3/12/1986 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS The County staff and Transportation Planning Ccmittee has reviewed this request. The road is being constructed to serve a proposed 147 acre development north of CR 512. During the Feb. 11, 1986 meeting of the Transportation Planning Committee, the TPC approved a staff study of the intersection which showed that signalization was not warranted. Also, no objection to Mr. Fischer's request was presented. RECONMENDATIONS AND FUNDING Staff recommends approval of the issuance of a right-of-way permit to construct the north extension of CR 510 north of CR 512 subject to the following conditions: 1) The Developer fund 1000 of all construction, including improvements to the existing CR 510 south of CR 512. A credit to future Traffic Impact Fees would be allowed for widening and improvements to the existing section of CR 510 south of CR 512. 2) Once signalization is warranted, the developer should fund his fair share of signalization at the intersection. 3) The developer agree to dedicate to the County the roadway in the .future if the County so desires. Possible future northerly extension shall be planned. 4) The developer agree to connect the convenience store to the new roadway. The County would assist in requiring the convenience store owner to relocate his east driveway from CR 512 to the new roadway. There is no funding to be addressed by the County. Director Davis informed the Board that there is a problem with future dedication. Mr. Ansin is the owner of the property between CR 512 and Mr. Fischer's future development, and Mr. Fischer simply has an easement across Mr.•Ansin's property; so, it would be necessary to deal with Mr. Ansin also re any future dedication. The 147 acre development will be within the City of Sebastian and will fall within their guidelines. Staff feels this is a very important intersection and would rather have a 4 -way intersection than a 3 -way one with a crossroad coming into it. Staff, therefore is recommending approval contingent on the four conditions listed. Commissioner Wodtke did not believe we have ever approved any road without being able to get ownership of that road. He noted Hetra first had to acquire the R/W, and it had to be in the - county's name before we would authorize the road. Chairman Scurlock felt that part of the recommendation should be modified to include that kind of language as he agreed we need to be consistent. 29 A 12 19 6 Boor. 63 1 n . 862