3/19/2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• When the comprehensive plan was adopted in 1990, and again when it was revised in 1998 as a result of the Evaluation and Appraisal Process, the county failed to consider the special circumstances concerning the referenced segment of 25`h Street, SW. Because 25`h Street SW could draw traffic from only one side of the street and because another parallel street is available, there was no need to include the referenced segment on the Thoroughfare Plan Map. For that reason, the proposed amendment is consistent with Future Land Use Element Policy 14.3. Transportation Element Policy 1.2 This policy sets the following guidelines for the evaluation and ranking of road projects: a. whether the project is needed to protect public health and safety, to fulfill the county's legal commitment to provide facilities and services, or to preserve or achieve full use of existing facilities; whether the project increases efficiency of use of existing facilities, prevents or reduces future improvement cost, provides service to developed areas lacking frill service, or promotes in -fill development; c. whether the project represents a logical extension of facilities and services within a designated urban service area; d. whether the project is the most cost effective alternative; and whether the project provides the least adverse impact to the environment of the options. Because of low anticipated traffic volumes (due to development of only one side of the street) a project constructing 25th Street, SW between 20`h Avenue and 27th Avenue is not consistent with any of the above guidelines. Therefore, the referenced segment of 25`h Street, SW does not need to be a Thoroughfare Plan road and the request to remove that segment from the Thoroughfare Plan Map is consistent with Transportation Element Policy 1.2. Consistency Summary As part of its consistency analysis, staff compared the proposed request to all applicable objectives and policies in the plan and found no conflicts Therefore, the request is consistent with the comprehensive plan. CONCLUSION The proposed amendment corrects an oversight in the comprehensive plan. Although 25th Street, SW is unlikely to be constructed, its location is such that even if it were built it would serve development only on one side of the road. For that reason, even if that segment of 25`h Street, SW were built, traffic volume would not likely warrant Thoroughfare Plan Map designation. Additionally, a parallel two-lane road already exists in St. Lucie County In contrast, the referenced segment of 25`h Street SW does not currently exist and there are no plans to build it. For those reasons, it is unlikely that that portion of 25`h Street, SW will ever be constructed and designation on the Thoroughfare Plan Map is not necessary. Staff supports the request. RECOMMENDATION Based on the analysis, staff and the Planning and Zoning Commission recommend that the Board of County Commissioners approve the proposed comprehensive plan text amendment by approving the attached ordinance. March 19, 2002 51 •