mobility
Post on 25-Dec-2021
18 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
CHAPTER 10 – TRANSPORTATIONDATA AND ANALYSIS
ELEMENT 4MOBILITY
ELEMENT 4
ACCEPTED 10/25/2016
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES AND MAPS V2-389
CHAPTER 10 – TRANSPORTATION V2-391
TRANSPORTATION CIRCULATION SUB CHAPTER DATA AND ANALYSIS
SARASOTA COUNTY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATIONS OF ROADS
LEVEL OF SERVICE
ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
FUTURE ROADWAYS LEVEL OF SERVICE
SARASOTA COUNTY MOBILITY PLAN
SARASOTA COUNTY YEAR 2040 FUTURE THOROUGHFARE PLAN
ACCIDENT FREQUENCY DATA
V2-400
V2-402
V2-406
V2-409
V2-418
V2-420
V2-426
PUBLIC TRANSIT SUB CHAPTER DATA AND ANALYSIS
TRANSIT PLANNING V2-428
AVIATION, PORT & RAIL SUB CHAPTER DATA AND ANALYSIS
AVIATION, PORTS & RAIL
AIRPORTS
PORTS
RAILROADS
CHAPTER 10 – TRANSPORTATION MAPS
V2-436
V2-438
V2-452
V2-453
V2-455
V2-388
LIST OF TABLES AND MAPS
Table 10-1: 2014 Peak Hour Roadway LOS by Jurisdiction V2-406
Table 10-2: Deficient Roadways, 2014 V2-407
Table 10-3: Projected Deficient Roadways, 2020 V2-410
Table 10-4: Designated Backlogged and Constrained Roadways in Sarasota County
V2-414
Table 10-5: 2040 Future Thoroughfare Plan V2-421
Table 10-6: Private Use Aviation Facilities in Sarasota County
V2-437
Table 10-7: Public Use Aviation Facilities in Sarasota County V2-437
Map 10-1: Existing and Planned Bicycle Facilities V2-456
Map 10-2: Existing and Planned Pedestrian Facilities V2-457
Map 10-3a: Mobility Plan Corridor, North County V2-458
Map 10-3b: Mobility Plan Corridor, Central County V2-459
Map 10-3c: Mobility Plan Corridor, South County V2-460
Map 10-4: Mobility Fee District V2-461
Map 10-5: Existing Road Network V2-462
Map 10-6: Existing Roadway Level of Service V2-463
Map 10-7: Projected 2020 Deficient Roadways V2-464
Map 10-8: Year 2040 Future Thoroughfare Plan (Functional Classifications) V2-465
V2-389
transportation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
LIST OIF TABLES AND MAPS
Map 10-9: Year 2040 Future Thoroughfare Plan (By Lanes) V2-466
Map 10-10: Scenic Highways V2-467
Map 10 -11: Sarasota County Transit Routes V2-468
Map 10 -12: Major Transit Trip Generators V2-469
Map 10 -13: Sarasota-Bradenton Airport Existing and Future Facilities, 2015 V2-470
Map 10-14: Venice Municipal Airport Existing Facilities, 2015 V2-471
Map 10-15: Buchan Airport Existing Facilities, 2015 V2-472
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysisV2-390
transportation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
CHAPTER 10 CHAPTER 10 TRANSPORTATION
DATA AND ANALYSIS
V2-391
The coordination of urban land uses with the availability of facilities, and in particular transportation facilities, is required. The availability of these facilities is measured by assessing the attainment of Level and Quality of Service (LOS & QLOS) standards for roadways and public transit as established in the TRAN Policies 1.3.1., and 2.1.10, while LOS and QOS maintenance, which is related to the ability of achieving capital funding, is accomplished through the inclusion of a Capital Improvements Chapter. Table 14-1h, “Five-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements” and Map 14-2, “Facilities with Unfunded Capital Improvements Needed to Achieve/Maintain Adopted Levels of Service” in that chapter provide specific information on capital improvement projects, revenues and expenditures. The Mobility Plan Corridor Map identifies multimodal and mobility corridors needed over the next 20 years and beyond for areas outside the 2050 Resource Management Area (RMA) Plan area.
Capital Improvements Chapter Table 14-1h lists all capital improvements to be funded for mobility circulation and public transit in the next five-year block. The table is updated annually to incorporate the most recently adopted Capital Budget and Capital Improvement Program. Programmed new construction is reviewed annually for consistency with the Sarasota County Comprehensive Plans Transportation Circulation Map in terms of the location of the new roadways and extensions of existing roadways. Similarly, a road maintenance program exists and is funded through the CIP.
Coordination of capital improvements takes place during the county’s annual update of the five-year schedule. Mobility improvements and new facilities are coordinated with the
installation of water transmission lines. Recently, the installation of stormwater management facilities and sanitary sewer collection lines, have also begun to be coordinated with the mobility improvement program. This coordination takes place as information on the type and order of needed capital improvements becomes available from the on-going planning and acquisitions programs.
Programmed new construction is reviewed annually for consistency with the Sarasota County Comprehensive Plans Transportation Circulation Map in terms of the location of the new roadways and extensions of existing roadways. Similarly, a road maintenance program exists and is funded through the CIP.
TRANSPORTATION
V2-392
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
TRANSPORTATION
The existing and projected intermodal deficiencies and needs, such as terminals, connections, high occupancy vehicle lanes, park-and-ride lots, and other facilities; and the projected transportation system levels of service and system needs based on the future land use categories, including their densities or intensities of uses as shown on the Future Land Use Map or map series; and the projected integrated transportation system; and the need for new facilities and expansions of alternative transportation modes to provide a safe and efficient transportation network and enhance mobility. The methodologies used in the analysis, including the assumptions used, modeling applications, and alternatives considered shall be included in the plan support document.
transportation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
Capital improvements beyond the immediate Five-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements are identified in Capital Improvements Chapter Table 14-2, “Facilities with Unfunded Capital Improvements Needed to Achieve/Maintain Adopted Levels of Service.” The future improvements listed in this table are derived, in part, from long range facility plans and the Mobility Plan Corridors Map which are based upon the distribution of land uses found on the Future Land Use Map and future travel demand from the Sarasota-Manatee Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) 2040 Travel Demand Model. An example of this is Cattlemen Road, a two-lane roadway from Fruitville Road to Bahia Vista Street, shown on the Future Land Use Map) as a thoroughfare, and included in Capital Improvements Chapter Table 14-2 as a four-lane facility; however, the table does not include all needed future capital improvements.
PLANNING FOR BICYCLISTS + PEDESTRIANS (Prev. pg 6-8)
In 1991 an agreement was signed between the county and the MPO which obligates the county to complete bicycle and pedestrian planning responsibilities for a Sarasota Bicycle Program including: 1) the adoption of a comprehensive Bicycle Plan and separate Pedestrian Plan; 2) the continuous monitoring of transportation improvements and development projects for bicycle/pedestrian consideration; 3) continued bicycle/pedestrian safety programs; 4) the coordination of bicycle/pedestrian policies with land development policies; 5) the development and maintenance of a map of bicycle lanes, wide curb lanes, separate paths and sidewalks; and, 6) the development of a prioritized list of candidate bicycle/pedestrian projects to be considered for inclusion in the next Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Map 10-1, “Existing and Planned Bicycle Facilities” presents the county’s Existing and Planned Bicycle Facilities consistent with the Sarasota County Bicycle/Pedestrian Program.
V2-393
Since the development of the 1991 agreement, the county has adopted the Sarasota County Trails Master Plan (2006) and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan for Sarasota County (2013). These plans provide a framework to establish a safe, convenient and efficient bicycle and pedestrian system, integrated into the overall transportation system and providing access to and between destinations within the region. The county also includes a separate line item in the Capital Improvements Program solely intended for the design and construction of bicycle and pedestrian facilities, as well as a line item for bicycle and pedestrian safety.
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
In 2013 the MPO adopted a Comprehensive Bicycle Plan for Manatee and Sarasota Counties. This plan represents a comprehensive vision and strategy for increasing the attractiveness of bicycling or walking. These transportation plans leverage the benefits of active transportation for everyone, including people who choose not to walk or ride, and are key strategy documents for enhancing overall livability.
The purpose of the MPO plan was to provide physical improvements to existing facilities, educate cyclists and motorists on road safety and efficiency, improve traffic behavior through encouraging police intervention, promote increased use of bicycles as an alternative form
of transportation, and institutionalize, and interrelate bicycle programs and policies, within routine government operations and funding mechanisms.
The county has adopted a standard policy of including sidewalks and bicycle lanes in the construction of new arterial and collector roads, as well as establishing annual funding for a sidewalk construction program to retrofit sidewalks along existing roads where pedestrian demand is evident, particularly in proximity to schools. The county also developed a Sidewalk Program which includes a limited number of projects along major arterials which generally have higher speeds and traffic volumes and which pose a greater threat to safety of pedestrians and bicyclists compared to most neighborhood streets. The program to date is shown on Map 10-2, “Existing and Future Pedestrian Facilities.
V2-394
PLANNING FOR MOTORISTS
transportation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
The road network can be divided into two broad categories that are referenced in this plan; local roads and thoroughfares. Local roads are low speed, low volume public and private streets that are used primarily for access to development. Generally, there is no specific plan for providing future capacity on them. However, a government agency may include local roads that are necessary to achieve mobility goals on its Thoroughfare Plan. The county has adopted “significant local roads,” policy that required the identification and adoption of significant local roads in 2010. Significant local roads are local roads that operate at or close to the level of a collector road.
Thoroughfares are the collector roads, arterial roads, and expressways. They serve the mobility
needs of the community by providing connections between residential and non-residential uses.
ROADS Sarasota County grew with the automobile, which provided the mobility to accommodate the low density urban growth that spread inland from the coast. New roads were built to supplement the early road system and to satisfy transportation needs in those areas east of the urban corridor along U.S. 41.
The county developed plans not only to accommodate future growth, but also to coordinate the development of an adequate road network to serve the desired land uses. A “Comprehensive Road Plan” developed in 1960 depicted a road system based upon urban expansion radiating inland and away from the Cities of Sarasota and Venice. This 1960
plan provided for the reservation of right of way for future roads in areas that had not yet developed. Additionally, this 1960 plan depicted an interstate located as much as 10 miles east of the coastline. The right of way requirements specified by the 1960 road plan were later incorporated into the 1978 “Subdivision General Land Development and Road Construction Regulations for Sarasota County.” However the plan itself was not implemented as a general road construction program throughout the county.
The adoption of the “1975 Sarasota County Thoroughfare Plan,” as part of the Land Use Plan provided for the development of a major thoroughfare system to serve the urban areas of the
V2-395
county. The 1975 thoroughfare plan was significantly different from the 1960 plan. It depicted I -75 in its current alignment. The road system was consistent with the urban containment policy and was generally designed to serve the areas west and south of the interstate. This plan also introduced the concept of planning for roadways with different functional classifications to serve the urban areas.
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
In 1974, the Sarasota Manatee Area Transportation Study (SMATS) was created to coordinate all transportation planning (local, county, State, and Federal) within the two county area. Its emphasis is on planning for urban areas, as determined by federal regulations. The
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), formerly SMATS, is composed of elected officials representing the various governmental entities located in the two counties. It is charged with preparing transportation plans and programming activities within the study area for Sarasota County. More significantly, MPO approval is required for all non-local transportation programs within the prescribed area in order to be eligible for federal and State urban area transportation funds. Thus, the MPO is and will continue to be a local forum available to Sarasota County for ensuring that transportation plans of neighboring communities are not in conflict with its own.
The MPO Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) is composed of representatives of the various planning and engineering departments within the MPO area. Its function is to provide technical advice and support to the MPO. In 2015 the MPO adopted a Year 2040 Needs Plan for the entire study area from the City of Palmetto to North Port. The Needs Plan identifies major improvements and additions to the thoroughfare system which are projected to be necessary by the year 2040. It is based on the projected transportation needs related to anticipated population growth, and land use patterns as well as political, environmental and financial considerations.
The MPO has completed the process of updating the long range plan for the two-county study area, to identify the thoroughfare system that will be needed through the year 2040. The Sarasota County Planning and Development Services Business Center has worked closely with the MPO to ensure that the year 2040 land use patterns are adequately represented in the
V2-396
MPO’s Year 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan Update, including the Year 2040 Financially Feasible Transportation Plan. As a result, the land use data and population projections utilized in the MPO update are consistent with the land use and population projections used in the updated Sarasota County Comprehensive Plan’s Future Land Use Plan and Map.
transportation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
In addition to the long range Needs Plan, the MPO is responsible for the annual preparation
of a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The TIP identifies state, county and municipal projects which are programmed for implementation within the next five year period.
The TIP is developed from data supplied by the Florida Department of Transportation, in the form of its Adopted Work Program, and the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) members from the counties and cities. The TIP includes information on the type of construction, sources of funding, implementation schedule, and the agencies responsible for implementation. One goal for the county, in working closely with the MPO in the formation of its TIP, is to ensure compatibility among policies and guidelines of the various transportation plans.
In conjunction with the MPO’s Year 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan Update, is the Freight Movement analysis of truck, rail, and boat activity for Sarasota and Manatee Counties. The objective of this study is to use the data in highway and transit planning, as well as in the preparation of the Congestion Management System. The end products included the Sarasota- Manatee MPO’s Congestion Management System Plan in 2014 and the FDOT District One Freight Mobility and Trade Study completed in August 2015.
COASTAL EVACUATION In addition to congestion, transportation circulation issues include the need for adequate hurricane vacation routes, and provision for police and fire emergency services. As such, the adequacy of the existing and projected transportation network is used to evacuate the coastal population prior to an impending natural disaster (See Chapter 6 -Coastal Disaster Management).
V2-397
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysisV2-398
transportation circulation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
TRANSPORTAT~ON C~RCUlAT~ON SUB-CHAPTER
TRANSPORTATION CIRCULATION SUB-CHAPTER
DATA AND ANALYSIS Transportation circulation connects our communities through the movement of people and goods along our roads, sidewalks, trails and cycling facilities.
V2-399
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
SArRASOTA COUN1Y FUNCT!ONAl ClASS!F!CAT!ON OF ROADS SARASOTA COUNTY FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION OF ROADS
The roadway functional classification system employed by the county, and used in the county’s
Year 2040 Future Thoroughfare Plan, utilizes a classification system designed to recognize the
unique road system found in Sarasota County. Each of the roadway categories is discussed below:
Freeways/Expressways are controlled access facilities with grade separated intersections providing for interregional and/or interstate travel at high operating speeds. Typically, expressways accommodate high volumes of traffic.
Major Arterials facilitate relatively long trip lengths at moderate to high operating speeds with somewhat limited access to adjacent properties. Major arterials generally serve major centers of activity in urban areas and have the highest traffic volume corridors.
Minor Arterials provide somewhat shorter trip lengths than major arterials and generally interconnect with and augment major arterial routes at moderate operating speeds, and allowing somewhat greater access to adjacent properties than major arterials.
Major Collectors collect and distribute significant amounts of traffic between arterials, minor collectors and local roads at moderate to low operating speeds. Major collectors provide for more accessibility to adjacent properties than arterials.
Minor Collectors collect and distribute moderate amounts of traffic between arterials, major collectors and local roads at relatively low operating speeds with greater accessibility than major collectors.
Significant Local Roads are local roads that provide a limited mobility function. They serve the accessibility role of local roads but have traffic characteristics and a collection/distribution function of low volume collector roads. Typically, the roadways are residential subdivision streets that are characterized by higher volumes than local roads. Traffic volumes are high enough that traffic calming, traffic abatement, or additional or enhanced pedestrian and bicycle amenities may be needed to ensure the road can serve its local road function.
V2-400
Local Roads generally provide access to abutting properties. Local roads possess relatively low traffic volumes, operating speeds and trip lengths and minimal through traffic movements. When high traffic volumes compromise a local road’s ability to accommodate pedestrian and bicycle traffic, the road should be considered for designation as a significant local road.
transportation circulation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) The determination as to whether the existing roadways can adequately serve the existing and future demands is predicated on the ability to estimate the maximum amount of traffic a roadway can safely accommodate. The establishment of threshold standards for roadway types or levels of service (LOS) are used to identify needed system improvements, either by
the expansion of existing roadways, constructing new roadways, creating parallel roadways, or the use of alternative modes of travel.
The principal objective of capacity analysis is to estimate the maximum amount of traffic that can be accommodated by a given roadway. However, capacity analysis is best used to estimate the traffic carrying ability of a given roadway over a range of defined operational conditions, using level of service criteria. Roadways generally operate poorly near capacity and are rarely planned or designed to operate near or at capacity.
The concept of level of service is defined as a qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a stream of traffic and the perception of those conditions by motorists and passengers. A level of service category generally describes these conditions in terms of speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort and convenience, and safety. Six levels of service have been defined, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions and LOS F the worst. Operating conditions under these levels of service (as defined in Highway Capacity Manual2010, Transportation Research Board) are on the following pages.
V2-401
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
lEVEl Q[F SERVICE
I
\
. I
,1
LEVEL OF SERVICE
LOS A: Motorists are unaffected by the presence of others in the stream of traffic. Freedom to select desired speeds and to maneuver within the stream of traffic is extremely high. The general level of comfort and convenience is excellent.
LOS B: Freedom to select desired speeds is relatively unaffected, but there is a reduction in the freedom to maneuver within the stream of traffic. The level of comfort and convenience is less, because the presence of others in the stream of traffic begins to affect individual motorist behavior.
LOS C: Motorists become significantly affected by the interactions with others within the stream of traffic. The selection of speed is affected, and maneuvering within the stream of traffic requires substantial effort on the part of the motorist comfort and convenience declines noticeably at this level.
V2-402
I II
I
transportation circulation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
LOS D: Speed and freedom to maneuver are severely restricted, and a poor level of comfort and convenience is experienced by the motorist. Small increases in traffic will generally cause operational problems at this level.
LOS E: Operating conditions are at or near capacity. All speeds are significantly reduced. Freedom to maneuver is difficult. Comfort and convenience is extremely poor, and motorist frustration is generally high.
LOS F: Operating conditions at this level are forced or have broken down. This condition exists wherever the amount of traffic approaching a point exceeds the amount that can traverse the point. Queues typically form at such locations. Operations are characterized by stop and go waves; vehicles may proceed at reasonable speeds for short distances, and then be required to stop in a cyclical fashion. Comfort and convenience are extremely poor, and frustration is high. These definitions are general and apply primarily to roadways having uninterrupted traffic flows, such as freeways. For each type of roadway facility, levels of service activities are based on one or more operational parameters or “measures of effectiveness.” Basic measures of effectiveness used to define levels of service for different types of roadways include: (a) average travel speed; (b) density; (c) delay; and (d) volume.
V2-403
ADOPTION OF ROADWAY LEVELS OF SERVICE
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
The adoption of LOS for roadways in Sarasota County will provide a basis for assessing the impacts of land use decisions and identify needed roadway system improvements. The adopted level of service for Sarasota County is LOS “D” within the urban service boundary, based on a 100th highest hour design criteria as its goal for roadways under its jurisdiction for arterials and collectors and LOS “C” for thoroughfare roads outside the urban service boundary and significant local roads. Roadways unable to obtain the adopted LOS due to environmental constraints or are not financially feasible will be identified as constrained or backlogged roadways.
Constrained county roadways are defined as exhibiting a level of service lower than the adopted standard and not being able to attain the adopted standard because prohibitive costs or environmental limitations prevent the construction of at least two additional through lanes.
Backlogged county roadways are defined as roadways operating below the adopted standard which do not have prohibitive financial or environmental constraints but are not scheduled for major capacity improvement in the county’s Five-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements.
Thus, the LOS for constrained roadways, i.e. prohibited due to physical or other policy limitations or backlogged roadways, i.e. currently un-funded in 5-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements, is to maintain the current level of service with minimal degradation.
The county’s acceptance of constrained and backlogged roadways on both the state and county systems, however, presumes an additional responsibility on the part of the county
in its review and approval of development orders: to base such decisions on maintaining the existing level of service of such roadways and to not allow the existing operating conditions to be degraded.
V2-404
The county’s adoption of Impact Management Plans would provide for intergovernmental coordination and would address the following:
transportation circulation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
• guidelines to be utilized by the private sector to address the impacts of proposed development;
• the establishment of funding contributions if necessary for improvements to the deficient roadway;
• the identification of needed system improvements such as access control or intersection improvements necessary to mitigate or improve the LOS on the deficient roadway;
• commitments for providing alternate transportation modes, such as public transit; and,
• Identification and commitment of long range system improvements to eliminate LOS deficiencies.
V2-405
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
ANAlYS~S OF EX~ST~NG COND~T~ONS ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS In Florida, level of service analysis is based on a theoretical 100th highest hour, i.e., the traffic
conditions in the 100th hour if all hours of traffic in a year were ranked from highest to lowest. The first 29 hours are generally considered “event related” traffic. In Sarasota County, this could
be Memorial Day or Independence Day peak on a road serving the beaches. For another part of the network, it could be unusually high traffic redirected to surface streets due to a crash on
I-75. The 30th highest hour is considered the highest “normal” traffic, equivalent to the heaviest PM peak hour traffic during peak season. This is often used for road design purposes. In the
State Level of Service Rule, the 100th highest hour is specified as the planning analysis hour, and it is used in the State’s level of service (LOS) analysis procedures. For consistency, Sarasota
County has adopted the 100th highest hour for LOS determinations. The 100th highest hour is roughly equivalent to an average PM peak hour during peak season. Staff uses the county’s
generalized level of service tables to estimate the operating conditions on all thoroughfares
within Sarasota County. Included in this analysis is the incorporation of FDOT’s peak direction
levels of service for roads. In specific applications, actual traffic conditions, signal characteristics, and roadway geometry are taken into consideration. In the county’s generalized LOS tables, the
county uses average values for each facility type. This results in LOS tables based on uniform
and individually symmetrical road segments. The current analysis procedures rely on the latest traffic data and Highway Capacity Manual 2010 methods, the county will continue to update
the analysis procedures as necessary to incorporate the best available data and professionally
accepted practices. Table 10-1, “Peak-Hour Roadway LOS by Jurisdiction,” presents a
comparison between the state and county systems, displaying the total lane miles operating
below LOS “D” peak hour and LOS “E” peak hour for each jurisdiction. A list of deficient road
segments, based on a LOS standard of “D” peak hour for county roadways and the adopted
FDOT LOS for state roads, is provided in Table 10-2, “Deficient Roadways, 2014.” The Existing
Roadway Level of Service is depicted on Map 10-4. The column labeled “Default LOS” is the
default or desired operating standard for each roadway before application of any exceptions as
may be specified in the constrained and backlogged facilities table.
TABLE10-1: 2014 PEAK HOUR ROADWAY LOS BY JURISDICTION Jurisdiction Total
Lane Miles LOS E or F Lane Miles
Percent by Jurisdiction
LOS F Lane Miles
Percent by Juridiction
State 673 178 26.45% 143 21.25%
Sarasota County 666 21 3.15% 14 2.10%
Total Lane Miles 1339 199 14.86% 157 11.73% Notes: (1) Table reflects existing roadway conditions, (2) Level of Service based on adopted methodology
Source: Sarasota County Public Works, 2015
V2-406
transportation circulation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
TABLE10-2: DEFICIENT ROADWAYS, 2014
road segments segment attributes roadway name limits jurisdiction 2014 LOS default LOS
Bahia Vista Street U.S. 41 Shade City/Sar F D
Bahia Vista Street Shade Euclid City/Sar F D
Bahia Vista Street Euclid Tuttle City/Sar F D
Bee Ridge Road (SR 758) McIntosh Honore FDOT F D
Bee Ridge Road (SR 758) Honore Center Gate FDOT F D
Bee Ridge Road (SR 758) Center Gate Maxfield FDOT F D
Bee Ridge Road (SR 758) Maxfield Cattlemen FDOT F D
Bee Ridge Road (SR 758) Cattlemen I-75 FDOT F D
Bay Rd/Osprey Ave (SR 758) Siesta Dr U.S. 41 FDOT/Sar F D
Cattlemen Road Fruitville N. Packinghouse County F D
Cattlemen Road Packinghouse Palmer County F D
Cattlemen Road Palmer Bahia Vista County E D
Cattlemen Road Webber Countrywood County E D
Cattlemen Road Cattleridge Blvd Bee Ridge County E D
Cattlemen Road Bee Ridge Center Pointe County F D
Fruitville (SR 780) Honore Paramount Dr FDOT E D
Fruitville (SR 780) Paramount Dr Cattlemen FDOT E D
Fruitville (SR 780) Cattlemen I-75 FDOT E D
Gulf Mexico Dr.(SR 789) Co Line New Pass Bridge FDOT/LBK E D
Honore Avenue University Desoto County E D
Honore Avenue Taywood 17th County E D
Honore Avenue 17th Richardson County F D
Honore Avenue Richardson Fruitville County F D
Honore Avenue Fruitville Antoinette County F D
Honore Avenue Antoinette Sawgrass County F D
Honore Avenue Sawgrass Palmer County F D
I-75 (SR 93) University Fruitville FDOT E C
I-75 (SR 93) Fruitville Bee Ridge FDOT D C
I-75 (SR 93) Clark SR 681 FDOT C B
I-75 (SR 93) SR 681 Laurel FDOT C B
I-75 (SR 93) Laurel Jacaranda FDOT C B
McIntosh Road Webber Bee Ridge County F D
Palmer Boulevard Packinghouse Porter County F D
Palmer Boulevard Porter Apex County F D
Ringling Causeway (SR 789) New Pass Bridge City Island Rd FDOT/Sar F D
Ringling Causeway (SR 789) City Island Rd St. Armands Circle
FDOT/Sar F D
V2-407
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
TABLE10-2: DEFICIENT ROADWAYS, 2014, CONT’D
road segments segment attributes roadway name limits jurisdiction 2014 LOS default LOS
Ringling Causeway (SR 789) St. Armands Circle
Bird Key Dr FDOT/Sar F D
Tuttle Avenue Fruitville Ringling City/Sar F D
University Parkway Honore Cooper Creek County E D
University Parkway Cooper Creek I-75 County F D
U.S. 301 (SR 683) 12th Fruitville (SR 780)
FDOT/Sar E D
U.S. 301 (SR 683) Fruitville Main FDOT/Sar F D
U.S. 301 (SR 683) Main Ringling FDOT/Sar F D
U.S. 301 (SR 683) Ringling U.S. 41 FDOT/Sar F D
U.S.41 By-Pass (SR 45A) TJ Maxx Ent. Albee Farm Rd FDOT/Ven F D
U.S.41 By-Pass (SR 45A) Albee Farm Rd Venice Ave FDOT/Ven F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Co Line Spaatz FDOT F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Spaatz University FDOT/Sar F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Myrtle 27th FDOT/Sar F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) 10th Blvd of Arts FDOT/Sar E D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Blvd of Arts Fruitville Rd FDOT/Sar E D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Fruitville Rd Ringling FDOT/Sar E D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Osprey US 301 FDOT/Sar F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) U.S. 301 Bay Street FDOT/Sar F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Bay Street Bahia Vista FDOT/Sar F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Bahia Vista Waldemere FDOT/Sar F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Waldemere Hillview FDOT/Sar F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Hillview Webber FDOT/Sar E D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Webber Siesta Dr FDOT/Sar E D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Siesta Dr Bee Ridge FDOT/Sar E D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Bee Ridge Glengary FDOT E D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Glengary Worrington FDOT E D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Worrington Field FDOT E D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Field Proctor FDOT E D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Beneva Club Dr FDOT F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Club Dr Central Sarasota Pkwy
FDOT F D
Source: Sarasota County Public Works, 2015
V2-408
transportation circulation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
IFUTUrRE rROADWAY lEVElS OIF SErRV!CE FUTURE ROADWAY LEVELS OF SERVICE
A projection of future Level of Service (LOS) was performed for the year 2020. In addition to the existing road network (Map 10-5), road projects which are scheduled for completion by the end of 2020 were incorporated in the analysis. These additions included those projects in the road construction program listed in the county’s current Five-Year Capital Improvements Program; other projects identified in the MPO’s adopted Transportation Improvement Program; and State projects in FDOT’s adopted Five-Year Work Program. Future traffic volumes were projected for this 2020 road network by applying growth factors based on historical traffic counts from 2010 to 2014. It should be noted that this procedure has the inherent assumption that 2010 to 2014 historical growth will continue through 2020 without restraint.
However, if all of the assumptions made in this 2020 evaluation procedure hold true, roadways listed in Table 10-3 “Projected Deficient Roadways, 2020” and shown on Map 10-7: “Projected Deficient Roadways, 2020” will be deficient in 2020. Some of the projected 2020 deficient roadways are currently operating at or above LOS “D” peak hour, based on a 100th hour design criteria, or, where applicable, the adopted FDOT LOS standard. At this time, these roadways do not warrant special consideration as constrained or backlogged facilities. The roadways which are listed in both Table 10-2, “Deficient Roadways, 2014” and in Table 10-3 “Projected Deficient Roadways, 2020” are the only ones that are candidate constrained or backlogged facilities. Table 10-2 contains the results of a generalized Level of Service analysis. To develop a final constrained and backlogged facilities list, staff also takes into consideration detailed analysis and scheduled improvements that will affect level of service on the candidate facilities. Often a better level of service is found than would be predicted using generalized level of service methods alone. Table 10-4 “Designated Constrained and Backlogged Roadways in Sarasota County” includes the effects of supplemental analysis and scheduled improvements and is therefore a subset of the candidate list. In Table 10-4, the “Default LOS” column represents standard, desired operating standard for each roadway.
The “B/C LOS”(Backlogged/Constrained LOS) is the adopted level of service specified based on
the level of service analysis and programmed improvements. The “Status” column indicates
whether the lower adopted LOS is due to backlogged improvements, suggesting a better LOS may
be restored at the time of future (but currently unfunded) improvements, or if it is constrained, meaning there are no potential improvements to provide better operating conditions.
V2-409
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
TABLE10-3. PROJECTED DEFICIENT ROADWAYS, 2020
Road Segments Segment Attributes Roadway Name Limits Jurisdiction 2020 LOS Default LOS
Bahia Vista Street U.S. 41 Shade City/Sar F D
Bahia Vista Street Shade Euclid City/Sar F D
Bahia Vista Street Euclid Tuttle City/Sar F D
Bee Ridge Road (SR 758) McIntosh Honore FDOT F D
Bee Ridge Road (SR 758) Honore Center Gate FDOT F D
Bee Ridge Road (SR 758) Center Gate Maxfield FDOT F D
Bee Ridge Road (SR 758) Maxfield Cattlemen FDOT F D
Bee Ridge Road (SR 758) Cattlemen I-75 FDOT F D
Bay Rd/Osprey Ave (SR 758)
Siesta Dr U.S. 41 FDOT/Sar F D
Cattlemen Road Fruitville N. Packinghouse County F D
Cattlemen Road Packinghouse Palmer County F D
Cattlemen Road Palmer Bahia Vista County F D
Cattlemen Road Webber Countrywood County F D
Cattlemen Road Cattleridge Blvd Bee Ridge County F D
Cattlemen Road Bee Ridge Center Pointe County F D
Clark Road (SR 72) Beneva Sawyer FDOT E D
Clark Road (SR 72) Sawyer McIntosh FDOT E D
Clark Road (SR 72) Honore Gantt FDOT E D
Clark Road (SR 72) Gantt Catamaran FDOT E D
Clark Road (SR 72) Catamaran I-75 FDOT E D
Fruitville (SR 780) Shade Tuttle FDOT/Sar F D
Fruitville (SR 780) Tuttle Lockwood Ridge FDOT/Sar F D
Fruitville (SR 780) Lockwood Ridge Beneva FDOT/Sar F D
Fruitville (SR 780) Beneva McIntosh FDOT/Sar E D
Fruitville (SR 780) McIntosh Honore FDOT E D
Fruitville (SR 780) Honore Arthur Andersen Pkwy
FDOT F D
Fruitville (SR 780) Arthur Andersen Pkwy
Cattlemen FDOT F D
Fruitville (SR 780) Cattlemen I-75 FDOT F D
Gulf Mexico Dr.(SR 789) Co Line New Pass Bridge FDOT/LBK F D
Higel Avenue (SR 758) Siesta Midnight Pass Rd
FDOT F D
Honore Avenue University Desoto County F D
Honore Avenue Desoto Longmeadow County F D
Honore Avenue Taywood 17th County F D
Honore Avenue 17th Richardson County F D
V2-410
transportation circulation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
TABLE10-3. PROJECTED DEFICIENT ROADWAYS, 2020 CONT’D
Road Segments Segment Attributes Roadway Name Limits Jurisdiction 2020 LOS Default LOS
Honore Avenue Richardson Fruitville County F D
Honore Avenue Fruitville Antoinette County F D
Honore Avenue Antoinette Sawgrass County F D
Honore Avenue Sawgrass Palmer County F D
Honore Avenue Palmer Bahia Vista County F D
Honore Avenue Colonia Oaks Webber County E D
Honore Avenue Brookmeade Bee Ridge County F D
Honore Avenue Ashton Clark County E D
I-75 (SR 93) University Fruitville FDOT F C
I-75 (SR 93) Fruitville Bee Ridge FDOT F C
I-75 (SR 93) Bee Ridge Clark (SR 72) FDOT D C
I-75 (SR 93) Clark SR 681 FDOT D B
I-75 (SR 93) SR 681 Laurel FDOT C B
I-75 (SR 93) Laurel Jacaranda FDOT C B
I-75 (SR 93) Jacaranda River Rd FDOT C B
I-75 (SR 93) River Rd Sumter Blvd FDOT C B
I-75 (SR 93) Sumter Blvd Toledo Blade FDOT/NPt C B
I-75 (SR 93) Toledo Blade County Line FDOT/NPt C B
Lockwood Ridge Road University 61st County E D
McIntosh Road Webber Bee Ridge County F D
Palmer Boulevard Packinghouse Porter County F D
Palmer Boulevard Porter Apex County F D
Ringling Causeway (SR 789)
New Pass Bridge City Island Rd FDOT/Sar F D
Ringling Causeway (SR 789)
City Island Rd St. Armands Circle
FDOT/Sar F D
Ringling Causeway (SR 789)
St. Armands Circle
Bird Key Dr FDOT/Sar F D
Ringling Causeway (SR 789)
Bird Key Dr U.S. 41 FDOT/Sar E D
River Road (north) I-75 Venice Ave. County E D
River Road (north) Venice Ave. Center County E D
River Road (north) Center West Villages Pkwy
County F D
River Road (north) West Villages Pkwy
U.S. 41 County E D
Siesta Drive (SR 758) Higel N. Bridge FDOT/Sar F D
Siesta Drive (SR 758) N. Bridge Osprey FDOT/Sar F D
V2-411
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
TABLE10-3. PROJECTED DEFICIENT ROADWAYS, 2020 CONT’D
Road Segments Segment Attributes Roadway Name Limits Jurisdiction 2020 LOS Default LOS
Stickney Pt. Road (SR 72) Midnight Pass U.S. 41 FDOT E D
Tuttle Avenue Fruitville Ringling City/Sar F D
University Parkway West University Pkwy
U.S. 301 County E D
University Parkway Tuttle Av Lockwood Ridge County F D
University Parkway Lockwood Ridge Conservatory County F D
University Parkway Conservatory Whitfield County E D
University Parkway Whitfield Longwood Run Blvd
County F D
University Parkway Longwood Run Blvd
Medici County E D
University Parkway Medici Honore County F D
University Parkway Honore Cooper Creek County F D
University Parkway Cooper Creek I-75 County F D
U.S. 301 (SR 683) Northgate Myrtle FDOT E D
U.S. 301 (SR 683) Myrtle 27th FDOT/Sar E D
U.S. 301 (SR 683) 27th 17th FDOT/Sar E D
U.S. 301 (SR 683) 17th 12th FDOT/Sar E D
U.S. 301 (SR 683) 12th Fruitville (SR 780)
FDOT/Sar F D
U.S. 301 (SR 683) Fruitville Main FDOT/Sar F D
U.S. 301 (SR 683) Main Ringling FDOT/Sar F D
U.S. 301 (SR 683) Ringling U.S. 41 FDOT/Sar F D
U.S.41 By-Pass (SR 45A) TJ Maxx Ent. Albee Farm Rd FDOT/Ven F D
U.S.41 By-Pass (SR 45A) Albee Farm Rd Venice Ave FDOT/Ven F D
U.S.41 By-Pass (SR 45A) Venice Ave Center Rd FDOT E D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Co Line Spaatz FDOT F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Spaatz University FDOT/Sar F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) University Myrtle FDOT/Sar F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Myrtle 27th FDOT/Sar F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) 27th 10th FDOT/Sar F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) 10th Blvd of Arts FDOT/Sar F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Blvd of Arts Fruitville Rd FDOT/Sar F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Fruitville Rd Ringling FDOT/Sar F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Ringling Orange FDOT/Sar E D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Osprey US 301 FDOT/Sar F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) U.S. 301 Bay Street FDOT/Sar F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Bay Street Bahia Vista FDOT/Sar F D
V2-412
transportation circulation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
TABLE10-3. PROJECTED DEFICIENT ROADWAYS, 2020 CONT’D
Road Segments Segment Attributes Roadway Name Limits Jurisdiction 2020 LOS Default LOS
U.S.41 (SR 45) Bahia Vista Waldemere FDOT/Sar F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Waldemere Hillview FDOT/Sar F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Hillview Webber FDOT/Sar F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Webber Siesta Dr FDOT/Sar F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Siesta Dr Bee Ridge FDOT/Sar F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Bee Ridge Glengary FDOT F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Glengary Worrington FDOT F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Worrington Field FDOT F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Field Proctor FDOT F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Proctor Philippi FDOT F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Philippi Constitution FDOT F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Constitution Beechwood FDOT F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Beechwood Stickney Point FDOT F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Stickney Point Gulf Gate FDOT F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Beneva Club Dr FDOT F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Club Dr Central Sarasota Pkwy
FDOT F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Central Sarasota Pkwy
McIntosh FDOT E D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Albee Colonia FDOT E D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Colonia U.S. 41 By-Pass FDOT F D
U.S.41 (SR 45) U.S. 41 By-Pass Shamrock FDOT E D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Shamrock Venetian Plaza FDOT E D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Seminole Alligator FDOT E D
U.S.41 (SR 45) Alligator S.R. 776 FDOT E D
U.S.41 (SR 45) S.R. 776 Jacaranda FDOT F D Source: Sarasota County Public Works, 2015
V2-413
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
TABLE10-4. DESIGNATED BACKLOGGED AND CONSTRAINED ROADWAYS IN SARASOTA COUNTY
Road Name From To Jurisdiction Default
LOS B/C LOS Status
Bahia Vista Street U.S. 41 Shade City/Sar D F Constrained
Bahia Vista Street Shade Euclid City/Sar D F Constrained
Bahia Vista Street Euclid Tuttle City/Sar D F Constrained
Bee Ridge Road (SR 758) McIntosh Honore FDOT D F Backlogged
Bee Ridge Road (SR 758) Honore Center Gate FDOT D F Backlogged
Bee Ridge Road (SR 758) Center Gate Maxfield FDOT D F Backlogged
Bee Ridge Road (SR 758) Maxfield Cattlemen FDOT D F Backlogged
Bee Ridge Road (SR 758) Cattlemen I-75 FDOT D F Backlogged
Bay Rd/Osprey Ave (SR 758) Siesta Dr U.S. 41 FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
Cattlemen Road Fruitville N. Packing-house
County D F Backlogged
Cattlemen Road Packinghouse Palmer County D F Backlogged
Cattlemen Road Palmer Bahia Vista County D F Backlogged
Cattlemen Road Webber Countrywood County D F Constrained
Cattlemen Road Cattleridge Blvd
Bee Ridge County D F Constrained
Cattlemen Road Bee Ridge Center Pointe County D F Constrained
Clark Road (SR 72) Beneva Sawyer FDOT D E Constrained
Clark Road (SR 72) Sawyer McIntosh FDOT D E Constrained
Clark Road (SR 72) Honore Gantt FDOT D E Backlogged
Clark Road (SR 72) Gantt Catamaran FDOT D E Constrained
Clark Road (SR 72) Catamaran I-75 FDOT D E Constrained
Fruitville (SR 780) Shade Tuttle FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
Fruitville (SR 780) Tuttle Lockwood Ridge
FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
Fruitville (SR 780) Lockwood Ridge
Beneva FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
Fruitville (SR 780) Beneva McIntosh FDOT/Sar D E Constrained
Fruitville (SR 780) McIntosh Honore FDOT D E Constrained
Fruitville (SR 780) Honore Arthur Ander-sen Pkwy
FDOT D F Constrained
Fruitville (SR 780) Arthur Ander-sen Pkwy
Cattlemen FDOT D F Constrained
Fruitville (SR 780) Cattlemen I-75 FDOT D F Constrained
Gulf Mexico Dr.(SR 789) Co Line New Pass Bridge
FDOT/LBK D F Constrained
V2-414
transportation circulation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
TABLE10-4. DESIGNATED BACKLOGGED AND CONSTRAINED ROADWAYS IN SARASOTA COUNTY, CONTD
Road Name From To Jurisdiction Default
LOS B/C LOS Status
Higel Avenue (SR 758) Siesta Midnight Pass Rd
FDOT D F Constrained
Honore Avenue University Desoto County D F Backlogged
Honore Avenue Desoto Longmeadow County D F Backlogged
Honore Avenue Taywood 17th County D F Backlogged
Honore Avenue 17th Richardson County D F Backlogged
Honore Avenue Richardson Fruitville County D F Backlogged
Honore Avenue Fruitville Antoinette County D F Backlogged
Honore Avenue Antoinette Sawgrass County D F Backlogged
Honore Avenue Sawgrass Palmer County D F Backlogged
Honore Avenue Palmer Bahia Vista County D F Backlogged
Honore Avenue Colonia Oaks Webber County D E Backlogged
Honore Avenue Brookmeade Bee Ridge County D F Backlogged
Honore Avenue Ashton Clark County D E Backlogged
Lockwood Ridge Road University 61st County D E Constrained
McIntosh Road Webber Bee Ridge County D F Backlogged
Palmer Boulevard Packinghouse Porter County D F Constrained
Palmer Boulevard Porter Apex County D F Constrained
Ringling Causeway (SR 789) New Pass Bridge
City Island Rd FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
Ringling Causeway (SR 789) City Island Rd St. Armands Circle
FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
Ringling Causeway (SR 789) St. Armands Circle
Bird Key Dr FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
Ringling Causeway (SR 789) Bird Key Dr U.S. 41 FDOT/Sar D E Constrained
River Road (north) I-75 Venice Ave. County D E Backlogged
River Road (north) Venice Ave. Center County D E Backlogged
River Road (north) Center West Villages Pkwy
County D F Backlogged
River Road (north) West Villages Pkwy
U.S. 41 County D E Backlogged
Siesta Drive (SR 758) Higel N. Bridge FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
Siesta Drive (SR 758) N. Bridge Osprey FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
Stickney Pt. Road (SR 72) Midnight Pass U.S. 41 FDOT D E Constrained
Tuttle Avenue Fruitville Ringling City/Sar D F Constrained
University Parkway West Univer-sity Pkwy
U.S. 301 County D E Constrained
V2-415
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
TABLE10-4. DESIGNATED BACKLOGGED AND CONSTRAINED ROADWAYS IN SARASOTA COUNTY, CONTD
Road Name From To Jurisdiction Default
LOS B/C LOS Status
University Parkway Tuttle Av Lockwood Ridge
County D F Constrained
University Parkway Lockwood Ridge
Conservatory County D F Constrained
University Parkway Conservatory Whitfield County D E Constrained
University Parkway Whitfield Longwood Run Blvd
County D F Constrained
University Parkway Longwood Run Blvd
Medici County D E Constrained
University Parkway Medici Honore County D F Constrained
University Parkway Honore Cooper Creek County D F Constrained
University Parkway Cooper Creek I-75 County D F Constrained
U.S. 301 (SR 683) Northgate Myrtle FDOT D E Constrained
U.S. 301 (SR 683) Myrtle 27th FDOT/Sar D E Constrained
U.S. 301 (SR 683) 27th 17th FDOT/Sar D E Constrained
U.S. 301 (SR 683) 17th 12th FDOT/Sar D E Constrained
U.S. 301 (SR 683) 12th Fruitville (SR 780)
FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
U.S. 301 (SR 683) Fruitville Main FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
U.S. 301 (SR 683) Main Ringling FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
U.S. 301 (SR 683) Ringling U.S. 41 FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Co Line Spaatz FDOT D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Spaatz University FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) University Myrtle FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Myrtle 27th FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) 27th 10th FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) 10th Blvd of Arts FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Blvd of Arts Fruitville Rd FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Fruitville Rd Ringling FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Ringling Orange FDOT/Sar D E Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Osprey US 301 FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) U.S. 301 Bay Street FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Bay Street Bahia Vista FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Bahia Vista Waldemere FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Waldemere Hillview FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Hillview Webber FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Webber Siesta Dr FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Siesta Dr Bee Ridge FDOT/Sar D F Constrained
V2-416
transportation circulation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
TABLE10-4. DESIGNATED BACKLOGGED AND CONSTRAINED ROADWAYS IN SARASOTA COUNTY, CONTD
Road Name From To Jurisdiction Default
LOS B/C LOS Status
U.S.41 (SR 45) Bee Ridge Glengary FDOT D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Glengary Worrington FDOT D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Worrington Field FDOT D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Field Proctor FDOT D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Proctor Philippi FDOT D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Philippi Constitution FDOT D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Constitution Beechwood FDOT D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Beechwood Stickney Point FDOT D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Stickney Point Gulf Gate FDOT D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Beneva Club Dr FDOT D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Club Dr Central Sara-sota Pkwy
FDOT D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Central Sara-sota Pkwy
McIntosh FDOT D E Backlogged
U.S.41 (SR 45) Albee Colonia FDOT D E Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Colonia U.S. 41 By-Pass
FDOT D F Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) U.S. 41 By-Pass
Shamrock FDOT D E Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Shamrock Venetian Plaza
FDOT D E Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Seminole Alligator FDOT D E Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) Alligator S.R. 776 FDOT D E Constrained
U.S.41 (SR 45) S.R. 776 Jacaranda FDOT D F Constrained
Source: Sarasota County Public Works, 2015
V2-417
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
SARASOTA COUN1Y MOB!lilY PlAN SARASOTA COUNTY MOBILITY PLAN
On September 8, 2015, the Board of County Commissioners adopted a Mobility Plan and
Mobility Fee based on the findings of the Sarasota County Mobility Plan and Fee Technical Report, dated June 2015. The Mobility Plan provides a balance between relieving congestion, ensuring public safety, protecting existing residences and minimizing impact to the natural environment. The intent of a mobility plan is to define how a community intends to provide mobility for its residents, businesses and visitors and to serve as the basis for a mobility fee. The mobility plan is based on a future corridors map and the accommodation of multiple modes of travel that is comprised of two different corridor types: mobility and multi-modal (Maps 10-3a-c).
Mobility corridors are new two-lane and four-lane roads or the widening of existing roads from
two- to four-lanes and four- to six-lanes. Mobility corridors will be designed in accordance with
Complete Street concepts that will include a mixture of sidewalks, multi-use paths, trails, bicycle lanes and vehicular travel lanes. Multi-modal corridors will also be designed in accordance with Complete Street concepts, but will not include any additional vehicular travel lanes. Multi-modal improvements will include a mixture of bicycle lanes, bicycle racks, sidewalks, multi-use paths, trails, transit stops, transit pullout bays, transit vehicles, vehicular turn lanes and roundabouts.
Consistent with changes in the Florida Legislature over the past few years, the county through adoption of a Mobility Plan and Mobility Fee provides an equitable and efficient way for new development to mitigate its impacts and provide the county with a flexible revenue source to fund a multi-modal transportation system to include roadways, sidewalks, bicycle lanes, trails and transit capital projects.
The mobility fee recognizes that a multi-modal transportation network provides capacity and travel via multiple modes of travel. In addition to vehicular capacity, the mobility fee also accounts for capacity provided by sidewalks, trails, multi-use path, bicycle lanes and transit ridership. The Mobility Fee is structured to incorporate the municipalities if they elect to join in with the county via an Interlocal Agreement.
V2-418
The county’s mobility fee is divided into three mobility fee districts, as illustrated on the Mobility Fee District Map (Map 10-4). Mobility Fee District 1 is located north of Clark Road. Mobility Fee District 2 is located between Clark Road and the northern boundaries of the Cities of Venice and North Port and Mobility Fee District 3 are areas south of the northern boundaries of the Cities of Venice and North Port. While travel occurs throughout the county, the three districts represent typical daily travel sheds for most non-work based trips.
transportation circulation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
V2-419
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
SArRASOTA COUN1Y YEAR 2040 FUTURE THOROUGHFARE PlAN SARASOTA COUNTY YEAR 2040 FUTURE THOROUGHFARE PLAN
The Sarasota County Year 2040 Thoroughfare Plan (Table 10-5), which identifies the general location and type of roadways needed to accommodate the traffic circulation system needs through the year 2040, is presented in Map 10-8: “Year 2040 Thoroughfare Plan (Functional Classification),” Map 10-9: “Year 2040 Thoroughfare Plan (By Lanes).”
The transportation network and accompanying facilities are coordinated with the Future Land Use Map through the update of the Future Land Use Chapter.
Road improvements and new facilities are coordinated with the installation of water transmission lines. Recently, the installation of stormwater management facilities, and sanitary sewer collection lines have also begun to be coordinated with the road improvement program. This coordination takes place as information on the type and order of needed capital improvements becomes available from the on-going planning and acquisitions programs.
V2-420
transportation circulation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
TABLE10-5. 2040 FUTURE THOROUGHFARE PLAN ROADS
Roadway Name Limits To Lanes
Freeways/Expressways
I-75 (SR 93) University Jacaranda 8
I-75 (SR 93) Jacaranda Charlotte County Line 6
SR 681 (Venice Connector) US 41 I-75 4
Major Arterials
Bee Ridge Road I-75 Bee Ridge Ext. 4
Bee Ridge Road (SR 758) US 41 I-75 6
Beneva Road 17th US 41 4
Center Road US 41 By Pass River Rd 4
Clark Road (SR 72) Swift I-75 6
Clark Road (SR 72) I-75 Co Line 2
Englewood Road (SR 776) US 41 Overbrook Dr 6
Englewood Road (SR 776) Overbrook Dr Dearborn 4
Fruitville I-75 Dog Kennel Rd 4
Fruitville Dog Kennel Rd Verna Road 2
Fruitville (SR 780) US 301 I-75 6
Honore Avenue University Laurel 4
Indiana Avenue (SR 776) Dearborn Co Line (Bay Heights) 4
Jacaranda Boulevard Laurel I-75 4
Jacaranda Boulevard I-75 Center 6
Keyway Road SR 776 Pine St 4
Laurel Road US 41 Jacaranda 4
Lockwood Ridge Road University Fruitville 4
West Villages Pkwy/Pine St North River Co Line 4
Pinebrook Rd Laurel Center Rd 4
River Road (North) I-75 US 41 6
River Road (South) US 41 East River Road 6
Stickney Pt. Road (SR 72) U.S. 41 Swift 6
Sumter Blvd I-75 US 41 4
Toledo Blade Blvd I-75 Co Line 4
US 301 (SR 683) University 17th 6
US 301 (SR 683) 17th US 41 4
US 41 (SR 45) Manatee Co Line US 301 4
US 41 (SR 45) US 301 US 41 Bypass (North) 6
US 41 (SR 45) US 41 Bypass (North) US 41 Bypass (South) 4
US 41 (SR 45) US 41 Bypass (South) Charlotte Co Line 6
V2-421
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
TABLE10-5. 2040 FUTURE THOROUGHFARE PLAN ROADS, CONT’D
Roadway Name Limits To Lanes
US 41 By-Pass (SR 45A) US 41 (North) US 41 (South) 6
University Pkwy US 41 US 301 4
University Pkwy US 301 Lakewood Ranch Blvd. 6
University Pkwy Lakewood Ranch Blvd. North-South Roadway B 4
Venice Avenue US 41 Bypass River Rd 4
Verna Road Fruitville Rd County Line 2
Winchester Blvd County Line River Rd 4
Minor Arterials
17th Street US 301 Honore 4
Bahia Vista Street US 41 Cattlemen 4
Bay Rd / Osprey Ave (SR 758) Siesta Dr US 41 4
Bee Ridge Rd Iona Rd North-South Roadway B 2
Bee Ridge Rd (Ext) Bee Ridge Clark 4
Cattlemen Road Fruitville Proctor 4
Center Road US 41 US 41 Bypass 2
Central Sarasota Pkwy US 41 Honore Avenue 4
Coburn Rd Palmer Blvd Fruitville Rd 2
Dearborn Street SR 776 Pine St 4
Desoto Rd University Pkwy US 301 4
Desoto Rd US 301 North Cattlemen Rd 2
East-West Roadway B North-South Roadway B Verna Rd 2
Gisinger St SR 776 Pine St River Rd 4
Gulf Mexico Dr (SR 789) New Pass Bridge County Line 2
Higel Avenue (SR 758) Siesta Dr Midnight Pass Rd 2
Iona Rd Bee Ridge Rd Fruitville Rd 4
Jacaranda Blvd Center SR 776 4
Knights Trail Rd Laurel Rd North-South Roadway A 4
Lakewood Ranch Blvd Fruitville Rd University Pkwy 4
Longwood Run Desoto University Pkwy 2
Lorraine Rd Fruitville Rd University Pkwy 4
McIntosh Rd Fruitville US 41 4
Midnight Pass Road (SR 758) Higel Stickney Pt 2
N Cattlemen Rd University Pkwy Fruitville Rd 4
North-South Roadway A Clark Rd Knights Trail Rd 4
North-South Roadway B University Pkwy North-South Roadway A 2
Old Englewood Rd SR 776 Dearborn 2
V2-422
transportation circulation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
TABLE10-5. 2040 FUTURE THOROUGHFARE PLAN ROADS, CONT’D
Roadway Name Limits To Lanes
Proctor Road US 41 Clark 4
Ringling Causeway (SR 789) New Pass Bridge St. Armands Circle 2
Ringling Causeway (SR 789) St. Armands Circle US 41 4
Siesta Drive (SR 758) Higel Osprey 2
Spine Rd Bee Ridge Rd Palmer Blvd 2
Stickney Pt. Road (SR 72) Midnight Pass US 41 4
Swift Road Bee Ridge Clark 4
Tuttle Avenue University Pkwy Bee Ridge 4
Major Collectors
Airport Ave Harbor Dr Avenida del Circo 2
Albee Farm Rd Laurel US 41 Bypass 4
Auburn Rd Border Venice 2
Avenida del Circo Airport Ave US 41 2
Bay St US 41 Honore Ave 4
Border Rd Auburn Rd Jackson Rd 2
Capri Isles Blvd Venice Border 4
Colonia Ln US 41 Albee Farm Rd 2
Dearborn St Old Englewood Rd SR 776 2
Edmondson Rd Albee Farm Rd Auburn Rd 2
Gantt Rd Proctor Clark 4
Gulf Gate Dr US 41 Gateway Ave 4
Gulf Gate Dr Gateway Ave Beneva Rd 2
Harbor Dr Venice Ave South of Beach Rd 2
Hatchett Creek Blvd Pinebrook Rd Jacaranda Blvd 2
Jackson Rd Center Rd Venice Ave 2 4
Myrtle Street US 41 Tuttle Ave 4
Palmer Blvd Honore Ave Iona Rd 2
Palmer Ranch Pkwy Beneva Rd McIntosh Rd 4
Palmer Ranch Pkwy E McIntosh Rd Honore Ave 4
Potter Park Dr Central Sarasota Pkwy Sarasota Square Blvd 2
Rockley Blvd US 41 Center Rd 4
Sarasota Square Blvd Beneva Rd McIntosh Rd 4
Sawyer Rd Bee Ridge Rd Clark Rd 2
Venice Ave Park Blvd US 41 Bypass 4
Webber St US 41 Cattlemen Rd 4
V2-423
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
TABLE10-5. 2040 FUTURE THOROUGHFARE PLAN ROADS, CONT’D
Roadway Name Limits To Lanes
Wilkinson Rd Swift Rd Cattlemen Rd 2
Minor Collectors
27th Street / Dr MLK Jr Way US 301 Lockwood Ridge 2
Albee Rd Casey Key US 41 2
Ashton Rd Sawyer Rd Gantt Rd 2
Baffin Rd Shamrock Blvd US 41 2
Blackburn Pt. Rd Casey Key US0 2
Casey Key Rd Blackburn Pt Rd Albee Rd 2
Casey Key Rd Albee End 2
De Leon Dr Ortiz US 41 2
Higel Ave / Treasure Boat Midnight Pass Rd Ocean Blvd 2
Jackson Rd Border Venice 2
Lockwood Ridge Rd Webber St Markridge Rd 2
Manasota Beach Rd Manasota Key Rd Venice East Blvd (N) 2
Manasota Key Rd Manasota Beach Rd County Line 2
Myakka Rd Fruitville Rd Myakka Park 2
Midnight Pass Rd Stickney Pt South of Stickney Pt 2
Ocean Blvd Higel Beach 2
Old Venice Rd Bay US 41 2
Ortiz Blvd DeLeon US 41 2
Richardson Rd Honore N Cattlemen Rd 2
Sawyer Loop Rd McIntosh Clark Rd € 2
Shamrock Blvd US 41 Center 2
Shamrock Drive Baffin US 41 2
South Venice Blvd Lemon Bay Dr US 41 2
Venice East Blvd Center Rd Keyway Rd 4
Significant Local Roads
Camino Real Hansen St Kenilworth St 2
Center Gate Boulevard Bee Ridge Rd Wilkinson Rd 2
Debrecen Road Fruitville Rd Fruitville Rd 2
Gateway Avenue Stickney Point Rd Gulf Gate Dr 2
Higel Avenue Ocean Blvd Treasure Boat Way 2
Higel Avenue Treasure Boat Way Windward Pl 2
Jamaica Road Shamrock Rd Siesta Dr 2
Lalani Boulevard Webber St Bee Ridge Rd 2
Livingstone Street Vamo Rd US 41 2
Mauna Loa Boulevard Bee Ridge Rd Lago Way 2
V2-424
transportation circulation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
TABLE10-5. 2040 FUTURE THOROUGHFARE PLAN ROADS, CONT’D
Roadway Name Limits To Lanes
Mission Valley Boulevard Calusa Lakes Blvd/Mackin-tosh Blvd
Laurel Rd 2
Queen Road Shamrock Dr Oriole Rd 2
Sarasota Golf Club Boulevard McKown Rd Bee Ridge Rd 2
Seminole Drive Siesta Dr US 41 2
Shade Avenue Hibiscus Ct (City Limits) Webber St 2
Shade Avenue Webber St Siesta Dr 2
Shade Avenue Siesta Dr Bee Ridge Rd 2
Shade Avenue Bee Ridge Rd Haley Ln 2
Siesta Drive US 41 Shade Ave 2
Siesta Drive Shade Ave Tuttle Ave 2
Vamo Road US 41 Livingstone St 2 Source: Sarasota County Public Works, 2015
V2-425
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
ACC~DENT [FREQUENCY DATA ACCIDENT FREQUENCY DATA
In 1998, Sarasota County Public Works began preparing and publishing an annual “Crash Analysis for Sarasota County.” In the report, emphasis is placed on crash rates and types at intersections. The Accident Frequency Data at Intersections summarized the 1997 through 2003 reports with information regarding the locations with the highest crash rates. Total crashes per year and crashes per one million entering vehicles (MEV) are presented. The intersection data was then sorted based on the average crash rate over the seven-year analysis period. These applicable accident frequency data provide only one factor in the analysis used to identify needed roadway or intersection improvements. Per TRAN Policy 1.3.11, the county shall maintain a county-wide Crash Management Database System and report the crash data annually.
V2-426
transportation circulation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
PUBl~C TRANS~T SUB-CHAPTER
PUBLIC TRANSIT SUB-CHAPTER
SUPPORT MATERIALS Public transit shall be a primary component of an overall multi-modal transportation system in Sarasota County.
V2-427
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
TRANSIT PlANN!NG TRANSIT PLANNING
The Sarasota County Area Transit (SCAT) bus system operates under the legal authority of the Sarasota County Transportation Authority, which was created under Sarasota County Ordinance No. 74-36, enacted on October 15, 1974, as amended. The governing body of the Authority is the Sarasota County Board of County Commissioners. Operationally, SCAT is an operating department of Sarasota County Government.
SCAT transit planning is established consistent to local, state and federal requirements and is guided by a Transit Development Plan, as required by all Florida transit agencies receiving State block grant funds. The Transit Development Plan (TDP) is a 10-year transit capital and operating plan that is updated by Sarasota County annually with major updates every 5 years. The TDP makes specific recommendations as to how the SCAT bus system can respond to the public transit needs of Sarasota County.
The passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 mandated both the purchase of accessible transit buses and the provision of complementary paratransit services providing equal access to public transportation services for passengers within a ¾ mile service area along the fixed route. The ADA requires SCAT to submit a plan for complementary paratransit services. SCAT incorporates the required complementary paratransit services plan for complementary paratransit services in the Sarasota County Transportation Disadvantaged Services Plan (TDSP) required for agencies receiving State Transportation Disadvantaged funds and updated annually with major updates every three-years. A primary goal of the current TDSP is to provide a level of fixed route service to allow accommodating eligible paratransit riders. The cost of that complementary paratransit service is significantly greater than the current level of State and federal operating assistance.
TRANSIT DEVELOPMENT PLAN The Sarasota County Transit Development Plan (TDP) identifies capital and operating requirements for service improvements that improve the fixed route system such as improvements that increase the frequency of bus service. New service coverage to some of the newly developed areas of urban concentration is considered with the annual updates of the TDP.
V2-428
TDP CAPITAL PROGRAM
public transit | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
SCAT will continue to place shelters, benches and signs to support its transit service. SCAT placed bicycle racks on all fixed route buses. SCAT is required under Federal Civil Rights Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to build and retrofit bus stops and related amenities whenever new development or redevelopment occurs. It is also sound practice to provide safe and pleasant amenities to encourage the general public to ride transit. Most, or all, of the cost of designing, permitting, and building amenities is borne by SCAT.
The transit service strategy contained in the TDP is directed toward meeting the objectives and policies contained in this Chapter including: improved service frequencies, improved residential coverage, increased service span, and improved transfer connections throughout Sarasota County and beyond.
TDP OPERATING PROGRAM The TDP follows the primary objectives of increasing residential transit service coverage, service
span, and improved service frequencies. The effort to increase service enables SCAT to meet other objectives, including improved intercommunity coordination, and increased service to trip
generators and attractors, such as the intensively utilized beach areas, libraries, medical facilities, and major employment centers. Better utilization of the transfer facilities will also result. Service
expansion will have a major impact on SCAT’s budget. The traditional funding sources available
for operating transit service -- fares at the current level, local ad valorem revenue, state and
federal operating subsidies -- may support only a small part of the improvement. Public transit systems have been facing diminishing subsidy revenues, and as federal and state subsidy funds
are reduced, Sarasota County will need to secure alternative revenues for SCAT.
Capital Purchases
Since SCAT’s inception, most capital improvements, including bus purchases, have been funded using federal and state capital assistance grants. Sarasota County Infrastructure Surtax revenues are also used for capital purchases. Capital assets include administrative and maintenance facilities, transfer stations and locations, transit fleet vehicles, fare collection and Intelligent Transit Systems, and passenger amenities, including bus stop shelters and benches.
V2-429
Administrative & Maintenance Facility
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
In Fiscal Year 1996, the Board appropriated grant funds for the design and construction of a new SCAT Maintenance and Operations Facility on the northern portion of the Ashton-Pinkney site. The new Maintenance and Operations Facility was completed and opened in 1997. The building was expanded in 2008 to add a Mobility Coordination Center.
TRANSFER FACILITIES In 1995, SCAT was notified that it would receive $1.35 million in Florida Intermodal Development Program funds for design and land acquisition of an intermodal terminal to be located near SCAT’s existing Downtown Sarasota transfer terminal. The grant was later increased to include an additional $1.5 million for the construction of a new terminal. After nearly 10 years of planning and preparation, in March 2005, SCAT opened the Sarasota Downtown Intermodal Transfer Station.
In October 2003, the historic Venice Train Depot was rehabilitated and converted into a transit hub and transfer station in the City of Venice. The SCAT transfer facility in the Pavilion Shopping Center located at U.S. 41 and Stickney Point Road was also completed in 2003. Chapter 14, Capital Improvement Program, identifies other opportunities and funding for future SCAT transfer location improvements.
In 2012, SCAT opened its Cattlemen Road Transfer station located on Porter Way near Bahia Vista Street. The station is designed as an intermodal transfer station and was funded with Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and American Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA) funds.
VEHICLES When it began service in 1979, SCAT leased buses from the FDOT. During the early 1980’s, SCAT began acquiring its own fleet with an annual bus replacement program. SCAT purchased new buses for replacement and expansion of its fleet. New buses are funded with federal and state capital assistance grants which cover up to 100 percent of associated costs. Sarasota County has funded any remaining local share from its ad valorem property taxes.
PASSENGER AMENITIES For safety of bus operation each bus stop is marked with a SCAT bus stop sign. SCAT has installed and maintains bus stops located throughout Sarasota County and the municipalities.
V2-430
In 2000, Sarasota County began an annual program to improve existing bus stop to meet ADA accessibility and to install passenger amenities such as benches and, where appropriate, shelters. The SCAT bus stop program is now funded by local infrastructure sales tax, state and federal funds.
public transit | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
FIXED ROUTE BUS SERVICE SCAT reports ridership quarterly and annually reports ridership data to the federal National Transit Data. FDOT requires that performance data be published annually as a public record of transit service. Annual ridership reporting and system performance criteria and measures are part of the Sarasota County Transit Development Plan.
FARES In the mid 1990’s the base fare of $1.00 with free transfers was reduced to $0.25 and free
transfers were discontinued. In 2007, after 10 years at $0.50, SCAT increased fares to $0.75
and 2011 the base fare was raised to $1.25 . Over the next few years SCAT will contemplate
increasing fares consistent with fares in the region. In compliance with federal regulations, SCAT offers a reduced fare to seniors and the disabled. SCAT offers single ride and a variety
of pass fares permitting the rider unlimited rides for from the date of first use for the pass
fare value.
DEMAND RESPONSE BUS SERVICE - COMMUNITY TRANSPORTATION COORDINATOR Paratransit service, is a service that is provided from the specific origin to the specific destination of the passenger’s trip. As the Community Transportation Coordinator (CTC) for Sarasota County, SCAT is responsible for all trips for the transportation disadvantaged under the guidance of the Transportation Disadvantaged Commission and its Local Coordinating Board. As part of its Coordinator responsibilities, SCAT tracks the activities of other providers of transportation service to the disadvantaged such as those using vehicles purchased under Section 5310 of the Federal Transit Act. Annually, Sarasota County reports to the Florida Commission for Transportation Disadvantaged as part of its Annual Operating Report (AOR).
FIXED ROUTE SERVICE AND THE TRANSPORTATION DISADVANTAGED One of public transit’s most important functions is to offer mobility to the transit-disadvantaged segments of society -- the young, the frail elderly, the disabled, and the
V2-431
economically disadvantaged. These groups represent the transit-dependent individuals who have special needs in Sarasota County. SCAT buses providing the daily fixed route service are wheelchair lift equipped. Boarding on buses using these lifts have risen steadily since the lifts were first placed in service in 1991. Further increases in wheelchair lifts are expected as accessibility improvements are provided at bus stops, and shelter amenities are provided at the terminals or bus stops.
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
COMMUTER TRANSPORTATION SERVICES SCAT participates in the Commuter Assistance Program administered by FDOT. FDOT commuter assistance program serves all of District One including Manatee County and Sarasota County offering commute choice resources and options to commuters, employers, developers and government agencies.
OTHER TRANSPORTATION SERVICES Other transportation providers within Sarasota County include a number of taxicab and limousine companies that provide door-to-door service throughout the area. Additionally, there are numerous nursing homes, medical facilities, and social service agencies that provide service to residents and clients.
ROUTE PERFORMANCE In order to develop new routes and services and fully evaluate its route designs, SCAT conducts a series of ride-checks and on-board rider surveys to determine the primary destinations of the current bus passengers and use of the bus system. In 2005, new on-bus technology improvements have allowed SCAT to conduct ridership surveys on an ongoing basis with Automated Passenger Counters to supplement the manual on-board surveys and ride checks. In 2007, SCAT added automated fare collection systems to the buses to provide additional data on ridership by route. SCAT implemented a new onboard Automatic Vehicle Location System and Intelligent Transit System in 2010, expanding electronic data collection for analysis and route design. Automated ride data are collected in accordance with the Federal Transit Administration National Transit Data collection rider survey and sampling requirements. In March 2009, SCAT instituted a Route Performance Standard measure to assist in identifying SCAT routes, route segments, or trips that are under performing or needing improvement and, therefore, subject to further study or, if appropriate, improvement, reduced hours, removal, or reallocating to other areas of the system. As part of the 2014 Major Update of the
V2-432
Transit Development Plan, SCAT refined and updated the Route Performance Standards and added a process to initiate a public process to consider changes to lower performing routes or segments of routes, and where appropriate discontinuing routes. Routes that are high performing and/or experiencing crowding could be considered for improvement. As a result, SCAT will review all routes in operation for greater than 18 months to determine if a route consistently under performs.
public transit | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
FIXED ROUTE TRANSIT LEVELS OF SERVICE (LOS) Every three years SCAT must be re-certified under Federal Title VI regulations of the Civil Rights Act (May 2007, or as amended). Title VI requires that existing levels of transit service and major transit service changes be evaluated to assure non-discrimination to areas with above-average percentage of minority plus low income population. For example, overcrowding on buses, as measured by a peak load factor, must not be worse in targeted neighborhoods than in the rest of the SCAT system. Title VI requires SCAT to evaluate transit levels of service based on criteria derived from the Transportation Research Board’s “Transit Capacity and Quality of Service Manual.”
V2-433
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysisV2-434
transportation circulation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
AVIAT~ON0 PORT AND RA~l SUB-CHAPTER
AVIATION, PORT AND RAIL SUB-CHAPTER
SUPPORT MATERIALS The County’s transportation needs are met primarily by highway oriented vehicles, i.e., automobiles and trucks. However, airplanes contribute greatly to the movement of people and goods to and from Sarasota County.
V2-435
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
AV~AT~ONu POrRT & rRA~l AVIATION, PORT & RAIL
The Continuing Florida Aviation Planning Process (CFASPP) established by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) establishes the method for continuously monitoring, updating, and maintaining the state’s aviation environment in order to meet projected aviation needs. The attendant outcome of the CFASPP findings is the Florida Aviation Systems Plan. The most recent Plan, the Florida Aviation Systems Plan 2025 (updated February 2012) provides both a state-wide and regional assessment of Florida’s aviation system.
Sarasota County is part of Region 7 which includes Manatee, Sarasota, Charlotte, Lee, Collier Glades and Hendry counties. The Region 7 - Southwest Florida (updated February 2012) is the most recent regional update of the region’s aviation system.
Although the county’s transportation needs are met primarily by highway oriented vehicles, i.e., automobiles and trucks. Aviation contributes greatly to the movement of people and goods to and from Sarasota County as well as providing a wide range of general aviation services. Three public-use airports as well as five private-use airports and five heliports provide aviation service to the county. Characteristics of the private use airports are provided in Table 10-7, “Private-Use Aviation Facilities in Sarasota County,” while a comparison of selected characteristics of the three public-use aviation facilities are provided in Table 10 - 8, “Public-Use Aviation Facilities in Sarasota County.”
Airport facilities are defined as any area of land or water improved, maintained, or operated by
a governmental agency for the landing and takeoff of aircraft, or privately owned paved runways
of 4,000 or more feet in length, and any appurtenant area which is used for airport buildings, or other airport facilities or rights-of-way. None of the private airports in Sarasota County meet or exceed this criterion. Consequently, the remainder of this chapter will address the Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport, the Venice Municipal Airport, and the Buchan Airport.
In addition to highway oriented vehicles and aviation, port and rail facilities also contribute to the movement of goods to and from the county. Sarasota County receives limited freight service by CSX Transportation and Seminole Gulf Railway which utilize the existing Seaboard Coastline (SCL) railroad lines. Passenger service is not available to Sarasota County, with
V2-436
transportation circulation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
the nearest passenger station in Tampa. There are no seaport facilities in the county with the county’s port needs met by the services of Port Manatee located north of Bradenton in Manatee County and the Port of Tampa. The following is a discussion of these facilities.
TABLE10-6: PRIVATE-USE AVIATION FACILITIES IN SARASOTA COUNTY
airport Location Orientation Runway Length Surface
Carlton Ranch SE Sarasota 9/27 3,400 Turf
Gator Creek Sarasota 18/36 2,200 -
Hidden River Sarasota 9/27 2,500 Asphalt
Lowe Sarasota 2/20 2,550 Turf
Schwartz Farms Sarasota 18/36 3,770 Turf
heliport/helistop Location Orientation Runway Length Surface
Sarasota County Fire Department Sarasota N/A N/A Concrete
Sarasota Memorial Hospital Sarasota N/A N/A Roof Top
North Port Fire Rescue Station 82 North Port N/A N/A Concrete
Oaks Sarasota N/A N/A Concrete
Englewood Community Hospital Englewood N/A N/A Concrete
Dove Sarasota N/A N/A Turf
TABLE10-7: PUBLIC-USE AVIATION FACILITIES IN SARASOTA COUNTY
Facility Acreage Navigational Aids &
Lighting 2015 Based
Aircraft Sarasota/Bradenton International 1,102 ILS,VORTAC, MALSR, PAPI-4N,
HIRL, and RNAV 244
Venice Municipal 835 PAPI, Beacon, REIL, MIRL, RNAV
243
Buchan 92 N/A 15
Key: ILS: Category I Instrument Landing System VORTAC: Very High Frequency Omnidirectional Range Tactical Air Navigational Facility MALSR: Medium Intensity Ap-proach Light System with Runway Alignment
VASI-4: Visual Approach Slope Indicator PAPI-4 Precision Approach Path Indicator RNAV: GPS based instrument approach HIRL: High Intensity Runway Lights REIL: Runway End Identification Lights
MIRL: Medium Intensity Runway Lights RNAV: GPS Instrument Approaches (Area Navigation) Source: Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport, 1995 2015 Venice Municipal Airport, 2015 Sarasota County Transportation Department, 2015
V2-437
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
A~RrPORTS AIRPORTS
SARASOTA-BRADENTON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport is characterized as an origin destination airport with passengers arriving to and departing from the Sarasota/Manatee area utilizing air carrier service involving many major cities in the Northeast and Midwest. The FAA classifies the Airport as a “small hub” transport category airport based on its physical facilities and level of passenger activity.
A publicly owned air carrier facility, the Airport is situated on 1,102 acres, owned in fee simple. It is located, on the Sarasota Manatee County line less than one half mile from Sarasota Bay, Map 10-13, “Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport: Existing Facilities.” It is administered by the Sarasota Manatee Airport Authority which is composed of six Commissioners appointed by the Governor. Three Commissioners reside in Sarasota County and three Commissioners reside in Manatee County. The airport has no ad valorem taxing power and supports its annual operating and debt service budget from its business operations. The Authority’s powers were established in 1955 by Chapter 77.651, F.S.
SARASOTA-BRADENTON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT – PLANNING The Sarasota Manatee Airport Authority initiated a Development of Regional Impact (DRI) in
1985, which proposed various improvements and expansions. In 1986, aircraft noise controls and
land use compatibility were addressed in the “Airport Noise Control and Land Use Compatibility
Study for Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport, Noise Exposure Maps, F.A.R. Part 150
Submission Documents.” The Noise Exposure Maps were accepted by the FAA on November 14, 1986, and notice of the maps was published locally in order to fulfill federal requirements to
recognize the maps as public documents. Also in 1986, the “Continuing Florida Aviation System
Planning Process Statewide Forecast Technical Supplement” provided an overview of State, county and demand center socio economic forecasts and future land use patterns.
The Florida Aviation Systems Plan 2025 (updated February 2012), Report for the Continuing
Florida Aviation System Planning Process (CFASPP),” included the Sarasota County airports and
their needs in a regional system context. Also in 1987, the “Sarasota-Bradenton International
V2-438
Airport Master Plan” provided recommendations regarding airport operations, defined types of development needed to meet the short and long term air transportation needs of the area and
addressed the Airport’s compatibility with its environs.
aviation, port and rail | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
In May 2009, the Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport Master Plan was updated in part through an Airport Master Planning Grant from the Federal Aviation Administration. This update
builds upon previous planning efforts and directs the Airport Authority’s long-range master plan.
SARASOTA-BRADENTON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT – INVENTORY Runways
There are two active runways at the Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport (SRQ). The designated primary runway of 14/32 is aligned northwest and southeast and is 9,500 feet long, 150 feet wide, and is constructed of asphaltic concrete. Based on the Federal Aviation
Administration’s (FAA) rating system for airfield movements, this runway is currently capable
of accommodating aircraft weighing up to 358,000 pounds with dual wheel tandem landing
gear. The main runway 14/32 uses Instrument Landing System (ILS), Very High Frequency
Omnidirectional Range Tactical Air Navigational facility (VORTAC) and GPS instrument approaches
as its primary navigational aids. Runway 14/32 also uses precision approach path indicator (PAPI) and Medium Intensity Approach Light System with Runway Alignment Indicator Lights (MALSR) as an approach lighting system.
The secondary (crosswind) runway of 4/22 is aligned northeast and southwest and is 5,000 feet long, 150 feet wide, and is also constructed of asphaltic concrete. It is rated to accommodate
aircraft weighing up to 404,000 pounds with dual wheel tandem gear. Runway 4/22 uses GPS
instrument approaches, and precision approach path indicator (PAPI) as approach lighting
system. The clear zones of all runways and major obstructions are shown on Map 10-13 “Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport: Existing Facilities.”
V2-439
General Aviation Facilities
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
In 2015, the Airport had three major general aviation areas known as fixed based operators (FBO), which provide pilot facilities, fueling, maintenance services, as well as hangar and tie down space. Two entities operate the three FBOs.
Dolphin Aviation, situated on the west side of the airfield, has approximately 175 automobile
parking spaces, a 23 thousand (23,084) square foot hangar, two 14 thousand (14,880) square foot hangars, twelve 8 thousand (8,925) square foot hangars, and a 6 thousand square foot hangar. In
addition to the corporate hangars, Dolphin also has three shade hangars and seven port-a-ports. The office and lobby area is approximately 11 thousand (11,500) square feet with approximately
50,000 square yards of paved apron. Dolphin also has one fuel farm with total capacity of 24,000
gallons of aviation gasoline and jet fuel.
Rectrix Aerodrome Center, located on the east side of the airport, has approximately 75 automobile parking spaces, a 13,000 square foot office/lobby area attached to a 46,000 square foot hangar and approximately 29,400 square yards of paved apron. Additionally, Rectrix has a hangar complex north of this facility which contains three hangars for aircraft storage (11,600, 8000 and 14,000 square feet each), a 20,000 square foot hangar for aircraft maintenance, and another 20,000 square foot hangar (with 6,000 square feet of office space attached). The Rectrix fuel farm has a total capacity of 52,000 gallons of aviation gasoline and jet fuel.
Terminal Facilities The airport terminal contains a departure lobby which houses the airline ticket counters, airline offices, and baggage make-up functions. The west end of the lower level is the arrival lobby which houses the baggage pickup area, airline baggage claim services, and rental car offices. Both the departure and arrival lobbies are one-story structures and are connected by a three level main lobby structure.
At ground level, the lobby contains airport police offices, public restrooms, elevators, escalator, and stairs. Also included on the east end of the lower level is a ground level gate area to accommodate commuter airline operations.
The second level of the main lobby contains a restaurant and cocktail lounge, retail shops, airline security check-in, security offices, and public restrooms. Passengers must circulate
V2-440
through the main lobby of this level to gain access to the 13 airline gates located in Airside B, which is located directly north of the security check-in and provides passenger departure lounges, supporting concessions, and public restrooms. The ground level of Airside B is used for airport and airline operations, U.S. Customs & Border Protection, and an airport Emergency Operations Center.
aviation, port and rail | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
The third level of the main lobby houses, the airport administration offices, and meeting rooms with an open air atrium spatially connecting the three levels. The passenger terminal building has 322,473 square feet (sf), and is distributed as follows: ticket wing- 69,972 sf; baggage wing 2- 41,416 sf; main terminal - 85,904 sf; concourse - 121,47 sf; and, other - 3,710 sf.
Air Cargo Facility The air cargo facility is located east of the former employee parking lot, near the fuel farm. The building consists of approximately 19,200 square feet of storage and handling space. The building does not have an aircraft apron; however, truck access to the air carrier apron is available. Currently, there are no air cargo operators such as Federal Express, United Parcel Service, or Emery Air Freight operating in or out of the airport. Instead, these cargo handlers rely upon domestic air carriers to handle their freight operations.
According to the Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport, air cargo movements are evenly spread during the year, with each month accounting for 8 to 10 percent of total movements, and do not follow any particular pattern.
Other Facilities Other facilities associated with aviation are also located at the Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport and include in part, the Airport Rescue and Fire Fighting station, and the airport’s Facilities complex and the fuel farm.
Accessibility and Parking The airport’s entrance from University Parkway consists of two lanes in each direction, divided by a landscaped median; it expands to six lanes in front of the Terminal Building. University Parkway runs east from U.S. 41 and crosses U.S. 301 and continues east of I-75 to Ganton Avenue. A secondary roadway network services the rental car facilities. A service road provides access to the aircraft parking apron area and the service dock of the Terminal Building. Additionally, a north-bound exit road was constructed to provide a continuous flow of traffic in
V2-441
a northerly direction along U.S. 41. These existing points of ingress and egress to the Airport for surface transportation, and access to all other modes of transportation are shown on Map 10-13, “Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport – Existing Facilities.” The public parking area consists of 953 long term and 393 short term parking spaces. Additionally, there are 259 spaces for the rental car lots. The employee parking lot accommodates 300 vehicles.
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
Adjacent Land Uses The existing land uses adjacent to the Airport include residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, and open space, as indicated on Map 10-13.
Aviation Activity
National Airlines initiated air carrier service to Sarasota and Manatee Counties in 1948, and was
joined by Eastern Air Lines in 1961. Since that time, a wide variety of air carriers have served
the area with major air carrier service. In 2015, the following air carriers serve SRQ: Air Canada, American Airlines, Delta Air Lines, JetBlue Airways, United Airlines, and WestJet Airlines.
SARASOTA-BRADENTON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT - ANALYSIS Airport Master Plan The purpose of the 2009 Master Plan update was to assess growth patterns, demand characteristics, and facility requirements necessary to accommodate existing and future demand at the Airport, taking into consideration trends in the aviation industry and local socioeconomic factors. Consistent with the cost restructuring being implemented by most of the major airlines and new business planning initiatives being undertaken at many airports throughout the country that drive what today defines a “cost-competitive airport.” The Master Plan Update for SRQ serves to redefine, in a financially viable and cost-effective manner, the demand-driven development priorities reflected in the Airport’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP).The Master Plan sets forth the types of development needed to meet the short and long-term air transportation needs of the Air Service Area (which includes Sarasota County, Manatee County, Hardee County, and DeSoto County) and to ensure the compatibility of the airport with its surrounding land uses.
V2-442
Per the 2009 Master Plan Update, the aviation industry and the U.S. economy have undergone some extensive changes resulting from some significant events and circumstances. More importantly, many of these factors are irreversible and several of the resulting changes are representative of the greatest transformation the aviation industry has experienced since deregulation. Based on these occurrences, the Sarasota Manatee Airport Authority (SMAA) recognized the need to reassess regional growth factors, changes in the aviation industry, and near-term and long-term Airport needs.
aviation, port and rail | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
The Master Plan Update revealed that SRQ is well positioned from a capacity standpoint to serve demand growth in the future. Notwithstanding the available capacity of the various airport assets, the SMAA will likely continue to make investments that offer beneficial returns by means of enhanced customer service or improved operating efficiencies for airport users and tenants, predominantly in its public parking facilities, rental car facilities, and general aviation corporate and T-hangar facilities. Thus, although the Master Plan Update did not conclude that extensive capacity enhancement or airport expansion projects are required, it did define a Capital Improvement Program for the Airport that represents projects addressing existing or anticipated airport maintenance or modernization needs or projects that enhance customer service or operating efficiency. More importantly, the Master Plan Update established this Capital Improvement Program within a financial framework that preserves a reasonable cost structure for airlines and tenants without straining the Airport Authority’s capital reserves. As of August 2014, the Authority is debt-free.
Finally, the Airport Authority completed its Noise Compatibility Program in 2005, which involved the acquisition of noise-impacted properties and noise easements. Funding for these projects came from Authority surplus revenues, moneys available in the Improvements Account, Passenger Facility Charges, and federal and state grants-in- aid. Although Sarasota County does not have a direct role in decisions relating to the Airport, there is a close relationship between the Sarasota County Comprehensive Plan and the plans of the Sarasota Manatee Airport Authority. Land use and ground transportation, both of which are partially or wholly regulated by Sarasota County government, are greatly affected by future airport plans.
V2-443
Land Use Compatibility
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
Today’s air carrier aircraft noise has diminished greatly due to FAA Stage III aircraft requirements. Nonetheless, the Airport Authority is continuously collaborating with surrounding municipalities to establish compatible land uses better suited for properties adjacent to airports. Airport requirements for airspace free of tall structures, the absence of activities which might interfere with aircraft communication equipment and similar considerations limit even more, the number of suitable uses. It is essential, therefore, that land use and aviation planning be coordinated.
In 2011, the Florida Department of Transportation completed a new Florida Airport Compatible Land Use Guidebook aimed at promoting airport land use compatibility and airspace protection through several means. The guidebook calls attention to existing statutory requirements related to airspace protection and airport land use compatibility. It offers clarification on existing statutory requirements on airport protection zoning, while also offering guidance on the implementation of these requirements.
At the Airport’s present location, the impact upon land uses in unincorporated Sarasota County is rather limited. Most of the land surrounding the Airport lies within the City of Sarasota or Manatee County. The relatively small amount of land located in unincorporated Sarasota County is presently committed to a variety of land uses. Some of the existing land uses are in conflict with the operation of the Airport.
By completing all of the Development of Regional Impact (DRI) requirements, including a FAR Part 150 Noise Compatibility Program, sound insulation program, land acquisition program, noise abatement turns, limitations to the aircraft operation hours, the Airport Authority is now in compliance with FAA and DRI obligations. The Noise Compatibility Program also encompassed a Noise Abatement Advisory Committee, Noise Abatement Officer, noise monitoring, noise complaint response, plan review and evaluation, and the dissemination of information to the public.
V2-444
VENICE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
aviation, port and rail | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
The Venice Municipal Airport was originally constructed by the United States Government in the early 1940’s. Shortly after World War II, a portion of the airport reverted back to the City of Venice, some was transferred to private ownership, and the remainder, approximately 1,200 acres, became the Venice Municipal Airport under municipal control of the City of Venice. The general aviation airport in its present configuration has been under city control since that time. Approximately 835 acres is located in the City of Venice, approximately 1.7 miles south of the downtown area, and is bonded on the southeast by the Intercoastal Waterway, on the west by the Gulf of Mexico, and on the north by residential development, see Map 10-14, “Venice Municipal Airport: Existing Facilities 2015.” The Airport is administered by the Airport Advisory Board under the direction of the Venice City Council. According to the 1987 West Central Florida Metropolitan Aviation System Plan, the Venice Municipal Airport plays an important role by absorbing some of the general aviation traffic which would otherwise use the Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport. In the future, this reliever role will become increasingly important by helping preclude saturation at the Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport. For this reason, it has been recommended that the Venice Municipal Airport become a designated reliever for the Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport.
VENICE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT – PLANNING The first master plan for the airport was undertaken in 1969. Subsequent master plan updates occurred in 1975, 1986 and 2000 with the last Master Plan completed in 2011. The current Venice Municipal Airport Master Plan forecasts annual operations for Venice Municipal Airport through the year 2010 and identifies needed facilities to accommodate forecast levels of demand. These improvements include the extension of runway 13/31 from 5,000 to 5,400 feet, an additional 26 corporate and 112 T-hanger spaces, and additional tie-down spaces.
The Supplemental Master Plan for Venice Municipal Airport (KVNC) was adopted by the City of Venice on August 9, 2011. The master plan established the goals and contained the data analysis necessary to develop the ALP. (http://www.venicegov.com/Municipal_links/Airport/ layout_plan.asp)
As a part of the master planning process, an Airport Layout Plan (ALP) is a long-range planning document was prepared and used by the City of Venice, Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to identify, prioritize and coordinate facility
V2-445
needs and improvements. The Venice City Council adopted the ALP for the Venice Municipal Airport (KVNC) on June 28, 2011. The two primary elements of the ALP include the following:
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
1. Runway 4-22, Taxiway E and RSA/ROFA Improvements. Runway 4-22 (Updated to Runway 5-23) was in extremely poor condition, but is designated as the City’s noise mitigation runway due to its orientation towards the Gulf of Mexico
2. Runway 13-31 Safety Improvements. The Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) for Runway 13-31, an area beyond the end of the runway intended to protect persons and property on the ground, extends over 26 single family homes. In order to enhance aviation and public safety, the City plans to shift the 5,000-foot long runway 727-feet southeast to remove the RPZ from 24 homes. An environmental assessment is currently underway, design is expected to begin later in 2014 and construction (depending upon the availability of federal and state grant funds) could begin as early as September 2015.
VENICE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT – INVENTORY Runways
There are two active runways at the Venice Municipal Airport. The designated primary runway is 13/31, and is aligned northwest/southeast, while the secondary runway is 05/23, and is aligned northeast/southwest. A third runway, 9/27, has been abandoned and is now used
for aircraft parking.
Runways 13/31 and 05/23 are 5,000 feet long and 150 feet wide. The weight bearing capacity of both runways is 45,000 pounds-single wheel, 80,000 pounds-dual wheel, and 140,000 pounds-dual tandem wheel. Rehabilitation of Runway 13/31 will be completed in the spring of 2016 and Runway 05/23 was reconstructed in 2013. Both runways are in good condition
Runways 13/31 and 05/23 are non-precision instrument category runways, with Medium Intensity Runway Lighting (MIRL), Precision Approach Path Indicator (PAPI), and Runway End Identification Lights (REIL) on both ends. Based on data obtained from the airport’s operations counting system for the fiscal year ending on September 30, 2014, 30 percent of aircraft utilized Runway 23, 28 percent of aircraft utilized Runway 05, 26 percent of aircraft utilized Runway 13 and 12 percent of aircraft utilized Runway 31. The airport was unable to determine which runway was utilized by the remaining four percent of aircraft.
V2-446
The threshold at the approach end of Runway 23 is displaced 463 feet due to a drawbridge on U.S.41 (Business) over the Intercoastal Waterway, which reduces the usable length for landing in this direction to 4, 377 feet. Upon completion of construction in the spring of 2016, Runways 13 and 31 will both have displaced thresholds of 639 feet, but will maintain 5,000 feet available for takeoff and landing. The existing taxiway system has recently been reconstructed, is in good condition, and consists asphalt surfaces. Aircraft parking aprons are generally in poor condition and require reconstruction.
aviation, port and rail | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
General Aviation Facilities
The City of Venice owns and operates 166 T-hangars, 12 shade hangars and 50 tie down spaces available for lease to the flying public.
Two fixed based operators (FBO’s) provide FBO services including aircraft sales, refueling, maintenance, and flight instruction. The total fuel storage capacity on the airport includes 10,000 gallons of Jet A fuel and 20,000 gallons of Avgas. In addition, other commercial tenants provide aircraft maintenance and avionics services.
The Sarasota County Sheriff’s Aviation Unit is based at Venice Municipal Airport and provides law enforcement, search and rescue and firefighting services throughout the county.
Accessibility Surface access to the north side of the Airport is fair; however, it should be improved as activity at the Airport increases. The Airport Master Plan proposes access improvements to US 41 (Business) from the Airport and improvements to Airport Avenue. Currently there is an access road on the northeast side of the airport which serves the Venice event/fairgrounds.”
Land Use The majority of the adjacent land subjected to high noise levels (65 + Ldn) is located within the Airport property boundaries, and, therefore, does not affect land uses off Airport property. Although noise complaints may occur as isolated incidents, the overall noise level is not considered a problem under F.A.R. Part 150 rules. The unincorporated areas adjacent to the Airport are a mixture of residential, commercial, and industrial uses, see Map 10-14, “Venice Municipal Airport- Existing Facilities 2015.”
V2-447
Aviation Activity
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
There is no scheduled passenger airline service at the airport, and the primary use is for general aviation activities. Venice Municipal Airport is a non-towered facility that is open 365 days per year, 24 hours per day. According to the FAA Airport Master Record (December 2015), for operations in 2013, there were 60,834 total aircraft operations consisting of 32,018 general aviation local operations and, 28,816 itinerant operations. There are 209 aircraft based at the airport for at least six months annually and include 182 single engine, 20 multi-engine, four helicopters and three jets.
The Florida Aviation Systems Plan, 2012 Regional Overview - Region 7: Southwest Florida Region, identifies Venice Municipal Airport as a reliever airport to larger surrounding commercial service airports and smaller general aviation airports (primarily Sarasota -Bradenton International airport)
VENICE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT - ANALYSIS In 2005, the Florida Department of Transportation, Office of Aviation and Spaceports in conjunction with the Federal Aviation Administration and the Florida Public Airports developed the Florida Aviation Systems Plan (FASP). The Plan evaluated both commercial and community (General Aviation) airports in Florida, primarily as a regional grouping. The study looked at population growth, capacity constrained airports, ground and air access, and compatibility,
The Venice Municipal Airport can play an important role by absorbing some of the general aviation traffic which would otherwise use the Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport. In the future, this reliever role will become increasingly important by helping preclude saturation at the Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport as the FASP indicate this facility becoming a “capacity constrained airport” by 2023. For this reason, it has been recommended that the Venice Municipal Airport become a designated reliever for the Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport.
The Venice Municipal Airport Master Plan (July 2011) forecasts annual operations through the year 2030 and identifies needed facilities to accommodate forecast levels of demand. These improvements include taxiway extensions, additional corporate hangars and t-hangers and tie-down spaces.
V2-448
Land Use
aviation, port and rail | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
The Venice Municipal Airport Master Plan (July 2011) determined that all land subjected to high noise levels (65 + Ldn) is located within airport property, and, therefore, does not affect land uses off airport property. Although the impact of aircraft operations may extend off airport property, this level of noise is not considered under F.A.R. Part 150 rules. The unincorporated areas adjacent to the Airport are a mixture of residential, commercial, and industrial uses, see Map 10-17, “Venice Municipal Airport- Existing Facilities 2015.” The Supplemental Master Plan for KVNC was adopted by the City of Venice on August 9, 2011. The master plan established the goals and contained the data analysis necessary to develop the ALP. (http://www.venicegov.com/Municipal_links/Airport/layout_plan.asp)
Transportation
Surface access to the north side of the Airport should be improved as activity at the airport increases. The Airport Master Plan proposes access improvements to U.S. 41 (Business) from the Airport and improvements to Airport Avenue. Also proposed is the construction of an access road around the approach end of Runway 23 in order to open up the industrial/ commercial area on the east of the Airport, see Map 10-14, “Venice Municipal Airport- Existing Facilities 2015.”
V2-449
BUCHAN AIRPORT
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
Buchan Airport is a publicly owned, special use general aviation airport under the direction of the
Sarasota County Board of County Commissioners. This 100-acre facility is utilized as an air related
recreation center for light private aircraft flying. It serves as a small general aviation facility for the Englewood area. There are no flight schools on the airport, nor are there any plans to provide
flight training in the future. It is located two miles northwest of Englewood; see Map 10-15, “Buchan Airport- Existing Facilities 2015.”
Several improvements have taken place at the Buchan Airport since 1979, such as improvements
to the runway, and removal of trees which were obstructing the runway clear zones. While
Buchan’s runway is adequate to safely accommodate aircraft operations, aviation activity
forecasts through 2020 indicates that three additional tie-down positions are needed to meet existing demand and an additional 18 may be needed to accommodate future demand. It is
estimated that the existing grassy parking area provides 15 parking spaces; up to 25 spaces may
be needed through the 20-year planning period. For reasons of national security, the Florida
Department of Transportation has recommended that the perimeter fencing plan include a
contiguous fence along the south side of the airport.
Runways
Since December 2002, there is one turf runway in operation oriented in a northwest/southeast direction. Runway 12/30 is 2,040 feet in length and 120 feet in width and in good condition. Since the airport is unattended, there are no lighting or aviation services, and additional services or facilities have not been planned. The airport’s clear zones and obstructions are shown on Map 10-15, “Buchan Airport- Existing Facilities 2015.”
Adjacent Land Uses
The existing land uses adjacent to the Airport include residential, recreation and open space, a county fire station, and vacant land. Existing points of ingress and egress for surface transportation to the Airport and access for all other modes of transportation are shown on Map 10-15, “Buchan Airport- Existing Facilities 2015.”
V2-450
aviation, port and rail | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
Aviation Activity
According to the Florida Aviation Systems Plan 2025 (updated February 2012) Region 7 - Southwest Florida (updated February 2012) the largest airplanes that use the facility on a regular basis are single-engine fixed-wing aircraft.
The current Airport Reference Code for the airport is A-I. The airport currently reports eight based aircraft at the airport. That aircraft are stored on tie-downs and there are no other planes or hangars located on the airport property. There are eight private hangars adjacent to the property along Osceola Drive.
Historic and forecast FDOT aviation activity information on file for the airport are as follows:
BUCHAN AIRPORT 2013 2018 2023 2033 Based Aircraft 8 8 9 9
General Aviation Operations
2,701 2,769 2,839 2,984
Commercial Operations 0 0 0 0
Enplanements 0 0 0 0 Source: FDOT Aviation and Spaceports Office
Future Aviation Activity
The roles of this airport are primarily to serve the residents who own land adjacent to the property and secondarily to serve the local community. The airport mainly serves recreational users; however, flight training schools do perform occasional touch-and-go operations at Buchan. There are no flight schools based on the field and there are no recorded numbers that quantify how many operations at Buchan are related to flight training.
There are two factors that could inhibit the future growth of the airport – environmental and developmental. The first, issue, is a drainage canal along the airport’s northern
boundary. The canal flows into a boat basin and then flows to Lemon Bay. The second issue
is the close proximity of the airport to established residential areas to the east, west, and
south of Buchan Airport.
Though the airport sees itself experiencing some growth in the future, the airport’s vision is to maintain minimal growth and to continue to operate with virtually no infrastructure.
V2-451
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
POrRTS PORTS
PORT MANATEE Port Manatee is located on Tampa Bay in the northwestern corner of Manatee County, approximately 17 miles north of the Sarasota/Manatee County line and is Florida’s fourth largest seaport. An access channel from the port connects with the Federal Channel in Tampa Bay, and the point where it connects is only 10 miles from the Gulf of Mexico, U.S. 41, and a main line of the CSX Transportation Group Railroad, are both situated within a few hundred feet from the port and provide rail and highway access to the port facilities. The existing facilities include approximately 1,100 acres of land, a ship basin 1,300 feet long by 788 feet wide, and an access channel 3 miles long, initially 400 feet wide and 40 feet deep, which links ship basin with the Federal Channel in Tampa Bay.
The port operates its own Class III Terminal railroad, with two switch engines and approximately 7 miles of track, 19 switches, 9 crossings and a 300± rail car capacity connecting with the CSX Railroad. The port complex also contains warehousing and other facilities which include the following:
• Warehouse and office space – 1 million square feet • Refrigerated warehouse space – 207,000 square feet • Freezer space – 30,000 square feet • Berthing area – 10 berths with 40-foot depth
Port Manatee is growing as intermodal terminal and distribution center because of its direct access to rail and highway facilities. It can also provide total container service for shippers with Ro-Ro berths, lifting cranes, reefer plugs, and dockside storage areas. Presently the Port has scheduled container liner service providing regular connections to Central and South America and Western Europe.
V2-452
aviation, port and rail | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
RA!lrROADS RAILROADS
SEMINOLE GULF RAILWAY In 1995, the CSX Rail Transportation Group (CSX) owned approximately 30 miles of track which linked the Cities of Venice and Sarasota with points north of the county line. In 1987, CSX leased these rail lines to the Seminole Gulf Railway which began operation in late 1987.
This Sarasota line went as far south as Venice when Seminole Gulf acquired it and connected with CSX’s Palmetto Subdivision in Oneco to the north. In the early 2000s, Seminole Gulf and CSX abandoned the little-used southern portion of the line between Palmer Ranch and the City of Venice. In December 2004, Sarasota County purchased a segment of the abandoned railway corridor and subsequently developed the rail bed into The Legacy Trail, a “Rails-to Trails” recreational facility.
Seminole Gulf Railway service is limited to the transportation of freight in the Sarasota area, with passenger service only available in the Tampa and St. Petersburg area. The volume of rail traffic over the Sarasota line segment has been low as Seminole Gulf’s traffic base (south of Clark Road) was significantly reduced by changes in the area’s manufacturing community and the emergence of product distribution points off of its lines. Seminole Gulf Railway has indicated that they are currently involved with long-term track improvements and are making efforts to reestablish the line’s presence in the local market place. Future plans include improvements to the facilities and efforts to encourage industrial facilities in the region.
V2-453
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysisV2-454
transportation circulation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
MAPS
TRANSPORTATION CHAPTER MAPS
V2-455
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
•
J
---- '-,, \ '---, \ ,,
I -.
i I
I
N S H AD E AV E
LAKEWOOD RANCHBLVD
UN
IVER
SITY
PKW
Y
N TAMIAMI TRL
N C ATTL
N TUT TL E AV E
E
G
LO
EAS
T-W
EST
RD
WY
B
VERNA R D
UL
E
F O
AV
F MEXI
N BE NEVA RD
RRAINE RD
17TH
ST
CODR
NGC
SWY
OHN R
L GI
J
S BE NE VA RD
N
ST
I
I
COBURNRD
NR
NGLI
PALM
ER
BLV
D
JOH
NG PKWY
CAT T LEME N RD
S S H ADE AV E
SIE
ST
IONARD
D
AVE
MCIN TOSH RD
L AL AN I BL V D
AR
A
OP
RD
I
UT
PRO
CTO
R R
D
BEAC
HR
D
GA N T T R D
MI
SSTATERO
O
CASEY KEY RD
REL
RD AL B E E FA R M R D S
N J AC
ESBLVD RICAP
W V
ENI
CE
AVE
N
I75
S I7
5 E
VE
NIC
E A
V
D
V N S UMTER BL
41 BYPA
HARBOR DR S
VD
SHA
MR
OC
B
LANDA B LVD
LEDR
R
ROCKLEYBLVD
N RIV
VENI
ER R
W P
RIC
E B
LVD
D
N TOL
E P
RIC
E B
LVD
JACA
NO
S TOLEDOBLADE B LVD
H
AMROS W
SEM
IN
DR
E EA S
NR
T BLVD
Z B LV D
EO
SSUMTER
D
EL
BAFFI
D
I
CKDR
OR T
TAM
IAM
I TR
L
MA
NA
SOTA
BEAC
H
ENGLEWOODR
RO
AD
D
iver
P
xico
Legacy
Trail
DE
SO
TOC
OU
NTY
BL
ACKB
UR
N P
OIN
T R
D
ST
STAT
ER
OAD
72
AD681
Mya
kka
Riv
erSt
ate
Park
scarScherer
tatePark
Myakk
a Rea
ceRi
ver
CO
UN
TY
D N
INDIANA AVE
MANASOTA KEY RD
PINE ST
S INDIANA AVE
OLD ENGL EWOOD RD
WINCHESTERBLVD
SRIV
ERR
0 4
8
Mile
s
41
75
MY
RLE
ST
T
N LOCKWOOD RIDGE RD
MEN RD
HA
RD
EE
Sara
sota
Bay
C
OU
NTY
TV IIL
LER
RD
FU
N HONORE
Tow
n of
City
of
Sara
sota
Lo
ngbo
atK
ey
S WASHINGTON BLVD
MO
UN
D
WB
BE
ERST
AD
RB
IG
EEE
RR
DD
SWIFT RD S TUTTLE AVE
MYAKK
BENEVA RD
SAWYER RD
MA
NAT
EE
CO
UN
TY
HIGEL
Gulf of Me
CLA
RK
RD EB
AYS
TVAMO RD
POT TER PARK DR
BAY
DNIGHT PASS RD
BEE RIDGE ROAD EXT
S TAMIAMI TRL
S L OC KW O O D R ID G E R D
HONORE AVE
S AWY
ER
LO
OPRD
NORTH-SOUTHRDWYA
NORTH-SOUTH RDWY B
41
City
of
Veni
ce
BOD
ER
RR
DISL
N AUBURN RD KNIGHTS TRAIL RD
KSON RD
LAU
E ALBEE FARM RD
PINEBROOK RD
75
City
of
Nor
th P
ort I7
5R
AMP
E
US
MAP
10-
1:EX
ISTI
NG
AN
D PL
ANN
EDK
BICY
CLE
FACI
LITI
ES
LEG
END
75
EDO BLA DE BLVD
SS S
BLVD
C
41
EXIS
TIN
G B
ICYC
LE F
ACIL
ITIE
S
PLAN
NED
BIC
YCLE
FAC
ILIT
IES
Sour
ce: S
aras
ota
Coun
ty G
IS, S
aras
ota
Coun
ty P
ublic
Wor
ks,
and
Sout
hwes
t Flo
rida
Regi
onal
Pla
nnin
g Co
mm
issio
n, 2
015
KE
YW
AY R
D
CH
AR
LOTT
E
V2-456
transportation circulation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
N S H AD E AV E
N
N BEN E VA R D
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
PK
W
C A
GULF
AV
TT
LAKEWOOD
L
R ANCH BLVD
O
N TAMIAMI TRL
E
L
F M
ORRAIN E RD
EA
ST-
WE
ST
RD
WY
B
VER NA R D
E
N T U TT LE AVE
ONR
XICO
DR
17T
H S
T
RIC
HAR
DS
ON
RD
JOHN
S BE N EVA R D
CSW
Y
G
RD
RI
N
NGL
L
COBURN
I
NS
T PA
LME
R B
LVD
I
DE BRECEN
IN
R
NG
H
G
JO
PKWY
CAT TL EME N RD
RD
M
SIE
STA
DR
S SH ADE AVE
LA LA N IBLV D
R
IO DNA
RD
A
A
BAY RD
RD
I
MA
UN
A
TOP
L
BEE RIDGE ROAD EXT
OA
BL V
D
U
BEACH
RD
M
PR
OC
TOR
RD
R D GA N T T
SAWYER
CLA
RK
RD
I
LOOP RD
DNIGHTP
S TAM
Gu
IAMI T
ASS RD
A DWY
RL
R H
B
l
WY
f
SOUT
DR
CE
NT
RA
L S
AR
AS
OT A
of
H
LIVI
NGST
ONE
ST
PK
WY
-
T
T
U
H
O
Legacy
S
NOR
T- H
Trail
RO
Mex
N
STAT
ER
OAD
72
i
BAY
ST
co
re er
BLAC
KBU
RN
POIN
T R
D
hc
k r8
Sa
1
r
6
P
caeAD
s
t
OSa STATERO
t
VA LL EYBLVD
CASEY KEY RD
M IS SION
S R D
N
S CASEY
RD
A
LBE
E
KEY RD
FA R M
ESBLV D
AL B EE
CAPRII
W V
ENI
CE
AVE
E
VE
NIC
E A
N I7
5 I7
5 R
AMP
S
I75
BYUP
S 4
AND A BLVD
HARB OR DR
AS
BLVD
1 SHA
MR
OC
K
N RIV
N S UM TER
E
D B
DR
W P
RIC
E B
LVD
N TOL
E P
RIC
E B
LVD
ROCKLEY
LE
R R
D
NO
JACAR
D
I
S TOLEDOBLA DE B LVD
S
MR O
BLV D
N
A
W
SEM
O
ORTIZ BLVD
E
E
D
LDR
CK
DR
SSUMTER
MAN
AO
TABE
TAM
IAM
I TR
L
ENG
A
L
CH
EWOOD RD
RO
AD
MANASOTA KEY RD
OLD ENGLEW OOD RD
D
RR
E
NI
I RV
ND
S
IANA AV S IN D IA N A AV E
PINE ST
W INCHESTERBL
Myakk
ver
ia
eace
Ri R
vP
er
41
MY
RLE
ST
T
Sara
sota
IIL
LER
RD
FU
TV
SWASHINGTONBLVD
NLOCKWOODRIDGERD
N HO
EMEN RD
Y
75
E
Sara
sota
Bay
H
AR
DE
EC
OU
NTY
Tow
n of
City
of
Long
boat
key
MO
UN
D
BH
IA
AV
IA
SS
TT
WB
BE
ER
ST
BI
GE
EE
RR
DD
AS
HT
ON
RD
SWIFTRD S TUTTLE AVE
SLOCKWOODRIDGERD
YAKK
SAWYERRD
BENEVA RD
MA
NAT
EE
CO
UN
TY
HONORE AVEE
BA
YS
T
Mya
kka
Riv
erSt
ate
Park
DE
SO
TOC
OU
NTY
41
KNIGHTSTRAILRDA
UL
LR
RD
EE
City
of
Veni
ce
75
ALBEEFARMRD
PINEBROOKRD
SL
BO
ER
RR
DD
VE
JACKSON RD
EDO BLA DEBLVD
City
of
MAP
10-
2:N
orth
Por
t
SS
LVEX
ISTI
NG
AN
D P
LAN
NED
75
SH
PED
ESTR
IAN
FACI
LITI
ES
BLV
LEGE
ND
41
SEX
ISTI
NG
PED
ESTR
IAN
FACI
LITI
ES
PLAN
NED
PED
ESTR
IAN
FAC
ILIT
IES
KE
YW
AY R
D
Sour
ce: S
aras
ota
Coun
tyG
IS,S
aras
ota
Coun
tyPu
blic
Wor
ks,
CH
AR
LOTT
Ean
d So
uthw
est F
lorid
a Re
gion
al P
lann
ing
Com
mis
sion,
2015
04
8
Mile
s
CO
UN
TY
E
VD
V2-457
K
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
'
~;, ... ,,, .... ,, ,, -
~~ ~ .. , -,.,,, \
I Verna Road
KKKKKKKKK
KKKKKKKKKKK
Un i
v
Gu
o R
oad
l
Lorraine R
North-So
f M
o
e
ut
xic
h Roadway B
ad
o D
B
rive (SR
17th
Str
eet
789)
Ric
hard
son
Roa
d
oad
R
d
Honore Avenue
men
a
latt
Palm
er B
oule
vard
e
Spine Road
C
IonaRoad
McIntos
North-South Roadway B
oad
(SR
758)
U.S.41 (SR 45)
Bee Ridge Road (Ext.)
North-SouthRoadwayB
KK
KKKKKKP r
octo
r Ro
KK K
ad
K C
lark
Roa
d (S
R 7
2)
KKKKK
KKK
Clar
k Road
(SR
72)
Clark
Road
(SR
72)
U.S.41
KKKKKK
KKKKKKKKKKKKK
(
Road
KKKKKKKKKKK
SR
A
4ya
5)os
h
dw
nt
Gulf of M
exico
I
a
Mc
Ro
h-South
tor
N
Hono
re
ayA
Av
e
w
nue
(SR 45) North-South Road
K
KKKK K
K
KKKK
Bay
esot
D
Tuttle Avenue
MA
NAT
EE C
OU
NTY
Sar
asot
aer
sit y
Prk
wa
ay
E-W
es
st
tRo
dwa
aay
Tow
n of
La
kew
ood
Ran
chC
ity o
f Lo
ngbo
at K
ey
Bou
leva
rdSa
raso
taFr
utvi
ille
Roa
dFr
uitv
ille
Roa
d
McIntosh Road
Wbb
Srr
ee
eet
tW
bbSr
re
eee
tt
h Ro
Bee
Rid
ge R
oad
(SR
758
)
MAP
10-
3a:
MO
BILI
TY P
LAN
CO
RRID
OR
-
McIntosh Road
BR
idg
eee
oad
(SR
R75
8)B
idg
eee
RR
NO
RTH
COU
NTY
LE
GEN
D
Swift Road Pr
octo
r Roa
d
Gantt Road
KC
lrk
oa
ad(S
RR
72)
KK K
KKKK
KK
K KKK
Nor
th/C
entr
al D
istr
ict L
ine
Maj
or R
oadw
ays
Mob
ility
Cor
ridor
Mul
ti-M
odal
Cor
ridor
KKK D
istric
t Lin
e
& Fu
ture
Inte
rcha
nge
Cen
tral
Sar
asot
aPa
rkw
ay
Sour
ce: S
aras
ota
Coun
ty T
rans
port
atio
n an
d Re
al E
stat
e;So
uthw
est F
lorid
a Re
gion
al P
lann
ing
Coun
cil,
2015
KKKKK
KKKKKKK KK KKKKKK K
KK
&
Mile
s
02
4
Kµ
U.S.41
Bay
Sre
et
t
V2-458
KKKKKK
transportation circulation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
, .. , ................. .. ,, . .. , ~ ::
111
111
I
KKKKKKKKKKKK
Bee Ridge Road (Ext.)
KKK
KK
U.
KC
lar
S.4
KCl
a
1
rkR
(
The Legacy Trail
o
SR 4
a
5
d(S
R7
)
2)
KKKKKK
KKKKK
KKKKK
KKKKK
KK
North-South Roadway B
KKKK
U.S
Clar
kR
oad
(SR
72)
KKKKKK
KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK
.41 (SR
45
Gulf of M
exico
KKKKKKKKKKK
)
Roadway A
Cen
tral
Sa r
a sot
a Pk
hw
ty
oSu
tr o
h
N
-
Hono
re
Avenue
North-South Roadway A
U.S.41 (SR 45)
KKK KKKKKKK
KKK
KKK
KKK
KKK
KKKK
KKKKKKKKK
KKKK
U.S.41 (SR 45)
KKKKKKKKK
K
KK
K
KK
KKK KKKKKK
K KLa
urKKKK KKK
Cen
tral
/Sou
th D
istr
ict L
ine
KK
K
K
KKKKK
K K KK
K KKKK
KKKK
McIntosh Road
Cl
rko
aad
(SR
R72
)k
KK
KKKK
KKK
KKKKK K
K KKKKKKKKK
oad
(SR
R72
)
Nor
th/C
entr
al D
istr
ict L
ine
Cen
tral
Sar
asot
aPa
rkw
ay
MAP
10-
3b:
MO
BILI
TY P
LAN
CORR
IDO
R -
CEN
TRAL
CO
UN
TYB
ayS
ree
tt
K KKK
KKKK
Mya
kka
Riv
erKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK KKKKKK KKKKKK
KKK
LEG
END
&
Stat
e Pa
rk
Maj
or R
oadw
ays
Mob
ility
Cor
ridor
Mul
ti-M
odal
Cor
ridor
KKK D
istric
t Lin
e O
scar
Sch
erer
Stat
e Pa
rk
& Fu
ture
Inte
rcha
nge
Sour
ce: S
aras
ota
Coun
ty T
rans
port
atio
n an
d Re
al E
stat
e;So
uthw
est F
lorid
a Re
gion
al P
lann
ing
Coun
cil,
2015
KKK
KKKKK
KKK
KK
KKKKKKKKKK
KKKKKKKK
KKKnights Trail Road
City
of V
enic
e
KK
elR
oad
Lur
elR
oa
adE
KKK
KKKKKK
0
12
Mile
s µ
V2-459
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
1111
r aved
l
North-South
U.S.41 (SR 45)
Roa
Laur
eC
entr
al/S
outh
Dis
tric
t Lin
e
Gu
acara n da B ou lev a rd
Ja ck s on Ro ad Bor
der
Roa
d
l
Pi n e bro o k R o a d
f o
Trop
icai
re B
oule
vard
if Mex
Harb o r Dri ve
co
J
Ri
d
ver Roa
oulevard
Biscayne Drive
Cra nb erry Boulevr a
Cen
ter
Roa
d
Boulevard
i
kleyBoulevard
ve
B
k ro
c ma
Sh
Dr
To led o Blade B
E P
rice
Bou
lev a
rd
d (n
WP
or
rice
Bo
ule v
ard
A twate r Drive
t
a
h)
mr
Ortiz Bouleva rd
cJacarand
Drive
k
t e
o
e
on
rt
A
e
Sh
Lpp
oer
S
De
im
atto
xD
riv e
45
) hs York
S
o
S R
ain
tree
Bu
odEnglew o
Road(SR 776)
(sou th)
Ove
rb
doRa
vr e
Ri
ng
W
inchester Boulevard
lew
Dea
rbor
n S
tree
t
Myakk
a Ri
Peac
eR
iver
ver
Osc
arSc
here
rSt
ate
Par
k
dway
A
City
of
Veni
celR
oad
Lur
elR
oa
adE
Knights Trail Road
Em
sn
nR
oo
oad
dd
Albee Farm Road
Auburn Road
City
of N
orth
Por
tVe
nic
Av
nue
ee
Vic
Av
nnu
ee
ee
a
U.
.41
(S
SR
Roc
Engl
ewoo
dR
oad
(SR
776
)E
Hi
sbgh
Bo
oo
uu
llle
var
rd
Cha
rlotte
Cou
nty
Hea
sley
Roa
d M
AP 1
0-3c
:r
kR
oooa
dM
OBI
LITY
PLA
NCO
RRID
OR
-SO
UTH
CO
UN
TY
LEG
END
Maj
or R
oadw
ays
Mob
ility
Cor
ridor
Mul
ti-M
odal
Cor
ridor
Dist
rict L
ine
Futu
re In
terc
hang
e
Sour
ce: S
aras
ota
Coun
ty T
rans
port
atio
n an
d Re
al E
stat
e;So
uthw
est F
lorid
a Re
gion
al P
lann
ing
Coun
cil,
2015
Old Eood Road
Cha
rlotte
Ha
borr
0 2.
5 5
Mile
s
oulevard
V2-460
transportation circulation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
•
17 .. I ·--- --. if.., ,c I L_
I I L.---_J
UN
IVE R
SIT
Y
VERNA RD
GU
E
L
V
F OF MEXICO
DR
ST
HIGELAVE
SIE
STA MIDNIGHT P
BEE R IDGE ROAD EXT
Gu
AS
lf o
S RD
f Mexico
N TAMIAMI TRL
N SUMTERBLVD
E
JACARANDA BLV D
N RIVER RD
S TOLEDOBLADEBLVD
TAM
IAM
I TRL
ENGLEWOOD RD
RRD
N I
IVS
RE
NDIANAAVE
Myakk
ia Ri
Peac
eR
vve
r
er
PKW
Y
Bay
Sa
raso
taH
AR
DE
EC
OU
NTY
301
Tow
n of
Long
boat
Key
N HONOREA
City
of
Sara
sota
VI
ILLE
RR
DF
UT
MO
UN
D
75
MA
NAT
EE
CO
UN
TY
DR
BAY
RD
BI
GEE
ER
RD
D
HONORE AVE
CLA
KR
RD
Mya
kka
Riv
erSt
ate
Park
41
DE
SO
TOC
OU
NTY
72
O
scar
Sche
rer
Stat
e68
1 Pa
rk
AU
LL
RR
DE
E
75
MAP
10-
4:C
ity o
f75
M
OBI
LITY
FEE
Veni
ce
CN
TE
ERR
D
NIC
AV
VE
EE
DIS
TRIC
TSC
ity o
fN
orth
Por
t LE
GEN
D 75
NO
RTH
DIST
RICT
CEN
TRAL
DIS
TRIC
TS
TAA
MM
II T
RL
41
SOU
TH D
ISTR
ICT
CH
AR
LOTT
EM
UN
ICIP
AL B
OU
NDA
RY
CO
UN
TY
STAT
E PA
RK B
OU
NDA
RY
Sour
ce: S
aras
ota
Coun
ty P
ublic
Wor
ks, 2
015
04
8
Mile
s
V2-461
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
1 1 1 Z•• i:!:
LONG- RUNBLVD
UN
IVER
SITY
PK
WY
G
N TAMIAMI TRL
WOOD
ULF O
N T UTT LE AVE
F M
N W A SH I N G TO N B LV D
DE-
SOTO
RD
EXICOD
VERNA R D
R
JOHN
NGLI VD
NG
RIBL
BURNCO-
RD
S TU T TL E AV E
MYAKKA RD
PALM
ERBLV
D
C ATT LEM E N R D
GULF
GA
IRODNA
HIGELAVE
BEE RID G E RD EXT
SAW YE R R D
PR
OC
TOR
B RE DACH
RD
NEY
CKI T
D TR
M
S
I
P
DN
TMC
Gu
I
O
GHT PASS RD S T
SI
DR
TE
R HN
D -
A
l
M
f o
IAM
f Me
I TRL
xi
HO NOR
co
EAVE
CASEY KEY RD
FA R M RD A LB EE
PI N EB R O O K
CAPRI ISLESBLVD
R D
A U B U R N
N JACKSON
R D
RD
BYPASS
HAR BOR DR
US 4
HAT
CH
ET
JACKSON
1
CR
EEK
BLV
D
RD
N RI
S
VER RD
VENICE EAST
JACARANDA
RD N
AMROCKDR
ROCKLEY BLVD
BLVD
BLVD
ON
BAFFI
ELDE
R
OR T IZ
AVEN
IDO
B LVD
D
DEL
CIR
CO
SH
SVE
NICE
BLVD
A
STO
AD
HR
ENN
CG
M
L
AA
E
E
WOOD RD
BMANASOTA KEY RD
NOLD E N GLEWOOD
I
D
N
RR
DI
WINCHESTER BLVD
A
E
NA
VI
RD
SR
Mya
kka
Rive
r i
eace
Rve
r
P
N HONORE
41
301
MYR
TLE
N LOCKW OOD RIDGE RD
Sara
sota
Bay
ST
LAKEWOOD RANCH BLVD
DES
OTO
RD
75
DR
MA
RTI
N
AVE
LUTH
ERK
ING
JR
WAY
Tow
n of
17TH
ST
RIC
HA
RD
SON
RD
HAR
DEE
CO
UN
TY
Long
boat
Key
FR
UIT
VIL
LE R
D
MA
NAT
EE
BENEVA RD
CO
UN
TY
BA
HIA
VIS
TAC
ity o
fST
SO
SPR
EYAV
EB
AY
Sara
sota
W
EBB
ER S
T
S LOCKWOOD RIDGE RD
SIES
TA D
R
BEE
RID
GE
RD
WIL
KIN
SON
RD
RD
SWIFT RD
OCEAN BLVD
ASH
TON
RD
GANTT RD
CLA
RK
RD
PALM
ER
RA
NC
HPK
WY
PALM
ER
SAR
A-
RA
NC
HSO
TAPK
WY
E SQ
BLV
D
CEN
.SA
RA
-SO
TAPK
WY
41
BAY
ST
BLA
CK
BU
RN
PT R
D
OLD VENICE
RD
72
DES
OTO
CO
UN
TY
681
75
LAU
REL
RD
KNIGHTS TRL RD
City
of
Veni
ce
ALB
EER
D
EDM
ON
DS
ON
RD
B
OR
DE
R R
D
CO
LON
IALN
PARK BLVD
E VE
NIC
E AV
E
41
75
City
of N
orth
Por
t
MAP
10-
5:EX
ISTI
NG
RO
AD N
ETW
ORK
CEN
TER
RD
SHA
MR
OC
KB
LVD
(NU
MBE
R O
F LA
NES
) S
TAM
IAM
I TR
L
41
LEG
END 2
LAN
ES
4 LA
NES
6 LA
NES
Sour
ce: S
aras
ta C
ount
y Pu
blic
Wor
ks, 2
015
04
8
CH
AR
LOTT
EC
OU
NTY
AVE
Mile
s D
EAR
BO
RN
ST
PINE S T
V2-462
transportation circulation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
•
I l l II Z•• :3:
LONG- RUNBLVD
UN
IVER
SITY
PK
WY
N T UTT LE AVE
G
WOOD
N TAMIAMI TRL
ULF M
F O
DE-
SOTO
N W A SH I N G TO N B LV D
RD
E
VER N A R D
XICODR
JOHN
ING
BURNCO-
NGL VD
RD
RIBL
S TU T TL E AV E
MYAKKA RD
PALM
ERBLV
D IRODNA
GULF
GA
HIGELAVE
BEE R IDG E RD EXT
C ATT LEM EN R D
B RE DACH
SAW YE R R D
PR
OC
TOR
RD
EY
Gu
CKN
M
D I
TRT
l
IDN
SP
MC
f o
I
OI
GHT PASS RD
N-
f Me
S T
DR
TE
T R H
D
AM
S
IAMI T
x
RL
i
HO NOR
co
EAVE
CASEY KEY RD
ALB EEFA R M R D
PI N EB R O O K
CAPRI ISLES
N JACKSON
A U B U R N
BLVD
R D
R D
RD
JACKSON
US 4
HAT
CH
ET
CR
EEK
BLV
D
1
HAR BOR DR
BYPASS
RD
N RI
S
VER RD
JACARANDA
VENICE EAST
ROCKLEY
AMROCKDR
RD N
BAFFI
AVEN
IDO
BLVD
BLVD
N
BLVD
OELR
OR T IZ
ED
D
B LVD
DEL
CIR
CO
SH
SVE
NICE
BLVD
TA
ASO HRD
EN
A
G
MN
L
CAEB
EWOOD RD
MANASOTA KEY RD
OLD E N GLEWOOD N IN
RR
DI
D
AN
IVE
WINCHESTER BLVD
A
SR
RD
Mya
kka
Rive
r ve
r
eace
Ri
P
N HONORE
41
301
N LOCKW OOD RIDGE RD
MYR
TLE
DES
OTO
RD
75
Sara
sota
Bay
ST
D
R M
AR
TIN
AVE
LUTH
ERK
ING
JR
WAY
Tow
n of
HAR
DEE
CO
UN
TY
17TH
ST
RIC
HA
RD
SON
RD
Lo
ngbo
atK
ey
FRU
ITV
ILLE
RD
M
AN
ATE
E
BENEVA RD
City
of
Sara
sota
CO
UN
TY
BA
HIA
VIS
TAST
WEB
BER
ST
SIES
TA D
R
S LOCKWOOD RIDGE RD
BEE
RID
GE
RD
S
OS
PREY
AVE
YB
AW
ILK
INSO
N R
D
OCEAN BLVD
RD
SWIFT RD
ASH
TON
RD
GANTT RD
CLA
RK
RD
PALM
ER
RA
NC
HPK
WY
PALM
ER
SAR
A-
RA
NC
HSO
TAPK
WY
E SQ
BLV
D
CEN
.SA
RA
-SO
TAPK
WY
41
BAY
ST
BLA
CK
BU
RN
PT R
D
OLD VENICE
RD
72
DES
OTO
CO
UN
TY
681
75
City
of
LAU
REL
RD
Ve
nice
ALB
EER
D
EDM
ON
D-
SON
RD
B
OR
DE
R R
D
CO
LON
IALN
MAP
10-
6:EX
ISTI
NG
RO
ADW
AY
PARK BLVD
41
E VE
NIC
E AV
E
75
LEVE
L O
F SE
RVIC
E LE
GEN
D
City
of N
orth
Por
t C
ENTE
R R
D
SHA
MR
OC
KB
LVD
AS
TAM
IAM
I TR
L
41
B C D E FSo
urce
: Sar
asot
a Co
unty
Pub
lic W
orks
, 201
5
04
8
CH
AR
LOTT
EC
OU
NTY
AVE
Mile
s D
EAR
BO
RN
ST
PINE ST
V2-463
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
1 1 1 ••· --~~ ~
LONG- RUNBLVD
UN
IVER
SITY
PK
WY
WOOD
GU
DE-
SOTO
N W A SH IN G TO N B LV D
VER N A RD
LF O
N TAMIAMI TRL
F M
RD
EX
N T U TT LE AVE
ICODR
OHN
J
ING
LNG
CO-
VD
R
BURNRD
MYAKKA RD
IBL
S TU T TL E AV E
PALM
ERBLV
D
GULF
GA
IRODNA
HIGEL
C ATT LEM EN R D
AVE
B EE RIDG E R D EXT
B RE DACH
S AW YE R R D
EY
Gu
PR
OC
TOR
RD
CNK
I
M
TSD
l
IDN
TRP
f o
I
M
GHT PASS RD
TC
DR
TE
IN
S T
D O-
SR
H
AM
f Me
IAMI TRL
xico
HO NOR EAVE
CASEY KEY RD
A LB EEFA R M R D
PIN EB R O O K
CAPRI ISLES
A U B U R N
N JACKSON
BLVD
R D
R D
RD
US 4
BYP
HAT
CH
ET
CR
EEK
BLV
D
JACKSON RD
N R
HAR BOR DR
ASS 1
S
I
BLVD
VER RD
BLVD
BLVD
RD N
VENICE EAST
ROCKLEY
NO
AMROCKDR
AVEN
IDO
JACARANDA
E
BAFFI
LR
D
OR T IZB LVD
ED
DEL
CIR
CO
SH
SVE
NICE
BLVD
TOA D
E
NSACH
RN
AG
ML
EAB
EWOOD RD
MANASOTA KEY RD
NOLD E N GLEWOOD
I
D
NDIA
RR
WINCHESTER BLV D
N
VI
A
E
SR
RD
Mya
kka
Rive
r i
eace
Rve
r
P
N HONORE
41
301
DES
OTO
RD
75
HAR
DEE
CO
UN
TY
MYR
TLE
Sara
sota
Bay
ST
AVE
DR
MA
RTI
NLU
THER
KIN
G J
R W
AY
N LO CKWOOD RIDGE RD
Tow
n of
17TH
ST
RIC
HA
RD
SON
RD
Lo
ngbo
atK
ey
FRU
ITV
ILLE
RD
M
AN
ATE
EC
OU
NTY
C
ity o
f
BENEVA RD
BA
HIA
VIS
TAST
Sara
sota
W
EBB
ER S
T
S LOCKWOOD RIDGE RD
SIES
TA D
R
SO
PREY
ASVE
BAY
BEE
RID
GE
RD
WIL
KIN
SON
RD
RD
SWIFT RD
OCEAN BLVD
ASH
TON
RD
GANTT RD
CLA
RK
RD
PALM
ER
RA
NC
HPK
WY
PALM
ER
SAR
A-
RA
NC
HSO
TAPK
WY
E SQ
BLV
D
CEN
.SA
RA
-SO
TAPK
WY
41
BAY
ST
72
DES
OTO
CO
UN
TY
681
75
City
of
LAU
REL
RD
Ve
nice
BLA
CK
BU
RN
PT R
D
OLD VENICE
RD ALB
EER
D
EDM
ON
D-
SON
RD
B
OR
DE
R R
D
CO
LON
IALN
PARK BLVD
E VE
NIC
E AV
E
41
75
MAP
10-
7:PR
OJE
CTED
202
0C
ity o
f Nor
th P
ort
CEN
TER
RD
BLV
D
DEF
ICIE
NT
ROA
DW
AYS
SHA
MR
OC
K
S TA
MIA
MI T
RL
41
CH
AR
LOTT
ESo
urce
: Sar
asta
Cou
nty
Publ
ic W
orks
, 201
5
04
8
CO
UN
TY
AVE
Mile
s D
EAR
BO
RN
ST
PINE ST
V2-464
LEG
END C D E F
transportation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
I I I I I I I I I
UN
IVER
SITY
PK
WY
DES
OTO
RD
17TH
ST
EAST
-WES
T R
DW
Y B
VERNA RD
OHN FR
UIT
VILL
E R
D
J NGI L
YNG
ONA RD
RKW
IP
PALM
ER B
LVD
I
CATTLEMEN RD
HRDWYB
SIES
TA D
R
UT
RIDG
ERD
NORTH-SO
BEE RIDGE RD EXT
BY
EAE
CHKN
RD I
D R
C TN
T
SOP
I
WYA
DH
R
NORTH-SOUT
Gu
KNIGHTS TRAIL RD
RU
STIC
RD
lf of M
exico
LAU
REL
RD
E
N AUB URNRD
BLADE BLVD
HARBOR
N TOLEDO
DR S
SHAMROCK DR
R DE
D N
LEO
SOUT
H BLVD
VENI
CE
ENGLEWOOD RD TA
MIA
MI T
RL
KEYW
A Y R
OAD
R RD
EVI R. S
WINCHESTER BLVD
Sara
sota
Bay
Tow
nof
75 §̈ ¦H
ARD
EEC
OU
NTY
Long
boat
Key
M
ANAT
EE
41
301
City
ofSa
raso
ta£ ¤£ ¤
CO
UN
TY
BI
GEE
ER
RD
DEE B
SLOCKWOOD RIDGERD SBENEVARD
HONOREAVE
SWIFTRD
MAP
10-8
:M
yakk
aR
iver
Stat
ePa
rk
2040
FUTU
RE72
Osc
ar(C
LASS
DESC
RIPT
IONS
)TH
OROU
GHFA
REPL
AN41
EB
AYSTEB
AYST
£ ¤
DES
OTO
BLA
CK
BU
RN
Sche
rer
Park 68
1
POIN
TR
D
Stat
eC
OU
NTY
Exist
ing
Thor
ough
fare
s FR
EEW
AYC
ityof
Veni
ce
MAJ
ORAR
TERI
AL
MAJ
ORCO
LLEC
TOR
MIN
ORAR
TERI
AL
MIN
ORCO
LLEC
TOR
§̈ ¦.
NIC
AV
VE
EE
E75
41 £ ¤
PINEBROOKRD
BO
DE
RR
RD
City
of
NSUMTER BLVD
SIGN
IFIC
ANT
LOCA
LROA
D
Futu
reTh
orou
ghfa
res
MAJ
ORAR
TERI
AL£ ¤
Nor
thPo
rt
CEN
TER
RD
41
MAJ
ORCO
LLEC
TOR
MIN
ORAR
TERI
AL
MIN
ORCO
LLEC
TOR
CH
ARLO
TTE
Sour
ce:S
aras
ota
Coun
tyPu
blic
Wor
ks,2
015
CO
UN
TY
µ 0
48
Mile
s
LEGE
ND
V2-465
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
I I I I I I I I
UN
IVER
SITY
PK
WY
DES
OTO
RD
NCA
GULEA
ST-W
EST
RD
WY
B F O
N TAMIAMI TRL
L
E
F M
V
WENDELL KENT RD
E
VERNA RD
ORRAINERD
A
XICOD
N BENEVA RD
R
AS
N TUTTLE AVE
LNG
NGI
RI
OH
S BENEVA RD
JN
Y
S T UTTLE AVE
S
ONA RD
WPA
LMER
BLV
D C
D
B
ER
I
M
I SPCATTLEMEN RD
N
ONARD
SIES
TA D
R
HRDWY
CAMINO REAL
S SHADE AVE
OUT
RIDG
ERD
LO A
A
RD
I
NORTH-S
AVE
BLVD
BEE RIDGE ROAD EXT
OCEAN BLVD
PRO
CTO
R R
D
MI
GUL
DNIGH
F
GAT
E DR
ASS R
T P
POTTER PARK DR
OSH RD
D
MCINT
WYA
DH
R
H-SOUT
E B
AY S
T
NORT
Gu
RU
STIC
RD
lf
CASEY KEY RD
of
LA
Mexico ALBE
E RD
W
NOIA
LN
E
LCO
W V
ENIC
E A
VE
NDABLVD E
VEN
ICE
AVE
ACARA
N RC
ENTE
R R
D
ICEEASTBLVD
ROCKLE Y BLVD
I
RBOR DR S
VER R
SHAM
ROCK
LV
D
S SUMTER BLVD
VEN
R
D
DELEON
S TOLEDOBLADE BLVD
TAM
IAM
I TRL
ENGLE
MANASOTA KEY RD WOOD RD
KEYW
AY R
OAD
RRD
VE
OLD ENGLEW OOD
IS
R
S INDI ANA AV E
WINCHESTERBLVD
HAR
DEE
CO
UN
TYSa
raso
ta
EST
OO
RD
D30
1 75
41
17H
ST
TB
ay
City
of
N WHINGTON BLVD
NLOCKWOODRIDGERD
N HONORE
§̈ ¦
TTLEMEN RD
£ ¤£ ¤
Tow
nof
MAN
ATEE
LLE
RR
DF
UTV I
ISa
raso
taLo
ngbo
atK
eyC
OU
NTY
IG
RR
DD
EEE
EEW
BB
LKII
SON
NR
D
ASH
TON
RD
CLA
KR
RD
HIGEL
SWIFTRD
SLOCKWOODRIDGERD SLOCKWOOD BENEVARD RIDGERD
GANTTRD
YAKK
MAUNA
41 £ ¤
VAMORD
Mya
kka
Rive
rSt
ate
Park
72
MAP
10-9
:20
40FU
TURE
THOR
OUGH
FARE
PLAN
EB
AYST
Osc
arOLDVENICERD
Sche
rer
DES
OTO
Stat
ePa
rk
CO
UN
TY
681
UL
RRD
EE
Exist
ing
Thor
ough
fare
s
KNIGHTSTRAILRD
(NUM
BER
OFLA
NES)
LE
GEND
C
ityof
Veni
ce
PINEBROOKRD
BO
ER
RR
DD
2LA
NES
§̈ ¦
£ ¤
75
41
41
£ ¤NJACKSONRD
4LA
NES
6LA
NES
City
ofN
orth
Port
Futu
reTh
orou
ghfa
res
J
DB
8LA
NES
HA
2LA
NES
4LA
NES
6LA
NES
8LA
NES
CH
ARLO
TTE
Sour
ce:S
aras
ota
Coun
tyPu
blic
Wor
ks,2
015
µ 0
48
Mile
s
RD
CO
UN
TY
V2-466
transportation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
UN
IVER
SITY
PK
WY
N
DES
OTO
RD
CA
G
TTL
ULF O
N TAMIAMI TRL
E AV
VERNA RD
F ME
RE
XICOD
N BENEVA RD
R
AS
S BENEVA RD
ST
UIT
VILL
E R
D
CATTLEMEN RD
SIES
TA D
R
S SHADE AVE
M
C
K ARD
AVE
BAY
RD
BEE RIDGE ROAD EXT
PRO
CTO
R R
D
BEA
Gu
H RD
M
IDNIGHTP
l
S TAM
f
I
ASS R
AM
o
I TR
f
SH
RD
L
D
Mex
POTTER PARK DR
MCINTO
ico
CASEY KEY RD
LAU
RE
S JACK SON RD W
VEN
ICE
AVE
E VE
NIC
E
LVD N SUMTERB
N RIV
E PR
ICE
BL V
D
ROCKLEY BLVD
E
H
R RD
MR O
R
HARBOR D R S
A
D
S TOLEDOBLADE BLVD
OCK
DR
DELEN
TAM
IAM
I TRL
ENGLE
MANASOTA KEY RD WOOD RD OLD ENGLEWOOD RD
RRD
VIE
N I
SR
ND
WINCHESTERBL
IANA
S INDIANA AVE
301
£ ¤H
ARD
EEC
OU
NTY
Sara
sota
41
17B
ayH
ST
T
Tow
nof
HINGTON BLVD
N TUTTLE AVE
N HONO
RDEMEN
£ ¤
FRLo
ngbo
at
NW
BAY
ST
City
ofSa
raso
ta
Key
MO
UN
DM
AN
ATE
EC
OU
NTY
BI
GEE
ER
RD
D
ASH
TON
RD
CHIGEL
LAK
RR
D
SWIFTRD S TUTTLE AVE
SLOCKWOODRIDGERD
BENEVARD
SAWYERRD
YAK
75
HONORE AVE
§̈ ¦M
yakk
aR
iver
41 £ ¤St
ate
Park
72
VAMORD
EB
AYST
Osc
arSc
here
rD
ESO
TOSt
ate
Park
C
OU
NTY
68
1
City
ofVe
nice
LR
DE
SCEN
ICHI
GHW
AYS
AVE
ALBEEFARMRD
PINEBROOKRD
BO
ER
RR
DD
£ ¤
MAP
10-1
0:§̈ ¦75
41
41
£ ¤C
ityof
LEGE
ND
Nor
thPo
rt
TAM
IAM
ITRA
IL
LEM
ON
BAY
/MYA
KKA
TRAI
L(S
.R.7
76)
CN
TE
ERR
D
SSo
urce
:Flo
rida
Depa
rtm
ento
fTra
nspo
rtat
ion,
2009
CH
AR
LOTT
EC
OU
NTY
VD
µ 0
48
Mile
s
AVE
V2-467
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
/ 1
UN
I VE R
S IT Y
PK
WY
GU
E
VERNA RD
L
V
F O
A
F MEXICO
DR
HIGELAVE
SIES
TA
BEE R IDGE ROAD EXT
MIDNIGHT PASS RD
Gulf of Mexico
N TAMIAMI TRL
N SUMTERBLVD
E
JACARANDA BLVD
N RIVER RD
S TOLEDOBLADEBLVD
TAM
IAM
I TRL
ENGLEWOODRD
RRD
E IVS
R
N INDIANAAVE
Myakk
ver
a
Peac
e Ri
Rive
r
V2-468
Sara
sota
HAR
DEE
Bay
C
OU
NTY
Tow
nof
STM
OU
ND
Key
C
ityof
Sara
sota
MA
NAT
EE
CO
UN
TY
301
UIT
VILL
ER
RD
FLo
ngbo
at
75
DR
BAY
RD
BI
GEE
ER
RD
D
CLA
KR
RD
41
72
N HONORE
¬ «
§̈ ¦
£ ¤
£ ¤
HONORE AVE
Mya
kka
Riv
erSt
ate
Par
k
Osc
arSc
here
r
681¬ «
Stat
eP
ark
DES
OTO
CO
UN
TY
City
of V
enic
e
75
75 §̈ ¦
§̈ ¦
AU
LL
RR
DE
E
City
ofN
orth
Port
CEN
TER
RD
NIC
AV
VE
EE
MAP
10-1
1:SA
RASO
TACO
UN
TYTR
ANSI
TSE
RVIC
EAR
EAS
§̈ ¦75
STA
MA
MI
I TR
L
LEGE
ND
£ ¤41
BusR
oute
s1/
4M
ileSe
rvic
eAr
ea
3/4
Mile
Serv
ice
Area
C
HA
RLO
TTE
CO
UN
TY
Sour
ce:E
SRI,
U.S.
Cens
usBu
reau
(ACS
2009
-201
3),S
aras
ota
Coun
tyAr
eaTr
ansit
,201
5
µ 0
48
Mile
s
transportation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
G
E
U
V
L
A
PKW
Y
VERNA RD
F OF MEXICO
DR
HIGELAVE SI
ESTA
BEE RIDGE ROAD EXT
MIDNIGHT P
G
ASS RD
ulf of M
exico
E VE
NIC
E AV
E
V
N TAMIAMI TRL
D JACARANDABL VE
NI C
E A V
E
N SUMTERBLVD
S TAM
N R
I
I
AM
VE
I TR
R RD
L
TAM
IAM
I TRL
S TOLEDOBLADEBLVD
ENGLEWOODRD
RRD
V
N
E
SRI
INDIANAAVE
Myak
Ri
Peac
e
ka
ve
r
River
ÆP!B
UN
VER
SI
ITY
Y ! !B B
41
£ ¤301
£ ¤
#! !B B
Sa
raso
ta!B
30
1 !B£ ¤
Inse
tMap
A
Bay
!B !B
Æ c
To
wn
ofSe
eIn
setM
apA
!B
Sa
ra-
VI
ILLE
RR
DF
UT
Long
boat
N HONORE
; cC
ityof
$ +
B! Æ cc B!; c;cc ;; c;
$ +
!B so
ta
Æ c
HAR
DEE
CO
UN
TYF
UTVI
ILLE
RR
DK
ey
!BÆ c
c
Sara
sota
;
; c!B
c;
cÆP
B
ay;
75
DR
BAY
RD
BI
GEE
ER
RD
DÆP
; c
§̈ ¦
#
; c
TU
ND
SM
O
CLA
KR
RD
!B Æ c
HONORE AVE41# £ ¤
£ ¤
Mya
kka
Riv
erÆP
St
ate
Par
k 30
1
MA
NAT
EE
CO
UN
TY
DES
OTO
CO
UN
TY
Inse
tMap
B
cÆO
scar
72 ¬ «Sc
here
rSt
ate
Par
k 68
1¬ «
$ +Æ c !B
ÆP
75
See
Inse
tMap
B C
ity§̈ ¦
AU
LL
RR
DE
E
£ ¤41
E
MAJ
OR
TRAN
SIT
Æ c !B
CN
TE
ERR
D$ +
M
AP10
-12:
of75 §̈ ¦
Veni
ce
; c
ÆP
City
ofN
orth
Port
CN
TE
ERR
DTR
IPGE
NER
ATO
RS§̈ ¦75 Y
LE
GEN
D Y
£ ¤Æ c
AAI
IR
BusR
oute
sS
TM
MT
LÆP !B Æ
41c
;
Gov
ernm
entB
uild
ings
c
Tran
sitSu
ppor
tive
Area
s Ai
rpor
ts
!B
Y
Cens
usBl
ock
Gro
upsw
ith
>3
hous
ehol
dspe
racr
e ÆP
Ho
spita
ls or
>4
jobs
pera
cre
$ +
Com
mun
ityCe
nter
s
!Po
st-S
econ
dary
Educ
atio
nB
C
HA
RLO
TTE
CO
UN
TY
Libr
arie
s Æ c
Y
#
Reg
iona
lSho
ppin
gCe
nter
s
Sour
ce:E
SRI,
U.S.
Cens
usBu
reau
(ACS
2009
-201
3),S
aras
ota
Coun
tyAr
eaTr
ansit
,201
5
V2-469
Æ c
µ 0
48
ÆP
Mile
s
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
A
32
22
14
4 SARASOTA COUNTY
MANATEE COUNTY
SarasotaBay
DESOTO RD
DAV
IDAV
E
WOODLAND DR
AIR CARGO AVE
BRA
EB
UR
NAV
E
AIRPORT CIR
NTAM
IAMI TR
L
UNIVERSITY PKWY
41
PEN
NS
YLV
AN
IA A
VE
TALLEVAST RD
WHI
TFIE
LD
AVE
NTAM
IAMI TR
L
15TH
ST
EMAP 10-13: SARASOTA-BRADENTON AIRPORT EXISTING AND FUTURE FACILITIES, 2015
Source: Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport and Sarasota County Planning Services, 2015
0 1800 3600
Feet
LEGEND
City of SarasotaAirport Boundary
Future Development
Clear Zones
Clear Zone Obstruction
Dolphin Aviation
County Boundary
Seminole Gulf Coast Railway
A Airport Runway Number32
V2-470
transportation | data and analysis
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
10/25/2016
Gu
l f of M
ex i c o
RECREATIONAL
RESIDENTIAL
RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL
COMMERCIAL/ INDUSTRIAL
3113
23
5
RESIDENTIAL
41
CENTER RD
S TAMIAMI TRL
Source: Venice Municipal Airport and Sarasota County Planning, 2015
MAP 10-14: VENICE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT EXISTING FACILITIES, 2015 LEGEND
0 1800 3600
Feet
Airport Boundary
Existing Runway Protection Zone
Estimated Completion March 2016 Future Runway Protection Zone
City of Venice
V2-471
mobility element | data and analysis10/25/2016
sarasota county comprehensive plan | volume 2: data and analysis
1230
NM
AR
INA
PLZ
DIANE CIR
KA
NSA
S AV
E
BLACKBURN ST
OLI
VE S
T
CLINTWOOD AVE
PARK PLACE DR
GASPARILLA BLV
D
TIFF
AN
Y ST
OSCEOLA BLVD
TROPHY DR
GILLESPIE ST
HOLIDAY LN
RAINBOW LN
BO
XWO
OD
LN
IOW
A A
VE
OLEANDER ST
CAPLES ST
GR
AN
DE
FAIR
WAY
SAVONAAVE
LEMO
NW
OO
DD
R
ENGLEWOOD
RD
EDE
N D
R
GLA
DST
ON
EB
LVD
BAY VISTABLV
D
DOVER DR S
ULR
EY L
N
BACKSP
IN D
R
OSCEOLA DR
NINDIANA
AVE
OLD
EN
GLE
WO
OD
RD
ARDEN
WO
OD
DR
OA
KW
OO
DC
IR
LAR
CH
MO
NT
DR
BOCA ROYALE BLVD
BAYSHORE DR
MAP 10-15: BUCHAN AIRPORT EXISTING FACILITIES, 2015 LEGEND
Airport Boundary
Clear Zones
0 1000 2000
Feet
Source: Sarasota County Transportation and Real Estate Division, 2015
12 Airport Runway Number
V2-472
top related