Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Planning Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Florence staff outline traffic‑impact rules, new regional study and funding gap for road projects
Summary
Town staff reviewed traffic impact analysis triggers, a town‑county coordinated update to the town’s transportation plan (Wilson & Company), and the town finance director summarized CIP balances and potential revenue options to address a projected $16.2 million shortfall over the next four years.
Town of Florence staff told a joint work session that the town has updated procedures to require traffic impact analyses for development proposals that meet standard trip‑generation thresholds and that the town has contracted Wilson & Company to update its 2020 transportation study to reflect new build‑out data, neighboring jurisdictions’ projects and multiple PUDs moving through the pipeline.
“Generally it is anything that would generate 100 trips within a peak hour [that] would be an instant flag for us to require the developer … supply us with a TIA,” said a town transportation presenter, describing the triggers staff now applies for Traffic Impact Analyses (TIAs). Staff also said larger projects that generate more than 500 peak‑hour trips are treated as higher‑level studies with additional scrutiny.
Wilson & Company will integrate build‑out inputs, recent TIAs, regional projects and updated crash data; staff described a proposed 15–18 month schedule for the study and said it includes stakeholder and public meetings. The study aims to identify short, medium and long‑term roadway and intersection improvements, revise recommended cross‑sections, and identify funding options and access management policies consistent with regional partners.
Finance staff described the town’s street‑fund balances and an unfunded gap. Carl (finance director) told the work session the town currently shows roughly $16.5 million on hand across street accounts (including a listed Highway User revenue bucket and a Pinal County transportation excise tax balance) but has roughly $42 million of projects on the four‑year CIP list; after anticipated receipts the town faces about $16.2 million in unfunded projects within that window.
“Our options include financing/bonding or a sales tax adjustment,” Carl said, noting a 1 percentage point local Transaction Privilege (sales) Tax (TPT) increase would generate an estimated $2.4 million a year and that council could consider dedicating any increase specifically to transportation projects. Staff also noted development impact fees and Pinal County half‑cent transportation funds as ongoing revenue sources.
Council and commissioners pressed staff on timelines and communications: several elected officials urged more frequent, granular updates on project schedules and right‑of‑way acquisitions and asked staff to publish CIP timelines and construction notice signage so residents know when work will be visible. Vice Mayor Adam asked that monthly director reports include county inputs to avoid siloed views of Hunt Highway and adjacent routes.
Staff said they will pursue more coordinated interjurisdictional reporting, provide a clearer public communications plan for projects under construction, and look at grant opportunities, including the U.S. DOT rural and tribal assistance pilot program for design assistance. Staff recommended joint bidding where timing aligns to reduce mobilization costs and mitigate inflation‑driven price escalation.
Ending: Town staff asked council to consider whether the technical advisory committee (TAC) should review a broader set of pre‑plat and site plan items to speed administrative review; staff also recommended improvements to monthly reporting and public notifications so commissioners, council and residents see project status earlier in development and construction cycles.
