If a parcel is developed already and the right-of-way it takes access from is not controlled by the municipality, why would a TIA be required at annexation and zoning? Should it be? When is the right time to get a TIA (obviously prior to development, but what about situations of bring in county islands)?
When Jesus said "love your enemies", he probably didn't mean kill them.
Moderator note:
Might be helpful if you let us know what a "TIA" is. It can mean a lot of different things to different people. (And we'll be able to edit the thread title accordingly)
"Growth is inevitable and desirable, but destruction of community character is not. The question is not whether your part of the world is going to change. The question is how." -- Edward T. McMahon, The Conservation Fund
oh, sorry. It's Friday!
traffic impact analysis.
and analysis makes me giggle.
When Jesus said "love your enemies", he probably didn't mean kill them.
Originally posted by Habanero
Off-topic:
That's what I assumed, but didn't want to be presumptuous. 
"Growth is inevitable and desirable, but destruction of community character is not. The question is not whether your part of the world is going to change. The question is how." -- Edward T. McMahon, The Conservation Fund
Well, assuming the road is "local jurisdiction" I would want to know what liability i was accepting when taking in the development. If it was a county or state jurisdiction road, and I was a "local" planner, I'd pass on the requirement. Beyond that, the requirement would seen sily.
Even though the road may be a state or county responsability, the residents of the "local jurisdiction" are impacted by a poor level of service on the non-local roadway within their community.
And then in Florida there is "Concurrency". This means that even if the local government does not control the roadway, a development may not allow (in general - there are loopholes) new development that would drive the LOS below the standard adopted in the local comprehensive plan.
In the context of a simple annexation of an existing building and site on an existing road, I would agree that the traffic impact analysis would be unnecessary.
The building is already there and nothing is changing except for jurisdictional responsibility.
I'm sorry. Is my bias showing?
Thanks for all of the replies. I ended up getting the comment cleared. I can understand the need but with the recent improvements and widening that occoured and I was flummoxed.
When Jesus said "love your enemies", he probably didn't mean kill them.
Quote