The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2009 02 18 Regular 600 Draft Transportation ElementPLANNING & ZONING BOARD / LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY ITEM 600 February 18, 2009 Special Meeting Consent Information Public Hearin Re ular X REQUEST : The Community Development Department -Planning Division requests that the Local Planning Agency review, comment and make recommendation to the City Commission on the draft Transportation Element. PURPOSE: To give opportunity for the Board to review, discuss and provide their recommendation to the City Commission on the draft Transportation Element. APPLICABLE LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY: Florida Statute s. 163.3177 (Required elements of the Comprehensive Plan) Florida Statute 163.3174 (4) (related to responsibilities of the LPA regarding the comprehensive plan) BACKGROUND: The City's Comprehensive Plan has proven to be a good guide for developing the City. Generally the objectives have been met and the policies implemented. However, the Florida Statutes describes the local government comprehensive planning program as a continuous and dynamic process. An Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) is required every seven years by each local government to assess the progress of implementing the local government's comprehensive plan. [The EAR process is designed to respond to changes in state, regional, and local policies on planning and growth management, changing conditions and trends, to ensure effective intergovernmental coordination, and to identify major issues regarding the community's achievement of its goals.] Florida law establishes minimum requirements for the City's planning data to ensure predictability, certainty, and integrity in the local growth management process. The City's Comprehensive Plan must be amended to address the needs of the City into the next planning period. The Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) on the City of Winter Springs 2001 Comprehensive Plan lays the groundwork for undertaking a comprehensive update of the City's Comprehensive Plan and offers a forthright evaluation and assessment of the City's current comprehensive plan. The EAR was developed over a 18-month period and involved numerous public workshops. During the spring of 2007, the City identified six Major Issues as the core emphasis of the EAR [Section 163.3191(1)(c), F.S.]: These included: February 18, 2009 Regular Agenda Item 600 • Greenway Interchange Employment District • Elderly Housing & Medical Care • Affordable and Work-Force Housing (Section 163.3177(6)(f), F.S. and Rule 9J-5.010 F.A.C.) • State Road 434 Corridor • Population, Housing Density and Greenspace • Redevelopment of West Side Data was collected and analyzed on each issue as well as an assessment of how things could have been done differently to better achieve the goals, objectives and policies of the comprehensive plan as they related to the major issues. In addition to the analysis of the major issues section, evaluation and assessment was provided with respect to each policy of the adopted Comprehensive Plan. The EAR identified needed changes to improve or otherwise refine the Comprehensive Plan. The EAR also addressed the requirements of Section 163.3191(2), Florida Statutes. These included: population growth and changes in land area, the location of development that occurred relative to where it was anticipated in the comprehensive plan, the extent of vacant and developable land, the financial feasibility of implementing the comprehensive plan and in providing necessary infrastructure through the Capital Improvements Element. CONSIDERATIONS: Winter Springs submitted its Adopted EAR to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) on April 17, 2008. Subsequently, the City received notice from the DCA on June 23, 2008, that the EAR was determined to be Sufficient pursuant to Section 163.3191(2). The DCA also commended the City's efforts in preparation of the EAR and indicated support for many of the recommendations made in the EAR. The EAR provides the foundation for the subsequent comprehensive plan amendments. The statutory deadline for this Adoption of the EAR-Based Comprehensive Plan Amendments is 18 months after the determination of Sufficiency for the EAR or no later than Dec. 14, 2009. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE: The schedule of special LPA meetings and the elements to be reviewed are as follows: Thurs., January 29 Housing Element Wed., February 4 Recreation & Open Space Element Tues., February 10 Conservation Element, Intergovernmental Coordination Element Wed., February 18 Transportation Element Wed., February 25 Infrastructure Element Wed., March 4 Future Land Use Element The Public School Facilities Element and Capital Improvements Element is not expected to require a special meeting as the only changes required, will be those needed for consistency as a result of changes to the other elements. Apri16, 2009 (c~ 6:00 PM- Jt. LPA/CC Special Meeting for the review of the recommended draft Apri120, 2009 ~ 6:00 PM-Jt. LPA/CC Special Meeting for the review of the recommended draft Apri12009- Revisions based on Jt. LPA/CC Meetings Mav 6, 2009 - LPA Public Hearing on EAR-Based Amendments Mav 26, 2009- City Commission Transmittal Public Hearing on EAR-Based Amendments August 2009 - Receive ORC Report from DCA Revise and produce fmal EAR-Based Amendments for Adoption Nov. 23, 2009- City Commission Adoption Public Hearing on EAR-Based Amendments February 18, 2009 Regular Agenda Item 600 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Community Development Department -Planning Division requests that the Local Planning Agency review, give comment and provide their recommendation to the City Commission on the draft Transportation Element. ATTACHMENTS: Draft Transportation Element- [Previously Distributed] LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY RECOMMENDATION: • City of Winter Springs Comprehensive Plan TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT Draft EAR-Based Amendments, January 2009 Prepared For: City of Winter Springs Community Development Department 1 126 East State Road 434 Winter Springs, Florida 32708-2799 Prepared By: Planning Communities, LLC 2510 Wild Tamarind Blvd. Orlando, FL 32828 Revised from the Original Text Prepared By: Land Design Innovations, Inc a TABLE OF CONTENTS A. GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES .................................................................................... 4 B. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................15 C. INVENTORY ........................................................................................................................ IS 1. Road System ..................................................................................................................15 a. Jurisdiction and Maintenance Responsibility ..........................................................................16 b. Functional Classification .............................................................................................................16 c. Constrained Facilities ..................................................................................................................22 d. Crash Locations ............................................................................................................................22 e. Signalized Intersections ..............................................................................................................24 f. Evacuation Routes ........................................................................................................................24 2. Public Transit System ....................................................................................................25 3. Parking System ..............................................................................................................27 4. Bicycle System ...............................................................................................................27 5. Pedestrian System .........................................................................................................28 6. Intermodal Facilities ......................................................................................................29 D. TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS ...........................................................................................30 1. Growth Trends ...............................................................................................................30 2. Roadway Current Performance .....................................................................................31 3. Future Roadway Performance .......................................................................................37 4. Model Development and Validation .............................................................................42 a. OUATS Model Set .......................................................................................................................42 b. Trip Generation ...........................................................................................................................42 c. Trip Distribution ............................................................................................................................42 • II-1 d. Modal Split/Auto Occupancy ...................................................................................................42 e. Traffic Assignment .......................................................................................................................43 f. Trip Generation Modifications ..................................................................................................43 g. Use of OUATS 1 1 Trip Purpose Models .................................................................................43 5. Public Transit PerFormance ............................................................................................43 6. Other Transportation Systems .......................................................................................44 7. Future Transportation Planning .....................................................................................44 a. Future Transportation Map ........................................................................................................45 b. Transportation Concurrency Alternatives ................................................................................48 c. Future Public Transit Plan ...........................................................................................................48 d. Pedestrian Planning ....................................................................................................................48 e. Bicycle Planning ...........................................................................................................................49 f. TSM/TDM Strategies ..................................................................................................................49 II-2 LIST OF TABLES ~~'~ ~.~ .. ,Sx ~ ~. .. , ~~.~, :'~ILi: ~~ U....A.._~... Table II - 1: Historic Daily Volumes and Year 2008 Roadway Link Levels of Service (LOS) ..............Error! Bookmazk not defined.l9 Table II - 2: Historic Daily Volumes and Roadway Link Levels of Service with Existing Network (City Streets)..Error! Bookmark not defined.20 Table II - 3: Crash Locations with Greater than 5 Crashes, 2007 .................................................................................................... 2424 Table II - 4: Public Twnsit Charaderisfics ........................................................................................................................................2525 Table II - 5: TAZ Projected Development ............................................................................................................................................. 50 Table II - 6: Statewide Minimum Level of Service (LOS) Standards for the State Highway System as Determined by ADT (total v o I u me) .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 34 Table II - 7: Generalized Annual Average Daily Volumes for Florida's Urbanized Areas .................................................................35 Table II - 8: 2012 Projected Traffic Conditions ......................................................................................................................................38 Table II - 9: Programmed and Planned Highway System Improvements ...........................................................................................41 Table tl - 10: Programmed City of Winter Springs Improvements .......................................................................................................41 Table II - 11: Year 2010 Road Needs/Projects (City Funding) ............................................................................................................ 45 Table 11- 12: State and County Road Projects Adjacent to or Within Winter Springs ....................................................................... 576 Table II - 13: Year 2010 Road Needs (County and State Funding) ........................................................Error! Bookmazk not defined.? LIST OF MAPS -CURRENTLY BEING UPDATED Map II- 1: Existing Roadway Classification, Jurisdiction, and Number of Lanes ..............................................................................18 Map II- 2: Signalized Intersections and Crash Locations, 2007 ..........................................................................................................23 Map II- 3: Public Transit System and Major Traffic Generators/Attractors .........................................................................................26 'ap 11- 4: City of Winter Springs TAZs ................................................................................................................................................. 32 flap 11- 5: Year 2008 Deficiencies and LOS ......................................................................................................................................... 36 Map 11- 6: Future Transportation Map (Year 2010 Transportation Plan) ................................................:........................................... 46 Map II- 7: Twnsportation Improvements ............................................................................................................................................. 47 • II-3 CHAPTER II TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT A. GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES GOAL 1: To develop a safe, convenient, efficient and coordinated system of motorized and non-motorized transportation facilities which ensure adequate movement of people and goods through and within the City and which incorporates transportation strategies to address reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector. Objective 1.1: Level of Service. Throughout the planning period, the City shall enforce the Level of Service (LOS) standard on all arterial and collector roads. (Cross Reference: See Capital Improvement Element, Policy 1.2.1.a.) Policy 1.1.1: Adopt the minimum daily LOS standard for transportation facilities based on annual average daily trips (AADT) as follows: • Limited Access Roads • Arterials as prescribed by FDOT D • Collectors D Policy 1.1.2: Coordinate with the MPO and LYNX to assist the County in maintaining the County's adopted LOS standard for mass transit - 1.03 revenue miles per capita per year based on the estimated functional population within the transit service area. (Ord. 2005-1 1; 09- 12-05) Policy 1.1.3: Monitor the functioning of the arterial and collector road system by use of the TRANPLAN~FSUTMS model updated by the City's traffic consultant so that collector road improvements may be scheduled according to valid priorities. Policy 1.1.4: Require a traffic study for all new development generating more than 300 Daily Trips. Such study shall be conducted in accordance with written procedures provided by the City. Policy 1.1.5: Evaluate proposed development for transportation concurrency using established criteria. Policy 1.1.6: Annually monitor the LOS status of arterials, collectors, and all state roadways within the City by obtaining from the State and County their most recent traffic counts at points along all roadways that would be affected by development in the City. Policy 1.1.7: Continue to use standards and guidelines for permitting the payment of proportionate fair-share contributions to mitigate locally and regionally significant transportation impacts consistent with Subsection 163.3180(16), Florida Statutes. Such standards and guidelines shall provide that the City shall not rely on transportation facilities in place or under actual II-4 construction more than three years after the issuance of a building permit, except as provided in Subsection 163.3180(16), Florida Statutes. (Ord. 2006-20, 1 t -27-06) Policy 1.1.8: Coordinate with the Florida Department of Transportation regarding methods by which the pedestrian orientation of the Town Center can be achieved. This coordination may include the possible reclassification of S.R. 434 through the Town Center as a Class II or Class III arterial, the potential designation of the facility west of Vistawilla Drive as one where it would be appropriate to apply a policy constraint prohibiting future widening of the roadway, and~or examining the appropriateness of lowering the speed limit along a portion of the roadway. Objective 1.2: Roadway Network. To provide an attractive, safe, convenient, and efficient arterial, collector and local roadway system that serves travel demands and reduces greenhouse gas emissions, through establishment of criteria to be enforced during site plan review, concurrency management and. access management. Policy 1.2.1: Design the arterial roadway system, through cooperation with the FDOT and Seminole County to provide high-volume, multi-lane facilities with access controls, where appropriate, to preserve the through traffic carrying capacity of the facility. (Ord. 2005-t 1; 09-12-05) Policy 1.2.2: Require joint use access and cross access easements, except where they would be infeasible, to encourage interconnectivity between developments and to reduce congestion on arterials and collector roads. Policy 1.2.3: Encourage the interconnection of collector roads on the street network to provide residents with alternative routes and the potential for a reduction in vehicle miles traveled. Policy 1.2.4: Fund the collector road system by transportation impact fees. (Ord. 2005-10; 2005-30 and 2006-23) Policy 1.2.5: Develop the collector road system according to the Future Transportation Map (Map II-6) and design standards derived under the auspices of the City, to coordinate the construction of segments of the system by both the public and the private sectors. Policy 1.2.6: Continue to address through the Future Transportation Map and periodic review, these factors: • Current and projected deficiencies of arterial roads under other jurisdictions; and • Existing deficiencies of City collector streets. Policy 1.2.7: Utilize appropriate access management alternative techniques to control arterial road access, reduce congestion, and preserve LOS. These techniques include but are not limited to the following: 1 II-5 • Limit access to roads by controlling the number and location of site access driveways; (Ord. 2005-11; 09-12-05) • Cross access easements to adjacent properties where feasible; and • Use of frontage or back-lot parallel access roads where feasible. Policy 1.2.8: Design all major roadways as complete transportation corridors, incorporating bicycle lanes, pedestrian and transit features to achieve a true multimodal system with the intent of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. As funding becomes available, retrofit existing corridors to accommodate multimodal options. Policy 1.2.9: Maintain LOS and projected traffic circulation system demand through the year 2030 by undertaking the projects listed in this element and future transportation studies conducted for the City as well as by encouraging the State, County, and MPO to implement projects on the State~County highway system. Policy 1.2.10: Cooperate and extensively coordinate with the State, the County and the MPO to ensure that their improvements are implemented by the dates indicated, and as the need develops. Monitor proposed developments within the City to determine if roadway infrastructure will be adequate to service projected demand, and development approvals will be dependent upon these criteria. Policy 1.2.11: Create intersections of the new City collector roads with arterials where they will coordinate with the functioning of arterials. Policy 1.2.12: Design and engineer the collector road system to minimize traffic impact on arterial roads. Policy 1.2.13: Limit individual driveway cuts to local roads or alleys. Prohibit new residential driveway cuts onto arterial or collector roadways, unless absolutely warranted. Prohibit existing lots that have access to local roads from creating new driveway cuts onto arterial and collector roads. Policy 1.2.14: Coordinate with FDOT to appropriately re-classify S.R. 434 within the Winter Springs Town Center Corridor as a Class II or Class III arterial based on the increased density of traffic signals along S.R. 434. (Cross Reference: Policy 1.1.7) Policy 1.2.15: Support the widening of S.R. 434 to 4-lanes from S.R. 417 to S.R. 426 in the City of Oviedo. Objective 1.3: Roadway Connectivity. The City shall, through configuration of the City-wide collector road system, create the interaction and cohesiveness that have been lacking among the residential neighborhoods of Winter Springs, but do so in a manner that does not diminish the quality of life within each neighborhood. Policy 1.3.1: Utilize design cross-sections for collector and local roads that accommodate narrower rights-of-way and roadway widths within developments that meet the definition of k traditional neighborhood development. (Ord. 2005-11; 09-12-OS) t II-6 Policy 1.3.2: Require that roadways be dedicated to the public when there is a compelling public interest for the roadways to connect with existing public roadways. Policy 1.3.3: Require new development and substantial redevelopment to connect to existing adjacent roadways, bicycle facilities, and sidewalks or otherwise "stub-out" to future development sites, except when such connections would be patently inappropriate. Policy 1.3.4: Utilize access management standards to ensure appropriate access to the City's transportation system. Standards may include the requirement of joint-use driveways and~or cross access easements to access sites. Policy 1.3.5: Preserve the movement function of the major thoroughfare system by requiring development of parallel roads or cross access easements to connect developments as they are permitted along major roads. Policy 1.3.6: Review through the development review process, all proposed .development for consistency with future transportation projects listed in this element, and for the implementation of the planned bicycle and trail system. Policy 1.3.7: When designing extensions of existing collector roads to their logical arterial connection, choose road designs that naturally slow traffic, so that improved circulation and opportunities for a reduction in vehicle miles traveled is not at the expense of peaceful habitation. (Ord. 2005-11; 09-12-05) Policy 1.3.8: Prohibit the creation of landlocked parcels. Non-residential parcels shall be required to have right-of-way frontage or an adequate access easement (such as in out-parcels in shopping centers). Policy 1.3.9: Require new development and redevelopment to provide adequate emergency access on- site and as necessary to adjacent properties. Objective 1.4: Rights-of--way. The City shall coordinate with the County and the State to protect existing rights-of-way, and to prioritize and acquire future rights-of-way in accordance with the Future Transportation Map. Policy 1.4.1: Update the Future Transportation Map when appropriate to ensure the protection of future rights-of-way. Policy 1.4.2: Do not vacate rights-of-way that are needed to maintain an efficient and adequate transportation system. Policy 1.4.3: Require the provision of adequate setbacks and dedications necessary to implement the Future Transportation Map. Policy 1.4.4: Continue requiring the dedication of needed rights-of-way from new development where applicable. II-7 Policy 1.4.5: Amend setback requirements, zoning restrictions and right-of-way protection requirements, if necessary, to make the City's land development regulations consistent with all elements of the Comprehensive Plan. Policy 1.4.6: Require adequate right-of-way protection for intersections, interchanges and future park- and-ride sites in order to retain flexibility for future growth and expansion. Policy 1.4.7: Require development in the Town Center to provide the necessary right-of-way dedications for the proposed public street network. Policy 1.4.8: Maintain minimum right-of-way requirements for new roadways. Policy 1.4.9: Pursue grant opportunities for median landscaping and road beautification. Policy 1.4.10: Require the dedication of all needed rights-of-way and necessary roadway improvements for all new development, and adopt provisions to protect dedication of roads to the City. (Ord. 2005-11; 09-12-05) Policy 1.4.11: Acquire rights-of-way for future transportation needs as funds become available. (Ord. 2005-1 1; 09-12-05) Policy 1.4.12: Designate U.S. Highway 1792 as a mass transit corridor. Objective 1.5: Multimodal System. The City shall promote alternative modes of transportation to provide 7 safe and efficient multimodal system. Policy 1.5.1: Support safe and convenient on-site motorized and non-motorized traffic flow, adequate pedestrian facilities and connections, and sufficient parking for both motorized and non- motorized vehicles. Policy 1.5.2: Develop standards for access to public transit. Such standards shall apply to new development, substantial improvements of existing development, and to road improvements. Policy 1.5.3: Require both new development and redevelopment to provide adequate safe pedestrian facilities on-site, to adjacent sites as practical, and in adjacent right-of-way. Such facilities shall include lighted sidewalks along both sides of all internal roadways and, as appropriate, on the development side of adjacent roadways. Additionally, mitigation or elimination of existing pedestrian hazards (e.g. upgrading an intersection) may be required, as needed and dependent upon the magnitude of the development or redevelopment project. In lieu of providing these systems, the developer may contribute funds quid pro quo for use by the City for funding expansion of similar systems. (Cross reference: Capital Improvements Element 1.4.5) Policy 1.5.4: Require both new development and redevelopment to provide adequate safe bicycle facilities on-site, to adjacent sites as practical, and in adjacent right-of-way. Such facilities shall include the provision of bicycle parking, as appropriate. Additionally, mitigation or elimination of existing bicycle hazards (e.g. installing bicycle detectors at signalized intersections) may be required, as needed and dependent upon the magnitude II-8 of the development or redevelopment project. In lieu of providing these systems, the developer may contribute funds quid pro quo for use by the City for funding expansion of similar Systems. (Cross reference: Capital Improvements Element 1.4.5) Policy 1.5.5: Promote context-sensitive parking design to encourage walking, bicycling, ridesharing, and transit use. Shared parking is encouraged where feasible. Policy 1.5.6: Require new development and redevelopment to provide adequate on-site handicap accessible facilities, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and, as appropriate, transit facilities to promote safe and efficient intermodal movement options. Policy 1.5.7: Require new development and redevelopment to provide safe and efficient on-site motorized and non-motorized traffic movements, parking, and, as applicable, connections to adjacent sites and rights-of-way. Policy 1.5.8: Encourage increased land use densities and mixed uses, consistent with the Future Land Use Element to enhance the feasibility of transit and promote alternative transportation modes. Policy 1.5.9: Require that new development be compatible with and further the achievement of the Transportation Element. Requirements for compatibility may include, but are not limited to providing clearly delineated routes through parking lots to safely accommodate pedestrian and bicycle circulation. Policy 1.5.10: Include landscaping and streetscaping as roadway design components in order to enhance the function of the road for all users. Policy 1.5.11: Prepare, adopt and implement a pedestrian circulation plan. Priority will be given to those walkways for which heavy recreational usage is projected, as well as those along roadways between residential areas and schools, which can be implemented concurrently with other roadway improvements. (Ord. 2005-1 1; 09-12-05) Policy 1.5.12: Require an effective and safe pedestrian circulation system as a part of any new public or private roadway design and construction. Such a system shall be given major consideration in any substantial road improvement project. Policy 1.5.13: Require that interconnected sidewalks be constructed concurrently with new development, by the developer (including sidewalks required to connect the development to schools, parks, bus stops, or other activity areas functioning as pedestrian generators). Policy 1.5.14: Implement bicycle lanes on both sides of every arterial and collector street where feasible, except in the Town Center where travel lanes are also utilized as bicycle lanes. Coordinate with the MPO, the County and the State to expand the current bicycle lane system. Implement sidewalks on both sides of all arterial and collector streets. Policy 1.5.15: Make intersections pedestrian-friendly whenever possible, by limiting the crossing width to 48 feet; use of adequate lighting; adequate timing for traffic signals; and the provision of facilities for the handicapped. Coordinate with FDOT and the County to implement this policy. __ II-9 Policy 1.5.16: Continue to work with other jurisdictions to convert the former railroad right-of-way into a corridor for alternative modes of travel within the City -walking trails, bicycle paths, equestrian and recreation. Policy 1.5.17: Establish a monitoring system to measure the achievement of the City's multimodal transportation goals. (Ord. 2005-1 1; 09-12-05) Policy 1.5.18: Adopt a Greenway Interchange District (GID) Master Circulation Plan prior to the issuance of any development approval in the portion of the GID west of S.R. 417. Policy 1.5.19: Encourage the implementation of the S.R. 434 Crosstown bus route and linkage to the planned Central Florida Commuter Rail (SunRail). Policy 1.5.20: Establish a Trails Advisory Committee comprised of residents who will work together to pursue the planning and implementation of an interconnected trail and bicycle system and make appropriate recommendations to the City Commission. Policy 1.5.21: Consider the feasibility of a transportation route along S.R. 434 connecting the Town Center and the Greenway Interchange District, with the proposed facility to be limited to transit, bicycle, and~or pedestrian access. Environmental feasibility and traffic circulation would be the primary effort of the initial consideration. If permitting issues are not found to be insurmountable, astudy may be performed to address issues such as potential routes and potential funding sources for capital and operating costs, and additional factors for a transit component such as operating agency, headways, hours of operation, projected ridership, and pricing. Objective 1.6: Pu61ic Transit. The City shall work to enhance the mobility of its traveling residents by improving access to public transit, including LYNX and the planned Central Florida Commuter Rail (SunRail). Policy 1.6.1: To help achieve ridership and thereby reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Policy 1.6.2: Including LYNX routes and the planned Central Florida Commuter Rail (SunRail). And to improve air quality and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Policy 1.6.3: Help achieve ridership by supporting use and with LYNX to provide a safe and efficient public transit system, based on existing and proposed major trip generators and attractors and land uses. Policy 1.6.4: Encourage land uses and site development that promotes public transit within designated public transit corridors, with priority given to those projects that will bring the greatest increase in transit ridership and reduction to greenhouse gas emissions, traffic congestions and air pollution. Policy 1.6.5: Require residential development with greater than 200 units or commercial developments over 50,000 square feet to incorporate a transit shelter, benches, and bicycle parking into their site plan, if located along a transit route, or if not located along a transit route, to F II-10 contribute fees in lieu of these facilities to be used by the City specifically for transit related facilities. Transit ridership to and from such developments shall be encouraged and further improved by including elements, such as: Clearly delineated walkways from the building to the transit stop; and Commercial buildings placed closer to the street with access and windows directed to the street. (Cross reference Future Land Use Element Policy 5.2.4) Policy 1.6.6: Ensure that all roads serviced by public transit routes function at a LOS sufficient to support the bus service. Policy 1.6.7: Notify LYNX of any proposed traffic generators~attractors submitted to the City for review. Policy 1.6.8: Work with LYNX to improve existing bus stops, and to design new ones to include benches, bicycle parking, signage, lights, and protection from the elements. Bus stops shall also be accessible for the handicapped and elderly. Policy 1.6.9: Coordinate with LYNX to accommodate the special needs of the transportation disadvantaged. Policy 1.6.10: Inventory sidewalks within one-quarter to one-half mile of the new LYNX Crosstown bus route to identify missing links in the pedestrian system. Implement new sidewalks where sidewalks do not exist or where sidewalks are in diS.R.epair and are hazardous, as funding becomes available to provide access to transit and promote ridership. 1. Land Use Coordination. Throu hout the tanning period, the City shall coordinate the Oblect~ve 7 9 P transportation system needs with land use designations, and ensure that existing and proposed population densities, housing and employment patterns, and land uses are consistent with the transportation modes and services proposed for these areas. Policy 1.7.1: Establish standards that promote the location of affordable housing in close proximity to employment opportunities and transit services. Policy 1.7.2: Continue to adopt and enforce regulations and standards that require that the design and function of the roadway be adequate for the type, size, and location of the land uses they serve. Policy 1.7.3: Encourage land uses that generate high traffic counts to locate adjacent to arterial roads and mass transit corridors. (Ord. 2005-11; 09-12-05) Policy 1.7.4: Update the traffic study portion of this Transportation Element periodically to reflect the most current population projections. (Ord. 2005-1 1; 09-12-05). Policy 1.7.5: Develop standards to ensure that development in the Town Center consists of pedestrian- sized blocks. (Cross reference: Future Land Use Policy ^) II-11 'objective 1.8: Environment. The City should conserve the natural environment and augment open space ~s functions of road development. Policy 1.8.1: Choose rights-of-way for the City's collector road system, where valid options are available, distant enough from natural drainage features and upland habitats to allow coexistence with these natural areas. Policy 1.8.2: Allow the incursion of a roadway through natural drainage features and upland habitats only when its public benefit outweighs other concerns. Policy 1.8.3: Include in all new road and trail plans, adequate right-of-way for potential landscaping, where feasible, and provide in the annual budget of the City, adequate funds for maintenance. Policy 1.8.4: Designate scenic guidelines to preserve existing vegetation and canopy, as much as possible. (Ord. 2005-11; 09-12-05) Objective 1.9: Intergovernmental Coordination. Traffic circulation planning will be coordinated with the MPO, FDOT, Seminole County, neighboring jurisdictions and other transportation related agencies. Policy 1.9.1: Keep appraised of the schedules for improvements and ongoing policies of all jurisdictions whose transportation responsibilities within the City limits affect the quality of life and the LOS on which Winter Springs citizens depend. Policy 1.9.2: Review subsequent versions of the FDOT Five-Year Transportation Plan, in order to update or modify this element, as necessary. Policy 1.9.3: Keep abreast and review updates to the Transportation Element of the Seminole County Comprehensive Plan, in order to update or modify the City' element, as necessary. Policy 1.9.4: Promote a comprehensive transportation planning process that coordinates state, regional, and local transportation plans. Policy 1.9.5: Support the State and the County on the establishment of alternative transportation systems, including high speed, commuter, and~or light rail line systems connecting Seminole County with other areas in Florida. Policy 1.9.6: Work with FDOT and Seminole County to make low speed urban street design the normal, default practice for street construction, reconstruction, or modification within the Town Center. These urban street design features shall include, but not be limited to, wide sidewalks, narrow motor-vehicle lanes, street trees, prominent crosswalks, tight turning radii, and very limited use of turn lanes. The City shall encourage the same policy be adopted and implemented by these entities for their roadway segments within the Town Center. Policy 1.9.7: Coordinate development of all property in the City adjacent to Tuskawilla Road with County requirements for laneage and intersection improvements to lessen development impact until the road is improved. II-12 Policy 1.9.8: Coordinate with the Florida Department of Transportation regarding a reduction in the speed limit on S.R. 434 in the Town Center, when warranted, to better reflect the pedestrian-friendly environment being created in the Town Center. (Cross reference: Policy 1.1.7) Policy 1.9.9: Discourage the widening of S.R. 434 west of Vistawilla Drive. (Cross reference: Policy 1.1.7) Objective 1.10: Traffic Management Systems. The City shall evaluate the need and feasibility of implementing traffic management systems. (Ord. 2005-11; 09-12-05) Policy 1.10.1: Consider adopting and~or promoting Transportation System Management (TSM) or Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies to enhance traffic capacity, movement and safety, if needed. Consider additional TSM~TDM strategies, such as staggered work hours, transit, trail, ridesharing~carpooling incentives, guaranteed ride home and other TSM~TDM measures. Objective 1.11: Concurrency Management System. The City shall maintain a Concurrency Management System to ensure that transportation facilities and services needed to support development and redevelopment are available concurrent with the impacts of such development. Policy 1.11.1: Continue requiring that adequate transportation facilities to maintain the City's LOS standards be available to meet the traffic demands of all new development prior to the issuance of a final development order, in accordance with the Concurrency Management Provisions set forth in the Capital Improvements Element of this Plan. Policy 1.11.2: Require that all new developments anticipated to generate 300 or more daily trips be required to submit a Transportation Impact Study. (Ord. 2005-11; 09-12-05) (Cross reference: Policy 1.1.3) Policy 1.11.3: Require new development, regardless of size, to provide operational improvements to the City' transportation system to mitigate their impacts on the system, to ensure smooth traffic flow, and to aid in the elimination of hazards. Improvements may include, but are not limited to: providing added connectivity, the addition of turn lanes, deceleration lanes, signage, signals and pavement markings, and contributions to the City's multimodal system. (Ord. 2005-11; 09-12-05) Policy 1.11.4: Require that transportation facilities needed to serve new development are in place, or under actual construction, within 3 years after the approval of a building permit, or its functional equivalent that results in traffic generation. The only exceptions to this policy are those described in Subsection 163.3180 of the Florida Statutes. Policy 1.11.5: Maintain records to determine whether any 1 10% de minimus transportation impact threshold pursuant to Subsection 163.3180(6) of the Florida Statutes is reached. A summary of these records shall be submitted with the annual Capital Improvements Element update. Policy 1.11.6: Consider conducting a study to determine the feasibility of implementing a Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA), Multimodal Transportation District (MMTD), or similar II-13 concurrency management alternative(s) for the Town• Center, Greenway Interchange District, and the developable land between the two areas, to encourage urban infill development. Such a study, following coordination with FDOT regarding the methodology, may include: Establishing whether concurrency management alternatives are appropriate to help achieve the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, Investigating the implementation of similar systems in jurisdictions with similar characteristics and issues, Establishing guidelines for granting exceptions to transportation concurrency for urban infill development, urban redevelopment, downtown revitalization, or similar purpose allowed by Florida Statutes, Evaluating possible mobility strategies that promote the purposes for which an exception may be proposed, and Determining specific steps that would need to be undertaken by the City. • t II-14 B. INTRODUCTION The City of Winter Springs is located within an urbanized portion of a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) - METROPLAN ORLANDO. Therefore, the City is required by the State to adopt a Transportation Element, as opposed to a Traffic Circulation Element, and to coordinate the element with the long-range transportation plan of the MPO. The purpose of the Transportation Element is to plan for a multimodal transportation system that emphasizes accessibility by placing emphasis on public transportation systems; encourages the development of compact, pedestrian-oriented urban areas; promotes energy efficient development patterns; and protects air quality. An essential base for planning a transportation system is the Future Land Use Element. The Future Land Use Map will determine where new or improved transportation facilities may be needed. The Transportation Element will assess the condition and capacity of the existing transportation facilities, project future needs, set Levels of Service (LOS) standards for roads and determine future system improvements. Roadway LOS standards will be established to ensure that adequate facility capacity for future development is concurrently sufficient with the issuance of development orders and development permits. These standards will be established for each roadway link consistent with the facility type, and current Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) LOS guidelines. The transportation planning process in Seminole County is a joint effort among various federal, state, regional, county and municipal agencies working together with the MPO. This agency ensures that highways, public transit, bicycle, pedestrian, and other transportation facilities are coordinated and planned consistent with planned development in the urbanized area. September 2004, METROPLAN ORLANDO adopted the 2025 Long Range Transportation Plan for the Orlando Urban Area, a 20-year multimodal plan for guiding transportation improvements in the Orlando urban area (Orange, Osceola, and Seminole Counties). The plan is based on regional needs identified through the process of forecasting future travel demand, evaluating system alternatives, and selecting those options which best meet the mobility needs of the region. The plan recommends road, highway, beltway, rail, and transit system improvements to be implemented by 2025. The plan represents the best combination of financial resources and improvements to meet the goals and objectives of the study. C. INVENTORY An efficient transportation system should provide access to various land uses through alternative transportation modes. The overview of the existing multimodal transportation system within the City of Winter Springs provides the basis for analyzing existing transportation deficiencies and needs within the City. This section will identify existing roadway and transit facilities, availability of public parking facilities, airport and rail line systems, availability of bicycle and pedestrian facilities and other ancillary services and programs. 1. Road System Historically, the City of Winter Springs, Florida has been an auto dependent, suburban community served by one major north-south County road, Tuskawilla Road, and one major east-west route, S.R. 434, which is primarily a 4- lane arterial highway. Other major roads in the City and vicinity are S.R. 417 (Seminole Expressway), S.R. 419, U.S. 17-92, Red Bug Lake Road, and East Lake Drive. The City's roadway network is displayed on Map II-1. II-15 • S.R. 417 (Seminole ExpresswoyJ: A north-south four-lane divided expressway located along the eastern boundary of the City, which provides access to Sanford to the north and Orange County to the south. • US. 1T-92: North-south principal arterial located along the west boundary of the City. It connects with Sanford to the north and Orange County to the south. The route passes through Orlando, Winter Park, Maitland, Casselberry, Longwood, Winter Springs, Lake Mary and Sanford. It is currently asix-lane undivided facility where adjacent to the City of Winter Springs, and four lanes north of Shepard Road. • S.R. 434: A principle arterial that runs from south of Altamonte Springs north to Longwood, then east through the center of Winter Springs to Oviedo, then south past the University of Central Florida to S.R. 50 east of Orlando. S.R. 434 within the City of Winter Springs is primarily afour- lane facility, with a portion of the road east of S.R. 417 consisting of a two-lane segment. S.R. 434 passes through the Town Center, the City of Winter Springs' concentrated mixed-use downtown urban center. Because the Town Center is apedestrian-oriented environment, the posted speed of 45 miles per hour on S.R. 434 poses safety and other issues for pedestrian crossings. • S.R. 419: A minor arterial that runs from S.R. 434 in Winter Springs to U.S. 17-92 near Lake Mary. Within the City of Winter Springs, it is a two-lane undivided facility. • Tuskawilla Road: A four-lane County minor arterial that runs from S.R. 434 in Winter Springs to S.R. 426 near the Orange County line. • Red Bug Lake Road: A four-lane County principal arterial that runs from S.R. 436 in Casselberry east to S.R. 426 in Oviedo where it aligns with Mitchell Hammock Road. • East Lake Drive: A realignment and widening of this facility was completed in 2008. It presently functions as a four-lane County minor arterial that runs from Tuskawilla Road west to Seminola Boulevard which provides easy access to U.S. 17-92. The recent improvements to the facility provide a convenient alternative for many trips that would otherwise utilize S.R. 434. a. Jurisdiction and Maintenance Responsibility Map II-1 shows the jurisdictional responsibility of each roadway in the City of Winter Springs. The road system includes one limited access facility (S.R. 417), three state arterials (U.S. 17-92, S.R. 434 and S.R. 419) and two County arterials, Tuskawilla Road and East Lake Drive. There is also one County collector (a portion of Shepard Road), nineteen (19) City collectors, and three local roads included in the classification. b. Functional Classification Tables II-2 and Map II-1 show the functional classification of major roads in the City of Winter Springs. The functional classification of public roads in this element is based on FDOT criteria, which consider quantitative and qualitative factors such as jurisdiction, land access, route length, and trip lengths. A road hierarchy is used to identify relative importance of roads within the system, provide guidance for LOS and design standards, aid in establishing improvement priorities, identify maintenance responsibility, and assist in determining funding and financing policies. The hierarchy used in this element includes: II-16 (1) Limited Access Facilities: Designed fo provide regional mobility via uninterrupted flow at high travel speeds for regional trips. Access spacing is generally on the order of one mile or more, and average travel speeds are above 40 miles per hour. There is no direct land access, and urban freeways are multi-lane, divided facilities. Lane access is always via ramps to major arterials or frontage roads. S.R. 417 (Seminole Expressway) is part of the Florida Intrastate Highway System (FINS) and the only limited access facility within the City of Winter Springs. (2) Arterials: Provide regional mobility via both uninterrupted flow and interrupted flow segments. Arterials provide mobility around and through urban and community cores, and accommodate relatively long trip lengths as opposed to providing access to adjacent properties. Arterials are sometimes further classified for performance as Class I, Il, and 111 based on the number of signals per mile, access controls, geometric cross sections, and speed limits. (3) Collectors: Provide for movement between local streets and the arterial network. Collectors serve residential, commercial and industrial areas. (4) Local Roads: Provide direct access to abutting properties. Local roads accommodate traffic originating in or traveling to properties within a neighborhood, commercial or industrial development. Local roads are not considered part of the major thoroughfare system. • II-17 LEGEND: e ~ ~ -------- 2W5/20W PRUPOSEDALKiNMENT ~ ~ + ^ ~ ^ ~ ^ PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL {STATE) Fa N M ~ ~ URBAN ARTERIAL/MAJOR C.OLLECTtlR(000NTY) 11i h ,1;~'. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ MINOR COLLECTOR (CWNtY) 1C 9+~ ~ O ~ °~' • 2L • MUNICIPAL COLLECTOR {tiITY) 4~^ Gti~ 96 y3 ~ ~ !„4J.L~ _F ~ 2L NUMSER OP LANc'S PROPOSED CITY COLLECTOR a ~~~ ~ ~HEPARD RO,rr *CENTRAL WINS * ~ PAWSYdAY + ~ 2L ~ 2L 4Y ~ 2L 4L DORAN DR ~'%' BLUMBERD DR 8L 2L ~ 2L ^ } Sc 6 ~ ~ . ~ R ~.~ ~ ;~ ~ ^ , 2L TOtiVN CENTER TOY{NHDUS[ RD. ~$ ~ p = ~ S.R. 43M1 < AL ' 2L ~1 WND~ * SPINE RD. (NORTH ANDSWTH OF S.R 134) * ~ 2 ~ ~ ^ ^ ~ ~ ~ K ~41 RD. TRE[SWALL(?W * . ii ~ ~ m ~ 4L w ZL ~ ~} 'A o3 ~c ZL 2L = ~ *SOUTHWEST LCOP ? * ^ • ~ ~ ~ , 2L N : ~ $ ~ B * CLIFF ROSE DR. *SDUTHEAST LOOP ~ r~ ^ ^ ^ ~ ^ ^ ~ !• ~ ^ ^ ~ ^ Qc 2L R~ O~ n' ZL •~ MARV ~ 4L ~ ~ ~~ ~ yyyN ~ 2L 2L IL ~ 4 ~ pytf 5~ BLY . 2L - ~}' i ~ ( ~ Z O ~ 3EAflryq.,S ' ~ ~. ~` WINT Ea~'Htly~ 2L ~ m ~g ~ Q1 °`L L7 7+D ~ BLyp. \, A'~ SL 4L ~~ ?J. O _J y1 2L ZL gq ~ ~ = 2L cg ~ ~b ~ 2 m ~ ~ ~ E. LAK ~ g E DR. 2L 25 4L R .j .` ~ .'il A O C] r~ ~~--f ;\ ~ t ~ Qvg` 4L ~ n ~ r ~4, WAY bL . ~ i eL z ~ rn ~ s ~' ~ 3L ~ . Bw ~' Dn. ° rt EAC4c ~,@. ~ 2L ^ m N O ~ n * ~ 6CLp ~ , C 2L ~ 4L ~, ~ ,'~, 2L 2L = y ~ RED BUD LAKE FiD. 1 ~ -R 4L ~ 2L qL 4L . ro N A ~ ' • m # II-18 Map ii- 1: Existing Roadway Classification, Jurisdiction, and Number of Lanes Table II - 1: Historic Daily Volumes and Year 2008 Roadway Linix Levels of Service (LOS) .ROADWAY FROM TO US 17-92 SEMINOLA BLVD SR 434 US 17-92 6R 434 SR 419 SR.434 US 17-82 BELLE AVENUE SR 434 BELLE AVENUE SR 419 SR 434 SR 419 TUSKAWILLA RD SR 434 TUSKAWILLA RD SPRING AVENUE SR.434 SPRING AVENUE. SR 417 SR 434 SIB 4.1.7 DELEQN STREET SR.419 US 17-92 EDGEMON AVENUE. SR 419 EDGEMON AVENUE SR 434 E LAKE (see Nate 1). SEMINOLA BLVD PARK DR E LAKE (see Mda 1) PARK DR STERLING OAKS DR E LAKE (see Nde 1) STERLING OAKS DR AZALEA RD E LAKE (sea Note 1)' AZALEA RD TUSKAWILLA RD TUSKAWILLA RD RED BUG LAKE RA EAGLE. BLVD TUSKAWILLA RD EAGLE BLVD E;LAKE.DR TUSKAWILLARD EAST LAKE DR DYSON DR TUSKAWILLA RD DYSON DR .WINTER. SPRINGS BLVD. TUSKAWILLA RD WINTER SPRINGS BLVD. TROTWOOD BLVD TUSKAWILLA RD TROTWOOD BLVD SR 434 SHEPARD RD SR 434 SR 419 " Updated to 2007 Florida LOS Values "" SR 434 to Shepard is 6 lanes. Cdledion point is north of Shepard.. LOS D" DAILY DAILY DAILY DAILY NO.OF ROADWAY DAILY VOLUME VOLUME VOLUME V/C RATIO LOS LANES CLASS CAPACITY 2008 2004 2001 2008 2008 6 ARTERIAL 53500 47429 51190 36959 0.89 G 4 ARTERIAL 35700 33832 39579 36959 0.95 C 4 ARTERIAL 35700 35370 25731 24988 0.99 D. 4 ARTERIAL 35700 27726 24410 23788 0.78 B 4' ARTERIAL 35700 36952 29983 32418 1.04 F 4 ARTERIAL 35700 261:30 21008 1872.0 0.73 B. 4 ARTERIAL 35700 227.43 22091 19394 0.64 B 2 ARTERIAL 16400 18500 NA NA 1.19 F 2 ARTERIAL 16400 17085 19265 21090 1.04 F 2 ARTERIAL 16400 15995 16888 18417 -0.98 D 4 ARTERIAL 14600. 12441 NA NA 0.85 D 4 ARTERIAL 14600 13140 NA NA t1.90 D 4 ARTERIAL 14600 10809- NA NA 0.74 D 4 ARTERIAL 14600. 14362 NA NA 0.96 D 4 ARTERAL 35700 34237- 31981 27583 0.96 C 4 ARTERIAL 35700 3151T 30532: 27844 0,88 C 4. ARTERIAL 35700 26256 NA NA 0.74 B 4 ARTERIAL 35700. 20155. NA NA 0.56 B 4 ARTERIAL 35700 19183 23044- 14226 0.54 B 4 ARTERIAL 35700 19582 20294 13822 0.55 B 2 COLLECTOR 10000 4542 5226 0.45 C NA =direct comparison nd available 1'or segment Note 1: A realignment and widening of East Lake Drive to 4 lanes was completed in 2008, 2008 treffic counts for ails roadway are not yet available, so the recent:data. in the table are2007 counts:when the roadway was 2 lehes. Level of seMOe shorn in this table is based oh a 2-lane segmeht. The Number of Lanes column reflects that the roadway isnow 4 lanes, end the Roadway Glass cdutnn roflects that-the roadway is now functioning as an arterial. Nde:2: 2008-daily volumes are based on Seminole County trefflccounts fw the first querter.of 2008. SOURCES: Seminole County Trefic Engineering, City of WinterSprings, CPH Engineering, Sievers & Associates LLC II-19 • • Table II - 2: Historic Daily Volumes and Roadway Link Levels of Service with Existing Network (City Streets) LOS D* NO.OF ROADWAY DAILY DAILY V/C DAILY ROADWAY FROM .L .LANES CLASS YEAR CAPACITY .VOLUME RATIO ~ SHEOAH BL1/D SHEPARR RD SR 434 2 COLLECTOR. 2004 10000 2676 0.27 C BAHAMA RD MOSS RD SHORE RD 2 COLLECTOR. 10000 NA NA NA MOSS RD PANAMA RD SR 434 2 COLLECTOR. 2004 10000 3932 0.39 C MOSS RD ** SR 434 5R 419 2 COLLECTOR 2004 10500 2594 0.26. C NORTHERN WAY WINTER SPRINGS BLVD TROTWOOD BLVD 2 COLLECTOR 20D1 10000 2761 -0.28 C NORTHERN WAY TRO7VWQD BLVD VISTA WILLA OR 2 COLLECTOR 2001 10000 2942 0.29 C NORTHERN WAY VISTA WILLA DR SHETLAND AVE 2 COLLECTOR 2001 10000 3012 0.30 C NORTHERN. WAY GREENBRIARtN WINTER SPRINGS SLVO 2 COLLECTOR. 2001 10000 2713 0.27 C TROTWI~OD BLVD TUSKAIMLLA RD NORTHERN WAY 2 COLLECTOR 2001 10000 4190 0.42. C TROTWOOD BLVD TUSKAIMLLA.RD: WEST 2 COLLECTOR 2001 10000 1647 0.16 C VIANTER SPRINGS.BLVD TUSKAVNLLA RD NORTHERN WAY 2 GOLIECT.OR 200.1 10500 7647 0.76 D WINTER SPRINGS BLVD NORTHERN W4Y GREENBRIAR LN 2 COLLECTOR 2001 10500 5280 .0.53 D WINTER SPRINGS BLVD NORTHERN WAY NORTHERN WAY 2 COLLECTOR.. 2001 10500 7647` 0.76- D WINTER"SPRINGS BLVD NORTHERN: WAY SR 426- 4 COLLECTOR'- 20Di 22600 11152 .0.50 C SHORE RD PANAMA RD SR 434 2 COLLECTOR 2001 10000 436- 0.04 C HAYES RD PANAMA RD SR 434 2 COLLECTOR 2001 10000 5671 0.57 D DOLPHIN RD SHORES RD HAYES RD 2 LOCAL 2001 10000 2455 0.25 C FISHER RD EAST LAKE DR PANAMA RD 2 COLLECTOR 2001 19000 944 0.09 C TUSCORA DR NORTHERN WAY SR 434 2 COLLECTOR 2001 10000 2242 A.22 G VISTAWILLA DR NORTHERN:WAY SENECA BLVD 2 COLLECTOR 2001 1000.0 3840 0.38 C GREENBRIAR LN NORTHERN WAY WINTER.SPRINGS BLVD 2 COLLECTOR 2001 10000 1569 0.16 C DYSON DR TUSKAWILLA RD SHETLAND AVE 2 COLLECTOR 2001 10000 1221 0.12. C SHETLAND AVE CITRUS DYSON DR 2 COLLECTOR. 2001 10000 5575- 0.56 C • II-20 • • Table II-2: Historic Daily Volumes and Roadway Link Levels of Service with Existing Network (City Streets) -continued ROADWAY .FROM TO EDGEMON AVE SEMINOLA BLVD PANAMA RD EDGEMON AVE PANAMA, RR SR 434 EDGEMON AVE SR 434 SR 419 WADE ST SR 434 SR 4.19 MCLEODS WAY ROBERTS FAMILY LANE SR 434 DORAN DRNE SR 434 WS HIGH SCHOOL ORANGE AVENUE TUSKAIMLLA ROAD CENTRAL WINDS BARK ALTON RD HAYES RD SHORE RD SENECA BLVD WINTER SPRINGS: BLVD. 112 WAY SENECA BLVD 1R WAY VISTAWILLA LOS D` NO. OF ROADWAY DAILY DAILY V/C LANES CLASS YEAR QAPACITY VOLUM RATIO 2 COLLECTOR 2001 10000 3250 0.33 2 COLLECTOR 2001 10000 2930 0.29 2 COLLECTOR 2001 10000 3281 -0.33 2 COLLECTOR- 2001 10000 623 0.06 2 COLLECTOR 10000 NA NA 2 COLLECTOR 2005 -10000 1270 0.13 2 COLLECTOR. 10000 NA NA 2 LOCAL 2001 10000 1246 0.,12. 2 LOCAL 2001 10000 21:1..5 0.21 2 LOCAL 2001 10000 1642 0.16 DAILY LOS C C C C NA C Np C C C "-Updated to_2002 LOS Values "" Tum Lanes Included Note: 2001 daily-volumes are based on qty. of V4tnter Springs.traffic counts conducted in February 2001. Sou[ces: CPH Engineering, City of Vbinter Springs II-21 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN c. Constrained Facilities Subsection 339.155, Florida Statutes, makes governmental police powers available to preserve and protect property necessary for transportation corridors and recommends that needed rights-of-way be acquired as far in advance of construction as possible. FDOT requests that local governments identify constrained roadways in their comprehensive plans to ensure maintenance of the operating conditions, so that significant degradation in the LOS does not occur. A constrained roadway is one in which adding two or more through lanes to meet current or future needs is not possible due to physical, environmental or policy barriers. With the development of the Town Center and its pedestrian orientation, the conflicts and potential conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians continue to increase. To assist in maintaining the pedestrian orientation of the Town Center, the City of Winter Springs will coordinate with the Florida Department of Transportation to see if a variance to Rule 14-94, F.A.C. can be obtained. d. Crash Locations Crash analysis is critical because it provides a tool for City and State officials to recommend appropriate safety measures. Crash frequency along with roadway performance can be used to prioritize future roadway needs. Table II-3 shows crash data for 2007, compiled by Seminole County Traffic Engineering from reports provided by the Winter Springs Police Department. It shows those road segments with 5 crashes or more during that year, and Map II-2 visually depicts those areas. The road segment with the largest number of incidents was S.R. 434 at Tuskawilla Road with 29 crashes. • II-22 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Map II- 2: Signalized Intersections and Crash Locations, 2007 ~P~AE~ANDJNSERT MAf'::11`.Z • II-23 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN • • Table II - 3: Crash Locations with Greater than 5 Crashes, 2007 Number of Crashes Intersection Fatalities In'turies 29 S.R. 434 @Tuskawilla Rd. 0 5 19 S.R. 434 @ Fountain: Tree Dr. 0 2 18 S.R. 434 a~ Timberlane Tr. 0 5 17 S.R. 434. @ Parlcstorie Blvd. 0 8 17 S.R. 434 @ Doran Dr. 0 5 15 S.R. 434 @ Moss Rd. 0 2 1 3 S.R. 419 @ Wade St. 0 5 10 S.R. 434 @ Vis#awilla Dr. 0 7 1 0 Tuskawilla Rd. @ Trotwood Blvd. 0 5 10 S.R. 434 @ Edgemon Ave. 0 3 10 S.R. 434 @ S.R. 419 0 3 9 Tuskawilla Rd. @ Winter Springs Blvd. 0 0 8 S.R. 434 a~ Hayes Rd. 0 4 8 S.R. 419 @ Edgemon Ave.. 0 3 7 S.R. 434 @ Central Winds Dr. 0 1 6 S.R. 434 a~7 CoterAve. 0 3 5 S.R. 434 a~ Consolidated Service 0 4 5 S.R. 434 @ Belle Ave. 0 3 5 S.R. 434 @ Sheoah Blvd. 0 0 5 Winter Springs B1vd.'@ Northern Way 0 0 Note: The crashes listed above were crashes that the City of Winter Springs Police Department responded to in 2007. Source: Seminole County Traffic Engineering, Sievers 8~ Associates LLC e. Signalized Intersections The location of signalized intersections is shown on Map II-2. Most of the intersections in the City use stop signs rather than traffic signals. Traffic lights are located mainly along S.R. 434, S.R. 419, and Tuskawilla Road. f. Evacuation Routes The City of Winter Springs adopted the Peace Time Emergency Plan in 1997. The plan outlines responsibilities for all departments in the City in the case of a man- made or natural disaster of local scale. For large-scale disasters, the City follows • II-24 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN the County's Comprehensive Emergency Plan. This plan does not identify evacuation routes, as Seminole County is a "receiving area", but lists the shelters available. All schools in Winter Springs can serve as shelter sites. 2. Public Transit System • • The fixed route bus transit system in Seminole County is operated by LYNX, which focuses its service on Orange, Seminole, and Osceola counties, with some service to Polk, Volusia and Lake Counties (see Map II-3). Table II-4 shows the public transit characteristics and ridership figures for 2003 through the first three quarters of 2008. Table II - 4: Public Transit Characteristics Rovte Service Area Days Frequency; Hours U.S. 17-92 Mon. to Sat. 30 min. 5:02 AM to 1 1:05 PM 103 Casselberr to Sanford ( Y ) Sunday 60 min. 6:24 AM to 8:05 PM 323 S.R. 434 Mon. to Sat. 60 min. 5:00 AM to 9:54 PM 47 Oviedo - UCF Mon. to Sat. 60 min. 5:00 AM to 9:54 PM Source: LYNX Website, October 2008. Ridership* Year Route 39 'Route 103 ' Route 47 2003 652,765 52,081 2004 698,917 45,786 2005 739,886 46,946 2006 736,273 52,618 2007 765,245 50,049 2008 (Jan -Sep) ** 488,623 48,178 38,534 * Does not include S.R.434 Crosstown route #323, which did not become operational until April 2009. ** In mid-August 2008, Route 39 was split into two. The northern portion of the old Route 39 is now Route 103 which follows the same path from Casselberry to Sanford. Source: LYNX II-25 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Map II- 3: Public Transit System and Major Traffic Generators/Attradors ~u,~~~` ~iJP~,dATE~,sYVI[` 5~RU5~T~WN° ,. ; ~.7ftA'~1=1e' ~ µ S AFtF THE S~yt • • II-26 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Presently, LYNX buses serve two routes adjacent to the City. Route 103 generally follows the U.S. 17-92 corridor from Sanford to Casselberry. Route 47 primarily serves Oviedo from the University of Central Florida to Oviedo Marketplace. Neither link provides any service on S.R. 434 in the vicinity of the Town Center. A new east-west route (Link 323), also known as the S.R. 434 Crosstown, connects Routes 103 and 47. The Crosstown service begins at Oviedo Marketplace, and runs along S.R. 417 to S.R. 434, then follows the S.R. 434 corridor through Longwood and Altamonte Springs terminating at the Rosemont Superstop in northwest Orlando. This service, funded by FDOT and Seminole County, is to be a 2-year demonstration project beginning in April 2009. It will provide the City with a much needed bus route to the City's major traffic generators. The route will be a feeder route, providing connecting service to the planned Longwood Commuter Rail (SunRail) Station. SunRail is scheduled to begin service in 201 1. As public transit service is implemented to serve the City of Winter Springs, the City will coordinate with METROPLAN ORLANDO and LYNX to assist in maintaining the County's adopted LOS of 1.03 revenue miles per capita per year. 3. Parking System At this time, the City of Winter Springs does not have any significant public parking facilities. Major events which demand additional public parking are accommodated by a coordinated and cooperative effort between the City and private landowners. 4. Bicycle System The Florida Department of Environmental Protection's Office of Greenways and Trails owns, and has sub-leased to Seminole County, the Cross Seminole Trail, a portion of which is located in Winter Springs. The Seminole County Parks and Recreation Department is in charge of maintaining the trail. An Interlocal Agreement exists between the City of Winter Springs and Seminole County regarding use and maintenance of the Cross Seminole Trail. The City of Winter Springs Parks and Recreation Department assisted with the design of the restroom facility located at the Black Hammock trailhead, located within the jurisdictional limits of the City, and is responsible for the maintenance and cleaning of the restroom facility. A 1.8-mile section of the trail corridor along S.R. 426 (south of Red Bug Lake Road) is owned by FDOT. The trail currently runs from Layer Elementary School in Winter Springs to the intersection of S.R. 434 and S.R. 426 in downtown Oviedo. Other built sections of the trail include from CR 46A south to Greenway Boulevard in Lake Mary and from Mikler Road to the Orange County Line. The Cross Seminole Trail connects with the Seminole Wekiva Trail via the I-4 Pedestrian Bridge in Lake Mary. Upon completion, the Cross Seminole Trail will be a 34.5 mile long continuous trail linking Altamonte Springs, Longwood, Lake Mary, Winter Springs, and Oviedo and connecting to the Cady Way Trail and the Orange County Trail System. The trail will run from Spring Hammock Preserve in Winter Springs to Howell Branch Road at the Orange County Line and will connect several parks including: Central Winds Park, Soldier's Creek Park, Big Tree Park, Greenwood Lakes Park, Sweetwater Creek Park, Torcaso Park, Lawton House Park, and Spring Hammock. The trail will also connect seven schools: Layer Elementary, Winter Springs High School, Indian Trails Middle School, Keeth Elementary, Trinity Preparatory School, Oviedo High School, and Lawton Elementary. • II-27 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Cross Seminole Trail is currently under construction from the Oviedo Mall to S.R. 434. Design is complete on the segment from Mikler to Red Bug Lake Road and construction is scheduled to begin in fate 2008. A pedestrian overpass is programmed to be constructed over Red Bug Lake Road beginning in the fall 2008, with a connection to S.R. 426 near the Oviedo Mall. The trail will also be realigned by the FDOT S.R. 426 widening project. The trail will cross at the signalized intersection of Marketplace Blvd 8~ S.R. 426 and connect with the trail corridor along Aulin Avenue. Existing and future portions of the Cross Seminole Trail are depicted in the Recreation and Open Space Element. The Conceptual City Trails Network Map, located in the Recreation and Open Space Element, identifies opportunities for increased bicycle. and pedestrian connectivity in the City. The City has had recent success in securing funding for bicycle and pedestrian amenities through FDOT grants and the "Safe Routes to School" program. The City should continue to explore opportunities for implementing additional interconnecting bike routes and trails. As the Town Center and GID develop, there may be an opportunity to provide shorter and easier bicycle and pedestrian connectivity between these activity centers. The configuration of the Cross Seminole Trail will take the trail from the Town Center south across S.R. 434 via an overpass, then east to the Black Hammock Trailhead where a second S.R. 434 crossing would be necessary to provide access to the GID to the north. Options for a more direct bicycle pedestrian route north of S.R. 434 linking the two centers could be considered by the City, but is should be noted that a wetland crossing would be required and undeveloped property might need to be purchased. The City could explore provision of pedestrian and~or bicycle accommodations .along S.R. 434 that would provide a less direct route, but would likely minimize additional right-of-way needs. As noted above, the corridor could be shared with local transit service linking the Town Center and the GID. 5. Pedestrian System The analysis of existing pedestrian conditions found that the City was well served by sidewalks, but encouraged identification of missing links and prioritization of improvements to enhance pedestrian connectivity. The Cross Seminole Trail discussed in the Recreation and Open Space Element offers alternate pedestrian and bicycle paths into the heart of the Town Center and equestrian ~ hiking trails around the periphery. The City has coordinated with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) regarding various issues concerning S.R. 434 and general agreement has been reached on resolving many of the issues such as access involving the pedestrian-oriented Town Center area. However, the issue of posted roadway speed limits on S.R. 434 through the Town Center has not yet been resolved. FDOT will require a detailed engineering study to justify the City's request for a lower speed limit, in accordance with the applicable Florida Statutes. A speed study for S.R. 434 was conducted by FDOT in 2008 which resulted in reducing the posted speed limit from 50 mph to 45 mph from Central Winds Parkway to Tuskawilla Road. Further reductions may be achievable in conjunction with development of the Town Center. Approximately 1.5 miles of S.R. 434 passes through the area designated on the Future Land Use Map as Town Center. Presently, this portion of the highway is part of a segment considered a Class I arterial with less than two signalized intersections per mile. At least one additional traffic II-28 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN signal within the Town Center area is planned at Michael Blake Blvd., which would result in more than two intersections per mile. As the Town Center continues to develop, it will be appropriate to readdress how the Town Center area is viewed in terms of roadway class and to work with FDOT to determine if the Town Center segment's characteristics should result in the segment being designated a Class II arterial with 2 to 4.5 signals per mile. The designation of the segment as a Class II arterial would allow for a change in the speed limit (currently 45 mph) to as low as 35 mph according to FDOT's generalized characteristics of arterial classes. A reduction of vehicle speeds on S.R. 434 through the Town Center would result in an environment much more conducive to the high levels of pedestrian activity anticipated for the Town Center at buildout. Such a reduction in vehicle speeds would be supported by FDOT's mission, the four key components of which are safety, mobility, economic prosperity, and the quality of the environment and communities. Although the Class II arterial designation would be based on an approximately 1.5 mile segment (FDOT guidelines for arterial facility analysis have a general recommended length of at least one mile), it might be appropriate to have a reduced speed limit only in the core of the downtown area. The City has identified the key corridor as being a 0.6 mile segment from Doran Drive to the Cross Seminole Trail Bridge. It should be noted that a 35 mph speed limit is currently in effect on S.R. 434 for an approximately 0.3 mile distance in downtown Longwood. To create a central core downtown pedestrian friendly district in the Town Center, retrofits to S.R. 434 will be essential to the existing streetscape. Coordination will be necessary with the Florida Department of Transportation to address proposed hardscape and landscaping alternatives including the narrowing of vehicular travel lanes, the demarcation of bicycle lanes, the addition of landscaped medians, on-street parking, and pedestrian crosswalks. Coordination with FDOT will. also be required to determine if a policy constraint to prohibit the widening of S.R. 434 in the Town Center area is appropriate. 6. Intermodal Facilities Intermodal facilities are those transportation elements that accommodate and interconnect different modes of transportation and serve interstate, intrastate and international movement of people and goods. Some facilities considered intermodal include ports, airports, bus stations and train terminals. The Intermodal Surface Efficiency Act (ISTEA) legislation encourages the provision of efficient access to these intermodal facilities. There are no public airports within the City limits. The closest public airport is Orlando Sanford International Airport in Sanford. In late 2008, the facility was served by five airlines with regularly scheduled service along with several charter airlines. Direct flights are available to 31 destinations in the United States as well as four European cities. The City of Winter Springs has only one active rail line within the City limits. It is operated by CSX and runs along S.R. 419 and terminates just east of Wade Street, within the Winter Springs Industrial Park. It is currently used for freight trains only. The Florida Department of Transportation, in cooperation with the federal and local governments, is planning to implement a commuter rail project (SunRail) that will follow a generally north-south route along 61 miles of existing track. The first phase, to consist of a 32.5-mile segment, will run from Orlando to DeBary and is anticipated to be operational in 2011. Twelve stations are • II-29 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN planned for the first phase, with the nearest one to Winter Springs to be located in Longwood. LYNX's planned 434 Crosstown route will be a feeder route, connecting the City of Winter Springs with the SunRail system. Until very recently, Seminole County was serviced by Greyhound Transportation Services with a bus terminal in Sanford. That facility is no longer included on the list of stations shown on the company's website. The City of Winter Springs is located along the south shore of Lake Jesup. The lake is currently used for recreational boating and fishing. Although it was used for steamboat transport services in the late 1800's, the lake is no longer used for transportation purposes. D. TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS Transportation can have a major role shaping the spatial and functional organization of a community. It can determine the size, scale, status and identity of a community. However, there are other contributing factors that need to be considered, such as the personal, social, physical, environmental, economic and cultural attributes of the community. This section will analyze existing conditions of the transportation system to provide a comprehensive assessment of the various transportation facilities and services, and their relationship with existing land uses. This section will also address growth trends, travel patterns, and interactions between land use and transportation, including the compatibility between future land uses and transportation systems. Winter Springs is an integral part of the Orlando Urban Area. Additionally, the City is one of the larger municipalities within Seminole County and is located primarily between two principal arterials, S.R. 434 and Red Bug Lake Road. As such, transportation planning for Winter Springs requires close cooperation with other planning efforts within the Orlando region and Seminole County. For this reason, the transportation planning methodology used to develop the transportation plan must necessarily be compatible with transportation methodologies in adjacent jurisdictions. In order to accomplish this requirement, extensive use of data sources and planning models from the Orlando Urban Area Transportation Study (OUATS) and the Seminole County Transportation Management Program (TMP) were used in the development of the Winter Springs Transportation Plan. Existing deficiencies on City, County and State systems were defined and Capital Improvement Programs identified to resolve these transportation deficiencies. Forecasts of anticipated land use/soci-economic activities for 2010 were made and the validated transportation models applied against them. This allowed the definition of future capacity deficiencies so that funding sources can be developed to correct these deficiencies. 1. Growth Trends The 2000 U. S. Census reported a City population of 30,860, and a total of 12,296 dwelling units. The population projections used in this Comprehensive Plan anticipate a population of 35,857 for the year 2010, 40,319 for 2020, and 44,538 for 2030. These figures are lower than corresponding figures from the Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing (36,929, 43,114, and 47,921, respectively). The projections reflect somewhat slower growth than anticipated earlier which will assist the City in ensuring transportation facilities can be provided concurrent • II-30 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN with development. Table II-5 at the end of the Transportation Element shows the existing and projected development by traffic analysis zone prepared by the City and included in the 2008 Evaluation and Appraisal Report. 2. Roadway Current Performance The 1985 Growth Management Act established two important responsibilities for local governments. The first was to set LOS standards for public facilities within the jurisdiction as part of the comprehensive plan. The second was to ensure that the public facilities and services proposed in the Capital Improvements Element of the local comprehensive plan were available concurrent with the development. The Department of Community Affairs (DCA) requires that adopted LOS standards be achievable and financially feasible. The standards set a minimum service level that the City must maintain for each of the public facilities, including roadways. The roadway LOS concept is defined in the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Quality~Level of Service Standards Handbook (2002) as a qualitative assessment of the road user's perception of the quality of flow, and is measured by a scale of driver satisfaction. The scale ranges from "A" to °F", with "A" representing the most favorable driving conditions and "F" representing the least favorable. FDOT adopted statewide minimum LOS standards for the State highway system. The minimum LOS standards are used for planning applications, including the review of local government plans. The generalized maximum volume tables provided by FDOT are guidelines recommended for broad planning applications. They are to be used as a general guide to determine highway LOS and through-lane requirements. For the purpose of LOS maintenance, the County has been divided into Traffic Analysis Zones (TAZs), twenty of which are in Winter Springs. TAZs are small, internally homogeneous aggregations of the entire urban area. They range from a city block to areas encompassing several square miles. Demographic data, such as population, housing, employment and traffic, is maintained at the TAZ level to measure existing roadway LOS. Map II-4 shows the TAZs within the City of Winter Springs. • II-31 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Map II- 4: City of Winter Springs TAZs • g ~~~ ~ ~~ ~ Ir ~ ~~ ~ I ~ ~ ~` ~ ~ ; I ~~ I tt Z ~~ ! ~ ~ _ ~ ~~ - ~ ~ H o O Q ~ i t o lil J L _ F~ ~ $ ` S/ y ' 3 ..~ ~. . T` ~~~~+~ ` ~ b r [ fJ .~ ~ ~, +i ~ ~~ iee~ O ~ _ ~ • ~ ~ ~ 'tll`J' ® S Q 1 In e ~ u ~ to r- s > ~ n G . ~~ Z t7 &LIPPLEMEt~T24L N0.3 Ss~k7 fJONE 20d4 TRAFFIC ZdNES ®,me rf tnrBeyrArdfancces Qgtq:2-i.,~r FIGURE ~ °i"'~°` ~~D.: W44~24 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS uss.crr rr~f aeer~.eerr ~~~~""~~'~~ n.r.~re e~r~csruc a+f~+~a~ xs.aza TRANSPORTATION STUDY -REVISE©2-2005 pBQe~ II-32 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Minimum LOS standards recommended for the state system are shown in Table II-b. Tables II-1 a and II-1 b show the most recent traffic count results and projected 2012 Levels of Service are presented in Table II-2. The standardized descriptions of service levels used in transportation planning are as follows: • LOS A - A condition of road performance where traffic density is very low, with little or no restrictions in maneuverability. Drivers can maintain their desired speed with little or no delay. • LOS B - A condition of road performance where traffic density is low and vehicles travel with operating speeds somewhat restricted by other vehicles. Drivers still have reasonable freedom to select their speeds. • LOS C - A performance condition where operating speeds are determined by other vehicles, permitting a stable traffic flow. Drivers might have limitations to maneuver and to increase speeds. • LOS D - A condition of road performance where traffic density is high but tolerable. Fluctuations in traffic volumes may cause reductions in operating speeds. Drivers have little freedom to maneuver. In some instances, traffic flows approach unstable conditions. • LOS E -Represents traffic operation near the roadway capacity or maximum service volume. Vehicles flow at unstable conditions. Stop-and-go situations may happen. In freeways or limited access roads, speeds are near thirty (30) miles per hour and traffic density is high. • LOS F -This condition usually results from long lines of vehicles backing up because the traffic volume exceeds the roadway capacity. The vehicles are forced to operate at very low speeds. Stop-and-go situations are frequent and in extreme cases, vehicles stop for long periods of time. • The 2002 FDOT Generalized Tables were used in 2005 to evaluate roadway performance in the City of Winter Springs. These tables have since been updated to 2007 FDOT Generalized Tables, which were used for more recent general analysis (see Table II-7). A LOS analysis was performed to determine existing deficiencies. The capacity analysis was based on the FDOT Generalized Peak Hour Directional Maximum Service Volumes for different roadway types. U.S. 17-92 showed deficiencies in the 2012 forecast north of Shepard Road, where U.S. 17-92 is a four-lane section. Seminole .County is planning to widen this'segment of U.S. 17-92 to b lanes; however, the construction phase of the project is not funded and the schedule for construction is uncertain. Deficiencies were also identified in the 2012 forecast for S.R. 419 from U.S. 17-92 to S.R. 434, S.R. 434 from U.S. 17-92 to Moss Road, and from S.R. 419 to Tuskawilla Road. However, the forecast did not account for additional collector roads added within the Town Center. In 2005, a traffic corridor study was prepared to analyze the Town Center and it showed that S.R. 434 could accept the traffic from the Town Center at build-out for the developments. In addition to the planned widening of U.S. 17-92, METROPLAN ORLANDO'S 2025 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) includes widening of S.R. 426 to 4 lanes from Pine Street to S.R. 434 in 2010 and widening of Seminola Boulevard to 6 lanes from U.S. 17-92 to Lake Drive (a widening to 4 lanes was completed in 2008). The improvements within Winter Springs and the surrounding roadway network may alleviate or delay deficiencies identified in the 2012 forecast. II-33 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Additionally, while use of the 2007 FDOT generalized tables may indicate that certain facilities may not be operating at an acceptable LOS, a detailed analysis of those facilities might show that they are in fact, operating at an acceptable LOS. Map II-5 shows the most recent LOS data available for the primary links in the Winter Springs network. Table II - 5: Statewide Minimum Level of Service (LOS) Standards for the State Highway System as Determined by ADT (total volume) • Transfioning Urbanized Areas, Urban Areas, or Commwnilies Urbanized Amas Under 500,000 Urbanized Areas Over 500,000 Roadways Parallel to Exclumt Transit Facilities Inside Transportation Concurmncy Management Areas nside TCEAs and MMTDs Constrained and Backlogged Roadways INTRASTATE Limited Access Highway (Freeway) C C(D) D(E) D(E) D(E) ** Maintain Controlled Access Highways C C D E E ** Maintain OTHER STATE ROADS Two-Lane C D D E * ** Maintain Multilanes C D D E * ** Maintain * Means the LOS standard will be set in a transporrarlon moalllry elemenT Tnar meers trte requirements of Rule 9J-5.0057, F.A.C. ** Means the Florida Department of Transportation must be consulted. Note: LOS standards inside of parentheses apply to general use lanes only when exclusive through lanes exists. SOURCES: FDOT 2002 Level of Service Handbook; Rule 14-94, Florida Administrative Code An unfunded County project need identified in the 2025 LRTP is the widening of Red Bug Lake Road from S.R. 436 to Eagle Circle. The City has completed numerous capacity and safety projects on City streets including turn lanes, paving and drainage improvements and construction of the Town Center collector roads. • II-34 • t • H W x.17 O n 0 a 0 v v 0 0 O O 7 IJ O V 0 N a fJ O Q ~_ fD V/ ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ .~ ~ LN~ O~AN~ 4e OMAN ~ WA,A N~ ~ OR O.A N~ 00 O~Af.N ~ O~+N~ ~ ~ rr gg x '6 ~~ t R "~~ ~ ~~' ~ w iRl~ g• w i ill ,~.q ~ ~' w w i iQ1 ~6 i i ~ i~ ~~~ ~~O- b-~ ~5 ~~~a"' •~ $" ; ~~ ~ 5 ~ $~ ~~8 ~ 258~~ ~ 8~~25c~~ rS ~~ a ~ ~8~ 8~ ~ 8$25ian 8 ~ ~,~ ~$n~ ' G~~ `~ ~ ~~ M ~~ ! ~ . ~~ ~ ~A' pp L N ~ ... 50~ ~ZS~ ~ g~g _ e 25g~~ s .`yw"~ w~8+' w 75~a~~ 4 ~ _{ t7 g~ ~j . ~" Fj ~ ~.~y°~.jN~ g$2525~ ~'~~ as ~,wak~o k" ~ `~ 298$ ~ a~ww u~ ~ v yq~ xw ~n c. ~~ 25S$~~ p 6 ~ ~~ ¢q i~r ~23~3~ j ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ ~~m 5~~ ~~~25~ ~~ 25~a25m x +252575.5 ...~~ ~~Q'in 2155 t' g~ • ~ ~ a MM ~i "~' 'NN..+ ~ 13 pe y y .~ '~ !g$y ~~ ~• R Nrea O~A[r+ O ii '. N.d Oe. 0~,1. ~ i ~. ~ ~~ ~ .: ~' ~ ~ C. ~ n ~ ~ ~ ~x. ~ - ~~ ~O'is v ~ cc ~~~ ~ ~.~^X~1 v~'i' A 000•~O> Vii }f..,i~ b~W ~33+. 040 00> ~4 I ~ ~ ~ . p p ~ N N ~ ~ ~~ ' ~ . o ~ X :s s~ :..a ~~~ 8 ::a s ~~. g~~~~m ~ g~8 8~~ ~' e ~ e ~ ~T77 ~ `C i. [Vi~b7 ~8 ~ i ~t~. ~~~.gg, ~ ti'" ~O •~ ~eT.~51~~ ~8~08h~ 6t7.~ "'OA< K ~ ~ ~ :s g• > i~ ~~o ~ rt ~~'~d ~~. ~$ /XWa ~. ~ ~ t~~~~~~~ ~~1~ ~A~n ~ 1 ~ O~ . ~ ~ n ; o ~ ~' 1 ~ i a ly itVi~ w ~~ } g a 66 ,.: a ~'N~ 0 N~ `°a 7 C G D ~Q Q 0 c O Q C Q N~ a a H n O 3 I~ rn 2 rn Z rn r D Z (~ O T Z rn /~ Z N CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Map II- 5: Year 2008 Deficiencies and LOS • • II-36 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 3. Future Roadway Performance The Florida Standard Urban Transportation Model Structure (FSUTMS) was used for all of the City's travel demand forecasting. The traffic simulation process was accomplished as noted in Section 4 which follows. Consistency with the METROPLAN ORLANDO model (OUATS) data and traffic zone structure was maintained through the process in forecasting the city's travel demand. Table II-8 shows the 2012 traffic conditions as projected. Deficiencies are projected for U.S. 17-92 north of Shepard Road, S.R. 434 from S.R. 419 to Tuskawilla Road, S.R. 434 from U.S. 17-92 to Moss Road, and S.R. 419 from U.S. 17-92 to S.R. 434. The projection does not take into consideration the additional collector roads added within the Town Center, which will help to alleviate the projected deficiency. Improvements to U.S. 17-92, S.R. 419, S.R. 434, and S.R. 417 are the responsibility of the State. • • II-37 ! ~ ! CITY OF Vr~I~TER SPRINGS TRANSPORTATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ELEMENT APPENDIX Table II - 7: 2012 Projected Traffic Conditions ROADWAY FROM TO NO. OF LANES ROADWAY CLA55 `LOS D ' DAILY VOLUME 2012 PROJECTED DAILY VOLUME V/C' RATIO PROJECTED DAILY LOS U.S. 17-92 S.R. 434 SHEPARD RD. 6 ARTERIAL 53 500 44 076 0.82 D U.S. 17-92 SHEPARD RD. S.R. 419 4 ARTERIAL 35 700 36 326 1.02 F S.R. 434 U.S. 17-92 MOSS RD. 4 ARTERIAL 35 700 36 519 1.02 F S.R. 434 MOSS RD. S.R. 419 4 ARTERIAL 35 700 31 882 0.89 D S.R. 434 S.R. 419 TUSKAWILLA RD 4 ARTERIAL 35 700 44 669 1.25 F S.R. 434 TUSKAWILLA RD SPRING AVENUE 4 ARTERIAL 35 700 33 581 0.94 D S.R. 434 SPRING AVENUE EASTERN BELTWAY 4 ARTERIAL 35 700 24 482 0.69 C S.R. 419 U.S. 17-92 EDGEMON AVE. 2 ARTERIAL 16 400 19 096 1.16 F S.R. 419 EDGEMON AVE. S.R. 434 2 ARTERIAL 16 400 17 721 1.08 F S.R. 417 RED BUG LAKE RD S.R. 434 4 FREEWAY 67 200 49 800 0.74 C E. LAKE DRIVE SEMINOLA BLVD FISHER ROAD 4 COLLECTOR 35 700 22 360 0.63 C E. LAKE DRIVE FISHER ROAD TUSKAWILLA RD. 4 COLLECTOR 35 700 23 500 0.66 C TUSKAWILLA RED BUG LK RD EAGLE BLVD. 6 ARTERIAL 53 500 41 080 0.77 D TUSKAWILLA RD. EAGLE BLVD. E. LAKE DRIVE 4 ARTERIAL 35 700 36 920 1.03 F TUSKAWILLA RD. E. LAKE DRIVE WINTER SPRINGS 4 ARTERIAL 35 700 26 200 0.73 D TUSKAWILLA RD. WINTER SPGS TROTWOOD BLVD 4 ARTERIAL 35 700 21 500 0.60 C TUSKAWILLA RD. TROTWOOD BLVD. S.R. 434 4 ARTERIAL 35 700 21 000 0.59 C SHEPARD RD. U.S. 17-92 SHEOAH BLVD. 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 5 680 0.57 D SHEPARD RD. SHEOAH BLVD. EDGEMON AVE. 2 COLLECTOR 10,000 8,216 0.82 D II-38 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS TRANSPORTATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ELEMENT APPENDIX ROADWAY FROM TO NO. OF LANES ROADWAY CLA55 LOS D DAILY VOLUME 2012 PROJECTED DAILY VOLUME V/C RATIO PROJECTED DAILY LOS BANANA ROAD MOSS ROAD SHORE ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 104 0.01 C MOSS ROAD PANAMA ROAD DOLPHIN ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 7 072 0.71 D MOSS ROAD DOLPHIN ROAD S.R. 434 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 7 592 0.76 D NORTHERN WAY VISTAWILLA DR. WINTER SPG BLVD -E 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 3 744 0.37 C NORTHERN WAY TROTWOOD BLVD WINTER SPG BLVD-S 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 2 600 0.26 C NORTHERN WAY WINTER SPG BLVD SHETLAND AVE. 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 3 600 0.36 C NORTHERN WAY SHETLAND AVE. GREENBRIAR LN. 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 4 056 0.41 C NORTHERN WAY GREENBRIAR LN. WINTER SPRG BLVD 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 2 288 0.23 C TROTWOOD BLVD TUSKAWILLA RD. NORTHERN WAY 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 4 680 0.47 C WINTER SPG BLVD ** TUSKAWILLA RD. NORTHERN WAY 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 8 840 0.88 D WINTER SPG BLVD.** NORTHERN WAY GREENBRIAR LN. 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 5 824 0.58 D WINTER SPG BLVD** GREENBRIAR LN. NORTHERN WAY 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 5 200 0.52 D WINTER SPG BLVD** NORTHERN WAY NORTHERN WAY 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 8 300 0.83 D WINTER SPG BL** NORTHERN WAY S.R. 426 4 COLLECTOR 22 600 1 1 900 0.50 C PANAMA ROAD EDGEMON AVE. MOSS ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 9 464 0.95 D PANAMA ROAD MOSS ROAD SHORE ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 1 352 0.14 C HAYES ROAD BANANA ROAD DOLPHIN ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 2 080 0.21 C II-39 • CITY OF W IIJTER SPRINGS TRANSPORTATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ELEMENT APPENDIX ROADWAY FROM 70 NO. OF LANES ROADWAY CLA55 LOS D DAILY VOLUME 2012 PROJECTED DAILY VOIUME VJC RATIO PROJECTED DAILY LOS HAYES ROAD DOLPHIN ROAD S.R. 434 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 6 864 0.69 D DOLPHIN ROAD MOSS ROAD HAYES ROAD 2 LOCAL 10,000 2,800 0.28 C FISHER ROAD EAST LAKE DRIVE PANAMA ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 1 456 0.15 C TUSCORA NORTHERN WAY S.R. 434 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 2 800 0.28 C VISTAWILLA NORTHERN WAY S.R. 434 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 4 160 0.42 C GREENBRIAR NORTHERN WAY WINTER SPRG 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 1 560 0.16 C DYSON DRIVE TUSKAWILLA RD. SHETLAND AVENUE 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 2 700 0.27 C SHETLAND AVE. RED BUG LAKE DYSON DRIVE 2 COLLECTOR 10,000 3 640 0.36 C SHETLAND AVE. DYSON DRIVE NORTHERN WAY 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 5 200 0.52 D EDGEMON SEMINOLA BLVD. PANAMA ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 9 464 0.95 D EDGEMON SHEPARD ROAD S.R. 419 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 4 470 0.45 C EDGEMON S.R. 434 SHEPARD ROAD. 2 COLLECTOR 10 000 5,820 0.58 D II-40 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The City of Winter Springs has limited financial resources to address all of the potential traffic circulation system needs identified in its Transportation Element. Therefore, intergovernmental coordination is critical. The MPO provided a list of committed roadway projects and transportation studies impacting the City of Winter Springs. Table II-9 shows the applicable road projects contained in the MPO Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), as well road improvements planned by the MPO. In addition to the improvements contained in the TIP, the City of Winter Springs has additional improvements, including those shown in Table II-10, in its FY 08 - FY 13 Capital Improvements Program. Table II - 8: Programmed and Planned Highway System Improvements Roadway Segment improvement Programmed * Planned ** Shepard Rd. to Lake Mary widen to 6 lanes 2010/2013 US 17-92 Blvd. Mitchell Hammock Rd. to widen to 4 lanes 2008/2009 S.R. 426 Pine Ave. Orange/Seminole County widen to 6 lanes 2008/2013 S.R. 417 line to S.R. 434 S.R. 426 Pine Ave. to S.R. 434 widen to 4 lanes 2010 *** Seminola Blvd. US 17/92 to Lake Dr. widen to 6 lanes 2010 *** * Contained in construction program of FDOT, Seminole County, or Florida's Turnpike Enterprise (METROPLAN ORLANDO Transportation Improvement Program 2008/09 - 2012/13) ** 2025 Long Range Transportation Plan *** Latest data based on need (from 2005 CPH Engineers transportation study) SOURCES: METROPLAN ORLANDO, CPH Engineers • Table II - 9: Programmed City of Winter Springs Improvements * Contained in the City of Winter Springs FY 08 - FY 13 Capital Improvements Program Roadway Segment Improvement Programmed S.R. 434 at S.R. 419 traffic signal improvements 2008/2009 Michael Blake Blvd. (Spine Rd.) S.R. 434 to Tuskawilla Blvd. new Town Center roadway 2008/2009 Orange Ave. Loop Central Winds Park to S.R. 434 new Town Center roadway 2012/2013 S.R. 434 at Hayes Rd. add deceleration lane 2008/2009 S.R. 434 at Vistawilla Dr. add deceleration lane 2008/2009 Bahama Rd. Shore Rd. to Hayes Rd. .paving 201 1 /2012 SOURCE: City of Winter Springs, January 2009 II-41 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 4. Model Development and Validation To adequately forecast future traffic conditions in a rapidly urbanizing area such as the City of Winter Springs, a set of transportation planning models must be developed and validated. In the case of the City of Winter Springs, such models exist and these models have been previously used to develop City, regional and county wide plans. These models are contained in the model set documented for the Orlando Urban Area Transportation Study. In order to provide the more detailed analysis required for the City of Winter Springs, this model set was modified. These modifications include the development of a more detailed TAZ set (microzones), a more detailed highway network, and the use of TRANSPLAN~FSUTMS model structure. These changes require the validation of the model set used in this process even though this model set is derived from and closely resembles the OUATS model set. This model set has been modified as detailed below. a. OUATS Model Set The transportation planning models used in the Orlando Urban Area Transportation Study have evolved from a set of models developed in the mid- sixties and based upon extensive home interviews conducted at that time. The model set is divided into four general functions and modifications to each of these functions have occurred over the last twenty-five years. b. Trip Generation The existing OUATS trip generation model is across-classification person trip production model with attractions calculated using expressions derived from regression analysis. This model currently uses 11 purposes including special generator purposed for the major tourist attractions, the various universities and colleges in the region, and Orlando International Airport. The model requires extensive data not generally available such as the forecast of the median income and car ownership by zone for the calculation of home-based productions. c. Trip Distribution The OUATS trip distribution model utilizes each of the 11 purposes for which productions and attractions are generated. Friction factors for each of these 1 1 purposes have been developed, although the special generator purposes generally borrow friction factors from other purposes. There are not K-factors utilized in the model. d. Modal SplitfAuto Occupancy The OUATS model set includes amulti-nominal logit expression for calculation of splits of trips to the transit sector. Auto occupancy is calculated with simple rates by purpose. The modal split is system-sensitive in that it requires the coded description of a transit system. • II-42 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ! e. Traffic Assignment The current OUATS traffic assignment procedure consists of a four-iteration equilibrium assignment with capacity restraint. This process is applied using network descriptions in accordance with the 1979 version of the Urban Transportation Planning System (UTPS) developed by the US Department of Transportation. f. Trip Generation Modifications In order to make use of the data available from Seminole County and to avoid the necessity to forecast income and car ownership as required by the OUATS trip generation model, modifications were made to this model. The trip generation models used are based upon the OUATS models, but these models incorporate simpler rate expressions instead of the more complex cross-classification models. These models have successfully been used numerous times in Winter Springs and in the greater Orlando area including Seminole County. The models were used to forecast trip generation for the Winter Springs 2005 Transportation Study and the 2007 Impact Fee Study. The models forecast vehicle trips instead of person trips so they additionally do not require a separate auto occupancy model. g. Use of OUATS 1 1 Trip Purpose Models Since trip generation expressions were available for each of the OUATS non- special generator purposes, it was decided to use the entire 1 1 purpose models available in OUATS. This required incorporating the special generator expressions available from OUATS into the Winter Springs Model Set. This use of the full OUATS model purposes additionally permitted use of the OUATS friction factors. 5. Public Transit Performance • The new LYNX route offers the potential to significantly increase the capacity of the City's transportation network while reducing traffic congestion, pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. One average size bus at capacity can carry as many passengers (approximately 40 persons) as 10 or more private automobiles. However, any impact in LOS for S.R. 434 will not be apparent (or documented) for several years. Successful transit systems emphasize the land use and travel demand relationship necessary to address congestion problems. The most important factors in encouraging transit use are mixed land uses and an urban form, which provides street connectivity and access to the pedestrian, transit and bikeway systems. Transit facilities and multimodal terminals also are important for the success of the transit system. These facilities allow for transfers among the various modes within the transportation system. Public transit LOS criteria are based on the operational and service characteristics of the transit system. Operational characteristics include the number of vehicles operated in maximum service, the amount of service supplied, the average speed, and the number of days the service is provided. Service characteristics include geographic location and service area population. These characteristics are monitored by the local transit provider, but the City could be monitoring LOS II-43 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN for transit performance based on headway standards. Headway is the time that separates vehicles moving in the same direction on the same route or track. The emphasis should be on reducing headways to encourage public transit ridership. The new LYNX Crosstown bus route now serves all of the City's major traffic generators~attractors identified on Map II-3. In analyzing access to transit service, national planning studies consider one-quarter to one-half mile on either side of the route the maximum distance that people would be willing to walk to use transit. 6. Other Transportation Systems The City's current transportation network is based primarily on a road network serving vehicular traffic, with very little attention given to other means of transportation. The City needs to start establishing facilities that will encourage the use of alternative transportation systems. Parking is an essential component of the overall transportation system. The decision of a commuter to drive alone or to use alternative transportation modes such as ride-sharing or public transit depends to a large extent on the cost, accessibility and availability of parking. As the City grows the need for these types of facilities will increase. Bicycling is a viable mobility alternative. Bicycle networks provide a commuting alternative as well as a recreational asset. The City has made efforts to establish a bicycle system. However, the adopted five-year plan was not achieved within that timeframe. The existing bicycle plan will need to be updated to plan for the expansion of the current system. Subsection 335.065, Florida Statutes, requires with only a few exceptions, that bicycle and pedestrian ways be established in conjunction with the construction, reconstruction, or other change of any state transportation facility. Pedestrian mobility is greatly influenced by the mix and proximity of land uses as well as the availability of adequate sidewalks and other pedestrian facilities. Adequate land uses and appropriate urban design would encourage walking for short trips and for accessing transit facilities and services. The City Code currently requires developers to provide sidewalks in new subdivisions. 7. Future Transportation Planning • This section provides recommendations for creating a safe, convenient, and energy efficient multimodal transportation system, coordinated with future land uses, plans and programs of the Seminole County, the MPO, and FDOT. Since World War II, roadways have been designed primarily for automobiles. Very little attention has been given to accommodating other modes of transportation such as bicycles, pedestrians, and transit. The goal of this Transportation Element is to look at roads as multimodal interconnected transportation corridors, and design them accordingly. Intergovernmental coordination is essential for the most cost-effective provision of transportation system improvements. Clearly, the City of Winter Springs does not possess the resources nor is it fiscally responsible for the entire transportation system within the City. Seminole County and FDOT have financial responsibility for County roads and State highway system roads, respectively. Therefore, it is necessary for the City to review the transportation improvement plans and programs prepared by the County and FDOT. In this way, the effort and dollars II-44 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN expended by the City to improve its traffic circulation system may be complemented and perhaps enhanced by the activities of the County and FDOT. One area of coordination should include the preservation and protection of rights-of-way for identified future roadway improvements and construction. With the escalating value of land and costs entailed in right-of-way acquisition, it is essential that the City protect roadway corridors in advance of development. Increased right-of-way costs reduce the funds available for actual construction. The City needs to utilize such techniques as setback requirements, zoning restrictions, right-of-way protection regulations and official transportation maps to preserve and protect existing and future rights-of-way. Other measures are discussed in the policy section. a. Future Transportation Maa The purpose of a Transportation Map is to graphically depict the location of all proposed collector and arterial roadways and any limited access facilities, airports, rail lines, and other related facilities. Map II-6 presents the proposed Future Transportation Map for the City of Winter Springs. This map shows the proposed roadway functional classification and number of lanes for each roadway segment. Roadway capacity is based on the functional classification and number of lanes. The LOS standard selected for each roadway was based either on its present or forecasted performance. The map shows the network as it is planned for the year 2010, with several roads at a LOS D, which is an acceptable standard. Map II-7 shows the needed improvements. Tables II-1 1, II-12, and II-13 at the end of the Transportation Element show the roadway improvement needs by State, County, City or developer funding. • II-45 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN • Map II- 6: Future Transportation Map (Year 2010 Transportation Plan) ~v1AF'~IEE~S 70'B~ i-hISTED {U~1~A''D?) • • II-46 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN • Map II- 7: Transportation Improvements ......_ nn~'P ~~ ~E;iNSERrEn/v~~a~ • • II-47 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN • Future roadway design will need to incorporate bicycle, pedestrian, and transit features to achieve a true multimodal system. In addition to incorporating roadway design standards in the City Code, the City will start requiring that new developments be interconnected to enhance the transportation network. Development design must provide connectivity and access between adjacent residential developments and nearby land uses. Traffic calming techniques can be used to protect neighborhoods, although street design that utilizes curving streets and on-street parking will naturally reduce speed and the need for other traffic calming methods. b. Transportation Concurrenc~Alternatives Several alternatives are available to the City to assist in meeting Florida's concurrency management requirements in the Urban Central Business District (Town Center) and elsewhere in the community. These alternatives are provided for in Chapter 163, Florida Statutes and Rule 91-5, Florida Administrative Code. The statute recognizes that planning and public policy goals may conflict with the requirement that transportation facilities and services be available concurrent with the impacts of development, and it provides for exceptions from the concurrency requirement for transportation facilities if certain criteria are met. Available alternatives include a Transportation concurrency Exception Area (TCEA), a Transportation concurrency Management Area (TCMA), a Long-term Transportation concurrency Management System (LTTCMS), a Multimodal Transportation District (MMTD), a Transportation concurrency Backlog Area (TCBA), and an Urban Infill and Redevelopment Area. An extensive discussion of each alternative and some of the requirements that must be met appears in the 2008 City of Winter Springs Evaluation and Appraisal Report. c. Future Public Transit Plan A transportation system that offers multimodal opportunities has the potential to absorb a significantly higher number of person trips than a system that focuses solely on accommodating vehicle trips. Improved transit service frequencies and new routes offer a viable transportation alternative and promote transit use. With the new LYNX Crosstown route, the City will need to work closely with the MPO, LYNX, and Seminole County to coordinate its support and participation in the transit system. The City will help achieve increased ridership by improving pedestrian access, encouraging compact development, and requiring the provision of transit facilities and amenities where warranted. d. Pedestrian Plannina In order to develop a pedestrian improvement/construction program to address City streets lacking sidewalks, aCity-wide inventory of sidewalks, crosswalks and other pedestrian facilities must be completed. By identifying missing links in the pedestrian system, the inventory will allow prioritization of improvements. Implementation of these improvements will provide pedestrian connectivity to the • II-48 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN overall transportation system. Particularly important will be an inventory of sidewalks within one-quarter to one-half mile of the new LYNX Crosstown bus route. e. Bicycle Plannina An important action needed by the City in the immediate future is the planning of a City trail system to interconnect with the LYNX Crosstown bus route and the Cross Seminole Trail. Such a system could result in reducing vehicle miles traveled and increasing bus ridership by providing alternative transportation options. The City currently owns a substantial portion of FP8~L easement which could be the beginnings of this network. In order to accomplish this, several policies relating to trails have been added to the Recreation and Open Space Element. Bicycle lanes should be implemented on existing roadways, where right-of-way a I lows. f. TSM/TDM Strategies Transportation System Management (TSM) and Transportation Demand Management (TDM) are options for communities trying to add roadway capacity without having to construct costly new facilities. The ultimate goal of the TDM program is to influence people to shift to more efficient modes of transportation and to travel during off-peak hours. TSM strategies, on the other hand, aim to affect the actual supply of transportation services. The most effective policies integrate supply and demand strategies to create a transportation network that promotes efficient choices. The City of Winter Springs does not currently offer any of these programs. However, they are options to consider in the future. • II-49 CITY OF ~, ~~JTER SPRINGS TRANSPORTATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ELEMENT APPENDIX Table II - 10: 2005 Existing and Projected Development by Traffic Zone Ufl F - etl an - _ ~~yy~~,yy~~, ~y .9111J[{H~4 ~y~ ~~~~t 4/4'?,IDY'•^"•1~.: .. ..gyp NyT. s., y' '~. ._ :; .. ul r., . { ~ {y ~ 'l ,; -iF, ~ ~Q~I~n. ;. MU F89t 1 I ri 4 71 Cascetis 6Q0 7©0©00 71 241fi Dods 79 Barn ion 110 71 Cano~Weaver 110 71 i ~ 0 0 p 0 7000 2 uscavw nit 1 72 Chelsea Woods 222 72 Bear Creek. Estates 67 at 72 litrrve~ Cre~c 153 72 Creaks Run $2 72 Courlne i 252 72 Kash n' Center 1 72 Ye Corrunercia[ 1U6DD QO 25 1 0 0 0 10000 0 74 es I 74 Cts3lsea Waods 73 0 0 II TuscaNn nit 1 28 62 Tucavr~la Unit 12 ~ nd ar s 82 Fauv+a Oaks 72 2 82 Greiar 189 i3z Chases Parc Phase 2 36 ~2 Chases Pare Phase 3 Fax Gfen 62 Pare ass 4 ox Glen I 41 82 Wardle Green 44 132 Bend Club 41 t#2 Glen Ea Ee Units 1 2 & 3 257 82 ~ ton Woods 76 132 even n 0 82 Chestrwt Ride 52 t32 TuscawiAa Unit #13 39 62 Braewick 85 82 TucscawiNa Unit 7 79 126@ 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 II-50 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS TRANSP I<TATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ELEMENT APPENDIX Table II-9: Cont. 8 usca ks 136 83 Wicklow Greens 48 83 WaokisVeam 32 rbkx en Ji3 Tuscaw~a Unit S 89 83 Sk 5t 1 83 Kinder Care 1 83 Sever Eke 1 1S3 Tta Office ex 1 83 Tuecarw~a UcS i 111 03 Tuscawia Urol2 65 03 Tcaxaw~aUnitd 379 83 Cou Ck~ Y 1, 2 & 3 245 $3 Mowhead tkut 2 28 03 Anovfiead lkdt 1 parcel 2 8 3 12 83 Tuscaw~a Cokxi Club 1 03 1hfx~ier Unit3 129 M 04 Casa Pmk Villas 316 $4 T Place 79 65 84 Ir~anTrails Middle Scholl i $4 Keeth Ekjmenta 1 L uni 84 ScFxtsr Tk»im Center 235[)00 8A The Reserve at Tuscawilta 92 84 Sown Unids 1 2 & 3 229 &t W TennisYillas 233 9 95 2 0 0 6 235000 0 k andk 1 85 McDaudds 1 awn enter 85 E le 4311 31 0 0 7 0 B6 Parkstwke 353 86 Parkstorke lI 104 86 Parkstone Corrsnercial 29DW f#'i Serrinde Coke Faciit~s Ma~1. 1 J~ JDC Phase [ and tl 86 8a Woods I1 207 86 RAY Pro 100 86 W.S. 1 i ti6 Bills [.and 1 86 Ki bu Trail 1 5 B6 Blun Tract 1 2t)d000 B6 Central Winds Park 1 55 D '! 411 0 3 9000 II-51 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS TRANSPGt<~ATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ELEMENT APPENDIX Table II-9: Cont. B k Fores# rri kris 4 to i 87 Oak Forest Unit 6 kris 562 to 715 15d 87 Oak Forest Ur~t 7 T16 to 808 83 crest s to 87 4Yurier Pcut Office 1 87 }{~ ~~ 170 87 Car Center 1 87 Ondick `~ 50iF~ r.~#s i 87 Tuscann~a Tra3s Phase II 4 28 87 SRd34Tovmhon~s 167 67 Leerdorn 70 87 A Park Cann~cial 1 87 Nwth Orland B~dres Sec. 9 109 67 tJorth Odrmdo l~dres Sec 10 112 67 Vrf io 87 Stores Gable 50 87 Stang Gable Gommeraal 7500 1449 0 3 0 368 0 57,500 0 Oak crest lJreit 1 114 eSt 88 Oak Forest lhirl3 120 88 Oak forest Unit 4 75 88 Tuscawi~ Unri5 10 88 Grarrd Reserve 18 88 Qurtmar Estakes 20 630 0 0 0 an s 89 Nash Odarxla Ranches Sec. 1A & i 55 ~ 89 North Orlando Bandies Sec. 6 37 2 89 North Chlarufo Bandies Sec. 7 d3 3 150 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 9D dies 90 North Orlarufo Ranches Sec.2A 196 90 North Odarrdo Readies Sec. 5 2d 1 90 North Orlackw Bandies Sec 1 39 3 ~ Norfh Orlando ranches Sec d 10 2 ~ Naltr Odendo Ranches Sec. d Ste M fill Church 1 90 Mosswood Ms 1d7 ~ Moss Glen Tanntwmes i0 so the v 171 90 The Seasons 141 90 North Orlando Ranches See. d 5 2. acaereda r 4 90 Pinewood Terrace 32 ~ State Farm Insurance 1 ~ Gurnbedand Farrrv; 2 i45i 989 d 0 0 0 II-52 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS TRANSP K~ATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ELEMENT APPENDIX Table II-9: Cont. 91 aMen ecrace fi3 91 North Orlando 2nd Addition f 7Q 91 Garden Gub rdnerris 40 N.. errance coon 1 91 N.O. Terrance Section 2 41 91 N.O. Terrance Section 3 T7 91 N.O. Terrance Section 4 72 91 N.O. Tenanw Section 5 4~v 1 errance ecGon 41 N.O. Terrance Section 8 64 91 N.O. Terrance Section 9 58 91 Foxrrroor tlnii 1 84 31 Foxmoor lhtit 2 2 vxnroor at 91 Fo>enoor ~t 34 91 North Orlando Ranches Sec. 3 36 91 Winter F~n>arda I 91 W i 1 91 Wsder Foods s 2 91 CahA 91 The Atrium 91 War Plaza 91 Stor a World 1 2 0 0 s sa Nada ~lardo 141 92 NarOr Orlando 1st AddAirm 138 92 Nath Orlarsio 4th Addition 242 92 NoAh Orlando 5th Additiat 34 th itiorr 92 Lai AnnAaes 64 92 s1JnA10 56 92 Moss Road Quads 20 92 Moss Road Twmhaanes ~ ran 92 Deer 152 92 Fairi~r aRnrents 16 92 La Petite Nurse 1 92 Mr. Bubbles Car Wash 1 m 32 Bantield Funeral dome 1 92 ExcelsierPark 1 92 War Cerder 1 92 Remelt Bank 1 e r4er 92 Autanoiive Orae 1 92 Circle K 1 92 Public Works Co lex i 92 Fire Statkrn I 92 Public Sal 1 63 3 13 0 94 0 II-53 • CITY OF , . ,INTER SPRINGS • TRANSPt~RTATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ELEMENT APPENDIX Table II-9: Cont. aRer ndustnal Park D 0 15 0 84 0 0 D s ~ 9d H ' lands Section 2 d9 94 H ' lands Section 4 75 94 H ' lands Secfwn 7 & 8 58 94 odes aad 94 lends East tau ekes 16 94 H' ands Patio Hennes 25 94 s Gkrb 75 94 C YR 22 1 94 S heoah Settion 3 28 94 h f land One 62 94 land Yil Two 74 9d H' land Latter 41 9d 8 162 94 T he Oaks 27 486 1 0 D D 0 95 Gold Terrxe artments 630 95 V Ytldwaod 120 170 95 SeviNe on tits Green 2D0 1 95 H' .lands Section 5 di 95 V lfinier Gatf Course 1 95 H' lands Glen 29 95 H' lards rds 42 95 Sheoah Sec. 1 44 95 GdisideY9as ~ 95 Kia~l4titsabishi 1 35D 1046 2 D 94 62 0 D TOtHIS 1D 897 3 81"1 54 7 3,336 127 1,434 600 0 Source: CPH Engineers, Inc. February 2005 II-54 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT APPENDIX Table II - 11: Year 2010 Road Needs/Projects (City Funding) Phase I 1. Improve Panama Road from Moss Raad to Edgemon Avenue. (Completed} 2. Improve Hayes Road north of Bahama Road to existing paving on Hayes. (Completed} 3, Improve Moss Road.. from Panama Road north to existing pacing on Moss Road.. (Garnpleted) 4. Replace Hayes Road bridge. (Completed} 5. Replace Mass Raad bridge, (Completed) Phase II 1. Paving and drainage improvements to Bahama Road from Shure Road to Hayes Road. 2. Paving and drainage improvements to Panama Road from Share Road to NFoss Raad. (completed'} 3. Paving and drainage improvements to Fisher Road from Panama Road to City Limits. (Completed) 4. Add stacking lanes to Hayes Raad at the S.R. 434 intersection. (Completed} Phase Ili 1. Upgrade Moss Road from SR 434 to SR 419 from two lanes to four lanes." (Not Required/Deleted} 2. Improve Tuskawilla Raad north of SR 434 (formerly Brantley Avenue}. (Completed} 3. construct Town Center collector read to accommodate new development. Roads will connect SR 434 and Tuskawilla Road for collection of traffic from this area. {Comple#ed. Roads include Tuskawilla Road, Doran Drive and Blumberg Blvd.) • II-55 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS TRANSPORTATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ELEMENT APPENDIX Table II - 12: State and County Road Projects Adjacent to or Within Winter Springs State - Qistrict l=ive Funded Projects 1. SR 434 from. US 17-92 to SR 419 -Improve the trafFtc control deviceslsystem. (City and State ,loint Project} 2. SR 426 -Four-lane from Mitchell Hammock Raad to Rine Street. {Design) State - I1Aetroplan Orlando 2Q25 Long Range Transportation Plan {Source: Table 5-2; Summary Report, Technical Report Na. 5j 1. SR 426 from Pine Street to S.R. 434 -Widen to 4 lanes. 2. US 17-92 from Shepard Read to Lake Mary Boulevard -Widen to 6 lanes. 3. Aesthetic/traffie improvement project on SR 434 from U.S. 17-92 to SR 419. (Under Construction) 4. Resurtaee U.S. 17-92 from Shepard Road to Airport Blvd. (Bids 2006/2007} (Does not add capacity.} 5. Skid hazard overlay of SR 419 from Sft 434 to U.S. 17-92. {Bids 200512006} (Does not add capacity.} 6. Grant ($100,OOOj to Winter Springs to pay for westbound left turn lane at Moss Road. (Under construction) {May add only minor capacity.) Coon - FY 2004/2Q05 1. Lake Drive from Seminola Boulevard to Tuskawilla Road -Reconstruct to 4 lanes. Coun - Mletraplan Orlando 2QZ5 Lang Range Transportation Plan (Source: Table 5-2; Summary Report, Technical Report Na. 5} 1. Serninola Boulevard from US 17-92 to Lake Drive -Widen tt~ 6 Lanes. Goun - Metroplan Orlando 2Q25 Long Range Transportation Plan Unfunded Critical Needs (Source: Table 5-2; Summary Report, Technical Report No. 5} 1. Red Bug Lake Road from SR 436 to Eagle Circle -Widen to 6 lanes. Source: CPH Engineers, Inc., February 2005. • II-56 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT APPENDIX Table II - 133: Year 2010 Road Needs (County and State Funding) GE3Un ~` 1. Improve Lake Drive from two {2} lames to four (4} lanes from Tuskawiiia to Seminole. (under design} Bids 20os} state"` 1. Improve U.S. 17-92 from Shepard to Lake (Mary Boulevard from four (4} lanes to six (6) lanes. (Under environmental review} 2. Improve SR 419 from SR 434 to U.S. 17-92 from tvvo (2} lanes to four (~#} lanes. Mote: This project is not funded or planned l?y the State. N{ITE: It appears that the City should start lobh~rln far improvements to SR 419 as current counts equal and/or exceed the existing roadway capac'~ty. 'See also Table 15A for additional information. Source: CPH Engineers, Inc., January 2005 • II-57