundaries and designated historically significant

properties meriting protection, generally identified and depicted.
Transportation concurrency management area boundaries or
transportation concurrency exception area boundaries.
Multimodal transportation district boundaries.
Mixed use categories.
Natural resources or conditions as defined under Section
163.3177(6)(a)10., F.S.
FLUM amendments must be based upon the following analyses:
An analysis of the availability of facilities and services

An analysis of the suitability of the plan amendment for its proposed
use considering the character of the undeveloped land, soils,
topography, natural resources, and historic resources on site.
An analysis of the minimum amount of land needed as determined by
the local government.
3.3.1 Legal Authorities

FDOT reviews amendments to the adopted Future Land Use Map (FLUM) under the
following authorities:
Florida Statutes (F.S.): Section 163.3177(6), F.S.
Resource Guide. DEO Online Resources
Resource Guide. LGCP FLUM Amendment Review Checklist
3.3.2 Review Procedure

The transmitted plan amendment package received from the local government
should contain all or a portion of, the following data:
Proposed changes to the goals, objectives and policies, if any.
A description of the proposed FLUM change, including the maximum
allowed densities and intensities of the existing and proposed land
use(s).
A map depicting the location of the proposed land use change and
the surrounding area as well as the existing FLUM.
A transportation analysis of the availability of transportation
facilities.
A map of the study area roadways.
If a travel demand model is used, the model files used for the short
term and long term analyses.
Copies of the analysis spreadsheets showing trip generation, internal
trip capture, pass-by trips, transit trips, trip distribution and
assignment, background traffic, total traffic, short-term (5-year)
analysis, and a long-term analysis that is consistent with the long-
term planning timeframe of the comprehensive plan.
Key Review Points FLUM amendments change an adopted land use classification as depicted on the
map. These changes have a great potential to affect the transportation system.
The amendment should identify the impacts that the proposed change will have
on the transportation system and any improvements needed to mitigate these
impacts. These improvements should then be incorporated into the
Transportation Element and in the Five-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements
(located in the Capital Improvements Element).
Pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S., FDOTs review of amendments is limited to

adverse impacts on important state transportation resources and facilities.
Review of FLUM amendments should focus on the following:
1) Whether the FLUM and the Future Transportation Map are
coordinated and consistent;
2) Whether the established LOS standard or other mobility performance
measures will be achieved and maintained over a 5-year period even
with the additional development potential associated with the
amendment;
3) Whether the infrastructure needs associated with the amendment
are reflected in the Capital Improvements Element and on the Future
Transportation Map; and
4) Whether the amendment is supported by relevant and appropriate
data and analysis applied in a professionally acceptable manner.
Based on the level of sophistication, reviewers should expect more detailed

degrees of documentation such as analysis spreadsheets and model files. The
appropriate level of documentation should enable the reviewer to understand
the assumptions and inputs underpinning the proposed amendment.
Interagency coordination between FDOT and the DEO is critical in implementing

effective transportation and land use planning (FDOT Procedure 525-010-101-d).
Throughout the review process, the District should communicate with the DEO
plan reviewer assigned to the community that submitted the amendment to
assist in determining whether a transportation issue should be included in the
District reviewers comments. DEO, the District, and the local government may
participate in conference calls to discuss transportation-related issues.
The LGCP FLUM Amendment Review Checklist in the Resource Guide can provide
a guide to criteria to consider when conducting a FLUM amendment impact
evaluation.
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Typically, FLUM amendments propose changes to the density or intensity of the
land use for a particular property. An accompanying transportation impact
analysis may convert the broad land use descriptions into quantifiable units.
This is usually done for commercial and office land uses where square footages
are calculated from gross acreages using Floor Area Ratios (FARs).
The FAR is the ratio of the gross square footage of a structure to the area of the
site. The higher the ratio, the greater the intensity of the individual site
development. Thus, a FLUM change to a category with a larger FAR will imply
greater area (as square feet) of particular uses which in turn may affect trip
generation and distribution, site access and levels of service.
Exhibit 26
Different Buildings with the same floor area (FAR 1.0)
Impervious Surface A companion measure, Impervious Surface Ratio (ISR) describes the relationship
Ratio (ISR) between the total impervious surface area on a site and the gross land area.
Though this may not affect trip generation specifically, a higher ISR indicates
that storm water may need to be accommodated off site.
The Future Land Use Element should specify the allowable intensities for every
land use category that allows non-residential land uses. The maximum
intensities should form the basis of all analyses. The FDOT reviewer should be
familiar with the jurisdictions land use categories, how the intensity standard is
determined, and its influence on land use and transportation.
A FLUM amendment may create an inconsistency between the Future Land Use
and Transportation Elements if the land use change causes a transportation
facility to fall below its established LOS standard or other mobility performance
measures. This inconsistency may be evident from the supporting
transportation analysis. In this case, the FDOT reviewer should identify the
inconsistency and suggest methods to remedy it.
Any FLUM amendment should include an analysis demonstrating internal

consistency and the continued coordination of the Future Land Use and
Transportation Elements. The transportation analysis should determine
whether the existing, committed or planned transportation facilities are
sufficient to accommodate any new growth impacts.
This test consists of whether the FLUM and the Future Transportation Map are
coordinated and consistent, and whether the established LOS standard or other
adopted mobility performance measures will be achieved and maintained over a
5-year period even with the additional development potential associated with
the amendment.
The LOS standard determines whether a roadway has sufficient capacity to

accommodate the impacts associated with the proposed land use change. It is
also expressed as the maximum service volume established by policy in the
comprehensive plan for a specific roadway.
In jurisdictions where the local government implements transportation

concurrency, the local government must consult with FDOT regarding the
establishment of LOS standards on SIS facilities adopted in the plan or when a
plan amendment negatively affects the LOS on SIS facilities pursuant to Section
163.3180(5)(h)1., F.S. However, the local government makes the final decision
regarding the LOS it adopts for SIS facilities and all other roadways in its
jurisdiction.
On other roadways, local governments may establish adequate LOS standards or

mobility performance measures that need not be consistent with any FDOT LOS
standard.
Resource Guide. FDOT Online Resources
Resource Guide. Legal Authority for Department Review
LGCP Reviews | 3.4 Review of Text Amendments Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
3.4 Review of Text Amendments

Text amendments are changes to the goals, objectives and policies of the
adopted comprehensive plan. Text amendments require an assessment of how
proposed changes in policy affect the transportation system. For example, an
amendment of the policy that establishes maximum development densities for a
particular FLUM category does not alter the map itself, but may result in
additional trips on facilities that serve areas designated by the FLUM category.
Text amendments may modify levels of service standards for specific local
facilities, or establish which modes are to serve specific land uses or districts
within the jurisdiction. The local government may make changes to its Five-Year
Schedule of Capital Improvements for facility prioritization or funding by local
ordinance which would not be subject to state review.
Legal Authorities
Florida Statutes (F.S.): Section 163.3177, F.S.
3.4.1 Review Procedures

Text amendments in any element should be reviewed for potential impacts to
the transportation system in a similar manner to the reviews of Future Land Use
Map amendments.
Required Information Proposed text amendment package
Any data and analysis used to support the amendment
Current Capital Improvements Element and Five-Year Schedule of
Capital Improvements, if required.
Key Review Points Future land use, transportation, and projects in the Five-Year Schedule of Capital
Improvements all affect the efficiency of the transportation system. Text
amendments should be analyzed for internal consistency and impacts on land
use patterns and transportation systems. The FDOT reviewer should coordinate
with DEO when reviewing text changes to plan elements.
LGCP Reviews | 3.5 Future Land Use Element Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
3.5 Future Land Use Element

This element contains goals, objectives and policies that implement the land
development pattern for the jurisdiction which must be consistent with specific
minimum criteria. Several of these affect the form and efficiency of the
transportation system. These criteria include:
Encourage the redevelopment and renewal of blighted areas;
Encourage the elimination or reduction of uses inconsistent with the
communitys character and future land uses; and
Discourage the proliferation of urban sprawl.
3.5.1 Review Procedure

The FDOT reviewer should be familiar with the requirements of Section
163.3177(6)(a), F.S., which specifies the criteria for the element. The element
must establish the long-term end toward which land use programs and
activities are ultimately directed. Similarly, the amount of land designated
for future planned uses must provide a balance of uses that foster vibrant,
viable communities and economic development opportunities and address
outdated development patterns, such as antiquated subdivisions.
The amount of land designated for future land uses should allow the
operation of real estate markets to provide adequate choices for permanent
and seasonal residents and business and may not be limited solely by the
projected population. The element must accommodate at least the minimum
amount of land required to accommodate the medium projections of the
University of Floridas Bureau of Economic and Business Research for at least
a 10-year planning period unless otherwise limited under Section 380.05,
F.S., including related rules of the Administration Commission.
Key Review Points In regards to future land use, urban sprawl is defined under Section 163.3164,
F.S., as low density, automobile dependent development patterns which
promote inefficient extensions of public facilities and services. As illustrated in
Section 163.3177(6)(a),
Exhibit 27, there are areas of development which have leapt over
F.S., provides a method
of determining urban undeveloped/vacant areas to create areas of growth which are barely connected
sprawl. to other developed lands or not connected at all causing this undesirable
pattern. Discouraging urban sprawl is critical in implementing transportation
and land use planning and accomplishes many related planning objectives.
Section 163.3177(6)(a), F.S., provides a method of determining whether or not a
plan or plan amendment discourages the proliferation of urban sprawl.
The reviewer should be familiar with this section of the Florida Statutes to
assure that transportation and land use goals, objectives and policies adequately
discourage the proliferation of urban sprawl. The element or plan amendment
LGCP Reviews | 3.5 Future Land Use Element Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
must be determined to discourage the proliferation of urban sprawl if it

incorporates a development pattern or urban form that achieves four or more of
the following:
Directs or locates economic growth and associated land development to

geographic areas of the community in a manner that does not have an
adverse impact on and protects natural resources and ecosystems.
Promotes the efficient and cost-effective provision or extension of public
infrastructure and services.
Promotes walkable and connected communities and provides for
compact development and a mix of uses at densities and intensities that
will support a range of housing choices and a multimodal transportation
system, including pedestrian, bicycle, and transit, if available.
Promotes conservation of water and energy.
Preserves agricultural areas and activities, including silviculture, and
dormant, unique, and prime farmlands and soils.
Preserves open space and natural lands and provides for public open
space and recreation needs.
Creates a balance of land uses based upon demands of residential
population for the nonresidential needs of an area.
Provides uses, densities, and intensities of use and urban form that
would remediate an existing or planned development pattern in the
vicinity that constitutes sprawl or if it provides for an innovative
development pattern such as transit-oriented developments or new
towns as defined in Section 163.3164, F.S.
Exhibit 27
Effects of Potential Sprawl
LGCP Reviews | 3.6 Transportation Element Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
3.6 Transportation Element

The Transportation Element must address existing and projected level of service
(LOS), system needs and deficiencies, how deficiencies are to be corrected, and
how identified needs are to be met. Legislatives changes have introduced a
stronger multimodal emphasis in the updated element.
Pursuant to Section 163.3177(6)(b), F.S., the purpose of the transportation
element is to plan for a multimodal transportation system that places emphasis
on public transportation systems, where feasible. The element must provide for
a safe, convenient multimodal transportation system, coordinated with the
future land use map and designed to support all elements of the comprehensive
plan. The element must be coordinated with the plans and programs of any
applicable metropolitan planning organization, transportation authority, Florida
Transportation Plan, and FDOTs adopted work program.
The element must reflect the data, analysis, and associated principles and
strategies relating to the following:
The existing transportation system conditions.

The growth trends and travel patterns and interactions between land
use and transportation.
Existing and projected intermodal deficiencies and needs.
The projected transportation system levels of service and system
needs based upon the future land use map and the projected
integrated transportation system.
How the local government will correct existing facility deficiencies,
meet the identified needs of the projected transportation system,
and advance this and other elements of the comprehensive plan.
3.6.1 Review Procedures

The transportation-related comprehensive plan requirements are not identical
for all communities. Local governments located within the metropolitan
planning area of an MPO must include a Transportation Element in their
comprehensive plan addressing traffic circulation, all alternative modes of
transportation, aviation, rail, seaport facilities, and access, and intermodal
terminals, evacuation of the coastal population, as well as airports, aviation
development, and airport land use compatibility. These requirements are listed
in subsection 163.3177(6)(b) 1 and 2, F.S.
Local governments located outside the metropolitan planning area of an MPO
(having a population of less than 50,000 for municipalities and less than 75,000
for counties) have fewer requirements in their Transportation Element (Section
163.3177(6)(b), F.S.) They must only address traffic circulation.
LGCP Reviews | 3.6 Transportation Element Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
Furthermore, municipalities having a population greater than 50,000 and

counties having a population greater than 75,000 that are located outside the
metropolitan planning area of an MPO must include a Transportation Element
that addresses mass transit, ports, aviation, and related facilities, as well as a
new piece called recreational traffic (note that at this time this requirement
applies to only two counties, Citrus and Monroe).
All local governments have the option of including an airport master plan and
amendments into the comprehensive plan as well. Once incorporated into the
comprehensive plan, any development or expansion consistent with the airport
master plan is exempt from a development of regional impact (DRI) review.
Key Review Points The Transportation Element provides goals, objectives, and policies for the
future transportation modes and needs (Section 163.3177(6)(b), F.S.), and
requires the community to plan for a multimodal transportation system where
feasible. In the new element, it is also specifically stated that the Transportation
Element and Future Land Use Element should demonstrate internal consistency
and continued coordination with each other. Coordination and consistency
between these two elements will help jurisdictions to create a cohesive
development pattern and transportation system. Any text amendment should
be reviewed for internal consistency with other portions of the comprehensive
plan and for effects on the existing and future transportation network.
A text change to the Transportation Element may result from a FLUM
amendment, an EAR-based amendment, or a need to update or revise the
element. Any change to the Transportation Element may influence land use
strategies and capital projects. The FDOT reviewer should be aware of the
following potential changes:
1) A change in level of service standards for any mode;
2) Land use strategies to promote bicycle and walking or transit; and
3) Measures to preserve, acquire or protect transportation rights-of-
way.
The text amendment should be reviewed for required multimodal components

and consistency with the Future Land Use Element. The new Transportation
Element must address traffic circulation and up to five additional required
components, depending on the MPO boundary and population size. The FDOT
reviewer and local government staff should be communicating frequently while
the element is being developed or amended.
LGCP Reviews | 3.7 Capital Improvements Element Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
3.7 Capital Improvements Element

The Capital Improvements Element (CIE) is adopted and updated to reflect the
timing and funding of capital projects to meet established LOS standards for
applicable public facilities. The CIE must include the following:
A component outlining principles for construction, extension, or

increase in capacity of public facilities, and a component that
WEB Capital
outlines principles for correcting existing public facility deficiencies
Improvements
Element necessary to implement the comprehensive plan for at least a 5-
year period.
Estimated public facility costs, including a delineation of when
facilities will be needed, the general location of the facilities, and
projected revenue sources to fund the facilities.
Standards to ensure the availability of public facilities and the
adequacy of those facilities to meet established acceptable levels of
service.
Identification of facilities necessary to meet adopted levels of
service during a 5-year period.
The schedule of capital improvements includes any publicly funded projects of

federal, state, or local government, and may include privately funded projects
for which the local government has no fiscal responsibility. Projects necessary to
ensure that any adopted level-of-service standards are achieved and maintained
for the 5-year period must be identified as either funded or unfunded, and if
unfunded given a level of priority for funding.
The schedule must include transportation improvements included in the

applicable metropolitan planning organizations transportation improvement
program adopted pursuant to Section 339.175(8), F.S., to the extent that such
improvements are relied upon to ensure concurrency and financial feasibility.
Additionally, the schedule must be coordinated with the applicable MPOs long-
range transportation plan adopted pursuant to Section 339.175(7), F.S.
LGCP Reviews | 3.8 Concurrency-Related Amendments Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
3.8 Transportation Concurrency-Related Amendments

Transportation concurrency is no longer mandatory. Transportation facilities, along
with Parks and Recreation and Schools may, however, be included in a local
governments concurrency system at a local governments option.
This section of the
handbook will As these elements were required in LGCPs prior to June of 2011, they are still
address considered to be in place until a local government adopts a comprehensive plan
transportation amendment in order to rescind transportation concurrency. This amendment is not
concurrency as subject to the state coordinated review process except for amendments located
revised in HB 7207
within an area of critical state concern pursuant to Section 163.3184(2)(c), F.S.
in 2011 and HB 319
in 2013.
If local governments apply concurrency to these other facilities and services,
including transportation, the amended statute, Section 163.3180, F.S., provides
requirements that must be met.
3.8.1 Requirements Governing Optional Transportation Concurrency Program

Key requirements in Section 163.3180(5), F.S., for those local governments that
utilize transportation concurrency include:
The LGCP must provide principles, guidelines, standards, and strategies,

including adopted levels of service to guide the application of
transportation concurrency.
Local government must use professionally accepted methods for
measuring level of service when evaluating potential impacts of a
proposed development and must consider the number of facilities that
will be necessary to meet adopted level-of-service demands.
Local governments must allow applicants for a DRI, a rezoning, or a
development permit to satisfy concurrency requirements in the plan by
entering into an agreement to pay for or construct its proportionate
share of transportation improvements.
The local government is encouraged to develop policy guidelines and
techniques to address potential negative impacts on future development
such as in urban service areas, infill and redevelopment.
The local government is encouraged to develop tools and techniques to
complement the application of transportation concurrency.
If a local government applies transportation concurrency in its
jurisdiction, it is encouraged to develop policy guidelines and techniques
to address potential negative impacts on future development.
The transportation concurrency program must exempt public transit

facilities such as transit transfer facilities and terminals from
concurrency.
When considering plan amendments that affect facilities on the strategic
intermodal system, the Department of Transportation must be
consulted.
Transportation concurrency is implemented through a local governments permitting

process designed to ensure transportation facilities and services are available to
address the impacts of development. Transportation concurrency is premised upon
adoption of LOS standards or other mobility performance measures, and capital
facilities planning to address existing service deficiencies, and provide infrastructure
or planning strategies to accommodate new growth.
FDOT staff should understand the requirements and methodologies of local

government concurrency systems as they may receive requests for technical
assistance from local governments and may become involved when a local
The FDOT's primary concurrency study identifies impacts to the State Highway System (SHS).
role in
transportation Local governments use existing roadway capacity, estimated trips from a proposed
concurrency
development and the adopted LOS standard or other mobility performance
management is to
provide technical
measures to determine whether the service needs of a proposed development
support to local exceed the existing and scheduled roadway capacity improvements. If capacity is
governments. unavailable and no improvements are scheduled, the developer has the option to
provide the improvements or a proportionate share contribution, unless the
government agrees to provide the necessary improvements.
Key Review Points The FDOT reviewer should focus on the goals, objectives, and policies in the local
comprehensive plan that defines the framework for the concurrency management
system. The FDOT reviewer should review the document and demonstrate that the
amendment to the local comprehensive plan achieves and maintains the adopted
LOS standards or other mobility performance measures. Having the needed data for
the corridor impacted by the proposed amendment will assist the FDOT reviewer.
For example, if a SHS or SIS facility is operating near or below the adopted LOS or
performance standard, the FDOT reviewer should coordinate with the DEO during
the review of a proposed comprehensive plan amendment to request additional
data and analysis documenting the effect of the amendment on the facility.
The FDOT reviewer may provide recommendations for:

Methodologies for evaluating concurrency;
Identifying facilities;
Tracking development projects;
Considering programmed improvements;
De minimus impacts on hurricane evacuation routes;
Proportionate share tracking;
Concurrency management system update schedule;
Preferred monitoring data for the Department;
Size of the study area; and
Use of common methodologies between local governments for
measuring level of service impacts.
The method for monitoring concurrency is an important element of a local

governments concurrency management system. Local governments use various
forms of tracking systems, such as spreadsheets, that can be used for segments of a
transportation system to determine concurrency. Intranet tracking systems can be
used for internal review and approval, and to provide automatic updates.
XLS Concurrency The FDOT reviewer should be familiar with the various methodologies used by the
Management jurisdictions in their District. A sample spreadsheet used for determining this
Systems information for concurrency management systems can be accessed online at:
http://www.cutr.usf.edu/research/access_m/pdf/CMS.xls
3.8.2 Concurrency Alternatives

Local governments may have existing alternatives to transportation concurrency in
their comprehensive plans that reflect previous state requirements. These
alternatives include:
Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas (TCEAs);
Multimodal Transportation Districts (MMTDs);
Long-Term Concurrency Management Systems (LTCMS); and
Transportation Concurrency Management Areas (TCMAs).
Another existing concurrency alternative that may be implemented by a local
government is the designation of a Transportation Development Authority. Although
this concurrency alternative is reflected in current state law, the provisions
governing this alternative did change in 2011. There may be local governments still
implementing these authorities pursuant to previous provisions.
LGCP Reviews | 3.9 Other LGCP Reviews Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
3.9 Other Local Government Comprehensive Plan Reviews

Local governments may process other amendments to the LGCP in addition to
those discussed in previous sections. When reviewing such amendments, the
FDOT reviewer should evaluate the impacts on the SHS and SIS, and the use of
professionally accepted techniques for measuring LOS and other mobility
performance measures.
PDF Resource Guide. Transportation and Land Use Strategies

that Support Mobility
Best Practices
3.9.1 Evaluation and Appraisal of the Comprehensive Plan

The Evaluation and Appraisal of the comprehensive plan is an opportunity for a
local government to determine whether amendments are necessary to reflect
statutory changes. Local governments must evaluate their comprehensive plan
at least every 7 years to determine if amendments are needed to reflect changes
in state requirements since the last update. Local governments must submit a
letter notifying DEO of their determination.
Legal Authorities
Florida Statutes (F.S.): Section 163.3184(4), F.S.
Section 163.3191, F.S.
If the local government determines that amendments are necessary, they will
have 1 year to submit the amendments for review. These amendments will
undergo the state coordinated review process, not the expedited state review
process. See Section 3.2 The Comprehensive Plan Amendment Process for an
overview of the two types of reviews.
Key Review Points The evaluation and appraisal based amendments to the comprehensive may
include updates that reflect changes in local circumstances and community
goals. However the only requirement is to update the plan to reflect changes in
state law.
3.9.2 Development of Regional Impact-based Amendments

DRI Amendment A Development of Regional Impact (DRI) is authorized through the issuance of a
local development order. Since all local development orders must be consistent
with the comprehensive plan, pursuant to Section 163.3194(1), F.S., the DRI
must be consistent with the comprehensive plan. Thus, a DRI-related
comprehensive plan amendment may need to be prepared to ensure
consistency of the plan with a proposed DRI, or substantial deviation to an
existing DRI. Such amendments follow the LGCP amendment review process.
Legal Authorities Florida Statutes: Section 163.3184(3), F.S.

Section 163.3184(4), F.S.
Section 380.06(6), F.S.
Florida Administrative Code: Rule 73C-40, F.A.C.
FDOT Review Procedure

Required information:
Amendment application
Transportation impact study for the amendment
Key review points The FDOT reviewer should analyze the amendment for consistency with the
relevant elements in the comprehensive plan and with Chapter 380, F.S. The
transportation impact study for the amendment should focus on the anticipated
trips, growth trends on the adjacent roadway facilities and proposed mitigation.
3.9.3 Sector Plans

Sector planning, pursuant to Section 163.3245, F.S., is a planning tool for
landscape scale planning not subject to DRI review and that is intended for
large geographic areas of at least 15,000 acres in size. Sector plans
emphasize urban form and the protection of regionally significant resources.
Sector Plans are initiated by a local government through a high level of public
involvement as comprehensive plan amendments. Sector Planning is a
planning process, not a regulatory one. Sector Plans are prepared at two
levels; the first level is the adoption of a long term master plan, formerly
known as the conceptual long-term master plan, and the second is adoption
by a local development order of two or more detailed specific areas plans
(DSAP). This two level planning process provides a method for dealing with a
planning period longer than the planning period of the local government
comprehensive plan, yet still maintaining consistency.
The adoption of a long-term master plan requires the identification of public

Adoption of Long- facilities and natural resources. It includes the conceptual framework map,
principles and guidelines that address urban form and procedures for
Term Master Plan
intergovernmental coordination. The Master Plan is adopted through the plan
amendment process (state coordinated review). The DSAP is adopted by local
ordinance, which must be rendered to DEO, and can be appealed. The key
components of a master plan are a framework map, the identification of needed
transportation facilities and the adoption of procedures to coordinate on extra-
jurisdictional impacts. Exhibit 28 is an example of a Map in Escambia County
from May of 2011:
Exhibit 28
Sector Plan Master
Plan Map for Mid-
West Sector Plan
(Escambia County)
Source: Escambia County Sector Planning Website

http://myescambia.com/business/ds/optional-sector-plan
Detailed specific area plans (DSAP) must have future uses, public facilities and
natural resources in the region. Identification of the distribution, extent and
location of future uses is required. Public facilities include those outside the
host jurisdiction and those necessary for the short term. Similar to the long-term
Detailed Specific Area master plan, the detailed specific area plans require inclusion of guidelines and
Plans (DSAPs) principles that address urban form and procedures for intergovernmental
coordination.
Pursuant to Section 163.3245, F.S., this level encompasses adoption by a

development order of two or more detailed specific area plans that implement
the long-term master plan and within which development of regional impact
requirements are waived. Exhibit 29 is an example of a DSAP Boundary in
Escambia County from September of 2011:
Exhibit 29
Sector Plan DSAP Map
for Mid-West Sector
Plan (Escambia
County)
Source: Escambia County Optional Sector Plan Website

http://myescambia.com/business/ds/optional-sector-plan
Application of Sector Pursuant to Section 163.3245(28), F.S., the sector plan process is an alternative
Plans to the development of regional impact process. As of June 2011, the pilot
program status, demonstration of need, and limitations on the number of sector
plans as well as planning time frame has been removed. Furthermore, Section
163.3245 F.S., establishes the minimum size for a sector plan to be 15,000 acres.
Review of Long Term Sector planning requires the adoption of a long-term master plan into the
Master Plans Comprehensive Plan. When reviewing the long-term master plan, the DEO is
required to consult with FDOT and any applicable MPO or urban transit agency
regarding the location, capacity, design, and phasing of major transportation
facilities in the planning area. The long-term master plan requires a general
identification of transportation facilities to serve the future land uses in the plan
and will include guidelines to be used to establish each modal component
intended to optimize mobility. The transportation facilities identified in the long-
term master plan should be consistent with the adopted MPO long range
transportation plan to the maximum extent feasible. Furthermore, the long-term
master plan should be consistent with state and regional plans. . General
information is required for the long-term master plan submittal, with the detailed
information deferred to the DSAP. DSAPs are still used to implement long-term
master plans, but they only require adoption by local ordinance, not plan
amendment.
A property owner, developer, or the DEO may appeal any local government
order approving a DSAP as being inconsistent with the long-term master plan or
comprehensive plan by filing a petition with the Florida Land and Water
Adjudicatory Commission (Governor and Cabinet) for an administrative
proceeding conducted according to Section 380.07(6), F.S. Sector Plans continue
to be prohibited in designated areas of critical state concern.
3.9.4 Rural Land Stewardship Areas

Initiated in 2001, the Rural Land Stewardship Area program under Section
163.3248, F.S., was revised in 2011 to include legislative changes to the initiation
process, designation, plan amendment process, and state agency coordination
and review. The program established that counties may designate rural land
stewardship areas (RLSAs) where planning and economic incentives encourage
implementing innovative and flexible planning and development strategies as well
as creative land use planning techniques for areas classified as predominantly
rural. An area to be designated under the RLSA program must be at least 10,000
acres, located outside of municipalities and/or established urban service areas,
and designated by a comprehensive plan amendment by the local government
which would have jurisdiction. It is important to note that an RSLA can include
more than one county and landowners must consent to being in a RLSA.
Agency Technical Pursuant to Section 163.3248(4), F.S., a local government or one or more
Assistance with property owners may request technical assistance and participation from state
RLSAs agencies, regional planning councils, water management districts, private land
owners, and other stakeholders in the development of a plan for a RLSA. State
agencies can include the FDOT, DEO, Department of Environmental Protection,
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, and Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission.
RLSA Comprehensive The RLSA process is initiated by the requests the applicable land owners.
Plan Amendments Comprehensive plan amendments proposing a rural land stewardship area are
subject to the state-coordinated review process in Section 163.3184(4), F.S., and
each local government with jurisdiction over a RLSA must designate the area
through a comprehensive plan amendment. RLSAs no longer require a
preliminary agreement with DEO prior to initiating a comprehensive plan
amendment designating an RLSA overlay. The comprehensive plan amendment
for a RLSA must include:
Criteria for designating Stewardship Receiving Areas, or SRAs;

Innovative planning and development strategies and associated
implementation processes that include provisions for a functional
mixture of land uses and other strategies described under Section
163.3248(5), F.S.; and
Mixture of densities and intensities which would not result in urban
sprawl-like development and protect natural habitats.
Upon the adoption of a plan amendment creating a RLSA, the local government
must pass an ordinance establishing a rural land stewardship overlay zoning
district, which provides the methodology for the creation, conveyance, and use
of stewardship credits. Furthermore, a demonstration of need based on
population or other factors is no longer a requirement for a RLSA Overlay
designation. Exhibit 30 is the RLSA Overlay Map from Collier County in March of
2010:
Exhibit 30
RLSA Overlay Map
from Collier County
Source: Collier County Rural Land Stewardship Area Overlay Program

http://www.colliergov.net/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=30764
According to the Rural Land Stewardship Area Program, the Stewardship Sending
Area (SSA) is used to generate area stewardship credits to property owners
which may be used to entitle SRA, which can be in the form of self-contained
planned urban developments in the RLSA. The SSA Program within the RLSA
establishes a method for protecting and conserving the most valuable
environmental land, including large connected wetland systems and significant

areas of habitat for listed species. Exhibit 31 is an RLSA Status Map of existing
SSAs in the Collier County RLSA updated in June 2010:
Exhibit 31
RLSA Status Map of
existing SSAs in the
Collier County
RLSA
Source: Collier County Rural Land Stewardship Area Overlay Program

http://www.colliergov.net/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=30763
Pursuant to Section 163.3248, F.S., stewardship credits, formerly known as

transferable rural land use credits, created in RLSAs no longer require a
minimum of a 25 year timeframe for receiving areas. Receiving areas are to be
based on available data and the development potential represented by
stewardship credits created in RLSAs and correlate to that amount.
Conservation easements must be placed on the sending area land prior to the
transfer of stewardship credits.
3.9.5 Planning Innovations

Planning Innovations In 2011, Section 163.3168, F.S., was created to encourage local governments to
and Urban Service apply innovative planning tools of visioning, sector planning and urban service
Areas areas to address future new development areas, urban service area
designations, urban growth boundaries, and mixed-use, high-density
development in urban areas as defined in Section 163.3164, F.S.
Technical Assistance Section 163.3168, F.S., requires the DEO provide direct and indirect technical
assistance to help local governments find creative solutions to foster vibrant,
healthy communities, while protecting the functions of important state
resources and facilities. If a plan amendment may adversely impact an important
state resource or facility, upon request by the local government, the state land
planning agency must coordinate multi-agency assistance, if needed, to develop
an amendment to minimize any adverse impacts. FDOTs review is limited to
issues within the agencys jurisdiction as it relates to the requirements of this
part and may include technical guidance.
Resource Guide. FDOT Online Resources
LGCP Reviews | Resource Guides Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
3.10 Resource Guide. Legal Authority for Department Review

Florida Statutes, Online Sunshine:
http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Welcome/index.cfm?CFID=229891382&CFTOKEN=88136963
WEB Florida Administrative Code: https://www.flrules.org/
Florida Statutes
The following Florida Statutes and Rule 73C-40, Florida
WEB Florida Administrative Code, provide the authority that guides the
Administrative review of local government comprehensive plans and
Code Developments of Regional Impact documents:
3.10.1 Florida Statutes (F.S.)

Future Land Use and Transportation Elements:
Sections 163.3177(6)(a) and (b), F.S., set forth the requirements for the local
government comprehensive plan Future Land Use and Transportation Elements.
Concurrency:
Section 163.3180, F.S., addresses concurrency and states that transportation
concurrency is optional. If the local government chooses to apply concurrency
to transportation facilities, the local government comprehensive plan must
provide the principles, guidelines, standards, and strategies to guide its
application pursuant to Section 163.3180(5), F.S. The local government may
choose to rescind optional transportation concurrency pursuant to Section
163.3180(1)(a), F.S.
Expedited State Review Process

Section 163.3184(3), F.S., explains the processing requirements of the Expedited
State Review Process for local government comprehensive plan amendments.
Local governments are required to submit the proposed and adopted
amendments to the Department, as it is one of the reviewing agencies. The
Department is limited to commenting on issues within the agencys jurisdiction
as it relates to transportation resources and facilities of state importance.
State Coordinated Review Process

Section 163.3184(4), F.S., explains the processing requirements of the State
Coordinated Review Process for local government comprehensive plan
amendments. Local governments are required to submit the proposed and
adopted amendments to the Department, as it is one of the reviewing agencies.
The Department is limited to commenting on issues within the agencys
jurisdiction as it relates to transportation resources and facilities of state
importance.
Evaluation and Appraisal Review Amendments

Section 163.3191(2), F.S. If the local government determines amendments to its
comprehensive plan are necessary to reflect changes in state requirements, as
reflected in its letter to the Department of Economic Opportunity, the local
government shall prepare and transmit within 1 year the plan amendments for
review under the State Coordinated Review Process in Section 163.3184(4), F.S.
Sector Plans
Section 163.3245, F.S., pertains to the requirements for establishing a Sector
Plan.
Rural Land Stewardship Areas

Section 163.3248, F.S., states the requirements for a Rural Land Stewardship
Area.
Safe, viable and balanced state transportation system

Section 334.044, F.S., establishes that FDOT has the responsibility for
coordinating the planning of a safe, viable and balanced state transportation
system serving all regions of the state, and to assure the compatibility of all
components, including multimodal facilities.
Development of Regional Impact

Section 380.06, F.S., pertains to the statutory requirements for Developments of
Regional Impact (DRI).
3.10.2 Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.):

Rule Chapter 73C-40, F.A.C., describes the Rules of Procedure and Practice
DOC
pertaining to Developments of Regional Impact
Rule Chapter
73C-40 F.A.C.
3.10.3 FDOT Policies/Procedures

The Department utilizes both policies and procedures to guide reviewers in their
duties. The department reviewer should be familiar with and as needed refer to
PDF
Procedure the following policies and procedures:
525-010-101-d
Topic No: 525-010-101-D, Review of Local Government Comprehensive Plans
3.10.4 Publications: Online Guidance

PDF Transportation Concurrency Best Practices Guide
A document produced by the Department of Community Affairs with a primary
Best Practices focus on local government concurrency. Also includes guidance on
comprehensive plan amendment reviews and cumulative analysis. Please note
that the statutory requirements within this document are out of date.
XLS Concurrency Sample Concurrency Management Spreadsheet

Management A downloadable CMS in excel spreadsheet.
Systems
User Guide
Instructions for concurrency management system spreadsheet.
PDF
MMTD QOS
A GIS-Based Concurrency Management System for Local Governments
Handbook
DCA sponsored project of Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council to use GIS as
basis for concurrency management system. Please note that the statutory
requirements within this document are out of date.
Multimodal Transportation Districts and Areawide Quality of Service Handbook

PDF FDOT handbook designed to assist local governments create and adopt MMTDs.
Model Regulations Model Regulations and Plan Amendments for Multimodal Transportation
Districts Report FDOT guidebook designed to assist local governments in
adopting comprehensive plan policies and local ordinances in support of
MMTDs.
PDF
Transit FDOT Draft Guidance for Producing a Transit Development Plan
Development Plan Guidance to assist Florida transit properties in the preparation of Transit
Development Plans as required by Chapter 14-73 in accordance with Sections
339.135 and 339.155 of Florida Statutes.
WEB
Transit Oriented
www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-
Development
development/programs/technical-assistance/planning-initiatives/urban-
planning/transit-oriented-development
A Framework for Transit Oriented Development in Florida.
3.11 Resource Guide. FDOT Online Resources

Transportation and Community Planning
FDOT Office of Policy Planning webpage providing transportation and growth
management guidance and resources.
FDOT Systems Planning Office Highway Capacity/Level of Service-

FDOT systems planning webpage providing information and resources on
measuring quality/level of service. Also hosts the 2013 Q/LOS Handbook
www.fltod.com/research_and_case_studies.htm
PDF ITE Transit Oriented Development in Florida Website by the Treasure Coast Regional
Trip Generation Planning Council and the Florida Department of Transportation-
Manual
www.ite.org
http://www.ite.org/tripgeneration/trippubs.asp
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation documents
www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/programs/mspi/brochures/default.shtm
SIS and Emerging SIS facilities
PDF reconnectingamerica.org/
Reconnecting America is a national nonprofit that advises civic and community
Framework TOD leaders on overcoming the challenges associated with community development
while facilitating transportation choices. As the managing partner of the Center
for Transit-Oriented Development, Reconnecting America promotes best
practices in transit-oriented development.
fltod.com/renaissance/docs/Products/FrameworkTOD_0715.pdf
The Framework for Transit Oriented Development is the result of a collaborative
effort among State of Florida agencies to assist local governments and state and
regional agencies in their use of transit oriented development to transform the
PDF state's existing auto-oriented, largely suburban development pattern into more
Citizens Guide to
compact, livable patterns supporting walking, biking, transit, and shorter auto
Better Streets
trips.
pps.org/pdf/bookstore/How_to_Engage_Your_Transportation_Agency_AARP.pdf
A Citizen's Guide to Better Streets, produced by the Project for Public Spaces,
Inc. is intended to be an easy-to-use guide to effective interaction with
transportation planning and engineering professionals to facilitate
transportation choices as a way of supporting positive community development
and creating walkable communities.
3.12 Resource Guide. DEO Online Resources

Comprehensive Plan Amendment Submittal and Processing Guidelines:
www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-development/programs/
comprehensive-planning/amendment-submittal-and-processing-guidelines
DEOs web page on how to prepare and submit a comprehensive plan
amendment for Expedited State Review and State Coordinated Review.
Evaluation and Appraisal of Comprehensive Plans:

comprehensive-planning/evaluation-and-appraisal-of-comprehensive-plans
DEOs webpage pertaining to evaluation and appraisal reviews of comprehensive
plans. At least every seven years, (see the Evaluation and Appraisal Notification
Schedule 2012 - 2018 ) local governments must determine whether the need
exists to amend the comprehensive plan to reflect changes in state
requirements since the last time the comprehensive plan was updated.
Capital Improvements Element:

technical-assistance/planning-initiatives/infrastructure-planning/capital-
improvements-element
DEOs webpage pertaining to the Local Governments Capital Improvements
Element, the 2011 changes, and the preparation of a Five-Year Schedule of
Capital Improvements.
Developments of Regional Impact (DRI) and Florida Quality Developments:

developments-of-regional-impact-and-florida-quality-developments
DEO webpage pertaining to the DRI program, including thresholds, procedures,
rules and forms.
Sector Planning Program:

www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-
development/programs/technical-assistance/planning-initiatives/rural-
planning/sector-planning-program
DEOs webpage on sector planning containing several examples of current sector
plans around the State.
Transportation Planning:
http://www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-development/programs/
technical-assistance/planning-initiatives/infrastructure-planning/transportation-
planning
DEOs web page on transportation planning includes important information on
the comprehensive plans transportation element, transportation concurrency
and transportation proportionate share contributions.
Transit Oriented Development:

technical-assistance/planning-initiatives/urban-planning/transit-oriented-
development
DEOs web page pertaining to Transit Oriented Development containing the
Chapter 163, Part II, F.S., references and numerous links.
Mobility Fees:
technical-assistance/planning-initiatives/urban-planning/mobility-fees
DEOs web page pertaining to the 2009 Mobility Fees Study and numerous links
regarding mobility fee implementation.
Rural Land Stewardship Area Program:

technical-assistance/planning-initiatives/rural-planning/rural-land-stewardship-
area-program
DEOs web page pertaining to Rural Land Stewardship
DEO Community Planning:

http://www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-development
DEOs web page containing all things related to community planning and the
State Land Planning Agency
3.13 Resource Guide. LGCP FLUM Amendment Review Checklist

This Checklist can provide a guide to criteria to consider when conducting a LGCP FLUM Amendment Review
Project Reviewer Date of Review:
Comments Due:
LGCP Amendment Review Checklist | Evaluation Criteria Y N N/A
A. Study area boundaries established to include all significantly impacted SHS segments under proposed FLUM
amendment land use scenario, including those located outside the jurisdiction of entity pursuing
amendments?
1. All SIS segments identified?
B. Transportation impacts for existing FLUM adequately defined for comparison use in review?
1. Land use scenario defined for existing FLUM category which has mix, densities and intensities of primary
and secondary permitted land uses?
a. Assumptions fully documented?
b. Trip-generating characteristics of the existing FLUM Land Use Scenario shown?

2. Professionally acceptable method employed to determine distribution of trips for existing FLUM Land
Use Scenarios?
a. All internal capture and internal/external split assumptions properly documented?
3. Existing SHS segments LOS shown?
b. Department and LGCP LOS standards used to determine LOS grade?
4. LOS determined for SHS Segments for existing FLUMs Land Use Scenario?
C. Maximum potential land uses permitted under the proposed FLUM Amendment allowable?
D. Future land use scenario defined with reasonable mix, densities and intensities of permitted land uses
a. Assumptions used in defining FLUM Amendment Land Use Scenario fully documented?
E. Professionally accepted methods used for trip generation, distribution and assignment based on FLUM
amendment Land Use Scenario?
a. Adequate documentation provided to permit review of the analyses?
F. LOS been determined for SHS segments under FLUM Amendment Land Use Scenario?
1. Additional improvements to SHS segments required, beyond those identified in adopted long-range
plans?
2. Commitments to providing additional improvements made as a condition of FLUM Amendment
approval?
G. FLUM Amendment and transportation impacts consistent with the Florida Transportation Plan and other
Department-adopted approval plans, policies, standards and guidelines, rules and procedures?
H. FLUM Amendment provides for sufficient additional local transportation infrastructure to preserve mobility
of impacted SHS segments,
I. Proposed FLUM Amendment impact existing or proposed public transit service, as set forth in local agencys
Transit Development Plan?
We have tried to have the most up to date information. However, due to changes in growth management
legislation in 2011 and 2012 we recommend you check with the links we have provided in this handbook. | 124
DRI | 4.1 Introduction to DRI Review Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
Developer
RPC PUBLIC
10 Days
HEARING
Regional Planning Council ADA MEETING No Complaint
PRE-APPLICATION MEETING
NOTICE
METHODOLOGY MEETING
DO
Complaint
30 Days 30 Days YES 60 Days DRI OK?
Administrative
Is ADA sufficient? Regional Report & Hearing
Effective
Recommendations
Date
Local Transmit CPA
ADA
Local Government
30 Days 30 Days 30 Days CPA OK? In Compliance
CPA
PUBLIC Not In Compliance
4
& Other
HEARING Agencies Administrative
Hearing
30 Days
DEO Expedited State Review
30 Days
ADA serves as data
Submitted Accepted 45 Days
ADA & analysis for CPA ADA
Developments of Regional Impact
4.1 Introduction to Development of Regional Impact Review
4.1.1 DRI Review Process

This section will help the FDOT reviewer understand the Development of
Regional Impact (DRI) review process. In addition to providing a general
understanding of the process, the section will discuss the milestones at which
the FDOT reviewer should become involved, when the reviews should be
conducted, and the timeframe allowed for review and with whom
coordination is required.
What is a DRI? A DRI is defined by Section 380.06(1), Florida Statutes (F.S.), as any
development which, because of its character, magnitude or location, would
have a substantial effect on the health, safety or welfare of citizens in more
than one county. Thresholds which determine when a development should
undergo the DRI review process can be found in Section 380.0651, F.S., and
Chapter 28-24, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.). The process used to
determine if a project is a DRI is presented in Chapter 4.2.1. The majority of
DRI activity is with Notices of Proposed Change (NOPCs) for established DRIs
taking advantage of these changes. Changes in state law include new
exemptions which preclude certain development from the DRI review

process, in addition to existing exemptions for Dense Urban Land Areas, if
the development is located within: (1) an urban service boundary as
previously established under Section 163.3177(14), F.S., (2) a rural land
stewardship area established under Section 163.3248, F.S., and (3) a detailed
specific area plan adopted under Section 163.3245, F.S. There are also
exemptions for development identified in airport and campus master plans.
In addition to these new exemptions, applicants for rural areas of the state
have more options outside of the DRI process for development. There has
been a rise in utilizing sector plans since the sector plan program has left
pilot status and is now allowed statewide. Another option for rural area
development is the rural land stewardship program. For additional
information for the sector plan program, see Chapter 3.9.3, and for the rural
land stewardship program, see Chapter 3.9.4. There are a number of existing
DRI exemptions still allowed within the provisions of Sections 380.06(24) and
(29), F.S. Development types which are exempt from the DRI process
include:
Hotel/Motel
Solid Mineral Mining Operations
Industrial Uses
Attraction/Recreation Facilities including multi-screen theatres and
additions to existing sport facility complexes
Hospitals
WEB Electrical Power Plants
List of Dense
Urban Land Areas Seaports
Marinas
Developments within Dense Urban Land Areas (DULA) also qualify for
exemption from DRI review. These qualifying areas must meet the
population and density criteria outlined in Section 380.06(29), F.S.
Exemptions include a DULA municipality, the Urban Service Area of a DULA
County pursuant to other requirements under Section 380.06(29)3., F.S., and
within a DULA County that has no Urban Service Area. Developments that
would otherwise meet thresholds for DRI review in qualifying DULAs are now
exempt from DRI review. Broward and Miami-Dade Counties are included
under the DRI exemption. In addition, certain areas of non-DULA cities and
counties may also qualify for exemption from the DRI review process.
DRI exemptions for non-DULA cities/counties:

In non-DULA municipalities, areas designated for:
Urban infill as defined under Section 163.3164, F.S.
Community redevelopment as defined under Section 163.340, F.S.
Downtown revitalization as defined under Section 163.3164, F.S.
Urban infill & redevelopment as defined under Section 163.2517,
F.S.
Urban service area/boundary as defined under Sections 163.3164
and 163.3177(14), F.S.
In non-DULA counties, areas designated for:
Urban infill as defined under Section 163.3164, F.S.
Urban infill & redevelopment as defined under Section 163.2517,
F.S.
Urban service area as defined under Section 163.3164, F.S.
4.1.2 Resources in This Document

A summary table is provided in Appendix A which lists the different DRI-
stages which the FDOT reviewer has an opportunity to participate in. The
FDOT Reviewers should
requirements listed in Question 10 (General Project Description) and
be familiar with
Question 21 (Transportation) for a proposed DRI Application for
TSIH Development Approval (ADA) is included in Appendix B.
Appendix A
DRI Stages FDOT reviews have historically focused on Question 21 dealing with the
transportation impacts of DRIs. However the FDOT reviewer will also need to
be familiar with Question 10 dealing with Land Use activities and impacts as
well as any other related requirements. This question requires a general
overview of the site and includes information about the size of the site, the
proposed development plan, the general market for the site, consistency
TSIH
Appendix B with the applicable local comprehensive plan and Regional Planning Council
Question 10 & 21 (RPC) Strategic Regional Policy Plan, and demographic and employment
information. The demographic and employment information is of particular
interest as it can be used as a reasonableness check for proposed internal
capture rates (i.e. a comparison can be made between the anticipated price
of homes and the expected on-site employment income).
DRI-level development may not only significantly impact regional and state
roadway systems, but also established land uses and activities and could
create incompatible uses which may not be allowable under local
jurisdictional laws and adversely impact neighboring populations, natural
resources, and other public facilities outside of transportation.
Each jurisdiction within the state has a local comprehensive plan which
dictates overall land uses and their placement within a Future Land Use
Element according to Section 163.3177(6)(a), F.S. These land use
designations assign allowable uses, density and intensity ranges, buffer
requirements and other provisions for a designated area. These land uses
can be found on the Existing and Future Land Use Maps. For example, the
City of Tallahassee has several land use designations including a Low Density
Residential designation. For areas designated Low Density Residential,
density of residential units cannot exceed 8 units per acre and non-
residential development cannot exceed 10,000 square feet per acre. Areas
with this designation must have public street access and be located in areas
such as the Bradfordville Mixed Use Area. A local comprehensive plan also
dictates natural resource protection requirements as well as level of service
standards and scheduled improvements for public facilities such as
roadways, potable water, and sewer. In addition to the local comprehensive
plan, local governments may adopt land development regulations as part of
their municipal code. These regulations are guided by the comprehensive
plan and provide more specific criteria and provisions.
In addition to Questions 10 and 21, FDOT reviewers should also be familiar
with Question 9 which requires the submission of the following:
General Location Map (Map A)

Aerial Photo of the Site (Map B)
Existing Land Use and Significant Resources Map (Map D)
DRI Master Plan Map (Map H)
These maps can provide valuable visual information that assists in orienting
the reviewer with the site.
4.1.3 Incorporating Transit and Other Multimodal Considerations

The National Center for Transit Research (NCTR) has developed specific
guidance for the FDOT reviewer to incorporate multimodal and transit
PDF
performance measures into the DRI review process. The guidance includes
Transit Guidelines specific multimodal information to be included in the Application for
Development Approval (ADA), multimodal information to be submitted for
the transportation methodology meeting, mode split analysis, sufficiency
checklist, evaluation criteria, mitigation strategies, local government
development order, and monitoring. Regardless of the stage of the DRI
review, the FDOT reviewer should work with local government, other
reviewing agency staff and applicants to identify opportunities to integrate
transit and multimodal services and create strategies for making
communities ready for transit in the future. The Guidelines and Performance
Measures to Incorporate Transit and Other Multimodal Considerations into
the FDOT DRI Review Process also provides sample FDOT review comments
and discusses methods for quantifying multimodal transportation impacts.
Key sections of the NCTR document have been incorporated into this
handbook, resources and appendices.
4.1.4 RPC and Local Government Participation in the DRI Review Process
The RPC plays a key role in the DRI process, coordinating application and
review activities at the regional level (Section 380.06(7)(a), F.S.). Local
government participation is also important since the local planning agency
plays a lead role in the identification of local issues or concerns relative to
the project. The local government is also responsible for conducting a public
hearing on the project and serves as the primary agency in the execution and
approval of DRI development orders (DO) and any required comprehensive
plan amendments authorizing necessary land uses for the DRI.
The procedural requirements

4.1.5 DRI Process Applicant Request
Applicant Obtains Binding Letter (optional)
considered when applying for
(15 days) approval of a DRI are found in
Applicant Contacts RPC Rule 73C-40.022, F.A.C., of the
(No Time Limit)
Exhibit 32 Department of Economic
DRI Process Applicant Prepares Project Summary Narrative Opportunity (DEO). The FDOT
(No Time Limit)
reviewer should know the
RPC Schedules Preapplication and Transportation review times appropriate for
Methodology Meeting
(No Time Limit) each step of the DRI process. It
Know the review times is noted that the actual review
for each step of the DRI Preapplication Meeting with All Parties times for the FDOT reviewer
process
will likely be even shorter than
RPC Summarizes Meeting Agreements the statutory limits since the
(35 days)
times reflect those for the lead
coordinating agencies. These
Applicant Prepares DRI -ADA Response and
Submits (1 year) review times, along with lead
agency identification and
First Sufficiency Determination statutory and code reference
(30 days)
guidelines, are depicted in
Sufficiency Response Not Sufficient Exhibit 31.
(30 days)
Applicant Provides Applicant Declines to

Additional Information Provide Information
(120 Days Maximum) (5 days)
Second Sufficiency Determination (30 days)
Applicant Provides Applicant Declines to

Additional Information Provide Information
Sufficiency Response (30 days)
Recommendations and Conditions Development
Local Government Sets Public Hearing Date (10 days) and RPC
Note: typical processing time
Assessment Report Submitted (50 days) thru DEO and local
jurisdiction(s) takes no less than
Final DRI Public Hearing (30 days)
270 days from initial submittal
Local Government Issues DO (30 days) to formal adoption
RPC/Applicant/DEO Review DO
and Appeal if Necessary (45 days)
Modifications of For modifications of approved DRIs, NOPCs, the review of annual/biennial

Approved DRIs reports, or the review of traffic monitoring reports, the FDOT reviewer
should clarify the review time and comment process with the lead agency
(often the local government). While such reviews are often not as lengthy or
complicated as the review of a newly proposed DRI, FDOT participation is
critical in assuring that impacts to the Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) and
State Highway System are identified and properly mitigated.
4.1.6 DRI Review Procedures

The instructions and review requirements outlined in this Chapter are
applicable to all types of Developments of Regional Impact. Additional
considerations unique to a particular step in the DRI process or to a unique
type of DRI are addressed in the review checklists referenced in this Chapter.
This Chapter primarily focuses on ADA reviews which normally represent the
most common and complex FDOT reviews associated with DRI applications.
The following list highlights the activities in which the FDOT reviewer has
opportunities to respond with comments, through the coordinating RPC or
other agency, to the applicant for various types of DRI reviews.
DRI Activities which the
FDOT Reviewer may DRI Reviews
respond to DRI Determination (Binding Letter of Interpretation)
Pre-application or Methodology Development Meeting
o Pre-application Conference Format Meeting
o Pre-application Conference Project Summary Narrative
Review
o Transportation Methodology Meeting Information Submittal
Review
o Review of RPC Regional Issues List and Agency Comments
(which may include Transportation Methodology Letter of
Understanding)
ADA Review
State Agency Sufficiency Review
RPC Assessment Report
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Review (if required)
Local Government Development Order Review
Approved DRIs
Proposed Changes to Approved DRIs
Annual/Biennial Report Review
Traffic Monitoring Study
4.1.7 Other review types

The following types of other reviews associated with DRIs are also addressed in
this section:
Notice of Proposed Change (NOPC): A report that is required to be

submitted by the applicant to the local government, the RPC and DEO
when a change is proposed to a previously approved DRI.
Annual/biennial reports: A required report that summarizes information
describing any changes that have been made to the development plan
TSIH during the reporting period, information about the master plan, lands
Appendix A purchased, permitting, and local government, and a summary of each
DRI Stages development order condition and when each commitment has been
complied with.
Transportation or Traffic monitoring studies: These studies are usually
required by a condition in the development order and are described in
greater detail below.
See Appendix A which details the DRI stages, review timeframes and responsible
agencies for the FDOT reviewer to provide input to.
Transportation or As DRI analysis is a complex process, the requirement for transportation or

Traffic monitoring traffic monitoring studies is becoming more common in Development Order
studies are frequently
agreements. These studies, which differ from the statutory requirement of
included in Development
Order conditions annual/biennial reports, usually require the collection and analysis of
transportation data to verify assumptions associated with internal capture (or
community capture if applicable), background growth rates, and other
assumptions made during the ADA. Monitoring studies also serve to show how
close a developments traffic is getting to the improvement thresholds. A similar
process to that of an ADA (i.e. methodology development, study review, and
sufficiency determinations) is often used in the review of monitoring studies.
FDOT participation throughout the process is essential. FDOT staff should
recommend appropriate monitoring for single occupancy vehicle use such as
applicable multimodal criteria from DRI Checklist 5. Additional information
about this step is presented in Chapter 4.4.2. In addition, understanding access
management needs and issues for a DRI development, as described in DRI
Checklist 6, would be important for purposes of transportation monitoring.
The DRI process often The DRI process requires reviewing large amounts of information over a period
requires the review of of time determined by statute. The following are general recommendations that
large amounts of
may be helpful for the FDOT reviewer throughout the DRI process.
information
Resolve minor problems by phone. If there is an apparently minor
question and assuming this is accepted protocol among parties involved
(if in doubt, ask at the Methodology Meeting), call the consultant directly
in an attempt to resolve the question.
Support local agencies in their attempts to achieve/maintain local and

collector road continuity. When the FDOT helps solve the problems on a
local system it often reduces problems on the state system. Local rights-
of-way systems frequently have discontinuous patterns. Consequently,
Solving problems on a the state system is used for many local trips. Many reasons have caused
local system can reduce
discontinuity in local street rights-of-way. These factors range from lack
problems on the state
of planning to intentionally planned enclaves. Developers continue to
system
pressure for very large enclaves without through streets. The FDOT needs
to work with and stand behind local planners attempts to create
continuous local street systems. These systems double as an attractive
alternative for pedestrians and bicyclist. Their trips can reduce motor
vehicle trips on state system.
Work with other reviewing agencies to introduce the concept of
multimodal considerations early in the process and provide available
resources. The discussion of multimodal measures should occur as early
as possible so that site designs and concepts can incorporate multimodal
features and continue all the way through the discussion of mitigation
alternatives.
DRI | 4.2 Review DRIs/Substantial Deviations Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
4.2 Review Requirements for Proposed DRIs/Substantial Deviations

Binding Letter of Determination/DRI Determination
Prior to initiating any DRI application, the applicant or the local government may
WEB request a determination from DEO as to whether the project meets the
definition of a DRI. A Binding Letter of Determination summarizes the decision
DRI Procedures by DEO as to whether a proposed development must undergo a DRI review.
Many DRIs choose to forgo this step if it is clear the development will cross the
thresholds and they already intend to go through the DRI process.
Chapter 28-24, F.A.C., and Section 380.0651, F.S., spell out the criteria used
by DEO to make this determination. These thresholds are provided in Exhibit
WEB
Developments of 31 and serve as the primary basis for DRI determination. The DEO DRI web
Regional Impact page contains additional information. DEO must make a finding of
sufficiency, or request additional information within 15 days of receipt of a
request for a binding letter of interpretation or a supplement. This leaves the
FDOT reviewer with even less time to provide assistance if requested.
FDOT Reviewer Role While DEO may request that the FDOT reviewer participate in the determination
of possible transportation impacts, this step in the DRI process does not
mandate review by the FDOT.
Exhibit 33
DRI Thresholds
DRI THRESHOLD
TYPE/MEASURE
100%
SEATS 10,000
ATTRACTION/ SINGLE PERFORMANCE
PARKING 2,500
RECREATION
FACILITIES SEATS 4,000
SERIAL PERFORMANCE
PARKING 1,000
MULTIPLE LAND USES TWO OR MORE USES (%) 145
(one of which must be
residential) THREE OR MORE USES3 160
OFFICE GROSS SQUARE FEET 300,000
RECREATIONAL
VEHICLE
SPACES 500
RESIDENTIAL SEE: DEO Residential Thresholds by Population Listing
GROSS SQUARE FEET 400,000
RETAIL/COMMERCIAL
PARKING SPACES 2,500
SCHOOLS NEW/NUMBER OF STUDENTS 5,000
(post-secondary) EXISTING/EXPANSION OF POPULATION (%) 20
Chart adapted from Tampa Bay Regional Planning Council
See exclusions, exceptions, and other information from Section 380.0651, F.S.
ATTRACTION/REC. FACS. [SOURCE: Section 380.0651(3)(b), F.S., & Rule 28-24.016, F.A.C]
MULTIPLE LAND USES [SOURCE: Section 380.0651(3)(f), F.S., & Rule 28-24.032, F.A.C.]
OFFICE [SOURCE: Section 380.0651(3)(c), F.S., & Rule 28-24.020, F.A.C.]
RECREATIONAL VEHICLE [SOURCE: Section 380.0651(3)(e), F.S., & Rule 28-24.027, F.A.C.]
RESIDENTIAL [SOURCE Section 380.0651(3)(g), F.S., & Rule 28-24.023, F.A.C.] See: DEO Thresholds
RETAIL/COMMERCIAL [SOURCE: Section 380.0651(3)(d), F.S., & Rule 28-24.031, F.A.C.]
SCHOOLS [SOURCE: Section 380.0651(3)(i), F.S.]
4.2.1 Transportation Methodology Development

Pre-application Conference
Before filing an ADA, the applicant should contact the RPC to arrange a Pre-
Application Conference to discuss all issues associated with the project (Rule
73C-40.021(1)(a), F.A.C.). This conference is typically organized by the RPC in
cooperation with the applicant. All appropriate review agencies, including the
FDOT, are also invited.
Pre-application This conference is conducted to identify issues, coordinate appropriate state and
Conference: local agency requirements, promote a proper and efficient review of the
Serves as a general proposed development, and ensure that RPC staff are aware of all the issues to
discussion of all issues which reviewing agencies will require the applicant to respond (such as wildlife
associated with the impacts, economic considerations, and environmental challenges). The applicant
proposed DRI
should prepare a Project Summary Narrative that summarizes the overall project
and the key assumptions to be used in preparing the ADA.
Transportation Additionally, the Pre-Application Conference will serve to specify information

Methodology Meeting: requirements, including the required number of copies of the ADA, the
Held as part of the Pre- method of their distribution to reviewing agencies, the deletion of questions
application conference from the ADA, and to clarify concerns of the reviewing agencies. A
to discuss applicants
Transportation Methodology Meeting typically occurs during the Pre-
response to Question 21
application Conference.
FDOT Reviewer Role While desirable, FDOT attendance at the entire Pre-Application Conference (i.e.
field visit, environmental discussion, etc.) should be decided on a case by case
basis. During the portion of the Pre-Application Conference where all disciplines
and agencies are present, FDOT comments should be general and focus more on
big picture issues and process such as stating whether the FDOT has any
committed projects in the area and confirming that the FDOT will be a reviewer
on all future biennial report and monitoring studies. Specific technical details are
usually better discussed during the Transportation Methodology Meeting. If a
specific Transportation Methodology Meeting is not held, all the issues listed
below under the Transportation Methodology should be discussed during the Pre-
application Conference.
Transportation Methodology Meeting

Usually a specific Transportation Methodology Meeting is held as part of the
Pre-Application Conference. This should be confirmed by the FDOT reviewer
upon being notified of the Pre-Application Conference (Section 380.06(7)(a), F.S.
and Rule 73C-40.021, F.A.C.). In cases where local government comprehensive
plans and land development regulations include policies to support a multimodal
transportation system, appropriate stakeholders representing these modes
should also be present. This could include staff from: the District Public
Transportation Office, regional transit authority, local transit agency, regional
ridesharing agency as well as Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
professionals and MPO and local bicycle/pedestrian coordinators. These
stakeholders would augment the staff representing the FDOT, DEO, DEP, MPO,
RPC, affected local governments, the applicant and their consultants.
To make each applicant fully aware of the type of multimodal features that
TSIH reviewers will be seeking in the application, it is recommended that the reviewer
DRI Pre-App
to make potential applicants aware of Pre-Application Checklist. This Checklist
Checklist
specifies information to be provided by the applicant to address modes in
See multimodal addition to single-occupant vehicles.
features in
Pre-Application Detailed parameters may be found within the materials listed in Pre-Application
Checklist Checklist. Much of this information is subject to local conditions and not
conducive to statewide parameters.
During the Transportation Methodology Meeting, technical discussions take
place regarding the details of the applicants methodology to answer Question
21 of the ADA. Before the Transportation Methodology meeting, the applicant
prepares a detailed transportation methodology to be submitted to the
reviewing agencies (this may be part of the overall Project Summary Narrative,
TSIH
but often it is a stand-alone document). Some Districts provide the applicant
Appendix C with a format for the transportation methodology to adhere. A sample used by
District 2 Format District 2 is listed in Appendix C.
The methodology document should be received by the reviewer 10 working days
prior to the transportation methodology meeting; if for some reason this does
not occur, the FDOT should request it from the RPC and applicant.
The reviewing agencies should come to the meeting having already reviewed the
methodology and prepared to discuss key issues. The methodology meeting
should focus on discussing key issues associated with the study such as phase
dates, roadway service volumes and LOS designations, network assumptions,
trip generation (internal capture, pass-by, mode reductions), and background
growth assumptions. In many cases, key issues will include multimodal and land
use considerations. The preliminary response by the applicant to the criteria in
should be contained in the applicants transportation methodology submittal.

The applicant should be made aware that the transportation methodology
should be received by the RPC 20 days prior to the Transportation Methodology
Meeting for distribution to reviewing agencies.
FDOT Reviewer Role The Transportation Methodology Meeting is critical in the DRI process. It is the
first opportunity for the FDOT to express its concerns about the projects
potential impact on the SIS/SHS and to provide significant input in the questions
Clearly document and needing answers. The Transportation Methodology Meeting also provides an
present the issues to the opportunity to collaborate with other reviewing agencies and identify
applicant and to the
information which may be useful in performing a thorough and accurate
RPC
assessment of project impacts. Checklists have been provided for each of these
purposes. The checklists cover issues raised in a typical DRI review. The lists
TSIH
DRI Pre-App should be modified, as appropriate, to address specific project characteristics.
Checklist DRI Checklist 1, should be used by the FDOT reviewer during this stage of the DRI
review process. As previously noted, the information provided in DRI Pre-
Application Checklist should be brought to the attention of the applicant.
It is important for the FDOT reviewer to clearly articulate all major issues and
concerns at this meeting to minimize possible discrepancies or omissions during
the review of the ADA. The FDOT reviewer needs to provide comments not only
on the information that is submitted and discussed, but also request any
information that has not been discussed or included that is necessary for the
completion of the study. Potential topics of discussion include:
Internal Capture/Community Capture: The methodology for determining

internal capture should be clearly documented and supported with sample
calculations. If the DRI is eligible to use Community Capture, the applicant
should state their intent to use the methodology to determine Community
Capture and provide the supporting documentation needed. It is noted that the
proposal of high capture rates will need to include detailed documentation and
discussion for support
Interchange Impacts: Whenever traffic from a DRI impacts a freeway or

interchange, the applicant should be made aware of the potential need to
coordinate with the District Interchange Review Committee. The applicant will
need to be provided and consider information from any ongoing interchange
modification study efforts (IMR, IJR, IOAR, or SIMR). It is also noted that if a new
interchange is being sought, the applicant should coordinate with the District
Interchange Review Committee and that specific analysis procedures will be
necessary. It is noted that this will be in addition to the standard requirements
of the ADA. Additional information regarding interchange justification can be
found at the Departments Interchange Justification webpage.
Multimodal Considerations: The FDOT reviewer should make certain that

existing multimodal guidance is made available to the applicant. The discussion
of multimodal measures should occur as early as possible so that site designs
and concepts can incorporate multimodal features and services. Mitigation
measures should also consider multimodal alternatives in addition to traditional
roadway capacity enhancements. In many cases, the applicant is required to
submit the proposed transportation methodology in advance. This gives the
reviewers the opportunity to provide early comment on the details of the
proposed methodology. One example of such comments is provided in Appendix
E. The example is from District 4 in which the applicant requests trip reductions
based on multimodal use. The comments offer a conditional acceptance of the
reductions based on additional information to be provided by the applicant.
Land use conversion table (Trip equivalency matrix): An applicant may

propose a land use conversion table or trip equivalency matrix as part of a
DRI traffic analysis. While the use of land use conversion tables and their
application varies around the state, there are some basic considerations that a
reviewer should be aware of. The base development program of a DRI provides
In regards to
for critical assumptions on mix of uses, internal capture, and trip distribution.
transportation
assessment, the Each of these factors also impact the transportation assessment and
reviewer must also proportionate share obligations. The purpose of these land use conversion
analyze impacts as they tables is to allow for flexibility in the development plan. The idea being that the
relate to established land use conversion tables determine the amounts of specified land uses that
level of service
may be exchanged with others in the development plan without changing the
standards. Please refer
to Chapter 2 of this overall transportation impacts of the DRI. Thus, the equivalency matrix will
handbook for more identify no changes will be required for the mitigation plan. The implementation
information. of conversion tables must be evaluated cautiously. Specified conversions are
often accepted in terms of one identified land use at a specific development
intensity being converted to another clearly identified land use at specific
development intensity. However, it is very difficult for a land use conversion
chart to adequately show the wide range of possible conversions.
When the use of a matrix is proposed the reviewer should ensure that:
1. The basic character of the project is not altered.

2. The proposed development intensity fluctuation does not contradict
the threshold set by Section 380.06(19), F.S., for Substantial
Deviation.
3. The proposed matrix is based on Peak Hour directional trips as the
peak hour directional rate is used as the basis for DRI analysis.
4. Land uses are not exchanged across phases of a multi-phase DRI. For
example, in a mixed use program if phase 2 had residential and
employment and the developer built the residential but not the
employment, they shouldnt use the matrix to pull residential
forward from phase 3 unless there is a clear understanding of the
impacts to transportation.
In addition, some reviewing agencies have established guidelines when
reviewing equivalency matrices. These are included as examples only, and
specific study conditions will determine actual limits.
Limiting the minimum/maximum development intensity threshold by

a maximum of 10% change in project trip directionality. Anything
more than that will be deemed significant as changes in such
magnitude will impact the directionality of the assigned project trips,
thus creating unreviewed traffic impact on the roadway network.
Limiting the use of the matrix by +/- 15% based on the substantial
deviation thresholds.
Limiting the minimum/maximum exchanges to 25-30% from the
requested land uses stated in the DRI
In summary, the key for the reviewer is to ensure that the resulting impacts of
the exchange are as close to the original approved study impacts and mitigation
as possible.
Review submittals The FDOT reviewer should request opportunities for review of submittals
prepared by the RPC prepared by the RPC prior to their transmittal to the applicant and should also
state its desire to be a reviewing agency for the biennial monitoring report,
should the DRI achieve approval. As transportation or traffic monitoring studies
become more utilized over the life of a DRI, the FDOT reviewer should introduce
the concept of monitoring and initiate the discussions about the potential need
for future monitoring studies.
Provide the applicant The FDOT reviewer should provide the applicant with a written summary of the
with a written summary FDOT comments shortly after the methodology meeting has been completed.
The FDOT reviewer should clearly explain to the applicant that interchange
approvals and permits for driveways, median openings, and traffic signals
require separate approvals outside of the DRI process. The FDOT reviewer
should document cases where assumptions clearly do not meet FDOT standards
(such as closely spaced signals and median openings).
Formal DRI-ADA requirements for review by the FDOT will include, at a

minimum, Questions 21 (found within Rule 73C-40.045, F.A.C., and Appendix A)
dealing with transportation impacts of the proposed development.
The FDOT reviewer can take two actions to increase the likelihood of receiving
complete and adequate information in all submittals. The first is to assure that
the applicant is aware of resources available through the FDOT which will assist
the preparation of plans and documentation which meet FDOT criteria. A list of
TSIH
DRI Pre-App these materials is provided in DRI Pre-Application Checklist. The second action is
Checklist to make copies of the FDOTs review checklists (1-7) available to potential
applicants and other reviewing agencies. This will clarify, for all parties involved,
the general issues which the FDOT will bring to the table when performing a
review.
The applicant is required to revise the transportation methodology per

discussions during the Transportation Methodology Meeting and comments
received shortly after the meeting. The FDOT reviewer should clearly document
any issues that have not been resolved during the methodology development
process and present the issues to the applicant and to the RPC. The FDOT
reviewer should also contact the RPC to understand the process used by the RPC
to officially close the methodology period. The RPC, DEO or applicant may
request that another Pre-Application Meeting be conducted if the DRI-ADA is
not submitted within one year of the initial Pre-application Meeting.
4.2.2 Pre-application Conference/Transportation Methodology

Meeting The RPC will document the findings and agreements from the Pre-Application
Documentation Conference and Transportation Methodology Meeting within 35 days following
the Pre-Application Conference. The RPC Regional Issues List and Agency
Comments may include the Transportation Methodology Meeting Letter of
Understanding (MLOU). The MLOU summarizes the study area and data, data
collection, analysis approaches and mechanisms, data presentation and
mappings, and documentation requirements agreed to by the applicant and all
agencies reviewing the transportation question. This documented
understanding helps ensure that the review occurs in a timely fashion. The basis
for the review of the MLOU should be a combination of two sets of
documentation: the FDOT reviewers analysis of the Transportation
TSIH Methodology
Methodology Meeting Information submittal and the FDOT reviewers notes
Meeting
Checklist 1 from the meeting itself. DRI Checklist 1, should be used again by the FDOT
reviewer during this stage of the DRI review process.
FDOT Reviewer Role The FDOT reviewer should recognize that the analysis conditions, restrictions
and special conditions identified in these transmittals are binding. If FDOT has
comments that state that it does not agree with or has concerns with the MLOU,
these must be submitted in writing to the RPC. This puts them on record. If these
comments are not agreed to by all parties, and FDOT objects later in the process,
this can give standing later with DEO. For this reason, FDOT should carefully
review the documents.
The Pre-Application Conference attendees and state and regional agencies

involved in the DRI review process have a review time period specified by the
RPC (at least 14 days) to comment, agree or disagree in writing with the
summary of the methodology Rule 73C-40.021(1)(f), F.A.C.
After agreement has been reached regarding assumptions and methodologies,

Reviewing agencies may the reviewing agencies, including the FDOT, may NOT subsequently object,
NOT object after unless changes to the project or information occur which make said assumptions
agreement has been
and methodologies inappropriate (Rules 73C-40.021(1)(f) and 73C-40.045(3)(e),
reached
F.A.C.).
4.2.3 Application for Development Approval Process

The ADA process is where the applicant provides review agencies with the
information needed to make a sufficiency determination. After reviewing the
submittal, the agency can either determine that the submittal is sufficient (no
additional information is needed) or request additional information Rule 73C-
40.022, F.A.C.
The RPC may request additional information on behalf of reviewing agencies no

more than twice, unless an applicant waives this limitation (Section 380.06(10),
The RPC may
request additional F.S.). Agency requests are in the form of comments on the ADA submittal (1st
information no more Request for Additional Information) and comments on the applicants first
than twice response to agency comments (2nd Request for Additional Information). While
later coordination between the applicant and agencies is often needed and
often occurs, every effort should be made to resolve issues during the required
review process.
However, new information submitted by the applicant in the form of an

amended or revised ADA is normally reviewed and commented upon by the
reviewing agencies after the first DRI-ADA submittal.
County must receive If required, DRI Local Government Comprehensive Plan (LGCP) amendments are
LGCP Amendment prior normally initiated at this point to ensure consistency with the proposed DRI
to or concurrent with (Section 380.06(6), F.S.). The ADA for the DRI can be used as data and analysis
developer filing ADA for the LGCP amendments. Detailed information about the review requirements
for LGCP amendments is found in Chapter 3. Exhibit 34 displays a chart showing
the concurrent review and processing of the DRI and LGCP. Note that Section
380.06(6)(b)6, F.S., requires the county to conduct a public hearing for both
processes at the same time.
Exhibit 34
DRI Process
Developer
RPC PUBLIC
10 Days
HEARING
Regional Planning Council
ADA MEETING No Complaint

PRE-APPLICATION MEETING
NOTICE
METHODOLOGY MEETING
DO
Complaint
30 Days 30 Days YES 60 Days DRI OK?
Administrative
Is ADA sufficient? Regional Report & Hearing
Effective
Recommendations
Date
Local Transmit CPA
ADA
Local Government
30 Days 30 Days 30 Days CPA OK? In Compliance
CPA
PUBLIC Not In Compliance
& Other
HEARING Agencies Administrative
Hearing
30 Days
DEO Expedited State Review
30 Days
ADA serves as data
Submitted Accepted 45 Days
ADA & analysis for CPA ADA
The RPCs have the responsibility to coordinate with all affected agencies with
regard to both the notification and coordination of review. This coordination
requires FDOT comments/interests to be weighed against concerns of other
agencies that may conflict with the interests of the FDOT. If this occurs the FDOT
reviewer should work with the staff of partner agencies to reach a decision that
is best for all parties involved. Even still, in such instances the RPC may carry
forward a position which does not support the FDOTs conclusions.
4.2.4 ADA Review/1st Sufficiency Determination/

1st Request for Additional Information
Applicant The applicant completes the ADA in accordance with the requirements agreed to
Requirements during the Pre-application Conference. The ADA is then submitted to the RPC for
distribution and review by the reviewing agencies including the FDOT.
Sufficiency Sufficiency is the determination that the applicant has supplied all of the
Determination necessary information in order to assess the development's regional impacts.
Sufficiency can either be declared by an applicant (after responding to two
Sufficiency can either be
requests for additional information by the RPC) or by the reviewing agencies.
declared by an applicant
or by the reviewing Local government staff members are notified by RPC to set a public hearing date
agencies once sufficiency has been declared.
When sufficiency is determined by the applicant, the FDOT reviewer needs to

coordinate with other agencies to make sure that all transportation issues have
been resolved. If outstanding issues still exist, the FDOT reviewer, often through
the RPC, should contact the applicant about whether additional information will
be provided by the applicant so that issues can be resolved prior to the RPC
hearing.
FDOT Reviewer Role The FDOT reviewers responsibility upon receipt of a ADA is to determine
whether the applicant has:
1. Provided a complete submittal. Due to the time constraints

associated with reviews, it is very important to check that the ADA
submittal contains all pages (including technical appendices) and all
requested supplemental information (such as analysis and model
files) for a review to be completed.
2. Adhered to the conditions agreed upon during the methodology
process and set forth in the MLOU.
3. Provided sufficient detail and support documentation to enable the
FDOT reviewer to adequately assess project impacts on the SIS/SHS..
4. Proposed impact mitigation measures which adequately protect
mobility on SIS/SHS facilities.
In addition, the FDOT reviewer should include specific recommendations to

resolve any outstanding issues. The FDOT reviewer may indicate any regionally
significant impacts identified by the applicable RPC(s).
The ADA review is the The ADA review is the first opportunity for the FDOT reviewer to conduct a
first opportunity to thorough review of the applicants estimate of transportation impacts
communicate FDOTs
anticipated by the proposed DRI. It also constitutes the most comprehensive
concerns regarding the
transportation impacts opportunity for the FDOT reviewer to let other review agencies know about
caused by development transportation concerns. The product of the review will be a determination that
the applicant is sufficient (i.e. no additional information is needed) or a written
set of comments requesting the applicant to provide additional information. This
is often referred to as either the ADA Review, 1st Sufficiency Determination, or 1st
Request for Additional Information. A determination of sufficiency based on the
initial ADA submittal does not occur very often. Also, the FDOT reviewer should
identify the need for traffic monitoring studies (if necessary) to the applicant if
the issue has not been agreed upon during the methodology development
process.
The FDOT reviewer should be familiar with the deadlines for review and
comment of the RPC. Pursuant to Rule 73C-40.022(3)(c), F.A.C., the ADA review
period is 30 calendar days. A comment by the FDOT after the legal deadline of
30 calendar days, which starts from the RPCs receipt of the ADA, can technically
be ignored by the applicant. Although there is usually some flexibility in this
area, it is limited and should not be assumed. The FDOT reviewer should not
assume more than 30 days for review. Close coordination with the RPC is
encouraged to ascertain whether or not flexibility in the schedule exists.
RPCs have differing policies and procedures for summarizing and transmitting
comments to the applicant. For that reason and to ensure comments are
distributed to all parties, it is suggested that the reviewer find out and follow the
TSIH ADA procedure established by the applicable RPC or the identified state agency
Sufficiency Review reviewer. DRI Checklist 2, prepared to correspond to the format of Question 21,
Checklist 2 summarizes both formal and informal areas of review for the ADA. The FDOT
reviewer can use this list as a general guide in the DRI review process.
Guidelines for The FDOT reviewer is encouraged to first browse the ADA document to gain an
FDOT Reviewers overall understanding of the project and how transportation relates to other
proposed development considerations. In general, the FDOT reviewer should not
try to review any area beyond his/her technical capability. Based on the initial
reading, if additional expertise is needed to complete a thorough submittal
review, it should be sought immediately. It is not unusual to request comments
from FDOT staff in the areas of traffic operations, permitting, right-of-way,
design, public transit, and bicycle/pedestrian. The assigned FDOT reviewer
should also be aware of other resources within and outside of FDOT which
should be used depending upon applicability to the review. FDOT resources may
include the Five-Year Work Program, SIS Cost Feasible Plan, SIS Unfunded Needs
Plan, SIS Ten-Year Project Plans, and others. Resources available outside of FDOT
may include MPO Plans such as the Long Range Transportation Plan and Five-
Year Transportation Improvement Program. Local governments may also have
plans such as transportation sufficiency plans in regards to identified
transportation deficiencies as well as a Five-Year Capital Improvements
Schedule.
FDOT District staff should provide thorough comments regarding whether or not
the information provided in the ADA is sufficient to analyze project impacts on
the transportation system. This includes multimodal concerns such as existing
conditions, trip generation, land use and site design, and modal facilities among
TSIH others. Sample comments taken verbatim from sufficiency review letters may
Appendix D serve as guidance for multimodal concerns. Examples of these comments are
Sample Comments found in Appendix D. In addition, District 4 uses a compilation of ADA review
TSIH comments taken from several DRI developments and grouped by category as
Appendix F guidance for developing comments (See Appendix F.)
ADA Review
In order to sustain a professional and constructive review process, FDOT
reviewer comments should be professional and concise. The FDOT reviewer
should also provide suggested action by the applicant to address specific
comments, and reference FDOT procedures, manuals and handbooks in the
methodology agreement, where applicable, including any District procedures,
Florida Statutes and Administrative Rules.
4.2.5 2nd Sufficiency Determination/

2nd Request for Additional Information
Applicant The applicant will provide written responses to agency comments (the agencys
Requirements 1st Request for Additional Information) and provide the responses for agency
review. Agencies will then have no more than 30 days to provide comments on
Make sure the
information needed to the responses (2nd Sufficiency Determination/2nd Request for Additional
make decisions has been Information). Similar to the ADA Review/1st Request for Additional Information,
provided by the the RPCs have the responsibility to coordinate with all affected agencies with
applicant regard to both the notification and coordination of the review.
FDOT Reviewer Role The FDOT reviewers responsibility upon receipt of the applicants responses is
to determine whether the applicant has:
1. Provided a complete submittal. Due to the time constraints associated

with reviews, it is very important to check that the submittal contains all
pages (including technical appendices) and all requested supplemental
information (such as analysis and model files) for a review to be
completed.
2. Addressed the comments made in the 1st Request for Additional
Information.
3. Made any changes that were not requested as part of the agency
comments. If changes were made, the FDOT reviewer needs to review
the changes for accuracy and impacts the changes may have to
conclusions.
4. Provided sufficient detail and support documentation to enable the
FDOT reviewer to adequately assess project regional impacts on the SIS
or SHS.
5. Proposed impact mitigation measures which adequately protect mobility
on SIS/SHS facilities and also Consistent with Section 163.3180, F.S.
Recommendations for mitigation may include reducing the amount of
land use/development change and revisions to development phasing.
DRI Checklist 3 provides guidance for the review. It is modeled on DRI Question
21(F) as presented in Appendix B. The checklist questions assume the FDOT
TSIH
ADA Review reviewer has performed thorough and timely reviews of all earlier submittals
Checklist 3 and therefore, focuses on the substance of the applicants responses.
In DRI Question 21 (F), applicants are asked to identify improvements to the

TSIH highway network needed to accommodate impacts of the proposed DRI that
Appendix B
cause facility LOS to fall below adopted standards. Significant degradation of
Question 10 & 21
facility LOS is with an increase of 5 percent above the maximum level of service
established for a facility. As an alternative to only focusing on roadway capacity,
the applicant may consider proposing multimodal solutions as mitigation for DRI
impacts.
Elements of the checklist pertaining to sufficient densities and intensities to

support transit refer the reviewer to applicable local or regional regulatory
mechanisms for specific parameters. If these parameters are not available, the
applicant should be asked to justify proposed densities and intensities if transit is
a proposed mode of accommodating person trips generated by the DRI.
At this point in the review many of the technical issues should be resolved and
focus should be on the critical issues that may affect project approval. The
reviewer should make sure that the information needed to make decisions
regarding the need and type of mitigation has been provided by the applicant. If
the FDOT reviewer anticipates issues associated with making a sufficiency
determination (i.e. methodology issues such as trip generation and background
growth are still unresolved), they should contact the RPC and request a meeting
with the applicant before submitting written comments. The product of the
review will be a written set of comments requesting the applicant to provide
additional information. This is often referred to as either the 2nd Sufficiency
Determination or 2nd Request for Additional Information.
4.2.6 Review of Applicant Response to 2nd Request for Additional

Information
Applicant The applicant will provide written responses to agency comments (the agencys
Requirements 2nd Request for Additional Information) and provide the responses for agency
review. After responding to the second request for additional information from
the RPC, the applicant has satisfied the statutory requirements for an ADA
submittal (Section 380.06(10)(b), F.S.) and has the ability to declare themselves
sufficient (most frequent occurrence). Other options for the applicant may
include indicating that they will participate in an additional round of sufficiency
review and seeking additional feedback from the review agencies outside of the
formal sufficiency process.
FDOT Reviewer Role If the applicant has allowed an additional round of sufficiency review, the FDOT
reviewer should follow the guidance under Chapter 4.2.5. Focus should remain
on the critical issues that impact study conclusions and close coordination
should be maintained with the applicant, the RPC, and the local government.
The product of the review will be a written set of comments requesting the
applicant to provide additional information.
If applicant declares In cases where the applicant declares sufficiency but the FDOT disagrees, it is
sufficiency but the FDOT
recommended that the FDOT prepare written comments clearly outlining the
disagrees, prepare
written comments unresolved issues. The FDOT should quickly notify the RPC and local government
clearly outlining the and communicate that the FDOT does not find the study sufficient and inform
unresolved issues the agencies of the FDOTs planned next steps. Next steps should include:
Coordinating with other reviewing agencies, particularly DEO and the

RPC and continuing to keep them apprised of the situation.
Contacting the applicant to see whether the applicant is willing to
provide additional information to resolve the outstanding issues. If
the applicant is willing to provide additional information, the FDOT
reviewer should follow the guidance under Chapter 4.2.5.
In instances where the applicant will not provide additional

information, the FDOT reviewer may need to conduct specific
analysis procedures to determine the impacts to the study
conclusions if the requested changes were made.
o It is recommended that the FDOT reviewer meet with FDOT
management to clearly outline the issues and the anticipated
effort needed in conducting the specific analysis before
initiating the work.
o If it is found that the study conclusions would change, the
FDOT reviewer should summarize the results of the additional
analysis and present the different conclusions to the RPC and
local government for inclusion in the RPC Assessment Report
and the Local Government Development Order.
The FDOT reviewer should also be prepared to present the results of the
analysis at the RPC Hearing and at the Local Government Public Hearings.
FDOT Reviewer Role The analysis conducted by the FDOT Review should include the following:
Transportation Identification of the study area
Sufficiency Comments Identification of facilities of state and regional significance
Analysis of whether the LOS of the identified facilities are adversely
affected by 5% or greater
Identification of the agreed upon assumptions, data and other
language
Identification of the transportation projects available during the
timeframe of the development
4.2.7 Recommendations and Conditions Development

Upon completion of the DRI ADA review, the FDOT reviewer should develop
recommendations to ensure the developer mitigates the impact of the DRI on
the transportation system. Chapter 5 of this document is devoted entirely to
mitigation.
The development of recommendations and conditions is intended to document

the agreements discussed during the ADA review process. For example, if
transportation or traffic monitoring studies were agreed to during the study
process, the requirement that the applicant conduct those studies needs to be
documented and included in the RPC Assessment Report and as conditions in
the local governments draft Development Order (DO). This document may also
be used to present FDOT concerns that remain after the sufficiency iterations
TSIH which may change the conclusion of project impacts.
Appendix D
Sample Comments Examples of FDOT multimodal recommendations can be found in Appendix D
Sample Proposed Transportation Methodology Comments (Orchard Park).
FDOT Reviewer Role The FDOT reviewer should work closely with the RPC, DEO, and local
government to ensure that FDOT concerns are incorporated into the RPC
Assessment Report and as conditions in the local governments DO. The FDOT
reviewer should also work toward having an agreed upon mitigation package in
the RPC Assessment Report.
If the FDOT reviewer believes that the agreements made during the ADA Review
process fail to adequately ensure the integrity of the SIS/SHS, the District
Secretary or Designee should be notified immediately.
The FDOT reviewer is encouraged to contact the RPC and local government to
determine the format, delivery, and time frame of FDOT comments. At a
minimum, a letter to the RPC containing a list of key issues, a summary of the
commitments agreed to by the Applicant, and a listing of general DO conditions
should be issued. Depending on the RPC and local government, detailed
recommendations in language ready to be included in the DO may be requested.
4.2.8 RPC Assessment Report

(Also referred to as Regional Report and Recommendations 73C-40.024)
The RPC has 50 days after receipt of the notice of public hearing (Rule 73C-
40.024, F.A.C., and Section 380.06(12), F.S.), to prepare and submit a formal RPC
Assessment Report detailing recommendations to the local government, the
Developer, and DEO on the regional impact of the proposed development. The
RPC may submit a draft assessment report for review. Ideally, though not
required, the RPC makes the necessary review modifications and submits the
adopted report to the local government and applicant at least 10 days in
advance of the public hearing.
FDOT Reviewer Role The FDOT reviewer should review this report to make sure FDOT
recommendations and conditions are properly documented. This is important
Make sure FDOT
since this report will often be used to develop and subsequently adopt the
recommendations and
conditions are properly binding DO between the applicant and the local government. The FDOTs review
documented will be solicited by the RPC for incorporation into the RPC Assessment Report
typically allowing less than 30 days for response.
4.2.9 DRI Draft Development Order Review

FDOT Reviewer Role The DRI DO Review is the FDOTs final opportunity to ensure that mobility on
SIS/SHS segments located in the project impact area has been adequately
addressed. The DRI DO is issued a maximum of 30 calendar days from the day of
Ensure that mobility on the public hearing. The reviewer should work to obtain a draft DO from the local
SIS/SHS segments has government no later than 15 days before the hearing date. The purpose is to
been adequately
resolve any outstanding issues before the DO is rendered, minimizing the chance
addressed
of an appeal to the DO once it is issued.
The LGDO Review checklist (DRI Checklist 4) has been designed to address
TSIH these points:
DO Review
preservation of mobility on FDOTs SIS/SHS
Checklist 4
the transportation implications of land use densities
the continued involvement of the FDOT in the annual/biennial
reporting
the review of project implementation
The FDOT reviewer should also assure that the agency remains informed about
the status of the project as it is implemented. Using the biennial report, the
FDOT has a continuing opportunity to require periodic monitoring of the projects
impacts on the SIS/SHS.
4.2.10 Rendered Development Order Review

FDOT should ensure that all commitments are contained in the final DO. If the
Once the development
FDOT reviewer believes the LGDO fails to adequately ensure the integrity of the
order is rendered by the SIS/SHS, the District Secretary or Designee should be notified immediately.
local government, it is While objections to conditions of the LGDO must recommended to be appealed
the FDOTs in writing to DEO 45 days of the issuance of the LGDO. This is because DEO must
responsibility to ensure issue an appeal if needed within 45 days as defined under Section 380.07, F.S.,
that all commitments
reducing the amount of time the FDOT reviewer actually has for review. Upon
are contained within the
LGDO identifying an issue that may require an appeal, the FDOT reviewer should
immediately contact DEO, the RPC, and the local government to initiate
communication about the issue. The FDOT reviewer should have all the support
information gathered and clear direction about the need for an appeal no later
than 30 days after the issuance of the LGDO so that DEO has adequate time to
process the information and move forward with the appeal if necessary.
DRI | 4.3 Modifications of Approved DRIs Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
4.3 Modification of Approved DRIs

Notice of Proposed A Notice of Proposed Change (NOPC) is required to be submitted by the
Change (NOPC) applicant to the local government, the RPC and DEO when a change is proposed
DOC to a previously approved DRI. The NOPC should be submitted following Section
380.06(19), F.S., and use the standard form provided by DEO (see PDF). A NOPC
NOPC may be filed for many reasons such as to extend the project build out date or
modify the land use program.
Substantial A change request to a previously approved DRI requires formal determinations

Deviation from DEO, the RPC and the local government as to what level of further review
Determination will be required. Often, a traffic study is submitted with a NOPC to request that
the deviation not be classified as substantial (i.e. rebut the presumption of a
substantial deviation). Guidance on what types of changes are considered
A change request substantial may be found in Section 380.06(19)(a-e), F.S. Exhibit 33 contains a
requires formal summary table of the thresholds that trigger a NOPC. It is recommended that a
determinations from the methodology meeting be established by all parties prior to the submittal of
DEO, RPC and local documentation supporting the proposed changes. The review process for traffic
government
studies associated with rebutting the presumption of a substantial deviation
varies depending on the magnitude and scope of the deviation requested. For
example, in some cases a trip generation comparison may be sufficient while in
other cases a detailed assessment similar to an ADA may be necessary.
The local government conducts a public hearing to determine if the proposed

change constitutes a substantial deviation. Thresholds for substantial deviation
determination can be found in Section 380.06(19), F.S. Once the local
government makes a determination, it is subject to the appeal provisions of
Section 380.07, F.S.
If it is determined that the changes submitted by the applicant constitute a

substantial deviation, Chapter 4.2 of this handbook applies.
Exhibit 35 Type of
Substantial Deviation Criteria Florida Statute
Substantial Change
Increase in the number of parking spaces by 15
Deviation Attraction and
percent or 500 spaces, whichever is greater
Criteria Recreation 380.06(19)(b)1
Increase in the number of spectators by 15
Facilities
Summary percent or 1,500, whichever is greater
A new runway or new terminal facility
A 25 percent lengthening of an existing runway
Airport A 25 percent increase in the number of gates of an 380.06(19)(b)2
existing terminal, but only if the increase adds at
least 3 additional gates
Increase in land area by 15 percent
Office
Increase of gross floor area by 15 percent or 380.06(19)(b)3
Development
100,000 gross square feet, whichever is greater
Increase in the number of dwelling units by 10
Residential 380.06(19)(b)4
percent or 55 dwelling units, whichever is greater
Increase in the number of dwelling units by 50
Residential
percent or 200 units, whichever is greater,
with workforce 380.06(19)(b)5
provided that 15 percent of the proposed addition is
housing
dedicated to affordable workforce housing
Increase by 60,000 square feet of gross floor area
Commercial Increase in the number of parking spaces by 10 380.06(19)(b)6
percent or 425 cars, whichever is greater
Recreational
Increase in the number of vehicle spaces by 10
Vehicle 380.06(19)(b)7
percent or 110 spaces, whichever is less
Development
Decrease of 5 percent or 20 acres, whichever is
Open Space 380.06(19)(b)8
less
The sum of increase of each land use is equal to or
Multi-Use
exceeds 110 percent and any percentage decrease 380.06(19)(b)9
Development
in open space shall be treated as an increase
A 15 percent increase in the number of external
Transportation 380.06(19)(b)10
vehicle trips generated by the development
Any change that would result in development of
any area which is set aside in the ADA or DO for
Preservation or
the preservation or special protection of
special
endangered, threatened, or species of special 380.06(19)(b)11
protection
concern and their habitat, any species protected
areas
by 16 U.S.C. ss. 668a-668d, primary dunes, or
archaeological and historical sites
Time An extension of the build out date by more than 7
years (presumed only) 380.06(19)(c)
Extensions
Legend: ADA Application for Development Approval DO Development Order
NOTES:
1. The substantial deviation numerical standards in subparagraphs 3, 6, and 10, excluding residential uses, are increased by 100 percent for a project
certified under s. 403.973 which creates jobs and meets criteria established by the Office of Tourism, Trade, and Economic Development as to its
impact on an area's economy, employment, and prevailing wage and skill levels. The substantial deviation numerical standards in subparagraphs 3, 4,
5, 6, 9 and 10 are increased by 50 percent for a project located wholly within an urban infill and redevelopment area designated on the applicable
adopted local comprehensive plan future land use map and not located within the coastal high hazard area.
FDOT Reviewer Role FDOT should review NOPC applications to assess potential transportation-
related impacts. Written FDOT comments on the NOPC are typically required
within 30 days.
The FDOT may also be asked to review traffic studies associated with a rebuttal
of the thresholds established for Substantial Deviations (the thresholds are listed
in Section 380.06(19), F.S.) supporting a request by the applicant that the
deviation not be classified as substantial. The reviewer should ensure that any
mitigation proposed in the NOPC is consistent with the original LGDO.
The FDOT has a role in review of all NOPC and Substantial Deviation
TSIH Determinations for approved DRI LGDO processes by RPCs. Several factors
NOPC should be considered in determining the FDOTs response to these notifications.
Checklist 7 DRI Checklist 7 identifies these critical issues.
As greater emphasis is being placed on multimodal mitigation strategies, the

reviewer should be versed in these approaches. To provide guidance, samples of
multimodal responses in NOPC reviews can be found in Appendix G Examples of
TSIH
Multimodal Notice of Proposed Change (NOPC) and Substantial Deviation
Appendix G
NOPC Determinations.
If a substantial deviation is determined (or not adequately rebutted), the FDOT

should provide comments to the RPC which in turn will summarize the
comments and provide to the applicant. Once the local government issues an
amended and restated DO, it is subject to the appeal provisions of Section
380.07, F.S.
In summary, the FDOT should be in agreement with the methodology,

assessment of proposed changes, and conclusions supporting the amended and
restated DO.
DRI | 4.4 DRI Reporting Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
4.4 DRI Reporting
4.4.1 Annual or Biennial Reports

Annual or biennial reports are a requirement of Section 380.06(18), F.S. and Rule
73C-40.025(7), F.A.C. Annual or biennial reports include information describing
DOC any changes that have been made to the development plan during the reporting
Biennial
period, information about the master plan, lands purchased, permitting, and
Report Form
local government, and a summary of each DO condition and when each
commitment has been complied with. The formal requirements for annual and
biennial reports are included in DEOs biennial report form (see PDF link). As an
impacted reviewing agency, the FDOT will often receive copies of these reports.
FDOT Reviewer Role The FDOT reviewer should ensure that mobility on SIS/SHS is addressed
throughout project implementation. If concerns arise, the FDOT reviewer is
instructed to contact the RPC, local government, and the applicant to discuss.
This discussion process should be guided by the relationships between the FDOT
and the other local parties. It is the responsibility of the local government to
cease issuing building permits for this project until appropriate written approvals
are obtained and any needed mitigation requirements are complied with.
The FDOT reviewer should also ensure that conditions included as part of the
DRI DO are being met. For example, if a condition stipulating the addition of a
traffic signal once it is warranted is included as a condition in the DRI DO and the
FDOT reviewer determines that the signal is now warranted, then it should be
brought to the attention of all parties.
4.4.2 Transportation Monitoring Studies

Transportation monitoring studies (see Rules 73C-40.045(4) and (5), F.A.C.) differ
Transportation
from the statutory requirement of annual/biennial reports. They usually require
monitoring studies are the applicant to collect and analyze transportation data to verify assumptions
being included more associated with internal capture (or community capture if applicable),
frequently in DO background growth rates, and other assumptions made during the ADA. A
agreements similar process to that of an ADA (i.e. methodology development, study review,
and sufficiency determinations) is often used in the review of transportation
monitoring studies. FDOT participation throughout the process is essential. The
RPCs have the responsibility to coordinate with all affected agencies with regard
to both the notification and coordination of the review.
FDOT Reviewer Role The FDOT should have it stipulated as a condition of the LGDO that it is a
reviewing agency for the Transportation Monitoring study. FDOT reviewers are
strongly encouraged to review annual monitoring studies and provide written
comments when necessary. The review of the study provides an opportunity to
The FDOT is a reviewing ensure that LGDO-mandated transportation improvements are realized in a
agency for the Traffic
timely manner. Depending on the specifics of the study, the FDOT review role
Monitoring study
will likely be very similar to the review of an ADA. In addition FDOT staff should
recommend appropriate monitoring for single occupancy vehicle use such as
applicable measures in DRI Checklist 5.
In Guidelines and Performance Measures to Incorporate Transit and Other
PDF
Multimodal Considerations into the FDOT DRI Review Process: Research
Transit Guidelines revealed concerns that although many DRI applications indicate that the use of
internal shuttles and ridesharing will be encouraged, no such actions are
undertaken by the developer. If such situations were uncovered by FDOT staff or
consultants reviewing the report, a letter could be sent to the local government
alerting them of the omission. Such a letter may also include an offer of
technical assistance if appropriate. In most cases, this review can be
accomplished by reviewing information submitted by the developer; however,
field observation may occasionally be warranted. Active FDOT participation in
supporting development order conditions through DRI monitoring may make it
easier for local governments to ensure compliance.
4.4.3 Transportation Monitoring and Modeling Studies (M & M)

In Guidelines and Questions for Transportation Monitoring and Modeling Studies
(September 2000),the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council advocates
the monitoring and modeling (M & M) schedule as a method of ensuring the
traffic impacts to any regional roadway affected by a DRI do not fall below its
adopted level of service (or other performance standard). Although not required
for the DRI review process, M & M may be included in a DO to satisfy a minimum
condition to show that adequate provisions are made for public transportation
facilities and maintenance of transportation mobility at the end of each project
phase or phase subset (Rule 73C-40.045(7)(a), F.A.C.).
An M&M Schedule An M & M schedule must identify the actions or measures necessary to mitigate
identifies required significant and adverse impacts to the transportation system in order to proceed
actions for each phase of
to the next phase of a projects development. It must also identify the amount of
a development.
development that will adversely impact the roadway, as well as when the
impacts are scheduled to be mitigated subsequent to each phase or phase
subset of a project. If roadway improvements together with timing of such
improvements are not identified in the M & M schedule, building permits will be
withheld for that project phase or subset until written approval is obtained and
compliance with any needed roadway improvements can be demonstrated.
A study period consisting of the next stage of development, and traffic study for
the existing peak hour LOS and projection of the next phases LOS for all
impacted roadways listed on the M & M schedule help exhibit compliance with
the DO. The study must include estimated traffic for all background
developments and the project during the next study period, as well as the end-
of-study period LOS for the impacted roadways. The project traffic is to include
all existing project developments, permitted project development building
permits during the next study period
FDOT Reviewer Role The FDOT is a reviewing agency for the M & M study. The reviewer should
ensure that all transportation studies are performed accurately. If the reviewer
The FDOT is a reviewing finds that the development transportation impacts are not in compliance with
agency for the M & M the M & M schedule, the reviewer should contact the local government to
study
discuss. If a solution is not found, then the reviewer should contact the RPC to
initiate formal action.
4.4.4 Community Capture Monitoring

Commitment to Expanded traffic monitoring beyond the current basic requirements of the DRI
Transportation or annual/biennial report will be a required provision in accepting Community
Traffic Monitoring Capture rates. While the detailed needs of the traffic monitoring program will be
determined through the traffic study process, elements such as origin and
destination studies, trip generation studies, and an evaluation of land use mixes
in the community and surrounding the community will usually be included in the
monitoring program. At a minimum, monitoring will be necessary before the
development enters a new phase. If appropriate, trip characteristic assumptions
and impact mitigation requirements will be revised, based on the monitoring.
Traffic monitoring at a frequency greater than by phase may be required for
more aggressive development programs or if significant changes are made to the
planned development program.
Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
Blank Page
Pre-Application Checklist Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
DRI Pre-Application Checklist 1 of 3
Information to be Provided to Applicant

Area Specific
A. Recommended transportation 1. Software programs
site impact methodologies 2. Traffic modeling techniques
used and/or required by the 3. Trip generation methodologies
Department including:
4. Other software may be used if agreed to be all parties
Information on: 1. Relevant existing or proposed rights-of-way,
2. Proposed or current Major Investment Studies (in urbanized areas
3. SIS action or master plans
4. Any corridors designated in the Florida Transportation Plan within the
study area
Work Program 1. How information regarding facilities programmed for improvement in
the first three years of the Departments Five-Year Adopted Work
Program may be obtained.
LGCP 1. Local Government Comprehensive Plans (LGCP) (as applicable)
LRTP 1. MPO Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) (as applicable)
Transit Development Plan (as applicable)
Transportation Disadvantaged 1. or other locally developed, coordinated public transit-human services
Service Plan transportation plan as required by the Jobs Access and Reverse
Commute (JARC) and New Freedom Programs (as applicable)
Resources for Applicant
General Guidance
Additional resources FDOT Transportation Site Impact Handbook .com website WEB
FDOT's Quality/Level of Service 2013 Handbook PDF

Handbook Q\LOS software WEB
Procedures and requirements for new or modified access to interchanges
Interchange Handbook WEB
on limited-access facilities
MMTDs & Areawide QOS Multimodal Transportation Districts and Areawide Quality of Service Handbook
Handbook [November 2003] PDF
Transportation Demand
http://www.nctr.usf.edu/clearinghouse/ WEB
Management (TDM) Resources
TDM Incorporating TDM into the Land Development Process PDF
LEED Certification Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Certification WEB
Commuter Assistance Programs (as applicable)
Multimodal Transportation
Model Regulations and Plan Amendments for MMTDs PDF
Districts (MMTDs)

Transit Information
Transit Design (statewide) Accessing Transit Design Handbook for Florida Bus Passenger Facilities PDF
LYNX Mobility Design Manual LYNX Central Florida Mobility Design Manual PDF
LYNX Customer Amenities LYNX Central Florida Customer Amenities Manual PDF
Manual
Transit Facility Handbook FDOT District I and 7 Transit Facility Handbook PDF
Transit Facilities Guidelines FDOT District 4 Transit Facilities Guidelines PDF
Palm Tran Transit Design Palm Tran Transit Design Manual PDF
Manual
Mobility Access Handbook Jacksonville Transportation Authority Mobility Access Program Handbook PDF
Developer Participation Developer Participation in Providing for Bus Transit Facilities/Operations PDF
Multimodal Access Information to be Included in the ADA

DRI Study Area Y N
A. High-occupancy vehicle 1. Availability
lanes 2. Location
3. Usage
B. Transit service (rail and/or 1. Availability
bus) 1. Location
2. Level of service
3. Duration
4. Frequency
5. Connectivity
6. Ridership
7. Are services limited to certain populations such as the elderly or disabled
C. Bus rapid transit 1. Availability
2. Location
3. Level of service
4. Ridership
D. Multi-use trails, local and 1. Availability
regional (off-road) 2. Location
3. Standard of facility design
4. LOS, connectivity
5. Parking locations
6. Usage
E. Bicycle lanes (on-road) 1. Availability
2. Location
4. Los
5. Connectivity
6. Usage
7. Bicycle facility sweeping and maintenance

DRI Study Area continued Y N
F. Sidewalks/pedestrian 1. Availability
facilities 2. Location
4. LOS
5. Connectivity
6. Usage
G. Parking management 1. Parking management
*
H. TDM Transportation 1. Commuter assistance services (i.e., vanpools, guaranteed ride home)
demand management 2. Availability
3. Usage
I. Modal Split 1. Baseline modal split of alternative modes
J. Multimodal facility 1. Planned, programmed or committed improvements to existing or new
improvements multimodal facilities
2. Documentation of designated corridor space for transit or multimodal options
K. Existing LOS 1. The existing level of service for transit or multimodal alternatives, if the local
government or transit agency has adopted such LOS standards
* Many developments restrict parking for vehicles with logos or do not have a public parking space to handle a 15-22 person
van. Allowance for overnight parking for vanpool vans is critical to implementing this TDM strategy.
Land Use/Site Design
Discuss how development is 1. Variety of land uses, including both employment and residential
consistent with local 2. Land uses that promote pedestrian, bicycle, and transit use
government comprehensive 3. Sufficient densities to support transit ridership
plans, land development 4. Sufficient intensity along major transit corridors
regulations, special area 5. Sufficient intensities in and around core areas
plans, or other applicable
6. Connectivity to adjacent properties, surrounding communities, and the
mechanisms. For multimodal surrounding street network; include multimodal connectivity analysis
purposes, the information
7. Appropriate numbers of connections within the street network
should include the following:
8. Support of pedestrian environment including shorter block lengths, traffic
calming measures, traffic enforcement programs, etc.
3 of 3
Blank Page
Checklist 1 | Methodology Meeting Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
DRI Checklist 1 | Methodology Meeting 1 of 3

Comments Due:
Project Information Y N N/A
A. Site relative to the surrounding
1. In map format?
roadway network shown?
B. Project phasing shown? 1. Single phase project?
2. Multiple phases?
C. Proposed buildout year(s) of project phase(s) identified?
D. Development defined in 1. Number dwelling units (DUs) for residential land uses?
acceptable manner for each
phase of implementation? 2. Square feet (SF or GLSF) for commercial, office, retail, industrial land uses?
E. Acceptable study area limits 1. Critical roadway segments identified?

identified? 2. Critical intersections identified?
Data Collection and Existing Conditions
A. Stated how data on existing 2. Acceptable locations and durations for traffic data collection identified?
conditions will be collected? a. 3 consecutive days for 24-hr counts in urban areas?
b. Five consecutive days in rural areas?
3. Measures identified for collecting transit, bicycle and pedestrian volumes
and facilities info?
4. TMOs, TDMs and other special considerations appropriate are identified?
B. Measures included to account for previously adopted development agreements including other DRIs?
C. WP or TIP projects used in 1. Project(s) listed in first three years of the WP/TIP?
existing conditions analysis? 2. Funding source(s) identified?
D. Traffic characteristics to be used 1. Each characteristic within range accepted by Department for facility and
in the analysis identified? area type?
Project Approach
A. Site Impact analysis to use 1. Manual approach appropriate for project scale and location?
primarily manual calculation 2. Acceptable methodology described for determining future year roadway
mechanisms? network volumes?
a. Growth rates reasonable based on historical/current development activity?
B. Site impact analysis to use 1. Latest FSUTMS model for the area to be used?
computer-based calculation 2. Project site extracted as separate TAZ?
mechanism? 3. Zdata files for project TAZ appropriate?
4. Buildout year(s) of project coincidental with future years of the approved
FSUTMS model?
a. If not, acceptable methodology proposed for determining interim year
conditions?
5. Described measures for project level validation of the model?
a. Will local roadways need to be added to analyze traffic behavior at
project level?
Project Approach continued Y N N/A

C. Any transportation network 1. Listed improvements included in MPOs adopted long-range plan?
improvements not included in 2. Listed improvements consistent with LGCP Capital Improvements and
first three years of the WP or TIP Transportation Elements for year(s) shown?
proposed in future year network 3. Listed improvements consistent with other recent Department -approved
conditions? plans (i.e., action plans, master plans, MISs, AISs)?
D. Provided source for seasonal and, if appropriate, model output conversion factors
from the Department to derive AADT volume?
Trip Generation
A. Trip generation rates based on 1. If land use is under reported in ITE: Trip Generation Manual, is an
ITE: Trip Generation (latest acceptable alternative means of determining project trip generation
edition data)? characteristics identified?
B. Proposes to analyze the critical hour (highest hour of project + adjacent) roadway traffic?
C. Internal trip capture 1. Internal capture rates reasonable,
characteristics proposed? based on proposed land uses and location?
D. Pass-by trip characteristics 1. Pass-by rates reasonable,
assumed? based on proposed land uses and location?
E. Means of determining truck/heavy vehicle volumes described?
F. If using a model-based trip generation method, prepared to show TAZ maps and project Zdata files?
Trip Distribution
A. If using a manual methodology, 1. Method acceptable, based on proposed and other area land uses?
proposed a method for trip
2. Site traffic trip length curve and average trip length data provided?
distribution?
B. If using a computer model 1. Expressed understanding of documentation requirements for average trip
methodology, compare model to length, friction factors or trip length frequency?
manual estimates? 2. External/internal trip assumptions documented?
Mode Split
A. Split of vehicle trips to alternate travel modes proposed?
B. Documentation supporting mode split provided?
Trip Assignment
A. Will show both daily and peak-hour assignments for each project phase?
B. If using FSUTMS, are trip assignments shown, by purpose, for each phase of the project?
C. If using FSUTMS, is single assignment method proposed for calculating background traffic volumes?
Analysis Procedures
A. Identified acceptable minimum LOS standard for study area roadway links?
B. Identified tools for performing 1. Tools appropriate to the types of facilities analyzed?
LOS determinations? 2. Department-approved tools identified?
a. Location(s) of possible queue analyses identified?
C. LOS for each critical roadway segment and intersection by phase?
Other Considerations Y N N/A
A. Recognized need to adhere to Department standards for SHS access controls?

B. Applicant aware of any local maximum number of lanes policy?
C. Applicant aware that any project
phase depending upon an
1. IJR/IMR such approval request cannot be initiated until at least 45 days
approved IJR/IMR shall not be
following the issuance of a Development Order?
approved until request
approved?
D. Applicant indicated the need to adhere to Departments access management standards?
E. Applicant defined method to determine left-turn queues into the site?
F. Is applicant aware of requirement to address multimodal site access and connectivity?
3 of 3
Blank Page
Checklist 2 | ADA Sufficiency Review Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
DRI Checklist 2 | ADA Sufficiency Review

Comments Due:
Y N N/A
A. Adequate explanation of existing conditions, data collection, and analysis procedures for all transportation
modes? (Section A)
B. Adequate discussion of trip generation data, modal split, assumptions, and methods from a multimodal
perspective provided? (Section B)
C. Adequate discussions and analysis results for each project phase? (Section C)
D. Adequate documentation for each 1. Forecasting of daily background traffic, by phase, graphically
project phase? (Section D) depicted?
2. Analysis of peak-hour traffic distribution and assignment for Section
D review
E. Adequate documentation for each 1. Project trips graphically depicted for each project phase?
project phase regarding distribution and 2. Percentage of project traffic in traffic stream at buildout
analysis of daily and peak-hour traffic documented?
3. Project study area boundary maintain adherence to study
volumes? (Section E)
significantly impacted SHS facilities requirement?
F. Recommended impact mitigation improvements, including TSM and alternate mode improvements,
discussed and analyzed in sufficient detail? (Section F)
G. Adequate discussion of projects contribution to planned transportation corridors, regardless of mode, as
shown in local plans through protection and/or development? (Section G)
H. Adequate discussion of projects contribution to designated transportation corridor improvements?
(Section H)
I. Sufficient discussion of provisions for the 1. Internal design
movement of people other than the 2. Site planning
private automobile? (Section I)
3. Parking provisions (or limits)
4. Location
5. Other
J. Map H, master development plan 1. Proposed land uses and locations
indicates: 2. Development phasing
(Section J)
3. Major public facilities
4. Utilities
5. Preservation areas
6. Easements
7. Right-of-way
8. Roads
9. Transit stops
10. Bicycle/pedestrian ways
1 of 1
Checklist 2 | ADA Sufficiency Review Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
Blank Page
Checklist 3 | ADA Review Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
DRI Checklist 3 | ADA Review 1 of 5

Comments Due:
Section A: Existing Conditions Y N N/A
A. (Reference Section E response)

Study area boundaries adjusted, if necessary, to include all SIS/SHS segments and intersections where
project traffic is five percent or more of adopted minimum LOS volumes?
B. Existing conditions adequately 1. AADT shown?
shown using Map J or in a table? 2. Peak-hour directional trips shown?
3. Existing segment and intersection volumes and LOS and maximum LOS
Volumes shown?
a. LOS standards exceeded?
C. Traffic characteristic assumptions 1. K, D Factors
stated? 2. Facility type necessary for analysis
3. Lanes
4. Traffic composition
5. Within accepted ranges per MLOU?
D. Planned and programmed
transportation network 1. Agency documentation provided which substantiates project(s) status?
improvements identified?
E. Data collection and analysis performed per MLOU?
F. Reviewer performed a site visit of roadway to verify that intersection volumes and LOS analysis
assumptions are reasonable?
Multimodal Supplement
A. Within an existing transportation concurrency exception area (TCEA), transportation concurrency
management area (TCMA), or multimodal transportation district (MMTD) and complies with local
government requirements
B. High-occupancy vehicle lanes 1. Availability, location, and usage
1. Transit subsidies, parking fees, parking discounts for ride sharers, parking
C. Pricing strategies
cash out, travel allowances, tax benefits
1. Location, level of service, span of service, frequency, coverage, connectivity,
D. Transit service
loading reliability, ridership, and transit auto travel time ratio
1. Location, level of service, span of service, frequency, coverage, connectivity,
E. Bus rapid transit
loading, reliability, ridership, and transit/auto travel time ratio
1. Local and regional (off-road) availability, location, standard of facility
F. Multi-use trails
design, LOS, connectivity, parking, and usage
G. Bicycle facilities (paved
1. Availability, location, standard of facility design, LOS, connectivity, usage,
shoulders, sharrows/shared
and connectivity to transit
lanes, etc.)
1. Availability, location, standard of facility design, LOS, connectivity, usage,
H. Sidewalks/pedestrian facilities
and connectivity to transit
I. Parking management
J. Transportation Demand Management
Multimodal Supplement continued Y N N/A

K. Baseline modal split of alternative modes
L. Multimodal Improvements 1. Planned, programmed or committed improvements to existing or new
multimodal facilities including documentation of designated corridor space
for transit or multimodal options
M. Existing Transit LOS 1. Existing level of service for transit or multimodal alternatives, if the local
government or transit agency has adopted such LOS standards
N. Land Use 1. Land use mix, including both employment and residential, within the
context of the DRI and the surrounding community
2. Land uses within the DRI that promote pedestrian, bicycle, and transit use
O. Sufficient Density/Intensity 1. Sufficient densities to support transit ridership*
2. Sufficient intensity along major transit corridors*
3. Sufficient intensities in and around core areas*
P. Connectivity 1. Connectivity to adjacent properties
2. Connectivity to transit
3. Appropriate numbers of connections within the street network
4. Shorter block lengths to support pedestrian environment.*
Q. Data 1. Assessment of the reliability of selected trip generation rates to predict the
number of trips from the new development
2. Identification of alternative sources of data, if applicable
Section B: Trip Generation
A. Trip generation projections by land use and phase provided?
B. Trip generation calculations performed per MLOU?
C. Reviewer performed spot verification of trip generation rates, by land use, to confirm phase and project
totals?
Section C: Internal/External Split by Phase
A. Internal/external project trips
calculated using internal capture 1. Master Plan map depicting internal circulation to support internal capture
and pass-by characteristics per shown?
MLOU?
B. Reviewer performed spot checks of project-based external trips applying approved and documented
internal capture and pass-by trip rates to project trips shown in Section B?
* Criteria are found in applicable local or regional plans and regulatory mechanisms
Section D: Projections Y N N/A
A. Forecasts of total peak-hour trips, with and without project, identified by phase?
B. Distribution methodology described and assumptions fully documented?
C. For computer-based distribution method, has FSUTMS model validation or modification at project level
documented?
D. Trip distribution method shown per MLOU?
E. Reviewer performed random spot 1. For manual calculation analysis, approved growth rates per year applied to
checks of forecasts per analysis existing traffic volumes?
method used? 2. For model-based analysis, future year ZDATA files reviewed for
reasonableness and inclusion of other development?
F. Proper documentation provided for any new transportation system improvements reflected in the future
year(s) network?
G. Maps or tables provided showing total traffic with and without the project, by development phase?
Section E: Developments Trip Assignments
A. Assignment of AADT project trips 1. Assignment of AADT project trips, by phase, to surrounding transportation
network performed?
2. Assignment also performed at directional peak-hour level?
B. Comparison of average trip length for project and no-project scenarios performed?
C. Reviewer verified that project trip assignments account for 100 percent of external project trips, as
documented into Sections B and C responses?
D. If splits to alternative modes

1. Service feasibility verified?
assumed, supporting
documentation from service
agencies and modal plans been 2. Auto occupancy adjustment factors by trip purpose verified?
included?
E. For model-based assignment methods, full documentation of manual model adjustments provided?
F. LOS for regionally significant roadways segments, SIS/SHS facilities and critical intersections calculated,
with and without project?
G. Trip assignments and LOS analyses performed per MLOU?
H. Maps or tables provided which summarize LOS by phase, with and without project?
I. Merge, diverge, weaving and ramp queuing analyses performed for study area freeway segments?
J. Reviewer performed spot checks of LOS analyses to verify appropriateness of analysis technique and
accuracy of reported results?
Section F: Recommended Road and Intersections Improvements Y N N/A

A. Transportation system 1. Improvements been identified for each project phase?
improvements which will result in
2. Improvements include measures other than addition of roadway lanes or
acceptable LOS on SIS and SHS new roadway facilities?
facility segments identified?
a. Documentation from appropriate agency(ies) included to verify
improvement feasibility?
B. Measures required to mitigate for 1. Intersection design at critical intersections and accesses required?
increased percentage of trucks
from project? 2. Intersection left-turn and right-turn channelization modifications required?
C. Mitigate for Noise Impacts? 1. Measures for dealing with noise impacts adequately addressed?
2. Proposed improvements to SIS and SHS facilities avoid noise impacts to
study area segments or need to study potential noise impacts and
associated mitigation for noise-sensitive sites adjacent to these segments?
D. Proposed improvements do not 1. Alternative improvement scenarios proposed if air quality conformity
have a negative impact on the air cannot be maintained?
quality conformity status of the 2. Detailed air quality modeling required on study area segments during
overall network? project implementation?
E. Identified where additional rights-of way including intersection flareouts, may be required for proposed
improvements?
Section G: Access Management and Median Openings
A. Number and general location of
1. Access points conform to Department access and driveway spacing
proposed points of access
standards?
identified?
B. Joint access and connectivity 1. Potential for shared access among commercial developments, including
improvements with neighboring alternate access roads sometimes referred to as fringe roads or
non-project parcels evaluated? backage roads"
C. Reasonable connections between internal project parcels proposed to provide complete project traffic
circulation system and minimum demands for external driveways or access points?
D. Can some proposed access points be relocated to side (non-SHS) streets?
E. Maps provided which show existing median openings and major driveways?
F. Proposed location(s) of access
points relative to existing (or 1. Potential signal locations conform to Department signal spacing standards
proposed) median openings that for the SHS facility type and area type?
may require signals?
1. Review independently verified Access Management Standards applied in
G. Access Management Standards
the study area are appropriate?
Section H: Corridor Management Strategies Y N N/A

A. Commitment to assisting
1. Measures to be taken in promoting corridor development form described?
Department or local government
in establishment of improved 2. Measures taken to minimize ROW impacts of future improvements to the
corridor management strategies? corridors?
Section I: Public Transit

A. If mode split assumed per Section E response, measures to be incorporated in developments design and
implementation supporting these mode choices identified? See sections A, J and K
Section J: Multimodal Access to Surrounding Community

A. Connectivity 1. Inventory and document the degree of connectivity to activity centers
(areas with destinations such as schools, shopping, recreational facilities,
and other points of attraction).
2. Include crossing features
3. Other features (lighting, visibility, medians, pavement markings) related to
pedestrian/bicycle safety at each intersection
B. Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities 1. Identify all pedestrian and bicycle facilities, including sidewalks shared
roadways, signed-shared roadways, bike lanes, or shared-use paths that lie
within the site access area, as designated in the [City/County
pedestrian/bicycle plan]. Identify gaps in the system
C. Identify specific transportation network improvements needed to provide safe and efficient pedestrian and
bicycle access from the project to activity centers
D. Transit Service 1. Location of bus routes
Inventory and document the
2. Frequency of service
availability of public and private
3. Hours of operation
transit service along routes to
activity centers within the study 4. Existing peak hour load factors
area or a minimum of 5 miles 5. Bus stops
from the DRI, whichever is
6. Amenities (concrete pad, bench, bus shelter and connectivity to the
further, including: sidewalk network) at existing and programmed bus stops.
7. The inventory must also include lighting features (overhead streetlights) at
transit stops, crosswalks and nearby parking areas, as well as availability
8. Posting of schedules or real-time transit information
E. Transit Facility Improvements 1. List specific transit facility improvements contained in the adopted [long
range transportation plan, transit development plan or public transit-human
services coordinated transportation plan] that address safe and efficient
transit access from the proposed development to activity centers
F. Identify specific transit-related facilities needed to provide access to existing or planned transit service
G. Minimizes vehicular, transit, bicycle, or pedestrian conflicts
5 of 5
Blank Page
Checklist 4 | DO Review Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
DRI Checklist 4 | DO Review

Comments Due:
Local Government Development Order Review
Concerns Related to Approved Land Uses Y N N/A
A. Approved land use categories intensities and densities comparable to Question 21 of the DRI-ADA analysis?
B. Approved land use intensities and densities support internal

1. Is change(s) in project traffic assignments
capture, pass-by mode splits and project internal/external
reasonable given land use changes?
characteristics of DRI-ADA Question 21 analyses?
C. LOS standards achieved on segments, at each development phase, with improvements proposed under
adopted land use scenario(s)?
D. Public transit, TDM, TCM or TSM measures proposed, remain feasible under approved land use scenario(s)?
E. Internal traffic circulation plan and access points and transportation system connectivity revised to reflect
approved land scenario(s)?
Concerns Related to SHS Access and LOS Standards

A. LGDO provides for phased implementation of full site access contingent upon project-generated
background traffic volumes?
B. Where appropriate, LGDO provides procedures for suspending project implementation should LOS on
roadway segments fall below minimum standards as a direct result of project traffic?
Involvement in Project Monitoring

A. LGDO mandates submittal of a 1. LGDO identifies Department as a reviewing agency for the Project
periodic Project Monitoring Monitoring Report?
Report?
2. Project Monitoring Report call for annual LOS, noise and air quality
determinations for significant impact areas SHS facilities?
If the Department Reviewer believes the LGDO fails to adequately ensure

the integrity of the SIS or SHS, the Districts Director for Planning and
Programming should be notified immediately. Objections to conditions of
the LGDO must be appealed in writing to DEO within 45 days of the issuance
of the LGDO. Objections expressed by the Department after this 45-day
appeal period has no legal standing with DEO, RPC or the applicant.
1 of 1
Checklist 4 | DO Review Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
Blank Page
Checklist 5 | Project Monitoring & Report Review Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
DRI Checklist 5 | Project Monitoring & Report Review 1 of 2

Comments Due:
Transportation Impact Y N N/A
A. Trip generation rates determining project-to-date and total project impacts consistent with rates and trip
generation procedures identified in DRI-ADA and LGDO?
B. Internal capture and pass-by trip characteristics used in reporting of project-to-date conditions appropriate
for land use mix and locations currently in development?
C. Is the distribution of project traffic on the transportation network consistent with the methodology
approved for use in the DRI-ADA analysis?
D. Background traffic volume annual growth rates consistent with forecasts used in DRI-ADA analyses?
E. LOS for project area SHS 1. Field counts collected to record current project and without-project
segments determined? volumes?
2. LOS analysis procedures consistent with techniques used in DRI-ADA
response?
3. Facility type, area type and laneage of SHS segments analyzed reflect
current year conditions?
F. Status of projects within the project impact area identified as programmed or under construction in the DRI-
ADA updated?
G. Other transportation network improvements affecting use of project impacts area SHS facilities identified?
H. Status of LGDO-mandated
1. Status consistent with the amount of project development that has
improvements to be undertaken
occurred per the LGDO?
by the developer provided?
I. Noise and air quality data collected and consistency with Department criteria, as set forth in the LGDO,
ascertained?
J. All Department review comments

1. Duplicate set of Department comments transmitted directly to the
detailed and transmitted to RPC
developer (or its authorized representative)?
Coordinator for transmittal to the
developer?
Checklist 5 | Project Monitoring & Report Review Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
DRI Checklist 5 | Project Monitoring & Report Review 2 of 2
Multimodal Criteria Y N N/A

A. Bus Stop Locations and Facilities 1. Bus stops - Increase in bus stops with emphasis on true mile accessibility
to the population (factoring in good sidewalk connectivity rather than
simple distance)
a. With shelters
b. With bicycle parking
B. Transit Revenue Miles and 1. The number of miles the transit vehicle is actually in service.
System Access 2. Intersecting transit routes
3. Park and ride locations
4. Traffic signals with transit priority
C. Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities 1. Multiuse path miles
2. Bike lane miles
3. Sidewalk miles
4. Well designed pedestrian crosswalks
5. Enhanced pedestrian crossings at bus stops
D. Increases 1. Increase in transit peak hour capacity
2. Increase in transit rides per capita
3. Increase in ridesharing
4. Increase in telecommuting
5. Increase in use of alternative work hours
6. Increase in walking
7. Increase in bicycling
E. Decreases 1. Decrease in growth rate of VMT per person
2. Decrease in growth rate of single occupant vehicle (SOV) mode share
2 of 2
Checklist 6 | Conceptual Site Access Review Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
DRI Checklist 6 | Conceptual Site Access Review

Comments Due:
Access Management Standards Y N N/A
A. Appropriate access management standards for median openings and major driveway connection spacing?
B. If exceptions to standards proposed, supporting documentation provided?
C. Reviewer evaluated effect of
number and location of proposed 1. Sufficient information on number of lanes, geometric conditions and
internal site circulation provided for evaluation of impacts to the public
driveways and median openings
roadway system?
on adjacent SHS roadway
segment(s) operations?
Site Specific Issues
A. Can surrounding roadway system serve high left turn movements?
B. Potential sight distance problems?
C. Potential Pedestrian conflicts?
D. Relationship of internal circulation facilities to public streets.
E. Sufficiency of driveway length at major entrances?
F. On-site circulation as it impacts the public roadway system or access to public transportation and
bicycle/pedestrian network?
G. Access treatments for out parcels?
H. Potential for shared access among commercial developments, including alternate access roads sometimes
referred to as fringe roads or backage roads?
Approval of the Conceptual Agency Access Review Submittal does not constitute permit approval.
1 of 1
Checklist 6 | Conceptual Site Access Review Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
Blank Page
Checklist 7 | NOPC Checklist Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
DRI Checklist 7 | Notice of Proposed Changes/Substantial Deviation Determination

Comments Due:
Evaluation Criteria Y N N/A
A. Proposed changes result in transportation impact reductions from original approved DRI?
B. External peak hour traffic 1. Increase sufficient for classification of application as

increased beyond original Substantial Deviation?
analysis projections for phase(s) 2. Increases raise LOS issues on these links?
or buildout years?
a. Willing to consider mitigation on LOS-deficient links to avoid
Substantial Deviation classification?
C. Time extensions for application cumulatively exceed seven years extension for project?
D. Reductions in land use densities

proposed? 1. Reductions in densities result in less internal capture and lower pass-by
capture rates, offsetting reductions in transportation impacts?
E. Same methodologies and assumptions used in analyzing transportation, noise, and air quality impacts as
used in initial ADA submittal?
F. Proposed changes constitute new 1. New development?

development?
2. Proposed changes constitute minor changes only?
G. Previous ADA authorization data 1. Original ADA authorized after January 20, 1987 and prior to March 23,
shown? 1994?
2. Authorized after March 23, 1994 or one with significant amounts of new
development?
a. Mitigation consistent with local concurrency management system
regulations and mitigation provisions in Section 163.3180,F.S.?
H. Qualifies as a Substantial
1. Re-evaluation of IJR/IMR per Interchange Handbook acknowledged?
Deviation and involves new or
modified interchange? 2. Need to adhere to IJR/IMR methodology and review process as detailed in
Interchange Handbook acknowledged?
I. Reviewer consultation with RPC and/or DEO to reach consensus on specific methodologies to be applied
during the review of the NOPC performed?
1 of 1
Checklist 7 | NOPC Checklist Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
Blank Page
Mitigation | 5.1 Introduction Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
5 Mitigation
5.1 Introduction
This chapter will provide general guidance on mitigation of the impacts of
This chapter provides development. It will provide some best practice examples and also discuss the
guidance on strategies
FDOTs changing role in mitigation agreements as a result of 2011, 2012, and
and funding
mechanisms for
2013 changes to Growth Management legislation.
mitigation.
Decisions about how to meet community plans and visions for development and
transportation options are a key responsibility of local government planning, and
should be coordinated with neighboring jurisdictional, Metropolitan Planning
Organization (MPO), and other agency plans to ensure that local and regional
mobility goals are met in a proactive, comprehensive way. When development is
expected to impact important state resources and facilities such as Strategic
Intermodal System (SIS) facilities, local entities should also consult with FDOT on
mitigation plans. Local government comprehensive plans should align with
regional and statewide mobility goals through a number of planning documents.
Mitigation efforts should be consistent with local government comprehensive
plans and future land use maps, as well as the applicable transportation agency
plans including the FDOT Work Program, SIS Cost Feasible Plan, MPOs
Transportation Development Plan (TDP), Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP),
the Unified Planning Work Program, and the Long-Range Transportation Plan
(LRTP).
As a result of the elimination of several sections of the Growth Management

statutes, much of the process regarding mitigation for the SIS is removed from
law. What remains is as follows:
Per Section 163.3177(6)(b), Florida Statutes (F.S.), the transportation

element should be coordinated with plans and programs from any
applicable MPO and transportation authority, as well as the State
Transportation Plan and applicable FDOT Work Program ; and
Per Section 163.3180(5)(h)(1), F.S., local governments implementing
concurrency must consult with FDOT when proposed amendments
affect SIS facilities.
Under the expedited state review process and state coordinated review process,
FDOTs role is essentially the same for identifying impacts and measures for
eliminating, reducing or mitigating impacts, as noted below:
Per Sections 163.3184 (2), (3)(b), and (4)(c), F.S., under the new
expedited state review process, comments on proposed plan
amendments must specifically state how the plan amendment will
adversely impact important state resources and facilities and identify
measures local governments can take to eliminate, reduce, or
mitigate for these impacts.
O These comments are sent to DEO and local government
within 30 days after receipt of the amendment by FDOT.
FDOT comments are limited to issues within the agencys
jurisdiction as it relates to transportation resources and
facilities of state importance.
Per Section 163.3184(4), F.S., under the state coordinated review
process, FDOT is limited to making comments similar to the
expedited state review process in regards to important state
resources and facilities.
o Comments are then submitted to DEO within 30 days of
DEOs receipt of the proposed plan amendment for their
transmission of the ORC Report.
Extent of Mitigation Mitigation should be relative to the scale of the expected transportation
Required impacts. For example, while two developments might initially seem similar, a
mall would expect to generate more traffic and have a greater impact to the
existing transportation network than a warehouse even when both
developments consists of an equal amount of commercial or retail square
footage.
Considerations for local Transportation impact analysis and mitigation can range in complexity, from
governments employing simple pay-and-go systems relying upon LOS impacts to more sophisticated
transportation
impacts analysis employing concurrency options within the local jurisdiction.
concurrency
Transportation impact analysis has traditionally focused on a few basic factors to
identify expected automobile level of service impacts on the transportation
system and the associated transportation facility and improvements and costs of
addressing these impacts. While this traditional analysis still holds true for many
traditional suburban developments and undeveloped areas, optional community
concurrency planning provisions and associated strategies like Transportation
Concurrency Exception Areas (TCEAs), Transportation Concurrency Management
Areas (TCMAs), Multimodal Transportation Districts (MMTDs), and/or sector
plans may involve additional factors that are not effectively measured in
automobile level of service calculations alone. The location of these provisions
and strategies are required to be indicated on a local governments adopted
future land use map pursuant to Section 163.3177(6)(a), F.S. In these cases,
consideration of transit needs, bicycle and pedestrian needs, and mitigation
efforts to reduce automobile dependence may also be necessary. In addition to
the traditional level of service considerations, some questions to consider in
analyzing impacts include:
Does the design of the proposed development work to reduce
impacts on adjacent arterials?
Are there factors in the proposed development that are expected to
reduce automobile trip generation?
Will the proposed development support higher rates of internal
capture?
Will the proposed development produce more trips by alternative
transportation modes?
Does the proposed development support more trip chaining that may
affect the activity patterns on the transportation system?
See Resource Guides for Chapter 3 regarding information on how multimodal
quality of service can be utilized to assess how well these questions are
addressed.
For local governments using transportation concurrency, it is important that

FDOT reviewers be aware of the principles, guidelines, standards, and strategies
included in the local comprehensive plan that will help to guide mitigation and
the relevant strategies to be employed. Direction from the local government
comprehensive plan will also help to determine the level of mitigation required.
Examples of techniques and tools include area-wide LOS (e.g. TCMAs),
exemptions or discounting impacts in specific areas where development has
been determined to be desirable (such as MMTDs), and other techniques
described in Section 163.3180(5)(f), F.S., may be employed in implementing
transportation concurrency, including:
Adoption of long-term strategies to facilitate development patterns
that support multimodal solutions, including urban design, and
appropriate land use mixes, including intensity and density.
Adoption of an areawide level of service not dependent on any single
road segment function.
Exempting or discounting impacts of locally desired development,
such as development in urban areas, redevelopment, job creation,
and mixed use on the transportation system.
Assigning secondary priority to vehicle mobility and primary priority
to ensuring a safe, comfortable, and attractive pedestrian
environment, with convenient interconnection to transit.
Establishing multimodal level of service standards that rely primarily
on nonvehicular modes of transportation where existing or planned
community design will provide adequate level of mobility.
Reducing impact fees or local access fees to promote development
within urban areas, multimodal transportation districts, and a
balance of mixed use development in certain areas or districts, or for
affordable or workforce housing.
Adoption of long-term strategies can include land use planning tools
that can reduce vehicle miles of travel for a development or specific
area. Strategies can consist of land use policies that allow for higher
densities and intensities in areas designated to promote multimodal
options such as transit, bicycling, and walking and discourage
development in areas with low amounts of supporting infrastructure.
Transportation In addition, different transportation impacts may be expected depending upon

impacts may also vary development type. Developments that are designed to include an
by development type interconnected street network, support high density mixed-use development, or
otherwise embrace transit-oriented design practices, serve to reduce reliance on
adjacent arterials through design features that promote bicycle and pedestrian
accessibility and the ability to move along local streets for daily trips. The
transportation impacts for these developments are therefore less than
conventional low density suburban developments that separate land uses and
promote automobile use due to insufficient bicycle and pedestrian facilities
accessibility, and vast distances to traverse.
FDOT reviewers should also recognize and look for opportunities to reduce
impacts to the State Highway System. For instance, some local governments and
MPOs have developed roadway constraint ordinances or policies to guide
transportation investment priorities, promote community mobility goals, and
offer less expensive options for enhancing regional transportation networks.
These policies should be consulted along with other local and regional planning
documents, and will have a significant impact on mitigation opportunities. For
PDF
instance, the Lake Sumter MPO Roadway Constraint Policy defines the maximum
number of lanes for several federal, state, and county roads within their jurisdiction
Lake Sumter Policy
in an effort to maintain and enhance the overall transportation network in a cost-
effective way that considers long-term community mobility goals.
FDOT provides guidance in Topic No. 625-000-007 Plans Preparation Manual

(PPM), Volume 1, Chapter 21, Transportation Design for Livable Communities.
PDF This optional guidance can be applied to provide a balance between mobility and
Plans Prep Manual livability when such features are desired, appropriate and feasible. For example,
Volume 1
the Number of Lanes section is copied below:
21.5.2 Number of Lanes

In developed urban areas, reducing the number of lanes may
provide space for pedestrians, bicycles, parking, landscaping
etc. This technique may be appropriate depending on volume
and character of traffic, availability of right of way, function of
the street, existing or planned level of pedestrian, bicycling and
transit activity, intensity of adjacent land use, and availability
of alternate routes. The decision to reduce the number of lanes
on a project shall be supported by an appropriate traffic
capacity study. If transit vehicles and school buses are currently
operating in the area of the project, appropriate local agencies
should be consulted.
Another method for reducing impacts on the State Highway System (SHS),
particularly SIS facilities, is the use of parallel reliever roads, nearby parallel
roads that serve common destinations and run in the same direction as a major
arterial. In the City of Destin, for example, parallel reliever roadways operate to
preserve existing capacity on US 98 (the main east-west arterial running through
the city) while contributing to the overall multimodal transportation goals and
policies of the community. In conjunction with the Citys adoption of a MMTD,
various transportation options have been developed to improve roadway
connectivity and reduce single occupant vehicle trip making in an overall effort
to create a multimodal environment. When using this strategy, particular
attention should be paid to safety considerations in the improvement of parallel
relievers to address operational issues and unfamiliar movements that can lead
to increased crash rates.
As more options become available to meet the mobility needs of the

transportation network, the analysis of mitigation options becomes more
complex. In general, reviewers should utilize both quantitative and qualitative
methods of analyzing the transportation impacts of new development.
FDOT reviewers should recognize the limitations of travel demand modeling in

multimodal analyses so that transportation impacts are assessed effectively. For
example, the use of transportation analysis zones (TAZs) as a unit of analysis
does not consider trips within those zones, like the ones that constitute the
majority of walking trips, a significant portion of bike trips, and most trips to
PDF access transit. In addition, existing land use models do not consider differences
Multimodal
in land use configurations that may occur as a result of changes in the
Tradeoff Analysis
transportation network. FDOT reviewers may wish to consult FDOTs Multimodal
Tradeoff Analysis in Traffic Impact Studies for more detailed information on
multimodal considerations.
5.1.1 Context-Sensitive Solutions (CSS)

FDOTs Topic No. 000-650-002-a defines Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) as, a
proactive, collaborative, interdisciplinary approach to transportation decision
making, project development, and implementation, taking into account, the
views of stakeholders, and the local area where a project will exist, be operated,
and be maintained. The PPM Chapter 21, Transportation Design for Livable
Communities provides implementation guidance for design originating from a
CSS process. CSS strategies support a broad view of the modal transportation
network to enhance local planning goals and conserve important environmental
resources, while also addressing safety and mobility issues. Conventional
approaches to capacity enhancement focus on widening lanes and creating more
continuous roadways. This leads to the unintended result of hindering specific
community and environmental objectives as well as aesthetics, accessibility and
safety. A CSS strategy requires the implementation of solutions tailored to the
specific community and takes multimodal and intermodal connections into
account when addressing capacity needs.
Local and regional plans provide the opportunity for creating and maintaining a
coordinated multimodal transportation systems through CSS. Early and
continuous coordination between FDOT, local governments, and the public is
imperative in order to define community and environmental goals to establish
long-term mobility on the transportation network. Examples of new capacity
improvements using CSS include: streetscape improvements, traffic calming
design elements, as well as road space reallocation to increase right of way for
alternative modes such as transit or bicycle/pedestrian improvements. CSS may
be combined with Transportation Demand Management (TDM) solutions that
seek to increase efficiency on the existing system by considering design elements
that influence travel behaviors.
5.1.2 Development or Land Use Changes

It is important to work in coordination with the applicable local government(s)
when changes are necessary for a proposed comprehensive plan amendment
which can impact the development plan initially proposed by an applicant.
Changes may be required if there are no other feasible alternatives to mitigate
for the traffic impacts such as reducing the magnitude of impacts by modifying
the assignment of traffic by the development.
Examples of changes to a proposed comprehensive plan amendment could

include:
Change proposed land uses
Modify development phasing
Include mixed-use land uses
Revise internal circulation
Urban and roadway design
Limiting the amount of traffic a site can generate through a site-
specific comprehensive plan policy
Reduce maximum densities and/or intensities within development
land uses
Recommendations for changes to a proposed comprehensive plan amendment

should be coordinated through the local government and should be consistent
with the local government comprehensive plan and land development
regulations. It should be noted that FDOT reviewer objections to a plan
amendment under review are limited to important state resources and facilities
pursuant to Section 163.3184, F.S. Recommendations for all identified objections
should be focused on strategies to minimize adverse impacts from additional
traffic which can include roadway facility improvements or land use changes.
FDOT reviewers may also provide technical assistance comments regarding
additional methods for mitigation outside of objections but applicable to the site
plan under review to provide further support pursuant to Section 163.3168, F.S.
The successful implementation of mitigation strategies will require increased and

continuous intergovernmental coordination, and as such, the final section of this
chapter provides guidance on developing mitigation agreements to help
facilitate coordination with local governments and other transportation
agencies.
Mitigation According to Section 163.3180(5)(h)1.a., F.S., local governments must consult

Agreements with FDOT when a proposed comprehensive plan amendment impacts
designated SIS facilities. To ensure consistency and avoid confusion for all parties
involved, a mitigation agreement can be used as an option to formalize agreed
upon methodology, assumptions, and necessary mitigation. The mitigation
agreement is entered into by the applicant the local government who issues the
development order and the applicable reviewing agencies such as FDOT, RPC, or
other local government which may be impacted by the proposed development.
Mitigation agreements are legally binding documents and should be thoughtfully
and carefully prepared. At a minimum, the agreements need to address the
following key issues:
What are the project impacts?

o A clear summary of project impacts should be included.
What is the cost to mitigate the project impacts and what is the
applicants proportionate share responsibility of the needed mitigation?
o This is usually shown in tabular form.
What type of mitigation is the applicant proposing?
o Options include paying a sum to the maintaining agency (i.e.
write a check), participating in a needed study, donation of right
of way, constructing a project, or a combination of strategies.
When should mitigation be secured?
o Usually prior to starting project or entering phase.
o May have a trigger in the Development Order (DO), such as the
number of trips.
Who is party to the agreement?
What should local governments commit to and when should
commitments be made?
How does the agreement satisfy concurrency guidelines and strategies
of the local governments comprehensive plan, if being implemented
through the local government?
FDOT reviewers can assist local governments with mitigation agreements.

Section 163.3168, F.S., provides a mechanism for planning innovation and
technical assistance:
If plan amendments may negatively impact important state

resources and facilities, upon request by the local government,
the state land planning agency may coordinate multi-agency
assistance, if needed, in developing an amendment that
minimizes impacts on these resources/facilities.
Mitigation | 5.2 Strategies Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
5.2 Strategies
This section provides guidance on mitigation strategies and alternatives that
should be considered in maintaining long-term mobility on the transportation
system.
Keys to Successful When a development negatively impacts important state resources and facilities,
Mitigation a number of mitigation alternatives may be considered in the review process to
lessen these transportation impacts. It is important to note, however, that FDOT
reviewers should verify that mitigation strategies recommended are codified by
Involvement of Partners the local government comprehensive plan, land development codes,
transportation sufficiency plans as defined in Section 163.3182(1)(e), F.S., and
outlined in Section 163.3182(4), F.S., consistent with the mitigation practices
outlined below, and other applicable transportation plans.
Close involvement with transportation and land use partners can help assure
that mitigation strategies proposed will effectively address the impacts of
development.
Two general needs have emerged as Districts and local governments attempt to
mitigate transportation impacts in a systematic way:
1. Regional Perspective
2. Land Use and Transportation Coordination
Regional Perspective It has become clear that transportation impacts to the State Highway System
often cross traditional jurisdictional boundaries, and in order to meet the long
term needs of the transportation system, a regional perspective is needed. In
addition, the consideration of other transportation modes such as, bicycle,
pedestrian, and transit will help accomplish long term mobility needs on the
transportation system, and present new opportunities for partnering and
funding. As part of the partnering process, FDOT planners and decision makers
are encouraged to coordinate with DEO, regional planning councils (RPCs),
metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), and local governments, to
maximize long term approaches of achieving mobility goals.
Land Use and Strategies that embrace the connection between land use and good
Transportation transportation service should be included in local government comprehensive
plans and land development codes to meet community goals. These strategies
may be found throughout the various elements of a comprehensive plan, and
specifically in the transportation element. New provisions for mandatory and
optional elements in Section 163.3177, F.S., dictate that the transportation
element must contain, growth trends and travel patterns and interactions
between land use and transportation. It will be key for FDOT staff to coordinate
with transportation partners in developing recommendations to accommodate
future traffic on the impacted corridors based on solutions other than adding
Mitigation | 5.2 Strategies Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
lanes to existing roads. This is particularly important particularly if no roadway

improvement projects are programmed on deficient facilities. Examples of these
and other strategies are discussed in the following sections, and include context
sensitive solutions, corridor access management solutions, transportation
demand strategies, and transit oriented development.
Early and Continuous Perhaps most importantly, initial efforts of FDOT staff will require establishing
Involvement early and continuous involvement between FDOT and transportation partners.
Transportation partners may include local governments, MPOs, RPCs, as well as
the DEO staff. Typically, an interlocal agreement or memorandum of agreement
is first established to identify the roles and responsibilities of all affected parties,
and to ensure proper coordination and documentation of mitigation.
Documentation should include a detailed description of the proposed
improvement(s), identify funding responsibilities, and demonstrate that
improvements are in compliance with local, regional, and state requirements.
With the revisions to Chapter 163, Part II, F.S., in 2011 and subsequent changes
PDF
Prop Share thereafter, transportation concurrency is no longer state-mandated. This
Agreement impacts how FDOT interacts with local governments, in particular those who
have made the decision to rescind transportation concurrency within their
jurisdiction and how these changes will impact agreements such as
proportionate share agreements into the future. For proportionate share
agreements, the changes to state law were not retroactive for existing
agreements. However, there are no restrictions in state law that may preclude a
developer from modifying their existing agreement to take advantage of these
changes.
Its important to understand that FDOT may only grant or deny modifications to
proportionate share agreements if FDOT is a party to the agreement. In addition,
modification of an agreement can differ if the development in question is at a
DRI or sub-DRI level. For information regarding the process at the DRI level,
please refer to Chapter 5.4.4. For information regarding the process at the Sub-
DRI level, please refer to Chapter 5.4.5. Additional information regarding
proportionate share may be found on the DEO website.
Long term strategies which are also regional in nature are presented first within
each subsection, and these mitigation strategies typically apply to DRIs, regional
activity centers or other large development. Following these long term, large
scale strategies, short term more project specific strategies are presented.
Though the scales of these strategies differ, they are not necessarily mutually
exclusive.
Mitigation | 5.3 Three Basic Categories of Mitigation Strategies Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
5.3 Three Basic Categories of Mitigation Strategies

As funding needs for new capacity improvements greatly exceed available funding
resources, the focus of transportation impact mitigation has shifted to a more
systematic approach to consider enhancing operational efficiency and increasing
options for alternative modes of travel in addition to increasing roadway capacity. A
variety of the following strategies may be chosen relative to the transportation
impacts of the proposed development, transportation system long-term
goals/plans, and applicable state and local requirements. Both short-term and long-
term mitigation options should be considered to coordinate achieving long-term
mobility goals. Mitigation strategies will be discussed in the following section within
the framework of three general categories to provide reviewers with a range of
options, specific to local and regional needs and goals:
1. Enhancing Operational Efficiency on Existing Transportation System

2. Increasing Other Modal Options
3. Increasing System Capacity
5.3.1 Enhancing Operational Efficiency on Existing Transportation System

Mitigation strategies designed to enhance operational efficiency on the existing
OPERATIONAL system and reduce greenhouse gas emissions may include:
Congestion Management Processes

Corridor Access Management Plans
Street Network Connectivity
Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
EFFICIENCY Transportation System Management (TSM)
Enhancements for use of high occupancy vehicle lanes or transit
Public Transit Operational Improvements
Congestion Federal Regulation, Titles 23 U.S.C. 134(k)(3) and 49 U.S.C. 5303(k)(3) require that
Management Process all MPOs maintain a Congestion Management Process using travel demand
(CMP) reduction and operational management strategies to identify and address
congestion issues on the transportation network. Partnering with MPOs through
this CMP can help identify and prioritize mitigation options that address long-term
mobility on the State Highway System. Employing this strategy can both aid in
identifying low-cost operational and management improvements and present an
opportunity for partnering in costly, large-scale needed improvements.
Corridor Access Comprehensive corridor access management planning provides an excellent way
Management to increase efficiency and safety on the impacted roadway systems. Good
Strategies corridor access management practices can assist with orderly development
patterns, increased safety, and efficiency on roadways. The management of
driveways also ensures a safer environment for pedestrians and cyclists. FDOT
has many resources to help with the important strategy.
Comprehensive corridor access management incorporates coordination of land

use decisions within the corridor. Comprehensive corridor access management
planning may be considered in coordination with the local comprehensive plan
elements and any transportation sufficiency plans. It should define
improvement projects, and should evaluate corridors beyond the roadway right
of way to address land use, street networks, and right of way. Examples of
proposed improvements resulting from the strategy may include:
Median improvements
Signal location and spacing
Auxiliary lanes
Right of way needs and requirements
New standards for site access, connectivity and circulation design
Effective location of commercial and transportation activity
centers
Improvements to the supporting roadway network
Improvements involving access for other transportation modes
(e.g. bus pullouts, transitions for special use transit lanes or bus
rapid transit, pedestrian crossing treatments)
Better design and integration of bicycle lanes and sidewalk
facilities.
In order to implement Corridor Access Management Plans, each implementing

agency (e.g. FDOT, MPOs, and local governments) should adopt the plan. State
and local governments should approve these plans. Implementation is typically
achieved by combining regulations, interagency or public/private agreements,
design standards, and road improvement projects. Detailed guidance and
resources on evaluation techniques and best practices are available in
1. Chapter 2 of the 2013 Transportation Site Impact Handbook

2. Corridor Preservation Best Practices
(Hillsborough County Corridor Study) CUTR 2003
3. Effective Strategies for Comprehensive Corridor Management
4. Managing Corridor Development
CUTR 1996
Street Network In a number of areas around Florida, SHS facilities are being used as the primary
Connectivity means for transportation between developments, while local and collector
Strategies street networks remain underdeveloped and/or fragmented. In addition to the
strain this puts on the ability of these facilities to maintain adequate mobility
and emergency access, the use of major highways results in negative impacts to
the community. The higher speeds and turning movements associated with
traffic on major highways create unsafe conditions for bicyclists and pedestrians.
In addition, these safety issues, combined with trip length and lack of
connectivity produce a greater dependence upon the automobile as the sole
means for transportation.
Mitigation to address transportation impacts to these facilities involves

promoting activity centers, providing alternative routes for local trips, focusing
on connecting existing roads, as well as considering street network connectivity
as new development emerges. Transportation sufficiency plans which could
include long term corridor access management plans can use the existing local
street system to identify where preferred alternative routes are located, and
mitigation efforts can be focused on promoting connectivity over time.
Continuous coordination with local governments is needed to implement this
strategy successfully, and reviewers should consult applicable land development
PDF codes for street spacing or connectivity requirements for developments
impacting SIS facilities. TRB Paper, Accomplishing Alternative Access on Major
Alternative Access Transportation Corridors by Williams and Seggerman, provides further examples
of street network connectivity strategies and sample regulatory language.
Transportation TDM consists of strategies that foster increased efficiency of the transportation
Demand system by influencing travel demand by mode, time of day, frequency, trip
Management length, regulation, route or cost. TDM discourages peak hour drive alone travel
Techniques through better management of existing transportation infrastructure, services
(TDM) and resources. TDM strategies include, for example, public transit services,
carpooling and vanpooling, compressed work weeks, telecommuting, limited
parking, and provision of bicycle parking, shower, and locker facilities by
employers. Detailed information about TDM strategies and existing programs
WEB
TDM can be found at the National TDM and Telework Clearinghouse.
Clearinghouse
FDOT staff unfamiliar with local government land development processes will
find guidance on measures that can be used to influence the incorporation of
TDM into the land development process in Incorporating TDM into the Land
Development Process. National Center for Transit Research at CUTR, August
2005. The report documents efforts to secure TDM strategies as part of
development approvals, summarizes the long range planning groundwork that
frames the land development process, includes several case study examples
from Florida and other states, and identifies institutional barriers to the use of
TDM as part of the land development process. Note that some of the statutory
references are out of date, but the basic principles are sound.
Transportation partners interested in using TDM in land development should

start their involvement early. This requires participation in review and updates of
the MPO long range transportation plan and transportation improvement
program as well as local government comprehensive plans. The reviewer should
ensure that the TDM measures are consistent with the MPOs CMP and traffic
analysis methodology. These activities will begin the integration of TDM
principles and strategies into the land use and transportation planning process
resulting in physical infrastructure and regulatory tools to support TDM as land
development proceeds.
TDM methodologies can also utilize state of the art

transportation system management and operations
strategies (TSM) such as displaying real time
duration of congestion information vs. travel times
on rail or bus rapid transit.
TDM strategies can also be site specific if they are part of a larger regional effort.
Transportation TSM strategies are improvements intended to utilize the existing transportation
System Management systems capacity to the greatest extent possible. These improvements consist of
Strategies (TSM) geometric improvements or traffic control strategies rather than increasing the
number of general use lanes.
Examples of TSM improvements include:
Add intersection turning lanes
Improve intersection channelization
Modify traffic signals phasing or timing
Improve signal progression
Implement ramp metering
WEB Interchange Add an auxiliary lane along a freeway
Access Request Modify an existing interchange to handle more traffic safely
Users Guide (If an interchange with a freeway is proposed, these improvements require
compliance with the analysis process, criteria, policies and standards set
forth in FDOTs Interchange Access Request Users Guide)
Implement incident management programs
Implement traveler information systems
Implement intelligent transportation systems (ITS)
TSM methodologies such as developing an advanced traffic management system

can be considered a regional large scale mitigation strategy, which individual
developments participate in funding.
Enhancements for Enhancements for the use of transit or managed lanes can alleviate traffic
Use of HOV or Transit impacts by resulting in an increase in transit use and reducing the number of
single occupant vehicle trips (SOV) thereby reducing the number of primary
vehicle trips on the roadway system. These improvements should be evaluated
carefully by FDOT and changes in mode split should be supported by the
developer based on data collected on projects of similar intensity and use. In
addition FDOT should work with local governments and MPOs to encourage
inclusion of these strategies into local and regional plans for potential impacts on
important state resources and facilities. Managed lanes and transit operations
improvements can be considered as either localized or regional mitigation
strategies depending on the scale of the projects.
Some of the strategies that may be appropriate for mitigation include:

Construction of park and ride lots
Construction of bus shelters, turn-outs, etc.
Construction of access ramps for managed lanes
Implementation of managed lanes at ramp metering and intersections
Operational funding for transit
Incorporating site design principles to facilitate transit
Add passing lanes so that transit vehicles can bypass congestion
hotspots
Public Transit Public transit operational improvement strategies are also strategies that are
Operational intended to reduce the amount of primary-trip vehicles on the transportation
Improvements network by changing the mode split. These strategies are encouraged; however,
they should be carefully evaluated to ensure that the proposed changes in mode
split are realistic. Additionally, it should be ensured that local transit agencies
support the change in transit service and are committed to the proposed
changes associated with the proposal. Examples of public transit operational
improvements that may be appropriate for mitigation include new or more
frequent service and employer subsidized transit service. Please note that public
transit facilities as defined under Section 163.3180(5)(h)1, F.S., are exempt from
transportation concurrency.
5.3.2 Increasing Other Modal Options

Another strategy for ensuring the long-term viability of the transportation
network is mitigation that increases mode choice. All mitigation options utilizing
non-automobile modes must be firmly rooted in local government
comprehensive plans. Options for increasing mode choice are discussed below,
and include:
Transit Oriented Development (TOD)
Providing Better Transit Options
Bicycle/Pedestrian Connectivity
Transit Oriented Another method for addressing congestion on the SHS is through the promotion
Development (TODs) of land uses that are supportive of transit. Transit oriented development is
defined in Section 163.3164 (46), F.S. to relate to areas defined in the local
comprehensive plan that is or will be served by existing or planned transit
service. These areas are characterized by compact, moderate to high density
mixed-use developments with integrated land uses that support multimodal
PDF
TOD Design options such as bicycle/pedestrian access and transit amenities.
Guidance
To implement these strategies, local governments should refine comprehensive
plans and land development codes to include transit supportive design criteria,
PDF such as density and intensity ranges, as part of the development standards.
FDOT planners and decision makers can then support these efforts in
Accessing Transit
partnership with local governments. FDOTs Transit Oriented Development
Design Guidance and Accessing Transit Design Handbook for Florida Bus
Passenger Facilities contain guidance on design features, safety issues, and land
use strategies that promote TODs.
Provide Transit Transit options are an important consideration in developing any mitigation
Options strategy in urbanized areas. All transit options should be included in transit
agency TDPs and LGCPs. Implementing this strategy requires early and
continuous coordination with transit agency representatives, such as MPOs in
addition to local governments, in the development of mobility strategies.
Consideration of funding mechanisms to maintain operational costs of the
system is needed to create cost feasible solutions.
PDF
Providing for The report, Land Developer Participation in Providing for Bus Transit
Transit Operations Facilities/Operations documents various strategies that Floridas local
governments and transit agencies can use to generate public transportation
funding through the involvement of private developers. Local and national case
studies highlight application of these strategies. Suggestions are designed for use
within the framework of local government comprehensive plans, land
development codes, and transit development plans, and call for increased
coordination and cooperation between local governments and transit. FDOT
planners and decision makers may also become involved in this process as
development impacts SIS facilities, and should work on establishing coordination
efforts to plan for transit options for mitigation.
Bicycle/Pedestrian To foster the use of alternative transportation modes, connectivity for bicycle
Connectivity and pedestrian movement should be an integral part of any multimodal
transportation network. Although often considered the realm of local
government alone, FDOT planners and decision makers should be prepared to
share technical expertise in this area. Ample bicycle and pedestrian connections
within and between residential areas and activity centers, such as shopping
areas, employment centers, transit stops, neighborhood parks, and schools may
reduce the number of short automobile trips.
PDF A bicycle and pedestrian network comprised of a system of interconnected and

MMTD QOS direct routes can be measured by a connectivity index. One method to perform
Handbook this analysis is found in FDOTs Multimodal Transportation Districts and Area-
wide Quality of Service Handbook. Even though Multi-Modal Transportation
Districts are no longer FDOT administered areas, this document is still useful for
the concepts and strategies in the report. Missing links or gaps in the bicycle and
pedestrian network should be identified and eliminated where appropriate
through the development process. Missing links may include locations between
cul-de-sacs, through walls or fences, mid-block where block length exceeds 660
PDF feet, or where bicycle pedestrian routes would otherwise be excessively
circuitous. Highest priority for improvements should be given to locations with
Model Regulations
high concentrations of pedestrian activity and where connections are needed to
ensure easy access between transportation modes, with particular attention to
bicycle and pedestrian access to schools, transit stops and regional greenway or
trail systems. Model comprehensive plan amendment and land development
regulation language can be found in Model Regulations and Plan Amendments
for Multimodal Transportation Districts.
5.3.3 Increasing System Capacity

Options for increasing roadway capacity may include:
Construction of new transportation facilities, such as new roads or

transit
Addition of new through lanes
Improving the support system for main roadways Improvements
that support the main highways, such as connectivity, parallel
facilities, or increased transit service
Construction of New The construction of new facilities is one strategy to address transportation
Facilities impact needs resulting from new development, and is encouraged when new
facilities help meet long-range transportation goals and policies, such as regional
connectivity. Applicable considerations when proposing new facilities include
impacts to regional community and environmental objectives, congestion
management system goals and policies, and air-quality planning requirements.
As such, features in roadways that aid future transportation system
management (TSM) strategies (e.g., Intelligent Transportation Systems), enhance
the use of transit (e.g., geometric and operational improvements to
accommodate bus travel) and future travel demand management strategies
(e.g., access to park and ride lots) can be part of this strategy.
In addition, new roadway facilities on the SHS should be consistent with all FDOT
standards and policies. Transportation facilities on the SIS are required to meet
standards and limitations set forth in FDOTs SIS Procedure on Strategic
Intermodal System Highway Component Standards and Criteria, Topic 525-30-
260. Construction of new facilities to the SIS and Emerging SIS are governed by
Section 339.63, F.S, and construction plans should be developed in coordination
with local governments, regional planning councils, transportation providers,
PDF
and affected public agencies. Requirements for new facilities to SIS or Emerging
SIS facilities are based upon FDOTs Adopted Criteria and Thresholds of January
Adopted Criteria
2010. Construction of new facilities should reflect the principles of functional
hierarchy and systems connectivity addressed in A Policy on the Geometric
Design of Streets and Highways, 6th Edition (AASHTO, 2011).
Add Lanes The addition of new through lanes on existing facilities is another way of
addressing the impacts resulting from new developments. However, the lane
additions should be consistent with regional goals and policies for SOV travel,
FDOT Topic 525-30-260 SIS Procedure on Strategic Intermodal System Highway
Component Standards and Criteria, and Adopted Criteria and Thresholds for the
SIS. The selection of corridors for new general use lanes should be coordinated
with FDOT. Features that facilitate future transportation system management
strategies, enhancements for the use of transit and future travel demand
management strategies are part of this strategy.
Alternatives to SIS Improvements made to arterial or collector roads running parallel to a SIS facility
Roads and serving common destinations may be considered as an option for mitigation
of transportation impacts to SIS facilities at or near capacity. This strategy
creates an opportunity to partner with appropriate transportation agencies
and/or MPOs to meet mutually beneficial, cost effective transportation
improvements. FDOT staff play a key role in approving relievers as SIS mitigation.
Developing these reliever roads may take the form of new road development as
WEB Growth
well as expansions to existing roads. Because of the expense and complexity
Management
Training associated with obtaining right of way for new roads, the designation of existing
roads as a parallel reliever may be desirable where travel demand evaluations
warrant such designation. Where service roads are designated as parallel
relievers, opportunities exist to integrate corridor development with local street
networks and enhance the ability of smaller areas to establish service roads on
the state highway system. Examples of mitigation options for parallel relievers
include improving access from the main facility to these reliever roads,
connecting a number of existing reliever roads into one interconnected road,
adding lanes to the parallel road to increase capacity, as well as improvements
to signal timing, turn lanes, and medians.
Exhibit 36
Reliever Road Example
The opportunities for partnering between FDOT, local governments, and other
transportation agencies to establish parallel reliever roads offer viable options
for meeting FDOT objectives of maintaining levels of service and mobility on the
SIS and SHS and local visions for mobility; however, reviewers should be aware
of known design issues to ensure safety and mobility in the creation of these
facilities. Continuous frontage roads, for example, are known to lead to crashes
and operational problems due to unfamiliar movements and where connecting
too close to a major roadway intersection. In addition, one of the lessons
learned from Destins parallel reliever has been the need to create bicycle and
pedestrian facilities in conjunction with these parallel relievers to develop a
connected, multimodal environment. Close coordination between FDOT and
local governments can help in ensuring that community and safety needs are
met on a project by project basis.
Mitigation | 5.4 Other Mitigation Strategies Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
5.4 Other Mitigation Strategies:

Land Use and Transportation Strategies to Enhance Mobility
In addition to the approaches referenced above, the following additional
mitigation options may be considered in reducing transportation impacts. These
options are long-term planning strategies that require adoption into local
government comprehensive plans.
5.4.1 Transportation Concurrency and Alternatives

(TCEAs, TCMAs, and MMTDs)
Recent legislation in 2011 has removed the state mandate for transportation
concurrency in local government comprehensive plans. However, transportation
concurrency remains a part of the adopted local government comprehensive
plan as an optional provision until an amendment removes this provision,
pursuant to Section 163.3180, F.S. This subject is discussed in more detail in
Chapter 3.8.
For local governments that retain transportation concurrency, there may be

some cases where the strict application of transportation concurrency
requirements may conflict with important area planning objectives such as
urban infill, redevelopment, or the promotion of public transportation. In these
cases, local governments are able to designate geographic areas into their
comprehensive plans as Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas (TCEAs),
Transportation Concurrency Management Areas (TCMAs), and Multimodal
Transportation Districts (MMTDs) in order to provide flexibility from the strict
application of concurrency. TCEAs, TCMAs, and MMTDs are used to implement
transit system improvements and supporting pedestrian/bicycle infrastructure as
a viable mitigation strategy, and proportionate share contributions may be used
to fund these mitigation efforts. For example, the City of Tallahassee has
implemented a multimodal transportation district for the urbanized area
surrounding the downtown area and Florida State University. Land uses within
this area are eligible for density and intensity bonuses to encourage infill and
redevelopment. Multimodal transportation district policies also include urban
design requirements for the width of sidewalks, location of parking lots and
other infrastructure to promote multimodal options.
5.4.2 Transportation Sufficiency Plans

Under Section 163.3182, F.S., a local government has the ability to create a
transportation development authority for its jurisdiction if there is an identified
transportation deficiency. The area for which the transportation development
authority is created for is defined as the transportation deficiency area which
includes the geographic location of the identified transportation deficiency. It is
the responsibility of the transportation development authority to develop a
transportation sufficiency plan for the designated transportation deficiency area
in order to correct or mitigate the areas deficient transportation facilities.
Transportation sufficiency plans identify transportation facilities that do not

achieve and maintain the level of service standards established in a local
governments comprehensive plan, and therefore, these facilities are considered
deficient. These plans include a priority listing of deficient facilities of which
transportation projects and associated project funding are meant to resolve
deficiencies. Projects that are identified within the plan shall be organized into a
schedule with the intent to eliminate transportation deficiencies within 10 years
after the adoption of the plan. Such projects shall also be included in a local
governments Five-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements found within the
comprehensive plan.
The adoption of the transportation sufficiency plan shall satisfy all applicable
transportation concurrency requirements as established by the local government
for the designated transportation deficiency area. Proportionate share
mitigation shall be limited to ensure that development within the transportation
deficiency area is not charged with additional costs in order to resolve any
deficiencies. The transportation sufficiency plan for this area may only be
removed from the comprehensive plan once all of the projects and costs
associated with the transportation sufficiency plan have been taken care of
pursuant to Section 163.3182(8), F.S.
FDOT reviewers should be aware of any transportation deficiency areas and

sufficiency plans for local governments implementing transportation
concurrency. Reviewers should make recommendations when applicable to
additional mitigation actions which can be included in local transportation
sufficiency plans.
5.4.3 Funding of Mitigation Improvements

Transportation mitigation needs vary by project and have the potential to impact
the viability of a proposed development. As a result, the funding of mitigation
options can be challenging and typically requires negotiation.
The methodology for determining the developers share of funding for

mitigation improvements should be identified in the methodology phase of the
development. The share is determined in relationship to the number of trips
generated by the development and the capacities on an affected roadway
segment or some other calculation based on impact, mobility fees or other
options a local government may adopt, including multimodal improvements.
The final mitigation fee is typically negotiated among the applicant, appropriate
local governments, RPC and the FDOT (if improvements to significant state
facilities such as the SIS are involved) following the mitigation analysis that
demonstrates the proposed improvements will be acceptable to the local
government or agency for alleviating any deficiencies caused by the proposed
development. This negotiation should occur before or concurrent with the
drafting of the development order.
Optional Concurrency A 2011 provision of Section 163.3180, F.S., requires that if transportation
Mitigation concurrency is utilized, the local government must provide an option for
(Proportionate Share) mitigation, also known as proportionate share. In 2013, House Bill 319 (HB 319)
updated this option. There has been much discussion across the state on the
interpretation of this type of mitigation and this handbook will only provide
general principles and statutory references. Some of the key statutory guidance
is provided below:
Any local government with an optional transportation concurrency

system under Section 163.3180, F.S., must provide a system for
development. This allows an applicant for a development-of-regional-
impact, development order, a rezoning, or other land use development
permit to satisfy the transportation concurrency requirements of the
local comprehensive plan, the local government's concurrency
management system, and Section 380.06, F.S, when applicable, if:
a. The applicant in good faith offers to enter into an agreement to pay

for or construct its proportionate share of required improvements.
b. The proportionate-share contribution or construction is sufficient to

accomplish one or more mobility improvements that will benefit a
regionally significant transportation facility.
In addition, any local government that continues to use an optional

transportation concurrency system must provide a means by which the
landowner will be assessed a proportionate share of the cost of providing
the transportation facilities necessary to serve the proposed
development. An applicant shall not be held responsible for the
additional cost of reducing or eliminating deficiencies. Under this system,
when an applicant contributes or constructs its proportionate share
pursuant to this subparagraph, a local government may not require
payment or construction of transportation facilities whose costs would
be greater than a development's proportionate share of the
improvements necessary to mitigate the development's impacts.
Deficiencies, pursuant to Section 163.3180(5)(h)4., F.S., pertain to any facility on

which the adopted level-of-service standard is exceeded by the existing,
committed, and vested trips, plus additional projected background trips from
any source other than the development project under review, and trips that are
forecast by established traffic standards. Under the proportionate share system,
only facilities considered deficient with the additional traffic projected for a
development project under review are considered in the proportionate share
calculation for that development. The additional trips projected to impact a
facility should be coincident with the particular stage of the development
project. For those facilities that are identified as deficient before the
establishment of the development project and will be impacted by the project,
the improvements necessary to alleviate the deficiency are considered to be in
place at the time of the proportionate share calculation.
The current legislation also specifies that the applicant shall receive a credit on a
dollar-for-dollar basis for impact fees, mobility fees, and other transportation
concurrency mitigation requirements paid or payable in the future for the
project. It also states that the credit shall be reduced up to 20 percent by the
percentage share that the project's traffic represents of the added capacity of
the selected improvement, or by the amount specified by local ordinance,
whichever yields the greater credit. Local governments that have repealed their
transportation concurrency system and associated impact fees and have
instituted a mobility-fee based system include counties such as Alachua and
Pasco, and municipalities such as Kissimmee and St. Petersburg.
Other changes from HB 319 affecting proportionate share include:

Allows local government to pool contributions from multiple
applicants to apply toward one planned mobility improvement that
will benefit a regionally significant transportation facility
Requires local governments to provide the basis upon which
landowners will be assessed a proportionate share of cost addressing
the transportation impacts from a proposed development
Clarifies when local governments are not required to approve new
development
Transportation Cost Determining accurate mitigation costs is an essential component to developing

Resources an equitable mitigation package. The FDOT maintains several cost estimating and
documentation resources to assist with the determination of:
Highway construction costs
Right of way costs
Bridge costs
Transit costs
Bicycle and Pedestrian facility costs
Inflation factors (for converting present day costs to future years)
Construction cost indicators
FDOTs Transportation Costs online site contains a full list of cost estimates and
documentation resources. The on-line resource page includes several key staff
WEB contacts for cost information. In reviewing the on-line resources, it should be
Transportation noted that much of the information is general. Many, if not all, of the cost
Costs factors are situation specific and will vary from District to District within the
FDOT based on local circumstances. In many situations, costs will vary even
within a given District. This is particularly true with right of way costs due to the
price of right of way acquisition in dense urban areas.
Because of the wide cost variation, all costs and adjustment factors relating to
specific transportation projects should be addressed with the District office
where the project will be located and all assumptions and cost estimating
methodologies should be reviewed and approved by the FDOT. It is noted that
the generalized costs available from the FDOT may not be accepted for use in
mitigation calculations. Where available, cost estimates based on design, Project
Development and Environment, or feasibility/corridor studies should be used.
Tools such as the FDOTs long-range estimating (LRE) software may also be used
to determine a more location specific cost as compared to generalized costs.
Because of the significant differences that can exist between a cost estimate
based on generalized costs and a cost estimate based on more site specific
information, the use of site specific costs in mitigation agreements is preferred
by the FDOT.
Cautionary The funding of transportation improvement projects is often key to satisfying

Considerations local government comprehensive plan and local ordinance requirements and
FDOT operating standards, allowing development to move forward.
Proportionate share mitigation, may be considered as a tool through which
development applicants can contribute their share of the cost of improving the
impacted transportation facility and thereby mitigate their impact. When
properly developed and administered, this funding mechanism can effectively
generate funding for future transportation improvements in an equitable
manner while allowing development to continue. To be effective, it is essential
that cost-sharing mitigation plans:
Be developed based on correct application of site related traffic
Be developed based on accurate and reliable cost estimates
Have an applicants or agencys commitment to deliver a funded
transportation improvement adopted into the local capital
improvements element
Development and administration of cost-sharing mitigation plans can be
complicated by:
Cost uncertainties such as:
o Lack of detailed design or cost estimates for future improvements
o Right of way acquisition costs
o Potential for large fluctuations in construction costs due to
unanticipated changes in material availability (particularly
shortages), fuel costs, and other inflationary considerations
Developments that are obligated to contribute but do not because
the development is unable to move forward (no development = no
contribution)
Potential lack of consistency between a project identified for
proportionate share and other adopted planning documents
(that may not include the project needed)
Funding shortfalls if insufficient funds are collected to fully pay for a
given proportional share mitigation project
It should be noted that cost-sharing contributions may be in the form of funds,
right of way, or the construction of improvements. The FDOT should be
consulted with projects that involve the SIS in order to ensure impacts on these
facilities are addressed.
5.4.4 Proportionate Share (DRI) Mitigation

Proportionate share is a commonly exercised option to address regional impacts
The next two sections
associated with DRIs to meet provisions within Sections 380.06 and 163.3180,
provide an overview of F.S. Section 163.3180(5)(h), F.S., identifies the parameters under which a
proportionate share proportionate share assessment can be offered as mitigation for the
mitigation for DRI and transportation impacts of a DRI. Much of this is summarized above. In addition,
Sub-DRI development. changes to DRI provisions including development exemptions are documented in
Chapter 4, Developments of Regional Impact.
For a DRI requesting a modification to an existing proportionate share

agreement, the developer must request the changes through a Notice of
Proposed Change (NOPC). The procedures and allowable changes for an
agreement are detailed under Section 380.06(19)(e)6., F.S. If the change from
the recalculation of the proportionate share meets the requirements of Section
163.3180(5)(h), F.S., then it is presumed the change will not create a substantial
deviation and will not be considered an additional regional transportation
impact. However, it must be noted that the recalculation of the proportionate
share is not guaranteed under state law to be accepted by the applicable local
government. Local governments have the option to accept or deny/postpone
approval of development rights with the changes to the proportionate share
calculation for an approved DRI. This is the same for FDOT if FDOT is a party to
the proportionate share agreement.
The role of FDOT, whether or not it is a party to the proportionate share

agreement is to coordinate with the local government regarding its position on
the changes for proportionate share. FDOT should also assist the local
government in evaluating the impact of rescinding the previous calculation of
commitment and assist in the recalculation of the proportionate share
mitigation. In particular, how would these changes impact projects identified on
the FDOT Work Program on the State Highway System. Monies collected for
development impacting facilities on the State Highway System should be used
for regionally significant projects that benefit the State Highway System.
Although not a DRI, sector planning is similar to the DRI process as it involves
planning and development of a substantial amount of area, at least 15,000 acres.
Sector plans also have the ability to potentially impact regional resources in
relation to their magnitude and development potential. Mitigation for sector
plans is usually done during the detailed specific area plan, or DSAP, stage. For
more information, please review Chapter 3.9.3.
5.4.5 Proportionate Share (Sub-DRI) Mitigation

Proportionate share mitigation is also defined by Section 163.3180(5)(h), F.S.,
and applies to smaller, sub-DRI level developments. As in proportionate share
for DRIs, proportionate share provides options to mitigate development impacts
through cooperative efforts between the public and private sector. This option
provides a way for developers to satisfy transportation concurrency
requirements by funding a specific road segment or segments falling below LOS
standards set by the local government. Examples of proportionate share
mitigation may include the contribution of private funds, contributions of land,
and/or construction and contribution of facilities.
For a Sub-DRI level development, a developer may request a change in the
calculation used for an existing funding agreement according to Section
163.3180(5)(h), F.S. The change in recalculation must be accepted by the local
government. FDOTs roles in regards to changes to the proportionate share
agreement are the same as those for DRI level development as discussed above.
Impact Fees Impact fees, one-time charges imposed on new development as a condition of
approval, is another funding strategy that may be used by county and municipal
governments to ensure that new development pays its proportionate share of
the costs to expand transportation system capacity. The Florida Impact Fee
Act, Section 163.31801, F.S., permits local governments to adopt impact fee
ordinances as long as these charges are consistent with the local governments
land development code and comprehensive plan, and meet the minimum
requirements stated in the statute.
In addition, Section 163.2517(3)(j), F.S., requires urban infill and redevelopment

plans to contain a package of financial incentives, which may include strategies
to lower impact fees for developments that promote the use of alternative
transportation modes. These types of incentives recognize the differences in
travel demand generated by different land use types, and should be considered
in the impact review process. Section 163.3180(5)(f), F.S., also includes
alternative techniques that may employ impact reductions for certain types of
development.
Mobility Fees In 2009, as directed by House Bill 360, DEO and FDOT produced a report
evaluating the implementation of mobility fees for local governments in the
state. Following this report, later revisions to Section 163.3180, F.S., encourage
PDF the use of mobility fees as an option for local governments who decide to repeal
Mobility Fee
their transportation concurrency provisions. Several local governments, such as
Methodology
Alachua and Pasco Counties, have implemented mobility fee ordinances and
associated provisions.
The mobility fee is a charge on new development as a form of mitigation for its
impact on a local governments transportation system. The revenue from the fee
is used to alleviate deficiencies to the portion of the system impacted by a
development project and can include internal roadway facilities, exclusive turn
lanes, and other forms of improvements. Mobility fees can be used to help
establish multimodal friendly land use patterns. For example, the Pasco County
mobility-fee system assesses improvement costs for roadway, transit, and
bicycle/pedestrian infrastructure. The system is tiered in order to focus infill and
redevelopment in urbanized areas of the county.
Under Section 163.3180(5)(i), F.S., mobility fee systems may not be used to
deny, time, or phase an application for development provided that the applicant
has agreed to pay for the impacts of the development project through the
mobility fee system. The mobility fee system implemented by a local
government must also comply with the dual rational nexus test applicable to the
development and associated fees. If a local government decides to repeal its
transportation concurrency system and uses a system that is not mobility-fee
based, the new alternative system may not be used to charge an applicant for
improvements to existing deficient roadway facilities as defined under Section
163.3180(5)(h), F.S.
Appendix A | DRI Stages of Review Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
Appendix A
FDOT Review Participation Reference Chart by DRI Stage
Sources: Primarily Chapter 380, Florida Statutes (F.S.), and Rule 73C-40, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.)
Rules, Procedures,
Directives, Policies, and
Review Product Agency Review Time Statutory Guidelines Topics
Written Rule 73C-40.016, F.A.C.
Binding Letter DEO < 15 days Section 380.06(4), F.S.
Comments Rule 73C-40.045, F.A.C.
Pre-application One or more
Methodology Meetings Section 380.06(7)(b), Rule 73C-40.021, F.A.C.
RPC As set by RPC
Methodology Letter of Written F.S. Topic # 525-030-115
Understanding (MLOU) Comments
ADA Sufficiency RPC < 30 days Section 380.06(10), F.S.
Comments Topic # 525-030-115
PDA DEO < 45 days Section 380.06(8), F.S.
DRI DO Comments DEO < 45 days Section 380.06(15), F.S. Rule 73C-40.045, F.A.C.
Topic # 525-030-115
None Rule 73C-40.025(3)(b)14,
DRI Annual Report LG None Section 380.06(18), F.S.
F.A.C.
Annual Traffic Written As set in DO
Rule 73C-
Monitoring Study and Comments
DEO, LG 40.045(7)(a)4.b, F.A.C.
the Modeling and DO review
Topic # 525-030-115
Monitoring Schedule < 45 days
NOPC RPC, DEO < 30 days Section 380.06(19), F.S.
Appendix B | Questions 10 & 21 Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
Appendix B
Questions 10 & 21
Question 10 deals with Land Use activities and impacts as well as any other
related requirements. This question provides a general overview of the site.
Question 21 focuses on the transportation impacts of the DRI. See Chapter 4. DRI
Checklist 3 is modeled on Question 21.
Question 10 General Project Description

Part 1 Specific Project Description
A. Describe and discuss in general terms all major elements of the proposed
development in its completed form. Include in this discussion the proposed
phases (or stages) of development (not to exceed five years), magnitude in the
appropriate units from Chapter 28-24, F.A.C., where applicable, and expected
beginning and completion dates for construction.
B. Provide a breakdown of the existing and proposed land uses on the site for each
phase of development through completion of the project. The developed land
uses should be those identified in Section 380.0651, F.S. and Chapter 28-24,
F.A.C. Use Level III of The Florida Land Use and Cover Classification System: A
Technical Report (September 1985), available from each regional planning
council. Refer to Maps D (Existing Land Use) and H (Master Plan). Use the
format below and treat each land use category as mutually exclusive unless
otherwise agreed to at the preapplication conference.
C. Briefly describe previous and existing activities on site. Identify any constraints
or special planning considerations that these previous activities have with
respect to the proposed development.
D. If the development is proposed to contain a shopping center, describe the

primary and secondary trade areas which the proposed shopping center will
serve.
E. Describe, in general terms, how the demand for this project was determined.
Existing and Proposed Land Uses

(Expand as necessary to accommodate additional land uses)
NON-RESIDENTIAL OTHER
PHASE (Specify by CH 28-24 F.A.C. RESIDENTIAL (Separate column for ROW, TOTAL
Land Use Type) Open Space, Drainage, etc.
NET (1) GROSS(1)

ACRES GSF/UNITS ACRES D.U. ACRES ACRES D.U./GSF
DENSITY DENSITY
Existing
Phase 1
TOTAL
(1) Definitions of net and gross densities to be provided at the preapplication conference
Part 2 Consistency with Comprehensive Plans

A. Demonstrate how the proposed project is consistent with the local
comprehensive plan and land development regulations. Indicate whether the
proposed project will require an amendment to the adopted local
comprehensive plan, including the capital improvements element. If so, please
describe the necessary changes.
B. Describe how the proposed development will meet goals and policies contained
in the appropriate Regional Comprehensive Policy Plan.
C. Describe how the proposed development will meet goals and policies contained
in the State Comprehensive Plan (Chapter 187, F.S.), including, but not limited
to, the goals addressing the following issues: housing, water resources, natural
systems and recreational lands, land use, public facilities, transportation, and
agriculture.
Part 3 Demographic and Employment Information

A. Complete the following Demographic and Employment Information tables.
Part 4 Impact Summary

A. Summarize the impacts this project will have on natural resources.
B. Summarize public facility capital costs associated with project impacts using the
following table:
Demographic Information Related to the Project's Population
TOTAL ELDERLY
PERSONS PER TOTAL CHILDREN PER SCHOOL AGE PER TOTAL
PHASE TOTAL DWELLING UNITS HOUSEHOLD POPULATION HOUSEHOLD CHILDREN HOUSEHOLD ELDERLY
MF SF
Existing
Phase
1
TOTAL
Estimated Employment Generated by Project by Income Range(1)
PHASE UNDER $10,000 $10,000-$14,999 $15,000-$19,999 $20,000-$24,999 $25,000-$29,999 $30,000-$34,999 $35,000-39,999 Over $40,000
CONSTR NON- CONSTR NON- CONSTR NON- CONSTR NON- CONSTR NON- CONSTR NON- CONSTR NON- CONSTR NON-
CONSTR CONSTR CONSTR CONSTR CONSTR CONSTR CONSTR CONSTR
Phase 1
TOTAL
(1) Construction employment in terms of Full-time equivalents (FTE) / Non-construction employment in terms of permanent employees
Public Facility Impacts(1)
TOTAL CAPITAL RESPONSIBLE

FACILITY PHASE COST ENTITY
Phase 1
TOTAL
(1) At a minimum, this table should include transportation, wastewater, potable water, recreation and
open space, and education.
Question 21 - Transportation
See State Comprehensive Plan (Chapter 187, F.S.)
Goal (11); Policy (2) / Goal (12); Policies (3),(4)/ Goal (16); Policies (1) / Goal (18);
Policies (1),(3)(4),(6) / Goal (20); Policies (2),(3),(8),(9),(10),(12),(13),(15) / Goal (25);
Policy ( 5)
ROAD LINK/INTERSECTION:
EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE:
ADOPTED LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARD:
LEVEL OF SERVICE AFTER PROJECT BUILDOUT:
A. Using Map J or a table as a base, indicate existing conditions on the highway

network within the study area (as previously defined on Map J), including
AADT, peak-hour trips directional, traffic split, levels of service and maximum
service volumes for the adopted level of service (LOS). Identify the
assumptions used in this analysis, including "K" factor, directional "D" factor,
facility type, number of lanes and existing signal locations. (If levels of service
are based on some methodology other than the most recent procedures of the
Transportation Research Board and FDOT, this should be agreed upon at the
preapplication conference stage.) Identify the adopted LOS standards of the
FDOT, appropriate regional planning council, and local government for
roadways within the identified study area. Identify what improvements or new
facilities within this study area are planned, programmed, or committed for
improvement. Attach appropriate excerpts from published capital
improvements plans, budgets and programs showing schedules and types of
work and letters from the appropriate agencies stating the current status of the
planned, programmed and committed improvements.
B. Provide a projection of vehicle trips expected to be generated by this

development. State all standards and assumptions used, including trip end
generation rates by land use types, sources of data, modal split, persons per
vehicle, etc., as appropriate. The acceptable methodology to be used for
projecting trip generation (including the Florida Standard Urban Model
Structure or the Institute of Transportation Engineers trip generation rates)
shall be determined at the preapplication conference stage.
C. Estimate the internal/external split for the generated trips at the end of each
phase of development as identified in (B) above. Use the format below and
include a discussion of what aspects of the development (i.e., provision of
on-site shopping and recreation facilities, on-site employment opportunities,

etc.) will account for this internal/external split. Provide supporting
documentation showing how splits were estimated, such as the results of the
Florida Standard Urban Transportation Model Structure (FSUTMS) model
application. Describe the extent to which the proposed design and land use
mix will foster a more cohesive, internally supported project.
Internal/External Split - Vehicle Trips
VEHICLE TRIPS (ADT) PEAK HOUR VEHICLE TRIPS
PHASING INTERNAL EXTERNAL INTERNAL EXTERNAL
Existing
Phase 1
.
D. Provide a projection of total peak hour directional traffic, with the DRI, on the
highway network within the study area at the end of each phase of
development. If these projections are based on a validated FSUTMS, state the
source, date and network of the model and of the TAZ projections. If no
standard model is available or some other model or procedure is used, describe
it in detail and include documentation showing its validity. Describe the
procedure used to estimate and distribute traffic with full DRI development in
subzones at buildout and at interim phase-end years. These assignments may
reflect the effects of any new road or improvements which are programmed in
adopted capital improvements programs and/or comprehensive plans to be
constructed during DRI construction; however, the inclusion of such roads
should be clearly identified. Show these link projections on maps or tables of
the study area network, one map or table for each phase-end year. Describe
how these conclusions were reached.
E. Assign the trips generated by this development as shown in (B) and (C) above
and show, on separate maps or tables for each phase-end year, the DRI traffic
on each link of the existing network within the study area. Include peak-hour
directional trips. If local data is available, compare average trip lengths by

purpose for the project and local jurisdiction. For the year of buildout and at
the end of each phase estimate the percent impact, in terms of peak hour
directional DRI trips/ total peak hour directional trips and in terms of peak hour
directional DRI trips/ existing peak hour service volume for desired LOS, on each
regionally significant roadway in the study area. Identify facility type, number of
lanes and projected signal locations for the regionally significant roads.
F. Based on the assignment of trips as shown in (D) and (E) above, what
modifications in the highway network (including intersections) will be
necessary at the end of each phase of development, to attain and maintain
local and regional level of service standards? Identify which of the above
improvements are required by traffic not associated with the DRI at the end of
each phase. For those improvements which will be needed earlier as a result of
the DRI, indicate how much earlier. Where applicable, identify Transportation
System Management (TSM) alternatives (e.g., signalization, one-way pairs,
ridesharing, etc.) that will be used and any other measures necessary to
mitigate other impacts such as increased maintenance due to a large number
of truck movements.
G. Identify the anticipated number and general location of access points for
driveways, median openings and roadways necessary to accommodate the
proposed development. Describe how the applicant's access plan will minimize
the impacts of the proposed development and preserve or enhance traffic flow
on the existing and proposed transportation system. This information will
assist the applicant and governmental agencies in reaching conceptual
agreement regarding the anticipated access points. While the ADA may
constitute a conceptual review for access points, it is not a permit application
and, therefore, the applicant is not required to include specific design
requirements (geometry) until the time of permit application.
H. If applicable, describe how the project will complement the protection of

existing, or development of proposed, transportation corridors designated by
local governments in their comprehensive plans. In addition, identify what
commitments will be made to protect the designated corridors such as
interlocal agreements, right-of-way dedication, building set-backs, etc.
I. What provisions, including but not limited to sidewalks, bicycle paths, internal
shuttles, ridesharing and public transit, will be made for the movement of
people by means other than private automobile? Refer to internal design, site
planning, parking provisions, location, etc.
Appendix C | Sample Transportation Impact Methodology Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
Appendix C
FDOT District 2 Generic Transportation Impact Analysis Methodology
Question 21 All of the information in Question 21 will be provided unless the applicant has been
Transportation specifically instructed in writing that the information does not need to be
submitted.
FDOT District Two does not support the use of a Land Use Trip Matrix.
I. Project Trip Generation

Trip Generation The applicant will use the latest edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers
(ITE) Trip Generation Handbook and will provide all necessary input data for agency
review and verification purposes. The applicant will provide both daily and PM
peak hour trip generation estimates by ITE land use and by development phase.
The applicant shall also provide PM peak hour trip generation by ITE land use and
by development phase. If a school is to be proposed, the applicant shall also
provide AM peak hour trip generation by ITE land use and by development phase.
Internal Capture The determination of internal capture rates will be guided by ITE Trip Generation
Estimation Handbook, latest edition. These rates shall not exceed the guidelines specified in
the FDOT Site Impact Handbook and not exceed a 25 percent maximum of total trip
generation. For purposes of the internal capture analysis, the Applicant will
combine all like uses into retail, office and residential.
Internal capture trips will be balanced using the latest ITE Trip Generation
Handbook and supporting calculation tables will be provided for review. Also,
capture rates will be determined by phase and consistent with the trip generation
table. Other internal capture considerations include the following:
a. Residential and employment centers should be compatible (with
respect to income levels) to allow internal capture.
b. Job estimations in other parts of the application shall match up to the
employment land use proposed in Question 21.
c. On-site employment may not attract work trips from on-site homes
for several years (if applicable).
d. Mixed use development should be constructed to optimize internal
capture at each phase of build-out.
e. Internal circulation roadways must be in place to accommodate
internal capture trips.
f. Trips that cross or use public roads are not internal capture trips.
It should also be noted, depending on model project setup, that FSUTMS will
internally capture project trips. Because ITE procedures will be used by the
Applicant to determine capture rates, before modeling the project, internal capture
calculated with a model is not acceptable. Concern with this modeling issue is the
double counting of internal project trips, once when determining external trip
production and again via the model assignment.
Model reported distribution rates for project related traffic shall be adjusted to account for
those trips internally captured by a Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) or between project TAZs. The
total model project trip generation produced by the model shall be determined by
performing a screen line analysis around the project TAZs. The total project traffic that
leaves a project TAZ, and does not traverse from one project TAZ to another, is the project
traffic number used to calculate project share on the roadway links.
Pass-by Trips Pass-by trips for all phases will be calculated consistent with ITE methodology.
However, pass-by trips shall not exceed 10 percent of the main adjacent street
traffic during the peak hour. Consistent with ITE and FDOT methodology, internal
trips will be subtracted before calculating the number of pass-by trips.
II. Existing Conditions

Existing Level of For all roadways on FDOTs Strategic Intermodal System (SIS), the applicant must
Service (LOS) adhere to the FDOTs adopted level of service standards and corresponding
maximum service volumes (MSVs) consistent with information provided in FDOT
District Two Level of Service Report, latest edition. Other state roads shall use the
locally adopted LOS, however the corresponding MSV for that adopted LOS shall be
determined using the FDOT Generalized Tables, latest edition.
Traffic Count The Applicant will use <Last Full Year> or newer traffic counts. FDOT District Two
Procedures provides the latest counts in the FDOT District Two Level of Service Report. The
applicant should contact FDOT to ensure that newer traffic counts are not
available. If the applicant performs traffic counts on state roads in support of this
application, the counts must conform to the FDOTs Quality Level of Service
Handbook, latest edition including posted addendums and corrections. Special note is
made that volume counts shall be a minimum of three days on Tuesday through
Thursday, turning movements shall be eight hours with four hours during the AM
peak and four hours in the PM peak. All documentation, including the raw counts
and factors used shall be included in the applicants technical appendix.
Peak Hour Factors The determination of K and D factors will follow FDOTs guidelines established in
the Quality Level of Service Handbook, latest edition including posted addendums
and corrections. A measured K is not acceptable unless it is within FDOTs
recommended minimum K factors. All sources of existing traffic counts will be
provided in the analysis tables and actual counts, as well as calculations, will be
provided in the applicants technical appendix.
Peak hour counts shall be calculated by multiplying the AADT by the K100 factor
pursuant to the FDOT Quality Level of Service Handbook, latest edition including
posted addendums and corrections. Turning movement counts shall be used for
purposes of determining the percentage of turning vehicles at an intersection.
Turning movements shall not be used to calculate existing or future traffic, the
practice of growing turning movements to arrive at future traffic is an unacceptable
methodology and often underestimates actual demand. All sources of existing
turning movement counts will be provided in the analysis tables and actual counts,
as well as calculations, will be provided in the applicants technical appendix.
Study Area The study area shall be determined using the Transportation Planning
Organizations (TPO) adopted model. The study area limits will be adjusted based
upon the extent of the substantially impacted segments defined as the roadway
segments where the project traffic share is 5 percent or more of the maximum
service volume. Maximum service volumes used to determine the study area shall
be based on the FDOTs Generalized Tables, latest edition. Facility and area type
shall be determined using the FDOT District Two Level of Service Report, latest
edition.
All supporting tables and maps shall identify significant roadway segments and at
least one segment beyond the 5 percent significance threshold.
Roadway All state roadway segmentation shall conform to the segmentation as provided in
Segmentation the FDOT District Two Level of Service Report, latest edition. The applicant shall
provide maps and tables that document the existing level of service based on this
segmentation.
Existing Intersection The applicant shall provide existing LOS for all intersections on any roadway
Analysis determined to be significant (A general list of intersections shall be agreed to at the
pre-application meeting). The applicant shall perform the analysis using the
Highway Capacity Manual procedures using existing signal timings at signalized
intersections. The applicant shall provide maps and tables that document the
intersection existing level of service.
All interchange ramps, ramp terminals and adjacent intersections shall be modeled
in Synchro software, latest edition, using existing signal timings for signalized
intersections. The applicant shall provide the HCM long form printouts and
Synchro output with V/C ratio and queuing analysis in the technical appendix. The
applicant shall also provide the electronic files for the HCM and Synchro analysis.
III. Future Years Analysis

Roadway Network Transportation system modifications, scheduled for construction and funded,
Modifications located within the project study area and specified in the latest adopted FDOT Five-
Year Work Program shall be identified and mapped. Only those projects identified
for construction within the first three years of the FDOT Five-Year Work Program
shall be considered for the future roadway network as applicable. Also, any
roadway modifications committed by other approved developments (if applicable),
and incorporated in the future networks of the applicants project, may create a
condition that would require these improvements to be in place before this
applicants project can move forward. The applicant can make network additions to
the phase models with the understanding that they must be in the first three years
of the FDOT Five-Year Work Program, or the applicant will be required provide full
cost for the improvements proposed.
Adopted Model The applicant shall obtain the latest adopted model from the FDOT District Modeling
Coordinator. No modifications by the applicant to the factors used for validating the
adopted model are acceptable. The applicant shall use the model as validated.
Developing The applicant shall develop background traffic as follows:

Background Traffic 1. Applicant shall run the <base year> model and the model for the first
phase of their development.
2. For any given link as defined by the maintaining agency, the applicant shall
select the model link with the highest number of background trips for
analysis.
3. The difference between the <base year> model and the applicants first
phase model on any given link (minus the applicants traffic), adjusted to
the number of years between the existing count year and the applicants
first phase, shall be added to the existing count for that link.
4. The number from step 2 shall be checked against a minimum growth rate
of 2 percent per year for the number of years between the existing counts
year and the applicants first phase year.
5. The applicant shall select the higher of the two (model difference number
added to existing count or 2 percent per year growth rate) as the
background traffic number.
6. The applicant shall calculate background traffic for any phase after Phase I
by taking the difference on any given link between the phase models and
adding it to the previous phase calculated. All background traffic for
phases after Phase I shall be checked against a 2 percent minimum growth
rate and the higher of the two (model difference number added to existing
count or 2 percent per year growth rate) shall be reported as the
background traffic number.
Developing Project The applicant shall determine the project trip assignment as follows:
Traffic 1. The applicant shall determine the socio-economic (SE) data for each
phase of the proposed project.
2. The applicant shall input the SE data in the model for each phase and
shall provide documentation for the SE changes in the technical
appendix.
3. The applicant shall ensure that the number of trips external to the
project TAZ(s) (excluding those trips that are internal to the model or
travel from a project TAZ to another project TAZ) are within 10 percent
of the ITE total external project trips the applicant has calculated for
the project trip generation.
4. For any phase model, the applicant shall determine by screen line the
actual number of trips to leave the project Transportation Analysis
Zones (TAZ).
5. For any given link the applicant shall select the model link with the
highest number of project trips for analysis.
6. The number calculated from step 4 shall be used to determine the
percentage of project traffic on any given link by dividing the project
traffic by the number from step 4.
7. The percentage from step 6 is applied the applicants PM peak hour ITE
external trip generation to determine the trip number used for
calculating proportionate share.
Model Results The applicant shall provide maps and tables that detail the background and project
trips for each phase. The applicant shall also provide all modeling files. The
applicant shall provide a DVD of the complete model folder structure with
completed model runs.
Future Level of Roadway segments that carry peak hour project trip volumes greater than five
Service Analysis percent of the adopted LOS standard maximum volume will be identified.
Segments that meet this criterion, and whose peak hour traffic exceeds the
adopted LOS standard maximum volumes, will be considered adverse (deficient).
These segments will be analyzed to determine what modifications are needed to
correct those deficiencies. To determine the adverse links within the study area,
the Applicant will use the maximum service volumes (MSVs) contained in FDOTs
Generalized Tables for the adopted level of service standard.
The analysis shall be provided for the following scenarios:
1. Existing (Base) year;
2. Future year (Base + Growth + Project) without modifications
(for each phase); and
3. Future year with modifications (as needed, for each phase).
Intersection Analysis Where roadway segments have been determined to be significant, the signalized
intersections along significant segments are deemed to be significant. The
Applicant will be responsible for analyzing all critical intersections identified and
will provide graphics indicating project, background, and total volumes by
movement.
Intersections shall be analyzed using HCM or Synchro software. The applicant shall
perform the analysis using the Highway Capacity Manual procedures using existing
signal timings at signalized intersections. The applicant shall provide maps and
tables that document the intersection existing level of service.
All future year analyses shall maintain the adopted level of service and the volume
to capacity ratio (v/c) shall not exceed 0.99 on all approach movements. The
intersection level of service shall be based on the most restrictive level of service
standard for the intersecting roadways.
All interchange ramps, ramp terminals and adjacent intersections shall be modeled
in Synchro software, latest edition. The applicant shall provide the HCM long form
printouts and Synchro output with v/c ration and queuing analysis in the technical
appendix. The applicant shall also provide the electronic files for the HCM and
Synchro analysis.
For State roadways, the percent trucks shall be 50 percent of the T-factor included
in the most recent FDOT Florida Traffic Information (FTI) DVD.
The analysis shall be provided for the following scenarios:
1. Existing (Base) year;
2. Future year (Base + Growth + Project) without modifications (for each
phase); and
3. Future year with modifications (as needed, for each phase).
To determine turning movement volumes for future background traffic, the existing
peak hour link volumes and the future year link volumes without the project shall
be multiplied by the percent turns obtained from the present day turning
movement counts. Peak hour link volumes shall be obtained consistent with the
procedures previously identified in this methodology.
Project traffic will be added to all intersection movements once the future year
intersection volumes have been determined. The analysis shall be performed for
the PM peak hour. Intersection turning movement illustrations shall be provided
for existing and future year scenarios. For the future year, the illustrations shall
clearly indicate the breakdown of existing traffic, background growth, project traffic
and total traffic.
Adequate turn lane storage must be provided where needed to accommodate the
average back of queue. Supporting documentation shall be provided that shows
that adequate turn lane storage has been provided. Intersection modifications will
include the provision of receiving lanes where needed.
The Applicant shall provide concept sketches that illustrate any proposed
intersection geometric modifications.
IV. Proportionate Share Analysis

Proportionate Share All proportionate share calculations shall conform to Transportation Uniform
Calculations Standard Rule 73C-40.045 (h), F.A.C. All cost estimations shall be calculated using
the latest FDOT Transportation Costs per mile models, inflation factors, rights-of-
way, and engineering costs from the FDOT website. The applicant shall detail all
proportionate share cumulatively by phase. The applicant shall contact the District
for any costs not included in the FDOT Transportation Cost models.
Appendix D | Sample Transportation Methodology Comments Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
Appendix D
Sample Proposed Transportation Methodology Comments
Orchard Park DRI 1 1. The coordination of land uses with adjacent uses is not apparent since the
surrounding uses are not included on Map H or other maps in the ADA.
Coordination of land uses as well as internal street connectivity are
important provisions in order to make progress towards providing traveler
choices other than by single occupant vehicles.
2. In order to foster desirable characteristics that result in sustainable
development, including access to various modes of travel to and from
adjacent land uses, the DRI applicant should be required to develop design
guidelines that demonstrate how urban design, land use, and roadway
characteristics will result in optimal mobility for the project and beyond.
3. The DRI claims to be encouraging non-vehicular forms of travel. However, no
maps are provided which demonstrate the accessibility of land uses to
bicycles, pedestrians, and future transit facilities. The applicant should
consider providing a transportation map for the DRI that overlays the
vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian, and transit facilities and services that are
expected to serve the DRI. Key parking areas and parking strategies should
also be identified to aid in assessing how this infrastructure affects the
encouragement of alternative modes of travel. The ADA indicates bicycle
facilities will be provided to connect to other greenways. It is important that
bicycle and pedestrian facilities be created throughout the area to foster
forms of mobility other than the single-occupant vehicle. The project will not
be marketed as retiree or second homes, and nearby and on-site research
and development employment opportunities will abound. As such, the
project will draw families with children to the community and therefore
bicycle and pedestrian access between residential areas, commercial areas,
and community facilities, such as parks and schools, should be included with
the development.
4. Many of the previous comments also relate to making the community
Transit Ready. The application proposes clustered development with
residential densities of nine to fifteen units per acre. These densities are
sufficient to support fixed route transit service and should be located on Map
1
Orchard Park (formerly West St. Lucie Farms) ADA-OMD Comments, Florida Department of Transportation, District 4 Office
of Modal Development, Ft. Lauderdale, October 2005, unpublished data.
Appendix D | Sample Transportation Methodology Comments Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
H of the ADA as well as the transportation map requested above. Although

transit does not service the area at this time, the application should not only
make a commitment to accommodate future service but also to maximize it
through supportive land uses, urban design, and connectivity. The demand
between the research and development uses to the north and the
commercial/mixed use areas along SR-70 will also support transit service.
The applicant should coordinate with the St. Lucie Council on Aging to
discuss the potential for future extension of existing transit service on
Okeechobee Road from east of the Turnpike to the development. Such
discussion should also be documented and reported as part of the ADA.
5. Local governments must adopt the LOS standards set by the Department for
Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) facilities. As such, the applicant and County
will need to ensure the level of service set for State Road 70/Okeechobee
Road is not exceeded. Consideration should be given to increasing the grid
pattern of local and regional roads to provide alternate routes. To address
potential congestion, the applicant also could commit to the development
and implementation of transportation demand management strategies to
reduce project related peak hour automobile trips. The applicant might
consider integrating a park and ride lot with the commercial development
along SR-70. This will enable commuters to accommodate various trip
purposes from one location and will thus reduce vehicles miles traveled and
impacts to area roadways, including the SIS.
6. Much of the above information is necessary to enable the Department to
conduct a thorough review of the DRI for Question 21(I) of the ADA. The
information will also aid in the review of anticipated comprehensive plan
amendments for consistency with the following County policies:
establish bicycle and pedestrian facilities;
ensure sidewalk connectivity and completion of missing sidewalk
segments;
review all future development plans for compatibility with transit
Appendix E | Sample Transportation Methodology Comments Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
Appendix E
Sample Proposed Transportation Methodology Comments
Appendix F | FDOT District 4 Example Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
Appendix F
FDOT District 4 Example: Office of Modal Development (OMD) Multimodal Sufficiency Comments
The following sample sufficiency comments have been used in District 4 as general
guidance on writing sufficiency comments.
Alternative The projected mode split of 3% is consistent with the projected total number of
Transportation Modes PM Peak Hour trips (96) and Daily trips (977). This number of trips would
support a "Hub" stop, which should be at locations with over 50 average daily
boardings and serve multiple transit routes. (Gulfstream)
The applicant should more clearly define the bicycle, pedestrian, and transit
facilities and services that are expected to serve the DRI so that the planning and
provision of these facilities and services can be addressed in a comprehensive
manner, rather than wait for future piecemeal site plan review as indicated on
page ... Key parking areas and parking strategies should also be identified to aid
in assessing how this infrastructure affects the encouragement of alternative
modes of travel. (Provences)
The applicant should coordinate with the St. Lucie Council on Aging, to
discuss the potential for future extension of existing transit service to the
development and the future establishment of a transit transfer and
ridesharing facility, if this is determined to be needed. Such discussion
should be documented and reported as part of the ADA. (Provences)
Transportation Demand A commitment to use Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies
Management Strategies and related details regarding those strategies should be included in Question
(TDM) 21(i) of the application. Some strategies include, but are not limited to the
following: (Gulfstream)
An Employee Transportation Coordinator employed on-site who will actively

coordinate with South Florida Commuter Services and offer them the
opportunity to review and comment on TDM activities.
Identification and designation of specific areas with close access to particular
jobsites for employees who carpool/vanpool to work.
Location and installation of kiosks within the facility to provide
transportation related information and options on carpooling, vanpooling,
bus/transit schedules, and maps.
Management of a "Guaranteed Ride Home Program" for car/vanpoolers.
Attainable/Affordable Expand efforts to increase the supply of affordable housing in close proximity to
Housing Located in Close employment and planned transit service. The opportunities this creates for
Proximity to Accessible travel choice options can yield savings in travel expenses that can be applied to
Travel Choice Options
housing costs. Additionally, this location strategy can enable potential residents
to take advantage of location efficient mortgages that help them to access
additional borrowing power due to the lower transportation costs of using non-
auto modes of transportation. This financial tool allow more family income to
be applied to housing costs rather than transportation, making these types of
loans potentially more secure.
Parking Provisions It should also be noted that there appears to be a large amount of surface
parking shown in This can have undesirable impacts on the pedestrian
environment, discourage a "park once" approach to reducing auto trips, and
increase the convenience of single occupant vehicles at the expense of using
other modes of transportation. The applicant should consider orienting parking
behind rather than in front of buildings and also consider more parking
structures with pedestrian oriented facades and first floor retail uses.
(Provences)
Site Planning/Balanced Seminole Pratt Whitney Road runs through the middle of a land use focal point
Land Uses (town center), which functions as a major attractor of trips and will discourage
potential internalization of trips within the site. This project in large part relies
on Seminole Pratt Whitney road as the major north/south artery for movement
of trips. This road is projected to fail. Alternate land use scenarios should be
considered to internalize trips to a greater extent. (Gallery-Judge Grove)
The spatial relationship between the proposed multiple family residential and
other proposed uses such as the school and the Traditional Neighborhood
Development (TND) should be depicted on Map H as part of the Master
Development Plan to justify claims in Question 21i that this scenario complies
with the characteristics of a TND. (Indrio Groves)
The realignment of Koblegard Road, by protruding to such an extent within the

DRI in lieu of bordering the property, may preclude the ability of future
development on adjacent vacant land to the east from having access to
distribute traffic in an efficient manner. Maximizing roadway connectivity aids in
the distribution of traffic. (Indrio Groves)
The applicant should consider a redistribution of commercial land use to be

located at the intersection of the spine road and Spanish Lakes Boulevard. Do to
the substantial number of residents in the Spanish Lakes Fairways development,
providing commercial land uses at this location to serve the home-based
shopping trip purposes of this community and lndrio Groves will help to reduce
trips on lndrio Road by shorten trip lengths due to its closer proximity. (Indrio
Groves)
Internal Design In order to foster desirable characteristics that result in sustainable

development, including access to various modes of travel from adjacent land
uses, the DRI applicant should be required to develop design guidelines that
demonstrate how urban design, land use, and roadway characteristics will result
in optimal mobility for the project and beyond. Such design guidelines should
function to illustrate how development will aid in the provision of pedestrian,
bicycle, and transit infrastructure as well as convenient connectivity for a quality
experience sufficient to capture choice participants. Some components of design
guidelines include, but are not limited to: (Indrio Groves)
building design activity nodes with higher density/intensity

building scale healthy mix of uses within easy walking
density/intensity distance of each other
street patterns sidewalks
street widths pedestrian-friendly block sizes (e.g., block
landscaping face no more than 500 ft, average block
activity centers that are perimeter 1,350 ft)
attractive, pedestrian-friendly, traffic calming measures
and serve surrounding transit, pedestrian, and bicycle
neighborhood-level infrastructure & access to those facilities
residential areas
parking
Appendix G | Examples of Multimodal NOPC Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
Appendix G
Examples of Multimodal NOPC
Notice of Proposed Change (NOPC) and Substantial Deviation Determinations
The following verbatim examples illustrate issue areas from development order
recommendations related to an NOPC and may serve as guidance:
LP Integrated In response to a Notice of Proposed Change (NOPC), the City Commission of the
Development Order City of Tallahassee drafted an integrated development order (DO) with a variety
of specific conditions to be met by the developer, St. Joe Towns & Resorts, LP.
Within the set of conditions, six transportation demand management (TDM)
strategies were issued for the developer, making provisions for:
Capital development transit including bus stops and shelters, and a

satellite transfer facility
Pedestrian and bicycle facilities, with criteria for constructing shower
and locker facilities within the buildings of the DRI
A transportation coordinator, as appointed by the developer
Preferential parking for high-occupancy vehicles, visitors, and the
handicapped
Pedestrian-friendly community design for areas within designated
Pedestrian Primary Areas
Resumption of a shuttle bus service to operate between this and an
adjacent DRI, with connections to the local Tallahassee transit service
LP Integrated Development Order, City Commission of the City of Tallahassee, St. Joe
Towns & Resorts, 1999-2004, Florida, pages 29-31.
Quillen DRI In a response to the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council regarding the
Quillen DRI, FDOT District Four addressed the modal and design issues the
applicant needed to take into consideration for approval. The following
comments are excerpted from the memorandum:
1) Residential clusters shown in the Master Plan appear to reflect a

traditional suburban environment. Coordination of land uses as well as
internal street connectivity are important provisions in order to make
progress towards providing travel choices other than by single occupant
vehicles. Consideration should be given to increasing the grid pattern of
local and regional roads to provide a variety of alternate routes.
2) The ADA indicates bicycle and pedestrian facilities will be provided;
however, no maps are provided that demonstrate the accessibility of land
uses to a bicycle/pedestrian system. It is important that bicycle and
pedestrian facilities be created throughout the area to foster forms of
mobility other than the single-occupant vehicle. In particular, bicycle and
Appendix G | Examples of Multimodal NOPC Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
pedestrian access between residential areas, commercial areas, and

community facilities, such as parks and schools, should be included.
3) To address potential congestion, the applicant should also consider
committing to the development and implementation of transportation
demand management/commute trip reduction strategies to reduce project
related peak hour automobile trips. The neighborhood center, in particular,
provides an opportunity to support these types of programs. A park and
ride lot for ridesharing/car pooling could be provided for to support future
transit access. The objective is to relieve the regional roadway from local
automobile trips that would otherwise be there.
4) Many of the previous comments also relate to making the community
Transit Ready. Transit service is available in Indiantown and expansion to
the project should be considered. Many of the design principles described in
the Indiantown Community Redevelopment Plan and Indiantown Design
Regulations assist in promoting alternate modes of travel and establishing
transit-ready and transit/pedestrian/bicycle-friendly communities. These
principles include providing parking in the rear, locating buildings closer to
the street, creating front porches to promote safety, providing pedestrian
linkages, and establishing neighborhood greens or meeting areas.
Quillen DRI, Martin County; Application for Development Approval (ADA), (interagency
memorandum), Florida Department of Transportation, Planning and Environmental
Management District Four, Ft. Lauderdale, May 11, 2006, pages 3-4.
Appendix H | Glossary Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
Appendix H
Glossary
Note: Italicized words and phrases in the Handbook are defined in this glossary.
Access Management The control and regulation of the spacing and design of driveways, medians, median
openings, traffic signals and intersections on arterial roads to improve safe and efficient
traffic flow on the road system.
Accessibility The dimension of mobility that addresses the ease in which travelers can engage in desired
activities.
ADA Review A thorough review of the applicants estimate of transportation impacts anticipated by the
proposed DRI. The most comprehensive opportunity for the FDOT reviewer to let other
review agencies know about transportation concerns.
Adverse Impact When a roadway is significantly impacted and the LOS on the roadway with the
development trips is below the adopted LOS standard.
Analysis Period The analysis period should be related to expected peaking patterns of demand on the
roadway and anticipated development traffic (usually a peak-hour analysis).
Analysis Years The years agreed to analyze transportation impacts. They should be clearly defined in the
report and agreed to during the methodology process.
Annual average daily The volume passing a point or segment of a roadway in both directions for 1 year divided by
traffic (AADT) the number of days in the year.
Application for The applicant provides review agencies with the information needed to make a sufficiency
Development Approval determination. After reviewing the submittal, the agency can either determine that the
(ADA) submittal is sufficient (no additional information is needed) or request additional
information Rule 73C-40.022, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.).
Area type In this Handbook a general categorization of an extent of surface based primarily on the
degree of urbanization.
Arterial 1) A signalized roadway that primarily serves thru traffic with average signalized
intersection spacing of 2.0 miles or less.
2) A state facility that is not on freeway.
3) A type of roadway based on FDOT functional classification.
ARTPLAN FDOTs arterial planning software for calculating level of service and service volume tables
for interrupted flow roadways.
Assignment The various trips are placed on the transportation network, including the number of trips,
their origins and destinations, and travel mode.
Auto Same as automobile.
Automobile 1) A motorized vehicle with 4 or less wheels touching the pavement during normal
operation.
2) In this Handbook, all motorized vehicle traffic using a roadway, except for buses.
Auxiliary lane An additional lane on a freeway connecting an on ramp of one interchange to the off ramp
of the downstream interchange.
Average daily traffic The total traffic volume during a given time period (more than a day and less than a year)
divided by the number of days in that time period.
Background Traffic The traffic that includes the expected increase from overall growth in through traffic as well
as traffic from other developments in the study area.
Base year The model is calibrated to accurately represent the current conditions.
Bicycle A mode of travel with two wheels in tandem, propelled by human power.
Bicycle lane A portion of roadway or path for bicycles.
Bicycle LOS Model The operational methodology from which this Handbooks bicycle quality/level of service
analyses are based.
Blended Methods The use of model methods to determine distribution percentages of vehicles is common in
combination with manual assignment processes.
Boundaries In this Handbook the geographical limits associated with FDOTs Level of Service Standards
for the State Highway System or its MPO Administrative Manual.
Build-Up Method Identifies all trips associated with vested developments in the study area, assigns those trips
to the study area transportation system, and then adds the background through traffic.
Bus A self-propelled, rubber-tired roadway vehicle designed to carry a substantial number of
passengers and traveling on a scheduled fixed route.
Bus stop An area where bus passengers wait for, board, alight, and transfer.
Capacity The maximum number of vehicles that can pass a point in a one hour time period under
prevailing roadway, traffic and control conditions.
Capital Improvements Adopted and updated to reflect the timing and funding of capital projects to meet and
Element (CIE) maintain adopted LOS standards for all infrastructure.
Class Same as roadway class.
Collector A roadway providing land access and traffic circulation with residential, commercial and
industrial areas.
Community In this Handbook outside of an urban or urbanized area, an incorporated place or a
developed but unincorporated area with a population of 500 or more identified in the
appropriate local government comprehensive plan.
Community Capture Extends the application of internal capture to include potential trip interactions and
reductions within the boundaries of large scale, multi-use developments.
Community Capture Detailed needs of elements such as origin and destination studies, trip generation studies,
Monitoring and an evaluation of land use mixes in the community and surrounding the community.
Conceptual planning Same as preliminary engineering.
Concurrency A systematic process utilized by local governments to ensure that new development does
not occur unless adequate infrastructure is in place to support growth.
Concurrency Designated in a local government comprehensive plan and must be a compact geographic
Management Areas area with an existing network of roads where multiple, viable alternative travel paths or
(CMA) modes are available for common trips.
Concurrency Official government plan to manage and pay for growth.
Management Systems
(CMS)
Congestion Condition in which traffic demand approaches or exceeds the available capacity of the
transportation facility(ies).
Context-Sensitive Proactive, collaborative, interdisciplinary approach to transportation decision making,
Solutions (CSS) project development, and implementation, taking into account, the views of stakeholders,
and the local area where a project will exist, be operated, and be maintained.
Corridor A set of essentially parallel transportation facilities for moving people and goods between
two points.
Critical hour The period that has the highest combination of development and background traffic.
CUBE Voyager FSUTMS The Cube Voyager Modeling software used by Florida to forecast travel demand.
D factor Same as directional distribution factor.
Daily tables In this Handbook, Service Volume Tables presented in terms of annual average daily traffic.
Data Collection The collection, assembly, analysis and presentation of all data. Includes proposed site
development characteristics, existing transportation systems data, existing traffic counts and
land use and demographic data.
Deficiency In general, defined under Section 163.3182, F.S., transportation deficiency means an
identified need where the existing and projected extent of traffic volume exceeds the level
of service standard adopted in a local government comprehensive plan for a transportation
facility.
For local governments which have chosen to continue implementation of transportation

concurrency, the term transportation deficiency means a facility or facilities on which
the adopted level-of-service standard is exceeded by the existing, committed, and vested
trips, plus additional projected background trips from any source other than the
development project under review, and trips that are forecast by established traffic
standards, including traffic modeling, consistent with the University of Floridas Bureau of
Economic and Business Research medium population projections. Additional projected
background trips are to be coincident with the particular stage or phase of development
under review pursuant to Section 163.3180(5)(h)4., F.S.
Demand The number of persons or vehicles desiring service on a roadway.
Demographic Data Intensity, population, employment, comprehensive plan data and zoning requirements.
Dense Urban Land Area Any jurisdiction, established under Section 380.06(29), Florida Statutes (F.S.), that meets the
following criteria:
a) A municipality that has an average of at least 1,000 people per square mile of land area
and a minimum total population of at least 5,000;
b) A county, including the municipalities located therein, which has an average of at least
1,000 people per square mile of land area; or
c) A county, including the municipalities located therein, which has a population of at least
1 million. Miami-Dade and Broward Counties are the exceptions.
Development of A development which, because of its character, magnitude, or location, would substantially
regional impact (DRI) affect the health, safety, or welfare of citizens of more than one county in Florida, as defined
in Section 380.06(1), F.S., and implemented by Rule 73C-40, F.A.C.
Directional distribution The proportion of an hours total volume occurring in the higher volume direction.
factor (D)
Diverted trips Similar to pass-by trips, however, vehicles use a segment of the roadway system that they
previously were not using.
Divided As used in the Generalized Tables, a roadway with a median.
DRI Amendments An amendment to a development which, because of its character, magnitude, or location,
would substantially affect the health, safety, or welfare of citizens of more than one county
in Florida, as defined in Section 380.06(1), F.S., implemented by Rule 73C-40, F.A.C., and
coordinated by the regional planning agency.
DRI Reports Required reports that summarize information describing any changes that have been made
to the development plan during the reporting period, information about the master plan,
lands purchased, permitting, and local government, and a summary of each development
order condition and when each commitment has been complied with.
Evaluation and An audit of a local governments successes and failures in implementing its comprehensive
Appraisal Report (EAR) plan. The EAR is prepared every seven years to evaluate and update a LGCP (s.163.3191, FS).
It is the first step in updating the comprehensive plan.
Existing Conditions The analysis developed to assess current conditions and establish a basis for comparison to
future conditions.
Factor A value by which a given quantity is multiplied, divided, added or subtracted in order to
indicate a difference in measurement.
FDOT Florida Department of Transportation.
FHWA Federal Highway Administration.
Future Land Use Map Communitys visual guide to future planning.
(FLUM)
Freeway A multilane, divided highway with at least 2 lanes for exclusive use of traffic in each direction
and full control of ingress and egress.
FSUTMS Florida Standard Urban Transportation Modeling System.
Floridas software that forecasts travel demand.
Functional classification The assignment of roads into systems according to the character of service they provide in
relation to the total road network.
Future Conditions Determines if the transportation system will operate acceptably with the additional site-
Analysis generated trips and, if not, what mitigation may be required.
Future Land Use Includes goals, objectives and policies and a Future Land Use Map that implement the
Element jurisdictions desired land use pattern.
Future Year Conditions The Future Background Conditions for a future horizon year that does not include the
proposed development.
General Transportation Include: Analysis periods, Trip Generation, Current traffic conditions, Future traffic
Factors conditions, current and future development, and comprehensive plans.
Generalized planning A broad type of planning application such as statewide analyses, initial problem
identification, and future year analyses; typically performed by use of the Generalized
Tables.
Generalized Service Maximum service volumes based on areawide roadway, traffic and control variables and
Volume Tables presented in tabular form.
Generalized Tables Same as Generalized Service Volume Tables.
Growth management The ideas necessary for use in planning for urban growth so as to responsibly balance the
concepts growth of the infrastructure required to support a communitys residential and commercial
growth with the protection of its natural systems (land, air, water).
Growth Rate/ Uses historic trends to predict future growth.
Trend Method
Guideline Based on FDOTs Standard Operating System (Topic No: 025-020-002-j), a recommended
process intended to provide efficiency and uniformity to the implementation of policies,
procedures, and standards; a guideline is intended to provide general program direction
with maximum flexibility.
HCM Same as Highway Capacity Manual.
Heavy vehicle A FHWA vehicle classification of 4 or higher, essentially vehicles with more than 4 wheels
touching the pavement during normal operation.
High-occupancy vehicle A freeway lane reserved for the use of vehicles with a preset minimum number of
(HOV) lane occupants; such vehicles often include buses, taxis, and carpools.
Highway 1) A generic term meaning the same as roadway.

2) A roadway with all the transportation elements within the right-of-way.
Highway Capacity The Transportation Research Board document on highway capacity and quality of service.
Manual (HCM)
Highway Capacity A software package faithfully replicating the Highway Capacity Manual.
Software (HCS)
Internal Capture The number of trips that occur inside the development and don't impact existing roads
outside the development.
Internal Circulation Good internal circulation of a land development is designed with respect to highway access
point(s) rather than the building(s).
Land Use Future land use classification.
Large Scale Plan Any change in text to the Comprehensive Plan or any change in the future land use map.
Amendment
Large Scale In Florida, the FSUTMS Model is used.
Transportation Model
Large urbanized area An MPO urbanized area greater than 1,000,000 population; in Florida these 7 areas consist
of the following central cities: Ft. Lauderdale, Jacksonville, Miami, Orlando, St. Petersburg,
Tampa, and West Palm Beach.
Level of service (LOS) A quantitative stratification of the quality of service to a typical traveler of a service or
facility into six letter grade levels, with A describing the highest quality and F describing
the lowest quality; a discrete stratification of a quality of service continuum.
Level of service (LOS) A quantitative examination of traveler quality of service provided by a transportation facility
analysis or service.
Level of Service Same as Level of Service Standards for the State Highway System.
Standards
Level of Service FDOTs Policy Topic No. 000-525-006-a to be used in the planning and operation of the State
Standards for the State Highway System.
Highway System
Local Government Any county or municipal plan that meets the requirements of Sections 163.3177, 163.3178,
Comprehensive Plan 163.3180, 163.3191, 163.3245, and 163.3248, F.S., as well as with the principles for guiding
(LGCP) development in areas designated as areas of critical state concern and Chapter 369, Part III,
F.S.
Local Government Draft FDOTs final opportunity to ensure that mobility on SIS/SHS segments located in the project
Development Order impact area has been adequately addressed. The purpose is to resolve any outstanding
Review issues before the DO is rendered.
LOS Same as level of service.
LOSPLAN FDOTs LOSPLAN software which includes ARTPLAN, FREEPLAN, and HIGHPLAN preliminary
engineering computer programs.
LOS standards Same as Level of Service Standards for the State Highway System.
Maintain Continuing operating conditions at a level that prevents significant degradation. In terms of
transportation concurrency, this applies to local governments which have chosen to
continue implementation.
Manual Methods Manual methods of trip distribution that provide the analyst with a basic understanding of
the travel patterns associated with the development.
Maximum service The highest number of vehicles for a given level of service.
volume
Median Areas typically at least 10 feet wide that are restrictive or non-restrictive that separate
opposing-direction mid-block traffic lanes and that, on arterials, contain turn lanes that
allow left turning vehicles to exit from the thru traffic lanes.
Methodology An essential component in any traffic impact analysis. It defines the data, techniques,
Development practices, and assumptions that will be used while preparing a transportation impact
analysis.
Mitigation Specific design commitments made during the environmental evaluation and study process
that serve to moderate or lessen impacts deriving from the proposed action. These
measures may include planning and development commitments, environmental measures,
right-of-way improvements, and agreements with resource or other agencies to effect
construction or post construction action.
Mixed-Use Same as multi-use developments. Contain a mix of land uses.
Developments
MMTDs Multimodal Transportation District: An area in which secondary priority is given to vehicle
mobility and primary priority is given to assuring a safe, comfortable, and attractive
pedestrian environment, with convenient interconnection to transit. Applies to local
governments that have designated and implemented these areas prior to legislative changes
in 2011.
Mobility The movement of people and goods.
Mode Particular form of transportation, such as automobile, transit, carpool, ship, and bicycle.
Mode Split The travel mode percentages (automobile, transit, walking, etc.) used by site-generated
trips.
Mode Split/ Alternative Separating the predicted trips from each origin zone to match each destination zone into
Travel Forecasts distinct travel modes (walking, biking, driving, train, bus).
Model Method Involves the use of a computerized large scale travel demand model, such as FSUTMS.
Model Volumes The number of vehicles, and occasionally persons, passing a point on a roadway during a
specified time period, often 1 hour; a volume may be measured or estimated, either of
which could be a constrained value or a hypothetical demand volume.
MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization.
Multimodal In this Handbook more than one highway mode.
Multimodal Mobility Same as multimodal transportation.
Options Alternatives to the single-occupant vehicle. Some alternatives include walking, cycling,
carpooling, boating, paratransit, taxi, light rail and transit.
Multimodal An area in which secondary priority is given to vehicle mobility and primary priority is given
Transportation District to assuring a safe, comfortable, and attractive pedestrian environment, with convenient
interconnection to transit. Applies to local governments that have designated and
implemented these areas prior to legislative changes in 2011.
Multi-Use Same as mixed-use developments. Contain a mix of land uses.
Developments
Neo-Traditional Provides a mix of land uses to serve residential needs and by providing a community design
Developments that supports walking and alternative modes of travel.
Non-state roadway A roadway not on the State Highway System.
NOPC Notice of Proposed Change: A report that is required to be submitted by the applicant to the
local government, the RPC and DEO when a change is proposed to a previously approved DRI.
Off peak The course of the lower flow of traffic.
OMD FDOT District 4 Office of Modal Development.
Operational analysis A detailed analysis of a roadways present or future level of service, as opposed to a
generalized planning analysis or preliminary engineering analysis.
Operational Efficiency Occurs when the right combination of people, process, and technology come together to
enhance the productivity and value of any business operation, while driving down the cost
of routine operations to a desired level.
Pass-by Trips Currently on the roadway system and pass directly by a generator on the way to the primary
destination.
Peak direction The course of the higher flow of traffic.
Peak hour In this Handbook a 1 hour time period with high volume.
Peak season The 13 consecutive weeks with the highest daily volumes for an area.
PSWADT Peak Season Weekday Average Daily Traffic:
The average daily traffic for Monday through Friday during the peak season.
Pedestrian An individual traveling on foot.
Pedestrian LOS Model The operational methodology from which the Q/LOS Handbooks pedestrian quality/level of
service analyses are based.
Performance measure A qualitative or quantitative factor used to evaluate a particular aspect of travel quality.
Planning application In this Handbook the use of default values and simplifying assumptions to an operational
model to address a roadways present or future level of service.
Pre-application Conducted to identify issues, coordinate appropriate State and local agency requirements,
Conference promote a proper and efficient review of the proposed development, and ensure that RPC
staff are aware of all the issues to which reviewing agencies will require the applicant to
respond.
Primary trips Trips made for the specific purpose of visiting the generator.
Proportionate Share Provides a way for developers to mitigate the impacts of proposed development on
significantly impacted state and regional roadways and allows a contribution from
developers to the governmental agency that has maintenance for the transportation facility
in order to satisfy transportation concurrency requirements according to Section 163.3180,
F.S. Examples of proportionate fair-share mitigation may include the contribution of private
funds, contributions of land, and/or construction and contribution of facilities.
QOS Same as quality of service.
Quality of service (QOS) A user based perception of how well a service or facility is operating.
Quality/level of service A combination of the broad quality of service and more detailed level of service concepts.
(Q/LOS)
Recommendations and Upon completion of the DRI ADA review, the FDOT reviewer should develop
Conditions recommendations to ensure the developer mitigates the impact of the DRI on the
transportation system. The development of recommendations and conditions is intended to
document the agreements discussed during the ADA review process.
Rendered Development Once the development order is rendered by the local government, it is the FDOTs
Order Review responsibility to ensure that all commitments are contained within the LGDO.
Roadway A general categorization of an open way for persons and vehicles to traverse; in this
Handbook it encompasses streets, arterials, freeways, highways and other facilities.
Roadway class Categories of arterials and two-lane highways; arterials are primarily grouped by signal
density or speed; two-lane highways are primarily grouped by area type.
Route As used in the Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual, a designated, specified path
to which a bus is assigned.
RPC Assessment Report Formal Assessment Report detailing recommendations to the local government, the
Developer, and DCA on the regional impact of the proposed development.
(Also referred to as Regional Report and Recommendations 9J-2.024)
Scheduled fixed route In this Handbook bus service provided on a repetitive, fixed-schedule basis along a specific
route with buses stopping to pick up and deliver passengers to specific locations.
Service measure A specific performance measure used to assign a level of service to a set of operating
conditions for a transportation facility or service.
Service volume Same as maximum service volume.
Service Volume Table Maximum service volumes based on roadway, traffic and control variables and presented in
tabular form.
Sidewalk A paved walkway for pedestrians at the side of a roadway.
Signal A traffic control device regulating the flow of traffic with green, yellow and red indications.
Significance Testing Determined by considering the percentage of traffic on a roadway segment that is
generated by the development during the peak hour in relationship to the maximum service
volume at the LOS standard for the facility during the same period.
Site Access Accommodation of automobiles, buses, pedestrians, bicycles and other modes of
transportation to a given site.
Site Development The location of the proposed development, site boundaries and other site related
Characteristics characteristics.
Special Generator Uses a combination of ITE Trip Generation and FSUTMS.
Method The trips in the model are adjusted to match the ITE trip generation rate.
Special or Unusual One that cannot be adequately described by ITE Trip Generation Report.
Generator
Standard A Florida Department of Transportation formally established criterion for a specific or
special activity to achieve a desired level of quality.
Standards Same as Statewide Minimum Level of Service Standards for the State Highway System.
State Highway System All roadways that the Florida Department of Transportation operates and maintains; the
(SHS) State Highway System consists of the Florida Intrastate Highway System and other state
roads.
Statute A written law enacted by a duly organized and constituted legislative body.
Strategic Intermodal Floridas system of transportation facilities and serves of statewide and interregional
System (SIS) significance.
Study Area Same as traffic impact area or simply the impact area.
The area affected by a new development.
Study period An hour period on which to base quality/level of service analyses of a facility or service.
A length in time including a future year of analysis.
Sufficiency The determination that the applicant has supplied all of the necessary information in order
to assess the development's regional impacts. Sufficiency can either be declared by an
applicant (after responding to two requests for additional information by the RPC) or by the
reviewing agencies.
System A combination of facilities or services forming a network.

A combination of facilities selected for analysis.
System Capacity The maximum number of vehicles that can reasonably be expected to pass over a lane or a
roadway during a given time period under prevailing roadway and traffic conditions.
Typically, the maximum expressway capacity for automobiles is 2,000 vehicles per lane per
hour.
Traffic A characteristic associated with the flow of vehicles.
Traffic Analysis Zone A geographic unit of analysis used to aggregate socioeconomic data (household and
(TAZ) employment data).
Traffic Attenuation As traffic from a specific site travels longer distances, the number of those site generated
trips attenuate (drop) because more and more people reach their final destinations.
Traffic Counts Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) counts.
Transit Capacity and The document and operational methodology from which the Q/LOS Handbooks bus
Quality of Service quality/level of service analyses are based.
Manual (TCQSM)
Transit system structure The Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manuals analytical methodology of transit stops,
route segments, and system.
Transitioning In the text of this Handbook, the same as transitioning area.
Transitioning area An area that exhibits characteristics between rural and urbanized/urban.
Transitioning/urban The grouping of transitioning areas and urban areas into one analysis category in the
Generalized Tables and software.
Transit-Oriented A mixed-use residential or commercial area designed to maximize access to public transport
Developments as defined under Section 163.3164(46), F.S.
Transportation An urban area delineated by a local government where infill and redevelopment are
Concurrency Exception encouraged, and where exceptions to the transportation concurrency requirement are
Areas (TCEA) made, providing that alternative modes of transportation, land use mixes, urban design,
connectivity, and funding are addressed. Applies to local governments that have designated
and implemented these areas prior to legislative changes in 2011.
Transportation A geographically compact area designated in a local government comprehensive plan where
Concurrency intensive development exists, or is planned, so as to ensure adequate mobility and further
Management Area the achievement of identified important state planning goals and policies, including
(TCMA) discouraging the proliferation of urban sprawl, encouraging the revitalization of an existing
downtown and any designated redevelopment area, protecting natural resources,
protecting historic resources, maximizing the efficient use of existing public facilities, and
promoting public transit, bicycling, walking, and other alternatives to the single-occupant
automobile. Applies to local governments that have designated and implemented these
areas prior to legislative changes in 2011.
Transportation demand Includes current and historical traffic volumes, turning movement counts, traffic
data characteristics such as peaking and directional factors, ridership data, and bicycle and
pedestrian activity.
Transportation Element Goals, objectives and policies creating the jurisdictions transportation system.
Transportation Technical discussions take place regarding the details of the applicants methodology to
Methodology Meeting answer Question 21 of the ADA. Before the Transportation Methodology meeting, the
applicant prepares a detailed transportation methodology to be submitted to the reviewing
agencies.
Transportation (M & M) A method of ensuring the traffic impacts to any regional roadway affected by a
Monitoring and development of regional impact (DRI) do not fall below its adopted level of service (or other
Modeling Studies performance standard).
Transportation These studies usually require the collection and analysis of transportation data to verify
Monitoring Studies assumptions associated with internal capture (or community capture if applicable),
background growth rates, and other assumptions made during the ADA. The studies are
usually required by a condition in the development order.
Transportation System Include the physical and functional characteristics of the transportation system.
Data
Travel time The average time spent by vehicles traversing a roadway.
Trip End A single or one-direction vehicle movement with either the origin or the destination inside
the study site and one origin or destination external to the land use.
Trip Assignment Determines the amount of traffic that will use each access point and route on the roadway
network and determines the number of site-generated turning and through movements at
each intersection and roadway segment of the study area network.
Trip Distribution Trip-making characteristics between the proposed development and off-site areas to
determine trip origins and destinations.
Trip Generation The number and type of trips associated with site development.
Trip Generation Trip generation fitted equations based on data collected.
Equations
Trip Generation Rates Weighted average trip generation rate based on one unit of independent variable.
Trip Types Three types of trips generated by ITE trip generation:
1) Primary trips
2) Pass-by trips
3) Diverted trips
Truck In this Handbook the same as heavy vehicle.
Two-way Movement allowed in either direction.
Undivided As used in the Generalized Tables, a roadway with no median.
Urban area a) A place with a population between 5,000 and 50,000 and not in an urbanized area.
b) A general characterization of places where people live and work.
Urban infill A land development strategy aimed at directing higher density residential and mixed-use
development to available sites in developed areas to maximize the use of adequate existing
infrastructure; often considered an alternative to low density land development.
Urbanized area An area within an MPOs designated urbanized area boundary. The minimum population for
an urbanized area is 50,000 people.
v/c The ratio of demand flow rate to capacity of a signalized intersection, segment or facility.
Vehicle A motorized mode of transportation.
Volume In this Handbook usually the number of vehicles, and occasionally persons, passing a point
on a roadway during a specified time period, often 1 hour; a volume may be measured or
estimated, either of which could be a constrained value or a hypothetical demand volume.
ZDATA Socioeconomic data input to FSUTMS.
1st Request for After a review to determine if an ADA is sufficient, a request for the applicant to provide
Additional Information additional information.
1st Sufficiency Sufficiency is the determination that the applicant has supplied all of the necessary
Determination information in order to assess the development's regional impacts. Sufficiency can either be
declared by an applicant or by the reviewing agencies.
2nd Request for Similar to the ADA Review/1st Request for Additional Information, the applicant will provide
Additional Information written responses to the agencys 1st Request for Additional Information and provide the
responses for agency review.
2nd Sufficiency RPCs have the responsibility to coordinate with all affected agencies with regard to both the
Determination notification and coordination of the review.
Appendix I | Websites and Links Transportation Site Impact Handbook April 2014
Appendix I
FDOT Transportation Site Impact Handbook Website and Document URLs
The FDOTTransportationImpactHandbook.com website is maintained by the FDOT Systems Planning Office to support the
Transportation Site Impact Handbook. The handbook is designed to be a work in progress that is updated as required.
The document contains many URLs to resource materials on the internet. In order to minimize the number of broken
links that occur as websites change over time, many of the .pdf documents were copied to a centralized location. This
appendix is a listing of the URLs to the documents. The bit.ly/ link is a shortened URL that accesses the current location of
the document in the RESOURCES tab of the website. The website is organized with the following tabs:
HOME The latest copy of the Transportation Site Impact Handbook is linked from the HOME
page. The recommended practice is to right click, and save the document to your
computer. When the document is opened in Acrobat, and a link is clicked, it will
open a window in a browser. This will make navigation easy between the two
windows.
NOTES Previous versions of the handbook will be listed here.
RESOURCES Brief descriptions and links to the documents referenced in the handbook. They are
listed in different categories, as well as a complete list of documents.
PRESENTATIONS Supporting audio/visual presentations that explain specific topics. As new
presentations are developed, this section will be updated.
TRAINING Schedule of upcoming training events.
CONTACTS List of District and Central Office contacts for more information
All Statutes found within the www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?Mode=View%20Statutes&Submenu=1&Tab=statutes

Transportation Site Impact &CFID=158342927&CFTOKEN=11600739
Handbook can be located at: bit.ly/cVEjkA
All Administrative Codes found https://www.flrules.org/notice/search.asp
within the Transportation Site bit.ly/cnkFlv
Impact Handbook:
Chapter 1
Transportation Site Impact FDOTTransportationImpactHandbook.com
Handbook Website: bit.ly/FDOTTSIH
DEOs website: www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-development

www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/programs/sm/los/pdfs/2013%20QLOS%20Handbook.pdf
Quality/Level of Service Handbook:
bit.ly/1fmUCjc
Incorporate Transit into the FDOT teachamerica.com/TIH/PDF/77703.pdf
DRI Review Process: bit.ly/d544uU
How We Shall Grow: www.myregion.org/

How Shall We Grow PDF: www.myregion.org/clientuploads/pdfs/HSWG_final.pdf
www.floridajobs.org/frequently-asked-questions-directory/frequently-asked-
DEO FAQs: questions/category/95b6d798-fea4-4d0c-8780-0d58825a5cad/x
www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-development/programs/comprehensive-
Reorganization Chapter 163, planning/amendment-submittal-and-processing-guidelines/community-planning-act-
Part II, F.S.: summaries/reorganization-of-chapter-163-florida-statutes
http://bit.ly/1dnFV0D
Chapter 2
Mike on Traffic: mikeontraffic.com/how-to-professionally-review-a-traffic-study/
TCQSM: www.trb.org/main/blurbs/153590.aspx
NCHRP Report 616: teachamerica.com/TIH/PDF/nchrp_rpt_616.pdf
2010 Highway Capacity Manual: www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/164718.asp
https://www.flrules.org/gateway/readFile.asp?sid=0&tid=0&cno=14-
Rule 14-96, F.A.C.: 96&caid=250859&type=4&file=14-96.doc
bit.ly/1nNTDhH
https://www.flrules.org/gateway/readFile.asp?sid=0&tid=0&cno=14-
Rule 14-97, F.A.C.: 97&caid=250956&type=4&file=14-97.doc
bit.ly/1jfQ8ia
www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/programs/sm/transition/information/default.shtm
FDOT Standard K Factor: bit.ly/1gq5dpP
FDOT Project Traffic Forecasting www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/statistics/trafficdata/ptf.pdf
Handbook: teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/2012ptf.pdf
Transportation Concurrency Best teachamerica.com/TIH/PDF/TCBP.pdf

Practices (DCA 2007): bit.ly/a3Bsg3
Producing a TDP: teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/ProducingaTDP.pdf

Framework for TOD: teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/FrameworkTOD_0715.pdf
FTI Request Form: www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/statistics/trafficdata/fti.shtm
Florida Traffic Online: www2.dot.state.fl.us/FloridaTrafficOnline/viewer.html
teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/2013QLOSHandbook.pdf
Quality/Level of Service Handbook:
bit.ly/1kTDIun
Mike on Traffic: www.mikeontraffic.com/top-9-things-to-review-with-a-field-visit/
Mike on Traffic: www.mikeontraffic.com/11-items-to-get-from-aerials-when-preparing-for-a-field-visit/
Incorporate Transit into the FDOT teachamerica.com/TIH/PDF/77703.pdf
DRI Review Process: bit.ly/d544uU
Multimodal Trade-off Analysis in teachamerica.com/TIH/PDF/Multimodal_Tradeoff.pdf
Traffic Impact Studies: bit.ly/dg69In
LOS Procedure 525-000-006: www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/programs/sm/los/pdfs/LOS%20Procedure.pdf
Interchange Access Request: www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/programs/sm/intjus/default.shtm
A/V Trip Generation Presentation teachamerica.com/GrowthManagement/13-TripGenerationBasics&Pitfalls/
ITE Trip Generation Manual: http://www.ite.org/tripgeneration/trippubs.asp
A/V Pass by Trips Presentation: teachamerica.com/growthmanagement/15-Pass-byTrips/index.htm
Transit Oriented Development: www.fltod.com/
Accessing Transit Handbook: teachamerica.com/TIH/PDF/2008_Transit_Handbook.pdf
FDOT Public Transit Office: www.dot.state.fl.us/transit/
Internal Capture Example (3 uses): teachamerica.com/TIH/PDF/2013Kaku.pdf
Internal Capture Example (4 uses): teachamerica.com/TIH/PDF/2013kakuExample.xls
A/V Internal Capture teachamerica.com/growthmanagement/14InternalCapture/
FDOT Research Documents: www.dot.state.fl.us/research-center/documents.shtm
teachamerica.com/TIH/PDF/nchrp_rpt_684.pdf
NCHRP 684:
onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_684.pdf
Excel Spreadsheet NCHRP 684: onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_684.xlsx

http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/programs/sm/siteimp/PDFs/capturemeth.pdf
Community Capture:
bit.ly/1oFfpRA
A/V Background Traffic and Trends: teachamerica.com/GrowthManagement/12BackgroundTraffic&Trends/
Traffic Trends Analysis Tool: teachamerica.com/TIH/PDF/Trend-V02_XML.xls
FHWA Travel Monitoring: www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/travel_monitoring/tvt.cfm
A/V Modeling Methods: http://teachamerica.com/GrowthManagement/18-ModelingMethods/
FSUTMS online: www.fsutmsonline.net/online_training/index.html
A/V Manual Distribution: teachamerica.com/GrowthManagement/17-ManualDistribution/
Transit Boardings Estimation Tool: www.tbest.org/
NCHRP 255 teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/nchrp255.pdf
NCHRP 255 Webinar: fhwa.na3.acrobat.com/p95484356/
Turns 5: teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/turns5-V02_XML.xls
Driveway Information Guide: www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/programs/sm/accman/pdfs/driveway2008.pdf
Technical Resources on Access
www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/programs/sm/accman/default.shtm
Management:
NCHRP Report 616: teachamerica.com/TIH/PDF/nchrp_rpt_616.pdf
A/V Standard Site Impact Process teachamerica.com/GrowthManagement/11StandardSiteImpactProcesss/
Performance Measures: www.dot.state.fl.us/research-center/Completed_Proj/Summary_PL/FDOT_BDK77_977-14_rpt.pdf
Transit Guidelines: teachamerica.com/TIH/PDF/77703.pdf
Multimodal Guidelines: teachamerica.com/TIH/PDF/Multimodal_Tradeoff.pdf
Highway Capacity Manual: www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/164718.aspx
FDOT Interchange Handbook: www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/programs/sm/intjus/default.shtm
ITE Traffic Impact Analyses: www.ite.org/emodules/scriptcontent/Orders/ProductDetail.cfm?pc=RP-020D
teachamerica.com/TIH/PDF/2008_Transit_Handbook.pdf
Accessing Transit: bit.ly/bH78M4
Transit Cooperative Research 144.171.11.107/Main/Public/Blurbs/153590.aspx
Program (TCRP) Report 100: bit.ly/aDLDdt
Chapter 3
Floridas Growth Management Act: www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&URL=Ch0163/part02.
htm&StatuteYear=2009&Title=%2D%3E2009%2D%3EChapter%20163%2D%3EPart%20II
Procedure 525-010-101: www2.dot.state.fl.us/proceduraldocuments/procedures/bin/525010101.pdf
Florida Statutes: www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm
Florida Administrative Code: https://www.flrules.org/
Expedited State Review Flowchart: www.floridajobs.org/fdcp/dcp/Procedures/Files/ExpeditedStateReviewProcessFlowchart.pdf
State Coordinated Review Flowchart: www.floridajobs.org/fdcp/dcp/Procedures/Files/StateCoordinatedReviewProcessFlowchart.pdf
Objections, Recommendations and
Comments, Reports, Notices of Intent dca.deo.myflorida.com/finddocumentsonline/
and Public School Interlocal Agreements:
Guide to the Annual Update of the www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-development/programs/technical-
Capital Improvements Element: assistance/planning-initiatives/infrastructure-planning/capital-improvements-element
bit.ly/1fWiRVW
Sample Spreadsheet on Information for www.cutr.usf.edu/research/access_m/pdf/CMS.xls
Concurrency Management Systems: bit.ly/9PKn7T
District Review of Local Government www2.dot.state.fl.us/proceduraldocuments/procedures/bin/525010101.pdf
Comprehensive Plans: bit.ly/cioJs9
Practices Guide: bit.ly/a3Bsg3
Florida Administrative Code Rule 73C-40: https://www.flrules.org/gateway/readFile.asp?sid=0&tid=0&cno=73C-
40&caid=609565&type=4&file=73C-40.doc
Escambia County Example: myescambia.com/business/ds/optional-sector-plan
Collier County Example: www.colliergov.net/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=30764
GIS Based CMS for Local Government: www.dca.state.fl.us/fdcp/dcp/transportation/Files/GISBasedCMSLocalGovt.pdf
MMTD QOS Handbook: teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/MMAreawideQOS1211.pdf
Model Regulations and Plan teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/MMTD%20Model%20Regs.pdf
Amendments for Multimodal bit.ly/c1bNwQ
Transportation Districts Report:
Transit Development Plan: www.dot.state.fl.us/transit/Pages/Draft Guidance for Producing a TDP.doc
Framework for Transit Oriented www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-development/programs /technical-
Development: assistance/planning-initiatives/urban-planning/transit-oriented-development
bit.ly/TOD_framework
FDOT Policy Planning resources: www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/policy/community/
FDOT Q/LOS resources: www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/sm/los/default.shtm
TOD in Florida website www.fltod.com/research_and_case_studies.htm
Institute of Transportation Engineers www.ite.org/
SIS and Emerging SIS facilities www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/programs/mspi/brochures/default.shtm
Reconnecting America reconnectingamerica.org/
Framework for Transit Oriented teachamerica.com/tih/pdf/FrameworkTOD_0715.pdf
Development
A Citizen's Guide to Better Streets teachamerica.com/tih/pdf/How_to_Engage_Your_Transportation_Agency_AARP.pdf
Comprehensive Plan Amendment www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-development/programs/ comprehensive-
Submittal and Processing Guidelines: planning/amendment-submittal-and-processing-guidelines
Evaluation and Appraisal Reports- www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-development/programs/comprehensive-

Division of Community Planning: planning/evaluation-and-appraisal-of-comprehensive-plans
bit.ly/1dab082
Capital Improvement Elements- Division www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-development/programs/technical-
of Community Planning: assistance/planning-initiatives/infrastructure-planning/capital-improvements-element
bit.ly/1fWiRVW
Developments of Regional Impact (DRI) www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-development/programs/ developments-of-
and Florida Quality Developments: regional-impact-and-florida-quality-developments
Sector Planning Program: www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-development/programs/t echnical-
assistance/planning-initiatives/rural-planning/sector-planning-program
Transportation Planning: www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-development/programs/ technical-
assistance/planning-initiatives/infrastructure-planning/transportation-planning
Transit Oriented Development: www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-development/programs/ technical-
assistance/planning-initiatives/urban-planning/transit-oriented-development
Mobility Fees: www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-development/programs/ technical-
assistance/planning-initiatives/urban-planning/mobility-fees
Rural Land Stewardship Area Program: www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-development/programs/ technical-
assistance/planning-initiatives/rural-planning/rural-land-stewardship-area-program
DEO Community Planning: www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-development
Chapter 4
List of Dense Urban Land Areas: www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-development/programs/developments-of-
regional-impact-and-florida-quality-developments/list-of-local-governments-qualifying-as-
dense-urban-land-areas
bit.ly/1fWDJK1
Guidelines and Performance Measures
to Incorporate Transit and Other teachamerica.com/TIH/PDF/77703.pdf
Multimodal Considerations into the bit.ly/d544uU
FDOT DRI Review Process:
DRI Procedures: https://www.flrules.org/gateway/ChapterHome.asp?Chapter=73C-40
www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-development/programs/developments-of-
DEO DRI web page: regional-impact-and-florida-quality-developments
www.floridajobs.org/community-planning-and-development/programs/comprehensive-
Growth Management and
planning
Comprehensive Planning:
bit.ly/1nB15wo
DEO Residential Thresholds by
www.floridajobs.org/fdcp/dcp/DRIFQD/Files/DRIThreshold.pdf
Population Listing:
Notice of Proposed Change (NOPC) www.floridajobs.org/fdcp/dcp/DRIFQD/Files/NOPC.doc
Annual or Biennial Reports www.floridajobs.org/fdcp/dcp/DRIFQD/Files/BIENNIAL.doc
Incorporate Transit into the FDOT DRI teachamerica.com/TIH/PDF/77703.pdf
Review Process: bit.ly/d544uU
Transportation Demand Management www.nctr.usf.edu/clearinghouse/
Resources:
Interchange Handbook: http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/programs/sm/intjus/default.shtm
Incorporation TDM into the Land www.nctr.usf.edu/pdf/576-11.pdf
Development Process:
Leadership in Energy and Environmental www.usgbc.org/DisplayPage.aspx?CategoryID=19
Design (LEED) Certification: bit.ly/9XEFMH
Model Regulations and Plan www.nctr.usf.edu/pdf/527-07.pdf
Amendments for MMTDs: bit.ly/chf2Ht
Accessing Transit: Design Handbook for teachamerica.com/TIH/PDF/2008_Transit_Handbook.pdf
Florida Bus Passenger Facilities: bit.ly/bH78M4
LYNX Central Florida Mobility Design teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/lynxdocs_mobility_manual.pdf
Manual: bit.ly/aovTKd
LYNX Central Florida Customer Amenities teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/lynxdocs_Amenities_Manual.pdf
Manual: bit.ly/awLbzH
FDOT Districts 1 and 7 Transit Facility teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/fdot_d1_d7_transit_facility_handbook.pdf
Handbook: bit.ly/9t0Jfl
FDOT District 4 Transit Facilities teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/UpdatedD4TransitFacilitiesGuidelines.pdf
Guidelines: bit.ly/cijGPd
teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/transit-design-manual.pdf
Palm Tran Transit Design Manual: bit.ly/drTgo3
Jacksonville Transportation Authority www.jtafla.com/Business/showPage.aspx?Sel=63
Mobility Access Program Handbook
Developer Participation in Providing for teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/Land%20Developer.pdf
Bus Transit Facilities/Operations: bit.ly/dyJsOv
Chapter 5
Lake Sumter MPO Roadway teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/Lane_Constraint_Policy.pdf
Constraint Policy: bit.ly/cN9D0D
Plans Prep Manual: www.dot.state.fl.us/rddesign/PPMManual/2014/Volume1/2014Volume1.pdf

Multimodal Tradeoff Analysis in teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/Multimodal_Tradeoff.pdf
Traffic Impact Studies: bit.ly/c44l1o
Context Sensitive Solutions: www2.dot.state.fl.us/proceduraldocuments/procedures/bin/000650002.pdf

Transportation Proportionate teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/06%20Transportation%20Proportionate%20Share%20Agreement.pdf
Share Agreement: bit.ly/9JllsV
Corridor Preservation Best teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/BestPracticesReport.pdf

Practices: bit.ly/cWowAF
Strategies for Comprehensive teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/ICCM%20FINAL%20NOV%203%202004%20REV.pdf

Corridor Management: bit.ly/c5rM8I
Managing Corridor Development: teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/corridor.pdf

Accomplishing Alternative Access teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/18%20Accomplishing%20Alternative%20Access%20on%20Major%
on Major Transportation Corridors: 20Transportation%20Corridors.pdf bit.ly/aNYhGJ
National TDM Clearinghouse: www.nctr.usf.edu/clearinghouse/

Incorporating TDM into the Land www.nctr.usf.edu/abstracts/abs576-11.htm
Development Process:
Interchange Access Request http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/programs/sm/intjus/default.shtm
Users Guide:
Transit Oriented Development www.dot.state.fl.us/rail/PlanDevel/RSAC/Mtg3files/Delaney%20handout%202.pdf
Design Guidance:
Accessing Transit: Design teachamerica.com/TIH/PDF/2008_Transit_Handbook.pdf
Handbook for Florida Bus bit.ly/bH78M4
Passenger Facilities:
Land Developer Participation in teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/Land%20Developer.pdf
Providing for Bus Transit bit.ly/dyJsOv
Facilities/Operations:
FDOTs Multimodal Transportation
Districts and Area-wide Quality of teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/MMAreawideQOS1211.pdf
Service Handbook.
Model Regulations and Plan teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/MMTD%20Model%20Regs.pdf
Amendments for Multimodal bit.ly/dpMmkO
Transportation Districts:
Procedure on Development of the www2.dot.state.fl.us/proceduraldocuments/procedures/bin/525030250.pdf
Florida Intrastate Highway System: bit.ly/bH10d1
SIS Criteria and Thresholds: teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/AdoptedSISCriteria2010.pdf

Policy on the Geometric Design of https://bookstore.transportation.org/Item_details.aspx?id=110
Streets and Highways, (AASHTO): bit.ly/cHueAj
Transportation Costs: www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/policy/costs/

Model Ordinance for Proportionate teachamerica.com/tih/PDF/model-ordinance.pdf
Fair-Share Mitigation of bit.ly/djSqVJ
Development Impacts :
Practices Guide:
Mobility Fee Methodology: www.floridajobs.org/fdcp/dcp/MobilityFees/Files/CUTRMobilityFeeFinalReport.pdf
Please note that some Adobe Presenter presentations may perform better on Microsoft Internet Explorer than other browsers.

Transportation Site Impact Handbook - April - 2014

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Transportation Site Impact Handbook - April - 2014

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Transportation Site Impact Handbook - April - 2014

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TRANSPORTATION

2 The Transportation Impact Process ............................................................................................................17

2.8 Trip Assignment .........................................................................................................................73

3 Local Government Comprehensive Plan Reviews .......................................................................................87

3.10 Resource Guide. Legal Authority for Department Review......................................................... 118

4 Developments of Regional Impact ........................................................................................................... 125

DRI Checklist 5 | Project Monitoring & Report Review ................................................ 179

5 Mitigation ............................................................................................................................................... 185

1.1 Purpose of Handbook

We have tried to make this handbook as current as possible; however

Transportation A major part of FDOTs role in growth management involves reviewing

Transportation In accordance with Sections 163.3184, 334.044, and 380.06(6), Florida

Local Government Reviews DRI Reviews

DRI ADA Pre-Application

Corridor Management Proportionate Share Preliminary Development Development Orders/

Long-Term Transportation Notices of Proposed

When conducting an analysis, professionals will need to be familiar with the

1.2.1 Why is a Transportation Impact Analysis Needed?

1.2.2 The FDOT Reviewers Role

In order to sustain a professional and constructive review process, FDOT

1.3 About this Handbook

Chapter 1 Introduction: This Chapter provides an overview of the

The Transportation Site Impact Handbook and many of the linked

1.4 Updates to this Handbook

Some major transportation-related changes include:

Redefining the roles of reviewing agencies including DEO, serving as

1.4.1 State Transportation Facilities and Concurrency

2 The Transportation Impact Process

Exhibit 2 illustrates a typical framework for transportation impact analysis and

Exhibit 2 Methodology Development

2.1.1 Considerations for the Components of a Transportation Impact Study

Methodology Methodology Development is an essential component in any transportation

2.2 Methodology Development

The Methodology Development process usually begins when the applicant

Part of methodology development is for the applicable authorities to agree on

2.2.1 Study Area Requirements

Many local governments have adopted procedures that prescribe the

For example, a small scale analysis might be required for developments

2.2.2 Time Horizons Analysis Years

A change in the proposed development phasing (notice of proposed change in

Under Section 163.3177, F.S., a comprehensive plan must be based on a

Legislative changes in 2011 eliminated mandatory transportation concurrency

2.2.3 Travel Adjustment Factors

Access Design X Saturday 11:00-15:00

Restaurants Fast Food X 11:00-13:00

Schools Grade X 14:30-15:30

Doctors offices X 9:00-10:00 16:00-18:00

Adapted From: ANALYSIS OF TRAFFIC IMPACT FOR NEW DEVELOPMENTS

PDF If there is no land use code in the Trip Generation Handbook

Source: Transportation Concurrency Best Practices, DCA,

In addition to trip generation, trip distribution is needed to determine the travel

2.2.4 Standard K Factors

In an effort to simplify the confusion around the K factor, FDOT transitioned

Exhibit 7 Facility Type Standard K

Other Urbanized Areas Freeways 9.0

Transitioning to Urbanized Areas Freeways 9.0

Urban Freeways 10.5

2.3 Existing Conditions Analysis and Data Collection