The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2010 10 13 - Other Town Parke Evidence Binder Planning & Zoning Board/Local Planning Agency Regular Meeting October 13, 2010 The attached document was shown during Public Hearings Agenda Item `500' by Ms. Rebecca Furman, Attorney, Lowndes Drosdick Doster Kantor & Reed, P.A. • Winter Springs Planning and Zoning Commission October 13, 2010 Evidence Binder Final Development Plan 1. City of Winter Springs Comprehensive Plan A. Town Center Designation B. Housing Element 2. City of Winter Springs City Code A. Town Center Zoning B. Procedures for Securing Approval of Plans & Plats 3. Winter Springs City Commission April 27, 2009 A. Agenda Item and Staff Report B. Meeting Minutes 4. Winter Springs Planning and Zoning October 13, 2010 A. Staff Report Special Exception B. Staff Report Final Engineering • 5. Joel Ivey, AICP A. Affidavit B. Qualifications 6. Hank Fishkind, PH.D. A. Affidavit B. Fiscal Neutrality Analysis and Economic Impact Study dated August 23, 2010 C. Qualifications 7. David Mulholland A. Affidavit B. Traffic Impact Study dated September 8, 2010 C. Qualifications 8. Randall Slocum A. Affidavit B. Qualifications 9. David Glunt, P.E. A. Affidavit B. Qualifications • 0909692 \148282 \1334060 \1 � k. .. ' ^r � k.' :� ' �.: "L `%e ) �� +�.! :,� �` �• ?s�. � � '��r... .. � � � ' s�ts" .,-'y� S' *� e '� ,,.,,,.<....:,��. r �,. "'° ,� `.. �r��,�' ..d �� . . .�t�� , .. ;.r�� • �� ,�:-' .. � � . � . � . ' . � .. ��. ,:�� . � � �' ;�� r:. p' ._........_..............� � � .:. ... S �f� `�` c • . ... ^� �� m.'Q�6 . .`__..... .....,.w._.. , ¢c ,. . a �, :�,.•:�+ � 5"'' � .� i� �� ✓ � � .. s � . � µ . .- : - gq� ° i. �:. '4 yc � g} it4 !. � *� R`:� , � .a . . . h _ @ �i �. . 7- °5 � � . ' • .^:,Y .,. _.. ... � „s' � 3' � ., t fi # . , � � . , ' �.. ,i� �f . �� s. � . ,:��,. e �' . � �.,., .,, ., �:'....... . ' ;f`'� Z � i . . . , n , �.�# .. +� ; Fe' ^ -... � ...'. �.: ... l � t /' . l i � A � � ' ¢ ; � c%�.1 � � £i�`sm. c Y�`./ n.. »�./' L .� ".� ,. �' •. . . .. _... ._ ..t'' ..�__ \'a�` � x �" r �. , � �i v ' • '� x � � � ��' ��' ` T � � � � T � .e:. ,r .«s' ,�. . ,� �. . ..� �� {� ... �� . �` . � y,�,�+s .4'� .E•� ° ' �. .r �+s °� � K �3 z a .�� Q � , �'�`� s � � � '�"��a �� .� � ` `°� v+ � ,�' f �"� ` � �� .... � * •'�' s : � �,� ,"� �,�� p �� ,.� :y ��, � �_ �� . '�` � �u £} � . ¢� ��# ,.,�� P_^��''r% . � � :.� � .�'" � �' ��,,c.#�`�,`"�"s��.� x � x • ��✓,.,` r. ,� ' .. � ' a�' �� . � � x� �l�; �.� '' � $ � ,. � i � .,� Z5�"� R : $d' �d ^ . . �� . � � g��ip�' yi y,�, j�' .. � 1 . C r ��'•� . �C�� '4T �... � } � . �� a�`3. � 4hr��• . �� r�� ,�� "� ,� �: , � z ,� � � _ t �C�s �. �' �' �` �� +a� � +a r � � o __ tE � . -�';,''' ,� '�� r � � � .i } �,,� :�� ti I�` p ;.�� •*� � �� ` fi ,. � j #� � �► �,.. ,�,� k 4 � ;, r y " 4 � -- r �� d�` $ ]�k ♦ V �, t � s+£ . $ S.k � t . ��*P `�.- �fi u� �. 4 j�„ � �� ' �� - �`QSb � q � Y� � ''�y y . . 4 {�.. ! �'. � �. . � � � . $' Yd ^ �� fs }e K � p � & �� i � � �= �, � g .f�� 7 > � i t � , st�".�, '. � � 9.,.! . �L� �-�Y. �, ��:rt: .� � � �� : � � � '�� t � ,; '� ��. ,. � � , � �, �i,� � � . � � t �� ! �` 7�� g r ""^" ° 3 c� .�. `�.,,`� ` �w�r� , . � �d�,.:_� z �'.,� � � A. . �„� ,� � � ' s > � � �� , ��, � � • � � � � ' ,,,� ;-i�Ea��...�sz � ' �� , � �„ re� � F � �`',�.�`�"�� ` ,�� . �. . r. � � /''� , �-, . R,.,�� '� � �..i,\zf � � i �1 � � f � � � V� `�� L..f � . � ;i ��, � + .r�l�, v'- +Ai _ .,�d.�,....... . , _ .. _ . � h ,, s CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT Policy 1.11.8: Collector /Arterial Road Access. Require new school sites to have frontage on or direct access to a collector or arterial road and to have suitable ingress and egress for pedestrians, bicycles, cars, buses, service vehicles, and emergency vehicles. Policy 1.11.9: Pre - Development Coordination. Coordinate during pre - development program planning and school site selection activities with the School Board, to collocate public facilities, such as parks, libraries, and community centers, with schools. Policy 1.11.10: Emergency Shelters. Encourage the School Board to construct portions of new schools to serve as emergency shelters in case of natural disasters. Policy 1.1 1.1 1: Consistency with Code and Interlocal Agreements. Require public schools to develop consistent with the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency As Amended January 2008, the City's Comprehensive Plan, and the City's Code of Ordinances. GOAL 2: Town Center. The City seeks to create a Town Center based upon traditional design standards for development that will become the identifying focus of the City's downtown and contribute to an increased and diversified tax base for the City. The primary purpose of the Town Center shall be to create an economically successful, vibrant, aesthetic, compact, multimodal, • diverse, mixed use (including horizontal and vertical integration of uses) neo- traditional urban environment, designed on a pedestrian scale and with a pedestrian orientation. The Town Center is to be a place where people can reside in a mix of single and multiple family dwellings, work, gather to shop, relax, recreate, be entertained, attend community events, and enjoy the natural beauty of lands located in the Town Center. The Town Center should be created through public and private investment and development. Objective 2.1: Location. The Town Center should be generally centered around the intersection of S.R. 434 and Tuskawilla Road, as depicted on the City's Future Land Use Map - 2030. Existing public facilities such as the City Hall, Winter Springs High School, Central Winds Community Park, and the U. S. Post Office are included within the Town Center designation. Policy 2.1.1: Future Land Use Map Designation. Revise the Future Land Use Map - 2030, as needed from time to time, to designate land "Town Center" consistent with the Objective. Policy 2.1.2: Design Charette. Host design charettes to create small area plans consistent with the Town Center Master Plan, involving property owners and stakeholders for the following areas, prior to their development: • Between Orange Avenue and Lake Jesup • North of and adjacent to Tuscawilla PUD • I -l1 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT Policy 2.1.3: Promote and Protect. Maintain a leadership position to protect the economic and planning integrity of the Town Center and promote public and private investment and growth therein. Policy 2.1.4: Future Roads and Traffic Patterns. Adopt appropriate transportation maps to identify future roads and traffic patterns related to the Town Center that assure best routes through land while attempting to maximize development potential and opportunities consistent with the Town Center Goal. Determine the final location of future Town Center roads during the development process. Policy 2.1.5: Public /Private Partnerships. Enter into public /private partnerships, as needed from time to time, with property owners or developers to develop the Town Center consistent with the Town Center Goal. Policy 2.1.6: Public Money as a Catalyst. Encourage private investment within the Town Center by spending public money as a catalyst to the extent financial resources are available. Coordinate as appropriate, with private development to undertake capital improvements for public infrastructure (e.g. sewer, water, roads, parks, stormwater) to enhance or assist private development to achieve the Town Center Goal. Policy 2.1.7: Private Investment and Economic Incentives. Encourage private • investment in the Town Center by enacting policies to provide economic incentives to private developers building within the Town Center, provided such development is consistent with the Town Center Goal. Consider to the extent allowed by law, incentives such as providing impact fees credits, subsidizing loans, reserving infrastructure capacity, improving rights -of -way, providing public infrastructure, and /or streamlining permit processing. Policy 2.1.8: Development Review Committee. Require all proposed developments within the Town Center to be subject to review by the Development Review Committee (DRC) as established by the City Commission. The DRC shall have the authority, granted by the City Commission, to approve all aspects of site planning and exterior architecture implications, traffic impacts, and any other site - specific matters related to development. Objective 2.2: Neo- traditional. Promote and enhance the development of the Town Center by allowing a mixed use higher density /intensity neo- traditional urban pattern. Policy 2.2.1: Neo - Traditional Characteristics. Encourage a mixed use higher density /intensity neo - traditional Town Center, utilizing, to the extent practical, the fundamentals and urban design concepts in the Town Center Master Plan: • Urban and high density • I -12 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT • Walkable community • Predictability in design /flexibility in land uses. • Visibly different section of S.R. 434 • Important sites for special public places • "Green network" of parks and preserved open spaces • Connected network of streets and blocks • Special public spaces of defined character • Special sites for civic buildings • Pedestrian sized blocks • Nongated developments Policy 2.2.2: Variety of Places. Promote and permit a variety of places to gather, shop, relax, recreate and enjoy the natural beauty of the Town Center. Choose sites for public spaces because of their uniqueness or existing physical features. Policy 2.2.3: Network of Public Green Spaces. Promote and develop a network of public green spaces such as parks, squares, preserves, and open spaces that form the framework for the Town Center, and in doing so, promote and develop connectivity of natural features for habitat, continuity and sustainability, scenic vistas, and trail systems. [Open space is defined as "undeveloped lands suitable for passive recreation or conservation ". • (Cross Reference: See Recreation and Open Space Element, Policy 1.1.1)] Designate lands for both passive and active parks. Policy 2.2.4: Mixed Uses. Permit a variety of mixed uses consistent, compatible, and in harmony with the Town Center Goal, including single family residential, multiple family residential, commercial retail and services, public services and buildings, parks, and schools, through the enactment of creative and flexible land development regulations. Policy 2.2.5: Wetlands. Utilize wetlands as conservation preserve and open space areas. Connect these to the extent feasible, to promote the natural drainage and ecological viability of the Town Center and to further uphold the City's designation as a "Tree City U.S.A." Designate jurisdictional wetlands located within the Town Center as Conservation on the Future Land Use Map - 2030 and require that these lands be subject to the Goals, Objectives and Policies of the Conservation Element. Policy 2.2.6: Residential Density. Support the desired commercial activity and urban character desired for the Town Center by encouraging high density residential development consistent with the Town Center Goal up to thirty -six (36) units per gross acre and by seeking a minimum average residential density of seven (7) units per acre, unless the type of unit would warrant a lesser density while still meeting the intent of the Town Center Code. III 1 - 13 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT Policy 2.2.7: Accessory Dwelling Units. Encourage developers of single family detached units in the Town Center, to include residential units with accessory dwelling units (such as garage apartments). (Cross Reference: See Housing Element, Policy 1.3.9) Policy 2.2.8: Intensity and Building Height. Encourage higher intensity development in the Town Center which does not exceed a floor area ratio (FAR) of two (2.0) and six (6) stories in height. Policy 2.2.9: Mix of Uses Defined. The City shall create a minimum mix of land uses in the Town Center as follows: Retail = 30% to 60% Commercial Office = 10% to 30% Residential = 30% to 60 %. Objective 2.3: Economic Development. Plan and promote sufficient economic growth and development that provides for an appropriate balance of high - quality land uses, development and activities that will provide a sound financial future for the City. Policy 2.3.1: Central Economic Development Core. Recognize the Town Center as the centrally located economic development core of the City with the potential for high - quality new development and revitalization that • provides needed services, employment opportunities, and high - quality residential living opportunities, while becoming a community activity center for the City. Policy 2.3.2: Studies. Conduct periodic economic development studies of the Town Center that are designed to compile relevant economic data and analysis that will: (1) educate and inform the City about trends affecting the economic performance of the Town Center; (2) assist the City in developing and implementing economic development strategies for the Town Center; and (3) serve as a significant factor in making development and other decisions related to the Town Center. Policy 2.3.3: Optimization of Tax Base. Enure comnatible land uses and development proiects within the Town Center that optimally increase and diversity the City's tax base and economic well - beinq, while complementing and protecting established surrounding_ neighborhoods. Policy 2.3.4: Fiscal Impacts of Development. Ensure that City policies, regulations, and decision making processes not only consider Town Center design planning impacts, but also consider whether proposed new development will have a positive and acceptable economic impact on the City. In furtherance of this policy, the City Commission may require, as a condition of considering the approval or denial of a development project, that developers provide a written economic fiscal impact • 1 -1 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT report, prepared by a duly qualified expert, that details the associated fiscal impacts of any proposed new development project on the City and the School District. Policy 2.3.5: Targeted Development Program. Develop and implement a targeted development program in cooperation with residents, local businesses and the development community to attract, expand and retain businesses and residential units appropriate to create and maintain an economically successful Town Center. Policy 2.3.6: High Quality Development. Ensure high - quality building and development that enhances the image and economic well -being of the City and the Town Center. Policy 2.3.7: Quality of Life. Strive to improve the quality of life of Winter Springs' residents by encouraging an increased number and variety of thriving commercial businesses that are supported and complimented by hiah- end residential projects located in the Town Center. GOAL 3: Greeneway Interchange District. The City hereby creates a Greeneway Interchange District (GID) land use category to target industries with high quality, higher income jobs and an increased tax base for the City. • Objective 3.1: Location. The GID shall be located in proximity to S.R. 417 and the interchange area on S.R. 434, as depicted on the City's Future Land Use Map - 2030. The GID is located within the "target area" identified by Seminole County in 2007 as "SeminoleWAY ", which runs north from S.R. 426 in the City of Oviedo to Interstate 4 in the City of Sanford, following the S.R. 417 corridor. Policy 3.1.1: Future Land Use Map - 2030 Designation. Revise the Future Land Use Map - 2030, as appropriate from time to time, to designate land "Greeneway Interchange District" (GID) consistent with this Objective. Policy 3.1.2: Future Roads and Traffic Patterns. Adopt appropriate transportation maps to identify future roads and traffic patterns related to the GID that provide best routes through and safe and convenient access to land while attempting to maximize development potential and opportunities consistent with GID Goal. Determine the final location of future roads within the GID and adjacent area during the development process in accordance with the Transportation Element. Policy 3.1.3: Connectivity. Require pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular connectivity both internally and externally to adjoining developable properties (including public trail linkages). (Cross Reference: See Recreation and Open Space Element, Policy 1.6.4) • I - 15 . Element Housing ,,.,,,,,. .. III ..., ,, [, ,-- . , :il . 1 ; ' '``. V , ' .1- ' ' - V. .""`' 4 fit"; , 4 , ,-,) 4,-.... • . , '.-:'..,.!''ll'ititig‘'' ,, ‘... ' - - , ' P ".-r `c. fr r ,.. " . .,..Th ,,.."..: 14- 7 % T',.,q,,‘, ',-- , , - 1.4kr.7, ''''''', • '‘' ' - j 1 I , ' _ . ■• • ° .'.., - ..„- - * - \ 1 I ' ., .. . I'''' ■+t"' *t ',. ' ' ' ' , . - i'''' '. ,. -:- - V - '' ' , ;;,' , 4 - ''.. • ''' / .. - . ' .. ' ' ro t)1:c.:,;', L' ' ; . , i.,....,;:,,,.:.--,n ;4-,i!zil..., `7‘..--i.,-/•%',...,,-„ , , id A-41. ,,.. f i ".',,f... : ' ' -." ' ,,,..= --'.Pri ' i'liiilaiV„,:, •:•b'- '-i; -;:.;-.._.:-.:,';:-'-'-' , -- ..- ,.;;',7: •` '4,,,1-01.-., -1 <:--,.,, k\ ' ,, y4 - ' .- ' 5 .'" '-‘ 1.--'' ,,,:',- '-'.,Y. .‘ti•:1,04 -' •• '',, ,, ---' . -c , 'i '::''' ,-7---- 7,.. „ , , -„, , ,i--,--,- ,,; f 4 f'*,,.......4, r1•,,,.,' ,,,,, ''. ' ", • ' w,..,,,,..:. :::,_ ,2t ,,:' !.[,,.."‘"'''''''' 11„ - '' '''' a ■,;11"."?Igl - ' - t•'. . 't, -=- ii ..,. .. -4... , ''! 1 III • 1 \`'''''' , 1 l';7'3''..It''7'''4".' ,"t,f1",?ir,.4'.*vtik ', , 2.-','"‘" , `.'!. '' 1110 f ' '''1'..". ''' 141-,!' i -z .,..... 1 ;::11 ,',,,::1,;„ ',:,14 tie, 4"-.211 • '.' 'II '' '''''' ' '.4° ''" •4 / - .' " : ''.*''''''',',"1.9t14 • : ‘'' i ' . -71 1 .-., ' , '.:-. , ,7"'it'V,4'41`,,i-:,:t-'1•1•Tpt, i • ' - ,-.,::. '' ' ', 4. I , ' [ ''',''..':.1; '11 1 .'1714, . '' •"-. r , -4 . - , -_ . t in 1 , ,...„g, ,, --, .:,,-7.,„1"; '.;,.. ,:,,,, I ) 1 ' .,: ' : ' / if-T3- *t.1C il? ;'' p , .-,. . (4 ., ›.. : .1 ' 1 • P ' .- , ,, . I i . f ' -7 - :::::'".14 ; ' '' C : , • . . t S '.. .,- ' . -' i t ' :-,,',-; - '. [ -, ",.',' r .. . . . ,' , ' -.. ' , . ' '. • 1 . '' H :1 _ ..•:', " '• . ;; "?-- ,-- r,..-*, v,,,-+,,,;.07,• - •t.,,,,..,,",, '-. - • - " • j ,:.,,,,,; ),:;..; • - -`, ,,,,,,,,;„ ,,,, . ,:...4,4, ' '`.4■?:;4'.',.:;'. :I -'< , f;'.; '''' ' ' ..., -.` ''.' - ■ _.,', " ... • f ti-Pt-....,, ... • , -,'" - ' * , 4 4.04r l '' % 4 t, • ,, 1 k -ve plan ,,..., i.o...1-151 4,64„,-.,.,,....,,,,*, '4' ..,t, $v:',..S.'1'.7.4 C° M • r"" " 2009 (-1Pciate ( ,„,gt,,, v„. • ....,,,,,, 2009 June , i ti-t ,4 e'' ,,,-. L':- , 1 - - d Amen ,. '-. -AR_Base ,,,70,.,,,,A?,,,,,,-,,,A1,,,,,„-..., t .'• , -, ,, ,, • •,.., .. ,_ III t CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS A. GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES 1 B. INTRODUCTION 12 1. Purpose of the Element 12 2. Growth Trends 13 C. HOUSING INVENTORY 16 1. Existing Housing Characteristics 16 a. Age of Housing Stock 16 b. Dwelling Units by Type 16 c. Dwelling Units by Tenure 18 d. Cost of Housing 20 e. Cost to Income Ratio 20 2. Housing Conditions 22 a. Physical Conditions 22 b. Overcrowding 23 3. Government Subsidized Housing 24 • 4. Group Homes 24 5. Mobile Homes 25 6. Historic Housing 25 7. Housing Construction Activity 26 D. HOUSING ANALYSIS 27 1. Household Characteristics 28 a. Household Size 28 b. Population by Age 29 c. Households by Income 32 2. Projected Housing Needs 34 a. Housing Tenure, Type and Cost 34 b. Housing for Special Populations 34 c. Group Homes 35 d. Dwelling Unit Demolitions and Conversions 35 3. Land Requirements and Availability for Projected Housing Needs 36 4111 III - i 1 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS III COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT 4. The Housing Delivery System 37 a. Financing 37 b. Regulatory and Administrative Process 38 c. Infill Housing Development 39 d. Mobile Homes 39 e. Infrastructure Requirements 40 f. Sustainability, Energy Efficiency, & Renewable Energy Resources 40 • 0 III - ii , 1 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS Ill COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT LIST OF TABLES Table Ill - 1 a: Population 14 Table Ill - 1 b: Population Forecasts 15 Table Ill - 2: Age of Housing Stock 17 Table III - 3: Housing Units by Type, 2000 & 1990 17 Table III - 4a: Housing Units by Tenure 19 Table III - 5: Median Household Income 21 Table III - 6: Cost Burden 21 Table III - 7: Comparison of Housing Conditions 23 Table III - 8: Cooperatives and Mobile Home /Recreational Vehicle Parks, 2008 25 Table III - 9: Housing Construction and Annexation Activity, 1990 — December 2007 26 Table Ill - 10: Shimberg Household Composition Projections, 2000 -2030 29 Table III - 11: Shimberg Projected Winter Springs Population By Age, 1990 -2030 30 Table III - 12a: Households by Income and Cost Burden, Winter Springs, 2005 33 Table Ill - 12b: Projected Households by Income, 2000 -2030 33 • Table III - 13: Demand for Housing Units by Tenure 34 Table III - 14: Vacant Developable Land Analysis 36 Table III - 15a: Comparison of Monthly Gross Rent 2000 42 Table Ill - 15b: Comparison of Monthly Gross Rent 1990 42 Table Ill - 16a: Value of Owner- Occupied Housing, 2000 43 Table III - 16b: Value of Owner- Occupied Housing, 1990 44 Table Ill - 17: Comparison of Monthly Cost of Owner - Occupied Housing, 2000 45 LIST OF MAPS Map III - 1: Mobile Home Parks and Cooperatives 41 • III - iii CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT • 0 III - iv CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT CHAPTER III HOUSING ELEMENT A. GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES GOAL 1: PROVISION OF HOUSING. To ensure an adequate supply of a wide range of housing types, at various levels of affordability, to accommodate the needs of the residents of Winter Springs. Objective 1.1: Housing Supply. Assist the private sector to provide a sufficient number of appropriate housing units through the end of the planning period. Policy 1.1.1: Include adequate amounts of land for housing on the Future Land Use Map to accommodate the City's projected population. Policy 1.1.2: Ensure, through the Concurrency Management System, that necessary infrastructure capacity is in place for new dwelling units, population, and nonresidential development. Policy 1.1.3: Revise ordinances, codes, regulations, and the permitting process to eliminate excessive requirements and to encourage private sector participation in meeting housing needs. Policy 1.1.4: Encourage the development /redevelopment of property that will integrate diverse choices of housing. • Policy 1.1.5: Continue to assist developers of residential dwelling units by providing technical and administrative support regarding permitting and regulations to maintain a housing production capacity level sufficient to meet the demand. Technical assistance includes, but is not limited to, assistance meeting the development review requirements of the City and other regulatory agencies; assistance with the City's permitting process; referral to appropriate agencies for information and assistance in meeting infrastructure standards and requirements imposed by the City; and provision of data regarding housing needs and conditions. Policy 1.1.6: Continue to allow mobile homes in certain residential zoning districts where adequate public facilities and services are available. Mobile home parks and co -ops should be located adjacent to areas with a comparable density of development or near small -scale convenience or neighborhood commercial activity, in areas accessible to arterial and collector roads; and they should be located within reasonable proximity to community facilities. Policy 1.1.7: Continue to allow modular homes in residentially zoned areas, provided that such housing is compatible with surrounding development and meets applicable building code regulations. Policy 1.1.8: Limit the development of housing with a density greater than 18 dwelling units per acre (dua), to the Town Center and the U.S. 17 -92 • III- 1 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT Community Redevelopment Area (C.R.A.) Corridor. Development of higher density housing must take reasonable and appropriate steps to minimize or eliminate adverse impacts to adjacent established residential neighborhoods through site layout, orientation of buildings, and a transition of densities. (Cross Reference: See Future Land Use Element, Policy 1.4.2) Policy 1.1.9: Higher density housing developments (9.1 dua and higher) shall be required to take reasonable and appropriate steps to ensure adequate property management techniques to ensure a safe and livable development at all times. Policy 1.1.10: Amend the City's land development regulations to include criteria allowing multi - family housing in commercially zoned areas contingent on the developer preserving greenspace either onsite or elsewhere in the City. Policy 1.1.11: Utilize Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles in order to increase the safety of housing developments. CPTED is a branch of situational crime prevention, which has as its basic premise that the physical environment can be changed or managed to produce behavioral effects that will reduce the incidence and fear of crime, thereby improving the quality of life, and enhancing profitability for business. Policy 1.1.12: Continue providing or requiring the provision by developers of • adequate supporting infrastructure, i.e. paved streets, sanitary sewer, drainage, potable water, etc., throughout the City to enhance and complement the housing stock. Policy 1.1.13: Cooperate with private and nonprofit participants involved in the housing production process through the following activities: • Investigate partnerships, if necessary, with private and nonprofit sector housing providers. Such investigation shall include a professional market analysis, cost benefit analysis, impact of the partnership on the private sector housing supply, and cost to taxpayers. Such partnership may include, but is not limited to, impact fee subsidies density bonuses, and workforce housing credits. • Provide technical assistance, legislative updates, and pertinent housing construction information, and availability of housing construction incentives to the Seminole County building and contracting community. Policy 1.1.14: Maintain a database of building permit activity organized to maintain a current inventory of new housing units by type and tenure characteristics. 4110 III - 2 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT Policy 1.1.15: Support the desired commercial activity and urban character desired for the Town Center by encouraging high density residential development up to thirty -six (36) units per acre, consistent with the City's economic development goals and Town Center Master Plan. (Cross Reference: Future Land Use Element, Policy 2.2.6) Objective 1.2: Relocation. The City shall coordinate with the appropriate agencies to offer relocation assistance to City residents who are displaced by Federal, State, or local government programs and projects. The displacing agency shall be responsible for providing assistance, which includes, but is not limited to, financial means and methods. Policy 1.2.1: When residents are displaced by City actions, through public development or redevelopment, attempt to ensure the residents are able to relocate to standard, affordable housing. Policy 1.2.2: Require that zoning or structure use changes be evaluated as to their impact on the surrounding area. Policy 1.2.3: Coordinate with appropriate agencies to prepare plans of action regarding relocation of residents, before programs are enacted that will create displaced households. Such plans shall include, but are not limited to, the following: • Timing of the relocation, • Assessment of the need for the program which will displace • households, • Costs associated with the displacement of such households, and • Assessment of the household's needs and the impact of the relocation on the household, including: o Location and the effect of a new neighborhood location on the household's distance to job, schools, and social activities, and o Adequacy of public transit, if applicable, to serve the displaced household. Objective 1.3: Very -Low, Low and Moderate - Income Households. The City shall encourage and attempt to assist the private sector in the provision of safe, clean and affordable housing for special needs populations of the City, including the very low, low and moderate - income households. Policy 1.3.1: Review and revise City land development regulations to remove undue constraints on the development of very -low, low and moderate - income housing projects, where such constraints are not supported by a valid concern for the health, safety, or welfare of the community. Policy 1.3.2: Examine the need by 2012 to amend the zoning ordinance to permit density increases for the development of very -low, low and moderate- • III - 3 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT income housing. Any such amendments will establish conditions under which such increases may be permitted. These conditions may include but are not limited to: differences in density compared to adjoining properties, adequacy of infrastructure, buffers, project size, and percent of any development devoted to very -low, low and moderate - income housing. Policy 1.3.3: Examine the need by 2012 to establish an Affordable Housing Trust Fund to assist very low and low- income families in the provision and maintenance of owner- occupied or locally managed rental housing. Policy 1.3.4: Explore the need for a program of density /development bonuses in return for developer contributions to affordable housing. Policy 1.3.5: Evaluate all infrastructure charges and fees to determine whether adjustments can be made for very -low, low and moderate- income housing projects. In addition, consideration should be given to providing funds to offset fees in situations where they cannot be reduced. The City should also encourage the County to assist in this effort as the provision of housing needs benefits the larger area as well as the City itself. Policy 1.3.6: Promote the refurbishment of existing housing structures by providing incentives and /or credits to homeowners for "sweat equity" rehabilitation within neighborhoods in need, by defining the criteria for • such incentives and /or credits in the City's Code of Ordinances. Policy 1.3.7: Promote mixed use developments, which include provisions for a wide variety of housing types and prices, in large tract developments, except within the Greeneway Interchange District. Policy 1.3.8: Continue allowing a wide range of housing types, such as cluster homes, single - family attached and zero lot line homes, through the Code of Ordinances. Policy 1.3.9: Encourage developers to address the need for workforce housing where appropriate, by including workforce housing units in their developments. Additionally, encourage developers of single family detached units, where appropriate, to include residential units with accessory dwelling units (such as garage apartments). (Cross Reference: See Future Land Use Element, Policy 2.2.7) Policy 1.3.10: Efficiently plan and operate utility systems to provide for cost effective service operations. Policy 1.3.11: Investigate means and methods for subsidization of impact fees to development that provide housing for low and moderate - income families. Include criteria and administrative rules for such subsidies in the City's land development regulations. Policy 1.3.12: Coordinate the provision of affordable housing with other agencies and municipalities in the area. 110 III -4 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT Policy 1.3.13: Amend the City Code to address the following issues in the provision of affordable housing: • Discourage the concentration of affordable housing units. • Encourage the provision of compatible, integrated affordable housing within the older neighborhoods through redevelopment of existing units and inclusion of compatible accessory dwelling units. • Establish a maximum size for new stand -alone housing developments. • Require a strong, local management company for rental developments. Policy 1.3.14: Continue to coordinate with Seminole County and review the research and guidelines developed under the Seminole County Workforce program to ensure coordination with this regional approach to address workforce housing needs. Policy 1.3.1 5: Periodically review affordable housing statistics and amend this element when warranted. Policy 1.3.16: Work with nonprofit groups and community organizations to provide for education on affordable housing topics such as available grant • programs, rehabilitation, and maintenance to further engage very -low, low and moderate - income homeowners in the entire process from purchase and rehabilitation to maintenance, upkeep, and care of housing. Objective 1 .4: Special Needs Households. The City shall ensure that adequate sites are available for special needs populations, such as the elderly and disabled. Policy 1.4.1: Maintain standards for the location of community residential homes and special needs housing, including group homes, in accordance with applicable law. Such standards shall ensure compatibility and consistency with surrounding land uses. Policy 1.4.2: Utilize the development review process to review any proposed projects or City Code amendments that impact housing for special need populations. Policy 1.4.3: Continue to support organizations that assist elderly and handicapped citizens in finding decent, accessible, and affordable housing. Such support may include technical assistance and alternative design standards and code requirements. Policy 1.4.4: Continue to ensure compliance with Federal and State laws on accessibility. • III -5 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT Policy 1.4.5: Address problems of housing for lower income elderly residents and other households with special housing needs, by allowing placement of retirement communities and elderly care facilities in areas of residential character as long as they are designed in a manner that is compatible with the character of the neighborhood and are consistent with the zoning code standards for the area as well as any applicable overlay districts. Policy 1.4.6: Establish strict design compatibility guidelines to allow accessory dwelling units as a conditional use in single family zoning districts. (Cross Reference: See Housing Element, Policy 2.4.7 and Future Land Use Element, Policy 1.1.6) Policy 1.4.7: Work with programs that address elderly housing policies to educate private and nonprofit developers and encourage implementation of "Communities for a Lifetime" standards and universal design principles. Policy 1.4.8: Explore attracting additional assisted living facilities (ALF) including studying potential locations, size requirements, market demand and timing, as well as potential partnerships and funding sources. Investigate the Elderly Housing Community Loan program, which provides loans of up to $750,000 to developers making substantial improvements to elderly housing. Policy 1.4.9: Maintain a working relationship with the State of Florida Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA), Seminole County Health agencies, Sand organizations with an interest in the housing of disadvantaged populations, including consideration of subsidy programs offered by these agencies. Policy 1.4.10: Support programs that address elderly housing policies through the area Councils on Aging, and State and Federal efforts. Such support may include providing education to seniors on senior housing and other issues such as available medical, health, and community resources. Policy 1.4.11: Identify additional programs, groups or other opportunities to link with nonprofit groups and community organizations with the purpose of providing for education to seniors, not only on senior housing, but also on issues such as medical, health, and community resources. Objective 1.5: Energy Efficiency and Sustainability. The City shall support sustainability and energy conservation in new housing development and redevelopment. Policy 1.5.1: New construction, structure rehabilitation, and future developments shall be encouraged to implement Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) principles established by the US Green Building Council (USGBC). Policy 1.5.2: Develop a scale of incentives for the different levels of LEED Certification; i.e. a LEED Platinum rated project should receive a • III - 6 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT greater incentive than one rated as LEED Silver. Consider incentives for buildings /developments that are determined to be LEED compliant. Policy 1.5.3: Encourage the use of specific building options and elements available to meet the City's energy performance goals such as: • Solar water heating; • Energy- efficient appliances such as "Energy Star "; • Energy- efficient windows, doors and skylights; • Low solar- absorption roofs, also known as "cool roofs "; • Enhanced ceiling and wall insulation; • Reduced -leak duct systems; • Programmable thermostats; and • Energy- efficient lighting systems. Policy 1.5.4: Encourage the use of cost - effective energy- efficient technologies. Facilitate and promote the use of cost - effective energy conservation, energy- demand management and renewable energy technologies in buildings and encourage energy performance which complies with the Florida Energy Efficient Code for Building Construction. • Policy 1.5.5: Identify specific building and landscaping options and elements available to meet the City's storm water management performance goals such as: (Cross Reference: See Infrastructure Element, Policy 5.2.3; and Conservation Element, Policy 1.2.9) • Green roofs; • Bio- swales; • Permeable or porous pavers; • Use of cisterns and rain barrels; • Native species landscaping. Policy 1.5.6: Runoff control shall be mandated for all construction sites to mitigate erosion and sediment or chemical discharges from construction activities. GOAL 2: PRESERVATION. Encourage the preservation of decent, safe and sanitary housing for the present and future residents of the City. Objective 2.1: Housing Units. The City shall continue to assist in extending the life of the existing housing stock, to stabilize neighborhoods and create community pride. • III -7 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT Policy 2.1.1: Continue applying the City's unsafe building abatement policy to reduce the amount of substandard housing and preserve the available housing stock. Policy 2.1.2: Encourage very -low and low- income residents to apply for housing rehabilitation assistance individually or through the programs managed by the County. Policy 2.1.3: Rehabilitation of existing buildings shall be in conformity with the Florida Building Code. Policy 2.1.4: Maintain a database which identifies residential units that may be in need of rehabilitation or demolition. Policy 2.1.5: The Code Enforcement division will coordinate with the building division to update the housing conditions database and conduct the necessary code enforcement inspections to keep the number of substandard and deteriorated units to a minimum. Policy 2.1.6: Continue enforcing the International Property Management Code to address substandard and deteriorated housing conditions. Policy 2.1.7: Continue to apply for housing rehabilitation grant funds and subsidy programs such as: • Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds administered by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban • Development. • Florida Neighborhood Housing Services grant administered by the Florida Department of Community Affairs. (Section 420.429, F.S.). • Florida Small Cities CDBG Program Funds administered by the Florida Department of Community Affairs (Section 290.0401- 290.049. F.S.). Policy 2.1.8: Condemn and require demolition by the City's duly adopted procedure, those units that are determined by the City as unsuitable for rehabilitation. The City will adopt from time to time, certain property maintenance codes including, but not limited to the International Property Management Code, which delineates the procedures for condemnation and demolition of unsuitable units. Objective 2.2: Neighborhoods. The City shall promote housing opportunities for new households in already established neighborhoods and insure the stabilization of all neighborhoods through the following policies, when applicable. Policy 2.2.1: Identify neighborhoods that are in need of rehabilitation or are experiencing instability based on any and all of, but not limited to, the following criteria: III 111 - CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT • Proliferation of crime, • A large percentage of substandard housing units, • Fragmentation of land uses, and • Poor or deteriorating infrastructure, including water, sewer, and drainage systems and inadequate traffic and pedestrian systems. Policy 2.2.2: Develop neighborhood plans, and implement programs, which strive to reduce or eliminate destabilizing neighborhood conditions, and include in such plans and programs activities which include, but are not limited to, greater levels of code enforcement, implementing neighborhood watch programs, "Safe Neighborhoods" programs, and Community Development Block Grant programs. Policy 2.2.3: Provide for a high level of resident and owner participation in any plan or program implemented for the purpose of improving and /or stabilizing neighborhoods. Policy 2.2.4: Investigate funding sources, for these plans and programs, which may include but are not limited to, special taxing districts, "Safe Neighborhoods Act" funding, and Community Development Block Grant Funding. Policy 2.2.5: Promote and support home ownership within older neighborhoods by • providing incentives and /or credits to home owners for "sweat equity" rehabilitation within targeted neighborhoods. Policy 2.2.6: Prohibit the expansion of noncompatible uses within residential neighborhoods. Policy 2.2.7: Require adequate buffering and screening of residential neighborhoods from incompatible uses, which could adversely impact existing neighborhoods. Landscape buffering and transitional uses shall be utilized to further this policy. Policy 2.2.8: Continue to require the implementation of the Town Center Code so that the concept of 'eyes on the street' is maintained to ensure safe, pedestrian friendly streets. Policy 2.2.9: Identify infrastructure deficits in existing neighborhoods and implementation strategies to mitigate them through partnerships, grant funding, or as part of capital budgeting. Policy 2.2.10: Require an interconnected network of sidewalks in new residential developments to support walking and neighborhood friendliness. Policy 2.2.11: Encourage property upgrades which enhance neighborhoods. (Cross Reference: See Future Land Use Element, Policy 1.5.7) • III - 9 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT Objective 2.3: Historic Preservation. As the housing stock begins to age, the City shall develop a process of identifying potential historic properties. Policy 2.3.1: Identify buildings that have the potential to be historic or significant structures. Policy 2.3.2: Establish standards for rehabilitation of historically significant structures. Objective 2.4: In fill. The City shall promote infill development by supporting alternative development standards consistent with the existing zoning standards, where necessary and feasible. Policy 2.4.1: Work to identify acceptable locations, priorities, and implementation strategies for potential infill development and redevelopment. Opportunities for residential, commercial, and mixed use shall be identified and categorized. The City will encourage mixed use and higher density and intensity development in priority infill development and redevelopment areas identified through these efforts. (Cross Reference: See Future Land Use Element, Policy 1.4.8) Policy 2.4.2: Maintain a vacant residential parcel map and database which includes location information, acreage, physical characteristics, utilities, zoning and ownership data. The vacant residential parcel map will be enhanced to identify infill and redevelopment opportunities. Policy 2.4.3: Evaluate barriers to redevelopment and infill and create standards • that will guide and support a strategic approach to redevelopment planning that will also help meet the projected shortfall in housing units. Policy 2.4.4: Prioritize the creation of redevelopment and small area plans identified through the strategic review of infill development and redevelopment opportunities. Policy 2.4.5: Make available the vacant land database and map to interested developers and /or builders. Policy 2.4.6: Consider a system of impact fee credits or other incentives to be applied, when appropriate for infill development, recognizing that infill development makes use of existing infrastructure and combats urban sprawl. Policy 2.4.7: Establish design compatibility guidelines to allow accessory dwelling units as a conditional use in residential districts to support development or redevelopment that integrates diverse choices of housing. (Cross Reference: See Housing Element, Policy 1.4.6 and Future Land Use Element, Policy 1.1.6) Policy 2.4.8: Implement neighborhood design standards and review criteria that encourage infill compatibility while allowing for increased density and /or mixed use. • I11 - 10 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT Policy 2.4.9: Support the conversion of older residential homes fronting onto arterial roadways to live -work or commercial use with proper rehabilitation. (Cross Reference: See Future Land Use Element, Policy 1.5.4) • • III - 1 1 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT • B. INTRODUCTION Winter Springs is committed to Smart Growth, which can be defined as, "growth that is economically sound, environmentally friendly, and supportive of community livability — growth that enhances the community's quality of life ". Housing is an important element in the analysis of present and future characteristics of a community. The type, structure, and condition of an area's housing stock influence the community's quality of life. Neighborhoods play an important part in determining the vitality, stability, and way of life of the residents within a community. A stable community offers a variety of housing units that appeal to a wide range of age groups, income levels, and family sizes. A proper mix of different housing types lends itself to accommodating different life styles and helps to encourage the development of a well - balanced community. Without a heterogeneous population, a community is limited in the most efficient allocation of economic resources necessary to sustain a valuable, economically vibrant community. Housing also impacts the economic strength of a community and provides a basis for directing the manner and type of economic development within an area. Since housing helps determine the economic strength of a community, it should be the objective of the City to protect existing housing values and develop policies that result in the appreciation of existing neighborhoods. In addition, the objective of new development should be to contribute to favorable quality of life conditions within the community, as well as reduce housing deficiencies that presently exist. 1. Purpose of the Element The purpose of the Housing Element is to: III Identify present conditions and types of housing stock within the community. • Analyze housing trends and determine the deficiencies and causes of those trends, which may negatively affect the community in the future. • Develop appropriate plans, programs, and policies to meet the objective of providing adequate and safe housing for the residents of the community. The Housing Element analyzes the present condition of housing within Winter Springs by examining the characteristics and conditions of the current housing stock, as well as the characteristics of the households in the City. An overview of current low to moderate - income housing is presented, as well as an inventory of group homes and institutional housing. Based on population projections and trend indicators of housing growth, the demand and supply of housing is discussed, including a determination of the need for replacement of existing substandard housing. The demographic characteristics of the present and projected City residents are useful in determining the future demand for housing types and the location of these units. The private sector normally takes care of the housing supply, but an analysis of projected demand is presented. Recommendations are made to respond to the failures of the private sector to meet the housing needs for all of the community. Because of the size of the City, and its suburban location relative to the rapidly growing Orlando urban area, the housing market has predominantly been demand based. This • III - 1 2 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT • suggests that developers have not viewed Winter Springs as an area for speculative development. Demand based development means that units are not constructed for an assumed or speculative market that leads to demographic conditions created by development. The demographic and economic forces, which naturally form a community, have been the predominant influence on new development in the Winter Springs area. A shift toward denser housing is now occurring in certain areas of the City, particularly in the Town Center; this trend toward denser housing may also assist the City in meeting its workforce housing needs. The purpose of this Element is to provide an inventory of existing housing; to forecast trends of the housing market; to locate possible deficiencies within the private sector and suggest ways to aid the private sector in eliminating those deficiencies; and to reinforce the policies and recommendations of the previous Comprehensive Plan that are still appropriate. Of prime importance in this area is the continuation of zoning and building policies that exist to promote public safety and community harmony. At the same time, these policies provide support for new development of higher quality that meets the needs and goals of the community. It is not the purpose of this Plan to dictate control over natural nonspeculative market forces that exist in the private sector. In fact, tampering with the market would be counterproductive considering the efficiency of the private sector in meeting housing demand in the past. 2. Growth Trends • Winter Springs is predominately a residential community of 34,390 persons in 2008. The original Village of North Orlando consisted of standard suburban homes on quarter -acre or larger Tots centered around the western section of S.R. 434. The Village served as a bedroom community to the City of Orlando. Through the early to mid 1960's, the City also functioned as a small residential community to the Sanford Naval Air Station, but the homes that were occupied by military families were abandoned by 1968. In 1970, the City's population was only 1,161 persons and concentrated on the western side of town. In 1972, the name was changed to Winter Springs to avoid the confusion associated with the geographic location reference implied by the original name. The name Winter Springs was decided upon, as it was the name of the significant new Planned Unit Development (PUD), now known as Tuscawilla. The name of the PUD was adapted from the name of the main access road known as Tuscawilla Road. By 1980, the new Tuscawilla PUD began attracting a great number of residents to the eastern half of the City. The majority of the City's growth occurred between 1970 and 1980 as it increased by nine -fold from 1,161 residents to 10,475 residents. Between 1980 and 1990, the population increased by 1 1,676 residents, slightly more than double. Between 1990 and 2000, population growth continued to be robust, but began to slow, increasing by 39% or 8,709 residents over this time period, an average annual growth rate of 3.9 %. Table 111- 1 a shows population figures for the City and the County for the last 47 years, and Table III-1b also includes population projections through 2030. Growth for Winter Springs from 2000 to 2010 was anticipated to occur at a slower rate than from 1990 to 2000, even • III - 13 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT • prior to the recent decline in housing values and sales. The City's population actually fell slightly from 2007 to 2008. Table 111 - 1 a: Population 3� H i ,� � , �M Ga # a i a µ2GG`w r fi � W ` . I P "+�"3 "� ��q9q H {! k � VII! rigq t s* x , : d tlfi � R� i : 0 w 4 o. m A; N }w y I !a a �9 k,f 'PVm,'4n 1 I 1"' r �a xi , t r`m i �dW 'te �' K Ig '� '74 AAi i t t aya` i a 4 I L ,1 y ' � �'"S�G k hWf -0 0 # t d r�y,y.� 4 1� % 4'� ° : ^dw a u 1 . � �r' Zw��r�r; � ��alh�� 4 S y r t � d `F, � a �^�� ; YeaF{ �� 1 I i"�+� , ,� i �" ib t x �' �m iy�I ,i a ■', A ,i t• a o a -i� d a. ,l ', prang r .,a,G 4 nge g , a 9 - 9 - ty Chi`anga Chang�ei linty 1960 _ 609 -- 54 947 -- -- 1.1 1965 885 276 45.3 73,000 18,053 32.9 1.2 1970 1,161 276 31.2 83,692 10,692 14.6 1.4 1975 3,467 _ 2,306 198.6 135,600 51,908 62.0 2.6 1980 10,475 7,008 202.1 179,752 44,152 32_6 5.8 1985 15,315 _ 4,840 46.0 226,304 46,552 25.9 6.8 1990 22,151 6,836 44.6 287,521 61,217 27.1 7.7 1995 25,673 3,522 15.9 324,100 36,579 12.7 7.9 2000 30,860 5,187 19.5 365,199 41,099 12.7 8.5 2005 33, 321 _ 2,461 8.0 411,744 46,545 12.7 8.1 2006 33,971 650 2.0 420,667 8,923 2.2 8.1 III 2007 34,433 462 1.4 425,698 _ 5,031 1.2 8.1 2008 34,390 -43 -0.1 1960 -1970 552 90.6 28,745 52.3 1970 -1980 9,314 802.2 96,060 114.8 1980 -1990 _ 11,676 111.5 107,769 60.0 1990 -2000 8,709 39.3 77,675 27.0 2000 -2007 3,573 11.6 60,499 16.6 Total Change 1960-2007 33,824 5,54.0 370,751 674.7 Average* Annual Change 719.7 18.2 7,888.3 14.4 *Average as applied here, means the arithmetic mean Source: Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing, September 2006, U.S. Bureau of the Census 2000; University of Florida, Bureau of Economic and Business Research; Florida Office of Economic and Demographic Research, City of Winter Springs • III - 14 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT Table 111 - 1 b: Population Forecasts A rr{�; i a ay 11 w x f'A'' J,? �i '" rM t ,'I ; ' �vr° '"Mi,F $77 +°" "' 4�;.r i�°''r.,v�riarriwr r $ $ y5 (��. 5 b 4� 'f S`t J9 ,�.�,pSc ,p �M� M�.- �,' Mr S hY r� v ,. � fnd�l'� 1,. t l ''r 5'' �t'4 �y &J x e v" �'" ,% � s r a � " o� q 7 a ,� i y ,1 .h '.S' N " ' n,ar.: i Y, ' , , 4r"� � � u � m � � din r�avr�'°� � �t � � r� w 5��q k � D''' � u x @£� i e r a , ' � y$ . � ' ,� 1 t. I ' 4 4 '4 :,.-J' i ' 1 Y W a 1 . f e aw'-4 a r ,,, r 1. v h P ''''''''71''''''Z '' I �� °A + :�� ". e + '�r ,p + v� ' iI -- A `" �'� } /!s r , I 4 ft l: y ,�`7va R 9v�7e 4� eV �C .'�. e 'E ,, . a. , fi O rd 'wr'l Y nvr� ,A % d � d , - 0 2010 36,929 35,857 2015 40,135 38,363 2020 43,114 40,319 2025 45,633 42,376 2030 47,921 44,538 Source: Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing, City of Winter Springs; Sievers & Associates Seminole County experienced a significant increase in population between 1970 and 1990 The U.S. Census Bureau indicated a population of 365,199 for the year 2000. Population growth in Winter Springs consistently exceeded growth trends in the County from 1960 through 2000 and the population of the City grew from 1.1% to 8.5% as a proportion of the County population. In particular, between 1975 and 1980, the City experienced a 202% increase in population, while the County only experienced a 33% growth during the same time period. As this indicates, while Seminole County is experiencing growth, some parts of the County are growing faster than other. For example, Oviedo's population while still less than that of Winter Springs has been • growing more quickly in recent years and is anticipated to exceed the Winter Springs population by sometime after 2010. Population growth has also been substantial in Sanford, as well as in Lake Mary, although Lake Mary's total population is still less than half of the Winter Springs population. Population growth has been nearly flat in Altamonte Springs, Casselberry and Longwood since 2000. Neighboring cities, Lake Jesup, and unincorporated areas consisting of developed areas and conservation lands encircle the City. The remaining developable acreage in the City is somewhat limited, with the Town Center and the Greeneway Interchange District providing the largest future development areas. Nearly 30 enclave areas have also been identified, but these total Tess than 400 acres. The City analyzed build -out population based on these constraints and prepared population projections. Based on the evaluation of population trends and build -out conditions, geometric extrapolation projections were selected for the overall updated Comprehensive Plan population projections. The population projections used in this Comprehensive Plan anticipate a population of 35,857 for the year 2010, 40,319 for 2020, and 44,538 for 2030. These figures are lower than corresponding figures from the Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing (36,929, 43,114, and 47,921, respectively). While the City finds the Shimberg population projections to be higher than anticipated and exceeding the projected build - out population, for the purposes of the Housing Element and projection of housing needs, the Shimberg data are used as they provide very detailed information that would otherwise not be available. The Shimberg data is thus useful in assessing the detailed • III - 15 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT distributions across categories (e.g. age, income), while the total figures are considered in Tight of the City's projected build -out and population projections. The following sections will analyze how this tremendous growth has impacted the provision of housing, and what can be expected through 2030. C. HOUSING INVENTORY This section deals with the characteristics and conditions of the existing housing stock in the City, the availability of subsidized housing developments, the protection of significant housing, and housing construction activity. The primary sources of statistical information used in the updating process were the Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing and the 2000 Census. 1. Existing Housing Characteristics a. Age of Housing Stock The City of Winter Springs has been experiencing a significant amount of new housing construction since the seventies. The trend in new housing construction between 1980 and 1990 was, on average, 520 units per year. Housing unit construction averaged approximately 392 units per year between 1990 and 2000. Figures from this decade show that the City is now seeing somewhat less than 200 units per year. New housing (units built between 1980 and March 2000) make up approximately seventy -one (71) percent of the City's total housing stock in the 2000 Census. At the other end of the spectrum, units built prior to 1960 constituted only one (1) percent of the existing housing stock, a reflection of the • fact that the City incorporated in 1959. Table 111-2 shows the age of housing units in the City and the County. The condition of the older housing stock is generally standard. Although there has not been a formal housing conditions survey conducted for the City, less than one (1) percent of units in the City meet the general definitions of substandard or deteriorated. b. Dwelling Units by Type Table 111-3 shows that, in 2000, there were approximately 12,296 dwelling units in the City of Winter Springs. This total and the other housing figures in this table were derived from the Census Summary File 3 (SF3) file sample, Tong -form data and differ slightly from the Summary File 1 (SF1) 100 - Percent Data, which shows a total of 12,306 dwelling units in the City in 2000 as reflected in Table III -4a. More than seventy four (74) percent of the housing units as shown in Table 11-3 were single - family detached homes, nearly six (6) percent were single family attached, half of one (1/2) percent were duplexes, fourteen (14) percent were multifamily units, and four (4) percent were mobile homes. Since 2000, the City has seen a significant increase in the development of single family attached units in the Town Center City data indicates that single - family attached homes make up 10 percent of the City's housing stock in 2005. 11111 111 - 16 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT • Table III - 2: Age of Housing Stock ',�"w9 i'"� ,�wt �yGb i �A#+C' C ��J 4h ke ti '�'� �" �^a ri � +.f Vi T 1 9, 1 .PPli; r M w 0.a � .V, TM tl Rfi a " � .. ;24,i 1999 to March 2000 622 5.06 4,704 3.20 1995- 1998 1,497 12.20 13,818 9.40 1990- 1994 1,752 14.27 19,258 13.10 1980 -1989 4,612 37.55 48,832 33.20 1970 -79 3,251 26.47 36,071 24.50 1960 -69 415 3.39 12,865 8.70 1950 -59 91 0.95 7,755 5.27 1940 -49 27 0.07 1,805 1.23 1939 and Earlier 29 0.02 2,519 1.70 Total Units Year 2000 12,296 100 147,079 100 NOTE: See Table III -9 for recent construction activity. *The data available for these census characteristics come from the Census Summary File 3 (SF3) file. The SF3 file is derived from a sample of households reporting on long forms and is weighted to reflect the entire population. Due to this process there are minor differences in estimates (in this case total housing units) from the Summary File 1 (SF1) 100- Percent Data. Source: SF3, H34, 2000 Census, U.S. Census Bureau • Table III - 3: Housing Units by Type, 2000 & 1990 f a i t r 'J d ti r i l " �a l"�iw tx"J ibev :R1, ;; r r � a p � i� ..�,{ { B II JJe p 4) � 7 z w .� y a � L��n{ per+ f Ot Tiii ig ° �w itrix� „ 0.00, CI4��'IsI` of ^ 4o M F m N r J N I4 1X ak is ' ' u P mo . w'u4 Yid � H 4 q��. nN Y'flrt" 14 v , h a n r m �6 8 104,' �'+� ai 6 �� I �� ,y Y el 8 „, ( � 8g t j iC li aEik . A dN � � „U "�i h 1 N '. �' toot 14.1 ' +yYl 'i «6 tl61 NIM�' e. �ari a 3u i' 4'Y r 1 'WH",J i.,n- o n ui� it � �U'n, � I � ld I" � to or Single Family Det. 9,120 74.17 95,809 65.10 6,179 70.98 74,389 63.13 Single Family Att. 728 5.92 8,557 5.80 666 7.65 8,063 6.84 Duplex 64 0.52 2,688 1.80 27 0.31 2,196 1.86 Multi - Family 1,821 14.81 34,779 23.65 1,220 14.01 27,787 23.58 Mobile Homes and 563 4.58 5,246 3.40 614 7.05 5,410 4.59 Other Total 12,296 100.00 147,079 100.00 8,706 100.0 117,845 100.0 Note: Single Family Detached includes "Other "; Single Family Attached includes townhomes; Condominiums are included in Multi - Family; Mobile Homes and Other includes boats, RVs and vans. Source: SF3, 2000 U.S. Census Bureau; 1990 U.S. Census Bureau *The data presented come from the Census Summary File 3 (SF3) file sample, Tong -form data and total housing units differ slightly from the Summary File 1 (SF1) 100- Percent Data. • III - 17 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT • c. Dwelling Units by Tenure According to the 2000 Census, approximately ninety -six (96) percent of the housing units in Winter Springs were occupied (see Table III -4a). Of the City's 11,774 occupied housing units, 9,458 units or eighty (80) percent were owner - occupied; and 2,316 units, or twenty (20) percent were renter - occupied. By comparison, sixty -nine (69) percent of all occupied housing units in the County were owner - occupied. The number of rental units increased over 400% between 1980 and 1990. The increase during the nineties, however, was not as significant (21 %). Estimates of occupied units for 2005 prepared by the Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing show a very slight increase but no proportional difference from the 2000 Census between owner and renter occupied units. At the time of the 2000 U.S. Census, about four (4) percent of the City and five (5) percent of the County housing units were found to be vacant. This figure compared favorably with that of the State, where almost thirteen (13) percent of the housing units were vacant. There were 532 vacant units in the City of Winter Springs in 2000. Of those vacant units, twenty two (22) percent were for sale, forty three (43) percent for rent, and over fifteen (15) percent were seasonal units. The vacancy rate declined in the City from 6.1 % in 1990 to 4.3% in 2000. There were no migrant worker units within the City of Winter Springs, and only four (4) units in the County. As foreclosures have been increasing in recent years across the country, Florida • has consistently been among the top five states with the highest foreclosure rates. This is likely to have increased the vacancy rate in the City since the 2000 Census. However, to what degree the vacancy rate has been affected is unclear as estimates by the Metro Orlando Economic Development Commission projected a doubling of the vacancy rate to 9.2 percent for the City in 2006, while the 2005- 2007 American Community Survey by the U.S. Census Bureau indicates a decrease to a vacancy rate of 3.6 percent for the City. Economic trends in 2007 and 2008 are likely to have increased the Census estimated figure somewhat. • III - 18 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT • Table III - 4a: Housing Units by Tenure - r r: Sda'l+'�'9Y T} Swti �,' b 4" D� 93 � rR sy r n � .r �' 'J+tr' . 0 , �. d ke ""w. I , a C " Y9 i y 1 u. su '0,1§4 0 k ,( � F ° � i � JJ a k l -r ti . a d Y 41r!) - i 41 s q �' �a h.� ��'. s Cri i&4 r'PX Miry �J uJ! �.r 1 ' ,'F� ECl f ,.d 4 k � S..thki. C9�,.+o 12. a �a �'' �a. ' �.'. t '" m i "p d�, �.�,.� �. � r *.d i� i . � a J i�:g. "w � '�'t;�,f N ''� �' I � J� +7�6 i �'k 1��,y IJ� � ' i �, j c ::rs { '' � � M '� a° i'� ilid'a ll��'i I' 7 " , k r��'e %PCd� 11 � 4/1 p ;ll tl'" �� a;d " n1E® r° ..., 1,111"!' Y I�+I ea l I',pa 9 ,Ti �. � p ' � L' r 1 a ¢N 1: '"'� P .."" 1 a u � w � 1 � �^ " � 'u9'. � o d �w fi 1 l b I J 4 11 ° � , r 'm^t I I r 1. d 9 �. tC a" ie 't 11 w M 4C #i hv0� D flyi�I��Vn ry�, � 9 ; I� N.� u ti �' r . w aa �'t . + . ° +' �w�' l�r� aaw' l a a�.,llRun w ".Ilrfl. 4 Total Occupied Units 12,638 100 159,502 100 11,774 95.68 139,572 94.9 Total Owner Occupied Units 10,158 80.38 110,946 10,946 69.5 9,458 80.33 96,949 69.46 Total Renter Occupied Units 2,480 19.62 48,556 30.44 2,316 19.67 42,623 30.54 Total Vacant Units 532 4.32 7,507 5.10 Vacant - For Rent 230 43.23 2,819 37.55 Vacant - For Sale Only 119 22.37 1,319 17.57 Rented /Sold, Not Occupied 45 8.46 676 9.01 Seasonal, Recreational, 83 15.60 1,174 15.64 • Occ. Use -- - - - For Migrant Workers 0 0 4 0.05 Other Vacant 55 10.34 1,515 20.18 Source: 2000 Census, STF1A, U.S. Census Bureau. 2005 from Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing 2006. Table 111 - 4b: Year Householder Moved into Unit, Owner Occupied Housing -0 X 040 d �N'uw ter Springs 'Year Householder ' o�ed� ' i� �a', ��...��ppp la �� °�� Total: 13,078 100.00 Moved in 2005 or later 2,315 17.70 Moved in 2000 to 2004 5,050 38.60 Moved in 1990 to 1999 3,668 28.00 Moved in 1980 to 1989 1,476 11.30 Moved in 1970 to 1979 468 3.60 Moved in 1969 or earlier 101 0.80 Source: 2005 -2007 American Community Survey, U.S. Census Bureau. • 10 - 19 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT d. Cost of Housing 2000 median gross rent information for the City of Winter Springs and Seminole County is contained in Table III -15 at the end of the Housing Element. Median gross rent for renter - occupied units in the City of Winter Springs was $727 in 2000, an increase of approximately 20 percent from the 1990 gross rent of $609. The 2000 figure was slightly less than the median gross rent in Seminole County ($731) which also increased more sharply from 1990 to 2000. Nearly four (4) percent of the rental units in the City, and eleven (1 1) percent in the County, had rents below $500. Approximately 5.73 percent of rental units in the City had no cash rent in 2000. It is probable that these rentals are occupied by custodians of seasonal units, the elderly renting from relatives or site management for no cash rent. The median contract rent for the City was $631 in 2000 increased from $496 in 1990. This indicates that expenses relating to rentals, above contract rent, were over $100 per month in 2000. This figure would include services and utilities not included in the rental price of the unit, such as electricity and insurance. The 2000 Census shows that the median value of housing units in the census tracts in the western portion of the City continues to be lower than the median value of housing units in the eastern part of the City. This is due to the lower cost of housing in the older portions of the City, as opposed to the country club setting of the Tuscawilla PUD on the east side. • Table III -16 at the end of the Housing Element shows owner- occupied housing units by home value in 2000 for both the City of Winter Springs and Seminole County. Housing values in the City are generally higher than those in the County, with approximately seventy (70) percent of the units in the City valued at $100,000 or more. The housing stock can accommodate different income needs and provide housing for numerous family income groups. The median value of owner - occupied housing in 2000 was $1 89,000, as reported by the U.S. Census, nearly double the 1990 median value of $96,400. In comparison, the median value for owner - occupied housing in Seminole County was $169,200, a smaller increase compared with the City, but still substantially higher than the 1990 value of $91,100 for the County. Less than fifteen (15) percent of owner - occupied housing in Winter Springs was not mortgaged, according to the 2000 Census. Of the 8,545 owner- occupied units calculated by the Census Bureau, 7,297 units had a mortgage at that time. The median owner cost for nonmortgaged units in the City was $333 per month, and $1,144 for mortgaged homes. The median costs in the County were $317 and $1,102, respectively. A detailed breakdown of housing costs in the City and the County is presented in Table III -17 at the end of the Housing Element. e. Cost to Income Ratio The Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) estimates that a family is paying too high a percentage of their income for housing if the cost to income ratio • III - 20 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT • is greater than thirty (30) percent. It is more common in rental housing than in owned housing for a fairly high percentage of families, usually those with very -low to low or moderate income levels, to spend a greater than acceptable share of their income on housing. Households are defined as very low, low, and moderate - income based on thresholds tied to the median income of a county or metropolitan statistical area. These thresholds are 50, 80, and 120 percent of the County's median income, respectively. The 1999 and estimated 2007 median household incomes for the City and Seminole County are shown in Table III -5. Table III - 5: Median Household Income x r „ r a31 r hen +4��'< n r ry � su N rl q9a, > 1 r 1 Milt+ "'r o- a i� i Sr! g ai' � � 1 v �.� - " s� ' 1 � M1d � �' �ary9 �r''�� r y n I fl j itJ � � t �s s' � .r , f a r ,,,i' t '� 4 ii i , MF ,�t1 x � N 4 c , , 4 ,� I g y(' p 4 4 a ��i CI � d,, t 1 a i I ` ��' � ' n d u r �a tsr� : a�� , � t d' � t� 1„ 4.r . fl� � A � � � w� ! i s ., fl � f 1 i ry l ry'p)� �,q�q i u t,� 4�"I^1 t � a , N1 J p pII�' W7�MX.itq� c „i , 4i 1 III Y; . �d J� ,ti ' "Hi: n E ti e,� wa,�. ; J ��,..' �'. �f�l" �M' �1 4��MW�1 il�idf�lnitlxw'1S17NNn�1 '�.�,,, � "i� IY db '...'ii�b,'�'��Gain N� a °�uair 4 ,Ld ��+ .��P �, d " '�1� HpN +t1u'�i� il('1MiI1161WN:,�ill�u�' ax3 „ .u"� Median Household Income in 1999 53,247 49,326 Median Household Income 2007 Estimate 73,174 57,318 Source: Census Bureau, 2000 Census, 2005 -2007 American Community Survey Table III - 6: Cost Burden a », ! aJ Ild ar 7J a, a �Ny+k�P'd 91 '�"v� 3 ��pti l��. ��l�a °�i µG `a x� y+r l4 �ly1�N�4 $��ti�' ��I � i i� q a�p� 1 �1 X 14 a ��gMia!��IMa�a g I k 4i ;y "� lk�Y i� :1J ��4z i �t�,? xr rt s, ;; r +r' m ��:, irx 1t N �i i P 4 " Tf� `�'�,��k l ti rr�n s�� "� ; n h t""'4 '�7 rl lid � ri M i ul �� f� 1 � �I� i i f ,t� d �1f a pw qd u i - �� ~NU ��F� �I �6r ��' d P� h� �,,�� h � +i� �9r U � �d +, rll,, ., - � 20 1 0� Ret t o r C t.t 'tnco �' atiof; �� Iner i t me � �+ ner '� ,. 'Renter III ., Less than 20% 4,495 571 22,877 1 2,616 20 % -24% 1,251 429 6,235 6,902 25 % -29% 946 301 4,137 4,754 30 % -34% 610 246 2,620 3,837 >_35% 1,196 599 8,678 12,365 Not Computed 47 139 482 2,076 Total Cost Burden 30 or More 1,806 845 11,298 16,202 ( (37 %) (29 %) (38 %) 1990 ° +1 n C ° "„..;04,7x,,.... e Ra $, . Ty .1, ,, � ° i M4 ' u G R enter . ,r ' n 3 r en t e I �:; a uM + auGr , w pie had � .M hra N+ inl - ..i er, w.. 4 m,„ yr+ . .r 1 0�,. r thew aa,' Less than 20% 2,353 503 30,504 9,868 20 % -24% 974 336 10,266 6,295 25 % -29% 604 360 6,870 4,662 30 % -34% 448 194 4,422 3,508 >_35% 859 f 473 9,748 10,124 Not Computed 8 31 327 1,022 Total Cost Burden 30% or More 1,307 667 14,170 13,632 (25 %) (35 %) (23 %) (38 %) Source: 1990 and 2000 Census • 111 - 21 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT Cost to income and rent to income ratios for 2000 are presented in Table III -6. Approximately twenty -one (21) percent of the City's home owners and thirty -seven (37) percent of renter households spent more than thirty (30) percent of their income on housing in 2000. These figures are slightly lower than Seminole County where twenty -nine (29) percent of County owners and thirty -eight (38) percent of the renter households were paying more than thirty (30) percent of their incomes on housing. 2. Housing Conditions a. Physical Conditions Based on the fact that most housing units in the City are less than thirty years old, it is evident that there are no major deterioration problems in the City. The older homes that were part of the original town are in most part still occupied. As a result, very few properties have been left unattended or allowed to degrade below standard. The City of Winter Springs has actively been pursuing the rehabilitation of any deteriorating structures in the City. The goals and objectives of this element will require that the City conduct a periodic detailed survey to determine the structural conditions of the City's housing stock. The following terms and definitions shall be used in the survey: Standard is defined as those units that are structurally sound with minimal defects that are easily remedied through normal maintenance. Units that display environmentally questionable conditions, but have no major structural defects are • also considered "standard." Substandard is defined as a unit that has deteriorated, but can be brought up to standard conditions with reasonable rehabilitation Deteriorated is defined as a structure that has deteriorated to where rehabilitation would exceed 50% of replacement value. The City maintains a database of complaints regarding built structures that is able to tract repairs and document information related to the building condition. Also, the 2000 Census provides an indicator of housing that is substandard by measuring certain "quality of housing" indicators such as the lack of complete plumbing, kitchen or heating equipment. Table III -7, which summarizes these statistics for the City and the County, indicates that the majority of housing condition indicators of the City's housing stock compare favorably to those of the County. The City has no knowledge of how units described in the Census (Table III - 7) would be lacking complete kitchens or plumbing fixtures, unless units have been allowed to deteriorate or if garages have been leased for housing. The City enforces the Florida Building Code for rehabilitation of existing buildings and construction of new buildings which requires all units to have complete kitchens and plumbing fixtures prior to receiving a certificate of occupancy. In 2008, the City adopted the International Property Management Code 2006 edition, which delineates the procedures for condemnation and demolition of unsuitable units. Adoption of this document has enabled the City's Code Enforcement division to • III - 22 • • • CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT take action against property owners who are letting their properties deteriorate or who are leasing substandard housing to tenants. Generally, Code Enforcement is made aware of the problem by tenants who file a complaint against their landlord. The 2004 hurricane season impacted many houses in Winter Springs. With the exception of one home with substantial roof problems that remains unrepaired, the hurricane damages resulted in improvement (especially roof replacements) covered by insurance. This is likely to have had an effect on the quality of housing figures from the 2000 Census. Table III - 7: Comparison of Housing Conditions 4 l 715. +attl�G.�S�' I Nrt 01'� a:�l`�a�urR 1 nplWl p ...!d�,1Mlr, } 14q lug'. ILU I � J` YrK �I+Wua r 4n4 y I � 'w1 �M t 9I C �l „ �tp 6 ( , �I'�ft j, f;: k ' kk a7 Yr a I �M�t+ J � f ash% {� 111 1a a . 4 IP' � i t n I e 1 l m 7 � � � +I� iT� �� '� I I N� I w~ a i ti h ja �.g�agy, A p I t ' q a r � � 1 1%'� Id tr a� . '"]11,, 3 �N i1+ m ! ,�r f k1P r S d a rs 1 �4 r'! 1 L � "" ^ A a '! wu2 n ti �� o ~; I� � �� _ R Total Housing Units 12,296 100.0 147,079 100.0 Lacking Complete Plumbing 43 0.35 495 0.34 Lacking Complete Kitchens 21 0.17 467 0.32 No Fuel Used 22 0.18 655 0.45 Overcrowded Occupied Units 217 1.76 4,824 3.28 (1.01 or more persons per room) 1199O�Cen °Isus +� Total Housing Units 8,706 100.0 117,845 100.0 Lacking Complete Plumbing 7 0.08 299 0.25 Lacking Complete Kitchens 15 0.17 417 0.35 No Fuel Used 19 0.22 335 0.28 Overcrowded Occupied Units 141 1.62 3,114 2.64 (1.01 or more persons per room) - a *The data presented come from the Census Summary File 3 (SF3) file sample, long -form data and total housing units differ slightly from the Summary File 1 (SF1) 100- Percent Data. Source: SF3, 2000 Census, 1990 Census. b. Overcrowding Overcrowding is also an indicator of substandard housing. According to the U.S. Bureau of the Census, overcrowding exists if there are more than 1.01 persons per room living in a dwelling unit. In making these computations, a "room" is defined as a living room, dining room, kitchen, bedroom, finished recreation room, or enclosed porch suitable for year -round use. Excluded are bathrooms, open porches, balconies, halls and utility rooms. Table III - shows that 217 dwelling units, or less than two (2) percent of the homes in Winter Springs were considered • 111. 23 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT • to be overcrowded (similar to 1990 overcrowding conditions), compared to 3.29 percent in the County. 3. Government Subsidized Housing The City of Winter Springs has successfully worked in recent years to provide full -scale affordable housing for those residents whose income, health, or family situation does not allow them to take full advantage of traditional private housing. In 2000, the City entered into a partnership arrangement with the Wyman Fields Foundation to acquire and rehabilitate over a seven -year period, 232 apartments /townhouses around the Moss Road area. Phase I consisted of the acquisition of 52 quadro -plex rental units in April 2000 and the rehabilitation of those 52 units for conversion into home ownership within a two -year period. The 52 units located on Rhoden Lane and Kristi Ann Court were completed and sold. However, before additional phases of the project on Lori Ann Lane and Cory Lane could be completed, the foundation became financially insolvent. The City utilized $909,655 of the "Improvement Revenue Refunding Bonds, Series 1999" as start- up funds with the intent that the loan would be paid back to the 306 Revolving Rehabilitation Fund, as the units were sold. The intent was to recover at least 101% of the initial investment. With the sale of these units, the City actually recovered 104% of its investment. Currently there are no plans for future rehabilitation work; however, the 306 Revolving Rehabilitation Fund has a balance of over $1 million available for any improvement project that the City would deem appropriate. Additionally, the City does currently own one unit, obtained as an equity conversion when the foundation became insolvent. 4. Group Homes The Department of Children and Family Services licenses and monitors group homes; foster care homes, nursing homes, and family childcare homes. According to the Seminole County Health Department, there are two licensed group homes, with a third facility pending, and 16 foster care homes in Winter Springs and the nearby vicinity. The Agency for Health Care Administration licenses and monitors assisted living facilities, adult family care homes, and adult day care centers. Although there are no facilities within the city limits of Winter Springs, there are several facilities within proximity, some of which even have a Winter Springs address. These include two Assisted Living Facilities and a Nursing and Rehab Center on Willa Springs drive, as well as small facilities on East Lake Drive and Tuskawilla Road. The Grove Counseling Center, a nonprofit organization, was founded in 1971 by a group of concerned citizens. However, the Center's 40 bed program for male and female youth 13 -17 years old was shut down by the Dept of Juvenile Justice. The Center is now running a voluntary mental health substance abuse program for girls only. The City recognizes the importance of providing group homes, but also needs to address the architectural compatibility of these facilities with adjacent neighborhoods. Group Homes are regulated under Chapter 419, Florida Statutes [Adult Family Care Homes]; Data is compiled by the Agency for Health Care Administration, Department of Elder Affairs and the Agency for Person with Disabilities who track the number and location of licensed community residential homes. Homes of six or fewer residents which otherwise meet the definition of a III - 24 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT community residential home are allowed in single - family or multifamily zoning without approval by the City, provided that the facility is not be located within a radius of 1,000 feet of another existing facility with six or fewer residents. Notification of the City is required of the intent to establish such a facility, as well as upon licensing by the state. 5. Mobile Homes Based on the 2000 U.S. Census, approximately five (4.6) percent of the City's housing stock in 2000 consisted of mobile homes, similar to the share of mobile homes in the County (4.4 %). Table 111 -8 shows an inventory of mobile home parks, cooperatives (co- ops), and subdivisions located in Winter Springs, and Map displays their locations. The total capacity of all of the mobile home parks and co -ops within the City in 2008 is 623 lots. This includes 595 occupied units with 28 vacant lots. The co -op structure of Hacienda Village works to eliminate deteriorated units, periodically resulting in some vacant lots. Table III - 8: Cooperatives and Mobile Home /Recreational Vehicle Parks, 2008 l * ro r � x a A i Xy y i, �.f P Is � iv'J 3 r c� >' qsw M x... v,�iG�' t � ' F � ,w µ y _d' " ��i'�'Wdt �,�p � d �' ; i i A r L�� Ni�'f � ,, L n h : ' Y r i � �f y � � , m�»,y m w ° ' P � 1 .�:� i i It �i� � Y'�W r rja z i � I'I i9' Y3� � "'kM`$ �6 r .� yl � �N a+�P t a5 A ��i n w.udu �.h H' �o �' ry., � x � NypYk.��y ;k ?: 2 �".'nia.J" J mr ,}ta^''4r t6P �" �,rx'l�„ a�'-�3� N1 �N :�" �� „ l ror ? di .� 'yk rr,rh �«, "y�Irp s "n „.F �i ,,,BhP I H7'tt r�m:d y j y . ° i,' wX �n w�'�; . t �,i 4 �"� � * d9 N "pG M �; J Ill ' ,� �+�I�p ' 1, * ry ,�Kla�' ^P t "y�, i ' d r' a ri; i e'� ��In. ��r+� d ��' . Ifs i re r , r { S ft. �',�' w �� i'. , r . m >� 'rh,'I�i fy1W.114; �rf,�i�r�G�"�� ; 4�4,�r,G�, �iJi�m.� „��P,v %w,l. I a"�I.N��II�Rf &i ,�V�41�o�,.ii�iU�� Al1��!�� %� i . F�9 wi l5 .��'4 1 .xl� Fi ulnrr'fin5 n ��H- ,...y q Hacien da Village 280 La Vista Drive West 447 421 26 Tuskawilla Trails 1070 Cheyenne Trail 176 174 2 (Including Phase II) Totals 623 595 28 • Source: City of Winter Springs, 2008; Florida Department of Health, December 2008. Modular or manufactured homes can be located in other zoning areas provided they are located on a stationary foundation and meet aesthetic compatibility requirements. The City recognizes the importance of housing alternatives to meet the housing needs of different types of households. As such, mobile home communities can help support the heterogeneous environment beneficial to the City as a whole. 6. Historic Housing The Division of Historical Resources of the Florida Department of State maintains a central archive for Florida's historical and archaeological sites known as the Florida Master Site File (FMSF). These properties are usually at least fifty years old, and adequately located and documented. These sites represent the known physical remains of Florida's prehistoric and historic cultural heritage. As there are over 170,000 historical structures and archaeological sites included in the FMSF and these properties are not required to meet any minimum level of historical or scientific importance, a more useful tool for determining sites with historical value might be the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). To be included on the NRHP, a property must meet age, integrity, and significance criteria. A December 2008 online search showed that there were no properties listed on the National Register of Historic Places in the City of Winter Springs. 4110 III - 25 t CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT • 7. Housing Construction Activity The City of Winter Springs tracks housing construction activity through the building permit process. A summary of building activity, by month, is reported to the U.S. Census Bureau in "Reports of Building or Zoning Permits Issued and Local Public Construction" (Form C- 404). Table 111 -9 presents housing construction activity by type of housing units permitted. The City has issued permits for approximately 1,411 new dwelling units between 2000 and 2007. The majority of these units, 1,353, have been single - family units. In this data, townhomes and mobile homes are included in the single - family designation. Data from the City indicates that nearly half of the single - family units were townhomes in the time period. The City issued 1 68 certificates of occupancy for townhomes in 2007 and 2008 and only 21 certificates of occupancy for single family detached homes over the same two -year period. Table III - 9: Housing Construction and Annexation Activity, 1990 — December 2007 '^ N t- p ri11 : a * ai 41,4 „ n IiMrG^6 7� , a. w'�l 7 was '' $'n s�, ,� '"�� ' .; e a '..., rh st ' �� $ '� �,�� a w�ff �� ,�; .,i �"a�' Y '�r *� � Th7 h v w � p� �.0 7 u s ?,r s nm � "� r r F T'i or '.',',1: f1Y1'to , ^ +r 101$1 .�"� 1 0 0 1 1 ° X 1 10x, ii:,, `�l ot / 1"H 1 u4 . 1a r g, "%. ^' oat ,, ,, ,F,AIAi p ,,.... ai Yon : ,! ": �`1LJW �zr,,„4 0,k^ n ,, , v1 'IOW* l<_ u x 4 i , . ...t. . . ; � $�x- 1990 -1995 2,415 12 2,427 0 n/a 2,427 1996 -1999 1,416 605 2,021 110 n /a 2,131 2000 195 8 203 0 0 203 2001 127 8 135 8 7 136 2002 204 0 204 1 0 205 0 2003 186 0 186 4 0 190 2004 205 42 247 8 6 249 2005 159 0 159 2 2 159 2006 274 0 274 0 0 274 2007 3 0 3 0 0 3 Total 5,184 675 5,859 133 15 5,977 % of Total 88.5 11.5 100.0 100.0 Note: Mobile Home starts and townhomes are included under Single Family; Condominiums are included in Multi - Family Source: Census Bureau (1996- 2000), Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing (1990 -1995) U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, State of the Cities Data System, accessed December 2008. Table III -9 does not present data regarding the number of units removed from the housing stock through demolition, conversions, or mobile home removals. Some demolitions occurred on properties that were annexed into the City and then were developed at a higher density within the Town Center. There have been very few demolitions in the last ten years. The City does not keep information on conversions. However, as noted previously, it is known that 52 rental units in the Moss Cove area were renovated for home ownership in 2000 and have been sold. III III - 26 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT The City has also added to its housing stock through the process of annexation. This data is also presented in Table III -9. Annexations in the decade of the 1990's, contributed 110 units to the City's housing stock. D. HOUSING ANALYSIS Based on the information presented in the previous section, the following statements summarize the current housing situation in the City of Winter Springs: • Single family is the most predominant housing type. The proportion from 1990 increased slightly by the 2000 Census, and remains higher than in Seminole County. Single family includes townhomes (attached units). The City will continue to see a decrease in new single family detached units as it nears build -out. • Between 1990 and 2000, the City experienced a substantial drop in the proportion of mobile home units (from 7.1 % to 4.6 %). Seminole County also saw mobile home units drop during that period, falling from 4.6% of all units to 3.4 %. • 80.4% of the homes in Winter Springs were occupied by owners in 2000, compared to 69.6% in the County. Preliminary figures from the 2005 Shimberg data indicate that the percentages have remained consistent in both the City and the County. • The vacancy rate in the City was lower than in the County in 2000(4.3% and 5.1% respectively). • As of the 2000 Census, the average single family home was built in 1987. • • Home values in the City of Winter Springs in 2000 were about 12% higher than the values in the County, while rents were only slightly lower (approximately 1% lower). • In 2000, 21% of homeowners were paying 30% or more of their income for housing, while 37% of renters were paying 30% or more of their incomes for rent. The corresponding rates for Seminole County were 29% for owner- occupied housing and 37% for renter - occupied housing. • Housing conditions in the City are excellent, with very low percentages of substandard housing or overcrowding. The following section will forecast housing needs based on population projections, and will address land requirements, expected housing supply, and the system of housing delivery. The information contained in this section was obtained from the following sources: 1990 and 2000 United States Census, and the Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing. Shimberg Center population projections are higher than those of this Comprehensive Plan, but proportionate trends are expected to be similar. Housing statistics provided in this element are only projections based on statistical models and past trends. These projections may not reflect actual conditions or future housing demands and trends of the Winter Springs' community, private property owners, and housing policies and strategies duly adopted by the City. For example, the City has been focusing on areas like the Town Center to intensify residential development and has also focused services and amenities to serve as an attractive location for retirees. These local trends are discussed as relates to the 1110 III - 27 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT projection data available from the Shimberg Center. It will be important for new residential development in the Town Center to support and enhance the economic viability of the Town Center. 1. Household Characteristics In order to adequately plan for future housing demand and City service needs, population and housing projections have been developed. The following section will address expected changes in household age, size, and income, as these factors will influence the type and size of housing that will be needed. a. Household Size The size of households is one of the most important elements in determining the housing need of the population. The smaller the household, the smaller the size of the dwelling unit needed to house the family in a comfortable, safe manner. Also, given a certain household size, alternatives to the traditional detached single family dwellings on quarter (1/4) acre lots may better serve the needs of certain households. Such alternatives include mobile homes and smaller, higher density multi - family units. In 2000, the average household size in the City was 2.69, slightly higher than that of the County at 2.59 persons per household and higher still than the household size of 2.46 for the State. There has been a trend toward the reduction of household size in the U.S. and Florida since the 1960's. Household size projections prepared by the Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing reflect this trend. • Table III -10 shows that the most predominant household size in the City is 1 -2 persons per household, with almost 56% percent of the total. Households with 3 to 4 persons accounted for 34.8 %, and with 5 or more persons accounted for 9.7 %. The average household size has decreased from 2.74 in 1990 to 2.69 in 2000. The City's household size is projected to continue to decrease to 2.40 in 2030 reflecting various factors such as the aging population, smaller family sizes, and increase in smaller housing units in areas such as the Town Center. The projections, shown in Table III -10 indicate that the City had 1 2,637 households in 2005, and can expect to have 17,348 households by the year 2020. The projections of household composition are associated with the Shimberg population projections, which exceed the population projections prepared by the City for the Comprehensive Plan and the anticipated build -out population. Therefore the projection of the total number of households in 2030 presented in Table III -10 exceeds the total number of households anticipated by the City's population projections (18,557 units). However, the trends in household size and tenure are anticipated to be reasonably reflected by the Shimberg data. • III - 28 • • • CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT Table I11 10: Shimberg Household Composition Projections, 2000 -2030 2000 : 2005 2010 1 1415 2k Size HH % HH iki. era E1H °/Q i __ .% 1 o .e ' 111 1 -2 6,529 55.51 7,019 55.54 7,959 55.65 8,831 55.82 9,716 56.01 10,509 56.16 11,264 56.30 3 -4 4,093 34.80 4,393 34.76 4,955 34.65 5,455 34.48 5,953 34.31 6,394 34.17 _ 6,809 _ 34.03 5+ 1,140 9.69 1,225 9.70 1,387 9.70 1,535 9.70 1,679 9.68 1,810 9.67 1,935 9.67 Total* 11,762 100 12,637 100 14,301 100 15,821 100 17,348 100 18,713 100 20,008 100 Owner 9,444 10,158 11,528 12 835 14,175 15,381 16,514 Renters 2,319 2,480 2,774 2,986 3,172 3,331 3,494 Persons /HH 2.69 2.64 2.58 2.54 2.49 2.44 2.40 Total Pop 30,860 33,319 36,929 40,135 43,114 45,633 47,921 The household size estimates and projections for "total" are estimated separately; therefore, owner and renter households do not add up to "total ". The differences are minor. Source: Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing, 2008 b. Population by Age In order to project the type of housing needed through the year 2030, projections of the age of the City residents were calculated. The age of the City residents is an important factor because it influences the type of housing necessary to house different individual lifestyles and family life cycles. Elderly households require different housing than younger households. Families desire larger dwelling units with adequate storage, and placed in areas accessible to schools and recreation areas. Younger seniors, age 55 -74 tend to have a more active lifestyle than more elderly seniors, 75 and over. This quickly growing younger group, made up of so- called "Empty Nesters" and the newly retired, may require a different set of amenities than the elderly or younger family households. These younger seniors may not require the larger dwelling units and proximity to schools favored by families nor the care - giving of elderly seniors. Thus, smaller dwelling units with ample access to active leisure and recreational facilities are often a higher priority. Also, age reflects levels through the lifetime income cycles of individuals, i.e., dissaving, saving, and retirement. These income periods, correlated with age, provide insight into the cost of new housing that will be in demand. III - 29 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT Table III -11 presents expected changes in the age of the population between 1990 and 2030 as projected by the Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing. While the Center projects the population of the City to grow 51.33% between 2000 and 2030, all age categories through age 44 are anticipated to grow at rates lower than that. Significantly higher increases are projected for the 55 -64 category (88.95 %), the 65 -74 category (194.41%), and the 75+ category (299.16 %). The 35 -44 age group will retain the highest proportion of the population in 2030 of any of the age categories shown at 13.8 %, but will decrease from the proportion of 17.9% in 2000. As noted previously, while the total population projections appear high, the trends in the City's age distribution are anticipated to be reasonably reflected by the Shimberg data. Table III - 11: Shimberg Projected Winter Springs Population By Age, 1990 -2030 Age Range 1990 200 >',� 240 206 ' *do o S 2030 0 -14 5,035 6,947 6,835 7,124 7,622 8,063 8,303 8,430 15 -24 2,919 3,924 4,197 4,556 4,557 4,553 4,826 5,089 25 -34 3,565 3,644 3,842 4,367 4,730 4,866 4,703 4,609 35 -44 4,374 5,671 5,396 5,317 5,629 6,142 6,488 6,595 45 -54 2,514 5,188 5,399 5,775 5,729 5,501 5,712 6,192 55 -64 1,696 2,859 3,822 4,947 5,483 5,755 5,650 5,402 • 65 -74 1,403 2,004 2,129 2,764 3,906 5,047 5,603 5,900 75+ 645 1,429 1,699 2,079 2,479 3,187 4,348 5,704 Total 15+ 17,116 24,719 26,484 29,805 32,513 35,051 37,330 39,491 % of Total 77.27% 78.06% 0 79.49% 80.71% 81.01% 0 81.30% 81.80% 82.41% Total Pop. 22,151 31,666* 33,319 36,929 40,135 43,114 45,633 47,921 *This population figure reflects the 2000 Census prior to being adjusted down to 30,860. Source: 2000 Census, STF3A, U.S. Census Bureau; Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing 2006 As reflected in the projections of population by age, the City's population is aging. The median age in the City has gone from 34.05 in 1990 to 37.4 in 2000. The City's need for elderly housing, including assisted living facilities, is expected to generally increase based upon Shimberg projections. There are a number of programs and approaches the City may encourage or implement to achieve the goal of providing housing options to support the aging population. Options may include: • Assisted Living - a term used to reference the housing arrangement for people who are able to continue to live on their own and do not require full time medical care but need assistance in taking care of daily activities such as, personal care, cooking, and /or assistance with housekeeping, etc. ALFs are residential communities that are equipped with supportive, personal and health care services (nonmedical) and encompass a variety of • 111 - 30 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT living arrangements such as continuing care, group homes or in one's own home. Types of ALFs include: o Adult Family Care Homes - single family homes in which room and board, supervision and personal care services are provided to no more than five adult residents at a time. o Continuing Care Retirement Communities - private home communities that offer active seniors a variety of resources in which to socialize and enjoy their golden years. This option allows elders the opportunity to purchase services, amenities and future medical care, at the same time that their home in the community is purchased. o Senior Apartment Complexes - private apartment communities, which provide limited communal services, such as activity programs, transportation services and evening meals to its residents. Owners of these housing complexes usually only rent to individuals that are 55 years old or older, often targeting the younger, independent and more active seniors. o Nursing Homes - long -term care facilities that provide 24 -hour medical and personal care, housekeeping services and rehabilitative services to seniors who are suffering from chronic illnesses, recovering after major surgery or who are physically • weak and unable to live on their own. • Communities for a Lifetime (CFAL) - is a statewide program initiated by the Florida Department of Elder Affairs aimed at creating a safe and nurturing place for people of all ages, especially elderly citizens. Participating municipalities use existing resources and state technical assistance to make crucial civic improvements such as: o Increase housing options to support independent living and active, adult communities, serving people age 55 or older, o Provide health care services and elderly facilities such as senior centers, o Provide for safe and affordable alternative to driving, o Ensure equitable accessibility and safer transportation routes, o Foster business partnerships, o Distribute community -wide education programs on available resources and services, o Implement /encourage a more efficient use of natural resources, and o Support volunteer opportunities. • III - 31 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT • In 2005, Winter Springs adopted Resolution 2005 -46, supporting the Communities for a Lifetime initiative. c. Households by Income One of the most influential variables that affect housing type and community trends is the income of an area's households. Income impacts "housing affordability ", which in turn impacts housing cost, housing type and size, lot size, and neighborhood composition. Based on standard criteria for various public assistance programs, households were divided into four income groups: Very Low Income - less than 50 percent of the Area Median Income (AMI). Low Income - 50 to 80 percent of AMI. • Moderate Income - 80 to 120 percent of AMI. Middle to High Income — greater than 120 percent of AMI. According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the generally accepted definition of affordability, as it pertains to housing, is for a household to pay no more than 30 percent of its annual income on housing. "Cost - burdened" households pay more than 30% of income for rent or mortgage costs. Table III -12a presents the percentage of income paid for rent or mortgage costs by income range. In 2005, 3,005 Winter Springs' households (24 %) paid more • than 30% of income for housing. By comparison, 25% of Seminole County households and 29% of households statewide are similarly cost - burdened. Households paying 50 percent or more of their annual income are considered "severely cost burdened." 1,110 households in Winter Springs (9 %) pay more than 50% of income for housing. By comparison, 10% of households in Seminole County and 29% of households statewide are severely cost- burdened. (Shimberg, 2007) Table III -12b shows historic and projected households by income range for the City and the County, and Table III -18 show projections of household income by tenure. As presented in Table III -5, the median household income in the City in 1999 was $53,247, while in the County it was $49,326. In 1999, the majority of the City households were in the moderate to high- income categories. However, 12.5% of City households were in the low category and 27.2% of City households were in the very -low category. The household income projections, which were prepared by the Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing, show that the distribution of households by income is expected to remain constant over the next ten years. The proportion of very -low- income household group is expected to have a slight increase, while the middle -to- high group is expected to have a proportional decrease. As noted previously, while the projections of total population and total households appear high, trends in the distribution of the City's households by income are anticipated to be reasonably reflected by the Shimberg data. • III - 32 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT To ensure community viability, the City's housing stock should include diverse, affordable, and accessible housing. New housing units should be developed and coordinated with demonstrated need. Options for affordable and work -force housing should be created that do not diminish neighborhood character. The City allows density increases and mixed uses in areas like the Town Center that can provide for more affordable housing options (type and number). The City has discouraged concentrations of affordable housing and employed housing surveys and code enforcement to ensure quality of housing. Table III - 12a: Households by Income and Cost Burden, Winter Springs, 2005 " r ai n Ild inco'I � a �lyTh.rce vl r rr L �a N A � 7-F N R'f ° f p X 11 ' � � .� e � ua � w eNi � Q � Rlfi" w e ui � I l .w,J�:n� ILI M P c PJ �'fa,� uf I ' �'r�A n� d'' 1 2 fl^ Jr x ;" � M ,� n � g i N o ' F r +p ggl y yl . l y a 4 1 0 C b o 1 �, ti � �' e m � 9 b. � ^' � �" f �' ' rt ^ 1 �6 �. �: r ui'I d�P., t i�'JJ:LPoWeM ,,, � 41 d 8 i a. � � '' " S n.a wW ,�w II a I �� I mM�� . � < =30% AMI 195 112 452 30.01 -50% AMI 248 267 361 50.01 -80% AMI 744 675 175 80.01 +% AMI 8,446 841 122 Total 9,633 1,895 1,110 Note: The income ranges are calculated using the County's Median Household Income. The Census excludes one - family houses on 10 acres or more from the count of specified units. Source: Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse, Housing Profile for the City of Winter Springs, Accessed December 2007 Table III - 12b: Projected Households by Income, 2000 -2030 Hous Income { ' u I j ,' 0M0, N k Y 5& I +� i r �9 ±19 11990 , N 0 2 ,4;1q � r � � gym' x �� 2 t I ° ' r. �' •d I Fro � �r+�u dr � � o ,� P �9 P 11I*l Y J hb a d Hk �� I � �r i t 3� *t J � I , i � n § � T T mqr i X �1 �IYI x i a 4 N 9� � i vaa r + } i jW ri d aa.� a��i 1 'tiY �,d a�1,�5�„liad7 �AIMAN4 -xlw., ,. �" Ji o01A 1N Merl :6 m wl .I�� . -. ... < =30% AMI 9,613 10,949 12,428 13,944 15,483 17,039 18,534 13,312 - .. 0 30 -50% AMI 10,596 12,050 13,766 15,651 _ 17,621 19,691 21,671 U 50 -80% AMI 17,018 18,978 21,631 24,569 27,532 30,517 33,498 36,354 2 80 -120% AMI 18,595 30,680 _ 35,066 39,646 43,813 47,815 - 51,542 55,097 F >120 %AMI 59,189 69,565 79,806 90,156 99,023 107,406 114,770 121,624 Total 108,114 139,432 159,502 180,565 199,963 218,842 236,540 253,280 < =30% AMI 701 759 871 992 1,121 1,239 1,355 rn 30 -50% AMI 583 809 876 1,021 1,182 1,364 1,526 1,685 N 50 -80% AMI 1,166 1,476 1,594 1,833 2,081 2,348 2,588 2,824 m 80- 120 ° A) AMI 1,275 2,500 2,686 3,042 3,368 3,693 3,983 4,259 3 >120% AMI 5,054 6,277 6,723 7,535 8,198 8,821 9,376 9,885 Total 8,078 11,763 12,638 14,302 15,821 17,347 18,712 20,008 Note: The income ranges are calculated using the County's Median Household Income. The Census excludes one - family houses on 10 acres or more from the count of specified units. Source: 2000 Census; 2000 -2030 Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing, 2006 111 - 33 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT 2. Projected Housing Needs Housing need projections were prepared by the Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing based on household projections, household income and housing costs. a. Housing Tenure, Type and Cost According to the Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing, there were 12,638 households in 2005 in the City of Winter Springs. The Center estimates that there will be 17,347 households by 2020 and 20,008 households by 2030. Shimberg estimates that between 2005 and 2020, there will be a demand for approximately 4,709 new housing units with an additional 2,661 new housing units needed by 2030. Shimberg further specifies the housing needs by tenure, showing a need for additional 6,356 units for ownership and 1,014 units for rent by 2030. As noted previously, the Shimberg projections for population and number of households are considered to be high with respect to analysis of the City's growth and build -out population. Therefore the need for new housing units is likely to be overstated. Table III -13 shows the projected demand for housing by year and tenure as indicated by the Shimberg data. Table 111 - 13: Demand for Housing Units by Tenure 1 1 1 �f� ^ � �,� STV F1 Y'rY 3 � 7 9 C EOi iat "Db 0 , ; Gri$V4rf i n Hou Typ 0 Unit �� y I� � � y� Ya4�d �u� Y �i�np S A J t �U j SI �1 i�a � � �� P I� j a i � t 00x5 $ yy��{( 4 ' � 2 0 N � 0 2d 5 . Q r 201h0 2020 4020 -20 '0 D GLU ,I�pV,k � R1 y � h � � � � � 4i i �i" • Owner- Occupied 10,158 11,528 14,175 16,514 1,370 2,647 2,339 Renter - Occupied 2,480 2,774 3,172 3,494 294 398 322 Total Occupied Units 12,638 14,302 17,347 20;008 1,664 3,045 2,661 Source: Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing b. Housing for Special Populations With an aging of the population anticipated for the City during the planning period, the projected demand of housing by the elderly is expected to increase. A greater emphasis on units designed with certain features that the elderly population will require, such as smaller units that are barrier free and easily accessible, may be required. Little data exists with respect to the disabled population. The housing problems of this population relate largely to accessibility. Physical barriers such as narrow doorways, lack of ramps, counter heights, and appliance design limit the supply of housing suitable for this group. Winter Springs has adopted the Florida Building Code which addresses handicap accessibility more stringently than the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Because the City of Winter Springs does not exist within an area of high agricultural use, separate estimates for rural and farm worker households were not made. According to the 2000 Census, only 12 City residents were working in the • III - 34 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT • farming, fishing, and forestry occupations. Therefore, their housing needs are not expected to impact the housing market. There are no specific areas in the City of Winter Springs targeted for the provision of housing for the very -low, low, and moderate - income households. Federal programs that offer rental subsidy, such as Section 8, allow the applicant to choose the location of the home. The City has a variety of zoning categories that allow for different types of housing and densities, including the provision of mobile homes. The Medium Density land use category of the Future Land Use Map allows mobile home zoning districts. Affordable housing does exist in the resale market. Most of these units are older single - family houses in good structural condition. A number of these older structures in the City could provide adequate housing for a number of low- income housing if improvements to these units are made. The improvements include minor rehabilitation of electrical and plumbing infrastructure, improved insulation, and re- roofing. Most of these improvements would not only add value to the structure, but also provide benefits to the resident in terms of energy cost savings, reduced maintenance costs, and increased fire safety. As noted in previous sections, the City has worked on specific projects to provide full -scale accessible housing for low- income residents. All of the 52 units that were renovated in 2000 have been sold. In addition, over $1 million remains available in the City's 306 Revolving Rehabilitation Fund. c. Group Homes Based on the fact that the percentage of the elderly population is expected to • increase in the next few years, it can be assumed that there will be a need for additional group home facilities for the elderly. When any new facilities open, they should be encouraged to be small scale if possible and to be located in proximity to bus routes, neighborhood shopping areas, and other essential personal service uses. The facilities should have a residential character as opposed to an institutional look and scale. d. Dwelling Unit Demolitions and Conversions According to the 2000 Census, approximately 562 housing units will be 50 years or older by the year 2020. Given the age of the housing stock the City does not expect any major demolition or conversion activity in the next 10 years. The City of Winter Springs has an active and effective code enforcement system that has helped maintain a sound condition for the older housing stock. Nonetheless, units do fall into disrepair and neglect for many reasons, including lack of economic incentives for maintenance. For planning purposes, it is anticipated that two (2) percent of units 50 years old and older will become substandard each year. Five (5) percent of these substandard units may at that time be categorized as deteriorated. The City Building Division works in coordination with the Code Enforcement Division when deteriorated housing is identified. During 2008 an increased level of deterioration was reported by the City associated with recent foreclosure activity. • III - 35 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT For conversions, the City requires compatibility and harmony to be maintained within established neighborhoods, which is regulated as part of the permit approval process. 3. Land Requirements and Availability for Projected Housing Needs Based on the figures provided by the Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing, a total of 20,008 dwelling units will be needed to serve the household population of the City by the year 2030, an increase of more than 6,500 units over the 2007 estimate. However, the City's population projections indicate a total demand for 18,557 dwelling units to serve the City in 2030, an increase of approximately 5,000 units. Table III -14 shows the acreage of vacant residential lands per land use category. The amount of vacant land designated for residential use in the Future Land Use map accounts for approximately 275 acres. There are also approximately 53 acres of Mixed Use and 221 acres of Town Center. It is estimated that approximately half of those acreages will be developed with residential uses. Within the Greeneway Interchange District, residential use is allowed only as conditional use, incidental to other uses and may occupy no more than 25% of any one vertically integrated, mixed use structure. Table III - 14: Vacant Developable Land Analysis �� it i f r w.j a G r ail M o . W III I w + p v ��i° ryry aA - d v 1 N'�f oteflt1aI . i 1� j ay LfQfn �ry 5� 1 J.'� i. tl P ,1 y � 4 �Nn 'J �. wN, h uU i�i�� N I� s i� Od Iola e?'6i na t} ° A l 1 , j , v r .r 1 b iTn niR" ) L:'3 : y 7 �MO�x mu ns t ° y� 141IW H n I �' I 1 ndN ty� ' r o i ' w k , �� o x r , a � �± a , , a� 1 �u � � N aur l � x NI h '6, ,4{ N .. , aft II u a> it vwir or f . v;iN F ; V?u1,, � u N a na { 5 . 144 4 r s ""�1"n • Rural Up to 1 du /gross acre 137.89 0.70 97 Low Density 1.1 to 3.5 du /gross acre 64.74 2.45 159 ------------------ - - - - -- -------- - - - - -- Medium Density 3.6 to 9 du /gross acre 67.81 6.30 427 High Density 9.1 to 21 du /gross acre 4.10 15.00 62 Mixed Use 1.0 FAR /12 du /ac 26.45* 10.00 265 Town Center 2.0 FAR * * /36 du /ac 1 10.46* 20.00 2,209 Greeneway 39.75 200 * ** Interchange TOTAL 451.20 3,419 * In order to estimate the residential holding capacity of the Mixed Use and Town Center categories, it has been assumed that approximately 50% of the vacant lands within those categories will be developed with residential uses (This assumption was previously utilized in the 2001 Comprehensive Plan). The actual quantity of developable vacant land in these categories is twice what is shown in this table. ** The total acreage includes vacant County enclaves adjacent to the existing Town Center boundary that are expected to be annexed and added to the Town Center sometime prior to 2030. * ** City staff estimates that no more than 200 residential units will be made available through a vertical mix of development in the Greeneway Interchange District. The quantity of developable vacant land in this category under current policy is 25 percent of the vacant acreage in the District. Source: 2008 Evaluation and Appraisal Report; Future Land Use Element, City of Winter Springs Comprehensive Plan. 41111 III - 36 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT The acreage of residential lands was converted to units, using density factors based on the densities permitted in each category, allowing for the provision of retention areas and rights -of -way. For Rural, Low and Medium density residential categories, thirty (30) percent of the land area was determined to be needed for retention and ROW, netting 0.7, 2.5 and 6.3 dwelling units per acre, respectively. High density residential was analyzed at 15 dwelling units per acre based on historical trends. For the Mixed Use and Town Center categories, it was estimated that approximately fifty percent of the vacant acreage will develop with high density residential uses at densities of approximately 10 dwelling units per acre for the Mixed Use and 20 dwelling units per acre for the Town Center land use category. (These density factors were previously utilized in the 2001 Comprehensive Plan.) City staff estimates that 200 residential units will be made available through a vertical mix of development in the Greeneway Interchange District. As the table shows, the City will be able to accommodate approximately 3,419 additional units, approximately 3,000 units fewer than anticipated to be needed by the year 2030 according to the Shimberg Center projections.. However, it should be noted that the Shimberg Center projections have already proved to be higher than actual, and this trend has become even stronger in recent years. For example, the projected figure of housing units for the year 2000 by the Shimberg Center was 13,103, when the actual figure for that year as reported by the Census was 1 2,306 (Note: Summary File 3 sample data totals to 1 2,296). Using the City's projections, the shortfall in units is anticipated to be approximately 1,600 units. Thus, there may be the need to encourage densities closer to the maximum allowable within each residential category. It is anticipated that with such measures implemented, the Future Land Use Map, combined with potential future • annexations, will provide for an adequate supply of land to satisfy the housing needs of the 2030 population of Winter Springs. 4. The Housing Delivery System While the City can estimate future housing needs, it cannot take a major role in supplying housing. That aspect is controlled for the most part by the private sector. The City can only assist in the delivery of housing by developing flexible regulations, providing appropriate land use designations and zoning categories, and by planning infrastructure facilities and services that are adequate to serve future development. The private sector is currently meeting the needs of the community in terms of providing much of the needed housing. The vacancy rate in Winter Springs was 4.32% percent in 2000, considered within the range where the housing supply is adequate. As discussed previously, data for 2006 from Metro Orlando and the American Community Survey indicate that the vacancy rate may have either increased or decreased. It is anticipated that more recent economic circumstances will have increased the vacancy rate, which may help absorb some of the projected need in housing units, or at least delay the rate of increase in that need. a. Financing Private sector housing delivery is divided into two parts, owned and rental. The delivery of financing for owned housing is based solely on affordability. As discussed earlier in this Element, affordable housing costs are calculated to be thirty (30) percent of gross income. Monthly payments for owned - housing are • III - 37 • CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT • based on two factors: mortgage rates and the price of the housing unit. Forecasting future trends of these two factors is difficult and highly unpredictable, particularly at this point in time. Mortgage rates are dependent on national economic conditions and not local factors. Housing prices are dependent on the inflation rate for housing, and local supply and demand forces. Financing for housing presents challenges and opportunities based on recent economic trends. While interest rates have fallen, the availability of credit has become more restrictive and mortgage lending standards have been tightened. The City may need to consider requiring developers to provide a certain percentage of affordable units within their developments as a requirement for development approvals. An alternative to the requirement could also be a contribution to an affordable housing fund that can be used for housing /rental assistance to lower income households. The City should also look into the programs offered through the County for capital improvements, rehabilitation or down payment /rental assistance, including those discussed in the analysis section, and make those programs available to City residents. b. Regulatory and Administrative Process The process of housing development includes several players, including government officials in multiple jurisdictions, design consultants, lenders, contractors, attorneys and the buyer or renter. The process, which at times can be lengthy, adds costs to the development of housing. Many ingredients of housing development such as • interest rates, labor and material costs, and State Laws, are beyond the control of the City. Nonetheless, a community can adopt an attitude that will affect the cost of housing. By taking a proactive position, the City can start instituting several actions to address affordable housing. The first step would be to do a thorough review of the Code of Ordinances as it relates to housing affordability. Areas to address may include: • Establishing a definition of affordable housing, • Expediting the permitting process for affordable housing projects, • Establishing density bonuses for the provision of affordable units, • Establishing certain zoning waivers such as parking, landscaping and setbacks, and • Modifying street right -of -way requirements. Another important aspect of reducing the cost of providing affordable housing is reviewing current development costs charged by the City. The City should review processing and impact fees and establish reductions or waivers for affordable housing projects. • III - 38 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT III c. Infill Housing Development Infill housing occurs in areas that are close to residential "build -out" with at least 90 percent of its residential land already developed. This traditional type of infill involves a small number of vacant parcels that were bypassed during the normal course of urbanization. In this process, individual Tots or small clusters of lots remained vacant due to a variety of reasons. There are very few residential lots in this category within the City. Large numbers of "passed over" parcels can often lead to lower market and assessed values for adjacent developed residential properties. It may often lower property values in entire neighborhoods where large numbers of vacant parcels exist. Most of the vacant lands in Winter Springs are located within recently platted subdivisions or in large tracts on the east side of the City. However, there are still a few vacant lots within the older part of the City. It is important for Winter Springs to develop strategies and programs which encourage the infill of these vacant residential parcels with new housing compatible with the established neighborhoods. d. Mobile Homes Mobile homes and mobile home developments have long had a reputation of being visually unattractive. Often, localities have had the tendency to regulate these housing types to undesirable areas of the community, such as adjacent to III industrial areas and railroad tracks and areas which lack utilities or community facilities. Mobile homes were rarely allowed or encouraged in areas well suited for residential development. However, as the cost of single - family dwellings has gone beyond the reach of many households, communities have started to change their local decision making process regarding the location of mobile homes. Rule 9J -5 requires that policies be developed which ensure adequate sites for mobile homes. These requirements will also alter local governments' traditional decision - making process regarding mobile homes. In consideration of these factors the following general criteria have been provided for the designation of future mobile home or manufactured home developments. • Mobile home parks and co -ops should be located adjacent to areas with a comparable density of development or near small -scale convenience or neighborhood commercial activity. • They should be in areas accessible to arterial and collector roads; • They should also be located on sites presently served by public water or sanitary sewer service, or in areas programmed for such service in the City's five -year capital improvements program; • They should be located within reasonable proximity to community facilities. Where mobile home development or individual mobile homes are designated to be located adjacent to residential uses, especially those of lower densities, buffer III III - 39 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT areas should be required to make the transition in density more compatible to the general neighborhood and community. In addition to these general provisions, the issue of improving existing substandard mobile home development should be addressed. These areas should be upgraded to modern mobile home planning and design requirements. e. Infrastructure Requirements The infrastructure needed to support housing for very -low, low and moderate - income households is similar to that required to support other development activity. The adequacy of this infrastructure is evaluated in various elements and summarized in the Future Land Use Element. Generally speaking, improvements to the road system, the water and sewer systems, and the drainage system will be necessary to support future land development activities, including low and moderate income housing. The City has several programs that are being planned or are underway to make these improvements. One consideration is the cost and methods for funding these improvements. New development is required to make dedications of land and site related improvements and to contribute to the larger system capacity increases to meet concurrency. The City also requires payment of impact fees to cover the cost of needed improvements. Once the property is developed and sold, the new landowners are required to pay periodic assessments to fund operations and capital improvements. In the case of low and moderate - income projects, funds for development and • operation are usually limited. The result is that extra fees can be expected to be a problem, occasionally enough to destroy the financial feasibility of the project. Under the theory that these are fees for services or benefits received, these fees and charges cannot be reduced for low and moderate - income projects. On the other hand, provision of adequate housing for low and moderate- income persons and households is a benefit to the public at large. f. Sustainability, Energy Efficiency, & Renewable Energy Resources There has been increasing information and focus on environmental impacts and issues such as climate change, in addition to awareness of the potential cost - savings from energy efficient construction and sustainable development practices. New construction and major rehabilitation and renovations in the City should include plans for greater energy efficiency in their design and construction. Furthermore the use of recycled materials and renewable energy resources should be encouraged. As these practices can cut long -term energy costs, they are encouraged for all types of housing. The US Green Building Council (USGBC) administers the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System. LEED for Homes is a rating system that promotes the design and construction of high - performance green homes through a certification system. New construction can be rated to meet one of the LEED for Homes tiers: Certified, Silver, Gold, or Platinum. Florida LEED for Homes is administered by the Florida Solar Energy Center. • III - 40 tegend �° . � . . . . . .. . .. . ..� .�P .. . � � . � LQEc: JCSU(T ' ?, ;..�� art�� ,� (� .z��' a ,�`iZ'� ��,.,._ /9/Ofl,,> � � CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT Table Ill - 15a: Comparison of Monthly Gross Rent 2000 r M:; aai $�y. ua "�. Y'1 ,r� wa n "�,qq�� lk' ', ' rota P ` °'� gy m r 4. .ati1�' sVa+ ;r + lay �'W 19'.4 "�94� r' ° s" " " , v & �' ""saWN6 X 3Y ^1f Zdd 'A'i Y dPf >( p� t S a l + IV 5 a a 'Eb.�a Fil ''°�. t., I r .. _ °� O ,x a.. p � .,. r Less than $200 10 0.44 685 1.61 $200 -$299 0 0 650 1.53 $300-$499 76 3.33 3,591 8.44 $500 -$749 1,146 50.15 17,148 40.3 $750-$999 -- 657 28.75 - -- 13,194 31.01 $1000 -$1499 228 9.98 4,863 11.43 $1500+ 37 1.62 1,060 _ 2.49 No Cash Rent 131 5.73 1,359 3.19 Total Rental 2,285 100 42;550 100 Median Contract Rent 2000 $631 $633 Median Gross Rent 2000 $727 $731 * Specified Units (The Census excludes one - family houses on ten acres or more from the count of specified • units). Source: 2000 Census, STF1A and STF3A, U.S. Census Bureau Table 111 - 15b: Comparison of Monthly Gross Rent 1990 �" Yd s I I 1 ; M1 f 0111 d(„ �� y �e 111 7 � yyy,,,vvv ms .' ' d� "l s V'k :,. ,,,4 e! p;';',14 � ,; +�,r1 � '�. V. (t . • , : � -, � ,, , 7 k- 1F n S�„dda k l 1 flflfl `� a m. a Y j ' Ik 1, � JI .,!, tl N k1 4 P 45 a 11)1,1 � ry'ry b t } a 1 n t ! * 3 1 d IRI '4' M'I • tar r A '''I'I Ha I R u ' a 1 II Rif V I 1 P u.k k dI II L II q, X r �: I I l a ' Fd �� x �d �t�ar!h 1-d'a v 1 d d ro d + O b I n I7 I a , di ''',+"''•''',: �'gd z ra + y a r i , t , a q: o I �4 ,i,� , : 1 ,4.,",,r rta n f ?� 9 6 r�S 1 sr v "O C a aOftl ga Y' ,t ar , ,„ , t i' I"d� ,„,.,t,„„,,,,,, 6 � , .a `'' " n r e s "�'' � r�:rs.. r ' - u �: , �_.�. r. ^u Less than $200 0 0.00% 921 2.60% $200-$299 10 0.53% 1,151 3.24% $300-$499 380 20.03% 10,776 30.37% $500-$749 1,111 58.57% 16,260 45.83% $750 -$999 313 16.50% 3,888 10.96% $1000+ 52 2.74% 1,731 4.88% No Cash Rent 31 1.63% 752 2.12% Total Rental Units 1,897 100 35,479 100 * Specified Units (The Census excludes one - family houses on ten acres or more from the count of specified units). Source: 1990 Census, U.S. Census Bureau • III - 42 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS 0 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT Table III - 16a: Value of Owner- Occupied Housing, 2000 I. J SpecafiOd YgltiO � 4 0; A ry " tF�0 k 1 , o1,0 � n ,lCd.[ ,* y , 'a 4At 1 d, , t _fah . 21 ,-rh4 YN.a. A uw ti !e 7u ,, k ' ,e x� �' ,�.�x �a �1 w � 6, 1 ;:r ��RO ra CSS�i � s f " � p � '�^ � � .y+e � � r v u . F: a ` w ��"�' � ti �:� �,. .�Ikt41 q a 1 ; " ��1 (� �dy� 4' G�� w� �� 1 �' "ybA � ��4 : w .r k ,q qi a y A . � ry n r ud L �L �.�' 9 e apt Y � F �` q .p �m�„ 3' � y�i �� a� f �1 ��•,� r m ,,G sin x m� .n, h �' a �: rt 'r'"47 k � F " r , ,.:' , 4,' d 3,� t'a ; ” 44i ,�dM' ^�'.` w` `+n+ � i'e, �€ � d 'f�� a l4), r �' 0; U4,41'11 n 1 , P : dia i'9 - K e i 3 ; , :,i M , v ,. , y e '�''£;1 ,4Aa. MRt�"aa7a. e4 "n. at.�a�..0 &cti�, +�Wd '6E��. .. i .u. '.ui i u w "�' Less than $15,000 4 0.05 152 0.18 $15,000 to $19,999 0 0 41 64.06 $20,000 to $24,999 0 0 87 135.9 $25,000 to $29,999 0 0 168 193.1 $30,000 to $34,999 8 0.09 232 266.7 $35,000 to $39,999 24 0.28 407 175.4 $40,000 to $49,999 102 1.19 1,151 282.8 $50,000 to $59,999 185 2.17 2,295 563.9 $60,000 to $69,999 485 _ 5.68 4,255 185.4 $70,000 to $79,999 564 6.6 5,943 259 $80,000 to $89,999 554 6.48 7,048 118.6 $90,000 to $99,999 661 7.74 8,287 139.4 $100,000 to $124,999 1,367 16 16,168 195.1 • $125,000 to $149,999 1,370 16.03 12,145 75.12 $150,000 to $174,999 815 9.54 7,779 __- 48.11 $175,000 to $199,999 481 5.63 5,625 72.31 - - - $200,000 to $249,999 881 10.31 5,993 77.04 $250,000 to $299,999 534 6.25 3,590 59.9 $300,000 to $399,999 323 3.78 2,438 40.68 $400,000 to $499,999 1 13 1.32% 882 36.18 $500,000 to $749,999 59 0.69% 724 82.09 $750,000 to $999,999 0 0.00% 237 26.87 $1,000,000 or more 15 0.18% 162 68.35 $100,000 or more 5,958 69.55 55,743 64.96 Totals 8,545 100 85,809 100 Median Value $189,000 $169,200 * Specified Units (The Census excludes one - family houses on ten acres or more from the count of specified units). Source: 2000 Census, STF3A, U.S. Census Bureau. • III - 43 f .• CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT • Table III - 16b: Value of Owner- Occupied Housing, 1990 Ta p bl.1 n : ', t Value o5 C 3 �.+L.,� n .." T�AC fFp' � 3uaa, 'k2m , I _ "a.. tl L4 ,7- : o • - E t , "9i J i �b�, F "Ir�l 4 r !'�" 4 w� "+ 9 Y`b� i �` � K" r " '�a' , r �1 +h; S 1 I� t, 1 �f �d 4 + ' P ,+d -b s" "!�' oNY k1, ��k I^ d m, +� dk Y hy+ a 61 fit �� / • s *, i E'i . , ,-L' r ,�� 4b � , 4, �I J �. i. � r �x4 9 tift'ed-V6i6e n' Less than $15,000 0 0 301 0.48 $15,000 to $19,999 0 0 160 0.26 $20,000 to $24,999 0 0 _ 249 0.4 $25,000 to $29,999 10 0.19 450 0.72 $30,000 to $34,999 0 0 461 0.74 $35,000 to $39,999 12 0.23 870 1.4 $40,000 to $49,999 69 1.31 2658 4.28 $50,000 to $59,999 470 8.96 4295 6.91 $60,000 to $74,999 809 15.42 9,676 15.57 $75,000 to $99,999 1,461 27.85 18,553 29.86 $100,000 to $124,999 746 14.22 8,889 14.31 5,506 8.86 • $125,000 to $149,999 680 12.96 $150,000 to $174,999 282 5.38 3,321 5.34 $175,000 to $199,999 219 4.17 2,023 3.26 $200,000 to $249,999 296 5.64 2,191 3.53 1.82 $250,000 to $299,999 91 1.73 1,131 1 $300,000 to $399,999 70 1.33 739 _19 281 0.45 $400,000 to $499,999 20 0.38 383 0.62 $500,000 or more 11 0.21 $100,000 or more 2,415 46.02 24,464 39.38 Totals 5,246 100 62,137 100 Median Value $96,400 $91,100 Source: 1990 Census • 111 - 44 r CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS • COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT Table III - 17: Comparison of Monthly Cost of Owner - Occupied Housing, 2000 200�r 1 it of�x11, I 1 41) S,`e lnolt~ C1i ,4y Speciftedl 3 "T 4 '' J y£ . ; ■ $ '' , , 4, : . Q , With Mortgage: 7,297 85.39 71,160 82.92 Less than $200 0 0 45 0.06 $200 -$299 29 0.4 240 0.34 $300 -$399 14 0.19 641 0.9 $400 -$499 105 1.44 1,457 2.05 $500 -$599 202 2.77 2,450 3.44 $600 -$699 395 5.41 4,159 5.84 $700 -$799 522 7.15 5,781 8.12 $800 -$899 735 10.07 7,457 10.48 $900 -$999 792 10.85 7,089 9.96 $1,000 or more 4,503 61.71 41,841 58.8 Total Mortgaged 7,297 100 71160 100 Median 1,144 1,102 Median as % of 1999 HH Income 20.7 21.4 • Not Mortgaged: 1,248 14.61 14,649 17.07 Less than $100 0 0 180 1.23 $100 -$149 8 0.64 473 3.23 $150 -$199 33 2.64 1,275 8.7 $200 -$249 145 11.62 2,063 14.08 $250 -$299 250 20.03 2,585 17.65 $300 -$349 287 23 2,156 14.72 $350 -$399 159 12.74 1,849 12.62 $400 or more 366 29.33 4,068 27.77 Total Not Mortgaged 1,248 100 14,649 100 Median 333 317 Median as % of 1999 HH Income 10 10 Total Owner-Occupied 8,545 100.00 85,809 100.00 * Specified Units (The Census excludes one - family houses on ten acres or more from the count of specified units). Source: 2000 Census, STF3A, U.S. Census Bureau; 2006 Shimberg Center for Affordable Housing • ID - 45 ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http:// library8. mulicode .com/default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 • DIVISION 12. TOWN CENTER DISTRICT CODE Sec. 20 -320. Intent. (a) The City of Winter Springs seeks to create a town center based upon traditional standards for city building. In February, 1998 the City of Winter Springs created a plan for the town center through a design session involving the community and a team of design professionals. This division is based on that plan. Traditional urban design conventions have been applied to create a palette of squares, parks, and street types that form the framework for the town center. These conventions are derived from a number of sources in planning literature. Where approvals, interpretations and judgements are left to the discretion of city officials, these officials shall use the following texts for guidance as to best practices: Civic Art, by Hegemann and Peets; Great Streets, by Allan B. Jacobs; The New Urbanism: Toward an Architecture of Community, by Peter Katz; AIA Graphic Standards, 9th Edition; The Lexicon of the New Urbanism, by Duany et al, Congress for the New Urbanism; Shared Parking, by Barton - Aschman Associates, The Urban Land Institute (b) This division repeals the Town Center Overlay Zoning District Regulations of June 9, • 1997 (Ordinance No. 661) and September 8, 1997 (Ordinance No. 676). Should any conflict arise between the provisions of this division and other local land development regulations for the City of Winter Springs, the provisions of this division shall apply. To the extent that this division is silent where other codes govern, they shall apply. (c) How To Use this division: (1) Determine whether your use is permitted in the Town Center. (2) Review the general provisions which apply throughout the district. (3) Determine which street type your lot fronts. (If you have a corner lot, you must determine the primary space or street based on the hierarchy in section 20 -325.) (4) Next, review section 20 -325 for provisions about the street type, square, or park that corresponds to the lot. (5) Finally, review the building elements and architectural guidelines which contain specific rules for buildings. (Ord. No. 707, § 1(Exh. A), 6- 12 -00) GRAPHIC LINK:CIick here Sec. 20 - 321. Administration. • (a) Interpretation of the standards. Interpretation of the standards in this division shall be the responsibility of the city's development review committee (DRC). The "In Our Generation" illustrative buildout drawing in section 20 -325 of this divisionode and on page 6 33 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: //l ibrary8.municode.com/default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 in the adopted masterplan shall serve as guidance to the development review committee • with regard to the city's intent for land development in the Town Center. The images contained in this division are meant to demonstrate the character intended for the Town Center, but are for illustrative purposes only. The accompanying text and numbers are rules that govem permitted development. (b) Review process. (1) Applications are subject to review by the development review committee. The committee shall have authority within reason for approving all aspects of site planning and exterior architecture, including aesthetic appropriateness, environmental implications, traffic impacts, and any other site - specific matters not delineated herein. (2) Optional preliminary review: Applicants may, at their option, submit designs in schematic or sketch form to the development review committee for preliminary approval, subject to further review. (3) Applicants shall submit the following items to the land development division of the department of community development for review: a. A current site survey, no more than one (1) year old. b. A current tree survey, no more than one (1) year old. c. A site plan, drawn to scale, which shall indicate: 1. Building locations and orientations, and landscape areas; 2. Parking locations and number of spaces; • 3. Paved surfaces, materials and location(s); 4. Site location diagram and legal description; and 5. Signage. d. Building elevations illustrating all sides of structures facing public streets or spaces. e. A parking analysis justifying the proposed parking solution (such as Shared Parking, by Barton Aschman Associates, The Urban Land Institute). f. Other reasonable supporting documents to indicate intentions and /or any other items reasonably required by the development review committee. (c) Special exceptions: (1) The city commission may by special exception waive strict compliance with provisions of this code. In granting a special exception, the city commission must find by substantial competent evidence that: a. The proposed development contributes to, promotes and encourages the improvement of the Winter Springs Town Center and catalyzes other development as envisioned in the Winter Springs Town Center regulations. b. The proposed development will not have an unfavorable effect on the economy of the Winter Springs Town Center. • c. The proposed development abides by all rules in this code other than those specially excepted. Special limitations apply to large footprint buildings (greater than twenty thousand (20,000) square feet); see subsection 34 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: / /Iibrary8.municode .corn/de fault- test/Doc View /12019/1/122/125 30- 324(12) for these limitations. 1111 d. The proposed development meets any reasonable additional conditions, restrictions or limitations deemed necessary by the city commission in order to preserve and promote the intent of the Winter Springs Town Center Master Plan. (2) Procedure for special exceptions: a. Approval may be granted only after a minimum of two (2) discretionary reviews. The first review shall be before the development review committee, at which time the development review committee shall review the project and provide to the city commission an advisory recommendation regarding approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval. The second review shall be a public hearing held before the city commission and shall be held no sooner than seven (7) calendar days following the development review committee hearing. b. Requests for special exceptions under this division shall include each exhibit required in the administration review process per subsection 20- 321(b). In addition, the city commission may within reason require additional exhibits and may defer approval of the special exception application or schedule an additional public hearing or hearings to review those exhibits. c. Special exceptions shall not be unreasonably withheld, but the city commission shall have authority to require that the applicant satisfy any • additional conditions it deems necessary to fulfill goals of the master plan, including reasonable offsite improvements directly related and proportionate to the specific impact of the request, or further review(s) and approval by the development review committee. (3) The city commission may grant the approval of an application for special exceptions from the code in whole or in part upon a majority vote of its members. (d) Site development agreement option: The city may enter into a site development agreement with the user or developer of a property, relating to development of a particular parcel or tract of land, and such an agreement may address such issues as impact fee credits; a specialized or negotiated concept of design or site plan development authorized or sanctioned by this division; infrastructure service credits or public - private participation in funding, design or construction; or other incentives based upon strict compliance with requirements of this ordinance. The agreement will be mutually acceptable to all parties. Considerations for the city in deciding whether to participate in such an agreement will include compliance with the objectives and design criteria specified in this division; demonstration of a cost benefit to city and developer; consideration of development amenities provided by the developer. Such a site development agreement shall be adopted and be in conformance with the requirements of the Florida Municipal Home Rule Powers Act or Sections 163.3220 through 163.4243, Florida Statutes, as to effect, duration, public hearing requirements and other issues. (e) Comprehensive plan compliance required: All development of property subject to the Town Center zoning designation and these regulations shall be subject to the Comprehensive Plan of the City of Winter Springs, Florida, and all approvals and land • development permits shall be in compliance with the comprehensive plan. An amendment to the comprehensive plan has been proposed and is currently being processed by the city. This amendment is proposed to increase densities for the area affected by these Town Center regulations; however, until this amendment to the comprehensive plan is approved 35 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: / /library8. municode .com /default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 and adopted in accordance with state law, the city cannot lawfully assure any owner or user • of any affected property densities and land uses not currently allowed or permitted by the city's comprehensive plan. (Ord. No. 707, § 1(Exh. A), 6- 12 -00) Sec. 20 -322. Definitions. [The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this division, shall have the meanings ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning:] Accessory structure: A building or structure subordinate to the principal building and used for purposes customarily incidental to the main or principal building and located on the same lot or set of attached lots therewith. Alley: A publicly or privately owned secondary way which affords access to the side or rear of abutting property. Appurtenances: Architectural features not used for human occupancy consisting of: spires, belfries, cupolas or dormers; silos; parapet walls, and cornices without windows; chimneys, ventilators, skylights, and antennas. Awning: An architectural projection roofed with flexible material supported entirely from the exterior wall of a building. Balcony: A porch connected to a building on upper stories supported by either a cantilever • or brackets. Block: An increment of land composed of an aggregate of lots, tracts and alleys circumscribed by thoroughfares. Build -to -line: A line parallel to the property line, along which a building shall be built. Exact location of build -to -lines shall be established by the DRC at the time of application. Building frontage: The vertical side of a building which faces the primary space or street and is built to the build -to -line. Building volume: The space displaced by the exterior walls and roof of a building; a product of building width, depth, and height. It is the intent of this division to regulate building volume in order to shape public spaces that are human - scaled, well- ordered, and which maximize the shared real estate amenity. Building width: The distance from one side of a building frontage to the other. In conditions where buildings are attached, building width is the distinction between buildings which shall be expressed via a change in architectural expression, such as a vertical element running from ground to roof, a change in fenestration or style, color or texture, or a break in facade plane or roof line. These changes may be subtle or significant, but it is the intent to avoid homogenous blocks of excessively long buildings. Colonnade or arcade: A covered, open -air walkway at standard sidewalk level attached to or integral with the building frontage; structure overhead is supported architecturally by columns or arches along the sidewalk. • Dwelling area: The total internal useable space on all floors of a structure, not including porches, balconies, terraces, stoops, patios, or garages. Front porch: A roofed area, attached at the ground floor level or first floor level, and to the 36 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: / /library8. municode .com /default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 front of a building, open except for railings, and support columns. • Garden wall: A freestanding wall along the property line dividing private areas from streets, alleys, and or adjacent Tots. Height: The vertical distance from the lowest point on the tallest side of the structure to the top of the parapet, cornice or eave. Liner building: A building built in front of a parking garage, cinema, supermarket etc., to conceal large expanses of blank wall area and to face the street space with a facade that has doors and windows opening onto the sidewalk (see diagrams in section 20 -324). Parking garages and their Liners may be built at different times. Lot: A single building plot; the smallest legal increment of land which may be bought and sold. Lot frontage: The property line adjacent to the frontage street. Marquee: A permanently roofed architectural projection the sides of which are vertical and are intended for the display of signs; which provides protection against the weather for the pedestrian; and which is supported entirely from an exterior wall of a building. Primary Space or Street: The space or street that a building fronts. At squares and street intersections the space or street highest in the hierarchy is the primary street. Stoop: A small platform and /or entrance stairway at a house door, commonly covered by a secondary roof or awning. Storefront: Building frontage for the ground floor usually associated with retail uses. • Structured parking: Layers of parking stacked vertically. (Ord. No. 707, § 1(Exh. A), 6- 12 -00) Sec. 20 - 323. Permitted uses. [(a) Uses permitted. The following uses shall be permitted in the Town Center District;] Administrative public buildings Adult congregate living facility Advertising agencies Alcoholic beverage sales (package) Alcoholic beverage on- premesis consumption Alterations and tailoring Amusement enterprises, private commercial Antique and gift shop Appliances, sales and service Artists' studios • Automotive accessories sales Bakery, wholesale and retail 37 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: / /library8.municode .com/default - test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 Bathroom accessories • Bed and breakfast inn Bicycles, sales and service Bookkeepers Bookstores, stationery, newsstands Bridal shops Butcher shop, retail only Carpets, rugs and linoleum Churches (with or without educational and recreational buildings and facilities) Cleaners Coin dealers Computers, hardware, and software sales and service Confectionery and ice cream stores Convention center Corner store or neighborhood convenience store without gas pumps Dance and music studios Day nurseries, kindergartens and day care • Drug and sundry stores Employment agencies Financial institutions, banks, savings and loan Florist and gift shops Fumiture, retail, new and used Government service facilities Grocers, retail and wholesale Gun shop Hair, nail and tanning salons Hardware stores Health food Hobby and craft shops Home occupations Hospitals and nursing homes Hotel • Hypnotists Inn Insurance 38 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: / /library8.municode .com/default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 Interior decorating and draperies • Jewelry stores Libraries Loan companies Locksmiths Luggage shops Manufacturing and assembly of scientific and optical precision instruments Markets and stores, small (Not exceeding 20,000 square feet) Medical clinics and laboratories Municipal Buildings Museums and /or cultural institutions Nurseries, plants, trees, etc., Retail and wholesale Nursing Homes Offices Outdoor signs sales offices Paint store Parking garages • Parks and public recreation areas and facilities Pet shops and grooming Photographic studios Physical fitness and health clubs Post office Private clubs and lodges Public restrooms Public utilities and service structures Quick printers Radio and TV broadcasting studios, excluding towers Radio and TV sales and service Reception facilities Rental stores Retirement homes, including independent living through assisted living Residential, single family (attached and detached) • Residential, multifamily Restaurants Schools, service and vocational schools (such as cosmetology, medical and dental assistant's 39 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http:// Iibrary8. municode .com/default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 training) Shoe repair shops Sidewalk cafes Snack shops Sporting goods, retail Tailoring shops Taxidermists Telephone business office and exchanges Theaters, not drive -ins Title companies Tobacco shops Town Center marketing and sales center Toy stores Trail heads Travel agencies Wearing apparel stores Any other similar retail store or business enterprise not listed, that in the judgement of the • development review committee is not specifically limited to other zoning districts within the city and is consistent with those included above, and further, that will be in harmony with the spirit of the Winter Springs Town Center Master Plan. (b) Uses permitted by special exception only. Automobile repair shops (routine service) Bowling alleys Bus terminal Car wash Corner store or neighborhood convenience store with gas pumps Equestrian facilities Gas stations Launderettes and Laundromats Printers, commercial Schools, private and parochial Skating rinks Stadiums and arenas • Swimming pools; sales service and supplies Veterinary clinics (no overnight boarding) (Ord. No. 707, § 1(Exh. A), 6- 12 -00; Ord. No. 2007 -30, § 2, 12- 10 -07) 40 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: / /library8.municode .com/default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 11111 Sec. 20 -324. General provisions. The following general provisions apply to all street types. (1) Corner radii and clear zones: Comer curb radii shall be between nine (9) feet and fifteen (15) feet. Fairly tight turning radii shorten pedestrian crossings and inhibit reckless drivers from turning corners at high speeds. To allow for emergency vehicles (e.g. fire trucks) to turn corners, a twenty- five -foot radius clear zone shall be established free of all vertical obstructions including but not limited to telephone poles, sign poles, fire hydrants, electrical boxes, or newspaper boxes. GRAPHIC LINK:Corner Radii and Clear Zones (2) Alleys: Alleys are required in the town center to minimize curb cuts and to provide access to parking and service areas behind buildings. Alley requirements may be waived by the DRC for access to detached single family residential lots greater than fifty -five (55) feet in width in situations in which proper streetfront orientation, pedestrian circulation, and parking can still be accomplished. Alley locations and dimensions are not fixed but shall be designed to accommodate the alley's purpose. Additional curb cuts shall be added only with the permission of the development review committee. Alleys may be incorporated into parking lots as drive aisles and fire lanes. (3) Exceptions from build -to lines: Exceptions from build -to lines may be granted by the development review committee for avoiding trees with calipers greater than • eight (8) inches. On comer sites (within fifty (50) feet of the corner) with build -to lines set back from the property line, building frontage may be positioned forward of the build -to line up to the property line, provided it does not encroach upon the clear zone. (4) Side and rear setbacks: No side or rear setbacks are required in the Town Center. (5) First floor height for residential: Residential uses on the first story shall have finished floor height raised a minimum of two (2) feet above sidewalk grade. (6) Diversity of building widths: No more than three (3) residential buildings twenty (20) feet or less in width are permitted within any two hundred (200) feet of frontage. (7) Accessory structures: Accessory structures are permitted and may contain parking, accessory dwelling units, home occupation uses, storage space, and trash receptacles. Home occupation uses are restricted to owner plus one (1) employee, shall not include noxious or disruptive functions, and may not disrupt parking for neighboring residents. Accessory structures shall not be greater than six hundred twenty -five (625) square feet in footprint and shall not exceed two (2) stories in height. (8) Drive - throughs: Drive - through service windows are permitted in the rear in mid -block and alley accessed locations provided they do not substantially disrupt pedestrian activity or surrounding uses. • GRAPHIC LINK:Drive- Throughs 41 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: //l ibrary8.municode .com/default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 (9) Civic sites: Civic buildings contain uses of special public importance. Civic • buildings include, but are not limited to, municipal buildings, churches, libraries, schools, daycare centers, recreation facilities, and places of assembly. Civic buildings do not include retail buildings, residential buildings, or privately owned office buildings. In order to provide greater flexibility to create a special architectural statement, civic buildings are not subject to build -to line requirements or building frontage requirements. The design of civic buildings shall be subject to review and approval by the development review committee. (10) Parking: a. Parking requirements. The intent of these parking regulations is to encourage a balance between compact pedestrian oriented development and necessary car storage. The goal is to construct neither more nor less parking than is needed. There shall be no minimum parking requirement in the Town Center. The applicant shall provide a parking analysis justifying the proposed parking solution. Minimum parking space dimensions for head -in or diagonal parking shall be 9' x 18' with eleven -foot drive lanes (twenty -two (22) feet for two -way traffic) and parallel parking spaces shall be 8'x 20' minimum with ten -foot drive lanes (twenty (20) feet for two -way traffic). Parking shall be provided as necessary to meet the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act and Florida Accessibility Code. • b. On- street parking. The selection of diagonal or parallel parking along any section of road shall be determined in consultation with DRC. In the event that DRC approves diagonal instead of parallel parking, dimensions should be adjusted in subsection 20- 325(c). c. Off - street surface parking lot placement. Off - street surface parking Tots shall be set back a minimum of fifty (50) feet from the property line along the main street. DRC shall have discretion to make this requirement applicable elsewhere on prominent frontages, such as along key pedestrian connections, within significant vistas and within important public spaces. Outbuildings serving as garages facing alleys shall be permitted within this setback. Surface parking lots may be built up to the property line on all other street frontages. GRAPHIC LINK:Off- Street Parking Lot Placement d. Structured parking lot placement. Parking structures shall be set back a minimum of fifty (50) feet from the property lines of all adjacent streets to reserve room for liner buildings between parking structures and the lot frontage. The liner building shall be no less than two (2) stories in height. Liner buildings may be detached from or attached to parking structures. e. Access to off - street parking. Alleys shall be the primary source of access to off - street parking. Parking along alleys may be head -in, diagonal or parallel. • Alleys may be incorporated into parking lots as standard drive aisles. Access to all properties adjacent to the alley shall be maintained. Access between parking lots across property lines is also encouraged. 42 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: / /library8. municode .com /default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 GRAPHIC LINK:Click here • Corner Tots that have both rear and side access shall access parking through the rear (see diagram below). GRAPHIC LINK:Click here Circular drives are prohibited except for civic buildings. Garage door(s) shall be positioned no closer to streets, squares or parks than twenty (20) feet behind the principal plane of the building frontage. Garage doors facing streets, squares or parks shall not exceed ten (10) feet in width. Where space permits, garage doors shall face the side or the rear, not the front. f. Parking lot landscaping requirements: Landscape strips of at least six feet in width shall be provided between parking isles of either head -in or diagonal parking. Tree spacing in parking lots shall be determined by the city arborist based upon tree species and location. The objective is to create as continuous a shade canopy as possible. A diversity of tree species across the Town Center is encouraged. To minimize water consumption, the use of low -water vegetative ground cover other than turf is encouraged. GRAPHIC LINK:Click here In lieu of landscape strips, landscape islands can be provided. No more than six (6) consecutive parking stalls are permitted without a landscape island of • at least six (6) feet in width and extending the entire length of the parking stall. A minimum of one (1) tree shall be planted in each landscape island. GRAPHIC LINK:Click here (11) Single versus double loaded roads: Segments of single loaded Edge Drive are designated for portions of the masterplan in order to provide public access to significant natural areas and to enhance these significant natural areas by facing them with the fronts of buildings. Single loaded Edge Drive may, by special exception, be replaced with a double loaded altemative. Double loaded roads may be appropriate in locations such as: where there is no significant natural view, in circumstances where no significant negative visual impact will be created by having the developed properties back up to the natural area or park space, or in other locations where it is deemed to be in the balanced publicprivate interest to incorporate double loaded roads for the economical use of the property. (12) Large footprint buildings: Buildings with a footprint greater than twenty thousand (20,000) square feet may be built within the Town Center District by special exception only. Such buildings must abide by all rules in this division with the following special limitations: a. Buildings may be one (1) story in height on any frontage except Main Street and Market Square, but shall be at least twenty -four (24) feet in height. This may be accomplished with liner buildings or higher ceiling heights and /or parapets. • b. To encourage use by pedestrians and decrease the need for solely auto- oriented patronage, large- Footprint buildings must reinforce the urban character of the Town Center and shall therefore continue a connected 43 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: / /library8. municode .com /default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 system of walkable street frontages. • c. Buildings are exempt from maximum lot size restrictions, however building footprints may not be larger than a single block. d. Loading docks, service areas and trash disposal facilities shall not face streets, parks, squares or significant pedestrian spaces. GRAPHIC LINK:Click here Large Footprint Buildings are wrapped in a liner of smaller buildings with doors and windows facing the street. GRAPHIC LINK:Undesirable Large Footprint Buildings Large Footprint Building has blank facades and sits behind a field of parking. (13) Additional prohibitions: The following are prohibited where visible from parks, squares and primary streets: a. Coin operated newspaper vending boxes. b. Utility boxes and machinery including but not limited to: backflow devices, electric meters and air conditioning units. (Ord. No. 707, § 1(Exh. A), 6- 12 -00) • Sec. 20 -325. Squares, parks, and, street types. Development under this code is regulated by street type. The squares, parks, and streets are related to each other in a hierarchical manner. When these spaces intersect, the primary space is determined by its higher order in the hierarchy. The front of a building and its main entrance must face the primary space. (a) Hierarchy of squares, parks, and streets: GRAPHIC LINK:Hierarchy of Squares, Parks, and Streets Alleys are covered under general provisions, as they are never fronted by main structures. On the following pages, diagrammatic examples are used to illustrate example building locations, configurations, and dimensions. The accompanying numbers and text are rules; the graphics are illustrative only. Particular details of the Illustrative Buildout Drawing and other sketches, illustrations, drawings and diagrams contained herein are subject to change, at the request of the affected property owner, with approval by the Development Review Committee and, if required below, with the approval of the City Commission. Such details may include the location dimensions, quantity, configuration and design of the following components of the Winter Springs Town Center: With approval by DRC and final approval by City Commission: (1) Streets, roads and alleys (including any boulevard, drive or lane) and the framework of blocks they form, except for the current alignment of State Road 434, Tuskawilla Road and other existing streets. (2) Squares, parks, and public spaces including the wetland park, relocated portions 44 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: / /library8.municode .com/default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 of the Cross Seminole Trail with trailhead(s) and /or /bridge, but not including the • existing Central Winds Park. It is the intent that squares, parks and open spaces should remain open and unbuilt (except for civic buildings). With approval by DRC: (3) Buildings and structures, whether residential or commercial or civic, including parking lots and structures, and the neighborhoods they form, except for the existing Winter Springs High School, City Hall and U.S. Post Office. (4) Stormwater retention areas and any wetlands jurisdictional lines. (b) "In Our Generation" illustrative buildout drawing. GRAPHIC LINK:In Our Generation Illustrative Buildout Drawing (c) Squares, parks and streets map. GRAPHIC LINK:Squares, parks and streets map (1) Market Square. This square is the window into Main Street. The eastern street has two way travel with diagonal parking on the building side. The western street is one way with parallel parking on the building side. Trees are optional in the right - of -way. a. Building placement: TABLE INSET: • Build -to -line location: (Typical) 0 ft. From R.O.W. line Space Between Buildings: 10 ft. maximum b. Building volume: TABLE INSET: Bldg. Width: 16 ft. minimum 160 ft. maximum Bldg. Depth: 125 ft. maximum 2 stories minimum Bldg. Height: 4 stories maximum 55 ft. maximum c. Notes: 1. Appurtenances may extend beyond the height limit. 2. Building fronts are required to provide shelter to the sidewalk by means of at least one of the following: arcade, colonnade, marquee, awning, or 2nd floor balcony. 3. All permitted uses are allowed on all floors. • 4. Specific design of tree planting and landscaping layouts in and along this space shall be subject to DRC approval. 45 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: //l ibrary8.municode .com/default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 5. The alignment of floor -to -floor heights of abutting buildings is 111 encouraged to allow for shared use of elevators. GRAPHIC LINK: Market Square (2) Magnolia Square. Magnolia Square is the formal gathering space in the town center. A focal fountain terminates the main streets into the square. Angled parking on the north and south sides of the square supports retail uses. a. Building Placement: TABLE INSET: Build -to -line location: 0 ft. From (Typical) R.O.W. line Space between buildings: 10 ft. maximum b. Building volume: TABLE INSET: Bldg. width: 16 ft. minimum 160 ft. maximum Bldg. Depth: 125 ft. maximum • Bldg. Height: 2 stories minimum 4 stories maximum 55 ft. maximum c. Notes: 1. Appurtenances may extend beyond the height limit. 2. Building fronts are required to provide shelter to the sidewalk by means of at least one of the following: arcade, colonnade, marquee, awning, or 2nd floor balcony. 3. All permitted uses are allowed on all floors. 4. Specific design of tree planting and landscaping layouts in and along this space shall be subject to DRC approval. 5. The alignment of floor -to -floor heights of abutting buildings is encouraged to allow for shared use of elevators. GRAPHIC LINK:Magnolia Square (3) Hickory Grove Park. Hickory Grove Park is the "central park" of the town center and is named for the large stand of mature hickory trees it contains. The Blumberg house is to be converted to a civic use and two additional civic sites are located in the southeast and southwest corners. • a. Building placement: TABLE INSET: 46 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: / /library8. municode .com /default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 Build -to -line location: • (Typical) 0 to 10 ft. from R.O.W. line Space Between Buildings: 35 ft. maximum b. Building volume: TABLE INSET: Bldg. width: 16 ft. minimum 160 ft. maximum Bldg. Depth: 125 ft. maximum 2 stories minimum Bldg. Height: 4 stories maximum 55 ft. maximum c. Notes: 1. Appurtenances may extend beyond the height limit. 2. All permitted uses are allowed on all floors. 3. Specific design of tree planting and landscaping layouts in and along this space shall be subject to DRC approval. 4. The alignment of floor -to -floor heights of abutting buildings is • encouraged to allow for shared use of elevators. GRAPHIC LINK:Hickory Grove Park (4) Lake Trail Park. This neighborhood park gives trail users a window into the Town Center and gives residents access to Lake Jesup. a. Building placement: TABLE INSET: Build -to -line location: 0 to 10 ft. from (Typical) R.O.W. line Space Between Buildings: 35 ft. maximum b. Building volume: TABLE INSET: Bldg. width: 16 ft. minimum 160 ft. maximum Bldg. Depth: 125 ft. maximum 2 stories minimum Bldg. Height: 4 stories maximum • 55 ft. maximum c. Notes: 47 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: / /library8.minicode .com/default- tesdDocView /12019/1/122/125 1. Appurtenances may extend beyond the height limit. • 2. All permitted uses are allowed on all floors. 3. Specific design of tree planting and landscaping layouts in and along this space shall be subject to DRC approval. 4. The alignment of floor -to -floor heights of abutting buildings is encouraged to allow for shared use of elevators. GRAPHIC LINK:Click here (5) Orange Avenue Park. This park marks the northern entrance into the town center district. It provides a public gathering space as well as needed stormwater retention for the Orange Avenue neighborhood. a. Building placement: TABLE INSET: Build -to -line location: 0 to 10 ft. from (Typical) R.O.W. line Space Between 50 ft. maximum Buildings: 10 ft. minimum b. Building volume: TABLE INSET: • 16 ft. minimum Bldg. Width: 160 ft. maximum Bldg. Depth: 125 ft. maximum 2 stories minimum Bldg. Height: 4 stories maximum 55 ft. maximum c. Notes: 1. Appurtenances may extend beyond the height limit. 2. All permitted uses are allowed on all floors. 3. Specific design of tree planting and landscaping layouts in and along this space shall be subject to DRC approval. GRAPHIC LINK:Click here (6) Neighborhood Squares. These small squares are distributed throughout the Town Center, providing frequent focal points and places of interest. a. Building placement: TABLE INSET: • Build-to-line location: 0 to 10 ft. from R.O.W. line (Typical) 48 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE 1II. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: //l ibrary8.municode .com/default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 • Space Between Buildings: 35 ft. maximum b. Building volume: TABLE INSET: Bldg. width: 16 ft. minimum 160 ft. maximum Bldg. Depth: 125 ft. maximum 2 stories minimum Bldg. Height: 4 stories maximum 55 ft. maximum c. Notes: 1. Appurtenances may extend beyond the height limit. 2. All permitted uses are allowed on all floors. 3. Specific design of tree planting and landscaping layouts in and along these spaces shall be subject to DRC approval. 4. The alignment of floor -to -floor heights of abutting buildings is encouraged to allow for shared use of elevators. • GRAPHIC LINK:Click here (7) Main Street. Main Street is the most important street in the Town Center. It is lined with mixed -use shopfront buildings that are positioned at the front of each lot. It features angled parking or parallel parking and wide sidewalks. Trees in the right - of -way are optional. The southern portion between Market Square and Magnolia Square is of primary importance for implementation, but it is understood that over time Main Street may grow into the area of Tuskawilla Road north of Magnolia Square. a. Building placement: TABLE INSET: Build -to -line location: 0 ft. from Typical) R.O.W. line Space Between Buildings: 10 ft. maximum b. Building volume: TABLE INSET: Bldg. width: 16 ft. minimum 160 ft. maximum • Bldg. depth: 125 ft. maximum 2 stories minimum Bldg. Height: 4 stories maximum 49 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: //l ibrary8.municode .com/default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 55 ft. maximum • c. Notes: 1. Appurtenances may extend beyond the height limit. 2. Building fronts are required to provide shelter to the sidewalk by means of at least one of the following: arcade, colonnade, marquee, awning, or 2nd floor balcony. 3. All permitted uses are allowed on all floors. 4. The alignment of floor -to -floor heights of abutting buildings is encouraged to allow for shared use of elevators. GRAPHIC LINK:Main Street (8) SR 434 Frontage Road. This frontage road completes the transformation of SR 434 into a boulevard and allows local traffic to circulate within the town center without necessarily using the regional road system. It also provides extra parking in front of buildings facing SR 434. The Frontage Road may be waived by the DRC under certain conditions. These may include, but are not limited to: facilitation of traffic movement within the Town Center without using S.R. 434, on- street parking along S.R. 434, and reasonably unimpaired pedestrian movement. a. Building placement: TABLE INSET: • Build -to -line location: (Typical) 0 ft. from R.O.W. line Space Between Buildings: 35 ft. maximum b. Building volume: TABLE INSET: Bldg. Width: 16 ft. minimum 160 ft. maximum Bldg. Depth: 125 ft. maximum 2 stories minimum Bldg. Height: 4 stories maximum 55 ft. maximum c. Notes: 1. Appurtenances may extend beyond the height limit. 2. All permitted uses are allowed on all floors. 3. Tree spacing shall be optimized for the species used, in consultation with the City Arborist. • 4. Trees on building side of street are optional. 5. Diagonal parking is permitted in lieu of parallel parking. 6. The alignment of floor -to -floor heights of abutting buildings is 50 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: / /library8.municode .com/default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 encouraged to allow for shared use of elevators. • GRAPHIC LINK:Frontage Road (9) Urban Boulevard. The urban boulevards are special streets with wide medians down the center usually containing a trail. This extra pedestrian element makes this street type an elegant multi -use connection between special areas within the town center. a. Building placement: TABLE INSET: Build -to -line location: 0 ft. from (Typical) R.O.W. line Space between buildings: 40 ft. maximum b. Building volume: TABLE INSET: Bldg. Width: 16 ft. minimum 160 ft. maximum Bldg. Depth: 125 ft. maximum • Bldg. Height: 2 stories minimum 4 stories maximum 55 ft. maximum c. Notes: 1. Appurtenances may extend beyond the height limit. 2. All permitted uses are allowed on all floors. 3. Tree spacing shall be optimized for the species used, in consultation with the City Arborist. 4. The alignment of floor -to -floor heights of abutting buildings is encouraged to allow for shared use of elevators. GRAPHIC LINK:Urban Boulevard (10) Town Center Street. Town center streets form the primary network of streets within the Town Center. Parallel parking on both sides of the street combined with wide sidewalks creates a safe inviting place for both pedestrians and motorists. twelve -foot wide sidewalks with tree wells are preferred, but six -foot sidewalks with six -foot green strips are also acceptable. a. Building placement: • TABLE INSET: Build -to -line location: 0 ft. from 51 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: / /library8. municode .com /default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 (Typical) R.O.W. line Space Between Buildings: 35 ft. maximum b. Building volume: TABLE INSET: Bldg. Width: 16 ft. minimum 160 ft. maximum Bldg. Depth: 125 ft. maximum 2 stories minimum Bldg. Height: 4 stories maximum 55 ft. maximum c. Notes: 1. Appurtenances may extend beyond the height limit. 2. All permitted uses are allowed on all floors. 3. Tree spacing shall be optimized for the species used, in consultation with the city arborist. 4. The alignment of floor -to -floor heights of abutting buildings is encouraged to allow for shared use of elevators. • GRAPHIC LINK:Town Center Street (11) Edge Drive. The Edge Drive provides public access along the natural boundaries of the town center. Occasionally running parallel to the Cross Seminole Trail, this street has the fronts of its buildings positioned to face the trail and scenic open spaces. a. Building placement: TABLE INSET: Build -to -line location: 10 ft. from (Typical) R.O.W. line Space between buildings: 50 ft. maximum b. Building volume: TABLE INSET: Bldg. Width: 16 ft. minimum 160 ft. maximum Bldg. Depth: 125 ft. maximum 2 stories minimum • Bldg. Height: 4 stories maximum 55 ft. maximum 52 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http:// library8. municode .com/default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 c. Notes: • 1. Appurtenances may extend beyond the height limit. 2. AU permitted uses are allowed on all floors. 3. Tree spacing shall be optimized for the species used, in consultation with the City Arborist. 4. The alignment of floor -to -floor heights of abutting buildings is encouraged to allow for shared use of elevators. GRAPHIC LINK:Edge Drive (12) Neighborhood Street. The neighborhood street is a quieter, more intimate street. Build -to lines are setback and a green strip is incorporated. If needed the setback area can be paved to provide a wider sidewalk for intense uses thus eliminating the door yard. a. Building placement: TABLE INSET: 10 ft. from Build -to -line location: (Typical) R.O.W. line Space Between Buildings: 50 ft. maximum • b. Building volume: TABLE INSET: Bldg. Width: 16 ft. minimum 160 ft. maximum Bldg. Depth: 125 ft. maximum Bldg. Height: 2 stories minimum 4 stories maximum 55 ft. maximum c. Notes: 1. Appurtenances may extend beyond the height limit. 2. All permitted uses are allowed on all floors. 3. Trees shall be planted a maximum of forty (40) feet on center. 4. Tree spacing shall be optimized for the species used, in consultation with the city arborist. 5. The alignment of floor -to -floor heights of abutting buildings is encouraged to allow for shared use of elevators. • GRAPHIC LINK:Neighborhood Street (13) Trail Street. The Trail Street has an asymmetrical section and is an optional street that may be approved by the DRC and the city commission. The area 53 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: / /library8.municode .com/default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 between curb and buildings on one side of the street is extra wide, providing room • for a generous pedestrian path lined with trees and plantings. a. Building placement: TABLE INSET: Build -to -line location: 0 to 10 ft. from (Typical) R.O.W. line Space Between Buildings: 50 ft. maximum b. Building volume: TABLE INSET: Bldg. Width: 16 ft. minimum 160 ft. maximum Bldg. Depth: 125 ft. maximum 2 stories minimum Bldg. Height: 4 stories maximum 55 ft. maximum c. Notes: 1. Appurtenances may extend beyond the height limit. • 2. All permitted uses are allowed on all floors. 3. Tree spacing shall be optimized for the species used, in consultation with the City Arborist. 4. The alignment of floor -to -floor heights of abutting buildings is encouraged to allow for shared use of elevators. GRAPHIC LINK: Trail Street (14) Neighborhood Lane. The neighborhood lane is a "give way" street. This means it is designed with traffic calming in mind. With parking on both sides, cars must 'give way' to oncoming cars. This street section is used primarily in residential areas or secondary streets. a. Building placement: TABLE INSET: Build -to -line location: (Typical) 10 ft. from R.O.W. line Space Between Buildings: 50 ft. maximum b. Building volume: TABLE INSET: • Bldg. Width: 16 ft. minimum 160 ft. maximum 54 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISI -IMENT OF DISTRICTS http: / /library8. municode .com /default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 Bldg. Depth: 125 ft. maximum • 2 stories minimum Bldg. Height: 4 stones maximum 55 ft. maximum c. Notes: 1. Appurtenances may extend beyond the height limit. 2. All permitted uses are allowed on all floors. 3. Tree spacing shall be optimized for the species used, in consultation with the City Arborist. 4. Parallel parking permitted on both sides of the street. 5. The alignment of floor -to -floor heights of abutting buildings is encouraged to allow for shared use of elevators. GRAPHIC LINK:Neighborhood Lane (Ord. No. 707, § 1(Exh. A), 6 12 - 00) Sec. 20 - 326. Building elements. (a) Awnings and Marquees: (b) Balconies: • GRAPHIC LINK:Awninqs, Marquees and Balconies TABLE INSET: Depth = 5 ft. minimum. Height = 10 ft. minimum clear. Length = 25% to 100% of building front. The above requirements apply to first -floor awnings. There are no minimum requirements for awnings above the first floor. Marquees and awnings shall occur forward of the build -to line and may encroach within the right - of -way, but shall not extend past the curb line. Awnings shall be made of fabric. High -gloss or plasticized fabrics are prohibited. TABLE INSET: Depth = 6 ft. minimum for 2nd floor balconies. Height = 10 ft. minimum clear. Length = 25% to 100% of building front. Balconies shall occur forward of the Build -to Line and may encroach within the right -of -way, but • shall not extend past the curb line. Balconies may have roofs, but are required to be open, un- airconditioned parts of the buildings. 55 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: / /library8.municode .com/default- testlDocView /12019/1/122/125 On corners, balconies may wrap around the side of the building facing the side street. • GRAPHIC LINK:Awnings, Marquees and Balconies (c) Colonnades /Arcades: (d) Front Porches: GRAPHIC LINK: Colonnades /Arcades and Front Porches TABLE INSET: Depth = 10 ft. minimum from the build -to line to the inside column face. Height = 10 ft. minimum clear. Length = 75- -100% of building front. Open multi -story verandas, awnings, balconies, and enclosed useable space shall be permitted above the colonnade. Colonnades shall only be constructed where the minimum depth can be obtained. Colonnades shall occur forward of the Build -to Line and may encroach within the right -of -way, but shall not extend past the curb line. On corners, colonnades may wrap around the side of the building facing the side street. TABLE INSET: • Depth = 8 ft. minimum. Length 25% to 90% of building front. Front porches may have multi -story verandas and /or balconies above. Front porches shall occur forward of the build -to line. Porches shall not extend into the right -of -way. Front porches are required to be open, un- airconditioned parts of the buildings. More than 25% of the floor area of a porch shall not be screened if the porch extends forward of the build -to line. GRAPHIC LINK:Colonades /Arcades and Front Porches (e) Stoops: GRAPHIC LINK: Stoops TABLE INSET: Depth = 6 ft. minimum Length = 5 ft. minimum Stoops are permitted and may occur forward of the Build -to Line. Stoops may encroach within the • right -of -way with approval. Sidewalks shall have clear access for pedestrians. Stoops may be covered or uncovered. GRAPHIC LINK:Stoops 56 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: / /library8.municode .com/default - test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 (Ord. No. 707, § 1(Exh. A), 6- 12 -00) • Sec. 20 -327. Architectural guidelines. The lists of permitted materials and configurations come from study of traditional buildings found in Central Florida and have been selected for their appropriateness to the visual environment and climate. A primary goal of the Architectural Guidelines is authenticity. The Guidelines encourage construction which is straightforward and functional, and which draws its ornament and variety from the traditional assembly of genuine materials. General Requirements: The following shall be located in rear yards or sideyards not facing side streets: • Window and wall air conditioners; • Electrical utility meters; • Air conditioning compressors; and • Irrigation and pool pumps. The following shall be located in the rear yards only: • Antennas; • Permanent Barbecues. The following are prohibited: • Undersized shutters (the shutter or shutters must be sized so as to equal the width that would be required to cover the window opening.); • Plastic or inoperable shutters; • Clotheslines; • Clothes drying yards; • Satellite dish antennas greater than 18" in diameter; • Reflective and /or bronze -tint glass; • Plastic or PVC roof tiles; • Backlit awnings; • Glossy- finish awnings; and • Fences made of chain Zink, barbed wire, or plain wire mesh. (a) Building walls. (1) General requirements. Required for all buildings except single family houses: An expression line shall delineate the division between the first story and the second story. A cornice shall delineate the tops of the facades. Expression lines and • comices shall either be moldings extending a minimum of two (2) inches, or jogs in the surface plane of the building wall greater than two (2) inches. 57 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: / /Iibrary8.municode .com/default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 GRAPHIC LINK:Building Walls • (2) Permitted finish materials. • Concrete masonry units with stucco (C.B.S.) • Reinforced concrete with stucco • "Hardie - Plank" siding • Wood (termite resistant): painted white, left natural (cypress and cedar preferred), or painted /stained with colors approved by the Development Review Committee. • Brick (b) Garden walls, fences and hedges: (1) General requirements. Fences, garden walls, or hedges are strongly encouraged and, if built, should be constructed along all un -built rights -of -way which abut streets and alleys as shown in the diagram below. Fences, garden walls and hedges shall be minimum twenty -five (25) percent opaque. GRAPHIC LINK:Garden Walls, Fences and Hedges • Height: Front yard: Maximum height of forty -eight (48) inches. Pillars and posts may extend up to six (6) inches more, to a height of fifty -four (54) inches. Side and rear yards: Maximum height of seventy -two (72) inches. Pillars and posts may extend up • to six (6) inches more, to a height of seventy -eight (78) inches. (2) Permitted finish materials • Wood (termite resistant): painted white, left natural, or painted /stained with colors approved by the development review committee. • Concrete Masonry Units with Stucco (C.B.S.) • Reinforced Concrete with Stucco • Wrought Iron • Brick (3) Permitted configurations • Wood: Picket fences: Minimum thirty (30) percent opaque, w /corner posts Other: To match building walls • Stucco: with texture and color to match building walls • Wrought iron: Vertical, five - eighths (5/8) inch minimum dimension, four (4) inches to six (6) inches spacing (c) Columns, arches, piers, railings and balustrades: • (1) General requirements. • Column and pier spacing: Columns and Piers shall be spaced no farther apart than they are tall. 58 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: / /library8.municode .com/default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 (2) Permitted finish materials. • Columns: Wood (termite resistant), painted or natural Cast Iron Concrete with smooth finish • Arches: Concrete masonry units with stucco (C.B.S.) Reinforced concrete with stucco brick • Piers: Concrete masonry units with stucco (C.B.S.) Reinforced concrete with stucco brick • Railings and balustrades: Wood (termite resistant), painted or natural Wrought Iron (3) Permitted configurations. • Columns: Square, six (6) inches minimum, with or without capitals and bases • Round, six (6) minimum outer diameter, with or without capitals and bases Classical orders • Arches: Semi- circular and segmental • Piers: Eight (8) inches minimum dimension • Porches: Railings 2- 3/4" inches minimum diameter Balustrades four (4) inches minimum spacing, six (6) inches maximum spacing. (d) Opacity and facades: Each floor of any building facade facing a park, square or street shall contain transparent windows covering from fifteen (15) percent to seventy (70) percent of the wall area. Retail storefront areas only: In order to provide clear views of merchandise in stores and to provide natural surveillance of exterior street spaces, the ground -floor along the building frontage shall have transparent storefront windows covering no Tess than fifty (50) percent of the wall area. Storefronts facing Main Street, parks and squares shall remain unshuttered at night and shall utilize transparent glazing material, and shall provide • view of interior spaces it from within. Doors or entrances with public access shall be provided at intervals no greater than fifty (50) feet, unless otherwise approved by the development review committee. 59 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: / /library8. municode .com /default- test/DocView /12019/1/22/125 GRAPHIC LINK:Facades • (e) Roofs and gutters. (1) General requirements. • Permitted roof types: Gabled, hipped, shed, barrel vaulted and domed. Shed roofs shall be concealed with parapets along the street frontage. Applied mansard roofs are not permitted. • Exposed rafter ends (or tabs) at overhangs are strongly recommended. • Downspouts are to match gutters in material and finish. (2) Permitted finish materials. • Metal: Galvanized Copper Aluminum Zinc -alum • Shingles: Asphalt or metal, "dimensional" type Slate Cedar shake • Tile: Clay, Terra cotta, Concrete • Gutters: Copper Aluminum Galvanized steel (3) Permitted configurations. • Metal: Standing seam or "Five -vee," twenty -four (24) inches maximum spacing, panel ends exposed at overhang • Shingles: Square, rectangular, fishscale, shield • Tile: Barrel, flat, French • Gutters: Rectangular section Square section 60 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: / /library8.municode .corn /default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 Half -round section • (f) Signs: (1) General requirements. • All signs shall be subject to a discretionary aesthetic appropriateness review by the DRC in order that signs are consistent and in harmony with the Winter Springs Town Center. The DRC shall use graphics in this section as nonbinding guidelines, but shall make a determination of appropriateness on a case by case basis. • Signs shall be flat against the facade, mounted projecting from the facade, or mounted above the top of the facade. Free standing monument signs are permitted by special exception along State Road 434 frontage. Temporary menu board signs are permitted subject to the restrictions and uniform design standards set forth in this Town Center Code. Wayfinding signage is encouraged, but must maintain the uniform design standards adopted by the DRC for the Town Center. • Signs shall be externally lit. Individual letters and symbols may be intemally lit or back -lit and may project no more than twelve (12) inches from the facade. (2) Finish materials • Wood: painted or natural • Metal: copper, brass, galvanized steel, aluminum • Painted canvas • Neon • • Paint/engraved directly on facade surface (3) Configurations. • Maximum gross area of signs on a given facade shall not exceed ten (10) percent of the applicant's facade area. • Maximum area of any single sign mounted perpendicular to a given facade shall not exceed 10 square feet, except for FIN signs. All projecting signs shall be installed in such a manner that there shall be no visible angle iron support structure above a roof, building face or wall, unless such brackets are incorporated into the signage as decorative elements of the signage. •Signs shall maintain a minimum clear height above sidewalks of eight (8) feet. • All signs shall be designed to be compatible with the respective storefront and subject building in scale, proportion, and color and should be visually interesting and compatible in the context of the town center guidelines. •Marquee signs shall be mounted substantially parallel with the face of the canopy or marquee but shall not be located in such a way as to cause a reduction in the minimum clearance standards set forth in section 20 -326. In addition, marquee signs shall not extend more than two (2) feet above the canopy or marquee to which it is attached. • Menu board signs are temporary accessory signs which display information about the goods and services of adjacent business that customarily have frequent walk in traffic such as eating and drinking establishments and light retail businesses. A maximum of one (1) menu board sign shall be allowed per street address. •Menu signs shall be utilized only during regular business hours and shall be removed during non - business hours and during serious incidents of inclement weather that may destabilize the menu board. Menu boards may be placed on private property or within the public right -of -way, provided 61 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: / /Iibrary8. municode .com /default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 they do not interfere with vehicle access, pedestrian movement, or wheel chair access to, through, and around the site. At least six (6) feet of clear sidewalk width must remain for pedestrian traffic. The total sign area per face shall not exceed six (6) square feet. Maximum height shall be four and one -half (4 1/2) feet. • FIN signs are vertically oriented projecting signs, that are uniquely situated and customized for high visibility. Fin signs shall not exceed twenty -eight (28) feet in height above the ground and shall be placed at least twelve (12) feet above the public sidewalk. Fin signs shall be between fifteen (15) square feet and twenty -five (25) square feet in area, but shall not extend more than five (5) feet from the building wall. All fin signs shall be installed in such a manner that there shall be no visible angle iron support structure above a roof, building face or wall unless such brackets are incorporated into the signage as decorative elements of the signage. GRAPHIC LINK:Desirable and Undesirable Signs GRAPHIC LINK:Signs Flat Aqsinst the Facade GRAPHIC LINK:Sign Examples (g) Windows, skylights, and doors: (1) General requirements. Rectangular window openings facing streets shall be oriented vertically. The following accessories are permitted: • Shutters (standard or Bahama types) Wooden window boxes Muntins and mullions Fabric awnings (no backlighting; no glossy- finish fabrics) (2) Finish materials • Windows, skylights, and storefronts: Wood Aluminum Copper Steel Vinyl clad wood • Doors: Wood or Metal (3) Permitted configurations • Windows: Rectangular • Square Round (eighteen (18) inches maximum outer diameter) 62 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE III. ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICTS http: / /library8. municode .com /default- test/DocView /12019/1/122/125 Semi - circular Octagonal • Window operations: Casement Single and double -hung Industrial Fixed Frame (thirty -six (36) square feet maximum) • Skylights: Flat to the pitch of the roof • Door Operations: Casement French Sliding (rear only) (Ord. No. 707, § 1(Exh. A), 6- 12 -00; Ord. No. 2005 -24, § 2, 7- 11 -05) [THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] • GRAPHIC LINK:Parks in the Town Center Area DIVISION 13. GREENEWAY INTERCHANGE ZONING DISTRICT Sec. 20 -328. Purpose. The GreeneWay Interchange District is designed as a mixed -use category which combines a strategy to attract higher density residential and commercial enterprises oriented toward a major transportation nexus of an expressway and arterial road and minimize urban sprawl. This district is specifically designed to: (1) Provide high density residential development in close proximity to economic centers for employees. (2) Discourage urban sprawl by clustering economic development activities along growth corridors. (3) Promote business development in close proximity to the regional road network providing high visibility and convenient access. (4) Ensure sufficient availability of land to realize the economic development needs of the city. (5) Provide for choice and diversity in living arrangements and work environments. • (Ord. No. 725, 8- 23 -99) 63 of 82 8/10/2010 2:10 PM ARTICLE II. PROCEDURE FOR SECURING APPROVAL OF PLA... htip: / /library8.municode.com/ default- test/DocView /12019/1/59/61 • ARTICLE II. PROCEDURE FOR SECURING APPROVAL OF PLANS AND PLATS DIVISION 1. GENERALLY Sec. 9 -26. Maps, engineering plans and plats to be submitted in preliminary and final form. Nine (9) copies of all maps, engineering plans or plats of subdivisions of any land within the city or other projects (condominiums, mobile home parks, etc.) subject to the provisions of this chapter, shall be submitted originally in preliminary form for preliminary approval. Subsequently plans shall be submitted to the city commission in final form for final review and approval prior to the approval to record such plat, or prosecute such plan. Final submittal to the city council shall be preceded by the approval of the appropriate city agencies, as indicated in this chapter, who shall determine whether all applicable requirements have been complied with by the applicant. (Code 1974, § 14 -23) Secs. 9-27--9-45. Reserved. • DIVISION 2. PRELIMINARY PLAN Sec. 9 -46. Filing and contents of preliminary map and plan. (a) Preapplication approval procedure. It is recommended that any developer contemplating subdividing land in the city consult with city planning, building and engineering officials before laying out any such plan. The above - referenced officials shall advise such person in the preparation of any such plan particularly as regards the requirements of these regulations. (b) Preliminary plan. (1) The applicant shall prepare and submit a preliminary subdivision map and /or plan together with other supplementary material specified below, accompanied by the appropriate form and fee to the city planner who shall process the application in accordance with provisions of this Code. Processing shall be as follows: a. City planner. b. City engineer. c. Staff review. • d. Planning and zoning board. e. City council. (2) Preliminary plan supporting data. The preliminary plan shall be drawn on 1 of 8 8/10/2010 2:12 PM ARTICLE H. PROCEDURE FOR SECURING APPROVAL OF PLA... http: / /library8.municode.com/ default- test/DocView /12019/1/59/61 standard twenty- four -inch by thirty- six -inch paper for convenient filing at a • reasonable scale (normally one (1) inch equals one hundred (100) feet) and shall include the following: a. Name of development; date of preliminary plan or revision; scale of plan; north arrow; approximate acreage in the tract being subdivided; total number of lots; name, address and telephone number of developer, surveyor and engineer. b. Location map showing relationship between area proposed for development and surrounding area. c. Legal description of tract to be subdivided. d. Boundaries of tract shown by a heavy line. e. Existing streets. The name, location and right -of -way width of all existing improved streets, rights -of -way and platted streets within two hundred (200) feet of the proposed subdivision; surface elevation, including any legally established centerline elevations; walks, curbs, gutters, culverts, etc. f. Proposed streets. The name of temporary designation (Street A, B, C, etc.), right -of -way, and type and width of pavement. Include any streets shown on the adopted comprehensive plan. g. Proposed easements or rights -of -way other than for streets (e.g., for drainage, pedestrian ways, bridle paths, or bicycle paths), location, width and purpose. • h. Lots. Lot lines and scaled dimension, lot numbers, and /or block numbers, and building setback lines for irregularly shaped lots. The building setback distance is the distance required to meet the minimum lot width of the zoning district. i. Sites, if any, for multifamily dwellings, shopping centers, churches, in- [THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK] dustry, parks, playgrounds, and other public and nonpublic uses exclusive of single - family dwellings. j. Names of abutting subdivisions, recordation date and number. k. Existing utilities on and abutting the tract; location, size and invert elevation of sanitary, storm, and combined sewers; location and size of water mains; location of gas lines, fire hydrants, electric and telephone poles, and streetlights. If water mains and sewers are not on or abutting the tract, indicate the direction and distance to, and size of nearest ones, showing invert elevation of sewers. I. Proposed utilities. A statement on the proposed method of water supply and sewage disposal. m. Other existing improvements, including buildings, on the tract. n. Natural features, including lakes, marshes or swamps, watercourses, and other pertinent features; wooded areas. A general description of soils and • existing vegetation on the tract shall also be provided (Seminole County Soils Survey). o. Existing contours at one -foot intervals based on U.S. Coast and 2 of 8 8/10/2010 2:12 PM ARTICLE II. PROCEDURE FOR SECURING APPROVAL OF PLA... http: / /library8.municode .com/default- test/DocView /12019/1/59/61 Geodetic Datum for the tract to be subdivided and, where practicable, • extending twenty -five (25) feet beyond the tract boundary. p. Proposed surface drainage with direction of flow and method of disposition to the natural drainage area indicated or other acceptable stormwater systems. q. Subsurface conditions on the tract, to a minimum depth requested by the city engineer; location and results of tests made to ascertain subsurface soil, rock and groundwater conditions; depth to groundwater; location and results of soil percolation tests; location and extent of muck pockets. Tests shall indicate weight- bearing capability of the soil after stripping and compacting. r. Zoning on and abutting the tract. s. Proposed public improvements; highways or other major improvements planned by public authorities for future consideration on or near the tract. t. Draft of restrictive covenants, if any. If the development is a PUD or private development of any nature, restrictive covenants will be required, if available at the time of submission. u. Other preliminary plans. When requested by the city, typical cross sections of the proposed grading, roadway and sidewalk, preliminary plans of proposed potable water and firefighting systems, sanitary sewage systems, stormwater management systems. All elevations shall be based on U.S. Coast and Geodetic Datum. The applicant shall provide the location and information of the hundred -year flood elevation relative to the proposed • site, based on the FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) maps and establish the wetlands boundary by the approved governing agencies, such as the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, the St. John's Water Management District and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. In addition, the seasonal high water elevation shall be provided, as determined by a registered professional engineer in the State of Florida. (Code 1974, § 14 -30; Ord. No. 444, § 1(1), 1 -9 -89) Sec. 9 - 47. Action on preliminary plan by city council. Within forty -five (45) days after receipt by the city of the complete preliminary plan, the city commission shall take action at any regular or special meeting and report to the applicant its approval, conditional approval, disapproval or request additional information from the applicant. (Code 1974, § 14 -31) Sec. 9 - 48. Reasons when preliminary plan is disapproved; conditional approval. Upon disapproval of any plan, the city commission shall indicate those sections of this chapter with which the plan does not comply. Conditional approval may be granted specifying conditions which must be complied with, and such conditions shall be considered thereafter as part of the preliminary plan. • (Code 1974, § 14 -32) 3 of 8 8/10/2010 2:12 PM ARTICLE II. PROCEDURE FOR SECURING APPROVAL OF PLA... http: / /library8.municode.com/ default- test/DocView /12019/1/59/61 • Sec. 9 -49. Approval of preliminary plan to be construed only as authority to submit final plan. Approval of the preliminary plan shall be construed as authority for submitting a final plan in accordance with this chapter. Approval of the preliminary plan by the city council shall not be construed as authority for the sale of lots in reference to the preliminary plan, nor as authority for obtaining building permits, nor for the recording of a plat, nor for the installation of required improvements. (Code 1974, § 14 -33) Secs. 9-50--9-70. Reserved. DIVISION 3. FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, FINAL PLAT Sec. 9 -71. When final development plan is to be filed; extension. (a) The final development plan including engineering and plat for all or a portion of the area covered by the preliminary plan shall be submitted within one (1) year of the date of approval of the preliminary plan; otherwise, such preliminary approval will automatically become null and void unless the city commission grants a specific extension of time. • (b) Application for approval of the final development plan/plat, engineering and supplementary data shall be submitted to the city planner accompanied by a check in an amount determined by the fee schedule in force at the time of application, payable to the city to cover the cost of handling, review and engineering inspections during the processing of the plans. (Code 1974, § 14 -39) Sec. 9 - 72. Processing of final plans. Processing of final plans shall be as follows: (1) City planner. (2) City engineer. (3) Staff review. (4) Only if significant changes, alterations or modifications have been made to the final plans which would cause to be construed at the time of staff review that a substantial difference between the final and the preliminary plans now exists, plans must then be sent to planning and zoning for further review. If no substantial difference between the preliminary and final plans exists, this step in the process will not be required. (5) City commission. • (Code 1974, § 14-41) 4 of 8 8/10/2010 2:12 PM ARTICLE II. PROCEDURE FOR SECURING APPROVAL OF PLA... http://library8.municode.com/default-test/DocView/12019/1/59/61 S Sec. 9 -73. Form and contents of final development plan. (a) The final development plan and plat shall conform substantially to the approved preliminary plan as approved and shall include all conditional requirements specified by the city commission on any conditional approval of the preliminary plan. The subdivider may propose only a portion of the area of an approved preliminary plan for final development should that be desired. Whenever developing only a portion of an approved preliminary plan, that portion being developed must be engineered so that section is not dependent upon further development to ensure adequate drainage, sewerage, water and other improvements. (b) Additional engineering /plans to accompany the final development plan/plat: (1) Potable water including fire protection systems. (2) Sanitary sewer. (3) Drainage and stormwater management facilities including underdrains. (4) Bulkheads. (5) Excavation and fill. (6) Sidewalks, bicycle paths, and bridle paths. (7) Streets and curbs. Street grades and elevation shall be established to minimize the need for underdrains. In soils where high groundwater is found or suspected, cuts shall be minimized in order to reduce the need for underdrains. Wherever along • the proposed roadways projected groundwater elevation is less than one (1) foot, six (6) inches below the bottom of swale (or bottom of road base where curb and gutter is used), underdrains shall be required. (8) Soils explorations. The results of comprehensive soils explorations, evaluation of results and recommendations by a city- approved soils engineering and testing firm. The soils explorations work shall include as a minimum: a. Results of borings located by survey at suitable intervals along the proposed roadways; classification and properties of soils encountered; and groundwater elevation to United States Geological Survey datum found subsequent to making the borings. The evaluation of the results and recommendations by the soils firm shall include as a minimum: Recommendations on the type of base construction; projected high -water elevation to United States Geological Survey datum along the proposed roadways, need, design, size, location, depth and details of underdrains; and a recommendation on the elevation of street grades including depth of cut. The results of the soils work, evaluation of results, and recommendations shall be incorporated into the plans and specifications submitted for review. b. If during construction of improvements, the city determines in the field that soils and /or groundwater conditions are found to be different than shown in the data submitted with final development and engineering plans, or there is question about adequacy of the approved plans caused by conditions found in the field, the city shall have the right to require the performance and submission of additional soils work and /or to require modification of the • previously approved design plans including, but not limited to modification of street grades and /or installation of additional underdrains, use of soil cement base course, or other modifications. 5 of 8 8/10/2010 2:12 PM ARTICLE II. PROCEDURE FOR SECURING APPROVAL OF PLA... http: / /library8. municode .com /default- test/DocView /12019/1/59/61 (9) Lot grading. At the time final engineering plans are submitted, lot grading and • drainage plans shall be submitted for review and approval. The plans shall show minimum floor elevations for all homes, existing topography, grading of all lots, and any drainage improvements proposed or required on the lots. The lot grading and drainage plans shall show the lot lines, existing topography (one -foot contour intervals), and proposed lot filling, grading and drainage at a scale of one (1) inch is equal to one hundred (100) feet (or larger) in general accordance with FHA standards for lot grading. Substantiating soil borings, evaluations and studies shall also be submitted to document soil conditions, projected high -water groundwater elevation on the lots, and adequacy of the lot grading and drainage plans. (10) Street lighting plan, demonstrating power company participation. (11) Landscaping plans. Where site is commercial, industrial, or multifamily in nature, landscaping plans shall be presented along with the final development plans, unless specifically waived by the staff at the time of processing the preliminary plan. (Code 1974, § 14-42) Sec. 9 - 74. Action on final development plan; expiration of approval. (a) If the developer elects to request approval of a final development plan separately and prior to approval to record the plat of that development, the city commission may approve such final development plan if the plan is in substantial.conftrmity with the_ appr_oved_ preliminary In or a subsequently approved modification to ine preliminary plan. The final development plan may be approved if_ it- romolies with altLe levant regulations included in this • chapter. Approval of the plan shall be subject to fulfillment of all conditions specified by the city staff and sanctioned by the city commission. Action to approve a final development plan shall be taken by the city commission within thirty (30) days after receipt by the city of the complete plan with all supporting data required by this chapter. (b) If within two (2) years after approval of a final development plan of a development not part of a PUD and for which the plat has not yet been recorded, the development encompassed by the plan has not been completed and inspected by the city, the final development plan shall be resubmitted for reapproval of all streets and areas within the scope of the plan that remain incomplete and /or unable to function independently of completion of remaining undeveloped portions of the development covered by the previously approved plan. Procedures for reapproval of such expired final development plans shall be the same as for the original approval. (Code 1974, § 14 -43) Sec. 9 - 75. Final plat, contents and recording procedures. (a) The final plat shall conform substantially to the approved preliminary plan, and shall be submitted to the city planner as follows: (1) The final plat shall include one (1) linen original. If more than one (1) sheet is required, a suitable index map showing the entire development with index for the various sheets shall be shown on the first sheet. • (2) The final plat shall show streets, lots, blocks and easements indicating the centerline, width and sidelines of all easements. 6of8 8/10/20102:12 PM ARTICLE II. PROCEDURE FOR SECURING APPROVAL OF PLA... http: / /Iibrary8.municode .corn/default- test/DocView /12019/1/59/61 (3) Surveys and surveying data on the final plat shall be in accordance with • acceptable professional practices and principles for land surveying and preparation of plats. Special consideration shall be given to the relationship of the proposed plat to existing abutting plats to prevent unintended overlap or omission of lands. (4) Mortgage holders shall execute before two (2) witnesses and a notary public the following certification on plats: "The mortgagee(s) consents and agrees to the platting of lands embraced in this plat and to the dedication(s) shown herein; and further, should it become necessary to foreclose the mortgage covering the property, that all pieces and parcels dedicated to the public will be excluded from the suit and the dedication shall remain in full force and effect." (5) A dedication to the public by the owners of all roads, streets, alleys, easements and other rights -of -way, however designated, shown on the plan for perpetual use for all public purposes. (b) Three (3) copies of all protective or restrictive covenants to be recorded shall be submitted with the final plat. (c) A letter from an acceptable abstractor shall certify the following: (1) That the parties executing the plats are owners of the land included therein. (2) All recorded mortgages, liens and other encumbrances. (3) That taxes and assessments have been paid to date. (4) That the description shown on the plat is correct. (d) An appropriate bond submitted in accordance with bonding procedures set forth in • section 9 -76 shall be required for all developments within which improvements are to be dedicated to the public. (Code 1974, § 14-44) Sec. 9 - 76. Bonding procedures. (a) Surety - performance bond. When requesting to record a plat for property with streets to be dedicated to the public in which all improvements have not been installed or have been only partially installed, the developer shall provide a corporate or surety completion bond including a payment of vendors' clause executed by a company authorized to do business in the state and acceptable to the city, payable to the city in the penal sum of the amount of the engineer's estimate or alternative bid estimates for the incompleted portions of the work to be done to provide the streets, drainage facilities, street signs, water and sewer facilities, sidewalks and other improvements as shown on the final development plan. As an alternative to the provision of a corporate or surety bond, the subdivider may provide the deposit of equivalent cash in an escrow account with the city, or a letter of credit drawn on an approved institution, drawn in a form approved by the city attorney. (b) Maintenance bonds. When requesting to record a plat for which the improvements have been installed, inspected and approved by the city engineer and when the city is being asked to accept such improvements, the subdivider shall provide a maintenance bond payable to the city guaranteeing the performance of required and installed improvements for two (2) years after the date of completion and acceptance by the city, executed and • enforceable in the same manner as the corporate or surety completion bond. The bond shall be in the amount of ten (10) percent of the estimated construction cost of all improvements to be owned and maintained by the city. As an alternative to the provision of a corporate or 7 of 8 8/10/2010 2:12 PM ARTICLE II. PROCEDURE FOR SECURING APPROVAL OF PLA... http: //l ibrary8.municode .com/default- test/DocView /12019/1/59/61 surety bond, the subdivider may provide the deposit of equivalent cash in an escrow account with the city, or a letter of credit drawn on an approved institution, drawn in a form approved by the city attorney. (Code 1974, § 14-45) Sec. 9 - 77. Approval of final plat. The city commission may approve the final plat, considering any applicable agency reports, if the plan is in substantial conformity with the approved preliminary plans and if it complies with regulations established by this chapter. Action by the city commission may be taken expeditiously, but not to exceed thirty (30) days after receipt of the final plat and supporting data by the city unless delay is requested by or caused by the applicant. If the commission certifies that the development has met all requirements hereof, the plat shall be endorsed as finally approved by the mayor and attested by the city clerk in order that the same may be recorded among the public records of the county. (Code 1974, § 14-46) Sec. 9 - 78. Recording /distribution of the final plat. Upon completion of all approval action, the city planner shall be responsible for ensuring that the original linen is signed and sealed, and the plat and deed restrictions, if any, are delivered to the appropriate authority for recording. The developer shall submit to the city the recording fee as • specified in the current fee schedule. (Code 1974, § 14-47) Secs. 9-79--9-100. Reserved. • 8 of 8 8/10/2010 2:12 PM COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM 606 Consent Information Public Hearin g Regular X April 27, 2009 Meeting MGR /Dept. / //f REQUEST: The Community Development Department requests the Commission consider a conceptual plan for a 201 unit apartment complex on 10.32 acres within the Town Center. PURPOSE: The purpose of this Agenda Item is for the Commission to consider and provide guidance, as the Development Review Committee, for a conceptual development plan for within the Winter Springs Town Center. • APPLICABLE REGULATIONS: Chapter 163, FS Chapter 166, FS Comprehensive Plan Chapter 9, City Code Town Center District Code Schrimsher Development Agreement (June 26, 2000) CONSIDERATIONS: Overview The 10.32 acre undeveloped and treed site is located within the Winter Springs Town Center on the southwest comer of SR 434 and the trail bridge (east of the Mobil station, on the south side of SR 434). The topography slopes eastward from a high point of about 42' near the SW corner of the proposed intersection of SR 434 and Michael Blake Boulevard to about 32' near the bridge crossing at SR 434. The topography slopes even farther on the east side of the trail to a low of about 14' to 15' There appears to be some wetlands in the area east of the trail, but not to the west of the trail. Utilities The site has central water and sewer available in the area, with adequate capacity. An 8" diameter sanitary force main is located in the southeastern corner of the site, along the SR 434 right -of -way. A 12 "potable water line is located along the eastern right -of -way line of Tuskawilla Road and extends southward of the Mobile gas station site. 411 April 27, 2009 • Regular Item 606 Page 2 of 2 Town Center Issues The Town Center Code and the Schrimsher Development Agreement address a number of items as related to the subject property. One of the most important considerations is the continuation of the street grid previously established in the Town Center Master Plan and further refined in the Doran Phase II plans. This pedestrian- scale grid has been embraced in the proposed concept plan and provides for a continuation of the street network through the subject site for eventual connection to Tuskawilla Road. This interconnected grid network helps to provide pedestrian-scale blocks to the development. Wide sidewalks and buildings oriented to the street with elevated first floors enhance the pedestrian — friendly aspect of the neighborhood and help to create a sense of place — a key goal of the Town Center Code. Street widths have been properly scaled to accommodate on- street parking as well as street trees which assist in the creation of a meaningful public space. The buildings have been located in such a manner to create nearly continuous frontages to further enhance the public spaces while hiding the parking lots. This element will be refined as the project moves into final engineering. While most of the buildings are three stories in height, the building located at the southwest corner of SR 434 and "Townhouse Road" is four stories in height and is a key element in creating a varied facade appearance along SR 434 while framing the interior street (Town House Road). • A gazebo has been added along the eastern property line where the trail bride becomes elevated. This gazebo provides a terminating vista for the east/west roadway section within the development. While the buildings will be brought back to the City Commission for formal Aesthetic Review, staff feels that the proposed architectural style will lend itself well to the incorporation of Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND) elements. FINDINGS: 1. The proposed development is located within the City of Winter Springs Town Center and within the area encompassed by the existing Schrimsher Development Agreement. 2. The Concept Plan appears to be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan, Code of Ordinances, Town Center Code, and general TND principles. 3. Any deviations from the Code will be addressed through a development agreement, special exception, or some other appropriate mechanism. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Commission approve the attached concept plan. ATTACHMENTS: A — Concept plan set COMMISSION ACTION: 2 'l101�6A8! S.18t,1��,'�j �IJ � Q> �!' C3 � Cl. 4n � �� r `v'� � :� 5: � — -- - _. . . ---. ._–� --- -- � • • • , r - j - - -- - O o N f — 1 1 1 1 'r — - 7 i^ c �f Pf 9�8 (f 1 1 fl'i Pfla!I i';;, i Big 3,' PB; ; ;;° Rf' _ 11 L�1 ,' I I,I ill' ll,l aaa� IG I i 1; " i I I II I' , I I 1 I 1 t l - 11 I O LT 1 r Ul (V "1 F n1 mo 1- a O DECORATIVE ALUM. FENCE ELEVATION z cn SCALE: I /4'. I' -0' W J W W g. IL if.' v Q X64 5 Il II I! 1 9 II 9 I ! 9 II 9 1 l l 9 II 9 i. ft I I 9 II I II 1 11�1 t 11- h , L 11 !. t sPUERE POST „.. 0 ,�i,�Im,iI Wiu11 .�11 ,11111 °-° I'll I 1 11 1 1 .1 ` I i i f ' If HI' II I I I q l)7 Ci I U! I' x -v7 WIDE 11 1 it I ! I II GL'1INUh1 RAILS QQQ I II 1 . � 1'' ' I z -I� so awnlNm W PDST • Z 1 1 I o ' I I ! 11 � 1 I' SO. PRESSED POINT t 0 1 1 1 ! w 4LU"TIN PICKE-S Q I V � 1 I ' I I I I ILi i i 11 1 I l i I � ' II 1 i I Ii P x - V2' WIDE ' 1 1 p — 4LUTINUI'1 cunwNEL ll[ wNs:,�U�U! � 1 l1 l IV l ILJU UI J !J VJ RG�L - � g W 0 Q i O 2 C ' - HIGH DECORATIVE ALUM. PERIMETER FENCE ELEVATION -• o o E_ 3 SCALE: I/4 .I -m •. E 8 41 • ■ 3' -2' 3' -2' 4' 2' -6' 4' 4' 2' - 4' 8 .. B' 11 0111111 11. — 1 K < —I [1 \ ∎) NI- '-' oe eda fl fl I -.. • 0 4 4 O FRONT OF SIGN (11) BACK OF SIGN SCALE: I/4'. HO' SCALE: Ua•_r -O' f7(OjfCf: - A REVISIONS TOWN PARK BUILDING SIGNS SCALE: A 0 IJ7 FOSTER ,CONANT & ASSOCIATES INC AS NOTED Landscape Architecture It Site Plarming DAT SHEET NO. CONANT k Sr1 Pi �% . r A.43xuis 120 WEST ROBINSON STREET, ORLANDO, FL.32801 -1617. PH.(407) 643-2225, FAX(4071643 -0175 0 3 . 21 O _ .... � _- • • 0 CONCEPT PLAN FOR 0 \ pARKH AFAR V-\ S :-..': ; ,-.----; z.7.=,_ SECTION 6 , TOWNSHIP 21 SOUTH, RANGE 31 EAST CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA PARCEL ID 4FS,; 26-20-30-5AR-0A00-008D, - 26-20-30-5AR-0A00-008E, 26-20-30-5AR-0A00-008H _.____........,,_ FOR •%7 .!...1. =41.47 , ATLANTIC HOUSING PARTNERS LLC. . _ :-.--........7...,..:"7„.--- -,e,,,, " '''f. '' : : 329 N. PARK AVE. SUITE 300 WINTER PARK, FL 32789 , ., — ..... PH (407)-741-8533 VICINITY MAP ..- INDEX OF SHEETS atJ MADDEN ..„.,.......„ 4. ... . .....„,....„,... - ,_ ........... ., ..... _..... ..... : . ._....:_ ..._ . ._%_.. ,1, k -,- MOORHEAD & GLUNT, INC. J 3 r. I CIVIL ENGINEERS tm ......... .:r!-1,:,..;,;:r.., ..„,.. 431 E HORATIO AVENUE, SUITE 260 MAITLAND, FLORIDA 32751 PHONE (407) 629-8330 ",i : FAX (407) 629-8336 ::: ! ; • " ' ....... - ""t - ' ' ',:. ... Fii::::::':' ' ....Z.: :,:::....:4 . :....,- .... ----" n'" :::::...--1......--. tt'.;:;::::::::::',.;;;:::::::.: ..... ;Itl::::::11:::::::-.:i::.;;;F:::" ••• 'i' =?' If • .• • ‘..•...–.14 :" ' -::::-.L.L.,::.::.:::;.::„..:.::::::". 'a = ..-" --.:::-:.:•--r:_..... .....,:–:;.::::. ........ :::::::;:r..r...Nr,......,....:::;- . :: ... ...,:...,;...73- :::z:::: ... ::::..-'1%,—. "---:•::::.-..t. - 1 ..7::::iii:;;;';;/:-.1IFF:Fi".11:41:4.11:11÷."''''''''74::Z: ':::::::........ .... " 0 . .... • i ! SCALE .. NTS. ! 'il 0 • 0 GRAPHIC SCALE '.\ UN)T & PARKING NOTES. t nwl5N AP / '-'-',' ■41 2 02 001 - 2, 212.2 I ery.o. (21 - . uferS • KC.. IN: I.. IT NOTES •'. MADDEN MADDEN . ,,,-■ cw , 2.0.02 .0.2 • .322 2... .'• ' n12.2260...) • 20 2.„ 2 BMW.. I. • .1.22 Cille - 1 1.12. ............... L •-% I I '''' ' 2 2.2.20. 01 • 12 ..2 "°''.7,1; r,'L::3;r'' • L... - TIO. ,...,k 2 MO. 10 - • ■,.., 1 1-002.s. 0.292 .0.s la2s2202.... • 222.001./ IN - 0 .123 CS) 'Il 11.1 1 24.00121 I.1 • . ..,, -. 3 M.o. NI- 22. 1.23 / ' • ..... I I I 22. .1. • s2.11. SOB. mu ..... BY 2.202 Swan. I' •••••' Ca ... " 3 III.:12 ! i ' 0/ . - ,---------- : I I .-.., -,--,,. - L'H.,i4.,...j ' < / / --\, 2 , 1 H-,_= :----,:= 1 e' 2 1r 21.0.12 P.m. 9 - 223 .2.5 ir 2 IV 2.0.0 .20.1 2. • 2 5 e 2 20 10242.21..a. 22 - . 21 y \ ( PROPOSED 1 1 70, D■Ca • „■ 2.0.a5 , , p . ,; 1= - 7 - - --- ,, =7, 7 _71_ . ,!--" 1 !' 1 , ,., II, '27. J !.. , ; =;;- a_ 1 ,.. AREA I '')''') — 1 ,....! • '''' ,, ,/,./.,,:- -' '.. ,s 5.....A ...... v....: - v s...cE: t, . ■or 2.0.0 B..... ...c. • 2 W.. (AMENMZED) 1 1 H m.= .. :. ---------,. 1--- r / 2 If 2 20 1.22.10. , Wigin10. SPACES • • eV.. .4■2 I -- 1 Mar al c , r.. .7. 12 • a) .... 0 7, )11 • / I.. - 7 : = = i' - n .. - l'.. — ' ._ - '. e 2 le' 2.22.20 v... 1 20 0 TO. MAC. • 20 2+22212 b. ttt r) 1 T'!_ :- 17 07 i ')/) -- - - 1 ')):: H -:-: r I T1 )-- )---: rL-) - WOW - = i t ,) ■11!,,1 ■,, r .,.........,,1,1■11 [ ,,,, ...2. 21 • 2. 9 r 2 .2 Se•029 - . v.:VS ' ' " "•••••' ': =2.; : . ' 2 ' 2 ' .0 :- '22'Sqt2:2 2''t =---- ' •• „;,,, IL :' K I 1 ,,,,,r,- .. :,....................... . - - ............, ..... ...=., .., .... ' 1--• , I'•• !'" 't."' I. IY■ I I .! t -I' ' • . : [ r - t' I "tt - V, k.- „......, . ,.0 ....0 ii !. ="' :j- : - - ■7 .c_l___Im,k ',' i j ^', , z , ...1 I r - - 71 7. 7 , 71-4.; ,, ,'-',' '1 7' '-.. r . , } 1 ffl FT! ! --,, i - --'-:\ :. "."-- i ;,. IL' r ! , t = . : . 1 ' ir, , , 1 1,i C — n ! 1 , ,,,,,,, 1 , 11 . ( ,,, ; SOIL LEGEND - a L,.. ,i T: Ir----'- \ . Lr l i,7;;: 1. .1 mininnumlquinimmeasonimm trytumers I 1-1.. 1;-::'----- '".":1:" L i t.-1 .1 : , ' ' Air l- . 1 1 37 0L.c= . 1 - -,,.) ; .\'' ',° 4 . =N - .....:,: •;' - 1 '1 '; ' '., 7:07 ',74, 1 ' 1 I la , ' 7 ___.----- ! i ,-- .0.102.12( GXLII•1 ,Ori - \ '---- ::I■ -, . .,,,, ;C: - 1 y STATE ROAD 434 - ,- L.....,0“...t.c rucr )- 1) ) 1 ), . .,..., '7 ' 71,;i. 1 -- -• ' I ■ 0 ' I .__,_ - 1 _ ...,..:‘,..... _.- i _ - -,, ,, niS. - .,- OF77 „VID1 0 ,7 '''.....C. CF-1 u 1 IMI 7 , [11 :ii ,______, _ ----- •- ME ,`7 , 1,i ' 1 1 1[11 R E- AE 11111-- L-4 ! 1M , -i - ,,---,---, r--, ,-- ------ 2 ,H!– ----- , r --, I ` n Am um -- lif 1 HI bd 1 1 ' ' ILIfd d H ti ' _ J _ I M t !I ___ _ __ IP- : 17 . . 1 I t ' ' 7 H-1 1 i i fi -.T , :. - 19 " ' ,T 1 1 HI -r, I - _ ' — 1 , . 1 11 E - 11 It= -1 1, I LI1 [Ell 1 I d H 0E1 I # -1 i _!! 11:1 am .1■1 __,..,- ' I 2 ■ I .!; • JL i___ L......,... - - 44 4100111? -- ------_------ -- imiiiimpipri, ----- 0 0 0 • • • 11 „ - - _ _tea ®....a _ _ _ — _ _ _ _ =_ 11 =m = a rm �"� = r it ii 1 r �� E_ - � � _■ ___ _�- �M 1 -- =1 ■ N :n a 111 :: — ham= - - �■�� - JM�■ = J : /M■M � L ■�� II i l It] I l i , 1 L _ ■SINE_ 5 li� IIII'll1lllll Fi l �t 0 U111111.1 M I r '4-1-------1 I RI J -I ��= "'__ — — WE M 1 Ell0_ ra_...■•••=11r a_ s ��II � i� ® i lilt � I ® _ 1 ■ ll I ■i =.--,- _ I ll i I 7„, '. _ p illieli wirraramig . 1 1 L ir _ I'fr II =kl ® :L �� r � � ' nu - Y I_ hi r IIH . -JLLJ --- - ± ® J II I- am_ ® - [VII �, •. ■ -� III ■ I ' i ll1 1Iu • IIIIII =ll� I J _ :� = Iii - - _. - -w k =; a_' • • • 1 , 1 : 1 LI:11__Ir' ! II , M: I -- i 1 E - , • li • ' L iu 1 0 - . -..--,, z ..,..._ 7 ‘Hc Al : , 1 fi - EIMV E 1 _ ,- _. M HA 1 H , :iv■-Ary —1 _ . p 1 .......... _ 1111111111•111111111_. – N , H:__.,. I 7111110_71: II j_ c I rp.. _1 1__, [ 1., , _ NW 0 ] • , -...Lowi 11111ftlal =-. - --- WV. . FM111111 . -- i iii -- i — - ,uumproa - — . . • 0 0 1 1 ii I t ' ffIE RR 111 i B F,Hri IFF-i-A [-Li L . L11,11 1 E! 111 Ll ,_11 — I • i - - -- -- -, - - -- - - - - - - , , •-...-_ ■.........=---- 1 I '-• 11111.1111r' m In mil I m ,, ,I fll rm FT .. IN E1 ±i- . 1 r. "111111 IIIIIL" i,j 'H-j. I — - 1-- i . :TT: 1 t -: :.: Tin — i - 1------- L---- = __ --4- - - %nil 21 Iri I ill 11 Du i 41111 ---- 111111P III -_-_- .- .. ,..., 1:1_ ... Mil - Imi !...1 . - __ gEl Rd: 1 0, - ',_ prifilrimi , -- TIIIIIIIII-I H • - — = -la E.! El! m. ,,-__:- J , - _ °EV PA -17 . I M H-4 11'1 r Ill = . --11HH-fiE.DE il ..._______---- ••••••••••■ini.....,_ •••••••■•••Mmiii , -"ill OPP -"1111 - ' • 0 . • =.. ......._ ■ ww -•� --=--._ el - _, • - .�— r - .� ■ -_ n - - ii:1 I I0k . i" 1 11■ ■i; ■ �,' �!PL°CI� i .: E n - ; ■ 111 "E1 �r 1 =Il�o�rd � r m i �- "7"----' � i III�r11 ■Ip 1 .■■■■■■■■■>•■• 11 :■ ■ ■ III - ■illl E I- t- -C : �■ _ 1 i ' IIIU ='111!: 1111 I� " • m� �I��iiul!il1ill�ilioi�i!I�E ®__ _ e�>t_ r_' =.111E � w + i I Il ��u, '�!!! _� � � ... � X71 rll ■ 1 � ■_ ■111 1 ■1 =1 ■1 1111 ■. a -1 " _ [ r � � •1 1 ■1_ ® =_■1 1 h� : 11 I � ] -1 III 1 = 1 - -.411 11,01.0.1 -.411 11,01.0.1 PI = ❑ � . . 1 4u1 1111Ip�� = f • • • i f-- 11 Q III f a " _ :; t _ �, ■ �� 4 ' ' I I � f iii_ _Ilia , -2 ` -, ■ I II ._.... F ql aL �L 1W .,-� L LI : 1 t ip � _. III IIIIIV m Bull I III�I��II �1� _ -- - � I - - - - -- 8[ _ -own- ::: 1111 : � -. = 1� >�� — I� - 1�1 _ :maa :II IIIII 1■ C� ■ 1 - l�� — 1 I _ � ri: - i ._ ,' ® dt i ... 9 : -: .... OLE •3 ® ter = ukubuk i1— • • • I I I' I ' I ,„„=.1.,,',7-7 ■ W i1 % ' 0 i 1 IIIIIIIIIII ' , , III 10 M14 IIIIIIIIII I II ' '; I II ' II IIIIIIii..I'..ii iit ■■I ■I■q l 'I FR ( 1 71 uri 1 II 11 p.n itm u iimmi " 111011111 Ell 1111 4 n ■ nu II , IMMIIII HIE lim •' [1 Iilllllllll ■10!� I gill ii� I 9 =mim I • I; Ti 1pi II t - //1 a.i will ! Ilil l� III Ii , i i Ill i1 / / t I,;1771 ' Tr; 1 Ijjl j, �: 11 i t , � 1 I I i j 1 1 1 / yI msro3imaw 1 1 / € : _ 1 7 •-•• i -_____-- c al= ,,\ 0 , Mill m i 1 - • • • FL -- — 11 i II ' i - _ C� ••• 11 ,∎ u o n - -41+H i i� O � 0 1 w Eifi lu L1± I -LA - 0ELOwI j[ P9 � nnpm= _ l � t i I ■ .a.i LI � -o =E =am 1 II sle I I - I' -ill 1 ! 7 — ®SC 6` 5 �!�ml n y } ai��i.s _ Lm � � II_I II ..— u■ Emil lai W d'mill I _ — �: II r . ∎ �= ■ — ill — 1� = = �!� = ® 1 I fl -, =��._ a l l - ' .' J i 11 1 19�� IlrmiIIJ. ` I ' 1 - U = fi e l PTO , H-I gia -a � j = 11�11ri v _ I i �ll illl.li�`- !I Illlli 1 IIIJ — _ ' � _ i Jr I I j I I I � N = - 4 — = lid �-p 0 • • 0 , A L ' r I I - 1M111.� .1i , �9 l � ��irn nuntt - Iris M 4 1 1 1 111111111111111111111 11 ,...H �i n n tnl a irrr n� II 1 1, • l L�1i11, ITS Alt �I r �i l 1 -rr p� AN- a� _ ,, II,O IE I 111 -. - I ` 711 E 1 I_, �L : :,Tf \ 1 \ \ --,----E- • III CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING APRIL 27, 2009 CALL TO ORDER The Regular Meeting of Monday, April 27, 2009 of the City Commission was called to Order by Deputy Mayor Joanne M. Krebs at 5:15 p.m. in the Commission Chambers of the Municipal Building (City Hall, 1126 East State Road 434, Winter Springs, Florida 32708). Roll Call: Mayor John F. Bush, present via telephone Deputy Mayor Joanne M. Krebs, present Commissioner Jean Hovey, present Commissioner Rick Brown, present Commissioner Gary Bonner, present Commissioner Sally McGinnis, present III City Manager Kevin L. Smith, present City Attorney Anthony A. Garganese, present The Pledge of Allegiance followed a moment of silence. Deputy Mayor Krebs noted an Agenda Change and stated, "If you agree, we would like to move Regular Item `606' to right after [Regular Agenda Item] `601'. Are there any objections ?" Commissioner Sally McGinnis stated "No." Commissioner Rick Brown remarked, "That is fine." No objections were voiced." INFORMATIONAL AGENDA INFORMATIONA L 100. Community Development Department Advising The City Commission Of The Status Of Various Current Planning Projects. This Agenda Item was not discussed. "MOTION TO APPROVE INFORMATIONAL." MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BROWN. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER McGINNIS. DISCUSSION. III CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA • MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - APRIL 27, 2009 PAGE 2 OF 20 VOTE: COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE DEPUTY MAYOR KREBS: AYE COMMISSIONER HOVEY: AYE COMMISSIONER BROWN: AYE COMMISSIONER BONNER: AYE MOTION CARRIED. ❖ ❖ AGENDA NOTE: THE FOLLOWING CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS WERE DISCUSSED NEXT, BUT NOT NECESSARILY IN THE ORDER DOCUMENTED, FOLLOWED BY THE REST OF THE AGENDA. • • CONSENT AGENDA CONSENT 200. Public Works Department — Stormwater Division Requests Approval To Execute Amendment No. (Number) 2 To The Project Agreement With The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) For The Restoration Of City Waterways Damaged During Tropical Storm Fay. • Brief discussion. CONSENT 201. Office Of The City Manager And Finance Department Requesting That The City Commission Adopt Resolution 2009 -28 Establishing An Identity Theft Detection And Prevention Program. Brief discussion. CONSENT 202. Community Development Department — Urban Beautification Services Division Requesting The City Commission Adopt Resolution 2009 -29, Allowing For The Establishment Of A Pole Banner Program As Approved In Commission Agenda Item 603 On April 13, 2009. Brief comments. • CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA • MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - APRIL 27, 2009 PAGE 3 OF 20 CONSENT 203. Office Of The City Clerk Requesting Approval Of The April 13, 2009 Regular City Commission Meeting Minutes. There was no discussion on this Agenda Item. "MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT." MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BROWN. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HOVEY. DISCUSSION. VOTE: COMMISSIONER HOVEY: AYE COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE DEPUTY MAYOR KREBS: AYE COMMISSIONER BONNER: AYE COMMISSIONER BROWN: AYE MOTION CARRIED. AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS • AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS 300. Office Of The City Manager Requesting City Commission Acceptance Of The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), As Presented, For The Fiscal Year Ended September 30, 2008. Ms. Kelly Leary, Auditor, McDirmit Davis and Company, LLC., 605 East Robinson Street, Suite 635, Orlando, Florida: spoke on the City's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR). Discussion. "MOTION TO - ACCEPT." MOTION BY COMMISSIONER McGINNIS. SECONDED BY DEPUTY MAYOR KREBS. DISCUSSION. VOTE: COMMISSIONER BONNER: AYE COMMISSIONER HOVEY: AYE COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE DEPUTY MAYOR KREBS: AYE COMMISSIONER BROWN: AYE MOTION CARRIED. 411 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA • INUTES M CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - APRIL 27, 2009 PAGE 4 OF 20 REPORTS REPORTS 400. Office Of The City Attorney — Anthony A. Garganese, Esquire City Attorney Anthony A. Garganese advised the City Commission, "I went back and I met with the Manager and the City Clerk regarding the Posting of Meetings and the City's Policy and Resolution. At the next Meeting, I will be bringing back an Agenda Item to discuss that. As far as preliminarily, we believe that the Policy doesn't need to be changed but I want to go over it again with the Commission and maybe administratively handle things a little bit differently." REPORTS 401. Office Of The City Manager — Kevin L. Smith City Manager Kevin L. Smith mentioned that the City of Oviedo has asked the City Commission to hold their Joint Meeting on Tuesday, May 19` 2009 and suggested the City Commission reschedule the previously scheduled Budget Workshop to another date. There were no objections to this. • With discussion on a new date for the next Budget Workshop, Wednesday, May 27 2009 was suggested. Mayor John F. Bush remarked, "Works for me." Deputy Mayor Krebs stated, "That is good for me." Commissioner McGinnis noted, "Good." Commissioner Jean Hovey commented, "Yes." Deputy Mayor Krebs added, "Six p.m." Commissioner Gary Bonner stated, "Agreed." No objections were noted. Next, Manager Smith brought up the issue of red -light cameras. Chief of Police Kevin Brunelle gave an update on Red Light Cameras to the City Commission and advised the City Commission that he was asked to provide statistical data to the City Commission. Deputy Mayor Krebs inquired of Chief Brunelle, "Can you send us that Report?" Chief Brunelle responded, "Absolutely." Commissioner Brown then asked Chief Brunelle, "Is there a time of day, specific ?" Chief Brunelle noted, "I can get the specific times for you." Commissioner Brown inquired, "Is there any concentration over a given period of time ?" Chief Brunelle said, "I don't have that answer for you - that is another Report that we have to pull from the document." Commissioner Bonner suggested to Chief Brunelle, "When you send the Report, if you could include a refresher - on what that criteria was..." Deputy Mayor Krebs stated, "...That is a good idea...." Commissioner Brown added, "...Okay..." Commissioner Bonner continued, "...If not already, that criteria can be posted to our Website." III CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA • MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - APRIL 27, 2009 PAGE 5 OF 20 Furthermore, Commissioner Bonner noted, "I am just anticipating a new opportunity to explain this new infraction to our citizens." Chief Brunelle stated, "Absolutely." Discussion. REPORTS 402. Office Of The City Clerk — Andrea Lorenzo - Luaces, MMC No Report. REPORTS 403. Commission Seat Three — Gary Bonner Commissioner Bonner complimented the City's Police Department on their efforts at this past weekend's Flag Football Game. REPORTS 404. Commission Seat Four — Sally McGinnis 1111 Commissioner McGinnis asked the City Manager for "An update on our City's Website - the progress that is being made. We had kind of a timeframe - a calendar of progress presented to us and I think it is time to get an update on that." Manager Smith said "Yes." Next, Commissioner McGinnis spoke of the recent fire in the Highlands and commented on the community effort. REPORTS 405. Commission Seat Five/Deputy Mayor — Joanne M. Krebs Deputy Mayor Krebs remarked about the City's Arbor Day and added, "Kudos to the team that put it together. It was really, really nice." Deputy Mayor Krebs then noted, "Thank you Steve (Richart) and Mike (Mingea). It was really, really good!" Secondly, Deputy Mayor Krebs also mentioned last weekend's Flag Football game. Thirdly, Deputy Mayor Krebs brought up the Lock Box program and thanked Attorney Garganese for sharing it with the City of Cocoa. Deputy Mayor Krebs added, "What I think is really neat is that Winter Springs has really been a true leader in getting that information out and just as another plug for something else when you go back to Cocoa, `Project Lifesaver'." • CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA • MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - APRIL 27, 2009 PAGE 6 OF 20 Fourthly, Deputy Mayor Krebs asked about the possibility of the City having E -PASS transponders on some City vehicles. Discussion followed with Manager Smith who said that he had been advised that transponders needed to be assigned to a specific vehicle and added, "We will take it up the ladder and see if we get a different answer." Lastly, Deputy Mayor Krebs asked about the City Manager position. Commissioner Brown stated, "I can tell you that my preference would be that we just continue him (Kevin Smith) on and keep him in this role without going out to Bid." Commissioner Brown added, "I think Kevin (Smith) has done an outstanding job and I think putting him in this role permanently would be the right thing to do; but we did commit to 180 days - unless we want to bring it back as an Agenda Item and change that." Discussion. Mayor John F. Bush stated, "Kevin (Smith) is still the acting Manager and we have two (2) important positions that are vacant and I don't think we are going to get good applicants until whoever applies knows that our Manager is our Manager." Mayor Bush added, "It is not fair to him to put those kind of responsibilities — three (3) • jobs on him here under the circumstances and I think he is doing a great job by the way; so, I am not being critical of him in any way, but, I just think we need to take a good look at this. I am convinced he is doing the job personally and I would imagine most of you feel the same way too. But, I just think that we need to think about this, because - he needs to be able put his Staff together so that we can move forward." Commissioner Brown remarked, "I echo the Mayor's comments." Furthermore, Commissioner Brown explained, "I was perfectly comfortable with the 180 days and if that was the only position we were looking for, I would be equally comfortable with waiting that time period because I do think Kevin is doing the job. I do think he is fulfilling all the criteria that we had set and I have been extremely happy with the communication; the accuracy of the information he presents; and his involvement with both the Commission and Staff; and watching that interaction happen." Additionally, Commissioner Brown noted, "If we are not going to make this position permanent, how can we possibly fill those other two (2) roles before we have the permanent City Manager in place, because if it is not Kevin (Smith) - I just think it would be fair to let the permanent City Manager pick his Staff and hire his Staff that he is going to be working with; so, I think that would be the only reason why, and I think that is actually a good reason that we may want to look at this before the 180 [days]." • CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA S MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING — APRIL 27, 2009 PAGE 7 OF 20 Deputy Mayor Krebs remarked, "Kevin (Smith) has proven himself. Not just here in City Hall. I mean I hear it with everybody he has even come in contact with, whether it be residents or business people." Further brief comments. Tape 1 /Side B Commissioner Bonner commented, "I will echo that all of the tasks and activities that we have been seeing are being performed magnificently by Kevin (Smith) thus far. I don't have any criticism of Kevin's (Smith) role thus far as City Manager. Just to be clear - during this 180 days, there are some rather significant City Manager responsibilities which we will have an opportunity to observe. The number one most critical component is the preparation and the process of developing our Budget, plus the fact that we will be dealing with the challenges that are handed to us by what comes out of Tallahassee and I for one, look forward to observing Kevin's performance as our Interim Manager during these challenges." "I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE THAT WE BRING THIS BACK AT THE NEXT MEETING AS AN AGENDA ITEM FOR DISCUSSION." MOTION BY COMMISSIONER McGINNIS. • MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Commissioner Brown asked Commissioner Bonner, "Do you think that can accurately be done given the fact that our City Manager will be down two (2) critical positions ?" Commissioner Bonner responded, "I believe it is an opportunity for us to observe, not only the City Manager in Kevin (Smith), in his performance as our City Manager, but - it is the opportunity for us to observe Staff in their performance during this time of change where Staff is being called upon inevitably by a reduced amount of defined leadership to effectively step up and have a chance to demonstrate themselves to Kevin (Smith) as Acting City Manager as well." Furthermore, Commissioner Bonner noted, "This is a short period of time remaining. There are - some material activities that will take place. I think it is a golden opportunity for us to see the - continued great performance, not only of Kevin (Smith), but to see Staff's performance. In no way, do I want to necessarily add to the burden - I recognize that it is creating additional burden, but I do believe - in answer to your question - I believe that all that needs to be done can be done with the resources that we have available." Commissioner Brown noted, "You are proposing that we evaluate the City Manager on his ability to generate a Budget without a Finance Director or a General Services Director, at his disposal ?" • CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA • MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - APRIL 27, 2009 PAGE 8 OF 20 Commissioner Bonner remarked, "I believe that the City Manager is well served by an outstanding Budget Manager; by an outstanding Budget tool - a brand new Budget tool and by a brand new Budget process which has never been practiced by the City before, which is Zero -Based budgeting and therefore this is a new experience for all participants within the Staff; and I think that we are going to see an opportunity for the entire Staff to lend a hand and participate in the process or have a chance to observe how each of them respond to this challenge that we are placing before them. I believe when we get through this in a few months, absent having answered those questions, because I respect the key leadership responsibilities, but one of the things in addition to this Commissioners, that I believe may come out of this, is that in an absence of those defined positions, as the Staff and Acting Manager Smith are putting together this Budget, we may see recommendations that would come forward for potentially a different organizational structure in some way or some element, yet to be known. But, if we go ahead and pigeonhole a business as usual solution, in advance of this 180 day timeframe, I don't think we are creating an environment that will allow that form of creativity to occur, within an organization where quite frankly, everyone is interested in performing well during this time frame. I think it is a great opportunity for us to allow that to occur." • "I WILL MAKE THE MOTION AGAIN THAT THIS COME BACK TO US IN TWO (2) WEEKS AS AN AGENDA ITEM FOR DISCUSSION." MOTION BY COMMISSIONER McGINNIS. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BROWN. DISCUSSION. VOTE: COMMISSIONER BROWN: AYE COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE COMMISSIONER HOVEY: AYE DEPUTY MAYOR KREBS: AYE COMMISSIONER BONNER: NAY MOTION CARRIED. REPORTS 406. Office Of The Mayor — John F. Bush Mayor Bush thanked Deputy Mayor Krebs for her efforts in getting Staff to the last Tri- County League of Cities Meeting and for winning the trophy. • CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA • MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - APRIL 27, 2009 PAGE 9 OF 20 Further comments. Mayor Bush telephonically departed the Meeting at approximately 6:09 p. m. REPORTS 407. Commission Seat One — Jean Hovey No Report. REPORTS 408. Commission Seat Two — Rick Brown Commissioner Brown also complimented the great Flag Football Game and said "You represented us well Chief (Brunelle), you and your team." Next, Commissioner Brown added, "Fantastic Arbor Day. Thank you very much Steve (Richart) and Mike (Mingea)." Commissioner Brown also spoke about Project Lifesaver and added, "I think it is a • tremendous effort." Lastly, Commissioner Brown thanked the City Commission and the City Manager for the flowers sent to his Mother when she was ill. PUBLIC INPUT Ms. Peggy Allen, 1423 Twin Rivers Boulevard, Oviedo, Florida: commented on the Chamber of Commerce's Beautification Award and the Chamber of Commerce's desire to put signs out in front of businesses; and hoped there would not be any Permit Fee. Brief discussion ensued on current revisions being made to the Sign Ordinance. On the issue of signage, Ms. Allen explained, "It would actually be a wooden sign. We're thinking maybe a two (2) x three (3) sign that would be posted in the front - on the property - in front of their building." Ms. Allen added, "The award winner, yes and it would be done on a quarterly basis. It may not always be in the City of Winter Springs; it may be in Oviedo; it may be in unincorporated areas." Attorney Garganese suggested, "I think you could just treat that as an on- premise sign - just the award winner. I don't even think the revisions to the Ordinance even addresses that." • CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA • MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - APRIL 27, 2009 PAGE 10 OF 20 Mr. Charles Lacey, 733 Bear Creek Circle, Winter Springs, Florida: representing the Planning and Zoning Board/Local Planning Agency, Mr. Lacey suggested some ways to reform the process between the Planning and Zoning Board/Local Planning Agency and the City Commission; including bringing Town Center Zoning under the Planning and Zoning Board/Local Planning Agency; a one (1) step process whenever possible; and the Planning and Zoning Board/Local Planning Agency being accountable for decisions. Discussion. Commissioner McGinnis commented to Mr. Randy Stevenson, ASLA, AICP, Director, Community Development Department about "Having the Town Center District be separate, so when you do your Workshop on that, if you would have that rationale - that would be helpful." Commissioner McGinnis added, "Within a short period of time, I think this should come back to us as an Agenda Item and work through this; and you make your recommendations in writing and we will begin to deal with it." Commissioner Brown asked the City Commission about Consensus, "Do we want it to come back to review, or do we want to wait until after the Workshop ?" Commissioner McGinnis stated, "I think we have to wait." Deputy Mayor Krebs stated, "After the Workshop." With no objections, Commissioner Brown said to the City Clerk, "Can you put a tickler then in to make sure this gets on the Agenda after the Workshop ?" City • Clerk Andrea Lorenzo - Luaces stated, "Sure." PUBLIC HEARINGS AGENDA PUBLIC HEARINGS 500. Not Used. PUBLIC HEARINGS 501. Office Of The City Attorney Requests That The City Commission Consider On Second And Final Reading Ordinance No. (Number) 2009 -09 Which Would Require That All Candidates For Municipal Election Within Winter Springs To Electronically File Their Campaign Reports With The Seminole County Supervisor Of Elections Utilizing The Electronic Reporting System Established By The Supervisor Of Elections. Attorney Garganese read the Ordinance by "Title" only; and stated, "During First Reading, the Commission directed that this Ordinance — although the Ordinance becomes effective immediately, the Ordinance will not apply retroactively so I added some language to Section 6." • CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA • MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - APRIL 27, 2009 PAGE I 1 OF 20 Mayor Bush opened the "Public Input " portion of the Agenda Item. No one spoke. Mayor Bush closed the "Public Input " portion of the Agenda Item. "MOTION TO APPROVE (ORDINANCE 2009 -09)." MOTION BY COMMISSIONER McGINNIS. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BROWN. DISCUSSION. VOTE: COMMISSIONER BONNER: AYE COMMISSIONER HOVEY: AYE COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE DEPUTY MAYOR KREBS: AYE COMMISSIONER BROWN: AYE MOTION CARRIED. REGULAR AGENDA • REGULAR 600. Office Of The City Manager Requesting The Commission To Review The Report Of Findings From Phase 1 Of The Forensic Investigation And Provide Direction For Proceeding With Phase 2. Manager Smith introduced this Agenda Item for discussion. Ms. Deede Weithorn, CPA, Associate Director, Berkowitz Dick Pollack & Brant, 200 South Biscayne Boulevard, Sixth Floor, Miami, Florida: addressed the City Commission on the Report. Discussion. "I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE PROCEED WITH ARTICLE A AND INCLUDE IN THAT BUDGET PROCESS DISCUSSIONS FOR B, D, AND E FOR THE UPCOMING BUDGET TO REVIEW THE PROCESSES THAT THE CITY MANAGER PUTS IN PLACE WITH OUR CURRENT CONSULTING AGENCY." MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BROWN. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HOVEY. DISCUSSION. • CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA • MINUTES CITY COMMISSION APRIL MEETING — L 27, 2009 PAGE 12 OF 20 AS TO COSTS, MS. WEITHORN STATED, IT IS NOT TO EXCEED TWENTY-. FIVE BUT IT IS PROBABLY LESS." COMMISSIONER BROWN NOTED, "THE RANGE IS ELEVEN (11) TO TWENTY -FIVE (25)." MS. WEITHORN ADDED, "IT IS NOT TO EXCEED." COMMISSIONER McGINNIS STATED, "I WOULD SUPPORT CONTINUING WITH OUR PRESENT CONSULTANT." VOTE: DEPUTY MAYOR KREBS: AYE COMMISSIONER BONNER: AYE COMMISSIONER HOVEY: AYE COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE COMMISSIONER BROWN: AYE MOTION CARRIED. Ms. Weithorn then asked about a time frame for completion; to which Deputy Mayor Krebs stated, "Just work with Kevin (Smith) on that." Commissioner Brown added, "The sooner the better so we can move on." Manager Smith left the Commission Chambers at 6.:45 p.nt. • REGULAR 601. Office Of The City Manager Requesting Acceptance Of Investment Report For Quarter Ended March 31, 2009 As Prepared And Presented By PFM Asset Management LLC. Mr. Steven Alexander, Managing Director, CTP, CGFO, The PFM Group, 300 South Orange Avenue, Suite 1170, Orlando, Florida: addressed the City Commission. Tape 2/Side A Discussion. Manager Smith returned to the Commission Chambers at 6.54 p.m. With further comments, Mr. Alexander noted, "So that everything that we've purchased is in Compliance with your Investment Policy, both from a permit investment standpoint and an asset allocation presentation - we're working closely with the City to make sure that we're in Compliance on a regular basis." Discussion. Mr. Alexander stated, "I support Kevin (Smith) in your decision - he has been awesome to work with. We really appreciate working with him!" • • CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - APRIL 27, 2009 PAGE 13 OF 20 ❖ ❖ AGENDA NOTE: THE FOLLOWING REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS WERE DISCUSSED NEXT, IN THE ORDER DOCUMENTED. • •:• REGULAR AGENDA REGULAR 606. Community Development Department Requests The Commission Consider A Conceptual Plan For A 201 Unit Apartment Complex On 10.32 Acres Within The Town Center. Mr. Stevenson introduced this Agenda Item for discussion. Mr. Scott Culp, Executive Vice President, Atlantic Housing Partners, LLLP, 329 North Park Avenue, Suite 300, Winter Park, Florida: spoke on this project. Members of the City Commission commented on the "Elderly" section. Discussion. Commissioner McGinnis asked when they would break ground? Mr. Culp stated, "The application process of the State is extremely competitive and it will take us through — at • the earliest, September of this year to be awarded an allocation from the State. At the latest, probably December of this year. We would start as soon as we could pull Permits after that." Mr. Culp added, "We have about 150 of these communities, a little over 30,000 apartment homes. Over a 100 of those are in Florida." Further discussion. Commissioner McGinnis asked Mr. Culp, "Do you have on -site management ?" Mr. Culp responded, "Always. Barbara Schulte here represents Concord Management [LTD.]. We only use our own management company. We don't hire third party managers. We have our own employees that live on site; so that the management lives there; the maintenance management lives there, and these are typically people that are hired right here from this community." Commissioner Brown asked about the Castle Woods Development in the City of Casselberry; and spoke of his concerns with crime at that community. Commissioner Brown then suggested "I would like us to proceed with extreme caution." Mr. Culp stated, "I hope as we walk through this process, we can work with you on some of those things like neighborhood watch; and courtesy officers. We like to actually give to some of your Officers the housing so they are actually living there, bringing their patrol units home in the evenings; helping us with some of the — circulation, as far as walking the property because that is important to us. • CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA • MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING — APRIL 27, 2009 PAGE 14 OF 20 We own the asset long -term; we don't sell the asset. We're not a merchant builder. We have to keep it for a certain period of time under this program. We've never sold any of our communities. So, it is important to us that we never get that blight." With further comments on recreational amenities, Mr. Culp explained, "Two (2) totally separate recreational amenities, although we do allow the seniors to share the family side, we don't allow the families to share the senior side." Discussion. Commissioner Brown noted, "When this is over, I will probably make a Motion or ask for Consensus that we have our Chief of Police pull the statistics from Legends, which is a high density development in our City and the other properties that this company manages in Oviedo and out by the Mall at Millenia; because I think it is very relevant when you are talking about potentially introducing a high crime situation into a developing business area of your City - 1 think it is extremely relevant when you are talking about the safety of our citizens." Ms. Barbara Schutte, Regional Manager, Concord Management, LTD., 1551 Sandspur Road, Maitland, Florida: spoke on the screening process. • Tape 2 /Side B With discussion, Ms. Schutte stated, "I have the same type of statistics that prove that - over seventy -one percent (71 %) of all crime that happens in a multi - family history or traditional community is from outside residents, not our residents; and that is something that I can lay -out on paper, for even Castle Woods; maybe not the seventy -one (71), but very close, it's over fifty percent (50 %) even at Castle Woods. They're not even our residents, they are outside people coming on the community and not being good neighbors." Commissioner Bonner then asked Ms. Schutte, "If you have a problem in one of your communities with one of your residents, does your Lease Agreement — do you practice removing those individuals from the property, revoking leases, and so on and so forth ?" Ms. Schutte responded by saying, "Very much so. It is a requirement of the program, our finance program with the State of Florida that we uphold that in a very serious manner." Discussion. • CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - APRIL 27, 2009 PAGE 15 OF 20 Commissioner Bonner suggested to Ms. Schutte, "We are blessed with a really • exceptional community Policing relationship within this City, and that is demonstrated monthly in the Police Department hosting citizen groups to a collective meeting. I would encourage you, as you put together your community plan for - this Development in our City, that you possibly entertain how your Development might be able to actively participate in that ongoing community relationship organization that are Police Department has already established." Ms. Schutte stated, "We'd be proud to participate in that." Further discussion. Commissioner McGinnis suggested, "I encourage everyone to go to Oviedo; to the Mall at Millenia — you will send a Memo, give us specific addresses that would be helpful." Commissioner Brown then asked Mr. Culp, "If you take your communities, and compare them against other high density communities in the cities that you are in, how is your crime rate ?" Mr. Culp responded, "I think that is a very valid point" and spoke of a community in Palm Bay, Florida. Mr. Culp added, "Every community has some crime. Our communities, each of them have right around 300 calls during that time frame that I reviewed." Mr. Culp noted, "We'll work with you. We'll work with the City; work with your Police Chief to help develop those programs to the highest level you want them." Furthermore, Mr. Culp stated, "Anything that we can do to work with the City to make sure that • happens, we want it." Mr. Stevenson added, "What they are asking tonight is approval of a Concept Plan — along with that, part of their Application requires the City to sign off stating just that — that they have Concept Plan Approval; so, I want the Commission to be well aware that if we move forward tonight, that one of the things you are authorizing is for your Staff to sign off that they have Concept Plan Approval on their finance package." Commissioner McGinnis said to Mr. Stevenson, "I understand that is — to move forward State level. Is that correct ?" Mr. Stevenson responded, "Yes." "I MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT THE SUBMITTED CONCEPT PLAN." MOTION BY COMMISSIONER McGINNIS. SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER BONNER. DISCUSSION. • CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA • MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - APRIL 27, 2009 PAGE 16 OF 20 COMMISSIONER BROWN SAID, "I WILL NOT BE VOTING IN THE AFFIRMATIVE UNTIL WE HAVE THE STATISTICAL DATA BACK FROM THE COMMUNITIES WHERE THEY HAVE THEIR DEVELOPMENTS IN OPERATION." VOTE: COMMISSIONER HOVEY: AYE COMMISSIONER BONNER: AYE COMMISSIONER BROWN: NAY COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE DEPUTY MAYOR KREBS: AYE MOTION CARRIED. REGULAR 602. Community Development Department — Arbor Division Requesting The City Commission Review Information Concerning The City's Arbor Ordinance, The Arbor Permitting Process And Code Requirements For Tree Removals, As Discussed At The March 23, 2009 Commission Meeting Under Item 405. • Mr. Stevenson introduced this Agenda Item. Mr. Mike Mingea, Arborist, Community Development Department addressed the City Commission on the Arbor process. Discussion. Commissioner McGinnis asked Mr. Mingea, "You did mention that there are some issues that you might like to tweak in this Code; or some things you don't quite agree with; so, I think maybe it would be a good idea if you would present those to us at some time with your rationale and let us look at that." Continuing, Commissioner McGinnis noted, "But, if you have some things that you would like to see, you worked with it all these nine (9) years - so, if you could do that and bring it to us as an Agenda Item? Agreed? Is there Consensus on that ?" Deputy Mayor Krebs remarked, "I would like to hear what he has to say." Commissioner Hovey and Commissioner Bonner nodded in agreement. No one voiced an objection. Mr. Mingea added, "We're more than willing to host a Workshop or anything that you need or you can meet individually - if you call and make an appointment. Glad to meet with you." Deputy Mayor Krebs stated, "That is a good idea if anybody has any questions." • CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA • MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING — APRIL 27, 2009 PAGE 17 OF 20 Mr. Stevenson then noted, "What you will see Commission, is this come back as a series of our Code Revisions. It's going to be incorporated into that." Commissioner Bonner complimented Mr. Mingea and said, "Your Permit process is probably the finest example of a Permit process that we have in the City." Commissioner Brown also complimented Mr. Mingea and noted, `Nice job." REGULAR 603. Not Used. REGULAR 604. Community Development Department — Urban Beautification Services Division Requesting The Commission Review Conceptual Banner Designs For Thirteen (13) Signalized Intersections Included As Part Of A Pole Banner Program Approved At The April 13, 2009 Commission Meeting Under Agenda Item 603. Mr. Steve Richart, Urban Beautification Services Division, Community Development • Department addressed the City Commission. Deputy Mayor Krebs suggested that instead of the "50 Years" to use `Incorporated in 1959'." Commissioner McGinnis mentioned that Blumberg Boulevard and fountains were great ideas for Banners, as was a "Vista ". Deputy Mayor Krebs noted, "Write down Commissioner McGinnis also recommended that "50 Years of Excellence" would be great, and suggested using fewer words, to make it easier for drivers passing by. Deputy Mayor Krebs liked the phrase, "City of Excellence." Commissioner Hovey suggested the wording, "Incorporated 1959 ". Tape 3 /Side A Commissioner Bonner suggested that citizens and the Beautification of Winter Springs Board could assist in designing future Banners. Mr. Richart commented on the template for the secondary Banner and noted they wanted to move forward, "So, we can go and order these tomorrow, and then we get our citizen advisory people involved and they help us with our next revision." 111 CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA • INUTES M CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - APRIL 27, 2009 PAGE 18 OF 20 Furthermore, Mr. Richart stated, "I can make these decisions. I would just say, be prepared to live with what I come up with." Commissioner McGinnis commented, "I know." Deputy Mayor Krebs stated, "I am prepared to live with it." No objections were noted. Deputy Mayor Krebs asked for the Commission's preference for the "layout ". Deputy Mayor Krebs stated, "I am 2." Commissioner Hovey remarked, "I am 2." Deputy Mayor Krebs added, "I am just talking about the wave. I am not talking about what is in between it." Commissioner Brown remarked, "I can go 2." Deputy Mayor Krebs summarized, "The 2's have it." REGULAR 605. Parks And Recreation Department Requests That The City Commission Review The Current Detailed Plan Regarding The July 4 Celebration Of Freedom /City Of Winter Springs 50 Anniversary And Provide Staff With Direction As Deemed Appropriate. Mr. Pula introduced this Agenda Item. Discussion ensued. Commissioner Brown commented for the Record that his company should not have been III listed as a Beer Vendor. Discussion continued. The Police Department's band "1770" was noted as entertainment, to which Deputy Mayor Krebs suggested, "We need to promote that really good." Deputy Mayor Krebs asked if "VIP" could not be used, and Manager Smith suggested using the term, "Hospitality." Deputy Mayor Krebs said, "Yes." As to something other than "VIP" parking, Manager Smith suggested that the wording - "Reserved" parking was a better choice. Security, coolers, and backpacks were then addressed by Chief Brunelle. Discussion. Commissioner Bonner noted, "If we have another City Newsletter which will go out prior to the 4 of July Event, and I suspect we do; perhaps we could include those security discussions and an explanation of cooler restrictions and backpack restrictions and so on; at least get the communication flowing so that folks can plan accordingly." Commissioner Hovey suggested, "In our water bills too." • CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA • MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - APRIL 27, 2009 PAGE 19 OF 20 Discussion followed on possible charges. Deputy Mayor Krebs stated, "I don't have a problem charging." Commissioner McGinnis noted, "Me too." Commissioner Bonner also said, "Me too." No objections were voiced. Commissioner Bonner recommended that a parking fee might be more accepted. Deputy Mayor Krebs summarized, "We wouldn't mind having a charge; we would like a charge actually, and then your team can come back with the best solutions as far as it is either going to be parking or at the gate." Mr. Pula remarked, `Be glad to discuss it in our next meeting. Great meetings and again, I thank the City Manager for them. His input and being a part of it has really been nice." In other City business, Commissioner McGinnis mentioned that the new LYNX bus route has started, and said to Mr. Charles Lacey in the audience, "Please bring that up to the Chamber. Ask them to maybe take a bus ride." Further discussion. Commissioner Hovey recognized nine (9) year old student Samantha Reviczky who was in the audience tonight. • Attorney Garganese stated, "The [Police] Chief mentioned that we were going to go live on the red light cameras and the Ordinance establishing the red light infraction program requires a Resolution of the Commission before that goes live." Attorney Garganese then read Resolution 2009 -31 into the Record. "MOVE TO APPROVE [RESOLUTION 2009 -311." MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BROWN. SECONDED. DISCUSSION. VOTE: COMMISSIONER McGINNIS: AYE DEPUTY MAYOR KREBS: AYE COMMISSIONER HOVEY: AYE COMMISSIONER BROWN: AYE COMMISSIONER BONNER: AYE MOTION CARRIED. Commissioner McGinnis also mentioned that a former local news reporter had joined the Army and noted that the City Commission wished him well. III • CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA MINUTES CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING — APRIL 27, 2009 PAGE 20 OF 20 ADJOURNMENT Deputy Mayor Krebs adjourned the Regular Meeting at 8:48 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: A LORENZO - LUACES, MMC CITY CLERK APPROVED: • 4 ti. 4,1,14 i YOR JOHN F. BUSH NOTE: These Minutes were approved at the May 1 1, 2009 Regular City Commission Mating. • • , , A - CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 1i ,%/ 1126 EAST STATE ROAD 434 A WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA 32708-2799 TELEPHONE: (407) 327 -1800 FACSIMILE: (407) 327 -4753 WEBSITE: www.winterspringsfl.org AGENDA CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING MONDAY, APRIL 27, 2009 — 5:15 P.M. CITY HALL — COMMISSION CHAMBERS 1126 EAST STATE ROAD 434 WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA ••••• NOTE: IT IS NOT UNCOMMON THAT THERE MAY BE CHANGES TO THIS AGENDA, INCLUDING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED TO THE CITY COMMISSION. s•• •:• • PLEASE SILENCE CELLULAR TELEPHONES AND /OR PAGERS DURING THE MEETING CALL TO ORDER Roll Call Invocation Pledge Of Allegiance Agenda Changes INFORMATIONAL AGENDA INFORMATIONAL 100. Community Development Department Advising The City Commission Of The Status Of Various Current Planning Projects. CONSENT AGENDA CONSENT 200. Public Works Department — Stormwater Division • Requests Approval To Execute Amendment No. (Number) 2 To The Project Agreement With The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) For The Restoration Of City Waterways Damaged During Tropical Storm Fay. CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA • AGENDA CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - APRIL 27, 2009 PAGE 2 OF 5 CONSENT 201. Office Of The City Manager And Finance Department Requesting That The City Commission Adopt Resolution 2009 -28 Establishing An Identity Theft Detection And Prevention Program. CONSENT 202. Community Development Department — Urban Beautification Services Division Requesting The City Commission Adopt Resolution 2009 -29, Allowing For The Establishment Of A Pole Banner Program As Approved In Commission Agenda Item 603 On April 13, 2009. CONSENT 203. Office Of The City Clerk Requesting Approval Of The April 13, 2009 Regular City Commission Meeting Minutes. AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS 300. Office Of The City Manager Requesting City Commission Acceptance Of The Comprehensive Annual • Financial Report (CAFR), As Presented, For The Fiscal Year Ended September 30, 2008. RECESS REPORTS REPORTS 400. Office Of The City Attorney — Anthony A. Garganese, Esquire REPORTS 401. Office Of The City Manager — Kevin L. Smith REPORTS 402. Office Of The City Clerk — Andrea Lorenzo - Luaces, MMC REPORTS 403. Commission Seat Three — Gary Bonner REPORTS 404. Commission Seat Four — Sally McGinnis REPORTS 405. Commission Seat Five /Deputy Mayor — Joanne M. Krebs • REPORTS 406. Office Of The Mayor — John F. Bush CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA • AGENDA CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - APRIL 27, 2009 PAGE 3 OF 5 REPORTS 407. Commission Seat One — Jean Hovey REPORTS 408. Commission Seat Two — Rick Brown PUBLIC INPUT (Anyone Who Wishes To Speak At Public Input On Any Agenda Item Or Subject Matter Will Need To Fill Out A "Public Input" Form. You Will Be Given Three (3) Minutes To Speak; If You Are Speaking For A Group Or Homeowner's Association You Will Be Given Five (5) Minutes To Speak. It Is At The Discretion Of The City Commission To Allow A Speaker More Than The Allotted Time. If You Wish To Speak At The Public Hearing Portion Of The Agenda, You Will Also Need To Fill Out A "Public Input" Form And Will Be Given The Same Time Allotment As Mentioned Above.) PUBLIC HEARINGS AGENDA PUBLIC HEARINGS 500. Not Used. • PUBLIC HEARINGS 501. Office Of The City Attorney Requests That The City Commission Consider On Second And Final Reading Ordinance No. (Number) 2009 -09 Which Would Require That All Candidates For Municipal Election Within Winter Springs To Electronically File Their Campaign Reports With The Seminole County Supervisor Of Elections Utilizing The Electronic Reporting System Established By The Supervisor Of Elections. REGULAR AGENDA REGULAR 600. Office Of The City Manager Requesting The Commission To Review The Report Of Findings From Phase 1 Of The Forensic Investigation And Provide Direction For Proceeding With Phase 2. REGULAR 601. Office Of The City Manager Requesting Acceptance Of Investment Report For Quarter Ended March 31, 2009 As Prepared And Presented By PFM Asset Management LLC. III CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA • AGENDA CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - APRIL 27, 2009 PAGE 4 OF 5 REGULAR 602. Community Development Department — Arbor Division Requesting The City Commission Review Information Concerning The City's Arbor Ordinance, The Arbor Permitting Process And Code Requirements For Tree Removals, As Discussed At The March 23, 2009 Commission Meeting Under Item 405. REGULAR 603. Not Used. REGULAR 604. Community Development Department — Urban Beautification Services Division Requesting The Commission Review Conceptual Banner Designs For Thirteen (13) Signalized Intersections Included As Part Of A Pole Banner Program Approved At The April 13, 2009 Commission Meeting Under Agenda Item 603. REGULAR 605. Parks And Recreation Department Requests That The City Commission Review The Current Detailed Plan Regarding The July 4 Celebration Of Freedom/City Of Winter Springs 50 • Anniversary And Provide Staff With Direction As Deemed Appropriate. REGULAR 606. Community Development Department Requests The Commission Consider A Conceptual Plan For A 201 Unit Apartment Complex On 10.32 Acres Within The Town Center. ADJOURNMENT • CITY OF WINTER SPRINGS, FLORIDA AGENDA CITY COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING - APRIL 27, 2009 PAGE 5 OF 5 • .+ PUBLIC NOTICE s This is a Public Meeting, and the public is invited to attend. This Agenda is subject to change. Please be advised that one (1) or more Members of any of the City's Advisory Boards and Committees may be in attendance at this Meeting, and may participate in discussions. Persons with disabilities needing assistance to participate in any of these proceedings should contact the City of Winter Springs at (407) 327 -1800 "at least 48 hours prior to the meeting, a written request by a physically handicapped person to attend the meeting, directed to the chairperson or director of such board, commission, agency, or authority" - per Section 286.26 Florida Statutes. "If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the board, agency, or commission with respect to any matter considered at such meeting or hearing, he or she will need a record of the proceedings, and that, for such purpose, he or she may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based" - per Section 286.0105 Florida Statutes. • P &Z BOARD AGENDA Consent ITE 500 Information Public Hearing X Regular October 13, 2010 Meeting MGR. /Dept. REQUEST: The Community Development Department requests the P &Z Board review the special exception requests for a 108 unit senior apartment complex with amenities on 6.95 acres within the Town Center and provide a recommendation to the City Commission. SYNOPSIS: The purpose of this Agenda Item is for the P & Z Board to review the special exception requests • for waivers and deviations, pursuant Section 20 -321 of the City Code and make a recommendation based on those criteria to the City Commission. CONSIDERATIONS: OVERVIEW: The 6.95 acre undeveloped and treed site is located within the Winter Springs Town Center on the southwest corner of SR 434 and the trail bridge (east of the Mobil station, on the south side of SR 434). The developer originally approached the City in 2003 with a proposal for 192 units. A concept plan was approved April 27, 2009 and amended May 18, 2009 for 201 units on 10.32 acres, but the number and composition of the units and the land area have been modified as the result of the applicant's meetings with concerned citizens (as well as from staff comments at development review meetings). The proposed development currently consists of 108 senior apartments, a pool, a community garden, a putting green, a small dog park, and 174 on -site parking spaces (15 adjacent on- street parking spaces and 14 on- street parking spaces located on the north side of "Townhouse Road "; some of the on -site parking spaces may be covered), on 6.95 acres (15.5 dwellings per acre) straddling the Cross - Seminole Trail adjacent to the south side of the trail bridge over SR 434. LAND USE & ZONING: Future Land Use Designation (FLU): Town Center Zoning: Town Center • October 13, 2010 Public Hearing Item 500 • Page 2 of 5 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS & DOCUMENTS: Housing for Older Persons Act of 1995 (federal) Chapter 163, FS Chapter 166, FS Chapter 760, FS Rule 9J -5, FAC Comprehensive Plan Chapter 9, City Code Town Center District Code Schrimsher Development Agreement (June 26, 2000) DISCUSSION: Transportation The 108 -unit apartment project generates an estimated 778 trips per day, including 57 AM peak hour trips and 77 PM peak hour trips (per ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 8 Edition). The site is accessed from S.R. 434 by "Townhouse Road," a new City street located approximately 400 - feet west of the Seminole County Trail Bridge. The location of Townhouse Road is consistent with the City's Town Center Master Plan for S.R. 434 Intersections. The Townhouse Road / S.R. 434 intersection will be constructed as a full- access median opening, which will allow left- in, left -out, right -in, and right -out turning movements, similar to the S.R. 434 intersection at City Hall. The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) is expected to require that the • "Townhouse Road" intersection be changed to a directional median opening (which allows left - in turning movements but not left -out) at the time the next intersection to the west, Michael Blake Boulevard, is constructed. The Michael Blake Boulevard intersection is pre- approved by FDOT as a full- access median opening, with signalization when warranted. FDOT currently does not allow two full- access median openings to be less than V.4 mile apart on S.R. 434 in this area, which is the case with Townhouse Road and Michael Blake Boulevard. Town Center Issues The Comprehensive Plan (primarily the Future Land Use Element: Town Center and Urban Central Business District objectives and policies), Town Center Code (sections 20 -320 through 20 -327 of the City Code of Ordinances), and the Schrimsher Development Agreement address a number of issues related to the subject property. One of the most important considerations is the continuation of the pedestrian- friendly street grid previously established in the Town Center Master Plan. This pedestrian-scale grid has been furthered in the proposed site plan and provides for a continuation of the street network through the subject site for eventual connection to Tuskawilla Road. This interconnected grid network helps to provide a pedestrian -scale to the development and makes efficient multi -modal transportation possible. There will be a LYNX bus stop adjacent to the site in the SR 434 right -of -way (ROW). Wide sidewalks and a nearly continuous line of 4 -story buildings oriented to the street (SR 434 and "Townhouse Road ") with elevated first floors (the first floor and the porch or stoop elevated at least 2 feet above the elevation of the adjacent public sidewalk) are required to enhance the • pedestrian— oriented aspect of the neighborhood and help to create walkability and a sense of place — key goals of the Town Center Code. Street width has been properly scaled to Town Center dimensions to accommodate on- street parallel parking as well as street trees which assist in the creation of a meaningful public space. Additionally, to further keep automobile speeds 2 October 13, 2010 Public Hearing Item 500 Page 3 of 5 III low, which is critical to a pedestrian- oriented development, corner radii are the prescribed 15 feet, except at the intersection of SR 434 and "Townhouse Road ", where they are 35 feet, as required by the FDOT. No SR 434 frontage road is proposed for the residential development, since frontage roads are more suitable for retail development. Special Exceptions Section 20 -321 of the City Code states that the City Commission may, by special exception, waive strict compliance with the provisions of the Code. In granting a special exception, the City Commission must find by substantial competent evidence that: a. The proposed development contributes to, promotes and encourages the improvement of the Winter Springs Town Center and catalyzes other development as envisioned in the Winter Springs Town Center regulations. b. The proposed development will not have an unfavorable effect on the economy of the Winter Springs Town Center. c. The proposed development abides by all rules in this code other than those specially excepted. Special limitations apply to large footprint buildings (greater than (20,000) square feet); see subsection 20 -324 (12) for these limitations. d. The proposed development meets any reasonable additional conditions, restrictions or limitations deemed necessary by the city commission in order to preserve and promote the intent of the Winter Springs Town Center Master Plan. • Staff believes that the site plan with the code deviations and waivers listed below satisfies these criteria for a pedestrian- friendly, multimodal, urban, development that meets the spirit and intent of the Town Center. Code Deviations & Waivers The site plan incorporates certain code waivers, as listed below: 1. Section 20 -325 (c) (8) provides for the City Commission to waive the frontage road requirement (frontage roads are more suitable in front of retail development; for example, the West End Office site was not required to provide a frontage road; the applicant is providing a wider sidewalk in conjunction with a bus stop with a shelter in the SR 434 ROW; staff supports the waiver). 2. Section 20 -324 (1) requires comer curb radii between 9 and 15 feet, which requires motor vehicles to slow down going around corners and thereby increases pedestrian safety. The applicant is meeting this standard, except at the intersection of the new "Townhouse Road" and SR 434, where the FDOT requires the roadway connection to SR 434 to have wider turning radii (35 feet), to maintain the motor vehicle level of service on SR 434 (therefore, since FDOT controls its ROW and will not issue a permit for tighter radii at the intersection, staff supports the waiver as a necessity). 3. Section 20 -327 (d) requires each floor of any building facade facing a park, square or street to have transparent windows covering from 15 to 70 percent of the wall area. The side wall of Building No. 1, which is in very close proximity to the trail bridge, has 10 • percent window area (which staff supports, since this side of the residential building is so close to the trail bridge; staff supports having windows facing the trail for safety /surveillance purposes, but does not want to compromise the privacy of the 3 October 13, 2010 Public Hearing Item 500 Page 4 of 5 • residents, by allowing too much view into the living and bedrooms from the trail bridge). The rest of the building frontages meet or exceed the 15 percent opacity requirement. 4. Section 20 -324 (10) (f) requires no more than 6 consecutive parking spaces provided without a landscape island, where there is not the alternative landscaping in front of the spaces. There are 8 spaces and handicap accessibility aisles in the area immediately south of the pool (toward the trail). The code allows tree spacing to be determined by the City Arborist, based on tree species and locations. The City Arborist supports this waiver, based upon the proposed tree planting/landscape plan. 5. Section 20 -324 (5) requires the first floor to be elevated at least 24 inches above the adjacent sidewalk grade. This is essential to a positive interactive relationship between residences and people on the sidewalks and street (Jane Jacobs' "eyes on the street "). The buildings will have monolithic slabs and some of the ends of the buildings do not meet the letter of this requirement. All buildings are designed to meet or exceed the 24 inch requirement at the front entrances. Staff has stated that deviations too minor to be noticeable (e.g. as much as 3 -5 inches below the 24 inch standard) at first floor windows nearest the ends of the buildings would be acceptable. 6. Section 20 -325 (8) and (10) set a maximum building width of 160 feet and building depth of 125 feet. Buildings 2 (L- shaped building at the corner; 173 feet along SR 434 & 173 feet along "Townhouse Road" 75 feet depth) and Building 4 (172 feet along "Townhouse Road" and 74 feet depth) exceed these maximums. These buildings do not pose the "big box" problems, such as depicted in Section 20 -324 (12) picture. Staff believes these buildings relate well to the adjacent roadways and supports these waivers. Staff had also • supported and the Commission approved waiving strict adherence to this rule in the Doran Phase II plans (for the east side of Tuskawilla Road, behind McDonalds), where it was determined that the overall design of the site more than compensated for the deviation. 7. Section 20 -325 (10) sets a maximum 35 foot distance between buildings. The distance between buildings 2 and 3 scales to about 80 feet. The driveway into the site (which functions very similarly to an internal roadway) is located within this area, with a 10 foot wide sidewalk and parallel parking on each side. There is a distance of about 32 feet from the western end of building 2 and the driveway curb. The other buildings are much closer together than the 35 foot standard. Staff supports this deviation in this location due to the manner in which this driveway functions as a roadway. Findings of Fact 1. The proposed development is located within the City of Winter Springs, within its Town Center (FLU designation and zoning district, and within the area encompassed by the existing June 26, 2000 Schrimsher Development Agreement. 2. Section 20 -323 (a) of the City Code of Ordinances lists adult congregate living facilities, retirement homes (including independent living through assisted living), and multi - family residential as permitted uses within the Town Center District. III 3. The concept plan for 201 multi - family dwelling units on 10.32 acres was approved on April 29, 2009, but was amended on May 18, 2009. 4 October 13, 2010 Public Hearing Item 500 Page 5 of 5 • 4. The final engineering/site plan is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 5. Deviations from the Town Center Code are addressed through a special exception, as provided in Section 20 -321. Staff supports the listed deviations. 6. The applicant has met with concerned citizens on multiple occasions to discuss the development, obtain input, and has reported that he has incorporated some of that input into the plans. FISCAL IMPACT: Staff estimates that the two parcels that make up this project currently generate approximately $16,000 in ad valorem taxes. These numbers have been estimated because both parcels are the result of a division of existing parcels. If the property is developed as proposed, it will contain 108 apartment units. The applicant has stated that, once the project is finished, it will facilitate 19 permanent jobs with an annual salary of $500,000. The project's Fiscal Neutrality Analysis (FNA) estimates that the project will have an additional fiscal benefit on both a revenue and Net Present Value (NPV) basis. The total net fiscal impact provided to the City due to the development of the project is $618,103. The NPV of the project's impact to the City is $230,185. The conclusion of the applicant's study is that the development will pay its own way in terms of services required from the City. Please be aware that this report is still being vetted by the City and additional information will be • forthcoming at the meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board. Staff has reviewed the FNA and has significant questions and concerns. The applicant is continuing to work to revise the report pursuant to staff concerns. Additional information will be presented at the October 13, 2010 P &Z meeting. The applicant is a for - profit [not a 501 (C) 3 tax exempt] organization. The permit, impact, and connection fees will be the same as for any other developer. The ad- valorem taxes are, however, adjusted for the rents, most of which will be below market rate. The entire Fiscal Neutrality Analysis can be viewed on the City's website by looking under "Proposed Town Parke Apartment Project" on the front page. The name of the analysis is "8- 23 -2010 Fiscal Neutrality Analysis" and is located under the "New Project Proposal" heading. COMMUNICATION EFFORTS: The advertising of the agenda item is required. Extensive information regarding this site is posted on the City website. In addition, a sign has been posted on the site and letters have been sent to abutting property owners of land within 150 feet of the site. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Board recommend that the City Commission approve the Town Parke Apartments special exceptions. • ATTACHMENTS: A — Final engineering plans 5 • P &Z BOARD AGENDA Consent ITEM 600 Information Public Hearing Regular X October 13, 2010 Meeting MGR. /Dept. REQUEST: The Community Development Department requests the P &Z Board review the final engineering site plan for a 108 unit senior apartment complex with amenities on 6.95 acres within the Town Center and provide a recommendation to the City Commission. SYNOPSIS: The purpose of this Agenda Item is for the P & Z Board to review the site plan for consistency • with the City's Comprehensive Plan and Code of Ordinances and make a recommendation based on those criteria to the City Commission. CONSIDERATIONS: OVERVIEW: The 6.95 acre undeveloped and treed site is located within the Winter Springs Town Center on the southwest corner of SR 434 and the trail bridge (east of the Mobil station, on the south side of SR 434). The developer originally approached the City in 2003 with a proposal for 192 units. A concept plan was approved April 27, 2009 and amended May 18, 2009 for 201 units on 10.32 acres, but the number and composition of the units and the land area have been modified as the result of the applicant's meetings with concerned citizens (as well as from staff comments at development review meetings). The proposed development currently consists of 108 senior apartments, a pool, a community garden, a putting green, a small dog park, and 174 on -site parking spaces (15 adjacent on- street parking spaces and 14 on- street parking spaces located on the north side of "Townhouse Road "; some of the on -site parking spaces may be covered), on 6.95 acres (15.5 dwellings per acre) straddling the Cross - Seminole Trail adjacent to the south side of the trail bridge over SR 434. Site topography slopes eastward from a high of about 42 feet near the west end of the proposed "Townhouse Road" to about 32 feet near the bridge crossing at SR 434 (elevations based on NGVD 1929). The development site is located outside of the 100 year floodplain and contains no wetlands. Gopher tortoises (10 or fewer burrows; these are the only listed animal species known or believed to inhabit the site) must be relocated before site work commences. • October 13, 2010 Regular Item 600 Page 2 of 6 • LAND USE & ZONING: Future Land Use Designation (FLU): Town Center Zoning: Town Center APPLICABLE REGULATIONS & DOCUMENTS: Housing for Older Persons Act of 1995 (federal) Chapter 163, FS Chapter 166, FS Chapter 760, FS Rule 9J -5, FAC Comprehensive Plan Chapter 9, City Code Town Center District Code Schrimsher Development Agreement (June 26, 2000) DISCUSSION: Transportation The 108 -unit apartment project generates an estimated 778 trips per day, including 57 AM peak hour trips and 77 PM peak hour trips (per ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 8 Edition). The site is accessed from S.R. 434 by Townhouse Road, a new City street located approximately 400 -feet west of the Seminole County Trail Bridge. The location of Townhouse Road is consistent with the City's Town Center Master Plan for S.R. 434 Intersections. The Townhouse Road / S.R. 434 • intersection will be constructed as a full- access median opening, which will allow left -in, left - out, right -in, and right -out turning movements, similar to the S.R. 434 intersection at City Hall. The Florida Department of Transportation is expected to require that the Townhouse Road intersection be changed to a directional median opening (which allows left -in turning movements but not left -out) at the time the next intersection to the west, Michael Blake Boulevard, is constructed. The Michael Blake Boulevard intersection is pre- approved by FDOT as a full - access median opening, with signalization when warranted. FDOT currently does not allow two full- access median openings to be less than 1 /4 mile apart on S.R. 434 in this area, which is the case with Townhouse Road and Michael Blake Boulevard. The applicant has submitted a traffic impact study that after several rounds of review was determined to be acceptable to Staff. The traffic study evaluated the project's impact on the following six (6) S.R. 434 intersections: Doran Drive, Cliff Rose Drive, Tuskawilla Road, Townhouse Road (project entrance), Gardena Drive, and Tuscora Drive. All study intersections currently operate at an acceptable level of service and are projected to continue to operate at an acceptable level of service after the project is built out in 2012. The traffic study also evaluated the project's impacts to S.R. 434 from S.R. 419 through the Town Center to Spring Avenue, and to Tuskawilla Road from Blumberg Boulevard to Winter Springs Boulevard. Staff required the applicant's traffic engineer to evaluate these roadway segments for the average daily traffic impacts as well as the AM and PM peak hour impacts. The traffic study indicates that all segments will operate at an acceptable level -of- service at project buildout for daily, AM peak, . and PM peak periods. A right -turn deceleration lane on S.R. 434 eastbound at the project entrance (Townhouse Road) does not have the volume to be warranted by City Code. 2 October 13, 2010 Regular Item 600 III Page 3 of 6 Utilities The site has central water and sewer available in the area, with adequate capacity. An 8" diameter sanitary force main is located in the southeastern comer of the site, along the SR 434 right -of -way. A 12 "potable water line is located along the eastern right -of -way line of Tuskawilla Road and extends southward of the Mobile gas station site. The applicant proposes to provide irrigation from the storm -water pond, to be supplemented by an irrigation well. An on -site sanitary -sewer lift station is provided. Town Center Issues The Comprehensive Plan (primarily the Future Land Use Element: Town Center and Urban Central Business District objectives and policies), Town Center Code (sections 20 -320 through 20 -327 of the City Code of Ordinances), and the Schrimsher Development Agreement address a number of items as related to the subject property. One of the most important considerations is the continuation of the street grid previously established in the Town Center Master Plan. This pedestrian -scale grid has been furthered in the proposed site plan and provides for a continuation of the street network through the subject site for eventual connection to Tuskawilla Road. The intersection on "Townhouse Road" that connects to parking and site amenities provide an opportunity for a connection to the north to Michael Blake Boulevard (through a future, non - related development), providing access to what is envisioned to become a full access signalized intersection. This interconnected grid network helps to provide a pedestrian -scale to the development and makes efficient multi -modal transportation possible. It also provides the first increment toward multiple routes for emergency response teams. There will be a LYNX bus III stop adjacent to the site in the SR 434 right -of -way (ROW). Bicycle, wheelchair, and pedestrian access to the Cross - Seminole Trail are provided, near the SW corner of the site, where it is compatible with the trail bridge slope for ease of use and safety. Wide sidewalks and a nearly continuous line of 4 -story buildings oriented to the street (SR 434 and "Townhouse Road ") with elevated first floors (the first floor and the porch or stoop elevated at least 2 feet above the elevation of the adjacent public sidewalk) are required to enhance the pedestrian — oriented aspect of the neighborhood and help to create walkability and a sense of place — key goals of the Town Center Code. Street widths have been properly scaled to Town Center dimensions to accommodate on- street parallel parking as well as street trees which assist in the creation of a meaningful public space. Additionally, to further keep automobile speeds low, which is critical to a pedestrian- oriented development, corner radii are the prescribed 15 feet, except at the intersection of SR 434 and "Townhouse Road ", where they are 35 feet, as required by the FDOT. The 15.5 dwellings per acre is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan (FLU Policy 2.2.6), which encourages a minimum average density of 7 dwellings per acre within the Town Center (maximum density of 36 dwellings per acre). Residential density above about 8 dwellings per acre is generally recognized as essential for efficient bus transit service. A critical mass of residential units and non - residential intensity (density and diversity = efficiency and flexibility) is an important principle of new urbanism that is necessary to create a sense of place, vibrant social and commercial interaction, and long -term value enhancement (long -term residual value 411 for the investment). Public infrastructure and services have a lower per capita cost as residential density and /or non - residential intensity increases. 3 October 13, 2010 Regular Item 600 III Page 4 of 6 The development site is comprised of parts of separate parcels owned by the same owner. Section 9 -14 of the City Code allows land within the Town Center to be divided by plat, lot split resolution, or in accordance with a recorded development agreement, except unless an exemption set forth in Section 9 -13 is applicable. The applicant proposes to divide the properties through the development agreement option. Transfer of ownership of the "Townhouse Road" ROW will include a deed to the City. Code Deviations & Waivers The site plan incorporates certain code waivers, as listed below. These are addressed separately in the special exception agenda item and, if approved by the City Commission, will be incorporated into a development agreement. 1. Section 20 -325 (c) (8) provides for the City Commission to waive the frontage road requirement (frontage roads are more suitable in front of retail development; the applicant is providing a wider sidewalk in conjunction with a bus stop with a shelter in the SR 434 ROW; staff supports the waiver). 2. Section 20 -324 (1) requires corner curb radii between 9 and 15 feet, which requires motor vehicles to slow down going around corners and thereby increases pedestrian safety. The applicant is meeting this standard, except at the intersection of the new "Townhouse Road" and SR 434, where the FDOT requires the roadway connection to SR 434 to have wider turning radii (35 feet), to maintain the motor vehicle level of service on SR 434 (therefore, since FDOT controls its ROW and will not issue a permit for tighter • radii at the intersection, staff supports the waiver as a necessity). 3. Section 20 -327 (d) requires each floor of any building facade facing a park, square or street to have transparent windows covering from 15 to 70 percent of the wall area. The side wall of Building No. 1, which is in very close proximity to the trail bridge, has 10 percent window area (since this side of the residential building is so close to the trail bridge; staff supports having windows facing the trail for safety /surveillance purposes, but does not want to compromise the privacy of the residents, by allowing too much view into the living and bedrooms from the trail bridge; staff supports the waiver). The rest of the building frontages meet the 15 percent opacity requirement. 4. Section 20 -324 (10) (f) requires no more than 6 consecutive parking spaces provided without a landscape island, where there is not the alternative landscaping in front of the spaces. There are 8 spaces and handicap accessibility aisles in the area immediately south of the pool (toward the trail). The code allows tree spacing to be determined by the City Arborist, based on tree species and locations. The City Arborist supports this waiver, based upon the proposed tree planting/landscape plan. 5. Section 20 -324 (5) requires the first floor to be elevated at least 24 inches above the adjacent sidewalk grade. This is essential to a positive interactive relationship between residences and people on the sidewalks and street ( "eyes on the street "). The buildings will have monolithic slabs and some of the ends of the buildings do not meet the letter of this requirement. All buildings are designed to meet or exceed the 24 inch requirement at the front entrances. Staff has stated that deviations too minor to be noticeable at the ends of the buildings would be acceptable. 6. Section 20 -325 (8) and (10) set a maximum building width of 160 feet and building depth • of 125 feet. Buildings 2 (L- shaped building at the corner) and Building 4 exceed these maximums. These buildings do not pose the "big box" problems, such as depicted in 4 October 13, 2010 Regular Item 600 Page 5 of 6 • Section 20 -324 (12) picture. Staff believes these buildings relate well to the adjacent roadways and supports these waivers. Staff had also supported and the Commission approved waiving strict adherence to this rule in the Doran Phase II plans (for the east side of Tuskawilla Road, behind McDonalds), where it was determined that the overall design of the site more than compensated for the deviation. 7. Section 20 -325 (10) sets a maximum 35 foot distance between buildings. The distance between buildings 2 and 3 scales to about 80 feet. The driveway into the site (which functions very similarly to an internal roadway) is located within this area, with a 10 foot wide sidewalk and parallel parking on each side. There is a distance of about 32 feet from the western end of building 2 and the driveway curb. The other buildings are much closer together than the 35 foot standard. Staff supports this deviation in this location due to the manner in which this driveway functions as a roadway. Findings of Fact 1. The proposed development is located within the City of Winter Springs, within its Town Center (FLU designation and zoning district), and within the area encompassed by the existing June 26, 2000 Schrimsher Development Agreement. 2. Section 20 -323 (a) of the City Code of Ordinances lists adult congregate living facilities, retirement homes (including independent living through assisted living), and multi- family residential as permitted uses within the Town Center District. • 3. The concept plan for 201 multi - family dwelling units on 10.32 acres was approved on April 29, 2009, but was amended on May 18, 2009. 4. The final engineering/site plan is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 5. Deviations from the Town Center Code are addressed through a special exception, development agreement, or some combination of these, as provided in Section 20 -321. Staff supports the listed deviations. 6. The applicant has met with concerned citizens on multiple occasions to discuss the development, obtain input, and has reported that he has incorporated some of that input into the plans. FISCAL IMPACT: Staff estimates that the two parcels that make up this project currently generate approximately $16,000 in ad valorem taxes. These numbers have been estimated because both parcels are the result of a division of existing parcels. If the property is developed as proposed, it will contain 108 apartment units. The applicant has stated that, once the project is finished, it will facilitate 19 permanent jobs with an annual salary of $500,000. The project's Fiscal Neutrality Analysis (FNA) estimates that the project will have an additional fiscal benefit on both a revenue and Net Present Value (NPV) basis. The total net fiscal impact provided to the City due to the development of the project is $618,103. The NPV • of the project's impact to the City is $230,185. The conclusion of the applicant's study is that the development will pay its own way in terms of services required from the City. Please be 5 October 13, 2010 Regular Item 600 Page 6 of 6 • aware that this report is still being vetted by the City and additional information will be forthcoming at the meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board. Staff has reviewed the FNA and has significant questions and concerns. The applicant is continuing to work to revise the report pursuant to staff concerns. Additional information will be presented at the October 13, 2010 P &Z meeting. The applicant is a for - profit [not a 501 (C) 3 tax exempt] organization. The permit, impact, and connection fees will be the same as for any other developer. The ad- valorem taxes are, however, adjusted for the rents, most of which will be below market rate. The entire Fiscal Neutrality Analysis can be viewed on the City's website by looking under "Proposed Town Parke Apartment Project" on the front page. The name of the analysis is "8- 23 -2010 Fiscal Neutrality Analysis" and is located under the "New Project Proposal" heading. COMMUNICATION EFFORTS: Extensive information on this site is posted on the City website. In addition, a sign has been posted on the site and letters have been sent to abutting property owners of land within 150 feet of the site as part of the public notification for the special exception. This meeting date has also been posted on the City's Website under the project name. This Agenda Item has been distributed to the Mayor and City Commission; City Manager; City Attorney; Department Directors; placed in Press Packets; placed in the Lobby binder; and will be available on the City's Website, LaserFiche, and the City's Server. • RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Board, after consideration of the information contained in this agenda item, recommend that the City Commission approve the Town Parke Apartments final engineering plan, subject to the special exceptions (deviations & waivers) listed above and a development agreement addressing these issues, the division of property, and other Town Center issues. ATTACHMENTS: A — Final engineering plans III 6 • AFFIDAVIT OF JOEL A. IVEY BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, an officer duly authorized to take oaths and acknowledgements, personally appeared Mr. Joel A. Ivey, known to me and who, under oath, deposes and says that: 1. I, Joel A. Ivey, am over the age of eighteen, have personal knowledge of the facts stated herein, and am competent to testify to such facts. 2. My education and professional experience is described in my curriculum vitae, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit A. 3. I am the president of Ivey Planning Group, LLC, 1349 S International Parkway, Suite 2441, Lake Mary, Florida. 4. I have been a professional planner for more than 33 years and direct the services of my firm in such planning activities as Developments of Regional Impact (DRI), major comprehensive plan amendments, and rezonings. My professional experience includes such fields as urban and regional planning, developments of regional impact, and major comprehensive plan amendments. I have provided expert testimony in comprehensive planning and zoning hearings before planning boards and governing bodies, judicial proceedings within the State of Florida and on behalf of the Department of Community Affairs as an expert on DRI. I have testified in Department of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) as an expert in comprehensive planning. I am the current chairman of the City of Lake Mary • Code Enforcement Board and am an appointed member of the Volusia County Green Ribbon Committee. I have served as chairman of the Lake Mary Downtown Development Advisory Board and have served on the Board of Directors of the National Association of Industrial and Office Parks, the Florida Planning and Zoning Association, and as chairman of the Volusia County Association for Responsible Development. I also served on both the Volusia County Smart Growth and Smart Growth Implementation Committees and Environmental Resources Subcommittee. 5. I have reviewed an application for site plan approval for the Town Parke Apartments to be located within the City limits of the City of Winter Springs, Florida and have also reviewed related reports, documents and analysis, including the following: a. City of Winter Springs adopted Comprehensive Plan. b. Future Land Use Map of the City of Winter Springs. c. Staff reports by the staff of the City of Winter Springs. d. Site Plan for Town Parke Apartments e. Minutes of Winter Springs City Commission on 4/27/09 approving Town Parke Apartments Concept Plan. f. Chapter 9J -5, Florida Administrative Code. g. Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. 6. Upon review of the pertinent support documents listed above, it is my expert opinion that the plans for the Town Parke Apartments are consistent with, and furthers the purposes of, the City's adopted comprehensive plan and the adopted Future Land Use Map of the City of Winter Springs. • 0909692\148282\133329311 411 7. The opinion expressed in para. 6 above is based on my observation that there were no apparent conflicts with the Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the adopted plan. 8. Specific policies that were especially pertinent to my opinion, and clearly support the Town Parke application included: a. Land Use: Goal 1, Objective 1, policy 1.1.1 which allows 36 units per acre or a Floor Area Ratio of 2.0. Both being the highest in the City. b. Policy 1.1.2 which confirmed that densities and intensities are calculated on gross acres. c. Policy 1.1.4.which encourages "energy efficient and innovative land use patterns (such as multi - modal, horizontally and vertically integrated, mixed use development, cluster development, low impact development, LEED, Green Globes, Florida Green Building Coalition standards, and other such environmentally - friendly development practices)." d. Policy 1.2.2. which notes that development orders will not be issued unless adequate potable water supplies are available. e. Policy 1.2.3. which discourages the use of septic tanks. f: Policy 1.2.4. which requires development to connect to central sewer. g. Objective 1.3 relating to concurrency. h. Objective 1.4 relating to discouraging sprawl and encouraging redevelopment, especially the following polices: i. Policy 1.4.2 which states, "Encourage compatible infill and higher • density and intensity development within the Town Center and the U.S. 17 -92 CRA Corridor. Minimize adverse impacts to adjacent established residential neighborhoods through site layout, orientation of buildings, and a transition of densities." ii. Policyl .4.3. which directs the City to ensure the availability of public services and facilities to accommodate development in the Town Center. i. Goal 2 relating to the Town Center which notes that the City seeks to create a Town Center based upon traditional design standards, noting that. "The primary purpose of the Town Center shall be to create an economically successful, vibrant, aesthetic, compact, multimodal, diverse, mixed use, nco- traditional urban environment designed at a pedestrian scale, and with a pedestrian orientation." The Town Center is intended to be a place where people can reside in a mix of single and multi family dwellings, work, gather to shop, relax, recreate, and be entertained, attend community events and enjoy the natural beauty of lands located in the Town Center. j. Policy 2.1.3. notes that the City shall "Maintain a leadership position to protect the economic and planning integrity of the Town Center and promote public and private investment and growth therein." k. Objective 2.2 notes that the City shall promote and enhance the development of the Town Center by allowing a mixed use high density /intensity neo traditional Town Center utilizing the Town Center master plan. 11111 0909692 \148282 \1333293 \1 4110 1. Policy .2.6 which states, "Support the desired commercial activity and Y � pp Y urban character desired for the Town Center by encouraging high density residential development consistent with the Town Center Goal up to thirty -six (36) units per gross acre and by seeking a minimum average residential density of seven (7) units per acre, unless the type of unit would warrant a lesser density while still meeting the intent of the Town Center Code." 9. I specifically reviewed the Housing Element of the adopted comprehensive plan and note that the introduction contains the following quote: "A stable community offers a variety of housing units that appeal to a wide range of age groups, income levels and family sizes." The Town Parke Apartments support this concept. 10. The Town Parke Apartments application is consistent with and advances the intent of the City's Comprehensive Plan Housing Element as is indicated by the following adopted policies: a. Policy 1.1.4: "Encourage the development/redevelopment of property that will integrate diverse choices of housing." b. Policy 1.1.8: "Limit the development of housing with a density greater than 18 dwelling units per acre (dua), to the Town Center and the U.S. 17- 92 Corrununity Redevelopment Area (C.R.A.) Corridor. Development of higher density housing must take reasonable and appropriate steps to minimize or eliminate adverse impacts to adjacent established residential neighborhoods through the site layout, orientation of buildings and a transition of densities." • c. Policy 1.1.15: "Support the desired commercial activity and urban character desired for the town Center by encouraging high density residential development up to thirty -six (36) units per acre, consistent with the City's economic dev elopement goals and Town center Master Plan." d. Objective 1.3: "The City shall encourage and attempt to assist the private sector in the provision of safe, clean and affordable housing for special needs populations of the City, including the very low, low and moderate - income households." e. Policy 1.3.9: "Encourage developers to address the need for workforce housing where appropriate, by including workforce housing units in their developments. Additionally, encourage developers of single family detached units, where appropriate, to include residential units with accessory dwelling units (such as garage apartments). 11. I also specifically assessed policy 1.3.13 of the Housing Element. This policy states, in part, "Amend the City Code to address the following issues in the provision of affordable housing: Discourage the concentration of affordable housing units." I was unable to find such a City Code rule. There is no definition of "concentration of affordable housing units." Assuming the data provided in the Housing Element analysis is still current, this application approve 108 units which would be eight tenths of one percent of the total City units. This small percentage does not appear to constitute a "concentration" (108 units divided by 13,816 units). A reasonable interpretation of this policy is needed in that otherwise the City's plan would be internally inconsistent in that the City's plan clearly calls for 11111 0909692 \148282 1133329311 • the highest densities allowed to be located in the "Town Center. Other policies encourage workforce housing, and the provision of low and moderate income housing. Finally, I note that this policy requires an action by the City vs. an applicant and the City has already approved the Comprehensive Plan, the Future Land Use Map, and the intended goal of the Town Center. Therefore, I conclude the application does not (and cannot) conflict with this policy. 12. I have reviewed the City's Town Center Code and observe no inconsistencies between it and the Town Parke application. FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT. (?,/ C yel A. Ivey Sworn and subscribed before me on this 1 day of October, 2010, at lakertia,r y , Florida. f ad No : y Public, State ofFlorida • J e_GLn &ri/Q A. 2„,...)/;v (• int /type name) y Commission Expires: / -.2_5 2 0Iy Cov7vrY SCNI,rvccti Cou+.+rY 5'r/tn : f1 0' JEANETTE A. ROWLINGS l„IY COMMISSION # DD938799 ., • EXPIRES January 25, 2014 407)398 -0153 FlorioallolaryService.com 110 0909692\148282\133329311 • Ivey Planning Group, LLC Joel A. Ivey 1349 S. International Pkwy., Ste 2441 President Lake Mary, FL 32746 (407) 660 -8881 joeli @iveypg.com Education Civic Appointments and Memberships MS, Environmental Planning, Florida Forestry Association Georgia Institute of Technology Volusia County Green Ribbon Committee Chairman, BA, History /Political Science, Lake Mary Downtown Development Advisory Birmingham Southern College Committee Board of Directors, National Association of Industrial Awards /Recoanition and Office Parks Associated with two projects that have won Chairman, Lake Mary Code Enforcement Board Chairman, Volusia County Association for National Awards: Responsible Development - Outstanding Small Community Award, Volusia Smart Growth Committee and Environmental Disney's Celebration New Town, The Resources Sub committee Urban Land Institute Florida Green Building Coalition - Planned Community One, Port Orange, Florida, Community Innovations Association Experience Summary As president and founder of Ivey Planning Group, LLC, Joel Ivey brings over 32 years of experience to • the firm and to clients' projects. Mr. Ivey primarily directs firm services for large -scale projects involving numerous stakeholders including Developments of Regional Impact (DRI) and major plan amendments. He has been retained by numerous local governments and land owners to solve complicated land use issues to include Orange and Volusia Counties, Disney Development Company, the MacArthur Foundation, the St. Joe Company, Tupperware, and the Miami Corporation. He led firm efforts in collaborating with Orange County, Florida staff to provide a master plan and growth management policy directives for the 32,000 -acre Innovation Way Study Area. He has served as the lead consultant to the Daytona Beach International Airport since 2001. Project Management • Innovation Way, Economic Development and Resource Management Study, Orange County, FL: Master plan and growth management policies, lead consultant. Client: Orange County, Florida • Farmton Local Plan: Developed new town Comprehensive Plan Amendment for 60,000 -acre tract located in Brevard and Volusia Counties. Client: The Miami Corporation • Volusia County Area -wide DRI: Master Plan, DRI. Client: Volusia County, Deltona and DeLand • Daytona Beach International Airport, Volusia County, FL: Land Planning / Design Consultant. Client: Volusia County - TSA Upgrade modifications - Plan Amendment to create airport commerce park - North Campus Land Use Plan - Preliminary Development / Long Range Airport Plan • Disney's Celebration DRI, Comprehensive Plan Amendment and PUD, Osceola County, Florida: Project Manager and authorized agent. Client: Disney Development Company • Southside DRI, Tallahassee, Florida: Project Manager and authorized agent. Client: The St. Joe Company 410 twrr' � PLANNING GROUP,LLC Town Planners 4 Community Builders • Joel Ivey, President • Panama City Beach Mixed - Use DRI Project, Panama City Beach, Florida: Project Manager and authorized agent. Client: The St. Joe Company • Osceola Corporate Center DRI and PUD, Osceola County, Florida: Project Manager and authorized agent. Client: Tupperware Corporation/ Deerfield Land Corporation • Seminole Towne Center Mall DRI, Sanford, Florida: DRI Project Manager and authorized agent. Client: Melvin Simon and Associates • North Point Office Park DRI, Lake Mary, Florida: DRI Project Manager and authorized agent. Client: Shell Oil Company • Gateway Commons DRI, Kissimmee, Florida: DRI Project Manager and authorized agent. Client: Gateway Development of Daytona Beach, LLC • Abacoa DRI, Jupiter, Florida: Owner's Consultant for cutting edge mixed -use project • • ray PLANNING GROUP, LAC Town Planners 4 Community Builders • AFFIDAVIT OF HENRY H. FISHKIND, PH.D. STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF ORANGE BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared HENRY H. FISHKIND, PH.D., who being duly sworn, deposes and states: 1. I am over the age of eighteen (18) years and have personal knowledge of the matters set forth in this Affidavit. 2. I am a professional economist and the President of Fishkind & Associates, Inc. I earned degrees in economics from Syracuse University (B.A.) and from Indiana University (M.A. and Ph.D.). I was Associate Professor of Economics and Associate Director of the Bureau of Economic and Business Research at the University of Florida from 1975 -1984. Thereafter, I joined the investment banking firm of M.G. Lewis and founded their research subsidiary M.G. Lewis Econometrics. In 1987 I formed Fishkind & Associates, Inc. ( "FA ") as a full service economic and financial advisory firm. FA has offices in Orlando, Naples and Port St. Lucie. FA publishes regular monthly forecasts for economic activity for all 77 Florida Counties. FA provides research and market studies to a wide array of public and private sector clients including the State of Florida, Fannie Mae, Florida Power and Light, Progress Energy, Ocean Bank, BankAtlantic, Lennar, Colonial Properties, Newland Communities, Forrest City • Enterprises, DDR, CBL, St. Joe Company, and the U.S. Department of Justice. FA serves as financial advisor and district manager to over 75 community development and special purpose districts in Florida. We have assisted our clients in raising over $4 billion in tax exempt funding for their infrastructure projects. I have served on the Governor's Council of Economic Advisors under Governors Graham and Bush. I have served on the Board of Directors of First National Bank in Winter Park, Bank of the Islands, Summit Properties, and Engle Homes. 3. The attached Fiscal Neutrality Analysis and Economic Impact Study ( "Economic Impact Analysis ") of Town Parke in Winter Springs, Florida was prepared under my supervision. 4. The proposed project includes 108 senior living units within the municipal boundary of the City of Winter Springs, Florida (the "Project "). 5. The Fiscal Impact Analysis Model ( "FIAM "), which has been used for fiscal impact analysis in over 100 different communities, was used to form the basis of the Economic Impact Analysis. 6. The Economic Impact Analysis was completed in accordance with the City of Winter Springs Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code. 7. The Economic Impact Analysis found that, based on 108 senior living units, the project will have a positive net present value fiscal benefit to the City of approximately $230,185.00. 110 0909692 \148282 \1326526 \1 410 8. The Economic Impact Analysis found that, based on 108 senior living units, the project will generate $28.7 million in economic output. 9. The Economic Impact Analysis demonstrates that the Project will create 19 permanent jobs. 10. The Economic Impact Analysis forecasts the average annual output/sales within the local economy will be $3 million. 11. The Economic Impact Analysis demonstrates that the Project will increase and diversify the City's tax base and economic well- being, while complementing and protecting established surrounding neighborhoods. Dated this a a day of S24 2010. FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT. Signature: (I 1. � �� 41I H RY H. FISHKIND, PH.D. SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this day of 2010 by HENRY H. FISHKIND, PH.D., 6d who is personally known to me or ❑ produced as identification. • a. �1n -- (NOTARY SEAL) Not 41/Public Signature (Name typed, printed or stamped) Notary Public, State of Florida My Commission Expires: JUDITH A. MINTER NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OF FLORIDA Commit DD0938517 • ' Expires 12/15/2013 • 0909692 \148282 \1326526 \I 9 FISHKIND Fiscal Neutrality Analysis & ASSOCIATES & Economic Impact Study of nx Town Parke in Winter Springs, FL iriihill 1; 1 August 23, 2010 Ill Prepared by: Fishkind & Associates, Inc. 12051 Corporate Boulevard Orlando, Florida 32817 407 - 382 -3256 brianm @fishkind.com • ' • Fiscal Neutrality & Economic Analysis for Town Parke in Winter Spring Page 2 Executive Summary Town Parke ( "the Project ") will be restricted to development as housing intended for persons 55 years of age or older as defined by the "Housing for Older Persons Act of 1995 ". Under this Act, at least 80 percent of the occupied units must be occupied by at least one person who is 55 years of age or older. The Project will contain 108 units and be located in Winter Springs, FL ( "the City "). The fiscal neutrality of the Project to the City was analyzed in the following study. In addition, the economic impact of the Project to the local area was determined. The Project pays for itself in terms of fiscal impacts to the City. The total net fiscal impact to the City is $618,103 over 20- years. The net fiscal impact takes all City revenues associated with the Project and subtracts the associated expenses in order to determine the net benefit of the Project to the City. The net present value of the fiscal impact to the City is $230,185. The positive NPV demonstrates that the Project is revenue neutral when it comes to paying for the services its residents will receive from the City. Net Fiscal Impacts Total Net Fiscal Benefit NPV of Net Fiscal Benefit $618,103 $230,185 There is also a substantial economic benefit to be derived from the Project's development. During construction, the Project will generate $28.7 million in economic output that can stimulate the local economy. At build out, an additional 19 permanent jobs will be created from the permanent direct and indirect employment impacts. Average annual output/sales within the local economy are forecasted to be $3.0 million. Total employee earnings are expected to average $0.5 million on an annual basis. These are very substantial contributions to the local economy that will benefit the City in a positive way. The table below summarizes these findings. Permanent Economic Impacts Jobs Output Earnings 19 $3.0 million $0.5 million • Fiscal Neutrality & Economic Analysis for Town Parke in Winter Springs Page 3 i 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Background The Project will consist of 108 units and will be restricted to development as housing intended for persons 55 years of age or older as defined by the "Housing for Older Persons Act of 1995 ". Under this Act, at least 80 percent of the occupied units must be occupied by at least one person who is 55 years of age or older. The apartment complex will be located near City Hall and will provide affordable housing for the elderly. 1.2 Assignment Fishkind & Associates, Inc ( "the Consultant ") has been contracted to conduct a fiscal neutrality study and an economic impact analysis to determine the impact the Project will have on the City. The fiscal neutrality study will analyze the project to determine if it is revenue neutral for the City. In other words, the study analyzes whether or not revenues such as property taxes, • sales taxes, charges for service, etc. are enough to cover expenditures such as police, administration, parks, etc. for the residents of the Project. The economic impact analysis will show the anticipated jobs, economic output, and wages associated with the Project. Both construction impacts and permanent impacts will be examined for direct and indirect economic impacts. 2.0 Development Schedule The Project's development program is listed in Table 1. Table 1. Town Parke Development Program Land Use Units Apartments 108 , 0 Fiscal Neutrality & Economic Analysis for Town Parke in Winter Springs Page 4 3.0 Fiscal Methodology 3.1 Introduction The Consultant has developed a Fiscal Impact Analysis Model (FIAM) under contract with the Florida Department of Community Affairs ( "DCA "). FIAM was designed to serve as the prototype fiscal and economic assessment tool for local governments in Florida. FIAM provides estimates of the costs and revenues to local governments associated with their land use decisions. FIAM examines both the long -range and near -term impacts, and it provides estimates for the effects of land use decisions on both the operating budget and the capital budget of the local government. FIAM is suitable for conducting analysis of individual projects, development corridors, and entire comprehensive plans. FIAM has been used for fiscal impact analysis in over 100 different communities. It is FIAM that forms the basis for our fiscal neutrality study. 3.2 Fiscal Impact Analysis Model Calibration The FIAM model used in the development scenario has been calibrated based on the latest adopted budget and demographics for the City. City staff has been contacted in order to gather accurate and current information regarding the demographics of the City. In this way, FIAM is properly calibrated to reflect the specific environment of the City with its unique budget and characteristics. Furthermore, FIAM also includes ten years of budgetary history for the City. This provides the base for FIAM to project inflation rates over the long term. 3.3 Modified Per Capita Method Local governments receive revenues from the land, development and the activities of their populations of residents, workers and visitors. The major portion of these revenues is in the form of taxes and fees, assessments and charges for service. Local governments also render services to all residents, to all who are working in the City, and to all visitors to the City. Therefore, on the cost side of the equation, counties incur costs to provide services to residents, those employed in the City, and to visitors. At some point during a 24 -hour period, a resident may become a person employed in the City and then later in the • Fiscal Neutrality & Economic Analysis for Town Parke in Winter Springs Page 5 day may be a resident again. To such an individual, the City has rendered services for a full 24- hours. Other residents may leave the City to work in another City. In this case, the City only provides services to that person when they are physically in the town. For those workers that do not live in the City, services are only provided to those workers when they are in the City. Finally, visitors receive service during the whole time period of their , visit but obviously not when they leave. To properly measure the services provided to each of these groups, a weighting procedure is needed that reflects the duration of time each group is present in the City. This calculation provides us with the full -time equivalent (FTE) population, employees and visitors. For both residents and workers, a working period assumption of 2,000 hours per year is applied. In this way, the fiscal impact of the FTE residents, employees and visitors can be properly identified. A variety of methods exist for quantifying the revenue and cost impacts flowing from a development opportunity such as the one presented here. The approach used in this FIAM is the modified per capita approach. When possible, the revenues and expenditures that can be identified from the • subject population are directly estimated or calculated. For this project, ad Valorem revenues were calculated using current rates. The remaining cost and revenue categories were estimated based on modified per capita estimates. The modified per capita approach involves the calculation of revenues using the latest published budgets for the appropriate population basis (i.e. per person, per employee, and /or per tourist). From an economic perspective, this is equivalent to assuming that average revenue generation applies to the particular situation being evaluated. This is a reasonable assumption in most cases for two reasons. First, local governments must run balanced budgets, so that current costs and current revenues balance and are appropriate for current circumstances. Secondly, using long run averages also means that any excess capital is maintained in the various systems and not allocated to the project. Furthermore, there is nothing peculiar about the location or the type of this particular project that indicates that per capita parameters estimated from the latest budgets would not be reflective of actual costs and revenues. The numerator for each cost or revenue item is the cost or revenue shown in the City's budget. The denominator depends upon the type of cost or revenue. Each category of cost and revenue was examined to determine the impact of population and /or employment (businesses). Then each fp • Fiscal Neutrality & Economic Analysis for Town Parke in Winter Springs Page 6 , category was divided by the appropriate divisor (FTE population; FTE population + FTE employment, etc.) to yield the average per capita revenues and expenditures for all budget categories. The arithmetic is shown below. { Revenue = Per Capita FTE Population + FTE Employees + FTE Visitors 3.4 Fiscal Impact Budget Calculations Appendix Table 4 provides the annual budget with projected revenues by source and expenditure detail by function for the City. Property taxes are calculated by multiplying the taxable property value (Appendix Table 3) by the current millage rates (Appendix Table 5) and adjusting for the taxable assessment ratio of 95 %. 1111 The other budget revenues and expenditures were calculated using the per capita methodology. The per capita numbers used are the full -time equivalents (FTE) residents and employees calculated using The University of Florida data and Fishkind estimates of employment. The revenues and expenditures are calculated by multiplying the FTE residents and employees by the per capita revenue and expenditure amounts from the budget. The City averages were used to maintain a conservative methodology. The per capita calculations for the City's budget were calculated using revenues and expenditures from the budget's General and Special Revenue Funds. The revenues and expenditures from these funds were divided by the City's FTE Population, FTE Employees and FTE Visitors. These Budget per capita amounts are then multiplied by the number of new FTE residents and FTE employees and FTE visitors in order to generate the projected revenues and expenditures found in Appendix Table 4. 3.5 Capital Impact Methodology 9Y Capital impacts of the Project are anticipated to be offset by the collection of impact fees or special assessments. Therefore, the net capital impact of the Project on the City is forecast to be revenue neutral. • • Fiscal Neutrality & Economic Analysis for Town Parke in Winter Springs Page 7 3.6 Assumptions Appendix Table 5 contains the basic data, assumptions and sources used in the City's fiscal impact model. These are provided for completeness and allow for the replication of our results. 4.0 FIAM Results 4.1 Fiscal Neutrality of the Project on the City The FIAM forecasts the fiscal impact of the Project on the future revenues and expenditures for the City based upon the City's budget. The total values look at the aggregate value associated with the development of the project and are simply the sum of the annual revenues, expenditures, or net impacts generated from the project at build out. The net present value ( "NPV ") calculation displays how much a future investment is worth in today's dollars. The NPV formula takes the annual • revenues, expenses, or net impacts and discounts them by a present value factor of 10% a year for 20- years. NPV is a common tool used by the public and private sectors to gauge a project's net effect on operations and capital in order to make sound business decisions. NPV assumes a person can take their money and invest it elsewhere for a given rate and then discounts each future year's cost or revenue by that rate in order to compensate for what could have been received on the money in the alternative investment. Once each annual amount has been adjusted, the values are summed in order to obtain the net present value of the future costs or revenues. Next, by deducting the expenses from the revenues, a net operating and capital present value impact can be determined. The project's overall NPV is calculated by summing the net capital impact and the net operating impact. A positive NPV indicates a good investment. The greater the number, the greater the positive impact the development will have on the City. Projects with overall negative NPV's should be avoided. Table 2 presents the results of the fiscal impacts calculated by the FIAM. • Fiscal Neutrality & Economic Analysis for Town Parke in Winter Springs Page 8 Table 2. Fiscal Neutrality of Town Parke on Winter Springs, FL Total Present Value Tot ,, eu' � `h }' " ' " $ 3,888,524,- $ Total Cost $3,270,421 $1,322,144 Net Fiscal Impact $618,103 $230,185 The FIAM determines both capital and operating revenues and expenditures. The revenues generated from the development of the project are the sum of each revenue source the City would receive based on the development schedule. Total revenues to the City associated with the Project are $3.9 million. The NPV of the revenues is $1.6 million. Revenues consist of such items as ad Valorem tax revenue, franchise fees, utility taxes, sales tax proceeds, and charges for City services. II Expenses are the City's costs for such items and services as financial and administrative expenses, general government, legislative and executive expenses, and parks. The total expenses are $3.3 million with an NPV of $1.3 million. By subtracting expenses from revenues, a net fiscal impact can be calculated. The net fiscal impact is $618,103. The NPV of the net fiscal impact is $230,185. Therefore, both over time and in today's dollars, the Project is revenue neutral for the City. 5.0 Economic Impacts of the Project The proposed Project will contribute greatly to the local economy. A new development creates not only fiscal impacts for a municipality, but also economic impacts. Direct economic benefits are the result of people purchasing goods or services from a business. For example, a person buying a new car from a dealership creates a direct impact on the economy. Indirect economic benefits are created by a 'ripple effect' through the economy. For example, if enough people buy new cars from a dealership, the owner must then hire more clerical workers, salespeople, mechanics, 0 • Fiscal Neutrality & Economic Analysis for Town Parke in Winter Springs Page 9 etc. These workers in turn purchase additional goods and services in the local municipality, thus further impacting the economy. Using the RIMS II multipliers for Seminole County that are generated by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, the Project's economic impact can be established. Economic impacts are displayed in terms of jobs, output, and earnings. Table 3 displays the economic impacts related to the construction of the Project. Average annual construction related jobs during the Project's creation are estimated at 339. Total economic output into the local economy during construction is $28.7 million. Total earnings during the construction period are forecasted to be $9.3 million. Table 3. Direct & Indirect Construction Impacts of the Project { Jobs Output Earnings 339 $28.7 million $9.3 million • Table 4 summarizes the permanent direct and indirect economic impacts of the Project to the local economy. A total of 19 jobs are created at build out through the increased demand for goods and services. An average of $3.0 million of additional output will be contributed annually into the local economy. Total employee earnings will average $0.5 million per year. Table 4. Direct & Indirect Permanent Economic Impacts of the Project Jobs Output Earnings 19 $3.0 million $0.5 million , 41) } • Fiscal Neutrality & Economic Analysis for Town Parke in Winter Springs Page 10 6.0 Conclusion Based on the preceding fiscal neutrality analysis, the Project is revenue neutral to the City and provides an additional fiscal benefit both on a total revenue and NPV basis. The total net fiscal impact provided to the City due to the development of the Project is $618,103. The NPV of the Project's impact to the City is $230,185 Thus, the additional development will pay its on way in terms of services required from the City. Net Fiscal Benefit to Winter Springs, FL Total Net Fiscal Benefit NPV of Net Fiscal Benefit $618,103 $230,185 There is also a substantial economic benefit to be derived from the Project's development. During construction, $28.7 million in economic output will stimulate the local economy. At build out, an additional 19 permanent jobs will be created from the direct and indirect employment impacts. Average annual output/sales within the local economy are forecasted to be $3.0 million. Total employee earnings are expected to average $0.5 million on an annual basis. These are very substantial contributions to the local economy that will benefit the City in a positive way. The table below summarizes these findings. Permanent Economic Impacts to the Local Economy { Jobs Output Earnings 19 $3.0 million $0.5 million The ultimate conclusion is clear. The Project is fiscally neutral to the City and provides the local area with an economic stimulus both during and after construction. r 1 -;� • Fiscal Neutrality & Economic Analysis for Town Parke in Winter Springs Page I I } Appendix Tables { • !; r � r s?; � h � 1 r� 0 �� ,,. • • • Table 1 Town Parke - Winter Springs Development Impact Summary (End of Year Totals) 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Households 108 108 108 108 108 108 108 Population 216 216 216 216 216 216 216 Resident Population 205 205 205 205 205 205 205 Seasonal Population 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 Full -Time Equivalent Resident - Residents 161 161 161 161 161 161 161 Town Parke - Winter Springs 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Total Operating Revenues Generated $135,225 $165,419 $168,936 $172,453 $175,970 $179,487 $183,004 Total Operating Expenditures Generated $137,413 $140,161 $142,909 $145,657 $148,406 $151,154 $153,902 Net Fiscal Impact of Operations -52,188 525,258 $26,027 $26,796 $27,564 $28,333 529,102 • • • Table 1 Town Parke - Winter Springs Development Impact Summary (End of Year Totals) 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Households 108 108 108 108 108 108 108 Population 216 216 216 216 216 216 216 Resident Population 205 205 205 205 205 205 205 Seasonal Population 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 Full -Time Equivalent Resident - Residents 161 161 161 161 161 161 161 Town Parke - Winter Springs 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Total Operating Revenues Generated $186,521 $190,038 $193,555 $197,072 $200,589 $204,106 $207,623 Total Operating Expenditures Generated $156,650 $159,399 $162,147 $164,895 $167,643 $170,392 $173,140 Net Fiscal Impact of Operations $29,871 $30,639 $31,408 $32,177 $32,945 $33,714 $34,483 • • • Table 1 Town Parke - Winter Springs Development Impact Summary (End of Year Totals) 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Households 108 108 108 108 108 108 Population 216 216 216 216 216 216 Resident Population 205 205 205 205 205 205 Seasonal Population 11 11 11 11 11 11 Full -Time Equivalent Resident - Residents 161 161 161 161 161 161 Town Parke - Winter Springs 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Total Operating Revenues Generated $211,140 $214,657 $218,174 $221,691 $225,208 $228,725 Total Operating Expenditures Generated $175,888 $178,636 $181,385 5184,133 $186,881 $189,629 Net Fiscal Impact of Operations $35,252 $36,020 $36,789 $37,558 $38,326 539,095 • • • Table 2 Town Parke - Winter Springs Development Scenario 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Multifamily - Rental Apartments 108 108 108 108 108 108 108 Table 3 Town Parke - Winter Springs Taxable Property Values 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Multifamily - Rental Apartments $1,162,458 $11,624,580 511,963,160 $12,301,740 $12,640,320 $12,978,900 $13,317,480 • • • Table 2 Town Parke - Winter Springs Development Scenario 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Multifamily - Rental Apartments 108 108 108 108 108 108 108 Table 3 Town Parke - Winter Springs Taxable Property Values 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Multifamily - Rental Apartments $13,656,060 $13,994,640 $14,333,220 $14,671,800 $15,010,380 $15,348,960 $15,687,540 • • • Table 2 Town Parke - Winter Springs Development Scenario 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Multifamily- Rental Apartments 108 108 108 108 108 108 Table 3 Town Parke - Winter Springs Taxable Property Values 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Multifamily - Rental Apartments $16,026,120 $16,364,700 $16,703,280 $17,041,860 $17,380,440 $17,719,020 • • • Table 4 Town Parke - Winter Springs Fiscal Impact Detail 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Revenues Ad Valorem Taxes $2,873 $28,729 $29,566 $30,403 531,239 $32,076 $32,913 Franchise Fees $10,901 511,119 $11,337 $11,555 511,773 511,991 $12,209 PST and CST $23,534 $24,005 $24,475 $24,946 $25,417 $25,887 $26,358 Community Development Revenues $854 5872 $889 $906 $923 $940 $957 Grants $1,047 $1,068 $1,089 $1,109 $1,130 $1,151 $1,172 State Revenue Sharing Proceeds $5,468 $5,577 $5,687 $5,796 $5,906 $6,015 $6,124 Sales Tax - Half Cent $11,193 $11,417 $11,640 $11,864 $12,088 $12,312 $12,536 Public Safety Resources $3,145 $5,268 $5,372 $5,475 $5,578 $5,682 $5,785 Public Works 5362 $373 $383 $394 $405 $416 $427 Parks & Recreation 51,658 51,691 $1,724 $1,758 $1,791 $1,824 $1,857 Road Improvements Fund $21,780 $22,215 522,651 $23,086 $23,522 $23,957 $24,393 Miscellaneous Revenues (1) $1,095 51,117 51,138 $1,160 $1,182 51,204 $1,226 Interfund Transfers (1) $42,280 $43,126 $43,971 $44,817 $45,662 $46,508 547,354 Balancing Revenue $9,036 $9,216 $9,397 $9,578 $9,759 $9,939 $10,120 Total Revenues $135,225 $165,792 $169,320 $172,847 $176,375 $179,903 $183,431 Expenditures Executive $3,638 $3,711 $3,784 $3,857 $3,929 54,002 $4,075 Finance $7,208 $7,352 $7,496 $7,640 $7,784 $7,928 $8,073 Community Development 59,511 $9,701 $9,892 $10,082 $10,272 $10,462 $10,653 General Government $13,229 $13,493 $13,758 514,023 $14,287 514,552 $14,816 Law Enforcement (1) $28,489 $29,059 $29,629 $30,199 $30,769 531,338 $31,908 Public Works $6,789 $6,925 $7,060 57,196 $7,332 $7,468 $7,604 Road Improvement Fund $16,951 $17,290 517,629 $17,968 $18,308 $18,647 $18,986 Public & Communications Service Fund $23,534 $24,005 $24,475 $24,946 525,417 $25,887 $26,358 Electric Franchise Fee Fund $10,702 510,916 511,130 511,345 $11,559 511,773 511,987 Parks /Recreation (2) $17,361 $17,708 $18,055 $18,402 $18,749 $19,097 $19,444 Total Expenditures $137,413 $140,161 $142,909 $145,657 $148,406 $151,154 $153,902 (1) Divisor includes FTE Population + FTE Employment + FTE Tourists (2) Divisor includes FTE Population (3) Divisor includes FTE Population + FTE Employment (4) Divisor includes FTE Tourists • . • Table 4 Town Parke - Winter Springs Fiscal Impact Detail 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 Revenues Ad Valorem Taxes $33,750 $34,586 $35,423 $36,260 $37,097 $37,933 $38,770 Franchise Fees $12,427 $12,645 $12,863 $13,081 $13,299 $13,517 $13,735 PST and CST $26,829 $27,299 $27,770 $28,241 $28,711 $29,182 $29,653 Community Development Revenues $974 $991 $1,008 $1,025 $1,042 $1,060 $1,077 Grants $1,193 $1,214 $1,235 $1,256 $1,277 $1,298 $1,319 State Revenue Sharing Proceeds $6,234 $6,343 $6,452 $6,562 $6,671 $6,780 $6,890 Sales Tax - Half Cent $12,760 $12,983 $13,207 $13,431 $13,655 $13,879 $14,103 Public Safety Resources $5,888 $5,992 $6,095 $6,198 $6,302 $6,405 $6,508 Public Works $438 $448 $459 $470 $481 $492 $503 Parks & Recreation $1,890 $1,923 $1,957 $1,990 $2,023 $2,056 $2,089 Road Improvements Fund $24,829 $25,264 $25,700 526,135 526,571 $27,007 $27,442 Miscellaneous Revenues (1) 51,248 51,270 $1,292 $1,314 $1,335 51,357 $1,379 Interfund Transfers (1) $48,199 $49,045 $49,890 $50,736 $51,581 552,427 $53,273 Balancing Revenue $10,301 $10,481 $10,662 $10,843 $11,024 $11,204 $11,385 Total Revenues $186,959 $190,486 $194,014 $197,542 $201,070 $204,598 $208,126 Expenditures Executive $4,148 $4,220 $4,293 $4,366 $4,439 $4,511 $4,584 Finance $8,217 $8,361 $8,505 $8,649 $8,793 $8,937 $9,082 Community Development $10,843 $11,033 $11,223 $11,414 511,604 $11,794 $11,984 General Government $15,081 $15,346 $15,610 $15,875 $16,139 $16,404 $16,668 Law Enforcement (1) $32,478 $33,048 $33,617 534,187 $34,757 $35,327 $35,897 Public Works $7,739 $7,875 $8,011 $8,147 $8,282 $8,418 $8,554 Road Improvement Fund $19,325 $19,664 $20,003 $20,342 $20,681 $21,020 $21,359 Public & Communications Service Fund $26,829 $27,299 $27,770 $28,241 $28,711 $29,182 $29,653 Electric Franchise Fee Fund $12,201 $12,415 $12,629 $12,843 $13,057 $13,271 $13,485 Parks /Recreation (2) $19,791 $20,138 $20,486 $20,833 $21,180 $21,527 $21,874 Total Expenditures $156,650 $159,399 $162,147 $164,895 $167,643 $170,392 $173,140 . . . Table 4 Town Parke - Winter Springs Fiscal Impact Detail 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 Revenues Ad Valorem Taxes $39,607 $40,444 $41,280 $42,117 $42,954 $43,791 Franchise Fees $13,953 $14,171 $14,389 $14,607 $14,826 $15,044 PST and CST $30,123 530,594 $31,065 531,535 $32,006 $32,477 Community Development Revenues 51,094 $1,111 51,128 51,145 $1,162 $1,179 Grants 51,340 $1,361 $1,382 $1,403 $1,423 $1,444 State Revenue Sharing Proceeds $6,999 $7,108 $7,218 57,327 $7,437 $7,546 Sales Tax - Half Cent $14,327 $14,550 $14,774 $14,998 $15,222 $15,446 Public Safety Resources $6,611 56,715 $6,818 $6,921 $7,025 $7,128 Public Works $514 $524 $535 $546 $557 $568 Parks & Recreation $2,122 $2,156 52,189 $2,222 $2,255 $2,288 Road Improvements Fund $27,878 $28,313 $28,749 $29,185 $29,620 $30,056 Miscellaneous Revenues (1) 51,401 51,423 $1,445 51,467 51,489 51,511 Interfund Transfers (1) $54,118 $54,964 $55,809 $56,655 $57,501 558,346 Balancing Revenue $11,566 $11,746 $11,927 $12,108 $12,289 $12,469 Total Revenues $211,653 $215,181 $218,709 $222,237 $225,765 $229,292 Expenditures Executive $4,657 $4,730 $4,802 $4,875 $4,948 $5,021 Finance $9,226 $9,370 $9,514 $9,658 59,802 $9,947 Community Development $12,174 $12,365 $12,555 512,745 $12,935 $13,126 General Government $16,933 $17,198 517,462 517,727 $17,991 518,256 Law Enforcement (1) $36,466 $37,036 $37,606 $38,176 $38,746 $39,315 Public Works $8,690 $8,826 $8,961 $9,097 $9,233 $9,369 Road Improvement Fund $21,698 $22,037 $22,376 $22,715 $23,054 $23,393 Public & Communications Service Fund $30,123 $30,594 $31,065 $31,535 $32,006 $32,477 Electric Franchise Fee Fund $13,699 $13,913 514,127 514,341 514,555 514,769 Parks /Recreation (2) $22,222 $22,569 $22,916 $23,263 $23,610 $23,958 Total Expenditures $175,888 $178,636 5181,385 5184,133 $186,881 $189,629 • • • Table 5 Town Parke - Winter Springs Fiscal Impact Assumptions Taxable Assessment Ratio 95% (from iput data) Homestead Exemption $50,000 (from iput data) % Single- Family with Homestead 90% (from iput data) % Multifamily with Homestead 70% (from iput data) Millage Town Parke - Winter Springs 2.4714 Mills Equivalent Full -Time Factor Equivalent Population - Working Residents 7,685 0.7619 5,855 Population- Non - Working Residents 20,604 1.0000 20,604 Population- Seasonal 188 0.3750 71 Population (peak season) 28,477 26,530 Population (total) 34,340 (FI Population Studies, 2009) Employment (total) 7,685 0.2381 1,830 (Isite 2009) Persons per Household 2.00 (FI Population Studies, 2009) Total Households 162,669 (FI Population Studies, 2009) Average Annual Change in Property Value: 3.0% Property Value Multifamily - Rental Apartments $110,000 (Developer) , so' 1 Henry H. Fishkind, PhD President 1 Professional ( Qualifications Education Areas of Expertise ' Bachelor of Arts, Economics Economic Analysis Syracuse University Econometric Modeling I July 1971 Project Finance & Feasibility Financial Analysis & Advisory Doctor of Philosophy, Economics Fiscal Analysis Indiana University Military Base Analysis (' July, 1975 Litigation Support I Real Estate Economics Employment Record Perio d ( Chairman 2008 - Present ( FSAFE Managing Partner Woodbridge Vintage Chips 1994 -2007 l President Fishkind & Associates, Inc. 1988- Present President M.G. Lewis Econometrics, Inc. 1984 -1987 I Associate Director For Programs ( Bureau of Economic and • Business Research University of Florida 1980 -1983 Economist/Associate Professor University of Florida 1975 -1983 f . Professional f Synopsis With over 30 years of experience in economic analysis and forecasting, Dr. Henry Fishkind is widely regarded as one of Florida's premier economists and fmancial advisors. Dr. Fishkind's career began in the public sector where he worked as an economist and Associate Professor at the University of Florida. In 1980 Dr. Fishkind became the Associate Director for Programs, University of Florida's Bureau of Economic and Business Research. .During his tenure at the University, Dr. Fishkind served for three years (1979 -1981) on the Governor's Economic Advisory Board. Dr. Fishkind began his career as a private sector consultant when he became president of M.G. Lewis Econometrics in Winter Park, Florida. In 1988 Dr. Fishkind formed Fishkind & Associates, Inc. as a full service economic and financial consulting firm. From 2001 -2003 Dr. Fishkind was a member of Governor Bush's Council of Economic Advisors. Dr. Fishkind served on the Board of Directors of Engle i Homes and Summit Properties until the companies were sold. l t Selected Client List Fannie Mae Colonial Properties Trust Collier Enterprises Centex State of Florida Florida Home Builders Association [. State of Pennsylvania Florida Power Corporation The Villages Baron Collier Perry Capital Lennar FPL Newland Communities Forrest City Enterprises Waste Management, Inc. Cemex/CSR/Rinker Materials St. Joe Major Central Florida Attraction Company WCI Communities BankAtlantic U.S. Department of Justice Mosaic King Ranch III f. . Fishkind and Associates Resume { • AFFIDAVIT OF DAVID MULHOLLAND STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF ORANGE BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared David Mulholland, who being duly sworn, deposes and states: 1. I am over 21 years of age and make this affidavit based upon my personal knowledge, and that I am Senior Vice President at GMB Engineers & Planners, Inc., located at 2602 East Livingston Street, Orlando, FL 32803. 2. I am a professionally qualified as a traffic engineer, having earned a B.S. in Civil Engineering from the University of Central Florida in 1993. 3. I have engaged in the profession of Transportation and Traffic Engineering for over 17 years and I am a licensed and registered Professional Engineer in the State of Florida and in the State of New York. 4. I have provided Federal, State and local jurisdictional permitting, engineering planning and design, and construction administration for a variety of clients. • 5. The Traffic Impact Study for Town Parke Apartments, Winter Springs, Florida (the "Project ") was prepared under my supervision. 6. The methodology and guidelines used in the analysis for the Traffic Impact Study are consistent with the procedures set forth by the City of Winter Springs and Seminole County. In addition, the study was revised based on comments received from the City of Winter Springs. 7. The Project generates an estimated 57 AM peak hour trips and 77 PM peak hour trips (per ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 8 Edition). 8. The site access is from S.R. 434 by "Townhouse Road," a new City street located approximately 400 feet west of the Seminole County Trail Bridge and consistent with the City's Town Center Master Plan for S.R. 434 and the City's Comprehensive Plan. 9. All study area intersections are projected to continue to operate at an acceptable level of service after the Project is built out in 2012. 10. The Traffic Impact Study indicates that all study area roadway segments will operate at an acceptable level -of- service at project huildout for daily. AM peak and PM peak periods. • 0909692 143281 1333779 I • Dated this 13th day of October, 2010. FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT. Signature: DAVID MULHOLLAND SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this l3 of O�7 2010 by DAVID MULHOLLAND, L . who is personally known to me or ❑ produced as identification. (NOTARY SEAL) I✓ IL, Notary Public Signatur rv/n,eite T a2y �' "ws GLORIA TERRY (Name typed, printed or stamped) � , Commission DD 762510 Notary Public, State of Florida ,�,,:. Expir M a y 5 2012 My Commission Expires: - mpy 3, ° r u' Boded Tru Trey Fein Yrmce B063Bb701B My 1 J • • 0909692 1 4 3232 t333779 • Traffic Impact Study For Town Parke Apartments GMB Project # 10- 029.02 • Prepared by: GMB Engineers & Planners 2602 Livingston Street Orlando, FL 32803 March 2010 (revised June 25, 2010) (revised August 10, 2010) (revised September 8, 2010) • • TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE INTRODUCTION 1 EXISTING CONDITIONS 3 Study Area .. 3 Existing Traffic Counts 3 Existing Roadway Conditions 4 Existing Intersection Conditions 6 • FUTURE CONDITIONS 7 Vested Trips 7 Background Traffic Volumes 7 Programmed Improvements 8 Trip Generation 8 Trip Distribution and Assignment .10 YR 2012 Roadway Capacity Analysis .10 YR 2012 Intersection Capacity Analysis .10 CONCLUSIONS 14 • • LIST OF FIGURES, EXHIBITS AND TABLES FIGURES PAGE 1 Site Location Map 2 TABLES 1 Existing Roadway Capacity Analysis .5 2 Trip Generation Summary 9 3 YR 2012 Future Daily Roadway Capacity Analysis 12 4 YR 2012 Future Peak Hour Roadway Capacity Analysis 13 APPENDIX A Methodology, Correspondence, and Seminole County Requirements • B Turning Movement Counts, Roadway Traffic Counts, and Adjustment Factors C Signal Timings D HCS Intersection Analysis Summary Sheets E Vested Trips Derivation F Historical Roadway Data, Growth Rates G Orlando Urban Area Transportation System (OUATS) Model Output H Future Conditions at Project Entrances I Intersection Analysis Summary J Response to Comments K Revised Site Plan • • INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to document the traffic impacts created by the Town Parke Apartments located in Winter Springs, Florida. The site will consist of 108 apartment dwelling units with an anticipated completion date YR 2012. The project site location is depicted graphically in Figure 1. Access to the site is proposed to be provided via one (1) full access in / right out only with a left in connection to SR 434 via Townhouse Road. The procedures taken in this analysis are consistent with the guidelines set forth by the City of Winter Springs and Seminole County. A copy of the methodology can be found in Appendix "A" of this report. This study has been revised based on comments received from the City of Winter Springs (May 2010). Those comments and corresponding responses can be found in Appendix "J ". It should be noted that the purpose of this revised study is to reflect the impacts • associated with the updated site plan and reduced land use summary. A copy of the updated site plan can be found in Appendix "K ". • GMI3 Engineers & Planners, Inc Page I GMB Engineers & Planners, Inc. 2602 East Livingston Street ' � own Parke Apartments Orlando, Florida 32803 Figure 1 _ocation Ma • EXISTING CONDITIONS The following section documents the existing traffic conditions in the vicinity of the project. Furthermore, the relationships of the proposed project site to the study area roadways are also discussed below. Study Area Consistent with the approved methodology, the project's primary impact area is proposed to be identified by the immediate roadway segments of SR 434 and Tuskawilla Road. It should be noted that the primary impact area included the roadway segments within a one (1) mile radius, consistent with Seminole County requirements. The Seminole County requirements for concurrency can be found in Appendix "A ". The project's study area is proposed to be defined by the following: • Roadway Segment SR 434 Spring Avenue to Tuskawilla Road Tuskawilla Road to SR 419 Tuskawilla Road Blumberg Boulevard to SR 434 SR 434 to Winter Springs Boulevard Intersection Control SR 434 at Tuskawilla Road Signal SR 434 at McLeod's Way /Doran Boulevard Signal SR 434 at Gardena Avenue Stop Controlled SR 434 at Tuscora Drive Stop Controlled SR 434 at Cliff Rose Drive Stop Controlled Existing Traffic Counts GMB Engineers & Planners assembled the necessary traffic counts for the roadways and intersections identified within the Study Area. The existing daily, AM, and PM Peak roadway link traffic volumes were obtained from the 2009 FDOT Florida Traffic Information CD for SR 434 and from the 2009 Seminole • GMB Engineers & Planners, Inc Page 3 • County Traffic Count Summary for Tuskawilla Road. If needed, the traffic count information was adjusted with the appropriate seasonal and axel adjustment factors. Roadway traffic counts, seasonal factors, and axel adjustment factors can be found in Appendix "B" of this report. Existing Roadway Conditions GMB Engineers & Planners conducted an assessment to determine the existing level of service of the study roadways. The level of service (LOS) of a given roadway is related to prevailing traffic volumes and to capacity, which is defined as the maximum number of vehicles that can pass through a roadway section during a specified period of time. The capacity of a roadway is determined by a number of factors including composition of traffic (cars, buses, and trucks), roadway alignment, width and number of lanes, posted travel speeds, and other variables. • The maximum service volumes used in this report were determined from the 2009 Quality / Level of Service Handbook. The maximum service volumes are displayed on Table 1. As shown on Table 1, a comparison of the roadway traffic volumes was made against the roadway maximum service volumes to determine the existing level of service for all roadways within the study area. The analysis concludes that all study area roadways exhibit traffic volumes lower than their respective roadway capacities for existing conditions. • GMB Engineers & Planners, Inc Page 4 • • • Table 1 Town Parke Apartments Existing Traffic Conditions AM Peak No. of Adopted LOS MSV Daily AM Peak Hour Traffic Roadway / Segment Lanes LOS Daily Pk Hr / Pk Dr Traffic LOS NB / EB SB / WB LOS SR 434 Springs Avenue to Tuskawilla Road 4LD D 33,200 1,770 23,500 C 863 1,078 C Tuskawilla Road to SR 419 4LD D 35,700 1,770 32,000 C 1,036 1,323 C Tuskawilla Road * Blumberg Boulevard to SR 434 2LU D 8,580 458 4,783 B 271 169 C SR 434 to Winter Springs Boulevard 4LD D 33,200 1,770 19,582 C 703 533 C PM Peak No. of Adopted LOS MSV Daily PM Peak Hour Traffic Roadway / Segment Lanes LOS Daily Pk Hr / Pk Dr Traffic LOS NB / EB SB / WB LOS SR 434 Springs Avenue to Tuskawilla Road 4LD D 33,200 1,770 23,500 C 1,241 1,068 C Tuskawilla Road to SR 419 4LD D 35,700 1,770 32,000 C 1,501 1,337 D Tuskawilla Road * Blumberg Boulevard to SR 434 2LU D 8,580 458 4,783 B 126 189 B SR 434 to Winter Springs Boulevard 4LD D 33,200 1,770 19,582 C 791 948 C Sources: 6,1 Engineers X- Planners September -10 2009 FDOT Florida Traffic Information CD Seminole County Trufc Count Summary (August 19, 20/0) Note: * Daily Traffic Volume based on the highest peak hour traffic (AM Peak Hour) and a generalized K tee factor of 0.092. • Existing Intersection Conditions The existing intersections were evaluated using the methodology outlined in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) and using the Highway Capacity Software (HCS +), version 5.3. The existing intersection analysis is based on the turning movement data collected during the AM peak period (7:00 -9:00) and the PM peak period (4:00- 6:00). It should be noted that the existing signal timings, obtained from Seminole County, were utilized for the signalized intersections within the study area. The signal timings can be found in Appendix "C ". The following table provides a summary of the existing intersection analysis measures of effectiveness including intersection delay and LOS. AM Peak Hour Delay Intersection Control LOS (sec /veh) SR 434 at Tuskawilla Road Signal D 45.9 • SR 434 at McLeods Way/Doran Boulevard Signal C 28.5 SR 434 at Gardena Avenue Stop B/B 11.0/10.8 SR 434 at Tuscora Drive Stop B/C 10.5/17.7 SR 434 at Cliff Rose Drive Stop C/C 16.2/15.6 PM Peak Hour Delay Intersection Control LOS (sec /veh) SR 434 at Tuskawilla Road Signal D 47.0 SR 434 at McLeod's Way /Doran Boulevard Signal C 29.7 SR 434 at Gardena Avenue Stop B/B 11.7/12.6 SR 434 at Tuscora Drive Stop B/D 12.3/27.6 SR 434 at Cliff Rose Drive Stop C/C 17.9/16.2 Note: x/x = mainline /side street Turning movement counts can be found in Appendix "B" of this report. A copy of the Highway Capacity Software summary sheets can be found in Appendix "D ". 4110 GMB Engineers & Planners, Inc Page 6 • FUTURE CONDITIONS This section of the report identifies the anticipated travel conditions for the study area roadways and intersections as a result of the project created traffic. As documented previously in this report, the analysis year for the proposed development is YR 2012. The site traffic for the proposed development was added to the background traffic volumes in order to assess the total operating conditions of the study area roadways and intersections. Vested Trips The total number of vested trips currently accounted for on the roadway facilities within the Area of Influence are continuously monitored by the City of Winter Springs. As requested by City Staff, vested trip information was determined from six (6) approved developments yet to be constructed. Using trip generation rates identified in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation • Manual (8 th Ed the number of trips generated by each development was determined. Furthermore, engineering judgment was used to determine distribution of those project trips. The vested trip derivation, as well as a location map, for these developments can be found in Appendix "E" of this report. It should be noted that no additional vested trips were identified within the Seminole County CMS database for the study area roadways. Background Traffic The background traffic was developed comparing vested trip information to historical trend growth rates for each of the respective roadway segments. To provide for a conservative analysis, the higher of the two rates was used for the analysis of background traffic. It was concluded that the vested trip information provided a higher growth rate; therefore, as a result the vested trip data was added to roadway and intersection volumes to reflect the future YR 2012 conditions. The historical roadway counts and corresponding growth rates can be found in Appendix "F ". • GMB Engineers & Planners, Inc Page 7 Programmed Improvements Consistent with the 2010/11 — 2014/15 FDOT Work Program, there are no roadway improvements currently scheduled for construction within the study area. Trip Generation The trip generation associated with the proposed Town Parke Apartments was determined based on the trip generation rates identified in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (8 Edition). Table 2 summarizes the land uses for the proposed project and the corresponding daily, AM peak, and PM peak hour trip generation traffic volumes. Internal capture and passer -by capture were not calculated due to the single residential land use. As displayed in Table 2, the site is expected to generate a total of 778 daily trips, 57 AM peak hour trips (11 inbound and 46 outbound), and 77 PM peak hour trips (50 inbound and 27 outbound). • • GMB Engineers & Planners, Inc Page 8 • Table 2 Town Parke Apartments Trip Generation Summary AM Peak ITE Total AM Peak Trips Land Use Size / Units Code Daily Total Enter Exit Apartments 108 / DU's 220 778 57 I1 46 PM Peak ITE Total PM Peak Trips Land Use Size / Units Code Daily Total Enter Exit Apartments 108 / DU's 220 778 77 50 27 Source: GMB Engineers & Planners September -10 • ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 8th Edition • • Trip Distribution and Assignment The distribution of project traffic was based on the Orlando Urban Area Transportation Study (OUATS) modeling results. The project distribution was verified for reasonability against existing roadway volumes and surrounding land use characteristics. The OUATS modeling results can be found in Appendix "G" of this report. YR 2012 Roadway Capacity Analysis The development will consist of 108 apartment dwelling units. Tables 3 and 4 present the results of the Daily, AM, and PM peak hour roadway link capacity analysis for the future year 2012. As shown in Tables 3 and 4, all roadways are anticipated to operate at an acceptable level of service for future conditions. YR 2012 Intersection Capacity Analysis The study area intersections were evaluated with the addition of project traffic in • order to quantify the impacts created by the proposed development. As mentioned in the previous section, vested trip information was added to intersections to reflect YR 2012 future conditions for the AM and PM peak hour. A figure displaying the future conditions at the project entrances are included as part of Appendix "H" and the intersection analysis summary can be found in Appendix "I" of this report. The following summarizes the results of the intersection capacity analysis: AM Peak Hour Delay Intersection Control LOS (sec /veh) SR 434 at Tuskawilla Road Signal D 46.7 SR 434 at McLeod's Way /Doran Boulevard Signal C 31.2 SR 434 at Gardena Avenue Stop B/B 11.7/11.1 SR 434 at Tuscora Drive Stop B/C 10.7/19.1 SR 434 at Cliff Rose Drive Stop C/C 17.9/16.6 SR 434 at Project Entrance Stop A/B 9.3/10.9 • GMB Engineers & Planners, Inc Page 10 • PM Peak Hour Delay Intersection Control LOS (sec /veh) SR 434 at Tuskawilla Road Signal D 49.4 SR 434 at McLeod's Way /Doran Boulevard Signal C 33.0 SR 434 at Gardena Avenue Stop B/B 12.1/13.0 SR 434 at Tuscora Drive Stop C/C 21.0/17.6 SR 434 at Cliff Rose Drive Stop B/D 12.9/31.7 SR 434 at Project Entrance Stop B/B 11.1/12.4 Note: x/x = mainline /side street As shown above, all study area intersections are anticipated to operate at an acceptable level of service for YR 2012. A copy of the Highway Capacity Software summary sheets can be found in II/ Appendix "D" of this report. • GMB Engineers & Planners, Inc Page I1 0 • • Table 3 Town Parke Apartments Future Daily Roadway Analysis Daily No. of Adopted Daily Vested Trips Background Traffic Project Traffic Total Traffic Roadway / Segment Lanes LOS MSV Daily Daily LOS Dist% Daily Daily LOS Sig ( %) Adverse SR 434 Springs Avenue to Project Entrance 4LD D 33,200 1,040 24,540 C 27.93% 217 24,757 C 0.65% NO Project Entrance to Tuskawilla Road 4LD D 33,200 1,040 24,540 C 72.07% 561 25,101 D 1.69% NO Tuskawilla Road to SR 419 4LD D 35,700 2,080 34,080 C 49.18% 383 34,463 C 1.07% NO Tuskawilla Road Blumberg Boulevard to SR 434 2LU D 8,580 416 5,199 C 4.16% 32 5,231 C 0.38% NO SR 434 to Winter Springs Boulevard 4LD D 33,200 624 20,206 C 18.65% 145 20,351 C 0.44% NO ,Sources: 6418 Engineers X- Planners Sep /ember -l0 1 • . • Table 4 Town Parke Apartments Future Peak Hour Roadway Analysis AM Peak Hour Nu. of Adopted Pk Hr / Pk Dr Vested Trips AM Peak Background Traffic Project Traffic Total AM Peak Traffic Roadway / Segment Lanes LOS MSV NB/EB SB/WB NB / EB SB / WB LOS Dist % NB / EB SB / WB NB / EB SB / WB LOS Sig ( %) Adverse SR 434 Springs Avenue to Project Entrance 4LD D 1,770 52 52 915 1,130 C 27.93% 13 3 928 1,133 C 0.73% NO Project Entrance to Tuskawilla Road 4LD D 1,770 52 52 915 1,130 C 72.07/0 8 33 923 1,163 C 1.86% NO Tuskawdla Road to SR 419 4LD D 1,770 104 103 1,140 1,426 D 49.18% 6 22 1,146 1,448 D 1.24% NO Tus kawilla Road Blumberg Boulevard to SR 434 2LU D 458 20 20 291 189 C 4.16% 2 0 293 189 C 0.44% NO SR 434 to Winter Springs Boulevard 4LD D 1,770 31 31 734 564 C 18.65% 2 9 736 573 C 0.51% NO PM Peak Hour No. of Adopted Pk Hr / Pk Dr Vested Trips PM Peak Background Traffic Project Traffic Total PM Peak Traffic Roadway /Segment Lanes LOS MSV NB/EB SB/WB NB /EB SB /WB LOS Dist% NB /EB SB /WB NB /EB SB /WB LOS Sig( %) Adverse SR 434 Springs Avenue to Project Entrance 4LD D 1,770 61 60 1,302 1.128 C 27.93% 8 14 1,310 1,142 C 0.79% NO Project Entrance to Tuskawilla Road 4LD D 1,770 61 60 1,302 1,128 C 72.07% 36 19 1,338 1,147 D 2.03% NO Tuskawilla Road to SR 419 4LD 13 1,770 121 120 1,622 1,457 D 49.18% 25 13 1,647 1,470 D 1.41% NO Tuskawillo Road Blumberg Boulevard to SR 434 2LU D 458 25 24 151 213 B 4.16% 1 2 152 215 B 0.44% NO SR 434 to Winter Springs Boulevard 4LD D 1,770 36 36 827 984 C 18.65% 9 5 836 939 C 0.51% NO .Sources: GMR hngineers rp Planners .Seplen her -l0 • CONCLUSIONS The final section of the report identifies the major conclusions regarding the traffic impacts associated with the proposed Town Parke Apartments. • The existing conditions analysis concludes that all study area roadways exhibit traffic volumes lower than their respective roadway maximum service volumes. • Under existing conditions, all study area intersections operate at an acceptable level of service. • The future condition analyses concluded that all study area roadways exhibit traffic volumes lower than their respective roadway maximum service • volumes for YR 2012. • The YR 2012 intersection analyses resulted in all study area intersections operating at an acceptable level of service for future conditions. • GMB Engineers & Planners, Inc Page 14 • APPENDIX "A" Methodology, Correspondence and Seminole County Requirements S S • TOWN PARKE APARTMENTS TRAFFIC LYIP 4CT AiVAL YSIS METHODOLOGY March 10. 2010 PURPOSE: The purpose of this document is to outline the proposed methodology for the Town Parke Apartments Traffic Impact Analysis. For the purpose of this study, the analysis year is the YR 2012 and YR 2013. This methodology is consistent with guidelines set forth by the City of Winter Springs. The traffic study is separated into the following seven (7) sections: • Section 1: Site Location and Access • Section 2: Primary Impact Area • Section 3: Data Collection & Existing Conditions • Section 4: Future Background Traffic • Section 5: Trip Generation • Section 6: Trip Distribution and Assignment • Section 7: Assessment SECTION 1: SITE LOCATION AND ACCESS The proposed project at full buildout will consist of 201 Apartment dwelling units. The proposed development is located on the south side of SR 434, east of Tuskawilla Road in Winter Springs, • Florida. Access will be provided via one (I) full access connection onto SR 434. A location map is provided on Figure 1. SECTION 2: PRIMARY IMPACT AREA The impact area will consist of analyzing SR 434 and Tuskawilla Road within the immediate vicinity of the proposed project. Significance will be identified on the study roadway network with respect to project traffic. SECTION 3: DATA COLLECTION & EXISTING CONDITIONS GMB Engineers & Planners will assemble the necessary roadway / intersection traffic volumes in order to establish existing traffic conditions. Roadway counts for all study roadways will be identified using the latest traffic information provided in the Florida Traffic Information CD, Seminole County Segment Count Summary, and any necessary count data conducted by GMB. Air[ and PM Peak hour turning, movement counts will be collected for a single weekday condition and will be provided in the report. The existing conditions analysis will identify the current status of the study roadways and intersections identified within the Primary Impact Area. For the purposes of this study, GMB proposes to monitor the roadway! intersection traffic volumes of • , - I • Roadway Segment SR 434 Springs Avenue to Tuskawilla Road Tuskawilla Road to SR 419 Tuskawilla Road SR 434 to Trotwood Boulevard Intersections • SR 434 at Tuskawilla Road • SR 434 at McLeods Way /Doran Boulevard • SR 434 at Heritage Park Street • Tuskawilla Road at Trotwood Boulevard SECTION 4: FUTURE BACKGROUND TRAFFIC The project is proposed to be evaluated for a build -out of YR 2012 for phases 1 and 3 and YR 2013 for phase 2. At this time the applicant is not seeking concurrency for phase 4 of the development. Future Background traffic volumes shall be developed by comparing three year historical traffic count trends and vested trip data. The greater of these two growth rates will be used to develop the future background traffic. The development traffic conditions are to be developed by adding the background traffic (non - project) to the development traffic. • SECTION 5: TRIP GENERATION The trip generation data shall be based on the trip generation rates and equations outlined in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (S Edition). For the purpose of this study, the trip generation will be based on phases 1 -3 using the Apartment Lane Use (ITE 220) for 153 dwelling units. Table 1 summarizes the land use for the proposed project and the corresponding total daily and peak hour trip generation traffic volumes. internal Capture was not calculated due to the single land use of the development. Passer -by was not determined due to the residential land use. As displayed in Table 1, the development is expected to generate a total of 1,051 daily trips, 79 AM peak hour trips (l6 inbound and 63 outbound), and 102 PM peak hour trips (66 inbound and 36 outbound). SECTION 6: TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT The trip distribution and assignment will be established using the adopted OL`ATS model results, utilizing the existing and committed network. The OUATS model will be interpolated to the YR 2012 to represent build -out year conditions. The project traffic will be distributed to the adjacent roadways and intersections based on these results. • A - t • SECTION 7: ASSESSMENT As a result of the trip generation, trip distribution, and trip assignment previously mentioned, GLIB Engineers & Planners will evaluate the study area roadways and intersections to determine the potential transportation impacts. Where necessary, GMB Engineers & Planners will identify necessary improvements required to accommodate the project. Attachments: Figure I — Site Location Map Table l — Trip Generation Summary YR 2012 Model Output Site Plan • A -3 • • • `(,V,�`,t 7 iYl —r 4 _t ; } I � �i r Y • l '3`r °tY '+61�j�}"a "Sn r 7 - v ' '. y d, r ! t t r - y t ,.;.. ! '? i ,' ` i 1' Y:�;+j yl „,IN.-40,:i.,,,..',,,,,,',,,- r + i � ` 4 +t' 1 'fi l S , t I r 1 , - ,J ty ! • ? '...,'„-,,:-„•,,,.., f / I ,, . ,` , 10- 11 , ♦p �!y„�* /luny j� < q y y� ph � ., , , . /FN IMa ' E. M k �Ml, � !!! rw , y . N NS s, T� +: �, � , „, ,\,, , , ,, ...„,_:„. , .„,•,,,,-,4 a , :try J t.Y , � %i 1. a. �, . �I .� .'v . ” J rd { ,.r t v =a -e -� s M $ A�r: p . +, v e,,, " ! �.. .. . _ � � P r , ,. ea I a+ Wx z - t7''�s � >i ` ,- i's, :X. 1 'I, , , J i !aF y� _ ',ti t 95,,i i\ j it `,14 i ,f� ` r r s t � a , . r l ,,: 1 117 r hid ,f r � kflik - 15: 1 /1k4 } k 434 r t t [y w } ; � {,p f; . 4I J� . s r x Y a f q4..+,x .Et P$ 1 1. � Sw! 4 t f %L i -, is f 1 1 y e F r 1` f t -w R ` y a tti p. t N ry , . 'A " I � , vk - -Pi; "•;,' h fi y t ? , 'k, �h�t,i�� \� - - �i � _ ...: r'+`'4 r v r 7 rf' S•�y n t� � y rEE {.�( ` ,, , I , : t + ttt , I b i �- /, _� if —�h ,,kk ; * Site Location' 1, 1 $ € ar r , , d 1 * I ... ■yl 0 x "i `t l a �3 - t r� irkhl 1 I 1 a , �- � a 419 434 ■ � � !u ,!ire ti, ter , a� >7� um 2 k t { Y 4 , . ,,,i , . ,,,3,, ;3, (-_,_ _ ._,* .. ( i ure1 , _____ ., , ,...,,,, . ___.,....... ... . ,......_ , ,, . .-.---,--"--- ,,---\..____,--, ___ . ,_,_ , . _.,_..........,....., .,1 _i .. . . .,...”„.,__....., _____ ( GM Engineers &Planne I nc, ' � ' Town P arke /� ar t m ents r I 1 26 E Live yston Str Site L M dp LL 1 Or and �IPri..LF103, • ..:,,,,,,,4, r 7 ! ' t� t 4 it �`, 4 - 5, P d Y + x� t o Kr 5 t 3 • { •A h ,i ?5` , 7.. t JIl V t tk '�2.. .,� k t < t� S } t 1+, r ,Y '� x,n `r , 'l' 'a, t u� .7� '°i. " � - �•r�ti;> 6 $ np . yt " N15 s, : , ,r: i,. a , th e „s c, . iti , l '+ ti , : k .!,5, , 7, 1+ • Table 1 Town Parke Apartments Trip Generation Summary - Phases 1 -3 AM Pea Total Trips ITE Total AM Peak Trips Land Use Size / Units Code Daily Total Enter Exit Apartments 153 / DU's 220 1.051 79 16 63 PM Peak Total Trips ITE Total PM Peak Trips Land Use Size / Units Code Daily Total Enter Exit Apartments 153 / DU's 220 1,051 102 66 36 Source: CMS Engineers & Planners March -10 ITE Trip Generation Handbook. 8th Edition • • A - • • 0 Town Parke Apartment Project Distribution Year 2012 (RATS Model _ — — — ------ -- — Number of Lanes = 2 Number of Lanes = 4 1 \ Number of Lanes = 6 Centroid Loading 1 - - = `_ 19.69 4729 193 — 45 _ — 45.62 1 4 9. 7 ( l0 1 �, -. i 90 24<9 1.15.9 , VI o f �6 I G b O r / �l '. O I' p S� v ' / / 21.95 21.29 20.51 • 0 11 i ( 11 �'' i .4., `;'' u> e a `0' , ` 0 ' m` ti j 1 v u / • 1 r 1 / 1 1 1 0 1 O 1 h 1 1 5 1 to ^. 11 • 1 1 1 4 N 1 1 O / / I 1 ■ • W Y - -i 5 / U3 _ a 0.74 Q 1 , �o O. 1 7 1 I , ' 0 0 7. >B 1 `0' ` 0.59 1 11 ' w O/ 1.78 0' • a ' ' Y - 0 0.7 ,' o �`_ 0 e 11 v v 0 W Y I �br�� r 1 / 0 1 01 • a 1 0 • 11 9 '. - .. _ --- 1.19 . .3, r 259 -- -.. o 4 y 1.19 07 r 0.59 1 1 D/ OO O u o C _ _ 7 / \ \� 0' -' ` 0 � r � r 4-_ \ N • ` - _, 0 . 15 r\ v , q�ti / 111 U ^I _ 0 0 00 0 o v.' G - - - - " 7.78 0 / 1 O r / p 045,E ^�� 1 O i A Y o 0 1 0 11 O 1 i r o 0 11 \ r 0 cd /),.,. • __ ,� J. >g o _ ■ - _ ; . o)y o o'0•'' 0 _ __• 0 20.74 O,'� \ _. 0.7 .v4 0.74 0 0 o — -- ....... __. -.. ._..... _. _. _..._..._.y. ._ -- - - -__ CA1404617eskes•0UAT 9% 10029.01 Town P•ka Apartment (2012)17 eur 2012t1IRLOXV.Al2 G;I II il VI( Gj Llct..rtsed to GM/1i F11c1i1 1r‘c°i f ; et Mat trli - rs, ! i 1C'. -.._ CC `'''' •I .....,_ ....... \ sc. CRAP :1C:ALC iv.._Q.=..............i. UNIT _N PARKING NO3F.S • ....”. 1 .222w 1 • 72 1 01, -- - MN= 00,2 SITE NOTES, =2 . MOW C7,1. 6000.1221170, .....-----____-----...-.....--- 7 .. 20....4o .... ... ........... .N.....Z ,. .... 'S. 1 1.102•1 UM. • T 7• ''''' - e Law WM 1,014 0 rt.ti. ■NotisTRIAL `.. rlff ZONING A- I AGRICUITIJGAL a Wc..ort 2....n 27102 7 2 1 01/ • 12 0.1 ---.........._..■ /'.---**..--.._,. •- •X C.I. , K , ... 10 • 7, .17', (.1) ! ,...,,... 2 ....224.11 • lib COMM . r VIreutat 1., .0. .2 •••-•••2•1 .2 a 1212.71.0•24, 11.72 • 30 ....,1, i:::: - _ 0, ...I ,, 7020 Kam 4 .,,..2.2. 01 - 1,2•12 Wm e11,11.2.3 a• • 22.11102.04 0.2-21124.77 ... 1 ra,-... 1. • 0 ,•••, ... 2 \\ Mil 7. 0... ,..„,, .. 0 .. \ 7 so.■ 24,......777.71 ' '''..' 2 • 5 :. 1cil i , .. . • 10 pr.,/ Kt VC ,.....ve tr..„0„ /7 .., \ ... ' ... \ 7 ' '''''....'. 7.... ''' ''.."*......* ''.." 1.122 • 2021, '11" \ \ .A2, 1 / I 100 0217. • 7. w. P.. , 4 . ,k ■ .• \ i \ \ ■ • • ' \ , I / T :. Li--_-...,.... 231,01-1. iil .1_, r,, \ . \ 1 1.11C) .7:- .- PHASE 1 .i k _ cl . 4. . • i/ - 2412721. C. 5 . .1 f 1 A c * / - • WM 1 1. i . , . .7Z . I 0 1 0 . . . . • - - . . . . 7... ............,,,., 3 a ',/ ; • ..1 fir 1 ...... 9,11. . .3 02, vo. . ' 1 ° Ph . .. ilacY 0 /-•• r till. I Pill 1 - _ 011 -IN.,. ., --•"„- _ s ,.... ,,.,„ III , k (.•• •• rE.12 • •-• \ \ 8 \ ' , ,... . ill1•111•1•3'• I INN e1 If ri• \ ' pelf, \ \ ,..-. - ,I, • .., ...ie72.: ' . .1. ,. . ile: 1 - 1 . E ! 2 \ f. \ . ‘.. ''''• \ '" - . , c---- i t• an 1 I. 1 To 1 n k....... - T. : 1 1 111 .... 1 " ..11 4 "r-- - 111 ; 1. ila --: •-• ••• . ii i t '1! 11111 4 .Noe . ‹.. . „.,' -1p 74-„,, • , , , \ in • _ _ \ \,, \ \ •, , , \ 1 I ■ . :2 --,-- '1 .' - - • ... \ \ \®\ \\ \\' \ \ \ I • 1.. PHA _..,.. :'-`,... . 1. ,,,-- vr ler ......„, ...„.......... - I 2.•22t a 3 - •,'■ \ \ \ I MI. . 1 .. .o. . .!". • i 1 g Ac .,./. - -Cf.' ' - ...... u ... r t , • \.......dmen wet ..mcn 0;\ \ , \ \ ,:,,, , •N 3 l lit :: ::- - .41 2-::_ i \ \ 1 \ , \ \ ,,. ‘ 1 • ,.- tar - . ' .. 0 _ .... - ";._ 1 I f I 1 1 rovN rt rl?t 1: - 's To 3 ,,,;.':' i i i 4 . C...• -; ,:_i t.., writ . q \ \ ,\ , k ''. :' ) • rc Ir li , t \ \ Ncr Ifil \ ' , , \ \ - k ...4 0 ;:z. L .1 - d; 1 I-IL ., --. I GC•41 r! 13 (ER 1 F. \ \ \ \ . I \ \ ., ... , \lt..1 I B 12 - • '"' lor " r, ..' .$ f \ '• \ \ ''''",. --: . 4 . , \ \ L ,: • , -4 111`,,..:. ! - i ,L, •I4.4 • ‘• • • • 't \ . \ \ hi . ....21117. & ,.,•„., i . - • I " h. 1 \ • '''. i i , ' , , •••• , s \ \ , \\ \ th....... H A . , , .. is ...._ k.,__-_,=.„__L- ---, ,_,-, z,- g , • 1 _ .., .. , , . .. ........ awasew ,,•%,.., ._ • __ - --------”--, - • -... • -.... --- - -- _ ,- ---,-._,,, -------.------------.---v.m....w - --- - .,„.._...._. 911 0 ( i T- _______ ..... _ __STAMPPAO.42 '.... - 7. - -:7:- : . - n1. .1 tc.,... '1.1' • - --- - • ; " ... ,_' , .= - _.1 .- .._ _ , • -' ,-. 2. :./. - , - - -; 1 -.-- i i , -- - - :... - :-: _ ._ 2 :-: .-;_----- r. ,. - -.---> - - ' ' - - - refi Ooor FON i4A.P - -- -.. •• 1 I ( • . . ' I. I 17, ( , . __.. ,-.-" .. -,tt„/,,,,....._,',EN II-IF. (7 _____ K -- --. •1 If NINN le • - 3 Mi /1 il - a /,k411 . I . .i, . . . _ _ _ WO NW ....... • • ......„ 11 ,, r 1:... WM17 122710,274.1 II P.., R ...o,zA4 7.--- 7-1. ■;...;.: 22.. ,/ - . , :lk . . 1 ,...', - --fr --------- -- - - - 2,74;j7 ------ _ -.) 04704 7 .-....22......,2 •20 (D.,7■12•:17111 0 2 7 N 0 :-;%'' “"' C;P - 1 ......-- • 4 1110 10 Manny Richardson From: . Brian Fields [bfields @winterspringsfl.orgj Sent: Friday, March 12, 2010 2:01 PM To: Manny Richardson Cc: Karl Krichbaum;'David Glunt'; Randy Stevenson Subject: RE: Town Parke Apartments TIA Methodology Attachments: image002.png; image001.jpg Manny, Comments are as follows: • Based on a recent meeting with FDOT, the project will have one full- access median opening (Spine Road) and one other intersection (Townhouse Road) between Spine Road and the trail bridge that will likely be a directional opening (right -in, right -out, left-in, but no left-out). Check with Dave Glunt regarding the latest access plan. • For all roadway segments studied, please provide both average daily and AM /PM peak hour analyses • Under the roadway segments, please add Tuskawilla Road from 434 north to Blumberg Boulevard (two lane segment) • For the intersections, please remove 434 at Heritage Park and Tuskawilla at Trotwood. Add the unsignalized intersections of 434 at Gardena , 434 at Tuscora, and 434 at Cliff Rose • Trips from the following approved / unbuilt projects should be considered vested: Project Location Descriptioi GGrandevil le NW corner of 434 and Doran Drive_ 152 apartments .iesup's Reserve SE corner of 434 and Mc .eod's Way 6g townhomes yet to be bui • HS2 Office Complex SW corner of 434 and Heritage Par" 24,000 SF Office Building 1P_.5 ]p'.s Landing Orange Avenue 135 Toavnhames Artesian Part Orange Avenue 103 Townhames West End Center south side of 434, west of Mc` e_od'.s Way 24,390 SF Office Building Please submit two hard copies and one pdf on a CD to my attention. Brian Fields, P.E. City Engineer City of Winter Springs 407 - 327 -7597 (office) 321 - 388.2757 (cell) From: Manny Richardson (rnailto:mrichardson @gmb.ccj Sent: Wednesday, March 10, 2010 10:34 AM To: Shan Fields Cc: Karl Krchbaum Subject: Town Parke Apartments TIA Methodology Brian, • 1 Attached is the methodology document for the Town Parke Apartments TIA. The project is located in the City of Winter Springs. Please review and respond with any questions or comments. • Thanks Manuel Richardson, E.1. Transportation Analyst t t ;: . Gri,t3 ES PLANtiFS, INC GMB Engineers & Planners, Inc. 2502 E. Livingston St. Orlando, FL 32803 (407) 898 -5424 x255 /Fax: (407) 898 -5425 Toll Free. 1- 883 -398 -5424 • www.omb.cc Orlando, FL • Saratoga Springs, NY Minority / Disadvantaged Business Enterprise Confidentiality Note This e-mail, and any attachment to it, contains informalicn intended only for the use of the indhidual(s) or entity named on the a - mail. If the • reader ;i this e-mail is not the intended recipient, or the employee cr agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that reading it is strictly prohibited If you have received this email it error please im" return it to the sender and delete ;t from your system Thank you • 2 A-a Summary of Traffic Study Requirements for Concurrency Step 1 - Determine whether or not a traffic study is required based on the following thresholds (The radius shall be measured from the main site entrance). For uses not listed below, traffic studies will be required for any site that generates more than 50 new peak hour trips. Traffic studies shall be required for all small high generators (i.e., convenience stores, gasoline stations, fast food restaurants, banks, etc). If a study is required, proceed to step 2. Radius Land Use Unit N.A. - Traffic Study 1 mile 2 mile 3 mile Not Required Residential - Single - Family DU 0 - 50 51 - 500 500 - 1,000 > 1,000 Residential - Apartments DU 0 - 100 101- 800 801 - 1,600 > 1,600 Residential - Condos DU 0 - 100 101- 1,000 1,001 - 2,000 > 2,000 Residential - Mobil Homes DU 0 - 100 101- 1,000 1,001 - 2,000 > 2,000 Hotel Room 0 - 100 101- 800 801 -1,600 > 1,600 Church TSF 0 - 75,000 > 75,000 N/A N/A Daycare TSF 0 - 4,000 > 4,000 N/A N/A Office: General TSF 0 - 35,000 35,001 - 350,000 350,001 - 700,000 > 700,000 Office: Medical TSF 0- 15,000 15,001 - 150,000 150,001 - 300,000 > 300,000 Retail Shopping Center TSF 0 - 10,000 10,001 - 135,000 135,001 - 270,000 > 270,000 Quality Restaurant TSF 0 - 7,500 > 7,500 N/A N/A High Turnover Restaurant TSF 0 - 5,000 > 5,000 N/A N/A New Car Sales TSF 0 - 20,000 > 20,000 N/A N/A Furniture Store TSF 0- 125,000 > 1.25,000 N/A N/A Industrial - Manufacturing TSF 0 - 75,000 75,0001 - 750,000 > 750,000 N/A Industrial - Warehouse TSF 0 - 100,000 100,001 - 1,000,000 > 1,000,000 N/A Industrial - Mini - Warehouse TSF 0 - 200,000 > 200,000 N/A N/A 110 Step 2 - Submit a traffic study methodology that contains the following information: Location map of the site. Summary of the proposed trip generation including any proposed pass -by trips and internal trip capture. Proposed trip distribution which should include backup calculations. List of arterial and collector roadways that fall within the radius of influence (see thresholds above). List of signalized intersections and major un- signalized intersections that fall within the radius of influence (see thresholds above). Site plan of the proposed development that shows the proposed access locations. The methodology should be submitted for approval by email, fax or regular mail to: Shad M. Smith, P.E. Principal Engineer, Engineering Division Seminole County Public Works Department 520 W. Lake Mary Blvd, Suite 200 Sanford, FL 32773 Office 407- 665 -5707 Fax 407 -665 -5789 SSmith(c�seminolecountvfl.gov • -Its • Step 3 — Once the methodology has been approved, existing traffic counts and committed trip information will be provided to the applicant. A traffic impact analysis study will then need to be submitted that contains the following information: A detailed trip generation summary including any applicable pass -by trips and internal capture. For internal capture, please submit backup calculations. A map showing the trip distribution percentages on each of the links in the study area. A table summarizing the daily trip impacts on all roadway links. For each roadway link in the study area, the table should include project distribution percentages, development trips, existing traffic counts, committed trips, total future traffic counts and Level of Service (LOS). If the LOS of a roadway does not meet the accepted standard, a more detailed peak hour peak direction analysis shall be performed. The methodology for this analysis shall be approved by Shad Smith. A table summarizing the peak hour operations of the intersections. Highway Capacity Software (HCS) analysis or equivalent should be included as backup information in the report. All movements of an intersection must be LOS E or better. The traffic study must be signed and sealed by a registered Professional Engineer. • Two copies of the Traffic Impact Analysis Study will need to be submitted along with the Concurrency Application. The studies should not be submitted directly to Shad Smith but follow the standard application process. For any questions regarding this process, please feel free to contact Shad Smith at 407- 665 -5707. • A- 11 • APPENDIX "B" Turning Movement Counts, Roadway Traffic Counts, and Adjustment Factors • • • Roadway Count Summary GMB Engineers & Planners, Inc. Intersection Tuskawilla Road & SR 434 Date March 11, 2010 Time Period AM Peak Hour Northbound Southbound Time Period Left Through Right Peds Total Left Through Right Peds Total 7:00 7:15 113 125 10 0 248 26 31 0 0 57 7:15 • 7:30 94 18 18 0 130 25 34 0 0 59 7:30 • 7:45 145 11 19 0 175 15 16 3 0 34 7:45 • 8:00 95 16 16 0 127 14 10 1 0 25 8:00 • 8:15 108 13 19 0 140 9 4 2 0 15 8:15 - 8:30 102 14 11 2 127 12 9 0 0 21 8:30 - 8:45 97 16 13 0 126 14 13 0 0 27 8:45 - 9:00 108 15 14 0 137 20 16 1 0 37 862 228 120 2 1.210 135 133 7 0 275 Eastbound Westbound Time Period Left Through Right Peds Total Left Through Right Peds Total 7:00 - 7:15 16 105 66 0 187 16 161 51 1 228 7:15 - 7:30 10 171 114 0 295 25 242 10 0 277 7:30 - 7:45 7 165 81 0 253 26 278 8 1 312 7:45 - 8:00 8 135 61 0 204 29 246 2 0 277 8 :00 - 8:15 9 153 66 0 228 17 210 5 0 232 • 8:15 8:30 10 139 101 0 250 23 165 6 0 194 8:30 8:45 10 161 98 0 269 21 195 6 1 222 8:45 9:00 7 115 99 0 221 43 199 8 0 250 77 1.144 686 0 1,907 200 1.596 96 3 1,992 a. (�,, a 2 0 4 91 80 lf North / South t--.—. 71 Tuskawilla Road A. In 4—i 1 L a---- 927 East/ West SR 434 ir F---- 96 Peak Hour 7:00 - 8:00 41 Peak Hour Factor 4 1 I 0.93 576 - -s E rj Total Pk Hr Vcume 322 2.888 447 170 63 0 • • B -1 • Roadway Count Summary GMB Engineers & Planners, Inc. Intersection Tuskawilla Road & SR 434 Date March 11, 2010 Time Period PM Peak Hour Northbound Southbound Time Period Left Through Right Peds Total Left Through Right Peds Total 4:00 • 4:15 130 12 27 0 169 25 24 1 0 50 4:15 • 4:30 104 18 37 0 159 15 19 0 0 34 4 :30 - 4:45 128 21 21 0 170 22 29 2 0 53 4:45 - 5:00 120 19 17 0 156 24 22 0 0 46 5:00 - 5:15 84 18 8 D 110 13 20 0 0 33 5 :15 - 5 :30 139 19 18 0 176 17 33 1 0 51 5:30 - 5:45 98 22 16 0 136 25 28 3 0 56 5:45 - 6:00 92 25 15 0 132 24 32 0 0 56 895 154 159 0 1.208 165 207 7 0 379 Eastbound Westbound Time Period Left Through Right Peds Total Left Through Right Peds Total 4:00 - 4:15 2 136 95 0 233 17 113 10 0 140 4:15 - 4:30 9 171 90 0 270 22 146 9 0 177 4:30 - 4:45 3 147 130 3 280 23 170 6 0 199 4:45 - 5:00 6 205 120 0 331 19 147 7 0 173 5:00 - 5:15 5 209 125 0 339 23 196 12 0 231 5:15 • 5 :30 3 231 151 0 385 30 174 6 0 210 • 5:30 • 5:45 2 249 144 0 395 21 207 6 0 234 5:45 6:00 6 235 126 0 367 19 181 7 0 207 36 1,583 981 3 2,600 174 1.334 63 0 1.571 ♦• ••LrJ •i 0 0 4 113 79 North / South 31 Tuskawilla Road (( East / West 41 ÷, 758 SR 434 9 1----- 93 Peak Hour 5:00 - 6:00 16 4 Peak Hour Factor 4 1 I T 0.95 924 -•1 Ef Total Pk Hr Voume 546 3,118 413 84 57 0 0 4.• .E .. • 6 -z • • . I I I r ; � 1 1 1 k_i 11 yl .L_ • • H H j i I I 1 I � 1 _ _ . _ � --I- ____ . � ( } 1 .. 1 ; • I r ' 1 _ I I _ --- ' , 1 1 • '' II 1 - -' -- - - - - -- --- - - -- - -- - - -� -- -- '-- - -.... . -I ._ — .. .... L — I _.. \ • 1 _ ' 1 i \�`' I ' r l— — I - _�_ — — r --+- 1 E __� L I i I ' s 1. .- - - — - — _ - - -- - __- ._. _.. L - i? I . - - - .-- :: . 1 I t 4 - 7 1 I I 1 -- — — — — _ . _ e F 1 a I . . - -'•1 -- 1 �* -- - • ; __ � _._ _ 1_ ; - t ± i L ..._ .._� __ L ._ , , , • , ..,. . , ! i i r , ; 1 - r ; `t , , f -- 1 ►_ , : . ------------ - -- -,--- - - LI-- , 1---H- . , , : , t,, 1 _ _ . , , . . . 4 : I , , l . i , ___„,______, ..._,.... .. _. ,......_ _. ____,___:.;.___,_„— .____ _ - .__ _._ ______ ._... 1 . ..f .ivi t ip.14 9 . . .. . 1 1 1. _ . [ __.. I ' I 1 I - ' � '— „�,t I IIVE SP EE ® LIMITS S� . I 1 � GMB Engineers & Planners- intersection Sketch • I .. I . `i i , 4r _ f I _ — _ North !South Road: j t4 1 ; IA.' l i i . "41 k 11 I. a Wit.. _ )1, . __ J _ — — —' East 1_ Wes. Road ,_ -I _ P L . _ Y . i T 1 I — _ • _ D 1� / 0 Project: . _l eu - - •-- - 1, E r — Observations: — 1 1 1 1 I I . i I I . -I - -�._ • Roadway Count Summary ry CA/18 Engineers & Planners, Inc. Intersection Doran Boulevard & SR 434 Date March 11, 2010 Time Period AM Peak Hour Northbound Southbound Time Period Left Through Right Peds Total Left Through Right Peds Total 7:00 - 7:15 3 2 0 0 5 14 0 3 0 17 7:15 - 7:30 1 1 2 1 4 15 0 7 0 22 7:30 - 7:45 1 0 1 0 2 4 0 2 0 6 7:45 - 8:00 1 0 2 0 3 0 0 5 0 5 8:00 8:15 1 0 2 4 3 4 0 2 0 6 8:15 8:30 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 2 2 5 8:30 • 8:45 1 0 2 0 3 1 0 2 0 3 8:45 • 9:00 0 0 2 0 2 2 0 1 0 3 8 3 11 5 22 43 0 24 2 67 Eastbound Westbound Time Period Left Through Right Peds Total Left Through Right Peds Total 7:00 7:15 44 162 1 0 207 1 164 73 0 238 7:15 • 7:30 11 218 0 0 229 0 296 16 0 312 7:30 7:45 4 256 1 0 261 I 398 8 0 407 7:45 - 8 :00 1 213 0 0 214 1 329 5 0 335 8:00 - 8:15 13 204 0 0 217 5 316 7 3 328 8:15 8:30 2 251 1 0 254 2 299 3 0 304 III 8:30 8:45 5 300 0 0 305 2 297 1 0 300 8:45 9:00 4 204 0 0 208 4 296 6 0 306 84 1,808 3 0 1.895 16 2,395 119 3 2,530 4 E ..,..- 3 0 16 0 23 North /South 36 Doran Boulevard 4 East / West Q 4� 1 L _____ 1.339 S R 434 7 r----"". 7 Peak Hour 7:15 - 8:15 29 Peak Hour Factor 0.87 891 — ®a• T Total Pk Hr Voume I 2,354 4 1 7 5 0 4 • • •1 p •is • g —q • Roadway Count Summary GMB Engineers & Planners, Inc. Intersection Doran Boulevard & SR 434 Date March 11. 2010 Time Period PM Peak Hour Northbound Southbound Time Period Left Through Right Peds Total Left Through Right Peds Total 4:00 - 4:15 1 0 1 0 2 4 0 1 0 5 4:15 • 4:30 1 0 0 0 1 5 0 4 0 9 4:30 - 4:45 2 0 1 0 3 6 0 5 0 11 4:45 - 5:00 1 0 2 0 3 3 1 5 0 9 5:00 • 5:15 0 0 1 0 1 4 0 4 0 8 5:15 - 5:30 1 0 0 0 1 9 0 1 0 10 5:30 - 5:45 0 0 2 0 2 3 0 3 0 6 5:45 - 6:00 0 2 2 0 4 4 1 5 0 10 6 2 9 0 17 38 2 28 0 68 Eastbound Westbound Time Period Left Through Right Peds Total Left Through Right Peds Total 4:00 - 4:15 13 245 3 0 • 261 1 251 3 0 255 4:15 • 4:30 8 271 0 0 279 3 269 6 0 278 4:30 - 4:45 12 281 2 0 295 5 249 3 0 257 4:45 - 5:00 18 335 3 0 356 4 280 5 0 289 5:00 • 5:15 13 344 1 0 358 0 275 9 0 284 5:15 - 5:30 11 409 1 0 421 1 301 4 0 306 • 5:30 • 5:45 18 405 3 0 426 3 291 4 0 298 5:45 6:00 12 323 1 0 336 5 259 13 0 277 105 2.613 14 0 2.732 22 2.175 47 0 2.244 4 0 - is 0 0 13 1 19 North / South t-- 22 Doran Boulevard _____ 1,147 East/ West ill SR 434 7 c 8 Peak Hour 4:45 - 5:45 60 Peak Hour Factor t I ! 1 ---). 0.94 1,493 -- --► Total Pk Hr Voume 8 2,778 2 0 5 0 • • • • 1 I ' I ' I ' _ I I I . , , --r----!-- - - -.�- �- 1 { -�- j -... i I - j I r .. 1 I - I _.i._.. f - __ - _..� I ._.I - ' � _ _ 1 , i - ;_ • . • • f 1 1 1 , . .. — _ 1 _- 1- -- - -- - — i -- ._�._ _- _...__ !__.I i - -- --- — � I _ _ ._ _ —_ -_ ___ .... __.._ ___ _� _ ._ -i. r .. _._._... \ i _._.�. ._ �I • • -� I � __. • ' f - I j ' -' 1 1 u � ! 1- i 1 •6. r t 1 — e '7 - i I r { . � •I I ■ . - .. _. I . --r- _ I _ .. ,. , _ — — � i • 1 L j I a h . I I .' 1 1 - - — j .. . I , T 1 __ I 1 t I j i - Y { E L N E EED I S ' 1 _ _ _GMB_En Engineers & Pl Int rsectio Sketch • _ - -� - North / South Road: £ ro �/ A r�S LAI East! West Road: je_ L -h am ti Date: — W � v 1 1 4 } _ 1 - — - - '- 1 - - -I — I Observations: — _ _ 1 { P ro' ect: 1 I T I I— i • Roadway Count Summary GMB Engineers & Planners, Inc. Intersection Gardenia Avenue & SR 434 Date March 18. 2010 Time Period AM Peak Hour Northbound Southbound Time Period Left Through Right Peds Total Left Through Right Peds Total 7:00 - 7:15 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 • 7:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 - 7:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 - 8:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 • 8:15 0 0 1 I 1 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 - 8:30 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 8:30 • 8:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8:45 - 9:00 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 Eastbound Westbound Time Period Left Through Right Peds Total Left Through Right Peds Total 7:00 - 7:15 0 137 1 0 138 0 269 0 0 269 7:15 7:30 0 220 0 0 220 0 267 0 0 267 7:30 - 7:45 2 232 0 0 234 0 304 0 0 304 7:45 - 8:00 3 191 0 0 194 0 288 0 0 288 8:00 - 8:15 2 210 0 0 212 0 251 0 0 251 8:15 • 8:30 0 207 0 0 207 0 213 0 0 213 S 8:30 - 8:45 1 225 0 0 226 I 255 0 0 256 8:45 9:00 I 177 1 0 179 0 224 0 0 224 9 1.599 2 0 1.610 I 2.071 0 0 2.072 a•.E ••.y 0 0 0 0 0 North /South 1 0 Gardenia .Avenue 4 East / West F L a- 1,110 SR434 41 f________ Q Peak Hour 7:15 8:15 Peak Hour Factor � 0.92 853 ---4. 41 'I 1 Lr l Total Pk Hr Voume 0 i 1,971 0 0 1 1 0 i •• .E..... III r 13 -N7 • Roadway Count Summary GMB Engineers & Planners. Inc. Intersection Gardenia Avenue & SR 434 Date March 18. 2010 Time Period PM Peak Hour Northbound Southbound Time Period Left Through Right Peds Total Left Through Right Peds Total 4:00 • 4:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 - 4:30 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 • 4:45 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 - 5:00 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 - 5:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 - 5:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 - 5:45 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 - 6:00 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 Eastbound Westbound Time Period Left Through Right Peds Total Left Through Right Peds Total 4:00 - 4:15 2 238 0 0 240 1 206 0 0 207 4:15 - 4:30 7 222 0 0 229 1 209 0 0 210 4:30 - 4:45 2 278 0 0 280 0 267 0 0 267 4:45 - 5:00 1 261 0 0 262 0 272 0 0 272 5:00 - 5:15 0 332 0 0 332 0 263 0 0 263 5:15 - 5:30 1 368 0 0 369 1 276 0 0 277 • 5:30 5:45 2 295 0 0 297 0 301 0 0 301 5:45 6:00 51 275 1 0 327 0 248 0 0 248 66 2.269 1 0 2.336 3 2.042 0 0 2.045 d. E • •4' 0 0 0 0 0 L_____ North / South 0 Gardenia Avenue A East / West Q I .4______ 1.088 5R 434 O f _________ 1 Peak Hour 5:00 - 6:00 54 4 Peak Hour Factor r 0.94 1,270 - •••••••••.--....4. I 0 Total Pk Hr Voume 1 2.417 0 0 3 0 0 i • • •{E••••.• • a -6" • . • I I 11 1 r 1 i '- � 7-_ i j .. j ■ L I I I I _ ! I • .. - -- - i I i , � 1 -_ I 1 I j I i • I i 1 r T._....r a I (4 '' - I I 1 � - I { I. _ t _ .; ■ . — a _ I I I I � I —. _- _- ._..._ .•__ - ^r=te• I T 1 i. _ - -- ! -• - ! I I- I i.. ; .1 ....,A - - —! 1 r/ `- • I - Its roc. I_ C`' -- —...__ _ -.._ - -- -- - { .. . 1 . 1 rll I ' t t_I _ r ....0 4 ii, ...7 l i ` I '417 j' r ._ i _ I I 3' ; 1 t; V . I - . _ I ... �.. I ' . !, ' I I P r �, r •".1 ._'. _._1___ - ._. .i_. - - - -- -- -;- - -` - °.. I _ _.. • • • t , I I 1 I , +/ _ _. I 1 I i L. - _- .... _.. __ -._ __ I. I 1 i i i. 1 , 1 wv; - - NEED SPEED L IMITS. - I " i I GMB Engineers & Planners- Intersection Sketch I � �._. . � (I h__ (' _ h I So Roa _ ____ =� a te _ _ Nort S uth d: { 1 r - I .... - f y 1_. - I - 1 East ! West Road:. _'�.._- L . r - -. - ------ t— • . . i i I '. r — � � - - - -- I I 1 D bse at P roject : !�i�✓7 F I r - ji( Gj �:J � O 1 1, 1 1 1 . I i 1 _ i . 1 . _�_ 110 Roadway Count Summary r`I GMB Engineers & Planners, Inc. Intersection Tuscora Drive & SR 434 Date March 18, 2010 Time Period AM Peak Hour Northbound Southbound Time Period Left Through Right Peds Total Left Through Right Peds Total 7:00 - 7:15 53 0 10 0 63 0 0 0 0 0 7:15 - 7:30 10 0 10 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 7:30 - 7:45 17 0 16 0 33 0 0 0 0 0 7:45 - 8:00 23 0 18 0 41 0 0 0 0 0 8:00 - 8:15 19 0 22 0 41 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 - 8:30 8 0 12 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 8:30 - 8:45 12 0 16 0 29 0 0 0 0 0 8:45 - 9:00 9 0 19 0 28 0 0 0 0 0 151 0 123 0 274 0 0 0 0 0 Eastbound Westbound Time Period Left Through Right Peds Total Left Through Right Peds Total 7:00 - 7:15 0 141 6 0 147 2 204 0 0 206 7:15 • 7:30 0 205 14 0 219 2 270 0 0 272 7:30 - 7:45 0 222 2 0 224 6 284 0 0 290 7:45 • 8:00 0 217 2 0 219 2 276 0 0 278 8:00 • 8:15 0 194 10 0 204 5 229 0 0 234 8:15 8:30 0 207 3 0 210 4 201 0 0 205 • 8:30 8:45 0 218 4 0 222 6 245 0 0 251 8:45 9:00 0 162 2 0 164 2 210 0 0 212 0 1.566 43 0 1,609 29 1.919 0 0 1,948 4 • LI...• 0 0 0 0 0 North / South 1—.® 0 Tuscora Drive 4. F 1 ems-- 1,059 East / West L. SR 434 v jjj l � 1.----- 15 Peak Hour -. 7:15 - 8:15 0 A 4 1 1 E Peak Hour Factor 0.95 838 •--0. 1 E 0 Total Pk Hr Voume 28 2,075 69 0 66 0 0 4•• .E , III _io • Roadway Count Summary GMB Engineers & Planners. Inc. Intersection Tuscora Drive & SR 434 Date March 18. 2010 Time Period PM Peak Hour Northbound Southbound Time Period Left Through Right Peds Total Left Through Right Peds Total 4:00 - 4:15 16 0 3 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 4:15 - 4:30 7 0 7 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 4:30 - 4:45 8 0 6 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 4:45 • 5:00 14 0 4 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 5:00 - 5:15 15 0 9 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 5:15 - 5:30 15 0 7 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 5:30 - 5:45 11 0 10 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 5:45 - 6:00 13 0 7 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 99 0 53 0 152 0 0 0 0 0 Eastbound Westbound Time Period Left Through Right Peds Total Left Through Right Peds Total 4:00 - 4:15 0 203 18 0 221 6 186 1 0 193 4:15 - 4:30 0 225 15 0 240 8 198 0 0 206 4:30 - 4:45 1 251 23 0 275 10 259 0 0 269 4:45 - 5:00 0 237 15 0 252 6 253 0 0 259 5:00 - 5:15 0 312 19 0 331 12 244 0 0 256 5:15 - 5:30 0 322 13 0 335 13 256 0 0 269 • 5:30 5:45 0 305 11 0 316 9 294 0 0 2 03 5:45 6:00 0 289 20 0 309 20 239 0 0 259 1 2.144 134 0 2.279 84 1,929 1 0 2.014 f. 0...4. 0 0 0 0 0 1 North / South 0 Tuscora Drive 4 4.-- 1 L. . 4...--............ 1,033 East / West P 5R 434 54 Peak Hour 5:00 - 6:00 0 4 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 1,228 °4. P Total Pk Hr Voume 63 2.465 54 0 33 0 0 4...2.••.0. • (3-0 0 • • 1 i ; , ; 1 1 ! , ■ i 1 ; , 1 I i ! , ! ! ' , I !, , 1 1 1 .. • ! I . I I 1 1 ' 1 1 .-' I: 1 1 ! I • ' 1 . 1 • , 1 : 1 I 1 - i l 1 I ! ; , ! i ; ; 1 I i• ' • ', ! - ! 1 - ' . ' ! ! 1 1 ( ;...( .. ; . I I 1 I I 1 : . : 1 I - ',/r1 ', - --,,- i - ; • -- + I , -- 1 1 1 i • ' ! • I • , ! ' ; I I ; 1 1 I • I ; , , , ,. , • i , r , 4\ ii , , , I I i 1 , ; 1 ,.. , I.. : --•! , 1 , _ i , i ! • , , , , , , 1 • " , , , , i• : , : _, , , r , I 1 • ., , , i . , , ,„ 1 , , , , ., . , . , , • 1 . _ , 1 : 1 1 . . _, . ! . .,, ,. , : , . , ., , " , • i _•, • ,_,____•_1••__,...._.,_: , . . . 1 • i , n ' h ...-- (is , 11 '''J' 14 I 1 ' 1 1 , I ' , ' ' ' I ! : '>3 ., V `r • •=1 .,...: I ;• - • • i - 't- •• \'• \ki • \t I 1 1 ' 1 ; —; • - 1 ' ■ ! ! .' ' I 1 I i • 1 1 - i'''''' - 1 - i` i - I 1 . • 1 1 1 1 1 i • I i 1 i • 1 , • , . i ' , i ; , , 1 '.. i .i .. i i. . . . , 1 • '. I_ ....; ... i ‘k •-•4 ' i i I ; 1 i ; ' 1 .1 ,_._7,•,...._..1 i ' I I ; 1 i ; ' I 1 . ; i 1 ; I • I 1_,) - I - I • - I - - ! - • '-- - I • I '‘i;I 1 _ i . .i .. ■ ' ,. ! ' I - I ' . 1 " 1 i I ; '• ' ', 1 1 ' , 7 7".*---.7 7 -1 1 1 ! ; I I 1 ': ! 1 I 1 I i : 1 i 1 • . • I , I ` ' , ! . ! , I ! - i It) ! I I - I - • - - I .. ; I -I- I I .-j•-•• •.1- 1 . I 1 • I I . . : . 1 ' " ` '. • I j : . 1 1 : ' ■ 1 ! , I . ■ I ' 1 I I 1 i • 1 i i ' . ■ ' 1 ' . I 1 „ • : ' . --1.71 1 ' I I 1 1 1 ! 1 - 1 1 —. . ..-ri ' I !.-.—,—.-. ,.. --..--, , , : , ■ - - - — - •• r ;. 1 1 . i ' . .7) I I : I ; • , I ' : ' . r ' , l 1 1 '. 1 - 1 . . I .--1.. .. -t• l • i , , . • . 1 ,... i . J 1...___:__ i ' 1 ' i 1 • 1 \ 1 1 : - i ' ' - i - - - !/'• - - I - • 'I • - ' ' ' ' . . r •-r• r , ! i • 1 1 1 ,--, ! • I ( . I ",, , I — 1 . i-- , - -.• 1 - 1" /1,_, , 1 , I1(c ' ' ' 1 / ,,, ,. ,,_...; ! ,..,.• ; ; ; 1 i . • • , .1 - ; ; I 1 ;.T •.; • 11 1 • - -- i4 , ; , (_-•,,:-.....--,-, :;\ (-1 '--!' 1 I - V 1 - l\I - yft 1 ' I 1 -. I i i \is . J I:\ \,i ;.‘. \ . ! I I -------4--- • ---1------- - ! . 1 1 . I . - . 1 ! * i 1 1 I ; .._... ..; 1 ' • : i i : 1 i . 1 I T I ''• 1, ' ---—- , • , 1 1 .; ) i I , . - I , I I, . ', ; ■ 111 I 1 , . , 1 . : 1 , i '• I 1 , , • ; 1 • , 1 c l. •1• 1 I--1 .1 !• i i i I I :1 : : 1 • 1 : ; I ' . 1 1 1 ! I ; ,. ! ! • i 1 i 1 i . , . i , • ' 1 ' c 1 1 I I I ; INEED SPEED LIMITS;. , , • • GMB Engineers & Planners- Intersection Sketch ' ; , ! ! ; 1 1 .i. 1 • - 4. 1 \ 1 1 -. 1 I S h R d ---- • — • - • 1 .; North / out Road . , s•'.,!_ ( I 1 ; 1 ' • , , ; 1 ..1 ; 1 . i . l I. _.1 oa : (...4. •-/ 's 4 . ..- 1 -''. ' ( I • • I r • il ' 1' c. Dat ... I I East / West R d '''• '', ---- i ' I ' ' .1 l' ' .' I • I --I - ' - I- ! - 1 1 1 • --- ,, / /, ,... , i ; . . , • 1 1- 1 i. :!, - ! ! ; -- • ; ", • 1 • : 1 e: : :0 / <••••,. ;Project /— : 4 ),,......d,./ .;/', i_.• i .. ,. ,•,.,•,., , , , 1 . 1 : ; , . - .. ; • , 1 1 1 ; i Observation: . L .. . . . ' • 1 ; ' I 1 :!. 'L 1 I .1 1 . 1 - 'HI ! -. 1" 1 -; - " .. - -,_,Giiii,1,-i• - , , , 1 , 1 1 i----1- 1. -------- • , - , . • Roadway Count Summary GMB Engineers & Planners, Inc. Intersection Cliff Rose Drive & SR 434 Date March 18. 2010 Time Period AM Peak Hour Northbound Southbound Time Period Left Through Right Peds Total Left Through Right Peds Total 7:00 - 7:15 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 1 0 1 7:15 • 7:30 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 1 0 1 7:30 - 7:45 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 1 0 1 7:45 • 8:00 0 0 5 0 5 0 0 2 0 2 8:00 8:15 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 8:15 - 8:30 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 8:30 - 8 :45 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 1 0 1 8:45 - 9:00 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 20 0 20 0 0 10 0 10 Eastbound Westbound Time Period Left Through Right Peds TotaI Left Through Right Peds Total 7:00 - 7:15 3 195 2 0 200 3 285 6 0 294 7:15 - 7:30 4 220 0 0 224 2 324 5 0 331 7:30 - 7:45 8 328 0 0 336 0 478 6 0 484 7:45 - 8:00 7 231 0 0 238 3 442 6 0 451 8:00 - 8:15 6 325 0 0 331 1 396 4 0 401 8:15 - 8:30 7 330 0 0 337 1 330 2 0 333 • 8:30 - 8:45 6 319 0 0 325 6 356 8 0 370 8:45 9:00 10 262 0 0 272 2 335 5 0 342 51 2.210 2 0 2.263 18 2 -946 42 0 3.006 4• • •2 •• . 0 0 3 0 0 North / South 18 Cliff Rose Drive East / West I I_. .4-- 1.646 r:= J I SR 434 Peak Hour 7:30 - 8:30 28 4 4 1 I Peak Hour Factor I 0.89 1,214 -----4- L:J Total Pk Hr Voume 0 2,925 0 0 11 0 0 4 • • • •► • og -1 • Roadway Count Summary GMB Engineers & Planners, Inc. Intersection Cliff Rose Drive & SR 434 Date March 18, 2010 Time Period PM Peak Hour Northbound Southbound Time Period Left Through Right Peds Total Left Through Right Peds Total 4:00 - 4:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 7 4:15 • 4:30 0 0 1 0 I 0 0 11 0 11 4:30 • 4 :45 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 12 0 13 4:45 - 5:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 14 5 :00 - 5:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 16 5:15 • 5:30 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 14 0 14 5:30 - 5:45 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 12 0 12 5:45 • 6:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 9 0 0 5 0 5 1 0 95 0 96 Eastbound Westbound Time Period Left Through Right Peds Total Left Through Right Peds Total 4:00 - 4:15 16 285 0 0 301 4 326 24 0 354 4:15 - 4:30 18 315 0 0 333 2 352 18 0 372 4:30 - 4:45 24 415 0 0 439 2 395 24 0 411 4:45 • 5:00 35 426 0 0 461 3 389 24 0 416 5:00 • 5:15 29 471 0 0 500 3 373 19 0 395 • 5:15 5:30 28 507 0 0 535 0 382 27 0 409 5:30 5:45 20 411 0 0 431 3 378 20 0 401 5:45 • 6:00 25 379 0 0 404 I 354 23 0 378 195 3,209 0 0 3,404 18 2.939 179 0 3.136 r• Ej••i 0 0 56 0 1 North /South 94 Cliff Rose Drive 4 J L 18,529 East / West SR 434 Peak Hour 4 :30 - 5 :30 4 116 --1 Peak Hour Factor 4- ] 0.94 1,819 -I. LJ 4 . Total Pk Hr Voume 0 3,625 0 0 2 0 0 4 • .C. .. • • • • . I I - - -- i. . I r ' 1 ---- -4 •-----4 -. 1 e t • I . i 1 : 7 I i l _ y. It ... i__1 . i� I I _ I r ._ ... I . . �� . I l • - . i M i ' I � I 1 t• I I ----t-'27-2./...:1 T ' ` II- I ...,_ _ ._L -- 1 `j rte I i - I S t:. �j i L - - I I • 1 - 1 ' �. -, 2. l � i. I i I I L.. 1 I I I - j I NEED SPEED L IMITS 1 :i , f GRAB Engineers & Planners- Intersection Sketch r ... _ . � - -� - • North / South Road: �_l ,4- ? -p j 1 � i { -- - - --.. -- - - -- -,-,---- - - -- - 1 i 1 _ East I West Road: 1 . I i . " i _ . _ }- -- �_ - - -- D ate: 3 I i ra • Pro ' ect: - I!1 a < << i i . 1 i I " � _r_ � I I _ { Obs i I I I - -r - -� - r • • • 2009 Peak Season Factor Category Report - Report Type: ALL Category: 7700 SEMINOLE COUNTYWIDE MOCF: 0.96 Week Dates SF PSCF 1 01/01/2009 - 01/03/2009 1.02 ca= 1.04 s=6 2 01/04 /2009 - 01/10/2009 1.01 1.03 3 01/11/2009 - 01/17/2009 1.00 1.02 4 01/18/2009 - 01/24/2009 1.00 1.02 5 01/25/2009 - 01/31/2009 0.99 1.01 6 02/01/2009 - 02/07/2009 0.98 1.00 02/08/2009 - 02/14/2009 0.96 1.00 ' 8 02/15/2009 - 02/21/2009 0.97 0.99 " 9 02/22/2009 - 02/28/2009 0.97 0.99 *10 03/01/2009 - 03/07/2009 0.97 0.99 '12 03/08/2009 - 03/14/2009 0.97 0.99 *12 03/15/2009 - 03/21/2009 0.97 0.99 '13 03/22/2009 - 03/28/2009 0.97 0.99 *14 03/29/2009 - 04/04/2009 0.98 1.00 '15 04/05/2009 - 04/11/2009 0.98 1.00 *16 04/12/2009 - 04/18/2009 0.99 1.01 *17 04/19/2009 - 04/25/2009 0.99 1.01 *18 04/26/2009 - 05/02/2009 0.99 1.01 19 05/03/2009 - 05/09/2009 0.99 1.01 20 05/10/2009 - 05/16/2009 0.99 1.01 21 05/17/2009 - 05/23/2009 0.99 1.01 22 05/24/2009 - 05/30/2009 0.99 1.01 23 05/31/2009 - 06/06/2009 1.00 1.02 24 06/07/2009 - 06/13/2009 1.00 1.02 Cl 25 06/14/2009 - 06/20/2009 1.00 1.02 26 06/21/2009 - 06/27/2009 1.01 1.03 ' 27 06/28/2009 - 07/04/2009 1.02 1.04 28 07/05/2009 - 07/11/2009 1.03 1.05 29 07/12/2009 - 07/18/2009 1.03 1.05 30 07/19/2009 - 07/25/2009 1.03 1.05 31 07/26/2009 - 08/01/2009 1.02 1.04 32 08/02/2009 - 08/08/2009 1.01 1.03 33 08/09/2009 - 08/15/2009 1.00 1.02 34 08/16/2009 - 08/22/2009 1.00 1.02 35 08/23/2009 - 08/29/2009 1.00 1.02 36 08/30/2009 - 09/05/2009 1.00 1.02 37 09/06/2009 - 09/12/2009 1.00 1.02 38 09/13/2009 - 09/19/2009 1.00 1.02 39 09/20/2009 - 09/26/2009 1.00 1.02 40 09/27/2009 - 10/03/2009 0.99 1.01 41 10/04/2009 - 10/10/2009 0.99 1.01 42 10/11/2009 - 10/17/2009 0.98 1.00 43 10/18/2009 - 10/24/2009 0.99 1.01 44 10/25/2009 - 10/31/2009 1.01 1.03 45 11/01/2009 - 11/07/2009 1.02 1.04 46 11/08/2009 - 11/14/2009 1.03 1.05 47 11/15/2009 - 11/21/2009 1.05 1.07 46 11/22/2009 - 11/28/2009 1.04 1.06 49 11/29/2009 - 12/05/2009 1.04 1.06 50 12/06/2009 - 12/12/2009 1.03 1.05 51 12/13/2009 - 12/19/2009 1.02 1.04 52 12/20/2009 - 12/26/2009 1.01 1.03 53 12/27/2009 - 12/31/2009 1.00 1.02 " Peak Season Page 1 of 2 • • • 2009 Weekly Axle Factor Category Report - Report Type: ALL County: 77 - SEMINOLE Week Dates 7701 7702 7703 7704 SEMINOLE RURAL SEMINOLE URBAN SR46,LAKE CO- US17/92 I4 1 01/01/2009 - 01/03/2009 0.98 0.99 0.94 0.95 2 01/04/2009 - 01/10/2009 0.98 0.93 0.94 0.94 3 01/11/2009 - 01/17/2009 0.98 0.86 0.94 0.93 4 01/18/2009 - 01/24/2009 0.98 0.89 0.93 0.93 5 01/25/2009 - 01/31/2009 0.98 0.91 0.93 0.94 9 02/01/2009 - 02/07/2009 0.98 0.94 0.92 0.94 7 02/08/2009 - 02/14/2009 0.98 0.96 0.91 0.94 8 02/15/2009 - 02/21/2009 0.98 0.99 0.90 0.94 9 02/22/2009 - 02/28/2009 0.98 0.99 0.90 0.94 10 03/01/2009 - 03/07/2009 0.98 0.99 0.90 0.94 11 03/08/2009 - 03/14/2009 0.98 0.99 0.90 0.95 12 03/15/2009 - 03/21/2009 0.98 0.99 0.90 0.95 13 03/22/2009 - 03/28/2009 0.9B 0.99 0.90 0.95 14 03/29/2009 - 04/04/2009 0.9B 0.99 0.91 0.95 15 04/05/2009 - 04/11/2009 0.98 0.99 0.91 0.95 16 04/12/2009 - 04/18/2009 0.98 0.99 0.91 0.95 17 04/19/2009 - 04/25/2009 0.98 0.99 0.91 0.95 18 04/26/2009 - 05/02/2009 0.98 0.99 0.91 0.95 19 05/03/2009 - 05/09/2009 0.98 0.99 0.91 0.95 20 05/10 /2009 - 05/16/2009 0.98 0.99 0.91 0.95 21 05/17/2009 - 05/23/2009 0.98 0.99 0.91 0.95 22 05/24/2009 - 05/30/2009 0.98 0.99 0.91 0.95 23 05/31/2009 - 06/06/2009 0.98 0.98 0.91 0.95 UM 24 06/07/2009 - 06/13/2009 0.98 0.98 0.92 0.95 i 25 06/14/2009 - 06/20/2009 0.98 0.98 0.92 0.95 26 06/21/2009 - 06/27/2009 0.98 0.98 0.92 0.95 2/ 06/28/2009 - 07/04/2009 0.98 0.98 0.92 0.95 26 07/05 /2009 - 07/11/2009 0.98 0.98 0.92 0.95 29 07/12/2009 - 07/18/2009 0.98 0.98 0.92 0.95 30 07/19/2009 - 07/25/2009 0.98 0.98 0.92 0.95 31 07/26/2009 - 08/01/2009 0.98 0.99 0.92 0.95 32 08/02/2009 - 08/08/2009 0.98 0.99 0.92 0.95 33 08/09/2009 - 08/15/2009 0.98 0.99 0.92 0.95 34 08/16/2009 - 08/22/2009 0.98 0.99 0.93 0.95 35 08/23/2009 - 08/29/2009 0.98 0.99 0.93 0.95 36 08/30/2009 - 09/05/2009 0.98 0.99 0.93 0.94 37 09/06/2009 - 09/12/2009 0.98 0.99 0.93 0.94 38 09/13/2009 - 09/19/2009 0.98 0.99 0.93 0.94 39 09/20/2009 - 09/26/2009 0.98 0.99 0.93 0.94 40 09/27/2009 - 10/03/2009 0.98 0.99 0.93 0.94 41 10/04/2009 - 10/10/2009 0.98 0.99 0.93 0.95 42 10/11/2009 - 10/17/2009 0.98 0.99 0.93 0.95 43 10/18/2009 - 10/24/2009 0.98 0.99 0.93 0.95 44 10/25/2009 - 10/31/2009 0.98 0.99 0.93 0.95 45 11/01/2009 - 11/07/2009 0.98 0.99 0.94 0.95 46 11/08/2009 - 11/14/2009 0.98 0.99 0.94 0.95 47 11/15/2009 - 11/21/2009 0.98 0.99 0.94 0.95 48 11/22/2009 - 11/28/2009 0.98 0.99 0.94 0.95 49 11/29/2009 - 12/05/2009 0.98 0.99 0.94 0.95 50 12/06/2009 - 12/12/2009 0.98 0.99 0.94 0.95 51 12/13/2009 - 12/19/2009 0.98 0.99 0.94 0.95 52 12/20/2009 - 12/26/2009 0.98 0.93 0.94 0.94 53 12/27/2009 - 12/31/2009 0.98 0.86 0.94 0.93 . . 2009 weekly Axle Factor Category Report - Report Type: ALL County: 77 - SEMINOLE Week Dates 7709 7710 7711 7712 SR419/434 TO SR417 US17/92 SR46,EAST OF US17/92 SR426 1 01/01/2009 - 01/03/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 2 01/04/2009 - 01/10/2009 0.97 0.98 0.95 0.97 3 01/11/2009 - 01/17/2009 0.97 0.97 0.95 0.97 4 01/18/2009 - 01/24/2009 0.97 0.97 0.95 0.97 5 01/25/2009 - 01/31/2009 0.97 0.98 0.95 0.97 6 32/01/2009 - 02/07/2009 0.97 0.98 0.95 0.97 7 32/08/2009 - 02/14/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 8 02/15/2009 - 02/21/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 9 02/22/2009 - 02/28/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 10 03/01/2009 - 03/07/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 11 03/08/2009 - 03/14/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 12 03/15/2009 - 03/21/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 13 03/22/2009 - 03/28/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 14 03/29/2009 - 04/04/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 15 04/05/2009 - 04/11/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 16 04/12/2009 - 04/18/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 17 04/19/2009 - 04/25/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 18 04/26/2009 - 05/02/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 19 05/03/2009 - 05/09/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 20 05/10/2009 - 05/16/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 21 05/27/2009 - 05/23/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 22 05/24/2009 - 05/30/2009 0.97 0.99 D.95 0.97 23 05/31/2009 - 06/06/2009 0.97 0.98 0.95 0.97 "ni 24 06/07/2009 - 06/13/2009 0.97 0.98 0.95 0.97 25 06/14/2009 - 06/20/2009 0.97 0.98 0.95 0.97 ° 'O 26 06/21/2009 - 06/27/2009 0.97 0.98 0.95 0.97 27 06/28/2009 - 07/04/2009 0.97 0.98 0.95 0.97 28 07/05/2009 - 07/11/2009 0.97 0.98 0.95 0.97 29 07/12/2009 - 07/18/2009 0.97 0.98 0.95 0.97 30 07/19/2009 - 07/25/2009 0.97 0.98 0.95 0.97 31 07/26/2009 - 08/01/2009 D.97 0.99 0,95 0.97 32 08/02 /2009 - 08/08/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 33 09/09/2009 - 08/15/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 34 39/16/2009 - 08/22/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 35 08/23/2009 - 08/29/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 36 08/30/2009 - 09/05/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 37 09/06/2009 - 09/12/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 38 09/13/2009 - 09/19/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 39 09/20/2009 - 09/26/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 40 09/27/2009 - 10/03/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 41 10/04/2009 - 10/10/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 42 10/11/2009 - 10/17/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 43 10/13/2009 - 10/24/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 44 10/25/2009 - 10/31/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 45 11/01/2009 - 11/07/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 46 11/08/2009 - 12/14/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 47 11/15/2009 - 11/21/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 48 11/22/2009 - 11/28/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 49 11/29/2009 - 12/05/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 50 12/06/2009 - 12/12/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 51 12/13/2009 - 12/19/2009 0.97 0.99 0.95 0.97 52 12/20/2009 - 12/26/2009 0.97 0.98 0.95 0.97 53 12/27/2009 - 12/31/2009 0.97 0.97 0.95 0.97 • • • FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 2009 Annual Average Daily Traffic Report - Report Type: ALL County: 77 SEMINOLE Site AADT "K" Demand "D" Demand "T" Site Type Description Direction 1 Direction 2 Two -Way Fctr K100 Fctr D100 Fctr 0284 SR -434, 0.15 MI. w OF TUSKAWILLA RD. (UCLP) UC 2 E 16000 w 16000 32000 C 8.69F 9.00 51.56F 52.00 14.15A SD Site Type : P= Portable; T= Telemetered AADT Flags : C= Computed; E= Manual Est; F= First Year Est; S= Second Year Est; T= Third Year Est; X= Unknown "E /D" Flags : A= Actual; F= Volume Fctr Catg; D= Dist /Func. Class; P= Prior Year; S= State -wide Default; W= One -Way Road "I" Flags A= Actual; F= Axle Fctr Catg; D= Dist /Fungi. Class; P= Prior Year; S= State -wide Default; X= Cross - Reference l5 -Mar -2010 16:45:38 Page 1 of 1 6220PD [1,0,0,2) 5_7'7_CAADT.txt III/ • • Synopsis Report: 770284C1- 20090108.syn Page: 2 County: 77 Station: 0284 Description: SR -434, 0.15 MI. W OF TUSKAWILLA RD. (UCLP) DC 200 Start Date: 01/08/2009 Start Time: 1230 Direction: E Direction: W Combined Time 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total Total 0000 70 48 26 27 171 I 74 37 36 15 162 1 333 0100 18 18 22 15 73 I 13 22 18 13 66 1 139 0200 16 13 14 11 54 I 14 8 7 6 35 I 89 0300 8 6 8 4 26 I 20 17 8 6 51 I 77 0400 13 20 12 21 66 I 10 19 22 30 81 I 147 0500 32 61 93 106 292 I 45 63 BO 68 256 I 548 0600 127 135 172 217 651 I 85 181 273 256 795 I 1446 0700 244 288 271 243 1046 1 279 309 382 337 1307 i 2353 0800 262 281 280 269 1092 I 305 326 284 311 1226 I 2318 0900 229 198 227 180 834 I 330 281 220 235 1066 I 1900 1000 175 180 179 207 741 I 199 189 198 232 818 I 1559 1100 193 191 193 191 768 1 216 173 226 220 835 I 1603 1200 210 222 194 203 829 I 208 216 199 215 838 I 1667 w 1300 194 233 222 225 674 I 248 236 226 202 912 I 1786 N 1400 272 264 263 216 1015 I 226 248 244 242 960 I 1975 ( 1500 256 293 323 286 1158 I 266 261 276 314 1117 I 2275 1600 315 316 354 348 1333 378 310 340 320 1348 I 2681 1700 390 413 365 355 1532 349 352 344 319 1364 I 2896 1600 336 252 284 195 1067 331 261 238 219 1049 I 2116 1900 184 211 163 145 703 176 190 149 137 652 I 1355 2000 135 140 115 112 502 106 118 80 92 396 I 898 2100 122 105 75 87 389 98 84 67 80 329 I 718 2200 87 72 50 47 256 I 77 69 49 47 242 I 498 2300 37 37 33 46 153 I 52 37 33 59 181 1 334 24 -Hour Totals: 15625 16086 31711 Peak Volume Information direction: E Direction: W Combined Directions Hour Volume Hour Volume Hour Volume A.H. 0800 1092 0730 1350 0730 2407 P.M. 1700 1532 1645 1365 1700 2896 Daily 1.700 1532 1645 1365 1700 2696 Truck Percentage ].3.58 14.70 14.15 Classification Summary Database Dir 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 TotTrk TotVol 0 190 9997 3121 356 887 180 45 481 100 66 0 0 7 0 195 2122 15625 H 117 7898 5592 300 1265 117 76 474 76 37 0 0 20 0 114 2365 16086 Generated by SPS 5.0.16 • • • FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 2009 Annual Average Daily Traffic Report - Report Type: ALL County: 77 SEMINOLE Site AADT "K" Demand "D" Demand "T" Site Type Description Direction 1 Direction 2 Two -Way Fctr K100 Fctr D100 Fctr ' 0276 = SR -434, 0.618 MI E. OF TUSKAWILA RD (UVL) E 12000 W 11500 23500 C 8.69F 9.00 51.56E 52.00 9.36F • fV Site Type : P= Portable; T= Telemetered AADT Flags : C- Computed; E- manual Est; F- First Year Est; S= Second Year Est; T= Third Year Est; X= Unknown "K /D" Flags : A= Actual; F= Volume Fctr Catg; D= Dist /Func. Class; P= Prior Year; S.. State -wide Default; W= One -Way Road "T" Flags : A= Actual; F- Axle Fctr Catg; D= Dist /Func. Class; P- Prior Year; S= State -wide Default; X= Cross - Reference 15- Mar -2010 16:45:38 Page 1 of 1 622UPD (1,0,0,2) 5_77 ^CAADT.txt • • • Synopsis Report: 770278- 20090108.syn Page: 1 County: 77 Station: 0278 Description: SR. -434, 0.618 MI E. OF TUSKAWILA RD (UVL) Start Date: 01/08 /2009 Start Time: 1200 Direction: E Direction: W Combined Time 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total 1st 2nd 3rd 4th Total Total 0000 36 40 20 19 115 I 43 43 16 20 122 237 0100 9 9 15 16 49 I 8 16 19 10 53 102 0200 6 9 7 7 29 1 8 5 3 4 20 49 0300 7 4 4 4 19 I 13 11 5 5 34 53 0400 5 12 7 13 37 I 7 13 14 15 49 86 0500 20 28 46 65 159 I 29 29 51 49 158 317 0600 83 91 120 137 431 1 64 100 167 244 575 1006 0700 159 239 232 212 842 I 239 232 318 301 1090 1932 0800 218 218 214 180 830 I 212 269 255 253 989 1819 0900 168 167 156 158 649 I 201 199 147 166 713 1362 1000 99 141 130 182 552 I 142 140 125 148 555 1107 1100 127 155 139 151 572 1 156 115 142 141 554 1126 1200 135 173 146 137 591 1 159 125 116 137 537 1128 1300 157 163 154 157 631 I 165 150 156 168 639 1270 1400 156 218 224 213 811 I 158 163 168 153 642 1453 1500 179 225 217 257 878 I 169 189 192 230 780 1658 1600 256 266 276 268 1066 I 256 223 210 263 952 2018 1700 303 345 331 287 1266 I 269 307 274 240 1090 2356 pd 1800 274 230 201 186 891 I 248 211 189 162 810 1701 1 1900 159 143 128 120 550 I 132 111 113 84 440 990 2000 116 130 72 79 397 1 83 71 68 60 282 679 N 2100 75 94 65 65 299 I 59 48 47 53 207 506 220C 69 60 50 25 204 1 58 42 25 28 153 357 2300 37 32 28 25 122 1 24 21 22 31 98 220 24 -Hour Totals: 11990 11542 23532 Peak Volume Information Direction: E Direction: W Combined Directions Hour Volume Hour Volume Hour Volume A.M. 0715 901 0730 1100 0730 1980 P.M. 1700 1266 1645 1113 1645 2360 Daily 1700 1266 1645 1113 1645 2360 Generated by SPS 5.0.16 • • 0 • . .. ._ _ ... Site ID:00000000326A — 1 — I — — . . . _ _ . Station Nurn:000000000002 E Description: Tuskawilla Rd: SR 434 to Trotwood By . ._ . ...... . . . -- Start Date/Time:02-19-2009 10:45 — - — ----- -- ' • - ' ' - — End Date/Time:02-20-2009 00:00 02 ,,:;:;,•. la ne 'clA14):;' <: EridTriiii100:, Ai p2 06 c OZ pa:i.ZZ 09,(Ece 15 :: ] :::. ...,_ 13 5 10 2 6 11 39 252 144 158 99 115 30 .. . ' ' . _ 10 15 6 3 3 27 71 144 143 224 107 128 _ . _ 45... 18 12 5 3 9 23 101 161 156 111 106 142 CO..- • ',. 12 3 5 8 19 34 200 175 146 122 129 107 He.Toiar 53 35 26 16 37 95 411 732 589 615 441 492 End Tim . 5??;.:R."5; :, 3 zizzi 455661 4:05:?. I 2 .55 - -7 0 71.06 10..676 Viat giti.615t 25:56 15' 125 144 139 133 216 181 223 127 70 68 48 31 .. 30:- ::.':!' .' 123 130 120 143 187 212 160 115 74 66 47 23 45`:. '! %.'. 118 119 __ 168 140 186 215 192 99 91 76 32 15 . .... 00i:.:'. :. 1211 137 160 153 176 215 170 87 62 65 32 20 Hr[lotal;: 4871 530 587 569 765 823 745 428 297 275 159 86 .,.._......_.. ■ 24.HotirlOtar.:, 9296 N . . , . . , ... . AM Peak:HO ur Belins:i.T...ii 06A5 AM.Pealatoliamii 757 AKPeakHcii.JC,Faate 0.75 —__ PM Peak:Hpar;f3e • ins-': 17:15 P,M,PeakV, 865 eNtRoaioliourFactort.:::AKKA";, 0.97 a 2-49L2009.;,-...:.:< Lane12-1SY",...•L Ei)d Oi 0 4:.:1-:,;:f.:,:. , . 91!:` 022% PPiS=S; Wi P58:i :1;? 1:1A'5 15•7; 17 7 12 4 9 12 39 119 109 184 106 125 - .. 30.::. . ,.,., 20 7 4 7 9 13 57 171 128 119 102 108 45: •:. 15 10. 7 2 5 24 71 109 145 137 106 102 00 ." 8 11 . 3r 2 11 19 87 155 161 110 113 — 120 He„Total 60 35 26 15 34 68 254 554 5,43 550 427455 Eijd 1 . 3 ‘1- 14';'2- I 1 CZ1S 'Al25i 1tc. 20 :?:Yz.".75 :ilf.Z5 *5,155 *FOR 15. .-:-.:. 3 122 110 126 144 211 230 191 140 88 95 57 27 3Ci..; . : 140 112 173 166 183 251 173 131 151 95 53 ------. . .. 45. : :.. 125 136 241 167 156 279 182 109 164 68 6 To ':1 . 109 125 160 206 239 227 160 80 104 50 28 20 __. ... _ . _ Hr Total 496 483 700 683 789 987 706 460 507 308 167 97 24 Hciurl'otalg"; 9404 ,.._—_...:...:::...:4. ..._ . . AM.Reic4t1:21,1acifiLins 08:15 AMPOIcktoliirrieTgO:Y.::. 618 ANI 0.84 P,M-Peal<171bur Brisz.:: 1645 PNI.Piiile19o1061Ci 999 PKgetticliiiii)tiEd'OtOilf.q.q. 6760 1 • • • Site ID :00000000326A - Station Nu,n :000000000002 Description:SR 434 to Trotwood By _ Start Date /Time:02 -19 -2009 10:45 j t End Date /Time 02 20 2009 00:00 — -- 02 =,19 2009: = ,.: I :•r,..r,s, ; -:).: * r I =f , - X-:'.'.4=r. ,∎,, , , A Enii Ttmj00; 01 ° :, - iJ0V:. _ .1 04 `_ < i..IUS „ 0l $ \ 07' ' ` ,`. 08 = .t;,'ri 09 `x„ ;a.`' 1D+ � � ss-i f ;,: 15'': 30 12 22' 6 15 23 .... 781 371 253 342 205 240 30,x'' 30 22 10 10 12 40 128 315 271 343 209 236 -` ' .: 45 :. ` . , 33 22 12 5 14 47 172 270 301 248 212 244 00." 20 14 81 10 30 53 287 330 307 232 242 227 HrTot 113 70 52 31 71 163 665 1286 1132 1165 868 947 a, r,,,'1,015,;-.2 t , - �.. r a = r ty -��.i AMR!. En i Tirnl1.2 . F :0::',.:C::5;,=,:: 11 ` ,n .1,� 3 9 a 1 $:iact I,�_._;., ;,' 0 ".� 6 ; 2 ,'!, -Z 22� „fi,. >r� 23 L 51: S =.f . 1$. :,: :,.., : :: 247 254 265 277 427 411 414 267 158 163 105 58 30'?; :; _ 263 242 293 309 370 463 333 246 225 161 100 54 451.' ? 243 255 - - - 409 _307 342 494 374 208 255 144 61 34 00 "„ 230 262 320 359 415 442 330 167 166 115 60 40 cxr He Total? 983 1013 1287, 1252 1554 1810 1451 888 804 583 326 186 24 7titat 18700 N AM• Peak-: Hour, Be ins.._, 08 :30 AM,Peak'Vot Mme _t• 1293 A Peak:'Hou F actor ` '- t 0.87 -- ---,— --- �--,�, PM Pea „ Hour 80.:gimts .•,,•• 1715 ,PM PealGVolume,. ,•_ ,, ,� „t 1813 PM Peak�.Hour,Facto,v;K :a ,• , ,:s 0.92 41111 • • Table B -1 Town Parke Apartments Existing Traffic Volume Determination Raw Data Aide Adjusted Traffic Volumes Roadway / Segment AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Sesonal Adjustment Source* AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour NBIEB SB/WB NB /EB WII factor WWII Factor NB /EB SB/WB NB /GB SB /WB SR 434 Springs Avenue to Tuskawilla Road 880 1,100 1,266 1,090 1.01 0.97 FTI CD 863 1,078 1,241 1,068 Tuskawilla Road to SR 419 1,057 1,350 1,532 1,364 1.01 0.97 FTI CD 1,036 1,323 1,501 1,337 Tuskawilla Road 13lomberg Boulevard to SR 434 -- — -- — — –_ -- 271 169 126 189 SR 434 to Winter Springs Boulevard 732 554 823 987 0.97 0.99 FTl CD 703 533 791 948 CMB Engineers & Planners September - Note: "2009 Florida Traffic information CD 1 N • Summary of Roadway Concurrency Information RKEY Roadway Name From To AIR05 Airport Blvd Mellonville Ave C.R. 425 Current Traffic Count 5,818 Roadway Link Capacity 19.360 Committed Trips 332 Net Available Capacity 13,210 AIM 0 Airport Blvd U.S. 17-92 C.R. 425 Current Traffic Count 10,205 Roadway Link Capacity 19,360 Committed Trips 0 Net Available Capacity 9155 AIR20 Airport Blvd C.R. 46 -A U.S. 17 -92 Current Traffic Count 17,395 Roadway Link Capacity 42.560 Committed Trips 373 Net Available Capacity 24,792 AIR30 Airport Blvd S.R. 46 C.R. 46 -A Current Traffic Count 8,747 • Roadway Link Capacity 19,360 Committed Trips 769 Net Available Capacity 9944 BDL10 Beardall Ave SR. 46 Marquette Ave Current Traffic Count 0 Roadway Link Capacity 0 Committed Trips 0 Net Available Capacity 0 BLKOO Bear Lake Rd Bunnell Rd Orange County Current Traffic Count 11 602 Roadway Link Capacity 19,360 Committed Trips 139 Net Available Capacity 7 619 BLK10 Bear Lake Rd McNeil Rd Bunnell Rd Current Traffic Count 11.828 Roadway Link Capacity 19,360 Committed Trips 0 Net Available Capacity 77 532 Thursday, August 19, 2010 Page 1 of 33 This information has been provided by Shad M. Smith, P.E. at Seminole County Engineering and is current information as of the above referenced date. • B -2(o • RKEY Roadway Name From To S3455 S.R. 434 Moss Rd U.S. 17 -92 Current Traffic Count 35.370 Roadway Link Capacity 48.000 Committed Trips 354 _ Net Available Capacity 12.276 53460 S.R. 434 S.R. 419 Moss Rd Current Traffic Count 27.726 Roadway Link Capacity 48,000 Committed Trips 0 Net Available Capacit 20,274 S3465 S.R. 434 Tuskawilla Rd S.R. 419 Current Traffic Count 36,952 Roadway Link Capacity 48.000 Committed Trips 0 Net Available Capacity 11,048 83470 S.R. 434 S.R. 417 Tuskawilla Rd Current Traffic Count 26,130 Roadway Link Capacity 48.000 Committed Trips 0 Net Available Capacity 21.870 S3475 S.R. 434 DeLeon Ave S.R. 417 • Current Traffic Count 21,399 Roadway Link Capacity 18.270 Committed Trips 467 N et Available Capacit •3 596 S3480 S.R. 434 S.R. 426 /C.R.419 DeLeon Ave Current Traffic Count 18,442 Roadway Link Capacity 18.270 Committed Trips 429 Net Available Ca n acity •601 S3485 S.R. 434 Mitchell Hammock S.R. 426 /C.R.419 Current Traffic Count 15,826 Roadway Link Capacity 18,270 Committed Trips 0 Net Available Capacity 2,444 S3490 S.R. 43 .._ . ._... __ ...... 4 Chapman Rd Mitchell Hammock Current Traffic Count 32,268 Roadway Link Capacity 60,000 Committed Trips 1,274 Net Available Capacity 26 458 Thursday, August 19, 2010 Page 24 of 33 This information has been provided by Shad M. Smith, P.E. at Seminole County Engineering and is current information as of the above referenced date. • �3 -2 h • RKEY Roadway Name From To TSK50 Tuskawilla Rd East Lake Dr Red Bug Lake Rd ..._ Current Traffic Count 34.237 Roadway Link Capacity 42,560 Committed Trips 281 Net Available Capacit 8 042 TSK75 Tuskawilla Rd Winter Springs Blvd East Lake Dr Current Traffic Count 26.256 Roadway Link Capacity 42.560 Committed Trips 0 Net Available Capacity 16 304 TSK90 Tuskawilla Rd S.R. 434 Winter Springs Blvd Current Traffic Count 19,582 Roadway Link Capacity 42,560 Committed Trips 0 ® Net Available Capacity 22.978 U1700 U.S. 17 -92 Lake of the Woods Blvd Orange County Line Current Traffic Count 55,596 Roadway Link Capacity 60,000 Committed Trips 117 Net Available Capacity 4,287 U1705 U.S. 17 -92 S.R. 436 Lake of the Woods Blvd • Current Traffic Count 47,413 Roadway Link Capacity 60,000 Committed Trips 306 Net Available Capacity 122 281 U1710 U.S. 17-92 Triplett Lake Dr S.R. 436 Current Traffic Count 50,441 Roadway Link Capacity 60,000 Committed Trips 0 Net Available Capacity 9,559 01715 U.S. 17.92 Dog Track Rd /Seminola Blvd Triplett Lake Dr Current Traffic Count 51,519 Roadway Link Capacity 60,000 Committed Trips 0 Net Available Capacity 8 U1720 U.S. 17 -92 S.R. 434 Seminola - Dogtrack Rd Current Traffic Count 47,429 Roadway Link Capacity 60,000 Committed Trips 26 Net Available Capacity 12,545 Thursday, August 19, 2010 Page 30 of 33 This Information has been provided by Shad M. Smith, P.E. at Seminole County Engineering and Is current information as of the above referenced date. • 3 —?I • APPENDIX "C" Signal Timings S S Seminole County Traffic Engineering Timing Sheet • Intersection: SR 434 0 35- Tuskawilla #2392 Name SR 434 Tuskawilla SR 434 Tuskawilla JP_ _ 010.049 202.053 Mask 255.255.0.0 • Direction WL ET ST EL WT NT _ Host 10.46.101.167 Pod S 5129 Channel 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Stay 10.49.3.1 Corn ID .3 1365 Phase/CL S I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 2 4 6 8 Ph Mode CSeq Node 2392 lag VEH VEH VEH VEH VEH VEH VEH VEH OLP OLP OLP OLP POD PED PED POD Date 18- .Mar -09 Done By rfitzgeraId Timingflan 1 Alt Timing Plan 1 Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Assign 1 2 4 5 " - 6 8 Min Gm 6 . 15 8 6 15 . - 8 Min Gm 6 15 8 6 15 8 Passage 3 4 4 3 4 ' 4 Passage 3 4 4 3 4 - 4 Max t 15 :70 65 15 70 50 Max 1 15 85 60 15 85 90 Max 2 15 70 65 .15 70 50 Max 15 85 60 15 85 90 YalClr .4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 Yel •4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4,5 . 4.5 Red CIE • ' 2 - 2 2 2 2 2 Rad Clr 2 2 - :2 2 :2 . 2 Walk 7 ' 7 . 7 7 ', Walk 7 7 '. 7 .'7 • Ped CIr • 27 38 • 27 38 ped CII( 27 38 ' 27 • 38 Red Rad 2 - ' 2 2 2 2 . 2 Alt Timing Plan 2 _ Added Initiat Assign 1 ' 2 : 4 • :: ?5- • ':6 8 : lax Initial !Win Grp 6 15 8 =6 15 , '8. Maxi Limit Passage ; 3 4 4 '3 4 4 .: Max St Max 1 15 "'70 65 15 70 50' Time 8 - Reduc Max 2 15 70 65 15 .70 .50' Cars 8 - Reduc Yet CIr 4.5 4.5 .4.5 4.5 4.5 ;'4.5 Time to Reduce Red Clr - . 2 - 2 ` ' .2 `' 2 7 .22 ?. •.2 : Reduce By Wal ` 7 `•.: "T °. . 7 : :7' Min Gap - Ped Cit :27 ; :38 .27: " 38 . Alt Timir9 Plan 3 Alt Timing Plan 4 Alt Timing Plan 5 assign '..1 ` :2 .: 4 5 "6'- `•g 1 ' Min Ord ' 6 -. 15 8 _ `:6 15 '. 8 Passage • -.3 4 :> 10, -.23 _. ;.4 • ,: : Max 1 '115 -70' - 65 15 :::7O = 5U :' Max 2 ' 70 1 - 15 ' •70 ='50 YelCli; 4.5 4.5 •4.5 4:5 4.5 4.5 Red Clr 2' :2 2 -2 ':. 2 • 's2 • Walk ' 7. 7 '7 Pod Clr 1- '27 38 : '. 27 38 Phase Options Alt Phase Opt 1 Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Assign Phase On On On On On On 'On soft 5 _ Min lb On On R - On On Max 0 Cond 5ary Ped r7 Alt Phase Oot _ Soft _ r si n Lock Call On On , soft Flash Ent On R -N -W Flash Exit On On Cond San) r Dual Entrt On On Alt Phase Oot 3 Sim Gas On On Assign Cond service _ Soft V Reservice R V-W Cnf Phase _ Coed Sari Type Included Phase blodirier Phase Grn Yel Red OL A= 1 - OL 6= 2 OLC= 3 01 0= 4 01 E= 5 _ OLF= 6 ' OL G= 7 OL H= 8 OL I= 9 01_.1= 10 OLK= 11 OLi_ 12 OL b1= 13 • PL. .`I= 14 try GL P= 161 I 1 I I I I 1 C -I • Phase I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Coordination Programming 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 =2= 9= 13= R1= Cycle So1it 1 _______ 5 +6= •0= 14= R2= Coord Ph --M _ __ 3/4+ 11= 15= R3= NA 0151 __ Mode 1111111.111.1_ 7/8= 12= 16= R4= NA Phase IMEMBIENICIIIIM 6 0 1 13= R1= Cycle_ Solit 2 ____-__ IQ= 14= R2= Coord Ph ___ 15= R3= NA OfS1 Mode ----=111- 16= R4= NA Phase 1 © © ©QQ 8 9 10 11 13= R1= Cycle Split 3 111111111111111111111111111111111 •1 14= R2= Coord Ph _______ 15= R3= NA OtSt, Mode ee I6= R4= NA Phase 1 13= R1= Cyde Sold 4 _______ .0= 14= R2= Coord Ph _111111-_-__ 11= 15= R3= NA 0151 Mode -_----- 12= 16= R4= NA Phase 0 ©1M1Q 5 6 © 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 +2= 9= 13= R1= Cycle Sold 5 .■■..e■ 5 +6= 10= 14= R2= Coord Ph 3/4+ 11= 15= R3= NA 051 Mode 7/8= 12= 16= R4= NA Phase else 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 +2= 9= 13= R1= Cycle Spit 6 ■■■■.■■ a +6= 10= 14= R2= , Coord Ph 3141 11= 15= R3= NA 051 Mode 718= 12= 16= R4= NA Phase MEM 4 5 • e 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 +2= 9= 13= R1= Cycle Soil 7 -_____- 5.6= 1 14= R2= , Coord Ph --___ , 3/4+ 11= 15= R3= NA 01St Mode a ©eee•e 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1+2= 13= R1 NA Phase Cycle Split 8 _______ 5 +6= 10= 14= R2= Coord Ph -_-____ 3/4+ 11= 15= R3= NA Mt Phase 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1.2 7/8= 12= 16= R4= NA • 9= Mode ��© Split 9 -----O- 5 +6= 0= 14= R2 = Coord Ph _______ 3/4+ 11 15= R3= NA 01St Mode _ 7/8= 12= 16= R4= NA Phase eIIII 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 +2= 9= 13= R1= Cyde Split 10 _---___ 5+6= 10= 14= R2= Coord Ph _-___-- 3/4+ 11= 15= R3= NA , 0/St Mode _-__-__ 718= 12= 16= R4= NA Phase 0©© ©0 6 7 8 9 10 13= R1= Cycle Sold 11 __--___ 1°' 14= R2= Coord Ph _______ 11= 15= R3= NA 0151 Mode IMIIIIIIIIIIIIMIIIIIIIIUIIIIMIII 718= 12= 16= R4= NA Phase 0 © ©Q_ 6 7 13= R1= ,Cyde Sold 12 __-_-__ 1°' 14= R2= Coord Ph ____-__ 15= R3= NA 01St Mode 12= 16= R4= NA Phase IIIM 3 4 5 5 7 3 9 10 9= 13= R:= Cycle Split 13 __ - _ - _ - 10= 14= R2= Coord Ph 11111_--___ 11= 15= R3= NA 0151 Mlode ■eel® 12= 16= R4= NA Phase 9= 13= R1= Cyc:e Split 14 __-_ =-_ / Coord Ph __---_- ® 14= R2= 15= R3= NA 0151 Mode ha e� ®� 9 = 16= R I= = NA Phase 3= 'R1 vcle Solit 15 _______ 1°' 14= P.2= Coord Ph - _---_ - 15= R3= NA C/St Mode ® 16= R 1= NA Phase 1 2 3 9= 1'i= R1= 160 cycre Solil16 mm-mE11131• 10= 1-t= P2= 65 1e0 Coor1 Ph ON --___ 1 ; ' 15= =t3= MA Cis' 1 Mode NON ® -NON NON NON I 7/0= 95 12= ■;= R4= NA 77 • C -L 5 Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 3 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1-2= <2 62 9= 13= RI= 140 Cycle Solitl7 16 46 44 16 46 34 5 +s= 62 10= 14 R2= 62 140 Coord Ph ON 3/4+ 11= 15= R3= NA 01St Mode NON MAX NON NON MAX NON 7/8= 78 12= 16= R4= NA 94 Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 +2= 9= 13= R1= Cycle Split 18 5 +6= 10= 14= R2= Coord Ph 3/4+ 11= 15= R3= NA OfSt Mode 718= 12= 1 6= R4= NA T Phase 1 2 3 4 5 8 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 +2= 9= 13= R1= Cycle Split 19 5 +6= 10= 14= R2= _ Coord Ph _ 314= 11= 15= R3= NA 01St Mode 7/8= 12= 16= R4= NA Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 +2= 9= 13= _ R1= Cycle Split 20 5 +6 =L 10= 14= R2= Coord Ph 3/4+ 11= 15= R3= NA 051 Mode 7/8= 12= 16= R4= NA Phase 1 ' 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 +2= 9= 13= R1= Cycle Split 21, 5.6= 10= 14= R2= Coord Ph 314+ 11= , 15= R3= NA O151 Mode 718= 12= 16= _ R4= NA Phase T 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ` 1 +2= 0 9= • 13= R1= Cycle Solit 22 3 +6=1 10= 14= R2= _ Coord Ph 3/4+ 11= 15= R3= NA_ 0151 Mode 7/8= 12= 16= R4= NA Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 +2= 9= 13= R1= Cycle Soft 23 I . 5 +6= 10= 14= R2= Coord Ph 314+ 11= 15= R3= NA OfSt Mode 718= 12= 16= R4= NA Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 +2= 9= 13= R1= Cycle Split 24 5 +6= 10= 14= R2= _ 1 Coord Ph 3/4+ 11= 15= R3= NA OfSt Mode 718= 12= 16= R4= NA • Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 t +2= 9 13= Rt= R2= Cycle Split 25 5+6= 10- 14= Coord Ph 314+ 11= 15= R3= NA OfSt Mode 7/8= 12= 16= R4= NA Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 +2= 83 9= 13= R1= in CYcle Split 26 18 65 25 18 65 , 52 5 +6= 83 10= 14= R2= 83_160 Coord Ph ON 314+ 11= 15= R3= NA OfSt Mode NON MxP NON NON MxP NON 7/8= 77 12= 16= R4= NA 77 Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 +2= 80 9= 13= R1= 140 Cycle Solit 27 18 62 25 18 62 '35 1 5 =6= 80 10= 14= R2= 80 140 Coord Ph ON 314+ 11= 15= R3= NA OfSt Mode NON MAX NON NON MAX NON ' 718= 60 ' 12= 16= R4= NA 94 Phase 1 2 3 4 ' 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 +2= 85 9= 13= R1= 160 Cycle Split 28 20 65 •25 17 68 50 5 +6= 85 14= 14= R2 85_ 160 Coord Ph ON 314+ 11= 15= R3= NA C/St Mode NON MxP NON NON MxP NON 718= 75 12= 16= R4= NA 112 Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 4 15 16 4 1 -2= 9= , 13 Split 29 1 5 -6= 10= , 14= R2= Coord Ph 314- 11= 15= R3= NA O1St Mode 1 7/8= 12= 16= R4= NA Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1 16 1+2= 9= 13= R1= Cycle Split 30 5 -6= 10= 14= Coord Ph 314+ 11= 15= R3= 7-IA 0151 Mode 718= 12= 16= R4= NA Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 . 16 1 - 2 = 9= 13= R1 . ycle Split 31 1-6=1 10= 14= R2= Coord Ph 314+ 11= 15= R3= NA 01St Mode 7'8 =1 1 16= P4= NA Phase 1 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 T 15 16 1 -2= _ 9= 13- P CyC1+ Solit 32 5 -6= 10= 14= R2= - Coed Ph 3 /4 - r 11= 15= R3= NA • Mode I 7/3= I 1 2= 16= R. t= NA ‘...--. • C - Pattern Table Apt ?pigs Time of Day - Day Plans C 0 SP Sag DA CPT C.LR. 41x2 Daa Plan I Oav Of'Neek= •Non Thur - Fri • pattern 41 Evnt 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10 1 1 13 14 15 16 II Pattern 13 Hr 111111 7 9 11® 30 30 IIII.II.IIII Pattern 13 _ ddln 20 30 30 30 Pattern 14 Act 99 26 16 26 27 m® 99 - Pattern 15 Day Plan:: Day Of'Neek= Ned Pattern 46 Evn 1 2 3 4 5 1111 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Pattern 48 Min mmE 1 2 30 mt 30 :30 ---- Pattern 49 Act 99 26 16 26 27 Pla 17 r �a Pattern 410 Da• n Day Of Week= su 9 Patlem #11 Evnt 1 2 3 4 5 6 m 8 • 10 12 13 14 15 16 Pattern 912 Hr --------I-------- Pattem 413 Mln ------- Pattern 414 I Act 99 ii i i � � Pattern .415 Day Plan 4 Day Of Week= Pattern 1'6 160 77 16 1 - -1 Evnt 1 2 3 4 S 10 13 14 15 16 Pattern 417 140 94 , 17 1 ' 3 - 1 Hr -m--_-mm-m-mmmmm Pattern N19 fvlin mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Pattern 419 rIci 11 1111 1 Pattern 420 Day Plan 5 Day Of Week= Pattern 421 E•rr4t 1 2 3 4 5 13 14 15 18 Pattern 422 It Pattern #23 Min -------------m 124 psl 1.11 III Pattern 125 Dav Plan 8 Day Of week-- Pyttem#26 160 77 26 1' �-1- Evnt 1 2 3 4 5 9 10 13 14 15 16 Pattern 427 '140 94 27 1 • 1 - Hr --mmm--mmmmmml♦mm Pattern 428 160 112 28 .1 1 • Ma -----m-mm-mmmmmm Pattern 429 Act Pattern 430 Da v Plan 7 Oay Of Week= Pattern 431 Evnt 1 2 3 4 5 10 13 14 15 16 Pattern 432 Hr • Pattern #33 1 ? I l5Pn mmmmmmmmmmmmMmmm Pattern 434 1 . ` I At Pattern 135 1 . I Day Plan 8 Day Of Week= Patter 136 1- I E 1 2 3 4 5 • ME 13 14 15 16 Pattern 437 1 1 Hr Pattern .938 1 • 1 _ tblin Pattern 139 1 ••1 A_ ------NIII-- ---_-m Pattern #40 - 1 1 D a y Plan 9 Day Of Week= Panem 441 i 1 1 Evr 1 2 3 4 5 10 13 14 15 16 P 442 • 1 1 _ Hr mmmml♦mm mmmmmmm Pattern 143 1 1 blip ---------------m Pattern 444 1 1 A cl -----------MIII---_ Pattern #45 I I Day Plan 10 Day Of Week= �---- Pattern *46 1 ' 1 E 1 2 3' 4 5 6 mm 12 13 14 15 16 Pattern 147 1 y 1 Hr mmmml♦m_mmImmm/ Pattern 448 I I blip --------------mm ?et= ?9=P12`4 Free Acr#100 =P3255 Flash Act --------------- - Dee ail v Div Lrk Sg Det Call ON L_k Ore D =t Call Swt Div Lck S re Oet J_ D_Ly Lek SSE Det# I • 1 . 2 17 33 49 Der/ 2 2 13 34 50 Oat/ 3 2 I 9 35 51 Der/ 4 8 20 36 52 Get/ 5 4 21 37 53 Der/ 6 5 6 22 38 54 Det# 7 6 i 23 39 55 Debi 8 6 I 24 40 50 _ Jet/ 9 4 I- 25 41 I 57 Del/ 10 8 26 42 58 _ Der# I1 27 43 59 Der 12 I 29 4 4 60 . Debt 13 _ 29 45 61 Der/ 14 - 30 46` 62 , Detrl 15 3 I 47 63 • Der/ ;n I 32 _ . 43 f 64 c —u TTt ' Alin Enbi Track Phase Gin Track Ovelaq Dwell Phase Owl Dwell Ove,lao Exit Phase Pre Run 1 Pre Run 2 • Pre Run 3 ON 6 5 1 5 Pre Run x ON 4 5 8 Pre Run 5 ON 2 5 T 5 2 6 Pre Run 6 ON 1 6 5 2 6 Intersection Notes T.C.D Notes Intersection set up with split sides. Runs Alt. Timing Prgrms in AM and PM Phases 1 + S are 5 -sect. and Det. Switched Pattern 16 used for AM HS rush. 2R hardwired to Phase 8. Pattern 17 used for release of HS and Alt. Timing 3 to increase extension time. P8 4► P6 6 -- 'C— Tuskawita Rd N I P64' -4 . P6 P4 � ' P8 5 64-- I 4* + W. I ►E I - -► 2 2R 8 i S 5 P1 ► P2 P4 Pe —,. ' Cabinet f x Pa 4 ■ P2 . Sect 1 Ring1 i'; 1 2 3 4 7 " ;8 Ring 2 5; . . • • G— f Seminole County Traffic Engineering Timing Sheet - Intersection: SR 434 34 -Doran Dr #12076 Name SR 434 Doran SR 434 Doran 1P_ 010.049.202.052 Mask 255.255.0.0 Direction WL ET ST EL WT SL NT Host 10.46.101.167 Pon it 5127 • Channel x ?tease /OL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Gtwy 10.49.8.1 Corn ID .K # 1360 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 2 4 6 B Ph Mode ST08 Node 12078 Tvoe VEH VEH VEH VEH VEH VEH' VEH VEH OLP 0LP OLP OLP PED PED PED RED,Date 16- Mar-09 Done By rfitzgerald Timinr Plan 1 Alt Timing Plan 1 Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Assign Min Gm 6 15 8 6 • 15 6 . 8.. Jottn Gm P 3 5 3 3 5 3 3 Passagtl Max 1 30 70 80 30 70 80 , 30 Max 1 Max 2 30 70 80 30 ' 70 80 30 Max Yel Clr 5 5 4.5 5 .5 ': 4.5 4,5 Yet Clr Red Clr 2 2 2 2 2• '2 Red Ck Walk 7 .7 '14. ' 10 Ped Clr 22 `34 . 22 ' 34 Ped Clr Red Rvrt - 2 2 ' 2 • 2 2 . 2 2 Alt Timing Plan 2 _ Added Initial Assign Max Initial Min Gm Jdax3 Limit P Max3 Step Max 1 Time 8 Reduc Max Z Cars 8 -4 Reduc Yet Clr Time to Reduce Red Clr Reduce By Walk plln Gap Ped-Clr , Alt Timing, Plan 3 Alt Timing Plan 4 Alt Timing Plan 5 — Assign ;:. 1 .2 "4 : - -5 6 : .7 = 8 _ Min Gm 6 15 '8 6 : - 15 - ` .'8 "8 Passage i - " 5 • . 8 ` .''.3 ..- , . -;,3 .' 3` Max 1 .' 30 70 _ '-80 3a" ' 70 :;80 . 80 _ Max 30 '70 80 '30 70 - 180 ` 80 Yal Or 5 5 : -- 4.5 - 5 '4 `5 -: .5 4.5 Red Clr 2 2 : - '. 2 _.2 • .: 2 . ., 2 ,. • Walk '7 7,.' 14 4.0 Ped Clr .22 34 . -'22 L34 Phase Options Alt Phase Opt 1 Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Assign '2 ;'.: Phase On • On On - On - On On. On On Soft 0 _ _ Min 0 On On R - - On ' On Max 79 Cond Serf Pe d y Alt Phase Oot R Soft 0 Assign . Lock Cal On On Soft V _ _ Flash Ent On On R -N =ri/ Flash Exit On On Cond Sera Deal Sntr/ On On - On On Alt Phase Oot q _ Sim Gao On On A Cord service Softn'a Reservice _R 4-W Cnf Phase - 1 Cond Sery Taoe Included Phase Modifier Phase Gm Yet Rad OL A= 1 01 8= 2 OLC= 3 _ 01. D= 4 5 OL F= 6 01 G= 7 OL H= 8 _ 01 1= 9 OL J= 10 CL K. 11 OLI= 12 - OL M= 13 - ill CL N= 14 O o L LP= to 1 5 I I I i- I l l I I - 1 I — C —G, • Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Coordination Programming 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 +2= 9= 13= R1= cycle Split 1 5+6= 10= 14= R2= Coord Ph 3 +4= 11= 15= R3= NA OfSi Mode 7+8= 12= 16= R4= NA Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ' 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 +2= , 9= 13= R1= Cycle Solit 2, 5 +6= 10= 14= R2= Coord Ph 3 +4= 11= 15= R3= NA 01St Mode 7+8= 12= 16= R4= NA Phase t 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 +2= 9 ~ 12= R1= cycle, Split 3 , 5 +8= 10= 14= R2= Coord Ph 3 +4= 11= 15= R3= NA 01St Mode - 7 +8= 12= 16= R4= NA Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 +2= 9= 13= ,R1= Cycle Split 4 5 +6= 10= 14= R2= Coord Ph 3 +4= 11= 15= R3= NA Ofs1, Mode 7 +8= 12= 16= R4= NA Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 +2= 9= 13= RI= Cycle Split 5 5 +6= 10= 14= R2= Coord Ph 3 +4= 11= 15= ' R3= NA OfSt Mode 7 +8= 12= 16= R4= NA Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 +2= 9= 13= R1= Cycle Split 6 _ 5+6= 10= 14= R2= Coord Ph 3 +4= 11= 15= R3= NA OfSt Mode 7 +8= 12= 18= R4= NA Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 +2= 9= 13= R1= Cycle, Split 7 5+6= 10= 14= R2= , Coord Ph 3 +4= 11= 15= R3= NA 0151 Mode 7 +8= 12= 16= R4= NA Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 ^ 15 16 1 +2= 9= 13= RI= Cycle Split 8 5+6= 10= 14= R2= Coord Ph 3 +4= 11= t5= R3= NA OfSt Mode 7 +8= 12= 16= R4= NA • Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 +2= 9= 13= R1= Cycle Split 9 5+6= 10= 14= R2= Coord Ph 3 +4= 11= 15= R3= NA 0151 Mode 7 +8= 12= 16= R4= NA Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1+2= 9= 13= R1= Cycle Split 10 5 +6= 10= 14= R2= Coord Ph 3 +4= 11= 15= '23= NA OfSt Mode 7 +8= 12= 16= R4= NA Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 +2= 9= 13= R1= Cycle Solit 11 +6= 10= 14= R2= Coord Ph 3 +4= 11= 15= R3= NA OfSt Mode 7 +8= 12= 16= R4-- NA , Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ' 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 18 1 +2 = 9= 13= R1= Cycle, Split 12 5+6= 10= 14= R2= Coord Ph 3 +4= 11= 15= R3= NA OfSt Mode 7 +8= 12= 16= R4= NA Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 +2= 9= 13= RI= cycle Split 13 5 +6= 10= 14= R2= Coord Ph 3 +4= 11= 15= R3= NA CISt Mode 7+8= 12= 16= R4= NA Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 -2= 9= 13= R1= Cycle Split 14 5 +6= 10= 14= R2= Coord Ph ._____, 3 +4= 11= 15= R3= NA CtSt Mode 7 +8= 12= 16= R4= NA Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 -2= 9= 13= R1= Cycle Split 15 �� 5 +6= 10= 14= R Coord Ph 3 -4= 11= 15= R3= NA 0151 Mode 7-8= 12= 16- RY - NA Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 - 13 14 15 16 1 +2 =' 9= 13= RI= Cycle Soiit 16 5 +6= 10= 14= R2= Coord Ph 3=4= 11= 15= R3= NA 0161 Mode 7 +8= 12= 16= R4= NA • C - 7 • Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ® -- - -- --- -- - -- --- 3 1 + 2= 85 9= 1= R1= 140 Cjee sort , 7 20 m- 20 65 20 MI +6= !� 10= 14= R2- 140 140 Coord Ph - ON - - - - -- ---- - --- ®® 11 15= R3= NA 0151 Mode NON MxP - NON NON MxP N NON _ - �m_-�-®® 1 2= 16 R4= NA Kg Phase 1 =ME= 6 7 8 9 m ® ® ® ®1111 10 ®- 9= 13= R1= EMI Split 18 -- - ----- -- - ----- 5 =6= - 10= 14= R2= - Ccord Ph -- - - - - -- ---- - - - - ®- 11= 15= R3= NA Mode 1111111111=111111111011111111111111111 -- - ----- 7 +8= 12= 16= R4= NA - Phase -©© 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 m ® ®® 15 16 ®- 9= 13= R1= IMM Split 19 -- - - -- -- -- --- - -- 5+6= - 10= 14= R2= - Coord Ph -- - - - - -- ---- - - - - ®- ii- t5= R3= NA Mode -- -_--_- -- --'---ZE- 12= 16= Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 9 mm ® ® ®® 16 COMM 9= 13= R1= EMI Split 20 - -- - --- ---- -- - -�- 10= 14= R2 = - Coord Ph -- -_ -- -- ---- - - -- ®- 11= 15= R3= NA • Mode �� 7 +8= gm 12 = R4= NA - Phase 1 2 3 10 - ®�® 16 ®- 9= 13= R1= Cycle Split 21 -- - - - --- ---- -- - - -- 10= 14= R2= - Coord Ph -- - - - - -- --- --- -- ®- 11= 15= R3= NA Ofst Mode -- - - -- -_ -- -_ - 12- 16= R4= NA - Phase 1 ©© 4 5 6 0 8 9 10 - ® ®mUMM 16 ®- 9= 13= R1= EMS Split 22 -- - -- - -- -- - - -- -- 5 +6= - 10= 14= R2= - Ccord Ph -- -- - --- ----- - - -® -IMINI 15= R3= NA OtSt Mode - -- - - - -- -- - - - _ __ _ 12= 16= R4= NA - Phase 1 �Q© 8 0 8 9 10 m ® ® ®® 16 ®- 9= 13= Rt= •® Split 23 -- - - - - -- -- - -- --- 5+6= - 10= 14= R2= - Coord Ph -- - - - - -- ---- - - -- ®- 11= 15= R3= NA En Mode - -- - - -- -- - -- --- 7 « 8= - 12= 16= R4= NA _ Phase I © ©0© 6 EM a 9 10 m ® ® ®® 16 ®— 9= 13= R1= m Sort 24 -- --- -_- -- - - - - -- 5 +6= - 10= 14= R2= - Coord Ph -- - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- 11 15= R3= NA O15t Mode Mod 7 12= 16= R4= NA Mod 1MRR11 M 10 =11®1 1 +2= 9= 16= R1 • Sollt 25 11111111---_-1M ---IIII-MII--EIIMI- 10= 14= R2= - Coord Ph -- - - -- -- ---- -- - - ®- 11= 15= R3= NA 01St Mode -- - - - - -- ---- -- -- ®- 12= 16= R4= NA - Phase 0 © © ©8 6 7 8 9 10 m ® ® ®® 16 ® 124 9= 13= R1= 16O sm sort 26 Kol 106 allEim 108 16 20 -- - - - - -1111 5 +6= ® 10= 14= R2= 160 180 Coord Ph -.ON - - - -- --- - - -I.-® 36 11= 15= R3= NA 01St Mode NON MxP MO NON NON CM NON NON - - - - - -_ 7.8= 36 12= 16= R4= NA 103 Phase 1 ©d ©© 6 QQ 9 10 m ® ®m® 16 ® 105 9= 13= R1= 140 Ea Split 27 20 m-® • 20 85 ® 20 -- - - - - -- 5 +6= 105 10= 14= R2= 140 140 Coord Ph - ON -- - - -- ---- - - - - ®® 11= 15= R3= NA - idode NON MxP NON NON NON NON - ---- --_ ®® 12= 16= R4= NA 107 Phase 0 © © ©© 6 0 8 9 10 11 ® ® ®® 16 ®® 9= 13= R1= 160 EEE Split 28 20 95 -Q® 90 20 ® -- - - - - -- 5 +6= ® 10= 14= R2= 160 160 Coord Ph - ON - - - - -- --- --- - -® 45 11= 15= R3= NA gm Mode NON MxP - NON NON MAP NON NON _- _- -- -- 7 8= - 12 16= R4= NA 1C8 Phase 1 ©© 4 5 6 7 8 9 mm ® ® ®® 16 ®- 9= 13= R1= BEE Split 29 -- - - - - -- -- - --- -- 5 *6= _ 10= 14= R2= - Cocrd Ph -- - - - - -- ---- -- -11011®- 11- 15= R3= NA - Mode EMIIIIMMEM11.1.1 _---_--- 7 =8= - 12 16= R4= NA am Phase 1 ©© ®8 0 7 8 9 10 m ® ® ® ®� 9= 13= R1= EMI Split 30 -- -_- - -- - - -� - -- 5 -6= - 10= 14= R2= - Coord Ph -- - - - - -- - --- - - --®- 11= 15= R3= NA Mode 11111111111===11= 111111== I - ® 18= R4= NA Fla a__& — ©IMM—® ®- 8 9 10 m ® ®m® 16 1 +2= 9= 13= R1= - Split 31 -1111111=_1.1111-- ---_.1111111_- 9 = 6 = - 10= 14= R2= - Coord Ph -- - -- --- ---IIIII----®_ t1= I5= R3= NA rgi Mcde ----1111_-- ®1.11 12= 16- R4 NA - Phase 80 9 �� 16 ®— 9= 13_.. R1= BEI Sciit 32 -- -- -- - --�--- ®- 10= 14= R2= - Coord Ph IIIIIMMMM--_-_ _- -EMIIII 11 15= = R3- NA rsi ,lode =MIN . . - 1 ' _6 -O 1° = R4 NA - • Cr ` d Pattern Table ai ?pans Time of Day - Day Plans C ? SP " CPT Gel C.1 = R. blx2 pav Plan 1 Day Of'l eek= 1 Mon Tue Thur' • Fri Pattern 41 Evnt 1 2 3 4 51 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 Pattern 42 Hr 6 9 ® 14 15 18 �011111111.11111.11111 Pattern 43 Min 30 15 45 30 30 Pattern 44 Act 99 26 27 17 27' 28 99 P3 em 45 Oay Plan 2 Day Cf Week= Wed Pattern 46 Evnt 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Pattern 47 Hr 1. 6 9 13 13 '15 18 Pattern 44 Min '30 15 45 °30 30 Pattern 49 Act .99 26 '27 17- 27 28 99 Pattern 4113 Day Plan 3 Oay Of Week= am Pattern 411 Ent 1 2 3 4 51 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 Pattern 412 Hr Pattern 413 Min Pattern 414 J 99 . . Pattern 415 Day Plan 4 Day Of'Neek= Pattern 416 vn 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 I 13 14 15 16 Pattern 4 140 107 '17 1 '3 " '1 Hr Pattern 314 Min Pattern 419 Act ------ 11111111111111111111111 Pattern .420 Da•! Plan 5 Day Of Week= _ Pattern .x21 Eont 1 2 3 4 5 • 7 8 9 10 11 ® 13 14 15 16 Pattern 422 Hr Pattern 423 fulin Pattern 424 Act P3ttem #25 Day Plan 4 Day Of Week= Pattern 426 160 103 26 1 • >• 1 Evnt 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 Pattern x27 140 107 •27 • • 4 ' Hr IIIIIIIIIIIIIIMIIIIIIIIM- -.111 1 1 1101 . 11111111111 Pattern 128 -160 108 28 .. 1 .1 Min Pattern 429 Acj ^ Pattern .430 Day Plan 7 Day Of Week= Pattern 431 Evnt 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Pattern 432 Hr ----_IIIIIII 1111111•11111111111111111 • Pattern 433 Min Pattern 134 Act Pattern .135 Day Plan 6 Day Of Week= Pattern 436 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 Pattern 437 Hr ---_-_ ------ Pattem 438 Pattern 439 tit ■■■■ii� ■11.■. Pattern 44t Day Plan 9 Day Of Week= Pattern 441 Evnt 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Pattern Hr Pattern 443 Min Pattern 444 Act Pattern 445 Day Plan 10 Day Of Week- Pattern 44e Evnt 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Pattern 447 Hr '- Pattern 443 Min Ac 496 =P_25a Free _ dct#100 =P4255 Flash Act ------' --_--.1111 Det_Cail Swt Olv Lck Src Del Call Set le Lek Src Del Call art CQ1y Lck 5rc 0224 J Swt gy Lck Src Get/ 1 1 2 i 7 f 33 4 13 49 Dell 2 2 18 34 50 Del/ 3 2 19 35 51 Dell 4 2 2C 36 I 52 Cell 5 2 21 37 1 53 Get/ 4 8 22 38 54 Detl 1 4 8 23 39 55 Dell # 5 6 24 40 56 Cell 9 6 25 41 57 Dell 10 6 26 42 58 Dell I t 6 27 43 59 Dell !2 6 25 44 SC Daly 1 7 29 456 1 Ceti 11 8 8 3C 16 I 62 Det4 15 31 f d' 03 _ • Gail 16 I 1 32 - 13 ` j 5.4 Tit - Min Enbi Track phase Gm Track Ovenao Owed Phase QJ Owed Q ie !ao Exit Phase Pra Run t Pre Run 2 • Pre Run ON 8 T 5 4 8 Pre Run 4 ON 4 7 5 4 8 Pre Run Z ON 2 5 5 2 6 Pre Run 6 [ ON 1 _ 6 - 1 — ' :. 5 _ 2 6 Intersection Notes T.O.D Notes Intersection set up with concurrent sides. Pattern 17 used to run Alt. Timing 1 for longer extension times Intersection has full PEDs for release of HS. Phases 1 & 5 are 5_sec and use Det switching. Phase 7 extended with sourcing if no call on 8. P6 r --- - ► P6 P4 1y I. 8 41-- I `d 7 - N I P64 P6 6.4--. P4 1 ^1 t I ► E IIII SR 434 • - W• •- Ccran ` 2 Pd P8 S 5 P24 ► P2 J 4 t A 6 Cabinet • I P24 ► P2 P4 • 1 PA Sect: Ring 1 1' -' 3 • '4 Ring 2 .5., 6 7 . 8 • • C ° • APPENDI "D" HCS Intersection Capacity Analysis Summary Sheets 0 0 • Existing AM Peak Hour Conditions -1 Detailed Report Page 1 of 1 • HCS+' DETAILED REPORT General Information Site information Analyst Intersection SR 434 & Tuskawfila Road Agency or Co. GMB Area Type All other areas Date Performed 3/23 /2010 Jurisdiction Time Period Existing AM Peak Analysis Year 2010 _ Project ID Existing AM Peak Volume and Timing Input EB WB _ NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT _ TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes, Ni 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 Lane Group L T R L TR L LT R 1. TR Volume, V (vph) 41 576 322 96 927 71 447 170 63 80 91 4 % Heavy Vehicles, %HV 2 7 2 2 5 2 2 2 2 _ 2 2 2 Peak - Hour Factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Pretimed (P) or Actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start Lost Time, li 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 _2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /Metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial Unmet Demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR Volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking Maneuvers, Nm Buses Stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Time for Pedestrians, Gp 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left Thru & RT 03 04 SB Only - NB Only 07 08 • Timing G= 14.0 G= 44.0 G= G= G= 14.0 = 32.0 G= G= Y= 6.5 Y= 6.5 Y= Y= Y= 6.5 Y= 6.5 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 130.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted Flow Rate, v 44 619 346 103 1073 361 303 68 86 102 Lane Group Capacity, c 191 1144 925 191 1156 436 450 390 191 199 vlc Ratio, X 0.23 0.54 0.37 0.54 0.93 0.83 0.67 0.17 0.45 0.51 Total Green Ratio, g/C 0.11 0.34 0.58 0.11 0.34 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.11 0.11 Uniform Delay, d 53.1 34.8 14.4 54.9 41.5 46.4 44.3 38.6 54.4 54.8 Progression Factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay Calibration, k 0.11 0.14 0.11 0.14 0.44 0.37 0.25 0.11 0.11 0.12 Incremental Delay, d 0.6 0.5 0.3 3.1 12.8 12.5 3.9 0.2 1.7 2.3 Initial Queue Delay, d 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay 53.7 35.3 14.6 58.0 54.3 58.9 48.2 38.8 56.1 57.0 Lane Group LOS D D B E D E D D E E Approach Delay 29.0 54.6 52.6 56.6 Approach LOS C D D E Intersection Delay 45.9 X = 0.79 Intersection LOS D Copyright 02007 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved HCS + 174 Version 53 Generated: 9/8/2010 9:17 AM • file: / /C: \Documents and Settings\nu \Local Settings \Temp \s2k25F.tmp 9 /8/2010 D-2 Detailed Report Page 1 of 1 • HCS +' DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst Intersection SR 434 & McLeods Agency or Co. GMB Way /Doran 8!v Area Type All other areas Date Performed 3/23 /2010 Jurisdiction Time Period Existing AM Peak Analysis Year 2010 Project ID Existing AM Peak Volume and Timing Input - EB WB NIB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes, Ni 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 Lane Group L TR L TR LT R LT _ R Volume, V (vph) 29 891 1 7 1339 36 4 1 7 23 0 16 % Heavy Vehicles, %HV 2 7 2 2 7 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Pretimed (P) or Actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start -up Lost Time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type, AT 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /Metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial Unmet Demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike I RTOR Volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking Maneuvers, Nm Buses Stopping, Na 0 0 0 _ 0 _ 0 0 _ 0 0 Min. Time for Pedestrians, Gp 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 • Phasing Excl. Left Thru & RT 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G= 15.0 G= 56.0 G= G= G= 18.5 G= G= G= Timing Y= 7 Y= 7 Y= Y= Y= 6.5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 110.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NIB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted Flow Rate, v 33 1025 8 1580 6 8 26 18 Lane Group Capacity, c 241 1721 241 1717 269 266 237 266 v/c Ratio, X 0.14 0.60 0.03 0.92 0.02 0.03 0.11 0.07 Total Green Ratio, g/C 0.14 0.51 0.14 0.51 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 Uniform Delay, d 41.8 19.0 41.2 24.9 38.2 38.2 38.8 38.5 Progression Factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay Calibration, k 0.11 0.18 0.11 0.44 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay, d 0.3 0.6 0.1 8.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 Initial Queue Delay, d 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay 42.1 19.6 41.3 33.5 38.2 38.3 39.0 38.6 - Lane Group LOS D 8 D C D D 0 D Approach Delay 20.3 33.5 38.3 38.8 Approach LOS C C D D Intersection Delay 28.5 X = 0.62 Intersection LOS C Copyright (0 2007 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved HCS + T11 Version 5.3 Generated: 9/012010 9:17 AM • file: / /C: \Documents and Settings\mrichardson \Local Settings \Temp \s2k270.tmp 9/8/2010 I) -3 Two -Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Intersection SR 434 & Gardena Avenue Agency /Co. GMB Jurisdiction Date Performed 3/23/2010 Analysis Year 2010 ,Analysis Time Period Existing AM Peak Project Description Existing AM Peak East/West Street: SR 434 North /South Street: Gardena Avenue Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound _ Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 7 853 0 0 1110 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 7 927 0 0 1206 0 (vehih) Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 - - 2 -- - Median Type Raised curb - RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 0 1 2 _ 0 Configuration L T TR L T Upstream Signal 0 0 - Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 1 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 0.92 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 1 0 0 0 III veh/h Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 0 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration I R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R v (veh/h) 7 0 1 C (m) (veh /h) 574 733 596 vie 0.01 0.00 0.00 95% queue length 0.04 0.00 0.01 , Control Delay (s /veh) 11.3 9.9 11.1 LOS 8 A B Approach Delay (s /veh) -- -- 11.1 Approach LOS -- -- B Copyright 0 2007 University of Florida, Alt Rights Reserved HCS + Version 5.3 Generated: 9/812010 9:18 AM IP file: / /C:\Documents and Settings\mrichardson \Local Settings \Temp \u21Q77.tmp 9/8/2010 T -u Two -Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 1111 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Intersection Tuscora Drive Agency /Co. GMB Jurisdiction Date Performed 3/23/2010 Analysis Year 2010 Analysis Time Period Existing AM Peak Project Description Existing AM Peak East/West Street: SR 434 North/South Street: Tuscora Drive Intersection Orientation: East - West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 0 838 28 15 1059 Peak - Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 882 29 15 1114 0 (veh /h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 — — 2 -- — Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 0 1 2 0 Configuration L T TR L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 69 66 Peak - Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 • Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 72 0 69 0 0 0 (veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 0 2 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L L R v (veh/h) 0 15 72 69 C (m) (veh/h) 623 743 242 603 v/c 0.00 0.02 0.30 0.11 95% queue length 0.00 0.06 1.20 0.39 Control Delay (s /veh) 10.8 9.9 26.1 11.7 LOS B A D B Approach Delay (s /veh) -- -- 19.1 Approach LOS -- -- C Copyright © 2007 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved HCS + Version 5.3 Generated: 9/8/2010 9:18 AM • file: / /C: \Documents and Settings\mrichardson \Local Settings \Temp \u2k274.tmp 9/8/2010 17 -3" Two -Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 II I TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Intersection SR 434 & Cliff Rose Drive Agency /Co. GMB Jurisdiction Date Performed 3/23 /2010 Analysis Year 2010 Analysis Time Period Existing AM Peak Project Description Existing AM Peak East/West Street: SR 434 North /South Street: Cliff Rose Drive Intersection Orientation: East - West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Ma'or Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L _ T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 28 1214 0 5 1646 18 Peak - Hour Factor, PHF 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 31 1364 0 5 1849 20 (veh /h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 – _ -- 2 – – _ Median Type Raised curb . RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 0 1 2 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR Upstream Signal 0 _ 0 , Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 18 3 Peak - Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 0.89 1.00 1.00 0.89 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 20 0 0 3 • (veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 0 0 2 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach I N — N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 Configuration R R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 _ 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R R v (veh /h) 31 5 20 3 C (m) (veh /h) 318 500 448 320 v/c 0.10 0.01 0.04 0.01 95% queue length 0.32 0.03 0.14 0.03 Control Delay (s /veh) 17.5 12.3 13.4 16.4 LOS C 8 B C Approach Delay (s/veh) -- -- 13.4 16.4 Approach LOS – -- B C Copyright © 2007 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS + Version 5.3 Generated: 918/2010 9:19 AM IP file: / /C:\Documents and Settings\mrichardson \Local Settings \Temp \u2k27A.tmp 9/8/2010 17-G • Existing PM Peak Hour Conditions S Detailed Report Page 1 of 1 0 HCS +" DETAILED REPORT General information Site information Analyst Intersection SR 434 & Tuskawilla Road Agency or Co. GMB Area Type Al! other areas Date Performed 3/23 /2010 Jurisdiction Time Period Existing PM Peak Analysis Year 2010 Project ID Existing PM Peak Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes, Ni 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 Lane Group L T R L TR L LT R L TR Volume, V (vph) 16 924 546 93 758 31 413 84 57 79 113 4 % Heavy Vehicles, %HV 2 7 2 2 5 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or Actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start -up Lost Time, h 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /Metering, l 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial Unmet Demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR Volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking Maneuvers, Nm Buses Stopping, Ns 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Time for Pedestrians, Gp 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left Thru & RT 03 04 SB Only NB Only 07 08 • G= 15.0 G= 45.0 G= G= G= 22.0 G= 32.0 G= G= Timing Y= 6.5 Y= 6.5 Y= Y= Y= 6.5 Y= 6.5 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 140.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted Flow Rate, v 17 973 575 98 831 305 218 60 83 123 Lane Group Capacity, c 190 1087 871 190 1102 405 413 362 278 291 v/c Ratio, X 0.09 0.90 0.66 0.52 0.75 0.75 0.53 0.17 0.30 0.42 Total Green Ratio, gIC 0.11 0.32 0.55 0.11 0.32 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.16 0.16 Uniform Delay, d 56.3 45.3 22.3 59.1 42.5 50.3 47.4 43.3 52.2 53.3 Progression Factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay Calibration, k 0.11 0.42 0.23 0.12 0.31 0.31 0.13 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay, d 0.2 9.8 1.9 2.4 3.0 7.8 1.3 0.2 0.6 1.0 Initial Queue Delay, d 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay 56.5 55.0 24.1 61.5 45.5 58.1 48.6 43.5 52.8 54.3 Lane Group LOS E E C E D E D D D D Approach Delay 43.7 47.2 53.1 53.7 Approach LOS D D 0 D Intersection Delay 47.0 X = 0.71 Intersection LOS 0 Copyright © 2007 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS + Version 5.3 Generated: 9/8/2010 9:19 AM III file: / /C:\Documents and Settings\rnrichardson \Loc l Settings \Tetnp \s2k28B.tmp 9/8/2010 Detailed Report Page 1 of 1 • HCS +" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst Intersection SR 434 & McLeods Way /Doran BIv Agency or Co. GMB Area Type All other areas Date Performed 3/23/2010 Jurisdiction Time Period Existing PM Peak Analysis Year 2010 Project ID Existing PM Peak Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB _ SB LT TH - RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes, Ni 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 Lane Group L TR L _TR LT R LT R Volume, V (vph) 60 1493 8 8 1147 22 2 0 5 19 1 9 Heavy Vehicles, %HV 2 7 2 2 7 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Pretimed (P) or Actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up Lost Time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/Metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 m 1.000 j1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial Unmet Demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR Volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N O N N 0 N N 0 N Parking Maneuvers, Nm Buses Stopping, Ns 0 _ 0 0 0 _ 0 0 0 0 Min. Time for Pedestrians, Gp 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 III Phasing Excl. Left Thru & RT 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 Timing G= 15.0 G= 56.0 G= G= G= 18.5 G= G= G= Y= 7 Y= 7 Y= Y= Y= 6.5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 110.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH , RT Adjusted Flow Rate, v 64 1597 9 1243 ' 2 5 21 10 Lane Group Capacity, c 241 1720 241 1718 271 266 246 266 v/c Ratio, X 0.27 0.93 0.04 0.72 0.01 0.02 0.09 0.04 Total Green Ratio, g/C 0.14 0.51 0.14 0.51 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 Uniform Delay, d 42.6 25.1 41.2 21.0 38.1 38.2 38.6 38.3 Progression Factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay Calibration, k 0.11 0.44 0.11 0.28 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay, d 0.6 9.4 0.1 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.1 Initial Queue Delay, d 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay 43.2 34.5 41.3 22.5 38.1 38.2 38.8 38.4 Lane Group LOS D C D C D D D D Approach Delay 34.8 22.7 38.2 38.6 Approach LOS C C D 0 Intersection Delay 29.7 c = 0.64 Intersection LOS C Copyright © 2007 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved HCS +TM Version 5.3 Generated: 9/8/2010 9:20 AM III file: / /C:\Documents and Settings\mrichardson \Local Settings \Temp \s2k29C.tmp 9/8/2010 -5 Two -Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 4110 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Intersection Tuscora Drive Agency /Co. GMB Jurisdiction Date Performed 3/23/2010 Analysis Year 2010 Analysis Time Period Existing PM Peak Project Description Existing PM Peak Eastlwest Street: SR 434 North /South Street: Tuscora Drive Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound _ Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh /h) 0 1228 63 54 1033 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 1279 65 56 1076 0 (veh /h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 — — 2 — — Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 0 1 2 0 • - Configuration L T TR L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 54 33 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.96 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 56 0 34 0 0 0 • (veh /h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 0 2 0 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L L R v (vehlh) 0 56 56 34 C (m) (veh /h) 644 509 151 454 v/c 0.00 0.11 0.37 0.07 95% queue length 0.00 0.37 1.56 0.24 _ Control Delay (s /veh) 10.6 12.9 42.3 13.6 LOS B B E B Approach Delay (slveh) -- -- 31.4 Approach LOS -- -- D Copyright © 2007 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS + Version 5.3 Generated: 9/812010 9:20 AM III tile: / /C: \Documents and Settings \mrichardson \Local Settings \Temp \u2k29F.tmp 9/8/2010 0 -to Two -Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 IIII TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information • Analyst Intersection SR 434 & Gardena Avenue Agency /Co. GMB Jurisdiction Date Performed 3/23/2010 Analysis Year 2010 Analysis Time Period Existing PM Peak Project Description Existing PM Peak East/West Street: SR 434 North/South Street: Gardena Avenue Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 _ 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh /h) 54 1270 1 1 1088 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 57 1351 1 1 1157 0 (veh /h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 — — 2 — — Median Type - Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 0 1 2 0 Configuration L T TR L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street _ Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh /h) 3 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 • (veh /h) Percent Heavy Vehicles ______ 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R v (vehlh) 57 1 3 C (m) (veh/h) 600 505 451 vlc 0.09 0.00 0.01 95% queue length 0.31 0.01 0.02 Control Delay (s /veh) 11.6 12.1 13.0 LOS B B B Approach Delay (slveh) -- — 13.0 Approach LOS -- -- 8 Copyright © 2007 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS +TM Version 5.3 Generated: 9/8/2010 9:20 AM III file: / /C:\Documents and Settings \mrichardson \Local Settings \Temp \u2k2A2.tmp 9/8/2010 a —II Two -Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 • TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Intersection SR 434 & Cliff Rose Drive Agency /Co. GMB Jurisdiction , Date Performed 3/23 /2010 Analysis Year 2010 Analysis Time Period Existing PM Peak Project Description Existing PM Peak East/West Street: SR 434 North /South Street: Cliff Rose Drive Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh /h) 116 1819 0 8 1529 94 Peak -Hour Factor, PH F 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0,94 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 123 1935 0 8 1626 100 (veh /h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 — -- 2 -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 0 1 2 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh /h) 2 56 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 0.94 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 2 0 0 59 0 (veh /h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 0 0 2 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 Configuration R R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R R v(veh /h) 123 8 2 I 59 C (m) (veh /h) 362 300 306 352 v/c 0.34 0.03 0.01 0.17 95% queue length 1.47 0.08 0.02 0.59 Control Delay (slveh) 20.0 17.3 16.8 17.3 ____ LOS C C C C Approach Delay (s /veh) -- -- 16,8 17.3 Approach LOS -- -- C C Copyright © 2007 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS + Version 5.3 Generated: 918/2010 9:20 AM • file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \truichardson \Local Settings \Temp \u2k2A5.tmp 9 /8/2010 1) --12 Future YR 2012 AM Peak Hour Conditions - 7- t3 Detailed Report Page 1 of 1 • HCS +'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Analyst Intersection SR 434 & Tuskawilla Road Agency or Co. GMB Area Type Al! other areas Date Performed 9/3/2010 Jurisdiction Time Period Future AM Peak Analysis Year 2012 Project ID Future AM Peak Volume and Timing Input _ EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes, Nt 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 Lane Group L T R L TR L LT R L TR Volume, V (vph) 44 611 345 106 938 73 449 171 65 86 97 4 % Heavy Vehicles, %HV 2 7 2 2 5 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Pretimed (P) or Actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start -up Lost Time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /Metering, I 1.000 1.000 1,000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial Unmet Demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike l RTOR Volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking I Grade I Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking Maneuvers, Nm Buses Stopping, 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Pedestrians, Min. Time for 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left Thru & RT 03 04 SB Only NB Only 07 08 • Timing G= 14.0 G= 44.0 G= G= G= 14.0 G= 32.0 G= G= Y= 6.5 Y= 6.5 Y= Y= Y= 6.5 Y= 6.5 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 130.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH 1 RT Adjusted Flow Rate, v 47 657 371 114 1087 362 305 70 92 108 Lane Group Capacity, c 191 1144 925 191 1156 436 450 390 191 199 v/c Ratio, X 0.25 0.57 0.40 0.60 0.94 0.83 0.68 0.18 0.48 0.54 Total Green Ratio, g/C 0.11 0.34 0.58 0.11 0.34 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.11 0.11 Uniform Delay, d 53.2 35.3 14.7 55.3 41.7 46.4 44.3 38.6 54.6 55.0 Progression Factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay Calibration, k 0.11 0.17 0.11 0.19 0.45 0.37 0.25 0.11 0.11 0.14 Incremental Delay, d 0.7 0.7 0.3 5.0 14.5 12.7 4.1 0.2 1.9 3.0 Initial Queue Delay, d 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay 53.8 36.0 14.9 60.3 56.2 59.2 48.4 38.9 56.5 58.0 Lane Group LOS D D 8 E E E D D E E Approach Delay 29.5 56.6 52.8 57.3 , Approach LOS C E D E Intersection Delay 46.7 X = 0.81 Intersection LOS D Copyright © 2007 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS + TPA Version 5.3 Generated. 9/8/2010 9:21 AM • tile: / /C:ADocuments and Settings \mrichardson \Local Settings \Temp \s2k2B6.tmp 9/8/2010 -0'4 Detailed Report Page 1 of 1 • General Information HCS +° DETAILED REPORT Site Information Analyst Intersection SR 434 & McLeods Y Way /Doran Blv Agency or Co. GMB Area Type All other areas Date Performed 9/3/2010 Jurisdiction Time Period Future AM Peak Analysis Year 2012 Project ID Future AM Peak Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH ' RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes, Ni 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 Lane Group L TR L TR ' LT R LT R Volume, V (vph) 31 945 1 8 1382 38 ' 4 1 7 22 0 15 % Heavy Vehicles, %HV 2 7 2 2 7 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 Pretimed (P) or Actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start-up Lost Time, It 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of Effective Green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type, AT 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 ,30 Filtering /Metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial Unmet Demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR Volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width '12.0 12.0 12.0 ,12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking Maneuvers, Nm Buses Stopping, Ns 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Time for Pedestrians, Gp _ 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 IIII0 Phasing Timing Excl. Left Thru & RT 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G= 1.5.0 G= 56.0 G= G= G= 18.5 G= G= G= Y= 7 Y= 7 Y= Y= Y= 6.5 _Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T_ 0.25 _ Cycle Length, C = 110.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB _ NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT , TH RT LT , TH RT Adjusted Flow Rate, v 36 1087 9 1633 6 8 25 17 Lane Group Capacity, c 241 1721 241 1717 269 266 238 266 v/c Ratio, X 0.15 0.63 0.04 0.95 0.02 0.03 0.11 0.06 Total Green Ratio, g/C 0.14 0.51 4 0.14 0.51 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 Uniform Delay, d 41.9 19.5 41.2 25.7 38.2 38.2 - 38.7 38.5 Progression Factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay Calibration, k 0.11 0.21 0.11 0.46 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay, d 0.3 0.8 0.1 12.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 10.1 Initial Queue Delay, d 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay 42.2 20.3 41.3 37.8 38.2 38.3 38.9 38.6 Lane Group LOS o C D D D D D D Approach Delay 21.0 37.9 38.3 38.8 Approach LOS C D D D Intersection Delay 31.2 X. = 0.64 Intersection LOS C - Cop © 2007 University of Florida, AS Rights Reserved HC; t" Version 5.3 Gon.erated. 9/8/2010 9:21 AM • tile: / /C:ADocuments and Settings \mrichardson \Local Settings \TempAs2k2C7.tmp 9/8/2010 - D. If- Two -Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 II I TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Intersection SR 434 & Gardena Avenue Agency /Co. GMB Jurisdiction , Date Performed 9/3/2010 Analysis Year 2012 Analysis Time Period Future AM Peak Project Description Future AM Peak East/West Street: SR 434 North /South Street: Gardena Avenue Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and A_ djustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh /h) 40 868 0 0 1099 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 43 943 0 0 1194 0 (veh /h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 2 -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 0 1 2 0 Configuration L T TR L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume veh /h 1 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 0.92 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 1 0 0 0 • (veh /h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 0 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R v (veh /h) 43 0 1 — C (m) (veh /h) 580 723 590 vlc 0.07 0.00 0.00 95% queue length 0.24 0.00 0.01 Control Delay (s /veh) 11.7 10.0 11.1 LOS B A 8 Approach Delay (s /veh) -- -- 11.1 Approach LOS -- -- 8 Copyright t7 2007 University of Florida. All Rights Reserved HCS + Version 5.3 Generated: 902010 9:22 AM • file: / /C:ADoctunents and Settings \Inrichardson \I,ocal Settings \Temp \u2k2D0.tmp 9/8/2010 3)-713 Two -Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 • TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Intersection Tuscora Drive Agency /Co. GMB Jurisdiction Date Performed 9/3/2010 Analysis Year 2012 Analysis Time Period _ Future AM Peak Project Description Future AM Peak East/West Street: SR 434 North /South Street: Tuscora Drive Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh /h) 0 848 32 15 1050 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 892 33 15 1105 0 (veh /h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 2 -- _ -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 0 1 2 0 Configuration L T TR L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh /h) 67 63 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 70 0 66 0 0 0 • (vehlh) Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 0 2 0 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage _ 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration _ L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound _ Westbound Northbound _ Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L L R v (veh /h) 0 15 70 66 C (m) (vehlh) 628 734 240 598 vlc 0.00 0.02 0.29 0.11 95% queue length 0.00 0.06 1.17 0.37 Control Delay (s /veh) 10.7 10.0 26.1 11.8 LOS 6 B D e Approach Delay (s /veh) -- -- 19. Approach LOS -- -- C Copyright (8) 2007 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS + Version 5.3 Generated 918)2010 9 - .21 AM • tile: / /C:ADocuments and Settings\mrichardson \Local Settings \Temp \u21c2CA.tmp 9/8/2010 Two -Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 III TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information — Analyst Intersection SR 434 8 Cliff Rose Drive Agency /Co. GMB Jurisdiction Date Performed 9/3/2010 Analysis Year 2012 , Analysis Time Period Future AM Peak Project Description Future AM Peak East/West Street: SR 434 North /South Street: Cliff Rose Drive Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh /h) 29 1250 0 5 1673 18 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 32 1404 0 5 1879 20 (vehlh) Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- 2 -- – Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 0 1 2 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh /h) 11 3 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 0.89 1.00 1.00 0.89 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 12 0 0 3 • (veh /h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 0 0 2 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 Configuration R R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L R R v (veh /h) 32 5 12 3 f C (rn) (veh /h) 310 482 436 314 ■lc 0.10 0.01 0.03 0.01 95% queue length 0.34 0.03 0.08 0.03 Control Delay (s /veh) 17.9 12.5 13.5 16.6 LOS C B B C Approach Delay (s /veh) - 13.5 16.6 Approach LOS -- -- B C Copyright © 2007 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+ Version 5.3 Generated: 9/8/2010 9'.22 AM • file: / /C:ADocuments and Settings \rurichardson \Local Settings \Temp \u2k2D3.tmp 9/8/2010 -0- Ii Two-Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 • TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information - Analyst Intersection SR 434 & Project Entrance Agency /Co. GMB Jurisdiction Date Performed 9/6/2010 Analysis Year 2012 Analysis Time Period Future AM Peak Project Description Future AM Peak EastiWest Street: SR 434 North /South Street: Project Entrance Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh /h) 729 8 3 1114 , Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 767 8 3 1172 0 (veh /h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 2 — -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes I 0 2 0 1 2 0 Configuration T TR L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T _ R Volume (veh /h) 46 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 48 0 0 0 0 • (veh /h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 0 2 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 _ 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration _ R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L R v (veh /h) 3 _ 48 C (m) (veh/h) I 837 658 vlc 0.00 0.07 95% queue length 0.01 0.24 Control Delay (s /veh) 9.3 10.9 LOS A B Approach Delay (s /veh) -- -- 10.9 Approach LOS ____ B Copyright 0) 2007 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS + Version 5.3 Generated: 9/8 /2010 912 AM • file: / /C:ADocuments and Settings \mrichardson \Local Settings \Temp \u21c2CD.tmp 9/8/2010 D -IS Future YR 2012 PM Peak Hour Conditions D -zo Detailed Report Page 1 of 1 HCS +° DETAILED REPORT . • General Information Site Information Analyst intersection SR 434 & Tuskawilla Road Agency or Co. GMB Area Type All other areas Date Performed 9/3/2010 Jurisdiction Time Period Future PM Peak Analysis Year 2012 Project ID Future PM Peak Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH ' RT LT TH RT Number of Lanes, Ni 1 2 1 1 2 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 Lane Group L T R L TR L LT R L TR Volume, V (vph) 16 969 569 100 777 33 424 86 68 88 123 4 % Heavy Vehicles, %HV 2 7 2 2 5 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 Pretimed (P) or Actuated (A) A A A A A A A A A A A A Start -up Lost Time, It 2.0 2.0 2.0 , 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 _Extension of Effective Green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 , 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival Type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 • Unit Extension, UE 3,0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3,0 3,0 _ 3.0 • Filtering/Metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial Unmet Demand, Qe 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR Volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking Maneuvers, Nm , Buses Stopping, NB 0 0 0 0 0 _ 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Time for Pedestrians, Gp 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left Thru & RT 03 04 SB Only NB Only 07 08 G= 15.0 G= 45.0 G= G= Gm 22.0 G= 32.0 G= G= Timing Y= 6.5 Y= 6.5 Y= Y= Y= 6.5 Y= 6.5 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 140.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT _ RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted Flow Rate, v 17 1020 599 105 853 312 225 72 93 133 Lane Group Capacity, c 190 1087 871 190 1102 405 413 362 278 291 v/c Ratio, X 0.09 0.94 0.69 0.55 0.77 0.77 0.54 0.20 0.33 0.46 Total Green Ratio, g/C 0.11 0.32 0.55 0.11 0.32 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.16 0.16 Uniform Delay, d 56.3 46.2 22.8 59.3 42.9 50.6 47.6 43.6 52.5 53.6 Progression Factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay Calibration, k 0.11 0.45 0.26 0.15 0.32 0.32 0.14 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay, d 0.2 14.8 2.3 3.5 3.5 8.6 1.5 0.3 0.7 1.1 Initial Queue Delay, d 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay 56.5 61.0 25.1 62.8 46.4 59.4 49.1 43.9 53.2 54.7 Lane Group LOS E E C E 0 E D D D D Approach Delay 47.8 48.2 53.7 54.1 Approach LOS D D D D Intersection Delay 49.4 X = 0.75 intersection LOS D Copyright © 2007 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS + version 5.3 Generated: 9/8/2010 9 :23 AM tile: / /C: \Documents and Settings\mrichardson \Local Settings \Temp \s2k2E5.tmp 9/8/2010 D-7 Detailed Report Page 1 of 1 HCS +" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site information Analyst Intersection SR ay/ /Doran Biv MeLeods Agency or Co. GMB Area Type All other areas Date Performed 9/3/2010 Jurisdiction Time Period Future PM Peak Analysis Year 2012 Project ID Future PM Peak Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH ' RT LT TH RT ' LT TH RT Number of Lanes, Ni 1 2 0 1 2 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 Lane Group L TR L TR LT R LT R Volume, V (vph) , 63 1546 9 9 1209 23 ' 2 ' 0 -, 5 - 18 1 12 % Heavy Vehicles, %HV 2 , 7 , 2 2 7 2 2 , 2 2 2 2 1 2 Peak - Hour Factor, PHF 0,94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0,94 ,0.94 Pretimed (P) or Actuated (A) A ' A A A A A A A A A A A Start -up Lost Time, Ii . 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 . 2.0 • 2.0 Extension of Effective Green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 • 2.0 2.0 ' 2.0 Arrival Type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit Extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /Metering, I ;1.000 1.000 , 1.000 1.000 1.000 ,1.000 ' 1.000 '1.000 Initial Unmet Demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR Volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width 12.0 '12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Parking / Grade I Parking N 0 i N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking Maneuvers, N. Buses Stopping, Ne 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Min. Time for Pedestrians, Gp 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.2 Phasing Excl. Left Thru & RT 4 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G= 15.0 G= 56.0 G= G= G= 18.5 G= G= G= Timing Y= 7 Y= 7 Y= Y= Y= 6.5 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 110.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted Flow Rate, v 67 1655 10 1310 2 5 20 13 Lane Group Capacity, c 241 1720 241 1718 271 266 247 266 v/c Ratio, X 0.28 0.96 0.04 0. 76 0.01 0.02 0.08 0.05 Total Green Ratio, g/C 0.14 0.51 0.14 0.51 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.17 Uniform Delay, d 42.6 26.0 41.3 21.7 38.1 38.2 38.6 38.4 Progression Factor, PF 1.000 1.000 • 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay Calibration, k 0.11 0.47 0.11 0.31 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.11 Incremental Delay, d 0.6 13.8 0.1 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 Initial Queue Delay, d 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Control Delay 43. 39.8 41.3 23.7 38.1 38.2 38.7 38.4 Lane Group LOS D D D C D D D D Approach Delay 39.9 23.9 38.2 38.6 Approach LOS D C D D Intersection Delay 33.0 X = 0.67 Intersection LOS C Copyright © 2007 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS• Version 5.3 Generated: 9/812010 923 AM file: / /C: \Documents and Settingslm.richardson \Local Settings \Temp \s2k2F6.tmp 9/8/2010 D -1Z Two -Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Intersection SR 434 & Gardena Avenue Agency /Co. GMB Jurisdiction Date Performed 9/3/2010 Analysis Year 2012 Analysis Time Period Future PM Peak Project Description Future PM Peak East/West Street: SR 434 North /South Street: Gardena Avenue Intersection Orientation: East - West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound _ Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 , L T R L T R Volume ( veh/h) 74 1261 1 1 1098 Peak - Hour Factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 78 1341 1 1 1168 0 ( veh/h) , Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- — 2 — -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 0 1 2 0 Configuration L T TR L T Upstream Signal 0 0 v Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 _ 9 10 11 _ 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 3 Peak - Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 0.94 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 3 0 0 0 ( veh/h) . Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 0 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L • R . v (veh /h) 78 1 3 C (m) (veh /h) 594 509 459 v/c 0.13 0.00 0.01 95% queue length 0.45 0.01 0.02 Control Delay (s /veh) 12.0 12.1 13.0 LOS 8 B B Approach Delay (s /veh) -- -- _ 13.0 Approach LOS -- — 8 Copyright ® 2007 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS + Version 5.3 Generated: 9/8/2010 9:24 AM file: / /C: \Docmnents and Settings \nrichardson \Local Settings\Temp\u2k2FF.trnp 9/8/2010 (7 -73 Two -Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst intersection Tuscora Drive , Agency /Co. GMB Jurisdiction Date Performed 9/3/2010 Analysis Year 2012 Analysis Time Period Future PM Peak Project Description Future PM Peak East/West Street: SR 434 North/South Street: Tuscora Drive Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 0 1219 65 55 1040 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 1.00 - Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 1269 67 57 1083 0 (veh/h) , Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 - - 2 - - Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 0 1 2 0 Configuration L T - TR L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 55 32 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.96 1.00 0.96 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 57 0 33 0 0 0 (veh /h) - Percent Heavy Vehides 2 0 2 0 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration L R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L L L R v (veh/h) 0 57 57 33 _ C (m) (veh/h) 640 512 152 456 vlc 0.00 0.11 0.38 0.07 95% queue length 0.00 0.37 1.59 0.23 Control Delay (slveh) 10.6 12.9 42.2 13.5 LOS B 6 E B Approach Delay (s /veh) - -- 31.7 Approach LOS - -- D Copyright © 2007 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS + Version 5.3 Generated: 918/2010 9:23 AM file: / /C: \Documents and Settings\rnrichardson \Local Settings \Temp \u2k2F9.tmp 9/8/2010 7 -uf Two -Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Intersection SR 434 & Cliff Rose Drive Agency /Co. GMB Jurisdiction Date Performed 9/3/2010 Analysis Year 2012 Analysis Time Period Future PM Peak Project Description Future PM Peak East/West Street: SR 434 North /South Street: Cliff Rose Drive Intersection Orientation: East -West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 118 1850 0 9 1564 97 , Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 125 1968 0 9 1663 103 (veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 — — 2 -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 1 2 0 1 2 0 Configuration L T TR L T TR Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 _ 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh /h) 1 2 54 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 0.94 — 1.00 1.00 0.94 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 2 0 0 57 (veh /h) , Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 2 0 0 2 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 1 Configuration R R Decay, Queue Length, and Level of Service _ Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration 1. L R R v (vehlh) 125 9 2 57 C(m)(veh/h) 349 291 300 343 v/c 0.36 0.03 0.01 0.17 95% queue length 1.58 0.10 0.02 0.59 Control Delay (s /veh) 21.0 17.8 17.1 17.6 LOS C C C C Approach Delay (s /veh) -- — 17.1 17.6 Approach LOS -- — C C _ Copyright ® 2007 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS + l Version 5.3 Generated: 9/8/2010 9:24 AM file: / /C:\Documents and Settings \mrichardson\Local Settings \Temp\u2k302.tmp 9/8/2010 i -ZS' Two -Way Stop Control Page 1 of 1 TWO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Analyst Intersection SR 434 & Project Entrance Agency /Co. GMB Jurisdiction Date Performed 9/6/2010 Analysis Year 2012 Analysis Time Period Future PM Peak Project Description Future PM Peak East/West Street: SR 434 North/South Street: Project Entrance Intersection Orientation: East - West Study Period (hrs): 0.25 — Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments major Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh /h) 1058 36 14 909 • Peak - Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 1113 37 14 956 0 (veh /h) _ Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 — — 2 — — Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 1 2 0 Configuration T TR L T Upstream Signal 0 0 Minor Street Northbound Southbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh /h) 27 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 1.00 0.95 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 28 0 0 0 (veh /h) _ Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 0 2 0 0 0 Percent Grade ( %) 0 0 Flared Approach N N _ Storage 0 0 , RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 1 0 0 0 Configuration R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L _ R v (veh /h) 14 28 C (m) (veh /h) 603 516 vlc 0.02 0.05 95% queue length 0.07 0.17 Control Delay (s /veh) 11.1 12.4 LOS B B Approach Delay (s /veh) -- -- 12.4 Approach LOS -- -- B Copyright © 2007 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS + Version 5.3 Generated: 9/8/2010 9:24 AM file: / /C: \Documents and Settings \mrichardson \Local Settings \Temp \u2k2FC.tmp 9/8/2010 APPENDMX "E" Vested Trips Derivation Vested Trip Derivation Development # of units Daily AM Peak PM Peak Grandeville 152 Apartments 1,045 102 79 Jesup's Reserve 68 townhomes 460 38 44 HSP Office Complex 24,000 SF office building 445 60 106 Jesup's Landing 185 townhomes 1,099 [00 85 Artesian Park 103 townhomes 660 53 62 West End Center 24,390 SF office building 451 61 107 TOTALS 4,160 414 483 Sources: GAO Engineers & Planners June-I 0 City of Winter Springs { Date Created :9 /8/2010. Project Number: 10- 0-29.02. ; .. £Y 2 a; . e.,1 V e<gs o w' i " t•• ",' :9 4 `, `.,e s . "' " 3,, L,� .. ppi §> ? , , E W E � '' x r a '' ,, � r 3r x, # x �� a � � - Grandeville r ' „, " 1` p ' i N.T.S. :. ® - Jesus Reserve ., t • , z � , HSP Office Complex 434 r ® q ■ ' . ; - Jesup Landing ,, ' ' ti , *� ;e,^' ©- Artesian Park r t y b ��'� West End Center E f . _ 'r g fit Site Locat ti E J , ?� a'•.” r w t s fGS'ua 1 ' •�• fl ¢fir , ■ 0. 14F ,..,' 110), , . , ,, -, 0,11: P // ) . - . :,: ) I ,' (---------- ' : i S k ... , nN ld. ?,:. # .,.",i F' t.. L _,.6: , .e �'.. eaKNY"ma yr sw' YaP, K, f .tP ' ^, P Y >i Irf f .:•: ff .F' '.. N' n,t „_, fl; ,d sfrt„ , ..^�: W �', G. . PF.M „. , t. a t N t d.,�t ; .,t” f',,,ty„ .,'?X.?Pi' er '', "W , " " c i` `b'k'” GMB Engineers & Planners, Inc. Figure E - 2 602 East Livi , ston St eet � n r Tawn Par A artr nen a t s �;F a.,. p : , k ,. <K� ..: : Q e o "atlons F , ;;Fb 'f ; n,: +: • btY !;:;:,,,'.f..' 1° ae-%w ". ., ?' 'K3 C . .' i, Y.a, < 'u. - A 9 ' : a - - < ©r r% Florida 8,133 _ .�, r � "� ��° , � w � � � . u, x .. rf . .,i. s' a '"'�, s� ', •ref . ;.a. Y� ` a : m t- x ��'��`�." GaiN + „ . Jv - � '� 1N � . e' .,s: t � m 73 � . � ° >., r°7� . . _ .. ,�.::. r f , e. �An . ar. 1 d.� r. -<;s< n. «, ' , 3 , . ,ar < a.> '.� < z ,...?,',,7, a � APPENDIX "F" Historical Roadway Counts and Growth Trends Analysis LDUU ZOU t '4.UU'- GLJU3 GCAli -r J) WC/(g L.fIV•! '4'U(Ji. ,•r< 420 - VVinier Sonngs Blvd tO SR 434 " '!'U - ' U U U U - U ' U' V _ •U SR 426 ' - Lake Jesup Ave to SR 434 . 15.325 17 637 610 982 19 812 18,979 19,331' '16_347 13857 SR 434 Orange County Line to Chapman Rd 30,962 r 32,054 , '1'5,''''''i33','075572. > r: 0 35.015 35;394 307942 "37944 'SR 434 .. Chaunian Flu to Mitchell Hammock '0 U 0' t 0 s '0 " 0 `0`` • 0 .0 .SR 434 Chapman Rd to Alataya Woods Blvd 23;171, 24209 ''' •`(24;755 0 0 k' 27498 _ '27`241 3:7851_ 32268 _ SR 43434 ! Alataya Wuuds to Michell Hammock Rd 27,550 27 985 ;!,°'t 28,7381 ".'t 0 0; 25707 ,:;25;565: ^21 807 :: 28744 - SR 434 Mitchell Hammock Rd i0 SR 420 -CR 4 19 17,714' 18,530 IgniZEZZI 0 n ' ' '17,257 r; 17 952. 11741 15826 ' SR 434 SR 4426-CR 426-CR 419 to DeLeon 5t 14 642 17.007 •r:: 8;16,518, +: 18,656 19;104:;. 17,783 18:134: 14,713 18442 SR 434 ' . ' DeLeon St to E -W Expressway 16 338 19,574 ''':',"-":"20',26e`:',! 20991 20.159 20,337 21 043 19,500 .::21399 SR 434 E _W Expressway to Springs Ave "19,394" 22,9 / '1' 734 Y 24025 22 091 23.400 >'24:891' 22,390 >'::22743 '- 5R'434 ;, . ... Sprinr�a_Ave+- lu,lu »kriwilland . ,,• - 18,720` '20 v;, ".21168x.fFi • 4 11;835` "21' 008';' 'x 2350+ . 26i010• ,.c2.3b6H ' <r26130' k 'SR 434. SR 419 to US 17-92 0 ' : I 0 > 0 ':' 0 0..:::!r: 0 0 c 0 0 , SR'434 LunkelAllie kd to SR::410 . -:.. 32,60T0w ` ° ;' ' 2') B3'i '`29;889 {130'874 s , t5as844 .. " . _..�.......,::as�_W......__.... . -._..� ,.:.s'D'1,9164'.. :x8r.188i:. �, r a6052 ,.;: ^e SR 434 SR 419 to Belle Ave 24,983. 25,456 "26 071 r', 26,724 ?5'731' 26,714 °.27 425` 26 165 • "27726 - SR 434 ' ' Belle Ave to US 17 -J2 213 921. 24,8/ I . '25,551 _ 25,010 24,410 25,410 x26,019 34,689 ,[: 35370 _ - _ :SR 434 US 17 -92 3 -- -- to CR 42'7 34 277• 33 785 :;12128 "` 32,468 31' 157;' 32,374 !t 33;174 3,5137 '. 37483 • : , SR R 434 CR 427 to Patin' Springs Rd 0 0 ? 0 ' 0 0:::i' _ 0 0:'.': 0 0 -� ' ',SR'434 CR 427 to kartgeline Rd 43`467° 46,561 :;40760; :1 45,351 X4211.51? 43, 061 .;42 826: 40,633 746821 'SR 434. Rangeline Rd to Patin Springs Dr 46;4(30 46 292 ?`:45 107 44915 „42;'159': 40,298 '41,563 44543 "s 46660 ^_ --_SR 434 . Palm Sprmqu Ur to Raymond Ave 45,3 ?5' 45 421 46 927''''''. 45,560 _44 408 43 079 42,440 4 1 102 - .'45620 SR 434; PalmnSprnlgs Dr (01-4 '' 0 0 0 0 0_ 0 • 0 ^ 0 • 0 SR 434.. Raymond Ave 101 -4 _:46;771 54,409 :.152 624 5285D _50,005 49181 .48272 500 810 X 4 _ 0138 !SR 434_. 1 -4 to Gout las Ave 56 301` 57 3 `93, 55,229 51'885;' 52099 :49 983 51,001 . 1':52898 SR 434 1 -4 10 VVeklva Springs U 0 a 0 r" 0 0 ''. 0 0 .:, 0 0 .:..: ';SR 434 Douglas Ave to Weklva Swings Rd 52,024' 53410 " -153 196 ; 54,069 50 881';• _48 47 560 52, 19 . 53341 . SR 434 . WekivaSurvive Rd to SR 436 1 °(1 5 p `e ` . : 0 1 , 1 0 11 0' '' 0 0 ; 1 0 0'` SR 434 VVekiva Springs Rd lo Sand take Rd - - , 44 636 ` 46,639 47 47 519 44434 41.455 '41,003 30 148 36547 SR 434 5' Sand Lake Rd to SR 436 4'I� ' 43,391 `< ':43 51(] '; {, 45035 42 459,;; 43 404 • 41 771 33,091 31919 SR 4347 SR 436 to Courtly Line 46 ;591';' 48,903 :46 47,382 ,451 _45, 952 44,780 42,748 0 Orange County Line to Howell Branch Rd 57,091, 56,964 r . >.83 E> /8" : 58,383 r � i 6 2/6 52986 56;6144; 57,590 67149 SR 436' . Howell Branch Rd to Red Bug Lake Rd 52,000' 52, a, 5'1 506 `' 53,233 57 51,294 54'362 59,677 55340,,. SR436 Red Bug Lake Rd to US 17 -92 75 493 78,1 /1 ` 17x1 217 "; 74,044 69 9 /3:`,ic 64,115 ` 63 303'_ 71,6(15 ;: S 436 US 17 -92 to CR 427 (LOngw000 Ave) 5`9 r. 222 58,749 .'' 5h 825 ' , R 59097 58 906'1" 56,611 54341;' 56 689 .:r 50726 _ SR 436 .''.: CR 427 (Lot to CR 427 (Mai81and) 61 638;" 63,244 c6 661:3; 61,784 i 69 988 ` 58,581 57154; 58,355 52898'- _SR.436 CR 427 (Maitland) to Palm Springs Dr %61;16!1: 6.3 840 ) w1`03 880 i 62,847 I 56 715', 57 585 67 624 6b, 599 , SR.436 Patin Svruils Di to Nortblake Blvd 651$3" 69 960 " r{'(`i5 403 .t 53,921 , 62 f� 1824. _ 5/.5/3 58 66 63,058 a 62074 77 SR 436' I -4 to SR 434 0 0 s r1T 0L' R 0 01 ,' 0 0 ; 0 ' 0 , ,:$1q436. Palen Suungs to 1 -4 0 0 t` "' (1 0 7 . e; " °` 0 ' 0 0' _ 5R 43 Nail'ilakr. Blvd 10 1 -4 East Ra n1u `64; 873` • 66,436 '66,960,4 �:'. 66,084 1 6,1,224' 62 772 64 220' 74,656 ::?:67149 • SR 437 1 -4 to Lvnchlield kd 0 0 "•'.. 0.r'- 0 .r,0,.` 0 'r 0'r -I 0 > 0` _ SR 436 I -4 East Ramu to Wvmore- Douglas .0 U tl 0 0 ..; 0 0'''' 0 0 ,;:SR 436' Wyuiore- Douglas to Lynthtleld Ave (31` 61 0 ;1160,87x)° i; 64,346 s 63 64 d er 63 63 282. 63,864 - 62983x' Lvnchlield Ave to SR 434 55 3061 0 '' 62,365 9 1344" 31 531 :'61907`. 61,233 :1' 63132.1' SR 436' SR 434 to Hear Lake Rd 00`665::: 63477 `,G2 624 58,496 5 " 597:1' 65 197 ;66 187 63469 1x'72160 -SR 436 SR 434 t0 Hunt Club ?.?0 0 ,K.'+ 0" "P + ? 0 '0 0 , '0: ".;'' 0 0'.; _ :.SR 436` Bear Lake Rd to Hunt Club Blvd "62 64,400 .: ^61 534 62,294 '64 385 63,399 60;921- 60,403 ':156029:1 SR. 436 Hunt Club Blvd to Orange County Line IMEal 51,905 :44;1(.45'095Y.0.• ....' 46 09'3!..?` 47,425 1 52'434 _ 56 007 602246`. 48,408 ■ .51519,:1 TANGERINE AVC' ` _ Howell Branch I:d to Or'arige Courtly Line '68 31 " 4.646 t "' 11 1 4,660 'r 5 1) r 6311 14,091' i 4,122 4047:' ., ;: . 1T(' IPLS I LAKE US 17 -92 to N. Triplet Lake Dr :0'1 v 0 ' 1,4 6"16 ( 4,619 4 ' 4 3 907: 3,523 2751 1. .�s 1c�� FROMTO i'.:2000'....1: 2001 X002 � 2003 �oo� X � o�� z o os ij�' ��+yn BWoo� r f ti ,, i f+ ,!] t .!s, ,t i y . .,rc "P$, � p �,� y : d , �. �.. 5:•ti y k . s�.t 1py � (, .4 ,9 ,,{ � dry �7 + - //yy e s. y. ,�7A /{,i: ry ''''Al ., � 7y /� ! s 61".'22.2.11141'''''' L b ,•� //��, q {Q� . .dry �y ` , •, t. 3 4 t� Trc�tWC'yUt ' '13IV�1 i,.f:'. ,......, Ik,ll. I., �` , CJUU s t 1q i�. ,204„ `'`4' 1 / S! 11 :C� `19, I rotwood E3lvd to Winter S pring s Blvd 0 0 22,767t . 23,048 3,044= 22 _ 43 "1 2 19183 4 0155 Winter Springs Blvd to Dyson Dr b . 0 a I ?_2,060 2898_;: 25,460 r23 x 21,682 _ Dyson to East Lake 28 070 28,833 8 7 2 29,895 ° 28, 1 ?_9,764 „ 29 `715 ` 25,524 6256 E take Dr to Eagle Blvd 2727,583 27 844' 29,366 898`" 31 123 30,x 3033,460 372 48 1 4 2 ry 37,146 585 3' 4237 Ya17 Eagle Blvd to Red Bug Lake Rd ,,636 3 2431 `; 32,375 1 981 :' ,, X Red Bud Lake Rd to Dike Rd 29,653, 30,6 30,3 ' f` t . ; 30,466 ' 0,7 1 +: ' 33,751 36 29,849_^ 3'1788 Dike Rd to SR 426 „20,758' 23,599 ''''''''..',24,:9.0.,..7,, f2 4 , 291 r 3;723 24,708 27,230 28443 SR 46 to Coastline Rd 5 572 6,057 77 886{ 7,814 " " 7 619 `, 8,090 .1038d_ 10,9/6 7x Coastline Rd to Central Park Dr ;8 553 6,298 f30" Yr 6,301 , 99 6,777 : 9 699 5,803 52 14 West 90 Turn to East 90 Turn 0. 0 ipidv r ` 0 " "'0 ` 0 0 0 0 ' Last 90 Turn to CR 46A X7,224 7 ,053 82 6807 �.'643 " 6 (l `351_ 8,239 106 73 Orange Count Line to Lake of the VVoods 54;379.,; 55,329 55,2:x9 55, 244 `85;54 , 56,297' , Orange County line to SR 436 b 0 b' "'�'� 0 0' 0 090 b 1:)259986 0 `� take of the Wood to SR 436 60,699 60,203 6 y ` i 59,616 %'61 `` 58,882 60 942 :. ;' 56 596 4 741 ' 3 t SR 436 to Seminola Blvd '''''''''''''6';')''''''.; 0 U'r' I 0 "`' "�C1` 0 � _ Or o 0: '4999,3,: 49,881 4 825` "' j 49,858 50 5 '' 49,826 j;5 2 74 56,823 5 0441 " SR 436 to triplet Lake Dr , Triplet take Dr to Seminola Dogtrack , :,';',.'4.8 . ;,1 2 1:1.',Y.., , 3 49,389 ', 5 0 3 i ' " 51 �ta"0 49,284 49 91 52 , 81 X1519 Sernfnola Dogtrack to SR 434 X1:9 2 91 51,421 `'t' 50 V� "r 52,151 " 48,22( �, 40` 51,497 4 7 4 2 SR 434 to CR 427 / -SR 419 36 ,959 37,849 38,4 ' ? 39,617 h070 43,026 ;4 37,660 33832 CR 427 SR 419 to CR 427 ra1,�a98 5 0 , 897 ; , = 4 46 'y,4' `,'a6 48,613 ' 41,669 47974 �t d r � x +rV P F u r�1 Ott N = 0 : i, . y e .{S�r.,"hw -_ tti ; 1 7 . 6 . - CR 427 to County Home Rd t� 0 � t:, 0 0 b 0 0 _ _ -_ �! F' � �:7 S Ir ��r �,. (:v:001:;,1,::::,:,,,:,.... r. _ `"' .".". "' County Home Rd to Lake Mary Blvd 4: 0 t` 0 r 0 0 b 0 0 CR 427 to Lake Mary Blvd fi 33,215 34,0/5 ''F' t ,'3 3,1 ,,, ;pr' 39,555 ` t*�3�_$ 2_ 35,483 s 3158 .`, 32778 Lake Mary Blvd to Airport Blvd ! ''.f4 0,89 40.753 ``4t1 25�i� ; 37,181 hti34'� 12 "` 33,888 ' 3 '' 37 38 6 420 - (]1 t.4 ( ,.. y Y4 f li 1 4 1 ' Airport Blvd to CR 46A , 2 0 ` 30,8 , 33 6 '44, 32 ,895 3,858: 34,508 35 0 39 ` 29,40 2741S4 -^ ! nn .i `. n ..-• h.trir.'.f nn nnn .,,i: fp, elyti3 nn #-i .,!Ari r'�� n_, r..# r. �n #r n �Wr1r:,lYG1f1.. :c Traffic Trends - V2.0 SR 434 -- Springs Avenue to Tuskawilla Road County: Seminole (77) FINN 0 Station #: 0 Location 1 Highway: SR 434 26500 — . (ADT /AADT) Year !: Count* Trend ** Y , Observed Count 2005 23500 24500 26000 �i '1 Y ' 2006 26000 24600 a� Fitted Curve c a ;y "`' b 2007 23700 24600 Q 25500 Y , r° iJ , ,,,t 2008 26100 24600 t :. a 7 s- r , 1 �p irla : i,, 2009 23500 24600 I k t c k , 4r .. I'' dg t' cu 25000 �! F ' U. .41` € , , U 11� , xF 1 I �b�L� t. { \ M4 I ` i in j{fiR "b 24500. o , i tiA Z a1�,,1i1 �1 V r; li El e C 41 '�u'j 7 4 a i 1 t ) �( JNI !�' 47: - I r t l y1 }14!\ 1' " 24000 x' , , tint ' tY1 i .ro s r - ,H w 0 23500 , , ti ,'. i s( s, t J { t IF t '>a a 1 r T �' /, Y 4 ft is 11 !4 11 �fl4 Ck4'.i -k i�CG. 4 ' '? i r I .. i t 00 '2 1 L 4 1 iN,. ' k i U fl PO \ . t , +r t 3t f R � i7,t v! t .� „y / ' 1 eta #r 6 f. a� 23000 A ¢ Y 5 „ ti 4^ , �`' I if .6t , 1 xiot v R V `!I r- t. 1 'v 4 _ I � �F . JlS i'is -r t fw t , > ht111 f i t 1 sI qty I, , {1 J r FA , i4 1.; d s �'� 1 ar:::I ^It i',1+, c i1 A .1 t� 4+P i f . a.� 14 ,,.. �1,, t t,, ,K ? SSf= r t l r�t� 1 0 I � t 4 ''' Y d 3• 5� 22500 a c r ,`z� i 1, v, sr1. r JI �i 1Y'� f IN 1 155 44,1 h Y f �3 t r b , i1 +� '�J''Fn S`s? ';(010,444,01'20,N, YkV..- 4k.4 Fi* Mfi1 '' tNy.. ■ 22000 — -,�, I _. , Sfiv +hh. �S1�t as ),,, - 1,sin °•... !c.-tkfrg,:1 2005 20:0040lrr6;iiirf8Nr s Year 2012 N/A 24600 -- .... -- -- .;s; 22P1a,MidnYearr`t"rand , ;,� 2013 N/A 24600 4414; Design Year Trend , , ** Annual Trend Increase: 10 2014 N/A 24600 Trend R-squared: 0.01 q . .,TOANPCAN Earedoif>a1T'rands, Trend Annual Historic Growth Rate: 0.10% Trend Growth Rate (2009 to Design Year): 0.00% Printed: 24- Jun -10 ! 'Streittht �,in4 GrO th Qpt qn • s / ,.,, 'Axle-Adjusted Traffic Trends - V2.0 SR 434 -- Tuskawilla Road to SR 419 County: Seminole (77) FIN# U Station #: 0 Location 1 Highway: SR 434 40000 Traffic (ADT /AADT) Year Count* Trend ** r,,..,,•, ]Observed Count "''r' r„ ` 2005 29900 30500 s' . 2006 30900 31500 35000 Fitted Curve ' , „ > 2007 32800 32500 v �t t ,„ ,, „ , 7� 2008 37000 33600 Q 30000 t{y �I i p Ask �. SI 1 N`ji PAP �M1 Y 1 t , l 13 � tJ � � K 4 ,G ,4 ,, 04 4 ; 3 t 0. ; , ; � � ; 2009 32000 34600 n e u R� N ; J I , ly , �4 bz' t ; � , H 1 � \ i ` 4 5 v i1 t + 3J i � �: c 25 �� k :' 0 I ' �; 1 , "��' � � �, -- a 4 :4e E d � , ! i 1u� , J r r , �,'�� S if it y 4.2 y i It , ' } . ` "RS Bi : r ,r a s 20000 r4 ; a * x , 11 4 `' *1 I n8 S , `' n t v 15000 n,„ w a y i A , { A t ",i' �f z i 4 "� ° :t �` `� ,: � L �' t " Yr} }t}� J 1 If 4 rot J i rr , r ur co 1000 " fib 4 Rfs A r f 4 &, : ;,� �� : � p wh ', ,1Pi +'( �rn aj P dPV 4 ti�4 o , ti e Q 7 % 2- cA 4� , „ , ,. f•., .. i , , 11;1- :1,10,7;111'K, T , II - 91.,' r i y, � Y - 1%.16 � t d , i� t I r� n t »I ra `i a bl.' Ott r tl X17 p� , , �� „ } ' 411,.`,V il, 5000 !� �t� a I wS1 � �: fl� ��y� v g�s�p ��i '"'��,�,at,�t til iiiii # '�e,�FeY + 9 OF ( 4 i 7 t } �� 'c � t4 cv v r r , 1: / p N r'. t o a r,�� te 1 , , a 6r�k� � � '� f, � ' 4� , � 1 ” �dt. F �til � , s� yy tqq�� v y ��C { ( � 44 ; 45 l 3 y µµ y � �' ,, Y ^ ' r 1 r tt . ,a., ��`1lyy a l t ; � Jt 1 . i( ,V' r. @ I ' ' ; t .'h � , ,, 2 i b , �J ail � t 1 t� I � 0 .� ;724 S 4 w 'T' I 2005 ' ';;2012; °Pening Year Trend Year 2012 N/A 37700 2013 Mid - Year 'frond 2013 N/A 38700 2014`, Design;Year Trend * *Annual Trend Increase: 1,030 2014 N/A 39700 Trend R - squared: 35.47% , .1RAFELAN Forecasts /Trends Trend Annual Historic Growth Rate: 3.36% Trend Growth Rate (2009 to Design Year): 2.95% Printed: 24- Jun -10 ;' Straight ` Growth Option _ *Axle Adjusted Traffic Trends - V2.0 TUSKAWILLA RD -- SR 434 to Trotwood Boulevard County: Seminole (77) FIN# 0 Station #: 0 Location 1 Highway: TUSKAWILLA RD 25000 - Traffic (ADT /AADT) _ _ __ _ __ __ Year Count* Trend ** > r ,. = ,,, 1 Observed Count 2005 23200 22800 ® Fitted Curve 2006 21600 21600 —20000 i et r i :i1 �� 2007 19300 20300 > s +3�° 'r `. ' r. r0 i g r[ a t N 2008 19600 19100 co t ,. n aW r h • CL) x rL srx,t 6 '� Y ` 7� , 4 2009 18000 17900 w t :40,i t4 rfl. t ( I s d i' 8' `,, ,"G x i° 4 } , f x I !I , 15000 iyti, r, � 4 01.44 , f i n ' . a � � �k - 7+10000 �� re— :f t { + 1 . ' . ( ,,,.. : �, g .t, � k �q t t � �t ' p t s , {. c T t ,,I x ' „* �t�1 ,t f g 64 v' � j ' co �6 t trill i .p f `Ft ti b` r m t�14 �, � 7 rM1 f 4 # 9 S�� t, q d d ut h ,, �- ) o ,, ti , �� q X w u ,,, n4 4 ° t , v 4 fl t i �' I ti , Yep ' ; i� r ,fin ' 1 `t � f s" ( . �� "r +{v1., � ri ¢ud r, { �i1 k q& ,, `"\ , s ¢5 't, i i - ,' , / , 0 i '-, g u t : 4 i p ' e p , 1 k 1, t 1... t + + � �Yt r' � ! � GgYs ' } ; n�ti��t' � &'� �+ �� , �Y3l � I. y � �K1 > 5000 h r T � p �� , ..y; tt ; ' 1 ''f s " e � y t 1� �� ' ,' t�+ i1'a��,. , �� }1�9 fJ,�tt� �'� a ,'I 11u i i t � � 2005 . 2012'Opening' Year. Trend Year 2012 N/A 14100 2013 Mid -Year Trorid 2013 N/A 12900 2014'`Desfgn Year Tretld ■ **Annual Trend Increase: -1,240 2014 N/A 11700 Trend R- squared: 91.13% TRANPLAN,Forecasts/Trends ". Trend Annual Historic Growth Rate: -5.37% Trend Growth Rate (2009 to Design Year): -6,93% Printed: 24- Jun -10 — Sra t h t. Li G .O �"' " � t �, 'Axle- Adjusted APPENDIX "G" Orlando Urban Area Transportation System (OUATS) Model Output • Town Parise Apartment Distribution Year 2012 OU el \ — - Number o anes = 2 Number of Lanes = 4 Number of Lanes = 6 Centroid Loading less o" 19. - - - - 47.25____ _ 1.93 69 0 45.62 - - 4552 4 9.18 .. -.. _ 9 ° 2 519/ O p 4 l 9 d 24.59 ;161 w 0 06 e. 0 0 0 � 0 ., 4i 0 s ''' 0 c o \- . ____ 21.99 2051 • - 0 11 11 y of ro 0 a. m O CO A O? N V w 0 0 0 40 o rn m' m N o a a 03 1P O VA 0.74 0.59 co 0 0 in 9 1 " ) 8 A 0 7S 0.59 a, O. 1.78 O' 0 CO M 0.74 p .S0 v ‘n O tO N6 . v a 4'. OP 0 1.19 -- 1.19 / a ° \ 1 0 \ 1 49 45 ( 05 0 1g 2.53 A o o 0 i 0 Xo 0 .15 v O O O 0 s y ,70- 0 0 00 O o a o O yry o ��. 1 76 . 1.78 o v 0 0 04 O A o 4 6 v ° 01 o S. O o 0 0 �5 3. 0 9 ° O) ° c O I , / o 0 _ 0.74 9 w 'A 0.7 h - . 0.74 0 0 t 0.3 0 A o o O ^ 1. C .1Model Taskes\OUATS \10-029.01 Town Parke Apartment (2012)1Year 20121HRLDXY.Al2 RUInc Licensed to GMB Engineers & Planners, Inc. APPENDIX "H" Future Conditions at Project Entrances � GMB Engineers & Planners, Inc. ! Figure H-1 +�i 2602EastLivingstonStreet TOWI7 Pal��e Apal�tl�elltS FutureConditionsatProjectEntrances ��...,.._.� Orlando, Florida 32803 YR 2012 Peak Hour Volumes ._ ._ . ., ' � � � APPENDIX "I" Intersection Analysis Summary Table 1 -I (I of 2) Town Parke Apartments YR 2012 AM Peak brtersection Analysis Summary SR 434 & Tuskawilla Road Background Traffic Commited Trips Project AM Existing Total % Movement In / Out Dist. Traffic Total EB Left 39 4% 5 0 44 Thru 542 104 61% 63 I 49.18% 6 611 Right 309 35% 36 0 345 WB U -Turns 0 0% 0 0 0 Left 92 9% 5 0 18.65% 9 106 Thru 872 52 84% 44 0 49.18% 22 938 Right 68 7% 3 0 4.16% 2 73 NB Left 429 66% 20 0 449 Thru 163 31 25% 8 0 171 Right 60 9% 3 I 18.65% 2 65 SB Left 77 46% 9 1 4.16% 0 36 Thm 37 20 52% 10 0 97 Right 4 2% 0 0 4 SR 434 & McLeods Way/Doran Boulevard Background Traffic Commited Trips Project AM Existing Total % Movement in / Out Dist. Traffic Total EB Left 28 3% 3 0 31 Thru 838 104 97% 101 1 49.18% 6 945 Right 1 0% 0 0 1 W11 Left 7 1% 1 0 8 Thru 1260 103 97% 100 0 49.18% 22 1,332 Right 35 3% 3 0 33 NB Left 4 33% 0 0 4 Thru 1 0 3% 0 0 1 Right 7 58% 0 0 7 SB Left 22 59% 0 0 22 Thru 0 0 0% 0 0 0 Right 15 41% 0 0 15 SR 434 & Gardena Avenue Background Traffic Commited Trips Project AM Existing Total % Movement In / Out Dist. Traffic Total EB U -Turns 0 0% 0 0 72.07% 33 33 Lett 7 1% 0 0 7 Thru 803 52 99% 52 0 27.93% 13 863 Right 0 0% 0 0 0 WB Lett 0 0% 0 0 0 Thru 1,044 52 100% 52 1 27.93% 3 1,099 Right 0 0% 0 0 0 NB Lett 0 0% 0 0 0 Thru 0 0 0% 0 0 0 Right 1 100% 0 0 1 SB Lett 0 0% 0 0 0 Thru 0 0 0% 0 0 0 Right 0 0% 0 0 0 1'1 Table 1 -1 (2 of 2) Town Parke Apartments YR 2012 AM Peak Intersection Analysis Summary SR 434 & Tuscora Drive Background Traffic Commited Trips Project AM Existing Total % Movement In / Out Dist. Traffic Total EB Left 0 0% 0 0 0 Thm 788 52 97% 50 0 21.99% 10 848 Right 27 3% 2 0 5.94% 3 32 WB Left 14 1% 1 0 15 Thru 996 52 99% 51 1 21.99% 3 1,050 Right 0 0% 0 0 0 NB Left 66 51% 0 I 5.94% 1 67 Thru 0 0 0% 0 0 0 Right 63 49% 0 0 63 SB Left 0 0% 0 0 0 Thru 0 0 0% 0 0 0 Right 0 0% 0 0 0 SR 434 & Cliff Rose Drive Background Traffic Commited Trips Project AM Existing Total % Movement In / Out Dist. Traffic Total Ell Left 27 2% 2 0 29 Thru 1,142 104 98% 102 1 49.18% 6 1,250 Right 0 0% 0 0 0 Wll Left 5 0% 0 0 5 Thru 1,549 103 99% 102 0 49.18% 22 1,673 Right 17 1% 1 0 18 NB Lett 0 0% 0 0 0 Thm 0 0% 0 0 0 Right 11 100% 0 0 11 SB Left 0 0% 0 0 0 Thru 0 0% 0 0 0 Right 3 100% 0 0 3 SR 434 & Project Entrance (Townhouse Road) Background Traffic Commited Trips Project AM Existing Total % Movement In / Out Dist. Traffic Total EB Left 0 0% 0 0 0 Thru 677 52 100% 52 0 729 Right 0 0% 0 I 72.07% 8 8 WB Left 0 0% 0 I 27.93% 3 3 Thru 1,029 52 100% 52 0 72.07% O 1,114 Right 0 0% 0 0 0 NB Lell 0 0% 0 0 0 Thru 0 0 0% 0 0 0 Right 0 0% 0 O 100.00% 46 46 SB Left 0 0% 0 0 0 Thru 0 0 0% 0 0 0 Right 0 0% 0 0 0 • 112 Table 1 -2 (1 of 2) Town Parke Apartments YR 2012 PM Peak Intersection Analysis Sunmtmy SR 434 & Tuskawilla Road Background Traffic Commited Trips Project PM Existing Total % Movement In / Out Dist Traffic Total EB Left (5 1% 1 0 16 Thru 869 121 62% 75 1 49.18% 25 969 Right 524 37% 45 0 569 WB U -Turns 0 0% 0 0 0 Lett 89 11% 6 0 18.65% 5 100 Thru 713 60 86% 51 0 49.18% 13 777 Right 30 4% 2 0 4.16% 1 33 NB Left 397 75% 27 0 424 Thru 81 36 15% 5 0 86 Right 55 10% 4 1 18.65% 9 68 SB Left 76 40% 10 I 4.16% 2 88 Thru 109 24 58% 14 0 123 Right 4 2% 0 0 4 SR 434 & McLeods Way/Doran Boulevard Background Traffic Columned Trips Project PM Existing Total % Movement In / Out Dist Traffic Total EB Left 58 4% 5 0 63 Thru 1,405 121 96% 116 I 49.18% 25 1,546 Right 8 1% I 0 9 WB Left 8 1% I 0 9 Thru 1,079 120 97% 117 0 49.18% 13 1 ,209 Right 21 2% 2 0 23 NB Left 2 29% 0 0 2 Thru 0 0 0% 0 0 0 Right 5 71% 0 0 5 SB Left 18 58% 0 0 18 Thin I 0 3% 0 0 1 Right 12 39% 0 0 12 SR 434 & Gardena Avenue Background Traffic Commited Trips Project PM Existing Total % Movement In I Out Dist. Traffic Total EB U -Turns 0 0% 0 0 72.07% 19 19 Left 52 4% 3 0 55 Thru 1,195 61 96% 58 0 27.93% 8 1,261 Right 1 0% 0 0 1 WB Left I 0% 0 0 1 Thru 1,024 60 100% 60 I 27.93% 14 1,098 Right 0 0% 0 0 0 NB Lett 0 0% 0 0 0 Thru 0 0 0% 0 0 0 Right 3 100% 0 0 3 SB Left 0 0% 0 0 0 Thru 0 0 0% 0 0 0 Right 0 0% 0 0 0 Table 1 -2 (2 of 2) Town Parke Apartments YR 2012 PM Peak Intersection Analysis Summary SR 434 & Tuscora Drive Background Traffic Commited Trips Project PM Existing Total % Movement In / Out Dist. Traffic Total EB Left 0 0% 0 0 0 Thru 1,155 61 95% 58 0 21.99% 6 1,219 Right 60 5% 3 0 5.94% 2 65 WB Left 52 5% 3 0 55 Thru 972 60 95% 57 1 21.99% II 1,040 Right 0 0% 0 0 0 NB Left 52 62% 0 1 5.94% 3 55 Thru 0 0 0% 0 0 0 Right 32 38% 0 0 32 SB Left 0 0% 0 0 0 Thru 0 0 0% 0 0 0 Right 0 0% 0 0 0 SR 434 & Cliff Rose Drive Background Traffic Commited Trips Project PM Existing Total % Movement In / Out Dist. Traffic Total EB Lett Ill 6% 7 0 118 Thru 1,711 121 94% 114 I 49.18% 25 1,850 Right 0 0% 0 0 0 WB Left 8 it% I 0 9 Thru 1,439 120 94% 112 0 49.18% 13 1,564 Right 90 6% 7 0 97 NB Left 0 0% 0 0 0 Thru 0 0 0% 0 0 0 Right 2 100% 0 0 2 SB Left I 2% 0 0 I Thru 0 0 0% 0 0 0 Right 54 98% 0 0 54 SR 434 & Project Entrance (Townhouse Road) Background Traffic Commited Trips Project PM Existing Total % Movement In / Out Dist. Traffic Total EB Left 0 0% 0 0 0 Thru 997 61 100% 61 0 1,058 Right 0 0% 0 1 72.07% 36 36 WB Left 0 0% 0 1 27.93% 14 14 Thru 830 G0 100% 60 0 72.07% O 909 Right 0 0% 0 0 0 NB Left 0 0% 0 0 0 Thru 0 0 0% 0 0 0 Right 0 0% 0 0 100.00% 27 27 SB Left 0 0% 0 0 0 Thru 0 0 0% 0 0 0 Right 0 0% 0 0 0 APPENDIX "J" Response to Comments A mac': 3 ;t fi St'f F3 • y �� June 25, 2010 9: LO Brian Fields, P.E. 3 i City Engineer Ci t of Winter S rings ;M143. • • 1126 East State Road 434 Goa EN Ctt = s`&FiAN RS,Ave.. ,, 4w> Winter Springs, FL 32708 Re: Response to Comments "y �y Town Parke Apartments Traffic Impact Analysis y Gi1'IB Project Number: 10- 029.01 - 2'� ; ` T Dear Mr. Fields: € The following are GMB Engineers & Planners responses to comments received on 47:'- ' - _. the above mentioned project: _ Comments by: Brian Fields, P.E. Company: City of Winter Springs Dated: May 25, 2010 Comment #1: Page 1. The phasin plan in the traffic study does not match the plans. The study shows the project in two total phases with 106 units in the first A phase and 47 in the second phase. The plans show 201 total units with 153 in phases 1 z E W 1 -3 and 48 in phase 4. It is recommended to include the traffic impacts from all phases in this traffic stud • otherwise a separate traffic study P Y, p would have to be } submitted with the future phases. w 4 - t4 Response: The study has been revised to include traffic impacts from all four phases of the development. It should be noted that Phases 2 and 4 were combined with an anticipated build-out of YR 2013. 112 r ' = 3 Comment #2: Page 3. The existing link volumes refer to 2009 Seminole County • data however Appendix E only shows data through 2008. k. 'm Response: The counts used in the study which were referred to can be found as part of Appendix "B". The information provided within Appendix "E" was utilized .- ": � � for the growth rate determination. The traffic count information used for the ` "y .fisting ana ysis r fers to the VP 2009 Seminole County data ^� t the 2009 441 ' .I ' . Florida Traffic Information CI), which are provided within Appendix "B': vi (n N r+ K N N fit' V OJ G� O N U cV O U N � M a� � a l v � � o � U � o p y U � O �' d y � �`\`\ � Q � t �l a., .Y CCC�� "`��\ fA °' � \` � \ \ J ° � H ' a � ,� o .� EE° '� 4, � V] CJ � E'+ woc; ,��t; ..q wi• •y isp^•.�',n'A' "nMO:rvp ,nfr'. /,'� C ,.,. .vr.'. e,,• &{: ,.n. •).r. .y �...v'' f $ ''n� , a'! N" ,1 'a r:t?..; ,,;. ,y\ '.,'�: e. U t;�,. ;y, �p v ,�. v • -:i -.fi, L �a q� �p? 1 � �,, Se �' � i':id•'r, l rt., q �If• Y 't",r H..�''•. 5. ��..:'7�€y,`4. "A ,t. •�� 1'. '#'�. ;j"' '�i1 :i' , yy fir. 4 ' ', I t N' +� i. ;kS. !f'� .''�� '� 4�r , a. �s:!' , }� ', 'YYr' e t�9+ Ia y,Ga' f 7:4 x1�. v, , : 3 v 7F . l • �e„ '�„ t } A ..4,. r't . Y � x'11' , �, d f' , V i � • '�I 1y, ff _ h `;+h; 1 ' 4 t•• ^ii$ v a� 1 :� .1� ,4 - .`N , tF: � t ? , 9� UJ�,•„�. :Y I. .51' I,•r� U. ;7: '�s� Y.. ,l}.,r�` <1 +}1 [ �'Nr. n L ,1 � !', -a .,, a, a., a ' . 1 �� .a,: :q $�f `;'° U, , '; Y'' < , � R . n. J �'Y""".,,.,! . - .i�5.� '� � t , ?k+ , tL , �.l, � „ kt`�,#, :.,5 �, a +'. ; � '' � , �.. }' •: r ••s.' ,S �, q„ s. s ,t .1 a,� f.. .,n.. .. uc., . z • r . l a ,� �p � : 1 - r . 'P, l .y"(I .: �t. , rb �Si , ,j r, )f e. h,�,,, r , f , r t , I � .'� ,) ,} a y �t t ,t !'; � l F• . r. . n � . � ' :C• .v^ n.. M � •' t. ° 6 � y 1' � . , Ul. ) ,I4ta � ;sa , �,I .4 . a � J ,1h raf , i�'!} au t ',r�w 1 �. p , , y'1, .�' t.. rr�i„ ar t,4. r. ,S• �. t.). �:., .,i4 ,U .�, '!r "� 74 tw.. :.. 1�)C) „� „P'- ,2 of v k:. 1 'I".' .�' : 1 :�. •.� �, a �'� y,.� tF� N' "� ,fi' Z n n: �� 4 �? , C� r:, r 7 1 J 3 , . ;�.1' . G , �4'' n.l �� ( { fl'- .4. 'fir,(: , , a" t o � ' r .� : � i( t7„ . � „ , ) «' .),4a , :'!Y vf, 4r „' } : r.w J' ae . J ,irTe r, , t ,f r 'I ,3. J ,,,.,'. �.t= ..� 7• }'�,� )r L, t� �,1,dtF'_' ��1+',,.Vn.U' S':4; i} "1a ¢ � ,. .,t: �,u :rfr + n. �),t„ t� .,'�>, . ,.” `4rA,�, f _„ „, , � 't 'f ' .S t �. }'•-,,, .', ry :. 16 h:, , >,. .r{ p f n ,�,. - ,q L.l r �, 4l P f..,. r .t'rt4{ t q 7r .a }. ,�f a : a�'''; ,°}., , :: :h. �.r � .. l' �? .,� 1. d,' . N"".. ,u L 2 , n.E , �i {: „l i, - 7� ,, : � f. �. I A t :.d!!. � „ �: i t • i'� ; ; f �t t 9) ,,t s .,� 'F ' V': }f a"a' :r t:, ,: 1 .. - M t`M�S!Y' f.,�s:+., .., , r, �d U. r: ,k ° : !, :, e{�': ,., . , 7 . r� 's �, } F Y, . r hti u '�;'(f,rr u� rr ,,. r � ) .1st 1. r• �• . x >'.,,, . +rt1 . A � • }r P. . � � `� � „tn „�n :��C,�o „l, 1.�', .,{,I� �:u t' � � 7. �' ' 1' . v :i ,.,��.: 6,. ' s . , ?r �c 74r., ` , 4 ,, ti�a, � � ,, �..- �1 - \ � ,nl� � 'Y, ,'( � .M ,. �w. , . a f � r . rf 1 ,i�' S , {, ,' FS:I .ii•��*.,��. 'r i• r�, l'!',�Uar� d, . a, f:'s ,•� J � :l :1 ,. t nt .. , {�� r;I JC .{� „P� :'�^��` >A.��au ,. .1' .Z tt � 1 ), ':s�.� 'rt” 1 `� . ,1 r i�. w , f� � . , (1l? . ..bt '3 1 7 , (: k� , t i.''oU , U1, t, , ,F , ,F l�an�`Ft, ,1 , �, G 1 h 8 �a'�t', �,v 'Y•X�, .'4 ��'�: i ii� u. ( ,�h„ � �) `�'A.'r. •a�•r�i'.. i -r i:, {�,, ,.s •!5, .I �- l�' � f,7 C :.•1. a'. t.. ' "'r , �tT�.':.;:a : f4 t 1� t .L , f„ t ! }]�� XW,.•r.. k' �• .Sl 1 �^, , I t 5 7� Y} ! }: � F r3 [ 1.' t . � �t � ��,. � ! . �_I. ;1. vl • Ar, k`�7uy'm �•?'= c„ a 1 ,w � �F., I.,� ,. � r I' I , 1 5 , rl), ,i r�1+. 4 " i c. L' y b . 7rr L .r1Y ), .1. A d.. t. it +.M f )� 'k :,�. 1, V. 'I ,j, .:V°..'�Irl !t�F, ., Q �. 5, f ;Y. �d� f X� Y;1., �'.� �fer'R L '�1iYY �ti i' Y .4i':c1.J , Ir .. <d�.' kv , ulf d �`. � v) � N 1. .1 1 i 1. ('I., 'A },� )' : ! 1, lh : # ..1(l;',• .. �, � - ft p 1 1. � ��' .'R ��;' .;x,., �. ::a.. ,)Yt4.t. .r�.4,>`.. x}. r,<. T �� .ia 1...� r 11',. I. 3 i �2 F ,;: �e s kcal t..l,r. .Cf, _�.!:u d 1 , :}�' a -'v tVr l., •,.i e4, .Y ass'. I; i,M,� i �' �'�} .i h:l. t } ty,,,, 1p:5 �adfi,' t �,l a f" 'fit` , . f '.,� a �.d F'4 . , frr i'�, ;..r4tL^ .:} „r •+h. t } :,t I!��i' � al� *�, , r?t � � �(,� ,t '� ,); d ' v .i,. ` - f. .:'t ^'.t, .�;�, ;.; r:Y.. 't 1, t�,�a. '� ,.a. �..0 M, , .t , : p. f�f ! ,1 � � %;r.• i „ n'99 , , / ;1�, !:MC'a'd, d': _ a rc2t� �- :d' ! ?I 4 .��. ,.l: s�` psl ri a - n:'.' .. t } v ' ,. t n M1 ,�} 1� 'Y •. t ' K•. V,va � ,,. • ��'� I, .•tii.:.,.a , _.,,.e +.,.:f•, .fir , � f..., ,° �.:.' °' s7�33''= �, �r�' �7,. } ,U: � t� t`� :�:I ti' ,},� . ),t •:� '�” _ �i 4 :�[.... � , ., -, e f 'rr5'_.IS'. . "{ r '�,. � 1 s }�'' ��rr,r:4� %r•.::P91 Y.,'� :�, M, ( � , r U •.ti+'= c.f•. #`'r : �'� „�! :.r�� , 5.�d. Ss 51,1 'x, .: ', I I � f ,s r r: ;/i it f: _r � ,. �7 , „ v., ;�. ,. ` .: a � ut: .;:v:, _:� t..: r :�: . ...,. ,., r��,.!„ it •3 w }l l,,. ,t ,., �S :.l �+ '_3a . • tl„ i r. >,., � , S �� !r , N• t .. > 5, 4 ,_.. .. � ., w .....G, ,. ...tl ..hr . nl•.I, I. _. '�.,�' �.., i,u. tl_ . '1!H+' v �I 7 I ��,� +, is A�1 , A , t' �� r 2 rl. r! S, # . � .0 fde . .'a .. ILF. i T�' } n �'. n".(�r .� \ , . 11 t �j � vJ.. .3 ,� . �I'.�.M1 V' ) v :.i_ - „�':. ,�, ..� ..s ,.n •s w:1 t } .a,.,l.,t � ,�'n r� 'k ��.1.:1 r..r,,l. 7 v „IrfY k •s�S r t ...a .. ,S h� Y Yr:S�• J� r "�s.w el r ...4 ,yr+. �. Ir.. .rt '}. E n ,"• } ,}.: { 4�. { , r.' �. :.J• a ,. t:., r! +5 --t';` L . r. ^''�' �.t,, }'y�,< •. ,. I u f - Sn 'If. r., .1,. �1 .d t - S3� r 1 .K ( t y ;d C] t.,r,','s. _ "v.•. ,m.r Y'. ;''�'�F,• \ `2 ", y�' . t I �t 4. �r. .,):,. I" I � =.4 �. .,L1. a ..e'w . .l ” .."f,:,r � r. _,471$,,., .. '� C e� { di r.i � ` 1.: r rt � r,,a. 7 : r f.,. 5.. s - -r , J. I �q � .), '�.. - j ). i. ;'� +�b � "M. „,r. �..., t �y. r i ] t .I i , I:.r t I , a �� l�`, :' AI ,`� �i '. a " ' , , r e'+ 4 !• � :r),1� .�1.., `}tk J.F t.F y ,� {� , :i'.i � { 1, ( f ..4: � IT'Y .I h� :'F. �IK 1 U }� ,. ' } P � }� x,,... - 'a•�tr ' r.,�k.... �! ? r r,�; - r ,.:. , , 1 .�},..r ., '. ,,:, , s, t L,,..h'T ,)_ i e. :.h' P :Ir: 'G � .a ,1 'c ?{.. .a ., h. t. .h., '+�. d� vb. tl.� �. ,a, t,a. r. �,.r: 'w thl. c. {. � :r't ,Ifo +t :: 1�, .,�. '�,� i,d. 5. ,•f 5,. �: •.!7 '. ,I, f 9 ;vn,. �r, ,t -r.. s,4 .. r, d,f, ,I �:(.,.f ,.:r)..I rqJ .'} .. ;y, -. t' >` 1 . .�, . r"i :. ,r.., K•• !a., t ,u,t�� f J ;i.. . �S. t :�. ( .1.. �., r -�. 1 `i � ��`� 1- • "4� � - t r ,n: ! ! ., n�- •" • I < 1 r.,: ' 1 . a.s I, c.:. ..) •P 1: . ,1.: .Ga�:. „.., "`x:'t+ .n }, t`e•'z:f, m�� .•f, nt +;.r', }. � .,}U, a `{'i C r t •i r • W`Y `flu ), � ,3,. . ,r . ;'� � •, r� .� x5 ,;.rP'1 !r- j � r• " l )c_r.,. X 4',1 t ry „' I r + r •'�• b S!r19 't'• Ir !P, . (1 .arl n ^I.,v .. 1,,, T .J.. -r.f :.:}. ..Ft.• G3 ,fid:n''..,�U ;4' �r. ^, ,r, :,. ,t�l. �,. , :.Itl, 1. ttr �t.t r,t:(�,.i. ,,•r ,!U' :t7., ,rr •Y 'S”' ::1'. '...•1.`.° - e,� 'w.. '} %•`4L d fMifw 6. t .1I ,fl � tJ k• \ke 1 }: Y I @', �. pl.. ,�f r . : ^a- , �)':4., s 'L tl '. F'++�1 s .4 .�. 11 'a. �- �. I, !M1 r:.r ' le .,c, �. 'i'° +,(i +. "N :'`1' - � ' +r }�� „ rr',1,�?.., rt'^, h':�. :�. a .� r .n s 1,,. :..I !, : 'U I: P mi �r i f+ `' '�w. . 't� :]'�. �•', a n w•• h, �^ ;d!� t�. •< 7 ! . !, t,..;u�.. , +s: 14. 1`r: - tr. ..'' p,•,n..` ,, .,•, n {' +,,....,.'t'...5 :::....'' 'ls 1!". ,-rx ..S'.r. : :) v�`,. 1: 1 t.,t� , {.X w' � n k ��y . ka. ,rk, ,a.. s.,..xx.• q') 1 I .r4 > f.t�„ .r. ,cI _1. .�' •,tn .7x,.. .,l i 7 t �, t S,. llv: .,. tl� !!. A, �,, �r{�... •Ud }", 't?•1 „c. .:r.," as .tw.., .r t: ,a,ra: ,�,ru.'4.: ,.Ra'; ,r.u!F.�r: AIf 3� S,v.G. r, :h, I. ..y,t tl;� .,n+,.,•1'•c. 1'(..m, r +,, eT3`!,vt U<r 'r, t'.y �:..d`w �. A . Y�4' �` ,n�j� u . J.F .; fTF, 'u .. n �il� r �xr �'1: �k .Ir"t.i -. Y fat'4 tit 't:. I) .J I. t,. •,11 , ,�, a l � !r t j ti. x r n .e , •z 1 c S t r, r + ) �t r ,y M +i. . �. .r• 3': ,ry.f } F •,`c`.. sd , ! ;: i'. }a . t:'r 7. 1 ; uiY'" .•uy r9 " " I { '�a6, f : , t . ., ,r ,. r'.. 5. ,I � rs &,Y „ r„� ,� 4� .r to t' S h., p s q .•ci{} ..., :•. ,. '.t y ' � 'lU' , ,,. .�+'•' .. z':' �F. ,; ��j ., �: Cr, .. ,8° M v 1 � A a ':'.f .,4t .,�. . - 6" .r �?(. i �i' e4 1 L'{. .. � ^.�a.Y' .- ,: fi,if a 1. R 't If , �. h a `h I , ' 1 r � hl 2 �! `�'i \ (} ; F l'�' T . � :t.. , i,� V.' r.:�..HA. �.. .sv; ,z ..f�, r ,ti. .,k;.• r• � \�, ti. �G a , ; ,:•:',t, i 6 s,:,�7, tt J A > •s' '�� .ta. F'•;M1 .-U� ;.�..., , ,r, t�+:, .t� t, 1 r 1 �.! 'r�:, r). �, 7,)r. ':C`�:,yt. ,. ,n'� ,t ,> .�. )�."s� {f' r9vr .,,...�..' a :. • ' `,� .k •' `J c'!�:'1 4. t.. >'�'t ?� .t1 x.l � - Il: '..F 1, pi'�'I',. ..�''f;� 1 l.:. S �q 4, a , ,)� , .I; . .�;z.l� t�'. 1, .w., dfi''. rt t 1. 7 �;7 t ti s.r n 'r n� r. IAA Nor , ' � ,... � ..�2 a .. f' c . ..., ,, ., R:v, s ,,. .�.,_r. , ., ...r . J 1' �4 :a :.:. -,rn ,., . 1 t ,f , (1. 1 , f � � i ri� S r ^ � • 4 . I..P( ,. '�s , .,i L.�,..4, - �r •�,;J' a..t ,.,, ,t.0 �.,�.., :I rk_Xr n � � ..:��$i�"�,+ „9r�. .. 'Se. ,.' t. .,,, ,r e :. r: r :(' J.Y n. i.1.4 � �.l.if' �::� ,{a ,r,. �h �,. � „fin.. ..d. „A -. �1' , <P .n. ,r`tL �. �n �.,. s., y5 , 1- J. i �. .k5. 4 1, ��kr... 4 i . ,,r �r., i� « r Ylid,” }..,{ ,:'a,d� •""�l �xf, '�f 4 r l , .. .. .,, , ^. n,.,,- u -, ^, +. [., ,. as :: ., •t..4. :�n.l 'I F. , l. :; �• r +, 4- ) 1. a. R �''. uf. L 1 r�la t' *a f. 'I .r fi. r ...,,, , t:.,�,. , - -. ... �..,...,._, Ga S,, �.,...,"r...,an 4 e�., � ::: Y'4 �r: ' „� .. r.. \�.`t. Ir... a Jr.:. ':U,J 1.: ..F t E. 1..-• .xs, a.n :i ,t, .4. ..r, .as 'k.” r ..�ro. �. G „� n,L' 7.. ,a• fl•f: ^t v! f -24.7 h. I n.4 r sr t} r�}, g� t ,r,. Y�'' )rsr ..z. .Y.: r ,Y . S ,7 J,. rr,: :k � r d., e f -,�, { 1`S'r! .VP .,a • yy' ' ' r`c �.�•:',{ .e x.r+ , M1 , t f. t : :Pr ^ . ✓ r . { ( h�., ;i , .f... —�_r -. :. is ;,: ;., t 1 b . r'1., a'1 • �k , , •G 7�c ' �1� �o ..'l:1 . 3 a - r 1 1 , n ; { ". // - „ ^ "_„� a 9'r �Fh':i ry ik:. - F'�'. + .. . A ' f w .;a • liF' 4�.•: �" .1..� : .'A { 1 l..f ( r.,k.: �, . �. ,�,� ..'�.� s ,. „ 3,.,. .� ,, ;,� - "•'):';;t 15,x, � 1 1 ,.f, t m..r•n �. n` m : a. ,d. ,I ,.i r � 1 t �(l ,�, ��, �` _ ,�,c�l , c .t „r . -) , !s4.� .. �Z J.,.,, tr .,S � r , t!:>'""Y + s a I , 1 a: .x :.t .if . , � :, � 1... F � I >x , t..- i U� / �1 2 ........ ...n :.. „�Yycr`l� .. ..h ,'i .. , .t v, ,... , 'M1' ,'{. r ✓.e y. .4i:e... +ir..:. .. .. ., rN... ,. ) !f..: f! l t 7� >i:•:: f - 5 v 9 :f ' .'1 , 1..:_.,: i..,, .,. ., _, .., .t !' ..Ax4'.,..k .. .,iu ..r nit .:�, r ,.ti. �, ,: �P. k. a, �1,7 3t .,. ,.1 h v el� L l .:t...a;. 7,..}L. ..,�. 1 Nit �1 t. „krv? �.,t � ,. i- ).' u. :... ............ •f,. efSr. .., , ...1. z � .... .�,t4><�:•t<., r u ..... �c f?' .. , . r� t..<i,. hr� r� +, r•r14, ,,. .,. 5.4i ,.. ! K f ,.:re.: ..r .r 'iv} !A ., J.-7� t.r+3 .. 1, , ky W `tia J. h.�.l . ,1f i tl ... .P:i :l �.. {' � 1 I.. „�. 4 :.�.. h:l• t-x �.577;)' fn` y .., .: •,. .. .. ., �x 4• u , , s ,.].: .c ,.g5 :•.. :cam:!' -. N.n , � h '.( '�� r, z.. , rl. r r;� 'N. t.A�''}., :.t ,.'f r:. ',',S. 1. f 1 .I '�, i �'f ..o.. •.ar. Ft.,�C , t•u I,.�f,,. .7, �Y. ,nh'.,Y. .r A�.. wl,.�, .:� n 4� .:5 / -� k:n1 n7 t - r:,l Yr a �i:E. \�t. ,5 {�44�1 .:v Ft 4�,.- .ff' t 7 ,:y . � •fi„ n. i .s, u, . e- �sn,,: c A.l :.,. ..1,.. t. t. 7 ro-r.. 1 r:�... 1 1 I i,e : Al 1� r •� � I . P,' :. .re. , rt .. nvtl, i '�� ,Y ..�, +o .5 .'a . ;r 3 y � : �� ..f.:,,,( �::( i f ;iC'� '; !r .1. { �'.. ,r� 'r + ^ ; %iL`;v tr .il( a h*..3 } • s . �' : Q' : � r I :(�.�1 y. �, ,Q 'J tY r•T' .r, s f.3. ''srr. a' ''r . p ..1' , t. ;I .y . "::T �,y � �i , a r :�, y.. "s�.., .e <` :t�L M�.' ,.Sr, ,, t C. �L. t., :,e. l J�: \, l_ �,'o-! "'`•4. zx•S -, , v� lo. � n '1 ,., / �. q'� - M1 ; I' N' I 4.1.. �d) r:rR 7r . I �r�' , q.:.,a�,. .0 •,JS • ,�.F, ., c -:• + t k �. 1 t' 4, 1 'iA 17 r'. r;' t i r �, ; t. r , i r R, :,� .�' +� �1 : ::. .a9ccr c'...r , r... ... I. ..Y. . , ' "' ... S. 4. �. d 'F ,� r . ) c'. h r d.,, k7 r J +,i .' t rtu.- „ 1 "i . 7, : " -�„ f.:, r• �,. t, .,.r .. f ..,..:: ;'N 1 r nR.l .: •:, li . �. r � :nc tJ �. - ' . 1, 5 k .'' x !{ s I� I r:;:� s d (.::} �.;. ..:,! u. Xr^i }1 t .� ..�r�'� .P .x „ri.�a.. . -� �. .,,{ ...,.. rd,.� < „ fC,a _. sC.,... q,,.,t(, :r..�.,, ,,. { r � : r �,� .Ir �yv :ur. a ,s 1r 1 .e (leu.d.,h, r [ 4 :h �P• H f. ,Lt„ ,'Y, `;.'}, � (..r 4v 1 t 1 c r / h,, h � ! '*'� .I t� ,1,. ,a, Y„Ar .a ,.r ,.� � n v h) I ti,�. :t.'. �c. ,, :'1��:`�� a i . �f, .5�f:. , k,r. t.d, ..`�6wax .f �'. t .0 I .I• I y :r. 4 f � 'r „_ ..,.,.. ..,,n. , , rz ...:. ,,r., ,.. . ,_.1, -.. r . a . ,, w . -f ` _) : � . � u , � , : ,., .,I ,, I ', r , ' .r' ' ,,,,:i.. ,.. .. .: .... .. ... N i�r.< t.. .. 7r .. �. � S H.,r s ,.. .. �1 If... .,4n A.r.r r 1 :.r,'r,:l, tt, 1: } :..I1:1'�ft ,rv"Z. ��'l' !�.•d r' „t �.Ii � t y'h gk ,�..,. -.. B,c } ,`S .,s ,i ..0, .< d....5..., .: - . v m r vs t r �; S �'�. M, '!`0.• :�e.r, .�i; .n,l ,� t.n n. n „?:,.4 ,1 ..,h ,r, 1 .., I:: i 5. f :f r ,+ I :J T,f i� • .,:., .a r J. x. >?' .� .. ..t., tr ,.. „w.v :+�...e ,.a � J�„+..5 . .. :.r4. .. �£6 ,.r".. ..,rl lx:, k>� r: t ... .1 :r ., ,,r I .. Ir � .fF I��;q rC. v. -1Y,: 4 .�J' �'l�k, •� . f ejn .,.,.,..H,u: a, .. �.r .�..1 +.., ,,. x. ...... x::.�. ... *' ... s�' ,. , :.�... ._-{It .e '�� .. U1��, .ra' .1 1: t V�dl A :� ,Fa.. � �y }.. ,7 .f, �. { a � fir, .{ J .. L u,. �. S. , ,fir 11 ;:. t ,. J ..1 5rr L: � •; 5 � �I , !1 J, . .,1 1- r r• . � {t ,•I., .'f 1 t! '.T �.�t� , s,e tl4'. o s•.. r, I I I f� r.� „ f � , hd^ ,1.: e. n .F.>, )�r.. t, 1. o.. �'.�', �;' p,i�4 S'. �'aie .'S J, r .r f{fiS, t t I '4,4r, - 3 �r �. .'v. -, f A K' ,f .a......+u'r ,l. .t. 4 t,., ,1 U., r r ^rl, J i. �f i�r ;,: J ' Ir ',�l � �ls �ht � •tn a, ,..,+ .11.•. '! tt')Aro `.4 , 11. � iik •.,L: i� :'4 V.. Y ( '7 �, :,1) f 1S '4. 1 : 1 "r {h \, .l � �, I V F :'. t t,L `1"><ir'.` •7. F , } o(� :� )? t.. h 1 t � li: i)� � ::i �� 7 .. �f Ir . 3, q, .r1'.. nom' 'i .. L h:.��. \ � , rS�l L %.1 .. - r �l T:' ii 4: - ;'� �. z. ? �: �...., .c' t. .. , l.., :'n.. ., t:. ,1N�'. S, ,., : �4.• 1 1 VU'S ,. 1 1 rk r 'r, l ., u. I _ , >! Ir” 1 1: t ,} . � o ':r 6,l .. Y� �' �S :6�� r n v .X � . 1,: : .^ . } n, �'•'�p �'c , �!rt J' . N. 'f +Gu. �' 3 r''� ru, I ,1.:, 't.) e, t 11 :r... , rr.�.. ., � i .a Oct. , y, .: , .,.,,� y �, �r' �`ir. r - %' .. t' �ri .: "1 I i f f 3 ' -S', 5 - s" ,ntra•: , s, , ft, :S,r a 1. r c i , Y., I I r l.,.G a . , x r 1 ') rY,a <h, "� l.,, � I : �' > .'.� , >,':t .'3 .5. ,...x. <.,..; „v;,.... .r .. ;,. .... r. { .: },, .(.3 1: ,I. ..n, r ar�3 r,.r 11) I J -v :,rd .Q,m'• s a ' -r l:, �'�.. F ... /. ..' .�'� Y.r, : .5 �.. v. r.. •q. •u ,Y r r �° t �;J\. a ;'Z 1, i. 1 l t . r, rl ?s, 1 � ,1 :1 y z �•' , 1, .'u. � t..>;..? ^•. F.. ,.E, ..h•,1 l.,�. '.a' 13. ,�, „ ,� lr,. J' 's: �.,. U r „ K .I+,r {.. l :� ! }r'. �i .'.,:,�.r 'I'rr [tit U^ d �t .,,5 �.t r.l, •.S tt6r r.' �+ Yn .4 :.rl rnF nl d':. •��, }+' •i� ^s� r.n.,c�: �'. •h 'k. ;e:;t. Ir. L' t •o: r r ,t. ,t p 4u. {: r J, �� t ?r. .� 'wn' r.t; •n:, '+f.`u J, y, ar +1, , W ( r ,tJ ,f. i } 1. ! ,.5�.. k �. }, �• 1 'r' y ., �,r 'i :'r ''Y-! f�, •:h” P ' i', . - :} .1 r� 7 `I � %I� t.. ) n.. t.. � y rl -� 1' I f I e,:. 1.: }1} , ,4 1 i :. �Yq F 1� " 'I•. r "?r•., n.,. > „�:, 't'R`; `<r.. •. arr \ 1 , tlllr• : 1 r �L. r . , . S1.Y• a d�, t +t; =Cr. N , t!, ,•� r < d 1, ,+R* L. . a 1if 3�� +��`.`''�',. P7;v .n i ,�, -gi .r c4 . i .,I- },. (s + i., Y 7 'I P S ?k, 3 TI , 'i � . � .,�.!.•. ,..4..n 'fi �� r',Ya,1 , ,�:' I. t.,. :'l(n. At• -l��: le� � d..S :.A. 42 ..�F:IM �Y d- Is,:. ,r� ,:,� . ��,,�� t • Yr q� V- .t V ,( Cr) �rw, l !,) r : � ' t. .,., �f ,; ..., ;.y „ .l ...f. .. .._r`tS' .n. �UJ ., •�:v I °' •.. i v,M'. -r ,, ,, ,. ., :.I QI: - rY "i w t... + 1 h • ,:>• � .'i x) -c ti£'. K, f . . +� I e' � � 5 � , • t y, ! ,.a f ,N r :� 'a :.) . r F, , 1, t r� f�T > 4 r ,� s,, t' >,' � � : fF r.£Y. .��• ,�f tf.. .G o:. '.e:. •,.;,• .r y� �rl+" n .J . G h4. s., 9 .4. . /.$' .`. i.. : �,-Y t. .r7 .ta.. � a ,rtr,. , P' :.� �d. V d}� �r,.''6,T a - � . at• , t �i . ��"7'� !, •a,,... {.f•;_:., t. v :;.s. u . 5� �,i p, '^ :S. t ,„ { u t.•:n 's � , { r IRS �f4lJ. 4 1: 1 1..}. .'a +�, a” ,.Y,r � .I, " � G; M+ 1 •I. . ( b +^:i' .z .�': �• ✓! ?`m4 ° �". , n , .r'�•' ..b ,, 1 .1. ., w..7 ,�a �, it 1. t, 4s.}.:� P #a' }V7 . .'`` vt ��s F. ,6 S r..t . � �: 5�'.'s .S,q :if' t �,ti "�:. ,:. a�`• - •��n • •. t' �� dt r� d+ lT. a,+ e �., ,C' a.�.l th. filt.. ,:�.4.. ,LC �.9�1n 3 9.e,. r�,.7n .r? �?.. •�. -1'; tF�`��b�� -. :JfG!,M1�}`,'f�:t' a1f�.k xP�rc�t� x: }�+.fi� : .i"p; , k5 '�t�:fE:o[FiSV�;Gt4:t � .'��a b , rc�' , .l5 : 5s: ��'d'7. n�5�'r!: 91� } �.XI F. -: 1 :kiXnrj � " ?`�w.l ntY�r,�Jr�� ,I lei, ,,.:!4.tt4. 1 ...: ftJt ,, +}, -. , n, .v` , .. Y. INi Gt`.'4�. 0 ,,.M- ."1n.. S:�lyd3).�. �u �� - ,� � ��s i a � '� ' � � 1 '�"a � >.� :'try_ - �i��- y: °' >,�s?` �� - i cfi�fr ��v�� r �.'' 'tom -_,= „;: fin__: _ �.� ^', r .Y . a3 �,`-, - __'�:t- - _ :,, �,�.�� August i 0, 2010 ' �-- � "•"' � Brian Fields, P.E. w - = ..- �.�.�� =u City Engineer ,; � � = , :.:- rat " �. �:xE� "�}---- .:. = -� � >?;:�:� �.. - City of Winter Springs cNisF�iii�r� ass ° �uvc °'N�. 1126 East State Road 434 � � �.��-,:.�� = �` �`-�'¢ Winter Springs, FL 32708 £'a . ^i � � . � _ n_ �� .� � ��.��,. ` � Re: 12esponse to Comments `��-�� -'= Town Parize Apartments Traffic Impact Analysis • �� _�' -��' GbIB Project Number: 10- 024,01 �} � �- �� `" �- -� �� „�:- Dear Ivlr. Fields: � �w iii �-,- -. � � "��-� The following are GMB Eno neers 8i Planners responses to comments received on �� A� �„� �-�� r-�:� � the above mentioned project: �. • _� � �� "�3 � - _� Comments by: Brian Fields, P.E. • _ � _ �--� Company: City of Winter Springs u_ _ � � _ � Dated: August 3, 2010 - -�� z - _ _� - �- _ � - : - - z:--�. - i � "" - _ - Comment #1: Page 1. The text describes four driveways connections, but the plans _ �� show only rivo driveway connections to S.R. 434. Please clarify. - _ - r _ -�� Response: 1Votect. The study has been updated to reflect the correct nt.cmber of _ � _ � � driveway connections. fls identifced 1•vithin the revised report, access to -� � �-�F � the site will be provided via two (2) connections: one (1) right in /right __ ,�� _ � t�3 �' out connection to Townhouse Road and one (1) f dl access connection to - Michael Blake Boulevard, _ L _ t — � � s �..��± � ��~�� -� Comment #2: Provide a listing of data that has Ueen adjusted based on season and �,� � �� ` �-� � aYle adjustment factors from the first submittal to this submittal, includin, the - � �� ti �� - factors used and the source of data. �� .� � - -� -� ; �� ,�� Response: tVoted. Table B -1 has been attached to this neemorandtenz, stcmmari�ing ,�� the raw data and adjustment factors used within the second submittal. �.��.� � � �,� �'�' The seasonal and axle acjtrstmentfactors ii•ere determined from the 2009 =§ `° `-� ` x FDuT Traffic �nforntation C1�, which tivas proviried ti�•ithin the report as � ` � � �� part of appendix B (pages B -16 to 8 -18). � � � �� Town Parke �tpartmen[s — Response to Comme�:ts Atr� rst !0, 2010 Page 2 oj3 Comment #3: The intersection of Michael Blake Boulevard and S.R. 434 is planned as a future signalized intersection when �vananted for si�alization. Please provide a signal warrant analysis for this intersection based on projected intersection volume at the project build-out year {2013). Identify the assumptions made to complete the warrant analysis at this tune. Res�onse: Noted. The intersection of tLlichael Blake Boulevard and S.R 434 tiv«s ficrther eval:catecl for the possibilily of signali�ation. The intersection was analyaed da�ring the A�YI and PMpeak hoz�rs, using the volume w•arrant criterin (YYarrc�nt #1 and #Z) outlined tivithin the MUTCD. Based on this critenan, the nsinimirm volume re�t�irement for the side street is 53 vehicles. As seen within Appendix "I'; there nre 61 vehicles rluring the �1 peak hour and 36 vehtcles da�ring the PMpeak hour ta�rning lefi on lYlichael Blake Boulevard at project build-out. Based on the signnl warrant criteria, only the .91Y1 peak hoa�r would meet the volttme warrants. Fc�rthermore, the project development consists of r•esiclential apartnzents only, therefore, it cnn be conclztded that the development will not generate enoirgh tr��c for 8-hot�rs to meet the criteria and warrant a signal. It shoutd be notecl that the intersection of 1l�Iichael Blake Boailevarc� with S.R 43�F is approximntely 0.2 miles from the sio alized intersectiofl of S R 434 with Tarskawilla Road. Basecf on the FDOT Access lYlanagement criteric�, the minimt�m spacing for signals on a Class 3 roadtivay is 0.5 miles. Consistent tivith this criterion, the intersection of 1�Iich�iel Blake Bo��levard does not nzeet the minimcim spacing criterin. Horvever, based on conversations with City staff, the signal has been pre-approved Iry the F.D.O.T., as long as the sid al meets the signc�l tivarrttnt critericc, as ocitlined in the tYlUl'CD. Per conversations tivith City staff, the City requests that a preliminary analysis be performecl to revierr the ca�rrent state of the subject intersection and shotiv the potential impacts of the proposed development. YYhile it is hard to determine project trnffic for n residential development clt�ring the oJ}=peak conditions, the applicant cued engineering jecdgment to assist in the determinatior�. Using the information provided tivithin the ITE Trip Generation �Llrtnt�al (8"' Edition), fottr hours can be determitled, while the other foacr hours tivere bcrsed on a daily to hvur trip ratfo. It sfaocdcl be notecf that a signal warrant analysis requires eight ho�cr•s (8) of data collection, hovvever it r�•as assumed that t{ie major street (S..R. 439) tivoctl�f ineet the minimum rec�tiiremei�ts in the fi�ture (YR 2013). As seen ticithin YVarrant fil, tivhicll ecot Ge foi�rzd attached to this memorandurrz, the minor street volumes fail to meet the mini»zurrc criteria for sis (6) of tl�e required eight (8) hours to satisfy this rcarrnnt. It should be noted that this ir formatio�z is prelirni�sary and is intended for plannino pa�rposes on(y. J- � Town Parke Apartments — Response !o Comments �I:r,,Ptrst 10, 20l0 Pnge 3 oJ3 It shoulcl be also mentioned that the F.D.O.T. does not currentiv accept signal warrant analyses using fitture projected tra�c volttmes_ Comment #4: Tables 2/3. Provide an additional table showing the combined trip generation at build-out for ail phases. Resportse: fts seen rvithin the revised report, the adcfitional table shorving the combined trip generation at builtl-oiit (Table 4) has been provided within the revis�d study. Comment #5: Tables 4 and 6. The Daily MSV calculated for S.R. 434 of �8,800 is not acceptable. The ARTPLAN analysis is not accurately representing the IvISV of S.R. 434, although based on tLe submitted data it is difficult to identify where exactly any discrepancies exist (other than the free flow speed, which reduces to 50 mph from just west of Heritage Park tlu�ough TuskawiIla). The Winter Springs Comprehensive Plan lists the MSV for this segment of S.R. 434 as 35,700 vpd at LOS D, which can be utilized for this projeet. . Respoitse: Noted. The ART-Plan analysis has been removed from the st��dy anci £lie Daily �vlSVfor S.R. 434 has been c�prlated to reflect 1he rt NISV of 35,ODD, consistent with the City of Winter Springs Comprehensive Plan. If you have any questions or concerns, ptease hesitate to contact me at 407-893- 5424, ext. 255. Sincerely, G�IB En�in Planners � for 1Ylanuel Richardson Transportation Analyst .�ttachments: Table B-1 —Ezisting Traffc Volz�mP Determination YYctrrtrnt #1 — Eight Hour Yehicular T�oh�me J-� ��T� d6�'S 17 Revised Site Plc�n I�� II � ... .. .. . ... .. e � l\ `��,� \� � I ' ..� \V' � 1 1 � ^\ � ' � g � \� � _. .. ' ` �`;� •,1 �� . .._ __ '-- -:� __ � _.._.. _..._. _ .__..... ._..—.__.__—__ �.:— — ' — _ �..� u.. c.we�_� � -- _� __ _ __ � �� Kw.�.o:� _ _ — --_ . _ _. _. ---r-- SITE NOTES: m a �a«c -.wi•m��a n ne m�m > w.w..omm � �� 1 d��+�� +��+W-� wn - �u wn � iw O.uA.�f�G �6�/�c � ), ui.i Mw�a �Uel�: � ��u41 GRAPHIC SCAIE irx w�n '� UNIT dc PARKING NOTES:� .:cuc�� em+eui P) • �� wn �s�� 1�1 - � u�n m� PI - b u�n a Raow •. , � ..�.Y .� �� - » �.,, ..�.. em.ew m . » wm �aaauuu maa w . � wn � Pl - �� wm a �maai (c) • � wn '/�( IDIy,11� . �a wn /��>' VTVn[.�mf 1 �.,i�...�a�� ,�,o.�...��,� `:w.�,b::.��°":.a, , m :..,�„n ..� v.�m : � v.�c,�' , Y � i� NA� rxw�p wm • � vm 3 1 �r.,rn.w.�ow+«�.� _�.!..m ��I 1"; }'.i�.. , r. T-� 'Y . # r�w.�u4 �w4C...4 vwS� . ] n�R� 'il".•ltld': 'f::4r Z 7 51'E��L q EnRl % �C �OTES�� ` wna.°��. o.rm u.� � �u..wm.n.. v� '_"_ "_ ,. � s� a ar� �°.�°�"m ... ... .. °f �`" 0 nuo� �• � �wu�.`m'""`w�m :.°o �.o...�n ��na..o�....,�<.o.+w,� ��---�-------_— I'J: - !..iL'r.. 7_r�:�F�:... �.- "ba1 � L., � '' , .. I ��.:� ..- _ V � oMl obw�w � I:a�l �»�- � � � � g � y � � � O a 0 F J Y +R e� a �� . 3 ��_ � 0 F I 8 ^ 9 tl :� a 1 S � v : d d� � � 6 a � . a� �, �� $ � ST � • David Mulholiand, P.E. has over 17 years of experience (il with GMB) in the professional field of practice that encompasses a wide variety of transportation planning and tra�c engineering projects. Mr. Mulholland has e�ensive experience in the preparation and evaluation of newly proposed projects and reuse developments. The services provided in these studies include concurrency applications, due diligence reviews, access studies and permitting, rezoning, master planning, driveway connection variances, pedestrian studies, safety analysis, and the preparation of alternative impact fees. He currently manages the Orange County Alternative Road Impact Fee Monitoring Studies Contract, Putnam County Continuing Transportation Planning Contract, and District Five Districtwide Intermodal Systems Development contract. • • AFFIDAVTT OF RA.NDALL SLOCUM STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF ORANGE BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared Ra.ndall Slocum, who being duly swom, deposes and states: 1. I am over 21 years of age and make this affidavit based upon my personal knowledge, and that I am the President of Slocum Platts Architects located at 200 E. New England Avenue, Suite 300, Winter Park, Florida 32789. 2. I am a professionally qualified arclutect, having earned my Masters in Architecture. 3. I have engaged in the registered profession of architecture far over 20 yeazs. 4. I have been retained by Atlantic Housing, LLP to provide competent and substantial evidence as well as expert testimony regarding the Fina1 Development Plan and Appearance and Aesthetic Review for the Town Parke project located in Winter Springs, Florida. 5. I have personally reviewed the Conceptual Plan approved by the City on Apri127, 2009; the Final Development Plan; and the Appearance and Aesthetic Review package submitted on September 29, 2010. 6. It is my professional opinion and testimony that: (a) The Final Development Plan is in substantial conformity with the approved Conceptual Plan. {b) The Final Develflpment Plan is in substantial conformance with the City's Land Development Code and Comprehensive Plan. (c) The architectural elevations and other documents submitted substantially conform with the Town Center Zoning Architectural Guidelines and the C�mmunity Appearance and Aesthetic Review Standards. 09096921t48282\133137111 Dated this �ay of 2010. FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NO' SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED betore me this /oiTd'ay o RANDALL SLOCUM, � who is personally known to as identification. ob�r 2010 by me or ❑ produced \ �a�su«iruu► i �� ``\ ��DYS G, 9 �c ' �� , . (NOTARY SEAL) � �,�tissro;y �` �,� � * .: ��' �`� � : = Notary Public S atur S . ' s ��'� � =z: `� .�l-� '° ' � : - {Name typed, printed or stamped) ' -r ;� ; Q � ' ., ''�d 1h "' �.°` Notary Public State of Florida ''//'/�� 1+iii ii�i��o�,` My Commission Expires: • oZoZ o�0 f I 0909692\148282\1331371\I � • u SL�CUM PLATTS ARCHITECTS Slocum Platts Architects, P.A. is an Architecture firm specializing in innovative design, located in Winter Park, Florida. Partners Randall J. Slocum and William P. Platts blend diversified portfolios in custom residential, multi-family, commercial, restaurant, resort hospitality, historic preservation, religious/education facilities and independent / assisted living facilities. The firm provides detail oriented service to their clients, stemming from combined talents in conceptual programming, planning, architectural design, documentation, construction administration and rendering presentations. William P. Platts / Principal Education: Professional Registration: Clemson University, Clemson, South Carolina Masters Degree in Architecture, 1986 Charles E. Daniel Center for Research and Urban Studies, Genoa, Italy, 1984 Bachelor of Science in Design, 1984 Randall J. Slocum / Principal Education: Montana State University, Bozeman, MT 5 Year Bachelor of Arts in Architecture, 1983 Masters Degree in Architecture, 2008 Russel M. Goliath / Director of Architecture Education: Andrews University, Berrien Springs, Michigan 5 Year Bachelor of Arts in Architecture, 1991 April 1990 June 1991 Sept. 2000 May 2002 June 2002 June 2003 May 2006 State of Florida, AR013262 NCARB State of Texas, 17131 State of N.C., 9144 State of Georgia, RA010607 State of Maryland, 0013551 State of Tennessee, 00103286 Professional Registration: May 1990 State of Florida, AR0013350 Aug.1990 NCARB April 2001 State of N.C., 8856 Sept. 2001 State of Montana, 2382 Mar. 2003 State of Michigan, 1301050271 HIGHLIGHTED ASSISTED / INDEPENDENT LIVING FACILITIES / SENIOR APARTMENTS: Oakview Assisted Living Facility Orlando, FL 2010 Madison Glen Senior Housing Apts. Ormond Beach, FL. 2010 Madison Vines Senior Housing Apts. Ft. Pierce, FL 2010 Madison Manor Senior f-Iousing Apts. Jacksonville, FL 2007 Lansdowne Terrace Tampa, FL 2005 Glenbrooke Pines Assisted / Independent Living Facility Palm Bay, FL 2003 HIGHLIGHTED RELIGIOUS FACILITIES: Seventh Day Adventist Church St. Anastasia Administration Building St. Anastasia Classroom Buildings St. Anastasia Band Room HIGHLIGHTED GOVERNMENT PROJECTS: City of Haines City Armory ��it�. r�r�+t�ti+��._� � �it�� t��,t�� i�,t� �uil,lin_�� .�t�C'lli(C'� l til'(l1 ill':�1�11 Sanford, FL 2009 Ft. Pierce, FL 1996 Ft. Pierce, FL 1996 Ft. Pierce, FL 1999 Flaines City FL.. 30Q9 ;;�;intti it� , _lU= 1�, .e �' �� f I �� [1 �' , w'�r ar �. �. � • • • SLOGUM PLATTS ARCHITECTS HIGHLIGHTED REHABILITATION PROJECTS: Seventh Day Adventist Day Care The Preserve Marina Landing Park @ Lee Vista Apartments Camden Bay Apartments McArthur Golf Club Osprey Links Gates @ Harbor Town The Vinings @ Delray Beach Jefferson Summit Apartments HIGHLIGHTED MULTI-FAMILY PROJECTS: College Suites at Woodbury Rd. Landmark at Universal Apts. Lakewood Dormitory Santa Fe Apartments Links at Bent Creek Bella Via Condominiums Avalon Park Townhomes Phase I- IV Kennesaw Farms: Aurora Award Winner in 2009 Grand Aurora Award in 2009 Sanford, FL. 2009 Orlando, FL 2007 Orlando, FL 2006 Orlando, FL 2005 Tampa, FL 2005 Hobe Sound, FL 2005 Orlando, FL 2004 Orlando, FL 2004 Delray Beach, FL 2004 Orlando, FL 2003 Orlando, FL. 2010 Orlando, FL. 2009 Fern Park, FL. 2009 Gainesville, FL 2008 Jacksonville, FL 2008 Charlotte County, FL 2007 Orlando, FL 2005 - 2007 Best in State Award Winner in 2009 Tennessee, 2006 Arlington Place Winter Park, FL 2006 La Amistad Phase II Orlando, FL 2006 Overvue Condominiums St. Petersburg, FL 2006 Penn. Ave. Townhomes: Grand Aurora Award Winner in 2007 Winter Park, FL 2005 Apollo Beach Condominiums Apollo Beach, FL 2005 Park Towers @ Uptown Altamonte Springs, FL 2005 Tuscan Reserve Condominium: Aurora Award Winner in 2007 Palm Coast, FL 2005 Gainesville Place Apartments Gainesville, FL 2005 Black Pearl Condominiums Daytona Beach, FL 2005 Harbor Vista Condominiums Leesburg, FL 2004 Blanton Commons Georgia, 2004 The Highlands at Heathbrook Ocala, FL 2004 �Iawthorne Groves at Port Orange Port Orange, FL 2004 Country Club Oaks Orlando, FL 2004 Woods Crossing II Easton, NID 2004 Park Place Townhomes: Grand Aurora Award Winner in 2004 W inter Park, FL 2003 HIGHLIGHTED MULTI-FAMILY AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS: Esperanza Apartments Signature Crossings Apartments Beach Village Apartments Covington Townhomes Lakewood Pointe Apartments Fountains at Falkenburg Apartments Southwinds Apartments Fairview Cove Apartments Malabar Cove Apartments Madison Cay Apartments Ro(lin�� cres apariments .-lrc:hi[ectur��l 1)c5i�;n Naples, FL. 2010 Osceola County FL. 2010 Flagler County FL. 2009 Oviedo, FL. 2009 Tampa, FL. 2009 Hillsborough County, FL 2008 Leesburg FL 2008 Hillsborough County, FL 2008 Palm Bay, FL 200$ Fort Pierce, FL 20Q � L;tl:e C'��ntv_ Fl. ?O(i� l;tl'� ilellC: �' �+• `3 ,r 1(i1211 ,�,� • • • SLOGUM PLATTS r�RCHITECTS HIGHLIGHTED MULTI-FAMILY AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROJECTS CONTINUED: Cape Morris Cove Apartments Daytona Beach, FL 2007 Spring Lake Cove Apartments Fruitland Park, FL 2007 Charleston Cay Apartments Charlotte County, FL 2007 Oviedo Town Center Apartments Oviedo, FL 2006 Fountains at Millenia Grand Aurora Award Winner in 2008 Orlando, FL 2006 Marbella Apartments Orange County, FL 2006 Nautilus Cove Apartments Panama City, FL 2005 Lakeside Pointe Apartments Leesburg, FL 2005 Cove at Lady Lake Lake County, FL 2005 Enterprise Cove Apartments Orange City, FL 2005 Lake Harris Cove Apartments Leesburg, FL 2005 Belle Isle Apartments Orlando, FL 2004 Madison Green Apartments Jacksonville, FL 2004 St. Andrew's Pointe Apartments Port St. Lucie, FL 2004 Newport Sound Apartments New Smyrna Beach, FL 2004 Stone Harbor Apartments Panama City, FL 2004 Hunters Run Apartments Tampa, FL 2003 Camden Cove Apartments Naples, FL 2003 Ashton Creek Apartments Lawrenceville, GA 2003 Bridgewater Club Apartments Spring Hill, FL 2003 Somerset Club Apartments Bartow County, GA 2003 Newnan Crossing Apartments Coweta County, GA 2003 Eagles Pointe Apartments Glynn County, GA 2003 Westwood Club Apartments Columbia County, GA 2002 Regatta Bay Apartments Kissimmee, FL 2002 Newport Sound Apartments New Smyrna Beach, FL 2002 Cambridge Cove Apartments Lakeland, FL 2002 Sabal Palm Apartments Manatee County, FL 2002 Riverside Apartments Tarpon Springs, F12002 Brittany Bay Apartments Naples, FL 2002 Brookside Apartments Alachua County, FL 2001 HIGHLIGHTED HOSPITALITY PROJECTS: World Quest Resort Orange County, FL 2004 - 2007 Lake Buena Vista Resorts Orange County, FL 2004 — 2007 Mystic Dunes Time Share Community Kissimmee, FL 2000-2007 Sunset Palms Resort Kissimmee, FL 2006 Celebration World Resort Kissimmee, FL 2000-2004 Cypress Palms Resort Administration Building Kissimmee, FL 1999 HIGHLIGHTED COMMERICAL PROJECTS: Lakewood Health Care Absolute Sound Windermere Corners Minnesota Office Building Honda Motorcycle Dealership Prince Bush Office Building Jamali Art Studio Harbor Federal Bank Building Park Place Office Buildings West New England Office Building Dexter's Multi-Use Building Fern Park, FL. 2009 Winter Park, FL. 2008 Orange Counry, FL 2007 Winter Park, FL 2007 Orange County, FL 2002 W inter Park, FL 2000 Winter Park, FL 2000 Ft. Pierce, FL 2000 Metrowest, FL 2000 W inter Park, FL 1999 Winter Park, FL 1999 r�rchitectural Desi�n Etcelleilce .�. �: � � � CJ � SLOCUM PLATTS ARCHITECTS HIGHLIGHTED RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS: Aurora Award Winners in 1999, 2000, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006 and 2008: Elabitat for Humanity — 2009 Winter Park, FL. 2008 Burden Residence — 2008 Orlando, FL 2006 Schenk Residence - 2006 W inter Park, FL 2004 McCalley Residence - 2005 Indian EIarbor Beach, FL 2003 Fuentes Residence - 2005 Winter Park, FL 2002 Berman Town homes — 2004 W inter Park, FL. 2004 Cordeil Residence - 2003 Winter Park, FL 2003 Cornell / Pelligrini Isleworth Residence - 2003 Windermere, FL 2001 B. Keller Residence - 2000 Lake County, FL 2000 R Keller Residence - 1999 Winter Park, FL 1999 Kennedy Cottage Plattsville, NY. 2009 Prince Ranch House Shiner, TX. 2010 Williams Residence Winter Park, FL. 2010 Luthra Residence Winter Park, FL. 2008 Hill Residence Orlando, FL. 2008 Hurt Residence Winter Park, FL. 2007 Glencoe Residence Winter Park, FL 2007 Windsong Lot #33 Winter Park, FL 2007 Hurt Residence Winter Park, FL 2007 Lyden Residence North Carolina, 2006 Ebrill Residence Lake County, FL 2006 Dietrich Residence Winter Park, FL 2006 Welker Residence Orlando, FL 2006 Giacalone Residence Winter Park, FL 2006 Einhorn Residence Winter Park, FL 2005 Johnston Residence Winter Park, FL 2005 Seigle Residence Winter Park, FL 2005 Hajek Residence Gulfport, FL 2005 Labadie Residence Michigan 2004 Culp Residence Seminole County, FL 2004 Tovissi Residence W inter Park, FL 2004 Herbert Residence Phillips Landing, FL 2003 Swann Residence Orlando, FL 2003 Toye / Glickman Residence Winter Park, FL 2003 Bethel Residence Winter Park, FL 2002 McIntosh Residence Winter Park, FL 2002 Pabst Residence W inter Park, FL 2002 Lyden Residence Winter Park, FL 2002 Jaffee Residence Maitland, FL 2001 Panella Residence Winter Park, FL 2001 Wetnight Residence Winter Park, FL 2001 Lawrence Residence Winter Park, FL 2000 r�rchitectural Desi�n Excellence ..:� �3 , inn i � � T � AFFIDAVIT OF DAVID GLUNT. P.E. STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF ORANGE BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally appeared David Glunt, P.E., who being duly sworn, deposes and states: 1. I am over 21 years of age and make this affidavit based upon my personal knowledge, and that I am a Principal at Madden, Moorhead & Glunt, Inc., located at 431 E. Horatio Avenue, Suite 260, Maitland, FL 32751. 2. I am a professionally qualified engineer, having earned a Bachelor of Science of Civil Engineering from the University of Central Florida. 3. I have engaged in the profession of engineering for over 15 years and I am a licensed and registered Professional Engineer. 4. I have provided Federal, State and local jurisdictional pezmitting, engineering planning and design, and construction administration for a variety of clients. 5. I have provided all aspects of site development including feasibility analysis, conceptual planning and design, stormwater design and computer nnodeling, roadway design, utilities and other related design elements of land development consulting services in connection with land use and development projects and real estate holdings in the State of Florida, as listed in my attached Qualifications Statement. 6. I have been retained by Atlantic Housing, LP to provide engineering services for the final development plan for Towne Park ("Project") in accordance with the Land Development Code of the City of Winter Springs. 7. On September _2_, 2010, I submitted the Final Development Plan for the Project. 8. It is my professional opinion and testimony that: (a) The Final Development Plan is in conformance with the City's Land Development Code, the Town Center zoning designation, the City's Comprehensive Plan and that certain concept plan approved by the City in Apri12009; (b) As required by the applicable sections of the City Land Development Code, the proposed Final Development Plan will not result in demands on public facilities and services exceeding the capacity of such facilities and services, existing or programmed, including transportation, utilities, drainage, recreation, education, emergency services, and similar necessary facilities and services; and 0909692U 48282\i 329152\l � . r, SWORN TO AND SUBSCRIBED before me this�� day of S� 2010 by DAVID GLUNT, P.E., � who is personally known to me or � produced as identification. (c) As required by the applicable sections of the City Land Development Code, the proposed Final Development Plan will not have significant adverse impacts on the natural environment. ``.`y' `l r � ,' ` , .` '� ? `> �.� � „�� , ` '+�\ ; , : �� '� • �j ��'^. !% : n ��' , �f �• � '�.� �.> � t,�'• Dated this 0�� day of Q�� 2010. _""�;�" `� t ., '�• J E — i-, �,.. . .' �� = ' ' �:.� � �y t�- �"j : _ - ' ls_ ' ;, — FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT. ' "' ° `� `� � - � ' � — 4^ ' ' �, ,�� {1 �' ��, Signature: ; ..�t. " ..�-�, .; `":' . : � ,.� DAVID GL T, P.E. �''•,,,. . ' . ��. � ,;.��a� (NOTARY SEAL) �'"`"'� IVICOI.E M�►iRTIIJ MY COD�+f18810N / DD991b1Z '� �CPIItE4:Av�oet0a,2014 �aoose�or�ar r�.Mo�•piooetArodGb l No,"ary Public Sign ture N� c�l.� n/1�{��, (Name typed, printed or stamped) Notary Public, State of Florida My Commission Expires: S D909692\148282\1329152\1 MADDEN, MOORHEA�D & GLUNT, INC. Resume of Qualifzcation DAVID F. GLUNT, P. E. PRINCIPAL PROFESSIONAL ABSTRACT David F. Glunt, P.E. joined the firm in January 2001. As a Principal, Dave manages his projects and staff to produce a quality product and provides continuous communication with the client. Dave's professional capabilities include representing the client in public forums, Federal, State and local permitting, engineering design and construction administration. Dave has designed and permitted civil engineering projects throughout the State of Florida. His design experience includes stormwater design and modeling, conceptual layout, feasibility analysis, roadway design, earthwork and utility design. Dave is the Engineer-of-Recorii on numerous civil engineering projects throughout i of Florida v , His design expertise includes all aspec��o��x�e��"evel�ipme�t� including feasibility analyses, conce��r;i�al �7anYUng an�i r design, stormwater design anc� compufer_,... mo'deluig�, roadway design, util�ties �,and; o�lier related design elemen�s",� of land development � His computer ski1L associated software geologic, CAD an particularly adept applications, and Moorhead & Glunt. ie full range of ::�levelc hydrologic%'>hydraulic; rmm�iitPr mnrlPlincr `. ter � AREAS OF EXPERTISE ; Urban Engineering & Development including: ♦ Multi-family Developments ♦ Single-family Developmerits ♦ Commercial/ Industrial Projects ♦ Roadway & Drainage Analysis 8i Design ♦ Preliminary and Final Engineering Design ♦ Stormwater Management Analysis & Design ♦ Computer Modeling ♦ Water and Wastewater Analysis & Design ♦ Project Management ♦ Jurisdictional Agency Liaison ♦ Low Impact and Sustainable Developments NOTABLE PROTECT EXPERIENCE ♦ Sterling Meadows Subdivision ♦ Orlando Paving Asphalt Plant ♦ Citrus County Maximum Risk juvenile justice Facility ♦ Newberry Ridge Subdivision ♦ Wolf Creek Ridge Subdivision ♦ Sullivan Ranch Subdivision ♦ Mystic Cove Apartrnents ♦ Fountains at Millenia Apartments ♦ North Bridge at Millenia Lake ♦ Orlando Gateway ♦ Nova Southeastern University ♦ Ashebrook Subdivision ♦ Okeechobee Ford ♦ Millenia Lakes Offices II and III ♦ Westin Hotel Lake Mary ♦ Winter Garden Executive Center � Rockefeller Group Corporate Center CATION elor of Science Civil Engineering ersity of Central Florida (1995) FESSIONAL REGISTRATION da Professional Engineer #57459 PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS ♦ Florida Engineering Society ♦ Florida Institute of Consulting Engineers ♦ Home Builders Association - Lake County ♦ National Socieiy of Professional Engineers 431 E. Horatio Avenue, Ste. 260 ♦ Maitland, FL 32751 ♦ phone: 407.629.8330 ♦ fax: 407.629.8336