My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7/12/1994
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1990's
>
1994
>
7/12/1994
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 12:04:25 PM
Creation date
6/16/2015 2:33:28 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
07/12/1994
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
125
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
800 l <br />The traffic impact= analysis and the proposed off-site traffic <br />improvements were reviewed and approved by the county's <br />Traffic Engineering Division. <br />6. Traffic Circulation: <br />-Overall Analysis: As required by the LDRs, the- developer <br />.submitted a traffic impact analysis performed by a <br />professional engineer (see attachment #9). This analysis, <br />which has been reviewed and accepted by the County Traffic <br />Engineer, assumes a "worst case scenario" of 47,500 square <br />feet of development including 2,300 square feet of restaurant <br />use (note: the site plan.depicts 46,560 square feet and no <br />sit down restaurant use).' According to the analysis, at <br />build -out (assumed to occur in 1995), the project would <br />generate 4,438 daily trips and 408 peak hour trips. Of the <br />total project trips, 57.9% would be pass -by capture trips from <br />vehicles already on the roadways. Thus, the new trips <br />anticipated from the project are 11868 daily trips and 172 <br />peak hour trips. Based on existing traffic volumes and <br />estimated volumes resulting from the project, 1995 roadway <br />level of service conditions with project traffic were <br />analyzed. The analysis shows that SR A -1-A in and around the <br />project site and in the entire south beach area would meet a <br />"B" level of service (LOS) (see attachment #9). The LOS "B" <br />is two levels above the county's minimum acceptable peak <br />season/peak hour/peak direction LOS "D" standard. <br />-External: The revised plan proposes three -driveway <br />connections, two to Mooring Line Drive and one to Windward <br />Way. The driveway on Windward Way and the eastern driveway on <br />Mooring Line Drive are shown as full movement driveways. The <br />western driveway on Mooring Line Drive would prohibit out <br />bound left turns. The western driveway on Mooring Line Drive <br />is designed to handle employee and delivery traffic, and would <br />function to separate this type of traffic from store <br />customers. _ <br />For northbound traffic on S.R. A -1-A, a left -turn lane would <br />need to be provided on S.R. A -1-A for traffic turning left <br />onto Windward Way. The existing 36' of pavement within the <br />Windward Way right-of-way would be restriped to provide 3 <br />lanes of traffic, two eastbound and one westbound. This would <br />provide a left turn lane and a right -turn lane/through lane <br />for eastbound traffic. <br />For southbound traffic on S.R. A -1-A, there would need to be <br />a right -turn deceleration lane provided on S.R. A -1-A for <br />traffic turning westbound onto Mooring Line Drive. Also, the <br />pavement and the median within the Mooring Line drive right- <br />of-way would need to be modified to provide a median opening <br />for left turns into the proposed shopping center at two <br />points. A left turn lane would need to be provided on the <br />westbound segment of Mooring Line Drive by striping -out the <br />existing 26' of pavement for a left turn into the center and <br />through lane. An additional 4' of pavement would need to be <br />added to the eastbound segment of Mooring Line Drive to <br />complete a 24' wide segment, and the pavement would be striped <br />to accommodate a through/left-turn lane and a right -turn lane. <br />(Please see attachment #6 for a depiction of these required <br />traffic improvements.) <br />Residents who have reviewed the revisions have raised a <br />concern that the proposed additional median cut is spaced <br />closer than the 330' separation distance referenced in LDR <br />section 952.12(9)(b) (see attachment #8). The Public Works <br />47 <br />July 12, 1994 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.