2035 mvp chapter 1 introduction

Page 1

Polk 2035 Mobility Vision Plan Adopted December 7, 2010

Amended: February 23, 2012 June 7, 2012 Prepared for:

Polk Transportation Planning Organization 330 West Church Street Bartow, Florida www.polktpo.com www.2035mobilityvisionplan.org

Prepared by:

URS Corporation Southern 7650 West Courtney Campbell Causeway Tampa, Florida 33607-1462


This page left intentionally blank


Polk Transportation Planning Organization 2035 Mobility Vision Plan

Credits and Acknowledgements

CREDITS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Polk Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) Board Chairperson, Commissioner Patrick Huff Vice-Chairperson, Roy Tyler

Polk County:

Commissioner Sam Johnson Commissioner Bob English Commissioner Edwin Smith Commissioner Todd Dantzler Commissioner Melony Bell

City of Winter Haven:

Mayor Jeff Potter Commissioner Nat Birdsong Commissioner Steven Hunnicutt

City of Lakeland:

Commissioner Phil Walker Mayor Gow Fields Commissioner Glenn Higgins Commissioner Edie Yates Commissioner Don Selvage Commissioner Justin Troller

City of Bartow:

Commissioner Patrick Huff

City of Haines City: Commissioner Roy Tyler City of Auburndale:

Commissioner Jack Myers

City of Lake Wales: Commissioner Jack Van Sickle

East County Voting Bloc Lake Hamilton:

Mayor Marlene Wagner

Lake Alfred:

Commissioner Tracy Garcia

Dundee:

Vice Mayor Randy Dowd

Eagle Lake:

Commissioner Wanda Petranick

City of Davenport:

Council Member Robert Lynch

Polk City:

Mayor Joe LaCascia Vice Mayor Trudy Block

South County Voting Bloc Mulberry:

Commissioner Collins Smith

Frostproof:

Council Member Kay Hutzelman

Fort Meade:

Commissioner Rick Cochrane Vice Mayor Bob Elliot

Art Credit: The artwork used throughout this document is from the Polk TPO’s Seventh Annual “Transportation of the Future” Poster Contest. Over 400 students from grades 4 through 8 participated in the contest, which has been recognized by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) as an outstanding example of public outreach. The contest was organized by the TPO’s Public Communications Specialist Jan Johnson, who passed away in 2010.

i

Adopted December 7, 2010


Polk Transportation Planning Organization 2035 Mobility Vision Plan

Credits and Acknowledgements

CREDITS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS (CONTINUED) Polk County Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) Chairperson, Sean Byers Vice-Chairperson, Chuck Barmby Polk County:

City of Winter Haven:

City of Bartow:

Thomas Deardorff City of Lakeland: (Growth Management Director) Wendy Alspaugh (Director of Trans. Engineering) Bill Skelton (Designee for Trans. Director) Paul Simmons (Transit Services Director) City of Auburndale: Sunit Dowudom (Designee for Transit Director)

Celeste Deardorff (Long Range Planning Mgr.) Charles Barmby (Designee for Planning Mgr.) Richard Lilyquist (Public Works Director)

Sean Byers (Designee for Planning Mgr.) Dale Smith (City Manager) David Dickey (Community Development Dir.)

City of Haines City:

Mark Bennett (Designee for City Manager) Ann Toney-Deal (City Mgr.)

City of Lake Wales:

Bob Weigers (Public Works Director Designee for City Manager)

Kathy Bangley (Designee for City Manager) Judith Delmar (City Manager)

Town of Frostproof:

Sarah Adel (Designee for Town Manager) T.R. Croley (Town Manager) Jennifer Codo-Salisbury (Central FL RPC, Alternate)

City of Mulberry:

Frank Satchel Jr. (City Mgr.)

City of Eagle Lake:

Pete Gardner (City Manager) Dawn Bially (Designee for City Manager) Marisa Barmby (Central FL RPC, Alternate)

City of Polk City:

Cory Carrier (City Manager) Pam Peterson (Alternate)

Central FL Regional Planning Council (CFRPC):

Patricia Steed (Director) Jennifer Codo-Salisbury (Designee for Director) Helen Sears (Alternate)

City of Lake Alfred: Larry Harbuck (City Manager) Valerie Way (Designee to City Manager) City of Fort Meade: Fred Hilliard (City Manager) Town of Lake Hamilton:

Mayor Marlene Wagner Doug Lenard (Designee for Town Manager)

Tow of Dundee:

Andy Stewart (Tow Manager) Marisa Barmby (Central FL RPC, Alternate)

City of Davenport: Amy Arrington (City Manager) Jerry Rodriguez (Development Svcs. Director) Polk County School Board:

Larry Helton (Designee for Superintendent)

Shawn Sherrouse (Designee for City Manager) Robert Green (City Manager)

Lakeland Area Mass Danny Ours (Director) Transit District (LAMTD): Adopted December 7, 2010

ii


Polk Transportation Planning Organization 2035 Mobility Vision Plan

Credits and Acknowledgements

CREDITS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS (CONTINUED) Polk County Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) Chairperson, Paul Staes Vice-Chairperson, Allen Keefeer

Lakeland Urbanized Area City of Lakeland:

David Hitchcock Ken Campbell

Lakeland Urbanized Area At Large:

Michael Finch Franklin Shoemaker Paul Staes Peter Karashay

Winter Haven Urbanized Area City of Winter Haven:

Philip Van Winkle Kellie Norris

Town of Dundee:

James Hall

City of Lake Alfred:

Leon Juday

City of Haines City:

Joe Hamilton

City of Auburndale:

Allen Keefer

City of Eagle Lake:

Howard Buck

City of Polk City:

Roger Smith

Non-Urbanized Area Non-Urbanized Area At Large:

Louis Campanelli

City of Fort Meade:

Garrett Cagiano

City of Bartow:

Walter O’Rourke

City of Frostproof:

John Biehl

Pedestrian/Bicycle Members Bike/Ped At Large:

Stewart Prince Alternates At Large

Edward LeDuc Paul Helmsteter Peter Jankowsky

iii

Adopted December 7, 2010


Polk Transportation Planning Organization 2035 Mobility Vision Plan

Credits and Acknowledgements

CREDITS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS (CONTINUED) 2035 Mobility Vision Plan (MVP) Steering Committee AECOM for Haines City: Brent Lacy

City of Mulberry:

Vanessa Baker

CFRPC:

Town of Dundee:

Andy Stewart Joe DeLegge

City of Polk City:

Kristy Eilertsen Pam Peterson

City of Winter Haven:

Dale Smith David Dickey Sean Byers Terrence Nealy Erin Tilghman

CivilSurv:

Hetty Harmon

Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT):

Lori Carlton Bob Crawley

Amy Arrington Jerry Rodriguez

LAMTD:

Danny Ours

City of Eagle Lake:

Dawn Bialy Pete Gardner

Polk County Growth Management:

Thomas Deardorff Quen Wilson

City of Fort Meade:

Fred Hilliard Deena Ware

Polk County Land Development:

City of Frostproof:

T.R. Croley

Chandra Frederick Tom Woodrich Erik Peterson John Bohde

City of Haines City:

Ann Toney-Deal Mark Bennett Heath Fordyce

Polk County Long Range Planning:

Ana Martinex Chanda Bennett Thado Hays

City of Lake Alfred:

Jan Shockley Larry Harbuck Valerie Way

Polk County School Board:

Larry Helton

Polk County Transit Services (PCTS):

Sunit Dowudom

Pat Steed Helen Sears Jennifer Codo-Salisbury Marcia Staszko Marisa Barmby Terry Simmers

City of Auburndale:

Robert Green Shawn Sherrouse

City of Bartow:

Bob Weigers George Long Ken Absher Russ Martin Patrick Huff

City of Davenport:

City of Lakes Wales:

City of Lakeland:

Adopted December 7, 2010

Kathy Bangley Margaret Swanson

Polk County Bill Skelton Transportation Engineering: Wendy Alspaugh

Celeste Deardorff Bruce Kisler Greg James Richard Lilyquist

Polk TPO:

iv

Ben Dunn Curtis Knowles Ryan Kordek Laura Lockwood Diane Slaybaugh Jennifer Stults Cherie Simmons


Polk Transportation Planning Organization 2035 Mobility Vision Plan

Credits and Acknowledgements

CREDITS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS (CONTINUED) Polk TPO Staff Jennifer Stults, AICP, TPO Long-Range Planning Director Ryan Kordek, Transportation Planning Administrator Ben Dunn, Senior Transportation Planner Curtis Knowles, Senior Transportation Planner Laura Lockwood, Senior Transportation Planner Diane Slaybaugh, Senior Transportation Planner Jan Johnson, TPO Public Communications Specialist Cherie Simmons, Office Manager

v

Adopted December 7, 2010


Polk Transportation Planning Organization 2035 Mobility Vision Plan

Credits and Acknowledgements

This page left intentionally blank

Adopted December 7, 2010

vi


Polk Transportation Planning Organization 2035 Mobility Vision Plan

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter

Page

1.0

2.0

3.0 4.0

5.0

CREDITS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................. i LIST OF ACRONYMS ......................................................................................................... xiii INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1‐1 1.1 Polk TPO Board and Committee Structure ................................................................ 1‐1 1.2 2035 Mobility Vision Plan .......................................................................................... 1‐2 1.3 SAFETEA‐LU Planning Factors .................................................................................... 1‐2 SETTING THE STAGE ........................................................................................................ 2‐1 2.1 Planning Since the Last Update ................................................................................. 2‐1 2.2 How Will Polk County Grow? .................................................................................... 2‐7 2.2.1 Future Land Use ........................................................................................... 2‐7 2.2.2 Population and Employment Projections ..................................................... 2‐8 2.2.3 Major Activity Centers ................................................................................ 2‐11 2.2.4 Environmental Constraints and Mitigation ................................................ 2‐11 2.2.4.1 Mitigation Challenges, Opportunities, and Strategies ............... 2‐14 2.2.4.2 Specific Mitigation Challenges ................................................... 2‐18 2.2.4.3 Mitigation Opportunities ........................................................... 2‐18 2.2.4.4 Senate Bill Mitigation ................................................................. 2‐20 2.2.4.5 Mitigation Strategies .................................................................. 2‐20 2.3 Technical Tools and Processes Used in the 2035 MVP ........................................... 2‐21 2.3.1 2007 Polk County Model ............................................................................ 2‐21 2.3.2 Long Range Transportation Plan Costing Tool ........................................... 2‐22 2.3.3 Transit Cost Estimating Tool ....................................................................... 2‐23 2.3.4 Efficient Transportation Decision Making Process ..................................... 2‐23 GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES ................................................................................. 3‐1 WHAT THE PUBLIC SAID ABOUT THE 2035 MVP .............................................................. 4‐1 4.1 Spreading the Word .................................................................................................. 4‐1 4.1.1 Newsletters .................................................................................................. 4‐1 4.1.2 Polk TV and Radio ......................................................................................... 4‐2 4.1.3 Newspaper and Print Media ........................................................................ 4‐2 4.1.4 Website/Internet .......................................................................................... 4‐2 4.1.5 Workshops and Special Events ..................................................................... 4‐3 4.2 Public Survey Results ................................................................................................. 4‐4 4.2.1 Survey #1 – Setting Transportation Goals and Identifying Needs................ 4‐4 4.2.2 Survey #2 – Identifying Transportation Investment Priorities ..................... 4‐5 4.3 Public Hearing............................................................................................................ 4‐6 4.4 Summary of Public Comments and How the 2035 MVP Responds to the Comments ................................................................................................................. 4‐6 DEFINING NEEDS THROUGH 2035 ................................................................................... 5‐1 5.1 Identifying Deficiencies ............................................................................................. 5‐1 5.1.1 E+C Network Results .................................................................................... 5‐1 5.1.2 Other Sources of Transportation Needs ...................................................... 5‐1 5.2 Road and Highway Needs .......................................................................................... 5‐7

vii

Adopted December 7, 2010


Polk Transportation Planning Organization 2035 Mobility Vision Plan

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)

Chapter

Page

5.2.1 5.2.2 5.2.3

6.0

7.0

Capacity Needs on Major Road Networks ................................................... 5‐7 Congestion Management Needs .................................................................. 5‐7 ITS Needs .................................................................................................... 5‐20 5.2.3.1 Providing for Transportation Safety and Security ...................... 5‐21 5.2.3.2 Transportation Safety ................................................................ 5‐21 5.2.3.3 Transportation Security ............................................................. 5‐22 5.2.3.4 How Safety and Security Considerations Helped Shape the 2035 MVP ................................................................................... 5‐26 5.2.4 Public/Private Road Needs ......................................................................... 5‐26 5.2.5 Constrained Corridors ................................................................................ 5‐27 5.3 Freight Mobility Needs ............................................................................................ 5‐38 5.4 Transit Needs ........................................................................................................... 5‐40 5.4.1 Bus System ................................................................................................. 5‐41 5.4.1.1 Route Improvements and Expansion ......................................... 5‐41 5.4.1.2 Fleet Requirements .................................................................... 5‐41 5.4.1.3 Transit Infrastructure ................................................................. 5‐49 5.4.1.4 Implementation of the 2060 Transportation Vision Plan .......... 5‐49 5.4.2 Commuter Rail ............................................................................................ 5‐51 5.4.3 High‐Speed Rail .......................................................................................... 5‐51 5.5 Non‐Motorized Transportation ............................................................................... 5‐51 5.5.1 Pedestrian Needs ....................................................................................... 5‐53 5.5.2 Bicycle and Multi‐Use Trail Needs .............................................................. 5‐53 5.6 Regional Needs ........................................................................................................ 5‐57 5.7 How Does the 2035 Needs Network Perform? ....................................................... 5‐61 5.7.1 Model Results ............................................................................................. 5‐61 5.8 Estimated Cost of Needs ......................................................................................... 5‐61 SETTING PRIORITIES FOR 2035 ........................................................................................ 6‐1 6.1 Criteria Used to Set Priorities .................................................................................... 6‐1 6.1.1 Roads and Highways Criteria ........................................................................ 6‐1 6.1.1.1 Environmental Screening ........................................................... 6‐10 6.1.2 Transit Criteria ............................................................................................ 6‐12 6.1.2.1 Additional Considerations for Transit ........................................ 6‐17 6.1.3 Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Multi‐Use Trail Criteria ........................................ 6‐17 FINANCIAL PLAN ............................................................................................................. 7‐1 7.1 Reasonably Available Revenues ................................................................................ 7‐1 7.1.1 State and Federal Highway Funding ............................................................. 7‐1 7.1.2 County and City Roadway Funding .............................................................. 7‐2 7.1.3 Transit Funding ............................................................................................. 7‐4 7.1.3.1 Dedicated Transit Funding and Other Assumptions .................... 7‐4 7.2 Anticipated Costs ....................................................................................................... 7‐7 7.2.1 State Infrastructure Preservation, Operating, and Maintenance Costs ....... 7‐7 7.2.2 SIS and Other State and Local Roadway Capacity Project Costs .................. 7‐8

Adopted December 7, 2010

viii


Polk Transportation Planning Organization 2035 Mobility Vision Plan

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)

Chapter

Page

7.2.2.1

8.0

Local Road Infrastructure Preservation, Operating, and Maintenance Costs ...................................................................... 7‐9 7.2.2.2 Debt Service ................................................................................. 7‐9 7.2.2.3 Transit Costs ................................................................................. 7‐9 7.2.3 Road and Highway Capacity Improvement Costs (Funded/Unfunded Project Listings) .......................................................................................... 7‐12 7.2.3.1 Roads and Highway Projects ...................................................... 7‐12 COST AFFORDABLE PLAN ................................................................................................ 8‐1 8.1 Description of Modes/Components .......................................................................... 8‐1 8.1.1 Major Projects .............................................................................................. 8‐1 8.2 Cost Affordable Improvements ................................................................................. 8‐1 8.2.1 Highway and Transit Project Listings by Phase and Time Period ................. 8‐2 8.2.2 Congestion Management Projects ............................................................... 8‐2 8.2.3 Florida’s HSR Program ................................................................................ 8‐26 8.2.3.1 Tampa‐Orlando on Track to be America’s First HSR Express Corridor ...................................................................................... 8‐26 8.2.3.2 Stations and Connectivity .......................................................... 8‐27 8.2.3.3 Funding HSR ‐ Capital and Operations ....................................... 8‐27 8.2.3.4 HSR Project Development .......................................................... 8‐28 8.3 How Does the Cost Affordable Network Perform? ................................................. 8‐28 8.3.1 Model Results ............................................................................................. 8‐28 8.4 Regional Network Needs and Funded Projects ....................................................... 8‐31 8.5 Review by Environmental Technical Advisory Team ............................................... 8‐35 LIST OF APPENDICES (Bound Separately)

Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Appendix F Appendix G Appendix H Appendix I Appendix J

2007 Model Validation Report TPO Survey #2 Results ‐ Identifying Transportation Investment Priorities Highway Project Evaluation Matrix 2035 Forecast of State and Federal Revenues for Statewide and Metropolitan Plans 2060 Transportation Vision Plan Polk County 2035/2060 Population and Employment Forecasts Ridge Scenic Highway Corridor Management Plan – 2010 Update Environmental Screening Tool – Evaluation of Highway Projects City of Lakeland Citywide Pathways Plan City of Winter Haven Sidewalk, Pedestrian and Multimodal Infrastructure Access Plan AMENDMENTS

February 23 June 7, 2012

ix

Adopted December 7, 2010


Polk Transportation Planning Organization 2035 Mobility Vision Plan

List of Tables and Figures

LIST OF TABLES Table Page 2‐1 Polk County Population and Employment Growth – 2007‐2035 .................................................. 2‐8 4‐1 4‐2

2035 MVP Community Workshops, Meetings, and Events .......................................................... 4‐3 How the 2035 MVP Responds to Public Concerns ........................................................................ 4‐7

5‐1 5‐2 5‐3 5‐4 5‐5 5‐6 5‐7 5‐8 5‐9 5‐10 5‐11 5‐12 5‐13 5‐14 5‐15 5‐16 5‐17 5‐18 5‐19 5‐20

Polk County Existing Bus Routes ................................................................................................... 5‐2 Summary of Model Results ........................................................................................................... 5‐5 Other Plans and Studies Considered in the 2035 MVP ................................................................. 5‐5 Polk County Roadway and Highway Needs .................................................................................. 5‐8 CMP Performance Measures, System‐Wide Summary .............................................................. 5‐16 CMP Strategies ............................................................................................................................ 5‐20 Polk County 2005 Local Mitigation Strategy Hazard Analysis Summary .................................... 5‐26 Public/Private Road Projects ....................................................................................................... 5‐28 Constrained Roads ...................................................................................................................... 5‐35 Constrained Roads Identified for Special Consideration in the 2035 MVP ................................ 5‐36 Polk County Bus Service Span Enhancements ............................................................................ 5‐42 Polk County Bus Service Headway Enhancements ..................................................................... 5‐43 Polk County 2035 Proposed Bus Service ..................................................................................... 5‐44 Polk County Bus System Fleet Requirements ............................................................................. 5‐49 Polk County Transit Infrastructure Improvements ..................................................................... 5‐50 Polk County 2035 Proposed Commuter Rail Service .................................................................. 5‐52 CCC 2035 RLRTP Needs Corridors Priorities ................................................................................ 5‐58 CCC 2035 RLRTP Summary of Total Costs by County for the Implementation of the Regional Cost Affordable Plan ................................................................................................................... 5‐59 Summary of Model Results ......................................................................................................... 5‐61 Estimated Costs for Identified Needs ......................................................................................... 5‐62

6‐1 6‐2 6‐3 6‐4 6‐5 6‐6 6‐7 6‐8 6‐9 6‐10

Project Evaluation Criteria ............................................................................................................ 6‐2 2035 MVP Road and Highway Project Priority Listing .................................................................. 6‐3 Environmental Screening Criteria Used in the 2035 MVP .......................................................... 6‐11 Transit Scoring Criteria ................................................................................................................ 6‐12 2035 MVP Transit Priority Listing ................................................................................................ 6‐14 2035 MVP Bicycle/Pedestrian Project Scoring Criteria ............................................................... 6‐18 2035 MVP Top 100 Sidewalk Needs ........................................................................................... 6‐19 2035 MVP Top 100 Bicycle Facility Needs .................................................................................. 6‐23 2035 MVP Multi‐Use Trail Project Scoring Criteria ..................................................................... 6‐28 2035 MVP Prioritized Multi‐Use Trails Needs ............................................................................. 6‐29

7‐1 7‐2 7‐3 7‐4

Federal and State Funding ............................................................................................................ 7‐1 Local Road and Highway Funding Sources .................................................................................... 7‐3 Year‐by‐Year Projection of Transit Funding Sources .................................................................... 7‐6 Bus Cost Assumptions ................................................................................................................. 7‐10

Adopted December 7, 2010

x


Polk Transportation Planning Organization 2035 Mobility Vision Plan

List of Tables and Figures

LIST OF TABLES (CONTINUED)

Table

Page

7‐5

Rail Capital Costs ......................................................................................................................... 7‐11

8‐1 8‐2 8‐3 8‐5 8‐6

Funded and Unfunded Road and Highway Capacity Projects ...................................................... 8‐5 Committed, Funded, and Unfunded Transit Projects ................................................................. 8‐19 Transit Revenues ......................................................................................................................... 8‐25 Summary of Model Results ......................................................................................................... 8‐31 Polk County Projects for 2011 ETDM Screening ......................................................................... 8‐35 LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page 4‐1 Survey #1 Results .......................................................................................................................... 4‐4 4‐2 Survey #1 Components ................................................................................................................. 4‐5 4‐3 Survey #2 Results .......................................................................................................................... 4‐6 7‐1 7‐2

Highway Funding Forecast by Source ........................................................................................... 7‐2 Transit Funding Forecast ............................................................................................................... 7‐5

xi

Adopted December 7, 2010


Polk Transportation Planning Organization 2035 Mobility Vision Plan

List of Maps

LIST OF MAPS Map 2‐1 2‐2 2‐3 2‐4 2‐5 2‐6 2‐7

Generalized Future Land Use ........................................................................................................ 2‐9 2035 Population Density by Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) ............................................................ 2‐10 2035 Employment Density by Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) ......................................................... 2‐12 Polk County Future Activity Centers ........................................................................................... 2‐13 Polk County Protected Areas ...................................................................................................... 2‐15 Polk County Wetlands ................................................................................................................. 2‐16 Polk County Floodplains .............................................................................................................. 2‐17

5‐1 5‐2 5‐3 5‐4 5‐5 5‐6 5‐7 5‐8 5‐9 5‐10 5‐11 5‐12 5‐13 5‐14 5‐15 5‐16 5‐17 5‐18 5‐19 5‐20 5‐21 5‐22

Existing and Committed Highway System .................................................................................... 5‐3 Existing Transit .............................................................................................................................. 5‐4 2013 Existing and Committed Highway Network Volume to Capacity Ratio >1.25 ..................... 5‐6 Polk County 2035 Highway Needs .............................................................................................. 5‐17 Polk County CMP Congested Corridors ....................................................................................... 5‐19 2000‐2009 Motor Vehicle Crash Locations ................................................................................. 5‐23 2000‐2009 Pedestrian Crash Locations....................................................................................... 5‐24 2000‐2009 Bicycle Crash Locations ............................................................................................. 5‐25 Proposed Road Improvements for Haines City/Davenport ........................................................ 5‐31 Proposed Road Improvements for Northeast Polk County ........................................................ 5‐32 Proposed Road Improvements for Lakeland/Auburndale Area ................................................. 5‐33 Proposed Road Improvements for South Lakeland .................................................................... 5‐34 Constrained Corridors ................................................................................................................. 5‐37 Freight Activity Centers and Major Truck Routes ....................................................................... 5‐39 Bus Transit Needs ....................................................................................................................... 5‐47 Other Transit Needs .................................................................................................................... 5‐48 Sidewalk Inventory ...................................................................................................................... 5‐54 Bicycle Facilities .......................................................................................................................... 5‐55 Multi‐Use Trails ........................................................................................................................... 5‐56 CCC 2035 Regional Long‐Range Transportation Plan ‐ Number of Lanes and Improvements ... 5‐59 SunRail ‐ Regional Transit Future ................................................................................................ 5‐60 2035 Highway Needs Network Segments – Volume to Capacity Ratio >1.25 ............................ 5‐63

6‐1 6‐2 6‐3

Bus Needs Transit and Transit Districts ...................................................................................... 6‐13 Top 100 Sidewalk Projects .......................................................................................................... 6‐27 Top 100 Bicycle and Multi‐Use Trail Projects ............................................................................. 6‐31

8‐1 8‐2 8‐3 8‐4 8‐5 8‐6 8‐7

2035 Cost Affordable Highway Plan ............................................................................................. 8‐3 Transit Plan 2011‐2035 ................................................................................................................. 8‐4 2035 Cost Feasible Network Volume to Capacity Ratio Greater than 1.25 ................................ 8‐30 Cost Affordable Highway Projects and Regional Road Networks ............................................... 8‐32 Regional Transit Service .............................................................................................................. 8‐33 Regional Multi‐Use Trail Network ............................................................................................... 8‐34 Central Polk Parkway .................................................................................................................. 8‐35

Page

Adopted December 7, 2010

xii


Polk Transportation Planning Organization 2035 Mobility Vision Plan

List of Acronyms

LIST OF ACRONYMS ADA ARRA ATMS AVL

Americans with Disabilities Act American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Arterial Traffic Management System Automatic Vehicle Location

BEBR BoCC BRT BNC

Bureau of Economic and Business Research Board of County Commissioners Bus Rapid Transit Bartow Northern Connector

CAC CCC CEI CFMPOA CFRPC CMP CPP CRA

Citizen's Advisory Committee (West Central Florida MPO) Chairs Coordinating Committee Construction Engineering and Inspection Central Florida Metropolitan Planning Organization Alliance Central Florida Regional Planning Council Congestion Management Process Central Polk Parkway Community Redevelopment Area

DRI

Development of Regional Impact

E+C ETDM EST ETAT

Existing Plus Committed Efficient Transportation Decision Making Environmental Screening Tool Environmental Technical Advisory Team

F.A.C. FDEP FDOT FEMA FFWCC FHWA FONSI FRA FRE F.S. FTE FY

Florida Administrative Code Florida Department of Environmental Protection Florida Department of Transportation Federal Emergency Management Agency Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Committee Florida Highway Administration Finding of No Significant Impact Federal Railroad Administration Florida Rail Enterprise Florida Statutes Florida’s Turnpike Enterprise Fiscal Year

GIS GOP

Geographic Information System Goal, Objective, and Policy

HART HSIPR HSR

Hillsborough Area Regional Transit High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail High-Speed Rail

xiii

Adopted December 7, 2010


Polk Transportation Planning Organization 2035 Mobility Vision Plan

List of Acronyms

LIST OF ACRONYMS (CONTINUED) ILC ITS

Integrated Logistics Center Intelligent Transportation System

LAMTD LOS LRE LRTP LYNX

Lakeland Area Mass Transit District Level of Service Long Range Estimate Long Range Transportation Plan Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority

MOE mph MPO MVP

Measures of Effectiveness Miles per Hour Metropolitan Planning Organization Mobility Vision Plan

NEPA NOFA

National Environmental Policy Act Notice of Funding Availability

OIA

Orlando International Airport

PCC PCTS PDC PD&E PGTV PRIIA PTA

Polk Community College Polk County Transit Services Present Day Costs Project Development and Environment Polk Government Television Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act Polk Transit Authority

RLRTP ROW RTO

Regional Long Range Transportation Plan Right-of-Way Regional Transportation Organization

SAFETEA-LU sf SFWMD SHSP SIS SOV SWFWMD SWIM

Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users Square feet South Florida Water Management District Strategic Highway Safety Plan Strategic Intermodal System Single Occupant Vehicle Southwest Florida Water Management District Surface Water Improvement

TAC TAZ TBARTA TCCO TDM TDP TIP

Technical Advisory Committee Traffic Analysis Zone Tampa Bay Area Regional Transportation Authority Transit Corridors and Centers Overlay Transportation Demand Management Transit Development Plan Transportation Improvement Program

Adopted December 7, 2010

xiv


Polk Transportation Planning Organization 2035 Mobility Vision Plan

List of Acronyms

LIST OF ACRONYMS (CONTINUED) TMC TOD TPA TPO TRIP TSDA TSM TVP

Traffic Management Center Transit Oriented Development Transit Potential Area Transportation Planning Organization Transportation Improvement Plan Transit Supportive Development Area Transportation System Management Transportation Vision Plan

UMAM USACE USDOT USF USFWS

Uniform Mitigation Assessment Methodology U.S. Army Corps of Engineers U.S. Department of Transportation University of South Florida U.S. Fish Wildlife Service

V/C VPCC VMT

Volume to Capacity Victor Posner City Center Vehicle Miles Traveled

WHAT

Winter Haven Area Transit

YOE

Year of Expenditure

xv

Adopted December 7, 2010


Polk Transportation Planning Organization 2035 Mobility Vision Plan

List of Acronyms

This page left intentionally blank

Adopted December 7, 2010

xvi


Chapter 1.0 Introduction

“My vehicle is called the Lightning Speed. It is used for a family car. It is made of metal. I use water for it to move. I had a hard time building it with metal. It is really fast.� Owen Douglas Klebba, 4th grade at Auburndale Central


This page left intentionally blank


Polk Transportation Planning Organization 2035 Mobility Vision Plan 1.0

Chapter 1.0 Introduction

INTRODUCTION

Much can change in 25 years: new economic generators such as the University of South Florida Polytechnic campus, can arise and old attractions such as Cypress Gardens can morph into new tourist destinations such as Legoland. Major transportation initiatives can materialize such as the statewide high-speed rail (HSR) system and SunRail in the Orlando region. Transportation funding can also change and new sources can be authorized and existing sources can wind down. All of these are real scenarios for Polk County and The Cypress Gardens site near Winter Haven is expected to attract millions of annual visitors as the new Legoland. are major reasons for keeping transportation plans up to date. To fully exploit the benefits of these changes, Polk County’s transportation system must keep up with and be prepared to respond favorably to them. The Polk Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) is the lead transportation planning agency for Polk County. It develops transportation plans and programs for Polk County as mandated by federal and state legislation, which are designed to meet our community’s short-term and long-term travel needs. Transportation projects, e.g., road widenings or bus service expansions, are planned and programmed (using federal and state funding) by the TPO in cooperation with the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), transportation operators, and local governments. 1.1

POLK TPO BOARD AND COMMITTEE STRUCTURE

Historic Bok Tower is also known as the Singing Tower because of its carillon.

The Polk TPO provides a forum for cooperative decisionmaking regarding countywide transportation issues. Member governments include the Polk County Board of County Commissioners (BoCC) and the cities of Lakeland, Winter Haven, Auburndale, Bartow, Haines City, Lake Wales, Fort Meade, Mulberry, Frostproof, Lake Alfred, Eagle Lake, Davenport, Polk City, Towns of Dundee and Lake Hamilton. The agency is comprised of a policy board (local elected officials), advisory committees, and staff. The TPO Board has nineteen voting members with representatives from the Polk County BoCC (5) and the following municipalities: City of Lakeland (6); City of Winter Haven (2); City of Auburndale (1); City of Bartow (1); City of Haines City (1); City of Lake Wales (1); South County Bloc (shared voting membership): Fort Meade, Mulberry, and Frostproof (1); East County Bloc (shared voting membership): Lake Alfred, Dundee, Eagle Lake, Davenport, Polk City, and Lake Hamilton (1).

1-1

Adopted December 7, 2010


Chapter 1.0 Introduction

Polk Transportation Planning Organization 2035 Mobility Vision Plan

The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) provides technical review, supervision, and assistance to the TPO on transportation planning matters for Polk County. This committee is comprised of planners, engineers, and managers from the member governments, as well as non-voting representatives from state and federal agencies. The Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) provides a forum for public participation in the TPO’s planning process. Its membership consists of a broad range of participants representing various sectors of Polk County, including local commerce, private, non-profit, and community organizations. 1.2

2035 MOBILITY VISION PLAN

The Polk 2035 Mobility Vision Plan (2035 MVP), adopted by the TPO Board on December 7, 2010, is Polk County’s federally and state mandated 25-year Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). The Polk TPO is required by law to update its LRTP at least once every five years. The 2035 MVP is an update to the 2030 Transportation Improvement Plan (TRIP) that was adopted in December 2005. 1.3

SAFETEA-LU PLANNING FACTORS

The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) is the current federal legislation governing Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs). The Polk TPO serves as the MPO for the Lakeland and Winter Haven Urbanized Area. SAFETEA-LU recognizes that transportation investments affect Downtown Lakeland features the local economy, environment, and quality of life. Therefore, the walkable streets. law was crafted to include eight factors that must be explicitly considered in the development of transportation plans and programs. These planning factors, listed below, were considered and applied in the development of the 2035 MVP. SAFETEA-LU metropolitan and statewide planning processes must consider transportation projects and strategies that will: 1.

Support the economic vitality of the nation, states, and metropolitan areas, especially by enabling global competitiveness, productivity, and efficiency;

2.

Increase the safety of the transportation system for motorized and non-motorized users;

3.

Increase the security of the transportation system for motorized and non-motorized users;

4.

Increase the accessibility and mobility of people and freight;

5.

Protect and enhance the environment, promote energy conservation, improve quality of life, and promote consistency between transportation improvements and state and local planned growth and economic development patterns;

Adopted December 7, 2010

1-2


Polk Transportation Planning Organization 2035 Mobility Vision Plan

Chapter 1.0 Introduction

6.

Enhance the integration and connectivity of the transportation system, across and between modes, for people and freight;

7.

Promote efficient system management and operation; and

8.

Emphasize the preservation of the existing transportation system.

The 2035 MVP takes into account growth over the next 25 years as envisioned in locally adopted Land Use and Comprehensive Plans. It also considers larger regional and statewide transportation needs over this period. The 2035 MVP is multi-modal; meaning it addresses the need for highway, transit, and non-motorized transportation improvements. Last, but certainly not least, the 2035 MVP is constrained, which means that not every need will be satisfied due to environmental and physical constraints as well as funding limitations.

1-3

Adopted December 7, 2010


Chapter 1.0 Introduction

Polk Transportation Planning Organization 2035 Mobility Vision Plan

This page left intentionally blank

Adopted December 7, 2010

1-4


Turn static files into dynamic content formats.

Create a flipbook
Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.