HomeMy WebLinkAboutSection 02 - Traffic Circulation ST. LUCIE COUNTY
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE
TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ELEMENT
Prepared by:
St. Lucie County
Board of County Commissioners
St. Lucie County
Department of Community Denelopment
January 9, 19 90 TRAFFI C CI RCULATI ON
TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ELEMENT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I NTRODUCTI ON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 1
EXI STI NG TRAFFI C CI RCULATI ON DATA . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 2
Functional Classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 2
Lane Geometry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 3
Daily Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 3
Other Transportation Modes . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 11
LEVELS OF SERVICE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 15
EXISTING TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 18
Existing Roadway Needs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 1g
FUTURE TRAFFIC CIRCULATION ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 23
1995 Traffic Forecast . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 24
Long-Range Traffic Forecasts . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 24
NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION CONSIDERATIONS . . . . . . . 2 - 42
Bicyclists . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 42
Pedestrians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 42
GOALS, OBJECTI VES, AND POLI CI ES , , , , , , , , , , , , , 2 - 4 3
i
LI ST OF FI GURES
Fiaure Paae
1 Existing Lane Geometry and Functional
Classification , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , 2 _ 4
2 Existing 24-Hour Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 5
3 Florida High Speed Rail Commission:
Proposed St. Lucie County Alignment 2- 13
4 FDOT Identified Airfields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 14
5 Special Transportation Service Areas . . . . . . . . . 2 - 22
6 1995 County Road Construction Program 2- 26
7 2015 Traffic Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 34
8 Thoroughfare Network Right-of-Way Protection
Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 41
9 Estimated Year 2010 F. D. O. T. Functional
Classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 41a
LIST OF TABLES
Table Paae
1 Existing Daily Traffic Volumes . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 6
2 Levels of Service . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 16
3 LOS Standard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 18
4 Minimum Required Improvement to Existing Roadway
Links to Provide LOS "D° or Better 2- i9
5 Road Improvements Program FY88/89 Thru FY94/95 2- 27
6 2 015 Needs Anal ys i s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 3 5
7 Category A Public Facilities Allowed to Operate at
or Below Minimum LOS Standards Until
Programmed for Improvement . . . . . . . . . . . 2 - 46
8 Category C Public Facilities Allowed to Operate at
or Below Minimum LOS Standards . . . . . , . . . 2 - 46
ii
TRAFFI C Q RCDL~TI ON ELffi~NT
ST. LIIQ E COIINTY
CO1~~PRRHS~iSIpE PLAN
I~ITRODIICTI OH
One of the greatest influences upon the mobility of Post-War
America has been the completion of the Interstate Highway
Network. This primary roadway network, criss-crossing the United
States, has opened areas and markets throughout the Country that
were once inaccessible to much of America. The influences of the
interstate system on the development of Florida as a whole may
only be rivaled by the influences of commercial aviation on the
development of the Central and South Florida regions.
An efficient transportation network may very simply be
characterized as a system which provides for the economical and
efficient delivery of goods and services to or from a given
community. Conversely, this same network would then permit that
community to export its local products to a much wider and
diverse market than previously available.
Until the early 1900's access to St. Lucie County was essentially
restricted to ocean going and inland waterway vessels. What few
roads existed in the area were more or less dirt trails. Trips to
neighboring communities that in contemporary society are now
measured in minutes would often take all day or in some cases
several days. With the construction of the Florida East Coast
Railroad, in the 1910~s, St. Lucie County was now better able to
export its agricultural products and to import the goods that it
needed to grow. In the 1920' s and 1930' s the coastal road, known
as the Federal Highway, provided an effective ground route to the
cities of Miami and Jacksonville.
Historically, St. Lucie County has been an agricultural
communi.ty. Until the last 15 years there has been no need for an
extensive internal county road network, other than what is
necessary to serve the immediate needs of the citrus and ranching
communi.ty. In many instances roadway and agricultural drainage
canals shared the same right-of-way. However, with the explosive
growth that the County has been experiencing over the last 15
years, and with the rates that are expected in the future, the
need for an efficient transportation network grows at the same
rate, or perhaps faster.
January 9, 1990 2- 1 TRAFFIC
This expanded/improved road network would permit the free and
reasonably uninterrupted movement of goods and services, which
are essential not oril.y for the maintenance of the desired
quality of life, but also for the continued economic well being.
the area. Whether an individual owns a motor vehicle or not,
whether an individual walks to work and shopping, or whether that
individual must drive 500 miles a week for these same purposes,
contemporary society demands that a community provide itself
with a efficient transportation network.
The purpose of this Element is to coordinate with the Future Land
Use Element both the the short and long term transportation needs
for St. Lucie County. As such, this element is divided into a
series of subsections. The first examines the current traffic
conditions within the County, identifying any areas that are
failing to meet accepted Level of Service standards. The next
section examines the short term transportation needs through the
year 1995. The next section examines the long term transportation
needs to the year 2015. This portion of the plan is intended to
serve as a guide for both the citizens and decision makers of St.
Lucie County in implementing their Comprehensive Plan for the
future.
Finally this Element examines, through both text and policy
statements, the need to explore and provide for alternative
transportation within the community. The purpose of this would
be so th~t as our community grows, those living in the more~
intensely developed areas of the County should not have to relay
on the private automobile as their sole source of transportation.
B~ STI HG TRAF'FI C Q RCDLg~I ON D~TB
An inventory of the 1987/88 existing St. Lucie County
transportation network was undertaken to determine the functional
classification of the roads in the County, number of through
lanes, corresponding capacities, daily traffic volumes, and
levels of service. The location of other links in the
transportation network, such as railroad lines, the Port of Ft.
Pierce, and the St. Lucie County International Airport were also
identified. Figures 2-1 and 2-2 were developed to illustrate the
results of this inventory which are discussed below.
Functional Classification
Roadways are classified according to the purpose they serve in
the network, as related to traffic volumes, speed of travel on
the roadway, access needs, and mobility needs. The following
definitions, which are based on Rule 9J-5, F. A. C. , describe the
"functional" terminology of street and highways used throughout
the remainder of this Element.
January 9, 1990 2- 2 TRAFFIC
Kajor ~rterial Road - is a roadway primarily focusing on
carrying through traffic. Major arterials provide service
that is relatively continuous, high in volume, of long trip
1 ength, and hi gh operati ng s peed.
l~ii.nor ~rterial.Road - emphasizes through traffic movement
similar to a ma~or arterial, but provides greater land
access and distributed traffic to smaller geographic areas
than the major arterials. Minor arterials also offer lower
traffic mobility.
Collector Streets - provide both land acce.ss and traffic
circulation between local roads and/or arterial roads. A
collector provides service that is relatively moderate in
volume, of moderate trip length, and moderate speed.
Local Streets - primarily permits direct access to abutting
property and connections to a higher order roadway. A local
street provides service that is relatively low in volume and
short average trip length or minimal through traffic
movements.
Figure 2-1 indicates the functional classification of the primary
road network in St. Lucie County, as defined by the Florida
Department of Transportation. It should be noted that with the
exception of selected ma~or transportation routes, the functional
classification of those roadways located within the Cities of Ft.-
Pierce and Port St. Lucie are not indicated on this figure. For
further information on the transportation network within these
communities, specific =eference will need be made to the
respective Traffic Circulation Elements in the municipal
comprehensive plans.
Lane Geoaetry
The number of through lanes on the existing roadway network is
also indicated on Figure 2-1. For the purpose of this plan, a
roadway~s Level of Service is based on the relationship between
the number of lanes, the capacity of those lanes, and the daily
traffic volumes using those roadways.
Daily Traffic Dolumes
Figure 2-2, in conjunction with Table 2-1, indicates the
existing daily traffic volumes for the primary traffic network in
St. Lucie County. This figure represents the peak season
conditions for the federal fiscal year 1987-88, the base year for.
the purpose of this transportation planning effort.
January 9, 1990 2- 3 TRAFFIC
i N 9 I A 1 A~~ E 1 ~ 0 tl A T 1
A.' E--_ w~` A'° ` E XI ST I NG
~ ti , ' LANE GEOMETRY
I o b,
~ ° ~ ANo
I
, f i ~ ~
~ FUNCTIONA~ CLASSIFICAIION
~ ~I - °a ~
~ a
B 9
t f
I 1 dLD ' 2L ~ a
' I w~ce dn.
~ ~ " ~ ~ ~oA~,~~~ LEGEND
v i ~ ti~
~ ~ _ r ~ L]N1iE~ FCCESS
~ PRINCIPAL ARTERIRL
' ~ e ~ Z~ ~ MAJOR AAiEA[AL
mwsr. +rdu~ Eners~a ~ 2l
( ~ ~ - ~ anw~ ~IINOR AftTERIAL
l i ~ " •~u~~ COLLECTOR
; ~ ~ ~ 2L Nll~IBER OF LANES
€ ~ 3
~ ~ ~ 2 ~ INCOAPORATED AREAS
~ ~ d~ ~ iL ° URBAN SEAVICE AREA
W I il a ~ f ~ BOUNOARY
i ti~ ( z
! I ~ YIMAT ROAD 2~ ~
I 2~ ~
e ~ ~ ~
I ~
~4 5 ~
u ~ d~
W ~ _.--n
~ , ~ P
~ ~ 1
ft n1M~1s1A L
~ I
, ~ ~
e I J
j ° I~II~III 9
w~a q
r
4 U~ ` i ~
~ ~ V
~ 2~ ~ 4 •
rn a~.
•~wc nw
I ~ s~
q II E
I
I~ ~ a T S. lYCdF ~
. ~ ~
~ a~,c4f NJ~. ~O~IIV~U
` ~~I ffI~AIDA
~
` (
~ FIGURE 2-i
- - _
~
A Si E p
76..E P i9 E fl. C
Y A A Y i ~ c o u M r r page 2- 4
1 N 0 1 1 N 1 ~ A d N 1 9 ~
w 1~ E__~_-----=~=----- R~a E R,~ E E XI ST I NG
~ ~ ~ ~ ° 24 -NOUR
• ~ ,a ~
~ ~ ' ~ ~ °e~ TRAFFIC VO~UMES
~ ~
~ ~s mi.ia p
• I p uDe
~
r ~ I ~ a t
e I ~ ~ ~v 9
'
~ I 5~~^1 ,
LEGEND
i ~ ~e' ron, nnrz
p , ~ rKE~
~ ~ ~
~ ~ . %~-0~~`~ ~ ;A) LEVEL Of SERVICE
~
}
P ~P
~ 9
i~~ ° ltR6 pfiZ7 1988 PEAN SE~SON 2?-HOOR
h°AN4E AVEN4C E'RP'~~~ON ~~i
. r r, ~ 9' ~ 1PnFFie uo~uMEs
~ I ~ `
~ - ~ ~ r PRIOR TO THe COMPLCTSON
~ aF i-s5
~ 4 ~ '
l 4
r~+ i p , ` f . ~
I ~ 4 ~ pP,BAN BOINJDAAY LWE
"s
..i F [ 2
~ t P0~ ~ : Fr~~ Q
~ I ~ Y ~ow~,, _ . INi~ Ir~R°;,~,~o aP~ns
~II 9
~ I ' ~ne 5 ~ S 2
Y I U) ^ ~fa, '
1
p I
~ ~ 8
s I ~
V ~ t~1' ~F.._ ~"A ~ ~ t~4c
~ i ~ • e ~ ,9G°t~ Pf .
~ c
a ~ ~ 9
}~R ~ ~
/ \ 'x
~ ~ ~ s
~
, ~r~
~ °E~~~ .
U r ~~~1
~V~a , ~ ft ll E
i~y
I ~
. ~ ~
~ I ~ P . lUt1H
~
, ~ ~ :.,~~,E ~ ~0~~~~
I " b~ ff~~~II~A
~ ' ~
FIGURE 2-2
. _ _ - .
p,,
E P.E E P`5 E A 1 E
s o u~ Y P page 2- 5
Ip A A T 1 i
TABI.E 2 - 1
ST. LUCIE ODUNCY
EXISfING QAILY 1TtA['FIC VOIA~7ES '
~ 1987/88 PEAI( SFA.9oN
A? .
~
~
A~
fi
~ ROAONR+IY JURIS* EIaCM 7~D PEAK SFA901~1 VOL[I~ IANFS 1988 I116
~ - - - -
ANC~E RD. C OEtANGE AVE. AVFNOE D 11,588 2 C
F-+
r.in~so Br.w. c es~ er,w. wESr vnacnlrA pa.. 6,835 2 A
~
p C f~ST VIIaGIIdi}? o[t. PRn~41 vISrA Bi.w. 8,403 2 A
C PR7l~ VISfA Bi~7D. Fi~ pR. 7, 208 2 A
C FTARESPA DR. So. 251H ST. 12,847 2 C
CI'iROS AvE.•* C/S So. US ~1 9O. 7'TH ST. 4,436 2 A
GS so. US ;1 II~IDIAN RIVII2 DR. 6,142 4 A
DE[AHARE A~IE.•• c/s So. US ~i So. T1H sr. 5,612 3 A
GS So. TIH ST. So, lOTH ST. 11,050 4 A
C/S So. 107H ST. So. 1374i ST. 11,211 4 A
GS So. 137H ST. So. 1771~ ST. 12, 830 4 A
ED[+R[2D6 EtD. C So. US ~1 OdFAPIDEIt AVE. 9,154 2 B
C OIFAPIDFR AvE. S[H~II2ISE BLVD. 11,020 2 B
c s[nuusE ar.w. so. 25~x sr. il, 239 2 s
N C So. 251H ST. SQ.VIT'L RD. 12,382 2 C
~ FIaRF~TA OR. PSL 9o[Tt4IDFSID BLV'D. PSL BLVD. 2,584 2 A
o~ C PSL BLVD• WFST VIRGINIA ~R. 13,004 2 C
C WESP VIIbGaIIA DR. PIti1~1 VISfA BLVD. 12.270 2 C
C PR7tR1 VISTA HLVD. AIIa0~90 BZW. N/A 2 N/A
GA77.IN/SAVAGE BLVD. PSI, I-95 SA\]Cx~~ SLVp. 3,936 2 A
PSI. SAVl7~B~ BLVD. PSL BLVD. N/A 2 N/A
r~°°~~Ta AVE- EP So. Os #1 So. T14! ST. 2,981 2 A
Fp So• TiH ST• ~[~1DBE~: EtB. 6,019 2 A
Q~1DFS C[Ir-OE'F RD. C SIIAITZ RD. N~ST tIIOf~?Y RD. N/A 2 N/A
C WFSP MLIx~Y RD. RE5FS7VE OOM. pK. 2,815 2 A
C RFSERVE ~1. PK. RESEi2~7E BLVD. N/A 2 N/A
u`IDIAN RIVEIt ~R," FP SEA[~Y DR, AVENUE A N/A 2 N/A
C/S AVENUE A QitANC~ AVE. 9,086 4 A
GS ORANGE AVE. CI7RUS AVE. 7,446 3 A
y F'P CI7ROS AvE. SAVAI~IH RD. 3, 565 2 A
~ GS SAVAAIl~BIH RD. hIIDNg?Y RD. 3, 046 2 A
GS FffOFQ1Y RD. [~I.7~Ot~1 RD. 2,527 2 A
?rJ GS c~I.rnoiN RD. I~1R'PIN Qo/I.]IdE 5,167 2 A
~
H
C~
TA[3[E 2 - 1
( Q~NPINUFD ~
SP. LUCIE OOIi.._.
IXISTII~IG OAILY 7RAN'FIC WL[r~S
4 1987/88 PEAK SEA.9DN .
W
~
~
A~
~ ~Y JiIRIS* EiaOM 1t~ PEAK SFA9oN VoLtJME iANFS 1988 LDs
~O
` IAU]RIO RD. C I-95 NOR1Ii [(7NGg I3Vy. 3, 023 2
~ C NOR1H KINGS EE+AC. No. OS ~1 4,545 2
~ A
p ~IOCIIH JFS]KINS RD. C OEtAN(~ AVE.
4, 664 2 A
C ~ N/A 2 A
Nolzill KINGS [iNY." C/S No. OS ~1 IDID[ZIO RD. 8,086 2 A
as n~cuo en. sr. wciE ar.w. u, 390 2 B
Gs sr. wctE ai,w. [sn. 10,223 2 e
GS ANC~,E Rp. QEtpNGE AVE. 9, 056 2 B
9o[T1H KII~GS [ivY.•* GS ORANGE AVE. ' 0[~QIDBEE RD. 6,368 2 A
LYN('~TE Oi2. PSL PffDPORT RD. So. US ~1 6.782 2 A
hIIDP(X2T RD. PSL So. OS ~1 LYNGATE DR. 10,526 2 B
PSL LYNC',ATE DR. PT. ST. LOCIE BI.VD. 12,613 2 C
N MIU[+AY RD. (FASPI C INDIAN RIVER OR. So. US /1 8,912 2 g
~ FffDG~AY RD. (WESP) C So. US ~1 OI.FAI~IDIIt AVE. 20,971 2
E
J C oiFA[~I2 AvE. S[]TIItISE SLVp. 12.407 2 C
c s~rnuse ar.w. so. 2stt~ sr. ii,383 2 B
C So. 25th ST. SFZVTTZ RD. 8.464 2 A
C SIIAITZ RD. (~l?DES CUP-9EF RD. 5, 875 2 A
C Ql~D~ CVr~-0FF RD. I-95 5.829 2 A
C I-95 oEC~OBF~ Bp. 1.154 2 A
ot~CiloBF~ RD.** C/S So. 17TH Sl. So. 25TH ST. 13,932 4 p
GS So. 257ti ST. So. 33RD ST. 15,435 4 A
C/S So. 33RD SP. VIFaGIIdIA AVE. . ll.593 4 A
C/S VIRGIIJIA AVE. MQ~EIL RD. 22.811 4 B
C/S McI~EiL Rp. ,JFNLCII~LS gp. 17,762 4 A
C/S .IFS1I(INS Rp. I-95 18,044 4 A
C/S I-95 FIA T[IItNpIKE 25,812 4 B
GS FiA TU~2t~pIKE S[~Ild Rp. 6,012 2 A
C/s SE~IIJ Rp. OKEpCflpg~ dp/I,I~ 3.514 2 A
OID DIXIE E3VY. C:. II~IDIAN RIVIIt C/L SR A-1 A 2,695 2 A
y C SR A-1 A No. US #1 1.765 2 A
~
~
'z]
H
n
TA9I.E 2
( dOBTPINUN._ .
C.~ ST. IACIE OD[R1PY ~
W IXISTING OAILY 14tAFFIC VOL[MES
~ 1987/88 PF1?[( SFA.9oN ~
A? .
fi
k
~O [~O~FP~Y .7[IItiS" EZt~M 11o PF~R SFA.9oN W7.[I~ IANES 1988 Los
. _
~
~ 0[.FAt~IDFSt AvE. E'P S[R~IItiSE I~I,vD. VIIbGINiA AVE. 7,028 2 A
~O FP VgaGII1IA AVE• IDFQ1ItDS RD. 10,485 2 A
0 C ~~F@1RD6 [tD. E7~It~IIits [~HCT. RD. 12,952 2 C
C FAIiMEIts I•HCT. Rp. W. NIIpN~1y gp. 12.952 2 C
C W t~IIDFQIY RD- KITTfI2hP1D1 RD. 6,663 2 A
C KITPEIi~p1b1 RD. BEAQ! pR. 6, 663 2 A
~ A~."' GS No. US ~1 71H Sf. 5,985 4 A
GS 7TH SP. 13TEi ST. 10,234 4 A
GS 137I~ SP. No. 25T[t ST. 16,425 4 A
C/S No. 257I! ST ANGGE RD. 14,117 4 A
C/S ANG[E Rp. I-95 10,780 2 B
C/S I-95 KIIdC~S E3VSC. 7,158 4 A
C KIIJGS ESVY. SHII~I RD. 5, 801 2 A
C SF~`8~1 RD. 0[~DQlOBF~ OD/LINE 2, 402 2 A .
PO[Zl' ST. LUCrE BLw.•" c/s So. US #1 [~RNINIGSIDE BLVD. 23,450 5 A
N c/s r~o~r~sinE sr,w. run[~o[rr [in. 16,906 5 A
~ C/S MIDPOR~P Rp. Fi~RFSTA pR, 24, 330 2 E
GS FLOF2~TA DR. AIId06o ELVp. 18,266 2 E
~ Gs 1~~oeo ar.w. er~ 7~r~ei[cE 15,6a7 2 e ,
Psi. FIA T[HtNPIKE ~G RIO BLw. 13,936 2 D
PSL DEL RIO BLVD. GATLIN/SAVAGE BLVD. N/A 2 N/A
e[tn~ visrA ar.w. c so. os fi tuo r~ 15,690 2 n
C RIO t~P1R DR. ETORE~TA Ixt. 22, 476 2 F
c Fzroa~'A aa. ~[aoe~ ~cw. 9.772 2 A
3t A-1-A ( NOit74f GS II~IDIAN RIVF~t C/L RE~L RD. 3, 619 2 A
GS RE)GAI, Rp, RpYAL pAi19 {~1y 5, 005 2 A
GS ROYAL PAil! NQ?Y OID DIXIE f3V)C. 7, 838 2 A
C/S OID DIXIE E3VY. No. OS #1 N/A 2 N/A
SR A-1- A( 90[11H) • R GS No. US ~1 II~IDIAN RNFSt DR. N/A 4 N/A
C/S II~IDTAN RIVIIi O[t. S. OCFAN pEt. 9,617 2 A
GS S. OCFAN DR. ET, pIQt(~ CITY LIl~IIT N/A 2 N/A
C/S FT. PIQ2CE CI/L. FPL PIANP N/A 2 N/A
I-] GS EPL P'IA~Tf NOF~NDY BQi AOCFSS N/A 2 N/A
~ GS NOit[~NDY HCEI A~C5 h~RTIN OD/LINE 15,903 3 D
~
~
H
n
TABIE 2
( QOBTPIIdIi.~ .
~-1 ' ST. L[]CIE Q~[R1PY
~ IXISlING OAILY TRAFFIC WL[I~1ES
~ 1987/88 PFAK SF1~.90N ~
~
p?
fi ~
K
~Y '~IS` ~ ~ PEAlC SFA90N UDLCME IANES 1988 Itls
~ - -
sanuusr ai.vn. Fe so, os ~i or.~r~t Ave. 4,564 2 A
~ F~' ~LF~?I~IDFit AVE. VIIaGIN7A AVE. 4,919 2 A
~ FL' VIIbGa1TA AVE• IDf~1R~s RD• 5,353 2 A
~ ~ ~ ~Z A~. 5,787 2 A
C BE[Z AVE. W. buDf+G~Y FtD. 3, 309 2 A
TIFFANY AvE. psi, So. US ;1 VII~AGE Q2EQ1 p[t. 11.632 2 C
NoR'IH Us fl*~ C/S No. KIt~C>S HdY. II~IDiRIO RD. 21,203 4 B
GS IHIX2I0 RD. ST. LOCIE BLVD. 19,888 4 A
C/S ST. L[]CIE BI~7D. JUANITA AVE. 26,680 5 S
GS JUANITA AvE. aRANC~ AvE. 36,059 5 E
9o[Ti~l US ~1•" C/S oRANC~ AVE. DQ.~lf+~1RE AVE. 33,886 5 E
GS DII1~ItE AvE. VIAGIIJ7A AVE. 38,823 5 E
C/S VIIaGIIJIA A17E. IDNQ~RD6 Rp. 45,012 5 E
GS E~c~fitps Etp, FAFi~gILS [IICT gp, 46,011 5 E
N GS EARI~RS FIICP [tD. l~'IIp4~lY RD. 38,984 5 E
Gs rua~Y Rn, e[zn~ visrA sLVU, 39, 913 a e
I GS PRII~ VISTA gT~7p. {~P1i,RC~I Rp. N/A 4 N/A
GS FWL7oN [tp. pT. ST. LOCIE gl,Vp. 37,720 4 E
l0
A~•*' GS So. US ~1 OLFISDIDFR AVE. 22,660 5 B
C/S oIFArIDFR AVE. S@IItISE BLVD. 23,421 2 ' E
C/S S[A~IItISE Bi~7D. So. 137H Sf. 24,054 2 E
GS So. 137H ST. So. 25TH ST. 25,285 2 E
C/S So. 2574! ST. So. 35~i ST. 17, 293 2 E
C/S So. 35TH ST. O[C~iDB~ Rp, 15, 060 2 p
C ~#1 VILi1~ c~iQ~Si ~R. 14,907 4 A
C VII1.AiGE Q2EESl OR. II~IDIAN RNII2 L1R. N/A 2 N/A
~ sr.w. ~ pr sr. wciE er.w. ~rne nr.w. a,733 2 A
PSI' Mx2NINGSIDE BLVD. So. US #1 N/A 2 N/A
T~ ~'r E'P DII1~RE AVE. CI7RUS AVE. 13,727 4 A
90. 251ii S18EE,T*R C W. PIIDf~Y gp. ~RD6 Rp. 10,538 2 B
~ c~s ~s Rn. ooaiEZ aLw. i~,864 2 e
GS OD[rPEZ BLVD. VIIaGINIA AVE. 16,823 2 E
~ C/s VIItGIt1iA AvE. o[~IOBE~ RD. 19,495 5 A
y~ C/S oECEDQiOBF~ Etp, DIIA(~RE AVE. 25,106 5 B
H GS D~[AF~[tE AvE. ditANC~ AVE. 17,007 5 A
n
TARI.E 2
( (70[JPIN[ll.
ST. L[ICIE a0(R~IPIf ,
y EXISTING OAILY 1it11~'EIC VWLl1~4~4
~ 1987/88 PEAK sFA9oN
~
~
a ~
K
~
~ ~Y JURIS• E~OM 1~D PEAiC SFA.9QN VOI,[ME IANhs 1988 L06
NO• 251~1 s'iRF~P GS cxtANGE AVE. AVFl~UE Q 16,553 5 A
~ C/S AVENUE Q JOANTTA AVE. 12,020 2 B
~ C/S JOANITA AVE. ST. LpCIE I3LVD. 6,638 2 A
O
I-95 S OKEEQ~OBEE RD. INpiAN RIVFIt pp/LINE 29,430 4 B
S OKEDC'~rJBF~ RD• h~RTIN 00/LINE N/A 6 N/A
E'I~RIOA'S TURNPIKE S IbIDIAN RIVII2 GL OKE~(IIDBEE ltD. N/A 4 N/A
S Ol~aliOdEE RD- PSL BLVD. 35,498 4 C
s esr, et.w. rm[rrnv o~/r.~ 32,667 4 c
~
N
1 • Sf. LOCIE OO[IDTPY F~1S JURISDICPIO[~I., L~IIdPII~LVCE OR OPFRATIOL~II. RESPOi~7SIBILITY ~ ESTAHLIS[I IA6.
r-+
p I116 UEi'IIt~fII~]FD M700[tDING 11D TASIE 2-3 BASID ~1 TE~ 1985 HQ~f.
I-95 90U1H OF OKIDCilOBEE RD. f+B1S OPESI UBbY 1t~ I4CAL 1RAFFIC AT RS~ TII~ ~ 7~ QO[$dP.
F~Y: PSL - CITY OE POErf ST. LOCIE
EP - CITY OF E~ORT PIIItCE
C - Sr. L[]CIE QO[A1CY
3 - ETJDRIIaA DF~ARIP'II~Nf OE 1RANSPOR'PATION
C/L - CITS(/QOONl'Y LINE
H
~
~
~
H
(7
The daily traffic voiumes were provided by the St. Lucie
Metropolitan Planriing Organization, which maintains a continuous
year round traffic monitoring program, and supplemented by data
from the Florida Department of Transportation. Where peak season
counts were not available, off-peak season counts were adjusted
for seasonal conditions by using seasonal ad~ustment factors
provided by the Florida Department of Transportation.
OTHER TRANSPORTATIOH irIODES
Railroad:
The Florida East Coast (FEC) Railroad mainline runs along the
Atlantic Coastal Ridge in eastern St. Lucie County. This heavy
rail line provides frequent freight service between the cities of
Miami and Jacksonville and was a primary influence in the early
development of St. Lucie County. Within the City of Ft. Pierce
are switching yards for the loading and off-loading of both bulk
and containerized cargo. The FEC provides no passenger services.
In addition to its mainline tracks, the FEC Railroad operates one
primary branch line in St. Lucie County. This branch extends
southwest from Ft. Pierce into Martin County, and eventually
int~o the Glades region of Palm Beach County. Aside from providing
service to several industrial users in the Ft. Pierc~e area, there
is almost no use of this branch line south of the St. Lucie
County/Martin County Line.
With the exception of S. R. A-1-A, no major roadways in the
County are significantly affected by the FEC mainline track
operations. The Glades Cut-Off branch line does cross several
north/south roadways, including US #1, but because of the limited
number of daily trains using that line, disruptions to traffic
movements are insignificant. Since the FEC mainline tracks are
heavily used, and recognizing the need to provide for an
unobstructed crossing point, the City of Ft. Pierce and the
State of Florida have previously constructed the Citrus Avenue
Overpass, which in the enent that all at grade crossing points
were blocked, would still permit vehicular movement from the
South Hutchinson Island area. No such grade separated crossing
exists from North Hutchinson Island at the present. Although
traffic delays have been minimal in the past, and do not
presently represent a significant problem to the function of
these roadways, this area should be monitored and when a problem
is satisfactorily documented, improvement programs initiated.
In September of 1991, the Florida High Speed Rail Commission is
expected to award a franchise for the construction and operation
of a High Speed Rail Line between Miami and Tampa, via Orlando.
At the present time one of the remaining two vendor proposals
indicates an alignment that would pass through the western
January 9, 1990 2- 11 TRAFFIC
portions of St. Lucie County. Included with this proposal is the
identification of a rail station facility to be constructed in
St. Lucie County around the year 2000. Figure 2-3 indicates the
location of this proposed rail corridor and the preferred region
for a station location.
Because of the uncertainty of any specific route, it is
difficult to fully address the impacts of this rail line on St.
Lucie County. Since the earliest that any station facilities can
be expected in the County is the year 2000, it is recommended
that in conjunction with the 1995 St. Lucie County Comprehensive
Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report, greater detail be focused
on the impacts of the High Speed Rail network and the pending
station site.
Port of Fort Pierce:
The Port of Fort Pierce consists of approximately 163 acres.
located within the City of Fort Pierce. The harbor area is
generally defined as lying between the S. R. A-1-A bridges
(referred to locally as North Bridge and South Bridge) and
extending west to the Florida East Coast Railroad. The St. Lucie
Port and Airport Authority, in con~unetion with the City of Ft.
Pierce, is charged with supervision of development activity in
the port area. However the authority currently does not control
under its name any land area within the Port of Fort Pierce.
Further information on the Port and its facilities is identified
in the Ports and Aviation and Related Facilities Element and
Coastal Management Element of this plan.
Ai.rports:
Operating within St. Lucie County is one primary general aviation
facility, the St. Lucie County International Airport. In addition
there are four (4) licensed private landing strips for fixed wing
aircraft, as well as applications pending for seven (7)
additional landing strips. With one exception, Evans Property,
these private landing strips are grassed/unimproved landing
strips capable of handling only the smallest general aviation
aircraft.
In addition to these fixed wing facilities, there are four (4)
authorized helicopter landing areas, including the Florida Power
& Light facility on South Hutchinson Island and Lawnwood
Regional Medical Center in Ft. Pierce.
Figure 2-4 indicates the location of these various aviation
facilities. Further comments and policies relative to the St.
Lucie County International Airport can be found in the Ports and
Aviation and Related Facilities Element of the St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan.
January 9, 1990 2- 12 TRAFFIC
I N 9 I A N W I tl E W , 7 U 1 Y I
_~~~~~~~~3~~~~~~ ft'39 C - A 1'J f I `OI \ 1 D I ~
~ , ~
~ NIGN-SPEED R~11~
g
~ d ~ ~ COMMISSION
, . ~
p ~ ~a
, ~ oU~P
v
s ~ ~ ~ `
i ~
~ ~ , ~~ra~a~ srr- ~mnr
~ ~ f~OALY~EIPR
~ 9tl
y° PROPOSED ST. LUCIE COUNIY
+ ~ ALiGNMENI
I ~V P AP
~ ~ ` ~E, ~EAe~ URBAN SERVICE AREA
au~E ~v~vE E~ers~a ~ s a u~~«"~." ~ ~OUNDARY
I ~ ~t
I , . ° nr~,~° ~
PROPOSED 4
i b e G C e ~
` I F T, I .L L R C C ~ ~ ~nUE en~o : y rmv.o 0
I I ~ r
' STATlON 1 -
u I ~ 9
i $ T Z
e. I c ~
I -
e I
a \ ~l ~
~
,u, 5
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t P
w i - °
W D I ~ 9g f
' G
~ I .~Alt~r3~~
o i ~
I \ I ~
I 4 ~ ~ ~ r
I k v ~~4( 9.
~ ~y
~ ' g ~ A 1I f
v ~
9 W4 3 . 1UCf2
~ I ~
~ ~ ~ ; ~
"~I ~d~~H~A
~
~ I
- - ~ - - F I GURE 2 -3
~ n~ P:? F A 1 E
P P E
~ A q' ~ N s o u~ r v page 2- 13
c ~ u e t v
1 N 9] A A p f Y E R
p . ~ ` FDOT
I 9 s° I D EI~T I F I ED
,
n 5
E
~ ~ ~ ~ °b~ AIRFIE~DS
I F"~ ° ~
RIOGE ~
~ ~•a
S1 LUCiE
~ ^ i ~ Si5A27UlLA ~~1Y 9 U,
F I ~ GROVES ~ o ~ '
~ a 9
POP.i OF
fi PTEACE
~ ~ ~ ~ - , ° ~ ~ PENDING
~ i 0~ F~P, P,~P«
u I . . . . . . ~ I~hfl
~ PERMITTED
,d ~ L b
~ ~ . . IEA6~ UROAN SERVICE AREP.
I ~a q ~ f6uP ~tt
~ BOUNDAP,Y
eo-ws ~ • te~aao - -
~~u~ ~ . ~ - ~ ' 4
I DMGONFLY . ~ ~
WY ? g
~ ~ `~uwcrno' ~ ~ ; ~Q
~ 1 ~
6
~ SOUTHEASTERN' a
~ ~ ~~.i~ AERIAL . ~rN'0~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~I ~ ~ e \ I
~ r
~ 2
~ ~
Y I _ or
~ .:wv
o I .~+.~Sb"?~ ~BROIM,S ~ (o0 9~ ~
~ > ~i
s i b
a ' 1 b FPl
AEftO ~p ~ ~~~r, PLAN fIREST4qON
° ~ ACAES~ T >
1~' ,a y ~ ND. 8
l
0 PO ~
d F I ~~P ~ 9
~ y~ ~elw nsu d
Y I ~C h w...
, 1 ~
o I r
I ~ G
1
rn~
i ' ~ 9
~
I ~ ~
~ ~
~ ~~w~ a ~
, P E
~
EVMIS
` i~ PR07ER7iE5 TAEASURE COAS1 Af S. SUCH2
~ ~ AfRPARK~~ (~~7 ppM5~
I . CLIIB MED I ~J ~ ~ V l~J ~S ~ l~l OO V IN u V
i ~
i I ~ I ~~~~d~~
i
I FLORIDA a I
,
^~~AE~^'E ~ F IGURE 2 -4
~L
~ -
I ~ w , ~
4~.r~~~~..~~~~~. P ~E E
F.~ E page 2- 14
s o u a r n
m e a r ~ M
LSVSLS OF SERVICE
Level of service is a method of describing the operating
condition of a roadway in relation to the volume of traffic using
that roadway. Factors which influence level of service include
the number of vehicle lanes, the number of vehicles on the
roadway, the speed of these vehicles, traffic interruptions, the
ability to maneuver freely and safely as well as the driving
comfort and convenience of the public. Level of service standards
are to be used as a guide for transportation planning purposes
and to identify roadway needs and to provide a measure for
determining time and type of roadway improvement.
In establishing Level of Service, Rule 9J-5.005, FAC, states:
Level of Service Standards: Level of service standards
shall be established for ensuring that adequate facility
capacity will be provided for future development and for
purposes of issuing development orders or development
permi.ts pursuant to Section 163.3202(2)(g), Florida
Statutes. Each local government shall establish a level
of service standard for each public facility located
within the boundary for which such local government has
authority to issue development orders or development .
permits. Such level of service standards shall be set
for each individual facility or facility type and not on
a systemwide basis.
Rule 9J5.007(2)(b), FAC, provides the following additional input
regarding levels of service as they relate to transportation
pl anni ng:
In addition, this analysis shall consider the
adopted level of service standards, improvements
expansions and new facilities planned for in the Florida
Department of Transportation 5 year transportation plan
and the plans of the appropriate Metropolitan Planning
Organization and should to the maximum extent feasible
as determined by the local government adopting the loaal
government comprehensive plan, be compatible with the
policies and guidelines of such plans.
For the purpose of this plan, the Florida Department of
Transportation LOS Manual based on the 1985 Highway Capacity
Manual has been used to establish levels of service for all roads
on the State Highway system in St. Lucie County. The 1965~
Highway Capacity Manual has been used to establish levels of
service on all other roadways. A detailed signal inventory will
be developed for all roadways for which St. Lucie County has
jurisdictional responsibility to establish levels of service as a
basis for using the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual for all roads in
St. Lucie County by 1995.
January 9, 1990 2- 15 TRAFFIC
Table 2-2 shows the level of service volume thresholds for urban
and non-urban roadways based on the 1965 Highway Capacity Manual
and will be used in the near future to establish levels of~
service on all roadways for which St. Lucie County has ~urisdic-
tional, operational or maintenance responsibility, except for
roads on the State Highway system. Table 2-3 shows the average
daily traffic maximum volumes based on peak hour volumes for
levels of service for urban and non-urban roadways. These
volumes are based on the 1985 Highway Capacity Volume and Florida
traffic data as provided by the Florida Department of
Transportation. At this point, this table will be used to
establish levels of service on all roads in St. Lucie County
which are part of the State Highway system. Upon completion of
the signal inventory for St. Lucie County, this table will be
used to establish levels of service for all roads for which St.
Lucie County has the responsibility to establish levels of
service.
T~BLI3 2-2
LEVSLS OF SERQICE
Level of 4-Lane 6-Lane
Service Characteristic 2-Lane 4-Lane Divided Divided
A Free flow 9, 800 16, 900 22, 500 34, 800
B Stable flow - il, 500 20, 000 26, 300 40, 600
slight delay
C Stable flow - 13, 100 22, 700 30, 000 46, 400
acceptable delay
D Approaching 15, 800 27, 200 36, 000 55, 800
unstable flow-
tolerable delay
E* Unstable flow - 17, 400 30, 300 40, 000 61, 900
congestion,
i ntol erabl e
del ay
*Service volume reflecting the roadway's capacity.
Source: Transportation Planning Systems Capacities (UTPS)
based on 9 percent peak hour factor.
January 9, 1990 2- 16 TRAFFIC
TABLE 2-3
GFNEFt1~-~'D ~IIL~Tf LEVEL OF SERVICE MAXIIIQUM VOLUMES
'IWO-WAY ARTERIAIS ~~=W~
croep w(o.o ~o o.rs .+g,ri~d me~.~. ~ nukl 1 hwcn,n ~,~t.,~a oKr soo~ooo .oa t~a~~g m or.~m
s mlks e( prtrn.ry dcy ameat bu~+e.. dl~bict)
Lors/ L~e~ [srd dSaNx
~~'d ~0~~~ A 8 C D E
A B C D E 4 27,800 4~800 81,100 T.~800 79.300
1UodN. 1~700 13~000 i3~600 '18500 17,~00 8 4L700 613~0 81.60~ 110.7'00 119~000
? Dr. 29,800 31.90D 33.000 3~800 3Q70D 8 54.SOD 83~7+OD 12~,ZC0 147,800 158.700
BD~c 45.400 4alOD 49~70~ SL400 SS.200 10 EQ~00 107,100 I5~700 18~,300 199.400
Ctov~ S(0-7a eo 1.5 .Igg~.llaod mto.actsoo~ pQ mtW <hvep Z f~b u~b.almd are~ wv 30.000 and aot ~ Crwp I)
[~nes/ Lm Ie+ddSava~e
~ ~O«~ A B C D E
A B C D B 4 21.400 33000 47J00 3~900 EI.100
4Uadf~. 9~000 1~'70~ 1130~ 15,.9D0 I~300 6 3~300 4q,.S00 70,800 8'.a.900 9L?00
4 DM. 20.000 2:ti700 31.000 3L300 ~000 8 4?.900 64000 9~2fl0 I19.700 lZ2 300
8 DM. 34900 45?100 4~700 4~90D 51.200 C 10 5~500 ffi,500 317,7'00 1~2~ 15~900
L
croap c(~.a m zs.fgs.Gaa meQ.xnoo. par mad A ceeav 3 l~.~eh1a aos-~ub.nlaea.uea.l
DW1ded Is~dotSQVloe s [me~ i.erdd5avlx
A B C D E $ A B C D E
~ 17,1OD 24.'!~0 37.BOD 43.400 4B~80D
svna,~. _ ia~oo i~soo iteoo is~~+oo a zs~eoo ~,.~soo. saaoo s~ooo ~at~ao
4DM. _ 22800 ~500 3L70~ 3340D 8 3~100 5q700 73~1CD 94700 87.500
BDM. _ 35~100 45~000 47,900 5Q300 j
Gr°s~ D R.et° 3s s~altscd t°ta.aen°°~ pes m6e) ONLr
WAY 1~RTERIALS ~
[an~s/ ~,~vap D tkss tbaa 3.8 ~15ed meQ.eeesoos per mlki
D1vlded l.ad ofSa~e
A~ B" C D E t~o~s I~ldSaNoe
4 Und1v. 9~00 19.70~ 15400 A B C D E
6 DM. _ _ 30.70D 44.'~00 50.20D 2 _ 9.800 1L800 14900 1$000 C
s _ 1L900 2~.700 25.600 27.20o L
I _ 1a900 30.800 3~300 38~."100 ?
Greap L(3.8 eo 4S dgnall~ed mtc+ecmn~ pez mGe)
a
Giovp L Ci.B to 4.5 atgoall:e,d tnta.eenon~ par m6e) fl
Dbfdrai Isvdof5avloe
A B" C~ D E ~°~SQ~
A S" C' D E
4 DM. ~ - - - ~ 3Z18
0 Z - - 13.300 1lL200 17,600 I
8 DM. - - - 3R.S00 48.800 3 _ _ Z4300 2i800 24600
- - - 1 - - 27,1aD 37.300 33~800
Groap F(mae tLan ~S dgnaltred mtc~atlon~ per m13e C .
aed noe.~ISLm premary dq emaal bu.aoeas L •
as.alci at..e.n~ed .e~ wv soa~ooa A ~av F t~ et~aa 4s rg~,.tr~ea mrQ.ectbo. per adk c
Iaaes/ and nd~ p~ cay astral bu.~eas L
DMtfad IadofSavt~e 3 dbtrfeta(nrD~nmedamaorv500.00q ,
A~ B~ C' D E 3
z v~. - - - ia9oo i~eo~ c~. c~t~rso.~ a .
4 DM: ZZB~D 32300 A B~ C~ D E: ~
eDr. - 31900 4aoo~ II s - - 34soo i3~eoo 1~TOO .
3 _ _ 14900 22~900 29
800
Cioap G Gawe tbao 4S dg~u!laod mtoseetloo~ per m1k 4 - _ 75.400 3Z400 35~900 jj
• aod wYhm ptim~ry clhr omtral bu~ber C
dLtrfd dt~E~r~ aeea a~Q:SOCL000) L
DMYied La~d d5a.be A Crocp G(moee ehan 4S slgaaBoed fuEs~aetloa~ pa mlk C
and wubmprtra~c!lpomOralbudnes L
A B" C~ D S S dsstrlctduc6aoeedaaawer500,00q •
2 UadN. 13.100 15.400 $ • •
4D1. ~ - 29~900 3~700 Iaoe~ Iadd5arloe ~ O
8 DY. ' _ _ . _ . 4.~200 519A0 A•• 9•• ' C. ' • D ' S . . .
III a
2 _ _ 1a..9~0 17.'t00 1$.'i00
DIVIDED/IINDZVIDED ADJIIST~NTB 4 _ _ 2~'r.e~oo ~2uo ~'i.1~OD III
4~tes oo~+vmd~t two-wsy artcf.l .dums mdlcated pasmd . .
ua~ s.~. F.~ ~~vo-wwY cor~x.~oRS arrn ~ s~rs
~.~~a e~e~.~ewo .o.~y~ . .
2 DNfded Ye~ ? SK Iaoo Leadd5w6e .
2 Uadlvldcd No. - 15~K . A B" C' D E' ,
Hulti Undtdded Yes ylr . 2 ~ 7.700 ,.11.900 • 129QD
MulC Lndlvfded No . - 2dK . . 4 _ . . ' ' 14200 24'i00 ' 2~40D .
. _ . , . ' . 8 . _ - 2<900 . 37ZOQ K1I00 .
• ~ t~bi~ de~ sot em~tltab a stiadair aad ~6autd be u~ed only for gtaQ~l ptanning applticatloos. I~c oompueer modcb [rom w~h3ch thb tabk
L dvlrod .honid be w.od for moee .P~ P~a~~K aPP~~~. 'IDe tabk and derMng ooa~puter ioodeL slwuld not be ~~ed for m~ridor as latas«tloa
deafg~ a~6ue mo~e ~ed teehnfqtri e~st Value~ ~bo~n are avcnge datly tra19c a~dmum wlwnes lb~ed on peak hour wltam~ br kveL of ~cvfce and
are ba~ed on tbe 1985 HfglrNy GPacltY Naau~l and FloAda tratsc data. Ro~dway~ wqth moee than the nim+ber o( Lncs s6owrn should be trcated oa a ose
by ta~e basf~ 'It+e tabk's tnput value ass~ptlon~ u+d kvcl of wvN.~e crltaL ~ppear oo the bock.
~ Cannot be achle.ed
9omee: Plorida DeparCooenL o( 2Yaa~portaLloa. 1988_
January 9, 1990 2- 17 TRAFFIC
Table 2-4 indicates the County-wide Level of Service standards
based upon roadway classification to be used in this plan
under average annual daily traffic, peak season daily traffic,
and peak season peak hour (30th highest hour) conditions. It
shall be the policy of St. Lucie County to maintain these levels
of service on all roadways for which St. Lucie County has
~urisdictional, operational or maintenance responsibility.
TABI.$ 2-4
LgVSL OF SERVICR STANDARDS
Facility Type Average Peak Season
~nnual Daily Daily Peak Hour
Local Road C C D
Collector C D D
Minor Arterial
IIrban C D E
Rural C D D
Maj or Arterial
Urban C D E
State Hwy Urban C D D
Rural C C D
Limited Access Facility ~
Urban D D D
Rural C C C
Backlogged Facilities maintain & maintain & maintain &
improve improve improve
Constrained Facilities maintain* maintain* maintain*
*Transportation System Management and Transportation Demand
Management measures will be used to maintain and improve traffic
flow
* * * * * * * * * * * *
E%I STI HG 7.'R~FFI C CI RC[TL~TI ON ~LYSI S
An analysis of existing traffic levels of service was conducted
using inventory data, peak season traffic volumes and
supplemented by traffic count data from previous studies
conducted in St. Lucie County. Summary accident information was
not available to assist in identifying additional roadway needs.
As described previously, Figure 2-2 illustrates the volumes and
the corresponding levels of service on the roadway links for
which data are available. Table 2-1 summarizes the information
provided in Figures 2-1 and 2-2.
January 9, 1990 2- 18 TRAFFIC
Rzisting R~adway Needs
A generalized link capacity analysis determined the number of
through lanes required for the roadway network. If the demand in
the peak season traffic volume was greater than a Level of
Service "D" daily service volume, it was determined that the
roadway needed improvement. The relationships between daily~
service volumes, Tables 2-2 and 2-3, and levels of service, Table
2-4, were used in the generalized link capacity analysis.
Several roadway links were found to operate at a level of service
worse than °D" based on peak season daily traffic volumes. The
generalized roadway improvements necessary to bring these links
to an acceptable Level of Service "D° or better are listed in
Table 2-5. Some of these facilities are in areas where it is not
practical to expand the existing roadway due to right-of-way
constraints and adverse environmental impacts. As such,
alternative corridors will have to be developed.
T~BI,B 2-5
I~IIHII~![ RSQDIRI~D IMPRaVB~1T TO -
~ STING RQ~D~Y LI~iBrS TO
PRdVIDS LOS ' D' OR BS7.TER
GEHSR~LI ~$D
Rt)~DA~Y S$GMENT IlIPR10VSl~NT
PSL Blvd. ~ Midport Rd. - Fla Turnpike add 41n to 61nd.
Prima Vista Blvd. So. US 1- Floresta Dr. add 31n to Sln
W. Midway Rd. So. US 1- Oleander Ave. add 31n to Sln
No. IIS 1 Juanita Ave. - Orange Ave. add 21n to 71n*
So. US 1 Orange Ave. - Virginia Ave. add 21n to 71n*
Vi rgi ni a Ave. - Edwards Rd. add 21 n to 71 n
Edwards Rd. - Midway Rd. add 21n to 61nd
NLidway Rd. - PSL Blvd. add 21n to 61nd
Virginia Ave. Oleander Ave. - Sunrise Blvd. add 21n to 41nd
Sunrise Blvd. - So. 13th St. add 21n to 41nd
So. 13th St. - So. 25th St. add 21n to 41nd
So. 25th St. - Okeechobee Rd. add 21n to 41nd
South 25th St. Virginia Ave. - Edwards Rd. add 31n to 51n
expansion not possible due to right-of-way limits
ln = lane lnd = lane divided
January 9, 1990 2- 19 TRAFFIC
To assist in addressing these areas of special concern, the
Florida Department of Transportation has developed three (3)
definitions that may be applied either in part or in whole, to
sections of St. Lucie County. They are: Constrained Facilities,
Backlogged Facilities and Special Transportation Areas:
Constrained Facility: A constrained facility can be best
characterized as a facility which, because of physical
limitations, is not possible to expand in order to provide
for greater lev~ls of vehicle service. In most cases those
facilities determi.ned to be constrained have been because of
inability to economically acquire additional right-of-way
without providing major damage to the environment or iocal
economy of the area.
Baclrlogqed Facility: A backlogged facility does not have the
physical limitations of a constrained roadway segment.
However, these roadway segments are not included in any
planned improvement projects within the Department of
Transportations Five Year Road program.
Special Transportation ~rea: A Special Transportation Area
(STA) is defined as a small, compact geographic area in which
growth management considerations outweigh the Department's
(FDOT) policy of operating the state highway system at a
normally accepted level of service. There are no specific
.size limitations on STA's, however, they may not be used for
liner delineation nor aan they be used to designate entire
cities or towns.
In addition to the above areas, FDOT has suggested St. Lucie~
County consider a fourth special designation to be known as an
Area of Special Interest. Within these areas a transportation
level of service may b reduced to Level of Service E, or may
decrease 5~ below the existing peak season, peak hour traffic
volumes. St.Lucie County has developed a definition for an Area
of Special Interest, which at the present time is proposed to be
applied to two sections in the County. The definition is:
An Area of Special Interest is defined as a compact geographic
area or specially designated roadway segments within such an
area, in which growth management considerations or una.que
transsportation characteristics may warrant a lower level of
service than normally accepted. An Area of Special Interest may
include a Special Transportation Area, constrained facilities or
backlogged facilities. An Area of Special Interest may also
include concentrated use of other specific transportation
measures to encourage the use of transit or other modes in order
to minimize use of automobiles and improve traffic flow
conditioins without constructing additional lanes on roadways.
The special designation and management of these areas will be
coordinated with FDOT, MPO, DCA and TCRPC.
January 9, 1990 2- 20 TRAFFIC
Figure 2-5 identifies the three areas within St. Lucie County
that the County in coordination with FDOT, MPO, TCRPC and DCA
proposes to designate as Areas of Special Interest.
The first Area of Special Interest would be located on the
lower end of South Hutchinson Island and would extend from the
vicinitiy of the Outdoor Resorts/Nettles Island south to the
Martin County line.
The South Hutchinson Island Area of Special Interest would affect
approximately a 1. 25 mile stretch of S. R. A-1-A (South Ocean~
Drive), just north of the Martin County Line. Overall land area
is about 1 square mile. With the exception of a three to four
month period (January to April) the this roadway operates at or
above Level of Service B. However, during the seasonal period of
January to April, this area may experience periodic LOS
operations at or below LOS D. Because of this strong seasonal
influence, and in consideration of the policy of the State of
Florida not to encourage the expenditure of public money that
could be viewed as supporting the further development of the
coastal barrier island regions, it is the position of St. Lucie
County that so long as the existing peak season LOS is maintained
(D average/ E peak hour), this area should qualify for the
designation of an Area of Special Interest.
In further support of the proposed designation is the fact that
with a few exceptions, there is essentially no significant amount
of buildable land remaining in this portion of., the barrier
island. Those lands that remain undeveloped are either in the
public trust, ownership or easement, or contain such
environmentally sensitine habitat that maximum density is not
possible.
The second Area of Special Interest is proposed for designation
at the intersection of I-95/The Florida Turnpike/and S.R. 70
(Okeechobee Road). This area is unique to most any other in the
State in that it is only one of two points where the Florida
Turnpike and I-95 meet with ad~acent interchange access points.
The level and type of development activities that have taken
place in this area over the past years are a direct result of the
accessibility of both of these primary roadways and not as the
result of local service demands.
Noting that the Department of Transportation has not programmed
any major expansion or facility improvement plans in this area,
and that what minor improvement plans it has proposed to do in
this area have been repeatedly delayed over the past 5+ years,
(reference FDOT Project No: 4119249), St. Lucie County proposes
to designate this area as an Area of Special Interest. In doing
so, it has incorporated as policy the intention to allow no lower
a degradation of LOS than that that experienced during the Peak
Season study period used as a part of this plan. That is Level of
Service D.
January 9, 1990 2- 21 TRAFFIC
~ ~ u M r r `
I M D I e N p s ~ F A
°i3 ` ` PROPOSED
P -
I s 9 ° AREAS OF
,
I ~ ? ~ ~ SPECIA~ INTEREST
~
' Fr~P, ST. ~UCIE COUNTY
~ ~ I ~ ~0 P
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ A = S0. HU?CHINSON
IS~AND
, ~ ~ ~ s°~°" s" ~9 d'~ B= SR 70 (I-9510 1PK)
~ ~~r ~~~a
e ~ . 1MEI
~ r = FI. I ILRC~
~ a
PIEA
~ I ~ o d,~„ URBAN SEP,VICE AREA
~ q oRnnsceveNUE - 9 ~ BOUNDARY ~
I - nn~w~ ~ ~
1= $
S
A I ..I a . ? ~'k
~ : ~ ~ ~ ~
~ I
` , ~ ~~,n a~ o
~f~pW
I ~j~ ~9
~ 4 I ~ ' ~
~ i ~
,
° I .,~~~o ~ ~ -
,
~ ~ :
a ~
;
~
u ,
aui ~ f_-.. ao rb P
n ~ i ~ g f
~`I t
~ i ~ „wp,-~~ m
~
~
a I ~
' ~ ~ ~
I y~ r
i fJ(4.
~ 5~ fl a~. E
s
~
~ i P b . IBCME
' i ' ~ ~ `o
~ ~~~~~~f
i ~°I ff~~A~~A
~ ~
~
~ ~ FIGURE 2-5
~
A i9 E A ~ ~
P '.18 E
A S E
c o u a r r page 2-22
Ip A A Y I A
Although not under the direat jurisdiction of St. Lucie Gounty,
the downtown area of the City of Ft. Pierce is proposed for
designation as Area of Special Interest number three. As typical
with most established urban areas, it is beyond the fisCal means
of the City of Ft. Pierce, St. Lucie County and the State of
Florida to.economically purchase the right-of-way necessary to
provide the mathematically required traffic lanes needed to meet
level of service standards. More importantly, if the necessary
right-of-way could be obtained, the disruption to the existing
downtown area of the City of Ft. Pierce would significantly
affect the ability of the City to redevelop its inner core. The
loss of this business center would result in the further
decentralization of business activity with the impacts upon areas~
that would otherwise remain undeveloped in the outlying areas. As
such, and in coordination with the City of Ft. Pierce, St. Lucie
County proposes here the application of the Speaial
Transportation Area designation in this area. It is intended that
in order to maintain the existi ng Level of Service, E Peak
Season, it will be neaessary to develop alternative traffic
corridors such as the programmed 25th Street and Jenkins Road
aonstruction proj ects.
St. Lucie County would propose in con~unction with the City of
Ft. Pierce and the St. Lucie Metropolitan Plannin~ Orc~anization
to continually monitor traffic volumes in this area and to
develop small area improvement projects such as, but not limited
to, traffic signalization adjustments, on-street parking
restrictions and the establishment of one-way pairings where
practical, in order to facilitate the movement of traffic in and
around the downtown area.
FUTOR$ TRAFFIC CIRCDLATIOH AN~LYSI S
Future traffic conditions were developed for three planning.
horizons to coi naide with the future land use planning periods.
These periods include the years 1995, 2015, and a presumed
buildout model. Traffic needs for the year 1995 are based on the
St. Lucie County Level I Urban Area Transportation Study. Year
2015 forecasts were determined using 2015 socioeconomic data
provided by the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and the
Florida Standard Urban Transportation Model Structure (FSUTMS)
transportation forecast model. Long-range right-of-way needs
were developed using the same model and buildout development
levels provided in the St. Lucie County Interim Thoroughfare Plan
Study. Adjustments were made to the buildout data to insurP its
land use variables and zone structure were compatible with the
2015 data and zone structure, in addition to the Future Land Use
Map as indicated in the Future Land Use Element.
Hurricane evacuation analyses were coordinated with this element.
A detailed hurricane evacuation discussion can be found in the ~
Coastal Element of this plan.
January 9, 1990 2- 23 TRAFFIC
1995 Traffic Forecast
The 1995 roadway needs program was extrapolated from a review of
the St. Lucie County Level I Urban Area Transportation Study and
the County's Five Year Transportation Program. The results of
this review are indicated in Table 2-6, and graphically
represented in Figure 2-6, whi ch identify both the roadway
improvement projects necessary to maintain LOS standards as well
as to provide the remaining portions of the County with a
comprehensive construction/maintenance program.
Long-Range Traffic Forecasts - 2015 ~ Buildout
The computer model Micro FSUTMS was used to develop the 2015 and
buildout future conditions for St. Luoie County. FSUTMS was
developed by the FDOT as a tool to be used throughout the State
for transportation modeling. Methodology from Urban
Transportation Planning Model Update - Phase II - Task C was used
to validate the model for St. Lucie County and Northern Martin
County. The model was val.idated £or the year 1985 using ground
counts and socioeconomic data from the St. Lucie County MPO.
Forecasts were made for the year 2015 and buildout using
socioeconomic data provided by the St. Lucie Metropolitan
Planning Organization and St. Lucie County.
Year 2015:
Socioeconomic data for the year 2015 was provided by the St.
Lucie County MPO and updated to reflect specific Developments of
Regi onal I mpact s uch ae : St. Luoi e Wes t, The Res erve, Town
Center Mall, Treasure Coast Mall, Sharrett, and West Jensen.
Further changes were made reflecti ng nodal development along the
I-95 and Turnpike corridors, which is consistent with the Future
Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan. These data were then
used in computer modeling to determine traffic demand and roadway
needs to support the Future Land Use Plan. The future needs
analysis is shown in Table 2-7 and illustrated in Figure 2-7.
Roadway needs for the year 2015 were developed to meet the
traffic demands projected in the modeling procedure at Level of
Service "D". Level of Service "D" was targeted since the
socioeconomic data provided by the MPO reflect peak season
conditions. The FDOT 5-Year Transportation Plan, the St. Lucie 5-
Year TIP, and the results of the Level I Transportation Study as
well as buildout rights-of-way needed to support the future
roadway network at the buildout for the County, were all taken
into consideration in determining these roadway needs. Ultimate
rights-of-way width are based upon the desired FDOT standards.
January 9, 1990 2- 24 TRAFFIC
Table 2-7 shows US #1 between No. SR A-1-A and Virginia ~venue to
require six lanes by the year 2015 in order to achieve LOS D.
The construction of two additional lanes is, however, impossible
due to physical constraints within the City of Ft. Pierce. In
coordination with the City of Ft. Pierce and the Florida
Department of Transportation this section of US #1 is
proposed to be classified as a constrained facility or
Special Transportation Area. The County in coordination
with the St. Lucie MPO, the City of Ft. Pierce and the.
Department of Transportation has designated the 25th Street
corridor as an alternative route for through traffic on US #1
through Ft. Pierce. It is proposed by the County to connect
North 25th Street from Industrial Ave ##3 to US #1 to the north
and to expand South 25th Street as a four lane roadway south of
Edwards Road to Prima Vista Blvd. The County is also exploring a
long term alternate route possibility by connecting and
expanding the Jenkins Road-Reen Rd corridor into Indian River
County to divert intercounty traffic from US #1• This
planning proposal is only in its initial conceptual stages.
Buildout:
Buildout land use data were developed by St. Lucie County Staff
for use in developing the 1987 Interim Thoroughfare Network.
This data was revised to reflect more recent land use data
available from Port St. Lucie, Fort Pierce, and St. Lucie County.
Approved and proposed Developments of Regional Impact such as St.
Lucie West, The Reserve, Town Center, the Treasure Coast Mall,
Sharrett, and West Jensen were included. The land use from the
Interim Thoroughfare Study was regrouped into the zones developed
by St. Lucie County and converted to variables suitable for input
into Micro FSUTMS. The right-of-way for the roadway network
necessary to support the buildout land use at Level of Service
"D" is illustrated in Figure 2-S. It should be noted that the
right-of-way widths shown, allow for possible changes in future
conditions that may result from changing travel patterns or
traffic intensities in a given corridor. On a case by case
basis, the actual right-of-way required to accommodate roadway
improvement may be less than what is shown and can be refined
through specific corridor studies.
The year 2015 and buildout analysis show the projected traffic
volumes and roadway needs for the respective target period. Any
construction of future roadways will have to undergo the complete
~eview and permit process including interchange justification
reports for future I-95 or Turnpike interchanges, a current
economic feasibility study for the Palmer Expressway, and
environmental impact statements for the development of new
corridors.
January 9, 1990 2- 25 TRAFFIC
i A e t e w A~ v a A 1
` ° ° " ' ' 1 gg 5 COUNTY
~nr E ~as ~ a . E _ e ~o i
~ ~ ~ ROAD CONSTRUCTION
~ ~ ~
~ ; ~ 5 PROGRAM
, s
I ~ ~ ~ ` e.
~ ~a ~ ' u
' - I f 89009 LEGEND
i . ° U~ ~y FISGAL YEAP
~ ~ ~ ~ ~0 9 89/90
, ~ , ~wswnE ~~uir r,~n.,r C~
+e~~~ 90/91
I ~ ~ N rpAlNPE[P't
~ ~ _ . . - ' 'e e~~~~~• 91/92
~ ~ 89015
i F A4
I ~~~RSff 92/93
GftAnGL 4VLNUC
. r~. ! u~wr< r.
~rF: ~
~ a ~ ~ 93/ga
, ? ;
y I ' viIFIM~s y'
P~U~~~~~ ' 0 h , 94 95
I , ~ i
a ~ ds ~
T ~ ~ - eeooe
y a~ ~ O
~ ~ I , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ $ ,,ot~~P° ~ ~ eH' asoo~ PRQJECT NUi~BERS
I ~ I A ~ 1UIV ~I ~ ~ ~ :esoi
~ 89
~ ~ _ i e~~ URBAN SERUIGE AREA
~ ~ ' ~ 80UNDARY
~ asooa ; ssooa ~ acz
. ~ INCORPORNTED AREAS
S ~ e' . CA~Sf SI.
~ • 890i2
,A9008 ?'b
u ~ g
r I ~ { r
~ ~ ~ 4 Ji
89018 001 - Q r
~ 02 d 9801 i ~
~ ~ . . ~ei.. nr~ ~ ~
B9W ~ . ~
I 9
° I 8901 '
3 ~
/ , 5 ~
5w 89033 ~ 88010
~ ~
~ ~
~ 89020
I ,yu~e 8&ODl " q
-~iriF , gs ~ A ~i F
~ Af 8 . {UCI~
~
i ~
~ ' ~ ; " ~ ~~~~~b
~ ~ ff6~3II~A ~
, ~
~
~ - ~ FIGURE 2-6
l_.~-------- p
x - P"~~
F --A ~
w ^ ~ page 2 -26
B1 1 p T 9 N S 0 U A f 0
~
w
p TABLE - 2-6
G
~ ST. I.DCIE (bONTY
F'S -
k
~D ~ PROGiiAM
~O .
` FY89/90 THItU FY95/96
~
~
~
0
FISCAL YFAR
PRU7EGT SDC3V~Tf 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/962
R~CYfD QONSIR[ICrIQN P1~U7F)C1S:
Required to meet 1995 level of service needs
N W. PSL Blvd. Midport Rd. - Eloresta 4.100cst1
i .200cei1
N W. Prima Vista So. US-1 - Rio Mar Dr. 1.650cst
~ W. Prima Vista Rio Mar Dr. - Naranja Dr. 4.OOOcst
W. Prima Vista Naranja Dr. - Airoso Dr. 1.250cst
W. Midway Rd. So. US-1 - Oleander Ave .765cst
.OSScei
W. Midway Rd. Oleander Ave. - So. 25th St. .025 pe .100row 1.305cst
.300brg
.145cei
W. Midway Rd. So. 25th St. - Fla. Turnpike .025
pe .200row .500row
2.009cst
.223cei
W. Midway Rd. Ela. Turnpike - I-95 .025 pe .500row 1.467cst
y .270r1x
~ .163cei
~ Edwards Road So. US-1 - So. 25th Street 2.214cst
~
H .270r1x
n .246cei
TABLE - 2-6
~
W
~ Sf. LDCIE OODNTY
G
a ~D II~i~7II~TP PitCIC~tANI
h
~
FY89/90 1~20 FY95l96
~ '
r
~ EISCAL YEAR
~
O
pRA7ECT SDC~~TP 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/962
So. 25th St. Edwards Rd.- PSL C/Limit .200 pe 3.460c:;t
.830row1 .170raw
,480brg
»100cRv
.270rRx
.280cei
So. 25th St. PSL C/Limit - Prima Vista .050 pe 5.128cst
, 300rcnv . 320brg
.150c1v
N .150mit
I
No. 25th St. Ind. Ave 3- No. US-1 .468cst
N .052cei
~
E. PSL Blvd So. US ~1 - Lennard Road .150row .450cst
Lennard Road E. PSL Blvd - Walton Road 1.620cst
.180cei
Lennard Road Waiton Road - Palmer X-Way .025 pe 1.900cst
~ .SOOraw .200c1v
1.OOOmit
Lennard Road Palmer X-Way - Buchannan Dr. .005 pe .300cst
.250raw .030cei
E. Prima Vista So. OS-1 - Lennard Rd. .025 pe .300row .900cst
.075cei
H
~ Palmer X-Way So. US-1 - Lennard Rd. .025 pe .250rix~r .590cst
.035cei
n]
H Walton Road Grn. Riv. Pky - Vil. Grn. Dr. ..025 pe .130row 1.575cst
.175cei
No. Jenkins Rd Angle Rd. - Orange Ave. .300row1 ~ .
.819cst
.150brg
.091cei
TABLE - 2-b
4
W
p Sf. LUCIE 400[d.PY
G
~ Rc~D Il~i~1VII~TP AZOC~i
fi
K
F5C89/90 7ffit0 FY95/96
~ - ,
`fl EISCAL YEAR
i0
O
PRO,7ECr SEC~g1VT 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/962
So. Jenkins Rd Fdwards Rd. - W. Midway Rd. .100:row 1.188cst
.320brg?riv
.540brg/rlx
.150c1v
.060ut1'
.200mit
• .I32cei.
Streets not included in the 1995 needs review
N but that need to be included as a part of local construction programs
i to maintain adequate traff~c circulation
N Howard Street Buchannan - Seagrape Drive .175cst
~
Timiblin Kling So. US-1 - Siulrise Blvd. .100row .275cst
E. Midway Rd. So. US #1 - Silver Qak Dr. .300cst
Oleander Ave. Edwards Rd - Kitterman Road .200 pe 1.500row
Oleander Ave. Edwards Rd - Bell Ave. 2.200cst
.270r1x
.100cei
Oleander Ave. Bell Ave. - W. Midway Rd. 2.200cst
.100c1v
.100cei
y Oleander Ave. W. Midway Rd - Kitterman Rd. .750cst
~ Kitterman Rd. Oleander Ave. - Lennard Rd. .025 pe .200row
.SOOcst
H
n Indrio Road Taylor Dairy - flmerson Ave. ~ .025 pe .500row
2.OOOcst
Avenue Q No. 21st St. - N. 17th St. .070cst1
St. Lucie Blvd. No. US #1 - Shinn Rd. .40Grow .500raw .SOOrow .SDOrow .500row .500row
TABLE - 2-6
~
~ Sf. LOCIE OD~ITPY
w
rs
~ FY89/90 7ffit0 FY95/96 ,
~
~
~ FISC~IL YF.AR
~
O
p~p,7-E~ gDC~~Tf 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/962
Il~2SE(.TIONS:
Midway & So. US #1" 1.OOOcst
W, hlidway & Oleander Ave.* .500cst1
W. Midway & S. 25th Street" .500cst1
N
~ W. Midway & Selvitz Rd.* .500CSt
w Edwards & S. 25th Street* .350cst1
O
Edwards & Selvitz Rd." .650~st
Eloresta & Airoso Blvd.* .030 pe .300cst
Floresta & Prima Vista Blvd.'` .030 pe .500cst
Eloresta & PSL Blvd." .030 pe .750cst
St. ,7ames (So 25th St.> .300cst
& Airoso elvd."
Orange Ave & Angle Rd. " .030'pe .300cst
Walton Rd. & Indian River Dr. .100row
.500cst
~3
~Z.gA~ .300cst .40Qcst .600cst .600cst .600cst .600cst .600cst
~
~
H ~
n
" necessary'to meet 1995 LDS Standards
4 TABLE - 2-6
a
~ sr. wcic oan~~r
~ -
~ RQAD Il~'R[7VIIrII2dP P~
FS _
~4
E'Y89/90 7~IIto FY95/96 '
~o
r
t0
~p FISCAL YFAR
O
PR0.7F.c.T S~P 99/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/962
MSBU's:
Iaketiaood Park .500 .500 .500
Anita Street .0751
Wagner Place .0751
(TBA) .300 .300 .300 .300 .300 .300 .300
N
1
F2FSURFACIIJC':
W
~
(TBA) .400cst .400~cst .400cst .400cst .400cst .400cst .400cst
C[TLVER'P REPIACII~TP/~2IDGE REPAIR:
TBA .250cst .030~cst .130cst .170cst .280est .300cst .500cst
Bridge #940077 (Orange) - replace .20acst
eridge #944008 (Floresta) - add lns." .020 pe .250cst
Bridge #940032 (Orange) - replace .020 pe .260cst
Bridge #940033 (Orange) - replace .020 pe .200cst
H
~ eridge #940034 (Orange) - replace .020 pe .200cst
~
~
H •
n SIDGY~IIXS:
(TBA) .100 .050 ~ .050 .050 .050 .050 .OSO ~
TABLE - 2-6
~
N
~ ST. LDCIE ODdNPY
~ .
~ fa(]AD II~i~dVII~N~ PROC~tAM
Ft
K
FY89/90 T~20 FY95/96
~
~
~ FISCAL YEAR
~O
O
pRO,7ECT SDC~IENf 89/90 90/9~1 91/92 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/962
MISC. PRQ7DC15:
Alt. Bridge Study - St. Lucie River .200
Traffic SignalizationlLighting .050 .050 .050 .050 .050 .050 .050
PROQ2AM 00STS
N
~ 1988-89 project carry over (funding available) 7.000
Projects a part of 1995 roadway needs 10.815 6.23~5 7.605 S.I10 8.173 4.800 2.732
N
Re~naining local roadway needs to be funded 2.175 2.6G~5 2.750 2.550 3.900 5.320 9.350
Total Costs to be funded in CIE 12.990 8.89~0 10.355 10.660 12.073 10.120 12.082
ALL AMC)UDTPS EXPRFSSED IN THOUSIINDS (000)
¦ * x • : ~ • ~t : * ~ ~ • ,e * a ~
Total Cost FY89/90 - FY94/95 $65,038,000 (dces not include FY88-89 carry over projects already funded)
y This figure to be used in capitai facilities planning portion of Conprehensive Plan
~
~
H Total Cost E'Y89-90 - E'Y95/96 $77,120,000 tdces not inc:lude F'Y88-89 carry over projects already funded) '
Cl
TABLE - 2-6
~
w ST. Lt)CIE ODiII119t
~ - -
~
w ~aaAn n~~xr riaoc~ri
K
~ FY89/90 TI~tO E'Y95/96 .
~o
~
~
~
0
NOTES: 1: Indicates project as a carry over from EY88-89.
2: Not include in current CIE pianning, but indicated as a part long tenn project recognition.
S~ecific furxiing plans to be identified in CIE to be adepted comnencing in FY90-91.
3: The above Road I~rovement Program would provide for a reasonably connected
road netw~ork - However, consideration needs to be given to the possibility of
adding South 25th Street from Virginia Avenue to Edwards Road in FY 92-93, to
• provide a continuous link five lane section from fran Ave Q to Prima Vista
Blvd. This project is needed by 1995, but is not on State Road program. Cost
$1,300,000.
N
1
W
W
LF)GF~1D OE ABBREl1IATIONS
cst: construction pe: preliminary engineering bgr: bridge structure clv:.culvert ~sc: misc. exp.
row: right-of-way cei: const. engr. & inspect. rlx: railroad crossing mit: mitigation utl: utilities
H
~
~
~
H '
n
I A D S A A A~ 7 E p + 7 u N P I
~ ~ M. )c ~ ° 10 L ~O I V
P 3I l
p
M
I ,
9 " TRAFFIC NEEDS
~ d~ p° e, P L A N
~ oco~N~L~~ ~„Y~c'~ooocoooo u
i „ -c c ...,.~~ocoa~
1 ~ PORT / AIP~PO?T
° I '
i
4, ~a~ ~ o
~ I ' ~ 9
~ ' ° ^ o NIGrI-SPEF~ P,RIL
~ ~ ~ ~ o Peoaos~o s~. ~~uctE ~ouN?v
¦ ALIuNMENi
II I ~ ~ SUF54INE S~Ai~ PARKIU7 ~ v ~
~ ~ cbo 9
~ ~ d°~. ~uce a~w ~
~ ~ ~ p~ UPBAN SEP.VICf AREA
p ~ iner ~ 90UNDAflY
I t; _ xl ~i,~ ~tw ~,,,,r,co ? LAN[
c G b IfAfF
~ . ~ i o , ~ 4 LANE
~ ~ ~ ~
?0000~0
C( G~~G G V~0
Oft E, 44FF V.~v r[nr, w~ a o c~~ ffY~ ¦ ~ o xu.wF n.
~o~o o ~~o°~~, ~ococ 4 LANE DIVIDC6 ~
_ _ - ' ° Eo,
. I.. . _ uc, . ¦ ~ ` : y nmu
c ~ ~ a ~ o
~ ? s i ~0 a~sw~ ~ ~ ,s~ S LANE
r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ` r i 5 LANE DIVIDED
~ ~ PPOPOSED ~6 ' ' GQ
S C= e ~ _ ~ Z
~ I ~ T p T ~ ~ L ° °0ao ~,pe - e c 09 0 ~ ~w~w ? '~~P.NE
~ i . . i 1~~~vL ~ ~ ~ 2t'o~"- :odaqm~~~- ' .
~ r li I~~~ # _ s~ `''~~~oJoo `(o~~ 1 a 1 ...~-...-a 6 LANt DIVI~[D
~ G ~ 6
J
d , ~TA ~ ~
~ ~ ' ~ o ~ ~ 0 9 LANE x-WA°
~~u~ ~ o o ""M1MO~ LIMITE~ PL ESS
J P~ w e° ~
a ~ ~,4~'wo~ r"~ ~L° ~ odcoor ~ ~ o? ~ ~ ~ ~ fi LANE R' WAY
~ ;,c ° ° ~ LIl~ITED 4C~CESS
~~o'; :coa~o~ 1 o I
o ~ H ; ~ ~ ~ ~ . %
s~ ~°~e o ~1 r4t' ~ o c
s I G~c~ ~ , °G .•.c~ 'p z ~`~G~
\ C~ e` vG , ,b ~
a I °
G vw~ - r ° ' ~ ° G~~~i~ , k r o
1 G 1 0000~~ ~ ¦ P~h P o
G
0
ci c / , i ~ 4, ~^L o
~
Y I ~ ~ ~
Y I
~ • ~w ~ fn
i ~ ~ ~ ~1 rI P
o ~
ti ~ ~u ¦ ~ ?
~ ~ c° o
~
r~ ~ ~
' ~ i o
` ¦u~n~uu ~ ~ ~n~, o
o
i A ° ; ~a i
I } c,, .b, , y ~ c
' ~ ` ° 1E~~!'+~ ~i5~i i ° y'c
0
i J a ~ ar
N~ "DGO~GG00' OOG~ ' ~ ppI A 11 E
~ ~ G G
0 '
~ r sf,iuctff
„I~ ~
_ ~ ~
z~ pp~r y~ ppMj~~VJ
I ~ ' ~ ~ ~
ic o I ~Vl~7~SS ~VO'JWII Il
I <.o o aIl
° ° ff~~R9~A
i ° ~ ~
, ~ F IGURE 2 -7
:
l_. ~ w;o E ~ A, E
P ' ]3
C
~ n a r~ a c o u M 4 v page 2- 34
'i.-.~i.E 2-7
y 5f. LUCIE OOUNTY ~
~ 2015 NEEDS ANALYSIS
~ PEAiC L~EL
~ SEASaN OF
~ ROAIX~L~Y JURIS+ FR(xf 1!0 VOLUME LANES SERVICE
~ ,
` AIROSO BLVD. PSL So. 25th 5f. FIDRES'PA IaR. 26,400 41d C
PSL ETiORESTA DR. PRIhII~ VISTA BLVD. 13,400 41d A
~ PSL PRIMA VISTA BLVD. WESf VIRGINIA DR. 19,800 41d B
~p PSL WfSP VIRGINIA DEt. BOE2T ST. LUCIE BLVD~. 12,900 41d B
O •
ANGLE RD. C OFtF~NGE AVE. N. JF~IKINS RD~ 9,600 21 A
C N. JENKINS RD. JOFIIV51CkV RD. 8,400 21 A
BAYSHORE BLVD. PSL SELVITZ RD. ETAftESTA DR. 4,300 21 A
PSL E~ORESTA DR. PRIMA VISPA BLVD. 16,90Q 51 A
PSL PRIMA VISfA BLVD. W. VIRGINIA DR. 19,000 51 A
PSL W. VIRGINIA DR. PSL BLVD. 23,400 51 8
BECKFI2 RD. PSL I-95 OARWIN BLVD. 5,800 21 A
PSL OAEtWIN BLVD. ETA. TURNPIKE 6,000 21 A
PSL FLA. TORNPIKE 90Ui4IDF3~D BLW. 6,000 21 A
PSL SOUTE~II~D BLVD. GIISON RD. 13,000 21 C
EDG~IRDS RD. C; So. US #1 OLEANDF72 AVE. 16,500 41 A
N C• OLFANDER AvE. So. 25TH ST. 15,600 41 A
~ C So. 25TH ST. W. ,7ENtcINS RD. 20, 000 41 A
E'IARESPA DR. PSL SO(TfEIDFIVD BLVD. PSL BLVD. 13,000 21 C
cJ~ C PSL HLVD. W. VIRGINIA DR. 8,520 41 A
C W. VIRGINIA DR. PRIMA VISTA BLW. 17,000 41 B
C PRIMA VISPA BLVD. AIROSO BLW. 13,100 41 A
PSL AIROSO HLVD. 9AYSHORE BLVD, 7,900 21 A
GATLIN/SAVAGE BLVD. C RANGE LINE RD. I-95 3,000 21 A
PSL I-95 SAVaNA BLVD. 28,100 51 C
PSL SAVONI~ BLVD. PSL BLVD. 17,100 51 A
GLADES CUf-0FF RD. C W. MID4~Y RD. PAil~IETt EXWY. 5,900 21 A
C PAIA1Qt ExWY. RESF72vE ooNM PK DR. 14,200 21 C
C RESFFStVE DOM PK DR. RESII2~)E BLVD. 11,200 21 C
GREF39 RIVIIt PKWY PSL/MC WAI,TON RD. .7IIdSIIV BCH. BLVD. 19,000 41d B
INDIAN RIVF~ DR."• C/S AVIIVUE OFtANGE AVE. 10,500 41 A
C/S ORANGE AVE. CITRUS AVE. 7,100 31 A
y FP/S CITRUS AVE. SAVADII~AB RD. 6,900 21 A
~ C/S SAVANNAH RD. MIG4~Y RD. 6,600 21 A
GS MIDF~IY RD. FR1L~I~ON RD. 8, 700 21 A
"7 C/S t~LTON RD. MAFt'PIN CO/LINE 6,800 21 A
'T1
H .
n
TABLE 2-7 /
(ODNf.)
C.r Sf. LUCIE OOUNPY
A? 2015 NEEDS ANAI.YSIS
~
~ p~( I.E~IEL
w '
~ s~ oe
~'C ROADV~IY JURIS• EROM 1!0 VOL[A~ LANES SERVICE
t0
` INDRIO RD. C No. OS ~1 KINGS HIGHFQIY 8,300 21 A
~ C KINGS HIGEII+lAY I-95 10, 000 21 B
~ C I-95 MINUPE MAID RD. 4,700 21 A
~O
O
JETIKINS RD. PSL SELVITZ RD. W. MII7WAY RD. 5,000 21 A
(I~XJRTH/9olTfH) C W. MIDV~IY RD. EiJ4~RDS RD. 10,300 21 B
C EGF~ItpS EtD, OKEFx:HOBEE RD. 15,000 41d A
C OKEELI-IOBEE RD ORANGE AVE. 16,500 41d A
C ORANGE AtIE. Sf. LUCIE BLVD. 10,500 21 B
JOEIlVST~ON RD. / C IbIDIAN RIVFI2 GL IN[J~tIO RD. 7, 200 21 A
II~'~I2SON AVE. C INDRIO RD. ST. LUCIE BLt7D. 7,800 21 A
C ST. LI)CIE BLtID. O[iANGE AVE. 3,800 21 A
KINGS [~c.'R C/S. No. US ~1 INDRIO RD. 22,900 41d A
(NORTH/SO[TPE!) C/S INDRIO RD. ORANGE AVE. 37,500 61d A
C/S ORANGE AVE. OKEECfiOHEE RD. 21,700 41d A
N KITTET2NIFIN RD. C OI,FAD7DF32 AVE. So. US #1 7,000 21 A
C So. US #1 LF2~II~1F1RD RD. 4,500 21 A
1
W I,ENNARD RD./ C E. MID4~Q~Y RD. PAT!•IEEt EXWY. 10,000 21 8
~ BUCHAIaIAN DR. C PAI~ EXWY. PRIMA VISTA BLVD. 22,000 41d A
C PRIMA VISTA BLVD. PT. ST. LUCIE GL 24,300 41d A
C PT ST LUCIE C/L So. US ~1 29,000 41d C
C/MC So. US #~1 JIIVSFN HCH BLVD. 35,000 Sld D
MIDPORT RD. PSL So. US ~1 LYNGATE DR. 17,300 41d A
PSL LYNC',ATE DR. PT Sf LUCIE BLVD. 11,700 21 C
E. h1ID4~Y RD. C INDIAN RI~ DR. BUCE~PII~Ck~ DR. 5,200 21 A
C gpCE3~ltalON pR, so. Us #1 12,600 21 C
W. MID4~1Y RD. C So. US ~1 OI.EANDFI2 AVE. 27,400 51 8
C OLFANDE~2 AVE. SUNRISE BLVD. 28,500 51 C
c s[nuusE sLw so. 25~1 sr. 33,300 51 n
C So. 25TH ST. SELVITZ RD. 14,300 41d A
C SELVITZ RD. 7~DRINO PKwY. 16,800 41d A
C 2~oRINO PKwY. GLADES CUT-0FE RD. 18,600 41d H
C GLADES C[Tf-OEP RD. I-95 15,600 41d A
y C I-95 OKEEX)IlOHEE RD. 12,300 21 C
~
~7
•
H
n
TABLE 2-7
(C~0[Jf. )
~ ST. L[1CIE OOUNl'Y
w zo15 t~EVS armr.YSrs
~
~
~ PEAK Lk,~IEL
Fi SEASON OF
~ ROADN~IY JURIS* FROM 'DD VOL[A~ LANES SII2VICE
~O '
` OKEECF3oBEE RD."• CJS So. 17TH ST. So. 25TH ST. 21,400 41d B
C/S So. 25TH ST. So. 33RD ST. 21,700 41d B
~ C/S So. 33RD 5T. VIRGINIA AVE. 23,700 41d B
~ C/S VIRGINIA AVE. M(:NEIL RD. 32,500 51 D
~ C/S MCIVEIL RD. So. JIIVKINS RD. 37,800 51 D
C/S So. JIIVKINS RD. I-95 47,900 61d D
C/S I-95 hLA TQRNPIKE 54,400 61d E•**
C/S FIA TU[tNPIKE GENfILE RD. 14,100 41d A
C/S GBIPILE RD. W. MI~Y RD. 6,700 21 A
C/S W. MIDV~,Y RD. SHINN RD. 7,100 21 A
C/S SHINN RD. OKEECHOBEE CO/LINE 10,200 21 B
OID DIXIE H4VY C INDIAN RIVER CJL No. SR A-1-A 4,800 Z1 A
C No. SR A-1-A No. US ~1 7,800 21 A
OL~FANDER AVE FP SUNRISE HIND. VIRGINIA A~IE. 12,200 21 C
FP VIliGINIA AVE. ID4~@,RDS RD. 16,200 41 A
C ED4dARDS RD. PARFIERS hIICT RD. 16,200 41 A
tv C FARNm2S hII(T RD. W. MIDhg1Y RD. 16, 200 41 A
C W. MIDhWY RD. KITTFItMAN RD. 10, 600 21 B
~ C KITTE~tMF,N EtD. BFACH DR. 4, 000 21 A
W ORANGE AVE•'~ C/S OKEEC:1-IOBEE C/L SHINN RD. 9,700 21 B
J
GS SHINN RD. II~Ih3tSON/JOE~7SI~ON RD. 8,600 21 A
C/S ~SON/JOEIIdS7t~N KINGS ESNY. 16, 700 41d A
C/S KINGS EA~VYY. I-95 34,200 41d E•'*
C/S I-95 ANGI.E RD. 25,000 51 B
C/S ANGI.E RD. So. 25Tt1 ST. 29,~00 51 B
C/S So. 25Tfi 5f. So. 13TH ST. 23,500 51 B
C/S So. 13TH ST. so. 7TH ST. 22,200 41 B
C/S So. 7TH ST. So. US Ikl 12,000 41 A fONE WAY)
PAIl1EE2 EXFVY. C LET~NAEtD RD. So. US 1 13,000 21 C
FA So. US I~1 So. 25TEi ST. 6,200 21 A
eA So. 25TH ST. SELVITZ RD. 11,100 21 B
EA SELVITZ RD. CASFA'm2E BLVD. 10,000 21 B(TPK INI'1
~ cAS[~E er.w. cr~es cvr-0ee xn. 6,400 21 A(NO I-951
H
~
~
~
H .
n
TABLE 2-7
c~ lootar. ) ~
~
~ ST. LOCIE COUNl'Y
~ 2015 NEIDS ANALYSIS
~
~ PEAK LEVEL
s~ oe
~ ROADG~Y JURIS FRC~I~i 'PD ViDLLME LANES SEI2VICE ~
.
~
~ pr sr i.uciE eLw cis so, os #i N1~RNINGSIDE BLVD. 43,900 61d e
~O C/S MDRNINGSIDE BLVD. MIDPORT RD. 43,100 61d B
~ C/S [~IIDPOR'P RD. FIARFSfA DR. 54,700 61d D
C/S E'LioRESTA ~2. FLA TURNPIKE 40,500 61d B
PSL FLA TURNPIKE DII, RIO BLVD. 40,500 61d B
PSL DEL RIO BLW. GATLIN/SAVAGE HLVD. 30,600 51 C
PSL GATLIN/SAVAGE HLVD BECKEI2 RD. 12,000 21 B
PRIMA VISTA BLVD C LF3dNNARD RD. So. US ;1 10,000 41d B
C So. US ~1 RIO MAR DR. 22,400 51 A
C RIO MAR DR. FIAF2ESfA DR. 23,900 51 B
C FLAEtE.SPA DR. AIR0.9o BLVD. 22, 500 51 A
PSL AIROSO BLVD. HAYSHORE HLVD. 20,80U 51 A
PSL BAYSHOItE BLw. CASHI~2E BLVD. 42,300 61d C
PSL CASEII~'g,'RE BLVD. CALIE'ORNIA BLVD. 29,800 61d A
PSL CALIEURNIA BLVD. PEAOOCK BLVD. 43,200 61d C
N PSL PEAOOCK BLVD. I-95 52,900 61d D
~ ST. LUCIE BLVD*• C/S F7A. TURNPIKE I-95 12,500 21 B
C/S I-95 No. KINGS t1WY. 10,500 21 B
W C/S No. KINGS HwY. So. 25TH ST. 13,200 21 B
0° C/S So. 25TH ST. No. US #1 11,900 21 B
SR A-1-A (NORTH)•• C/S INDIAN RIVEI2 C/L RDGAL RD. 9,700 21 A
C/S RDGAI. RD. ROYAL PALM t~Y 20,500 41 A
GS ROYAL PAIl9 WAY OID DIXIE HWY. 20,500 41d A
C/S OLD DIXIE HFVY. No. US ~1 16,900 41d A
SR A-1-A (SO[TI'k])"• C/S No. US ~1 INDIAN RIVII2 DR. 18,500 41d A
GS INDIAN RIVIIt DR. So. oCEAN DR. 20,900 41 A
C/S So. OCFAN DR. ET. PIFRCE C/L 10,500 21 A
GS ET PIF~tCE GL FPL PLAKP 5,000 21 A
C/S FPL PLANf NORMANDY HCH AC5 9,000 21 A
C/S NORNm,NDY BCH ACS MARTIN 00/LINE 16,400 21 D
SELVITZ RD./ PSL BAYSHORE BLVD. PAIl~2 EXWY. 6,800 21 A
[IARTMAN RD. C/PSL PAi1~R EXWY. ED4+Q~RDS RD. 9,600 21 A
C E~~,RDS RD. OKEECF1oBEE RD. 9, 600 21 A
y C OKEECHOBEE RD. o[tANGE AVE. 9,000 21 A
~
~
~
H •
n
TABLE 2-7 (
G ST. LUCIE OOUNTY
~ 2015 NEEDS ANALYSIS
~
G
~ PEAK LEUEL
1-j SEASUN OE
~ ROADWAY JURIS" FROM TO VOI.[d~ LANES SERVICE
t0 .
` SOUI'FIDFSID BIND. PSL FIARESfA DR. BECKEI2 RD. 3,000 21 A
~
~ US #1"• C/3 No. KINGS HWY. IN~2I0 RD. 25,900 41d C
~ (NORTH/SOCiPfI) C/3 INDRIO RD. ST. LUCIE BLUD. 31,300 61d B
C/S ST. I~CIE BLVD. JUANITA AVE. 34,100 61d B
C/3 JUANITA AVE. No. SR A-1-A 37,000 61d C
C/S No. SR A-1-A ORANGE AVE. 46,300 61d* D
C/3 ORANGE AVE. DELAV~m,RE A~IE 46, 700 61d* D
C/S DECANIARE AVE. VIRGINIA AVE. 4~,900 61d* D
GS VIRGINIA AVE. ID4~RDS RD. 51,800 61d E"**
GS E~4~1RDS RD. FARlV43is tYIICT RD. 50,000 61d E•*'
C/S FARhm2S ME(T RD. NIIIX~Y RD. 45,500 61d D
C/S MID[~Y RD. PRIMA VISTA BLVD. 45,300 61d D
C/S PRII~ VISfA BLVD. F1P,LTON RD. 41,700 61d C
C/S NIALT~1 RD. PT ST LUCIE BL17D. 46,400 61d D
GS PT ST LI7CIE BLVD. JENSEN BEACH BLVD. 63,600 81d D
" 1~0 BE PR(7VIDED TEII20UGfi ALTFI2NATE i~ORRIDORS.
N
VIRGINIA AVE.•= C/S So. US ~1 OLFANDEIt AVE. 34,000 61d B
~ cis or.~v~~ AvE S[R~IRISE BLl7D. 31,000 61d a
W GS SUNRISE HLVD. so. 13TH ST. 33,000 61d A
~ C/S So. 13TEI ST. So. 25TEI ST. 31,500 61d B
C/S so. 25TH sT. So. 35TH ST. 31,000 61d B
C/S So. 35TH ST. OKEFC[IOBEE RD. 36,000 61d C
WEST VIRGINIA IX2. / C GI.ADES C[Tr-0FF RD. I-95 14.300 21 D
VILt.A~GE GRN. DEt./ PSL I-95 cALIE~ORNIA BLVD. 16,200 41d A
c~@,UPOBI RD. PSL CALIE~ORNIA BLVD. CASFH+II32E BLVD. 21,100 41d B
psr. cAStn~ es.v~. BAYSHORE BLVD. 23,500 41d c
PSL BAYSHORE BLW. E7ARESTA DR. 16,100 41d A
PSL ELrORESTA DR. So. US #1 34,000 41d D
VILI.FIGE (12N. DR. PSL So. US ~1 NIALTON RD. 20,000 41d A
t~AI.'PON RD. C So. US /1 VILL. C~7N. DR. 20,000 41d A
t+IP,L1~I RD. C VILL. c~tN. D[t. c~tEIIB RIVII2 PKWY. 27,100 41d C
c+@.T,TON RD. C c~tEfld RIVIIt PKWY. SR A-1-A 15.000 21 D
H
~
~
'
H
n ~
TABLE 2-7
(OONP.I '
~I
~ ST. LUCIE OOUbTPY
2015 NEIDS ANALYSIS
G
~ •
fi PFAK LEVEL
~ SEA.90N OE
~ ROAD4~Y JURI3" FROM 1!0 VOLUME LANES SFI2VICE ,
~ 25~n-i sr** c Aixoso sLw. rvacmo a~. ~ 25,700 41d s
~ (SO1TI'H/NORTHI C MACFDO IXt. PALt+~t EXWY. 27,000 41d B
C PAIMER EXVJ~( W. MIDt~Y RD. 31,800 41d C
~ C W. NiZGF@~Y RD. EDN~IRDS RD. 37, 000 61d B
c/s e~s Rn. ~z ai.w. 26,600 61d A
C/S C'ORTEZ BLVD. VIRGINIA AVE. 28,500 61d A
C/S VIRGINIA AVE. OKEECHOBEE RD. 40,500 61d B
C/S OKEECFIOBEE RD. ORANGE AVE. 36,200 61d B
C/S ORANGE AVE. AVE34UE Q 30,400 51 C
C/S A~7FlVUE Q JUANITA AVE. 29,500 51 B
C/S JUANITA AVE. Sf. LUCIE HLVD. 18,000 41d A
C/S ST. LUCIE BLVD. No. US ~1 13,000 41d A
I-95'• S INDIAN RIVEIt C/L Sf. L[ICIE BLW. 40,500 41X C
S ST. LUCIE BLVD. OKEECEIOBEE RD. 42,300 61X 8
S OKEECHOBEE RD. W. MID4~Y RD. 64,400 61X C
S W. MIDWAY RD. PRIMA VISTA HLVD. 70,400 61X C
N S PRIMA VISTA BLw. W. VIRGINIA DR. 70,700 61X C
S W. VIRGINIA DR. GATLIN BLVD. 57,300 61X C
~ S GATLIN HLVD. Ig1RTIN 00/LINE 31,000 61X A
~ FLA TURNPIKE"~ S INDIAN RIV~t GL OKEE(~iOBEE RD. 29,90U 41X B
O
S OKEEC'EIOBEE RD. PT ST LUCIE BLt7D. 53,000 41X D
S PT ST LUCIE BLVD. MAR'PIN C/L 56,400 41X D
" ST. Ll1CIE O~UNi'Y HAS JURISDICTIONAL, OPERATIONAL AND MAINl'F~IANCE flESPONSIBILITY 1l7 ESlABLISH IAS.
LAS OETF~MINED ACOORDING 1~0 TAHLE 2-3 BASED ON THE 1985 H(M.
TSM AND TCM MEAS[IRES WILL BE IMPLFI~IINfID 'PO IMPRORIE TRAE'EIC FIAW (X)NDITIONS.
KEY: PSL - CITY OE POI2T ST. LUCIE
FP - CI'PY OE E~DRT PIERCE
C - ST LUCIE ODUNTY
S - FIARIDA DEPAR71~3VT OF 1RANSPORTATION
EA - EXPRESSS+WY AUPHORITY
y 1= lane ld = lane divided 1X = lane expressway
~
~7
~
H .
C~
, ~ ~ s A p ° ~ ~ ~ A C ° ° ~ ' ' P ,o ESTIMATED YEAR 2010
N ~
P. 9=_ R ~e
L
+ _ ~ , F . D . 0.1.
~ 9
i ~ r~ x ~ ~ UNC i IONAL C~,qSSIFI CATION
; ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~
, I
~ " ~ BASEC f~V 1REASUftE GUn51 YEAR 2010 FSUTMS MODEL ~
~6
~ -
~ ` ~ ~ ff ~ ~ 30AC0 TRiPS/OAY ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ lc/, ~ PAINCIPAL RIi7ER1A'~ NDi
~ S~ ~ i 'r I {
~ 'R ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~MINOR AkiERIAL "xD1 ~ 30,00~ >>3,000 IRIPSIDAY
~ ~ .
i ~ ,
r p
h ~ N ~ ` \ FoA1 PI[AU
i ~1 . ~ . . ~
x. II~ ~ P ~ ~ . o~ I~[i
L-.. J
! . . . ~~~e'm ' ~i W.~+- ~ J
„ 3b
~ I~~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~Ai
, .i ~ _ EfAC§ .
's ~ ~ : •
~ OPAhfE AVF.MUE E'rtENi[qt b ~ ' .
i
r ~f E _ _ . . . . . -
_ ' _ _ . . III~ ~ ~I ~ ~ ~ .u^ Sr aUU `
f k ' ' ~ `
'i a G ~ ~
' ~I~ 4 ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~
~ ~ s ~f ~
'4 ii , r A1~~ \
4 t F ~ I\ 1,/Y j \ r
- s
~ i
, . ' ~ .
i
,
; _ , , 9
~ ~ ~ , ~ ~
~ , _ .t e
~ i
, ~ i S { ~ ~
i ~
~ ~ I~, I 4
~
!a ( ~ ~I~ 4 ~ ~
i ~ Eut Si y \ ~
C \
~ g ~ ; p
µ e ~ .
~ ' ~I' ~ ~A ~ , ~
" ' -::L-- , ~
~ i
~ ~ ~ ~ ~e ~
0g p ~ m
E u p y i
9
f a € j ~I ~ ; ~ i
~ , ~ ;,,4-,J
{ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ EY ~ t ~ ~ .
i j ~ ` ~ E
P € ~ " '
{ " ~ ~ W9 S~. 1UCIQ
~ ~ ` ~II ~ e ~~i , ~~0)~~~~ j
I \ i 4 ~ ~ e`"+i ffdOR?~A i
; ~ ~ ~ ` ~ \ ~ _T n
-~v
i l . ~ r ' ~UftE c
, ~ u,,, ~ ~ ~ :
~ - ~ -
T= F t
a;rt ~ eiee
~ m k R ~ ~ A 6 B U 0 I 4
i~ :ia:,e ~ - 4ia
~
NON-KO'1'ORI ZED TRANSPORTATI ON CONSI DERA~I ONS
The non-motorized transportation system serves bicyclists and
pedestrians. The State Transportation ~~lan requires that bicycle
and pedestrian ways be given full consideration in the planning
and development of transportation facilities. Sidewalks and
bikeways should be incorporated into state and regional plans
along with local transportation plans snd programs. The state
also requires that bicycle and pedestrian ways be established in
conjunction with construction, reconstruction or changes in any
state facilities within 5 miles of an urban area. Exceptions to
this plan may be made if consideration of a non-motorized way is
contrary to public safety, cost is disproportionate to need or
probable use, or absence of need or use has been determined.
Bicyclists
St. Lucie County encourages the development of bikeways i n all
plar~ned deeelopmen~s. ~'he leeels of b~epele ~et#vity and future
need within the County are being explored in the St. Lucie County
through the St. Lucie County Bicycle Advisory Committee. More
specific information on existing bicycle activity, future needs
and recommended programs will be available through the work of
t}~c? Ri c!v~l g Arlyi anrl (_nmmi t~itce.
Pedestrians
The interface of pedestrians with vehicles requires careful
design to ensure the safety and movement of the pedestrian, as
well as the safety and movement of vehicles. The City of Fort
Pierce has established a Sidewalk Plan to develop a uniform
system of sidewalks for pedestrian circulation city-wide, with
sidewalks on both sides of every street and short-range
improvements to schools and park areas, along with other
improvements. A similar plan should be implemented throughout
the urban area of unincorporated St. Lucie County.
Bikeways and sidewalks should include standard signage and
marking to conform with FDOT standards. Proper signage and
marking should delineate the limits of the pathway while'
indicating locations where interaction between various modes of
transportation occurs. These measures will increase the safety
of the cyclist, motorists, and pedestrians.
January 9, 1990 2- 42 TRAFFIC
GOALS, OBJI3CTIVSS AND POLICI]3S
GOAL 2. 1: PROVI DE SAF'I~ AND RFFI CI $NT 1~IOVBI~NT OF
PEOPI,$ AND GOODS, AT RSASON~BL$ COST AND
IKI HT 1![Tl~i DETRI 1[SNT TO THE RNVI RONMSNT.
Obj ective 2. 1. 1: The St. Lucie County roadway transportation
system sha11 be reviewed annually in
coordination and consistent with changes to
the Future Land IIse Element in this plan.
~ report oa the statws of the ~ystem and
impacts on the system by proposed land use
changes shall be prepared.
Pel~cy 2: 1: 1: 1: Eor~c~uet in eoordina~io~ w~th t~e MPO a
regular review of accident data and~
identify above average accident locations.
Prepare an annual report on high acoident
locations i ncluding proposed corrective
~,t~,gag»rog anrl nngitg,
Policy 2. 1. 1. 2: Develop an annual report on the level of
servioe provided on the St. Luaie County
roadway system and identify improvement
needs and costs to provide the levels of
service listed in Policy 2. 1. 2. 8.
Policy 2. 1. 1. 3: In coordination with the Florida Department
of Transportation, St. Lucie Metropolitan
Planning Organization, Florida Department
of Community Affairs and Treasure Coast
Regional Planning Council annually review
the transportation network and define
any Special Interest Areas that may
warrant LOS standards lower than those
lieted in Policy 2. 1. 2. 8.
Policy 2. 1. 1.4: Facilities currently operating at
conditions below those standards listed in
Policy 2. 1.2. 8 shall be maintained at least
at their current LOS through development
order conditions for roadway improvements
within the radius of influence of a
proposed development. The radius of
• influence for a given development shall be
further defined in the County's Land
Development Regulations traffic monitoring
provisions.
January 9, 1990 2- 43 TRAFFIC
Policy 2. 1. 1. 5: Conduct in coordination with the MPO a
signal inventory study for all roads for
which St. Lucie County has operational,
maintenance and jurisdictional
responsibility as a basis for implementing
the 1985 Highway Capaaity Manual county-
wide by 1995.
Objective 2. 1.2: Ez3.stinq an.d future roadway deficiencies
based on standarc3s established in this plan
shall be mitigated through a continuous
roadway improvement program.
Policy 2. 1.2. 1: Develop and implement a Transportation
Improvement Program (TIP) that is
consistent with the goals, objectives and
policies of this plan. Update this plan
annually in conjunction with review of the
eap~t~~ improveme~~ b~dget:
Poli cy 2. 1. 2. 2: Reni ew all propos ed devel opments f or.
consistency with the goals, objectives, and
policies of this plan and require
~nnrt~i nai_i nn nf tr?ffi r! ni rr.~,~l atri nrZ rl gng
and improvements with land use, right-of-
way and infrastructure plans befors
denelopment~ approval. Traffia oirculation
plans shall address the mitigation of all
potential project impacts on the roadway
system.
Policy 2. 1.2.3: Review access driveways and new roadway
connections associated with development to
assure safety and compatibility with the
existing and future roadway network.
Impose requirements for conformity as
condition of development approval.
Poliay 2. 1.2.4: Except as defined in Policies 2. 1.2. 6
through 2. 1. 2. 13, maintain the operation
of the roadway network for which St. Lucie
has operational, maintenance or
jurisdictional responsibilitiy at or above
the LOS standards as listed in Policy
2. 1. 2. 8.
Policy 2. 1. 2. 5: In coordination with the Florida Department
of Transportation, St. Lucie Metropolitan
Planning Organization, Treasure Coast
Regional Planning Council and the
Department of Community Affairs, designate
as Areas of Special Interest the lower
reaches of South Hutchinson Island and
January 9, 1990 2- 44 TRAFFIC
the interchange area of I-95 and the Florida
Turnpi ke.
Policy 2. 1.2.6: Enaourage the Cii~:y of Fort Pierce to
establish an STA i~1 the downtown area of
Fort Pierce extending from the North City
Limit to Virginia Avenue.
Policy 2. 1. 2. 7: Coordinate with the City of Fort Pierce and
the Florida Department of Transportation to
meet future corridor capacity needs for
U. S. 1. Explore the cost and feasibility
of alternative traffic corridors through
the downtown area of Ft. Pierce.
Policy 2. 1.2.8: St. Lucie County ado~~ts the following level
of service standards for application within
the unincorporated areas of St. Lucie
County:
TABI,$ 2-4
LEVSL OF SERVICR ST~iDARDS
F8C3,lltv TgDe AvpraQEa l~a~ ~rsassnn
~nnual Daily Daily Peak Ho»r
Local Road C C D
Collector C ~ D D
Minor Arterial
Urban C D E
Rural C D D
Ma j or Arteri al
Urban C D E
State Hwy Urban C D D
Rural C C D
Limited Access Facility
Urban D D D
Rural C C C
Backlogged Facilities maintain & maintain & maintain &
improve improve improve~
Constrained Facilities maintain* maintain* maintain*
*Transportation System Management and Transportation Demand
Management measures will be used to maintain and improve traffic
flow
January 9, 1990 2- 45 TRAFFIC
Policy 2. 1.2. 9: In coordination with the Capital
I mprovements El ement ( Pol i cy 11. 1. 1. 10
the Category "A" public facilities as
listed in Table 2-8 will be allowed to
operate at LOS "E" or increase up to 5~ in
peak season, peak hour traffic volume
through ~he end of the fiscal year
indicated for improvement and shall be
maintained at or above LOS " D" thereafter:
Table 2-8
ST. LIICI E CODNTY SACxLOGGED F~Q LI TI RS
RQAD~AY SEGMFlNT F/Y I1~IPROVEM$NT
PLANNL;D
PSL Blvd. Midport Rd. - Floresta Dr. 89-90
W. Mi~way Rd. So. US 4~eanc~er 1~ve. 92-9~
W. Midway Rd. Oleander Ave. - So. 25th St. 91-92
Prima Vista Blvd. So. US 1- Rio Mar Dr. 89-90
Prima Vista Blvd. Rio Mar Dr. - Naranj a Dr. 94-95
Prima Vista Blvd. Naranj a Dr. - Airoso Dr. 89-90
F1 nrt~xxt-a llr 'PGT. R1 vr~ - Uri ma Vi et-a A1 vri Q1 _Q7 .
Policy 2. 1.2. 10: In coordination with the Capital
I mprovements El ement ( Pol i cy 11. 1. 1. 17
the Category "C" pub~ic facilities as
listed in Table 2-9 shall be classified as
backlogged facilities in coordination with
FDOT. These roadways or roadway segments
will be allowed to increase up to 5% in
peak season, peak hour traffic volume
through the end of the fisaal year
indicated for improvement and shall be
maintained at or above LOS " D" thereafter:
Table 2-9
PROPOSED ST~TS B~CKLOGGED FACILITIES
RO~D~'AY SBGl~sSNT F/Y IMPRO~VSMBNT
PLANPSD
PSL Blvd. Floresta Dr. - FLA Turnpike 92-93
State Rd. #70 I-95 - So. US #1 90-91
No. US #1 Orange Ave. - North A-1-A None
So. US #1 Orange Ave. - Edwards Rd. None
So. US # 1 Edwards Rd. - Midway Rd. None
So. US #1 Midway Rd. - Prima Vista Blvd. None
So. US #1 Prima Vista Blvd. - PSL Blvd. None
So. 2 Sth St. Vi rgi ni a Ave. - Edwards Rd. None
No. Ri ngs Hwy. Orange Ave. - I ndri o Rd. None
January 9, 1990 2- 46 TRAFFIC
Policy 2. 1.2. 11: In coordination with FDOT designate as
constrained facilities those roadways in
St. Lucie County which operate below
acceptable levels of service and where
capacity improvements are not feasible due
to physical or policy barriers.
Policy 2. 1.2. 12: Allow no roadway link which is not subjeat
to Area of Special Interest designation or
listed in Tables 2-8 ar 2-9 to operate at
more than ten percent above the service
volumes listed in Tables 2-2 or 2-3 for the
levels of service identified in Policy
2. 1. 2. 8. When any County arterial or
collector road or segment of such a road
is determined to be operating one level
of service below its adopted standard, the
County shall exercise one of the following
options:
a. Enter into a contract that will
result in the addition of capacity to
the facility within six months of the
rlai_r~rmi n~~r.^n i~p:~~ ~}22 f~^.1~~i. ~Y 3.~
operating below its level of service
standard, and delay issuance of
development orders until the contract
has been executed;
b. Enter into an enforceable
development agreement that specifies
that new development will provide for
the upgraded facility;
c. Amend the plan to lower the level of
service at the next opportunity; or
d. Not issue any development permits in
the impacted area. The purpose of
providing for the temporary operation below
the adopted level of service is to provide
a reasonable period of time to restore the
level of service through appropriate
improvements to roads that are forecast
to operate at the adopted level of
service, but which may unexpectedly
operate at a lower level of service. All
development orders issued pursuant to
this policy shall be conditioned on the
attainment of the adopted level of
service. However, this policy shall not
impair the county's right to refuse to
issue a development order pursuant to this
January 9, 1990 2- 47 TRAFFIC
policy if the Board of County Commissioners
determines that the resultant lower
level of service caused by the proposed
development order would constitute a
threat to public health or safety."
Policy 2. 1.2. 13: In coordination with FDOT, designate
roadways or roadways segments within Areas
of Special Interest as backlogged or
constrained facilities which operate at
levels of service as established in policy
2. 1. 2. 8.
Policy 2. 1.2. 14: Up to the fiscal year indicated for
improvements, operating conditions for the
roadways listed in Tables 2-8 and 2-9 shall
be maintained or improved through traffic
systems management and traffic demand
management measures.
Obj ective 2. 1. 3: By August 1, 1990, St. Lucie County shall
adopt a tho~ouqhfare right-of-way
protection plan for the major roadway
~ne~c~?~r7. 7~? ~..+.7 ~ m .C~ S 7
YG\.AV1A ,~,~a~.. ii^ya?~~. a.~'3~ .~~aii~..~v C.iii:~3ia.a~v73
Blement and the Future Land IIse Rlement of
this plan.
Policy 2. 1. 3. 1: Prohibit encroachment of development and
required setbacks into established present
and future rights-of-way and, within the
law, require dedication of right-of-way
through development orders issued by the
County.
Pol i cy 2. 1. 3. 2: Revi ew propos ed devel opment pl ans f or
impact on the future land use plan and
assess the capacity needs of each project
as it relates to the thoroughfare right-of-
way protection plan by requiring a traffic
impaat analysis, as further described in
the County's Land Development Regulations,
with proposed development applications.
GQ~L 2. 2: $ST~BLI SH ~N I NTSGRATSD TRANSPORTATI ON
SYSTBI~I CONSISTENT WITH FUTURS DEVSLOPMBNT
OF THE COIIN'1.'Y.
Obj ective 2. 2_ 1: I~iotorized and non-motorized needs shall be
assessed and met for each new development
approved.
January 9, 1990 2- 48 TRAFFIC
Pol i cy 2. 2. 1. 1: I ncl ude wi thi n the Land Devel opment
Regulations provisions for requiring an
adequate number of motorized and bicycle
on-site parking spaces for each new site
development and provide for safe and
efficient movement of vehicles and
pedestrians within the site in conjunction
with plan review and permitting.
Policy 2.2. 1.2: Review on-site traffic flow to assure
adequate circulation for motorized and non-
motorized vehicles and pedestrians is
provided. Require signage and roadway
specifications that conform to the County's
adopted standards.
Obj ective 2. 2. 2: By December 31, 1991, a plan shall be
developed to provide transportation
services to transportatios disadvantaged
persons.
Policy 2.2.2. 1: Participate with the efforts of the St.
Lucie County Council on Aging, or other
~~~~gn~t~3 ~,r~~i3~r, t~ aaS28o t r~G~us ~f
and develop a plan to provide effeotive
service for work, meals, and other
necessary trips to the transportation
disadvantaged.
Obj ective 2. 2. 3: The long range transportation needs plan
shall be updated on a regular basis_
Pol i cy 2. 2. 3. 1: Revi s e the trans portati on el ement as
appropriate upon the oompletion of the
current 2010 transportation study.
GOAL 2. 3: TO DEVSLOP ~ SAFE BICYCLl3 AND PRDBSTRIAAi
7.'RANSPORTATI ON SYSTSIyi ACCRSSI BLB TO ALL
MAJOR PIIBLI C~PiD PRIPATI~ F~CI LI TI ES.
Obj ective 2.3.1: The transportation system shall be improved
to appropriately accommodate bicycle and
pedestri.an. roadway desiqn and facility
requirements.
Pol i cy 2. 3. 1. 1: I ncl ude wi thi n the Land Devel opment
Regulations, design criteria and standards
to be used in addressing the needs of
bicyclists and pedestrians.
January 9, 1990 2- 49 TRAFFIC
Pol i oy 2. 3. 1. 2: Us e the Bi cycl e Advi s ory Commi ttee to
develop recommendations for a bicycle and
pedestrian transportation plan to be
submitted to the County Commission by
December 31, 1991. The plan should provide
access to major public and private
facilities including parks, sahools, beaah
accesses and maj or shopping facilities.
Policy 2.3. 1. 3: Develop a program to systematically
inventory all significant streets within
the MPO area, with particular attention
given to hazards, bottlenecks, and barriers
to bicyclists.
Policy 2. 3. 1. 4: Develop a bicycle and pedestrian accident
recording program to identify road segments
and intersections having frequent bicycle
and pedestrian-related accidents.
Policy 2.3. 1.5: Include within the Land Development
• regulations a requirement that all new
development provide bicycle fac~lities
and/or sidewalks along all maj or collector
and arterial roadways within and adjacent
to the proposed development pro~ect.
Obj ective 2. 3_ 2: ~ bicycle transportation system shall be
developed into a network connecting all
major travel destination~ to population
concentrations.
Policy 2. 3. 2. 1: Establish bioycle and pedestrian facilities
in accordance with AASHTO guidelines around
schools, with emphasis placed upon the area
encompassing schools that are not serviced
by the s chool bus s ys tem.
Policy 2.3.2.2: Use the Bicycle Advisory Committee to
develop recommendations for a bicycle and
pedestrian transportation plan to be
submitted to the County Commission by
December 31, 1991. The plan should provide
access to major public and private
facilities including parks, schools, beach
accesses and maj or shopping facilities.
Policy 2. 3. 2. 3: Work with local recreation departments and
the State Department of Natural Resources
to develop bicycle facilities within
community and regional parks and other
major recreational facilities.
January 9, 1990 2- 50 TRAFFIC
Policy 2. 3. 2. 4: Coordinate bicycle planning activities of
the bicycle advisory committee on bicycle
facilities with other agencies associated
with bicycle planning activities in Martin
and Indian River Counties.
Obj ective 2. 3. 3: A usable pedestrian circulation system
shall be developed.
Policy 2. 3. 3. 1: Provide, in association with all new road
construction in the urban area sidewalks
along all maj or streets (including all
arterials and collectors identified in the
Comprehensive Plan).
Policy 2. 3.3.2: Provide additional sidewalks, where
necessary, to connect or complete either
existing or proposed sidewalks in a manner
that provi~des a complete pedestrian
circulation system.
GO~L 2. 4: COORDI NATS TR~IiTSPORT~TI ON-RELATSD I SSIIES
WITH THI~ PL~NS AND PR(X=RAMS f1F THR
FLORID~ DEPgRTMBNT OF TRANSPORT~TTON, THE
TRS~SDRS ~(~AST RSGI ON~L PI~ANNI NG CODNCI L,
THI3 ST_ LIICI g METROPOLI TAN PLANNI NG
ORGAMI ZATI ON, FLORI DA ~SP~RTI~IENT OF
COMMII1~lI TY AF'FAI RS, THE IiDTCHI NSON I SLAND
RSSOURCE M~GSMENT PL~N, ADJACBNT
l~IiJNI CI PALI TI ES, ADJACENT COIINTI $S, AND
OTHBR PRI V~TS TRANSPORT~TI ON-RSI,~TSD
AGENCI RS.
Obj ective 2. 4. 1: Common transportation goals, obj ectives,
and policies shall be shared on an on-qoing
basis with the transportation-related
agencies listed in Goal 2.4, where common
interests are involved.
Policy 2. 4. 1. 1: Review the existing Transportation Goals,
Objectives, and Policies of other agencies
when revising or altering Goals,
Objectives, and Policies for St. Lucie
County.
Obj ective 2. 4. 2: The Coun.ty sha11 communi.cate with the
agencies listed in Goal 2.4 reqarding
transportation activities and planned
improvements_
January 9, 1990 2- 51 TRAFFIC
Policy 2. 4.2. 1: By December 31, 1990, establish a mailing
list to ensure that all interested agencies
listed above are informed of transportation
related activities and improvements via
copies of correspondence.
Policy 2. 4.2.2: As a part of the Capital Improvements
Element update process annually review
transportation improvements planned for St.
Lucie County indicati ng the agency
responsible for the improvement and the
estimated date of completion.
Obj ective 2. 4. 3: ~pplicable agencies listed in Goal 2. 4
shall be advised of development proposals
which may have impacts within their
respective jurisdiction and request
comments as applicable.
Policy 2. 4. 3. 1: Establish a standard check list procedure
to advise applicable agencies of proposed
development by August 1, 1990.
January 9, 1990 2- 52 TRAFFIC