My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7/16/2002
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2000's
>
2002
>
7/16/2002
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/17/2019 1:40:11 PM
Creation date
9/25/2015 4:42:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
BCC
Document Type
Migration
Meeting Date
07/16/2002
Archived Roll/Disk#
2558
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
106
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
• <br />Given those conditions, the number ofpeak hour/peak season/peak direction trips that would be generated <br />bythe most intense use of the subject property under the existing land use designation was calculated to <br />be 6.4. This was determinedbymultiplying the total number ofunits allowed (16) under the existing land <br />use designation byITE 's factor of 1 01 p.m peak hour trips/unit, to determine the total number of trips <br />generated. Of these trips, 64% of the 6.4 will be inbound and 36% will be outbound. Of the inbound trips, <br />62% or 4 will be northbound. <br />To determine the number ofpeak hour/peak season/peak direction trips that would be generated bythe <br />most intense use of the subject property under the proposed land use designation, the total number ofunits <br />allowed under the proposed amendment (80) was multiplied by ITE 's factor of 1.01 p.m. peak hour <br />trips/unit to determine the total number of trips generated (81) Ofthese trips, 64% will be inbound and <br />36% will be outbound. Of the inbound trips, 62% or 50 will be northbound Therefore the most intense <br />use of the subject property under the proposed land use designation would generate 26 (32 - 6 = 26) more <br />peak hour/peak season/peak direction traps than the 6 that would be generated bythe most intense use of <br />the subject property under the existing land use designation. <br />Using a modified gravitymodel and a hand assignment, the peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips <br />generated by the proposed use were then assigned to impacted roads on the network. Impacted roads <br />are defined in section 910.09(4)(b)3 of the county's LDRs as roadway segments which receive five percent <br />(5%) or more of the project traffic or fifty (50) or more of the project trips, whichever is less. <br />Capacities for all roadway segments in Indian River County are calculated and updated annually, utilizing <br />the latest and best available peak season traffic characteristics and applying the Florida Department of <br />Transportation Level ofService Handbook approved methodology. Available capacity is the total capacity <br />less existing and committed (vested) traffic volumes, this is updated daily based upon vesting associated <br />with project approvals. <br />The traffic capacity for the segment of 82nd Avenue adjacent to this site is 820 trips (peak hour/peak <br />season/peak direction) at Level of Service (LOS) "D," while the Total Segment Demand (existing traffic <br />volume + vested traffic volume) on this segment of 82"d Avenue is 141 trips (peak hour/peak season/peak <br />direction). The additional 32 peak hour/peak season/peak direction trips created bythe most intense use <br />of the subject property under the proposed amendment would increase the Total Segment Demand peak <br />hour/peak season/peak direction trips for this segment of 82' Avenue to approximately 173. <br />Based on the above analysis, staff determined that 82nd Avenue and all other impacted roads can <br />accommodate the additional trips without decreasing their existing levels of service. <br />Table 1 identifies each of the impacted roadway segments associated with the proposed land use <br />designation. As indicated in Table 1, sufficient capacity is available on all of the segments to accommodate <br />the projected traffic associated with the request. <br />Table 1: Traffic Concurrency Deteiruination <br />Impacted Road Segments <br />(peak hour/peak season/peak direction) <br />Link <br />Road <br />From <br />To <br />Segment <br />Capacity <br />LOS "D" <br />Existing Demand <br />Total <br />Segme <br />rat <br />Dema <br />Available <br />Segment <br />Capacity <br />Project <br />Demand <br />Positive <br />Concurren <br />cy Deter - <br />nnnation <br />Existing <br />Volume <br />Vested <br />Volume <br />1915E <br />S.R.60 <br />1-95 <br />32nd <br />Ave <br />1,890 <br />999 <br />704 <br />nd <br />1,714 <br />176 <br />11 <br />Y <br />JULY 16, 2002 <br />f,,, <br />Lid i <br />• <br />-65- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.