The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2007-046ftit RESOLUTION NO. 2007- 046 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVE_"_ COUNTY, FLORIDA, APPROVING THE TRANSMITTAL OF A PROPOSED INDIAN RIVER COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE TEXT OF THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT TO THE STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners adopted the Indian River County Comprehensive Plan on February 13, 1990, and WHEREAS, the county received comprehensive plan amendment applications during its January 2007 amendment submittal window, and WHEREAS, the Local Planning Agency held a public hearing on this comprehensive ply.•. amendment request on April 12, 2007, after due public notice, and WHEREAS, the Local Planning Agency voted 6 to 0 to recommend that the Board of County Commissioners transmit the comprehensive plan amendment listed below to the Florida Department of Community Affairs; and WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County held a Transmittal Public Hearing on May 8, 2007, after advertising pursuant to F.S. 163.3184(15)(b)(1), and WHEREAS, The Board of County Commissioners announced at the transmittal public hearins' intention to hold and advertise a final public hearing at the adoption stage of the plan amendment process. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA THAT: 1. The above recitals are ratified in their entirety. 2. The following proposed amendment is approved for transmittal to the State of Florida Department of Community Affairs: 1 of 3 RESOLUTION NO. 2007- 046 AMENDING THE TEXT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN'S TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT BY CHANGING THE ROADWAY LEVEL OF SERVICE STANDARD FOR SR 60 BETWEEN I-95 AND 98TH AVENUE, BY CORRECTING MINOR TYPOGRAPHICAL ERRORS IN THE ANALYSIS SECTION, AND BY CHANGING POLICIES 1.4 AND 1.5 REGARDING THE COUNTY'S TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY REQUIREMENTS (Attachment A) 3. The county does request that the Florida Department of Community Affairs review this comprehensive plan text amendment. The forgoing Resolution was offered by Commissioner Davi s and seconded by Commissioner 01 Bryan and upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Gary C. Wheeler, Chairman Aye Sandra L. Bowden, Vice Chairman Aie Wesley S. Davis, Commissioner Aye Peter D. O'Bryan, Commissioner Aye Joseph E. Flescher, Commissioner AyP The Chairman thereupon declared the resolution duly passed and adopted at a public hearing held this 8"' day of May 2007. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RI'VER COUNTY, FLORIDA BY: Gary ATTEST: ."Wheeler, Chairman Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk 2 of 3 RESOLUTION NO. 2007- 046 APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY William G. Collins II, County Attorney APPROVED AS TO PLANNING MATTERS 1�J/ ..111144. /a Robert '.Keating, AICP Community Development Director F:\Community Development\Users\LONG RANGE\CompPlan Amendments \2007 Jan\FLUE CPTA\BCC transmittal resolution.doc 3 of 3 Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element Link ID On Street From Street To Street Length No. of Lanes Exist ROW Road Type Existing LOS Juris- diction Functional Class LOS Standard 1720 C.R. 512 1-95 C.R.510 3.00 2 100 U 13 CR COL D 1730 C.R. 512 C.R. 510 Roseland Rd 1,25 2 100 U B CR COL D 1740 C.R. 512 Roseland Rd Barber St 0.39 4 100 D B CR COL D • 1741 C.R. 512 Barber St Fleming St 0.72 4 100 D C CR COL D 1742 C.R. 512 Fleming St Easy St ' 0,60 4 . 100 D C CR COL D 1743 C.R. 512 Easy St Delaware St 0.21 4 100 D C CR COL D 1750 C.R. 512 Delaware St U.S. 1 0.86 4 100 D C CR COL D 1805 C.R. 510 C.R. 512 87th St 1.73 2 80 U B CR COL D 1810 C.R. 510 87th St 66th Ave 2.51 2 80 U B • CR COL D 1820 C.R. 510 66th Ave 58th Ave 1.00 2 80 U B CR COL D 1830 C.R. 510 58th Ave U.S. 1 0.50 2 80 U C CR COL D 1840 C.R. 510 U.S. 1 S.R. AIA 2.50 2 100 U B CR COL D 1905 S.R. 60 W. County Line C.R. 512 14.00 2 100 U A SR PA B 1907 S.R. 60 C.R. 512 98th Ave 6.52 2 100 U A SR PA 13 1910 S.R. 60 98th Ave 1-95 1.19 2 100 IJ 13 SR PA 13F3 1915 S.R. 60 1-95 82nd Ave 2.00 4 234 D B • SR PA D' 1920 S.R. 60 82nd Ave 66th Ave 2.00 4 136 D B SR PA D 1925 S.R. 60 66th Ave 58th Ave 1.00 6 100 D 13 SR PA D 1930 S.R. 60 58th Ave 43rc1 Ave II.00 6 100 D 13 SR PA D 1935 S.R. 60 43rd Ave 27th Ave 1,00 6 100 D B SR PA D 1940 S.R. 60 27th Ave W. of 20th Ave 0.50 6 100 D C SR PA D 1945 S.R. 60 (EB) W. of 20th Ave Old Dixie Hwy 0.50 3 70 0 D SR PA D 1950 S.R. 60 (EB) Old Dixie Hwy 10th Ave 0.30 3 70 0 D SR PA D 1955 S.R. 60 (EB) 10th Ave U.S. 1 0.30 3 70 0 D SR PA D 1960 S.R. 60 (EB) U.S. 1 W. of 6th Ave 0.50 3 70 0 D SR PA D 1962 S.R. 60 W. of 6th Ave Indian River Blvd 0.34 4 140 D D SR MA D 1965 S.R. 60 Indian River Blvd ICWW 1.10 4 140 D D SR MA D 1970 S.R. 60 ICWW S.R. AIA 0.50 4 80 D C SR MA D 1975 S.R. 60 (WB) W. of 20th Ave Old Dixie Hwy 0.43 4 . N/A 0 D SR PA D 1980 S.R. 60 (WB) Old Dixie Hwy 10th Ave 0.35 4 N/A 0 D SR PA D 1985 S.R. 60 (WB) 10th Ave • U.S. 1 0.25 4 N/A 0 D SR PA D 1990 S.R. 60 (WB) U.S. 1 W. of 6th Ave 0.24 4 N/A 0 D SR PA D 2020 16th St 58th Ave 43rd Ave 1.00 2 50 U B CR MA D 2030 16th St 43rd Ave 27th Ave 1.00 2 50 U B CR MA D 2040 16th St 27th Ave 20th Ave 0.50 2 100 U B CR MA D Community Development Department Indian River County 68 ATTACHMENT A Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element Link ID On Street From Street To Street Len th g No. of Lanes Road Type Juris- diction Functional Class LOS Exist ROW Needed ROW Improvements by 2030 2230 12th St 43rd Ave 27th Ave 1.00 2 U CR MA D 40 100 2240 12th St 27th Ave 20th Ave 0,50 2 U CR MA D 80 100 2250 12th St 20th Ave OId Dixie Hwy 1.00 2 U CR MA D 80 100 2260 12th St Old Dixie Hwy U.S. 1 0.50 4 U CR .MA D 80 100 2270 12th St U.S. 1 IR Blvd. 0.62 4 U CR MA D 980 9100 verify 2305 Old Dixie Hwy S. County Line Oslo Rd 2.20 2 U CR COL D 35 80-100 2310 Old Dixie Hwy Oslo Rd 4th St 2.10 2 U CR MA D 35 80-100 2315 Old Dixie Hwy 4th St 8th St 0.50 2 . U CR MA D 60 80-100 2320 Old Dixie Hwy 8th St 12th St 0.50 2 U CR MA D 60 80-100 2325 Old Dixie Hwy 12th St S. VB City L 0.30 2 U CR MA D 60 80-100 2330 Old Dixie Hwy S. VB City L 16th St 0.50 2 U CR MA D 60 80-100 2335 OId Dixie Hwy 16th St S.R. 60 0.50 2 U CR MA D 60. 80-100 2340 Old Dixie Hwy U.S. 1 41st Ave 0.35 2 U CR MA D 960 D100 2345 Old Dixie Hwy 41st St 45th St 0.52 2 U CR COL D 60 80-100 2350 Old Dixie Hwy 45th St 49th St 0.50 2 U CR COL D 60 80-100 2355 Old Dixie Hwy 49th St 65th St 2.00 2 U CR COL D 60 80-100 2360 Old Dixie Hwy 65th St 69th St 0.50 2 U CR COL D 60 80-100 2365 Old Dixie Hwy 69th St C.R. 510 2.50 2 U CR COL D 60 80-100 2410 27th Ave S. County Line Oslo Rd 2.00 2 U CR COL D 50 80 Add 2 Lanes 2420 27th Ave Oslo Rd 4th St 2.00 2 U CR MA 0 80 80 Add 2 Lanes 2430 271h Ave 4th St 8th St 0.50 2 U CR MA D 80 80 Add 2 Lanes 2440 27th Ave 8th St 12th St 0.50 2 U CR MA D 80 80 Add 2 Lanes 2450 27th Ave 12th St S. VB City L 0.30 2 U CR MA D 80 80 Add 2 Lanes 2460 27th Ave S. VB City L 16th St 0.40 2 U CR MA D 80 80 Add 2 Lanes 2470 27th Ave 16th St S.R. 60 0.50 2 U CR MA D 80 80 Add 2 Lanes 2480 27th Ave S.R. 60 Atlantic Blvd 0.30 2 U CR MA D 80 2510 27th Ave Atlantic Blvd Aviation Blvd 0.30 2 U CR MA D 80 2520 Oslo Rd 1-95 82nd Avenue 0.23 2 U CR COL D 60 174 Add 2 Lanes 2530 Oslo Rd 82nd Ave 58th Ave 2.00 2 U CR COL D 60 174 Add 2 Lanes 2540 Oslo Rd 58th Ave 43rd Ave 1.00 2 U CR COL D 60 174 Add 2 Lanes 2550 Oslo Rd 43rd Ave 27th Ave 1.00 2 U CR COL D 60 174 Add 2 Lanes 2560 Oslo Rd 27th Ave 20th Ave 0.50 2 U CR MA D 30 162 Add 2 Lanes 2570 Oslo Rd 20th Ave Old Dixie Hwy 2.00 2 U CR MA D 30 162 Add 2 Lanes 2580 Oslo Rd Old Dixie Hwy U.S. 1 0.30 4 D CR MA D 30 130 2610 6th Ave ' 12th St 17th St 0.64 2 U CR MA D 60 80 2615 6th Ave 17th St S. VB City L 0.13 2 U CR MA D 60 80 Community Development Department Indian River County 84. Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element POLICY 1.4: No development project shall be approved if the projected impacts of the project would serve to reduce service levels of any roadway on the traffic circulation system below the standards identified in Policy 1.1. Conditions applicable to this policy are as follows: 0 Development project shall be defined as any activity which requires issuance of a development order. This includes: comprehensive plan amendment, rezonings, site plan approval, preliminary plat approval, preliminary PD approval, DRI development order approval, preliminary PD approval, DRI development order approval, and building permit approval for single family structures. Projected project traffic shall be based on the application of ITE trip rates (Trip Generation, 71h Edition or subsequent editions), Indian River County trip rates, or applicant derived/county approved trip rates for the proposed use(s) to the project. Existing service level will be derived by using the peak hour/peak season/peak direction traffic volume ranges or average travel speeds of a link. Volume shall be the sum of existing demand and plus committed demand. This is described in the concurrency management system component of the Capital Improvements Element. 0 Capacity shall be calculated as specified in the state road category of the appropriate table in the most current version of Florida's Level of Service Handbook, using peak hour/peak season/peak direction default table assumptions. As an alternative, capacity ma n , analysis, or speed delay studies. For capacity determination purposes, a roadway improvement may be considered to be in place and the capacity to be provided by the improvement may be counted as available if the referenced improvement is listed in the first five years of the county's adopted Seven Year Schedule of Capital Improvements (appendix A of the Capital Improvements Element) or in the first three years of the adopted Florida Department of Transportation five year work program, is scheduled to be under construction not more than three years after issuance of the project's first building permit, and where the county issues a development order for the project needing the improvement approving this allowance. If based on the above analysis the proposed development does not meet approval requirements, the developer may choose to conduct a more detailed traffic impact analysis as described in Policy 1.5. POLICY 1.5: The county, through its land development regulations, shall require submission of a traffic impact analis study for all projects projected to generate/attract 1000 or more average daily trips, or 54 .or more peak hour trips. Community Development Department Indian River County 104 Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element limited to the afternoon peak hour. Existing peak hours will be identified from traffic counts between 7:00 and 9:00 a.m., 11:30 a.m. and 1:30 p.m., and 4:00 and 6:00 p.m., using 15 -minute intervals. Counts not taken during the peak season shall be factored, based on county traffic counts in the project area, to represent peak season conditions. Level of service calculations shall be based on the Operational Analysis methodology described in the 3099 latest edition of the Highway Capacity Manual. Future levels of service shall be calculated for the buildout date of the proposed project, as well as for any intermediate development phases. Conditions with and without the proposed development shall be evaluated and documented. Conditions with the development shall be based on a combined traffic volume of the projected peak hour/peak season traffic generated by the site and the projected peak hour/peak season background traffic. The background traffic shall be calculated based on one of the following methods: a) Increase the existing peak season traffic to the buildout date based on historical growth trends over a minimum of 5 years and a maximum of 10 years. Traffic generated by committed developments which would impact the study area shall also be included subject to appeal to reviewing agencies. b) Increase the existing peak season traffic to the buildout date based on an interpolation using traffic volumes projected by the county. The county reserves the right to require method "a" to be used if it feels traffic projections may be inaccurate due to recent changes in land use or roadway improvements. Roadway improvements which are committed and scheduled to be complete at or before the project buildout, or development phase, date may be included when calculating future levels of service. Roadway improvementswhich are necessary to maintain projected peak hour -peak season peak direction conditions at a level of service consistent with Policy 1.1 shall be identified. POLICY 1.6: The county shall maintain its traffic impact fee process and shall review the fee schedule at least once every two years. If necessary, changes to the fee schedule shall be made based upon the results of the fee schedule review. POLICY 1.7: By 2005, the county shall consider imposing part or all of the ELMS one to five cent local option gas tax. OBJECTIVE 2 SAFETY By 2010, the number of intersections with a high relative crash rate (over 2.0 accidents per million entering vehicles) will be less than the five high relative crash rate intersections identified in 2001. Community Development Department Indian River County 106