News Crossroads Plaza Faces Demoliton

[briangaw]

Thanks for the link. If it isn't funded yet, why are businesses being told they have 18 months to vacate?

Yes it does seem odd - without funding there can be no sign off & project launch?

So you posed a great question and I dug a bit deeper. The process for large road improvements is quite a behemoth with lots of moving parts. So just to clarify, construction has no funds, as of yet. And that is in the FDOT 5 year work plan which governs what is funded for the next 5 years, however that is updated yearly so things get moved around. Also federal funding would be applicable to this project so most probably the state is waiting for federal funds for construction then will allocate their own match.

That said design and right of way acquisition (ROW) (getting the land) does have funding. About 5 million dollars is currently allocated for the entire project for 2018-2022 for ROW acquisition. Looks like from some of the planning dates that they want to have documents going by this May. (http://www.i4express.com/242484-8.shtm, scroll to the bottom to see the timeline). Also discussed more here: http://www.i4express.com/Seg1Docs/Segment_1_Reevaluation_Form_FINAL_ALL.pdf, talks all about the redesign and the need for the parcels. Good news is that there are no residential impacts and that there are relocation assistance programs (read $$$) to those affected.

The bad news and the weird news is that the businesses complaints and the news articles etc are way late. This is much farther along then even I realized. This is basically a done deal. The process really started back in 2000 and the redesign and public input time (read time where this could of been stopped) happened in 2014-2015. So they missed the boat. They had a ton of chances if they were paying attention through the process, but this train has left the station. This all has federal approval and state approval.

 

[briangaw]

Add me to the list of "tin foilers" who believe this plan has its origins with Disney. It very much seems that, for $135 million of taxpayer money, a better alternative could have been figured out to save those businesses if that was ever a possible alternative. By eliminating Crossroads, you eliminate the most convenient alternative for dining and shopping for visitors in hotel row or people using the back gate. It certainly isn't the only alternative, but it is definitely the most convenient.

We have heard for years that Disney wanted Crossroads to go away, so why is it such a surprise that it is finally happening? Seems like quite the coincidence.

For those of you saying Crossroads wasn't much competition to Disney, most of those businesses are saying that their Crossroads locations are, if not the best, then among the best in their entire companies. That is an ENORMOUS amount of money that is leaving Disney property every day.

I would say for this one thing and only this one thing, you may need to put the tin-foil away. Oh we can talk all day about Reedy Creek, Disney abuses and a whole bunch of other issues, but for this case there is quite the documentation to the contrary of a large Disney plan to eliminate the "competition". For one the FDOT did look a great number of alternatives. Actually more then any other intersection on the entire alignment. Four alternatives were evaluated by FDOT and its consultants: (http://www.i4express.com/Seg1Docs/Seg_1_Evaluation_Matrix.pdf). This option scored the best for multiple reasons and using the state and federally approved analysis. Ultimately, this is being done to keep the level of service (LOS) up on I-4 and mostly for the PM peak (more on this below).

I find it very interesting that the plans use up a huge parcel of land to the north of the loop that could still be used for retail (even with the traffic circle) and that businesses like Uno's, Red Lobster and Perkin's, that could have been spared, are being demolished under this plan for really no reason (an extra turn lane to those businesses could have been included in the plan so that the object of making traffic not slow down when using the traffic circle could still be achieved).

I find it very hard to believe that it hasn't been Disney's plan to attempt to get these restaurants and retailers into Flamingo Crossings, which hasn't taken off the way they envisioned. By eliminating Crossroads, Disney now has a whole list of desirable tenants that will be looking for a new version of Crossroads – which is exactly what Flamingo Crossings was designed to be.

Eliminating Crossroads makes that whole area of Disney property ripe to become what the Back Gate is now. Except that in this case, Disney owns all of the land around Flamingo Crossing (unlike up and down 535), so getting people to start using that area instead of the Back Gate would be an enormous boon for Disney.

First off if you zoom in on the current plans (http://www.i4express.com/Seg1Docs/SEGMENT1_SR535_RECOMMENDED.pdf) the vast majority of the right of way that is being acquired is for ponds. As @donsullivan has correctly pointed out the I-4 beyond ultimate build out with widening and addition of express lanes as well as setting up for a future rail corridor will greatly increase the impervious area and that water has to have somewhere to go. So the Crossroads properties will be basically covered by 3 large ponds. So all the land is being used. Second, it is not a traffic circle and will be an elevating ramp that will raise traffic to the elevation needed for the overpass over the north bound lanes of 535 so you can't really branch off easily as it will be above grade and that is mute anyway as they need pond space.

The next possible argument is that the ponds could have gone elsewhere and the loop is not needed. Well for the first part, the ponds were needed in this area. There is no large enough area for all of the ponds along the alignment. Could there have been smaller ponds, yes, but that would have disrupted far more businesses and road networks and would have been more expensive. Could the ponds been placed on the Disney side of 535, well I think here was the decision point and value judgement. There are multiple high rise hotels that would have to be demo'd and relocated versus a strip mall and some outlying buildings. The road loop could not be placed elsewhere. So FDOT consolidated the pond needs and the road needs and Crossroads is on the chopping block in the name of progress.

And was the loop needed and will all of this affect traffic flows? The analysis done by the state and federally approved supports @HauntedPirate and this loop was needed. The analysis is quite clear and convincing http://www.i4express.com/Docs/I4_BtU_SOUTH_SAMR_2017_03_16_FHWA_SUBMITTAL.pdf and go to pages 47 and 51. This was the updated traffic analysis for the original 2000 era proposal compared to the redesign. So I would argue that @s8film40 these are not marginal improvements but serious ones and it is silly to think that a reduction in the trips that the plaza generated was anything near significant to the traffic flows of the area, just silly. While I will say there is always a limit to analysis and modeling as @lazyboy97o points out. Also induced demand as @the.dreamfinder discusses among other factors may not lead to the full benefits that modeling indicates, improvements are needed and you have to use the tools you have currently to make the best decisions. Also induced demand has not reared its head to the same extent with express lanes and intersection optimization doesn't tend to lead to induced demand either. That document also goes into the safety improvements realized with the changes, which is a great benefit as well.

I don't think it's a coincidence that Disney sold Crossroads at the exact same time they began developing Flamingo Crossings and it wouldn't surprise me in the least to find out that Disney had their own engineers design this traffic circle to alleviate the congestion going into the Back Gate and suggested it to FDOT. Traffic was a nightmare so this plan would be desirable to FDOT and the elination of Crossroads would help bolster Flamingo Crossings. They knew exactly what they were doing when they sold Crossroads (which a the time had become somewhat dilapidated, was in need of renovation and wasn't nearly as desirable as it is now). It really is brilliant.

Yeah I think Disney is too cheap to spend money on traffic analysis and design for something the FDOT would design and spend the money for. Now to be clear, I don't think Disney would object to this proposal at all and it might in some way "eliminate the competition." Although I think you are way overstating how much Disney cares about this. If they really cared, they more likely would not have sold it and either jacked rents way up or closed everyone down at the end of lease terms and bulldozed it all or built their own stores. Or held the land and then offer it to FDOT when they came knocking to get rid of the businesses while getting money for the land. Silly to think that the best way to eliminate the competition was to lose control of the land by selling it in an evil plot to one day years later have FDOT need the land for I-4 expansion and then take it. That would not be brilliant it would be silly.

 

[s8film40]

So I would argue that @s8film40 these are not marginal improvements but serious ones and it is silly to think that a reduction in the trips that the plaza generated was anything near significant to the traffic flows of the area, just silly.

I wasn’t referring to the scope of the work, but rather the real world practical impact. At its peak now it can take roughly 5 minutes to get through that intersection. I would expect these changes to maybe reduce that to 3-4 minutes. So yeah I call that marginal. As far as the traffic the center generates again I’m just going by real world observations. It’s not uncommon at all for the traffic exiting the center to back up well into the center itself sometimes as far back as the second stop signed intersection. So yeah there’s substantial trips being generated. More importantly eliminating the center eliminates that need for that entire side of the intersection, that East side of the intersection only serves Crossroads. So going back to what I was saying simply closing Crossroads would eliminate the need for left turns in and out of the center and likely make the existing intersection as efficient as this new plan or at best give it only the slimist of margins of improving the traffic through there.

 

[Master Yoda]

I would say for this one thing and only this one thing, you may need to put the tin-foil away. Oh we can talk all day about Reedy Creek, Disney abuses and a whole bunch of other issues, but for this case there is quite the documentation to the contrary of a large Disney plan to eliminate the "competition". For one the FDOT did look a great number of alternatives. Actually more then any other intersection on the entire alignment. Four alternatives were evaluated by FDOT and its consultants: (http://www.i4express.com/Seg1Docs/Seg_1_Evaluation_Matrix.pdf). This option scored the best for multiple reasons and using the state and federally approved analysis. Ultimately, this is being done to keep the level of service (LOS) up on I-4 and mostly for the PM peak (more on this below).



First off if you zoom in on the current plans (http://www.i4express.com/Seg1Docs/SEGMENT1_SR535_RECOMMENDED.pdf) the vast majority of the right of way that is being acquired is for ponds. As @donsullivan has correctly pointed out the I-4 beyond ultimate build out with widening and addition of express lanes as well as setting up for a future rail corridor will greatly increase the impervious area and that water has to have somewhere to go. So the Crossroads properties will be basically covered by 3 large ponds. So all the land is being used. Second, it is not a traffic circle and will be an elevating ramp that will raise traffic to the elevation needed for the overpass over the north bound lanes of 535 so you can't really branch off easily as it will be above grade and that is mute anyway as they need pond space.

The next possible argument is that the ponds could have gone elsewhere and the loop is not needed. Well for the first part, the ponds were needed in this area. There is no large enough area for all of the ponds along the alignment. Could there have been smaller ponds, yes, but that would have disrupted far more businesses and road networks and would have been more expensive. Could the ponds been placed on the Disney side of 535, well I think here was the decision point and value judgement. There are multiple high rise hotels that would have to be demo'd and relocated versus a strip mall and some outlying buildings. The road loop could not be placed elsewhere. So FDOT consolidated the pond needs and the road needs and Crossroads is on the chopping block in the name of progress.

And was the loop needed and will all of this affect traffic flows? The analysis done by the state and federally approved supports @HauntedPirate and this loop was needed. The analysis is quite clear and convincing http://www.i4express.com/Docs/I4_BtU_SOUTH_SAMR_2017_03_16_FHWA_SUBMITTAL.pdf and go to pages 47 and 51. This was the updated traffic analysis for the original 2000 era proposal compared to the redesign. So I would argue that @s8film40 these are not marginal improvements but serious ones and it is silly to think that a reduction in the trips that the plaza generated was anything near significant to the traffic flows of the area, just silly. While I will say there is always a limit to analysis and modeling as @lazyboy97o points out. Also induced demand as @the.dreamfinder discusses among other factors may not lead to the full benefits that modeling indicates, improvements are needed and you have to use the tools you have currently to make the best decisions. Also induced demand has not reared its head to the same extent with express lanes and intersection optimization doesn't tend to lead to induced demand either. That document also goes into the safety improvements realized with the changes, which is a great benefit as well.



Yeah I think Disney is too cheap to spend money on traffic analysis and design for something the FDOT would design and spend the money for. Now to be clear, I don't think Disney would object to this proposal at all and it might in some way "eliminate the competition." Although I think you are way overstating how much Disney cares about this. If they really cared, they more likely would not have sold it and either jacked rents way up or closed everyone down at the end of lease terms and bulldozed it all or built their own stores. Or held the land and then offer it to FDOT when they came knocking to get rid of the businesses while getting money for the land. Silly to think that the best way to eliminate the competition was to lose control of the land by selling it in an evil plot to one day years later have FDOT need the land for I-4 expansion and then take it. That would not be brilliant it would be silly.

You are kind of new here so we will cut you a break, but it is against forum rules to bring facts and evidence into an argument. Disney is evil and bent on world domination and that is all there is to it.

 

[NiarrNDisney]

You are kind of new here so we will cut you a break, but it is against forum rules to bring facts and evidence into an argument. Disney is evil and bent on world domination and that is all there is to it.

Thread Win!

 

[ford91exploder]

You are kind of new here so we will cut you a break, but it is against forum rules to bring facts and evidence into an argument. Disney is evil and bent on world domination and that is all there is to it.

Name any multi-national corporation which is not evil...

Hey - at Ubersoft the boss is the devil incarnate...

https://www.eviscerati.org/Dark-Lord-Ubersoft

 

[Rich Brownn]

I think the number one factor this has going for it improving traffic is the closure of a large number of businesses. Obviously with those businesses gone the demand for this exit will drop. It's by far the stupidest way to reduce traffic, but it's hard to deny it works. If you closed MK you would greatly reduce the traffic on World Dr. same thing here.

Yeah cause there's no there businesses on the road. (jeez...)

 

[lazyboy97o]

o I would argue that @s8film40 these are not marginal improvements but serious ones and it is silly to think that a reduction in the trips that the plaza generated was anything near significant to the traffic flows of the area, just silly.

The FDOT report must be a very silly document. The Crossroads is the most popular destination for the intersection of FL 535 and Hotel Plaza Blvd. The bulk of the traffic is between Walt Disney World and The Crossroads with a supermajority of those going to Walt Disney World coming from The Crossroads. Eliminating The Crossroads means removing the destination of nearly half of the motorists at the intersection.

Existing Conditions (AM Peak / PM Peak)
Minimum going to The Crossroads*: 44% / 43%
Maximum going to Walt Disney World*: 34% / 40%
Percent of to WDW from The Crossroads: 90% / 75%

2020 Projection
Going to The Crossroads: 45% / 44%
Going to Walt Disney World: 36% / 40%
Percent of to WDW from The Crossroads: 91% / 80%

2040 Projection
Minimum going to The Crossroads: 45% / 44%
Maximum going to Walt Disney World: 36% / 39%
Percent of to WDW from The Crossroads: 88% / 81%

*Minimum and maximum are given due to the combined straight and turn lanes on FL 535. All traffic in the southbound turn/straight lane is assumed to be going straight. All traffic in the northbound turn/straight lane is assumed to be going into Walt Disney World.

out. Also induced demand as @the.dreamfinder discusses among other factors may not lead to the full benefits that modeling indicates, improvements are needed and you have to use the tools you have currently to make the best decisions.

At what point are the tools seriously questioned or even finally rejected? The issue of highway projects not living up to promises has been a widespread issue for going on half a century.

 

[Lensman]

Existing Conditions (AM Peak / PM Peak)
Minimum going to The Crossroads*: 44% / 43%
Maximum going to Walt Disney World*: 34% / 40%
Percent of to WDW from The Crossroads: 90% / 75%

2020 Projection
Going to The Crossroads: 45% / 44%
Going to Walt Disney World: 36% / 40%
Percent of to WDW from The Crossroads: 91% / 80%

2040 Projection
Minimum going to The Crossroads: 45% / 44%
Maximum going to Walt Disney World: 36% / 39%
Percent of to WDW from The Crossroads: 88% / 81%

These are interesting figures. Which document are they from? I can't find it. Is it really saying that combined, 36+44=80% of the daily traffic at the intersection is either going to Crossroads or WDW?

At what point are the tools seriously questioned or even finally rejected? The issue of highway projects not living up to promises has been a widespread issue for going on half a century.

I've been fascinated by the speed of advances in traffic engineering in the past 20 years compared to the previous 50. It seems like we're finally moving beyond the 4-phase intersections into newer alternatives for 2-phase intersections. This includes a couple of at-grade 2-phase intersection designs I had never previously heard of until tonight, the Continuous Flow Intersection and the Parallel Flow Intersection

 

[briangaw]

You are kind of new here so we will cut you a break, but it is against forum rules to bring facts and evidence into an argument. Disney is evil and bent on world domination and that is all there is to it.

Haha, new to posting, long time follower. And consider me guilty! And wait Disney isn't trying to take over the world?

I wasn’t referring to the scope of the work, but rather the real world practical impact. At its peak now it can take roughly 5 minutes to get through that intersection. I would expect these changes to maybe reduce that to 3-4 minutes. So yeah I call that marginal. As far as the traffic the center generates again I’m just going by real world observations. It’s not uncommon at all for the traffic exiting the center to back up well into the center itself sometimes as far back as the second stop signed intersection. So yeah there’s substantial trips being generated. More importantly eliminating the center eliminates that need for that entire side of the intersection, that East side of the intersection only serves Crossroads. So going back to what I was saying simply closing Crossroads would eliminate the need for left turns in and out of the center and likely make the existing intersection as efficient as this new plan or at best give it only the slimist of margins of improving the traffic through there.

One minute reduction in wait time through an intersection in huge (just taking your numbers as is)!!! One minute of intersection time is hundreds of cars on 535 that can get through and ultimately that is the point get cars through 535 and not backing up onto I-4. One minute is ginormous and not marginal. And let me be clear, yes there are trips generated by the Crossroads. And yes it is more then would be generated by one small store, but as a fraction of the trips traveling the 535 corridor is so small. This is all relative. See below for the proof. And actually a 3 way intersection with no loop or other improvements would still need 3 phases for the light so wouldn't help too much. The additional new plan gets it to 2 phases which will be huge. And again, the analysis shows the improvements in level of service to be more then just marginal. It is in the engineering analysis if you care to read it. Also again you forget, the drainage space is needed!!! I think the real win is that residential area has been spared, which is not always the case.

The FDOT report must be a very silly document. The Crossroads is the most popular destination for the intersection of FL 535 and Hotel Plaza Blvd. The bulk of the traffic is between Walt Disney World and The Crossroads with a supermajority of those going to Walt Disney World coming from The Crossroads. Eliminating The Crossroads means removing the destination of nearly half of the motorists at the intersection.

Existing Conditions (AM Peak / PM Peak)
Minimum going to The Crossroads*: 44% / 43%
Maximum going to Walt Disney World*: 34% / 40%
Percent of to WDW from The Crossroads: 90% / 75%

2020 Projection
Going to The Crossroads: 45% / 44%
Going to Walt Disney World: 36% / 40%
Percent of to WDW from The Crossroads: 91% / 80%

2040 Projection
Minimum going to The Crossroads: 45% / 44%
Maximum going to Walt Disney World: 36% / 39%
Percent of to WDW from The Crossroads: 88% / 81%

*Minimum and maximum are given due to the combined straight and turn lanes on FL 535. All traffic in the southbound turn/straight lane is assumed to be going straight. All traffic in the northbound turn/straight lane is assumed to be going into Walt Disney World.


At what point are the tools seriously questioned or even finally rejected? The issue of highway projects not living up to promises has been a widespread issue for going on half a century.

As @2percenter has questioned, I am not sure how you did your math would love to see the work. I think you are forgetting through traffic and just thinking about turning movements. Not sure. But here are the numbers and the analysis. Data from http://www.i4express.com/Docs/I4_BtU_SOUTH_SAMR_2017_03_16_FHWA_SUBMITTAL.pdf.

Existing Conditions 2011 (AM/PM peak) page 80

To orient, North is to the top. 535 is the vertical road, Crossroads to the right. Hotel Plaza Boulevard (Disney) to the left.

Total traffic movements through intersection in AM peak hour (top numbers): 4,729
Total traffic movements through intersection in PM peak hour (bottom numbers): 5,976

Total traffic movements from Hotel Plaza Boulevard: AM: 467 PM: 1,484
Total traffic movements from Crossroads: AM: 124 PM: 278
Total traffic movements from Northbound 535: AM: 2092 PM: 2412
Total traffic movements from Southbound 535: AM: 2046 PM: 1802

Total traffic movements into Crossroads in AM peak hour: Max 176 /Min 144
Total traffic movements into Crossroads in PM peak hour: Max 345 /Min 277
(yes there are straight and turn lanes so max and min is a good way to express this)

Total traffic movements into Hotel Plaza Boulevard AM peak hour: Max 915 / Min 869
Total traffic movements into Hotel Plaza Boulevard PM peak hour: Max 722 / Min 657
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________-
So just looking at the maximums to simplify:
Percent of all traffic movements going to Crossroads: AM: 3.7% (Example of work: 176/4729x100) PM: 5.8%

Even if you count all out and in at Crossroads:
Percent of all traffic movements related to Crossroads: AM: 6.3% PM: 10%

Same for Hotel Plaza Boulevard for all movements related to that road as percent of total movements: AM: 29.2% PM: 36.9%

Also for all traffic movements directly back and forth between Hotel Plaza Boulevard and Crossroads: AM 1.6% PM 2.2%

Also the percentage of traffic movements coming into Crossroads that come directly from Hotel Plaza Boulevard (Disney): AM: 32/176 = 18% PM: 68/345 = 19.7%

So as you can see by the numbers. Crossroads accounts for 6-10% of traffic movements at the light so not huge. And that is just a micro look at one light. Crossroads is not the majority and further back and forth trips from Hotel Boulevard is 1-2%. Additionally Disney direct traffic (I would agree this is a crude way to measure this but just is illustrative) going into Crossroads is just 18-20% of the traffic so in the 1/5th area.

A final point if you look on pg 140 the 2040 modified design projections using traffic modeling:

Total traffic movements through intersection in AM peak hour (top numbers): 7,587
Total traffic movements through intersection in PM peak hour (bottom numbers): 8,125

That represents an increase in traffic movements able to go through the intersection of 60% in the AM and 40% PM peak hours.

That seems like quite a substantial increase in capacity and throughput to me @s8film40.

 

[Hakunamatata]

Haha, new to posting, long time follower. And consider me guilty! And wait Disney isn't trying to take over the world?



One minute reduction in wait time through an intersection in huge (just taking your numbers as is)!!! One minute of intersection time is hundreds of cars on 535 that can get through and ultimately that is the point get cars through 535 and not backing up onto I-4. One minute is ginormous and not marginal. And let me be clear, yes there are trips generated by the Crossroads. And yes it is more then would be generated by one small store, but as a fraction of the trips traveling the 535 corridor is so small. This is all relative. See below for the proof. And actually a 3 way intersection with no loop or other improvements would still need 3 phases for the light so wouldn't help too much. The additional new plan gets it to 2 phases which will be huge. And again, the analysis shows the improvements in level of service to be more then just marginal. It is in the engineering analysis if you care to read it. Also again you forget, the drainage space is needed!!! I think the real win is that residential area has been spared, which is not always the case.



As @2percenter has questioned, I am not sure how you did your math would love to see the work. I think you are forgetting through traffic and just thinking about turning movements. Not sure. But here are the numbers and the analysis. Data from http://www.i4express.com/Docs/I4_BtU_SOUTH_SAMR_2017_03_16_FHWA_SUBMITTAL.pdf.

Existing Conditions 2011 (AM/PM peak) page 80

View attachment 277159
To orient, North is to the top. 535 is the vertical road, Crossroads to the right. Hotel Plaza Boulevard (Disney) to the left.

Total traffic movements through intersection in AM peak hour (top numbers): 4,729
Total traffic movements through intersection in PM peak hour (bottom numbers): 5,976

Total traffic movements from Hotel Plaza Boulevard: AM: 467 PM: 1,484
Total traffic movements from Crossroads: AM: 124 PM: 278
Total traffic movements from Northbound 535: AM: 2092 PM: 2412
Total traffic movements from Southbound 535: AM: 2046 PM: 1802

Total traffic movements into Crossroads in AM peak hour: Max 176 /Min 144
Total traffic movements into Crossroads in PM peak hour: Max 345 /Min 277
(yes there are straight and turn lanes so max and min is a good way to express this)

Total traffic movements into Hotel Plaza Boulevard AM peak hour: Max 915 / Min 869
Total traffic movements into Hotel Plaza Boulevard PM peak hour: Max 722 / Min 657
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________-
So just looking at the maximums to simplify:
Percent of all traffic movements going to Crossroads: AM: 3.7% (Example of work: 176/4729x100) PM: 5.8%

Even if you count all out and in at Crossroads:
Percent of all traffic movements related to Crossroads: AM: 6.3% PM: 10%

Same for Hotel Plaza Boulevard for all movements related to that road as percent of total movements: AM: 29.2% PM: 36.9%

Also for all traffic movements directly back and forth between Hotel Plaza Boulevard and Crossroads: AM 1.6% PM 2.2%

Also the percentage of traffic movements coming into Crossroads that come directly from Hotel Plaza Boulevard (Disney): AM: 32/176 = 18% PM: 68/345 = 19.7%

So as you can see by the numbers. Crossroads accounts for 6-10% of traffic movements at the light so not huge. And that is just a micro look at one light. Crossroads is not the majority and further back and forth trips from Hotel Boulevard is 1-2%. Additionally Disney direct traffic (I would agree this is a crude way to measure this but just is illustrative) going into Crossroads is just 18-20% of the traffic so in the 1/5th area.

A final point if you look on pg 140 the 2040 modified design projections using traffic modeling:

View attachment 277174
Total traffic movements through intersection in AM peak hour (top numbers): 7,587
Total traffic movements through intersection in PM peak hour (bottom numbers): 8,125

That represents an increase in traffic movements able to go through the intersection of 60% in the AM and 40% PM peak hours.

That seems like quite a substantial increase in capacity and throughput to me @s8film40.

Charts and graphs, figures and exhibits. You are really getting to the point where someone is goint to reaort to calling you a stinky poo poo face.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I think you are forgetting through traffic and just thinking about turning movements. Not sure.

No, I think I had the orientation wrong. Cold medicine and charts don’t mix well.

 

[jakeman]

No, I think I had the orientation wrong. Cold medicine and charts don’t mix well.

Or they mix great depending on the chart!

 

[Casper Gutman]

The article in the OP is old and, frankly, irrelevant to the present situation.

I think it’s worth quoting this here, since it seems to be the only example in this thread of someone dismissing information they don’t like, and it didn’t come from a critic of the project.

A certain contingent of posters here are deeply invested in straw-manning anyone who criticizes this project, pretending critics believe Disney is “evil” and has launched some Bond-villian level conspiracy. No one has seriously suggested that.

No one has suggested traffic at this intersection isn’t bad.

What some posters have suggested is that Disney has exerted undue influence on this project. This is what several stakeholders in the OP OS article suggest. It is also supported by the fact, in the article, that Disney had been meeting with the FDOT fairly frequently for four years, something apparently discovered by an outside group and not disclosed by Disney or the FDOT. A major corporation exerting this kind of influence on a government project would not be even slightly unusual.

Some other posters have suggested that this fix will not correct the traffic issues or is unnecessarily invasive. I - and I suspect most posters - lack the expertise to definitively support or oppose that point, though interesting information has been presented here by folks like Briangaw.

A lot of this thread seems to be people yelling past each other without directly disagreeing on specific points. It’s frustrating.

 

[s8film40]

One minute reduction in wait time through an intersection in huge (just taking your numbers as is)!!! One minute of intersection time is hundreds of cars on 535 that can get through and ultimately that is the point get cars through 535 and not backing up onto I-4. One minute is ginormous and not marginal. And let me be clear, yes there are trips generated by the Crossroads. And yes it is more then would be generated by one small store, but as a fraction of the trips traveling the 535 corridor is so small. This is all relative. See below for the proof. And actually a 3 way intersection with no loop or other improvements would still need 3 phases for the light so wouldn't help too much. The additional new plan gets it to 2 phases which will be huge. And again, the analysis shows the improvements in level of service to be more then just marginal. It is in the engineering analysis if you care to read it. Also again you forget, the drainage space is needed!!! I think the real win is that residential area has been spared, which is not always the case.

What you’re saying isn’t false the point is though this traffic doesn’t back up into I-4. Typically I-4 is congested and can’t produce enough exiting traffic to back up this intersection. Its extremely rare at this intersection for things to back up to the point where you have to wait more than one cycle of the lights. You can look at statistics and find a better solution for literally every intersection that exists. My complaint isn’t about losing Crossroads. I’m not in disagreement that this plan will help this intersection. My only complaint is that there are thousands of other intersections and traffic issues that should be addressed before this, not even considering that this adds on the expense of buying out a large piece of expensive commercial land. From a practical real world perspective as a local who drives through this intersection all the time, it’s simply a non issue by comparison to other areas.

 

[larryz]

Raise your hand if you or somebody you love has been or almost been killed or injured at this intersection...

 

[halltd]

Studying the Hotel Boulevard intersection with 535, here's what I think:
View attachment 276885
- 535 North will be an overpass over the 535 North loop to Hotel Boulevard. The loop will end at a level intersection crossing 535 South with a traffic light. Note that this light will actually be at the edge of the 535 North overpass before the crosswalk as per the map.
- I agree that Hotel Boulevard to 535 North will be a bridge/overpass, but there will still be a traffic light.
- I agree that Hotel Boulevard to 535 South will remain a street level right turn.

The traffic light will have two phases with the following traffic flows:
Phase 1: Hotel Boulevard to 535 North + Hotel Boulevard to 535 South + 535 North Loop to Hotel Boulevard
Phase 2: 535 North to 535 North + 535 South to 535 South + 535 South to Hotel Boulevard
I'd recommend no right turn on red from 535 South because of the blind traffic coming from under the overpass.

This is a slight modification to donsullivan's excellent analysis!


Update: I found some supporting text in the Segment_1_Reevaluation_Form_FINAL_ALL.pdf.
On page 10:


On page 47:



I think there's something similar at Vineland and 535, if there's interest I'll post my analysis.

Crossroads: I've only been to Goodings, but I have some fond memories of late night grocery shopping there. The past few trips we've gone to Publix for our main grocery shopping.

Finally, why are they adding in additional water retention ponds? Are there not enough in the area or is the work going to significantly increase the paved surface area?

There’s video that shows the new i4 express in 3D. You don’t need to guess about alignment and bridges.

 

[s8film40]

Raise your hand if you or somebody you love has been or almost been killed or injured at this intersection...

Can’t say I have, but here’s a list of at least 25 that are worse.
http://photos.orlandoweekly.com/the...ndo-has-to-offer/?slide=4&woodburyandcolonial

 

[Master Yoda]

Can’t say I have, but here’s a list of at least 25 that are worse.
http://photos.orlandoweekly.com/the...ndo-has-to-offer/?slide=4&woodburyandcolonial

Worse by what measure? There were no mention of crash statistics, travel delay numbers, etc.

The article might as well be a Buzzfeed listicle about 25 Celebrities That Look Like Mattresses.

 

[s8film40]

Worse by what measure? There were no mention of crash statistics, travel delay numbers, etc.

The article might as well be a Buzzfeed listicle about 25 Celebrities That Look Like Mattresses.

Well you can use google and probably find everything you want. Just don’t be too disappointed when the facts don’t align with your opinion.