Laserfiche WebLink
Traf f ic Circulation Element Policy 1. 1,, Economic Development <br />Element objective 4,, Future Land Use Element Policy 3.4,, and Ports,, <br />Aviation,, and Related Facilities Element Objective 3 all relate to <br />LOS standards on roads within the county. These policies and <br />objectives state that the county must take steps to maintain a <br />specified minimum level of service on all roads within the county. <br />By removing many large,, slow,, citrus hauling trucks from other <br />arterial roads, the Citrus Highway will increase the level of <br />service of these roads. Therefore, this amendment is consistent <br />with these comprehensive plan objectives and policies. <br />I <br />Economic Development Element Policy 1.1 states that the county <br />shall encourage expansion of existing businesses. The Citrus <br />Highway will provide for the expansion of the citrus industry by <br />providing more efficient movement of citrus from groves to <br />packinghouses and consumers. Therefore, this amendment is <br />consistent with Economic Development Element Policy 1.1. <br />Capital Improvements Element Policy 1.6 states that the county <br />shall encourage the FDOT to reallocate budgeted appropriations for <br />traffic facilities in Indian River County. Since this amendment <br />facilitates the construction of an FDOT funded traffic facility in <br />Indian River County by incorporating the Citrus Highway into the <br />county's comprehensive plan,, the amendment is consistent with <br />Capital Improvements Element Policy 1.6. <br />- S.R. 60 west of 1-95 <br />The current traffic volumes on S.R. 60 from 1-95 to Osceola County <br />do not justify additional lanes. Howevers several factors indicate <br />that, despite existing traffic volumes, there is a need for <br />additional lanes. Evidence indicates that this portion of S.R. 60 <br />is so dangerous that drivers who would otherwise use it to reach <br />the Florida Turnpike or the Tampa Bay area instead use much longer <br />alternate routes. <br />Several factors combine to make this portion of S.R. 60 dangerous. <br />It is a longr narrow road, covering a distance of approximately <br />22.5 miles from 1-95 to 'Che Osceola County 'Line. Even though the <br />comprehensive plan indicates that this portion of S.R. 60 currently <br />has 100 feet of public road right-of-way, the paved portion of the <br />road is actually only 28 feet wide. Deep ditches run along each <br />side of this road. Additionally, this portion of S.R. 60 has no <br />median and, until recently, had no shoulders or guardrails. <br />In the last five years, there have been at least 123 accidents and <br />seven fatalities on this portion of S.R. 60. This is despite the <br />fact that many drivers are using alternate routes. This statistic <br />demonstrates the hazards of this road in its current condition. <br />In August,, 1991,, a petition requesting that S.R. 60 be <br />substantially improved from 1-95 to the Osceola County line was <br />presented to the Board of County Commissioners. The petition, one <br />of the largest ever received by the commission, was signed by more <br />than 14,000 people. <br />Other important benefits of four-laning this section of S.R. 60 <br />would be the increased speed and efficiency of evacuations for <br />hurricanes and other emergencies,, and the economic benefits of <br />more efficient transportation of goods and services. <br />in addition tc <br />as part of th <br />least four lan <br />A preliminary <br />$33.6 million. <br />being dangerous in its current condition, S.R. 60, <br />e Intrastate Highway System, must be widened to at <br />es to meet FDOT's minimum standards for this system. <br />estimate of the cost of this project is approximately <br />41 <br />BOOK 89 PAGFP05 <br />