Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout4180 Comp PlanOrdinance No. 4180 An Ordinance of the City of Sanford, Florida amending the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan as previously amended; providing for amendments implementing the statutorily required Evaluation and Appraisal Report; amending the Future Land Use, Transportation, Housing, Infrastructure, Conservation, Recreation, Intergovernmental Coordination, Capital Improvement, Public School Facilities and General Monitoring Elements of the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan; providing for legislative findings and intent; providing for amendment as described and depicted in the exhibits to this Ordinance; providing for ratification of prior acts of the City Commission; providing for conflicts; providing for codification and directions to the Code codifier and providing for an effective date. Whereas, the Florida Legislature in enacting growth management laws expressed its intent and established State policy that local planning be a continuous and ongoing process; and Whereas, Section 163.3191, Florida Statutes, directs local governments to periodically assess the success or failure of their adopted comprehensive plans in order to adequately address changing conditions and State laws, policies and rules and to submit an Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR); and Whereas, the City of Sanford adopted its EAR on February 25, 2008; and Whereas, the State land planning agency, the Florida Department of Community Affairs (FDCA), issued a sufficiency letter to the City on May 2, 2008; and Whereas, Section 163.3191, Florida Statutes, directs local governments to adopt the EAR -based amendments to their comprehensive plans within eighteen (18) months after the EAR has been determined to be sufficient by the FDCA; and Whereas, the City of Sanford's proposed EAR -based amendments include revisions to all elements of the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan; and 1 Whereas, the City of Sanford Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on May 21, 2009, to receive public input and comment on the proposed EAR - based amendments to the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan and to make a recommendation to the City Commission and a copy of the materials considered and recommendations made by the Planning and Zoning Commission are on file in the office of the City Clerk for public review and consideration; and Whereas, the City Commission of the City of Sanford held a public hearing on June 22, 2009, to receive public input and comment on the proposed EAR -based amendments to the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan; and Whereas, the proposed changes to the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan are vital to the future growth and development of the City of Sanford and further the City Commission's goal of providing a high quality of life to the citizens of the City; and Whereas, pursuant to Part II, Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, the City Commission of the City of Sanford desires to accept and favorably act upon the proposed EAR -based amendments to the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan and authorize their transmittal to the FDCA and other agencies as required by State law; and Whereas, the City Commission of the City of Sanford hereby adopts and incorporates into this Ordinance the City staff report and City Commission agenda memorandum relating to the proposed EAR -based amendments to the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan as well as the Data, Inventory and Analysis used to support such amendments; and Whereas, the Exhibit to this Ordinance is incorporated herein as if fully set forth 2 herein verbatim which Exhibit sets forth amendments to the Introduction and the ten (10) Elements which make up the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan; and Whereas, this Ordinance is internally consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan; and Whereas, the City of Sanford has complied with all requirements and procedures of Florida law in processing this amendment to the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan including, but not limited to, those prescribed in Section 163.3187, Florida Statutes. Now, therefore, be it enacted by the People of the City of Sanford, Florida: Section 1. Legislative findings and intent. (a). The City Commission of the City of Sanford hereby adopts and incorporates into this Ordinance, as legislative findings and intent, the City staff report and City Commission agenda memorandum relating to the proposed amendment to the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan. (b). The Exhibit to this Ordinance is incorporated herein as if fully set forth herein verbatim. (c). The City Commission of the City of Sanford hereby adopts as legislative findings and intent the recitals (whereas clauses) to this Ordinance. Section 2. Amendment to City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan. (a). The amendments to the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan implementing the statutorily required Evaluation and Appraisal Report as set forth in the attached Exhibit are hereby enacted. (b). The Comprehensive Plan Introduction, and the Land Use, Transportation, Housing, Infrastructure, Conservation, Recreation, Intergovernmental Coordination, 3 Capital Improvement, Public School Facilities and General Monitoring Elements of the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan are amended as set forth in the Exhibit to this Ordinance with words stFir7keR representing deletions and words underlined depicting additions. Section 3. Implementing Administrative Actions. The City Manager, or designee, is hereby authorized and directed to implement the provisions of this Ordinance and to take any and all necessary administrative actions necessary to process the provisions of this Ordinance. Section 4. Severability. If any section, sentence, phrase, word, or portion of this Ordinance is determined to be invalid, unlawful or unconstitutional, said determination shall not be held to invalidate or impair the validity, force or effect of any other section, sentence, phrase, word, or portion of this Ordinance not otherwise determined to be invalid, unlawful, or unconstitutional. Section 5. Conflicts/Ratification of Prior Actions. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. The prior actions of the City Commission and its agencies in enacting and amending the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan are hereby ratified and affirmed. Section 6. Codification/Instructions to Code Codifier. It is the intention of the City Commission of the City of Sanford, Florida, and it is hereby ordained, that the provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made a part of the codified version of the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan and/or the Code of Ordinances of the City of Sanford, Florida and that the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan shall be codified and 4 made available to the public and broadly made available to the public as is the overall provisions of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Sanford, Florida. The actual text of the Sections to this Ordinance need not be codified. The Code codifier of the City is given broad and liberal authority to appropriately codify the provisions of the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan in a format that can be readily published and distributed in a useable and manageable format. The City Manager, in conjunction with the City Clerk and the City Attorney, are hereby granted the authority to take any and all necessary and appropriate actions to accomplish the provisions of this Section. Section 7. Effective Date. The effective date of this Ordinance and plan amendment shall be the date a Final Order is issued by the Department of Community Affairs finding the amendment to be in compliance, in accordance with Chapter 163.3184, Florida Statutes, or the date a Final Order is issued by the Administration Commission finding the amendment to be in compliance, in accordance with Chapter 163.3184, Florida Statutes. Attest. Passed and adopted this 9th day of November, 2009. City Commission of the City of Sanford, Florida Qg-txti Janet Dougherty, Orty Clerk Linda Ku , Mayor �P' 5 M&4; I. 01 l46-1ral I I [side Comprehensive Plan City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan Part I: Goals, Objectives and Policies November 9, 2009 INTRODUCTION Under State law, the municipal comprehensive plan is the ultimate regulatory authority governing all land development activities within the City of Sanford. The City's Land Development Code (LDC), which contains zoning, subdivision and other local development regulations, takes its purpose and direction from the goals, objectives and policies adopted in this Comprehensive Plan. The Land Development Code furthers its goals, objectives and policies. The specific authority and requirement for municipalities to do comprehensive planning in Florida emanates from Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. In 1985, the State Legislature amended Chapter 163 through the adoption of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act. This Act substantially increases the requirements for local land use plans, associated infrastructure and other plan elements as well as mandates that local governments adopt land development regulations (or code) to implement the policies of the local comprehensive plan. The Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act is implemented primarily via Rules 9J-5 and 9J-11 of the Florida Administrative Code, as amended. This Comprehensive Plan has been prepared to be fully consistent with Chapter 163, F.S., and Rule 9J-5, F.A.C. as required by State law. Consistent with State requirements, the Village's new Comprehensive Plan is divided into two components: Part l: Goals, Objectives and Policies (GOPs) Part 11: Data, Inventory, & Analysis (DIA) Reports This is the "Comprehensive Plan: Part I — GOPs" document, formally adopted by ordinance. The "Comprehensive Plan: Part II — Data, Inventory, and Analysis (DIA) Reports" is a separately bound document and is used to provide supporting data and conclusions as the foundation for the goals, objectives, and policies. This section of the comprehensive plan is not formally adopted. The DIA Report support document may be reviewed at City Hall during regular business hours. The Goals, Objectives and Policies contained herein are organized into 10 plan elements (chapters). Each element addresses an important aspect of land development and growth in City of Sanford including, but not limited to, future land use, transportation, housing, infrastructure, recreation and open space, and capital improvements. The Future Land Use Element also contains the official Future Land Use Map (FLUM) for the City, and specific definitions for the various future land use categories referenced in the FLUM. The Comprehensive Plan for the City of Sanford has been prepared in accordance with State requirements. The intent of the goals, objectives, and policies contained within this Comprehensive Plan is to provide the overall policy framework from which zoning and other land development regulations (code) can be developed. Together, the Plan and implementing tools will ensure that the development patterns for future land uses within Sanford match the community vision and quality -of -life expectations of its residents. CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1: Future Land Use Element Chapter 2: Transportation Element Chapter 3: Housing Element Chapter 4: Infrastructure Element Chapter 5: Conservation Element Chapter 6: Recreation And Open Space Element Chapter 7: Intergovernmental Coordination Element Chapter 8: Capital Improvement Element Chapter 9: Public School Facilities Element Chapter 10: General Monitoring CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER 1: FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT FUTURE LAND USE O. r GIP .. -■4r, 126ANNING PRING1126ES-To 21 AN' ■ . -� .• r ■ . - O, r . r R&SID&NT-8,1• -• to GOAL MANAGE LAND USE DISTRIBUTION AND PROVISION OF SERVICES AND FACILITIES. THE CITY SHALL PROMOTE AN ORDERLY DISTRIBUTION OF LAND USES IN AN ECONOMICALLY, SOCIALLY, AND ENVIRONMENTALLY ACCEPTABLE MANNER WHILE ENSURING THE ADEQUATE AND TIMELY PROVISION OF SERVICES AND FACILITIES TO MEET THE NEEDS OF THE CURRENT AND PROJECTED POPULATIONS. Objective 1-1.1: Implement the Future Land Use Map Series. The City shall adopt and implement the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) series in the Future Land Use Element Goals of the Comprehensive Plan,. Maps 1 1 thFeugh 1 13 The Future Land Use Map series reflects the City policy for managing the allocation of future land use. The Future Land Use Map Series (Base Year 200920N) is supported by the Comprehensive Plan -Data, Inventory, and Analysis 20092988). The Future Land Use Map (Map 4 4) includes the land use categories with corresponding densities and intensities and which are further implemented through the City's Land Development Regulations (LDR). The City shall not approve land use amendments, zoning changes, or development in conflict with these densities and intensities. The LDRs shall encourage the use of innovative development techniques to achieve a mix of uses, where appropriate. The following future land use categories are contained on the City's FLUM: LAND USE DESIGNATIONS MAP SYMBOL DENSITY/INTENSITY (MAXIMUM) Low Density Residential - LDR-SF 6 du/acre Single Family Low Density Residential - LDR-MH 6 du/acre Mobile Home Medium Density MDR DR 10 du/acre Residential Medium Density Residential MDR 15 du/acre High Density Residential HDR 20 du/acre Suburban Estates SE 1 du/acre 1-1 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FLJTtJRF I ANTI 1 I.qF LAND USE DESIGNATIONS MAP SYMBOL DENSITY/INTENSITY (MAXIMUM) Neighborhood Commercial, Office NC 0.35 FAR Commercial General Commercial(4), Office GC 0.35 FAR Industrial 1 0.50 FAR Includes: Education, Public Public/semi-public Facilities Transportation, Private Recreation, and PSP 0.35 FAR other Institutional Parks, Recreation Includes Municipal and Open Space Recreation and Open Space PRO 0.25 FAR Wetlands and Aquatic Habitats('); Floodways and Drainageways('); Aquifer Resource protection Recharge Area (2); Wellfield RP See Notes Below Protection Areas (2); Upland Wildlife Habitats (2) Floodplains(2) (1) Within wetlands, aquatic habitats, floodways and drainageways no development is permitted pursuant to plan. However, in certain cases, in order to avoid a taking of property without just compensation, the City shall negotiate a minimal development right necessary to provide "reasonable" use of the land. In such cases, development shall be shifted to the upland portion of the site. However, where no upland exists, development rights within the wetland, floodways or drainageways shall be negotiated in order to protect private property rights and preserve "reasonable" use of the land while preserving the physical and biological functions of the wetlands, floodways and/or drainageways through mitigation techniques identified in the policies cited herein , (2) The FAR for these areas shall be restricted pursuant to this o _Ian performance eAtega 4.2.6, ` 4-:7.4, 61 °' and &44.4. In no case shall the FAR exceed the FAR for the underlying Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use designation. However, the building footprint and total impermeable surface shall be restricted to maximize permeable surface while preserving a "reasonable" development right pursuant to the policies identified herein (3) Where a federal, state, or regional agency has jurisdiction over a resource protection area, the City shall not grant a development right which exceeds the development right provided by such agencies having jurisdiction. (4) Multifamily residential no oreater than 20 Knits oer acre is permitted as n-Prnnriary nm M 0— ne --1 for public facilities (not including c .hoolg great r than that which would be reau red for aeneral commercial uses. (5) Existing MDR — 10 designations may remain but no new MDR — 10 future land use designations shall be established after the effective date of this Ordinance. 1-2 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE The distribution range of uses in the mixed-use designations below represents an area wide composite land use mix. LAND USE DESIGNATIONS MAP SYMBOL DENSITY/INTENSITY (MAXIMUM) PERCENTAGE DISTR/BLITQN lM/mx) COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL RESIDENTIAL Mixed Use Districts I-4 High Intensity HI 1.0 FAR 0.50 FAR 50 du/acre Waterfront/ Downtown Business District WDBD 1.0 FAR 1.0 FAR 50 du/acre ° % / 10% 3� Westside Industry & Commerce WIC 0.508-35 FAR 0.50 FAR 20 du/acre 5% /50% 30%% My 1 Residential/ Office/ Institutional ROI 0.35 FAR n/a 20 du/acre 75% 2 Airport Industry & Commerce AIC 1.0 FAR 1.0 FAR 50 du/acre (MF) 1 du/acre (SF) � °� Notes: du/acre =dwelling units per acre as defined in Policy 1-1.2.1; FAR= Floor Area Ratio; MF =Multifamily; SF = Single Family The percent distribution ren - entc minim um and maximum gemeatage mix for aach Use Th oemaotaae distribution of d for the total area of th . land usg d cianation 1-13e,5 must b-nncict n with adiacent land ices_ Policy 1-1.1.1: Maintain Consistency of Future Land Use Map and Related Policies. The Future Land Use Map and related policies, definitions of land use designations and qualitative standards whieh shall be applied in allocating future land uses. All the developments are subject to the City's Concurrency Management system. In addition to the evaluation criteria iR Pelisy 9 1 65 64 which pertain_q to capital improvements, the City shall evaluate amendments to the Future Land Use Map for consistency with the following criteria: • The amendment shall be consistent with the State Comprehensive Plan (Chapter 187, F.S.) and the Growth Policy Act (Chapter 163 F.S.); • The amendment shall be consistent with all elements of the City Comprehensive Plan; • The amendment shall be consistent with Rule 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code; 1-3 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE • Public facilities and services shall be available concurrent with development of the site; • There have been changes in population, land use or economic development trends and/or projections that warrant a change in the future land use designation; • There have been sufficient changes in the character of the area or adjacent lands to warrant a different land use designation; • The proposed future land use designation and its allowable uses are compatible with surrounding land use designations and with the preferred growth and development pattern of the City as evidenced by land use policies in the Comprehensive Plan. The amendment will not significantly alter acceptable existing land use patterns or adversely affect the livability of the area or the health and safety of the residents; • The land shall be capable of supporting development allowed under the proposed future land use designation as evidenced by the presence or absence on the site of soil types suitable for development, vegetative habitats, wetlands, wetland protection zones or flood -prone areas, well field protection zones, wildlife habitats, archaeological, historical or cultural resources. • The proposed amendment will create a demonstrated benefit to the City and enhance the character of the community: • If the amendment increases the density or intensity of use the applicant shall demonstrate that there is a need for the increase in the near plannina future (10 years). Policy 1-1.1.2: Manage Future Land Use. The Future Land Use Map and performance criteria in this plan shall be applied as a planning and management tool in order to prevent development of land uses which do not conform to the City's character as reflected in the City's adopted Future Land Use Map. Policy 1-1.1.3: Manage and Coordinate Future Land Use Decisions. The City shall maintain land development regulations, including performance standards which ensure that land development activities, resource conservation, and infrastructure issues are managed in a manner that includes timely coordination with County, regional, and State agencies having jurisdictional authority. Management of land and physical improvements identified on the Future Land Use Map will be coordinated in order to protect and/or conserve natural systems, including topography, soil conditions, vegetation, natural habitat, potable water wellfields, and other environmentally sensitive land and water resources. Land use shall also be predicated on availability of man-made infrastructure and service systems required to support respective land use activities. Policy 1-1.1.48: Promote Orderly Land Use Transition. Where it is infeasible or undesirable to physically separate residential from non-residential land uses, buffering shall be required to promote a smooth land use transition. Buffering may take the form of: • physical separation such as distance (building setbacks), vegetative berms, hedges or other landscape cover; walls or fences aesthetically designed for screening purposes; and open space systems with dense native vegetation and tree canopy; and/or 1-4 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE • the development of a transitional use between the incompatible uses (such as low intensity office development between general retail commercial centers and residential areas). Policy 1-1.1.56: Encourage Separation of Urban and Rural Land Uses through Support of the Seminole County's Rural Boundary. The City will support the County's desionated rural boundary and its intent to protect the intearity of its rural lands and to preserve and reinforce the rural character and lifestyle of east Seminole County. The City will comply with the County's provisions reaardina land use chanaes and annexations within the rural boundary (Future Land Use Map Series) and legally described in Seminole County Ordinance 2004-36 and as am Policy 1-1.1.67-: Implement Land Development Regulations. The City's exie4ing land development regulations governing zoning; subdivision; signage; landscaping and tree protection; and surface water management shall be revised as needed in order to: 1) effectively regulate future land use activities and natural resources identified on the Future Land Use Map; 2) adequately protect property rights; and 3) implement the goals, objectives, and policies stipulated in the Comprehensive Plan. The land development regulations shall continue to be applied to: a. Regulate the subdivision of land; b. Regulate the use of land and water consistent with this Element, ensure the compatibility of adjacent land uses, and provide for open space; C. Protect the environmentally sensitive lands designated in the Comprehensive Plan; d. Regulate areas subject to seasonal and periodic flooding and provide for drainage and stormwater management; e. Protect potable water wellfields and aquifer recharge areas a--" and ensure consistency with the City's water conservation regulations; Regulate signage; g. Ensure safe and convenient on-site and off-site traffic flow and vehicle parking needs and prohibit development within existing and future rights-of-way. h. Enforce the Concurrency Management System (CMS) to maintain levels of services (LOS) for public facilities. 1-5 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE Policy 1-1.1.78: Establish Performance Criteria for New Development. New development must comply with performance criteria established in the Comprehensive Plan. The performance criteria shall be enforced through a site plan review process. The performance criteria within the plan include, but are not limited to, the following: a. Land use compatibility (Pelisy--1-4 -1�; b. Wetlands and aquatic habitat protection-{Relicy6-4."; C. Open space requirements(PeNsy 1 4."; d. Potable water wellfields protection (Peliey6 1-2-6); e. Water quality, drainage and stormwater management (Deli ); f. Off-street parking and internal traffic circulation as well as access to and egress from the street system(Pelisy-2 !."; g. Availability of requisite services and infrastructure, level of service criteria, adequate water supply, and concurrency management , 4.4-3); h. Perimeter screening and buffering of land uses and facilities which may otherwise adversely impact development of adjacent land use activities or natural resources such as wetlands and recharge area ; i. Erosion and sedimentation control ; j. Protection of historically significant properties , ; k. Wastewater discharge (Pelisy6 1.2-6); I. Floodplain and floodway protection ; M. Aquifer recharge protection (Relies); n. Potable water conservation (Relish-8); o. Vegetative communities protection -(Pelisy-g-4.7-.�; P. Wildlife and wildlife and aquatic habitat q. Nuisance abatement standards regulating adverse impacts such as noise, vibration, glare, odor, fire and explosion; r. Community appearance (Pelisy4--1-fl~1-}. Policy 1-1.1.J5: Apply Residential and Non-Residential Development Criteria. Land development regulations addressing the location and extent of residential and non-residential land uses shall be applied in a manner consistent with the Future Land Use Map and the policies and descriptions of types, sizes, and densities/intensities of land uses contained in this Element. Policy 1-1.1 _939: Implement Concurrency Management System. The CMS sGRGUFFeRey . shall be an integral part of the Future Land Use Element and shall be binding performance criteria to which all new development shall comply. . 1-6 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE Policy 1-1.1.10: Provide On -Site and Off -Site Improvements. Prior to receiving a building permit, plans for all new development shall be evaluated by the City. Similarly, prior to receiving a building permit, the applicant's plans must incorporate necessary on- and off-site improvements or equitable contributions required as part of a development application pursuant to the concurrency management system or pursuant to other policies of the Comprehensive Plan or any other requirement of the Code of Ordinances, as exists or as may hereinafter be amended. Institutional facilities and services shall be required to comply with all criteria cited in objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Supportive facilities, services, or other improvements as required by ordinance shall be agreed to by the applicant prior to City approval of a development order and facilities shall be constructed as agreed upon concurrent with the impact of development 68RGisteRt with 129196Y 1 3. . The intent of this policy is that all development applications include a satisfactory plan providing for the development of required on-site and off-site improvements, or equitable contribution in order to assure that the City does not assume unanticipated fiscal liabilities for supportive facilities and services which may be expressly attributed to new development. Policy 1-1.1.1142: Coordinate Public and Private Investments in Land Improvements. The location, scale, timing, and design of necessary public services and semi-public uses shall be closely coordinated with development activities in order to promote improvements in delivery of requisite services. The site plan review process shall be used by the City as a technique for achieving a comprehensive review of all issues underlying a proposed development. The site plan review process shall occur prior to the release of a building permit and shall involve not only review by City staff, but also review by County, regional, state, and federal agencies having jurisdiction over a resource potentially impacted by a proposed development. Policy 1-1.1.1243: Promote Community Appearance, Natural Amenities And Urban Design Principles. The City shall maintain land development regulations which contain performance criteria promoting community appearance, natural amenities and urban design principles. Policy 1-1.1.x: Reinforce and Enhance the City's Community Appearance. The City shall reinforce and enhance the City's community appearance requiring new development and redevelopment to incorporate the following principles into site plans and be required as a condition of development approval: • Landscape: Landscaping shall be required in all vehicle use and storage areas for non- residential development and multiple family residential and cluster development. In addition, street tree planting shall be required pursuant to the following standard: one tree shall be provided and evenly spaced for every 25 lineal feet along all parcel lines abutting a street classified as arterial or collector roadways in the TFaffie, GirewlatieR P18R Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan and one tree shall be provided for every 50 lineal feet of parcel line along all parcel lines abutting a street right-of-way other than arterials and collectors as clarified in the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. • Visual Screening and Buffers: 12elisy�-�4. • Open Space Preservation: Gress-Rfere- pelisy 1-4.4.4. • Signage: The City shall regulate the number, placement, height, structural integrity, as well as 1-7 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE the character and square footage of copy on signs within the City. The intent shall be to promote and protect the public health, safety, welfare, and aesthetics of the City, to protect property values, create a more attractive economic climate, preserve physical appearance of the community, including the natural scenic beauty of the City, and provide for vehicular and pedestrian safety. • Screening: Require screening of utilities, mechanical appurtenances, refuse storage areas and other similar objects to protect the general appearance of residential and non-residential areas. • Scenic Views: Preserve scenic view of the waterfront by regulating placement and height of structures. • Structure Appearance: Ensure land use compatibility and harmonious design of structures by regulating the general appearance of structures to ensure compatibility and harmonious design and to prevent introduction of gaudy and garish structures which disrupt the visual integrity of an area. • Historic Compatibility: Ensure that new development in the central business district and the residential historic district is designed in a manner compatible with historically significant structure Policy 1-1.1.14: Utilize Buffers and Perimeter Landscaping. The following criteria shall be required through site plan review. Landscape buffers serving as a visual screen shall be required along the perimeter of all properties where potential land use incompatibilities or other adverse impacts may exist. Such buffers shall be maintained in perpetuity. One of the following types of visual screens shall be required depending on the intensity of the potential adverse impacts: Type I Visual Screening - Masonry Wall. A Type I visual screen shall mean a continuous, non -perforated and solid masonry wall at least six feet in height, except where a lesser or greater height is required by this ordinance. Such required wall shall be constructed of cement block, brick or other similar masonry material. If the wall is constructed of cement block, the side facing the abutting use shall be faced with stucco or another similar decorative finish. In addition, one tree shall be provided every 25 feet along the wall. Type I/ Visual Screening - Hedge. A Type II visual screen shall mean a continuous hedge of dense shrub plantings which shall attain a height of at least six feet within 18 months of the time of planting. Such required hedge shall not be less than four feet in height at the time of planting. The maximum distance between shrub foliage at time of planting shall be two feet. A Type I visual screen may be utilized in conjunction with Type II visual screen when either type of visual screen is required. In addition, one tree shall be provided every 25 feet along the hedge. • Type /// Visual Screening - Shrubs. A Type III visual screen shall mean the required planting of 25 shrubs per 100 lineal feet within the required buffer. Type 1 and Type II visual screens may be utilized in conjunction with Type III visual screen. In addition, a Type III visual screen shall include the provision of one tree every 50 lineal feet. 1-8 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE • Berms. Earthen berms may be utilized to provide all or a portion of the required height of visual screening. Such berms shall generally be centered within a minimum area of 10 feet in width and shall utilize a slope of 3:1 or less. A flexible matrix shall be used as a guide in determining appropriate visual screens for potentially incompatible uses. The matrix shall identify proposed uses, abutting uses, and shall site alternative setbacks. The setback selected by the applicant/development shall determine the specific visual screen requirement. A waiver may be provided based on the following conditions: • When such requirements would result in an arbitrary and undesirable view obstruction from a major thoroughfare; • When the reduction of such requirements would not be detrimental to the adjacent parcel or parcels; • When such visual screen would be unreasonable and excessive due to the size of the parcel in question and/or the fact that the required visual screen is not necessary due to the unique location and/or natural topographical or other physical character of the specific parcel in question and provided such reduction would not be detrimental to the adjacent parcel or parcels. All proposed development site plan review criteria shall require retention of open space and regulate building design, including setbacks, building placement, and orientation. These provisions shall be directed toward protecting privacy, as well light, air and open space. The minimum standard for open space retention shall be as follows: Proposed Land Use Minimum Open Space Reauired' Residential 50% Institutional 35% Commercial 25% Industrial 20% 'Open space means any portion of a parcel which is open and unobstructed from the ground to the sky, including areas maintained in a natural and undisturbed character and areas which are permeable in nature. Open space shall not include water areas below the control water elevation, or areas covered with buildings, sidewalks, pools, decks and patios, paved parking areas, drives or other paved areas. If open space is not maintained in a natural and undisturbed state, it shall be maintained as a landscaped or sodded area. The percent is expressed as required open space to total site area. Policy 1-1.1 J&W: Limit Improvements to Existing Non -Complying Structures and Non - Conforming Uses. Lawful existing land uses which do not comply with the Future Land Use Map and/or other provisions of the Comprehensive Plan may continue as lawful nonconforming uses. However, such uses shall not be expanded. Minor alterations to such lawful nonconforming uses for purposes of maintaining public safety and structural integrity shall be permitted so long as the square footage and intensity of uses not be extended. is-irasfeased- 1- 9 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE ". The City shall develop rules of procedure to gradually eliminate unlawful nonconforming uses after serving due public notice and providing opportunity to bring such use or structure into conformity with the Plan. Any such unlawful nonconforming uses which are a hazard to public health, safety and welfare may be issued a City citation ordering a cease to unlawful activities and requiring abandonment of such facilities if the operators fail to comply with City orders to cease operations judged to be a hazard to public health, safety, or welfare. The land development regulations include standards regulating improvements to existing noncomplying structures as well as changes to nonconforming uses. These standards require that plans for alterations to noncomplying uses incorporate improvements to bring the subject structure into compliance to the greatest reasonable and practical extent. Policy 1-1.1.1147-: Provide Access to Goods and Services and Protect Residential Areas from the Adverse Impacts of Transition in Land Use. Residential land uses shall be protected from encroachment by incompatible nonresidential development. This policy does not preclude necessary community facilities from locating within residential areas when such activities satisfy established criteria of this plan and the City's land development regulations. Any potential adverse impacts caused by non-residential land uses shall be minimized by landscaping, including vegetated berms with tree canopy, and other appropriate screening and buffering techniques. These landscaping techniques shall be incorporated into the design of new or redeveloping non-residential projects located adjacent to existing or planned residential development. Similarly, perimeter landscaping techniques shall be applied in multiple family residential developments in order to appropriately screen and buffer existing and planned single family home sites from residential development having differing structure types and density. Objective 1-1.2Pehey 1-2 4 4: Allocate Residential Land Use. The Future Land Use Map shall allocate residential density based on the following considerations: • past and projected #fie population, and housing trends, and characteristics; • provision and maintenance of quality residential environments; • protection of environmentally fragile natural systems; • the need to plan for smooth transition in residential densities; and • provision and maintenance of traffic circulation and multiple -family improvements. The City shall maintain land development regulations that include performance standards regulating the allowable density on any specific site for which new development is proposed. These performance standards shall address: • Stormwater management and floodplain protection; • Traffic impact analysis; • Minimum open space criteria; • Perimeter landscaping, screening and buffering; • Wetlands preservation; • Concurrency management system; • Recreation land and facilities provision; and • Erosion and sedimentation control. 1-10 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE Policy 1-1.2.1: Define Residential Density. For planning purposes, density is defined as the number of residential units permitted per land area. Land area means the total area of land contained within the lot, tract or project boundary lines not including dedicated rights-of-way, wetlands and undevelopable areas such as flood plains. Density is determined by dividing the number of units by the total area of land within the boundaries of a lot or parcel not including dedicated rights-of-way, flood -prone, preservation, wetlands and undevelopable areas. For any given lot or parcel, one residential unit may be transferred from within the 100 year flood zone to an area of the lot or parcel not within the 100 year flood zone provided that the area within the 100 year flood zone is at least one acre in size. In determining the number of residential dwelling units to be permitted on a specific parcel of land, a fractional unit shall not entitle the applicant to an additional unit. Density is expressed in terms of a range up to a specified maximum. Where so stated as a range, the maximum density is not guaranteed by right. Specific density assigned to new development shall be compatible and consistent with established residential development patterns and shall provide reasonable use of the land. Criteria to be considered in allocating density shall include, but not be limited to, the following: • Protect the integrity and stability of established residential areas; • Ensure smooth transition in residential densities; • Require application of sound landscaping and urban design principles and practices; • Protect environmentally sensitive areas; • Minimize the impact of flood hazards; • Ensure compatibility with Seminole County land use policies together with federal, state and regional agencies having jurisdiction or managing authority over land and water resources; and • Provide reasonable use of the land. Policy 1-1.2.2: Designate Low Density Residential — Single Family (LDR-SF) Districts. The areas delineated for LDR-SF development shall include existing stable single family areas as well as those areas for future low density residential single family development in order to provide sufficient land area to meet projected single family housing needs. Areas delineated as LDR-SF shall allow residential development with a maximum density of up to six dwelling units per acre comprised of single family detached homes on individual lots. Specific densities will be determined by such factors as natural features of the land, density and/or intensity of developed and/or undeveloped land surrounding development, level of accessibility, housing supply and demand, and adequacy of public facilities, consumer preference and other factors which may be identified in the land development regulations. Supportive community facilities and accessory land uses may be located within areas designated LDR-SF. Development within the LDR-SF designation shall be required to meet the following general criteria together with performance criteria in this Element: • Compatible with the quality and character of existing low density single family neighborhoods • Preserve open space eensisteRt with Peliey 4 4.4 4; • Compatible with existing and anticipated future developments; • Compatible with natural features of the land and comply with performance criteria e 1- 11 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE as well as other policies within the Comprehensive Plan impacting natural resources; and, Comply with concurrency management regulations. Policy 1-1.2.3: Designate Mobile Home Low Density — Residential (LDR-MH) Districts. The Future Land Use Map designates existing and committed mobile home development as LDR-MH. The density of the mobile home parks or subdivisions shall be permitted up to a maximum of six units per acre; however, specific site densities must be consistent with the policy, map and standards of the Comprehensive Plan and the City's land development regulations. Replacement of existing mobile homes in existing mobile home parks and sites of record, as of the effective date of this Plan, shall be permitted and shall not be deemed inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The City shall ensure that new mobile home development shall be consistent with performance criteria cited in this ol n Reliey4-32-6. This policy shall be implemented through a mandatory site plan review process. Policy 1-1.2.4: Identify Medium Density Residential (MDR) Districts. Areas identified MDR shall include existing and committed medium density residential neighborhoods as well as those areas which have been selected in order to meet projected housing needs. The latter areas were selected based on their proximity to existing or planned multiple family housing development and based on the availability of public facilities to service the projected residential development demands. MDR districts shall be developed, redeveloped and/or maintained as stable medium density residential neighborhoods. MDR shall permit up to a maximum of 15 units per acre. Supportive community facilities and accessory land uses may be located within areas designated MDR. Review of specific densities of developments shall be directed toward preserving stability of established residential areas. Sites for medium density residential developments should be located so that they provide a smooth transition between lower density residential areas and areas developed and/or designated for other more intense uses. All new development within the "MDR" designated areas shall comply with performance criteria eked OA Pelisy 1 3.2-6. This policy shall be implemented through a mandatory site plan review process. Policy 1-1.2.5: Designate High Density Residential (HDR) Districts. High density residential development ranges up to a maximum 20 units per acre. The specific areas designated HDR shall be accessible to existing or anticipated future major thoroughfares and requisite utilities. Specific density of future development proposals within these areas shall provide for smooth transition in residential density, preserve stability of established residential areas, and shall include sufficient open space, parking and landscaping to reinforce goals and objectives for quality living areas. All new development designated HDR shall comply with performance criteria eited iR PGIiGy 1 3.2.6. Policy 1-1.2.6: Designated Suburban Estates as Transitional Agricultural Lands. ,T3gttAap4: Future Land Use Map SeAeW6and Wse Peliey Designatien shall identify any lands anticipated to remain rural or agricultural use for the foreseeable future as "Suburban Estates" (SE). The Suburban Estates designation shall be considered identical to the "Agricultural" designation as 1-12 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN defined in the -Rule 9J-5.003(1), F.A.C. FUTURE LAND USE •TIrS7tRrZLL� .. _ • . i' r ■1:1 .1., ■ N 11700.4-06", • Mm i' N 11700.4-06", • Mm 1-13 November 2009 i' r 9F etheF iRfeFM8tieR that the pFastise will pFeyide BR adequate level ef #eatmeRl r wheR W Meet 1-13 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE r -M -7-M W -ft ...... ... 10 ■ POP Objective 1-1.3: Allocate Commercial Land Uses. The Future Land Use Map shall identify commercial land for: 1) residential/office/and institutional mixed uses; 2) neighborhood commercial development; 3) general commercial development; and 4) central business district development and redevelopment. The allocation of land for commercial development shall be compatible with goals and objectives identified in the Comprehensive Plan and consistent with supportive research and analysis. The policies stated below provide an explanation of the purpose, intent and character of the commercial land use designations. This objective shall be measured through the implementation of the following policies: Policy 1-1.3.1: Consider Factors for Locating Commercial Development. The location and distribution of specific types of commercial activities shall be determined based on the following considerations: a. Trip generation characteristics, impact on existing and planned transportation facilities and ability to achieve a functional internal circulation and off-street parking system, with landscaping amenities; b. Location and site requirements based on specific needs of respective commercial activities, their market area, and anticipated employment generation and floor area requirements; C. Compatibility with and impact on other surrounding commercial activities; d. Relationship to surrounding land uses and natural systems; and e. Impact on existing and planned community services and utilities. Policy 1-1.3.2: Concentrate Pattern of Commercial Land Use. In order to promote efficient flow of traffic along major thoroughfares cited in the Transportation Element, achieve orderly development, and minimize adverse impact on residential quality, commercial development shall be concentrated in strategically located areas having location characteristics which best accommodate specific land, site, public facilities and market location requirements of the respective commercial uses. Policy 1-1.3.3: Provide Appropriate Locations for Commercial Office Development. The Future Land Use Map shall provide for office development located on accessible sites near major thoroughfares. Office development may serve as a transitional use separating more intensive commercial uses from residential development. Office development shall also locate along the outer fringe of the core commercial area where such development may encourage reinvestment in declining residential areas surrounding the business district.ln addition, office complexes may be compatible with multiple family units and/or institutional uses situated on strategically located sites along major thoroughfares where the sites are of sufficient size to accommodate land requirements for controlled access, effective internal circulation and off-street parking, and appropriate landscape, screening and buffering to assure stability and protection of established or anticipated future residential areas. The mixed use 'Residential/Office/Institutional' (ROI) land use designation, as described herein, is designed to cavy out the intent of this objective. The visual 1-14 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE screening requirements eited iA P916GY 1 1.4.4 shall be used as criteria to ensure land use compatibility. In addition, multiple family and non-residential developments in 'ROP' designated areas shall include required open space , pedestrian linkages, compatible signage, and shall satisfy all other applicable criteria cited in the objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Policy 1-1.3.4: Designate Various Types of Commercial Nodes to Accommodate Diverse Commercial Uses. A variety of commercial development designations shall be provided in order to adequately assure availability of sites that accommodate the varied site and spatial requirements for such activities as: professional and business offices, neighborhood commercial activities, and general retail sales and services. The allocation of commercial uses shall recognize that respective commercial activities frequently have different site, spatial, and market area characteristics and generate significantly different impacts. Similarly, the commercial development designations on the Future Land Use Map shall be complemented by zoning, performance standards, and site plan review requirements which shall regulate development on such land. These regulations shall assure that the proposed development of commercially designated sites is appropriate and can be adapted to the proposed site. The land development regulation shall address issues surrounding: • Intensity of use; • Floor area; • Natural constraints to development; • Perimeter and internal landscape requirements; • Availability of public facilities at adequate levels of service; • Concurrency management; • Controlled ingress and egress; • Off-street parking with safe and convenient internal vehicular and pedestrian circulation; • Open space preservation; • Adequate building setbacks; and • Urban design and required amenities, including, but not limited to, signage controls, pedestrian amenities, building height and orientation, and other similar design features. Policy 1-1.3.5: Allocate Neighborhood Commercial Development (NC). Neighborhood commercial (NC) development is allocated to commercial sites accessible to major thoroughfares near residential neighborhoods. The maximum intensity of neighborhood commercial development measured as a floor area ratio is 0.35. Sites within this designation are intended to accommodate shops with limited inventory or goods meeting performance criteria of the Comprehensive Plan Ailed OR Peliey 4 . The "NC" designation is not intended to accommodate residential development except on a limited, conditional basis. However, duly approved residential uses existing at the effective date of the Comprehensive Plan shall be deemed permitted uses. Neighborhood Commercial activities shall include shops catering to the following markets: • Neighborhood residential markets within the immediate vicinity as opposed to community -wide or regional markets; or • Specialized markets with customized market demands. Commercial development within the neighborhood commercial district shall generally be restricted to the following uses: 1-15 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE • Business and professional offices; • Neighborhood convenience stores; • Small limited item shops and stores restricted to retail sales of convenience items and services including barber, beauty care, and other personal services; • Drug stores, laundry and dry cleaning pick-up stations; and • Specialty shops. Areas designated for neighborhood commercial development shall generally include areas where individual properties and uses are located on sites of less than three acres. Such areas are not intended to accommodate large scale retail sales, service, and trade activities, generally serving a community -wide or regional market. Residential development within areas designated for neighborhood commercial development shall be permitted on a conditional basis. Uses which are not intended to be accommodated within the neighborhood commercial area include the following: large scale discount stores, full service department stores or hardware stores; large wholesale and warehousing activities; sales, service or repair of motor vehicles, machine equipment or accessory parts, including tire and battery shops; automotive service centers; commercial amusements; fast food establishments primarily serving in disposable containers and/or providing drive-in facilities, and other similar services to be expressly defined in the land development regulations. Policy 1-1.3.6: Accommodate General Commercial Development (GC). The General Commercial (GC) areas are designated on the Future Land Use Map for purposes of accommodating community -oriented retail sales and services; highway -oriented sales and services; and other general commercial activities. ' Multifamily residential is encouraaed as a secondary use to foster sustainable mixed-use developments that reduces vehicle miles traveled and foster a walkable community, The General Commercial designation generally shall be located in highly accessible areas adjacent to major thoroughfares which possess necessary location, site, and market requirements. The maximum intensity of general commercial development measured as a floor area ratio is Q.35. All new development within "general commercial' designated areas shall be required to comply with performance criteria eited iR 12916GY 4 3.2.6. The general commercial area is not generally intended to accommodate manufacturing, processing, or assembly of goods, sales and service of heavy commercial vehicle and equipment, or related services or maintenance activities; warehousing; uses requiring extensive outside storage; or other activities which may generate nuisance impacts, including glare, smoke or other air pollutants, noise, vibration or major fire hazards, or other impacts generally associated with more intensive industrial uses. Multifamily residential is permitted within this desianation at a density of 20 dwelling units gIr acre The residential mix may not exceed more than 40 percent of the total sauafe footage of the general commercial uses. The prion of residential must result in a no net increase in demand for public—facilities (not in ludinn srh2= greater than that which would be required for general commerc_ I uses The City will ggQEd nates 1-16 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE Objective 1-1.4: Allocate Industrial Development. The Future Land Use Map shall allocate land resources for existing and anticipated future industrial needs and requisite support services. This objective shall be measured through the implementation of the following policy: Policy 1-1.4.1: Industrial Land Use Designation. The allocation of land use designations should provide a high priority to industry's frequent need for strategically located lands which are accessible to air, rail and highway transport facilities, as well as labor markets and necessary urban services. The Industrial (1) designation is intended to provide strategically located sites. The City shall work with industrial interest groups to pursue a selective industrial expansion PeliGy Set 1644 . The maximum intensity of industrial development measured as a floor area ratio is 0.50. Industrially designated areas are not adaptive to residential use and as such residential activities shall not be located in areas designated for industrial development. This provision shall not prohibit residences for exclusive use by night watchmen or custodians whose presence on industrial sites is necessary for security purposes. The Industrial land use designation shall be allocated to industrial sites accessible to rail facilities, and/or major thoroughfares. The sites shall be buffered from residential neighborhoods. Industrial uses include: manufacturing, assembling and distribution activities; warehousing and storage activities; and other similar land uses which shall be regulated through appropriate zoning procedures. Heavy metal fabrication, batch plants, salvage yards, chemical or petroleum manufacturing or refining, rubber or plastics manufacturing, or other use generating potentially harmful environmental or nuisance impacts shall be prohibited. These uses typically generate heavy truck traffic, require significant acreage, are difficult to screen and buffer from residential areas, and therefore, should be carefully located in industrial areas in conformity with performance criteria cited iR Pelisy-1 3.2-6. Based on the extensive impacts which industrial development frequently generates, if a proposed industrial development of either five acres of land area or 5,000 square feet of gross floor area requires either a Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map amendment or rezoning, the proposed industrial development shall be developed under provisions of a planned unit development petition in order to allow maximum flexibility in design to the applicant and to avoid any major adverse impacts which may not be anticipated during a less in-depth plan review. Objective 1-1.5: Encourage Planned Development. The City shall maintain and enforce land development regulations which include provisions for encouraging establishment of strategically located mixed use planned development. Policy 1-1.5.1: Implementipg Cluster Design Techniques through Planned Development. The City shall implement a planned development concept in order to provide a voluntary management strategy for coordinating and implementing objectives of developers with those of the City Commission, especially preserving natural resources through clustered development within uplands. Nothing in this Plan shall limit or modify the rights of any person to complete any development that has been authorized as a development of regional impact pursuant to Chapter 1-17 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE 380, F.S., or who has been issued a final development order and development has commenced and is continuing in good faith. Where a developer requests an extension of a time constraint imposed in a development order, the City Commission shall reserve the authority to invoke new conditions in extending development rights based on: • Changes in conditions surrounding the impacted land use conditions in the vicinity; • Evolving issues surrounding infrastructure levels of service; • Impacts on natural resources; and/or • Other related issues impacting the nature of the proposed planned development. Objective 1-1.6: Develop Mixed Use Districts. The City shall enforce land development regulations which include provisions for mixed use districts. Policy 1-1.6.1: Utilize Westside Industry and Commerce (WIC) Mixed Use Designation. The "Westside Industry and Commerce" (WIC) area is a mixed use designation intended to promote the development of employment centers in the vicinity of the West SR 46 corridor and the commuter rail station. The corridor's proximity to 1-4 as well as SR 417 and the SunRail commuter line provides access to regional markets and a substantial labor force. The CSX Main Rail Line also provides a transportation amenity of regional significance. The WIC desionation permits both a vertical and horizontal land use mix of commercial, office, residential. and as industrial development. wlthaR the 'WIG" aFea shall 198 FestAsted te epeffitiGRG that pFevide essential semmemia Po*npr, I aFea Fatee is 9.35. The maximum intensity for commercial. office, and industrial development as a floor area ratio is 0.50. The maximum residential density shall be 20 dwelling units per acre. Policy 1-1.6.2: Designate Residential/Office/Institutional (ROI) Areas. The Residential/ Office/Institutional (ROI) pelisyF-desigais a mixed use designation designed to accommodate business and professional offices as well as high density multiple family residential opportunities and institutional uses. The allowable maximum residential density shall be tweR# -(20) units per acre. The maximum intensity of office and institutional development measured as a floor area ratio is 2,35. The mix must contain at least two uses with a minimum of 20 percent. This land use policy designation expressly excludes general retail sales and services, warehousing, and outside storage. Furthermore, this policy designation is intended for sites which: • Have accessibility to major thoroughfares or are located along the outer fringe of core commercial areas; • Build on the purpose and function of the central business district and Lake Monroe waterfront; • Encourage reinvestment in declining residential areas adjacent to commercial core areas. • Have potential to be served by a full complement of urban services; • Contain sufficient land area to accommodate good principles of urban design, including sufficient land area to provide adequate landscaping and buffers to separate existing as well as potential future adjacent land uses of differing intensity; and • Frequently serve as a transition area which buffers residential uses located in one area from a nearby area which accommodates uses of a higher intensity. 1-18 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE The City shall ensure that new development within 'ROP' designated areas complies with performance criteria sited iR 129IiGy 1 3.2.5. This policy shall be implemented through a mandatory site plan review process. Policy 1-1.6.3: Utilize Airport Industry and Commerce Land Use Designation (AIC). The "Airport Industry and Commerce" (AIC) land use designation is a high-intensity mixed use policy for managing lands comprised of the Orlando Sanford Airport and adjacent lands capable of supporting a variety of residential rental properties and commercial and industrial uses. a. The Airport Industry and Commerce designation is intended to encourage the expansion of industrial land uses in areas where airport noise impacts will prohibit residential development and provide additional areas for mixed-use development that would be compatible with airport operations. b. The majority of such lands is located in airport property and is subject to the Airport Master Plan. Certain properties, primarily east of Beardall Avenue, are located in the 2005 noise zone. c. The Orlando -Sanford Airport shall develop according to the Airport Layout Plan , adopted as part of the Sanford Comprehensive Plan. Any substantial change to the designated uses in the Airport Master Plan requires an amendment to the Sanford Comprehensive Plan. d. Upon annexation of lands that are currently within the jurisdiction of Seminole County and are included in the Airport Layout Plan, the lands will be automatically given the land use designation of Airport Industry Commerce. e. Upon annexation of lands currently within the jurisdiction of Seminole County and included in the Airport Layout Plan, the lands will be given a zoning consistent with the existing zoning of the Airport. f. The land use mix in the AIC is intended to provide a full range of urban services and facilities including: • Industrial and Business Parks; • Office Complexes; • Commercial and retail developments; • Service and hotel uses; and • Medium to high density rental multifamily residential developments. g. The maximum intensity of industrial and commercial development measured as floor area is 1.0. The maximum intensity for rental residential uses is 50 units per acre. h. The Development Review Team, the Airport Zoning Board and the Airport Design Review Team shall review development included in the ALP for compliance with the Sanford Land Development Regulations. Development contemplated by the ALP shall comply with all land development regulations included, but not limited to, setbacks, landscaping, parking, drainage and floor area ratios except where such regulations conflict with FAA rules and regulations. i. New development within the "AIC' designated area may be developed as a "Planned Development". . As a "PD" Planned Development, all new development shall be required to address infrastructure needs, provision of services, development phasing, development intensity and land use compatibility as part of an integrated design scheme which includes very detailed strategies and techniques for resolving development impacts. The location of future high density residential developments shall comply with guidelines 1-19 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE issued by the Federal Aviation Administration and the Department of Transportation relating to airport compatible uses, noise zones, approach zones and other safety measures. k. Future high and medium density residential developments shall occur outside the 60 DNL (day/night sound level) noise contours. 1• , "PD" proposals in the "AIC" area will be the subject of negotiated development agreements. The review process shall involve county, state, regional and federal agencies having jurisdiction over impacted resources. No development order shall be granted prior to City approval of the development agreement. m. Developments within the "AIC" that exist prior to the adoption of this Plan will be "grandfathered". However, all new development in the Airport Industry and Commerce Area outside the Airport boundaries shall incorporate performance criteria 2.4 eAd 129109y 4 . Such criteria shall include but not be limited to: • Narrative and graphic information required for review of rezoning petitions, for site plan review, and other related procedural requirements; • Impact analysis, including plans for managing any potential impacts on air operations; • Noise impact analysis, including required sound insulation in areas within the airport impact noise zones; • Requirements for controlled access and internal circulation, including provisions for cross access easements, and joint use of driveways; • Requirements for perimeter buffer yards; • Management framework for encouraging development of strategically planned sub -centers of commerce and industry; • Dedication of necessary rights-of-way; and • Use of pedestrian and mass transit facilities to reduce vehicle trips. Objective 1-1.7: Utilize 1-4 High Intensity Center (HI). 1-4 High Intensity" is a mixed use designation intended to promote and regulate anticipated development within the vicinity of the I- 4/State Road 46 Interchange. 1-4 High Intensity land uses shall include commerce, industry, and high density residential development. The maximum intensity of development within the 1-4 High Intensity designation shall be an FAR of 1.0. Maximum residential density shall be X503 dwelling units per acre. This area corresponds to maximum intensities and densities of the "Core" designation applicable to adjacent unincorporated areas pursuant to the Seminole County Comprehensive Planning Program's High Intensity Planned area. Policy 1-1.7.1: Employ 1-4 High Intensity Criteria. New development shall be required to address infrastructure needs, provision of services, development phasing, development intensity and land use compatibility as part of an integrated design scheme which includes very detailed strategies and techniques for resolving development impacts. In addition to compliance with all performance criteria e# -Pew, " proposals in the 1-4 High Intensity Center may be the subject of negotiated development agreements. The review process shall involve county, state, regional, and federal agencies having jurisdiction over impacted resources. No development order shall be granted prior to approval by the City of the development agreement. Development within "HI" designated areas existing prior to adoption of this Plan will be "grandfathered." However, all new development within the 1-4 High Intensity Area must: 1-20 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE • Accommodate and encourage use of multi -modal transportation systems; • Incorporate access controls as may be deemed necessary including dedication of cross easements and joint uses of driveway and off-street parking areas; • Employ buffer yards, internal and perimeter landscape amenities, as well as landscape and design techniques for ensuring land use compatibility within a dynamic mixed use setting. • Achieve a high standard of urban design amenities, including pedestrian walkways which link activity centers with parking areas, transit stops, urban plazas, and other open spaces and amenities intended to reinforce appropriate design themes; • Incorporate a planning and management framework and regulating concepts necessary to regulate development within the 14 High Intensity Mixed Use Development," a strategically located centerfor'regional commerce and industry; and Objective 1-1.8: Maintain_WaterfrontlDowntown Business District (WDBD). The Waterfront/ Downtown Business District is designed to provide centralized residential, governmental, cultural, institutional, and general commercial activities within the downtown and waterfront urban area. The designation provides a planning and management framework for promoting the revitalization, development and redevelopment of the Lake Monroe waterfront and the historic downtown commercial area as designated on the Future Land Use Map Designatiens. This expanded land use category includes the City's historic Central Business District (CBD) area, and is in response to the goals contained in the Lake Monroe Waterfront and Downtown Sanford Community Redevelopment Area Plan. The purpose of the WDBD) is to: • Generate a revitalization effort that attracts private sector investment and strengthens the City's economy; • Establish the district as a regional center; • Strengthen public/private partnerships; • Enhance the livability of North Seminole County by encouraging improved residential, retail, educational, cultural and entertainment opportunities; and • Provide the framework for redevelopment and infill. The WDBD is located in an Urban Service Area, and is comprised of those areas that are in close proximity to, and have historically, been most influenced by the St. Johns River and Lake Monroe. lR the late RiReteeRth seAtwFy, The Waterfront/Downtown Business District (WDBD) is designated as the City's "central business district." The western portion of the WDBD contains commercial uses based upon the railway line, as well as significant institutional, residential, and recreational facilities located therein. Policy 1-1.8.1: Maintain Density/Intensity Standards. Intensity and density standards within the WDBD have been designed to attract quality private investment and stimulate the vibrant atmosphere of mixed-use activity that is typical of a thriving downtown. Developers in the WDBD may utilize the comprehensive infill program (Obj to further maximize floor area ratios and multifamily residential densities. The maximum intensity of nonresidential development, other than industrial, measured as a floor area ratio is 2.0 for the areas east of French Avenue, and 0.35 for the areas west of French Avenue. These floor area ratios are 1-21 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE intended to illustrate the amount of development on both specific parcels and in the district overall. However, through the implementation of the comprehensive infill program, individual developments may exceed these maximum floor area ratios and residential densities. The maximum density for residential development shall be 50 units per acre. The maximum floor area ratio for industrial uses shall be 0.50. Policy 1-1.8.2: Apply Performance Criteria. All new development shall comply with 3.2.5 the following criteria, all of which shall be implemented through a mandatory site plan review of new development: a. Historic District Compatibility: The design of future development and redevelopment within the vicinity of the historic district shall be compatible with the design of buildings of historic significance which are located within the historic area and its environs. Site plan review shall incorporate criteria to ensure that the design of new structures, including building materials, roof lines, fenestration and setbacks, are compatible with buildings of historic significance. b. Parking Provisions: New development within the WDBD shall be served by adequate parking resources. New development shall provide off-street parking sufficient to serve each proposed new development either on site or through the provision of a shared parking agreement. In the historic district, where off-street parking cannot be accommodated on-site, applicants for development may contribute to a special parking fund, which shall be established for purposes of purchasing land and contributing strategically located parking facilities and pedestrian walkways linking major retail activity centers, residential areas, and social, civic, recreational, or cultural attractions within the downtown area. c. Urban Design Amenities: Proposed new development shall provide a higher level of urban design amenities including landscaping, compatible signage, and pedestrian linkages together with a broader mix of land uses attractive to potential users of the downtown area. d. Site Plan Review Process: The site plan review process shall include management procedures necessary to implement the WDBD development criteria, objectives and policies cited in the comprehensive plan. Where appropriate, the site plan review process shall ensure the preservation and enhancement of the 'original' traditional neighborhood by implementing the recommendations of the historic surveys of the downtown area and the historic residential area along the Park Avenue Corridor. e. Reinforce/Regenerate Historic Buildings: Encourage development and redevelopment of projects that reinforce and regenerate the historic significance of buildings and corridors within the historic area and its environs. Strategic Parking Resources: Promote development of adequate parking resources in strategic areas of the WDBD and pedestrian walkways linking major retail activity centers, as well as social, civic, recreational, or cultural attractions within the downtown and waterfront area. g. Mix of Land Uses: Achieve a higher level of urban design amenities together with a broader 1-22 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE mix of land uses attractive to potential users of the downtown and waterfront area. h. Regulatory Concepts: Provide a planning and management framework that incorporates regulatory concepts necessary to implement redevelopment planning objectives together with the recommendations of the historic surveys of the downtown area and the historic residential area along the Park Avenue Corridor. Policy 1-1.8.3: Establish Aesthetic Cohesiveness in the City's Historic Downtown Waterfront District Through an Architectural Design Program. The City shall continue to enforce land development regulations that enhance the identity design, and vitality of the Lake Monroe waterfront commercial area and the historic commercial district. The Lake Monroe waterfront corridor and historic commercial district shall continue to be part of an architectural design program which shall be coordinated closely with the public and private special interest groups concerned with promoting the central traditional neighborhood. Objective 1-1.9: Promote Westside Industry and Commerce. Rew New development shall be required to address infrastructure needs, provision of services, development phasing, development intensity and land use compatibility as part of an integrated design scheme which includes very detailed strategies and techniques for resolving development impacts. "PD" proposals in the "WIC" area may be the subject of negotiated development agreements. The review process shall involve county, state, regional, and federal agencies having jurisdiction over impacted resources. No development order shall be granted prior to approval by the City of the development agreement. Development within the "WIC" area existing prior to the adoption of this Plan will be "grandfathered." All new development in the Westside Industry and Commerce Area shall comply with the following: • Requirements and procedures for obtaining a WIC mixed use Future Land Use Map designation and appropriate zoning; • Standards for controlled access and internal circulation, including cross access easements and joint use of driveways; • Development standards for Gateway Corridor Development Districts, including requirements for buffer yards, landscaping; and screening, off-street parking, and signage and; • Planning and management criteria regulating the land use mix, intensity, and qualitative standards for assuring land use compatibility and consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. Objective 1-1.10: Designate Regional Activity Centers as Appropriate Areas for Intensive Growth and Development. Regional Activity Centers (RACs) are intended to encourage development or redevelopment of areas that are of regional significance. RACs may include residential, retail; office; cultural, recreational and entertainment facilities; hotels and motels; or appropriate industrial facilities. Policy 1-1.9.1: Purpose of Regional Activity Centers. The purpose of Regional Activity Centers 1-23 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE is to: • Plan appropriate and balanced land uses on a scale, and at an intensity, consistent with the availability of public facilities and services, particularly with regard to providing adequate levels of service on major thoroughfares serving the center; • Facilitate mixed use development; • Encourage mass transit; • Reduce the need for automobile travel; • Provide incentives for quality development; and • Give definition to the urban form through clustering of uses rather than strip -type development. Policy 1-1.9.2: Characteristics of Regional Activity Centers. Regional Activity Centers (RACs) are multi -use areas appropriate for intensive growth and shall have the following characteristics: • Compact in design; • High densities and intensities; • Routinely used by a significant number of citizens of more than one county; • Proximate and accessible to interstate highways and major arterial roadways; and • Adequate public facilities including water, roads, wastewater, solid waste disposal, stormwater drainage and recreation. Policy 1-1.9.3: Maintain RAC Consistency with Comprehensive Plan. All Regieaal Aet+v* G--er*eFs—BACs shall be consistent with the Sanford Comprehensive Plan. Densities and intensities of activity centers shall be increased based on the underlying future land use map densities and intensities. Policy 1-1.9.4: Determine Suitable RAC Locations. RACs shall be suitable for increased development of regional impact (DRI) guidelines and standards. Examples of areas which may be appropriate for the RAC include downtown and community redevelopment areas; areas surrounding regional community facilities such as the airport or a government complex; and areas surrounding or proximate to an existing development -of -regional -impact. Policy 1-1.9.5: Delineate RAC Boundaries. Each RAC shall be a defined geographical area, delineated on the Future Land Use Map of the Sanford Comprehensive Plan. Policy 1-1.9.6: €xpawsiep-e€-a Manasae Regional Activity Center Expansions. A regional activity center shall only be expanded by an amendment to the text of the Comprehensive Plan and an amendment to the Future Land Use Map of the Comprehensive Plan. The following evaluation criteria, in addition to other planning policies set forth in the Sanford Comprehensive Plan shall be used to assess modifications to an activity center's boundaries: • The request shall have property that is contiguous to an existing Activity Center boundary; • The Future Land Use designation sought for the property must be consistent with those allowed for the adjacent activity center; • Soil and environmental characteristics of the site must be capable of supporting minimum density and intensity standards for the proposed Future Land Use designation; • Transit service must be available on roads adjacent to the site; or, if not currently available, the site must occur within one-half mile walking distance to an existing transit route and a 1-24 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE continuous pedestrian pathway must connect the property to the nearest transit route; • Zoning applications must accompany the Future Land Use Amendment if required; • If the applicant is other than the City, a preliminary site plan must be submitted with the Land Use Map and zoning amendment applications. The site plan must demonstrate transit- and pedestrian -friendly site design. Policy 1-9.7 Adopt Regional Activity Centers in the City. The City adopts the following regional activity center as shown on map i 42 9 the Future Land Use Map series: A. The Marketplace at Seminole Towne Center. The Marketplace is intended to provide large scale commercial activities to serve retail needs of a regional population. Boundaries of the Marketplace at Seminole Towne Center are shown on Map -1-12 of the Future Land Use map series. Design Criteria for the Marketplace at Seminole Towne Center. The following shall be used as the design criteria for the Marketplace: 1. Intensity. Pursuant to the guidelines and standards for develepmeRts ef FegieRal impaet DRI (28-24.014(10)(a)(1) F.A.C.), the maximum intensity of the Marketplace at Seminole Towne Center shall be 600,000 square feet of commercial retail and office use review. The Marketplace may exceed this intensity only if DRI is approved. 2. Future Land Use Designation. The future land use designation of all development within the Marketplace shall be 1-4 High Intensity Planned Development. 3. Public Areas within the Marketplace. The Marketplace shall be designed with commonly used development techniques that create focal points in the development such as plazas, parks, gardens, courtyards, recreation facilities or other open space areas. 4. Pedestrian and Transit -Friendly Site Design. The site and building designs within the Marketplace RegieRal AcAivity Gente RAC shall promote pedestrian and bicycle modes. At a minimum, the design of the Marketplace shall include: a. Direct pedestrian pathways from building entranceways, through parking areas or adjacent access drives, to public sidewalks and transit stops; b. Pedestrian walkways shall provide intermittent shaded areas when the walkway exceeds 100 linear feet in length at a ratio of 100 square feet for every 100 linear feet of walkway; c. A transit easement on private property; d. Bicycle parking facilities conveniently located for both customers and employees; e. Pedestrian lighting and; 1-25 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE f. Streetscape design compatible with pedestrian, bicycle, and transit facilities. g. The developer of the Marketplace at Seminole Towne Center shall maintain LYNX bus stops at the Marketplace on the LYNX route that presently serves the development 5. General Design of Individual Developments within the Marketplace Activity Center. It is not intended that each development within the Ast+vity GORtef RAC be aesthetically identical. However, individual developments within the Astivify—G8Rt9F RAC shall be designed to provide visual compatibility and functional continuity with other developments within the Activity Center. New development shall be required to: a. Present a unified appearance with existing development by coordinating signage (location, number, height and copy area) landscape screening/buffering requirements (i.e., width and composition), underground utilities, and building setback and height requirements; b. Continuity of facades and consolidated parking for several businesses in one parking lot. When the use of common wall, side by side development occurs. c. Prohibit the following fagade treatments or features on any primary fagade: • Reflective or mirrored glass; • Garage doors used either as decoration or for vehicular service, storage or any other use; • Glass curtain walls. d. Prohibited materials. No exterior wall shall be covered with the following materials: • Plastic or vinyl siding; • Corrugated or reflective metal panels; • Applied stone in an ashlar or rubble look. • Smooth, scored or rib faced concrete block; • Any translucent material, other than glass; • Any combination of the above. e. Provide vehicular connections between out -parcel structures that are adjacent to each other for the respective parking lots and provide interconnection of pedestrian walkways. f. Utilize shared parking, access and loading facilities, as practical, in an effort to reduce impervious surfaces; g. Promote vehicular, pedestrian and non -vehicular movement throughout the RA.AWYky QeRtsf; h. Provide a network of unifying open spaces which promote linkage with other adjoining developments; Use common frontage/service roads, and shared or joint facilities such as stormwater, bus stops, and utility easements. 1-26 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE j. Access and egress to activity centers as well as internal vehicle travel shall be planned in a comprehensive manner in order to facilitate traffic movement. 6. Drive-through meats Standards. Drive-through lanes and windows shall be designed to the following standards: a. Windows and Lanes. Drive-through windows and lanes shall not be located on a side of the building fronting a street. b. Hedges. A dense hedge of evergreen shrubs shall be provided in the following manner: • At initial planting and installation, shrubs shall be at least #y430; inches in height and shall planted 30 inches or less on center; • Within one year of initial planting and installation, shrubs shall have attained, and be maintained at, a minimum height of four feet and shall provide an opaque vegetative screen between the street and the drive-through. The hedge must continue for the entire length of the drive-through cueing or stacking area; • In lieu of a vegetative hedge, the use of vegetated berms with appropriate landscape materials may be used in a manner that results in the visual separation of street right-of-way and the drive-through. c. Stacking Distance. The following stacking distances, measured from the point of entry to the center of the farthest service window area, are required: USE REQUIRED STACKING Restaurants, full service car washes and day care facilities 220 feet Banks(per lane 176 feet Self Service Car Wash (per bay) and Dry Cleaners 66 feet Facilities not listed above with more than one drive-through lane shall provide 100 feet of stacking distance per lane measured from the point of entry to the center of the farthest service window area. 2. The drive-through lane shall be a separate lane from the circulation routes and aisles necessary for ingress and egress from the property or access to any off- street parking spaces. 3. For lanes greater than 175 feet a pass-through lane shall be constructed adjacent to at least one stacking lane in order to provide a way out of the stacking lane. 4. The Planning Director shall have the authority to determine the stacking distance for other uses on a case-by-case distance. 7. Service Areas. Service areas shall not be located in front yards and shall not be visible from a public right-of-way. Service areas shall be screened by a masonry wall and landscape buffer. The wall shall be a minimum of six feet in height using architectural design, materials and colors that are consistent with those of the primary structure. The landscape buffer shall be a minimum of five feet in width and shall contain a hedge three feet in height at planting and capable of attaining five feet in height and total opacity within 18 months. 1-27 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE 8. Pay phones; Vending Machines. All telephones, vending machines and any facility dispensing merchandise or a service, shall be confined to a space built into the building or buildings or enclosed in a separate structure compatible with the main building. 9. Advertising and Signage. No advertising or signage is allowed on any exposed amenity including, but not limited to, benches, trash containers and fences. 11. Mechanical Equipment. All equipment located atop a roof of a building must be concealed so that it is not visible by a person standing anywhere on the site or on an adjacent public street. 12. Storage of Shopping Carts. All outdoor storage of customer shopping carts adjacent to the building shall be screened by a wall a minimum of four feet in height that is consistent in style, materials and color to the facade. Arcade or colonnade areas cannot be used for the storage of shopping carts. Objective 1-1.11: Allocate ANesatiwg Public and Semi -Public Services (PSP) and Parks. Recreation and Open Space (PRO). The Future Land Use Map shall allocate land resources for public and semi-public facilities and services as specified in the policies stipulated below. These sites shall be compatible with adjacent land uses to the greatest practical extent. The sites shall also fulfill the unique site location requirements included in functional plans and shall be responsive to the needs identified in related demographic and supportive needs analysis. This objective shall be measured through the implementation of the following policies: Policy 1-1.11.1: Accommodate Public and Semi -Public Land Use Designation (PSP). The public and semi-public (PSP) land use designation is intended to accommodate existing public and semi-public services including: governmental administration buildings; public schools and not-for- profit educational institutions; hospital facilities and supportive health care units; arts and cultural or civic facilities; essential public services and facilities; cemeteries; fire and emergency operation facilities; public and private parks and recreation areas; utilities; extensive open areas comprising major committed public and semi-public open spaces; and other similar activities as shall be identified in the land development regulations. Additionally, the Public/Semi-Public designation includes major transportation facilities including the CSX railroad terminal, plus expressway right- of-way that is proposed for use and/or owned by the Seminole County Expressway Authority. a. Lands designated for public and semi-public facilities and services shall contain sufficient acreage and open space and be properly screened and buffered in order to minimize potential adverse impacts on adjacent land uses. The maximum intensity of institutional activity measured as a floor area ratio is 0.35. b. The City shall monitor the need for increased land area for public and semi-public uses in order to ensure that the public and semi-public land use designation on the Future Land Use Map is expanded to accommodate the development of public and semi-public facilities such as governmental administration buildings; fire, police and rescue services; health care delivery services; and educational institutions. c. Land uses such as places of worship, cultural or civic centers, and other similar public or private not-for-profit uses may be included within this land use designation or within other land 1-28 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN use designations as provided for in the land development regulations. FUTURE LAND USE d. With regards to lands located in areas proposed for use by the expressway but not owned by the Expressway Authority, the City shall discourage land use planning or regulatory changes that would result in higher intensities or densities. This policy shall not prevent the reasonable use of such lands pursuant to goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. e. All new development or redevelopment shall comply with performance criteria eited OR 1291ieyL 1 3-2-5. This policy shall be implemented through a mandatory site plan review process. Policy 1-1.11.2: Accommodate Institutional Facilities and Public Services. The City shall continue to enforce the adopted concurrency management program and performance criteria which ensure that needed public services and facilities are developed concurrent with new development. In addition, the City shall continue to use the capital improvement program and budget process to pursue advance acquisition of land required to provide recreation, conservation, and related public benefits and promote multiple use of public lands. Policy 1-1.11.3: Parks, Recreation and Open Space Land Use Designation (PRO). The Parks, Recreation and Open Space land use designation is intended to distinguish Sanford's parks, recreational facilities and opens space facilities from other public uses. This designation is intended for developed City parks and areas of significant open space, including cemeteries. Parks and recreation areas shall be readily accessible at the neighborhood and community level. Parks shall be developed and redeveloped according to the level of service standards for parks and recreational facilities, community demand and community input. Parks shall generally provide outdoor recreational facilities. However, community centers and indoor facilities are also permitted up to a floor area ratio of 0.25. Objective 1-1.12: Ensure Availability of Suitable Land for Utility Facilities to SupportWe4e Development. The City shall continue to require that easements be dedicated to accommodate utilities necessary to service development, including water and wastewater services, drainageways, electricity transmission lines, lines for telephone service and cable television, and other utilities. Such dedication shall occur prior to the issuance of a development order or permit for the subject development. Policy 1-1.12.1: Continue to Ensure Easements for Utilities. The City's land development regulations currently require and shall continue to require that applicants for subdivision approval, site plan approval, and building permit approval dedicate land necessary to accommodate utilities needed to service the respective developments. The land development regulations shall ensure a continuance of mandatory dedication requirement to ensure availability of land for utility. Objective 1-1.13: Protect Archaeological and Historic Resources. The City shall notify any applicant for development within the historic district (both the commercial and residential segments) that the subject site is governed by preservation criteria enforced by the City's Historic Preservation Board. No development within this area shall be approved until a "Certificate of Appropriateness" has been issued by the Historic Preservation Board pursuant to the adopted historic preservation ordinance. The City shall continue to maintain and enforce land development 1-29 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE regulations which ensure that future land development activities include appropriate measures to prevent damage to archaeological and historically significant resources. Policy 1-1.13.1: Administer Program for Archaeological and Historic Sites. The City's Historical Preservation Board shall continue to analyze, identify, and preserve the City's historical resources. The Sanford Historic Survey prepared by Florida Preservation Services (1989) and revised by Land Design Innovation (2004) shall serve as a guide in identifying, analyzing, and preserving the City's historical residential resources. Such efforts shall include determining the worth and vulnerability of respective historic resources, as well as implementation of preservation management policies as such resources is identified. a. The City's Historic Preservation Board shall assist the renovation and adaptive re -use of historically significant structures by coordinating grantsmanship functions and carrying out information and referral services which link the private sector with potential sources of technical assistance and funding for renovation and adaptive re -use of historically significant structures. b. The City shall coordinate with the State in developing appropriate programs for implementing City and State policies for identifying, preserving, and enhancing sites of historical and archaeological significance. Programs for identification, evaluation of relative significance, protection, preservation, and enhancement shall be promoted, utilizing available public resources at the local, State, and Federal level as well as available private sector resources. Policy 1-1.13.2: Prevent Adverse Impact of Development on Historic or Archaeological Sites. The City shall establish procedures to refer development proposals for sites within the historic district to the City Historic Preservation Board in order to ensure preventing adverse impacts to historic structures and to their environs. In reviewing development proposals the Historic Preservation Board shall ensure against the following conditions: 1. Destruction or alteration of all or part of such site; 2. Isolation from or significant alteration to its surrounding environment; 3. Introduction of visible, audible, or atmospheric elements that are out of character with the property or significantly alter its setting; 4. Transfer or sale of a site of significance without adequate conditions or restrictions regarding preservation, maintenance, or use; and 5. Other forms of neglect resulting in its deterioration. Policy 1-1.13.3: Protect Historically Significant Properties. The City shall enforce land development regulations that ensure future land development activities will incorporate appropriate measures to maintain the integrity of archaeologically and historically significant resources of State and local significance. Objective 1-14.1: Protect Natural Resources. The City shall continue to protect natural resources by enforcing existing land development regulations which govem preservation of wetlands and management of development to ensure compatibility with soil types impacted by development. In addition, surface water management criteria within the adopted land development regulations shall be enforced to protect water quality, preserve the physical and biological functions of the floodplain, and abate erosion. This objective shall be measured through the implementation of the following policies. 1-30 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE Policy 1-1.14.1: Manage Environmentally Sensitive Lands. Management of resource protection areas shall be carried out through performance standards stipulated in the conservation element fit - Policy 1-1.14.2: Maintain Intergovernmental Coordination and Natural Resource Management. The City shall coordinate with the State, the St. Johns River Water Management District, the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council, Seminole County, state agencies, and other agencies concerned with managing natural resources. Such intergovemmental coordinating activities shall be directed toward protecting the values and functions of respective natural systems. Policy 1-1.14.3: Protect Flora and Fauna Having Special Status. The habitat of rare and endangered species of flora and fauna and others having special status as identified in the Conservation Element shall be protected pursuant to Policies 6 1.4.1, 6 1.7.1, 5 1.8.1 and 6 1.8.2. " Policy 1-1.14.4: Manage Stormwater Run-off. The developer/owner of any site shall be responsible for managing on-site run-off. Policy 1-1.14.5: Conserve of Potable Water Supply. The potable water supply shall be conserved by enforcing potable water conservation strategies 4 Objective 1-1.15: Designate Resource Protection (RP) Areas. The "resource protection" (RP) designation has been established to direct the preservation of natural systems including environmentally fragile wetlands which the City has committed to retain, preserve, and/or conserve as essential open space systems. This designation shall be considered identical to the "Conservation" designation as defined in. Rule 9J-5.003(19), F.A.C. Uses within the resource protection areas shall be regulated pursuant to State law as though they were designated "conservation". Policy 1-1.15.1: Implement Resource Protection. The following A where the resource protection performance criteria which shall be used to ensure that these areas are conserved and/or protected from the adverse impacts of development: Ar -an F tf 1-31 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE a. Within the RP area, development must comply with performance criteria Gited arq-sAtera cited in this peliey-Element. Within wetlands, floodways and drainageways no development is permitted pursuant to thi n. However, in certain cases, in order to avoid a taking of property without just compensation the City shall negotiate development agreements which provide a minimal development right necessary to provide "reasonable" use of the land. In such cases development shall be shifted to upland portions of the site. However, where no upland exists, development rights within the wetland, aquatic habitat, floodway or drainageway shall be negotiated in order to protect private property rights and preserve "reasonable" use of the land, while preserving the physical and biological functions of the wetlands, floodways, and drainageways through mitigation techniques identified in the policies cited in the matrix. This restriction shall not prohibit one dwelling unit from being constructed on a legal lot or parcel of record existing prior to the adoption of this Plan. b. The floor area ratio for development within floodplains, aquifer recharge areas, wellfield protection areas, and upland wildlife habitats shall be restricted 1.34. In no case shall the FAR exceed FAR for the underlying Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use designation. However, the building footprint and total impermeable surface shall be restricted to maximize permeable surface while preserving a "reasonable" development right pursuant to the policies herein identified. c. Within any resource protection area, where a federal, state, or regional agency has jurisdiction over a resource protection area, the City shall not grant a development right which exceeds the development right provided for such agencies having jurisdiction. The City shall request the jurisdictional agencies to enter into negotiations prerequisite to drafting and executing any applicable development agreement or development order. Objective 1-1.16: Prevent Proliferation of Urban Sprawl and Develop Efficient Systems for Coordinating the Timing and Staging of Public and Private Development. The City shall continue to enforce adopted land development regulations which require that proposed land uses be adequately served by requisite public facilities, including water and wastewater services, adequate stormwater management, solid waste disposal and hazardous waste management. The subdivision and site plan review processes shall provide a unified system for coordinating the efficient location, timing, phasing, and scale of public and private development. For example, in order to abate urban sprawl and maximize use of existing infrastructure all new development shall be required to hook up to the existing central water and wastewater system. The City shall maintain land development regulations which include performance standards requiring that requisite public facilities be provided concurrent with the impacts of new 1-32 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE development. The City's land development regulations shall continue to include performance standards ensuring that the location, scale, timing and design of development shall be coordinated with public facilities and services in order to prevent the proliferation of urban sprawl and achieve cost effective land development patterns. Urban sprawl shall be further abated through land development regulations, including performance standards which shall: • Direct future development only to those areas where provision of public facilities necessary to meet levels of service standards are available concurrent with the impacts of the development. • Maximize use of existing central potable water and wastewater facilities by requiring that all new development hook up to the City's existing central systems; • Avoid expensive development at very low densities surrounding the City's urban core area; • Promote planned mixed use development within the strategically located Westside area, the 1-4 interchange, the Waterfront/Downtown Business District, and Airport Industry and Commerce area; • Conserve wetlands, natural drainage corridors, and other environmentally sensitive areas; • Prevent extended strip commercial development within the areas designated planned mixed use development by mandating access and curb cut controls together with required dedication of cross easements to restrict and/or to facilitate well planned access, internal circulation, shared parking, and egress; and • Provide density and intensity threshold which promote infill. Policy 1-1.16.1: Establish Design Standards for Public Facilities and Utilities. Public facilities and utilities shall be located and designed to: 1) maximize the efficiency of services provided; 2) minimize related costs; and 3) minimize adverse impacts on natural systems. Policy 1-1.16.2: Require Public Water and/or Wastewater Systems for New Development. Prior to receiving a building permit, all proposed development must include hookups to the respective public utility systems, if available, on their site plans and building plans. Availability shall be determined by the established policies of the respective public utility systems. Map 1V 4 and Map IV 2- within the Publin- F-ae-ilities Data IRVeRtGFy and Analysis delineate the petable wateF and . Policy 1-1.16.3: Accommodate Requisite Infrastructure. During the subdivision review, site plan review, and permitting processes the City shall insure that respective future developments allocate sufficient land area for infrastructure required to support proposed development. Objective 1-1.17: Coordinate Future Land Use with Soil and Topographic Conditions and Ensure Availability of Facilities and Services. Upon adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, the City shall not issue a development order or permit unless the applicant for development has demonstrated that each proposed future land use is located on a site which has soil and topographic conditions which are suitable for accommodating the proposed land use. Furthermore, no proposed future land use shall be granted a development order or permit unless the applicant for the development has demonstrated that all requisite facilities and services shall be available concurrent with the impacts of development and shall meet or exceed level of service standards established in the Comprehensive Plan. Policy 1-1.17.1: Implement Coordinated Land Use Planning. Upon adoption of the Comprehensive Plan the City shall ensure that all proposed land development is compatible with 1-33 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE soil and topographic conditions. The City shall ensure that all new development is consistent with resource conservation policies, ' . Objective 1-1.18: Coordinate Unincorporated Urban Area Land Use. Based 9R Reselution #4556,4o -The City shall implement joint planning procedures, including a commitment to develop consistent Future Land Use Map concepts for the unincorporated urban area plus transportation, water, sewer and drainage facilities and services. The City and Seminole County shall maintain land development regulations which implement the mutually agreed upon program for coordinating development within the unincorporated area. Policy 1-1.18.1: Execute Voluntary Annexation. The City shall implement the interlocal agreement with Seminole County which shall provide a management strategy for implementing future land use policy within the City Urban Planning Area, including unincorporated enclaves and the unincorporated urbanizing fringe. The interlocal agreement shall provide a strategy and procedure that furthers reasonable, compact, contiguous and efficient City boundaries through voluntary annexation. The procedures shall ensure development consistent with City and County Comprehensive Plans, including implementation of the concurrency management system established in the Comprehensive Plan. GOAL 1-2: CREATE AND MAINTAIN A LIVABLE, SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITY. THE CITY SHALL UTILIZE INNOVATIVE PLANNING PRINCIPLES TO PLAN AND MANAGE FUTURE GROWTH WITHIN THE CITY TO CREATE AND MAINTAIN A LIVABLE COMMUNITY, ENHANCE THE QUALITY OF LIFE OF ITS RESIDENTS. Objective 1-2.1: Plan and Design for Residential Quality. The City shall continue to enforce land development regulations with performance criteria and a zoning map designed to provide sufficient space for residential development and required community facilities to adequately meet the housing needs of the present and expected future population. Residential development shall be planned and designed to create and perpetuate stable residential neighborhoods and implement policies stipulated below. Policy 1-2.1.1: Promote Orderly Transition in Residential Densities. Highest residential densities shall continue to be allocated to sites accessible to major thoroughfares or collector streets as identified on the City's Major Thoroughfare Plan as well as adjacent to existing development with the same or higher density. Residential densities shall be allocated in a manner compatible with available public services, natural features of land as well as existing and anticipated future development. Policy 1-2.1.2: Reinforce and Enhance Appearance of Residential Areas and Provide Amenities. The City together with the private sector shall consider enhancing preservation of open space for scenic vistas, especially along gateway transportation corridors, the Seminole Boulevard waterfront corridor along Lake Monroe and within areas of historic significance. Such enhancement shall include application of community appearance criteria which reinforces good principles of design as well as preserve unique characteristics. 1-34 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE Objective 1-2.2: Regulate Commercial Development. The City's land development regulations shall continue to ensure that commercial development shall be comprised of a wide range of business uses. The City shall continue to promote redevelopment of the central business district including the Lake Monroe waterfront and the historic commercial downtown area. This area has historically served as the City's center for commerce as well as the focal point of civic and cultural enrichment. In this pursuit the City shall continue to enhance the identity, design, and vitality of the corridor which provides a unique waterfront activity center within the City's central core area. The allocation of land resources shall consider the location and space requirements of commercial activities and potential economic and fiscal impacts on the City. The City shall also promote redevelopment within the US 17-92 Community Redevelopment Area/TCEA to establish the corridor as the commercial and economic spine of the City. Policy 1-2.2.1: Limit Community Retail Commercial Development to General Commercial Areas. Community -oriented retail commercial goods and services shall be encouraged to locate within existing development corridors that are already committed to such uses and are specifically designated as General Commercial on the Future Land Use Map. Conversely, general retail commercial developments shall be discouraged in other areas of the City. This location policy is intended to prevent the proliferation of additional strip commercial highway development and to encourage infill and redevelopment in already established highway commercial areas. Community commercial areas generally contain everyday goods and services that serve the Sanford area. Shopping areas with major grocery store chains or similar large scale grocery stores, drug stores, drive -in -banks, automobile sales, service and repair establishments and mini -warehouses typify community -oriented commercial areas. Such areas are differentiated from regional commercial areas typified by a large scale shopping mall in close proximity to Interstate 4 and small neighborhood commercial centers supporting a given residential area. Policy 1-2.2.2: Prevent Additional Corridor Strip Retail Commercial Development. To prevent the proliferation of typical strip commercial development along certain relatively undeveloped segments of major roadways, this policy shall identify specific road segments and undesirable uses. The following general land use activities, when allowed to proliferate in an uncontrolled manner along a roadway, result in urban sprawl and strip commercial development: • Retail sales; • Drive-in restaurants; • Alcoholic beverage sales establishments for off-site consumption; • Automotive, truck, equipment and vehicular service, sales and repair; and • Other highway oriented commercial uses shall be as cited in the Land Development Regulations. The above-described uses shall be discouraged for lands adjacent to the following road segments: • State Road 46 East between the CSX Railroad Crossing and Beardall Avenue • Upsala Road R 15 • Airport Boulevard between State Road 46 West and Bungalow Boulevard Policy 1-2.2.3: Improve the Image and Function of the Central Core Area and Adjacent 1-35 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE Traditional Neighborhood. Upon plan adoption, commercial development decisions shall promote the function of the central commercial core area as a center for government and institutional services as well as a focal point for retail trade, business and professional offices, and civic and cultural enrichment. The adjacent traditional neighborhood south of the commercial area represents an integral component of the area that shall be recognized in decisions affecting the commercial area. This traditional neighborhood shall be developed in a manner which preserves the historic significance of the area consistent with performance criteria. identified The site plan review process shall be used on a continuing basis to ensure that new development is consistent with and responsive to the criteria in the Comprehensive Plan objectives and policies applicable to the central business district and areas of historic significance. In addition, the City shall convene technical coordinating meetings quarterly with the Chamber of Commerce, County government and the private sector interest groups such as the Sanford Historic Trust concerned with enhancing the central business district and traditional neighborhood in order to direct efforts to achieve a public and private partnership in improving the image and function of the central core area, including the waterfront corridor and historic commercial district. Design strategies shall provide a physical theme for development and redevelopment opportunities which prevents "walling off' the waterfront view and which preserves public access. Within the central business district the Lake Monroe Waterfront is virtually unobstructed and the waterfront view is preserved. A substantial portion of the land is already in public ownership, including the City Marina and Memorial Park, together with Fort Mellon Park, located slightly east of the central business district. Objective 1-2.3: PlawgRg For Industrial Development. The Future Land Use Map shall allocate sufficient land to accommodate industrial uses. The City shall continue to enforce land development regulations which implement the intent of this objective in a manner consistent with all elements of the Comprehensive Plan. Policy 1-2.3.1: Apply General Considerations for Locating Industrial Development. The allocation of land resources for industrial development shall be responsive to the location and space requirements of industrial activities and potential fiscal and environmental impacts. The location and distribution of specific types of industrial activities shall be determined based on the following considerations: a. Trip generation characteristics and impact on existing and planned transportation systems, including dependency on rail, air, or trucking for distribution of material and goods; b. Anticipated employment generation, floor area requirements, and market area; c. Ability to meet established performance standards for preventing or minimizing nuisance impacts, such as emission of air pollutants, glare, noise or odor, or generation of hazardous by- products; d. Impact on established as well as anticipated future development and natural systems; and e. Impact on existing and planned public services, utilities, water resources, and energy resources. Policy 1-2.3.2: Mai'ntain,General Pattern of Industrial Land Use. Within the City the evolving centers of major industrial activity are the 1) airport and airport environs; 2) the Silver Lake Drive industrial area; 3) the warehousing and industrial trades along Airport Boulevard generally west of the Amtrak/CSX Terminal; and 4) the Westside industrial area along the SR 46 corridor west to 1-36 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE Upsala Road. A high priority shall be directed toward full utilization and development of lands designed for industrial development within the airport property and in the Silver Lake Drive area. The existing and proposed future transportation facilities including SR 417 the Sastem Beltway and improvements to Airport Boulevard shall enhance the accessibility of the industrial centers to regional markets. Furthermore, the airport industrial complex provides a spacious area for indus- trial activities which contribute to a diversified economic base within the City and the region. Policy 1-2.3.3: Pursue Selective Industrial Expansion Policy. The City shall pursue a strategy of selective expansion of its Industrial base. The City shall encourage industries that contribute optimally to the City's economy and that of the Greater Sanford Urban Area. Highest priority shall be directed toward recruiting industries which: a. Generate high levels of employment together with higher than average wage and salaries; b. Promote an industrial mix to counterbalance the impact of cyclical economic changes; c. Produce services and/or products which complement the needs and resources of existing industry within the City and the region. d. Provide industry and service activities required to support and attract prime industrial land uses which are compatible with the City's growth management and resource conservation goals, objectives and policies; e. Contribute a net revenue to the City and enhance the fiscal capacity of the City; and f. Do not adversely impact the City's natural resources including groundwater quality; infrastructure; and public facility improvement needs. The City shall seek to work in partnership with industrial development interest groups to achieve competitive amenity packages including: • Requisite transportation system improvements and other on- or off-site improvements; • Access to public potable water and wastewater services; • Efficient stormwater management systems; and • Maintenance of adopted levels of services for infrastructure systems. Policy 1-2.3.4: Pursue Nuisance Abatement Standards and Criteria. The City shall prevent nuisance impacts frequently associated with industrial activities by maintaining performance standards for managing emission of noise, air pollutants, odor, vibration, fire or explosive hazard, and glare. Similarly land shall be allocated to industrial uses in a manner which allows for separation and co - location of industrial activities capable of complying with the most restrictive performance standards and exhibiting minimal adverse impacts on surrounding development. Objective 1-2.4: Implement Redevelopment and Renewal Program. The City shall continue to implement redevelopment programs within the following target areas: • Goldsboro area, located in the western sector of the City and east of US 17-92, and a portion extends into the unincorporated area; • Georgetown area, situated between Sanford and Mellonville Avenues and North Celery Avenue; • Downtown Historic Residential District; • Waterfront/Downtown Business District; 1-37 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN • The US 17-92 TCEA afld-GGFFidef; and • The Seminole Town Center. FUTURE LAND USE The City shall continue to carry out neighborhood rehabilitation programs directed towards improving housing conditions and neighborhood environments characterized in the Housing Element as having a high degree of substandard housing. The City shall also pursue revitalization of the expanded historic district including adaptation of the "traditional neighborhood" program within the expanded district and development of incentives for redevelopment which furthers the plan for historic districts revitalization and preservation of historic resources. Redevelopment activities are identified in the policies listed below. This objective shall be measured through the implementation of the following policies. Policy 1-2.4.1: Initiate and Implement Neighborhood Master Plans. The City shall initiate a master plan for the Goldsboro neighborhood. The City shall implement the directives of the Goldsboro plan and the Georgetown Master Plan, especially those related to the rehabilitation of these neighborhoods. Community Development Block Grant (CBDG) funds may be used to implement the master plan, as well as provide infrastructure and comprehensive community development activities in the Georgetown and Goldsboro neighborhoods. Policy 1-2.4.2: Implement Programs for Residential Redevelopment, Rehabilitation, and Renewal. The City's Community Development Office shall continue to manage the City's share of Seminole County's BD programs and other similar funding sources in order to carry out the following programs: 1. Provide City -Wide Weatherization Program. Using this program as available, the City shall assist low- and moderate -income households unable to afford weatherization improvements for their homes. The City shall continue to use State Department of Community Affairs grant funds to support a weatherization program. 2. Administer City -Wide Low Income Housing Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP). Using this program as available, the City shall assist low income households unable to pay their electric bills through the Low Income Housing Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP), which utilizes Florida Department of Community Affairs grant funding. 3. Provide Emergency Shelters. The City shall support the grantsmanship efforts of selected adult care living facilities and temporary shelters for the homeless such as the Good Samaritan Home. Matching grant funds from FDCA's Community Service Grant Program and the Emergency Shelter Grant Program as available shall continue to be allocated for this purpose. The City's land development regulations shall ensure that such facilities are not concentrated in any neighborhood. Policy 1-2.4.3: Continue to Implement Front Porch Initiative. The City will continue to support the Goldsboro Front Porch Initiative in the areas of housing, beautification, crime prevention, education, infrastructure, elderly affairs and economic development and will continue to implement the revitalization efforts of this initiative. Policy 1-2.4.4: Utilize the Sanford Neighborhood Action Partnership (SNAP). The City will continue to utilize the Sanford Neighborhood Action Partnership to work with residents to help solve neighborhood problems. Several of the goals that can be realized through this effort 1-38 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE include: Approach neighborhood problems from a multi -departmental approach, while customizing the approach to the particular neighborhood. Improve relationships and communication between neighborhoods and City Hall. Empower existing neighborhood groups, and develop them where they do not exist, in an effort to achieve sustainability of the improvement efforts. Policy 1-2.4.5: Seminole Town Center Redevelopment Area. IA the GaFly 4999's, a A Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) was Ls established for the Seminole Town Center area. The CRA developed a redevelopment plan that included provisions for infrastructure improvements for roads, utilities and drainage to alleviate blighted conditions. The majority of the work identified in the CRA Plan has been accomplished. The City shall continue to implement the CRA Plan for the Seminole Town Center Area. Policy 1-2.4.6: Redevelopment of Waterfront and Historic Downtown. The City shall continue to manage the redevelopment of Lake Monroe waterfront and the downtown historic districts consistent with the Comprehensive Plan , and a-2.2-4). Redevelopment planning activities shall direct highest priority to areas with local historical significance, especially areas along the waterfront or within and adjacent to the Downtown area. The City shall continue to coordinate public and private resources necessary to initiate needed improvements and/or redevelopment within these areas. Furthermore, the City shall continue to analyze potential alternative scenarios for redeveloping the downtown waterfront corridor along Lake Monroe. The focus shall be on achieving a more attractive waterfront oriented market place for specialty shopping and waterfront oriented activities. The Lake Monroe corridor redevelopment shall continue to emphasize design measures which promote a unique waterfront market place theme reinforced by significant pedestrian oriented urban design amenities. The City shall use the following programs and activities to implement this policy: 1. Community Redevelopment Agency. The City established a RA to include both Seminole County and City tax increments to be used toward revitalizing the Waterfront/Downtown area. Simee-sifies-tee allowed eRly eRe GRA, The City's CRA has jurisdiction over both the Waterfront/Downtown Redevelopment Area and the Seminole Town Center Redevelopment Area. Altheugh, the GRA is new a jeiRt GOWGeuRty effeFl, haV8 SGRe *148 A Q11 Area with the GeuRty taxes beiR@ elimeted to the Red8V8IGPffl8Rt AF The CRA's Redevelopment Plan addresses blight in the Waterfront/Downtown Area. 2. Waterfront Master Plan. �IDTOE<SL�7T7 1 Mod =.m The WMP illustrates a policy direction not necessarily specific development projects. The WMP denotes property intended for use as public parks, recreation areas, streets, and public improvements. The WMP also includes a potential hotel/convention center. 1-39 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE 3. Riverwalk. The Lake Monroe Riverwalk is a pedestrian and bicycle system providing circulation between Downtown Sanford and Wayside Park on the St. Johns River near 1-4. 4. Downtown Sanford/Lake Monroe Waterfront Redevelopment Plan. . The Plan identifies means and strategies to make redevelopment economically attractive to developers. Several of the strategies discussed in the Plan focus on urban design opportunities that are linked to the two redevelopment scenarios described in the Plan. 5. Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas. The City has established two Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas (TCEAs) to eliminate the constraints of transportation concurrency on redevelopment within the Downtown Sanford/Lake Monroe Waterfront and the US 17-92 Corridor. Policy 1-2.4.7: Promote Urban Infill Redevelopment. The City shall encourage the development and redevelopment of parcels in otherwise built-up areas where public facilities, such as sewer systems, roadways, schools, and recreation areas, are already in place through the use of Urban Infill Redevelopment (UIR) projects. Such projects shall be encouraged especially within the TCEAs where redevelopments are exempt from transportation concurrency requirements. UIR projects involve a land use or mix of land uses that do not conform to typical land use categories or development forms. In addition, these land uses are designed and located in a special or innovative way with special functions or characteristics that are beneficial to the City and the citizens of Sanford as a whole. UIR projects shall be permitted within any land use designation as conditional uses. A. Criteria for Non -Residential and Multiple Family UIR Projects. Non-residential UIR projects shall be consistent with the following criteria: • The proposed land uses in the UIR project are permitted within the City. • The proposed land uses in the UIR project are compatible with adjacent land uses. • The design creates a form and function that enhances the character of the community. • The flexibility granted by the City, regarding densities, intensities, building height, lot width, building setbacks, and off-street parking standards, is justified by the benefits to the public good and the ability of the project to assist the City in achieving its redevelopment, renewal and revitalization goals as stated in the Comprehensive Plan, the Strategic Plan, the Redevelopment Plan and Finding of Necessity for the RA} and/or the Downtown Sanford/Lake Monroe Waterfront Redevelopment Plan. • Adequate off-street parking is available either on site or in the immediate vicinity through a shared parking agreement. • The design of the proposed development complies with the design guidelines for the Downtown Historic District, if applicable. B. Criteria for Residential UIR Projects. Residential UIR projects shall be consistent with the following criteria: 1-40 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE • The proposed land uses in the UIR project are permitted within Residential Land Use Categories shown on the City's Future Land Use Map. • The proposed land uses in the UIR project are compatible with adjacent land uses. • The design creates a form and function that enhances the character of the community. • The flexibility granted by the City, regarding building height, lot width, building setbacks, and off-street parking standards, is justified by the benefits to the community character. • The development of the residential UIR project will improve the surrounding area. • The design of the proposed development complies with the design guidelines for the Downtown Historic District, if applicable. Policy 1-2.4.8: Promote Public and Private Sector Partnerships. The City shall coordinate redevelopment issues with the private sector in promoting mobilization of public and private resources necessary to effectively carry out redevelopment efforts, especially along the Lake Monroe waterfront corridor. Policy • 1-2.4.9: Support Seminole Way Vision. The purpose of the Seminole Way economic development vision is to provide economic stability and arowth for the next 20 years throuah the attraction of hiah value investments and hiah waae gobs in the followina target industry sectors: Financialnd information services • Diaital media includina modelina and simulation, film and broadcasting, themed entertainment and animation name development • Life sciences includina biotech and medical instrumentation • Technical and research services includina civil and environmental engineerina and so- called "areen" architectural and engineerina services. The City will continue to support and participate in the Seminole Way vision for lands designated for commercial, mixed-use and industrial uses. Policy 1-2.4.10: Utilize Brownfield Proarams for Redevelopment. The City will continue to implement Brownfield programs to provide incentives for redevelopment within the City. Policy 1-2.4.10: Economic Development Incentives. The City shall evaluate policies designed to stimulate economic development including, but not limited to, ad valorem tax exemptions. Objective 1-2.5: Designate US Highway 17-92 and Downtown Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas. The US 17-92 and Downtown Community Redevelopment Area is hereby established (see -Map 1 1) as a transportation concurrency exception area (TCEA) to facilitate urban infill and redevelopment, reduce the adverse impact of transportation concurrency on redevelopment, provide strategies for mobility, urban design, mixed uses, and network connectivity, and create a vibrant community for existing and future residents by achieving a balanced mix of sustainable and functional land uses. Policy 1-2.5.1: Implement US 17-92 CRA 2006 Corridor Strategy Report and Downtown CRA Redevelopment Plan. The City shall implement the feAewing recommendations of the US 17-92 CRA 2006 Corridor Strategy Report and the Downtown Redevelopment Plan to further the image of the major spine roadway of the TCEA: a. Developing a unique identity for the corridor through streetscaping improvements that 1-41 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE enhance the pedestrian, bicycle, and transit experience along the corridor in addition to improving the aesthetic environment. b. Defining and defending the residential neighborhoods located within and immediately outside the boundaries of the proposed TCEA to incorporate them as a complementary use into the commercial and mixed uses along the corridor. c. Creating alternative local routes to US 17-92 through restoration of local roads that can relieve congestion along the corridor as well as serve as parallel facilities for local travel. d. Reorienting the intersection of US 17-92 and Park Drive around a central square to create a public amenity as well as open up more land for development. e. Undertaking a land use and urban design study for the corridor to analyze the feasibility of implementing community oriented retail services and mixed uses and replacing the large land auto related uses. f. Offering financial incentives to encourage the development of new retail centers to strengthen the convenience goods and services trade. g. Enhancing the image of the Community Redevelopment Area through improvements to lakes, parks, public views and public spaces that will improve real estate values and provide recreational opportunities. Policy 1-2.5.2: Mixed-use Future Land Use for the US 17-92 Corridor TCEA. The City shall evaluate the feasibility of amending the Comprehensive Plan to adopt a mixed use future land use designation for properties within the US 17-92 TCEA to promote high quality mixed use developments at appropriate densities and intensities that can adequately to support public transportation and promote the use of and bicycling and walking bicycle and pedestrian modes. Development and redevelopment within the TCEA shall occur at densities and intensities that support multi -modal transportation services. The minimum residential densities within the TCEA shall be ten units per acre for developments within Y -mile walking distance from major transit stops and a comparable level of intensity/density for mixed use projects. The minimum floor area ratio for office and commercial uses shall be at least 0.35. The City shall administratively initiate land use amendments within the US 17-92 corridor. The City shall schedule the land use amendments to achieve the re -designation by December 2010. Policy 1-2.5.3: Promote Integrated Land Use and Transportation Planning Principles. The City shall amend the Land Development Code to incorporate regulations aimed at improving the built environment through integrated land use and transportation planning. The Land Development Code will be amended to include additional site planning requirements within the TCEAs including: a. Build -to lines requiring buildings to front the major roads and limit parking in the front; b. Internal sidewalks connecting to parking areas and building entrances. c. Building orientation and placement in close proximity to the street in order to minimize the distance between the building entrances and the street. d. Access requirements (including shared driveway connections) that do not impede traffic flow and reduce pedestrian obstructions through limiting curb cuts; e. Shared parking to minimize excessive parking and use parking resources efficiently; f. Locating parking to the rear of the building to improve the relationship of the building to the street; g. Bicycle parking accommodations including shower and locker requirements; h. Mandatory sidewalk connections from developments to the sidewalks along the roads; i. Landscaping and signage requirements for developments fronting the US 17-92; and 1-42 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE j. Transit accommodations within larger developments including allowing buses to drop off within site. Policy 1-2.5.4: Support Multimodal Supportive Densities/Intensities. Development and redevelopment within the TCEA shall occur at densities and intensities that support multimodal transportation services. The minimum residential densities within the TCEA shall be seven 7 units per acre for developments within '/Z -mile walking distance from transit stops and a comparable level of intensity/density for mixed use projects. The minimum floor area ratio for office and commercial uses shall be at least 0.25. Policy 1-2.5.5: Develop Multimodal Requirements for Development/Redevelopment. The City shall revise the Land Development Code (LDC) by December 2009 to include updated standards to improve the ease of transit and bicycle use within the US 17-92 corridor, including but not limited to transit shelters incorporated into mixed use buildings and multiple use parking structures and requiring bicycle parking within parking structures and as a part of all development/redevelopment. Policy 1-2.5.6: Provide Development Bonus and Incentive Program for US 17-92. The City shall adopt by December 2010, as appropriate, land development regulations to provide development bonuses or incentives for development/redevelopment projects that include the following: a. Transit -oriented development principles; b. Transit facilities including shelters and bicycle racks; c. Financial commitment to transit services; d. Contributions, either in funding, land dedication, or in-kind services, for park and recreation improvements or pubic plazas dedicated to the City; e. Drive -way consolidations and cross -access easements; f. Or other innovative land use and transportation integration designs as determined to be appropriate by the Planning Director. Policy 1-2.5.7: Promote Redevelopment within US 17-92 Corridor. The City shall continue to work with Seminole County to promote development and redevelopment within the US 17-92 corridor. By December 2009, the City shall implement an expedited process for projects within the corridor and identify additional time and cost saving strategies for these projects. The City will also promptly review and act on petitions for land use plan amendments and rezoning to mixed use for property within the TCEA to facilitate redevelopment. To further facilitate redevelopment, the City will continue to review and revise existing land use, zoning, and development policies to promote redevelopment consistent with the vision for the corridor. Policy 1-2.5.8: Support Redevelopment Opportunities. The City will continue to focus planning efforts in the areas of the City that have special opportunities and/or potential for redevelopment, including the US 17-92 corridor, consistent with the CRA action plans adopted by the City. Policy 1-2.5.9: Promote Economic Development Support for Redevelopment. The City shall continue to promote economic development through private sector investment through the following actions adopted as part of the CRA plan: 1-43 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE a. Improve the investment image of the US 17-92 corridor and use strategic public investments to stimulate private investments. b. Strive to make the US 17-92 corridor competitive with major activity centers and corridors within the City and County. c. Expand the economic base of the US 17-92 corridor by retaining existing jobs while creating new and diverse employment opportunities. d. Promote the US 17-92 corridor's unique economic and market assets as a corridor of activities that include a full range of commercial, office, institutional, community, residential and neighborhood services. e. Maximize marketing opportunities to promote the corridor. f. Encourage partnerships among property owners and private and public sector groups to implement redevelopment projects to achieve the redevelopment goals. Policy 1-2.5.10: Economic Development Incentives The City shall evaluate policies desianed to stimulate economic development including but not limited to ad valorem tax exemptions. Objective 1-2.6: Consider Application Of Innovative Land And Water Resource Management And Energy Conservation Concepts. The City shall maintain land development regulations which incorporate concepts for managing land, water and energy resources which are responsive to unique development and conservation issues identified in the City's Comprehensive Plan. The City will promote 1he, u5p, of U5 Q[eea B iildinn C:gUcol a,212 d buildel3a +crhnini and low impact developm nt techniques. Policy 1-2.6.1: Incorporate Contemporary Regulatory Techniques in the Land Development Regulations. The City's amended land development regulations shall incorporate land and water resource management techniques which implement performance criteria SUFRFASFized OR the Pelisy in the Conservation element. Policy 1-2.6.2: Conserve Energy Use. Site planning'standards shall be adopted which require and/or provide incentives to developers to incorporate energy conservation measures in site layout and design. Recognize the attributes provided by natural features of the environment, including landscape, sun and wind, and promote site development and resource management that complements or substitutes for energy -intensive technologies. Policy 1-2.6.3: Coordinate of Energy Management. The City shall participate in regional, State, or local initiatives directed at coordinating energy management within the public and private sectors. These tasks may include joint formulation of energy related decisions with concerned federal, state, regional, and county agencies as well as with concerned private entities. Such activities shall be directed toward maximizing awareness of energy related problems, issues, alternative techniques for resolving energy related problems and issues, and to identify future areas where joint efforts may enhance mutual goals and objectives. Policy 1-2.6.4: Promote Energy Efficiency in Plans. The City shall promote a systematic approach to the development of pedestrian and bicycle path networks by the public and private sectors in order to improve energy efficient transportation links between major activity areas such as residential neighborhoods, employment centers, shopping areas, parks, and schools (Cross- reference Recreation and Open Space Element). 1-44 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE Policy 1-2.6.5: Enforce Energy Conservation in Building and Construction. The City shall enforce energy efficient building codes and promote efficient energy conservation in building heating and cooling systems. The City shall promote attendance at regional training workshops in energy efficiency in construction and continue to foster cooperative relationships between building trades, architects, engineers and building officials. Objective 1-2.7: Manage Airport Lands. The City shall manage lands owned by the Orlando - Sanford Airport and surrounding uses to minimize airport impacts to adjacent land uses and conservation resources in a manner that also protects the integrity of airport operations and safety through the following policies: Policy 1-2.7.1: Implement Airport Master Plan. The City hereby adopts the Airport Layout Plan (ALP) of the Airport Master Plan as the document to guide development of the Airport. Any modification to the uses in the Airport Layout Plan shall require an amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan. The City hereby adopts the goals and objectives of the Airport Master Plan as the general guidelines for development of the Airport to ensure that Airport facilities will be adequate to meet both long- and short-term demand for aviation services. The goals and objectives reflect policy goals to be reached through the master planning process. These goals include the ultimate development of self-supporting facilities to serve the existing and future aviation needs of the region; the achievement of compatible land uses in the vicinity of the Airport; and provisions for the type of development that will yield the most public benefit of the investment represented by the airfield. If a conflict occurs between what is allowed on the future land use map and what is shown on the ALP, the Comprehensive Plan shall be amended prior to the approval of any use that is inconsistent with the future land use map. Goal No. 1. Continue to meet and enhance the level of service provided to all Airport users. Objectives: a. Promote passenger processing which is convenient for all segments of the traveling public, through reduction of delays and the promotion of a safe and pleasant experience. b. Provide adequate runway capacity for estimated demand in terms of annual and hourly operations. c. Provide adequate runway length to meet existing and forecasted operational needs. d. Provide opportunities for development of services associated with air carrier, charter, corporate -type GA, cargo, flight training, and recreational flying operations. 1-45 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE e. Effectively integrate commercial air carrier operations with commercial and non- commercial GA operations. f. Provide other aviation related support facilities needed to support a full range of aviation services. Policies: a. In order to promote convenient passenger processing and a safe and pleasant experience for passengers, by 2020, as dictated by demand, the Airport shall: • Provide functional building modifications including expansion of the ticketing areas, Federal Inspection Services (FIS), concession areas, inbound and outbound baggage, passenger and baggage security screening areas, a parking garage, expanded rental car facilities and various support function facilities. • Realign the Red Cleveland Boulevard main entrance to accommodate international apron/gate expansion and to become a two-level, three -lane terminal frontage road. • Expand the Welcome Center to accommodate increased levels of international passenger traffic. • Provide a 32 -gate terminal. b. In order to provide adequate runway capacity and runway length and to effectively integrate commercial air carrier operations with commercial and non- commercial GA operations, by 2020, as dictated by demand, the Airport shall: • Extend Runway 9L -27R to 12,000 ft to ease current international operational restrictions and accommodate forecast operations and future fleet mix that include larger international transports, such as the B747 and A380. The load- bearing capabilities of Runway 9L -27R shall be improved to 400,000 lbs dual tandem wheel (DTW) load to accommodate the demand for greater stage lengths from the increased number and frequency of existing large and heavy air transport aircraft. • Extend Runway 9R -27L to a maximum of 7,140 ft long, widened to 150 ft, and strengthened to accommodate larger commercial aircraft. • Extend Runway 9C -27C to an ultimate length of 5000 feet. • Extend Runway 18-36 to a length of 8,500 feet. • Construct a new 4,000 foot long parallel runway south of existing Runway 9R - 27L for general aviation aircraft. • Provide taxiways for each of the above runway improvements including adequate taxiway entrances and exits and full-length parallel taxiways. c. In order to provide opportunities for development of services associated with air carrier, charter, corporate -type GA, cargo, flight training, and recreational flying operations, by 2020, as dictated by demand, the Airport shall: 1-46 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE • Utilize areas of land between Runways 9L -27R and 9R -27L for GA development, including corporate and conventional hangars and larger apron and other aircraft parking areas. • Utilize areas of land between Runway 9R -27L and new Runway 8-26 for lighter GA development, such as T -hangars, small conventional hangar, and Fixed Base Operator (FBO) facilities. • Construct new taxiway, ramp area, hangar, and warehouse facilities on the north side of the airfield, as part of the new Northside Aviation Complex, to serve air cargo and heavy maintenance demands. • Coordinate with Pan Am World Airways and Delta Connection Academy, or other airlines, on their proposals for new maintenance and training facilities on the north side of the airport. • Provide a dedicated cargo facility that would include several large cargo warehouses on the northeast side of Runway 9L -27R. d. In order to provide other aviation related support facilities needed to support a full range of aviation services, by 2020, as dictated by demand, the Airport shall: • Move Airport support and maintenance areas to an expanded area between the southwest side of the terminal apron and Carrier Avenue. • Encourage the non -aviation properties that develop on Airport property to develop in ways that enhance the air operations and support those functions that are directly dependent upon Airport services. • Continue to utilize available but underdeveloped land areas to the west of the airfield and in the Airport Commerce Park. • Construct a new air traffic control tower and coordinate with the FAA to determine the most appropriate location for the tower. Goal No. 2. Provide guidelines for future development, while satisfying anticipated demand. Objectives: a. Establish land parcels to meet anticipated demand. b. Provide adequate airside and landside facilities to meet anticipated demand, while meeting all FAA requirements. c. Continue to market facilities to domestic air carriers, international operators, and integrated air cargo operators. d. Effectively market commercial and non-commercial GA operators and facilities. e. Develop a self-sustaining commerce park, which will benefit the Airport and the community as a whole. Policies: • The Airport shall continue to secure funds from the FAA, the State of Florida and local public transit funding sources for the acquisition of lands for projects listed in the Airport Master Plan. • The Airport shall continue to utilize the FAA -approved ALP as its primary planning document. • The Airport shall continue to promote and market the Airport's assets including 1-47 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE Commerce Park, the Foreign Trade Zone (#250) and the Small Business Incubator. • The Airport shall continue to maximize the economic development potential of the airport commerce park and surrounding areas by the following measures: ■ Installation of necessary roadway, water, sewer and drainage facilities, when applicable. ■ Coordination with Seminole County to recognize the Airport as a `Target Area' as specified in the County's Economic Development Strategy. • Establishment of connections with venture capital firms and financial institutions to support the airport. ■ Utilization of target business incentive program jobs growth incentive application. Goal No. 3. Provide an Airport that is safe and reliable. Objectives: a. Provide navigational, landing aids, and meteorological facilities, which enhance the safety and reliability of operations under all weather conditions. b. Protect FAA mandated safety areas, runway protection zones, and other clear zones. c. Minimize possible obstructions to air navigation. d. Provide adequate Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting (ARFF) access roads, facilities, equipment, and personnel, to maintain response time under all conditions. e. Ensure that airside and landside operations and facilities meet all applicable security standards. f. Ensure that parking facilities are adequately sized and easy to negotiate. g. Develop facilities to meet the demands of the current and future critical aircraft. Policies (as funding is available): • The Airport shall install the following navigation aids on extended runways: ■ Runway 9R -27L: PAPI-4/Category I ILSPAPI-4/Category I ILS/GPS/MALSR • Runway 9L -27R: MALSR, PAPI-4, ILS, NDB, Outer Marker, Middle Marker, GPS, RVR • Runway 18: ILS, MALSR, PAPI-4, GPS • Runway 36: GPS, MALSR, PAPI-4 ■ Future 41h Parallel RW 18-36: PAPI-4 (each end) • The Airport shall maintain the runway safety area (RSA), based on the critical aircraft design group, free of objects except for those that need to be located in the RSA. • The Airport shall continue to acquire land within the runway protection zone (RPZ) in order to ensure that the area is free of land uses that create glare, smoke or other hazards to air navigation. • The Airport shall maintain the object -free area (OFA) in a manner free of any above ground objects protruding above the RSA edge elevation except for objects that need to be located in the OFA such as navigational equipment and holding aircraft signage. • The Airport shall install improvements to airfield lighting, signage and pavement markings to enhance the safety and reliability of operations. 1-48 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE The Airport shall continue to maintain a fire rescue department in order to protect the lives and property of the citizens and travelers to Central Florida through immediate response to emergency needs, rapid suppression of fire, competent application of life saving techniques, and public education. The Airport shall comply with the City's requirements for size of parking spaces and configuration of parking lots. The Airport shall design new facilities and change or reposition existing facilities to accommodate the length and wing span of its existing critical aircraft, the Airbus 330 or its future critical aircraft, the Airbus 380. Should the critical aircraft change, the Airport shall modify the design of all existing and proposed facilities utilized by the critical aircraft to accommodate the critical aircraft. Goal No. 4. Develop the Airport and its vicinity to minimize negative environmental impacts. Objectives: a. Identify the major environmental issues of concern. b. Minimize potential environmental impacts, and provide special attention to minimizing residential dislocation, air and water pollution, and wetland impacts. c. Provide a facility that minimizes adverse effects on other environmental concerns. d. Develop an energy-efficient Airport layout to provide ease of air and ground access. Policies: • A complete environmental assessment (EA) shall be required for each of the projects enumerated in the Airport Master Plan and on the ALP. Each EA must be completed before design and construction begins. A site survey shall be used to assess specific vegetative community types on-site and the possible presence of threatened and endangered species shall be completed during the EA and/or EIS process for each project. A species-specific survey methodology shall be utilized to ascertain the definitive presence, population density, and location of all threatened and endangered species and species of special concern. Review of possible wetland impacts on and in the vicinity of the Airport will be conducted during the EA and/or EIS process for each project. • The Airport shall continue to comply with all current federal, state and local guidelines as it applies to the protection and preservation of protected species of plants and animals. • To ensure water quality, the Airport shall coordinate with both the FDEP and the St. Johns River water Management District in order to obtain NPDES and Environmental Resource permits. • If federal funds are used by the Airport, the FAA will meet 49 CFR, Part 24: Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition for Federal and Federally assisted Programs. • The Airport shall develop an energy-efficient Airport layout, as funding is available, to provide ease of air and ground access by: • Minimizing passenger walking distances. ■ Providing convenient passenger loading and unloading. 1-49 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE • Providing an equal level of service and access to all terminals from the parking areas. • Maintaining operational flexibility. Realigning the terminal circulation roadway to continue following the face of the terminal building, ultimately providing dual -level departure and arrival terminal curb frontage from Red Cleveland Boulevard on the east side, westward until it intersects Airport Boulevard. ■ Expanding the operational capacity of the airfield to effectively accommodate the increase in traffic expected, as well as the aircraft mix anticipated to use the Airport including extension of the three primary runways, addition of associated taxiways, and consideration of a new runway in the long term. Goal No. 5. Promote the development of compatible land use in undeveloped areas within the Airport vicinity. Objectives: a. Promote land use planning and development objectives for on -Airport and off -Airport land uses which are compatible with the anticipated long-range needs of the Airport and the community as a whole. b. Designate areas for future development (i.e. air cargo, heavy aircraft maintenance, flight training, etc.). c. Locate Airport and access facilities so that growth may be controlled through land use planning and zoning. d. Develop and implement a Master Stormwater Plan in conjunction with St. John's River Water Management District and FAA criteria. Policies (as dictated by demand and subject to available funding): • The Airport shall continue to develop according to the Airport Master Plan which designates areas for air cargo, heavy aircraft maintenance, flight training, parking, terminal expansion, commerce and industry. • Airport lands shall be designated Airport Industry and Commerce on the Future Land Use Map. All development on Airport property shall be consistent with the policies and objectives of the Airport Industry and Commerce land use designation. • Lands affected by the airport but off airport property shall be developed consistent with Peliey 1 2.44- the Airport Industry and Commerce land use desionation including the submittal to the City of a noise impact analysis and required sound insulation in areas within the airport impact noise zones. • The Airport shall continue to coordinate with Seminole County, Metroplan Orlando and the FDOT to provide the most appropriate and effective means of ensuring adequate ground access to the Airport. • The Airport shall ensure that adequate stormwater management facilities are available to meet St. Johns River Water Management District requirements for water quality and attenuation volumes for each phase of development. This shall be accomplished by adherence to the Stormwater Master Plan prepared by Post 1-50 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE Buckley Shuh and Jernigan (May, 2003) or as may be amended from time to time. Goal No. 6. Develop an Airport that supports local and regional economic goals while accommodating new opportunities or shifts in development patterns. Objectives: a. Achieve a level of service and user convenience such that the Airport is a positive factor in regional economic development decisions. b. Achieve capacities of the airfield, the terminal area systems, and Commerce Park so that the Airport may be an attractive location for major airline maintenance, cargo, and other aviation related hub. c. Provide appropriate and achievable commercial opportunities at, near, and on the Airport. d. To assure economic feasibility, identify an equitable distribution of user charges; distribute the burden of capital investment, maintenance, and operating costs, while keeping overall costs within an acceptable level. e. Identify financial alternatives and funding sources available for the implementation of aviation and non -aviation projects. f. Quantify financial resources available for funding projects identified and recommended, as well as identify project implementation. g. Develop an airport layout plan (ALP) that easily integrates with existing and proposed transportation infrastructure, to encourage economic growth. Policies (as dictated by demand and subject to available funding): The Airport shall install airfield, terminal, access and parking improvements in accordance with the Airport Master Plan and ALP in order to achieve a level of service and user convenience that will make the Airport a positive factor in regional economic development decisions. The Airport shall expand and strengthen runways and taxiways, install state-of- the-art navigational instruments, upgrade and expand terminal facilities, construct new hangar, cargo and warehouse facilities on the north side of the airfield and construct a new air traffic control tower, in order to attract major airline maintenance, cargo, and other aviation related hub. In order to attract tenant business at Commerce Park, and spark development of the remaining land area, the Airport shall complete the following items: ■ Identify available parcels by number, acreage, and the available utilities that are in place for prospective tenants. ■ Set a lease/buy cost associated with each parcel, for proposals and financial analysis by prospective tenants. ■ Develop a comprehensive development plan that identifies business segments and their locations within the commerce park. • Develop minimum standards for construction and maintenance of tenant businesses in the commerce park. ■ Construct roadway, drainage, and utility infrastructure where necessary, to 1-51 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN create value and attract potential tenant businesses. FUTURE LAND USE The Airport shall adhere to the ALP in allocating peripheral airport lands for commercial and industrial development in order to provide appropriate and achievable commercial opportunities at, near, and on the Airport. The Airport shall utilize the information in Chapter 10, Financial Feasibility, of the Airport Master Plan when determining revenue sources and expenditures for airport improvements, identifying an equitable distribution of user charges, distributing the burden of capital investment, maintenance and operating costs, keeping overall costs within an acceptable level and quantifying financial resources available for funding projects identified and recommended, as well as identifying project implementation. The Airport shall continue to seek continuous funding for airport development from the FAA entitlement and discretionary funds and the FDOT airport development program and, when funding is available, from Congressional appropriations, economic development assistance grants, TEA -21, and the Surface Transportation Program (STP). The Airport shall continue to coordinate with Seminole County, FDOT and Metroplan Orlando to ensure adequate vehicular capacity on primary surface access roads to the Airport and to reduce overall traffic congestion. Goal No. 7. Minimize Costs to All Users (I.E. Passengers, Airlines, Flight Training Facilities, Employees, Etc.) of the Airport. Objectives (as dictated by demand): a. Minimize airspace congestion and delays for air carrier and GA aircraft operations through procedural changes and/or provision of additional navigational aids (NAVAIDS). b. Minimize airside congestion through construction of runways, taxiways, and aprons, when the costs of providing the additional capacity are less than the additional operating costs associated with aircraft delays. Policies: The Airport shall minimize airspace congestion and delays by modifying local approach and departure procedures, providing facilities to accommodate simultaneous airfield operations and increased airfield capacity and/or installing the improved navigation aids enumerated in the policies of Goal 3. The timing of airfield improvements shall coincide with existing or projected aviation demand as documented in Chapter 5, Demand/Capacity Analysis and Chapter 6, Facility Requirements of the Airport Master Plan. Goal No. 8. Ensure Adequate And Convenient Ground Access To The Airport. Objectives (as dictated by demand): a. Provide safe access and easy -to -follow signs to Airport roadways and facilities. b. Provide adequate lane capacity on roads leading to the Airport to serve existing and 1-52 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE future activity. c. Provide adequate land capacity on internal circulation roadways serving functional areas (terminal, GA, cargo, flight academy, etc.). d. Provide parking facilities (for GA, cargo, terminal, etc.) that are conveniently located and easily accessible. e. Incorporate multi -modal opportunities into Airport development plans (e.g. commuter or high-speed rail). f. Maintain close coordination with Regional Planning Council, Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO), FDOT, and other transportation groups. Policies (as dictated by demand): • The Airport shall continue to coordinate with FDOT, the County and the City to ensure that routes to the Airport are well marked. The Airport shall increase signage west of the Airport Boulevard/Red Cleveland Boulevard intersection, to separate traffic sooner and reduce congestion by 2005. • The Airport shall continue to coordinate with FDOT, the County and the City to ensure adequate lane capacity on roads leading to the Airport to serve existing and future activity. • The Airport shall expand Red Cleveland Boulevard to three 12 -foot lanes in each direction by 2010. • The Airport shall add additional service roads as airport improvements are implemented. • The Airport will provide parking convenient to employee work areas. The Airport shall provide space for limousine and bus loading curbside at both domestic and international terminal entrances. • The Airport shall coordinate with LYNX, Metroplan and FDOT to ensure that, once demand is sufficient, multimodal transportation shall be included in the Airport's development plans. • Airport staff shall continue to participate in Regional Planning Council, Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO), FDOT, and other transportation groups. Goal No. 9. Minimize The Impact Of Noise On Neighboring Residents and Noise Sensitive Land Uses Through Noise Abatement And Mitigation. Objectives: a. Design and select noise abatement measures that minimize the number of people exposed to noise above day -night noise level (DNL) greater than 65 decibels. b. In selecting noise abatement actions, avoid actions that would adversely affect capacity, impose restrictions on Airport use that would be discriminatory, or that could erode prudent margins of safety. c. Design and select (if necessary) land use mitigation measures for noise sensitive land uses exposed to aircraft noise between 65 and 75 decibels. d. Maximize, to the greatest extent possible, any mitigation projects that may be eligible for FAA funding assistance, aside from the Airport Improvement Program (AIP), that minimize the impacts of noise upon the surrounding environment. 1-53 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE Policies (as dictated by demand and subject to available funding): • The Airport shall continue to acquire noise -sensitive land based on the FAR Part 150 Noise Study prepared by ESA in 2001. • The Airport shall continue to support the Sanford Airport Noise Abatement Committee (SANAC) in its efforts to study and implement noise reduction measures both on and off Airport property. • When possible, the Airport will work with the FAA to modify runway flow percentages to maximize east flow. • When possible, the Airport will work with the FAA to reduce flyovers of residential communities by beginning a northwesterly turn approximately three (3) miles west of the beginning of take -off roll on runway 27R. • When possible, the Airport shall work with the FAA to require jet aircraft conducting ILS flight training to continue along the runway heading to gain altitude beyond the Airport property boundaries prior to making the turn to the north. • When possible, the Airport will extend east -west runways on the east end to reduce noise intrusion on the more heavily populated west side. • The Airport shall coordinate with the FAA to implement noise abatement operational procedures to reduce the exposure of aircraft noise on neighboring communities. • The Airport shall utilize FAA funds to acquire additional noise monitors. Goal No. 10. Develop An Airport That Is Consistent With Federal, State, Regional, And Local Plans. Objectives: a. Develop the Airport as a regionally significant asset and make it consistent with national, state, and metropolitan system plans. b. Develop the Airport in accordance with local land use and transportation plans. Policies: The Airport shall develop according to the Airport Master Plan and the ALP which have been designed to meet all federal, state and local plans. The Airport development shall be consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan and land development regulations. The Airport will work with Metroplan Orlando's 2020 Long Range Transportation Plan and Transportation Improvement Program and with FDOT's transportation plans to assure responsible development. Policy 1-2.7.2: Coordinate Airport Expansion and Coordination with the Conservation Element. The implementation of the Airport Master Plan shall be coordinated with the Conservation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Expansion and operation plans shall minimize impacts to environmental resources consistent with policies set forth within the Comprehensive Plan. Resource Protection and Conservation lands shall be protected through the use of open space requirements, clustering, conservation easements and wetlands buffer 1-54 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE and transition areas, or mitigation as approved by the St. Johns River Water Management District. Policy 1-2.7.3: Maintain Public Facilities LOS. The development of the Airport Master Plan shall be phased concurrent with major public roadway improvements and the installation of drainage, sewer and water utilities. As necessary to ensure that development of the Airport is consistent with public facility standards, the City or Sanford Airport Authority, as appropriate, shall enter into any necessary interlocal agreements for the purposes of the provision of public facilities and services in order to maintain the adopted level of service standards for facilities subject to concurrency. Policy 1-2.7.4: Ensure Compatibility with Airport Operations for Adjacent Development. The City's Future Land Use Map and the Official Zoning Map shall continue to delineate all Runway Protection Zones (RPZ) established for the airport. These clear zones shall be, at a minimum, consistent with requirements set forth by the Federal Aviation Administration. Development and land uses activities within a RPZ shall be consistent with regulations established by the Federal Aviation Administration. Schedule R, Airports and Aircraft, of the Land Development Regulations shall continue to control land use activities, height, and construction to ensure that development and activities within the RPZ and other areas of the City are consistent with standards set forth by the Federal Aviation Administration. Schedule R is consistent with Chapter 333, Florida Statutes. Policy 1-2.7.5: Coordinate with the FAA. For structure heights that require approval from the Federal Aviation Administration, the City shall issue no development or construction permit until authorization has been received from the FAA. Policy 1-2.7.6: Coordinate through Development Review. The City Department of Engineering and Planning shall coordinate with Airport staff regarding development applications, zoning changes, and land use amendment petitions proposed for property adjacent to or near the airport. Policy 1-2.7.7: Protect from Noise Exposure. Future expansion of the Orlando -Sanford International Airport (OSIA) property and runways shall be focused to the east and south to minimize airport noise and development impacts to urban residential areas to the north and west. The Airport Authority shall continue to monitor noise impacts generated by airport operations and enforce compliance. Lands annexed near or adjacent to the airport shall be assigned land use designations compatible with the Airport Master Plan and in a manner consistent with the joint planning agreement established with Seminole County. The City shall ensure that land uses surrounding the airport are compatible with noise levels generated by the airport use through the following measures: 1. All land east or south of the OSIA's new runway system shall be developed based on the part 150 Noise Exposure Maps and Compatibility Plan prepared in 2001 for the Orlando Sanford International Airport by Environmental Science Associates (ESA), as approved by the FAA and any revisions to the noise exposure maps that may occur as the result of airport development. If new residential land uses or residential zoning districts are 1-55 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE permitted, an avigation easement and development order approval shall be required. 2. New residential land use designations, zoning classifications and residential development for fee simple home ownership (single-family detached, duplexes, townhomes or condominiums) shall be prohibited where noise contours are greater than 60 DNL (day -night noise level). Transient, rental and multi -family residential developments shall comply with the guidelines issued by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Department of Transportation relating to airport compatible uses and will be allowed between the 60 and the 65 DNL noise contour only with an avigation easement and associated development order and shall be designed to meet the soundproofing regulations pursuant to the FAA FAR Part 150 Noise Compatible Land Use Guidelines. 3. The following uses are compatible with the Airport: • Industrial Parks; • Business Parks; • Commercial Developments; • Attendant retail; • Service and Hotel Uses; • Medium and high-density rental residential developments between the 60 and 65 DNL; • Agricultural uses;nod • Public Uses. 4. Multifamily developments shall be designed with noise reducing features such as acoustical insulation or other soundproofing. 5. An avigation easement shall be required and included in the recorded deed of any new lot prior to the construction of a single family dwelling unit or a multifamily dwelling unit for properties located in the area depicted in Map 4-44the Future Land Use Mar) series. Policy 1-2.7.8: Monitor and Evaluate Airport Layout Plan and Goals of Airport Master Plan. The Airport Layout Plan and the goals of the Airport Master Plan shall be reviewed on an annual basis in order to ensure that the development is proceeding according to the Plan and that goals are being achieved. Review shall also establish that public facilities are in place to accommodate expected development. The annual review shall be the responsibility of the Administrative Official. The Sanford Aviation Authority and the local planning agency shall consider findings and recommendations of the Administrative Official. Monitoring and evaluation procedures shall incorporate the following: • GensistenGy Feviewi deteFfflinatien Determine e€—whether development is proceeding according to the Airport Layout Plan and goals of the Airport Master Plan; • Deter ninegetem*a&m whether public facilities can accommodate proposed airport development for next period; • AsseN}gliGhments. Review of annual progress towards fulfillment of Airport Layout Plan and goals of Airport Master Plan; • Descna the nature and extent of unanticipated and unforeseen problems and opportunities occurring during the past year; 1-56 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE • Provide recommendations concerning new or modified goals and objectives and substantial modifications to the FAA approved Airport Master Plan and resultant Comprehensive Plan amendments that are necessary during the coming year. Policy 1-2.7.9: Manage New Development Surrounding the Airport. By July 1, 2011, the City shall complete a small -area study and prepare overlay standards for properties accessing East Lake Mary Boulevard between State Road 46 and Sanford Avenue. The purpose of the study and standards is: • to ensure the compatibility of future development with airport uses; • to prevent strip development and urban sprawl; • to ensure a mix of uses conducive tourist development, industrial development, airport development and the industries targeted in the Seminole Way Vision. Objective 1-2.8: Maintain Intergovernmental Coordination. The City shall maintain administrative procedures in the land development regulations to ensure efficient coordination of land and water management issues surrounding proposed development are carried out in a timely manner with all public entities having jurisdictional authority. Policy 1-2.8.1: Implement Intergovemmental Coordination. The City shall require that development applications be coordinated, as appropriate, with the City of Lake Mary, Seminole County, the Seminole County School Board, other special districts, the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council (ECFRPC), the St. Johns River Water Management District, as well as applicable State and Federal agencies prior to issuance of a development order or permit. The City shall coordinate with the ECFRPC in meeting regional policies contained in the Strategic Regional Policy Plan. Objective 2-2.9: Plan for Public Schools within Sanford. In order to provide proper planning for new public school facilities in Sanford, the City shall implement the following policies addressing public schools as an allowable land use, criteria for locating schools, and collocation of schools and community facilities. Policy 2-2.9.1: Allow Public Schools in Certain Future Land Use Map Designations. The City shall allow elementary, middle and other similar low -intensity schools to be located within the Public/Semi-Public, Suburban Estates, Low Density Residential - Single Family, Low Density Residential - Mobile Home, Medium Density Residential, High Density Residential, Neighborhood Office Commercial, and Residential/Office/Institutional Land Use categories shown on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). High schools and similar high-intensity schools shall be allowed in Medium Density Residential, High Density Residential, Public/Semi-Public, Neighborhood Office Commercial, and Residential/Office/Institutional Land Use categories shown on the FLUM. 1-57 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE Policy 2-2.9.2: Interim Public School Siting Criteria. The following criteria shall be used in locating public schools within Sanford until an interlocal agreement between the School Board and the City is adopted: General Guidelines. A. Proposed school sites shall be located away from industrial uses, limited access roadways, railroads, and similar land uses to avoid noise, odors, dust, and traffic impacts and hazards. B. Disrupting influences caused by school yard noise and traffic require that schools be located sufficient distances from adult communities, nursing homes and similar land uses or buffered from these areas. C. New school sites shall be located within the County's urban growth boundary or be compatible with compact urban growth patterns. D. Schools shall be designed to minimize the impacts to adjacent neighborhoods through control of site aspects including traffic access, landscaping, buffers, and site design and layout. Site Acceptability. A. School size and land area requirements for elementary, middle and high schools shall meet the minimum standards established by the Seminole County School Board. B. Schools should be centrally located within their intended attendance zones, to the maximum extent possible, and be consistent with walking and bus travel time standards. High schools shall be exempted from this provision due the large land area requirement. C. The site should be of sufficient size to ensure that buildings and ancillary facilities, and future expansions can be located away from floodplains, flood prone areas, wetlands and other environmentally sensitive areas, coastal high hazard areas and will not interfere with historic or archaeological resources. D. Public utilities (e.g., water, sewer, stormwater) must be available to the site. E. Access to the site should be from a collector road (local roads for elementary schools) and avoid the need for slow down zones, if possible. F. Ingress and egress should not create detrimental impacts on roads adjacent to the site. G. Approaches to the site should be safe for pedestrians, bicycles, cars and buses. H. A mass transit or bus stop should be located near the site. 111. School Specific Site Location Recommendations. A. Elementary Schools. Elementary schools serve a neighborhood or group of neighborhoods where students have a short distance to walk. Land uses should be predominately residential and include housing types and densities sufficient to meet the school's enrollment capacity with students that are predominately within walking distance of the school. B. Middle Schools. Middle schools have a community orientation and the mix of land uses can include more commercial uses than would be allowed in a neighborhood. Enrollment comes from two or more elementary schools. C. High Schools. High schools should be buffered from residential areas. Enrollment for high schools comes from two or more middle schools. The campus should be large enough to encourage students to remain onsite and to ensure sufficient parking or parking controls to avoid disruptive offsite parking. 1-58 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE Policy 2-2.9.3: Collocate Public Facilities. The City shall collocate, to greatest extent possible, public facilities such as parks, libraries, and community centers with schools. In collocating facilities, the City shall use the following guidelines: A. Elementary Schools. Playgrounds can be collocated with elementary schools. In areas with densities high enough to support them, a neighborhood park with facilities for the elderly, a neighborhood recreation center, and a library sub -branch can be included. B. Middle Schools. A community park and athletic fields are appropriate to locate with middle schools. A community center, if the school will not be used for this purpose, and a library sub -branch or branch can be included depending on the school's location and the population served. C. High School. Community parks with a community center, if the school will not be used for this purpose, and athletic field can be collocated with high schools. A main or branch library is also appropriate. If justified by the population to be served, a district park could be collocated with the school. Objective 2-2.10: Maintain Geet;in, -e Land Use Programs. The City shall implement land use goals and objectives by carrying out a continuing program of land use activities below cited. This objective shall be measured through the implementation of the following policies. Policy 2-2.10.1: Maintain Land Use Information System. Maintain and periodically update the land use information system, integration of the Tax Appraiser property files, Planning Office field data, Building and Zoning Department permit files, engineering base maps, and all other relevant land use data files. Policy 2-2.10.2: Monitor Land Use Trends. The City shall monitor and evaluate population and land use trends. Policy 2-2.10.3: Ensure Fiscal Management The City shall implement fiscal management policies of the capital improvement program and budget. Policy 2-2.10.4: Administer Land Use Controls. The City shall administer adopted land use controls, including the zoning ordinance, subdivision regulations, building regulations, housing code, water and sewer codes, traffic regulations, and regulations governing streets and sidewalks. Policy 1-2.JRU.5: Provide Public Assistance. The City shall provide continuing land use information and assistance to the public. Policy 2-2.10.6: Maintain Intergovernmental Coordination. The City shall coordinate land development issues where applicable with other public agencies at all levels of government pursuant to the Intergovernmental Coordination Element of this plan. Policy 2-2.10.7: Manage Current Developmental Impacts. The City shall evaluate and manage impacts of proposed development pursuant to existing ordinances, including, but not limited to, 1-59 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE public facilities, natural environment, and impact on stable residential neighborhoods. Policy 2-2.10.8: Apply Urban Design and Community Appearance. Best management principles and practices of urban design shall be applied through site plan review procedures in order to enhance general community appearance as well as to preserve and enhance open space and landscape. The City shall enforce on a continuing basis the community appearance performance criteria Gited OR Peliey 1 4.6.1. Policy 2-2.10.9: Undertake Special Land Use Studies. In order to maintain land use policies responsive to changing conditions, problems, and issues, the City shall undertake special studies as needed. Policy 2-2.10.10: Support the 2050 How Shall We Grow Regional vision The City will support the 4 -C's of the regional vision. The 4 -C's of the reaional vision consist of. • Conservation- Identifvina and protecting our most critical natural resources of reaional sianificance. and doing this first. • Centers- Promoting more future growth and development in compact urban centers with areat amenities (areat places to live, work shop and recreate in a more pedestrian - friendly settina). • Corridors- Connectina centers with mixed-use corridors served by multi -modal (motor vehicles, liaht rail. commuter rail. bus, bus rapid transit, bike lanes and pedestrian trails) transportation systems. • Countryside- Takina the pressure off countryside by increasing the density and intensity of areat urban centers and thus deferring the need for more sprawl into the countryside Objective 2-2.11: Continue Evaluation of Future Land Use Element Effectiveness. The City shall use the following policies as criteria in evaluating the effectiveness of the Future Land Use Element. Policy 2-2.11.1: Review the Impact of Change Indicators on Land Use Policy. Trends in the magnitude, distribution, and characteristics of population and land use shall serve as indicators of possible changes in land use needs. The policy implications of major trends in land use characteristics shall be evaluated on a continuing basis. Land use policy shall be refined as needed in order to remain responsive to evolving problems and issues. Policy 2-2.11.2: Schedule, Budget and Implement Programmed Activities. The timely scheduling, programming, budgeting and implementation of programmed land use activities identified in this Element shall be evidence of the City's effectiveness in carrying out a systematic program for implementing adopted land use goals, objectives and policies. Policy 2-2.11.3: Coordinate with Public and Private Sectors. While continually implementing and evaluating the Land Use Element, the City shall maintain a process of intergovernmental coordination as well as coordination with private sector groups interested in land use policy and programs. The effectiveness of this approach shall be evaluated by the success of coordination mechanisms in resolving land use problems and issues. Policy 2-2.11.4: Achieve Effective Resolution of Land Use Goals, Objectives, and 1-60 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE Policies. The effectiveness of the Land Use Element shall be measured by the City's success in achieving land use goals, objectives, and policies. The Land Use Element incorporates a systematic planning process for identifying land use problems and issues and implementing corrective actions. Policy 2-2.11.5: Coordinate Hazard Mitigation Reports with Development and Redevelopment. Should the City be included in a Presidential Disaster Declaration, the City shall use the interagency hazard mitigation report as the basis for prohibiting redevelopment of uses which are inconsistent with the report recommendations. Additionally, the City shall use the interagency hazard mitigation report to prevent new uses that are inconsistent with the report recommendations from locating in the area included in the Presidential Disaster Declaration. Finally, should an interagency hazard mitigation report be issued for Sanford, the City shall consider adopting a program for eliminating existing uses which are inconsistent with the report recommendations. 1-61 November 2009 City of Sanford Map: 1-1 0 Lake Monroe Future Land Use C2. Legend I City IJmits r � _ i � 1 ; ,i _, , w •�, � - ----",'` \ � p, --- �I tea'■ ■ o �O f U u Future Land Use Lav Density Residential -Mobile Home - Suburban Estates CELE KY AV o a j )\)� —o „ o „ v' m \� Lav Density Residential Single Family Medium Density Residential •10 Mecum Density Residential -75 - Figh Density Residential Neighborhood Commercial : General Commercial '.. - _ t:. Industrial r. �'� SR46 _ 411, _ -' _. �. 94 i L c �� v� • [ : = J / _ � Airport Indraa Commerce try Residential I Office /Institutional IA fth Intensity Waleftnt Downtown Business Dist. Wa3tsid6lraustry a commerce Public / semi -Public — Parks, Recreation. Open Space Resource Protection - � •'u � � W+E tAK[ IMl4Y VD i a"^ S \ -- Jr. POO WAV i -- — _..� 0 0.5 1 Miles CDi / Lake Jesup -r 0 cryds.rnad Dep.M"o(PYmnpaoeeaep.n S.rvv Nov.ne.r2009 �018B 19 I-0 .1 fly 1 lol. l.t may; ��f�• ;T 'L'�if-'�. .:1. �,I 1���� � s � �■ p � ��I� .o"t"'.' ���T•%raull [hili ` Ir I r �m i • �L//% r y ►� � C1� MR a 1 • City of Sanford .✓ Map: 1-3 Lake Monroe Vacant Developable Land [j Future Land Use _I p - U6 Legend City Limas L-e;,SR e- air • r - r ay vV 1 v� Vacant Future Land Use Futuro Land Use Category CE RY VE Low DensaY Residential _ Single Family •-,r�°"�— — \ � rile/ �1',� - 4 r ;SVS s� _ W __ Y' °rc' l w l q6 SR Medium Dens' Residential r._- Medium Density Residential ® H9n Density Residential b — _ Z LL- o{ o I Suburban Estates °0 m [- Neighborhood Commercial 11II 417 t� 7 nrsr .. mss,,, �, _ 1 iii. 4; 7 - General Commercial Industrial - Pubic d Semi -Public _ Park/Recreation jM1 a Open Space Airport Industry 3 Commerce \ Wale rlront/Downtown Business District I-4 High Intensity Westside Industry6 Commerce J ABtPOR D �.\ r i ,r_-�` ��; ResitlentiaVORKe/lnstitutional �_ N MAROUEYTE AVE / O t� t = I tt.Jlj��LJ \\ W E LAKE MARY BLVD ♦�� �'/ E _ 1 ! i 0 0.5 1 Miles city ol3 co r4 100 sem�couwy LYNX !M1 KA 4 J1 i \Sarw: Lake Jesup ®©© b' �R►p I KimleyHom and Associales, Inc. City of Sanford Lake Monroe Map: 1-4 Transportation �j r ❑ r Concurrency Exception Areas - — —� -ra —1 N p 7 ❑ �� - -- - ' a SR STH 8T IN CE VE J — d,f _-_____-.fL-- r y < -- .,. Legend bow —�o LL � I N City Limits Downtown Waterfront TCEA -----(j_ – 25TH ST SR �US17-92TCEA SR 41 Ji �i� 1 AtRP-D - — -- N �I MARQUETTE a AVE J7/ � � LAKE MARY BLVD A 0 0.5 1 Miles � All sa.ce: Qty as We 2m FDOT V s° �1 Lake Jesup 0 ❑�� vpg f� KimleyFbm A–'077-9 ardy1550CIa1eS.1110. City of Sanford Map: 1-5 �'— Lake Monroe Potable Water Service Area and Wellfield V- Protection Zones I SR�1 L_j Li n Legend CE RV VE 13TH ST Water Service Area S 4i L_—J City Limits Orlando -Sanford Airport �_ / T. — SR --- - _ _ '— u ----- _-_ Wellfield Protection Zone 1 rj YAROUETTE AVE / TARE MARY BLVD j r� J / Lake Jesup 0 0.5 1 Miles Sources: City of Sanford, 2008 FDOSeminole County FDOT er"x KimleyHorn and Associates. Inc. r City of Sanford Map: 1-6 Lake Monroe Soil Types loll Type .- R RLMM LL 46 J MASWE-SPA-101ESANDS AFIENTS—SLOPES C '1'• 11 '�: I.;n ASTATUUAPOPMFINE SANDS S %SLOPES DS ASTATUUAPOPMFWE SANDS bit% SLOPES T_9 9AS—ER L DELRAY FINE SANDS J' a _BAS MER LSMRYINFlNESANDs- EPRESSICINAL 13TH ST CCI.ERY, VE - &ASe1GER SAA4UU6 HONROON SOILS DEPRESGIONAL _- •-. :� I •--""---/1eOHT �_..._..._�-rte -I_-.__ 9 SR —AMSUU L SAMSEL 0-11 LANOVALTERMCEMMUCAs �L O r, .i __...I-- LL 9 -_.. t__„ v<i < QTS _ M EAUGAI LIE d MOMLEE"P SANDS ® FELDA L MANATEE MUCKY FINE SANDS- DEPRESSIONAL 6 h ® A.-.E SAND _ .. ice; - w m � m _ � 4NIABAR FlNE SAID -MANATEE-FLOROIAIU B HOLD-SOILS- FREQUENTLY FLOODED - - 25THST SR r,__ J - - MMMTANM L EAUCALLE FINE SANDS J r SR '�! :.i �I•:.+-ilif.11ii; ••.,•i' Lig L .� I i - NTTAW MJCKT FINE SAND. DEPRESSIONAL _ O4`177- OPEN WATER -PAOLA-ST. LOGE SANDS 03%SLOPES J ®PHEDA FINE SAND O - �o- i_-.I '. ., r' ,- '• �POMELLO FlNE SAND 0.5%SLOPES POMPANO FINE SAND-OCGs10NALLY FLOODED SEFFNER FINE SAND L. NHPORT❑LVDn42 JONN5IEAWALLE FINE SANDS J TAVARESJAL PPER FINE SANDS 0.5%SLOPES ( .-Il ftp. w f1 -'�, _-•i �.\ - -J _TAVARESJALLIOPPER FINE SANDS 56%SLOPES - - - MAI VETTE AVE -IDORTlIENT6.EXGVATED - IlItBANU SLOPE _ � c, SAI -WASSO FINE ND LANE MARY BLVD !71 1 �9 °g 0 0.5 1 Lake Jesup Miles Sources: City of Sanford, 2008 Seminole County FDOT LYNXVA SJRWMO 0,IKimley-Fbm nl), -TT37,-- and Assoliates,lnc. FiM City of Sanford i Map: 1-7 Lake Monroe a [j Historic Districts Lj K O � U ❑ _ aLegend I CE RV VE �� 1]TK 4T t ^ J/ ' `-" o 7­­1'// <—� -y < SR ��� -- City Limits Orlando-Sanford Airport — p n ( Z o m .+ Historic Districts ) Historic Commercial _ n 25TH ST art - - _i Historic Residential BR I_ti I {� L� ABIPCM _❑ t� / � OUETiE AVE MAR -- � l"-R a ��J❑ N W - LAKE MARY BLVD -� f � 1--� S 0 0.5 1 fW rr / J L L, Miles soccer city ars.neN. � �M1 \^ Lake Jesup I ®®p, � �ORip Kimley-Hom and Associales, Inc. Fee 2— City of Sanford LAKE COUNTY ' ,•��'� Map: 1-8 VOLUSIA COUNTY Rural Boundary SAN O,D Legend Rural Boundary � p �•-•-� -- .:.� . • '�� J] _ LAKE �' - -:r• n l�r•,. • - Water Body MAR / , LeN Jesup ONGWOOD m/v RURAL a VASSELBERRY--f— I N � ;�•� : 0 2 4 Miles ORANGE COUNTY Sov2' City of SanbN GIS, �eE FDOT lYN% a E -IR 1 KimleyHom and Associates. Inc. F— 2 A City of Sanford Map: 1-9 Lake Monroe Areas Targeted for Redevelopment o46 -.--: SR lbLegend � a ° 77TH 9T XCE WE �- - ---- City Limits - Orlando -Sanford Airport _ -- r sR 415 Tr -a — —D G < r m 6 6 Waterfront CRA % % Seminole Town Center .r -L. ---- L :aTHST — J Georgetown/Goldsboro Area US 97-92 CRA / X17 .. -'J ?:1 I._J `r r r AMtPOR— D �`l �-^-- s+. WROUETTE AVE / LAKE MARY BLVD Iy { z � i LJ ' 0 0.5 , Miles Li sew: Gh oisaiem.:me DoT !M1 ♦1 / \\ Lake Jesup , 0 I ❑c" ,,OR Ip KimleyHom F—,n77-9 ardAssoeiate, 1.1, City of Sanford ' _ Lake Monroe Map: 1-10 Airport Noise Contours BR i L� -------------- < L r n Q (. l j a <.il < f W �! Cf�; ; - j 'R all Legend � City Limits Airport Clear Zones SR \ l _ ISTHBr �'`�� BR I J Orlando-Sanford Airport Noise Contours 9)1 419L AIRPO w I rte• ., :�, ti—��� U AVE RO ETiE LAKE MARY BLVD 11>\C U,1/ �? Miles s,�r. cM aisr,eq. moe �1 �� Lake Jesup Kim lAssocates.IIx. and F,d AD9 City of Sanford Map: 1-11 Lake Monroe D I El 1 �L� Sanford Activity Center L cc n a I 171H ST CE FRY VE ---- _.-- T+ w1rw � z a ` ata Legend a°J� ul 8R a City Limits ®Sanford Activity Center 73THST K - OdandoSanfordAirport •1T -- br- rre� ARPOR ❑ i! MAROUETTEAVE b � �-�r-'� �� J W E -. uuE WARY sLvn G 0 0.5 1 Miles F� LYNX Lake Jesup ( use �DRIp Kimley-Wm and Associates, Inc. City of Sanford Map: 1-12 Floodplains Legend = City Limits = Orlando -Sanford Airport FEMA Zone Subject to 100 -year Flood - Subject to 100 -year Flood with Base Elevation Determined _ Subject to 100 -year Shallow FI O Outside 500 -year Flood Plain N W E S 0 0.5 1 Miles Emil F-1877= 9 FandAssociates, In y City of Sanford Map: 1-13 � Lake Monroe 'AG Wetlands l CE 17TH ST 1 Legend ---j -- City Limits Orlando -Sanford Airport a ;N, 1` `J 'o m 9i� , IL1 Wetland Type Wetland FT 25TH aR r�3 Water Body Riverine F'} ���.,; V .^ • ..1 ( .J . ARPOR ���--_�.�1;' �I -� !/ a'" _ iJ.i.,� --------- i S '� �� r i� MAROUETTEAVE E Li Y aLW 9 v �6' _` ✓J �._" "� SS.:.� :, c%}, �� �l. }}J '/, ✓ LANE MARAj S r ✓r / l/c,/ryy�-e T�- '�j Miles - .k, p o , V� !/ ,ti -,1 int . - sw�.: cnrma.nem.xme /�. LYNx P �� T Lake Jesup 0^' / vORlp Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. F- i 1Pimp EW+E Rural County Charter Area Legal Description Legal Description for Rural Area fAdded: ArnerWmmt UliSWO.3; Ordl w#" 20OS-17, 0511W2M August 10, 2004 The Rural Area is located in the Eastern portion of Seminole County, Florida. The calls within this description are based on the individual plats and deeds to which the rural boundary line is coincident with and are not part of a uniform basis of bearings throughout. Being more particularly described as follows: Begin in Sec 1, Twp 20S , Rng 31E, at the intersection of the thread of the St. John's River, also being the Northerly boundary of Seminole County, with the West line of the East one-half of said Section 1; Thence run southerly along said line to its intersection with the Northeasterly shoreline of Lake Jesup; Thence run Southerly and Southwesterly along said Easterly and Southeasterly shoreline of Lake Jesup to the NE Corner of the West 30 acres of Government Lot 3 of Sec 33, Twp 20S, Rng 31 E. Thence run Southerly along the East line of said West 30 aces to a point 60.00 feet North of the South line of Govt Lot 3, Sec 33, Twp 20S, Rng-31 E. Thence run East along the North line of the South 60.00 feet of Govt Lots 3, 2, & 1 to a point 60.00 feet North of the NW Comer of Sec 3, Twp 21 S, Rng 31 E. Thence, South 60.00 feet to said NW Section Comer. Thence South along the West line of said Section 3 to a point on the Northerly Right of Way of SR 434. Thence run Easterly along said Northerly Right of Way to the East line of Lot 19, Black Hammock, Plat Book 1, Page 31 of the Official Records of Seminole County, Florida. Thence run North along said East lot line to the NE Comer of said Lot 19. Thence continue North along the Northerly extension of the East line of said Lot 19 extended North to the North Right of Way of Florida Avenue. Thence run East along said North Right of Way to the West line of the E 1/2 of said Section 3. Thence run South along said West line to the SW Comer of the NW 1/4 of the SE '/4 of Sec 3, Twp 21 S, Rng 31 E. Thence run East along the South line of the North 1/2 of the SE 'A Of said Section 3 to the East line of said Section 3. Thence continue East along the South line of the NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Sec 2, Twp 21S, Rng 31E to the SE Corner of said NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 2. Thence run the fohowing courses through Black Hammock, Plat Book 1, Page 31 of the Official Records of Seminole County, Florida: Easterly'across Canal Street Right of Way to the SW Comer of Lot 140; East along the South line of said lot to the SE Comer of Lot 140, Easterly across Elm Street Right of Way to the SW Corner of Lot 153, East along the South line of said lot to the SE Comer of Lot 153; Easterly across Kansas Street Right of Way to the SW Comer of Lot 236; East along the South line of said lot to the SE Corner of Lot 236; Easterly across Oklahoma Street Right of Way to the SW Caner of Lot 245; East along the South line of said lot to the SE Comer of Lot 245; Easterly across Orange Street Right of Way to the SW Comer of Lot 333; East along the South line of said lot to the SE Comer of Lot 333; Easterly across Stone Street Right of Way to the SW Corner of Lot 342; South along the West line of Lots 341, 340, 339 and 338 to the SW Caner of Lot 338; East along the South line of said lot to the SE Comer of Lot 338, Black Hammock, Plat Book 1, Page 31 of the Official Records of Seminole County, Florida, being the end of above referenced courses through said subdivision. Thence Easterly across Van Arsdale Street R704 of Way to the NW Comer of Lot 1, Swope's 2nd Addition to Black Hammock, Plat Book 3, Page 14 of the Official Records of Seminole County, Florida. Thence run Southerly 204.00 feet to the SW Comer of said Lot 1. Thence run Northeasterly along Southerly lot line of said Lot 1 a FUHME MAD USE Ord 2MG-44, 0"tIM distance of 741.50 feet to the Easterly most point of said Lot 1. Thence, run Easterly along the Nath line of Sec 12, Twp 21 S, Rng 31 E to the NE Comer of said Section 12. Thence run South along the East line of said Section 12 a distance of 667.50 feet to the NW Corner of Lot 25, Lee's lova City, Plat Book 7, Page 35 of the Official Records of Seminole County, Florida. Thence continue South along the West line of Lots 25 & 30, said Plat of Lee's Iowa City, a distance of 1,979.90 feet to the SW Corner of said Lot 30. Thence run along the South line of Lot 31, said subdivision, for the following courses: West a distance of 631.50 feet; North a distance of 25.00 feet, and West a distance of 660.00 feet to the SW Comer of said Lot 31. Thence run Westerly across Van Arsdale Street Right of Way to the SE Comer of Lot 18, Swope's 2nd Addition to Black Hammock, Plat Book 3, Page 14 of the Official Records of Seminole County, Florida. Thence run North along the East line of said lot to the NE Comer of said lot 18. Thence run West along the North line of said Lot 18 a distance of 330.00 feet. Thence run North to the North line of the South 3/4 of Lot 17, said Swope's 2' Addition to Black Hammock. Thence run West along said North line of the S 3/4 a distance of 726.00 feet. Thence run South to the North line of said Lot 18. Thence, West along said North lot line to the NW Comer of said Lot 18. Thence run South along the West lot line to the SW Corner of said lot 18. Thence continue South along the Southerly extension of the West line of said Lot 18, across Cabbage Avenue Right of Way, to the North line of the South 1/2 of Sec 12, Twp 21 S, Rng 31 E. Thence West along the North line of the S'/z of said Section 12 to the NW Comer of the SE 1/4 of said Section 12. Thence run South along the West line of said SE 114 a distance of 349.50 feet; N76-38-OOW a distance of 329.00 feet; S13-07-OOE a distance of 530.00 feet; N65-28-OOE a distance of 219.20 feet. Thence run South along the West line of said SE 1/4 a distance of 567.70 feet to the NW Comer of the SW 1/o of the SE 1/4 of said Section 12. Thence run East along said North line of the SW 1/4 of the SE 114 a distance of 132.00 feet. Thence, South to the South line of the N'/4 of said SW y4 of the SE 1/4. Thence run West along South line of said N'/4 a distance of 132.00 feet to the West line of said SW '/4 of the SE 1/4. Thence run South along the West line of said SW '/4 of the SE '/4 to the South '/4 Comer of Sec 12, Twp 21 S, Rng 31 L Thence run South along the East line of the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Sec 13, Twp 215, Rng 31E a distance of 1,316.16 feet. Thence, West along the South line of the NE '/4 of the NW '/4 of said Section 13 a distance of 1,310.32 feet to the SE Comer of Lockwood Boulevard Complex, Plat Book 48, Page 17 of the Official Records of Seminole County, Florida. Thence run the following courses: 589-34-53W along the South line of said subdivision a distance of 820.11 feet to the SW Comer of Lot 2; N00 -52-30W along the West line of said lot 2 a distance of 662.32 feet to the NW Corner of said Lot 2; 589-41-03W a" the North line of said subdivision a distance of 550.03 feet to the West line of the NW '/4 of the NW 1/4 of Sec 13, Twp 21 S, Rng 31 E. Thence South along the West line of said Section 13 to the Northerly Right of Way of CR 419. Thence run Southeasterly along the Southwesterly boundaries of Riverside Landings First Amendment, Plat Book 63, Pages 64-66, Riverside Landings, Plat Book 55, Pages 1-2, and River Oaks Reserve Commercial, Plat Book 63, Pages 20-21, all recorded in the Official Records of Seminole County, Florida, to the Southerly most point of said River Oaks Reserve Commercial. Thence continue Southeasterly along said Northerly Right of Way of CR 419 to the East line of the NW 'A of the NE 1/4 of Sec 24, Twp 215, Rng 31 E. Thence departing said Right of Way, run Northerly along said East line of the NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of Section 24 to the NE Comer of the NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of said Section 24. Thence, continue Northerly along the East line of the SW 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of Sec 13, Twp 215, Rng 31 E a distance of 1320 feet more or less to the Southeasterly Right of Way of Willingham Road as recorded in Plat Book 6, Page 10 of the Official Records of Seminole County, Florida. Thence, Northeasterly along said Right of Way to the East Line of said Section 13. Thence, Southerly along the East line of said Section 13 a distance of 660 feet plus or minus to the South line of the North '/s of the NW 1/4 of the SW '/4 of Sec 18, Twp 215, Rng 32E. Thence, run Easterly along said South line to the SE Comer of the NE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of said Section 18, said point being on the South line of Willingham Acres (an unrecorded subdivision). t)TM L4W uU ora. MM44, IZVWAM Thence, continue Easterly along the South line of the North '/a of the NE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of said Section 18 to the East line of the SW 1/4 of Section 18. Thence run Northerly along said East line to the Southerly Right of Way of said Willingham Road. Thence, run Easterly along said Southerly Right of Way of Willingham Road to the NW Comer of Sanctuary Phase 1, Village 4, as recorded in Plat Book 58, Pages 85-90 of the Official Records of Seminole County, Florida. Thence, continue Easterly along the Northerly line of the subdivision to the NE Comer of said subdivision, also being the NW Corner of Sanctuary Phase 2, Villages 7 and 8, as recorded in Plat Book 63, Pages 70-83 of the Official Records of Seminole County, Florida. Thence, continue Easterly along the Northerly line of said Phase 2, Villages 7 and 8, to its NE Comer. Thence, run SOO-59-27E along the Easterly boundary of said subdivision and Westerly Right of Way of said Willingham Road 1246.29 feet. Thence, departing said Right of Way, continue along said subdivision boundary the following courses: S89 -13-27W a distance of 459.52 feet; SO4-03-44E a distance of 500.82 feet; S89 -13-27W a distance of 1524.20 feet; SOO-58-45E a distance of 855.08 feet to the Southern most Comer of Sanctuary Phase 2, Villages 7 & 8, also being the NE Comer of Sanctuary Phase 2, Village 10 as recorded in Plat Book 63, Page 35-42 of the Official Records of Seminole County, Florida. Thence, continue along said boundary of Phase 2, Village 10 the following courses: SOO-26-46E a distance of 1328.77 feet; S89 -14-36W a distance of 1324.20 feet; SOO-19-28E a distance of 700.89 feet to the southern most Comer of said Phase 2, Village 10. Thence, departing said subdivision boundary, run Easterly along the North line of the West 165.00 feet of the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Sec 20, Twp 21S, Rge 32E a distance of 165.00 feet. Thence, Southerly along the East line of the West 165.00 feet of the SW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Sec 20, Twp 21S, Rge 32E to the Southerly Right of Way of County Road 419. Thence, run Northwesterly along said Right of Way to the East line of the West 7/8 of the East 1/2 of Sec 19, Twp 21S, Rng 32E. Thence, departing said Right of Way, run Southerly along said East line to the NE Corner of the West'/z of the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of said Section 19. Thence, run N85 -51-30E along the South line of Lake Eva Estates (an unrecorded subdivision) a distance of 2000.93 feet to the SE Comer of said Lake Eva Estates. Thence, run N12 -25-35W along the East boundary of Lake Eva Estates a distance of 595.53 feet. Thence, departing said subdivision boundary, continue N12 -25-35W a distance of 1080 feet more or less to the Southerly Right of Way of CR 419. Thence, run Southeasterly along said Right of Way to the West line of the Easy/: of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/. of the SE 1/4 of Sec 20, Twp 21 S, Rge 32E. Thence, run Southerly on said West line to the South line of the East 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the SE 1/4. Thence run Easterly on said South line to the West boundary of Townsite of North Chuluota as recorded in Plat Book 2, Pages 54-58 of the Official Records of Seminole County, Florida. Thence, run Northerly on said West boundary to the NW Comer of said North Chuluota. Thence, run Easterly along the Northerly boundary of said North Chuluota to its intersection with the Southerly extension of the West line of Lake Lenelle Woods as recorded in Plat Book 37, Pages 67-69 of the Official Records of Seminole County, Florida; Thence run N00'00'21 "W to the SW comer of said Lake Lenelle Woods. Thence, run along the boundary of said Lake Lenelle Woods the following courses: NOO-00-21 W a distance of 1131.60 feet; S89 -50-55E a distance of 143.67 feet; N00-00-21 W a distance of 606.40 feet; N89 -50-55W a distance of 593.67 feet; NOD -00-21W a distance of 399.90 feet; S89 -51-06W a distance of 450.00 feet; N00- 00 -21W a distance of 483.00 feet; N89 -51-06E a distance of 450.00 feet:; N89 -51-06E a distance of 936.41 feet Thence continue N89 -51-06E on an extension of said subdivision boundary, across Jacob's Trail Right of Way, a distance of 100.00 feet to a point on the West boundary of Osprey Lakes Phase 1 as recorded in Plat Book 60, Pages 38-45 of the Official Records of Seminole County, Florida. Thence, run along the boundary of said Osprey Lakes Phase 1 the following courses: N89 -54 -OSE a distance of 25.00 feet; NOO-08-38E a distance of 383.95 feet; N54-30-OOE a distance of 2524.44 feet to the Northern most Corner of said Osprey Lakes Phase 1 said corner being the Northwesterly Comer of Osprey Lakes Phase 3 as recorded in Plat Book 62, Pages 4-6 of the Official Records of Seminole County, Florida. Thence, continue along the boundary of said Osprey Lakes Phase 3 the following courses: N54-30-OOE a distance of 184.63 feet; N90 -00-00E a distance of 721.00 feet; SOO-00-OOE a distance of 1,988.08 feet to the SE Corner of the SW 1/4 of Sec 16, Twp 21 S, Jb%,32E. rUTM MAD USE Ord. 2000-N,1ZOW 000 Thence, departing said boundary, run Easterly on the South line of said Section 16 to the Northeasterly Comer of Osprey Lakes Phase 2 as recorded in Plat Book 62, Pages 1-3 of the Official Records of Seminole County, Florida. Thence run S00 -00-49W along the Easterly boundary of said Osprey Lakes Phase 2 a distance of 1332.68 feet to the SE Corner of the NW 1/4 of the NE'/4 of Sec 21, Twp 21S, Rng 32E. Thence, run S88 -58- 07E along the South line of the NE'/4 of the NE 1/4 of said Section 21 a distance of 1302.25 feet to a point 25.00 feet West of the East line of the NE 1/4 of Sec 21, Twp 21S, Rng 32E. Thence run Southerly along a line parallel to and 25.00 feet West of said East line to the Easterly extension of the Northerly Right of Way of Brumley Road (being a 50' Right of Way). Thence Westerly along said Northerly Right of Way to the Southerly extension of the Easterly Right of Way of Avenue H. Thence, Southerly along said Easterly Right of Way a distance of 500 feet more or less to the Northwesterly Comer of Estates on Lake Mills as recorded in Plat Book 60, Pages 85-92 of the Official Records of Seminole County, Florida. Thence, continue along the westerly Boundary of said Estates of Lake Mills and the Easterly Right of Way of Avenue H the following courses: S03 -00-24E a distance of 165.41 feet; S00 -55-07E a distance of 314.50 feet; thru a curve concave to the Northwest an arc distance of 70.66 feet. Thence departing said Right of Way and continuing on said Estates on Lake Mills boundary the following courses: S00 -46-27E 155.97 feet; S01 -06-36E a distance of 727.01 feet; S00 -57-02E a distance of 709.22 feet; S01 -13-59E a distance of 73.56 feet; S01 -02-19E a distance of 1929.43 feet to the South line of the North 1/2 of Sec 28, Twp 21S, Rng 32E. Thence, run Westerly along said South line to the Easterly Right of Way line of SR 13 (per SRD Right of Way Map; also shown in the Townsite of North Chuluota, Plat Book 2, Pages 54-58). Thence, Southerly along said Easterly Right of Way to the South fine of the SW 1/4 of Sec 28, Twp 21 S, Rng 32E. Thence, run Westerly along the South line to the SW Comer of said Section. Thence, run Northerly along the West line of said Section 28 to the South boundary of Townsite of North Chuluota as recorded in Plat Book 2, Pages 54-58 of the Official Records of Seminole County, Florida. Theme, run West along said subdivision to the SW Corner of said Townsite of North Chuluota. Thence, run Northerly along the Westerly boundary of said Townsite of North Chuluota to the SW Corner of Lot 5, Block 54 of said Townsite of North Chuluota. Thence, run West a distance of 50.00 feet Thence run North to the Southeasterly shoreline of North Horseshoe Lake. Thence, run Easterly along said shoreline to a point on the Westerly boundary of said Townsite of North Chuluota. Thence, Northerly along said boundary to a point 100.00 feet South of the NE Corner of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NE "A of Sec 29, Twp 21S, Rng 32E. Thence, Westerly along a line 100 feet South of and parallel to the North line of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of said Section 29 to a point on the Westerly line of said -SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4. Thence, Southerly on said Westerly line to the SW Corner of said SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of the NE 1/4. Thence, Westerly along the North line of the SW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 of said Section 29 to the NW Comer of the SW 1/4 of the NE 1/4. Thence, Southerly along the Westerly line of the SW 1/4 of the NE 1/4 to the NE Comer of the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of said Section 29. Thence, Westerly on the North line of said SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of the SE '/4 of the NW 1/4 to the NW Comer of the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4. Thence, Southerly on the West line of the SE 1/4 of the SE 114 of the SE 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of said Section 29 to the North line of the SW 1/4 of said Section 29. Thence, Westerly on the North line of the SW 1/4 of said Section 29 to the NE Corner of the Westerly 22 acres of the NE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of said Section 29. Thence, Southerly along the Easterly line of the Westerly 22 acres of said NE 1/4 to the North line of the SE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of said Section 29. Thence, run Westerly along said North line to the NW Comer of the SE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of said Section 29. Thence, run Southerly along the West line of said SE '/4 to the SW Corner of the SE 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of said Section 29. A FUTURE LAND USE Ora. 2OW44,121b9/" Thence, run Westerly on the South line to the SW Comer of said Section 29. Thence, continue Westerly on the South line of Sec 30, Twp 21S, Rng 32E a distance of 3,400 feet pits or minus to the thread of the Econlockhatchee River. Thence, run Southerly along the thread of said river to the South line of Sec 31, Twp 21 S, Rng 32E, also being the Southern most boundary of Seminole County. Thence run along the boundary of Seminole County (per Florida Statutes Chapter 6511, No. 91, the "Creation of Seminole County") the following courses: Easterly along said Southern most boundary, also being the Southerly line of Twp 21S, Rng 32E and Twp 21S, Rng 33E, to the thread of the St. John's River and the Easterly most point of Seminole County, located within Sec 35, Twp 21 S, Rng 33E; Northwesterly along the thread of said river, also being the Eastern boundary of Seminole County, to and through Lake Harney, returning to the thread of the St. John's River; continue Northwesterly and then Southwesterly along the thread of said river, being the Eastern and Northern boundary of Seminole County, to the Point of Beginning of the Rural Boundary Description. LESS the following areas within the Rural Boundary located within the city limits of Winter Springs, further described as: • SEC 03 TWP 21 S RGE 31 E NW 1/4 OF NW 1/4 (LESS S 340 FT OF E 660 FT) • SEC 03 TWP 21 S RGE 31 E W 1/2 OF SW 1/4 OF NW'h • SEC 03 TWP 21 S RGE 31 E N 2/3 OF S 3/4 OF E 1/2 OF SW 1/4 OF NW'/. (LESS S 100 FT OF E264 FT) • LOT 19, BLACK HAMMOCK, PB 1 PG 31 & R/W ADJ ON N & W Also LESS the following areas within the Rural Boundary located within the city limits of Oviedo, further described as: • PT OF LOTS 25 & 30 DESC AS BEG NW COR LOT 25 RUN E 608.44 FT S 1979.42 FT W 608.15 FT N 1980.3 FT TO BEG, LEES IOWA CITY, PB 7 PG 35 • SEC 13 TWP 215 RGE 31 E THAT PART OF N 1/2 OF NE 1/4 LYING W OF A LINE 550 FT W OF SHORE LI ECONLOCKHATCHEE CREEK • SEC 13 TWP 21 S RGE 31 E THAT PART OF S 3/4 LYING W OF A UNE 550 FT W OF SHORE LI ECONLOCKHATCHEE CREEK & E OF WLY R/W LINE OF LOCKWOOD RD & NELY OF CR 419 (LESS RIVER OAKS RESERVE COMMERCIAL, PS 63 PGS 20 & 21) • RIVER OAKS RESERVE COMMERCIAL, PB 63 PGS 20 & 21 • LOT 1, LOCKWOOD BLVD COMPLEX, PB 48 PG 17 & EVANS ST R/W ADJ ON S • SEC 13 TWP 21 S RGE 31 E THAT PART OF S 3/4 LYING W OF WLY R/W LINE OF LOCKWOOD RD & NELY OF CR 419 (charter tegad_ dod "HIM wuo uM ora. =&",1%%*n s CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE • Ten-year Flood Plain - Be located above the 10 -year flood elevation. No alteration shall be allowed within the 10 -year flood line. (Page -M- 5) Soil Suitability - Be located in soils that are suitable for retention - detention ponds. Soils which have been identified by the Soil Conservation Service as giving a very low potential for septic tank absorption fields shall be considered as unsuitable for retention - detention ponds. Policy 4-6.1.4 4-4.4:4: Coordinate with Other Recharge Protection Programs. The City wiI4, in concert with local, State, and federal agencies, will achieve regional aquifer recharge protection through the following PeGsies-aad Gbjest+ve: • Implement Drainage Policy Concerning Maximizing Recharge o.e„e.,+R_ Irnh-al-a n -e- to the; Ecosystems (Policy 4-63-1.2); • Coordinate Issues Surrounding Aquifer Recharge (013j€CTIV€ 4f24.1); • Protect Surficial Aquifer Recharge Areas (Peliey4-64.1-.4 • Deep Aquifer Water Sensewation (Peliey4-641.2); and • Retain Run-off to Maximize Recharge (Pelisy 4-64�4-ffi Policy 4-6.1.5 4-4.15: Enforcemept Water Quality Standards for New Development. New development shall be coordinated with appropriated State agencies to ensure that State water quality standards are met. and dispesal faGi1°+,es shall he .wed-te-meet the design- and -perfermanee d'; established On GhapteF 1:7 SeGfien 17 F.A.G., with tF9atFA(9Rt Of the fiMt iRGh Of FUR 94 en site to meet wateF quality standaFds reqUiFed by GhapteF 17 3, SeGtiel; 1:7 3-95;F.A.G. Stormwater discharge facilities shall be designed so as not to degrade the receiving water body below the minimum conditions necessary to ensure the suitability of water for the designated use of its classification as. es+.,hrshed iR Ghapter 1:7 3, F.A.G. 44e Policy 4-6.1.6 4-4.16: Coordinate Land Use and Development Activity to Protect Wellfields Pretestiea. The City shall regulate land development activities in order to protect potable water from contamination by establishing protective zones around municipal potable water wells and prohibiting certain land uses and activities within the zones which have the potential to contaminate groundwater. No new development shall be allowed within a 200 foot radius of any proposed wellhead. In addition, no land uses which store, handle, or generate hazardous materials or wastes shall be located within the 10 year horizontal capture zones of the Upper Floridan aquifer for each wellhead. The location of the wellfield protection zones shall be based on analysis of the most current hydrological data and may be amended from time to time as updated information becomes available. 4-28 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN standing water. INFRASTRUCTURE • Design Without Positive Outfall. Developments without a positive outfall for discharge shall retain all runoff resulting from the design storm as computed for the developed condition. Design Based on Soils. The design of stormwater management facilities shall be based upon soil conditions as set forth in the Soil Survey of Seminole County, Florida and any supplements thereof as prepared by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. In areas where the soils are poorly drained or experience a high groundwater table, such facilities shall be designed for detention with filtration. • Retention - Retention ponds shall be designed to retain the difference in runoff volume between pre- and post -development or the pollution abatement volume, whichever is greater. Exfiltration - Exfiltration systems shall be designed to store and exfiltrate over the duration of the storm the difference in runoff volume between pre- and post -development or the pollution abatement volume, whichever is greater. 2. GFiteFia-fGF Wetlands, Flood -prone Areas, and Effective Aquifer Recharge Areas. These regulations shall apply to any use or alteration of a parcel which contains environmentally sensitive lands within the corporate limits of the City of Sanford. Environmentally sensitive lands includes wetlands, soils with limited potential for certain manmade activities, flood -prone areas and areas with effective groundwater aquifer recharge characteristics. • Wetland Design and Performance Criteria: Uses and activities in wetlands shall comply with the following design and performance criteria: Retain Natural Drainage Characteristics - Natural surface water patterns shall be maintained. Proposed drainage conditions shall approximate existing drainage conditions. The velocity of water flowing through wetlands shall remain approximately the same before and after development. (Page -M 4) • Minimize Alteration or Modification - No land use or development shall be permitted that would result in the elimination of any beneficial function of a wetland. If permitted, any alteration or modification of wetlands shall be the minimum necessary to conduct the use or activity. (Page -M 4) 3. Flood -Prone Area Design and Performance-SfiteFia. Uses and activities in flood - prone areas shall comply with the following design and performance criteria: • Retention - Detention Facilities - Retention- detention ponds proposed to be located in flood -prone areas shall: 4-27 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE The City has identified 16 1;04deen potential recharge sites which can be used for groundwater recharge in order to offset groundwater withdrawal. Policy 4-6.1.2 4-442: Protect Deep Aquifer Water Resources Consewatien. I-eMeF the The City shall coordinate with the SJRWMD St. jehRr, RiVeF WateF Management Distrigt and other applicable regulatory agencies to in identifying free flowing deep aquifer wells and in require protective measures that include, but are not limited to, capping, plugging, or installing regulatory devices which control the discharge of water from the deep aquifer. Policy 4-6.1.3 4-4.1 2: Retain Run-off to Maximize Recharge. The City shall require stormwater management techniques for FegUiFing retention of stormwater run-off to maximize groundwater recharge. In order to achieve such stormwater retention, the City shall require that the criteria for the following water retention, settling structures, and flow attenuation devices are met. 1. Sdteraafef Drainage Easements, and Site Preparation or Excavation • Maintain Existing Surface Drainage. Site alteration shall not adversely affect existing surface water flow pattern. Drainage subbasin boundaries shall be maintained unless it is determined to be in the public interest to allow such change in established drainage patterns. • Maximize Recharge. Parcels shall be developed to maximize the amount of natural rainfall which is infiltrated into the soil and to minimize direct overland runoff into adjoining streets and watercourses. Storm water runoff from roofs and other impervious surfaces shall be diverted into swales or terraces on the lot when possible. • Divert Overland Flow. Runoff from impervious areas shall be diverted using one of the following techniques before entering a receiving water body: • The runoff shall be diverted so as to flow over vegetated areas. • The runoff shall be diverted to a detention pond with the ability to attenuate peak outflows to pre -development rates and to provide filtration for the pollution volume. • Design Dry Retention Ponds. Unless retention ponds are approved as a water feature or other similar special facility, such retention -detention facilities shall be designed to insure dry bottom within seventy-two (72) hours after the design storm event. Dry bottom shall mean the absence of 4-26 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE The City shall 111-erder to maintain acid-pefpetuate the functions of these natural groundwater aquifers the-Gityshall and regulate development that w#iGh may presents a threat to the natural aquifer recharge process agUlfeF-FesfaF@e. New development proposed within aquifer recharge areas shall be coordinated with the St-. JRWMD) in order to ensure maintenance of aquifer recharge area functions. During the development review process the City shall ensure that the functions of the City's most effective natural groundwater recharge areas are protected by: • Conserving open space • Prohibiting uses within recharge areas which generate or otherwise require on site use of hazardous materials • Preserving predevelopment soil types, grade elevations, drainage rates, and water levels • Minimizing reduction of recharge to the surficial aquifer Policy 4-6.1.1 4-4:x:1: Protect Surficial Aquifer Recharge Areas. The City shall assist with iri protecting groundwater from point and non -point pollution sources by including the St. Johns River Water Management District in the review of development plans located within areas designated as "most effective" recharge areas. This review process shall ensure conservation and efficient use of water as it travels through groundwater systems. The City shall regulate new development to ensure the maintenance of adequate supplies of high quality groundwater. The City shall assist the State and SJRWMD St 'AhR-q Riy in managing water quality by involving appropriate State agencies and the SJRWMD in review of water quality management issues, including the discharge of inadequately treated wastewater and poor quality stormwater into public water bodies. The City shall require and enforce standards which minimize impervious surface coverage in the City's "most effective recharge areas"_ as FefeFensed in QbjeGtwyA 4 4 1 The City shall further enhance the natural groundwater aquifer recharge function in the City's most effective recharge areas through the City's water reuse system. The Gity has adepted the „ 4-25 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE • Outfall Criteria • Retention Ponds • Construction Requirements • Underdrains • Roadway Drainage Design • Storm Sewer Design Criteria • Culvert Design Criteria • Drainage Pipes and Structures • Open Storm Drainage Systems • Drainage Structure Material Specifications • Easements Objective 4-5.2 4-2.1 : Reconcile Existing Stormwater Management BFainW Deficiencies. The City shall continue to reconcile deficiencies in the drainage system through the implementation of identified capital improvements projects, and by maintaining the stormwater utility district as a dedicated funding source for drainage improvements. The City shall continue to comply with the standards for discharge authorized by EPA permit No. FLS 000038 or its successor under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. Policy 4-5.2.1 4-3 6: Continue GGRURUiRg Stormwater Management System Inspection and Maintenance: data ;s, the As 1pak -9f the tThe City shall ensure that major drainage systems are inspected and receive required maintenance on at least an annual basis. GOAL 4-6 4-4: PROTECT FUNCTIONS OF GROUNDWATER AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS FUNCTION. THE FUNCTIONS OF NATURAL GROUNDWATER AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS WITHIN THE CITY SHALL BE PROTECTED AND MAINTAINED. Objective 4-6.1 4-4.4: Coordinate issues Surrounding Aquifer Recharge Issues. T4;e getable water-. 7, "Land Use Element Data, !RVenteFy, and Analysis" PF9yide wital -A.r4P-;;,; f9F FeGeaVeng 4-24 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE Drainage system design shall insure that sediment from runoff will not enter such natural drainageways. • Regulate Runoff Rates and Volumes ef-Pme- Permitted rates and volumes of stormwater runoff, whether discharged into natural or artificial watercourses, shall meet existing water quality standards at the first downstream receiving water body for which such standards have been established. • Prevent Adverse Impact - Site alteration shall not cause siltation of wetlands, pollution of downstream wetlands or reduce the natural retention or filtering capabilities of wetlands. • Maximize Recharge - The parcel shall be developed to maximize the amount of natural rainfall which is infiltrated into the soil and to minimize direct overland runoff into adjoining streets and watercourses. Stormwater runoff from roofs and other impervious surfaces shall be diverted into swales or terraces on the lot when possible. • Divert Overland Flow - To the extent feasible runoff from impervious areas shall be diverted so as to flow ever vegetated areas prior to flowing into gutters, stormdrains and retention areas. • Provide Drainage Easements, General - Where necessary and as otherwise prescribed or required in this ordinance, easements for drainage facilities, as approved by the Administrative Official, shall be provided. • Provide Off-site Easements - Off-site easements necessary to the function of the drainage system shall be provided. • Show Easements on Plans - Easements for drainage facilities must be shown on required plans and approved by the City. • LOS Standards for Facilities and Pollution Abatement {CFess-refeF8 • Retention of the First Half Inch of Runoff • Level of Service Standards for Water Quality • Provide Compatible Stormwater Management Facilities with Soils - The design of stormwater management facilities shall be designed in a manner compatible with soil conditions as set forth in the Soil Survey of Seminole County, Florida and supplements thereof as prepared by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. In areas where the soils are poorly drained or experience a high groundwater table, such facilities shall be designed for detention with filtration. • Adopt Design Specifications for Stormwater Facilities - The City shall adopt specifications for the following stormwater management facilities and easements consistent with best management principles and practices: 4-23 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE Developments. The City shall protect natural resources by requiring that all new development comply with the following pelisies-and criteria: • preserve the natural function of floodplains and floodprone areas and maintain natural topography and hydrological functions of floodplains (5 1.3.1, 5 1.24); • maximize aquifer recharge areas'; • minimize dredge and fill operations requiring removal of natural vegetation (6 4.7.4); and • protect wetlands from untreated runoff In addition, the City shall require that all new development be effectively integrated into the City's existing stormwater management system. For instance, new development shall neither overload existing natural or man-made conveyance systems nor adversely impact water quality. New development shall comply with the following criteria: OR e.rd-eF to anhieve these-eNesffves. • Maintain Predevelopment Conditions - In general, neither the rate nor the quantity of stormwater runoff shall be increased. • Provide Necessary Facilities - All site alteration activities shall provide for such water retention and settling structures and flow -attenuation devices as may be necessary to insure that the foregoing standards and requirements are met. • Favor Nonstructural Approach Prod - When possible, the nonstructural approach shall be used to meet both surface water quantity and quality requirements. • Provide Stand -Alone System - The drainage system for each phase of a development shall meet the requirements of these regulations. Such systems shall be functionally independent of planned but unbuilt phases of the development project in question. • Accommodate Upstream Runoff - The drainage system for each development shall be sized to accommodate existing upstream runoff. • Maintain Existing Surface Drainage - Site alteration shall not adversely affect existing surface water flow pattern. Drainage subbasin boundaries shall be maintained. • Prohibit Deep Ditches PFGhibited - Open drainageways with slopes of greater than three to one (3:1) shall be prohibited. • Permit Natural Drainage ways and Watercourses - Developments that contain an existing natural drainage way or watercourse, related floodplain and adjacent vegetation shall maintain and incorporate such features into the project design. 4-22 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE both land and water management programs and practices that whinh limit retard runoff and enhance percolation in order to increase the quantity and protect the quality of ground- water. Land use control , mAGluding Site plan FegulatieRs-shall be used to accomplish this program. The programs shall be wally updated based on improved knowledge of problems, issues, and best management practices. Policy 4-5.1.5 4-313: Pursue the Development of Adequate Off -Site Surface Water Management Facilities. The City shall manage stormwater based on watershed management plans. Implementing strategies shall provide a basis for evaluating the performance of existing off-site drainage facilities, identifying existing and potential future problems or issues, and funding necessary structural and non-structural system improvements for effective surface water management. Existing structures which cause adverse impacts to water resources or sensitive natural resources shall be identified and corrective measures shall be coordinated with appropriate entities. No new development shall be allowed which overloads existing off-site facilities or unduly increases the potential for flooding. Policy 4-5.1-4 3-1-5: Implementing Stormwater Management Plan. The City has commissioned a fifty thousand (50,000) dollar engineered drainage study designed to provide a basis for establishing a stormwater utility. The study shall examine assessment alternatives for achieving revenues required for operation and maintenance of stormwater infrastructure. The City shall establish a program and funding mechanisms necessary to identify needed drainage improvements within the Cloud Branch/Mill Creek basins. As stated in the drainage system data inventory and analysis, the Cloud Branch/Mill Creek basins The study shall address, but shall not necessarily be limited to: a. Plans for protecting natural drainage corridors and other natural drainage features, including acquiring necessary drainage easements; b. Funding mechanisms necessary for achieving any needed future drainage improvements within the Lake Monroe Sub -Basin and other sub -basins; C. Organizational structure and funding mechanisms for carrying out necessary operation and maintenance programs; d. Cleaning and reshaping approximately 33,000 linear feet of open drainageway in the Mill Creek basin and 11,000 linear feet in the Cloud Branch basin; e. Upgrading and adding several new road crossings in both basins; Adding three retention/detention ponds in the Mill Creek basin and two ponds in the Cloud Branch basin to attenuate peak flow rates and lesson flooding in upstream areas; and g. Adding piping to carry water from Mill Creek and Cloud Branch more efficiently. Policy 4-5.1.7 4-214: Continue to Manage Stormwater DFaleage Impacts of New 4-21 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE Drainage S stem bv Facili Type Facility Type Event LOS Standard/Storm Retention/Detention for parcels with positive 25 -Year. 24 -Hour outfall Retention for parcels without positive outfall 25 -Year, 96 -Hour Closed drainage for urban streets with piped 10 -Year, 24 -Hour draina e Open drainage for rural streets with swales 10 -Year, 24 -Hour Canals, ditches, culverts, and other off -the- 25 -Year, 24 -Hour remise facilities Bridges and ma'or highway crossings 100 -Year 24 -Hour (1) The design frequency may be increased if deemed necessary by the Administrative Official. (2) Mill Creek/Cloud Branch basins shall have a 25 -year, 6 -hour retention/detention for parcels with positive outfall since these basins are currently incorporate significantly older drainage systems. For purposes of designing practical improvements to such older systems, the City shall adopt a 25 -year, 6 -hour storm event for the period 1991-1995. The City's long term objective for redesigning these older drainage system shall be the 25 -year, 24- hour storm event for the period 1996-2005. LOS Standard for Water Quality and Pollution Abatement: Pollution Abatement. The City shall maintain the LOS standards included in the City's current Land Development Regulations, Schedule O, Section 2.1 Retention -Detention Facilities, page 0-3, which are as follows: Retention of the first half-inch runoff - Provide on-site retention or detention with filtration for the first one-half inch of runoff or the runoff from the first one inch of rainfall, whichever is greater. Parcels greater than 100 acres shall retain runoff from the first one inch of rainfall. Water Quality LOS: • All storm water treatment and disposal facilities shall meet design and performance standards required by the City. Treatment of the first inch of run-off on-site to meet water quality standards required by the City. Stormwater discharge facilities must be designed so as not to degrade the receiving water body below the minimum conditions necessary to assure the suitability of water for the designated use of its classification. Where a conflict exists between two or more LOS standards, the more restrictive shall be enforced. Policy 4-5.1.4 4-3-1 2: Ensure the Quality and Quantity of Stormwater. PraWde €sesystems The City's surface water management program shall be designed-te protect and preserve the hydrological and ecological functions of the-Sity's water resources while permitting the most favorable beneficial uses to occur. The City Of 2:449rd shall promote 4-20 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE shall be located between the ordinary high water elevation and the ene-hunded000} year elevation. Fill shall be placed below the tea4103 year flood elevation and in no case shall fill in the floodplain extend beyond ene hundFW41003 feet beyond the original floodline. Reshaping the floodplain shall not create a rise in flood elevation, reduce flood storage capabilities, increase flood flow velocities, or reduce flood flow capacity. Predevelopment conditions maintenance. In general, neither the rate nor the quantity of stormwater runoff shall be increased. All site alteration activities shall provide for such water retention, settling structures, and flow -attenuation devices as may be necessary to ensure that level of service standards are met. Whenever possible, the nonstructural approach shall be used to meet both surface quantity and quality requirements. Drainage systems for each development shall be sized to accommodate existing upstream runoff. Site alternations shall not adversely affect the existing surface water flow pattern. Drainage sub -basin boundaries shall be maintained. • PFeteeting—Natural drainageways and watercourses protection. Developments that contain an existing natural drainage way or watercourse, related floodplain and adjacent vegetation shall maintain and incorporate such features into the project design. Drainage system design shall ensure that sediment from runoff will not enter the natural drainage way. • Maintain Existing surface drainage maintenance and t adverse impacts prevention. Site alteration shall not cause siltation of wetlands, pollution of downstream wetlands, or reduce the natural retention or filtering capabilities of wetlands. Maximize recharge. Sites shall be developed to maximize the amount of natural rainfall which is infiltrated into the soil and to minimize direct overland runoff into adjoining streets and watercourses. Stormwater runoff from roofs and other impervious surfaces shall be diverted into swales or terraces on the site when possible. To the extent feasible, runoff from impervious areas shall be diverted so as to flow over vegetative areas prior to flowing into gutters, storm drains, and retention areas. Easements for drainage facilities must be shown on required plans. In addition, the City shall prohibit land use activities which generate or use such hazardous substances as oil, gasoline, and other toxic substances on sites which are designated as the City's "most effective" recharge areas. These areas are delineated on the water resources map in the land use data inventory and analysis. Policy 4-5.1.2 4 3.4.4: Coordinate Watershed Management Plans and Policies with Appropriate Public Agencies. €nswe Coordinate of watershed management plans and policies, with appropriate local, regional, state and federal agencies, including Seminole County, St. Johns River Water Management District, East Central Florida Regional Planning Council, the State Department of Environmental Regulation, the Agricultural Extension Service, the United States Army Corps of Engineers, and other appropriate agencies. Policy 4-5.1.3: Maintain Stormwater LOS Standard. The City hereby establishes the following LOS standards for stormwater quantity and quality 4-19 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE Objective 4-5.1 4-3a: Protect Natural Drainage Features. The City shall regulate land development to ensure that the natural functions of wetlands, river basins, lakes and ponds, natural drainage corridors, and floodplains are maintained and perpetuated. The City of Sanfefd shall require that all new development shall be required to submit site plans which incorporate management techniques for preserving the functions of natural drainage features identified ab . The site plan review process shall incorporate performance standards which ensure that techniques applied by private developers are designed to achieve this objective. The City shall incorporate LOS level of seFy standards cited herein. The City shall include a concurrency management program which ensures that all new development will construct requisite drainage improvements which meet or exceed the adopted LOS levelef c6err'ive standards prior to the impacts of development. Policy 4-5.1.1 4-314: Coordinate Ceerdonatmn—and Implement ImplemeRtieg DFainage Stormwater Managment Policy. The City shall enforce the stormwater management and flood prevention requirements. As stipulated On QbjeGthre 4 1.1 nhnve-1 €er iastanGe-tThe City will shall require: • Wetland protection. Protect existing wetlands from the impacts of development. Wetlands shall continue to be identified based on hydric soils and wetland vegetative species. Wetland buffers. Wetland buffers of MeRty five (25) -feet in width shall be provided adjacent to wetlands that are five (a) acres or less; a wetland buffer of fFfty(50) feet in width shall be provided adjacent to wetlands that are greater than five (6) -acres. The area of wetlands in question shall include all contiguous wetlands on the site and adjacent to the site. The width of the wetland buffer shall be measured and provided parallel to the wetland buffer in question. Floodplain protection. New development shall not reduce the storage capacity of the floodplain or limit the flow capacity of the floodway. Retention and detention facilities shall comply with level of service criteria and no alterations shall be allowed within the tee -{10) year floodline. Soils which have been identified by the Soil Conservation Service as having a very low potential for septic tank absorption fields shall be considered unsuitable for retention -detention ponds. Traversing works in a floodplain shall not create a net reduction in either flood flow or flood storage capabilities immediately upstream or downstream of the structure. • Compensatory storage. Reshaping and filling within floodprone areas shall be balanced by providing an equal volume of compensatory storage. Such compensation 4-18 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE Establish easily accessible opportunities for recycling subcenters and the enhancement of public awareness; DraftiAg policy for appropriate regulatory measures governing solid waste and hazardous waste including identification of long term operating costs and capital improvement needs associated with various policy options. err�rr. ■ : _ .. M • ARM J. Policy 4-4.1.2: Maintain Solid Waste LOS Standard. The City hereby adopts the Seminole County solid waste LOS standards and will continue to coordinate with the County to recalculate the LOS standards when needed. GOAL 4-5 4-3: PROVIDE ADEQUATE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES. DRAINAGE. PROVIDE ADEQUATE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT DRAINAGE IN ORDER TO PROTECT AGAINST FLOOD CONDITIONS AND PREVENT DEGRADATION OF QUALITY OF RECEIVING WATERS AND ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE NATURAL RESOURCES. 4-17 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE stated-peliry. The City will continue to bethe -collectkw e# -household refuse within wily residential eeighb9F#eeds�# the-Slty-areas. The City shall will coordinate with Seminole County to ensure that the County provided facilities will continue to maintain sufficient capacity to accommodate solid Policy 4-4.1.1 4-2 1h : Maximize Existing System . The City shall coordinate with Seminole County to achieve improvements in hazardous and solid waste collection and disposal- and continue to reduce lR additien, in solid waste volumes by 1994. In addition. Tthe City shall cooperate with the County effisials and other appropriate agencies to increase recycling programs and address: eneFatiene. 11+her speGifln in whkh rh;i" he ;;ddrec.c er! innl, Erle• • Enhance solid waste collection and transfer operations; • Curb illegal dumping of solid waste as well as disposal activities which adversely impact natural systems; • PFepaFing a stFategy rsempliaRt with 1988 State Selid Waste Management legiSlati9A welumes X9941 4-16 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE mandated standards for inspections, operation, and maintenance of on-site wastewater treatment systems. Policy 4-3.2.1 4-124: Condition else --e# On -Site WastewateF Sanitary Sewer Treatment Systems Use. "Re of a On-site wastewater treatment systems use shall be limited to the following conditions: a. Existing septic tank and package treatment plants may remain in service until such time as the City of Sanford public wastewater system is made available. b. Use of private water septic tank systems for new development shall be restricted to sites which are inaccessible to the City's wastewater service system. However no such septic system shall be allowed without prior approval of Utilities Director. No construction or alteration of a septic tank shall be permitted without approval by the Seminole County Environmental Health Services Unit of all related plans and specifications governing the type, location, capacity, design, and layout. All such specifications shall comply with applicable State, County or City regulations. c. When4he City of SaRferd-polis wastewater systems are temporarily unavailable, the City shall consider approving use of an interim treatment plant. Use of package treatment plants shall comply with applicable laws governing the location, use, and design of the facility. Package treatment plants shall be designed in a manner which facilitates future connection and integration with the City public wastewater system. Policy 4-3.2.2 4 1 2 4: Comply with On -Site Wastewatff Sanitary SewerTreatment and Water Quality Regulations. The City shall coordinate with appropriate federal, State, and County agencies and amend local ordinances as may be required to assure that issuance of permits for replacement or expansion of existing on-site wastewater treatment systems is conditioned upon compliance with current regulatory requirements and water quality standards. Policy 4-3.2.3 4-122: Coordinate with the Seminole County Public Health Unit. The City shall require that all proposed development which that impacts an existing septic tank or generates need for a new septic tank be required to provide evidence of approval by the Seminole County Public Health Unit prior to receiving a development order or permit from the City. Any such approval by the City shall be conditioned upon the applicant's compliance with Seminole County requirements for ongoing facility maintenance and operation. GOAL 4-4 4-6: PROVIDE SOLID WASTE COLLECTION AND DISPOSAL. PROVIDE SOLID WASTE COLLECTION ON A REGULAR BASIS IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN THE APPEARANCE OF THE CITY AND PROTECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH. Objective 4-4.1 4-21h: Provide Adequate Solid Waste Service. The Gity has net 4-15 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE CALCULATED LEVEL OF SERVICE FOR THE SYSTEM. Objective 4-3.1 4-2 In- Reconcile Existing WastewateF Sanitary Sewer System Deficiencies. ;.A;­RAfi*A;AtAr dRtR and analysis. , The City shall ensure that futwe deficiencies in public wastewater facilities are corrected I Nat the fAll and will amend the Plan to provide for the correction. Policy 4-3.1.1 4-133: Enforce Conditions Governing Development Orders or Permits. Issuance of development orders or permits shall be conditioned upon demon- stration of compliance with applicable federal, State, and local permit requirements for on- site wastewater treatment systems. The City shall regulate the location, timing, and scale of development in order to assure that new development shall be effectively served by wastewater services. The City shall discourage the proliferation of package treatment plants.. and discourage use of septic tanks and wastewater drain fields in areas unsuited for their adaptation. System reviews shall be coordinated with the State Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) in order to promote best management practices and compliance with relevant State permitting procedures. Similady,the Gity--shall dissewage e*tensive ase of septi^ •aRkr% and adaptation. Policy 4-3.1.2: Maintain Sanitary Sewer LOS Standard. The City's wastewater system shall provide a LOS standard of 132 gallons per person per day. Objective 4-3.2 4-1 3: Enforce PFGGedUFes Standards For On -Site aAl�as�tew M Sanitary Sewer Treatment Systems. The City shall assist in assuring implementation of State regulations imposing mandated standards for inspections, operation, and maintenance of on-site wastewater treatment systems. The City shall require that residents connect to the public wastewater system where available. Offiere PUbIiG When wastewater facilities are not available, the City shall enforce the following design, collection performance, and disposal criteria for wastewater facilities: • Design flows • Pump selection • Wet well design • Emergency pump connections • Pump motors and pump controls • Submersible pump facilities • Landscaping and buffer requirements • Testing procedures The City shall assist iR asswFiRg 9FAPIeFAARtAtiQR e enforce State regulations imposing 4-14 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE ;-;R altPeFRaRthge wateF supply system utiliaiRg the 19west quality awailable water A--rh as Where available development must connect to the City's reclaimed water system. Where not available development shall install an irrigation system utilizing the lowest quality water available. Policy 4-2.4.4 4-4:22: Implement Emergency Conservation of Water Sources. The City shall comply with the SJRWMD) emergency potable water conservation policies by implementing emergency water conservation measures based on the SJRWMD Chapter 40C-21 The Water Shortage Plan, F.A.C., for management of the region's water resources through the following actions: • The City shall increase communication with the District regarding hydrologic conditions during a water shortage warning declared by the District pursuant to Rule 40C-21.231, F.A.C.; • The City shall provide data as requested by the District in anticipation of and during a declared water shortage or water shortage emergency pursuant to Rule 40C - 21.401(1)&(2)(d), F.A.C.; • Local law enforcement officials must communicate with the District concerning any water emergency declaration or change of restrictions in effect within the City's areas of responsibility pursuant to Rule 40C-21.391(4), F.A.C.; • The City shall adopt ordinances which substantially incorporate the provisions of the Chapter 40C-21, Water Shortage Plan and which provide for local enforcement as authorized and encouraged by Rule 40C-21.421(1), F.A.C.; • The City's water utility shall institute voluntary conservation measures such as improving and accelerating leak detection surveys and repair programs, installing and calibrating meters, and stabilizing and equalizing system pressures pursuant to Rule 40C-21.631(l)(c), F.A.C.; When a critical water shortage is declared by the District, the initial pressure of City's water utility will be reduced by at least 15% where it is operationally feasible to do so. Prior to the reduction of pressure, the utility will notify the appropriate firefighting agencies and make arrangements for direct communication when additional pressure is required pursuant to Rule 40C -21.651(1)(c)1, F.A.C. GOAL 4-3 4-2: PROVIDE ADEQUATE OF SANITARY SEWER FACILITIES. PROVIDE A LEVEL OF SANITARY SEWER TREATMENT THAT MEETS THE ESTABLISHED WATER QUALITY BASED EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS ESTABLISHED BY THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND THE 4-13 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE replacement Capital Projects Program, regular calibration of water facility master meters, meter testing, repair and replacement programs The City's employee awareness and customer education program concerning water conservation includes= brochure mailouts, City Hall brochure rack Bill Backer messages 8 times a year, Speakers bureau, Florida Friendly/ drought tolerant demonstration projects, toilet rebate, automatic meter reading/data logging, and water wise education events. Policy 4-2.4.2: Require Reclaimed Water Connection. All new development shall be required to hook up to the existing central water and wastewater system and reclaimed water system. If not within the required reclaimed water connection distances ,_. s listed in the "Utilities Standards and Specifications and Design Standards for Water Conservation", new development shall a use the lowest quality available water for irrigation purposes. The distance from t#-- a reclaimed water line shall be measured along the path of the City's future reclaimed water lines. E*hgbmt 4 c�crriirT Reclaimed Water Connection Distances Type and Quantity of Development Distance from Existing Reclaimed Water Line Linear feet Minimum: Line Size Single family residences individual) owned 100 2 -inch Single family residential developments 2 -10 houses 400 2 -inch 11- 35 houses 1,400 4 -inch 36 -120 houses 2,000 6 -inch 121 or more houses 50 ft. each additional house 8 -inch Multi -family or Town home developments 1-100 units 1,500 4 -inch Greater than 100 units 50 ft. each additional unit 6 -inch Commercial or Industrial developments 4,999 or less Sq. ft. 900 2 -inch 5,000 - 25,000 Sq. ft. 1,250 4 -inch 25,001 - 60,000 Sq. ft. 1,500 6 -inch Greater than 60,000 Sq. ft. 200 ft. each additional 100,000 sq. ft. 8 -inch Policy 4-2.4.3 4-2 1 a 1: Use of Reclaimed Water and Lowest Quality Available Water for Irrigation. The City shall continue appl+eatien implementation of reclaimed water fewse ##row susi}use and continue expanding programs for spray irrigation. "Utilitiesin addition, the Gity has adopted the 4-12 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE available in the future. All developments shall be required to install an irrigation system. The City's water utility shall continue to use conservation measures that include sesta-as the use of reclaimed water, improving and accelerating leak detection surveys and repair programs, installing and calibrating meters and stabilizing and equalizing system pressures, water conservation blocks, water restrictions, fixture exchanges and public education. New or renovated buildings are required to install water conserving plumbing fixtures that are at a minimum consistent with the requirements of the State Water Conservation Act: New development shall employ and/or preserve native vegetation, or use drought -resistant plants for landscaping to the greatest practicable extent. Native or drought resistant plants include, but are not limited to, those in the Florida Native Plant Society's Native Plants for Landscaping in Florida, or comparable guidelines prepared by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission, the Florida Department of Natural Resources, the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council, or the St. Johns Water Management District. At least twenty peFeei#420%) of all landscape material obtained from off-site sources for use on any site shall have a soil moisture range of 'dry'. No more than feFty peMeAt440%) of all plant material shall have a high water demand. Plants shall be grouped according to their water needs and soil conditions. The City has amended its land development regulations to require all developers to submit water budget plans prepared by a certified landscape architect or certified irrigation contractor that account for all water usage on a site. The plan must include the water requirement for each landscaping or turfed area. For residential developments, the water budget plan must demonstrate that water requirement for landscaping does not exceed the equivalent residential connection (ERC) of 300 gallons per day. The plan must also include an assurance that the water budget plans are available to every prospective home buyer. For commercial, industrial and multifamily developments, the developer must demonstrate compliance with the City's take -back reuse program for future growth and development. This program requires new developments that connected to the City's wastewater system to "take -back" the same amount of highly treated effluent as generated by the developments. Effluent from developments will receive tertiary treatment, which can be used for non -potable water purposes such as irrigation and fire protection. The City's water utility will continue to use conservation measures such as wse 9# reclaimed water for irrigation, improving and accelerating leak detection surveys and repair programs, installing and calibrating meters and stabilizing and equalizing system pressures, water conservation blocks, and fixture exchanges. The programs for technological procedural, and/or programmatic improvements to the production facility, transmission lines, and distribution system to decrease water consumption include multi-year well metering program, water line 4-11 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE Objective 4-2.3 4-65 2: Adhere to Water Supply Plan. The City Commission has adopted the 10 -year WSFWP VVat8F SUPPly PaGilities VWFk Plan dated cluly 23,.2007 and has incorporated the work plan into the Comprehensive Plan. 2, Policy 4-2.3.1 4-65 2a: Coordinate with Appropriate Agencies. The WSFWP Wattgr will be consistent with the standards and regulations established by the SJRWMD St. John's River Water MaRagemept D:strist, FDEP, State and other jurisdiction agencies. Policy 4-2.3.2 64b: Coordinate Potable Water Facilities Upgrades. The Water Supply Facilities will be used to prioritize and coordinate the development of future upgrades to existing water facilities and identify alternative water sources in order to meet projected demand. Objective 4-2.4 4-42: Conserve Potable Water GGRsewatiew. The City shall conserve potable water supply by continuing to implement the systeF ,� reclaimed water projects and dish -distribute the reclaimed water as a source for non -potable water irrigation. Other conservation measure include 86FRilafiy, objective -by requiring the use of water saving fixtures in new construction and mandating use of xeriscape for purposes of reducing demands for irrigation. The use ef potable wateF for irrigatienParpeses will naed. The City shall also assist in implementing the SJRWMD's emergency water conservation programs_ as directed in Relish -4 2.1. This-ebjestive shall be Measured thFOUgh the Policy 4-2.4.1 4-4.2.4: Conserve e€ Potable Water Supply. The following strategies policies -shall be implemented OR erdef to conserve the City's potable water supply: Potable water supplies may not be used to meet irrigation needs for new developments in the City's utility service area and new potable irrigation meters shall be prohibited. The Cities of Sanford and Lake Mary and Seminole County reached an agreement to reduce groundwater withdrawals from Floridan Aquifer by expanding reclaimed water use in lieu of potable water for irrigation. All new development within the City's service area shall utilize a dual distribution system so that irrigation needs are met by using the lowest quality available water. All new developments within the distance listed in the Utilities Manual should connect to the City's reclaimed water system. Development that are not required to connect to the existing reclaimed water system shall be required to install irrigation lines connected to an alternative water supply system utilizing the lowest quality available water such as capable of connecting to the City's reclaimed water lines when reclaimed water becomes 4-10 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE • At least 144 gallons per capita per day (gpcd) of potable water and 432 gallons peF Flow demand shall be established from existing records using the best available data. • Fire flows in single family residential areas shall provide 600 -gallons per minute (gpm) at a 20 psi pressure; fire flow for non-residential areas shall provide 1,200 gpm at a 20 psi residual pressure. • Issuance of development orders or permits shall be conditioned upon demonstrated compliance with applicable federal, state, and local permit requirements for potable water, wastewater, drainage, irrigation quality water and solid waste facilities. developments - Objective 4-2.2 4-21x: Reconcile Existing Potable Water System Deficiencies. The City shall provide efleugh capacity to meet water demand for the next twenty years, . The City shall raemmeRrae plaRRiRg te avoid peteRtial pFebleFRS OR eaeetiRg address projected water needs by GaFFyiA9 eut the through implementation of the short range and long range capital improvement program. i Policy 4-2.2.1 4-2In 4: Initiate Area wide Planning for Potable Water Systems. The City shall work with appropriate County and State public agencies ie-er4ef to �^.*„gate-a peFiedir. G9URty 9F State monitoring PF9gFaFn efprivate wells for-. This pFegFa.m. *A df4girghle se tiG 9A P ontamination from septic tank leakage., the potential for future problems surrounding the withdrawal of potable water resources, and to develop and implement alternative water moiects. Also, the City shall work with the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) to initiate a SJRWMD program or other appropriate areawide approach designed to analyze existing or potential future problems surrounding existing practices of withdrawing potable water resources. Any needed areawide improvements shall be investigated on an areawide basis. The City will work with the SJRWMD and Seminole County to develop alternative water supply sources such as surface water augmentation, brackish groundwater treatment and aquifer storage and recovery (ASR) system. 4-9 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE b. Discourage individual systems based on generally unfavorable geologic conditions and soils limitations for individual wells . c. Ensure that facility expansions are designed in a manner that is consistent with land use densities and intensities reflected on the Future Land Use Concept map of the Future Land Use Plan. d. Prohibit the establishment of new private central potable water facilities sas#-as e. Ensure adequate funding through the City's Utility Fund by a system of customer service fees, development or impact fees, bonds, bond anticipation notes, federal and state grants, utility taxes, developer contributions, special assessment districts and other appropriate revenue sources. f. Continue primary administrative responsibilities for the provision of potable water and- y0ast-ewate facilities by the Utilities Department and the Department of Engineering and Planning. g. The Gity shaI4 Determine whether there will be adequateop table water sallies capacity to serve the new development no later than the anticipated date of certificate of occupancy issuance or its functional equivalent, prior to approval of a building permit. The G4ty Well ORF -441-449 ;and- Maintain the WSFWP Water Supply Facilities Work Plan mit 2 „fthmg .,..,e.,.+..,e.,+) for a minimum planning period of tern -{103 years. The WSFWP addresses issues that pertain to water supply facilities and required needs to serve current and future development within the City's water service area. The City shall review and update the WSFWP at least every five years. Aay-e Changes to the first five (5) years of the WSFWP shall be included in the annual Capital Improvements Plan update to ensure to consistency between the Potable Water Element and the Capital Improvements Element. Policy 4-2.1.2: Maintain Potable Water LOS Standard. On a system wide basis, the City shall provide a LOS of at least 144 gallons a day per person. Policy 4-2.1.3 4-112: Comply with LOS Standards for Potable Water and Wastewate . (PaFt of no9c , 84.54: I_Piro' aoefgi6e-otana"a All improvements for replacement, expansion or increase in capacity of facilities shall be compatible with the adopted level-e€-sewiEe LOS standards for the facilities. Issuance of development orders or permits shall be conditioned upon demonstrated compliance with applicable federal, state, and local permit requirements for potable water, irrigation quality water, wastewater, drainage, and solid waste facilities. All improvements for replacement, expansion or increase in capacity of facilities shall be compatible with the adopted level of seNioe LOS standards for the facilities as followlns: 4-8 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE Policy 4-2.1.1 4-1 1 4: Coordinate Beta mpn Future Land Use and Potable WaterAAFastewateF System Needs. The City shall require decisions concerning the potable water system needs, plans and the location and timing of improve- ments to be consistent with land use and conservation resource management policies and with the City's Water Supply Facilities Work PlanW( SFWP) (Exhibit2)as stipulated in the Comprehensive Plan and with the SJRWMD's Oistrist's regional water supply plan. The City shall require the following policies governingop table water services: a. Require all major development to utilize central services provided by the City. 4-7 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Use Map. INFRASTRUCTURE Policy 4-1.2.5 4-2 1 1 Assign Priority for Correcting Existing Deficiencies. '-devel- The City shall assign highest priority to these projects required for emeses-ecorrecting existing deficiencies and shall promote urban infill. Policy 4-1.2.6 At -2i=: Utilize Criteria for Public Facility Planning and Management Efficiency. In scheduling the location, timing and staging of public facility improvements, the City Commission shall use the following criteria: a. Minimize disruption of services; b. Prevent duplication of labor; and C. Maintain LOS sewise levels for all respective facilities. Policy 4-1.2.7 4-224: Schedule Seheduling Planned Needed Capital Improvements. The City Commission shall assure that projects required to meet projected demands for public facilities thF91619h the yeaF 2006 shall be in the Capital Improvements Element of this plan in accordance with the requirements of Section 163.3177(3), F.S. Policy 4-1.2.8 4-2 2:2: Add+t+enef Obtain Permits for Public Facility Projects ApPFevals. All required federal, State, and County permits shall be obtained before the City undertakes or authorizes contractors to undertake construction and/or operation of facilities. .. . o.n�:z,� _ -r ■ GOAL 4-2 4-6: PROVIDE Of- SAFE POTABLE WATER. THE CITY OF SANFORD SHALL ENSURE THAT A SAFE POTABLE WATER SUPPLY WITH SUFFICIENT QUANTITY AND QUALITY TO SERVE THE CITY IS AVAILABLE. Objective 4-2.1 4-5.4: Maintain Potable Water System. The Gity's ^9*4-b'e 4A9a+P_• supply well be 9 The Citv shall provide an adeauate LOS for potable water to meet both existing and future needs by enforcing the standards set forth in the Comprehensive Plan and regulations established by the St. John's River Water Management District (SJRWMD). In addition, the safety, protection, and delivery of potable water shall be supported through the implementation of water conservation practices and regulations. Fegulatiens. 4-6 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE horizons. thFeugh the yeaF 2002 by undeFtakiRg the pFejeGts identified IR Table IV 1. "Plu „ Data IRVA-FitAwy and Analysral. Policy 4-1.2.1 4-2 2 1: Coordinate with Capital Improvements Element. All public facility projects shall be undertaken in accordance with the schedule provided in the Capital Improvements Element of this WAR. Policy 4-1.2.2 4-2 1 1: Comply with Capital Improvements Element. All major public facility projects shall be undertaken in accordance with the schedule provided in the Capital Improvements Element of this plan, . Policy 4-1.2.3 4-13: Update Demand and Supply Information System. The City of Sanford shall develop procedures for updating facility demand and capacity information and shall prepare annual summaries of capacity and demand information for respective facilities and/or service areas as part of the concurrency management program. Policy 4-1.2.4 4-1 21: Evaluate Capital Improvement Schedule. Projects proposed for inclusion in the five-year schedule of capital improvement needs. will be annually evaluated and ranked by the Citv Commission. The evaluation and rank will be based on the followina oriority level guidelines: a. "Level 1" —whether the project +s- needed -te: • Protects public health, safety, and environmentally sensitive natural resources. • Fulfills the City's legal commitment to provide facilities and services. • Preserves or achieves full use of existing facilities and assigning highest priority to those projects required for purposes of correcting existing system deficiencies. b. "Level 2" - whether the project accomplishes the following: • Increases efficiency of existing facilities. • Prevents or reduces future improvement costs. • Provides service to developed areas lacking full service or promotes in -fill development. c. "Level 3" - Whether the project: • Represents a logical extension of facilities and services in a manner consistent with Future Land Use Element goals, objectives and policies, including the Future Land 4-5 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE concurrency management system shall be maintained and enforced as part of the land development regulations for potable water, sanitary sewer, stormwater management, and solid waste. It FeGlUiF96 thati. , PF9pesed developments. The Gity will keep tFaGk ef the total ef Gurre-Rt demands and outstanding and deteffRi% the availability ef adequate WateF supply The GQ-AG-'-1FF9RGy management system. shall ens -'Fe all exiesting and planned publiG seFyin-e area the level e Policy 4-1.1.3 4-213: Eliminate Existing Public Facility Deficiencies Prior to Development Approval. . The City shall issue no development order for new development which would result in an increase in demand on deficient facilities prior to completion of improvements designed to eliminate the deficiencies. needed to Wing the respeGtiye faGility up te standaM. The City shall include an adequate facilities requirement. The adequate facilities requirement shall mandate that future applications for development shall include a written evaluation of the impact of the anticipated development on the levels of services for the water and wastewater systems, solid waste system, drainage, recreation, and the traffic circulation system. Prior to issuing a site plan or building permit (whichever is first applicable), the City shall render a finding that the applicant has provided written assurance that the proposed development shall be served with each of the above cited facilities with a LOS at least equal to that level ef sepwfiGs LOS stipulated in this Plan.FzeliGy 4.1-4-1- The developers application shall include written assurances that any required improvements shall be in place concurrent with the impacts of the development (i.e., by the time a certificate of occupancy is granted by the City). Objective 4-1.2 41-24: Meeting Projected Public Facility Demands To 2002. The City shall plan for projected public facility demands for the short and long-term planning 4-4 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE adequately served by Fequisite public facilities, including water and wastewater serines, adequate stormwater management, solid waste disposal and hazardous waste management. The subdivision and site plan review processes shall provide a unified system for maximizing use of existing public facilities and for coordinating the efficient location, timing, phasing, and scale of public and private development. €eF-e*ample, Policy 4-1.1.1: Enforce General Performance Standards. The City of Sanford shall maintain land development regulations that include performance standards requiring that fequisite public facilities be provided concurrent with the impacts of new development. The City shall enforce performance standards ensuring that the location, scale, timing and design of development shall be coordinated with public facilities and services in order to prevent the proliferation of urban sprawl and achieve cost effective land development patterns. Urban sprawl shall be further abated addressed through performance standards that: Direct future development only to those areas where provision of public facilities necessary to meet levels of service (LOS) standards are available concurrent with the impacts of the development; • Maximize use of existing central potable water, reclaimed water and wastewater facilities by requiring that all new development hook up to the City's existing central systems; Require all new development connect to irrigation quality reclaimed water lines for irrigation purposes. If not within the required reclaimed water connection distances (Exhibit , of this ame.,d efA as listed in the "Utilities Standards and Specifications and Design Standards for Water Conservation" (referred to as the Utilities Manual), new development shall utilize the lowest quality available water for irrigation purposes; • Avoid expensive development at very low densities surrounding the City's urban core area; • Promote planned mixed use development within the strategically located westside area, the 1-4 interchange, the Waterfront/Downtown Business District, and Airport Industry and Commerce area; • Conserve wetlands, natural drainage corridors, and other environmentally sensitive areas; • Prevent extended strip commercial development within the areas designated planned mixed use development by mandating access and curb cut controls together with required dedication of cross easements to restrict and/or to facilitate well planned access, internal circulation, shared parking, and egress; and • Provide density and intensity thresholds that promote infill. Policy 4-1.1.2 4-1 1 1: Maintain Public Facility Concurrency Requirements. A 4-3 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE IYh'�7171'I'RGG16-G CiWi.StiAg G .R{rnl P9tahle ..piere renlaimed • ateF and WastewateF fanilitie by FequiFing that all Rew development heel up to the Gity's existing nentrol aFea; ■ Objective 4-1.1: Ensure Available Public Facilities, Maximize Use of Existing Public Facilities, and Prevent Urban Sprawl. The City shall require that proposed land uses be 4-2 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INFRASTRUCTURE CHAPTER 4: INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT GOAL 4-1: PROVIDE ADEQUATE NEEDED PUBLIC FACILITIES. ENSURE AVAILABILITY AND PROVISION OF WERPED ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES INCLUDING POTABLE WATER, SANITARY SEWER, SOLID WASTE, STORMWATER DRAINAGE, AND AQUIFER RECHARGE IN A MANNER WHICH PROTECTS INVESTMENTS IN EXISTING FACILITIES, CONTINUES TO SERVE EXISTING RESIDENTS AND PROMOTER SUPPORTS ORDERLY, COMPACT GROWTH. -P.Tn NAN -=- MimiQ- .. IUMMZ_M _ _..-. .. 4-1 November 2009 4W5 1-rT77-7,17% ............. -P.Tn NAN -=- MimiQ- .. IUMMZ_M _ _..-. .. 4-1 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING of new housing construction how the energy efficiency requirements will be adhered to. Policy 3-1.7.6: Undertake Special Housing Studies. In order to maintain housing policies responsive to changing conditions, problems, and issues, the City shall undertake special housing studies as needed in order to develop specific local strategies for resolving unanticipated housing problems and issues. Polite 3-1.7.7: Encourage Neighborhood Planning. City staff shall continue to work with neighborhoods to encourage neiahborhood planning and the development of neighborhood plans in order to increase public involvement. These plans should create neighborhood goals that provide opportunities to strengthen neighborhoods and identify desired improvements and needs of residents. Objective 3-1.8: Continue Evaluation of Housing Element Effectiveness. The City shall use the following policies as criteria in evaluating the effectiveness of the Housing Element. Policy 3-1.8.1: Review the Impact of Change Indicators on Housing Policy. Major shifts in the magnitude, distribution, and characteristics of population and housing shall serve as indicators of change in various aspects of housing supply and demand. The policy implications of major changes in housing supply and demand shall be evaluated on a continuing basis. Housing policy shall be refined as needed in order to remain responsive to changing problems and issues. Policy 3-1.8.2: Schedule, Budget and Implementing Programmed Activities. The timely scheduling, programming, budgeting and implementation of housing programs identified in this Element shall be evidence of the City's effectiveness in carrying out a systematic program for implementing adopted housing goals, objectives, and policies. Policy 3-1.8.3: Coordinate with Public and Private Sectors. While continually implementing and evaluating the Housing Element, the City shall maintain a process of intergovernmental coordination as well as coordination with private sector groups interested in housing policy and programs. The effectiveness of this approach shall be evaluated by the success of coordination mechanisms in resolving housing problems and issues. Policy 3-1.8.4: Achieve Effective Resolution of Housing Goals, Objectives, and Policies. The effectiveness of the Housing Element shall be measured by the City's success in achieving housing goals, objectives, and policies. The Housing Element incorporates a systematic planning process for identifying housing problems and issues and corrective actions. biective 3-1.9: Implement Energy Efficient Housing, The City will encourage energy-effirwent ousina through use of renewable enerav resources in existing and new housing. Policy 3-1.9.1: Educate Residents on Energy Efficiency. The City well provide educational materials and conduct programs to educate residents on enerav reduction measures for iml2lementat*on inside homes as well as landscaping. Policy 3-1.9.2: Encourage Green Housing Construction. The City shall encourage ho ina construction at meets Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) rating syste ministered by the United States Green Buildina Council. the Florida Green Building Coalitio standards or other nationally recoanized preen building rating systems. 3-9 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING related programs: a. Population and Housina Research and Information System. Maintain and periodically update the population and housing information system. b. Housing Trends. Monitor and evaluate population and housing trends. Analysis of land use interrelationships shall be included in the continuing evaluation. C. Review -Plans and Policies. Review and amend as necessary adopted plans and policies based on continuing analysis of problems and issues related to housing and other plan elements. The review shall include consideration of the City's regulatory and administrative requirements for site plan review and permitting in order to assure that these policies and procedures do not impose unreasonable construction time requirements or building costs to providers of housing stock. This review shall include analysis to further the concept of one- stop permitting procedures, a policy adopted by the ECFRPC. Major shifts in the magnitude, distribution, and demographic characteristics of the population which are indicative of changes in housing demand shall be analyzed. Similarly, shifts in the magnitude, distribution and structural characteristics of the City's housing stock shall be analyzed on a continuing basis. d. Fiscal Management. Review and evaluate residential development and infrastructure policy, including fiscal implications. Each year fiscal management policies including the capital improvement program and budget shall be reviewed, evaluated and refined to reflect current program priorities. e. "Housing Code and Other Related Codes. Administer adopted housing and energy codes and other housing related codes. Public Assistance and Information Referral. Provide housing information and referral services to the public pursuant to adopted goals, objectives and policies of this Housing Element. g. Intergovernmental Coordination. Coordinate local housing program activities including discussions of related fiscal problems and issues with other public agencies at all levels of government pursuant to the Intergovernmental Coordination Element of this Plan. h. Development Impacts. Evaluate and manage impacts of proposed development pursuant to existing ordinances, including, but not limited to impacts on residential neighborhoods, local housing supply and demand, public facility impacts, and natural environmental factors. Housing Policies. The City shall maintain a continuing review and evaluation of housing policies as identified in this Element. The h9usiRg data and anal, i updated 91; a reRtii;uii;9 This analysis shall provide a basis for continuing refinement of housing policies. Where such analysis reveals housing needs, required infrastructure improvements, or other related problems and issues, the City shall coordinate an effective response, including cooperation with the public and private sectors. L Energy Efficiency in New Housing. The City shall add language to the Land Development Regulations that add requirements for new housing to adhere to energy efficiency standards during the design and construction phases. It must be demonstrated prior to the permitting 3-8 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING The City shall thmugh its Gemmunity Develepment 0 direct public funds through its Community Development Office to assist in maintaining sound housing by reducing the supply of deteriorated and dilapidated units and by providing neighborhood facilities improvements where such facilities as sewers, potable water distribution systems, drainage facilities, roads, or recreation areas are substandard. Funds shall also be directed to improving access to shepping-geeds commercial and employment opportunities in order to stabilize neighborhood commercial activities. The Community Development Office shall use the Community Development Block Grant programs, including but not limited to, weatherization, rental housing rehabilitation, neighborhood facility improvements, economic development, and commercial revitalization. The City shall also maintain an active code enforcement program as a means to identify housing accommodations and non-residential structures which fail to comply with minimum specification governing building construction, electrical facilities, water and sewer systems, construction, septic tanks and waste disposal fields, fire protection, flood prevention, and housing. Where structures are found to violate minimum standard specifications the City shall duly notice the violation and stipulate conditions for bringing the structure into compliance. Policy 3-1.7.2: Plan Supportive Facilities and Services Necessary for Quality Residential Neighborhoods. The City of Sanford through the Community Development Block Grant Program shall work with Seminole County, the State of Florida, and the private sector in planning systems for delivery of public facilities and services supportive to a quality residential environment. The City shall use the Community Development Block Grant program and other available programs directed to improve conditions within Goldsboro and Georgetown. The City shall use the capital improvement program and budgeting process to schedule improvement needs. The City shall coordinate with the State Department of Community Affairs in order to develop a Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) in concert with Seminole County in order to expand available technical and financial assistance for neighborhood improvement needs, especially within the primary target areas of Goldsboro and Georgetown. Policy 3-1.7.3: Minimize Potential Blighting Influences. Potential blighting influences within residential areas shall be minimized by promoting use of best management principles and practices of land use planning, urban design and landscaping in development and site plan review. €ef established On Pelisy 1 4.1.1 by F8qWiFiAg adequate seFeeniRg, land6eapiR9, and etheF design , The Community Development Block Grant program shall be used to reduce dilapidated housing and increase the supply of standard housing equipped with neighborhood facilities operating at adequate levels of service. Policy 3-1.7.4: Coordinate Public/Private Partnerships. In addressing housing issues requiring unique partnerships involving the public and private sector, the City of Sanford shall promote effective communication and innovative approaches to housing and neighborhood improvements which foster mutual benefits for the public and private sectors. The City Community Development Office shall also establish highest priority for infrastructure improvements within redevelopment target areas using both private sector funding sources as well as available public assistance programs through the Community Development Block Grant Program. Policy 3-1.7.5: Continue Housing Programs. The City shall carry out the following housing 3-7 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING Objective 3-1.5: Preserve Historically Significant Housing. The City shall promote the preservation and protection of housing resources identified as historically significant, especially those located in the designated Downtown ResideRNal Historic District as well as structures identified in the historically significant area south of the Central Business District. Policy 3-1.5.1: Promote Identification of the City's Historically Significant Housing Resources. The City of Sanford shall encourage the continued identification, protection, analysis, and explanation of the City's historical district resources (RefeFepre Table I ' and Map "' 5 Such efforts shall include determination of their worth and vulnerability, as well as implementation of preservation management policies . Policy 3-1.5.2: Rehabilitate and Adaptive Re -Use of Historically Significant Housing. The City's Historic Preservation Board shall assist the rehabilitation and adaptive re -use of historically significant housing by coordinating grantsmanship functions and carrying out information and referral services which link the private sector with potential sources of technical assistance and funding for rehabilitation and adaptive re -use of historically significant housing resources. Policy 3-1.5.3: Assist with Grants for Preserving Historically Significant Housing. The City shall assist property owners of historically significant housing in applying for and utilizing available State and federal assistance programs. Objective 3-1.6: Wousi Provide Equitable Displacement Treatment. The City shall provide WRifeFFnuniform and equitable treatment of persons and businesses displaced by State and local government programs , Policy 3-1.6.1: Provide Alternative Housing Sites for Displaced Structures and Residents. The City shall assist any person that is required to move from any real property as a result of the acquisition of such real property for public purposes by making other sites and housing facilities available to them as replacement dwellings. When planning the location of land acquisition for public purposes the City shall assess the degree of displacement which may be incurred and factor the costs of relocating such displaced persons into the total costs of alternative site acquisitions. In certain cases where federal -aid is being used for public projects or programs the City shall be guided in its relocation assistance by the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 as may hereinafter be amended. The law provides for mandatory relocation assistance to persons displaced by certain federal -aid public projects and authorizes, as a last resort, the use of eminent domain power to acquire real property for replacement housing. Objective 3-1.7: Conserve Neighborhood Quality and Existing Housing Stock. The useful life of the existing housing stock including affordable housing shall be conserved through effective implementation of laws, ordinances, and programs directed toward preserving neighborhood quality, including conservation of natural resources, maintenance of community facilities, and code enforcement activities. Policy 3-1.7.1: Maintain Housing Stock and Neighborhood Conservation. 3-6 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING temporarily homeless. A full inventeFy ef the Gi4e Policy 3-1.4.1: Relisies-feFProvide areas for Foster Care Facilities. To advance the provision of foster care facilities within the City of Sanford, foster care facilities in single family homes shall continue to be allowed in residential and agricultural districts. The City shall continue to maintain land development regulations ., for foster care facilities including performance standards in order to ensure that all sites for foster care facilities contain requisite infrastructure including: potable water; adequate surface water management; an approved system of wastewater disposal; and an adequate system for solid waste collection and disposal. The sites shall also be free of safety hazards and all structures shall comply with City ordinances and applicable State laws including applicable licensing and program requirements of the State. Policy 3-1.4.2: Apply Criteria to Community Residential Facilities. , tThe City shall adhere to the following requirements related to Community Residential facilities . • Group homes of six (mor fewer residents licensed as community residential homes by Department of Children and Family Services (DCFS) shall be deemed a single family unit and shall be allowed in single-family or multi -family zoning districts provided that such homes shall not be located within a radius of 1,000) feet of another existing duly licensed group home of six (6) of fewer residents. • Group homes duly licensed by DCFS as a community residential care facilities which have from seven (7) to fewteeR 01 unrelated residents operating as a family, including supportive staff , FS, shall be allowed in multi -family residential districts unless the City finds that the group home siting as proposed: 1. Does not otherwise conform to existing zoning regulations applicable to other multi -family uses in the City. 2. Does not meet applicable licensing criteria established and determined by DCFS including requirements that the home be located to assure the safe care and supervision of all clients in the home. 3. Would result in excessive concentration of community residential homes. A home that is located within a radius of 1,200) feet of another existing community residential home in a multi -family zone shall be an over concentration of such homes that substantially alters the nature and character of the area. A home that is located within a radius of 500) feet of an area of single-family zoning substantially alters the nature and character of the area. All distance requirements cited in this subseetienolp icv shall be measured from the nearest point of the existing home or area of single-family zoning to the nearest point of the proposed home. • All sites for aPA group homes shall contain requisite infrastructure including: potable water; adequate surface water management; and approved system of wastewater disposal; and an adequate system for solid waste collection and disposal. The sites shall also be free of safety hazards and all structures shall comply with City ordinances and applicable State laws including applicable licensing and program requirements of the State. 3-5 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING In addition, the City shall refine land development regulations in order to create incentives which encourage and facilitate redevelopment in areas with a relatively high concentration of substandard housing such as Goldsboro and Georgetown—and Gcontinue to enforce the City's adopted building codes in order to protect and preserve the structural integrity of the City's housing stock. The City shall contact owners of substandard housing units in order to communicate necessary corrective actions and assist by informing owners of available federal, state and local housing assistance programs. Similarly, the City shall use funds from the Community Development Block program to reduce substandard housing and increase the supply of affordable housing consistent with Objective 3-1.1. Policy 3-1.2.2: Provide Infrastructure to Support SUPper#iFve-fie Low and Moderate Income Housing. The City shall continue to use the Community Development Block Grant Program and initiate a program of incentives to attract necessary financial resources required to provide infrastructure improvement needs by neighborhood cited in the analysis of redevelopment needs. Objective 3-1.3: Provide Adequate Land Areas for Mobile Homes and Manufactured Housing. The City of Sanford shall continue to provide adequate land area to accommodate mobile home residences within its corporate limits. The P -4 --we I -and U69 Maps PF9Vide 16F M913018 . . The City shall allow manufactured housing in all residential districts within the City if the housing meets the below stated policies.61 fe8ew+R-pelieies. Policy 3-1.3.1: 1-esatien-and Comply with Building Codes GempHanse. Building Codes with the City shall be consistent with State mandated criteria governing construction. The City's land development regulations shall continue to allow manufactured housing in all residential zoning districts provided the manufactured housing complies with building standards of Chapter 320 and 553, F_S., and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Manufactured Home Construction and Safety Standards of 1974. (i.e., Ses.320.823, E:a.,) Objective 3-1.4: Provide Opportunities for Group Homes, Housing for the Elderly, Foster Care Facilities and Emergency Temporary Housing Needs. , _, The City of Sanford shall promote housing opportunities licensed by the State Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services to meet the unique housing needs of the elderly, dependent children and physically and mentally handicapped, developmentally disabled, and the 3-4 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING Policy 3-1.1.79: Eliminate Barriers within the Land Development Regulations. AR ied by the Ensure that the proposed regulatory techniques and review procedures do not create barriers to affordable housing. , the Gity shall FeV98W the existing land The City shall also promote nondiscrimination in access to housing within the City by promoting fair housing laws and practices. Objective 3-1.2: Use Conservation, Rehabilitation, and Demolition Program Techniques to achieve a Housing Stock Free of Substandard Units. ' , tThe City shall ° continue to reduce the vercentaae of the City housing stock exxperieases experiencing substandard conditions. Weatheri�atien Pregrams, and Lew Inseme-Meme €nefgy A660stanee-Pf (WHEA,TT The City shall encourage the use Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds to rehabilitate substandard units which may be improved through the CDBG program and shall demolish and clean dilapidated structures which are beyond repair and detrimental to the neighborhood environment. CDBG funds shall also be used to assist in defraying costs of persons who must relocate. Policy 3-1.2.1: Elimination -e# Eliminate Substandard Housing Conditions and Improvemen of Neighborhood Quality in Redevelopment Areas. A.F;alysis identifies-speraft target areas ferpes6i1919 FedeVe'^^ffle^+ The Ing + c,+ The City's CDBG program shall continue to maximize Community Block Grant Program funds of the countystate and federal government as well as other available resources required to eliminate substandard housing and improve neighborhood quality within areas in need of redevelopment. To assist low and moderate income household unable to afford weatherization improvements for their homes, the City shall continue to apply State Department of Community Affairs grant funds to support a weatherization program. Musing units d9fiGit-MAt systems, and need n-e.m.Meffei-al revitalizatien A study, the 3-3 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING requirements administered through the State Department of Community Affairs and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Policy 3-1.1.33: Provide Technical Assistance, Information and Referral Services. The City shalla rp Ovide technical assistance, information and referral services to the private sector in order to maintain a housing production capacity sufficient to meet the projected housing market demand.. and 6eatiAUe continue to advance fair housing and eliminate discrimination in housing. Policy 3-1.1.43: Developing Public/Private Partnerships. The City shall Sevelep develop local government partnerships with the private sector in order to improve the efficiency and expand the capacity of the housing delivery system. In addition, the City shall coordinate the timely extension of water and wastewater services as well as utilities and road improvements to developing or redeveloping residential areas in need of infrastructure supportive to new housing. Policy 3-1.1.54: Selecting Sites for Affordable Housing for Very -Low, Low, and Moderate Income Households. The City of Sanford is committed to fair, open, and affordable housing and shall approve sites for very -low, low, and moderate income housing units which are consistent with the Land Development Plan. The City shall not approve affordable housing development proposals unless such proposed sites are: 1. Serviced by potable water and central wastewater systems; 2. Accessible to employment centers, including shopping centers which accommodate stores offering household goods and services needed on a frequent and recurring basis; 3. Located on a paved street accessible to a major street identified on the City's major thoroughfare plan; 4. Accessible to public parks, recreation areas, and/or open space systems; and 5. Located on sites having adequate surface water management and solid waste collection and disposal. 6. Within %-mile of a bus route. Policy 3-1.1.65: PFGVisienProvide Opportunities for of -Diverse Housing Types. The City shall continue to provide land use designations and zoning districts on the Future Land Use and the Official Zoning Maps, respectively, to ensure that single family, duplex, and multi -family housing units are allowed within the City. 3-2 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING CHAPTER 3: HOUSING ELEMENT GOAL 3-1: HOUSINGACCOMMODATE AFFORDABLE, QUALITY HOUSING FOR CITY'S RESIDENTS. THE CITY OF SANFORD SHALL ALLOCATE LAND AREA i=GR TOAh 'ACCOMMODATE A SUPPLY OF HOUSING RESPONSIVE TO THE DIVERSE HOUSING NEEDS OF THE EXISTING AND PPn�TED CIITURE CITY POPULATION VERY -LOW, LOW, AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSEHOLDS, GROUP HOMES, FOSTER CARE FACILITIES, AND HOUSEHOLDS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS AND ASSIST THE PRIVATE SECTOR IN PROVIDING AFFORDABLE QUALITY HOUSING IN NEIGHBORHOODS PROTT€GTED Fm ^RQ?.4INIGGA QL—USES AND SERVED BY ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES. Objective 3-1.1: Promote Affordable Quality Housing and Adequate Sites for Low and Moderate Income Housing. its in 2990, 3,165 tetalaffe-rd-able units on 2905, and 3,604 "okal nftrdRh19 UR*ts *F1 2()10 IR :2000 the Gity aRtiraipates a d -e -fin -it ef 6-91 units available te Med-e-rate inrVeMe heusehelds. The Gity , The City of Sanford shall ensure that a sufficient number {2,788} of affordable housing t R0tssites are available within the City. Furthermore, the City shall ensure that adequate sites for all housing types are achieved through the implementation of the following policies. Policy 3-1.1.1: Prevision Provide Adequate Sites for Housing of Low and Moderate Income Families. The City's Future Land Use Map shall designate substantial acreage for housing sites which can be marketed and developed for all income ranges. Policy 3-1.1.2: Implement State and Federal Housing Programs. The City of Sanford Housing Authority shall participate in federally subsidized rental housing programs. The Authority's activities shall include renovation of Authority -owned housing units as well as participation in the Section 8 housing program and other available programs to meet housing needs of the City of Sanford. The City of Sanford Community Development Office shall continue to seek State and federal assistance through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program. The City shall continue to use the Section 236 federal housing program which provides a reduction in interest payments to developers constructing rental and cooperative housing for lower income families. The-SaR#erd Development shall alse arosist in pmmetinq use of available fedeFal and State Who interest lean Upon plan adoption the City shall develop a Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) in concert with Seminole County. The CHAS shall be drafted pursuant to CHAS program 3-1 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION Policy 2-1.13.62-1-14.6: Mitigate MitigatiGn Structural and Non-structural Impacts. The Airport shall continue to obtain environmental resource permits for storm water drainage and wetlands impacts from the SJRWMD. Permit applications shall address the protection of wetland systems and/or the need for mitigation measures for adverse structural and non-structural impacts from airport development upon adjacent natural resources and land uses as deemed appropriate by the SJRWMD. The Airport shall also continue to coordinate mitigation measures for adverse structural and non-structural impacts on protected species with the FFWCC and USFWS. 2-28 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION roadways including the eastern and northern extension of Lake Mary Boulevard to SR 46 and #fie GrAAAw R 417) in order to provide improved access and to minimize future airport traffic impacts to Sanford Avenue. Policy 2-1.12.52-1.43.6: Minimize Impacts to Adjacent Airport Roadways. Service roads on airport property shall be used to the greatest extent possible to capture internal airport trips thus minimizing the need to use off-site public roads to travel between airport facilities. Policy 2-1.12.62-1 126: Coordinate with METROPLAN Orlando Long Range Transportation Plan. The Airport shall maintain consistency with the goals of the Metroplan Orlando Long Range Transportation Plan. The Airport shall coordinate the timing of future development with the timing of roadway improvements in the Metroplan 2OW2030 Long Range Transportation Plan. Policy 2-1.12.72-1 12 T: Coordinate with Metroplan Orlando and FDOT on Right -of -Way Acquisition. The Airport shall coordinate with FDOT and Metroplan Orlando on acquisition of rights-of-way for roadway projects on roads surrounding the Airport, including State Road 46. Policy 2-1.12.82-4.4 3.8: Integrate the Airport with Bicyclists' Needs. In the interest of safety and to promote alternative forms of transportation, the Airport shall accommodate bicycles to the extent practical and within the limitations of maintaining bicyclist safety and airport safety and security. Objective 2-1.132-4 14: Ensure Protection of Natural Resources within Airport Boundaries. The City shall ensure that all development within the Airport protects and conserves natural resources, consistent with FAA regulations. Policy 2-1.13.12-44.4: Maintain List of Threatened and Endangered Species. The Airport shall continue to maintain a detailed list of occurring and potentially occurring threatened and endangered species. Policy 2-1.13.22-1x42: Monitoring-FFWCC Database. The Airport shall continue to monitor, on a yearly basis, the FFWCC) database for the presence of protected bird species, including the bald eagle. Policy 2-1.13.32 1.143: Perform Environmental Assessments. The Airport shall continue to complete environmental assessments, including a threatened and endangered species evaluation, for each phase or portion of development. Policy 2-1.13."'42-1 144: Coordinate with Federal and State Agencies. The Airport shall continue to coordinate with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the JRWMD) and/or the FFWCC on best management practices for the protection of threatened and endangered species and species of special concern. Policy 2-1.13.52-1 14:6: Relocate Relesatian of Protected Species. The Airport shall continue to relocate protected species in accordance with federal, state and local environmental standards in order to conserve and protect their value. 2-27 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION appropriate local government's comprehensive plan capital improvement element (or as otherwise provided in the applicable jurisdiction's capital improvement element); 2. A roadway improvement scheduled for construction within the first three (3) years of the FDOT's Five Year Work Program; 3. A binding financially secured and irrevocable commitment by the Airport or other appropriate person or entity for the design, engineering, land acquisition and actual construction of the necessary improvements (with posting of a cash bond, surety bond, irrevocable letter of credit, escrow account or other security in a form acceptable to the agency of jurisdiction) within the next three years and incorporated by reference into the development order; 4. Any other mitigation option permitted by law, including a local government development agreement consistent with Chapter 163, F.S., or a proportionate share payment agreement pursuant to and consistent with Chapter 163 or Chapter 380, F.S., and related rules, which ameliorates the projected impact and is incorporated into the development order by amendment. These improvements shall occur by the required threshold in order for the project to proceed. If the Airport can demonstrate that a project listed in the Airport Master Plan does not adversely affect the Regional Roadway network as determined by the monitoring and modeling tests discussed above, then the Airport may proceed with the development. c. In the event that a roadway widening is identified which is not compatible with adopted policy of the FDOT (8 or 10 laning of a state roadway) or local government (constrained), the Airport, the City of Sanford, Seminole County, the ECFRPC and the party having either maintenance or jurisdictional responsibility for the facility shall jointly determine alternate mitigation solutions to provide for the movement of people. Toward the achievement of the objectives in the two preceding conditions, an agreement(s) among the City of Sanford, Seminole County, the FDOT, and the Airport may be entered into within 12 twWwq months of the City's approval of any development project discussed in the Airport Master Plan which affects the Regional Transportation system. Said agreement(s) shall address and clarify such issues related to equity in the application of fees for transportation improvements. Said fees shall be based on a fair -share basis with respect to the improvements to be provided and not solely on the basis of impact fees. However, such an agreement would not alter or waive the provisions and requirements of the other recommendations listed above as a mitigation measure for the transportation impacts of the Airport Master Plan. In the event that one of the designated parties to the agreement (other than the Airport) fails to execute said interlocal agreement(s) within the specified time, then the Airport or developer of Airport property may proceed with the project based on the traffic impact study by providing funding for any roadway improvements and/or mitigation measures. The Airport shall be responsible for 100% of all on-site transportation improvements necessitated by on-site implementation of the Airport Master Plan. The City of Sanford Planning Department AdFAiRiGtFatiVP OffiGiAlshall be responsible for monitoring the development and enforcing the provisions of this policy. The City shall not issue any permits or approvals or provide any extensions of services if the Airport fails to act in substantial compliance with this policy. Policy 2-1.12."'42-1 13 4: Ensure Access to the Orlando -Sanford Airport. The City's Transportation Plan and Airport Master Plans shall continue to provide efficient linkages between airport main entranceways and the state intrastate highway system via arterial and collector 2-26 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION consistent with the presets of the approved trip generation model, i.e. the Seminole County Trip Generation model, the Orlando Urban Area Transportation Study (OUATS) model, or another distribution model approved by the City, the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council (ECFRPC), Seminole County, the FDOT)-, the Department of Community Affairs and the Airport Authority. The impact area shall include adjacent roadway segments. Analyses and models shall be consistent with professional standards established in one (�4 or more of the following documents: a. Highway Capacity Manual 2000, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, 2000. b. Florida Highway System Plan, "Traffic Analysis Procedures," Florida Department of Transportation, Bureau of Multi -Modal Systems Planning, most recent edition. c. Florida Highway System Plan, "Level of Service Standards and Guidelines Manual," Florida Department of Transportation, most recent edition. d. Trip Generation, 7thM Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers. e. Transportation and Land Development, Stover, Virgil G., Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1988. Traffic Study Results/Mitigation: a. The Airport shall not develop when LOS is below the Mini.. -Urn ^^^•�^� temadopted LOS in the applicable local government's comprehensive plan during the peak hour and the project contributes, or is projected to contribute with the next phase of traffic, teft 10 percent of the adopted LOS service volume of the roadway or intersection as determined by the monitoring program required in the preceding recommendations, unless mitigation measure and/or improvements are 'secured and committed' for completion of construction during the phase in which the impacts occur. The schedule of improvements shall be tied to the development level at which the improvement is needed within each development phase. The results of the traffic impact study will be used to determine the then -current conditions regarding improvement needs and priorities, and the pace of both development under the Airport Master Plan and the area development. The study will evaluate the appropriateness of proposed mitigation measures, as well as validate the transportation assumptions developed for the original Application for Development Approval for the Development of Regional Impact dated February 28, 2000. These assumptions relate to, but are not limited to, impact area, planned and programmed improvements, existing conditions, project traffic, pass -by traffic, modal split, internal capture, distribution of traffic, and daily and peak -hour trip generation rates, identification of areas where project traffic is significant an adverse, projected roadway levels of service (AADT and peak -hour) for 349& 2010, 2015 and 2020 and annual growth rates for the affected area. The developer of Airport property shall identify the needed roadway improvements necessary as a result of significant and adverse roadway impacts form the proposed development. b. The 'securing and commitment' of adequate mitigation/measures shall include one of the following: 1. A roadway improvement scheduled for construction within the first three (3) years of the 2-25 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION Any development on Airport property that is anticipated to generate 1,000 daily trips or 100 peak -hour trips shall be required to submit a traffic impact study. The traffic impact study shall include: 1. Total projected peak -hour trips for the proposed development. • pass -by capture rate (commercial land uses only); • internal capture rate (planned development only); • peak -hour external trips based on Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, most recent Edition; and • peak -hour directional projected vehicle trips on all segments of the arterial and collector street system which are adjacent to the development project or as determined necessary by the Planning Director. 2. Design capacity of the accessed road(s). 3. Analysis of traffic distribution on the road network including all links impacted by more than five percent (6o-} of project traffic or 5001 trips per day, whichever is greater. 4. Necessary operational improvements to the City, County, or State maintained transportation system in order to maintain the appropriate level of ^e^•i^^ LOS for the roadway. 5. Justification, including appropriate references, for the use of any trip generation rates, adjustments factors or traffic assignment methods not previously approved by the City. 6. The latest edition of the'Rg_tit to efT-PaRspeFtatiaR FingineeFs (ITC4 Trip Generation Manual shall be used to calculate these estimates. Adjustments to these estimates may be made, based on special trip generation information supplied by the applicant. In determining impacts on available capacity for roadways, the following criteria shall be used: • The impacts of development shall be based on the peak -hour, peak direction trips associated with the land use designation in which the proposed development shall occur, using the most recent published edition of the ITE " Trip Generation manual, or as may be subsequently updated. Internal capture rates may be considered in determining traffic volumes for mixed use developments; however, the applicant shall bear the burden of demonstrating any internal capture rates upon five (94 percent of the total nonresidential trips. • Roads analyzed shall include all links impacted by more than tea 10 percent 4944 of the project traffic or receiving flup h -,^^'red X500) trips per day, whichever is greater. • Methodologies used to determine transportation concurrency shall be consistent with methodologies established in the FDOT LOS Guidelines. • Roads analyzed shall include all links impacted by more than tea 10 percent (4W4 of the project traffic or receiving 500) trips per day, whichever is greater. • Methodologies used to determine transportation concurrency shall be consistent with methodologies established in the FDOT LOS Guidelines. If the preliminary level ef LOS information indicates a deficiency in capacity based on adopted level -of sePvise4LOS) standards, the developer has two alternatives: a. Accept the level of sewi LOS information as set forth in the comprehensive plan; b. Prepare a more detailed alternative Highway Capacity Analysis as outlined in the Highway Capacity Manual 2000, Transportation Research Board. The trip distribution shall be 2-24 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION Policy 2-1.11.12-1 2 4: Develop Planning for Bicycle and Pedestrian Ways. By January 1, 2012, the City shall prepare a plan for developing bicycle and pedestrian ways which connect residential areas to recreational areas and major activity centers. The plan shall include programs for implementation and anticipated funding sources and shall be consistent with roadway improvement plans identified in the engineered transportation master plan. The City Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan shall be consistent with and further enhance the MetroPlan Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. Policy 2-1.11.22-1 12is Enforce Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities RegUiFed for New Devel- opment. The City shall continue to enforce land development regulations that require: New subdivisions, replats, planned unit developments, and site plans accommodate bicycle and pedestrian traffic needs; and New multi -family residences, shopping facilities, recreational areas, schools, and other public uses provide storage areas for bicycles. Policy 2-1.11.32-1 12 Provide Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Connections between Residential Areas and Community Facilities. The land development regulations ensures that priority for both new and repair of bicycle and pedestrian facilities are given to those facilities which link residential areas with schools, shopping, recreation areas, and other community facilities. Objective 2-1.122-1.13: Coordinate GGGFdiRatie Aviation Facilities with Surface Transportation Plans. The development of the Orlando Sanford Airport shall continue to be coordinated and consistent with state, local and regional transportation plans and the Transportation Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan to ensure efficient integration with regional surface transportation systems and to minimize traffic impacts on local roads. Policy 2-1.132.12-1 12 Integrate the Airport with Regional Transit. The City shall annually coordinate with LYNX and Seminole County regarding the feasibility of a transit feeder route that links the airport with the regional bus transit system. At the time light or commuter rail is evaluated between Sanford and Orlando, the City shall encourage LYNX, Metroplan Orlando (MPO) or the entity conducting such study to also evaluate the potential for feeder bus routes linking the airport with regional transit centers and/or intermodal facilities, existing or planned within the Sanford area. Once regional transit is provided, the Airport shall work with public transit providers to incorporate signage to direct the public to available transit and to inform the public about transit and ridesharing. Policy 2-1.132.222: Integrate Bus Transit Facilities with Future Airport Expansion Plans. Pursuant to the Airport Master Plan, site design plans for future airport terminal areas shall accommodate locations for future public transit service at convenient locations for travelers and employees. Site design shall also consider the design needs for charter buses, including access and bus parking and passenger loading areas. Policy 2-1.132.32-1 43:3: Coordinate Transportation Improvements and the Airport Master Plan. The City shall ensure that coordination occurs between the development anticipated by the Airport Master Plan and any proposed or future state, local or regional transportation plans and improvements. 2-23 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION Policy 2-1.10."'42-4 1 4: Incorporate Other Potential City Roadway Improvements to be Evaluated. The City of Sanford shall amend the Capital Improvement Schedule on an annual basis to incorporate improvements to local roadways determined to be necessary in order to maintain level of service and/or improve traffic circulation. Policy 2-1.10.52-1 11:A: Participate in County Impact Fee Program. The City shall continue to participate in the County's Transportation Impact Fee Program. The City shall be represented on the impact fee's Municipal Technical and Citizen Advisory Committees. Objective 2-1.11 2: Analyze Bicycle and Pedestrian Way Facilities #e Bisysle dE PP- . The City shall analyze the feasibility for bicycle and pedestrian ways iRwhen planning for transportation facilities. 2-22 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION • Protect public health and safety; • Fulfill the City's legal commitment to provide facilities and services; or • Preserve or achieve full use of existing facilities. 2. Whether the project: • Increases efficiency of use of existing facilities; • Prevents or reduces future improvement cost; • Provides service to developed areas lacking full service; or • Promotes in -fill development. Policy 2-1.10.32-1 11v2: Coordinate Proposed Roadway Capital Improvement Program. The City of Sanford shall coordinate with FDOT, aPA Seminole County, and METROPLAN Orlando to ensure that the roadway improvements identified in the capital improvement element are completed in a timely and cost efficient manner. , the fi.m.eframe, and the funding ef th nt. This table iFiGluder, pFejeGte Iirted en the Long Gity, and the GeuRty. 2-21 November 2009 .. • .. . .. . ..... ... ... • - --- . . ... ..AeMaUTM&TaTs 2-21 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION agencies regarding SIS and FIHS facilities. Policy 2-1.9.1 2-1 0 14: Acquire Right -of -Way Asga+sitiew for Future US 17-92 Widening. In recognition of the need for future widening of portions of US 17-92 (especially between Lake Mary Boulevard and Airport Boulevard), the City shall proactively engage in acquisition of right-of-way along US 17-92 within TCEA limits. The City will work with developments along the TCEA to acquire right-of-way through strategies including but not limited to outright purchase, developer dedications, fee -in -lieu and easements. The amount of right-of-way needed will be identified after a preliminary typical section for the proposed US 17-92 widening is available. Policy 2-1.9.26: Monitor Impacts to SIS and FIHS Facilities. The TCEA will not adversely affect the Florida Intrastate Highway System (FIHS) or Strategic Intermodal System (SIS). SIS facilities in the vicinity of the TCEA includes SR 417, East Lake Mary Blvd. (east of SR 417) and SR 46 (west of Persimmon Ave.). In an effort to monitor future operation of the SIS, the baseline condition deGGFibed On PeliGy 2 1.9.14 will include an assessment of queuing of vehicles of the off_ ramps from SR 417 to Airport Blvd., CR 427 and US 17-92). The results of the queuing assessment will be communicated to FDOT. Policy 2-1.9.3: Protect Inftnatatp 140qhway 3V&t9m FIHS Functions. The City shall protect the interregional and interstate functions of the FIHS by scheduling improvements to the local roadway system. Policy 2-1.9.4 : Promote Multi -Modal Transportation to Improve Access to and from Sanford. The City of Sanford shall promote multi -modal transportation sirsalatiee to improve access to and from Sanford and other parts of Seminole County from the Intrastate Highway. PG!mGy 2 1 10 1 - Watpat F-mainanst of Intrast te Highway System. Beginning OR QGtebeF 2000, Objective 2-1.102-1 Enhance Traffic Circulation. The City shall carry out the identified capital improvements program and budget that address existing and future traffic improvement needs, including coordinating with other entities. Policy 2-1.10.12-1 11 Utilize Traffic Calming to Encourage Pedestrian Circulation. The City has adopted the Seminole County's Traffic Calming Program to assist residents and City staff in navigating the project submittal, review, and approval process for the installation of traffic calming devices. The traffic calming handbook provides strategies that facilitate safe pedestrian circulation at roadway crossings and in other areas where pedestrian and vehicular conflict may occur. Policy 2-1.10.212-1 44 2: Utilize Criteria for Evaluating Proposed Roadway Improvement. Roadway improvement proposals shall be evaluated and assigned a relative priority based on specific criteria below cited: 1. Whether the project is needed to: 2-20 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION Criteria Net New Average Daily Required Number of Strategies Level Trip Generation Level 1 Less than 50 Pedestrian Strategy: 1 Bicycle Strategy: 2, 3 Pedestrian Strategy: 1, 2, 5 Level 2 50 to 400 Bicycle Strategy: 2, 3 Transit Strategy: 4 Pedestrian Strategy: 1, 2, 5 Level 3 400 to 1,999 Bicycle Strategy: 2, 3 Transit Strategy:4 TDM Strategy: 2, 3 Pedestrian Strategy: 1, 2, 5 Level 4 Greater than 2,000 but Bicycle Strategy: 1, 2, 3 less than 5,000 Transit Strategy: 1, 4 TDM Strategy: 2, 3 Pedestrian Strategy: 1, 2, 5 Bicycle Strategy: 1, 2, 3 Level 5 Greater than 5,000 - 9,999 Transit Strategy: 1, 4 TDM Strategy: 1. 2 and 3 will apply as appropriate. TSM Strategy: 1 Pedestrian Strategy: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 (all applicable) Greater than 10,000 or SO- Bicycle Strategy: 1, 2, 3 Level 6 Fm Transit Strategy: 1, 4. 2 and 3 as appropriate TDM Strategy: 1. 2 and 3 as appropriate TSM Strategy: 1 The developer may sign a development agreement or contract with the City of Sanford for the provision of the required strategies. The choice of strategies shall be subject to final approval by the City during the site plan approval process. The strategies chosen shall relate to the particular site and transportation conditions where the development is located. The developer may choose to provide one or more strategies off-site with the City's approval. In recognition of the varying costs associated with the strategies, the City shall have the discretion to count the sufficiency of strategies, based on cost estimates provided by the developer and verified by the City. Policy 2-1.8.28 9.43: Funding fe -TCEA Strategy+es Implementation „c TGEA c}..,tegies. The funding for implementation of the above mentioned TCEA strategies will be obtained through CRA Tax Increment Financing (TIF) funds, Seminole County grants, FDOT grants, City funds and developer contributions. A financially feasible TCEA Mobility Plan will be adopted as part of the City's annual Capital Improvements Element (CIE) update. Objective 2-1.9: Coordinate with Regional Agencies. The City will partner with Seminole County. FDOT and METROPLAN ORLANDO to implement widen ina of the segment of US 17-92, especially between Lake Mary Boulevard and Airport Boulevard. The City will also coordinate with the regional 2-19 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION TCEA STRATEGIES TARGET IMPLEMENTATION IMPLEMENTATION RESPONSIBILITY TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES 1. Implementation of Transportation All employers with 35 or Demand Management (TDM) Program more employees shall CRA TIF/Employer implement a TDM program 2. Number of shared parking At least 1 redevelopment Developer opportunities implemented project per year 3. Number of joint driveways or cross At least 1 redevelopment Developer access easements established project per year TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES 1. Intersection modifications including At least 1 intersection every addition of turn lanes, pavement 1 to 2 years determined CRA TIF/Developer marking improvements, lane based on traffic analysis for Contributions reassignments redevelopment projects 2. Signal Timing optimization and Evaluation and optimization synchronization along US 17-92 by 2012. Reevaluation of FDOT corridor signal timings every 2 years after 2012. 3. Streetscaping improvements along US Inclusion of streetscape 17-92 corridor improvements with roadway FDOT/CRA TIF widening and resurfacing projects (1) Specific sites and locations for implementation of TCEA strategies will be identified in the TCEA Mobility Plan. Strategies and targets may be subject to further consideration during the development of the TCEA Mobility Plan based on whether they can be supported by reasonably available data or if additional measures need to be identified. (2) CRA/TIF funding sources are proposed for program/policy development. The future funding to meet the requirements of the programs or policies created will be the responsibility of developers to the extent that the funding is generally commensurate with development impacts. The balance of any funding needs not addressed by developer contributions shall be evaluated by the City in the TCEA Funding Program. Policy 2-1.8.27 2: Implementatien-0 TCEA Strategies. The above mentioned TCEA strategies will be implemented by the development/redevelopment projects based on the following strategy selection criteria. The number and type of strategies are chosen based on a project's trip generation potential and their impact on adjacent roadways: 2-18 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION TCEA STRATEGIES TARGET IMPLEMENTATION' IMPLEMENTATION RESPONSIBILITY 5. Number of TCEA non- residential/mixed use developments upgraded with direct pedestrian 4 developments per year Developer connection from site entrance to building entrance BICYCLE STRATEGIES 1. Lane miles of roadways with Inclusion of bicycle lanes or designated bicycle lanes similar facilities with CRA TIF/Developer roadway widening or Contributions streetscaping projects 2. Inclusion of bicycle parking, lockers, All redevelopment projects and shower facilities in new shall include bicycle developments parking. Minimum of 4 spaces per development. 1 Developer additional space for every additional 50 car parking spaces. 3. Addition of bicycle parking and related Conversion of car parking to facilities in existing developments bicycle parking or addition of bicycle parking in at least Developer 2 development projects per year TRANSIT STRATEGIES 1. Number of improved bus shelters 1 improved shelter each Developer along on LYNX routes within the TCEA year. 2. Number of new bus shelters added 1 new shelter every 2 years Developer along existing/new LYNX routes or as identified by LYNX 3. Number of bus turn out facilities 1 every 3 years or as Developer identified by LYNX 4. Number of free transit passes issued 1 month's worth of free by employers transit passes per every 5 Developer employees. 2-17 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION • Evaluate EyaluatueR ef Transit Conditions — existing transit routes, headways, ridership, improvements to facilities from previous report, existing deficiencies, developer initiated improvements, future planned/programmed improvements and funding sources. • Evaluate €val-Watien of Traffic Conditions — existing levels of service, improvements to roadway network from previous report, planned/programmed improvements and funding sources. • Evaluate €valaatiea-ef Redevelopment Activity — level of development activity within the TCEA in terms of non-residential building square footage and dwelling units, successes of TCEA mobility and redevelopment strategies. • Evaluate effectiveness of Other TCEA Strategies — implementation of other mobility and redevelopment strategies, policies and programs against adopted targets and performance measures. Policy 2-1.8.26'2 1.9.11: Implement TCEA Monitoring and Evaluation Performance Measures. The City shall monitor the success of multi -modal infrastructure, redevelopment activity and mobility/redevelopment strategies through the evaluation of performance measures and adopted targets. The baseline condition for the performance measures and respective targets will be identified/defined in 2009 and shall be the data available for comparison against the data collected for the adoption year of the TCEA or the date of subsequent Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR), and mid -EAR reporting timeframes as appropriate. The following performance measures and targets will be used in the TCEA Evaluation and Monitoring Report to assess whether or not the adopted TCEA is achieving its intended purpose: TCEA STRATEGIES TARGET IMPLEMENTATION' IMPLEMENTATION RESPONSIBILITY PEDESTRIAN STRATEGIES 1. Construction of new public sidewalks 500 linear feet per year CRA TIF/Developer Contributions 2. Improvements or repairs along existing CRA TIF/Developer network through resurfacing, removal 1,500 linear feet per year Contributions of obstacles, etc. 3. Number of pedestrian level lighting CRA TIF Developer added along US 17-92 and side 20 lights per year Contributions streets and within TCEA 4. Number of intersections upgraded with CRA TIF/Developer crosswalks, pedestrian push buttons, 4 intersections per year Contributions and pedestrian countdown heads 2-16 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION Policy 2-1.8.2329: Support a Transit Emphasis Corridor. The City will partner with LYNX to incorporate Transit Emphasis Corridor passenger amenities along US 17-92 and in Downtown Sanford within the City's two TCEAs, including but not limited to sidewalks leading to/from bus stops, lighted passenger shelters, pull out lanes at select stops, real time passenger information at select stops/transit centers, and signal prioritization and bus queue bypass lanes at select intersections. The City shall cooperate with LYNX on implementation of the long range vision for higher capacity transit service such bus rapid transit or streetcar service . Policy 2-1.8.242 1.9.9: Re vire Transportation Demand Management Programs. In accordance with the Land Development Code, all employers with 35 or more employees in the TCEAs will be required to establish employer -based transportation demand management programs (TDM). Any four of the 10 te-R TDM strategies shall be incorporated into the TDM program: 1. Alternative work schedules/flex time; 2. Preferential parking for carpool and vanpool vehicles; 3. Bicycle locker and shower facilities; 4. Information center for transportation alternatives including, but not limited to, current bicycle, sidewalk and transit maps, transit routes and schedules, and rideshare match lists; 5. Bus stop improvements; 6. On-site child care facilities; 7. Facilities and equipment to encourage telecommuting; 8. Transit incentives for employees such as subsidy of bus passes and financial incentives for carpoolers, etc. 9. Plans for delivery of goods at off-peak hours; and 10. Plans and facilities for centralized deliveries of goods for multi -tenant facilities. For all new developments and redevelopments, these programs shall be set forth within a recordable development order/agreement. Policy 2-1.8.252-1:9:48: Develop TCEA Monitoring and Evaluation Report. The City will prepare a TCEA Monitoring and Evaluation Report every seven years to evaluate the overall traffic conditions within the TCEAs and compare with changes in traffic conditions from the previous report. The report will comprise of the following analyses: • Evaluate t9f Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities — existing facilities and their comprehensiveness, connectivity to facilities outside TCEA, existing conditions, deficiencies, and improvements to the network from previous report, planned/programmed improvements and funding sources. 2-15 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION • Low cost, low impact transportation systems management measures and a transportation demand management system designed to alter travel behavior and provide alternate modes to single -occupant vehicles. Policy 2-1.8.212-1 0 A: IdentifyPriorities for Redevelopment. Based on the existing roadway network and development pattern, the US 17-92 TCEA can be identified three distinct network connectivity areas: Traditional Grid — The area within the TCEA from 1 st Street to 25th Street/SR 46/CR 46A represents a grid patterns of roadways that are closely spaced and interconnected at regular intervals; Transitional Grid — The area between 25th Street and 27th Street represents a transition from closely spaced grid connection to a larger vertical girl with receding horizontal connectivity; and Suburban Non -Grid — The area from 27th Street to the southern boundary of TCEA (Lake Mary Boulevard) represents a large block roadway pattern only one major north -south and east -west roadway with limited connectivity. In order to focus on appropriate strategies and improvements within the TCEA, the TCEA will be analyzed as two zones: Zone A — North US 17-92 TCEA Sub -district (including traditional and transitional grid described above) extending from 1 st Street to 27th Street and Zone B — South US 17-92 TCEA Sub -district (including suburban non -grid described above) extending from 27th Street to Lake Mary Boulevard). Zone A is characterized by closely spaced and well connected local street network with US 17-92 serving as the main spine. Zone B is characterized by bigger block sizes and limited connectivity. The following list provides the priorities for these zones in the TCEA Mobility Plan. Zone A — North US 17-92 TCEA Sub -district • Complete sidewalk network and provide pedestrian crossings and other pedestrian amenities at all intersections • Restore abandoned alleys for use as service access • Develop access management plan for shared driveway access • Reorient buildings to the street, especially along US 17-92 • Locate buildings closer to the street with parking accommodations in the rear • Promote service oriented commercial uses to support residential and office populations • Streetscape US 17-92 with lighting, landscaping, and other urban design features Zone B — South US 17-92 TCEA Sub -district • Create parallel streets to US 17-92 to provide alternatives for local trips • Promote urban compact mixed use developments on larger parcels • Provide connections from commercial/mixed-use destinations to residential neighborhoods • Develop a continuous and well connected sidewalk network with access to transit • Streetscape US 17-92 with lighting, landscaping, and other urban design features Policy 2-1.8.222-1 A 6: Coordinate a Transit Shuttle Service. By 20192, the City and the CRA shall coordinate with LYNX to determine the feasibility of providing a transit shuttle service along the US 17-92 corridor, within Downtown Sanford, and the surrounding residential neighborhoods. 2-14 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION Policy 2-1.8.18:9.2: Implementatiee-e-Design Recommendations e# the US 17-92 CRA 2006 Corridor Strategy Plan. The US 17-92 TCEA will incorporate all the physical design recommendations from the US 17-92 CRA 2006 Corridor Strategy Plan into a US 17-92 TCEA Overlay District Design Regulation Ordinance. The standards of the ordinance will apply to all developments within the US 17-92 TCEA and will include at a minimum the following objectives: • Manage, AAanaeikie ccess through development of an access management plan promoting shared access between business uses and minimization of pedestrian conflict points. • Encourage €seag+FFg parking management through maximum parking utilization and shared parking facilities for all developments within TCEA. • Create GFeating a sense of place within TCEA by enhancing the built environment through requirements such as building orientation to the street, parking behind the building and service access from alleys. • Encourage FiFiseUFagiAg transit friendly site layouts and roadway features to increase comfort for transit users making it a viable travel mode for local and regional trips. • Provideg of excellent pedestrian connectivity between origins and destinations within TCEA and direct pedestrian access from the roadway and bus stops to building entrances. • Develop+eg a comfortable bicycling environment within the TCEA through provision of bicycle lanes, bicycle parking areas, and bicycle lockers and shower facilities in buildings. Policy 2-1.8.193: Implementation the US 17-92 CRA 2006 Corridor Strategy Plan Policy Recommendations. The US 17-92 TCEA will incorporate all the marketing, financial and investment strategies from the US 17-92 CRA 2006 Corridor Strategy Plan into an Implementation Plan. The Implementation Plan will be used by the City to negotiate with property owners, developers and business owners within the TCEA. Policy 2-1.8.202-19:4: Develop TCEA Mobility Plan. By 2012, the City will develop a TCEA Mobility Plan, which will identify and list strategies to improve mobility within the two TCEA boundaries along with the associated time frame and funding plan. The mobility plan will include: • Identification of deficiencies in the sidewalk connections and timeline for phased completion of the sidewalk network. • Development of a designated bicycle routes within the TCEA and implementation plan connecting to integral regional bicycle routes. • Analysis of transit routes, headways, ridership and strategies to improve route alignment, headways, location and placement of bus shelters to provide access to businesses and residential neighborhoods within TCEA. 2-13 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION Policy 2-1.8.13 2 1 2a4: Evaluate Transit Facilities Faei'ity Evaluation. Within the TCEA, applicants of development or redevelopment exceeding 20,000 square feet gross floor area shall coordinate with LYNX regarding transit facilities necessary to serve that development. The developer/property owner shall install any improvements requested by LYNX unless otherwise waived by the City. Policy 2-1.8.14 2-1 It I A: Discourage Automobile Related Land Use Activities BisseUragins Auda-Mah"a 'Isla. Automobile -related land uses activities will be discouraged within the TCEA. Such activities to be discouraged by the Land Development Regulations for this District include but are not limited to drive-through facilities, automobile repair and services and sales, warehousing, and gas stations. Policy 2-1.8.16 2-1 2 I IS: Promote Watercraft Access to the C D Central Business District. Alternative modes of transportation promoted in the Transportation Concurrency Exception Area include watercraft. Retail commercial development locating adjacent to the waterfront and proposing boat dock facilities, may be encouraged or required by the City to accommodate temporary public docking facilities to allow boaters access to that business. Policy 2-1.8.16 2-1 2 17: Require Hotel Develepment and Shuttle Service. The City shall establish criteria within the Land Development Regulations that requires new lodging facilities to provide guest shuttle services to locations within downtown and other areas of Sanford, including connections to the Sanford/Orlando Airport and the Amtrak Station. The extent of such service will be based upon the number of guest rooms or other similar methods measuring transportation demands. Such criteria shall not preclude lodging business from developing alternative transit plans that could include services provided by LYNX, contributions to a City downtown shuttle service, or other similar programs when accepted by the City. Policy 2-1.8.17 2-1 9 18: Improve Transit Level of Service. LYNX shall be encouraged to improve the transit level of sewise LOS within the TCEAs from sixty60-minute headways to # 30 - minutes headways and to provide Sunday transit service at an LOS of 60 minutes or less by-yeaF 2016. PGIO .y 9_4 4 1 n.TCieSanil n nn �a,�a--,-.,rrreiEa• aFeas l IQ 17 9-2Redeyelenmen+ Area is hereby established as a TGEA, in addi+ien +e the e medes> > [Combined with Objective 2-1.8] 2-12 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION [Policy 2-1.8-24] Policy 2-1.8.6 2-1 2 7: Install Bicycle Parking Facilities at Public Buildings.' , The City shall continue to install bicycle parking facilities at all city -owned public buildings within the TCEAs. By The City shall coordinate with Seminole County regarding the installation of bicycle parking facilities at all County -owned public buildings within the TCEAs . Policy 2-1.8.7 2 1.9.8;: Require Parking Garage Design Standards and Uses. The architectural design standards contained in the Land Development Code for parking garages will be adhered to while designing parking garages. The intent of the design standards is to assure attractive construction that complements the character of the historic downtown or the principal building. Covered waiting areas for transit or shuttle service shall be provided at parking garages when determined appropriate by the City. The Land Development Code shall allow compatible retail commercial uses and services to locate on the ground floor of parking garage facilities. Policy 2-1.8.8 2-19: Develop Seminole Boulevard Pedestrian Pathwav System. Redevelopment plans for the Waterfront/Downtown CRA shall continue to include a pedestrian pathway system along Seminole Boulevard and the St. Johns River. Policy 2-1.8.9 2-1o: Provide Public Parking and Enhance Signage. To maximize use of public parking lots, the Land Development Code shall allow directional signage that increases public awareness of parking lot locations within the TCEAs. Such signage shall be located only within or adjacent to public rights-of-way. Policy 2-1.8.10'x: Monitor Traffic Impacts MORROFIR9. Though exempt from concurrency, new development and redevelopment with the TCEAs shall submit to the City a traffic impact analysis report. This report shall evaluate all roadways identified by the City. The evaluation shall follow professional standards described within the Land Development Code. Exemption from concurrency does not exempt any applicant or property owner from conducting traffic impact analysis necessary to evaluate traffic safety and operational standards or from installing road and access improvements necessary to promote public safety. The annual update of the City's concurrency management system (CMS) shall monitor traffic impacts generated from new development occurring within the TCEA. The update report shall identify those traffic impacts affecting the level of service status for roadways within and near the TCEA. Policy 2-1.8.11 2-12: Assess Intermodal Transportation Facilities,Fasilfty. At such time as an intermodal transportation facility receives funding commitments from state, regional and/or federal sources, the City shall undertake the following activities: a. A study shall evaluate appropriate land use designations and zoning categories within the vicinity of the intermodal facility. Based on this study, the City shall assess any need to assign zoning and land development regulations that further pedestrian and transit transportation alternatives. b. Evaluate the area surrounding the intermodal facility for annexation/incorporation into the TCEA. Policy 2-1.8.12 'moo: Require Adequate Sidewalk Facilities. The City shall continue to require development or redevelopment to install sidewalks where Rene-essU where sidewalks are not present within or adjacent to public right-of-way. The City shall require a developer/property owner to replace and improve deteriorated sidewalks located along roadways adjacent to the new development or redevelopment. 2-11 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION Objective 2-1.8: Establish Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas (TCEA). °° TrrTvEA;s dWiReated 9R Map 11 8, FUWFe TFaRspeFtatieR . The US 17-92 CRA is hereby established as a TCEA, in addition to the existing Downtown Sanford TCEA/CRA as delineated on Map 1-4 of the future land use map series, to reduce adverse impacts of concurrency and to promote compact urban redevelopment and infill development to fulfill the City's redevelopment goals. Transportation programs and improvements within the TCEA shall emphasize pedestrian and transit modes of transportation. The TCEA will promote the redevelopment objective through providing mobility for all modes, implementing good urban design principles, achieving a balanced mix of land uses and promoting network connectivity. Transportation and mobility needs within the TCEA shall be met through the implementation of the following policies: Policy 2-1.8.1: Consider Transportation Concurrency Exception ; xeMptiGn. The City may grant exceptions to transportation concurrency requirements shall net apply4e, for development or redevelopment within the City's two TCEAs, US 17-92 and Downtown Sanford. Policy 2-1.8.2: Maintain TCEARA Boundaries. Only areas located within the central business district and CRAs, as delineated on the Future Land Use Map, may be incorporated into the TCEA, unless sufficient justification is provided that supports the addition of the respective parcels within the TCEA. Policy 2-1.8.3: Reguire Pedestrian and Transit Friendly Site Design. All developments are required to adhere to the Land Development Code requirements for site and building design promoting pedestrian, bicycle and transit modes. The design standards include: • Direct pedestrian pathways from building entranceways to public sidewalks and transit stops; • Building orientation toward public streets; • Transit easements on private property; • Bicycle parking facilities; • Pedestrian lighting, • Streetscape design compatible with pedestrian, bicycle and transit facilities. Policy 2-1.8.4: Coordinate Downtown Transit Service. By 2012, the City and the CRA shall coordinate with LYNX to conduct a feasibility study for a transit shuttle service or rapid bus transit that can serve the central business district and the northern Seminole County area including Heathrow and the Seminole Community College campus. Policy 2-1.8.5: Evaluate Feasibility of Transportation Management Associations. By 2012, the City shall evaluate the feasibility and potential effectiveness for establishing a Transportation Management Association (TMA) for major employers within the central business district. If a TMA is not feasible, the City shall periodically reassess its feasibility at least once every three years. 2-10 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION system through the on-going monitoring and evaluation of the Comprehensive Plan, especially the Future Land Use and Transportation Elements. Objective 2-1.7: Ensure Right -of -Way Protection. The City of Sanford shall protect existing and future right-of-way from building encroachment as well as coordinate with Seminole County to ensure that the additional rights-of-way necessary for roadway improvements planned for 2020 are acquired. Policy 2-1.7.1: Continue Acquisition and Preservation of Rights -of -Way. Sanford shall continue to maintain measures for identifying and PF9teG#ngpreservinq existing rights-of-way as part of the City's continuing planning operations. In addition, the City shall continue to maintain the integrity of the Future Land Use Map and the Future Transportation System Map, by monitoring the impacts of development and ensuring consistency of new development with the Future Land Use and Transportation Elements. The City's long range planning activities shall continue to identify possible needs for additional future rights-of-way based on-ge nff analysis of land use and tfa#fis Policy 2-1.7.2: Enforce Standards for Road RM Right -of -Way Acquisition. The City hereby adopts minimum standards for road rights-of-way as listed below. The City shall preserve existing rights-of-way and shall enforce standards requiring dedication of roadways, the need forwhich was generated by new development. The City shall work with the County and FDOT to acquire right-of- way to address existing or projected future LOS deficiencies. ROADWAY RIGHT-OF-WAY WIDTH (in feet) Arterials 100 Major Collector 80 Minor Collector 60 Local Streets 50 (exclusive curb and gutter) Policy 2-1.7.3: Require Mandatory RAA/ Right -of -Way Dedication/Fees in Lieu. The City shall continue to require mandatory dedication or fees in lieu thereof as a condition of development approval associated with plats, replats, PUDs, or site plans where such developments generate a need for new or improved roadways. The purpose and intent of the program shall be to assure that: 1) adequate road #AAF right-of-way and necessary roadway improvements are dedicated and developed concurrent with the impacts of new development; and 2) the cost of such improvements shall be borne by the developer generating the need for the facilities. Policy 2-1.7.4: Require Prevision a On-site and Off-site Roadway Improvements. All plans for all• new development shall be evaluated by the City. Prior to receiving a development permit, the applicant's plans must incorporate necessary on- and off-site roadway improvements or equitable contributions in lieu thereof which are required as part of a development application pursuant to the Comprehensive Plan or any other requirement of the Code of Ordinances, as exiStS OF as May In cases involving unpaved roads adjacent to a proposed development, the applicant shall be required to pave the portion of the road which the development will be utilizing. The applicant shall not be required to pave adjacent unpaved roads if the development will not be accessing those roads. In cases of insufficient rights-of-way adjacent to a proposed development, the applicant shall be required to donate the land necessary to make the rights-of- way compliant with the requirements of the Land Development Code. 2-9 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION intrude into neighborhoods, the City will ensure that the State and/or County provide buffers such as concrete walls, landscaped buffers, berms, and other similar buffers alongside the roadway. The City will coordinate with the State and/or County to review the feasibility of relocating roadways when intrusion is proposed. Policy 2-1.5.3: Minimize MiniRiZing Impact of Arterial Roadways on Adjacent Neighborhoods. Arterial roadways and intersections shall, to the extent possible, be located and designed sista-as to minimize impacts to existing neighborhoods nor produce excessive traffic on local roads through residential areas. The following are serne ef the characteristics by which the City will determine whether neighborhoods are adversely impacted: • severed existing neighborhoods • more traffic other than local traffic using roadways • widening of roadways which result in roadways constructed closer to residential homes: and • other similar characteristics In areas where arterial roadways and their intersections adversely affect existing neighborhoods, the City will coordinate with the County and/or State to provide buffers :2 1 9 2. The City will also review the feasibility of relocating roadways and intersections as well as limiting the number of roadway connections and accesses. Where appropriate, the City will implement traffic calming improvements. Policy 2-1.5.4: Minimize Minimizing Adverse Environmental Impacts. Beginning in Ontehe 2 The City shall locate and design roadways to minimize adverse environmental impacts. Where sensitive environmental areas will be impacted by roadway construction, the City will mitigate those impacts by taking action as pfevidedfef adopted in the Conservation Element is Objective 2-1.6: Coordinate Land Use and Transportation Elements. The Transportation Element will continue to be coordinated with the goals objectives and policies of the Future Land Use Element and other elements of the Comprehensive Plan, to maintain internal consistency and Similarly, the City shall review new development and redevelopment proposals to ensure that major traffic generators generally remain in the compact commercial core areas. This eWeGtive is alse Policy 2-1.6.1: Maintain Element Consistency between City and County Comprehensive Plans. The City shall maintain and enforce a G9FRpFeheRsive Plan Transportation Element that is consistent with other elements of the City Comprehensive Plan as well as applicable provisions of the Seminole County Comprehensive Plan. Policy 2-1.6.2: Utilize FLUM to Guide Transportation Planning. The adopted Future Land Use MapF( LUM) shall be used to guide the planning of future transportation corridors and facilities to ensure the proper coordination between transportation planning and future development patterns. In addition, the Land Development Code shall ensure that site plans for future development and redevelopment are reviewed for impacts of projected vehicle trip generation on existing and planned roadway capacity. The City concurrency management system and adequate facilities ordinance shall assist in aveiding mitigating future adverse impacts on roadways. Policy 2-1.6.3: Monitoring of -and Evaluate the Transportation Element. The City of Sanford shall continue to provide a safe, convenient and efficient multi -modal Gkou4atien--transportation 2-8 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION TFaR6PnFtatiQRFDOT. This coordinated effort will further the City's objectives, policies, and programs related to maintenance of an integrated multi -modal transportation system consistent with adopted level of service standards. Policy 2-1.3.5: Assesst Traffic Impacts of New Developments. The City shall require the submittal of a traffic impact study for new development that is anticipated to generate at least 500 daily trips, 100 peak -hour trips, or at the discretion of City staff. Objective 2-1.4: Provide Efficient Public Transit Service. The City shall coordinate with Seminole County and LYNX to address the provision of efficient public transit services based upon existing and proposed major trip generators and attractors, safe and convenient public transit, land uses, and accommodation of the special needs of the transportation disadvantaged. Also, Sanford shall coordinate with the County's transit provider to encourage ease of transfer between mass transit and all other modes, where it improves the functioning of the Transportation network. Policy 2-1.4.1: Encourage Land Uses that Promote Transit. The City shall coordinate policies and projects with the future land use element to encourage land uses that promote public transportation in the DowntownMaterfront area and along the SR 46 and US 17-92 corridors. Policy 2-1.4.2: Provide Linkages between Transit and Significant Attractors. Sanford shall coordinate with Seminole County to ensure that linkages are provided from the major transportation corridors along routes to land uses generating or attracting heavy automobile traffic such as commercial development along SR 46 and US 17-92 corridors and in the DowntownMaterfront area, institutional uses, and existing and future residential developments. Policy 2-1.4.3: Enhance Future Transit Facilities to Provide Ease of Transfer. Future transit facilities in the City of Sanford shall incorporate provisions to enhance the ease of transfer with other modes (e.g., park-and-ride lots, bicycle lockers and racks, pedestrian walkways, taxi stands). This shall be done in conjunction with LYNX and MetroPlan. Objective 2-1.5: Establish a Transportation System that Protects Neighborhood Integrity and Promotes Community Values. The transportation system will protect neighborhood integrity, while providing a system of arterial and collector streets to direct through traffic away from local residential streets. The City shall coordinate with the State and the County to ensure that the functional classification system is responsive to both existing development and the City's future land use plans. Sanford shall work to ensure that the multi -modal transportation system preserves environmentally sensitive areas, conserves natural resources, and promotes community aesthetic values. Policy 2-1.5.1: Increase Traffic Circulation PFejeets—and Reduce Impacts to SeRSItwe Surrounding Land Use., The City shall continue to initiate future traffic circulation and access projects that not only provide connectivity between heavy trip generators and attractors, but also initiate strategies that maderatemitigate traffic impacts on residential neighborhoods and/or direct through traffic away from residential neighborhoods that may be impacted. Policy 2-1.5.2: Minimize Intrusion of Arterial Roadways into Neighborhoods. The City will, as much as possible, protect the character of existing neighborhoods from the intrusion of arterial roadways. The criteria used to determine whether arterials will be allowed to intrude in existing neighborhoods are whether there are problems maintaining level-ef sewise LOS standards on the applicable roadways, whether there are safety problems, right-of-way availability and whether there are viable alternatives . In areas where arterial roadways 2-7 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION landscaping. Policy 2-1.2.3: Establish Parking Strategies in Downtown Sanford, the Waterfront, and for Major Traffic Generators. By januaFy 2 #w --The City shall 4ave established parking strategies for the Waterfront area, Downtown Sanford, and other major traffic generators in order to promote the transportation goals and objectives set forth in this Plan. The strategies shall be enforced ifs through coordination G99F61inating of ongoing and future transportation projects impacting land use and requiring off-street parking. Policy 2-1.2.4: Establish Land Use, Site and Building Design Standards for Public Transit Corridors., The City shall establish land use, site, and building design standards for development iA aed along tho%transit corridors. This will assure the public transit accessibility 4for existing infill and new development to pablis tFans4. Policy 2-1.2.5: Coordinate Transit Planning with Land Use Planning Process. The revised Land Development Code shall include a mandatory site plan review process during which all development shall be reviewed for impacts on transit. Applicable improvements shall be required to facilitate the movement of transit users between major activity centers and nearby transit stops. Similarly, the City short and long range planning efforts shall continue to manage new commercial development and redevelopment in the Downtown/Waterfront area and along the SR 46 and US 17- 92 corridors, so that the City maintains a compact commercial core easily accessible to the Seminole County roadway network and transit system. Objective 2-1.3: Coordinate with Metroplan, FDOT, and Other Agencies. The City shall coordinate the transportation system services and facilities with the plans and programs of tine MetroPlan, FDOT, and other agencies as appropriate. Policy 2-1.3.1: Coordinate Roadway and Transit Improvements. l3eginning in GeAebeF 2QQQ-, tThe City shall continue to coordinate roadway improvements with future public transit facility improvements as identified by Seminole County Metroglan, LYNX, and FDOT. Policy 2-1.3.2: Utilize tItifizai#en of County and State Numerical Indicators. Agin 9steher-29 the City shall continue to use County and State numerical indicators for measuring the achievement of City mobility goals. Numerical Indicators shall include: • Modal splits; • Annual transit trips per capita; and • Automobile occupancy rates. Policy 2-1.3.3: Coordinate with County, MetroPlan and FDOT fGF I... -.l...,..,. nt—atia-n of rile .en The Ci�LSaefefd shall continue to work with Seminole County, MetroPlan, FDOT, and other pertinent agencies to establish strategies, agreements and other mechanisms # at deanef+stfate- he area wide coordination necessary to implement the transportation, land use, parking and other provisions of the Transportation Element. Policy 2-1.3.4: Establish a Multi -Agency Review Process. In addition, the City will establish a multi -agency planning and development review process for proposed public improvement plans for streets, pedestrian and bike ways, as well as any other public improvements which may potentially impact and/or further maintenance of an integrated multi -modal transportation system. In this manner the City will establish and maintain a continuing technical review and coordination mechanism involving the Orlando Area MPO (MetroPlan) and the F=190da Depailment ^s 2-6 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION enforceimplement athe land development regulations by DeGember. 2001 whi that iaseperateestablish standards for: • Controlling connections and access points of driveways and roadways to existing roadways; • Preventing conflicts between vehicular, pedestrian and rail traffic; and • Providing a traffic circulation system which is designed to accommodate the demands of emergency service delivery systems. Policy 2-1.1.88: Designate County Facilities within an Urban Center. The following County seAestef facilities within the City of Sanford shall be designated as within an urban center: • CR 46A - West City Limits to Old Lake Mary Road; • Airport Boulevard - SR 46 to CR 46A; • Upsala Road (CR 15) — SR 417 to 25th Street; and • Old Lake Mary Road - Country Club Road to Southwest Road. Policy 2-1.1.9: Implement the SR 46 Transportation Agreement. The City of Sanford will adhere to the provisions of the transportation agreement between the City, Seminole County, and FDOT regarding the widening of SR 46 from Mellonville Avenue to East of SR 415 from two to four lanes by 2013. Policy 2-1.1.10: Establish Is a Long Term Concurrency Management System for 25th Street / SR 46 / CR46A. 14y 2910, tThe City shall, in coordination with the Florida Department of Transportation and Seminole County, establish a long-term concurrency management system to address potential roadway deficiencies along SR 46 east arrest of Interstate 4) and SR 415, and prioritize roadway improvements for these corridors within a timeframe of up to 10 ter—years. The long term concurrency management system will be coordinated with the Capital Improvements Element and will include periodic monitoring of level of semina LOS conditions and funding status. Objective 2-1.2: Coordinate Land Uses and TWAS GiFGUIatien Transportation. The City shall coordinate the transportation system with the Future Land Use Map Series and ensure that existing and proposed population densities, housing and employment patterns, land uses, and all other short and long term development plans are consistent with the ci transportation mades system and services pfepesed. Policy 2-1.2.1: Integrated Transportation and Land Use Planning. The City shall continually monitor and evaluate the impacts of existing and proposed future land development on the transportation system in order to achieve integrated management of the land use decisions and transportation impacts and opportunities. Policy 2-1.2.2: Enforce Traffic Circulation Site Plan Review Criteria. The City shall enforce traffic circulation site plan review criteria in the Land Development Code. The criteria address such factors as: • trip generation; • desigFi of e#+sieRt internal traffic circulation and parking facilities design, including mini- mizing pedestrian and vehicular conflict, off-street parking, as well as safe and convenient circulation and maneuverability; • seRUel-efaccess points; • potential need for acceleration/deceleration lanes; • adequate surface water management and drainage; and 2-5 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION Policy 2-1.1.32-114: Establish Transportation System Management Strategies. As adopted ire The City shall egfefceimplement Transportation System Management (TSM) Strategies as appropriate to improve system efficiency and enhance safety- TSM strategies may be required as a condition of development approval throughout the City. Policy 2-1.1.42-115: Enforce the Concurrency Management System. The City's Land Development Code mandates that physical improvements required to provide adequate roadway capacity be in place prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. In addition, prior to approval of a site plan the developer/applicant shall demonstrate to the City's satisfaction that required on - and off-site roadway and traffic improvements shall be in place concurrent with the impacts of development. Also, the developer shall demonstrate to the City's satisfaction that the proposed development shall not cause the level of service LOS on adjacent public roads to decline below the adopted LOS standards ^^+^h'*^he.J OR P910GY 2 1.1-4. . No development shall be approved that is projected to generate a traffic volume which would decrease exceed the existing adopted LOS below the adopted standard, except within the City's two TCEAs. Policy 2-1.1.52-1 1 A: Controlfiiwg Vehicular Access+bMW to Major Thoroughfares. By ber-- ' , *The City shall continue to provide an adequate, properly designed and safe system for controlling vehicular accessibility to major thoroughfares through the control of the intersections of access points, including driveways and roads, to connecting roadways. This action shall be facilitated by-adepting through design standards and procedures as ^^F* of the Land de which address: 1. Adequate storage and turning bays; 2. Provision of service roads; 3. Spacing and design of median openings and curb cuts; 4. Driveway access and spacing; 5. Cross and/or ioint access; and 6. Traffic operations. These controls shall be coordinated through the site plan review and building permit process as provided for in the City Code. Policy 2-1.1.62-m:7-: Require On -Site Transportation Improvements and Safe Traffic Flow. The City shall enforce existing development regulations, which require that all developments provide safe and convenient on-site traffic flow considering motorized and non -motorized vehicle parking and internal circulation needs as well as pedestrian #iewcirculation. Policy 2-1.1.72-1-1:1t: Enforce Controlled Access Regulations. in adds GR to the ^. i -g -ti,^ Ardinan The City shall continue to 2-4 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION 7. Map 2-6: Significant Park Facilities (2009) identifies the significant parking facilities within the City. These parking facilities typically provide 100 parking spaces or more and are associated with the major trip generators/attractors. 8. Map 2-7: Railways. Intermodal, and Airport Facilities (2009) identifies the CSX railways. Amtrak station, the bulk transport terminal. The Amtrak station is also the general location of the future commuter rail station being proposed. 9. Map 2-8: Existing Peak Hour Peak Direction LOS on Maior Thoroughfares (2009) illustrates the current peak hour peak direction LOS for major roadways within the City of Sanford. 10. Map 2-9: Maior Thoroughfares by Number of Lanes (2025) illustrates the major thoroughfares in the City of Sanford by the number of through lanes for each facility type anticipated in 2025. 11. Map 2-10b: Jurisdictional Roadway Classification Map (2025) identifies the jurisdictional classification of roadways within the City's boundaries and reveals the jurisdiction responsible for maintenance. 12. Map 2-11: Major Trip Generators and Attractors (2025) illustrate the existing major trip generators and attractors within the City of Sanford as well as any new attractors. There are no new major trip generators forecasted at this time. 13. Map 2-12: Future Transit Facilities (2025) illustrates LYNX public transit service proposed new routes and route extensions. Route 103 currently services the southern portion of US 17-92; however this map illustrates its planned extension to continue through the City on US 17-92 turning west on SR 46 and south on Towne Center Boulevard to the proposed Seminole Towne Center Transit center. Link 419 — Sanford East would provide service to eastern Sanford, between the Seminole Center transit center. downtown Sanford and Central Florida Regional Hospital. Link 420 — Sanford West would provide circulator service to western Sanford area. The Link would operate between Seminole Center transit center and the Central Florida Regional Hospital. 14. Map 2-13: Future Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (2025) identifies proposed on -street bicycle facilities improvements within the City of Sanford along with the proposed Pedestrian -related improvements. 15. Map 2-14: Proiected Peak Hour Peak Direction Levels of Service (2013) illustrates the projected peak hour peak direction LOS calculated for major roadways within the City based on build -out of land uses proposed in the City Future Land Use Map. 16. Map 2-15: Proiected Peak Hour Peak Direction Levels of Service (2025) illustrates the projected peak hour peak direction LOS calculated for major roadways within the City based on build -out of land uses proposed in the City Future Land Use Map. 2-3 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION ROADWAYS LOS STANDARD State minor arterials outside the urbanized LOS D area *The City may sfia# grant exceptions to the transportation concurrency requirements for #fie development projects within the City's two TCEAs, US 17-92 and Downtown Sanford. The section of US 17-92 from Lake Mary Boulevard to Airport Boulevard has a defined capacity as provided in the table above. /+enter A -hall epeFate at 108 nnu OF he##er at LOS "I=" e. Limited Anness Cr,eili#ie 1 A LOS shall he G; Fiastern Beltway shall he I,. f. State F:RffiReF aFteFial fag-iliti%- ;VithiR the wFbaRized aFea shall epeFate at 1=06 9 9F be#eFj State [LOS standards reconfigured in table above] Policy 2-1.1.2: Develop and Maintain the Future Transportation Map Series. PUFGUant to 919(5}4The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element hereby includes the Future Transportation Map Series as described below: 1. Map 2-1: Major Thoroughfares by Number of Lanes (2009) identifies each major thoroughfare within the City of Sanford by the number of through lanes for the facility. 2. Map 2-2a: Maior Thoroughfares by Functional Classification (2009) identifies arterial and collector streets and their functional classification for each facility. The functional classification system indicates the role of each thoroughfare and assists in defining land use relationships. 3. Map 2-2b: Jurisdictional Roadway Classification Map (2009) identifies the jurisdictional classification of roadways within the City's boundaries and reveals the jurisdiction responsible for maintenance. 4. Map 2-3: Maior Trip Generators and Attractors (2009) identifies the location of the major trip generators and attractors in the City of Sanford including City Hall, Civic Center, Aquatic Center, Orlando -Sanford Airport, Fort Mellon Park, Seminole County Court House, Sanford Museum, and Monroe Harbor Marina. 5. Map 2-4: Existing Public Transit Facilities (2009) illustrates public transit service_currentl serving the City of Sanford. Three LYNX fixed routes (34, 46, and 103) operate within the City of Sanford. Route 34 services the central core of Sanford and the downtown area, while route 46 services SR 46 and the western part of the City. Route 103 services the southern ortion of US 17-92. 6. Map 2-5: Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (2009) identifies existing bicycle and Pedestrian facilities located within the City of Sanford. 2-2 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER 2: TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT GOAL 2-1: PROVIDE A ENSURE INTEG-R-ATED MULTI -MODAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM. THE CITY SHALL DEVELOP AND MAINTAIN AN INTEGRATED MULTI- MODAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IN THE CITY OF SANFORD WHICH PROMOTES MOBILITY AND ACCESSIBILITY TO MOVE PEOPLE AND GOODS IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH THE LOCAL AND Q=A9 LAND USE, AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION GOALS, AS WELL AS COORDINATED WITH PROPOSED RESIB€NTIAL AND €GGNGMIG DEVELOPMENTS. THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM SHALL FOCUS ON STRESS MULTI -MODAL MOBILITY THAT OFFERS TRANSPORTATION AND TRANSIT SERVICES TO A' I� RESIDENTS AND— S IN THE MOST EFFICIENT, CONVENIENT, ACCESSIBLE, AND AFFORDABLE MANNER POSSIBLE. Objective 2-1.1: Provide a F43* Safe, Convenient, and Efficient Multi -Modal Transportation System. The City of Sanford shall provide feF an integrated multi -modal transportation system that emphasizes safe, convenient, and efficient movement of motorized and non -motorized vehicles as well as pedestrians within Sanford through the use of management systems as described in the below policies. Policy 2-1.1.1: Establish Level of ServiceL( OS) Standards for Major Thoroughfares. The City shall maintain use the following adopted peak hour LOS standards . ROADWAYS LOS STANDARD All City collectors LOS D All County collectors and minor arterials that LOS D are not within a County designated urban center All County collectors and minor arterials that LOS E are within an area designated as 1-4 High Intensity, Westside Industry and Commerce. and Airport Industry and Commerce All state principal arterials other than freeways LOS D that are not classified as backlogged or constrained Exceptions US 17-92* LOS E US 17-92* from Lake LOS F with acceptable traffic volumes consistent with LOS E for a 6 -lane roadway Mary Boulevard to Airport Boulevard (i.e., 51,800 daily: 4.920 peak hour two-way: and 2.710 peak hour peak direction) Limited Access Roadways 1-4 LOS D Eastern Beltway LOS D State minor arterials within the urbanized area LOS E 2-1 November 2009 City of Sanford Housing Element Table 3-26 Severely Cost Burdened Units with Income Less Than 80 Percent of AMI by Tenure and Income Level Household Income as Percent of AMI Owner 2010 to 2015 2015 to 2020 Owner 2010 1 2015 2020 2025 Less than 30 percent 276 321 370 421 30 to 50 percent 283 331 383 438 50 to 80 percent 170 198 227 255 Total Owner 729 850 1 980 1,114 Renter Less than 30 percent 125 122 Less than 30 percent 858 983 1,105 1,226 30 to 50 percent 486 565 645 735 50 to 80 percent 106 123 142 161 Total Renter 1,450 1,671 1,892 2,122 Total Owner+ Renter 1 2,179 2,521 1 2,872 3,236 Source: Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse, 2008 Based on the data presented in Table 3-26, the number of severely cost burdened households is expected to steadily increase through 2025. The number of severely cost burdened households is projected to increase by approximately 65 percent, from 2,179 in 2010 to 3,599 in 2025. This rate of increase is consistent with the projected increase in the number of households in the City during this time period. The growth in severely cost burdened households is summarized in Table 3-27. Table 3-27 Growth in Severely Cost Burdened Units with Income Less Than 80 Percent of AMI by Tenure and Income Level Household Income as Percent of Annual Median Income AMI Owner 2010 to 2015 2015 to 2020 2020 to 2025 Total Less than 30 percent 45 49 51 145 30 to 50 percent 48 52 55 155 50 to 80 percent 28 29 28 85 Total Below 80 percent 121 130 134 385 Renter Less than 30 percent 125 122 121 368 30 to 50 percent 79 80 90 249 50 to 80 percent 17 19 19 55 Total Below 80 percent 1 221 221 230 672 Total Owner + Renter 342 351 364 1057 Source: Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse, 2008 The FHDC defines two classes of renter households, "prime homeowners" and "prime renters", as another useful indicator of the need for affordable housing. These two classes of renter households are important to evaluate because their age and income are at a critical place in the cycle of housing consumption. The FHDC defines the "prime homeowner' segment as those renters between the ages of 35 and 64 whose incomes are between 50 percent and 80 percent of area median and "prime renters" as those renter households aged 15 to 34 with incomes less City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-21 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Housing Element than 50 percent of area median. Table 3-28 presents the total households for each of these segments by year. Table 3-28 "Prime Homeowner" and "Prime Renter" Households Income Between 50 and 80 Percent 2010 of Area Median Income 2015 2020 2025 Prime Homeowner 920 1,044 1,168 1,262 Prime Renter 890 987 1,055 1,100 Source: Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse, 2008 City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-22 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Housing Element SUMMARY The following provides a summary of the findings from the data collected as part of the Data Inventory and Analysis. Based on the findings, preliminary recommendations have been developed to help address the City's need to accommodate all income levels. The findings include: ■ Per capita income rates and the number of cost burdened households in the City relative to residents countywide identifies the need for continuing the monitoring of affordable housing units in the City and expanding the number of these units to meet demand; ■ There are few households in the City classified as substandard, with percentages similar to the County; ■ Cost of rental and owner -occupied housing is lower that the County median costs. While this is consistent with and appropriate given the median income rates for the area, it indicates a need to both improve the existing housing stock as well as attempt to encourage the development housing at a higher value; ■ The older age of housing stock and associated maintenance costs may have an impact on the housing cost burden of lower income residents; ■ Home sales were below the median for Palm Beach County; ■ Significant population growth is projected to continue through 2025 and there is limited available vacant land to accommodate project growth; ■ Much of the future development is expected to occur in the form of multi -family housing, single-family housing on smaller lots and in the City's identified activity centers; ■ The City is well served by needed infrastructure to accommodate future growth. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-23 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Map: 2-1 ` Lake Monroe Major Thoroughfares Number of Lanes (2009) '-I. � 1.� � rl:: �_._. 1.,171._.• .cn&.. /�, ' f 1�' 46 -1 I l 1••1 �., 1 -. ■A1 mml. OI 1111 ]6 J� i' I�Ii t. r Legend ,� ;5..... nil 'I111 In : ( z g i r..i L i! i L In■ramwtl nom nu laml����!I!i11, �l��I� a f '�■usmm lana nu 1■■uoulnl - ¢ ! ' rl 11: , 7 uIs.1.m1! SR 11■1 Int In 11111111:- .11pm. aur ui aaI1111111C .,�J. = City Limits SIN IgMM 4/ ■■i nu g o m ■ nnm Tilt 1■N unR„l CE RY t VFr_ I .El .. �._ o ' k �.a. �[ I is tale W Number of Lanes (2009) moo' 1 �� -��� ._m ..._'' ® ._o 2 Lanes h a - 4 Lanes m- C �� ��M■u■ 6 Lanes SR E■ 417 ii n, WE — 1 • ,� ttt r _—� j �T — LAKE MARY BLVD Miles 1 r ti ,10 Spurn: CNy o! S+Nad GIS. M09 FDOT cwrvy ,y, FWT LYNX Lake Jesup 0m® and AssWates. Inc. F,1- zan City of Sanford Map: 2-2a Lake Monroe Functional Classification (2009) L-J, Legend L.J e46�"A 131 us 7-9 foe a: City Limits xti. Functional Classification o 46 tf E CE. RY 13TH ST• Collector -32 uj w SR Minor Arterial 415 w Principal Arterial S 25TH ST R =7 D4 AIRPOR 0 N > MARQUETTEAIF 7 1 Ij I o w LAKE MARY BLVD 0 0.5 1 Miles s.—, cny,f2008 ,.I, cl-ly Ly- ti Lake Jesup ff" � MI.)b C]" U R' I(Wey4iom candAs1=1 .15 City of Sanford Map: 2-2b Lake Monroe Jurisdictional Roadway Classification Roadway (2009) [._ I. sR ,r 46 E L 1 Jj a. !, r. it ���� : r4:i cii� US (1 Yi i ■ 1 l 7 9 .! I L y :,WON 1! SR �� 46�1 iiia r: .4 ti.. ..III p rlfl q 7- W! ...� iiia -.ate..._.. Legend LJ MOM r. CELRY�IVE � - 4 s W a a' Wml City Limis ^' F J SR 45 a N 1 N- Maintenance Responsibility City .25TH 3T N County ` Department of Transportation ( IJ Lti — - 1 _J _. SLI I Florida Turnpike AIRPOR D •'--'-�- MAROUETTE AVE Y W L' LAKE MARY SLVO i_ I i _ !_..—;i�"o i [_ISI i -v 0 0.5 1 �_ i -; • i _--i '•--._-- tLLJii Miles Sovice: Gry of SeNad. 2008 I � �� ewer Lr� 5 /Jesup Lake and Hom and Associates, Inc. November 2008 City of Sanford Map: 2-3 Lake Monroe Major Trip Generators and Attractors (2009) fJ, IV'-, �j" —` �� �7 i I _ Legend jy r I 46 ' iooinicic o U 1 I I I r•. �' us r City Limns 79 1 r�_� ,a Q■OW." ® `° ! f Name ® Ameripath Sanford Hospital 46 �EIli 13TH ST - w > f.` �Y (, ! Q a--u .. a a s o N W a sR d15 Civic Center Parks Monroe Harbor Marina ® Orlando-Sanford Airport fi , -7 I _'q, 1�. - zsrR sr III ' SR L__ - 46 - i-i sR an ��- i• i r �-_� r r;�r-� `J ^l Orlando-Sanford Airport Industrial Area ® Sanford Aquatic Center G Sanford Auto Train Amtrak Q Sanford City Hall lie ,� � r--1 �• i.�r_ F' F J Sanford Museum e v- �P I ?� J . r w AIRPOR 0 (D Sanford Plaza ® Seminole Centre J -- - -ter, L j � � l ® Seminole Community College U"• W I MARUUETTEAVE (ID Seminole County Courthouse "o Seminole Town Center US 17-92 Commercial Area LAKE MARY BLVD II i W E ,L S Lr- 0 0.5 1 Jy Miles s�m�,d� cel Foor Lake Jesup I� IWeyu_Y _ and Associates, Inc. c,bnn zoos City of Sanford 0� Map: 2-4 Lake Monroe Public Transit Facilities (2009) Legend SR City Limits — �� ta 1 �� � �cSfhl Inniii inl t r nmi°O 'IaI�I;I Iii ipnl n u5 am nu laa �E�lii [lEJp �ti�@t II' I O LYNX Transit Cei Iter wll 'l .9.0,nuInmnmar ,filleufillnl aIInnnPl an iatll��unn7il In !l ul. IV .. LYNX Route 46n lI CRY Il ;nol 181111. --__— `� is SR E9 Route 46 Shelter - rc ;� n ` ��I 415 Route 46 Bus Stop .d- iimn Oil LYNX Route 34 I' SR 48 r - '- 0 Route 34 Shelter 477 --I o Route 34 Bus Stop Lzj LYNX Route 103 S t AIRPOR D I j <, I'�: w r. . �'�'� I ■ ' > ■ MAROUETTE AVE _ LPO, �x� li 7� YY ■ S LAKE MARY BLVD Tn 1 --j I 0 0.5 1 I l �.� �_.� Miles r- Saeca: M Sawd.200B S— scmme cw.ry LYNX LYNX Lake Jesup - K� •Fbm and AAss$i?i tes, hre. Fr.Crwry }N3 ' City of Sanford rN� Lake Monroe Yom,-,..—� Map: 2-5 Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (2009) c L J SR •J i I i ( b„' US r in L �(, c. F. Fgyp 17e .A, 2, --,�--- Legend _� i :._.I .:qr� � n.m erg �, j._,i•�..�... .•,.•�: % �E7ifPlWnf. q6 u 'i ..wr �� + - [!'!Rt CELERYAVE = City Limits L� .5!'..��� a t ST -- I j�/ -, W a .n....v. Bike Lane F Q W —� O °J : 9 �l R r1 y 1 1, _ t ! = 0 415 o '.' ( N � y W ......=n Shared Use Path .u00000 , Sidewalk/Bikeway r0 / 25TH ST n, SR I J 41 tSR I i 417 :. N MAROUETTE AVE LAKE MARY BLVD 1 j ti , ji 0 0.5 1 =— Miles �' soup: cM or saMo.e. Looe Scrtirok Cwrn' t �1 Jy Lake Jesup 11 Elm”YtlX KMNeyHom and Associates, Ine. Fella 2Ctg City of Sanford Map: 2-6 Lake Monroe Significant Parking Facilities Jj Lj (2009) I SIR 46 Legend _j <R 17 92 man; �4 City Limits Facility Name CELERY VE I ::13TH ST j j W F, ED Civic Center 0 Fort Mellow Park > = SIR > 0 415 0 L 0 Monroe Harbor Marina 0 Orlando-Sanford Airport E —� 25TH STSR —s (_() 4 S, imP I 0 Sanford Aquatic Center 0 Sanford City Hall r, 10 1 L'JI _j 0 Sanford Museum 0 Seminole County Courthouse 0 Town Center AIRPOR 00 "R( rlLi J1L MARQUETTE AVE W + LAKE MARY BLVD 0 V V/ 0 0.5 1 Miles FOOT Lake Jesup 111 K I F77n, 75 Kidey-Hom and Associates, Inc. City of Sanford L Map: 2-7 Lake Monroe Railways, Intermodal, i ! and Airport Facilities ,✓ .� ; _ ! (2009) L%, Rr -'-1 r_._11.._. u• !•.,rid__... i 1� I l.•� i! 1 r... rt'�, ,..) '_ 46 ! ^ I, { I us Legend � 7.9 SR I ; City Limits I! 46 CELERY VE li I Proposed Commuter Rail Station _� 17TNST Bulk Transport Intermodal Terminal SR J Amtrak Station �" o a < 415 ° Railways ii 25TH ST SR I46 —J r SR — /li �� �f , ,:ria,. ,.i,, o. •.q to;�u �� {� ! I I 417 1 1. r i f Y Ll MARQUE—TE AVE ------ N 1 J ! �.— S LAKE MARY BLVD i• t f 0 0.5 1 -•--I L, Miles 1 ti so�ce: cny arsenab.:ooe eCovEY Fp T A1A o ( Elm"m_ ❑ vr,x LYN. Lake Jesup KiMey lom and Associates, Inc, F—, Z' City of Sanford Map: 2-8 Lake Monroe Existing Peak Hour and r Peak Direction Leve I L — of Service it CI.r -a j�,..',�1- • Nano gw.;, 413TH �':� -�^II ..II (2009) Legend T:,..c �`'• C , . JU '� s4Rss cr'f'■°n„ dliil: �� CELERY City Limits ST IM I.—..-.7--- d BOJ 1'�ry •. Y K l� I...a. w SR 415 Level of Service LOS B LOS ('i a N w a m LOS D ii ti •.\ r L 25TH ST i ? •.. SR I _— 46 J —� LOS E ._. .... i SR ”. �s 417 /i L� -r --i (� I —� LOS F N/A (Not Available) d- OT IJ:' J I(�'-7_• Z,� .� AIRPOR D i^ o •—_� F� Jif j MAROUETTE AVE •-� N F0 - -.E-.-.LVD w I ��.__.__._, +.•I 1._. �-� t_..r Miles same: dry orsannm, zoos F.T coa+r FOOT Yr, aiM1 y,1 JCIO" Lake Jesup � Icy —i'� and Associates, Inc. Feb—X109 %f City of Sanford _ Map: 2-9 �Lake Monroe Major Thoroughfares Number of Lanes (2025) % ' °� ' I sR 48 �; 1 I I t vtha t, w� e'i>c 1�•t. t. Sf' t www wr it, Us a lilt ,-- ,, ,R l il-`•-a_., Legend f r- .. -. �: � ja .�i._ L - , ' Y:�I�ir■ ■iia 7"9 in ine innn�, ■ ■wawww nail; mr rnrtIML'4. City Limits a g `�s� ■wwuemta ■nr t ': EE - .__. = 6 w �'; Z r." , 111H , no IN Int ut�nr nnv �w■w' gg in „w■ w■ tilt'IM, ttt il, ! ����IIYw■ 46 ■ill un tnnnutvtt, RY VE CEL - f Number of Lanes (2025) �,. m mil ■ ■ ■■■1 tilt i inntlntl!'- .t, — 2 Lanes kl� 4 Lanes rr_r... .moo p� �f 1 , - ti Lz ¢ 3R 415 t 6 Lanes t a ,• ; t dQ� if � ■ .,�' m m � 8 Lanes ,� 4a - 6 Lanes + 4 Special Use Lanes 47 i. .:� tq�.,.,,. �� I I I AIRPOR D .. MARQUETTE .. .. AVE I' N 1+11-7 ti. LAKE MARY BLVD t. — V y i,f 0 0.5 1 i : I —.—A `-- ---F --1 Miles Savca: CXy al Sanbrd GIS. 2008 sa�:,d�cowy J5 % r 9:1 F-7-11 tvl,x Lake Jesup Kimtey-Hom —ren=`Y and Associates, Inc. Feb­009 City of Sanford Map: 2-10a L Lake Monroe Functional r Classification (2025) I U F Legend SR 46y L City Limits J u3 9 aill men Jill!! vm I" out $"r own" Functional Classification was I a I'll B.. 113 1Y■nr rug owl 9111 10111111111v5' CEL 6RY Fj 1 Collector 13TH �ST 1121 Minor Arterial moo . . . ....... r cl —7 III ul SR Principal Arterial L w a < 415 .. z z 25TH ST (SR SR 46 tl 4" Lj AIRPOR VD r F., I L -j N MARQUETTE AVE WE + o E I I ' LP! I I Ilk 0 UD LAKE MARY BLVD 0 0.5 1 r -1 Miles ti F city ds" Ly- Lake Jesup (IWey-Flom WN and Asst�'Vm, City of Sanford Map: 2-10b Lake Monroe Jurisdictional Roadway Classification (2025) SR 1 i L W 46 P G CELERY ! �vr: Legend .,107H ST ? > W I- City Limits L > < SR '�; P -1 A f" - -I 0 40 1, z 415 < Maintenance Responsibility — City r ; 25TH ST rj — County L 1� SR 46 wri — Department of Transportation 417 M — Florida Turnpike AIRPOR 21.2 D t LMARQUETTE AVE> W E + r-1 0 L -JILJ LAKE MARY BLVD 1 rL—j 0 0.5 1 L Miles IMT LYNX Lake Jesup Ktniey-Hom and Associates, Inc. November 2008 City of Sanford i Map: 2-11 Lake Monroe -- I V ti`s 7 •-• I Generators Major Trip and Attractors (2025) L/ f �J JL SR)' 1 _, 46 r /� ,_ :_! • I i r\ i iid us 52n e _ e ! •.'-I I_� ' L C..� L j \j s�slMsi 17 B2 a © Legend Name City Limits ® ' = Lr] �� I as Q Ameripath Sanford Hospital w I z a �•–' 3;.17TH ST ; �ELE_RYI VE ! m � _'— r --- / -- w > a > ..a } > O 415 © © Q Civic Center Parks Monroe Harbor Marina �• a© �a a10 i H d w © Orlando-SanfordAirport _ n `• "� m m _ 25714 Sr SR _ •] 46 i SR i SR _ i `�•( Lr' r ,1' � r— �' Q 0 Q Orlando-Sanford Airport Industrial Area Sanford Aquatic Center Sanford Auto Train Amtrak Sanford City Hall – © ilI• Q � � 11D Sanford Museum Sanford Plaza —4=; — — 1(D Seminole Centre i 1D Seminole Community College Seminole County Courthouse MARQUETTE AVE j tri iJ Seminole Town Center o f ^_J ! f--! US 17-92 Commercial Area LAKE MARY BLVD LJ I -----•--- \ 0 0.5 1 so•.ce: cny ais.nbb, mos ti \ Miles 5'D7TN covey FDOT eyux J \ Lake Jesup Kimley+lom and Associaln Inc. Fcb— mos City of Sanford Map: 2-12 Lake Monroe Future Public Transit Facilities (2025) - I • b �i J�, �Ea.;�' �r8 I i �- - um uu Dant 11�BC� . u nnm nu Inns nm uu tvnl Inn SR In nu Innl Im f1C�,: _ .. Legend = City Limits p 'I i I1 45 nn 111 Ont IIIIIt- I •+nn1 IIIc Inns Inn; CE RY VE - :untlr all I: sr New Routes Beginning in 2010 Existing Transit Routes -0 W-, 9 a ,r I�; �c9 i z o SR ass LYNX Route 46 e� — a- y LYNX Route 34 / • �/' Illi _ '25TH ST SR LYNX Route 103 46 SR 417 6s^. L(•'.., �t�l Ll�gl",..� i � I MARQUETTE AVE N LAKE MARY BLVD 0 0.5 1 Miles i---- - F" cly ols„rae. xooe W i ❑�❑ is— LYNX Lake Jesup ` yam -_ and Assodates, hlc. February 2009 City of Sanford Figure: 2-13 Lake Monroe Future Bicycle - ' and Pedestrian Facilities 'N (2025) 46 us 1792 � S Q G� I r�Z �pEs . SR Ir 46 rnt •.rsns�' =� - _(- 119 i '. Q.C-1,-I j E Legend - . rr' 12TH 3T -J: ti[_r _':�..s. _ �1_ r_m �'a a a W - _� .,I •-_i -ru:t>=�-r�s-_cu_r a SR ® City Limits O OJ � e crL� r'7 ri y �K i 2 h a 5 _ 1. .. �� - .--- L. i a z -- o , y 6 4 5 o o _°°°°.-° Proposed Bike Lane n U ¢ ¢ U N � W ia m I� r r i � -, �j �•' �L.•G '.25TH 3TC.: -- .}jy� 41 l iso 7AIRPOR D r'•' j— _—� " \� Y L, _ MARQUETT ,'�r� Y.; _,� .' „ �• J=' ,.. > I E AVE It 0 i LAKE MARY BLVD 0 0.5 1 i — — -- — 1 ✓ 1 i r_ _. L—_.__J l_.J Miles S­ CHYOS M .2" kms„" Ory yam/ Lake Jesup iZI Dm �• 0�❑ ,r :nor yb, and Associates, Inc. Feb—ry ro City of Sanford Map: 2-14 Lake Monroe Peak Hour and Peak r Direction Level of Service (2013) � z s, 1!! �i_ _._. � 1 i•= I .�R un ' � �: ...: _; -i US yy to Legend Level of Service a i 8R ■o �r: .. � w = ' K �' 1lp, J i _rte em D I" `i f".` - ...1�Iq;7:•�V1 �•ST�� �e •e �r . 6 gnu :ifs ^ I CELERY AVE II �. I c—, Los 6 u .• *Ws" . ' —1 w LOS C - ..- r.. ---.. i ... _..__. > a w - 1 w �'_J :: a I < w > a SR LOS D �.. l._..J.--. O jo C 9� _:i:7 (. a 5 1 1: I o x > i -•a N C 415 o _--.� LOS E r I H a JOfit Q LOS F .� rI '� I 1 •1. . 'tet L ,. 25TH ST 9R — J �1 City Limits �% i AIRPOR D MAROUETTEAVE w�+ r -t j o LAKE MARY BLVD � t 0 0.5 1 Miles ti souce' Clty of s-bk, s.mnde cawr LYNX Lake Jesup C-71® AIN ICrcnley-Hom —.11 aMAssociates,Inc. F6—ry 3009 City of Sanford Map: 2-15 _ Lake Monroe Peak Hour and Peak Direction Level of Service (2025) _ — o �. $ 1 -'r `f �; I o®9 r...r.. �_ F— __ . -iii ■ w , ,i r N"$� I � j !- �.._... 5 I �j ' �:i: e■ m 6R °ii `n .ire f 1 -! j I Legend City Limits Level f eve o Service — LOS A z r a 46 ren r�r CELERY: lj n 1 - �•. W a �.: – --- I – J _ _I i , — W j `TI'i._.. – o of° 1 >. I ! z a a SR a,s LOS B LOS C LOS D °•` w –a ti m .® LOS E 25TH ST :• i_ - LOS F t _.. SR j}J ar i .pu.;. i.. .-: u•:,,, 1 r ! � �. 1 r : cY ..__ AIRPOR D � .�.� 'L^ L.JL.,j _j --'l (� .�. n�iwMuf; w ! MAROUETTE AVE 1` r • d, r, – i i W E -j LAKE MARY BLVD _ r 0 0.5 1 _ _J <s _; ;•� --' _ --- c Miles sovice: Gily dsnnbN, XV8 Sem 0� Co-Y �rr,x An _ J Lake Jesup _ ❑®❑ Horn and Associates, Inc. FeEu — City of Sanford APPENDIX A US CENSUS THEMATIC MAPS Housing Element ■ TM -1-1001. Total Housing Units: 2000 ■ TM -1-1002. Percent of Housing Units Vacant: 2000 ■ TM -1-1003. Rental Vacancy Rate: 2000 ■ TM -1-1004. Percent of Occupied Housing Units That Are Owner -Occupied: 2000 ■ TM -1-1005. Percent of Occupied Housing Units That Are Renter -Occupied: 2000 ■ TM -P027. Percent of Persons Living in Group Quarters: 2000 ■ TM -H028. Median Selected Monthly Owner Costs of Specified Owner -Occupied Housing Units With a Mortgage: 2000 City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-24 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element resolve any capacity deficiencies on the roadway along the limits from SR 434 to the SeminoleNolusia County Line. If these improvements do not proceed by 2025, the City may also adjust its LOS Standard for 1-4 to resolve capacity deficiencies. Internal Consistency within the Comprehensive Plan. This element was developed consistent with the other elements of the Sanford Comprehensive Plan, particularly the Future Land Use Element. As noted throughout this element, the analysis of the future transportation system for the City was based upon the vision of Sanford as expressed within the goals, objectives and polices of the Comprehensive Plan and reflected on the Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The City of Sanford 2.27 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element Existing and Projected Integrated Transportation System. The City is served several state and county roadways including US 17-92, SR 46, SR 417, and Interstate 4 along the western edge. In addition, there are three LYNX routes that serve the City connecting local residents with the greater Orlando Metro area and the rest of Seminole County. The City contains an adequate network of pedestrian and bicycle facilities especially in the downtown area of the City. Seminole Boulevard/US 17-92 contains a sidewalk/bikeway that traverses east from 1-4 all the way to Sanford Avenue. The City plans to upgrade the current system of pedestrian and bicycle facilities to increase the multimodal options within the City. The City also contains the Orlando -Sanford Airport. The Sanford Airport Authority is responsible for the operation, maintenance and development of the Orlando Sanford International Airport and the airport's facilities. In 2007, there were 1.7 million total passengers that boarded flights at the airport. Concurrency Management. The City of Sanford has established a concurrency management system. This system is in place to ensure that specified public facilities and services are available to meet the needs of growth and development. An essential requirement of the State's local government comprehensive planning law has termed the service "concurrency" requirement. Paraphrasing Chapter 163.3202, F.S., each county and municipality must ensure key public facilities and services (i.e., the transportation system) achieve and maintain their LOS standards and are available when needed for the development. Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas. The City contains two TCEAs, the downtown TCEA and the US 17-92 TCEA. As a part of the establishment of each TCEA, the Comprehensive Plan was amended to incorporate policies that promote compact urban redevelopment and infill development to fulfill the City's redevelopment goals. Transportation programs and improvements within the TCEA emphasize pedestrian and transit modes of transportation as part of the overall strategy to encourage redevelopment and reduce automobile dependency. The TCEAs are illustrated on Map 2-16. Transportation Projects Planned by Other Jurisdictions. There are several transportation projects planned within the City of Sanford. Some of the projects involve significant roadway expansion through additional lane creation. Several of the projects are listed on METROPLAN Orlando 5 -year Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP). Florida Department of Transportation Proiects/METROPLAN Orlando Transportation Proiects. • SR 46 from Mellonville Avenue to SR 415, widen to four lanes (2008 — 2011) • SR 415 from SR 46 to Volusia County Line, widen to four lanes (2008 — 2011) • SR 46 Gateway Side sidewalk construction from Rhinehart Road to Airport Boulevard (2009 — 2010) Improvements to 1-4, including the addition of four special use lanes to the facility, are identified in METROPLAN ORLANDO'S Long Range Plan. These improvements should The City of Sanford 2-26 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element • 25th Street (CR 46A/SR 46) • Lake Mary Boulevard • Rinehart Road • SR 417 • US 17-92 • Upsala Road The following strategies have been implemented or will be considered to address the projected long term deficiencies on these roadways: • Long Term Concurrency Management System (LTCMS) The City, in coordination with the FDOT and Seminole County, will be developing an LTCMS to address potential roadway deficiencies along SR 46 (west of Interstate 4), SR 415, SR 417, and Rinehart Road. The LTCMS will prioritize roadway improvements for these corridors within a timeframe of up to 10 years. The LTCMS will be coordinated with the Capital Improvements Element and will include periodic monitoring of LOS conditions and funding status. In addition, the City, Seminole County, and FDOT have entered into an agreement to widen SR 46 from two to four lanes to address the projected LOS deficiencies. The agreement also references the proposed LTCMS. • Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) The City recently adopted a TCEA designation for the US 17-92 corridor which includes Lake Mary Boulevard. The TCEA provides strategies to address mobility and land use within the corridor. The TCEA focuses on multimodal transportation and supports redevelopment and infill development. Transportation Planning Approach. Traditionally, congestion problems are addressed with either supply-side or demand-side strategies. Supply side strategies may include tactics such as building more roads to increase capacity. Demand-side strategies may include tactics such as encouraging more ridesharing among commuters or the use of alternative modes of transportation. As part of the Comprehensive Plan update, the City has begun to take a proactive approach to addressing mobility needs within the City using both supply-side and demand-side strategies. The City has proposed numerous objectives and policies to move towards a multimodal transportation system, thereby reducing the City's dependence on the automobile. This includes, but is not limited to: • Balancing land use and transportation • Improving bicycle and pedestrian facilities • Coordinating with other transportation agencies • Improving transit facilities • Initiating additional LYNX service • Supporting the Central Florida Commuter Rail Line This approach will be used to address future potential LOS issues in the operation of the transportation network. The City of Sanford 2-25 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element Projected Peak Hour Traffic Conditions. As shown in Tables 2-10 and 2-11, based on generalized service volumes, all roadway links are expected to meet their adopted LOS standard through the short-term (2013) for the daily and peak hour, peak direction conditions with the exception of portions of the following links: • 25th Street (CR 46A/SR 46) between Mellonville Avenue and Beardall Avenue (daily and peak hour conditions) • Rinehart Road between CR 46A to S. Mall Entrance (daily conditions only) • SR 600/US 17-92 between Seminole Boulevard and Oak Drive (daily conditions only) 25th Street (CR 46A/SR 46) between Mellonville Avenue and Beardall Avenue is the only roadway segment that is expected to exceed the adopted LOS in the short-term. The City, FDOT and Seminole County have entered into an agreement for the widening of SR 46 from Mellonville Avenue to SR 415 from two to four lanes to address the project LOS deficiency. In addition, Seminole County is adopting a comprehensive plan policy supporting the establishment of a long term concurrency management system (LTCMS) for the timing of the widening project so that the comprehensive plans remain financially feasible. From a longer term perspective, the local governments within Central Florida (including those in Seminole, Orange, Osceola, Volusia, Brevard, Lake, and Polk Counties) have agreed to implement a Regional Growth Vision which includes an expanded multimodal approach to meeting future transportation needs. In Sanford, this will include the implementation of commuter rail. As the region transitions from a primarily auto dependent transportation system to a more multimodal system, the transportation system will experience growth pains. For example, as development with sufficient density and intensity to support transit is approved, the more urban areas, such as Sanford, are expected to experience increased congestion levels. These increased congestion levels will actually benefit the implementation of the regional vision by making transit a more attractive alternative travel mode. As congestion increases, the percentage of traffic occurring in the peak hour is expected to decrease (represented by lower K factors) and the directionality of traffic is expected to become more balanced (represented by lower D factors). For example, 2008 traffic counts on SR 434 by Seminole County identified K factors ranging from 7.7% to 9.0%. As congestion increases in the future, these are expected to reduce to around 7.5%. Similarly, the existing D factors range from 50.8% to 87.9% and they are expected to average around 52% in the future. The anticipated increases in congestion are illustrated in Tables 2-12 and 2-13. Although the daily conditions show poor levels on many roadways, the peak hour conditions determine if the congestion is at unacceptable levels of service. Based on projected 2025 peak hour conditions, the following roads are projected to operate below their adopted LOS standard: The City of Sanford 2-24 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element Table 2-14 Long -Term (2025) Peak Hour Peak Direction Traffic Volumes Roadway No. of Adopted Service Volume at 2025 Exceeds Lanes LOS Std. LOS 2008 PHPD 2013 Peak Service Standard Vol PHPD Vol AADT Applied K lied PHPD Vol Direction volume? 13th Street t0.625650 SouBrwest Road to US 17-92 2 D 760 314 330 6,937 0.093 400 w no 25th Street (CR 46AISR 46) Rinehart Road to Country Club Road 4 D 1,620 1401 1,440 38,727 0.095 2,370 E Yes Country Club Road to Airport Boulevard 4 D 1,620 1128 1,190 41,243 0.098 ., 2,100 W Yes Airport Boulevard to Old Lake Mary Road 4 D 1,620 Na 750 27,900 0.076 0.557 2,120 1,180 E no Old Lake Mary Road to US 17-92 4 D 1,620 731 750 34,271 0.076 0.557 2,600 1,450 E no US 17-92 to Sanford Avenue 4 D 1,710 805 970 34,971 0.090 0.531 3,150 1,670 w no Sanford Avenue to Melonvile Avenue 4 D 1,860 1269 1,530 43,781 0.090 0.634 3,940 2,500 E Yes Mellonville Avenue to Beardall Avenue 4 D 1,860 885 970 29,647 0.090 0.628 2,670 1,680 E no Beardal Avenue to SR 415 4 D 1,860 701 730 36,572 0.091 0.666 3,330 2,220 E Yes Airport Boulevard SR 46 (1st St) to McCracken Road 4 D 1,620 446 470 17,630 0.089 0.547 1,570 860 S no McCracken Road to CR 46A 4 D 1,620 446 470 22,874 0.098 0.547 2,240 1,230 S no CR 46A to Old Lake Mary Road 4 D 1,620 nla 520 24,733 0.086 0.565 2,130 1,200 E no Old Lake Mary Road to US 17-92 4 D 1,620 nla 520 24,409 0.086 0.565 2,100 1,190 E no US 17-92 to Sanford Avenue 2 D 760 496 520 13229 0.086 0.565 1,140 640 E no Sanford Avenue to Mellonville Avenue 2 D 760 305 320 7,544 0.081 0.646 610 390 w no Mellonville Avenue to Red Cleveland Boulevard 2 D 760 We 320 7,544 0.081 0.646 610 390 w no Beardall Avenue MarquetteAvenue to SR 46 2 E 810 n/a 150 11,494 0.096 0.649 1,100 720 N no SR 46 to Celery Avenue (CR 415) 2 D 760 37 50 1,794 0.096 0.649 170 110 N no Brisson Avenue SR 46 to Celery Avenue (CR 415) 2 D 760 149 210 3,770 0.113 0.616 430 260 N no Celery Avenue US 17-92 to Park Avenue 2 D 760 295 310 8,140 0.085 0.551 690 380 E no Park Avenue to Sanford Avenue 2 D 760 296 310 8,821 0.087 0.568 770 450 E no Sanford Avenue to Melonvile Avenue 2 D 760 392 460 12,522 0.082 0.556 1,030 570 E no Mellonville Avenue to Sipes Avenue 2 D 760 315 330 6,222 0.092 0.685 570 390 E no Lake Mary Boulevard Country Club Road to US 17-92 4 D 1,860 1253 1,320 47,144 0.091 0.608 4,290 2,610 E Yes US 17-92 to SR 417 4 D 1,860 952 1,000 25,651 0.094 0.561 2,410 1,350 E no SR 417 to CR 427 4 D 1,860 952 11000 23,473 0.094 0.561 2,210 1,240 E no CR 427 to Red Cleveland Boulevard 4 D 1,860 960 990 17,664 0.107 0.637 1,890 1,200 E no Red Cleveland Boulevard to Cameron Avenue 4 D 1,860 852 880 14,722 0.100 0.740 1,470 1,090 E no Cameron Avenue to SR 46 4 D 1,860 621 650 14,683 0.090 0.610 1,320 810 S no Marquette Avenue Ohio Avenue to Sipes Avenue 2 E 810 35 40 6,010 0.108 0.547 650 360 N no Sipes Avenue to Seardall Avenue 2 E 810 23 20 11,914 0.098 0.605 1,170 710 w no Mellonvilk: Avenue SR 46 to Celery Avenue 2 D 760 184 190 5,754 0.077 0.601 440 270 N no Celery Avenue to Seminole Boulevard 2 D 760 432 440 7,921 0.110 0.633 870 550 S no Ohio Avenue Lake Mary Boulevard to Marquette Avenue 2 D 760 23 20 556 0.100 0.523 60 30 N no Old Lake Mary Road Airport Boulevard to Country Club Road 2 D 760 367 390 9,159 0.090 0.580 820 480 N no Country Club Road to Southwest Road 2 D 760 148 150 4,089 0.084 0.556 340 190 N no Park Avenue US 17-92 to SR 46 2 D 760 355 370 8,931 0.083 0.624 740 460 S no SR 46 to 13th Street 2 D 760 136 140 2,781 0.091 0.638 250 160 S no 13th Street to 1 at Street 2 D 760 133 140 3,496 0.090 0.547 310 170 S no JaiStreet to Seminole Boulevard 2 D 760 79 80 1,976 0.090 0.572 180 100 N no Persimmon Avenue SR 46 to Sanford Amtrak station entrance 2 0 690 153 170 4,547 0.090 0.550 410 230 N no Rinehart Road CR 46A to S. Mal Entrance 4 E 1,720 1145 1,460 42,493 0.082 0.520 3,480 1,810 N Yes S. Mall Entrance to SR 46 4 E 1,720 984 1,540 37,416 0.087 0.592 3,260 1,930 N Yes SR 46 (1 st Street) 1-4 to Rinehart Road 6 D 2,790 1848 2,500 51,775 0.090 0.623 4,660 2,900 IN Yes Rinehart Road to CR 15 (Upsala Road) 6 D 2,790 1407 1,780 52,501 0.090 0.587 4,730 2,770 w no CR 15 (Upsala Road) to Airport Boulevard 4 D1,860 948 1230 33,625 0.090 0.568 3,030 1,720 E no Airport Boulevard to US 17-92 4 D 1,860 856 1,080 28,374 0.090 0.526 2,550 1,340 w no SR 400 (44) CR46Ato SR46 6 D 5,530 4325 4,640 128,464 0.085 0.550 10,920 6,010 E Yes SR 417 Lake Mary Boulevard to US 17-92 4 D 3,440 1669 2,310 76,318 0.085 0.550 6,490 3,570 N Yes US 17-92 to CR 46A 4 D 3,440 1618 2,320 62,251 0.085 0.550 5,290 2,910 N no CR 46A to 1-4 4 D 3,440 1571 2,140 50,859 0.085 0.550 4,320 2,380 N no SR 6001 US 17-92 CR 427 to Lake Mary Boulevard 6 E 2,710 1518 1,770 62,613 0.090 0.546 5,640 3,080 N Yes Lake Mary Boulevard to Airport Boulevard 4 F 2,710 1145 2,070 54,715 0.090 0.520 4,920 2,560 N no Airport Boulevard to CR 46A 4 E 1,800 1145 1,410 37,393 0.090 0.520 3,370 1,750 N no CR 46A to SR 46 4 E 1,800 948 1,290 32,154 0.090 0.568 2,890 1,640 N no SR 46 to Seminole Boulevard 4 E 1,800 729 800 25,980 0.092 0.696 2,390 1,860 N no Seminole Boulevard to Oak Drive 2 E 890 992 760 22,294 0.091 0.524 2,030 1,060 S Yes Oak Drive to CR 15 (Upsala Road) 2 E 890 478 690 23,191 0.090 0.539 2,090 1,120 W Yes Sanford Avenue Lake Mary Boulevard to Airport Boulevard 4 D 1,620 836 870 32,777 0.089 0.537 2,920 1,570 N no Airport Boulevard to SR 46 4 D 1,620 794 820 27,402 0.086 0.548 2,360 1,290 S no Sipes Avenue SR 46 te Celery Avenue (CR 415) 2 D 760 58 60 4,540 0.082 0.879 370 330 S no Southwest Road Old Lake Mary Road to 13th Street 2 D 760 298 380 6,675 0.108 0.654 720 470 S no Upsets Road CR 46A to Central Park Drive 2 D 760 661 690 13,179 0.107 0.579 1,410 820 S Yes Central Park Drive to Coastline Road 2 E 810 266 280 6,864 0.094 0.536 650 350 S no Coastline Road to SR 46 2 E 810 375 390 9,783 0.085 0.581 830 480 N no The City of Sanford 2.23 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element Table 2-13 Long -Term (2013) Peak Hour Peak Direction Traffic Volumes Roadway No. of Lanes Adopted LOS Std. Somice Volume at LOS Standard Applied Growth Rate 2013 AADT Applied K Applied D 2013 Total Peak Hr Vol 2013 Peak Hr Peak Dir PHPD Vol Peak Direction Exceeds Service Volume? 13th Street Southwest Road to US 17-92 2 D 760 2.0% 5,595 0.093 0.625 520 330 W no 25th Street (CR 46NSR 46) Rinehart Road to Country Club Road 4 D 1,620 2.0% 23,598 0.095 0.644 2,240 1,440 E no Country Club Road to Airport Boulevard 4 D 1,620 2.0% 23,340 0.098 0.520 2,290 1,190 W no Airport Boulevard to Old Lake Mary Road 4 D 1,620 2.0% 17,754 0.07601 0.55701 1,350 750 E no Old Lake Mary Road to US 17-92 4 D 1,620 2.0% 17,754 0.076 0.557 1,350 750 E no US 17-92 to Sanford Avenue 4 D 1,710 2.0% 20,210 0.090 0.531 1,820 970 W no Sanford Avenue to Mellonville Avenue 4 D 1,860 2.0% 26,773 0.090 0.634 2,410 1,530 E no Mellonvllie Avenue to Beardall Avenue (2) 2 D 860 2.0% 17,133 0.090 0.628 1,540 970 E Yes R) Beardall Avenue to SR 415 2 D 860 2.0% 12,095 0.091 0.666 1,100 730 E no Airport Boulevard SR 46 (1st St) to McCracken Road 4 D 1,620 2.0% 9,572 0.089 0.547 850 470 S no McCracken Road to CR 46A 4 D 1,620 2.0% 8,721 0.098 0.547 850 470 S no CR 46A to Old Lake Mary Road 4 D 1,620 2.0 % 10,669 0.086111 0.5651'1 920 520 E no Old Lake Mary Road to US 17-92 4 D 1,620 2.0 % 10,669 0.0861'1 0.5651'1 920 520 E no US 17-92 to Sanford Avenue 2 D 760 2.0% 10,669 0.086 0.565 920 520 E no Sanford Avenue to Mellonville Avenue 2 D 760 2.0% 6,084 0.081 0.646 490 320 W no Mellonville Avenue to Red Cleveland Boulevard 2 D 760 2.0% 6,084 0.081111 0.64601 490 320 W no Beardall Avenue Marquette Avenue to SR 46 2 E 810 2.0% 2,349 0.09601 0.6490) 230 150 N no SR 46 to Celery Avenue (CR 415) 2 D 760 7.2% 756 0.096 0.649 70 50 N no Brisson Avenue SR 46 to Celery Avenue (CR 415) 2 D 760 10.1% 3,040 0.113 0.616 340 210 N no Celery Avenue US 17-92 to Park Avenue 2 D 760 2.0% 6,565 0.085 0.551 560 310 E no Park Avenue to Sanford Avenue 2 D 760 2.0% 6,039 0.087 0.588 530 310 E no Sanford Avenue 10 Mellonville Avenue 2 D 760 4.6% 10,098 0.082 0.556 830 460 E no Mellonville Avenue to Sipes Avenue 2 D 760 2.0% 5,229 0.092 0.685 480 330 E no Lake Mary Boulevard Country Club Road to US 17-92 4 D 1,860 2.0% 23,781 0.091 0.608 2,160 1,320 E no US 17-92 to SR 417 4 D 1,860 2.0% 18,930 0.094 0.561 1,780 1,000 E no SR 417 to CR 427 4 D 1,860 2.0% 18,930 0.094 0.561 1,780 1,000 E no CR 427 to Red Cleveland Boulevard 4 D 1,860 2.0% 14,582 0.107 0.637 1,560 990 E no Red Cleveland Boulevard to Cameron Avenue 4 D 1,860 2.0% 11,872 0.100 0.740 1,190 880 E no Cameron Avenue to SR 46 4 D 1,860 2.0% 11,842 0.090 0.610 1,070 650 S no Marquette Avenue Ohio Avenue to Sipes Avenue 2 E 810 2.0% 616 0.108 0.547 70 40 N no Sipes Avenue to Beardall Avenue 2 E 810 2.0% 402 0.098 0.605 40 20 W no Mellonvills Avenue SR 46 to Celery Avenue 2 D 760 2.0% 4,133 0.077 0.601 320 190 N no Celery Avenue to Seminole Boulevard 2 D 760 2.0% 6,388 0.110 0.633 700 440 S no Ohio Avenue Lake Mary Boulevard to Marquette Avenue 2 D 760 2.0% 457 0.100 0.523 50 20 N no Old Lake Mary Road Airport Boulevard to Country Club Road 2 D 760 2.0% 7,387 0.090 0.580 660 390 N no Counhy Club Road to Southwest Road 2 D 760 2.0% 3,298 0.084 0.556 280 150 N no Park Avenue US 17-92 to SR 46 2 D 760 2.0% 7,203 0.083 0.624 600 370 S no SR 46 to 13th Street 2 D 760 2.0% 2,430 0.091 0.638 220 140 S no 13th Street to Iat Street 2 D 760 2.0% 2,819 0.090 0.547 250 140 S no 1 at Street to Seminole Boulevard 2 D 760 2.0% 1,594 0.090 0.572 140 80 N no Persimmon Avenue SR 46 to Sanford Amtrak station entrance 2 D 690 2.0% 3,410 0.090 0.550 310 170 N no Rinehart Road CR 46A to S. Mall Entrance 4 E 1,720 6.3% 34,269 0.082 0.520 2,810 1,460 N no S. Mall Entrance to SR 46 4 E 1,720 13.4% 29,916 0.087 0.592 2,600 1,540 N no SR 46 (1 at Street) 1-4 to Rinehart Road 6 D 2,790 4.3% 44,502 0.090 0.623 4,010 2,500 W no Rinehart Road to CR 15 (Upsets Road) 6 D 2,790 2.0% 33,684 0.090 0.587 3,030 1,780 W no CR 15 (Ups Is Road) to Airport Boulevard 4 D 1,860 2.0% 23,967 0.090 0.568 2,160 1,230 E no Airport Boulevard to US 17-92 4 D 1,860 2.0% 22,882 0.090 0.526 2,060 1,080 W no SR 400 (1-4) CR 46A to SR 46 6 D 5,530 2.4% 103,600 0.085 0.550 8,810 4,840 E no SR 417 Lake Mary Boulevard to US 17-92 4 D 3,440 6.4% 49,373 0.085 0.550 4,200 2,310 N no US 17-92 to CR 46A 4 D 3,440 7_2% 49,594 0.085 0.550 4,220 2,320 N no CR 46A to 1-4 4 D 3,440 6.1% 45,853 0.085 0.550 3,900 2,140 N no SR 6001 US 17.92 CR 427 to Lake Mary Boulevard 4 E 1,800 2.0% 36,056 0.090 0.546 3,250 1,770 N no Lake Mary Boulevard to Airport Boulevard 4 F 2,710 2.0% 44,125 0.090 0.520 3,970 2,070 N no Airport Boulevard to CR 46A 4 E 1,800 2.0% 30,155 0.090 0.520 2,710 1,410 N no CR 46A to SR 46 4 E 1,800 2.0% 25,212 0.090 0.568 2,270 1,290 N no SR 46 to Seminole Boulevard 4 E 1,800 2.0% 12,569 0.092 0.696 1,160 000 N no Seminole Boulevard to Oak Drive 2 E 890 2.0% 15,968 0.091 0.524 1,450 760 S no Oak Drive to CR 15 (Upsala Road) 2 E 890 2.0% 14,230 0.090 0.539 1,280 690 W no Sanford Avenue Lake Mary Boulevard to Airport Boulevard 4 D 1,620 2.0% 18,294 0.089 0.537 1,630 870 N no Airport Boulevard to SR 46 4 D 1,620 2.0% 17,483 0.086 0.548 1,500 820 S no Sipes Avenue SR 46 to Celery Avenue (CR 415) 2 D 760 2.0% 837 0.082 0.879 70 60 S no Southwest Road Old Lake Mary Road to 13th Street 2 D 760 6.0% 5,383 0.108 0.654 580 380 S no Upsets Read CR 46A to Central Park Drive 2 D 760 2.0% 11,161 0.107 0.579 1,190 690 S no Central Park Drive to Coastline Road 2 E 810 2.0% 5,535 0.094 0.536 520 280 S no Coastline Road to SR 46 2 E 810 2.0% 7,989 0.085 0.581 670 390 N no til ror segm ns vem no eus 9 p,,,nuuw (2) The City and County are currently establishing a Long Term Concurrency Management System on SR 46, east of Mellonvi9e Ave. to idenfify deficiencies. Projected widening to 4 lanes by 2016 The City of Sanford 2-22 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report - October 2008 City of Sanford Transportation Element Table 2-12 Long -Term (2025) Daily Traffic Volumes Roadway No. of Adopted ryee Volume at 2025 Exceeds Lanes LOS Std. LOS Growth Service Standard 2008 AADT 2013 AADT Method AADT Volume? 13th Street Southwest Road to US 17-92 2 D 14,600 5,086 5,595 2% Growth 6,937 no 26th Street (CR 46MSR 46) Rinehart Road to Country Club Road 4 D 31,100 21,444 23,588 Model 38,727 Yes Country Club Road to Airport Boulevard 4 D 31,100 21,218 23,340 Model 41,243 Yes Airport Boulevard to Old Lake Mary Road 4 D 31,100 Na 17,754 Model 27,900 no Old Lake Mary Road to US 17-92 4 D 31,100 16,140 17,754 Model 34,271 Yes US 17-92 to Sanford Avenue 4 D 32,700 18,373 20,210 Model 34,971 Yes Sanford Avenue to Melonvile Avenue 4 D 35,700 24,339 26,773 Model 43,781 Yes Melonvile Avenue to Beardall Avenue 4 D 35,700 15,575 17,133 Model 29,647 no Beardall Avenue to SR 415 4 D 35,700 10,995 12,095 Model 36,572 Yes Airport Boulevard SR 46 (1st St) to McCracken Road 4 D 31,100 8,702 9,572 Model 17,630 no McCracken Road to CR 46A 4 D 31,100 7,928 8,721 Model 22,874 no CR 46A to Old Lake Mary Road 4 D 31,100 Na 10,669 Model 24,733 no Old Lake Mary Road to US 17-92 4 D 31,100 nla 10,669 Model 24,409 no US 17-92 to Sanford Avenue 2 D 14,600 9,699 10,669 2% Growth 13,229 no Sanford Avenue to Melonville Avenue 2 D 14,600 5,531 6,084 2% Growth 7,544 no Mellonville Avenue to Red Cleveland Boulevard 2 D 14,800 We 6,084 2% Growth 7,544 no Beardall Avenue Marquette Avenue to SR 46 2 E 15,600 2,097 2,349 Model 11,494 no SR 46 to Celery Avenue (CR 415) 2 D 14,600 556 756 Model 1,794 no Brisson Avenue SR 46 to Celery Avenue (CR 415) 2 D 14,600 2,020 3,040 2% Growth 3,770 no Celery Avenue US 17-92 to Park Avenue 2 D 14,600 5,968 6,565 2% Growth 8,140 no Park Avenue to Sanford Avenue 2 D 14,600 5,490 6,039 Model 8,821 no Sanford Avenue to Melonville Avenue 2 D 14,600 8,210 10,098 2% Growth 12,522 no Melonvile Avenue to Sipes Avenue 2 D 14,600 4,754 5,229 Model 6,222 no Lake Mary Boulevard Country Club Road to US 17-92 4 D 35,700 21,619 23,781 Model 47,144 Yes US 17-92 to SR 417 4 D 35,700 17,209 18,930 Model 25,651 no SR 417 to CR 427 4 D 35,700 17,209 18,930 2% Growth 23,473 no CR 427 to Red Cleveland Boulevard 4 D 35,700 13,256 14,582 Model 17,e64 rev Red Cleveland Boulevard to Cameron Avenue 4 D 35,700 10,793 11,872 2% Growth 14,722 no Cameron Avenue to SR 46 4 D 35,700 10,765 11,842 2% Growth 14,683 no Marquette Avenue Ohio Avenue to Sipes Avenue 2 E 15,600 560 616 Model 6,010 no Sipes Avenue to Beardall Avenue 2 E 15,600 365 402 Model 11,914 no Mollonville Avenue SR 46 to Celery Avenue 2 D 14,600 3,757 4,133 Model 5,754 no Celery Avenue to Seminole Boulevard 2 D 14,600 5,807 6,388 2% Growth 7,921 no Ohio Avenue Lake Mary Boulevard to Marquette Avenue 2 D 14,600 415 457 2% Growth 556 no Old Lake Mary Road Airport Boulevard to Country Club Road 2 D 14,600 6,715 7,387 2% Growth 9,159 no Country Club Road to Southwest Road 2 D 14,600 2,998 3,298 2% Growth 4,089 no Park Avenue US 17-92 to SR 46 2 D 14,600 6,548 7,203 2% Growth 8,931 no SR 46 to 13th Street 2 D 14,600 2,209 2,430 Model 2,781 no 13th Street to 1st Street 2 D 14,600 2,563 2,819 2% Growth 3,496 no 1 st Street to Seminole Boulevard 2 D 14,600 1,449 1,594 2% Growth 1,976 no Persimmon Avenue SR 46 to Sanford Amtrak station entrance 2 D 13,120 3,100 3,410 Model 4,547 no Rinehart Road CR 46A to S. Mall Entrance 4 E 32,900 26,060 34,269 2% Growth 42,493 Yes S. Mall Entrance to SR 46 4 E 32,900 17,914 29,918 Model 37,416 Yes SR 46 (1st Street) 1-4 to Rinehart Road 6 D 53,500 36,627 44,502 Model 51,775 no Rinehart Road to CR 15 (Upsets Road) 6 D 53,500 30,622 33,684 Model 52,501 no CR 15 (Upsala Road) to Airport Boulevard 4 D 35,700 21,788 23,967 Model 33,625 no Airport Boulevard to US 17-92 4 D 35,700 20,802 22,882 2% Growth 28,374 no SR 400 (1-4) CR 46A to SR 46 6 D 103,600 92,500 103,600 2% Growth 128,464 Yes SR 417 Lake Mary Boulevard to US 17-92 4 D 67,200 35,700 49,373 Model 76,318 Yes US 17-92 to CR 46A 4 D 67,200 34,600 49,594 Model 62,251 no CR 48A to 1-4 4 D 67,200 33,600 45,853 Model 50,859 no SR 6001 US 17-82 CR 427 to Lake Mary Boulevard 6 E 51,800 31,159 36,056 Model 62,613 Yes Lake Mary Boulevard to Airport Boulevard 4 F 51,800 38,132 44,125 2% Growth 54,715 Yes Airport Boulevard to CR 46A 4 E 34,500 26,060 30,155 2% Growth 37,393 Yes CR 46A to SR 46 4 E 34,500 21,788 25,212 Model 32,154 no SR 46 to Seminole Boulevard 4 E 34,500 10,862 12,569 Model 25,980 no Seminole Boulevard to Oak Drive 2 E 16,900 13,799 15,968 Model 22,294 Yes Oak on" to CR 15 (Upsala Road) 2 E 16,900 12,297 14,230 Model 23,191 Yes Sanford Avenue Lake Mary Boulevard to Airport Boulevard 4 D 31,100 16,631 18,294 Model 32,777 Yes Airport Boulevard to SR 46 4 D 31,100 15,894 17,483 Model 27,402 no Sipes Avenue SR 46 to Celery Avenue (CR 415) 2 D 14,600 761 837 Model 4,540 no Southwest Road Old Lake Mary Road to 13th Street 2 D 14,600 4,141 5,383 2% Growth 6,675 no Upsala Road CR 46A to Central Park Drive 2 D 14,600 10,146 11,161 Model 13,179 no Central Park Drive to Coastline Road 2 E 15,600 5,032 5,535 2% Growth 6,864 na Coastline Road to SR 46 2 E 15,e00 7,172 7,889 2% Growth 9,783 no Note: 2% growth was applied where 2025 model volumes were inconsistent with 2013 AADT. The City of Sanford Y-21 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report - October 2008 City of Sanford Transportation Element Table 2-11 Short -Term (2013) Peak Hour Peak Direction Traffic Volumes Roadway No. of Lana. Adopted LOS Std. rv¢e Volume at LOS Standard Applied Growth Rafe 2013 AADT Applied K Applied D 2013 Total Peak Hr Vol 2013 Peak Hr Peak Dir PHPD Vol Peak Direction Exceeds Service Volume? 13th Street Southwest Road to US 17-92 2 D 760 2.0% 5,595 0.093 0.625 520 330 W no 21ith Street (CR 46AISR 46) Rinehart Road to Country Club Road 4 D 1,620 2.0% 23,588 0.095 0.644 2,240 1,440 E no Country Club Road to Airport Boulevard 4 D 1,620 2.09A 23,340 0.098 0.520 2,290 1,190 W no Airport Boulevard to Old Lake Mary Road 4 D 1,620 2.0% 17,754 0.07601 0.557(l) 1,350 750 E no Old Lake Mary Road to US 17-92 4 D 1,620 2.0% 17,754 0.076 0.557 1,350 750 E no US 17-92 to Sanford Avenue 4 D 1,710 2.0% 20,210 0.090 0.531 1,820 970 W no Sanford Avenue to Mellonville Avenue 4 D 1,860 2.0% 26,773 0.090 0.634 2,410 1,530 E no Mellonville Avenue to Beardall Avenue(2) 2 D 860 2.0% 17,133 0.090 0.628 1,540 970 E Yes(2) Beardall Avenue to SR 415 2 D 860 2.0°A 12,095 0.091 0.666 1,100 730 E no Airport Boulevard SR 46 (1 at St) to McCracken Road 4 D 1,620 2.0% 9,572 0.089 0.547 850 470 S no McCracken Road to CR 46A 4 D 1,620 2.0% 8,721 0.098 0.547 850 470 S no CR 46A to Old Lake Mary Road 4 D 1,620 2.09A 10,659 0.08601 0.56501 920 520 E no Old Lake Mary Road to US 17-92 4 D 1,620 2.0% 10,669 0.08601 0.56501 920 520 E no US 17-92 to Sanford Avenue 2 D 760 2.0% 10,669 0.086 0.565 920 520 E no Sanford Avenue to Mellonville Avenue 2 D 760 2.0% 6,084 0.081 0.646 490 320 W no Mellonville Avenue to Red Cleveland Boulevard 2 D 760 2.0% 6,084 0.0811'1 0.6461'1 490 320 W no Beardall Avenue Marquette Avenue to SR 46 2 E 810 2.0% 2,349 0.096(') 0.64901 230 150 N no SR 46 to Celery Avenue (CR 415) 2 D 760 7.2% 756 0.096 0.649 70 50 N no Brisson Avenue SR 46 to Celery Avenue (CR 415) 2 D 760 10.1% 3,040 0.113 0.616 340 210 N no Celery Avenue US 17-92 to Park Avenue 2 D 760 2.0% 6,565 0.085 0.551 560 310 E no Park Avenue to Sanford Avenue 2 D 760 2.0% 6,039 0.087 0.588 530 310 E no Sanford Avenue to Mellonville Avenue 2 D 760 4.6% 10,098 0.082 0.556 830 460 E no MeI onville Avenue to Sipes Avenue 2 D 760 2.0% 5,229 0.092 0.685 480 330 E no Lake Mary Boulevard Country Club Road to US 17-92 4 D 1,860 2.0% 23,781 0.091 0.608 2,160 1,320 E no US 17-92 to SR 417 4 D 1,860 2.0% 18,930 0.094 0.561 1,780 1,000 E no SR 417 to CR 427 4 D 1,860 2.0% 18,930 0.094 0.561 1,780 1,000 E no CR 427 to Red Cleveland Boulevard 4 D 1,860 2.0% 14,582 0.107 0.637 1,560 990 E no Red Cleveland Boulevard to Cameron Avenue 4 D 1,860 2.0% 11,872 0.100 0.740 1,190 880 E no Cameron Avenue to SR 46 4 D 1,860 2.0% 11,842 0.090 0.610 1,070 650 S no Marquette Avenue Ohio Avenue to Sipes Avenue 2 E 810 2.0% 616 0.108 0.547 70 40 N no Sipes Avenue to Beardall Avenue 2 E 810 2.0% 402 0.098 0.605 40 20 W no Mellonville Avenue SR 46 to Celery Avenue 2 D 760 2.0 % 4,133 0.077 0.601 320 190 N no Celery Avenue to Seminole Boulevard 2 D 760 2.0% 6,388 0.110 0.633 700 440 S no Ohio Avenue Lake Mary Boulevard to Marquette Avenue 2 D 760 2.0% 457 0.100 0.523 50 20 N no Old Lake Mary Read Airport Boulevard to Country Club Road 2 D 760 2.0% 7,387 0.090 0.580 660 390 N no Country Club Road to Southwest Road 2 D 760 2.0% 3,298 0.084 0.556 280 150 N no Park Avenue US 17-92 to SR 46 2 D 760 2.0% 7,203 0.083 0.624 600 370 S no SR 46 to 13th Street 2 D 760 2.0% 2,430 0.091 0.638 220 140 S no 13th Street to l at Street 2 D 760 2.0% 2,819 0.090 0.547 250 140 S no 1 at Street to Seminole Boulevard 2 D 760 2.0% 1,594 0.090 0.572 140 8o N no Rinehart Road CR 46A to S. Mall Entrance 4 E 1,720 6.3% 34,269 0.082 0.520 2,810 1,460 N no S'Mail Entrance to SR 46 4 E 1,720 13.4% 29,916 0.087 0.592 2,600 1,540 N no SR 46 (1st Street) 1-4 to Rinehart Road 6 D 2,790 4.3% 44,502 0.090 0.623 4,010 2,500 W no Rinehart Road to CR 15 (Upsets Road) 6 D 2,790 2.0% 33,684 0.090 0.587 3,030 1,780 W no CR 15(Upsala Road) to Airport Boulevard 4 D 1,860 2.0% 23,967 0.090 0.568 2,160 1230 E no Airport Boulevard to US 17-92 4 D 1,860 2.0% 22,882 0.090 0.526 2,060 1,080 W no SR 417 Lake Mary Boulevard to US 17-92 4 D 3,440 6.4% 49,373 0.085 0.550 4,200 2,310 N no US 17-92 to CR 46A 4 D 3,440 7.2% 49,594 0.085 0.550 4,220 2,320 N no CR 46A to 1-4 4 D 3,440 6.1% 45,853 0.085 0.550 3,900 2,140 N no SR SWI US 17'92 CR 427 to Lake Mary Boulevard 4 E 1,800 2.0% 36,056 0.090 0.546 3,250 1,770 N no Lake Mary Boulevard to Airport Boulevard 4 F 2,570 2.0% 44,125 0.090 0.520 3,970 2,070 N no Airport Boulevard to CR 46A 4 E 1,800 2.0% 30,155 0.090 0.520 2,710 1,410 N no CR 46A to SR 46 4 E 1,800 2.0% 25,212 0.090 0.568 2,270 1,290 N no SR 46 to Seminole Boulevard 4 E 1,800 2.0% 12,569 0.092 0.696 1,160 800 N no Seminole Boulevard to Oak Drtve 2 E 890 2.0% 15,968 0.091 0.524 1,450 760 S no Oak Delve to CR 15 (Upsala Road) 2 E 890 2.0% 14,230 0.090 0.539 1,280 690 W no Sanford Avenue Lake Mary Boulevard to Airport Boulevard 4 0 1,620 2.0% 18,294 0.089 0.537 1,630 870 N no Airport Boulevard to SR 46 4 D 1,620 2.0% 17,483 0.086 0.548 1,500 820 S no Si pas Avenue SR 46 to Celery Avenue (CR 415) 2 D 760 2.0% 837 0.082 0.879 70 60 S no Soudrwest Road Old Lake Mary Road to 13th Street 2 D 760 6.0% 5,383 0.108 0.654 580 380 S no Upsala Road CR 46A to Central Park Drive 2 D 760 2.0% 11,161 0.107 0.579 1,190 690 S no Central Park Drive to Coastline Road 2 E 810 2.0% 5,535 0.094 0.536 520 280 S no Coastline Road to SR 46 2 E 810 2.01/6 7,889 0.085 0.581 670 390 N no (2) The City and County are currently establishing a Long Toren Coucunency Management System on SR 46, east of Mellonville Ave. to idenfify deficiencies. Projected widening to 4lanes by 2016 The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 2-20 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report - October 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element Table 2-10 Short -Term (2013) Daily Traffic Volumes Roadway No. of Lanes Adopted LOS Std. 30"i Volume at LOS Standard 2008 AADT Applied Growth Rate 2018 AADT AADT Exceeds Service Volume? 13th Street Southwest Road to US 17-92 2 D 14,600 5,086 2.0% 5,595 no 26th Street (CR 46AISR 46) Rinehart Road to Country Club Road 4 D 31,100 21,444 2.0% 23,588 no Country Club Road to Airport Boulevard 4 D 31,100 21,218 2.0% 23,340 no Airport Boulevard to OM Lake Mary Road 4 D 31,100 n/a 2.0% 17,754(21 no Oki Lake Mary Road to US 17-92 4 D 31,100 16,140 2.0% 17,754 no US 17-92 to Sanford Avenue 4 D 32,700 18,373 2.0% 20,210 no Sanford Avenue 10 Mellonville Avenue 4 D 35,700 24,339 2.0% 26,773 no Mellonville Avenue to Beardall Avenue 2 D 16,400 15,575 2.0% 17,133 Yes Beardall Avenue to SR 415 2 D 16,400 10,995 2.0% 12,095 no Airport Boulevard SR 46 (1st St) to McCracken Road 4 D 31,100 8,702 2.0% 9,572 no McCracken Road to CR 46A 4 D 31,100 7,928 2.0% 8,721 no CR 46A to Old Lake Mary Road 4 D 31,100 n/a 2.0% 10,6692) no Oki Lake Mary Road to US 17-92 4 D 31,100 n/a 2.0% 10,6602) no US 17-9210 Sanford Avenue 2 D 14,800 9,699 2.0% 10,669 no Sanford Avenue to Mellonville Avenue 2 D 14,800 5,531 2.0% 6,084 no Mellonville Avenue to Red Cleveland Boulevard 2 D 14,600 We 2.0% 6,084(2) no Beardall Avenue Marquette Avenue to SR 46 2 E 15,600 2,09701 2.0% 2,349 no SR 46 to Celery Avenue (CR 415) 2 D 14,600 556 7.2% 756 no Brisson Avenue SR 48 to Celery Avenue (CR 415) 2 D 14,600 2,020 10.1% 3,040 no Celery Avenue US 17-92 to Park Avenue 2 D 14,600 5,968 2.0% 6,565 no Park Avenue to Sanford Avenue 2 D 14,600 5,490 2.0% 6,039 no Sanford Avenue to Mellonville Avenue 2 D 14,600 8,210 4.6% 10,098 no Mellonville Avenue to Sipes Avenue 2 D 14,600 4,754 2.0% 5,229 no Lake Mary Boulevard Country Club Road to US 17-92 4 D 35,700 21,619 2.0% 23,781 no US 17-92 to SR 417 4 D 35,700 17,209 2.0% 18,930 no SR 417 to CR 427 4 D 35,700 17,209 2.0% 18,930 no CR 427 to Red Cleveland Boulevard 4 D 35,700 13,256 2.0% 14,582 no Red Cleveland Boulevard to Cameron Avenue 4 D 35,700 10,793 2.0% 11,872 no Cameron Avenue to SR 46 4 D 35,700 10,785 2.0% 11,842 no Marquette Avenue Ohio Avenue to Sipes Avenue 2 E 15,600 560 2.0% 616 no Sipes Avenue to Beardall Avenue 2 E 15,600 365 2.0% 402 no Mollonvills Avenue SR 46 to Celery Avenue 2 D 14,600 3,757 2.0% 4,133 no Celery Avenue to Seminole Boulevard 2 D 14,600 5,807 2.0% 6,388 no Ohio Avenue Lake Mary Boulevard to Marquette Avenue 2 D 14,600 415 2.0% 457 no Old Lake Mary Road Airport Boulevard to Country Club Road 2 D 14,600 6,715 2.0% 7,387 no Country Club Road to Southwest Road 2 D 14,600 2,998 2.0% 3,298 no Park Avenue US 17.92 to SR 46 2 D 14,600 6,548 2.0% 7,203 no SR 46 to 13th Street 2 D 14,600 2,209 2.0% 2,430 no 13th Street to 1 at Street 2 D 14,600 2,583 2.0% 2,819 no 1 st Street to Seminole Boulevard 2 D 14,600 1,449 2.0% 1,594 no Persimmon Avenue SR 46 to Sanford Amtrak station entrance 2 D 13,120 3,1001) 2.0% 3,410 no Rinehart Road CR 46A to S. Mall Entrance 4 E 32,900 26,D60 6.3% 34,269 Yes S. Mall Entrance to SR 46 4 E 32,900 17,914 13.4% 29,916 no SR 46 (1st Street) 1-4 to Rinehart Road 8 D 53,500 36,627 4.3% 44,502 no Rinehart Road to CR 15 (Upsets Road) 6 D 53,500 30,822 2.0% 33,684 no CR 15 (Upsets Road) to Airport Boulevard 4 D 35,700 21,788 2.0% 23,967 no Airport Boulevard to US 17-92 4 D 35,700 20,802 2.0% 22,882 no SR 400 (I-4) CR 46A to SR 46 6 D 103,600 92,5001'1 2.4% 103,600 no SR 417 Lake Mary Boulevard to US 17-92 4 D 67,200 35,7001'1 6.4% 49,373 no US 17-92 to CR 46A 4 D 67,200 34,6001'1 7.2% 49,594 no CR 46A to 1-4 4 D 67,200 33,60011) 6.1% 45,853 no SR 600/ US 17-92 CR 427 to Lake Mary Boulevard 4 E 34,500 31,159 2.0% 36,056 Yes Lake Mary Boulevard to Airport Boulevard 4 F 51,800 38,132 2.0% 44,125 no Airport Boulevard to CR 46A 4 E 34,500 26,060 2.0% 30,155 no CR 48A to SR 46 4 E 34,500 21,788 2.0% 25,212 no SR 46 to Seminole Boulevard 4 E 34,500 10,862 2.0% 12,569 no Seminole Boulevard to Oak Drive 2 E 16,900 13,799 2.0% 15,968 no Oak Drive to CR 15 (Upsets Road) 2 E 16,900 12,297 2.0% 14,230 no Sanford Avenue Lake Mary Boulevard to Airport Boulevard 4 D 31,100 16,631 2.0% 18,294 no Airport Boulevard to SR 46 4 D 31,100 15,894 2.0% 17,483 no Sipes Avenue SR 46 to Celery Avenue (CR 415) 2 D 14,800 761 2.0% 837 no Southwest Road Old Lake Mary Road to 13th Street 2 D 14,600 4,141 8.0% 5,383 no Upsets Road CR 46A to Central Park Drive 2 D 14,600 10,146 2.0% 11,161 no Central Park Drive to Coastline Road 2 E 15,600 5,032 2.0% 5,535 no Coastline Road to SR 46 2 E 15,600 7,172 2.0% 7,889 no tl) mu Nuo volumes available ror oearuall Avenue, Rom marquene Ave io bK aa, ana JK 41 t. 2uu1 volumes uses. (2) For segments with no 2008 AADT, 2013 AADT was calculated based on 2008 AADT of adjacent segment. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 2-19 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report - October 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element ANALYSIS OF FUTURE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM Growth Trends. The City of Sanford is projected to see a slightly higher rate of population growth through 2025 than Seminole County. The City's population in 2025 is projected to be 78,611, compared to 49,251 in 2005. Impact of Projected Land Use on Transportation System LOS. The Future Land Use Map (FLUM) is not anticipated to depart significantly from the Existing Land Use Map (ELUM). Metroplan and Seminole County work together to provide the vision and framework for transportation improvements through the Orlando Metro Region. This area includes Orange, Osceola, and Seminole Counties. Traffic Forecasting Methodology. Traffic volumes were forecast based on the short- term (2013) and long-term (2025) planning horizons. The short-term volumes were forecasted based on the existing volumes, which were grown for five years using historic growth rates for both the daily and peak hour peak direction conditions. The long-term volumes were forecasted based on Seminole County's Comprehensive Plan Model. The model included the projected 2025 roadway network and development. [This space intentionally left blank.] The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 2-18 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — October 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element FUTURE TRANSPORTATION MAP SERIES The following series of maps represent the future conditions (2025) for the transportation network. This includes the roadway system, public transit system and bicycle and pedestrian facilities within the City of Sanford. Map 2-9: Major Thoroughfares by Number of Lanes (2025) illustrates the major thoroughfares in the City of Sanford by the number of through lanes for each facility type anticipated in 2025. Map 2-10a: Major Thoroughfares by Functional Classification (2025) identifies the 2025 roadway network, including arterial and collector streets and their functional classification. The functional classification system indicates the role of each thoroughfare and assists in defining land use relationships. Map 2-10b: Jurisdictional Roadway Classification Map (2025) identifies the jurisdictional classification of roadways within the City's boundaries and reveals the jurisdiction responsible for maintenance. Map 2-11: Major Trip Generators and Attractors (2025) illustrate the existing major trip generators and attractors within the City of Sanford as well as any new attractors. There are no new major trip generators forecasted at this time. Map 2-12: Future Transit Facilities (2025) illustrates LYNX public transit service proposed new routes and route extensions. Route 103 currently services the southern portion of US 17-92; however this map illustrates its planned extension to continue through the City on US 17-92 turning west on SR 46 and south on Towne Center Boulevard to the proposed Seminole Towne Center Transit center. Link 419 — Sanford East would provide service to eastern Sanford, between the Seminole Center transit center, downtown Sanford and Central Florida Regional Hospital. Link 420 — Sanford West would provide circulator service to western Sanford area. The Link would operate between Seminole Center transit center and the Central Florida Regional Hospital. Map 2-13: Future Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (2025) identifies proposed on - street bicycle facilities improvements within the City of Sanford along with the proposed pedestrian -related improvements. Map 2-14: Projected Peak Hour Peak Direction Levels of Service (2013) illustrates the projected peak hour peak direction LOS calculated for major roadways within the City based on build -out of land uses proposed in the City Future Land Use Map. Map 2-15: Projected Peak Hour Peak Direction Levels of Service (2025) illustrates the projected peak hour peak direction LOS calculated for major roadways within the City based on build -out of land uses proposed in the City Future Land Use Map. Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas are presented on Map 1-5 of the Future Land Use Element Map Series. The City's TCEAs that include the Downtown Waterfront TCEA and the US 17-92 TCEA. The TCEAs are designated to support infill development and redevelopment within these areas. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 2-17 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — October 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element Availability of Transportation Facilities and Service to Serve Existing Land Uses. According to the City's Evaluation and Appraisal Report, Sanford comprises approximately 13,968 acres or 21.83 square miles. Residential land uses account for approximately 26.32 percent of the total acreage. The next largest existing land use categories included Public Facilities, Commercial, and Industrial. Table 2-9 lists the primary land uses along with the City's most significant transportation corridors. Table 2-9 Primary Land Uses Adjacent to Major Transportation Corridors Roadway Facility Type Primary Land Uses US 17-92/French Avenue Principal Arterial Commercial, Office, Institutional SR 46/1 st Street Principal Arterial Single Family, Office Park Avenue Collector Single Family 25th Street Minor Arterial Commercial, Multi -Family Celery Avenue/13th Street Collector Single Family Airport Boulevard Minor Arterial Public Facility, Multi -Family Lake Mary Boulevard Principal Arterial Industrial, Commercial Mellonville Avenue Collector Single Family, Public Facility Source: City of Sanford GIS, 2007 Results from the existing Peak Hour Peak Direction (PHPD) analysis demonstrate the City is maintaining the adopted LOS for the overall transportation network of the City of Sanford. There are two roadway segments that currently exceeding their adopted LOS standard, which include: • 25th Street (CR 46A/SR 46) between Mellonville Avenue and Beardall Avenue • SR 600/US 17-92 between Seminole Boulevard and Oak Drive However, travel time and delay studies performed by Seminole County for 25th Street (CR 46A/SR 46) indicate that the deficient segment operates at an acceptable LOS. In addition, the deficient segment along SR600/US 17-92 is located with the City's US 17- 92 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) and is exempt from concurrency. Adequacy of Existing and Projected Evacuation Transportation System. The City of Sanford does not border the coastline of Florida. However, the City is located on the south side of the Lake Monroe. According to the Florida State Emergency Response Team, the main evacuation routes within the City are SR 46 and portions of US 17-92. Traveling west along SR 46 will link an evacuee to Interstate 4 and traveling along SR 46 east will link an evacuee to SR 415. Both of these routes will take a traveler out of the City limits and to one of the 15 designated emergency shelters. There are also three emergency shelters located within the City at Midway Elementary School, Millennium Middle School, and Bentley Elementary School. Based upon the current population and transportation projections the existing and projected evacuation transportation system and emergency shelters are adequate to serve the needs of the City of Sanford. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 2-16 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — October 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element Table 2-8 Population Estimates for Sanford Year Population Gross Change Percent Change 2000A 38,291 - - 2005 49,251 10,960 2.86% 2010 57,203 7,952 16.1% 2015 64,837 7,634 13.3% 2020 72,068 7,231 11.1% 2025 78,611 6,543 9.1% Notes: A = US Bureau of the Census, 2000 B = Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse Projection, 2008 Transportation Disadvantaged. The transportation disadvantaged are people who are unable to transport themselves. They also can be people who cannot purchase the needed personal transportation because of a physical, mental, or financial problem. Therefore, they are dependent upon other people and service providers to help them with their transportation needs. LYNX has been designated the Community Transportation Coordinator (CTC) by the State of Florida and has been for the last 15 years. As the CTC, LYNX coordinates publicly funded transportation for all persons within Orange, Osceola, and Seminole Counties. Existing Characteristics of Major Trip Generators and Attractors. Overall, the location of major trip generators and attractors influences roadway improvement needs as well as the demand for transit. Trip production areas are those portions of the City where major residential developments are located because this where trips are generated. All of the residential areas would be considered trip production areas. Trip attraction areas are locations with shopping, recreation, medical, employment, and other facilities, generally the location of the trip ends. People are attracted to these areas by the services or facilities available there. The major traffic attractors within the City include the Seminole Towne Center Mall, Columbia Medical Center, Seminole Community College, commercial districts, industrial districts, the Airport, and the Downtown/Waterfront area. Map 2-3 identifies these attractors and their location in the City. Existing Bicycle Facilities. Bicycle facilities can include on -road facilities, such as bike lanes, wide shoulders, and sidewalks, and off-road facilities, such as trails and recreation paths. The City does not have any off-road facilities; however there are a number of formal on -road facilities, such as bike lanes. These are illustrated on Map 2-5. The availability of these facilities plays an important role in promoting bicycling. The City is actively promoting the use of and enhancing bicycle facilities. Bicycle facility improvements are part of the multimodal approach aimed at addressing traffic congestion, reducing the demand for automobile parking facilities, and improving the overall health of residents. Existing Pedestrian Facilities. Pedestrian facilities can include on -road facilities, such as sidewalks and off-road facilities such as trails and recreation paths. Most local streets throughout the City have sidewalks. The City's existing pedestrian facilities are illustrated on Map 2-5. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 2-15 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — October 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element Month LYNX by Route 34 46 103 Mar -08 6,926 14,712 N/A Apr -08 7,317 12,764 N/A May -08 1 7,665 13,890 N/A Jun -08 7,601 13,566 N/A Jul -08 8,322 1 13,653 1 N/A Aug -08 7,695 1 12,399 1 13,384 Source: LYNX 2008 The monthly ridership totals for the three LYNX fixed service routes presented above illustrate that Route 46 is the most widely used within the City. Route 34 appears to transport just above half the number of people that use Route 46. Route 46 is the more widely used route due to its service area. Route 46 travels north on US 17-92 making stops downtown, at the Central Florida Regional Hospital heading west along SR 46 passing by several major residential neighborhoods before ending at the Seminole Towne Center and returning to its point of origin, the Seminole Centre. Table 2-7 Transit Service Characteristics Source: LYNX 2008. Levels of Service and System Needs (Existing Design and Operating Capacity). In Seminole County, public transit is served by the Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority, also known as LYNX. LYNX is responsible for public transit within the City of Sanford. LYNX coordinates closely with the metropolitan planning organization, Metroplan Orlando, in developing improvements to public transportation mobility needs. An updated Transit Vision plan was approved in 2003 by the METROPLAN Orlando and LYNX boards. According to the LYNX 2009 — 2018 Transit Development Plan, the public transit routes in the City are currently operating at an LOS of E or F based on FDOT Transit Quality of Service Frequency thresholds, 2006 LYNX Comprehensive Operations Analyst. Population Characteristics. The City of Sanford's year 2000 population was 38,291 and the 2005 population was 49,251. This represents an increase of approximately 9,000 people. The projected population for the City in 2025 is estimated to be 78,611. Table 2-8 illustrates the population estimates for the City. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 2-14 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — October 2009 Peak Off -Peak Total Peak Route Headway Headway Hour Vehicles min min 34 60 60 2 46 60 60 2 103 30 60 3 Source: LYNX 2008. Levels of Service and System Needs (Existing Design and Operating Capacity). In Seminole County, public transit is served by the Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority, also known as LYNX. LYNX is responsible for public transit within the City of Sanford. LYNX coordinates closely with the metropolitan planning organization, Metroplan Orlando, in developing improvements to public transportation mobility needs. An updated Transit Vision plan was approved in 2003 by the METROPLAN Orlando and LYNX boards. According to the LYNX 2009 — 2018 Transit Development Plan, the public transit routes in the City are currently operating at an LOS of E or F based on FDOT Transit Quality of Service Frequency thresholds, 2006 LYNX Comprehensive Operations Analyst. Population Characteristics. The City of Sanford's year 2000 population was 38,291 and the 2005 population was 49,251. This represents an increase of approximately 9,000 people. The projected population for the City in 2025 is estimated to be 78,611. Table 2-8 illustrates the population estimates for the City. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 2-14 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — October 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element Seminole Centre making stops at the previous intersections. The route operates on one-hour headways and is in operation from 5:12 A.M. until 10:17 P.M. Route 103 partially operates in the southern portion of the City along US 17-92 and started operating in August of 2008. It begins at the intersection of Fernwood Boulevard and Oxford road, stopping next at US 17-92 and SR 434, then stopping at Seminole Community College, and finally stopping at the Seminole Center. The route operates on 30 -minute headways and is in operation from 5:10 A.M. to 9:00 P.M. Monday thru Saturday. On Sunday the route operates on 60 - minute headways and is in operation from 5:58 A.M. to 8:00 P.M. The City is also served by the Amtrak Auto Train. The Sanford station is located at 600 South Persimmon Avenue and provides non-stop service between Lorton, Virginia and the City of Sanford. The station operates Monday thru Sunday from 8:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. and has an enclosed waiting area with restroom facilities. The Central Florida Commuter Rail Project is a proposed passenger rail transit service that has a planned stop in the City. The rail service is proposed to run along 61 -miles of CSX tracks from Volusia County to Osceola County. Trains are being proposed to run on 30 -minute headways. The station located within the City would be an at -grade station that has pedestrian connections, access to LYNX, and include a free park-and-ride parking lot. Peak Hour Transit Capacities, Headways, and Ridership by Route. The City of Sanford is served by LYNX fixed service routes. Peak hour headways for Route 34 are typically 120 minutes and peak hour headways for Route 46 are typically 60 -minutes. The peak hour headways for Route 103 are 30 -minutes Monday through Saturday and 60 -minutes on Sunday. Ridership totals were obtained from LYNX from January 2007 through August 2008 for Routes 34 and 46 and are presented in Table 2-6. Route 103 began service in August 2008 and those ridership numbers are presented in Table 2-6 as well. Table 2-7 summarizes transit peak and off-peak service to the City of Sanford. Table 2-6 Ridership by Route Month LYNX by Route 34 46 103 Jan -07 8,539 14,643 N/A Feb -07 6,922 14,276 N/A Mar -07 8,491 14,893 N/A Apr -07 7,501 12,915 N/A Ma -07 7,849 13,859 N/A Jun -07 7,960 13,798 N/A Jul -07 7,605 13,937 N/A Aug -07 8,533 13,987 N/A Sep -07 6,802 13,525 N/A Oct -07 8,118 14,453 N/A Nov -07 7,601 13,510 N/A Dec -07 7,017 14,101 N/A Jan -08 7,295 14,334 N/A Feb -08 6,619 d 14,668 N/A The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 2-13 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — October 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element Existing Modal Split and Vehicle Occupancy Rates. Information collected by the U.S. Census Bureau regarding workers by transportation mode for both the City and the County have been compiled in Table 2-5. Workers in both the City and County predominately drive alone in a car, truck, or van with the percentages being far above 50 percent. The second highest preferred mode of travel was carpooling in a car, truck, or van. The mean travel time to work for the City was approximately 25.7 minutes and 27 minutes for the County. Table 2-5 Workers by Trans ortation Mode Mode Workers (Sanford) Percentage Workers (Seminole County) Percentage All Means of Transportation 16,612 100 187,594 100 Car, truck, or van — drove alone 12,563 75.6 155,868 83.1 Car, truck, or van — carpooled 2,912 17.5 18,904 10.1 Public Transportation (includes taxicab) 199 1.2 1,227 0.7 Walked 265 1.6 1,898 1.0 Other means 304 1.8 2,511 1.3 Worked at home 369 2.2 7,186 3.8 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Summary File 3; workers are individuals 16 years or older. Existing Public Transit Facilities and Routes. The City of Sanford is currently served by three Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority (LYNX) fixed service routes. The LYNX fixed service route system serves a 2,500 -square mile area in Orange, Osceola, and Seminole Counties. In addition, LYNX also provides forums for user to enroll in a `Vanpool' or 'Carpool' program. Enrollment information can be found on the LYNX website along with detailed information on how the programs work. The three fixed service routes are illustrated in Map 2-4 and described below. Route 34 begins at the Seminole Centre and circulates around the central portion of the City. The route makes stops at the Seminole County Health and Human Services along with the following intersections: French Street and 25th Street, 13th Street and Olive Avenue, 1st Street and French Avenue, Summerlin Avenue and Celery Street, and Jitway Street and Midway Avenue. At this point the returns back to French Avenue and 13th street before returning back to its point of origin, the Seminole Centre. This route provides good circulation around the City's downtown and Lake Monroe lake front area. In addition, the fifth stop on the route (1 st street and French Avenue) in less than a quarter mile from the Central Florida Regional Hospital and less than a mile from the Seminole County Administration building. Route 34 operates on one-hour headways and is in operation from 5:35 A.M. to 10:32 P.M. • Route 46 operates between the Seminole Centre and the Seminole Town Center. The route stops at the following intersections: French Avenue and 25th Street and French Avenue and 1st Street. After stopping at French Avenue and 1st Street, route 46 continues on SR 46 until it reaches the Seminole Towne Center. After reaching the Seminole Towne Center, Route 46 returns to the The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 2-12 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — October 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element LOS and System Needs (Existing Design and Operating Capacity). The City has adopted LOS standards for roadways within the City based up the roadway's classification and location. Based upon the best available data, the majority of roadways within the City currently operate within the adopted LOS during the daily and peak hour conditions with the exception of the following roadway segments: 25th Street (CR 46AISR 46) between Mellonville Avenue and Beardall Avenue currently exceeds its adopted LOS standard during the peak hour, peak direction conditions, and SR600/US 17-92 between Seminole Boulevard and Oak Drive currently exceeds its adopted LOS standard during the peak hour, peak direction conditions. Note: this segment is located within the City's US 17-92 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) and is exempt from concurrency. As part of the City's TCEA, the City continues to monitor the level of service of all roadways within the TCEA and has adopted policies within the Comprehensive Plan that are intended to increase mobility and reduce congestion within the TCEA. Although the existing traffic volumes indicate the segments along 25th Street and SR 600/US 17-92 exceeded their adopted LOS standard, travel time and delay studies performed by Seminole County indicate that these segments operate at an acceptable LOS. A summary of the results from the travel time and delay study for the peak hour, peak direction are provided in the Table 2-4. Table 2-4 Year 2009 Seminole County Travel Time & Delav Studv Roadway Segment H� Limit Speed (mph) Dist. (ft) Traffic Control Device Travel Time (sec) Stop Delay (sec) Class Segment 9 S end (m.,h) LOS 25"' Street (CR 46AISR 46) - Eastbound Mellonville Ave to Brisson Ave AM 40/50 5,475 Stop 74.5 0.0 1 50.1 A Brison Ave to Beardall Ave AM 50 5,315 Stop 72.5 0.0 1 50.0 A Mellonville Ave to Brisson Ave PM 40/50 5,440 Stop 76.7 0.0 1 48.4 A Brison Ave to Beardall Ave PM 50 5,345 Stop 73.2 0.0 1 49.8 A 25'* Street (CR 46AISR 46) - Westbound Beardall Ave to Brisson Ave AM 50 5,324 Stop 76.3 1.2 1 47.6 A Brisson Ave to Mellonville Ave AM 40/50 5,449 Stop 76.7 0.5 1 48.5 A Beardall Ave to Brisson Ave PM 50 5,345 Stop 76.2 2.5 1 47.8 A Brisson Ave to Mellonville Ave PM 40/50 5,429 Stop 72.2 0.0 1 51.3 A SR600/1JS 17-92 - Northbound SR 46/1 st St to Oak Dr AM 40/55 8,249 Stop 134.4 10.4 1 41.8 B Oak Dr to CR 15/1-4 Eastbound Ramp AM 55/50 9,728 Signal 150.6 7.1 1 44.0 A SR 46/1 st St to Oak Dr PM 40/55 8,245 Stop 121.7 1.3 1 46.2 A Oak or to CR 15/1-4 Eastbound Ramp PM 55/50 9,727 Signal 147.7 12.7 1 44.9 A SR6001US 17-92 - Southbound 1-4 Eastbound Ramp/CR 15 to Oak Dr AM 50/55 9,769 Stop 136.0 0.0 1 49.0 A Oak Dr to SR 46/1 st St AM 55/40 8,124 Signal 148.0 24.8 1 37.4 B 1-4 Eastbound Ramp/CR 15 to Oak Dr PM 50/55 9,782 Stop 137.5 0.0 1 48.5 A Oak Dr to SR 46/1 st St PM 55/40 8,113 Signal 175.8 52.7 1 31.5 C Source: 2006 Travel Time and Delay Study, Seminole County Public Works The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 2.11 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report - October 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element Table 2-3 Existing (2009) Peak Hour Peak Direction Traffic Volumes RoadwayAdopted E:istina Service Volume at Total pk r Peak Dir PHPD Exceeds No. of Roadway Type LOS Std. Lanes LOS Existing Existing Peak Hr (PHPD) Peak Service Standard K D Vol Vol Direction Volume? 13th Street Sou6avest Road to US 17-92 Collector D 2 760 0.093 0.625 502 314 w no 2Sth Street (CR 46A/SR 46) Rinehart Road to Country Club Road Minor Arterial D 4 1,620 0.095 0.644 2,176 1,401 E no Country Club Road to Airport Boulevard Minor Arterial D 4 1,620 0.098 0.518 2,178 1,128 w no Airport Boulevard to Old Lake Mary Road Minor Arterial D 4 1,620 n/a Na n/a n/a n/a Na Old Lake Mary Road to US 17-92 Minor Arterial D 4 1,620 0.076 0.557 1,312 731 E no US 17-92 to Sanford Avenue Principal Arterial D 4 1,710 0.078 0.531 1,517 805 w no Sanford Avenue to Mellonville Avenue Principal Arterial D 4 1,860 0.078 0.634 2,001 1,269 E no Mellonville Avenue to Beardall Avenue Principal Arterial D 2 860 0.086 0.628 1,410 885 E yes') Beardall Avenue to SR 415 Principal Arterial D 2 860 0.091 0.666 1,053 701 E no Airport Boulevard SR 46 (1 at St) to McCracken Road Minor Arterial D 4 1,620 0.089 0.547 815 446 S no McCracken Road to CR 46A Minor Arterial D 4 1,620 0.098 0.547 815 446 S no CR 46A to Old Lake Mary Road Minor Arterial D 4 1,620 n/a We Na n/a n/a We Old Lake Mary Road to US 17-92 Minor Arterial D 4 1,620 n/a Na n/a We Na We US 17-92 to Sanford Avenue Minor Arterial D 2 760 0.086 0.565 878 496 E no Sanford Avenue to Mellonville Avenue Minor Arterial D 2 760 0.081 0.646 472 305 w no Mellonville Avenue to Red Cleveland Boulevard Minor Arterial D 2 760 We We We Na We We Beardall Avenue(+) Marquette Avenue to SR 46 Collector E 2 810 We We We We n/a We SR 46 to Celery Avenue (CR 415) Collector D 2 760 0.096 0.649 57 37 N no Brisson Avenue SR 46 to Celery Avenue (CR 415) Collector D 2 760 0.113 0.616 242 149 N no Celery Avenue US 17-92 to Park Avenue Collector D 2 760 0.085 0.551 535 295 E no Park Avenue to Sanford Avenue Collector D 2 760 0.087 0.588 503 296 E no Sanford Avenue to Mellonville Avenue Collector D 2 760 0.082 0.556 705 392 E no Mellonville Avenue to Sipes Avenue Collector D 2 760 0.092 0.685 460 315 E no Lake Mary Boulevard Country Club Road to US 17-92 Principal Arterial D 4 1,860 0.091 0.608 2,061 1,253 E no US 17-92 to SR 417 Principal Arterial D 4 1,860 0.094 0.561 1,697 952 E no SR 417 to CR 427 Principal Arterial D 4 1,860 0.094 0.561 1,697 952 E no CR 427 to Red Cleveland Boulevard Minor Arterial D 4 1,860 0.107 0.637 1,508 960 E no Red Cleveland Boulevard to Cameron Avenue Minor Arterial D 4 1,860 0.100 0.740 1,151 852 E no Cameron Avenue to SR 46 Minor Arterial D 4 1,860 0.090 0.610 1,018 621 S no Marquette Avenue Ohio Avenue to Sipes Avenue Collector E 2 810 0.108 0.547 64 35 N no Sipes Avenue to Beardall Avenue Collector E 2 810 0.098 0.605 38 23 w no Mellonville Avenue SR 46 to Celery Avenue Collector D 2 760 0.077 0.601 306 184 N no Celery Avenue to Seminole Boulevard Collector D 2 760 0.110 0.633 682 432 S no Ohio Avenue Lake Mary Boulevard to Marquette Avenue Collector D 2 760 0.100 0.523 44 23 N no Old Lake Mary Road Airport Boulevard to Country Club RoadCollector D 2 760 0.090 0.580 633 367 N no Country Club Road to Southwest Road Collector D 2 760 0.084 0.556 266 148 N no Park Avanue US 17-92 to SR 46 Collector D 2 760 0.083 0.624 569 355 S no SR 46 to 13th Street Collector D 2 760 0.091 0.638 213 136 S no 13th Street to 1st Street Collector D 2 760 0.090 0.547 243 133 S no 1st Street to Seminole Boulevard Collector D 2 760 0.090 0.572 138 79 N no Persimmon Avenue SR 46 to Sanford Amtrak station entrance Local D 2 690 0.090 0.550 279 153 N no Rinehart Road CR 46A to S. Mail Entrance Collector E 4 1,720 0.082 0.508 2,255 1,145 N no S. Mance to SR 46 Collector E 4 1,720 0.087 0.592 1,662 984 N no SR 46 list= 1-4 to Rinehart Road Principal Arterial D 6 2,790 0.077 0.623 2,968 1,848 w no Rinehart Road to CR 15 (Upsala Road) Principal Arterial D 6 2,790 0.074 0.587 2,397 1,407 w no CR 15 (Upsala Road) to Airport Boulevard Principal Arterial D 4 1,860 0.073 0.568 1,669 948 E no Airport Boulevard to US 17-92 Principal Arterial D 4 1,860 0.074 0.526 1,628 856 w no SR 400 0-4) CR 46A to SR 46 Principal Arterial D 6 5,530 0.085 0.550 7,863 4,325 E no SR 417 Lake Mary Boulevard to US 17-92 Principal Arterial D 4 3,440 0.085 0.550 3,035 1,669 N no US 17-92 to CR 46A Principal Arterial D 4 3,440 0.085 0.550 2,941 1,618 N no CR 46A to 1-4 Principal Arterial D 4 3,440 0.085 0.550 2,856 1,571 N no SR SW / US 17-921') CR 427 to Lake Mary Boulevard Principal Arterial E 4 1,800 0.085 0.546 2,780 1,518 N no Lake Mary Boulevard to Airport Boulevard Principal Arterial F 4 2,710 0.056 0.508 2,255 1,145 N no Airport Boulevard to CR 46A Principal Arterial E 4 1,800 0.082 0.508 2,255 1,145 N no CR 46A to SR 46 Principal Artedal E 4 1,800 0.073 0.568 1,669 948 N no SR 46 to Seminole Boulevard Principal Arterial E 4 1,800 0.092 0.696 1,048 729 N no Seminole Boulevard to Oak Drive Principal Arterial E 2 890 0.091 0.524 1,422 992 S yesl'I Oak Drive to CR 15 (Upsala Road) Principal Arterial E 2 890 0.069 0.539 887 478 w no Sanford Avenue Lake Mary Boulevard to Airport Boulevard Minor Arterial D 4 1,620 0.089 0.537 1,556 836 N no Airport Boulevard to SR 46 Minor Arterial D 4 1,620 0.086 0.548 1,448 794 S no Sipes Avenue SR 46 to Celery Avenue (CR 415) Collector D 2 760 0.082 0.879 66 58 S no Southwest Road Old Lake Mary Road to 13th Street Collector D 2 760 0.108 0.654 456 298 S no Upsala Road CR 46A to Central Park Drive Collector D 2 760 0.107 0.579 1,141 661 S no Central Park Drive to Coastline Road Collector E 2 810 0.094 0.536 496 266 S no Coastline Road to SR 46 Collector E 2 810 0.085 0.581 645 375 N no Notes, (1) Travel time and delay study perfemled by Seminole County indicates segment operates at an acceptable level of service. (2)2008 volumes wwra not available for Beardall A- us, from Marquette Ave u, SR 46, and SR 417. For this analysis 2007 volumes vera used. (3) This segment of US 17-92 is within the City of Sanford's 17-92 Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA). C.10xumm,e aM SSMnW10m.aeanWLLacal Sa kn;alTan, a, yWannet FiM Contant. OsenOkNO M74wLa abN san mis nsdsAsvwsd10050a. 72008 PNPO The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 2-10 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — October 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element Table 2-2 Existing (2009) Daily Traffic Volumes Roadway E: istina Service Volume at Weekly AADT Exceeds Adopted No. of Roadway Type LOS Std. Lanes LOS Seasonal Axle Service Standard 2008 ADT Factor Factor 2008 AADT Volume? 13th Street Southwest Road to US 17-92 Collector D 2 14,600 5,405 0.97 0.97 5,086 no 26th Street (CR 46AISR 46) Rinehart Road to Country Club Road Minor Arterial D 4 31,100 22,791 0.97 0.97 21,444 no Country Club Road to Airport Boulevard Minor Arterial D 4 31,100 22,321 0.97 0.98 21,218 no Airport Boulevard to Old Lake Mary Road Minor Arterial D 4 31,100 n/a n/a n1a n/a n/a Old Lake Mary Road to US 17-92 Minor Arterial D 4 31,100 17,154 0.97 0.97 16,140 no US 17-92 to Sanford Avenue Principal Arterial D 4 32,700 19,328 0.97 0.98 18,373 no Sanford Avenue to Mellonville Avenue Principal Arterial D 4 35,700 25,604 0.97 0.98 24,339 no Mellonville Avenue to Beardall Avenue Principal Arterial D 2 16,400 16,384 0.97 0.98 15,575 no Beardall Avenue to SR 415 Principal Arterial D 2 16,400 11,566 0.97 0.98 10,995 no Airport Boulevard SR 46 (1st St) to McCracken Road Minor Arterial D 4 31,100 9,154 0.97 0.98 8,702 no McCracken Road to CR 46A Minor Arterial D 4 31,100 8,340 0.97 0.98 7,928 no CR 46A to Old Lake Mary Road Minor Arterial D 4 31,100 We n/a n/a n/a n/a Oki Lake Mary Road to US 17-92 Minor Arterial D 4 31,100 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a US 17.92 to Sanford Avenue Minor Arterial D 2 14,600 10,205 0.96 0.99 9,699 no Sanford Avenue to Mellonville Avenue Minor Arterial D 2 14,600 5,818 0.97 0.98 5,531 no Mellonvil[a Avenue to Red Cleveland Boulevard Minor Arterial D 2 14,600 n/a n/a We n/a n/a Beardall Avenue Marquette Avenue to SR 46"1 Collector E 2 15,600 n/a n/a n/a 2,097 no SR 46 to Celery Avenue (CR 415) Collector D 2 14,600 591 0.96 0.98 556 no Brisson Avenue SR 46 to Celery Avenue (CR 415) Collector D 2 14,600 2,147 0.96 0.98 2,020 no Celery Avenue US 17-92 to Park Avenue Collector D 2 14,600 6,279 0.96 0.99 5,968 no Park Avenue to Sanford Avenue Collector D 2 14,600 5,776 0.96 0.99 5,490 no Sanford Avenue to Mellonville Avenue Collector D 2 14,600 8,638 0.96 0.99 8,210 no Mellonville Avenue to Sipes Avenue Collector D 2 14,600 5,002 0.96 0.99 4,754 no Lake Mary Boulevard Country Club Road to US 17-92 Principal Arterial D 4 35,700 22,743 0.97 0.98 21,619 no US 17-92 to SR 417 Principal Arterial D 4 35,700 18,103 0.97 0.98 17,209 no SR 417 to CR 427 Principal Arterial D 4 35,700 18,103 0.97 0.98 17,209 no CR 427 to Red Cleveland Boulevard Minor Arterial D 4 35,700 14,090 0.96 0.98 13,256 no Red Cleveland Boulevard to Cameron Avenue Minor Arterial D 4 35,700 11,472 0.96 0.98 10,793 no Cameron Avenue to SR 46 Minor Arterial D 4 35,700 11,324 0.97 0.98 10,765 no Marquette Avenue Ohio Avenue to Sipes Avenue Collector E 2 15,600 595 0.96 0.98 560 no Sipes Avenue to Beardall Avenue Collector E 2 15,600 388 0.96 0.98 365 no Mellonville Avenue SR 46 to Celery Avenue Collector D 2 14,600 3,993 0.96 0.98 3,757 no Celery Avenue to Seminole Boulevard Collector D 2 14,600 6,172 0.96 0.98 5,807 no Ohio Avenue Lake Mary Boulevard to Marquette Avenue Collector D 2 14,600 441 0.96 0.98 415 no Old Lake Mary Road Airport Boulevard to Country Club Road Collector D 2 14,600 7,064 0.97 0.98 8,715 no Country Club Road to Southwest Road Collector D 2 14,600 3,154 0.97 0.98 2,998 no Park Avenue US 17-92 to SR 46 Collector D 2 14,600 6,890 0.96 0.99 8,548 no SR 46 to 13th Street Collector D 2 14,600 2,348 0.96 0.98 2,209 no 13th Street to 1st Street Collector D 2 14,600 2,697 0.96 0.99 2,583 no 1 st Street to Seminole Boulevard Collector D 2 14,600 1,540 0.98 0.98 1,449 no Persimmon Avenue SR 46 to Sanford Amtrak station entrance Local D 2 13,120 3,10011 no Rinehart Road CR 46A to S. Mall Entrance Collector E 4 32,900 27,414 0.97 0.98 26,060 no S. Map Entrance to SR 48 Collector E 4 32,900 19,039 0.97 0.97 17,914 no SR 46 (1st Street) 1-4 to Rinehart Road Principal Arterial D 6 53,500 38,530 0.97 0.98 36,627 no Rinehart Road to CR 15 (Upsets Road) Principal Arterial D 6 53,500 32,213 0.97 0.98 30,622 no CR 15 (Upsala Road) to Airport Boulevard Principal Arterial D 4 35,700 22,920 0.97 0.98 21,788 no Airport Boulevard to US 17-92 Principal Arterial D 4 35,700 21,883 0.97 0.98 20,802 no SR 400 (1-4) CR 46A to SR 48 Principal Arterial D 6 103,600 n/a n/a We 92,5001'1 no SR 417 Lake Mary Boulevard to US 17-92 Principal Arterial D 4 67,200 n/a n/a n/a 35,7001'1 no US 17-92 to CR "A Principal Arterial D 4 67,200 n/a n/a n/a 34,800111 no CR 48A to 1-4 Principal Arterial D 4 67,200 n/a n/a n/a 33,6001'1 no SR 600/ US 17-92 CR 427 to Lake Mary Boulevard Principal Arterial E 4 34,500 32,778 0.97 0.98 31,159 no Lake Mary Boulevard to Airport Boulevard Principal Arterial F 4 51,800 40,114 0.97 0.98 38,132 no Airport Boulevard to CR 46A Principal Arterial E 4 34,500 27,414 0.97 0.98 26,060 no CR 48A to SR 46 Principal Arterial E 4 34,500 22,920 0.97 0.98 21,788 no SR 46 to Seminole Boulevard Principal Arterial E 4 34,500 11,426 0.97 0.98 10,862 no Seminole Boulevard to Oak Drive Principal Arterial E 2 16,900 14,516 0.97 0.98 13,799 no Oak Drive to CR 15 (Upsala Road) Principal Arterial E 2 16,900 12,936 0.97 0.98 12,297 no Sanford Avenue Lake Mary Boulevard to Airport Boulevard Minor Arterial D 4 31,100 17,499 0.96 0.99 16,631 no Airport Boulevard to SR 46 Minor Arterial D 4 31,100 16,894 0.96 0.98 15,894 no Sipes Avenue SR 46 to Celery Avenue (CR 415) Collector D 2 14,600 809 0.96 0.98 761 no Southwest Road Old Lake Mary Road to 13th Street Collector D 2 14,600 4,225 1.00 0.98 4,141 no Upsets Road CR 46A to Central Park Drive Collector D 2 14,800 10,673 0.97 0.98 10,146 no Central Park Drive to Coastline Road Collector E 2 15,600 5,294 0.97 0.98 5,032 no Coastline Road to SR 46 Collector E 2 15,600 7,545 0.97 0.98 7,172 no (1) No 2008 volumes available for Beardall Avenue, from Marquette Ave to SR 46, and SR 417. 2007 volumes used. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 2-9 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report - October 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element The peak season daily counts were adjusted to Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) by multiplying the counts provided with the 2008 Seminole County Annual Traffic Report by the seasonal factor and weekly axle factor from the 2007 Florida Traffic Information DVD for the week the counts were taken. Tables 2-2 and 2-3 present the existing daily and peak hour peak direction (2009) volumes for the major roadways within the City of Sanford. [This space intentionally left blank.] The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 2-8 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — October 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element Map 2-7: Railways, Intermodal, and Airport Facilities (2009) identifies the CSX railways, Amtrak station, the bulk transport terminal. The Amtrak station is also the general location of the future commuter rail station being proposed. Map 2-8: Existing Peak Hour Peak Direction LOS on Major Thoroughfares (2009) illustrates the current peak hour peak direction LOS for major roadways within the City of Sanford. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM To plan for projected growth trends and travel patterns the City coordinates with Seminole County by utilizing data and forecasts generated by the County. The City is an integral part of the countywide network. It is influenced by several state and county major thoroughfares. The City strives to balance the regional transportation and its impact on Sanford. An examination of the City's existing transportation system is presented in this section to provide guidance for the short (2013) and long range (2025) planning needs to maintain the transportation system. LOS Calculation Methodology. The City of Sanford recognizes the appropriate method for measuring LOS as the methods described in the latest Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) published by the Transportation Research Board (TRB). Other acceptable methods include evaluating LOS standards using the FDOT 2002 Quality/Level of Service Handbook (including FDOT programs such as ARTPLAN) and Seminole County's Travel Time Runs. Minimum K factors of 0.075 and D factors of 0.52 apply for all roadway impact analysis. LOS Standards. The City of Sanford adopts the following peak hour LOS standards by roadway functional classification and location: Table 2-1: LOS Standard by Functional Classification Functional Classification LOS Standard City Collectors D County Minor Arterials and Collector not within an Urban Center D County Minor Arterials and Collector within 1-4 High Intensity, Westside Industry and Commerce, and Airport Industry and Commerce E Principal Arterials not constrained or backlogged) D Limited Access Facilities: 1-4 C Limited Access Facilities: SR 417 D State Minor Arterials within Urban Center E State Minor Arterials outside Urban Center D Existing (2009) Peak Hour Peak Direction Vehicle Trips. Daily vehicle trips were estimated using peak season daily traffic counts from Seminole County (where available). Peak hour peak direction volumes were provided in the 2008 Seminole County Annual Traffic Report. The City of Sanford does not maintain traffic counts for roadways within the City. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 2-7 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — October 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element due to limited space between vehicles and rapidly changing speeds. The roadway is congested. Generally, a facility with LOS F is above capacity. Bicycle LOS. Bicycle LOS standards are currently not in place in the City of Sanford. The City is actively promoting the increased use of bicycles. Metroplan Orlando has programmed improvements for sidewalk bikeways along CR 46 in 2007 and 2008. Pedestrian LOS. Pedestrian LOS standards for the City of Sanford are not in place at this time. The City is continually implementing projects to improve the pedestrian environment, specifically in downtown and along major thoroughfares corridors of the City. EXISTING TRANSPORTATION MAP SERIES The following series of maps represent the existing conditions of the City's transportation network. This includes the roadway system, public transit system and bicycle and pedestrian facilities within the City of Sanford. Map 2-1: Major Thoroughfares by Number of Lanes (2009) identifies each major thoroughfare within the City of Sanford by the number of through lanes for the facility. Map 2-2a: Major Thoroughfares by Functional Classification (2009) identifies arterial and collector streets and their functional classification for each facility. The functional classification system indicates the role of each thoroughfare and assists in defining land use relationships. Map 2-21b: Jurisdictional Roadway Classification Map (2009) identifies the jurisdictional classification of roadways within the City's boundaries and reveals the jurisdiction responsible for maintenance. Map 2-3: Major Trip Generators and Attractors (2009) identifies the location of the major trip generators and attractors in the City of Sanford including City Hall, Civic Center, Aquatic Center, Orlando -Sanford Airport, Fort Mellon Park, Seminole County Court House, Sanford Museum, and Monroe Harbor Marina. Map 2-4: Existing Public Transit Facilities (2009) illustrates public transit service currently serving the City of Sanford. Three LYNX fixed routes (34, 46, and 103) operate within the City of Sanford. Route 34 services the central core of Sanford and the downtown area, while route 46 services SR 46 and the western part of the City. Route 103 services the southern portion of US 17-92. Map 2-5: Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (2009) identifies existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities located within the City of Sanford. Map 2-6: Significant Park Facilities (2009) identifies the significant parking facilities within the City. These parking facilities typically provide 100 parking spaces or more and are associated with the major trip generators/attractors. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 2-6 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — October 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element serve greater traffic volumes and have greater length than other local streets, and usually provide access to collector or arterial facilities. Level of Service Roadway LOS measurements are determined for roadways within the City based upon the amount and distribution of automobile traffic. The definitions for LOS standards for automobiles are discussed below. Automobile LOS. The Traffic Engineering Handbook (Institute of Transportation Engineers 1999) defines LOS for roadways as: "a qualitative measure that characterizes operational conditions within a traffic stream and perception of these conditions by motorists and passengers. The descriptions of individual levels of service characterize these conditions in terms of factors such as speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions and comfort and convenience." This definition can be further simplified as the ratio of traffic volume to roadway capacity. The six different LOS categories are described below: • LOS A - This LOS represents an ideal condition of primarily free-flow traffic operations at average travel speeds. Vehicles are completely unimpeded in their ability to maneuver within the traffic stream, and delays at intersections are minimal. • LOS B - This LOS represents reasonably stable, unimpeded traffic flow at average travel speeds. The ability to maneuver within the traffic stream is only slightly restricted and stopped delays are not bothersome. • LOS C - Traffic flow is stable but drivers are becoming restricted in their choice of speeds and ability to maneuver. This service level is often selected as an appropriate criterion for design purposes. • LOS D - Most motorists would consider this LOS unsatisfactory as traffic flow is unstable. Driving speeds are tolerable for short periods of time, but are subject to sudden variances. Time delays do occur due to high volumes of traffic. Ability to maneuver and choose speed is severely restricted. • LOS E - Traffic flow is unstable as speeds and flow rates vary. Traffic flow has either stopped or is maintained at a low speed. There is little independence in selection of speeds or ability to maneuver. Driving comfort is low and accident potential is high due to limited space between vehicles and rapidly changing speeds. The roadway may act as a storage area resulting from downstream congestion. Generally, a facility with LOS E is at or above capacity. LOS F - Traffic flow has generally come to a stopped but will have slight, but inconsistent movement. No independence in selection of speeds or ability to maneuver exists at this LOS. Driving comfort is low and accident potential is high The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 2-5 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — October 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element DEFINITIONS OF TERMS AND CONCEPTS Classification of Maior Thoroughfares Major thoroughfares are categorized into functional classification groups according to the roadway characteristics. The five functional classification groups for urban areas are principal arterials, major arterials, minor arterials, collectors and local streets. The extent and degree of access control is a significant factor in defining the functional classification of a roadway. Regulated limitation of access is necessary on arterials to enhance their primary function of mobility, while the primary function of local streets is to provide access. The functional classifications of major thoroughfares are defined in the Florida Transportation Code, Section 334.03, F.S., as follows: Principal Arterials. The principal arterial system serves the major centers of activity and the highest volume traffic corridors of urbanized areas. Principal arterials typically serve longer distance trips. Although principal arterials constitute a small percentage of the total roadway network, they carry a high proportion of the total urban area travel. The principal arterial system also carries most of the trips entering and leaving the urban area. Service on principal arterials is relatively continuous with relatively high traffic volumes, long average trip lengths, and high operating speed. Service to abutting lands should be subordinate to the provision of travel service and major traffic movements. Major Arterials. These facilities area also designed for the movement of large volumes of traffic over a relatively long distance. Major arterials serve major movements of traffic entering or leaving an urban area, as well as a majority of trips not destined or originating in an urban area. Although, access to adjacent land is not prohibited, it should be strictly controlled due to mobility being the primary function of major arterials. Minor Arterials. This roadway is very similar to a major arterial but is designed to serve moderate volumes of traffic. The minor arterial system interconnects and supports the principal and major arterial systems. This type of roadways allows more land access than the previous two facilities. It accommodates trips of moderate lengths at a lower level of mobility than provided by major arterials. Minor arterials provide continuity among communities and may also carry local bus routes. Ideally, minor arterials do not penetrate identifiable neighborhoods. Collectors. The collector street system provides access and mobility within residential neighborhoods, commercial and industrial areas. It differs from the arterial system in that it penetrates neighborhoods and distributes trips from arterials to their ultimate destinations. Collectors also channelize traffic from local streets onto the arterial system. The collector street system may carry local bus routes. Service on collectors has relatively moderate average traffic volume, moderate average trip length and moderately average operating speed. Also, collectors serve as linkages between land access and mobility needs. Local Streets. The local street system comprises all roadways not in one of the higher systems. It provides direct access to abutting land uses and connections to the higher order systems. It offers the lowest level of mobility and usually contains no bus routes. Through traffic is often discouraged on local streets. Service on local streets has relatively low average traffic volume, short average trip length or minimal through traffic movements and high land access for abutting property. Significant (or major) local streets The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 2-4 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — October 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT DATA, INVENTORY, AND ANALYSIS Local governments that have all or part of their jurisdiction included within the urbanized area of a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) are required to prepare and adopt a Transportation Element consistent with the provisions of Chapter 163, Part III of the Florida Statutes (F.S.). The purpose of the Transportation Element is to plan for an integrated multimodal transportation system that places emphasis on both motorized and non -motorized modes of transportation within the City to help mitigate the impacts of future development. The objective of the Transportation Element Data Inventory and Analysis Report is to describe and analyze transportation resources within the City of Sanford, project future conditions and prepare a foundation for the formulation of goals, objectives, policies and respective implementation programs. As required by Rule 9J-5.019, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), data has been collected, analyzed, and is presented in the following sections including a series of transportation maps. In this analysis, the City of Sanford's Comprehensive Plan long range planning horizon is year 2025. The Transportation Element Data, Inventory, and Analysis (DIA) Report presents: • An analysis of the existing transportation systems, including the ability of transportation facilities and services to serve existing land uses and the adequacy of the existing and projected transportation system to provide adequate emergency evacuation routes; • Growth trends and travel patterns, including relationships between land use and transportation systems; • Report projected transportation system levels of service (LOS) and maintenance of adopted LOS standards; • An analysis of local and state transportation programs; • Land use policy implications of transportation management programs necessary to promote public transportation. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 2-3 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — October 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1: LOS Standard by Functional Classification..................................................2-7 Table 2-1: Existing (2009) Daily Traffic Volumes..........................................................2-9 Table 2-3: Existing (2009) Peak Hour Peak Direction Traffic Volumes .......................2-10 Table 2-4: Year 2009 Seminole county Travel Time & Delay Study ...........................2-11 Table 2-5: Workers by Transportation Mode...............................................................2-12 Table 2-6: Ridership by Route....................................................................................2-13 Table 2-7: Transit Service characteristics................................................................... 2-14 Table 2-8: Population Estimates for Sanford..............................................................2-15 Table2-9: Primary Land Uses....................................................................................2-16 Table 2-10: Short -Term (2013) Daily Traffic Volumes................................................2-19 Table 2-11: Short -Term (2013) Peak Hour Peak Direction Traffic Volumes...............2-20 Table 2-12: Long -Term (2025) Daily Traffic Volumes.................................................2-21 Table 2-13: Long -Term (2013) Peak Hour Direction Traffic Volumes .........................2-22 Table 2-14: Long -Term (2025) Peak Hour Peak Direction Traffic Volumes................2-23 LIST OF MAPS Map 2-1: Major Thoroughfares by Number of Lanes (2009) Map 2-2a: Major Thoroughfares by Functional Classification (2009) Map 2-2b: Jurisdictional Roadway Classification Map (2009) Map 2-3: Major Trip Generators and Attractors (2009) Map 2-4: Existing Public Transit Facilities (2009 Map 2-5: Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (2009) Map 2-6: Significant Park Facilities (2009) Map 2-7: Railways, Intermodal, and Airport Facilities (2009) Map 2-8: Existing Peak Hour Peak Direction LOS on Major Thoroughfares (2009) Map 2-9: Major Thoroughfares by Number of Lanes (2025) Map 2-10a: Major Thoroughfares by Functional Classification (2025) Map 2-10b: Jurisdictional Roadway Classification Map (2025) Map 2-11: Major Trip Generators and Attractors (2025) Map 2-12: Future Transit Facilities (2025) Map 2-13: Future Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (2025) Map 2-14: Projected Peak Hour Peak Direction Levels of Service (2013) Map 2-15: Projected Peak Hour Peak Direction Levels of Service (2025) The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 2-2 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT DATA, INVENTORY, AND ANALYSIS REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS DATA, INVENTORY, AND ANALYSIS.........................................................................2-3 DEFINITIONS OF TERMS AND CONCEPTS...............................................................2-4 EXISTING TRANSPORTATION MAP SERIES.............................................................2-6 ANALYSIS OF EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS .......................... Level of Service Calculation Methodology ............................................. Level of Service Standards..................................................................... Existing (2009) Peak Hour Peak Direction Vehicle Trips ........................ Levels of Service and System Needs ..................................................... Existing Modal Split and Vehicle Occupancy Rates ................................ Existing Public Transit Facilities and Routes .......................................... Peak Hour Transit Capacities, Headways and Ridership by Route ........ Levels of Service and System Needs ..................................................... Population Characteristics...................................................................... Transportation Disadvantaged................................................................ Existing Characteristics of Major Trip Generators and Attractors ........... Existing Bicycle Facilities........................................................................ Existing Pedestrian Facilities.................................................................. Availability of Transportation Facilities to Serve Existing Land Uses...... Adequacy of Existing and Projected Evacuation Transportation System ........... 2-7 ........... 2-7 ...........2-7 ...........2-7 .........2-11 .........2-12 .........2-13 .........2-14 .........2-14 .........2-14 .........2-15 ......... 2-15 .........2-15 ......... 2-15 ......... 2-16 .........2-16 FUTURE TRANSPORTATION MAP SERIES.............................................................2-17 Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas.....................................................2-17 ANALYSIS OF FUTURE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM...........................................2-18 GrowthTrends....................................................................................................2-18 Impact of Projected Land Use on Transportation System Levels of Service . ..... 2-18 Traffic Forecasting Methodology.........................................................................2-18 Projected Peak Hour Traffic Conditions............................................................ 2-234 Transportation Planning Approach......................................................................2-25 Existing and Projected Integrated Transportation System . ................................. 2-26 Concurrency Management..................................................................................2-26 Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas.....................................................2-26 Transportation Projects Planned by Other Jurisdictions.....................................2-26 The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 2-1 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 Year Number of Annexations Acres 2001 34 587 2002 32 322 2003 27 266 2004 43 292 2005 22 150 2006 31 133 2007 23 107 Total 236 2,091 Source: City of Sanford Planning Department, 2007 SUMMARY The City has a variety of future land uses to direct growth into more compact and mixed- use forms. Activity centers, mixed-use districts, Community Redevelopment Areas and Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas are all planning tools the City has developed to successfully accommodate future growth. Vacant land is very limited in the City, accounting for less than 20 percent of the total land area. Much of the vacant land has development planned or already underway. Based on an analysis of vacant residential land uses and the five categories for higher intensity, mixed-use development, the City has adequate planning tools available to maintain projected growth rates. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 1-15 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 LAND USE DESIGNATIONS MAP SYMBOL DENSITY/INTENSITY (MAXIMUM) PERCENTAGED/STR/BUT/ON(M/N/MA)Q COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL RESIDENTIAL Airport Industry & Commerce AIC 1.0 FAR 1.0 FAR 50 du/acre (MF) 1 du/acre (SF) 25%150% 50%175% 0%/10% Public & Semi -Public. This classification includes public and semi-public uses such as governmental administration buildings, public schools, medical and health facilities, cemeteries, fire and emergency services, etc. The maximum allowable FAR is 0.35. Park/Recreation & Open Space. This classification identifies areas in the City for recreational areas and open space. Resource Protection. This classification was established to allow for the preservation of natural systems including environmentally sensitive wetlands and other areas important for conservation purposes. Development is heavily restricted in this district. Community Redevelopment Area (CRA)/Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA). The City has developed CRAs and TCEAs within the City to accommodate urban infill and redevelopment in targeted areas of the City. The Lake Monroe Waterfront and Downtown Sanford CRA include the historic residential and commercial areas and the corridor to the south of Lake Monroe. The Seminole Towne Center CRA is located around the Seminole Town Center Mall and Towne Center Boulevard. The third CRA is along the US 17-92. The TCEA covers the US 17-92 corridor and the corridor to the south of Lake Monroe. The TCEA assists the City with redevelopment efforts by promoting multiple transportation options and allowing development that could otherwise be restricted due to existing transportation concurrency issues. ANNEXATION The City has annexed a significant amount of unincorporated land into the City since 2000, totaling more than 2,000 acres. More than half of the annexations, in terms of acreage, occurred between 2000 and 2002, and annexation during the past few years has declined. It is likely annexations will continue, but at a slower rate. New development is likely to occur because of infill, redevelopment and higher density development within the existing City limits. Table 1-9 identifies annexations since the year 2000. Table 1-9 Annexation since 2000 Number of Year Acres Annexations 2000 24 234 City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 1-14 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 Residential/Office/Institutional. This mixed-use classification allows for residential office and institutional uses. The maximum floor -to -area (FAR) ratio for non-residential development is 0.35 and residential development up to 20 dwelling units per acre. 1-4 High Intensity. This classification is a mixed-use designation in the vicinity of the I- 4/SR 46 Interchange. Non-residential development is permissible up to an FAR of 1.0 and residential development is permissible up to 50 dwelling units per acre. Waterfront/Downtown Business District. This classification allows for residential, governmental, cultural, institutional, and commercial activities within the waterfront and downtown areas of Sanford. Revitalization, redevelopment and infill development are encouraged in this district. Maximum FAR's and densities vary throughout the district, with the maximum being an FAR of 2.0 and a residential density of 50 dwelling units per acre. Westside Industry & Commerce. This classification allows for a mixture of commercial and industrial uses in the vicinity of the West SR 46 corridor. The maximum FAR for commercial and industrial development is 0.50. Residential uses are also permitted at a density up to 20 dwelling units per acre. The previous classifications are the City's five mixed-use designations. These areas are primarily employment centers; however, a mix of uses including residential supports a strong community and the City's smart growth objectives. The following is the recommended distribution of uses within each classification: LAND USE DESIGNATIONS MAP SYMBOL DENSITY/INTENSITY (MAXIMUM) PERCENTAGEDIS TR/BUT/ON(MINIMA X� COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL RESIDENTIAL Mixed Use Districts 1-4 High Intensity HI 1.0 FAR 50%175% 0.50 FAR 50 du/acre 25%150% 0%/10% Waterfront/ Downtown Business District WDBD 1.0 FAR 1.0 FAR 50 du/acre 50%1100% 25%150% 0%140% Westside Industry & Commerce WIC 0.500.35 FAR 0.50 FAR 20 du/acre 50%110% 50%1100% 0%140% Residential/ Office/ Institutional ROI 0.35 FAR n/a 20 du/acre 75%/100% 0%/40% City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 1-13 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 ■ Westside Industry & Commerce ■ Public & Semi -Public ■ Park/Recreation & Open Space ■ Resource Protection ■ Community Redevelopment Area (CRA)/Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA). The following provides a brief description of the City's future land use categories/designations. Mobile Home. This classification allows for mobile home parks with a density up to six dwelling units per acre. Suburban Estates. This district is intended to protect land with soils productive for agricultural use. Residential density in this category is limited to one dwelling unit per acre. Low Density Residential Single Family. These areas have been identified for single- family development with a maximum density of six dwelling units per acre. Medium Density Residential. The two medium density residential categories allow for up to ten dwelling units per acre and 15 dwelling units per acre. This category allows for single-family and multi -family development. High Density Residential. This classification allows for residential development up to 20 dwelling units per acre. These areas are to be accessible to existing or future major thoroughfares with adequate public facilities to accommodate this intensity of development. Neighborhood Commercial. This classification allows for commercial development with an FAR up to 0.35. Commercial uses within this classification are intended to serve neighborhood needs and be located near major thoroughfares and residential neighborhoods. General Commercial. This classification allows for commercial development with an FAR up to 0.35. This district accommodates commercial uses that are community - oriented and highway -oriented and allows a mix of uses including residential at 20 dwelling units per acre. Industrial. This classification allows for industrial uses accessible to air, rail and highway transport facilities. Allowable uses include manufacturing, assembling and distribution activities, warehousing and storage activities, and other similar land uses. The maximum FAR is 0.50. Airport Industry & Commerce. This classification is a mixed-use district surrounding the Orlando Sanford International Airport. The maximum FAR for commercial and industrial development is 1.0. Residential uses are also permitted at a density up to 50 dwelling units per acre. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 1-12 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 2) A number of housing programs, such as the Low Income Housing Tax Credit and, in most cases, Section 8 Housing Vouchers, set income limits below 80 percent of area median. Through 2025 the number of households considered to be cost -burdened is expected to increase. The Housing Data, Inventory and Analysis Report provides specific breakdowns of affordable housing needs in the City and provides an analysis based on the two previous points. ENVIRONMENTAL LAND USE ISSUES [Rule 9J -5.006(2)(e)] Despite the level of development within the City, there are areas of environmental significance that need to be taken into consideration as the City continues to grow. Monitoring and protection of these areas need to be ongoing. This section describes the conclusions and recommendations for preservation of natural resources within the City consistent with the City's vision for land use. The Conservation Element of this Comprehensive Plan provides more detailed information of the environmental resources and concerns summarized below. Overall, environmental conditions and conservation efforts in the City are being successfully implemented and the City is meeting adopted environmental standards. Lake Monroe is currently at acceptable water quality levels and the City continues to coordinate with the County and environmental agencies to monitor and improve conditions on both Lake Monroe and Lake Jesup. Protection of lands near Lake Monroe and other open spaces throughout the City will provide shelter for wildlife and native habitats. Potable water supplies are adequately meeting demand and the City has entered into an interlocal agreement to enhance the supply of reuse water. Ozone level and particulate matter standards set forth by the EPA are being met. As growth continues, the City will need to continue current efforts and adjust to changing conditions to continue to meet environmental regulations. The City's future land use map identifies Resource Protection Areas and Park/Recreation & Open Space. The City will maintain efforts to preserve these areas. FUTURE LAND USE The City's adopted Future Land Use Map currently contains the following 17 future land use categories/designations: ■ Mobile Home ■ Suburban Estates ■ Low Density Residential Single Family ■ Medium Density Residential ■ High Density Residential ■ Neighborhood Commercial ■ General Commercial ■ Industrial ■ Airport Industry & Commerce ■ Residential/Office/Institutional ■ 1-4 High Intensity ■ Waterfront/Downtown Business District City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 1-11 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 International Airport. The City's policies relating to redevelopment and infill development have been designed to provide incentives and to encourage the pursuit of multi -modal transportation opportunities. The following section provides details on the City's three C RA's: • Lake Monroe Waterfront and Downtown Sanford CRA This CRA includes the historic residential and commercial areas and the corridor located to the south of Lake Monroe. Redevelopment is envisioned to consist primarily of local residential or commercial projects that are in character with existing development. • Seminole Towne Center CRA This CRA surrounds the Seminole Town Center Mall and Towne Center Boulevard. This CRA promotes large-scale commercial development and high- density residential development. • US 17-92 Corridor CRA This CRA is located along US 17-92 between 1st Street and the southern City Limits. A TCEA is in place along this corridor to promote multi -modal transportation and redevelopment. The TCEA assists the City with redevelopment efforts by allowing development that could otherwise be restricted due to existing transportation concurrency issues. The City has also created activity centers to focus high density residential development. Some activity centers allow for residential densities up to 50 dwelling units per acre. The activity centers allow for a mixture of uses, potentially reducing the number and length of automobile trips. The following activity centers and mixed-use districts are located within the City: • 14 High Intensity: A density of up to 50 du/acre • Waterfront/Downtown Business District: A density of up to 50 du/acre • Westside Industry & Commerce: A density of up to 20 du/acre • Airport Industry & Commerce: A density of up to 50 du/acre • Residential/Office/Institutional: A density of up to 20 du/acre AFFORDABLE HOUSING According to the Florida Housing Database Clearinghouse (FHDC), although summary indicators can provide a measure of the overall housing need, targeting housing assistance appropriately often requires a more detailed analysis on the income variation within the total number of low-income, severely cost -burdened households. The FHDC provides the following two reasons why this detailed analysis is important: 1) If needs are to be addressed through construction of new units, income variation within low-income households means that not all new rent- or price -restricted units will be affordable to all households. For example, a household at 30 percent area median income (AMI) would still pay more than half of its income for rent in an apartment with rent set for households with incomes of 60 percent AMI. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 1-10 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES [Rule 9J-5.006(1)] The City has a Historic Preservation Board that regulates the City's historic districts. The City is also one of 57 Certified Local Governments in the State. The Certified Local Government (CLG) Program provides for coordination between the federal government, state government, and local government for the identification, evaluation and protection of historic properties. CLG's are eligible for matching grants funded by the Bureau of Historic Preservation to assist with these activities. The City has two historic districts, the Sanford Commercial District and the Sanford Residential Historic District. The National Register of Historic Places identified five historic structures in the City. Tables 1-7 and 1-8 provide information on these structures and districts. Table 1-7 Identified Historic Structures Structure Address Year Listed Old Fernald- Laughton Memorial Hospital 500 S. Oak Avenue 1987 Ritz Theater 201 S. Magnolia Avenue 2001 Sanford Grammar School 7th and Myrtle Streets 1984 Seminole County Home 300 Bush Boulevard 1999 St. James A.M.E. Church 819 Cvpress Avenue 1992 Source: National Register of Historic Places Table 1-8 Identified Historic Districts Structure Address Year Listed Sanford Commercial District Portions of 1st, 2nd, and Commercial 1976 Streets between Palmetto and Oak Avenue Sanford Residential Historic Roughly bounded by Sanford 1989 District Avenue, 14th St., Elm Avenue, and 3rd Street Source: National Register of Historic Places REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES [Rule 9J -5.006(2)(d)] Redevelopment and urban infill are two methods of future development that have been identified by the City as integral to maintaining future growth. The City does not contain significant areas of vacant land, so much of the future growth will occur in the form of redevelopment projects. In order to encourage redevelopment, the City has implemented tools in specified corridors to focus growth. These include the Lake Monroe Waterfront and Downtown Sanford CRA/TCEA, the Seminole Towne Center CRA, the US 17-92 CRA/TCEA, and the area surrounding the Orlando Sanford City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 1-9 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 ANALYSIS OF UNDEVELOPED LANDS [Rule 9J -5.006(2)(b)] The City of Sanford is approaching buildout, with more than 80 percent of the City's land currently developed. There are 2,264.2 acres of vacant developable land, which constitutes 15.7 percent of the City's total land area. The following provides a breakdown of the existing vacant developable lands by land use: • Vacant Residential = 503.3 acres • Vacant Mixed -Use = 554.7 acres • Vacant Non -Residential = 2,264.2 acres • Total = 2,264.2 acres Table 1-6 identifies the potential increase in housing units based on vacant and the respective maximum allowable density. These future land use categories could supply a maximum of 12,203 additional dwelling units based on allowable density and vacant acreage. Based on projected population growth, this will be sufficient to accommodate growth. Table 1-6 Potential Housing Units Land Use Vacant, Maximum Developable Density Land acres du/acre Potential Housing Units2 Low Density Residential - Single Family 11.96 6 72 Medium Density Residential - 10 112.90 10 1,129 Medium Density Residential - 15 178.23 15 2,673 High Density Residential - 20 83.12 20 1,662 Waterfront/Downtown Business District 103.91 50 1,039 1-4 High Intensity' 39.99 50 1,000 Westside Industry & Commerce 304.72 20 3,047 Airport Industry & Commerce 79.0 50 1,580 Residential/Office/Institutional 27.08 20 190 General Commercial 214.66 20 601 Total 1,155.57 -- 12,993 Source: GIS Data provided by the City of Sanford 'Assumes maximum residential as 40 percent of total FAR permitted within each mixed use district. 2Rounded to nearest whole number. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 1_8 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 Sanitary Sewer. Two wastewater treatment plants serve the City's service area, the Sanford North Water Reclamation Facility (SNWRF) and the Sanford South Water Resource Center. The SNWRF has a permitted and designed capacity of 7.3 MGD and the Sanford South Water Resource Center has a capacity of 2.0 MGD, however, the total designed capacity is 6.0 MGD. The additional 4.0 MGD is anticipated to come online by the year 2011. The 12 month trailing average of wastewater collected, according to the Department of Water and Sewer Utilities, was 7.1 MGD as of May 2008. The system is currently operating at an LOS of 130.8 gallons per capita daily (GPCD), below the adopted LOS standard of 132 GPCD. The City anticipates additional wastewater treatment plant capacity of 4.0 MGD to come online by the year 2011. Stormwater Drainage Facilities. A combination of natural and man-made drainage facilities provide stormwater drainage to the City. Because of topographic features and the City's location in the Middle St. John's River Basin, the stormwater system receives flows from areas located outside its boundaries. The stormwater system has been designed to accommodate a 25 year — 24 hour retention/detention of stormwater. The Public Works Department is responsible for the stormwater system. The Department is in the process of completing several significant improvements to the system. The Cloud Branch 13th Street Outfall Project is adding additional reservoir capacity through the construction of two large ponds. In addition, the completion of two large box culverts will significantly enhance control and flow throughout the entire system. Also connecting with the Cloud Branch 13th Street project is the addition of another drainage line just east of US 17-92 to provide better drainage along the roadway. Several other recently completed projects have enclosed open drainage ditches along roadways which provide additional stormwater drainage capacity. Solid Waste. Solid Waste service is operated by Seminole County. The County maintains and operates two solid waste facilities, the Osceola Road Landfill (ORL) which is the County's main solid waste facility, and the Central Transfer Station (CTS). The Osceola Road Landfill is located in the northeastern portion of the County and provides disposal and recycling services to the entire County. The Central Transfer Station is located in the center of the County, where it is easily accessible to a majority of the County's urban areas. The CTS is an essential part to the County's waste management system because it provides a central point at which solid waste generated from the municipalities within the County can deposit solid waste before it is transferred to the ORL. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection collects data on solid waste facilities within each county in the State. The latest data numbers for Seminole County are for the year 2006. For the year ending in December 2006, the ORL contained 423,553 tons of solid waste. The total amount of solid waste recycled was 150,339 tons, for a County solid waste generation of 573,892 tons. Parks and Recreation. The City is currently meeting the LOS standard for recreation and open space. The adopted LOS standard is 4 acres per 1,000 persons. Based on the 2007 population estimate and the amount of existing recreation and open space, the City is operating at a LOS of approximately 5.6 acres per 1,000 persons. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 1-7 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 Transit. The City of Sanford is served by LYNX, the regional system. LYNX operates the following bus routes through the City: • Route 34: Connects the downtown area of Sanford and the Central Florida Regional Hospital with the Georgetown and Goldsboro neighborhoods in Sanford and the Midway neighborhood in Seminole County. The route operates Monday through Saturday and runs every other hour. • Route 45: Serves southern Sanford, from the Seminole Center and runs along Lake Mary Boulevard. The route operates Monday through Saturday and runs every hour. • Route 46: Serves much of the City, starting at the Seminole Center, passing by the Central Florida Regional Hospital and running along the western portion of SR 46 corridor the Seminole Towne Center Mall. The route operates seven days a week and runs every hour. • Route 103: This route begins at the Seminole Center and serves the southern portion of the City along US 17-92 and the Seminole Community College. The route connects with Route 102 to provide service to downtown Orlando and operates seven days a week and runs every half hour. Another form of transit being considered is the Central Florida Commuter Rail. This project is a proposed commuter rail service operating along 61 miles of track between Volusia and Osceola County, with a stop proposed in the City of Sanford west of the US 17-92 TCEA. The rail would provide access to downtown Orlando and potentially minimize congestion along 1-4. Potable Water. The City's potable water supply is retrieved from the Floridan Aquifer. This groundwater is the primary source of potable water for the City of Sanford. The City's Consumptive Use Permit (CUP) Number 162 allocates a withdrawal of up to 3,496.7 million gallons per year (MGY), which equates to approximately 9.58 million gallons per day (MGD). The permit is processed and managed through the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) and will expire on February 8, 2026. The potable water system is structured to accommodate an entire service area instead of smaller individual areas that comprise the entirety of a service area. This approach avoids one individual facility providing service to a specific area, rather all facilities function to serve the entire system. This approach allows the City to deliver high quality water service to customers and allows problems to be isolated and corrected quickly. The current underground storage capacity for the system is 4.0 million gallons (MG), with an additional 0.5 MG of elevated storage. The City's primary source for potable water storage is at the Water Treatment Plants. The Main Water Treatment Plant has 1.5 MG of ground storage, the Auxiliary Plant provides another 1.5 MG of ground storage, and the City operates another 1.0 MG of ground storage. The total designed capacity of the City's potable water system is 20.74 MGD. The 2008 projected potable water demand is 7.783 MGD, within the permitted withdrawal amount. To further reduce potable water demands, the City is a part of the Tri -Party Agreement between the City, Lake Mary and Seminole County, to establish coordination mechanisms for the expansion of reclaimed/reuse water facilities. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 1-6 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 The City of Sanford is projected to see a slightly higher rate of population growth through 2025 than the County. The City's population in 2025 is projected to be 78,611, compared to 48,801 in 2005. Based on the limited availability of vacant land, future growth will likely be focused in the identified activity centers and in the form of redevelopment and infill development. The population figures and estimates in Table 1-5 were obtained from the U.S. Bureau of the Census and the City's Water Supply Facilities Plan. Population growth rates are anticipated to decrease through 2030, as the amount of vacant developable land continues to decrease. Table 1-5 Population Estimates for Sanford Year Population Gross Change Percent Change 2000A 38,291 - - 20058 49,251 10,960 2.86% 20106 57,203 7,952 16.1% 2015B 64,837 7,634 13.3% 20208 72,068 7,231 11.1% 20258 78,611 6,543 9.1% Notes: A = US Bureau of the Census, 2000 B = Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse, 2008 AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES [Rule 9J -5.006(2)(a)] A review of public facilities and services is needed in order to determine if future growth can adequately be accommodated. This section analyzes the public facilities and services to determine if they are adequate to accommodate anticipated growth or if improvements to these systems are needed. Roadways. Major thoroughfares serving the City of Sanford include 1-4, Toll 417 (the Seminole Expressway), US 17-92, SR 46, CR 15, CR 46A, CR 425, and CR 427A. Roadways in the City are currently meeting the LOS standards except for the segment of US 17-92 between Lake Mary Boulevard and Airport Boulevard. The following project has been identified with funding in the MetroPlan Long Range Transportation Plan to address this deficiency: • US 17-92- widening to six lanes from Shepard Road to CR 427 The City has recently implemented a Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) along US 17-92. This corridor is one of three Community Redevelopment Area's (CRA) located within the City. The US 17-92 CRA is a linear CRA beginning at 1 st Street and continuing to the southern city limit. Designating this CRA as a TCEA will allow for redevelopment in the area and promote additional means of transportation to serve the increased growth. Without the implementation of the TCEA, infill and redevelopment would be hindered by concurrency issues. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 1-5 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 POPULATION HISTORY, TRENDS AND PROJECTIONS [Rule 9J -5.006(1)(g)] Table 1-3 identifies historical population trends in the County and the City. Both jurisdictions have experienced rapid population growth since 1980. Seminole County has experienced a population increase of nearly 128 percent while the City has increased nearly 118 percent. Between 1980 and 2007 the City has contained between 10 and 13 percent of the total County population. The 2007 population estimate for Sanford was 50,468, a significant increase over the 2000 Census figure of 38,291. The County's population growth rate was slower during this time period, increasing 12 percent compared to the City's 32 percent growth rate. Table 1-3 Historical Population Growth City of Sanford vs. Orange County Year Seminole County population City of Sanford Population Sanford (Percent of County Total 1980 179,752 23,176 12.89% 1990 287,529 32,387 11.26% 2000 365,196 38,291 10.49% 2007 409,509 50,468 12.32% Source: US Bureau of the Census, 1980, 1990, 2000; Population Estimate for 2007 Population Projections. Seminole County and the City of Sanford have experienced significant population growth over the last few decades. Table 1-4 presents the projected population of Seminole County through 2025. The County is projected to experience sustained population growth through 2025, increasing from 411,739 in 2005 to 580,406 in 2025. Table 1-4 Population Estimates for Seminole County Year Population Gross Change Percent Change 2000A 365,196 - - 2005(8I 411,739 46,543 12.74% 20108 460,005 48,266 11.72% 20158 504,099 44,094 9.59% 20208 544,700 40,601 8.05% 20258 580,406 35,706 6.56% Notes: A = US Bureau of the Census, 2000 B = Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse Projection City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 1-4 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 Table 1-2 Future Land Use Categories Code Future Land Use Category Acres Percent of Total LDRSF Low Density Residential Single Family 2,410.16 19.36% MDR 10 Medium Density Residential (up to 10 du/ac) 338.09 2.72% MDR 15 Medium Density Residential (up to 15 du/ac) 676.95 5.44% HDR High Density Residential 354.58 2.85% SE Suburban Estates 114.26 0.92% LDRMH Mobile Home 76.97 0.62% NC Neighborhood Commercial 126.13 1.01% GC General Commercial 758.35 6.09% 1 Industrial 684.26 5.50% PSP Public & Semi Public 680.03 5.46% PRO Park, Recreation & Open Space 285.42 2.29% RP Resource Protection 1256.54 10.09% WDBD Waterfront/Downtown Business District 523.38 4.20% HI 1-4 High Intensity 441.09 3.54% WIC Westside Industry & Commerce 1,200.25 9.64% AIC Airport Industry & Commerce 2,415.21 19.40% ROI Residential/Office/Institutional 110.52 0.89% Total 12,452.19 100.00% *= Not a future land use category 1- Based on an analysis of these parcels on the Seminole County Property Appraiser website, the largest portion of land classified as Unknown were parcels with the DOR use code of 99, Acreage not Zoned Agriculture Source: City Sanford GIS information City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 1-3 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 Table 1-1 Existing Land Use Categories Code Existing Land Use Category Acres Percent of Total RES -SF Single Family Residential 2,894.03 23.24% RES -MF Multi -Family Residential 625.77 5.03% RES -MH Medium High Residential 98.46 0.79% COM Commercial 944.01 7.58% OFF Office 130.39 1.05% IND Industrial 636.49 5.11% INS Institutional 199.08 1.60% SCHOOL Public Schools 437.50 3.51% PUBFACIL Public Facility 2,078.77 16.69% PUBSRVC Public Service 413.77 3.32% REC Recreational 229.02 1.84% CONS Conservation 1,265.51 10.16% AG Agricultural 554.54 4.45% VACANT Vacant 1,944.85 15.62% Total 12,452.19 100.00% = Not an existing land use category Source: City of Sanford GIS information Table 1-2 identifies the future land use categories within the City and the acreage associated with each. Airport Industry & Commerce is the largest category, mainly because the Orlando Sanford International Airport is located within the City. The second most predominant future land use category in the City is low density residential -single family. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 1-2 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT DATA, INVENTORY, AND ANALYSIS The Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan provides a framework for future land use and development patterns. The Element provides the framework for the types of uses, density/intensity and location of where future growth will occur as well as areas intended for preservation. The Element is developed with consideration of all other Elements, taking into account environmental features, recreation needs, housing needs, transportation issues, and the availability of public facilities and services. The Future Land Use Element guides zoning regulations, as zoning is used to implement the future land use categories identified in the Element. This Data, Inventory and Analysis (DIA) Report supplies an inventory of existing and future land use conditions and takes into consideration population projections, vacant and developable lands, environmental considerations, and areas identified for more intense development. EXISTING LAND USE CONDITIONS [Rule 9J-5.006(1)] An evaluation of the City's current land use and development patterns is the initial step in formulating goals and a vision for future growth patterns. This analysis includes reviewing the existing land uses, the amount and location of each use and how much vacant land is available in the City for future development. Table 1-1 identifies the existing land uses in the City and the acreage of each use. Approximately 15 percent of the City's land is currently vacant. A detailed analysis of vacant lands is provided later in this Report. The City of Sanford consists of approximately 14,402 acres. Excluding roads and rights- of-way, there are 12,452 acres of parcels in the City. Roughly one-quarter of the City's land area is currently identified as a residential use. Nearly 17 percent of the City is identified as public facility, a higher percentage than is typically found in jurisdictions of similar size and population to Sanford. The significant portion of land within this classification is largely due to the Orlando Sanford International Airport's location within the City. Commercial uses in the City are clustered along US 17-92, in the downtown/waterfront area, and in the City's western areas in the 1-4 vicinity. The majority of vacant lands are in the recently annexed areas, in the City's southern and western areas. Nearly all of the public facility land use is in the eastern portion of the City where the airport is located. Industrial uses are concentrated in the southeastern and western areas of the City. Residential uses are spread throughout the City. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 1-1 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT DATA, INVENTORY, AND ANALYSIS REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS EXISTING LAND USE CONDITIONS...........................................................................1-1 POPULATION HISTORY, TRENDS AND PROJECTIONS..........................................1-4 AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES.........................................1-5 ANALYSIS OF UNDEVELOPED LANDS............................................................... ..... 1-8 HISTORIC AND ARCHEOLOGICAL RESOURCES.....................................................1-9 REDEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES........................................................................1-9 AFFORDABLE HOUSING...........................................................................................1-10 ENVIRONMENTAL LAND USE ISSUES....................................................................1-11 FUTURELAND USE...................................................................................................1-11 ANNEXATION.............................................................................................................1-16 SUMMARY...................................................................................................................1-17 LIST OF TABLES Table 1-1: Existing Land Use Categories.......................................................................1-2 Table 1-2: Future Land Use Categories........................................................................ 1-3 Table 1-3: Historical Population Growth City of Sanford vs. Seminole County..............1-4 Table 1-4: Population Estimates for Seminole County...................................................1-4 Table 1-5: Population Estimates for Sanford.................................................................1-5 Table 1-6: Potential Housing Units.................................................................................1-8 Table 1-7: Identified Historic Structures.........................................................................1-9 Table 1-8: Identified Historic Districts.............................................................................1-9 Table 1-9: Annexations Since 2000.............................................................................1-14 City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EAR shall GENERAL MONITORING ontain an €element Aassessment section that reviews the successes and shortcomings of each element. This section should review the -goals and objectives of each element, particularly as they relate to the identified maior issue Where shortcomings are identified, corrective action(s) should be identified. Objective 10-1.2: Adopt and Transmit EAR and EAR -based Amendments. The City shall continue to adopt and transmit the EAR and EAR -based amendments in accordance with the Florida Statutes. Policy 10-1.2.11: Adopt EAR The City's Planninq and Development Department shall prepare the EAR, with public comment and participation constituting part of this process. Upon completion of the EAR. the Planning and Zoning Commission shall review the document and make a recommendation to the City Commission. The City Commission shall be responsible for approval of the EAR for submission to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) for compliance review. The public hearings before the Planning and Zoning Commission and City Commission shall be open to the public for comment. The City shall follow all review and adoption rules specified in Section 163.3191, F.S. Policy 10-1.2.2: Adopt EAR -based Comprehensive Plan Amendments. All EAR -based amendments to the Comprehensive Plan shall be adopted within 18 months of the DCA finding the EAR sufficient. The City of Sanford Planning and Development Department shall update the Comprehensive Plan according to the approved EAR. Upon completion of the update the Planning and Zoning Commission shall review the document and make a recommendation to the City Commission. The City Commission shall be responsible for adoption and transmittal to the DCA. 10-3 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GENERAL MONITORING and Implications these have to the Adopted Comprehensive Plan. a. State Level: The State of Florida regulates local government comprehensive planning through Chapter 163, Part 2. F.S. These statutes shall be reviewed by the City of Sanford Planning and Development Department and the EAR shall address relevant changes. The EAR should also review the State of Florida Comprehensive Plan. b. Regional Level: The City shall work with the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council (ECFRPC) to address any updates in regional policy and review the ECFRPC's strategic Regional Policy Plan. C. Local Level: The EAR shall be developed in a manner that addresses local Policy and promotes implementation of these policies. 4JQ Review Impact of Changing Conditions and the Implications on the Comprehensive Plan. Update appropriate baseline data and review evolving issues, including major shifts in the magnitude, distribution, and/or characteristics of the following: • Housing supply and demand • Land use • Natural resources • Public facilities • Transportation system • Park and recreation system • Fiscal management resources • District water supply Ian • Public school facilities 2L3) Identify Major Issues Regarding the Community's Achievement of the Plan's Goals. The evaluation and appraisal report shall identify major issues as part of the EAR process. The EAR shall be based on the analysis of these major issues in order to facilitate meeting the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. 3_(4) Aseemplishm Review the Effectiveness of Intergovernmental Coordination. The EAR shall describe the . xisting coordination efforts and identify successes and areas in need of improvement. 4L51 Review Each of the Plan's Elements and Evaluate How the Community is Achieving the Specified Goals and Obiectives. The 10-2 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GENERAL MONITORING CHAPTER 109: GENERAL MONITORING AND REVIEW CRITERIA , -A-G- GOAL 10-1: ESTABLISH MONITORING AND EVALUATION PROCEDURES. ESTABLISH AND MAINTAIN PROCEDURES FOR IMPLEMENTING THE MONITORING AND EVALUATION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EVERY SEVEN YEARS PURSUANT TO SECTION 163.3191, F.S. AND RULE 9J-5.005(7), F.A.C. Objective 10-1.1: Maintain Review Procedures. The City shall ensure that the evaluating and updating of the Comprehensive Plan maintains proper review procedures and that public involvement is a component ofthe overall process. Policy 109-1.1.1: IAL C/TY—TWI=DI ANNINC AND GNING COMMISSION IN PI AN EVALUATION AND UPDATES Utilize Planning and Zoning Commission in Plan Evaluation and Updates. The Planning and Zoning Commission as the designated Local Planning Agency , shall monitor and oversee the effectiveness and status of the Comprehensive Plan and recommend to the City Commission such changes in the Comprehensive Plan as Fnay ftem time te time be required. Policy 10-1.1.2: Administer General Procedures. The monitoring and evaluation of the Comprehensive Plan shall be a continuous and ongoing process. The City of Sanford Planning and Development Department shall prepare the EAR once every seven years and submit to the Planning and Zoning Commission for their review and recommendation to the City Commission. The City Commission shall be responsible for approval of the EAR prior to submission to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) for compliance review. -The Planning -and 19 The preparation of the €val-atieR and Appraisal Rope EAR shall comply with the procedures and contents set forth in Section 163.3191, F_S., and Rule 9J-5.005(7), F.A.C. Policy 10-1.1.3: Solicit Public Participation. (2)—SitTaer tea,-�I;�PaFtiri ^ -. Public participation shall be an integral part of the process. Prior to preparation of the EAR, at least one public meeting shall be held to solicit the public's input. This meetina shall be advertised in the local newspaper at least two weeks prior to the meeting. Subsequent to the initial public participation meeting, the process of Comprehensive Plan evaluation and update shall include a public hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission and the City Commission, respectively, prior to adopting the final report. The public hearing shall be duly noticed and citizen input shall be encouraged. The adopted City of Sanford's Citizen Participation Plan is included in the Comprehensive Plan as Appendi*GO. Policy 10-1.21.4: Criteria for Continuing Evaluation of Comprehensive Plan Elements. 4A evaluating eaGh Filement of the The Planning and Zoning Commission and City Commission shall use the following general criteria as well as any more specific criteria contained in respective elements of the Plan to evaluate each Element of the Comprehensive Plan. (1) Review Changes to State. Regional, and Local Policies on Growth Management 10-1 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES ELEMENT Policy 940-1.7.3: Coordinate Bicycle Access and Pedestrian Connection. The City will coordinate bicycle access to public schools consistent with the Seminole County countywide bicycle plan adopted by the Metropolitan Planning Organization, METROPLAN. In addition, the City shall revise its land development regulations as needed to specify that performance standards for new residential developments adjacent to existing and proposed school sites, other than age restricted developments, shall include pedestrian connections between the sidewalk network within the development and the adjacent school site. Policy 940-1.7.4: GeefdiFtaiew Coordinate to Ensure Necessary Off -Site Improvements. During the development review process for a proposed new school facility, the City will work with the School Board to determine the party or parties responsibility for the financing, constructingse etk)a, operating, and maintaining e#—any needed off-site improvements, including but not limited to: signalsi , Vief deceleration lanes, roadway striping for crosswalks, safe directional/warning signage, and ' sidewalks. A new development adjacent to or sharing an access road with an existing school or future school site shall mitigate the traffic impacts of the development for safe access to the school. Such mitigation efforts may include, but are not limited to: developer striping of crosswalks, developer installation of sidewalks, payment for safe directional/warning signage, and payment for signals4atie+f. Policy 940-1.7.5:sksiep-0f Include Provisions for School Buses. The City shall revise its land development regulations to require the inclusion of school bus stops and turnarounds in new residential developments that are not age restricted. Objective 940-1.8: GeefdinatieFF Coordinate with School Board and Cities. The City of Sanford shall coordinate with the School Board and other local jurisdictions as specified by the procedures in the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency and provide information for emergency preparedness. Policy 940-1.8.1: PFGVmding Provide Data to the School Board. The City shall maintain data on the approved number of residential dwelling units by unit type and location and the corresponding number of units within each development that have received a certificate of occupancy (CO). The data shall be provided to the School Board annually by October 15th. Policy 940-1.8.2: PFGYidiR9 Provide Representation for School Planning. The City shall assign representatives to take part in committees and meetings as specified by the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facilities Planning and School Concurrency. A staff representative shall be assigned to the Planning Technical Advisory Committee (PTAC) which shall meet as specified in the Interlocal Agreement. An elected official or designee shall be appointed to the Public Schools Facilities Planning Committee (PSFPC) which shall meet as specified in the Interlocal Agreement. Policy 940-1.8.3: Provide Notification Proposed Changes. The City shall provide notification in accordance with the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facilities Planning and School Concurrency. to the School Board of proposed amendments to the Future Land Use Map (FLUM), rezonings, developments of regional impact, and/or major residential or mixed use development projects that may increase residential densities, effect student enrollment, enrollment projections, or school facilities. Such notice will be provided within 10 working days of receipt of the application. Policy 940-1.8.4: Provide Emergency Preparedness Information. The City shall continue to provide information needed by the School Board and local jurisdictions for emergency preparedness purposes. 9-8 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES • New school sites within the City must not be adjacent to any noxious industrial uses or other property from which noise, vibration, odors, dust, toxic materials, traffic conditions or other disturbances would have a negative impact on the health and safety of students. • Public school sites shall be compatible with environmental protection, based on soils, topography, protected species and other natural resources on the site. • An assessment of critical transportation issues, including provision of adequate roadway capacity, transit capacity and bikeways shall be performed for proposed school sites prior to any development to ensure safe and efficient transport of students. • New school sites must comply with the City's land development regulations and must minimize potential detrimental impacts on adjacent uses by providing sufficient on-site parking, sufficient internal vehicular circulation to ensure that unsafe stacking of vehicles on access roads does not occur, containment of off-site light spillage and glare, and reduction of off—site noise through compliance with the City's buffer requirements. • New school sites for elementary and middle schools shall be located in close proximity to existing or anticipated concentrations of residential development. New school sites for high schools and specialized schools are suitable for other locations; due to their special characteristics. • The development review process shall ensure that facilities such as sanitary sewer and potable water are available at the time demanded by the new school site, and services such as public safety can also be provided. • New school sites in shall have safe ingress and egress for pedestrians, bicycles, cars, buses, service vehicles and emergency vehicles. High schools should be located with access to collector or arterial roads, rather than relying solely on local roads. Policy 948-1.6.2: Encourage Co -Location and Community Focal Point. Recognizing that new schools are an essential component in creating a sense of community, to the „t feasible; the City shall encourage the co -location of new school sites with appropriate City facilities to the extent feasible, and shall encourage, through the development review process, the location of new school sites so they may serve as community focal points. Where co - location takes place, the City may enter into an interlocal agreement with the School Board to address shared uses of facilities, maintenance costs, vehicular and bicycle parking, supervision and liability issues, among other concerns. Objective 948-1.7: FinsuFing Ensure Provision of Necessary Infrastructure. The School Board will coordinate with the City of Sanford to ensure the timely provision of public facilities to support the necessary functions of public school facilities. Policy 94.0-1.7.1: MaximiaiRg Maximize Efficiency of Infrastructure. During participation in the future school site identification process detailed in the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency, the City shall seek to maximize efficient use of existing infrastructure and avoid sprawl development by identifying future school sites that take advantage of existing and planned roads, potable water, sanitary sewer, parks and drainage systems. Policy 940-1.7.2: Ensure Safe Student Access. The City will ensure safe student access to school sites by coordinating the construction of new neighborhoods and residential developments, expansion of existing neighborhoods and developments and redevelopment or revitalization of existing neighborhoods and developments with Seminole County's safe road and sidewalk connection programs to school sites. 9-1 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES ELEMENT Letter approving the development subject to those mitigation measures agreed to by the local government, developer and the School Board. Prior to; site plan approval, final subdivision approval or the functional equivalent, the mitigation measures shall be memorialized in an enforceable and binding agreement with the local government, the School Board and the Developer that specifically details mitigation provisions to be paid for by the developer and the relevant terms and conditions. If mitigation is not agreed to, the Determination Letter shall detail why any mitigation proposals were rejected and why the development is not in compliance with school concurrency requirements. A SCALD indicating either that adequate capacity is available, or that there is not a negotiated proportionate share mitigation settlement following the (90 -day negotiation period as described in Section 12.7(B) of the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency constitutes final agency action by the School Board for purposes of Chapter 120, F.S. Policy 940-1.4.6: Administer Appeal Process. A person substantially affected by a School Board's adequate capacity determination made as a part of the School Concurrency Process may appeal such determination through the process provided in Chapter 120, F.S. Objective 944)-1.5: Update W Capital Improvements Element Annually. The City of Sanford shall amend its Capital Improvement Element (CIE) to include that portion of the adopted School Board's Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan which deals with capacity improvements. Policy 945-1.5.1: A nnual Update e# Capital Improvements Element. On an annual basis, no later than December 1St of each year, the City shall update the City's Capital Improvements Element to include that portion of the School Board's annual update of their financially feasible Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan related to capacity improvements. However, the City shall not have the obligation, or the responsibility for funding or accomplishing the School Board Five - Year Capital Improvement Plan. Policy 945-1.5.2: Additive -e# New Financially Feasible Fifth Year Projects During Each Update. Each annual update to the Capital Improvements Element shall include a new fifth year with its financially feasible school capacity projects that have been adopted by the School District in its update of the Five -Year Capital Improvement Schedule. Policy 940-1.5.1 CenPliaRGe Comply with Florida Statutes i-afor Timing of Capital Improvements Element Update. The City shall amend its Capital Improvements Element to reflect changes to the School District's Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan in compliance with timing requirements of Florida Statutes. Objective 940-1.6: EnsWing Ensure Compatibility with Surrounding Land Uses, Encourage +ae Co -location with Appropriate City Facilities, Location in Proximity to Residential Areas to be Served and Function as a Community Focal Point. The City of Sanford shall ensure compatibility of school facilities with surrounding land use through the development review process and shall encourage, to the extent feasible, co -location of new schools with compatible City facilities, and the location of school facilities to serve as Community Focal Points. Policy 940-1.6.1: Establish Lesatien of School location Sites and Compatibility Standards. School sites are allowed within any land use designation in the City except Resource Protection (RP). Compatibility with adjacent land uses will be ensured through the following measures: 9-6 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES accordance with Section 9.5 of the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency. 2. If capacity projects are planned in years four f4} or five (a} of the School Board's Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan within the same CSA as the proposed residential development, the developer may pay his proportionate share to mitigate the proposed development in accordance with the formula provided in Section 12.7 (B) of the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency. 3. If a capacity project does not exist in the five-year Capital Improvement Plan, the School Board will add a capacity project to satisfy the impacts from a proposed residential development, if it is funded through the developer's proportionate share mitigation contributions. Mitigation options may include, but are not limited to: a. Contribution of land or payment for land acquisition suitable for and in conjunction with, the provision of additional school capacity; or b. Mitigation banking based on the construction of a educational facility in exchange for the right to sell capacity credits; or C. Provide modular or permanent student stations acceptable for use as an educational facilities; or d. Provide additional student stations through the remodeling of existing buildings acceptable for use as an educational facility; or e. Construction or expansion of permanent student stations at the impacted school within the CSA; or f. Construction of an educational facility in advance of the time set forth in the School Board's Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan. D. For mitigation measures (a) thru (f) above, the estimated cost to construct the mitigating capacity will reflect the estimated future construction costs at the time of the anticipated construction. Improvements contributed by the developer shall receive school impact fee credit. E. The developer shall receive an impact fee credit for the proportionate share mitigation. Credits will be given for that portion of the impact fees that would have been used to fund the improvements on which the proportionate fair share contribution was calculated. The portion of impact fees available for the credit will be based on the historic distribution of impact fee funds to the school type (elementary, middle, high) in the appropriate CSA. Impact fee credits shall be calculated at the same time as the applicant's proportionate share obligation is calculated. Any school impact fee credit based on proportionate fair share contributions for a proposed development cannot be transferred to any other parcel or parcels of real property within the CSA. F. A proportionate share mitigation contribution shall not be subsequently amended or refunded after final site plan or plat approval to reflect a reduction in planned or constructed residential density. G. Impact fees shall be credited against the proportionate share mitigation total. H. Any proportionate share mitigation must be directed by the School Board toward a school capacity improvement identified in the School Board's Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan. I. Upon conclusion of the negotiation period, a second Determination Letter shall be issued. If mitigation is agreed to, the School Board shall issue a new Determination 9-1 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES ELEMENT Policy 948-1.4.3: Establish Residential Uses Exempt from the Requirements of School Concurrency. The following residential uses shall be exempt from the FeqUiFeMeRts of seheel seF►seFFepsy school concurrency reauirements: All single family lots of record at the time the school concurrency implementing ordinance became effective. • Any new residential development that has a preliminary plat or site plan approval or the functional equivalent for a site specific development order prior to the commencement date of the School Concurrency Program on July 1, 2008. • Any amendment to a previously approved residential development which does not increase the number of dwelling units or change the type of dwelling units. • Any age restricted community with no permanent residents under the age of 18 (a restrictive covenant limiting the age of residents to 18 and older shall be required-)_ Policy 948-1.4.4: Use -e# Administer Revenues Received Through Proportionate Share Mitigation. Any revenues received for proportionate share mitigation are to be directed by the School Board toward a school capacity improvement identified in the School Board's Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan. Policy 948-1.4.5 Consider Proportionate Share Mitigation. In the event theFe +s --ret amrailable school capacity is not available to support a development, the School Board may entertain proportionate share mitigation options and, if accepted, shall enter into an enforceable and binding agreement with the developer to mitigate the impact from the development through the creation of additional school capacity using the following methodology: A. When the anticipated student impacts from a proposed development cause the adopted LOS to be exceeded, the developer's proportionate share will be based on the number of additional student stations necessary to achieve the established LOS. The amount to be paid will be calculated by the cost per student station for elementary, middle and high school as determined and published by the State of Florida. B. The methodology used to calculate a developer's proportionate share mitigation shall be as follows: Proportionate Share = ('Development students - Available Capacity) x 2Total Cost per student station Where: 'Development students = those students from the development that are assigned to a CSA and have triggered a deficiency of the available capacity. 2Total Cost = the cost per student station as determined and published by the State of Florida. C. The applicant shall be allowed to enter a 90 -day negotiation period with the School Board in an effort to mitigate the impact from the development through the creation of additional capacity. Upon identification and acceptance of a mitigation option deemed financially feasible by the School Board, the developer shall enter into a binding and enforceable development agreement with the School Board. 1. A mitigation contribution provided by a developer to offset the impact of a residential development must be directed by the School Board toward a school capacity project identified in the School Board's Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan. Capacity enhancing projects identified within the first three {3} years of the Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan shall be considered as committed in 9-4 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES Policy 940-1.3.2: Coordinate School Site Sizes and Co -location in the City. The City will work with the School District to identify sites for future educational facilities that meet the minimum standards of the School Board where possible and which are consistent with the provisions of the Sanford Comprehensive Plan. When the size of available sites does not meet the minimum School Board standards, the City will support the School Board in efforts to use standards more appropriate to a built urban environment. To the extent feasible, as a solution to the problem of lack of sufficiently sized sites, the City shall work with the School Board to achieve co -location of schools with City facilities. Policy 940-1.3.3: Par4ieipatiea Participate in Planning Technical Advisory Committee (PTAC). The City shall participate in the Planning Technical Advisory Committee (PTAC) meetings, as provided in the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency, for the purpose of discussing issues and formulating recommendations to the Public Schools Facilities Planning Committee (PSFPC) regarding coordination of land use and school facilities planning, including such issues as population and student projections, development trends, school needs, co -location and joint use opportunities, ancillary infrastructure improvements needed to support the schools, School Board Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan and the Public School Concurrency Program. Policy 940-1.3.4: DeteMieiRg Determine Impacts. The School Board shall be responsible for determination of adequate school capacity wall be the FeSPGASibility 9f the SGI4991 RnRrd. Policy 940-1.3.5: Provide Notification of Submittal of Residential Applications. The City shall notify the School Board within 10 working days of receipt of any land use or development application having a residential component and will transmit submitted subdivision plans and site plans to the School Board for their review. Policy 940-1.3.6: Provide Notification of Meetings. The City shall provide the School Board with agendas of staff review, the Planning & Zoning Board/Local Planning Agency and the City Commission meetings. OBJECTIVE 940-1.4: Administer Public School Concurrency. The City of Sanford Shall Require that Public School Facility Capacity is Available Concurrent with the Impacts of New Residential Development, as Required by Section 163.3180(13)(E), €-leFida-Statut%4F.S.} Policy 940-1.4.1: Time' Concurrency Review. The City shall require that all new residential development be reviewed for school concurrency prior to development approval as defined in the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency. Policy 940-1.4.2: Results e Enforce Concurrency Review. In compliance with the availability standards of Section 163.3180(13)(e), F.S., the City shall not deny development approval due to failure to achieve the adopted LOS for public school facilities when the following occurs: Adequate school facilities are planned and will be in place or under construction within three (3} years of the development approval. The developer executes a legally binding commitment to provide mitigation proportionate to the demand for public school facilities consistent with the methodology in the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency. 9-1 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES ELEMENT Policy 948-1.1.4: Establish CSAs for Each Type of School. The CSA boundaries established by the School Board will be based on clustered attendance zones for each school type (elementary, middle and high school) based on adjacency and will be re-evaluated by the School Board, as needed. Policy 948-1.1.5: Consider CSA Boundary Changes. At the determination of the School Board, CSA maps may be modified from time to time, to maximize utilization of school capacity. The School Board shall transmit the proposed change request with supporting data and analysis to the City and the other local jurisdictions. The City, upon receipt of supporting data and analysis for the proposed modification shall review and submit comments to the School Board within feFty five (45) days. Policy 948-1.1.6: GOOFdanatien a Coordinate School Board Capital Improvements Schedule and Potential CSA Boundary Changes. As identified in the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency, the School Board's annual update of its Capital Improvements Schedule will include review of attendance zone changes and if necessary, modifications to the CSA maps to the greatest extent possible to provide maximum utilization. Objective 948-1.2: Coordinate Development Review to Achieve Concurrency. The City of Sanford will coordinate with the Seminole County School Board in the City's development review efforts to achieve concurrency in all public school facilities. Policy 948-1.2.1: Maintain Development Review Process. The City shall withhold or condition the approval of any site plan, final subdivision, or functional equivalent for new residential units not exempted; until a School Capacity Availability Letter Determination (SCALD) has been issued by the School Board to the City indicating that adequate public school facilities exist or until a mitigation agreement has been reached, pursuant to the availability standard specified in Section 163.3180(13)(e), Florida Statutes (F1.1. Policy 948-1.2.2: Adoptien--ef—School Concurrency Provisions into the City's Land Development Regulations. The City shall adopt school concurrency provisions into its land development regulations for the review of development approvals, consistent with the requirements of the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency. Objective 948-1.3: Gee - e# Coordinate Existing and Future School Facility Planning with the Future Land Use Element and Development Approval Process. The School Board shall coordinate future siting of schools and capacity needs with development approvals and changes to the City's Future Land Use Plan Map (FLUM). Policy 948-1.3.1: Coordinate Comprehensive Plan Amendments and Facility Planning. The city will consider the availability and future provision of school facility capacity, the provision of school sites and facilities within neighborhoods, the compatibility of land uses adjacent to existing schools and reserved school sites, the co -location of parks, recreation and neighborhood facilities with school sites and the linkage of schools, parks, libraries and other public facilities with bikeways, trails, and sidewalks for safe access during the review of proposed comprehensive plan land use map amendments. 9-2 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAPTER 94.0: PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES ELEMENT PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES GOAL 940-1: PROVIDE QUALITY EDUCATION. AS A BASIC TENET OF COMMUNITY LIFE, IT IS THE GOAL OF THE CITY OF SANFORD TO CONTRIBUTE TO AND MAINTAIN A HIGH QUALITY PUBLIC SCHOOL ENVIRONMENT. Objective 940-1.1: Coordinate Level of ServiceL( OSl Standards and Service Boundaries. The City of Sanford shall coordinate with the Seminole County School Board in the School Board's efforts to correct existing deficiencies and address future needs through implementation of adopted level of sewvise LOS standards and appropriate public school facility service area boundaries. The levele€sew+seLOS standard is a countywide standard specified in the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency, wherein the following terms are used: • Permanent Florida Inventory of School Houses (FISH): meaning the permanent facilities within the inventory of land, buildings and rooms in public educational facilities used by the Florida Department of Education, Office of Educational Facilities; and • Concurrency Service Area (CSA): A geographic unit promulgated by the School Board and adopted by local governments within which the level eef sseep.AiGe, LOS is measured when an application for residential development is reviewed for school concurrency purposes. The CSA coincides with groupings of school attendance zones within each school type based on adjacency. Level Of 88WiG9 (LOS) standard: A standard established to measure utilization of capacity within a CSA). Current LOS within a CSA is determined by dividing the full-time equivalent student count (FTE) for the Fall Semester at the same type of schools by the permanent FISH capacity of the same type of schools. Projected or future LOS is determined by the dividing the projected enrolled students at the same type of schools within a CSA by the planned permanent FISH capacity of the same type of schools. Policy 940-1.1.1: Adoption of I evel of SemiGe LOS Standards (LAS). To ensure that the capacity of schools is sufficient to support student growth, the City along with other cities within the Seminole County, the County, and the School Board agree that the desired LOS standard shall be 100% of the aggregate permanent FISH capacity for each school type within each CSA4. To financially achieve the desired LOS standard, the following tiered LOS standards lsare established as follows: School T e 2008-2012 Beginning 2013 Elementary & Middle CSA 100% of Permanent 100% of Permanent FISH FISH Capacity Capacity High School CSA 110% of Permanent 100% of Permanent FISH FISH Capacity Capacity Policy 940-1.1.2: Coordinate (LOS) Standards. The City shall use its Concurrency Management System to coordinate with the School Board and other local jurisdictions to ensure that the LOS standards established for each school type is maintained. Policy 940-1.1.3: Utilize (CSA) Boundaries. The City shall apply school concurrency using CSA boundaries adopted by the School Board. 9-1 November 2009 -- �"T'.-'e!"] 7[. - , moff--r-1 moff---j soff--r--I vmw—r-1 t'"?_'l 77 r::::;-..: � . t -ti - z.7. -� >_� �� W?7' . Mrs =�� ■= T. .5 "": W. -I_ 7 '. off F lit7-T.1M:r.T:'1M77'"7t.T`r'"7 MEF_ T"l NOF'_':.r-I 7-1 W —T71 X7:7 W-7 .t ff- 17`_ . r7 K '--TT— M.r-T T_--...•.���� H z w 2 w J w Z w 2 w 0 Q' d J H CL Q U Z J a �w LL CO ZZ aw U)_ LL w�/ O Ids. H � UQU }} 0 O 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 �� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0) rn co Ln 0 0 0 0 0 LO U) N o — 0 N o M w W o N co ao r _ OT H O N i i i i i 0 p r_ O O O O N T CD O 69 Go LL 400N N OO O O O O O O O O O O O T \ T LO O LO O LO ao 0�0 }69 LO 69 .- lg� LL in of 0 0 0 0 0 0 T o 0 0 0 0 0 T mLn 0 mLO O M N }69 mn 469 69n LL c0 0 O0O 0 0 O O o O 0 O 1 LO 00 O LO LO o 69 — O69 NpLL 401 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O p O O O mto O mLO W r } mn co mf) N T69 40 T LL O O N c 0 c 0 c c c c c c c c c co d r V > > > > > > > > > o N 0 0 LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL N a N r rn O I N N N LL ,.3.. 65 C w U-2 w a C d > 0 o m m m N H c c w N y •41 V 47 LL w y N C O 2 c N 7 N CO C d R J c J m J fC a E L •0 N W L o w o o y N O Z E N > y c 'm7 O LL' O r j a� 'O m E a 2 c a� o v 72 -L L -2 .r L N a 'O 7 7 a F ` H O N N mlS m6 Q m0 ` Q ` C C N > y r+ 'O C N a L mD L w mU a' L 3 2 w O E m6 CL O` a A 3•� m0 ry., U fn 0) mu N N 0 (n V)L 4)o w 0 me 3 i= in a E +: O om E om Z c w i) g g — N V N J O N O , , C14 30 ONj O QNj O 'm w 'E 'mo L 0 3 c c c U V N Q jCl) ate+ : t V y N O) O N N m O pro 0) N co F - Z W 2 W J W H Z W 2 W O w ILL G J Q CL Q U Z J CL W LL ZZ Q w (n = LL LU OCL CL � 2 O UU }} ,It 0) v o o 0 o o O O O O O o oo m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LL LL LO Cl) O O Or- O LO O O O O O O O O O O O O O ' O p a N f- N f- N M O O N O N O O) N O N Of 1- co O In N O O LO O N N O aD N O O L O6 N LO r- O O O O In O O u O O 0 Il- O O N F p T 0 63 6 M 69 � 69 .1 69 ee N 69 N 69 6a en O N 69 0 69 I 69 I 69 51 69 11 69 I CD M 441 00 00 T }69 LO O LL 1 O 1 1 1 1 I N 69 I 1 I I 1 1 p � O r � INL M 69 O O I ' 0 0 T T O O O O O O T O In O OJ T >- 69 40 I- N LL 0 M N O O 1 O � O OO OO ON CD LO1- >->- N N It N 69 U') 69 LO 69 M 69 NpU 410 O 0 Cl O O OLL M O � OO OO O O OOW f- N O N O N P P O N O O_ O LO �:Op Oco >- Cl) 69 69 M N 69 L 69 69 69 N 69 4 69 4 4A a C a C a C a C N 69 a C a C a C a C a C a C a C a C a C y y� n• y� �� �� y� (-D � 30°0 N O N N 00 N N N N N N N 3 O 7 7 7 7 7 7 LL 7 LL 3 LL 7 LL 7 LL 7 LL 3 30 30 3o LL LL LL LL LL LL LL OC O y o (te) ad) o aD) o ate) $ a4) = _ U a4) LL 0 U- N LL U LL C LL C LL U LL cl c_ y a m 7 N a aCL 0W o N? ++ o c 5 +O+ c c d y U O a0p m N 0 N y O cn3 a) D N E cn u) L M d O ((moD > Q > O` N > Q > L N >O U C .N C N c a - N U _ C C N C C 5 C N E U t U N t V K - li Q � E 2 2 `m U C m co m m W U" c a) E E a`> F d O t� C .� f6 C Yca L w O E N U N N w y f0 f6 y L = C J N Cl)f0 f0 Y l6 - J- Q l6 J P l6 .`y-. N ,G C •f4 fn U a N s N 3 C a 7 .y Q L N C L N y r > f6 O O E E �C E U C U C C N f6 f0 a L jp J f0 f6 a t ++ !0 M !0 y N L d '� '� f4 d U C 'C •f0 N f0 L CD l6 E L m> N O N LL U f� a O d U Y N f6 U) C �" �6 C �(6 C V V y N C V) U y N j O V ` J 0 �y N N Q' �' c O U U cin cl s aL in M aL z cn in z < ¢' z z in ¢ co 0) O O N L .Q E O Z OJ N 00 F - z W 2 W J W Z W 2 W O d J IL Q U Z g W LL CO Z Z Q W Cf) _ �w O0- H� UOU }} o O r N O) a7 to r ^ N O h o M 0 O 0 M 0 O or O LO N v r o o OO 0 O 0 O Y. LLHaC q: lo: 00h V:nLn �O��VMNOO GpMTr}' II- U') Ln Lo r N N N N W) O LO LO CO CO n M N - N N f- N O O LO c M le O CO I- O M � O O O O co oo co - L6 M OD N M r 0 M Go te00 w M I- r I- O CD O M O M T- O 69 0) N N 40) N O O1OOO44 r 44 69 69 401 69 40) n OR O CD Il O O O N O O CO O V. O co O to M � 17 C! I� N 69 r 69 M 69 V LL N 69 O O N 69 .- O O -e 44 O O N 69 O O O O ' O O O O MO 49 O O O O ' ' O O N O O r O O Op CD N O to O Cfl r co OR T r O O O I,- LO O CO a r N Q1 ti IT co O O � CO r r I- v n le > O O Cfl Cn O N - CO OD co co LL le N fe M N 69N 6e 6e ug te40 r o O co M v M co 0- eo m coo M O o O O O m M M O d7 o O ' r b N O V' ti N Vf O CO M I� OR CD p r CO co O O Oo O r O O Nr CO O O t` O r M I- O CO co V It >-r r LO CO M LO N M M O co M M N T D O O N O r O T N O N co ' ' O O ' O O O O N co O O 'IT M r O O O O O O r O M t0 r UL O O N O LO OO O O p N N O M O O N N O M co CO O O 0 CO N (O r CO �f m CO O O O O } O> N f� C! W N N r CO M O> D1 Fl-cn M 01 In 1D LL co N r r r r CA O O sr Q) co O N M 14 N I -T O O r O co O O O CO O O O O v NV P- O M O O O O O O p O N LQ M N N 114: U? Ln d' O CO In O M Oo O O O co p CO w co v O r O 3 w O O 0 O M't N CO � N O O � w w m N M w I- N r- v w O O O O >-01 O 69 Om 11 V N LCA - M O co O M O LO w U.ti 6e O N fA M 40 ti 4A r 44 - Ged C r d 7 V N 3 � y O F- LD H C o $A m m LD ` N 7 = C C W p w U) 0' caE .0 N c d x O CL :� 3 m N > O 0- w 0 w F- m 2D F- C E t N O W c =3 c c LU a> O c o d > .'4 E E E x a� m x w CL L t w' m E E F O c c o o y aoi Ll LL o U a E > E E > > .N, O o c a0i m a c a o 0 o N N d m o d d O O N V Y fn Z d N .D c .� co i O F- -C s U > Q O 2 C6 m N N C ad+ m m i° W v ��0c) c -o V w'>> o m = � � 3 m 5 m F- Co M -i CO 0.' w co 5 z w fn z F- W. U a- a U w U 5 U to �I ti N co H z W 2 W J W Z W 2 W O I.CL G J Q IL Q U G R V a 0 L a C Cd C d > 0 t. G E .Q v a m LL Z J d 0 W LL U) ZZ QW (n = LL W O� C� C O 00 >-} O Cl N CD O O O O O O O O h M O O0 Of O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O M O O O O O O O O )y LL O O � r - O O O r O ti O O 00 O O r O O O O O O O O O O O O O O tD O O O M 0 O C LO ti (O O U7 O O (O N p O M M O N O O CD CO O 0 Cl) N O V) (A M O O L669 69 69 69 <n ti F' p ' Cl) f.9 O 69 r a n o o r 69 o M r O 00 0 p Oo O O N O 000 C69 a 6e n >469 Cl) Cl) CO LL ' M ' ' ' O 69 O VZ 49 Cl) ' ' ' O ' O OO ' O ' ' ' O O C,j Z O O O O O a O O a O U 69 O r M Cl) O Co O LL N 6s Cf 69 49 6t 6t r o v a o o U? CD O 000 cop M M O CO co69 69 O M to w LL ' 0) 0 M ee 0 M 4A m o0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C, •••• CD O O O O r. CoO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O m CD I- O O O O r- r O M O Cl) O O O CO O O v LO N O O CA CA C M Cl) O r e- <- Cf) CO 1f) t - LL O O 0 69 O O O O O O O O O O M 69r O r" O O M p n O O O O O O C) O � ' ' CD O ' ' M 11 O 0 M O 0 p p O O O O O O CO O CO O O O O O 0 0 CO p O LO O O Cl LA f� t` P- PCN O M O O 00 t� O M M O O CO O O t o CY) � CA t- w M 69 0 0 p 69 LO 69 69 � 69 co Cl) LL Mw N 69 M 00 N 49 M ee 6N 3 d� > p LL LL LL LLLL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL N a a a a a a a a a a a a a� U U U U U U U U U U U U 0 jN O U O .c N Z =c O c rn v o c Z i D m o � IL N d C C C N C O k E C N o 0 o LL iy 4! y H ai 45 t^+ a CO CO M C to N r. Ll 'Q L' C O i N U O U y to N CO AS f0 C ' 'OdL C 'O O CL ` w C `� s LL .C.. a c c c E� `m �3 v O `o to � d>> LL= m CA u o v m m ca LL v Q N O U E E m � T O > pm _�pp O O O O = p U U ~O G Ix U .= O O (O� ` ca to = O U Z 7 2O / � U m O f0 � N `O 7 E d .` .0 .0 .0 .0 N N U�{ =� O d w y 5 y > N C?0 t/1 a ;� E C C C m m t rn � ;� _ C 7 C .0 m rn C N O C w v v o v v U v ci v �- w L R F°- a' IL c� CA O O N L �C C O VI CO N ob CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT 8-25 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT 8-24 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT a. Does the proposed action contribute to any condition of public hazard; b. Does the proposed action increase any existing condition of public facility capacity deficits, as described in the Traffic Circulation, Public Facilities, and/or Recreation and Open Space Elements; C. Does the proposed action generate public facility demands that may be accommodated by capacity increases planned in the Five -Year Capital Improvement Program; d. Does the proposed action conform with the future land uses designated on the Future Land Use Map within the Future Land Use Element; e. Does the proposed action comply with and accommodate public facility demands based on the adopted LOS standards contained herein; If the proposed action requires that any public facilities be provided by the City, the applicant shall demonstrate that funds shall be available; acceptable to the City; and no project requiring a City expenditure for a capital improvement shall be approved by the City unless the City Commission approves the funding for the subject property prior to the project approval; g. Does the proposed action impact facility plans of any State agencies or facility plans of the SJRWMD. Objective 8-1.6: Implementing Capital Improvements. This section stipulates a Five -Year Capital Improvement Program together with criteria for monitoring and evaluating the capital improvements element. Policy 8-1.6.1: Establish Short Range Schedule of Improvements. The Five -Year Capital Improvement Program, contained herein, establishes the estimated projected cost, and potential revenue sources for each of the capital improvement needs identified within the respective comprehensive plan elements. These programs are scheduled in order to ensure that the goals, objectives, and policies established in the capital improvements element shall be met. Policy 8-1.6.2: Adopt Local wheelSchool District Capital Improvements. The City hereby adoptsby FefeFenGe the 2009/2010 &Five-year Capital Improvement Plan of the Seminole County Public Schools Annual School Budget prepared by John G. Pavelchak, Executive Director of Finance and Budgeting as formally adopted by the Seminole County School Board on September 8, 2009. 8-23 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT will be available to accommodate the impact of that development. i. A provision that a monitoring system shall be adopted which enables the local government to determine whether it is adhering to the adopted level of service standards and its schedule of capital improvements and that the local government has a demonstrated capability of monitoring the availability of public facilities and services. j. A clear designation within the adopted comprehensive plan of those areas within which facilities and services will be provided by the local government with public funds in accordance with the Five -Year Capital Improvement Program. In determining the availability of services or facilities, a developer may propose and the City of Sanford may approve developments in stages or phases so that facilities and services needed for each phase will be available in accordance with the standards required by Rules 9J -5.0055(2)(a), (2)(b) and (2)(c), F.A.C. As stipulated in QbjeGtive 9 1.4, at a minimum the latest peint in the appliGatien pF9G866 f4gr thA peFFA ment T If any change in the Comprehensive Plan future land use map is proposed, no such amendment shall be approved until the impacts of proposed new land use activities on existing infrastructure as well as infrastructure included in the City's adopted capital improvement program have been identified and evaluated. The plan amendment shall be approved only if the projected impacts have been resolved through amendments to the capital improvements program or through an enforceable development agreement which ensures that any public facility needs generated by the proposed change in land use shall be met concurrent with the impacts of development and that adopted LOS standards shall be met. Policy 8-1.5.7: Ensure Availability of Adequate Facilities. The City shall issue no development order for new development which would result in a facility deficiency prior to completion of improvements needed to address the deficiency and maintain the adopted LOS standard. The City shall include an adequate facilities requirement as part of the updated land development regulations. The provisions governing adequate facilities shall mandate that future applications for development shall include a written evaluation of the impact of the anticipated development on the LOS for the water and wastewater systems, solid waste system, drainage, recreation, public school facilities and the traffic circulation system. Prior to issuing a building permit the City shall render a finding that the applicant has provided written assurance that the proposed development shall be served with each of the above cited facilities with a le-upi cif s;ppr+ee LOS at least equal to the City's adopted LOS standards . The application for development shall include written assurances that any required improvements shall be in place concurrent with the impacts of the development (i.e., by the time a building peFmitis gFanted by the Gity depeRdeRt 9R the #as�l+ties}. Policy 8-1.5.8: Evaluation Evaluate Criteria for Plan Amendments. Proposed Plan amendments and requests for new development or redevelopment shall be evaluated according to the following guidelines: 8-22 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT The developer executes a legally binding commitment to provide mitigation proportionate to the demand for public school facilities consistent with the methodology in the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency for Coordinated Planning and School Concurrency. Policy 8-1541.5.6: Coordinate Concurrency Ceerd-ORatien with the Capital Improvements Program. In areas in which the City of Sanford commits to provide the necessary public facilities and services in accordance with its Five -Year Capital Improvement Program the concurrency requirement for roads may be met by the adoption and implementation of a concurrency management system based upon an adequate capital improvements program and schedule and adequate implementing regulations which, at a minimum, include the following provisions: a. A Capital Improvements Element and a Five -Year Capital Improvement Program which, in addition to meeting all of the other statutory and rule requirements, must be financially feasible. The Capital Improvements Element and schedule of capital improvements may recognize and include transportation projects included in the first three years of the applicable adopted Florida Department of Transportation Five Year Work Program. b. Committed improvements which are relied upon to meet concurrency and which are funded by the City, Seminole County, or the Florida Department of Transportation must be scheduled within the first three years of the capital improvements program for the respective government agency. A committed improvement scheduled in the first three years of the City's capital improvements program shall not be delayed, eliminated or removed from said program except through the act of a comprehensive plan amendment. c. A Five-Year—Capital Improvement Program which must include both necessary facilities to maintain the adopted level of service standards to serve the new development proposed to be permitted and the necessary facilities required to eliminate those portions of existing deficiencies which are a priority to be eliminated during the five-year period under the local government plan's schedule of capital improvements pursuant to Rule 9J -5.016(4)(a)1, F.A.C. d. A realistic, financially feasible funding system based on currently available revenue sources which must be adequate to fund the public facilities required to serve the development authorized by the development order and development permit and which public facilities are included in the Five -Year Capital Improvement Program. e. A Five -Year Capital Improvement Program which must include the estimated date of commencement of actual construction and the estimated date of project completion. A Five -Year Capital Improvement Program which must demonstrate that the actual construction of the road and the provision of services are scheduled to commence within the third year of the five-year timeframe. g. A provision that a plan amendment would be required to eliminate, defer or delay construction of any road which is needed to maintain the adopted level of service standard and which is listed in the Five -Year Capital Improvement Program. h. A requirement that the local government must adopt local development regulations which, in conjunction with the capital improvements element, ensure that development orders and permits are issued in a manner that will assure that the necessary public facilities and services 8-21 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT construction of the required facilities or the provision of services within one year of the issuance of the development permit; or C. The necessary facilities and services are guaranteed in an enforceable development agreement which requires the commencement of the actual construction of the facilities or the provision of services within one of the issuance of the applicable development permit. An enforceable development agreement may include, but is not limited to, development agreements pursuant to Section 163.3220, F.S., or an agreement or development order issued pursuant to Chapter 380, F.S. Policy 8-1.5.4: Regulate Transportation Criteria. For #eadwajrsroadways, Ft4�^ 6tand-an.rds-the City shall €Rd- that ensure the following criteria have been met in order for a proposed development to be found in compliance with concurrency management requirements: a. At the time the final development order is issued, the necessary facilities and services are in place or under actual construction; or b. A final development order is issued subject to the conditions that the necessary facilities and services needed to serve the new development are scheduled to be in place or under actual construction not more than three years after issuance of a certificate of occupancy as provided in the City's adopted Five -Year Capital Improvement Program (CSR}. The CIP may recognize and include transportation projects included in the first three years of the adopted Florida Department of Transportation Five -Year work program. The Capital Improvement Program, must include the estimated fiscal year of commencement of actual construction and the estimated fiscal year the project will be completed. A plan amendment is required to eliminate, defer, or delay construction of any road or mass transit facility or service which is needed to maintain the adopted nf sigpoi e LOS standard and which is listed in the Five -Year Capital Improvement Program. C. At the time the final development order is issued, the necessary facilities and services are the subject of a binding executed agreement which requires the necessary facilities and services to serve the new development to be in place or under actual construction not more than three years after issuance of a certificate of occupancy; or d. At the time the final development order is issued, the necessary facilities and services are guaranteed in an enforceable development agreement, pursuant to section 163.3220, F.S., or an agreement or development order issued pursuant to Chapter 380, F.S., to be in place or under actual construction not more than three years after issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Policy 8-1 A 41.5.5: Provide Adequate Public School Facilities. For public school facilities, in compliance with the availability standards of Section 163.3180(13)(e), F.S., at a minimum, the City shall find that the following criteria have been met in order for a proposed development to be found in compliance with concurrency management requirements: Adequate school facilities are planned and will be in place or under construction within three years of the development approval. 8-20 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT Policy 8-1.5.2: Enforce Potable Water, Sewer, Solid Waste, arfd Drainage Concurrency Requirements. For potable water, sanitary sewer, solid waste, aad drainage,, the City shall €4 that ensure the following criteria have been met in order for a proposed development to be found in compliance with concurrency management requirements: a. Facilities and services must be in place or under construction at the time a development order or permit is issued. If the facilities will be under construction at the time a development order or permit is issued, the final development order is issued subject to the condition that such facilities must be in place and operational before or at the time of the issuance of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent. No certificate of occupancy will be issued unless the necessary potable water, sewer, solid waste and drainage facilities and services are in place and available to serve the new development and its occupants. At the time the final development order is issued, the necessary facilities and services are guaranteed in a binding executed development agreement, pursuant to Section 163.3220, F.S. or an agreement or development order issued pursuant to Chapter 380, F.S., to be in place and available to serve new development at the time of the issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Policy 8-1.5.3: Regulate Parks and Recreation Facilities Criteria. For parks and recreation facilities, at a minimum, the City shall find that the ensure following criteria have been met in order for a proposed development to be found in compliance with concurrency management requirements: a. At the time the final development order is issued, the necessary facilities and services are in place; or b. At the time the development permit is issued, the necessary facilities and services are the subject of a binding executed contract which provides for the commencement of the actual 8-19 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT 8-18 November 2009 .. ._ Mw WPM I 8-18 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT Facility/Service LOS Standard All County collectors and minor arterials that are within an area LOS E designated as 1-4 High intensity. Westside Industry and Commerce. and Airport Industry and Commerce All state principal arterials other than freeways that are not LOS D classified as backlogged or constrained Exceptionsvolumes US 17-92(3) LOS E US 17-92(3) from Lake Mary Boulevard to Airport Boulevard LOS F with acceptable traffic consistent with LOS E for a 6 -lane roadway (i.e., 51.800 daily; 4,920 peak hour two-way; and 2,710 peak hour peak direction Limited Access Roadways 1_4 LOS D Eastern Beltway LOS D State minor arterials within the urbanized area LOS E State minor arterials outside the urbanized area LOS D Recreation Areas 4 acres per 1,000 population ReGFeatien Facilities Public School Facilities School Type 2008-2012 Beginning 2013 Elementary & Middle CSA 100% of Permanent FISH Capacity 100% of Permanent FISH Capacity High School CSA 110% of Permanent FISH Capacity 100% of Permanent FISH Capacity (1) The design frequency may be increased if deemed necessary by the AdrAffiRistFative OffiemalRublic Works Department. (2) Mill Creek/Cloud Branch basins shall have a 25 -year, 6 -hour retention/detention for parcels with positive outfall since these basins are currently incorporate significantly older drainage systems. For purposes of designing practical improvements to such older systems, the City shall adopt a 25 -year, 6 -hour storm event for the period 1991-1995. The City's long term objective for redesigning these older drainage systems shall be the 25 -year, 24-hour storm event for the period 1996-2005. (3) The City may grant exceptions to the transportation concurrency requirements for future development projects within the City's two TCEAs. US 17-92 and Downtown Sanford. The section of US 17-92 from Lake Mary Boulevard to Airport Boulevard has a defined capacity as provided in the table above 8-17 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT Facility/Service LOS Standard All storm water treatment and disposal facilities shall be required to meet the design and performance standards established in Chapter 62, F.A.C. Treatment of the first inch of run- off on-site to meet water quality standards required by Chapter 62, F.A.C. Designed so as not to degrade the receiving water body below the minimum conditions necessary to assure the suitability of water for the designated use of its classification as established in Chapter 62, F.A.C. Where a conflict exists between two or more LOS standards, the more restrictive shall be enforced. System 102- "U, AN he4+er LOS °rl° nr hei4er and Westside lRdustFy and LOS "E" erbei#eF (Net Glassified as Baeklegged) "60"OF _he#eF united A..nass C.+n71ef*AQ 1 A C Eastern Bei y ��+ 1- LOS 1Q� Roadways All City Collectors LOS D All County collectors and minor arterials that are not within a LOS D County designated urban center 8-16 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT Facility/Service LOS Standard Solid Waste 4.2 Osceola Landfill lbs/capita/day 4.7 Ibr_Way�empleyee Central Transfer Station 4.4 lbsklay�dwellinq unit 4.3 lbs/capita/day 4.9 Ibs/day/empleyee Wastewater System 132 gal/capita/day Potable Water System 144 gal/capita/day Fire flow Residential 600 gpm/20 psi Non-residential 1200 gpm/20 psi Drainage System By Retention/Detention for parcels 25 -Year, 24 -Hour Facility Type with positive outfall (Z) Retention for parcels without 25 -Year, 96 -Hour positive outfall p Closed drainage for urban streets 10 -Year, 24 -Hour with piped drainage Open drainage for rural streets 10 -Year, 24 -Hour with swales Canals, ditches, culverts, and 25 -Year, 24 -Hour other off -the -premise facilities Bridges and major highway 100 -Year, 24 -Hour crossings Pollution Abatement Schedule O, Land Development Regulations Provide on-site retention or detention with filtration for the first one-half inch of runoff or the Water Quality runoff from the first one inch of rainfall, whichever is greater. Parcels greater than 100 acres shall retain runoff from the first one inch of rainfall. 8-15 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT G. Impact fees shall be credited against the proportionate share mitigation total. H. Any proportionate share mitigation must be directed by the School Board toward a school capacity improvement identified in the School Board's Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan. I. Upon conclusion of the negotiation period, a second Determination Letter shall be issued. If mitigation is agreed to, the School Board shall issue a new Determination Letter approving the development subject to those mitigation measures agreed to by the local government, developer and the School Board. Prior to, site plan approval, final subdivision approval or the functional equivalent, the mitigation measures shall be memorialized in an enforceable and binding agreement with the local government, the School Board and the Developer that specifically details mitigation provisions to be paid for by the developer and the relevant terms and conditions. If mitigation is not agreed to, the Determination Letter shall detail why any mitigation proposals were rejected and why the development is not in compliance with school concurrency requirements. A SCALD indicating either that adequate capacity is available, or that there is not a negotiated proportionate share mitigation settlement following the 90 day negotiation period as described in Section 12.7(C) of the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency, constitutes final agency action by the School Board for purposes of Chapter 120, F.S. Appeal Process. A person substantially affected by a School Board's adequate capacity determination made as a part of the School Concurrency Process may appeal such determination through the process provided in Chapter 120, F.S. Objective 8-1.5: RegUiFiR9 Re uire Development Orders and Permits to Comply with Concurrency Management, LOS Standards, and Capital Improvement Schedule. Decisions regarding the issuance of development orders, building permits, certificates of occupancy, and other applicable permits shall be consistent with goals, objectives, and policies of the respective Comprehensive Plan elements, the City's adopted land development regulations, and requirements for adequate public facilities meeting stated levels of service criteria. Upon adeptieR ef the The City shall ensure that land use decisions and fiscal decisions are coordinated with the adopted schedule of capital improvements to maintain adopted LOS standards and meet existing and future needs. _ny applicant for development shall be required to ensure that public facilities shall be available concurrent with the impacts of development as An applicant/developer shall be issued a building -permit development order only if the following policies are met, as determined by the City: Policy 8-1.5.1: Enforce LOS Standards. All facilities shall identify be assigned the def appropriate adopted LOS standards for each public facility. der-RNew development orders and permits shall be issued only if they Fneetmaintain the adopted LOS standards. The City shall use the following LOS standards in reviewing the impacts of new development and redevelopment upon public facilities: ;s ►1'dR2ii1T14WIi111s7 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN development agreement with the School Board. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT 1. A mitigation contribution provided by a developer to offset the impact of a residential development must be directed by the School Board toward a school capacity project identified in the School Board's Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan. Capacity enhancing projects identified within the first three years of the Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan shall be considered as committed in accordance with Section 9.5 of the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency. 2. If capacity projects are planned in years four or five of the School Board's Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan within the same CSA as the proposed residential development, the developer may pay his proportionate share to mitigate the proposed development in accordance with the formula provided in Section 12.7(B) of the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency. 3. If a capacity project does not exist in the Capital Improvement Plan, the School Board will add a capacity project to satisfy the impacts from a proposed residential development, if it is funded through the developer's proportionate share mitigation contributions. Mitigation options may include, but are not limited to: a. Contribution of land or payment for land acquisition suitable for and in conjunction with, the provision of additional school capacity; or b. Mitigation banking based on the construction of a educational facility in exchange for the right to sell capacity credits; or c. Provide modular or permanent student stations acceptable for use as an educational facilities; or d. Provide additional student stations through the remodeling of existing buildings acceptable for use as an educational facility; or e. Construction or expansion of permanent student stations at the impacted school within the CSA; or f. Construction of a educational facility in advance of the time set forth in the School Board's Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan. D. For mitigation measures (a) thru (f) above, the estimated cost to construct the mitigating capacity will reflect the estimated future construction costs at the time of the anticipated construction. Improvements contributed by the developer shall receive school impact fee credit. E. Developer shall receive an impact fee credit for the proportionate share mitigation. Credits will be given for that portion of the impact fees that would have been used to fund the improvements on which the proportionate fair share contribution was calculated. The portion of impact fees available for the credit will be based on the historic distribution of impact fee funds to the school type (elementary, middle, high) in the appropriate CSA. Impact fee credits shall be calculated at the same time as the applicant's proportionate share obligation is calculated. Any school impact fee credit based on proportionate fair share contributions for a proposed development cannot be transferred to any other parcel or parcels of real property within the CSA. F. A proportionate share mitigation contribution shall not be subsequently amended or refunded after final site plan or plat approval to reflect a reduction in planned or constructed residential density. 8-13 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT Development Review Table. The School Board shall create and maintain a Development Review Table (DRT) for each CSA, and will use the DRT to compare the projected students from proposed residential developments to the CSAs available capacity programmed within the first three years of the current five-year capital planning period. A. Student enrollment projections shall be based on the most recently adopted School Board Capital Facilities Work Program, and the DRT shall be updated to reflect these projections. Available capacity shall be derived using the following formula: Available Capacity = School Capacity' — (Enrollment2 + Approved') Where: 'School Capacity = Permanent School Capacity as programmed in the first three years of the School Board's Five -Year CIP. 2Enrollment = Student enrollment as counted at the Fall FTE. 3Approved = Students generated from approved residential developments after the implementation of school concurrency. B. Using the Fall FTE, the vested number of students on the DRT will be reduced by the number of students represented by the residential units that received certificates of occupancy within the previous 12 month period. Policy 8-1.4.10: Entertain Proportionate Share Mitigation Options for Public School Concurrency. In the event there is no available school capacity to support a development, the School Board shall entertain proportionate share mitigation options and, if accepted, shall enter into an enforceable and binding agreement with the developer to mitigate the impact from the development through the creation of additional school capacity. A. When the anticipated student impacts from a proposed development cause the adopted LOS to be exceeded, the developer's proportionate share will be based on the number of additional student stations necessary to achieve the established LOS. The amount to be paid will be calculated by the cost per student station for elementary, middle and high school as determined and published by the State of Florida. B. The methodology used to calculate a developer's proportionate share mitigation shall be as follows: Proportionate Share = ('Development students - Available Capacity) x 2Total Cost per student station Where: 'Development students = those students from the development that are assigned to a CSA and have triggered a deficiency of the available capacity. 2Total Cost = the cost per student station as determined and published by the State of Florida. C. The applicant shall be allowed to enter a 90 day negotiation period with the School Board in an effort to mitigate the impact from the development through the creation of additional capacity. Upon identification and acceptance of a mitigation option deemed financially feasible by the School Board, the developer shall enter into a binding and enforceable 8-12 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT C. If the projected student growth from a residential development causes the adopted LOS to be exceeded in the CSA, an adjacent CSA which is contiguous with and touches the boundary of, the concurrency service area within which the proposed development is located shall be evaluated for available capacity. An adjacency evaluation review shall be conducted as follows: 1. In conducting the adjacency review, the School Board shall first use the adjacent CSA with the most available capacity to evaluate projected enrollment impact and, if necessary, shall continue to the next adjacent CSA with the next most available capacity. 2. Consistent with Rule 6A-3.0171, F.A.C., at no time shall the shift of impact to an adjacent CSA result in a total morning or afternoon transportation time of either elementary or secondary students to exceed 50 minutes or one hour, respectively. The transportation time shall be determined by the School Board transportation routing system and measured from the school the impact is to be assigned, to the center of the subject parcel/plat in the amendment application, along the most direct improved pubic roadway free from major hazards. Reserved Capacity. School capacity will be reserved when there is a final disposition of the Development Application by the local government. If the local government approves the Development Application by means of a Development approval, or its equivalent, the School Board shall move the school capacity from encumbered status to reserved status for the proposed project. This reserved capacity is held for a period of one year from the date of the Development approval, or the issuance of a building permit, whichever occurs first. If the building permit once issued expires under the development regulations of the local government, the project will lose its reserved capacity. When the local government issues a Development approval for a residential project it shall notify the School Board within 10 working days. School Concurrency Approval. Issuance of a SCALD by the School Board identifying that adequate capacity exists indicates only that school facilities are currently available, and capacity will not be reserved until the local government issues development approval. A. A local government shall not issue a development approval for a residential development until receiving confirmation of available school capacity in the form of a SCALD from the School Board. The Development approval shall include a reference to the findings of the SCALD indicating that the project meets school concurrency. Once the local government has issued a Development approval, school concurrency for the residential development shall be valid for one year from the date of issuance of the Development approval. Expiration, extension or modification of a Development approval for a residential development shall require a new review for adequate school capacity to be performed by the School Board. B. Local governments shall notify the School Board within 10 working days of any official change in the validity (status) of a Development approval for a residential development. C. The Local Government shall not issue a building permit or its functional equivalent for a non- exempt residential development until receiving confirmation of available school capacity from the School Board in the form of a SCALD. Once the local government has issued a final development approval, school concurrency for the residential development shall be valid for the life of the final development approval. 8-11 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT local government with jurisdiction over the proposed development. The completed SIA must be submitted a minimum of five working days but not more than 30 days prior to Development Application submittal to the local government. The School Board shall perform a sufficiency review on the SIA application. An incomplete SIA application will be returned to the Owner/Developer without processing. The School Board will have 20 working days to determine sufficiency and complete the Test Review. The School Board may charge the applicant a non-refundable application fee payable to the School Board to meet the cost of review in accordance with Florida Statutes. 2. Test Review. Each SIA application will be reviewed in the order in which it is received by the School Board. Passing the Test. If the available capacity of public schools for each type within the CSA [or contiguous CSAs as provided for in 12.3(C) of the ILA] containing the proposed project is equal to or greater than the proposed project's needed capacity, the concurrency test is passed. The School Board will issue a SCALD identifying the school capacity available to serve the proposed project and that said capacity has been encumbered for the proposed project for a period of one year. A capacity encumbrance fee will be established during the regulatory phase of this process. 4. F-a&g the If the available capacity of public schools for any type within the CSA (or contiguous CSAs as provided for in 12.3(C) of the ILA) containing the proposed project is less than the proposed project's needed capacity, the concurrency test is failed. The School Board will issue a SCALD and inform the developer. If capacity is not available the School Board will advise the developer of the following options: a. Accept a 30 -day encumbrance of available school capacity, and within the same 30 day period, amend the Development Application to balance it with the available capacity; or b. Accept a 60 -day encumbrance of available school capacity, and within the same 60 day period, negotiate with the School Board and the local government on a Proportionate Share Mitigation plan as outlined in Section 12.7 of the ILA; or c. Appeal the results of the failed test pursuant to the provisions in Section 12.8 below; or d. Withdraw the SIA application. 5. . If no option under Section 12.2(8)(4) of the ILA is exercised by the developer within 45 days, then the application shall deemed abandoned. Methodology. The methodology for performing the concurrency test shall follow the steps outlined below: A. To determine a proposed development's projected students, the proposed development's projected number and type of residential units shall be converted into projected students for all schools of each type within the specific CSA using the adopted Student Generation Multiplier, as established in the most current adopted Seminole County BCC Public School Impact Fee Ordinance. B. New school capacity within a CSA which is in place or under actual construction in the first three years of the School Board's Capital Improvement Plan will be added to the capacity shown in the CSA, and is counted as available capacity for the residential development under review. 8-10 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT A. No site plan, final subdivision, or functional equivalent for new residential development may be approved by the County or Cities, unless the residential development is exempt from these requirements as provided in section 12.1(C) of the of the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency (ILA) this AgFeeea, or until a School Capacity Availability Letter Determination (SCALD) has been issued by the School Board to the local government indicating that adequate school facilities exist. B. The City may condition the approval of the residential development to ensure that necessary school facilities are in place. This shall not limit the authority of a local government to deny a site plan, final subdivision or its functional equivalent, pursuant to its home rule regulatory powers. C. The following residential uses shall be considered exempt from the requirements of school concurrency: 1. All residential lots of record at the time the School Concurrency implementing ordinance becomes effective. 2. Any new residential development that has a site plan approval, final subdivision or the functional equivalent for a site specific development approval prior to the commencement date of the School Concurrency Program. 3. Any amendment to any previously approved residential development, which does not increase the number of dwelling units or change the type of dwelling units (single-family, multi -family, etc.). 4. Any age restricted community with no permanent residents under the age of 18. An age restricted community shall be subject to a restrictive covenant on all residential units limiting the age of permanent residents to 18 years and older. D. Upon request by a developer submitting a land development application with a residential component, the School Board shall issue a determination as to whether or not a development, lot or unit is exempt from the requirements of school concurrency and submit a copy of the determination to the local government within 10 days. School Concurrency Application Review. The county, cities and the School Board shall administer the following application review process. A. Any developer submitting a development permit application (such as site plan or final subdivision) with a residential component that is not exempt under Section 12.1(C) of the ILA is subject to school concurrency and shall prepare and submit a School Impact Analysis (SIA) to the School Board for review. B. The SIA shall indicate the location of the development, the number of dwelling units by unit type (single-family detached, single family attached, multi -family, apartments), a phasing schedule (if applicable), and age restrictions for occupancy (if any). The School Board concurrency test shall follow the following steps: 1. Te6t subm The developer shall submit a SIA to the School Board with a copy to the 8-9 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT Policy 8-1.4.5: Consider Transportation Concurrency €xerptien#eaException(s). All new development and redevelopment occurring within the Downtown/Waterfront and US 17-92 Corridor Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas, as defined by ObjeGfiVe 2 1.8, is eXeMpt frnm be authorized for exceptions to transportation concurrency requirements. Policy 8-1.4.6: Assessing Transportation Concurrency. The Concurrency Management System shall assess transportation impacts for new development or redevelopment according to the minimum standards listed below. These minimum standards shall be incorporated into the Land Development Code. a. Level of 6PBROOG9 LOS standard shall be based upon peak hour, peak direction trips. b. Roads analyzed shall include roads located within one mile of the project site. c. Uniform methodology for analyzing transportation concurrency shall be provided within the Land Development Code and shall be consistent with methodologies established within the FDOT LOS Guidelines Manual, Highway Capacity Manual, or other methodology consistent with transportation professional standards. d. Traffic generation rates used for concurrency analysis shall be based upon the most recent published edition of the Trip Generation manual prepared by the Institute of Transportation Engineers or by an independent study accepted by the City. Policy 8-1.4.7: Maintain Consistency with Other Transportation Plans. toa# g -Update of the Five -Year Capital Improvement Program, the shall identify multi -modal transportation system projects, including those completed by FDOT, Metroplan, Seminole County, and other agency transportation plans, as appropriate. Policy 8-1.4.8: Coordinate US 17-92 Corridor Redevelopment Plan. All planned capital improvement projects along or adjacent to the US 17-92 Corridor shall be coordinated with the US 17-92 (CRA) Corridor Redevelopment (GR -A) Plan to ensure consistency between this Comprehensive Plan and the CRA—Wao. The US 17-92 CRA Plan is located within five jurisdictions and unincorporated Seminole County. In order for the US 17-92 CRA Plan to be successful, each jurisdiction shall comply with the plan's overall vision to ensure the success of the redevelopment plan. Policy 8-1.4.9: Implementing Public School Facility Concurrency. The City shall applyrequlate school concurrency using concurrency service area (CSA) boundaries adopted by the School Board. The CSA boundaries established by the School Board will be based on clustered attendance zones for each school type (elementary, middle and high school) based on adjacency and will be re-evaluated by the School Board, as needed. At the determination of the School Board, CSA maps may be modified from time to time, to maximize utilization of school capacity. The School Board shall transmit the proposed change request with supporting data and analysis to the City and the other local jurisdictions. The City, upon receipt of supporting data and analysis for the proposed modification shall review and submit comments to the School Board within 45 days. The S -n -heel BeaFd's annual update of its Gapital IFnPF9VeFAA_Rts Srahed-de will review Af General Provisions. The County, the Cities and the School Board shall ensure that the LOS Standard established for each school type is maintained. 8-8 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT • Planned improvements in potable water and/or wastewater systems required to establish and/or maintain adopted water and wastewater LOS. System improvements and proposed funding resources required for implementing any improvements required to establish and/or maintain adopted potable water and wastewater system LOS standards; • Conceptual plan for accommodating stormwater run-off and demonstrated evidence that the proposed drainage improvements shall accommodate stormwater run-off without adversely impacting natural systems or the City's adopted LOS for storm drainage; • In cases where residential development is proposed, information shall be submitted describing plans for accommodating recreational demands generated by the development, including demonstrated evidence that the City's adopted LOS for recreation shall not be adversely impacted; • Projected demand generated by the development on the solid waste disposal system and assurances that the City's adopted LOS for solid waste disposal shall not be adversely impacted; • A School Impact Analysis projecting the demand generated by the development for permanent student stations within the public school facilities system based on student generation rates provided by the school administration and a School Capacity Availability Letter Determination issued by the School Board. • Other information which the City determines is necessary to assure that the concurrency requirement shall be satisfied without adversely impacting LOS or the City's ability to adequately service anticipated developments which are consistent with adopted plans and policies of the City. All such information submitted pursuant to this subsection shall incorporate proposed funding sources, including any identification of improvements which the applicant anticipates shall be funded by the City or other public or private entity other than the applicant. Policy 8-1.4.4: Stipulate De Minimis Impacts for TMRSpeFtatl Roadways. A proposed development may be deemed to have a de minimis impact ofn roadways and may not be subject to concurrency requirements if the de minimis impacts are defined within the Land Development Code. For a development to qualify as a de minimis impact, the Land Development Code must stipulate conditions compatible with Section 163.3180(6), F.S. 8-7 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT Policy 8-1.4.1: FUtUFe DevelepmeRt t9 Maintain LOS Standards. In order to ensure that future development maintains the adopted LOS standards, the City shall issue no development order or permit for development unless the applicant provides narrative and graphic information demonstrating to the satisfaction of the City that the adopted LOS standards for public facilities, including roads, water and wastewater services, drainage, solid waste, public schools and recreation will be maintained and that improvement needs shall be planned Policy 8-1.4.2: Implementatk -e-Concurrency Management. The Land Development Code shall further implement the concurrency management system . Development review procedures c^+ f F*" shall contain evaluation criteria to determine whether sapasity OR public facilit" capacityis aFe-iia-place or will be available according to the GGhedules set feFth in GbjeGtive 8 1.6 adopted LOS standards. Policy 8-1.4.3: Resolving Resolve Concurrency Issues. In order to implement the above measures, the City shall require that all developments requiring a development permit (as defined in Section 163.3164, F.S.) shall; at the time the subject permit application is filed, submit information which demonstrates that all urban services needed by the proposed development can and will be provided concurrent with the new development. In addition, shall determine whether there will be adequate water supplies to serve the new development no later than the anticipated date of development order issuance or its functional equivalent, prior to approval of a building permit. All the developments are subject to the City's Concurrency Management system. The City will keep track of the total of current demands and outstanding commitments, and determine the availability of adequate water supply prior to the approval of the proposed development. In order to establish an orderly review process, the City shall refine the land development regulations by stipulating specific narrative and/or graphic data and information required at the time a development plan application is filed with the City. At a minimum, the information shall include the following: The specific land use(s) and the proposed density and/or intensity of the land use; • Estimated trips per day and per peak hour, peak direction generated by the proposed land use(s) together with anticipated on- and off-site improvements needed to accommodate the traffic impacts generated by the development including, additional R/W, roadway improvements, additional paved lanes, traffic signalization, proposed methods for controlling access and egress, and other similar improvements; 8-6 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT Policy 8-1.3.2: Limitation-eft.-lndebtedness. Virg For capital improvements, the City shall limit its maximum ratio of outstanding general obligation indebtedness to no greater than 1.5 percent of the property tax base. The City shall restrict maximum ratio of total debt service to total revenue to a ratio of 50 percent. In funding capital improvements, the City shall use revenue bonds as opposed to general obligation bonds when possible ,aad-asserdingly.The City does not limit the use of revenue bonds as compared to total debt. Policy 8-1.3.3: Adopt Capital Improvements Program. The City shall prepare and adopt a Five -Year Capital Improvement Program and annual capital budget as part of its budgeting process. The Five -Year Capital Improvement Program shall be annually updated and those projects required to maintain LOS standards shall be adopted as part of this Element. Policy 8-1.3.4: Correct Transportation Deficiencies. Road improvements required to correct existing deficiencies in adopted LOS standards shall be included in the Five -Year Capital Improvement Program (GW4. Improvements funded by FDOT, Metroplan, Seminole County, or other governmental entity, and which occur on roadways within the City shall also be included -44 tt'•ie-CIP. Policy 8-1.3.5: Correct Drainage System Deficiencies. Stormwater drainage system LOS deficiencies, when I entiiied, shall be included in the City's Five -Year Capital Improvement Program in order to meet the adopted LOS standard. Policy 8-1.3.6: Plan New Public Schools. New public schools within the City shall be planned for asserdingly;-aed through cooperation and in conjunction with the parties to the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency, as amended in January 2008. Policy 8-1.3.7: Pursue Available Grantsmanship. The City shall continue to pursue available grants such as the Community Development Block Grant Fund {in coordination with Seminole County: ; public facility revolving loan programs administered through the Department of Environmental Regulation; the Land and Water Conservation Fund; and other public or private grantsmanr** programs in order to finance the provision of needed capital improvements. Objective 8-1.4: Manage Concurrency ManageFRGRt. The City's concurrency management system shall ensure that facilities and services needed to support development are available concurrent with the impacts of such development and pFevide maintain LOS at or above the adopted level--ef- sen ise standards. Prior to the approval of a building permit or its functional equivalent, the City, whiGh is alse the WateF supplieF, shall determine whether adequate water supplies to serve the new development will be available no later than the anticipated date of issuance of the City of a certificate of occupancy or its functional equivalent. Acreage for parks and recreation shall be dedicated by the development or acquired by the City; or necessary funds provided as part of a developer's proportionate fair share, before the City may issue a certificate of occupancy or its equivalent. Facilities for parks and recreation shall be in place or under construction within one year of the City issuing a certificate of occupancy or its equivalent. Within three years of the City approving a building permit or its equivalent, necessary transportation facilities needed to serve new development shall be in place. 8-5 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT program assesses new development a pro -rata share of costs required to fund transportation improvement needs generated by such development. Policy 8-1.2.2: Supplemental Transportation Funding. The local option gas tax and other funding measures that may be made available to the City shall be used to supplement impact fees and fund non -County -maintained transportation improvements. Policy 8-1.2.3: Require Recreation Impact Fees Generated by for New Development. The City shall continue to enforce the City's recreation impact fee which shall require that new development pay a pro -rata for recreational land and facility needs generated by the respective developments. Policy 8-1.2.4: FundiW&guire Water and Wastewater Impacts Generated by Fees for New Development. The City shall continue assessing impact fees from new development for water and wastewater facility improvements necessitated by the respective development. The land development regulations shall continue to incorporate performance criteria assuring that all new development provide water and wastewater improvements to meet+ag-the adopted LOS standards. Policy 8-1.2.5: Funding Drainage lMpastslmprovements. The City shall continue to feseasilecorrect deficiencies in the drainage system through the implementation of identified capital improvements projects, and by maintaining the stormwater utility district as a dedicated funding source for drainage improvements. The City shall continue to comply with the standards for discharge authorized by EPA permit No. FLS 000038, or its successor under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. The City will continue to include projects in the Five - Year Capital Improvement Program when needed to maintain adopted LOS standards for drainage. Policy 8-1.2.6: Collect School Impact Fees. The City shall continue to collect impact fees imposed by the School Board to fund public school facility needs generated by new development. Objective 8-1.3: Manage Fiscal Resource Management. The City shall manage fiscal resources to ensure provision of needed capital improvements for approved development orders and for future development and redevelopment. Policy 8-1.3.1: Ensure Availability of Adequate Public Facilities. The City shall issue no development order for new development which would result in an increase in demand on deficient facilities prior to completion of improvements needed to achieve the adopted LOS standard. The City shall include an adequate facilities requirement as part of the concurrency management regu- lations within the land development regulations. The provisions governing adequate facilities shall mandate that future applications for development shall include a written evaluation of the impact of the anticipated development on the LOS for the water and wastewater systems, solid waste system, drainage, recreation, public school facilities, and the traffic circulation system. Prior to issuing a building permit, the City shall render a finding that the applicant has provided written assurance that the proposed development shall be served with each of the above cited facilities. The written statement shall ensure compliance with the City's adopted LOS standards . The application for development shall include written assurances that any required improvements shall be in place concurrent with the impacts of the development (i.e., by the time a building permit is granted by the City). 8-4 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT priority for each capital improvement is proposed for inclusion in the Five -Year Capital Improvement Program. The City Commission shall retain its authority to adopt the recommendations of the Planning and Zoning Commission, with or without modifications to the proposed Five -Year Capital Improvement Program. Policy 8-1.1.7: Evaluate and Rank Capital Improvement Projects CiFiteFia. Proposed capital improvement projects shall be evaluated and ranked according to the following priority level guidelines: a. "Level 1 ": Whether the project is needed to: Protect public health and safety. Fulfill the City's legal commitment to provide facilities and services. Preserve or achieve full use. of existing facilities. b. "Level 2": Whether the project accomplishes the following: Increases efficiency of existing facilities. Prevents or reduces future improvement costs. Provides service to developed areas lacking full service or promotes in -fill development. C. "Level 3": Whether the project: Represents a logical extension of facilities and services in a manner consistent with future Land Use Element goals, objectives and policies, including the Future Land Use Map. The applicable plans of state agencies and the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) shall be part of the evaluation criteria for capital improvement projects. Policy 8-1.1.8: Coordinate Capital Improvements Eeerdinatien with School District. The City shall adopt the capacity portions of the annual School Board's Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan into the Capital Improvement Element of the Comprehensive Plan each year. By adopting the capacity portions of the Seminole County Public School's Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan in the Capital Improvement Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan, Sanford shall have neither the obligation nor the responsibility for funding or aesemplishing implementing -the School Board Five - Year Capital Improvement Plan. Objective 8-1.2: Require Future Developments to Bear Proportionate Costs of Then Resyestive—Infrastructure Impacts. Future development shall bear a proportionate cost for facility improvements necessitated by the development in order to maintain adopted LOS standards. This objective shall be measured through the implementation of the following policies. Policy 8-1.2.1: Require Funding Transportation Impacto GGRerated by fees for New Development. The City shall participate in the Seminole County traffic impact fee program for purposes of assisting the funding of new or improved roadways and intersection improvements required to accommodate traffic demands impacts of new development. The traffic impact fee 8-3 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT a. To consolidate and coordinate all the various departmental requests by taxing district with the hope of reducing delays and coordinating individual improvement programs. b. To establish a system of procedures and priorities by which each proposal can be evaluated in terms of public needs, long range development plans, and short and long-term fiscal management impacts. C. To schedule future capital outlay projects pursuant to identified needs and priorities. To set forth a financing program that identifies potential funding sources, including but not limited to ad valorem taxes/general obligation bonds; user fees/revenue of excise tax bonds; grant programs; equitable contributions (exactions, such as impact fees) as well as performance standards and other components of a growth management program which may be used as fiscal strategies for obtaining needed capital improvements in developing areas. e. To coordinate joint projects involving participation by one or more local governments, as well as regional, state, or federal agencies. Policy 8-1.1.3: Utilize Capital Improvement Program and Budget as a Plan Implementation Device. The capital improvement program shall be used for achieving orderly urban growth and development. By providing a planned and reasonably reliable schedule of public projects, the capital improvement program and budget shall provide a guide for both public and private capital investment decisions influencing community development patterns. The capital improvement programming and budgeting process is athe primary tool for closely coordinating land use planning and fiscal management required to successfully carry out the Comprehensive Plan. Policy 8-1.1.4: Program Availability and Scheduling of Capital Improvements. The City shall include within the Five -Year Capital Improvement Program all capital improvements which are identified in any of the respective elements of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The Five -Year Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and annual capital budget shall be prepared by the City and the CIP and budget shall be adopted by the City Commission. In the case of the capital improvement program for public school facilities, the City relies on the School Board's obligation to prepare, adopt and implement a financially feasible capital facilities program to achieve public schools operating at the adopted level -of se-R.F LOS consistent with the timing specified in the Board's Capital Facilities Plan. Policy 8-1.1.5: PiFiGiFities in AIIeGat11R9 Prioritize Capital Improvements. In allocating priorities for scheduling and funding capital improvement needs, the City shall assign highest priority to capital improvement projects in the Five -Year Capital Improvement which are designed to correct existing deficiencies and maintain the adopted LOS standards for public facilities. Policy 8-1.1.6: to Draft and Rank Capital Improvement Priorities. The City Manager shall have the authority and responsibility to evaluate and recommend a rank order of 8-2 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT CHAPTER 8: CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT GOAL 8-1: MANAGE=VI€#:r--Ai`CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS MANAGEMENT. THE CITY SHALL UNDERTAKE ACTIONS NECESSARY TO ADEQUATELY PROVIDE NEEDED PUBLIC FACILITIES WITHIN THE CITY'S JURISDICTION IN A MANNER WHICH PROTECTS INVESTMENTS AND EXISTING FACILITIES, MAXIMIZES THE USE OF EXISTING FACILITIES, AND PROMOTES ORDERLY COMPACT GROWTH. Objective 8-1.1: R-abienalefeF-Capital Improvements Rationale. Capital improvements will be provided for purposes of correcting existing deficiencies, accommodating future growth, and replacing worn-out or obsolete facilities, as ifldieated programmed in the Five -Year Capital Improvement Program . Policy 8-1.1.1: intent tarCapital Improvement Element Intent. The City is committed to growth management which incorporates appropriate fiscal management practices and procedures. The City shall consider the use of all legal and equitable fiscal management techniques to achieve delivery of public services and facilities needed by existing and anticipated future populations. The capital improvement program presented herein identifies capital improvements needed by the existing and projected future population to sat+sfy maintain adopted level of service (LOS) standards adopted WithoR this G9fflPFeheRriye Plaw The City shall consider performance standards as well as legal and equitable impact fees, where appropriate, to ensure that new developments cover the costs of needed to maintain the adopted LOS for facilities and services based upon; the impacts of the development. The capital improvement program and budgeting process provides an on-going process for planning and review of the City's capital outlays, including their location, timing, estimated cost, relative priority, and potential funding sources. The-Gapital Capital outlays are approved only by the City Commission. Policy 8-1.1.2: Capital Improvement Program Criteria. The term "capital improvement" ffejeet, as used in the Comprehensive plan, is defined as a project that is self-contained and that will usually be constructed or purchased as a unit. Capital improvements generally include only those items constructed or purchased that have a useful life extending beyond a 10 -year period following their acquisition, and usually involve a cost in excess of $25,000 or involve the acquisition or disposal of land regardless of cost. Minor recurring annual expense items including routine maintenance and repairs are excluded. All projects that are to be financed from bond funds are included. Similarly, preliminary engineering studies for public facilities such as the design improvements to the transportation, water, wastewater, public school facilities and drainage systems are generally itemized as capital expenditure items due to their significant cost and their impact on the capital improvement program. The capital improvement program and budget is concerned with the assessment of need, assignment of priorities, and efficient allocation of the City's existing and potential fiscal resources for major community improvements or acquisitions over a five to 10 -year period. The fundamental purposes of the capital improvement programming pFesess-are as follows: 8-1 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION The City shall continue to coordinate with the FDEP in the following activities: • Permitting and funding of the City's wastewater facilities; • Monitoring the quality of the City's potable water, wastewater and solid waste facilities. Policy 7-1.4.2: Participate in Management of Lake Monroe. The City shall continue to participate in plans and programs fostered by the State or EPA to improve the quality of Lake Monroe and to abate land and water management activities which adversely impact Lake Monroe. Objective 7-1.5: Develop Data Base Management And Coordination. The City annually shall develop and update an appropriate data base in order to further the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Policy 7-1.5.1: Generate Necessary Data. The City shall predicate growth management policies and land development strategies upon quantifiable data, where appropriate, that are consistent with recognized areawide projections and forecasts. Policy 7-1.5.2: Consideratiee-ef Areawide Data Resources. The City shall collect and analyze data developed by Seminole County, Seminole County School Board, and other public entities providing services but not having regulatory authority over the use of land within incorporated and unincorporated areas of Seminole County. 7-12 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION Policy 7-1.3.3: Coordinate the Capital Improvement Program During prepara- tion of the annual capital improvements program, the City shall evaluate all applicable State, regional, and local programs proposed for funding in order to promote consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. Policy 7-1.3.4: Cooperate with the Orlando Metropolitan Area Planning Organization. Regarding regional transportation programs the City shall cooperate with the MPO by participation of City staff in the MPO's Transportation Technical Committee. In addition, the City Commission shall cooperate with the MPO by appointing a representative to serve on the Orlando Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization. Policy 7-1.3.5: Cooperate with the LYNX. The City of Sanford shall continue to cooperate with LYNX regarding the provision of mass transit, including buses, light rail and/or commuter rail as well as any studies related to the creation of a regional intermodal transportation facility in the Rand Yard area. Objective 7-1.4: Coordinate Multi -Jurisdictional Environmental Issues. The City shall coordinate with the Seminole County Planners Coordinating Committee and/or other similar organization established by the County to ensure consistent and coordinated management of multi - jurisdictional environmental issues. The City shall coordinate on an "as needed" basis with the i= DE -R- F DNR, FDEP� and impacted local governments on matters surrounding preservation of water quality within or affecting Lake Monroe, and on other development issues impacting marine resources. The City shall coordinate with the Seminole County Planners Coordinating Committee and/or other similar organization established by the County to ensure consistent and coordinated management of multi jurisdictional environmental issues. Policy 7-1.4.1: Establish a Liaison with Permitting Agencies. Establish a formal liaison with the SJRWMD, Seminole County, State, and federal agencies which have permitting responsibility within the City of Sanford. The City of Sanford shall continue to coordinate with the St '„hRc-; River Water Management Oistfist--(SJRWMD) and the FleFi a ^e^"'+MPRt s E,,. e.,+al oe,.,,l.,+,,... �FDEP } in establishing base line environmental data in order to provide a wet weather upstream discharge point north of the 4-1-4 bridge over the St. Johns River. In addition, the City of Sanford shall continue to cooperate with and support the SJRWMD in the following areas of concern: • Stormwater drainage regulation for new development and drainage system improvements in the downtown area. • Consumptive use permits for the City's potable water supply facilities. • Effluent discharge into the St. Johns River and Lake Monroe. and wetlands protection. • Implementation of the Water Supply Facilities Work Plan (F=*hibit 2). • Consideration of the most current SJRWMD District Water Supply Plan when proposing and/or amending the tee10-year Water Supply Facilities Work Plan and amendments to the Sanford Comprehensive Plan. 7-11 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION intergovernmental issues surrounding development proposed in the Comprehensive Plan, Such mechanisms shall be used as issues arise. At least once a year the City shall participate in technical regional forums sponsored by the City of Sanford and adjacent local governments to evaluate ongoing development trends and potential Comprehensive Plan issues impacting adjacent local governments. Policy 7-1.2.6: AmFPGFt Land Use GOGWIRatiGA Coordinate Airport Lane Use with Seminole County. Py the year-2402-,4The City shall continue to coordinate with Seminole County regarding coordination of the Master Plan for the airport with the County Future Land Use Map. Specifically, clear zones should be added to the County's Future Land Use Map and coordinated as a part of the City's joint planning agreement with the County. Policy 7-1.2.7: Coordinate with Federal Aviation Administration. The City shall continue to coordinate with the Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) regarding expansion plans of the Orlando Sanford Airport as well as proposed development outside the airport that requires FAA review and authorization. Objective 7-1.3: Coordinate Infrastructure Systems and Level of C^^•'^^ LOS Standards. The City shall ensure effective coordination in developing a concurrency management program that requires specific issues surrounding LOS level of sewi,.e standards for existing and proposed public facilities within the City and adjacent areas to be coordinated with all State, regional, or local agencies or private entities having existing or proposed future responsibility for the operation and maintenance of such facilities. The City shall exchange information with such entities on issues impacting concurrency and level of service throughout the process of developing the concurrency management system and especially in the determination of effective LOS standards. levels-ef se A this ehieotive shall he f thw implemented as sited in the Dnlinice helnw Policy 7-1.3.1: Coordinate Regional/Sub-Regional Infrastructure Issues. The City shall work with Seminole County, the Orlando Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization, the Seminole Expressway Authority, as well as any State, regional, or local jurisdiction having operational and maintenance responsibility for public facilities in addressing issues surrounding regional or sub - regional infrastructure systems. Issues which shall be coordinated include, but shall not be limited to, transportation, wastewater and potable water systems improvements within the unincorporated urban area, and solid waste and hazardous waste disposal, and coordination in establishing level of service standards for all public facilities, traffic circulation system components, and recreation. Policy 7-1.3.2: Cooperate with the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council (EGFRRC). The City shall use the 9arA GentFal FIOFida Regional Planning GeunGil ECFRPC to resolve conflicts with other local governments. In addition, the City shall cooperate with the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council in the review of regional policies and standards which require coordination with local governments. Foremost, among such issues shall be assessment of standards for adequate levels of service for regional transportation facilities. However, the City of Sanford shall coordinate with the ECFRPC in all matters of regional significance in which the ECFRPC desires City input, including but not limited to, development of regional impact (DRIB), Comprehensive Plan review, intergovernmental coordination review of projects of regional significance (ICR projects). 7-10 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION land uses and policies in the Sanford Urban Area are consistent with land use policies governing land use within the urban service area to the land use designations and policy issues. In addition, the agreement includes provisions for annexation. The parties agree that the County shall not oppose annexation of any parcel that is contiguous and relates to lands located either east of Interstate 4 or east of the Interstate 4 Industrial Park. d. Upon annexation of County land by the City, the agreement proposes that such annexed lands shall be subject to the City's land development regulations and the City shall apply a City zoning district equivalent to the closest comparable County zoning district, unless the City wishes to rezone such lands in a manner consistent with the Future Land Use Equivalency Chart or in conformance with recommendations and policies agreed upon by each party, as discussed above. Further, the City shall amend its Comprehensive Plan to include the annexed lands immediately following such annexation. Prior to the City amending the lands into its Comprehensive Plan, the City's LDR would in effect be implementing the County's Plan. The proposed planning agreement is predicated upon transportation and utilities agreements. e. The agreement shall contain provisions for land development regulation coordination which includes uniform right-of-way and building setbacks on major roadways; agreement to provide the other party with formal comments relating to land development regulation revisions, including planned development project rezonings, proposed subdivisions and site plans located adjacent to the other's jurisdiction. Each party shall provide the other party with a meaningful opportunity to evaluate and analyze off-site transportation impacts of proposed projects located adjacent to the other's jurisdiction. The draft joint planning agreement shall define the management structure and terms of the interlocal agreement implementation. Policy 7-1.2.2: Establish Informal Mediation Process. The City shall work with and support regional efforts to establish an informal mediation process for resolving intergovernmental coordination problems among local governments and other units of local governments providing services but not having regulatory authority over the use of land. Policy 7-1.2.3: Use Mechanisms for Intergovernmental Coordination Review. The City shall use the committees 'd-A-Rtified OR GbjeGtive 7 14 as informal conflict resolution forums to assist resolution of intergovernmental coordination problems. Policy 7-1.2.4: Coordinate with the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council. Where the City is unable to resolve intergovernmental conflicts with local governments through formal and informal mechanisms identified above, the City Commission shall determine if it is appropriate for the respective issue to be mediated through the ECFRPC Susi'. Policy 7-1.2.5: Coordinate Impacts of Comprehensive Plans with Adjacent Local Governments. The City shall coordinate with technical coordinating committees of adjacent local governments and shall use the formal and informal processes cited above to assist in resolving 7-9 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION system. The FDOT has the authority to direct the design, construction, maintenance, and related activities of the Florida Highway Systems including setting design standards for curb cuts, and determining the functional classification of roads within Sanford. The City Engineer maintains principal liaison with FDOT. 65. Florida Department of State. The City of Sanford coordinates with the Florida Department of State primarily on issues related to State archives and records, historic sites and properties, libraries, and fine arts. The City works with the Division of Archives, History and Records Management in addressing comprehensive planning issues surrounding historical and archaeological sites of significance. The Department of State is also the City's principal source for obtaining rules and regulations promulgated by State agencies. The City Manager maintains principal liaison with FDOT. 76. Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission (FGFWFC). The City coordinates its comprehensive planning activities with the FGFWFC in order to achieve appropriate fish and wildlife management perspectives of issues potentially impacting Lake Monroe or other water bodies in the City, and related fish and wildlife habitat, particularly that of endangered and threatened species. The City Manager maintains principal liaison with the €aefida Game a;Rd- Fresh \AL,4er PSI; Gemn;issi9n (FGFWFC). 67. Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Affairs (DACA). The City staff and residents receive technical assistance, consumer related services, and publications which address a broad range of special services provided by these private and public entities. The Division of Forestry manages the growth and preservation of woodlands within Seminole County, as well as authorizes controlled burning of grasslands, and flatwood understories. Primary contact is made withDACA through the City Manager. Policy 7-1.2.1: PFOpGsed InteFIeGaI AgFeement with Seminole County 40 Coordinate Intergovernmental Planning Issues with Seminole County. The City of Sanford has approved a draft of an interlocal agreement with Seminole County concerning joint management of mutual planning issues. The City is awaiting County approval. The City shall negotiate an agreement with Seminole County in order to adopt joint standards and procedures for ensuring that coordinated and cooperative comprehensive planning activities are accomplished. The agreement shall guide urban expansion and reduce the likelihood of disputes and provide constructive and beneficial dispute resolution guidelines, including, but not limited to, the following: a. The joint planning agreement shall include a chart as illustrated on Table VII -2: "Land Use Equivalency Chart" of the Comprehensive Plan Intergovernmental Coordination data inventory and analysis. The table sets forth equivalent future land use plan map designations with related intensities and densities between respective City and County Comprehensive Plans. The chart provides the basis for reviewing land use proposed adjacent to the jurisdictional limits and may also be used in evaluating annexation proposals. b. The proposed agreement shall include a list of land use designations and related policies for resolving land use compatibility issues. The City and County would agree to exchange draft planning documents so as to compare each other's plan to determine whether proposed 7-8 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION elected officials from local and county governments located within the metropolitan area and is responsible for comprehensive transportation planning throughout the Orlando metropolitan area. The City of Sanford is represented on the MPO by one of its elected officials, as appointed by the City Commission. The Transportation Advisory Committee (TAC) has been established to provide the MPO with technical assistance in its decision- making process. The City Planner represents the City at TAC meetings. State of Florida Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA). The (DCA) provides technical assistance to local governments in the areas of housing, community development resource planning and management, community services, land and water management, public safety, as well as in emergency management preparedness and post -disaster recovery. The DCA is also responsible for distributing federal money for the improvement or maintenance of housing through the Small Cities and Community Development Block Grant Programs. 2. Florida Department of Environmental Regulatien Protection (DEP). The purpose of the DepaFt ,ent of EnyiFenmental Re,.ulatien PFetep fien 4DE#P4 is to preserve quality of State lands, waters, and are resources through the regulation of industrial waste, air pollution emission, hazardous wastes, potable water usage, solid waste disposal, dredge and fill activities an alterations to environmentally sensitive areas. The City Engineer serves as primary contact with DERP. The City of Sanford is located within DEP's East Central Management District. The DNP has jurisdiction over State owned submerged bottom lands and thus any construction that will impact the submerged bottom lands of Lake Monroe must be reviewed by DEP. The (DEP) houses Division of Recreation and Parks and is the most significant external agency that Sanford has coordinated with in regard to provision of open space and recreational amenities. 3. Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS). The City coordinates with HRS on issues surrounding delivery of rehabilitative social and medical services for children, youth, family, and elderly, including services directed toward special needs. The City principally coordinates through the District VII regional office of HRS and through the County Health and Human Services Department. In addition, HRS licenses various residential care facilities located in Sanford. The City Manager serves as primary contact with the HRS. 4. agUatis-pFeseares- 1 54. Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). The {FDOT3 directs planning functions and project coordination for Florida's transportation 7-7 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION Management 9istFiGt JRWMD) regulates development as it relates to environmental issues within its jurisdiction. They have regulating authority over the following areas: • Stormwater Discharge & Drainage, 40C-42 • Wetlands Resource Management • Consumptive Use of Water Permit, 40C-2 • Wetlands Mapping • Wet Weather Effluent Discharge into the St. Johns River • Agricultural Surface Water Management Systems 0 Works of the District • Well Construction, Repair, and Abandonment, 40C-3 • Water Shortage Plan, 40C-21 • Management and Storage of Surface Waters, 40C-4 2.3-. Orlando Urban Area Metropolitan Organization (MPO). The Orlando MPO is comprised of 7-6 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION related land development issues of mutual concern. 4. Tri -Party Agreement. The Cities of Sanford and Lake Mary and Seminole County has reached an agreement (Tri -Party Agreement) to reduce groundwater withdrawals from Floridan Aquifer by expanding reclaimed water use in lieu of potable water for irrigation. 5. Council of Local Governments. The Council of Local Governments serves as a mechanism for policy level coordination between the City of Sanford and surrounding municipalities. 6. Seminole County School Board The Sanford City Commission and Seminole County School Board conduct joint meetings on an annual basis to discuss items of mutual interest including the use of School Board or City property and facilities for maximum mutual benefit. 7. Seminole County Commission. The Seminole County Commission collaborates with Sanford on many issues of mutual concern including the following: • Annexation • Concurrency Management • Housing • Land Use • Transportation • Urban Planning • Utility Service Areas • Mutual Fire Assistance • Health Assistance • Recreation and Open Space Coordination • Potable water and wastewater services Volusia County. Besau%4The City of Sanford borders Volusia County, and the two entities share concerns of growth management. The City will probably emerge as an important wholesale, distribution, manufacturing and employment center. A consistent exchange of information will assist in monitoring the impacts of growth within the two areas and in signaling when more concerted joint planning efforts may become necessary. 9. U -S- Highway 17-92 Corridor Redevelopment Committee. Seminole County local governments together with their respective Chambers of Commerce aFe initiating initiated an effort to revitalize, redevelop, and beautify the U.S- Highway 17-92 corridor. The Committee's main goal is to strengthen the economic vitality and introduce landscaping and urban design amenities along U -S-17-92. Regional Coordination St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD). The St. johns RiyeF Mte 7-5 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION The City and other participants in the technical coordinating committee shall identify their specific duties and responsibilities in order to implement the agreed upon strategy. The participants shall place proposed actions requiring local legislative approval before the respective governing bodies. Plan amendment may be required where proposed actions requires a higher level of specificity in the plan or requires a change in policy direction or fiscal allocation. d) Continue Monitoring and Evaluation. The City shall monitor progress in implementing actions agreed upon by the technical coordinating committee. Where such actions do not bring about intended problem resolution the City shall reconvene the technical coordinating committee to reassess specific planning and management issues in dispute. Where intergovernmental coordination activities of the Seminole County technical coordinating meeting are ineffective, the City shall seek assistance using the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council resources pursuant to Policy 7-1.2.4. Objective 7-1.2: Adopt Coordination Mechanisms to Resolve Comprehensive Plan Issues Impacting the City and Adjacent Governments and Develop Measures for Conflict Resolution. As set forth the Joint Planning Resolution between the City of Sanford and Seminole County, conflict resolution shall be conducted on a staff level prior to consideration by elected officials. In addition, various technical and citizen committees shall provide forums to resolve conflicts. The Council of Local Governments which includes elected officials of Seminole County, its municipalities and the Seminole County School Board shall also provide a forum to establish interlocal agreements and resolve inter jurisdictional disputes. These committees shall be used as informal forums for resolving conflicts among Seminole County, municipalities within the County, the School Board, and other special purpose districts or entities which provide services but do not have regulatory authority over the use of land within the incorporated and unincorporated areas of the County. In addition, the City of Sanford shall participate on the respective technical advisory committees of adjacent local governments for purposes of resolving issues arising from development proposed in the City's Comprehensive Plan which impact adjacent jurisdictions. Coordination at the local level occurs within the City of Sanford with the Sanford Airport Authority, the Sanford Housing Authority, the City of Lake Mary, the Seminole County Board of Instruction (School Board), Volusia County, and with Seminole County. Sanford Airport Authority. The airport is managed by the Sanford Airport Authority, a five member body created by Legislative action in 1971 and appointed to four-year terms of office by the Sanford City GeunaCommission. The Airport Authority oversees developments of the aviation and industrial facilities at the City -owned facility. 2. Sanford Housing Authority. The Sanford City Commission appoints five non -paid housing commission members to govern the responsibilities of the Sanford Housing Authority. The City Commission coordinates with the Housing Authority over program and management issues. 3. City of Lake Mary. Located southwest of the City of Sanford, the two municipalities exchange pertinent information on applications for approval of a variety of development - related issues, such as plan amendments, rezonings, subdivisions, annexations, and other 7-4 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION • Urban services and service areas for infrastructure systems impacting the City and adjacent unincorporated areas (Reliry 4-1.1.4). • Natural resource conservation, including wetlands and drainageways (Pelisies 4 3.'� 1, 5 4.2.5, 5 1.3.1, 5._1 A 4 ;and G 1.7-14. 714 • Coordination and implementation of the FDOT Wive -year Transportation Plan and County road improvement strategies managed through the Orlando Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (PONG896 2 1.4 :2 ARd 7 4.4.�` • Coordination with the Seminole County Health Department in monitoring the quality of individual potable water and wastewater systems (PeliGies 4 " 1.3.1.b, " 1.3.2 and "2.1.G.1). • Coordination of recreation and open space planning efforts (ObjeGtiVe Q ' P^'i^i^s a ' 5 ' • Joint management of land development regulations impacting ■ High intensity planned development (HIP) standards (PeliGy 1 2.2.7- ■ Uniform building setbacks from major roads (Policy 7 1.24.^ `; ■ Land development code updates (1291i^• 7 1.24-.4; ■ Review and development proposals for transportation impacts (Deli e} ■ Roadway beautification and related development standards }. • Oeerdinated Coordination of sub -basin surface water management plans. Agree upon conflict resolution management strategies (PeliGy " 3.1.4)- Resolution .'.4) Resolution of the above cited issues shall be advanced during the technical G99FG!inating coordination meetings by using the following techniques: a) Achieve Recognition of the Issues or Problem. As issues are identified by the City, Seminole County, other adjacent incorporated municipalities, or agencies of the state or federal government having jurisdiction, the City of Sanford shall exchange information with interested public entities and solicit agreement on specific parameters of the issue or problem, including causal factors which must be managed to achieve resolution of the problem. b) Identify Alternative Strategies for Managing "Causal Factors." The City shall review specific comprehensive plan objectives and policies above referenced which guide management of the respective issues. The City shall evaluate relevant implementing strategies currently being employed which impact the issue. The evaluation shall include defining specific alternative strategies, programs, and tactics for problem resolution. Costs and other necessary resource considerations shall be identified. C) Select Strategy for Problem Resolution. The City shall assess alternative strategies for problem resolution with the appropriate entities as referenced in subparagraph "a" above. 7-3 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION • mplemei# the Water Supply Facilities Work Plan implementation /C.. . The Werk Plaa • City of Sanford land development activities adjacent to the unincorporated area of Seminole County (7-1.2.5). • P^+r �i,a;nnexation issaes and City -County coordination of land use policy and zoning in the unincorporated urbanized area (P91isy 7 1-21). • Coordination of housing assistance and rehabilitation programs with the Seminole County and use of County Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding FesetFses by the City of Sanford Community Development Office . .14. • GeaURued-Participation of the Gity of Sanford in the Seminole County road impact fee program • Solid waste and hazardous waste disposal, especially improvements required in order to comply with the 1988 Solid Waste Recovery Act (See policies below). ■ €nhanGingeSolid waste collection and transfer operations enhancement (Abjestive--4z?h ■ ManagemeRt StFategies F^r'^'^'^^^^^+�^g (Recycling efforts management strategies (Pelisy4 2.1 b. 1); f ■ Develeping-Improved information dissemination regarding hazardous waste generators (12913; ■ DeterteiaiegfFeasibility of hazardous waste storage/transfer facilities (Pelisy4 2.4 b_}; ■ FRManagement of the collection and disposal of hazardous waste (Relisy4 2.1 b.2); • Seminole County transportation improvements impacting the City; and terahnoral rsemmktees established by Seminole County to GOWd-iRate A-VehWoRg issues sueI4 as neeS(P9'*Gy 2-1.22). • Level of service standards for infrastructure system impacting the City and adjacent unincorporated areas (PeliGy 2 1.2.3). 7-2 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION CHAPTER 7: INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT GOAL 7-1: PROVIDE MECHANISMS FOR IMPROVED INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION. THE CITY OF SANFORD SHALL UNDERTAKE ACTIONS NECESSARY TO ESTABLISH GOVERNMENTAL RELATIONSHIPS DESIGNED TO IMPROVE THE COORDINATION OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE ENTITIES INVOLVED IN -D-RVEI-GRIVI€PJT"GTIVI PUBLIC FACILITIES, GROWTH MANAGEMENT, AND RESOURCE CONSERVATION. Objective 7-1.1: Coordinate And CGGrd*nat*GR Of Comprehensive Plans of WM Adjacent Local Governments. As the Comprehensive Plan is being prepared, amended, or implemented, the City shall systematically coordinate the development and implementation of the City's Comprehensive Plan with the plans of Tthe City of Lake Mary, Seminole County, Volusia County, Seminole County School Board, and other �ni#e-sf lesal government agencies through respective technical advisory committees of each adjacent government. As At a minimum, the process of coordination shall occur every six months or as the plan is considered for amendment. The intent is that coordination occurs on a sentinuing continual basis. Policy 7-1.1.1: Establish Responsible Entity for Intergovernmental Coordination. The City Commission shall be responsible for ensuring an effective intergovernmental coordination program for the City. The City Manager, Wannef or other persons designated by the City Commissionef shall represent the City on the respective technical advisory committees established by adjacent local governments. Policy 7-1.1.2: Coordinate+en with Adjacent Jurisdictions. The City shall file a written request with Seminole County, the City of Lake Mary and Volusia County to receive copies of pFepesed comprehensive plans as well as Afie proposed amendments for the City's review for purposes of intergovernmental coordination and to promote consistency with the City's adopted Plan. Policy 7-1.1.3: Coordinateien of Development and Growth Management Issues. The City shall resolve development and growth management issues having impacts transcending the City's political jurisdiction; by participating in the Seminole County Technical Advisory Committee. Issues swFreandinginvolving Lake Monroe water quality shall be coordinated with Volusia County and other agencies having appropriate jurisdiction. Issues of regional and state significance shall be coordinated with the regional or State agencies having jurisdictional authority. Following is a list of growth management issues and respective coordination activities included in Felated pelmei^c ^f this Comprehensive Plan as sited: Development impacts on the City of Lake Marv, Seminole County, the region or the State proposed in the Comprehensive Plan. • City of Lake Mary and Seminole County land development activities adjacent to the City's corporate limits (o^'i^y 7- 1.2.6). 7-1 November 2009 Open Space designation on the Future Land Use Map. 1 Policy 6-1.3.5: Ensure Compatibility with Natural and Open Space Systems. The City shall ensure that all new development is designed in a manner compatible with natural system and shall not encroach upon open space systems. The City shall require dedication of open space systems and/or conservation easements in order to implement this policy where such action is consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare and does not impose a "taking" without just compensation. Policy 6-1.3.6: Regulate Park Conversions. The City may consider the allocation of existing parkland for another use provided that all three (3) of the following conditions are met and the conversion is expressly for the public's well beina: The proposed use is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of this Comprehensive Plan; The facilities located within that park can be provided at another park within the City (i.e., no net loss of recreation facilities); and The resulting level of service for park land is not less than the adopted iaOA-1 ef sew+se LQ3of 4.0 acres/1,000 people. Policy 6-1.3.1: Establ"sh Open Space Preservation Criteria. The City of Sanford E4ef+ne9jdentifies three types of open space: utility oven space, conservation oven space, and recreation open space. % tmed13e1ew: The followina policies establish the definition and criteria for preservation of each of these types. Policy 6-1.3.2: De_lity Open Space. Utility open space includes the following: • Transportation Corridors • Potentially Incompatible Land Use Buffer Areas Weeewed thmugh Peliey 4 4.4.4,; • Stormwater Retention Areas . ; Policy 6-1.3.3: Define Conservation Open Space. Conservation open space includes the followina areas identified as resource protection areas; ' . • Wetlands and Aquatic Habitats - Preserved through the Resource Protection designation of the Future Land Use Ma ; • Floodways and Drainage Ways - Preserved through the Resource Protection designation on the Future Land Use Map;; , 4.2.59, G 4.4.4-47 • Aquifer Recharge Areas and Wellfield Protection Areas - Preserved through the Resource Protection designation on the Future Land Use Map+; Map 1 4, Pelieies 4-41.1, 4-4.1.2 4 4.1.3, 4 4.4.4, . G 4.2.6, 6 4.2.7, 4 6 144 1. ,, • Upland Wildlife Habitats - jErotection measures of these habitat areas shall be involved as a condition of site plan review. • Floodplains - The areas areidentified on the WBteF Reseurees Map 1 4 IR the Future Land Use PlereeRI Map series shall be protected PUFfiWaRt t9 P9liGY 6 4.3.4. Policy 6-1.3.4: Define Recreation Open Space. This classification consists of 6gity parks and recreation areas These lands are preserved pursuant to the Parks, Recreation and 6-5 Policy 6-1.2.4: , Minimize Alteration or Modification, No land use or development shall be permitted that would result in the elimination of any beneficial function of a wetland. If permitted, any alteration or modification of wetlands shall be the minimum necessary to conduct the use or activity. Policy 6-1.2.5: Reaulate . ormwater Conditions. The use of cypress, hardwood swamp, bayhead, and hydric hammock wetlands for water retention shall be permitted when utilized to decompose dissolved organics and when such wetlands are not connected to surface waters. Stormwater detention basins shall screen, filter, trap and/or otherwise prevent sediment and debris and minimize the amount of chemicals entering wetlands. Channelization of water to or through a wetland shall not be permitted. Policy 6-1.2.6: Require Minimum Ground Floor Elevation. When structures intended for human habitation are proposed to be located in wetlands that are not regulated by the provisions of Ordinance No. 1859, the Administrative Official shall be authorized to establish and require a minimum ground floor elevation sufficient to prevent future flood damage of buildings on the parcel iw ar+ion hmcaa an +h^ h^;* ^ ailRbi^ iRf m;R*i^^ and anv surroundina buildinas impacted by the [The following information has been summarized within Policy 6-1.2.1] 131:1#6F Of �MOMY WS (25) feet OR Width Shall 138 PFOYiEIGd BE4616ARI 10 4AFRUR IOGG, 8 W808Rd 13kiffeF Of fifty (60) feet iR width shall be pFeYided aEIjaG8R than &M (6) aeFee. The area efwetl REIS !R E11:186WR Shall iRelude all Be :Phe felleWing U686 Shall 138 PeFFRi6GibI8 WithiR a wetland 196'&F • Be+l�s:• OBJECTIVE 6-1.33. ,Protect Open Spaces Systems. The City shall preserve open space for recreation activities, for utilitarian uses, for purposes of conserving resource protection area§ 6-4 - - -- ._ .M _ Policy 6-1.2.1: Require _Wetland_sBu�rsThe City shall protect wetlands by requiring that new development institute wetland buffers to comply with the -feNewiRg,2gcified design and performance criteria. The following wetland buffers shall be reauired: Wetland buffer of t�y-f 253 feet in width shall be provided adjacent to wetlands that are five (6) acres or less; a wetland buffer of x4503 feet in width shall be provided adjacent to wetlands that are greater than five (65) acres. The appli le area shall include all contiguous wetlands located on the site and adjacent to the site. The width of the wetland buffer shall be measured and provided parallel to the edge of the wetland in question. The required wetland buffer shall, unless otherwise provided for in this ordinance, be planted and maintained in landscaping materials including ground cover, shrubs, hedges or trees. Policy 6-1.2.2: Regulate Permissible and Prohibited Uses within Wetlands, The following uses shall be permissible within a wetland buffer. • Required project improvements; • Permitted public service structures; • Walkways with pervious surfaces; • Required landscaped areas. The following uses shall be prohibited within a wetland buffer. • Vehicular use areas, off-street parking and/or loading and service areas; • Buildings. In addition, all off-street parking spaces located adjacent to wetland buffer shall be provided with appropriate tire stops, curbs or other vehicular bumper guards designed to prevent any encroachment of vehicles upon the required buffer. Policy 6-1.2.3: Retain Natural Drainage Characteristics. Natural surface water patterns shall be maintained. FFepesedPost-development drainage conditions shall approximate e*a#Rg2M- develooment drainage conditions. The velocity of water flowing through wetlands shall remain approximately the same before and after development. 6-3 Policy 6-1.1.46: Program Future Recreation Capital Improvements. recreation improvements , needed for the City to maintain adopted LOS standards shall be scheduled and incorporated as capital projects in the Capital Improvements SltameRl Oda. Policy 6-1.1.F: AAafwtewaRee Maintain of Existing Recreation Land and Facilities. The City shall maintain existing recreation land and facilities through the use of proper management and funding techniques. The City shall asseFe ensure that recreation facilities are we# properly managed, well maintained, and that quality recreation programs are available to all residents. Tgis Policy 6-1.1.68: Utilize Creative Concepts of Urban Design and Conservation of Environmentally Sensitive Open Space. All plans for development or redevelopment of parkland resources shall incorporate creative concepts of urban design and landscape. The plans shall be designed to preserve existing areas of unrestricted access along the shoreline of Lake Monroe and prevent "walling-ofr' views of the water. Active and passive recreation areas shall be planned in a manner compatible with unique natural features of the site. Park development plans shall be designed to preserve resource protection areas. The design shall provide a circulation system to minimize conflict between pedestrians and vehicles. Adequate landscape and screening shall be integrated into park development plans to minimize land use conflicts, protect stability of established residential areas, and enhance community appearance. Policy 6-1.1.78: Promote Environmental Concern as Part of Recreational Programs. The City shall provide environmental education and management as aFP-iAtegFal part of park and recreation policies and programs, in concert with environmental interest groups such as the local Audubon Society. Support for cooperative programming between resource agencies and local educational advisors will provide park and recreation resources as an instrument for environmental teaching„ The City shall develop educational nature trails along environmentally unique segments of Lake Monroe to provide opportunities for environmental education. Policy 6-1.1.848: Designate or Acquire Open Space and Natural Reservations. "PlatuFal _____._it___11 _.._ _..___ J..:_..__L_J r-- -------- L:-- _.—J _.—_....a_J 1.... .._.—a—....a....i 11 11 Ar H 11 AFRAR AR the The City shall enforce performance criteria designed to protect and preserve wetlands, wetland transition areas and water management areas as Aited OR 9The City shall enforce its stormwater management and wetland preservation regulations to provide for the dedication of conservation easements or reservations where the City finds that the dedication is reasonable in order to protect the value and function of a wetland or to further the objective of stormwater management plan. 6-2 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE CHAPTER 6: RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT GOAL 6-1: MAINTAIN AND INCREASE ADEQUATE RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES AND OPEN SPACE FOR THE VISITORS AND RESIDENTS OF SANFORD. Objective 6-1.1: Prov_ id_System of Parks and Recreation. Continue to provide recreational facilities adequate to meet the recreational needs of residents and visitors consistent with the level of service (LOS) standards established in Policy 6-1.1.1 Policy 6-1.1.1: Esta�bl'Ish 6evel 91 Be JAMStandards for Parks and Recreation Facilities. The City of Sanford shall apply the level e€ selviee standard . T4eseJbj1 standards shall be used in reviewing proposals for development orders or permits. Additionally. the City shall review the location of facilities and the types of facilities located throuahout the City to ensure that , all parts of the City are served by adeauate and appropriate recreation facilities. Policy 6-1.1.2: Monitor and Update Recreation Demand mid Supply ARalyeiledeeds. By June 1 4 , analysis of the use of recreational facilities i_ncludina, but not limited to basketball courts hall fields, plavarounds and tennis courts and recommend to the City Commission apv additional or new recreational facilities that may be needed by the, City. The analysis shall be The-arSlysiss be directed toward maintaining a system of recreational sites and facilities which is responsive to user needs. dereeRE1- Pefty 6 4 1 & PFejested ReeFeallen Needs GWOF ihe imeng RaRge PIORRORS POFIG& -20- -0-2 -20- 4 Q. Policy 6-11,11&6: Maintain Recreation Impact Fees for Recreation Improvements. The City §g maintains a FAeRdateFy recreation impact fee program ---le erdel to ensure that private residential development contributes to recreation, park and open space demand generated by the respective developments., @S!Pleisated by the deYeI8PFA8Rt. 6-1 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION Soils which have been identified by the Soil Conservation Service as giving a very low potential for septic tank absorption fields shall be considered as unsuitable for retention -detention ponds. Policy 5-2.1.4: Coordinate with Other Recharge Protection Programs. The City will, in concert with local, State, and federal agencies, achieve regional aquifer recharge protection objectives by actions herein listed in the following Policies and Objective: • Implement Drainage Policy Concerning Maximizing Recharge {PeliGy 4-3.4.44; • Provide Adequate On -Site Retention and Ground Water Recharge while Directing the Surplus Run-off to Receiving Waterways in a Manner which Prevents Imbalance to their Ecosystems (PeliGy " 4 1.24; • Implement Stormwater Management Plan • Coordinate Issues Surrounding Aquifer Recharge (Objective -4-4 • Protect Surficial Aquifer Recharge Areas • Deep Aquifer Water Conservation (PeliGy " 4.1.24; and • Retain Run-off to Maximize Recharge 5-26 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION c. Control Overland Flow. Runoff from impervious areas shall be diverted using one of the following techniques before entering a receiving water body: i. The runoff shall be diverted so as to flow over vegetated areas. ii. The runoff shall be diverted to a detention pond with the ability to attenuate peak outflows to pre -development rates and to provide filtration for the pollution volume. d. Design Dry Retention Ponds. Unless retention ponds are approved as a water feature or other similar special facility, such retention -detention facilities shall be designed to insure dry bottom within sere —(72) hours after the design storm event. Dry bottom shall mean the absence of standing water. e. Design Without Positive Outfall. Developments without a positive outfall for discharge shall retain all runoff resulting from the design storm as computed for the developed condition. Design Based on Soils. The design of stormwater management facilities shall be based upon soil conditions as set forth in the Soil Survey of Seminole County, Florida and any supplements thereof as prepared by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service. In areas where the soils are poorly drained or experience a high groundwater table, such facilities shall be designed for detention with filtration. i. Retention - Retention ponds shall be designed to retain the difference in runoff volume between pre- and post -development or the pollution abatement volume, whichever is greater. ii. Exfiltration - Exfiltration systems shall be designed to store and exfiltrate over the duration of the storm the difference in runoff volume between pre- and post - development or the pollution abatement volume, whichever is greater. 2. Criteria for Wetlands, Flood -prone Areas, and Effective Aquifer Recharge Areas. These regulations shall apply to any use or alteration of a parcel which contains environmentally sensitive lands within the corporate limits of the City of Sanford. Environmentally sensitive lands includes wetlands, soils with limited potential for certain manmade activities, flood - prone areas and areas with effective groundwater aquifer recharge characteristics. a. Wetland Design and Performance Criteria: Uses and activities in wetlands shall comply with the following design and performance criteria: i. Retain Natural Drainage Characteristics - Natural surface water patterns shall be maintained. Proposed drainage conditions shall approximate existing drainage conditions. The velocity of water flowing through wetlands shall remain approximately the same before and after development. ii. Minimize Alteration or Modification - No land use or development shall be permitted that would result in the elimination of any beneficial function of a wetland. If permitted, any alteration or modification of wetlands shall be the minimum necessary to conduct the use or activity. 3. Flood -Prone Area Design and Performance Criteria. Uses and activities in flood -prone areas shall comply with the following design and performance criteria: a. Retention - Detention Facilities - Retention- detention ponds proposed to be located in flood -prone areas shall: i. Ten-year Flood Plain - Be located above the 10 -year flood elevation. No alteration shall be allowed within the 10 -year flood line. ii. Soil Suitability - Be located in soils that are suitable for retention -detention ponds. 5-25 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION seep downward into the shallow aquifer. The downward drift of pollutants also endangers the deeper Floridan aquifer which receives water from the shallow aquifer through downward percolation. The City shall enforce performance criteria to ensure effective maintenance of groundwater aquifer recharge. The intent of the regulatory process shall be to assist management of recharge areas and recharge of groundwater in order to promote continuance of natural hydrological processes. Policy 5-2.1.1: Protect Surficial Aquifer Recharge Areas. The City shall assist in protecting groundwater from point and non -point pollution sources by including the St. Johns River Water Management District in the review of development plans located within areas designated as "most effective" recharge areas. The development review process shall incorporate performance standards ^;ted- aabeve in QNeGt 5 2.' for purposes of ensuring that the functions of the aquifer recharge areas are maintained. This review process shall ensure conservation and efficient use of water as it travels through groundwater systems. Similarly, the City shall regulate development to ensure maintenance of adequate supplies of high quality groundwater. The City shall assist the State and St. Johns River Water Management District in managing water quality by involving appropriate State agencies and the St. -'A-;Rs-Iger `�fer Management Distrint SJRWMD in review of water quality management issues, including the discharge of inadequately treated wastewater and poor quality stormwater into public water bodies. The City shall require and enforce standards which minimize impervious surface coverage in the City's "most effective recharge areas" . The City shall further enhance the natural groundwater aquifer recharge function in the City's most effective recharge areas through the City's water reuse system involving irrigation of the Mayfair Golf Course and other public lands. Policy 5-2.1.2: Conserve Deep Aquifer Water CnnApp.Fataeff. In order to protect the quality and quantity of deep aquifer water resources, the City shall coordinate with the St. JehRe-RM4 SJRWMD and other applicable regulatory agencies in identifying free flowing deep aquifer wells. The City will coordinate with the appropriate regulatory agency in determining if corrective measures, including capping, plugging, or installing regulatory devices which control the discharge of water from the deep aquifer are required. Policy 5-2.1.3: Retain Run-off to Maximize Recharge. The City shall require stormwater management techniques requiring retention of stormwater run-off to maximize groundwater recharge. In order to achieve such stormwater retention the City shall require that the following water retention, settling structures, and flow attenuation devices are met. 1. Criteria for Drainage Easements, and Site Preparation or Excavation a. Maintain Existing Surface Drainage. Site alteration shall not adversely affect existing surface water flow pattern. Drainage subbasin boundaries shall be maintained unless it is determined to be in the public interest to allow such change in established drainage patterns. b. Maximize Recharge. The parcel shall be developed to maximize the amount of natural rainfall which is infiltrated into the soil and to minimize direct overland runoff into adjoining streets and watercourses. Storm water runoff from roofs and other impervious surfaces shall be diverted into swales or terraces on the lot when possible. 5-24 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION Objective 5-1.14: Continue Oentinuieg Evaluation of the Conservation Element Effectiveness. The City shall use the following policies as criteria in evaluating the effectiveness of the Conservation Element. Policy 5-1.14.1: Review the Impact of Changing Conditions on Conservation Policy. The City shall monitor and evaluate significant changes in the characteristics of natural resources within the City. Policy implications of such changes shall be examined and corrective measures shall be pursued. Conservation policies shall be refined as needed in order to remain responsive to evolving problems and issues. Policy 5-1.14.2: Schedule, Budget, and Implement Programmed Activities. The timely scheduling, programming, budgeting and implementation of programmed conservation activities identified in this Element shall be evidence of the City's effectiveness in carrying out a systematic program for implementing conservation coastal management goals, objectives, and policies. Policy 5-1.14.3: Coordinate with Public and Private Sectors. While continually implementing and evaluating the Conservation Element the City shall maintain a process of intergovernmental coordination as well as coordination with private sector groups interested in conservation policy and programs. The effectiveness of this approach shall be evaluated by the success of coordination mechanisms in resolving conservation problems and issues. Policy 5-1.14.4: Achieve Effect Resolution of Conservation Goals, Objectives and Policies. The effectiveness of the Conservation Element shall be measured by the City's success in achieving conservation goals, objectives and policies. The Conservation Element incorporates a systematic planning process for identifying conservation problems and issues and implementing corrective measures. GOAL 5-2: PROTECT FUNCTIONS OF GROUNDWATER AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS. THE FUNCTIONS OF NATURAL GROUNDWATER AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS WITHIN THE CITY SHALL BE PROTECTED AND MAINTAINED. Objective 5-2.1: Coordinate Issues Surrounding Aquifer Recharge. The non-partisan shallow aquifer and the deeper Floridan aquifer are the source of the City's potable water. The mapped areas identified as the most effective recharge areas eg Map -1 7, "6a^�'„��-1-1646-9 €leMel;t "to provide vital areas for receiving rainfall which recharges the aquifers. In order to maintain and perpetuate the functions of these natural groundwater aquifers the City shall regulate development which presents a threat to the natural process aquifer recharge. New development proposed within aquifer recharge areas shall be coordinated with the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) in order to ensure maintenance of aquifer recharge area functions. During the development review process the City shall ensure that the functions of the City's most effective natural groundwater recharge areas are protected by: • Conserving open space; • Prohibiting uses within recharge areas which generate or otherwise require on site use of hazardous materials; • Preserving pre -development soil types, grade elevations, drainage rates, and water levels; • Minimizing reduction of recharge to the surficial aquifer. These regulations are necessary since the City's shallow aquifer is especially sensitive to pollutants such as oils, gasoline, or other improperly managed hazardous substances that may 5-23 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION applicable techniques for responding to air quality management required by the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council; and The City shall participate with Seminole County in assessing the feasibility of air quality monitoring programs for major transportation construction projects, non -DRI projects with projected high traffic volumes and areas of high traffic congestion. To maintain and perpetuate the functions of the recharge of aquifers, the City shall coordinate with the SJRWMD with the following activities and actions stated in Policies of the Public Facilities Element: The City shall assist in protecting groundwater from point and non -point pollution sources by including the SJRWMD in the review of new development proposed within aquifer recharge areas (PeliGy 4-4.14); • The City shall coordinate with the SJRWMD and other applicable agencies in identifying free flowing deep aquifer wells and in requiring corrective measures which control the discharge of water from the deep aquifer (PeliGy ^ 4.1.24 The City shall incorporate floodplain protection measures to protect the natural function of the 100 - year floodplain consistent with the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council floodplain policy to protect and preserve the value and function of floodplains by development as stated in peliGy 5 444. The City and the City engineer shall continue to coordinate and assist the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) f egulat+en (PE -R4 to preserve the quality of State lands, waters, and area resources, through the regulation of industrial waste, air pollution emission, hazardous wastes, potable water usage, solid waste disposal, dredge and fill activities and alterations to environmentally sensitive areas. The City shall continue to assist the DEP DepaFtment of NatuFal Re69„rnes (DNR4 which has jurisdiction over State owned submerged bottom lands and thus any construction that will impact the submerged bottom lands of Lake Monroe, as the City of Sanford is located within DEP D East Central Management District. The DEP 94R houses Division of Recreation and Parks and is the most significant external agency that Sanford has coordinated with in regard to provision of open space and recreational amenities. The City shall continue to coordinate its comprehensive planning activities with the FGFWFC in order to achieve appropriate fish and wildlife management perspectives of issues potentially impacting Lake Monroe or other water bodies in the City, and related fish and wildlife habitat, particularly that of endangered and threatened species. These activities shall include, but not be limited to, review of proposed development potentially impacting natural resources, including development petitions for docks, shoreline stabilization, dredging, or other alteration of natural resources under the State's jurisdiction. The City Manager shall continue to serve as a principal liaison with the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission (FGFWFC). The City shall continue to assist through the City Manager with the Division of Forestry which manage growth and preservation of woodlands within Seminole County, as well as authorizes controlled burning of grasslands, and flatwood understories. The City shall continue its coordination with the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) provides technical assistance to the City in the areas of land and water management. 5-22 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION The City shall coordinate with Seminole County in order to assure that all future development shall be timed and staged to assure that requisite infrastructure and services are available to respective developments concurrent with the impacts of the development. The City shall be especially interested in reviewing impacts generated by development within the unincorporated area on the City. Such development reviews shall closely monitor and evaluate impacts on: • City infrastructure levels of service, especially impacts on: roadways, water and wastewater systems, floodplain and storm water management, and the area -wide recreation system. • Natural resources especially water quality and quantity issues which transcend local jurisdictional boundaries. Major issues and activities to be coordinated with the (F=9#R)7-the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP)Regulatien (PPER`, the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD), the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish (FGFWFC) Commission, and the Division of Forestry as may be appropriate in managing the following activities: The City shall coordinate with technical staff within the SJRWMD, 2EP4)NR aR FDE- in order to assure implementation of sound principles and practices of conservation resource management during the development review process as well as in the formulation of policies impacting coastal resource management. The City shall coordinate with the SJRWMD as well as other appropriate State agencies in matters surrounding stormwater management, floodplain protection, drainage, water quality and quantity, and consumptive use permitting. The City shall coordinate with the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council (ECFRPC) in preparing the Comprehensive Plan and amendments thereto in order to assure consistency with the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council Comprehensive Plan. In addition, the City shall coordinate other planning issues of regional significance with the ECFRPC. The City shall forward copies of development proposals impacting major conservation resources such as Lake Monroe, Cloud Branch, and Mill Creek to public agencies having jurisdiction in the management of potentially impacted natural resources. Existing waterways and surface water management activities shall comply with all applicable policies of the St. Johns River Water Management District as delegated by the DepaFtMent 9f DEP to prevent adverse impacts to water quality as stated 12910GY 1 2.6.1 G9ntaiRed on the I RRd I I1.e The City shall coordinate with the JRWMD) in implementing emergency water conservation measures for the management of the region's water resources, based on the SJRWMD The Water Shortage Plan, through activities stated -Relisy-4- The City shall conduct the following activities as contained in Policy 5-1.1.3 to protect against loss of air quality: • The City shall require specific Department of Environmental Regulation standards which regulate air pollutants, including smoke, particulate matter, odor, and toxic matter; • The City shall require that applications which are developments of regional impact include 5-21 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION awareness of energy related problems, issues, alternative techniques for resolving energy related problems and issues, and to identify future areas where joint efforts may enhance mutual goals and objectives. Policy 5-1.12.2: Encourage Energy Efficiency in Plans. Encourage land use, traffic circulation systems, and urban design which minimizes energy consumption and maximizes effectiveness of energy consumed. Reduce travel demands by locating major traffic generators on accessible sites situated along major traffic corridors near potential users. Promote a systematic approach to the development of pedestrian and bicycle path networks by the public and private sectors in order to improve energy efficient transportation links between major activity areas such as residential neighborhoods, employment centers, shopping areas, parks, and schools. Policy 5-1.12.3: Require Energy Efficient Design. Promote site planning and design which reduces demand for artificial heating, cooling, ventilation and lighting. Design factors include building design, siting and orientation that effectively utilizes natural solar resources, wind conditions, tree canopy, and plant material to reduce the effects of exposure to extreme weather conditions. Energy efficient construction shall be promoted through enforcement of the building and energy codes, through application of new and proven energy-efficient technology and through cooperative efforts with building trades, design professionals, building officials, and county, regional and state agencies concerned with energy conservation. Policy 5-1.12.4: Enforce Energy Conservation in Building and Construction. The City shall enforce energy efficient building codes and promote efficient energy conservation in building heating and cooling systems. The City shall promote training workshops in energy efficiency in construction and continue to foster cooperative relationships between building trades, architects, engineers and building officials. Policy 5-1.12.5: Monitoring New Energy Conservation Techniques. The City shall monitor new cost effective techniques for managing land development and energy conservation. The City shall coordinate these reviews with the State and the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council. These review efforts shall consider innovation in analysis of energy supplies; alternative energy sources; energy consumption patterns; cost implications; and energy related impacts of utilities including the electrical utility, water and wastewater systems, and solid waste disposal. Energy use in housing, transportation, industry and commerce shall be monitored and evaluated on a continuing basis using available analytical techniques. Analytical findings shall be used to formulate public policy directed toward needed corrective energy conservation measures. Objective 5-1.13: Administer Intergovernmental Coordination for Managing Conservation Activities. Establish an intergovernmental coordination mechanism in order to manage natural resources and assist in implementing appropriate laws, ordinances, and plans of existing State, regional and local agencies sharing responsibilities for managing natural resources within the City. Policy 5-1.13.1: Implementing Policies for Intergovernmental Coordination into Manage Managing Conservation Activities. The City of Sanford shall coordinate with Seminole County and appropriate regional, State, and federal agencies in managing conservation resources. The City shall coordinate with Seminole County and other public entities as needed by participating in technical reviews concerning water quality, floodplain management, surface water management, and fish and wildlife, especially issues impacting major environmentally sensitive resources such as Lake Monroe, Cloud Branch, and Mill Creek. The activities shall also be coordinated with State and regional entities having appropriate jurisdictional interests. 5-20 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION management technologies that: conserve energy; produce renewable energy; and effectively manage hazardous waste. Policy 5-1.10.2: Manacle Managing Hazardous Wast The City shall adept enforce land development regulations which incorporate development restrictions directed toward preserving natural systems. The City shall continue to work with Seminole County and appropriate State and regional agencies in developing an improved area -wide solid waste management program which includes more innovative solid and hazardous waste management technologies that save energy, produce renewable energy and effectively manage hazardous waste. Objective 5-1.11: Preserve PF86e ` atiQn Of Historic Resources. The City of Sanford shall assure that there shall be no loss of historic resources on City -owned property. Historic resources on private property shall be protected, preserved, and/or re -used in a manner sensitive to the historic properties of the site and/or structure. Policy 5-1.11.1: Promote Identification of the City's Historic, Archaeological, and Cultural Resources. The City shall coordinate with the State Division of Historic Resources in continuing to identify, protect, analyze, and explain the City's historical, archaeological, and cultural resources. Such efforts shall include determination of their worth and vulnerability, as well as determination of specific applicable preservation management policies. Policy 5.1.11.2: Establish Performance Standards for Protecting Sites of Historic or Archaeological Significance. Land development regulations shall include precautions designed to prevent the following adverse impacts to historic or archaeological sites of significance: a. Destruction or alteration of all or part of such site; b. Isolation from, or alteration of the surrounding environment; C. Introduction of visual, audible, or atmospheric elements that are out of character with a property or alter its setting; d. Transfer or sale of the site of significance without adequate conditions or restrictions regarding preservation, maintenance, use, or re -use; e. Vegetation removal shall not be permitted on a historic or archaeological site unless the vegetation to be removed is a part of a duly authorized scientific excavation, or is a part of an approved development plan; and f. Other forms of neglect resulting in resource deterioration. Policy 5-1.11.3: Permit Alternatives to Preserving Historic or Archaeological Sites. As an alternative to preserving historic or archaeological sites, the owner of impacted lands may allow excavation of the site by the Division of Historic Resources or another State approved entity prior to development. Should a site be scientifically excavated in this manner, development may proceed following completion of the scientific excavation by the approved entity. Objective 5-1.12: AppIV Appliisiep—A# Energy Resource Management and Conservation Concepts. Monitor concepts for managing energy resources conservation issues confronted by the City. Consider application of concepts which have been demonstrated to be successful and cost effective in resolving development and conservation issues. Policy 5-1.12.1: Coordinate Geer4dinatiea of Energy Management. Coordinate energy management with concerned entities within the public and private sectors. Coordinate formulation of energy related decisions with concerned federal, state, regional, and County agencies as well as with concerned private entities. Work with these agencies and entities in order to maximize 5-19 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION 4-.2-.64. The City shall protect the natural function of soils by protecting against soil erosion puFswant to PeliGy 5 4.1.2; by protecting against development in areas with hydric soils 4-44 and restricting mining and excavation , as well as adopted land development regulations; by protecting recharge areas including soils and topography pUFSUaRt te Relisy 5-1-x§ and adopted land development regulations. Lakes and fisheries shall be protected by managing aquatic habitats 1.84. These peliewes shall be applied Objective 5-1.10: Manage Hazardous Waste Management. The City of Sanford shall coordinate with Seminole County as well as appropriate State and regional agencies in developing effective plans for managing hazardous waste. Policy 5-1.10.1: Manage Maeagieg Hazardous Waste. The City shall prohibit the location of land use activities which handle, store, or generate hazardous materials or wastes in the following areas: • Within 600 feet of wellheads; • Within an areas identified as an effective recharge area ," G9FF1PFeheA6iV9 Plan, Land Use Fmiernent-.-, Within a wetland area or other environmentally sensitive area pursuant to adopted land development regulations. In addition, the City shall enforce a regulatory program which requires that all users and generators of hazardous waste and material located in the City shall submit plans, procedures and documentation which ensure that such waste and material is properly stored, disposed and processed. The City shall have the authority to require that such plans, procedures and verification include but are not necessarily limited to the following: On-site plans, procedures and facilities that explain procedures, processes and facilities to be utilized for the storage, disposal and processing of hazardous waste and materials. 2. Documentation from one or more responsible public agencies that hazardous waste and materials plans and programs for the premises in question are approved and/or in compliance with applicable requirements. Such responsible public agencies shall include one or more of the following: • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency • U.S. Department of Transportation • Florida Department of Environmental Protections Regulations • Florida Department of Community Affairs • St. Johns River Water Management District 3. The City shall review each application and shall impose conditions regarding on-site storage, transfer, and/or treatment of hazardous wastes, including prohibition of activities deemed harmful to natural resources. The City shall enforce land development regulations which incorporate development restrictions directed toward preserving natural systems. The City shall continue to work with the County and appropriate State and regional agencies in identifying industries which use hazardous materials or generate hazardous wastes. In addition the City shall coordinate with the County in developing an improved areawide solid waste management program which includes more innovative solid waste 5-18 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION maximum extent feasible. Mechanisms for reducing the impacts of wastewater treatment plants include, but are not limited to: consideration of the cumulative impacts of both point source and non - point source pollution in the establishment of wasteload allocations; increased monitoring of impacts of wastewater treatment plant effluent on surface waters; establishment of maintenance programs to ensure that wastewater treatment plants are in good repair; enaction of swift enforcement action against violations of State standards by wastewater treatment plants; and implementation of alternatives to surface water discharge of wastewater where such alternatives are economically feasible, environmentally sound and consistent with the protection of public health. Parks, open spaces, and recreation areas shall be protected, to the greatest degree practicable, from the adverse affects of encroaching urbanization. Impacts which shall be limited include those which would affect the hydrology, water quality, air quality, ambient noise level, wildlife populations, natural ecosystems and aesthetics of parks. Impacts shall be avoided through comprehensive planning and development reviews, as appropriate. The City of Sanford shall enforce the following techniques, 1 • ClusteriP4 of development on upland portion of sites; • Reduce-Redustien of densities or intensities of land uses within floodplains; • Prohibit Septic tanks and other sewer facilities shall be -prohibited; • Prohibit No hazardous materials or waste storage shall be stered within the floodplain; • Retaining the natural function of floodplain and floodprone areas. Policy 5-1.8.2: Protect Wildlife and Wildlife Habitats. The City shall preserve wetland areas identified mainly as resource protection areas in -the -Land lyse-€lement"ter "Plit-ire L-a„d Use -Map". The wetlands are designated "Resource Preservation" and constitute wildlife habitat areas. No development shall be permitted in the wetlands. In addition, the City shall require implementation of protective measures such as preservation of native plant species which serve as wildlife habitat in cases where such actions do not constitute a taking and provide for reasonable use of the land. The site plan review process shall include review of wildlife habitats and shall restrict development activities known to adversely impact endangered, threatened, or rare wildlife and wildlife habitats as well as wildlife and wildlife habitats of special concern as defined in Tables V 2 and %12- of theQenservatien €lement data inventwy and analysis. The Gity shall f FtheF pFeteGt w,ldl'fe and wildlife habitats by use of GeRsewatien ea6ements aG FefeFenGed in PeliGy 5 1.4.1 (d). Objective 5-1.9: Protect Environmentally Sensitive Lands. Designate environmentally sensitive lands for protection based on locally determined criteria which further the goals, objectives and policies of the Conservation Element. The City shall develop regulatory programs which protect the natural functions of existing soils, lakes, floodplains, and fisheries as directed by the below stated policies. The City has no rivers, bays, or harbors. This objective shall be measured through the implementation of the following policies. Policy 5-1.9.1: Designation -ef-Environmentally Sensitive Areas. The City's land development regulations shall include performance standards and/or criteria for preserving wetlands (cross reference Policy 5-1.4.1), managing surface waters , maintaining storage functions of the floodplain , protecting wildlife and wildlife habitats (cross reference Policy 5-1.8.2), and promoting water quality 5-17 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION District, the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission, and the DEP FIDER, as appropriate, in reviewing the implications of development proposals, including proposed subdivisions and site plan review petitions. Such coordination shall be designed to assist in identifying potential adverse impacts of proposed development on aquatic habitats. ^c stipulated in PerGy 5_1.244e) +The City shall incorporate performance standards which are designed to preserve the water quality within Lake Monroe and which protect freshwater grassbeds and in order to preserve aquatic habitats and fisheries. 'A QrdPF t9 GGR#01 &AWER.A AFARYAR, maintain wateF quality and PF9t9Gt fish and wildlife habitats, tThe removal or control of native species of emergent, submersed or floating vegetation in natural waters of the State shall be limited to that necessary to provide for reasonable and beneficial uses of surface waters , €.A.G). Proposed activities which destroy or degrade the function of wetlands or deepwater habitats shall not be permitted except where such activities are not contrary to the public interest and there is no practical alternative which reduces or avoids impacts to wetlands or deepwater habitats. Unavoidable losses of viable wetlands shall be mitigated through the demonstrably successful restoration, creation or (where no other alternative is feasible) preservation of wetlands whose functional values are at least comparable to those of the wetlands lost. Wetlands mitigation shall occur within the same watershed as the proposed impact to ensure that there is no net loss of wetland functional values within the drainage basin where the loss is to occur. Creation of new wetlands as mitigation shall avoid impacts to ecologically valuable uplands including but not limited to, bird nesting, migratory wildlife corridors and rare or endangered ecosystems. To be effective at providing habitats so that significant wetlands can protect their ecological values, buffers shall be delineated and maintained in such a way so that they protect: the quality of the wetland habitat; the quantity of habitat that will provide sufficient space for species; and the wildlife in these buffers from adverse impacts of adjacent land -uses. In order to maintain good water quality in stormwater management detention ponds and maximize the provision of fish and wildlife habitats, stormwater management systems with permanently wet detention ponds shall be designed, operated and maintained so as to resemble a natural pond to the greatest extent practicable. A natural pond design shall include: a littoral zone comprised of native emergent and submersed aquatic macrophytic vegetation; a deep, open -water limnetic zone free of rooted emergent and submersed vegetation; and where feasible, an upland buffer of native trees, shrubs and understory vegetation. Best Management Practices (BMP) for control of erosion and sedimentation shall be employed for all road construction, urban development, and agricultural activities in order to protect natural water bodies, water courses, and wetlands from siltation. BMP's shall also be employed, as necessary, to protect the function of stormwater management systems. Agriculture and forestry operations shall use Integrated Pest Management (IMP) programs, where appropriate, in order to reduce the use of chemical pesticides which may contaminate soils, groundwater and surface water. IPM programs shall be modeled, after the guidelines given in Institute of and Agricultural Sciences, University of Florida. Gainesville, Florida. Wastewater treatment plant effluent impacts on surface water quality shall be reduced to the 5-16 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION • Protect existing trees by requiring measures such as protective barriers to protect trees during development as well as regulations pertaining to utility companies. • Protect existing trees to allow required parking space reductions to result in the preservation of six-inch diameter existing trees. • Protect existing trees by allowing existing healthy trees to be used towards required trees. • Require tree and landscape area plantings within residential areas, within front yards, required landscaped areas, public streets and adjacent to the perimeter boundaries of parcels, within off- street parking and vehicular circulation areas, and along required visual screens. • The City shall provide performance standards governing development activities. • The City shall review site plans for proposed development in forested uplands to assure that common areas and other buffer areas use native vegetation to the greatest feasible extent. • The City shall mandate fair and equitable restoration and/or compensatory mitigative measures in order to compensate for loss of vegetation and to enhance stabilization of fragile slopes and/or shorelines. 2. Protect and retain aquatic habitats: Maintain the City's existing wetland regulations to manage and protect the impacts of development on the following wetland and vegetative communities_ , Forested Wetlands Cypress Bayhead Hardwood Swamp Hydric Hammock Herbaceous Wetlands Wet Prairie Shallow Marsh Deep Marsh Water Lilies Shrub Wetlands Shrub Swamp Scrub Bog Transitional Shrub Aquatic Wetlands Lakeshore Emergents Free Floating • The City shall protect hardwood hammock communities. Maintain the City's existing wetland regulations to manage and protect the impacts of development on the wetland and vegetative communities adjacent to Lake Monroe, other water bodies, and along other major drainage corridors, . Objective 5-1.8: Protecting Wildlife and Wildlife Habitats. The City shall coordinate with the St. Johns River Water Management District and the State in protecting fisheries, wildlife, and wildlife habitat. Policy 5-1.8.1: Manage the Impacts of Development on Aquatic Habitats. The City e€Sanford shall incorporate procedures for coordinating with the St. Johns River Water &47- Management 5-15 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION mining activities based on the irretrievable losses which such intense activities may potentially impose on the City's ecosystem. The City's land development regulations shall require that all mining and resource extraction including but not limited to, sand and peat excavation shall be conducted according to an excavation and reclamation plan approved by the City. Because of the high potential for surface and groundwater contamination associated with mining and extraction activities, a horizontal impervious layer (possibly including a portion of the extracted resource) shall, if feasible, be left undisturbed and unpenetrated beneath all excavated areas. The amount and location of the impervious layer to remain intact, if any, will be determined by soil surveys prior to excavation. The City shall enforce a regulatory program including procedures for managing preparation and review of the excavation and reclamation plan. The regulatory program shall be designed to preserve natural resources such as recharge areas, wetlands, and welifields and mining shall be prohibited within these areas. Where mining is permitted, the regulatory program shall require restoration of sites and revegetation. Predevelopment plans must be submitted for review and approval by the City prior to mining and excavation such plans must provide for the following: Quantity of material to be mined or extracted. 2. Scaled plans and drawings that indicate area and dimensions of proposed mining. 3. Time frame, dates and phasing of each increment of mining or extraction activity. 4. Soil survey prepared by a geotechnical engineer registered in the State of Florida depicting the feasibility of retaining an impervious layer of material and amount and location of such impervious layer. 5. Restoration and reclamation plan including scaled drawings and plans that indicate restored elevations, restoration materials, landscape, revegetation, structures and uses after mining or each phase or increment thereof has been completed. 6. Setbacks, buffers, fencing, landscaping and other methods of protecting adjacent land from adverse impact of proposed mining activities. Policy 5-1.6.2: Require Reclamation Plans Activities. Gity'sThe City shall require that mining sites, including borrow pits, undergo reclamation. The City shall require restoration and reclamation plans including scaled drawings and plans that indicate restored elevations, restoration materials, landscape, revegetation, structures and uses after mining or each phase or increment thereof that has been completed. Objective 5-1.7: Protect Native Vegetation And Aquatic Habitats. The City shall protect and retain major vegetative communities as well as aquatic habitats which include: forested wetlands, herbaceous wetlands, Shrub wetlands, and aquatic wetlands; hardwood hammock communities; wetland and vegetative communities adjacent to Lake Monroe, other water bodies, and along other major drainage corridors; and shorelines. Policy 5-1.7.1: IT...plementing ProtectiGn-e--Vegetative Communities and Aquatic Habitats. The City shall implement programs designed to: Protect and retain major vegetative communities: • Protect existing trees from destruction by requiring site development permits issued pursuant to review criteria prior to any action which may directly or indirectly damage a tree. 5-14 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION described. Soil erosion and sedimentation control measures for all such areas shall be provided with a view toward achieving the specific purpose listed below for which a control plan is required. a. Erodible slopes: Prevent detachment and transportation of soil particles from slope. b. Streams, streambeds, streambanks, bodies of water, lake shorelines: Prevent detachment and transportation of soil particles. C. Drainageways: Prevent detachment and transportation of soil particles (which would otherwise deposit in streams, bodies of water, or wetlands); promote deposit or sediment loads (traversing these areas) before these reach bodies of water. Land adjacent to streams, ponds, lakes, and wetlands: Prevent detachment and transportation of soil particles. The applicant shall not adversely impact aquatic vegetation within the sensitive transition zone separating wetlands and uplands except in cases of overriding public interest. No such vegetation shall be disturbed without approval of the City. Any such approval shall be based on a demonstrated necessity which promotes the overall public health, safety and welfare. Furthermore, any such disturbance of aquatic vegetation shall be compensated by revegetation based on a plan approved by the City as stipulated herein. Such mitigation shall provide for replacement on the basis of a ratio of at least two (2-) to one (4-). The applicant shall coordinate plans for development with appropriate state and/or federal agencies having jurisdiction. Other requisite performance criteria governing shoreline protection, wetland buffers, and the littoral zone contained in the Conservation element shall be satisfied. e. Enclosed drainage structure: Prevent sedimentation in structure, erosion at outfall of system, and deposit of sediment loads within system or beyond it. Large flat surface areas (unpaved): Prevent detachment of soil particles and their off-site transportation. g. Impervious surfaces: Prevent the detachment and transportation of soil. h. Borrow and stockpile areas: Divert runoff from face of slopes which are exposed in the excavation process; convey runoff in stabilized channels to stable disposal points; leave borrow areas and stockpiles in stable condition and plant native ground cover to assist such stabilization. Adjacent properties: Prevent erosion on adjacent properties and avoid depositing sediment on adjacent properties. Appropriate measures shall be taken during land clearing and building operations to assure that exposed, destabilized or otherwise altered soil is expeditiously covered with an acceptable erosion control material. All criteria herein stipulated shall be applicable to the act of subdividing and installation of related improvements as well as throughout the duration of the development process and whenever soil is caused to be exposed to natural elements. Objective 5-1.6: Preventing Potential Adverse Impacts of Future Mining and Excavation Activities. Mining activities shall be regulated within the City of Sanford since the City's natural systems could potentially receive irretrievable losses from the impacts of unregulated mining operations. Policy 5-1.6.1: Regulate RegulatieR of Mining Activities. The City of Sanford shall restrict 5-13 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION performance criteria which also regulate retention of natural drainage characteristics, minimization of alteration or modification, stormwater, minimum ground floor elevations, and wetland buffers. Structures shall be clustered on the non -floodplain portions of the site, or where the entire site lies in the floodplain, they shall also be elevated on pilings. Residential densities of land use shall be no greater than one (4) dwelling unit per acre within floodplains in undeveloped areas of the City. Policy 5-1.4.34: Required Dedication of Conservation Easements or Reservation. The City shall enforce performance criteria designed to protect and preserve wetlands, wetland transition areas and water management areas. The City shall enforce its stormwater management and wetland preservation regulations to provide for the dedication of conservation easements or reservations where the City finds that the dedication is reasonable in order to protect the value and function of a wetland or to further the objective of stormwater management plan. Policy 5-1.4.45: Enforce Wetland Buffers. The City shall continue to enforce the specific buffer widths as follows: a wetland buffer of Uventy five -(25) feet in width shall be provided adjacent to wetlands that are five (5} acres or less; and a wetland buffer of E50) feet in width shall be provided adjacent to wetlands that are greater than five (5} acres. The area of wetlands in question shall include all contiguous wetlands located on the site and adjacent to the site. The width of the wetland buffer shall be measured and provided parallel to the edge of the wetland in question. The required wetland buffer shall be planted and maintained in landscaping materials including ground cover, shrubs, hedges or trees. Policy 5-1.4.56: Allow Exceptions for Sites Existing Prior to 1990. The City shall not allow lots or parcels to be created without sufficient uplands. For sites, parcels, and lots recorded or platted on or before October 28, 1990 that do not contain sufficient uplands to permit development, the City shall allow one (1) residential structure. The City shall allow fill and clearing of natural vegetation only in conjunction with a minimal accessway and a minimum amount beneath the structure, and provided that the direction and rate of historical surface water flows are not altered. Objective 5-1.5: Combat Soil Erosion. Reduce the incidence of soil erosion caused by land clearing, breaches in stabilized shorelines, and lands having exposed soil without vegetative cover. Policy 5-1.5.1: ImplementiiRg Erosion and Sedimentation Controls. The City shall require that appropriate measures be taken during land clearing and building operations to assure that exposed, destabilized or otherwise altered soil is expeditiously covered with an acceptable erosion control material. These provisions shall be applicable to the act of subdividing and installation of related improvements as well as during the development review process including the period during which improvements are being undertaken. The tree protection and erosion control measures shall be applicable to all clearing and grading activities and shall include specifications for managing vegetation and revegetation. The City shall require that plans for development and excavation incorporate all measures necessary to minimize soil erosion and to control sedimentation in the disturbed land area. The following protection shall be provided within all disturbed areas: minimize velocities of water runoff, maximize protection of disturbed areas from stormwater runoff, and retain sedimentation within the development site as early as possible following disturbances. A list of major problem areas for erosion and sedimentation control follows. For each one, the purpose(s) of requiring control is 5-12 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION Policy 5-1.4.13; Protectfea-ef Wetland Transition Areas. Transition areas shall be defined as the area separating wetland and upland areas and in which development activities may be regulated to protect wetlands. The transition zone is an area having a direct groundwater or surface water influence. The transition area provides a buffer between wetlands and upland development or other land alteration activities. The purpose of the transition zone is to ensure the continuing function of respective wetland communities. The City shall retain the right to prohibit development within the wetland transition area. The boundary of a wetland transition area shall be established by field investigation. At a minimum the following uses shall be prohibited within the wetland transition areas: • All industrial uses; • Sanitary landfills; • Wastewater treatment facilities; • Incinerators; • Animal feedlots; • Petroleum or pesticide storage facilities; • Above -ground or below -ground pipes for pollutants or contaminants; • Any land uses that stores, handles, or generates hazardous material or waste. Policy 5-1.4.23_ Develop Wetland Development Restrictions. Wetlands as delineate " identified with the "Resource Preservation" designation; shall be protected from physical or hydrologic alterations in order to maintain natural functions (The "Resource Preservation" designation is the City's "Conservation" designation). No development shall be permitted in wetlands other than approved passive recreation, open space, restricted accessway, bird sanctuary, natural stormwater retention/detention, natural preserve, or other similar land uses approved by the City pursuant to land development regulations designed to carry out the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. The City shall continue to enforce existing regulations that address the following issues: a. Criteria and stipulations for protecting wetlands and managing the development review criteria; b. Protection of wetlands and fragile transition areas (i.e., Transition areas shall be defined as the area separating wetland and upland areas and in which development activities may be regulated to protect wetlands. The transition zone is an area having a direct ground water or surface water influence and provides a buffer between wetlands and development or other land alteration activities. The purpose of the transition zone is to ensure the continuing function of respective wetland communities. The boundary of transition zones adjacent to specific wetland areas shall be established by field investigation); c. Compensatory mitigation where proposed upland development presents a potential hazard to wetland functions. The City's existing regulations require uses and activities in wetlands to comply with design and 5-11 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION • As appropriate, the City's water utility shall institute voluntary conservation measures such as reclaiming of backwash water, improving and accelerating leak detection surveys and repair programs, installing and calibrating meters, and stabilizing and equalizing system pressures • When a critical water shortage is declared by the District, initial pressure of City's water utility will be reduced by at least 15% where it is operationally feasible to do so. Prior to the reduction of pressure, the utility will notify the appropriate firefighting agencies and make arrangements for direct communication when additional pressure is required . Objective 5-1.3: Maintenaese Maintain of Floodplains. The City shall protect the natural functions of the 100 -year floodplain in order to protect and maintain it's flood -carrying and flood storage capacity. Policy 5-1.3.1: Enforce Policies to Maintain Floodplains. Consistent with ECFRPC floodplain policy, the City shall incorporate floodplain protection measures sufficient to protect and preserve the value and function of floodplains from encroachment by development. The City shall provide that flood control measures for new development minimize fill within the 100 -year floodplain. Where no alternative to fill within the 100 -year floodplain exists, compensatory storage for such fill shall be provided through excavation of a volume of uplands equivalent to the loss of storage within the 100 - year floodplain caused by the placement of fill. No development shall occur in the 100 -year floodway. The City shall maintain consistency with program policies of the Federal Insurance Administration. The City shall monitor new cost effective programs for minimizing flood damage. Such programs may include modification in construction setback requirements or other site design techniques, as well as upgraded building and construction techniques to protect against flood hazards. Gmss Structures shall be clustered on the non -floodplain portions of the site, or where the entire site lies in the floodplain, they shall also be elevated on pilings. Densities and/or intensities of land uses shall be r.Pd +nes reduced within floodplains. Septic tanks and other sewer facilities shall be prohibited. No hazardous materials or waste shall be stored within the floodplain. In order to protect the natural function of floodplains and flood prone areas dredge and fill practices and the clearing of natural vegetation shall be minimized in order to maintain the natural topography and hydrological functions of floodplains. For sites (parcels recorded on or before the date of plan adoption) which do not contain sufficient uplands to permit development, fill and clearing of natural vegetation shall be allowed only in conjunction with a minimal accessway and a minimum amount beneath one residential structure, provided the direction and rate of historical surface water flows are not altered. Subsequent to plan adoption, the City shall not allow lots or parcels to be created without sufficient uplands. Objective 5-1.4: Protect and Preserve Wetlands. The City shall maintain and enforce land development regulations that include performance criteria designed to protect and preserve wetlands from physical and hydrologic alterations as well as specifically direct incompatible land uses away from wetlands. 5-10 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION include, but are not limited to, those in the Florida Native Plant Society's Native Plants for Landscaping in Florida, or comparable guidelines prepared by the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, the Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission, the Florida Department of Natural Resources, the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council, or the St. Johns Water Management District. Where the City's reclaimed water system is available for irrigation, more highly water dependent vegetation may be used. reeptrar-ter that aGG9UAt f49- all 4A.FaRtP_F 1 -16 -age OR a Site. Fore residential developments, the water budget plan must demonstrate that water requirements do not exceed the equivalent residential connection (ERC) of 300 gallons per day. The plan must also include an assurance that the water budget plans are available to every prospective home buyer. For commercial, industrial and multifamily developments, the developer must demonstrate compliance with the City's take -back reuse program for future growth and development. This program requires new developments that connect to the City' wastewater system to "take -back" the same amount of highly treated effluent as generated by the developments. Effluent from development will receive tertiary treatment, which can be used for non - potable water purposes such as irrigation and fire protection. 49.. The City has extensive on-going program in order to develop alternative water supply sources in order to meet the water demand in the future. The alternatives include surface water augmentation, aquifer storage and recovery system, and brackish groundwater. The City will coordinate with SJRWMD and Seminole County to development its alternative water supply sources. Policy 5-1.2.108_ Coordinate Emergency Conservation of Water Sources. The City shall coordinate with the St. Jehns RiyeF `AWeF Management Dist.,,.+ (SJRWMD) in implementing emergency water conservation measures based on the SJRWMD Chapter 40C-21 The Water Shortage Plan, for management of the region's water resources through the following actions as contained in the Water Shortage Plan: • The City shall increase communication with the District regarding hydrologic conditions during a water shortage warning declared by the District pursuant to 40C-21.231. • The City shall provide data as requested by the District in anticipation of and during a declared water shortage or water shortage emergency pursuant to 40C -21.401(1)&(2)(d). • Local law enforcement officials communicate with the District of any water emergency declaration or change of restrictions in effect within the City's areas of 40G 21.391(4}. • The City shall adopt ordinances which substantially incorporate the provisions of the Chapter 40C-21, Water Shortage Plan, and which provide for local enforcement as authorized aad enGeuFaged by 40G 21.42". 5-9 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN recharge protection objectives, by aGtienrs listed (Pelir.y A 4 4.2-Y, vv"rvTd71'iai�G-16611648 Q„rrA. RdiA9 Aquifer ReGhaFge (QB EGT-1 VG. 4_4_1_L CONSERVATION Policy 5-1.2.99: Conserveatien Potable Water Supply. In order to conserve potable water supply and achieve a reduction in the current rates of water consumption the City shall incorporate the following performance standards: a. The City shall implement the Water Supply Facilities Work Plan (Exhibit for at least a 10 - year planning period addressing water supply facilities necessary to serve existing and new development. The plan shall consider the SJRWMD district water supply plan. b. Potable water supplies may not be used to meet irrigation needs for the new developments. All new development within the City's service area shall utilize a dual distribution system so that irrigation needs are met by using the lowest quality available water. The City has adopted the "Utilities Standards and Specifications and Design Standards for Water Conservation" (Refer to as Utilities Manual"). All new developments within the distance listed in the manual (F=*hihit 1 of this amen dmef* should connect to the City's reclaimed water system. Development that afeis not required to connect to the existing reclaimed water system shall be required to install irrigation lines connected to an alternative water supply system utilizing the lowest quality available water such as capable of connecting to the City's reclaimed water lines when reclaimed water becomes available in the future. All developments shall be required to install an irrigation system. c. The City's water quality shall continue to use conservation measures such as use of reclaimed water, improving and accelerating leak surveys and repair programs, installing and calibrating meters and stabilizing and equalizing system pressures, water conservation blocks, water restrictions, fixture exchanges and public education. d. New or renovated buildings are required to install water conserving plumbing fixtures that are at a minimum consistent with the requirements of the State Water Conservation Act e. New development shall employ and/or preserve native vegetation, or use drought -resistant plants for landscaping to the greatest practicable extent. Native or drought resistant plants 5-8 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION to exempt flood prone areas adjacent to Lake Monroe where such exemption is consistent with the public interest and required to preserve reasonable use of the land and/or to avoid a "taking" of property without just compensation. 8. Maintain Existing Surface Drainage - Site alteration shall not adversely affect existing surface water flow pattern. Drainage subbasin boundaries shall be maintained except where modification is required by overriding public interest or to preserve a "reasonable" use of the land and prevent a "taking" of private property without just compensation. 9. Natural Drainageways and Watercourses - Developments that contain an existing natural drainageway or watercourse, related floodplain and adjacent vegetation shall maintain and incorporate such features into the project design. Drainage system design shall ensure that sediment from runoff will not enter such natural drainageway. 5 4.5: 4) Policy 5-1.2.76: Protect Floridan and Surficial Aquifer Recharge Areas and Public Wellfields. The City of Saafei:d shall prohibit mining, resource extraction, junkyards, outdoor storage of hazardous material and waste in ElemeRt Data Inve.,teFy and ARalysis as a "most effective" recharge areas. The City shall also incorporate aquifer recharge standards which regulate excavating groundwater runoff, as well as changes in topography and shall restrict the amount of impermeable surface allowed within effective recharge areas. The regulations shall be designed to mandate retention of open space in recharge areas in order to preserve the quality and quantity of groundwater resources within the surficial and deep aquifers. The City shall protect wellfields delineated in Map 1-3 9 the Future Land Use Element- -e , „ ;AFhmRh "Rnh-dag Land within a 600 feet Fadius ef any publiG wellhead. Development other than wellfield facilities or passive recreation is prohibited with the primary protection zone. The secondary protection zone prohibits the following land use activities: sanitary landfills, animal feedlots, wastewater treatment facilities, petroleum and pesticide storage facilities, incinerators, and all other activities that store, handle, or generate hazardous materials or wastes. Above -ground or below -ground pipes which store or transfer pollutants or other contaminants as well as open drainage cuts below the seasonal high water table shall also be prohibited within the secondary protection zone. The City shall prohibit the use of on-site septic tanks within a designated aquifer recharge area. The City has identified sixteen potential groundwater recharge sites in order to offset groundwater withdraw within the Tri -Party service area. Policy 5-1.2.87-:_ Conserve Deep Aquifer Water GensesvatieF►. In order to protect the quality and quantity of the Floridan aquifer, the City shall coordinate with the St. jehi:is Rover Wate SJRWMD and other applicable regulatory agencies in identifying free flowing deep aquifer wells and in requiring corrective measures, including capping, plugging, or installing regulatory devices which control the discharge of water from the deep aquifer. The City shall also coordinate with local, State, and federal agencies to achieve regional aquifer 5-7 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION Soils which have been identified by the Soil Conservation Service as having a very low potential for septic tank absorption fields shall be considered as unsuitable for retention -detention ponds. C. Floodway Hazard - Not create a negative impact on existing flooding conditions. Construction of the retention -detention pond shall not constitute a net reduction in flood plain storage or limit the flow capacity of the floodway. 2. Open Space and Recreational Uses - Flood -prone areas may be used for open space and recreational uses. Recreation -oriented structural improvements shall not impair the flood flow or flood storage capacity nor shall such structures contribute to the debris which may become swept up by flood waters. Open space and recreational uses include the following: a. Hiking and nature trails b. Gazebos, picnic tables and resting benches C. Boardwalks and observation decks d. Open play areas e. Canoe launches 3. Traversing Works - Traversing works in flood prone areas shall not create a net reduction in either flood flow or flood storage capabilities immediately upstream or downstream of the structure. 4. Compensating Storage - Reshaping and filling within flood -prone areas shall be balanced by providing an equal volume of compensating storage. Such compensation shall be located between the ordinary high water elevation and the 100 -year elevation. Fill shall not be placed below the 10 -year flood elevation and in no case shall fill in the flood plain extend beyond 100 feet of the original floodline. Reshaping the flood plain shall not create a rise in flood elevation, reduce flood storage capabilities, increase food flow velocities, or reduce flood flow capacity. Parking Spaces and Vehicular Circulation Areas - Required parking spaces and vehicular circulation areas located within flood prone areas shall not cause a net decrease in flood storage or a change in flood flow capacity. Flood free emergency access must be maintained. Required parking spaces shall not be located within the 10 -year flood elevation. 6. Utilities - Utilities shall be located outside of flood prone areas wherever feasible. When it is not feasible to avoid placing utilities within a flood plain, such utilities shall comply with the following provisions. a. Materials - Material and equipment shall be resistant to flood damage. b. Construction Methods - Construction methods and practices shall minimize flood damage. C. Potable Water Supply - Potable water supply systems shall be designed and constructed to prevent damage by flood waters. d. Sanitary Sewage System - Sanitary sewage systems shall be designed and constructed to minimize or eliminate infiltration of flood waters. Discharges shall be located to avoid impairment or contamination during flooding. 7. Exemption Adjacent to Lake Monroe - Because the Lake Monroe shoreline and adjacent lands are in a highly altered state from natural conditions, the City shall have the authority 5-6 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION 41A1FRtAR1A"6yS- Policy 5-1.2.4: Regulate Wastewater Treatment Discharge to Preserve Water Quality. The City of Sanford shall incorporate the following performance standards in order to protect water quality: a. All new residential subdivisions as well as multiple family and nonresidential development within the City of Sanford which are served by existing or planned future expansions to the City of Sanford wastewater collection and disposal system shall be required to connect to the public wastewater system. b. In areas where developments cannot be connected to the public sewer, private wastewater disposal systems are acceptable as interim measures PFevidiegprovided such facilities are approved by the City Utilities Director's office. Notwithstanding all private wastewater disposal systems shall be designed to facilitate mandatory hookups to the public wastewater system when the public system becomes available. C. The City of Sanford shall promote application of innovative concepts in wastewater collection and disposal including wastewater reuse through such programs as use of reclaimed water for spray irrigation. The City has adopted the "Utilities Standards and Specifications and Design Standards for Water Conservation" (Refer to as Utilities Manual"). All new developments within the distance listed in the manual (exhibit 1 of t i_ should connect to the City's reclaimed water system. Development that are not required to connect to the existing reclaimed water system shall be required to install irrigation lines connected to an alternative water supply system utilizing the lowest quality available water such as capable of connecting to the City's reclaimed water lines when reclaimed water becomes available in the future. All developments shall be required to install an irrigation system. Policy 5-1.2.5: Preserve the Shoreline of Major Floodways. The City of Sanford shall require that development along portions of the shoreline which are subject to erosion include a plan for revegetation to stabilize the shoreline and encourage reintroduction of wildlife. The City ef-ganfefd has determined floodways and floodprone areas to be environmentally sensitive including areas located in Floodways and Zone "A" of the Flood Insurance Rate Map prepared by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Accordingly, the yew 100 -year flood plain has been designated a "resource protection area", 2... Policy 5-1.2.6: Establish Flood -Prone Area Design and Performance Criteria. Uses and activities in flood -prone areas shall comply with the following design and performance criteria: Retention -Detention Facilities - Retention -detention ponds proposed to be located in flood - prone areas shall: a. Flood Plain - Be located above the 10 -year flood elevation. No alteration shall be allowed within the 10 -year flood line. b. Soil Suitability - Be located in soils that are suitable for retention -detention ponds. 5-5 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION use of Class III waters to water dependent activities that are not contrary to the public interest and satisfy a community need. 9F PFGbleFRr:, aFe identified by the Gity. The Gity shall limit the use ef Glass 111 wateF6 te wate-F dependent arAiyAie6 that aFe R9t GGntFaFy te the publin- interest and satisfy a G9FAMURibF RAM d. VVateF Quality gtandaFd; Stormwater facilities shall be designed to meet the design and performance standards established in Ch. 62 25, §25425, and 62 49-, F.A.C. with treatment of the runoff from the first one inch of rainfall on-site to meet the water quality standards required by Ch. 62 302 §62 302.600, F.A.C. Stormwater discharge facilities must be designed so as not to degrade the receiving water body below the minimum conditions necessary to assure the suitability of water for the designated use of its classification as established in Chapter 62-3; F.A.C. Where a conflict exists between two or more LOS standards, the more restrictive shall be enforced. Policy 5-1.2.2: Monitoring-e4-Stormwater Issues. The City shall coordinate with the ECFRPC and the DepaFtmeAt (i-DERP) in matters regarding documentation of: • stormwater management practices; stormwater construction and maintenance costs; and monitoring of selected stormwater management facilities. Finally the City shall coordinate with the ECFRPC, DEP the St john RiveF gniater Management IDi6tFiGtSJRWMD and other entities as directed in a unified State program directed at educating the general public on the non -point source pollution problems and available stormwater management practices to abate non -point source impacts on water quality. Policy 5-1.2.3: Regulate Agricultural Activities to Preserve Water Quality. The City of Sanford shall incorporate and enforce regulations requiring that agricultural activities shall: a. Not be conducted adjacent to existing waterways and shall require that surface water management activities comply with all applicable policies of the WDER DEP, S#. _19-hR6 R+veF JRWMD, and other agencies having appropriate jurisdiction as well as State laws; b. Maintain natural drainage patterns; Promote the use of surface water supplies for irrigation purposes; d. Prohibit the expansion of agricultural activities into wetland areas; and e. Use best management principles and practices in order to reduce pesticide and fertilizer run-off, prevent soil erosion, and preserve water quality. 5-4 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION groundwater from point and non -point pollution sources by assisting the State and S#'e#as River WateF Management Dist SJRWMD in managing water quality by preventing the discharge of poor quality stormwater into public water bodies through the adoption of the following level of service standard: a. Surface water management systems shall be designed and constructed to meet the following standards: Limit the allowable stormwater peak discharge detained from a site to be developed or altered to the pre -development or pre -alteration peak discharge for the 25 -year frequency, 24-hour duration storm with positive outfall or 96 -hour duration without positive outfall. In addition, the City's shall enforce regulations governing surface water management to include the following considerations: Incorporate a floodplain management standard which requires that no net reduction occur in flood storage (e.g., 100 -yr flood) for any development within the impacted area. The intent is to allow some development to occur in the 100 -yr floodplain but only where drainage improvements are constructed which provide compensatory storage in order to alleviate flood problems within the impacted area. However, no development shall be allowed within the 100 year flood hazard area (floodway). The stormwater management ordinance shall include mandatory retention and/or detention of stormwater discharge from developed or altered sites which in the City Engineer's discretion are volumetrically sensitive. Furthermore, the ordinance shall incorporate applicable SJRWMD stormwater management criteria. b. A vegetated and functional littoral zone shall be established as part of the surface water management system of lakes occurring on all property, excluding beaGhes, seawalled area, and navigation areas. Prior to construction of the surface water management system for any phase of a project, the developer shall prepare a design and management plan for the wetland/littoral zone that will be developed as part of these systems. The plan shall: Include typical cross sections of the surface water management system showing the average water elevation and the-3three foot contour (i.e., below average elevation); Specify how vegetation is to be established within this zone, including the extent, method, type and timing of any planting to be provided; and iii. Provide a description of any management procedures to be followed in order to assure the continued viability and health of the littoral zone. The littoral zone as established shall consist entirely of native vegetation and shall be maintained permanently as part of the water management system. As a minimum, 10 square feet of vegetated littoral zone per linear foot of lake shoreline shall be established as part of the surface water management system. c. , All lakes and major tributaries within the City of Sanford, including Lake Monroe and its tributaries are Class III waters. The City shall limit dredging activities to DEP approved dredqinq. Furthermore, the Citv shall ensure aood water quality by coordinating with the DEP and the SJRWMD in monitoring the quality of stormwater run-off and all discharge. The City shall notify the appropriate agency with jurisdiction as potential issues or problems are identified by the City. The City shall limit the 5-3 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION Policy 5-1.1.3: Maintain Air Pollution Nuisance Abatement. The City shall continue to protect against loss of air quality by maintaining land use controls which promote only activities compatible with existing land uses and natural systems and by enforcing nuisance abatement regulations governing emission of smoke and particulate matter. In addition, site plan review standards shall include consideration of prevailing wind directions and other pollution abatement factors in the site plan review process. All uses and development activity shall be seastfisted constructed, maintained and operated in a manner which is not injurious or offensive to the occupation of adjacent premises due to the emission or accretion or smoke, dust or other particulate matter, toxic or noxious waste materials and odors. Air pollutants, including smoke, particulate matter, odor and toxic matter shall be abated pursuant to the following criteria: Smoke. Every use shall be se operated as to prevent the emission of smoke as specified in GhapteFeF 1�7.22 "Rules of *%Rt f Cnyirenmental Regulatiens: AiF Pollution", Florida Administrative CodeF( A.C.). 2. Particulate Matter Including Dust. Every use shall be se—operated as to prevent the emission into the air of dust or other solid matter as specified in Ghaffter 17.2 "o„lets of the e�a.+.,, + f E� tal Re9uIatinnr, Air 129HUtien�� rcrr,eRr-er v�enrneRtur�-ccga , F.A.C. 3. Odor. Every use shall be se operated as to prevent the emission of objectionable of offensive odors in such concentration as to be readily perceptible at any point at or beyond the lot line of the property on which the use is located as specified in GhapteF 17.2 "Rules F.A.C. 4. Toxic Matter. The ambient air quality standards for guiding the release of airborne toxic materials across lot lines shall be in accordance with F.A.C. The City shall require that applications which are developments of regional impact include applicable techniques for responding to air quality management required by the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council. Thp ER'St Gen+raI Cleric a Renienal Dlawiinn Geui;Gil (F=GFRPG rlepIIo.�The d e USt QARdiint thp mnnitWinn Rd the rnedeiing. There FAeRiteFing mg,-ItS Af+he At, Bier in +he A Al . ne.++e IGGal goyemMen+ en+i+ier • Objective 5-1.2: Ensure Water Quality And Quantity. Coordinate with Seminole County, St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMDI as well as federal, State, and regional entities having water -related jurisdiction, in order to conserve and protect the quality and quantity of current and projected future water sources and surface water run-off. Policy 5-1.2.1: Coordinate Surface Water Management and Land Use. The City shall protect 5-2 November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSERVATION CHAPTER 5: CONSERVATION ELEMENT This section stipulates goals, objectives, and implementing policies for the Conservation Element pursuant to 163.3177(6)(d), F.S., and Rule 9J-5.013(2), F.A.C. GOAL 5-1: CONSERVATION CONSERVE, PROTECT, AND APPROPRIATELY MANAGE AND RESTORE THE CITY'S NATURAL RESOURCES. THE CITY OF SANFORD SHALL INORDERENHANCE THE QUALITY OF NATURAL SYSTEMS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE FA1=1_OWING —NAT -URAL AIR, SURFACE WATER, GROUNDWATER SUPPLIES, WETLANDS, FLORA AND FAUNA, SURFICIAL AND FLORIDAN AQUIFERS THROUGH CONSERVATION, PROTECTION, AND MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES. Objective 5-1.1: Protect Air Quality. The City shall meet or exceed the minimum air quality standards established by the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) and shall continue to enforce regulatory programs to prevent and/or minimize non -point sources of air pollution. Policy 5-1.1.1: Cooperate with FD€R DEP Air Quality Monitoring Activities. The City of Sanford shall cooperate with RFs: DEP in the monitoring of air quality and in the placement of air monitoring devices currently located in the City of Sanford. Such cooperation shall be furthered by City enforcement of the techniques bel which include: • Combat erosion and generation of fugitive dust particles (PGIisy5-a- 2-) • Achieve compatible land uses (Pelisy 5 1.4.34; • Require new development to incorporate design features responsive to prevailing wind directions and other pollution abatement factors (Pelisy 5 1.1.9); • Abate nuisance factors by mandating that new development be designed in a manner which avoids emissions of smoke, particulate matter including dust, odor and toxic matter which exceed best management standards(PGlisy 6 1.1.34; • Require that proposed developments of regional impact respond to East Central Florida Regional Planing Council air quality management techniques which include air quality monitoring and modeling (Relisy a-1,34; • Assist +a -i► IeFGee ►g Seminole County's air quality monitoring programs (PGlisy' -5-1.1. ; and Policy 5-1.1.2: Combat Erosion and Generation of Dust Particles. The City shall require that measures be taken on sites proposed for excavation and/or construction activity as well as on cleared areas which assure that exposed, destabilized, or other altered soil is expeditiously covered with an acceptable erosion control material to combat erosion and generation of fugitive dust particles. Every use shall be se -operated as to prevent the emission into the air of dust or other solid matter "Rules Air Pel ," F.A.G. The City shall also require that soil erosion and sedimentation control techniques be implemented puFawant te Peliray 5 1.5. 4 as required in this plan. 5-1 November 2009 City of Sanford Housing Element AFFORDABLE HOUSING ASSESSMENT [Rule 9J -5.010(2)(b)] Florida Statutes, Chapter 9J -5.010(2)(b) requires that an affordable housing assessment be performed using a methodology established by the Florida Department of Community Affairs. Data for the Affordable Housing Assessment for the City was provided by the Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse (FHDC), using the best data currently available. The FHDC provides the most detailed data on projected affordable housing needs. To remain consistent with this data, population projections used in the housing element are provided by the FHDC. According to the FHDC, while summary indicators can provide a measure of the overall housing need, targeting housing assistance appropriately often requires a more detailed analysis on the income variation within the total number of low-income, severely cost -burdened households. The FHDC provides the following two reasons why it is important: 1) If needs are to be addressed through construction of new units, income variation within low-income households means that not all new rent- or price -restricted units will be affordable to all households. For example, a household at 30 percent area median income (AMI) would still pay more than half of its income for rent in an apartment with rent set for households with incomes of 60 percent AMI. 2) A number of housing programs, such as the Low Income Housing Tax Credit and, in most cases, Section 8 Housing Vouchers, set income limits below 80 percent of area median. FHDC projects housing needs based on the number of households that are cost burden where the cost of housing exceeds 50 percent of their income and thus is not affordable. Table 3-25 presents the number of affordable homes needed over time for both owners and renters. Table 3-26 provides a summary of the severely cost burdened units with incomes less than 80 percent of the AMI. 2010 2015 2020 2025 Owner Units 729 850 980 1,114 Renter Units 1,450 1,671 1,892 2,122 Source: Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse, 2008 City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-20 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Housing Element projects to address wastewater issues. More than $52 million has been budgeted for water and wastewater projects. Pursuant to Florida Statutes, cities and counties must show how adopted LOS standards will be met. This requirement means before a proposed development can receive approval, it must identify if all adopted LOS standards will be met, and if not, what capital improvement projects are needed to maintain these standards. Due to the urbanized nature of Sanford, future development could be impacted by the level of traffic on roadways. The City has implemented a Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) to assist with redevelopment and urban infill by allowing development that would otherwise be restricted due to the failure to meet adopted roadway LOS standards. The TCEA puts an emphasis on multimodal transportation. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-19 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Housing Element Lake Mary Boulevard Overlay District. This overlay district includes parcels located within, or partially within, 320 feet of the centerline of Lake Mary Boulevard between the CSX Railroad Line near Country Club Road and the intersection of SR 46 and CR 415. The purpose is to create a gateway corridor that is well landscaped, provides uniform design standards to create high quality development, prevents unplanned and uncoordinated uses, maximizes transportation function, maintains and enhances property values, and preserves natural features where feasible. West SR 46/Rinehart Road Overlay District. This overlay district includes parcels located within, or partially within, 320 feet of the centerline of SR 46 between the 1-4 and Airport Boulevard Interchange and Rinehart Road. The purpose is to create a gateway corridor that is well landscaped, provides uniform design standards to create high quality development, prevents unplanned and uncoordinated uses, maximizes transportation function, maintains and enhances property values, and preserves natural features where feasible. Annexations. The City has annexed a significant amount of unincorporated land into the City since 2000, totaling more than 2,000 acres. More than half of these annexations occurred between 2000 and 2002, and annexation during the past few years has declined. Although this provides one method for the City to continue growing, it has the potential to create conflict with Seminole County because the annexation process here and within the other municipalities is diminishing the amount of land in unincorporated Seminole County. It is likely annexations will continue, but at a slower pace. New development is likely to occur because of infill, redevelopment and higher density development within the existing City limits. Infrastructure. The City of Sanford, other municipalities, and unincorporated Seminole County are well served by infrastructure, including water, sewer, roads, public schools and storm drainage facilities, due to the urbanized nature of much of the County. The City is currently meeting LOS standards and has projects identified in the Capital Improvements Program (CIP) to maintain adopted standards. As previously discussed, much of the future development in the City is likely to be in the form of urban infill and redevelopment projects. Water and wastewater capacity is available to serve both current and future residents of the City. The current usage and capacities are as follows: Water Design capacity — 9.58 million gallons per day (MGD) Current usage — 7.52 MGD Wastewater ■ Design capacity — o Sanford North Water Reclamation Facility (SNWRF): 7.3 MGD o Sanford South Water Resource Center: 2.0 MGD; Total Designed Capacity is equal to 6.0 MGD ■ Current usage — 7.1 MGD Based on current usage and design capacities, there is a significant amount of excess capacity of water and sewer to accommodate future growth. To keep up with growth and maintaining adequate water and wastewater systems, the City has budgeted funding for projects regarding water supply in the 2008 through 2012 CIP, mainly by developing alternative water sources, and City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-18 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Housing Element Maintain policies that promote urban infill and redevelopment. There is minimal available vacant land of adequate acreage to support substantial new development. Locating affordable housing in urbanized areas near mass transit aids in lowering monthly costs for households by minimizing the dependency on automobiles for travel needs. There are some impediments to constructing housing at affordable prices that are not within the City's control. Increased fuel prices, combined with increased costs for construction materials, has significantly increased the per square footage costs on new construction. During these economic conditions it is particularly important that the City focus on measures it can control to reduce costs to at least partially offset increased construction costs. Potential Impediments to Meeting Demand. The potential hurdles include limited funding for affordable housing, implementation of policies promoting urban infill and redevelopment, and development regulations which make housing development more expensive housing. The City Commission does have the power to waive, discount, or defer impact fees for affordable housing. These programs should be reviewed for success and potential for improvement. Housing Resources. Resources, programs and housing providers assisting with affordable housing needs within the City include the City of Sanford, Seminole County, Section 8 Funding, Section 236 Funding, the Sanford Housing Authority, the Sanford Community Development Department, and state and federal agencies including the Florida Housing Finance Corporation and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The City coordinates with all of these entities to address affordable housing needs in the City. The following provides a brief summary of programs promoting neighborhood revitalization: Sanford Economic Enhancement District. This District, designated in 2007, is generally oriented north to south along French Avenue/Orlando Drive (US 17-92) through the central portion of the City. A brownfield area is defined as an area containing abandoned, idle, or underused industrial and commercial facilities where expansion or redevelopment is complicated by environmental contamination. Sanford designated this area as a brownfield area to facilitate environmental remediation, rehabilitation, and economic redevelopment in the US 17-92 Corridor. Lake Monroe Waterfront and Downtown Sanford CRA. This CRA includes the historic commercial and residential areas south of Lake Monroe and north of SR 46. This area is also a designated transportation concurrency exception area (TCEA). The focus of this CRA is to promote infill and redevelopment while protecting the character and historic nature of the district. ■ Seminole Towne Center CRA. This CRA is located around the Seminole Towne Center Mall and Towne Center Boulevard. It is intended to provide incentives for large scale commercial development and high-density residential development. US 17-92 CRA. This is a linear CRA located along US 17-92 between 1st Street and the southern city limit. The purpose of this CRA is to redevelop parcels along this roadway that are predominantly automobile -oriented businesses and aging strip commercial shopping centers. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-17 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Housing Element Graph 3-1: Single -Family New Construction Building Permits Single -Family Building Permits 1200 1000 800 600 tPermits 400 200 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Graph 1 highlights the cyclical nature of the housing market. The years 2001 and 2002 saw reduced building permits, in part because of an economic downturn as well as the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Subsequent to this two year period, new housing construction increased significantly, beginning in 2003, to a high of 1,011 in 2005. For the last year data is available, in 2007, there has been a nearly 72 percent drop, from 1,011 in 2005 to 287 in 2007. As demand for new housing begins to increase, it is expected the home building industry will be able to accommodate those demands. Housing Delivery System. As demand for new housing begins to increase, it is fully anticipated that the private market will be able to deliver adequate products to meet demand. The private sector is building both multi -family units which tend to be more affordable as well as small lot single family units which are also more affordable than single family units on large lots. There are also developments of high density, which typically allow for lower per-unit costs. These products are made possible because of the land development regulations in place and the private sector's willingness to develop the product types. To maintain an adequate supply of affordable housing, the delivery of this product type is aided through programs and agencies such as Section 8 Funding, Section 236 Funding, the Sanford Housing Authority, and the Sanford Community Development Department. Nearly 30 percent of housing units in the City are considered to be cost -burdened, higher than the percentage for the County. The City should continue to review the following issues for possible hindrance to maintaining an adequate supply of affordable housing: • Development regulations which may drive up the price of housing, including mandatory minimum unit sizes or other similar standards which increase costs, and the amount of impact fees imposed on new development. Limited funding available to communities for the development of affordable housing. The City should continue partnerships to help position the City positively to receive funding. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-16 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Housing Element Table 3-23 Household Costs Based on AMI Household Income 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 Less than 30 percent AMI 1,528 1,784 2,070 2,361 2,669 30 to 50 percent AMI 1,630 1,892 2,218 2,556 2,937 50 to 80 percent AMI 2,812 3,288 3,802 4,320 4,860 80 to 120 percent AMI 4,269 5,017 5,751 6,467 7,159 Greater than 120 percent AMI 8,303 9,792 1 11,203 1 12,589 1 13,876 Source: Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse, 2008 Sanford is located within the Orlando Metropolitan area, a rapidly growing region of Florida. As identified within the population projections, it is anticipated that Sanford will continue to experience growth. Sanford does not contain significant amounts of undeveloped land, so urban infill and redevelopment will likely be the predominant forms of future development. Growth will likely be concentrated in the identified activity centers. Land Requirements. Table 3-24 identifies existing vacant land within the residential and mixed use future land uses. If these areas were to develop at their maximum allowable density, there would be an additional 12,993 homes on 1,158 acres. Based on population projections through 2025, this is significantly lower than the number of new units that will be required to accommodate growth. There are numerous factors that could potentially minimize the shortfall in supply as compared to the projected demand: Based on the population projections, there is ample land designated for residential use to accommodate future growth. Table 3-24 Potential Housing Units Based on Future Land Use Classification Land Use Vacant, Developable Land acres(du/acre)Housing Maximum Density Potential Units 2 Low Density Residential - Single Famil 11.96 6 72 Medium Density Residential - 10 112.90 10 1,129 Medium Density Residential - 15 178.23 15 2,673 High Density Residential - 20 83.12 20 1,662 Waterfront/Downtown Business District 103.91 50 1,039 1-4 High Intensity' 39.99 50 1,000 Westside Indust & Commerce 304.72 20 3,047 Airport Industry & Commerce 79.0 50 1,580 Residential/Office/Institutional 27.08 20 190 General Commercial 214.66 20 601 Total 1,155.57 -- 12,993 Source: GIS Data provided by the City of Sanford Private Sector Current Market Conditions. Housing conditions have slowed over the last two to three years nationwide. The Florida housing market has been particularly affected due to the large increases in housing prices and levels of construction leading up to the beginning of the downturn. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-15 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report - November 2009 City of Sanford Housing Element HOUSING ANALYSIS [Rule 9J-5.010(2)] Housing Projections. Projections of housing growth are derived from population projections that have been formulated by the FHDC. The population projections are based on Census data and are updated using data from the Florida Bureau of Economic and Business Research. The data is summarized in Tables 3-20 through 3-23. Table 3-20 presents population projections through 2025 that are produced by the FHDC, which projects a steady increase in population. Between 2005 and 2025, the population increase is projected to total 29,360 people, a nearly 60 percent increase. Table 3-21 presents the projected housing demand by household size for the 2005 to 2025 time period. Compared with 2005, approximately 16,000 additional households will be needed by 2025 to accommodate projected growth. Table 3-20 Population Proiection 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 Population 1 49,251 57,203 1 64,837 72,068 78,611 Source: Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse, 2008 Table 3-21 Proiected Housing Demand by Household Size Household Size 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 1-2 10,889 12,783 14,710 16,625 18,528 3-4 5,978 7,029 8,075 9,115 10,126 5+ 1,669 1,963 2,259 2,555 2,847 Total 18,536 21,775 25,044 28,295 31,501 Source: Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse, 2008 Table 3-22 provides population projections based on age groups. In 2005, 2010 and 2015 the most populous age group is projected to be 20-39 years old. After 2015, the 40-64 age group is projected to be the largest. Every age group is projected to see an increase in population. The 65 and older group is projected to more than double between 2005 and 2025. Table 3-23 provides a breakdown of projected households based on the household's income. Each income group is anticipated to see substantial population growth. Table 3-22 Proiections of Resident's Age Age 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 0-9 7,025 8,087 9,103 9,987 10,570 10-19 6,900 7,474 8,117 9,116 9,985 20-39 15,867 18,548 20,665 22,073 23,131 40-64 14,675 17,767 20,248 22,583 24,422 65+ 4,664 5,207 6,584 8,189 10,383 Source: Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse, 2008 City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-14 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report - November 2009 City of Sanford Housing Element These densities will allow for areas to absorb the high rate of growth projected, while creating a more urban form that will further enhance conditions promoting non -automobile transportation methods. Historically Significant Structures. Table 3-19 identifies the structures listed in the National Register of Historic Places. All of the identified structures are in the downtown area, except the Seminole County Home which is located near the Seminole Community College in southern Sanford. Table 3-19 Identified Historic Structures Structure Address Year Listed Old Fernald- Laughton Memorial Hospital 500 S. Oak Avenue 1987 Ritz Theater 201 S. Magnolia Avenue 2001 Portions of 1st, 2nd, and Commercial Sanford Commercial District Streets between Palmetto and Oak 1976 Avenue Sanford Grammar School 7th and Myrtle Streets 1984 Sanford Residential Historic Roughly bounded by Sanford District Avenue, 14th St., Elm Avenue, and 1989 3rd Street Seminole County Home 300 Bush Boulevard 1999 St. James A.M.E. Church 819 Cypress Avenue 1992 Source: National Register of Historic Places City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-13 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Table 3-17 Assisted Livinq Facilities/Adult Familv Care Housing Element Facility Bed Types Facility Type Tennyson A. Meade Optional State Supplementation (OSS)' & Private Adult Family Care Home Gracious Age OSS & Private Assisted Living Facility Sanford Manor OSS & Private Assisted Living Facility Rainbow Retreat OSS & Private Assisted Living Facility A Home Away from Home OSS Assisted Living Facility Alle ne A.L.F. OSS Assisted Living Facility The Family of Friends, Inc. OSS & Private Assisted Living Facility Renaissance Retirement Center, LLC Private Assisted Living Facility Guardian Home A.L.F., LLC OSS & Private Assisted Living Facility Four Seasons A.L.F. Private Assisted Living Facility Lake Jessup Retirement Home Private Assisted Living Facility NTM Homes Private Assisted Living Facility The Heritage at Lake Forest Private Assisted Living Facility Source: Social Serve- Housing Provider Database 1- OSS is a cash assistance program to assist low income individuals with costs Mobile Home and Recreational Vehicle Parks. Table 3-18 lists the mobile home parks located within the City. The three mobile home parks located in the City contain 596 units. Table 3-18 Inventory of Mobile Home Parks Park Name Location Number of Units Carriage Cove MHP 500 Carriage Cove Way 476 Dreamwold MHP 800 Santa Barbara Drive 25 Park Avenue MHP 2545 Park Drive 95 Total 596 Source: Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation Neighborhood Redevelopment and Urban Infill. Encouraging urban infill and redevelopment was an identified major issue in the 2008 Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR). Due to the level of future growth expected, future development will likely be in the form of higher density infill and redevelopment. The City has designated Activity Centers to focus high density development, with some allowing up to 50 dwelling units per acre. The City has created the following activity centers/mixed use districts with the respective residential densities: • 1-4 High Intensity: A density of up to 50 du/acre • Waterfront/Downtown Business District: A density of up to 50 du/acre • Westside Industry & Commerce: A density of up to 20 du/acre • Airport Industry & Commerce: A density of up to 50 du/acre • Residential/Office/Institutional: A density of up to 20 du/acre City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-12 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Housing Element Table 3-15 2000 Select Housing Living Characteristics Housing Characteristics Sanford Units Percent Statewide Percent Occupied housing units with more than 1 person per room 919 6.6 6.5 No fuel used 116 0.8% 1.8 Lacking complete kitchen facilities 91 0.6 1 0.5 Lacking complete plumbing 65 0.4 1 0.4 Source: Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse, 2008 Subsidized Housing. Table 3-16 presents the housing projects that have been constructed in the City of Sanford and may operate with federal, state, or local assistance. There are fifteen subsidized housing projects, totaling 2,957 units, in the City with the majority being rental communities. Table 3-16 Subsidized Housing Units Development Name Unit Type (Target) Units Funding Source Bram Towers Elderly 158 HUD Charleston Club Apartments Family 288 FHFC, LHFA Georgia Arms Apartments Elderly 90 HUD Hatteras Sound Family 184 FHFC, LHFA Huntington Reserve Family 168 FHFC Kensington Oaks Family 20 LHFA Lake Jennie I Family 25 LHFA Lake Jennie II Family 40 FHFC, LHFA Logan Heights Apartments Family 360 HUD, FHFC Seminole Garden Apartments Family 108 HUD Seminole Pointe Apartments Family 336 FHFC, LHFA Stratford Point Apartments Family 384 FHFC Town Centre Family 184 FHFC Windchase Apartments Family 352 HUD, FHFC ndham Place Apartments Family 260 HUD, FHFC Source: Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse, 2008 Group Facilities and Homes. The Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse provides data on congregate and homeless facilities. Based on the databases most recent information, there are no such facilities operating in the City of Sanford. Assisted Living Facilities. Based on data provided by Florida Housing Search, there are numerous adult family care homes/assisted living facilities in the City of Sanford. Table 3-17 provides a listing of these facilities. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-11 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Housing Element Table 3-13 1999 Annual Household Income Distribution Income Range Sanford Households Percent Seminole County Households Percent Less than $10,000 1,822 13.0 7,895 5.7 $10,000 to $14,999 1,100 7.9 5,945 4.3 $15,000 to $24,999 2,471 17.7 14,354 10.3 $25,000 to $34,999 2,351 16.8 16,937 12.1 $35,000 to $49,999 2,442 17.5 25,617 18.3 $50,000 to $74,999 2,322 16.6 29,545 21.2 $75,000 to $99,999 1,147 8.2 17,175 12.3 $100,000 to $149,999 509 3.6 14,292 10.2 $150,000 to $199,999 86 0.6 3,869 2.8 $200,000 or more 78 0.6 4,002 2.9 Totals 13,974 100.0 139,631 100.0 Median $31,163 $49,326 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000, Table P52: Household Income in 1999 Table 3-14 presents the 2005 distribution of households by income group and the amount of income paid for housing. For households earning less than 30 percent AMI, nearly two-thirds were paying more than 50 percent of their household income to housing costs. More than ninety percent of households earning more than 80 percent AMI were paying less than 30 percent of their income to housing costs. Those earning between 30 and 50 percent AMI and 50 and 80 percent AMI had a greater distribution across the various percentages of income paid for housing costs. Table 3-14 2005 Household by Income and Cost Burden Household Income as Percentage of AMI Amount of Income Paid for Housing 0-30% 30-50% 50%+ <= 30% AMI 402 159 967 30.01-50% AM 1 407 561 662 50.01-80% AM 1 1,197 1,379 236 80.01 % + AMI 11,357 1,058 157 Total 13,363 3,157 2,022 Source: Florida Data Clearinghouse, 2008 Housing and Living Conditions. The typical conditions used to evaluate the condition of housing include the age of housing structures, lack of heating fuel, over -crowding (more than one person per room), lack of complete kitchens, and lack of complete plumbing. Households lacking any of these are often referred to as "substandard." Table 3-15 presents the housing conditions within the City. According to data obtained from the 2000 Census and FHDC, 979 households, or 6.6 percent of the 13,974 occupied units, reported occupancy of more than one person per room in the City. Less than one percent of households lacked heating fuel, complete kitchen facilities or complete plumbing. Overall, the percentage of substandard housing in the City is similar to the State. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-10 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report - November 2009 City of Sanford Housing Element Table 3-11 1999 Comparative Cost Burden Characteristics S ecifed Units Gross Rent as a Percentage of Household Income Sanford Units Percent Seminole County Units Percent Less than 15 percent 1,095 21.0 15,594 23.3 15 to 19 percent 957 18.4 15,416 21.7 20 to 24 percent 902 17.3 12,585 17.7 25 to 29 percent 618 11.9 8,408 11.8 30 to 34 percent 413 7.9 5,412 7.6 35 percent or more 1,168 22.4 12,456 17.5 Not computed 61 1.2 289 0.4 Totals 5,214 100.0 71,160 100.0 Selected Monthly Owner Costs as a Percentage of Household Income (units with a mortgage) Less than 15 percent 1,103 69.6 10,648 72.7 15 to 19 percent 123 7.8 1,338 9.1 20 to 24 percent 95 6.0 738 5.0 25 to 29 percent 27 1.7 402 2.7 30 to 34 percent 72 4.5 337 2.3 35 percent or more 131 8.3 1,050 7.2 Not computed 33 2.1 136 0.9 Totals 1,584 100.0 14,649 1 100.0 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000, Table H94: Mortgage Status by Selected Monthly Owner Costs as a Percentage of Household Income in 1999 Table 3-12 2005 Housing Cost as a Percent of Income Household Costs Pay Range Sanford Units Percent Seminole County Units Percent Households Pays < 30 Percent 13,363 72.1 118,988 74.6 Household Pays 30 - 50 Percent 3,157 17.0 25,201 15.8 Household Pays > 50 Percent 2,022 10.9 15,313 9.6 Totals 18,542 100.0 159,502 100.0 Source: Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse, 2008 Household and Personal Income Characteristics. Household income statistics for the City and County from the 2000 Census are presented in Table 3-13. As of 2000 (1999 household income data), there was a large disparity between household incomes in Sanford and Seminole County. The median household income in the County was $49,326, compared to $31,163 in the City, a difference of more than $18,000. Approximately two-thirds of households in the City earned between $15,000 and $74,999. For the County, approximately two-thirds of households earned between $25,000 and $99,999. Thirteen percent of households in the City had incomes of less than $10,000, compared to only 5.7 percent in the County. Approximately 16 percent of households in the County had incomes above $100,000 compared to 4.8 percent in the City. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-9 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report - November 2009 City of Sanford Housing Element Table 3-10 2000 Monthly Owner Costs of Owner -Occupied Units Mortgage Status and Selected Monthly Owner Costs Sanford Seminole County Units Percent Units Percent Mortgaged Units Less than $300 73 1.4 285 0.4 $300 to $499 451 8.7 2,098 3.0 $500 to $699 1,172 22.5 6,609 9.3 $700 to $999 2,290 43.9 20,327 28.6 $1,000 to $1,499 1,038 19.9 25,439 35.8 $1,500 to $1,999 131 2.5 9,868 13.9 $2,000 or more 59 1.1 6,534 9.2 Totals 5,214 100.0 71,160 100.0 Median per month $798 $1,102 Units Without a Mortgage Less than $200 544 34.3 1,928 13.2 $200 to $399 896 56.6 8,653 59.1 $400 to $599 116 7.3 2,863 19.5 $600 to $799 28 1.8 811 5.5 $800 to $999 0 0.0 205 1.4 $1,000 or more 0 0.0 189 1.3 Totals 1,584 100.0 14,649 100.0 Median per month $238 $317 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000, Table H91: Median Selected Monthly Owner Costs (Dollars) for Specified Owner -Occupied Housing Units by Mortgage Status According to the Department of Community Affairs (DCA), it is recommended that no more than 30 percent of a household's income should be spent on housing costs. Costs exceeding 30 percent are considered to be cost burdened and those exceeding 50 percent are considered severely cost burdened. In 2000, 12.8 percent of households had housing costs that exceeded 30 percent, compared to 9.5 percent countywide. In 2005, 17 percent of households in the City housing costs between 30 and 50 percent of income and an additional 10.9 percent exceeding 50 percent. These figures for the County were 15.8 percent and 9.6 percent, respectively. Tables 3-11 and 3-12 present detailed information regarding housing costs and cost burdened households. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-8 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report - November 2009 City of Sanford Housing Element Table 3-7 2000 Value of Sp ecified Owner-Occu ied H usina Units Value Range Sanford Units Percent Seminole County Units Percent Less than $50,000 906 13.3 2,238 2.6 $50,000 to $99,999 4,594 67.6 27,828 32.4 $100,000 to $149,999 1,001 14.7 28,313 33.0 $150,000 to $199,999 225 3.3 13,404 15.6 $200,000 to $299,999 66 1.0 9,583 11.2 Greater than $300,000 6 0.1 4,443 5.2 Totals 6,798 100.0 1 85,809 100.0 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000, Table H74: Value for Specified Owner -Occupied Housing Units Table 3-8 Average and Median Home Value Value Sanford Seminole Statewide Condominium Number of Price Sales County 1,619 Average Value $78,457 $140,383 $127,405 Median Value $72,800 $115,100 $93,200 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000, Table H76: Median Value for Specified Owner -Occupied Housing Units Table 3-9 provides median sales prices of single-family and condominiums between 2000 and 2006. The sales data clearly identifies the peak of the housing market, when prices reached record high levels in 2005 and 2006. Single-family units had the highest median sales price in 2006 while condominiums saw the peak occur in 2005. Between 2000 and 2005, the median sales price of a condominium increased from $59,550 to $218,863, a nearly 268 percent increase. Between 2000 and 2008, the median sales price of single-family units rose from $106,111 to $232,003, an increase of nearly 119 percent. Data was not provided for 2007, but it is likely that sales prices were lower than the previous year. Table 3-9 2000-2006 Median Sales Price Year Single Number of Sales Famil Price Condominium Number of Price Sales 2006 1,619 $232,003 173 $193,676 2005 1,863 $205,184 182 $218,863 2004 1,512 $157,742 99 $84,746 2003 1,007 $134,022 60 $77,342 2002 648 $111,831 53 $62,827 2001 727 $106,814 53 $63,856 2000 820 $106,111 67 $59,550 Source: Florida housing Data clearinghouse, Zoos Monthly owner costs of occupied units for the City and Seminole County are presented in Table 3-10. As of the 2000 Census, the median cost of owner -occupied housing with a mortgage was $798. The median cost for units without a mortgage was $238. These costs are significantly lower than the median for the County, which was $1,102 for units containing a mortgage and $317 for those without. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3.7 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report - November 2009 City of Sanford Table 3-5 2000 Housing Tenure Characteristics Housing Element Characteristics Sanford Units Percent Seminole County Units Percent Owner Occupied 7,847 50.7 96,956 65.9 Renter Occupied 6,249 40.4 42,616 29.0 Vacant For Rent 447 2.9 3,018 2.1 Vacant For Sale 258 1.7 1,500 1.0 Vacant Rented or Sold, Not Occupied 122 0.8 689 0.5 Vacant Seasonal, Recreational or Occasional Use 197 1.3 1,183 0.8 Vacant For Migrant Workers 0 0.0 0 0.0 Other vacant 361 2.3 1,117 0.8 Total Vacant 1,385 8.9 7,507 5.1 Median rent per month $605 $731 Total Occupied 14,096 91.1 139,572 94.9 Total Units 15,481 100.0 147,079 100.0 Source: Florida Data Clearinghouse, 2000 Table 3-6 displays the monthly gross rent of specified renter -occupied units for the City and County as of 2000. Median rent was less expensive in the City than the County, $605 and $731, respectively. Both the City and County had the largest proportion of monthly gross rent in the $500 to $749 range. Table 3-6 2000 Monthly Gross Rent of Specified Renter -Occupied Units Gross Monthly Rent Range Sanford Units Percent Seminole County Units Percent Less than $200 371 5.9 685 1.6 $200 to $299 325 5.2 650 1.5 $300 to $499 1,207 19.4 3,591 8.4 $500 to $749 2,958 47.4 17,148 40.3 $750 to $999 1,077 17.3 13,194 31.0 $1,000 to $1,499 144 2.3 4,863 11.4 $1,500 or more 20 0.3 1,060 2.5 No cash rent 135 2.2 1,359 3.2 Totals 6,237 100.0 42,550 100.0 Median rent per month $605 $731 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000, Table H62: Gross Rent Tables 3-7 and 3-8 list the value of specified owner -occupied housing units in the City and County from 2000. Similar to gross monthly rent, owner -occupied housing units had higher values in Seminole County than in Sanford. The median home value in Sanford was $72,800, approximately $20,000 below the State median and more than $40,000 below the County median. No home value data is available post -2000, but Table 3-7 provides the average home sales price for the years 2000 through 2006. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-6 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report - November 2009 City of Sanford Housing Element included to show the number of housing building permits which were issued between 2000 and 2007. There was a significant increase in the number of permits issued in 2005 and 2006, correlating to the peak of the last housing cycle. Table 3-3 Age of Housing Stock Year Built (Age) Units Percent 1990 -March 2000 < 18 ears 2,927 18.9% 1960-1989 19-48 ears 8,482 54.8% Before 1960 > 48 ears 4,072 26.3% Total 15,481 100.0% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000, Table H34: Year Structure Built Table 3-4 Single -Family New House Construction Building Permits Year Permits 2000 327 2001 132 2002 125 2003 524 2004 686 2005 1,011 2006 825 2007 287 Source: City of Sanford Household Characteristics. Characteristics of housing within the City, including type, tenure, rent, value, monthly cost, and cost -to -income ratio are examined in this section. Each quantitative measure is compared to the countywide values. The most current statistics available for an inventory and analysis of this type are presented in the 2000 Census and the Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse. The City had a housing vacancy rate of 8.9 percent in 2000, compared to 5.1 percent for Seminole County. Table 3-5 provides a summary of the housing tenure by type of home in comparison to the County. Vacancy statistics by unit type are also provided. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-5 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Housing Element Table 3-1 Units in Structure - Year 2000 Units in Structure Total Units Percent One Detached 8,708 56.2% One Attached 827 5.3% Two 858 5.5% Three to Four 837 5.4% Five to Nine 1,202 7.8% Ten to Nineteen 1,138 7.4% Twenty or More 1,312 8.5% Mobile Home 593 3.8% Boat, RV, Van, etc. 6 0.0% Totals 15,481 100.0% Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000, Table DP -4, Profile of Selected Housing Characteristics The number of housing units within City constituted a significant share of the Seminole County total, comprising approximately 10.5 percent of the 147,079 year-round units reported by the 2000 US Census. By 2005, Sanford's housing stock was nearly 12 percent of the County's 159,502 housing units. The City housing stock, by age of structure, is summarized in Table 3-2. The average age of homes in the City of Sanford is similar to Seminole County, both of which contain the highest percentages of homes built in the 1970 to 1979 and 1980 to 1989 time periods. Based on the increase of approximately 3,000 housing units from the 2000 Census to the 2005 data provided by the Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse, it can be inferred that a significant percentage of the City's housing stock was built after the year 2000. Table 3-2 Housing Units by Age Year Structure Built Sanford Number Percentage of Units of Total Seminole Coun Number Percentage of Units of Total 1995 to 2000 1,668 10.8 18,522 12.6 1990 to 1994 1,259 8.1 19,258 13.1 1980 to 1989 3,919 25.3 48,832 33.2 1970 to 1979 2,851 18.4 36,071 24.5 1960 to 1969 1,712 11.1 12,865 8.7 1950 to 1959 1,947 12.6 7,192 4.9 1940 to 1949 729 4.7 1,820 1.2 1939 or earlier 1,396 9.0 2,519 1.7 Total Units 15,481 100.0 147,079 100.0 Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000, Table H34, Year Structure Built Table 3-3 lists the time period that housing units were constructed, as of the 2000 Census. The majority, approximately 55 percent, of housing units were built between 1960 and 1989. More than one-quarter of the housing stock had been built prior to 1960, making those structures at least 48 years old. Since the data only includes up to the year 2000, Table 3-4 has been City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-4 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report - November 2009 City of Sanford Housing Element HOUSING ELEMENT DATA, INVENTORY, AND ANALYSIS Local governments are required to have a Housing Element in the Comprehensive Plan that is consistent with the provisions of Chapter 163, Part III of the Florida Statutes. The Housing Element provides data regarding the existing and projected future conditions needed to develop the housing goal, objectives and policies for the City's Comprehensive Plan. Data from multiple sources is used in the analysis, including from the US Census, the Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse (Shimberg Affordable Housing Institute), and additional local, state and federal agencies. EXISTING HOUSING DATA REQUIREMENTS [Rule 9J-5.010(1)] Housing and Household Characteristics. Housing and Household characteristics for the existing units within the City are summarized using the 2000 Census and more recent data from the Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse. There is a significant mixture of both single-family and multi -family housing units in the City. Approximately 40 percent of the housing stock is multi- family units. The age of housing units in the City is diverse, with the largest percentage of units (25.3 percent) built between 1980 and 1989. The data is summarized in Tables 3-1 and 3-2. Housing and Residential Development. According to the 2000 US Census, the City contained an estimated total 15,481 housing units consisting of: ■ 9,535 single-family units 0 8,708 single-family detached 0 827 single-family attached ■ 5,347 multiple -family units ■ 593 mobile home units ■ 6 boat/RV/van Single-family attached and detached homes accounted for approximately 61.5 percent of the housing stock in 2000. The Florida Housing Data Clearinghouse (FHDC) has household data from 2005. That year, the number of housing units in the County increased to 18,522. No breakdown by unit type is provided by the FHDC. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3 - Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Housing Element LIST OF TABLES AND GRAPHS Table 3-1: Units in Structure — Year 2000......................................................................3-4 Table 3-2: Housing Units by Age...................................................................................3-4 Table 3-3: 2000 Age of Housing Stock..........................................................................3-5 Table 3-4: 2000-2007 Single -Family New House Construction Building Permits ..........3-5 Table 3-5: 2000 Housing Tenure Characteristics...........................................................3-6 Table 3-6: 2000 Monthly Gross Rent of Specified Renter -Occupied Units....................3-6 Table 3-7: 2000 Value of Specified Owner -Occupied Housing Units.............................3-7 Table 3-8: 2000 Average and Median Home Value.......................................................3-7 Table 3-9: 2000-2006 Median Sales Price.....................................................................3-7 Table 3-10: 2000 Monthly Owner Costs of Owner -Occupied Units...............................3-8 Table 3-11: 1999 Comparative Cost Burden Characteristics.........................................3-9 Table 3-12: 2005 Housing Cost as a Percent of Income...............................................3-9 Table 3-13: 1999 Annual Household Income Distribution............................................3-10 Table 3-14: 2005 Household by Income and Cost Burden..........................................3-10 Table 3-15: 2000 Select Housing Living Characteristics..............................................3-11 Table 3-16: Subsidized Housing Units.........................................................................3-11 Table 3-17: Assisted Living Facilities/Adult Family Care.............................................3-12 Table 3-18: Inventory of Mobile Home Parks...............................................................3-12 Table 3-19: Identified Historic Structures.....................................................................3-13 Table 3-20: 2005-2025 Population Projection..............................................................3-14 Table 3-21: 2005-2025 Projected Housing Demand by Household Size ....................3-14 Table 3-22: 2005-2025 Projections of Resident's Age.................................................3-14 Table 3-23: Household Costs Based on AMI...............................................................3-15 Table 3-24: Potential Housing Units Based on Future Land Use.................................3-16 Table 3-25: 2010-2025 Cost Burden Housing Needs Projections...............................3-20 Table 3-26: Severely Cost Burdened Units with Income Less Than 80 Percent of AMI by Tenure and Income Level............................................................................................3-21 Table 3-27: Growth in Severely Cost Burdened Units with Income Less Than 80 Percent of AMI by Tenure and Income Level............................................................................3-21 Table 3-28: "Prime Homeowner" and "Prime Renter" Households..............................3-22 Graph 3-1: Single Family New Construction Building Permits.....................................3-16 City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-2 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Housing Element HOUSING ELEMENT DATA, INVENTORY, AND ANALYSIS REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS EXISTING HOUSING DATA REQUIREMENTS............................................................3-3 Housing and Household Characteristics.....................................................................3-3 Housing Projections..................................................................................................3-14 Housing and Residential Development.......................................................................3-3 LandRequirements..................................................................................................3-15 Household Characteristics..........................................................................................3-5 Private Sector Current Market Conditions................................................................3-15 Household and Personal Income Characteristics.......................................................3-9 Housing Delivery System..........................................................................................3-16 Housing and Living Conditions.................................................................................3-10 Potential Impediments to Meeting Demand..............................................................3-17 SubsidizedHousing..................................................................................................3-11 Housing Resources..................................................................................................3-17 Group Facilities and Homes.....................................................................................3-11 Annexation................................................................................................................3-18 Assisted Living Facilities...........................................................................................3-11 Infrastructure............................................................................................................. Mobile Home and Recreational Vehicle Parks.........................................................3-12 Neighborhood Redevelopment and Urban Infill........................................................3-12 Historically Significant Housing.................................................................................3-13 HOUSING ANALYSIS.................................................................................................3-14 Housing Projections..................................................................................................3-14 LandRequirements..................................................................................................3-15 Private Sector Current Market Conditions................................................................3-15 Housing Delivery System..........................................................................................3-16 Potential Impediments to Meeting Demand..............................................................3-17 Housing Resources..................................................................................................3-17 Annexation................................................................................................................3-18 Infrastructure............................................................................................................. 3-18 AFFORDABLE HOUSING ASSESSMENT.................................................................3-20 SUMMARY...................................................................................................................3-23 City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-1 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Data Ctaaaaa Total *A" M = 700 sn - no 1172 -1301 191 - an nn -am //now awa strut �'` Stew�JWtartio�r Housing Element TM4W. Tdd HnwkW ups: 2= 0 pMWA"Mus a .. y FM t (r!F 1) IN*- nit Do" aMbnd air. Fimldr by C. Tract City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-25 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Housing Element 1M+M . otrarwaUrMVMML=W of F AW 1 pry 1) too�l+Ir*w Dd. dky. Fkdit by wr City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-26 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Dom Chas" ft 2.2 - 3.6 t.3 -4A 3.3 - 6.6 8.4- 10.9 19.3 . 19.3 F Mww /,/Nd r bat /✓ street i x f✓u Housing Element MAWS= Aww�gMr owewcs6 —F6r1AF1)100Pum Iaft ft"60 *. Ow1 yO-M--Tait City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-27 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Dda Ciwns >4eraal 192 .7 - 35.4 .4• S4.i .7-71.5.7 - U.4 .7-94.4 uF ,- bw J'*' Street Housing Element 1rrr� o1a ��or�rw ua�. ter �vs o.�n«�000r�we: Amo 11�M sit f N�slA00 !iU i OF 1)1004%0" Dow 0r>n� cit, RNA b�r��O�AOI Y City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3.28 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Housing Element �N hWIM"IMM Unit An M MnMrCmpN� X000 O tli wft tCfntM 7000 FN 1(V 1)1OGV W* f DOW w 0�, /1011fti oy hfLMR JM 6- 14.3 i - 36.3 ,S - 3S.3 1 - 1716 .6 - V.3 Rehm /1/aw woof Std ,suuwvmrb* City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-29 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Dda ft 79.6 0.4 1.3 1.7-33 3.2 S.2 VA - 11.4 F /✓NOW fwd t+.T Stf* K c. Std Housing Element TIA.PW. PwaK 4f Pweru uwn� in OraipOwmn io0o 0 CiMrh FM 1 PF 1)10pPNOW O&M arwea dY. FJafa. ar F" City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-30 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Data Ciwp atlas al - ist ne - ns w - "s st - lms LM - MW Fortuna /*/MBW IWd "V urw str*wr*w*"x* Housing Element nstau aMa.a arn.rCa.e�.no.ar.aaaa.roacapta atAMawr„ra19 - :2WO uNrw. 1�aY�aMa aM a wopapa oats sat Caoas ioo0 ter s lsf �! -srap. Dw aanbr0 dhr. wAda CWWATOM City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 3-31 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT DATA, INVENTORY, AND ANALYSIS REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS DATA, INVENTORY, AND ANALYSIS ....2-3 DEFINITIONS OF TERMS AND CONCEPTS...............................................................2-4 EXISTING TRANSPORTATION MAP SERIES.............................................................2-6 ANALYSIS OF EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS........................................2-7 Level of Service Calculation Methodology...........................................................2-7 Level of Service Standards...................................................................................2-7 Existing (2009) Peak Hour Peak Direction Vehicle Trips......................................2-7 Levels of Service and System Needs.................................................................2-11 Existing Modal Split and Vehicle Occupancy Rates............................................2-12 Existing Public Transit Facilities and Routes......................................................2-13 Peak Hour Transit Capacities, Headways and Ridership by Route ....................2-14 Levels of Service and System Needs.................................................................2-14 PopulationCharacteristics..................................................................................2-14 Transportation Disadvantaged............................................................................ 2-15 Existing Characteristics of Major Trip Generators and Attractors .......................2-15 Existing Bicycle Facilities....................................................................................2-15 Existing Pedestrian Facilities..............................................................................2-15 Availability of Transportation Facilities to Serve Existing Land Uses..................2-16 Adequacy of Existing and Projected Evacuation Transportation System ...........2-16 FUTURE TRANSPORTATION MAP SERIES.............................................................2-17 Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas.....................................................2-17 ANALYSIS OF FUTURE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM...........................................2-18 GrowthTrends....................................................................................................2-18 Impact of Projected Land Use on Transportation System Levels of Service ...... 2-18 Traffic Forecasting Methodology.........................................................................2-18 Projected Peak Hour Traffic Conditions............................................................ 2-234 Transportation Planning Approach......................................................................2-25 Existing and Projected Integrated Transportation System . ................................. 2-26 Concurrency Management..................................................................................2-26 Transportation Concurrency Exception Areas.....................................................2-26 Transportation Projects Planned by Other Jurisdictions.....................................2-26 The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 2-1 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — October 2009 City of Sanford Transportation Element LIST OF TABLES Table 2-1: LOS Standard by Functional Classification .................................... Table 2-1: Existing (2009) Daily Traffic Volumes ............................................ Table 2-3: Existing (2009) Peak Hour Peak Direction Traffic Volumes........... Table 2-4: Year 2009 Seminole county Travel Time & Delay Study ............... Table 2-5: Workers by Transportation Mode ................................................... Table 2-6: Ridership by Route........................................................................ Table 2-7: Transit Service characteristics....................................................... Table 2-8: Population Estimates for Sanford .................................................. Table 2-9: Primary Land Uses........................................................................ Table 2-10: Short -Term (2013) Daily Traffic Volumes .................................... Table 2-11: Short -Term (2013) Peak Hour Peak Direction Traffic Volumes... Table 2-12: Long -Term (2025) Daily Traffic Volumes ..................................... Table 2-13: Long -Term (2013) Peak Hour Direction Traffic Volumes ............. Table 2-14: Long -Term (2025) Peak Hour Peak Direction Traffic Volumes.... LIST OF MAPS Map 2-1: Major Thoroughfares by Number of Lanes (2009) Map 2-2a: Major Thoroughfares by Functional Classification (2009) Map 2-2b: Jurisdictional Roadway Classification Map (2009) Map 2-3: Major Trip Generators and Attractors (2009) Map 2-4: Existing Public Transit Facilities (2009 Map 2-5: Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (2009) Map 2-6: Significant Park Facilities (2009) Map 2-7: Railways, Intermodal, and Airport Facilities (2009) Map 2-8: Existing Peak Hour Peak Direction LOS on Major Thoroughfares (2009) Map 2-9: Major Thoroughfares by Number of Lanes (2025) Map 2-10a: Major Thoroughfares by Functional Classification (2025) Map 2-10b: Jurisdictional Roadway Classification Map (2025) Map 2-11: Major Trip Generators and Attractors (2025) Map 2-12: Future Transit Facilities (2025) Map 2-13: Future Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities (2025) Map 2-14: Projected Peak Hour Peak Direction Levels of Service (2013) Map 2-15: Projected Peak Hour Peak Direction Levels of Service (2025) The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 2-2 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — October 2009 Citv of Sanford Infrastructure Element INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT DATA, INVENTORY, AND ANALYSIS REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT..................................................................................................4-1 DATA, INVENTORY, AND ANALYSIS REPORT.......................................................................4-1 TABLEOF CONTENTS............................................................................................................... 4-1 INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT..................................................................................................4-3 DATA, INVENTORY, AND ANALYSIS........................................................................................ 4-3 POTABLE WATER SUB-ELEMENT...........................................................................................4-3 Existing and Projected Potable Water Demand...................................................................... 4-3 Wellfields.................................................................................................................................. 4-4 WaterTreatment Plants........................................................................................................... 4-4 WaterStorage Facilities........................................................................................................... 4-5 Distribution............................................................................................................................... 4-5 Existing Water Demands and Level-of-Service....................................................................... 4-5 Projected Water Demand........................................................................................................ 4-6 ReclaimedWater..................................................................................................................... 4-7 Tri -Party Agreement................................................................................................................ 4-8 SANITARY SEWER SUB-ELEMENT.......................................................................................... 4-8 Wastewater Treatment Facilities............................................................................................. 4-8 Current Facilities Demand and Level-of-Service..................................................................... 4-9 SepticTanks.......................................................................................................................... 4-11 STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SUB-ELEMENT...................................................................4-12 Natural Drainage Features.................................................................................................... 4-13 Man -Made Drainage Features...............................................................................................4-13 Existing Storm Drainage System and Level-of-Service......................................................... 4-14 SOLIDWASTE SUB-ELEMENT................................................................................................4-14 Solid Waste Disposal System................................................................................................4-14 RecyclingEffort ...................................................................................................................... 4-15 Solid Waste Level-of-Service................................................................................................ 4-15 Future Projects, Programs, and Policies............................................................................... 4-16 NATURAL GROUNDWATER AQUIFER RECHARGE SUB-ELEMENT..................................4-16 Natural Groundwater Aquifers............................................................................................... 4-16 AquiferRecharge Areas........................................................................................................ 4-16 Protection Mechanisms for Recharge Areas......................................................................... 4-17 City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 4-1 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 of Sanford List of Tables Infrastructure Element Table 4-1: Operational Wellfields................................................................................................. 4-4 Table 4-2: Projected and Permitted Water................................................................................... 4-6 Table 4-3: Projected Wastewater Demand................................................................................ 4-10 Table 4-4: Level-of-Service....................................................................................... 4-10 Table 4-5: Soil Suitability............................................................................................................4-12 City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 4-2 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Infrastructure Element INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT DATA, INVENTORY, AND ANALYSIS The purpose of the Infrastructure Element is to identify and plan for public facilities and services to support the future population projections and development patterns envisioned within the Future Land Use Element of the City's Comprehensive Plan. The objective of the Infrastructure Element Data, Inventory, and Analysis (DIA) Report is to evaluate existing potable water, sanitary sewer, solid waste, stormwater management, and natural groundwater aquifer recharge resources within the City and determine whether adequate capacity exists to maintain the adopted level of service (LOS) standards through the planning period defined within this plan. Within this DIA, each of the public facilities and/or resources mentioned above is treated as a sub -element. This information collectively serves as the foundation for the goals, objectives, and policies (GOPs) prepared to guide future development within the City of Sanford. Data and analysis for each of the five sub -elements contained within the Infrastructure Element is provided below. POTABLE WATER SUB -ELEMENT Potable water facilities are designed to collect, treat, and distribute potable water. Typical system facilities include water wells, treatment plants, reservoirs, and distribution mains. In a potable water supply system there is a water supply source, a treatment plant, and a distribution and storage network. The raw water used in the City's system is drawn from the Floridan Aquifer by way of wells. Treatment of the raw water is necessary prior to public consumption in order to remove impurities. After treatment, the water is supplied to individual users in the City by a network of pipes and storage facilities. Large transmission lines, called distribution mains, carry water to major demand areas and interconnect with a network of smaller lines which eventually supply individual establishments. These water lines typically run along City roads. The City of Sanford provides high quality potable water to all land uses within the City and serves a residential population of approximately 54,000 (2007). The City's potable water system is not confined to the City's jurisdictional boundary, but encompasses a larger service area. The extent of the service area for potable water utilities is displayed in Figure 4-3. [9J-5.011(a)(b)] The City's potable water service area extends beyond the jurisdictional boundary of the City to include approximately 11,482 acres of unincorporated Seminole County. A majority of the unincorporated area of Seminole County served is located east of the City and along Lake Jesup. As of 2008, the City had approximately 16,072 potable water connections within the service area. Among these connections, 1,245 connections were outside of the City's jurisdictional boundary. This is equal to roughly 7.75 percent of the City's total potable water system capacity. [9J -5.011(c)] Existing and Projected Potable Water Demand The City draws raw water from the Floridan Aquifer to supply its potable water needs. This groundwater is the primary source of potable water for the City of Sanford. The City's Consumptive Use Permit (CUP) Number 162 allocates a withdrawal of up to 3,496.7 million gallons per year (MGY), which equates to approximately 9.58 million City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 4-3 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 of Sanford Infrastructure Element gallons per day (MGD). The permit is processed and managed through the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) and will expire on February 8, 2026. The existing potable water system has been designed to accommodate an entire service area instead of smaller individual areas that comprise the entirety of a service area. The benefit of this approach is that no one individual facility provides service to a specific area, all facilities function to serve the entire system. This system approach allows the City to deliver high quality water service to customers and allows problems to be isolated and corrected quickly. Finally, capital improvements and system upgrades affect the entire system instead increasing capacity and quality in particular areas. The total design capacity of the City's potable water system is 20.74 MGD. [9J -5.011(e)] Wellfields The City of Sanford currently maintains four operational wellfields. These wellfields are located within the jurisdictional boundary of the City and provide the raw potable water to the City's water treatment plants. Table 4.1 summarizes each wellfield. Table 4-1 Operational Wellfields Wellfield Number of Number of Operational Pumping Wells Capacity Range Wells Wellfield 1 Hidden Lake 8 6 325 — 700 GPM Wellfield 2 Golf Course 7 6 700 GPM Wellfield 3 (Oregon Avenue 5 1 5 1,000 —1,500 GPM T1,500 Wellfield 4 Twin Lake 4 1 2 — 2,000 GPM Source: City of Sanford Water Facilities Work Plan Data and Analysis GPM = Gallons per Minute The wellfields are protected from the potential impacts of development in several ways. The development review process incorporates performance standards for conserving open space, prohibiting specific uses within recharge areas, preserving predevelopment soil types, grade elevations, drainage rates, and water levels, and minimizing reduction of recharge to the surficial aquifer. In addition, the City does not allow new development within a 200 foot radius of any existing or proposed wellhead. [9J -5.011(e)] Water Treatment Plants The City owns and operates two water treatment plants (WTP). The Main WTP and the Auxiliary WPT both provide treatment to the raw water drawn from the Floridan Aquifer through the City's wellfields. The raw water from wellfield 1 is sent to the Auxiliary WTP and the raw water from wellfields 2, 3, and 4 is sent to the Main WTP. Combined, both of these WPTs provide 20.74 MGD to the City's service area. [9J -5.011(e)] • Main WTP has two ground storage tanks that provide a combined 1.5 million gallons of ground storage of treated water. The well capacity is 16.13 MGD with a high service pumping capacity of 15.12 MGD. Auxiliary WTP provides an additional 1.5 million gallons of ground storage for treated water. The well capacity is 4.61 MGD with a high service pumping capacity of 5.76 MGD. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 4-4 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 Citv of Sanford Infrastructure Element Water Storage Facilities The current ground storage capacity for the City's potable water system is 4.0 MG, with an additional 0.5 MG of elevated storage. The two elevated storage tanks are located on Mellonville Avenue and 13th Street and on East Lake Mary Boulevard. These storage tanks provide an additional 0.25 MG each of extra storage capacity. However, the City's primary source for potable water storage is the two WTPs. The Main WTP has 1.5 MG of ground storage, the Auxiliary WPT provides 1.5 MG of ground storage, and the City operates another 1.0 MG of ground storage located at French Avenue and 13th street. [9J -5.011(e)] Distribution The existing water distribution system has been designed and sized for domestic water consumption. The distribution system primarily follows a grid pattern along City roadways and serves all land uses within the City. The system consists of approximately 300 miles or 1.6 million linear feet of distribution pipes, two elevated storage tanks, and ground storage tanks at each of the WTPs. The Sanford Department of Water and Sewer Utilities has the responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the system. The Department is continually monitoring and upgrading the system when needed to supply increasingly greater quantities of water to customers in the City's water service area. According to the City's Water Supply Plan, approximately 51,470 linear feet of water mains were constructed ranging in size from 12 -inches to 24 -inches during 2000 through 2005 and an estimated 48,900 linear feet more of water mains ranging in size from 8 -inches to 18 -inches will be constructed from 2005 to 2010, according to the Department of Water and Sewer Utilities. In general, the system is in good operating condition. With normal maintenance, the system should last well beyond the planning period. The system is not known to have any adverse impacts on adjacent natural resources and with the increased use of reuse/reclaimed water the City is minimizing the use of potable water for irrigation purposes. Through the reuse/reclaimed water system for irrigation, landscaping requirements that preserve native and drought resistant vegetation, and the encouraging the installation of water saving plumbing fixtures the City is conserving greater amounts of potable water. In addition, the City continues to implement a leak detection program that is designed to curtail the wasteful loss of potable water from the distribution system. [9J -5.011(e)] Existing Water Demands and Level -of -Service According to data from the Department of Water and Sewer Utilities, as of May 2008, the trailing 12 month average water usage for the City's water service area was 7.52 MGD. The 2007 population for the City, according the adopted Water Supply Plan is 52,618. This equates to an existing potable water LOS of 138.57 gallons per capita per day. This is below the City's adopted Level of Service (LOS) standard of 144 gallons per capita per day and the total demand is well under the system capacity. [9J -5.011(e)] The current CUP with the SJRWMD allows withdrawal of up to 9.58 MGD of raw water from the Floridan Aquifer starting in year 2010 and lasting through 2026. The current City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 4-5 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Infrastructure Element permitted amount of withdrawal for 2008 and 2009 is 9.02 and 9.30 MGD. Based on the City's trailing 12 month average of 7.52 MGD, there is a 1.50 MGD surplus in remaining permitted withdrawal. With the combined capacity of the water treatment plants being 20.74 MGD, the City has adequate total capacity to meet the potential increase in potable water demand that may be generated from growth in the City. To facilitate increased conservation and demand, the City is and continues to actively increase the use of reclaimed water for irrigation purposes and is participating in the planning and coordination of surface water treatment facilities with the SJRWMD, Seminole County and other utilities. In addition, the previously mentioned conservation measures (leak detection program, landscaping with native and drought resistant vegetation, and water saving plumbing fixtures) further support the City's ability to meet water demands without dramatically increasing raw water withdrawal. The general performance of the existing water system has been sufficient to supply the demands of the service area. The existing water system provides 20.74 MGD with all the wells in the service area and 4 MG of ground storage along with 0.5 MG of elevated storage. As the population increases, improvements will be necessary to meet future demands. [9J -5.011(f)] Projected Water Demand In 2007, the City adopted a Water Facilities Work Plan. The plan analyzed the existing capabilities of the system, compared these capabilities to the current and future needs, and created a 20 -year program for the City's water system. According to the Water Supply Plan, the projected water demand is anticipated to increase from its current projected demand of 7.783 MGD in 2008 to 9.49 MGD in 2017; table 4.2 illustrates the projected and permitted amounts of water. Based on the projected growth the City may exceed the amount permitted for withdrawal from the Floridan Aquifer sometime after 2017. The projected demand is within the design capacity of the system. Therefore, the City is actively trying to conserve potable water through its reclaimed water system and the water conservation measures mentioned throughout. Table 4-2 Projected and Permitted Water Year Projected Water Demand Outside City Limits Projected Water Demand Inside City Limits Total Projected Water Demand (MGD) CUP Permitted Withdrawal Amount (MGD) Difference 2008 1 0.60 7.18 7.78 9.02 1.24 2009 0.62 7.37 7.99 9.30 1.31 2010 0.64 7.57 8.21 9.58 1.37 2011 0.65 7.76 8.41 9.58 1.17 2012 0.67 7.95 8.62 9.58 0.96 2013 1 0.68 8.15 8.83 9.58 0.74 2014 0.70 1 8.35 9.05 9.58 0.53 2015 0.72 8.55 9.27 9.58 0.30 2016 0.73 8.65 9.38 9.58 0.20 2017 0.74 8.75 9.49 9.58 0.09 Source: City of Sanford 2007 Water Supply Plan City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 4-6 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report - November 2009 City of Sanford Infrastructure Element The table above illustrates the projected water demand, for areas within the City's jurisdictional boundary and areas of unincorporated Seminole County within the City's water service area, in MGD along with the permitted CUP withdrawal. The projected water demand does not increase above the permitted withdrawal amount until sometime after the year 2017. The demand for water service outside of the City's jurisdictional boundary was estimated using the straight line method. In 2008, the City had approximately 16,072 total water service connections. Among these connections, 1,245 or 7.75 percent were outside of the City's jurisdictional boundary. It was assumed that the demand for water service outside the City's jurisdictional boundary would increase proportionately with the increase in demand for water service within the City's jurisdictional boundary. The City, with its service area partners, Seminole County, Lake Mary, Volusia County and other utilities aims to offset demand through the continued optimization, extension, and use of reclaimed water. The increased use of reclaimed water is beginning to have a positive impact on potable water demand. As stated before, the trailing 12 -month water usage average for the City was 7.52 MGD, as obtained from the City's Department of Water and Sewer Utilities. This 12 month average is 0.263 MGD less than the projected water demand of 7.783 MGD. [9J -5.011(f)] As part of the City's Water Facilities Work Plan, alternative water supply projects were identified to aid the City in meeting the projected water demand. Reclaimed Water The City has and continues to actively support, both financially and with regulatory policies, the use of reclaimed water for irrigation purposes. The establishment of this large-scale reclaimed water system took place in 1990. Since then, the City has consistently funded its implementation and expansion. According to the Department of Water and Sewer Utilities, in 2008 the City had approximately 2,620 reclaimed water customers. Currently, the City owns, operates, and maintains the Sanford North Water Reclamation Facility (SNWRF) which has a capacity of 7.3 MGD and in 2002 the Surface Water Augmentation System, with a capacity of 7.3 MGD, was completed and placed into service at the SNWRF. The Surface Water Augmentation System draws water from Lake Monroe. The surface water is filtered and blended with reclaimed water that is produced at the SNWRF. In 2007, the City added an additional 2.0 MGD of capacity to the reclaimed water system with the completion of the Sanford South Water Resource Center (SSWRC). There is approximately 407,000 linear feet of reuse water pipes throughout the City's service area. The City continues to monitor and evaluate the reclaimed water system to ensure that improvements keep pace with demand and any needed improvements become programmed in five-year Capital Improvements Plan. Sanford is the sole operator of these two facilities along with the reclaimed water distribution system. In 2007, the Timacuan Golf Course reclaimed water storage pond was completed. Additional improvements for the 2005 — 2010 planning period include: Greenwood Lakes reclaimed water tanks, distribution system improvements, and the implementation of an augmentation facility management system at the SNWRF. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 4-7 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 of Sanford Tri -Party Agreement Infrastructure Element While the City owns and operates significant reclaimed water facilities, the reclaimed water system needs to be taken in context of the entire Tri -Party Reclaimed Water Service Area. In 2001, the City entered into a Tri -Party Agreement with the City of Lake Mary and Seminole County related to the use of reclaimed/reuse water and surface water augmentation from the St. Johns River to help reduce groundwater withdrawal from the Floridan Aquifer. This agreement establishes coordination mechanisms for the expansion of these facilities. The amended agreement increased the maximum flow of reclaimed/reuse water to Seminole County. The flow increased from 0.75 MGD to 2.75 MGD to Seminole County and 0.15 MGD to 1.2 MGD for the City of Lake Mary. This additional capacity was made available through the Surface Water Augmentation System Upgrade at the SNWRF mentioned above. Reclaimed/reuse water is mostly used for irrigation purposes and can have a significant effect on the amount of raw water drawn from the Aquifer. The Tri -Party Reclaimed Water Service Area includes the City of Sanford, the City of Lake Mary, Seminole County's Northwest Service Area and several areas of unincorporated portions of Seminole County. This service area is served by over 75 -miles of distribution piping. The City is becoming a regional supplier of reclaimed water and has a forward vision for expansion on a regional level. According to the adopted 2007 Water Facilities Work Plan (WFWP), there is capacity to further expand the system to supply Winter Springs, Altamonte Springs, Oviedo, and Volusia County. The North Seminole Regional Reclaimed Water and Surface Optimization System Expansion and Optimization Project proposed an alternative water system supply project using water drawn directly from the St. Johns River to be used in the reclaimed water system. This could add an additional 7.3 MGD to the system. The expansion and facility improvements to the reclaimed water system are closely coordinated with the SJRWMD. The 2007 WFWP also concluded that the increased usage of reclaimed water for irrigation should have a limited impact on groundwater quality. [9J -5.011(f)] SANITARY SEWER SUB -ELEMENT A functional aspect of protecting an area's water resources is the treatment and reuse or disposal of wastewater. Sanford continues to take an innovative and aggressive approach to collecting and treating wastewater. The wastewater generated within the City continues to be collected by City owned and operated wastewater treatment plants and collection facilities. As discussed in the Potable Water Sub -Element, the City has and is continuing to serve the entire service area with an integrated system which does not distinguish individual wastewater service districts that provide service outside the City's jurisdictional boundary. A description of the City's wastewater system is below. [9J -5.011(a)] Wastewater Treatment Facilities To serve the customers within the City's service area, the City owns, operates, and maintains wastewater treatment plants and collection facilities. This responsibility has been delegated to the City's Department of Water and Sewer Utilities. The wastewater system is designed to serve all of the City's land uses including residential, commercial, light industrial and agricultural uses. The wastewater generated by the above uses is collected by a system that consists of lift stations, force mains, and gravity sewers which City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 4-8 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 of Sanford Infrastructure Element transmits the wastewater to the City's water treatment plants. According to the Department of Water and Sewer Utilities, there are currently 13,677 sewer connections (2008). There are two wastewater treatment plants that serve the City's service area, the Sanford North Water Reclamation Facility (SNWRF) and the Sanford South Water Resource Center (SSWRC). The SNWRF has a permitted and designed capacity of 7.3 MGD and the SSWRC has a capacity of 2.0 MGD, however, the total design capacity is 6.0 MGD. The capability exists for an additional 4.0 MGD of capacity at the SSWRC. The City's Department of Water and Sewer Utilities is monitoring growth and demand and will increase the capacity at the SSWRC as necessary to adequately meet any increase in for wastewater service. Treatment plants are the components of wastewater systems that remove solid and organic material from the effluent. There is a variety of processes that can accomplish this procedure. Depending on the proportion of the material that is removed, these processes are typically grouped into one of the following categories. Primary treatment can remove the majority of solids from the effluent and secondary treatment removes almost all of the organic material and suspended solids. The treated effluent is then disposed of via spray irrigation within the North Seminole Regional Reclaimed Water Service Area. The SSWRC treatment process, according the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), uses effluent screening, grit removal, and advanced secondary treatment by way of Kruger Triple Ditch Process. This method achieves the removal of nitrogen without using internal recycle streams or external clarifiers and is very cost effective. [9J-5.011(d)(e)] Current Facilities Demand and Level -of -Service There are approximately 96 lift stations within the City's service area. The City operates and maintains 63 of these lift stations while the other 36 are privately owned. In addition to the lift stations, the system consists of force mains ranging in size from 2 -inch to 20 - inch and gravity sewer lines that range in size from 4 -inch to 36 -inch. As with the design of the potable water system, the wastewater collection system is designed in a grid pattern along City roadways. This facilitates service for residential customers which comprise the majority of the customers. The effluent collected by these lift stations flows to one of the City's two water treatment plants. The 12 month trailing average of wastewater collected within the entire service area, according to the Department of Water and Sewer Utilities as of May 2008 was 7.1 MGD. The system is currently operating at an LOS of 131.6 gallons per capita daily (GPCD) which is within the adopted LOS standard of 132 GPCD. The current operating LOS is fairly close to the adopted LOS standard of 132 GPCD. The City has the ability to increase the wastewater treatment plant capacity by an additional 4.0 MGD. The Department of Water and Sewer Utilities is monitoring wastewater demand and will schedule capacity increases as necessary to meet any increases in demand. Table 4.3 illustrates the projected wastewater demand through year 2017 and Table 4.4 illustrates the projected operating LOS for each equivalent year. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 4-9 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Table 4-3 Projected Wastewater Demand Infrastructure Element Year Population' WW Projected Demand within City Limits WW Projected Demand Outside Limits' Total WW Demand WW Capacity* Remaining Capacity 2008 1 54,047 6.55 0.55 7.10 9.3 2.20 2009 55,515 6.70 0.56 7.26 9.3 2.04 2010 57,022 6.82 0.57 7.39 9.3 1.91 2011 58,431 6.98 0.59 7.57 13.3 5.73 2012 59,874 7.16 0.60 7.76 13.3 5.54 2013 61,354 7.33 0.62 7.95 13.3 5.35 2014 62,870 7.51 0.63 8.15 13.3 5.16 2015 64,423 7.70 0.65 8.34 13.3 4.96 2016 65,157 7.79 0.65 8.44 13.3 4.86 2017 65,900 7.88 0.66 8.54 13.3 4.76 ' Population estimates derived from 2007 adopted Water Supply Plan. 2 Wastewater for 2008 was based on usage information from the Department of Water and Sewer Utilities. The wastewater projection for the year 2009 was based on the current operating LOS of year 2008 (130.8 MGD) multiplied by the 2009 population estimate since wastewater demand will most likely be very similar. Projections for years 2010 - 2017 were computed by taking 90% of potable water demand projections because wastewater generation is historically 90% of potable water demand. 3 The same percentage for potable water used outside the City limits was used to project wastewater demand in areas that are outside the City limits but within the Service Area. This percentage was used on the basis that those customers who received potable water service are highly likely to receive wastewater service as well. "The City has programmed an additional 4.0 MGD of wastewater capacity to be available by the year 2011. **All wastewater value in MGD. Table 4-4 Level -of -Service Year Population' Total WW Demand Level -of -Service 2008 54,047 7.10 131.37 2009 55,515 7.26 130.80 2010 57,022 7.39 129.58 2011 58,431 7.57 129.54 2012 1 59,874 7.76 129.57 2013 61,354 7.95 129.53 2014 62,870 8.15 129.55 2015 64,423 8.34 129.50 2016 65,157 8.44 129.56 2017 65,900 8.54 129.61 ' Population estimates derived from 2007 adopted Water Supply Plan. The operational performance of the wastewater system has been adequate and is projected to be adequate and functioning within the adopted LOS standard of 132 GPCD. With normal maintenance and operation the City's wastewater system should perform and operate well into the next planning period. The City has an additional 4.0 MGD of wastewater capacity and will schedule capacity increases according to demand. The City will have adequate operating capacity to meet the projected increase in demand. The City has established a reclaimed/reuse water system and continues to expand both capacity and service. More information can be found in the Potable Water Sub -Element and in the City's adopted 2007 Water Facilities Work Plan. [9J -5.011(f)] City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 4-10 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report - November 2009 City of Sanford Infrastructure Element Septic Tanks In addition to wastewater system, private septic tank systems are used within the City limits. The Florida Department of Health (FLDOH) is the agency responsible for permitting the use of onsite sewage treatment and disposal systems (OSTDS) along with licensing septic tank contractors and the mediation of OSTDS complaints. Septic tanks typically only serve individual sites, and within the City of Sanford the use of septic tanks is very limited due to the City's extensive wastewater system collection system. The residential septic tanks in the City range in capacity from 500 to 1,000 gallons. Commercial septic tanks are typically larger. The effluent collected in septic tanks discharges into a drain field where it then will percolate into the soil. The City continues to facilitate the transition to public potable water and wastewater by requiring connection to these services when they are placed within 75 feet of a subject property that uses a septic tank. Geographic Information Systems (GIS) information obtained from the FLDOH contains OSTDSs that are inspected by the FLDOH; the data was last updated in June 2008. According to the data, the City has approximately 218 septic tanks within the jurisdictional boundary and this includes Kaywood subdivision in West Sanford. Furthermore, within the City's water service area there are approximately 695 septic tanks. The data does not delineate between which septic tanks are for commercial verses residential use. There are a variety of soil types around the land area that serves septic tank. Table 4.3 describes the soil type and it suitability for septic tanks. [Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank] City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 4-11 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 Citv of Sanford Table 4-5 Soil Suitability Infrastructure Element Soil Type Description Drainage and Suitability for Septic Permeability Tanks Astatula - Consists of very deep, well drained, Well drained with rapid and moderate Fair Apopka and moderately permeable soils permeability Tavares - Consists of very deep, moderately Moderately well Millhopper well drained, rapid to moderately drained, rapid to Fair permeable soils slow permeability Myakka & Consists of very deep, poorly to very Poorly drained, rapid to slow Fair Eaugallie poorly drained soils permeability Brighton - Consists of very deep, very poorly Samsula drained, moderately to rapidly Very poorly drained Fair permeable soils Basinger & Consists of very deep, poorly drained Poorly and very Delray and very poorly drained soils poorly drained, rapid Fair ermeabilit Consists of very deep, very poorly or Poorly or very poorly St. Johns poorly drained, moderately permeable drained, moderate Good soils permeability Poorly and very Eaugallie & Consists of deep and very deep, poorly drained, very Immokalee poorly drained and very poorly rapid to moderate Good drained soils and slow permeability Sources: United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service Soil Surveys St. Johns River Water Management District An analysis of soil surveys for areas served by septic tanks within the City's jurisdictional boundary was performed in the above table. The ranges of soil suitability are from fair to good. In order for a particular soil type or a combination of soil types to be suitable for septic tank use, the soil should have a moderate to slow permeability. The permeability of a soil affects the rate of velocity that the effluent moves through the soil and ultimately to the water table. Slow travel will provide the opportunity for good absorption of effluent components to soil particles and allow and widen the opportunity for bacteria and viruses to die off, along with the biodegradation of degradable materials. [9J -5.011(f)(4)] STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SUB -ELEMENT The geographic location of the City places it in one of the largest drainage basins within the St. Johns River Water Management District. This provides the City with unique opportunities and challenges for stormwater management. Stormwater drainage within the City is performed by a combination of man-made structures designed to collect, convey, hold, divert, or discharge stormwater. In addition to man-made structures, there are a significant amount of natural drainage features that facilitate stormwater drainage. Stormwater runoff is one of the primary contributors to surface water pollution. Furthermore, the pollution from stormwater runoff can enter into groundwater recharge City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 4-12 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Infrastructure Element areas where the pollutants can migrate into the Floridan Aquifer and pollute groundwater supplies. With the appropriate use of Comprehensive Plan goals, objectives, and policies, Land Development Regulations, and the proper management of stormwater facilities the negative effects of pollution can be mitigated against and groundwater resources protected. Natural Drainage Features Due to the City's geographic location, there are significant natural drainage features that facilitate the collection and discharge of stormwater. The City is located in the Middle St. Johns River Basin. This basin encompasses the watersheds of the St. Johns River, the Wekiva River, and the Econolahatchee River along with Lake Monroe and Lake Jesup. The entire basin is comprised of two sub -basins that typically receive a majority of stormwater flows. The two sub -basins that make up the larger Middle St. Johns River Basin are the Lake Jesup drainage basin and the Lake Monroe drainage basin. Other natural drainage features are: Lake Jennie, Reservoir Lake, Lake Ada, Hidden Lake, Lake Minnie, Silver Lake and Lake Golden. Together all these features comprise the Middle St. Johns River Basin which is greater than 1,200 square miles. A more in depth and technical analysis of the Middle St. Johns River Basin has been completed by the SJRWMD. The two most recognized water features that are impacted by the City's stormwater system are Lake Monroe and Lake Jesup. Lake Monroe is located along the City's northern border and Lake Jesup is located to the southeast of the City. Lake Monroe is approximately 17 square miles and is part of the larger St. Johns River system. The lake has been identified as a priority water body because of its potential water resources and its impact on the ecology of the surrounding area. As of 2004, the water quality rating for Lake Monroe was fair while the water quality ratings for Lake Jesup were poor. The SJRWMD completed a Surface Water Improvement and Management Plan for the Basin in 2002. The City has a close working relationship with the District and coordinates stormwater system improvements with the District. This coordination is typically done through the City Manager, the Planning and Building Department, or Public Works Department depending on the issue. Man -Made Drainage Features The man-made drainage features that the City owns and operates are drainage conveyance mechanisms which include pipes, ponds, culverts, and swales. The City continually monitors development patterns and land use changes to ensure that adequate stormwater drainage exists or will be in place to serve development. The City has created performance standards that impact open space, the minimization in the reduction of recharge areas, and the preservation of original soil types and grading. One of the largest concerns of the City is to reduce residential flooding and a majority of the City's man-made stormwater improvement focuses on this aspect. However, in the process of reducing flooding in residential neighborhoods the City is actively enforcing policy mechanisms that retain stormwater run-off to maximize aquifer recharge. This is done through specific criteria for drainage easements and site preparation. [9J -5.011(a)] City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 4-13 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 of Sanford Infrastructure Element Existing Storm Drainage System and Level -of -Service Both the natural and man-made drainage facilities provide stormwater drainage to the entire City. As mentioned before, due to the location of the City, the stormwater system receives flows from areas located outside the jurisdictional boundaries. The stormwater system has been designed to accommodate a 25 year — 24 hour retention/detention of stormwater. Soils also play an integral role in stormwater drainage. The ability of different soil types to absorb and retain stormwater will have an impact on the amount of runoff, which will subsequently increase or decrease the demand placed on a stormwater system. For example, a beach quality soil has an excellent absorption rate and very good infiltration, while a clay soil type is almost completely impervious and can accommodate very little storage. The principal and most abundant soil located within the jurisdictional boundary of the City, according to the City's Water Supply Facilities Work Plan, is Urban Land- Astatula Apopka. Small amounts of Nittaw-Felda-Floridana, Brig hton-Samsula-Sanibel and Pompano-Nittaw-Basinger are located on the south side of Lake Monroe and the west side of Lake Jesup has the soil type Nittaw-Felda-Floridana. The Urban Land- Astatula Apopka consists of very well drained sandy soils, while the Nittaw-Felda- Floridana, Brig hton-Samsula-San ibel and Pompano-Nittaw-Basinger types consists of poorly drained mineral soils. These poorly drained soils are mostly located on the shores of Lake Monroe and Lake Jesup. The Public Works Department is responsible for the maintenance and proper function of the stormwater system. The Department is in the process of completing several significant improvements to the system. The Cloud Branch 13th Street Outfall Project is adding additional reservoir capacity through the construction of two large ponds. In addition, the completion of two large box culverts will significantly enhance control and flow throughout the entire system. Also tying into the Cloud Branch 13th Street project is the addition of another drainage line just east of US 17-92 to provide better drainage along that major roadway. Several other recently completed projects have enclosed open drainage ditches along roadways which provide additional safety to motorists and the public. [9J -5.011(e)(0] For regulations and programs that govern land use and development of natural drainage features and groundwater recharge areas, please see the Natural Groundwater Aquifer Recharge Element. [9J -5.011(h)] SOLID WASTE SUB -ELEMENT Seminole County is responsible for the storage and disposal of solid waste throughout the County. The County operates and maintains the Osceola Road Landfill (ORL) and the Central Transfer Station (CTS). The City is responsible for the collection and transportation of solid waste generated within its jurisdictional boundaries to one of the County's two solid waste facilities. Typically, the solid waste generated by the City is delivered to the CTS due to its central location within the County's urban area. Solid Waste Disposal System Seminole County maintains and operates two solid waste facilities. The ORL is the County's main solid waste facility and is located in the northeastern corner of the City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 4-14 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Infrastructure Element County. This facility provides disposal and recycling services to the entire County. The CTS is located in the center of the County, where it is easily accessible to a majority of the County's urban areas. The CTS is an essential part to the County's waste management system. It provides a central point at which solid waste generated from the municipalities can be deposited before it is transferred to the ORL. According to the Seminole County Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR), the ORL and CTS are projected to meet the needs of the County beyond the 2025 planning horizon. This estimate is based on current County regulations, disposal techniques, and operational policies. [9J -5.011(f)] The City is responsible for the collection and delivery of solid waste that is generated within its jurisdictional boundary. The City has contracted this service out to a private waste hauler that collects and distributes the solid waste generated in the City to one of the Counties two solid waste facilities, the CTS or the ORL. The City has contracted the collection and delivery of solid waste with Waste Services, Inc. The FDEP collects data on solid waste facilities within each county in the State. The latest data numbers for Seminole County are for the year 2006. For the year ending in December 2006, the ORL landfilled 423,553 tons of solid waste. The total amount of solid waste recycled was 150,339 tons. Combining both totals, the County generated 573,892 tons of solid waste. [9.1-5.011(a)(b)(e)] Recycling Effort The City has established a recycling program for residents to participate in. Residents are allowed to place an unlimited amount of accepted recyclable materials out for collection in a 14 -gallon recycle bin provided by the City. The following are materials that are accepted for the curbside pickup recycling program: newspapers, magazines, junk mail, mixed office paper, cardboard, plastic bottle #1 - #7, glass bottles and jars of clear, green or brown color, aluminum cans, steel cans, and telephone books. Through this recycling program the City is moving toward achieving compliance with the State's recycling goals. By offering curbside pick-up, the City is making it very easy and accessible for broad participation in the program. [9J -5.011(f)] Solid Waste Level -of -Service Table 4-6 Solid Waste Level of Service Year Population* Solid Waste Tonnage LOS 2004 46,491 52,902 6.24 2005 48,801 52,041 5.84 2006 51,227 62,088 6.64 2007 52,618 1 61,069 1 6.36 *Population figures obtained from the City of Sanford Adopted Water Supply Plan [9J -5.011(e)] City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 4-15 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Infrastructure Element Future Projects, Programs, and Policies The City's solid waste level of service will be maintained through the planning period and be coordinated with the County's LOS standard. Since the solid waste disposal facilities are owned and operated by Seminole County, there are no solid waste facilities or improvements planned by the City for the foreseeable future. [9J -5.011(f)] NATURAL GROUNDWATER AQUIFER RECHARGE SUB -ELEMENT The purpose of the natural groundwater aquifer recharge sub -element is to identify and analyze natural groundwater recharge areas for the Floridan Aquifer that may be located within the City. Furthermore, existing regulations and programs that govern land use and development around these recharge areas will be identified and assessed for their strengths and weaknesses in maintaining the natural recharge function of the area. Natural Groundwater Aquifers There are two aquifer systems within the City, the Floridan Aquifer and the non -artesian surficial aquifer. The Floridan Aquifer is an artesian aquifer that is comprised of limestone and dolomite. An artesian aquifer holds groundwater under natural pressure that is greater than atmospheric pressure, which will allow water to rise naturally in tightly cased wells that run down to the aquifer. As described in the Potable Water Sub - Element, the City's primary source of raw potable water is drawn from this aquifer under the CUP approved by SJRWMD. The City is currently permitted to withdrawal 9.02 MGD in the year 2008 and increasing to 9.58 by the year 2017. The surficial aquifer is composed of sand, shells, and some clay. This aquifer is directly replenished by rainfall and its flow typically follows the topography of the land. In the absence of adequate water quality from the Floridan Aquifer, the surficial aquifer is an important source for individual domestic wells and small-scale irrigation. The surficial aquifer is directly impacted by pollutants that can seep into the aquifer from stormwater runoff. These pollutants can then seep into the Floridan Aquifer, which is the City's primary source for potable water. Therefore, it is of high importance that aquifer recharge areas be protected from improper development. [9J -5.011(a)] Aquifer Recharge Areas The City is located within the Middle St. Johns River Basin. Detailed information on this river basin is provided within the Stormwater Management Sub -Element. The SJRWMD has provided general inventory report of the groundwater resources that are present in the Middle St. Johns River Basin in the form of a technical report titled Middle St. Johns Ground Water Basin Resource Availability Inventory. In addition, the SJRWMD provides geographic information systems (GIS) data for aquifer recharge areas. This GIS data was used to provide a general description of where the most significant recharge areas area present within the City. According to the Seminole County EAR, the most beneficial recharge areas are located in the southwest part of the County and include the Interstate 4 corridor, and the Geneva area. The Interstate4 corridor runs along the western jurisdictional boundary of Sanford for approximately 1.5 miles and the aquifer recharge areas range between 0 to 4 -inches City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 4-16 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Infrastructure Element per year and 8 to 12 -inches per year. The central portion of the City contains recharge areas that range from 0 to 4, 4 to 8, and 8 to 12 -inches per year. Southern portions of the City contain recharge areas that range from 0 to 8 inches per year and the western area has recharge areas ranging from 0 to 20 inches per year. The majority of the northern portion of the City's jurisdictional boundary has been determined to be a discharge area. Typically, aquifer recharge is done through the use of ponds that store stormwater. These ponds can be man-made or naturally occurring. In addition, reclaimed water may be used to facilitate aquifer recharge. The two primary factors that impact ponds ability for recharge are soil conditions and water table. The soil conditions impact the peculation of water into the water table and water table depth impacts how far the water must travel. Protection Mechanisms for Recharge Areas The City has four wellfields that are used to withdraw raw potable water from the Floridan Aquifer. These wellfields are described in the Potable Water Sub -Element. The City understands the importance of protecting these wellfields and all of designated high aquifer recharge areas from development pressures and pollution. Therefore, the City has been proactive and aggressive in establishing Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan policies to provide protection to these assets. As part of the Future Land Use Map series (Water Resources Map 1-1), the City has mapped their wellfields and recharge areas and provides them protection from development under the Resource Protection future land use designation. This allows for adjacent land uses to be properly planned and managed in regards to protecting and buffering these sensitive areas. To further protect these areas, the City has established open space requirements for new and redevelopment projects, and allows the SJRWMD to review and comment on development proposals and their potential impact on groundwater recharge. The City also engages in protection through conservation efforts. The City's Water Supply Facilities Work Plan identified and analyzed projects and measure designed to reduce the consumption of aquifer resources for non -potable uses, most notably irrigation. This has led the City to become one of the most abundant suppliers of reclaimed water. The City's reclaimed efforts and system is described in the Potable Water Sub -Element. To enhance the recharge effect, the City continues to manage the stormwater system and its facilities to maximize aquifer recharge zones. [9J -5.011(h)] Refer to Major Natural Drainage Features and natural groundwater recharge maps. [9J-5.011(9)] City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 4-17 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 Citv of Sanford Conservation Element CONSERVATION ELEMENT DATA, INVENTORY, AND ANALYSIS REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS IDENTIFICATION & ANALYSIS OF NATURAL RESOURCES..................................................5-2 SurfaceWater Quality...............................................................................................................5-2 Groundwater............................................................................................................................. 5-3 Floodplains................................................................................................................................ 5-3 Soil Erosion and Mineral Resources........................................................................................ 5-4 Hazardous Waste Management and Brownfields Areas..........................................................5-4 EcologicalCommunities........................................................................................................... 5-5 AirQuality................................................................................................................................. 5-8 EXISTING AND POTENTIAL CONSERVATION AND USE OF NATURAL RESOURES.......... 5-8 Protection of Quality and Quantity of Surface Water................................................................5-8 Protection of Quality and Quantity of Groundwater..................................................................5-9 Protection of Vegetative Communities and Wildlife Habitats...................................................5-9 Protectionof Air Quality............................................................................................................5-9 CURRENT AND PROJECTED POTABLE WATER NEEDS.......................................................5-9 Existing Potable Water Sources............................................................................................... 5-9 Existing and Projected Potable Water Available - Capacity and Demand . .............................. 5-9 SUMMARY.................................................................................................................................. 5-11 LIST OF TABLES Table 5-1: Listed Species in the State of Florida..........................................................................5-5 Table 5-2: Public Water Supply and Domestic Self -Supply Average Finished Water Demand Projections...........................................................5-10 City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 5-1 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 of Sanford CONSERVATION ELEMENT DATA, INVENTORY, AND ANALYSIS Conservation Element The purpose of the Conservation Element is to promote the conservation, use and protection of natural resources within the City of Sanford. The objective of the Conservation Element Data Inventory and Analysis (DIA) Report is to document the existing conditions for various natural resources found within the City and identify key community priorities for conservation strategies. The DIA Report also examines the current and projected water needs for the community over the 10 -year planning horizon to ensure adequate water supply is available to support future demands. Together this information serves as the foundation for the goals, objectives, and policies prepared to guide future development within the City of Sanford. IDENTIFICATION & ANALYSIS OF NATURAL RESOURCES [Rule 9J-5.013] Rule 9J -5.013(1)(a) of the Florida Administrative Code requires a local government to identify and analyze all natural resources found within its jurisdiction. Natural resources may include air, water, wetlands, uplands, groundwater, floodplains, minerals, soil erosion, wildlife, and vegetative resources. Surface Water Quality. Lake Monroe is a major water body located partially within the City of Sanford, on the City's north side. The Lake is approximately 17.1 square miles and is part of the St. Johns River system. Lake Monroe is listed on the minimum flow and levels Priority Water Body List and Schedule, meaning minimum water levels must be established for the Lake, pursuant to section 373.042(2), F.S. The Lake is identified as a priority water body due to its importance to the region and relevance to the conditions of water resources and the ecology of the surrounding areas. According to Technical Publication SJ2007-2 from the SJRWMD, the following factors are used to determine the priority water body list: • Whether the existing or projected demand for water in the area is sufficient to meaningfully affect flows and/or levels of the surface water or groundwater • Whether any water supply development is planned in the area that may adversely affect regionally significant environmental resources • Whether the system includes regionally significant environmental resources • Whether historic hydrologic records (flows and/or levels) are available to allow statistical analysis and calibration of computer models when selecting particular water bodies in areas with many water bodies There is one water quality monitoring site located in Lake Monroe (Station LMAC), and three water quality monitoring sites on Lake Jesup (Stations OW -2, 4 and 6), which is a few miles to the south of the City of Sanford. As of 2004, the water quality rating for Lake Monroe was fair, with no discernable trend in terms of improvement or degradation. The water quality at all three of the monitoring stations on Lake Jesup was rated as poor. Water quality ratings are based on the Florida Water Quality Index (WQI), correlated with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Profiles Index (NPI). The rating combines dissolved oxygen, pH, bacteria, nutrients, turbidity, and inorganic and organic toxics into a single index, ranging between 0 and 100. For lakes, values less than 60 represent good water quality; values between 60 and 70 represent fair quality; and greater than 60 represents poor quality. For lakes, a poor water quality value means the lake water is considered to have an unhealthy concentration of nutrients, chlorophyll a, or both. Data for the evaluation of Lakes Monroe and Jesup were collected between 2000 and 2004. [Rule 9j -5.013(1)(a-1)] City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 5-2 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 Citv of Sanford Conservation Element Groundwater and Reuse. The City's Water Facilities Work Plan was adopted in July 2007 and identifies needed water supply facilities for at least a 10 -year planning period. The intent of the plan is to outline strategies and methods of meeting potable and non -potable water demands within the City over the next 20 years. The plan places an emphasis on environmentally beneficial and economically sound solutions. The major themes for water supply maintenance identified in the plan include development and optimization of groundwater supplies, expansion of reclaimed water systems, water conservation programs including conservation rate structures, utilization of permitted surface water augmentation system to meet irrigation demands, and development of aquifer storage and recovery to reduce impacts of groundwater withdrawals. In order to enhance the use of reuse water and conserve potable water resources, the City participates in the North Seminole Regional Reclaimed Water and Surface Water Optimization System Expansion and Optimization Project. This multi jurisdictional project, including Sanford, Lake Mary, and Seminole County, includes a surface water augmentation system capable of withdrawing and treating up to 7.3 million gallons per day (MGD) of St. Johns River water for use in the reclaimed water system. Additional projects include water system improvements, added water storage, reclaimed water main transmission lines, and interconnections with the cities of Altamonte Springs, Oviedo, Winter Springs, and Volusia County. Groundwater is the principal source of potable water for the City of Sanford. The source of water for this area is the Floridan aquifer system, one of the world's most productive aquifers. Surface water is not a substantial source of potable water within the City, and because the aquifer is the source for potable water, it is vital that the City continue to work with the SJRWMD and other agencies to ensure pollution is minimized and drinking water standards are maintained. [Rule 9j -5.013(1)(a-1)] Floodplains. National Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMS) produced by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) are available for the City of Sanford. The majority of the land in the City is classified by FEMA as Flood Zone X, which is the zone least likely to experience flooding. Smaller portions of the City are classified with the Zone A, Zone AE, and Zone AH flood zone categories, particularly in areas surrounding Lake Monroe, smaller area lakes, wetland areas and along drainage areas including the Mill Creek and Cloud Branch systems. National Flood Insurance Program definitions for the flood zones located within the City include: ■ Zone A - An area inundated by 100 -year flooding, for which Base Flood Elevations (BFEs) have not been determined. ■ Zone AE - An area inundated by 100 -year flooding, for which BFEs have been determined. ■ Zone AH — An area inundated by 100 -year flooding, for which BFEs have been determined; Flood depths of 1 to 3 feet (usually areas of ponding). ■ Zone X — An area outside the 100 -year floodplains; areas of 100 -year flood with average depths of less than 1 foot or with drainage areas less than 1 square mile; or areas protected by levees from the 100 -year flood. The areas outside of Zone X are mainly located around small lakes within the City. Overall, flooding is not a major concern for the City of Sanford. [Rule 9J -5.013(1)(a-2)] City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 5-3 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 of Sanford Conservation Element Soil Erosion and Mineral Resources. There are numerous soil types found within the City of Sanford. The following soil types are found within the City: • Adamsville- Sparr Fine Sanes • Arents 0-5% Slopes • Astatula-Apopka Fine Sands 5-8% and 8-12% Slopes • Basinger -Delray Fine Sands • Basinger -Smyrna Fine Sands- Depressional • Basinger Samsula Hontoon Soils- Depressional • Brig hton-Samsula Sanibel Mucks • Canova Terra Ceia Mucks • Canova Terra Ceia Mucks • Eaugallie Immokalee Fine Sands • Felda Manatee Mucky Fine Sands- Depressional • Immokalee Sand • Malabar Fine Sand • Manatee-Floridiana Holopaw Soils- Frequently Flooded • Myakka and Eau Gallie Fine Sands • Nittaw Mucky Fine Sand- Depressional • Paola -St. Lucie Sands 0-5% Slopes • Pineda Fine Sand • Pomello Fine Sand 0-5% Slopes • Pompano Fine Sand- Occasionally Flooded • Seffner Fine Sand • St. Johns Eaugallie Fine Sands • Tavares-Millhopper Fine Sands 0-5% and 5-8% Slopes • Udorthents- Excavated • Urban Land 0-12% Slope • Wabasso Fine Sand The most common of the above listing in the City is Urban Land 0-12 percent slope. This classification is particularly concentrated in the north central portion of the City, near Lake Monroe. Myakka and Eaugallie Fine Sands and Tavares-Millhopper Fine Sands 0-5% are also fairly prevalent throughout the City. The remainder of each of the soil types are fairly scattered throughout the City and not prevelant. The Millhopper soils series are characterized by being deep, moderately well drained, and moderately permeable. This soil type is found in central and southern Florida with slopes ranging from 0 to 8 percent. Myakka and Eau Gallie sands tend to be deep and poorly drained. No mining operations are currently occurring in the City of Sanford. Soil erosion is not a significant problem in the City. Due to its relatively flat terrain, adequate drainageways including bank re -enforcement, and the monitoring of construction activities to minimize erosion, the City has adequately mitigated against erosion issues. Areas the City will need to continue to focus on are areas of steeper slopes, as these areas tend to have more significant soil erosion. [Rule 9J -5.013(1)(a -3)j Hazardous Waste Management and Brownfields Areas. The Solid Waste Department of Seminole County accommodates household hazardous waste for residents of Sanford. The disposal of hazardous waste is free of charge for common household substances including anti - City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 5-4 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 Citv of Sanford freeze, automobile batteries, insecticides, lawn chemicals, propane tanks, rechargeable used oil. These wastes are Longwood. Conservation Element compact fluorescent light tubes, gasoline and cans, glues, mercury -containing devices, paints, poisons, pool chemicals, batteries, solvents, televisions, thermostats, thermometers, and accepted the Central Transfer Station located in the City of There are no brownfield sites with executed Brownfield Site Rehabilitation Agreements (BSRA) located within the City. The nearest brownfield with a BSRA is the former Microvia Facility, located in Casselberry. The City does have an area identified as a brownfield area, the Sanford Economic Enhancement District. This District, designated as such in 2007, is generally oriented north to south along French Avenue/Orlando Drive (US 17/92) through the central portion of the City. A brownfield area is defined as an area containing abandoned, idle, or underused industrial and commercial facilities where expansion or redevelopment is complicated by environmental contamination. Sanford designated this area as a brownfield area to facilitate environmental remediation, rehabilitation, and economic redevelopment in the US 17/92 Corridor. [Rule 9j -5.013(1)(a-1)] Ecological Communities. The majority of land within the City is currently developed. The Florida Land Use Cover Classification System (FLUCCS) is used to identify the uses of land and types of vegetative communities present. The system contains four levels of categorization with each level increasing in specificity. Currently, the most prevalent classifications in the City include residential medium density and airports. Another common classification is commercial and services. A small percentage of the land is classified with environmental features. The dominant vegetative land covers throughout the City include mixed wetland hardwoods, cypress, and hardwood conifer mixed. The southwestern portion of the City contains a fairly significant acreage of wetlands. According to information from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services, two types of wetlands scattered throughout the City are freshwater emergent wetlands and freshwater forested/shrub wetlands. The latter type is concentrated along Lake Monroe, except in the downtown region of the City. Areas of wetlands are highly limited in the downtown core. Table 5-1 provides a list of the threatened and endangered species in the State of Florida. New development within the City must adhere to state legislation regarding these species and minimizing impacts to their habitats. [Rule 9J-5.013(a)(a-5)] Table 5-1 Listed Species in the State of Florida Scientific Name Common Name State Status FISH Acipenser oxyrinchus (Acipenser ox rinchus desotoi Atlantic sturgeon (Gulf sturgeon) SSC Acipenser brevirostrum shortnose sturgeon E Micro terus cataractae shoal bass SSC Micro terus notius Suwannee bass SSC Rivulus marmoratus Rivulus (mangrove rivulus SSC Cyprinodon varie atus hubbsi Lake Eustis pupfish SSC Notro is melanostomus blackmouth shiner E Pteronotro is welaka bluenose shiner SSC Fundulus'enkinsi saltmarsh to minnow SSC Menidia conchorum key silverside T Crystallaria as rella crystal darter T City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 5-5 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 Citv of Sanford Conservation Element Scientific Name Common Name State Status Etheostoma histrio harlequin darter SSC Etheostoma okalossae okaloosa darter E Etheostoma olmstedi maculaticeps Southern tessellated darter (tessellated johnny darter SSC Starksia starcki key blenny SSC AMPHIBIANS Amb stoma cin ulatum flatwoods salamander SSC Haideotriton wallacei Georgia blind salamander SSC Hyla andersonii pine barrens treefrog SSC Rana okaloosae Florida bog frog SSC Rana capito go her frog SSC REPTILES Alligator mississippiensis American alligator SSC Crocod lus acutus American crocodile E Diado his punctatus acricus key rin neck snake T Drymarchon corais cou eri Eastern indigo snake T Ela he guttata red rat snake SSC Nerodia clarkii taeniata Atlantic salt marsh water snake (Atlantic salt marsh snake T Pituo his melanoleucus mu itus Florida pine snake SSC Stilosoma extenuatum short -tailed snake T Storeria deka i vista Florida brown snake T Tantilla oolitica rim rock crowned snake T Thamno his sauritus sackeni Florida ribbon snake T Eumeces a re ius lividus bluetail mole skink T Eumeces a re ius a re ius Florida Key mole skink SSC Neose s re noldsi sand skink T Go herus polyphemus gopher tortoise T Gra tem s barbouri Barbour's map turtle SSC Macroclem s temminckii alligator snapping turtle SSC Kinosternon baurii striped mud turtle E Pseudem s concinna suwanniensis Suwannee cooter SSC Caretta caretta loggerhead sea turtle (loggerhead sea turtle T Chelonia m das green seaturtle(green sea turtle E Dermochel s coriacea leatherback seaturtle leatherback sea turtle E Eretmochel s imbricata hawksbill seaturtle hawksbill sea turtle E Lepidochelys kempii Kemp's ridley seaturtle (Kemp's ridley sea turtle E BIRDS Charadrius melodus i i92 plover T Charadrius alexandrinus snowy lover Cuban snowy lover T Haemato us palliatus American oystercatcher SSG Pelecanus occidentalis brown pelican SSC R ncho s ni er black skimmer SSC Sterna antillarum least tem T Sterna dougalli (Sterna dougallii dou allii roseate tem T Aramus guarauna lim kin SSC E retta rufescens reddish egret SSC E retta thula snowy egret SSC E retta caerulea little blue heron SSC E retta tricolor tricolored heron SSC Eudocimus albus white ibis SSC Grus canadensis pratensis Florida sandhill crane T Grus americana whOODina crane SSC M cteria americana wood stork E Platalea ala'a roseate spoonbill SSC Athene cunicularia Athene cunicularia burrowing owl Florida burrowing owl SSC City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 5-6 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 of Sanford Conservation Element Scientific Name Common Name State Status floridana Caracara cheriway (Polyborus plancus audubonii) crested caracara (Audubon's crested caracara T Falco peregrinus peregrine falcon E Falco s arverius paulus Southeastern American kestrel T Haliaeetus leucocehalus bald eagle T Rostrhamus sociabilis plumbeus snail kite (Everglades snail kite E A helocoma coerulescens Florida scrub jay T Ammodramus maritimus mirabilis Cape Sable seaside sparrow E Ammodramus savannarum floridanus Florida grasshopper sparrow E Ammodramus maritimus peninsulae Scott's seaside sparrow SSC Ammodramus maritimus'uncicolus Wakulla seaside sparrow SSC Columba leucocephala white -crowned pigeon T Dendroica kirtlandii Kirtland's warbler E Vermivora bachmanii Bachman's warbler E Came hilus principalis ivory -billed woodpecker E Picoides borealis red -cockaded woodpecker SSC Cistothorus palustris marianae Marian's marsh wren SSC Cistothorus palustris griseus Worthington's marsh wren SSC MAMMALS Puma concolor coryi (Puma [=Felis] concolor co i Florida panther E Ursus americanus floridanus Florida black bear T Mustela vison ever ladensis Everglades mink T Odocoileus vir inianus clavium key deer E S Ivila us palustris hefned Lower Keys marsh rabbit E Sciurus ni er avicennia Big Cypress fox squirrel T Sciurus ni er shermani Sherman's fox squirrel SSC Tamias striatus Eastern chipmunk SSC Oryzomys alustris sanibeli Sanibel Island rice rat SSC Oryzomys argentatus (Oryzomys palustris natator silver rice rat (rice rat, lower FL Keys) E Perom scus polionotus allophrys Choctawhatchee beach mouse E Neotoma floridana smalli Key Largo woodrat E Perom scus gossypinus alla aticola Key Largo Cotton Mouse E Perom scus polionotus niveiventris Southeastern beach mouse T Perom scus polionotus phasma Anastasia Island beach mouse E Perom scus polionotus peninsularis St. Andrews beach mouse E Perom scus polionotus triss Ile sis Perdido Key beach mouse E Podom s floridanus Florida mouse SSC Eumo s glaucinus floridanus Florida mastiff bat E M otis grisescens gray bat E M otis sodalis Indiana bat E Microtus pennsylvanicus dukecampbelli Florida saltmarsh vole (Florida salt marsh vole E Blarina carolonensis [=brevicauda] shermani Sherman's short -tailed shrew SSC Sorex Ion irostris eionis Homosassa shrew SSC Balaeno tera borealis sei whale E Balaeno tera physalus fin whale finback whale E Eubalaena glacialis (Balaena glacialis incl. australis North Atlantic right whale (right whale) E Me a tera novaean lice humpback whale E Ph seter macrocephalus sperm whale E Trichechus manatus latirostris Trichechus manatus Florida manatee (West Indian manatee) E INVERTEBRATES CRUSTACEANS City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 5-7 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 of Sanford Conservation Element Scientific Name Common Name State Status Procambarus econfinae Panama City crayfish econfina crayfish) SSC Procambarus erythrops sims sink crayfish Santa Fe cave crayfish) SSC Procambarus pictus black creek crayfish SSC INSECTS Cyclargus [=Hermiargus] thomasi bethunebakeri Miami blue butterfly E Heraclides aristodemus ponceanus Schaus' swallowtail butterfly E MOLLUSKS Li uus fasciatus Florida tree snail SSC Orthalicus reses Orthalicus reses [not incl. nesod as Stock Island tree snail E Source: Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Table Key FWC = Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission E = Endangered T = Threatened SSC = Species of Special Concern Air Quality. An air quality monitoring site is located in the southern portion of the City at the Seminole Community College. This site began monitoring ozone levels in 1980. As of 2008, the year-to-date three year running average for ozone is 72 parts per billion (ppb). The non - attainment threshold for ozone levels is 75 ppb, indicating that the air quality within the City is at an acceptable level, and in attainment of existing standards. The City, as well as the entirety of the State, is in attainment of Particulate (<2.5 micrometers and <10 micrometers) standards set forth by the EPA. [Rule 9J -5.013(1)(a-1)] EXISTING AND POTENTIAL CONSERVATION AND USE OF NATURAL RESOURCES [Rule 9J -5.013(1)(b)] Rule 9J -5.013(1)(b) of the Florida Administrative Code requires that a local government identify commercial uses, recreational uses, conservation uses, and pollution problems within its natural resources. The majority of the City is already developed, and those areas currently identified as environmentally sensitive through the Conservation Future Land Use designation are not proposed for development. The City coordinates with the SJRWMD regarding environmental issues to promote conservation and minimize pollution. Air quality standards are being met. There are no large-scale mining operations located within the City. The City is located south of Lake Monroe and north of Lake Jesup, two important water bodies within the St. Johns River watershed. In order to protect these resources and improve water quality, the City will continue working with the SJRWMD and FDEP to ensure steps are being taken to minimize pollution from runoff into these water bodies. Additionally, drinking water is mainly received from the Floridan Aquifer, and measures to reduce the potential for groundwater contamination will continue to be enforced. Protection of Quality and Quantity of Surface Water. Stormwater runoff is the primary contributor to surface water pollution. The City continues to coordinate with the County, City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 5_8 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 Citv of Sanford Conservation Element SJRWMD and FDEP to monitor water quality levels in area lakes, specifically Lake Monroe and Lake Jesup. Due to Lake Jesup being located outside of the City limits, coordination efforts with regard to this waterbody are performed with the County. Lake Monroe, as part of the St. Johns River system which ultimately flows into the Atlantic Ocean, is a riverain aquatic wetland that serves as a habitat for various vegetative and wildlife communities. Given Lake Monroe's importance to the ecological community, environmental conditions need to be heavily monitored and pollution controls in place to protect the variety of species. The City has budgeted funding for various stormwater related projects to improve stormwater conditions throughout the City. Some of the stormwater projects identified in the Capital Improvements Plan are Cloud Branch Railroad Corridor Stormwater Improvements, Southwest Road Drainage Improvements, Southeast Outfall- final phase of the stormwater master plan, and Driftwood Lane Drainage Project. Protection of Quality and Quantity of Groundwater. The Floridian aquifer is located beneath the City and is the main source of water for this region. Groundwater recharge is critical in this area, particularly because of its role in supplying potable water. The following tools are in place to regulate the protection of area groundwater supplies: • Through the Comprehensive Plan • Land Development Regulations • State and Federal regulations • Allowable land uses and open space requirements Protection of Vegetative Communities and Wildlife Habitats. Despite being an urbanized area, there are areas of vegetative communities and wildlife communities. These areas are concentrated in the southwestern portion of the City and near Lake Monroe, specifically outside of the downtown area abutting the lake. The City will continue to protect existing natural areas surrounding the lake, which will aid in the water quality protection efforts in Lake Monroe. Natural vegetative communities help to absorb potential pollutants from stormwater runoff prior to entering a body of water. These natural areas also provide habitats for wildlife. Protection of Air Quality. As discussed in the previous section, the City of Sanford is currently in attainment of air quality standards. Areas of the Orlando Metropolitan Area, including Sanford, do have days each year in non -attainment and the City will continue to coordinate with the EPA and the FDEP to develop policies and projects to maintain current air quality levels that are in compliance with adopted air quality standards. CURRENT AND PROJECTED POTABLE WATER NEEDS [Rule 9J -5.013(1)(c)] This section provides an inventory of the current and projected water needs and potential sources of potable water for the planning period. The projections are based on current water consumption demand and projected population figures. Existing Potable Water Sources. The City's major source of potable water is groundwater retrieved from the Floridan Aquifer. The City is currently permitted to withdraw 9.02 million gallons per day (MGD). In 2009, the permitted use increases to 9.30 MGD and between 2010 and 2017 the permitted use is 9.58 MGD. Existing and Projected Potable Water Available - Capacity and Demand. Based on the consumptive use permit (CUP) with the SJRWMD, the City of Sanford is permitted to withdraw City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 5-9 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 of Sanford Conservation Element 9.02 MGD. By 2017, the City is projected to have a demand for 9.49 MGD while being permitted to withdraw 9.58 MGD. Based on projected growth in the City, after 2017 the demand for water is expected to exceed the amount permitted for withdrawal. The City and surrounding areas are proactively addressing water demand issues. The Cities of Sanford and Lake Mary have entered into the Tri -Party Agreement with Seminole County to expand reuse water to aid in the reduction of groundwater withdrawal from the Floridan Aquifer. The City is also actively involved with the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) to plan for future water needs and efforts to reduce per capita use. Due to the projected steady increase in demand, the City must continue to partner with the County, surrounding municipalities, the SJRWMD and FDEP to ensure adequate water supplies in the future. The City continues to participate in the Tri -Party Agreement with the City of Lake Mary and Seminole County. This agreement was created to enhance the use of reclaimed water and surface water augmentation from the St. Johns River. Continuing to develop and increase the use of reclaimed water systems will aid in reducing the demand for potable water. As a result of this agreement, per -capita use of water has decreased. The City is also entered into the North Seminole Regional Reclaimed Water and Surface Water Optimization System Expansion and Optimization Project. This alternative water supply project is a multi jurisdictional project between the cities of Sanford and Lake Mary, and Seminole County, and is supported by the SJRWMD. The project includes a surface water augmentation system capable of withdrawing and treating up to 7.3 MGD of water from the St. Johns River for use in the reclaimed water system. Table 5-2 identifies the projected demand in the City for a 10 year period as well as the CUP permitted withdrawal. Through the time period, water demand in the City is projected to be within permitted withdrawal rates. However, beyond this period the City is expected to surpass the CUP permitted level. To proactively address this increase, the City has and will continue to partner with surrounding jurisdictions and related agencies to develop water supply projects. Table 5-2 City of Sanford Projected Water Demand Year Projected Demand MGD CUP Permitted MGD 2008 7.783 9.02 2009 7.994 9.30 2010 8.211 9.58 2011 8.414 9.58 2012 8.622 9.58 2013 8.835 9.58 2014 9.053 9.58 2015 9.277 9.58 2016 9.383 9.58 2017 9.490 9.58 Source: City of Sanford Water Supply Facilities Work Plan, 2007 City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 5-10 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 Citv of Sanford Summary Conservation Element Overall, environmental conditions and conservation efforts in the City are being successfully implemented and the City is meeting adopted environmental standards. Lake Monroe is currently at acceptable water quality levels and the City continues to coordinate with the County and environmental agencies to monitor and improve conditions on both Lake Monroe and Lake Jesup, despite its location south of the City. Potable water supplies are adequately meeting the demand and the City is in an interlocal agreement to enhance the supply of reuse water. Ozone level and particulate matter standards set forth by the EPA are being met. As growth continues, the City will need to continue current efforts and adjust to changing conditions to continue to be in attainment of environmental regulations. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 5-11 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE CHAPTER 6: RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE ELEMENT GOAL 6-1: MAINTAIN AND INCREASE ADEQUATE RECREATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES AND OPEN SPACE FOR THE VISITORS AND RESIDENTS OF SANFORD. Objective 6-1.1: Provi a System of Parks and Recreation. Continue to provide recreational facilities adequate to meet the recreational needs of residents and visitors consistent with the level of service(LOS) standards established in Policy 6-1.1.1 Policy 6-1.1.1: Establish Level of 69FWGe ,Standards for Parks and Recreation Facilities. The City of Sanford shall apply the teve4-e#-sewisa L�a_standard ' r 1 T#wese ii standards shall be used in reviewing proposals for development orders or permits. Additionally, the City shall review the location of facilities and the types of facilities located throuahout the Citv to ensure that _all _Darts of the Citv are served by adeauate and ropriate recreation facilities. Policy 6-1.1.2: Monitor and Update Recreation nem a 1 of 2011. and every four (4) vears thereafter, the City sh analysis of the use of recreational facilities includina. but not limited to basketball courts. ball fields. plavarounds and tennis courts and recommend to the City Commission any additional or new recreational facilities that may be needed by the City. The analysis shall be The aRelysir,sk�all be directed toward maintaining a system of recreational sites and facilities which is responsive to user needs. Policy 6-1.1.16: Maintain Recreation Impact Fees for Recreation Improvements. The City shall maintains a recreation impact fee programv-4p e14e to ensure that private residential development contributes to recreation, park and open space demand generated by the respective developments., geReFated by the deyelepmeicit. 6-1 November 2009 Policy 6-1.1.A6: Program Future Recreation Capital Improvements. Fity--faecreation improvements feF Whirah pUblie fUREIG We FeElWi%d, aG 9PPeG8d W d8YeleP8F fiReneed ifflpF8YeffieRtS, needed for the City to maintain adopted LOS standards shall be scheduled and incorporated as capital projects in the Capital Improvements EIeFAGR Ewa. Policy 6-1.1.57-: AllainteRawce Maintain of Existing Recreation Land and Facilities. The City shall maintain existing recreation land and facilities through the use of proper management and funding techniques. The City shall assaFe ensure that recreation facilities are we44 properly managed, well maintained, and that quality recreation programs are available to all residents. 44s Policy 6-1.1.68: Utilize Creative Concepts of Urban Design and Conservation of Environmentally Sensitive Open Space. All plans for development or redevelopment of parkland resources shall incorporate creative concepts of urban design and landscape. The plans shall be designed to preserve existing areas of unrestricted access along the shoreline of Lake Monroe and prevent "walling -off' views of the water. Active and passive recreation areas shall be planned in a manner compatible with unique natural features of the site. Park development plans shall be designed to preserve resource protection areas. The design shall provide a circulation system to minimize conflict between pedestrians and vehicles. Adequate landscape and screening shall be integrated into park development plans to minimize land use conflicts, protect stability of established residential areas, and enhance community appearance. Policy 6-1.1.79: Promote Environmental Concern as Part of Recreational Programs. The City shall provide environmental education and management as aFrinte@Fal part of park and recreation policies and programs, in concert with environmental interest groups such as the local Audubon Society. Support for cooperative programming between resource agencies and local educational advisors will provide park and recreation resources as an instrument for environmental teaching„ and as Ra FRA-aiRgs for ar,69FAplishing thir, The City shall develop educational nature trails along environmentally unique segments of Lake Monroe to provide opportunities for environmental education. Policy 6-1.1.848: Designate or Acquire Open Space and Natural Reservations. ____-._L.___11 ___ ____- _J__. --- L-A r_.. --A ......r.4_A 4... ....i.v...4, ...I 11 11 Ar 11 1, The City shall enforce performance criteria designed to protect and preserve wetlands, wetland transition areas and water management areas as sked 5The City shall enforce its stormwater management and wetland preservation regulations to provide for the dedication of conservation easements or reservations where the City finds that the dedication is reasonable in order to protect the value and function of a wetland or to further the objective of stormwater management plan. 6-2 ' • _ l[FOrOMM .- -• • - 1.1 - - • •C••i _ - • - - • •- - •� • •��• l • - �- - •� - • • • • • o�i�•j,��.� • . • • • • N --,t • • •.� ■ - - - AN .11.10 Policy 6-1.2.1: Reguire Be#fa-Fin et Wetlands Buffers. The City shall protect wetlands by requiring that new development institute wetland buffers to comply with the feNewRg 2gecified design and performance criteria. Wetland BUffeF The following wetland buffers shall be required: Wetland buffer of WAmity fwe-f25-) feet in width shall be provided adjacent to wetlands that are five (6) acres or less; a wetland buffer of f#y4503 feet in width shall be provided adjacent to wetlands that are greater than five (&) acres. The aFea ef wetlands iA questi applicable area shall include all contiguous wetlands located on the site and adjacent to the site. The width of the wetland buffer shall be measured and provided parallel to the edge of the wetland in question. The required wetland buffer shall, unless otherwise provided for in this ordinance, be planted and maintained in landscaping materials including ground cover, shrubs, hedges or trees. Policy 6-1.2.2: Regulate Permissible and Prohibited Uses within Wetlands. The following uses shall be permissible within a wetland buffer: • Required project improvements; • Permitted public service structures; • Walkways with pervious surfaces; • Required landscaped areas. The following uses shall be prohibited within a wetland buffer: • Vehicular use areas, off-street parking and/or loading and service areas; • Buildings. In addition, all off-street parking spaces located adjacent to wetland buffer shall be provided with appropriate tire stops, curbs or other vehicular bumper guards designed to prevent any encroachment of vehicles upon the required buffer. Policy 6-1.2.3:, Retain Natural Drainage Characteristics. Natural surface water patterns shall be maintained. PFepesedPost-development drainage conditions shall approximate e*ie�Le- development drainage conditions. The velocity of water flowing through wetlands shall remain approximately the same before and after development. 6-3 Policy 6-1.2.4: Minimize Alteration or Modification. No land use or development shall be permitted that would result in the elimination of any beneficial function of a wetland. If permitted, any alteration or modification of wetlands shall be the minimum necessary to conduct the use or activity. Policy 6-1.2.5: Regulate Stormwater Conditions. The use of cypress, hardwood swamp, bayhead, and hydric hammock wetlands for water retention shall be permitted when utilized to decompose dissolved organics and when such wetlands are not connected to surface waters. Stormwater detention basins shall screen, filter, trap and/or otherwise prevent sediment and debris and minimize the amount of chemicals entering wetlands. Channelization of water to or through a wetland shall not be permitted. Policy 6-1.2.6: Reguire Minimum Ground Floor Elevation. When structures intended for human habitation are proposed to be located in wetlands that are not regulated by the provisions of Ordinance No. 1859, the Administrative Official shall be authorized to establish and require a minimum ground floor elevation sufficient to prevent future flood damage of buildings on the parcel iw and any surrounding buildings impacted by the development. [The following information has been summarized within Policy 6-1.2.1] h10012 A -f #MORty WS (263) fe8t *R Width shall 19a pFeyided aEljae8R1 $A MR419 ler%-, a MQUARd 141 I&F ef fifty (50) feet iR 4.Yid-th shall 138 PF9*19d aGqaGBR IhRR .A EIW8Gt09R. ; OBJECTIVE 6-1.36-1-2: Protect Open Spaces Systems. The City shall preserve open space for recreation activities, for utilitarian uses, arij for purposes of conserving resource protection areas 6-4 Policy 6-1.3.1: Establish Open Space Preservation Criteria. The City of Sanford defiRe &identifies three types of open space: utility open space. conservation open space, and recreation open space, assited-1ielew: The followina policies establish the definition and criteria for preservation of each of these types. Policy 6-1.3.2: Define Utility Open Space. Utility open space includes the following: Transportation Corridors . , • Potentially Incompatible Land Use Buffer Areas PFesewed thFeugh Peliey 4 4.4 . ; • Stormwater Retention Areas .11; Policy 6-1.3.3: Define Conservation Open Space. Conservation open space includes the f to lowing areas identified as resource protection areas_ ' . • Wetlands and Aquatic Habitats - Preserved through the Resource Protection designation of the Future Land Use Ma ; • Floodways and Drainage Ways - Preserved through the Resource Protection designation on the Future Land Use Map„ , 4.2.69, 6 44• , • Aquifer Recharge Areas and Wellfield Protection Areas - Preserved through the Resource Protection designation on the Future Land Use Map., Map 1 4, WBteF Reseweer, Map-, aFid Pe1;ewery 44.4.4,44.4.2,44.43 A 444 6476 6477 64.444• • Upland Wildlife Habitats - „ jProtection measures of these habitat areas shall be involved as a condition of site plan review. • Floodplains - The areas aFeidentifiied on the WEIteF ResewFees Map 1 4 OR the Future Land Use PileFRORt Map series shall be protected PUFSWaRt t9 Peliey 5 4.3.4. Policy 6-1.3.4: Define Recreation Open Space. This classification consists of G ity parks and recreation areas These lands are preserved pursuant to the Parks, Recreation and 6-5 Open Space designation on the Future Land Use Map. Policy 6-1.3.5: Ensure Compatibility with Natural and Open Space Systems. The City shall ensure that all new development is designed in a manner compatible with natural system and shall not encroach upon open space systems. The City shall require dedication of open space systems and/or conservation easements in order to implement this policy where such action is consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare and does not impose a "taking" without just compensation. Policy 6-1.3.6: Regulate Park Conversions. The City may consider the allocation of existing parkland for another use provided that all three (4) of the following conditions are met and the conversion is expressly for the public's well beina: The proposed use is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of this Comprehensive Plan; The facilities located within that park can be provided at another park within the City (i.e., no net loss of recreation facilities); and The resulting level of service for park land is not less than the adopted level Af sewise LL OJof 4.0 acres/1,000 people. City of Sanford Intergovernmental Coordination Element INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT DATA, INVENTORY, AND ANALYSIS TABLE OF CONTENTS INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION INVENTORY Local Governments and Agencies .................................. Regional Agencies.......................................................... StateAgencies................................................................ Federal Agencies............................................................ Franchise Agreements and Related Services ................. Additional Coordination................................................... ........................................................ 7-2 ........................................................ 7-6 ........................................................ 7-7 ........................................................ 7-8 ........................................................ 7-8 ...................................................... 7-10 ...................................................... 7-10 INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION WITHIN AREAS OF CRITICAL CONCERN...... 7-10 INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ANALYSIS.......................................................... 7-10 Effectiveness of Existing Coordination Mechanisms............................................................. 7-11 Potential Intergovernmental Coordination Improvements...................................................... 7-12 GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT AND REGIONAL PLANNING IMPLICATIONS ........................ 7-154 LIST OF TABLES Table 7-1: Inventory of Intergovernmental Coordination Responsibilities .................................... 7-3 Table 7-2: Interlocal, Joint Planning, and Service Agreements ................................................. 7-12 The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 7-1 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Intergovernmental Coordination Element INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT DATA, INVENTORY, AND ANALYSIS Pursuant to Rule 9J-5.015, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.), the purpose of the Intergovernmental Coordination Element is to review the goals, objectives, and policies and to determine and respond to the needs for coordination processes and procedures with adjacent local governments, and regional and state agencies. This Data, Inventory, and Analysis Report presents the following information: ■ Inventory of adjacent governments, local, regional, State, and federal agencies ■ Description of existing coordination mechanisms ■ Review of the effectiveness of existing coordination ■ Review of each comprehensive plan element relevant to specific problems and needs which would benefit from improved or additional coordination ■ Analysis of growth and development proposed in the comprehensive plan and an evaluation of possible need for additional coordination ■ Verification that no areas of critical state concern fall partially or wholly in the city The objective of this report is to identify and evaluate existing intergovernmental agreements, relationships, and coordination efforts in order to identity those that need to be strengthened or maintained, and identify potential opportunities. The Data, Inventory, and Analysis analyzes intergovernmental agreements, joint planning and service agreements, special legislation and joint meetings or work groups which further intergovernmental coordination. This Data, Inventory, and Analysis will serve as the foundation for the goals, objectives, and policies of the City's Intergovernmental Coordination Element. Sections (1) and (2) of Rule 9J-5.015, F.A.C., specify requirements for the Data, Inventory and Analysis Report. This report will identify which portions of the rule are being addressed within each section. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION INVENTORY Table 7-1 of this report provides an inventory of existing intergovernmental coordination mechanisms between the City of Sanford and local, regional, and state agencies, and identified service franchises. This list includes governmental entities which have intergovernmental relationships with the City of Sanford. The inventory provides a brief description of the relationship, the coordination mechanism in place, and the City office primarily responsible for coordination. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 7-2 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Intergovernmental Coordination Element Table 7-1 Inventory of I nteraovern mental Coordination Resnonsibilities The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 7-3 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 Office with Primary Governmental Entity Subject Nature of Relationship Coordination Responsibility • Comprehensive plan issues An informal coordination effort to address City Manager (CM), City of Lake Mary Developments of regional growth management issues both are part ofPlanning and impact (DRI) review an Interlocal School Agreement with Development (P&D) Seminole Countyand its municipalities ■ Comprehensive plan and Comprehensive plan updates and Seminole Countyplan amendment review • DRI review amendment review. DRIs within Sanford are CM, P&D ■ General Plannin Issues reviewed by both jurisdictions • Comprehensive plan Certain aspects of growth and development, Volusia County amendment review particularly with large-scale development CM, P&D ■ DRI review such as DRIs and large-scale comprehensive plan amendments Seminole County School School siting, concurrency issues/level of District Public schools service standards for public school facilities, CM, P&D and coordination with School District Seminole Expressway 0 Transportation and planning issues relating CM, Public Works AuthorityTransportation to future expressway projects P Sanford Airport Authority ■ Transportation Operation, maintenance and development of CM the airport and its facilities Sanford Housing . Affordable housing The development and maintenance of CM, P&D Authorityaffordable housing units in the City Central Florida Commuter Rail Authority . Transportation Proposed commuter rail project coordination CM, P&D Orlando Urban Area Metropolitan Planning ■ Transportation Regional transportation planning for future CM, P&D, PW Organization MetroPlan transportation projects St. Johns River Water Management District Water issues Water permitting for consumptive use, well City Manager, Planning and Building SJRWMD construction, and surface water management Division, Public Works The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 7-3 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Intergovernmental Coordination Element The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 7-4 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 Office with Primary Governmental Entity Subject Nature of Relationship Coordination Responsibility East Central Florida Coordination of DRIs and comprehensive Regional Planning ■ Regional planning plan amendments and a forum for local CM, P&D, PW Council ECFRPCgovernments to discuss regional issues Florida Department of . Public health Public safety issues including during and CM Health DOH after natural disasters Florida Department of Family/personal issues including abuse, Children and Family ■ Personal affairs adoption, homelessness and other social CM Services (DCF) issues Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation ■ Environmental issues Enforcement of environmental legislation CM Commission FWCC Florida Department of Agricultural issues including food safety and Agriculture and ■ Agricultural issues and consumer affairs such as telemarketing CM Consumer Services consumer affairs complaints and automobile fraud DACS Florida Division of Historical, archaeological and cultural CM, P&D Historical Resources ■ Historic resources resources throughout the state DHR Federal Aviation M Transportation Management of civil aviation, including CM Administration Orlando Sanford International Airport plan amendments, growth Florida Department ofComprehensive 0 Growth management management initiatives, and technical CM, P&D Community Affairs (DCA) assistance Statewide jurisdiction for protecting and Florida Department of Environmental Protection ■ Environmental management conserving Florida's natural resources, CM, P&D managing State owned resources and (FDEP) regulation over environmental impacts Florida Department of . Transportation State roads CM, PW Transportation FDOT Florida Department of . Elections Oversight of elections in the State of Florida CM, P&D State FDOS The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 7-4 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Intergovernmental Coordination Element (Rule 9J -5.015(1)(a) and (b) , F.A.C.] The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 7-5 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report— November 2009 Office with Primary Governmental Entity Subject Nature of Relationship Coordination Responsibility Facilitates housing programs and grants to Housing and Urban ■ Housing help provide adequate housing to those in CM Development need Army Corps of Engineers ■ Environmental/disaster Control over major flood control projects, CM recoverydisaster response, and navigation ro'ects Environmental Protection ■ Air pollution Environmental issues of federal concern CM Agency EPA Federal Emergency 0 Emergency and disaster Assistance prior to, during, and after natural CM Management Agency relief disasters FEMA Florida Power and Light . Electricity services Provision of electrical services CM FPL AT&T Telephone Service. Communications Communication services CM (formerly Bell South) Brighthouse Networks ■ Cable service A franchise agreement to provide cable CM service (Rule 9J -5.015(1)(a) and (b) , F.A.C.] The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 7-5 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report— November 2009 City of Sanford Intergovernmental Coordination Element The following section describes in greater detail the adjacent local governments, state, federal, and identified service franchises with which the City has existing coordination mechanisms and agreements. LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND AGENCIES [Rule 9J -5.015(2)(a), F.A.C.] The City of Lake Mary. The City of Lake Mary is located southwest of Sanford. Both cities are part of an interlocal agreement with Seminole County regarding public school facilities. The City of Sanford, Lake Mary and Seminole County entered into a tri -party agreement in 2001 related to reuse water to aid in reducing groundwater withdrawal from the Floridan aquifer by expanding reclaimed water use. Seminole County. The City of Sanford maintains significant coordination efforts with Seminole County due to its location within the County. The City coordinates with the County on growth management and comprehensive plan issues. The City and County, including the other municipalities within Seminole County, are in an interlocal agreement regarding public schools. Volusia County. The City of Sanford's proximity to Volusia County creates a need for coordination on certain aspects of growth and development. The County reviews and comments on large-scale development, particularly with DRIs and large-scale comprehensive plan amendments. Seminole County School District. The City of Sanford coordinates with the Seminole County School District regarding public education facilities. Coordination between the City and County regarding school facilities include the siting of new facilities, modifications to population projections and the impact of new residential development on public school facility level of service standards (LOS). Florida State Law requires schools to adhere to adopted LOS standards in order to limit overcrowding of schools. Schools in Seminole County must adhere to the following LOS standards: 100% of permanent FISH capacity for elementary and middle schools and 110% of permanent FISH capacity for high schools between 2008 and 2012 and then 100% beginning in 2013. The following schools facilities serve the Sanford area of Seminole County: • Goldsboro Elementary • Hamilton Elementary • Idyllwilde Elementary • Pine Crest Elementary • Wicklow Elementary • Greenwood Lakes Middle • Markham Woods Middle • Millennium Middle • Sanford Middle • Crooms Technology High • Lake Mary High • Seminole High Seminole County Expressway Authority. The Seminole County Expressway Authority plays several important transportation roles including: tracking the planning process for future toll The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 7-6 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Intergovernmental Coordination Element roads located in Seminole County; influencing the decision making processes of all entities dealing with toll road facilities in the county, and protecting the interests of the citizens of Seminole County in these areas. The SCEA will play a vital part in the location and possible implementation of the extension of the Western Beltway (Wekiva Parkway) to SR417/Greeneway._ Fight of way aGqUi6iti9R, Feadway engineeFiAq, and linkage . Sanford Airport Authority. This authority provides coordination for issues regarding the Orlando Sanford Airport. The Airport has seen recent improvements and the Authority will provide continued coordination between the City and County. Sanford Housing Authority. The City of Sanford coordinates with the Sanford Housing Authority to assist in supporting affordable housing development and improving the condition of the existing housing stock. The Authority also provides improved avenues for obtaining grants and other funding to encourage affordable housing development. REGIONAL AGENCIES Central Florida Commuter Rail Authority. This authority is charged with the development of commuter rail serving Central Florida, specifically Volusia, Seminole, Orange, and Osceola Counties and municipalities located within these counties, including Sanford. The Sanford Station is identified as part of phase I, which hopes to be operational by 2011. Orlando Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization. The Orlando Urban Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (MARE MetroPlan) serves Orange, Osceola and Seminole Counties. The MPO provides a forum for elected officials of these counties and municipalities to address mobility and transportation related issues. The A4120has a regional transportation vision of creating a transportation system that safely and efficiently moves people and good through a variety of transportation options to support the region's desire to preserve natural lands, create community centers, conserve energy and maintain a strong economy. St. Johns River Water Management District. The St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) is one of five regional water management districts in the State of Florida. SJRWMD is an independent special district empowered to assess ad valorem taxes. The SJRWMD is involved with multiple water issues, including water permitting for consumptive use, well construction, and surface water management. East Central Florida Regional Planning Council. The East Central Florida Regional Planning Council (ECFRPC) is one of the eleven regional planning councils in the State of Florida. The ECFRPC serves Brevard. Lake, Volusia. Orange. Osceola and Seminole Counties. The Regional Planning Council provides a forum where leaders can discuss complex regional issues, develop strategic regional responses for resolving them, and build consensus for setting and accomplishing regional goals. The Regional Planning Council approaches its mission through an array of programs and projects. The mix of activities changes from year to vear depending upon community needs, but all proiects and programs fall within one or more of the cateaories described below. Planning Tools The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 7-7 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Intergovernmental Coordination Element Developing, through the use of digital technologies, the means for communities to generate information on the effects of their actions on neighboring communities and the regional systems and resources they share. Planning Techniques Demonstrating how existing community processes and practices can be modified, or new ones created, to incorporate consideration of regional system functions and goals. Information Development Providing data and analysis on the structure, function and dynamics of regional systems, how they respond to change, and the effect of the response on affected communities. Regional Leadership Training and Education Facilitating the transfer of ideas, information and skills that can enhance the ability of community leaders to work in a regional environment. Organizational Partnerships Assisting communities and/or organizations secure resources and mobilize a coordinated response to regional opportunities and challenges. Regional Coalitions and Compacts Working with communities to pursue public policy initiatives relating to the governance of shared systems and resources. STATE AGENCIES Florida Department of Community Affairs. The Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) is administered by a Secretary appointed by the Governor. The DCA provides technical assistance to local governments in the areas of: ■ Housing ■ Resource planning and management ■ Community services ■ Community development ■ Land and water management ■ Public safety ■ Post -disaster recovery ■ Emergency management preparedness The DCA administers a variety of grant programs designed to assist local governments in improving growth management resources, community infrastructure, and service delivery systems. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 7-8 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Intergovernmental Coordination Element Florida Department of Environmental Protection. The Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP) serves two major purposes: ■ Protecting and conserving Florida's natural resources, managing state owned lands/aquatic preserves; and ■ Regulating industrial waste, air pollution emissions, hazardous wastes, potable water usages, solid waste disposal, dredge and fill activities, and alterations to environmentally sensitive areas. The DEP also issues National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) water quality certifications and serves as an umbrella agency for Florida's five regional water management districts. The DEP is administered by a secretary appointed by the Governor. The DEP has permitting authority over various land and water preserves and regulates the impacts of new development. Florida Department of Transportation. The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) directs planning functions and coordinates maintenance and development of Florida's transportation system. The FDOT has authority to direct the design, construction, maintenance, and related activities of the Florida Highway System. The FDOT has limited regulatory authority over the use of land along State roads, including design standards for curb cuts and billboards on the State's major highway system. Florida Department of State. The Florida Department of State (DOS) informally coordinates with the City of Sanford through the Division of Historic Resources. The City of Sanford works with the Division of Historic Resources, Bureau of Historic Preservation to address comprehensive planning issues surrounding historic sites and archaeological sites of significance. Proposed DRIs in Sanford and Seminole County are reviewed in terms of their potential impacts to historic resources within the City of Sanford. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) is mainly -charged with managing the fish and wildlife resources of the State of Florida for their long-term well-being. FEDERAL AGENCIES Housing and Urban Development. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is the federal agency responsible for housing issues. HUD's major goals are to: • Increase home ownership; • Support community development; and • Increase access to affordable housing free from discrimination. The Sanford Housing Authority coordinates with HUD regularly to address housing concerns in the City. Army Corps of Engineers. The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is comprised of civilian and military members. The agency is tasked maWy =with engineering and environmental matters. Specific services include control over major flood control projects, disaster response, and navigation projects. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 7-9 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Intergovernmental Coordination Element Environmental Protection Agency. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is the federal agency responsible for protection of the natural environment. The EPA administers a variety of programs ranging from air and water quality protection to noise abatement. The EPA exerts authority through the issuance of grant monies, and through its regulatory powers. The agency establishes national drinking water and air quality standards with which all local agencies must comply. Federal Emergency Management Agency. Although no formal communication exists between the City of Sanford and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the agency provides assistance prior to, during, and after natural disasters when needed. FRANCHISE AGREEMENTS AND RELATED SERVICES Electric Service. The City of Sanford maintains an agreement with the Florida Power and Light (FP&L) Company for the provision of electricity for City residents and businesses. Telephone Service. The City of Sanford maintains an agreement with AT&T for telephone service. Television Cable Service. The City of Sanford has a franchise contract with Brighthouse Networks to provide cable service to the City and its residents. ADDITIONAL COORDINATION Intergovernmental Coordination and Conflict Mediation. The Council of Local Governments of Seminole County provides a forum for coordination between the County and its municipalities and a means by which to address conflicts between jurisdictions. Tri -Party Service Area. The Tri -Party Service Area involves the City of Sanford, the City of Lake Mary, and Seminole County. The major purpose of the Tri -Party study performed, with SJRWMD, was to optimize the existing reclaimed/augmentation water system. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION WITHIN AREAS OF CRITICAL CONCERN No Areas of Critical State Concern are located within the City of Sanford [Rule 9J -5.015(2)(d), F.A.C.]. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ANALYSIS This section provides an analysis of the existing intergovernmental coordination mechanisms, including their effectiveness, and identifies problems and needs which could benefit from improved or added coordination. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 7-10 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Intergovernmental Coordination Element EFFECTIVENESS OF EXISTING COORDINATION MECHANISMS The City of Sanford is a party in several types of intergovernmental coordination mechanisms to improve available services and coordination of activities, including interlocal governmental agreements, joint planning agreements, and service agreements. These mechanisms are detailed in the next section, along with an analysis of their effectiveness. In addition, the areas of potential improvement for intergovernmental coordination activities are identified by each element of the Comprehensive Plan. Interlocal, Joint Planning, and Service Agreements. The City of Sanford has adopted multiple interlocal agreements, joint planning agreements, and service agreements with Seminole County, nearby municipalities and other entities to provide services. Table 7-2 details these agreements. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 7-11 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Intergovernmental Coordination Element Table 7-2 Intarinr_al_ Jnint Planning. and Service Aareements Agency/Department Existing Coordination Mechanism Subject Nature of Relationship Seminole County Planning and Interlocal Agreement: Growth management Annexations, comprehensive Development Joint Planning Interlocal coordination plan amendments, service Agreement, 1991 provision, and transition areas Seminole County Planning and Interlocal Agreement: The Intergovernmental Planning Comprehensive planning Notification of land use Development Coordination Agreement of 1997 and land use issues amendments Seminole County Department of Interlocal Agreement Emergency services "First Response" agreement to improve emergency response Public Safety coordination Public school planning Establishes a process for Seminole County School Board Interlocal Agreement and concurrency coordinated school planning and public school concurrent Florida Power and Light Service Agreement Electric service Electricity provision Brighthouse Networks Service Agreement Cable service Cable service Fiber optics Communication Seminole County Information Interlocal Agreement Telecommunications Network and related Technologies infrastructure Seminole County Information Interlocal Agreement Geographical Information Information sharing of GIS Technologies System GIS digital maps Seminole County Public Works Interlocal Agreement Impact fees Collection of road, school and library fees Specific project interlocal Seminole County Public Works Interlocal Agreement Transportation agreements, road impact fee and one cent sales tax Seminole County Public Works Interlocal Agreement Stormwater Control of stormwater pollutants To optimize the existing Tri -Party Service Area Interlocal Agreement Joint planning reclaimed/augmentation water system (Rule 9J -5.015(2)(a), F.A.C.] The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 7-12 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Intergovernmental Coordination Element POTENTIAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION IMPROVEMENTS The City of Sanford has identified specific areas for improvement in intergovernmental coordination within each appropriate Comprehensive Plan Element. The Comprehensive Plan Elements are listed below, with the respective areas for specific improvements. (Rule 9J - 5.015(2)(b -c), F.A.C.] Future Land Use. The City of Sanford should continue to coordinate with the following local, state and federal agencies regarding the City's Future Land Use Element. ■ City of Lake Mary. It is recommended that coordination continue between these two municipalities. Each municipality should provide share copies of applications for large-scale developments that will lead to impacts beyond city boundaries, not limited to DRIs. ■ Municipalities in Seminole County. It is recommended that coordination should occur between the municipalities, as well as unincorporated Seminole County, on a bi-annual basis. This informal coordination should address growth issues due to the impacts on a large scale throughout the County. East Central Florida Regional Planning Council. It is recommended that increased coordination occur between the ECFRPC and Sanford to more proactively deal with growth issues. There are state requirements for coordination between regional planning councils and jurisdictions regarding large developments, such as DRIs, but large projects not meeting this threshold should also be coordinated with the ECFRPC to promote enhanced planning. Housing. The City of Sanford needs to coordinate with the County, regional and federal agencies to develop and maintain an adequate stock of affordable housing. Specific intergovernmental coordination actions recommended to assist with housing issues in the City include: ■ Florida Department of Community Affairs. It is recommended that the City establish a liaison with the DCA to foster better communication on growth management issues. The City should work with the DCA to aggressively pursue grant monies eligible to the City. ■ Coordination with Regional Agencies. It is recommended that the City of Sanford develop a schedule with the ECFRPC to examine upcoming DRI impacts, as well as potential future DRI impacts, and other large-scale projects that will have implications beyond the boundaries of Sanford. Transportation. The City of Sanford should increase its coordination with Seminole County, the City of Lake Mary, and the FDOT relating to traffic utilizing SR 46, SR 417, and US 17-92. Coordination prior to new development is needed to mitigate and maintain LOS standards and explore additional transit opportunities. ■ Coordination with MetroPlan Orlando for Transportation. It is recommended that the City increase participation in MetroPlan transportation planning initiatives, and ensure that the City is in full compliance with the County's LOS standards and the FDOT adopted LOS standards that supersede those of the County's. The City should maintain coordination with regard to the potential commuter rail transit station in the City. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 7-13 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Intergovernmental Coordination Element ■ Coordinate with FDOT, Other State and Regional Agencies. It is recommended that the City increase coordination with MOT to ensure that area roadways maintain LOS standards and are properly maintained. Plans for new development should be reviewed to address potential impacts prior to construction. Conservation. The Conservation Element promotes the conservation, protection, and appropriate management and restoration of the City's natural resources. Specifically, the City identifies the following natural resources as priorities: • Lakes • Floodplains • Wetlands • Flora and fauna • Surficial and Floridan aquifers Coordinate with Regional Agencies. It is recommended that the City of Sanford increase coordination with the SJRWMD. The City is located in an area identified by the water management district as a priority water resource caution area. This classification is used to identify areas where existing and reasonably anticipated sources of water may not be adequate to supply water for existing legal uses and anticipated future needs while sustaining water resources and related natural systems through 2025. The City will need signficant coordination with SJRWMD as well as other state and federal agencies to ensure adequate water supply and to identify further ways to conserve resources and develop in a more sustainable manner, including the use of Florida native landscaping and expansion of reuse systems. ■ Coordinate with Federal Agencies. It is recommended that the City of Sanford increase coordination with the EPA to ensure that growth management initiatives do not conflict with the EPA's policies. Continued coordination with regard to the Sanford Gasification Plant cleaup will be ongoing. Recreation and Open Space. It is recommended that the City coordinate with the County's recreation department and the City of Lake Mary to develop plans for potential future recreational projects in and around Sanford. Capital Improvement. The Capital Improvement Element identifies the public facilities and services budgeted and proposed for the current fiscal year and for the following five years. The facilities must maintain the adopted LOS standards for compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan. This coordination ensures that adequate facilities will support future development and population growth forecasted for the City within the Future Land Use Element. Coordinate with Seminole County. It is recommended that the City of Sanford maintain coordination with Seminole County, and its respective departments, to ensure that the associated LOS standards for public facilities continue to be met. Under state law, the City must identify how concurrency will be met during the next five years. This requirement enhances the importance of coordination with the County and municiplaties to plan for infrastructure projects and needed services. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 7-14 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Intergovernmental Coordination Element ■ Coordinate with Regional Agencies. It is recommended that the City of Sanford increase coordination with the SJRWMD and other agencies to coordinate for the development of future infrastructure projects needed to adequately accommodate growth. GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT AND REGIONAL PLANNING IMPLICATIONS This Data, Inventory and Analysis has presented an analysis of intergovernmental coordination between the City of Sanford and various other jurisdictions and agencies, and provided an inventory of agencies within the area of concern. It is recommended that the goals, objectives, and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan be updated to ensure their applicability and compliance with new State of Florida growth management requirements found in Chapter 163 F.S., and Rule 9J-5 F.A.C. The recommendations for this element's goals, objectives, and policies include revisions that stipulate: ■ Development and incorporation of a concurrency management system ■ Development impacts ■ Comprehensive Plan coordination In addition to the above recommendations, and those presented elsewhere in this Data, Inventory, and Analysis report, the City of Sanford shall continue to participate in intergovernmental coordination activities involving land use, transportation, housing, public facilities, and resource conservation with Seminole County and other appropriate agencies. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 7-15 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Capital Improvement Element CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT DATA, INVENTORY, AND ANALYSIS REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS Existing Revenue Sources & Funding Mechanisms................................................................................ 8-2 Capital Improvement Analysis................................................................................................................. 8-6 Projected Capital Improvement Needs.................................................................................................. 8-12 LIST OF TABLES Table 8-1 General Fund Revenues......................................................................................................... 8-3 Table8-2 Special Fund Revenues.......................................................................................................... 8-4 Table 8-3 Grants by Source FY2007/2008.............................................................................................. 8-4 Table 8-4 Changes in Long -Term Debt FY2006-2007............................................................................ 8-5 Table 8-5 Population Estimates.............................................................................................8-7 Table 8-6 Level of Service Standards..................................................................................................... 8-8 Table 8-7 Annual Budget Revenues vs. Expenditures.................................................................. 8-13 Table 8-8 Five -Year Capital Improvements Program.................................................................... 8-14 The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 8-1 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Capital Improvement Element CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT DATA, INVENTORY, AND ANALYSIS The Capital Improvement Element of the Comprehensive Plan outlines the funding, schedule, and construction of planned improvements identified in other elements of the Comprehensive Plan so that adequate public facilities are in place to accommodate existing and projected growth and to maintain the minimum level of service (LOS) standards established by the City of Sanford. The Data, Inventory, and Analysis (DIA) portion of the Capital Improvement Element summarizes the need for public facilities and services identified in other plan elements, estimates the cost to implement the improvements, and identifies the source of funding for those improvements. This section also evaluates the concurrency management system and how the City plans to achieve and/or maintain the adopted LOS standards. This DIA serves as support for the goals, objectives, and policies of the Capital Improvement Element. EXISTING REVENUE SOURCES AND FUNDING MECHANISMS The City's annual budget and Five -Year Capital Improvements Program (CIP) contains multiple revenue sources and funding mechanisms to finance operations and capital improvement projects. The following information focuses on the various revenue sources and funding mechanisms available to the City. Funding mechanisms currently used by the City of Sanford are noted, when applicable. Financial Overview The 2880/2009 budget totals more than $140 for all activities which includes utility funds, capital projects, debt service and other special revenue funds. Expenditures are decreasing approximately $20 million from the previous year's budget due to general fund revenue restraints, the elimination of capital funding from reserves, and the timing of capital projects in the utility fund. Due to falling revenues, increased fuel costs and decreases in sales tax revenues, the City will not be able to maintain the same level of services as provided in 2007/2008. This is true throughout the State. General Fund Revenue Sources The following revenues constitute Sanford's general fund: • Ad valorem taxes • State and County shared revenue • Local licenses and permits • Interest on investments • Miscellaneous revenues • Franchise fees • Fines and forfeitures • Administrative services Ad Valorem Taxes — Real and Personal Property. These are taxes on nonexempt real and personal property assessed according to the millage rate that is applied to the taxable value of property. The 2009 millage rate assessed by the City is 6.325. The assessed value of properties in the City is a component of the amount of taxes that will be collected. Revenues The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 8-2 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Capital Improvement Element from property taxes in FY2008/2009 totaled $18,248,300. This represents an $899,350 decrease from the previous year, highlighting the effects of the current economic downturn. Utility and Other Taxes. This revenue source accounted for just over $11 million of the general fund in FY2008/2009. These represent taxes levied by service providers on utility bills. Other Revenue Sources. Table 8-1 lists each source of revenue of the City's general fund. Property taxes and utility taxes represent the majority of revenue in this fund. Table 8-1 General Fund Revenues FY2008/2009 Revenues General Fund Taxes Property (Ad Valorem) Utility and Other Taxes $ 18,248,300 $ 11,542,600 Licenses and Permits $ 636,000 Intergovernmental $ 4,794,000 Charges for Services $ 1,733,200 Fines and Forfeitures $ 303,450 Other Revenues $ 3,596,550 Total Revenues $ 40, 854,100 Cash Forward Balance $ 1,337,950 Transfer In - Total Revenues and Balances $ 42,192,050 Source: City of Sanford Finance Department, FY200812009 Budget. Special Revenue Funds. Grants, and Other Sources The following revenues constitute Sanford's special revenue funds: • Local option gas tax • Seminole Town Center CRA Bonds Trust Fund • Lake Monroe Waterfront and Downtown Community Redevelopment Trust Fund • Community Development Block Grant Fund • Impact fees Special Revenue Funds. Table 8-2 lists revenues by source that comprised the special revenue fund in FY2008/2009. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 8-3 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Capital Improvement Element Table 8-2 Special Revenue Funds FY2007/2008 Revenues Special Revenue Funds Taxes Property (Ad Valorem) Utility and Other Taxes - $ 1,031,900 Licenses and Permits $ 699,800 Intergovernmental - Char es for Services $ 23,800 Fines and Forfeitures $ 82,200 Other Revenues $ 12,321,340 Total Revenues $ 14,255,140 Cash Forward Balance $ 3,419,860 Transfer In $ 96,100 Total Revenues and Balances $ 17,675,000 Source: City of Sanford Finance Department, FY 2008/2009 Budget. Grants. The City of Sanford receives grants from the federal, state, and local levels. Table 8-3 summarizes the current grant amounts being received by the City, and the general use of each grant. In FY2007/2008 the City received a total of $495,500 in federal, state and local grants. The 2008/2009 budget identifies $101,000 of these grants. Table 8-3 Grants by Source FY2007/2008 Grant FY2007/2008 Budget FY2008/2009 Proposal Federal Grants $422,500 $61,000 State Grants $33,000 - Local Grants $40,000 $40,000 Total $495,500 $101,000 Source: City of Sanford Finance Department, FY 2008/2009 Budget. State Shared Revenue. In FY2007/2008, the City of Sanford budgeted $5,730,550 in State Shared Revenue. For FY2008/2009 the City is budgeting only $4,693,000, a decrease of nearly twenty percent. These revenues consist of taxes imposed by the State, which are then shared with local governments including taxes collected from alcoholic beverage licenses, local option fuel taxes, and local government half -cent sales taxes. Licenses and Permits, Charges for Services, and Fines and Forfeitures. These items are budgeted for $31,550,700 for FY2008/2009. Examples of revenues collected in this category include professional and occupational fees, golf course fees, rezoning and planning -related fees, and building permit fees. Within the General Fund, these items are budgeted for $2,672,650. Enterprise (Utility) Funds. Utility funds include Water and Wastewater, Stormwater and Solid Waste. Utility funds are collected through usage charges for these services. For FY2008/2009, the Utility Fund has projected revenues of $39,845,350. The Water and Wastewater Utility The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 8-4 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Capital Improvement Element Fund total was approximately $25.5 million, Stormwater was approximately $8.2 million and Solid Waste was approximately $6.2 million. Bonds. The City is able to issue bonds in order to finance capital improvements within the City. At the end of FY2007, Sanford had outstanding bonded debt totaling $24,081,773. Of this total, governmental -type activities totaled $1,115,000 and business -type activities totaled $22,966,773. The business type bonds included $21,699,235 for Water and Sewer Fund revenue bonds and $1,267,538 for Stormwater System Fund revenue bonds. Table 8-4 summarizes changes in long-term debt ending with FY2007. Table 8-4 Chanaes in Lona -Term Debt FY2006-2007 Source: City of Sanford Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for FY Ended September 30, 2007. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 8-5 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 Balance Increase DecreaseT Balance TDue Within 10/01/06 09/30/07 One Year Governmental Activities: Bonds Payable $1,225,000 - $110,000 $1,115,000 $115,000 Accrued compensated $1,882,046 $1,612,064 ($1,542,473) $1,951,637 $550,126 absences Claims payable $1,749,409 $811,232 $504,999 $2,055,642 $28,480 Accrued clean-up and long-term $2,235,947 $38,924 ($19,439) $2,255,432 $19,439 care costs Governmental activity long-term $7,092,402 $2,462,220 ($2,176,911) $7,377,711 $713,045 liabilities Business-Tvpe Activities: Water and Sewer Fund revenue $22,550,368 - ($851,133) $21,699,235 $1,030,000 bonds payable Stormwater System Fund $1,596,079 - ($328,541) $1,267,538 $345,504 revenue bonds payable Notes payable $24,658,809 $8,260,109 $1,413,701 $31,505,217 $1,936,759 Accrued compensated $492,370 $457,541 ($443,775) $506,136 $134,321 absences Business -type activity long-term $49,297,626 $8,717,650 ($3,037,150) $54,978,126 $3,446,584 liabilities Total Amount $56,390,028 $11,179,870 $5,214,061 $62,355,837 $4,159,629 Source: City of Sanford Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for FY Ended September 30, 2007. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 8-5 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Capital Improvement Element CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ANALYSIS The City of Sanford is a growing community located in one of the fastest growing metropolitan areas in the County. Between 2000 and 2007, the City grew by more than 10,000 people, from 39,137 to 50,468. This represents an increase of nearly 30 percent in seven years. The last update of the Comprehensive Plan identified a significant number of planned developments in the City. The Comprehensive Plan has identified several areas prime for redevelopment through the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA). These identified CRAs include: ■ Seminole Towne Center CRA ■ US 17/92 CRA ■ Waterfront/Downtown Sanford CRA As the City continues to grow, it will continue to monitor public services and infrastructure to maintain the adopted LOS standards. The location and timing of capital improvements is an important component of concurrency management. Public services and infrastructure must be located and timed appropriately to accommodate growth as it occurs. Proposals for new development must be reviewed with regard to LOS standards to determine whether development can be adequately served. If there are insufficient services or infrastructure, it must be demonstrated how the infrastructure or services will be expanded or modified in time to accommodate the development. All proposed plans for capital improvements must be deemed to be financially feasible. A concurrency management system is established in the Comprehensive Plan and outlined in Policy 4-1.1.2: Concurrency Requirements. The policy cites Section 163.3180(2)(a), F.S., as the guidance for the City's Concurrency Management System (CMS), and indicates that concurrency provisions and their implementation are to be consistent with other policies in the Comprehensive Plan. Population Analysis. The City of Sanford is projected to continue to experience population growth through 2030. The City's population in 2030 is projected to be 72,536, compared to 48,801 in 2005. Based on the limited availability of vacant land, future growth will likely be focused in the identified activity centers and in the form of redevelopment and infill development. The population figures and estimates in Table 8-5 were obtained from the City of Sanford's Water Facilities Work Plan. Population growth rates are anticipated to decrease through 2030, as the amount of vacant developable land continues to decrease. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan g -g Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Capital Improvement Element Table 8-5 Population Estimates for Sanford Year Population Gross Change Percent Change 2000A 38,291 - - 20058 48,801 10,510 27.45% 20108 57,022 8,221 16.85% 20158 64,423 7,401 12.98% 20208 68,180 3,757 5.83% 20258 70,333 2,153 3.16% 2030 72,536 2,203 3.13% Notes: A = US Bureau of the Census, 2000 B = City of Sanford Water Supply Facilities Plan C = 2030 projection is estimated from the latest Water Supply Facilities Plan population estimate for 2027 Level of Service Standards. An LOS standard is a performance measure used to evaluate the extent to which a public facility or service is accommodating the demands placed on that system. In the State of Florida, LOS is monitored for transportation, recreation and open space, potable water, sanitary sewer, solid waste, stormwater drainage, and public schools. An LOS standard sets the expectations for performance of a particular public facility or service that is maintained by the City or other governmental entity. These standards then become criteria for evaluating new development applications, and for issuing development orders or permits to ensure adequate facility capacity is maintained concurrent with future development. In this way, LOS standards affect the timing and location of development by encouraging development in areas where facilities have excess capacity, and not permitting development in areas with no excess capacity unless additional capacity is provided. Table 8-5 provides a summary of the current LOS for facilities described in other elements of this Comprehensive Plan, including the Transportation, Infrastructure [potable water, wastewater, solid waste, stormwater drainage], Recreation and Open Space, and Public School Facilities elements. The shaded boxes indicate where a LOS deficiency has been identified, based on current population projections and anticipated capital improvements. Some public facilities and services provided to residents of the City of Sanford, specifically sanitary sewer, potable water, stormwater drainage, and public schools, are provided by or provided with assistance from other governmental entities. The City of Sanford also manages the LOS standards adopted by Seminole County and the Florida Department of Transportation for roadways within the City for which the County or State maintain. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 8-7 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Capital Improvement Element Table 8-6 Level of Service Standards Public Current LOS Short Term Long Term Facility Adopted LOS Standard (2008) (2015)5 (2030)5 LOS D for all City and County collectors and minor arterial facilities; State principal arterial, and minor arterial facilities outside urban area, and the Road' Eastern Beltway Public LOS E for State minor arterial Below 100% capacity Below 100% capacity Above 100% capacity Middle School: 100% of FISH facilities within the urban area, Below 100% Below 100% Schools5 capacity and County collector and minor LOS E LOS E LOS E Below 100% arterial facilities coinciding with Below 100% capacity; 100% starting in 2013 the Urban Centers capacity capacity Potable 144 gallons per capita per day 138.57 gpcd 143.1 gpcd 120.5 gpcd Water2 (gpcd) Wastewater2 132 gpcd 130.8 gpcd 128.8 gpcd 108.4 gpcd Central Transfer Station: 4.3 4.3/4.2 4.3/4.2 4.3/4.2 Solid Waste3 lbs/capita/day Osceola Landfill: 4.2 pounds per pounds per capita per Pounds per lbs/capita/daylbs/capita/day capita per day day capita per day Stormwater 25 year — 24 hour Same Same Same retention/detention Recreation 5.6 acres per 4.6 acres per 4.1 acres per and Open c ---- 4 4 acres per 1,000 persons 1,000 persons 1,000 I ^-- 1,000 persons Public Elementary School: 100% of FISH capacity Below 100% capacity Below 100% capacity Above 100% capacity Middle School: 100% of FISH Below 100% Below 100% Below 100% Schools5 capacity capacity capacity capacity High School: 110% of FISH Below 100% Below 100% Below 100% capacity; 100% starting in 2013 capacity capacity capacity Roadwav LOS based on short-term horizon of 2013. and lona-term horizon to 2020 z Sanford Water Supply Plan for potable water, Wastewater based on 90% of potable water demand for short and long term. Long-term horizon to 2027. 3 Based on the Capacity, Demand, and Level of Service exhibit from Seminole County Ordinance 2008-44 4 LOS based on 2007 population and existing Park and Open Space facilities 5 Seminole County School District Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan, FY 2006-2011; COFTE 2007 5 Based on population projections in the City's Water Facilities Work Plan The following analyzes the current status and needs for public facilities, by type. The City is currently meeting most of its LOS standards, but capital improvement projects will be needed to meet projected growth and facilities that are projected to be deficient. Transportation. The FY2007/2008 adopted budget and Five -Year CIP contain significant expenditures for transportation facility improvements. These improvements include new roadways, intersection improvements, traffic calming, sidewalk replacement and traffic The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 8-8 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Capital Improvement Element circulation improvements. The City will continue to monitor transportation needs and existing and potential deficiencies and address those issues in the Five -Year Capital Improvement Program. Roadway improvement projects are currently included in the Five -Year Capital Improvement Program to correct a LOS deficiency along US 17-92. The following segments of US 17-92 are anticipated to operate below the adopted LOS for either the short or long-term planning period: • Airport Blvd to Ramp SR 417 (short and long-term) • Lake Mary Boulevard to Airport Boulevard (short and long-term) • SR 417 northbound ramps to Park Drive (long-term) • SR 419 to Lake Mary Boulevard (short term; capital project identified to correct) The City is currently in the process of establishing a Transportation Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) as part of an overall redevelopment strategy for the US 17-92 corridor and existing CRA. Recommendations within the TCEA amendment package include lowering the adopted LOS for portions of US 17-92 as part of a long-term strategy and widening certain segments. A Long Term Concurrency Management System (LTCMS) is being established for SR 46 and SR 415 to address potential roadway deficiencies and prioritize roadway improvements within a timeframe up to ten years. SR 436 from Hunt Club Blvd. to Pearl Lake Causeway, SR 46 from US17-92 to Mellonville Avenue, and US 17-92 from Lake Monroe to Park Drive have been identified by the County, FDOT, and the MPO has constrained state facilities. The City will continue to coordinate with Seminole County, Metroplan, and the FDOT regarding potential transportation projects within the City. Stormwater Drainage. The City of Sanford is meeting its adopted LOS standards for stormwater drainage and continues to implement projects in order to address drainage issues related to stormwater. The current 2007/2008 CIP contains the following 10 stormwater projects: • Cloud Brand 13th Street Outfall Project • Cloud Brand Railroad Corridor Stormwater Improvements • Marina Northshore Project • Southeast Outfall- Final Phase of the Stormwater Master Plan • Holly, Cedar, Lake and Chase Avenue Drainage Project- Phase I • Southwest Road Drainage Improvements • Driftwood Lane Drainage Project • First Drive Ditch Enclosure • Holly, Cedar, Lake and Chase Avenue Drainage Project- Phase II • South Park Avenue Ditch Enclosure These capital improvement projects will provide the improvements needed throughout the City to adequately address stormwater drainage to and prevent neighborhood and street flooding. These identified projects have a five-year estimated cost of approximately $12,341,677. Potable Water/Wastewater. Presently, the City of Sanford has nearly 17,000 water customers with an annual consumption of greater than seven million gallons of potable water per day. To adequately address an increased demand for potable water, the City has dedicated nearly $6 million to address water supply between 2008 and 2012, mainly by developing alternative water The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 8-9 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Capital Improvement Element sources. Potential sources for additional water supply include constructing a surface water treatment plant, or partnering with other agencies to develop a joint surface water treatment project. Additional potable water capital improvement projects are located in the Five -Year CIP. The City of Sanford currently operates two wastewater treatment plants, the North Plant and the South Plant. The City has identified wastewater treatment capital improvement projects that will ensure LOS standards are maintained. One such project is equipment replacement to keep the plants functioning adequately. Capital projects with total costs in excess of $52 million related to water/wastewater are identified in the Five -Year CIP. Solid Waste. The City's LOS standards have been modified to match Seminole County's solid waste LOS standards, because the City utilizes the County's landfill facilities. Solid Waste is a division of the Public Works Department and accounts for approximately $6 million of the $36.5 million in public works expenditures annually. The Osceola Landfill had a surplus of space for 23,580,000 tons of solid waste. The site is anticipated to maintain a surplus through the long- term planning period. The Solid Waste Division provides the collection and disposal of residential and commercial solid waste services through management of contractual services (Waste Pro USA). The contract with Waste Pro USA accounted for the majority of the Solid Waste Division expenditures. Recreation and Open Space. The City of Sanford continues to meet or exceed the adopted Recreation and Open Space LOS standard, and will continue to do so throughout the long-term planning period. The City has multiple recreation and open space projects in the Five -Year Capital Improvement Program. The identified projects range from urban reforestation to parks and community centers. The total expenditures for these projects in the FY 2007/2008 budget is $12,668,848. Public Schools. The City of Sanford and Seminole County entered into an interlocal agreement in 2007, amended in January 2008, for public school facility planning and school concurrency. The adopted LOS standard for elementary and middle schools is 100 percent of permanent FISH capacity. The adopted LOS standard is 110 percent of permanent FISH capacity for high schools, which will be reduced to 100 percent beginning in 2013. In March 2008, the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) found the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency, as amended in January 2008, which was entered into by Seminole County, Altamonte Springs, Casselberry, Lake Mary, Longwood, Oviedo, Sanford, Winter Springs and the Seminole County School Board to be consistent with Section 163.31777(2) and (3), F.S. In April 2008, the DCA issued a notice of intent (NOI) to find the City's school concurrency comprehensive plan amendments in compliance. Based on identified capacity improvements and anticipated enrollment, elementary schools in Seminole County will be operating above their adopted LOS standard by the end of the long- term planning period. The School Board will need to identify and fund capacity improvement projects ahead of the expected demand in order to meet the LOS standards. Medical Facilities. The Central Florida Regional Hospital is the major medical facility serving Sanford and the surrounding area. This facility is located at 1401 West Seminole Boulevard. Services offered by the hospital include the following: birthing services, cancer services, cardiac The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 8-10 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Capital Improvement Element services, company care, diabetes education, emergency services, hyperbaric medicine and wound care, Imaging & Outpatient Network of Central Florida, laboratory services, neurohealth sciences center, rehabilitation, sleep disorders laboratory, and surgical services. A VA Primary Care Clinic is located in Sanford at 1403 Medical Plaza Drive. There are numerous medical practices located throughout the City offering a range of medical services to residents. The expansion of existing facilities or the development of new medical facilities will further impact various public facilities in the City and will be monitored to ensure LOS standards are maintained. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 8-11 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Capital Improvement Element PROJECTED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT NEEDS This section of the Capital Improvement Element DIA Report analyzes the fiscal implications of the projected capital improvement needs within the City of Sanford. It also provides a summary of current local practices to guide the timing and location of construction and/or extension of public facilities and services needed to keep pace with new development. The capital improvements identified will allow the City to continue to achieve and/or maintain minimum LOS standards described in other elements of this Comprehensive Plan. Identified Needs to Correct Existing or Projected LOS Deficiencies. Based on Table 8-5, the projected deficiency in elementary school facilities will need to be addressed and planned for by the Seminole County School Board. The potable water LOS standard was lowered in 2007, as part of the City's water supply -related amendments, from 161 gallons per capita per day to 144 gallons per capita per day. The City is currently meeting the adopted level of service for potable water and wastewater. Additionally, potable water facilities improvements are currently included in the Five -Year CIP to maintain adequate levels. For several segments of the City's roadway system identified as having LOS deficiencies, improvement projects have already been programmed. These include the widening of Airport Boulevard from 25th Street to US 17-92, and the widening of US 17-92 from Shepard Road to CR 417. They also include street improvements to North White Cedar/Church Street, and Phase II of the St. Johns Parkway. The US 17-92 corridor has been identified by the LYNX Transit Development Plan, Fiscal Years 2008-2017 as a "transit emphasis corridor". As multi -modal transportation options increase along the US 17-92 corridor, existing LOS issues will likely be reduced. Additionally, the City is currently in the process of establishing a TCEA as part of an overall redevelopment strategy for the US17-92 corridor and existing CRA. Recommendations within the TCEA amendments include lowering the adopted LOS for portions of US 17-92 as part of a long-term strategy. Any proposed road widening for particular segments will be included within the City's Five -Year CIP. Annual Budget and Five -Year Capital Improvement Program. Table 8-7 displays a summary of the FY 2007-2008 adopted annual budget as well the Five -Year CIP. The projects scheduled for the next five years will allow the City to maintain the adopted LOS standards and to keep pace with growth and development. The City's adopted LOS standards are listed in this analysis as well as in Policy 8-1.5.1 of the Capital Improvement Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The Five -Year CIP lists the capital expenditures incurred each year for a fixed period of years (typically five years) to meet anticipated capital improvement needs. The first three years of the CIP are mandated to be committed funding sources, while years four and five may be represented with planned revenues as needed. The CIP is reviewed and updated on an annual basis to adequately address capital improvement needs and to reflect updates to projects and newly identified needs. The main purpose of the CIP is to show how planned capital projects or other expenditures will be financed, including the estimated cost and the source of revenue. The CIP must be consistent with the Capital Improvement Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Table 8-6 summarizes the revenues and expenditures and indicates a balanced budget for FY2008/2009. Any deficiencies in the City's ability to meet the adopted LOS standards must be addressed by including sufficient project(s) in the CIP. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 8-12 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Capital Improvement Element Table 8-7 FY 2008/2009 Annual Budget Revenues vs. Expenditures Source Fund Amount Revenues Total Revenues $96,252,440 Other Sources (Cash Balance Forward, Transfers In, Debt $44,378,560 Proceeds Total $140,631,000 Expenditures Total Expenditures $124,960,400 Other Sources Transfers Out, Other uses ($15,670,600) Total $140,631,000 Difference 1 1 $0 Source: City of Sanford Finance Department, FY200812009 Proposed Budget. Summary. The City's FY 2008-2009 budget exceeds $145 million, a substantial decline from the previous year's budget which exceeded $160 million. This nearly ten percent drop will have implications throughout the City and provides a concrete example of how the current economic and housing downturns are affecting local governments throughout the region and the State. The budget includes governmental services, utility funds, capital projects, debt service and other special revenue funds. The City maintains a balanced budget and numerous capital projects identified to maintain adopted LOS standards as growth continues. The City's concurrency management program identifies capital needs and considers the location and timing of capital improvements to provide adequate infrastructure. The City will continue to explore funding options to provide a financially feasible plan that continues to monitor and maintain adopted LOS standards. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 8-13 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 w C Cd G d W L._ L IM O L a C d E d co > co 0 d C. CL R V e`a d LL C ea U) 0 v >O O N w o OO O Or o O o O r - OCD O OO m vr O OO O O o OO o O O O O O O O O O O o O O O O O O L O O O O O O O O O I O I` 0 � O OMO M t0 00000000 OWOMNOO_ O M O 0 69 O U') Ge O m 69 69 9 69 9 o 09 rM O r O O 00 O O o co 00 in in 09 09 M en co w LL ' M ' ' ' O O O O M ' ' ' O ' 0 O ' O O ' ' ' o O N O LO O O O O O w O O W) fA O >- M M O 0 O O LL N ea 'i O N O O CD ' ' O ' ' ' O ' ' ' O CD T. O O O l0 to O O co 000 M M <O 69 CO 69 } M O M O O M O O ' M 07 r O O ' ' O O O O o O O O O O 0 O O o ' o O O p O O Ip O O O O O O O O O p) O O M O O I, r O M O - o 0 W O o v LO N o Ln O � co to fie `O LL O o O fn o 0 O o O o O o o o M in O lr O O M O rn O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 fie ' ' 69 o o ' ' wO ' O O CD O o O . 0 0 0 0 o g o m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Go O O LO O O o to I� � h I- O M N o o M ti O M M 0 o CO O O LO O LO O r- � r- 69 r te co l0 w m r 66 l0 N t` Co M LL N inM in M N dd d� > O �N LL rL LL a LL a LL a LL (L LL a LL a_ LL a LL CL LL CL LL a a U U U U U U U U U U U U V- � O L N N O U 0 N Z s to V O C 0 y y W C o a 0 m a. •? c o 9L Q K N "O O ca y O y O H O (D t5 (D w C N N LL LL W o C U (D U 0) N R t0 O Z O O O N 2 0) LL C C O LL C O L d b7 Y +-� N t .C. d E _ 4 N N fZ C E' C 45 ll- = V) C y '0000 N 03 f0 0 LL Q t r O D O o o- a U)CCC— — O a •o o •o w 3 - o O-- o o U CL O w E a N L)v v_ m a 0° c °' �, °.0 a E .n C C C C C U) 3:3, 0 N N lC N p N : :6 v ci o v v v t` v L°- v a' v a' w LL 101, C7 0) O N z UL a N .r - (D N N Q >, E E UQ O N 160 N o � C U L f0 H 13 t� oD N L E 0 MZ > 0 rn N N � L N N CL UQ o c Z to � o o .�. C U r m �F- 0 O O r O O O O O O r to 11,O O O }} O N O to I- N r- M O M O O w N N to O O O LL LL O V: It M h � � to to V:O V: ti qT � M" O O M r r to N w t� W M N r O r 'IT� M O O r M to r- N w to w N N N O M M O0 O I1 O O wR O a O U' — N O to to — M to to M V O r r- O O O O r co co to M 06 N M � Oo MIle to M M H p r 44 O 69 h M N 40 07 69 O te 4A O 69 ' O 69r69 O 4A w ' 69 40 69 49 O M O Or Go O ttoo r tV) O O N r a to N O M N 4 O 4 r r O- CO m O� co O— M IT } LL N te O_ N 69 O O N 69 O O ' O O M 40 O O O N O O co O O O O O O O O r O O O c0 U, O to O O r 00 00 r r O O CD rO to O r N O 'IT co O O r O r r � r } O O O O O N 9 M en O co te tb LL of N co •- V O M co N c0 ' ' O ' O O N to O ' O O r r O O M N M O c0 M h M N O to O O O c0 M M O � O c0 O to C2, co M 00 r O O O— r M r M r O c0 M It M r r tOA w N 69 69 69 LL N O M N N ' ' O ' O O N N 69 O � I- r O O O O p r O O co W O 00 O to O O O co O N O) O CO to O co O O O O pt 0 N O M O O N N P O M to O O � co N to O cD w 0 O O O O p O> N r W N N M IM to I� M C1 to O } LL tD Im 69 69 co N N 44 O O O O O te O r 6e r eq O 6g � r O ee r 48 O O O W O O O N O to M M N N O N f` V: M to O to M v O O O O N to r 00 C M M w O O O O O O p w w CD O Cl co O cp M �' � O I- w N O N O O p O to tr O O O Of O c0 to N r c0 N N to O w M m W M w r- w r- M O w O to O In } LL lw O 4A 69 69 N te 69 M 09 ti 4A 69 69 69 z r 4A - fA r 4A � d C yWI N N N N O x 0 N to w C ` c NE 2 o fA d w N X N W +� i to E aci aci r an L m > C m 0 X w O F- a c '(D c r c d o c m x � O x fO m m t o— E= o E > W to E U oo U aci E aci E LU to '� C a� � N y c N F- x W o= E o 0 o c c O o m X m C7 LL c L U `� L a > N E N E > E d N c li c to m a ca a c 41 o v � a > o a IL c a o E y m o a mJ9 m m a c _ '� 1�- 3 a `° Q m U a 3 U c ' F- F- c o 3 .d A 3 V m O Fm- a) y c "a v m V �D E r r o>> r- c E o E a0i '� � N�> � m r-=- o 3 = A E a) d E � E coo z w v O o�> w v v O cn of -j co a w N O z of N a li U 5 N t� oD N L E 0 MZ > 0 rn N N � L N N CL UQ o c Z to � o o .�. C U r m �F- 0 d E d W M W }7 v rn v 0 0 0 O 0 O 0 0 0 0 o w a+ O 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LL LL M O O O r O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ' M T N 1l N O O O N O O N O N 0 ti OO 0 ON O O O O O _O O LO O O O LO O O O O Ln I- O O O O O p N M N O N O N N 0 N f,- 0 LO Ln N LA T H O M T T69 19 N 69 N 69 p N 69 p p r O O r O LO O O >- P.- 69 O LL p p N N p � O r p T LO LL69 ' M O ' O O O T O O O O O OT T LO co } 69 49 r- N LL O M 69 ' ' N 69 ' ' ' ' ' ' O O 'L O OM O O of TpO} O OtO N NN � N 69 LO 69 Lf) 69 P 40 ' ' O O ' O O O O ' ' O O ' ' O O O O O O p� v O O O O O V O p M I� O O O O O O O O O N N N � 0 CD O M M N N O LO N LO � O N O Ln } LL v 69 4A a a a a N 69 a 69 a a a 69 a a a 69 a 69 a 69 a C Cil N �6 N N �0 N N �6 N N 7 3 7 7 O 7 7 7 7 7 3 7 7 7 3❑ 3❑ 3❑ 3❑ 3❑ 3❑ 3❑ LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL LL C y y y y y y y d Q. O 4).s O N O O O - - - - - - - - - - - - - - CO LL CO LL ULL U LL U LL N LL U LL C CO a_ N C !Q E N to w d O a L co Oof O N N m Q C m U 1 oC14 CO 0 u v .r c c d a p _ U °' 0 R LL AM N O O f/1 y ❑ N E N y ` O` a LL' a Y C N r Q' C O � a o > > ❑ > M L d E o (A In c- o — vo 'r - 0) Q o -i Q E = W }} O 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U. O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cc 0 O 0 In 0 Ln N o 0� o wo o rn co rn co O cc r69 69 r 69 69 a- te N w M wr t0 N I� H O N O O O O LO O } co69 LL N 40 N O OO O i O O O O O O O O O O O O r r O U) O 0 O U) O LO O b O a0 69 4 44 O i O i O O O O O O O OO jo 69 O to O � O 0 O69 } 69 169 69t0 n LL O O O ' ' ' O OCD O O rLOO O O O O O O O O ulLOO OO> -69 LL N 46 ' O ' O OO O ' O 10 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N } co LO CN 69 w r LL b r O N C O to c O fa O d d C C C C C C C C n 7 V C 7 LL 7 LL 7 LL 7 LL 3 LL 7 LL 7 LL 7 LL O N p � C y p "O C O 0 L cn 'O C LL .�_. U- c w c V)I C w LL b 12 c w a` c m 0 o m m m o f U) 2 ac E o c o a7 .�•, E 'C C Y C Y� Y m cnCY C > w y y J C J m J N IL L o oo W o 0 y o Z �° c— E m > W H c vm Ofc -d3 a v3 w o ani w E E o v `as E.: �o o E E m as d 0 Q c > d '00 Nd a) I= 0w a' m g E m o m ecu Cj W u, CO v, to u, ` O O O N O O > (n C H `O N w w f6 O a3 N •o O O O a CN 0 04 O O E w 1F E ¢ a, ONj A as m m N U ami o ami f o cn 0 co ::i3 d _ cn� 3 S 3 3 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES ELEMENT DATA, INVENTORY, AND ANALYSIS TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................. 9-3 INVENTORY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS......................................................................................... 9-5 Existing Public School Facilities, Existing Attendance Zones, Capacity and Enrollment .............. 9-5 AttendanceZones.......................................................................................................................... 9-5 Charter and Special Needs Schools.............................................................................................. 9-6 Existing Public School Facility Capacity and Concurrency Service Areas ..................................... 9-6 Concurrency Service Areas.......................................................................................................... 9-10 EXISTING POPULATION AND DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS......................................................... 9-11 Historical Population Statistics..................................................................................................... 9-11 Existing Development Patterns.................................................................................................... 9-12 Existing School Age Population and Enrollment.......................................................................... 9-13 PROJECTED POPULATION AND DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS ................................................... 9-14 Future Development Patterns...................................................................................................... 9-17 Analysis of Impact of Projected Development and Enrollment on Facilities ................................ 9-18 ANALYSIS OF PROBLEMS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR EXISTING SCHOOLS AND SCHOOLS ANTICIPATED IN FUTURE PERTAINING TO LOCATION.............................................................. 9-23 ANALYSIS OF OPPORTUNITY TO CO -LOCATE PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND OTHER PUBLIC FACILITIES, COMMUNITY FOCAL POINT.......................................................................................9-25 Parks............................................................................................................................................ 9-25 Libraries........................................................................................................................................ 9-26 OtherFacilities.............................................................................................................................. 9-26 CommunityFocal Point................................................................................................................ 9-27 Analysis of Need for Supporting Facilities.................................................................................... 9-27 SCHOOL ATTENDANCE ZONES, CONCURRENCY SERVICE AREAS AND THE PROCESS FOR DETERMINING CONCURRENCY.....................................................................................................9-29 FUNDING FOR SCHOOL FACILITIES.............................................................................................. 9-30 City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-1 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT LIST OF TABLES AND MAPS Table 10-1: Inventory of Existing Public School Facilities Serving Seminole County ........................10-5 Table 10-2: Charter Schools and Special Needs Schools..................................................................10-6 Table 10-3: Florida Inventory of School House (FISH) Capacity and Enrollment Surplus/ Deficit..... 10-7 Table 10-4: Historical Population Growth.........................................................................................10-11 Table 10-5: Profile of Housing Characteristics.................................................................................10-12 Table 10-6: Housing Units Authorized by Building Permits..............................................................10-12 Table 10-7: Household Statistics......................................................................................................10-12 Table 10-8: Population Projections................................................................................................... 10-14 Table 10-9: Elementary School Enrollment Projections...................................................................10-15 Table 10-10: Projected Residential Building Permits.......................................................................10-17 Table 10-11: Projected Housing Construction.................................................................................. 10-18 Table 10-12: Seminole County School District Student Generation Rates ...................................... 10-18 Table 10-13: Seminole County Population by Age...........................................................................10-19 Table 10-14: School Aged Children Projections, Based on Planning Population Projections ......... 10-19 Table 10-15: Projected Permanent School Capacity........................................................................ 10-20 Table 10-16: Planned New Public School Facility Construction Capital Improvement Budget........ 10-22 Table 10-17: Proposed Public School Additions..............................................................................10-23 Table 10-18: Unincorporated Seminole County Vacant Unincorporated Developable Acres by Land Use....................................................................................................................................................10-24 Table 10-19: Capital Improvement Revenue Sources......................................................................10-31 Map 1: High School Attendance Zones............................................................................................10-32 Map 2: Middle School Attendance Zones.........................................................................................10-33 Map 3: Elementary School Attendance Zones................................................................................. 10-34 City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-2 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES ELEMENT DATA, INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS INTRODUCTION All Elements (Chapters) of a comprehensive plan in the State of Florida are based on data and analyses for the goals, objectives and policies contained in the comprehensive plan. This support document provides the information that shaped the goal, objectives and policies for the City's Public School Facilities Element, including historical information on the evolving effort to coordinate land use and public school facility planning. Historically, Chapter 163 Florida Statutes (F.S.), the law governing local comprehensive planning, did not include school facility planning. The City of Sanford, Seminole County, the School Board and the other cities in the County initiated major efforts toward achieving coordination of land use and school facility planning with the adoption of an Interlocal Agreement in 1997. The Agreement created a framework for notification of proposed land use actions and a staff working committee called the Planning Technical Advisory Committee (PTAC). By 1999, in accordance with amendments to State Law, the County and cities revised the Land Use Elements of their respective Comprehensive Plans to specify which land use designations allowed public schools as possible uses, and further refined processes to notify the School District and request comments on potential land development. The City of Sanford, Seminole County, and the other cities within the County recognize the benefits of providing adequate public school facilities to their citizens and students in a timely manner, and the importance of coordinated school planning to ensure that public school capacity needs are met. To further the goal of coordination, the Seminole County School Board, the Seminole County Board of County Commissioners, and the governing bodies of the seven cities adopted an Interlocal Agreement in 2007 that addressed coordination of public school facility and comprehensive land use planning. The County and cities also adopted a Public School Facilities Element (PSFE) to their respective Comprehensive Plans. The PSFEs are compatible, establish countywide Levels of Service (LOS), and identify procedures for the district -wide school concurrency management process. The process for developing both the 2007 Interlocal Agreement and the PSFEs involved the PTAC, comprised of staff representing each of the signatories to the Interlocal Agreement. During 2006 and 2007, the PTAC developed recommendations for coordinated land use and school facilities planning as the basis for the 2007 Interlocal Agreement. The PTAC also reviewed drafts of a model PSFE for use by all involved. As directed by the 2007 Interlocal Agreement, PTAC will meet a minimum of twice annually to discuss population and student projections, development trends, school needs, co -location and joint use opportunities, infrastructure improvements needed to support schools and safe student access, the School Board Five -Year Capital Improvement Plan and school concurrency processes. In addition to the PTAC, the 2007 Interlocal Agreement created the Public School Facilities Planning Committee (PSFPC), which will review the recommendations of PTAC and present recommendations to the School Board. This committee will serve as a standing committee to review the School Board Capital Improvement Plan, and will meet jointly with the School Board annually. The membership of this committee will include elected officials or their designees, and will further the process of ensuring coordination of land use and school facility planning. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-3 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT Leaislative Direction Amendments to Section 163.3180, Florida Statutes (F.S.) enacted by the 2005 Florida Legislature with the passage of Senate Bill 360 mandated a comprehensive focus on school planning by requiring local governments and school boards to adopt district -wide school concurrency systems. School concurrency ensures coordination between local governments and school boards in planning and permitting developments that affect school capacity and utilization rates. Requirements To implement school concurrency, local governments and school boards are required to: • Prepare a public school Interlocal Agreement and revise the local government Intergovernmental Coordination Elements to include procedures for implementing school concurrency (Sections 163.3177(6)(h)(1), 163.31777, F.S. and 163.3180(13) , Florida Statutes (F.S.); • Adopt a Public School Facilities Element into the Comprehensive Plan (Sections 163.3180(13)(a) and 163.3177(12), F.S., and Rule 9J-5.025, F.A.C.); • Adopt level of service standards to establish maximum permissible school utilization rates relative to capacity, and include these standards in an amended Capital Improvements Element of the Comprehensive Plan and in the updated Interlocal Agreement (Section 163.3180(13)(b), F.S.); • Establish a financially feasible Public School Capital Facilities Program and include this program in an amended Capital Improvements Element of the comprehensive plan (Section 163.3180(13)(d)1., F.S.); • Establish proportionate -share mitigation methodology and options to be included in the Public School Facilities Element and the Interlocal Agreement (Section 163.3180(13)(e), F.S.); • Establish concurrency Service Areas (CSAs) for public schools to define the geographic boundaries of school concurrency, and include the CSAs in the updated Interlocal Agreement and in the supporting data and analysis for the Comprehensive Plan (Sections 163.3180(13)(c) and 163.3180(13)(g)(5), F.S.). Section 163.3180(13)(e), F.S. explains the standards for availability of school capacity to be considered in concurrency analysis in this manner: "Consistent with the public welfare, a local government may not deny an application for site plan, final subdivision approval, or the functional equivalent for a development or phase of a development authorizing residential development for failure to achieve and maintain the level -of -service standard for public school capacity in a local school concurrency management system where adequate school facilities will be in place or under actual construction within three years after the issuance of final subdivision or site plan approval, or the functional equivalent. School concurrency shall be satisfied if the developer executes a legally binding commitment to provide mitigation proportionate to the demand for public school facilities to be created by actual development of the property, including, but not limited to, options described in subparagraph 1 of this section of Statute." City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-4 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT INVENTORY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS Residential development is the primary factor driving the growth of, and need for, public school capacity. Existing conditions data are used to understand relationships between public school facilities, county demographics and residential development activity, and to identify conditions that may require improvements. This section of the Support Document will identify historical and existing public school facility enrollment and capacity trends, County level population trends and recent residential development trends. Existing Public School Facilities, Existing Attendance Zones, Capacity And Enrollment 9J -5.025(2)(a), Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) Attendance Zones The attendance zones for public schools are provided by the Seminole County School Board and are shown in Maps 10-1 though 10-3 following this document. Seminole County's students are currently served by 59 total school attendance zones, including 37 for elementary schools, 12 for existing middle schools, and ten for high schools. A complete listing of all schools is provided in Table 10-1. Table 10-1 Inventory of Existing Public School Facilities Serving Seminole County Geneva Elementary Milwee Middle Quest Lawton Elementary Rock Lake Middle Walker Elementary Teague Middle Carillon Elementary Greenwood Lakes Lake Mary High Evans Elementary Markham Woods Crooms Partin Elementary Millennium Middle Seminole High Stenstrom Elementary New Middle "EE" Sanford Middle Keeth Elementary Layer Elementary Indian Trails Middle Lake Brantley High Rainbow Elementary South Seminole Lyman High Sterling Park Tuskawilla Middle Eastbrook Elementary Chiles New Middle Lake Howell Hiah English Estates Jackson Heights Winter Springs Hi h Red Bug Elementary Casselberry Hagerty High Winter Spring s Oviedo Hi h Heathrow Elementary Highlands ary Lake Mary Longwood Elementary Altamonte Elementary Lake Orienta Woodlands City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-5 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT Forest Charter and Special Needs Schools Charter schools are typically created to improve student learning, to increase choices in learning opportunities for students and to provide students with a rich academic experience. Charter schools are funded by the State, have a contract (or charter) with the Seminole School district and are monitored by the School District and State. Typically, Charter schools do not have limited school service areas (attendance zones) and can accept students from throughout the County in which they are located. Table 10-2 lists the three charter schools and two special needs schools located in Seminole County. Table 10-2 Charter Schools and Special Needs Schools Source: Seminole County School Board, 2007. One of the three charter schools was created with the specific purpose of addressing special needs. The capacity of charter schools other than special needs schools is included in the capacity analysis for determining the ability to achieve and maintain level of service for concurrency review calculations for future residential development. Existing Public School Facility Capacity and Concurrency Service Areas The current enrollment capacity of the schools in Seminole County is determined by comparing the number of permanent student stations to the number of students enrolled. The capacity measure is the "Florida Inventory of School Houses" (FISH). Table 10-3 lists all public schools serving Seminole County, shows the existing permanent FISH capacity, and identifies the current status of each school in terms of both percent over or under capacity, and percent of FISH capacity currently in use. Based upon the data and analysis for school enrollment, the current district -wide school capacity utilization rate is 99 percent. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-6 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 Choices in Learning Charter School Rays of Hope Charter School UCP of Central Florida Charter School for Special Needs Rosenwald Emotionally disabled school Hopper Center Special Needs Source: Seminole County School Board, 2007. One of the three charter schools was created with the specific purpose of addressing special needs. The capacity of charter schools other than special needs schools is included in the capacity analysis for determining the ability to achieve and maintain level of service for concurrency review calculations for future residential development. Existing Public School Facility Capacity and Concurrency Service Areas The current enrollment capacity of the schools in Seminole County is determined by comparing the number of permanent student stations to the number of students enrolled. The capacity measure is the "Florida Inventory of School Houses" (FISH). Table 10-3 lists all public schools serving Seminole County, shows the existing permanent FISH capacity, and identifies the current status of each school in terms of both percent over or under capacity, and percent of FISH capacity currently in use. Based upon the data and analysis for school enrollment, the current district -wide school capacity utilization rate is 99 percent. The City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-6 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT utilization rates by type of school are 102 percent for elementary, 97 percent for middle schools, and 96 percent for high schools. Table 10-3 Florida Inventory of School Houses (FISH) Capacity and Enrollment Surplus/Deficiency ELEMENTARY - CSA EXISTING PERMANENT FISH CAPACITY CURRENT PERMANENT BUILDING SCHOOL CAPACITY PERM NO. STUDENT STATIONS SCHOOL (FISH) CAPACITY 100% OVER(,,,)/% BELOW(-) CAPACITY OF FISH CAPACITY Geneva Elementary - E1 601 601 -99 83.5% Lawton Elementary - E1 882 882 -1 99.9% Walker Elementary - E1 827 827 63 107.6% Total E1 2,310 2,310 -37 98.4% Carillon Elementary - E2 942 942 -141 85.0% Evans Elementary - E2 966 966 -108 88.8% Partin Elementary - E2 748 748 47 106.3% Stenstrom Elementary - E2 622 622 97 115.6% Total E2 3,278 -312-78- -105 96.8% Keeth Elementary - E3 576 576 200 134.7% Layer Elementary - E3 735 735 -101 86.3% Rainbow Elementary - E3 749 749 139 118.6% Sterling Park Elementary - E3 501 501 152 1 130.3% Total E3 2,561 2 561 390 115.2% Eastbrook Elementary - E4 932 932 -116 87.6% English Estates Elementary - E4 843 843 -81 90.4% Red Bug Elementary - E4 819 819 22 102.7% Total E4 2,594 2,594 -175 93.3% Casselberry Elementary - E5 878 878 -80 90.9% Winter Springs Elementary - E5 810 810 -178 78.0% Total E5 1,688 1,688 -258 84.7% Heathrow Elementary - E6 862 862 257 129.8% Highlands Elementary - E6 625 625 -79 87.4% Lake Mary Elementary - E6 638 638 -28 95.6% Longwood Elementary - E6 715 715 -47 93.4% Total E6 2,840 2,840 103 103.6% Altamonte Elementary - E7 991 991 -127 87.2% Lake Orienta Elementary - E7 1 475 475 224 147.2% Woodlands Elementary - E7 1 840 840 -25 97.0% City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-7 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report - November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT Total E7 1 2,306 2,306 72 103.1% Bear Lake Elementary— E8 11,026 1,026 53 105.2% Forest City Elementary — E8 915 915 -44 95.2% Sabal Point Elementary — E8 567 567 248 143.7% Spring Lake Elementary — E8 633 633 187 129.5% Wekiva Elementary — E8 713 713 158 122.2% Bentley Elementary — E9 933 933 42 104.5% Crystal Lake — E9 853 853 -192 77.5% Goldsboro Elementary — E9 713 713 -29 95.9% Id llwilde Elementary — E9 825 825 62 107.5% Wicklow Elementary — E9 792 792 29 103.7% Wilson Elementary — E9 881 881 69 107.8% Total E9 4,997 4,997 -19 99.6% Hamilton Elementary — E10 725 725 91 112.6% Midway Elementary — E10 385 385 24 106.2% Pine Crest Elementary — E10 823 823 57 106.9% Total E10 1,933 1,933 172 108.9% City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-7 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT MIDDLE SCHOOL - CSAs EXISTING PERMANENT FISH CAPACITY CURRENT PERMANENT BUILDING SCHOOL CAPACITY PERM NO. STUDENT STATIONS SCHOOL (FISH) CAPACITY (90%) OVER(+)/ BELOW(-) CAPACITY % OF FISH CAPACITY Greenwood Lakes Middle - M1 1,423 1,281 -105 91.8% Markham Woods Middle - M1 1,390 1,251 -399 68.1% Millennium Middle - M1 1,720 1,548 198 112.8% New Middle "EE" - M1 Sanford Middle- M1 1,564 1,408 -89 93.7% Total M1 6,097 5,487 -394 92.8% Milwee Middle - M2 1,446 1,301 -155 88.1% Rock Lake Middle - M2 1,281 1,153 -29 97.5% Teague Middle - M2 1,640 1,476 142 109.6% Total M2 4,367 3,930 -42 98.9% Indian Trails Middle - M3 1,518 1,366 41 103.0% South Seminole Middle - M3 1,310 1,179 42 103.6% TuskawillaMiddle -M3 1,389 1,250 -97 92.2% Total M3 4,217 3,795 -14 99.6% Chiles New Middle -M4 1,577 1,419 31 102.2% Jackson Heights Middle - M4 1,494 1,345 -52 96.2% Total M4 3,071 2,764 -21 99.2% TOTAL 1 17,752 15,977 City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-9 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report - November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT Source: Seminole County School Board, 2007. Information on the existing capacity of the entire Seminole County School District system was obtained from the Florida Department of Education (FDOE). The information is dated June 30, 2006. According to the FDOE, Seminole County's system contained 68,633 permanent student stations and 6,331 relocatable student stations, for a total capacity of 71,789 student stations. The total enrollment as of June 30, 2006, based on the Capital Outlay Full Time Equivalent (COFTE) numbers used by the FDOE was 65,354, and within the capacity available district -wide. Concurrency Service Areas Schools are grouped by Concurrency Service Area (CSA) that define the geographic boundaries of school concurrency. The CSA maps were created as part of the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency, to provide the geographic basis for concurrency analysis. There are 10 CSAs for Elementary Schools (E1 - E10) and four each for the Middle and High Schools (M1 - M4 and H1 - 1-14). Maps of the CSAs are included in the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public Schools Facility Planning and School Concurrency. It was determined that concurrency should be applied on a less than whole district basis from the outset, because concurrency service areas would be used in the future, and the use of concurrency service areas was deemed to be the most logical approach from the outset. For City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-10 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report - November 2009 EXISTING PERMANENT CURRENT PERMANENT FISH CAPACITY BUILDING SCHOOL CAPACITY HIGH SCHOOL - CSAs PERM NO. SCHOOL (FISH) OVER(+)/ o �0 OF FISH STUDENT CAPACITY BELOW(-) CAPACITY STATIONS (95%) CAPACITY Quest 125 119 -9 92.6% Lake Mary High - H1 2,980 2,831 -242 91.5% Crooms - H1 948 806 -277 65.6% Seminole High - H1 3,209 3,049 138 104.5% Total H1 7,137 6,685 -380 94.3% Lake Brantley High - H2 3,099 2,944 262 108.9% Lyman High - H2 2,649 2,517 -193 92.3% Total H2 5,748 5,461 69 101.3% Lake Howell High - H3 2,487 2,363 -122 94.9% Winter Springs High - H3 2,574 2,445 44 101.8% Total H3 6,061 4,808 -78 98.4% Hagerty High - H4 2,890 2,746 -1,694 38.3% Oviedo High - H4 2,891 2,746 10 100.3% Total H4 5,781 5,492 -1,684 69.3% TOTAL 23,852 1 22,665 Source: Seminole County School Board, 2007. Information on the existing capacity of the entire Seminole County School District system was obtained from the Florida Department of Education (FDOE). The information is dated June 30, 2006. According to the FDOE, Seminole County's system contained 68,633 permanent student stations and 6,331 relocatable student stations, for a total capacity of 71,789 student stations. The total enrollment as of June 30, 2006, based on the Capital Outlay Full Time Equivalent (COFTE) numbers used by the FDOE was 65,354, and within the capacity available district -wide. Concurrency Service Areas Schools are grouped by Concurrency Service Area (CSA) that define the geographic boundaries of school concurrency. The CSA maps were created as part of the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency, to provide the geographic basis for concurrency analysis. There are 10 CSAs for Elementary Schools (E1 - E10) and four each for the Middle and High Schools (M1 - M4 and H1 - 1-14). Maps of the CSAs are included in the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public Schools Facility Planning and School Concurrency. It was determined that concurrency should be applied on a less than whole district basis from the outset, because concurrency service areas would be used in the future, and the use of concurrency service areas was deemed to be the most logical approach from the outset. For City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-10 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report - November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT additional clarity, it was determined that three sets of concurrency service areas were needed, one set for each school level. EXISTING POPULATION AND DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS Section 163.3177(12)(c) Population and housing data are important components in the planning of any public facilities or services. Seminole County, its cities and the Seminole County School Board have agreed to use projections issued by the FDOE and provided to the School Board, based on the Capital Outlay Full Time Equivalency (COFTE) cohort projections, for purposes of public school facility planning. These figures are based on past enrollment. However, projections of increased population and new residential units by local governments based on land use patterns are also an important component in understanding the potential future impacts on public school capacity. Changes in land use that result in increased residential density generally increase population, although they may not automatically result in an increase in the school aged population. Increases in population are not evenly distributed throughout Seminole County and need to be closely and continuously evaluated in order to determine the need for new public school facilities, and potential impacts on existing facilities. Historical Population Statistics Historic population data for Seminole County were taken from the US Census Bureau. Population totals from 1980, 1990, and 2000 are depicted in Table 10-4 and can be used to identify historical changes in population growth. The results of this comparison revealed that population is still growing in Seminole County, but at a slower rate. Between 1980 and 1990, total population increased by 60 percent. However, between 1990 and 2000 population growth was 27 percent. While the rate of population growth accelerated again between 2000 and 2006, it is now believed this rate of growth has slowed in tandem with the deceleration of the housing market. Average household size, an indirect indicator of possible need for increased school facility capacity, declined between the decennial Census dates. Table 10-4 Historical Po ulation Growth Demographic Measure 1980 1990 Percent Change 1980 to 1990 2000 Percent Change 1990 to 2000 Total Population 179,752 287,528 60.0% 365,196 27.0% Female 51.60% 51.10% 58.3% 51.00% 26.9% Male 48.40% 48.90% 61.8% 49.00% 27.2% Total Households 63,250 107,656 70.2% 139,572 29.6% Average Household Size 2.82 2.64 -6.4% 2.59 -2.0% Family Population 161,675 240,297 48.6% 306,065 27.4% Group Quarters Population 1,078 2,856 164.9% 3,606 26.30/6 City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-11 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT Existing Development Patterns Existing patterns of housing development impact current and future demands for school capacity. Table 10-5 summarizes the number of housing units by type of unit for Seminole County, including Sanford, as of the 2000 Census. Based on this exhibit alone, it is clear that the County is heavily oriented toward single family housing, and utilization of the student generation rate for single family residential use has been prominently used in order to determine impact on schools. Table 10-5 Profile of Housing Characteristics - 2000 Housing Units By Type 2000 Single Family 95,809 Multi -Family 46,024 Mobile Home (Incl. Rv) 5246 Total 147,079 Source: Census 2000. Table 10-6 summarizes the number of building permits issued for single family and multi- family units in each jurisdiction between 2000 and 2005. Building permits for mobile homes are not included in this information. Although single family units remain the dominant housing type, in 2000 and 2001 a significant number of building permits were issued for multi -family housing. Additionally, building permit issuance does not show a consistent pattern over time. For example, the City of Sanford's multi -family building permits more than doubled between 2000 and 2001, and then sharply dropped off in 2002. For unincorporated Seminole County, almost as many building permits were issued for multi -family units in 2000 as single family, but the same is not true of the unincorporated area in 2001. Multi -family building permits again increased in the unincorporated area in 2002, but again declined sharply in 2003 and 2004. Table 10-6 Housing Units Authorized by Building Permits (Does Not Include Mobile Homes) Jurisdiction 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 SF MF SF MF SF MF SF MF SF MF SF MF Altamonte Springs 13 72 8 110 8 52 5 98 35 89 9 7 Casselberry 85 0 71 112 62 0 126 0 72 0 27 0 Lake Mary 244 0 253 0 276 0 303 0 285 0 101 0 Longwood 15 0 15 0 22 0 12 0 10 0 25 0 Oviedo 241 6 308 12 168 12 381 2 362 16 400 4 Sanford 327 530 132 1334 125 14 524 500 686 42 1011 63 Winter Springs 195 8 127 8 204 0 186 0 205 42 159 0 Unincorporated 1347 1336 1311 294 1118 1 754 1411 57 2212 40 12082 1 264 Totals 2467 1952 12225 1 1870 1 1983 1 832 12948 657 3867 229 1 3814 1 338 Source: Bureau Of Economic And Business Research, University Of Florida Florida Statistical Abstracts Of 2001 Through 2006 City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-12 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT This information pertains only to the building permits, not to actual certificates of occupancy, so it cannot be assumed to definitively represent the final building pattern. However, it is an important indicator of the direction of building patterns. As noted above, increases in population resulting from residential construction are not evenly distributed throughout Seminole County and need to be closely and continuously monitored in order to determine the need for new public school facilities, and potential impacts on existing facilities. Nevertheless, the long-standing prevalence of single family units appears to be shifting in new construction where multi -family units make up an increasing share of the total. Existing School Ape Population and Enrollment Table 10-6 provides information on historical trends for all age groups within the County, including school aged children (ages 5 to 19), between the 1990 Census to the 2000 Census, with an estimate for 2006. This information shows that the school -aged population represented 7.0 percent of the total population of Seminole County in 1990, and had declined to 6.8 percent of the County's population according to the 2000 Census. The estimate for school age population as of 2006 showed that this age cohort represented 7.1 percent of the population. However, the median age of the total population in Seminole County continued to increase over this time period, indicating that the age distribution appears to be trending toward an older population. Household Count The total count of households within a jurisdiction, as well as information about the occupancy of those households, can also be used to help determine the need for future school capacity. This information for Seminole County is shown in Table 10-7. According to this exhibit, the total number of occupied households in Seminole County increased by 30 percent between the 1990 and 2000 Census counts. However, during that time period, the total number of occupied households with children only increased by 27 percent. During the same time period, the average household size decreased by 2 percent. Table 10-7 Household Statistics Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Decision Data Resources, Inc. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-13 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 1990 2000 Census Census Change `90-`00 Total Occupied Households 107,656 139,572 30% Total Occupied Households with Children 40,720 51,594 27% Ave Household Size 2.64 2.59 -2% Length of Residence: Stability In Res. 5+ Yrs 41.00% 41.20% Turnover % Yearly) 26.00% 24.50% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Decision Data Resources, Inc. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-13 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT PROJECTED POPULATION AND DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS Section 163.3177(12)(c) While the City will continue to use BEBR projections to depict future City populations, public school facility planning is based on the population of the County as a whole. Therefore, it is appropriate to use the projections developed by Seminole County in conjunction with its 2006 Evaluation and Appraisal Report. During the process of performing the 2006 Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) required by State Law for each local comprehensive plan, Seminole County prepared updated population projections for both permanent population (year-round residents) and 'functional' population (year-round + seasonal + population in group quarters) in five year increments from 2010 to the year 2025. The projection was performed by Seminole County, using a methodology reviewed and accepted by the State Department of Community Affairs (DCA). The County prepared its own projections, rather than using projections issued by the Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) of the University of Florida, because as of 2006, Seminole County had a limited amount of developable and redevelopable land available. BEBR projections are not limited by land availability. The explicit consideration of the land constraint is a hallmark difference between the County and BEBR projections. The County's projections are useful in helping to determine the need for public facilities in general, and although they are not disaggregated by age cohort, they are by themselves an adequate guide to help determine the need for additional school capacity. Compared to BEBR projections, County projections show a slower overall increase in population over the planning horizon. The County's projected future population is contained in Table 10-8. Table 10-8 Population Projections Seminole County Population Resident (Year -Round Only) and Functional (Year- Round+Seasonal) Resident Population (October 1) Area 2010 2015 2020 2025 Unincorporated 234,075 248,692 253,751 255,075 Total County 457,207 482,190 490,195 492,260 Functional Population (October 1) Area 2010 2015 2020 2025 Unincorporated 236,621 251,263 256,379 257,764 Total County 464,634 489,954 498,250 500,582 Source: Seminole County Traffic Analysis Zone data Student enrollment projections issued by the FDOE and provided to the School Board, based on COFTE cohort projections, anticipate increases for 2011. The enrollment projections for elementary, middle and high schools are grouped together in Table 10-9. The Seminole County School District reported that enrollments have declined for School Year 2006/2007, as they have statewide, but enrollment projections provided by the FDOE did not indicate a downturn. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-14 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT Table 10-9 Elementary School Enrollment Proiections ELEMENTARY ENROLLMENT 10/10/2006 2011 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT Geneva Elementary 502 485 Lawton Elementary 881 852 Walker Elementary 890 800 Carillon Elementary 801 775 Evans Elementary 858 884 Partin Elementary 795 723 Stenstrom Elementary 719 601 Keeth Elementary 776 557 Layer Elementary 634 711 Rainbow Elementary 888 724 Sterlinq Park Elementary 653 958 Eastbrook Elementary 816 789 English Estates Elementary 762 799 Red Bug Elementary 841 792 Casselberry Elementary 798 772 Winter Springs Elementa 632 611 Heathrow Elementary 1,119 834 Highlands Elementary 546 528 Lake Mary Elementary 610 914 Longwood Elementary 668 646 Altamonte Elementary 864 958 Lake Orienta Elementary 699 894 Woodlands Elementary 815 788 Bear Lake Elementary 1,079 992 Forest City Elementary 871 885 Sabal Point Elementary 815 938 Spring Lake Elementary 820 612 Wekiva Elementary 871 869 Bentley Elementary 975 902 Crystal Lake 661 639 Goldsboro Elementary 684 661 Id Ilwilde Elementary 887 798 Wicklow Elementary 821 766 Wilson Elementary 950 852 Hamilton Elementary 816 701 Midway Elementary 409 711 Pine Crest Elementary 880 1,039 City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-15 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT ENROLLMENT 2011 ELEMENTARY 10/10/2006 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT New Elementary "M" 793 New Elementary "O" 793 Totals 29,106 30,346 MIDDLE ENROLLMENT 10/10/2006 2011 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT Milwee Middle 1,146 1,164 Rock Lake Middle 1,124 1,171 Teague Middle 1,618 1,499 Greenwood Lakes Middle 1,176 1,194 Markham Woods Middle 852 995 Millennium Middle 1,746 1,572 New Middle "EE" 2,241 1,411 Sanford Middle 1,319 1,429 Indian Trails Middle 1,407 1,387 South Seminole Middle 1,221 1,197 Tuskawilla Middle 1,153 1,253 Chiles New Middle 1,450 1,441 Jackson Heights Middle 1,293 1,313 Total 15,505 17,026 HIGH ENROLLMENT 10/10/2006 2011 PROJECTED ENROLLMENT Quest 110 118 Lake Mary High 2,589 3,024 Crooms 85% Utilization 529 622 Seminole High 3,187 3,257 Lake Brantley High 3,206 3,145 Lyman High 2,324 2,688 Lake Howell High 2,241 2,524 Winter Springs Hi h 2,489 2,612 Hagerty High 1,052 1,236 Oviedo High 2,756 2,934 Totals 20,483 22,161 City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-16 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report - November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT Future Development Patterns (2006 — 2011 and Long Term) According to the findings of the 2006 Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) of the Seminole County Comprehensive Plan, the County was approaching a level of maturity in the developed landscapes of the County. The most easily developed, sizable vacant parcels have been either developed or committed to development. With this shift away from `greenfield' development and toward an emphasis on the use of smaller `infill' parcels originally avoided by developers, and the revitalization of older declining areas, comes a slower and less predictable growth rate. The EAR found that growth would continue, but at a slower pace. The projected growth rate over the next planning horizon (from 2008 to 2025) was anticipated to average 15 percent annually. Table 10-6 above reveals that the rate of building permit issuance between 2000 and 2005 has varied from year to year. Similarly, it is anticipated that the rate of growth each year in this more mature phase of the County's development may also vary. Table 10-10, provides a projection of anticipated development for the five year period of 2006 — 2011. The projection anticipates an increase in multi -family housing permits, although the number of permits is still projected to be less than those issued for single family housing. Table 10-10 Projected Residential Building Permits 2006-2011 A second exhibit, Table 10-11 was originally prepared for the County's EAR, and projects that the future direction in housing units built based on availability of land will show an increased trend toward multi -family units within the incorporated area, while single family remains the dominant type of housing in the unincorporated portions of the County. This exhibit provides a projection as to the development pattern over the long term planning period. If this pattern of increasing multi -family housing continues, public school capacity planning may be affected. According to Table 10-12, single family homes generate more students than multi -family homes. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-17 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 Single Family Multi - Family 2006 2,744 1,343 2007 2,817 1,358 2008 2,638 1,329 2009 2,277 1,226 2010 2,017 1,125 2011 1,718 1,025 A second exhibit, Table 10-11 was originally prepared for the County's EAR, and projects that the future direction in housing units built based on availability of land will show an increased trend toward multi -family units within the incorporated area, while single family remains the dominant type of housing in the unincorporated portions of the County. This exhibit provides a projection as to the development pattern over the long term planning period. If this pattern of increasing multi -family housing continues, public school capacity planning may be affected. According to Table 10-12, single family homes generate more students than multi -family homes. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-17 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT Table 10-11 Projected Housin Construction, Based on Available Land 2010 2015 2020 2025 SF MF SF MF SF MF SF MF Unincorporated 10,823 3,318 15,866 3,594 18,098 3,789 19,093 3,875 Incor orated 3,986 4,208 5,164 7,341 5,712 8,654 5,934 9,235 TOTAL 14-18-0-9- 7 526 21,030 10,935 23,795 12,443 25,027 13,110 Source: 2006 Seminole County Evaluation and Appraisal Report Table 10-12 Seminole County School District Student Generation Rates Residence Type Elementary Middle High Total Single Family 0.249 0.114 0.124 0.487 Multi -Family 0.115 0.053 0.057 0.226 Mobile Home 0.186 0.083 0.075 0.345 Source: Seminole County Public Schools website, 2007. As noted above, the School District, the County and the cities are committed, through the 2007 Interlocal Agreement, to the use of student projections provided by the FDOE based on COFTE cohort projections. The COFTE projections are based on prior enrollment. Over time, should the anticipated slowing of the development rate and movement toward more multi- family housing as shown herein take place, it is anticipated that enrollment figures will reflect this change. Annual data sharing and ongoing coordination efforts will help ensure that school capacity planning corresponds to shifts in the land development pattern within Seminole County, and the City of Sanford. Analysis of Impact of Projected Development and Enrollment on Facilities The following data series were used as primary data sources: • Existing enrollment and existing FISH capacity • Surplus and deficiencies (Table 3 entitled Florida Inventory of School Houses (FISH) Capacity and Enrollment Surplus/Deficiency), • Existing and projected population, and • Existing development pattern and projected development. Utilizing these data, an analysis was performed of conditions that will impact public school capacity. As part of this analysis, the current and planned inventory of school facilities was reviewed in light of projected student population growth and available revenue to finance capital improvements. (Information on available revenue streams is contained in Table 10-16). More detailed information explaining the revenue sources is found below.) The analysis was conducted to determine if the planned school capacity will be sufficient to accommodate the projected enrollment at the adopted level of service. As noted above, the existing capacity of the Seminole County School District is sufficient to serve the existing total number of students in the County. However, specific Concurrency Service Areas (CSAs) were determined to be over capacity, as shown Table 10-3 above. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-18 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT In addition to FDOE enrollment projections, forecasts of school aged population were also developed using the County's own population projections (Table 10-13). County population projections explicitly consider the availability of land in determining the ability to absorb future population growth. Utilizing these overall projections, the University of Florida's Shimberg Center produced a breakout of population by age cohort. The findings of this analysis are included in Table 10-14. Table 10-13 Seminole County Population by Age Age Bracket 1990 Census Share 2000 Census Share 2006 Estimate Share Share Loss/Gain 2000206 0 to 4 20,042 7.00% 23,062 6.30% 24,291 6.00% Loss 5 to 14 40,651 14.10% 53,779 14.70% 1 53,978 13.40% Loss 15 to 19 20,101 7.00% 24,802 6.80% 28,677 7.10% Gain 20 to 24 19,641 6.80% 21,559 5.90% 26,752 6.60% Gain 25 to 34 52,585 18.30% 51,933 14.20% 49,757 12.30% Loss 35 to 44 49,904 17.40% 64,959 17.80% 60,941 15.10% Loss 45 to 54 31,958 11.10% 54,636 15.00% 64,869 16.10% Gain 55 to 64 22,943 8.00% 31,613 8.70% 48,188 11.90% Gain 65 to 74 18,092 6.30% 21,392 5.90% 26,493 6.60% Gain 75 to 84 9,038 3.10% 13,468 3.70% 14,456 3.60% Loss 85+ 2,564 0.90% 3,993 1.10% 4,933 1.20% Gain Median Age: 33.3 36.2 38.3 Source: Decision Data Resources, Inc. Table 10-14 School A ed Children Projections, Based on PlanningPo ulation Projections Projection of School Age Children (Based on County population projections) 2005 2010 2011 a 2012 2013 2014 2015 Elementary School Age' 33,527 34,806 35,113 35,420 35,726 36,033 36,339 Middle School Age 2 18,461 18,502 18,596 18,689 18,783 18,876 18,970 High School A e3 28,806 30,567 30,433 30,299 30,165 30,031 29,897 Total Count School Age Children 80,794 83,876 84,142 84,408 84,674 84,940 85,206 ' All of'S-9' cohort plus 20% of '10- 1 4'cohort 2 60% of '10-14' cohort 380% of '15-19' cohort plus 20% of '10-14' cohort ° 2011 figures derived from a linear extrapolation between 2010 and 2015 projections Table 10-14 identifies the expected school aged children population projections between 2005 and 2015. The numbers of school aged children are expected to increase by year 2011 for all school levels (i.e., Elementary, Middle and High Schools). Between 2005 and 2011, the incremental increase in school aged children is modest compared to earlier County experience (1990 to 2006). Only 1,586 additional elementary school -aged residents, 135 City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-19 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT additional middle school -aged residents, and 1,627 additional high school -aged residents are expected in the County. These increases are derived from County projections and may not correspond to FDOE or School Board figures, and public school enrollment is also influenced by private school enrollment and demographics. Nevertheless, these figures suggest that Seminole County may be embarking on a slower growth trajectory in regard to school -aged residents. Table 10-15 displays the FDOE projected permanent school capacity in 2011. Table 10-15 Proiected Permanent School Capacity- 2011 ELEMENTARY 5 Year CIP Additions PERM NO. STUDENT STATIONS SCHOOL (FISH) CAPACITY (100%) OVER(+)/ BELOW(-) CAPACITY o �o OF FISH CAPACITY Geneva Elementary 0 601 601 -116 80.8% Lawton Elementary 0 882 882 -30 96.6% Walker Elementary 0 827 827 -27 96.7% 2,310 2,310 -173 92.5% Carillon Elementary 0 942 942 -167 82.2% Evans Elementary 0 966 966 -82 91.5% Partin Elementary 0 748 748 -25 96.7% Stenstrom Elementary 0 622 622 -21 96.7% 3,278 3,278 -295 91.0% Keeth Elementary 0 576 576 -19 96.7% Layer Elementary 0 735 735 -24 96.7% Rainbow Elementary 0 749 749 -25 96.7% Sterling Park Elementary 490 991 991 -33 96.7% 3 051 3,051 -101 96.7% Eastbrook Elementary 0 932 932 -143 84.7% English Estates Elementary 0 843 843 -44 94.8% Red Bug Elementary 0 819 819 -27 96.7% 2,594 2,594 -214 91.8% Casselberry Elementary 0 878 878 -106 87.9% Winter Springs Elementa 0 810 810 -199 75.4% 1,688 1,688 -305 81.9% Heathrow Elementary 0 862 862 -28 96.7% Highlands Elementary 0 625 625 -97 84.5% Lake Mary Elementary 335 973 973 -59 93.9% Lon wood Elementary 0 715 715 -69 90.3% 3175 3175 -254 92.0% Altamonte Elementary 0 991 991 -33 96.7% Lake Orienta Elementary 450 925 925 -31 96.7% Woodlands Elementary 0 840 840 -52 93.8% 2,756 2,756 -115 95.8% Bear Lake Elementary 0 1,026 1,026 -34 96.7% Forest City Elementary 0 915 915 -30 96.7% Sabal Point Elementary 403 970 970 -32 96.7% Spring Lake Elementary 0 633 633 -21 96.7% Wekiva Elementary 186 899 899 -30 96.7% 4 1 443 4-A-43 -147 96.7% City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-20 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report - November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT ELEMENTARY 5 Year CIP Additions PERM NO. STUDENT STATIONS SCHOOL (FISH) CAPACITY (100%) OVER(+)/ BELOW(-) CAPACITY % OF FISH CAPACITY Bentley Elementary 0 933 933 -31 96.7% Crystal Lake 0 853 853 -214 74.9% Goldsboro Elementary 0 713 713 -52 92.8% Id Ilwilde Elementary 0 825 825 -27 96.7% Wicklow Elementary 0 792 792 -26 96.7% Wilson Elementary 0 881 881 -29 96.7% Millennium Middle 0 4 997 4,997 -379 92.4% Hamilton Elementary 0 725 725 -24 96.7% Midway Elementary 350 735 735 -24 96.7% Pine Crest Elementary 252 11075 1,075 -36 96.7% Indian Trails Middle 0 2,535 2,535 -84 96.7% New Elementary "M" 820 871 871 -78 91.0% New Elementary "O" 820 871 871 -78 91.0% Totals 4,106 32,569 32,569 42 101.1% MIDDLE 5 Year CIP Addition PERM NO. STUDENT STATIONS SCHOOL (FISH) CAPACITY (100%) OVER(+)/ BELOW(-) CAPACITY % OF FISH CAPACITY Milwee Middle 0 1,446 1,301 -138 89.4% Rock Lake Middle 0 1,281 1,153 18 101.5% Teague Middle 0 1,640 1,476 23 101.5% 4,367 3,930 -97 97.5% Greenwood Lakes Middle 0 1,423 1,281 -87 93.2% Markham Woods Middle 0 1,390 1,251 -256 79.5% Millennium Middle 0 1,720 1,548 24 101.5% New Middle "EE" 1,390 1,390 1,251 160 112.8% Sanford Middle 0 1,564 1,408 22 101.5% 7,487 6,738 -137 98.0% Indian Trails Middle 0 1,518 1,366 21 101.5% South Seminole Middle 0 1,310 1,179 18 101.5% Tuskawilla Middle 0 1,389 1,250 3 100.2% 4,217 3,795 42 101.1% Chiles New Middle 0 1,577 1,419 22 101.5% Jackson Hei hts Middle 0 1,494 1,345 -32 97.6% 3,071 2,764 -10 99.6% Totals 1 1,390 1 19,142 1 17,228 City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-21 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report - November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT HIGH 5 Year CIP Addition PERM NO. STUDENT STATIONS SCHOOL (FISH) CAPACITY (100%) OVER(+)/ BELOW(-) CAPACITY % OF FISH CAPACITY Quest 0 125 119 -6 95.2% Lake Mary High 0 2,980 2,831 164 105.8% Crooms 0 948 901 -302 66.4% Seminole High 0 3,209 3,049 251 108.2% NEW MIDDLE SITE TBD 7,137 6,780 112 101.7% Lake Brantley High 0 3,099 2,944 242 108.2% High 0 2,649 2,517 88 103.5% -Lyman 1 5-,74-8- 5,461 330 106.0% Lake Howell Hi h 0 2,487 2,363 194 108.2% Winter Springs Hi h 0 2,574 2,445 201 108.2% 5,061 4,808 395 108.2% Hagerty High 0 2,890 2,746 -1,556 43.3% Oviedo High 0 1 2,891 12,746 226 108.2% 5,781 5,492 -1330 1 75.8% Totals 0 1 23,862 22,659 The projected enrollment and existing deficiencies resulted in the School District programming improvements in their Capital Improvement Plan. These financially feasible improvements are shown in Table 10-16 and Table 10-17. The projected enrollment is greater than the projected school -aged population anticipated from development allowing the programmed capacities to accommodate the anticipated development at the adopted levels of service (LOSS). Table 10-16 Planned New Public School Facility Construction Capital Improvement Budget NEW CONSTRUCTION 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 LAND $6,000,000 NEW MIDWAY ELEM $2,000,000 NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SITE TBD $1,000,000 $15,000,000 NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SITE TBD $1,000,000 $15,000,000 NEW MIDDLE SITE TBD $2,000,000 $33,000,000 NEW HIGH SCHOOL (SITE TBD) $5,000,000 30 MODULAR CLASSROOMS 1 $3,180,000 ROSENWALD 1 $1,000,000 $15,000,000 City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-22 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT Table 10-17 Proposed Public School Additions REMODELING & ADDITIONS 2007/08 2008/09 2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 GREENWOOD LAKES MIDDLE $800,000 $11,000,000 CASSELBERRY $1,000,000 HAMILTON $1,000,000 $7,000,000 IDYLLWILDE ADMIN $500,000 $1,000,000 JACKSON HEIGHTS ROUND BLDG $500,000 $6,000,000 LAKE ORIENTA $11,000,000 PINE CREST ADDITION/REMODELING $4,000,000 $10,000,000 SEMINOLE HIGH $18,000,000 $5,000,000 SMALL PROJECTS $1,395,000 $700,000 $700,000 $700,000 $700,000 SPRING LAKE $1,000,000 $10,000,000 STENSTROM $1,000,000 $9,000,000 WEKIVA $1,000,000 $11,000,000 WILSON/GENEVA PODS $800,000 $6,000,000 The Goal, Objectives and Policies of the Public School Facilities Element and the school concurrency program, like the financially feasible public school capacity capital improvements program, were based on this data and analysis. ANALYSIS OF PROBLEMS AND OPPORTUNITIES FOR EXISTING SCHOOLS AND SCHOOLS ANTICIPATED IN FUTURE PERTAINING TO LOCATION Sec. 163.3177(12)(c), F.S. In both the City and the County, the most significant problem for both existing schools and future schools is the increasing scarcity of vacant, developable land. This land constraint limits the ability to co -locate public schools with other public facilities. In addition, the ability of the Seminole County School District to locate sites for new schools that comply with the standards of the FDOE is limited. The scarcity of vacant land also limits the ability to expand most existing schools on their current sites. According to the Seminole County school administration the desirable gross acreage to accommodate all school facilities and activities is: • Elementary School 11 acres • Middle School 20 acres • High School 60 acres According to Seminole County's 2006 EAR, unincorporated Seminole County had a total acreage of 149,017.61 in 2004. Table 10-18 is based on the EAR findings and contains information on the number of acres that may be available for a future school. The greatest availability of vacant land is found in the East Rural area of the County. Land designated Rural -10 (allowing a maximum of 1 dwelling unit per 10 net acres) represents just over 28 City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-23 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT percent of all vacant unincorporated land. Land designated Rural -5 represents 31.79 percent of all vacant unincorporated land. Table 10-18 Unincorporated Seminole County Vacant Unincorporated Developable Acres by Land Use. 2004 Future Land Use Designation Acres % Of All Vacant Unincorp. Land % Of All Unincorp. Land Rural - 10 6384.91 28.05% 4.28% Rural - 5 7236.63 31.79% 4.86% Rural - 3 130.76 0.57% 0.09% Suburban Estates 3230.3 14.19% 2.17% Low Density Res. 3213.14 14.11% 2.16% Medium Density Res. 343.33 1.51% 0.23% High Density Res. 29.54 0.13% 0.02% Commercial 334.74 1.47% 0.22% Office 65.25 0.29% 0.04% Industrial 886.47 3.89% 0.59% High Intensity Planned Development Airport 346.4 0.00% 0.00% 1.52% 0.23% High Intensity Planned Development Target Industries 442.4 1.94% 0.30% High Intensity Planned Development Core & Transition 97.46 0.43% 0.07% Recreation 7.57 0.03% 0.01% Public 17.63 0.08% 0.01% Total Vacant 22,766.55 Total Unincorporated Acreage 149,017.61 Total Percent 100.00% 15.28% The East Rural area is a County sector that is very restricted in use, in order to preserve its rural character. Only elementary schools are an allowable school use in this area. In addition, central sewer and water service is only available in limited locations, and rural road standards prevail. Rural road standards do not typically include sidewalks and other urban corridor amenities. In addition, the residents of Seminole County have expressed a strong desire to retain the rural character of the area by enacting an amendment to the County charter that grants the County the power of controlling land use on properties within that area described by legal definition (in both the County Charter and the Future Land Use Element of Seminole County's Comprehensive Plan), even if parcels are annexed into cities. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-24 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report - November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT An opportunity for future schools in the unincorporated portions of Seminole County may be available, if a more 'urban' footprint can be used for those schools. Although the unincorporated county has had a land use designation for "Mixed Use" within its Future Land Use Plan, this was an applicant -driven designation that did not permit schools as an allowable use. With the adoption of text and map amendments in response to the 2006 EAR and the 2006 US 17-92 CRA Corridor Strategy, the Mixed Use land use designation is anticipated to be opened to uses such as public schools, and will be introduced via County - initiated comprehensive plan future land use map amendments into locations such as the US 17-92 corridor. Annual consultations between the County and the School Board, as outlined in the 2007 Interlocal Agreement, may help to turn this situation into an opportunity rather than a constraint. ANALYSIS OF OPPORTUNITY TO CO -LOCATE PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND OTHER PUBLIC FACILITIES, COMMUNITY FOCAL POINT Sec. 163.3177(12)(c ), F.S. Parks County: The County's park system contains 24 parks (with one additional park now under development) and several single purpose facilities, such as boat ramps. The existing park system contained 1,582 acres as of 2004. In the past, park initiatives concentrated on the development of urban community parks equipped with active and passive recreational opportunities, intended to serve residents countywide. Seminole County has no regional parks and relies on State Parks and County natural lands for large scale passive recreational experiences. As land availability decreased, the effort shifted to smaller community parks. In the Seminole County Comprehensive Plan, 30 — 40 percent of every community park is to remain in open space use for purposes of wildlife habitat, protection of native vegetation and passive recreation. This limits the ability of existing parks to allow for co -location of a new public school or any other public use, unless the residents of the County decide that this policy should be changed. The additional community park now under development, Jetta Point Park, will be a 45 acre park located at the trailhead of the Cross Seminole Trail. Roughly 25% of the park area contains wetlands which will be preserved, and the area next to the trail will be reserved for uses complementary to hiking. Equestrian uses will also be featured, along with active recreational areas. The park is located in CSA E-1 for Elementary Schools and H4 for High Schools, and appears to be on the boundary of CSAs M-3 and M-4 for Middle Schools. According to Table 10-3, no of those CSAs were out of compliance with their adopted LOSS, so this area would not have been identified as an area in need of additional capacity at the time planning for this park began. The majority of future park planning efforts may be focused on development of small neighborhood parks, where sufficient land for a community park is not available. Given 2007 legislative changes that alter the ability of local governments to collect ad valorem taxes, it is not certain at this time whether a major effort to develop neighborhood parks will be financially feasible. However, should an effort to develop neighborhood parks occur, the smaller size of the parks may mean co -location with a public school is not feasible, unless the footprint of the public school can become smaller, too. Administration of the Parks and Recreation Division presently works with the School District through interlocal agreements to City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9- 25 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT jointly use recreation facilities located at public schools, and is eager to continue that relationship. City: The City of Sanford owns 273.6 acres of developed park land and 56 acres of undeveloped park land. For the most part, the parcels comprising undeveloped park land are too small for collocation with school facilities. The largest undeveloped tract is approximately 17 acres and is located across the street from Sanford Middle School. A park is the preferred use of this site, but it is not known if this site will continue to be targeted for park facilities. The parcel is located in the oldest section of town, which has adequate park lands, making it unlikely that the parcel will be developed as a park. However, there may be opportunities to collocate recreational facilities needed by Sanford Middle School across the street. Libraries County: Seminole County presently operates five libraries. The City of Winter Springs has expressed interest in a library, but, to date, no plans have been finalized. The Capital Improvements Element of the Seminole County Comprehensive Plan contains budget items only for the expansion of the book collection, not for expansion of library capacity through new construction. The existing libraries occupy small sites that would not have space for a public school co -location. A survey of possible library improvements was administered to likely voters during the same time period when the 2006 EAR of the Seminole County Comprehensive Plan was underway. The results indicated that, while respondents were favorably disposed toward the idea of expanding library space (especially space to be used by school children), there was no support for a financing mechanism to accomplish expansion. Co -location of future public schools with library facilities in unincorporated Seminole County does not appear likely within the five year planning horizon. Based on the foregoing analysis, policies calling for co -location of public schools with County facilities in the unincorporated area simply stated that the County would work with the School Board to examine this approach 'to the extent feasible.' (Policy 10-1.3.2) However, the data indicate that this is unlikely to be accomplished without a change in the County's financial forecast. City: Residents of the City of Sanford utilize Seminole County libraries. The City does not own or manage any libraries. Other Facilities County: Other than roadways, stormwater improvements, fire facilities, police facilities and the Natural Lands Program, the County's capital budget does not envision additional public facilities, such as community centers. The roadways, stormwater improvements and public safety improvements do not lend themselves to co -location with public schools. The Natural Lands Program is intended to preserve valuable and fragile environmental assets and cannot be co -located with an intensive use, such as a public school. City: The City provides roads, sidewalks, water and sewer to all schools within its jurisdiction. Properties located within the City's service area and adjacent to the City boundaries are required to annex into the City in order to receive City services. The School City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-26 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT Board will break ground this year on recently purchased property for a new high school on SR 46 adjacent to the City boundary. When the site is developed with a school, the site will be annexed into the City and the City will provide water and sewer to the school. No other schools are anticipated to be built in, or adjacent to, the City. The City maintains one community center located in the Goldsboro neighborhood. While there has been talk of building another community center, there are no specific plans to do so and it is not a budgeted item. As previously mentioned, the City does not own property large enough to accommodate a school and the Seminole County School District has no plans to construct another school in the City. As a result, collocation of a school and a community center is not an option at this time. However, the City will entertain the collocation of school and City facilities at the time they are proposed. Community Focal Point County: As noted above, unincorporated Seminole County lacks large tracts of land that can house significant new residential developments in the urban service area. Most future development in the unincorporated area is likely to occur within small infill properties, or as a part of the redevelopment of current commercial areas in need of revitalization through innovative approaches such as Mixed Use development. Seminole County is open to the idea of working in a partnership with the School Board and the private sector to include a school within such redevelopment projects that could serve as a community focal point, but does not anticipate such large-scale projects at this time. City: At this time, there are no opportunities to locate schools to serve as community focal points within the City. As mentioned above, the School Board has purchased land adjacent to the City boundary for a new high school. If this property is annexed into the City, there may be an opportunity for the school to serve as a community focal point. However, the property is partially isolated by SR 46 and the Orlando Sanford International Airport and is not proximate to a highly populated area. Analysis of Need for Supporting Facilities.— Sec. 163.3177(12)(c ), F.S. This portion of the Support Document focuses primarily on supporting facilities that are provided by either the Board of County Commissioners of Seminole County or the City of Sanford. Each site proposed for a public school needs to be analyzed in terms of its own characteristics; some will be located within areas where all supporting facilities are already in place, while others (primarily within unincorporated Seminole County) may lack some facilities. Both the County and the City development review process identify any supporting facilities that are lacking. The following information summarizes existing approaches for some supporting facilities. Other facilities will require individual agreements between the School District and the County during the development review process. Sidewalks Both the City of Sanford and the Seminole County Land Development Codes (LDC) require developers to install sidewalks as a condition of development, although the County allows waivers in the East Rural Area. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-27 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT Many portions of the unincorporated County were developed before the advent of this requirement. Accordingly, Seminole County initiated a Sidewalk Program, developed with voter support of the '26 Generation One -Cent Sales Tax Program' in 2001. The First Generation Sales Tax Program was adopted in 1990 and, expired in 2000. The 2nd Generation Sales Tax Program included $40 million for sidewalks over a ten year period. Funds were included for both design and construction. A priority list was developed for the Sidewalk Program first through the School Safety Advisory Committee. A second list of priorities was developed from a 2000 study intended to address missing links or gaps in the sidewalk program, again focusing on school -related safety as a priority. The highest priority was given to improvements within one and two miles of elementary schools, followed by middle schools. High schools were last in priority. The original two lists were used to develop the sidewalk program that was contained in the 2nd Generation Sales Tax Program. A change in school attendance boundaries or a new school can alter these priorities. The Department of Public Works staff conducts an annual minor update of its programs that can revise the priorities as needed. In addition, during the development review process for any proposed school site, any gaps in sidewalks can be identified and decisions can be made at that time as to whether a gap can be remedied through the County's Sidewalk Program. For example, for the new Midway Elementary School, the Public Works staff met in May and June of 2007 to discuss potential locations of sidewalks. Since the passage of the 2001 sales tax, the County has completed most of the highly ranked sidewalk projects. The proposed sidewalk budgets for fiscal years 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 include sidewalks to serve the new Midway Elementary School, a sidewalk on County Road 419 to serve Jackson Heights Middle School, sidewalks on County Road 46A to serve Seminole High School, sidewalks on West 27th Street to serve Pine Crest Elementary School and sidewalks on Snow Hill Road to serve Walker Elementary School. The City also has a sidewalk program funded by the 2nd Generation Sales Tax. The funds are primarily used to fill in gaps between existing sidewalks and to install new sidewalks in the more populated areas. The City recently installed sidewalks on 20th Street, which facilitates access to Goldsboro Elementary School, Sanford Middle School and Hamilton Elementary School. The City applied for, and has been approved for, two grants from the Transportation Enhancement Fund to construct sidewalks on Persimmon Avenue to access Crooms High School and on County Road 46A to access Seminole High School and Millennium Middle School. Both projects are on Metroplan Orlando's Prioritized Project List. The City will continue to analyze the need for sidewalks to access the City's schools and either use funds from the 2nd generation sales tax or from grants to pay for new sidewalks. Water and Sewer Services Within the East Rural area of the County, only elementary schools are an allowable use (K- 6). Since little central sewer and water service is available within the rural area, a site that the Seminole County School District desires to use for an elementary school in this area would need to be approved for onsite potable water well and septic tank. This was the case for the Geneva Elementary School located in CSA E-1. The development review process will ensure that the appropriate steps are taken to secure approval of the onsite systems. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-78 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT Within the urban services area, Seminole County approaches the provision of water and sewer services to public schools in two ways. If Seminole County provides direct service to the site for a proposed public school, the school must install the connection to the central services. This is necessary because Seminole County's potable water and sanitary sewer systems are run as enterprise funds, so the other rate payers in the system are not made to pay for the installation of the connection. However, the Seminole County Board of County Commissioners adopted an ordinance that exempted the Seminole County School District from paying the connection fees for central water and sewer service. The development review process will advise the School District of this exemption from connection fees. Seminole County also provides bulk water service and wastewater treatment to some of the cities located within the County. One such example is the City of Lake Mary, which purchases potable water at a wholesale rate for resale to customers within the City. If a proposed public school site is located within a bulk customer of Seminole County's water or sewer system, then the City purchasing the service is responsible for paying the connection fee to the County. Cities that purchase service from the County are made aware of this requirement. The City will continue to provide water and sewer to customers within its service area including all public schools within the City limits. Other Supporting Facilities As stated in Section 5.4 of the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency, the School Board and the City will jointly determine the need for and timing of on-site and off-site improvements necessary to support each new school or the proposed remodeling of an existing school. The parties will agree to the timing, location and party or parties responsible for financing construction, operating and maintenance of the required improvements. Based on the analysis contained in this section and the language in the 2007 Interlocal Agreement, the City included Objective 10-1.7 Ensuring Provision of Necessary Infrastructure, and its associated policies, within the Public School Facilities Element. SCHOOL ATTENDANCE ZONES, CONCURRENCY SERVICE AREAS AND THE PROCESS FOR DETERMINING CONCURRENCY Chapter 9J -5.025(2)(a), Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) Maps 10-1 through 10-3 show the school attendance zones. Attendance zones shift as new school capacity is added. Therefore, CSAs were established to provide a more stable geographic framework for analysis. The CSAs are depicted on maps in the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning and School Concurrency. When an application for residential development is reviewed for concurrency, the School District evaluates the availability of school capacity within the CSA in accordance with the provisions of the 2007 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Capacity and Facility Planning for School Concurrency, specifically Sections 12.2, 12.3, and 12.4. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-29 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT FUNDING FOR SCHOOLS FACILITIES The School District must rely on multiple revenue sources to fund the new construction, renovation and maintenance needs identified in its Five -Year Capital Facilities Plan. The funding is made available from both State and local sources. The primary funding source for the Capital Facilities Plan is derived from property and sales taxes. There are many additional sources such as impact fees, certificates of participation (COPs) and other forms of taxation. These typical sources of revenue are identified below and depicted in Table 10- 19. • Property Tax — Florida Statutes allows School Districts to levy up to 2 mils to fund capital improvement programs for public schools. Seminole County levies the full 2 mils and it is the single largest constant revenue source for the School District, averaging $56 to $77 million during the five year planning horizon. • Sales Tax — Sales taxes generated by Seminole County residents, business owners and tourists may be used for public school projects. • State Class Size Reduction — The recent legislative mandates have provided additional state funding for smaller class sizes and early childhood education. The Seminole County School Board will receive revenue of $21,076,049 in School Year 2006/07 from the State. • PECO — The utility Public Education Capital Outlay fund is derived from State gross receipts tax revenue may be used for expansion projects for student stations. • Impact Fees — New residential development in Seminole County is required to provide public school impact fees to offset a portion of the cost associated with the students generated by the development. The impact fee rate is: Residence Type Impact Fee Rate Per Unit Single Family $1,384 Multi -Family $639 Mobile Home $955 • CO&DS Bonds — The Capital Outlay and Debt Service funds derived from the motor vehicle license tax may be used for expansion projects for student stations. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-30 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT Table 10-19 Capital Improvement Revenue Sources REVENUE 2007/2008 2008/2009 2009/2010 2010/2011 2011/2012 STATE CLASS SIZE REDUCTION $5,409,345 PECO NEW CONSTRUCTION $2,929,596 $1,985,715 $1,985,715 $1,985,715 $1,985,715 PECO MAINTENANCE $3,815,185 $2,050,000 $2,050,000 $2,050,000 $2,050,000 COWSBONDS COWSBONDS $368,064 $368,064 $368,064 $368,064 $368,064 LOCAL 2 MILL $63,432,790 $67,238,758 $71,273,083 $75,549,468 $80,082,436 SALES TAX $18,617,585 $14,070,410 $9,270,699 $9,548,820 $4,844,968 IMPACT FEES $3,500,000 $3,500,000 $3,500,000 $3,500,000 $3,500,000 GASOLINE TAX REFUND $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 COPS RAN LOCAL CAP IMPROVEMENT/INTEREST $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 UNDESIGNATED $26,000,000 SUB -TOTAL $125,172,565 $90,312,947 $89,547,561 $94,102,067 $93,931,183 PRIOR YEAR CARRYOVER $5,984,821 $27,164,852 $11,005,597 $3,194,086 $125,172,565 $96,297,768 $116,712,413 $105,107,664 $97,125,269 The School Board may also receive other revenues from undesignated sources, such as new development, but these sources do not provide constant and predictable revenue. City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-31 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT Map 1 High School Attendance Zones City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-32 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT Map 2 Middle School Attendance Zones City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-33 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report— November 2009 CITY OF SANFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS FACILITIES ELEMENT Map 3 Elementary School Attendance Zones City of Sanford Comprehensive Plan 9-34 Data, Inventory and Analysis Report — November 2009 City of Sanford Map- 4-4 Sanitary Sewer Lake Monroe Service Area i, ', SR I 46 LI �r• i If US r a -- -- --- -i - -- _, � --- - - --- SR Legend 615 City Limits - — - - �I41 46 Sanitary Sewer Service Area _ 'a _� fieri v.K RY B auuefrr;AVE 0 0.5 1 Miles Lake Jesup Sources: City in le Cord, 2008 County�1L/L/ �\ ®®r-7c-tSeminole �\�\��FDOTLYNX ,K-144 Wey4brn nand Associates. Inc. Feb�uvy :009 City of Sanford f / Map: 4-3 Water Service Area Lake Monroe I SR —2— LAI E U L 0 F— J. Legend o L; 0.- SR 777'-� I Water Service Area City Limits kt It . SR UT Local Roads AWN& Not IT, all, -7 U RQUCTFE AXE F - N w E S L 0 0.5 1 Miles Lake Jesup Sources: City of Sanford, 2008 Seminole County FOOT ■ LYNX City of Sanford Map: 4-2 Lake County Solid Waste Facilities % Voluisa County / Legend 4 Solid Waste Facilities Lake Monroe =City Limits DMunicipality Altamonte Springs 1 4s 1 •� us p O Casselberry 'I' SR '. O Lake Mary 415 SR OLongwood 46 I R Osceola Oviedo _ t Land Fill Writer Springs Orange sR County N7 a rre eve �t o �� NA BL � O N WE Seminole County Central Transfer Station \\ Lake Jesup / S SR 419 0 1 2 Miles i �-- � _� �9 andand A�ssodates, Yu. City of Sanford Map: 4-1 Lake Monroe Septic Tank Areas r I h .. SR 46 IL 0 i•-1 I m IRI,- a .^Q r.J r I• —J r, ,7.9 _1, e.�/ — SR (� j '� • • r'•--'4 c -- — I '--� : • • ' 41S Legend — —) City Limits Water Service Area /- -' �I fi` \ .��'' - - �� ` c '"• •• Septic Tanks in Water Service Area ' C u"' SRLJ 4 1 417 tai 4 — J Septic Tanks within the City Limits t� 'k^ `� S I> r' i '•�: I --_•� c ••-: ' _.—_� ROUfiTT[AVE LF-KY L K a' L I; b --••- I I j►T i . 41. , .1 • Owl tY_y.J 'Y.I_.i:._I •. i .. .. 0 0.5 1 Miles I Lake Jesup KAe� O —IB77- 9 and Associates, Inc.