Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mobility Fee topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves first reading to adopt downtown mobility fee; aims to keep county-collected impact funds in downtown
Summary
The West Palm Beach City Commission approved on first reading Ordinance No. 5130-25 to adopt a downtown mobility fee and to establish a mobility-fee benefit district that would replace the county road impact fee for development in the defined downtown assessment area.
Get email alerts on the Mobility Fee topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The West Palm Beach City Commission approved on first reading an ordinance to create a downtown mobility fee and a mobility-fee benefit district intended to replace the Palm Beach County road impact fee for development inside a defined downtown assessment area.
Staff and consultants said the mobility fee — authorized under recent state law changes — is a one-time development fee charged at the time of a building permit to mitigate the transportation impacts of new development and to fund projects that prioritize walking, biking, transit and streetscape improvements in downtown West Palm Beach.
Jessica Keller, the city’s mobility and transportation manager, introduced the item and said multiple departments had worked on the proposal. Consultant Jonathan Paul of New Urban Concepts and Louis Rotundo (who advised on House Bill 479 implementation) described the technical basis and legal context. Paul said the mobility fee is designed to fund transit, bicycle lanes, sidewalk gap closures, streetscape and corridor studies that county road fees typically cannot target to the downtown core.
"This fee is a one-time fee paid by new development into the downtown. And the city would not be the first in the state of Florida," Jonathan Paul said, listing other Florida municipalities that have adopted mobility fees.
The proposal would create an assessment district roughly a little over one square mile bounded by Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard to the north, Okeechobee Boulevard to the south, Clear Lake to the west and the Intracoastal to the east; a slightly larger benefit district would allow funds to be spent on projects immediately outside the assessment area that serve downtown users.
Paul said the county currently collects roadway impact fees on downtown development and may spend those fees elsewhere within the county’s District 2 (roughly 10 square miles), and staff estimates $20 million–$30 million in fees have been collected over the last 10–15 years from development in downtown without those funds being spent in downtown. Over a 20‑year period, Paul said the county fee receipts tied to downtown development could total about $50 million. The mobility plan identifies about $97 million in multimodal projects needed to implement the downtown mobility plan.
Staff presented a sample fee schedule: a single-family unit in the downtown area would pay about $5,600 under the city schedule, compared with the county’s $5,597 fee for the same unit; other uses vary, in some cases lower and in some cases higher than current county charges depending on trip generation and trip length assumptions.
City staff recommended approval on first reading to adopt the downtown mobility fee technical report, to create Chapter 86 Article 7 in the code (mobility fee) and to proceed with a comprehensive plan amendment and interlocal negotiations with Palm Beach County. Staff said if the ordinance moves forward, the city would begin negotiations with the county and could begin collecting mobility fees for downtown in about 90 days (staff said that timetable would correspond to Aug. 10 in their schedule); the item also requires a separate comprehensive-plan amendment and interlocal agreement with the county to fully substitute the county fee.
Commissioners and staff discussed the negotiations with the county and a built-in 10% discount that would apply if an interlocal is not in place by Oct. 1; assistant city administrator Armando Fana said the city expected good‑faith negotiations but noted the county’s participation is required for a full replacement of the county fee. The motion to approve Ordinance No. 5130-25 on first reading carried unanimously.

