HomeMy WebLinkAbout2002 05 06 Public Hearing A Second Reading - Ordinance 2001-55 Proposed Comprehensive Plan to DCACOMMISSION AGENDA
ITEM A
May 6, 2002
Special Meeting
REQUEST:
Consent
Informational
Public Hearing X
Regular
Mgr. / Attor / pt.
Authorization
The Community Development Department requests the City Commission consider the Objections,
Recommendations and Comments (ORC) report received from the Department of Community
Affairs (DCA) and the recommendations of Land Design Innovations (LDI) for the Evaluation and
Appraisal Report (EAR) based amendments to the Comprehensive Plan.
PURPOSE:
The purpose of this item is to request the Commission conduct a public hearing for the second
reading and adoption of Ordinance 2001-55, which would authorize staff to transmit the proposed
Comprehensive Plan to the Department of Community Affairs for compliance review.
APPLICABLE LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY:
Rule 9J-11.011, Florida Administrative Code, Local Government Adoption of the Comprehensive
Plan or Plan Amendment and Submittal for the Compliance Review
Chapter 163.3184, Florida Statutes, Process for Adoption of Comprehensive Plan or Plan
Amendment
CONSIDERATIONS:
• The City's Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 1992, is the guiding document that identifies the
future development patterns in the City and the services that will be necessary to meet the
demands of future growth.
CDD/April 26, 200212:57 PM
May 6, 2002
PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEM A
Page 2
• The City is required by State Statutes to prepare an evaluation and update the Comprehensive
Plan with current data every seven (7) years.
• The City successfully completed an Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) of the
Comprehensive Plan, which was determined to be sufficient by DCA on March 26, 1999.
• The EAR concluded the entire document was poorly written and should be completely
rewritten as part of the EAR Based Amendments.
• Land Design Innovations (LDI) was contracted to supplement staffresources and prepare the
EAR Based Amendments to the Comprehensive Plan.
• The proposed Comprehensive Plan (Attachment D) represents LDI's final deliverable in
response to the ORC report and several joint workshops held by the Local Planning Agency
and City Commission to review the plan.
• On November 7, 2001, the Local Planning Agency recommended the City Commission
approve transmittal of the proposed Comprehensive Plan to DCA for review.
• On November 26, 2001, the City Commission approved first reading of Ordinance 2001-55
and authorized transmittal of the proposed Comprehensive Plan to DCA for review.
• On February 19, 2002, the Community Development Department received the ORC report
from DCA, detailing objections and comments prepared pursuant to Rule 9J-11.010, Florida
Administrative Code.
• From the date the ORC report is received, the City has 120 days to adopt, adopt with
changes, or not adopt the proposed amendments. The last available regular meeting date of
the City Commission to take action on the proposed amendments is June 10, 2002.
FINDINGS:
Section 15-36 of the City's Code of Ordinances describes the review criteria for Comprehensive Plan
amendments. The proposed amendments meet the criteria as follows:
1. The proposed amendments will not have an adverse effect on the City budget and will have a
favorable effect on the economy of the City and the region.
2. The proposed amendments will not diminish the adopted level of service (LOS) of public
facilities.
3. The proposed amendments will have a favorable impact on the environment and the natural
and historical resources of the City.
4. The proposed amendments are consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the
State's Comprehensive Plan and the East Central Florida Regional Policy Plan.
5. The proposed amendments will promote the cost-effective use of public facilities.
6. The proposed amendments will cause the Comprehensive Plan to be internally consistent.
7. The proposed amendments will promote the public health, safety, welfare, economic order
and aesthetics of the City and the region.
CDD/Apri126, 2002/2:57 PM
May 6, 2002
PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEM A
Page 3
8. The proposed amendments are consistent with the previously adopted Evaluation and
Appraisal Report.
ADOPTION SCHEDULE:
Should the City Commission adopt Ordinance 2001-55 and authorize transmittal of the proposed
amendments to DCA for compliance review, the remainder of the adoption schedule would proceed
as follows:
• May 15, 2002 Last available date to transmit adopted Comprehensive Plan to DCA
for compliance review, following May 6, 2002 adoption date.
• July 2002 DCA completes 45-day compliance review and issues a Notice of
Intent to find the proposed amendments either in compliance or not in
compliance.
• August 2002 Assuming the proposed amendments are found in compliance, a 21-
dayperiod to allow for petitions (by affected persons) that challenge
the determination of compliance follows.
• August 2002 Assuming no petitions are filed to challenge the determination of
compliance, the Notice of Intent becomes final agency action and the
Comprehensive Plan becomes effective.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Commission consider staff's and LDI's recommendations in response to
the ORC report and adopt Ordinance 2001-55, which would authorize the transmittal of the
proposed Comprehensive Plan to DCA for compliance review.
PLEASE BRING COPIES OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, APPROVED FOR TRANSMITTAL ON
NOVEMBER 26, 2001, TO THIS MEETING FOR DISCUSSION P URPOSES.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Ordinance 2001-55
B. Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report (ORC) from DCA.
C. Staff response to the ORC report
COMMISSION ACTION:
CDD/April 29, 2002/12:08 PM
ATTACHMENT A
JCi! L by . DPI UYYIV, Y~Nf1U, JHL L~rwi+u•+~......, ~ .... ~ rv r +c,J ..r....>v, .... ~ ~ ... ~ . ...~ ..., _. J
ORUINANCL+'+' N0.2001-55
AN ORDINANCE OF THE, CITY OF WINTER SPRINC:S, SEMINULE
COUNTY, FLOKIllA, ADOPTING THE EVAL[JATIUN ANU APPRAISAL
REPORT (F.AR) RASED PLAN AMENDMENTS TO THE
CC)MPRF.HF.NSiVE PLAN OF THE CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS,
FLOKIDA; REPEALING THE PRIOR CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN ITS ENTIRETY ANn REPLACING IT W('TH
A NEW COMPRF.HF.NSIVi; PLAN ENTITLED "CITY OF WINTER
SPRINGS CUMPREHENSIVE PLAN - 2001" WHICH 1S ATTACHED
IIERETO AS EXIfIIBTT "A"; PROVIDING FUR RF,PEAL OF PRIOR
INCONSISTENT ORDINANC.F,S ANA RESOLUTIONS; PRUVIDING FOR
SEVEKABILITY; FKOVIDING FOR INCORPORATION INTO THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; PROVIDING FOR LEGAL STATUS OF THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMF.NDMF.NTS AND EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Section 163.31b1 et. seq., 1~larida Statutes (1987) established the Local
Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Devetc~pment Regulation Act; and
WHF.RFAS, Section 163.3167,1•'lorida.5tatutes, requires each municipality in the State of
Florida to prepare and adopt a Comprehensive Platt as scheduled by the Florida Ucpartment of
Community Affairs; and
WHEREAS, the City has conducted an evaluation and appraisal oi' the City of Winter
Springs' Comprehensive Plan purstr~rnt tc.~ Section Ib3.3191, Florida Statutes; and
WHEREAS, during the evaltation process, the City commission determined it was in the
best interests of the public Health, safety raid welfare of the City to update the CucrrprchcrtsivN Pl~.n
by adopting a new Comprehensive Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Local Planning Agency of the City o1' Winter Springs held a duly noticed
public hearing, in accordance with the procedures in chapter 163, part I1,1''luridu .Statutes, ~,,n the
Evaluation and Appraisal Report, the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments and RCA's ORC
City of Winter Springs
' Ordinance No. 2001-26
Pn~c ~ mot' S
Sent By: BROIVN,I^lARD,SALL~AAN&wEISS,P.A.; 407 425 9596; Nov-14-01 12:48PM; Page 5/9
Report and comsidered findings and advice of staff, citizen,, and all interested parties tiubnutting
written ~cnd oral comments find has recommended adoption to the City Commission; and
WHEREAS, on November 26, 2Q01, the City Commission of the City of Winter Springs
held a duly noticed public hearing nn the jroposed Colnprellellsivc Plan amendment and considered
f inciint;s and advice of'the T..and Platuiins Agency, staff, citicens, and all utterested parties submitting
written and oral comments, azid after complete deliberation, approved the amendment for transmittal
io ti7~ Florida DepartlilZilt of COI1llIlUlllty Aflalrs; and
WHEREAS, on , thr Flvrda Department of Community Affairs issued its
Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report {"ORC Report") to the City and made
rccocnalendatiuns to bring the suhjeci Comprehensive Plan amendments in compliance with Rule
9J-5, !~'/vridu Adminislrutive Coclcr, and Chapter 1G3, Part II, !~'loridu .S[ulut~s; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission and the I-,and 1'laculiirg Agency have evaluated the ORC
Report and have accepted the recommendations contained thereto by making the necessary
modifications to the Comprehensive Plan amendments origin~Illy transmitted to the Fh)rida
Department of Community Affairs in order to bring the amendments in cornpliancc with Rule 9.1-5,
Florida AdminLctrative Cade, and Chapter l b3, Part II, Florida Statutes; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 9J-1 LOOb, Flnridu Admmi,rtrative C'odc~, this
Comprehensive Plan amendment will not cause the City to exceed its twice yearly submittal
allowance for comprehensive plan amendments; and
WHEREAS. on ,the City Commission of the City of Winter Springs held a
duly noticed public adoption hearing on the proposed amendments set forth hereunder and
City of Winter Springs
Ordinance No. 2001-5 S
Page 2 of 5
Sent By: BRO'NN,WARD,SALZh1AN3VlEISS,P.A.; 407 425 9596; Nov-14-01 12:49PM; Page ti/9
considered findings and advice ofthe band Planning Agency, staff, citizens, and all interested parties
submitting writtrn and oral comments and suprc-rting data and analysis, as well as the Objections,
Recottuneudelions, and Conunents of the Florida llepartment of Community Affairs, and after
complete deliberation, approved and adopted the proposed amendments hereunder; and
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan rmendments adopted by this Ordinance comply with
th4 requirements of the Local Government C;omprehensivz Planning and land I?cvelopmcnt
Regulation Act and the amendments are in the best interests e~l'the public health, safety, and welfare
of the citizens of Winter Springs, Florida.
NO~'V, THEREFORE, THE Cl'1'Y COMMISSION OF THE CITY Oh' WINTEK
SPItINCS, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section l . Recitals. The foregoing recitals arc true and correct and are fully
inc;orporatcd herein by this reference.
Section 2. Authority. This Ordinance is adopted in compliance with, and pursuant
to, the Local Government Comprehensive Platuiing and land Ucvelopmcnt Regulations Act,
Sections lb3.184 and 163.187, Florida Statutes.
Section 3. Purpose and Intent. It is hereby declared to be the purpose and intent of this
Ordinance to clarify, expand, correct, t~pdute, modify and otherwise further the provisions of the City
of Winter Springs' Conipreltensive Plan.
Section 4. Kepeat of Prior Comprehensive Ylan- The previously adopted
Comprehensive Ylan of the City of Winter Springs, Florida, is hereby rcpCaled in its entirety and
shaI1 no longer be in force and efTect.
City of Waiter Springs
Chdinance No. ZOUi-55
Page ? ur 5
Sent By: BROWN, WARD, SALZMANBWEISS,P.A.; 407 425 9596; Nov-14-Q1 12:50PM; Page 7/9
Section .5. Adoption of New Curaprehcnsive Plan. The City of Winter Springs'
Comprehensive Plan-20U1, attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and fully incorporated herein by this
reference, is hereby adopted and shall be given t'ull legal status as the new Comprehensive Plan of
the City of Winter SpriT~gs, Florida.
Section 6. xepcal of Prior Inconsistent Qrdinances and Resulutioas. A11 prior
inconsistent ordinances and resolutions adopted by the City C'onunission, or parts of ordinances and
resolutions in conflict herewith, are hereby repealed to thz extent ~f the eanfliet.
Section ~. Scverability. if arty section, subsection, sentence, clause, p}>rasi;, word or
provision of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by v~y court ai'
competent jurisdiction, whether for substantive, procedural, or any other reason, such portion shall
be deemed tt separate, distinct and independent provision, and such balding shall not affect the
validity of the rcmttining portions of this ordinance.
Sect. lncorporation into Comprehensive Plan. Upon the effective date of the
new Comprehensive Plan adctpted by this ordinance, said Comprchensivc Plan shall be incorporated
as the City of Winter Springs C'amprehensive Plart and any section or paragraph number or letter and
any heading may be changed or modified as necessary to effectuate the foregoing.
S tine 9. Effective Date and Lefial Status of the Plau Amendments. The effective
dare of the new Comprehensive Plan adopted by this Ordinance shall be the date n final order is
issued by the Florida Department oCCotntnunity e1t't'airs, or the Administration Commiscicln finding
the new Comprehensive Plan in compliance with Section 1(3.31$4, Flvrida Statutes. lvo
development orders, development permits, or land use dependent nn the new Comprehensive Plan
' City of Winter Springs
Ordinance No. 2001-SS
PaRc a ~r s
Sent By: BROWN, WARD,SALZMANBWEISS,P.A.; 407 425 9596; Nov-14-01 12:50P61; Page 8/9
may be issued or commenced before it has become effective. If a ftnal order of noncompliance is
i~~ued by the Administration t=ommission, the new Comprehensive Plan may nevertheless be made
effective by adoption oi'a resolution aftirnung its effective status. After and from the effective date
ot'the new Comprehensive I'Ian set forth herein shall hAVC the legal stales of the Comprehensive
Plan of the City of Winter Springs.
ADAPTED by the City Conunission of the City of Winter Springs, Florida, in a regular
meeting assembled on the _• day of
ATTEST:
Andrea Lorenzo-LuHCCS, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FARM AND
SUFFICIENCY FQR TAF CITY OF
WINTER SPRINGS ONLY:
Anthony A. Gargancse, City Attorney
First Rcaduig:
Second Reading:
Effective Date:
Y`.tdocsl~:ity of W inter Synugsl0nfinancesU'AR-(:otnp Plan (Ndinunce 2U0l-55
2UU2.
Pau[ P. PArty[ca, Mayor
C'iry of Winter tiprings
Qrdinance No.2001-2b
Pxgc 5 of 5
Sent By: BROWN,WARO,SALZMANBWEISS,P.A.; 407 425 9596; Nov-14-01 12:51PM; Page 9/9
E~uirsiT K~=,
NF,W WINTF,R SPRINGS C'OMPIZFIlEHSIVE PLAN
ATTACHMENT B
DEP
JEB BUSH
Governor
February 14, 2002
_ r~~'~,
~;
'~ .~ n`°
STATE OF FLORIDA
ARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS.
"Dedicated to making Florida a 6etfer place to cal! home"
Honorable Paul P. Partyka, Mayor
City of Winter Springs
1126 East State Road 434
Winter Springs, Florida 32708-2799
Dear Mayor Partyka:
STEVEN M. SEISERT
Secretary
n
CIryOF <
Car77ri?Ur~IY O~ue opm~n~ S
The Department has completed its review of the proposed Comprehensive Plan
Amendment for the City of Winter Springs (DCA No. 02-lER), which was received by the
Department on December 11, 2001. Copies of the proposed amendment have been distributed to
the appropriate state, regional and local agencies for their review and their comments are
enclosed.
I am enclosing the Department's Objections, Recommendations and Comments (ORC)
Report, issued pursuant to Rule 9J-11.010, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.). The issues
identified in this ORC Report include a lack of information regarding what specific changes are
proposed for the City's Future Land Use Map along with the data and analysis to support such
changes, the lack of percentage distribution standards for Mixed Use and Greenway Interchange
future land use categories, and a lack of supporting data and analysis for proposed provisions of
the plan that increase densities in the High Density Residential future land use category and the
allowance of a density and intensity bonus without adequate criteria for their application.
Upon receipt of this letter, the City of Winter Springs has 120 days in which to adopt,
adopt with changes, or determine that the City will not adopt the proposed amendment. The
process for adoption of local government comprehensive plan amendments is outlined in s.
163.3184, Florida Statutes, and Rule 9J-11.011, F.A.C.
2555 SHUMARD OAK BOULEVARD •TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32399-2100
Phone: {850) 488-8466/Suncom 278-8466 FAX: (850) 921-0781/Suncom 291-0781
Internet address: http://www.dca.state-fl.us
CRITICAL STATE CONCERN FIELD OFFICE COMMUNITY PLANNING EMERGENCY MANAGEMEN7 HOUSING & COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
2796 Overseas Highway, Suite 212 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard 2555 Shumard Oak Soutevard 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
6larathon. FL 33050-2227 Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100 Tallahassee' FL 32399-2100 Tallahassee- FL 32399-2100
Honorable Paul P. Partyka, Mayor
Febniary 14, 2002
Page Two
Within ten working days of the date of adoption, the County must submit the following to
the Department:
Three copies of the adopted comprehensive plan amendments;
A copy of the adoption ordinance;
A listing of findings by the local governing body, if any, which were not included in the
ordinance;
A listing of additional changes not previously reviewed; and,
A statement indicating the relationship of the additional changes to the Department's
Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report.
The above amendment and documentation are required for the Department to conduct a
compliance review, make a compliance determination and issue the appropriate notice of intent.
In order to expedite the regional planning council's review of the amendments, and pursuant to
Rule 9J-11.011(5), F.A.C., please provide a copy of the adopted amendment directly to the
Executive Director of the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council.
Please be advised that the Florida Legislature amended Section 163.3184(8)(b),
Florida Statutes, regrciring the Department to provide a courtesy ii:formatio~: statement
regarding the Department's Notice of Intent to citizens who furnish their names and addresses
at the local government's plan amendment transmittal (proposed) or adoption hearings. In
order to provide tl:is courtesy information statement, local governments are required by the
law to furnish to the Department the names and addresses of the citizens regicesting this
lltformatlon. This list is to be submitted at the time of transmittal of the adopted plan or plan
amendment. As discussed in our letter sent to you on May 25, 2001, outlining t{:e changes to
Section 163.3184(8)(b) which are effective July 1, 2001, and providing a model sign-in
information sheet, please provide these required names and addresses to the Department when
you transmit your adopted amendment package for compliance review. For efficiency, we
encourage that the information sheet be provided in electronic format.
a
Honorable Paul P. Partyka, Mayor
February 14, 2002
Page Three
I would be pleased to arrange a visit to Winter Springs to work with your staff and
consultants to help resolve the issues discussed in the ORC Report in order to facilitate the
adoption of the proposed amendments. Please contact Russell Grace, Planner N, at {SSO) 922-
1794 or Brenda Winningham, Community Program Administrator at (850) 922-1800, to
coordinate this visit, of if we can be of assistance in any way as you formulate.your response to
this Report.
Sincerely yours,
_ r
~/ ~ C
Y v~ _'
-~_~~
~~~ Charles Gauthier, AICP
Chief, Bureau of Local Planning
Enclosures: Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report
Review Agency Comments
cc:=Charles-C: Carrington; AICP, City of Winter Springs Community Development Department
Sandra S. Glenn, Executive Director, East Central Florida Regional Planning Council
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS
FOR
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 02-lER
February 14, 2002
Division of Community Planning Bureau of Local Planning
INTRODUCTION
The following objections, recommendations and comments are based upon the Department's
review of the City of Winter Springs proposed amendment to their comprehensive plan pursuant
to s.163.3184, Florida Statutes (F.S.).
Objections relate to specific requirements of relevant portions of Chapter 9J-5, Florida
Administrative Code (F.A.C.), and Chapter 163, Part II, F.S. Each objection includes a
recommendation of one approach that might be taken to address the cited objection. Other
approaches maybe more suitable in specific situations. Some of these objections may have
initially been raised by one of the other external review agencies. if there is a difference between
the Department's objection and the external agency advisory objection or comment, the
Department's objection would take precedence.
Each of these objections must be addressed by the local government and corrected when the
amendment is resubmitted for our compliance review. Objections which are not addressed may
result in a determination that the amendment is not in compliance. The Department may have
raised an objection regarding missing data and analysis items which the local government
considers not applicable to its amendment. If that is the case, a statement justifying its
non-applicability pursuant to Rule 9J-5.002(2), F.A.C., must be submitted. The Department will
make a determination on the non-applicability of the requirement, and if the justification is
sufficient, the objection will be considered addressed.
The comments which follow the objections and recommendations section are advisory in
nature. Comments will not form bases of a determination ofnon-compliance. They are included
to call attention to items raised by our reviewers. The comments can be substantive, concerning
planning principles, methodology or logic, as well as editorial in nature dealing with grammar,
organization, mapping, and reader comprehension.
Appended to the back of the Department's report are the comment letters from the other state
review agencies and other agencies, organizations and individuals. These comments are advisory
to the Department and may not form bases of Departmental objections unless they appear under
the "Objections" heading in this report.
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND COMMENTS REPORT
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
PROPOSED ANIENDl~1ENT 02-lER
CONSISTENCY WITH CHAPTERS 9J-5 AND 9J-11 F.A.C. AND CHAPTER 163 ~F'.S.
The Department identifies the following objections, recommendations and comments to
the proposed amendment.
OBJECTIONS
A. Future Land Use Map
1. General Revision to the Future Land Use Map:
The City is proposing a new future land use map in its entirety, but has failed to indicate
which properties are proposed to be changed to a different future land use category, and has not
provided the data and analysis to support any potential impacts on public facilities and natural
resources of those specific changes. It therefore cannot be determined where or to what extent the
future land use map has been revised when compared to the currently adopted future land use
map. Thus, the proposed Future Land Use Map in its entirety (including all specific proposed
changes) has not demonstrated consistency with requirements in Chapter 163.3177(6){a), Florida
Statutes (F.S.), and with Rule 9J-5.006{3)(b)l, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), to support
the map with appropriate data and analysis on allocation, impacts to natural resources, and to
coordinate land uses with appropriate site characteristics and facilities and services. Based on a
comparison of the proposed and existing Future Land Use Map, it appears that the City is
proposing to designate properties in the East Rural Area (Weaver, Minter, and Carroll properties)
to Low Density Residential. These properties appear to contain wetland areas which are
designated Conservation in the County. The sites are also within the County's Rural Area
Boundary. Adequate data and analysis was not provided demonstrating that the proposed uses for
the eastern area are suitable for the proposed sites, compatible with surrounding land uses,
needed to accomodate the projected population, will not result in the promotion of urban sprawl,
nor that the City has adequate public facilities available to serve the area with the proposed use.
Section: 163.3177(3), 163.3177{6)(a), 163.3177(8), and 163.3187(2), F.S.
Rule: 9J-5.005(2), 9J-5-005(5), 9J-5.006(3)(b), 9J-5.006(4}, F.A.C.
Recommendation:
Provide a future land use map or maps that indicate what properties are proposed to be re-
designated, and for each of these changes, provide data and analysis regarding 1) the location of
the amendment site including a map clearly identifying the boundaries of the site on an
individual amendment basis; 2) individual acreage amounts for each amendment identifying the
acreage for each of the current future land uses and the reciprocal acreage for the adopted
amendments. The data and analysis should be clear on the amount of acreage and the type of
current land use each individual amendment is converting and clearly identify the land us;e
category and acreage for the adopted land use; 3) the existing land use onsite, specifically, the
character of the property, for example is it vacant or developed, and if developed what type of
development currently exists on the site.
The data and analysis to address the impacts from the change in land use should include
a public facilities analysis based on the maximum density or intensity allowed, and analysis of
the suitability of the proposed land use for the site related to natural resources and compatibility
with adjacent land uses. If the amendment is projected to increase demand or impacts then the
amendment should explain how this increase is addressed consistent with the goals objectives
and policies of the comprehensive plan. Include a demonstration of how each amendment is
internally consistent with the overall goals, objectives and policies of the comprehensive plan
including whether the amendment is consistent with goals, objectives and policies on limiting
urban sprawl.
B. Future Land Use Element
1. Mix of Uses:
The City does not establish the percentage distribution among the mix of allowed uses
within the proposed Mixed Use and Greenway Interchange future land use categories or other
objective measurement that ensures a balanced mix of land uses based on data and analysis will
be achieved. The proposed plan also lacks specific language on what types of land uses will be
allowed beyond stated density and intensity standards.
Section: 163.3177{6)(a), F.S.
Rule: 9J-5.006(4}(c), F.A.C.
Recommendation:
The City provides specific language under Goal 2 and corresponding objectives and
policies concerning mixed use standards associated with the Town Center futtTre land use
category. The City should revise the proposed Mixed Use and Greenway Interchange future land
use designation to include specifically what the allowed land uses are, along with standards that
regulate the percentage distribution of the range of allowed uses in a manner similarly applied to
the Town Center designation. The range of uses and percent distribution should be based on
relevant data and analysis.
2. High Density Residential
Proposed Policy 1.1.1 provides for a maximum residential density in the High Dentsity
Residential future land use category at 21 units per acre. The current plan caps this density at 12
units per acre. The City has not provided data and analysis that supports this proposed increase or
has indicated what potential impact this change might have on properties currently designated
High Density including impacts on public facilities and natural resources.
Section:163.3177(8), F.S.
Rnle: 9J-5.005(2}, 9J-5.006(2)(a) F.A.C.
Recommendation:
Provide an analysis of the lands currently designated High Density on the Future Land use
Map to determine the extent of acreage with this designation, and how much of this acreage is
developed, undeveloped, and the potential for re-development based on the proposed density
standard of 21 units per acre. Once this is determined, conduct a public facilities analysis based
on the additional demand, and a site suitability analysis to determine potential impacts on natural
resources. Unless the data and analysis is found to clearly support the proposed density standard,
the City should retain the existing standard of 12 units per acre.
3. Policy 1.1.6 -Density Bonuses:
This proposed policy allows up to a 25% increase of the maximum permitted density and
intensity for all future land use categories where "exceptional provisions" in site design are
made. The proposed bonus has the potential to significantly increase the number of units and
development intensity on a particular site without any meaningful standards and thus lacks
guidance to the land development regulations, or any suitability analysis to show that the site can
support this increase above the maximum allowed. The City also has not supported this policy
with data and analysis to indicate that this directive is needed, and what potential impacts on
allocation, public facilities, and natural resources it might have.
Section:163.3177(8), F.S.
Rule: 9J-5.005(2), 9J-5.006(2)(a} F.A.C.
Recommendation:
Conduct an analysis to determine what impacts a 25% density bonus beyond the
maximum permitted standard will be on public facilities, natural resources, and site suitability,
and is consistent with density and intensity use allocations. Should the data and analysis clearly
support this provision, the City should then revise the proposed policy to more clearly indicate
under what circumstances a project maybe awarded the bonus density or intensity. Further, a
provision should be included stating that such increases in density must still be consistent with
the comprehensive plan goals, objectives, and policies, and that the site can acco.mmodate~ the
additional density and intensity without adverse impacts to public facilities, traffic circulation,
natural resources, and land use compatibility.
II. COMMENTS
A. Future Land Use Element
1. Policy 1.4.3 -Intense Development Outside of Utility Service Area:
Proposed Policy 1.4.3 would allow "intense development" outside of the established
utility service areas if alternative service delivery systems are provided. The use of such delivery
systems have historically resulted in the proliferation of urban sprawl and is therefore in conflict
with corresponding Objective 1.4 (preventing urban sprawl). The policy should be revised to
remove this conflicting.
2. Joint Planning Agreements
Policy 1.8.1 of the Future Land Use Element is proposed to be changed in a manner that
will lessen its enforceability and measurability. This policy addresses the joint planning
agreement process with Seminole County, and has eliminated the date by which a JPA is to be
entered into, and has taken out the directive of "shall" and replaced with "may." The County has
objected to the City's proposed changes and provided a suggested alternative as follows:
By January 1, 2003, the City and Seminole County shall enter into a joint interlocal
planning agreement {JPA) to address, at a minimum, future annexations, provision of services
and facilities and land use compatibility in the East Rural Area of Seminole County. The JPA
shall also include agreement on future densities and intensities of properties that maybe annexed
to protect the rural integrity of and discourage urban sprawl into the County's Rural Area and the
area know as "Black Hammock.." The JPA shall set forth a procedure for resolution of any future
conflicts and/or disputes, shall include criteria for when and how the urban hQundary can be
amended and include standards for cut through traffic.
The City should consider the County's position on this issue and revise the proposed policy
accordingly. The County also suggested that the City's annexation of enclaves be part of a JPA as
discussed in Future Land Use Element Policy 1.8.2
3. Historical Resources:
The plan indicates in its data and analysis that there are no known historical or
archaeological resources located within the City. However, there are occurrences within the City
of archeological sites identified in the Florida Master Site File. This section should be revised to
include this information, along with an analysis as to their significance and what, if any,
additional measures of protection should be undertaken. According to the records of the Division
Of Historical Resources, archeological sites are present within the area designated as Town
Center. The City should revise or add a new policy under Goal 2 of the Future Land use Element
to address these resources.
Future Land Use Element Policy 1.9.2 directs the City to prohibit development that alters
or damages any site or building determined to historically significant, and refers to a "register of
historically significant properties maintained by the State of Florida." The state maintains the
Florida Master Site File, which is a data base of statewide occurrences of archeological sites and
structures. Many of the sites have not been evacuated for significance, and is not comparable to
the National Register of Historic Places. The City should revise this policy to apply to any
development that might impact such resources, whether that particular site is included on the
Master Site File or not.
In the Housing Element Data and Analysis, the City has identified 12 structures that were
built prior to 1950, and 117 buildings constructed in the 1950's. The City should include an
analysis to determine the historical significance of these structures, and describe what, if any,
measures need to be undertaken to ensure their protection.
Housing Element Policy 2.3.2 directs the City to conduct a survey of buildings to identify
those that have the potential to become historically significant. A date by which time this survey
is to be completed should be included in this policy.
4. Water Resources:
Policy 1.2.5 of the Future Land Use Element prohibits land uses potentially detrimental to
drinking water quality within 500 feet radii of public potable water wells. To improve the
enforceability of this directive, the City should consider the prohibition of Industrial Future Land
Use designations in areas where public drinking water well fields are located. °
Future Land Use Element Policy 1.2.11 provides fora 50 foot minimum upland lake
buffer, and Policy 1.2.13 provides a minimum 25 foot upland wetland buffer. It is not clear if
these policies cover major creeks and streams, which should also retain an upland buffer. The
City should consider revising policy 1.2.11 to include major streams along with lakes.
B. Conservation Element
1. Wetland Buffers
Conservation Element Policy 1.4.2 directs the City to establish upland buffers to wetlands
with a minimum of 15 feet and an average of 25 feet. Future Land Use Element Policy 1.2.13
also addresses wetland buffers and requires a 25 foot minimum wetland buffer. These policies
should be consistent with each other.
C. Transportation Element
1. Transportation Analysis:
Per Chapter 9J-5.019(3), F.A.C., the transportation analysis section of the comprehensive
plan should address the effect of transportation concurrency management areas as well as
transportation concurrency exceptions, where applicable. If no transportation concurrency
management areas exist in the City, Section b. on page II-13 should be revised to include
management areas as well. In Addition, the transportation analysis section of the comprehensive
plan should consider the projects planned for in FDOT's adopted work program. The first state
road project listed in Table II-10 (page II-33) is not included in FDOT's adopted 2002-2006 work
program. As indicated in the table, the other three state road projects listed are not funded or
planned by the state. Applicable projects in FDOT's work program, such as those below, should
be included in the analysis.
SR 15/600 (17/92) from Lake Triplet Drive to Shepard Road (add lanes and reconstruct)
SR 15/600 (17/92) interchange at SR 436
SR 419 from 17/92 to SR 434 (resurface)
SR 419 from Moss Road to Edgemon Avenue (add right turn lanes)
SR 434 from 17/92 to SR 419 (traffic control devices/system)
SR 434 from East Street to SR 419 (resurfacing)
SR 434 from SR 419 to east of Tuskawilla Road (add lanes and reconstruct)
2. Policy Clarifications:
Per Chapter 9J-5.019{4)(c)1, F.A.C., the City should adopt the level of service standards
established by FDOT for facilities on the Florida Intrastate Highway System (I'~IS). SR 417
(Eastern Greeneway) is a component of the FIRS and should be identified as such in Policy 1.1 ~l.
Per Chapter 9J-5.019(4)(c)10, F.A.C., the element should contain a policy which
establishes numerical indicators against which the achievement of the mobility goals of the
community can be measured, such as modal split, annual transit trips per capita or automobile
occupancy rates.
Per Chapter 9J-S.Oi9(4)(c}16, F.A.C., the element should contain a policy which
establishes measures for the acquisition and preservation of existing and future public transit
rights-of--way and exclusive public transit corridors. Several policies contained in the element
address the protection and acquisition ofrights-of--way and the public transit system, but none
directly address public transit rights-of--way.
3. Future Transportation Map:
Per Chapter 9J-5.019(5), F.A.C., the future transportation map should include the future
public transit system, the maintenance responsibility for all roads, and the projected peak hour
levels of service for all transportation facilities (it is not clear if public transit features shown on
Map II-3 represent both existing and future conditions). These features are not found on the
maps contained in the submittal.
III. STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY
A. OBJECTION
1. The proposed amendments are not consistent with the following goals and policies of the
State Comprehensive Plan:
a) Goal (10), Natural Systems, and Policies b(1), b(3}, b(7), and b(10);
b) Goal (16), Land Use, Policy (b)2 and (b)6
c) Goal (18), Public Facilities, Policy (b)1;
d) Goal (20) Transportation, Policies (b)3, and (b)13.
B. RECOMMENDATION
The City should revise the proposed amendment, as necessary, to be consistent with the
above-referenced goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan. Specific
recommendations can be found following the objections cited elsewhere in this ORC report.b)
Goal (20) Transportation, Policies (b)3, and (b)13.
ATTACHMENT C
City of Winter Springs Comprehensive Plan
Objections, Recommendations & Comments Report
Response
Future Land Use Map OBJECTION: • Provide FLUM that indicate • The proposed FLU for the
General revision to the Future what properties are properties in the East
Land Use Mau {Proposal of proposed to be Rural Area (Minter,
new FLUM & failure to redesignated & supporting Weaver and Carroll) is
indicate which properties are data & analysis. being withdrawn in its
proposed to ~ changed to a entirety. Map I-4 is
different FLU category, as revised to reflect this
well. as supporflng data & change, and the currently
analysis) adopted FLUM will
continue "as is" without
Chan es.
Future Land Use Element OBJECTION: • Indicate allowed land uses • See ATTACHMENT A.
Allix of Uses (Failure to & standards that regulate
establish percentage the percentage distribution
distribution among the mix of of the range of allowed
allowed uses in the proposed uses.
Mixed Use and Gr~nway
lnterchan FLU cat oriel
Future Land Use Element OBJECTION: • Provide data and analysis • There are two parcels in
High :Residential .Density to support proposed the City that exceed 12
(Failure to provide data and increase in high residential dwelling units per acre, as
analysis that supports density and indicate what a result of a court-
proposed increase from 12 to potential impact this change approved settlement of a
21 dwelling units per acre) will have on public facilities dispute between the
and natural resources. developer and the City.
The new cap of 21 units
per acre was intended to
apply only to those two
sites and thus make them
conformin .
Future Land Use Element OBJECTION: • Conduct analysis to • Proposed Policy 1.1.6 is
Density Bonuses (Proposed determine what impacts a withdrawn in its entirety.
Policy '1.1.fi fails. t4 provide. 25% density bonus beyond
data c~ analysis to indicate the maximum permitted will
the Wesel #or this directive & be on public facilities,
the potential impacts on natural resources, & site
public facilities, natural suitability.
resources, & site suitabil'
Future Land Use Element COMMENT: • Proposed Policy 1.4.3 is in • Proposed Policy 1.4.3 is
Policy 1.4.3 Intense conflict with corresponding revised to state, "Intensive
pevelopment Outside of Objective 1.4 (preventing development proposed for
Utility Service Area urban sprawl) & should be areas outside the
{Proposed Policy 1.4.3 would revised to eliminate conflict. established utility service
allow intense development areas shall be
outside of established utility discouraged."
service areas if alternative
service systems are
rovided
Future Land Use Element COMMENT: • Revise Proposed Policy • Policy 1.8.1 adequately
Joint Planning Agreements 1.8.1 to include language addresses the pursuit of a
(Proposed Policy 1.$.1 would suggested by Seminole Joint Planning Agreement.
lessen enfon~ability & County.
measurability by eliminating
data by which JPA is to be
entered into ar~d by replacing
the directive of "shall" with
"ma
• • • • • • • ~ . ~ I ~ ~
Future Land Use Element COMMENT: • Revise Proposed Policy • Proposed Policy 1.9.2
Housing Element Historical Resources (Failure 1.9.2 (Future Land Use (Future Land Use
of plan to indicate known Element) to include Element) is revised to
archaeological sites identified archaeological sites state, "Development shall
in the Florida Master Site File identified in the Florida be prohibited which
and failure to identify sites Master Site File, along with damages any site or
that have poten#ial to become analysis as to their building determined to be
historically significant) significance & measures of either historically or
protection that should be archeologically significant,
undertaken whether or not the site or
• Revise Proposed Policy building is designated on a
2.3.1 (Housing Element) to register of historically
provide a date by which significant places or the
time a survey of buildings to Florida Master Site File.
identify historically Any alteration of such site
significant structures will be or building can only occur
completed. if authorized by law and in
keeping with the historical
and archeological
significance of the site or
building.,,
• Proposed Policy 2.3.1
(Housing Element) is
revised to state, `The City
shall conduct a survey of
buildings by December
2003 to identify those that
have the potential to
become historical or
si nificant structures."
Future Land Use Element COMMENT: • Revise Proposed Policy • Proposed Policy 1.2.5 is
Water Resources (Failure of 1.2.5 to improve revised to state,
Proposed Policy 1.2.5 to enforceability by prohibiting "Wellheads. Industrial
.protect Industriafi FLU Industrial FLU designations Future Land Use
designations in areas where in areas where public designation shall be
public drinking water well drinking water well fields prohibited within 500 feet
:fields are located) are located of any public drinking
water well field."
Conservation Element COMMENT:. • Proposed Policies 1.4.2 • Proposed Policy 1.4.2 is
Future Land Use Element We~and Buffers {Conflict (Conservation Element) & revised to state, "By
between. Proposed Policies 1.2.13 (Future Land Use January 2003, the City
1.4.2 & 1.2.13) Element) should be made shall require within its
consistent to address Code of Ordinances
minimum wetland buffers minimum upland buffers
for wetlands, as defined by
the St. Johns River Water
Management District, to
be a minimum of twenty-
five feet (25') from the
edge of the wetland."
• Proposed Policy 1.2.13 is
revised to state, "Wetland
Buffers. The minimum
vegetative cover buffer
required upland from a
wetland is twenty-five feet
25' .
Transportation Element COMMENT: • Revise plan to include See ATTACHMENT B.
Transt~ortation Analysis management areas if no
(Failure to address the effect concurrency management
of transportatron concurrency areas exist
management areas & • Revise plan to consider
#ransportation concurrency projects planned for FDOT's
exceptior-s in the work program
Trans ortation E~ernent
Transportation Element GOMMENT: • Revise Proposed Policy • See ATTACHMENT C.
Policy Clarificafiion (Failure to 1.1.1 to identify S.R. 417
adopt LOS established by (Eastern Greeneway) as a
FDOT for facilities on Florida component of the Florida
Intrastate Highway System & Intrastate Highway System)
failure to address pro#ection .Revise element to include
& acquisition of public #ransit policy which establishes
ROWj numerical indicators against
which achievement of
mobility goals of city can be
measured
• Revise element to include
policy which establishes
measures for acquisition &
preservation of existing &
future public transit ROW &
exclusive public transit
corridors
Transportation Element COMMENT: • Revise Map II-3 to include • The title of Map II-3 is
Future Transportation Map future public transit system, revised to read, "Existing
{Failure to include future maintenance responsibility and Future Public Transit
transportation map indicating of all roads, & projected System; Major Traffic
future public #r-ansit system, peak hour LOS for all Generators."
maintenance responsibility of transportation facilities Table II-1 shows roadway
all roads, & projected peak maintenance
hour LOS for all responsibility.
transportation facilities) Table II-8 shows peak
hour LOS for all
trans ortation facilities.
Transportation Element .OBJECTION: • Revise plan to be consistent • See ATTACHMENTS B
inconsis#ency with State with above COMMENTS for through C and above
Comprehensive Plan the Transportation Element responses to
(Proposed plan is Transportation comments.
inconsistent with Goals 10,
16, 18, & 20 of the State
Corn rehensive Pian
ATTACHMENT A
GOAL 3: Greeneway Interchange. The City of Winter Springs hereby creates a Greeneway
Interchange land use category to target and attract a limited variety of regional land uses and
intensities in order to provide employment opportunities and an increased tax base.
Objective 3.1: Location. The Greeneway Interchange area shall be located in close
proximity to the Central Florida Greeneway (State Road 417). The
Greeneway Interchange area should be a compact area in close proximity to
the intersection of State Road 417, as depicted on the City's Future Land Use
Map.
Policy 3.1.1: From time to time, the City Commission may revise the Future Land Use
Map to designate land "Greenway Interchange" consistent with this
Objective.
Policy 3.1.2: From time to time, the City Commission may adopt appropriate
transportation maps to identify future roads and traffic patterns related to the
Greeneway Interchange that assure best routes through, and safe and
convenient access to, land while attempting to maximize development
potential and opportunities consistent with the Greeneway Interchange Goal.
The final location of future roads within the Greeneway Interchange area will
be determined by the City during the development procedure.
Objective 3.2 Land Uses. The intent and purpose of the Greeneway Interchange is to
attract regional businesses which will afford employment opportunities to the
citizens of Winter Springs and which will increase the City's tax base.
Policy 3.2.1: Through the adoption of land development regulations, land uses within the
Greeneway Interchange shall be limited to hotels, convention centers,
professional training facilities, professional office parks, restaurants, and
educational and research facilities. Additional regional-type commercial uses
may be added by the City Commission as a conditional use provided the use
complies with this Objective.
Policy 3.2.2: Through the adoption of land development regulations, medium to high
density residential uses may be added by the City Commission as conditional
uses, but shall not be required. If added and approved during the
development review process, medium to high density residential uses shall be
incidental to existing Greeneway Interchange uses set forth in Policy 3.2.1.
Medium to high density residential uses shall not be permitted within the
Greeneway Interchange area until such time as at least thirty percent (30%)
of the developable Greeneway Interchange land has been developed with the
uses set forth in Policy 3.2.1. Medium to high density residential uses shall
not occupy more than twenty-five percent (25%) of the developable land
designated Greeneway Interchange.
Policy 3.2.3: Professional office parks shall be limited to providing professional-type
services, such as financial, high-tech, educational and research, data
processing, communications, engineering, architectural, legal, real estate, and
medical laboratories.
Objective 3.3 Private/Public Investment. The City shall encourage and promote
regional businesses to invest and locate on land designated Greeneway
Interchange.
Policy 3.3.1 To the extend financial resources axe available, public money should be spent
as a catalyst to encourage private investment within the Greeneway
Interchange area. In coordination with private development, the City may
undertake such capital improvements for public infrastructure and provide
economic incentives as identified in Town Center Policies 2.1.5 and 2.1.6.
Objective 3.4 Compatibility of Uses. Through the adoption of land development
regulations and the development review process, the City shall require that
the land uses within the Greeneway Interchange area be compatible.
Policy 3.4.1: Alternative modes of transportation shall be required to encourage
pedestrian circulation and compatibility of land uses.
Policy 3.4.2: Tracts of land shall be developed as a whole to provide continuity among the
various land uses and to create a compact and walkable living environment
and workplace.
Policy 3.4.3: Transitional uses are required to protect lower intensity and density uses
from more intense and dense uses. Building heights must be stepped down
adjacent to lower intensity and density uses.
Policy 3.4.4: The City Commission may require a Master Plan for the Greeneway
Interchange area to ensure compatibility of land uses and compliance with
Goa13.
GOAL 4: Mixed Use. The City of Winter Springs seeks to promote a Mixed Use category,
which provides for a variety of land uses and intensities within a development site to preserve
conservation areas, reduce public investment in service provision, encourage flexible and creative
site design, and provide public amenities with area wide benefits.
Objective 4.1: Location. The Mixed Use category shall be located proximate to major
transportation corridors as depicted on the City's Future Land Use Map.
Policy 4.1.1: From time to time, the City Commission may revise the Future Land Use
Map to designate land "Mixed Use" consistent with this Objective.
Objective 4.2: General Uses and Intensities. Promote the development of the
Mixed Use category by allowing low, medium and high density residential;
commercial uses (retail and office); light industrial; educational facilities;
recreational facilities; and compatible public facilities.
Policy 4.2.1: The City shall allow no more than 75 percent of any one type of land use to
dominate the Mixed Use category.
Policy 4.2.2: A minimum of ten (10) acres shall be required to develop a site in the Mixed
Use category.
Policy 4.2.3: The City may require a Master Plan and Planned Unit Development Zoning
to ensure that tracts of land are developed as a whole throughout the Mixed
Use category to provide continuity among the various land uses and create a
compact and walkable environment.
Policy 4.2.4: Transitional uses shall be required to protect lower intensity and density uses
from higher uses. Building heights shall be stepped down adjacent to lower
intensity and density uses.
ATTACHMENT B
b. Transportation Concurrency Management Areas and Concurrency Exception Areas
Chapter 163, F.S., and 9J-5.0055(5), F.A.C., allow the option of exempting certain
developments from the transportation concurrency requirements if a project is
consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan, if an areawide
level of service standard is established and maintained for certain facilities and
transportation concurrency management areas are depicted on the future conditions
map.
Chapter 163, F.S., and 9J-5.0055(6), F.A.C., allow the option of exempting certain
developments from the transportation concurrency requirements if a project is
consistent with the comprehensive plan; promotes public transportation; or is within
an area designated for infill development, redevelopment, or downtown
revitalization.
The City of Winter Springs does not have any designated Transportation
Concurrency Management Areas or Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas.
Tables II-9 and II-10 of the Transportation Element is revised to incorporate all programmed and
planned highway system improvements, based on the most recent schedules as of Apri12002.
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
Table II- 9: Programmed and Planned Highway System Improvements
Roadwa Se ment Im rovement Pro rammed' Planned z•<
SR 419 Edgemon to Moss Turn Lanes 2002
S.R. 434 US 17-92 to SR 419 Tragic Control 2002
Lake Drive Seminola Boulevard to Add 2 Lanes 2002-2005
Tuskawilfa Road
Moss Road S.R. 434 to S.R. 419 Add 2 Lanes 2000-2005
Red Bug Lake SR 436 to Eagle Circle Widen to 6 2000-2005
Rd Lanes
Seminola Blvd. "US 17-92 to Lake Drive Widen to 6 2015
Lanes
S.R. 434 U.S. 17-92 to S.R. 419 Add 2 Lanes 2010z•'
(Removed in 4 below) (6 Total)
S.R. 434 S.R. 419 to Eastern Add 2 Lanes 2010z•'
Beltway (6 Total)
(Removed in 4 below)
U.S. 17-92 Shepard Road to Airport Add 2 Lanes 2010z•'
Boulevard
SR 426 County Line to Widen to 6 2015
Greenewa Lanes
Contained in construction program of FDOT or Seminole County.
Contained in OUATS 2010 Plan Update (Adopted Highway Needs Network). Not in current 2020 Long
Range Transportation Plan Update.
Latest date based on need. This applies to all "2010" numbers in this column.
2020 Long Range Transportation Plan.
Source: CPH Engineering, Inc., February 2001.
II-32
City of Winter Springs
Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element
Table II-9: Programmed and Planned Roadway System Improvements. (Revised)
FDOT WO~t,K PROGRAM 2042-2006
S.R. 419 Edgemon te-mess-.A~-c Adci \R ril;hr turn
lanes K ~i}anal 29A~~11" 03; u-4
I>id
ti. R. ~~41`) ~'.S. I~-')'' to S.R. Li-4 Rr•surfacin~ 1~1~ o2/I1S (CO~lst.~
S.It. -f3-1 V'ist;nvilla l~ri~•c ~l~ralfic siy~,nal f~I' II?/f13 {ct~nst.~
S.R. 434 US 17-92 to S.R 419 Traffic control
C1CA'ICCS~5~'5tC.O7 ~9E}~1~1~ U2i'o:,
COntiC
~,~ r tc » rn «~ c u n~ n ~n~~
~
S.R. 434 S.R. 419 to East of Tuskawilla
Rd. Add Lanes and
Reconstruct FY 02/03 (ROW)
S.R. 434 East of Tuscawilla Rd. Cross Semiruole Trail
overpass FY 02/03
S.R. 434 East St. to S.R. 419 Resurfacing FY 02/03 (const)
U.S. 17-92 Lake Triplet Dr. to Shepard Rd. Add lanes and
reconstruct FY 02/03 (RO~~U,
RR & Util.)
SEMINOLE C OUNTY CIP ~FY 01/02 to 05/06)
Lake Drive Seminola Blvd.to Tuskawilla
Rd. Add 21anes for rural
of -4 ''nn~-f~1~ U1!0'
(ROV`v' Lac const.~
Red Bug Lake Rd. S.R. 436 to Eagle Cir. Widen to 61anes ''nT[~1' O1 02
ro Fl' 04 05
~~ c n nzn «.. c n non ~a.i~ ~nn~r~
BASED ON N EED*
Seminola Blvd. U.S. 17-92 to Lake Dr. Widen to 6 lanes 2015
U.S. 17-92 Shepard Rd. to Airport Blvd. Add 2 lanes 2010
* ~~s determined b~~ CPI-f.
Source: ., 1'DOT Worlc Program 2002-2000 (Adopted);
Seminole Count~~'s Capital Impro~rcmcnts Program 2001 /02 - 2005/06; land Design Inno~rations,
Inc., April 2002.
II-32
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
Table II- 10: Year 2010 Road Needs (Developer and Other Funding)
Local Developer
Improve Tuskawilla Road north of SR 434 (formerly Brantley Avenue).
(Switch to Impact Fee Funding)
2. Improve Spring Avenue (existing dirt road} with drainage and paving improvements.
County*
Improve Shepard Road to three (3} lanes from U.S. 17-92 to Sheoah Boulevard. (County
portion) Note: This project is not funded or planned by the County.
2. Improve East Lake Drive from two {2) lanes to four (4) lanes. {Under design)'
State*
Improve U.S. 17-92 from Seminola Boulevard to SR 419 from four (4) lanes to six (ti) lanes.
(Construction for six [6] lanes completed to Shepard.) Six (6) lanes are planned in the 2020
Lang Range Transportation Plan.*
2. Improve SR 434 from U.S. 17-92 to Moss Road from five (5} lanes to seven (7) lanes.
Note: This project is not funded or planned by the State. It was in the previous OUATS
2010 Plan Update. It is not in the current 2020 Long Range Transportation Pian Update.
3. Improve SR 434 from SR 419 to Eastern Beltway from four {4) lanes to six {6) lanes. Note:
this project is not funded or planned by State. It was in the previous OUATS 2010 Plan
Update. It is not in the current 2020 Long Range Transportation Plan Update.
4. Improve SR 419 from SR 434 to U.S. 17-92 from two (2} lanes to four {4) lanes.
Note: This project is not funded or planned by the State.
NOTE: Projects 2 and 3 may not be necessary and should be watched closely to determine if
capacities exceed expected projections. {t appears that the City should start lobbying for
improvements to SR 419 as current counts exceed the existing roadway capacity.
Source: CPH Engineers, Inc., February 2001.
II-33
City of Winter Springs
Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element
Table II-10: Year 2010 Road Needs
Local ~evele~
1. Improve Tuskawilla Road north of S.R. 434 (formerly Brantley Avenue).
2. Improve Spring Avenue (existing dirt road) with drainage and paving improvements.
County
1. Improve Shepard Road to three (3) lanes from U.S. 17-92 to Sheoah Boulevard. (County
portion) Note: This project is not funded or planned by the County.
2. Improve East Lake Drive from two (2) lanes to four (4) lanes. (- I n
l~llO'1°s ~Y~orh pro~;rau1).
State
Improve U.S. 17-92 from Seminola Boulevard to S.R. 419 from four (4) lanes to six (6)
lanes. (Construction to six lanes completed to Shepard.) Note: ' . ;
"Phis project is not currently funded or
planned b~1:D0"l~.
2. Improve S.R. 434 from U.S. 17-92 to Moss Road from five (5) lanes to seven (7) lanes.
Note: The I~1~OT ~~'orl: program shows improvements to S.R. X34 from ~- S. 17-9? to
east oE'l~uscawilla Road. Improvements include widening; and traffic control devices ,ice
3. Improve S.R. 434 from S.R. 419 to Eastern Beltway from four (4) lanes to six (6) lanes.
Note: This project is not funded or planned by the State. ~ .
~~tr-6~~-t~
4. Improve S.R. 419 from S.R. 434 to U.S. 17-92 from two (2) lanes to four (4) lanes.
Note: This project is not funded or planned by the State.
NOTE: Projects 2 and 3 may not be necessary and should be watched closely to determine if
capacities exceed expected projections. It appears that the City should start lobbying for
improvements to S.R. 419 as current counts exceed the existing roadway capacity.
Source: CPH Enginners, Inc.; Land Design Innovations, Inc., Apri12002.
II-33
ATTACHMENT C
• The City will adopt data and analysis by ordinance, in addition to goals, objectives and
policies. In the data and analysis, the City recognizes that the Central Florida Greeneway
(S.R. 417) is a limited access facility and a component of the Florida Intrastate Highway
System.
• The following policy is added to Objective 1.5 of the proposed Transportation Element:
Policy 1.5.17 By January 2004, a monitoring system will be established to measure the
achievement of the City's multi-modal transportation goals.
• Objective 1.4 of the Transportation Element provides policies, which establishes measures
for acquiring and preserving existing and future public rights-of--way. To address public
transit, the following policy is added to Object 1.4:
Policy 1.4.12 The City shall designate U.S. Highway 17/92 as a mass transit corridor.
.,~ . City of Winter Springs
J
~~
~ ~
~ ~ ®~ I ,
,~.~
~1
'db0 ~
.. _
`~ ~
~ ~
1 ~
_L l L
~-~ _
c=r
,--r~u ~.~-.-- i ~
•
Source: Land Design Innovations, July 2001
Map II-3: Existing and Future Public
Transit System; Major Traffic Generators
:FUTURE TRAFFIC GENERATOR
PUBLIC TRANSIT ROUTE
N MAJOR ROADS
~~~ STREETS
N CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY
~ MAJOR TRAFFIC GENERATOR
® WATER FEATURES
,. .
~r _
r
Map is for graphic representation purposes only;
actual data must be verified by City staff.
n 1 0 1 Miles
lyv\ ~ ,
N
~iiiLANI> DESIC;N INNOVATIONS
140 Orlando Avenue, Suite 295
Winter Park. Florldo 32789
407 975-1273
• City of Winter Springs
.~
~ ~ 4
~ / /
e
~•
~ ~~~
e
\ ,r`~
g~
~,';~ ..
,.
~~~ ,~. ~ ,r~ ~ ,.
~ ~:
~~s
n t;
~. .
,.
•
.~
;'
7 D 1'
e
/ ~ ~ ' ~ ~,
Map is for graphic representation purposes only;
Source: ELS Engineering & Land Systems and Land Design Innovations, Inc., October 2001 actual data must be verified by City staff.
Map 1-4: Future Land Use
NMAJOR ROADS FUTURE LAND USE:
, ,' LOCAL STREETS O
O Residential Rural
Residential Low
NCITY OF WINTER SPRINGS Residential Medium
MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY Residential High
Town Center
® WATER FEATURES ~ Greenway Interchange
!~ Mixed Use
CONSERVATION OVERLAY ~ Commercial
0 Industrial
Recreabon
Conservation
Public /Semi-Public
1 0 1 Miles
N
~.WD ~ESIGN jNNOV,,~I~IONS
140 Orlando Avenue. Suite 295
Winter Park. Florida 32789
407-975-1273