Technical Report 6: Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Final Adopted Plan

Transcription

1 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan Technical Report 6: Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Final Adopted Plan January South Orange Avenue, Suite 200, Orlando, FL MetroPlan

2 Table of Contents LIST OF TABLES... ii LIST OF FIGURES... ii LIST OF APPENDICES... ii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY INTRODUCTION Emphasis Areas Report Organization DATA INVENTORY Existing Roadway Characteristics DATA DRIVEN ANALYSIS Process for Prioritizing Improvements Improving Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Coast-to-Coast Trail Inventory Scores Existing Conditions Socioeconomic Score Transit Emphasis Score Cumulative Segment Score Trails and Network Connectivity ADDITIONAL PROJECTS Long Range Transportation Plan: Technical Report #6 i

3 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Scoring Criteria for Bicycle & Pedestrian Projects... 8 Table 2: Scoring Criteria for Regionally Significant Trail Projects... 9 Table 3: Bicycle/Pedestrian Improvements for Orange Table 4: Bicycle/Pedestrian Improvements for Osceola Table 5: Bicycle/Pedestrian Improvements for Seminole Table 6: Trail Project Improvements Table 7: Connection Improvements LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Study Roadways... 4 Figure 2: Existing Sidewalk Coverage... 5 Figure 3: Existing Bicycle Facilities... 6 Figure 4: Existing and Programmed Trails... 7 Figure 5: Existing Inventory Score Figure 6: Socioeconomic Score Figure 7: Transit Emphasis Multiplier Figure 8: Final Scores for Roadway Segments Figure 9: Trail and Connection Scores Figure 10: Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects Figure 11: Trail and Connectivity Projects LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A: Existing Data Inventory Appendix B: Roadway Segment Scoring Appendix C: Connectivity Scoring Appendix D: General Cost Per Mile Models Long Range Transportation Plan: Technical Report #6 ii

4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) includes an update to MetroPlan Orlando s Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. Bicycle and pedestrian elements are vital to a multimodal community. This analysis includes a description of MetroPlan Orlando s existing processes for prioritizing Bicycle and Pedestrian projects. There are more projects identified than can be funded in the short term, and this LRTP exercise does not attempt to re-prioritize existing projects. The intention is to identify additional projects likely to shift trips away from single-occupant vehicles. Three main goals were considered in the bicycle and pedestrian portion of the 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan: Provide connectivity and fill gaps in the bike way and sidewalk network. Serve areas that have a higher potential for bicycle and pedestrian usage and demand, based on a review of data. Identify improvements that will expand the bicycle/pedestrian network and provide connectivity to transit, making the region more user-friendly for multimodal commuter trips. Areas for improvements were identified based on the existing conditions, socioeconomic data, and connectivity to transit. Socioeconomic projections for the study area were evaluated to determine areas with high densities of compatible uses, assuming these areas will have high demand for non-auto trips. Connectivity to transit was evaluated to identify projects that will provide additional connectivity to SunRail and other transit emphasis corridors. Once study area roadways had been scored, a qualitative review was conducted to remove projects that are already programmed, and to further refine the list of potential projects. The resulting top sidewalk/bicycle projects in each county, as well as the resulting top trail/connections projects, are included in this report Long Range Transportation Plan: Technical Report #6 1

5 1.0 Introduction This Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan Report was prepared as part of the MetroPlan Orlando 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan. The desire in this region is to increase the use of alternative modes of transportation, such as walking and cycling. As the region moves forward, drivers of single-occupant vehicles will be encouraged to use alternative modes. Bicycle and pedestrian facilities are important parts of a multimodal transportation system. Facilities such as bike ways and sidewalks designate space for these travel modes and augment the travel options available. In addition, using alternative modes helps promote social benefits such as improved air quality, public health, and overall mobility. As the focus of the region s transportation planning shifts toward a multimodal approach, the need for facilities that enhance bicycling and walking is also becoming more apparent. The purpose of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan of the 2040 LRTP is to develop a list of bicycle, pedestrian, and trail facilities through data collection, systems analysis, and cost estimates. This document describes the data collection, methodology, and analysis to provide the recommended list of projects. 1.1 Emphasis Areas The focus of this update is to identify bicycle and pedestrian projects that: Provide connectivity and complete missing gaps in the bicycle and sidewalk network; Serve areas of the region that have a higher potential for bicycle and pedestrian use and demand; Identify improvements that will expand the bicycle/pedestrian network to make it more user-friendly for commuter trips. Projects are identified in this plan through evaluating existing facilities, identifying connectivity and gap-filling opportunities, estimating user demand based on projected socioeconomic data, and reviewing the long-term transit plans for the study area. These steps are discussed in the following sections. 1.2 Report Organization This report is organized into four sections: Introduction; Data Inventory, which presents the roadway data inventory used in conducting the analysis; Data Driven Evaluation, which documents the analysis method used for potential projects; Data Driven Alternatives, which presents the analysis results and the cost determinations for the prioritized list of bicycle, pedestrian, and trail facilities in each of the three counties within MetroPlan Orlando Long Range Transportation Plan: Technical Report #6 2

6 2.0 Data Inventory The existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities inventory data was provided by MetroPlan Orlando. In all, data for over 1,660 centerline miles of roadway and over 450 centerline miles of shared use path alignment was the basis of the analysis. Figure 1 illustrates the threecounty study area and study roadways. The data inventory is provided in Appendix A. 2.1 Existing Roadway Characteristics The following roadway characteristics were collected in the inventory data. Number of lanes Median (divided or undivided) Lane width Presence and type of bike ways Percent of sidewalk coverage Widths of sidewalks Presence of curbs The presence and extent of existing sidewalk coverage is illustrated in Figure 2. Figure 3 provides a summary of the existing bicycle facilities. Figure 4 identifies the existing, programmed, and prioritized trail network Long Range Transportation Plan: Technical Report #6 3

7 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan: Technical Report #6 4

8 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan: Technical Report #6 5

9 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan: Technical Report #6 6

10 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan: Technical Report #6 7

11 3.0 Data Driven Evaluation The analysis for this Long Range Transportation Plan used a quantitative GIS-based scoring to evaluate potential projects. The existing conditions data, socioeconomic data, and transit emphasis data were used to develop a preliminary score. During this initial scoring, roadways that already have full coverage of bicycle or pedestrian facilities were filtered out. After the preliminary list of projects was identified, those that have been prioritized or programmed were eliminated from consideration. Next, the top scoring projects in each county were analyzed qualitatively by looking at the connectivity and gap-filling function provided. The overall feasibility of the projects was considered to refine the list to 10 recommended projects for each county. 3.1 Process for Prioritizing Improvements MetroPlan Orlando has existing processes to solicit applications for new pedestrian, bicycle, and trail projects. The project application and prioritization process is typically conducted annually, though the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) can choose to postpone applications for a given year. The end result of the process is the addition of projects to the back of the Prioritized Project List. New projects are compared and ranked, then prioritized, behind projects from the previous year. Thus, projects that were ranked previously are not re-prioritized each year. The process begins when the BPAC solicits projects from local governments (project sponsors). Two application forms are available, one for Pedestrian & Bicycle Mobility Projects, and one for Regionally Significant Trail Projects. The subsequent processes are similar for each type of project, though the criteria are different. The projects are divided based on their total cost, where projects that cost over $300,000 per phase are limited to one phase per year per jurisdiction. For Bicycle & Pedestrian Projects, the ranking criteria are specific to whether the project primarily benefits bicyclists, pedestrians, or both. The current scoring criteria and weight are shown in Table 1. Table 1 Scoring Criteria for Bicycle & Pedestrian Projects Scoring Criteria Bicycle Pedestrian Non-Motorized Trip Demand 15% 15% Type of Accommodation 25% 20% Connectivity 20% 25% Intermodal 15% 15% Local Match 15% 15% Local Plans 5% 5% Project Readiness 5% 5% 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan: Technical Report #6 8

12 For Regional Trail Projects, the ranking criteria are heavily weighted to consider regional importance, which favors long trails that connect to other regionally significant trails, cross jurisdictional boundaries, serve destinations, are in desirable settings, and will be well used. Bonus points are available if the trail will reach an underserved area or fill a critical gap in the network. The current scoring criteria and weight are shown in Table 2. Table 2 Scoring Criteria for Regionally Significant Trail Projects Scoring Criteria Maximum Points Weighting Regional Importance 5 50% Economic Development Potential 5 5% Intermodal 5 5% Local Match 5 20% Trail Surface 5 10% Project Readiness 5 10% Both types of applications require details and illustrations to be considered. After the project applications are submitted, they are reviewed by a prioritization subcommittee consisting of a select group of BPAC members. The subcommittee submits the project scores and rankings to BPAC. Projects must exceed a minimum score to be prioritized. Once ranked against other projects submitted that year, the projects are added to the back of the Prioritized Project List. 3.2 Improving Pedestrian and Bicyclist Safety (Engineering, Education, Enforcement, and Emergency Response) MetroPlan Orlando has long been an advocate of bicyclist and pedestrian safety. The regional approach is to include the four E s Engineering, Education, Enforcement, and Emergency Response. Several initiatives have been directed by MetroPlan Orlando, including participation in Florida s Safe Routes to School and development of the Pedestrian Safety Action Plan. Safe Routes to School focuses on improving conditions for students who walk to school. Projects are solicited for funding and considered based on several factors, such as the number of students affected, the amount of community support, and existing roadway characteristics. The Pedestrian Safety Action Plan was developed to improve the physical environment for pedestrians and the behaviors necessary to reduce crashes. The plan includes elements that address ongoing efforts to improve safety and identifies needs, such as improving crossings. Specific corridors were listed for Pedestrian Road Safety Audits, and other corridors were listed as Pedestrian Safety Lighting Priorities Long Range Transportation Plan: Technical Report #6 9

13 3.3 Coast-to-Coast Trail The Coast-to-Coast Connector will provide a continuous multi-use trail from the Gulf of Mexico to the Atlantic Ocean. The trail travels through several counties, including Orange and Seminole, for a total distance of approximately 275 miles. About 75% of the connector is currently in operation or funded for construction. Two gaps are located within MetroPlan Orlando s service area, the Orange Gap (approximately 4.5 miles) and the Seminole/Volusia Gap (approximately 0.8 miles). Recent budget approvals have allocated additional funding to the connector, though not enough to fund the entire project. The connector will link to several existing trails, including these within the MetroPlan Orlando service area: West Orange Trail, Clarcona-Ocoee Trail, Pine Hills Trail, Seminole-Wekiva Trail, and Rinehart Trail. 3.4 Inventory Scores Existing Conditions The first step was to develop an inventory score for each segment based on existing conditions. Existing sidewalk coverage The percent of sidewalk coverage and roadway segment length were used to determine the length of missing sidewalk for each roadway segment. The existing data inventory was used to assign a score from 0 to 100 for each segment based on an inverse relationship to the amount of missing sidewalk. In other words, the fewer gaps, the higher (closer to 100) the score. This helped identify gaps in pedestrian facilities for completion. Roadways with sidewalk coverage for the entire length on both sides were filtered out. Existing bicycle coverage Availability of designated bicycle lanes was evaluated using the existing data inventory. A score from 0 to 100 was assigned to each segment based on an inverse relationship to the presence of designated bicycle facilities. Roadways with full bicycle lane coverage were filtered out. The sidewalk and bicycle coverage scores were averaged for each segment to get a cumulative existing inventory score. The results of this analysis are shown in Figure Socioeconomic Score Projected 2040 socioeconomic data was used to evaluate the potential for bicycle and pedestrian trips on each segment, based on the density of compatible uses. Attraction/Production The ratio of attractions to productions was calculated for each Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) and applied to the study area roadway segments. Ratios close to 1.0 reflect a balance of attractions and productions within the zone, and therefore, a higher potential for conversion of commuter trips to bicycle/pedestrian modes. A score between 0 and 100 was assigned to each segment, with scores closest to 1.0 receiving the highest scores. The overall magnitude of attractions was also considered in the evaluation of this factor. This factor indicates the potential for bicycle and pedestrian trips to occur within the zone Long Range Transportation Plan: Technical Report #6 10

14 Population/Employment Density A score on a scale of 0 to 100 was applied to each segment based on the density of population and employment within the adjacent TAZs. Higher densities received higher scores, in the recognition that they provide a higher potential for conversion of commuter trips to bicycle and pedestrian modes. The population and employment scores were averaged for each segment. The attraction/production scores and population/employment density scores were averaged for each segment to come up with a cumulative socioeconomic score. The results of this analysis are shown in Figure Transit Emphasis Score Central Florida is seeing an increased emphasis on transit. With the recent opening of SunRail, and the LYNX VISION 2030, it is anticipated this emphasis on transit will continue. As these transit routes come on-line, it is important to provide connectivity to the bicycle and pedestrian network. Connectivity to premium transit is a major criterion for identifying potential projects. For this reason, a transit multiplier was applied to each segment to emphasize making improvements near transit. SunRail A half-mile radius was applied around all Phase 1 and Phase 2 SunRail stations. Roadway segments that fell within or partially within this radius were assigned a score of 100. LYNX High Emphasis Corridors A quarter-mile radius was applied to all high emphasis corridors identified in the 2030 Network of the LYNX VISION A score of 0 to 100 was applied, based on the type of transit anticipated. The two transit scores were averaged and translated into a multiplier value between 1.0 and 1.3. The resulting multipliers are shown in Figure Cumulative Segment Score calculate a cumulative score for each roadway link, the transit multiplier was applied to the average of the inventory scores and socioeconomic scores. The resulting final scores are shown in Figure 8. Appendix B contains details on scoring these roadway segments. The recommended list of projects is presented in Section Trails and Network Connectivity A similar analysis was conducted to review and evaluate the connectivity in the overall trails network. Existing trail information was supplied by MetroPlan Orlando and combined with community input supplied by the Commute Orlando website. Potential projects were analyzed based on socioeconomic data and transit emphasis, using similar methodologies to those applied during the roadway analysis. The resulting final scores are shown in Figure Long Range Transportation Plan: Technical Report #6 11

15 Once the projects were scored, a qualitative analysis was performed to review the top scoring projects and their potential to be implemented, as well as their ability to serve a connectivity role in the larger network. Appendix C contains details on scoring these segments. The recommended list of projects is presented in Section Long Range Transportation Plan: Technical Report #6 12

16 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan: Technical Report #6 13

17 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan: Technical Report #6 14

18 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan: Technical Report #6 15

19 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan: Technical Report #6 16

20 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan: Technical Report #6 17

21 4.0 Additional Projects enhance the current prioritization process and connectivity efforts, the Bicycle and Pedestrian element of the 2040 plan identifies gaps in the bicycle and pedestrian network throughout the three-county area. This was done through data collection, systems analysis, and cost estimates. After the areas were ranked based on existing conditions, socioeconomic data and connectivity to transit, projects that were already planned or programmed were removed to clearly show needs. The BPAC can then use these recommendations to develop future project priorities. The identified segment list emphasizes providing connectivity, serving demand, and meeting public needs. The resulting segments for pedestrian facilities, bicycle facilities, and trail/connectivity projects are presented in this section. General costper-mile information is included in Appendix D. Table 3 Bicycle/Pedestrian Improvements for Orange Improvement Type Anderson St. Westmoreland Ave. Division Ave. Sidewalk South St. Summerlin Ave. Mills Ave. Sidewalk Pembrook Dr. Keller Rd. SR 434 Bicycle & Sidewalk Challenger Pky. Alafaya Tr. Ingenuity Dr. Bicycle & Sidewalk Vineland Rd. Kirkman Rd. Turnpike Overpass Bicycle & Sidewalk Columbia St. Orange Ave. Division Ave. Sidewalk Rouse Rd. SR 408 Lake Underhill Rd. Sidewalk Woodbury Rd. SR 50 Lake Underhill Rd. Bicycle & Sidewalk South St. Bumby Ave. Primrose Ave. Sidewalk Brown Ave. South St. Robinson St. Sidewalk Table 4 Bicycle/Pedestrian Improvements for Osceola Improvement Type Oak St. Main St. US 192 Sidewalk Old Dixie Hwy. Osceola Pky. line Bicycle & Sidewalk Osceola Pky. US 17/92 Old Dixie Hwy. Sidewalk International Dr. SR 417 Osceola Pkwy. Sidewalk Lakeshore Blvd. Montana Ave. Brown Chapel Rd. Sidewalk 10th St. Vermont Ave. Massachusetts Ave. Sidewalk Dyer Blvd. Oak St. south end Bicycle & Sidewalk Vermont Ave. Lakeshore Blvd. 10th St. Sidewalk Carroll St. Dyer Blvd. Thacker Ave. Bicycle & Sidewalk Hoagland Blvd. Kissimmee Tr. Donegan Ave. Bicycle & Sidewalk 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan: Technical Report #6 18

22 Table 5 Bicycle/Pedestrian Improvements for Seminole Improvement Type Wekiva Springs Rd. SR 434 Wekiva Springs Ln. Sidewalk Winter Park Dr. Marigold Rd. Red Bug Lake Rd. Sidewalk Central Pky. North Lake Blvd. Palm Springs Dr. Bicycle & SIdewalk Lake Emma Rd. Lake Mary Blvd. Flagg Ln. Sidewalk Douglas Ave. Central Pkwy. SR 436 Bicycle & Sidewalk North Lake Blvd. SR 436 End Sidewalk College Dr. Weldon Blvd. Lake Mary Blvd. Sidewalk West wn Pkwy. Pearl Lake Cswy. Bunnell Rd. Sidewalk Wymore Rd. SR 436 Lake Destiny Dr. Sidewalk Airport Blvd. SR 46 Martin Luther King Blvd. Bicycle & Sidewalk Table 6 Trail Project Alternatives Trail Limits Length Orlando Urban Trail Washington St. to North of SR Orlando Urban Trail Columbia St.t to Church St Millenia Connection John Young Pkwy. to Millenia Mall 0.91 Anderson Street Trail Downtown Orlando to Lake Underhill Rd Cady Way West Extension Orange Ave. to Lake Formosa Dr Little Econ Greenway Alafaya Tr. to McCulloch Rd Alafaya Trail Extension Lake Underhill Rd. to Colonial Dr Convention Center Trail International Dr. to John Young Pkwy 1.94 Cady Way Trail Connection Cady Way to Maguire Blvd East Lake ho Trail Around East Lake hopekaliga 3.24 Table 7 Connection Improvements Description Length North Lake Connection Connect Multi-Family Residential area 0.11 Lee Vista Connection Bridge the Ditch, North of Bent Pine Dr. -- Cross Seminole Trail Connection Connection around Drainage Area 0.21 Casselberry-Vistawilla Bikeway Connection from Wirz Trail 4.47 Maitland Ave. Expand Bicycle/Pedestrian Features Long Range Transportation Plan: Technical Report #6 19

23 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan: Technical Report #6 20

24 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan: Technical Report #6 21

25 APPENDIX A: Existing Data Inventory 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan: Technical Report #6 22

26 One Side of Road Other Side of Road Length (mi) Length (ft) # of Lanes Divided/ Undivided 2000 Volumes ORG Old 441 line US U N S N S ORG US 441 line Sadler Road 4 D P S P S ORG Sadler Road US 441 line 2 U N S N S ORG Sadler Road US 441 ROUND LAKE RD. 2 U N S N S ORG US 441 Sadler Road JONES 4 D P S P S ORG Jones Road US 441 CO. LINE 2 U N S N S ORG Round Lake Road KELLY PARK CO. LINE 2 U N S N S ORG Round Lake Road SADLER KELLY PARK 2 U N S N S ORG Round Lake Road PONKAN SADLER 2 U N S N S ORG US 441 JONES PONKAN 4 D P C P S ORG Ponkan Road US 441 ROUND LAKE 2 U N S N S ORG Kelly Park Road ROUND LAKE PLYMOUTH-SORRENT 2 U N S N S ORG Kelly Park Road JASON DWELLEY PKWY MT. PLYMOUTH 2 U N S N S ORG Kelly Park Road MT. PLYMOUTH ROCK SPRINGS RD 2 U N S N S ORG Plymouth-Sorrento Road KELLY PARK CO. LINE 2 U N S N S ORG Plymouth-Sorrento Road PONKAN KELLY PARK 2 U N S N S ORG Ponkan Road ROUND LAKE PLYMOUTH-SORRENT 2 U N S N S ORG Ponkan Road PLYMOUTH-SORRENT ROCK SPRINGS RD 2 U N S N S ORG Mt. Plymouth Road KELLY PARK CO. LINE 2 U N S N S ORG Rock Springs Road KELLY PARK PONKAN 4 D Y C Y C ORG US 441 PONKAN BINION 4 D P S P S ORG US 441 BINION PLYMOUTH-SORRENT 4 D N C N C ORG US 441 PLYMOUTH-SORRENT LAKEVIEW DR. 4 D N C N C ORG Plymouth-Sorrento Road US 441 PONKAN 2 U N S N S ORG Binion Road US 441 LAKEVIEW 2 U N S N S ORG Lakeview Road BINION US U N S N S ORG Rock Springs Road PONKAN WELCH 4 U N C N C ORG Rock Springs Road WELCH VOTAW 4 U N C N C ORG Welch Road THOMPSON WEKIVA SPRINGS 2 U N C N C ORG Wekiva Springs Road WELCH CO. LINE 2 U N C N C ORG Wekiva Springs Road CANTERCLUB WELCH 2 U N C N C ORG Thompson Road WELCH VOTAW 2 U N S N S ORG Votaw Road ROCK SPRINGS THOMPSON 2 U N S N S ORG Votaw Road THOMPSON WEKIVA SPRINGS 2 U N S N S ORG US 441 CENTRAL PARK AVE 4 D N C N C ORG US 441 PARK ALABAMA 4 U N C N C ORG US 441 ALABAMA SR U N C N C ORG US 441 SR 436 THOMPSON 4 D N C N S INTERCHANGE ORG SR 436 US 441 THOMPSON Y C Y C ORG SR 436 THOMPSON THOMPSON Y C Y C ORG SR 436 WEKIVA SPRINGS CO. LINE Y C Y C ORG Binion Road LAKEVIEW OCOEE-APOPKA 2 U N S N S ORG Clarcona Road CLEVELAND AVE WEST ORANGE TRAIL 2 U N C N C ORG Kenne Road CLARCONA THOMPSON 2 U N C N C ORG Sheeler Ave. KEENE S APOPKA BLVD. 2 U N S N S ORG Sheeler Ave. US 441 S APOPKA BLVD. 2 U N S N S ORG Sheeler Ave. SR 436 US U N S N S ORG Apopka Blvd./Alabama Ave. US 441 SHEELER AVE 2 U N S N S ORG Apopka Blvd. SHEELER AVE LAKEVILLE RD 2 U N S N S ORG Apopka Blvd. LAKEVILLE RD PIEDMONT-WEKIVA 2 U N S N S ORG Apopka Blvd. PIEDMONT-WEKIVA OVERLAND ROAD 2 U N S N S TRUCKS ORG US 441 THOMPSON PIEDMONT-WEKIVA 4 D P S P S ORG Piedmont-Wekiva Road US 441 SR U N C N C ORG Hiawassee Road US 441 S APOPKA BLVD. 4 D N C N C ORG Lakeville Road S APOPKA BLVD. BEGGS 2 U N S N S ORG US 441 PIEDMONT-WEKIVA COUNTY LINE 4 D P S P S ORG US 441 MAITLAND BLVD ROSE AVE 4 D P S P S ORG Apopka-Vineland Road MCCORMICK ROAD CLARCONA-OCOEE 2 U N C N C ORG Clarcona Road A.D. MIMS ROAD CLARCONA-OCOEE 2 U N S N S ORG Ocoee-Apopka Road WEST ROAD SILVER STAR 2 U N S N S ORG Ocoee-Apopka Road SILVER STAR FRANKLIN 2 U P S P S ORG Lakewood Ave. FULLERS CROSS RD SILVER STAR RD 2 U N S N S ORG Lakewood Ave. FULLER'S CROSS RD CLARCONA-OCOEE RD 2 U N S N S ORG Silver Star Road OCOEE-APOPKA ROA BLUFORD AVE 2 U P S P S ORG Silver Star Road GOOD HOMES ROAD LAKE STANLEY RD 4 D Y C Y C ORG Clarcona-Ocoee Road APOPKA VINELAND RD LAKEVILLE ROAD 4 D Y C Y C ORG Clarcona-Ocoee Road LAKEVILLE ROAD HIAWASSEE ROAD 4 D N C N C ORG Clarcona-Ocoee Road HIAWASSEE ROAD POWERS ROAD 4 U N C N C ORG Clarcona-Ocoee Road POWERS ROAD PINE HILLS ROAD 4 U N C N C ORG Clarcona-Ocoee Road PINE HILLS ROAD ROSE AVE. 4 U N C N C ORG Clarcona-Ocoee Road ROSE AVE. US U N C N C ORG Lakeville Road CLARCONA-OCOEE R BEGGS ROAD 2 U N S N S ORG Beggs Road HIAWASSEE RD PINE HILLS ROAD 2 U N S N S ORG Beggs Road S APOPKA BLVD ROSE AVE. 2 U N S N S Volumes % Heavy Vehicles 2006 Posted Speed Pavement Condition 2013 Comments

27 One Side of Road Other Side of Road Length (mi) Length (ft) # of Lanes Divided/ Undivided 2000 Volumes ORG Rose Ave. BEGGS ROAD SEMINOLE CO. LIN 2 U N S N S ORG Rose Ave. BEGGS ROAD US U N S N S ORG Rose Ave. US 441 CLARCONA-OCOEE R 2 U N S N S ORG Mott Ave/Eden Park Road EDGEWATER DR MAITLAND BLVD 2 U N S N S ORG Mott Ave. EDGEWATER DR US U N S N S ORG Magnolia Homes Road RIVERSIDE PARK R MAITLAND BLVD 2 U N S N S ORG Magnolia Homes Road RIVERSIDE PARK R EDGEWATER DR. 2 U N S N S ORG Magnolia Homes Road EDGEWATER DR. CLARCONA-OCOEE R 2 U N S N S ORG SR 434 MAITLAND BLVD. RIVERSIDE PARK R 4 D N C N C ORG SR 434 RIVERSIDE PARK R KENNEDY BLVD. 4 D N C N C ORG SR 434 KENNEDY BLVD. EDGEWATER DR. 4 D N C N C ORG Riverside Park Road SR 434 MAGNOLIA HOMES R 2 U N S N S ORG Edgewater Dr. ROSE AVE. MOTT AVE. 2 U N S N S ORG Edgewater Dr. MOTT AVE. MAGNOLIA HOMES R 2 U N S N S BAD RR XING ORG Edgewater Dr. CLARCONA-OCOEE R MAGNOLIA HOMES R 4 U N C N C BAD RR XING ORG Edgewater Dr. CLARCONA-OCOEE R ALL AMERICAN BLV 4 U N C N C ORG Edgewater Dr. SR 434 ALL AMERICAN BLV 4 U N C N C ORG Edgewater Dr. SR 434 LEE ROAD 4 U N C N C ORG Edgewater Dr. LEE ROAD FAIRBANKS AVE. 4 U N C N C ORG Edgewater Dr. FAIRBANKS AVE. MAURY DR. 4 U N C N C ORG Edgewater Dr. PAR ST. BROWN ST. 2 U Y C Y C ORG US 441 MOTT AVE. CLARCONA-OCOEE R 4 D U C U C ORG US 441 CLARCONA-OCOEE R LEE ROAD 4 D P S P S ORG US 441 LEE ROAD SILVER STAR ROAD 4 D P S P S ORG US 441 SILVER STAR ROAD PRINCETON ST. 4 D N C N C ORG Clarcona-Ocoee Road US 441 MAGNOLIA HOMES R 4 U N C N C ORG Clarcona-Ocoee Road MAGNOLIA HOMES R EDGEWATER DR. 4 U N C N C ORG All American Blvd EDGEWATER DR. SR U N S N S ORG Hiawassee Road SILVER STAR ROAD CLARCONA-OCOEE R 4 D N C N C ORG Powers Dr. NORTH LANE CLARCONA-OCOEE R 2 U N S N S ORG Powers Dr. INDIAN HILL ROAD NORTH LANE 2 U N C N C ORG Powers Dr. INDIAN HILL ROAD SILVER STAR ROAD 2 U N S N S ORG Pine Hills Road CLARCONA-OCOEE R NORTH LANE 4 U N C N C ORG Pine Hills Road NORTH LANE INDIAN HILL ROAD 4 U N C N C ORG Pine Hills Road INDIAN HILL ROAD SILVER STAR ROAD 4 U N C N C ORG North Lane POWERS DR. PINE HILLS ROAD 2 U N S N S ORG Indian Hill Road POWERS DR. PINE HILLS ROAD 2 U N S N S ORG Silver Star Road APOPKA VINELAND HIAWASSEE ROAD 6 D Y C Y C ORG Silver Star Road HIAWASSEE ROAD POWERS DR. 6 D N C N C ORG Silver Star Road POWERS DR. HASTINGS ST. 6 D N C N C ORG Silver Star Road HASTINGS ST. PINE HILLS ROAD 6 D N C N C ORG Silver Star Road PINE HILLS ROAD PRINCETON ST. 6 D N C N C ORG Silver Star Road PRINCETON ST. MERCY DR. 3 U P S P C ORG Silver Star Road MERCY DR. JOHN YOUNG PARKW 2 U P S P S ORG Silver Star Road JOHN YOUNG PARKW US U N S N S ORG Silver Star Road US 441 RIO GRANDE AVE. 4 U N C N C ORG Maury Road RIO GRANDE AVE. EDGEWATER DR. 4 U N C N C ORG Kennedy Blvd. SR 434 KELLER ROAD 2 U N S N S ORG Kennedy Blvd. KELLER ROAD LAKE DESTINY DR. 2 U N S N S ORG Keller Road KENNEDY BLVD. FENNELL ST. 2 U N C N S ORG Maitland Blvd. KELLER ROAD SR D P S P S ORG Maitland Blvd. KELLER ROAD LAKE DESTINY DR. 4 D P S P S ORG Lee Road EDGEWATER DR. I-4 6 D N C N C ORG Lee Road US 441 EDGEWATER DR. 6 D N C N C ORG John Young Parkway US 441 SILVER STAR ROAD 4 D P S P S ORG Lake Breeze Dr. JOHN YOUNG PARKW LAKE ORLANDO DR. 2 U Y C Y C ORG Lake Orlando Dr. LAKE BREEZE DR. LAKE BREEZE DR. 2 U Y C Y C ORG Rosamond Dr. LAKE ORLANDO DR. US D Y C Y C ORG Long Road LAKE ORLANDO DR. CLARCONA-OCOEE R 2 U N S N S ORG North Lane LAKE ORLANDO DR. PINE HILLS ROAD 2 U Y C Y C ORG Lake Destiny Dr. MAITLAND BLVD. SEMINOLE CO. LIN 2 U N S N C ORG Lake Destiny Dr. MAITLAND BLVD. KENNEDY BLVD. 2 U Y S Y S ORG Maitland Blvd. LAKE DESTINY DR. WYMORE ROAD 6 D P S P S ORG Maitland Blvd. WYMORE ROAD MAITLAND AVE. 4 D N C N C ORG Maitland Blvd. MAITLAND AVE. US 17/92 4 D P S P S ORG Wymore Road MAITLAND BLVD. ORANOLE 2 U N S N C ORG Wymore Road MAITLAND BLVD. KENNEDY BLVD. 2 U N S N S ORG Sandspur Road WYMORE ROAD MAITLAND AVE. 2 D N C Y C ORG Maitland Ave. MAITLAND BLVD. SEMINOLE CO. LIN 4 D N C N C ORG Maitland Ave. MAITLAND BLVD. SANDSPUR ROAD 4 U N C N C ORG Maitland Ave. HORATIO AVE US 17/92 2 U N C N C ORG US 17/92 MAITLAND BLVD. SEMINOLE CO. LIN 6 D P S P S ORG US 17/92 MAITLAND BLVD. HORATIO AV. 6 D N C N C ORG US 17/92 HORATIO AV. MAITLAND AVE. 6 D N C N C Volumes % Heavy Vehicles 2006 Posted Speed Pavement Condition 2013 Comments

28 One Side of Road Other Side of Road Length (mi) Length (ft) # of Lanes Divided/ Undivided 2000 Volumes ORG US 17/92 MAITLAND AVE. LAKE AVE. 6 D N C N C ORG US 17/92 LAKE AVE. LEE ROAD 6 D N C N C ORG US 17/92 LEE ROAD WEBSTER AV. 4 D N C N C ORG US 17/92 WEBSTER AV. MORSE AVE. 4 U N C N C ORG Old SR 50 SR 50 LAKE CO. LINE 2 U N S N S ORG W. Plant St. SR 50 TILDENVILLE SCHO 2 U N S N S ORG W. Plant St. TILDENVILLE SCHO STORY ROAD 2 U N S N S ORG W. Plant St. STORY ROAD PARK AVE. 2 U N S N S ORG Plant St. DILLARD ST. W CROWN PT 2 U P S P S ORG SR 50 AVALON ROAD W.GARD/VINELAND 6 D Y C Y C ORG SR 50 W.GARD/VINELAND DILLARD ST. 6 D Y C Y C ORG SR 50 DILLARD ST. BEULAH ROAD 6 D Y C Y C ORG SR 50 BEULAH ROAD TURNPIKE RAMP 6 D Y C Y C ORG Dillard St. PLANT ST. STORY ROAD 4 U U C U C ORG Dillard St. STORY ROAD SR 50 4 U N C N C ORG Tildenville School Road W PLANT ST. SR 50 2 U N S N S ORG Avalon Road SR 50 CURVE 2 U N S N S ORG Avalon Road CURVE MARSH ROAD 2 U N S N S ORG Plant St. W CROWN PT E CROWN POINT RD 4 D N C N C ORG Franklin/taylor St. OCOEE-APOPKA RD MCKEY ST 2 U N S N S ORG McKey St. FRANKLIN/TAYLOR BLUFORD AVE. 2 U N C N C ORG Kissimmee Ave. COLUMBUS ST STORY ROAD 2 U N S N S ORG Bluford Ave. MCKEY ST SILVER STAR ROAD 2 U N S N S ORG Bluford Ave. MCKEY ST WHITE ROAD 2 U N S N S ORG Bluford Ave. WHITE ROAD STORY ROAD 2 U N S N S ORG Geneva St. KISSIMMEE AVE. BLUFORD AVE. 2 U N S N S ORG Maguire Road MARSHALL FARMS R STORY ROAD 2 U N S N S ORG Marshall Farms Road SR 50 MAGUIRE ROAD 2 U N S N S ORG Maguire Road MARSHALL FARMS R SR 50 2 U N S N S ORG Bluford Ave. SR 50 STORY ROAD 2 U N S N S ORG SR 50 TURNPIKE RAMP MAGUIRE ROAD 4 U P S P S ORG SR 50 MAGUIRE ROAD BLUFORD AVE. 4 U P S P S ORG SR 50 BLUFORD AVE. CLARK ROAD 4 U P S P S ORG Maguire Road SR 50 OLD WINTER GARDEN RD 4 D N C N C ORG Maguire Road TOMYN BLVD. ROBERSON RD 4 D N C N C ORG Maguire Road GOTHA ROAD WINDERMERE ROAD 2 U N S N S ORG Winter Garden-Vineland Road SR 50 TURNPIKE OVERPAS 2 U N S N S ORG Winter Garden-Vineland Road TURNPIKE OVERPAS STONEYBROOK N 2 U N S N S ORG Tilden Road W.GARD/VINELAND AVALON ROAD 2 U N S N S ORG Avalon Road TILDEN ROAD CURVE 2 U N S N S ORG Avalon Road CURVE SEIDEL ROAD 2 U N S N S ORG Seidel Road AVALON ROAD SUMMELAKE PARK BLVD 2 U N S N S ORG Ficquette Road LAKE HANCOCK RD W.GARD/VINELAND 2 U N S N S ORG Winter Garden-Vineland Road FICQUETTE ROAD LAKE BUTLER RD 4 D N C N C ORG Reams Road SEIDEL ROAD SILVERLAKE PARK DR 2 U N C N C ORG Winter Garden-Vineland Road FICQUETTE ROAD CHASE ROAD 4 D N C N C ORG Winter Garden-Vineland Road CHASE ROAD REAMS ROAD 4 D P S P S ORG Main St. CHASE ROAD CONROY ROAD 2 U N S N S ORG Avalon Road SEIDEL ROAD OSCEOLA CO. LINE 2 U N S N S ORG Winter Garden-Vineland Road BUENA VISTA DR. APOPKA VINELAND 4 D N C N C ORG White Road BLUFORD AVE. CLARK ROAD 2 U N C N S ORG White Road CLARK ROAD GOOD HOMES ROAD 2 U N S N S ORG Clarke Road WHITE ROAD SILVER STAR ROAD 4 D N C N C ORG Clarke Road WHITE ROAD SR 50 4 D N C N C ORG Good Homes Road WHITE ROAD SILVER STAR ROAD 2 U N C N C ORG Good Homes Road WHITE ROAD BALBOA DR. 2 U N S N S ORG Good Homes Road BALBOA DR. SR 50 2 U N C N C ORG Balboa Dr. GOOD HOMES ROAD APOPKA VINELAND 2 U N C N C ORG Balboa Dr. APOPKA VINELAND HIAWASSEE ROAD 2 U N C N S ORG SR 50 CLARK ROAD GOOD HOMES ROAD 4 U P S P S ORG SR 50 HIAWASSEE ROAD POWERS DR. 4 U P S P S ORG SR 50 POWERS DR. HASTINGS AVE. 6 D U C U C ORG Balboa Dr./Vernon St. HIAWASSEE ROAD POWERS DR. 2 U N S N S ORG Balboa Dr. POWERS DR. HASTINGS AVE. 2 U N C N C ORG Balboa Dr. EMERALDA DR PINE HILLS ROAD 2 U N C N C ORG Hiawassee Road BALBOA DR. SILVER STAR ROAD 4 U N C N C ORG Hiawassee Road BALBOA DR. SR 50 4 U N C N C ORG Powers Dr. BALBOA DR. SR 50 2 U N S N S ORG Hastings Ave. BALBOA DR. SILVER STAR ROAD 2 U N C N C ORG Hastings Ave. BALBOA DR. SR 50 2 U N C N C ORG Pine Hills Road SR 50 SILVER STAR ROAD 4 U Y C Y C ORG Old Winter Garden Road SR 50 HEMPEL ROAD 4 D Y C Y C ORG Old Winter Garden Road HEMPEL ROAD APOPKA VINELAND 4 D Y C Y C ORG Old Winter Garden Road APOPKA VINELAND HIAWASSEE ROAD 4 D N C N C Volumes % Heavy Vehicles 2006 Posted Speed Pavement Condition 2013 Comments