HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-019 Exhibit C
.
To:
Submitted By:
SUBJECT:
BACKGROUND:
,NDS AVAILABLE:
PREVIOUS ACTION:
RECOMMENDATION:
EXHIBIT C
Future Land Use Amendments
Item Number:
Meeting Date:
Amend. No.
Consent
Regular
Public Hearing
Leg. [ ]
qc
11101105
PA-05-003
[ ]
[ ]
[ X ]
Quasi-JD [ X ]
Presented By
Michael Brillhart :nil)
Strategy & Special Projects /lfftJ
Censider a privately re.submitted amendment te the Future Land Use Plan Map
(FLUP), requested by Jehn DiSalvatere ("The Preserve"), ta change land use
designatien .of a 75 acre parcel lecated generally west .of Angle Read, east .of
Canal 29 and Westweed High Scheel, nerth .of Metzger Read" from Industrial
(IND) land use te Residential High (RH) land use (maximum 15 units per gross
acre). (File Number: PA-05-003)
Board of County Commissioners
Growth Management
. Applicant's reasan fer request: plan fer a propesed residential multifamily
develepment praject .of 999 units (1,125 gress units weuld be allawed if
amendment frem IND te RH is appreved).
. Applicant's reasens fer amendment applicatian re-submittal:: Applicant
has amended the tatal site te include 75 acres fram the .original 56.9 acres.
Applicant is prepesing te implement a 10/10 afferdable/werk ferce heusing
initiative as part .of the preject's site develepment pregram.
N!A
At the Lecal Planning Agency (LPA) meeting en June 16, 2005, the LPA vated 5-
1 ta recommend that the Caunty Cemmissien nat transmit the amendment. On
July 12, 2005, the Beard .of Ceunty Cemmissieners vated 4-1 ta nat transmit this
amendment te the State DCA. At the applicant's re-submittal public hearing
befere the Lecal Planning Agency en Octeber 20, 2005, the LPA vated 7-0 ta
recammend that the Baard .of Ceunty Cemmissieners .once again deny this
amendment ta the Cemprehensive Plan.
Staff recemmends that the Beard .of Ceunty Cemmissieners deny this plan
amendment applicatien fer transmittal te the Department .of Cammunity Affairs. It
sheuld be neted that the applicant has prepesed implementing landscape
buffering and building setback separatien measures in cansideratian .of the
surreunding industrial area. The applicant is alse prapasing an affardable
werkferce heusing initiative te the prepesed preject which weuld censist .of adding
a minimum number .of werkferce heusing units (99) ta the develapment.
Additianally, the area te the immediate west will be invalved in a camprehensive
neighberheed planning precess ever the next several manths in cansideratien .of
the transitienalland use character aleng the N. Jenkins Raad carridar study area.
COMMISSION ACTION:
Iifl APPROVED 0 DENIED
EJ OTHER
CONCURRENCE:
tIt/kl ~
I Douglas M. Anderson
County Administrator
.
County Attorney
Finance:
Environ. Resources;
Coordination! Signatures
~ rlW t\
Mgt. & Budget:
Fire Dept:
Utility:
Purchasing:
Public Works:
Other:
CITY OF FORT PIERCE
2005 Florida League of Cities "City of Excellence" Award Winner
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
ZONING ADMINfSTRA TlaN
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING
URBAN DESIGN
HISTORIC PRESERVATION
CUL ruRAL RESOURCES
To:
FROM:
CC:
RE:
DATE:
"IMPROVING THE WA Y WE Do BUSINESS"
GIL BACKENSTOSS, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT, ST. LUCIE COUNTY
KARA WOOD, URBAN DESIGNER
PETER BUCHWALD, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
DAVID RECOR, DEPUTY CITY MANAGER, INTERIM PLANNING DIRECTOR
DAVID KELLY, PLANNING MANAGER, ST. LUCIE COUNTY
THE PRESERVE - PRELIMINARY PUD
MAY4,2006
~ity of Fort Pierce staff has recently been informed that the above-referenced site plan and
~ezoning application has been submitted in conjunction with an application for Future Land Use
Amendment from IND, Industrial to RH, Residential High, 15 dwelling units per acre.
. It is the assessment of City staff that this proposed Land Use Amendment is inconsistent with the
surrounding land uses. RH designations in this area are limited to areas immediately adjacent to
commercial uses along the Orange Avenue corridor. (See attached map.) Parcels adjacent to
other industrial land and bordering Westwood High School all have Future Land Use designations
of RU, Residential Urban at a maximum of 5 du/acre. Granting this parcel the land use
designation of RH implies that Angle Road should develop according to a similar pattern and
intensity as the Orange Avenue corridor. This is not the intention of Angle Road given by the
existing Future Land Uses.
Ultimately, the City of Fort Pierce disapproves of the rezoning of Industrial Land for residential
uses, which undermines the opportunities for the establishment or expansion of businesses and
the creation of jobs in the area. The City requests that this application for Future Land Use
Amendment be denied.
.
.
100 N. U.S. 1 0 P.O. Box 1480 0 FORT PIERCE, FL 34954-1480 0 772-460-2200 0 FAX 772-466-5808
MAY 10, 2006
PAGE 2
.
.
P.O. Box 1480 0 FORT PIERCE, FL 34954-1480 0 772-460-2200
.
.
.
Board of County Commissioners: November 1, 2005
File Number PA-05-003
MEMORANDUM
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
TO:
Board of County Commissioners
FROM:
Michael Brillhart, Strategy & Special Projects
DATE:
October 26, 2005
SUBJECT:
Re-submittal Application of The Preserve (John DiSalvatore) for a
Change in Future Land Use Designation from IND (Industrial) to RH
(Residential High - maximum of 15 du/gross acre).
LOCATION:
The property is generally located west of Angle Road, east
of Canal 29 and Westwood High School, north of Metzger
Road and south of Avenue M ( Please see attached
"Petition of John Disalvatore" Map)
CURRENT FUTURE LAND
USE DESIGNATION: IND (Industrial)
PROPOSED FUTURE LAND
USE DESIGNATION: RH (Residential High)
EXISTING ZONING: IL (Industrial Light)
PARCEL SIZE: 75 acres
PROPOSED USE: Multifamily residential development (applicant is proposing
999 multi-family dwelling units)
SURROUNDING FUTURE LAND
USE DESIGNATIONS: North: IND (Industrial). South: IND (Industrial) and MXD.
East: IND (Industrial). West: P/F (Public Facilities) and IND
(Industrial). Please see attached "Land Use" map
SURROUNDING ZONING
DESIGNATIONS:
North: IL (Light Industrial). South: IL (Light Industrial) &
Road right-of-way (Metzger Road) East: IL (Light
Industrial). West: I (Institutional) and IL (Light Industrial)
.
.
.
October 26, 2005
Page 2
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
SURROUNDING EXISTING
LAND USES:
The existing uses of lands abutting the subject property to
the north and northwest, south of Montecillo Avenue
IAvenue M, include an auto salvage business and vacant
lands. The existing uses of lands north of Montecillo
AvenuelAvenue M and southwest of Angle Road include
single family homes and vacant lands. The existing uses of
lands to the east include vacant lands and residences for
that portion between north of Avenue I, and vacant lands,
a storage facility with office and a repair shop for that
portion south of Avenue I and north of Metzger Road.
Existing lands to the south of the subject property contain
agricultural uses, a warehouse and two single family
homes. West of Canal No. 29 is Westwood High School.
(Please see attached "Existing Land Use Map")
UTILITY SERVICE:
The subject site is within the service area of the Ft. Pierce
Utilities Authority.
TRANSPORTATION SERVICE:
RIGHT-OF-WAY
ADEQUACY:
The existing right-of-way for Angle Road varies from 66
feet to 100 feet. (The applicant has identified Angle Road
as the road to be accessed.)
SCHEDULED
IMPROVEMENTS:
None.
TYPE OF CONCURRENCY
DOCUMENT REQUIRED:
Concurrency Deferral Affidavit.
REASON FOR RE-SUBMITTAL:
Applicant has purchased additional adjacent land thus
bringing the total land area from the original 56.9 acres to
75 acres. Applicant is also proposing to implement a
"10/10" affordable/work force housing program as part of a
residential multi-family development project.
...............................................................................
A future land use amendment is not regarded as a development order as defined in Florida
Statutes and does not imply that any specific development scenario can occur on the property.
No right to obtain a final development order or any other rights to develop the subject property
are granted or implied by the County if the requested Comprehensive Plan amendment is
approved. Analysis of potential impacts at the land use amendment stage is undertaken .to
determine if other portions of the Comprehensive Plan need to be revised as a result of
approval of a land use amendment. Concurrency rights cannot be considered at the land use
amendment stage because actual projects proceeding toward a final development order will
.
October 26, 2005
Page 3
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05~003
enter the development review process between the time that a land use amendment is under
consideration for approval and a final project is brought forward to use that approved land use
amendment. Prior to the issuance of any final development order, the developer must
demonstrate that all public facilities are available to service the parcel and obtain a Certificate of
Capacity.
*********************************************************************************************************~
DATA AND ANALYSIS
BACKGROUND
The applicant is requesting a change in the Future Land Use designation of the 75 acre subject
property from Industrial (INO) to Residential High (RH). The present Future Land Use
designation of the subject property allows for both heavy and light industrial uses. The Future
Land Use Element states that this land use designation "is applied to specific areas of the
County identified as suitable for industrial use". The existing zoning designation is Industrial,
Light (IL).
The Future Land Use designations of lands abutting the subject property are summarized above
and shown on the attached map entitled "Future Land Use", which also shows the future land
use designations within % mile of the subject site.
.
The existing use of the subject property is vacant land. The existing uses of lands abutting the
subject property is summarized above, and also shown on the attached "Existing Use Map".
***********************************************************************************************************
APPLICANT PROPOSAL AND REASONS FOR REQUEST
The applicant requests a land use amendment to Residential High (RH) land use, which allows
a density of up to 15 dwelling units per gross acre. The total acreage for which the application is
submitted is 75 acres, which could yield a maximum of 1,125 dwelling units. The applicant is
proposing to construct only 999 units.
The applicant provides three main reasons for the request:
1. The applicant states that the current land use designation and zoning category is 'not
entirely compatible' with the St. Lucie Comprehensive Plan location criteria provided at
[Future Land Use Element] Policy 1.1.11.3, which requires Light Industrial property to
have immediate access to the regional transportation network.
2. The applicant states that the County has an ample surplus of industrial lands that remain
undeveloped and has also provided for new employment centers as part of mixed-use
areas.
3. The applicant states that the subject parcel is 'ideally suited for multifamily development
providing a transition from the adjacent industrial lands to residential lands to the south
and the school to the west.'
.
The applicant also identifies goal, objectives and policies of the 8t. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan with which the applicant believes the proposal is consistent. These include
Future Land Use Element Objectives 1.1.4, Objective 1.1.5, Objective 1.1.9 and Objective
1.1.12
.
October 26, 2005
Page 4
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
******************************************************************************************************
STAFF FINDINGS
1. During the presentation to the Local Planning Agency, the applicant stated that the intent
of the proposed land use amendment was to enable the development of affordable
housing. The application submitted to the County did not indicate that affordable housing
was one of the justifications for the proposed amendment, or staff would have included
that information in the analysis. Specific numerical goals to be achieved in the provision
of affordable housing have not yet been adopted as a part of the St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan, although the data and analysis in the Housing Element do identify
need. However, despite the fact that affordable housing is needed in St. Lucie County,
the concerns regarding compatibility with adjacent existing uses, and loss of needed
industrial acreage with potential jobs remain. The recommendation to deny the land use
amendment would still have been made even if affordable housing had been included in
the analysis. Whether affordable or not, housing deserves to be located in proximity to
uses compatible with residential. Where mixed use land use has been encouraged,
design standards can ensure compatibility of light industrial with residential land uses.
Where lands have been designated as "Industrial", such design considerations have not
been ensured, as the primary intent was to encourage job development.
.
2. In addition, the comprehensive plan needs to be examined as a whole when evaluating
a proposed land use change. Encouraging development of affordable housing is an
important goal, and an equally important goal is enabling the County to encourage the
provision of new employment, and the retention of existing industrial uses.
3. Future Land Use Element Policy 1.1.11.3, cited by the applicant as the basis for
concluding that the Industrial land use designation of the subject site is not appropriate,
is a policy that provides standards to use when considering a change in zoning to 'Light
Industrial'. Point 3 under that Policy states that 'New Light Industrial areas should have
immediate access to the regional transportation network'. Staff notes that the subject
property has had 'Industrial' Land Use designation at least since the adoption of the
1990 St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan and is not under consideration for a new
rezoning to Light Industrial. In addition, the subject property has access to Angle Road
via both Montecillo Avenue and Metzger Road. Angle Road east of Kings Highway is
classified as a State Arterial Highway.
.
4. The applicant states that the County has an ample surplus of industrial lands that remain
undeveloped. However, according to the St. Lucie County Future Land Use Element,
approximately 1,144 acres of vacant land are available for additional industrial use. This
vacant acreage represents approximately three-tenths of a percent (.3%) of the
unincorporated County's total acreage. According to the Housing Element of the St.
Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, there are 754 acres of vacant land in the
unincorporated County that have Land Use designations allowing multi-family
development, and that vacant land was projected to accommodate the needs of multi-
family housing through the year 2020. There are 204 acres of vacant land available
under the RH land use designation.
.
.
.
October 26, 2005
Page 5
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
5. Staff is concerned that the loss of 75 acres of land originally planned for Industrial use,
and surrounded by other lands with Industrial designation, will discourage the existing
industrial uses adjacent to the property and undermine the goals of the St. Lucie County
Economic Development Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The Economic
Development Element stresses improving the economy of the County by attracting
employers and investors to provide higher paying jobs. Economic Development Policy
12.1.1.1 states: "Attract investors to help diversify the industrial base, broaden the
economic tax base and strengthen the job market." The proposed land use amendment
would remove the subject property from the inventory of land available for industrial use,
and therefore does not support and further this policy, or the general direction of the
Economic Development Element. Loss of land within the Urban Services area that can
be used for industrial purposes, at this point in the County's development, may result in
future lack of ability to accommodate the desired employment base and put the County
in the position of searching for land for future industrial uses that is not as appropriate.
6. The applicant has stated that the land use amendment would enable the subject
property to serve as a transition between residential lands to the south and the school to
the west. However, existing industrial uses abutting the property do not appear
compatible with residential uses. The impact on those existing uses of new residential
development can result in loss of the industrial uses. In addition, in accordance with
Future Land Use Policy 1.1.5.3, when considering any amendment to the Future Land
Use Maps of the County's Comprehensive Plan, a finding must be made that the
property proposed for amendment is adjacent to, or no more than 'Xi mile of, the sameor
greater type of land use designation. As shown in the map entitled "The Preserve
application", the properties directly adjacent to the subject property are Industrial.
Although there are properties with Residential High land use designation to the south of
the subject property that are within the 'Xi mile radius, properties with a Residential
designation to the east and north are designated as Residential Urban, which is a lower
density that that requested for the subject property. Thus, the proposal does not appear
to be in the position to serve as a transition between the school and other residential
lands.
The applicant has provided a rebuttal letter regarding staff's findings. The letter, dated June 6,
2005, is included in the "Correspondence" section.
...............................................................................
Any proposed amendment to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan may be reviewed by
several state and regional agencies. The State Department of Community Affairs, which is
identified by Chapter 163, Florida Statutes (FS) as the "Land Planning Agency" for the state,
has the responsibility to determine if proposed amendments are consistent with and further the
St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, the State Comprehensive Plan, the Strategic Regional
Policy Plan and Chapter 163, FS. The St. Lucie County Local Planning Agency (LPA), which is
the Planning and Zoning Board, has the responsibility according to subsection 163.3174(4)(a),
FS, to "make recommendations to the governing body regarding the adoption or amendment"
of the Comprehensive Plan.
...............................................................................
CONSISTENCY WITH THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
.
.
.
October 26, 2005
Page 6
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
In reviewing this application for a proposed amendment to the St. Lucie County Future Land
Use Map, staff finds that the following Goals, Objectives and Policies of the County
Comprehensive Plan are applicable to this petition.
FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT
The proposed amendment does not appear to support and further this element. The applicant
cites several Objectives which support the proposed amendment. Staff findings do not support
the applicant's conclusion.
Future Land Use Objective 1.1.4
. The applicant cites Future Land Use Objective 1.1.4, stating that the Objective
addresses compatibility with adjacent land uses and that the proposed amendment will
provide a transition between residential lands to the south, Industrial to the north and
Institutional lands to the west.
. However, Objective 1.1.4 actually addresses the provision of requirements in the Land
Development Regulations (such as performance criteria and landscaping) to ensure that
all new development be compatible with surrounding land uses, both existing and future.
As noted above, there is reasonable concern that the insertion of high density multi-
family residential uses adjacent to existing industrial uses, and proposed future industrial
uses, might have a chilling effect upon the industrial lands.
Future Land Use Objective 1.1.5
. The applicant states that the proposal is consistent with Future Land Use Objective
1.1.5, which states that future development within the Urban Services Area shall be
directed to areas where urban and community services/facilities can be provided in the
most efficient and compact manner so as to discourage proliferation of sprawl. It is
noted that the subject property is located within the service area of the Fort Pierce Utility
Authority (FPUA), which provided a letter to the applicant that is discussed below.
Service can be provided, but the need level exceeds that for which the FPUA had
planned. Improvements to the wastewater management system would be needed to
accommodate the demand.
Future Land Use Policy 1.1.5.3
. This Policy states: "When considering an amendment to the Future Land Use Maps of
the County's Comprehensive Plan, the County Commission shall make the following
findings, supported by the other elements of this Plan, prior to taking any approval
actions granting an individual amendment to the Future Land Use Maps:
1. That the property under a land use amendment application is adjacent to, or within
no more than }4 mile of the same or greater land use classification.
.
October 26, 2005
Page 7
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
.
2. That the property under a land use amendment consideration lies within the Five
Year Capital Improvement Program of the Water and Wastewater Master Plan for St.
Lucie County or otherwise meets the requirements of Policy 1.1.5.4."
. As noted in the prior analysis, adjacent lands are all designated as Industrial. While
those classifications are 'greater' than the requested land use designation, a request for
a lower intensity land use designation raises questions of compatibility with the existing
Industrial uses. When examining the land use designations within a Y-i mile radius, it is
found that some lands with the requested density level are located to the south, but
lower density lands are located north and east.
. The second part of this Policy requires that the property for which an amendment is
requested must lie within the Five Year Capital Improvement Program of the Water and
Wastewater Master Plan for St. Lucie County or otherwise meet the requirements of
Policy 1.1.5.4 (a policy requiring access to potable water and sanitary sewer services). It
is noted that an amendment to the land use map of the comprehensive plan does not
require a concurrency determination. However, the minimum standards of Rule 9J-11,
Florida Administrative Code, require that local governments evaluate the potential
impacts of proposed amendments on services. The subject property lies within the
service area of the FPUA. Calculations from the applicant submitted to FPUA estimated
that the total wastewater that could be generated by the subject property if developed as
nonresidential uses would be 145,664 gallons of wastewater a day. If the subject
property is developed as a residential project with 15 housing units per acre, the
wastewater flow would increase to 270,000 gallons per day. A letter from FPUA to the
applicant (please see attached letter) indicates that service can be provided but that
wastewater capacity for a proposal such as this is limited in the vicinity of this proposal.
Improvements to the local wastewater system would be needed. The burden of ensuring
construction of the improvements to the wastewater system would fall upon the
applicant.
Future Land Use Objective 1.1.9
. The applicant cites this Objective as one with which the application is consistent.
. This Objective states that the County shall, through enforcement of Chapter 6.00.00 of
its Land Development Code, support standards for protection/creation of native plant
communities within the County. The applicant indicates that the subject property is of
sufficient size to allow for preservation and buffering of those environmental assets on
the property that were identified in the Environmental Impact Report submitted as part of
this application and that development would provide the required protections.
. Any use of this property would need to be consistent with this Objective. A change in
land use designation is not required in order to achieve the Objective.
Future Land Use Objective 1.1.11
.
. This Objective states that the County shall 'continue to work with interested groups and
agencies to increase and broaden the County's economic base while expanding
existing business and industrial opportunities.'
. The proposed amendment would reduce the County's ability to implement this
Objective.
.
October 26, 2005
Page 8
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
Future Land Use Objective 1.1.12
. The applicant cites this Objective as one with which the application is consistent. .
. This Objective states that, pursuant to Chapter 5.00.00 of the Land Development Code,
all development orders and permits for future development shall be issued only if public
facilities necessary to meet the level of service standards are available concurrent with
the impacts of development. This Objective affirms that the County will enforce the state-
mandated Concurrency provisions for development orders. Concurrency is not a
requirement for land use plan amendments, but is required for subsequent development
orders. Any development of this property would be subject to the requirements
addressed by this Objective. A change in land use designation is not needed to
implement this Objective.
TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
.
A future land use amendment is not regarded as a development order as defined in Florida
Statutes and does not imply that any specific development scenario can occur on the property.
No right to obtain a final development order or any other rights to develop the subject property
are granted or implied by the County if the requested Comprehensive Plan amendment is
approved. Analysis of potential impacts at the land use stage is undertaken to determine if other
portions of the Comprehensive Plan need to be revised as a result of approval of a land use
amendment. Concurrency rights cannot be considered at the land use amendment stage
because actual projects proceeding toward a final development order will enter the development
review process between the time that a land use amendment is under consideration for
approval and a final project is brought forward to use that approved land use amendment. Prior
to the issuance of any final development order, the developer must demonstrate that all public
facilities are available to service the parcel and obtain a Certificate of Capacity.
The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element.
When considering a possible change to Future Land Use, this element requires the following:
Objective 2.1.1: The 8t. Lucie County transportation system shall be reviewed in coordination
with any requested changes to the Future Land Use Element or other related components of
this plan. A report on the impacts to the system brought about by any proposed land use
changes shall be prepared and presented to the Board of County Commissioners as part of the
review of that Land Use change.
The applicant provided a Transportation Impact Analysis Report estimating the trips associated
with the maximum potential development for both the current and proposed Future Land Use
designations. The daily trip generation calculations provided by the applicant indicate that the
proposed Land Use generates fewer trips than the existing Land Use designation. (Please see
attached table labeled "Exhibit 2A DiSalvatore Property Daily Trip Generation Comparison").
. Road and Bridge Department review
.
.
.
October 26, 2005
Page 9
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
The Road and Bridge Department staff reviewed the Transportation Impact Analysis Report.
Their comments indicated their understanding that a Land Use amendment includes a
concurrency deferral, and that roadway concurrency would be determined in conjunction with a
formal development application. Given that fact, the Road and Bridge review stated that an
application for formal development would need to determine whether a decrease in trips would
occur, and what the actual impact on the roadway system would be. Additional information will
be necessary at that time.
The applicant reviewed the St. Lucie Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) fiscal year
2004/2005 through 2008/2009 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) to determine if any
roadways within the impact area are scheduled to be improved. No roadways within this impact
area are scheduled for improvement within the 5-year timeframe.
St. Lucie Metropolitan Planning Organization review
The St. Lucie Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) staff reviewed the proposed Land Use
amendment and noted that it is not in conflict with the MPO's adopted 2025 Long Range
Transportation Plan. (Please see attached letter from the St. Lucie Metropolitan Planning
Organization. )
HOUSING ELEMENT
As has been noted above, the Housing Element data and analysis indicated that the 754 acres
of vacant land available for multi-family housing was sufficient to accommodate needs projected
to the year 2020. Based on this analysis, the following Housing Policy was adopted:
Policy 5.1.1.1 : To provide sufficient land to meet the future housing needs, the Future
Land Use Map has designated 1,868 acres to accommodate 9,340 new single-family
dwelling units and 754 acres to accommodate a minimum of 6,786 new multifamily
dwelling units.
If the proposed amendment is adopted, the State Department of Community Affairs may find
that the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan is internally inconsistent, which is a violation of
subsection 163.3177(2), Florida Statutes, or may require St. Lucie County to revise its
Comprehensive Plan and Housing Element in order to demonstrate the need for the additional
acreage.
INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT
The applicant has provided documentation about the potential impacts on potable water,
sanitary sewer and drainage services. This analysis is provided to comply with the requirements
of Rule 9J-11 and is not a concurrency reservation analysis. Prior to any Final Development
Order for the property, a developer must obtain Certificates of Capacity that demonstrate
sufficient capacity in these services is available to serve the proposal.
.
October 26, 2005
Page 10
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
. Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element
The proposed amendment is not in conflict with this sub-element, but the service provider has
advised that improvements may be necessary to ensure service availability (Please see
attached letter in "Correspondence" section.)
Sanitary Sewer Objective 60.1.2. states: The County shall implement procedures for
ensuring that when a development permit is issued, pursuant to then current Service
Availability Report, adequate facility capacity is available or will be available when
needed to serve the development, concurrent with the impacts, in order to meet adopted
level-of-service standards.
Because the proposed amendment is contained within the Urban Services Area Boundary and
is within the Fort Pierce Utility Authority (FPUA) Service Area, the proposed amendment can be
consistent with this sub-element at the time that a Final Development Order would be issued.
FPUA has provided a letter verifying that service can be made available, but that"... the entire
wastewater system that this project will effect will require evaluation by a private consultant in
order to determine what improvements may be necessary to handle the increased flow." Prior
to issuance of any Final Development Order, an applicant would need to demonstrate that these
issues have been addressed.
.
Sanitary Sewer Sub-element Policy 60. 1.2.2.: The level of service standard for those
areas of the unincorporated County served by Ft. Pierce Utility Authority shall be 380
gallons per capita per day (Ft. Pierce Utilities Authority 1988 Water and Wastewater
Master Plan, July 1988).
Assuming that the existing Industrial land use designation would yield a maximum of 1,633,500
square feet of floor area (based on the maximum 50% lot coverage allowed in both Industrial
zoning districts), and that 2,500 square feet is needed per employee (according to the
calculations of the "Fiscal Impact Analysis Model" ["FlAM"] created by Fishkind and Associates
for calculating costs and revenues for land use changes), the estimated number of employees
for the subject property with its current "Industrial" classification would be 653 employees. At a
level of service of 380 gallons per capita per day for employee, the resulting daily wastewater
flow would be 248,292 gallons.
If the amendment is adopted, a maximum of 1,125 residential units could be built. With a person
per household rate of 2.47 (Census 2000), the residential wastewater generation would be
1,125 units X 2.47 = 2,779 persons. At a rate of 380 gallons per capita per day, the wastewater
generation rate would be 1,633,500 gallons per day. The total daily demand for wastewater
treatment if the amendment is adopted as proposed is estimated to be a higher demand than
that generated by the subject site with its current land use designation.
. Solid Waste Sub-Element
The proposed amendment is not in conflict with this sub-element, because the sub-element
. states that the County will not need to begin to assess new disposal options until the year 2015.
.
.
.
October 26, 2005
Page 11
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05~003
Solid Waste Objective 68.1.1.1 establishes a level of service of 9.31 pounds per capita per day
to ensure sufficient capacity at the landfill through the year 2015. Assuming that the existing
Industrial land use designation might yield a maximum of 1,633,500 square feet of floor area
(based on the maximum 50% lot coverage allowed in both Industrial zoning districts), and that
2,500 square feet is needed per employee (according to the assumptions of the "Fiscal Impact
Analysis Model" ["FlAM"] created by Fishkind and Associates for calculating costs and revenues
from land use changes), the estimated number of employees for the subject property with its
current 'Industrial' classification would be 653. At a level of service of 9.31 pounds per capita
per day, the solid waste generated would be 6,079 pounds per day.
If the amendment is adopted, a maximum of 1,125 multi-family dwelling units could be built.
With a person per household rate of 2.47 (Census 2000) and a per capita solid waste level of
service of 9.31 pounds per day, the subject site is estimated to generate 25,870 pounds of solid
waste per day.
. Drainage and Aquifer Recharge Sub-Element
The proposed amendment is not inconsistent with this sub-element. The subject property is
located within the existing limit of the North St. Lucie River Water Control District, and an
allowable stormwater runoff rate has been established by that District. Future development will
be required to comply with those limitations. In accordance with Objective 6C.1.4.2 of this
element, all development will be conditioned on the availability of services necessary to
maintain the level of service standards for stormwater set forth in Policy 6C.1.1.2. Objective
6C.3.2 requires development to protect the functions of natural groundwater recharge areas.
Prior to development taking place the project will also require an Environmental Resource
Permit from the South Florida Water Management District.
. Potable Water Sub-Element
The proposed amendment is not inconsistent with this sub-element. The subject property is
located within the Fort Pierce Utility Authority (FPUA) service area and a letter from that
provider indicates that potable water service is available via a 12-inch water main on the south
side of Angle Road. Prior to any Final Development Order approvals, the applicant would be
required to demonstrate that sufficient capacity is available to service the project, including
provisions for fire protection.
Potable Water Sub-Element Policy 6A.1.2.2: The level of service standard for those
areas of the unincorporated County served by Ft. Pierce Utilities Authority shall be
332 gallons per capita per day (Ft. Pierce Utilities Authority, 1999).
Assuming that the existing Industrial land use designation would yield a maximum of
1,633.500 square feet of retail floor area (based on the maximum 50% lot coverage allowed
in both Industrial zoning districts), and that 2,500 square feet is needed per employee
(according to the calculations of the "Fiscal Impact Analysis Model" ["FlAM"] created by
Fishkind and Associates for calculating costs and revenues for land use changes), the
estimated number of employees for the subject property with its current "Industrial"
.
.
.
October 26, 2005
Page 12
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
classification would be 653 employees. At a level of service of 332 gallons per capita per
day for employee, the resulting daily demand for potable water would be estimated at
216,796 gallons per day.
If the amendment is adopted as proposed, a maximum of 1,125 residential units could be
built. With a person per household rate of 2.47 (Census 2000), the residential water demand
would be 1,125 units X 2.47 = 2,779 persons. At a rate of 332 gallons per capita per day, the
potable water demand would be 922,628 gallons per day. The total demand for potable
water if the amendment is approved is estimated to be more than that of the existing future
land use designation.
COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
The subject site is not located within the coastal planning area. Therefore, the proposed
amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element.
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element.
An Environmental Impact Report was submitted by the applicant. The parcel was found to be
dominated predominantly by disturbed pine flatwoods that accounted for approximately 36.94
acres the subject property. Previous use of the site as a junkyard had eliminated native canopy.
Brazilian peppers, in the northeast corner and along the western boundary, occupy 9.90 acres.
Vegetated non-forested wetlands are located in the northern portion of the subject property ,
occupying 1.20 acres. Citrus groves account for .88 acres. A race track with grandstand and
outbuildings had been built in the southcentral portion of the subject property, and is now
becoming reclaimed by native and exotic vegetation; this accounts for 4.04 acres. The
remainder is in species that combine native and exotic vegetation. Of listed animal species, one
active gopher tortoise burrow was observed.
The applicant noted that, at time of development, all regulations pertaining to wetlands and
other protected species would be enforced. This is consistent with the Goal of the Element:
Goal 8.1: The natural resources of St. Lucie County shall be protected, appropriately
used, or conserved in a manner which maximizes their functions, and values.
RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE
The current future land use designation of Industrial does not create a demand for recreational
facilities. The proposed amendment will create a demand. Should the amendment be
approved, a residential development would need to pay impact fees in order to ensure that it
does not conflict with this Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
The Level of Service for recreational facilities established in the St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan is contained in Policy 9.1.1.1 of the Recreation and Open Space Element.
Policy 9.1.1.1 Level of Service for Recreation and Open Space shall be as follows:
.
October 26, 2005
Page 13
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
. Community Parks: 5 acres/1000 residents in the unincorporated area
. Regional parks: 5 acres/1000 residents countywide.
If the amendment is adopted, a maximum of 1,125 multi-family dwelling units could be built.
With a person per household rate of 2.47 (Census 2000), the total population is estimated as
2,779. The standard of 5 acres/1000 population for community parks produces a demand of
13.5 acres in community park acreage to meet the needs of the proposed residents.
According to the information contained in Table 9-1 of the Recreation and Open Space Element
of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, the total community park acreage is 160.3. The
projected unincorporated permanent resident population for 2005, according to the Recreation
and Open Space Element, is 70,951, which would require a community park total acreage of
354.7 acres in order to meet adopted level of service standards. With the current total acreage,
the projected permanent population stands at a level of service of 2.3 acres/1000.
.
An individual project can only be required to address impacts caused by that project. The
applicant states that, given the size of the subject parcel, 10 acres of open space and recreation
can be provided on the site. This is a positive step that can help ensure that this proposed
project, if approved, does not further reduce the level of service for recreation for other
residents. However, Policy 9.1.2.2 , which states that the County shall use monies collected
from the parks impact fee to acquire additional open space, indicates that the proposed project
would also be assessed its fair share of impact fees to ensure progress toward achieving the
adopted level of service.
According to Table 9-1 of the Recreation and Open Space Element, the County total Regional
Park acreage is 7,069 acres. For Regional Parks, the countywide population is used for
establishing level of service. The projected 2005 population for the County as cited in this
Element is 220,334. This equates to approximately 32 acres per 1000 persons, which is well
above the 5 acres per 1000 persons required as the level of service for Regional Parks.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT
The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element.
Levels of service for each required public facility are contained in this Element. The applicant. of
the proposed Future Land Use amendment has signed a Concurrency Deferral Affidavit that
defers the reservation of capacity in public facilities. However, should this amendment be
approved, a Certificate of Capacity demonstrating the availability of sufficient public facilities
must be obtained before a final development order can be issued.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
.
The proposed amendment does not support and further the Goals, Objectives and Policies of
this Element.
.
.
.
October 26, 2005
Page 14
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
As noted above in "Staff Findings", according to the statistics in the Future Land Use Element,
approximately 1,144 acres of vacant land are still available for Industrial Use.. Adoption of the
proposed amendment would further reduce the acreage available for Industrial use, and would
not support or further the following Policy of the Economic Development Element: 12.2.2.3:
Promote and encourage the implementation of the Treasure Coast and the St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS)
................................................................................
CONSISTENCY WITH THE STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The proposed amendment does not further or support the following goals and policies that apply
to this petition:
THE ECONOMY 187.201(21), Florida Statutes (FS)
(a) Goal: Florida shall promote an economic climate which provides for economic stability,
maximizes job opportunities, and increases per capita income for its residents.
(b) Policies:
1. Attract new, job-producing industries, corporate headquarters, distribution and service
centers, regional offices and research and development facilities to provide quality
employment for the residents of Florida.
...............................................................................
CONSISTENCY WITH THE REGIONAL POLICY PLAN
The proposed amendment does not further or support the following goals and policies that
apply to this petition:
Regional Goal 3.6
Diversification of the year-round economy and establishment of an economic climate
that will allow the Region to compete effectively in the global economy.
Strategy 3.6.1: Support efforts to diversify the Regional Economy and to make the Region an
effective competitor.
Policy 3.6.1.1: Local governments should develop areawide land use plans that will
increase the opportunities for business and commerce.
Policy 3.6.1.2: Recruit desired businesses that would provide year-round employment
opportunities.
Policy 3.6.1.3: Identify locations for and encourage development of economic clusters
for business that would benefit from being located near related industries in the Region.
Policy 3.8.1.3: Local governments should prepare and adopt economic development
elements as part of their comprehensive plans.
.
October 26, 2005
Page 15
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
.........................................................................
CONSISTENCY WITH SCHOOL DISTRICT PLANS
Subsection 163.31777, Florida Statutes, requires local governments within the geographic area
of a school district to enter into an Interlocal Agreement with the district school board that jointly
establishes the specific ways in which the plans and processes of the district school board and
local government are to be coordinated. St. Lucie County adopted its Interlocal Agreement with
the St. Lucie County School Board on October 7, 2003. Pursuant to that Interlocal Agreement,
St. Lucie County provides the school board with copies of all petitions proposing land use
changes, rezonings and site plans that will increase residential density.
A copy of this petition was provided to the school board and comments were received from the
school district staff recommending against the land use amendment unless capacity concerns
can be mitigated. The applicant has been advised of the school district recommendations. In
addition, a representative of the school district testified at the Local Planning Agency hearing.
An e-mailed letter dated July 1, 2005 was submitted by the applicant in response to the school
district concerns. Please see the attached letters in the "Correspondence" section.
· ************************************************************************************************************
CONCLUSION
.
Based upon the information provided, staff has found the proposed land use change to be
inconsistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies as set forth in the County's Comprehensive
Plan. Staff also finds that the proposed amendment does not support and further the State
Comprehensive Plan and the Strategic Regional Policy Plan. The proposed amendment would
further reduce available vacant land for industrial usage, which does not support the policy
direction of the Economic Development Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The amendment
will also place residential uses on land directly abutting existing industrial uses, which will lessen
the ability of those uses to expand and develop new jobs and may discourage those industrial
uses from remaining in place.
At its October 20th meeting, the Local Planning Agency once again recommended that the
Board of County Commissioners deny this application and not transmit it to the State
Department of Community Affairs for consideration as an amendment to the County
Comprehensive Plan. Staff is recommending that the Board of County Commissioners deny this
application as an amendment to its Comprehensive Plan.
It should be noted that the applicant has proposed implementing landscape buffering and
building setbacks that will effectively separate the proposed dwelling units from existing
surrounding industrial buildings. The applicant has also proposed implementing a
affordable/work force housing initiative into the site's project development plan that will provide
a minimum of 99 dwelling units for work force housing. Additionally, the area to the immediate
west of the site will be involved in a comprehensive neighborhood planning process over the
next several months in consideration of transitioning land uses within the larger North Jenkins
Road study area.
.
.
.
October 26, 2005
Page 16
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
...............................................................................
Attachment
cc: County Administrator
County Attorney
File
.
.
.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
REGULAR MEETING
Date: July 12,2005
Tape: 1-5
Convened: 2:00 p.m.
Recessed: 2:30 p.m
Reconvened: 6:00 p.m.
Adjourned: 11 :55 p.m.
Commissioners Present: Chairperson, Frannie Hutchinson, Doug Coward, Paula A.
Lewis, Joseph Smith, Chris Craft
Others Present: Doug Anderson, County Administrator, Ray Wazny, Asst. County
Administrator, Faye Outlaw, Asst. County Administrator, Heather Young, Asst. County
Attorney, Don West, Public Works Director, Beth Ryder, Community Services Director,
Ed Parker, Purchasing Director, Jim David, Mosquito Control Director, Pete Keogh,
Parks and Recreations Director, Marie Gouin, M & B Director, Roger Shinn, Central
Services Director, David Kelly, Planning Manager, Millie Delgado-Feliciano, Deputy
Clerk
1. MINUTES (l-024)
It was moved by Com. Coward, seconded by Com. Lewis, to approve the minutes of the
meeting held June 28,2005, and; upon roll call, motion carried unanimously.
2. PROCLAMA nONS/PRESENT A TION
A. A Wings and Wheels update was given by Allen Wierman
B. The County Administrator read up coming events.
3. GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS
Mr. Steve Romain, President of the Friday County Mens Golf League, addressed the
Board and addressed the changes in fees and handicap play and the cart path only rule.
The Golf Course Professional from Fairwinds, addressed Mr. Romain's questions.
Mr. Bob Bangart, Conservation Alliance addressed the Board and stated he was very
proud of the Charrette plan presented.
4. CONSENT AGENDA (l-404)
It was moved by Com. Lewis, seconded by Com. Coward, to approve the Consent
Agenda, to include CA-l and CA-2, and: upon roll call, motion carried unanimously.
.
B. Ordinance No. 05-027- Permission to advertise- The Board approved
advertising Ordinance No. 05-027 for public hearing on August 2,
2005 at 6:00 p.m.
C. Revocable License Agreement- Mr. Joseph Sexton, Sr.- Encroachment
in DrainagelUtility Easement- The Board approved the Revocable
License Agreement authorized the Chairman to sign the Revocable
License Agreement and directed Mr. Sexton to record the document in
the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida.
D. Contract for Sale and Purchase- Indrio Savanna Parcel 170- The Board
approved rejecting the Contract for Sale and Purchase with Ms.
Chadwick, Ms. Howes, Ms. Loftus, Ms. Dipeitro based on the offer
Being out of range of value of the appraised value.
F.
Permission to advertise- Ordinance No. 05-026- The Board approved
Advertising Ordinance No. 05-026 for a public hearing on August 2,
2005 at 6:00 p.m.
Bear Point Mitigation Bank- Credit Purchase Agreement- The Board
approved the proposed Bear Point Mitigation Bank Credit Purchase
Agreement with Destin Beach, Inc., and Ft. Pierce Waterfront
Terminals, LLC and authorized the Chairman to sign the agreement.
E.
.
3. PARKS AND RECREATION
A. St. Lucie County School Board Fee Reduction- The Board approved the
School Board's request for a reduction in fees for the rental ofthe Adam's
Ranch Equestrian Arena and approved a total fee of$2,000. for its May 22-27,
2006 graduation rehearsals and ceremonies.
B. Resolution No. 05-261- The Board approved adopting Resolution No. 05-261
to increase golf fees rates, establish new criteria for golf league play and to
create a policy or no-shows and cancellations as they relate to advance
booking of tee-times.
C. Adams Ranch Equestrian Arena Seat numbers- The Board approved the use of
$15,579.79 from the left over water purification line dollars to fund the
addition of section markers and seat numbers and authorized the Chairman to
sign the contract as drafted by the County Attorney.
4. SHERIFF
.
A.
FEMA Trailer Camp Reimbursement- The Board approved the Sheriffs
Budget Amendment and transfer of funds in the amount of $217,808.
B. Livescan Workstation Grant Application- Request to Apply- The Board
approved the Sheriff s Office request to apply and accept the Florida
Department of Law Enforcement's Livescan Workstation Grant and
authorized the Chairman to sign the required documents.
" l'FNTR AT SFRVTl:FS
.
B.
Approval to use Rock Road Jail expansion contingency funds in the amount of
$23,875 for installation of phone lines and data lines in the new jail pods- both
North and South bui1dings- The Board approved the use of the contingency
funds in the amount of$23,875 for the installation of phone lines and data
lines in the new jail pods and approved using Gere1com # C003-09-681 for
this work.
C. Purchase of two spot coolers for use at various 10cations- The Board
approved Equipment Requests EQ05-346 & EQ05-347 for equipment
purchases in the amount of $11,060.00 for the purchase of two spot coolers
and approved EQ05-346 and EQ05-347.
6. ADMINISTRATION
A. Early Learning Coalition- Reappointment of Beth Miller for a second term-
The Board approved the re-appointment of Beth Miller.
B. Parking Lease- The Board approved the lease and authorized the Chairman to
sign the lease.
7. GRANTS
.
.
A.
Authorize the acceptance of the grant- The Board authorized the acceptance
of the grant from the Florida Coastal Management Program in the amount of
$20,000. The funds are to be utilized to construct a fishing/observation pier at
lndrio Blueway Lagoon.
B. The Board authorized the submittal of a grant application to the Florida Dept.,
of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Emergency Hurricane Supplemental
Urban and Community Forestry Grant Program for $156,000 to help replace
trees severely damaged or destroyed as a result of the 2004 hurricanes.
C. The Board authorized the submittal of a grant application to the Florida Dept.,
of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Emergency Hurricane Supplemental
Urban and Community Forestry Grant Program for $40,200 to help replace
trees severely damaged or destroyed at eh County's Fairwinds Golf Course as
a result ofthe 2004 hurricanes and also approved Resolution No. 05-290 to
authorize St. Lucie County to enter into a Urban and Community Forestry
Grant Memorandum of Agreement and a Maintenance Memorandum of
Agreement with the State of Florida Dept., of Agriculture and Consumer
Services, Division of Forestry.
8. PURCHASING
A.
Bid # 05-048- Sale of Surplus Computer Equipment- The Board approved
awarding Bid # 05-048 Sale of Surplus Computer Equipment to the highest
bidder Creative Recycling System Co., for a total amount of $750.00.
B.
Permission to advertise a Request or Proposal for Disaster Debris Monitoring
Management Consulting Services- The Board granted permission to advertise
the RFP.
"
n___;__;~_ +_ ~rl,,~....;~= ~~ T~";+"+;A" fAr 1=1.;1'1 fnr PTV", ,,,,,tplYl RplYl(,"'\I~l ~t
.
F.
G.
H.
.
.
vendor, Mira Food Services for the Administrative Complex, authorized the
Chairman to sign the contract as prepared by the County Attorney, and reject
the proposal from Sterling Facility Services, LLC for the South County
Regional Sports Stadium and approved re-advertising the RFP for Lawnwood
Stadium and the South County Regional Sports Stadium.
Award RFP # 05-060- Preventative Maintenance Services for Cars and
Pickup Trucks- The Board approved awarding RFP 05-060 to Steve Barnett
and approved the Chairman signing the contract as prepared by the County
Attorney.
Permission to advertise for IFB for Security Camera Systems- The Board
approved advertising for IFB for Security Camera Systems.
Work Authorization No.7 for Contract C03-02-235- with Hazen & Sawyer
P.C. for Capron Trail Park - The Board approved Work Authorization No.7 to
Contract C03-02-235 with Hazen & Sawyer in the amount of $78,500.00 and
authorized the Chairman to sign the Work Authorization as prepared by the
County Attorney.
9.
PUBLIC WORKS
A.
Accept the Florida Highway Administration Grant and Budget Resolution No.
05-271 in the amount of$1O,845,011.50 (Hurricane Jeanne)- The Board
approved Budget Resolution No. 05-271 and the establishment of a budget for
grant proceeds from the Federal Highway Admin., in the amount of
$10,845,011,50 and authorized the Chairman to sign.
B. Acceptance of the Florida Highway Admin. Grant and Budget Resolution No.
05-270 in the amount of $12,952,573 (Hurricane Frances)- The Board
approved Budget Resolution No. 05-270 and the establishment of a budget for
grant proceeds from the Federal Highway Admin., in the amount of
$12,952,573 and authorized the Chairman to sign.
C. Greenacres M.S.B.U.- Potable Water Improvements -FPUA Permission to
advertise- The Board granted permission to advertise the second public
hearing to be held August 16,2005 at 6:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as it may
be heard.
D. Solid Waste Initial Assessment Resolution No. 05-273- Permission to
advertise- The Board granted permission to advertise a public hearing on
August 16,2005 at 6:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible, adopted
Resolution No. 05-273 a Solid Waste Initial Assessment Resolution.
E.
The Board approved a reduction in the overall retainage of the Hurricane
Debris Removal Project with AshBritt Environmental from ten percent to five
percent for the remainder of the contract. Approval of the reduction in the
overall retainage will release $440,032.37 which will assist the contractor in
compensating his subcontractors and assist in finalizing the project.
F. The Board approved a reduction in the overall retainage of the Hurricane
l\",h..;C' J;>pn->rnl"] Pr,,;pl't UTith TlRr fl'C\l"l1 tpn npl'{'pnt t() fivp nprcpnt f()l' thp
.
.
.
11.
AGRICUL TURE
Keep Port St. Lucie Beautiful Reimbursement Funds- The Board approved Budget
Resolution No. 05-276 appropriating funds reimbursed by the City of Port St. Lucie for
trees purchased for the Spread the ShadelPlant a Tree Give A way event.
12. INVESTMENT FOR THE FUTURE
A. Renovation of break room at St. Lucie West Annex- The Board approved the
use ofIFF Funds -Central Services Project Reserves in the amount of$35,000
for the additional judicial space and judges' chambers at the St. Lucie West
Annex.
B. Approval to use Central Services Capital Project Reserves- The Board
approved the use of Central Services Capital Project Reserves funds in the
amount of$15,000 for the renovation work at the State Attorney Empire
Building.
c.
Approval to use Central Services Project Reserves for renovation/remodeling
of Central Services Administration Office- The Board approved the use of
Central Services Capital Project Reserve funds in the amount of $50,000 for
the renovation/remodeling of Central Services Administration Office.
D. Approval of Work Authorization with C3TS (Contract No. C03-02-247)
Architectural Engineering Services for Walton Road Annex Building- Second
floor tenant improvement- The Board approved the use of Central Services
project reserve funds in the amount of $26,295.00 for C3TS to provide
Architectural/Engineering Services through a Work Authorization Contract
No. C03-02-247.
E. Request for approval to use Central Services Project Reserves to conduct
assessment on the Civic Center. The Board approved the use of Central
Services project reserves to approve to use the vendor, Sunbelt Restoration
Inc., to conduce the assessment on the Civic Center at a firm fixed price of
$25,000 and authorized the Chair to sign the contract as prepared by the
County Attorney.
13. AIRPORT
A.
Airfield Lighting Rehab- Change Order # 3 Contract Extension of Time- The
Board approved Florida Industrial Electric, Inc., Change Order No.3 for a 63
day contract extension for the Airfield Lighting Rehab Project at the St. Lucie
County International Airport.
B. Wings and Wheels Air Military and Vehicle Show- Airport Use Agreement
Amendment- The Board approve the Use Agreement Amendment with
Treasure Coast Victory Children's Home Inc., to conduct a Wings and Wheels
Air Military and Vehicle Show at the St. Lucie County IntI., Airport during
the final weekend of March 2006.
1 L1 rnr\lfMT ll'-TTTV ~PR\1T(,P~
.
.
.
05-285 amending the SHIP LHAP and authorized the Chairman to sign all
documents necessary to accept the funding.
15.
GROWTH MANAGEMENT
The Board approved Equipment Request EQ05-343 for a Dell Laptop and rolling case to
be used solely for the new digital recording system fro the Planning Division.
CA-1. COMMUNITY SERVICES
The Board accepted the grant agreement for $3,000,000 funding from the Florida
Department of Community Affairs Disaster Recovery Initiative to fund drainage and
sewage infrastructure installation for the 26th St., project and for various eligible CDBG
Housing Activities such as new construction, rehabilitation, acquiring property, down-
payment assistance, and replacement, and authorized the Chairman to sign all the
documents necessary for the grant.
CA-2. COUNTY ATTORNEY
Ordinance No. 05-030- Impact Fees for Public Buildings, Roads and Parks- The Board
approved advertising Ordinance No. 05-030.
REGULAR AGENDA (1-585)
5. ADMINISTRA nON
Cultural Affairs Council currently has one vacant appointment- Consider staff
recommendation to select one at large appointment from the candidate applications
submitted to fill the vacancy.
Upon tally of the votes, the Board appointed Jenkins to the Cultural Affairs Council.
6. MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET (1-673)
Approval of millage rates to be submitted to the Property Appraiser and set dates for
public hearing. Consider staff recommendation to approve the following:
1.
Approve millage rates as outlined on "Worksheet Analysis of Roll
Back Millage Rate for Fiscal Year 2005-06 under the column headed
"2005-2006 proposed millage".
")
Set two public hearings on September 15 and 22 at 5 :05 p.m. in the
Roger Poitras Administration Annex Commission Chambers.
3.
Authorize the County Administrator to be able to modify the millage
rates between General Fund and Fine and Forfeiture Fund as long as
the total countywide millage rate stays the same. Also, authorizing the
County Administrator to transmit the millage rates to the Property
Appraiser on From DR-420.
4. Set aggregate millage at 18.45% over the rollback rate for tax year
'11111'::::
.
.
.
7.
COUNTY ATTORNEY (1-828)
Ordinance No. 05-031 Permission to advertise- Consider staff recommendation to grant
permission to advertise Ordinance No. 05-031 for public hearing on August 2, 2005 at
6:00 p.m.
It was moved by Com. Coward, seconded by Com. Lewis, to grant permission to
advertise Ordinance no. 05-031, and; upon roll call, motion carried unanimously.
Recess: 2:30 p.m.
Reconvened: 6:00 p.m.
8.A COUNTY ATTORNEY (1-1067)
Ordinance No. 05-014- Amending Occupational License Fees to provide for a five
percent increase in the fee schedule. No action required at this time. Second public
hearing to be held on August 2,2005 at 6:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as it may be
heard.
No action required.
8.B MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET (1437)
This item was heard during the session held between 2:00 p.m. and 4:00 p.m.
Consider staff recommendation to adopt Budget Resolution No. 05-266 amending the
FY05 Budget to reflect the actual beginning cash balances, the revised revenue estimates,
and establishing transfers between funds.
The Management and Budget Director addressed the Board on this issue.
It was moved by Com. Craft, seconded by Com. Smith to approve Budget Resolution No.
05-266, and; upon roll call, motion carried unanimously.
8.C COUNTY ATTORNEY (1-1162)
Petition for Abandonment- Resolution No. 05-259- Abandon a portion of Dunn Road,
Section 17, Township 36S, Range 40E- Consider staffrecommendation to approve
Resolution No. 05-259 instruct staff to publish the final Notice of Abandonment, record
Resolution No. 05-259 Proof of Publication Notice of Intent to Abandon, Proof of
Publication of the Notice of Public Hearing, Proof of Publication of the Notice of
Abandonment in the Public Records of St. Lucie County.
It was moved by Com. Smith, seconded by Com. Craft to approve Resolution No. 05-259
contingent upon KB Homes contacting St. Lucie County to address the landscaping
requirements in the median of St. James Drive directly in front of their property and the
Resolution not be recorded until this condition has been complied with to the satisfaction
of the St. Lucie County Road and Bridge Manager, and: upon roll call, motion carried
............n.....~,...,...,,^llC'l.,r
.
.
.
It was moved by Com. Coward, seconded by Com. Lewis to transmit the amendment to
the Florida Department of Community Affairs to be included in the St. Lucie County's
Comprehensive Plan, and; upon roll call, motion carried unanimously.
8.E GROWTH MANAGEMENT (1-1420)
Consider a privately submitted amendment to the Future Land Use Plan Map requested
by Jeffrey Freedman, to change land use designation of a 40 acre parcel located on east
side of S. Kings Highway, north of and adjacent to Ft. Pierce Jai Alai Fronton, from
Commercial land use to Residential Medium land use. Consider staff recommendation
not to transmit the amendment.
Ms. Sheryl Stolzenberg, Planner addressed the Board on this item.
The Local Planning Agency voted 4 to 2 not to transmit.
Quasi-Judicial- The Board members advised everyone they had conversations with the
attorney for the applicant and neighbors.
Ms. Cynthia Angelos, attorney for the applicant addressed the Board on this issue.
Ms. Angelos stated she was aware of the residents concerns regarding connectivity of the
road through their neighborhood. She also understood the main reason for the request to
deny was due to the Research and Education Park. Proposed. She felt it was ironic due to
the fact this is the very reason they thought this request would be consistent with this
location.
Ms. Angelos alluded to the letters from the School Board and asked if the Board had
received and reviewed them.
The Board affirmed the receipt of the letters from the School Board.
Mr. Dennis Murphy, Senior Project Manager for Culpepper & Terpening, addressed the
Board on this issue and reviewed the project and land use.
Com. Lewis questioned if the 3,000 trips per day noted included the commercial end of
the project.
Com. Coward questioned what staff felt were the appropriate uses to the area around the
Research and Education Park.
Com. Hutchinson stated the discussions is, the past were to make sure there was a buffer
more in the area towards the back (open fields). In the front (Kings Highway area) is
being envisioned to be mostly buildings, urban area, and the big concern on this is in and
out of the park for security reasons. There have been discussions as to whether or not
commercial is wanted in the area.
The Planning Manager stated on Kings Highway he would envision a need for
commercial beyond the corner "Starbucks". He imagined those coming to the area
would need hotels and restaurants and some things bigger than Starbucks.
,.,~~ "'~...,H "t,.,t""rl he> rl;rl nnt UT;"\-' tn "pp Kina" UianuJ::lv tlln1f'n intn ~ 1T S 1 He felt
.
.
.
The Planning Manager addressed Com. Coward's question and stated in the Jenkins
Corridor there are two projects or 2,000 new homes coming in to that area. North of
Orange Ave., at Jenkins there is nothing approved at this point, but there is a large area
coming under consideration for housing. There is quite a lot in the immediate area.
Mr. Randy Miangold, 1799 Lakecircle, addressed the Board and stated he was interested
in what is happening in the area. He expressed his concern with the traffic build up in the
area. He is in favor of the park but is not sure they need to place all this housing on top
of him. He requested he be informed in the future of what will be taking place in the
area.
Mr. Paul Jacquin, area resident questioned the easements on Copenhaver Road.
The Planning Manager stated they are not easements, they are parcels owned, actual
frontage.
Mr. David Karrigan, 1870 Lake Circle, addressed Copenhaver being utilized to get out
once development begins. There is only one way in and one way back out. They cannot
handle the traffic on Copenhaver.
Com. Hutchinson stated the area is already zoned for houses at an RU zoning at 5 units
per acre .
Mr. George Emerson, 1850 Lake Circle addressed the traffic in the area presently and
stated if this development was approved the traffic would be massive for the area.
Mr. Marty Sanders, Executive Director Growth Management St. Lucie County School
District, addressed the letters from the School Board. He stated they currently have a 2
billion dollar need for schools over the next 10 years. This project as proposed has
additional impact on the School District. The current impact fee pays 52% of capital
needs for school construction. The School District is proposing to revise and increase by
61 % for the educational impact fee only. This would raise the percentage of cost of
construction paid by the impact fee to about 63% of the total cost or capital needs from
residential construction.
The remainder of the construction funding for schools is paid through state revenues and
other local revenues. As a result of the three land use changes before the Board tonight,
they have estimated depending upon the student generation rate, a low rate of about $4
million additional capital needs over and above the impact fees to a high of about $9
million dollars.
The School District does not have available capacity for elementary school students in
District 1 where these projects are proposed. They are meeting capacity needs for middle
and high school through the use of portable classrooms.
Mr. Sanders stated they have worked with the developer and their representative, Cynthia
Angelos and they have voluntarily agreed to provide a voluntary contribution for an
additional enhancement to their capacities to mitigate the impacts to the School District.
Based on this commitment, they believe the project will not have an adverse impact on
the School District because of this additional funding.
l\A~ TAn~ r;-;c>lrl r"",,,,,....lvnr,,,r D""rl r",,,;rl,,,,....t Clrlrlr",,,,,prl thP "Rr""IClrrl ;n r""Inn..<:itirm to thp
.
.
.
Com. Hutchinson advised Ms. Hobbs that there was not an overlay and advised Ms.
Hobbs they were not within the 500 feet of the project, however if this continues to move
forward it would be expanded out for notification.
The Planning Manager stated he would make a commitment that they would notify
everyone on Copenhaver Road even before PUD if this is transmitted.
Ms. Hobbs asked if they could remove the buffer zone if it was committed years ago.
Com. Hutchinson stated she was not aware of a buffer zone being promised and all she
had to go by was the existing zoning.
Ms. Hobbs stated they were guaranteed a buffer zone and they were told when they
bought the property there was a buffer zone. The noise buffer I between Jai Alai fence
and the homes.
Com. Craft stated he did not believe they would put a buffer on property Jai Alai does not
own it would include their property only.
Ms. Hobbs asked they check into the noise buffer zone.
The Planning Manager advised Ms. Hobbs of the zoning and what is permitted on the
current zoning and also the Comp Plan shows RU it shows it is available with higher
density zoning and this is the process.
Ms. Hobbs also commented on city water in the area.
Ms. Elizabeth Knapp, area resident addressed the Board and stated the residents in area
do not want the neighborhood changed.
Mr. Dennis Murphy questioned as to what everyone really wanted to see along Kings
Highway. They fully understand that what they bring forth will have to deal what there is
to the east. The reality is the large wetland property that is not subject to this petition is
going to drive what happens to that back 40 acres. The wetlands will have a significant
affect what will happen to that area and they do not want to negatively impact the
wetlands, they are an asset. The real question as to why they are here tonight and that is
there is a petitioner to request the change 40 acres from a commercial land use
designation to medium density residential land use designation. Tonight is not the final
action. They are asking the Board authorize the petition for transmittal to the Dept. of
Community Affairs for further review and then come back to the Board.
Com. Craft stated that regardless of what happens he wants to make sure they give
multiple access points to this property. He asked if there was anyway the applicant can
wait on this to find out what they come up with as a plan with the Research Authority.
Mr. Murphy stated the process is a slow process. They have a long road to go and would
appreciate being able to keep moving as much as they can. The Research and Education
Park land use matters are moving forward and will probably come to some sort of closure
within the next 3 months which is about the same amount of time that they will be back
for an adoption hearing.
r~~, r~n++ ~tntorl ho rlirl nAt ,,,ic!, tA ""h,,,it Clnvthina tn tnp nr A th~t hp nop" not intpnn
.
.
.
Com. Lewis stated they needed to look at Kings Highway and see what the mixes would
be. She would like to delay this transmittal until the Park plan is more complete.
The Assistant County Administrator advised the Board of the transmittal schedule for this
year.
Ms. Angelos stated if they would have the ability to be considered at another transmittal
hearing before the end of the year, they would agree to delay this petition.
The Planning Manager advised the Board they already had one adoption this year
however, they can still transmit twice this year.
Ms. Angelos asked if this could be continued to a date certain.
The Board discussed scheduling a workshop on this issue with the authority and
overview from staff finding out what they are proposing in the city area along with what
the county has there from Orange Ave. to the 95 overpass as part ofthe discussion prior
to the actual park itself and how we are going to pay for road improvements as well as the
land use issue.
It was moved by Com. Craft, seconded by Com. Smith to continue this hearing on
October 4,2005 at 6:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as it may be heard, and; upon roll call,
motion carried unanimously.
8.F GROWTH MANAGEMENT (2-2567)
Application of Coconut Cove, L.L.C. for Final Planned Unit Development approval for
this project. Staff finds that the requested Final Planned Unit Development is in
substantial conformity with the preliminary plan approve by the Board on substantial
conformity with the preliminary plan approved by the Board on October 19,2004.
Consider staff recommendation to approve Resolution No. 05-144 which grants Final
Planned Unit Development approval to the project.
Com. Coward requested information on the traffic impact report and asked staff to review
the report to make sure they are meeting concurrency.
The Planning Manager stated page 11 of the staff report, condition 8, states what the
developer is required to do.
Com. Coward stated it does not say who will be paying for the improvements.
The Planning Manager stated the developer would be making that contribution and will
ask the petitioner to verify this when he makes his presentation.
Com. Coward asked ifthis meets concurrency right now.
The Planning Manager stated he believed it did but would need to review the traffic
concurrency rule.
Mr. Bobby Klein, Klein and Dobbins, attorney for the petitioner, addressed the Board and
stated they meet all requirements and the intersection was outside the 2 mile limitation
....,.t..~.....1-.. ~r1 +1-..ro. ........10. ~...." +h.o rn."11Y\+'lr rArl.o
.
Mr. Klein stated he would be happy to call his FIND contact to see if he could assist Mr.
Dennis in having access since the easements he referred to are not on file indicating he
had ownership as he once believed.
The Public Works Director addressed the Board's questions and stated that in speaking
with Mr. Herring, Road and Bridge Manager, the criteria is the 2 mile radius and
according to our Code, if the intersection in question is more than 2 miles outside the
project boundary, it is not taken into account and this does meet the concurrency for
traffic. Also, he advised the Board the intersection at Indrio and D.S, I is going to be
improved by the County.
Mr. John Dennis, Hibiscus Road resident, addressed the Board and stated the information
related by Mr. Klein is correct. He does not have an existing easement to his mothers
property and asked assistance in obtaining access. He also advised the Board the
property is mainly mangroves.
Com. Hutchinson asked our legal department to research as to what can and cannot be
done regarding Mr. Dennis' request.
.
Ms. Pamela Hammer, P & Z Board questioned the fire district and ifthe equipment for an
8 story building would be made available or if the taxpayers would be responsible for it.
Also, she asked what the concerns were by the Indian River County Commissioners
regarding this project.
Com. Hutchinson advised Ms. Hammer of a letter received by the Fire District where
they have signed off on it and also no comments were received by the Board of County
Commissioners from Indian River County. This indicates to her that all concerns have
been met.
Com. Coward stated his concern is the height of the towers. Twenty 98 ft. towers are not
compatible with the surrounding areas. He would have liked to see the project modified
and because this change was not made he cannot support the project. Also having one
primary access to such a project does not work. This project needs multiple access to the
project avoid traffic congestion.
Com. Coward also commented on the environmental lands issue requested by a former
Commissioner that has not been secured as discussed previously. He also addressed the
impact fees for the school not covering the capital needed and asked the developer to
meet the standards.
.
Mr. Klein stated the cost to construct public improvements is a moving target due to the
daily increase in cost and this is why they cannot come up with a figure. The project has
met all the requirements imposed upon the applicant by the Board at the time of the
preliminary approval. The improvements that were imposed upon this development as
part of the approval conditions 8,9 and 10 are the items that were done to provide the
concurrency for this project and that is all that is required by the law. With regards to the
School Board, the agreement was entered into on March 8th and that was the prevailing
rate, $490.00 per unit and he is sure Mr. Sanders did recommend it and the School Board
signed it.
.
Mr. Seamons stated neither of the property owners were willing to sell the property Com.
Craft is speaking about.
Com. Coward stated the former Commissioner was attempting to have a trade off where
some environmental lands would be secured for the Board giving the developer
additional development potential.
Mr. Seamons stated he did not believe this was the former Commissioner's intention. He
stated there were two 15 acre parcels which constitute the 30 acres and the Commissioner
said, "it would be a good idea if we could attach that to the property to enlarge the size of
the conservation area.
Mr. Seamons stated he had spoken to the Bank and to Mr. Dennis' mother and neither
were willing to sell and he advised the Commissioner of this.
Com. Lewis disclosed speaking with the applicant.
It was moved by Com. Smith, seconded by Com. Lewis, to approve Resolution No. 05-
144 which grants Final Planned Unit Development for the project, and; upon roll call, the
vote was as follows: Nay: Coward, Aye's: Craft, Lewis, Smith, Hutchinson, motion
. carried by a vote of 4 to 1.
8.G GROWTH MANAGEMENT (3-1674)
Consider a privately submitted amendment to the Future Land Use Plan Map requested
by Vero Vista Center LLC to change land use designation of 46 acre parcel located on
east side ofD.S. 1 approximately 1/8 mile south of the St. Lucie Indian River County line
from Commercial land use to Mixed High Ridge land use subject to limitations of
specified sub area policies. Consider staff recommendation to transmit the amendment.
Mr. Bobby Klein, Klein and Dobbins, representative for petitioner addressed the Board.
Com. Coward stated this project was trying to emulate some of the progressive issues
raised in the North County Charrette and he will not let his disappointment in the last
project preclude him from trying to push forward with what he felt was going to be a
good project. Nonetheless, when we look at changes to land use, we must look at the
impacts on our community and one of those is the school system. One of the issues is to
raise the voluntary contribution until we can get the impact fees in line so that we are not
creating a greater shortfall to the School Board. He agreed they need some language
stating they are requiring the developerls to meet the standard that is being set by the
School Board even if it is preliminary today.
.
Com. Hutchinson stated she did not have a problem with that what so ever, her problem
is if there was a specific amount. this is where she starts to get uncomfortable, until they
have something adopted through a recommendation of the School Board.
Com. Coward stated the basic issue was brought forth by Com. Smith that it was not the
lower amount from before but the higher amount they are trying to fine tune for the
School Board.
rrwY'l rrmmrr1 "r1ui"pr1 pupnTnnp 1,p h:ln mp.t with the: re:nresentHtives for the nroiect. He
.
.
.
Mr. Cuozzo stated the concern he would have in trying to design it is that he does not
know that the North County Charrette actually applied the level of detail they are talking
about, they dealt more with general concepts.
Mr. Siemons stated it was very difficult to pin things down now because they have a lot
of work to do and they do not have the answers at this point.
Mr. Marty Sanders, School Board, addressed the Board and stated they appreciate the
Boards support in trying to mitigate these impacts and appreciates the developer trying to
work with them. He stated what they have talked about with the developers is looking at
the differential between the cost per unit for capital for the School District and that cost
impact fee pays. They have agreed to bring Dr. Nicholas back in to determine the fair
and appropriate credit and work with the developers to enter into a capacity agreement
that would mitigate this impact and they would ask that they approve sending this project
forward with the developer working with them.
Com. Coward stated exhibit J is not consistent with what is being shown tonight. He
asked the language" a recreational greenway shall be provided on the northeastern
boundary" .
Mr. Klein agreed to add comment.
It was moved by Com. Coward, seconded by Com. Smith to approve transmitting the
amendment contingent upon the modifications to the staff report 1 ) school contribution
to be higher than the current voluntary level, 2) with the added language to the PMUD, (
number 3), "to include design standards consistent with the North County Charrette , 3) a
recreational greenway shall be provided on the northeastern boundary (added to number
7), and; upon roll call, motion carried unanimously.
8.H GROWTH MANAGEMENT
Consider a privately submitted amendment to the Future Land Use Plan Map requested
by John DiSalvatore (The Preserve) to change land use designation of a 56.9 acre parcel
located generally west of Angle Road, east of Canal 29 and Westwood High School north
of Metzger Road, from IND use to Residential High land use. Consider staff
recommendation not to transmit the amendment.
Mr. Jonathan Ferguson, attorney for the applicant, addressed the Board on this issue. He
stated although he did not disagree with staff s analysis, they disagree with the
conclusion. He asked the Board to consider the merits of the project.
Mr. Mark Mathis, Thomas Lucido & Associates, addressed the Board regarding the
compatibility of the land use for this project. the need for industrial land use and for
residential high uses within the county and also impact on public facilities.
Mr. Mathis reviewed the analysis of industrial future land use and the analysis of
residential high future land use (attached).
Mr. Mathis stated whatever is developed on this site will need to address the water and
sewer connection needs for this site. He commented on the compatibility of residential
np-:lT inr1l1~trl ~ 1
.
Mr. Mathis stated this was to be a mixed income project a mixed of social economic
status households within the community. They do not want to build a housing project.
Mr. Ferguson stated the Board should consider if they have made enough strides and
efforts in creating areas where businesses can locate in the county and now because of the
hurricanes and the real estate market, that affordable and attainable housing has risen and
become more critical. Also he stated they are committed in working with the school
district. The only problem at this point is they are not comfortable committing to a dollar
amount. They would like to flexibility to work with the School District and Community
Services. He stated they would commit to pay their fair share but cannot commit to is a
specific amount.
Mr. Ferguson stated they would like to work with staff to see what kind of programs they
can integrate in the project. He stated this was not going to be a 100% attainable housing
project and is certainly not going to be a section 8 project. What they are committing to
is that a certain percentage of this housing would be targeted towards workforce housing.
Mr. John DiSalvatore, applicant addressed the Board and advised them this would not be
a section 8 housing project, however it would be affordable.
.
Com. Smith stated there is a lot of industrial in this area but he believes this project can
be a catalyst for the Angle Road corridor. The question oftraffic would be the biggest
issue, but he believes if they go ahead with this project others may want to go ahead and
continue this type of development in the area.
Mr. Marty Sanders, School District addressed the Board and stated the Board has Dr.
Miller's letter regarding the School Boards concern. The schools are crowded with
portables and asked the Board take this into consideration. They appreciate the applicant
wanting to work with the School Board and asked this be made a requirement for
forwarding this application.
Mr. Chris Lange, 1303 Angle Road, owns salvage shop in the area. Mr. Lange stated he
felt this was not an area for residential housing due to the many industrial businesses in
the area.
Mr. Jensen, 907 Angle Road addressed the Board regarding his concern in losing their
rights as an industrial area. One of his concerns is the noise generated by the industrial
site and if in the future the residents in the area would complain about the noise and
saying his business is not fit for the neighborhood.
Com. Lewis stated every item discussed comes with a disclaimer and reviewed the
disclaimer for the public.
.
Mr. Tom V aughn, Avenue J resident addressed the Board and stated they have been in
business for 24 years and were encouraged by the County to move to an industrial zone
for the business. He is also concerned about the residents complaining about the noise in
the industrial area.
Com. Hutchinson stated she has yet to understand how placing residential in the middle
of industrial works. She recalls realtors telling her there is not much industrial areas left
in the county. She advised everyone she would not move forward with the request. She
;" f""."l,,,r "'1th thp ~rp~ ~nr1 r1op~ not UI~nt to TP('pivp ::lnv ('omnl::lints re(J::lrc1in(J tne noise
.
.
.
Com. Coward stated he concurred and after hearing the comments by the area businesses,
he has no choice but to deny this request. He cannot imagine having residential
anywhere near such intense industrial uses, he too supports staff recommendation.
It was moved by Com. Lewis, seconded by Com. Craft, to approve staff recommendation
and not transmit this amendment incorporating staff findings, and; upon roll call, the vote
was as follows: Nay: Smith, Aye's: Coward, Lewis, Craft, Hutchinson; motion carried by
a vote of 4 to 1.
There being no further business to be brought before the Board, the meeting was
adjourned.
Chairman
Clerk of Circuit Court
Proposed Future
.d Use
RU
.
_ FLOYD JOHNSON RD
en
I
I~
I
I
COM
PA 05-003
P/F
I
P/F
P/F
RU
John Disalvatore
I
I
I
I
I
i
1
~tol-I-I~-I-I! 1~~~__I~VQfrt"f- J rIlQj'dlfu'E_IIR'
I I- (/) I- ui-I- ui r--,'" - (/), rv0
I- I- .-1- ';'-1- I83I-- I- ~
g~',-l= ~-l= ~=~ :::~=- tn ~.(.:<' ''-I
~~~ <o::t _ <o::t "I:t <o::t 0 II
v";;'. , .,;;;;;;;liiiiii I .,;;;;;;;.... g AVENUE Q
<;/?";;'.'\0rvt"f-~r\"~1 J O>('w~^ j<vl / /-1. I~= I I ;T1~ I
';<'~~s-' _~ I--- AVE~~E P
',() - I--- I .. I
.' 0v --I--
'1-'" ---'--- to : I- I I II f0-
R g~~i~~ + I,J,;r:'ri -"
~ - -II I I '-1' I::j
..,. f.----
III I U
-
% AVENUE M i ~ ! iVI1UIE M J-
~ III~ ~ ,~!!" .
~ ~ ~T I -Ii" H
~Q D III 1=
I-
._~_w'''i'm ~v . : I 1'~!1U I I LJ
~i T1~ 1 IIIIIIII 1=1
~ ~ ~- // w,~ W' 1 r'I"" I L
; ,~, r b. rW"~'Gn
~M i 01 II ~~
~ I \ I' --1 =lrMETZGERiD ~ III \ TMET~
L-r,~-"pd,~~ g- ~ lN~
~IGARNE,R~ ~ =J H~HARITYLN , I \ \
~~,~;w; f'M;tVI 1 ;~MARIA~H"I~~
H ,J~~
1.i!lE-~
IND
I- ~
"- r-'~'~J --
~i}ii[j ~
_ ~VENUE 8,_ ~ j:::::
~: J tt f----l-- ~ =t=
Ii.. H- f--t- ~i: -V0'
I" /c.
.>2. .~~ 6,-,U4~~~.:-c- N
Map ;;:~'a::~:;=~:;;~, 2005 A
t::j
I-
I-
RH
I I
i
[I
ir
COM
Legend
~ Subject property
Existing Future
nd Use
RU
\
.
I--- FLaYD JaHNSON RD
it
~l
\
I RU
I
P/F
P/F
II
I
P/F
I'
~-J
,....,~
I
] COM III:
PA 05-003
John Disalvatore
I
I
'I
I
I
~~..... -II II" II'=EII' II ~R- ./ I I II 1 .. 1
CI) ..... ' ..... >-- .....,..:-= f-; - '" <::!fi- AVENUE R
~-= ~tii~=>-- ~ ~~=- ~= ~<vC;; ~rnl \ I \ Ii rri1il ~
"'c-- en 00 ->-- !::; ---I--; ~ _c- ,!;,' -::; ,;:,,,,-<' II II r T
""",." 1:-.... ~;",;;;;;_'_C;;O , i, II
~'\.i~'~' I Ju & i, i! 7 -p II~_ .tiEtiEII' J:::j
<(~ '\~~<::!~ f-- ~= I II II \ 1=1
is'1l'VS" -\.- I-- AVE~~E P
~,.>O - I-- I II
~ =~..... I H
. ,--CI)..... I
RI~~1 \~~~ I fri"i: ~
~ I'VE.U.E t e-
II I-
~'" "'~ : "nr I ~
~. J.~ D h I 1"'11" H
r'tF~~'o... : "i1~" 1 :
.~tL~,l"4(~ / T: "':f,' , I ~
~ '''''"''~,I I 1".1'11 I LJ
~ ~ I </~l(\ I II I
~ SLaAN RD I SLOAN RR
.-,1 I, ~ I ~,~"-
rMETZGERR,DlCl -\'1 \'1 rrM~ETZ~GER
~ \ \ I H =t, I LL~ U
;:: i, ''F U :tij ~ ~
!;,' I ,...,..I~ I IND '-'- IND INk
L I I ,t; r "',~, I ,.0:- I-'
r-1~~R2: ~ =1 --';H~RITY ~N . - ~ \ \ I' \
I U rt1XP--),,:; I fl MJKu)'!' i
;iMAR'AH~'R 'CI)~F_-=_
_SELENAAVE .....-l 'f-:~
H ~-r<1H-
I a:;-~
~E~
\,~;-r:=t='rmAVE~N~~C --:=
I~ c/) ~ ~
I~ ~ ~ -
,...., ,~ ~ H R~
~"ENUE B,_ -P", r;=
~~ ~t;-=
1--_ f.--\-----i :: --
..L 1--- ~ R ---11//
r -1l'.. >-- >--+--1. ,,,-<'
IND
I !
RH
I
r--
i
I !
COM
N
A
Legend
~ Subject property
~__ / ,/C ~
_~~. .Au-t./W/ (/ou~ .~~>~-'-
firtrWtJi :Managemenr Vepartment
Map prepared October 26, 2005
.
.
THE PRESERVE
--~.-"---_._-~--~._----_.__._~-_._._---_._._--_._-----....__._--~----~_._-~-_..._-_.
75 ACRE PARCEL
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
.
0. Lucido & Associa tes
~~'<v Land Planning/Landscape Architecture
V ~ 701 E. Ocean Blvd., Stuart, Florida, 34994
V Phone: (772) 220-2100 Fax (772) 223-0220
Scale: 1"= 500'
Date: September 30, 2005
-
- -
.
-
-
-
-
-
-
~.-
-
-
-
-
--
--
-
" ....
FLUCFCS
1100 = Residential, Low Density
1831 = Abandon Automobile Tracks
1940 = Other Open Land
2210 = Citrus Groves
4110 = Pine Flatwoods
4210 = Xeric Oak
4220 = Brazilian Pepper
6400 = Vegetated
Non-Forested Wetland
6442 = Emergent Aquatic
Vegetation (Spatterdock)
::t1.17ac
::t4.04ac
::t3.02ac
::t17.71 ac
::t36.94ac
::to.70ac
::t9.90ac
::t1.20ac
::to.32ac
Total ::t75.00ac
Irj
0.375 0.75 Km
Source: Aerials Express
Aerial Photogmph. 2003.
Section 6, Township 35 South, Range 40 East
".~:.:. ,;
/i ENVIRONMENTAL
! SERVICES, INC.
^,r--t"5
Vegetative Co~nities Map
Metzger Road f!.()acre Parcel
St. Lucie County, Florida
Figure: 3
Project: EF05023
Date:Rev Aug. 2005
.
.
.
Planning & Zoning Commission: October 20,2005
File Number PA-05-003
MEMORANDUM
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
TO:
Planning & Zoning Commission
FROM:
Michael Brillhart, Strategy & Special Projects
DATE:
October 13, 2005
SUBJECT:
Re-submittal Application of The Preserve (John DiSalvatore) for a
Change in Future Land Use Designation from IND (Industrial) to RH
(Residential High - maximum of 15 du/gross acre).
LOCATION:
The property is generally located west of Angle Road, east
of Canal 29 and Westwood High School, north of Metzger
Road and south of Avenue M ( Please see attached
"Petition of John Disalvatore" Map)
CURRENT FUTURE LAND
USE DESIGNATION: IND (Industrial)
PROPOSED FUTURE LAND
USE DESIGNATION: RH (Residential High)
EXISTING ZONING: IL (Industrial Light)
PARCEL SIZE: 75 acres
PROPOSED USE: Multifamily residential development (999 units)
SURROUNDING FUTURE LAND
USE DESIGNATIONS: North: IND (Industrial). South: IND (Industrial) and MXD.
East: IND (Industrial). West: P/F (Public Facilities) and IND
(Industrial). Please see attached "Land Use" map
SURROUNDING ZONING
DESIGNATIONS:
North: IL (Light Industrial). South: IL (Light Industrial) &
Road right-of-way (Metzger Road) East: IL (Light
Industrial). West: I (Institutional) and IL (Light Industrial)
.
.
.
October 13, 2005
Page 2
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
SURROUNDING EXISTING
LAND USES:
The existing uses of lands abutting the subject property to
the north and northwest, south of Montecillo Avenue
/Avenue M, include an auto salvage business and vacant
lands. The existing uses of lands north of Montecillo
Avenue/Avenue M and southwest of Angle Road include
single family homes and vacant lands. The existing uses of
lands to the east include vacant lands and residences for
that portion between north of Avenue I, and vacant lands,
a storage facility with office and a repair shop for that
portion south of Avenue I and north of Metzger Road.
Existing lands to the south of the subject property contain
agricultural uses, a warehouse and two single family
homes. West of Canal No. 29 is Westwood High School.
(Please see attached "Existing Land Use Map")
UTILITY SERVICE:
The subject site is within the service area of the Ft. Pierce
Utilities Authority.
TRANSPORTATION SERVICE:
RIGHT-OF-WAY
ADEQUACY:
The existing right-of-way for Angle Road varies from 66
feet to 100 feet. (The applicant has identified Angle Road
as the road to be accessed.)
SCHEDULED
IMPROVEMENTS:
None.
TYPE OF CONCURRENCY
DOCUMENT REQUIRED:
Concurrency Deferral Affidavit.
REASON FOR RE-SUBMITT AL:
Applicant has purchased additional adjacent land thus
bringing the total land area from the original 56.9 acres to
75 acres. Applicant s also interested in implementing a
"10/10" affordable/work force housing program as part of a
residential multi-family development project.
...............................................................................
A future land use amendment is not regarded as a development order as defined in Florida
Statutes and does not imply that any specific development scenario can occur on the property.
No right to obtain a final development order or any other rights to develop the subject property
are granted or implied by the County if the requested Comprehensive Plan amendment is
approved. Analysis of potential impacts at the land use amendment stage is undertaken to
determine if other portions of the Comprehensive Plan need to be revised as a result of
approval of a land use amendment. Concurrency rights cannot be considered at the land use
amendment stage because actual projects proceeding toward a final development order will
enter the development review process between the time that a land use amendment is under
.
.
.
October 13, 2005
Page 3
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
consideration for approval and a final project is brought forward to use that approved land use
amendment. Prior to the issuance of any final development order, the developer must
demonstrate that all public facilities are available to service the parcel and obtain a Certificate of
Capacity.
**********************************************************************************************************
DATA AND ANALYSIS
BACKGROUND
The applicant is requesting a change in the Future Land Use designation of the 75 acre subject
property from Industrial (I NO) to Residential High (RH). The present Future Land Use
designation of the subject property allows for both heavy and light industrial uses. The Future
Land Use Element states that this land use designation "is applied to specific areas of the
County identified as suitable for industrial use". The existing zoning designation is Industrial,
Light (IL).
The Future Land Use designations of lands abutting the subject property are summarized above
and shown on the attached map entitled "Future Land Use", which also shows the future land
use designations within % mile of the subject site.
The existing use of the subject property is vacant land. The existing uses of lands abutting the
subject property is summarized above, and also shown on the attached "Existing Use Map".
***********************************************************************************************************
APPLICANT PROPOSAL AND REASONS FOR REQUEST
The applicant requests a land use amendment to Residential High (RH) land use, which allows
a density of up to 15 dwelling units per gross acre. The total acreage for which the application is
submitted is 75 acres, which could yield a maximum of 1,125 dwelling units. The applicant is
proposing to construct only 999 units.
The applicant provides three main reasons for the request:
1. The applicant states that the current land use designation and zoning category is 'not
entirely compatible' with the St. Lucie Comprehensive Plan location criteria provided at
[Future Land Use Element] Policy 1.1.11.3, which requires Light Industrial property to
have immediate access to the regional transportation network.
2. The applicant states that the County has an ample surplus of industrial lands that remain
undeveloped and has also provided for new employment centers as part of mixed-use
areas.
3. The applicant states that the subject parcel is 'ideally suited for multifamily development
providing a transition from the adjacent industrial lands to residential lands to the south
and the school to the west.'
The applicant also identifies goal, objectives and policies of the St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan with which the applicant believes the proposal is consistent. These include
Future Land Use Element Objectives 1.1.4, Objective 1.1.5, Objective 1.1.9 and Objective
1.1.12
.
October 13, 2005
Page 4
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
******************************************************************************************************
STAFF FINDINGS
1. During the presentation to the Local Planning Agency, the applicant stated that the intent
of the proposed land use amendment was to enable the development of affordable
housing. The application submitted to the County did not indicate that affordable housing
was one of the justifications for the proposed amendment, or staff would have included
that information in the analysis. Specific numerical goals to be achieved in the provision
of affordable housing have not yet been adopted as a part of the St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan, although the data and analysis in the Housing Element do identify
need. However, despite the fact that affordable housing is needed in St. Lucie County,
the concerns regarding compatibility with adjacent existing uses, and loss of needed
industrial acreage with potential jobs remain. The recommendation to deny the land use
amendment would still have been made even if affordable housing had been included in
the analysis. Whether affordable or not, housing deserves to be located in proximity to
uses compatible with residential. Where mixed use land use has been encouraged,
design standards can ensure compatibility of light industrial with residential land uses.
Where lands have been designated as "Industrial", such design considerations have not
been ensured, as the primary intent was to encourage job development.
.
2. In addition, the comprehensive plan needs to be examined as a whole when evaluating
a proposed land use change. Encouraging development of affordable housing is an
important goal, and an equally important goal is enabling the County to encourage the
provision of new employment, and the retention of existing industrial uses.
3. Future Land Use Element Policy 1.1.11.3, cited by the applicant as the basis for
concluding that the Industrial land use designation of the subject site is not appropriate,
is a policy that provides standards to use when considering a change in zoning to 'Light
Industrial'. Point 3 under that Policy states that 'New Light Industrial areas should have
immediate access to the regional transportation network'. Staff notes that the subject
property has had 'Industrial' Land Use designation at least since the adoption of the
1990 St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan and is not under consideration for a new
rezoning to Light Industrial. In addition, the subject property has access to Angle Road
via both Montecillo Avenue and Metzger Road. Angle Road east of Kings Highway is
classified as a State Arterial Highway.
.
4. The applicant states that the County has an ample surplus of industrial lands that remain
undeveloped. However, according to the St. Lucie County Future Land Use Element,
approximately 1,144 acres of vacant land are available for additional industrial use. This
vacant acreage represents approximately three-tenths of a percent (.3%) of the
unincorporated County's total acreage. According to the Housing Element of the St.
Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, there are 754 acres of vacant land in the
unincorporated County that have Land Use designations allowing multi-family
development, and that vacant land was projected to accommodate the needs of multi-
family housing through the year 2020. There are 204 acres of vacant land available
under the RH land use designation.
5. Staff is concerned that the loss of 75 acres of land originally planned for Industrial use,
and surrounded by other lands with Industrial designation, will discourage the existing
.
October 13, 2005
Page 5
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
industrial uses adjacent to the property and undermine the goals of the St. Lucie County
Economic Development Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The Economic
Development Element stresses improving the economy of the County by attracting
employers and investors to provide higher paying jobs. Economic Development Policy
12.1.1.1 states: "Attract investors to help diversify the industrial base, broaden the
economic tax base and strengthen the job market." The proposed land use amendment
would remove the subject property from the inventory of land available for industrial use,
and therefore does not support and further this policy, or the general direction of the
Economic Development Element. Loss of land within the Urban Services area that can
be used for industrial purposes, at this point in the County's development, may result in
future lack of ability to accommodate the desired employment base and put the County
in the position of searching for land for future industrial uses that is not as appropriate.
.
6. The applicant has stated that the land use amendment would enable the subject
property to serve as a transition between residential lands to the south and the school to
the west. However, existing industrial uses abutting the property do not appear
compatible with residential uses. The impact on those existing uses of new residential
development can result in loss of the industrial uses. In addition, in accordance with
Future Land Use Policy 1.1.5.3, when considering any amendment to the Future Land
Use Maps of the County's Comprehensive Plan, a finding must be made that the
property proposed for amendment is adjacent to, or no more than % mile of, the same or
greater type of land use designation. As shown in the map entitled "The Preserve
application", the properties directly adjacent to the subject property are Industrial.
Although there are properties with Residential High land use designation to the south of
the subject property that are within the % mile radius, properties with a Residential
designation to the east and north are designated as Residential Urban, which is a lower
density that that requested for the subject property. Thus, the proposal does not appear
to be in the position to serve as a transition between the school and other residential
lands.
The applicant has provided a rebuttal letter regarding staff's findings. The letter, dated June 6,
2005, is included in the "Correspondence" section.
...............................................................................
Any proposed amendment to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan may be reviewed by
several state and regional agencies. The State Department of Community Affairs, which is
identified by Chapter 163, Florida Statutes (FS) as the "Land Planning Agency" for the state,
has the responsibility to determine if proposed amendments are consistent with and further the
St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, the State Comprehensive Plan, the Strategic Regional
Policy Plan and Chapter 163, FS. The St. Lucie County Local Planning Agency (LPA), which is
the Planning and Zoning Board, has the responsibility according to subsection 163.3174(4)(a),
FS, to "make recommendations to the governing body regarding the adoption or amendment"
of the Comprehensive Plan.
.
...............................................................................
CONSISTENCY WITH THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
.
.
.
October 13, 2005
Page 6
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
In reviewing this application for a proposed amendment to the St. Lucie County Future Land
Use Map, staff finds that the following Goals, Objectives and Policies of the County
Comprehensive Plan are applicable to this petition.
FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT
The proposed amendment does not appear to support and further this element. The applicant
cites several Objectives which support the proposed amendment. Staff findings do not support
the applicant's conclusion.
Future Land Use Objective 1.1.4
. The applicant cites Future Land Use Objective 1.1.4, stating that the Objective
addresses compatibility with adjacent land uses and that the proposed amendment will
provide a transition between residential lands to the south, Industrial to the north and
Institutional lands to the west.
. However, Objective 1.1.4 actually addresses the provision of requirements in the Land
Development Regulations (such as performance criteria and landscaping) to ensure that
all new development be compatible with surrounding land uses, both existing and future.
As noted above, there is reasonable concern that the insertion of high density multi-
family residential uses adjacent to existing industrial uses, and proposed future industrial
uses, might have a chilling effect upon the industrial lands.
Future Land Use Objective 1.1.5
. The applicant states that the proposal is consistent with Future Land Use Objective
1.1.5, which states that future development within the Urban Services Area shall be
directed to areas where urban and community services/facilities can be provided in the
most efficient and compact manner so as to discourage proliferation of sprawl. It is
noted that the subject property is located within the service area of the Fort Pierce Utility
Authority (FPUA), which provided a letter to the applicant that is discussed below.
Service can be provided, but the need level exceeds that for which the FPUA had
planned. Improvements to the wastewater management system would be needed to
accommodate the demand.
Future Land Use Policy 1.1.5.3
. This Policy states: "When considering an amendment to the Future Land Use Maps of
the County's Comprehensive Plan, the County Commission shall make the following
findings, supported by the other elements of this Plan, prior to taking any approval
actions granting an individual amendment to the Future Land Use Maps:
1. That the property under a land use amendment application is adjacent to, or within
no more than % mile of the same or greater land use classification.
.
October 13, 2005
Page 7
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
.
2. That the property under a land use amendment consideration lies within the Five
Year Capital Improvement Program of the Water and Wastewater Master Plan for St.
Lucie County or otherwise meets the requirements of Policy 1.1.5.4."
. As noted in the prior analysis, adjacent lands are all designated as Industrial. While
those classifications are 'greater' than the requested land use designation, a request for
a lower intensity land use designation raises questions of compatibility with the existing
Industrial uses. When examining the land use designations within a ~ mile radius, it is
found that some lands with the requested density level are located to the south, but
lower density lands are located north and east.
. The second part of this Policy requires that the property for which an amendment is
requested must lie within the Five Year Capital Improvement Program of the Water and
Wastewater Master Plan for St. Lucie County or otherwise meet the requirements of
Policy 1.1.5.4 (a policy requiring access to potable water and sanitary sewer services). It
is noted that an amendment to the land use map of the comprehensive plan does not
require a concurrency determination. However, the minimum standards of Rule 9J-11,
Florida Administrative Code, require that local governments evaluate the potential
impacts of proposed amendments on services. The subject property lies within the
service area of the FPUA. Calculations from the applicant submitted to FPUA estimated
that the total wastewater that could be generated by the subject property if developed as
nonresidential uses would be 145,664 gallons of wastewater a day. If the subject
property is developed as a residential project with 15 housing units per acre, the
wastewater flow would increase to 270,000 gallons per day. A letter from FPUA to the
applicant (please see attached letter) indicates that service can be provided but that
wastewater capacity for a proposal such as this is limited in the vicinity of this proposal.
Improvements to the local wastewater system would be needed. The burden of ensuring
construction of the improvements to the wastewater system would fall upon the
applicant.
Future Land Use Objective 1.1.9
. The applicant cites this Objective as one with which the application is consistent.
. This Objective states that the County shall, through enforcement of Chapter 6.00.00 of
its Land Development Code, support standards for protection/creation of native plant
communities within the County. The applicant indicates that the subject property is of
sufficient size to allow for preservation and buffering of those environmental assets on
the property that were identified in the Environmental Impact Report submitted as part of
this application and that development would provide the required protections.
. Any use of this property would need to be consistent with this Objective. A change in
land use designation is not required in order to achieve the Objective.
Future Land Use Objective 1.1.11
.
. This Objective states that the County shall 'continue to work with interested groups and
agencies to increase and broaden the County's economic base while expanding
existing business and industrial opportunities.'
. The proposed amendment would reduce the County's ability to implement this
Objective.
.
October 13, 2005
Page 8
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
Future Land Use Objective 1.1.12
. The applicant cites this Objective as one with which the application is consistent.
. This Objective states that, pursuant to Chapter 5.00.00 of the Land Development Code,
all development orders and permits for future development shall be issued only if public
facilities necessary to meet the level of service standards are available concurrent with
the impacts of development. This Objective affirms that the County will enforce the state-
mandated Concurrency provisions for development orders. Concurrency is not a
requirement for land use plan amendments, but is required for subsequent development
orders. Any development of this property would be subject to the requirements
addressed by this Objective. A change in land use designation is not needed to
implement this Objective.
TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
.
A future land use amendment is not regarded as a development order as defined in Florida
Statutes and does not imply that any specific development scenario can occur on the property.
No right to obtain a final development order or any other rights to develop the subject property
are granted or implied by the County if the requested Comprehensive Plan amendment is
approved. Analysis of potential impacts at the land use stage is undertaken to determine if other
portions of the Comprehensive Plan need to be revised as a result of approval of a land use
amendment. Concurrency rights cannot be considered at the land use amendment stage
because actual projects proceeding toward a final development order will enter the development
review process between the time that a land use amendment is under consideration for
approval and a final project is brought forward to use that approved land use amendment. Prior
to the issuance of any final development order, the developer must demonstrate that all public
facilities are available to service the parcel and obtain a Certificate of Capacity.
The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element.
When considering a possible change to Future Land Use, this element requires the following:
Objective 2.1.1: The St. Lucie County transportation system shall be reviewed in coordination
with any requested changes to the Future Land Use Element or other related components of
this plan. A report on the impacts to the system brought about by any proposed land use
changes shall be prepared and presented to the Board of County Commissioners as part of the
review of that Land Use change.
The applicant provided a Transportation Impact Analysis Report estimating the trips associated
with the maximum potential development for both the current and proposed Future Land Use
designations. The daily trip generation calculations provided by the applicant indicate that the
proposed Land Use generates fewer trips than the existing Land Use designation. (Please see
attached table labeled "Exhibit 2A DiSalvatore Property Daily Trip Generation Comparison").
. Road and Bridge Department review
.
.
.
October 13, 2005
Page 9
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
The Road and Bridge Department staff reviewed the Transportation Impact Analysis Report.
Their comments indicated their understanding that a Land Use amendment includes a
concurrency deferral, and that roadway concurrency would be determined in conjunction with a
formal development application. Given that fact, the Road and Bridge review stated that an
application for formal development would need to determine whether a decrease in trips would
occur, and what the actual impact on the roadway system would be. Additional information will
be necessary at that time.
The applicant reviewed the St. Lucie Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) fiscal year
2004/2005 through 2008/2009 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) to determine if any
roadways within the impact area are scheduled to be improved. No roadways within this impact
area are scheduled for improvement within the 5-year timeframe.
St. Lucie Metropolitan Planning Organization review
The St. Lucie Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) staff reviewed the proposed Land Use
amendment and noted that it is not in conflict with the MPO's adopted 2025 Long Range
Transportation Plan. (Please see attached letter from the St. Lucie Metropolitan Planning
Organization.)
HOUSING ELEMENT
As has been noted above, the Housing Element data and analysis indicated that the 754 acres
of vacant land available for multi-family housing was sufficient to accommodate needs projected
to the year 2020. Based on this analysis, the following Housing Policy was adopted:
Policy 5.1.1.1: To provide sufficient land to meet the future housing needs, the Future
Land Use Map has designated 1,868 acres to accommodate 9,340 new single-family
dwelling units and 754 acres to accommodate a minimum of 6,786 new multifamily
dwelling units.
If the proposed amendment is adopted, the State Department of Community Affairs may find
that the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan is internally inconsistent, which is a violation of
subsection 163.3177(2), Florida Statutes, or may require St. Lucie County to revise its
Comprehensive Plan and Housing Element in order to demonstrate the need for the additional
acreage.
INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT
The applicant has provided documentation about the potential impacts on potable water,
sanitary sewer and drainage services. This analysis is provided to comply with the requirements
of Rule 9J-11 and is not a concurrency reservation analysis. Prior to any Final Development
Order for the property, a developer must obtain Certificates of Capacity that demonstrate
sufficient capacity in these services is available to serve the proposal.
.
.
.
October 13, 2005
Page 10
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
. Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element
The proposed amendment is not in conflict with this sub-element, but the service provider has
advised that improvements may be necessary to ensure service availability (Please see
attached letter in "Correspondence" section.)
Sanitary Sewer Objective 60.1.2. states: The County shall implement procedures for
ensuring that when a development permit is issued, pursuant to then current Service
Availability Report, adequate facility capacity is available or will be available when
needed to serve the development, concurrent with the impacts, in order to meet adopted
level-of-service standards.
Because the proposed amendment is contained within the Urban Services Area Boundary and
is within the Fort Pierce Utility Authority (FPUA) Service Area, the proposed amendment can be
consistent with this sub-element at the time that a Final Development Order would be issued.
FPUA has provided a letter verifying that service can be made available, but that"... the entire
wastewater system that this project will effect will require evaluation by a private consultant in
order to determine what improvements may be necessary to handle the increased flow." Prior
to issuance of any Final Development Order, an applicant would need to demonstrate that these
issues have been addressed.
Sanitary Sewer Sub-element Policy 60. 1.2.2.: The level of service standard for those
areas of the unincorporated County served by Ft. Pierce Utility Authority shall be 380
gallons per capita per day (Ft. Pierce Utilities Authority 1988 Water and Wastewater
Master Plan, July 1988).
Assuming that the existing Industrial land use designation would yield a maximum of 1,633,500
square feet of floor area (based on the maximum 50% lot coverage allowed in both Industrial
zoning districts), and that 2,500 square feet is needed per employee (according to the
calculations of the "Fiscal Impact Analysis Model" ["FlAM"] created by Fishkind and Associates
for calculating costs and revenues for land use changes), the estimated number of employees
for the subject property with its current "Industrial" classification would be 653 employees. At a
level of service of 380 gallons per capita per day for employee, the resulting daily wastewater
flow would be 248,292 gallons.
If the amendment is adopted, a maximum of 1,125 residential units could be built. With a person
per household rate of 2.47 (Census 2000), the residential wastewater generation would be
1,125 units X 2.47 = 2,779 persons. At a rate of 380 gallons per capita per day, the wastewater
generation rate would be 1,633,500 gallons per day. The total daily demand for wastewater
treatment if the amendment is adopted as proposed is estimated to be a higher demand than
that generated by the subject site with its current land use designation.
. Solid Waste Sub-Element
The proposed amendment is not in conflict with this sub-element, because the sub-element
states that the County will not need to begin to assess new disposal options until the year 2015.
.
October 13, 2005
Page 11
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
Solid Waste Objective 68.1.1.1 establishes a level of service of 9.31 pounds per capita per day
to ensure sufficient capacity at the landfill through the year 2015. Assuming that the existing
Industrial land use designation might yield a maximum of 1,633,500 square feet of floor area
(based on the maximum 50% lot coverage allowed in both Industrial zoning districts), and that
2,500 square feet is needed per employee (according to the assumptions of the "Fiscal Impact
Analysis Model" ["FlAM"] created by Fishkind and Associates for calculating costs and revenues
from land use changes), the estimated number of employees for the subject property with its
current 'Industrial' classification would be 653. At a level of service of 9.31 pounds per capita
per day, the solid waste generated would be 6,079 pounds per day.
If the amendment is adopted, a maximum of 1,125 multi-family dwelling units could be built.
With a person per household rate of 2.47 (Census 2000) and a per capita solid waste level of
service of 9.31 pounds per day, the subject site is estimated to generate 25,870 pounds of solid
waste per day.
. Drainage and Aquifer Recharge Sub-Element
.
The proposed amendment is not inconsistent with this sub-element. The subject property is
located within the existing limit of the North St. Lucie River Water Control District, and an
allowable stormwater runoff rate has been established by that District. Future development will
be required to comply with those limitations. In accordance with Objective 6C.1.4.2 of this
element, all development will be conditioned on the availability of services necessary to
maintain the level of service standards for stormwater set forth in Policy 6C.1.1.2. Objective
6C.3.2 requires development to protect the functions of natural groundwater recharge areas.
Prior to development taking place the project will also require an Environmental Resource
Permit from the South Florida Water Management District.
. Potable Water Sub-Element
The proposed amendment is not inconsistent with this sub-element. The subject property is
located within the Fort Pierce Utility Authority (FPUA) service area and a letter from that
provider indicates that potable water service is available via a 12-inch water main on the south
side of Angle Road. Prior to any Final Development Order approvals, the applicant would be
required to demonstrate that sufficient capacity is available to service the project, including
provisions for fire protection.
Potable Water Sub-Element Policy 6A.1.2.2: The level of service standard for those
areas of the unincorporated County served by Ft. Pierce Utilities Authority shall be
332 gallons per capita per day (Ft. Pierce Utilities Authority, 1999).
.
Assuming that the existing Industrial land use designation would yield a maximum of
1,633.500 square feet of retail floor area (based on the maximum 50% lot coverage allowed
in both Industrial zoning districts), and that 2,500 square feet is needed per employee
(according to the calculations of the "Fiscal Impact Analysis Model" ["FlAM"] created by
Fishkind and Associates for calculating costs and revenues for land use changes), the
estimated number of employees for the subject property with its current "Industrial"
.
October 13,2005
Page 12
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
classification would be 653 employees. At a level of service of 332 gallons per capita per
day for employee, the resulting daily demand for potable water would be estimated at
216,796 gallons per day.
If the amendment is adopted as proposed, a maximum of 1,125 residential units could be
built. With a person per household rate of 2.47 (Census 2000), the residential water demand
would be 1,125 units X 2.47 = 2,779 persons. At a rate of 332 gallons per capita per day, the
potable water demand would be 922,628 gallons per day. The total demand for potable
water if the amendment is approved is estimated to be more than that of the existing future
land use designation.
COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
The subject site is not located within the coastal planning area. Therefore, the proposed
amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element.
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element.
.
An Environmental Impact Report was submitted by the applicant. The parcel was found to be
dominated predominantly by disturbed pine flatwoods that accounted for approximately 36.94
acres the subject property. Previous use of the site as a junkyard had eliminated native canopy.
Brazilian peppers, in the northeast corner and along the western boundary, occupy 9.90 acres.
Vegetated non-forested wetlands are located in the northern portion of the subject property,
occupying 1.20 acres. Citrus groves account for .88 acres. A race track with grandstand and
outbuildings had been built in the southcentral portion of the subject property, and is now
becoming reclaimed by native and exotic vegetation; this accounts for 4.04 acres. The
remainder is in species that combine native and exotic vegetation. Of listed animal species, one
active gopher tortoise burrow was observed.
The applicant noted that, at time of development, all regulations pertaining to wetlands and
other protected species would be enforced. This is consistent with the Goal of the Element:
Goal 8.1: The natural resources of St. Lucie County shall be protected, appropriately
used, or conserved in a manner which maximizes their functions, and values.
RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE
The current future land use designation of Industrial does not create a demand for recreational
facilities. The proposed amendment will create a demand. Should the amendment be
approved, a residential development would need to pay impact fees in order to ensure that it
does not conflict with this Element of the Comprehensive Plan.
. The Level of Service for recreational facilities established in the St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan is contained in Policy 9.1.1.1 of the Recreation and Open Space Element.
Policy 9.1.1.1 Level of Service for Recreation and Open Space shall be as follows:
.
.
.
October 13, 2005
Page 13
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
. Community Parks: 5 acres/1000 residents in the unincorporated area
. Regional parks: 5 acres/1000 residents countywide.
If the amendment is adopted, a maximum of 1,125 multi-family dwelling units could be built.
With a person per household rate of 2.47 (Census 2000), the total population is estimated as
2,779. The standard of 5 acres/1000 population for community parks produces a demand of
13.5 acres in community park acreage to meet the needs of the proposed residents.
According to the information contained in Table 9-1 of the Recreation and Open Space Element
of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, the total community park acreage is 160.3. The
projected unincorporated permanent resident population for 2005, according to the Recreation
and Open Space Element, is 70,951, which would require a community park total acreage of
354.7 acres in order to meet adopted level of service standards. With the current total acreage,
the projected permanent population stands at a level of service of 2.3 acres/1 000.
An individual project can only be required to address impacts caused by that project. The
applicant states that, given the size of the subject parcel, 10 acres of open space and recreation
can be provided on the site. This is a positive step that can help ensure that this proposed
project, if approved, does not further reduce the level of service for recreation for other
residents. However, Policy 9.1.2.2 , which states that the County shall use monies collected
from the parks impact fee to acquire additional open space, indicates that the proposed project
would also be assessed its fair share of impact fees to ensure progress toward achieving the
adopted level of service.
According to Table 9-1 of the Recreation and Open Space Element, the County total Regional
Park acreage is 7,069 acres. For Regional Parks, the countywide population is used for
establishing level of service. The projected 2005 population for the County as cited in this
Element is 220,334. This equates to approximately 32 acres per 1000 persons, which is well
above the 5 acres per 1000 persons required as the level of service for Regional Parks.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT
The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element.
Levels of service for each required public facility are contained in this Element. The applicant of
the proposed Future Land Use amendment has signed a Concurrency Deferral Affidavit that
defers the reservation of capacity in public facilities. However, should this amendment be
approved, a Certificate of Capacity demonstrating the availability of sufficient public facilities
must be obtained before a final development order can be issued.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
The proposed amendment does not support and further the Goals, Objectives and Policies of
this Element.
.
.
.
October 13, 2005
Page 14
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
As noted above in "Staff Findings", according to the statistics in the Future Land Use Element,
approximately 1,144 acres of vacant land are still available for Industrial Use.. Adoption of the
proposed amendment would further reduce the acreage available for Industrial use, and would
not support or further the following Policy of the Economic Development Element: 12.2.2.3:
Promote and encourage the implementation of the Treasure Coast and the St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS)
...............................................................................
CONSISTENCY WITH THE STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The proposed amendment does not further or support the following goals and policies that apply
to this petition:
THE ECONOMY 187.201(21), Florida Statutes (FS)
(a) Goal: Florida shall promote an economic climate which provides for economic stability,
maximizes job opportunities, and increases per capita income for its residents.
(b) Policies:
1. Attract new, job-producing industries, corporate headquarters, distribution and service
centers, regional offices and research and development facilities to provide quality
employment for the residents of Florida.
...............................................................................
CONSISTENCY WITH THE REGIONAL POLICY PLAN
The proposed amendment does not further or support the following goals and policies that
apply to this petition:
Regional Goal 3.6
Diversification of the year-round economy and establishment of an economic climate
that will allow the Region to compete effectively in the global economy.
Strategy 3.6.1: Support efforts to diversify the Regional Economy and to make the Region an
effective competitor.
Policy 3.6.1.1: Local governments should develop areawide land use plans that will
increase the opportunities for business and commerce.
Policy 3.6.1.2: Recruit desired businesses that would provide year-round employment
opportunities.
Policy 3.6.1.3: Identify locations for and encourage development of economic clusters
for business that would benefit from being located near related industries in the Region.
Policy 3.8.1.3: Local governments should prepare and adopt economic development
elements as part of their comprehensive plans.
.
.
.
October 13, 2005
Page 15
Subject: The Preserve Future Land Use Designation Amendment
File No.: PA-05-003
.........................................................................
CONSISTENCY WITH SCHOOL DISTRICT PLANS
Subsection 163.31777, Florida Statutes, requires local governments within the geographic area
of a school district to enter into an Interlocal Agreement with the district school board that jointly
establishes the specifiC ways in which the plans and processes of the district school board and
local government are to be coordinated. St. Lucie County adopted its Interlocal Agreement with
the St. Lucie County School Board on October 7, 2003. Pursuant to that Interlocal Agreement,
St. Lucie County provides the school board with copies of all petitions proposing land use
changes, rezonings and site plans that will increase residential density.
A copy of this petition was provided to the school board and comments were received from the
school district staff recommending against the land use amendment unless capacity concerns
can be mitigated. The applicant has been advised of the school district recommendations. In
addition, a representative of the school district testified at the Local Planning Agency hearing.
An e-mailed letter dated July 1, 2005 was submitted by the applicant in response to the school
district concerns. Please see the attached letters in the "Correspondence" section.
************************************************************************************************************
CONCLUSION
Based upon the information provided, staff has found the proposed land use change to be
inconsistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies as set forth in the County's Comprehensive
Plan. Staff also finds that the proposed amendment does not support and further the State
Comprehensive Plan and the Strategic Regional Policy Plan. The proposed amendment would
further reduce available vacant land for industrial usage, which does not support the policy
direction of the Economic Development Element of the Comprehensive Plan. The amendment
will also place residential uses on land directly abutting existing industrial uses, which will lessen
the ability of those uses to expand and develop new jobs and may discourage those industrial
uses from remaining in place.
Staff recommends that the Local Planning Agency forward a recommendation to the Board of
County Commissioners that this application should not be transmitted to the State Department
of Community Affairs for consideration as an amendment to the County Comprehensive Plan.
It should be noted, however, that the applicant has proposed implementing effectual landscape
buffering and affordable/work force housing initiatives into the site's project development plan.
Additionally, the area to the immediate west of the site will be involved in a comprehensive
neighborhood planning process over the next several months in consideration of transitioning
land uses within the larger study area.
...............................................................................
.
.
.
RESPONSE
TO
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATION AND COMMENTS REPORT
FOR
Comprehensive Plan Amendment #P A05-0 13
Prepared for
Mr. John DiSalvatore
4077 F Norbeck Road
Rockvill, MD 20854
and
Mr. Jan Stewart
3413 Olandwood Court
Suite 203
Olney, MD 20832
Prepared by
Ruden, McClosky
145 NW Central Park Plaza
Suite 200
Port St. Lucie, FL 34986
(772) 873-5900
and
Lucido and Associates
70 I E. Ocean Blvd.
Stuart, FL 34994
(772) 220-2100
April 11, 2006
APR J 4 2006
PSL:23347:1
.
.
.
Response to DCA ORC
The Preserve
Comprehensive Plan Amendment #PA05-013
APPENDICES
Appendix A
Letter from Engineering Design and
Construction, Inc.
Appendix B
Traffic Analysis prepared by Pinder -
Troutman Consulting, Inc.
Appendix C
Signed Agreement with School Board and
Letter of no objection
Appendix D
Draft Planned Unit Development Agreement
with attainable workforce housing requirement
PSL:23347:1
Page 30f7
.
.
.
Response to DCA ORC
The Preserve
Comprehensive Plan Amendment #PA05-013
Objection 1: The County did not provide the appropriate data and analysis to demonstrate
that adequate water supply and adequate sanitary sewer capacity will be
available at adopted level of service standards concurrent with the impacts of the
proposed development. The proposed amendment did not demonstrate that
adequate facilities will be provided in a manner that is financially feasible.
The water and wastewater service for this project is provided by the Fort Pierce Utility Authority.
Analysis provided by Engineering Design and Construction, Inc. indicates that there is adequate water
and wastewater treatment capacity for the proposed land use (see Appendix A)
Objection 2: The support documentation lacked a transportation analysis to support the
statement that the proposed land use generates fewer trips than the existing land
use.
Traffic analysis done by Pinder - Troutman Consulting, Inc. shows that the daily and peak hour trip
generation of the proposed land use designation is substantially less than the daily and peak hour
generation of the existing land use designation (see Appendix B).
Objection 3: The support data and analysis do not provide adequate information on capacity
deficiencies in the zone in which this proposed land use is located not did it address how
the County and property owner will coordinate with the School Board to mitigate
capacity deficiencies.
The proposed project has consented to provide a payment above and beyond the required impact fees to
mitigate any capacity deficiencies. Please refer to the School Board Agreement (Appendix C). Pursuant to
this agreement, the school board has no objection to the proposed land use change. Please see letter of no
objection from the School Board (Appendix C).
Objection 4: The analysis states that this proposed amendment will help address the need for
affordable housing by designating approximately 10 percent of the units as affordable.
However, there are no comprehensive plan provisions to ensure the implementation of
affordable housing set-asides. Additionally, no information has been submitted with the
proposed amendment that shows how the County will ensure that affordable units will be
constructed on this parcel after the future land use map is amended.
S1. Lucie County has undertaken a number of initiatives to address the affordable housing imbalance that
currently exists. Due to the timing of this comprehensive plan amendment and the ongoing affordable
housing initiatives, the County at this time has elected to place within the Planned Unit Development
agreement that accompanies the local government approval, the condition requiring a ten percent set-aside
of units to the affordable housing program of the County. Please refer to the enclosed draft PUD
agreement (Appendix D).
The County further commits to review the Comprehensive Plan and propose policy recommendations
related to affordable housing set-asides, particularly for land conversions to the Residential High future
land use category.
PSL:23347:1
Page 2 of7
.
.
.
Response to DCA ORC
The Preserve
Comprehensive Plan Amendment #P A05-0 13
APPENDIX A
PSL:23347:1
Page 4 of7
.
.
.
E
D
C
ENGINEERING DESIGN
& CONSTRUCTION, I Ne.
101 N. 4th Street, Suite 120
Ft. Pierce, FL 34950
phone: 772-462-2455
fax: 772-462-2454
August 29, 2005
05-208
James T. Snyder
Ruben, McClosky, Smith, Schuster & Russell, P.A.
145 NW Central Park Plaza
Suite 200
Port S1. Lucie, Florida 34986
Subject: DiSalvatore Land Use Amendment Engineering
Dear Mr. Snyder,
As requested, the following responses are required for submittal to S1. Lucie County for the
proposed land use amendment for DiSalvatore parcel. The following questions reference the
Application for Amendment:
Question 3 - Where are the nearest public or investor-owned water and sewer services? Who
is the service provider? Is the site included in the five-year expansion plan of these utilities? If
private facilities are proposed, describe the capacity and type of water and wastewater services
to be provided.
The service provider for both water and wastewater service is the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority
(FPUA) and there are no private water or wastewater facilities proposed.
Water
On the north end of the project, there is an existing 10" CIP water main on the south side of
Avenue M; an existing 6" CIP water main on the west side of Panther Lane; and a 12" PVC
water main on the south side of Angle Road. These three mains converge at the Angle Road
and Avenue M intersection. On the south end of the proposed project, there is an existing 6"
PVC on the north side Mariah Circle. See attached exhibit. In discussions with FPUA, some
form of water main looping will be required for the existing systems. This looping, as well as
service to the proposed project, may be accomplished via an internal water main connecting the
Mariah Circle water main to the intersection of Avenue M and Angle Road. See attached exhibit.
Wastewater
There is an existing 8" CIP force main on the north side of Avenue M and an 8" PVC force main
on the west side of Angle Road. An existing lift station, LS #49, is located at the northwest
corner of the proposed project on Panther Lane. The proposed project will require a force main
connection near the existing lift station at Westwood High School. See attached exhibit.
Water & Wastewater Capacity
The existing Land Use of Industrial would allow a General Commercial Use. This is the most
intense use allowed under IND land use. The Land Development Regulations allow for
Engineering Design & Censtructien, Inc.
05-208
DiSalvatore-Land Use
August26,2005
Page 1 .of 3
.
.
.
maximum building coverage of 50% for this use but typical of local "CG" projects a more realistic
building coverage of 16,000-s.f. per acre can be expected. Using this assumption, the 75-acre
site would yield 1,200,320-s.f. of general commercial space. This equates to 240,060-gallons of
water usage and would generate 192,050-gallons of wastewater.
The proposed Land Use of RH would allow a residential density of 15-units per acre. This type
of intensity would consume approximately 236,250-gallons per day of water and generate
270,000-gallons of wastewater per day.
The FPUA Water Treatment Plant is currently permitted for treatment of up to 20-mgd.
Available capacity as of February 2005 is 10.29-mgd minus the requested capacity of 0.236-
mgd for a recognized total of 10.05-mgd of remaining capacity. This facility has adequate
treatment capacity for the planned development.
The following Table projects the average daily potable water demands for the proposed project.
It should be noted that 1-erc of potable water flow is equivalent to 210-gpd. There is a reduced
reservation capacity of 30% for multi-family developments. Therefore, 1-erc of single-family is
300-gpd while 1-erc of multi-family is 210-gpd.
Potential Water Generation
Projected
ERC's
1,125
Permitted Plant
Capacity
(mgd)
20.0
Max. Day
Demand
( mgd)
11.5
Remaining
Capacity
(mgd)
10.05
Available
Capacity
(mgd)
10.29
Projected
Demand
(mgd)
0.236
The wastewater facility serving this project is the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority (FPUA)
Reclamation Facility. This Facility is currently permitted for treatment of up to 10-mgd.
Available capacity as of February 2005 is 2.22-mgd minus the requested capacity of 0.270-mgd
for a recognized total of 1.95-mgd of remaining capacity. This facility has adequate treatment
capacity for the planned development. Per discussions with FPUA, a hydraulic evaluation will be
required for the wastewater system to determine the impacts that this project will have and to
determine what improvements will be necessary. It is anticipated that some upgrades to the
existing lift station at the Westwood entrance will be required.
The following Table projects the generated wastewater flows for the proposed project. It should
be noted that 1-erc of wastewater flow is equivalent to 240-gpd. There is no discount on
wastewater reservation for multi-family uses.
Potential Wastewater Generation
Projected
ERC's
1,125
Permitted Plant
Capacity
(mgd)
10.0
Remaining
Capacity
(mgd)
1.95
Max. Day
Demand
(mgd)
9.51
Available
Capacity
(mgd)
2.22
Projected
Demand
(mgd)
.270
Engineering Design & Censtructien, Inc.
05-208
DiSalvatere-Land Use
August26,2005
Page 2 .of 3
.
Question 5 - What is the general drainage pattern in the surrounding area, and what general
approach to storm-water management would you anticipate if the requested land use change is
granted? What effects would the requested land use change have on the volume and quality of
runoff?
The subject parcel is located within the existing limit of the North St. Lucie River Water Control
District (NSLRWCD). The southern portion of the property drains to the south to an existing
drainage swale on Metzger Road. This swale flows westward to the NSLRWCD Canal #29. The
northern portion of the property appears to drain to the west into NSLRWCD Canal #29 as is
evident by a drainage culvert found during a site visit. The swales existing along the eastern
boundary of the property do not have a well defined drainage outfall; however it is believed that
the intended outfall is to NSLRWCD Canal #29 and the North Emergency Relief Canal.
The effects of the requested land use on runoff volume and quality have already been
established by the NSLRWCD. The parcel is allowed a runoff rate of 2"lacre/day. Water quality
will be determined using South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) criteria of 1" over
the subject parcel or 2.5 times the percent impervious, whichever is greater.
We researched the SFWMD database for infonnation on existing surface water and
consumptive use pennits. According to the researched database, there were no existing
SFWMD permits issued to the parcels that comprise of the subject project. There has been no
correspondence with SFWMD on the subject project.
. The SFWMD database did not reveal any permits covering existing wells.
It is anticipated that 12% to 15% of the total project area will be dedicated to lake detention as
measured from the top of bank. It is also anticipated that a 20 foot maintenance easement will
be provided as measured from control elevation. The maintenance will be provided via a master
HOA.
Should you have any questions or need further information, please do not hesitate to contact
me at (772) 462-2455.
Sincerely,
Gary R. Priest
Cc: John DiSalvatore
Roderick Kennedy, P.E.
.
Engineering Design & Censtructien, Inc.
05-208
DiSalvatere-Land Use
August 26, 2005
Page 3 .of 3
-
lo'StZ-Z9tr-ZU :X1!J
SStZ-Z9tr-ZU :8UO\ld
OS6tt 1:J '3~~3Id '.l:j
9~~ 3.lIns '.l33~.lS ~t'N ~O~
":>NI 'NOI1:>nH.LSNO:> "
N9IS30 9NIH33NI9N3
~
a
3
--
-"
.........
.....-
-'"
--
...--
-
n.
<(
~
>-.
t-~
-z
Z
U
-
>
~
VORlO,:I
i ~
~ !'t
IU l~'
~,'I~
. "':II! I
;;!IHt
....
1lO
o
N
.
10
o
...
u.
o
NOll. VWHO~NI
lVnJ.d3:>NO:> aNY lVIH3V
A.lH3dOHd 3HO.l V ^ 1VSIO
o
~
w
(!)
z
~<(
.0
J:_
I-Q:
:)0
0-'
enLL
10 -
(")~
a.z
-::>
mo
~~
0-
I-g
ai-'
z"-:
oen
i=t-="
uen
W<(
enw
en
w
Q:
U
<(
1.0
l"-
II
LD
Q:
<(
w
t:
en
-'
<(
I-
o
I-
\ I ~
c ~ ~
~Zl;~
(!) g ~
W a:;;:
-' .. UJ
\ :
'l! ~ '-11
~ , ;::
..
a: t;;
~ ~ g ~
~ ~ .. 00\
l!; l!; l!;
t; t; to t; t;
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
I I~ ~ \\l
o :
,
t
~
"'t ....
..,...
*
:',..r"
~
~ .'..l.~
.. " ~....." i
f!I' .....Jt " I
. . .'It t. ("
1\ ~,!
"\0. " ','.'f
~ . f- I
"~:~iI' ,'~ .. I
-_~.' I
. '~........
~ ..... ~
.,.~.. ;'I."
,::- ~...~..
'1"'......;.1.. "',',
. .. .. y - . "
'-!l:J !S~t N.
..
'.,"t'"
""1
'.u,
,,'''' .~
.. ...
,l"-
.....~
If""" mit ....
_ ~ ;-; ........ '!III i.'
.-:"l!"'" .......' -.
;"'" .~# itIf ~: ·
, ... - . ,
...-~ ~ ...... ~."
"f'l ......... ..
ft.~ ... 1':
,..1 .'
. f"""
!
...,.'
"
""ft"
<<
, '
; r..
{
".t'
I
:!
i~~m' ...... .;
~ ..,..... ;""'" .
1!i....JJ. z
-1. 1J".' ~;!;
_. 02
wa:
zw
8\3
zw
_G1
~o
I-
Ww
01-
a::J
00
1La:
o
w
U)
o
B-
o
a:
B-
Le
.il
,l
".
.;'III. .
~i
U)x
~!2
J:
;10 cwY !a"'~.u H.LW' lIIatLKJOJ
.-- --.----,-.... --..-
.
.
.
Response to DCA ORC
The Preserve
Comprehensive Plan Amendment #PA05-013
APPENDIX B
PSL:23347:1
Page 5 of7
.
DiSfiLVfiTORE PROPERTY
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
i'Hlparqd for
JOtlN DiSfiLVfiTORE
.
PINDER lROUTMfitt COttSOL liNG. INC,
7 Z 5 Colorado fivvnuQ
Stuart. FL 34994
(772) 463-0271
.
#PTCO 5,,006 S
tiugust 16, ZOOS
Di
.
DiSAL V A TORE PROPERlY
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
INTRODUCTION
It is proposed to change the land use designation from Industrial (lL) to High Residential (RH) on a site
located in unincorporated St Lucie County (Exhibit 1). The 75.02-acre site is located on the northwest
side of Angle Road north of Metzger Road. Access to the site will be via driveway connections to Angle
Road.
. The purpose of this analysis is to determine if the proposed land use designations are consistent with the
Transportation Element of the St Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan requires
an analysis of existing and future traffic conditions.
SITE DATA
As indicated above, the proposal is to designate the entire 75.02 acres as High Residential (RH). The
comprehensive plan assigns a maximum intensity to both the existing Industrial land use designation and
the proposed Residential land use designation. For Industrial, the maximum intensity scenario is a Floor
to Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.50 and for the High Residential the maximum intensity is 15 OU's per acre.
Based on these intensities, the maximum development potential is 1,633,935 SF of light industrial and
1,125 multi family residential units.
TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
Trip Generation
The Institute of Engineers (lTE) Trip Generation, 7111 Edition was the sole source of daily and peak hour trip
. generation rates/equations utilized in this study. Trips generated by the existing land use designation as
well as trips generated by the proposed land use designation are shown on Exhibit s 2A, 2B and 2C for
the daily, AM peak hour and PM peak hour respectively. The daily and peak hour trip generation of the
Report OS..(J(J6 5 08-2rroS
1
.
proposed land use designation is substantially less than the daily and peak hour trip generation of the
existing land use designation.
Existing Traffic Conditions
Spring, 2004 24-hour daily traffic volumes collected by the St Lucie County Road and Bridge Division are
shown on Exhibit 3 for the roadway links within a radius of development influence of the project
Existing volumes plus committed trips from approved projects and levels of service are also shown on this
Exhibit. All roadway links meet the adopted LOS standard for the existing lanes.
Roadway Improvements
The FY 2004/2005 through2008/2009 Transportation Improvement Program from the MPO of St Lucie
. County were reviewed to determine if any roadways within the study area are scheduled to be improved.
No roadways within the study area are schedule for improvement within the 5-year time frame.
Future Traffic Conditions
The St. Lucie County 2025 long Range Transportation Plan was reviewed to determine future roadway
improvements. The 2025 Needs Plan shows that a number of roadways within the vicinity of the project/
including Angle Road, will require widening from 2 to 4 lanes. However, the 2025 Cost Feasible Plan
does not show any improvements to these roadways, indicating that funds will not be available for the
needed improvements.
This proposed land use changer which results in a reduction of daily and peak hour trips, could eliminate
or delay the need to widen Angle Road in the vicinity of the project
CONCLUSIONS
. This analysis shows that the proposed land use designation at maximum intensity will be consistent with
the Transportation Element of the St lucie County Comprehensive Plan.
2
Report 05-006 5 08-26-05
Di
o
<
o
at
Z
o
Ii;
Z
J:
Q
^NCLE RO^D
...
..
D I SALVATO RE
PRO PE RTY
ST LUCIE BOULEV^RD
o
<
o
at
~
""
o
<
o
at
Z
;;:
~
::: VIRCINI^ ^VENUE
at
Ii;
,r,
...
...
KIRBY lOOP RO^D
o
<
o
'"
t:'
~
EXHIBIT 1
PROJECT LOCATION
o
N.T.S.
~
DE~W^RE ^VENUE
03/09/05
05-0065
~
Exhibit 2A
DiSalvatore Property
Daily Trip Generation Comparison
#PTC05-006 S
8/26/2005
TripGen 05-006 S 08-26-05
Page 1 of 3
.
Existing land Use Designation - light Industrial (lL)
land Use
Li ht Industrial
ITE
Code
110
Intensi
1,633,935 SF (2)
T ri Generation Rate (1)
T = 7 .47(X)-1 01.92
Total
Tri 5
12,104
TOTALS
12,104
Proposed land Use Designation - High Residential (RH)
land Use
Residential Multi Famil
ITE
Code
220
Intensi
1,125 Dus (3)
T ri Generation Rate (1)
T =6.01 (X)+ 150.35
Total
Tri
6,912
TOTALS
6,912
Net Increase
(5,192)
(1) Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation 7th Edition.
(2) Based en an FAR of 0.5 for 75.02 Acres.
(3) Based on 15 DUs per Acre for 75.02 Acres.
.
#PTC05-006 S
. 6/26/2005
TripGen 05-006 S 08-2M>5
Page 2 0( 3
Exhibit 28
DiSAlvatore Property
Daily Trip Generation Comparison
Existing i and Use l1esig"ation - ligttt industrial flU
ITE Total Trips
land Use Code intensity Trip Generation Rate (1) In Out Total
liKht Industrial 110 1,633,935 SF (2) T = 1.18(X)-89.28 (88/12) 1618 221 1,839
TOTALS 1618 221 1839
Prnpr-d land Use Desi(plation - Higtt Residential (RHl
ITE Total Trips
land Use Code Intensity Trip Generation Rate (1) In Out Total
Residential Multi Familv 220 1,125 Dus (3) T =0.49(Xl+ 3.73(20/80) 112 450 562
TOTALS 112 450 562
Net. Increase (1,506) 229 (1,277)
. (1) Source: Institute 0( Transportation Engineers (1m, Trill Generation, 7th Edition.
(2) 8ased on an FAR 0( 0.5 for 75.02 Iv::res.
(3) Based on 15 DUs per Iv:;re for 75.02 Acres.
.
#PTC05-006 S
. 8/26/2005
TripGen 05-006 S 08-26-05
Page3 of 3
Exhibit 2C
DiSAlvatore Property
Daily Trip Generation Comparison
Fxisting I and Use DesiKJ13tion - Ligttt Industrial {lU
ITE T olal Trips
land Use Code Intensity Trip Generation Rate (1) In Out Total
liRht Industrial 110 1,633,935 Sf (2) T=1.43(X)-163.42 (12/88) 261 1912 2,173
TOTALS 261 1912 2173
p~ Land Use DesiKJ13tion - Higtt Residential CRHl
ITE Total Trips
land Use Code Intensity Trip Generation Rate (1) In Out Total
Residential Multi Family 220 1,125 Dus(3) T =0.55(X)+ 17.65(65/35) 413 223 636
TOTALS 413 223 636
Net Increase 152 (1,689) (1,537)
. (1) Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (lTE), Trio Generation. 7th Edition.
(2) Based on an FAR of 0.5 fOl' 75.02 Acres.
(3) Based on 15 DUs per IV:re fOf 75.02 Acres.
.
.~~.- en
\DOO- 0 u~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~oouuuuuu~uu
00' 0
9~gr- ....l
LI')\CIQJ
0"""" ClC
U~O...
f- VIa..
a.. \D ~
'lk 0 ~
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
.;, en ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 ,..... ,..... ,..... ,..... ,..... ,..... ,..... ,..... ,..... ,..... L1"l L1"l ,..... L1"l L1"l L1"l -:t -:t -:t -.t -:t -:t -.t ~ \0 ,..... ,..... ......
U ....l N L1"l L1"l L1"l L1"l L1"l L1"l L1"l L1"l L1"l l""I l""l L1"l l""I l""I l""l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -:t -:t L1"l L1"l lI'l
!:: ~ l""l l""I l""I l""l l""l l""I l""I l""I l""I l""l L1"l L1"l l""l L1"l L1"l L1"l ..... ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... ..... l""l l""I ..,
...
~ ~
1;;
]
U 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
se 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 l""l ......
o I! a:l l""l ,.... a'I a:l ,.... L1"l ~ a'I ,..... N l""l ...... ,.... a'I N 0 0 l""I l""l L1"l ,.... l""I L1"l 0 L1"l \0 ......
.... .... ~ ~ ,.... 0 .., a:l ,..... a:l a:l ,..... a'I ,.... N 0 ,.... ~ 0 L1"l -:t N l""l a'I ,.... ~ ...... a'I l""I ..,
~ ,.... ,.... ..... ,.... ..... ,.... N N N N l""l ..... N N N ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... N N
<
0
l~ 0
'E J 0 0
00000000000 0 0000000000000 0 l""l ......
E -c: .....
o ....
U
~
1lO.... 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0
c - 8 0 0 0
'i~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
,- ~ a:l l""I ,.... a'I c:o ,.... L1"l ~ a'I ,..... N N ...... ,.... a'I N 0 0 l""l l""I L1"l ,.... l""l L1"l 0 L1"l ~ ......
~ 0 ~ ~ ,.... 0 l""I a:l ,..... a:l a:l ,..... a'I ..... N 0 ..... ~ 0 L1"l -:t N l""l a'I ,.... ~ ...... a'I l""l l""I
,.... ,.... ,.... ..... ..... ..... N N N N l""l ..... N N N ,.... ..... ,.... ,.... ,.... ,.... ..... N N
!:!.
. l~ <<<<<< <<<<<<< <<< < <<< < << << <<<
o E ZZZZZZ zzzzzzz zzz z zzz z zz zz zzz
... -
Q..
IlO
.i ~ 000000 0000000000 ....J ....J ....J ....J ....J ....J ....J ....J ....l 000
....J ....J ....J ....J ....J ....J ....J....J....J....J....J....J...J...J...J....J N N N N N N N N N ...J ...J ...J
.- III -.t-:t-:t-:t-:t-:t -.t-.t-.t-:t~~-:t~~~ -:t-:t-:t
~...J
.
'"
c:
o
.~
~:g
II) 0
c..u
e u
Q. .-
~, :t
;: [!
t"'lBI-
..... "' tID
~>c::
~ ~ :~
~C5~
.:rt.
C
::i... ""
~ ~ 1\1 ~
.bO~~
V"l~lVon
.s lV lib'~
L1"llibC;~L1"l
~~~~5:
0..... 0..... .....
...0....00
rJ'I ...... en ...... ......
lV :a lV :a on
3UJ3UJ~
II)
;:,
~ ~
~ ~
"C
~ ~
a:: fi
o
lV
..)f; lV
.;:; ..)f;
C '0.
:; E
.... ;:,
on....
-1\1 _on
" 1\1
I.t1 .-= -0
a'I 0 .-=
....!.L:i:..Q
...
.....
o
..... .....
o 0
.... ....
on on
lV lV
33
lV
:J
e:
-olV....
~ ~ ~
~ 1\1 .b
III 'c Vl
L1"l ,~'!i("E
~ I.t1 ~.= l""l
q> lV>l""l
'-" - '-......
~'O'O~~
...., rJ'I ...... ..,; VI en
III lV on on lV lV
~3~~33
6'
,.....
Ol:
~
-0
~
Ol:
.8
o
..c
lrl
lV
.:Jtl
o
-0 "'C -0
1\1 "' 1\1
~ lV lVlVOlVOlV..9lV
o :J" :J:JOl::JO:::J~:J
~~ ~~~-o~~..oal~~~al~
':O(jJaJ<-;;.....~<<o<o<-g<
o .b lV ~. '0 ,~ Ol: !H. ~. 15 !H. 15 !H. 15 .!!l
..c Vl .b c :J :J lV ~ ~e: lVe: ~ ~ ~e: lV e:
u ..c Vl 1\1 ...J ...J ~ 1\1 1\1 CIJ 1\1 ~ CIJ ';:;'.
~......~..... c........~....~~~t::'
~~.nOv;v;<00000005
8'0:'0'0'0'0'0'0'0'0'0'0'0'0
o....o..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c..c
~ on .... ~ ~ .... .... ~ .... ~ .... t .... .... ....
w. ~ on 0 0 :J :J 0 :J 0 :J 0 :J :J :J
~3~zz~~z~z~z~~~
lV
;:,
e:
lV
>
<
1\1
'c
.60
...
:>
>-
" III
1\1 ~
~j,
C1J:!:
~~
< ,~
~
"
1\1
o
Ol:
'"
e:
~
c:
lV
--
..c
...
;:,
o
III
-5
U')
N
d
c..
~
...
~
<
c:
..2!
:5
CI>
'0
~
-'
.J
VI
~- ~
(3 -g
u ...
<= :c
'j;j VI
~ 9
8~
"" ...
ail ~
c: a
'C N
0.0
VI 0
""
e f-
~ 0
o Cl
'" ....
~a
.
.
.
Response to DCA ORC
The Preserve
Comprehensive Plan Amendment #PA05-013
APPENDIX C
PSL:23347:1
Page 6 of7
.
Prepared by and to be returned to:
Johnathan A. Ferguson, Esq.
Ruden, McClosky, Smith, Schuster & Russell, PA
145 NW Central Park Plaza, Suite 200
Port St. Lucie, FL 34986
AGREEMENT FOR CONTRIBUTION TOWARD PUBLIC SCHOOL
LAND ACQUISITION AND FACILITIES CONSTRUCTION
[PRESERVE]
AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made and entered into this ,~ay of
THIS
"-1~ , 2006, by and between the School Board of St. Lucie County ("School Board") and
Libertytown, LLLP (a Maryland limited liability limited partnership) ("PRESERVE").
WHEREAS, PRESERVE proposes to change the St. Lucie County future land use
designation on the property identified in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof
. ("Property"); and
WHEREAS, under its current future land use designation, a maximum of zero (0)
residential units potentially could be developed on the Property ("Current Maximum"); and
WHEREAS, the future land use change proposed by PRESERVE, if granted, would
increase the potential residential density on the Property, thereby increasing the impact on public
school facilities in St. Lucie County; and
WHEREAS, if PRESERVE obtains the proposed future land use change, the maximum
number of residential units that may be developed on the Property ("Future Maximwn'') will be
established by a development order entered by St. Lucie County with respect to the Property
("Development Order"); and
WHEREAS, the difference between the Future Maximum and the Current Maximum
.
represents the increase in the number of residential units on the Property ("Density Increase")
that would result from the future land use change proposed by PRESERVE; and
PSL:19181 :3
.
.
WHEREAS, the existing St. Lucie County Educational Facilities Impact Fee Ordinance
(codified at Chapter 1-6.5, Article V, of the Code of Ordinances of St. Lucie County, Florida,
and hereinafter referred to as the "Ordinance") requires that an educational facilities impact fee
("School Impact Fee") be paid at the time of issuance of a building permit for each unit when
property is developed; and
WHEREAS, PRESERVE will be subject to payment of the School Impact Fee as
required by the Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the School Impact Fee as established by the Ordinance does not currently
include a component to compensate for the increased density represented by a future land use
change and the resultant need for additional public school sites and facilities; and
WHEREAS, the School Board is in need of funds to acquire real property and to
construct additional public schools; and
WHEREAS, the S1. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan provides that future development
shall pay for 100 percent of the capital improvements needed to address the impact of such
development, and that future development payments may take the form of voluntary
contributions for the benefit of any public facility; and
WHEREAS, PRESERVE wishes voluntarily to contribute funds toward the acquisition of
property for additional public school sites and the construction of additional public school
facilities to compensate for the future land use change proposed for the Property and the Density
Increase that would result from that change.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants entered into between the
. parties, and in consideration of the benefits to accrue to each, it is agreed upon as follows:
1. Accuracy of Recitals. The above recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein.
PSL:19181:3
2
.
.
.
2. Contribution of Funds. PRESERVE hereby agrees to contribute to the School Board,
for the purchase of public school sites and the construction of public school facilities, an amount
("Density Increase Contribution") calculated by multiplying the sum of $1,500.00 per unit times
the Density Increase in units as determined at the time of approval of a Development Order for
the Property. The Density Increase Contribution shall be paid to the School Board prior to the
issuance of the first building permit for a residential unit for each phase in accordance with such
phasing plan as may be approved by St. Lucie County pursuant to the Development Order for the
Property, or if no phasing plan is approved, then prior to the issuance of the first building pennit
for a residential unit in the approved development.
3. Credit Against School Imoact Fees and Adootion of Additional Fees. PRESERVE
agrees that the Density Increase Contribution shall not be creditable against the School Impact
Fee existing on the date of this Agreement because the fee includes no component for the
increased land and facilities needs attributable to changes in future land use designation that
result in increased residential density. The School Board agrees that in the event the Ordinance
is amended to include this component in the School Impact Fee or in the event a fee is otherwise
imposed on new development for the cost of additional school sites and facilities attributable to
future land use changes, it will support PRESERVES'S request for a credit against such
amended School Impact Fees or other new development fee, as such fees may be applicable to
the Property, to the extent that any portion of the Density Increase Contribution has been paid in
accordance with this Agreement. Such credits shall be applicable to such units or such portion of
the Property as may be designated in a school impact fee credit agreement between the parties, or
by written designation provided to and approved by the School Board, which approval shall not
be unreasonably withheld. In the event that the Ordinance is amended to include the cost
PSL:19181:3
3
.
component contemplated herein or in the event a fee is otherwise imposed on new development
for the cost of additional school sites and facilities and some or all of the Density Increase
Contribution otherwise payable pursuant to this Agreement has not been paid, then such
remaining Density Increase Contribution payments shall no longer be required and instead the
amended School Impact Fee or other new development fee for such remaining units shall be paid
in accordance with the applicable ordinance.
4. Satisfaction of School Needs. The School Board agrees, based upon the infonnation
provided by PRESERVE and otherwise made available to the School Board, and without
determining that the Density Increase Contribution provided in this Agreement would be
appropriate for any other project or development if other information becomes available that (i)
PRESERVE'S payment of School Impact fees in accordance with the Ordinance, and (ii) this
Agreement for Density Increase Contribution as provided herein, collectively fairly address the
impacts of the future development of the Property on educational facilities needs in St. Lucie
County, and as such the School Board has no objection to the approval of the proposed future
land use change for the Property.
5. Miscellaneous.
(a) Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains and sets forth all the promises,
covenants, agreements, conditions, and understandings between the Parties with respect to the
subject matter of this Agreement.
(b) Terms and Words. All terms and words used in this Agreement, regardless of the
number and gender in which used, shall be deemed to include any other gender or number as the
. context or the use thereof may require.
.
PSL:19181:3
4
.
.
.
(c) Severability. If any provision of this Agreement is held to be invalid, void, or
unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this Agreement shall not be affected or impaired and
each remaining provision shall remain in full force and effect. In the event that any term or
provision of this Agreement is determined by appropriate judicial authorities to be illegal, void
or otherwise invalid, said provision shall be given its nearest legal meaning, or be construed as
deleted as such authority determines and the remainder of this Agreement shall be construed to
be in full force and effect.
(d) Headings. Captions and paragraph headings contained in this Agreement are for
convenience and reference only and in no way define, describe, extend or limit the scope or
intent of this Agreement, nor the intent of any provision hereof.
(e) Governing Law. This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted according to the
laws of the State of Florida and venue with respect to any litigation between the parties related to
this Agreement shall be St. Lucie County, Florida.
6. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon the parties, their
heirs, successors, and assigns.
7. Amendments. This Agreement shall not be changed, modified, or amended except by
an instrument in writing and executed by the parties.
[END OF PAGE]
PSL:19181:3
5
.
.
.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused the execution of this
Agreement by their duly authorized officials as of the day and year fIrst above written.
Print Name:
By:
Print Name:
Title:
STATE OF F~f"'ll
COUNTY OF
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this &4-laay of ~~
200' by -:ran CS-t~t , as ~~ I l'a(~ of
LIBERTYTOWN, LLLP, a Maryland limited liability limited partnership, who erlS
personally known to me or 0 has produced as
identifIcation.
SHARON It REED
,.." NIID
...... CaunIr
MIIyIInd
Mr c...... lula . ...... Aup11111, ..
PSL:191B1:3
~~~
" blic, State o' ra~
Print Name: S~V\~. QY-d
My Commission Expires: ~ 11J19.t- l,dOO'
By:
6
.
.
.
EXHIBIT" A"
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
PARCEL 1
Commencing at the SW corner of the NW ~ of the SE Y.. of Section 6, Township 35 South,
Range 40 East, St. Lucie County, Florida, thence run North 890 45' 53" West, 55 feet to the
Point of Beginning, from said Point of Beginning run North 000 06' 24" East, a distance of
1330.37 feet to a point, thence run South 890 32' 30" East, 696.14 feet to a point, thence run
South 000 00' 53" West, 1016.43 feet to a point, thence run North 890 45' 53" West, 1273.62 feet
to the Point of Beginning.
PARCEL 2
The NE Y.. of the SW ~ of the SE Y.. of Section 6, Township 35 South, Range 40 East, S1. Lucie
County, Florida, LESS the South 200 feet thereof.
PARCEL 3
That part of the SE ~ of the SE ~ of Section 6, Township 35 South, Range 40 East, S1. Lucie
County, Florida, described as: beginning at the Northwest comer of the Se Y.. of the SE Y.. of said
Section 6; thence South 890 45' 53" East, along the North line of the SE Y.. of the SE Y.. of said
Section 6, 664.31 feet, thence South 000 03' 33" West, 35536 feet; thence South 890 45' 53"
East, 14.11 feet to the Northwest comer of lands described in Official Record Book 166, Page
540, St. Lucie County, Florida public records, thence South 00000' 33" West, 293.01 feet to the
North line of that certain easement described in Deed Book 253, Page 480, S1. Lucie County,
Florida public records, thence North 890 59' 15" West, 80.51 feet to the Northwest comer of said
easement, thence South 000 02' 35" West, 630.00 feet to the North right of way line of Metzger
Road; thence North 890 59' 15" West, 37433 feet to the East line of lands described in Deed
Book 145, Page 39, S1. Lucie County, Florida public records; thence North 000 04' 30" East,
180.00 feet to the Northeast comer of lands described in Deed Book 145, Page 391, S1. Lucie
County, Florida public records, thence North 890 59' IS" West, 210.00 feet to the West line of
the Se ~ of the SE ~ of said Section 6, thence North 000 04' 30" East, 1090.42 feet to the Point
of Beginning.
PARCEL 4
The SW ~ ofthe SW ~ of the SE ~ and the NW ~ of the Southeast Y.. of Section 6, Township
35 South, Range 40 East, St. Lucie County, Florida, LESS and excepting therefrom:
Being a parcel of land lying and being in the Northwest ~ of the Southeast ~ of Section 6,
Township 35 South, Range 40 East, St. Lucie County, Florida, being more particularly described
as follows:
Commence at the }\."ortheast comer of the Northwest ~ of the Southeast ~ of said Section 6,
Township 35 South, Range 40 East, St. Lucie County, Florida, thence run South O~)~ 03' 25"
PSL:19181:3
.
.
.
East, an assumed bearing, along the East line of the Northwest Y.. of the Southeast Y. of said
Section 6,308.98 feet, thence run South 89028' 37" West, 555.51 feet to the Pint of Beginning;
thence continue South 890 28' 37" West, 276.01 feet, thence run North 00026' 12" West, 316.91
feet to the North line of the Northwest Y4 of the Southeast Y.. of said Section 6, thence run South
890 59' 35" East, along said North line, 276.02 feet, thence run South 000 26' 12" East, 314.36
feet to the Point of Beginning.
PSL:19181:3
8
Board Members
[=)((>,11. '111l? III idl !('.]I!()I':
The School Board of St. L.ucie County
.W i l!
......r' .-'
, f':'?>-
, /
(
.
.
,I
,\~ r_.'l,'~!,,~\!,:,
.L-'iI.., ,;':! I Ji "e'I" Pi I II j
F , )j I '; 'c I .'. !.. i ( ) I I!I "I ' 14;'
. I ~ c iLl \'. ',:' 1 ( )
S II pen n t€~ll dl~' It
I 1\-.11 .,+;]c;
April (). :W()()
Jonathan A Ferguson
Ruden, McClosky. Smith, Schuster & Russell. P.A.
145 NW Central Park Plaza. Suite 1()()
Port St. Lu<.:ie, FL 349g6
Rc: The Preserve-A~reement for Contrihution Toward Puhlic School Land Acquisitioll
and Facilities Construction
Dear M r Ferguson:
Thank you t(lr the agreement regarding the contrihution towards puhlic school constructIOn. We
appreciate your client's willingness to mitigate the impacts on the public schools.
At the February .28, 2006 School Board Meeting, the Board approved the agrecment. I ha\ e sent
you the original agreement under separate cover for rccording.
As slated in thc agnxmenl in Section 4:
~.5i.1l!~J~lcti(~!l....i.lJ~~.h<l..QLt-J\.'\.'Q,'i. The School Board agrees. based upon the inlnrmation pHl" idl'd hI,.
PRESEV E and otherwise made available to the School Board. and v\ ithout determining that the Den.ojl \
Increase Contribution prov'ided in this Agreement would he appropriate f(lr allY \lth<:r pr< ).1\'1'; II
development if other inli.1fJllatlon becomes available that (i) PRFSEVE paymcnt of Schoul Imp",:l l\:e\ i!,
accordance with the Ordinance, and (ii) this Agreemcnt Illr Density Increase Contribution as plm jJed
herein, collectively fairly addrcss the impacts of the future dt'H:lopment of the Property 011 cducatlonal
facilities Ilt'eds ill St. lucie County. and as such the School Board has no I )b,ectioll to the appro\ al of the
proposed future land use change for the Pruperty,"
lJ"you hu\c allY questions. rlcase feel frce to give me a call
I~~@~D\IJJ~~
Jl, APR 1 0 2006 lQJ
:;lr:IY" ~ L
J..,:~ ~an:~rs,'p~ R u den M cC 1 oa k y
Executive Director of Gnmth \1anagcment. Land Acquisitions & Gp\crnmcntal Relations
\lES:mtf
I,',
,I. j, ,:, . ,'-.,. " .1 \.,
.
.
.
Response to DCA ORC
The Preserve
Comprehensive Plan Amendment #PA05-013
APPENDIX D
PSL:23347:1
Page7of7
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
RESOLUTION 06-
FILE NO.:
A RESOLUTION GRANTING PRELIMINARY
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT SITE PLAN APPROVAL
FOR THE PROJECT TO BE KNOWN AS "THE
PRESERVE" - A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT,
AND A CHANGE IN ZONING FOR CERTAIN
PROPERTY IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, based on the
testimony and evidence, including but not limited to the staff report, has made the following
determinations:
16
17 1.
18
.19
20
21
22 2.
23
24
25
26
27
28 3.
29
30
31
32
33 4.
34
35
36
37
38
39 5.
40
41
42
43 6.
.44
45
P~I '?l1fi'H
File Ne.:
CHANGE IN ZONING
Thomas Lucido & Associates presented a petition for a change in zoning from the 1I
(Light Industrial) Zoning District to the PUD (Planned Unit Development - the Preserve)
Zoning District for certain property in 81. Lucie County, Florida depicted on the attached
maps as Exhibit "A" and described in Part "B" below.
On , the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission
held a public hearing, of which due notice was published and mailed to all property
owners within 500 feet at least 10 days prior to the hearing and recommended to this
Board thatthe requested change in zoning from the 1I (Light Industrial) Zoning Districtto
the PUD (Planned Unit Development - the Preserve) Zoning District be
On , this Board held a public hearing on the petition, after
publishing a notice of such hearing and notifying by mail all owners of property within
500 feet of the subject property and granted final approval to the property described
below.
The proposed change in zoning is consistent with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive
Plan and meets the requirements of Section 11.06.03 of the 81. Lucie County Land
Development Code.
SITE PLAN
The petitioner is proposing to develop 974 multi-family dwelling units and associated
commercial uses on 75.08 acres located on the west side of Angle Road, north of
Metzger Road and east of Westwood High School.
The Development Review Committee has reviewed the site plan for the proposed project
and found it to meet minimum technical requirements.
Reselution 06-
Page 1
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
.21
22
23
24
~ co
L..J
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
.6
7. On , the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission held a
public hearing, of which due public notice was published and mailed to all property
owners within 500 feet at least 10 days prior to the hearing, and recommended to this
Board that Preliminary Development Plan approval for the project to be known as the
Preserve be
8. On , this Board held a public hearing on the petition, after
publishing a notice of such hearing and notifying by mail all owners of property within
500 feet of the subject property, and granted Preliminary Development Site Plan
approval for the property described below.
9. The proposed project is consistent with the general purpose, goals, objectives, and
standards of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, the St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan, and the Code of Ordinances of St. Lucie County.
10. The proposed project will not have an undue adverse effect on adjacent property, the
character of the neighborhood, traffic conditions, parking, utility facilities, or other matters
affecting the public health, safety, and general welfare.
11. All reasonable steps have been taken to minimize any adverse effect of the proposed
project on the immediate vicinity through building design, site design, landscaping, and
screening.
12. The proposed project will be constructed, arranged, and operated so as not to interfere
with the development and use of neighboring property, in accordance with applicable
district regulations.
13. The proposed project will be served by adequate public facilities and services.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie
County, Florida:
CHANGE IN ZONING
A. The property on which this Preliminary and Final Planned Unit Development is being
granted is described as follows:
PARCEL 1
Commencing at the SW corner of the NW ~ of the SE ~ of Section 6, Township 35 South,
Range 40 East, St. Lucie County, Florida, thence run North 890 45' 53" West, 55 feet to the
Point of Beginning, from said Point of Beginning run North 000 06' 24" East, a distance of
1330.37 feet to a point, thence run South 890 32' 30" East, 696.14 feet to a point, thence run
PSI Inli,',
File No.:
Resolutien 06-
Page 2
.
16
17
18
19
20
.21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
.6
1 South 000 00' 53"' West, 1016.43 feet to a point, thence run North 89045' 53"' West, 1273.62
2 feet to the Point of Beginning.
3
4 PARCEL 2
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
The NE 1,4 of the SW 1,4 of the SE 1,4 of Section 6, Township 35 South, Range 40 East, St. Lucie
County, Florida, LESS the South 200 feet thereof.
PARCEL 3
15
That part of the SE X of the SE 1,4 of Section 6, Township 35 South, Range 40 East, St. Lucie
County, Florida, described as: beginning at the Northwest corner of the Se 1,4 of the SE X of said
Section 6; thence South 890 45' 53"' East, along the North line of the SE 1,4 of the SE 1,4 of said
Section 6,664.31 feet, thence South 000 03' 33"' West, 355.36 feet; thence South 89045' 53"'
East, 14.11 feet to the Northwest corner of lands described in Official Record Book 166, Page
540, St. Lucie County, Florida public records, thence South 000 00' 33"' West, 293.01 feet to the
North line of that certain easement described in Deed Book 253, Page 480, St. Lucie County,
Florida public records, thence North 890 59' 15"' West, 80.51 feet to the Northwest comer of said
easement, thence South 000 02' 35"' West, 630.00 feet to the North right of way line of Metzger
Road; thence North 89059' 15"' West, 374.33 feet to the East line of lands described in Deed
Book 145, Page 39, St. Lucie County, Florida public records; thence North 00004' 30"' East,
180.00 feet to the Northeast corner of lands described in Deed Book 145, Page 391, St. Lucie
County, Florida public records, thence North 890 59' 15"' West, 210.00 feet to the West line of
the Se 1,4 of the SE 1,4 of said Section 6, thence North 000 04' 30"' East, 1090.42 feet to the Point
of Beginning.
PARCEL 4
The SW X of the SW 1,4 of the SE 1,4 and the NW 1,4 of the Southeast 1,4 of Section 6, Township
35 South, Range 40 East, St. Lucie County, Florida, LESS and excepting there from:
Being a parcel of land lying and being in the Northwest X of the Southeast 1,4 of Section 6,
Township 35 South, Range 40 East, St. Lucie County, Florida, being more particularly described
as follows:
37
Commence at the Northeast corner of the Northwest X of the Southeast 1,4 of said Section 6,
Township 35 South, Range 40 East, St. Lucie County, Florida, thence run South 000 03' 25"'
East, an assumed bearing, along the East line of the Northwest 1,4 of the Southeast X of said
Section 6,308.98 feet, thence run South 890 28' 3T West, 555.51 feet to the Pint of Beginning;
thence continue South 890 28' 3T West, 276.01 feet, thence run North 000 26' 12" West,
316.91 feet to the North line of the Northwest 1,4 of the Southeast 1,4 of said Section 6, thence run
South 890 59' 35"' East, along said North line, 276.02 feet, thence run South 000 26' 12"' East,
314.36 feet to the Point of Beginning.
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
Location: on the west side of Angle Road, north of Metzger Road and east of Westwood High
School.
P'iI'?1~h~'~
File No.:
Resolutien 06-
Page 3
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
1/
18
19
20
.21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
.
SITE PLAN
8. Pursuant to Section 11.02.05 of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, the
Preliminary Site Plan for the project to be known as the Preserve - A Planned Unit Development,
is hereby approved as shown on the site plan drawings for the project prepared by Thomas
Lucido & Associates, dated I and date stamped received by the St. Lucie
County Growth Management Director on , for the property described in
Part "8" below, subject to the following conditions:
1. Prior to the recording of any Final Plat of the Preserve PUD, the developer,
his successors or assigns, shall pay to St. Lucie County the amount of
$1,852,548 as the Road Impact Fee assessment due for this project (974
multi-family units at $1,902.00 per multi-family unit). The payment ofthis
fee shall permit the development of 974 multi-family units. In the event
amendments to the approved development change the total number of
approved units, no additional road impact fees shall be due so long as the
total number of units does not exceed 974. Should any additional units or
other activities be proposed in the development that would require the
payment of additional Road Impact Fees, the fees to be assessed shall be
in accordance with all adopted St. Lucie County regulations in effect at the
time approval of the additional units or activities are approved. All road
impact fees due for the commercial component of the project shall be paid
in accordance with the impact fee ordinance in effect at the time the road
impact fees for the commercial component are deemed due.
P'iI.)1,f),.,
File No.:
Resolution 06-
Page 4
.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
1(;
17
18
19
.20
21
22
23
24
38
39
40
41
42
43
.~
1
.L
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
PSI.)1,f),.,
File No.:
2.
Prior to the recording of any Final Plat for the project, the developer, his
successors or assigns, shall pay the amount of $377,000.00 to St. Lucie
County to offset any and all impacts of the Preserve PUD on St. Lucie
County's transportation network. This contribution may be used by the
County, at the County's discretion, as follows: a) a portion of the
contribution may be used to pay for the proportionate share of the impacts
ofthe Preserve PUD on the intersection of Angle Road and Kings Highway;
b) a portion of the contribution may be used to pay for the proportionate
share of the impacts of the Preserve PUD on the intersection of Orange
Avenue and Kings Highway; c) a portion ofthe contribution may be used to
pay for the proportionate share of the impacts of the Preserve PUD on the
road work necessary to rehabilitate Angle Road between Orange Avenue
and Kings Highway. This contribution, along with payment of the impact
fees set forth in Paragraph 1, shall satisfy all transportation related impacts
of the Preserve PUD and shall satisfy transportation concurrency for this
project.
3.
Turn lanes and other road improvements shall be provided at the following
locations:
a. North bound left turn lane and south bound right turn lane on Angle
Road at the intersection of Angle Road and Metzger Road;
b. North bound left turn and south bound right turn lane on Angle
Road at the project entrance;
c. East bound left turn lanes and west bound right turn lanes on
Metzger Road at the project entrances.
d. Reconstruction of Metzger Road from the intersection of Angle
Road to the western boundary of the Preserve PUD.
These turn lanes may be bonded with a Subdivision Improvement
Agreement and a bond or Letter of Credit.
4.
Prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy (CO) for the
proposed project, the developer, his successors or assigns, shall
construct a 6-foot wide sidewalk along the project's frontage on Metzger
Road (the north side of the Metzger Road right of way).
5.
In conjunction with the final plat for the final phase, the developer, his
successor or assigns, shall submit a Traffic Signal warrant analysis for the
intersection of Angle Road and Metzger Road. The final plat shall not be
recorded until such time as the County has reviewed and approved the
signal warrant study including the bonding of any necessary
improvements identified by the signal warrant study. If there are other
projects under County review that will benefit by improvements identified
by the signal warrant study, then the County will enter into a fair share
Resolution 06-
Page 5
.
18
19
.20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
.44
45
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
1 (;
17
<~
~ I
38
39
40
41
42
43
PSI.7iif),.,
File No.:
agreement with the developer in order to reimburse the developer the
costs of such improvements. All approved or proposed projects that will
benefit from the improvements will share in a pro rata share of the costs of
such improvements.
6.
Prior to the issuance of the first Building Permit for the proposed project,
the petitioner, his successors or assigns, shall convey to St. Lucie County,
in manner and form acceptable to the St. Lucie County Attorney, the south
feet of the subject property for additional right-of-way for Metzger
Road. To the extent permitted under the County's Code and Compiled
Laws, any such dedication may be considered eligible for Road Impact Fee
Credits.
7.
If jurisdictional wetland areas are to be impacted, then prior to the
issuance of a St. Lucie County Vegetation Removal Permit, a permit from
the South Florida Water Management District allowing impacts to wetland
areas shall be required to be provided to the Environmental Resources
Department. A .69 acre and 2.27 acre wetland area shall be preserved on
site.
8.
If wetland area impacts are to be mitigated, then prior to the issuance of a
St. Lucie County Vegetation Removal Permit, the WRAP or UMAM
evaluations of the quality of the wetland and proof of purchase of the
agreed upon credits from an approved St. Lucie County mitigation bank, if
any, shall be submitted to the Environmental Resources Department.
9.
Prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy all exotic plant
species shall be removed, tree relocations shall be complete, and
restoration plantings shall be installed.
10.
Prior to Final Plat approval the developer, his successors or assigns, shall
submit and have approved adequate littoral planting plans to the
Environmental Resources Department.
11.
Prior to Final Plat approval the developer, his successors or assigns, shall
cooperate with the County to implement and put into place the
administrative mechanisms for the Preserve "10-10 Program" Attainable
Work-Force Housing Initiative as outlined in attached Exhibit "C." Ifthe
County chooses notto implement the "10-10 Program", then the developer,
his successors or assigns, shall set aside 10% ofthe units and sell such
units at 10% less than the market price to purchasers that are eligible
according to income guidelines established by the County. In no event
shall the developer have any obligation or responsibility to monitor or
control resales of such units.
Resolution 06-
Page 6
.
18
19
20
.21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
42
43
44
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
1 6
17
41
P'iI.7iif),.,
File No.:
18.
19.
20.
21.
12.
The developer, his successors or assigns, shall be required to provide a
bus stop/transit stop on Metzger Road just west of the west entrance to the
project.
13.
Prior to the issuance of a St. Lucie County Vegetation Removal Permit, the
developer, his successors or assigns, shall provide to the St. Lucie County
Environmental Resources Department an executed and recorded copy of
the conservation easement for the 10.20 acres of uplands to be preserved.
14.
The Homeowners' Association guidelines provided with the Final Planned
Unit Development shall include or reference the Preserve Area
Management and Monitoring Plan.
15.
Prior to the issuance of a St. Lucie County Vegetation Removal Permit, all
preserve areas shall be barricaded per the approved Preserve Area
Management and Monitoring Plan.
16.
The preferred source of irrigation water is reuse water. The irrigation
system within the project shall be designed to accept reuse water once it is
available.
17.
The project is designed to provide access to the St. Lucie County School
District ("School District") property adjacent to the western boundary and
the developer, his successors or assigns, agree to allow such access at
the discretion of the School District. However, the developer, his
successors or assigns, shall have no obligation or responsibility to design,
construct, or pay for such access if the School District decides to proceed
with such access.
The following commercial uses shall be allowed in the commercial areas
identified on the site plan: all permitted and conditional uses allowed in
the CN (Commercial Neighborhood), CO (Commercial Office), and CG
(Commercial General) zoning districts except for those permitted and
conditional uses listed on Exhibit "D" which are prohibited.
To the extent necessary, the developer, his successors or assigns, shall be
allowed to use nine (9) foot wide parking stalls.
Building spacing for all residential buildings shall be as shown on the site
plan.
If there are public or private funds available to the County to assist with
infrastructure costs associated with affordable or attainable workforce
housing, then the County agrees to participate with the developer, his
Resolution 06-
Page 7
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
.21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
.6
successors or assigns, in paying for the off-site costs for infrastructure
improvements.
GENERAL
C. This Preliminary Planned Unit Development Site Plan approval shall expire on-
, unless an extension is granted in accordance with Section
11.02.06(B)(3), St. Lucie County Land Development Code or final plat approval is
granted in accordance with Section 11.03.00.
D. The Preliminary Planned Development Site Plan approval granted under this resolution
is specifically conditioned to the requirement that the petitioner, including any successors
in interest, shall obtain all necessary development permits and construction
authorizations from the appropriate Local, State, and Federal regulatory authorities,
including but not limited to; the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the Florida
Department of Environmental Protection, the South Florida Water Management District,
and the Ft. Pierce Farms Water Management District prior to the issuance of any local
building permits of authorizations to commence development activities on the property
described in Part B.
E. A copy of this resolution shall be attached to the site plan drawings described in Part A,
which plan shall be placed on file with the St. Lucie County Growth Management
Director.
F. A copy of this Order shall be attached to the site plan drawings described in Section A,
which plan shall be on file with the 81. Lucie County Growth Management Director.
G. This Order shall be recorded in the Public Records of St. Lucie County.
After motion and second, the vote on this resolution was as follows:
Chairman Doug Coward
AYE
Vice-Chairman Chris Craft
AYE
Commissioner Paula A. Lewis
AYE
Commissioner Joseph E. Smith
AYE
Commissioner Frannie Hutchinson
AYE
PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED this 29th Day of November 2005.
P'il ')1,f),.,
File No.:
Resolution 06-
Page 8
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11 ATTEST:
12
13
14
15
16
1 7 Deputy Clerk
18
19
20
.21
22
23
24
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA
BY
Chairman
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND
CORRECTNESS:
.
P'iI.7iif),.,
File No.:
County Attorney
Resolution 06-
Page 9
.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
. 9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
.8
P'iI')11fll'1
File No.:
Exhibit "A"
Certificate of Capacity
Resolution 06-
Page 10
.
.9
.8
1
.L
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
PSI'7iinl"l
File No.:
Resolution 06-
Page 11
.
Exhibit "8"
Location Maps and
Site Plan Graphics
Resolution 06-
Page 12
.
THE PRESERVE "10-10 PROGRAM"
ATTAINABLE WORK-FORCE HOUSING INITIATIVE
The Developers of the PRESERVE are aware that the median price of homes
sold in St. Lucie County ("County") is reaching the point where the workforce of
the County, such as teachers, firemen, policemen and store clerks, are finding it
increasingly difficult to buy housing for themselves and their families. It is this
group of home buyers that the Developers had in mind when they decided to
include as part of the PRESERVE an attainable housing initiative for the workers of
St. Lucie County.
.
To begin with, because of its location, it is likely that the median sales price
of all of the PRESERVE homes will be less than the median price of comparable
homes sold throughout the County. However, in addition to the benefit of the
selling prices of the PRESERVE being less than the County median, the
Developers are proposing to create a special category of even more affordable
housing. The Developers refer to this attainable housing initiative as the "10-10
Program".
THE 10-10 PROGRAM
In general, the Developers will set aside 1 0% of the units to be sold at 1 0%
less than the market price. The Developers, in conjunction with the County,
envision the 1 0-1 0 Program to work similar to the following:
1. 10% of housing units. The Developer will select and identify 10% of the
homes from its portfolio as moderately priced housing units ("Units"). The
Developer will notify the County of its selections.
2. 10% price discount. The Units will be offered for sale at a price that will be
10% less than the current selling price for comparable new homes in the
PRESERVE at the time of the offering; in the alternative, the qualified buyer
could choose to purchase the Unit at the full current selling price but receive
a credit from the Developer at settlement equal to 10% of the full price.
.
3. Price limits upon resale. The Developers will grant to the County the right to
impose reasonable pricing formula limits upon the resale of those units
identified as Units; these formulas would remain in effect for the covered
Unit for such duration as the County deems appropriate.
PSL:16945:1
1
.
.
.
4. Other Programs Available. If an applicant qualifies to purchase a Unit
through the 10-10 Program, the applicant may also be eligible for down
payment assistance through the County. Historically these allowances have
been in the $15,000 to $40,000 range. The County will establish the
guidelines and standards for determining which applicants will be eligible.
Typically, the applicant may use such assistance for all or part of the down
payment or for closing costs or for both.
ELIGIBILITY FOR THE 10-10 PROGRAM
Who is eligible to benefit/rom the 10-10 Program?
Successful applicants must meet at least 2 conditions to qualify (the
conditions to be determined by the County):
1)
The applicant must satisfy income guidelines similar to or the same as for
other housing programs, such as the SHIP program, Home Again, CDBG
and Hurricane Disaster; and
2)
The applicant must be able to qualify for a mortgage at standard rates
( except that the County may grant exceptions to the standard rates
requirement for medical or other extraordinary circumstances).
*
The County may establish other conditions of eligibility, such as
limiting the program to first time home buyers.
What if there are more applicants for MPHUs than there are units available for
sale?
The County will establish a system (such as a lottery), which will govern the
allocation of Units to eligible applicants.
Who will administer the 10-10 Program?
The County will have exclusive jurisdiction and responsibility for the
administration of the 10-10 Program. The Developer will simply supply the
eligible Units.
PSL: 16945: 1
2
I
,
,
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
Administration
MEMORANDUM
TO:
County Commissioners
FROM:
Bob Nix, Growth Management Director
DATE:
May 10, 2005
SUBJECT:
Quail Meadows/Petition for a Change in Future Land Use Ordinance No. 06-024
On November 1, 2005, this Board transmitted the Quail Meadows LLC petition for a Change in
Future Land Use designation from RS (Residential Suburban - 2 du/acre) to RU (Residential
Urban - 5 du/ac) to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (Department) for review under
Chapter 163, Florida Statues. The Department found that the supporting data and analysis did
not demonstrate how adequate facility capacity and maintenance of adopted level of service
standards will be maintained (See Attached Excerpts from the Objections, Recommendations
and Comments Report). The applicant's response to the Department of Community Affairs is
attached.
To address Objection 4, School Capacity, the applicant has agreed to enter into an agreement
with the School Board to dedicate 10 acres of property for a school site. The School Board has
indicated that the dedication of the 10 acre school site will mitigate the impacts on the St. Lucie
County public schools concerning this land use amendment (See Attached Letter from the
School Board).
Approval of the proposed land use change would allow a maximum of 5 dwelling units per acre
on a 114 acre tract located at the corner of Old FFA Road and Angle Road, approximately 1 }'2
miles west of Kings Highway. This would increase the development potential of the amendment
lands from 282 maximum dwelling units to 570 maximum dwelling units, an increase of 288
dwelling units. The applicant has submitted a Planned Unit Development application proposing
a total of 507 dwelling units (170 single family dwellings and 337 townhomes).
The revised transportation analysis presented by the applicant indicates that the present land
use designation (RS) would generate 2,219 daily trips and 225 trips in the PM peak hour.
According to the analysis, the proposed land use of RU would generate 5,156 daily trips and
513 trips during the PM peak hour, an increase of 2,937 trips. The analysis found that two
roadway links would exceed capacity, but these same roadway links would exceed capacity
under the existing land use category. The analysis pointed out that the Long Range
Transportation Plan for the St. Lucie County Urban Area, prepared by the Metropolitan Planning
Organization, identifies Kings Highway widening as a high priority, and that key intersections at
Kings Highway and Angle Road, Orange Avenue and Indrio Road are included in the Cost
Feasible Plan.
As the applicant noted in their response, a portion of the increase traffic demands may be
addressed through the interconnected roadway system proposed as part of the TVC planning
I
,
,
May 10, 2006
Page 2
Subject: Quail Meadows LLC
Future Land Use Amendment
area. Also, a north/south connector road included on the County's existing Thoroughfare Right-
of-way Protection Map will result in the ultimate extension of the adjacent Old FFA Road via
Sunnyland Drive and Rock Road to Orange Avenue. The northern extension of this north/south
corridor extends north of the C-25 Canal (existing bridge), along the west side of 1-95 to Indrio
Road. This north/south connector can be expected to distribute the Quail Meadows project
traffic away from Kings Highway and assist County efforts to improve existing and future
conditions on Kings Highway and the 1-95 corridor. A portion of school based trips will also be
eliminated from this project due to the proposed construction of a Kindergarden through 8th
grade school at the southern end of Old FFA Road.
Staff notes that the future land use amendment is a preliminary development order and does not
imply that any particular development scenario can occur on the property. Prior to the issuance
of any Final Development Order the applicant must demonstrate that public facilities, including
roadways, will be available and maintained at the County's Adopted Level of Service. Adoption
of Ordinance No. 06-019 will allow the applicant to seek residential development up to the
maximum allowed by the future land designations but does not ensure that the maximum level
of development is feasible. Based on the hierarchy of FLU designations, a party desiring to
develop at a density between 3 to 5 dwelling units per acre is required to seek a designation of
RU or higher.
Consider adoption of Ordinance No. 06-019 approving the Quail Meadows LLC change in
Future Land Use from RS (Residential Suburban - 2 units per acre) to RU (Residential Urban -
5 units per acre).
If you have any questions regarding this petition please let us know.
cc: County Administrator
County Attorney
Noreen S. Dreyer, Ruden McClosky
File
:
.
.
I
lli~ ;~ ~ -." '7v }f ~w...
D i."r: ~. U
, i,~ ~': ~ .~. }OOSI,
v,...... 1 ( -
STATE OF FLORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF COM AIRS
"Dedicated to making Florida a better place to call home"
JEB BUSH
Governor
THADDEUS L. COHEN. AlA
Secretary
The Honorable Douglas Coward
Chairman, St. Lucie County
Board of County Commissioners
2300 Virginia Avenue
Fort Pierce, Florida 34982
January 13,2006
~r~\l\V
M:~
~A.
~~~
Dear Chairman Coward:
The Department has completed its review of the proposed Comprehensive Plan
Amendment for St. Lucie County (DCA No. 06-1), which was received on November 14,2005.
Copies of the proposed amendment have been distributed to appropriate state, regional, and local
agencies for their review and their comments are enclosed.
The Department has reviewed the comprehensive plan amendment for consistency with
Rule 9J-5, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C) and Chapter 163, Part II, Florida Statutes (F.S.)
and has prepared the attached Objections, Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report
which outlines our fmdings concerning the comprehensive plan amendment.
The County is to be commended for proposing the Towns, Villages and Countryside
amendment, an innovative approach to guiding future development in its North County area.
This amendment, developed through an initiative of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning
Council, uses incentives for transferring development rights from rural, agricultural, and other
specified areas into new towns and villages, and to other locations that are deemed sUitable for
development. The issues raised in this Report are not direc~.~._~o the TVC concept itself, but
rather to the need for sufficient gUidance for development oncethe TVC program is'--
implemented. The Department believes that the proposed TVC amendments need more
specificity and internal consistenc to ensure' entation of innovatIve planning and
-development strategies. Objections to the proposed Quail Meadows an reserve amendments
primarily-:rddreSS adequate facility capacity, maintenance of adopted level of service standards,
and financial feasibility. The Department further believes that all items identified can be
resolved with revisions.
-''=''-1
....... ! ....... ,/rr.".---'
\[', fI~fc--:-=:' -". ,'\
2 5 5 5 SHUMARD OAK BOULEVARD · TALLAHASSEE, F:\\cb R I PIA '2!J3!~ 1\D ill
Phone: 850"488.8466/Suncom 278.8466 FAX: 850.921.078\n'lsuJld.b'n '2!l1.~781,
I n Ie r n e I add res s: h t t D : II w w w " d c a " S tat e - fl. u Is L------ IN-C5FFIC E ,
CRITICAL STATE CONCERN FIELD OFFICE COMMUNITY PLANNING EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT ~QlIVmM'MIlI'.., r Ut:vEiJ5PriENT
2796 Overseas H'ghway. SUIte 212 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
MaratMn. FL 33050-2227 Tallahassee. FL 32399.2100 Tallahassee. "L 3239S-2100 Tallahassee. FL 3239!l-2100
(305) 269-2402 (650) 466-2356 (850) 413-9969 (850) 488-7956
I
I
,
The Honorable Douglas Coward
January 13,2006
Page 2
I believe these concerns can be resolved and my staff and I are available to assist the
County in doing so. If you have any questions, please call Julie Evans, Planner, at (850) 922-
1816.
Sincerely,
~V~
Roger Wilburn
Regional Planning Administrator
RW/je
Enclosures: Objections, Recommendations and Comments Report
Review Agency Comments
cc: Mr. Dennis Mmphy, Director, Community Development Division
Mr. Michael Busha, Executive Director, Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council
I
I
I
Recommendation: Provide a transportation analysis to support the statement that the proposed
land use generates fewer trips than the existing land use.
3.0biection: The support data and analysis did not provide adequate information on capacity
deficiencies in the zone in which this proposed land use is located, nor did it address how the
County and property owner will coordinate with the School Board to mitigate capacity
deficiencies. [Ch.163.3l80 (1) (a), F.S.]
Recommendation: In the support data and analysis, identify capacity deficiencies in the zone in
which this proposed land use is located. Specify how the County and property owner will
coordinate with the School Board to mitigate capacity deficiencies. Provide the letter from the
applicant that responded to School District concerns. Provide examples of mitigation actions,
such as land dedication, and the payment of impact fees and other fees, to address school
capacity deficiencies.
4.0biection: The analysis states that this proposed amendment will help address the need for
affordable housing by designating approximately ten percent of the units as affordable. However,
there are no comprehensive plan provisions to ensure the implementation of affordable housing
set-asides. Additionally, no information has been submitted with the proposed amendment that
shows how the County will ensure that affordable units will be constructed on this parcel after
the future land use map is amended. [Ch. l63.3177(6)(f); Rule 9J-5.010 (3)(b) 1.,3 and. 7,
F.A.C; Rule 9J-5.010 (3)(c) 1.,2.,5., 7., and 11., F.A.C]
Recommendation: In a policy statement or statements, include specific and measurable actions,
activities and programs to ensure that the ten percent set-aside target is met. The comprehensive
plan must provide for affordable housing set-asides that address very low-, low- and moderate-
income housing. Demonstrate that the proposed amendment will be consistent with and further
existing Housing Element Objective 5.2.5, and Policies 5.2.5.1. and 5.2.5.2.
C. Ouail Meadows
1.0biection: The County did not provide the appropriate data and analysis to demonstrate that
adequate water supply and capacity will be available at adopted level of service standards,
concurrent with the impacts of the proposed development. The proposed amendment did not
demonstrate that adequate facilities will be provided in a manner that is financially feasible.
[Ch.163.3177 (2) and (3)(a), F.S.; Rule 9J-5.006(3)(c)3., Rule 9J-5.011(2)(b)2, Rule 9J-
5.011(2)(b)4, Rule 9J-5.0l1(2)(c) 2., Rule 9J-5.015 (3)(b)3., F.A.C.]
Recommendation: Provide the appropriate data and analysis to. demonstrate that adequate water
supply and capacity will be available at adopted level of service standards, concurrent with the
impacts of the proposed development. Demonstrate that adequate facilities will be provided in a
manner that is financially feasible.
2.0biection: The support data and analysis for the proposed amendment does not demonstrate,
through relevant and appropriate data and analysis, how roadway levels of service will be
7
.
. maintained. [Ch. 163.3177(2) and (3)(a), F.S.; Rule 9J-5.006 (3)(b)1.; Rule 9J-5.006 (3)(c)3.,
Rule 9J-5.0l9 (3)(t)., Rule 9J-5.019 (4)(b)2., Rule 9J-5.019 (4)(c)1., F.A.C.]
I
I
Recommendation: Revise the transportation data and analysis to utilize the maximum. level
allowed by the land use category. For transportation, this means the analysis should be based on
570 single-family units, the maximum allowable development.
3. Oblection: The support material indicates an intersection analysis showing that levels of
service can be maintained. The methodology in the provided analysis appears generous
regarding the peak hour factor used and the rate of right turns on red lights. Explanations for the
values used should be provided to justify the conclusion. [Ch.163.3177(2) and (3)(a)3., F.S.;
Rule 9J-5.006 (3)(b)1.; Rule 9J-5.006 (3)(c)3., Rule 9J-5.019 (4)(b)2., Rule 9J-5.019 (4)(c)1.,
F.A.C.]
Recommendation: The data and analysis relating to intersections must incorporate the maximum
development potential permitted by the future land use designation. Updated support material
must show how levels of service will be maintained or how mobility will be achieved
4.0blection: The support data and analysis did not provide adequate information on capacity
deficiencies in the school zone in which this proposed land use is located, nor did it address how
the County and property owner will coordinate with the School Board to mitigate capacity
deficiencies. [Ch.163.3180(1)(a), F.S.]
Recommendation: In the support data and analysis, identify capacity deficiencies in the school
zone in which this proposed land use is located. Specify how the County and property owner
will coordinate with the School Board to mitigate capacity deficiencies.
II. Consistencv with the State Comprehensive Plan
The County's proposed comprehensive plan amendments are not consistent with and do not
further the goals and policies of the State Comprehensive Plan Chapter 187, Florida Statutes:
(4) Housing (b) Policies 1. and 3.;
(7) Water Resources (b) Policies 2.,5.,6.,8.,9.,10.,11.,12.,13., and 14.;
(9) Natural Systems and Recreational Lands (b) Policies 1., 3., 5., 8., 9., and 12.;
(15) Land Use (b) Policies 1.,2.,3., 5.,6., and 7.;
(17) Public Facilities (b) Policies 1. and 7.;
(19) Transportation (b) Policies 2., 3., 9., 13., and 15.;
(21) The Economy (b) Policies 6. and 12.
Recommendation: By addressing the concerns noted in Section I above, these inconsistencies
with Chapter 187, Florida Statutes, can be addressed.
8
.i
,
I
I
1~/27/2005 15:55
9545777892
MODAL DEVELOPEMENT
PAGE 02/08
~
Florida Department- of Transportation
JE8 BU51'f
GOVER.NOR
DENVER J. STUTLER., J1l.
SECRETARY
DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT
3400 West C~mmcrci31 R(lulevnrd. FOTll.lluderd.\c, Florina 33309-3421
Telephone: (954) 777.4411 I'L"C (954) 777-4197
In\cmct I?mail: prrv.oreiJ}V@dot.ltlle.n.U!
Toll Free: l-lltifl-33(,-1l435
Decemher 27, 2005
Mr. Ray Eubanks, Community Program Administrator
Plan Review and DR! Processing Team
Department of Community Affairs
2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard
Tallahassee, FL 32399-2100
SUBJECT: Proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments ORC Review
Local Government: 8t. Lucie County
DCA Amendment #: 06-1
Dear Mr. Eubanks:
The Department has reviewed the proposed comprehensive plan amendment for 51. Lucie
County. The Department's objections, recommendations and comments regarding the proposed
amendment are enclosed. The response includes several major concerns about the text
amendments for the Towns, Villages and Countryside Element, the new TVC future land use
designation, and the associated future land use map amendment. A concern regarding
maintaining levels of service for the Quail Meadows map amendment also is included.
Thank you for the opportunity to participate in the review process. If you have any comments or
questions about this letter, please contact me at (954) 777-4490.
Sincerely,
~ Gerry 'Reilly, P .E.
Director ofTrnnsportation Development
District Four
GO:LH
Cc:
B. Romig, FDOT Central Office
R. Wilburn, DCA
N. Ziegler, FDOT 4
L. Hymowitz, FDOT 4
K. Kiselewski, Carter & Burgess. Inc.
M. Brillhart, 81. Lucie County
I'll.: 41nnm
wwvv.dot.state.fLu5
* R:C\'lUO PAPEr;
:
.
.
I
DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMENTS
RESPONSIBLE DIVISIONIBUREAU:
NAME OF LOCAL GOVERN1vffiNT:
DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA:
REQUIRED RETURN DATE FOR COMMENTS:
Growth Management
S1. Lucie Countv
11/16/05
11/17/05
12/16/05
ELEMENT:
Future Land Use Map
Quail Meadows, P A-05-0 1 0
DCA Amendment #06-1
RULE DEFICIENCY:
9J-5.005(2)(a)
9J-5.055(1)(a)
9J-5.019(3)(f) and (h)
This proposed amendment modifies the future land use designation on a 114-acre parcel located
west of the intersection of State Road 7l3/Kings Highway and Angle Road, lying between
Florida's Turnpike and 1-95, from Residential Suburban (RS) to Residential Urban (RD). This
change increases the allowed number of units per gross acre from two (2) to five (5).
CONCERN: The support material for the future land use element does not demonstrate,
through relevant and appropriate data, how roadway levels of service will be maintained with the
. proposed amendment.
DISCUSSION: The support material for the future land use map amendment provides a
trip impact analysis and the Department has several concerns with this analysis. Regional
roadways are projected to be below levels of service standards without the amendment and the
proposed increase in density likely will exacerbate congestion. The County should demonstrate
that levels of service standards can be maintained in all planning horizons or mitigation strategies
provided to address how mobility will be achieved. State Road 713/Kings Highway provides a
parallel route to 1-95 and Florida's Turnpike, both Strategic lntermodal System (SIS) facilities,
and maintaining levels of service on State Road 713/Kings Highway allows drivers making local
trips to do so on local roads, instead of inadvertently encouraging drivers to use SIS facilities for
local purposes.
The impact analysis relies on the project's proposed development and not the maximum
development potential permitted by the future land use designation and the analysis assumes a
mixture of single- family and muhi- family units. Because land development markets change, it is
possible a different proposal vlill be brought forward in the future. As such, the infrastructure
impact analyses should account for the maximum level of allowed development. For
transportation, this means the analysis should be based on 570 single-family units.
(Continued)
~
I
I
I
DISTRICT 4, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS & COMMENTS
RESPONSIBLE DIVISION/BUREAU:
NAME OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE PLAN RECEIVED FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT:
DATE MEMORANDUM RECEIVED FROM DCA:
REQillRED RETURN DATE FOR COM1vffiNTS:
Growth Management
St. Lucie County
11/16/05
11/17/05
12/16/05
- ELEMENT:
Future Land Use Map
Quail Meadows, P A-05-0l 0
DCA Amendment #06-1
RULE DEFICIENCY:
9J-5.005(2)(a)
9J-5.055(1)(a)
9J-5.019(3)(f) and (h)
DISCUSSION, Continued:
The support material indicates an intersection analysis shows that levels of service can be
maintained. The methodology in the provided analysis appears generous regarding the peak hour
factor used and the rate of right-turns on red lights. Explanations for the values used should be
provided to justify the conclusion.
RECOMMENDATION: The County's data and analysis should be reevaluated to
incorporate maximum development potential permitted by the future land use designation.
Furthermore, the updated support material should clarify how levels of service will be
maintained or how mobility will be achieved.
REVIEWED BY: Larrv Hvmowitz. AICP
PHONE:
954-777-4490
REVIEWED BY: Nancv Zieder
PHONE:
954-777-4490
h
I
,
I
TREASURE COAST REGIO~AL PLANNING COUNCIL
. t
MEMORANDUM
To:
Council Members
AGENDA ITEM 6A
From:
Staff
Date:
December 16, 2005 Council Meeting
Subject:
Local Government Comprehensive Plan Revit:w
Draft Amendments to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan
DCA Reference No. 06-1
Introduction
The Local Government Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act,
Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, requires that Council review local government
comprehensive plan amendments prior to their adoption. Under the provisions of this
law, the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) prepares an Objections,
Recommendations, and Comments (ORC) Report on a proposed amendment only if
requested to do so by the local government, the regional planning council, an affected
person, or if an ORC Report is otherwise deemed necessary by the DCA. If the local
government requests DCA to prepare an ORC Report, then Council must provide DCA
with its own objections, recommendations for modification, and comments on the
proposed amendment within 30 days of its receipt.
Back!!round
St. Lucie County is proposing the following amendments to the County Comprehensive
Plan:
. The adoption of a new element of the Plan entitled Towns, Villages and
Countryside (TVC)
. Two amendments to the Future Land Use Map (FLUM)
. Text amendments to the Future Land Use, Transportation, Recreation and Open
Space, Intergovernmental Coordination and Capital Improvements Elements.
The County has requested a formal review of the amendments by the DCA.
I
The existing land use on surrounding propertieS.1ncludes an auto salvage business,
single family homes and vacant land to the north, a storage facility, repair shop,
residential vacant land to the east agricultural use, warehouses and single family
homes to the south, and a high school and citrus groves to the west The FLUM
designations on surrounding lands include Industrial to the north and east,
Industrial and Mixed Use to the south and Industrial and Public Facilities to the
west.
In June of 2005, the same applicant requested an RH designation on 56.4 acres of
this property. The application was denied (5-1 vote to recommend denial by
LP A, 4-1 vote not to transmit by the BCC) based on the incompatibility of the
proposed use with the surrounding industrial use. The applicant came back \vith a
similar request, increasing the acreage to 75.9, committing to set backs and
landscape buffering and proposing to sell a minimum of 10% of the units at a
price that was 10% below the market sale price ofthe other units.
The County staff again found the proposed designation to be incompatible with
the adjacent uses and took issue with the applicant contention that the County has
a surplus of land designated for industrial use. The staff indicated a concern
about the redesignation of these lands, surrounded as they are by industrial uses
and designations, and the effect it would have on discouraging additional
industrial development at this location. The County staff found the amendment to
be in conflict with the Economic Development Element in that it could result in
an inability to accommodate uses that would add to the employment base. The
staff also pointed out that there are sufficient lands designated elsewhere for high
density residential uses, and disagreed with the applicant's conclusion that the
land use would be a good transition between the existing industrial uses and the
school and residential uses to the west. The School District expressed concern
about the negative impacts that the addition of students will ha\'e on its ability to
accommodate students in this area, where there is no additional school capacity
planned in the near future.
I
The LP A voted 7-0 to recommend that the BCC not transmit the amendment.
However, the BCe transmitted the amendment by a 5-0 vote, referencing the
serious need for affordable/workforce housing and the positive benefits that may
accrue from new investment in this area of the County. '
2. P A-05-0 1 0 (Quail Meadows, LLC)
I
This 114.0 acre property is located between 1-95 and the Florida Turnpike,
approximately 2 miles west of the intersection of SR713 (King's Highway) and
CR603 (Angle Road). The property is currently vacant. The proposed use is as a
residential POO with 502 multi-family, single family and townhouse units. The
existing FLUM designation is Residential Suburban (RS). The proposed FLU}.!
designation is Residential Urban (RU), which would increase the maximum
development potential from 2 to 5 dwelling units per acre.
"
,I
....
The existing land uses on surrounding lands include agricultural to the north and
south, residential to the west, and mobile homes, single family homes and vacant
lands to the east. The FLUM designations on surrounding lands are MXD (Mixed
Use) to the north and east, and RS and the Florida Turnpike to the south and west.
The County staff points out that RU is the predominate residential FLUM
category in the urban portion of the County. This property is at the western edge
of the urban service boundary. "
The applicant indicates that the development plan is to include a range of
workforce housing units. The property is immediately south of the TVC area and
will use many of the design characteristics of a village, but will not contain any
commercial uses, according to the landowner. Also, development is to be
clustered to preserve the environmentally sensitive lands on the site.
I
County staff found the proposed designation to be compatible with adjacent uses
and consistent with the County plan. There is some concern about roadway
capacity in this area. Improvements are needed to certain intersections and links,
even if developed under the existing FLUM designation. The School District has
expressed concerns about this amendment due to the lack of capacity in
elementary and middle schools in this area of the County.
C. Text Amendments
These amendments are intended to provide a more accurate description of St.
Lucie County's role in providing public services on a countywide basis. The
amendments were recommended by the County's Impact Fee consultant. They
are to clarify where services provided by the County are applicable to all residents
of the County and to be consistent with the Florida Statutes (see Attachment A).
1. Future Land Use, Transportation and Intergovernmental Coordination Elements
Text amendments to these elements are to reflect the County's responsibility for
the County road system, park system, circuit and county courts, corrections and
detention facilities. They include a reflection of planning and programming to
meet future needs. .
2. Recreation and Open Space Element
I
The text is amended to reflect the cost of providing capital improvements and
additions to the park system within municipal areas as a county purpose and
requires a fair share burden. Policy 9.1.1.1 regarding the Level of Service
standards for Community and Regional parks is revised to apply to all residents of
the County.
6
1-
I
I
Dee 06 05 05:21p
5t Lucie HPO
7724622549
p.5
......
.m C2'ttopolilan
Plaftnlng
O'9Clnlsolioft
ST. LUCIE URBAN AREA
. I
Telephone: 772/462-1593
Facsimile: 772/462-2549
2300 Virginia Avenue
Ft. Pierce, FL 34982.5652
TO:
Sheryl Stolzenberg, Senior Planner
fl{)~
Marceia Lathou, MPO Senior Planner
FROM:
I
I
DATE: August 26, 2005 \
RE; Quail Meadows - Future Land Use Amer.c.m:nt Application
MFO staff has reviewed the Quail Meadows Future L.J Use Amehdment Application. Based on the '
submitted information, MPO staff notes that the project does nol idbtify construction of major, public
roadways or new lanes on existing roadways, and is therdforc found not to bt: in conflict with the MFO 's
adopted 2025 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). In addition\ the following C01.1ments !re
provided for the above-referenced project: \ ~
. o ran ge A venue from Kin p Hi gbw,y to 1-9SISR 9 is il",tified " "congesled ""dw, y" in the 2025
LRTP (see attached Table 4-5 of the LRTP). I
. Kings Highway from Angle Road to Orange A venue is. id::1tifled as a "tongested roadway" in the 2025
LRTP (see attached Table 4-5 of the LR TP).I \
. Kings Highway from Indrio Road to St. Lucie Blvd is id:::1tified a1 a "congested roadway" in the 202.5
LRTP (see attached Table 4-5 of the LRTP). I \
. Kings Highway from Okeechobee Road to Orang: A vd:it.:e is in the 2025 LRTP needs plan (se: attached
Table 4.6 of the LRTP). i \
. Kings Highway from Orange Avenue to Indrio Road is!in the 2025 LRTP needs plar. (see attached Table
4.6 of the LRTP). \ \
. Orange A venue west of Kings Highway to the Okeechobe: County line is in the 2025 LR TP needs plan
(se: attached Table 4-6 of the LRTP). \ \
. A Kings Highway/Orang: A venue intersection imprcve:-:-::nt project is in the 2025 LRTP needs plan (see
attached Table 4-6 of the LRTP). 1 1
. 1-95 from the Indian River County line to Ok:echobee ~oad IS in c 2025 LRTP needs plan (s:: attached
TlIble 4-6 orthe LRTP). \
Thank you for the opportunity to review this plan amend:ne:'ll If you have any questions, please do not
hesitate to contact me at (772) 462-1593. \ \
\ \1
Attachments (Tables 4-5 and 4-6 of the LR TP)
cc (w/o attachment): Vick.i Gatanis, FDOT i. \
T "'nsportanon Planning to' FI. Pime, Port 5 I. LUC;~. 51. Lude I'"age and 51. Lude Coun~
\
I
I
.
.
.
.
PSL:23631: 1
RESPONSE
TO
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATION AND COMMENTS REPORT
FOR
Comprehensive Plan Amendment # PA-05-0l0
Prepared for:
E H Building Group
4227 Northlake Boulevard
Palm Beach Gardens, Florida
Prepared by:
Ruden, McClosky
145 NW Central Park Plaza
Port St. Lucie, Florida 34986
(772) 873-5900
Susan E. O'Rourke, P.E.
229 SE Villas Street
Stuart, Florida 34994
(772) 781-7918
and
Jordon, Jones & Goulding
3300 PGA Boulevard, Suite 780
Palm Beach Gardens, Florida 33410
(561) 799-3855
May 10,2006
I
I
,
Response to DCA ORC
Quail Meadows
Comprehensive Plan Amendment #PA-05-010
Objection 1: The County did not provide the appropriate data and analysis to demonstrate
that adequate water supply and capacity will be available at adopted level of
service standards, concurrent with the impacts of the proposed development.
The proposed amendment did not demonstrate that adequate facilities will be
provided in a manner that is financially feasible.
The following is an analysis to demonstrate that adequate water supply and capacity will be
available. Proj ect demands were calculated according to Policy 6A.1.2.2 of the St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan. Fort Pierce Utilities Authority (FPUA) design standards. Plant capacity
information for the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority Water Treatment Plant was provided by
FPUA.
Normal Flow Demands:
570 dwelling units (maximum density) at 2.5 residents per dwelling unit = 1,425 residents
332 gallons per capita per day x 1,425 residents = 473,100 gallons per day
Potential Water Generation
Permitted Plant Max. Day Available Projected Remaining
Capacity Demand Capacity Demand Capacity
(MGD) (MGD) (MGD) (MGD) (MGD)
15.99 11.50 4.49 0.473 4.02
Objection 2: The support data and analysis for the proposed amendment does not
demonstrate, through relevant and appropriate data and analysis, how roadway
level of service will be maintained.
A revised traffic analysis was conducted utilizing the maximum density (570 dwelling units) that is
allowed under the proposed land use designation. Please see attached traffic analysis completed by
Susan E. O'Rourke, P.E., dated April 28, 2006 (Appendix A). Two links on Kings Highway fail as
a two lane section under the existing land use scenario. Increase in traffic associated with the
proposed land use change does not create additional impacts that would result in additional roadway
improvements. Improvements to the to the intersection at Orange Avenue and Kings Highway that
are presently under consideration to be placed in the County's five year capital improvement plan
will provide sufficient capacity to achieve and maintain the adopted level of service on Kings
Highway through 2011. The County has entered into an agreement for the design of the
intersection and is presently entering into other development agreements for funding the
construction.
In addition there are improvements to Kings Highway in the cost feasible plan of the County's 2030
Long Range Transportation Plan. Also, St. Lucie County's proposed Towns, Villages and
Countryside Element requires the creation of a future street network providing for a system of
interconnected north-south and east-west streets. This network along with other projected
improvements in the area will result in improved distribution of traffic over the existing and
proposed roadway network and result in less traffic on 1-95 and major arterials in the area including
Kings Highway.
PSL:23631 : 1
Page 2 of7
I
I
I
Response to DCA ORC
Quail Meadows
Comprehensive Plan Amendment #PA-05-010
At the time the PUD application is submitted, the applicant will enter into a binding agreement with
the County for additional improvements to Kings Highway at Angle Road. These improvements
will be consistent with the long range plans for maintaining level of service.
Objection 3: The support material indicates an intersection analysis showing that levels of service can
be maintained. The methodology in the providing analysis appears generous regarding
the peak hour factor used and the rate of right turns on red lights. Explanations for the
values used should be provided to justify the conclusion.
The intersection level of service analyses provided in the traffic analysis dated July 22, 2005
used a peak hour factor of 0.95. The Highway Capacity Manual acknowledges the
homogenizing of the peak 15 minute units as the capacity increases resulting in peak hour factors
as high as 1.0.
The right turns on red were 10 and up to 60 vehicles per hour. The 60 vehicles were assumed in
an improved condition in which a widened outside lane would provide right turn opportunities
during red. The HCS shows conditions in which the right turns on red were reduced (Appendix
B).
Also found in Appendix B is a sheet from Palm Beach County engineering that outline
parameters for HCS input. In absence of other guidelines, these input values were relied upon as
acceptable.
Objection 4: The support data and analysis did not provide adequate information on capacity
deficiencies in the school zone in which this proposed land use is located, nor did it
address how the County and property owner will coordinate with the School Board to
mitigate capacity deficiencies.
The proposed project has consented in conjunction with adjoining property owners to provide acreage for a
school site to mitigate capacity deficiencies. Please see attached letter of commitment (Appendix C).
PSL:23631: 1
Page 3 of7
I
I
I
Response to DCA ORC
Quail Meadows
Comprehensive Plan Amendment #P A -05-010
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
Traffic Analysis dated April 28, 2006
APPENDIX B
HCS Analysis and Inputs
APPENDIX C
Letter from St. Lucie County School Board
PSL:23631 :1
Page 4 0[7
I
,
,
Response to DCA ORC
Quail Meadows
Comprehensive Plan Amendment #P A-OS-Ol 0
APPENDIX A
PSL:23631 :1
Page5of7
I
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
FOR
QUAIL MEADOWS
Prepared for:
I
ED Building Group
4227 Northlake Boulevard
Palm Beach Gardens, Florida
Prepared by
Susan E. O'Rourke, P.E., Inc.
811 East Ocean Boulevard
Stuart, FL
(772)781 7918
July 22, 2005
Revised April 28, 2006
TR05073.0
,
I
I
,
April 28, 2006
Mr. Todd White
E.H. Building Group
4227 North Lake Boulevard
Palm Beach Gardens, FL
Re: Quail Meadows, LUP A
Dear Mr. White:
Susan E. O'Rourke, Traffic Engineer has completed the analysis of the 570 residential
dwelling units to be located east of the Turnpike, south of Angle Road in St. Lucie
County. The steps in the analysis and the ensuing results are presented herein.
Please call if you have any questions of comments.
Respectfully,
SUSAN E. O'ROURKE, P.E., INe.
Susan E. O'Rourke, P.E.
Principal Engineer
.
.
.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT
Land Uses
3
Trip Generation
Long Term Traffic Analysis for the LUPA
Model
Assignment
3
3
3
Transportation Improvements
7
LUP A Conclusion
7
CONCURRENCY REVIEW
8
Project Traffic
8
Total Traffic! Concurrency Review
Intersection Analysis
Roadway Improvements
8
8
10
CONCLUSION
10
TABLES
TABLE 1: Land Use
TABLE 2: Trip Generation
TABLE 3: Link Analysis Long Range 2025+- Existing Land Use
TABLE 4: Link Analysis Long Range 2025+- Proposed Land Use
TABLE 5: Link Analysis- Concurrency 2009
I
4
5
6
9
FIGURES
2
FIGURE 1: Project Location
APPENDIX A _ Data and Information (includes: site plan, percent assignment, model plot,
LRTP info, intersection analysis and FDOT traffic data)
.
INTRODUCTION
Quail Meadows is a 114 acres site located east of the Florida Turnpike and south of
Angle Road. Figure 1 identifies the project location.
The purpose of this traffic analysis is to provide the analysis for the Land Use Plan Amendment
Quail Meadows is a 114 acre site that is currently designated as RS allowing 2 dwelling units
per acre or 228 dwelling units. The project seeks a change to RU which allows up to 5 units per
acre or 570 dwelling units. The potential impact of the net increase in traffic associated with the
land use change is the subject of this report. To that end the following infonnation is presented:
allowable land use types, potential trip generation, Long Range traffic analysis and five year
analysis consistent with the five year program.
Each of the analysis is outlined herein.
. LAND USES
To undertake a land use change designation, the maximum number of trips that could
be generated under the existing and proposed land uses should be determined. The land
uses under the existing designation and under the proposed land use category are
summarized in Table 1.
Table 1: Land Use
Scenario Category Land Use Densitv Units
Existing RS Residential 2 du / acre 228
Allowable RU Residential 5 duJ acre 570
The maximum number of units in the Future Land Use scenario will be 570.
Project Traffic -- project traffic was distributed by general geographic direction and then
assigned to the roadway network. The project general geographic traffic distribution was
estimated as 15% north, 50% south, 25% east and 10% west. This general distribution led to an
assignment of external, new trips to the roadway network. The project assignment is shown
along with the existing, background and other project traffic volumes in the link tables. The
components of the traffic were added together to create total traffic. Traffic data and
information used in this analysis are provided in Appendix A.
.
.
1-95
"C
a::
c:
.s
III
c:
s:
o
...,
"C
a::
c:
o
I!!
CI
E
w
~
:I:
III
Cl
c:
i:
Indrio Rd
. St Lucie Rd ~
'jij
0
Turnpike 0 "C
>. a::
l'lI c:
I- !
Angle Rd
"C
a::
is
0
a::
"C "C Orange Ave
a:: a::
:8 CI
Cl
0. :2
E '0 <i5
l'lI 0
"C () () 'E
~ a:: n
s: n
c: ""
c: E Picas Rd Ul
:c Ul c:
en is :it
e c:
III
!Xl ...,
1 Figure 1
. Project Location
North Quail Meadows
not to scale
2
.
Trip Generation
The existing land use would generate 2,219 daily trips and 225 trips in the PM peak hour. The
proposed land use would generate approximately 5,156 trips on a daily basis and 513 PM trips
during the PM peak hour. Table 2 summarizes the trip generation for the various scenarios and
the trip differential between the existing future land use and proposed future land use
designation on the site.
To estimate traffic generated by the development, the ITE Trip Generation, 7th Edition
trip rates were applied. These calculations provide an estimate of the typical generation.
As shown in Table 2, the differential between the two land use scenarios is 2,937 daily trips and
288 PM peak hour trips.
Long Term Traffic Analysis for the LUPA
.
The purpose of this analysis is to determine the project's impact on the surrounding roadway
system and the relative impact of the proposed land use versus the proposed land use.
Model _ The 2025 Treasure Coast Regional Planning Model was used to estimate the future
traffic for the existing and proposed land use conditions. The model includes traffic from recent
DR! applications in St. Lucie County to the north; annexation projects including Southern
Groves; as well as other major developments such as; Midway Partners, Egan Groves, Tesoro,
St. Lucie Land, The Reserve, PGA Village, LTC Ranch, Tradition and St. Lucie West. The
model values were peak season ADTs. Traffic from potential projects north of Okeechobee
Boulevard was manually added to address potential growth to the west. A total of
approximately 15,900 daily trips and 1,600 PM peak hour trips were added to the network. The
model volumes were factored using the MOCF from the Florida Traffic lnfonnation CD and the
standard K and 0 factors of .093 and .55. These factors are appropriate given the long term
planning horiwn.
Assignment --The project distribution and assignment was based on the ultimate origins and
destinations of the trips and the likely travel patterns based on the existing and future roadway
network. 100% of the traffic generated by the FULA was assigned instead of the incremental
traffic since the model volumes were not specifically loaded for this project.
Tables 3 and 4 identify the project impact with the total traffic for the existing future land use
and proposed future land use scenarios.
.
The links where the project has an impact of 1 % of existing plus committed capacity were
deemed significant. Two project significant links exceed capacity. These same two links would
exceed capacity under the existing land use category. Neither of the exceedances is caused by
the land use change. The two links are: Kings Highway from Orange Avenue to Angle Road
and Kings Highway from Angle Road to St. Lucie Boulevard.
3
.
.
.
c
o
:;;
t!
C>>
c
C>>
C)
a.
'1:
....
N
w
..J
m
<C
....
~IC')
::JI CD
il
CIN
.-. q-
::!:..-
(l.
~-;Je
01'-
*'C')
?; *'\
*'~
~~.l'
I-N
::!: N\
(l. 1
~
10
1+
~I~
::JI...J
tB"1l$
::!:.O
(l.1 ~
I...J
&.~10l
e! I- ..-
~~~
<(~
..-
r--:
cN
~~
2.~
wS
.g. N
1-01
~O
._ II
IV~
Ot:.
Ci
...J~
CD
I~
~I
~
I
C>>
III
:J
"
c
~
at
C
~
III
';(
W
evO
'0"-
oN
U
ev
III
:J
'0
C
IV
...J
I
i T
I
l~
C! EI
01 as
:p1u..1
.9-1 Q)
...~
~!.El
01(/)1
ev ~
C)'c
IV I-
Gi~
> .-
<(IV
o
i
C>>
III
:J
"
c
~
e
:J
..
:J
u..
-
::J
o
::!:
(l.
I'-
o
..-
.S
::!:
(l.
N
CD
..-
-
::J
o
*'
z
~
~
'C
I-
::!:
(l.
I
I
I~I
CD
CD
N
C
o
:p
IV
::J
'CJ'
UJ
::!:
(l.
, C')
I~
Ik
IC
I...J
10
I~
10
'II
I~
I...J
Iffi
..-
~
I'-
C')
01
N
C
o
:p
IV
::J
C"
UJ
a.
'C
I-
~
.ftj
o
..-
I~l
'I'~
1><
IC'
I...J
I~
i='
C'
...J
I
~ I ~ !
I ' , '
! ! I :
4J~
-C i I I
~ 10 I
UJ i~
:J iN I
-g I I
IV
...J
C
o
:p
a.
'C
u
Kl
o
fl
u..,
~
CI
en'
C
:J
/1.
~
.
'ii
;:;
c
l!!
~
c
4
.
i ~ ~ ~ ~
-l ...J ...J ...J
~ ~ ~ ~
~ m is ~
1 1111
!1 ~ ~ ~ ~
ri ri ri ri
B Dee a
....I ...J ...J ...J
.. .... .... ....
jut ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t t t c ~ t t c ~ c ~
,.; N ci ci 0 0 N d ci d 0 ci d tri ~ ci ~ ~ 0 o 0
t~
~1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I. I. I. , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Ii
i-
...
!BI , ! !.I.I.!.I.!.!.!.! I. I. ~ ~ I. I. , , I. t
-- --- ------
!I.t , ! !. I. !. l t l l t ! t t ~ ~ l t , ! t t
!I !
~Jt , ! tttttttl.' I. l ~ ~ 1 l ! ! I. !.
III
... u
lIt ji ~ I ~ a ~ I ! ~ ~ ~ o ! i ~ I o ~ ~ I o ~ o :B :::
11 ... ...
... .
.....
iu ! ... i ~ ~ ~ i i i i ft o ~ ~ ~ ; o ~ ~ g o ~ o i ~
I
...
H ~ . ~ a 3 i ~ I ! ~ i o I ~ ~ I o i ! ~ o I g
... ~ - - - -... ~ ~ ... o ~
tH l!l l!l f') I"lI f"') f') ~ .. ..,. .... ~ t-. ..... tn ~ ... ~ ~ - l!l ~
d ~ :; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..... ..... ..... R :: :: Ii r:l :: ~ ~ ... :; :B
H
..
t~ i ~ ; ; ; ; E ~ ~ ~ ~ ;: ;: ! a ;: ~ I f.l ~ I
'I
i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ t t t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ., ., ~ ~ ~
on ill If.l
ill ji l') ~ ~ ! i ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ i ~ 0 ~ ij
~
~u II 3 ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ! I ~ ! ~ :B l!! ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~
;:: ~ ~
H ~ . m ~ i i i i t ~ ~ GI ~ ~ ... .... z ~ I !a
~ i _ _ _ _ ...... f.l a _ ! ~ ~ - ::l ~ ~ ~
on _
... I ... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I I I I !Ii sa ta I ~ ta I ... I I
~ .. ..
0 0 o ci ci ci ci 0 ci 0 d ci d ci d ci d ci 0 c:i ci
ill ~ ~ ~ ~ I I G ~ ; i - ! ~ I ~ ~ I ~ f,l I ~
- - . . - ... ~ ~ ~ o C'J ..... ....
..... ..... .... ..... N N N ... ..... N N on ..
PIt . .. ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i
~ ...
~ >
, ~ :B :B :B :B :B :B :B :B :B :B :B :B :B :B :B :B ~ :B :B :B 3
all
, l! 0 0 ci ci d ci ci d d ci ci ci ci ci ci 000 0 ci ci
, ~ ~ g g ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"'ll
, l! 0 0 d ci ci ci d ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci 0 o 0
i g u u 0 u 0 u ~ ~ ~ U U U u l l u u 8 g
.... ~ uJ iii u<< ~ ...J ..... ..... ...J 1 1 iil iil
"' "' UJ tI) rn '" u. "'
i ~ ~ I Iii I I I I I ~ ~ ~ i i ~ I i i ~
;;; ~ ill ill ill ... iI III
I~ ~ ~ f,l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ ~
oft .,; ~ . . . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ oj ai ~ :! N N ~ ~ tri
11 ~ i i i i i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i i i i i i i ~ M ~
~U!: lil ~ !a !a !a ~ lil ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ..... ............, -
~ ~ ~ ~ ri ~ .., ill _
Sjh ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.
~ > <Ii ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ R ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ <Ii ~ ~
p '" ii: ~ ~ ~ ~ ii: ii: ii: ii: ~ u:: iL iL iL iL iL ii: ii: ~ ~
cdl ~ in in in en in ;) iij U) ca ii iij iij iij in
"! .... .... ~ ~ ~ ~ Q 0 0 0 Q ...J -' ...J -' .... .... .... -' w w
L ... ... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N N N ... ... ... ... .... ....
. .,
1 >- 1 ~ 1
I "' · II 0
1 u . "'
.. "' i 11 )'1 ~ ; I I I
II i II < II . l
"' lii!ili; "' f "' !
0 ! f
~ ! ft t.
Ii: III
1 ! t I 1 j
j .. >- 1111 "'
il~ll ! I
~ j i lii~ilJ i f i 1 !
ill ! >- 1
... -'-
1 . I 1 1
II: 1
I I ~
II: f II: II:
z: i i t i
! !
.,
I
:;)
'g
C
~
g'
i
~
II
I
.
i
ii
a
.i
~
.
DI
C
~
DI
c
.3
..
ii
>-
i
""
c
::J
;.;
w
-'
CD
ct
~
.
on
~
li
I
~
I
J;
I
fi l'l ;
iI!I)
1111
f
I
I
'#
!
- I f
A II
I 11
E '#
I J i
i ! I
.
.
I 5 5 5 5
~ ~ ~ ~
-J -' -J ....
" It) V') V')
1 J J J J
II i i ~ I
ri f'i f'i f'i
B Q Q Q Q
~ -' ...J ...J
.. .... .... ....
, ! .,. ~ ~ ~ ~ c ~ ~ ~ c c c ~ c C l C ~ C C
1~11 ...
.. ..; o 000 N 0 ci ci ci ci c:ii ,..; ~ o ~ ... ci ci 0
11 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ lll! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
1 a
...
!Bl ! ! t t t t t t t t I t t 11 11 l l ! ! l l
--
!llt ! ! t t t t t t l t ! l t 11 11 t t ! I t l
!l tJ
~Ii ! ! t l l l t l l t ! t t 11 11 t l ! ! l l
111
... tJ
~II ~ .. E i ~ E ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~ f! ~ I III - ; ~ ~ ~
!! :n - ~ ... ... .
iu E ~ ~ I ~ ~ l i lift ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ \:; ; .
Wi f:
...
U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ B I I I i ~ ~ t I ; ~ 5! ~ lQ -
... ... - ;;; l:l ! Ii a
;: ~ A N
ill lI! R .... .... .... .... i ~ ~ ~ ~ cam~~ ca ~ -: ... R :;
11 :8 f.'l G Gee I m G m ~ :! :! ~ ~ :! ~ ~ ... f.'l :B
&:1
..
l~ ... tl! ~ ~ Z ~ I :B :B :B ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ lil ~ ~ ~ -
:ll ...... ~ ,.... .. :B
'}
I ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ l ~ ~ .,. .,. ~ ! ~ ~
.. ill
!U ~ ... ~ ~ i i ~ ; ~ ~ ! ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ i ::! o ~ ~
:t
!!l .
tlH !! ... ~ I E ~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~ !~ill~ ~ , ~ .. I ~
....'" :II :: ~ ~ ...
I; ~ .. ~ ~ i i ~ i ! ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ... SI .. S !il
~ i _ _ _ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ - !:i ~ ~ ~
~ - - ~ on _
.. S ... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I I I I :a fa fO I ~ sa I ... S S
~ .. ..
ci ci o ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci o ci ci ci ci ci
ill ~ ~ ~ ~ I I 5 q ; i - ~le1!! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
- - .. .. - \:; \:; \:; ! ~ ~ N N
...... .... _ ..... rot '" ..
PIt .. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ; ! ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~
~
l ..
hI ill ill ill ill ill ill ill ill ill ill ill ill :g :g :g ill ill ill :g ill ill
. o!! ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci ci o d ci ci ci ci
. . ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
n ci ci o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ci ci ci ci ci ci ci 0 o 0
i g g o u u 0 u 000 o 0 0 u l l 0 g g g
~ ~ ~ ~ u1 ... ... ... ~ ...J -' ...J 1 1 iil
., ., ., ., ., en en 0) tn ., ... .,
! ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ I I I I I ~ ~ ~ I i ~ I I i ~
;;; ~ ill ill ill ... ill S;
I~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i
.; .; . . . . ~ ~ ~ :: ~ Q c; ~ ~ N rot ~ - ~
II ~
~ i ~ i ~ i ! ~ ~ ~ ~ i i i i i i i il I ~ I
....
I
~!Ui ~- i_ S S S S ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M ~ ~ ~ 5! I
~ ~
~Ih ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ .. '" !! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ '" ~ S!
U "' ii: ~ ~ ~ ~ ii: ii: ii: ii: f iL ii: ii: iL ii: iL ii: ii: ~ ~
0
!l iij u; in ;; u; ii) c;; en iij in (ij en in iij
"! ... ... ~ ~ ~ ~ Q 0 Q 0 0 ..... ..J ..J -' ... ... ... oj W w
I~ ... ... -' ..... ..... ..J ..... ..... ..J ..... ..J ('II N ('II N ... ... ... ~ ~
N N N ('II . . . . .
i ...
... II
1 II ... 1 ! I ~ I ... I "'
1 "' I d )'1 tli I I
Ii <( II .. !
"' li:!llil "' I "' ~
0 I
~ ~ 1 t ai
'I ~ ~ I 1 I
i 1 ... Idl "'
11",11 ] I
! j s i lii!ll! i ! i g ! ! 1 ! A
..L ~
1 .. I 1 1 I
I .. 1 ~
I 0 0 I
.. f '" '"
z i t t i
"0 ! I
.
.; ., ""
:;)
o
o
10
E
::I
E
;c
t
:;)
"
C
..
...I
1
&.
e
~
~
11
.
:lE
ii
::I
a
it
~
.
ell
C
~
ell
C
o
...I
..
iii
>-
ii
~
....
C
~
.
W
...I
lD
'"
I-
.
\0
I
i
I
I
J;
i
. ~
fII)
ill
f
I
I
#
t
.
! f
\!
, I
! I
.
.
.
.
Transportation Improvements
The Long Range Transportation Plan for the St. Lucie County Urban Area prepared by the
MPO identifies Kings Highway to be widened with a high level of priority. The County has
indicated involvement with the FDOT to assemble a funding package to complete the
improvement. In addition, key intersections including: Kings Highway at Angle Road, Kings
Highway at Orange A venue and Kings Highway at Indrio Road are included in the Cost
Feasible Plan of the LRTP. Therefore, for the purposes of the Long Range Planning, the
improvements have been assumed to be in place by 2025+.
FIVE YEAR ANAL YSIS
The five-year forecast (2011) was developed using a straight-line estimate between the existing
volumes and 2025 volume forecast. "Other Projects" were then added to address the impact of
short term growth in the immediate study area. Traffic from projects along Orange Avenue
made up the bulk of the approved and/or pending projects. The projects included: Palm Breezes,
Celebration Pointe, Bent Creek, Kirtut I and 2, Sea Wind and Whispering Oaks. Although a
portion of these projects is likely in the model, the build out of these projects was assumed to be
occurring over a shorter time frame. To avoid the double counting from the model and
interaction of trips, a reduction of 24% of the projects' traffic was deducted (the portion
included in the straight line)
Tables 5 and 6 show the future volumes with the existing future land use and the proposed
future land use, respectively.
Improvements Needed
The link on Kings Highway from Orange Avenue to Angle Road is projected to exceed the level
of service D threshold. The county has entered into binding agreements with local developers to
design and construct improvements to the intersection of Orange Avenue and Kings Highway.
Furthermore, the County ",ill adopt the improvements into this current round of amendments for
the CIP. Arterial analysis indicates that the level of service on Kings Highway will be
maintained through the five year projections with this improvement added to the CIP. Table 7
summarizes the results of the arterial analysis. Anal)'tical sheets are included in the appendix.
7
llti I I HHH1H Htt HI I
ili t t HHtHH Htt IH t
H
Iti a ! ::inG~~i~~ ~~iI !!;;~ ~
~II
Ii " I "~nl~ii~ "'in U! i
~t c; ill...... ,,_ .. L__
ll...
I 00
111 ~ ... ~::i!il!!i~U~ un ~!! ..
... ...
11
Ii ~ ! INI:.....II...... UU an t1
1 a~ej _i~
-10;
II) 0 0 ::!::!:;!o;~~!jH! liill'Hl::: -liil 0
h
j~ 0 0 !lIn~~~~n un ~;; 0
III
II) ~ ~;;unUi ~~I!a ~!!I ..
... ...
...
It
1
id ~ ~ 5l........~I.lll- glU al'!lQ
1; - c;i,l~~!_~~~ :liE t1
111 at___
Uti ~ ... nnnmu i~n iU ~
!
Ui
III III 1Il "C"I....I"');J..........::!: ........:;:! ...:!1Il -
II ~ ::; .n.,,""'ItII..............~ ~~lHI ::~:R ..
L
l-
II EU
I ~ ~ :n:nilOlololi! EEla ~
#1 ~ ~ uu~uu un ~u ~ ~
l~ 5i
l
il '"
b
... n~nuu BU- ....II~ !
1 ~ ! ~:na ~
I --~
li"
~ . Iii Iii Iii Iii Iii Iii.... Iii Ii Iii. Iili. Iii i
.,; .,; ciiciciiciciiccicici cicicio dcio .,;
II ~ ~ !HlnE~~r !Ul! ~n ~
~~__N\:i~ ft ~~~t::i
.
! :s :s :ll :II :s :II :lI:llllllll :II :lIUI:II :S:ll:S :s t
p .,; .,; ciciociociooo codd ddo .,;
.
! ~ ~ nnsun nn n~ Ii J
I< .,; .,; 00000,0000 cicic:icii aoo .,;
I g g ~~~~~ ggg gggg llo ~ t
'" "' "''''"' UJClJfnU) 11m 1
I
~ I nnUIU nn UI ~ "'
i g
;;; ...ilI !
.. J
.. i':l
h !!! ~ nu~U~1 n~.~ !U!~ ~ ~ :!.i:
D
'" oi ~..;..;..:~~::~ ..ai:!~ NN~ &
. ;
I II ~II JU
~ liInlil~nlE
'a !!! iI nn nil ~ JiI
c il:
~
~ i-
l- I
i sf ~ lil.UIUI!U UU U~
~ g I !!! !!! . !
oi :2 !!!!!!!!~~~~R ~~~~ ~~~ oi I
~ ,. ~
'a 1~ '" ;;:: ~~ii~~~~~ ii:iL~G: ii:ii:iL ;;:: 8 i ~
. ~ ...
. ..J 0; iiic;;u;Cij o;o;/n 0; ~ I ~
~
ii .~ 1
:::I ~ ~ j::>::>:lQCCQO .................... l'l~~ ~ I
a " N N ~FSr:~~~;:~:;# NNNN NN N I ~
.... f
.... i
~ i
I . !
i /n I I
. 1 ).
~ 1 I iI III ln~ ,I! I !
... 1 '"
C 0:: Ii IihIU; o::r~ ! ! ~
::::i i I I
li 0 I Iii I-d ~
. l- i
>- i
.
,. i
u: ilh ! ~ ri
,;; 1 1 I .. !,I I f 1 t
w lr1 : 1
.... ! i Jihih Hi 5 I
. ~ I
c l!l LI
l- lL .. l' j
.,.
= :s
I _
/J - S I
1 B I 11 1
I '" 1 1 1 1 ~i I i ~
I '" ! '" '" A
'I i I t i ~
'" ~J ~ " ~
.
.
.
lltl t t ttttttlll llll III I
.
ill
H!
Iti
III
Ii
::~
51..
I
III
.
Ii
pa
III
i~
Ai
In
lu
It'
III
Uti
Jill!
III
it
L
i
I
~l
t
i
I
~
II
II
:)
og
c
~
I
1
o
og
=
:I
ii
"
o
..
Sii
~il
:>0
1~
"'~
u
.
....
fi
j
.
c
C
...
c
::i
~
.
>
.
>
it
ii
w
....
m
c
....
I I tllllllll llll III I
~ ~ ~a.~~~I~~ liii ~i~ ~
5 g illi~~~li I~~~ Ilg 5
~ ~ ~~H~~~~I~ !!ii ~!I ~
~ ~ 1~~~~lli~ ~~~, al~ ~
o 0 ~~~~~~!~! ~~~~ -~ 0
o 0 ~~~~~~~Ifi ~~a~ ~~ 0
~ ~ ~!I.iue~i ~~~a ~~I ~
~ ! ~~~~i~!DE ~lti8 a~~ ~
----- --- ...
~ ~ i~~~lil~~ a~~~ i!~ ~
8 ~ GQGD~~2~~ ~~~~ ~~. ~
~ ~ ~222'~~~~ ~~~~ ~9~ ~
~ ~ ~~~~~!~!! ~~i~ ~I~ ~
~ ~ ~~~~~~~~C ~~~~ ~l~ ~
~ ~ i~~~lil~~ !~i~ i!~ ~
s ~ ~~~~~ssss ~~~s ~~s ~
ci ci ciooocicicicici cicicci cicici ci
~ ~ ~~~~~~~I~ ~~!~ ~I~ ~
Ii
!
p
Ii
J
f
* * *****z**~ *zz* *** *
ci ci cicicicicicicicici ciocici cicici ci
~ i i~~~~~i~i i~~i ~~~ ~
ci 0 cicicicicicicicici cicicici cicici ci
j
u 0 uouuu 000 uouo llu g
~ ~ ~~~~~ ~~~ ~~m~ ji~ 0
i
I I IIIIIIII! III1 III I
Ii
II
~ ~ ~~~~~li~l ~~~~ !!~ ~
~ . ....~~e;~ mm~~ NN2
~ i ~~II!lllg iiii iii ~
~ ~ llll~~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~
m ~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~
"' -
~ ~ ~~i~~~~~i i~ii iii
-!
I,
~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~
o
..
~ i
1 ] "'13 11 ]]1 illl II
i i lil!lli; ili! III I
l
~ v 1 I 1
! iilil] "'ji i ! I "'j
I ~ i li!~llt ill !I!
I
1
"'
1 ..
"' 1 =
i i i
I
I
1
'"'
t
0'1
!
;ji
i
"'
b
1
~
~
f
Q.
I
1
t
I
1
..
9
!
;: al
t
ili IUI
iil i i
- ~
1
! ~ i
ii'
ii: ~ Q. ~
: J I ~
"! n
.!. ~!
; I I
, t
~ ! ~
I Ii
~ f 1 i
: ~ I
ii,
n ~ ! i
1 f~ i II
"' ~i I ! ~
I "'I B " ..
.
.
.
.
.
LUPA CONCLUSION
The increase in traffic associated with the land use change does not create additional impacts
that result in additional roadway improvements. The two links on Kings Highway that fail as a
two lane section, fail in the existing land use scenario as well. Therefore, the improvement to a
four lane section is not required as a result of the land use change. Furthermore, the Kings
Highway Improvements have been a part of the "Needs Plan" with portions included in the
"Cost Feasible Plan" of the Long Range Transportation Plan.
The five year capital improvement plan programmed improvements at Orange and Kings
Highway provide sufficient capacity to provide acceptable levels of service on the network and
specifically Kings Highway through 20 II.
Finally, as the subject property is moved forward to the PUD level, the applicant will enter into
a binding agreement with the County for additional improvements on Kings Highway at Angle
Road. Those improvements will be consistent with the long range plans for maintaining levels
of service.
In summary, the proposed land use plan amendment will generate an increase in traffic, but not
significant enough to require improvements beyond those necessary to support the existing
future land use scenario"
CONCLUSION
The Quail Meadows Development can be accommodated on the roadway network as
proposed. The project satisfies the requirements of the LUFA.
10
.
APPENDIX A - Traffic Data and Information
.
.
.
1-95
't:l 't:l
a: a: ~
c c
.s 0 :I:
III l!! III
C CD CI
.c E c
0 ~
..., w
18 2
Indrio Rd
8
20 2 3 10
. St Lucie Rd ~
'iij
0
Turnpike 10 5 .2 't:l
>- a:
<II c
~ 3l
5 75 75 25 20 :ll:
Angle Rd
't:l
a:
~ 40
0 15
a:
2 2 2 2 33 3 3 9
't:l 't:l Orange Ave
a: a:
:8 CD 3 3.
CI
0. :2
E (5 en
<II 0 5
'0 U u 'E
't:l a: ("')
a: .c ("')
c .~
c E Picos Rd rIl
:i: III C
(/) ~ :i
0 c:
.Ii CD
...,
. 1 Project Percent Assignment
North Quail Meadows
not to scale
~+
;l;
'"
...
4241
4241
~ ~
...
0
"'
,..,
,..,
'"
S
"'
,..,
ll\
e<lL!,-
N
C
...
;!l
~
to9l[ Ll'IlI 6317
... N
C, .... N
~ N '" c
29fr: .... ~
3929
600(1
ZLZS
:l1
'"
'"
<;:
l1;
o
...
...
'"
,..,
...
N
.,
-
CI
CD
N
-
!
III
-
c - III
~ . q
..
. =:
.
- !I
-
!--=
_Iii
Q III
-- ~
III .,.
S :.
N =
1& ~
. ~
>- I
......
21
u
.
-
~
......
cii
~
:!;
~
Q ~
n :!l/
2351 W ,..,
Z61>Z
"'
M
...
:!1
LI>
HI>
:::
~
N
'"
...
OZI
~
,..,
300
;
;!;
.
0>
0>
I
o
~
0>0>
1O'<t
00
10......
II II
WW
D-D-
~~
I I
~~
:::::i:::::i
00
<(<(
~~ 0>
............NM'<tJ>
II II II II II II
CJ)CJ)CJ)CJ)CJ)CJ)
WWWWWW
r:::z~ZZZZ
:fi:5~:5:5:5:5
~ I I I I I I
:a~~~~~~
::::>::::>::::>::::>::::>::::>
eoZZZZZZ
a.
~IIII~
1 lUlL LJIl,.oU..... .lUll ..u, ",-vv-> . IV. .1UU L-'''''p'''u 1.-.1.1.1""IH.. VI 11\A..1,hJi-'V.11.-U1.-IVII
Transportation Statistics Office
2004 Historical AADT Report
4'unty:88 - INDIAN RIVER
ite: 2003 Description: SR 9 / I 95 - S OF SR 60
Year AADT Di rection I Oi rection 2 K Factor D Factor T Factor
2004 C 36,500 N 18,000 S 18.500 0.10 0.55 20.20
2003 C 35,000 N 17,500 S 17,500 0.09 0.54 22.40
2002 C 35.000 N 18,000 S 17,000 0.09 0.53 21.50
2001 C 36,500 N 18.000 S 18,500 0.10 0.55 16.60
2000 C 32,500 N 16,500 S 16,000 0.10 0.53 12.40
1999 C 34,500 N 17,500 S 17,000 0.10 0.55 ]4.]0
1998 C 37.000 N ]9,000 S 18.000 0.10 0.59 19.]0
1997 C 37,000 N 19,000 S 18,000 0.] I 0.55 12.80
1996 C 34,000 N 16,500 S 17,500 0.11 0.54 22.80
]995 C 24,000 N 11,500 S 12,500 0.]0 0.57 ]3.60
1994 C 22,500 N 10,000 S 12,500 0.09 0.59 16.00
1993 F 26,000 N 14,000 S 12,000 0.00 0.00 0.00
1992 C 26,000 N 14,000 S 12,000 0.00 0.00 0.00
]991 19,154 N 9,718 S 9,436 0.00 0.00 0.00
1990 21,327 N 10,791 S 10,536 0.00 0.00 0.00
1989 I 7.444 N 9,285 S 8,159 0.00 0.00 0.00
1988 18,814 N 9,174 S 9,640 0.00 0.00 0.00
1987 16.197 N 8.5 ]3 S 7.684 0.00 0.00 0.00
]986 16,340 N 7,084 S 9.256 0.00 0.00 0.00
1985 8,615 N 4,329 S 4.286 0.00 0.00 0.00
1984 8,859 N 4,383 S 4,476 0.00 0.00 0.00
1983 10,870 N 5,455 S 5,4] 5 0.00 0.00 0.00
.~ 11.132 N 5,518 S 5.614 0.00 0.00 0.00
] 1,026 N 5,581 S 5,445 0.00 0.00 0.00
1980 9,009 N 4,577 S 4,432 0.00 0.00 0.00
1979 10,105 N 5,404 S 4,701 0.00 0.00 0.00
1978 7,352 N 3,903 S 3,449 0.00 0.00 0.00
.
AADT Flags: C = Computed; E = Manual Estimate: F = First Year Est;
S = Second Year Est; T = Third Year Est; X ~ LJnknov.n
Page
Print Date: Juln2005 Florida Department ofTransportatioo
Transportation Statistics Office
2004 Peak Season Factor Category Report
V.-W OF 195 MOCF = 0.87
Ca .. ry: 9402 ~ Dates SF PSCF
1 01.'0 I /2004 - 0 I /03/2004 0.97 1.11
2 01/04/2004 - 0] / 1 0/2004 0.96 1.]0
'" 3 01/11/2004 - 01/17/2004 0.94 1.08
'" 4 01/18/2004 - 01,24.2004 0.92 1.06
'" 5 01/25/2004 - 0 I :31 /2004 0.90 1.03
'" 6 02/0 I /2004 - 02/07/2004 0.88 1.01
'" 7 02/08/2004 - 02/ 14/2004 0.86 0.99
'" 8 02/15/2004 - 02/21.'2004 0.84 0.97
'" 9 02/22/2004 - 02/28/2004 0.84 0.97
'" 10 02/29/2004 - 03106/2004 0.84 0.97
'" II 03/07/2004 - 03, 13/2004 0.83 0.95
'" 12 03.' 14/2004 - 03/20/2004 0.83 0.95
'" 13 03/21.2004 - 03/27/2004 0.86 0.99
'" 14 03/28/2004 - 04/03/2004 0.89 1.02
'" 15 04/04/2004 - 04/ I 0/2004 0.92 1.06
16 04/ II /2004 - 04/17/2004 0.95 1.09
17 04/18/2004 - 04/24/2004 0.96 \.\0
18 04/25/2004 - 05/01/2004 0.98 1.13
11) 05/02/2004 - 05/08/2004 0.99 1.14
20 05/09/2004 - 05/ 15/2004 I.U I 1.16
21 05/16/2004 - 05,22/2004 1.03 1.18
22 OS/23/2004 - OS/29/2004 1.04 1.20
23 05/30/2004 - 06/05/2004 1.06 1.22
. 24 06/06/2004 - 06; 12/2004 1.08 1.24
25 06/13/2004 - 06/19/2004 1.10 \.26
26 06/20/2004 - 06/26/2004 1.11 1.28
27 06/27/2004 - 07/03/2004 1.13 1.30
28 07/04/2004 - 07. 10/2004 1.14 1.31
29 07/11/2004 - 07/17/2004 1.16 1.33
30 07/18/2004 - 07/24/2004 1.15 1.32
31 07/25/2004 - 07/31/2004 1.14 1.3]
32 08/01;2004 - 08/07/2004 1.14 1.31
33 08/08/2004 - 08,14/2004 1.13 1.30
34 08/15/2004 - 08/21/2004 \.12 1.29
35 08/22/2004 - 08/28/2004 1.14 1.31
36 08/29/2004 - 09/04/2004 1.17 1.34
37 09/05/2004 - 09/11/2004 1.19 1.37
38 09/12/2004 - 09/18/2004 1.22 IAO
39 09/19/2004 - 0925/2004 1.18 1.36
40 09/26.2004 - 1002,2004 1.14 1.31
41 10/03/2004 - 10109/2004 1.10 1.26
42 10/10/2004 - 10/16/2004 1.06 1.22
43 10/17/2004 - 10,23/2004 1.04 1.20
44 10/24/2004 - 10/30/2004 1.03 1.18
45 10.t31,2004 - 11.06/2004 1.0 I 1.16
46 1 L07:2004 - 1 J, 13/2004 1.00 1.] 5
47 I L 14,2004 - 11.20/2004 0.98 1.13
48 1 \,21:2004 - 1\,272004 0.98 I. 13
. 49 I \'28,2004 - 120'04/2004 0.98 1.13
50 12/05/2004 - \2, 1 1.2004 0.97 1.11
51 12, 12/2004 - 12. 18.2004 0.97 \.11
52 1219,2004 - 12.25 2004 0.96 1.10
53 12.26/2004 - 12/31.2004 0.94 1.08
Print Date: Juln'2o.o.5 Florida Deparnnent of Transportatioo
Transportation Statistics Office
2004 Peak Season Factor Category Report
_CIE 195 \-IOCF 0.96
. ry: 9495 Week Oates SF PSCF
1 01/01/2004 - 01/03/2004 0.93 0.97
2 01,'04/2004 - 01 ] 0/2004 0.99 \.03
3 01/11/2004 - 01/17/2004 1.05 1.09
4 01/18/2004 - 0. 1.24/2004 1.04 1.08
5 01/25/2004 - 01/31.2004 1.03 1.07
6 02/0 I /2004 - 02/07/2004 1.02 1.06
7 02/08/2004 - 02/14/2004 1.01 1.05
8 02/15/2004 - 02/21/2004 1.00 1.04
9 02/22:2004 - 02/28/2004 0.98 1.02
10 02/29/2004 - 03/06/2004 0.96 1.00
11 03/07/2004 - 03/13/2004 0.94 0.98
12 03/14,2004 - 03/20/2004 0.92 0.96
13 03/21/2004 - 03/27/2004 0.94 0.98
14 03/28/2004 - 04/03/2004 0.95 0.99
15 04/04/2004 - 04/10/2004 0.97 1.0 I
16 04/11/2004 - 04/17/2004 0.98 1.02
17 04/18/2004 - 04/24/2004 0.99 1.03
18 04/25/2004 - 05/01/2004 1.00 1.04
19 05/02/2004 - 05/08/2004 1.01 1.05
20 05/09/2004 - 05/15/2004 1.02 1.06
21 05/16/2004 - OS/22/2004 1.02 1.06
22 OS/23/2004 - OS/29/2004 1.02 1.06
23 05/30/2004 - 06/05/2004 1.03 1.07
. 24 06/06/2004 - 06/12/2004 1.03 1.07
25 06/13/2004 - 06/19/2004 1.03 1.07
26 06/2012004 - 06/26/2004 1.02 1.06
27 06/27/2004 - 07/03/2004 1.01 1.05
28 07/04/2004 - 0711 0/2004 1.0 I 1.05
29 07/11/2004 - 07/17/2004 1.00 1.04
30 07/18/2004 - 07/24/2004 1.0 I 1.05
3 ] 07/25/2004 - 07/3 1/2004 1.01 1.05
32 08/01/2004 - 08/07/2004 1.02 1.06
33 08/08/2004 - 08/14/2004 1.02 1.06
34 08/15/2004 - 08/21/2004 1.03 1.07
35 08/22/2004 - 08/28/2004 1.08 1.13
36 08/29/2004 - 09/04/2004 1.13 1.18
37 09/05/2004 - 09/ II /2004 1.19 1.24
38 09/12/2004 - 09/18/2004 1.24 1.29
39 09/19/2004 - 09/25/2004 1.17 1.22
40 09.26.2004 - 10,02,2004 1.10 1.15
* 41 10/03/2004 - 10/09/2004 1.03 1.07
* 42 10/10/2004 - 10/16/2004 0.96 1.00
* 43 101172004 - 10/23/2004 0.95 0.99
* 44 10/24/2004 - 10/30/2004 0.94 0.98
'" 45 10.'31.2004 - 11 '06/2004 0.94 0.98
* 46 11.'07:2004 - 11. 13.2004 0.93 0.97
'" 47 1 \.14'2004 - 11.20/2004 0.92 0.96
'" 48 11.21.2004 - 11/272004 0..92 0..96
'" 49 11.28,2004 - 12'04/2004 0..93 0.97
. '" 50 12,05/2004 - 12!1I;:~004 0.93 0.97
'" 51 12/12/2004 - 12, 1 8/2004 0.93 0.97
'" 52 12/192004 - 12/252004 0.99 1.03
'" 53 12.26,2004 - 12/3 12004 1.05 1.0.9
Prin1 Date: Juln2005 Florida Department ofTransportatioo
Transportation Statistics Office
2004 Peak Season Factor Category Report
C. OF USl TO 195 MOCF = 0.96
Ca .: 9401 Week Dates SF ~
-
1 01/01/2004 - 01/03/2004 0.97 1.0 I
2 01,'04/2004 - 01! 1 0/2004 0.99 1.0)
3 01/11/2004 - 01;17/2004 1.01 1.05
4 01: 18/2004 - 0 \;24:2004 1.00 1.04
5 01/25/2004 - 01/31/2004 0.99 1.03
6 02/0 I /2004 - 02/07/2004 0.98 1.02
7 02/08/2004 - 02/14/2004 0.97 1.0 I
8 02/15,2004 - 02/21/2004 0.96 1.00
9 02/22/2004 - 02/28/2004 0.96 \.00
\0 02/29/2004 - 03/06/2004 0.96 1.00
II 03/07/2004 - 03/11'2004 0.96 1.00
12 03/14/2004 - 03/20/2004 0.96 1.00
13 03/21/2004 - 03/27/2004 0.96 1.00
14 03/28/2004 - 04103/2004 0.97 1.01
15 04/04/2004 - 04/10/2004 0.97 1.01
16 04/1 \;2004 - 04/17/2004 0.98 1.02
17 04/18/2004 - 04/24/2004 0.99 1.03
18 04/25/2004 - 05/01/2004 1.00 1.04
19 05/02/2004 - 05/08/2004 1.00 1.04
20 05/09/2004 - 05/15/2004 1.0 I I.U5
21 05/16/2004 - OS/22/2004 1.02 1.06
22 OS/23/2004 - OS/29/2004 1.02 1.06
23 05/30/2004 - 06/05/2004 1.02 1.06
. 24 06/06/2004 - 06/12/2004 1.02 1.06
25 06/13/2004 - 06/1912004 1.02 1.06
26 06/20/2004 - 06/26/2004 1.03 1.07
27 06/27/2004 - 07/03/2004 1.03 1.07
28 07/04/2004 - 07/10/2004 1.04 1.08
29 07/11/2004 - 07/17/2004 1.04 1.08
30 07/18/2004 - 07/24/2004 1.04 1.08
31 07/25/2004 - 07/31/2004 1.03 1.07
32 08/0 L'2004 - 08/07/2004 1.03 1.07
33 08/08/2004 - 08/14/2004 1.02 1.06
34 08/15/2004 - 08/21/2004 1.0 I 1.05
35 08/22/2004 - 08/28/2004 1.06 \.10
36 08/29;2004 - 09/04/2004 1.11 \.16
37 09/05/2004 - 09: I 1.2004 1.15 \.20
38 09/12/2004 - 09/18/2004 \.20 1.25
39 09/19/2004 - 09/25/2004 1.13 1.18
40 09:26/2004 - 10/02/2004 1.07 1.11
* 41 10/03/2004 - 10/09/2004 1.00 1.04
* 42 10/ I 0/2004 - 10/16/2004 0.94 0.98
* 43 10/17'2004 - 10/23/2004 0.94 0.98
* 44 10/24/2004 - 10:30/2004 0.95 0.99
* 45 10/3 1/2004 - 11/06/2004 0.95 0.99
* 46 11/07/2004 - 1 Ii 1312004 0.95 0.99
* 47 Iii 14/2004 - 11 :2012004 0.95 0.99
* 48 11,2 \2004 - I L27 2004 0.96 1.00
* 49 11/28/2004 - 12.'04/2004 0.96 1.00
. * 50 12:05/2004 - 12/11:2004 0.97 1.01
* 51 12/12.2004 - 12/18,'2004 0.97 1.0 I
* 52 1219.'2004 - 1225/2004 0.99 1.03
* 53 12.26/2004 - 12,31/2004 1.01 1.05
Page 1 ot ,
.
ARTPLAN 2002 Conceptual Planning Analysis
Description I File Information
IFllenBme Ilc:\prOjects\st. Lucie C~unty Project~Quail ~lolIte Pre redIIS/1/2006 I
Meadows\Artplan\AP kmgshwysbnolmprovements.xml pII
Iprovl1lm IIARTPLAN Ilver.ion IIs.2.0 I
IA...Iy8t IIS0R IlAaencv list. Lucie County 1I0.trict 114 I
IAneri.' 1127 Avenue 11=~Mdkln Illndrio 11~~r.ectkln lorange I
NBme
IStudy IIKS-6pm II:-~ion IIsouthbound I
Period
lu..r Ilexisting land use I
No..
Facility Data
. I Roadway Variables I Traffic Variables Control Variables Multimodal
Variables
IAr- Type UrbaniZedllAAoT IG~'- Ty.. ID PBved [3
Shoulder IBike
l.8ne
lei... 111K 0.09SIISig...../Mile l.S011~-::=- "'ne I~
IPoeted Speed 4sIIo o.sslICYCIe Length 1001lPBve~nt I~
ConditIOn
I. Thru "'n_ 211PHF 0.9s!lThrough g/C 0.441lSiclewBlk I~
IMedlen Type N II'~ Tun. Excl. I 1211Control Type Actuated I SicIew.lk/Ro8dwBY rYPical1
one ...... Seplll1ltion
ILeft Turn L.n_11 11% H_vy 101 Sidew.lkl RoBClw.y G
Yes Vehiclee Protective BIIrrler
1= 58t Flow 19001 10lwtBcle to B_ IG
Stop
ILoeBl Adj. I 11 IBu. Freq 10
FlICtor
Adj_ted 58t II 16411 IBu. ~plln Of 1[3
Flow Rate ServICe
.
file://C:\Documents and Settings\Susan O'Rourke\Local Settings\Temp\preview.xml 5/1/2006
.
I Segment #I
11 (to St.. Lucie)
12 (to Angle)
13 (to Orange)
I Segment · II
11 (to St.. Lucie) I
12 (to Angle) I
13 (to Orange) I
Arteri.1 Length
I lII..-
I 1
2
3
4
. *
lII..-
2
4
6
8
*
lIIn_
2
4
6
8
*
.
Automobile Segment Data
]1 Cycle IDIC ~~I#I olr'll Len th IIAAOTllHoUrlylQI
_ Length ~~~lIIn_ g Vol. u.
II 1001l0.48ICJICElc:J]12.6363611168801~~1
II 10011 0.47 ICJI CElc:=21 I 11l168801~~1
II 1001l0.38ICJ1~c:J]11.5757611178761~~1
Automobile LOS
Thru Mvmt 1r-1r Control 111 Int. ApprOllCh
Flow RIIte I~I Deley II LOS
II ~= II
Auto Speed
I
II
I
I
Automobile Service Volume Tables
A II B II C II D
Hourly Volume In Peek Direction
Hourly Volume In Both Direction.
I
I
II
I
I
I
I
I
AnnUIII Averllge 0.11y Tr.ffic
file://C:\Documents and Settings\Susan O'Rourke\Local Settings\Temp\preview.xml
Auto LOS
page 1. or J
Medilln Type I
Nonel
Nonel
Nonel
Segment I
LOS .
II
E
5/1/2006
.
.
.
rage 1 or J
ARTPLAN 2002 Conceptual Planning Analysis
Descriptionl File Information
IFilename I C:\Projects\St. Lucie C~unty Project\Quall IDate Pre red
. . Meadows\Artplan\AP _kin shwySB2011.xml . pII
IProgl'llm IIARTPLAN llv..lon
IAnIIlyft IIs0R IIAgency
IArterial Namel127 Avenue 11:::~.ection
IStudy Period IIKs-6pm lI~k Direction
I~:,~ I
115/1/2006
115.2.0
list. Lucie County
IIIndrio
IISouthbound
Facility Data
I Roadway Variables I Traffic Variables Control Variables Multimodal
Variables
r- Typo I rDT IGIA"Wo'Type ID PlIVed [3
Urbanized Shoulder /Blke
Lllne
ICla.. II l11K II 0.09sIlSienll../Mile 1 sollOUDide lAne IITYPiCal1
. Width
IPoeted Speed II 4sllD o.ssllevele Length 1001lpavem~nt IITYPical1
ConditIOn
I_ Thru LIIn_ II 2!1PHF 0.9sllThrough g/C 0.44 II Sidewalk l~
IMedian Type II Nonell~:::" Exel. 1211control Type Actuated I Sidewalk/ RollClway ~YPiCall
Sepllratlon
ILeft Turn lan_II Yesll~e:.= 101 Sidewalk/ RolICIway G
Protective Barrier
1= SlIt Flow 19001 10IMtllcle to B_ IG
Stop
ILocal Adj. 1\ IBu. Freq 10
Factor
IAdjUSted SlIt G IBU. ~plln Of 1[3
Flow RIIte ServICe
file://C:\Documents and Settings\Susan O'Rourke\Local Settings\Temp\preview.xml
5/1/2006
.
.
.
ri:1~t; ~ Vi J
Automobile Segment Data
r Segment II II. Cyde I~~~I. "" .11......IIAADTIIH...~IElI Meet.n Type I
Length g Type Turrw La.... Vol.
~ (to St.. Lucie) II 10011 0.48Ic=:1lc:J3)C=!1I2.6363611168801~~1 Nonel
12 (to Angle) II 1001l0.47Ic=:1lc:J3)c:::2Il 111168801~~1 Nonel
13 (to Orange) II 10011 0.44Ic=:11~c:=1l11.5757611178761~~1 Nonel
Automobile LOS
I II Thru Mvmt IGJI control II Int. Approach II speed Il Segment I
Segment II Flow bte Dellly LOS (mph) LOS
11 (to St.. Lucie) II 81711 1.0411 47.4811 011 33.81l cl
12 (to Angle) JI 81711 0.5311 18.73lr aJI 35.11[ al
13 (to Orange) II 68811 0.9511 47.031\ On 30.2!r cl
Arter.1 Length I 5.2 1 Auto speed I 32.. I Auto LOS I c I
Automobile Service Volume Tables
I A II 8 II c II D II E I
I La... 1\ Hourly Volume In P_k D~rection I
I 1 II .. 800 II 880 II .u II ...
I 2 .. 1650 1\ 1750 II ... II .** I
I 3 ** 2500 II 2630 II *** If **. I
I 4 ** 3360 II 3510 II "'** II *** I
I '" ** 860 II 900 II *u II *** I
I La... Hourly Volume In 80th Di:ection. \
2 I ** II 1450 II 1590 *** II **'"
4 II ** II 3000 II 3190 *** II **. I
6 II ** II 4550 II 4780 **. II .** J
8 II ** II 6110 II 6370 *** II **. J
. II ** II 1570 1\ 1630 I *** II *** I
Lan. II Annual Averege D8ily T~8ffic :
2 II ** II 15300 II 16800 II *** II ***
4 II ** II 31600 II 33500 II *** II "'** 1
6 II ** II 47900 II 50300 II *** II .** I
8 II ** II 64300 If 67100 II *** II *** I
* II ** II 16500 II 17100 II *** II "'** I
file://C:\Documents and Settings\Susan O'Rourke\Local Settings\Temp\preview.xml
5/1/2006
t'age 1 or :)
.
ARTPLAN 2002 Conceptual Planning Analysis
Description/File Information
IFilename llc:\projects\St. Lucie County project\QuailllllOIlle Peed IIS/1/2006 I
Meadows\Artplan\AP KinClshwynb2011.xml r pIIr
IProgl1lm !IARTPLAN IIv.sion IIS.2.0 I
IAIUlIy" IIs0R IIAgencv liSt. Lucie County 1I0.trict 114 I
IArterial Namel127 Avenue I I Begin 1I0range 11~::er.ectionlllndrio I
Intersection
IStudy Period IIKs-6pm lItte.k Olrection lINorthbound I
lu.er II no improvements I
Notes
Facility Data
I Roadway Variables II Traffic Variables I Control Variables Multimodal
. Variables
r-Type II U<b," ;"', II....DT IGI~rivol Typo ID Paved [3
Shoulder /Bike
Lane
ICI... II 111K II o.09sIISigna../Mlle 1. Soll~u:~ Lane I~
IPo.ted Speed 4sII0 o.ssIICYCIe Length 100llpavement IITYPical1
Condition
I_ Thru Lan_ 211PHF 0.9sllThrough g/C 0.441lsidewalk I~
IMedian Type Nonell~=" Excl. 1211Control Type Actuatedl Sidewalk/Roadway ~YPiCall
Separation
ILeft Turn Lan_ Yesll~':= 101 Sidewalk/ ROIIcIway G
Protective Barrier
1= Sat Flow I 19001 10..tac:1e to B.. IG
Stop
ILocaI Adj. II 11 IBU. Freq 10
Factor
IAdj..teet Sat II 16411 /BU. ~plln Of 1[3
Flow Rate ServICe
.
file://C:\Documents and Settings\Susan O'Rourke\Local Settings\Temp\preview.xml 5/1/2006
ra~~.. V~ oJ
. Automobile Segment Data
r Segment #1 II Cyc~ 1~~~I#1 Dir'll Len thllAADTIIHour~181 Median Type I
Length III Type Turne u...- III Vol.
11 (to Angle) \I 100ImL21~~ll.5757611146221~~1 Nonel
12 (to St. Lucie) 1\ 100UO.451L21CEl~1 111138181c::9~1 Nonel
r3 (to Indrio) \I 10011 0.441L21CEl~12.636361117876Ic::E31~1 Nonel
Automobile LOS
I II Thru Mvmt Iwl control II Int. ApprCNICh II Speed II Segment I
Segment #1 Flow RIIte Del8y LOS (mph) LOS
11 (to Angle) II 563]1 0.8611 32.1511 ell 33.21[ el
12 (to St. Lucie) \I 66911 0.9111 32.3811 ell 29.911 el
13 (to Indrio) II 66911 0.9311 33.4211 ell 36.111 Bl
Arterial Length I 5.2 I Auto Speed I 33.9 I Auto LOS I c I
Automobile Service Volume Tables
I A II B II c II D II E I
u...- II Hour~ Volume In P_k D~rection l
1 I ** II 720 820 U* Il ***
2 ** II 1500 1640 *** II *** I
3 ** II 2290 2460 *** II *** I
4 ** 1\ 3070 3280 *** 1I *** I
. * I ** II 720 820 I *u 1I *** I
u...- 1\ Hour~ Volume In Both Di:ections :
2 1\ ** \I 1310 II 1490 II *u II ***
4 II ** II 2730 1\ 2980 I *** II *** I
6 1I ** II 4160 II 4480 *** 1\ *** I
8 1I ** II 5590 II 5970 *** II *** I
* II ** II 1310 II 1490 *** II *** I
u.nes 1\ Annual Average Dally T: alfic I
2 1\ ** 13800 II 15700 *** II ***
I 4 II ** 28700 II 31400 *** II *** I
I 6 Il ** 43800 II 47100 *** II *** 1
I 8 II ** 58800 II 62800 *** 1I *** I
I * II ** 13800 II 15700 *** II *** I
.
file:l/C:\Documents and Settings\Susan O'Rourke\Local Settings\Temp\preview.xml 5/112006
Page 1 ot' 5
.
ARTPLAN 2002 Conceptual Planning Analysis
Description I File Information
IFilename Ilf:\projects\St. Lucie c~unty project\QuailllllDate Pre red 115/1/2006 I
Meadows\Artplan\AP Klnllshwynb2011.xml PB
IProgrBm IIARTPLAN IIversion 115.2.0 I
IAnalyst IISOR IIAgencv liSt. Lucie County !I Diatrict 114 I
IArterial Namel127 Avenue II&eain lIorange 11~::rsectionlllndrio I
Intersection
IStudy Period IIKs-6pm n~k Direction lINorthbound I
luser I
Not_
Facility Data
I Roadway Variables II Traffic Variables I Control Variables Multimodal
. Variables
JA'. Type FT IGlk-,Type ID PBved G
Urbanized Shoulder tBike
l.8ne
Ic'.s 111K 0.09sIISlgna../Mile l.S011~~:-1.8ne IB
IPcMted Speed 4sllD o.sslICYCIe Length 1001lplIVem~nt IB
ConditIOn
I- Thru l.8n_ 211PHF 0.9sllThrough v/C O.4411SlcIewalk ~
IMedian Type Nonell~:::'" Excl. I 1211control Type I Actuatedl Siclewalk/RoBCIwey ITYPiCal1
SePBration
ILeft Turn Lanes II Yesll~e:= 10\ Sidewalk/RoBCIw8Y G
protective Barrier
IBllse Set Flow 19001 10blltllCle to B.- IG
Rate Stop
ILocal Adj. 11 IBUS Freq 10
Flldor
Adj.-ted Set II 16411 IBU. ~PBn Of 1[3
Flow Rate Service
.
file://C:\Documents and Settings\Susan O'Rourke\Local Settings\Temp\preview.xml 5/1/2006
rage 1. or J
. Automobile Segment Data
I Segment #I II Cyc.I~~~~ILengthIB~81 Medilln Type I
Length g Type Turntl u.nes Vol.
11 (to Angle) II 10011 0.44Ic::21~CJJI1.5757611146221~~1 Nonel
12 (to St. Lucie) jl 10011 0.451c::21CElCJJI 1n138181~~1 Nonel
13 (to lndrio) 11 10011 0.44Ic::21CElCJJI2.6363611178761~~1 Nonel
Automobile LOS
I II Thru Mvmt IWr C~::;I 11 Int. Approach II Speed II Segment I
Segment #I Flow RIIte LOS (mph) LOS
11 (to Angle) 56311 0.7811 26.8711 ell 34.311 BI
12 (to St. Lucie) 66911 0.9111 34.3711 ell 29.411 el
13 (to lndrio) 66911 0.9311 33.4211 ell 36.111 BI
Arteri.1 Length I 5.2 I Auto Speed I 34.1 I Auto LOS I B I
Automobile Service Volume Tables
A II Bile II D II E I
u.nes Hourly Volume In P.k D~rection I
1 ** I 730 II 820 II *** II ***
2 ** 1520 II 1640 II *** II *** I
3 ** 2310 II 2460 II *** II *** I
4 ** 3100 II 3280 \I *** II *** I
. * ** 730 II 820 II *** II *** I
u.... I Hourly Volume In Both Di~ection. :
2 II ** II 1330 II 1490 U* II ***
4 II ** II 2760 II 2980 *** II *** I
6 I ** II 4200 \I 4480 *** II *** I
8 ** II 5640 II 5970 *** II *** I
* ** II 1330 II 1490 *** II *** I
u.n. Ann UBI AverBge D.ily T:.ffic I
I 2 ** II 14000 II 15700 I *** II ***
I 4 ** II 29000 II 31400 *** II *** I
I 6 II ** II 44200 II 47100 *** II *** I
I 8 II ** II 59400 II 62800 *** II *** I
I * II ** \I 14000 II 15700 *** II *** I
.
file://C:\Documents and Settings\Susan O'Rourke\Local Settings\Temp\preview.xml 5/1/2006
.
j
. i
: ~::
.
~
i
l>
:5
.
~
J;
. Ul
-
U
Q)
.~
0
~ ~ "-
CD c..
j Ql "C
.0 fa
- It! 0
- t- o:::
-
Q)
:;j -
fa
/) -
en
j
-
~
:...l
-
.=2
-
/)
-
>J
:;
I
..oJ
.?
J
.)
~..,
.
.~
-
I
!:l18 0 18
00 0 ..
88 0 ..
0
.,... .. ..
..- .. ..
;;I~ 1:1 ;!
...
-... "
"'''' I::
'"
z z z
1.1. ~
I
~ ~ .
0
~
~
"
.
. .
~ ~ i
~ ~ 6
5 !
~i
: u
.. ~ J
i 11 i:
on .3 ;
~ 0; ~
00
~ ~
"''''
~~
: ~
o 0
'" '" I
~IZ
~I~ ,
gg ~
~i
g g ~I -'
-, ..
~
.
.
u
~
..
.t
f.
H
~1
2':
E'lj,
!"
~t
~IC
Ii
~1
. ~
ic
oJ 5
~u
i 0
-'.2
"'I
~ ~
.c
.. 0
gil
:;:
.
~
i
-'
~
E
!
E
~ C
II
ii:
1II
:x:
ii:
..
;;
iii
f
~
E
~~
-~
1II'C
.... II
U 0
wet:
o E
fz
c (;
< '"
o ..
n:: ~
W..J
....-
< ..
.... c:
",,E
",0::
;;~
u.<
.
'"
~ ~
I
81~118 ~1
=i~!~!~ta
.....=:::::;::;a:
.. ...
...
LJ..~~~G""
....""o,...S!:!i
5'
~
~~
" :i r
. - "
vl:':t~
~: Q;';5 ~
~~l.:~"
"dl:iq~
:x:~.."'5~ilu
~
c:
o
Z
~ i
;; ~ CII C
. ~ f4 ~
g i :..'
-1111-':'1-
ti;~~cc'"
..2s~~'5...
"~n1i!i,~
~ 0 cf ~ c::...... VI '"
_ u
o II
ir. et:
'" 0
:x:
~ ~
g ~
~ II ~ ~
~ ~ ; ._~
~ E 1 :~i
aZ~_"'_!1;6
it: ~ffi;S~]tl
Q.. c:--~-o: 0:
o II ~ ~ . ~ a ~ ~
~ ~~~~~i:l
a: c:
W ,E
.... = f"oI f"'l..... l>>... IIrl ..I
c:( 't:S ...... ~ .. - f"'I .... .c
:n ~ e
818 ~I! g
..
... ... III
m. :D; ..,
.. .. .. .. ...
...
...
II
I I
,
I
VI ~ vL
:x: !
~ . > .
. .. .
c: oj '" f '"
0 'S f g ~
Z
II ..
iO ~ il!
in
. :t .. . I
.. ~ ~ ~~'
c: i< i<..1
,E
u
..
~ ;!; ~ ~ Do oJ
II ~ ~ on ..
C ~
- gg 8
..
...... N
~~ II>
..... ..
.. .. ...
....
...
ee
~~
~
.. .
+~
I
I
.. .
~~
1
c .
n
~Di
I
10
'" t i
:x: s ~
~
C
0
Z
II
7ii
Vi
:J
u
~
0
ir.
(5 on <;1 i
:g "''''
~~
(; - -
U ~ ~
:E
VI
~ : ! -'
..
C I-
.... ::
:l
u
..
0
ir.
ii
'tI
0
~ ~
:;
:E .
... ~
..
.r::
0 .
'tI ~
c:
II 1m
c:
~
.. .1
.. ",
'tI
.. ..
Q.. I~
~ I
u
u
iii
0
g
0
0
.,.
0
...
..
.c
.!I
..
E
;;
1]
..
:E
...
" f-
~
:;
...
~
~
.0
'i
.
0
Q
;:;
~
u
0
i'
:1:
'0
'0
.c
u
;;
E
Ii
~
cj
;;
.....
G:
.!O
'"
0
c
c
'0,
~
.0
;;
t
~. i:
'0 .;:
z C
'"
~:B
~.8
c B
0
.. ..
c '"
~ u
:;
E ::l
on '"
~~
@'"
"'~
iji:
c iii
"
u.. .~
_'0
!l ..
~~
u ..
~~
g E
~ ~I
c.~
c f. I
\~"- V
I~ v I
lco
~ -
;:: .111 !
i -'
OJ I ~
c
.. I I ::!
i=
.
:;
3
l.~
~l:
~F
...
'::0
....
.:lE
u"'
! ~
:: g
g ~
....
6 :
~~
~ r.
. c
~ i
~~
~.1.
. 0
0:0:
I
.. i
.0:
{~
"i:
,,:
r~
~r..'
a C-'
'5~
i~
'5 :.
l~~
S~]
~ ~ i"
~ : ~
:.; !
. 0 ~
. u Z
~SS
~~~
.. . 0
~H
~~I'
.coo
o:o:.r
.
i'
z
"'"''''
zz'Z
.
M
,
CD
C>>
:E
CG
I-
-
CG
.
(,)
C
0
:t:i
CG
::J
ii
>
w
C>>
.c
-
c
0
"C
4)
en
CG
CO
-
"C :3
(1) 'E
N :J
.- C
..,
.- ~
....
0 01
41
.- en
....
0-
f/)
..,
U
.
a.
c..
...
c::
..J
......0.....0111.,1,.....'
'-11
~ ...... .....-:11
...~ .......~
.........._.~
......
"""-.-- 2
-'-
! ...::...~~
; . _. ......, ~.....,
,..--.......
...-......~....III
.~.....,..,.~
... """-0 ~...~
j
I -.
.-.-,,-
........:2 ..-....
~101''''''_'''
___".:.=:............. 2
~ ................... 1
...... .............
-.--
...-.~ .....,. .......
...... ...........-tll
-.=.:..-::=-=~ :
....-.-I-o.lU..... :r.
..........,......wn.. 2
....., ........
........,.-..-.-0
~
c
e
E
8
o
....
E
o
..
~
~
U
"-l
...
, i !!
:' i
: 1,1 I I!
I'
i, I
i,1
......... .. .... ..... ........... .......
;
.~....... . .... 0"'".. ............... .......
.......... . ......~N...."..."...." .......
."....~". . ._"_.."'" . ......."....... .......
~~-------. .. ---.. ----------------~ -----...-
NN""NO.N"" " .0"_ ".."N............ .......
- - .. ... .. .. ... .. ... ....... ..,..... ............................. 1.0......
".............. ... .... ....N.............. .......
2
"""........... .."..."..~....".".."...... .........
%
-"P"""~"- "N."" ""._. ..N....N... """N~."
~~------- - -------~--------.----- --------------
---~-------- ---------- ----------- --p---.
""DN""... "ND". ..... ........... .......
~
~........ . .... ................. .......
."D.""".. . H_.. ..... ........... .......
---.....- . .... ..... -..........
..."""H". . "".. ..... ........ N. ..NN.N........
; ;.. J ,f .f f If , ," I "ffff', I ""
;. 1
- l II ! !!
i i I i (..
~ ! I II _ Ii I J I IH' I. II J J1
I 1!IJJ'J1J,!!J 'lo!Jif J1J IJJJ'J~JlllltIJI~1"JliIJ~f!I"JJ1111
! Is J ! I I uJ A I! AI II'! Is ~J H I III
z
j
f_~ f I
~ · I i~ II
~11I f ilJ)
3 Jaj"_I!) . ,.111 _,
1 f II .J.JIIJIJII=
. ;; i I
!~ ;; -
I I J I 'I 1 J 1)11 II',
,'Ja,'11 J'flllIJJJlJfJllfll~""JJ!
J~ J J J!I I1J i I
II
II
I
..... ~. 'lz-'t
i:
I : , ,
; I I I i
, ,
, ,
~ I i I ,
,
i! i i!
2
~
.
z
~
2
2
2
1
1
2
Z
~
Z
Z
., 5'1
! . . .
! ...... , . .
.
.
J _
.. I
n Jli
~ JI I J
~ .JU,. II''I
~ H B 1 ~F;lilh I J
i I
.
r i
- Ii!
i.~_1 _,1
j IJi!1 iiil"J
i till: ,HI
3
I
I
.
J IU,.
UI'UJI HJil
.. -,
It i-
. !
. !
. '!
,
i J.f
111 J
J..!
.1 h
s--I
JII,
! : . :
i'~U
1>'" ..
~~$!
, - "!
. !
. 5
!!
.5
.!
; ;. .. ,
. - -
1 ~ f~
'~.T
- ........
I ~
I '~,~
I ,.:.,.. c ~
~~,
'!
L---.
. j!lli- . ~
.., ..;c- '.,
i
. m-,
N -10. - ,
!!
8 8 'i:lT
. 1",<
! 8~f
!
! ~~
!
I
! '- !I!
I
I
!fL _ ! !
.11i . .
"I- .,.-
!/U!! !
!
! ...!!
! !!I
!IU! !I!,
!
IiI f
I I~t
.!
~
1
J I ,'J 11
, /l!iiW
a
l!
~
J 110'11 1 j
ll1iHlll
,
JL
. J i I :
1. ! i ,
.
.
.
Response to DCA ORC
Quail Meadows
Comprehensive Plan Amendment #PA-05-010
APPENDIX B
PSL:23631:1
Page 6 of7
.
.
.
03/22/2005 05:52
7727819251
SUSAN E O'ROURKE PE
PAGE 02/03
PALM BEACH COUNTY
ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
TRAFFIC DMSION
.- ._""
..'4.'""'!' (.'~
'_.!OO......~
/...T!" ~ .'
\.... \ 01'
,EI ...J '.....",
'\ 0/
,~~.~'U~/
DEFAULT INPUT VALUES FOR
Hes INTERSECTION ANALYSIS
ArM, Geometry m1CI vORIme Data
Area Type CBO or Other
Turn lanes Actual
Intersection Tumil"lQ Movements Actual
PeakHourF~or(PHF1 0.95
Lenath of Analvsis Period (Duration) 0.25 IT
Right Tum on Red 1. If protected overlapping left turn phase and exclusive right
tum lane, use 60 vph + overlapping left tum volume, else
2. If pennitted overlapping left tum phase and exclusive right
tum lane, use 60 vph, else
3. If shared rightlthmunh lane, use 10 vch
Average Queue Spacing 25ft
Available Queue Storage Length Use County minimums (280 ft single lane. 450 ft dual lane).
If the calculated queue storage ratio (RQ) exceeds 1.0, field
measurements can be made to detennine actual storage
Ienaths
on [)eta
Initial Unmet Demand (veh) 0
Arrival Type 3 - ul'lCOOniinated
4 - coordinated (peak and off-peak direction through
movements)
Unit Extension Time (UE) 3.0 seconds
Uostream FiIterinQ/MeterinQ Adi. Factor lI\ 1.0
Startup Lost Time 2 seconds per applicable phase
Extension of Effective Green Time 2.0 seconds
Control TYPe Actual or Programmed
Cycle Length, Phasing and Green Times Actual unless conditions warrant change by County Engineer,
then accordina to PBC timina analYsis procedure
on ROW D8bI
Base Satumtion Flow Rate 1.900 DdhIIn
Lane Widths Actual
Heavv Vehicles 2%
Grades 0%
Parkinc Maneuver Factor 1.0
Local Bus Factor 1.0
Pedestrian Factor 1.0
Lane Utilization Where CMA is greater than 1400 use 1.0, otherwise use
table 10-23 (HCM Manual)
C:'DocuTlent6 and Settlngs Ypatane \l...OCa1 Settings \T em~CS Default ,"puts.doc
PAGE 2 OF6
PAGE 2131 RCVD AT 3/23/2006 3:12:30 PM ~astem Standard Time!, SVR:FTLWEB1/1' DNIS:3163I CSID:7727819261I DURATION (mm-ssl:01-12
0J/22/2005 05:52
7727819251
SUSAN E O'ROURKE PE
PAGE 03/03
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1d
.Analyst: SO'R
Agency:
Date: 7/28/2005
Period: PM Peak Hour
project ID: Quail Meadows FUD
E/W St: Orange
Inter.: Kings/Angle
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd:
Year 2009
N/S St: Kings
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
I Eastbound I Westbound I Northbound I southbound I
I L T R I L T R I L T R I L T R I
I I I I I
No. Lanes I 1 1 0 I 1 1 0 I 0 1 1 I 0 1 0 I
LGConfig I L TR I L TR I LT R I LTR I
Volume 142 61 95 1124 126 114 1134 430 126 1118 535 57 I
Lane Width 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 I 12.0 12.0 I 12.0 I
RTOR Vol I 10 I 10 I 20 I 57 I
(W(~ ~ o~h~e \<u)~
Duration 0.25 Area TYPe: All other areas
signal operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
EB Lert A NB Left p
Thru P Thru E'
Right P Right P
Peds Peds
WB Left P SB Left P
Thru P Thru p
. Right P Right P
Peds Peds
NB Right EB Right
SB Right WB Right
Green 13.0 39.5 34.0
Yellow 3.5 3.5 3.5
All Red 1.0 1.0 1.0
Cycle Length: 100.0 sees
Intersection Performance Summary
Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group 1\Pproach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp Capacity (s) 'v/e g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
L 242 1863 0.18 0_13 39.1 D
TR 242 1863 0.63 0.13 53.2 D 50.0 D
westbound
L ?42 1863 0.54 0.13 49.1 D
TR 242 1863 1.00 0.13 101. 4 F B3.0 :E'
Northbound
LT 633 1863 0.94 0.34 53.9 D 49.0 D
R 633 1863 0.18 0.34 22.7 C
Southbound
.LTR 736 1863 0.93 0.40 46.5 D 46.5 D
Intersection Delay = 54.7 ( sec/veh) Intersection LOS = D
PAGE 3/3 ~ RCVD AT 3/23/2006 3:12:30 PM ~astern Standard Timel ~ SVR:FTLWEB1/1 ~ DNIS:3163 ~ CSID:7727819261 ~ DURATION Imm-ss):01.12
.
.
.
Response to DCA ORC
Quail Meadows
Comprehensive Plan Amendment #P A-05-0l 0
APPENDIX C
PSL:23631:1
Page 7 of7
.
....:'t1 D.)". .1\
." .....'....".1.......1
:;>brf'"":<' ..,
~/r."
.lo,...... '
..: "
. , "
r: i .
St. Lucie County
public Schools
Excellence in Education
The School Board of St. Lucie County
4204 Okeechobee Road
Fort Pierce, Florida 34947 . (772) 429-3600
Board Members
Kathryn Hensley. Chairman
Dr John Carvelh. Vice Chairman
Dr. Samuel S Gaines
Carol A. Hilson
Dr Judi Miller
Superintendent
Michael J Lannon
April 24,2006
Noreen Dreyer
Ruden, McClosky, Smith, Schuster & Russell, P.A.
145 NW Central Park Plaza, Suite 200
Port St. Lucie, FL 34986
Rc: Quail Meadows Future Land Use Amcndmcnt- School Site
Dear Ms. Dreyer:
.
Thank you tor your correspondence regarding the above referenced project indicating your client
wi II provide approximately 10 acres of the 20 acres required il.)!" a school sitc to serve the proposed
projCd. This donation, combined with an approved agreement regarding the contribution towards
public school construction, is in my opinion helpful in that it will mitigate the impacts to the puhlic
school system. The collaboration with you and your client, Sunnyland Fanns, the County, and thl.:
School District has allowed everyone to look beyond property lines and do what IS right for thl:
project and public facilities.
I have f()rwarded to you by electronic mail a similar agreement for contributions towards public
school construction that has been approved by the School Board that you may use as a template. In
order to meet the response time we will submit the agreement to thl: Board fl.)r review and approval
upon rel:eipt it will then be scheduled for the next Board meeting. We will also l1l:cd u commitment
on the option so we can proceed with design changes to accommodate Sunnyland Farms PUD no
latl:r than July 31. 2006.
Upon approval of the contribution agreement and the dedication of the nd I ()-;Jl:re school sile lill'
public school student stations. it is my opinion that this will mitigate the impads 011 the St. LUl:ie
County public schools concerning this land use amendment. This opinion is based upon Ihe
infonnation contained in the land use amendment and the site plan tl.)r Quail Meadows lhat is on tile
at St. Lucie County.
If you have any questions, pkase teel free to give me a call at (772) 429-3640.
Sincerely,
t1;t- ~a~~
Executive Director of Growth Management, Land Acquisitions & Governmental Relations
.
MES:mtf ..\>.1MEfo/ro
'v~ "'",
Endosure ",0 SEAl. OF ~
I,~" ]10,,, Ull'l1l1,\I",h..,1 011".11\ 1('~101 ,II\"')U.IIII\II";"I...., ';11"1.1. """..I", IM...Ill.\.I. I t. 21M1'1I'1l~ FI~.:!1Al ~
cc: Dan Harrell w/enclosure '? MANAGEMENT 5
... PIlAC11CEs ~
Diana Waite w/enclosure
ACCREDITED SYSTEM-WIDE BYTHE SOUTHERN ASSOCIATION OF COLLEGES AND SCHOOLS
The School Board of SI LIIr.Je County IS an Equal Opportunity Agency
"Committed to Quality"
.. FORT PIERCE UTILITIES AUTHORITY
113 N. Second Street (34950)
Post Office Box 3191
Fort Pierce, Florida 34948-3191
Phone 772-466- 1600
Fax 772-489-D396
August 1,2005
Steven M. Pawlyk, P.E.
Boyer-Singleton & Associates, Inc.
Northpoint business Plaza
West Palm Beach, FL 33407
RE: Quail Meadows request for utility service
.
Dear Mr. Pawlyk,
The purpose of this letter is to confirm that the above referenced project is within the
FPUA service boundary and FPUA intends to serve your project with water and
wastewater service. However, service is contingent upon construction of any and all
required infrastructure to include any offsite improvements that may be deemed
necessary by FPUA Engineering, payment of any applicable fees, execution of a FPUA
Water and Wastewater Supply Agreement, and execution of a City of Fort Pierce
Annexation Agreement. This letter shall not be construed to reserve water or wastewater
allocations to your project.
I trust that this Jetter provides you with the information necessary to move forward with
your project. Please feel free to contact me at 466-1600 extension 3480 if you require
further assistance.
Very truly yours,
~ft
.
Bo Hutchinson
Environmental Engineer
BHvr
cc: David Mellert, Environmental Engineer
James Carnes, Utility Engineer
.
To:
Submitted By:
SUBJECT:
BACKGROUND:
.
FUNDS AVAilABLE:
PREVIOUS ACTION:
RECOMMENDATION:
COMMISSION ACTION:
[=:J APPROVED
[=:J OTHER
Agenda Request
Item Number:
Meeting Date:
Cfc
11/1105
Consent
Regular
Public Hearing
Leg. [ ]
[ ]
[ ]
[X]
Quasi-JD [X
Board of County Commissioners
Growth Management
dmin strator
r--
Consider transmitting the application of uail Meadows LLC for a Change
in Future land Use Designation from RS (Residential Suburban - 2 du/ac)
to RU (Residential Urban - 5 du/ac) to the Florida Department of Community
Affairs for review. If approved, the amendment would change the
designation of 114 acres located approximately 1.5 miles west of the
intersection of Kings Highway and Angle Road. (File Number PA-05-010)
The subject property's current future land use designation allows for
residential uses at a density of 2 dwelling units per acre, or a total of 228
dwelling units. Approval of the proposed change to the RU Future Land Use
Designation would allow a maximum of 5 dwelling units per acre or 570 total
dwelling units on the amendment site. The applicant has submitted a
Planned Unit Development proposing a total of 502 dwelling units (173
single family dwellings, 165 multi-family/condo dwellings and 164 townhouse
dwellings).
N/A
On September 15, 2005, the Local Planning Agency (lPA) held a public
hearing on this matter; by a vote of 5 to 2 (Ms. Hammer & Mr. Grande voted
against) the lPA recommended the Board of County Commission transmit
the requested change in Future land Use Designation from the RS
(Residential Suburban) to the RU (Residential Urban) to the Department of
Community Affairs for further review.
Transmit the Quail Meadows LLC petition for a change in Future Land Use
Designation from RS (Residential Suburban) to RU (Residential Urban) to
the Florida Department of Community Affairs for review under Chapter 163,
Florida Statues.
CONCURRENCE:
CJ DENIED
Douglas M. Anderson
County Administrator
Coordinationl Signatures
.
County Attorney '1-' ~ OJ' M
Finance.:
Environ. Resources;
Mgt. & Budget:
Fire Dept:
Utility:
Purchasing:
Public Works:
Other:
.
.
.
Board of County Commissioners: November 1, 2005
File Number PA-05-01 0
MEMORANDUM
GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT
TO:
Board of County Commissioners
FROM:
Faye Outlaw, Assistant County Administrator
DATE:
October 26,2005
SUBJECT:
Application of Quail Meadows LLC for a Change in Future Land Use
Designation from RS (Residential Suburban - 1 to 2 units per gross acre)
to RU (Residential Urban - 5 units per gross acre)
LOCATION:
SW Corner of Angle Road & Old FFA Road
CURRENT FUTURE LAND
USE DESIGNATION:
RS (Residential Suburban)
PROPOSED FUTURE LAND
DESIGNATION:
RU (Residential Urban)
EXISTING ZONING:
AG-1 (Agricultural- 1 -- 1 du/gross acre)
PROPOSED ZONING:
PUD
PARCEL SIZE:
114 acres
PROPOSED USE:
A PUD containing 502 dwelling units (180 single family
dwellings, 164 multi-family/condo dwellings and 165
townhouse dwellings)
SURROUNDING FUTURE
LAND USE DESIGNATIONS:
RS (Residential Suburban) and the right-of-way of the
Florida Turnpike to the west. MXD (Mixed Use - Specific
Use Area - Woods of St. Lucie PUD) to the north. MXD
(Mixed Use - Specific Use Area - Golden Ponds Mobile
Home Development) to the east. RS (Residential
Suburban) and right-of-way of the Florida Turnpike to the
south. (Please see Land Use Map in "Maps and other
Data" section.)
SURROUNDING ZONING
DESIGNATIONS:
AG-1 (Agricultural-1 - 1 du/ 1 gross acre) and Florida
Turnpike right-of-way to the west. PUD to the north. RMH-
5 (Residential Mobile Home-5) and AR-1 (Agricultural
.
.
October 26, 2005
Page 2
Petition: Quail Meadows LLC
File Number: PA-05-010
Residential-1 - 1 du/1 gross acre) to the east. AG-1
(Agricultural-1 - 1 du/ 1 gross acre) and Florida Turnpike
right-of-way to the south. (Please see Zoning Map in
"Maps and other Data" section.)
SURROUNDING EXISTING
LAND USES:
The land to the west is classified as single family. The land
located to the north is unbuilt land classified by the
Property Appraiser as Class I grazing land soil capability.
Lands to the east include Mobile homes, vacant residential
sites, single family homes and vacant acreage not zoned
as agriculture. The land to the south is unbuilt land
classified by the Property Appraiser as Class I grazing land
soil capability. (Please see Existing Land Use Map in
"Maps and other Data" section.)
UTILITY SERVICE:
The subject property is located within the Fort Pierce
Utilities Authority (FPUA) Service Area.
TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS:
RIGHT-OF-WAY
ADEQUACY:
The existing right-of-way width along Angle Road is
shown as 80 feet.
SCHEDULED
IMPROVEMENTS:
None
TYPE OF CONCURRENCY
DOCUMENT REQUIRED:
Concurrency Deferral Affidavit.
*************************************************************************************************************
A future land use amendment is not regarded as a development order as defined in Florida
Statutes and does not imply that any specific development scenario can occur on the property.
No right to obtain a final development order or any other rights to develop the subject property
are granted or implied by the County if the requested Comprehensive Plan amendment is
approved. Analysis of potential impacts at the land use amendment stage is undertaken to
determine if other portions of the Comprehensive Plan need to be revised as a result of
approval of the land use amendment. Concurrency rights cannot be considered at the land use
amendment stage because actual projects proceeding toward a final development order will
enter the development review process between the time that a land use amendment is under
consideration for approval and a final project is brought forward to use that approved land use
amendment. Prior to the issuance of any final development order, the developer must
demonstrate that all public facilities are available to service the parcel and obtain a Certificate of
Capacity.
~ *************************************************************************************************************
.
October 26,2005
Page 3
Petition: Quail Meadows LLC
File Number: P A-05-01 0
DATA AND ANALYSIS
BACKGROUND
The applicant is requesting a change in the Future Land Use designation of the 114 acre
subject property from Residential Suburban (RS) to Residential Urban (RU). The Future Land
Use Element states that the land use designation of RU:
"... is the predominant residential land use category in the County. This
residential land use category provides for a maximum density of 5 dwelling units
per gross acre. The RU designation is generally found between the identified
urban service areas and the transitional RS areas. These properties need to be
serviced with central water and wastewater services. These services may be
provided by either a public utility or through private on-site facilities, as would be
permitted in accordance with all applicable regulations. New development in the
RU areas can occur using traditional single-family or multi-family zoning
designations or through the Planned Unit Development process."
The Future Land Use designations of lands abutting the subject property are summarized above
and shown on the map entitled "Land Use" in the "Maps and other data" section. Also included
is a map which shows the future land use designations within X mile of the subject site.
.
The existing use of the subject property is identified by the Property Appraiser as 'acreage not
zoned agricultural' and currently is vacant uncleared land and contains areas of environmental
interest. The existing uses of lands abutting the subject property is summarized above, and also
shown on the attached "Existing Use Map".
*************************************************************************************************************
APPLICANT PROPOSAL AND REASONS FOR REQUEST
The applicant requests a land use amendment to Residential Urban (RU) land use, which allows
a density of up to 5 dwelling units per gross acre. The total acreage for which the application is
submitted is 114 acres, which could yield a maximum of 570 dwelling units.
.
The applicant provides the following reasons for the request:
1. The applicant states that planning objective for the change in land use is to provide the
planning foundation for a unified development plan featuring a range of workforce
housing options, including single-family residences and two types of multi-family
housing.
2. The applicant states that the property is just south of the boundary proposed for the
future Towns, Villages and Countryside (TVC) land use designation, and the Planned
Unit Development (PUD) proposed for the site will incorporate the many of the village
design characteristics of the TVC, although it is smaller in size than the village concept
of the TVC and will not contain commercial uses to serve the residents. The PUD will be
proposed to include trails for bicyclists and hikers that could connect to a public park
proposed as part of the Sunnyland Farms PUD to the southeast of the amendment site.
3. The applicant states that the use of the higher density land use designation and the PUD
concept will allow development in clusters, thus permitting the preservation of
environmentally significant lands.
.
October 26, 2005
Page 4
Petition: Quail Meadows LLC
File Number: PA-05-010
STAFF FINDINGS
Staff notes the importance of the fact that this proposal for urban development is located within
the Urban Service area. The importance is not only due to the fact that the St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan currently requires urban densities to be located within the Urban Service
area, but because the County is experiencing development requests on agricultural lands not
included within either the TVC boundary or the Rural Stewardship Area, and not anticipated to
be served by central water and wastewater facilities. Allowing lands within the Urban Service
area boundary to absorb some of that market demand for housing can reduce pressures on the
agricultural lands at the same time that it reduces housing costs by permitting clustering.
Staff also examined the compatibility of this proposal with the language of Future Land Use
Element Policy 1.1.5.3, as required when an amendment is proposed. This Policy states the
following:
.
When considering any amendment to the Future Land Use Maps of the County's
Comprehensive Plan, the County Commission shall make the following findings,
supported by the other elements of this Plan, prior to taking any actions granting an
individual amendment to the Future Land Use Maps:
1. That the property under land use amendment application is adjacent to, or no
more than % mile of the same or greater type of land use classification.
2. That the property under land use amendment consideration lies within the Five
Year Capital Improvement Program of the Water and Wastewater Master Plan
for St. Lucie County or otherwise meets the requirements of Policy 1.1.5.4.
An examination of land use designations that are within X mile of the subject property (Please
see Land Use Map with X acre buffer in the "Maps and Other data" section) finds that lands to
the north and west have a land use designation of MXD (Mixed Use) and both are classified as
Mixed Use - Specific Use Area (MXD-SU). Each Mixed Use area in the St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan is further detailed by Activity Area maps contained in the text of the Future
Land Use Element, following Future Land Use Element Policy 1.1.7.3. The Mixed Use Activity
Area map illustrating the areas to the north and east of the subject property is "Figure 1-7e "St.
Lucie Blvd. Mixed Use Activity Area". The figure identifies what each Specific Use contains.
The MXD-SU to the north of the subject parcel was restricted to a PUD known as the Woods of
St. Lucie that was approved but only one cluster and a bridge over the C-25 canal were built. At
the time of approval of the Preliminary PUD on the 271.37 acre parcel in the late 1980s, the
development was proposed to contain a total of 950 dwelling units in clusters that would contain
21 units per cluster. While the overall density of the property would have been 3.5 units per
acre, the clustering of the units (if they had been built) meant that the land use proposed for the
subject parcel would be consistent with the MXD-SU to the north. According to the provisions
shown on Figure 1-7e, Specific Use areas are restricted to the uses approved, unless otherwise
amended through a Comprehensive Plan amendment.
.
The MXD-SU area to the east of the subject parcel contains the Golden Ponds Mobile Home
Park. The current provisions of the St. Lucie County Land Development Regulations limit
mobile home parks to a density of 5 per acre, which would be compatible with the amendment
requested for the subject property. However, the Specific Use designation is applied to the
Golden Ponds Mobile Home Park because it predates the current land development regulations,
and has a higher density, estimated at 14 units per acre. This density is greater than that
requested by the amendment for the subject property.
.
.
.
October 26, 2005
Page 5
Petition: Quail Meadows LLC
File Number: PA-05-010
A triangular parcel of land directly to the west of the subject property would remain in the RS
land use designation. The Property Appraiser classifies this parcel as vacant residential.
Directly to the west of this parcel and running to the south is the right-of-way of the Florida
Turnpike, serving as a barrier between the subject property and the remaining land to the west
within the y.. mile buffer, which has a land use designation of AG-5 (Agricultural-5, allowing a
maximum of 1 dwelling unit per 5 gross acres). It should be noted that the AG-5 land is not
within the Urban Service Area boundary and is not anticipated to receive central water and
wastewater service. An additional parcel located to the south of the subject parcel will remain in
RS land use designation; however, it should be noted that the Property Appraiser classifies this
parcel as right-of-way.
Overall, the proposed amendment for the subject property meets the requirements of point 1 of
Future Land Use Element Policy 1.1.5.3. The requirements of point 2 of this Policy are also
satisfied, because the subject site is located within the service area of the Fort Pierce Utility
Authority (FPUA) and the utility indicates that it is able to serve the proposal. (Please see letter
from FPUA, included in the "Maps and Other data" section.)
*************************************************************************************************************
Any proposed amendment to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan may be reviewed by
several state and regional agencies. The State Department of Community Affairs, which is
identified by Chapter 163, Florida Statutes (FS) as the "Land Planning Agency" for the state,
has the responsibility to determine if proposed amendments are consistent with and further the
St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, the State Comprehensive Plan, the Strategic Regional
Policy Plan and Chapter 163, FS. The St. Lucie County Local Planning Agency (LPA), which is
the Planning and Zoning Board, has the responsibility according to subsection 163.3174(4)(a),
FS, to "make recommendations to the governing body regarding the adoption or amendment"
of the Comprehensive Plan.
*************************************************************************************************************
CONSISTENCY WITH THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
In reviewing this application for a proposed amendment to the St. Lucie County Future Land
Use Map, staff finds that the following Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the County
Comprehensive Plan are applicable to this petition.
FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT
The petition is found to support and further this Element.
As noted above, the petition is found to support and further the intent of Future Land Use
Element Policy 1.1.5.3.
In addition, the petition supports and furthers the following:
Future Land Use Element Policy 1.1.4.1, which states: "Encourage the location of urban land
use intensities, through the development of density bonus and incentive programs in the Land
Development Regulations, to those areas that lie within the urban service boundary and
discourage the conversion of property in the agricultural and suburban areas to higher intensity
urban uses, while still keeping all development authorizations in line with the adopted levels of
.
.
.
October 26, 2005
Page 6
Petition: Quail Meadows LLC
File Number: PA-05-010
service within this plan." The petition supports and furthers this Policy by proposing to locate an
urban density within the Urban Service Area boundary, through the use of the Planned Unit
Development (PUD) zoning designation. The PUD regulations within the Land Development
Regulations provide an incentive to the preservation of open space and natural resources
through allowing clustering of units, on smaller sized lots and with setbacks that vary from the
lot sizes and setbacks required by standard zoning districts. While the current land use
designation also allows the use of the PUD, the RS land use is limited by the St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan to single family homes.
Future Land Use Element Policy 1.1.4.2, which states: "Require that new development be
designed and planned in a manner that does not place an unanticipated economic burden upon
the services and facilities of St. Lucie County." Because the petition requests an urban density
within that portion of the County that is identified for Urban Services, it supports the intent of this
Policy.
Future Land Use Objective 1.1.5, which states: "In coordination with the other elements of this
plan, future development within the Urban Service Area shall be directed to areas where urban
and community services/facilities can be provided in the most efficient and compact manner so
as to discourage the proliferation of urban sprawl." As noted above, the development proposes
to cluster its housing units, which will support the intent of this objective by providing a more
compact development pattern. In addition, as noted above, allowing additional units within the
urban service area will help to reduce the pressure on agricultural areas not anticipated to
receive residential growth at this time, and thus helps to prevent urban sprawl.
TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
A future land use amendment is not regarded as a development order as defined in Florida
Statutes and does not imply that any specific development scenario can occur on the property.
No right to obtain a final development order, or any other rights to develop the subject property
are granted or implied by the County if the requested Comprehensive Plan amendment is
approved. Analysis of potential impacts at the land use amendment stage is undertaken to
determine if other portions of the Comprehensive Plan need to be revised as a result of
approval of the land use amendment. Concurrency rights cannot be considered at the land use
amendment stage because actual projects proceeding toward a final development order will
enter the development review process between the time that a land use amendment is under
consideration for approval and a final project is brought forward to use that approved land use
amendment. Prior to the issuance of any final development order, the developer must
demonstrate that all public facilities are available to service the parcel and obtain a Certificate of
Capacity.
***********************************************************************************************************
Staff examined the compatibility of this proposal with Transportation Element Policy 2.1.1,
which is required when a land use plan amendment is proposed. Based on the data submitted,
it is necessary for the applicant to conduct additional analyses at the development approval
stage in order to ensure that transportation system impacts can be addressed. As the land use
approval process does not require reservation of capacity, the need for intersection
improvements to jointly accommodate trips from this proposed land use and development (or a
development based on the present land use designation), and other developments in the area,
does not mean that this proposal fails to support and further the Transportation Element. The
.
.
.
October 26,2005
Page 7
Petition: Quail Meadows LLC
File Number: PA-05-010
applicant has indicated that, if the proposed land use amendment is approved, the PUD
subsequently submitted will include features that support and further other policies of the
Transportation Element.
Policy 2.1.1: The St. Lucie County transportation system shall be reviewed in
coordination with any requested changes to the Future Land use Element or other
related component of this plan. A report on the impacts to the system brought about by
any proposed land use changes shall be prepared and presented to the Board of County
Commissioners as part of the review of that Land Use change.
The applicant provided a Traffic Analysis for the proposal, which was reviewed by both the
Road and Bridge Manager and the St. Lucie Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO).
The analysis presented by the applicant indicated that the present land use designation (RS)
would generate 2,219 daily trips and 225 trips in the PM peak hour. According to the analysis.
the proposed land use of RU, with a PUD development plan, would generate approximately
3,552 daily trips and 342 trips during the PM peak hour. The analysis found that two roadway
links would exceed capacity, but these same roadway links would exceed capacity under the
existing land use category. The analysis pointed out that the Long Range Transportation Plan
for the St. Lucie County Urban Area, prepared by the Metropolitan Planning Organization,
identifies Kings Highway widening as a high priority, and that key intersections at Kings
Highway and Angle Road, Orange Avenue and Indrio Road are included in the Cost Feasible
Plan. The finding of the analysis is that, although the proposed land use amendment will
generate an increase in traffic, that increase is not significant enough to require improvements
beyond those necessary to support the existing land use. (Please see "Traffic Analysis" in the
"Maps and Other Data" section.)
The Traffic Analysis was reviewed by the Road and Bridge Division. The comments of the Road
and Bridge Division are as follows:
1. Previously submitted traffic impact reports (for other projects in this area) have identified
the need for improvements at the intersections of Kings Highway and Angle Road, and
Kings Highway and Orange Avenue. These reports (for Sunnyland Farms and Taylor's
Glen) should be taken into consideration in the analysis for this proposal.
2. It is not clear how the traffic was loaded onto the network and the reductions to eliminate
the "Double Counting" of trips in converting from the Treasure Coast Regional Planning
Model [which was used by the Engineer to prepare the analysis].
3. While the links identified as overcapacity by the analysis may be capacity with or without
the land use amendment, this capacity problem will still have to be met in order to
comply with the Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. [At time of development approval].
St. Lucie Metropolitan Planning Organization review
The St. Lucie Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) staff has also reviewed the Traffic
Analysis. Comments from the Metropolitan Planning Organization are included in the section
entitled "Maps and Other Data". The MPO noted that, since the land use amendment did not
identify construction of major public roadways or new lanes on existing roadways, the
amendment is not in conflict with the MPO's adopted 2025 Long Range Transportation Plan.
However, the MPO comments do note that several roadway segments that are likely to be
affected by the proposed land use amendment are identified as 'congested' in the 2025 Plan.
.
.
.
October 26, 2005
Page 8
Petition: Quail Meadows LLC
File Number: PA-05-010
This issue, again, would need to be addressed at the development approval stage, when an
applicant can indicate how intersection capacity issues will be mitigated.
The proposed land use amendment is found to support and further the following:
Transportation Element Objective 2.3.4: A usable pedestrian circulation system shall be
developed.
Transportation Element Policy 2.3.4.1: Provide, in association with all new road
construction in the urban area, sidewalks along all arterials and collectors identified in
the Comprehensive Plan. Pedestrian facilities shall be required along all local streets as
necessary to support the intensity and density of development.
HOUSING ELEMENT
The proposed amendment has been determined to support and further the intent of this
Element. Although the Housing Element does not contain specific goals, objectives or policies
regarding a necessary number of housing units for workforce housing, the data and analysis
section of the Housing Element noted the following:
"The Shimberg Affordable Housing Needs Assessment further analyzed the
county's housing data by completing a comparison of affordable units within
the unincorporated area of the county. The results of this comparison are
indicated in Table 5-28 [of the Data and Analysis section of the Housing
Element; please see section entitled "Maps and Other data".]. As this table
indicates by the year 2020, the Unincorporated County will have a severe
deficit of affordable housing for homeowners in all income ranges..."
The application indicates that, if the land use amendment is approved, the subsequent
development will include housing described as 'workforce', which is construed to apply to
person employed in positions with moderate pay rates. (Examples are teachers, nurses, and fire
fighters) The present Future Land Use designation does allow the use of the Planned Unit
Development (PUD) zoning, but is restricted to single family housing, which is less conducive to
creating workforce housing. Accordingly, the application is supportive of the Housing Element.
INFRASTRUCTURE ELEMENT
The site is located within the service area of the Fort Pierce Utility Authority (FPUA). The
applicant has provided documentation from FPUA that service can be provided. (Please see
letter from FPUA in the section entitled "Maps and Other data".)
Prior to any Final Development Order for the property the applicant must obtain appropriate
documentation from FPUA indicating that these services can be provided to serve the property.
· Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element
The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this sub-element. The
relevant Objectives and Policies are shown below:
.
.
.
October 26, 2005
Page 9
Petition: Quail Meadows LLC
File Number: PA-05-010
Policy 6D.1.2.2: The level of service standard for those areas of the unincorporated
County served by Ft. Pierce Utility Authority shall be 380 gallons per capita per day
(Ft. Pierce Utilities Authority 1988 Water and Wastewater Master Plan, July 1988).
Assuming that the existing future land use designation would yield a maximum of 228
housing units; with a person per household rate of 2.47 (Census 2000), the residential
wastewater generation rate would be 228 units X 2.47 persons, yielding 563 persons. At a
level of service of 380 gallons per capita per day, the resulting daily demand would be
214,001 gallons.
If the amendment is adopted as proposed, a total of 570 units could be built. With a person
per household rate of 2.47 (Census 2000), the residential wastewater generation rate would
be 570 units X 2.47 person, yielding 1,408 persons. At a rate of 380 gallons per capita per
day, the wastewater generation rate would be 535,002. While this does represent an
increase in wastewater flow, the provider has indicated an ability to provide service.
Prior to any final development order approvals, the applicant would provide more
information, and would need to demonstrate that sufficient capacity is available to service
the project.
Sanitary Sewer Sub-Element Policy 6D.1.2.6: Development within the unincorporated
areas of the County will only be permitted when such development ties into or makes
provision for tying into a regional or sub-regional system that is available as set forth
in the annual Service Availability Report.
. Solid Waste Sub-Element
The proposed amendment is not in conflict with this sub-element and would not reduce the
Level of Service standards for the County's solid waste facility as set forth by Policy
6B.1.1.1. The County's Solid Waste facility currently has a 30-year capacity based upon
current usage and does not need to begin assessing disposal options until the year 2015.
The level of service specified in Policy 6B.1.1.1 is 9.31 pounds per capital per day.
Assuming that the existing future land use designation for the 114 acres included in the
subject site would yield a maximum of 228 residential units with a person per household rate
of 2.47 (Census 2000), the estimated population for the existing future land use designation
is 563 persons. At a level of service of 9.31 pounds per capita per day, the total solid waste
generation from the existing future land use would be 5,242 pounds per day.
If the amendment is adopted as proposed, a maximum of 570 residential units could be
built. With a person per household rate of 2.47 (Census 2000), the population resulting
would be 1,408 persons. At a rate of 9.31 pounds per capita per day, the solid waste
generation rate would be 13,108.5 pounds per day.
The applicant has provided a letter from the Consultant to St. Lucie County's Public Works
Department indicating an ability to serve. Please see the letter in the section entitled "Maps
and Other data".
. Drainage and Aquifer Recharge Sub-Element
.
.
.
October 26, 2005
Page 10
Petition: Quail Meadows LLC
File Number: PA-05-010
The proposed amendment is not inconsistent with this sub-element. In accordance with
Objective 6C.1.4.2 of this element, all development will be conditioned on the availability of
services necessary to maintain the level of service standards for stormwater set forth in
Policy 6C.1.1.2. The applicant has provided a Letter of No Objection from the North St.
Lucie River Water Control District (NSLRWCD), within whose service area the site is
located. (Please see section entitled "Maps and Other Data").
Objective 6C.3.2 requires development to protect the functions of natural groundwater
recharge areas.
As noted in the letter from the Water Control District, prior to development taking place,
approval will be required from the Board of this Agency.
. Potable Water Sub-Element
The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this sub-element. The
relevant Objectives and Policies are shown below:
Policy 6A.1.2.2: The level of service standard for those areas of the unincorporated
County served by Ft. Pierce Utility Authority shall be 332 gallons per capita per day
(Ft. Pierce Utilities Authority, 1999).
Assuming that the existing future land use designation would yield a maximum of 228
housing units, with a person per household rate of 2.47 (Census 2000), the residential water
demand would be 228 units X 2.47 persons, yielding 563 persons. At a level of service of
332 gallons per capita per day, the resulting daily demand would be 186,916 gallons.
If the amendment is adopted as proposed, a total of 570 units could be built. With a person
per household rate of 2.47 (Census 2000), the residential wastewater generation rate would
be 570 units X 2.47 person, yielding 1,408 persons. At a rate of 332 gallons per capita per
day, the water demand would be 467,456. While this does represent an increase in water
demand, the provider has indicated an ability to provide service.
Prior to any final development order approvals, the applicant would provide more
information, and would need to demonstrate that sufficient capacity is available to service
the project.
COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENT
The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. The subject
site is not located within the coastal planning area.
CONSERVATION ELEMENT
The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element. The proposed
land use amendment and its Preliminary Environmental Assessment and Preliminary Listed
Species Survey was reviewed by the Environmental Resources Division (ERD). The staff of
ERD noted that, as presented, the new future land use designation with a Planned Unit
Development (PUD) would require set asides of the native habitat on the site. With the existing
.
.
.
October 26, 2005
Page 11
Petition: Quail Meadows LLC
File Number: PA-05-010
future land use designation of RS and a straight subdivision, there is no similar requirement to
set aside native habitat, although tree mitigation requirements would be of some help.
Relevant Goals and Policies are shown below.
Goal 8.1: The natural resources of St. Lucie County shall be protected, appropriately
used, or conserved in a manner which maximizes their function, and values.
Policy 8.1.8.16: The County shall require clustering of dwelling units and/or open space
for land development projects which contain environmentally sensitive lands and critical
habitats within its project boundaries, in order to preserve these resources.
The applicant's Preliminary Assessment and Listed Species Review indicated that the site does
contain pine flatwoods throughout, although the quality varies. Development of this site, if the
land use amendment is approved, would be required to comply with relevant Land Development
Regulations. If the land use amendment is approved, a more detailed Environmental
Assessment would need to be submitted along with the development proposal, in order to
ensure compliance with Policy 8.1.8.16.
RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE
The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element because of
requirements that will ensure that the project will bear its fair share of the cost of providing
recreation and open space facilities.
The current future land use designation of RS creates a demand for recreational facilities. The
proposed amendment would create an increase in demand, although the proposed PUD would
provide internal recreational amenities to mitigate demand against County facilities. Should the
amendment be approved, the development would need to pay impact fees in order to ensure
that it does not conflict with this element.
The Level of Service for recreational facilities established in the St. Lucie County
Comprehensive Plan is contained in Policy 9.1.1.1 of the Recreation and Open Space Element.
Recreation and Open Space Policy 9.1.1.1 Level of Service for Recreation and Open
Space shall be as follows:
. Community Parks: 5 acres/1000 residents in the unincorporated area
. Regional parks: 5 acres/1000 residents countywide.
Assuming that the existing future land use designation would yield a maximum of 228 units, with
a person per household rate of 2.47 (Census 2000), the number of persons resulting would be
563. The standard of 5 acres/1000 population for community parks produces a demand of 2.8
acres of community park.
If the amendment is adopted, a maximum of 570 dwelling units are proposed. With a person per
household rate of 2.47 (Census 2000), the total population for the proposed site is estimated as
1,408. The standard of 5 acres/1000 population for community parks produces a demand of
7.04 acres in community park acreage to meet the needs of the proposed residents.
.
.
.
October 26,2005
Page 12
Petition: Quail Meadows LLC
File Number: PA-05-010
According to the information contained in Table 9-1 of the Recreation and Open Space Element
of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, the total community park acreage is 160.3. The
projected unincorporated permanent resident population for 2005, according to the Recreation
and Open Space Element, is 70,951, which would require a community park total acreage of
354.7 acres in order to meet adopted level of service standards. With the current total acreage,
the projected permanent population stands at a level of service of 2.3 acres/1000.
An individual project can only be required to address impacts caused by that project. Recreation
and Open Space Policy 9.1.2.2 , which states that the County shall use monies collected from
the parks impact fee to acquire additional open space, indicates that the proposed project would
also be assessed its fair share of impact fees to ensure progress toward achieving the adopted
level of service.
According to Table 9-1 of the Recreation and Open Space Element, the County total Regional
Park acreage is 7,069 acres. For Regional Parks, the countywide population is used for
establishing level of service. The projected 2005 population for the County as cited in this
Element is 220,334. This equates to approximately 32 acres per 1000 persons, which is well
above the 5 acres per 1000 persons required as the level of service for Regional Parks.
INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT
The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT
The proposed amendment has been determined not to conflict with this element.
11.1.1.28: The County shall continue to require new development to meet level of service
standards for both on and off-site improvements, including local streets, water and
sewer connection lines, Stormwater management facilities and open space.
The applicant of the proposed Future Land Use Amendment has signed a Concurrency Deferral
Affidavit that defers the reservation of capacity in public facilities. The Affidavit states "St. Lucie
County can make no guarantee that adequate public facilities will be available when I apply for
the Final Development Order" and that "the issuance of a preliminary development order without
a Certificate of Capacity creates no vested or other rights to develop the subject property." A
Certificate of Capacity will be obtained before the issuance any final development orders for
development of this property.
Policy 11.1.4: No right to obtain final development order, nor any other rights to develop
(B)(3)(b) the subject property have been granted or implied by the County's approval of
the preliminary development order without determining the capacity of public facilities.
A Certificate of Capacity demonstrating sufficient public facilities are available to support any
future development proposal must be obtained before a final development order is issued.
.
.
.
October 26,2005
Page 13
Petition: Quail Meadows LLC
File Number: PA-05-010
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT
The proposed amendment was reviewed by the staff of the Economic Development Division
and found not to conflict with the goals, objectives and policies of the Economic Development
Element.
************************************************************************************************************
CONSISTENCY WITH THE STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The applicant cited a number of Goals and Policies from the State Comprehensive Plan with
which the proposed land use amendment is seen by the applicant as consistent. Most, however,
deal with how the site would be developed after a land use amendment is approved, rather than
whether this particular land use is appropriate at this location.
It is interesting to note that the State Comprehensive Plan does not, itself, provide significant
guidance on the issue of initial residential development in areas beyond an Urban Service
boundary, in portions of a community previously restricted to rural uses only.
The proposed amendment furthers and supports the following policy that applies to this petition:
LAND USE 187.201(16), Florida Statutes (FS)
(a) Goa/:
In recognition of the importance of preserving the natural resources and enhancing the
quality of life of the state, development shall be directed to those areas which have in
place, or have agreements to provide, the land and water resources, fiscal abilities, and
service capacity to accommodate growth in an environmentally acceptable manner.
*************************************************************************************************************
CONSISTENCY WITH THE REGIONAL COMPREHENSIVE POLICY PLAN
The proposed amendment furthers and supports the following goals, strategies and policies that
apply to this petition through its intent to preserve habitat in the PUD proposed to implement the
land use, and potential linkage to greenways:
Regional Goal 6.7
Protection of upland natural communities and ecosystems.
Strategy 6.7.1: Preserve and manage upland natural communities in order to maintain
viable populations of all native plant and animal species, and representative stands of
each habitat type.
Policy 6.7.1.2: Development plans should be designed to maximize the amount of
protected habitat. Protected natural communities and ecosystems should be preserved
in viable condition with intact canopy, understory, and ground cover. Where possible,
preserve areas should be designed to interconnect with other natural areas that have
been set aside for preservation. A restoration and management plan for the protected
areas should be developed. Upon review, or request for review, the regional planning
.
.
.
October 26, 2005
Page 14
Petition: Quail Meadows LLC
File Number: PA-05-010
council will make a recommendation concerning the appropriateness of: 1) the amount
of habitat protected, 2) the design and location of the preserve area, and 3) the
restoration and management plan for the protected natural communities.
*************************************************************************************************************
CONSISTENCY WITH SCHOOL DISTRICT PLANS
Subsection 163.3177, Florida Statutes, requires local governments within the geographic area
of a school district to enter into an Interlocal Agreement with the district school board that jointly
establishes the specific ways in which plans and processes of the district school board and local
government are to be coordinated. St. Lucie County adopted its Interlocal Agreement with the
St. Lucie County School Board on October 7, 2003. Pursuant to that Interlocal Agreement, St.
Lucie County provides the school board with copies of all petitions proposing land use changes,
rezonings and site plans that will increase residential density. A copy of this petition was
provided to the school board. A comment letter was provided by the school board and has been
included in the "Maps and Other data" section.
************************************************************************************************************
CONCLUSION
Based upon the information provided staff has found the proposed land use change to be
consistent with the Goals, Objectives and Policies as set forth in the County's Comprehensive
Plan. Staff also finds that the proposed amendment does support and further the State
Comprehensive Plan and the Strategic Regional Policy Plan.
Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners transmit this application to the State
Department of Community Affairs for consideration as an amendment to the County
Comprehensive Plan.
Attachment
cc: County Administrator
County Attorney
File
MAPS AND OTHER DATA
.
en L()
;: 0
I.. 0
0 0 ,;~~ N
"'0 U;
-r- z.~ ......
ro 0 j' ......
Q) ; } ii)
I i ::::l
~ lC) Cl
0 :s ' . t ::::l
~ <(
.- ~ 'C
ro .~. t Q)
....
::J m
0 "{.. ~ 0-
~
~t 0-
~ 0-
m
~
>-
c
OJ
o
<.)
Q;
>
i(
c:
III
'0
.!:
p~ P"'~"QO~
>-
c
OJ
o
<.)
c:
:e
III
::2:
l:I .uq .~"l:I
->-
ut
Q) Q)
EO.
:J 0
cnll:
ex:>
to
"Iuno:) aaqOlpaa~o
.
I
MO:::
o 0
0......
~~
~ E
o
.;::
I-
u..
<(
0:::
o
~~
c: VI
~:J
O"C
() c:
Q) C'CJ
._ ..J
(.) Q)
~ ...
...J ~
-
...; ~
UJLL.
f~
~~
~~ t.'.
J ~ ~ e lilt
Hi!~ H
~ i- Cl.~ "C lij t.~!
8 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ & ~ ~:
Iii. Ii g~ a
co U"'l N i~
l~~~ti~~~~~ 2t
~ ~i im II ;1
.
z."
is
'"
o
~
"I
~~
J i
'~ .
q
~~
~!
~
.
o
,
,
"C
~
.
~
c.
:1
,
. I
>- >-
c
C :>
:> 0
0 u
u c:
Q; '€
> 111
0:: ::.
c:
111
ii
E
.
..... >-
Ut
Q) Q)
'-, a.
.00
:J "-
Wa..
~----_.
\
~/
/~
-<
\
~luno:J ""qo~o,,"~o
petition of Quail Meadows for Future Land Use Amendment from RS Land
Use designation to RU Land Use designation
\S'v.
"VIS'
~~
~\S'
~
~
'%
tz,)...
f
I
f
..---
....
..
- -/ -~ - - - -- - - --
~ I -.
Canal C-23
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
,
,
,
,
~
,
~
,
,
,
,
~
,
,
,
~
~
~
;<-
"1~
()
I
I
I
I
,
I
~olden Ponds
M<y>ile Home Park.
,
,
~
~
,
~
,
.. I
.. ..I
I
I
f
,
I
I
,
,
,
..
,
..
,
,
PA 05-010
~ Subject property - 114 acres
~ _ _ _: 1/4 mile buffer
5?::- .L.~qW ~~~,>_
grtrWtli :Nan~em:ent :Do/artmt!'7tt
N
A
Map prepared August 11, 2005
Quail Meadows LLC
I
I
I
I
I
I
l
l
\
\
..
,
..
,
..
..
..
..
,
..
..
..
..
..
AG-5
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
.......
E
PA 05-010
~~ Subject property - 114 acres
~ _ _ _: 1/4 mile buffer
5t;- .L.1~-W ~u~>
gro-wrli ..MtZ71.0f1tmu7f.1 lJepartmenr
N
A
Map prepared August 11, 2005
Quail Meadows LLC
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
,
,
,
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
AG-5
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
PA 05-010
~~) Subject property - 114 acres
~ _ _ _: 1/4 mile buffer
x- ..L.te4&- &~~~_;~
(;rO"Wtli :Man~em.l!7t.t ZJ9artmntT
N
A
Map prepared August 11 , 2005
Quail Meadows LLC
/ I
_--t--7J~----l_
,,-#" /' <;,,~/ /,/-,./~
,/ . ,\// I .. I
~------- ~C;;nai c~l'-I-
';;~"t.. --~ANGLE RO_-1
I
I
I
;,,' !
'T1 '
~."_.-,---I
::0 !
o I
L..___
. I
I I
tr-."!
!
t._..........:
1S'v.
~&
~~
~IS'
~
~
'%
tz,J-
t
.
,
\
"
"
,
"
,
,
" ,
'1-.
I'
I ,
,
'"
''''
"""
~
'"
"",
"""""""",
".
',"
Legend
Existing Land Use
D 0000 - Vacant residential
L._.....: 0100. Single family
[._.mj 0200 - Mobile homes
1..._: 2800 - Parking lots/mobile home parks
L..m"' 5100. Cropland soil capability Class I
1_.__"._.: 6000. Grazing land soil capability Class I
L: 6600.. Orchard groves, citrus
D 9400 - Right-of-way, streets, roads...
~ 9900 -Acreage not zoned agricultural
Data Source: St. Lucie County
Property Appraiser
I-
C/J
0::
LlJ
,..
\ ..
\ 4lt
, ~
\ ,
\ "
\ ~ IA.
\ \ 'V)';
" . ~-?
._~\ IS'~J'~
\. .9$
-~-~
i
~olden Ponds
M4>i1e Home Park
~
,
~
~
I
.
I
1
,
,
i
,
I
I
PA 05-010
tD~ Subject property
~ _ _ _: 1/4 mile buffer
5t;- ~.#C--U:- a.~~~;,...
(irO"Wrli .Manaunn.ntl ZJf'!/Nzrtmenr
N
A
Map prepared August 11,2005
Quail Meadows LLC
PA 05-010
~ Subject property - 114 acres
~ _ _ _: 1/4 mile buffer
X' AupU:- a,~~~
(jrtrWtli :Nanti9t!"Me1'It D,!parl'ml!1tt
N
A
Map prepared August 11, 2005
JXf, _ Ii",,::" ", ..
f,l.f,',. . "'C:~ .
~':;:;~~>-:T"";>; .f..:. ,"",
~"":~~,~~~~~""
_..,..;..-..:: ~,..'. t._....,,::..:...a..:,;."'_~.I1;..
~\~...:.~....,.,...--.
.
SUSAN E. O'ROURKE, P.E., Inc.
.
.
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
FOR
QUAIL MEADOWS
Prepared for:
EH Building Group
4227 Northlake Boulevard
Palm Beach Gardens, FlOrIda
Prepared by
Susan E. O'Rourke, P.E.
229 SE Villas Street
Stuart, FL
(772)781 7918
July 22, 2005
TR05073.0
.............u '.'
...... "'i;":',:,,~
229 Villas SCreec
Stuart. Florida 34994
772.781 7918
772 781 9261 tax
;:Jr..I""\_:. ~_-I r-"\.
..
.
.
...."E~'!f;~::E~r~}ri2.::2;:,~~
INTRODUCTION
Quail Meadows is a 114 acres site located east of the Florida Turnpike and south of
Angle Road. Figure 1 identifies the project location.
The purpose of this traffic analysis is two fold: provide the analysis for the Land Use Plan
Amendment and evaluate the requirements for concurrency for the PUD. The report addresses
the Land Use Plan Amendment followed by the analysis of concurrency for the PUD.
Quail Meadows is a 114 acre site that is currently designated as RS allowing 2 dwelling units
per acre or 228 dwelling units. The project seeks a change to RU which allows up to 5 units per
acre or 570 dwelling units. The project is being submitted as a PUD concurrently with the
LUPA and seeks a mix of single family and multi-family town home with 509 dwelling units.
With the concurrent application, the maximum allowable number of units would be as
designated in the POO. The potential impact of the net increase in traffic associated with the
land use change is the subject of this report. To that end the following information is presented:
allowable land use types, potential trip generation and traffic analysis of the differential.
Each of the analysis is outlined herein.
LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT
Land Uses
To undertake a land use change designation, the maximum number of trips that could be generated
under the existing and proposed land uses should be determined. The land uses under the existing
designation and under the proposed land use category are summarized in Table I.
Table I: Land Use
Land Use
Residential
Residential
Residential
Scenario
Existin
Allowable
Proposed
Cate ory
RS
RU
PUD
Densi
2 du I acre
5 dul acre
4.4 du/acre
Units
228
590
509 (180 SFI329
MF
Since the PUD is being filed concurrently, the maximum number of units in the Future
Land Use scenario will be 509.
. r
....:~.-..;.~~~:~~; .
,,-. .....:...;.--..........;....,~~..,'..:-,. :.".-'-.-" ...~~_'...;,._:._ I",..
-
..
Trip Generation
The existing land use would generate 2,219 daily trips and 225 trips in the PM peak hour. The
proposed land use would generate approximately 3,552 trips on a daily basis and 342 PM trips
during the PM peak hour. The trip generation for the proposed land use is based on the PUD
submittal. Table 2 summarizes the trip generation for the various scenarios and the trip
differential between the existing and proposed land use designation on the site.
To estimate traffic generated by the development, the ITE Trip Generation, 7th Edition
trip rates were applied. These calculations provide an estimate of the typical generation.
As shown in Table 2, the differential between the two land use scenarios is 1,333 daily trips and
117 PM peak hour trips.
.
Long Term Traffic Analysis for the LUPA
The purpose of this analysis is to determine the project's impact on the surrounding roadway
system and the relative impact of the proposed land use versus the proposed land use.
Model- The 2025 Treasure Coast Regional Planning Model was used to estimate the future
traffic for the existing and proposed land use conditions. The model includes traffic from recent
ORl applications in St. Lucie County to the north; annexation projects including Southern
Groves; as well as other major developments such as; Midway Partners, Egan Groves, Tesoro,
St. Lucie Land, The Reserve, PGA Village, LTC Ranch, Tradition and St. Lucie West. The
model values were peak season AOTs. Traffic from potential projects north of Okeechobee
Boulevard was manually added to address potential growth to the west. A total of
approximately 15,900 daily trips and 1,600 PM peak hour trips were added to the network. The
model volumes were factored using theMOCF from the Florida Traffic Information CO and the
standard K and 0 factors of .093 and .55. These factors are appropriate given the long term
planning horizon.
Assignment -The project distribution and assignment was based on the ultimate origins and
destinations of the trips and the likely travel patterns based on the existing and future roadway
network. 100% of the PUD traffic was assigned instead of the incremental traffic since the
model volumes were not specifically loaded for this project.
Tables 3 and 4 identify the project impact with the total traffic for the existing land use and
. proposed land use scenarios.
The links where the project has an impact of I % of existing plus commit1ed capacity were
deemed significant. Two project significant links exceed capacity. These same two links would
exceed capacity under the existing land use category. Neither of the exceedances is caused by
the land use change. The two links are: Kings Highway from Orange Avenue to Angle Road
and Kings Highway from Angle Road to St. Lucie Boulevard.
..
.
.
c
o
:;:;
l'll
....
C1I
C
C1I
C)
C.
'i:
~
N
W
...J
a:J
<
~
II)
III 0-
en";:: en
tC ~ ,...
~>.N
> = N
<C(g
c: ~I
~I:I
:::l x
O'~
W S
O-N
.~ 0>
~ 0
>-
= 1/
fll ~
o ~
Ie:
-.J
co
N
N
II)
:J
o
en
0::
Q) 0
'C ,...
o N
U
QJ
VJ
:J
'C
c:
!ll
-.J
I
C1I
r/)
::>
"
c
j
C)
C
:;:;
III
'x
W
E
C rn
giLL
Q./ aJ
~,O>
~I~
. S; c:;
::E ,...
a..
"5
0 0
::E en
....
a..
.S; M
::E N
a.. M
"5 ,....
0
~ M
"
Z M
~ f.D
"
II)
0-
.;:: M
~ ....
::E Lll
a..
M
Lll
0
c: +
g S
co c:
:::l -.J
0' 0
W en
:::!= 0
a.. .!!...
t:
c:
-J ,
II) ~I
QJ Q.
Ol"C
~~ I
III >. .... I
>= Lll
<C co
0
....
,....
c: N
0 +
:,::; I~
fll
:::l
0'
ill I-J
0- I~
~
~ 10
II
co
0 ~
~
c:
-J
VJ 01
::> I'--
0 Lll ,
I
III
'C
0 I
u I
QJ I 0
l/) .-1
::J NI
'C
C
fll
::> -.J
0::
I
C1I
III
::>
't:l
C ~
l'll
..J C E
C1I g tC
.... a. u..
:::J '5 .S?
... VJ en
:::J Q) ">;:
U. 0 (f)
:::l ~
o
::E
a..
"5
0 ,.... MO
:::!= f.D Lll~
a..
s; Lll ,.... N
::E .... 0 N
a.. or- .... N
"5 I"- M
0
~ M M
"
Z M I'--
~ f.D f.D
c
VJ
0-
.;:: N 0 N
~ co CD .".
:::!= ..... ,... C")
n..
C") N
~r
00
c: + +
"Q EE
ro C c:
:::l -.J -.J
0' 0 N
ill m co
~ 0 0
a.. .!!... .!!...
t: t:
c: c:
-.J -.J
Ul
QJ 0-
0> -~ ICD CDN
1E~ COICD Lll
QJ >- r--II'-- Lll
>= ..........C")
<C co I
0
..... Lll
r-- Lll
c: NN
.Q :/:1
ro
:::l XX
0' e:le:
w -.J -.J
Q. NILll
.;:: en co
~ 0 0
~ III II
co 1;::-
0 ~
Is c:
-J
I
Ul I
/0 enlm
::> co'NIO
0 I.....!M/Lll
Q) I i I
'C
0
U I I
Q) 1~lg
Ul
::J IN N
'C I
c
0 cu I I
:J --'
tl. I ~I
.
C1I I 0
.c
III >-c:
:J c E~
" g
a. COlt: E
c '5 u.. :::l
1\1 ~If VJ
..J VJ
Q)
ell 0 1~lj
...
:l
...
:l
U.
"5~
o ,....
~C")
Zef.
~~
VJ
0-
.C l()
~N
::EN
n..
Lll
o
+
C ~
.Q ~
ro c:
:::l -.J
0'0
Wen
:::!= 0
n.. II
~
c:
-.J
>-
"-
C"')
o
co
,....
,...
,...
C"')
M
M
i
j
'j
~i
I
,
C
:J
a,-
ll)
~
II
III
:.:;
c:
e
~
Ci
".
."e-"opolitaft
'...ftlft'
O,ga.lsalloft
ST. LUCIE URBAN AREA
2300 Virginia Avenue
Ft" Pierce, FL 34982-5652
Telephone: 772/462-1593
Facsimile: 772/462-2549
TO:
Sheryl Stolzenberg, Senior Planner
.Xl7J I--
Marceia Lathou, MPO Senior Planner
FROM:
DATE:
August 26, 2005
RE:
Quail Meadows - Future Land Use Amendment Application
MPO staff has reviewed the Quail Meadows Future Land Use Amendment Application. Based on the
submitted information, MPO staff notes that the project does not identify construction of major, public
. roadways or new lanes on existing roadways, and is therefore found not to be in conflict with the MPO's
adopted 2025 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). In addition, the following comments are
provided for the above-referenced project:
· Orange Avenue from Kings Highway to 1-95/SR 9 is identified as a "congested roadway" in the 2025
LRTP (see attached Table 4-5 of the LRTP).
· Kings Highway from Angle Road to Orange A venue is identified as a "congested roadway" in the 2025
LRTP (see attached Table 4-5 of the LRTP).
· Kings Highway from Indrio Road to St. Lucie Blvd is identified as a "congested roadway" in the 2025
LRTP (see attached Table 4-5 of the LRTP).
· Kings Highway from Okeechobee Road to Orange A venue is in the 2025 LR TP needs plan (see attached
Table 4-6 of the LRTP).
· Kings Highway from Orange Avenue to Indrio Road is in the 2025 LRTP needs plan (see attached Table
4-6 of the LRTP).
· Orange A venue west of Kings Highway to the Okeechobee County line is in the 2025 LR TP needs plan
(see attached Table 4-6 of the LRTP).
· A Kings Highway/Orange A venue intersection improvement project is in the 2025 LRTP needs plan (see
attached Table 4-6 of the LR TP).
· 1-95 from the Indian River County line to Okeechobee Road is in the 2025 LRTP needs plan (see attached
Table 4-6 of the LRTP).
Thank you for the opportunity to review this plan amendment. If you have any questions, please do not
hesitate to contact me at (772) 462- 1593.
. Attachments (Tables 4-5 and 4-6 of the LRTP)
cc (w/o attachment): Vicki Gatanis, FDOT
Transportation Planning for Ft" Pierce, Port SI. Lucie, St. Lucie Village and Sf. Lucie County
I
I.
,.
.
St. Lucie MPQ 2025 Long Range Transportation Plan
Table 4-5
Transportation Plan 2025 Congested Roadways
~m_.
.~ ."-'- P---.
.~ O~...._
51. Lucir Urban Ana
5r:mrnt Limits 2025 Trans Plan
Facility Volumr/C~paci~' Ralio
From To
13lh Srreet A\o'tT1ue 0 A venue 0 0"84
25th Streel (5R 6151 Avenue 0 Vlr~l",a Avrnue (5R 70) 65 -87
25th Street tSR 6151 VIf~nia Avenue I SR 70) Edw~rds Road 069
25th Sv 51 JlIT'Ies Dr 5"""tCf Onve Alroso BI vd 0.74
Anele Road Dranee Avalue (5R 68) A venue 01 Metz2er Road 044
Btcker Road Soulhbend Blvd. ManlO Count\' LIOe 0.1 i
Cashmere Blvd. SI. Lucie WeSI Blvd Del RIo Blvd 074
DelllJo Blvd" Pan SI" LuCIC Blvd (SR 716) California Blvd. 0.58
Delaware Avenue 25th Street (SR 615) 33rd 5rrccI 101
Delaware Avenue 10th SrrCl:t 13lh SU'Cl:1 075
Edwards Road JenkIns Road SelVltz Road 040
Edwards Road SeIVl12 Road 25lh Srrcct (CR 615) 048
Floresla Dnve Wesl Vorl/lnla Drive Port SI. LucIe Blvd. 15R 7161 104
FloreSla Onve Port S~ Lucie Blvd Soulhbend Blvd. 162
Gallin Blvd' ).95/5ll.9 Pon SI. LUCIe Blvd tSR 7161 085
Ineino Road r5R 614) Emerson Avenue (SR 607\ KIOl/s H1~hwav (SR 713\ 0.75
Jenkins Ro~d Graham Road Edwards Road 050
Kines Hlvhwav rSR 713) US 1 (SR SI Indrio Road (SR 6141 067
Klnel H1ehwav fSR 7131 Indno Road (SR 614\ 51 Lucie Blvd 073
Klntrs HJtrhwav (SR 713) SI. Lucie Blvd An~le Road 0.69
Kines HJtrhwav (SR 713) Anele Road Oranee Avenue (SR 681 074
Kines HJ!hwav (SR 7131 Okccchobcc Road (S R 70 I FL T umplke Enrr~nce 0.80
Lennard Road' US I ISR 5\ Tlff~nv A\o'tT1ue 0.50
MidwaY Road US 1 (SR 51 Buchan~n On"e 063
Midwav Road' 25th S<rCl:IISR 6151 5elVltz Road 072
Mldwav Road 1.951 SB lUmps 1.951 NIl R,;,mDs 045
Okeechobce Road (5R 701 K.ln~s HJehwav (SR 7131 1.9SI 5R 9 073
Okeeehobce Road (SR 701 ).951 SR 9 Jenkins Road 098
OkCl:chobce Road (SR 70\ Jenkrns Ro~d Vlfc'nl~ Avenue ISR 70\ 076
Okccchobce Road (5R 701 30lh Srrccl Drd SrrCl:1 0.83
Dranee Avenue (SR 68) Krnes HJehwav (SR 7131 ).951 SR 9 084
Oranee Avenue (SR 68) Anele Road 251h Street (SR 6151 078
POrl 51. LuclC Blvd Midilorl Road Floresla Onve 104
PorI 51. Lucie Blvd FloreslI Onve AlfOSO Blvd 095
Port 51. LuclC Blvd Darwtn Blvd" Parr Dr lVe 057
PnmJ ViSI~ Blvd US I ISRSl Floresla On.. 064
Pnma V ma Blvd Florem Onve Alfoso Blvd 046
Pnma V,sla Blvd Alfoso Blvd Bavshore Blvd 061
Pnma V,sla Blvd Ba vshore BI vd Cashmere Blvd 1.20
SR A.I-A (Se~~v Onvel South Bndl/e Blnnev Dnve 108
SelVlIZ Road Edwards Road Glades Cut-OfT Road 087
SI. LUCie Wesl Blvd 1.951 NB IUmos 1-951 SB R.1mos 0.54
Sunnle Blvd Oleander Avenue US I ISR 51 100
US I (SR 5) Indrio Road (SR 614) 251h StrcctlSR 61S) 0.87
US J (SR S 1 SI LUCie Blvd SR a.I.A (soulh bridee) 075
US J (SR S I Avenue D Sourh Bridee(SR A-I-A) 104
US I (SR 51 Dranee AvaluelSR 68) Dela ware ^ ven ue 101
US I (SR 5) Delaware Avenue Sunrise Blvd I 17
US I (SR 51 Sunnse Blvd" VIfRlnlJ AVCTIue (SR 701 1.09
US 1 (SR 5 I Vlr~nla Avenue ISR 70\ Edwards Road 096
US 1 (SR 5) Edwards Road Mldwav Road 100
'S 1 (SR 51 Mldwav Road Sae2'er A VCT1 ue 1.08
Transportation Plan Analysis
4-21
-
: I
i . :
. J 'i
. I'
d.:d !
~
c:
~
-
a..
c:
o
.-
..,
~
1:
o
c.
CJ)
c:
~
...
l-
ll)
N
o
N
!I
I
.. c
I ~ . ~
.;; c ;
w . ...
0....;:
,<> c
<> c
~ U
.
c
D.
;; ~ ~6 i , i! ~ i ~
s; 5 ~~ ~ ~, ..11 = s; . -'
~ :! ~!! f ~ if"!.\\! t" ~ lil Il
~ m ~=~ ~ E v ~ i isli.= 1:; I ~ ~
~ ~ ~~f i ~ ~ !! f i ~!i~! : &. f~ ~
~ e- ~~~ I _ ~ - "i i5 ~ e-
- .s .8; ~ rr: - 1; :.. zn:!! ~lJ:!~ Ie _ I
~ ~ ~if ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ili~ ~i ~ ~~~ ~ II ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~r~ i c! i ~ ~ ~ ! ~i~! c ;~ ~~ ~~; ~ !! ~ ~ ~
2 2 ~~~t ? ~~ ~ 2 2 2 Iii- !.:c ~ ~~ :~i uu~ u := 2 2 2
tI'l VJ ill ~ -I! &n U) '" ti .. c .... ... . ~ I" _ .~ ~ _ ~ ... (,I') U't VJ
C C , "-li~ : . c C C R .-.~ I ~- ~O. ~~ C C C
~ e ~: ~ ~ Ii: pie ~ ~ I ~ i r i ! I J i s i u'~ ~ ~ ;3 ;3 e ~ e
i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ t ; I ~ 1 I I Iii i 4:}1 ~ ~ ~ ~ {z. ~ II i I B ~ B!\1 B ~ ~ f I I I 1
o .. ~ ..i~ j- .. Ed:: IV i ! 1 ~ .. ~ .. ~ ~ I H 1::: Ii ~ Ii 5j ~ ItS"~'" ~-' =i ~ ~ "Ii 0 ~ ~ .. & .. ~ .. ~
"~u!,, t"~ -l= ~I~~ ~Jt!t!~!l I~..x~~! ~~"Ii ~~~ rrx~~u!~!~
~:~.~ ~ e!: ! !~ ~ ~.~:~rli ~:~":"!I-. ffl~~ ww~I!~ ~~":~.::~:~
~ ~ ~ if ~ ~ it Ii E 1 '& i ~ i! if J i J i 1115 f J i & i ~ Ii i ~ i i f ~ f i i"li"O "O'i "Ii !! ~ ! f i i i i ~ f f ~
z~li~~;~z:~ :~j~i~~~ri!ize~.fu:~:!l~~!~~I~f:::~:~~~z~~i%;~i~
c
c
E ':;
, .
E ;
.c .~
i C
c
u
c
...
.,
'"
a:
Vl
~
-'
C f0-
E
:
U'>
t
~
r
~
Cl
f
..
E
~
...
~ ~
a: rr
Vl Vl
~ ~
.. ..
e e
llo !l-
S 5
~
.
..
~
II
~
'tl
II
o
r:r
3:
41
Z
o
'"
~ I
:3 ~
II ~
c
.!2
'tl -
'tl
~
..
~
~
;r;-
oD
rr
U'>
..Nf"'f......... ,.,....... fA)
....w:t..... ..... .......N.............,."N.......~.. .. ..
NN Q ..... Q 0..... N .... ,..". N
'l:
c
a:
&
l>
..
2
..
...
rr
~
L
> .
i~
o
u
..
;
! ~
i ..
I ~
I ~ ~
. ...
13 .:! Iii
!
:f
f
~
z
t
i j ~
~ 2 ~
~ u f
~ . '"
~ ~ ~
'"
I
0_
rr .
IE
lI.
-",
~~
'"
I
C
0:
j
o
N...... C NNNONNNNNNOCNNNN" N N N
",
'"
.. 0:
:: ~
~ ;; I
f ~ ~ ~
5~5':..
;;.... l 0
~Jl~~
~
...
~
'"
o
......
0:0
",'"
-~
..'"
", ~ E
~q~
· t ~
~i5u
j
Ii ill
I ! i i '"
" ii~~I!!
jJ j ! J !! i j
.:IIf'll.D..... .o-~ =
~ I
I !
'" ..
'"
0:
'"
<I
~
;;; Vi
... ...
0: a:
i '" ~ ~
~~~I~
~t~!]'"
...,~5/ija;
~]~ll~
s
1
.li
.;
~
j
13
21
~..(
H$
i~A
i ~i i
.. Ii I
l\~J:
~ I
~ c
i ~
j
I
~
o
... r
~ I:
~ c:l
i i I
.. .f ~
. 0: a:
: c c '"
~~i f~
I
c
.
13
. ~
::
~~~ ::
~
i~~~1D ;
$;~~:: ~ ~
,"'",,"': ~ I~ 'i ~~
fj~t'II)"'''~tI~ ~ :.,... ~
.. ~o(f'l:~]::g~ .", "i r /i ~
C _ 1/0(1 0 '" a: ~ ~ '" II: ;; ~ ~ ~ a::
:! OJ: ~::liililii~liiN~",O""""
0( ~ ~... II ~ i - ... -.., .. r _
a; ~ l\",Ol:~l~l,d~~~~Jl ~ ~ ;
~
c
: ~= ~ c;
VI lZ' :: -' IX
I l i~'" ~ <.. ;;8 ~
"'''"a:i~ m u~ ..., Il" ..
.0. ~~~.~~. ~
~ m~:~!o(~~g~g!m.~.. II:
i rrli~!i! :~"'~"'5a:lC.!!5l~ Ii
i ~iUil~ls:~E~'~~I !
~ .J.ww..,o~~i:..~..~...U'>Iii~~ 2
'l:
c
a: ...
f ~
i ~
;; i
~ ...
lil
j ~ ~I~ tit
.. f~E2 ~~~ ~
;; ~lZ'~~ O~~~~ ~
Cl' cr wf!!? II) U) Z Z 3 : ~ .,
U)~ Jljl ~~~~~~~~~~ t
~~ 0 Z~Z~:;!e.". ~ f ~ lr
..:11: Q:.a::a:ll::a::~~~.!!' of( c c:
~ ~ f J ~~i Ii! I H ; f i f t ~ ~ ~
~ ! .., .., ~I~bz ... ... ... ... ... ~ i: 1\ ~ 1\ ~ ~ ~ 0..
~~~~;;~~~~~~~~~~g;; ~ ~ ~;!;
,
,
I
-
II I f
If;
: J ~
&..0
II ~
II
c
I ~
-
D-
c
. 0
.....
~
0 ~
u
I u:> 0
~ 0..
-= CJ)
..:: C
<":l
I f- ~
'-
r-
I L()
N
0
N
I
I
I
I.
I
I
I
i
~
~ t
~ ~ 1 E
. 0 ~ i
~; b l 'l
c ~ ~. ~
~: ~~ ~
-! :; I
~ ,: j 'l *i !
10 '''' . t ,,0: ::I
! i ~ E~ e
~ !: Ii I
~ ~;. ilj~ ~
',!;,!;;f;!.:.;~H;;;
t:..,.....".J..~........
:;;'ll~:lA:D',I.III!
"
I
..
.
!
c
o
~
0: c
I i
! I
~ ~
. ..
!f;f;;a
~iii:
.......... .... ............. ................
.........0.... 0 0...........0 000....,..
~
j II
i i &
~ :If
i ~-
! !~
j IH
: l .
~ !li
Ji ~i
" "I
j..jJ-
~;~~~
H~H
I!SH
- - :.. -
o 0 0 0
z
.. Ii "I" "II
: -: . " !,,-:: "A iI.
;l::A IE DIE. 1ft _.,.,..
. .. ~I~ ; -: ~ i . II: .. ~ t l
0:
. j;':.. j :;U ::j ~b'.
!o~n J'::a ~...--.!...Zi
...~... "'"w ~ ::JU..~ ::Ivt
-=
0:
;
" ! ~ j
. ..
.
0: . ..
.. . ~ i
. ..
.
- Ii l' .,,! 0: % ~ ;;;
0: f .
'" .. . .. :: : a H 1'! 11 I~ .
T" . . "'&..1[ ~. .
&., I 0: =::111: f .UD lIC 0: ~
; n ~& 00: ~ ~ ~ J -IP .. .. 1 j :;
.. .. . " c .:.. 11
:3IC 0 21 .. Jdj!H5~.aHi ~ ~
-
~
Ij ~
;
J
:e ~ . l ~
~ J ~
'1'1",,,,,":' ."i jHt!! I WI ; J
~~~a...t . ; J
." ~ J
~iii! ;#. 4~;\ott.... :! " 1
." .
'1~c.c . .... . ~
---- c *;... .. ... .. B H ~ ~: .. ~ 0: :
0;0I0i0l. i ; !
..i.: J f---- B!Bll.s 2'1 ! I
1lr..1LQ,Q,,,,, 1I'I1l~~~~~~~~~~ c': .. III
..
~
u
%:~~....- ~ ~;;;;'::!=:st~: .;;;; :;: " :1.
WI
.E
"
;
,
i
~
f
.
~
t
d~
~~ !
ur
q !
H f
~: I
P i
.l I
! l ..
!.. r
if ~
~.. ;
~i i
fi .
Ll
~1. t
. -
~" ~
~t f
~&: It
!
i
~
j
f.
- ~
. i
~l
[.
! "
2 e
; i
~
f
I
.
iii
ti
~
o
~
-c
r. -
it ~
11 ~,...~...r-~~,.......
! u g
~.
;
.
!
~
."
i
.
.
~
f
.c
f g~
e 0 J, WI
[ ::1 5,.....~......."'............
: u u
:: r i:'
-~~
..
o
II:
!a
IS
.
II.
i
~
r
..
., . 0 '"
. >- - .
.. ~~. : ~ ~ .z
c.. i.'::"! ~
Br ...~c:"~ J"'I
. ci~i~,qf;~~i~~u
! :~r';I~Js .-;~
If-- :o~.E~"~","~';IIl":II
.I I~
~
~ ~..
i~~:i ~ ~
! OKII:" l" ~
......."to1a12":... !
cnl:i:iHl ~::
E ~I: ; ~ ; II ~ 'Ii ~ ~;
12..:llih",HJ.dh
~"""--- ~;);I> L ... a. jl ~ .... '" > <II( ilIlI ~
..
:l
'tI
C
..
E
..
c
i c 0
~ 0 WI ~ E
; - ~.f
~ 00: J
o 1I"J...c.. A.
!!!AAA~~~;;=..f
cu;;;Hf....... ':
~~~;j.i;;,;:;;;:;~.e
_ __roor:o.....ooO:J::J:J>1o:.l'
: :!
Ii ~-""~==::;:;::::J~~:.
~ 8
w
(;
z
i
I .
.
. .
~ ..
j
~j
!l . . . " . . . - .
:u
r~
~f ~ ~ " " " N ~ . ~
. ..
:: ~
...
.
~
!
I
.
1
-= .
WI i 00:
ti ~ 00: 0:
I~ ~ -= -: ~ ~
0 t 0: 00: " oj t I
~ f f .
.s & u !!
." i i i
f c: . ~ ~ ~ ~
.. 0: ii ~ "
E ~ ~ ;;;
t 1 1 .. ..
II ~ ; ; i !! !
:> j ~
0 t i 1 & C ..
~ i f ! III !
E , % :II :II ; .
c ! ,. , 1; . . i ~
0 ;2:; J i i .. ~
-= "
.. u
. II
. WI :: :: ~ li: :;:
't:. ~ :;; ;; ; :z
...z II
~ 'E
.. -
I.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
.t
t)
I~
OJ
.0
I~
I
I
I
I
I.
I
I
-
. .
l ~
. r J:
i i :
. I !
ec:O
~
t:
CO
-
a.
t:
e
--
......
CO
......
l-
e
c..
tJ)
t:
co
I-
....
at)
N
o
N
..
II
<
c:
..
.rJ
:3
.!:
lJ
='
..J
iii
>-
c:
o
co
...
co
C
QJ
U
c:
QJ
~
QJ
-
QJ
c c
.. ..
'" Q;
III ..
'C 'C
" "
" "
z z
~ ~
iii iii
is is
II II
... ...
";;. ';;.
c c
:; ;;
~ ~
~ ~
0 0
c c
... ...
1: .5:
'C ."
II II
'C '0
" "
u U
.E 1:
- ~
0 0
'0
1'0
0
a::
Ii
... '"
U
II ~ >-
CD c
e 0
@ U'l
1= 1= ~
'=- '=- CD
II " Z
... ... ~
5. '5. II
c c :!f
;; ;;
~ ~ c
.. .. ;;
~ ~ ~
c: is is ..
~ u:: u:: ~
~ -
III
"
GI
GI
Z
:=
I'll II
~ II Ol
C c
Ol It
C .z:;
... II U
U .z:; Ii
u
'':; Ii :E
...
III E ii
C '0 C
II 0
GI 0 '0
a:: "
:!: Ii a::
.z:;
~ ... 't:
u
c: " 0
.. CD Z
:l
l-
I- N ,.,
0 .,., '"
t""'l
-
_NNN
0000
~
o
U
c
~
~:i~
u... "
"!! ~ ~ ..
~ cz: J c
..... "'= ~ "2
V;mCD~
~.;..;.- ]
o
a::
Ii
...
U
II
CD
~
....
'e
"
.~
c ~
;; 0
~ a::
1'1 -... ti
:-2_-',...."1:
- u 8-
~~c8~~
!!
~
is
...
CD
z
...
c
..
II
...
5.
c
;;
~
II
'E
is
u::
CD
Vl
~
'"
~
CD
Vl
c:
~
D.
III
'1:l
GI
GI
Z
~ ~
; :2
c: cD
'E II I Vi
- Ol Z co
~ ;:'!-. ~
... ~ ~ ii !
0.. ~ ~ .i!: -" .z:;
---E-a::: .,.
:-~~~c
C~;~oe:
='c>-uVt
Ca::ii~E~
U~~..c:!o
O~:!;c.
~ c8a:z:~
:!:
c:
't: :;:{ .
"'
....
...
II
U
..
Q.
..
~
II
"
...
c.
..
E
co
It
Q;
C
.S!
o
~
II
;:;
"
.....
l!
..
E
..
a.
"
Ii:
...
is
~
I-
o c
~.!!
-~
Z:..
c ...
" II
o II
Uz
Ii 0
.2: ~
a::z
i c
~~
; Ii
!~
0-
'C_
.. 0
O~
~ :t
~ .~
CD
...
'ti
>
iD
Ii
>
ii
c
..
:;;
1:
~
!!
Vi
.z:;
6i
~
Vl
'"
("II
I
~
c:
~
~
III
"
GI
GI
Z
...
It
o
a::
Ii
'0
II
II
...
II
...
'Q.
c
;;
I-
I'll
c:
]
GI
..
D.
:=
I'll
~
C
o
~
:E
..
GI
>
~
c:
.!!
~
VI
:J
III
III
"Committed to Quality"
'. FORT PIERCE UTILITIES AUTHORllY
113 N. Second Street (34950)
Post Office Box 3191
Fort Pierce, Florida 34948-3191
Phone 772-466- 1600
Fax 772-489-G396
August 1, 2005
Steven M. Pawlyk, P.E.
Boyer-Singleton & Associates, Inc.
Northpoint business Plaza
West Palm Beach, FL 33407
RE: Quail Meadows request for utility service
.
Dear Mr. Pawlyk,
The purpose of this letter is to confirm that the above referenced project is within the
FPUA service boundary and FPUA intends to serve your project with water and
wastewater service. However, service is contingent upon construction of any and all
required infrastructure to include any offsite improvements that may be deemed
necessary by FPUA Engineering, payment of any applicable fees, execution of a FPUA
Water and Wastewater Supply Agreement, and execution of a City of Fort Pierce
Annexation Agreement. This letter shall not be construed to reserve water or wastewater
allocations to your project.
I trust that this letter provides you with the information necessary to move forward with
your project. Please feel free to contact me at 466-1600 extension 3480 if you require
further assistance.
Very truly yours,
~~
.
Bo Hutchinson
Environmental Engineer
BHvr
cc: David MelleTt, Environmental Engineer
James Carnes, Utility Engineer
88/28/2605 87:42
551683711:32
BOWYER SINGLETON
PAGE 1:32
..
JOHN SCOTT'O
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
STEVEN D. CASSENS
PRESIDENT
TOM JERl(INS
PRESIDENT PRO '!EM
NORm ST. LUCIE RIVER WATER CONTROL DISTRICT
2721 SOUTH. jENJ<JNS ROAD
rolU PIERCI'. FLORIDA 34981
TELEPHONE (772) 461.5050
IV. NONO ~. ('.MetA. ~"F_
DlSTlUC'C fNGlNUiIl.
CMOL ^" DONN-IUl;
5E~T^R~~UR~R
FR.I\NJI:.~. f.'F.I!. [II
ATTORNEY
August 30, 2005
.... .
Steven M. Pawlyk, P.E.
Bowyer-Singleton & Associations, Inc.
Northpoint Business Plaza
901 Northpoint Parkway, Suite 204
RECE'VED
I SEP 1 2005
BOWYER. S1NGLETON
RE:
Quail Meadows
Request for Letter of No Objection
.I.~.
f -....-.-... -- . ...--
.
Dear Mr. Pawlyk:
We have reviewed the following preliminary plans and information regarding the referenced project received
August 4, 2D05:
. Conceptual Site Plan prepared by Fram;man/Davis & Associates, Ltd.
The proposed project consists of approximately 114 acres of single-family/multi-farnily development located
east of the Florida Turnpike and north of NSLRWCD Canal No. 43 in Section 4, 135S, R40E within the
North St. Lucie River Water Control District (NSLRWCD). From the information provided, it appears the
project has the legal and physical ability to discharge into the NSLRWCD system. Based on our engineering
review, we have no engineering objection to the preliminary configuration as shown on the plans provided.
Please be aware that the applicant will need to submit for this project a pennit application, associated fees,
and detailed supporting information demonstrating compliance with NSLRWCD criteria. For NSLRWCD
requirements, please refer to the NSLRWCD Permit Information and, Criteria Manual For Use uf Or
Connection to Works ofrhe District. Supporting infonnation includes but IS not limited to the following:
" !
. Topographic information
. Aerial exhibit
. Signed and scaled stormwater management calculations demonstrating compliance with the
NSLRWCD allowable discharge crileria of 2.0 inches per area peri day for the lO-year, 7Z-hour design
storm.
. . Final Construction Plans
This project will also require approval from the NSLRWCD Board of SlI1pervisors. 'When you are prepared
to submit an application package, please contact Carol Donahue in the NSLRWCD office at 772-461-5050
for application forms, applicable fee requirements, or any other details.
Should you have any questions or comments please fecI free to contact. me at (772) 286-3883, or Carol
'..
.
.
08/28/2005 07:42
56168371132
"
Quail Meadows
AUgust 3D, 2005
Donahue in the NSLRWCD office at 772-461-5050.
Raym M. Garcia, P.E.
District Engineer
cc: D. Waite, C. Lestrange - SLC
BOWYER SINGLETON
P:\74-0901\Permlr Applic9.tion~\QWli1 MeadClWs\QUllil Me~dows LNO_050830,doc
PAGE 83
Pap 2 on
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
!
.
.
.
.
BOARD OF
COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS
"'5l~~Elt:I~~-- ,~"'.
COUNTY ~.
FLORIDA
PUBLIC WORKS
DEPARTMENT
August31,2005
Ms. Julia Shewchuk
Senior Planner
Jordan Jones & Goulding
3300 PGA Boulevard, Suite 605
Palm Beach, FL 33410
Re: Proposed Development - Quail Meadows
Solid Waste Service Availability
Dear Ms. Shewchuk:
In response to your request en~losed is a letter from Eric Grotke, P.E, of COM which
should answer all,of your questions pertaining to the solid waste service availability for
the proposed Indno Development.
Sincerely,
eo J, Cordeiro
Solid Waste Manager
LJC:dls
Enclosure
JOSEPH E WITH, 01111'" NO.1' DOUG COWAl\O, O'$lTICI NO.2' PAULA A. LEWIS. Ol""o No. J . FMNNIE HUTCHINSON. OII"'CI NO.4. CHRIS CMFT. 01$"'" No.5
Covnry Admlnll"aro( . DOU9Io$ M. AnO(>(wn
2300 Virginia Avenue . Fr, Pierce, FL 34982
Public Works: (772) 462-1485 . FAX (772) 462-2362
DIVISion of Engineenng: (772) 462-1707 Fax 462-2J62 . Dtvi5ion of Road & Oridge: (772) 462-2511 FAX 462-2J6J
Division of Solid Wasre: (772) 462-1766 fAX 462-6987
Dlvl.sJonofDulldlng&lnspeCllon5; (772)462-155J Fo)(462-17.35. TDD(772)462-1428
www.co.st-Iucle.n.u.
.
.
.
CDIVI
17Dl Highway A'1-A, Suit. 301
Vero Beach, F10rjda 32963
tel 772 231-4301
fax: 772 231-4332
August 26, 2005
Mr. Leo J. Cordeiro
Solid Waste Director
St. Lucie County
6120 Glades Cut-Off Road
Fort Pierce, Florida 34982
Subject:
Proposed Development - Quail Meadows
Solid Waste Services Availability
Dear Mr. Cordeiro:
We received a copy of the letter dated July 25, 2005 from Jordan Jones & Goulding regarding
residential development plans for above the referenced subject. Using the solid waste
generation ratios provided by St. Lucie County's Solid Waste Division, the following is
expected by the construction of the proposed development.
Land Use
MuJti- Family Residential
Single-Family Residential
Total
Estimated Waste Generation (tons/vear)
560
198
758
Useful1iie projections are based on estimated population projections, Class I landfill capa.city
is projected to end in 2025 assuming the population increase does not exceed the projections
supplied by the University of Florida, Bureau of Economic Business Research. Similarly,
construction and demolition debris landfill capacity is projected to end in 2022, assuming
current operations continue, Mining of the C&D debris landfill would extend the useful life of
the landfill, Please note that hazardous waste and medical waste management are not
currently SLC's responsibility,
The St. Lucie County Glades Road Landfill can provide the necessary services for the
proposed development; however, it appears that the development in the area is much greater
than the population projections predicted. It is likely that the useful life of the Glades Road
Landfill may be reduced as a result of the recent development increase,
mh21B3.doc
consultlno . enolneerina - construction. ootrations
.
CONI
Mr. Leo J. Cordeiro
August 26, 2005
Page 2
If you have any questions or comments, please contact me,
VeryU:IY:~
gtke, r.E., DEE
Principal Engineer
Camp Dresser & McKee Inc.
File: 6277-45077-091
.
.
mNtll.dDe
.
.
.
",1 nay.
<ole
.q; . ,cbooJ,.
'b-- f,..t.
._"Y .~ ,.
~ .~
CJ I
t- :"
GI :
:. -;
III :
St. Lucie County
Public Schools
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Sheryl Stolzenberg, St. Lucie County Planner III
FROM:
Marty Sanders, P .E., School District of St. Lucie County
Executive Director of Growth Management, Land, Acquisition & Inter-
Governmental Relations
SUBJECT:
Future Land Use Plan Map Amendment requested by Quail meadows LLC
DATE:
September 6, 2005
As a part of the intergovernmental coordination I have reviewed the impacts of the proposed land
use amendment on the St. Lucie County Public School system, The Interlocal Agreement for
Public School Facilities Planning-Sf, Lucie County between the School District, St. Lucie
County, City of Port St. Lucie and the City of Fort Pierce states in Section 9.6 the factors
considered in reviewing comprehensive plan amendment the local government shall consider the
following:
a) School Board comments,
b) Available school capacity or planned improvements to increase school capacity.
The project is proposed within the Zone I of the School District's choice system. The School
District's current 5-year work plan has a shortfall of approximately $ 233 million dollars and
does not have any new schools identified in to be constructed in Zone 1. Currently the
elementary and middle schools in Zone I are over the program and core facility capacity, There
are insufficient permanent student stations at the middle and high schools to meet the program
needs, but are being met thru the placement of portable classrooms on the sites, The high school
in Zone 1, Fort Pierce Westwood High School is scheduled for modernization and will create
additional capacity but is currently not funded, St. Lucie County has approved about 6,465
residential dwelling units since 2003. From these approved developments and based upon
average student generation rates we can expect about:
. Total 2,400 public school students.
. 1130 elementary.
. 550 middle.
. 720 high,
Most ofthese units are located in Zone 1. Based upon the current 5-year work plan we will have
a shortfall of capacity to meet the needs of additional residential units in Zone 1, Traditionally
we have made up the difference in capacity with the use of relocatable classrooms, Weare
currently seeking a school site in zone 1 to accommodate the demands of growth, Without
additional school sites and the necessary funding to build the schools the methods to meet the
growth demands have been portables and ultimately double sessions when the capacity is too
.
.
.
Page 2
Future Land Use Plan Map Amendment requested by Quail meadows LLC
September 6, 2005
great to be accommodated with the use of portables, The alternative of double sessions would be
in conflict with the public interest {LDR 11.06,03 (I)},
This project is proposing a land use that will increase density and potential generate 230 students
at the maximum density, or create an additional 92 students because of the land use amendment.
There is a county-wide educational impact fee for residential units that to some extent
ameliorates the impact on public schools. The current impact fee does not include a component
for land but the revised impact fee study that is presently in the review phase at the BOCC (2nd
public hearing scheduled for 9-6-05). The impact fees pay about 2/3 of the cost of capital
improvements necessary to meet the capital requirements for schools,
The following table provides the breakdown of the cost per dwelling unit and the proposed
impact fee.
Impact Fee StUdy Data
Student Generation
Unit Type Rate (Students/du)
Total Cost Net Impact
per du Fee
2005 Draft Impact fee Single Family
Multi Family
0.405
0.207
$ 7,873
$ 4,029
$ 4,956
$ 2,537
It has been the School Board's direction to address the impact due to land use change should be
addressed at this time because they are different than those that occur at time of final
development approval. This is also addressed in the County's Land Development Code 11.06,03
(E) Standards of Review: "whether or to the extent to which the proposed amendment would
exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including ,.. ,schools.., " The St. Lucie County
Comprehensive plan also provides guidance development impacts, The first is Policy 11,1.2.4
(Page 11-58) it states: "Future development shall pay for 100% of the capital improvements
needed to address the impact of such development..,
Future development payments may take the form of, but are not limited to, voluntary
contributions for the benefit of any public facility, impact fees, capacity fees, dedications of land,
provisions of public facilities andfuture payments of user fees, special assessments and taxes, "
The School Board has directed me to continue to work with the developers requesting land use
amendment to address the impacts and seek solutions to prevent additional shortfalls in the
necessary funding for the schools as a result of the development. We have been working with
the developer and their representatives on methods to address school needs, We are actually
meeting later this week with the developer's representative but at this time there are no tangible
results in how the school impacts will be mitigated, Therefore we ask that the developer address
in writing how the school impacts will be mitigated,
Please call me at (772) 429-3640 if you have any questIons,
MES/mtf
C.\Doc..rneBb .nd Selltlll.\MSAll r9\My D"""mc"...l(jo~ LouI-5t l..~,~ Co..nlt'Sll~ PI.II ke""'...\Q....il Mud""" fLlIf' .m...."d"'"'"1 9.l16.2IIUS d<><:
.
AGENDA ITEM 9: QUAIL MEADOWS, LLC
Senior Planner, Sheryl Stolzenberg stated this proposal is a Land Use Amendment. She stated
staff views this Land Use Amendment in terms of some basic state requirements, They are
guided by sub section 9J11,0061 b of Florida Administrative Code, Staff also views the
surrounding Future Land Use Designations and the existing uses that are on land, surrounding
it. Staff also looks at the availability of and demand on Sanitary Sewer, Solid waste, Drainage,
Potable Water, Traffic Circulation and Recreation, In addition, staff views the compatibility of
the proposed Land Use Amendment, with not only the objectives and policies of the Land Use
element, but those of other elements as well. This arises from the requirements of Chapter 161
Florida Statutes that requires that the elements of the local Comprehensive Plan shall be
coordinated and consistent and that the Comprehensive Plan as a whole should be
economically feasible,
The proposal is an application by Quail Meadows LLC for a Change in Future Land Use
Designation from RS (Residential Suburban) which allows 1 to 2 units per gross acre, to RU
(Residential Urban) which allows 5 units per gross acre on 114 acres, located in the southwest
corner of Angle Road and Old FFA Road,
.
The surrounding Land Use Designations for the Future Land Use include RS (Residential
Suburban) and the Florida Turnpike to the west. There is Mixed Use-Specific Use area to the
north, which is defined as "Woods of St. Lucie-PUD," There is Mixed Use-Specific Use area,
"Golden Ponds Mobile Home Development" to the east and RS (Residential Suburban) and the
Florida Turnpike to the south,
The surrounding existing Land Uses were guided by the Property Appraiser's information, The
land to the west is classified single-family by the Property Appraisers, The land located to the
north is classified as "un-built" land, Lands to the east include mobile homes, vacant residential
sites, single-family homes and other vacant acreage and the land to the south is un-built land,
This site is located within the Urban Service Area and is located within the Ft. Pierce Utilities
Authority Service Area, The significance of that is that the County is beginning to experience
Land Use Amendment applications from areas outside of the Urban Service Area, that are not
within the TVC area and this is indicating a strong and increase demand for additional
residential development, which makes the overall intent of guiding development into the Urban
Service are an important consideration,
.
Ms, Stolzenberg stated the applicant was requesting the change in zoning for a number of
reasons:
1, The proposed project can be use to create a unified development plan, featuring a range
of workforce housing options, including single-family and two types of multi-family,
2, The subject property is south of the boundary of the proposed TVC Element.
3, The PUD proposed for this site will incorporate many of the village designed
characteristics, although it is smaller in size, and will not contain commercial uses,
However, it will include trails and other types of amenities that will increase connectivity
to surrounding proposed areas such as Sunnyland Farms,
4. The use of the higher density will allow clustering, that will preserve a lot of the
environmental assets on the site,
Ms, Stolzenberg stated retaining the existing land use designation does not allow for the use of
multi-family, but it does allow for the use of PUD,
40
.
.
.
Ms, Stolzenberg stated the increase in density will allow the developer to develop mixed
multiple types of housing units (multi-family), if the developer maintains a RS (Residential
Suburban) Zoning District.
Ms. Stolzenberg stated one of the first things that have to be examined when looking at a Future
Land Use Amendment is Future Land Use Element Policy 1,1,5,3" which requires that the
property under the Land Use Amendment application is adjacent to, or no more than one
quarter of a mile from the same or greater type of land use classification,
Within the surrounding Land Use Designations, there are two mixed use areas which are both
classified as Specific Use areas, Under the Comprehensive Plan requirements, when
something is classified as a Specific Use area, the Specific Use areas are restricted to what is
specified, unless otherwise amended through the Comprehensive Plan Amendment process,
The Specific Use area to the north (the PUD, Woods of St. Lucie) will remain as that Specific
Use, until the land use plan is changed and likewise with the Specific Use area for Golden
Ponds,
There are remaining additional parcels around the area, There is one parcel that will remain RS
(Residential Suburban), However, because of the surrounding mixed use areas, it was their
judgment that this change would not be incompatible.
The other concerns regarding Future Land Use Element Policy 1,1,5.3 is that the property under
Land Use Amendment consideration lies within the five year capital improvement program of the
County's water and wastewater master plan or otherwise meets the requirements of being able
to be served, The Ft. Pierce Utilities Authority has indicated that they will be able to serve,
Ms, Stolzenberg stated staff has received supporting documentation that was submitted by the
Ft. Pierce Utilities Authority, Staff has also received a letter that was submitted from the school
district.
Mr, Hearn asked what the public benefits of making this Land Use change are,
Ms, Stolzenberg stated from her perspective as a planner, the public benefit is the ability to
encourage a mixture of housing types and at the same time preserve some environmental
assets that can be preserved if there is no mix of housing types, In addition, the mix of housing
types is something that will become a demand and will be needed to create the possibility of
allowing for housing for people of different income levels and also to answer to those who are
now going out into areas beyond the Urban Service Boundary looking for affordable housing,
She added the land is cheaper, takes place on well and septic and takes place on large lots etc.
If some of the demand can be accommodated within the Urban Service Area by allowing a little
additional density, then it is better to try to attract that into the Urban Service Area than to allow
it to sprawl in the rural area.
Chairman Grande asked if there were any other questions of staff.
Ms, Noreen Dryer, with the law firm of Ruden McKloskey, representing Quail Meadows LLC (the
applicant) and their request for Future Land Use Change from RS (Residential Suburban) to RU
(Residential Urban) stated they also have an application for a Planned Unit Development on this
41
.
.
.
property, She stated they have a concept plan that was submitted with the Future Land use
immediately after the application for the Future Land Use and they also submitted an application
for a PUD, She stated they hope that at the end of this process, when it is time to adopt the
Land Use Change that they are requesting, that there will also be the rezoning to PUD before
the board, so that they will know exactly what is intended to be built on this property,
Ms. Dryer stated they believe that the proposed project is in the exact location where it makes
good sense to look at a future land use change, They are within the Urban Service area and
their proposed project does provide for a mixture of housing types and a range of housing to
accommodate various price points for it to address the workforce housing needs of the
community,
The surrounding land uses and entitlements are compatible with what they are requesting,
They are working diligently with the school board to assists the school district in finding a
location for a school site. At the conclusion of the hearing, the applicant requests that the Local
Planning Agency would approve their request to transmit this Land Use Amendment to the
County Commissions for their consideration,
Ms, Julia Shucheck with Jordan, Jones and Golding, on the behalf of Quail Meadows stated
their request to receive the privilege to go from a RS (Residential Suburban) to a RU
(Residential Urban) Land use in this location, for this project is justified,
She stated they are within the Urban Service Area, She stated they there are clusters of multi-
type housing in the proposed project. There are also single-family Residential, small and large
town houses and recreation amenities all over the project.
The native upland habitat is a minimum of 100 feet wide,
There are a total of 502 dwelling units at this point, which are 4.4 units to the acre, The
continuous chunk of the native upland preserve is 35.34 acres, which amounts to 31% of the
property, The lake tracks are 11 %, and other open-spaces such as landscape areas and the
isolated pockets of the native habitat amount up to another 30%, which altogether amounts to
about 72,6% of open-space on the property, The open-space requirement is about double of
what is currently being required for PUDs and a third if buildings,
Ms, Shucheck stated inside of the Urban Service Area, the project is located between two
major-major highway corridors, which are 1-95 and the Turnpike, It is an infill between high
intensity uses, which include the turnpike, the MXD to the north, Golden Ponds and then 1-95,
Because they can increase the density, there is a reduce construction cost because there is a
lot more efficient use of the land and more efficient use of the infrastructure, because with less
infrastructure, you serve more units.
Ms. Shucheck stated they are creating place throughout the neighborhood where people want
to be, such as community centers, pools, tot lots, ball fields and green spaces, all through out.
She stated they have worked with the school board and during their meetings they has
suggesting locating the school bus stop at the community center, so that when the parents pick
up and drop off their kids, they can have social events, She stated they are trying to turn the
streets into public spaces with sidewalks and bicycle paths,
42
. Ms, Shucheck stated 33% of the units will be below $150,000, She stated this is a price point
and it is 40% below the average market point. She stated 31 % of native upland preserve is also
a public benefit. She also added 72% of the site is open-space, which is also another public
benefit. The recreation amenities on site lessens the demand for County facilities and their
bicycle and pedestrian connectivity with the sidewalks throughout the development will be
connect to the trail system that is proposed along Balcher Canal and also connected to the
south to the proposed Sunnyland Farms community park,
Ms, Shucheck stated they are working with the school board to make a school site somewhere
in the north county, She stated the school bus stop site on site, at the community center is a
public benefit. In regards to improvements to old FFA Road and Angle Road, Sunnyland Farms
is going to pave to the canal and the developers of this proposed project's property line begins
at the canal and goes all the way to Angle Road. She added this is also another public benefit.
Mr. Hearn asked if the improvements that they propose to make are in regards to the applicant
paving the road,
Ms, Shucheck stated yes,
.
Ms, Shucheck stated if they stay under the AG-1 zoning and the RS land use, a developer can
come up with 141 acre lots and preservation of native upland is not required as well as
preservation of open-space, She stated there is no recreation amenities, no recreation or trail
connectivity and it will be just a regular subdivision, She added there will be no sidewalks and
bicycle paths, She stated there will be not architectural control.
The lots will be on well and septic and may limited road improvements,
Ms, Shucheck closed stating they hope that the Board favorably considers this project. She
stated "In a professional plan that everyone dislikes for different reasons, is a success. A plan
that everybody dislikes for the same reason is a failure and a plan that everyone likes for the
same reason is a miracle,"
Mr, Trias asked how all of the units are able to fit into the project with the 70% open-space, He
also asked what is the net density and how is the project balanced.
Ms, Shucheck stated the density is 4.4 units to the acre, She stated they are counting the
native upland preservation as open-space, which is 31 % of the site, along with the lake areas-
11 % and other landscape areas and open-space areas which are the isolated pockets of
landscaping, which adds up to another 30% of site, This total open-space adds up to 72%
open-space,
Mr, Trias asked how much of the site is the roads and the parking lots,
Ms. Shucheck stated they have not done those calculations in detail yet. She stated the
calculations of the roads and the parking lots within the site would be a part of the Preliminary
PUD,
.
Chairman Grande asked if there were any other questions of the applicant.
43
.
Ms, Hammer asked if the applicant has considered adjusting the community center to have
hurricane impact resistant doors, window, and generators etc" so that it can be a self contained
community,
Ms, Dryer stated that would really be an item concurrent with the PUD because it is not a
condition of land use, however, the applicant is willingly to make those types of improvements to
a community center.
Mr. Lounds asked if Ft. Pierce Utilities Authority will service the proposed project.
Ms, Shucheck stated yes,
Mr, Lounds asked if the utilities will come through Angle Road,
Ms, Shucheck stated the utilities are already at Golden Ponds.
Mr. Lounds asked if this will give the residents living at Abbalon Mobile Home Park the
opportunity to hook on to this line as it comes to the proposed project.
Ms, Shucheck stated this question will be addressed in the PUD review,
Chairman Grande asked if there were any other questions of the applicant.
. Chairman Grande opened the public hearing.
Mr, Chet Mosley stated he has been living in the subject area for approximately 12 to 13 years,
He stated he has seen a tremendous amount of wildlife in the area, He stated he has seen
foxes, fox squirrels and even a Florida Panther, He stated his concern is that the developer
stated they are going to improve the road, He stated shortly after old FFA Road ends, it turns
into a dirt road,
Mr, Mosley stated he is concerned about the dirt road and whether or not if the developer will
pave this road and if so, then how far are they going to pave it.
He also stated he has concerns about the water management.
Mr, Mosley stated one of his main concerns is how much will his taxes be raised and whether or
not he will be force to hook up to any of the utilities that they bring down that road, He stated
his concerns are in regards to how this development will affect him in the long run,
He stated his taxes have recently been doubled because he acquired a property that his father
has owned for about 17 years, Since then, the County has re-asset the property that he
acquired and doubled the value of it, along with his taxes. He stated he does not want his taxes
to go up any higher,
Mr, Mosley stated the road is a two-lane road, He stated he has traffic concerns about the new
development, with regards to the traffic impact.
. Ms, Heather Buckstin stated one of their neighbors wanted them to consider the traffic impacts,
She stated the roads are narrow,
44
. Ms, Buckstin stated currently they do not have much property from the road to their front yard,
because the county owns the area from the ditch, forward. She also had concerns about the
property taxes affecting them,
Ms. Buckstin stated she also has concerns about the wildlife,
Ms, Buckstin also has traffic concerns, She stated it has taken many years and many accidents
before a traffic light was put up at the King's Highway and Angle Road light. She added that this
has always been a busy intersection,
Mr, Marty Sanders, with the school district stated he appreciates the applicant working with
them trying to locate a school site in the proximity, He stated he forwarded a letter on
September 6th, He stated the standards of review for amendments to the Land Development
Code under 11,06,03 item E is whether to the extent of which the proposed amendment would
result in demands on public facilities on whether it is the extent that the proposed amendment
would exceed the capacities of such public facilities included by not limited to transportation
facilities, sewer facilities, water supply, parks, drainage and schools,
Mr. Sanders stated he has spoken to the group before, He stated in this area they have a short
fall of student stations in elementary, middle and high schools, He stated they need a school
site in this area, He stated he feels that the land use is an appropriate land use between the
Turnpike and Golden Ponds, He stated he feels that the proposed project is something that can
be supported, but only with finding a school site in the proximity,
.
Mr. Sanders stated the school district does not object to this application being forwarded to the
County Commission and DCA for a recommendation of approval. He stated they ask that there
will be a similar provision on this as with Sunnyland Farms, that a final development order is not
issued until a school site is found in the proximity,
Ms. Noreen Dryer stated they are clear on what the school board is requesting of them and they
are working diligently towards assisting them and finding a school site in the area, She stated
they understand that if they come in for a final development order and there is not a school site
available that the school board will not be happy with that.
Mr. Chet Mosley stated he does not have problems with the development, however, has would
like to see less density.
Chairman Grande closed the public hearing.
Mr, Knapp stated he has problems with the 70% open-space, He stated he has concerns about
the open-space on that small piece of property.
Mr, Trias agreed with Mr, Knapp, He stated in his view, a PUD at the existing land use density
would be appropriate,
.
Mr, Lounds stated he feels more comfortable with this request than he did with the previous
requests that were before them at tonight's hearing, He stated the proposed project will bring
utility services to the surrounding areas and he finds it to be a great benefit to the Abbalon
Mobile Home, He stated the type of dwelling that will be there will add the residential area that
the industrial area along King's Highway needs, as well as the research park, with out it being in
the park itself,
45
.
.
.
Mr, Hearn stated he does not support this future land use plan because it gives away density to
the developer to bring more overgrowth problems into the community,
Chairman Grande stated he thinks that this is a good plan; however, it may be in the wrong
place, He stated he has concerns about planning to build houses this close to a major highway,
He stated there is 100 feet between the highway and single-family homes to the south and town
homes to the north.
Mr. Lounds made a motion to recommend that the Local Planning Agency of St. Lucie County
recommend that the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners approve transmittal of
the application of Quail Meadows LLC for a Change in Future Land Use Designation for RS
(Residential Suburban) to RU (Residential Urban) to the State Department of Community Affairs
for consideration of this amendment, because he feels that it will fit there better than it does on
the King's Highway area, He stated it brings utilities and will help develop other areas there,
Ms, Morgan seconded the motion,
Chairman Grande announced that there is a motion and a second and asked if there were any
comments on the motion,
Ms, Hammer asked if there were any possibilities of tying this land use designation change to
the PUD that have been submitted,
Mr, Kelly stated in past times, the PUD has been brought forth at the time of adoption; however
this is the process of transmittal, which allows the state and other agencies to review this,
Chairman Grande asked if there were further comments,
The role was called.
Mr, McCurdy voted for the motion,
Mr. Trias voted against the motion,
Mr, Knapp voted against the motion.
Ms. Hammer voted for the motion, She stated she like the project as a PUD, She state she
believes the proposed project may be a good idea and she expects the PUD plan to be better,
Mr. Hearn voted against the motion,
Ms, Morgan voted for the motion,
Mr, Lounds voted for the motion,
Mr. Grande voted for the motion, He stated if the PUD plan comes back and does not move
away from the highway, he will not be able to support the PUD,
This application will be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with a
recommendation to be forwarded to DCA.
46
.
.
.
Mr, Kelly stated they have a request from the city of Port St. Lucie for the state to give them a 3
foot easement. The state will not do so, unless the Local Planning Agency says that it is not in
conflict with the county's Comprehensive Plan, Staff has looked at it and believes that it is not
in conflict with the County's Comprehensive Plan, He stated they need a letter from the
Chairman saying it is not in conflict with the County's Comprehensive Plan.
The Local Planning and Zoning Commission/ Local Planning Agency agreed to give the city of
Port St. Lucie their request of the 3 foot easement and their vote on the approval was
unanimous,
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting was adjourned at 2:00 A.M.
Respectfully submitted:
Approved by:
Talea Owens, Sr. Staff Assistant
Charles Grande, Chairman
47
.
.
.
COUNTY "'-,
FLORIDA
~PO{~tJltJ
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT
APPLICATION
Please complete the requested information below and submit all items to the St. Lucie County
Growth Management Department, 2300 Virginia Avenue, Ft. Pierce, Florida, 34982. For
assistance in completing the application and to schedule a pre-application meeting, please
contact the St. Lucie County Growth Management, Planning Division at 772-462-2822.
APPLICATION FEES
Application
Review Fee
Concurrency
Review &
Deferral
Small Scale Amendment
(See 163.3187, FS)
Residential.:::... 10 acres and .:::...10 dwelling units per acre
Non-Residential.:::... 10 acres
10,01 to 20 acres
$ 200,00
$ 400,00
Large Scale Amendment
Large Scale Amendment
20 acres plus
$ 600,00
$ 1,000,00
$ 1.200,00 + $5 per
acre over 20 acres
$ 400,00
In accordance with Chapter 163,3187, Florida Statutes, The St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners will consider
applications for land uses changes on parcels in excess of 10 acres ('Large Scale Amendments") only twice each calendar year,
The Commission will consider applications for land use changes on parcels less or equal to 10 acres and 10 dwelling units ("Small
Scale Amendments") at any time during the calendar year. The deadline for submission of a complete application for large
scale amendments is February 1st and August 1st of each calendar year, You are encouraged to schedule a pre-application
meeting with planning staff and to submit your application up to three months in advance of the application deadline,
Application submissions shall include the following:
1. One (1) original and six (6) paper copies of the application and support documents, Provide
one (1) electronic copy of the application and the property's legal description~
2.VOne (1) copy of the County's Property Appraisers Tax Malf'and one (1) aerial with the
property subject to the application highlightedY
3.Y'Six (6) copies of the traffic repoKand any available environmental"Or historical report,
4./ Six (6) copies of any conceptual development plan (if available).
Applicant's Name: Quail Meadows LLC
Applicant's Address: 4227 Northlake Blvd., Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410
Applicant's Phone Number: li_61-626-61~________________
Applicant's Fax: 561-626-2150 Email:Jwhite@ehbuildina.com
Note: The above applicant (may be agent or owner) information will be used by the County as
the single contact for all correspondence and other communication.
SPECIAL NOTE: Under the provisions of the Sl Lucie County Land Development Code, a petition for change in land use is
considered to be a PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT ORDER. Under the definition of Preliminary Development Order, and
consistent with the County's concurrency regulations, Sl Lucie County neither warrants nor represents that there are suffICient
public facilities or services available to serve the property on which the change in land use is sought. Further, pursuant to Section
5,01,Ol(B) (3) of the Code, a signed Concurrency Deferral Affidavit must accompany all applications for land use changes that
acknowledge that no public facility capacity will be reserved for the subject property, A determination of public facilities capacity is
required prior to the issuance of a Final Development Order. A Final Development Order cannot be issued until capacity is available.
****************************************************************************
OFFICE USE: FILE CODE: ______ CHECK NO: _____ RECEIPT NO,: _____ RECEIVED: ______
CERT, COMPLETE: ______LPA REVIEW: ______ TRANSMITTAL TO DCA ____ ADOPTION:__________
ORD NO: __________ DATE APPRVD: __________
t.
::.r
..~:. . " I~
.
I (We) do hereby petition the St. Lucie County Local Planning Agency and the St. Lucie County
Board of County Commissioners to change the Future Land Use Designation of the following
property:
Legal Description: (Type or print in black ink and attach any available sketch and description)
See attached
Property Tax ID( s) #:_~04-111-0002.-0QQlA-___________________________
2304-112-0001-00010
(Please indicate if only a portion of a Property Tax 10 is included)
Parcel Acres: 114 Amendment Acres: 114
Property Address/Location: S"Y-CorneI9f ~Q.9le Rd. & Old FFA Rd.
Existing Future Land Use: RS Proposed Future Land Use: RU
Existing Zoning: A.~.:!___________ Existing Use: _Vacan~__________
Are any other applications being submitted concurrent with this application? Quail Meadows
Please indicate the type of any concurrent applications being submitted. Pre!. PUD ____
Describe the existing improvements and structures on the amendment lands:
None
Proposed use of amendment lands:
Residential
. My (Our) reason for making this request is:
See attached
Required Documentation
On a separate sheet provide the following information, Your responses should be thorough and
supported by references to specific sections of the Comprehensive Plan that are applicable to
the proposed future land use amendment. Please provide documentation to support your
responses and complete the attached worksheets.
1. A general statement describing whether and how the proposed amendment conforms to the
St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan.
2, A statement describing how the proposed future land use designation is compatible with the
future land use designation(s) and existing land uses surrounding the amendment lands?
3, In accordance with Future Land Use Policy 1.1.5.3 provide the following information:
a. Identification future land use designations and existing land uses within ~ mile of the
subject property that have the same or greater type of proposed future land use designation.
.
November 12, 2004
Page 2 of 10
.
b. Is the property under the land use amendment application within the Five Year Capital
Improvement Program of the Water and Wastewater Master Plan for St. Lucie County or
otherwise meet the requirements of Policy 1.1.5.4.
4. Provide a statement describing any conditions affecting the area of the amendment lands
that have changed since the most recent adoption of the Comprehensive Plan. Describe any
changes in development patterns, utility availability, and public service capacity. Provide the
data and analysis supporting your conclusions,
5. Provide a statement describing why there is a need for the proposed Future Land Use Map
Amendment and how the amendment will result in an orderly and logical development pattern.
6. If a change to Industrial Land Use is proposed, explain how the proposal meets Future Land
Use Policy 1.1.11.2 or Policy 1.1.11.3 of the Comprehensive Plan,
7. Provide a traffic report of the potential impacts to the County's transportation system brought
about by the proposed land use change. The report must include existing, background.
committed trips, and the projected traffic volumes and the level of service for all affected
roadways. Projected traffic volumes must be based on the highest densitylintensity allowed
under the requested future land use designation,
8. Describe the drainage characteristics of the area and what effects the proposed land use
amendment would have on the volume and quality of stormwater runoff? Identify the property's
flood zone classification?
.
9. What are the potential environmental impacts of the requested amendment? Describe the
natural resources occurring on and adjacent to the amendment lands. Identify any protected
species that are known to occur and estimate the acres of wetlands and native upland habitats
on the amendment lands. Identify Category I, II, or III Wetlands as described in Policy 8,1.14.1.
10. Provide a potable water impact and capacity analysis and documentation that demonstrate
adequate water supply facilities and service will be available concurrent with the impact of
development. Provide correspondence from the service provider verifying their ability to serve
the proposed development. (See attached worksheet)
11. Provide a projection of the average daily volumes of solid waste that would be generated if
the land use(s) change.
12, What demands for recreational facilities will be created by development as a result of the
land use change? If you are requesting a residential classification, identify the recreational
facilities and open spaces that are available in the vicinity?
13, Indicate the location of any archaeological or historic resources that are known to occur on
or near the amendment lands, Describe potential impacts to these resources as a result of the
proposed amendment. Provide a copy of any available archaeological or historic assessment.
14, Is the property currently within the Planned Urban Service Area Boundary?
.
15, If you answered "no" to Question 12 above, will the property be used for "urban
development activities" as defined in Future Land Use Policy 1,1.5.1? Check which urban
development activities apply:
________ residential development in excess of two units to the gross acre
any non-agricultural commercial activity
any non-extractive, non-agriculturally related industrial activity
November 12, 2004
Page 3 of 10
.
.
.
16. If any item in Question 13 above is checked, the property must lie outside the Planned
Urban Service Area. If an expansion of the Urban Service Area boundary line is proposed,
please refer to Future Land Use Policy 1.1.5.1 and answer the following questions:
a. What is the distance between the property and the Urban Service Area Boundary?
b. Is the subject property contiguous to lands with the requested future land use
designation?
c. Can the owners of contiguous properties between your property and the present Urban
Services Area Boundary ensure appropriate urban infrastructure and services can be
provided? If so, please provide documentation.
d. To what extent will the proposed expansion detrimentally impact the established
character of the area?
17. If changing from an agricultural category (AG-5 and AG-2.5) to a non-agricultural category
(all others), please answer the following questions.
,
a. How will the non-agricultural use(s) maintain the viability of continued agricultural uses
on adjacent lands? How will any adjacent agricultural uses affect the proposed non-
agricultural uses?
b. Using the S1. Lucie County Soil Survey, provide documentation of the soil type(s) found
on the subject parcel and their suitability for the proposed use, Indicate their suitability as
defined by the soil survey.
c. Describe the existing land characteristics and how the proposed land use is suitable with
those characteristics?
d. Does the propose land use amendment propose the extension of the urban services
boundary in a manner that creates any enclaves, pockets, or finger areas?
e. Describe why the non-agricultural uses could not be feasibly located on non-agricultural
land.
18, Provide a copy of all existing federal, state, regional or local permits or plans related to the
property (i.e. SFWMD permits, USDA Conservation Plans, documents related to the lands
present or past enrollment in any federal, state or local program).
19. Indicate if the area under consideration is located within a unique area with common
characteristics, such as the Indrio Road corridor and White City. If so, indicate how the
proposed change in future land use is consistent with the character of the area and any
neighborhood plan or special planning project for the amendment area.
20. Identify any local government within one mile of the amendment lands. If any, provide a
copy of the proposed application documents to the appropriate government official. Indicate the
name and address of the official for which the application documents were provided,
21. S1. Lucie County reserves the right to request additional information.
November 12, 2004
Page 4 of 10
22, APPLICANT ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS (Owner's Signature Must be Notarized)
.
I CERTIFY THAT: (CHECK ONE)
I X I I (We) do hereby certify that I (we) own in fee simple the above described
property for which a change in Future Land Use is requested,
_I L I (We) are not the owner of the above described property; however, the owners
signature below authorizes the applicants the authority to act as agent for the owner(s) of
record.
Applicant's Signature
Date
Address:
Phone:
Email Address: Fax:
Note: The above applicant will be the County's single contact for all correspondence and
other communication related to this application,
PROPERTY OWNERS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: (please print) - This application will not be considered
complete without the signature of all property owners of record, which shall serve as an acknowledgement of the
submission of this application for a change in future land use. The property owner's signature below shall also
authorize the applicant (if other than the property owner) and/or Agent to act in his/her behalf for the purposes of
seeking this change to the County's Comprehensive Plan for the property described herein,
. ~~~rt~~~~~~~'~m~'.('~~~~SiL~li~t))-i 'vie"''>/I..'l Phone:S&J -- ~J.(.,-&j.J i
. J-., -1;?, J -, , : / 'j
,l' ~:) ~'~) N<..ftli DIc!,t' . tL vi, [5~(l d:.- L'r",,~-c!'t?4; S F L .7 '1/(;
Address CitY State Zip
t. '"
STATE OF FLORIDA. COUNTY OF ST. LUCIE
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
20['f2, by r()
/)(p
day of
Jul<j
who is personallY known to me or has
as identification,
4dJe//~ L - cK ~
Type or Print Name of Notary
( seal)
...,..q-~-~"----'---- ~
\liCJ'EI.LE' SiDES I
,
r:flril~~:S:;fU: #\)[11 Em 8(1 I
T"" ,. -R "J ?O~- I
.) .,,', "',. '0\'/ I
~G\I:':i:;)ge f'J()t(!rv 1
,
Title
Commission Number
.
St. Lucie County
November 12, 2004
Page 5 of 10
__ uo ~ eEl 'pepnIOUI"'""'~ AlI'"oes
~
=
=
....
-
VI
::s
t=
oCl
,:,<
a
!Xl
f
...
'0
...
Uo
,€
~
u:
.
u
~
~
=
=
..
fIl
..
~
~
~
r.rJ.
""'"
""'"
~ 0
= ~
= ~
... ...l
C Uo.
CJ~ ~
='iii~
;.;~~
_",0
'S:C 'f:i
,.,..5~
-Z al
=~E
~~ci':
.
o
o
c::i
o
~ 1
z *
;;J :
o *
:; :
< :
*
*
*
*
EA
o
r-
-.0
~
or;
...,
r-
~
...,
-.0
If)
o
o
\;lil N
~ r-:
< N
c ....l
=:J
-.
o
o
--'
---
o
o
"0
e
ee
'"
I-
~
'0
Cl
"0
do)
....
"0
C
~
:r:
'"
I-
do)
C
ell
'c;;
'"
"g
E
o
U
C
e
~
o
U
'-
o
"0
I-
ee
o
c::l
U
....l
[/)
'"
I-
do)
C
o
'c;;
'"
'g N
E If)
o \D
U ";1
cg~
ceO'
5~;;
U-<....l
'0 ,~ u..
"O.E d.l
~ ~ e
o ,- do)
c::l>o::
u8t::
...l,..., 0
[/)("'lu..
...
~
o ...
u.. Gi 0
.... :: ~
.JI' 0"0
c::~;
'!:
ru
LI1
..:
LI1
tT
~
ru
o
o
o
o
o
o
..
-
cc
U'1
r1"I
r'-
CC
o
r'-
tll
ru
..
-
'!:
ru
tT
o
o
~
'!:
M
C/\
=
=
""'"
do)
~
o
o
~
o
o
~
o
o
c::i
o
~
-
eu
;z.
c
,~\
0\
-\ g
CI 0
51 0
~\ ~
'-
o
do)
OIl
te
Q..
0::
ee
-
'"
do)
~
0-
do)
\ i
i,.J::
U 1 ~
:j 1\ ~
== ~
.:: I ~
~ : ~~
-;: ~~' g
.. 0 :~
Q '.:: "0
~ ti\ ~
~~\
~ '
= ,ui
o ....1
... ee
CO
e1
=
..
"0
-
'S
i:Q
::r:
~
'"
I-
eu
e
o
'c;;
'i
o
u
C
c
~
o
U
'-
o
"0
I-
ee
o
c::l
U
....l
[/)
If)
o
r:::
N
r::::
o
N
0'
o
o
--'
=ll:
~
U
If)
o
r:::
N
r:::
o
=ll:
do)
,:!
o
;>-
c
If)
e
r--
("'l
r:::
o
~ ua qIII8(] CEJ .pepnpu, "Jm"~ Al!J~S
.
..j'
...c
-
2
l-
o'll
...:
a
co
Cii
..
U
'0
U
"'"
,q
'il
'0
~
.
u
~
~
==
=
.-
rI.I
.....
~
=
~
rI).
...
...
l:l. 0
::5 ~
= ~
... ..J
e" "'".
~~ ~
=a:i~
.... Q,) ~
::52 ~ "
.; ~ "fi
_ 0 ~
-;zco
=::::i .E
~~~
.
o
~
o
r-
!- 100.
Z *
;:l *
o :
~ :
< :
*
*
*
~
lr)
o
o
W C'l
!- r-
< C'l
Q .J
:J
....,
o
r-
>J:>
~
.,..,
...,
r-
oo
M
>J:>
o
o
25
o
"0
C
<o:l
CIl
...
~
'0
Cl
C
c
o
;>
o
en
"0
o
...
"0
C
:3
:r:
.~
en
"0
c
<o:l
CIl
:3
o
.c
t-
o
c ....
o cu 0
>- -5 ~
~ 0"0
Q: ~ ~
~
f7
~.
I
CIl
...
(I)
c
o
'Vi
,~
E
E
o
u
.c
c
:3
o
U
'-
o
"0
...
<o:l
o
c:o
U
.J
en
CIl
...
(I)
c
,9
CIl
CIl
'E C'l
E lr)
o \0
U v;>
.c~C'l
c c 00
:3 (I) 0\
O;>~
U~M
'-<o:l.J
0.- ~
"0.5 ..;
~ ~ ~
0'- 0
c:o>c:
ugt:
.....lMO
enC'l~
~
ru
U1
.z
U1
lJ"
....
ru
o
o
o
o
o
o
..
cc
Lf1
rM
C'-
cc
o
C'-
t..D
ru
..
~
....
lJ"
o
o
....
~
-
~
==
=
-
I
i
I
::: I
.S: I
.~
~,~
~ '61
rI). ~
-0
-
U
...J
...J
Q.
= (1)1
Q ....
I- <o:l
c;O
OJ
.:
~
=
~
=
~
(I)
:3
o
o
~
o
r-
100.
o
o
c::i
r-
\0.
....
o
Z
E
::l
o
u
'~I
01
'-
o
E
:3
o
E
~
o
o
o
r-
\0.
Q)
OIl
l':l
Cl..
lr)
o
--
lr)
C'l
r:::
o
CIl
...
Q)
c
o
'Vi
'~
o
u
.c
c
:3
o
U
'-
o
"tl
...
<o:l
o
CD
U
.J
en
0\
o
o
=It:
..lo::
U
i\
~I
-I
lr)
o
--
r-
C'l
--
I"-
o
,
<n
e
<n
C'l
--
r-
o
.
.
.
Potable Water Availability Worksheet
This worksheet is provided to assist applicants in submitting comprehensive plan amendments
that provide the potable water analysis required to determine the availability of potable water
resources to serve the proposed development. The South Florida Water Management District
and local utility company contacts are attached.
1. Generallnformation
Date: August 1, 2005
Contact Name: J.R, Chapman Phone: 561-799-3855 E-mail: jchapman@jjg.com
Potable Water Supplier: Fort Pierce Utilities Authority
2. Infrastructure Information
Water treatment plant permit number:
Pennitted capacity of water treatment plant(s):
Are distribution lines available to serve the property? No
If not, indicate if, how and when the lines will be provided: The ditribution system will be
extended west along Angle Rd. by the developer at the time of infrastructure construction.
Permitting agency:
million gallons a day (mgd)
3. Water Management District Consumptive Use Permit (CUP)
CUP Number: Expiration Date:
Total CUP duration (years):
CUP allocation in last year of permit:
Current Status of CUP: In compliance Not In compliance
Reserved capacity:
4. Consumptive Use Analysis
A. Current year CUP allocation:
B. Consumption in the previous calendar year:
C. Reserved capacity or growth projection:
D. Projected consumption by proposed comprehensive plan amendment areas:**See below
E. Amount available for all other future uses (A-B-C-D =E):_________________________
If the amount in E is zero or a negative number. explain how potable water will be made available for future uses:
**Projected Consumption:
=(180 single family homes)x(250 gpd)+(329 multi-family homes)x(250gpd)x(0.75)
=106,688 gpd
=0.11 MGD
November 12, 2004
Page 6 of 10
"Committed to Quality"
FORT PIERCE UTiliTIES AUTHORllY
.
.
.
113 N, Second Street (34950)
Post Office Box 3191
Fort Pierce, Florido 34948-3191
Phone 772-466-1600
Fax 772-489-0396
August 1, 2005
Steven M. Pawlyk, P.E.
Boyer-Singleton & Associates, Inc.
Northpoint business Plaza
West Palm Beach, FL 33407
RE: Quail Meadows request for utility service
Dear Mr. Pawlyk,
The purpose of this letter is to confirm that the above referenced project is within the
FPUA service boundary and FPUA intends to serve your project with water and
wastewater service. However, service is contingent upon construction of any and all
required infrastructure to include any offsite improvements that may be deemed
necessary by FPUA Engineering, payment of any applicable fees, execution of a FPUA
Water and Wastewater Supply Agreement, and execution of a City of Fort Pierce
Annexation Agreement. This letter shall not be construed to reserve water or wastewater
allocations to your project.
I trust that this letter provides you with the information necessary to move forward with
your project. Please feel free to contact me at 466-1600 extension 3480 if you require
further assistance.
Very trul y yours,
~~
Bo Hutchinson
Environmental Engineer
BH:vr
cc:
David Mellert, Environmental Engineer
James Carnes, Utility Engineer
.
Potable Water Availability
Worksheet Instructions
1. Date: Enter worksheet completion date.
Contact name: Enter the contact information for the person who prepared the worksheet.
Potable water supplier: Supplier for the amendment area(s).
2. Infrastructure Information
Permitted capacity of the water treatment plat: Obtain from the utility.
Distribution lines: Indicate if distribution lines are available to serve the property. If not,
indicate who will fund the improvements and when the improvements will be completed.
Reuse Distribution lines: Indicate if reuse distribution lines are available to serve the
property .
3, SFWMD Consumptive Use (CUP) Permit Information
CUP information: Obtain from the utility.
Reserved capacity: Enter the amount of potable water capacity currently encumbered for
developments that are approved but not yet constructed.
4. Consumptive Use Analysis
Designate mgd or mgy: Indicate which unit of measure is used. The figures may be cited in
units of either million gallons per year (mgy) or million gallons per day (mgd), but you must
be consistent throughout the worksheet.
.
A. Current Year CUP allocation: provide the annual groundwater withdrawal allowed under
the SFWMD - issued CUP for the current calendar year. If you receive water from
another local government, enter the allocation established by agreement or by the
secondary user CUP issued by SFWMD. It is important to consider the duration of the
CUP and the CUP allocation in the last year of permit. If your CUP allocation is less in
the final year than in the current year, consider using the final year figure as a more
conservation approach for planning purposes,
B. Consumption in the previous calendar year: this figure may be taken from the EN-50
forms (SFWMD), from FDEP monthly operating reports, or from other acceptable
documentation. Cite your source.
C, Reserved capacity or growth projection: Enter an amount based on your reserved
capacity or growth projection. Check which alternative you selected. Attached the
calculation for the alternative selected,
Reserved Capacity: Enter the amount of potable water capacity currently encumbered
for developments that are approved.
Growth Projection: Enter the water use attributable to this year's growth and cite your
data source(s). Sources for growth projections include the comprehensive land use plan,
the CUP, the most current SFWMD water supply assessment, or the utility's water
supply plan. Include the amount of the previous year's allocation that was not used.
D. Projected consumption: Attach a description of formulas, including figures and
assumptions used to deriver this figure. The projected consumption should be based on
new growth attributable to the proposed amendment. Calculate the difference in
projected assumption based on the difference between the maximum development
potential under the current future land use designation and the proposed future land use
designation.
E. Amount available for all other future uses: This line represents the amount available for
all other future uses by subtracting lines B, C, and 0 from A.
.
November 12, 2004
Page 7 of 10
.
.
.
Contact Information:
South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD)
Keith Smith, Sr. Supv. Hydrologeologist
WATER USE REGULATION
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 24680
West Palm Beach, FL 33416-4680
Telephone number: 561-682-6620
SFWMD Martin/S1. Lucie Service Center
Upper East Coast Office
Phone: 772-223-2600 or 800-250-4100
The Upper East Coast Water Supply Plan webpage is
http://www.sfwmd.gov/org/wsd/wsp/uecwsp.htm
S1. Lucie County Utility
Office mailing address: 2300 Virginia Avenue
Fort Pierce, FL 34982
Office telephone numbers: 772-462-1150
Office fax number: 772-462-1153 (Fax)
Office e-mail address:Utilities_CustomecService@co.st-lucie.f1.us
Fort Pierce Utilities Authority (FPUA)
206 S 6th Street
Fort Pierce, FL 34950
Mailing Address: PO Box 3191
Fort Pierce, FL 34948-3191
Office Telephone Number: (772) 466-1600
November 12, 2004
Page 8 of 10
.
.
.
St. Lucie County
School Impact Worksheet
This worksheet is required to be submitted as part of an application for changes to the Future
Land Use Map or Zoning Map that will increase the maximum residential densities allowed on
the property. The worksheet is also required for all Site Plan applications proposing residential
development. The purpose of the worksheet is to assist the County and the School District in
planning for future public school facility needs,
Project Information
Date:m1L05
1. Property owner: EH Building Corporation LLC, SE Division________
2. ParceIID#:: 2304-111-0002-000/4 & 2304-112-0001-000/0__
3,
4,
5,
6,
Project Name: Quail Meadows ____
Former Project Name (if any): ______ ____
Total Project acres: 114 _________________
Is build-out expected within 5 years: Yes
7. The project number and type of residential dwelling units at build-out:
Unit Type Number of Typical Floor Estimated Unit Number
Units Area (sq. ft.) Price per Unit Restricted to
($) 55+ Age Group
(if any)
Sinale-Familv detached 180 1600-2200 185-250K
DUD lex
Multi-family dwellings
(aDt./condo) 164 1120-1826 115-125K
Townhouse dwellinas 165 1472-1826 150-175K
Zero lot line dwellings
Other
School Board of St. Lucie County Contact Infonnation:
Marty Sanders
327 NW Commerce Park Drive
Port St. Lucie, FL 34986
772-340-4816
sandersm@stlucie.k12.fl.us
Staff Use Only:
Project Number:_____ ________________________________
Application Type:_________________________________________________
St. Lucie County
Page 9 of 10
.
St. Lucie County
409.t!lO
Fee: $~O
I, jV\ 1c..lA-6-.~ "f. A ~~'" DA- , residing or doing business at 1Z77 No 'A 71-4.L.-A K t. '17i...y'7;;.
Name Street
Concurrency Deferral Affidavit
f1 \... r"\ ~1.~'--\-4 t., ~~ ~
City
, 'Fi.<.:I;~ 1 t.J~
State
,.?H+10
Zip
, :;~/-~Z"-~/Z/
Phone
have applied for a
.TUTU e..~ ~1+""711 \)SE AM (aJ'bk EN"" from St. Lucie County, Florida, for the following project:
Type of Development Order
UUkl L tA €;~Pc>v\t~
Name of Proposed Development
I do hereby affirm that in connection with my application for the above project, I have elected to defer the certificate of
capacity and reservation of capacity in public facilities for the above property until a later time, but no later than the
application for a final development order for the same property.
.
I understand and acknowledge that the above listed property will be subject to the certificate of capacity before any final
development order can be issued, and that St. Lucie County can make no guarantee that adequate public facilities will be
available when I apply for the final develo ment order.
1110 0 Section 5.01.01 of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, no final
ed until capacity in those facilities is available at that time. The issuance of a preliminary
rtificate of capacity creates no vested or other rights to develop the subject property.
I further acknowledge that acc
development approvl!
development (Wdt'r' witho
Sighed:
Date:
I) .."l,..S -01
State of Florida, County of St. Lucie
, the und 'oned authority personally appeared
ly sworn, deposes and says sworn to and subscribed before me this day of
, 2010-.
My Commission expires: e2 - ;;2'-/- D /}
d~~
If<;~~';
, "'*~l"
I \~~:~J\.,.<~~~.'J
I.
L___ ---,
...-~._.,__~A"'__",
':Jl\r:l {l IF I SIDES 1
~;-i!'),1i:;SION #OD1 g71 80 \
c,r iRE). FER?1 2007 \
,LI(]vamaqe Notary i
I
.
ReC81veli F1'\I
4/13/01
GrowtJ) lViana,UHn"c;; ,i
. Reason for Land Use Chanf!e Request for Ouail Meadows
.
.
The planning objective for the change in Land Use from RS (Residential Sub-
urban) to RU (Residential Urban) is to provide the planning foundation for a
unified development plan which features a range of workforce housing options
including single-family residences and two distinctive types of multi-family housing.
The development is located just south of the C-25 Canal in the south-west corner of
Angle Road and Old FFA Road between the Florida Turnpike and 1-95. The Golden
Ponds Mobile Home Community is located directly to the east of this property. The
Sunnyland Farms pun is being proposed to the south-east of this property and will
be providing a public connection from Emerson Road to Old FF A Road. The high
intensity vehicular use on both the east and west side of the property, the high
intensity use of a mobile home community adjacent to the site and Old FFA Road as
a new road for through traffic all characterize this area as a RS Land Use area in
transition, which per the Comprehensive Plan makes it appropriate for a RU land
use designation.
The property is also located just south of the boundary which is proposed for the
future TVC (Town, Villages and the Countryside) area proposed for North St. Lucie
County, Albeit on a much smaller scale and without a commercial node due to the
small size of the parcel, this development incorporates the village design concept
into its proposal in order to provide consistency with development concepts just to
the north of the Belcher Canal. The development will be designed in a village-type
concept featuring centralized amenities as well as connective trails for bicyclists and
hikers. These trails could provide much public benefit by connecting to a public
park proposed as part of Sunnyland Farms PUD, to the recreational trails proposed
along the C-25 Canal, and by complementing any commercial and recreational uses
that maybe developed in the future on the old St. Lucie Woods parcel. Other
amenities include such enhanced features as ball fields, lakes, a pool, multi-sport
court, tot lot, a clubhouse and a continuous large native upland habitat preserves
which will be protected by a recorded conservation easement and accessible for
hiking.
The utilization of the RU Land Use with a maximum density of 5 units/acres and the
pun concept are necessary to allow development of the site in residential clusters,
thereby permitting the maximum preservation of the existing habitat in a generally
massed and continuous form while providing for an efficient lay-out and sufficient
number of units. Total open space will constitute approximately 44 acres or 38
percent of the site and approximately 33.4 acres or 29.5 percent of the existing
native upland habitat will be preserved. The enhanced habitat preservation and
landscaping will enable Quail Meadows to provide a residential product that is both
architecturally and aesthetically pleasing while still being accessible to the
workforce at a variety of price points. In return for smaller building separation the
project offers enhanced design features such as wide native landscape buffers along
Angle Road, Old FFA Road and the Turnpike and by re-vegetation of the upland
preserves which will provide access through managed nature trails. The internal
.
landscaping has been enhanced to provide additional landscaping between buildings
to create unique settings for each multi-family building that create the impression of
stand-alone settings and individual landscapes.
.
.
.
Ouail Meadows Future Land Use Amendment
1, Provide a general Statement describing whether and how the proposed amendment
conforms to the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan.
.
The subject property is located within the Urban Service Area in the south-west corner
of Angle Road and Old FFA Road between the /-95 and Turnpike corridors. The
Comprehensive Plan identifies R U as appropriate for areas within the identified urban
service area and for transitional RS (Residential Suburban) areas. The proximity of
the existing MX.D land uses with medium intensity to the east and north, of two major
freeway corridors and of the Golden Ponds community support the assumption that
this area is transitioning from RS to R U The subject property and proposed
development as shown in the enclosed conceptual development plan demonstrate the
transition aspect by providing a transition of open space and wooded uplands along the
Turnpike Corridor and a mix of single family residences and townhouses towards the
Golden Ponds community. The project benefits the public by establishing connectivity
to existing and proposed recreation trails along the C-25 Canal and to future
recreation opportunities presented by proposed development to the south-east
(Sunnyland Farms), by offering a variety of housing choices at pricepoints accessible
to the workforce, by providing connectivity of roadways as envisioned in the proposed
TVC Element and by preserving native habitat and providing open space in excess of
the requirements of the Land Development Code.
2, Provide a statement describing how the proposed future land use designation is
compatible with the future land use designations and existing land uses surrounding the
amendment lands,
The proposed future land use of R U (5 units/acre) for Quail Meadows is compatible
with adjacent future land use designations. The future land use to the north across the
canal is MX.D (Mixed Use Development) with an approved density of up to 9 units/acre
under "The Woods PUD". The /-95 corridor with a future Land Use designation of
TIU including a FPL sub-station isjust on the other side of the Golden Ponds Mobile
Home Park, which lies immediately to the east of this property. The Golden Ponds
Mobile Home Park shows afuture Land Use of MXD with an SU (Res 9) designation.
This means that the uses within this zone are equivalent to the RM land use
designation (see attached Figure 1-7e, Sf. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan Land Use
Element). To the south of Quail Meadows lies Sunnyland PUD which is under review
for an R U Future Land Use. The subject property lies within the urban service area
and borders the Turnpike corridor on the west side and lies within ~ mile of the 1-95
corridor. The property is being developed as a subdivision which will preserve 29% of
the existing upland habitat and which will provide 38% of the site in open space for the
residents and which also will tie into the green ways and trails along the C-25 canal
.
.
3, In accordance with Future Land Use Policy 1,1.5,3 provide the following information:
a. Identification of future land use designation and existing land uses within ~ mile of the
subject property that have the same or greater type of proposed future land use
designation,
See attached land use map for the St. Lucie Blvd MXD area and information provided
under #2.
b, Is the property under the land use amendment application within the Five Year Capital
Improvement Program of the Waster and Wastewater Master Plan for St. Lucie County or
otherwise meet the requirements of Policy 1.1,5.4.
Fort Pierce Utilities Authority is the provider for Water and Wastewater for the subject
property. The conceptual design for the water/sanitary sewer service system will be
detailed in the companion Quail Meadows Preliminary PUD. Construction and
extension of the existing lines will be completed concurrent with the proposed impact
of the development. The nearest public water main andforce main are approximately a
halfmile east of the site, and currently serve the Golden Ponds Mobile Home Park.
These services are owned by the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority. Upgrades and
extensions of these utilities will be necessary to service the proposed development and
will be in place concurrent with development.
.
4. Provide a statement describing any conditions affecting the area of the amendment
lands that have changed since the most recent adoption of the Comprehensive Plan,
Describe any changes in land development patterns, utility availability, and public service
capacity, Provide the data and analysis supporting your conclusions.
.
Since the most recent adoption of the Comprehensive Plan, several changes in
development pattern have occurred, which support the amendment of the existing land
use for this property. The ultimate goal is to fill in the areas within the urban service
area, preserve as much native habitat as possible and utilize central water and sewer
for services. The subject property is located within the urban service area and also is
located in between two major freeways and adjacent to a mobile home community. It is
filling in development on a vacant parcel which is surrounded by development at or
higher than the requested density. It is designed as a subdivision which aims at
preserving the maximum possible native habitat. The nearest public water main and
force main are approximately a half mile east of the site, and currently serve the
Golden Ponds Mobile Home Community. These services are owned by the Fort Pierce
Utilities Authority. Upgrades and extensions of these utilities will be necessary to
service the proposed development. Another more recent development trend within St.
Lucie County has been the escalating prices of housing. It is almost impossible to find
a single family residence that is in decent shape under $200,000. The proposed density
and mix of housing types will enable the owner of the property to offer a variety of
housing product at a variety of prices which will enable the average person in the
workforce to afford to buy a home.
. 5. Provide a statement describing why there is a need for the proposed Future Land Use
Map Amendment and how the amendment will result in an orderly and logical
development pattern,
The increase in density from RS to R U is necessary to obtain a density on the property
which will allow the maximum preservation of native upland habitat, provide
reasonably priced housing, and further benefit the public by providing connectivity to
existing and future recreational trails along Old FFA Road and along the C-25 CanaL
The project is also envisioned to complement any higher intensity uses on the MXD
Future Land Use designation to the north, which is part of the proposed TVC element,
thereby promoting consistency and compatibility of uses.
6, If a change to Industrial Land Use is proposed, explain how the proposal meets future
Land Use Policy 1.1.11.2 or Policy 1,1.11,3 of the Comprehensive Plan,
Not applicable. The requested Land Use is R U - Residential Urban,
.
7. Provide a traffic report of the potential impacts to the County's transportation system
brought about by the land use change. The report must include existing, background,
committed trips, and the projected traffic volumes and levels of service for all affected
roadways. Projected traffic volumes must be based on the highest density/intensity
allowed under the requested future land use designation,
The traffic impact report is attached.
8. Describe the drainage characteristics of the area and what effects the proposed land use
amendment would have on the volume and quality of storm water run-off? Identify the
property's flood zone classification,
The site and surrounding areas currently drain to the C-25 (Belcher Canal). The
proposed storm water management system for the project will be designed to meet the
applicable criteria set forth by St. Lucie County and the South Florida Water
Management District. The system will provide water quality and storm attenuation
prior to discharging off-site. The property has an X Flood zone designation.
9. What are the potential environmental impacts of the requested amendment? Describe
the natural resources occurring on and adjacent to the amendment lands. Identify any
protected species that are known to occur and estimate the acres of wetlands and native
upland habitats on the amendment lands, Identify Category I, II, or III wetlands as
described in Policy 8.1,14.1.
The environmental impact report is attached.
.
.
.
10, Provide a potable water impact and capacity analysis and documentation that
demonstrate adequate water supply facilities and service will be available concurrent with
the impact of development. Provide correspondence from the service provider verifying
their ability to serve the proposed development.
See attached worksheet. A letter from FPUA is included.
11, Provide a projection of average daily volumes of solid waste that would be generated
if the Land Use changes.
The change in land use to RU and the approval of the companion Quail Meadows
PUD as proposed would generate approximately 10,981.25 lbs of solid waste per day.
This projection was calculated as follows: 509 units x 2.46 persons/household x 8.77
lbs solid waste/capitalday (Table 6-B-7, Infrastructure/Solid Waste Element). A letter
from the St. Lucie County Solid Waste Department with more specific projections has
been requested.
12. What demands for recreational facilities will be created by development in
accordance with the land use change? Describe any available plans for recreation and
open space. If you are requesting a residential classification, what recreational facilities
and open spaces are available in the vicinity?
It is not anticipated that the proposed development will create additional recreational
demands on existing public recreation facilities. Active and passive recreation demands
by the new residents will be satisfied on site, as shown on the conceptual development
plan. The plan shows the extensive native upland habitat preserve which will be
maintained with a nature trail system for recreation, and the lake area which includes
such amenities as a pool, tot lots, playgrounds and a multisport court for active
recreation. Recreational trails for pedestrians and bikers will be provided throughout
the development and a connectivity link will be provided to the green ways and trails
system along the C-25 canal and along Old FFA Road, linking the property's trail
system to other proposed parks and recreation places to the south-east of the property. .
13, Indicate the location of any archaeological or historic resources that are known to
occur on or near amendment lands, Describe the potential impacts to these resources as a
result of the proposed amendment. Provide a copy of any available archaeological or
historic assessment.
Not applicable, none known to exist.
14. Is the property currently within the Planned Urban Service Area Boundary?
The property currently lies totally within the Planned Urban Service Area Boundary.
. 15. If you answered "no" to Question 14 above, will the property be used for "urban
development activities", as defined in the Future Land Use Policy 1,},5,1?
.
.
.
Not applicable, The property lies within the Urban Service Area Boundary.
16, If any item in Question 15 above is checked, the property must lie inside the Planned
Urban Service Area Boundary.
Not applicable, the property lies within the Urban Service Area Boundary.
17. If changing from an agricultural category (AG-5 and AG-2.5) to a non-agricultural
category (all others) is proposed, please answer the following questions.
Not applicable, the requested change is from the Future Land Use Category RS -
Residential Single Family (2 units/acre) to RU - Residential Urban (5 units/acre),
18. Provide a copy of all existing federal, state, regional or local permits or plans related
to the property,
Not applicable, none exist.
19. Indicate if the area under consideration is located within a unique area with common
characteristics, such as the Indrio Road corridor or White City. If so, indicate how the
proposed change in future land use is consistent with the character of the area and any
neighborhood plan or special planning project for the amendment area.
The subject property does not lie within such a unique area.
20. Identify any local government within one mile of the amendment lands. If any,
provide a copy of the proposed application documents to the appropriate government
official. Indicate the name and address of the official for which with application
documents were provided.
No other local governments are within one mile of the subject property.
.0
~'Cfj
OC
.....JO)
C
Q)
CJ)
::)
-+-'
(/)-0
Q)
X
.-
~
co
Q)
~
<(
D~
>:t::
->
m
peotl
~OlSULlOr
-+-'
o
.0)<(
o
:J
-.J
0
~ >.
CD
0 ..~
X w 'DCfJ
:2: U O)C
:J ~2
...J
t-' C
Cf)
..0
'D'Cfj
o)c
~2
C
o
>..
~
m
w
o
:J
~
~
(f)
"
,
.
ill
a:
o
x
~
.0
~'Cfj
OC
.....JO)
C
(f)
a:
"D
ro
o
0:
en
~:
ff)0)
'0:
.0)
0)
c
<(
2
CfJ
'0
C 0
0 ~
-::)0... CD
0
cr.ic x w
0) :2: U
:g :J
'.. ...J
0 t-'
(') ,Cf)
~.
1
(
,
It
r
\ ".-.-.-.........---. .
l ~lt]~t~j~J3^"-
\ ~ i ill
0)
'0
::l
--l
0...::
-::Jff)
0...0
I \CfJ
~"8
ff)~
0)
''-'E'
I
I
I
I
I
I
.1
:1
~ I
tl
II
q
!I
-i!
II
Co I
! I
f I
f I
f I"
)'1
Cf)
4:
UJ Q)
a: =:
4:
UJ .9
Cf) "0
::J Q) Q)
u 13 =:
.;::
u: "' .J:::
::J U i!' OJ
UJ :0
cr.i Q) 0
CL -5
Cf) 10
<{
w
a:
<{
o
z
w
~
w
~
L!)
I
~
<(
~ C
U5-fg
Z ......
W co
f-'O
Z C
sCi5
o g;
.....JCf)
to
i!' "0
4: Q)
c 1! iii
~ E ~
~ m g
ell ~ 0..
:s .~
Q)
.J:::
o
'<:t
I'--
or-:
>.
.~
o
n..
Qj
"0
C
:0
'" C
Jg ;:
:.= "0 0
C Q) C
Q) C -"
:g ~ ~
1 a... '0'
CD 76 D-
'u t ro
:::l ('C -=
-'c.C
.-Q)
li5 CO :g
'0 ~ e
ai
Tj
tf) "'0 Cll ::l
"8 ffi E ....J
~ ~..Q ~
I .~ ~ ~
O~ e -g
~ ~ ~ ~
'<:t
I'--
>.
.~
o
0...
~.~
- (/)
ff)'O
Z"""
WCO
f-'O
zffi
.ff)
00)
WO)
:?:ff)
(f)
a:
~
~~
'l""""
0)"'0
L- 0)
::J (f)
0) ">
.- 0)
LL L-
...........
(f)
a:
Q)
'"
i (lJ :0
Q) ro ~ "0
E a: C
(lJ (lJ .!l'
> c. C (lJ
0 0 0 =: (lJ
c. Cii N
> .9 :;
c. Q) '" :2
ro "0 ;S C
(lJ Q) C (lJ (lJ
=: E :s rn f;
'0 0 ."
.J::: 'j: :0 .~
ro 0-
OJ ~ '" OJ "0
10 15 (lJ OJ (lJ cO
'" .0 ro
0 ::> .0
OJ E 'C 0.
f; (lJ "0 "
'" Q)
'" f; :; (lJ >
'" "0 ro 0 "0 '"
~ C ;: '" C
0 f; Q)
C CL ro <<l .J:::
Q) C '" f; C (lJ
:g OJ C .9 C.
"0 <<l OJ E
I 0 (lJ '" ro 0
CJ E 0 C "
'" f; OJ
"0 I 'in OJ
C 0, Ol .9 (lJ f;
0 C "0
a. 't; en '0
"0 (lJ
C 'X (lJ OJ en C
Q) Q) !;S .g ::>
"0 OJ
0 "0 "0 E
CJ C ::J <;; C OJ
ro Cf) i!' .!l' Cii
.
.
.
JORDAN
JONES &
GOULDING
3300 PGA Boulevard
Suite 605
Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410
T 561.799.3855
F 561.799.6579
www.jjg.com
July 25, 2005
Ms. Debbie Scribner
St Lucie County Solid Waste
6120 GLADES CUTOFF ROAD
FT. PIERCE, FL 34981
Re: Projections for Solid Waste Generation
Dear Ms. Scribner:
We are in the process of submitting for an application for Land Use Amendment for
the subject 114 acres property with the tax 1.D. #s of 2304-111-0002-000/4 and
2304-112-0001-000/0. The property is located on the south-west corner of Angle
Road and Old FFA Road.
The companion Preliminary PUD application will be submitted under the name of
Quail Meadows and is proposing to develop 164 townhomes with no garage, 165
townhomes with one garage, and 180 single family detached residences.
We would like to request an estimated projection of the average daily volumes of
solid waste that would be generated by this proposed development.
Please let me know if you have any questions or require any additional information
You can reach me at 561-799-3855. I appreciate your assistance.
Regards,
JORDAN JO.NESJLD~
- ",j;t&..o
lia Shewchuk
enior Planner
Q8C:8l\.'F;(1 f3\
Growth Mana.~JEmIHni
--e
.
.
..
~
-
....
Q."
-
ct:
L>
V)
Lu
Q
....J
~
(,:>
Lu
....J
-.I
Lu
U
n::
"'t
CL
CLLu
.....n::
B5~
~
a_
I-"'t
o
-.....
....n::
a
~-.I
all..
.....
I-
U
Lu:>-
V) I-
~
Ll..~
aa
U
....
'Lu
-..... ..
UYl
Lu~:t:
~-.la
-.I
Lu '-.1
::t:l-a
f-,:v)Ll..
~ -V)
.....I-"'t
V)
<":>"'to
~LuLu
..... I-
:>-o>CL
-.II\').....
n::
OLuU
~<":>V)
"'t~Lu
-.I"'tO
n::
Ll.. :>-
o -.I
an::
lj~:5
U~~
n::OU
"'tV).....
Q.. l-
n::
ll)"'t
"'tl\')Q..
--Lu::t:1- LuV)"'t Ll..::t:n:: :>-:>-Lu V)"'t~1- I-Ll..
....~~~~ ~~~ O~~ ~~~ ~ ~G GO
..... O~ -.I n:: 31:::..... ~ -.11-1-..........
~n:: V) 0 I- n:: ~ "'tun:: n::1-
00Ll.. Lu O-s::t:~ Ll..v)Ll.. Lu ~
.....-.lOLu-.l I-I-Ll.. <":>0 o~a I- V) .....
I-Ll.. ::t:<..:> V) ..........Lu = "'to::t:::t:O
u f-,:~ ~ Lu n::1-..... I- ::t:Lu I- hQ..
Lu -Lu "'t =~;:t: uu ::t:I-Lu 1-n::Ll..::J ~
V):>-~::t: v,~ Lu::J <":>Lu~ ~oa 0
l-.....hV) lulu :>-V)-S .....Lu..... V) V) V)"'t
..~-.I~"'t ;:t:-SLl..0 ~~ n::Ll..-.I ~~~..,
oal-=o-~ Lu~. :>-~I- ~~-~ ~O
Uv)~Lu<..:><..:>n::Lu ~~I- -sl\')V) -S I- "'tl-
bl.J01-~~0~ .....V), ,"'t v)Lu V)
....Lu~....."'t.....O ..... 0 ~~Lu "'t~~
,..... I-~~-.I -.I .....V)::t: ~ "'t ..... Luv)
-ULuU<":>~"'tLu "'tl-I- O~Lu -Lu ::t:V)
~::t:Lu""'''''' n:::>- V).....n:: .....::t: Ll..::t:1- I-Lu
Lu-.ll-V)V)<..:> -O"l: 0 "'tV)1- <":>Ol-~ -S
~ n::LuLuI-~~ <..:>O~ V)Lu ~ ..... <..:>
. <..:>LuOmV) ~I- .....0 0:>-Ll..0 ~
Lul-~I- "'tl-Ll.. 0 Lu <..:>-sl- -S-.lOQ..-On::
~V)~~Q~Lu~O ~~~ ~I-Lu "'t~Lu"'t~~O
-"'t "'t ~ Ll..1- Lu -s"'t-.l _I-~ 0 Lu
Ll..1- V)01-~ ::t: --sLl.. "'t::t:<..:> I-V).....OO::-O::
0V) _I-O::~ll)-<":> I- 0 I-~ v)\.LJ-s1- 1-0
"'tl-..... .....'~..... v)0:: I\') - "'t!.u:3:: I-V)~
O::Luv) :>-0-.0:: "'tOLu....1-1- ~ 1-V)V)bl.J
Lu "'t01-Q..0l\') Lu ~ V)~I- 1-V)V)!.u:3::1-
~O>LuI-~ 10>:>- Lu..... ."'t.....::t: ~ Lu"'tLu:3: Lu
~I\')~ 1-6~~ll)~ ~ O::-sOLuO<":> I\')LuLu-s ~ Lu
ULu~LuUf-,:O Lu ~~:>-~~Q..~~~Ll..Oo::~~Ll..
<,,:>ll)Lu .~ - I "l:-.lI\')"'t ,~.....O<..:> I I\')
3I:::~ 1 Ll.."'t<..:>::t:.... >-, I-~"'t- "'t~C\JI\')"'t ~'O)
~"'t' ~1-'Lu"l:~Lu~' 0 00 .V)Lu"'t.... .
n::-~Ll.......~-::t:~....LuLl.."'t~I-I-.....,~ 0:: ....ll)
Lu OOOLuO 1-~ILl..OUll) "'tI-O~LuOOI-
::t: . I . mV) 0::0 I I- UC\J~::t:~.....O 0)
l-::t:oOLu Lu::t:"'tC\JO) 1-0 LuOLuO I- "'to>-
1--ll)~I-Lu~I-Q......-I-UO)LuLuv) 0 I-V)~
~OC\J.....~~..... '::t:.....~Ll..n:: ~OLu
1-0 -.I.....~ 3I:::Lu::t:ll)<..:>n:: ~Ll..::t:"'tI-LuLl..::t:.
"'tV)::t:. 0.....0 1-1-0).....1-::t:ll)V)01- Ll..OI-Lu
1-....:>-Q..1-.....~"'t::J~0::V)1-I\')"'t O::OLu O::~
ll)~'''l: ~"'t01-0C\J .....~ 'bl.J....OI--sO)LuO.....
<..:>I\')O-~OOV).....V)V) OO~~,~ <..:>a~~-S'
~ V) .....U I- .:>- V)~ ~...... <..:>
.....CL LuLl.."'t ULu Lu-sLu -.I"'tll)-s ~
U..... .~OV) .4JLu~ .~, t..::> . V)4J -4.1 <.0 .:>-.....
~::t:4J Lu::t:V).....Lu.....~"'tLu "'t~4J-.I ll):>-Lu"l:~
bl.JV)U I- .UI-O::::t:U-S ~U. U-.lI-C\J"l:U~~
~~~0::t:0~ 4Jv)~ .....~Lu O~"'t::t: ~~ .....
~:3::Lu""'<":>"'tLu 1-~4J>-Lu"'tLu~ ......Lun::<..:> Lu <..:>
00::t:"'t.....0::t:Ll..~::J::t:"l:::t:0::::t:.....Ll.."'t::t:"'t..... .Ll..::t:Ll..Lu
UI-I-V)O::O::I-O.....V)I-~I-OI--SoV)l-Q..o::....aI-Om
C\J
Ll..Ll..
00::t:
I-
::J
::t:1-0
1-::t:V)
::J<":>
0.....
V)0::ll)
I\')
<":>1\')
~....
..... Q..
>--.1.....
-.I"'t:t:
~V)
. "'t ;c:
....U~
, 0
-Ll..1-
o "'t
I- ....0
V)::t: .....
"'tl-~O::
4.10::00
::t:0.....-S
h~l-Ll..
0:: U
OOLu
~;z:V):>-
"'t I-
Lu .~
::t::>-I-::J
1-"l:4J0
~LuU
Ll.. lJ...
all.. 4.1
00.....
I- ....U
Lul- ::J
4J::t:1--s
lJ...<":>v)
..... "'t .
~O::LuI-
I\') V)
. 0 Lu
~ "'t::t: .
~Ohl-
~O:: V)
"'t
I-V)Lu
I-V)V)
v)bl.JLuO)
"'t~-Sl\')
4.1
Lu Lu
-.I . <..:>
Lu<..:>>-~
~~~~
-s
4.1
U
n::
"'t
Q..
V)
V)
Lu
-.I
n::
o
Lu
n::
~
V)
Lu
n::
U
"'t
ll)
a
a
....
..
<..:>
;z:
.....
;z:
.....
~
~
a
U
.
.
.I. J.VP"'J.\.J ~a..ppJ.u.J.J""'''' ....,"'..LJ-.""'..."'" ___V'_........J,....A.-J
Quail Meadows LLC Record: 1 of 1
Property Identification
Site Address:
SecfTown/Range:
MaplD:
Zoning:
TBD
04 :35S :39E
23/04N
Ownership and Mailing
Owner:
Address:
Quail Meadows LLC
4227 Northlake Blvd
Palm Beach Gardens FL 33410
Sales Information
Date Price
7/812004 1010000
81712002 100
1/1/1900 0
Code
00
01
Deed
WD
WD
<<Prev
Book/Page
2014/0818
1591/0441
I
'C
Next >>
Spec,Assmnt
Taxes
Exemptions Permits Map
ParcellD:
Account #:
Land Use:
City/Cnty:
2304-111-0002-000-4
12938
UNCLSFD ACRG
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
Legal Description
43539 E 726.38 FT OF NE 1/4 L YG 5 OF ANGLE RD W RfIN AND N OF
CANAL 43 RfIN-LESS E 40 FT- (40.40 AC)
More.~
Assessment Final Value Total Land and Building
2004 Val: 175042 Land Value: 175042 Acres: 40.4
Assessed: 5656 Building Value: 0
Ag.Credit: 169386 Finished Area: OSqFt
Exempt: 0
Taxable: 5656
TotalTax: 123.43
BUILDING INFORMATION
No Sketch
Available
Exterior Features
View:
ExtType:
Grade:
StoryHght:
Interior Features
BedRooms:
FullBath:
1/2Bath:
%AlC:
Roof Cover:
YearBIt:
EffYrBIt:
NO.Units:
Electric:
HeatType:
HeatFuel:
%Heated:
Special Features and Yard Items
Type YIS Qty. Units
Qual.
Condo
o
RoofStruct:
Frame:
PrimeWall:
SecWall:
PrmlntWall:
AvgHtlFI:
Prm.Flors:
%Sprinkled:
YrBlt
Land Information
No. Land Use
1 9900-UNCLSFD ACRG
Type
510 -Acres
Measure
40.4
Depth
THIS INFORMATION IS BELIEVED TO BE CORRECT AT THIS TIME BUT IT IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE AND IS NOT WARRANTED.
.
;."{t:l"tdi\:(-;\.":. f,:)
http://www.paslc.org/PRC.asp?prclid=2304111 00020004
<Jrowlrl Munagen\~)fn
6/6/2005
.
.
.
43539 E 726,38 FT OF NE 1/4 LYG S OF ANGLE RD W RfW AND N OF CANAL 43 RfW-LESS E 40 FT- (40,40 ACXOR 2014-818)
http://www.pas1c.orgllegal.asp
6/612005
"'<..---.1 __~~.A. -~-_..
r:J @.. e.. ~ B ~ ~~~~ ~
. "
.
.
...
~
,
I
"
...
."
.,.
~
~
ReCefveej By
clrowth Managemel1t
http://www . paslc.org/ gwmprop/findparcel.asp?PID=23 0411100020004 6/6/2005
.
.
Quail Meadows llC Record: 1 of 1
Property Identification
Site Address:
SecfT own/Range:
MaplD:
Zoning:
TBD
04 :35S :39E
23/04N
Ownership and Mailing
Owner:
Address:
Quail Meadows LLC
4227 Northlake Blvd
Palm Beach Gardens FL 33410
Sales Information
Date Price
7/812004 1837500
11/1/1972 75000
Code
00
00
Deed
WD
CV
No Sketc11
Available
Exterior Features
View:
ExtType:
Grade:
StoryHght:
Interior Features
BedRooms:
Full Bath:
1/2Bath:
%NC:
Roof Cover:
YearBIt:
EffYrBIt:
NO.Units:
Electric:
HeatType:
HeatFuel:
%Heated:
Special Features and Yard Items
Type Y/S Qty. Units
Qual.
Condo
<<Prev
Next >>
Spec.Assmnt
Taxes
Exemptions Permits Map
ParcellD:
Account #:
Land Use:
City/Cnty:
2304-112-0001-000-0
12939
UNCLSFD ACRG
ST. LUCIE COUNTY
:I. \.IlClf Co
l\I......i'.....v~.
~ ., (',.,-~
"'~>>J~
. '".- f;': :~
J . '~'c:;"" \-
Legal Description
43539 FROM NW COR OF NE 1/4 RUN S 01 DEG 01 MIN 58 SEC E
ON W LI OF NE 1/4 250.06 FT TO S RfW ANGL
More..,
Book/Page
2014/0816
0208 / 0842
Assessment Final Value
2004 Val: 294000
Assessed: 10290
Ag.Credit: 283710
Exempt: 0
Taxable: 10290
TotalTax: 224.54
Total land and Building
Land Value: 294000 Acres: 73.5
Building Value: 0
Finished Area: 0 SqFt
BUilDING INFORMATION
o
RoofStruct:
Frame:
PrimeWall:
SecWall:
PrmlntWall:
AvgHUFI:
Prm.Flors:
%Sprinkled:
land Information
YrBIt. No. Land Use
1 9900-UNCLSFD ACRG
Type
510 -Acres
Measure
73.5
Depth
THIS INFORMATION IS BELIEVED TO BE CORRECT AT THIS TIME BUT IT IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE AND IS NOT WARRANTED.
.
".,
bluvvth ~Jlalid~!G:!
6/6/2005
http://www.paslc.org/PRC.asp?prclid=230411200010000
.
.
.
J.. u5'-" ~ V.1. J..
43539 FROM NW COR OF NE 1/4 RUN S 01 DEG 01 MIN 58 SEC E ON W LI OF NE 1/4250.06 FT TO S RfIN ANGLE RD W FOR POB, TH S ON
SAME BEARING 593.61 FT MIL TO NEL Y RfIN TRNPK, TH S 42 DEG 46 MIN 35 SEC E ALG SD RfIN 2695.19 FT MIL TO N RfIN CANAL 43, TH S
89DEG 57 MIN 13 SEC E ALG SD RfIN 166.35 FT TO A PT THAT IS 726.38FT WL Y OF, AS MEAS AT RT ANGLE TO, ELI OF NE 1/4, TH N 02
DEG 02MIN 43 SEC W ON A LI /I TO AND 726,38 FT WL Y OF E LI OF NE 1/42565.09 FT MIL TO S RfIN ANGLE RDW, TH N 89 DEG 44 MIN 46
SEC W ALG RD RfIN 1915.93 FT MIL TO POB(73.50 AC) (OR 2014-816)
http://www ,paslc,org/legal,asp
6/6/2005
""'<.__"".' """".....L _""__"-
~J~e..~B~~~~~~
. ,.
.
.
...
..
~
...
~
..
~
R,- 8l-'<';'"'''/i,,,ri B\,-
: ." .."" ',' ~-' ,--'", J
http://www .paslc.orglgwmprop/findparce1.asp?PID=2304112000 1 OO&@rowth rVI a/lagement 6/6/2005
JL-Oi-2005 FR\ 00:J0rM
[II UUI'-LlI"~ _.-
T-293 P.02/04 P-49T
~ANNE HOLMMN. CLERK Of 1He Cl~~~UUHI - "A1N\ LUC1~ LUUNll
Flle Number: 2437716 OR BOOK 2014 PAGE 816
Recorded:Ol/13/04 10:41
Jul-Ol-05 03:10pm From-
... -
.. ... - .:
ThJi J)oClI~ prepatad By aDd lUaIrlllO:
~t V. S~__%e~, Ea~i~a
~ Bayslc.U 'WalJte~ _ Schwex~ D1mda8 ~ Mc:Cai.n
515-51.9 Sou't11 I:nd;i.an IUve: D:~ve
)ro=~ ?~oel rlorida 34950
.,/ cot]R.9OUSE BOX #9
larCdJ])JolD~ber: 2304-112-0001-000/0
Warranty Deed
This I:ndenture, l4>de this 8th ~ of Jul.y , 2004 AD.. BetWeen
Bola, :tnc., a Fl.orida corporation, fox;medy known as B. J. lloss
~soc~ates, Inc.
'" me CoaII1>' of ' s= of Fl.orida ' grantor, ""
Quail. MeadOWs, LLC, a norida l.iJDi tad l.ial>lli ty company
.boo<"""";" '227 Northl.ake Bl.vd., PalJu Beach Gardlms, FL 33'10
State of Florida
, grantee.
of the Count)' of Palm Beach
.
Witnesseth '!bar me oRANl'OR. for;uu1 jn consideration o!thc: sum of
_-----------------------~ DOLLARS ($10)----------------------- ~
. "" om.. 1"'" and .~U>bl, __ '" GlWtfOll. .. "..., p>i' ",. cnwmre. ... ",,;p' .hc<<<>f b -.,. _"",Iodgod. haS
........ ......... "" ..ld .. <be '"" GR.<J<'l"S "'" GRANIEFS ..... ___ "" ...... fMNcC. ... ...- "","bod ...... "......
,,............1....""-" st. Lucie ..... 0' norida ",.i<
A parcel. of land l.ying in the NE V' of Sec:tion 4, '!wp. 35S., p,ange
39 E., St. Lucie county, !i'l.orida; more partic:l11arly descrU>ed as
f'ol.low5:
commenciDg at the NW c:orner of the NE 1/' of section 4, 'twp. 35S.,
1lar1ge 39 E, st. Lucie eo'W>ty, Fl.oricla; thence S 01.01' 58" East al.o"9
the West l.1ne of the said NE l./" 250.06 feet to its intersection
with the south right-of-way l.ine of a county road, des1gnated as ,
~l.e Weet Road, said point being the point of beginning; thence
eonUn"" S 01.01' 58" E along the west l.i.ne of the said NE 1/' 593.61
feet more or less to .i~ intersection with the NE'l.y right-of-way
J.i.ne of the Flor:;.da sunshine State parkway; thence S 42.'6' 35" E
along the said m:' l.y right-of-way ].ine, 2695. l.9 feet more or l.ess to
its intersetion with the N'ly right-of-way line of the North st.
Lucie i<i ver Drainage Pistrict canal. No. '3; thenc:e S a9. 57 ' 13" E
along the said N'l.y right-of-way l.ine, 166.35 feet to a point that
_ . __ _ __ _ . ... _ _ __.___,/J _~ _ _-' _......... ___.. - --- .-'L_
.
Oi-OS 03: \\lpm r rOIll-
"'-'.;
arranty Deed _P_ie 1
~iJIIL~ 2304_~~2-000~.OOO/O
_.
OR 'BOOy, 2014 PAGE E1'7
as 1l.J.
ST-,TF. OF F:\.01:i.da
couNTY OF
1b< o.et<>'" ,......-~.. ......~ ..... - "'" 81:h drJ 01
f~ey ;! - 1<066, ?%,,6i.cJ,ent of ;!J1l, Inc., f
60ci.ate6, xuc" a ~lori.da co~ora~oU' c
. ,I. ........" ""_ '" ... " ",. ... ........... ~lori.da ~i. ""r · 6
JulY
1n:in tee.
l1otar'Y iC
),{y comm'$SiOft l!Jqlit'C':
~",\\\\\lIl1ml',
~~ ~?~ ~rendt "~b
;::. ,...... ....~
~ ,..~SION .... ~
g l-:; ~'fItl1/~~'" ~
_ ..... ~'fIo~ '~ . 0:::: .
~ :~~ .,. \ ~
=.1\' ~ ... ::*::
::::,' "",I\A'-
~..u..'. 1lCC:I\J,B"" .'~ '!!(::
~~' . ~
~"'..o'" ;;".~~ A .: ~
~.I'; '~'Innll'l"':." ~
~/I. PC/8.... ,.,~ &'<::;.,~
~III LIe, 51'fI\\~ ~,~
"'",m\"\\\\~
.
JUL-01-2005 FR! 03:54 PM
EH BUILDING GROUP
FAX No, 56162621~O
P, 00]
Jul-Ol-Q5 03:10pm From-
T-29a P.04/04 F-4g7
..~..
- ,
"-"
'-,I,.
,
~
nl. Dotl1lneJll Pnpared By .lId ~rurll [l):
Rab&rt V, Schverer, Es~re
B~enna.n Ha.ysJc.ar Wa:Lker Schwerer Dundas , McCain
515-51S1 sou'th Iz:lciian R:i:"er Drive
Fart Piorco, Floxida 34950
COURTROOSE BOX ,g
ParulJDNumlnr: 2304-111-0002-000/4
Warranty Deed
This Indenture~ Made lhis 8th day of July , 2004 A.D.. Between
H, J. Ross, as Trustee of the H. J. Ros.s Re,,"oc:a.ble '1'rustda ted Augus t 7,
2002 as Amended and Restated on January 25, 2004
of me County of Ki2Utl.i-Oade ,Sttte of Florida , grantor, l1Dd
Quail. Meadows, LLC, a Florida limi ted liabil.i ty company
whose lllldn:n is: 4227 Northlake Blvd., Paln1 Beach Gardens, FL 33410
or &he CO\.lnIiY of l?alzn Beach
Slate of Flo:t'~da
, grantee.
Witnesseth w,t rho GRANTOR. for Illd in considmtlOll Clfthe sun. of
-------------------------TEN DOIa:tARS ($10) ----------------------- DOLLARS.
And other soed and vAluable consideration \0 GRANTOR. in band paid by OMNTSE. Jh~ receipt whereof is ~rtby ltc:knowlcogecl, has
~tcd. bal'pined IIltG $old ~ the said ORANT.EE end ORANTEE'S hein;, iUCl:eiS0r5 2nd :wit:ni forever, the followins dcsc:ribed IaIld. situate,
lying and bani: in the COlinI)' or St. !"ucie SEale ot Florida III wit:
'the Ea.$t 726,38 feet: of the Nort:.heast 1/4, l.yi.ng South of Ang~e Road
West r.ight-of-way and North of Canal. 43 right-of-way, less the East
40 feet, Section 4, Township 35 South, Range 39 ~astl St. Luc~e
County, Florida.
Subject to restrictions, reservations, limitations a~d easements of
reco~d, if any, and taxes subsequent to 2004.
JOANNE HOL~AN, CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT - SAINT LUCIE COUNTY
File Number: 2437717 OR BODK 2014 PAGE 818
Recorded:07/13/04 10:41
.
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS
FOR
QUAa MEADOWS
Prepared for:
ED Building Group
4227 Northlake Boulevard
Palm Beach Gardens, Florida
Prepared by
Susan E. O'Rourke, P.E.
229 SE Villas Street
Stuart, FL
(772)781 7918
July 22, 2005
TR05073,O
/>/
,/ /
/' /
/ ,/ ~/.;--
~-:~/ -- -~ I
'J
// ;f'~~
,/
/
;'
7 (-*~s/
229 Villas Street
Stuart, Florida 34994
772.781 7918
772.781.9261 fax
SORourke@adelphla.net
Traffic Engineering, Transportation Planning
July 27, 2005
Mr. Todd White
E.H. Building Group
4227 North Lake Boulevard
Palm Beach Gardens, FL
Re: Quail Meadows, L UP A, PUD
Dear Mr. White:
Susan E. O'Rourke, Traffic Engineer has completed the analysis of the 509 residential
dwelling units to be located east of the Turnpike, south of Angle Road in St. Lucie
County. The steps in the analysis and the ensuing results are presented herein.
Please call if you have any questions of comments.
,-"
, OURKE, P,E., INC,
/7
J .::/
,/ /5/~ ~
.----._>,./ -'<.Ao.G)t.Ly-. ~
- "-
. Susan E, O'Rourke, P.E.
Principal Engineer
229 Villas Street
Stuart, Florida 34994
7727817918
772781.9261 fax
SORourke@adelphia. net
.
.
.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
1
LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT
Land Uses
1
Trip Generation
3
Long Term Traffic Analysis for the LUPA
Model
Assignment
3
3
3
Transportation Improvements
7
LUP A Conclusion
7
CONCURRENCY REVIEW
8
Project Traffic
8
Total Traffic/ Concurrency Review
Intersection Analysis
Roadway Improvements
8
8
10
CONCLUSION
10
TABLES
TABLE 1: Land Use
TABLE 2: Trip Generation
TABLE 3: Link Analysis Long Range 2025+- Existing Land Use
TABLE 4: Link Analysis Long Range 2025+- Proposed Land Use
TABLE 5: Link Analysis- Concurrency 2009
1
4
5
6
9
FIGURES
FIGURE 1: Project Location
2
APPENDIX A - Data and Information (includes: site plan, percent assignment, model plot,
LRTP info, intersection analysis and FDOT traffic data)
.
.
.
INTRODUCTION
Quail Meadows is a 114 acres site located east of the Florida Turnpike and south of
Angle Road. Figure 1 identifies the project location.
The purpose of this traffic analysis is two fold: provide the analysis for the Land Use Plan
Amendment and evaluate the requirements for concurrency for the PUD, The report addresses
the Land Use Plan Amendment followed by the analysis of concurrency for the PUD,
Quail Meadows is a 114 acre site that is currently designated as RS allowing 2 dwelling units
per acre or 228 dwelling units. The project seeks a change to RU which allows up to 5 units per
acre or 570 dwelling units, The project is being submitted as a PUD concurrently with the
LUPA and seeks a mix of single family and multi-family town home with 509 dwelling units.
With the concurrent application, the maximum allowable number of units would be as
designated in the PUD. The potential impact of the net increase in traffic associated with the
land use change is the subject ofthis report. To that end the following information is presented:
allowable land use types, potential trip generation and traffic analysis of the differential,
Each ofthe analysis is outlined herein,
LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT
Land Uses
To undertake a land use change designation, the maximum number of trips that could be generated
under the existing and proposed land uses should be determined, The land uses under the existing
designation and under the proposed land use category are summarized in Table },
Table 1: Land Use
Land Use
Residential
Residential
Residential
Scenario
Existing
Allowable
Proposed
Category
RS
RU
PUD
Density
2 du I acre
5 dul acre
4.4 du/acre
Units
228
590
509 (180 SFI 329
MF)
Since the PUD is being filed concurrently, the maximum number of units in the Future
Land Use scenario will be 509,
.
1-95
'C
0::
e
o
Ul
e
.c
o
...,
'C
0::
e
o
III
Cii
E
w
~
:c
III
01
e
::;::
Indrio Rd
51 Lucie Rd ~
'n;
. 0
Turnpike 0 'C
>. 0::
III
l- e
Q)
Q)
lo:::
Angle Rd
'C
0::
-'"
u
0
0::
'C 'C Orange Ave
0:: 0::
Qj Q)
.0 0>
Q. :Q
E (5 ii5
III 0
'C () () "0
"0 0:: ~
0:: :E [V")
e 'E
e If>
i: III e
-'" :i:
CIJ u
0 e
[0 CD
...,
1 Figure 1
Project Location
.
North Quail Meadows
not to scale
2
.
.
.
Trip Generation
The existing land use would generate 2,219 daily trips and 225 trips in the PM peak hour. The
proposed land use would generate approximately 3,552 trips on a daily basis and 342 PM trips
during the PM peak hour. The trip generation for the proposed land use is based on the PUD
submittal. Table 2 summarizes the trip generation for the various scenarios and the trip
differential between the existing and proposed land use designation on the site.
To estimate traffic generated by the development, the ITE Trip Generation, ih Edition
trip rates were applied. These calculations provide an estimate of the typical generation.
As shown in Table 2, the differential between the two land use scenarios is 1,333 daily trips and
117 PM peak hour trips,
Long Term Traffic Analysis for the LUP A
The purpose of this analysis is to determine the project's impact on the surrounding roadway
system and the relative impact of the proposed land use versus the proposed land use.
Model- The 2025 Treasure Coast Regional Planning Model was used to estimate the future
traffic for the existing and proposed land use conditions, The model includes traffic from recent
DR! applications in St. Lucie County to the north; annexation projects including Southern
Groves; as well as other major developments such as; Midway Partners, Egan Groves, Tesoro,
St. Lucie Land, The Reserve, PGA Village, LTC Ranch, Tradition and St. Lucie West. The
model values were peak season ADTs, Traffic from potential projects north ofOkeechobee
Boulevard was manually added to address potential growth to the west. A total of
approximately 15,900 daily trips and 1,600 PM peak hour trips were added to the network, The
model volumes were factored using the MOCF from the Florida Traffic Information CD and the
standard K and D factors of ,093 and .55, These factors are appropriate given the long term
planning horizon.
Assignment -The project distribution and assignment was based on the ultimate origins and
destinations of the trips and the likely travel patterns based on the existing and future roadway
network. 100% of the PUD traffic was assigned instead of the incremental traffic since the
model volumes were not specifically loaded for this project.
Tables 3 and 4 identify the project impact with the total traffic for the existing land use and
proposed land use scenarios,
The links where the project has an impact of 1 % of existing plus committed capacity were
deemed significant. Two project significant links exceed capacity, These same two links would
exceed capacity under the existing land use category. Neither of the exceedances is caused by
the land use change. The two links are: Kings Highway from Orange Avenue to Angle Road
and Kings Highway from Angle Road to 51. Lucie Boulevard,
3
.
.
.
Project Traffic -- project traffic was distributed by general geographic direction and then
assigned to the roadway network. The project general geographic traffic distribution was
estimated as 15% north, 50% south, 25% east and 10% west. This general distribution led to an
assignment of external, new trips to the roadway network. The project assignment is shown
along with the existing, background and other project traffic volumes in Table 5. The
components of the traffic were added together to create total traffic. Traffic data and
information used in this analysis are provided in Appendix A.
Total Traffic/ Concurrency Review
The total traffic at project buildout 2009 was compared to the available capacity. All
links will meet concurrency. The link of Kings Highway between Orange and Angle
exceeds its generalized ADT threshold but is under the PM peak hour directional
threshold, therefore it meets concurrency, When the Seawind traffic is added (a project
that is in process but not approved) the link exceeds capacity. However, the
intersections at each end of the link will function at acceptable levels of service.
Therefore, the link is deemed to function at acceptable levels of service,
Intersection Analysis
The intersections of Kings Highway/ Orange Avenue, Kings Highway/ Angle Road
and Johnson! Angle Road were analyzed to determine operating conditions. The
traffic counts were made May 19,2004 and July 27,2005. A seasonal factor of 1.18
was applied to reflect the peak season at Kings Highway and Orange and 1,07 at Kings
and Angle (based on dates and location). Then the counts were grown by applying a
growth rate consistent with the straight - lining, other projects and the project traffic to
reflect the 2009 total traffic volumes. A growth of9.5% was added to Kings Highway,
6% to Angle Road and 25% on Orange Avenue. These rates account for growth
beyond the identified projects. A 23% reduction of "other project" traffic was made to
accounts for the portion of the project that was included in the "background traffic" In
other words, all of the traffic is included, but it is identified within the background and
then as a separate line item in "other projects",
The intersection of Angle and Orange would operate at LOS D with 42.0 seconds of
delay. The intersection of Angle and Kings would operate at LOS D with 54.3 seconds
ofdelay. Since both intersections will operate at level of service D, the link is
determined to also operate at LOS D.
The Johnston and Angel intersection was analyzed using the unsignalized HCS analysis,
All movements would operate at LOS A or B. The worksheets for the analyses are
included in Appendix A
8
.
.
.
Roadway Improvements
To achieve LOS D at Angle and Kings, the eastbound and westbound approaches
should be restriped to allow a separate left turn lane and a through right combination.
As the volumes increase, the turn lanes should be aligned to allow a single- phase
operation for the eastbound and westbound movements. The County has identified both
of the Kings Highway intersections for improvement as identified in the Cost Feasible
Plan of the LRTP. As identified in the LUPA analysis, County staffhave indicated the
ongoing efforts to improve Kings Highway.
Conclusion
The Quail Meadows Development can be accommodated on the roadway network as
proposed within the PUD, The project satisfies the requirements of the LUPA and
concurrency,
10
Print Date: Ju1/27/2005 Florida Department ofTransponatioo
Transportation Statistics Office
2004 Peak Season Factor Category Report
ST LUCIE 195 MOCF = 0.96
C.'1': 9495 Week Dates SF PSCF
I 01/01/2004 - 01/03/2004 0.93 0,97
2 01/0412004 - 01/1012004 0.99 1.03
3 0111 1/2004 - 01117/2004 1.05 1.09
4 01/1 8/2004 - 01/24/2004 1.04 1.08
5 01/25/2004 - 01/31/2004 1.03 1.07
6 02/01/2004 - 02/07/2004 1.02 1.06
7 02/08/2004 - 02/14/2004 1.01 1.05
8 02/15/2004 - 02/21/2004 1.00 1.04
9 02/22/2004 - 02/28/2004 0,98 1.02
10 02/29/2004 - 03/06/2004 0,96 1.00
11 03/07/2004 - 03113/2004 0.94 0,98
12 03/14/2004 - 03/20/2004 0,92 0,96
13 03/21/2004 - 03/27/2004 0.94 0.98
14 03/28/2004 - 04/03/2004 0,95 0.99
15 04/04/2004 - 0411 0/2004 0,97 1.01
16 0411 I/2004 - 04/1 7/2004 0,98 1.02
17 04/18/2004 - 04/24/2004 0,99 1.03
18 04/25/2004 - 05/01/2004 1.00 1.04
19 05/02/2004 - 05/08/2004 1.01 1.05
20 05/09/2004 - 0511 5/2004 1.02 1.06
21 05/16/2004 - OS/22/2004 1.02 1.06
22 OS/23/2004 - OS/29/2004 1.02 1.06
23 05/30/2004 - 06/05/2004 1.03 1.07
. 24 06/0612004 - 06/12/2004 1.03 1.07
25 06113/2004 - 06119/2004 1.03 1.07
26 06/20/2004 - 06/26/2004 1.02 1.06
27 06/27/2004 - 07/03/2004 1.01 1.05
28 07/04/2004 - 07/10/2004 1.01 1.05
29 07/11/2004 - 07/17/2004 1.00 1.04
30 07/1 812004 - 07/24/2004 1.01 1.05
31 07/2512004 - 07/31/2004 1.01 1.05
32 08/01/2004 - 08/07/2004 1.02 1.06
33 08/08/2004 - 08/14/2004 1.02 1.06
34 0811 5/2004 - 08/21/2004 1.03 1.07
35 08/2212004 - 08/28/2004 1.08 1.13
36 08/29/2004 - 09/04/2004 1.13 1.18
37 09/05/2004 - 0911 I/2004 1.19 1.24
38 09/12/2004 - 0911 8/2004 1.24 1.29
39 0911 9/2004 - 09/25/2004 1.17 1.22
40 09/26/2004 - 10/02/2004 1.10 1.15
* 41 10/03/2004 - 10/09/2004 1,03 1.07
* 42 10/1 0/2004 - 1011 6/2004 0.96 1.00
* 43 10/17/2004 - 10/23/2004 0,95 0,99
* 44 10/24/2004 - 10/30/2004 0,94 0.98
* 45 10/3] /2004 - 11/06/2004 0.94 0,98
* 46 11 /07/2004 - 11/13/2004 0,93 0,97
* 47 11/ 14/2004 - 11/20/2004 0,92 0.96
* 48 11/21/2004 - 11/27/2004 0,92 0.96
* 49 11/28/2004 - 12/04/2004 0,93 0.97
. '" 50 12/05/2004 - 1211 1/2004 0,93 0.97
* 51 12/12/2004 - 12/18/2004 0,93 0,97
* 52 12/19/2004 - 12/25/2004 0,99 1.03
* 53 12/26/2004 - ] 2/31/2004 1.05 1.09
.. Io~'" ~__ .- _,.._ ........~_.I.........,.... ....... ............pV. "....~.\Ju
Transportation Statistics Office
2004 Historical AADT Report
County: 88 - INDIAN RIVER
ete: 2003 Description: SR 9 / I 95 - S OF SR 60
Year AADT Di rectio n I Direction 2 K Factor D Factor T Factor
2004 C 36,500 N I 8,000 S 18,500 0.10 0.55 20,20
2003 C 35,000 N 17,500 S 17,500 0.09 0.54 22.40
2002 C 35,000 N 18,000 S 17,000 0,09 0.53 21.50
2001 C 36,500 N 18,000 S 18,500 0,10 0.55 16.60
2000 C 32,500 N 16,500 S 16,000 0.10 0.53 12.40
1999 C 34,500 N 17,500 S 17,000 0.10 0.55 14,10
1998 C 37,000 N 19,000 S 18,000 0.10 0.59 19.10
1997 C 37,000 N 19,000 S 18,000 0.11 0.55 12.80
1996 C 34,000 N 16,500 S 1 7,500 0.11 0.54 22,80
1995 C 24,000 N 11,500 S 12,500 0.10 0.57 13,60
1994 C 22,500 N 10,000 S 12,500 0.09 0.59 16.00
1993 F 26,000 N 14,000 S 12,000 0,00 0.00 0.00
1992 C 26,000 N 14,000 S 12,000 0.00 0.00 0.00
1991 19,154 N 9,718 S 9,436 0.00 0.00 0,00
1990 21,327 N 10,791 S 10,536 0.00 0.00 0,00
1989 17,444 N 9,285 S 8,159 0,00 0.00 0,00
1988 18,814 N 9,174 S 9,640 0,00 0,00 0.00
1987 16,197 N 8,513 S 7,684 0.00 0,00 0,00
1986 16,340 N 7,084 S 9,256 0.00 0.00 0,00
1985 8,615 N 4,329 S 4,286 0.00 0.00 0,00
1984 8,859 N 4,383 S 4,476 0.00 0,00 0,00
1983 10,870 N 5,455 S 5,415 0,00 0.00 0,00
tf.; ILl 32 N 5,518 S 5,614 0,00 0.00 0,00
11,026 N 5,581 S 5,445 0.00 0.00 0,00
80 9,009 N 4,577 S 4,432 0,00 0.00 0.00
1979 10,105 N 5,404 S 4,701 0,00 0,00 0,00
1978 7,352 N 3,903 S 3,449 0,00 0.00 0,00
.
AADTFlags: C = Computed; E = Manual Estimate; F = First Year Est;
S = Second Year Est; T = Third Year Est; X = Unknown
Page
.
APPENDIX A - Traffic Data and Information
.
.
.
1-95
-c
c::
t:
o
iil
t:
.r:
o
...,
-c
c::
t:
o
rn
Ci>
E
w
~
:c
rn
en
t:
~
18
2
Indrio Rd
20 2 3 10
. St Lucie Rd ~
'iij
0
Turnpike 10 5 .Q -c
>. c::
m t:
I- ev
5 75 25 20 ev
~
Angle Rd
-c
c::
.>< 40
u
0 15
c::
2 2 2 2 33 3 3 9
'C -c Orange Ave
c:: c::
'iii ev 3 3,
.0 en
c. :g
E '0 en
m 0 5
'C (,) (,) -c
-c c:: M
c:: ~ C')
t: E Picos Rd
t: rn
:c '"
.>< t:
C/) u :i::
0 t:
.xi ev
...,
. 1 Project Percent Assignment
North Quail Meadows
not to scale
8
9rint Date: JuJ/27/2005 Florida Department of T ransportatioo
Transportation Statistics Office
2004 Peak Season Factor Category Report
caw OF USl TO 195 MOCF = 0,96
C 11': 9401 Week Dates SF PSCF
1 01/0 1/2004 - 01/03/2004 0.97 1.01
2 01/04/2004 - 01/1 0/2004 0.99 1.03
3 01/11/2004 - 01/17/2004 1.01 1.05
4 01/ 18/2004 - 01/24/2004 1.00 1.04
5 01/25/2004 - 01/31/2004 0,99 1.03
6 02/01/2004 - 02/07/2004 0,98 1.02
7 02/08/2004 - 02/14/2004 0.97 1.01
8 02/15/2004 - 02/21/2004 0.96 1.00
9 02/22/2004 - 02/28/2004 0.96 1.00
10 02/29/2004 - 03/06/2004 0,96 1.00
11 03/07/2004 - 03/13/2004 0,96 1.00
12 03/14/2004 - 03/20/2004 0.96 1.00
13 03/21/2004 - 03/27/2004 0.96 1.00
14 03/28/2004 - 04/03/2004 0.97 1.01
15 04/04/2004 - 04/1 0/2004 0.97 1.01
16 04/11/2004 - 04/17/2004 0,98 1.02
17 04/18/2004 - 04/24/2004 0.99 1.03
18 04/25/2004 - 05/01/2004 1.00 1.04
19 05/02/2004 - 05/08/2004 1.00 1.04
20 05/09/2004 - 05/15/2004 1.01 1.05
21 05/16/2004 - OS/22/2004 1.02 1.06
22 OS/23/2004 - OS/29/2004 1.02 1.06
23 05/30/2004 - 06/05/2004 1.02 1.06
. 24 06/06/2004 - 06/12/2004 1.02 1.06
25 06/13/2004 - 06/19/2004 1.02 1.06
26 06/20/2004 - 06/26/2004 1.03 1.07
27 06/27/2004 - 07/03/2004 1.03 1.07
28 07/04/2004 - 07/10/2004 1.04 1.08
29 07111/2004 - 07/17/2004 1.04 1.08
30 07/18/2004 - 07/24/2004 1.04 1.08
31 07/25/2004 - 07/3 1/2004 1.03 1.07
32 08/01/2004 - 08/07/2004 1.03 1.07
33 08/08/2004 - 08/14/2004 1.02 1.06
34 08/15/2004 - 08/21/2004 1.01 1.05
35 08/22/2004 - 08/28/2004 1.06 1.10
36 08/29/2004 - 09/04/2004 1.11 1.16
37 09/05/2004 - 09/11/2004 1.15 1.20
38 09/12/2004 - 09/18/2004 1.20 1.25
39 09/19/2004 - 09/25/2004 1.13 1.18
40 09/26/2004 - 10/02/2004 1.07 1.11
'" 41 1 0/03/2004 - ] 0/09/2004 1.00 1.04
'" 42 ] 0/1 0/2004 - 10/16/2004 0,94 0.98
II< 43 1 0/17/2004 - 10/23/2004 0,94 0,98
'" 44 1 0/24/2004 - 1 0/30/2004 0,95 0,99
'" 45 10/31/2004 - 11/06/2004 0.95 0.99
'" 46 11/07/2004 - 11/13/2004 0.95 0.99
'" 47 11/14/2004 - 11/20/2004 0.95 0,99
'" 48 1 ]/21/2004 - ] 1/27/2004 0,96 1.00
. '" 49 11/28/2004 - 12/04/2004 0.96 1.00
'" 50 12/05/2004 - 12/11/2004 0,97 1.01
'" 51 12/12/2004 - 12/18/2004 0,97 1.01
'" 52 12/19/2004 - 12/25/2004 0,99 1.03
'" 53 12/26/2004 - 12/31/2004 1.01 1.05
.
~ ... ....
... ...
p -
_\ 1 L
~ L
8~~ in
its - :E GEt
c..
Li ~ I" t&~
.
\ i 1-
... ;;; '"
.... II>
l,
ii5
.:.;
0
a:
~
z
0
u
UJ
I-
Z
::>>
0
0
w
e3 '"
- C
:J
0
~
10
0 .
~ 3:
> 0
(.J
I- ~
Z ~
W ." in -
:i m
0
'"
W J1
> ~
<(
0 ,:..: :> -'"
c
w ~ :J
:i w <:3 0
a: ...
0 ~ 0;
(Jl ..
~ w
~ w
Z
0::
::>>
I-
'"
- c
>- :J
m 0
] ...
.c
III :;
:l
~ 0
Ul
>'
<(
0
Ul
'E
:l
>- 0
"
co ;g
;:
.t= 0
0> N
r 0>
'" ~
0>
C ";;
. >2 w
..,.
0
0
N
U';
<i5
,:..:
w Iii
w
a: :2
~ <( Iii
(Jl z
(Jl w ~
Z ...J <(
u: 0
w II: ::E co 0> ., on co
z ::> ::> co on ~ 0> ....
0 ~ ~ ~
0 x Ul -
...J
~ 0 on 0 ., 0> ., ;0
~ N .... ;;; co 0> .... ....
0 N N ., ., N ., N
~
a: N ., .,
m ~ ;;; N ~ ~
3: N N N N
~
m to ~ to ~ N ~ :: ~
3:
...J N
m ~ :: 0 en en ~ N
3: N N N - -
II: ~ on
m .... .... ..,. .... .... co
w -
~
m 0> on .... to .... on co co
W
...J
m ..., ..., ., co en .... on N
W
II: ~ .,
m to co en co co ...,
Ul -
~ ~ co en en 0 en .... ~
m co ~ :: ~ .... ::
Ul
...J on .... co to ~ co ~
m N
Ul ..., - N .., N
II: ~ on N
m :: N ~ ~ ~
Z - -
~ N 0 co .... N N co
m ~ c;
Z co 0> <D 0> co co
...J ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~
m co co
Z ~
'"
- C
:J
o
...
.c
t:
o
oZ
co ."
~ .~ ~ g '" 8 ~ g '" 8
... ...
~ ~ 0.. 'i ~ ~ ~ .0 .0 ~ ~
8 8 '!2
~ " " '" .0 ~ '"
_I L
~ L
-
-* I
...
~
01 t
co I \-
;;::
c I
0
"if.
OJ)
m
oj
c;,
c
<(
c
0
:>!1
<0
.... "
~ J::
Ii ~
"- 0
(Jl i5
OJ)
en
'"
;!
..,. 0 ~ on "'7
en
lR ~
co N <0 "'7
OJ) <0
..,.
~
.... '" 0> 0> '7
co 0> N
~ '"
Cl>
0 '" .... 0
..,. ..,.
0 co
~,
.... <0 .... "'7
N N
~ N
..,.
<0 co '" 0
N N
0 ....
N '"
., '" N 0
CO) CO)
:!l
'" .... "'
0> '" CO) 0> '9
'" co N ..,.
.... ..,.
~
0> <0 <0 co <"'i
::;: '" ~
..
~
.0 '"
0
~ ~
::;: .... N ..,. 0> 0
.. co .... ..,.
~
0;
N co 6
..,. CO) N CO) CO) "i
.... '" N
CO) CO)
~
0 g: ~
a:
"-
~ 0 '" 0
..,. ..,.
a:
::> ~
0 8 u
OJ: it; :; ~
0
'" 2' ~ .!! 1l
<( 0 ~
w ~ .~ e "E ] ~
~ (.J :;
"- ~ a. .g 1 1
:::; ~ li 'S .~ ]j
0 "- e Q; t
"- > UJ '" lD 0 " UJ m 0 12
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1d
Analyst: SO'R
AAgency:
"'Date: 7/28/2005
Period: PM Peak Hour
Project ID: Quail Meadows PUD
E/W St: Orange
Inter.: Kings/Angle
Area Type: All other areas
Jurisd:
Year 2009
N/S St: Kings
No. Lanes
LGConfig
Volume
Lane Width
RTOR Vol
I Eastbound
I L T R
I
I
I L
142
112.0
I
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
I Westbound I Northbound
I L T R I L T R
I I
I 110 I
I L TR I
1124 126 114 1134
112.0 12.0 I
I 60 I
I Southbound
I L T R
I
I
I
1118
I
I
1
1
TR
61
12.0
95
60
o
o
1
LT
430
12.0
1
R
126
12.0
60
o
o
1
LTR
535 57
12.0
57
Duration
0.25
Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
3 4
Phase Combination 1
EB Left A
Thru P
Right P
Peds
WB Left
Thru
. Right
Peds
NB Right
SB Right
Green
Yellow
All Red
P
P
P
14.5
4.0
1.0
Appr/
Lane
Grp
Lane
Group
Capacity
2
v/c
g/C
NB
5
6
P
P
P
7
8
SB
Left
Thru
Right
Peds
Left
Thru
Right
Peds
Right
Right
P
P
P
secs
Approach
Delay LOS
50.0 40.5
4.0 4.0
1.0 1.0
Cycle Length: 120.0
Intersection Performance Summary
Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group
Flow Rate
(s)
Eastbound
L 225
TR 225
1863
1863
Westbound
L 225
TR 225
1863
1863
Northbound
LT 629
R 629
Southbound
.LTR
1863
1863
776
1863
0.20
0.45
0.12
0.12
EB
WB
Delay LOS
47.9
55.4
60.4
82.0
61. 4
26.5
42.4
Intersection Delay = 54.3 (sec/veh)
0.58
0.84
0.12
0.12
o
E
53.1
D
E
F
73.2
E
0.94
0.11
0.34
0.34
E
C
57.8
E
D
42.4
D
0.89
0.42
Intersection LOS
o
.
f 'Q . ."
~ :;> ~ s::
~ 0 ~ ~ i ~ 5' 0 ."
l . m
~ g ~ ~ i ~. )>
'j ^
~ ~ 5. :c ~ ~ ;; :!:
~
;0
c.n ~~ .. 0;
'" " " " " " " co
~ .,.,
?2
;:
'-' N N
: " " ~ N
w :: ~ " " c.n N
"
..
~
CD en "'0
" " - rn ;:; CD '" ;::
~ .;
0
..
W ~
.. .. "'0
~ w ~ N en 3
~ ;; :: w .. ~ 0 0 en
w '"
" " " ~ w (JJ
w rn :.. .. " 0 0
" ...., ...., <:':
~ ~ :.. w " " " N
:::: CD en
~ .. :.. .. " " " " CD '"
w
...., W '"
;; 0 en
~ '" " .. CD N <JJ
.
<D W N
" " " " " .. <D
t;
~ CD ....,
" - .. ~ '" w 0
~
c.n N ;jj
~ ~ ~ w
w " .. CD .. CD
"
...... .,J
N N
::; ~ ~
1
.", .;
3 ~
~ ~
-
~ 2
5 "-
; n
~ Q
2.
i
:)
i!
'"
m
;;
5
"
C
~
~
1
~
~
.
r ~ ." Z
.. .. w . r (jj
~ ~ .. .. " .. :;: ~ ;:;I m
" .. w .. ::: ~ :z (fJ
:.;: " ~ " w I ;; .....
u. u. " Ii; ;: )> ::c
-t:; w ;; s::
w ;; " " " 5' m
" " m m
.....
~ ^
I :;
1 I \ z ~: <g
I lD :;
r- '"
z - !i!
I '"
0 <D 8
-I I I ! I z ~ ~ CD
lD 0' .,.,
... 0 ~
I r:: - C
I "
0. iii
,- : z
I lD
::c
- -
I 0
)>
I '" <
lD
r-
f/l -
0
r::
f/l s-
lD 0'
... 0
r:: -
"
Q.
Ul
lD
::c
-
I
I \
I
I \ i
I
o 10
i
\ \
! I Iii II
: I I
I ' i I I
'10 \0 \0 0 10
10 I I i
i ill ,
o \0 0 10 \0
m
lD m
r- ~
-
m (fJ
.. :iJ
..
m a- (") m
lD 0 =i m
..... r:: -< .....
"
0. ~
m ~
lD
::c
:!)
:E "'0
lD [
r-
:E
"
:E ..
a-
lii 0
..... r::
"
0.
~
::c
.....
0
.....
:I>
r-
(")
en:!: ~l 0
z
cO ;a
~~ f2
~
i
.. CD
e '" w
..
.-\ L
L 83
62 - '"tJ
371
304 s:
97 r 537
~ 1 I-
I
~ w ..
'" '"
~ '"
... ""
""'"
c
::a
z
Z
C)
~
<
m
i:
m
z
-t
<
o
r-
c
i:
m
(')
o
c
Z
-t
CJ)
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1d
Analyst: SO' R
A\gency:
~ate: 7/28/2005
Period: PM Peak Hour
Project ID: Quail Meadows PUD
E/W St: Orange
Inter.: Kings/Orange
Area Type: All other areas
,Jurisd:
Year 2009
N/S St: Kings
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
I Eastbound 1 Westbound I Northbound 1 Southbound
I L T R 1 L T R 1 L T R 1 L T R
1 I 1 I
I 1 2 0 I 1 2 1 I 1 1 0 1 1 1 0
1 L TR I L T R I L TR I L TR
190 404 43 1119 308 430 162 304 119 1540 372 83
112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0
1 10 I 10 1 10 1 10
No. Lanes
LGConfig
Volume
Lane Width
RTOR Vol
Appr/
Lane
Grp
Lane
Group
Capacity
Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
p P NB Left P P
P Thru P
p Right P
Peds
P P SB Left P P
P Thru p
P Right P
Peds
EB Right
WB Right P
4.0 20.0 26.0 30.0
4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0
Cycle Length: 100.0 secs
Intersection Performance Summary
Adj Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Flow Rate
(s) vlc g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
1770 0.39 0.29 33.8 C
3499 0.66 0.20 41. 6 D 40.3 D
1770 0.68 0.29 52.5 D
3539 0.46 0.20 37.4 D 30.5 C
1583 0.55 0.51 19.3 B
1770 0.12 0.61 11. 6 B
1789 0.81 0.30 44.8 D 40.5 D
1770 0.98 0.61 57.0 E
1817 0.86 0.30 49.2 D 53.5 D
Duration 0.25
Phase Combination
EB Le ft
Thru
Right
Peds
WB Left
Thru
. Right
Peds
NB Right
SB Right
Green
Yellow
All Red
Eastbound
L 243
TR 700
Westbound
L 185
T 708
R 807
Northbound
L 555
TR 537
Southbound
L 580
.TR 545
Intersection Delay = 42.0 (sec/veh)
Intersection LOS
D
. '"
e e e ... .
... ... e
_I 1 L _I 1 I
L-
0 --.--1 L 0 6t1' --.--1 L
0
0 - :E - 0 0 - :E 0
<C c..
0 ~ r-o !i9 -~ r-o
I i I- I i I-
e e e '" III e
... .
...
"
C
0
C
.:..i
0
a::
I-
Z
0
()
t/)
I-
Z
::l
0
()
w
:E "0
c:
~ :>
0
~
VI
..
;:
> "
"
I- 0;
0:
Z u::
w
:E
w "
> 0>
C
0 .. "0
.:-: ~ c:
:E W :>
W U 0
a:: ~
(!) I- VI
en ..
Z ~ w
- W
Z
0::
::l
I-
>- "0
m c:
"0
en :>
Q) 0
c: .c
"0 .l:
Q) -=
5 0
en
:>:
<l:
0
en "0
c:: c:
Q) :>
0 t; .8
iii <l:
c: €
.<= 0
. 0 0
..., 0
Z
('oj
0
;;::
('oj
.:-: ;;::
w W
W ::;:
a::
l- e(
en Z W
en W I-
-' <l:
Z u:: 0
w ~ ~
::l
Z 0 ::l 0 0 0 0 0
0 J: Ul
..J
<
I- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
I-
~
ID
;:
I-
ID
;:
..J
m
;:
~
ID
w
....
m
w
..J
m
W
~
ID
en
....
ID
Ul
..J I
ID
Ul
~ I
ID
Z
....
m
z
..J
m
Z
C " ~ g ~ 0 ~ g "' 0
~ g 0 ... 0
~ " ..... ..... ..... '" '" '" '" ~
0- 6 .;, g .;, 6 .;, g
0 ... 0
..... ;... ;... '" '" <0 '"
w ~ ~ '" '"
::l .... . III
Z 0 ::l en ~ ~ ~ <0
0 :I: Ul ~ ~
..J
< .... III N <0 III M ~
.... ;r;
0 .... <0 . .... M (')
I-
~ (')
ID ~ ~ 0 .... .... ~ '"
~ ~ ~ ('oj ~
....
m M ~ ~ ~ '" .... co :!
~ ~ ~
..J
ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
~
II::
ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
W
.... N N N
ID .... '" ;: .... '"
W ~ ~ ~
..J
ID ~ ~ 0 ~ N ~ 0 '"
W
II::
m N co 00 N N 00 N ~
Ul
....
m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ul
..J N
ID '" co .... co <0 '" ...
Ul ~
II::
ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Z
....
ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Z
..J
ID 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Z
0
0
"0
c:
:>
0
0 ~
VI
Q)
;:
0
0
"0
c:
:>
0 0
~
VI
..
W
0
0
"0
c:
:>
0
0 .c
.l:
-=
0
Ul
0
0
"0
C
:>
0
0 .c
::;: €
0 0
a:: z
L.l.
~ 0
a::
::l
0
I (/)
~ >-
e( ~ z
W w
Q. ~ :2
::;: :2
-0 0
e( > 0
C " ~ 0 "' 0 ~ g ~ 8
~ 0
'C <'> ... 0
" ~ .;, .;, ... "' on in on U;>
0- ~ 6 of!. g ~ 6 .;, 6 on
c 0 0 <'> ...
m ... ... ... on in on on
'"'"!
o
tl
~
<a
c:
s:
'"
"
</J
... w ~ ~
'" on
~ N N N
en ... <0 ;.:
.... <0 <D
en ..... N ..... '"
00 ..... <0 >C ...
N
0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 N on 0 on
.... on on '" ...
M ... on ;! '"
.....
00 0 N ... on
~ N ... <D
0 0 0 0
::: 0 ... ~
0- M ... ...
0
0
on
0
>-
::: 0 0 0
0-
0
0
.;,
0 0 0
::;:
0
a::
L.l.
~ 0 0 0
a::
::l
0
I i5
~ 1:3
L5 ~ .l" "0
~ C ~ 1:3 c
Q. E ~ j " .~ m
::;: .2 0 "0
0 " <5 0: "6
Q. > (f) (/) >-
HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1d
~usan O'Rourke
Susan E. O'Rourke, P.E.
3023 SE Quanset Circle
Stuart, Florida
34997
Phone: 772-781-7918
E-Mail: sorourke@adelphia.net
Fax: 772-781-9261
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL (TWSC) ANALYSIS
Analyst: SO'R
Agency/Co.: Susan E. O'Rourke, P.E., Inc.
Date Performed: 7/28/2005
Analysis Time period: PM Peak
Intersection: Johnston/Angle
Jurisdiction: St. Lucie County
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2009
Project ID:
East/West Street: Angle
North/South Street: Johnston
Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs)
0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
.Maj or Street Movements 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
Volume 79 145 249 71
Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00
Peak-15 Minute Volume 20 36 62 18
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 79 145 249 71
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2
Median Type/Storage Undivided /
RT Channelized?
Lanes 0 1 1 0
Configuration LT TR
Upstream Signal? Yes No
Minor Street Movements 7 8 9 10 11 12
L T R L T R
Volume 49 65
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1. 00 1. 00
Peak-15 Minute Volume 12 16
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 49 65
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2
Percent Grade ( %) 0 0
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage / No /
RT Channelized?
Lanes 0 0
4ItconfigUration LR
Pedestrian Volumes and Adjustments
Movements 13 14 15 16
Flow (ped/hr) 0 0 0 0
Lane Width (ft)
Walking Speed (ft/sec)
~ercent Blockage
12.0
4.0
o
12.0
4.0
o
12.0
4.0
o
12.0
4.0
o
Prog.
Flow
vph
Upstream Signal Data
Sat Arrival Green Cycle
Flow Type Time Length
vph see see
Prog.
Speed
mph
Distance
to Signal
feet
S2 Left-Turn
Through
S5 Left-Turn
Through
o
o
1700
1700
3
3
o
o
120
120
35
35
7920
7920
Worksheet 3-Data for Computing Effect of Delay to Major Street Vehicles
Movement 2
Movement 5
Shared In volume, major th vehicles:
Shared In volume, major rt vehicles:
Sat flow rate, major th vehicles:
Sat flow rate, major rt vehicles:
Number of major street through lanes:
145
o
1700
1700
1
Worksheet 4-Critical Gap and Follow-up Time Calculation
ari tical Gap Calculation
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
L L L T R L T R
t(c,base) 4.1 7.1 6.2
t(c,hv) 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00
P(hv) 2 2 2
t(c,g) 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.10
Grade/IOO 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
t(3,lt) 0.00 0.70 0.00
t (c, T) : I-stage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
2-stage 0.00 0.00 1. 00 1. 00 0.00 1. 00 1. 00 0.00
t (c) I-stage 4.1 6.4 6.2
2-stage
Follow-Up Time Calculations
Movement I 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
L L L T R L T R
t (f,base) 2.20 3.50 3.30
t(f,HV) 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90
P(HV) 2 2 2
t (f) 2.2 3.5 3.3
4ItworkSheet 5-Effect of Upstream Signals
Computation l-Queue Clearance Time at Upstream Signal
Movement 2
V(t) V(l,prot)
Movement 5
V(t) V(l,prot)
V prog
o
o
Total Saturation Flow Rate, s (vph) 1700 1700
Arrival Type 3 3
Effective Green, g (see) 0 0
Cycle Length, C (see) 120 120
Rp (from Exhibit 16-11 ) 1.000 1.000
Proportion vehicles arriving on green P 0.000 0.000
g(q1) 0.0 0.0 .
g(q2) 0.0 0.0
g (q) 0.0 0.0
Computation 2-Proportion of TWSC Intersection Time blocked
Movement 2
V(t) V(l,prot)
Movement 5
V(t) V(l,prot)
alpha
beta
Travel time, t (a) (see)
Smoothing Factor, F
Proportion of conflicting flow, f
Max platooned flow, V(c,max)
Min platooned flow, V(c,min)
Duration of blocked period, t(p)
Proportion time blocked, p
0.550
0.645
153.936
0.018
1.000 1.000
o 0
1000 1000
0.0 0.0
0.000
0.000
Computation 3-Platoon Event Periods
Result
P (2)
P (5)
p(dom)
p(subo)
Constrained or unconstrained?
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
o
Proportion
unblocked
for minor
movements, p(x)
(1 )
Single-stage
Process
(2) (3)
Two-Stage Process
Stage I Stage II
.
p (1)
P (4)
P (7)
P (8)
P (9)
p (10)
p (11)
P (12)
1.000
1.000
1.000
Computation 4 and 5
Single-Stage Process
Movement
C r,x
C plat,x
1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12
L L L T R L T R
320 587 284
1500 1500 1500
1.000 1.000 1.000
320 587 284
1240 472 755
1240 472 755 .
8 10 11
v c,x
s
Px
V c,u,x
Two-Stage Process
7
Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2
V(c,x)
.(X)
V(c,u,x)
1500
1500
C(r,x)
C(plat,x)
Worksheet 6-Impedance and Capacity Equations
Step 1: RT from Minor St.
9
12
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Movement Capacity
Probability of Queue free St.
1. 00
284
755
1. 00
755
0.91
1. 00
Step 2: LT from Major St.
4
1
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Movement Capacity
Probability of Queue free St.
411[aj L-Shared Prob Q free St.
Step 3: TH from Minor St.
1. 00
320
1240
1. 00
1240
0.94
0.93
1. 00
8
11
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Probability of Queue free St.
1. 00
0.93
1. 00
0.93
1. 00
1. 00
Step 4: LT from Minor St.
7
10
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor
Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor.
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
1. 00
0.93
0.95
0.87
587
472
1. 00
0.94
442
Worksheet 7-Computation of the Effect of Two-stage Gap Acceptance
Step 3: TH from Minor St.
8
11
Part 1 - First Stage
~onflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Probability of Queue free St.
Part 2 - Second Stage
Conflicting Flows
.otential Capacity
edestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvrnnt
Movement Capacity
Part 3 - Single Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvrnnt
Movement Capacity
1.00
0.93
1.00
0.93
Result for 2 stage process:
a
y
C t
Probability of Queue free St.
1.00
1.00
Step 4: LT from Minor St.
7
10
Part 1 - First Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvrnnt
Movement Capacity
.part 2 - Second Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
Part 3 - Single Stage
Conflicting Flows
Potential Capacity
Pedestrian Impedance Factor
Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor
Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor.
Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt
Movement Capacity
1.00
0.93
0.95
0.87
587
472
1.00
0.94
442
Results for Two-stage process:
a
y
C t
442
Worksheet 8-Shared Lane Calculations
7
L
8
T
9
R
10
L
11
T
12
R
Movement
.
Volume (vph)
Movement Capacity (vph)
Shared Lane Capacity (vph)
49
442
65
755
579
-
..
1'1'0' ~n.,o, SOOZ'SZlL "I"OA., '6Mp.w"enO\.jtJawnooO A.'6U!l1as pUB "uawnooa\~
..el13 i ~ I
~~I~I
o oCo..
~~iH
~8!;
~~m
....~.!i
\
~
~
o
o
.-
W
-l
<(
U
en
U)
~
o
0;3
<(-
w~
~~Li
LL
z
<(
-l
CL
l-
n...
w
U
z
o
u
....JW
<(~
:J~
a~
1+ <Xl
~ 99L!l
69(z[ ~
... C~ 3735 f-
'"'
'" <;:.
fll 672
'" ~
0
N
~
'" !'; 6317
g N
N
0 0
N :'l
...
3929
" R
'"'
'" on N
" ...
...
4241 '"
4241
on
;;: ill
::l
on
'"'
::J
::.
'"'
'"' N
'"
~ '" ...
'"' ~
<Xl N
on
~
:!;
-
Z
=
N
-
l1li'
z:::
In
-
- In
. ~
ZHZ 'III
CI =
E a
'" = -
'"' -=
'" ~i
~ :1:1
iiii
Ii. In
:;;Ie N
-
en
g =-
==
N =
.. -
llllI N
.
N >- =
'"'
=
-
13
.
-
CI
..
a.
~
=
~
'"
~
"
;!;
~ ~
o 0
~ ~
'"
'"
'"
;;
'"'
'"
'"'
O"l
O'l
6
CC!.
O"l O'l
It)~
, ,
00
It) T'""
II II
UJUJ
a.. a..
~i:=
I I
~~
:J:J
00
<(<(
u.u. O'l
~~NC")~J,
II II II II II II
Cf)Cf)Cf)Cf)Cf)Cf)
UJUJ~UJUJUJ
-Q~~<(~~5
t5 --II --II --II I --II I
~~~~~~~
~::>::>::>::>::>::J
Q)zzzzzz
i II 'I ,
--I
--
..
--
..
~
.
oX
15
I
~
e
j
e'"
II
...u
B
!i.'"
1:: i I
!"O u
i~
. i
II
~ e
j .i
'3.
~
. . ..
j!!'"
..h!
"I. .'.
.....j~
'31-&
~m t:3
10.',:,
-<~..
.. x
~J3
:E . .
..,a.J
ii .1
FlO
~iJ
. ~
-..
~
'3"
~~
-1)
.ll,.8
!I~
d
e'"
.. ~
..
h
..
'" 'i
il
el
....
i C D
::~!
~1=
1::.
MA.=
"'S
Ii:
~~
..
o
:E
.. .
~H!
:q f'~
:;l ..
{hI
~!=~
.
~~
.
, 1I
~.!
j
!
"
...
..
::I
'CI
C
..
-l
'"
c
i
~
..
~
o
'CI
..
..
::E
iii
::I
a
if.
N
o
N
GI
'"
C
..
a:
Cl
c
o
-l
..
Oijj
~
..
.l
"'"
c
::;
;.;
UJ
~
I-
..
....
~~
...
1",
Ii
"u
;1=!f;
~,o..= if:
8~1"
~S.5!
..l"'>
1 II
,lio
i!
-a-
Ol .
~
.,.
..
..;
;!
.
~
~
~
~
'"
..
M
o
...
..
~
..
..
'"
..
~
...
I
z
1
..
..
..
..
~
~
.,.
..
ri
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
o 0 0 0 N 0 000
;!
~ ~ ;! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
~ = : : ! ~ ! : !
~
! ! i ! t i. ~
~ ~
;. ~
::
>
tii.i.i.~i.!~
..
::
on Non....
~ ~ ~ : ~ ~ ~ ~ E
DO
:;::
! i ~ ~ i i i I ~
M
o
: ~ ! ~ I I Iii
..
..
n ~ " M ~ ~ .... .... ~
:;
~ on ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ re
'"
l!;
.... .... .... .... N ~ ~ ~ a
.... .... .... .... ~ m ~ c ~
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
M
:;
~ : i : ~ ~ ~ ~ ;
..
~
..
...
..
'"
: a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! :
o
~
~
..
~
1ft Go ca .... 10 on CI 1"1
; ~ ~ ~ s ~ ~ ~ ~
_o,.,C')Q12~:e~
:l:
o
...
..
o
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~
o 000 0 a a a 0
~
o
!:l
.....- ~ : ; ~ ~N - ~"'''N ;
1ft ~ ~ : ~ E .- !
..
...
..
~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~ E ~ :
..
...
'"
'"
o
'"
'"
o
~ : ~ : ~ : ~ ~ :
o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
...
'"
o
o
M
:1:
o
S 5 5 ~ ~ 5 i g S
000 0 0 0 0 0 0
~
U)
~
U)
g g ~ g g
ltJ (f) en U) (,I)
~ g g
U) U) U)
..
o
o
eo
...
..
o
o
ll!
~
N
t!i gas g
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ (!;
o 0
eo eo
~ ,;
o
e
..;
o
:i:
..
a 10 a a 10010 a a
g ~ ~ ~ 10.._ ~ i 10 ~
. . . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
o
i'!
~
i ~ ~ ~ 3 : ~ = :
o
'"
...
o
..
~
o 0 DOC 0 000
~ 5 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "
o
o
,,;
o
~
.;
i ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
o m ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
0:
o
o
2
lL
;;;
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
....
N
....
N
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
i
0:
~
."
.
o
0:
~
!
.!l
...
.
~ ~ [ i
lol.~;...i
Iii u ~ ~ ~ ~
"
.
~ i
~ & ~
!! t ~
!l
Ii
~
~
5
1: i ~ 1 I
~~li~=:
~ CD U ~ ~
."
~
i i .
l f I
~
'"
"
8
0:
j
I
1
i
.
~
.
S
to to to to
~ 5 ~ 5
o 0 0 0
4. 0.. Q.. 4.
~ 2: ::E :e
...J ...J ...J ...J
U) cD UJ II)
i i i 1
~ ~ ~ it
! = ~ !
M ..; ..; ..;
~ ~ ~ ~
r. ~ , ~
o c:i ~ -
'" UII " {II
~ ~ ~ ~
t = g ~
E. i. 2 ~
E i. g g
! ~ ~ ~
on N ~ GIl
..... ..
o ~ CD ~
~ ~ ~ ~
r- r- :n ::
:: ;: & ~
_ _ :: a
~ ~ ~ ~
~ : i ~
:; G ~ 5
ca g ~ 0
.. 0 iD N
:, N ~ ~
:0 ~ :0 ~
o 0 0 0
~ ~ ~ ~
: ~ ~ ~
~ co N ~
lit on .... ....
on on on Il1
ci 0 Q 0
,., ~ C"Ii II')
ca ca GIl GI
o 0 0 CI
o c::t 0 ei
g ~ ~ g
en (/) U) UJ
N ..
o g
~ ~
~ ...
.. .. .. .
o 0 0 0
a 0 a 0
~ ~ 5i ~
CO) r'I M ~
o 0 0 0
; ; ~ :
o 0 0 0
: :g : ~
o CI 0 0
tD ., tD 10
on on '" CI)
o 000
~ ~ ~ ~
~';ci~
u: u: u: u::
u; Cij iij U;
..J ..J ...J ...J
N N N N
...
o
..
~ ; ~ i
: ~ i .
~ & a: ~
~ g t iii
."
..
:i l
i i i i
i ~ 1St ~
o l I
I
r
I
~ "f. ~
o ~ C"1
~ ~ ~
= = ':.
- - -
~ ~ ~
.. ~ .
t :. :
o .. '"
~ .. 1!
~ E i$
.. ... 0
~ ! 6
..... Il') ~
:: ;: ~
- ~ ~
:; ~ ~
.. .. ..
Il') ~ :g
~ ! :
... '" ..
~ : ~
:; :0 I
ci 0 0
: ; i
g : ~
.. .. '"
:g ~ ~
ci Q ci
... ... '"
~ g ~
o Q 0
2 2
~ a.. g
: -= (/)
g g g
C! S ~
~ ., !
~ ~ g
N N ~
~ : i
000
~ :g :;
~ ~ ~
g)';~
u: u: ii:
iij ij; U;
.... .... ....
N N N
I I
.: % .
~
! ! 5
5 11 I
! J I
J
t
..
.,.
..
o
~ ~
c:i c:i
~
~ ~
-
.
..
~
~
~
~ ~
~
.
..
~ ..
~ t
~
M '"
;; ~
.. ..
...
N
... ..
: ~
'"
..
..
'" ..
~ ;
., '"
N ..
:;: ::
l::
'" ..
'" ..
'" ..
.,
~ ~
M
..... ...
~ 0 ~ ~
..
N
X N
!!I ...
~
.. 0
= ~
5:: ~
...
..
o
:l: ~
o 0
o
:;
o 0
o 0
~ ~
N
o
~ ~
... ..
'"
'"
o
~ :g
o 0
...
'"
o
o
... M
'" '"
o 0
o 0
~
U)
o ~
~ U)
.
o
o
~
..
5:
..
o
g ~
N ~
o
e
-
o 0
~ g
~ t;;
o
..
...
o 0
.. '"
~ '"
M '"
o
'"
C
~ ~
- e
o
o
cO
o 0
c> :i:
~ S
lL
;;;
~ ~
....
N
&
~
o
."
..
.
'"
e
i
i
;;
1
0:
I
\T)
~
~
i
~
!
~
~
;
~
d:
IS N
~"
it
~1
i"
II
-~
15
~ ~
~
..
0:
e
..
.Q
o ~
:s .:
c 0
..
c
1
.
~
i
i
.,.
~
e
\i
- ~ l!
~ ~ 1
~ II
i It
i t i
.. 12
ill ~ l!
~
i
&
~ S
.
:!
..
..
~
~
Ii
.
i
J
~.G'
1I1
. .
...u
~ Ii
!;\
"$-= ~
i.::jl
,-; ~
.G'
~~
:.;
~ I
1 .
J l
if
,:
. . ..
-.R,.G'
ill!
.... ~
=Jl:.G'
.. ~ -!! i-
II u
~ j~'
- - ~
II . ..
t!.iI~
::Ii : .
",..B
!ij
~~a
B
.....~
1:1
...
....
;ii~
_ i I
.lB..
.n~
..
~
i&
e...
.. =
..
h
..
~ i
il
e"
"'<
1; ;
~t'ii
~.~ 0
ftr::ll.
~ij
'"
.....
.0
."
.....
.....
<~
~
.. .
~i!
~ii
~ ..
,1 ~ .
!~~~
..
~
~j
~
, 51
~.;
~
~
!
II
..
CD
..
::J
'tl
C
III
..J
'i
'"
o
CL
e
Q,
,;,
~
o
'tl
III
CD
:!!
ii
::J
a
..
It)
...
o
'"
CD
CD
C
III
0::
CD
c
o
..J
'"
-;;
~
..
.i
...
c
:J
~
w
~
too
f~
...
ls-
i i
liU
.....~~~
~ .. .
::s:~ :J
5;j..
"'5.~
9"'>
... II
ie
joi
.j ~
... 0
{!.
!
I
z
~
.i
:-:
..
11
.
>-
.
>-
e
'"
"
..
..
~
'"
~
~
..
..
:l
"
~
~
'"
,.,
..
'"
"
~
'"
'"
"
..
~
..
...
..
'"
'"
ci
g
'"
~
.,
..
'"
~
,.,
.,
~
"
'"
...
.,
o
..,
.,
'"
0:
U
U
::;
~
~
0:
I
.
~
li
~
!
g
...
3
..
j
1
;f.
co
..;
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
o 0 0 0 ~ ci 0 ci ~
11
11 11 11 11 11 11 11. 11 11
E
!i.i.i.:.E.r.l~
~
.
>-
_ ~ ~ w ~. ~ ~
~~~~~~~:~
~
~
. - ~ . ~ ~ ~ - ~
~~t~~~tt~
,.,
..
'"
5 a ~ ~ g i ~ ~ ~
~
~ ~ ~ Co ~ E i i a
,.,
'"
~
~ ~ ~ ~ I I ~ i I
.,
..
. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
N
..
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
co
:;:
~ ~ ~ ~ : ~ ~ ~ ~
::;
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
,.,
..
'"
~ : i i ~ ; E ~ ~
..
co
: ~ : ~ ~ ~ ~ g g
..
~
roll m GI ... Co \I) co ..,
i g ~ ~ g : 5 5 ~
N N ('If N
...
..
ci
~ 5 5 ~ ~ ! ! ! ~
g
N
~
"N ~ : = ~ ~ - : GI
~~::~~~~
'"
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ; ~ : ~ ;
'"
'"
ci
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
o a 0 0 0 ci 000
g
ci
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ M ~
g g g ~ g g g ~ ~
Q 0 0 0 0 ci 0 ci 0
u
....
.,
~ ~ g g g
In en UJ cI.l (/)
g ~ ~
'" '" '"
..
'"
'"
C!
~
~ g ~ ~ ~ s SSg
N _ N ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
i ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~
.,
.,
'"
.;
~ ~ ~ ~ g : g g i
. . . . ~ ~ 0 ~ ~
.,
..
a
; ~ ; ~ . Iii :
.,
~
o 000 0 0 0 0 co
5 5 ~ 5 ~ a ~ ~ ~
o
.,
..
:i
~ i ~ g g ~ ~ f ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
ii:
iii
~ ~ i i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
....
N
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
i
a:
c
i
s=
.!l
...
.
~ ~t !!~
~l.~f jlf.~
m 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~
'l'
isJii
Ii ~ a : ~
lii!~~
1
..
i
..
~
.
S
t= t= t= t=
5 5 ~ 5
o 0 0 0
D. D. D. 0..
2; :E ::I 2
....I ..J ...J ...J
(1)000
i i
c c
JI JI
0.. 0..
... "
~ ~
f. f.
o CI co 0
~ ~ ~ at
~ ri ...;
~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ :'i ~
.... _ to N
" .. Ul III
., ., . .
~ >- >
~ ~ g g
18 '" 0 0
~ ~ c: c:
e. i g g
! ~ ~ ~
.. 0
~ ~ : =
po. e '" CD
~ E ~ E
~ ~ :: ~
~ !;: t- ~
~ ~ ~ ~
:; ~ ~ ~
<<lI . 01) ..,
~ CD ~ ~
: co It. ~
CD g ~ (;
: 2 ; 2
~ :;; :0 I
ci 0 0 0
~ ~ ~ ~
: : ~ ~
.., .., on Y'I
II) Y'I Y'I ..,
o 0 0 0
~ 4"1 .., ..,
o cs CD 0
o 000
ci 0 0 0
~ ~ ~ ~
CI) en 0 en
g g ~ ~
~ ::! S ~
.., .., po) ~
~ g ~ ~
ai ca M ..
o 0 0 0
: : ~ :
o 000
:g ~ :g :::
~ ~ ~ ~
fti ci ~ ~
ii ii: ii: ir
en en in ii)
...J ...J ...J ...J
N N N N
"
.,
..
"...i~~
~l~':
~ t i ~
~ (; .:r in
"ll
..
a:
i I J
...
.
..
0:
i i
~ '"
: Ii
5 il:
j
,
&
I
;f. ~ ~
_ 0 wi
N
11 11 11
~ ~
. . .
>- ;.. ~
~ ~ ~
. . ..
>- >- >-
~ '" ~
t t ~
.. ., '"
~ : ~
... .. ..
re ~ ~
: ~ ;
:: N ~
~ ~ :g
~ E :
~ 5 ~
.. .. ..
" .. ..
_ N ..
." ~ ;
i ~ ~
~ ~ It
o 0 0
~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~
'" '" '"
'" on '"
ci 0 ci
M "
'" '" co
., ., 0
o 0 ci
::i ::;
D. a.. ~
: : tJ)
on .. N
goo
~ ~ ;
~ ~ g
... 0
N N ci
o ., 0
: ~ :
., ., .,
~ ; :g
., ., .,
~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~
u: u: u:
Cii en U)
~ ~ ~
~ ...
~ !
! t
..
>- ~
J .i
f & i
.- ~ 0
~ t
! I j
u ~ '"
1
t
~
ci
~
:-: ~
ci
11
11 11
~
.. ~
. .
>-
~ '"
.. .
>- >-
~
~
'" ~
:. t
~
.. "
N ..
.. N
N ..
..
N
..
::: ~
...
~
'" ..
~ 5
~ ~
N "
a .,
~
5 ~
!
~ ~
M ...
~ 0 ~ ~
..
N
~ N
;j
:i: :;:
~ ~
...
..
ci
.. ..
CO '"
ci ci
~
., 0
'" '"
.. '"
~ :
N
.,
~ ~
'"
on
ci
'" '"
'" '"
ci 0
"
co
.,
ci
M M
~ g
d 0
~
.,
b ~
~ '"
..
'"
~
~
..
.,
g ~
N ~
.,
.,
~ g
~ ~
.,
..
...
~ ~
'"
'"
"
., :;:
~ g
g
.;
., g
~ s
ii:
iii
....
N
~
5
"
.
..
a:
i
i
o
1
'"
i
..
\0
~
~
i
'"
o
!
~
"
i
Ii
~ ~ ~
IIll)
&:~1;'
itn.!"o
~ ~
w w
~ ;;
...
.
o
0:
.
" ..
.. .0
& 1
" ~
~ a
i
E
~
I
i
"I-
;
~
.l
€ ~
l! 5
J
I ; i
i Ii
II i
! t !
II ! l!
.
~
..
..
IUt
>- AI <'I
Ui
!II
111
jll
II
>-1
~>-
I
III
l~
pl!
All
Il!
III
in
~li
III
lUl
IU
It
II
I
il
I
I
Ii
I
l>
!
~
1
Gl
II
;:)
...
c
j
...
Gl
..
~
o
It
e
~
...
II
.
:Ii
Iii
11
SIll
~il
>
Ji
i!
h
..
:2
a
.;,
C>
C>
CO<
;0
co
co
CO<
ti
c
~
:2
U
C
o
U
.
l
..
c
<(
...
c
::;
Ui
W
...I
ID
<(
...
I 1 lttitlltl ilit
l t t~!!~lttt !t2t
R $ ~~~~~~!!~ ~aii
on N ~..i~~~8~~~ 8-~8
g i ",$~~~~~!~ ~~~!
~ : ~~~~~~5i~
CJI.....IIO.....
CDNr-.N
...,,...10
i i
mr.n",,.,IE:...1D
iii~~ft~!i
~igi
"'---
~~~;;~~!f.!;!
~~~~
li!n~g~n
f"Jf"J~O
~~..~
~ i !~~~~!~~a !~~i
; ~ a;~;a~,a~ ~~~~
.. en ;S:2540IlO::2!:_~= GlCD:!:!
o ~ .~Gl.~or.nm~ ~8~2
~ ~ ~~~~~~i~~ ~~=~
~ ~ ~~...:~,..,..~ ~~=~
= ~ ,..,..~~a~~g~ ~~~~
~ g ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~
~ ~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~
o . Glr.n._X~G.f"J GlRr.n
~ ! i~~~~~~~~ a~!~
i
I ~ ~~~~~iSil ~~~s
ci ci cicicicicicicicici ciodci
~ 0 N~==~~:::a;
r-- ~ E::!:!~~~$f:!
!:i~S'"
......O!
Df'll........
....._Nt'II
~ :g :I:;~~:g~:l~:g
ci ci cioooooooo
~ g i5B58~iiii
ci ci cidddcicidcici
~ ~ ~~~~~ ~~~
"'III WI r.n
11)"''''''
deico
iH i.
i.tl l
~~&i ~
!~I g
N"'_
~~~ ~
i~~ 2
~::l:: m
_~ 0
~~ 0
~;::~ !:V
--on
lil~i ~
!:l",_
i~~ ~
::~:R ('It
~a:g M
~;!= U)
-~., ..,
~u ~
:~~ fQ
Ntn:! N
:i:Di ~
000 ci
g~~ 8
;;;I:~ to)
::l:ll:ll ::l
000 ci
","'1"1'"
~zz~
dcidci
ii~ g
cicid ci
OUUU
~a:ffi~
~~g 0
11m ~
A
I I 111111111 III1 III I
~ ~ ~~~~~~!~! ~~~~ ~~~ ~
~ ~ .~.~_____ ~~__ NN~
~ !S ~~n~!HE
un !Iii ~
..
I
0'>
I
!:!
.
'2
a:
b
c
j
~
~
;
i
d:
t
.
I
.
l;
j
1
i
<II
g
~
~
:;j N fj~
~ ~ No
~
10
~!! IH
d:_:il 11 i
~ 1I i
'Ii
.
11
i
~ i ~
~g ~
i ! 1
1 ,; ~
!l 5 g
! ~"8
.!. ~ ~
iii 1 I
i ~ t
1 !;
~ i 1;
i_I. 0 I
5 ~ !
oil i.
. i;
~ N {j
i i ! 1
ii . i ~
q ! I ~
;.! i j
a I 0 1
] !il' I i
~- i ~ I
I ::01 EO '" ..
~ ~ ~a~~~~~~~ ~!~~ ~~! ~
m ! ~~~e~~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~ a ~
8 i
'"
~~~~~~~~~
f4 ~ ~~~~~~~~~
iLi:L~U:
in u;cn OJ
ii:ii:li: iL
iiimu; Ui
i i
~ 1 & ~ il~ ~i~l Ii
! i 11!l~lil~ it!~ ili ~
I i ~~!J~~lt~ lot~ !!o 5
o
>-
..J....J-1...J
NNNN
rt~r: ~
s !
i 111]1] i]I]! i t
! ! 111!I!ilt ~J!t !tJ 0
~
...
I
J
] j t
I i I
I
I
]
t
..
-
.
-k.- ~~ ~ t:L., .~~ ~ ~
~~KS-;li;, XJu ~ i7~
~,/':Lo~. cV~~QJ
~~~~~~
--;k.~~ ~.-/!~ ~-r
Rs-~~~~. .~~~
0,~~ ~ 7?f-(..' -
~ R-sJJt ~~,~ ~ ~
~t;~~cv . ~ ~
. ~~_n-R-L ) ~
~~-~~~~~
t:::::i~ $ Co;Lo ~
-;;Z~~ '~
~ 'jJ~ ~ # -;;I:~:-u ,;;k
~~~~<p~~ ~ c J
f~ ~.~ ;.----LJ~., t2&. ~ ;
~~~~Z~Z;~
~_~h~~ft'<!L0~~ ~~
. .~~~
-W~~~.~~~ cL ~
~ U:-<0 ~~ P-- . ~ ~-<!:
.
.
.
~~~~ ~~~
~cr:t ~"~~d~~~
---&. ~~ ~ 2u)~.~ ~ ~ IdJ
C~ . ~~,7d~.~
~1J~
~~r~~,
~o7JdL
Sames A. kJILk.l~5 J;.I
$-e, '10 Sh a dJ Ldk~ Ln.
Fr:-;::Je'rc e,I / F/
3-'11</7
I;~~T- f.,--:._-~
i.~1 MAY '9" ~;
I L..
I CQ:J\.[)lilIN. OFFICE