Commissioner Lesley “Les” Miller, Jr. Meeting of the Technical Advisory Committee Hillsborough County MPO Chairman Monday, June 17, 2019, 1:30 PM County Center, 18th Floor – Plan Hillsborough Committee Room Commissioner Pat Kemp Hillsborough County MPO Vice Chair

Paul Anderson I. Call to Order II. Public Comment - 3 minutes per speaker, please Councilman Harry Cohen City of Tampa III. Approval of Minutes – May 20, 2019 Trent Green Planning Commission IV. Action Items

Commissioner Ken Hagan Hillsborough County A. It’s TIME Hillsborough Survey (Lisa Silva, MPO Staff)

Mayor Mel Jurado B. Temple Terrace Electric Vehicle Study (Wade Reynolds, MPO Staff) City of Temple Terrace

Joe Lopano V. Status Reports Hillsborough County Aviation Authority A. East Fowler Avenue Land Use Study (Pedro Parra, TPC) Mayor Rick A. Lott City of Plant City B. THEA – Sketch Level Planning (Bob Frey, THEA)

Councilman Guido Maniscalco C. Smart Cities Update (Vik Bhide, City of Tampa) City of Tampa VI. Old Business & New Business David Mechanik HART A. TAC Workshop July 29 Commissioner Kimberly Overman B. MPO TAC liaison – Sarah McKinley Hillsborough County

Commissioner VII. Adjournment Mariella Smith Hillsborough County VIII. Addendum Cindy Stuart Hillsborough County A. MPO Meeting Summary & Committee Reports School Board

Councilman Luis Viera B. Correspondence from FDOT on SIS Network City of Tampa C. Publication of Notice of Funding ATCMTD Joseph Waggoner Expressway Authority D. FTA to hold June 18 Webinar – Integrating Mobility Innovation Program Beth Alden, AICP Executive Director The full agenda packet is available on the MPO’s website, www.planhillsborough.org, or by calling (813) 272-5940.

The MPO does not discriminate in any of its programs or services. Public participation is solicited without regard to race, color, national origin, age, sex, religion, disability or family status. Learn more about our commitment to non-discrimination.

Persons needing interpreter services or accommodations for a disability in order to participate in this meeting, free of charge, are encouraged to contact Johnny Wong,

813-273-3774 x370 or [email protected], three business days in advance of the Plan Hillsborough meeting. Also, if you are only able to speak Spanish, please call the Spanish helpline planhillsborough.org at (813) 273-3774, ext. 211. [email protected] 813 - 272 - 5940 601 E Kennedy Blvd 18th Floor Tampa, FL, 33602

Si necesita servicios de traducción, el MPO ofrece por gratis. Para registrarse por estos servicios, por favor llame a Johnny Wong directamente al (813) 273-3774, ext. 370 con tres días antes, o [email protected] de cerro electronico. También, si sólo se puede hablar en español, por favor llame a la línea de ayuda en español al (813) 273-3774, ext. 211.

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, materials attached are for research and educational purposes, and are distributed without profit to MPO Board members, MPO staff, or related committees or subcommittees the MPO supports. The MPO has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of attached articles nor is the MPO endorsed or sponsored by the originator. Persons wishing to use copyrighted material for purposes of their own that go beyond ‘fair use’ must first obtain permission from the copyright owner.

If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the board, he or she will need a record of the proceedings, and for such purpose may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based.

MAY 20, 2019 – METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE

The Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), Hillsborough County, Florida, met in Regular Meeting, scheduled for Monday, May 20, 2019, at 1:30 p.m., in the Plan Hillsborough Committee Room, 18th Floor, Frederick B. Karl County Center, Tampa, Florida. The following members were present: Jeffrey Sims, Chairman Environmental Protection Commission Chris DeAnnuntis for Michael Case Tampa Bay Area Regional Transportation Authority Vincenzo Corazza City of Temple Terrace (Temple Terrace) Amber Dickerson Hillsborough County School District Leland Dicus (arrived at 1:46 p.m.) Hillsborough County Development Services Gina Evans Hillsborough County Aviation Authority Robert Frey Tampa-Hillsborough Expressway Authority (THEA) Anthony Garcia Planning Commission (PC) Stephen Griffin PC Mark Hudson for Julie Ham City of Plant City John Marsh for Danni Jorgenson City of Tampa (Tampa) (arrived at 1:53 p.m.) Melanie Calloway for Jonathan Scott Tampa Michael Williams Hillsborough County The following members were absent: Rachel Chase Florida Department of Health – Hillsborough County Michael English Tampa Historic Streetcar Incorporated Linda Walker HART I. CALL TO ORDER DRAFT Chairman Sims called the meeting to order at 1:36 p.m. II. PUBLIC COMMENT

Mr. Christopher Vela requested Item IV.A., Imagine 2040 Plan Amendment for Tampa Bay Next (TBN) Section 7 Project Development and Environment Study and Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act Consistency, be denied and to remove Items 27 and 28 from Item V.A, 2045 Needs Assessment. Ms. Laurel Urena encouraged the deletion of Items 27 and 28 from Item V.A.

1 MONDAY, MAY 20, 2019

III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – APRIL 15, 2019

Following remarks, Mr. Griffin moved to approve the minutes as distributed, seconded by Mr. Garcia, and carried eleven to zero. (Members Dicus and Marsh had not arrived; Members Chase, English, and Walker were absent.)

IV. ACTION ITEMS A. Imagine 2040 Plan Amendment for TBN Section 7 Project Development and Environment Study and FAST Act Consistency

Dr. Johnny Wong and Ms. Sarah McKinley, MPO, presented the item. Ms. Dickerson inquired how the plan incorporated public outreach efforts. Citing toll lane relocations/language change discussions, Mr. Corazza considered general purpose lanes/carpool incentive alternatives, to which Mr. Stephen Benson, Florida Department of Transportation, added comments. Chairman Sims clarified the project dimensions. Ms. Gena Torres, MPO, participated in conversations with Mr. Vela regarding Item IV.C., Fiscal Year (FY) 2020-2024 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and Priorities. Mr. Frey asked about future corridor volume projections. Chairman Sims touched on peak hour capacities and the performance report. After talks, Mr. Corazza moved to approve amending the long range transportation plan for consistency with FAST Act by including the item in the performance report, seconded by Mr. Hudson, and carried thirteen to zero. (Members Chase, English, and Walker were absent.)

Chairman Sims sought a motion to remove the toll lanes. Ms. Calloway made the motion, seconded by Mr. Dicus, and carried twelve to one; Mr. Corazza voted no. (Members Chase, English, and Walker were absent.) B. TIP Amendment – DRAFTPedestrian Crosswalk at Florida and Idlewild Avenues Ms. McKinley reviewed the item. Subsequent to expressing hope for a less- expensive study approach, Chairman Sims asked for a motion to approve the TIP amendment as proposed. Mr. Dicus so moved, seconded by Mr. Garcia, and carried thirteen to zero. (Members Chase, English, and Walker were absent.) C. FY 2020-2024 TIP and Priorities

Ms. McKinley expounded on the item and answered questions. Chairman Sims referenced Items 27 and 28. After inquiring on withholding certain items from the list, Mr. Corazza moved to accept the plan minus Item 27. (The motion died for lack of a second.) Responding to Chairman Sims, Ms. McKinley clarified

2 MONDAY, MAY 20, 2019

Item 28 and displayed images. Discussion occurred. Mr. Williams sought information on westbound/southbound improvements and lanes. Mr. Frey considered the consequences of rejecting the plan. Mr. Marsh asked about the existing 2024 TIP priorities. Chairman Sims sought a motion to approve the TIP as stated on the agenda for FY 2020-2024. Ms. Calloway so moved, seconded by Mr. Dicus, and carried twelve to one; Mr. Corazza voted no. (Members Chase, English, and Walker were absent.)

V. STATUS REPORTS A. 2045 Needs Assessment

Mr. Wally Blain, Tindale-Oliver and Associates Incorporated, elaborated on the report. Mr. Griffin wondered if the report touched on shared mobility. Mr. Frey wanted a workshop on the project siting/purpose, which Ms. Torres addressed. Ms. McKinley observed ongoing testing. Mr. Frey desired further analysis before sending the item to the MPO. Talks ensued. Citing Interstate 4 and parallel roads, Mr. Griffin inquired on the plans. Dialogue continued. Ms. Evans remarked about the airport access improvements. Mr. Dicus referenced the growth map not showing the projected growth. B. THEA Connected Vehicle Pilot Phase III

Mr. Frey and Ms. Anna Quinones, THEA, supplied the presentation. Mr. Corazza alluded to wrong-way driving functions. Chairman Sims suggested including the safety enhancements/units on the trolleys and participant notices for rear mirrors. Discussion took place. C. Shared Data and Analytics Platform Dr. Wong supplied the DRAFTpresentation. Mr. Frey considered methodology determination and regional instructions. Talks occurred. Mr. Dicus agreed on having a representative group. Ms. Dickerson asked if the platform would serve as a project warehouse, which Dr. Wong and Ms. Beth Alden, MPO Executive Director, addressed. Comments followed. VI. OLD BUSINESS AND NEW BUSINESS A. Next meeting: June 17, 2019

Chairman Sims summarized the May 13, 2019, PC/MPO TAC workshop.

3 MONDAY, MAY 20, 2019

VII. ADDENDUM A. MPO Meeting Summary and Committee Reports B. Announcement – May 21, 2019, and May 23, 2019, Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Public Workshops C. MPO Advisory Council (MPOAC) Freight Priorities 2019 D. MPOAC Legislative Session Wrap-up E. PC Legislative Session Wrap-up

VIII. ADJOURNMENT

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 3:19 p.m.

READ AND APPROVED: ______CHAIRMAN

ATTEST: PAT FRANK, CLERK

By: ______Deputy Clerk jh DRAFT

4

Board & Committee Agenda Item

Agenda Item It’s TIME Hillsborough Survey Presenter

Committee Liaison

Summary

This June 2019, the Hillsborough Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) kicks off the next phase of its public engagement campaign, collecting input on specific types of projects Hillsborough residents want to see in the county’s 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan.

Book an It’s TIME Hillsborough presentation now We are scheduling presentations now for community groups and neighborhood associations meeting in June and July. May we schedule you?

Take and share the online survey in June and July Contact us, we’ll send you a direct link, along with information to share with your

colleagues, friends and neighbors.

You’ll have an opportunity to respond online and at community meetings. Survey found at: www.planhillsborough.org/2045lrtp

Survey participants will be eligible for prizes: • Tickets to Rays;

• Tickets to Bucs; • Tickets to Lightning.

If you know someone else who wants to participate, please share the link with your family, friends, neighbors, and local businesses. Together we can create a vision for Hillsborough County.

Recommended Action Take the survey. Prepared By

Plan Hillsborough Lisa K. Silva, AICP, PLA (MPO Staff) planhillsborough.org [email protected] Attachments 813 - 272 - 5940 601 E Kennedy Blvd Flyer 18th floor Tampa, FL, 33602 It’s TIME to tell us your priorities for major transportation projects.

You could win tickets to the Rays, Bucs, or Lightning thanks to our Marketing Partners:

BEASLEY MEDIA GROUP

Take and share the survey at planhillsborough.org/2045lrtp 2045 LRTP UPDATE AT A GLANCE The Long-Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) directs federal and state dollars towards transportation projects we value. It looks out at least 20 years and is updated every five years. The LRTP, which will be adopted in November 2019, identifies future projects recommended for state and federal funding.

CREATE GROWTH SCENARIOS Why It’s TIME! Tampa Bay is growing up. We feel it every day as traffic congestion worsens and commutes get longer. Add another one million people to the region over the next 20 years, and it's easy to see why It's TIME to address our mobility needs.

Spring 2018 Summer 2018 ESTABLISH GOALS AND OBJECTIVES You spoke, we listened. With input received from nearly 10,000 citizens in the It’s TIME Tampa Bay survey, the MPO developed goals and objectives for how we want our region to grow.

Spring 2019 IDENTIFY NEEDED ENGAGEMENT ON IMPROVEMENTS FUTURE PROJECTS What is It’s TIME Hillsborough? The Hillsborough How I can share my input? MPO is collecting input on specific projects people in Take the online survey at Hillsborough County want. planhillsborough.org/2045lrtp/ Summer 2019 Share the link with your friends and family.

Book an It’s TIME Hillsborough presentation. We are scheduling presentations for community PLAN ADOPTION groups in June and July. May we schedule you? November 5, 2019 at 6:00 pm WE ARE Public Hearing of the Hillsborough MPO Board HERE! Hillsborough County Center 601 E. Kennedy Blvd., 2nd Floor

Fall 2019

For more information or to request a presentation for your community group, contact Lisa Silva [email protected].

The MPO does not discriminate in any of its programs or services. Public participation is solicited without regard to race, color, national origin, age, sex, religion, disability or family status. Learn more about our commitment to non-discrimination. To learn more about our commitment to nondiscrimination and diversity, contact our Title VI/Nondiscrimination Coordinator, Johnny Wong, at (813) 273-3774 x370 or [email protected] or visit: http://www.planhillsborough.org/non-discrimination-commitment/.

Board & Committee Agenda Item

Agenda Item Temple Terrace Low Speed Electric Vehicle Study Presenter

Wade Reynolds, MPO Staff

Summary The City of Temple Terrace, which has historic roots as a golf course centered community, currently allows golf carts on city streets, but is bisected by two state roads. This causes portions of the city to be disconnected from the golf courses and limits the ability of residents to use golf carts for other tasks such as shopping for groceries. Golf cart crossings of state roads are restricted by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) based on speed, volume, number of lanes, and other factors. Based on this need, the City of Temple Terrace requested a study to examine connections for golf carts across state roads. The Temple Terrace Low Speed Electric Vehicle Study has evaluated the locations of crossings on 56th Street and Fowler Avenue. This study is focused primarily on golf carts and evaluating speed, volume, and crash data to determine whether one or more locations would meet FDOT warrants for a crossing, and if not, what variations to the standards will be required. Seven crossing locations were evaluated with input from Temple Terrace staff and FDOT.

Recommended Action Recommend approval to MPO Board Prepared By

Wade Reynolds, MPO Staff

Attachments Draft Presentation

Plan Hillsborough planhillsborough.org [email protected] 813 - 272 - 5940 601 E Kennedy Blvd 18th floor Tampa, FL, 33602 Draft Update 05.23.19

DRAFT Project Overview • Purpose: • 7 potential intersections for low speed electric vehicle crossings • East Fowler Avenue • 56th Street • Other Florida Examples: • Dunedin • Sun City • Fowler Avenue Project Legend Planned Trails Parks Existing Crossings City Boundary Discussed Crossings Schools ProgrammedTrails DRAFT 2 Registered Golf Carts

• Current Registrations: • Total: 579 from 2013 - 2019 • Registration Clusters: • Whiteway Dr/Druid Hills Rd & Gillette Ave • Temple Terrace Golf Course • City following up with survey

Legend Registered Golf Cart Parks Addresses City Boundary Schools DRAFT 3 Discussed Crossings E F G A = Temple Heights Rd at 56th St B = Mission Hills Dr at 56th St C = Serena Dr/Druid Hills Rd at 56th St D D = Whiteway Dr at 56th St C E = Raintree Blvd at E Fowler Ave B F = Gillette Ave at E Fowler Ave A G= Hillsborough River at E Fowler Ave

Legend Planned Trails Parks Existing Crossings City Boundary Discussed Crossings Schools DRAFT 4 Temple Heights th Road at 56 Street A LOOKING EAST LOOKING EAST Opportunities: • Utilize right turn lane as a shared bicycle and golf cart lane • Consider easement on the east of the intersection • Permission from Frontier & Church Constraints: • Sidewalks are close to the street near 56th street; pavers on sidewalk • Drainage concerns • Lack of a pedestrian crossing on the North side • Eastbound and westbound travel lanes do not have exclusive left turn lanes • Steeper grades East and West of intersection • Church owns property on east side

DRAFT 5 Main Crash Types for Intersection Angle Rear End Temple Heights Pedestrian Sideswipe th Road at 56 Street A *Crashes not shown are located outside of picture boundary Traffic Counts: Crossing Distance AM Peak Hour 9:00 AM • Crosswalk measures about 68 feet • Eastbound: 143 on 56th Street • Westbound: 14 • 2 thru lanes & 1 left turn lane on PM Peak Hour 7:30 PM 56th Street • Eastbound: 100 • Westbound: 7

Crash Data (2014– 2018) • Total: 40 • Rear End: 20 • Angle: 6 • Pedestrian: 2 • Sideswipe: 3

DRAFT 6 Mission Hills Drive B at 56th St LOOKING WEST Opportunities: • Good amount of right-of-way and separation of sidewalk

E Challenges • Utility conflicts at the intersection, less space with utility poles • Westbound travel lanes does not have exclusive left turn lane

E DRAFT 7 Main Crash Types for Intersection Angle Left-Turn Mission Hills Drive Rear End at 56th Street B *Crashes not shown are located outside of picture boundary

Traffic Counts: Crossing Distance AM Peak Hour 7:00 AM • Crosswalk measures about 73 feet • Eastbound: 89 on 56th Street • Westbound: 89 • 2 thru lanes & 1 left-turn lane on PM Peak Hour 5:00 PM 56th Street • Eastbound: 88 • Westbound: 68 Crash Data (2014 – 2018) • Total: 28 • Rear End: 11 • Angle: 7 • Left-Turn: 5

DRAFT 8 Serena Drive/ Druid Hills Rd C at 56th Street

LOOKING NORTH Opportunities: • Consider RRFB or HAWK for school crossing, not a golf cart crossing Challenges: • Would require a mid-block crossing • Crossing hasn’t been warranted in the past

9 LOOKING SOUTH DRAFT Main Crash Types for Intersection Angle Rear End Hit Fixed Serena Drive/Druid Hills Object C Pedestrian Bike Road at 56th Street *Crashes not shown are located outside of picture boundary

Traffic Counts: Crossing Distance • N/A • No traffic signal or marked crosswalk on 56th street Crash Data • Crosswalk measures about 72 feet from curb to curb (2014 – 2018) • 2 thru lanes & 1 left-turn lane in • Total: 40 each direction on 56th street • Bike/Pedestrian: 4 • 1 right-turn lane North side • Angle: 20 • Rear End:7 • Hit-Fixed Object: 4

DRAFT 10 Whiteway Dr D at 56th Street

Opportunities: LOOKING EAST • Decrease turn radii • Good amount of right-of-way and Traffic Counts: separation of sidewalk AM Peak Hour 9:00 AM • Connects Greco Softball Complex • Eastbound: 139 • Additional coordination with • Westbound: 150 the City of Tampa PM Peak Hour 7:30 PM • Connects to Temple Terrace Family • Eastbound: 148 Recreation • Westbound: 89 Constraints: Challenges: • • Buffer decreases between sidewalk None and roadway at Holland Ave • Large turn radii

DRAFT 11 Main Crash Types for Intersection Angle Rear End Left-Turn Whiteway Drive D Pedestrian Bike at 56th Street *Crashes not shown are located outside of picture boundary

Traffic Counts: Crossing Distance AM Peak Hour 9:00 AM • Crosswalk measures about 144 • Eastbound: 139 feet on 56th Street • Westbound: 150 • 4 thru lanes & 2 turn lanes in PM Peak Hour 7:30 PM each direction on 56th Street • Eastbound: 148 • Westbound: 89 Crash Data (2014 – 2018) • Total: 83 • Bike/Pedestrian: 5 • Angle: 34 • Rear End: 26 • Left Turn: 6

DRAFT 12 Raintree Blvd E and East Fowler Ave

LOOKING WEST LOOKING SOUTHWEST Opportunities: • Close to several commercial options at E Fowler Ave & 56th Street • Potential to decrease posted speed • Good connection to Linwood Park • Address missing sidewalks AM Peak Hour exceeds 200 vehicles per hour • Mix golf carts with traffic (on Raintree Blvd) Golf Cart crossings not permitted at “T” intersections • Bicycle lane/shoulder along Raintree Blvd Crossing exceeds more than 5 lanes of traffic • 62nd Street – narrow sidewalks & West side gaps Challenges: • Discuss with FDOT ability to run golf carts on sidewalks for approximately 120’ • Wider multi-use path to accommodate • No crossings on west side • AM Peak Hour exceeds 200 vehicles per hour • Golf Cart crossings not permitted at “T” intersections • Crossing exceeds more than 5 lanes of traffic

DRAFT 13 Main Crash Types for Intersection E Angle Rear End Raintree Blvd

Bike Sideswipe and East *Crashes not shown are located outside of picture boundary Fowler Ave

Traffic Counts: Crossing Distance AM Peak Hour 7:00 AM • Crosswalk measures about • Southbound: 256 137 feet across E Fowler Ave PM Peak Hour 4:30 PM • 4 lanes East and 5 lanes West • Southbound: 137 on E Fowler Ave Crash Data (2014 – 2018) • Total: 67 • Bike/Pedestrian: 1 • Rear End: 39 • Sideswipe: 6 • Angle: 7

DRAFT 14 F Gillette Ave and East Fowler Ave

LOOKING NORTH LOOKING NORTH Opportunities: • Consider wide sidewalks on both sides of Gillette • Potential to decrease posted speed • Wider crossings along Fowler • Extend nose on eastern side of intersection Challenges: • Have to cross a 6 lane state roadway • Southbound traffic does not have exclusive left turn lane • Crossing exceeds more than 5 lanes of traffic • Sidewalks don’t meet the 8 foot minimum FDOT requirement • Narrow on the west side with columns (3’2’’) • Slight buffer between the street and sidewalk (3’6’’) DRAFT 15 Main Crash Types for Intersection F Angle Rear End Hit Fixed Object Gillette Ave

Pedestrian Left-Turn and East *Crashes not shown are located outside of picture boundary Fowler Ave

Traffic Counts: Crossing Distance AM Peak Hour 7:00 AM • Crosswalk measures about • Northbound: 192 118 feet across E Fowler • Southbound: 36 Ave PM Peak Hour 5:00 PM • 4 lanes East and 4 lanes • Northbound: 142 West on E Fowler Ave • Southbound: 30

Crash Data (2014 – 2018) • Total: 51 • Rear End: 35 • Angle: 5

DRAFT 16 Hillsborough River at G Fowler Avenue Opportunities: • Connection to 114th Avenue • Connection to Riverhills Drive Traffic Counts: LOOKING WEST • Potential to decrease posted speed AM Peak Hour 7:00 AM • Potential underpass underneath • Northbound: 455 Fowler • Southbound: 388 • No crossings needed PM Peak Hour 5:00 PM • No intersection AADT • Northbound: 584 requirement • Southbound: 353 Challenges: • Coordination with the County • Running golf carts on Gail Drive • Riverhills Drive Connection • Northbound and southbound AM/PM Peak Hour traffic counts exceed 200 vehicles per hour. • Analyze feasibility of path underneath bridge • Grade to the south of the bridge DRAFT 17 April FDOT Meeting Recap

Overall Comments: • Review additional demand data • City responsibility for all intersection improvements • All registered golf carts must have a turn signal • Hillsborough County will need to change its ordinances to allow golf carts on County Roads • ‘After’ safety study takes place 1 year after installation of improvements.

56th Street Overall Comments: • FDOT to review signal timing plans • Will need standard golf cart crossing signs on the side streets only • Propose 1 recommended 56th street crossing proposal be sent to FDOT

Fowler Avenue Overall Comments: • More challenging to cross intersection with golf carts • Reference the Traffic Engineering Manual for all location crossings • FDOT would prefer a different crossing location than Raintree Boulevard

DRAFT 18 Crossing Matrix

DRAFT 19 Next Steps

• Origin/destination survey • Prepare a proposal/concept for 1 crossing on 56th Street • Coordinate with Hillsborough County on an Ordinance change to allow golf cart crossings • Coordinate with FDOT on additional required City funded facilities

DRAFT 20 DRAFT

Board & Committee Agenda Item

Agenda Item

East Fowler Avenue Land Use Study

Presenter

Pedro Parra, Planning Commission Staff Summary This study was requested by The Tampa Innovation Alliance, !p: POTENTIAL UNLEASHED to assist in planning for future land uses along the East Fowler Avenue Corridor between I-275 and I-75, up to the Tampa Bypass Canal that would foster a desirable, robust mixed-use space resulting in a work, play and live environment for a network of innovative and creative companies and associated workforce.

The study looked at other innovation districts, corridors, and centers across the country and compared these to existing development conditions, zoning and future land uses along East Fowler Avenue. The process included discussion of existing development patterns and future land use options in the Cities of Temple Terrace and Tampa and Unincorporated Hillsborough County. Future land use discussions included: mixed-use design, appropriate density, the range of uses, and incentives supporting the !p and jurisdictional objectives (included in the background section of this report).

The primary recommendations of the study are: • That the Cities of Temple Terrace and Tampa, and Hillsborough County recognize the portion of the East Fowler Avenue from I-275, up to and including the intersection of North 56th Street, as “special study areas” in each of their adopted Comprehensive Plans to highlight the unique conditions of the area and describe the desired outcomes for the future. • That future land use designation changes along the corridor be initiated to the Cities of Temple Terrace and Tampa, and Unincorporated Hillsborough County Future Land Use Maps to urban level mixed use categories that support the !p’s long-range vision and mission.

Recommended Action None

Prepared By:

Plan Hillsborough Lisa K. Silva, AICP, PLA planhillsborough.org [email protected] Attachments: 813 - 272 - 5940 601 E Kennedy Blvd 18th floor East Fowler Study Draft Tampa, FL, 33602

Board & Committee Agenda Item

Agenda Item Tampa-Hillsborough Expressway Authority (THEA) - Sketch Level Planning Presenter

Bob Frey, THEA

Summary The Tampa-Hillsborough Expressway Authority are reviewing a number of roadways at the highest level to determine project viability as a toll road. This is a step before initiating a Project Development & Environment study. THEA looks at future traffic and revenue and constructability/cost. Jurisdictions can request the analysis and whether to include a transit component to investigate the potential for a Bus Toll Lane, for instance. In this example, the transit agency helps build the corridor by contributing to the funding of the roadway to become an equity partner in the facility. Today, the committee will hear an update on the Selmon South, Whiting, Nebraska, and Selmon East studies.

Recommended Action

None, for information only. Prepared By Gena Torres, MPO Staff

Attachments

None.

Plan Hillsborough planhillsborough.org [email protected] 813 - 272 - 5940 601 E Kennedy Blvd 18th floor Tampa, FL, 33602

Board & Committee Agenda Item

Agenda Item Smart Cities Initiatives: Tampa Presenter Vik Bhide, City of Tampa Summary In 2018, the City of Tampa was recognized as one of the “21 Smart Cities to Watch,” by the technology-oriented news site, statescoop. Over the past year, the City has proactively initiated a number of transportation technologies and pilot projects to solve problems ranging from flooding and parking to congestion and safety. Vik Bhide will present a high-level overview of the City of Tampa’s Smart Cities Initiatives. Recommended Action None. For information only. Prepared By Johnny Wong, PhD, MPO Staff Attachments None.

Plan Hillsborough planhillsborough.org [email protected] 813 - 272 - 5940 601 E Kennedy Blvd 18th floor Tampa, FL, 33602

DRAFT

MPO Board Meeting of Wednesday, May 8, 2019

CALL TO ORDER, PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE & INVOCATION

The MPO Chairman, Commissioner Les Miller, called the meeting to order at 9:01 a.m., led the pledge of allegiance and gave the invocation. The regular monthly meeting was held at the County Center in the 2nd Floor Boardroom.

The following members were present:

Trent Green, Commissioner Ken Hagan, Mayor Mel Jurado, Commissioner Pat Kemp, Charles Klug for Paul Anderson, Councilman Guido Maniscalco, David Mechanik, Commissioner Les Miller, Commissioner Kimberly Overman, Janet Scherberger for Joe Lopano, Commissioner Mariella Smith, Councilman Luis Viera, and Joe Waggoner.

The following members were absent:

Mayor Rick Lott and Cindy Stuart.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES – April 2, 2019

A motion was made by Commissioner Overman to approve the minutes of April 2, 2019. The motion was seconded by Councilman Maniscalco and carried unanimously.

PUBLIC COMMENT

Mr. Doug Jessup commented on the Tampa Bay Next Update agenda item.

Mr. Rick Fernandez commented on Tampa Bay Next and the Boulevard Tampa Project and the MPO’s Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC) motion to further study the Boulevard Project. He requested removal of Sections 6 and 7 from the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP).

Mr. Chris Vela provided comments regarding the Boulevard Project and line 29 of the TIP. He would like to see the merger study removed from documentation of the Annual Joint Certification of the Hillsborough MPO.

Ms. Connie Burton thought the BOCC was meeting and came to thank them for the 5.2 million dollars that was set aside for a housing initiative. Ms. Burton commented on the 40th Street business district and the possible shutdown of the Floribraska exit. She expressed concerns about the economic impacts on well needed communities.

Mr. Ron Weaver expressed concerns regarding congestion relief for I-275 North.

MPO Meeting of May 8, 2019 – Page 1

COMMITTEE REPORTS, ONLINE COMMENTS

Chairman Miller introduced Bill Roberts, CAC Chair, who was in attendance to satisfy the request from Board members to have CAC committee reports presented in person by the CAC Chair or a designated member. Commissioner Miller informed the group that he had an opportunity to attend and have a discussion with the CAC at their first informal evening workshop, which was a request from the CAC members.

Mr. Roberts thanked the Board for the opportunity to present CAC reports in person. His report was included in the Board folders. The committee approved TIP amendments and an amendment to the Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP). In addition, the committee had a robust discussion on the Boulevard concept, which resulted in a motion to the Board to approve further study of the project.

Following Mr. Robert’s update, Commissioner Overman suggested that board members attend a CAC meeting if they have not. She thanked the entire committee and staff that supports the committee for their work. Commissioner Kemp thanked the CAC for their expertise and stated she is looking forward to the monthly in-person reports from the committee. Mr. Robert’s stated that he will relay comments to the committee.

Ms. Gena Torres, Executive Planner, provided a summary of committee reports, emails and Facebook comments received from citizens.

The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) approved Action Items on the MPO Board agenda.

The Bicycle – Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) passed a motion supporting the CAC’s motion on the Boulevard Concept and asked that impacts on pedestrians and cyclists be included as part of the study. The committee also approved and forwarded items that appear on the MPO Board’s Consent Agenda, as well as, a letter requesting the Tampa Police Department to speak to the committee regarding their policies on car parking on sidewalks and in bicycle lanes. Wanda Vinson was appointed to the committee as a Member At Large.

The committees received presentations on the Tampa Bay Next update and the Transportation Sales Surtax. The committee offered to act as a sounding board at any time needed during the Independent Oversight Committee process.

The Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Committee discussed the data and analytics platform and is forming a working group to get into details to develop a scope.

The Transportation Disadvantaged Coordinating Board (TDCB) re-approved the 2019/2020 rates per trip for Sunshine Line. Overall rates per trip, effective July 1, 2019, will increase one dollar over the current fiscal year and customer co-pays will not be not affected. The TDCB also approved its Grievance Procedures, noting that there have been no complaints in the last 10 years regarding Sunshine Line’s services.

The MPO Chairs Coordinating Committee discussed the Regional Chapter of the upcoming Long Range Transportation Plans (LRTP). Members expressed interest in creating a stand-alone regional LRTP next year. The regional document will include the tri-county vision created by Hillsborough, Pinellas and Pasco MPOs, and the relationship between the tri-county area and the adjacent MPOs to the north, south, and east. There was discussion of the evolving relationship between TBARTA and the MPOs. TBARTA is focusing on its Regional Transit Development Plan. The next meeting of the MPO Chairs will be held on July 19, 2019 at the Florida Hospital Ice Center in Pasco County. There will be a briefing on Pasco’s Connected City Project and a welcome from Commissioner Kathryn Starkey.

MPO Meeting of May 8, 2019 – Page 2

The following email remarks, in full, were provided to board members with their meeting material:

Ms. Michele Cookson shared a Facebook post requesting that the CAC recommendations be included for the Boulevard Study and removal of item 29 from the TIP. In addition, she opposed a merger of the MPOs.

Ms. Ingrid Jacoba’s Facebook comments asked that CSX rail lines be bought to link USF to Downtown. In addition, she does not want Tampa Bay Next funded, would like to see a “No Build” option, and development of the Boulevard concept. She would like to see Vision Zero objectives made a reality.

Mr. Fernandez’s Facebook posts referenced a motion to approve a study of the Boulevard Concept and requested removal of Sections 6 and 7 from the LRTP.

Mr. Mauricio Rosas emailed and shared a video clip regarding a speeding vehicle crashing into a home in Seminole Heights. He also shared a link from Josh Frank’s presentation of the Tampa Heights Civic Association.

Ms. Lena Young Green emailed regarding best complete streets policies.

Ms. Kaitlyn Ranze shared concerns regarding problems on Symmes Road between US41 and Highway 301.

Mr. Joe Bohn thanked Wade Reynolds for a great presentation to USF students.

Mr. Eric Goldstein thanked Beth Alden for taking time to address members of the Westchase Community Association.

There were no questions following the committee reports and online comments.

CONSENT AGENDA

A. Committee Appointments B. Letter Requested by BPAC on Parking in Bike Lanes

A motion was made by David Mechanik and Councilman Maniscalco to approve the Consent Agenda. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Kemp and carried unanimously.

ACTION ITEMS A. Transportation Improvement Program Amendment for HART Grants

Sarah McKinley, MPO Staff, presented information on two amendments to the TIP on HART grants that were received. The $1,000,000 resilience grant from FDOT will be used to repair damaged infrastructure. HART’s Transit Oriented Development (TOD) grant will fund a joint study with Plan Hillsborough and the City of Tampa to revise the TOD policies within the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The study will focus on the Florida and Fowler corridors and coordinate with ongoing efforts. $800,000 are funds from Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and $200,000 are local funds.

There was no discussion or questions following the presentation.

A motion was made by David Mechanik to approve the TIP Amendment. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Overman. Upon a roll call vote, the motion carried 14-0.

B. Unified Planning Work Program Amendment: Annual Update & New Surtax Funds for Planning

MPO Meeting of May 8, 2019 – Page 3

Allison Yeh, MPO Staff, presented information on amendments to the UPWP. The administrative document outlines the MPO’s major planning tasks and documents federal, state, and local funding between the MPO, HART, and FDOT.

(Commissioner Hagan left @ 9:45 a.m.)

The recommended action was to approve amendment of the following items to FY19 & FY20 UPWP:

1. FY19 and FY20 budget adjustments 2. Update Task 2 – System & Corridor Planning (TD Section) • Add $50K National Healthiest Cities & Counties Challenge Grant • Add Transportation Equity Scorecard Tool • Update FY20 TD Grant Allocation 3. HART Planning Program 4. Hillsborough County Transportation Improvement Surtax Budget for FY20 contingent on resolution of legal challenge

Committee Requests:

1. The CAC requested adding to Task 2, in Corridor/Subarea/Environmental Studies section – a Study of the I-275 Boulevard Conversion Concept in FY20. 2. The BPAC supported the CAC’s request. 3. The TAC supported all proposed changes to the UPWP.

Following the presentation, Commissioner Smith wanted to make sure that the BPAC’s request to include the impacts on pedestrians and cyclists was included in Task 2.

A motion was made by Commissioner Kemp to add committee requested information and approve the amendment to the UPWP. The motion was seconded by Commissioner Overman.

Commissioner Kemp would like to see a Transportation Equity Planner added when the surtax resources come in that would look at transportation equity issues, as well as, transportation disadvantaged, instead of the Community Planner for shared mobility services.

Following brief discussion, the motion carried unanimously.

C. Annual Joint Certification of the MPO

Mr. Rich Clarendon presented information on the MPO/FDOT yearly joint certification. He pointed out the It’s Time Tampa Bay survey; Vision Zero efforts; Resilient Tampa Bay; the School Safety Study; and the Gulf Coast Safe Streets Summit as notable achievements. Recommendations included eliminating duplicate projects and funding from the TIP; establishing a review process for grant invoices; and considering committee effectiveness and time management. In an effort to improve the partnership with FDOT and suggested from the Regional Structure Best Practices, a MPO Co-Chair staff member will assist with the regional travel demand modeling forecast and report monthly to the MPO Directors. No corrective actions were recommended.

A motion was made by Commissioner Kemp to support re-certification of the MPO and authorization for the MPO Chairman to sign a Joint Certification Statement. The motion was seconded by Councilman Maniscalco.

MPO Meeting of May 8, 2019 – Page 4

Following the motion, Commissioner Overman referenced the MPO Merger Study information that was included in the report and wanted to make sure that by accepting the report merger of the MPO was not being approved. Ms. Beth Alden clarified that action was not approving a merger and the Merger Study report was sent to the TBARTA Board and the task was closed.

Commissioner Smith requested an explanation on the elimination of duplicate projects and funding from the TIP that was stated in the presentation. Mr. Clarendon provided clarification on the reconciliation process.

Mayor Jurado followed up on Commissioner Smith’s inquiry and wanted to know what staff has identified as an action step to communicate or take a corrective action that allows the Board to know where the duplicate projects exist before decisions are made on funding projects. Mr. Clarendon provided additional information on staff processes which assure accuracy.

Following additional discussion, the motion carried unanimously.

STATUS REPORTS

A. Tampa Bay Next Update

Secretary David Gwynn, FDOT District 7, provided an update on Tampa Bay Next. The Howard Frankland Bridge is currently in an active procurement process for design-build and plans to award the contract will take place late 2019. Construction will begin in 2020 with an anticipated completion of 2024. The SEIS process, which began in early 2017, along with viable alternatives are being refined through the process. There are two Tampa Interstate Study alternatives workshops being held: (1) May 21 at the Cuban Club from 5:30 – 7:30 p.m. and (2) May 23 at the Tampa Marriott Westshore located at 1001 N. Westshore Boulevard in Tampa. A public hearing is anticipated in early 2020.

(Councilmen Viera & Maniscalco left @ 9:55 a.m.)

Following the update, Commissioner Overman commented on the Boulevard Concept and impacts of the Downtown Interchange, the complexity of the SEIS, and communities and tax payer’s dollars. She expressed concerns regarding safety risks of I-275 and MLK and wanted to know if the lane addition will include widening the area between MLK and Sligh. Secretary Gwynn stated the addition will be within the existing right-of-way and there will be more pavement, as well as noise walls. Commissioner Overman also wanted to know if it was too late to include the Boulevard Concept as a priority into the SEIS project. The Secretary stated that the concept would not be part of the SEIS project. He also explained the lengthy process of the concept and working with FHWA. Commissioner Overman stated that she would like to see plans for Westshore moved forward.

Commissioner Kemp commented on I-275 traffic, north of Fletcher, and local traffic and connecting Vision Zero. She pointed out a personal experience of a dangerous crosswalk at Hillsborough and 40th Street and wanted to know if FDOT could point out projects that are being completed on Hillsborough Avenue to see what can be done to make the street safer. Secretary Gwynn stated that FDOT would be glad to put together a presentation and mentioned that there are a lot of lighting and safety projects that are taking place. Commissioner Miller stated that Hillsborough and 40th are not the only problems and referenced Nebraska to 56th Street. He also mentioned other areas in the intercity with safety issues.

Commissioner Smith thanked FDOT for their hard work in the community. Commissioner Smith expressed concerns about case studies that FDOT pulled regarding tolling vs. non-tolled and impacts of environmental justice and social equity. She wanted to know if further studies are being done. Secretary Gwynn stated that he will check on the final study.

MPO Meeting of May 8, 2019 – Page 5

(David Mechanik left @ 10:27 a.m.) (Joseph Waggoner left @ 10:31 a.m.)

B. 2045 Plan Need Assessment for Major Projects

Mr. Wally Blain, Tindale Oliver, MPO Consultant presented information on the 2045 LRTP. The LRTP must be cost-feasible, reflect local priorities, and look at least twenty years into the future (effectively a 25- year horizon). A public hearing for the MPO to adopt its 2045 Plan is scheduled for Tuesday, November 5, 2019 and a draft will be made available 30 days in advance for public review.

Following the presentation, Commissioner Overman commented on the 2045 traffic congestion forecast, fixed guideway, and the desires of the citizens from the It’s Time Tampa Bay survey. Ms. Alden addressed Commissioner Overman’s concerns regarding CSX owned rail corridors in South Hillsborough County and East to the Polk County line.

Commissioner Kemp commented on fixed guideway in terms of Hwy 41 and the Ferry, which was not included. Commissioner Kemp made comments regarding a recent film, The Last Green Thread, and would like to see future discussion planned for the wildlife corridor of I-4.

Commissioner Smith would have liked to receive the presentation included in the agenda material prior to the meeting and requested a copy be emailed to the Board. She also commented on the population projections for people in South County and echoed concerns on the wildlife corridor, the Ferry, and congestion on I-275.

(Charles Klug left @ 10:52 a.m.)

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S REPORT

Ms. Alden informed board members of the FY19 – Quarter 3 report that was provided in the board folder, along with a copy of the Executive Summary for the It’s Time Tampa Bay survey that took place last summer for the Long Range Transportation Plan. The summary information is posted on the website for the public to review. A more detailed survey, It’s Time Hillsborough, will take place this summer beginning in June. The next Tampa Bay Transportation Management Area Leadership Group meeting is scheduled on June 7 in Pasco County. The next MPO Board meeting will be held on Tuesday, June 11 and is the Annual Public Hearing for the TIP, in addition to the annual update of the Priority List. An amendment to the LRTP will also be considered at the June meeting.

OLD & NEW BUSINESS

Mayor Jurado thanked Beth Alden, Gena Torres and other MPO staff who provided the City of Temple Terrace the benefits of street painting. The City of Temple Terrace will have their first street painting project on Saturday, May 18 with the goal of calming traffic, safety and beautification.

Under new business, Commissioner Miller mentioned the importance of the meetings, and stated after about an hour and a half the group begins to lose its quorum. He suggested keeping meetings to an hour and a half so that a quorum is present for a vote.

ADJOURNMENT

A quorum was lost during the meeting, and the meeting adjourned at 10:57 a.m.

MPO Meeting of May 8, 2019 – Page 6

Committee Reports

Meeting of the Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC) on May 15 Under public comment, five citizens commented on the TIP, urging the MPO not to prioritize improvements to the downtown interchange or the section of I-275 north of Downtown Tampa.

Under action items, the CAC voted to:

✓ Recommend by an 11 – 2 vote an amendment of the Imagine 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan for FAST Act Consistency, and eliminating express toll lanes on I-275 Section 7 north of downtown Tampa; however, • The CAC did not concur with the PD&E preferred alternative of adding two general use lanes in place of the express toll lanes; ✓ Unanimously recommend approval of a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) amendment for a Pedestrian Crosswalk at Florida and Idlewild; ✓ Recommend the FY20–FY24 TIP, by a vote of 11–1, with the following revisions to the draft priority list: • By a vote of 9–3, to strike priorities #40 (Big Bend Rd ext.) and #44 (widening Balm Rd) due to concern about promoting sprawl development; • By a vote of 10–2, to strike priorities #27 (I-275 from north of MLK to Bearss Ave) and #28 (safety and operational improvements to the downtown interchange) because the surrounding community has spoken against further capacity expansion; • Members also expressed concern about making revisions to the draft list of TIP priorities after the draft is distributed to the committee for review.

The CAC also received a status report on the Needs Assessment for the 2045 update of the Long Range Transportation Plan.

Under new business, the CAC voted to recommend that the MPO consider the following rules for public comments for tonight’s TIP Hearing: ✓ Speakers should be allowed more time if they represent groups of not more than four people who have signed up to speak;

✓ Allow not more than 15 minutes per group; Plan Hillsborough planhillsborough.org ✓ Allow not less than 2 minutes per individual speaker. [email protected] 813 - 272 - 5940 ✓ You do not have to be present to donate time as long as a signature is there 601 E Kennedy Blvd indicated that the time was donated. 18th floor Tampa, FL, 33602

Meeting of the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) on May 20 The committee approved and forwarded to the MPO Board: ✓ Imagine 2040 Plan Amendment for Tampa Bay Next Section 7 PD&E and FAST Act Consistency: the TAC chose to take two actions, with the FAST Act Consistency amendment passing unanimously, and the Section 7 PDE amendment passing 11-1 with a concern by one member that no additional lanes should be built; ✓ TIP Amendment for Pedestrian Crosswalk on Florida Ave at Idlewild; ✓ FY20-24 Transportation Improvement Program and Priorities: was approved 11-1, with one member requesting that Line #27 be struck from the TIP. The TAC members were engaged and interested in the status reports presented: o 2045 Needs Assessment: members asked for a workshop – perhaps in July, instead of recessing – to review the major projects moving forward. o THEA Connected Vehicle Pilot Phase III; o MPO Shared Data and Analytics Platform project.

Meeting of the Policy Committee on May 21 The committee approved and forwarded to the MPO Board: ✓ TIP Amendment for Pedestrian Crosswalk on Florida Ave at Idlewild. The committee held a follow-up, deeper-dive discussion on the 2045 Needs Assessment for Major Projects presentation heard by the board on May 8. Members discussed the importance of street network connectivity; evaluating road improvements systemically rather than in isolation; and considering how land use decisions might affect the need (or lack of need) for specific projects. The MPO Speed Management Study kick-off was announced, and there was brief discussion of next steps on the board’s motion to study the I-275 boulevard conversion concept.

Meeting of the Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) on May 8 The committee approved and forwarded to the MPO Board: ✓ Reappointment of BPAC Chair Jonathan Forbes to a Citizen-at-Large seat on the Committee; ✓ FY20-24 Transportation Improvement Program and Priorities: was approved 13- 3, with concerns that infrastructure for bicycles and pedestrians makes up only 1.4% of TIP funding. The BPAC also heard status reports on: o The 2045 Long Range Transportation Program needs assessment: with comments that urban sprawl needs to be addressed, and questions about parking requirements, traffic modeling, and specific corridors; o Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR) Sustainable Transportation Course projects: members appreciated the students’ out of the box ideas and proposals for different corridors in Tampa’s urban core. The BPAC also heard a public comment from Well Bikes about their program to build bicycles for those in need.

Meeting of the Livable Roadways Advisory Committee (LRC) on May 22 The committee received three public comments asking for removal of Items #27 and #28 from the TIP Priority List. Later motions regarding both were not seconded during Action Item discussion. The committee approved and forwarded to the MPO Board: ✓ FY20-24 Transportation Improvement Program and Priorities, with a recommendation that the MPO work with FDOT on a comprehensive review of the I-4 interchange revisions from I-275 to 22nd Avenue, and how these changes impact the land use and adjacent areas of 14th and 15th Street, and 21st and 22nd Avenues. ✓ A request that the MPO Board establish a performance measure that is the percent of non-single occupancy vehicles (non-SOV) travel, and set an ambitious target for growing non-SOV trips; by doing so, they are making progress towards the other performance measure targets under congestion management, bridge wear and tear, and safety. The LRC also heard status reports on: o 2045 Needs Assessment o THEA Connected Vehicle Pilot Phase III

ATTACHMENT A SIS/Strategic Growth Designation Criteria

Structure

FDOT management has reviewed and approved the revised SIS structure. The new structure will continue to focus on the original intent of SIS and provide a greater focus on a managed system of designated facilities. Structure changes include:  Combine existing SIS and Emerging SIS components  Create Strategic Growth component  Strengthen bi-annual SIS designation reviews  Simplify SIS designation criteria where needed Hub Designation Criteria

Strategic Growth Component (For all Hubs and corridors unless otherwise noted)

Must meet AT LEAST ONE of the following:  Is the facility projected to meet SIS minimum activity levels within three years of being designated?  Is the facility determined by FDOT to be of compelling state interest, such as serving a unique marketing niche or potentially becoming the most strategic facility in a region that has no designated SIS facility? Must meet ALL of the following:  Does the facility have a current master plan as well as a prioritized list of production ready projects?  Is the facility identified in a local government comprehensive plan, Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS), Transit Development Plan, or equivalent?  Does the facility have partner and public consensus on viability of a new or significantly expanded facility?  Does the facility meet Community and Environment screening criteria?

SIS Commercial Service Airport Designation Criteria Size Criteria (must meet one of the following)  ≥ 2.5% of Florida total – annual passenger enplanements  ≥ 2.5% of Florida total – annual freight and mail tonnage

SIS General Aviation Reliever Airport Designation Criteria (criteria as defined in s. 339.63 Florida Statute) Must meet ALL of the following:  The airport it relieves must be designated as SIS or Strategic Growth  Handles at least 75,000 itinerant (nonlocal) operations per year  Has a runway length of at least 5,500 linear feet  Capable of handling aircraft weighing at least 60,000 pounds with a dual wheel configuration which is served by at least one precision instrument approach  Serves a cluster of aviation-dependent industries General Aviation Reliever Airport has the same designation (SIS or Strategic Growth) as the Commercial Service Airport it relieves

SIS Spaceport Designation Criteria Regularly scheduled civil, commercial, or military launches resulting in suborbital or orbital flights. SIS Public Seaport Designation Criteria Size Criteria (must meet one of the following):  ≥ 1% of Florida total – annual freight volume measured in tons  ≥ 1% of Florida total – annual container volume measured in twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs)  ≥ 250,000 annual home-port cruise ship passengers

SIS Interregional Passenger Terminal Designation Criteria Size Criteria  ≥ 100,000 annual interregional rail passengers  ≥ 100,000 annual interregional bus passengers OR (must be co-located1 with another interregional transit mode AND meet size criteria) Size Criteria  ≥ 50,000 annual interregional rail passengers  ≥ 50,000 annual interregional bus passengers  ≥ 50,000 annual interregional rail AND bus passengers

SIS Urban Fixed Guideway Transit Terminal Designation Criteria All qualifying urban fixed guideway system terminals will be included as part of the corridor designation. Terminals will be treated as SIS hubs and associated with an intermodal connector if they meet one or more of the following criteria:  Are located at or near the termini of the urban fixed guideway corridor  Serve2 a SIS airport, seaport, or spaceport  Are integrated with other SIS passenger rail or bus systems providing connections to other regions or states  Are co-located1 with a major park-and-ride facility (≥ 500 spaces) Strategic Growth does not apply to Urban Fixed Guideway Terminals

SIS Freight Rail Terminal Designation Criteria Size Criteria  ≥ 5% of Florida total – intermodal rail units per year

SIS Intermodal Logistics Center Designation Criteria Meets the definition of an ILC. AND Provides ability to accommodate and support, within a logistics chain that may span multiple modes and handling steps, domestic or international trade moving to or from a SIS seaport or airport. AND Is identified in a local comprehensive plan or local government development order as an intermodal logistics center or equivalent planning term. AND Meets minimum size thresholds for cargo throughput, consistent with existing SIS hub criteria for the type of intermodal movement primarily handled by the ILC (e.g., air cargo-to-truck tonnage – 2.5% of Florida total; waterborne container-to-truck or –rail TEUs - 1% of Florida total; intermodal rail terminal units - 5% of Florida total)

1 For the purposes of designation, co-location is defined as multiple services sharing the same space or being located directly adjacent to one another. 2 For the purposes of designation, facilities are considered to serve a SIS airport, seaport, or spaceport if they are co- located or directly connected in close proximity to the SIS airport, seaport, or spaceport, meaning there are no additional stops or transfers, they are within short walking distance, or are connected by a short shuttle or people mover ride.

2 Corridor Designation Criteria SIS Highway Corridor Designation Criteria To be designated a SIS Highway Corridor, a facility must be:  An interstate or high capacity tolled facility OR  A limited access facility (access level 1) with a SIS facility or limited access facility (access level 1) at each end3 OR  An NHS facility that connects to an urbanized area outside of Florida that is not already served by a SIS facility OR  A controlled access facility (access level 2 or 3) connecting two or more urbanized areas with a SIS facility at each end4 OR  A corridor connecting one or more urbanized areas with or through a Rural Area of Opportunity (RAO) and having an AADT of at least 6,000 or an AADTT of at least 1,000 with a SIS facility at each end4 There is no Strategic Growth component for highway corridors

SIS Rail Corridor Designation Criteria SIS Rail Corridor  Mainline rail corridor that is Class I or Class II with two or more average daily trains. Strategic Growth Rail Corridor  Shortline rail corridor that is Class III with two or more average daily trains5. OR  Rail corridor determined by FDOT to be of compelling state interest, such as creating a significant economic development opportunity

SIS Waterway Corridor Designation Criteria Must meet one of the following: Coastal Shipping Lanes6 and Intracoastal Waterway  Designated intracoastal waterway or coastal shipping lane handling international waterborne trade. Inland Deep Draft Waterway – authorized depth greater than or equal to 14 feet  ≥ 5% of Florida Total – annual total waterway freight tonnage Inland Shallow Draft Waterway – authorized depth less than 14 feet  ≥ 5% of Florida Total – annual domestic waterway freight tonnage

Urban Fixed Guideway Corridor Designation Criteria Urban fixed guideway transit corridors connecting multiple urbanized area counties and serving as a regionally significant facility within a region.

3 If a limited access facility serves as the primary emergency evacuation route of statewide significance, it may be designated even if it is not connected to another SIS or limited access facility at one end. 4 In an area where multiple parallel facilities are connecting to the same urbanized areas or contiguous urbanized areas, only the facility/facilities that meet(s) Criteria 1-3 will be designated. If none of the parallel facilities meet Criteria 1-3, the facility meeting criteria 4 or 5 with the highest AADT will be designated. 5 Exception is SFRC (TriRail) which provides trackage rights to CSX for freight movements. 6 For the purposes of designation, Coastal Shipping Lanes are federally designated Marine Highway Routes identified by the United States Maritime Administration.

3 Intermodal Connector Designation Criteria

Hub to Corridor Connector Designation Criteria  Connects to the nearest or most appropriate SIS corridor to facilitate interregional, interstate, or international trips?  Meets the following conditions where possible: o Ability to accommodate significant flows of interregional, interstate, or international trips to/from a hub? o Ability to provide high-speed, high-capacity, limited access service? o Ability to provide the most direct access? o Ability to provide two-way directional movement? o Meets Community and Environmental Screening criteria established for SIS facilities?  It is assumed that a single hub is associated with a single intermodal connector. However, more than one connector to a single hub can be designated if any of the following conditions are met: o Hub meets both freight and passenger thresholds, and freight and passenger handling facilities have discrete access points at different locations? o Hub has multiple terminals or terminal areas with discrete access points? o Existing interregional flows of people or goods are divided significantly among more than one mode or more than one major geographic flow? o Separating passenger and freight connections improves overall mobility to/from the hub? o Allowing multiple options provides needed redundancy and resiliency?

Hub to Hub Connector Designation Criteria Intermodal Freight Drayage Route  Route provides direct connection from one SIS hub to another SIS hub?  Route’s primary purpose is to move freight from one SIS hub to another SIS hub via public access facilities? Intermodal Passenger Transfer Facility  Route provides exclusive-use service with no intermediate stops?  Majority of trips on route are for interregional or interstate passengers?

Military Access Facility Designation Criteria Must meet one of the following:  Designate as “Military Access Facilities” Strategic Highway Network (STRAHNET) roads and Strategic Rail Corridor Network (STRACNET) rail lines serving main entrance(s) of U.S. Department of Defense military installations with at least 4% of Florida total military and civilian personnel.  Designate as “Military Access Facilities” primary roads and rail lines serving main entrance(s) of military installations designated as the Governor’s Continuity of Government site(s).

4 DISTRICT 1

Added Removed Facility Highway Type Highway • Central Polk Parkway ("Planned SIS • SR 35/US 98, SR 60 to Polk Parkway ("Planned Drop" will Add" once constructed) be removed once Central Polk Parkway is constructed) • SR 82/Martin Luther King Blvd, I-75 to Fort Myers ILC Greyhound/Lee Tran Intermodal Center • Florida’s Gateway ILC (Previously Strategic "Planned Add") Growth Waterway • Okeechobee Waterway Railway • CSX Transportation, CSX Passenger Terminal Transportation Line (Bartow) to SIS • Fort Myers Greyhound/Lee Tran Intermodal Center South Polk County • CSX Transportation, Bradenton SIS Railway to Oneco • CSX Transportation, CSX Transportation Line (West • , CSX Strategic Bartow) to CR 555 Transportation Line (Oneco) Growth to Sarasota • Seminole Gulf Railway, Estero to Bonita Springs • CSX Transportation, CSX Transportation Line (Bradley Junction) to Hooker’s Prairie Mine Rd

ATTACHMENT B DISTRICT 2

Added Removed Facility Highway Type Highway • SR 113/Southside Connector, I-295 to SR SIS • US 1, I-295 to Georgia State Line 115/Arlington Expressway • SR 115/MLK Jr Parkway/Arlington Expressway, • SR 100, I-10 to US 301/SR 223 SIS I-95 to SR 113/Southside Connector • US 17, SR 20 to Flagler County Line • SR 202/Butler Blvd, I-95 to I-295 SIS • SR 24/Waldo Rd and SR 120/NE 23rd Ave, SR 20 to Gainesville Greyhound Station Spaceport Strategic Waterway • Cecil Spaceport (Previously "Planned Add") Growth • St. Johns River, Jacksonville to Lake Harney

Railway Passenger Terminal • Norfolk Southern, Lake City to Georgia State Line SIS • Gainesville Greyhound • Georgia and Florida Railway Georgia State Line Strategic • Jacksonville Greyhound ("Planned Drop" once to Perry Growth Jacksonville Regional Transportation Center is constructed) Passenger Terminal • Jacksonville ("Planned Drop" once Jacksonville Regional Transportation Center is • Jacksonville Regional Transportation Center SIS constructed) ("Planned Add" once constructed)

ATTACHMENT B DISTRICT 3

Added Removed Facility Highway Type Highway • SR 390, US 98 to US 231 SIS • SR 79, I-10 to Alabama State Line • SR 77, I-10 to SR 390 Seaport • SR 85, US 98 to SR 123 • Port of Port St. Joe (Previously Strategic • US 231/SR 75/Harrison Ave, US 98 to Panama City Seaport "Planned Add") Growth Greyhound Station • SR 742/W Burgess Rd, I-10 to Pensacola Railway Greyhound Station • CSX Transportation, US 29 to • SR 90/Mahan Drive, I-10 to Tallahassee SIS Alabama Gulf Coast Railway Line Greyhound Station • Alabama Gulf Coast Railway, CSX Strategic Transportation Line to Market St Growth Waterway • La Grange Bayou

Passenger Terminal • Tallahassee Greyhound • Pensacola Greyhound • Panama City Greyhound

ATTACHMENT B DISTRICT 4

Added Removed Facility Aviation Type Highway • Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport SIS • SR 842, I-95 to Fort Lauderdale Greyhound (GAR) Waterway UFGs • Okeechobee Waterway • Delray Beach Station SIS (New UFG Hub) • Cypress Creek Station Passenger Terminal SIS (New UFG Hub) • Fort Lauderdale Greyhound • Sheridan Street Station SIS (New UFG Hub) Railway • U.S. Sugar Rail Spur, South Central Florida Express Rail Line (Pahokee) to CR 700/Connors Highway (Previously "Planned Add")

ATTACHMENT B DISTRICT 5

Added Removed Facility Highway Type Highway • SR 407, SR 528 to I-95 SIS • US 17/SR 15, Putnam County Line to SR 40 • US 92, Midway Avenue to US 1 Passenger Terminal • CR 5054/Sarno Rd and Apollo Blvd, I-95 to SR 508/ • Winter Park Amtrak SIS NASA Blvd

UFGs Waterway • DeBary Station (New UFG Hub) SIS • St. Johns River, Jacksonville to Lake Harney • (New UFG Hub) SIS • Florida Hospital Health Village Station Passenger Terminal SIS (New UFG Hub) • Daytona Beach Greyhound • (New UFG • Melbourne Greyhound SIS Stations) (Previously "Planned Add") • (New UFG Stations) SIS Aviation (Previously "Planned Add") • Kissimmee Gateway Airport • (New UFG Stations) SIS (Previously "Planned Add") UFGs • DeLand Station ("Planned Add" - UFG SIS Hub - Not Operational Yet) • as UFG Hub still a UFG Station • Central Station as UFG Hub still a UFG Station

ATTACHMENT B DISTRICT 6

Added Removed Facility Highway Type Highway • SR 878/Snapper Expy, SR 874/Don • US 1, CR 905 to N Ocean Bay Drive Shula Expy to US 1/SR 5/South Dixie SIS Highway UFGs • Tri-Rail and Metrorail Transfer Station as a UFG Passenger Terminal Hub still a Station Strategic • Amtrak Growth Railway • Florida East Coast Railroad, SR 826/ Aviation Palmetto Expy to NW 121st Way • Miami Opa-Locka Executive Airport SIS (OPF) (GAR)

Railway • CSX Transportation, SW 12 St to SIS SW 24 St • CSX Transportation, Tri-Rail (TCCX) SIS Line to NW 10th Ave

ATTACHMENT B DISTRICT 7

Added Removed Facility Highway Type Highway • SR 54, Suncoast Parkway to SIS • SR 55/US 19, SR-686A/118th Ave to SR 687/ US 41/Land O Lakes Blvd Gandy Blvd to I-275

Railway Passenger Terminal • CSX Transportation, Plant City to CSX SIS • Tampa Greyhound Transportation Line (near Valrico) • CSX Transportation, CSX Transportation Line (near Selmon SIS Connector) to Channelside Dr

ATTACHMENT B ATTACHMENT C

AVIATION DESIGNATIONS Facility Name District County Airport Code SIS/Strategic Growth Facility Type International Airport 1 Lee RSW SIS Hub CSA Sarasota-Bradenton International Airport 1 Manatee SRQ SIS Hub CSA Punta Gorda Airport 1 Charlotte PGD Strategic Growth Hub CSA Jacksonville International Airport 2 Duval JAX SIS Hub CSA Gainesville Regional Airport 2 Alachua GNV Strategic Growth Hub CSA Tallahassee International Airport 3 Leon TLH Strategic Growth Hub CSA Northwest Florida Beaches International Airport 3 Bay ECP Strategic Growth Hub CSA Destin - Fort Walton Beach Airport 3 Okaloosa VPS Strategic Growth Hub CSA Pensacola International Airport 3 Escambia PNS Strategic Growth Hub CSA Palm Beach International Airport 4 Palm Beach PBI SIS Hub CSA Fort Lauderdale–Hollywood International Airport 4 Broward FLL SIS Hub CSA Fort Lauderdale Executive Airport 4 Broward FXE SIS Hub GAR Daytona Beach International Airport 5 Volusia DAB Strategic Growth Hub CSA Orlando International Airport 5 Orange MCO SIS Hub CSA Kissimmee Gateway Airport* 5 Osceola ISM Not Designated Hub GAR Orlando - Sanford International Airport 5 Seminole SFB Strategic Growth Hub CSA Melbourne International Airport 5 Brevard MLB Strategic Growth Hub CSA Miami International Airport 6 Miami-Dade MIA SIS Hub CSA Miami Executive Airport* 6 Miami-Dade TMB SIS Hub GAR Miami Opa-Locka Executive Airport 6 Miami-Dade OPF SIS Hub GAR Tampa International Airport 7 Hillsborough TPA SIS Hub CSA St. Petersburg-Clearwater International Airport 7 Pinellas PIE Strategic Growth Hub CSA

SPACEPORT DESIGNATIONS Facility Name District County SIS/Strategic Growth Facility Cecil Spaceport 2 Duval Strategic Growth Hub Cape Canaveral Spaceport 5 Brevard SIS Hub

SEAPORT DESIGNATIONS Facility Name District County SIS/Strategic Growth Facility 1 Manatee SIS Hub 2 Duval SIS Hub 2 Nassau Strategic Growth Hub 3 Bay SIS Hub 3 Escambia Strategic Growth Hub Port of Port St. Joe 3 Gulf Strategic Growth Hub 4 Palm Beach SIS Hub Port of Fort Pierce 4 St. Lucie Strategic Growth Hub 4 Broward SIS Hub 5 Brevard SIS Hub PortMiami 6 Miami-Dade SIS Hub Port Tampa Bay 7 Hillsborough SIS Hub

WATERWAY DESIGNATIONS Facility Name District County SIS/Strategic Growth Facility Waterway Type Port Manatee to Port of Tampa Water Connector 1 Multiple SIS Connector Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway from Fernandina to St. Johns River 2 Multiple SIS Corridor Intracoastal Waterway Escambia River from Pensacola Harbor to North Escambia Bay and North end of Pate Street 2 Multiple SIS Corridor Port of Jacksonville to Atlantic Coast Shipping Lane 2 Duval SIS Connector Coastal Shipping Lane Port of Fernandina to Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway 2 Nassau SIS Connector Intracoastal Waterway Gulf Intracoastal Waterway from Panama City Harbor to Carrabelle 3 Multiple SIS Corridor Intracoastal Waterway Gulf Intracoastal Waterway from Pensacola Harbor to Panama City Harbor 3 Multiple SIS Corridor Intracoastal Waterway Gulf Intracoastal Waterway from Alabama State Line to Pensacola Harbor 3 Escambia SIS Corridor Intracoastal Waterway La Grange Bayou 3 Walton Not Designated Corridor Port of Pensacola to Gulf Intracoastal Waterway 3 Escambia SIS Connector Intracoastal Waterway Port of Panama City to Gulf Intracoastal Waterway 3 Bay SIS Connector Intracoastal Waterway Port of Port St Joe to Gulf Coast Shipping Lane 3 Gulf SIS Connector Coastal Shipping Lane Port of Fort Pierce to Atlantic Coast Shipping Lane 4 St. Lucie SIS Connector Coastal Shipping Lane Port Everglades to Atlantic Coast Shipping Lane 4 Broward SIS Connector Coastal Shipping Lane Port of Palm Beach Water Connector from channel and turning basins to Atlantic Coast Shipping Lane 4 Palm Beach SIS Connector Coastal Shipping Lane Port of Canaveral to Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway 5 Brevard SIS Connector Intracoastal Waterway Miami River 6 Miami-Dade Strategic Growth Corridor Port of Miami to Atlantic Coast Shipping Lane 6 Miami-Dade SIS Connector Coastal Shipping Lane Port of Tampa to Gulf Coast Shipping Lane 7 Multiple SIS Connector Coastal Shipping Lane Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway from Miami Harbor Channel to St. Johns River Multiple Multiple SIS Corridor Intracoastal Waterway Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway from Key West to Miami Harbor Channel Multiple Multiple SIS Corridor Intracoastal Waterway Gulf Intracoastal Waterway from Anclote River to Multiple Multiple SIS Corridor Intracoastal Waterway Okeechobee Waterway from Gulf Intracoastal Waterway to Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway Multiple Multiple Not Designated Corridor Intracoastal Waterway St. John's River, from SE tip of Lake Monroe to South end of Jacksonville Harbor Channel Multiple Multiple Not Designated Corridor Coastal Shipping Lane Gulf Coastal Shipping Lane from Anclote River to Apalachee Bay at Carrabelle Multiple Multiple SIS Corridor Coastal Shipping Lane Atlantic Shipping Lane from Key West to Georgia State Line Multiple Multiple SIS Corridor Coastal Shipping Lane

Page 1 of 8 ATTACHMENT C

URBAN FIXED GUIDEWAY DESIGNATIONS Facility Name District County SIS/Strategic Growth Facility Corridor Magnonia Park Tri-Rail Station 4 Palm Beach SIS Hub/Station TriRail West Palm Beach Intermodal Center 4 Palm Beach SIS Hub/Station TriRail Lake Worth Tri-Rail Station 4 Palm Beach SIS Station TriRail Boynton Beach Tri-Rail Station 4 Palm Beach SIS Station TriRail Delray Beach Tri-Rail Station 4 Palm Beach SIS Hub/Station TriRail Boca Raton Tri-Rail Station 4 Palm Beach SIS Station TriRail Deerfield Beach Amtrak/Tri-Rail Station 4 Broward SIS Hub/Station TriRail Pompano Beach Tri-Rail Station 4 Broward SIS Station TriRail Cypress Creek Tri-Rail Station 4 Broward SIS Hub/Station TriRail Fort Lauderdale Amtrak/Tri-Rail Station 4 Broward SIS Hub/Station TriRail Fort Lauderdale/Hollywood International Airport Tri-Rail Station 4 Broward SIS Hub/Station TriRail Sheriden Street Tri-Rail Station 4 Broward SIS Hub/Station TriRail Hollywood Amtrak/Tri-Rail Station 4 Broward SIS Hub/Station TriRail DeBary SunRail Station 5 Volusia SIS Hub/Station SunRail Sanford SunRail Station 5 Seminole SIS Station SunRail Lake Mary SunRail Station 5 Seminole SIS Hub/Station SunRail Longwood SunRail Station 5 Seminole SIS Hub/Station SunRail Atlamonte Springs SunRail 5 Seminole SIS Hub/Station SunRail Maitland SunRail 5 Orange SIS Hub/Station SunRail Winter Park SunRail 5 Orange SIS Hub/Station SunRail Florida Hospital Health Village SunRail 5 Orange SIS Hub/Station SunRail Lynx Central SunRail 5 Orange SIS Hub/Station SunRail Church Street SunRail 5 Orange SIS Hub/Station SunRail Orlando Health SunRail/Amtrak 5 Orange SIS Hub/Station SunRail Sand Lake Road SunRail 5 Orange SIS Station SunRail DeLand Station 5 Volusia Not Designated Hub/Station SunRail Kissimmee SunRail Station 5 Osceola SIS Station SunRail Poinciana SunRail Station 5 Osceola SIS Hub/Station SunRail Meadow Woods SunRail Station 5 Orange SIS Station SunRail Tupperware Station 5 Osceola SIS Station Golden Glades Tri-Rail Station 6 Miami-Dade SIS Hub/Station TriRail Opa-Locka Tri-Rail Station 6 Miami-Dade SIS Station TriRail Tri-Rail/Metrorail Transfer Station 6 Miami-Dade SIS Station TriRail Hialeah Market Tri-Rail Station 6 Miami-Dade SIS Station TriRail Miami Intermodal Center 6 Miami-Dade SIS Hub/Station TriRail Miami Airport Tri-Rail Station 6 Miami-Dade SIS Hub/Station TriRail

INTERMODAL LOGISTICS CENTER DESIGNATIONS Facility Name District County SIS/Strategic Growth Facility Central Florida Intermodal Logistic Center 1 Polk Strategic Growth Hub

FREIGHT TERMINAL DESIGNATIONS Facility Name District County SIS/Strategic Growth Facility Winter Haven Intermodal Freight Terminal 1 Polk SIS Hub Jacksonville CSX Intermodal Terminal 2 Duval SIS Hub Jacksonville Norfolk Southern Intermodal Terminal 2 Duval SIS Hub Jacksonville Florida East Coast Intermodal Terminal 2 Duval SIS Hub Fort Lauderdale FEC Intermodal Terminal 4 Broward SIS Hub Orlando CSXI Intermodal Terminal 5 Orange Strategic Growth Hub Miami Hialeah FEC Intermodal Terminal 6 Miami-Dade SIS Hub Tampa CSXI UCETA Intermodal Terminal 7 Hillsborough SIS Hub

PASSENGER TERMINAL DESIGNATIONS Facility Name District County SIS/Strategic Growth Facility Lee Tran Intermodal Center 1 Lee Not Designated Hub Gainesville Greyhound 2 Alachua Not Designated Hub Jacksonville Greyhound 2 Duval Strategic Growth Hub Jacksonville Amtrak 2 Duval Strategic Growth Hub Jacksonville Regional Transportation Center 2 Duval SIS Hub Pensacola Greyhound 3 Escambia Not Designated Hub Panama City Greyhound 3 Bay Not Designated Hub Tallahassee Greyhound 3 Leon Not Designated Hub Fort Lauderdale Greyhound 4 Broward Not Designated Hub Hollywood Amtrak and Tri-Rail 4 Broward SIS Hub Daytona Beach Greyhound 5 Volusia Strategic Growth Hub Melbourne Greyhound 5 Brevard Strategic Growth Hub Orlando Greyhound 5 Orange SIS Hub Orlando Amtrak Station 5 Orange SIS Hub Winter Park Amtrak Station 5 Orange SIS Hub Sanford (Auto Train) Amtrak Station 5 Seminole SIS Hub Kissimmee Intermodal Center 5 Osceola Strategic Growth Hub Golden Glades Intermodal Center 6 Miami-Dade SIS Hub Miami Amtrak 6 Miami-Dade Strategic Growth Hub Miami Greyhound 6 Miami-Dade SIS Hub Miami Intermodal Center 6 Miami-Dade SIS Hub Tampa Greyhound 7 Hillsborough Not Designated Hub Tampa Amtrak 7 Hillsborough SIS Hub

Page 2 of 8 ATTACHMENT C

RAIL DESIGNATIONS Facility Name District County SIS/Strategic Growth Facility Miles Rail Line Rail Company CSX Agricola Tram Spur east from Bradley Junction east to Ft. Meade in Polk County 1 Polk Strategic Growth CORRIDOR 2.19 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT SPUR (AGRICOLA TRAM SPUR) CSX AR Line from the CSX S Line-B in Polk County to the Polk-Pasco County Line 1 Multiple SIS CORRIDOR 15.06 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE (AR) CSX AY Line from Agricola to Prairie Junction (CSX A Line) in Polk County 1 Polk SIS CORRIDOR 18.94 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE (AY) CSX SVC Line from SGLR AX Line in Desoto County to Hillsborough-Polk County Line 1 Multiple SIS CORRIDOR 46.03 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSX - CSX TRANSPORTATION MAINLINE CSX SVH from CSX SVC Line and Agricola Tram Spur to CSX AY Line in Pasco County 1 Polk SIS CORRIDOR 4.36 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE (SVH SOUTH) CSX SVH North from CSX AY Line to CSX SV South Line in Polk County 1 Polk SIS CORRIDOR 2.66 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE (SVH NORTH) Port Manatee to CSX AZA Line 1 Manatee SIS CONNECTOR 0.93 PORT OF MANATEE PORT MANATEE SPUR (PORT) SGLR AX from the Collier-Lee County Line to CSX SVC Line in Desoto County 1 Multiple Strategic Growth CORRIDOR 76.33 SEMINOLE GULF RAILWAY SGLR MAINLINE (AX) CSX A Line from the Clay-Duval County Line to the Georgia State Line 2 Multiple SIS CORRIDOR 49.41 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE (A) CSX SM Line from CSX SP Line in Duval County to CSX A Line in Nassau County 2 Multiple SIS CORRIDOR 20.02 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE (SM) CSX SN Line from FNOR SN Line in Alachua County to CSX S Line-B in Bradford County 2 Multiple SIS CORRIDOR 39.27 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE (SN) FEC Mainline A from FEC Mainline B in St. Johns County to CSX A Line in Jacksonville 2 Multiple SIS CORRIDOR 37.00 FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILROAD FEC MAINLINE (A) FNOR SN Line from FNOR AR Line to CSX SN Line in Alachua County 2 Alachua SIS CORRIDOR 1.29 FLORIDA NORTHERN RAILROAD FNOR MAINLINE (SN) Jacksonville CSX Intermodal Terminal to CSX A Line 2 Duval SIS CONNECTOR 2.37 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT CONNECTOR (ASK) Norfolk Southern Line from CSX A Line in Duval County to the Georgia State Line 2 Multiple SIS CORRIDOR 24.08 NORFOLK SOUTHERN CORPORATION NS MAINLINE (NS) Norfolk Southern Line from CSX A Line in Jacksonville to the Georgia State Line 2 Baker SIS CORRIDOR 14.50 NORFOLK SOUTHERN CORPORATION NS MAINLINE Port of Fernandina to CSX A and Northfolk Southern Lines 2 Multiple SIS CONNECTOR 25.87 CSXT MAINLINE (S LINE-A) Port of Jacksonville (Blount Island) to CSX A and Norfolk Southern Lines 2 Duval SIS CONNECTOR 13.85 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE (S LINE-A) Port of Jacksonville (Dames Point) to CSX A and Norfolk Southern Lines 2 Duval SIS CONNECTOR 5.30 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE (PORT OF JAX-DAMES POINT) Port of Jacksonville (Talleyrand) to CSX A and Norfolk Southern Lines 2 Duval SIS CONNECTOR 2.58 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE (S LINE-A) CSX K Line from Alabama State Line to CSX SP Line at the Apalachicola River 3 Multiple SIS CORRIDOR 202.90 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSX - CSX TRANSPORTATION MAINLINE Port of Panama City to Georgia State Line () 3 Multiple SIS CONNECTOR 68.10 THE BAY LINE RAILROAD, LIC BAYL MAINLINE Port of Pensacola to CSX K Line 3 Escambia SIS CONNECTOR 0.84 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT CONNECTOR (PORT OF PENSACOLA) Port of Port St. Joe to CSX SP Line 3 Multiple Strategic Growth CONNECTOR 96.29 APALACHICOLA AND NOTHERN RR AN MAINLINE Port Everglades to FEC Mainline C 4 Broward SIS CONNECTOR 0.75 PORT EVERGLADES AUTHORITY PORT EVERGLADES SPUR Port of Palm Beach to FEC Mainline C 4 Palm Beach SIS CONNECTOR 0.52 PORT OF PALM BEACH TERMINAL PORT OF PALM BEACH SPUR South Central Florida Express Railroad (SCFER) K Line from SCFER AVD Line to FEC Mainline C in St. Lucie County 4 Multiple Strategic Growth CORRIDOR 73.79 FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILROAD SCXF MAINLINE US-SUGAR Rail Line from South Central Florida Express Railroad K Line to Stewart Mining 4 Palm Beach Not Designated CONNECTOR 22.09 U. S. SUGAR CORPORATION US SUGAR SPUR Cape Canaveral Spaceport to FEC Mainline C ( Railroad) 5 Brevard SIS CONNECTOR 2.41 UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT NASA SPUR FCEN Mainline from FCEN ST Line in Orange County to Umatilla in Lake County 5 Multiple Strategic Growth CORRIDOR 32.62 FLORIDA CENTRAL RAILROAD FCEN MAINLINE FCEN ST Line from CSX A Line to FCEN Mainline in Orange County 5 Orange Strategic Growth CORRIDOR 8.50 FLORIDA CENTRAL RAILROAD FCEN MAINLINE Orlando CSXI Intermodal Terminal to CSX A Line 5 Orange SIS CONNECTOR 2.86 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT CONNECTOR (CSXT INTERMODAL TERMINAL FEC LR Line from SW 80th Street to FEC Mainline C in Dade County 6 Miami-Dade SIS CORRIDOR 17.20 FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILROAD FEC MAINLINE (LR) FEC Medley Lead from FEC LR Line to NW 121st Way in Dade County 6 Miami-Dade Not Designated CORRIDOR 4.51 FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILROAD FEC MAINLINE (ML) Miami Hialeah FEC Intermodal Terminal to FEC LR Line 6 Miami-Dade SIS CONNECTOR 0.30 FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILROAD FEC MAINLINE (ML) Port of Miami to FEC LR Line 6 Miami-Dade SIS CONNECTOR 5.86 FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILROAD FEC MAINLINE (C) SFRC SXH Line from FEC LR Line to SFRC SX Line in Dade County 6 Miami-Dade SIS CORRIDOR 4.36 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE (SXH) Spur to South Florida Rail Corridor 6 Miami-Dade SIS CONNECTOR 0.28 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSX - CSX TRANSPORTATION CONNECTOR CSX A Line from the CSX SY Line in Tampa to the Georgia State Line 7 Hillsborough SIS CORRIDOR 23.26 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE (A) CSX AR Line from Pasco-Polk County Line to CSX S Line-B in North Pasco County 7 Pasco SIS CORRIDOR 16.92 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE (AR) CSX S Line-C from CSX A Line in Hillsborough County to CSX ARF Line in Pasco County 7 Multiple SIS CORRIDOR 15.03 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE CSX S Line-D Line from the Port of Tampa to CSX SZ Line in Hillsborough County 7 Multiple SIS CORRIDOR 10.36 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE CSX SV Line North from CSX SZ & SV South Lines to CSX A & S Line-C Lines in Hillsborough County 7 Hillsborough Strategic Growth CORRIDOR 10.81 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE CSX SVC Line from Hillsborough-Polk County Line to CSX SV South Line in Hillsborough County 7 Hillsborough SIS CORRIDOR 0.97 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE CSX SY Line from CSX S Line-D Line to near Busch Boulevard in Hillsborough County 7 Hillsborough Strategic Growth CORRIDOR 5.58 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE CSX SZ Line from CSX SV North and South Lines to CSX S Line-D Line in Hillsborough County 7 Hillsborough SIS CORRIDOR 11.60 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE FNOR ARD Line from Progress Energy Line to FNOR AR Line in Citrus County 7 Citrus Strategic Growth CORRIDOR 3.75 FLORIDA NORTHERN RAILROAD FNOR MAINLINE (ARD) Port of Tampa (Hookers Point) to CSX S/D Lines 7 Hillsborough SIS CONNECTOR 3.50 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE (PORT OF TAMPA) Port of Tampa (Port Redwing) to CSX AZA Line 7 Hillsborough SIS CONNECTOR 0.54 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT SPUR (PORT OF TAMPA REDWING) Port of Tampa (Sutton/Pendola Point) to CSX AZA Line 7 Hillsborough SIS CONNECTOR 2.64 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT SPUR (PORT) Progress Energy Line from Crystal River to FNOR ARD Line in Citrus County 7 Citrus Strategic Growth CORRIDOR 12.34 PROGRESS ENERGY FLORIDA PROGRESS ENERGY MAINLINE CSX A Line from the Hillsborough-Polk County Line to the Clay-Duval County Line Multiple Multiple SIS CORRIDOR 201.78 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE (A) CSX ARF Line from CSX S Line-C in Pasco County to CSX AR Line in Pasco County Multiple Multiple SIS CORRIDOR 4.00 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE (ARF) CSX AZA Line from Bradenton to CSX S Line-D Line in Hillsborough County Multiple Multiple SIS CORRIDOR 37.61 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE CSX S Line-B from CSX AR Line in Pasco County to CSX SB and SM Lines in Duval County Multiple Multiple SIS CORRIDOR 139.87 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE (S LINE-B) CSX SP Line from CSX K Line at the Apalachicola River to CSX A Line in Jacksonville Multiple Multiple SIS CORRIDOR 208.43 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE (SP) CSX SV South Line from CSX SZ Line in Hillsborough County to Fort Meade in Polk County Multiple Multiple SIS CORRIDOR 14.22 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE (SV) CSX SX Line from near I-95 in Palm Beach County to CSX A Line in Polk County Multiple Multiple SIS CORRIDOR 145.89 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE FEC Mainline B from FEC Mainline C in Flagler County to FEC Mainline A in St. Johns County Multiple Multiple SIS CORRIDOR 30.49 FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILROAD FEC-FLORIDA EAST COAST RAIL MAINLINE(A) FEC Mainline C from FEC LR Line in Dade County to FEC Mainline B in Flagler County Multiple Multiple SIS CORRIDOR 274.42 FLORIDA EAST COAST RAILROAD FEC MAINLINE FNOR AR Line from FNOR ARD Line in Citrus County to FNOR SN Line in Alachua County Multiple Multiple Strategic Growth CORRIDOR 47.97 FLORIDA NORTHERN RAILROAD FNOR MAINLINE (AR) SFRC SX Line from the Miami Intermodal Center to CSX SX Line in Palm Beach County Multiple Multiple SIS CORRIDOR 72.47 CSX TRANSPORTATION CSXT MAINLINE South Central Florida Express Railroad (SCFER) AVD Line from SCFER K Line to CSX SX Line in Highlands County Multiple Multiple Strategic Growth CORRIDOR 78.26 SOUTH CENTRAL FLORIDA EXPRESS SCXF MAINLINE

Page 3 of 8 ATTACHMENT C

HIGHWAY AND MILITARY ACCESS FACILITY DESIGNATIONS Facility Name District County SIS/Strategic Growth Facility Total Miles District Miles 21ST ST 2 Duval SIS Connector 0.632 0.632 22 ST 7 Hillsborough SIS Connector 0.007 0.007 45 ST 4 Palm Beach SIS Connector 2.342 2.342 ANDREWS AVE 4 Broward SIS Connector 0.589 0.589 AVE H 4 St. Lucie SIS Connector 0.079 0.079 BARRACKS ST 3 Escambia SIS Connector 0.145 0.145 BUSINESS CENTER BLVD 5 Orange SIS Connector 0.164 0.164 CAMPBELL DR 6 Miami-Dade SIS Corridor 0.231 0.231 COLUMBIA ST 5 Orange SIS Connector 0.19 0.19 CR 0012 2 Nassau SIS Connector 0.69 0.69 CR 173 3 Escambia SIS Military Access Facility 0.195 0.195 CR 225 2 Clay SIS Military Access Facility 6.411 6.411 CR 2327 3 Bay SIS Military Access Facility 2.633 2.633 CR 404 5 Brevard SIS Military Access Facility 0.21 0.21 CR 405 5 Brevard SIS Connector 0.28 0.28 CR 522 5 Osceola SIS Connector 1.562 1.562 CR 610 1 Sarasota SIS Connector 6.626 6.626 CR 672 7 Hillsborough SIS Connector 1.695 1.695 CR 768 1 Charlotte SIS Connector 0.364 0.364 DAVID RAWLS BLVD 2 Duval SIS Connector 0.944 0.944 DIVISION AVE 5 Orange SIS Connector 0.526 0.526 DIXIE CLIPPER DR 2 Duval SIS Connector 0.665 0.665 DUVAL ST 3 Leon SIS Connector 0.033 0.033 E 21ST ST WB OFF 2 Duval SIS Connector 0.245 0.245 E CASS ST 7 Hillsborough SIS Connector 0.306 0.306 E COLUMBUS DR 7 Hillsborough SIS Connector 1.038 1.038 E DAKIN AVE 5 Osceola SIS Connector 0.07 0.07 E LAKE MARY BLVD 5 Seminole SIS Connector 1.399 1.399 E POLK ST 7 Hillsborough SIS Connector 0.337 0.337 E SCOTT ST 7 Hillsborough SIS Connector 0.268 0.268 EAST AVE 3 Bay SIS Connector 1.115 1.115 EDGEWOOD DR 2 Duval SIS Connector 0.662 0.662 ELLER DR 4 Broward SIS Connector 0.115 0.115 EMMETT ST 5 Osceola SIS Connector 0.142 0.142 GOOLSBY BLVD 4 Broward SIS Connector 0.102 0.102 GULFSTREAM WAY 4 Broward SIS Connector 0.156 0.156 HENDRY ST 1 Lee SIS Connector 0.123 0.123 HOAGLAND BLVD 5 Osceola SIS Connector 1.085 1.085 I-10 2 Multiple SIS Corridor 362.023 126.767 I-10 3 Multiple SIS Corridor 362.023 235.256 I-110 3 Escambia SIS Corridor 6.306 6.306 I-175 7 Pinellas SIS Corridor 1.213 1.213 I-195 6 Miami-Dade SIS Corridor 4.424 4.424 I-275 1 Manatee SIS Corridor 7.391 7.391 I-275 7 Multiple SIS Corridor 52.236 52.236 I-295 2 Duval SIS Corridor 60.864 60.864 I-375 7 Pinellas SIS Corridor 1.1 1.1 I-395 6 Miami-Dade SIS Corridor 1.292 1.292 I-4 1 Polk SIS Corridor 131.596 32.022 I-4 5 Multiple SIS Corridor 131.596 74.409 I-4 7 Hillsborough SIS Corridor 131.596 25.165 I-4 TPK Multiple SIS Corridor 1.378 1.378 I-595 4 Broward SIS Corridor 12.86 12.86 I-595 Reversible Lanes 4 Broward SIS Corridor 8.796 8.796 I-75 1 Multiple SIS Corridor 472.201 182.945 I-75 2 Multiple SIS Corridor 472.201 98.039 I-75 4 Broward SIS Corridor 472.201 46.754 I-75 5 Multiple SIS Corridor 472.201 67.278 I-75 6 Miami-Dade SIS Corridor 472.201 5.442 I-75 7 Multiple SIS Corridor 472.201 71.743 I-95 2 Multiple SIS Corridor 382.244 85.18 I-95 4 Multiple SIS Corridor 382.244 142.626 I-95 5 Multiple SIS Corridor 382.244 137.178 I-95 6 Miami-Dade SIS Corridor 382.244 17.26 I-95 NB EXPRESS LANES 6 Miami-Dade SIS Corridor 12.978 12.978 I-95 SB EXPRESS LANES 6 Miami-Dade SIS Corridor 12.975 12.975 INTERMODAL DR 1 Polk SIS Connector 0.652 0.652 JACKSON STREET 1 SIS Connector 0.081 0.081 KALEY ST 5 SIS Connector 0.087 0.087 LAKE MARY BLVD 5 SIS Connector 0.353 0.353 LOGISTICS PKWY 1 SIS Connector 1.621 1.621 MAIN ST 5 SIS Connector 0.582 0.582 MARITIME BLVD 7 SIS Connector 0.161 0.161 MIDWAY AVE 5 SIS Connector 0.444 0.444 MORGAN ST N 7 SIS Connector 0.032 0.032 N 62 ST 7 SIS Connector 0.403 0.403 N ADAMS ST 3 SIS Connector 0.033 0.033 N ASHLEY DR 7 SIS Connector 0.364 0.364 N ORANGE AVE 7 SIS Connector 0.268 0.268 N ORANGE ST 1WAY NB 7 SIS Connector 0.25 0.25 N PIERCE ST 7 SIS Connector 0.055 0.055 NE 3 ST 4 SIS Connector 0.18 0.18 NEW BERLIN RD S 2 SIS Connector 0.664 0.664 NW 12 ST DR 6 SIS Connector 0.371 0.371 NW 25TH ST-VIADUCT 6 SIS Connector 1.019 1.019

Page 4 of 8 ATTACHMENT C

NW 69 AVE 6 SIS Connector 0.06 0.06 NW 74 ST 6 SIS Connector 0.243 0.243 NW 8 ST 6 SIS Corridor 0.547 0.547 OLD KINGS RD 2 SIS Connector 1.49 1.49 PEMBROKE RD 7 SIS Connector 0.372 0.372 PERSIMMON AVE 5 SIS Connector 0.291 0.291 PINEDA CSWY 5 SIS Military Access Facility 2.639 2.639 PINEY POINT RD 1 SIS Connector 0.332 0.332 PIPER ROAD 1 SIS Connector 1.45 1.45 PRITCHARD RD W 2 SIS Connector 0.998 0.998 RAVENSWOOD RD 4 SIS Connector 0.152 0.152 RED CLEVELAND BLVD 5 SIS Connector 1.06 1.06 S 9TH AVE 3 SIS Connector 0.36 0.36 SE 3 AVE 4 SIS Connector 0.194 0.194 SEAPORT DR 3 SIS Connector 0.172 0.172 SLIGH BLVD 5 SIS Connector 0.134 0.134 SPORTSMAN CLUB RD 2 SIS Connector 0.754 0.754 SR 100 5 SIS Corridor 22.367 4.683 SR 100 2 Multiple SIS Corridor 78.938 72.845 SR 101 2 SIS Military Access Facility 0.197 0.197 SR 102 2 SIS Connector 1.39 1.39 SR 105 2 SIS Connector 7.278 7.278 SR 111 2 SIS Connector 0.053 0.053 SR 112 6 SIS Corridor 4.511 4.511 SR 112 6 SIS Connector 0.107 0.107 SR 116 2 SIS Military Access Facility 8.877 8.877 SR 120 2 SIS Connector 1.593 1.593 SR 121 2 SIS Corridor 0.167 0.167 SR 123 3 SIS Corridor 4.383 4.383 SR 15 4 SIS Corridor 3.004 3.004 SR 15 4 SIS Corridor 30.522 0.006 SR 15A 5 SIS Corridor 6.899 6.899 SR 16 2 SIS Military Access Facility 1.761 1.761 SR 173 3 SIS Military Access Facility 11.933 11.933 SR 19 2 SIS Corridor 1.256 1.256 SR 190 3 SIS Military Access Facility 0.755 0.755 SR 196 3 SIS Connector 0.972 0.972 SR 20 2 SIS Corridor 40.534 40.534 SR 20 2 SIS Corridor 28.245 6.093 SR 20 5 SIS Corridor 17.684 17.684 SR 202 2 SIS Connector 0.516 0.516 SR 207 2 SIS Corridor 19.451 19.451 SR 222 2 SIS Connector 9.5 9.5 SR 24 2 SIS Connector 2.697 2.697 SR 243 2 SIS Connector 1.306 1.306 SR 24A 2 SIS Corridor 1.796 1.796 SR 26 2 SIS Corridor 32.371 32.371 SR 263 3 SIS Connector 6.399 6.399 SR 29 1 SIS Corridor 13.994 13.994 SR 29 1 SIS Corridor 44.829 44.829 SR 297 3 SIS Military Access Facility 2.476 2.476 SR 31 1 SIS Corridor 36.219 36.219 SR 326 5 SIS Corridor 2.606 2.606 SR 326 5 SIS Corridor 8.46 8.46 SR 331 2 SIS Corridor 3.638 3.638 SR 368 3 SIS Connector 1.812 1.812 SR 388 3 SIS Connector 4.147 4.147 SR 389 3 SIS Connector 3.026 3.026 SR 390 3 SIS Connector 5.032 5.032 SR 397 3 SIS Military Access Facility 1.519 1.519 SR 40 5 SIS Corridor 59.118 59.118 SR 401 5 SIS Connector 1.946 1.946 SR 404 5 SIS Military Access Facility 3.61 3.61 SR 405 5 SIS Connector 4.406 4.406 SR 408 5 SIS Corridor 16.307 16.307 SR 408 TPK SIS Corridor 0.759 0.759 SR 417 5 SIS Corridor 31.904 31.904 SR 417 TPK SIS Corridor 22.764 22.764 SR 423 5 SIS Connector 0.41 0.41 SR 429 5 SIS Corridor 19.203 19.203 SR 429 5 SIS Corridor 2.798 2.798 SR 429 TPK SIS Corridor 10.199 10.199 SR 429 5 SIS Corridor 2.413 2.413 SR 436 5 SIS Connector 1.031 1.031 SR 44 5 SIS Corridor 8.379 8.379 SR 44 7 SIS Corridor 24.301 23.372 SR 45 7 SIS Connector 7.384 0.055 SR 451 5 SIS Corridor 1.868 1.868 SR 46 5 SIS Connector 3.032 3.032 SR 50 5 SIS Connector 0.341 0.341 SR 50 7 SIS Corridor 21.948 13.727 SR 508 5 SIS #N/A 0.133 SR 528 5 SIS Corridor 22.37 22.37 SR 528 5 SIS Corridor 7.598 7.598 SR 528 TPK SIS Corridor 23.334 23.334 SR 54 7 SIS Corridor 4.392 4.392 SR 56 7 SIS Corridor 0.895 0.895

Page 5 of 8 ATTACHMENT C

SR 568 TPK SIS Corridor 3.036 3.036 SR 570 TPK SIS Corridor 24.299 24.299 SR 573 7 SIS Military Access Facility 1.901 1.901 SR 580 7 SIS Connector 0.731 0.731 SR 589 7 SIS Corridor 0.896 0.896 SR 589 TPK SIS Corridor 53.298 53.298 SR 597 7 SIS Corridor 4.475 4.475 SR 60 1 SIS Corridor 56.466 55.853 SR 60 4 SIS Corridor 22.77 22.77 SR 60 5 SIS Corridor 21.777 21.777 SR 60 7 SIS Connector 0.23 0.23 SR 60 7 SIS Corridor 18.536 18.536 SR 61 3 SIS Corridor 13.904 0.369 SR 618 7 SIS Corridor 14.064 14.064 SR 618A 7 SIS Corridor 8.296 8.296 SR 636 1 SIS Corridor 0.019 0.019 SR 64 1 SIS Corridor 19.342 19.342 SR 676 7 SIS Connector 0.01 0.01 SR 694 7 SIS Corridor 1.753 1.753 SR 694 7 SIS Corridor 1.543 1.543 SR 7 6 SIS Connector 1.673 0.225 SR 70 1 SIS Corridor 66.643 65.472 SR 70 1 SIS Corridor 50.453 50.453 SR 70 4 SIS Connector 4.001 4.001 SR 70 4 SIS Corridor 21.219 21.219 SR 700 4 SIS Corridor 0.003 0.003 SR 704 4 SIS Connector 0.849 0.849 SR 708 4 SIS Corridor 0.875 0.875 SR 710 1 SIS Corridor 9.922 9.922 SR 710 4 SIS Connector 1.596 1.596 SR 710 4 SIS Corridor 43.391 43.391 SR 742 3 SIS Connector 0.072 0.072 SR 750 3 SIS Connector 2.09 2.09 SR 77 3 SIS Connector 4.913 4.913 SR 77 3 SIS Corridor 33.8 33.8 SR 79 3 SIS Connector 38.478 38.478 SR 79 3 SIS Corridor 16.438 16.438 SR 80 1 SIS Corridor 54.189 46.641 SR 80 4 SIS Corridor 41.947 3.998 SR 810 4 SIS Connector 0.605 0.605 SR 818 4 SIS Connector 0.297 0.297 SR 82 1 SIS Connector 3.642 3.642 SR 82 1 SIS Corridor 25.486 25.486 SR 820 4 SIS Connector 0.089 0.089 SR 821 TPK SIS Corridor 47.572 47.572

Page 6 of 8 ATTACHMENT C

SR 825 6 SIS Connector 0.548 0.548 SR 826 6 SIS Corridor 24.192 24.192 SR 826 6 SIS Corridor 0.363 0.363 SR 826/NW 7 AVE EXTENSION 6 SIS Corridor 0.046 0.046 SR 836 6 SIS Corridor 11.756 11.756 SR 836 6 SIS Corridor 0.015 0.015 SR 84 4 SIS Connector 2.07 2.07 SR 842 4 SIS Connector 1.746 1.746 SR 85 3 SIS Connector 0.766 0.766 SR 85 3 SIS Military Access Facility 11.485 11.485 SR 85 3 SIS Corridor 11.525 11.525 SR 869 TPK SIS Corridor 21.821 21.821 SR 869 4 SIS Corridor 2.055 2.055 SR 87 3 SIS Corridor 18.477 18.477 SR 874 6 SIS Corridor 6.949 6.949 SR 887 6 SIS Connector 1.003 1.003 SR 91 TPK SIS Corridor 264.836 264.836 SR 924 6 SIS Corridor 4.851 4.851 SR 924 6 SIS Corridor 2.651 2.651 SR 934 6 SIS Connector 0.513 0.513 SR 969 6 SIS Connector 0.052 0.052 SR 997 6 SIS Corridor 33.881 33.881 SR 9B 2 SIS Corridor 4.168 4.168 SR A1A 2 SIS Connector 14.377 14.377 SR A1A 2 SIS Corridor 11.945 11.945 SW 120 STREET 6 SIS Connector 1.919 1.919 SW 2 ST 4 SIS Connector 0.179 0.179 SW 4 AVE 4 SIS Connector 0.773 0.773 TALLEYRAND AVE 2 SIS Connector 0.579 0.579 TAMARIND AVE 4 SIS Connector 0.388 0.388 TERMINAL ACCESS RD 1 SIS Connector 0.554 0.554 TRADEPORT DR 5 SIS Connector 3.048 3.048 US 1 2 SIS Connector 2.243 2.243 US 1 4 SIS Connector 4.578 4.578 US 1 5 SIS Connector 0.089 0.089 US 1 6 SIS Corridor 30.051 30.051 US 1 5 SIS Corridor 0.422 0.422 US 1 2 SIS Corridor 29.523 29.523 US 17 5 SIS Connector 3.003 3.003 US 17 1 SIS Corridor 77.42 77.42 US 17 5 SIS Corridor 11.822 11.822 US 17 2 SIS Corridor 50.715 50.715 US 17 2 SIS Military Access Facility 2.054 2.054 US 17 2 SIS Corridor 41.919 41.919 US 19 7 SIS Corridor 74.606 74.606 US 19 7 SIS Corridor 10.417 10.417 US 19 7 SIS Corridor 3.212 3.212 US 19 3 SIS Corridor 25.06 25.06 US 19 2 SIS Corridor 125.206 125.206 US 192 5 SIS Connector 1.766 1.766 US 231 3 SIS Connector 3.463 3.463 US 231 3 SIS Corridor 62.701 62.701 US 27 6 SIS Corridor 10.205 10.205 US 27 1 SIS Corridor 140.073 140.073 US 27 4 SIS Corridor 66.363 66.363 US 27 5 SIS Corridor 27.393 27.393 US 27 5 SIS Corridor 17.894 17.894 US 27 2 SIS Corridor 17.905 3.422 US 29 3 SIS Connector 0.458 0.458 US 29 3 SIS Corridor 37.246 37.246 US 301 2 SIS Corridor 83.867 83.867 US 301 5 SIS Corridor 12.759 12.759 US 319 3 SIS Corridor 13.535 13.535 US 331 3 SIS Corridor 47.468 47.468 US 41 2 SIS Corridor 4.471 4.471 US 41 7 SIS Connector 2.612 2.612 US 41 1 SIS Connector 3.344 3.344 US 41 6 SIS Connector 0.542 0.542 US 41 7 SIS Corridor 1.406 1.406 US 441 4 SIS Corridor 11.255 11.255 US 441 5 SIS Corridor 4.335 4.335 US 441 6 SIS Connector 1.448 1.448 US 441 1 SIS Corridor 42.182 28.562 US 90 2 SIS Corridor 0.663 0.663 US 90 3 SIS Connector 7.994 7.994 US 90 2 SIS Corridor 2.157 2.157 US 90 3 SIS Corridor 1.891 1.891 US 92 5 SIS Connector 4.776 4.776 US 92 7 SIS Military Access Facility 0.24 0.24 US 92 7 SIS Corridor 8.326 8.326 US 98 4 SIS Corridor 19.261 19.261 US 98 1 SIS Corridor 15.128 15.128 US 98 3 SIS Connector 0.688 0.688 US 98 3 SIS Connector 0.605 0.605 US 98 1 SIS Corridor 13.931 9.578 US 98 3 SIS Military Access Facility 14.477 14.477 US 98 3 SIS Corridor 26.756 26.756

Page 7 of 8 ATTACHMENT C

US 98 7 SIS Corridor 12.424 12.424 US 98 4 SIS Corridor 37.949 37.949 US 1 2 SIS Connector 0.764 0.764 US 27 2 SIS Corridor 26.65 26.65 US 41 1 SIS Connector 0.448 0.448 US 41 7 SIS Connector 4.896 4.896 US 98 3 SIS Connector 0.278 0.278 US 98 3 SIS Military Access Facility 0.008 0.008 W ADAMS ST 2 Duval SIS Connector 0.159 0.159 W FORSYTH ST 2 Duval SIS Connector 0.306 0.306 WOODWINGS RD 2 Duval SIS Connector 1.328 1.328 YANKEE CLIPPER DR 2 Duval SIS Connector 0.62 0.62

Page 8 of 8

Hi Division Administrators / Division Directors -

The purpose of this email is to give you a heads up of the June 6, 2019 publication of the Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) for the FY 19 Advanced Transportation and Congestion Management Technologies Deployment (ATCMTD) program. The NOFO is published in Grants.gov (search using “693JJ319NF00003”) or accessed directly at: https://www.grants.gov/web/grants/view-opportunity.html?oppId=316761. The application due date is July 19, 2019. A webinar covering details of the program and the NOFO is being scheduled and we will follow up with the date and time as well as a link to register for the event. This information will be updated in the Grants.gov listing as well.

As background, section 6004 of the FAST Act created a new section – 503(c)(4) – under title 23 of the United States Code (23 USC 503(c)(4)) to establish the ATCMTD program. The ATCMTD program provides funding to eligible entities to develop model deployment sites for large-scale installation and operation of advanced transportation technologies to improve safety, efficiency, system performance, and infrastructure return on investment. The ATCMTD program is funded at $60 million per year for Fiscal Years 2016 through 2020, for between 5 and 10 awards per year with no more than $12 million to a single grant recipient each fiscal year. Eligible applicants include State or local government or political subdivision thereof, transit agency, MPO (representing populations of more than 200,000), multijurisdictional groups of eligible applicants, and consortium of research or academic institutions.

If you have any questions, please contact the ATCMTD Program Manager, David Harris at [email protected] or telephone number 202-366-2825.

From: Federal Transit Administration Sent: Monday, June 10, 2019 10:55 AM To: Winters, Philip Subject: Re-sending: FTA to Hold June 18 Webinar on Integrated Mobility Innovation Program Funding Opportunity (New Registration Link)

On Tuesday, June 18, at 2 p.m. EDT, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) will host a second webinar for potential applicants and other stakeholders interested in the Integrated Mobility Innovation (IMI) Demonstration Program. FTA staff will provide further information on the application process, key requirements, including data, and will answer frequently asked questions.

FTA announced the $15 million IMI funding opportunity on May 8, and the application period closes on August 6. Don't miss this chance to learn from FTA about the application process.

Links: Sign up for the IMI Webinar IMI Notice of Funding Opportunity IMI Home Page