Manatee planners push 'context classification' and multimodal metrics in draft comp plan update

Manatee County planners and consultants told commissioners on April 1 that the transportation element of the county comprehensive plan needs a new, measurable approach that ties roadway design to adjacent land use, prioritizes walking, biking and transit and replaces the older concurrency framework with multimodal performance metrics.

The presentation by Rachel Layton, Planning Division Manager, and consultants Kelly Klepper and Adam Kerr of Kimley‑Horn covered three main changes: adopting FDOT—ontext classification (urban/suburban/rural) for roads, expanding multimodal provisions (pedestrians, bicycles, transit) and establishing performance measures to track progress on safety, connectivity and livability.

"Transportation involves more than just cars. It's about all modes of transportation," consultant Kelly Klepper told the board, arguing officials must plan for future growth where building additional travel lanes is not always feasible. The plan also shows a job‑density mapping tool that staff said can be used to compare where jobs exist relative to housing and transit routes.

Why it matters: Commissioners face two practical choices as the county grows: continue widening roads under a vehicle‑level‑of‑service model or adopt context‑sensitive, multimodal standards that measure walkability, transit access and connectivity. The latter can reduce pressure to widen major corridors if neighborhoods are better connected and jobs are sited closer to housing.

Key technical points: Adam Kerr explained FDOT—ontext classification, which designs road width, access and pedestrian features to match surrounding land use. He also recommended performance measures such as livability (housing/jobs within walkable distance), crash data (safety) and intersection density (connectivity). Kerr noted that 2013 changes to state planning law moved Florida away from strict concurrency to proportionate‑share methods, and that performance metrics will be important to judge whether the county pproach is functioning.

Board reaction and debate: Commissioners sought examples and data. Several members pushed for explicit pedestrian and bike goals and asked for sidewalk network inventories, especially in older urban neighborhoods. Commissioner Siddique recommended a focus on functional improvements in urban cores and completion of sidewalk networks; Commissioner Bearden pressed for evidence that new approaches (for example, mobility fees) will work better than past tools, and asked staff to return with comparative analysis and rationale.

Data and tools: Staff demonstrated a job‑density map intended to show where employment centers are concentrated; Nelson Galliano, Transportation Planning Division Manager, said GIS layers can be adjusted (time slices, buffer radii) so staff and commissioners can test how housing, jobs and transit overlay in different areas. The consultants recommended waiting for forthcoming federal/state HMIS and planning guidance on data and funding before making final software decisions.

No formal actions were taken. Planners said the next steps include refining context classifications, incorporating performance measures into the draft transportation element, and coordinating with FDOT and municipalities on corridor design and funding. Staff also flagged an upcoming round of public postings over the summer and scheduled briefings on accompanying impact fee/mobility fee work.

Ending: Commissioners asked staff to return with more precise comparisons (mobility fees vs. concurrency), draft performance metrics and a prioritized list of pedestrian/bicycle projects for urban neighborhoods once the GIS layers and CIP linkages are prepared.