1/14/1992 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

M Chapter 951 of the LDRs governs the appeal issue and is intended to facilitate timely and efficient emergency response (9 11) as well as a logical addressing pattern helpful to the general public. In staff's opinion, approval of the street name appeal would adversely affect emergency services response time and the continuation of a logical addressing system. The Director of the Emergency Services department has stated that the department consistently supports the use of road number designations for new projects. Therefore, both planning staff and emergency services staff believe that the Community Development Director's appeal should be approved, that the Planning and Zoning Commission's December 12th decision should be overturned, and that the use of road names for the subject project should be denied. *The Dual Designation Compromise At its regular meeting of December 17, 1991, the Board of County Commissioners considered a road name request by the Indian River Country Club Planned Development project developer. Staff recommended denial of the request and noted during the hearing that the Postal Service opposed the use of a dual street designation (eg. 1110th Parkway/Walter Road"). The Board decided that an acceptable compromise between the developer's desires and the staff's position was to allow a dual designation on street signs (the street number would be more prominent), whereby emergency services would use the street number in its response system and the Postal Service would presumably use the street number designation as well. The Board subsequently voted to allow the developer to use the dual designation compromise. Since the Board's December 17th decision, the Postal Service has written staff, noting that its system cannot support dual street designations and strongly recommending against the use of any dual designations (see attachment #6). The Postal Service asserts that dual designations, even as applied only to road signs, cause postal delivery problems. Thus, the dual designation compromise applied on December 17th is not an option that satisfies the Postal Service. It was staff's intent that the Board's decision on the Indian River Country Club road name request would resolve the issue of road names/road numbers generally. Accordingly, prior to the Indian River Country Club hearing, staff planned either to take no action or to appeal two recent road number decisions by the Planning and Zoning Commission, depending on the Board's action. After the Board's dual designation compromise on the Indian River Country Club request, staff intended to apply the dual designation alternative to the other contested road number cases (Rosewood Court, Florida Baptist). However, since the post office has now determined in writing that dual designations are unacceptable, a final decision on road names/road numbers must be made in light of the post office's recommendation against dual designations. *Summary By requiring this development to utilize number designations rather than names, the county is facilitating the quick response of emergency services, providing the potential for enhanced postal services, and is continuing a logical addressing system helpful to navigation by the general public. In staff's opinion, quick emergency response time is especially critical for this project which houses the elderly and persons with health problems. In staff's opinion, approval of the use of road names would not be consistent with the intent and purpose of Chapter 951. The only alternative that would meet both the 951 standards and the Postal Service's recommendation would be to approve staff's appeal and continue to use and apply road number designations to the Florida Baptist Retirement Center project. 21