7/12/1994 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The initial work we did was limited in scope and was easy to address. It included a review of the Kimley Horn Traffic Study and a determination whether or not the effort was in conformance with Section 952.07 of the Indian River County LDR's. My review concluded that the mechanics of the Study were in conformance with generally accepted traffic principles. At the time I completed my review, I did not have the final Site Plan, nor was I asked to review Internal Circulation and traffic demands on the project's proposed driveway operation. Subsequently, Mr. Scott McGuire and I discussed my preliminary review, and I was asked to review the report again in order to address the traffic demands that full development of the proposed Site Plan would place on the driveways serving the Site as well as any other possible areas of LDR non-compliance. By way of background, in 19901 had a major input in developing Section 952 while serving as Indian River County Traffic Engineer. Upon receipt of this assignment from Mr. McGuire, and after thorough review, I again today confirm my position that both driveways should be treated as "Major Driveways" since they fully meet the code definition as well as promoting: traffic safety and reducing the possibility of internal congestion occurring within the Site. Even using the Kimley Horn methodology, the 2,000 TEDD "trigger" was definitely exceeded for the Mooring Line Drive and only missed by 3 TEPD (2 in and 1 out move for a 24 hour period). The need for both driveways to be classed as "Major" was because if the Windward Way traffic distribution was only 0.1 % more, the 2,000 TEPD trigger will be exceeded. A recent review of the number of potential shoppers residing along SR Al indicated that if the Moorings population were removed from the census data, the number of potential customers south of the Site along SR A 1 A would approach the number to the north of the Site between the Moorings and the 17th Street Bridge. This would indicate that the Kimley Horn Report underestimated the number of people using the Center from the south. Even if it was off by as little as 0.1 %, the Windward Way driveway would officially have to classified as Major. Subsequently, I reviewed the July 12th Property Owners presentation to the County Commissioners on this issue of driveway classification. I find this work very comprehensive in nature, and I am in agreement with it. The report is thorough and makes several excellent points which most reports normally don't address in detail. A second important issue is the subject of whether the second median cutin Mooring Line Drive was in conformance with the County LDR's. In making this review, I was shown the memorandum by Staff that this median cut was not subject to the LDR's since it was not listed on the County "Thoroughfare Plan". I strongly dig -agree with this position by Staff. Section 952.03 of the LDR's clearly state that "the requirements set forth in this Chapter should be applicable to all land development activities in the unincorporated area of Indian River County". This clearly indicates that all of the operational safety criteria from the project have to meet the minimum standards set forth in Chapter 952 of the LDR's, and the present plan of two closely spaced median cuts along Mooring tine Drive does not satisfy this requirement. My findings indicated that the treatment of the driveways, median cuts, internal loading areas, and parking criteria involved with the proposed Sea Mist Site Plan must meet the LDR standards. My professional judgment has not changed. 84 July 12, 1994 5OOK 9� AGE 858