Laserfiche WebLink
TRAFFIC CIRCULL-ATT ELEMENT <br />GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES <br />GOAL <br />A safe, convenient and efficient motorized and non -motorized <br />transportation system available for all residents and visitors to <br />the countywith-a -minimum- detriment to the environment.. <br />OBJECTIVE 1 CORRECTION OF DEFICIENCIES <br />The county -acknowledges and -'it is documented in the- Analysis <br />'section of this element that there is only one existing roadway <br />deficiency, however; technically this is not a deficiency under <br />concurrency rules since this roadway improvement is in the first <br />three years of FDOT's 5 -year Transportation Improvement Plan. By <br />1994_, the -existing roadway r-apacity _deficiency will be corrected. <br />POLICY 1.1: The county hereby adopts traffic circulation <br />level of service standards. These standards are as follows: <br />Level of service "C" shall be maintained for rural principal <br />arterials and rural freeways during peak hour, peak season <br />and peak direction conditions. During peak hour, peak season <br />and peak ection onditions, le el of service-D`or-better <br />shall be maintained on all other freeway, arterial and <br />collector roadways. <br />POLICY 1.2 .Proposed roadway -projects -sham be -evaluated -and <br />_--ranked-inorder of priority according to the following <br />guidelines: <br />a. whether the project is needed to protect public health <br />and safety-,-moo-fulfill the county's legal commitment to <br />provide facilities and services, or to preserve or <br />achieve full use of existing facilities; <br />b, whether the project increases efficiency of use of <br />existing facilities, prevents or reduces future <br />improvement cost, provides service to developed areas <br />lack-iag�ful-1 s-evLice or—promotes in-#31-1-deve-lopment; <br />C. whether the project represents a logical extension of <br />facilities and services within a designated urban <br />service area; <br />d. whether the project is the most cost effective <br />alternative; and <br />e. whether the project provides the least adverse impact to <br />the environment of the options. <br />24 <br />SmeadSoft Reprint Date: Monday, August 12, 2013 - 15:22:31 - OfficialDocuments:672, Attachment Id 0, Page 77 <br />