HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001 03 21 Public Hearings F First Reading - Ordinance 2001-23 Traffic Circulation Element
COMMISSION AGENDA
ITEM
F
Consent
Informational
Public Hearing X
Regular
March 21,2001
Meeting
~..
Mgr. / Attor /
Authorization
REQUEST:
The Community Development Department - Planning Division requests the City Commission
hold a public hearing for first reading and consideration of Ordinance 2001-23 to adopt the large
scale comprehensive plan amendment (LS-CP A-6-00) that would replace completely the current
text and maps in the Traffic Circulation Element Volume 1 of 2 and Volume 2 of 2 of the City's
Comprehensive Plan.
PURPOSE:
The purpose of this Agenda Item is to request the Commission hold a public hearing for first
reading and consideration of Ordinance 2001-23 to replace completely the current text and maps
in the Traffic Circulation Element Volume 1 of 2 and Volume 2 of 2 of the City's Comprehensive
Plan due to the need to update the Traffic Circulation Element.
APPLICABLE LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY:
The provisions of Florida Statutes Chapter 163.3184(15)(b) F.S. which state: "The local
governing body shall hold at least one advertised public hearing on the proposed comprehensive
plan or plan amendment as follows:
1. The first public hearing shall be held at the transmittal stage pursuant to subsection
(3). It shall be held on a weekday at least 7 days after the day that the
advertisement is published.
COD/March 14,2001/5:40 PM
MARCH 21,2001
PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEM F
Page 2
2. The second public hearing shall be held at the adoption stage pursuant to
subsection (7). It shall be held on a weekday at least 5 days after the day that the
second advertisement is published."
The provisions of 166.041(3)(a) which state in part: "Except as provided in paragraph (c), a
proposed ordinance may be read by title, or in full, on at least 2 separate days and shall, at least 10
days prior to adoption, be noticed once in a newspaper of general circulation in the municipality."
CONSIDERA TIONS:
.
The Traffic Circulation Element should be updated based on the results of the City of
Winter Springs Transportation Study prepared by CPH Engineering, Inc.. The
preparation of Supplement # 1 prepared December, 1999 was necessary because the Town
Center Concept had been adopted since the Study was completed.
.
The City Attorney concerned about potential procedural difficulties (the time period
between initial review by the Local Planning Agency, the ORC Report, and the second
public hearing by the City Commission), had recommended commencing the plan
amendment process again. The large scale plan amendment process was begun again.
.
The LP A previously recommended transmittal at its March 22, 2000 meeting upon
reviewing the ORC Report recommending adoption by the Commission. City staff
recommended that the plan amendments be forwarded to DCA for approval.
.
The first (transmittal) public hearing is a forum in which the governing body votes to
either transmit the proposed large scale comprehensive plan amendment to the Florida
Department of Community Affairs and the other state agencies and regional planning
council to request their professional review and recommendations on the plan amendment.
The ORC (objections, recommendations and comments) Report will be sent to the City
within two (2) months from the date that the plan amendment submittal is found sufficient
as a transmittal.
.
CPH Engineering, Inc. has provided the necessary response (as Supplement #2 "Update to
City of Winter Springs Transportation Study") to the ORC Report relating to the
proposed plan amendment LS-CP A-6-00.
.
The Local Planning Agency at its March 7, 2001 meeting reviewed the ORC Report and
the Response to the ORC Report and made its recommendation to the City Commission.
CDD/March 14,2001/5:40 PM
MARCH 21,2001
PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEM F
Page 3
FINDINGS:
.
A number of changes have occurred since the preparation and adoption
(on April 27, 1992) of the City's Comprehensive Plan, prompting the need for an update
of the Traffic Circulation Element.
.
The City initiated comprehensive plan amendment updates the Traffic Circulation Element
Data, Inventory & Analysis (Volume I of2) and the Goals, Objectives and Policies
(Volume 2 of2).
.
The comprehensive plan amendment is compatible with the other elements of the City's
Comprehensive Plan.
.
The comprehensive plan amendment is compatible with and furthers the State
Comprehensive Plan, in Chapter 187 F.S.
.
The comprehensive plan amendment is compatible with and furthers elements of the East
Central Florida Comprehensive Regional Policy Plan (aka Strategic Regional Policy Plan).
FISCAL IMPACT:
None.
IMPLEMENTA TION SCHEDULE:
A public hearing for second reading and adoption of Ordinance 2001-23 is scheduled for
March 26, 2001. The ordinance would become effective after 21 days of the issue of "Notice of
Intent" by the Florida Department of Community Affairs to find the large scale comprehensive
plan amendment in compliance. [ref: 163.3184(1O)(a) F.S.]
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Commission hold a public hearing for first reading and consideration
of Ordinance 2001-23 to replace completely the current text and maps in the Traffic Circulation
Element Volume 1 of 2 and Volume 2 of 2 of the City's Comprehensive Plan, incorporating the
City staff and the Local Planning Agency's Findings, and the Response to the ORC Report as the
basis for the adoption of the plan amendment.
CDD/March 14,2001/5:40 PM
MARCH 21,2001
PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA ITEM F
Page 4
LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY RECOMMENDATION:
The Local Planning Agency at its March 7,2001 meeting recommended the City Commission
approve the proposed plan amendment to replace completely the current text and maps in the
Traffic Circulation Element Volume 1 of 2 and Volume 2 of 2 of the City's Comprehensive Plan,
incorporating the City staff and the Local Planning Agency's Findings, and the Response to the
ORC Report as the basis for the adoption of the plan amendment.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Ordinance 2001-23
ORC Report for Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment LS-CPA-6-00.
[ See Local Planning Agency Agenda Item II. H. Attachment 1 ]
Response to the ORC Report for LS-CP A-6-00
[ See Local Planning Agency Agenda Item II. H. Attachment 2 ]
LS-CP A-6-00 Plan Amendment Original Data & Analysis Submission Included in the Transmittal
to the Florida Department of Community Affairs.
[ See Local Planning Agency Agenda Item II. H. Attachment 3 ]
COMMISSION ACTION:
CDD/March 14,2001/5:40 PM
ATTACHMENT A
I
~ '"
.'
ORDINANCE NO. 2001-23
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, SEMINOLE
COUNTY, FLORIDA, RELATING TO LARGE SCALE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN AMENDMENT TO UPDATE THE TRAFFIC CIRCULATION
ELEMENT VOLUMES 1 AND 2; BY COMPLETELY REPLACING ALL
TEXT AND MAPS IN THE TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ELEMENT;
PURSUANT TO 163.3184(15(b) AND 166.041, FLORIDA STATUTES;
PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF PRIOR INCONSISTENT
ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;
PROVIDING FOR INCORPORATION INTO THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND LEGAL STATUS OF
THE PLAN AMENDMENTS.
WHEREAS, section 163.3161 et. seq., Florida Statutes (1987) established the Local
Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act; and
WHEREAS, section 163.3167, Florida Statutes, requires each municipality in the State of
Florida to prepare and adopt a Comprehensive Plan as scheduled by the Florida Department of
Community Affairs; and
WHEREAS, the Local Planning Agency of the City of Winter Springs held a duly noticed
public hearing, in accordance with the procedures in chapter 163, part II, Florida Statutes, on the
proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments and considered findings and advice of the staff, citizens,
and all interested parties submitting written and oral comments and has recommended adoption to
the City Commission; and
WHEREAS, on November 13,2001, the City Commission of the City of Winter Springs
held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment and considered
findings and advice of the Land Planning Agency, staff, citizens, and all interested parties submitting
City of Winter Springs
Ordinance No. 2001-26
Page I of 5
written and oral comments, and after complete deliberation, approved the amendment for transmittal
to the Florida Department of Community Affairs; and
WHEREAS, on January 26, 2001, the Florida Department of Community Affairs issued its
Objections, Recommendations, and Comments Report ("ORC Report") to the City and made
recommendations to bring the subject Comprehensive Plan amendments in compliance with Rule
9J-5, Florida Administrative Code, and Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes; and
WHEREAS, the City Commission and the Land Planning Agency have evaluated the ORC
Report and have accepted the recommendations contained therein by making the necessary
modifications to the Comprehensive Plan amendments originally transmitted to the Florida
Department of Community Affairs in order to bring the amendments in compliance with Rule 9J-5,
Florida Administrative Code, and Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to section 9J-ll.006, Florida Administrative Code, this
Comprehensive Plan amendment will not cause the City to exceed its twice yearly submittal
allowance for comprehensive plan amendments; and
WHEREAS, on March 26,2001, the City Commission of the City of Winter Springs held
a duly noticed public adoption hearing on the proposed amendments set forth hereunder and
considered findings and advice of the Land Planning Agency, staff, citizens, and all interested parties
submitting written and oral comments and supporting data and analysis, as well as the Objections,
Recommendations, and Comments of the Florida Department of Community Affairs, and after
complete deliberation, approved and adopted the proposed amendments hereunder; and
WHEREAS, the Comprehensive Plan amendments adopted by this Ordinance comply with
City of Winter Springs
Ordinance No. 2001-26
Page 2 of 5
.'to
the requirements of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development
Regulation Act and the amendments are in the best interests of the public health, safety, and welfare
of the citizens of Winter Springs, Florida; and
WHEREAS, the City needs to update the Traffic Circulation Element based on the results
of the recently completed City of Winter Springs Transportation Study prepared by CPH
Engineering, Inc. The contents of the study are intended to completely replace the current text and
maps in the Traffic Circulation Element Volumes 1 and 2. Furthermore, the Town Center zoning
project, that was recently adopted by the City Commission since the study was completed,
necessitated amendments to the Traffic Circulation Element.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF WINTER
SPRINGS HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1.
Recitals.
The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are fully
incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 2.
Authority. This Ordinance is adopted in compliance with, and pursuant
to, the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulations Act,
sections 163.184 and 163.187, Florida Statutes.
Section 3.
Purpose and Intent. It is hereby declared to be the purpose and intent of this
Ordinance to clarify, expand, correct, update, modify and otherwise further the provisions of the City
of Winter Springs' Comprehensive Plan.
Section 4.
Adoption of Amendments to Comprehensive Plan.
The City of
Winter Springs' Comprehensive Plan, Traffic Circulation Element, Volumes 1 and 2, is hereby
repealed in its entirety and replaced by Supplement No.2, Update To City of Winter Springs
City of Winter Springs
Ordinance No. 2001-26
Page 3 of 5
o
:.' -<
Transportation Study, February 2001, prepared by CPH Engineers, Inc., as set forth in Exhibit "1 ",
which is attached hereto and fully incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 5.
Repeal of Prior Inconsistent Ordinances and Resolutions. All prior
inconsistent ordinances and resolutions adopted by the City Commission, or parts of ordinances and
resolutions in conflict herewith, are hereby repealed to the extent of the conflict.
Section 6.
Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, word or
provision of this Ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of
competent jurisdiction, whether for substantive, procedural, or any other reason, such portion shall
be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision, and such holding shall not affect the
validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.
Section 7.
Incorporation into Comprehensive Plan. Upon the effective date of the
Comprehensive Plan Amendments adopted by this ordinance, said Amendments shall be
incorporated into the City of Winter Springs Comprehensive Plan and any section or paragraph
number or letter and any heading may be changed or modified as necessary to effectuate the
foregoing.
Section 8.
Effective Date and Legal Status of the Plan Amendments. The effective
date of the Comprehensive Plan Amendments adopted by this Ordinance shall be the date a final
order is issued by the Florida Department of Community Affairs, or the Administration Commission
finding the Amendments in compliance with section 163.3184, Florida Statutes. No development
orders, development permits, or land use dependent on these Amendments may be issued or
commenced before it has become effective. If a final order of noncompliance is issued by the
Administration Commission, the Amendments may nevertheless be made effective by adoption of
City of Winter Springs
Ordinance No. 2001-26
Page 4 of 5
~
,'\;"-.. r ....
~
a resolution affirming its effective status. After and from the effective date of these Amendments,
the Comprehensive Plan Amendments set forth herein shall amend the City of Winter Springs
Comprehensive Plan and become a part of that plan and the Amendments shall have the legal status
of the City of Winter Springs Comprehensive Plan, as amended.
ADOPTED by the City Commission of the City of Winter Springs, Florida, in a regular
meeting assembled on the 26th day of March, 2001.
Paul P. Partyka, Mayor
ATTEST:
Andrea Lorenzo-Luaces, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO LEGAL FORM AND
SUFFICIENCY FOR THE CITY OF
WINTER SPRINGS ONLY:
Anthony A. Garganese, City Attorney
First Reading:
Second Reading:
Effective Date:
F:\DOCS\City of Winter Springs\Ordinances\Large Scale Compo Plan Amendment Traffic Circulation .wpd
City of Winter Springs
Ordinance No. 2000-35
Page 5 of 5
SUPPLEMENT NO.2
Update To
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
TRANSPORTATION STUDY
February 2001
EXHIBIT
I I
CPH Engineers, Inc.
1117 E. Robinson Street
Orlando, Florida 32801
(407) 425-0452
CPH Project No. W0459.04
The Transportation Study was completed in 1997 and identified no deficiencies in the transportation
infrastructure of the City of Winter Springs' local system for the projected 2010 traffic loadings.
Roadways identified for improvements included U.S. 17-92, S.R. 434, Seminola Boulevard, Lake
Drive, and Tuskawilla Road which are under the control of the County and FOOT. The U.S. 17-92
six-lane improvement project from Shepard Road (Winter Springs) south to Melody Lane
(Casselberry) has been completed. State Road 434 has been improved to four lanes from S.R.
419 to the Greeneway. Seminola Boulevard has been improved to four lanes; Tuskawilla Road has
been improved to four lanes divided from Lake Drive to Red Bug and is und~r construction from
Lake Drive north to SR 434; and Lake Drive is currently under design for four lanes divided. This
Supplement No. 2 updates the 1997 study and Sup.plement No. 1 to acknowledge these
improvements and the ones also constructed by the City. No changes were made to the land use,
existing uses, or projected development. We are presenting current data to allow for a comparison
of where we were in 1996 and where we are today. We can also use this data to evaluate the
accuracy of our projection,s. We have also updated roadway capacities based on the FOOT 1998
Level of Service Handbook.
It has become evident that a collector road system is required for the undeveloped area east of the
City Hall. This area has been designated as the Town Center and is scheduled for growth within
the planning period. A roadway collector system has been identified to serve this area. Since
these roads are for new growth, the funding is projected to come from the transportation impact
fee. This collector system is shown on the attached revised drawings.
Only updated materials are attached to this supplement. Since the growth projections have not
been revised, the overall traffic study remains valid..
Supplemenl No.2
Page 1
Supplement No.2
REVISED/UPDATED TABLES a.nd FIGURES
Page 2
Table 4A
1996/2001 AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY TRAFFIC COUNT RESULTS
RAW : AVERAGE ADJUSTED
"
ROADWAY FROM TO TRAFFIC COUNT ANNUAL ANNUAL
COUNTS DATE FDOT ADJ. TRA FFI C
TWO-WAY 1996 FACTOR TWO-WAY
SHEPARD RD. U.S. 17-92 SH~OAH BLVD. 5279 2/13 0.99 5226
SHEOAH BLVD. SHEPARD RD. S.R. 434 2703 2/13 0.99 2676
MOSS ROAD S.R.434 C.R.419 2620 2/13 0.99 2594
MOSS ROAD PANAMA S.R. 434 3972 2/13 0.99 3932
EDGEMON AVE. SEMINOLA PANAMA 3316 2/14 0.98 3250
EDGEMON AVE. PANAMA S.R. 434 2990 2/14 0.98 2930
EDGEMON AVE. S.R. 434 C.R.419 3314 2/13 0.99 3281
WADE STREET S.R. 434 C.R.419 623 2/13 0.98 617
DOLPHIN ROAD I-I A YES ROAD SHORE ROAD 2505 2/14 0.98 2455
HA YES ROAD. PANAMA S.R. 434 5787 2/14 0.98 5671
SHORE ROAD PANAMA S.R. 434 436 2/14 0.98 427
TROTWOOD BLVD TUSCA WILLA NORTHERN WAY 4275 2/15 0.98 4190
TROTWOOD BLVD W. OF TUSKA WILLA 1681 2/15 0.98 1647
NORTHERN WAY WINTER SPGS BLVD TROTWOOD BLVD 2817 2/15 0.98 2761
NORTHERN WA Y TROTWOOD BLVD. VISTA WILLA 3002 2/15 0.98 2942
NORTHERN WAY WINTER SPG~ BL YD SHETLAND 3073 2/15 0.98 3012
NORTHERN WAY GREENBRIAR WINTER SPGS BLVD 2768 2/15 0.98 2713
VISTA WILLA NORTHERN WAY SENECA 3918 2/20 0.98 3840
WINTER SPGS BLVD TUSCA WILLA NORTHERN WAY 7803 2/19 0.98 7647
WINTER SPGS BLVD NORTHERN WAY GREENBRIAR 5388 2/19 0.98 5280
WINTER SPGS BLVD NORTHERN WAY NORTHERN WAY 7803 2/19 0.98 7647
WINTER SPGS BLVD NORTHERN WAY CITY LIMITS 11380 2/19 0.98 11,152
GREENBRIAR WINTER SPGS B,L VD NORTHERN WAY 1601 2/19 0.98 1569
DYSON DRIVE TUSCA WILLA SHETLAND 1246 2/20 0.98 . 1221
SHETLAND CITRUS ROAD DYSON DRIVE ' 5689 2/20 0.98 5575
ALTON ROAD HA YES ROAD SHORE 1271 2/14 0.98 1246
BIRD RD/FISHER LAKE DRIVE NORTH 963 2/14 0.98 944
TUSKA WILLA S.R. 434 NORTH 4509 2/15 0.98 4419
TUSCORA NORTHERN WAY S.R.434 2288 2/15 0.98 2242
SENECA WINTER SPGS BLVD YzWAY 2158 2/19 0.98 2115
SENECA Yz WAY VISTA WILLA 1675 2/19 0.98 1642
J:\W0459.04\WP\TA8LE 4A.WPD
TABLE 6
(Revised 2/2001)
PROGRAMMED AND PLANNED HIGHWAY SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
WINTER SPRINGS TRANSPORTATION STUDY AREA
Roadwav Seqment Improvement Proqrammed1 Planned 2,4
SR 419 Edgemon to Moss Turn Lanes 2002
SR. 434. US 17-92 to SR 419 Traffic Control 2002
Lake Drive Seminola Boulevard to Add 2 Lanes 2002-2005
Tuskawilla Road
Moss Road S.R. 434 to S.R. 419 Add 2 Lanes 2000-2005
Red Bug Lcik.E;j.. SR 436 to Eagle Circle Widen to 6 2000-2005
Rd Lanes
Seminola Blvd. US 17-92 to Lake Drive Widen to 6 2015
Lanes
S.R. 434 U.S. 17-92 to S.R. 419 Add 2 Lanes 20102.3
(Removed in 4 below) (6 Total)
S.R.: 434 S.R. 419 to Eastern Add 2 Lanes 201(f-3.
Beltway (6 Total)
(Removed in 4 below)
U.S. 17-92 Shepard Road to Airport. Add 2 Lanes 20102.4
Boulevard
SR 426 County Line to Widen to 6 2015
Greenawav Lanes
1. Contained in construction program of FDOT or Seminole County.
2. Contained in OUATS 2010 Plan Update (Adopted Highway.Needs Network). Not in current 2020 Long
. Range Transportation Plan Update.
3. Latest date based on need. This applies to all "2010" numbers in this column.
4. 2020 Long Range Transportation Plan.
Supplement No.2
Page 4
Table 8
INTEFlRVPTED FlOo'<
Class I
p.O.OO k) t.5? ':;~aJ:Ud !nlerHctlOftI ~~mll.)
lanes!
Divided
2 U Odiv ided
4 Divided
6 Div idcd
8 Div ided
level 01 SelV ice
e
15.600
33.200
49.900
61.400
B
10,600
23,500 .
35,800
45.300
Eoo.
16.600
35.000
52,500
64.400
A"
NJA
NJA
NJA
NJA
Class II
12.00 Ie .a.!o .j~ljl:~ :ntmtctic"T' terrrell)
lanes!
Divided
2 Undivided
4 Div ided
6 Divided
8 Divided
Level 01 SelV ice
e
9,900
22,900
35.500
44.700
E
16,200
34.300
51.700
63.400
A..
N/A
N/A
NJA
N/A
Boo
NJA
NJA
N/A
N/A
Class 111 Cmo,. t!\an 4.50 ,iQ:'laJiztd inlerseetioru p.e' mil. andnol within pdmary city
c:enlraJ bus In." dIstrict of ulbaniud area OYtf 500.00ca
Lanes
4
6
8
10
12
Group 2
lanes
4
6
8
10
12
Lanes
2 Undivided
4 Divided
6 Div ided
lanes! Level 01 SelV ice lanes
Divided A" Boo e 0 E 2 Undiv ided
2 Undivided NJA N/A 3,300 12.100 15.800 4 Div.ided
4 Div ided NJA N/A 7.800 27,800 33,600
6 Divided N/A N!A 12.100 43,300 50,500
8 Div ided N/A NJA 15.300 54.200 62.100
Class IV
~ore l,....n .4.50 ,igna!indinlersecbl)l"'-s p',mile andwiU'lln pdma", ciry ce:111'al
tuslnus chlliet 01 ..:rta:1;ud a~a over ~OO.CCOl
Lanes! Lev cl or Serv ice
Divided A.. Boo C D E
2 Undiv ided N/A N/A 3,700 13.800 15,300
4 Divided N/A N/A 8.900 29.900 32,600
6 Div ided NJA N/A .14.000 45.500 49.000
8 Div ided N/A NJA 17.500 56,200 60,100
The Florida Departmenl 01 Transportalion
Source: Systems Planning Office
605 Suwannee Slreel . Mail Slalion 19
Tallahassee. Florida 32399.0450
hllp:/lwww.do!.slale.ll.us/planning
Lanes
2
2
Multi
Mulli
One-Way
Lanes
fwit"'n ultlanJud .ru OVI' 500,OCC .nd '..($lng 10 Of p.nlng \MIlhin! mile, 0' rhl
ctirnll\l ciN c~1iII1 bu,in... dill"'!)
A
21,200
32.600
44.500
55.600
65.200
B
34,300
52,700
71,800
89,800
105.400
level 01 SelV ice
e
51,500
79,000
107,800
134,700
158.100
,.....:I:".;n utbilniled ..,ea a~d r.0I in Gro\Io 1)
o
66,200
101.600
138.600
173.200
203.200
E
81,700
125,400
171,100
213,800
250.900
Level 01 SelV ice
A B e 0 E
20.900 32,800 49,200 62,600 74,500
32.100 50.400 75,600 96,200 114,500
43.800 68,800 103.200 131,300 156.300
54.700 86,000 129.000 164.200 195.400
64.100 100,800 151.200 192,400 229,100 \
NON.STATE ROI>OWAYS
UA,J(:R ClTYiCOJNlY RC>oD'NAYS
AOO
N/A
N/A
NJA
level 01 SelVic
e
8,600
19,800
30.800
taU" comsponding rNO-wilY volume !ndicaled pefCl!nl)
lell Turn ,<\djuslmenl
Bays Factors
Yes +50/.
No -20%
Yes .5%
No .25~-~
Median
Divided
U now ided
U ndiv id~d
U ndiv ided
B.'
N/A
N/A
N/A
OT>tER SIGNALIZED ROADWAYS
(signalized inlerseclion analysis)
AU BOO C
NlA N/A 4,800
N/A N/A 11,600
I>OJUSTMENTS
OIVIOEOiUNOIVloeo
ONE-WAY
(a!te' conesponding rwoo......ay "oJum. indic:ated pecer:l)
2
3
4
5
EqUvalent
T_\.V... . __.
4
6
8
8
,<\diustmenl
Factors
- 40~.
.40%
-40%
-25'l'.
. The table does not constilute a standard and shoufd be used only tor general planning applications. The computer models from which this table is derived
should be used lor more specil.1e planning applicalions. The lable and deriving compuler models should nol be used lor corridor or inlersection design. where
more relined techniques e.is!. .Values shown are anncal average dany volc",es (based on K100 laclOrs, not peak.lo-daily ralios) lor levels of ser',;ce. and
are based on Ihe 1997 Updale 10 Ihe Hi.hl'lay Capacily Mancal and Florida Iralfic, roadway, and si.nafizalion dala. The lable's inpul value assumplions and
level of service criferia appear on the fOllo\\ing page. .
.. Canner be achieved.
-.. Volumes are comparatlle because inle~eclion capacilies have been reached. September 1995
Supplerrent No. 2
@
Page 5
J:\\V0459.04\LOS TABLE 14.WPD February 200 I
TABLE 14 (Revised) (1 of 3)
YEAR 2010 ROADWAY LINK LEVELS OF SERVICE
WITH 2010 NETWORK (Computer Model)
ROADWAY mOM TO. NO.OF ROADWAY LOS D MODEL VIC RATIO MODEL
LANES CLASS DAILY DAILY DAILY
CAPACITY VOLUME LOS
U.S. 17-91 S.R.434 SHEPARD RD. 6 ARTERIAL 52,500 52,200 1.00 D
U.S. 17.91 SI~EPARD RD. S.R.419 6 ARTERIAL 52.500 55.200 1.05 F
S.R.434 U.s. 17.92 MOSS RD. 6 ARTERIAL 52,500 41,800 0,88 D
S.R.4J4 MOSS RD. S.R.419 4 ARTERIAL 35,000 26,900 0.75 D
S.R.434 S.R.419 TUSKAWILI.A RD 4 ARTERIAL 35,000 39.000 1.1 F
S.I\.43'1 TIISKA WIl.l.A RO SPRING A VENUE ARTERIAl. 35,000 39..000 1.1 F
S.R.434 SPRING A VENUE EASTERN BEL TW A Y 4 ARTERUAK 35,000 41,800 1.19 F
S.R.419 U.S. 17-1)2 EDGEMON AVE. 2 ARTERIAL 16,600 \9,900 1.20 F
S.R.419 EDGEMON AVE. S. R. 434 2 ARTERIAL 16,600 16,600 1.00 D
E. LAKE DRIVE SEMINOLA BLVD FISHER ROAD 4 COLLECTOR 31,700 21,500 0.95 D
E. LAKE DRIVE FISHER ROAD TUSKAWILLA RD. 4 COLLECTOR 31,700 22,600 1.00 D
TUSKAWILLA RD.- RED BUG LK RD EAGLE BLVD. 6 ARTERIAL 48,900 39,500 0.83 D
TlJSKA WILI.A RD. EAGLE OLVD. E. LAKE DRIVE 4 ARTERIAL 35,000 35.500 1.0 D
TUSKAWILLA RD. E. LAKE DRIVE WINTERSPGS. BLVD 4 ARTERIAL 35,000 25,200 0.7\ D
TUSKAWILLA RD. WINTER SPGS BLVD TROTWOOD BLVD 4 ARTERIAL 35,000 20,700 0.60 C
TUSKAWILLA RD. TROTWOOD BLVD. S. R. 43~ 4 ARTERIAL 35,000 20,200 0.57 C
SHEPARD RD. U.S. 17.92 SHEOAH BLVD. 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 11.200 1.03 E
SHErARD RD. SHEOAH BLVD. EDGEMON AVE. 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 7,900 0.72 D
SHEOAH BLVD. SHEPARD RD. S.R.434 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 8,400 0.77 D
BAHAMA ROAD ::"HA YES ROAD WINDING HOLLOW BL 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 100 0.01 C
MOSS ROAD PANAMA ROAD DOLPHIN ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 6.800 0.62 D
MOSS ROAD DOLPHIN ROAD S.R.434 COLLECTOR 10,900 7,300 0.67 D
Suoo IP.l'rCT1t No. 2 Page 6
February 2001
TABLE 14 (Revised) (2 0 f 3)
YEAR 2010 ROADWAY LINK LEVELS OF SERVICE
WITH 2010 NETWORK (Computer Model)
ROADWAV rROM TO NO. OF ROADWA Y LOS D MODEL VIC MODEL
LANES CLASS DAILY DAILY RATIO DAILY
. CAPACITY VOLUME LOS
MOSS ROAD S.R.434 FIRST STREET 4 COLLECTOR 22,600 14,100 .62 D
MOSS ROAD" FIRST STREET S.R.419 3 COLLECTOR 12,000 :7,200 0.60 D
NORTHERN WAV TROTWOOD BLVD TUSCORA DR. 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 6,100 0.56 D
NORTHERN WAV TUSCORA DR. VISTAVILLA DR. 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 3,200 0.29 C
NORTHIO!tN WAV VISTA VILLA DR. WINTER SI'G f3LVD-E 2 COLLIOCTOR 10,900 3,600 0,33 C
NORTHERN WAV . TROTWOOD BLVD WINTER SPG BLVD-S 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 2,500 0.23 C
NORTHERN WAV WINTER SPG BLVD SHETLAND AVE. 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 3,600 0.33 C
NORTHERN WA V SHETLAND AVE. GREENBRIAR LN. 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 3,900 0.36 C
NORTHERN WAV GREENBRIAR LN. WINTERSPRG BLVD 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 2,200 0.20 C
TROTWOOD BLVD TUSKA WILLA RD. NORTHERN WAY 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 4,500 0.42 C
WINTER SPG BLVD TUSKA WILLA RD. NORTHERN W A V 2 COLLECTOR 11,500 8,500 0.74 D
WINTER SI'G BLVD NORTHERN W A V GREENBRIAR LN. 2 COLLECTOR 11,500 5,600 0.49 D
WINTER SPG 8LVD GREENBRIAR LN. NORTHERN WAY 2 COLLECTOR 11,500 5,000 0.43 C
WINTER SPG nLVD NORTHERN WAY NORTHERN WAY 2 COLLECTOR 12,000 11,100 0.93 D
WINTER SI'G 8L'. NORTHERN WAY S.R.426 2 COLLECTOR 12.000 11,900 0.99 D
PANAMA ROAD EDGEMON AVE. - MOSS ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 9,100 0.83 D
PANAMA ROAD MOSS ROAD SHORE ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 1,300 0.12 C
HA YES ROAD BAHAMA ROAD DOLPHIN ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 2,000 0.18 C
HAYES ROAD DOLPHIN ROAD S.R.434 2 COLLECTOR 10,906 6,600 0.61 D
. '.'
DOLPHIN ROAD MOSS ROAD H~YES ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 2,700 0.25 C
Sl1onlm-ent No. 2 Page}
February 2001
(3 of 3)
TABLE 14 (Revised)
YEAR 2010 ROADWAY LINK LEVELS OF SERVICE
WITH 20 I 0 NETWORK (Computer Model) .
ROADWAY FROM TO NO. OF ROADW A Y LOS.D MODEL VIC MODEL
LANES CLASS DAILY DAILY RATIO DAILY
CAPACITY VOLUME LOS
'I:
FISHER ROAD EAST LAKE DRIVE PANAMA ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 f;400 0.13 C
TUSCORA DRIVE NORTHERN WA Y S.R.434 2 COLLECTOR 10,900. 2,700 0.25 C
VISTA WILLA DR. NORTHERN WA Y S.R.434 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 4,000 0.37 C
GREENBRIAR LN. NORTHERN WAY WINTER SPRG BLVD. 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 1,500 0.14 C
DYSON DRIVE TUSKA WILLA RD. SHETLAND A VENUE 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 2,600 0.24 C
SHETLAND AVE. RED BUG LAKE DYSON DRIVE 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 3,500 0.32 C
RD.'
SHETLAND AVE. DYSON DRIVE NORTHERN WAY 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 5,000 0.46 C
EDGEMON AVE. SEMINOLA BLVD. PANAMA ROAD 2 COLLECTOR ]0,900 9,100 0.83 D
EDGEMON AVE. SHEPARD ROAD S.R.419 2 COLLECTOR 10.900 4,300 0.39 C
EDGEMON AVE. S.R. 434 SHEPARD ROAD. 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 5,600 0.5] D
· A PORTION OF THIS SECTION OF ROAD IS 6 LANES.
.. ALTHOUGH THE 2010 TEST NETWORK HAD 4 LANES, THESE ITEMS HAVE BEEN REVISED FOR TURN LANES AND NOT WIDENING.
J:\W045IJ.04\LOS TAIlLE J4.WPO
Supp lerrent No. 2
Page S
J:\W0459.04\LOS TA13L~ 14A.WPD February 200 I
TABLE 14 A (I of3)
YEAR 2000 ROADWAY LINK LEVELS OF SERVICE
WITH EXISTING NETWORK
ROADWAY mOM TO NO. or ROADW A Y LOS D 2000 VIC RATIO DAILY 1. 99 5/1 906
. LANES CLASS DAILY DAILY LOS DAILY
CAPACITY VOLUME VOLUME
U.S: 17.92 S. R. 434 SH~PARD RD. 6 ARTERIAL 52.500 36,959 0.70 D 36,123
LJ,S. 17.92 SH~PARD RD. S.R.419 4 ARTERIAL 35,000 36.959 1.06 F 36.123
S. R.434 U.S. 17.92 S.R.419 4 ART~RJAL 35,000 24,983 0.71 C 24.892
S.R.434 S.R.419 TUSKA WILLA RD 4' ARTERIAL 35,000 32,609 0.93 C 24.757
S.R.434 TUSKA WILLA RD SPRING A VENUE 4 ARTERIAL 35,000 )8,720 0.53 13 16.552
S.R. 434 SPRING A VENUE GREENEWAY 4 ARTERIAL 35,000 19,394 0.55 13 15.286
S.R.419 U.S.17-n EDGEMON AVE. 2 ARTERIAL 16,600 21,090 1.27 F 15,553
S.R.4IQ ~DGEMON AVE. S.R. 434 2 ARTERIAL 16,600 18.417 1.11 F 12,271
E. LAKE DRIVE SEMINOLA OLVD fiSHER ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 14,600 12,044 0.82 D 12,617
E. LAKE DRIVE FISH~R ROAD TUSKA WILLA RD. 2 COLL~CTOR 14,600 11,277 0.77 D 9,472
TUSKAWILLA RD. RED DUG LK RD EAGLE 13LVD. 4 ARTERIAL 35,000 27,583 0.79 D 25.398
TUSKAWILLA RD. EAGLE 13LVD. E. LAK~ DRIVE 4 ARTERIAL 35,000 27,844 0.80 D 24,573
TUSKAWILLA RD. E. LAK~ DRIVE WINTER spas. BLVD 4 ARTERIAL 35,000 28,070 0.80 D 22.867
TUSKAWILLA RD. WINT~R SPGS BLVD TROTWOOD BLVD 4 ARTERIAL 35,000 UtC (14,226) 0.41 C 16,071
TUSKAWILLA RD. TROTWOOD 13LVD. S.R.434 4 ARTERJAL 35,000 U/C (13,822) 0.39 C 12.058
TUSKAW1LLA RD. S.R. 434 NORTH 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 4,419 0.41 C 917
SIIEPARD RD. U.s. 17.92 SH~OAH BLVD. 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 5.226 0.48 C 3,081
SI-IEOAH OLVD. SH~PARD RD. S.R.434 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 2.676 0.25 C 5,881
MOSS ROAD PANAMA ROAD S.R.434 2 COLL~CTOR 10,900 3,932 0.36 C 4,707
....\.
. ,;.
MOSS ROAD S.R.434 C.R.419 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 2.594 0.24 C 2,431
February 200 I f~e.1
February 2001
TABLE 14 A (2 of 3)
YEAR 2000 ROADWAY LINK LEVELS OF SERVICE
WITH EXISTING NETWORK
ROADWAY FROM TO NO. OF ROADWAY LOS D 2000 VIC DAILY 1995/\ 996
'LANES CLASS DAILY DAILY "RATIO LOS DAILY
CAPACITY VOLUME VOLUME
NORTHERN WAY WINTER SPG BLVD TROTWOOD BLVD. 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 2,761 0.25 C 1,868
NORTI-IERN WAY TROTWOOD BLVD VISTA WILLA DR. 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 2,942 0.27 C 2,501
,.
'NORTHERN WAY WINTER SPG BLVD SHETLAND AVE. 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 3,012 ; 0.28 C 2,736
NORTHERN WAY GREENBRIAR LN. WINTER SPRGBLVD 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 2,713 0.25 C 1,991
TROTWOOD I3LVD TUSKAWILLA RD. NORTHERN WAY 2 COLLECTOR 10,900. 4,190 0.38 C 4,121
TROTWOOD BLVD. TUSKA WILLA RD. WEST 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 1,647 0.15 C 2,046
WINTER SPG BLVD TUSKA WILLA RD. NORTHERN WAV 2 COLLECTOR 11,500 7,647 0.66 D 7,384
WINTER SPG BLVD NORTliERN WAY GREENBRIAR LN. 2 COLLECTOR 11,500 5,280 0.46 D 6,099
WINTER SPG BLVD NORTHERN WAY NORTHERN WAY 2 COLLECTOR 1 \,500 7,647 0.66 D 7.484
WINTER SPG BL NORTHERN WAY S.R.426 2 COLLECTOR '\2,000 . . 11,152 0.93 D \2,260
SHORE ROAD PANAMA ROAD S.R. 434- 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 436 0.04 C 475
HAVES ROAD PANAMA ROAD S.R.434 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 5,671 0.52 D 3,381
DOLPHIN ROAD SHORES ROAD HA YES ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 2,455 0.23 C 241
FISHER ROAD EAST LAKE DRIVE PANAMA ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 944 0.09 C 1,267
TUSCORA DRIVE NORTHERN WAY S.R.434 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 2,242 0.21 C 765
VISTA WILLA ole NORTHERN WAY SENECA BLVD. 2 COLLECTOR . 10,900 . 3,840 0.35 C 1,410
'..
r~e. {O
. TABLE 14 A
YEAR 2000 ROADWAY LINK LEVELS OF SERVICE
WITH EXISTING NETWORK
February 200 I
(3 oD)
ROADWAY FROM TO . NO. OF . ROADWAY LOS 0 2000 VIC DAILY 199511996
LANES CLASS DAILY DAILY RATIO LOS DAILY
CAPACITY VOLUME. VOLUME
GREEN8RIAR LN. NORTHERN WAY WINTER SPRG BLVD. 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 1,569 0.14 C 1,141
DYSON DRIVE TUSKA WILLA RD. SHETLAND A VENUE 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 1,221 0.\ I C 3.262
SHETLAND AVE. CITRUS DYSON DRIVE 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 5,575 0.51 C 4,474
EDGEMON AVE. SEMINOLA 8LVD. PANAMA ROAD 2 COLLECTOR ]0,900 3,250 0.30 C 2,774
EDGEMON AVE. PANAMA ROAD S.R. ~34 2 COLLECTOR ]0,900 2,930 0.27 C 3,783
EDGEMON AVE. S.R. 434 S.R.4]9 2 COLLECTOR ]0,900 3,281 0.30 C 2,480
WADE STREET S.R.434 S.RAI9 2 COLLECTOR 10,900 623 0.06 C 1,034
ALTON ROAD HA YES ROAD SHORE ROAD 2 COLLECTOR to,900 1,246 0.11 C 1,380
SENECA BLVD. WINTER SPG BLVD Y, WAY 2 COLLECTOR 1 Q,900 . 2,\ 15 0.\9 C 1,418
SENECA BLVD. '/,WAY . "VISTAWILLA 2 COLLECTOR. ]0,900 t,642 0.15 C 1,054
UlC = UNDER CONSTRUCTION - USED 1999 DATA
2000 DAILY VOLUME ARE BASED ON COUNTY TRAFFIC COUNTS FOR THE LAST QUARTER OF 2000 AND CITY TRAFFIC COUNTS' IN FEB. 2001.
- .
J:\W0459.04\LOS TAIl!.E 14A.WPD
P41 e tl
CIl
! cO)~
~ ::J
g lQ)~
......
r dfi
N ::.
_ Gl
~p~~; .,
t;~6r91gm
~~p~ i.:s
"''''';:J!!l,.a.
't''I'g~ ,.
e~~~':a :z:
~N ~~.!#' ~
g~-~
-... Z;J
nGl
. CIl
LEGEND: '
@
DEfiCIENT (EXCEEDS, LOS D)
CURRENT LEVEL OF SERVICE (A-F)
c... 0 III
0 >- ~
lD 'r.l
r
z r.'
2 0 z
~ N -l
~ III
./> 01
(]I -g
<0
"
./>
~'"
~g
:00
, (I) ~
-0-
~~
Zz
"'@e>
o 0
g~m
~z])
O(J)Q
)>-om
~oz
~Q
)>m
::l(J)
0)>
z~
(J)r
~O
~ O(J)
-<
~ :n
~ we>
)>c
:n
m
@
c.:>
z
~w
n.>
(1)<(
(l:::
u
CD
RED BUG LAKE RD.
@
~
-N-
~
N.T.S.
f-
l (0)~
...- ::s
~ CZJ~
f'" ~::s
OJ
; dn
. ...
N ...
";;lO-", C!)
l<P~~ Z'"
. ~~6M em
~~p~ i:J
~~;:l~", a.
.!.b~V) "'
e~~~:tl :J:
C'JN(.,.j'V1 en 0
~~.. -
g~i3 .
oC!)
'(ll
LEGEND:
., ~ , ~ , , ,. , ,. , ,. , , "" , , '.
SIX LANES
FOUR LANES
THREE LANES
TWO LANES
PAVING/DRAINAGE
EXTENSION
TRAFFIC SIGNAL/
INTERSECTION GEOMETRY
WESTERN TOWN
CENTER COLLECTOR
S.R. 434
o
'.
C- o Vl
0 > ()
CD f.1 >
z r
r;>
f? 0
N Z
::E ":::- ...,
Vl
0 01
~ "-
(]I S
!"
0
~
:E
.~~
:00
CJJz
-Om
;!;1m r:v
:oZO
~rh~ OJ
I
"-
CJJ~_ -
m s:: Vi
O:t>-o
oz:o :;).
",roO
_-0<
.....om
E!.:os::
O-lm
.....:t>~
5CJJ
z-o
CJJ~
>,j ~'Z
OJ 0
~ -<
...... "
I'V.l
coB
.C
:0
m
"--- --- . ...._- .---.
EASTERN TOWN
CENTER COLLECTOR
(:>
z
oc~
5;<(
S.R. 434
. LAKE DR.
>-
<(
~
f-
...J
W .--..
CD...J
...J
zO
a:::: 0
w
f-
Vl
<(
W
,...
W
...J
.U
~
U
W
...J
'(:>
<(
w
. ';.
RED BUG'LAKE RD.
~
-N-
~
N.T.S.
Table 15
2010 ROAD NEEDS
DEVELOPER AND OTHER FUNDING
(Inside City Limits)
(Revised 2/2001)
Local Developer
1. Improve Tuskawilla Road north of SR 434 (formerly Brantley Avenue).
(Switch to Impact Fee Funding)
2. Improve Spring Avenue (existing dirt road) with drainage and paving improvements.
County*
1. Improve Shepard Road to three (3) lanes from U.S. 17-92 to Sheoah Boulevard. (County
portion) Note: This project is not funded or planned by the County.
2. Improve East Lake Drive from two (2) lanes to four (4) lanes. (Under design)*
State*
1. Improve U.S. 17-92 from Seminola Boulevard to SR419 from four (4) lanes to six (6) lanes.
(Construction for six [6] lanes completed to Shepard.) Six (6) lanes are planned in the 2020
Long Range Tr.ansportation Plan. *
. 2. Improve SR 434 from U.S. 17-92 to Moss Road from five (5) Janes to seven (7) lanes.
Note: This project IS not funded or planned by the State. It was in the previous OUA TS
2010 Plan Update. It is not in the current 2020 Long Range Transportation Plan Update.
3. Improve SR 434 from SR 419 to Eastern B~ltway from four(4) lanes to six (6) lanes. Note:
this project is not funded or planned by State. It was in the previous QUA TS 2010 Plan
Update. It is not in the current 2020 Long Range Transpqrtation Plan Update. .
4. Improve SR 419 from SR 434 to U.S. 17-92 from two (2) lanes to four (4) lanes.
Note: This project is not funded or planned by the State. .
NOTE: Projects 2 and 3 may not be .necessary and should be watched closely to determine if
capacities exceed expected projections. It appears that the City. should start lobbying for
improvements to SR 419 as current counts exceed the existing roadway capacity.
*See also Table 15A.
Supplement No.2
Page 1 II
Table 15A
STATE and COUNTY ROAD PROJECTS
ADJACENT TO WINTER SPRINGS.
State - TIP FY 2000/2001 - FY 2004-2005
. 1. SR 434 from US 17-92 to SR 419 - Improve .the traffic control devices/system.
2. SR 419 - Add right turn lanes at Edgemon Avenue and Moss Road.
3. SR 434 from East Street to SR 419 - Resurface.
State - 2020 .[ong Range Trans.portation Plan Update
1. SR 426 from the Seminole/Orange County Line to the Greeneway - Widen to 6 Janes.
2. US 17-92 from Shepard Road to Airport Boulevard - Widen to 6 lanes.
County - TIP FY 2000/2001 - FY 2004/2005
1. Lake Drive from Seminola Boulevard to Tuskawilla Road - Reconstruct to 4 lanes.
2. Red Bug Lake Road form SR 436 to Eagle Circle - Widen to 6 lanes.
County - 2020 Long Range.Transportation Plan Update
1. Seminola Boulevard from US 17-92 to Lake Drive - Widen to 6 lanes.
Supplement No.2
Page 15
Table 16
2010 ROAD NEEDS
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS FUNDING
(Revised 02/01)
Phase I
All Phase I recommendations have been completed.
Phase II
1. Paving and drainage improvements to Bahama Road from Shore Road to Hayes Road.
(Completed) .
2. Paving and drainage improvements to Panama Road.from Shore Road to Moss Road.
. (Completed)
3.. Paving and drainage improvements to'Fisher Road from Panama Road to City Limits.
(Under Design)
4. Add stacking lanes to Hayes Road at the SR 434 intersection.
(Completed)
Phase III
1. Upgrade Moss Road from SR 434 to First Street from two lanes to four lanes and from First.
Street to SR 419 from two lanes t6 two lanes divided arid turn lanes..
(Under Design)
2. Improve Tuskawilla Road north of SR 434 (formerly Brantley Avenue). (Switch project from
developer funded to impact fee.)
3. Construct Town Center collector road to accommodate new development. Roads will
connect SR 434 and Tuskawilla Road for collection of traffic from this area.
Phase IV
1. Improve Winter Springs Boulevard to three lane capability from Northern Way to Northern
Way (east section). This will be accomplished by adding turn lanes at each intersection for
both traffic flow directions. . .
Supplement No.2
Page 16
ATTACHMENT 3
'P:;
.'.
<, I
(:11
".1:::i
nR
.. t:st
:'],
i'J
.:.:.}
]
:~H;
jyt
"'"
":.
Ui
g.'
., ~.:
'.
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
TRANSPORTATION STUDY
~~;
\,""
\...,
~H
'P~
:} :~
,I.;
:f:i
ik
AUGUST 1997
'm'"
/\:
Hi
~'
;\',
..,
W
I'
, \
i'
:Ii..
;:(
;:~
I
iill.
~
]...
","\
:n
"'."1
,,~~
.:~~~
Conklin, Porter and Holmes - Engineers, Inc.
1104 E. Robinson Street
Orlando, Florida 32801
CPH Project No. W0459.00
Tables, Continued
13. ScreenIine Comparisons - 1996 Model Validation
(Average Daily Traffic) .................................. ill-29
Source: CPH Model
14. Year 2010 R03;dway Link Levels of Service With
2010 Network. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ill-32 - ill-34
Source: F.D.O.T. Five-Year Plan, OUATS 2010 Plan Update,
Seminole County, City of Winter Springs
15. City 2010 Road Needs - Developer and Other Funding
(Inside City Limits) ..................................... ill-36
Source: None (Generated for this study)
. 16. City 2010 Road Needs - City of Winter Springs Funding. . . . . . . . ill-37 - ill-38
Source: None (Generated for this study)
17. October 1996 Existing Plus Committed Socioeconomics Data. . . . IV-3
Source: City of Winter Springs Data (Generated for this study)
18. E + C System Capacity Analysis (Average Daily Traffic) ....... IV -4 - IV-6
Source: City of Winter Springs Data (Generated for this study)
19. Primary Impact Area For Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) ........ IV-7
Source: City of Lake Mary, CPH Engineers 1993
20. Sight Distance For Turn Lane Policy (Rounded Values) ........ IV-17
Source: City of Lake Mary, CPH Engineers 1993
A-I Public Works - Local Option Gas Tax. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix I
Source: City of Winter Springs
A-2 Local Option Gas Tax - Historical Data ..................... Appendix 2
Source: City of Winter Springs
A-3 Transportation Impact Fee Fund ........................... Appendix 3
Source: City of Winter Springs
A-4 Final Budget Figures Transportation Impact Fees. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix 4
Source: City of Winter Springs
A-5 October 1996 City of Winter Springs Socioeconomics Data ..... Appendix 5
Source: City of Winter Springs
FIGURES
1. Study Area Location .................................... ill-8
Source: Seminole County Road Map 1996
2. 1996 Existing Roadway Classifications and
Number of Lanes ....................................... ill-IO
Source: Seminole County, City of Winter Springs and F.D.O.T.
3. 1996 Existing DeficienCies ............................... ill-I 9
Source: Generated by this study
4. 1996 Traffic Zones. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ill-23
Source: Generated for this study
5. Screenlines Model Validation 1996 . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ill-26
Source: Generated for this study
6. Comparison of Existing and Computer Assigned Volumes ...... ill-28
Source: Generated for this study
7. 2010 Test Highway Network. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ill-3I
Source: Generated for this study
8. 2010 Needed Improvements Plan .......................... ill-35
Source: Generated for this study
A-I Micro-Zone System ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix 8
Source: Casselberry Transportation Plan
A-2 1996 Traffic Assignment Network Nodal Map. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Appendix 9
Source: Generated for this study
A-3 Test Highway Network .................................. Appendix 10
Source: Generated for this study
A-4 2010 Traffic Assignment network Nodal Map ................ Appendix 11
Source: Generated for this study
. I
I
.J
~n
l~L..J
:'j
'....l
nr
f L~."
INDEX
CHAPTER I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . INTRODUCTION
~..
i:
V
CHAPTERII ........................ FINANCIAL RESOURCES ANALYSIS
CHAPTER ill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TRANSPORTATION PLAN
~\"
ii)!
t:~.
CHAPTERIV ......................: CONCURRENCY PLANNING
r.q
U:J
~.,
"
u.:
,,\"L'
'.D'"
'\.
.i:
....J.
'.r"
t
.h
~".
q."':
".
Il
bI
:'lJ;
...<,
~l'
].
.,
)
.;
11
.i
~.J
J
.1
j
..J,
-:'\
]
'\
J
f1
LJ
]
J
J
":")
.."
i.1
J
]
]
]
]
.J
--I
~
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
Background
Winter Springs, a community of 26,000 persons, is served by one major north-south route in the
central part of the city, Tuskawilla Road, and one major east-west route, S.R. 434. Two major
north-south routes exist on the western and eastern boundaries. On the western boundary is U.S.
17-92 and on the eastern boundary is the Greeneway, a multi-lane tollway. Located in south-
central Seminole County in a rural/suburban residential setting, the City's major roadways
provide access to neighboring towns for Winter Springs residents and employees and facilitate
the flow of through traffic.
State Road 434 provides access to Oviedo and the Greeneway to the east and to Longwood and
U.S. 17-92 to the west. U.S. 17-92 and the Greeneway provide major arterial routes to Sanford
to the north or Orange County to the south. Recent widening of S.R. 434 from S.R. 419 to
TuskaWilla Road and projected widening from Tuskawilla Road to the Greeneway have positive
benefits for the City of Winter Springs.
Traffic circulation patterns are directly dependent upon the land uses associated with the property
adjacent to the roadway. While other factors such as major trip attraction (a theme park or an
airport) can have a substantial effect, it is often the land uses which dictate the current and
projected traffic volumes on a given road. A thorough examination of the land uses and
projected construction was performed as part of this Transportation Plan update.
Purpose
There are tWo primary purposes for the City of Winter Springs Transportation Study. The first is
to develop a transportation plan that defines the needs of the city in the forecast year 2010. The
second purpose is to establish a mechanism for monitoring new development to insure that
needed transportation facilities are in place concurrent with impacts from such development. In
addition, the following purposes are also important:
1. Develop a plan to guide the city in future transportation decisions;
2. Provide the Traffic Circulation Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan;
3. Develop a plan that assures that transportation improvements required of
developers in the city are in accordance with the long range needs of the city;
4. Define capital improvements needed to maintain a satisfactory level of service;
5. Review ctirrent financial resources available for transportation funding in the city.
I-I
I
J
]
_.I
.J
]
f:11,:,:"}
"
"]
J
J
J
-1
-:J
J
]
]
J
J
\
I
I
Transportation Plan Methodology
The City of 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 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 planning 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. The transportation plan development was divided into two phases.
These are:
Phase I - Organization and Data Collection; and
Phase II - Analysis and Plan Development.
Additionally, a third phase of the project was defined to allow for the monitoring of new
development:
Phase III - Concurrency Planning.
Wherever possible, existing data from the OUA TS and the Seminole County TMP were used in
the development of the Winter Springs Transportation Plan. This not only provides compatibility
with other planning activities within the region but, in addition, the use of existing data sources
minimizes the need for creating extensive new data.
All data collection efforts were designed to permit complete use of existing data sources. After
existing data were carefully reviewed, additional data were collected. Among the data required
to conduct the technical analyses were land use/socio-economic data, traffic counts,
transportation planning models currently used in the surrounding region and existing data for
planned developments within the city and adjacent areas.
Transportation models developed from the OUATS and the TMP were applied for existing
conditions to validate their effectiveness in forecasting existing traffic patterns within the Winter
Springs Study area. These tests were made in order to validate the use of the models and the data
~nputs to the models for forecast conditions. In order to permit more detailed analysis of
conditions within the Winter Springs Study area, a more refined highway network and a zonal
system compatible with this network were developed.
1-2
, (
I
I
: I
; I
Existing deficiencies on city, county and state systems were defined ahd Capital Improvement
Programs identified to resolve these transportation deficiencies. No existing deficiencies were
defined on the city collector system.
q
'h')
.'J'
..
.l
"~.J'
..
'~.'
U.'
;i:
'\0'
0;..
Forecasts of anticipated land use/socio-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.
~ml
:lla
W045900.INT
'':.:J. .
. ,
.-\;.
,J
iM
~.":.
};
"{<.
'."j
!:..:
m:
~.,..
....'..
:',1
.,.
(~~
]I
Ji
.'I~
"
1."
~
J
"J
:.....
J
- 1
1-3
,
J
]
]
CHAPTER II
-FINANCIAL RESOURCES ANALYSIS
- J
-~1
li'J..
~~J
:- J
:~J
~
J
.1
J
J
J
]
]
1
Local governments in Florida are now confronting the fiscal situation of ever increasing demands
for services and capital facilities contrasted with declining assistance from traditional State and
Federal sources. National imperatives to reduce Federal budget deficits appear to offer little hope
for a resurgence of external funding sources for local improvements. In addition, recent changes in
the State Comprehensive Planning legislation now mandate that adequate infrastructure capacity be
present or programmed by the governing jurisdiction as a condition precedent to new development
approval. The local manifestations of these policy changes are twofold. First, local governments
must now develop alternative funding strategies to accommodate new growth and development.
Second, the local government must ensure that the timing of the revenue collections and the
subsequent improvement construction are such that new infrastructure capacity is available when
required to accommodate new growth.
For pUrposes of this Transportation Study, funding will only be evaluated from the perspective that
projects contained herein are growth-induced. In cases where a roadway improvement is clearly
required to satisfy travel demand related to new growth and development, local governments are
entitled to pass this cost along to development in the form of regulatory fees collected prior to the
occupancy of the building. On the other hand, highway construction required as a result of existing
capacity deficiencies must be funded through traditional general revenue sources. These deficiencies
are being covered by other City programs and resources. The transportation impact fee should
provide the City of Winter Springs with sufficient revenue to maintain the desired level of services
on the highway network within its jurisdiction.
Financial Analysis Format
This analysis evaluates the City of Winter Springs Transportation Impact Fee Funding to establish
the following:
1. Historical revenue collection and expenditure patterns;
2. Project revenue sources available to amortize any roadway deficiencies and/or
construct growth induced improvements;
3. Provide a Capitallmprovement Program format for the initial five year period of the
transportation study.
A general analytical framework is provided with which the city staff can replicate the type of fiscal
impact determinations provided in this report. By so doing, the City of Winter Springs will derive
maximum benefit from this study.
II-I
:..J
]
~]
]
]
j
"']
J
~
]
J
]
J
,;)
]
]
]
J
Data Base
Data for this portion of the report have been taken from the following sources:
1. City of Winter Springs Annual Budget, FY 1995-96 and 1996-97;
2. City of Winter Springs Annual Financial Statement, FY 1993-94 and FY 1994-95.
All data contained herein have been provided by the City of Winter Springs and are shown in
Appendix Table A-I through A-4 and represent all funding sources and expenditures for
transportation purposes available to the City.
Local Option Gas Tax - During the past five years, Winter Springs has made extensive use of Local
Option Gas Tax (LOGT) funds for area wide roadway construction. In fact, the LOGT contingent
of funding has constituted the most significant revenue source for roadways in the City of Winter
Springs during the historical period surveyed. During this time, LOGT funds have ranged from a
low of$205,765 in FY 1993-94 to a high of$268,779 in FY 1990-91. Winter Springs has used these
funds for a variety of transportation related projects. All funds have been allocated from this fund
to improve existing deficiencies and maintenance and are not available for construction of the growth
related roadway improvement projects.
One Cent Sales Tax - Seminole County has a one cent sales tax which is used specifically in the
County for transportation/roadway improvements.
Federal Revenue Sharing (FRS) - This revenue source has typically not demonstrated stability in year
to year appropriations. Local entitlements are always uncertain as a result of the Federal budget
process, and the program is always in danger oftermination. For these reasons, it is recommended
that this revenue source be considered expendable. The City of Winter Springs should not consider
funding any critical roadway project primarily from FRS funds. Instead, to the extent that FRS funds
are available, if at all, the City should accelerate its Capital Improvement Program, or consider
adding projects which are not considered fmancially fe~ible when using only hard revenue sources.
Special Assessment Proiects - During the pasttwenty years, the City of Winter Springs has only used
this mechanism on improvements to Moss Road from S.R. 434 to S.R. 419. It is recommended that
the City of Winter Springs use special assessment projects as little as possible to improve local
streets.
General Fund Appropriations - These revenues, generally derived from ad valorem assessment, are
not used for funding major capital improvements in the roadway system. They are appropriated to
repair and replacement (R&R) expenditures, and to operation and maintenance (O&M) expenditures.
In addition, these revenues are generally used for major debt service by most cities in the State of
Florida. The City of Winter Springs has adhered to these principle during the five year period of the
financial inventory.
II-2
1
J
Transportation Impact Fees
-')
J
These are fees collected from new development/growth for the construction of new and improved
roadways. The improvements must provide capacity for growth. Impact fees are not used for
correcting existing roadway deficiencies or repair and maintenance projects. These funds are used
to provide roadway capacity when and where it is needed in a timely fashion in order to allow growth
in an orderly fashion. It is advisable to periodically review the projects funded by impact fees to
determine that the funds are going to the area with the most need.
',J
.'j
]
.'f"....'~..
,t"
,;:'~~
}T
''''J
:)
~
J
.J
J
J':
"
J
J
]
J
Roadway Revenue Resources
As noted earlier, this review emphasizes only hard revenue sources. Therefore, while Federal
revenue Sharing or State DOT discretionary funding may playa role in funding some roadway
segments, this analysis assumes that only those revenues identified as hard revenue sources will be
used to fund improvements.
Table 1
Available Transportation Revenues for Roadway Improvements
Local Option Gas Tax
One Cent Sales Tax
Transportation Impact Fees
W045900,FIN/tm
11-3
I
. i
"j
]
]
.]
J
]
1
J..
~
J
I
J
J
"I
]
J
I
CHAPTER III
TRANSPORTATION PLAN
This Chapter documents the updating of the transportation plan for the City of Winter Springs. This
plan was developed using procedures and data from similar planning activities in the surrounding
jurisdictions as well as information from the 1988 Transportation Element of the Comprehensive
Plan. The planning process focused on a detailed analysis of the roadways in Winter Springs
including the Municipal Collector System.
The City of Winter Springs is an integral part of the Orlando Urban Area. In order to be compatible
with planning efforts in the Orlando area, extensive use was made of data sources from the Orlando
Urban Area Transportation Study (OUA TS) and the Seminole County Transportation Management
Program (TMP). Transportation planning models and procedures from these processes were also
used wherever possible.
Goals and Objectives
Traffic circulation Goals and Objectives were developed as part of the Comprehensive Plan and
updated in this study. The updated goals, objectives and policies are as follows:
GOAL
Provide a road system within the City that facilitates internal traffic circulation, assists ingress and
egress from the municipal area, and accommodates through traffic simultaneously to coordinate
safely, efficiently, economically and conveniently the flow of all modes of transportation in and
around Winter Springs.
OBJECTIVE
A) Throughout the planning period, the City shall develop and maintain a safe convenient and
efficient motorized and non-motorized transportation network, through establishment of
criteria to be enforced during site plan review, concurrency management and access
management by the statutory deadline.
Policies
1) The collector road system shall be funded by the standards-driven impact fee created
in 1990 by the City.
2) The collector road system shall be developed according to the master conceptual plan
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.
I
" )
III-I
.J
]
,j
3)
The conceptual plan does and shall continue to address through periodic review these
factors:
a. Current and projected deficiencies of arterial roads under other jurisdictions;
b. Existing deficiencies of City collector streets; and
c.
Winter Springs shall continue to adopt revisions to the Land Development
Regulations to include guidelines and criteria consistent with nationally-
recognized standards and tailored to local conditions which provide for safe
and convenient on-site traffic flow, adequate pedestrian ways and sidewalks,
as well as sufficient on-site parking for both motorized and non-motorized
vehicles.
r:J,.
l~i
0....
<:"';
ii.'.
I
( ~: ~
~q
:z: ~
4) Land development regulations, contain specific access management alternative
techniques to control access and preserve level of service. These techniques include
but are not limited to the following:
~..,
.~J
J
~
]
".J
\;.~.
~1
~
J
,]
J
J
I
a. Limit access to roads by controlling the number and location of site access
driveways and other intersecting roads; .
b. Cross-access easements of adjacent properties where feasible; and
c. Use of frontage or back-lot parallel access roads where feasible.
OBJECTIVE
B). Keep apprised 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
levels of service on which Winter Springs citizens depend.
Policies
1) Continue to monitor the construction schedules of Department of Transportation
regarding improvement ofSR 434 through the City so that the level of service is not
degraded below the State's criteria for a principal arterial link. In applying the
lenience to permit three years in advance of funded improvements, be selective so
that development permitted to proceed prior to actual construction of the higher
capacity road will include only those projects which further progress toward other
goals.
2) Require all development plans for property abutting state highways to include
controlled access and minimal driveway cuts, with common service roads connecting
I
.. )
III-2
I
..J
--":J
-- j
.OJ
--1
'1"','"
"',
'\',
" '}
J
J
]
J
J
,J
]
]
J
.I
I
to adjacent development whenever possible, to minimize interruption of traffic on
the principal arterial sections. Coordinate permitting with the D.O.T. Access
Management Program.
3) Pursue one of the objectives of the City's municipal collector road building program
- that of providing residents alternative routes over collector roads.
4) Participate biannually in the update of the Seminole County impact fee road
construction schedule to press the need for widening of the northern section of
Tuscawilla Road, the only north-south arterial through Winter Springs.
5) Coordinate development of all property in the City adjacent to Tuscawilla Road with
County requirements for laneage and intersection improvements to lessen
development impact until the road is improved.
6) Continue to work with other jurisdictions to convert the former railroad into a
corridor for alternative modes of travel within the City - walking trails, bicycle paths,
,equestrian and recreation.
OBJECTIVE
C) Throughout the planning period, the City will coordinate the transportation system needs
with land use designations; planning for land use and transportation is to be closely
correlated by ensuring that adequate capacity is available to accommodate the impacts of
development.
Policies
1) Make bi-annual traffic counts, plus increases to occur from permitted development
as of the effective date of the concurrency requirement.
2) No development orders will be issued that will degrade the level of service standard
of D on all roadways. Level of service must consider vested development and
transportation facilities committed for construction within three years.
3) 'Design and engineer the collector road system to minimize traffic impact on these
arterial roads.
4) Create intersections of the new City collector roads with arterials where they will
coordinate with the functioning of arterials.
5) Monitor the functioning of the arterial and collector road system by use of the
III-3
I
.J
J
::-'\
!;.'-.'J
"
:i....
fJ'
i;
!L
~':'
V
~::.'-'
T']
h,
ITl
~
J
..J
a
J
.J
]
J
....J
TRANPLANIFSUTMS model updated (1996) by the City's traffic consultant so that
collector road improvements may be scheduled according to valid priorities.
6) Establish the level of service for municipal collector roads at LOS D.
7) Require a traffic study for all new development generating more than 300 Daily
Trips. Such study to be conducted in accord with written procedures provided by the
City.
OBJECTIVE
D) Throughout the planning period, the City shall enforce the level of service standard on all
arterial and collector roads.
Policies
1) Update and monitor transportation concurrency with formalized procedures that
ascertain the permittability of proposed developments according to criteria
established by an expert consultant.
2) The City shall annually monitor the LOS status of arterial and all state roadways
within the City including U.S. Highways 17 and 92 and the Eastern Beltway, by
obtaining from the State and County their most recent traffic counts at points along
all roadways which would be affected by development in the City.
3) Permit no development within the municipal limits that will cause the level of service
of any state arterial road to decrease below LOS D no sooner than three years prior
to construction funding of the impacted arterial as reflected in the Florida Department
of Transportation's then adopted Five- Year Plan.
OBJECTIVE
E) Create through the configuration of the City-wide collector road system the interaction and
cohesiveness that have been lacking among the residential neighborhoods of Winter Springs,
but do so in a manner that enhances and preserves the quality oflife within each community.
Policies
1) Extend the several true collector roads that now end abruptly or degrade from paving
to unimproved status within existing neighborhoods without connection or outlet to
another collector road or arterial, to complete valid collector linkages for these
communities.
I
" ,
III-4
I
.:.J
J
']
]
d
2) When designing extensions of existing collector roads to their logical arterial
connection south of the City - the Lake Drive-Seminola Boulevard major collector
that is planned for improvement by the county - choose rights-of-way that minimize
intrusion and cut-through high speed traffic, so that improved traffic circulation is
not at the expense of peaceful habitation.
3) Plan for completion of the one-ended collector roads in existing developments on a
neighborhood-by-neighborhood basis so that input from the residents is acquired.
~k:
~<i~
'.~.' .
'\',
.,.
.,
"--
4) The City, shall ensure the provision and maintenance of bicycle and pedestrian
walkways to supplement collector roads between r~sidential areas and parks, schools,
and other major attractors. Specific provisions for the establishment and
maintenance of bicycle pedestrian walkways shall include, but not necessarily be
limited to the following:
""J
"'.
~
T,',l,
[J
:::]
.~~.:
ill)
iliJ
..']
J1I
)'$
"Or.
;)'
a. The City shall review all proposed development for its accommodation of
bicycle and pedestrian traffic needs. .
b. The land. development regulations, shall continue to reqUIre all new
developments to provide bicycle parking space.
c. Sidewalks or other pedestrian ways shall be provided where feasible and
appropriate along all roadways.
OBJECTIVE
F) In the design of the municipal collector road system, seize opportunities to solve specific
problems.
Policies
1) Eliminate landlocked parcels by providing for rights-of-way to reach these properties.
2) Emphasize improved access for emergency vehicles to secluded areas in the design.
3) Permit no individual residential driveways onto the collector roads where feasible.
J
4)
Encourage "green commerce" along the abandoned CSX railroad corridor to create
an open view near any intersections of crossroads and the tracks. Green commerce
is to be defined by the City and shall include such commercial activities as nurseries,
truck farming, and outdoor recreation which does not require large areas of vertical
construction to block the drivers' clear view.
~
JI
]
j
_:\
l
III-5
I
J
]'
f.'.
=--.
]
'~'J
~'
J
D
m
~>
; ~~-
B
~
J
";]
<"
TI
iliI
J
OBJECTIVE
G) Conserve the natural environment and augment open space in the City as functions of road
development.
Policies
I) Where valid options are available, choose rights-of-way for the City collector system
distant enough from natural drainage features and upland habitats to coexist with
these natural areas.
2) The incursion of a roadway through these natural areas shall be allowed if it benefits
the public need, such as for access by emergency vehicles or transporting school
children, outweighing other concerns.
3) Include in all new road plans adequate right-of-way for potential landscaping and
provide for maintenance, in the annual budget of the City.
4) Designate scenic drives along which collector road construction will be adapted to
preserve as much as possible of existing vegetation and canopy.
OBJECTIVE
H) Ensure that current and future rights-of-way are protected from encroachment from structures
or ancillary uses inconsistent with the designation of rights-of-way. Rights-of-way necessary
for the maintenance of level of service standards and for the safe design of roadways in
accordance with State standards shall be required. Existing rights-of-way shall be preserved
through enforcement of setback provisions, which prevent encroachments into the rights-of-
way.
Policies
:B
1) The City, in its land development regulations shall require the dedication of all
needed rights-of-way and necessary roadway improvements for all new development,
and adopt provisions to protect existing rights-of-way by limiting the use and/or
encroachment by structures and ancillary uses.
J
]
J
-:\
-,1
"
2)
The City shall acquire right-of-way for future transportation needs as funds become
available.
III-6
J
j
J
]
B
fl.,
n
f]
"
:J
W
n::
'.
.(
!!!'].
r
<It.
11..
~
B
I
I
I
'.".
~
":)
j
Existing.Conditions
To plan for the future transportation needs of the City of Winter Springs, a complete understanding
of the community's existing transportation system is necessary. This includes a thorough
understanding of existing transportation conditions and existing transportation deficiencies. To
accomplish this, an extensive data collection and review process was accomplished. This effort
included a categorization of the existing roadways in the city .and their functional use or
classification, a detailing of existing traffic flows within the city and its surrounding area as revealed
in daily and peak hour traffic counts, a detailing of transportation planning models currently used
in the area including those used by Seminole County and the OUA TS, a detailing of the data
currently used in the area for transportation planning including computer coded networks and
socioeconomic data, and a review of existing transportation plans within the area including the city,
county, and the region.
Study Area - The development of a transportation plan for the City of Winter Springs requires a
detailed analysis of transportation plans and systems in the city and the surrounding area. In addition
to the City's Comprehensive Plan, current transportation planning activities generally consider the
entire Orlando urban area which is defined as Seminole, Orange and Osceola County. While the
City of Winter Springs Transportation Plan must consider the established relationships between the
City and this entire region, a study area for more detailed analysis was defined.
In order to measure the impacts of growth within the City, the study area must include all of the city
and fringe areas surrounding the city that affect traffic flows within the city limits. For the purposes
of this analysis, a study area meeting these requirements was developed (see Figure 1). This area
is generally bounded on the north by Lake Jessup, on the east by the Eastern Beltway (C.R. 417), on
the south by Red Bug Lake Road, and on the west by U.S. 17-92. These boundaries are compatible
with traffic zone boundaries established in the OUA TS and the Seminole County TMP.
Existing Roadways - The existing roadway system within the study area defined above has been
functionally classified in the Orlando Urban Area Transportation Study and in the Seminole County
TMP. These definitions of roadway usages as seen from the county perspective were reviewed so
that a similar classification of roadway usage from the City's perspective could be made.
Functional Classification of Existing System - Seminole County has developed a set of definitions
in order to functionally classify the roadways in the county according to their usage. These
definitions were adopted as a part of this study effort so that compatibility with local planning efforts
could be maintained. Thus, the roads shown in Seminole County traffic segment counts were
functionally classified and were adopted for use in this study. The list of the roadways within the
study area boundary is shown in Table 2. The functional classifications are also shown in Figure 2.
Existing Traffic Counts - Seminole County maintains a comprehensive traffic counting program
within the study area and the city. The most recently published counts from this agency were
reviewed and posted within the study area. These state and county counts were available for 1995
III-7
~~..l]
":t
:;
i,i
J I
n I
;.../ .
[1
'~..J
''''}
<,',
r
L.
fJ:
',..
~..t..
~)
,;
~ q
1:::
fJ
:",
1.'
',~~
..,
,
.)~.'
:r
i'"
]
]
J
]
OJ
Conklin ~orl.r and Holm..
~ ~ .NGIN..R8, INC.
1104 E ROSlNSON SlREET
ORlANDO, F1.ORlDA 32801
lEI. oW7 .2~0452
fAX oW7 6-4&-1036
SCAlE: NTS
DATE: 3-14-97
STUDY AREA LOCATION
W1N"Tffi SPRINGS TRANSPORT A 1lON SlUDY
AGURE
1
JOB NO.: W0459.01
II 1-8
':1
,',j,
'~'"
'. .~:
(\:>
f1
i.J
'J'
...;
,',
;i'
~,u
:h)
;\:.:
'\,",
.',/\
I'..
'Hi
,',
"
:l,"~',"
....'
'K
n
I
"'j','
,".'.
:~:
:::;:(
t=.,
T~'
',,'-.;
:t:;
ik
~,..;
'''\r
.~H
~::',~
(\;'
~!
J.
)
f
I'
T
"
I
11
ll'
"
,
H
h
~'i
::~
. '
J'"
..
"~
"
. .?,
Table 2
1996
FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION
WINTER SPRINGS TRANSPORT A TION STUDY
Freeways
Principal Arterials (State)
])
Eastern Be]tway (State)
S.R. 434
S.R.4]9
])
2)
Principal Arterials (Countv)
Maior Collectors (County)
])
2)
Red Bug Lake Road
Tuskawilla Road
])
2)
East Lake Drive
Red Bug Lake Road - Tuskawilla
Road to Eastern Beltway
Minor Collectors (County)
]) Dodd Road
2) Eag]e Bou]evard
3) Shepard Road - U.S. ] 7-92 to Winter Springs City Limit
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7) ,
8)
9)
]0)
I])
]2)
13)
]4)
15)
16)
] 7)
] 8)
Municipal Collectors (City)
Bahama Road - Shore Road to Hayes Road
Dolphin Road - Moss Road to Hayes Road
Dyson Road - Tuskawilla Road to Shetland A venue
Edgemon A venue - Panama Road to S.R. 419
Fischer Road - Panama Road to E. Lake Drive
Greenbriar Lane - Northern Way to Winter Springs Boulevard
Hayes Road - S.R. 434 to Bahama Road
Moss Road - S.R. 419 to Panama Road
Northern Way - All
Panama Road - Shore Road to Edgemon A venue
Shepard Road - Seminole County Line to End
Sheoah Bou]evard - Shepard Road to S.R. 434
Shore Road - Panama Road to End
Winding Hollow Boulevard - S.R. 434 to End
Winter Springs Boulevard - Tuskawilla Road to Eastern Beltway
Trotwood Boulevard - Tuskawilla Road to Northern Way
Tuscora Drive - S.R. 434 to Northern Way
Vista-Willa Drive - S.R. 434 to Northern Way
III-9
~~
::I
(Q)i
:5n
..
..
"'::l~:: ..
l<P~f Z"
~Sol"1 G II
... P"'-::1
o>~..,lil Z a.
&'f'~z.
!..~~~ =:1:
~N ~~J'!.
~g-a
~.
..
H
H
H
~ g ~
~ ~ ~
* $ ~
co ~
9
'-'
o
~ ~
~ US
~~::l
-ot5
~~~
~~~
tJ5:D~
""'00-<
0"T1()
~H:!;
~fft~
000-
z ~
~ ~
o ~
-<. 00 .
-n
Ng
:D
m
"-
I J~\~ ,l..=j
L-I
.'$. . .;
.......
~
f(~ .': I
~
..........
~
tl}l;:. .J
f,:;)Lil
[., !
;". ..~~ t
~
LEGEND:
..... PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL (STATE)
URBAN MINOR ARlERIAL (COUNTY)
MAJOR COLLECTOR (COUNTY)
-.-.-.- MINOR COLLECTOR (COUNTY)
MUNICIPAL COLLECTOR (CITY)
~
-N-
1
N.T.S.
<-1{;
~ BLVD.
EAGy: '-J\)
r..J>:.;.
.
. @-\.,
0\
RED BUG LAKE. RD. 0::.
O.
8l--'20
oj ~
J
and are summarized in Table 3. Municipal collectors were not counted by Seminole County;
thus, the consultant made hourly machine counts on all of the roadways currently paved in early
1996. These counts are summarized in Tables 4 and 5. These counts were used to help
determine roadway classifications and were also used as a base for model validation.
""'"1
"".
!,:\
.,..,
"',",
~t
J
:1
~
d
~'
t ~~
, \';'~
~"]
:.,'
9....
~
A vailable Model Inputs - The City of Winter Springs and the study area defined above are part of
the Orlando Urban Transportation Study and the Seminole County TMP. Each of these
transportation studies has developed a set of transportation planning models and a set of data that
is input to these models. These input data include descriptions of the roadway networks which
normally only include collectors and high classified roadways. Additionally, these studies used
socioeconomic data files which describe land use activities in discreet areas known as traffic
analysis zones (T AZ's).
These computer files and listings were gathered so that a complete understanding of the
transportation planning efforts in this area could be obtained. Additionally, these files were
transferred to the proper format for input to the model chosen for this study.
D".
"t
~..
;:.,
Existing Transportation Plans - Both state and county transportation planning activities have
produced transportation plans within the Winter Springs Study Area. These plans have been
reviewed and a listing of the transportation improvements presently planned and programmed
(within 5 years) for the City of Winter Springs and the study area is provided in Table 6. These
improvements will be studied in the 20 I 0 Transportation Plans and Existing Plus Committed
Plans in the development of recommendation and concurrency management procedures.
1FJ..
..
t~~'
Tl
illtl
-'J
JEJ
"J
.,;.
"1
~;: .
~~l
.a..
(This space intentionally left blank)
.~~...
IIi:
~<~:
Jl.
SJ
+
";'.
..'\
w~
":'.'
:~:
TI....
'.
,~;
III-II
I
j
]
.-.J
.<1
J
]
~.
::il
.:~\
."1
,.:
Table 3
1995
DAILY SEMINOLE COUNTY COUNTS
WINTER SPRINGS TRANSPORTATION STUDY
,
J
fj
]
J
}
1J
Jr.
"
':':]::
.,
w
]
11
J
'J.
"
]
J
Roadwav Location 1995 ADT
U.S. 17-92 Dog Track Road to S.R. 434 52,114
S.R. 434 to S.R. 419 36,123
S.R. 434 S.R. 419 to U.S. 17-92 24,892
S.R. 419 to Tuskawilla Road 24,757
Tuskawilla Road to Springs A venue 16,552
Springs A venue to Eastern Beltway 15,286
S.R.419 S.R. 434 to Edgemon A venue 12,271
Edgemon A venue to U.S. 17-92 15,553
Red Bug Lake Road Eagle Circle to Dodd Road 34,888
Dodd Road to Tuskawilla Road 35,790
Tuskawilla Road S.R. 434 to Trotwood Boulevard 12,058
Trotwood Blvd. to Winter Springs Blvd. 16,071
Winter Springs Blvd. to Dyson Drive 16,572
Dyson Drive to E. Lake Drive 22,867
E. Lake Drive to Eagle Boulevard 24,573
Eagle Boulevard to Red Bug.Lake Road 25,398
Red Bug Lake Road to Dike Road 22,684
E. Lake Drive Seminola Boulevard to Fischer Road 12,617
Fischer Road to Tuskawilla Road 9,472
Red Bug Lake Road Tuskawilla Road to Brooks Cave 30,448
Brooks Cave to Citrus Road 26,829
Citrus Road to Slavia Road 25,390
Slavia Road to Eastern Beltway 17,589
Eagle Boulevard Dodd Road to Tuskawilla Road 4,278
III-12
~
I .';~. .j
H
H
H
I
......
UJ
~,o_.. .Ii
w~
~
fUdW
~;;:'..,..Q
ff:[ff,.c~
fe,i,j
~.:~:::.:..-~
~". "J
~'''':;'''' -:~
r'....,...c~
t"',..: i
1 .j
~.....
;. :,::.,
........--.-.
Table 4
1996 AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY TRAFFIC COUNT RESULTS
RAW AVERAGE ADJUSTED
TRAFFIC COUNT ANNUAL ANNUAL
ROADWAY FROM TO COUNTS DATE FDOT ADJ. TRAFFIC
TWO WAY 1996 FACTOR TWO WAY
SHEPARD RD U.S. 17-92 SHEOAH BLVD 3081 1/24 1 3081
SHEOAH BLVD SHEPARD RD. S.R. 434 5881 1/25 1 5881
MOSS RD. S. R. 434 C.R. 419 2431 1/24 1 2431
MOSS RD. PANAMA S.R. 434 4707 1/24 1 4707
EDGEMON AVE. SEMI NOLA PANAMA 2774 1/25 1 2774
EDGEMON AVE. PANAMA S.R. 434 3783 1/25 1 3783
EDGEMON AVE. S. R. 434 C.R. 419 2480 2/6 1 2480
WADE ST. S.R. 434 C.R. 419 1034 1/25 1 1034
DOLPHIN RD. HAYES RD. SHORE RD. 241 1/25 1 241
HAYES RD. PANAMA S.R. 434 3381 1/29 1 3381
SHORE RD. PANAMA S.R. 434 475 1/29 1 475
TROTWOOD BLVD. TUSCAWILLA NORTHERN WAY 4121 1/29 1 4121
TROTWOOD BLVD WEST OF TUSKAWILLA 2046 1/29 1 2046
NORTHERN WAY WINTER SPRS. BLVD. TROTWOOD BLVD. 1868 1/29 1 1868
NORTHERN WAY TROTWOOD BLVD. VISTAWILLA 2501 1/30 1 2501
NORTHERN WAY WINTER SPRS. BLVD. SHETLAND 2736 1/30 1 2736
NORTHERN WAY GREENBRIAR WINTER SPRS. BLVD 1991 1/30 1 1991
VISTAWILLA NORTHERN WAY SENECA 1410 1/31 1 1410
WINTER SPRS. BLVD TUSCAWILLA NORTHERN WAY 7384 1/30 1 7384
WINTER SPRS. BLVD. NORTHERN WAY GREENBRIAR 6099 1/31 1 6099
WINTER SPRS. BLVD. NORTHERN WAY NORTHERN WAY 7484 1/31 1 7484
WINTER SPRS. BLVD. NORTHERN WAY CITY LIMITS 12260 1/31 1 12260
GREENBRIAR WINTER SPRS. BLVD. NORTHERN WAY 1141 1/31 1 1141
DYSON DR. TUSCAWILLA SHETLAND 3262 1/31 1 3262
SHETLAND CITRUS RD. DYSON DR. 4474 1/31 1 4474
ALTON RD. HAYES SHORE 1380 2/1 1 1380
BIRD RD. LAKE DR. NORTH 1267 2/1 1 1267
TUSKAWILLA S.R. 434 NORTH 917 2/1 1 917
TUSCORA NORTHERN WAY SR. 434 765 2/1 1 765
SENECA WINTER SPRS BLVD. 1/2 WAY 1418 2/1 1 1418
SENECA 1/2 WAY VISTAWILLA 1054 2/1 1 1054
'---
L.i4
L....J
~~,' ~-'. . '.~
~
to :
Ioi...-.I
fi"""j
~
L.J
~!
~.~
v:~
L-J
.......--
--.J
L-J
TABLE 5
1996 AVERAGE ANNUAL A.M. AND P.M. PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC COUNT RESULTS
H
H
H
t
.....
.j:'-
AM PEAK HR PM PEAK AM PEAK PM PEAK
RAW AVERAGE RAW ADJUSTED ADJUSTED
TRAFFIC COUNT ANNUAL ANNUAL ANNUAL ANNUAL
ROADWAY FROM TO COUNTS DATE FOOT ADJ. TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC
TWO WAY 1996 FACTOR TWO WAY TWO WAY TWO WAY
SHEPARD RD U.S. 17-92 SHEOAH BLVD 284 1/24 1 290 284 290
SHEOAH BLVD SHEPARD RD. S.R. 434 501 1/25 1 552 501 552
MOSS RD. S.R. 434 C.R. 419 183 1/24 1 224 183 224
MOSS RD. PANAMA S.R. 434 371 1/24 1 426 371 426
EDGEMON AVE. SEMI NOLA PANAMA 243 1/25 1 291 243 291
EDGEMON AVE. PANAMA S.R. 434 381 1/25 1 332 381 332
EDGEMON AVE. S.R. 434 C.R. 419 213 2/6 1 320 213 320
WADE ST. S.R. 434 C.R. 419 108 1/25 1 115 108 115
DOLPHIN RD. HAYES RD. SHORE RD. 26 1/25 1 38 26 38
HAYES RD. PANAMA S.R. 434 319 1/29 1 344 319 344
SHORE RD. PANAMA S.R. 434 38 1/29 1 66 38 66
TROTWOOD BLVD. TUSCAWILLA NORTHERN WAY 444 1/29 1 498 444 498
TROTWOOD BLVD WEST OF TUSKAWILLA 230 1/29 1 204 230 204
NORTHERN WAY WINTER SPRS. BLVD. TROTWOOD BLVD. 212 1/29 1 228 212 228
NORTHERN WAY TROTWOOD BLVD. VISTAWILLA 247 1/30 1 275 247 275
NORTHERN WAY WINTER SPRS. BLVD. SHETLAND 270 1/30 1 301 270 301
NORTHERN WAY GREENBRIAR WINTER SPRS. BLVD 179 1/30 1 210 179 210
VISTAWILLA NORTHERN WAY SENECA 120 1/31 1 162 120 162
WINTER SPRS. BLVD TUSCAWILLA NORTHERN WAY 521 1/30 1 709 521 709
WINTER SPRS. BLVD. NORTHERN WAY GREENBRIAR 475 1/31 1 576 475 576
WINTER SPRS. BLVD. NORTHERN WAY NORTHERN WAY 653 1/31 1 765 653 765
WINTER SPRS. BLVD. NORTHERN WAY CITY LIMITS 1043 1/31 1 1211 1043 1211
GREENBRIAR WINTER SPRS. BLVD. NORTHERN WAY 107 1/31 1 129 107 129
DYSON DR. TUSCAWILLA SHETLAND 261 1/31 1 319 261 319
SHETLAND CITRUS RD. DYSON DR. 467 1/31 1 453 467 453
ALTON RD. HAYES SHORE 134 2/1 1 156 134 156
BIRD RD. LAKE DR. NORTH 113 2/1 1 135 113 135
TUSKAWILLA S.R. 434 NORTH 144 2/1 1 162 144 162
TUSCORA NORTHERN WAY SR. 434 77 2/1 1 79 77 79
SENECA WINTER SPRS BLVD. 1/2 WAY 126 2/1 1 144 126 144
SENECA 1/2 WAY VISTAWILLA 86 2/1 1 149 86 149
,J
J
]
.]
J
.Tifll.
!,'.
t
L
l"J
.'~.
J
lid
'....J
..,.
~~
\...
'lJ
.;
~~.
D.:
,..
'..::.
J
"'1
.,
,
.~
t~.
]\
,
.:>
I:~
.L
'l~'~
J
.J
I
Table 6
1996
PROGRAMMED AND PLANNED HIGHWAY SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
WINTER SPRINGS TRANSPORTATION STUDY AREA
Roadway Segment Improvement Pro~rammedl Plannedz
u.s. ] 7-92 Lake Trip]et Drive to Add 2 Lanes ]998
Shepard Road
S.R. 434 S.R. 4] 9 to Tuskawilla Rd. Add 2 Lanes ]997
S.R. 434 Tuskawilla Rd to Eastern Add 2 Lanes ]998
Be]tway
Tuskawilla Rd. Dike Rd to Red Bug Lake Add 4 Lanes ]997
Tuskawilla Rd. Red Bug Lake Rd to E. Add 2 Lanes ]998
Lake Drive
Tuskawilla Rd. E. Lake Drive to Winter Add 2 Lanes ]998
Springs Bou]evard
Tuskawilla Rd. Winter Springs Boulevard Add 2 Lanes 1998
to S.R. 434
Lake Drive Seminola Boulevard to Add 2 Lanes 2002
Tuskawilla Road
Moss Road S.R. 434 to S.R. 419 Add 2 Lanes 2000
Winter Park Dr. Wilshire Dr. to Semino]a Add Turn Lanes 1997
Boulevard
S.R. 434 U.S. ]7-92 to S.R. 4]9 Add 2 Lanes 20103
(6 Total)
S.R. 434 S.R. 4] 9 to Eastern Be]tway Add 2 Lanes 2010
(6 Total)
U.S. 17-92 Shepard Road to Airport Add 2 Lanes 2010
Boulevard
Red Bug Lake Rd Tuskawilla Rd. to S.R. 426 Add 2 Lanes 2010
1. Contained in construction program ofFDOT or Seminole County.
2. Contained in OUA TS 2010 Plan Update (Adopted Highway Needs Network).
3. Latest date based on need. This applies to all "2010" numbers in this column.
III-I 5
I
'.1
'"~~I
~':' .'
'--1
'j
:'J
., '
D
~,..
\:..,'
'\-::',,'
\,'.
i;'~.~
:1""J"
i"
:\.
:'1
~.
"]
J
:/J
JiJ
~,:l
d
,,]
],
i~J
J
J
J
J
Level of Service Policies - Level of service (LOS) standards are essential for transportation
planning to determine both existing traffic conditions as well as project future deficiencies and
required facility improvements. The LOS of a roadway or roadway section analyzes the
condition of an existing facility in terms of its operating condition. There are six levels of
service used in transportation planning that are ranked in descending order of safety and
convenience of travel from level A to level F. A description of the accepted service levels is as
follows:
Level of Service
Description
A
Highest quality of service a particular road segment can
provide. ' General condition of free flow in which there is
very little or no restriction on spread or maneuverability
caused by the presence of other vehicles.
B
Reasonable unimpeded traffic and stable flow. Ability to
maneuver within the traffic stream is only slightly
restricted, and stopping delays are not bothersome.
C
Characterized by stable flow, but restrictions in freedom to
select speed, to change lanes, or to pass is becoming
restricted for most drivers.
D
Approaching unstable flow. Tolerable average operating
speeds are generally maintained but are subject to
considerable and sudden variation. Driving comfort and
freedom to maneuver are low because of increased lane
density, adverse signal progression, inappropriate signal
timing, or some combination of these factors.
E
Indicates significant delays and lower operating speeds.
Suc.h operations are caused by some combination of
adverse progression, high signal density, extensive queuing
at critical intersections, and inappropriate signal timing.
Driving comfort is low and accidental potential is high.
F
Forced flow operations at extremely low speeds. Roadway
tends to act as a storage area and intersection congestion is
likely at critical signalized intersections, with high
approach delays resulting. Adverse signal progression is
frequently a contributor to this condition.
III-I 6
.!
I
-:/
. .
"]
J
J
,.WJ
t.1
"']..
"
~}
d
"''J
~,rl
....'
n:;
..-..
. .
]
.*
'1'
l
]
]
J
.j
The FDOT outlined in their Florida's Level of Service Standards and Guidelines Manual
for Planning (1995) the minimum acceptable operating LOS standards, as presented below.
TABLE 7
STATEWIDE MINIMUM LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARDS
FOR THE STATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM
(Urbanized Areas Over 500,000)
Transitioning
Existing Inside Transportation Urbanized or
Urbanized Concurrency Management. Incorporated Rural
Roadway Type Areas Areas Areas Areas
Freeways D D C B
Other Multi-lane D * C B
Two-lane D * C C
*Means the level of service standard will be set in a transportation mobility element that meets requirements of Rule
9J-5.0057.
The City of Winter Springs falls into the category of "Inside Transportation Concurrency
Management Areas" for the purposes of determining LOS standards. Lacking the concurrency
management designation, the City is part of the existing Orlando Urbanized Area as defined by
FDOT and the MPO which requires LOS D.
Seminole County has determined that Tuskawilla Road within the City limits falls within an
Urban Center Traffic Impact Area. The County's strategy, as per their Traffic Circulation
Support Document Volume IV of the 1991 plan update, allows a LOS E within these areas while
a LOS D is the minimum standard outside of the defined area.
In accord with the Comprehensive Plan and previously adopted standards, Level of Service "D"
conditions on all roads within the City of Winter Springs and the study area was used as the
minimum standard. This corresponds with FDOT recommendations shown in Table 7 above.
Level of Service standards have been reduced to daily roadway capacity (service volumes) terms
in order to permit assessment of both existing and forecast conditions. The FDOT daily roadway
capacities as shown in Table 8 for LOS D were used (circled service volumes).
Existing Deficiencies - Given the standards defined above, the existing roadway system in the
study area and the City of Winter Springs were evaluated. This evaluation was based upon
existing roadway volumes as documented in the previous discussion on traffic counts.
These analyses indicate that many roadways on the state and county system within the study area
were not operating within LOS D in 1996 (see Figure 3). Almost all are contained in Table 6 as
committed improvement projects. However, the following are not and need immediate attention:
III-I 7
.1
j
"'J.
I
J
J
~.'."l
,.
'J
.~~.r
~
J
.I
]
J
:.}
]
]
TABLE 8
GENERAUZED ANNUAL AVERAGE DAILY VOLUMES FOR FLORIDA'S
URBANIZED AREAS.
STATE TWO-WAY ARTEIUAI.S FREEWAYS
UNlNTERRUFTED now Group 1 (wilhin urb.nized .rea ovcr 500.000 .nd ludiag 10 or passing
within 5 miles or the primuy cily central buslDCU dislrict)
UDJilPlallud I..cvcl or Service
uYd or Service Luu A 8 C D E
Lanes A 8 C D E 4 22,000 35,200 52,900 67,000 80,800
2 Uadiv. 8.900 13,900 18,900 24,800 33,100 6 33,100 52,900 79,400 100,600 126,900
4 Div. 21,soo 35,800 SO,I00 60,100 71,600 8 44,100 70,500 105,900 134,100 169,200
6Div. 32,200 53,700 7S,200 90,200 107,400 10 SS,200 88.200 132,400 167,700 211,400
12 63,200 101,100 151,700 192,200 242,300
lNTElUtUPTED fLOW
Group 2 (within urb.nized area and nOC In Group 1)
Oau 18 (>0.00 to 2.49 .ignalized In\cncaions pcr mile) uYd of Service
I..cvclor Service Lules A 8 C D E
unes AU 8 C DU. E." 4 20,300 32,SOO 48,800 61,800 74.soo
2 Undiv. 12,600 15,200 16,600 17,000 c 6 30,600 48,900 73,400 93.000 117,300
4 Div. 27,900 33,300 .35,700 35,800 L 8 40,800 65,200 97,900 124,000 156,300
6 Div. 43,200 SO,400 53,700 53,700 A 10 51,000 81,500 122,300 155,000 195,400
SDlv. 53.800 62,000 65,800 65,800 s 12 S8,400 93,200 140,000 177,300 223,600
s
Oau Ib (2.50 10 4.50 signalized iatcncctlolU pcr mile)
uvcl or Snvice
C
8,800
19,200
29,300
35,800
Lanes
2 Undlv.
4 Div.
6 Div.
SDiv.
AU
BOO
E
15,900
34,000
51,400
62.900
Ous U (moo: t1wl4.50 signalized in\cneclioo.s per mile and DOl
within primuy city ceutraJ busincu dislrid DC urbanized
.ru over 500,(00)
uvcl Dr Service
Lanes AU BOO Coo D E
2 Undiv. 11,800 l' ,200
4 Div; 26,500 33.400
6Div. 40,700 50.600
SDiv. 49,700 61,800
C1au III (mon: Ih.n 4.50 signalized inktxaions per mile .nd willtin
prim.ry city cenlral business distria of IIrbanized
.rea over 500,(00)
uvcl oC Service
Lanes AU BOO C" D E
2 Undiv. 13.200 14,800
4 Div. 29,500 32.600
6 Div. 44.800 49,300
SDiv. So4,700 60,100
NON-STATE ROADWAYS
MAJOR CITY/COUNTY ROADWAYS
I..cvcl of Service
Lancs AU BOO C e E
2Undiv 10,900 15,500
4 Div. 24.400 33,200
6 Div. 37,800 47,500 50.200
OTHER SIGNALIZED ROADWAYS
c (sipalized intcrscction malysis)
L I..cvcl oC Service
A Lanes AU BOO C E
s 2 Undiv 5,200 11,700
s 4 Div. 11400 25100
II
C
L
A
S
S
III
Lanca
2
2
Mulli
Multi
ADJUSTMENTS
DlVIDED/UNDMDED
(alter corresponding two-w.y volume indicated pmzm)
Mcdw. Left Tllrn Bays Adjustment Fac10rs
Divided Yes +S'll>
UDdlvided No .209(,
UlICIividcd Yes .5'll>
UDdividcd No .25%
ONE-WAY
(aller comaponding two-w.y volume Indicated pclCCnl)
One. Way Corresponding Adjusuncnt
Lanes Two-Way Lanes FadOt
2 4 -4O'lL
3 6 -4O'lL
4 8 -4O'lL
:i 8 .25'1&
The"''- ""'......-. __ MIl......, be _lriy'" --'...... ",,*",lono. The -.-.- _ wllicIl dtio.- io _ _ bI_ fer...,.. opocifieP-iaa ~
The... """...........".".... _ _ _ be _ b _ 00 --.iooo-.,. """'"...... rdioal """","",,"..ill. Value _ ON _UOI __ dIoiI, _ (AADT) mui_.........
(I-.! "" K,. -.. _ .... .. .w, ramo}'" ..... of.moo. MIl.. _ "" Iloo t_ HCJIwo, ~iIy 104....... UpdooIlIlcI FloricIo lnIIlc. -." lIlcI.......ialioe -. The lIi>lI', --...-
IIld '....1 of oavico crillrilllf'llGllllt lito bet.
c- be_ined.
VoIUDa we CIMI~' __ iala'-=tioe ~ ... ruc:Md..
Florida Oeponm.... ofT~ 1m.
ScNrer.:
III-18
95D\1f
OUlSM
L-: .- l-a.j L..J ;.:._- -j' ~ LJ ~ L.J L.j ." ['""/;5] LJ . f
- --..; '" ~ ~ ~
(O)~
:I
(gi
~
..
..
"'f:1~:::.e
~ ~Z"
~~c'" 0 II
......0" -:I
~~~i I a.
~~~~ ~:s:
'" ~.O
1:1 . _
~~ig
ne
. .
C- O ~
g >
z r.l ~
f? t.I Z
~ I VI
H t.)
H ~ If
H cD cD
I g .....
.....
'"
;;;
~
~i
3l~
~~
U
"1Jrn
OJ]
~~
:::Its
0-
zrn
~
~
~~
:D
rn
LEGEND:
DEFICIENT (EXCEEDS LOS D)
~
-N-
~ .
N.T.S.
"
~
Ii
c.5
LAKE DR.
RED BUG LAKE RD.
1
" J
1
:'''J
..
'.".J'
'.';
\.:.
J
iffi1
Jlli
r]
.,
..,
~
'J
.)
OJ
J~,
"
]
'1
J
J
J
I
,..1
"'J
1. S.R. 419 - U.S. 17-92 to Moss Road.
2. U.S. 17-92 - Shepard Road to S.R. 419.
3. Red Bug Lake Road - Winter Park Drive to Tuskawilla Road.
U.S. 17-92 is in the long range plans of the MPO (OUATS); however, it is very deficient and
should be moved to the FDOT five-year construction program. Neither the S.R. 419 nor Red
Bug Lake Road sections mentioned above are contained on any programmed or planned 2010
improvements list. There are no municipal collector facilities within the City of Winter Springs
operating at a LOS of less than D in 1996.
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 T AZ set
(microzones), a more detailed highway network, and the use of TRANPLANIFSUTMS 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 OUA TS model set.
The model set used was originally tested and confirmed in the Casselberry Transportation Plan and
Impact Fee Study. It is derived from and based upon the OUA TS model set. This model set has
been modified as detailed below.
OUA TS 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.
Trip Generation - The existing OUA TS trip generation model is a cross-classification person trip
production model with attractions calculated using expressions derived from regression analysis.
This model currently uses 11 purposes including special generator purposes for the major tourist
, attractions, the various universities and colleges in the region, and the 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.
Trip Distribution - The OUA TS trip distribution model utilizes each of the 11 purposes for which
productions and attractions are generated. Friction factors for each of these 11 purposes have been
developed, although the special generator purposes generally borrow friction factors from other
-20-
I
I
.1
]
....'j
..OJ
,l
'~"
:,.:
~.
'''J
'..
]
WJ
']
J
J
J
J
-J
]
.I
J
.J ..
purposes. There are not K-factors utilized in the model.
Modal Split! Auto Occupancy - The OUA TS model set includes a muIti-nomiallogit expression for
calculation of splits of trips to the transit sector. Auto occupancy is calculated with simple rates by
purpose. The modal split model is system-sensitive in that it requires the coded description of a
transit system.
Traffic Assignment - The current OUA TS traffic assignment procedure consists of a 4-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.
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 OVA TS trip
generation model, modifications were made to this model. The trip generation models used are
based upon the OUA TS 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 the Orlando area including Casselberry and for Seminole County projects. In addition to
the Transportation Plan and Impact Fee Study in Casselberry, the models were used to forecast trip
generation for the Lake Mary Boulevard Corridor Study and the Lake Mary/I-4 interchange study
for the Florida Department of Transportation. The models forecast vehicle trips instead of person
trips so they additionally do not require a separate auto occupancy model. The structure of the trip
generation statements used as input to the model validation procedure are detailed in Table 9. The
input socio-economic data for the Winter Springs traffic zones (Figure 4) was approved by the City
for 1996 and 2010 (see Appendix). All other zones used Seminole County or OUATS data (in
Orange County).
Use of OUA TS 11 Trip Pm:pose Models - Since trip generation expressions were available for each
of the OVATS non-special generator purposes, it was decided to use the entire 11 purpose models
available in OUA TS. This required incorporating the special generator expressions available from
OUA TS into the Winter Springs Model Set. This use of the full OUA TS model purposes
additionally permitted use of the OUATS friction factors.
-21-
".1
]
'''1
' '
i,OJ
Homebase Work
Homebase Shopping,
Homebase Pers.-Bus.
Homebase Social - Rec.
,I
",J
Homebase School
~"'.:<.'
";:'\:
",.",
~~:'
Non-Homebased
""J
:hl
"-1
tcl
Homebase Work
Homebase Shopping
Homebase Pers.-Bus.
J
"I
'. J
" J
'i,t\'
'J
Homebase Social - Rec.
Homebase School
Non-Homebased
Truck Production
,J
"J
3
Truck Attraction
Internal-External
Attraction
Internal-External
Productions
J
J
J
TABLE 9
TRIP GENERA nON EXPRESSIONS (VEHICLE TRIPS)
Winter SpringsTransportation Study - 1996
PRODUCTION EOUA TIONS
1.41 (Dwelling Units) + 0.32 (Hotel-Motel Rooms)
1.37 (Dwelling Units) + 0.48 (Hotel-Motel Rooms)
= 0.68 (Dwelling Units) + 0.48 (Hotel-Motel Rooms)
= 0.76 (Dwelling Units) + 0.96 (Hotel-Motel Rooms)
= 0.83 (Dwelling Units)
= Same as attractions
ATTRACTION EOUA TIONS
= 0.43 Retail Employment + 1.13 Other Employment - 8.15
= 4.20 Retail Employment + 12.06
= 0.23 Single Dwelling Units + 0.54 Hotel-Motel Units
+ 0.59 Total Employment - I 1.05
= 0.30 Total Dwelling Units + 0.84 High School Attendance
+ 0.69 Retail Employment + 19.25
= 0.08 (1-6 Attendance) + 0.13 (7-12) Attendance) + 3.02
= 0.56 Total Dwelling Units + 3.80 Retail Employment
+ 0.32 Total Employment + 6.52
OTHER TRIP PURPOSE PRODUCTION AND ATTRACTION
= 0.96 Retail Employment + 0.37 Total Dwelling Units
+ 0.14 Other Employment + 27.56
= Truck Trip Production
= 0.42 Retail Employment + 0.12 Total Dwelling Units
+ O. I 3 Hotel-Motel Units + 0.01 Other Employment + 24.36
= Calculated Through the Use of Growth Factors
-22-
L- ~
(0)~
::I
cgi
~
..
..
"'ii!!il::..
~ 2Z"
~~~,., D II
.......Og -::I
.- Z
~~~~. A.
-2-~ ·
~...~ :II Z
"'...."'.0
"'~w _
g -51
-"'Z
, o.
. .
C- o III
g > ()
r.1 >
z F.i
f? Y' z
H ~ vl
H I'.)
H <j>
I U1
<0 to
N g '-l
W
~
~
:D
!:g
~~
fh~
~~
!:gN
00
~ffi
::::iOO
0
z
~
~
~~
fR
--
""===--
I ':
-----
L-..:
'" :
~
L~.'. " :;~
~
....... . - ~
I . '.. ~
.;. .~~"':.
r<,t) ~ ("::-=:01
C:' J
r.....;;.....
~
N
~
T
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS"
MASTER PLANNING MAP
OCTOBER 1996
~
~
\ ?~/:)
1000 0 1000 2000 JOOO 'OClO
1'1
.....;..u.l,.. IU'
LAKe Jesup
1
. I
)
l
. I
I
OUA TS Highway Network Modifications - The micro-computer process selected for use in this
Winter Springs Transportation Study is the TRANPLAN battery of programs as incorporated by the
Florida Department of Transportation into Micro-FSUTMS. This battery of programs was
developed by the Florida Department of Transportation in order to provide a standardized tool to
local planners throughout the state. This model is designed to enable the local planner to utilize the
data files and routines available throughout the State of Florida on micro-computers.
j
,.I
j
"hl
J
J
1
J
J
I
...1
]
I
.J
J
The regional network chosen for use in both Casselberry and Winter Springs was used by Seminole
County in the development of their Transportation Management Program (TMP). This network
required some modifications as zone sizes are extremely large.
Zone Structure Modifications - In order to conduct the detailed analysis required in this effort,
modifications to the zone structure incorporated above were required. The Seminole County
network and zone structure used as input included only 300 zones for the entire three county region
including 91 zones in Seminole County. The resultant highway network was equally coarse. This
network and zone structure was subdivided into new zones compatible with the detailed highway
network previously described. Since the zone structure in Casselberry was previously developed
for a very detailed study, it was retained outside the City of Winter Springs. The resulting network
contained 400 zones with 29 micro-zones within the City of Winter Springs and 86 in the
Casselberry area. Micro-zones used in the City of Winter Springs are shown in Figure 4 and those
in Casselberry are provided in the Appendix.
Winter Springs Transportation Network - Since the OUATS basic network was utilized as a skeleton
for the Winter Springs Study, roadways had to be added to the model structure. Existing major
roadways in the planning area are:
1. S.R. 434
2. Tuscawilla Road
3. Red Bug Lake Road
4. S.R. 436
5. U.S. 17-92
6. Seminola Boulevard-Lake Drive
7. S.R. 419
8. Winter Park Drive
9. S.R. 426
Roadways added to the Winter Springs Network in this study are:
1. Northern Way
2. Winter Springs Boulevard
3. Dyson Road
4. Trotwood Boulevard
5. Panama Road
-24-
.. I
J
TJ
J
H]'
..,
6.. Hayes Road
7. Moss Road
8. Edgemon Avenue
9. Sheoah Boulevard
10. Sheparel Road
11. Shore Road
The complete 1996 network used in this study is shown in Figure 2, 1996 Existing Roadway
Classification and Number of Lanes.
Model Validation
'~~.'
h..'
~r
As a means of checking and validating travel inventories, several screenlines are normally defined
which would completely bisect the planning area. Screenlines should follow natural topographic
features and cut as few major streets as possible to minimize the cost of travel inventories which
would be conducted at those points. In the Winter Springs planning area, there are three screenlines.
Screenline A runs east-west, and Screenlines Band C run north-south. These screenlines are shown
in Figure 5.
~.""'1
' '~'"
J
]
::J
"
]:
:;
..
]
:J
J
1ft
JI
J
"]
']
1
Model validation was accomplished by loading of the current trip table (1996) on the network (see
Appendix for Traffic Assignment Node Map) and comparing assigned volumes to observed volumes
as determined by traffic counts. The FSUTMSffRANPLAN computer programs examine the paths
from origin to destination to determine which links are used and then accumulates trips from the
origins to destinations on the links. Capacity restraint was used in the process of calibration to
change link speeds in response to loaded volumes with the objective of providing realistic
assignments. The files necessary to reproduce the 1996 E + C and 20 I 0 traffic are shown in Tables
10, 11 and 12, provided to the City along with the final report.
An Equilibrium Assignment (FSUTMS) was used to have a more balanced loading on the network.
Table 13 shows the screenline results on screenlines A, B and C in the Winter Springs area. The
overall amount of trips are correct with very slight differences on both north-south and east-west
screenlines. As can be seen from Figure 6, most links in the Winter Springs network had very
acceptable assignment loadings.
-25-
L.;,."j L ;,.,..;
cr>>~
:s
lQ) i'
~
..
..
..,~~::.. ct
~ 2."
~~o"'D.
........o:o-:s
ft~~Ia.
'r~z
o*~~ g:z:
ll:",,,,'" 01 0
Nil.. _
~Sia
nct
..
<... 0 ~
g >
r.1 >
z F.i
f? l' z
~ J-) VI
...... ~ ?
...... (l) lD
~ ....,
......
I
N
0' ~co
~()
:DfR
com
-oZ
2;!C
ZZ
~m
~~
Z~
cor
-0<
o~
~o
::t~
~~
~~
-<
~@
~
L.::.-J
I,.,.....).
~
LJ
;C~""" .~
1...,.....1 f[,<< ,;,-1 f.. -'''1 ~ ~ f,- ..'....'1 [ . ..:.\fJ (,"/"'1 r......."':".~ r :,; r:" '''''1 ,
.. , ~ ".- -. . ~ '----J L.:.-'
B
SCREENUNES LEGEND:
- -AA
· 88
- - CC
LAKE DR.
RED BUG LAKE RD.
B
~
-N-
f
N.T.S.
,....
~
ci
cJ
.....
I
"'-I
']
.]
J
lillI.::!
d
J
~-
....J
.~
'L:
'l'<J
. :
"
,~~
~,..
\,:.,
\\~~
],
','
',J
,'\/
..,~.:
.~{;
~;t
Y.I
.llI
I
":>.]
..
'::l
lli
''PJ'
"
~' .
File Name
LINKS.WSE
GRVTOT96.PRN
HASSIGN.WSE
File Name
LINKSEC. WSE
GRVTOTEC.PRN
HASSIGN.WEC
File Name
LINKSI0.WSE
GRVTOTIO.WSP
HASSIGN.WSP
Table 10
MODEL VALIDATION FILES
(TRANPLAN)/(FSUTMS)
Table 11
E & C FILES
(TRANPLAN)/(FSUTMS)
Table 12
2010 FILES
(TRANPLAN)/(FSUTMS)
-27-
Content
1996 Road Network
Gravity Model-Input
1996 Assignment
Content
1996 + Committed Road
Network
Gravity Model-Input
1996 + Committed
Assignment
Content
2010 Road Network
Gravity Model-Input
2010 Assignment
[./,'., t,..,~,,~ f-"h"j ~ L, .,;:J
?,. ...,', g;.'.l Wc!'<i?! (,' :", LJ
~"" "I "'" .,
~ ~
?:~:jt?:J (;:';;: -~ ~. ",
; ',': I
(0)~
. :I
cgi
dn
..
..
"'~r III e
~ ~z"
~~ol'1 a ID
""0:0 -:I
"'t;~~ Z Go
h' z III
8~g~; :z
'" ","'_0
~::a- _
~aii
ne
. .
c... 0 ~
0 >
lD r.l ~
z
!? y z
...... ~ ~ ul
...... ~ I
......
I '" '"
g "
N
co
:E
~oo
::Do 0
~~~
~~~
Z ::D
~ CJ)
r~
13~~
ornx
~~~
)>oz
:::IrC)
oe)>
z~z
~mo
~
'TI
O>~
::D
rn
15.900
(15.553)
LEGEND:
000 = TRAFFIC MODEL
. /(000) = EXISTlNG VOLUME
~
-N-
~
N.T.S.
16,600
(15.300)
800
" (1,410)
~
n::
U
. i
1
.1
~I
~'I
]
J
~
':(,
. ,
--")
"
~
iid
"]
'J
~
d
..~
dI
'p
.:~Y
]
]
J
J
"]
-'
Table 13
SCREENLINE COMPARISONS
1996 MODEL VALIDATION
(Average Daily Traffic)
Screenline
Model
Result
Traffic
Count
Percent
Validated
AA
BB
CC
25,600
67,600
61,300
25,141
69,029
61,713
1.02
0.98
0.99
Plan Development
In order to detail the transportation improvements that are needed in a particular area, the future
demand for transportation facilities must be quantified. This is normally done by using forecasts of
future socioeconomic activity to generate future trip making potential. These trips are then assigned
to a network in order to determine the transportation facilities necessary to meet these demands.
Socioeconomic Forecast - The basis for the forecast of socioeconomic (SE) data for the 1996 Winter
Springs Transportation Study outside the City are similar forecasts that are available from OUA TS.
Seminole County also has base year (1995), and 2001 data by OUATS TAZ. The forecasts for
Winter Springs micro-zones were developed by the consultant with the cooperation of the City of
Winter Springs.
The 1996 Winter Springs Transportation Study involved the creation of 29 micro-zones within the
City as previously described. These micro-zones permitted the kind of detailed analysis of
socioeconomic growth that is critical to the detailed forecasts of future traffic that was required in
order to fully measure transportation impacts on municipal collector streets. This type of detailed
analysis was accomplished for the micro-zones within the city and changes to the previously
published socioeconomic projections for the city resulted. The final 2010 forecast of socioeconomic
data for the 29 micro-zones within the city is provided in the Appendix. It is important to understand
that this 2010 city projection is based on current vested projects, approved PUDs and growth trends.
It does not assume a high density urban center at S.R. 434 and Tuscawilla Road. 2010 SE data for
the other zones within the region were taken from the OUA TS.
Test Highway Network - The 2010 test network was developed by the City in an attempt to
accommodate the type of2010 development described above and quantified with SE data in the
Appendix. This network incorporated all of the programmed improvements from the FDOT and
Seminole County as well as modifications to the 2010 Future Traffic Circulation Map (see
-29-
I
I
J
'J
:--j
j
"J
:}
~
']
J
J
]:
"
')
.j
]
]
J
.J
"1
Appendix) to respond to the change in land development assumptions and minimize the impact on
residential areas as provided for in the Transportation Goals, Objectives and Policies, previously
described. This test network is illustrated in Figure 7.
An analysis of the assignment of Year 2010 trips to this network is provided in Table 14. It is clear
that LOS D will be exceeded on some major'segments and several transportation improvements are
required in the Winter Springs study area in order to satisfy future traffic demands. These needed
improvements are primarily on the arterial system and the responsibility for making most of these
improvements has been undertaken by either the Florida Department of Transportation or Seminole
County. However, this test assignment also indicates that some improvements are needed on the
local street system. These improvements are the responsibility of the City.
Final Transportation Plan
The results of the assignments to the Test Highway Network were analyzed in order to develop a
final plan that represents the roadway improvements required in the City of Winter Springs and the
study area by 2010 (see Figure 8). These include improvements committed to by FDOT (5 Yr. Plan),
those committed to by Seminole County and in the ~UA TS 2010 update. These are shown in Table
6. Those improvements needed within the City Limits that are funded by sources other than the City
are shown in Table 15. Projects that are the City's responsibility are shown in Table 16.
-30-
L--..-J i' ""~..A i,:."; I->y,)
L.-J
....... ~ ' 10'>;.. .1 L-.J L..:J
It...J
L.....l
t "'--:,
L-J
L-..;
I
----.:
~~
::I
lQJi
dn
..
..
..,~~::..
~ ~z"
~~~'" D II
...... '" -::I
,~~1i!=a.
'i'~z
~~~~:I z
13~'" !.
gj9 i 51
n.
..
a c III
)> (")
to ~ ~
z
l? -..j z
~ I ul
H ~
H ..". I
0'1 u:>
H <0
I 9 -..j
~
~~
~~ ~
;Bn1 r!-
~~ -
~:I:
~~
"'O~
0
~z
S~
z:o
~^
~
J]
'-Jg
~
LEGEND:
SIX LANES
FOUR LANES
,','>',',',','>'/. THREE LANES
TWO LANES
LAKE ,DR.
RED BUG LAKE RD.
>-
~
....J
w........
CD:J
z~
0:: '-'
~
lJ)
<:{
w
,..
. - I
~
-N-
1
N.T.S.
t:::;\'? ::'; [,<\"'1;'5:; !",:;,'~-;;:j V"/"',:;,! V:!i'~:":?~ If"',' 'I P;f:;";'j ~... ".:.., ::~ I,,'';'';''(j ~ VJ55;;m f-?~'''1 r;:::, :;:":) .. :-1 ",,:::]
'..,..........'.... ........... '.. ~', .;:.: ,:,:" ~ '---
':::.;::;..,...---...; "-----"
TABLE 14 (I of3)
YEAR 2010 ROADWAY LINK LEVELS OF SERVICE
WITH 2010 NETWORK
ROADWAY FROM TO NO,OF ROADWAY LOS'D MODEL VIC RATIO MODEL
LANES CLASS DAlLY DAlLY DAlL Y
CAPACITY VOLUME LOS
U.S. 17.92 S.R. 434 SHEPARD RD. 6 ARTERIAL 47,500 52,200 1.10 F
U.S, 17..92 SHEPARD RD. C.R,419 6 ARTERIAL 47,500 55.200 1.16 F
S,R, 434 U,S.17.92 MOSS RO, 6 ARTERIAL 47,500 41.800 0.88 D
S,R,434 MOSS RD. C.R,419 ARTERIAL 31,100 26,900 0,87 D
S,R. 434 C,R,419 TUSKA WILLA RD 4 ARTERIAL 31.100 39,000 1.25 F
S,R, 434 TUSKA WILLA RD EASTERN BEL TW A Y 4 ARTERIAL 31,100 42,800 1.38 F
S.R.419 U,S, 17,,92 EDGEMON AVE, 2 ARTERIAL 14,300 19,900 1.39 F
S,R.419 EDGEMON AVE. S.R, 434 2 ARTERIAL 14,300 16,600 1.16 F
E, LAKE DRIVE SEMINOLA BLVD FISHER ROAD COLLECTOR 22,600 21,500 0,95 D
E, LAKE DRIVE FISHER ROAD TUSKA WILLA RD. COLLECTOR 22,600 22,600 1.00 D
TUSKA WILLA RO, RED BUG LK RD EAGLE BLVD, 6 ARTERIAL 47,500 39,500 0.83 D
TUSKA WILLA RO, EAGLE BLVD, E, LAKE DRIVE 4 ARTERIAL 31.100 35,500 1.14 F
TUSKA WILLA RO, E, LAKE DRIVE WINTER SPGS. BLVD ARTERIAL 31,100 25.200 0.81 D
TUSKA WILLA RO, WINTER SPGS BLVD TROTWOOD BLVD ARTERIAL 31,100 20.700 0.67 C
TUSKA WILLA RO, TROTWOOD BL VD, S.R, 434 ARTERIAL 31,100 20,200 0,65 C
SHEPARD RD. U,S, 17.92 SHEOAH BLVD, 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 11,200 1.10 E
SHEPARD RD, SHEOAH BLVD. EDGEMON AVE, COLLECTOR 10,200 7,900 0.78 D
SHEOAH BLVD, SHEPARD RO. S.R, 434 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 8,400 0,82 D
BAHAMA ROAD HA YES ROAD WINDING HOLLOW BL 2 COLLECTOR 10.200 100 0,01 C
MOSS ROAD PANAMA ROAD DOLPHIN ROAD COLLECTOR 10,200 6,800 0.67 D
MOSS ROAD DOLPHIN ROAD S,R, 434 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 7.300 0.72 D
111-32
"
" '
~
v: .' 'I
[-'.':....,1
L....;.. ~
(;.' 1
~
I
~
("', 1
~
..............
TABLE 14
YEAR 2010 ROADWAY LINK LEVELS OF SERVICE
WITH 2010 NETWORK
ROADWAY FROM TO
MOSS ROAD S.R.434 C.R.419
NORTHERN WAY TROTWOOD BLVD TUSCORA DR,
NORTHERN WAY TUSCORA DR. VISTAVILLA DR.
NORTHERN WAY VISTA VILLA DR. WINTER SPG BLVD -E
NORTHERN WAY TROTWOOD BLVD WINTER SPG BL VD-S
NORTHERN WAY WINTER SPG BLVD SHETLAND AVE,
NORTHERN WAY SHETLAND AVE. GREENBRIAR LN.
NORTHERN. WAY GREENBRIAR LN. WINTER SPRG BLVD
TROTWOOD BLVD TUSKA WILLA RD. NORTHERN WAY
WINTER SPG BLVD TUSKAWILLA RD. NORTHERN WAY
WINTER SPG BLVD NORTHERN WAY GREENBRIAR LN.
WINTER SPG BLVD GREENBRIAR LN. NORTHERN WAY
WINTER SPG BLVD NORTHERN WAY NORTHERN WAY
WINTER SPG BLVD NORTHERN WAY S.R.426
PANAMA ROAD EDGEMON AVE. MOSS ROAD
PANAMA ROAD MOSS ROAD SHORE ROAD
HA YES ROAD BAHAMA ROAD DOLPHIN ROAD
HA YES ROAD DOLPHIN ROAD S.R,434
DOLPHIN ROAD MOSS ROAD HAYES ROAD
FISHER ROAD EAST LAKE DRIVE PANAMA ROAD
NO. OF ROADWAY
LANES CLASS
4 COLLECTOR
2 COLLECTOR
2 COLLECTOR
2 COLLECTOR
2 COLLECTOR
2 COLLECTOR
2 COLLECTOR
2 COLLECTOR
2 COLLECTOR
2 COLLECTOR
2 COLLECTOR
2 COLLECTOR
3 COLLECTOR
4 COLLECTOR
2 COLLECTOR
2 COLLECTOR
2 COLLECTOR
2 COLLECTOR
2 COLLECTOR
2 COLLECTOR
111-33
LOS D '
DAILY,
CAPACITY
22,600
10,200
10,200
10,200
10,200
10,200
10,200
10,200
10,200
10,200
10,200
10,200
12,000
22,600
10,200
10,200
10,200
10,200
10,200
10,200
r : .')~'3
~
MODEL
DAILY
VOLUME
14,100
6.100
3,200
3,600
2,500
3,600
3,900
2,200
4,500
8,500
5,600
5,000
11,100
11 ,900
9,100
1,300
2,000
6,600
2,700
1,400
L....J
V/C
RATIO
0.62
0.60
0.31
0.35
0.25
0.35
0.38
0.22
0.44
0.83
0.55
0.49
0.93
0.53
0,89
0.13
0.28
0.65
0,26
0.14
i....-.:.....J
--J
~
(2 of 3)
MODEL
DAILY
LOS
D
D
c
C
C
c
c
c
C
D
D
C
D
D
D
C
C
D
c
C
~~ L....:.J L-,. L-J ,f';,'::'J I:. '. t :.,;' ~, ~;. ,j ::;; :..:"t~, :^3 E~
..:.- - ~ ~ :. ".':";'''': .-~.:;..:::::;:-.:: .~ ' I . .... .
'--~ . :::'_ I
(3 of 3)
TABLE 14
YEAR 20 I 0 ROADWAY LINK LEVELS OF SERVICE
WITH 2010 NETWORK
ROADWAY FROM TQ NO, OF ROADWAY ,LOS D MODEL VIC MODEL
LANES CLASS DAILY DAILY RA no DAILY
CAPACITY VOLUME LOS
TUSCORA DRIVE NORTHERN WAY S.R. 434 2 COLLECTOR 10.200 2,700 0.27 C
VISTA WILLA DR. NORTHERN WAY S.R. 434 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 4,000 0.39 C
GREENBRIAR LN. NORTHERN WAY WINTER SPRG BLVD. 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 1,500 0,15 C
DYSON DR. TUSCA WILLA RD. SHETLAND AVE. 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 2,600 0.26 C
SHETLAND AVE, RED BUG LAKE RD DYSON DRIVE 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 3,500 0.34 C
SHETLAND AVE, DYSON DRIVE NORTHERN WAY 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 5,000 0.49 C
EDGEMON AVE. SEMINOLA BLVD PANAMA ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 9,100 0.89 D
EDGEMON AVE. SHEPARD ROAD S.R.419 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 4,300 0.42 C
EDGEMON AVE. S,R, 434 SHEPARD ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 5,600 0.39 D
111-34
~-
(O)~
:I
1QJi
dn
..
..
"ii1r..
~ ~...
~~o"'D.
.....,-..Jo;o_:;1
~~~i Ii Go
~h~=z
...."'IIl.O
~~:. i
~.
. .
5 c ~
>
lD f.l ~
z
f? jl Z
H ~ !::! vi
I
H ~ to
H <0 ....,
I 9
l,..)
Ln
~
~~
:u~
~m
~~
Ii
'3::
~~
Z"'tJ
~~
~
oo~
:u
m
EIGHT LANES
SIX LANES
FOUR LANES
THREE LANES
TWO LANES
PAVING/DRAINAGE
EX1ENSION
TRAFFIC SIGNAL/
IN1ERSECllON GEOMETRY
l...-..,.,!
i ,
'-----"
-=:---
L....-
, !
'~
~,
iL..J
~. '~'.'1
~J
---I
'---
-
LEGEND:
.....
, ~, " '" " " " ',.1, '.
.
.
.
. ~
. .
. S.R. 434
o
.
LAKE DR.
RED BUG LAKE RD.
~ I
-'
, '
~
~
-N-
.~
N.T.S.
>-
~
...J
w-
m::J
z~
0:::........
~
(f)
<:
w
J-
\
.~I,
'1
I
. 'J
1
J
'"
('.:.
J
]
~
J
)
].
J.
:1
J
],
J
J
\
Table 15
CITY 2010 ROAD NEEDS
DEVELOPER AND OTHER FUNDING
(Inside City Limits)
Developer
1.
Connect Shepard Road to Edgemon A venue.
2. Improve Tuskawilla Road north ofS.R. 434 (formerly Brantley Avenue).
3. Improve Spring Avenue with drainage and paving improvements.
County
1. Improve Tuscawilla Road from two (2) lanes to four (4) lanes.
2. Improve Shepard Road to three (3) lanes from U.S. 17-92 to Sheoah Boulevard.
3. Improve East Lake Drive from two (2) lanes to four (4) lanes.
State
1. Improve U.S. 17-92 from Seminola Boulevard to S.R. 419 from four (4) lanes to eight (8)
lanes.
2. Improve S.R. 434 from U.S. 17-92 to Moss Road from five (5) lanes to seven (7) lanes.
3. . Improve S.R. 434 from S.R. 419 to Eastern Beltway from four (4) lanes to six (6) lanes.
4. Improve S.R. 419 from S.R. 434 to U.S. 17-92 from two (2) lanes to four (4) lanes.
III-36
, I
... ,~
...t
,j
"'}
'';.'
;,., ,.
f(:]
"
:H'.
.~... :
,.;:;.
~,..
'\,'.
'l",'
:+
:11.:
';J
J
~
']
,: }
",J
-
J
','I
.,....
J
."}
"
.01
~
Table 16
CITY 2010 ROAD NEEDS
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS FUNDING
Phase I
The following improvements should be undertaken by the City at the earliest possible date:
1. Improve Panama Road from Moss Road to Edgemon Avenue.
2. Improve Hayes Road north of Bahama Road to existing paving on Hayes.
3.
Improve Moss Road from Panama Road north to existing paving on Moss Road.
4. Replace Hayes Road bridge.
5. 'Replace Moss Road bridge.
Phase II
1. Paving and drainage improvements to Bahama Road from Shore Road to Hayes Road.
2. Paving and drainage improvements to Panama Road from Shore Road to Moss Road.
3. Paving and drainage improvements to Fisher Road from Panama Road to City Limits.
4. Add stacking lanes to Hayes Road at the S.R. 434 intersection.
Phase III
1. Upgrade Moss Road from S.R. 434 to S.R. 419 from two lanes to four lanes.
Phase IV
1. Improve Winter Springs Boulevard to three lane capability from Northern Way to Northern
Way (east section). This will be accomplished by adding turn lanes at each intersection for
both traffic flow directions.
III-37
)
Table 16
(Continued)
--I
J
J
. 'r
]
ft
:._J
~.~
New Traffic Signals
The following traffic signals on major intersections should be installed when warranted by using ITE
standards. Signals shall be constructed using County mast arm standards:
1. S.R. 434 & Tuscora Drive
2. S.R. 434 & Vista Willa Drive
3. S.R. 419 & Edgemon Avenue
4. S.R. 419 & Moss Road
The following traffic signals on minor intersections should be installed when warranted by using ITE
standards. Signals shall be constructed using Seminole County mast arm standards:
~J
J
J
1
::.:::;;
1. . Moss Road & Dolphin
2. Winter Springs Boulevard & Northern Way (westernmost)
3. Northern Way & Shetland A venue
4. Northern Way & Tuscora Drive
5. Northern Way & Vista Willa Drive
6. Trotwood Boulevard & Northern Way
7. Edgemon Avenue & Shepard Road
8. Winter Springs Boulevard & Northern Way (easternmost)
J
]
]
r:r.
.J
J
..J
\
I
III-38
.0.1
j
}
...1
],
'~,"',
~~}
']
J
J
}
'1
-\',
.J
J
J.
]
.f
J
~
CHAPTER IV
CONCURRENCY PLANNING
In 1985, the Florida Legislature adopted the "Growth Management Act," (Florida Statutes, Chp. 163)
to provide a framework for local governments to use as they develop or modify their long-range
Comprehensive Plans. One of the major provisions of this Act required local governments to insure
that the public facilities and services that are necessary to support development, be available
"concurrent" with the impacts of development. This means that all new development must be
located where existing services are available or where there are plans and funds to provide these
services. It is understood that the Winter Springs City Commission intends to pass a concurrency
management ordinance in compliance with this requirement.
OBJECTIVE OF THIS REVIEW
As of this date, the City of Winter Springs has not monitored traffic impacts from new development
since adoption of the Comprehensive Plan; thus, approved (vested) development traffic mayor may
not be under the Level of Service (LOS) threshold established in the Comprehensive Plan. To
determine whether existing and committed (funded for construction within three years)
transportation facilities can accommodate existing and approved development, a comparison of
existing and committed traffic to adopted roadway capacities was accomplished. Since traffic
studies have not been required for new development, it was necessary to simulate this vested
(committed) traffic using traffic models calibrated for the City of Winter Springs (Chapter III).
These models require socioeconomic data by traffic zone for the existing plus committed (E+C)
development. This data was developed by the Consultant from data provided by the City (see Table
17), and the application of the model resulted in an assignment of E+C traffic to the system of
arterial and collector roads in the Winter Springs Area.
AVAILABLE CAPACITY
Since the traffic model results are in Average Daily Traffic (ADT), daily capacity was used for this
analysis. Peak hour traffic must be used in intersection analysis and for traffic impact studies (see
following section). Where capacity is not available using ADT values, the applicant must show that
peak hour traffic generated by the development will not cause any roadway link or intersection to
exceed the LOS provided for in the Comprehensive Plan (LOS D).
Table 18 shows the status of each link in the City of Winter Springs as of the end of 1996. Those
links showing a negative "Available Capacity" will require widening before additional development
traffic can be accommodated. In some instances, it may be possible to accommodate the
development using a peak hour analysis which must be performed by the applicant. ADT traffic
IV-l
'j
'-1
- j
1
J
1
-1
values shown in Table 18 may be converting to peak hour using factors developed by FDOT1 in their
derivation of LOS D Capacity.
The information in Table 18 (as updated) may be given to development applicants. It is understood
that as developments are approved, the table should be updated by adding traffic (ADT) obtained
from a Traffic Study Report. The table should be fully updated every two (2) years with new traffic
counts and E+C traffic either from the model or manually by deleting that portion of each project's
traffic that is builtout.
TRAFFIC IMPACT REPORTS FOR CONCURRENCY AND MITIGATION
It is the intent of the City Commission to responsibly monitor growth and development in order to
ensure that adequate public facilities are in-place to serve new development, and that such facilities
perform at adopted levels of service so defined in the City's Comprehensive Plan.
~J
~
J
}
J
J
,}
]
J
J
J
~
In order to assess and monitor the impact of new development and comply with concurrency
requirements, a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) is required for all new development, with the
exception of that provided by ordinance. The TIA will be used to determine the extent of site related
traffic improvements, mitigation for off-site improvements, and will be used as the basis for
concurrency determinations.
For proposed developments that will add 300 or more new Average Daily Traffic (ADT) to adjacent
roads, the TIA will provide a comprehensive assessment of the development's impact on the
surrounding road system. For proposed developments that will add less than 300 new ADT, the TIA
shall provide information regarding the development's impact on access points onto the adjacent
street system.
All developments with more than 300 ADT ("New Trips") shall be required to demonstrate that the
additional vehicle trips generated by such development would not cause any road segment or
intersection within the distances shown in Table 1 (primary impact area) to exceed the Levels of
Service (LOS) as specified in the Comprehensive Plan and under Objective D given in Chapter III.
The primary impact area shall be determined by drawing a circle with a center point at the centerline
of each development's access point(s), using the appropriate radius as provided in Table 1 based on
the estimated "New" ADT. Any arterial or collector intersection that is captured within the primary
impact area must be evaluated and shall be the starting point for a road segment that must also be
evaluated; except that any intersection which cannot be reached by normal driving practices on a
paved access from the development's access point may be excluded from the evaluation.
I Florida's Level of Service Standards and Guidelines Manual for Planning, FDOT 1995
(or as updated), See Table E- I.
IV-2
\
"---'
w
L-..1
I; I (1
~'............... ..............
~
g:i' l
'." '....:--:,
. }5"')
~
.
------.,;..
.' '
--=--'-
-
'---
'.:--,,;
;....-..--,.
TABLE 17
H
<
I
VJ
October 1996 City of Winter Springs Existing Plus Committed Socioeconomics Data ,
Seminole Subzone Existing Existing Existing Existing Existing Total School School
County Single Multi-Family Industrial Commercial Service Employment Enrollment Enrollmen~
Traffic Zone Familv DU DU Emplovment Emplovment Emolovment K-8 9-'12
70 71 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
776 60 0 0 0 0 0 0
72 72 113 0 0 0 0 0 0
778 468 , 0 0 0 15 15 0
82 82 1371 0 0 9 30 39 0
83 83 545 0 0 104 0 104 0
780 127 0 10 0 10 20 0
781 1005 0 0 30 0 30 0
782 129 0 0 0 0 0 0
84 84 92 0 72 0 57 139 0
783 243 460 166 10 54 230 2458
85 85 0 0 0 28 0 26 0
86 86 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
785 25 0 0 54 0 54 0 2715
87 87 260 0 0 6 72 78 0
786 473 0 0 0 0 0 0
787 557 0 0 0 0 0 0
88 88 130 0 0 0 11 11 0
788 498 0 0 0 0 0 0
789 103 0 0 0 0 0 0
89 89 170 0 0 3 8 11 0
90 90 370 0 0 11 55 86 0
790 447 - 32 0 40 0 40 0
791 349 157 0 0 0 0 0
91 91 962 40 0 96 0 95 1280
92 92 633 392 6 124 369 499 0
93 93 2 0 412 8 27 447 0
94 94 461 622 1340 531 568 2439 815
95 95 350 1066 110 227 457 794 0
TOTALS: 9946 2769 2116 1281 1733 5157 4553 2715
',-- 1 I...---; ~ l.-J ~",', l .=.". :::":'1 €.';'~=;:;<~. (-:::....~.<.'! ..
~ - -=-- .... -- ~ ....--'- ~ ~ ..
~ --- -----.,
TABLE 18 (I of 3)
WINTER SPRINGS
E + C SYSTEM CAPACITY ANALYSIS
(A VERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC)
ROADW A Y FROM TO NO, OF ROADWAY LOS D 1996 1996 E&C NEW AVAILABLE TRIPS
LANES CLASS DAILY COUNT COMMITTED TRAFFIC TRIPS CAPACITY THIS
(E & C) CAPACITY (E) TRAFFIC SINCE PROJECT
(C) 1996
U,S, 17,,92 S.R. 434 SHEPARD RD, 6 ARTERIAL 47,500 36,123 4.271 40,394 7.106
U.S, 17-92 SHEPARD RD, C.R. 419 4 ARTERIAL 31,100 36,123 4,010 40,133 ..9,035
S.R. 434 U.S. 17..92 C.R. 419 4 ARTERIAL 31.100 24.842 3,998 28.890 2.2,10
S.R. 434 C.R. 419 TUSKAWILLA RD 4 ARTERIAL 31,100 24,752 5,509 30,256 844
S.R. 434 TUSKAWILLA RD EASTERN BEL TWA Y 4 ARTERIAL 31,100 16,552 7,478 24,030 7,070
S.R.419 U.S. 17-92 EDGEMON AVE. 2 ARTERIAL 14,300 15,553 2,541 18,094 3.792
S.R. 419 EDGEMON AVE, S.R. 434 2 ARTERIAL 14.300 12,271 1,274 13.545 755
E. LAKE DRIVE SEMINOLA BLVD FISHER ROAD 4 COLLECTOR 22.600 12,617 6,596 19.213 3,387
E. LAKE DRIVE FISHER ROAD TUSKAWILLA RD, 4 COLLECTOR 22,600 9.472 6.826 . 16.298 6.302
TUSKAWILLA RD. RED BUG LK RD EAGLE BLVD. 4 ARTERIAL 31,000 25.398 11.400 36.793 -5,493
TUSKAWILLA RD, EAGLE BLVD. E. LAKE DRIVE 4 ARTERIAL 31,100 24,573 10,470 35,043 -4,043
TUSKAWILLA RD, E. LAKE DRIVE WINTER SPGS. BLVD 4 ARTERIAL 31,100 16,572 5.184 21,756 9.244
TUSKAWILLA RD. WINTER SPGS BLVD TROTWOOD BLVD 4 ARTERIAL 31,100 16,071 2.374 18,441 12,559
TUSKAWILLA RD, TROTWOOD BLVD. S,R. 434 4 ARTERIAL 31,100 12.058 2,269 14,327 16,673
SHEPARD RD. U.S. 17-92 SHEOAH BLVD. 2 COLLECTOR 10.200 3,081 60 3,141 7.059
SHEOAH BLVD. SHEPARD RD, S,R. 434 2 COLLECTOR 10.200 5,831 1,060 6,941 3.259
BAHAMA ROAD HAYES ROAD WINDING HOLLOW 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 Dirt N/A
BL
MOSS ROAD PANAMA ROAD DOLPHIN ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 Dirt N/A
MOSS ROAD DOLPHIN ROAD S.R.434 2 COLLECTOR 10.200, 4.707 608 5,315 4,885
IV-4
L-- i I , , I . I 1!LJ I f ....\ I I
~ I..---.; - '-- ,~ '- .......- --' ~
--=-,. --
TABLE 18 (2 of 3)
WINTER SPRINGS
E + C SYSTEM CAPACITY ANALYSIS
(AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC)
ROADWAY FROM TO NO,OF ROADWAY LOS D 1996 1996 E&C NEW AVAILABLE TRIPS
LANES CLASS DAILY COUNT COMMITTED TRAFFIC TRIPS CAPACITY THIS
(E & C) CAPACITY (E) TRAFFIC SINCE PROJECT
(C) 1996
MOSS ROAD S.R. 434 C,R. 419 4 COLLECTOR 22,600 2,431 1,589 4,020 18,580
NORTHERN WAY TROTWOOD BLVD TUSCORA DR, 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 2,500 84 2,584 7,616
NORTHERN WAY TUSCORA DR. VISTAVILLA DR. 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 2,500 900 3,400 ' 6,800
NORTHERN WAY TROTWOOD BLVD WINTER SPG BLVD.S 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 1,868 129 1,997 8,203
NORTHERN WAY WINTER SPG. BLVD SHETLAND AVENUE 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 2,736 1,572 4,304 5.896
NORTHERN WAY GREENBRIAR LN. WINTER SPRG BLVD 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 1,991 530 2,521 7,679
TROTWOOD BLVD TUSKAWILLA RD. NORTHERN WAY 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 4,121 906 5,027 5,173
WINTER SPG BLVD TUSKAWILLA RD, NORTHERN WAY 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 7,384 2,448 9,832 368
WINTER SPG BLVD NORTHERN WAY GREENBRIAR LN. 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 6,099 1,226 7,324 2,876
WINTER SPG BLVD NORTHERN WAY NORTHERN WAY 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 7,284 430 7,714 2,486
WINTER SPG BLVD NORTHERN WAY S, R. 426 4 COLLECTOR 22,600 12,260 301 12,561 10,039
PANAMA ROAD EDGEMON AVE, MOSS ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 DIRT N/A
PANAMA ROAD MOSS ROAD SHORE ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 DIRT N/A
HAYE.S ROAD BAHAMA ROAD DOLPHIN ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 DIRT N/A
HAYES ROAD DOLPHIN ROAD S,R.434 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 3,381 460 384 6,359
DOLPHIN ROAD MOSS ROAD HAYES ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 241 35 276 9,924
FISHER ROAD EAST LAKE DRIVE PANAMA ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 1,267 218 1,485 8,715
IV-5
i1.-J
~
~.
, :
\.i.-.-I
~
l....;.;...i
t/~r !
~
f ,
.............
Pr1 "
~
',. .,,},~
~
i.' ..'-. I
.~--.;
- .8'
~
:.........-.
TABLE 18
WINTER SPRINGS
'E + C SYSTEM CAPACITY ANALYSIS
(AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC)
(3 of 3)
ROADWAY FROM TO NO,OF ROADWAY LOS D 1996 1996 E&C NEW AVAILABLE TRIPS
LANES CLASS DAILY COUNT COMMITTED TRAFFIC TRIPS CAPACITY THIS
(E & C) CAPACITY (E) TRAFFIC SINCE PROJECT
(C) 1996
SHORE ROAD PANAMA ROAD END 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 425 170 595 ,9,605
EAGLE RIDGE RD. BAHAMA ROAD S.R. 434 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 NOT OPEN
TUSCORA DRIVE NORTHERN WAY S,R. 434 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 765 2,127 2,892 7,308
VISTAWILLA DR, NORTHERN WAY S.R. 434 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 1.410 174 1,584 8,616
GREENBRIAR LN, NORTHERN WAY WINTER SPRG BLVD, 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 1,141 20 1,161 9,039
DYSON DR. TUSCAWILLA RD. SHETLAND AVE. 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 3,262 281 3,543 6,657
SHETLAND AVE, DYSON DRIVE NORTHERN WAY 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 4,474 125 4,599 5,601
EDGEMON AVE. E. LAKE DRIVE MOSS ROAD 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 2,774 49 2,823 7,377
EDGEMON AVE. SHEPARD ROAD S.R. 419 2 COLLECTOR 10,200 2,480 365 2,845 7,355
IV-6
J
"'\
"':J
,,I:
"]
~,.'
,:~'"
'\~\::
t>
"~;~
\ .',
~ ."
~} ":
"'J
.j,. :
'~
\(.....,
Iii<'
11:;,
<::'}
':: .:
.:-.,:..
,J
~i~!
llilJ
""1
::t-'
.,;j..J
""J'
't',;:
~ ..,
J
"T'J
'\1'
.
'"I
"
'h'
j
j
TABLE 19
CITY OF WINTER SPRJrNGS
PRIMARY IMPACT AREA
FOR
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS (TIA)
(DEVELOPMENTS WITH 300 OR MORE ADT)
DAILY NEW TRIPS (ADT)2
GENERATED
PRIMARY IMP ACT AREA
(RADIUS)
300-1500
1501-5000
5001-10,000
10,001 +
~-mile
1 mile
2 miles
3 miles
2Total and "Passer-by" trips to be determined from the latest edition of Trip Generation,
Institute of Transportation Engineers or "Microtrans" software (Equations if available). "New
Trips" include trips ends above those generated by existing use (parcel must be occupied within
last 5 years to qualify as existing) less "passer-by" trips.
IV-7
..I
"""1
. '. .:. ~
"J
...,."J
"
:::;:J
":
~'-'.
~"',
:n
:.0...
""',,'1
.~ '",
",
~
~",:"
!\..
.~;.~
Definitions
The following terms are used to help specify the procedures necessary for the TIA:
Methodology Meeting - This is a meeting with the City of Winter Springs Staff to discuss the
methodology that will be used to prepare the TIA. This meeting is strongly recommended for
projects where the trip generation will be over 300 new daily (ADT). It is also suggested for projects
where new trip generation is under 300 ADT.
Intersection Analysis - Analysis of the Level of SerVice (LOS) of the intersection using the
"Operations Analysis" as defined by the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (or latest edition).
Site-Related Road Improvements - These are road capital improvements and right-of-way
dedications for direct access improvements to the development in question. These include, but are
not limited to:
'''1
.....
.;f:
'<,
"
1. Site Driveways and Roads;
2. Median cuts made necessary by such driveways or roads;
3. Right and left turn deceleration or acceleration lanes, leading to or from those
driveways or roads;
4. Traffic control measures for those driveways or roads;
5. Access or frontage roads not considered in impact fee calculations; and
6. Roads or intersection improvements whose primary purpose at the time of
construction is to provide access to the development.
'illt
iliJ
lI,il
ill
:~
JI
J
~
11
~.
..,
~~
J
"J
Traffic Signal Warrant Analysis - This is an analysis of the project's site(s) to verify whether a traffic
signal will be required. It shall include, at a minimum, an investigation of Traffic Signal Warrants
No.1, 2, 9 and 11 from the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), latest edition.
This analysis may not be required if it can be shown that the traffic volumes are too low to warrant
such analysis. The need for such analyses should be determined in the Methodology Meeting.
Turn Lane - This means the width of pavement required to protect the health, safety and welfare of
the public and reduce adverse traffic impacts from turning movements, generated by a development
onto and off of a street. Such turn lanes would include separate left-turn, right-turn deceleration
lanes, right-turn free-flow traffic lanes, and right-turn acceleration lanes.
Traffic Generating Development - Land development designed or intended to permit a use of the
land which will contain more dwelling units or floor space than the existing use of the land, or to
otherwise change the use of the land in a manner that increases the generation of vehicular traffic.
Trip End - A one-way movement of vehicular travel from an origin (one trip end) to a destination
(the other trip end). For the purpose of this requirement, "trip" shall have the meaning which it has
IV-8
(
, : j
.-'}
, )
:":j
;:-..:...\
, ,I
\,', }
''':~
mJ}'
~. ,_,'
v
~h.
''",'1
'i;
.~: .
;~,~t]",
~
J
" j
p,
,:P, ,
ill]
',.J,"
'J
']
]
J
.1
J
I
in commonly accepted traffic engineering practice.
Trip Generation - The attraction and/or production of trips caused by a given type of land
development, as documented in the current Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) "Trip
Generation" publication, or as calculated using the computer software "Microtrans."
Traffic Modeling - The application of a series of mathematical formulae, converted to computer
software, for the purpose of estimating trip generation, trip distribution and traffic assignment to a
system of transportation facilities. Such models, calibrated for Winter Springs, currently in use by
Seminole County, or by the Orlando Urban Area Transportation Study (OUA TS), may be acceptable
if approved for use in the Methodology Meeting. Other stich models will require documentation of '
their appropriate application in the Winter Springs area.
Pm:pose 'of TIA
The TIA is to identify transportation related impacts on the roadway that are likely to be generated
by, a specific proposed development because of type, size, density, trip generation or location. The
TIA will identify access improvements, near-site improvements, and on-site improvements. The
, improvements are defined as follows:
1. Access Improvements
Road improvements necessary to provide safe and adequate ingress and egress and
for efficient operations. Access improvements include but are not limited to the
following:
a. Right-of-way easements;
b. Left and right turn lanes;
c. Acceleration and deceleration lanes;
d. Traffic control devices, signage and markings; and
e. Drainage and utilities as they relate to transportation improvements.
2. Near-Site Improve~ents
Off-site or near-site improvements may be required in addition to impact fees to'
satisfy concurrency requirements within the primary impact area.
3. On-Site Improvements
Road and parking improvements located within the boundaries of the specific parcel
proposed for development and road improvements which provide direct access (turn-
lane, tapers, signalization, etc.) and right-of-way dedication are deemed to be totally
the responsibility of the developer and exclusive of the transportation impact fee.
On-site circulation and parking issues will also be addressed including traffic
IV-9
(
]
J
".1
...I
-"'J
i...
R
u
""1
,,,
j"
..;.
i
]
,:J
B
]
;)
]
]
"J
..J
.I
controls, pavement markings and traffic safety.
Content of TIA'
A TIA shall be prepared by a qualified Transportation Engineer pursuant to an acceptable
methodology of transportation planning and engineering procedures. It is understood that the report
and/or recommendations would be sealed by a professional engineer, registered in the State of
Florida The expense of preparing the TIA is to be borne solely by the Owner/Developer. The TIA
shall be reviewed for accuracy and content by the City or its representative prior to acceptance. Cost
of such review shall be borne solely by the Owner/Developer.
The TIA shall include the following items and describe the methodology, practices and principles
utilized in determining the fmdings and recommendations:
Requirements ofTIA with less than 300 new daily trips. The following shall be provided in letter
form with Engineer's seal and appropriate backup tables:
a. Number of units (i.e. dwelling units, ~quare feet, etc.);
b. Description of development and ITE category for trip generation;
c. Trip end rates, or equations (to be used if available) used to generate the traffic, and the
source of this information (use of the ITE Trip Generation Manual, latest edition is required
unless otherwise approved or required by the City);
d. Total trips generated for the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) and the A.M. and P.M. peak
hours. (The peak hour for adjacent street traffic is usually the most appropriate peak hour
to use);
e. An analysis check if turn lanes, traffic signals, or other site related improvements will be
required at the project access points and roads. Turn lane warrants prescribed at the end of
this chapter are required. Turn lane design and length of storage lanes shall be based on
calculated "queue" length and shall conform to FDOT Roadway and Traffic Design
Standards (latest edition).
f. Sight distance triangles3 shall be plotted and included on site plans being reviewed with this
TIA. Limitation and restrictions within the sight distance triangle shall be identified and
removed if contained on the property of the applicant.
3Use Index Nos. 545 and 546 ofFDOT Roadway and Traffic Design Standards (latest
edition) or alternative approved by the City.
IV-I0
-'J
--t
j
J
:-.J
~1
..J
l:i:~"'
.....;.
:'.1:.,
..J
J
]
J
_ J
]
]
I
J
I
TIA Requirements for Developments with 300 or More New Daily Trips - In addition to the
information listed above for projects generating less than 300 new trips, the following shall be
provided:
1. Existing Conditions:
a. General Site Description - A detailed description of the proposed development
including site location, type of development, projected construction completion date,
and phasing. This section shall also provide a description of the roadway network
for the area under study, right-of-way and pavement widths, signal locations and
slgnage.
b. Discussion of Standards and Analysis Techniques - A detailed discussion of the
proposed analysis methodology, including intersection analysis, roadway capacities
and service volumes.
c. Analysis of Existing Conditions - For all roadways and intersections within the
subject area, the existing average daily traffic, and peak hour traffic volumes shall be
reported, and roadway link analysis and intersection analysis provided. The peak
hour of the generator (development) should be provided as it relates both to the A.M.
and P.M. peak hour of the adjacent street. This discussion should occur at the
methodology meeting and an agreed peak hour(s) determined for the TIA.
d. Programmed Improvements - The analysis shall indicate any programmed
transportation improvements funded for the primary impact area. A programmed
improvement is one that has been funded and is contained in a.work program. The
analysis shall indicate what program improvements are assumed in the analysis.
Programmed improvements expected to be under contract more than three (3) years
following the Certificate of Occupancy of this development shall not be used to
determine concurrency.
Statement of Project Trip Generation Characteristics - This ,shall indicate the project's trip
generation characteristics in terms of daily and peak hour generation. Full documentation shall be
provided if the trip generation rate utilized is other than that shown in the most recent ITE Trip
Generation Manual. Such documentation shall be provided at the methodology meeting and
subsequently approved by the City prior to use. Special trip generation studies may be appropriate;
however, specific procedures, number of studies and location shall be reviewed and concurred in by
the City.
Statement of Background Traffic - The analysis shall include background traffic on the adjacent
roadway network. This shall include current traffic counts as well as projection of this base line
traffic to the occupancy date and/or concurrency date. All such growth factors require
documentation and justification. They should be discussed and agreed on at the Methodology
IV-II
J
.'.1
'j
,..: \
Meeting.
.,..,-,
. ~ "
EJ
Statement of Trip Distribution and Assignment - The TIA shall provide projected trip distribution
with appropriate justification and documentation. The distribution of traffic approaching the
development shall either be based on demographic data, current turning movements in the area, or
"gravity mode1." The procedure to be included should be discussed and documented in the
Methodology Meeting. The project traffic shall be, shown and superimposed over the background
volumes with totals indicated in map and/or table format. ADT and peak hour are required on all
links.
'...,J,
;. '.~'
..\.,"
".....'
\~:.:
~"
I",,'
:;;H
"\~'
';'~1..
..'.,J,
:" ~ : .
..:.
~
,1
,J
, "J
"
..'
'\'.'
v..
:;,C:"l,
18
.:.],
Ej
"',':.. ,}
~~ '
'("
;J
J
",\
..~ I
J
]
Traffic Impact Analyses - All analyses shall be on a peak'hour basis. For intersection and driveway
analyses, turning movements will be required for a LOS analysis. Highway capacity manual
software (HCS or equivalent to be agreed at methodology meeting) would be used for intersection
and driveway access points. Link analysis shall be performed using software available from FDOT
and described in Florida's Level of Service Standards and Guidelines Manual for Planning.
Driveway access points as well as intersections within the primary impact area shall be evaluated for
the Levels of Service indicated in the traffic element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. Critical
intersections to be analyzed shall be agreed to in the Methodology Meeting. At a minimum, all
signalized intersections in the primary impact area shall be analyzed. In addition, a roadway link
analysis using the FDOT software shall be developed for all impacted (more than 30 new peak hour
trips) roadways shown in the City's Comprehensive Plan and located within the primary impact area.
Tables and figures shall include but not be limited to the following:
TABLES
1. Proposed Land Use by Phase, Type and Size;
2. Passerby and/or Diverted Traffic Percentages by Phase and Land Use;
3. Daily Trip Generation by Phase, Land Use, and Size with New Trips and
PasserbyIDiverted Trips Separated;
4. Peak Hour Trip Generation in the Same Categories as Daily Trip Generation;.
and
5. Trip Distribution - Percentages Approaching the Site by Direction.
FIGURES
1. Vicinity Map Showing Site;
2. Existing Traffic Counts by Link (ADT and Peak Hour);
IV-12
I
\
, !
'J
'1
.1
]
~: J
TJ
~~J
-]
;]
~
']
.\
,',1
ill
]
.1
J
"J
.1
..1
I
3. Post-Development Peak Hour Traffic (Turning Movements) - Project and
Total Traffic Separated;
4. Post-Development Daily Traffic; and
5. Recommended Improvements (either listed and described, in table format, or
on a drawing).
Traffic count summary documents and other reference material should be included in a Report
Appendix.
Conclusions and Recommendations - The report shall contain recommended improvements and
mitigating measures made necessary by the proposed development, including but not limited to:
a. Road Widening;
b. Provision of turriing, acceleration and deceleration lanes;
c. Signalization;
d. Regulatory Signage; and
e. New Roadway Construction.
While the payment of impact fees is presumed to mItIgate off-site impacts, programmed
improvements (three years) may not be sufficient to accommodate the traffic impact of the project,
thus violating concurrency requirements contained in the Comprehensive Plan. It will be encumbent
upon the applicant to identify such intersections and links of the roadway system where Level of
Service standards will be violated at project buildout, or where improvements are planned three years
from the occupancy date of the development. It is understood that. in those developments which are
not to be occupied within one year. growth of background traffic before Levels of Service are tested
is required.
IV-13
l
",(
,\
".1
,.:.,1
~'_.
'If}
t",:::
.i:-
.:\.'
:,..1
~~l
JI
]
j
Q;:, ,
....
\:'"
J'.,.,
;\
"),
,',
,;
j
1,'
~
']
;'.
"
J
]
1
TURN LANE POLICY
LEFT TURN LANES
1. A left turn lane on the major cross street will be required when any two (2) or more of the
following warrants are satisfied:
a. Posted speed limit is equal to or greater than thirty-five (35) mph.
b. Number of Left Turn Movements
1. On multi-lane facilities, the number of left turning vehicles from the major
roadway is equal to or greater than fifteen (15) during either the A.M. or PIM.
peak hour of the major street.
2. 'On two (2) lane two-way facilities, the number of left turning vehicles from
the major roadway is equal to or greater than ten (10) and the opposing
through traffic volume exceeds three hundred and fifty (350) vehicles during
either the A.M. or P.M. peak hour.
c. Available Sight Distance
If the available sight distance for left turning vehicles to observe approaching traffic
or for approaching traffic moving in either direction to observe the left turning
vehicle is less than the value shown in Table A-I for the posted speed of the major
street.
d. Access Control
I. The street has been designated as a controlled access facility by Seminole
County, FDOT, or the City of Winter Springs.
2. The roadway is a multi-lane divided facility and there is sufficient room in
the median to allow construction of a left turn lane.
e. Traffic Control
The intersecting minor street or access point driveway is controlled by a traffic signal.
2. Separate left turn lanes are required on the intersecting minor streets or access point
driveways when any two (2) or more of the following warrants are satisfied:
IV-14
,..I
L.
~"l
~ I
:"1
iLl
,..:
..(, J
'"
~\:. :
~'
-I"
'll'
tr
a. Posted Speed Limit
When the posted speed limit of the intersecting street or access point driveway is
equal to or greater than thirty (30) mph.
b. Number of Turning Vehicles
When the number of left turning vehicles from the intersecting street or access point
driveway is equal to or greater than sixty (60) vehicles during either A.M. or P.M.
peak hour of the arterial street.
c. Available Sight Distance
Available sight distance is not an applicable warrant in this case.
,-~ "1
"
"
,;.
~
"'J'
\.
..~. ,
j
l,Ll
illJ
"d.'
\,"
,,'
'iJ.
,.";
..:,
]
]
d. When the street which is being entered has been designated as a controlled access
facility by Seminole County, FDOT, or the City of Winter Springs.
e. Traffic Control
When the intersecting street or access point driveway is controlled by a traffic signal.
DECELERATION AND RIGHT TURN LANES
1. A deceleration and right turn lane on the major street will be required when any two (2) or
more of the following warrants are satisfied:
a. Posted major street speed limit is equal to or greater than forty (40) mph.
b. Number of right turning movements from the major roadway is equal to or greater
than thirty (30) during either the A.M. or P.M. peak hour of the major street.
c. Available Sight Distance
If the available sight distance for a right turning vehicle to be seen "by through traffic
traveling in the same direction is less than the value shown in Table A-I for the
posted speed limit of the major street.
d. Major street has been designated.as a controlled access facility by Seminole County,
FDOT, or the City of Winter Springs.
J
j
\
IV-I5
-j
f
. j
...:1
-'J
]'
, ,
_dl
~
-]
" J
J
J
,I
]
J
J
.J
\
e. Traffic Control
Intersecting street or access point driveway is controlled by a traffic signal.
2.
Separate right turn lanes are required on a minor intersection street or access point driveway
whenever any two (2) or more of the following warrants are satisfied:
a. Posted speed limit of the intersecting or access point driveway is equal to or greater
than thirty (30) mph.
b. Number of right turning vehicles from the intersecting street or access point driveway
is equal to or greater than sixty (60) during either the A.M. or P.M. peak hour of the
major street.
c. Available sight distance is not an applicable warrant in this case.
d. Access Control
If the arterial street which is being entered has been designated as a controlled access
facility by Seminole County, FDOT, or the City of Winter Springs.
e. Traffic Control
1. Intersecting street or access point driveway is controlled by a traffic signal.
2. An acceleration lane is provided on the arterial street and the right turn
movement is not controlled by a yield or stop sign.
IV-16
I
J
J
]
"1
i,
-'.:],:
.:( .
~
f1
LJ
"'J
~
J
,]
~l
.J
'J
J
]
J
,,)
J
I
TABLE 20
SIGHT DISTANCE FOR TURN LANE POLICY
(Rounded Values)
POSTED SPEED (MPH)
20
30
40
50
60
STOPPING SIGHT DISTANCE
Minimum (FT) 125 200 275 400 525
Desirable (FT) 200 250 375 475 650
IV-17
I
I
>1
']
:01
."
~'J,
~.
'''I
J
w~
~,:I
APPENDIX
"I
>,J
~'
,;,
'.,'\
1,'1
J..,.
..
,
"'J
"
l'
]
~
JI
J
..J
J
, L......J L..J L...J ~ LJ mu 7 I ('"7'079 ~:. I f' I
~ --- ~ ~ '-----' ~ : .! ~ '~ --
TABLE A-1
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
PUBLIC WORKS - LOCAL OPTION GAS TAX
PROPOSED PROJECT EXPENDITURES BY YEAR
Project Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Prior
Proiect Name Number 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01 01/02
Wagners Curve Removal 97 -4411-062 $80,000 $80 000
Public Works Comoound 99-4411-063 $60.000 $60 000 $60 000 $60 000 $240000
Resurfacina 98-4411 -064 $150000 $150.000 $150000 $150 000 $150 000 $750 000
Underdrains 98-4411 -065 $50,000 $50 000 $50 000 $150000
TOTAL $280.000 $210,000 $260 000 $210,000 $260 000 $1,220000 $0
PROPOSED PROJECT REVENUE SOURCE BY YEAR
:>
"0
"0
(1)
::l
0..
;;<.
,
-
Project Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Prior
Revenue Source Number 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01 01102
Local Ootion Gas Tax 97 -4411-062 $80.000 $80 000
Local Option Gas Tax 99-4411-063 $60 000 $60 000 $60.000 $60 000 $240000
Local Ootion Gas Tax 98-4411-064 $150.000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150000 $750000
Local Option Gas Tax 98-4411-065 $50.000 $50.000 $50,000 $150000
TOTAL $280,000 $210000 $260,000 $210.000 $260,000 $1,220 000 $0
PROPOSED EQUIPMENT EXPENDITURES BY YEAR
Project Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Prior
Equipment Name Number 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01 01/02
Vehicle 98-4411-066 $26.000 $20 500 $21,000 $67 500
TOTAL $26,000 $20 500 $0 $21,000 $0 $67 500 $0
PROPOSED EQUIPMENT REVENUE SOURCE BY YEAR
Project Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Prior
Revenue Source Number 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01 01/02
Local Option Gas Tax 98-4411-066 $26.000 $20,500 $21,000 $67 500
TOTAL $26,000 $20,500 $0 $21.000 $0 $67 500 $0
-=----' L-..J
fj, .. "
-
~
....
iO<,:.'" -~
~l""""_~ f;5'?k_;j
L..;
~
~~t' I
. "
...........
l ,':':':''1
L-J
L....:.J
"""---'
LJ
TABLE A-2
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
LOCAL OPTION GAS TAX
Historical Data
FY91 FY92 FY 93 FY 94 FY95 FY96 FY97 FY98 FY99 FY 2000
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT FUND ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET PROJECTION PROJECTION PROJECTION
REVENUES:
INTERGOVERNMENTAL REVENUES $268,779 $245,312 $237,753 $205,765 $221,816 $224,256 $245,644 $257,926 $270,822 $284,363
INTEREST $35,483 $31,427 $13,261 $26,604 $30,451 $17,000 $25,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000
MISCELLANEOUS $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
TOTAL REVENUES $304,262 $276,739 $251,014 $232,369 $252,267 $241 ,256 $270,644 $277,926 $290,822 $304,363
PERCENT INCREASE 5.14% ..9,05% -9.30% -7.43% 8.56% -4.36% 10,11% 4.62% 4.64% 4.66%
:> RECURRING EXPENSES: $30,073 $19,901 $24,913 $28,556 $96,028 $197,500 $50,000 $75,000 $75,000 $75,000
"0
"0
~
::s RECURRING CAPITAL OUTLAY $165,872 $366,256 $228,259 $0 $355,147 $344,804 $258,050 $250,000 $200,000 $200,000
c..
x'
N
TOTAL EXPENSES $195,945 $386,157 $253,172 $28,556 $451,175 $542,304 $308,050 $325,000 $275,000 $275,000
PERCENT INCREASE 3,74% 97,07% -34.44% -88.72% 1479.97% 20.20% -43.20% 5.50% -15,38% 0.00%
REVENUES OVER (UNDER) EXPENSES $108,317 ($109,418) ($2,158) $203,813 ($198,908) ($301,048) ($37,406) ($47,074) $15,822 $29,363
BEGINNING FUND BALANCE $505,352 $613,669 $504,251 $502,093 $705,906 $506,998 $205,950 $168,544 $121,470 $137,292
ENDING FUND BALANCE $613,669 $504,251 $502,093 $705,906 $506,998 $205,950 $168,544 $121,470 $137,292 $166,655
, L....,,; ~ l......J
""'--J ~ ~ hi. ' j ~ L-J
flU
, .,
~
["""''9
('>' ,. I
I:~ :.
. .
'--
l....:,_"_:d
1.....-.....-......
k-,-,'-;:-,;
~,,;fi
r;'a_'_"~
W,.;.,.,,>;;:i
IIE:-';j;:-l
g-----'
,..... ..~:1
~
f,-,-;:":'j
fm:'" I
~
i'--'~0t1
f"/f-'1
L-:J
r '1
~
L2J
TABLE A-4
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
FINAL BUDGET FIGURES
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES
REVENUES & EXPENDITURES (UNAUDITED)
Description of Revenue
TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE FUND
Impact Fees Collected
Interest Earned
Amended *To Date
FY,95/96 FY 96/97 FY 96/97
Actual Budget Actual '
$282,993 $310,436 $158,121
$91,583 $50,900 $39,903
$374,576 $361,336 $198,024
$0 $1,470,164 $268,765
$374,576 $1,831,500 $466,789
TOTAL TRANSP, IMPACT FEE REVENUE
APPROPRIATION FROM FUND BALANCE
TOTAL TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE REVENUES
? AND APPROPRIATION FROM FUND BALANCE
"0
(II
::l
~ Account No. Description of Expenditure
.l:.. TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEE FUND
53180 Consulting Services
54620 Signalization
56310 Capital Improvements
56930 Reserves
$92,613 $107,000 $77,111
$0 $21,000 $0
$0 $1,703,500 $399,678
$0 $0 $0
$92,613 $1,831,500 $466,789
$281,963 $0 $0
$374,576 $1 ,831,500 $466,789
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
APPROPRIATION TO FUND BALANCE
TOTAL EXPENSE AND APPROPRIATION
TO FUND BALANCE
CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE
FUND BALANCE - October 1,
Appropriations to (from) Fund Balance
FUND BALANCE - September 30,
$1,874,226
$281,963
$2,156,189
$2,156,189
($1,470,164)
$686,025
$2,156,189
($268,765)
$1,887,424
· To Date: 4/15/97
: :
---'
f
::l
0..
".
X
I
\J1
L-J ~ (..,:.cd
L,,'t..../ :":t..:'':' b,''',l V~:'/"J
L..:......l L........:..J IT,~: I
TABLE A-5
L.....LJ r --,-:-:]
( '., ~
~
/,
""----'
:-.J
October 1996 City of Winter Springs Existing Socioeconomics Data
Seminole Subzone Existing Existing Existing Existing Existing Total School School
County Single Multi-Family Industrial Commercial Service Employment Enrollment Enrollment
Traffic Zone Familv DU DU Emplovment Employment Employment K-8 9-12
70 71 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
776 60 0 0 0 0 0 0
72 72 113 0 0 0 0 0 0
778 454 0 0 0 15 15 0
82 82 1132 0 0 9 30 39 0
83 83 545 0 0 104 0 104 0
780 120 0 10 0 10 20 0
781 940 0 0 30 0 30 0
782 129 0 0 0 0 0 0
84 84 44 0 72 0 67 139 0
783 243 388 166 10 54 230 2450'
85 85 0' 0 0 26 0 26 0
86 86 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
785 25 0 0 54 0 54 0 2715
87 87 97 0 0 6 72 78 0
786 473 0 0 0 0 0 0
787 370 0 0 0 0 0 0
88 88 20 0 0 0 11 11 0
788 477 0 0 0 0 0 0
789 103 0 0 0 0 0 0
89 89 156 0 0 3 8 11 0
90 90 359 0 0 11 55 66 0
790 441 32 0 40 0 40 0
791 227 157 0 0 0 0 0
91 91 955 40 0 96 0 96 1200
92 92 633 392 6 124 304 434 0
93 93 2 0 412 8 27 447 0
94 94 449 622 1340 531 568 2439 815
95 95 327 796 110 227 457 794 0
TOTALS: 8897 2427 2116 1279 1678 5073 4465 27-15
I,.",.:):,
:g
ro
::l
0-
;('
&.
h'~'", _.:,~.;,
~
[::?4#i
1;;0.,0',>.)
k:;ok,',i /:;/'';;'ill
I/,.".:......j
~'.l
';'......,
f.?'.,i1
Vt~:'.l
r..-..... .....
~
LJ'
~ .:#~:~]
~
~
'----:..0..;;
~
TABLE A-6
City of Winter Springs 2010 Socioeconomics Data Projections
Seminole Subzone Existing Existing Existing Existing Existing Total School School
County Single Multi-Family Industrial Commercial Service Employment Enrollment Enrollment
Traffic Zone Familv DU DU Employment Emolovment Emolovment K-8 9-12
70 71 62 100 0 100 0 100 0
776 118 40 0 100 0 100 0
72 72 346 0 0 640 0 1328 0
778 468 0 0 0 30 30 0
82 82 1371 16 0 9 30 39 0
83 83 585 0 0 104 0 104 0
780 127 0 15 0 325 340 0
781 1031 0 0 30 0 30 0
782 129 0 0 0 0 0 0
84 84 92 0 72 0 67 139 0
783 243 460 166 10 54 230 2458
85 85 31 0 26 1080 72 1178 0
86 86 89 140 12 100 0 112 0
785 107 106 0 54 0 54 0 2715
87 87 260 0 0 6 11 17 0
786 473 0 0 O. 0 0 0
787 557 0 161 0 11 172 0
88 88 130 0 0 0 8 8 0
788 498 0 0 0 0 0 0
789 103 0 0 0 0 0 0
89 89 170 0 0 0 8 8 0
90 90 370 0 0 11 55 66 0
790 447 32 0 63 0 63 0
791 349 157 0 0 0 0 0
91 91 962 40 86 96 65 182 1200
92 92 633 392 213 124 369 706 0
93 93 2 0 1344 8 27 1379 0
94 94 461 622 1340 531 568 2439 1000
95 95 350 1066 695 227 457 1379 0
TOTALS: 10564 3171 4130 3293 2157 10203 4658 2715
I
...J
l
':"j
'...1
~.:.~
]
J
~]
'~
J
.1
;1
iJ
J
..'1
]
]
J
]
1
TABLE A-7
WINTER SPRINGS
TRAFFIC ZONE CONVERSION
INDEX
Planning Data
Zone (Figure 4)
Assignment
Zone
71
776
72
778
82
83
780
781
782
84
783
85
86
785
87
786
787
88
788
789
89
90
790
791
91
92
93
94
95
150
150
148
149
97
98
147
96
190
151
146
152
187
192
153
191
144
99
100
46
45
143
6
14
3
4
5
1
2
Appendix-7
.1
,.."J
....
""J
','
"] ~
'2J
..,,;J
sa
dil
~..:
~~f
.H~'
~,"]
.'
'.
iJ".,.,
~
~..,,'
c~:
~~\:
",:'J
::~..;
jJ
mil
illl
"-1)
J
',~I
.'
:>
11
J
,lI,
illI
":~,::
"
\;.<.
]"
~;.:
..,t
:'\
..,
"
.:,':1
~~
o
() 0
,0
"
SEE FIGtJRE 4
WINTER SPRINGS ZONES
~
u
/"
/
,(
~
/-
~j1Jlff-
LEGEND
48
- STUDY AREA BOUNDARY
-.-. MICRO-ZONE BOUNDARY
32 MICRO-ZONE NUUBER
50
62
MICRO-ZONE SYSTEM
FIGURE A~1
: Source: Casselberry Transportation Plan by Foxworth, Swift and Associates.
Appendix-8
, " i..':')" '~ f,~,.<d L.,;.,j ;;~',::-::''' ~ P'.f.';'l ~ L.J tlJ{j;' ) ~.. :.-.~ ;o.;)~ f'\., I .. ~ ~ ~
- L..:.::.::.::: ' ' , , , "----'- "---
: ~ ~
'f' z
~ to) iil
U1 ~
U) ~
9
fJJOJ (l.f;;:)
1087 ~ ~
-+-
C'\l
lO
0
....
1071
I
1766
~
-N-
~
~~
:I
cg~
~
..
..
"'::l~::" e
~p f Z"
~~ "'0.
....,.....o?rl-.
.... lISZ"
t~~% .. Go
e~~~ ~ z
........"1.0
~;a.. _
~6 i iI
ne
. .
~<:> f)-
,
N.T.S.
'\.10~--@
Ot.<.
,'"
1109
1409
1410
~
~ ~
i8~
~~~
~~~
~,~
~ ~
~ 0
o ~
-<
1435
1453 1454
1456
II.>.
"it
1175
1516
-+- !
1187
J]
~8
fR
------
~~
::I
(Q)i
:::J:
..
..
~;;j~:: III-
><p>~ z"
~~6'" D II
...........,O::tl-:I
,~~~ I: r:a.
~o_llllll
0"'0:':'" _
"",(J'l> ..._
"'''''''~.O
~~ii
ne
. .
~
m
z
I?
o
>
r.l
If
~
I
co
~
*
co
9
~
~
::D
~rrI
~(J)
Z-i
@;t
~~
-oz
~~
~o
o~
Z
~
o
-<
>zg
Ie
"'::D
m
~
.
t-
~
I _','
~
(.,- . "I
~
L....:;
V:'-: I
I ,
----
[~~, !
I.:,;..;q
f. I
~
'--o;;.J
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
2010 FUTURE TRAFFIC
CIRCULATION MAP
~
>
F.i
/__-r--..,"--././
/
JCSUP
<
a..
z
vl
~
-N-
~
'(00 D ,... """ 3DOD """
""" NftI1
.\
~
EXISllNG ROADWAYS
AAlER1AL ROA[)WA'l'S
CQ.J...EC~ RO~WA'YS
STAlE AND COUNTY FUNDED
-.-.-.- STAT!: n.t<CfD
IW'IlO'<tlENTS
. .............. COUNTY fUNml
II4PRO-.nem
MUNICIPAL IMPACT FEE FUNDED
DE\nOPIJl fUNDl'D
It.PRo~n
It.<PACT rn:
II4PR000000lS
FUNC110NAL CLASSlFlCA 11 ON
P A PRlNOPAL ARIDllAL
M A I6NQR ARTERIAL
R A RURAl ARTERIAL
M C UAJOR OOUECTOR
CMC COUIl1Y U\NOR =TOO
NOTE: AU.. H1C1UGHlED ROADS NOT LABW:D
~ IIUNlClPAL OOUECTORS-
NUMBER OF LANES
(4) NUU&R Of ROADWAY L\N[s
HOlE: RO,A,OWAYS NOT lABUED HA\ot: 1VIQ lANES.
L- L.2J L-.! LJ ii.{; :;) " I : ~ '''1 !" __... I r.. :' I
_,u --.......... ~ '....:....-.:;J ~ I
~~ 1766 ~
::I
(gf
~ ,,~~ '), -N-
~
..
..
"'prlllll-
~ ~z"
~~o'" D II
"""OXII-=- N.T.S.
t~~~ II a. 1351
o*~~~Z
ll:...",~.O
... - - reO)
~~ia
o. 1087 ~ 1.l0~ -..@
. . ....
@ c ~ O~
> ,,'\
r.I ~ 1071 1109 1409 1410
z
f? CD z I
~ I iil
I-.J
i!n cr
<D ID
~ -.j
~ 1435
~ I\)
~
::D
iJ 1453
1454
1452
@ 1456
~8>
Z~~ tx,...J< ">
~~~ " -t
~.~ 1175
~ ~ .... 1516
1187 ~
~ ~
~
1I 1450
~g , l
,ll.~
I '
'-
I ".0.,1
L-J
L-j
~;i!:~ " 1
r :
~: I
~0rjF e HJ, ,,€)stQts'erf';: is ~ -, ." Gt~l"Qm' e '. ,(;1. ~'<
,.., . ..-.". ..'-, ..4 )i~,. _..;....... ->:.::,...., ......;.. .. , ._ w'o ' . .'., ..... _ . ..~
778 Tuscawilla Unit 11 66 '
778 Chelsea Woods 321
778 Bear Creek Estates 67
778 Chestnut Estates Ph. 1 & 2 37 14
491 0 0 0 14 0 0 0
72 Eaqles Watch Ph, 1 & 2 57 53
72 Howell Creek Ph, 1 & 2 56 100
72 Tuscawilla Tract 15 Parcel 3 80
113 0 0 0 233 0 0 0
82 Tuscawilla Unit 11 B 28
82 Tuscawilla Unit 12 90
82 Arrowhead Unit 1 (Parcels 3,4 5) 0 11
82 Fairway Oaks 72
82 Woodstream (Arrowhead Unit 5) 32 56
82 Greenbriar Phase 1 .86
82 Greenbriar Phase 2 34 81
82 Chesea Parc Phase 2 36
82 Chelsea Parc Phase 3(Fox Glen) 11 51
82 Chelsea Parc Phase 4 40
82 Bentley Green 44
82 Bentley Club 41
82 Glen Eaqle Units 1 2 & 3 257
82 Carrinqton Woods 76
82 Davenport Glen 70
82 Chestnut Ridge 52
82 Tuscawilla Unit #13 39
82 Braewick 85
82 Tuscawilla Unit 7 79
1132 0 0 0 239 0 0 0
.........
t:.:~::;;;,
[.:;':::. I
~
~
~ ~ ~, iii.;' ,-1 t... ',::: ~%'f': ! ':'"S~ ["ii..;,,::\ .'
. , ,. -,,'. ,,, r.' "'",: , '
"----' - ----- -----
.~... t.:"J~Q',eq. ~. ~_,,'. ',:r~,.\'~~ ' .,;, _ '-, ,[' ,; . ',;'
783 Tuscawilla Unit 8 78 '
783 Tuscawilla Unit 9 & 9B 164
783 Casa Park Villas 316
783 Tuscanv Place 72 72
783 Indian Trails Middle School 1
783 Keeth Elementary 1
242 388 2 0 0 72 0 0'
84 The Reserve at Tuscawilla 44 48
44 0 0 0 48 0 0 0
83 Tusca Oaks Phase 1 & 2 98 40
83 WedQewood Tennis Villas 233
83 Georaetown Units 1,2 & 3 214
545 0 0 0 40 0 0 0
85 St. Johns LandinQ 31
85 McDonalds 1
0 0 1 0 31 0 0 0
785 W.S, Municipal BuildinQ 1
785 W.S, High School 1
785 Bills Landscapinq 1
785 Central Winds Park 1
0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0
780 Arbor Glen 37 1
780 Tuscawilla Unit 6 89
780 St. Stephens 1
780 Kinder Care 1
780 Seven-Eleven 1
780 Tuscawilla Realty 1
780 Tuscawilla Office Complex
126 0 4 0 1 0 0 0
i ;
-----....
I '
L--
L....: L....;
, ,
~
r;t;:" !
~
~
L-J
L-
I
~
781 Tuscawilla Unit 1 111 '
781 Tuscawilla Unit 2 65
781 Tuscawilla Unit 4 379
781 Wedaewood Units 1 2 & 3 128
781 Countrv Club Villaae 1.2. & 3 245
781 Arrowhead Unit 2 10 18
781 Arrowhead Unit 1 - (Partial) 1 7
781 Tuscawilla Country Club 1
781 Arrowhead Unit 3 20
781 Arrowhead Unit 4 20
939 0 1 0 65 0 0 0
782 Winter Sorinas Unit 3 129
129 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
788 Oak Forest Unit 1 114
788 Oak Forest Unit 2 2A & 28 163
788 Oak Forest Unit 3 120
788 Oak Forest Unit 4 75,
788 Tuscawilla Unit 5 10
788 Grand Reserve 4 12
486 0 0 0 12 0 0 0
786 Oak Forest Unit 5 (lots 468 to 561) 94
786 Oak Forest Unit 6 (lots 562 to 715) 154
786 Oak Forest Unit 7 (716 to 808) 93
786 Oak Forest Unit 8 (lots 809 to 940) 132
473 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
87 Winter Sorinas Post Office 1
87 Seminole Pines 102 100
87 Windinq Hollow (east of Easement) 63
102 0 1 0 163 0 0 0
L-'
L-i
L-.. L...,
P~:' !
:---.J
---'
:;~u--f.'E":~",+~',~j "LJ-'6'_..i.;K...4,,','...:-': - f.., -_~~;'"_~'''''~..-':,,';rl_' 04'~ .~, 'Boo .
t_~~~{~J:~~~t.:{i~
!K';.,..:;i;;...<l.lc:lf~
787 North Orlando Ranches Sec, 9 109 '
787 North Orlando Ranches Sec, 10 112
787 Windinq Hollow 149 187
370 0 0 0 187 0 0 0
90 North Orlando Ranches Sec, 2 52
90 North Orlando Ranches Sec. 2A 196
90 North Orlando Ranches Sec. 5 22 3
90 North Orlando Ranches Sec, 8 72
90 North Orlando Ranches Sec, {(Part) 14 3
90 North Orlando Ranches Sec. 4 (Part) 3 5
359 0 0 0 11 0 0 0
88 Seville Chase 0 110
Dunmar Estates 20
20 0 0 0 110 0 0 0
791 Mosswood Aoartments 147
791 Moss Glen Townhomes 10
791 The Vineyards 171
791 The Seasons 26 115
791 North Orlando Ranches Sec. 4 (Part) 5 2
791 North Orlando Ranches Sec. 1 (Part) 25 5
227 157 0 0 122 0 0 0
790 Hacienda Villaqe 441 6
790 Pinewood Terrace 32
790 State Farm Insurance 1
790 Cumberland Farms 2
441 32 3 0 6 0 0 0
-----.: ~ ~ L-J L-.:.J .....:.........
L.J 1":'1
'--
~
i'~f' I
~ f'. ~~.:'(] r~" :. 1
, rltWa{{1
~ ~~~~~
92 Hiqhlands Section 6 56 '
92 North Orlando 141
92 North Orlando 1 st Addition 138
92 North Orlando 4th Addition 242
92 North Orlando 5th Addition (partial) 34
92 North Orlando 8th Addition 22
92 Lori Ann Acres 64
92 Doug's Unit 10 56
92 Moss Road Quads 20
92 Indian Ridqe 84
92 Deer Song 152
92 Fairfax Apartments 16
92 La Petite Nursery 1
92 Mr. Bubbles Car Wash 1
92 Dr. Pete Corum
92 Banfield Funeral Home 1
92 Excelsior Park 1
92 Winter Springs Center 33
92 Barnett Bank 1
92 Villaqe Market Place
92 Automotive One 1
92 Circle K 1
92 Public Works Complex 1
92 Fire Station 1
92 Public Safety Complex 1
633 392 42 0 0 0 0 0
L...J
L-.:
L~ L..:J L-J
,
-
l.......J L:.J
I. !
~
I.::a\t I
i
~
L.J
L.J
L.J
,
'-----'I
... . p '(ill)". . illll1lB .mG. ". '. . . . ~ . ,
" }j " " .J, "', '., ....,.~;>o>;. ,'.. '., _ '..'. ..__ .. ._~....j.. . _ . . ", ... .
,
r.~;,
93 Winter Sorinas Industrial Park '
93 Broadway Gymnastics
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
94 Hiahlands Section 1 102
94 Hiahlands Section 2 41
94 Hiahlands Section 4 75
94 Hiahlands Section 7 & 8 56 2
94 Hiahlands (Blades Court) 8
94 Hiahlands East Quadraolxes 16
94 Hiahlands Patio Homes 25
94 Cvoress Club 75
94 Cvoress Villaae 22
94 Sheoah Section 2 144
94 Sheoah Section 3 28
94 Hiahland Villaae One 62
94 Hiahland Villaae Two 74
94 Hiahland Lakes 31 10
94 Hiahlands Elementarv School 1
94 Bavtree 182
449 492 1 0 12 0 0 0
95 Sheoah Site A 46
95 Golf Terrace Aoartments 380 250
95 Wildwood 120 170
95 Seville on the Green 200 20
95 GreensDoint 107 9
95 Hiahlands Section 5 41
95 Winter SDrinas Golf Course
95 Hiahlands Glen 15 14
95 Sheoah Sec. 1 44
327 796 0 0 23 270 0 0
89 North Orlando Ranches Sec. 1 12 6
89 North Orlando Ranches Sec. 1 A & 1 B 55 3
89 North Orlando Ranches Sec, 6 37 2
89 North Orlando Ranches Sec 7 43 3
147 14
ATTACHMENTS
ORC Report for Large Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment LS-CPA-6-00,
[ See Local Planning Agency Agenda Item II, H. Attachment 1 ]
Response to the ORC Report for LS-CP A-6-00
[ See Local Planning Agency Agenda Item II. H. Attachment 2]
LS-CP A-6-00 Plan Amendment Original Data & Analysis Submission Included in the
Transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs,
[ See Local Planning Agency Agenda Item II. H. Attachment 3 ]
CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA
, 1126 EAST STATE ROAD 434
WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 32708..2799
Telephone (407) 327-1800
Community Development Dept.
Planning Division
,:LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY REGULAR AGENDA ITEM:
II. ! H.
CITY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE TRAFFIC
CIRCULATION ELEMENT SUBSTITUTING C1TY'S
TRANSPORTATION STUDY FOR ALL TEXT AND MAPS IN VOLUME I
AND ll. (LS-CPA-6-00)
STAFF REPORT:
APPLICABLE LAW AND PUBLIC POLICY:
The provisions of 163.317 4( 4) Florida Statutes which state "Be the agency (Local
Planning Agency) responsible for the preparation of the comprehensive plan or plan
amendment and shall make recommendations to the governing body regarding the
adoption or amendment of such plan. During the preparation of the plan or plan
amendment and prior to any recommendation to the governing body, the Local Planning
Agency shall hold at least one public hearing, with public notice, on the proposed plan or
plan amendment."
The provisions of Sec. 20-57 of the City Code which state in part ". .the planning and
zoning board shall serve as the local planning agency pursuant to the county
comprehensive planning act and the local government comprehensive planning act of the
state. . ." .
It is City Administration policy that the applicant must provide the data, inventory and
analysis in support of the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and provide the
response to the ORC Report.
APPLICANT:
'.i.:
City of Winter Springs
1126 East S.R. 434
Winter Springs, FL 32708
(407) 327-1800
LOCALPLANNlNGAGENCY
March 7,2001
Traffic Circulation Element Update Plan Amendment
LS-CP A-6..00
Page I of3
REQUEST:
PURPOSE:
For the Local Planning Agency to review and recommend the requested changes to the
City's Comprehensive Plan Traffic Circulation Element Data, Inventory & Analysis
section and Goals, Objectives and Policies section.
The City needs to update the Traffic Circulation Element based on the results of the
recently completed City of Winter Springs Transportation Study prepared by Conklin,
Porter & Holmes. The contents of the Study are intended to replace completely the
current text and maps in the Traffic Circulation Element Volume 1 of 2 and
Volume 2 of2.
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS REPORT (ORC) FROM
THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS:
The City's consultant for this proposed plan amendment is CPH Engineering, Inc, CPH
Engineering, Inc. received a copy of the ORC Report and has made the responses.
[ See Attachment 2 ]
FINDINGS:
.
CPH Engineering, Inc. has provided the necessary response (as Supplement #2
"Update to City of Winter Springs Transportation Study"") to the ORC Report
relating to the proposed plan amendment LS-CPA-6-00.
.
A number of changes have occurred since the preparation and adoption
(on April 27, 1992) of the City's Comprehensive Plan, prompting the need for an
update of the Traffic Circulation Element.
.
The City initiated comprehensive plan amendment updates the Traffic Circulation
Element Data, Inventory & Analysis (Volume 1 of2) and the Goals, Objectives
and Policies (Volume 2 of 2).
.
The proposed plan amendment is compatible with and not in conflict with the
other elements of the City's Comprehensive Plan,
.
The comprehensive plan amendment is compatible with and furthers the goals,
objectives and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan.
.
The comprehensive plan amendment is compatible with and furthers the goals,
LOCAL PLANNlNG AGENCY
Mareh 7, 2001
Traffie Circulation Elemcnt Updatc Plan Amendment
LS..CPA..6..00
Pagc 2 of3
.
The comprehensive plan amendment is compatible with and furthers the goals,
objectives and policies of the East Central Florida Comprehensive Regional Policy
Plan.
STAFF RECOMMENDA TION:
Staff recommends that the Local Planning Agency make the following recommendation to
the City Commission:
That the City Commission hold a second (adoption) public hearing and adopt the
large scale comprehensive plan amendment (LS-CP A-6-00) incorporating CPR
Engineering, Inc.' s response to the ORC Report into the amendment, that would
update the Traffic Circulation Element in Volume 1 of 2 and Volume 2 of 2 of the
City's Comprehensive Plan,
ATTACHMENTS:
1. ORC Report for Proposed Plan Amendment (LS-CP A-6-00).
2. Response to the ORe Report for LS-CP A-6-00.
3. City of Winter Springs Transportation Study - August, 1997.
LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY
March 7. 2001
Traffic Circulalion Elcmcnl Updalc Plan Amcndmcnl
LS-CPA-6-00
Page 3 of J
ATTACHMENT 1
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
OBJECTIONS', RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS
FOR THE
.CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS
. AMENDMENT 01-1
January 26,2001
Division of Community Planning
Bureau of Local Planning
Thi3 report is prepared pursuant 10 Rule 9J-) LOlO
INTRODUCTION
The following objections, recommendations and comh1ents are based upon the Department's review
of the City of Winter Springs 01-1 proposed amendment to their comprehensive plan pursuant to s.
163.31.84, Florida Statutes .(F.S.). .
Objections relate to specific requirements ofre1evant portions of Chapter 9J-5. Florida Administrative'
Code (F.A.C.), and Chapter 163. Part IT, F.S. Each'objection includes a recommendation of one
approach that might be taken to address the cited objection. Other approaches may be more suitable
in specific situations. Some of these objections may have initially been raised by one of the other
external review agencies. Ifthere is a difference between the Department's objection and the external
agency advisory objection or comment. the Department's objection would take precedenCe.
Each of these objections must be addressed by the local government and corrected when the.
amendment is resubmitted for our compliance review. Objections which are not addressed may result
in.a determination that the amendment is not in compliance. The Department may have raised an .
objection regarding missing data and analysis items which the local government considers not
applicable to its amendment. If that is the case, a statement justifying its non-applicability pursuant
to Rule 9J-5.002(2), F.A.C.. must be submitted. The Department will make a 4etermination on the
non-applicability of the requ.irement, and if the justification is sufficient. the objection will be
considered addressed. . '
The comments which follow the objections and recommendations section are. advisory in nature.
, Comments will not form bases of a determination of non-compliance. They are included to call
attention to items raised by our reviewers. The comments can be substantive, concerning planning
. principles. methodology or logic, as well as editorial in nature dealing With grammar, organization,
mapping.. and reader comprehension.
Appended to the back ofthe Department's r~port are the comment letters from the other state review
agencies and other agencies. organizations and individuals. These comments are advisory to the
Department and may not form bases of Departmental objections unless they appear under the
"Objections" heading in this report,
b. Internal Consistency: Because the amendment has not demonstrated consistency with
statutory requirements for protection of natural resources, and for coordination of land uses with
transportation facilities and services, amendment has not demonstrated internal consistency with
the City's goals, objectives and policies of the comprehensive plan as listed:
Traffic Circulation: Objective B, Policy 1 and 6, requiring coordination, Objective C,
and Policies 1 through 7 requiring level of service maintenance, Objective D, Policies 2
and 3;
Future Land Use Element: Goal 2, Objective A, Policies 1 through 3, requiring
protection of natural resources; and Goal 4 Objective B, Policies 1,3, and 5, regarding
open space and wetland preservation in Town Center Areas;
Conservation: Goal 1, Objective B, Policies 1,2,4, and 5, protecting natural resources,
Objective c, Policies 6 and 7, regarding protection of floodplains and coordination;
Capital Improvements: goal 1, Objective C, Policy 1, Transportation LOS
Recommendation: Make applicable revisions as recommended in Part LA.1.b.
Sections:'163.3177(1), 163.3177(6)(a), 163,3177(6)(c), 163.3177(6)(d),
163.3177(6)0),163.3177(8),163.3187(2), F.S.
Rules: 9J-5.005(2), 9J-5.005(5), 9J-5.006(2)(b) and (c); 91:.5.006(3)(b)3, (b)6, (b) 1 0 and (c)2;
9J-5.006(4); 91-5.006(5), 91-5.013(2), F.A.C.
B. Traffic Circulation Element
1. LS-CP A-6-00: The City has not met the requirements of the Transportation because certain
tables are not consistent with the FDOT work program and the revised element does not include
a current LOS for all roadways in the City.
Recommend~tion: Revise Tables 14, 15, and Figures 7, 8 f~r SR. 434, CR 419, SR 419, and Us
17-92 to be consistent with the FDOT work program. Reflect applicable roadway improvements
as scheduled in the'FDOT work program as was recommended in the original 98-1 ORe.
Furthermore, the City has not revised the listing of facilities in: the program to be consistent with
SeniinoleCounty. The City should revise the element to demonstrate coordination of facilities '
. with the County by including a sch~duleof improvements. -
Other requirements should be met under chapter 163.3177(6)G), F.S., and 91-5.019(4) and (5),
Florida Administrative Code. The Element should include the current Level of Service for
roadways in the City. Given that the data is from 1996 and 1997, the City should revisit the
issue to determine if this is still the best available data. The map series should include current
level of service for-roadways. The plan includes projected level of service but the table should
be reviewed to see if the information is still applicable.
Sections: '163.3177(6)(b), 163.3 1 77(6)G), 163,3177(8), F.S.
-Rules: 91_5.006(4),91-5.019(4),91-5.019(5), F.A.C.
5
II. STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY
A. OBJECTION
1. The proposed amendments are not consistent with the following goals and policies of the
State Comprehensive Plan: . ' . '
a Goal (8) Water Resources, and Policies (b)2, (b)4, (b)8, and (b)10;
b. Goal (10) Natural Systems, and Recreational Lands and Policies (b)I, (b)3, (b)6,
and (b)7; ,
c. Goal (12), Energy, and Policy (b)3;
d. ..~.Goal (16), Land Use, and Policies (b)l, (b)2, (b)3, and (b)6;
e. 'Goal (18), Public Facilities, and,Policies (b)I, and (b)6; ,
f. Goal (20), Transportation, and Policies (b)2, (bP, (b)13, and (b)15; and
g~ Goal'(26), Plan Implementation and Policy (b)7.
B. RECO~NDATION
The City should revise the proposed amendment, as necessary, to be consistent with the
above-referenced goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan. Specific
recommendations can be found following the objections cited elsewhere in this ORC .report.
.~.:~;
6
ATTACHMENT 2
';.
We have prepared a response to the DCA comments on the Traffic Circulation.
B. Traffic Circulation Element
1. LS-CPA-6-00: The City has not met the requirements of the Transportation because certain
tables are not consistent with the FOOT work program and the,revised element does not include
a current LOS for all roadways in the City.
Recommendation: Revise Tables 14.15, and Figures 7, 8 for SR 434, CR 419, SR419, and
US 17-92 to be consistent with tt1e FOOT work program. Reflect applicable roadway
improvements as scheduled in the FOOT work program as was recommended in the original
98-1 ORC. Furthermore, the. City has not revised the listing"of facilities in the program to be
consistent with Seminole County. The City should revise the element to demonstrate
coordination of facilities with the County by including a schedule of improvements.
..
Other requirements should be met under Chapter 163.3177(6)0), F.S., and 9J-5.019(4) and (5),
Florida Administrative Code. The E'lerrient should include the current Level of Service for
roadways in the City; Given that the data is from 1996 and 1997, the City should revisit the
issue to determine if this is still the best available data. The map series should include current
level of service for roadways. The plan includes projected level of service but the table should
be reviewed to see if the information is still applicable.
Sections: 163.3177(6)(b). 163.3177(6)0). 163.3177(8). F.S.
Rules: 9J-5.006(4), 9J-5.019(4), 9J-5.019(5). F.A.C.
Response: We have revised Tables 14,. 15 and Figure 8. We do not believe that Figure 7
needs to be revised. Figure 7 represents the test network used, not the recommended plan. It
was used as the base to determine the required improvements as identified by the model. In
reality, the only difference between the Figure 7 shown and the existing roadways (as they exist
today) is the test network had SR 434 as a six (6)-lane road between US 17-92 and Moss Road,
and Seminola as a six (6)-lane road by 2020. 'Improvements to SR 434 from US '17 -92 to Moss
Road have been removed from the current 2020 Long RangeTransporta,tion Plan by the MPO-
Metro Plan Orlando. ,We have adjusted our planning ,docu/TI~!1tation accordingly to reflect this
information.
We have prepared Supplement NO.2 which updates the Transportation ,Element and includes
revisions and additions as requested. It also includes 2000 counts from the County and
February 2001 Counts from the City. We have also included Table 14A, which shows the 2000
Existing LOS Data for City Roadways (including state and county roads), and Figure 3A, which
identifies LOS in a graphics format.
J:\W0459.04\WD\RESPONSE TO DCA COMMENTS.DOC