Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Packet 05.15.2025
PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION AGENDA ST. LUCIE COUNTY Regular Meeting Thursday, May 15, 2025 6:00 PM St. Lucie County Commission Chambers 2300 Virginia Avenue 3rd Floor of Roger Poitras Building Fort Pierce, FL 34982 BOARD MEMBERS CHAIRMAN RYAN BINNER VICE-CHAIRMAN LAWRENCE “BEAU” SLAY BOARD MEMBER JOSHUA BRADLEY BOARD MEMBER DARREN GUETTLER BOARD MEMBER ED LOUNDS BOARD MEMBER WILLIAM O’DELL AT-LARGE BOARD MEMBER LARRY NEESE EX-OFFICIO BOARD MEMBER NICOLE FOGARTY Mission Statement St. Lucie delivers superior service that enhances our quality of life Page 1 of 331 Regular Meeting Thursday, May 15, 2025 6:00 PM 2 | P a g e WELCOME • Please turn off all cellular phones and pagers prior to entering the Commission Chambers. • Please note that the Planning and Zoning Commission/Local Planning Agency serves in an advisory capacity to the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners and has the power to review and make recommendations to the Board, for approval or disapproval, on any applications within their area of responsibility. • The Planning and Zoning Commission strongly encourages your input and comment at the public hearing. Please limit comments to three minutes if possible and be respectful of others’ opinions. • For public convenience, all meetings are televised and are provided with wireless internet access. NOTICE: All Proceedings before this Board are electronically recorded. Any person who decides to appeal any action taken by the Board at these meetings will need a record of the proceedings and for such purpose may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made. Upon the request of any party to the proceedings, individuals testifying during a hearing will be sworn in. Any party to the proceedings will be granted the opportunity to cross-examine any individual testifying during a hearing upon request. Anyone with a disability requiring accommodation to attend this meeting should contact the Human Resources Department at (772) 462-1546, HumanResources@stlucieco.org or TDD (772) 462-1428 at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the meeting. Page 2 of 331 Regular Meeting Thursday, May 15, 2025 6:00 PM 3 | P a g e 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. INVOCATION 4. ROLL CALL 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS 6. DISCLOSURE(S) 7. MINUTES A. St. Lucie County Planning & Zoning Commission minutes for the meeting of April 17, 2025 8. PUBLIC COMMENT 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Indrio SHG PUD – Amendment to the Official Zoning Atlas from PUD (Planned Unit Development, lapsed) to PUD (Planned Unit Development) & Preliminary Development Plan - THIS ITEM IS QUASI-JUDICIAL B. Land Development Code Text Amendment to require community participation meetings for certain types of development applications and allow certain permitted as-of-right uses in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code, as well as development applications that are in substantial conformity with an approved Preliminary Planned Development Plan, and any Live Local Affordable Housing applications meeting the provisions of Section 125.01055, F.S. to be processed as a Minor Site Plan. 10. WORKSHOPS 11. OTHER BUSINESS 12. ADJOURN Page 3 of 331 Regular Meeting Thursday, May 15, 2025 6:00 PM 4 | P a g e Page 4 of 331 PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA Regular Meeting April 17, 2025 Convened: 6:00pm Adjourned: 6:53pm 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair Binner @ 6:00pm. 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chair Binner. 3. INVOCATION Commissioner O'Dell. 4. ROLL CALL Present Board Member Ed Lounds, Board Member Billy O'Dell, Chair Ryan Binner, Board Member Larry Neese, Board Member Darren Guettler, Vice-Chair Lawrence Slay Excused Ex-Officio Nicole Fogarty, Board Member Joshua Bradley 5. ANNOUNCEMENTS Commissioner Guettler – Recuses himself from voting for item 9B. 6. DISCLOSURE(S) Commissioner O'Dell attended the groundbreaking of the P1 Motorsports project as a spectator. Page 5 of 331 Planning & Zoning Commission MeetingThursday, April 17, 2025 6:00 PM 2 | P a g e 7. MINUTES A. St. Lucie County Planning & Zoning Commission minutes for the meeting of March 20, 2025 A motion was made to approve all minutes, and it passed unanimously. RESULT: APPROVE MOVER: Board Member Ed Lounds SECONDER: Board Member Larry Neese AYES: Ed Lounds, Billy O'Dell, Ryan Binner, Larry Neese, Darren Guettler, Lawrence Slay NAYS: None EXCUSED: None 8. PUBLIC COMMENT None. 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Ordinance Amending St. Lucie County Land Development Code by Amending Chapter XI, to add Section 11.00.05 to Allow for Publication of Advertisements and Public Notices on a Publicly Accessible Website STAFF PRESENTATION: Katherine Barbieri, Assistant County Attorney III, stated that all public notification requirements were met per St. Lucie County Development Code Section 11.00.03. Attorney Barbieri gave a presentation to the board regarding a proposed amendment to the Land Development Code regarding digital publication, advertising, and legal notices. Attorney Barbieri’s presentation included information regarding the 2022amended Florida law allowing government agencies to publish notices online instead of in newspapers, offering cost savings and flexibility. St. Lucie County spent $100,000-$150,000 annually on print ads and plans to use an online public notice system, costing $30,000 annually. Municipalities like Port St. Lucie and St. Lucie County Property Appraiser and the School Board expressed interest in participating in the County-hosted website. The county needed to amend its Land Development Code language, as it currently only allowed newspaper ads to proceed with the online system. BOARD DISCUSSION WITH STAFF: Commissioner Guettler asked if we have to use this public notice method and, if it was adopted, would it be the only mechanism for advertising. Advertisements could be published both online and in the paper. Attorney Barbieri responded that we’re going to leave the paper in, and outreach will remain through posting the yellow signs. APPLICANT PRESENTATION: None. County initiated. Page 6 of 331 Planning & Zoning Commission MeetingThursday, April 17, 2025 6:00 PM 3 | P a g e PUBLIC COMMENTS: None. BOARD DISCUSSION: None. Motion: Approve Motioner –– Lounds - Second – O’Dell RESULT: APPROVE MOVER: Board Member Ed Lounds SECONDER: Board Member Billy O'Dell AYES: Ed Lounds, Billy O'Dell, Ryan Binner, Larry Neese, Darren Guettler, Lawrence Slay NAYS: None EXCUSED: None B. P1 Motor Club - Proposed Comprehensive Plan FLUE (Future Land Use Element) Map Amendment to Revise P1 Motor Club Special District Regulatory Standard # 1 STAFF PRESENTATION: Thad Crowe, AICP, Senior Planner, with Planning and Development Services. Mr. Crowe stated that all public notification requirements were met per St Lucie County Development Code Section 11.00.03. Mr. Crowe gave a presentation on the proposed large- scale comp plan amendment for the P1 Motor Club, which is located on Okeechobee Road. The amendment would allow the county to potentially provide water to the private motorsport facility, while wastewater services would remain self-contained. This would also allow temporary water and wastewater service for the corporate building and up to four residences until the development's full infrastructure is in place. Importantly, the county would not bear any costs for these services, which would be handled by the developer. BOARD DISCUSSION WITH STAFF: None. APPLICANT PRESENTATION: None. BOARD DISCUSSION WITH APPLICANT: None. PUBLIC COMMENTS: None. BOARD DISCUSSION: Page 7 of 331 Planning & Zoning Commission MeetingThursday, April 17, 2025 6:00 PM 4 | P a g e Motion: Approve Motioner –– Lounds - Second – O’Dell RESULT: APPROVE MOVER: Board Member Ed Lounds SECONDER: Board Member Billy O'Dell AYES: Ed Lounds, Billy O'Dell, Ryan Binner, Larry Neese, Darren Guettler, Lawrence Slay NAYS: None EXCUSED: None C. Haris Market LLC Convenience Store - Conditional Use Permit to allow for the sale of packaged alcoholic beverages for off-site consumption at a convenience store located at 2233 N 25th Street, within the CN (Commercial, Neighborhood) Zoning District in St. Lucie County. STAFF PRESENTATION: James Glover, COSS, Planning Compliance Specialist, with Planning and Development Services. Mr. Glover stated that all public notification requirements were met per St Lucie County Development Code Section 11.00.03. Mr. Glover gave a presentation on the proposed request for a conditional use petition for Harris Market Food Store at 2233 North 25th Street in St. Lucie County, seeking approval to sell packaged alcoholic beverages for off- site consumption. The site is within the Commercial Neighborhood Zoning District and consists of a 1,440 sq. ft. building. The retail sale of beer and wine is allowed through a conditional use in this district, but liquor is not permitted. The convenience store, which is a grocery store under the Standard Industrial Classification Code 5411, proposes to sell alcohol between 7 a.m. and 9 p.m., complying with local ordinances. Notices were sent to 49 surrounding property owners, and two responses opposed the petition. The property is surrounded by commercial zoning to the north and south, and residential zoning to the east and west. The store provides five parking spaces, including one ADA space. No alcohol will be consumed on-site, and the petition generally conforms to the county’s development standards. The Planning Division recommends approval, subject to conditions, including compliance with hours of operation and proper enclosure for the dumpster. BOARD DISCUSSION WITH STAFF: Commissioner Lounds asked staff about the institutional designation in an aerial exhibit, inquiring what institution it was and about the number of alcoholic beverage permits in the area and the proximity to a nearby grammar school. Mr. Glover could not immediately identify the institutional use or the number of permits but mentioned another convenience store selling beer and wine nearby. Mr. Glover believed the institution shown was a church. Mr. Benton, Planning Manager, clarified that the institutional zoning was undeveloped land owned by All World Multi-Services, LLC. The church in question was on the northwest corner of 25th Street and Juanita Avenue, previously BJ's Lounge. Mr. Benton proceeded to address the proximity of the convenience store to other uses and explained that a specialty school is located at the site of the former Garden City Elementary, and is now part of a specialty Page 8 of 331 Planning & Zoning Commission MeetingThursday, April 17, 2025 6:00 PM 5 | P a g e education program. The specialty school is located about a quarter of a mile away in the City of Fort Pierce. Commissioner Lounds asked about ATF rulings for distances between alcohol- selling facilities and schools. Mr. Glover stated that St. Lucie County's Land Development Code had distance restrictions, but they did not apply to this project, as it was for off- premises alcohol sales and clarified that there was no conflict with ATF rules, emphasizing that the project involved alcohol sales, not on-site consumption. Mr. Benton confirmed there were no state proximity restrictions for packaged alcohol sales. Explained the difference between sales for off-premises consumption and on-site consumption, and confirmed the educational facility as Queen Townsend Head Start Center II. APPLICANT PRESENTATION: Brenda Carter, 1910 South 34th Street, Fort Pierce, stated that working at the store gave her a life-changing opportunity to speak before the board for the first time. She said the store aimed to improve the community, help those in need, and maintain a safe environment. She emphasized that residents appreciated the store’s presence and that receiving the alcohol license would not change their positive impact. As the store’s manager, she’s committed to overseeing operations responsibly and expressed deep gratitude for the chance to speak. BOARD DISCUSSION WITH APPLICANT: None. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Residents expressed concerns about the proposed sale of packaged alcoholic beverages at Harris Market. They stated they did not receive proper public notice and noted the store's proximity to an existing store already selling alcohol. They feared increased loitering, undesirable activity, and changes to the neighborhood's character and safety. Concerns were also raised about the impact on nearby family-oriented facilities, including schools, a Boys & Girls Club, and a planned mini-golf course. While they supported the store itself, they opposed alcohol sales due to potential negative effects on their quiet, diverse, and law- abiding community. Dr. Pinky Henley - 2306 San Diego Avenue Fort Pierce, Florida Mildred Allen - 2402 Barcelona Avenue Fort Pierce, Florida BOARD DISCUSSION: Mr. Benton responded to concerns about public notice. He clarified that the first person who raised an issue about not receiving a mail notice lives approximately 560 feet from the property in question—outside the 500-foot radius required for mailed notices. He also explained that public notice was provided in three ways: a newspaper display ad, mailed notices to property owners within 500 feet, and a sign posted on the property. The posted sign was verified to meet all requirements and had been in place for several days—not just put up that morning. Commissioner Lounds asked if the store would be selling just beer and wine or liquor also. Mr. Glover responded, just beer and wine. Chair Binner asked whether the applicant had been informed about the dumpster issue and Page 9 of 331 Planning & Zoning Commission MeetingThursday, April 17, 2025 6:00 PM 6 | P a g e whether they had been cooperating with county staff on cleaning up the parking lot, including striping and other related matters. Mr. Benton answered, the applicant was open to relocating and screening the dumpster. They made significant site improvements, including new landscaping, shrubs, a new stop sign, added sod to block rear access, and initial striping completed in September, though it has since faded. Conversation continued regarding paving the parking lot and outside seating being discouraged. Vice-Chair Slay acknowledged both the community's concerns and the business owner's rights. He expressed support for the business, noting that it is unfair to put stipulations on one business and allow another to do so. Vice- Chair Slay moved to approve the application with conditions, including dumpster relocation, lot cleanup, and prohibiting outdoor seating. They also noted changes in laws since COVID that have made alcohol sales more flexible, even for sit-down restaurants, and expressed some confusion about selling food alongside alcohol. There was a second for the motion by Commissioner O’Dell, but the conversation picked back up again, and Ms. Brenda Carter came back up to the podium to make a statement. Ms. Carter, the applicant’s representative, agreed with public concerns and emphasized wanting to improve the community, not harm it. Ms. Carter stated the store was for business only, not a hangout spot, and committed to preventing loitering or alcohol consumption on the property. Ms. Carter sees the project as a chance to be part of a solution and promises to uphold community standards. Vice-Chair Slay made a statement acknowledging that while laws now allow drive-thru beer sales, it rarely happened at his business. He supported the applicant’s right to operate and sell beer and wine legally, commended their efforts to meet community needs, and encouraged them to help improve and uplift the area. Chair Binner put Vice-Chair Slay’s motion back on the table for the board to vote on with amendments, Commissioner O’Dell seconded. Motion: Approve: Motioner –– Slay - Second – O’Dell RESULT: APPROVE MOVER: Board Member Lawrence Slay SECONDER: Board Member Billy O'Dell AYES: Billy O'Dell, Ryan Binner, Larry Neese, Darren Guettler, Lawrence Slay NAYS: Ed Lounds EXCUSED: None Page 10 of 331 Planning & Zoning Commission MeetingThursday, April 17, 2025 6:00 PM 7 | P a g e 10. WORKSHOPS None. 11. OTHER BUSINESS Brief conversation took place regarding amending the 500ft guidelines to 1000ft. 12. ADJOURN There being no further business to be brought before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 6:53pm. Page 11 of 331 ITEM NO. (ID # 2025-4170) DATE: 5/15/2025 AGENDA REQUEST TO: Planning and Zoning Commission PRESENTED BY: Thad Crowe, Senior Planner SUBMITTED BY: Planning & Development Services SUBJECT: Indrio SHG PUD – Amendment to the Official Zoning Atlas from PUD (Planned Unit Development, lapsed) to PUD (Planned Unit Development) & Preliminary Development Plan - THIS ITEM IS QUASI-JUDICIAL BACKGROUND: The subject properties (herein referred to as “site”) is located between Deleon Ave. & Taylor Dairy Rd., approximately ¼ mile east of Turnpike Feeder Rd. and 3.3 miles east of the Indrio Rd. and I-95 interchange. The Indrio Road corridor is transitioning from rural to suburban character. To the west is a shopping center (Indrio Crossings) and an undeveloped but approved apartment complex (Sugar Sands), a duplex subdivision is to the north, large lot single family detached homes are to the east, and to the south is a historic residence surrounded on three sides by the approved but undeveloped Indrio Woods apartment complex. Indrio Crossings Shopping Center is anchored by a grocery store and also includes a discount store, brewhouse, liquor store/pub, postal services store, several fast food restaurants, dentist, nails salon, and Sheriff’s substation. The site is appropriate for a transitional use that is between the intensity of the commercial uses to the west and single-family and duplex uses to the east and north. PREVIOUS ACTION: In 1956, the Fort Pierce Garden Estates Plat was recorded for a series of single-family lots. On June 20, 2006, the Board of County Commissioners approved Resolution 2006-164, granting the Lakeside PUD for the subject site, to contain 92 single-family homes, preservation area, lake and amenity/recreation center. A petition to extend the Lakeside PUD was withdrawn on 5/13/2009, due to the requested documentation not being addressed. FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Page 12 of 331 Staff recommends the Planning & Zoning Commission review the proposal, provide input aligning with the Land Development Code and Comprehensive Plan, and forward a recommendation of approval to the Board of County Commissioners with conditions. COMMISSION ACTION: RESULT: MOVER: None SECONDER: None AYES: None NAYS: None EXCUSED: None Coordination/Signatures Date: May 09, 2025 Kori Benton, Planning Manager Date: May 09, 2025 Benjamin Balcer, Planning & Development Services Director Date: May 09, 2025 Katherine Barbieri, Assistant County Attorney III Page 13 of 331 Planning and Development Services Department Planning Division M E M O R A N D U M TO:Planning & Zoning Commission THROUGH:Benjamin Balcer, AICP, Planning and Development Services Director Kori Benton, AICP, Planning Manager FROM:Thad Crowe, AICP, Senior Planner DATE: May 9, 2025 SUBJECT:Indrio SHG PUD – PD-2408-000048 Amendment to the Official Zoning Atlas to PUD (Planned Unit Development) & Preliminary Development Plan GENERAL INFORMATION Property Owner/Applicant:Indrio SHG, LLC 9255 Sunset Blvd. West Hollywood, CA 90069 Representative:Leah Heinzelmann, ASLA Cotleur & Hearing 1934 Commerce Ln. Jupiter, FL 34987 Location:North side of Indrio Rd., between Deleon Ave. & Taylor Dairy Rd. Parcel ID Numbers:1313-601-0065-000-2, 1313-601-0087-000-2, 1313-601-0109-000-3, 1313-601-0131-000-6,1313-601-0001-000-6, & 1313-601-0087-000-2. Petition Site(s): +/-33.18 Acres Proposal:Planned Unit Development Rezoning and a Preliminary Development Plan for a 232-unit townhome community and associated amenities, conservation area, landscape buffers, and stormwater ponds Current Zoning District:PUD (Planned Unit Development), lapsed Proposed Zoning District:PUD (Planned Unit Development) Wetlands:Wetland Impact & Other Surface Water Present Fire Protection:Fire District Station #7 is located at 4900 Ft. Pierce Blvd,, approximately ¾ mile driving distance to the west. Utilities:Inside the Urban Service Boundary o St. Lucie County Utilities (SLCU) Water & Wastewater o Fort Pierce Utilities Authority (FPUA) Natural Gas o FPL Electric Service Page 14 of 331 Indrio SHG PUD - PUD-2408-000048 5/6/2025 Page 2 BACKGROUND INFORMATION Location & Vicinity The subject properties (hereafter referred to as “site”) are located north of Indrio Road, between Deleon Ave. & Taylor Dairy Rd., approximately ¼ mile east of Turnpike Feeder Rd. and 3.3 miles east of the intersection of Indrio Rd. and I-95. The site was originally approved in 1956 for 186 single-family lots, sized 60 by 100 feet, known as the Garden Estates subdivision and not developed (see Figure 16), arranged around the internal street system now shown on County maps (a street vacation/replat will be required). In 2006 the site was rezoned to PUD, approved as the Lakeside Village PUD, allowing for 97 single-family residential lots (Figure 17). That PUD approval has since expired. Future Land Use Zoning Existing Use(s) Petition Site RM (Residential Medium – up to 9 du/ac) PUD (Planned Unit Development) – lapsed approval Undeveloped North RU (Residential Urban – up to 5du/ac) RM-5 (Residential Multiple- Family-5) Duplex Subdivision South TVC (Towns, Villages, & Countryside) PUD AR-1 (Agricultural- Residential-1) Historic Residence (Binney Estate) Approved / Undeveloped 229-Unit Apartment Community (Indrio Woods PUD) East RU RS-4 (Residential Single- Family-4) Large Lot Single-Family Homes Su r r o u n d i n g West RM CG (Commercial, General) RM-9 (Residential Multiple- Family-9) Approved / Undeveloped 84-Unit Apartment Complex (Sugar Sands) Figure 1: Aerial Map Table 1: Land Uses Page 15 of 331 Indrio SHG PUD - PUD-2408-000048 5/6/2025 Page 3 The Indrio Road corridor is experiencing development interest, preparing a transition from rural to suburban character. To the immediate west is the Indrio Crossings shopping center and an undeveloped parcel approved for an 82 unit apartment complex (Sugar Sands). A duplex subdivision is situated to the north, with large lot single family detached homes across an unopened right-of-way and drainage canal to the east, and to the south is the historic Binney Estate surrounded on three sides by the approved but undeveloped Indrio Woods PUD. The Indrio Crossings Shopping Center is anchored by a grocery store and also includes a discount store, brewhouse, liquor store/pub, postal services store, several fast food restaurants, dentist, and nail salon. The site, with attention to environmental impacts and design, is appropriate for townhome development as a transitional use, with a density/intensity that achieves compatibility between the commercial uses to the west and single- family and duplex uses to the east and north. SITE PLAN Site Design Summary The proposed development consists of 232 townhome units via 34 buildings, with 36 units in 6 six-unit buildings and 196 units in 28 seven-unit buildings. Buildings are arranged on both sides of a loop road which circulates around a central pond. Of the site's 33.18 acres, 15 acres are proposed for conservation, 12 acres are buildings, driveways, and vehicular use areas, 6.5 acres are in landscape areas, and 4 acres are ponds. The main vehicular entrance is on Indrio Rd. with a secondary entrance to the west onto Deleon Ave. across from the shopping center entrance. A connection to the north, to Miramar Ave was declined by the applicant, and a connection to the east is not practicable as Taylor Dairy Rd. is an unimproved right-of-way, and due to existing canals, would be misaligned north and south of Indrio Road. An important element of the site design is the +/- 15 acres of conservation area, almost half of the site, which includes approximately four acres of wetlands and six acres of uplands, located in the northern half of the site. Improvements to this preserve would include restoration of habitat and removal of exotics, as well as the installation of stabilized hard surface trails in upland areas. Project amenities include a common lawn near the entrance located next to the mail kiosk and a shade structure, and there are also two pocket parks located in the southeastern and southwestern corners of the site along Indrio Rd. Space left blank intentionally Page 16 of 331 Indrio SHG PUD - PUD-2408-000048 5/6/2025 Page 4 Figure 2: Preliminary Site Plan Indrio Road Page 17 of 331 Indrio SHG PUD - PUD-2408-000048 5/6/2025 Page 5 Density The initial site plan submittal showed 278 units, a density of 8.4 du/ac, below the maximum 9 du/ac in the RM FLU category. The revised site plan proposes 232 units, a lower density of 6.99 du/ac. Lot & Building Layouts Figures 3 & 4 show the following: •16-foot interior townhome unit lot width and a 23.5-foot townhome end unit lot width; •16-foot driveway width; •22-foot front setback; •19-foot rear setback; and •7.5-foot side setback. Front entrances are recessed +/-13 feet behind the garage, and each unit would have a 7.5-foot deep rear patio. Height The proposed townhomes are two-stories, with a maximum height of 35 feet which is consistent with the existing zoning districts, and that of adjacent residential districts in the vicinity. Figure 3: 6-Unit Townhomes Dimensional Standards Figure 4: 7-Unit Townhomes Dimensional Standards Figure 5: Townhome Elevations Page 18 of 331 Indrio SHG PUD - PUD-2408-000048 5/6/2025 Page 6 Private Internal Street Right-Of-Way Figures 6 & 7 show the proposed 50-foot right-of-way (ROW), which includes 10-foot-wide travel lanes with additional 2-foot valley curbs, a 10 or 11-foot-wide tree lawn width, and five-foot-wide sidewalks on one side of the street. A 10-foot-wide utility easement would be provided on townhome lots on each side of the ROW. Staff supports removing the sidewalk from street frontage of the lakefront townhomes since an equivalent sidewalk is placed to the rear of those townhomes. Locating the sidewalk to the rear of townhomes around the lake and having a continuous uninterrupted sidewalk is preferable to the streetside sidewalk, frequently interrupted by driveways. A sidewalk link should be accessible to each unit, whether through a traditional street sidewalk or through a trail along back yards. Given the applicant’s proposal for a sidewalk on a single side of the street, staff suggests such a concession should provide the sidewalk on the other side of the street, as shown in Figure 9, Staff’s recommended Pedestrian Plan with additional connections and crosswalks. Impervious Surface Ratio The individual lot impervious surface ratio (ISR) of this proposed development is high, ranging between 85 and 87 percent. When factoring in the conservation areas, landscape buffers, and common green areas, the overall ISR is a much lower 42%. Figure 6: 50’ Right-of-Way Typical Figure 7: 50’ Right-of-Way Typical – with Guest Parking Figure 8: Recommended Yard/Street Tree Diagram Page 19 of 331 Indrio SHG PUD - PUD-2408-000048 5/6/2025 Page 7 Figure 9: Recommended Pedestrian Plan (Alternative) Space left blank intentionally Page 20 of 331 Indrio SHG PUD - PUD-2408-000048 5/6/2025 Page 8 Transportation & Parking The Applicant’s Traffic Impact Report (TIR) was initially based on a higher number of trips – 278 – so the impacts of the revised 232 units would be approximately 16% lower. The study area (Figure 10 and Table 2 below) includes road segments and intersections within a two-mile radius of the site. Table 2: Study Area Traffic Impacts Study Area Road Segments Study Area Intersections Kings Highway/Turnpike Feeder Rd., Orange Ave. to US 1 (six segments) Indrio Road & Emerson Avenue (Signalized) Indrio Road & Turnpike Feeder Road/ Kings Highway (Signalized) Turnpike Feeder Road & Miramar Avenue/ Kings Highway (Unsignalized) Turnpike Feeder Road & Palomar Parkway (Unsignalized) Turnpike Feeder Road & Winter Garden Parkway (Signalized) Indrio Rd., Emerson Ave. to US 1(four road segments) Indrio Road & Deleon Avenue (Unsignalized) The development is projected to generate 2,068 daily trips, including 139 AM Peak Hour trips and 163 PM Peak Hour trips. The TIR provided the following conclusions. AM and PM peak hour roadway segment capacity analyses was performed for study area roadway segments for existing (2024), background (2027), and buildout (2027) conditions. All study area roadway segments are expected to operate acceptably during 2024 existing traffic conditions. Upon review, no transportation improvements were identified near the study intersection by developers or within the latest St. Lucie Figure 10: Traffic Impact Report Study Area Page 21 of 331 Indrio SHG PUD - PUD-2408-000048 5/6/2025 Page 9 County Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) Transportation Improvements Program (TIP), St. Lucie County 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), and Florida Department of Transportation’s (FDOT) Five-Year Work Program. AM and PM peak hour operational analyses for existing (2024), background (2027), and buildout (2027) conditions were performed at the study area intersections. The analyses identified no deficiencies except for Turnpike Feeder Road & Palomar Parkway which operates with a failing LOS and delay and v/c ratio greater than 1.0 during 2024 existing and 2027 future background and buildout traffic conditions. Access to the site will be provided via one full access driveway on Indrio Road and one full access driveway on Deleon Avenue/Royal Palm Avenue. Turn lane criteria provided in NCHRP Report 457 was reviewed against future conditions to determine turn lane requirements at project driveways. Based on NCHRP Report 457 output, no additional ingress turn lanes are warranted at the proposed driveway connections on Indrio Road and Deleon Avenue/Royal Palm Avenue. Existing turn lanes at the study area intersections were evaluated to determine if sufficient deceleration and storage is provided to accommodate buildout project traffic volume projections. The southbound left turn lanes at the intersections of Indrio Road & Emerson Avenue and Turnpike Feeder Road & Winter Garden Parkway do not have sufficient storage to accommodate project traffic upon buildout of the development. It should be noted that the southbound storage lengths are deficient during existing traffic conditions and therefore not deficient due to project traffic. In addition, extension of the southbound left-turn lanes is not recommended as the 95th percentile queue can be accommodated within the turn lane (excluding the deceleration length). Preliminary PUDs are required to provide a transportation impact baseline to understand the adjacent roadway capacity and impacts of the proposed development, with final evaluation and concurrency decided with the Final Site Plan. Buffering & Landscaping The following table shows required and provided buffers, demonstrating that the PUD exceeds minimum standards. Table 3: Project Landscape Buffers Buffer Required Provided Adjacent Use North (Miramar Ave.)15’*Duplex Subdivision South (Indrio Rd.)15’25’Residence, Approved Apt. Complex East (Taylor Dairy Rd.)15’25’Large Lot Single Family Homes West (Deleon Ave.)15’25’Shopping Center, Approved Apt. Complex * Conservation area depth from Miramar Ave. ROW ranges between approximately 45 to 440 feet Space left blank intentionally Page 22 of 331 Indrio SHG PUD - PUD-2408-000048 5/6/2025 Page 10 Figure 11: South and West Property Line Buffers Although the applicant is proposing a 25-foot-wide landscape buffer along Indrio Road, which exceeds the minimum 15-foot specification, staff recommends additional trees to be planted between the backyards of townhomes and the proposed linear landscape buffer adjacent to Indrio to dampen noise and light impacts from the proximity to Indrio Road while enhancing the buffer between the Historic Binney Estate and the proposed development. Figure 12: East Property Line Buffer In addition to the proposed 25-foot landscape buffer along the eastern property line, which includes a berm, 6ft. tall opaque fence, and landscaping, an existing unopened right-of-way and canal right-of-way extend the separation between existing large lot single-family homes and the proposed community. Finally, Staff recommends the following additional landscaping standards: •With the recognition that 50-foot street tree spacing will not provide sufficient shade for pedestrians, Staff recommends supplementing R.O.W. street trees in each townhome front yard with four shade trees, understory trees, or palm clusters, as shown in Figure 8, above. •Provide foundation plantings for townhome building fronts and sides. •Provide enhanced tree plantings at rear of townhomes along Indrio Rd. with the intent of further mitigating noise/proximity to Indrio Road, enhance buffering from Historic Binney Estate, and support shade along Indrio Rd., at one time a canopy road. Page 23 of 331 Indrio SHG PUD - PUD-2408-000048 5/6/2025 Page 11 Open Space Open space, which comprises common area green space, recreation areas, and preserve areas, is 56.8% of the site, well over the minimum 35% required for PUDs. Clustering of townhome buildings allows for such high open space acreage, which includes the notable conservation area at the northwest segment of the site. Figure 13: Open Space Plan Space left blank intentionally Page 24 of 331 Indrio SHG PUD - PUD-2408-000048 5/6/2025 Page 12 ********************************************** STANDARDS OF REVIEW - REZONING AS SET FORTH IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 11.06.03 Section 11.06.03 of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code establishes the standards for reviewing Zoning Atlas Amendments. In reviewing an application for Zoning Atlas Amendment, the Planning & Zoning Commission and Board of County Commissioners shall consider the following: A. Whether the proposed rezoning is in conflict with any applicable portions of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code; Figure 14 shows zoning for the site and vicinity properties. Vicinity zoning reflects the transitioning over time of the Indrio Rd. corridor from rural to suburban character, with remnant AG zoning and more intensive zoning such as CG, RM-9 and RM-5. The requested amendment seeks the following departures from the LDC: the amendment requests reductions of dimensional requirements of the comparable RM zoning district, as noted below: Figure14: Zoning Map Page 25 of 331 Indrio SHG PUD - PUD-2408-000048 5/6/2025 Page 13 •reduction of minimum lot width from 100 feet to 16 or 23.5 feet; •reduction of front yard setback from 25 to 23 feet; •reduction of side yard setback from 10 to 7.5 feet; and •reduction of minimum ROW width from 60 to 50 feet. •waiver from the Building Spacing Formula (LDC Section 7.04.03), for reduced setbacks between buildings. The intent of a PUD is to provide flexibility in regulations in exchange for design creativity and innovation, which in this case is provided through a strong open space and habitat preservation program. B. Whether the proposed amendment is consistent with all elements of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan; As shown in Figure 15, the Future Land Use for the site is RM (Residential Medium – 9 du/acre), which allows for residential development via single or multi-family zoning designations or through the planned unit development process. The site was originally approved in 1956 for 186 single-family lots, sized 60 by 100 feet, known as the Garden Estates subdivision and not developed (see Figure 16), arranged around the internal street system now shown on County maps (a street vacation/replat will be required). In 2006 the site was rezoned to PUD, approved as the Lakeside Village PUD, allowing for 97 single-family residential lots (Figure 17). That PUD approval has since expired. Figure 15: Future Land Use Map Page 26 of 331 Indrio SHG PUD - PUD-2408-000048 5/6/2025 Page 14 Figure 16: Garden Estates Plat (existing Platted Streets) Figure 17: Expired Lakeside Village PUD Page 27 of 331 Indrio SHG PUD - PUD-2408-000048 5/6/2025 Page 15 With the revised plan, the Applicant is not pursuing the maximize RM FLU density of 9 du/ac – which could allow up to 300 units. Staff agrees that the reduced 232-unit count is an appropriate range, balancing the variety of uses existing and planned nearby and given the LDC standard below that allows the County to compel lower density in situations like this where there is the potential for significant environmental impacts. LDC Sec. 11.02.08.B.7. Reduction In Maximum Residential Density. The Board of County Commissioners shall require a reduction from the maximum density permitted in the zoning district in which a proposed development is to be located when such allowable maximum residential density: a. Would impose an excessive burden, as determined by recognized engineering or other professional standards, on public facilities that would serve the proposed development; or b. Would contravene any goal, objective, or policy of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, or of Chapter VIII, "Natural Environment Analysis", of the St. Lucie County Barrier Island Study Analysis of Growth Management Policy Plan, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (August, 1982). Goals, Objectives, and Policies of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan applicable to this application include the following: Future Land Use Element Objective 1.1.5 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. Policy 1.1.5.4 All new subdivision and site plan development projects that are proposed to take place within the unincorporated area of the County for which water/sanitary sewer service can be provided to the project as identified in the Infrastructure Element, the project shall be required to provide a dry- line water/sanitary sewer distribution/collection system, and provide for connection to such available water/sanitary sewer service as such service becomes available. The standard for construction of these systems shall be included as a part of the County's Land Development Code or Utility Extension Policy Regulations. Policy 1.1.5.8 - St. Lucie County shall continue to implement the greenway and trail conceptual plans, in coordination with the federal, state and the adjacent jurisdictions, to provide connectivity between land uses, provide for recreational uses, provide for alternative modes of transportation, and encourage energy efficiency and greenhouse gas reduction. Policy 1.1.8.1 All new subdivisions planned unit developments and site development plans shall be designed to include an efficient system of internal traffic circulation that does not require internal trips or trips of short duration to be forced onto the major roadway network. Connections to new and existing subdivision shall be encouraged. The site plan demonstrates connectivity through the west entrance on Deleon Ave. Objective 1.1.12 Pursuant to the Land Development Code, all development orders and permits for future development and redevelopment activities shall be issued only if public facilities necessary to meet level of service standards (which are adopted as part of the Capital Improvements Element of this plan) are available concurrent with the impacts of the development. Policy 1.1.12.2 Time the development of residential, commercial, and industrial land concurrently with provision of supporting community facilities, such as streets, utilities, police and fire protection service, emergency medical service, and public schools. Water, sewer, and road infrastructure are available. Page 28 of 331 Indrio SHG PUD - PUD-2408-000048 5/6/2025 Page 16 Housing Element Goal 3.2 To provide an adequate mix of safe and sanitary housing that meets the needs of existing and future St. Lucie County residents. The 1,260 square foot townhomes support affordable housing options. C. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is inconsistent with existing and proposed land uses; The proposed townhomes are an appropriate transitional use between commercial uses to the west and lower density residential uses to the north and east. Similar multi-family development has been approved to the west (Sugar Sands) and the south (Indrio Woods). The Preliminary Plan’s integration of 25ft. wide landscape buffers along the west, south, and east property lines assist in improving transition and compatibility. D. Whether there have been changed conditions that require an amendment; Changed conditions include the ongoing growth of the County, development activities in the immediate vicinity (Cabo Rio, Sugar Sands, Indrio Woods, etc.), planned development at the I-95 and Indrio Road Interchange, and increased activity at the Treasure Coast International Airport. The most recent Census of 2020 documented the growth of the past decade as shown in Table 4. Table 4: St. Lucie County & Municipal Census Data – 2010 to 2020 Changes Census County & City April 1, 2020 April 1, 2010 Total Change Percent Change St. Lucie 329,226 277,789 51,437 18.5 Fort Pierce 47,297 41,590 5,707 13.7 Port St. Lucie 204,851 164,603 40,248 24.5 St. Lucie Village 613 590 23 3.9 UNINCORPORATED 76,465 71,006 5,459 7.7 The University of Florida Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR) Projections of Florida Population by County for 2025–2050, projects a total population between 406,000 to 655,400 by 2050. BEBR believes the medium series is the most likely to provide accurate forecasts in most circumstances, which would place the St. Lucie County population at 530,700 by 2050. This is a total change of 201,474 or a percent change of 61.2% from the 2020 Census count. The population within the unincorporated County continues to increase, with increased demand to develop property along the western edge of growth centers and the interstate network. Pursuant to Section 163.3177, Florida Statutes, the comprehensive plan is intended to provide the principles, guidelines, standards, and strategies for the orderly and balanced future economic, social, physical, environmental, and fiscal development of the area that reflects community commitments to implement the plan and its elements; and requires that the comprehensive plan be based upon permanent and seasonal population estimates and projections, on at least the minimum amount of land required to accommodate the medium projections as published by the Office of Economic and Demographic Research (EDR) for at least a 10-year planning period. The EDR population projections for St. Lucie County are below. Page 29 of 331 Indrio SHG PUD - PUD-2408-000048 5/6/2025 Page 17 Table 5: EDR Population Projections for St. Lucie County, 10 year period Additional housing is needed to serve existing and new residents. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether or to the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, solid waste, mass transit and emergency medical facilities; The proposed development would create additional demands on roads, particularly Indrio Rd. Prior to the issuance of any final development order, the developer must demonstrate that all public facilities are available to serve the parcel and obtain a certificate of capacity. Transportation: As indicated by the TIR, this project would not adversely impact area roads. There are no plans to widen Indrio Rd., which is shown on the Comprehensive Plan’s Future Number of Lanes Map as a two-lane road. The need for turn lanes would be evaluated at the time of Final Site Plan review. The Figure 18: Nearby Development & Proposal Snapshot Page 30 of 331 Indrio SHG PUD - PUD-2408-000048 5/6/2025 Page 18 Applicant would extend the sidewalk on the north side of Indrio Rd. from its current terminus at Deleon Ave. to Taylor Dairy Rd – this sidewalk would connect the site to the Lakewood Park Elementary School, ½ mile to the west of the site. Utility Facilities: The site is served by electric power, central water and sewer, and natural gas. St. Lucie County has and is continuing to invest in utility capacity in the vicinity. Transit: Fixed bus line # 7 serves Indrio Road, provided by the Area Regional Transit (ART) system. Specifically, the ART system has bus stops along N. Kings Hwy & Indrio Crossing – North. As employment expands along the Kings Highway corridor and residential development continues, additional demand for transit routes and stops in the area is expected to increase. Stormwater Management South Florida Water Management District and County stormwater permits are required to demonstrate compliance with water quality requirements. The plan proposes a centrally located retention pond for stormwater retention. Solid Waste Solid waste disposal service will be provided by St. Lucie County, via a contracted service. Solid waste collection is planned on a per unit basis. Parks and Recreation Nearby parks include Lakewood Park Neighborhood Park, 1 ½ miles to the north and Lakewood Park Regional Park, two miles to the northwest. The Comprehensive Plan Recreation Element strives to support an adequate and equitable distribution of parks, recreation, and open spaces throughout the county to provide a range of activities to its citizens and visitors. The Comprehensive Plan Level of Service (LOS) standards for parks and recreation are as follows: • Community parks: 5 acres/1,000 residents in the unincorporated area; • Regional parks: 2.5 acres/1,000 population county-wide; and • Resource-based Parks: 21.2 acres/1,000 population county-wide. At build-out the project could add approximately 603 new residents, and the Comprehensive Plan standards above seek to provide an additional three acres of community park assets to support the additional demand for recreational amenities. Due to the relatively small size of the development, the applicant is proposing limited active recreational amenities, however the proposed conservation area provides opportunities for passive recreation in the form of walking trails. Since a public park component is not warranted or provided outwardly from the site, each home would be assessed impact fees at the time of permitting. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment; The Environmental Resources Department has reviewed the application and submitted the following guidance, in advance of a Final Report: Findings The following items are required to be addressed, prior to approval: Page 31 of 331 Indrio SHG PUD - PUD-2408-000048 5/6/2025 Page 19 1) Provide the limits and elevations of the wetland, including bearing and distance information used in determining the extent of the area, on the boundary survey in accordance with LDC 11.02.10.A.2. A note stating the wetland limits are ‘as delineated by EW Consultants, Inc.’ or ‘others’ within the survey is acceptable since the jurisdictional determination will not be finalized until the issuance of an Environmental Resource Permit (ERP). 2) Provide a Wetland Waiver application within EnerGov for the proposed wetland and indirect wetland buffer impacts. 3) The southern portion of the wetland and associated buffer partially lie within interior road right-of-way as currently depicted. If that portion of right-of-way area is required to remain, instead of meandering around the wetland, please account for those impacts within the EIR, Wetland Waiver application, and supporting documentation since it would not be able to be placed under a conservation easement. 4) Specify/depict a retaining wall and a permanent safety barricade, such as a guardrail, where the interior road abuts the southern part of the preserved wetland. 5) Remove the note ‘VUA trees may be relocated from ROA to front/rear yards if in conflict with utilities’ from the VUA Tree Planting Exhibit (LP-3). As an alternative, VUA trees may be relocated to common open space areas throughout the development if in conflict with utilities. Future enforcement of VUA plantings within individual lots becomes problematic as the lots fall under individual ownership. ERD Conditions of Approval are found at the end of this Staff Report. G. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would adversely affect the property values in the area; With Staff recommendations in place, the proposed zoning change is not expected to have an adverse impact on property values in the area. The Project’s strong open space program would help to support property value over time. H. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in an orderly and logical development pattern, specifically identifying any negative effects on such pattern; The proposed townhomes provide an appropriate transitional zoning between commercial zoning and development to the west and lower density residential zoning and development to the east and north. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and interest of this Code; and Staff believes that with the Staff recommendations the proposed amendment does not harm the public interest and is in keeping with the LDC intent. J. Any other matters that may be deemed appropriate by the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Board of County Commissioners, in review and consideration of the proposed amendment. The Planing & Zoning Commission may introduce any matter that they believe is germaine to the request. Rezoning Criteria Summary Based upon staff analysis contained in this memorandum, the proposed rezoning to PUD (Planned Unit Development) is consistent with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan and the Land Development Code, with the inclusion of Staff recommendations. The amendment provides for a compact and transitional design Page 32 of 331 Indrio SHG PUD - PUD-2408-000048 5/6/2025 Page 20 which provides connection to central wastewater service and provides a strong open space preservation program. ********************************************** STANDARDS OF REVIEW – SITE PLAN AS SET FORTH IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 11.02.07 Section 11.02.07 establishes the Standards for Review for Site Plans. The site plan shall demonstrate the following: A. Consistency with Local Ordinances and Comprehensive Plan With Staff’s recommendations, the proposed PUD site plan is generally consistent with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive plan, furthering the following goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plans detailed in the respone to LDC rezoning criteria A and B. LDC Section 7.01.01. describes the purpose of the PUD District: to achieve residential land development of superior quality through the encouragement of flexibility and creativity in design options that: A. Permit creative approaches to the development of residential land reflecting changes in the technology of land development; B. Allow for the efficient use of land, which can result in smaller networks of utilities and streets and thereby lower development costs; C. Allow design options that encourage an environment of stable character, compatible with surrounding land uses; and D. Permit the enhancement of neighborhoods through the preservation of natural features, the provision of underground utilities, and the provision of recreation areas and open space. This PUD seeks design flexibility to allow for smaller lots not currently allowed by the RM-9 zoning district, the most dense zoning district in the RM FLU. The proposed zoning is consistent with the FLU, and landscape buffers would heighten compatibility with adjacent development. B. Effect on Adjacent Properties Buffers exceeding minimum standards would reduce visual impacts on adjacent properties and the reduction of density from the RM FLU maximum would lessen traffic impacts. C. Adequacy of Public Facilities The proposed development and its use are not expected to create significant adverse demands on any public facilities in this area. All public facilities are expected to operate within the adopted Level of Service Standards as set forth by the St. Lucie County Land Development Code and Comprehensive Plan. See previous section (Pages 16 & 17) for a discussion of public facilities. D. Adequacy of Fire Protection Fire District Station #7 is located at 4900 Ft. Pierce Blvd,, approximately ¾ mile driving distance to the west. E. Adequacy of School Facilities The St. Lucie School Board Growth Management Division has reviewed the proposed development for school facility concurrency, identifying no capacity concerns. Lakewood Park Elementary School is in walking distance from the site, approximately ½ mile to the west along Indrio Rd., on an existing sidewalk. Page 33 of 331 Indrio SHG PUD - PUD-2408-000048 5/6/2025 Page 21 F. Environmental Impact The County’s Environmental Resources Department has no objections to the rezoning with recommended conditions. See response to Rezoning Criterion F., on Page 17. NOTICE Public notice was properly provided including a newspaper ad, posted signs on the site, and mailer distributed to residents within 500 feet. Neighborhood Meeting A neighborhood meeting is scheduled for May 12, 2025, at the nearby Lakewood Park Property Owners Association building. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning & Zoning Commission review the proposal, provide input aligning with the Land Development Code and Comprehensive Plan, and forward a recommendation of approval to the Board of County Commissioners with the following conditions: Planning and Development Services Department 1. The Final Site Plan shall: a. Include design standards preventing similar models/floor plans next to & across from each other, and varying front & rear façade depths. b. Allow for reduction of front setbacks to 17.5’ to allow for front porches in the non-garage front façade. c. Include final traffic analysis, detailing the scope of off-site improvements (i.e. DeLeon extension to the project entrance, turn lanes serving site entrance(s), school bus stop, etc.). d. Consider a nominal shift of Buildings 32-34 to the west to address line of sight from the historic Binney Estate across Indrio Rd. e. Provide for sidewalks on both sides of the proposed streets, unless the internal sidewalk plan is updated to reflect the connections provided in Figure 9: Recommended Pedestrian Plan. f. Supplement R.O.W. street trees in each townhome front yard with four shade trees, understory trees, or palm clusters. g. Provide foundation plantings for townhome building fronts and sides. h. Provide enhanced tree plantings at rear of townhomes along Indrio Rd. with the intent of further mitigating noise/proximity to Indrio Road, enhance buffering from Historic Binney Estate, and support shade along Indrio Rd., a canopy road in past years. i. Provide a sidewalk along the Miramar Ave frontage, unless the Board of County Commissioners approves a fee-in-lieu. 2. Prior to Final Site Plan approval, the applicant shall secure the abandonment of the platted street rights- of-way within project boundaries, excluding the ROW for Royal Palm Avenue, West Pineapple Avenue, Grapefruit (Miramar) Street, and Indrio Road, along the entire perimeter. Alternatively, a condition of approval shall be a replat of the Fort Pierce, Florida Garden Estates Plat adhering to the same. Environmental Resources Department 3. Prior to Final Site Plan approval, a finalized landscape plan consistent with Land Development Code 7.09.00 shall be provided. 4. Prior to Final Site Plan approval, a finalized tree mitigation plan consistent with Land Development Code 6.00.05.D shall be provided. 5. Prior to commencement of development, including, but not limited to clearing, filling, excavation, grading, or planting of vegetation, as defined in LDC 2.00.00, the developer shall provide executed Conservation Easements over all preserved areas, along with the approved Preserve Area Monitoring and Management Plan (PAMMP), with an attached affidavit and cashier's check (payable to the Clerk Page 34 of 331 Indrio SHG PUD - PUD-2408-000048 5/6/2025 Page 22 of the Court for recording fees) to the County Attorney. The applicant shall also provide a georeferenced GIS shapefile or CAD file of the conservation easements’ boundaries to St. Lucie County. 6. Prior to commencement of development, including, but not limited to clearing, filling, excavation, grading, or planting of vegetation, as defined in LDC 2.00.00, an Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) from South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) shall be provided to verify the limits of the wetlands. Should the limits of the wetland substantially deviate from the environmental consultant’s delineation, a new Wetland Waiver application shall be submitted in accordance with Comprehensive Plan Policy 6.1.14.4. 7. Prior to commencement of development, including, but not limited to clearing, filling, excavation, grading, or planting of vegetation, as defined in LDC 2.00.00, updated listed species surveys shall be provided per state and/or federal survey protocol. Should any listed species be found as a result of these surveys, appropriate permits from state and federal agencies shall be required. 8. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, all Category I listed invasive plants shall be eradicated from the site. Public Works Department 9. A Site Development Permit is required prior to performing site improvement activities. 10. For plat approval prior to completion of required improvements, a Subdivision Improvement Agreement and appropriate bonding is required. Page 35 of 331 RESOLUTION NO. 2025-XX FILE NO.: PD-2408-000048 A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FL AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS FOR +/-33.18 ACRES OWNED BY INDRIO SHG, LCC FROM THE PUD (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT) ZONING DISTRICT TO THE PUD (PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT) ZONING DISTRICT AND APPROVING A PRELIMINARY PUD SITE PLAN FOR THE PROJECT KNOWN AS INDRIO GARDENS PUD, LOCATED IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA. WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, based on testimony and evidence, including, but not limited to the staff report, has made the following determinations: 1) Cotleur & Hearing, Inc., on behalf of Indrio SHG, LLC initially presented a petition for an Amendment to the Official Zoning Atlas from the PUD (Planned Unit Development, lapsed) Zoning District to the PUD (Planned Unit Development) Zoning District and an associated Preliminary PUD Site Plan to develop a 278-unit residential townhome community, including stormwater ponds, landscape buffers, amenity area, and a conservation area/preserve for property located on the north side of Indrio Road, between Deleon Avenue and Taylor Dairy Road, in unincorporated St. Lucie County, Florida, as depicted on the attached location map as Exhibit A and described in Part A below. The proposed Preliminary PUD Site Plan was subsequently revised to feature 232 townhomes. 2) On May 15, 2025, the St. Lucie County Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on this petition, after installing a sign on the property and notifying by mail all owners of property within 500 feet of the subject at which all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard and recommended that the Board of County Commissioners approve/deny the request for the property described in Part A. 3) On _____________, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida, Commission held a public hearing on this petition, after installing a sign on the property and notifying by mail all owners of property within 500 feet of the subject at which all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard. 4) The St. Lucie County Development Review Committee has reviewed the rezoning petition and preliminary planned development site plan and found them to meet the technical requirements and to be consistent with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, subject to the conditions set forth in Part B of this Resolution. 5) The proposed change in zoning satisfies the requirements of Section 11.06.03 of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code and is consistent with the goals, objectives, and Page 36 of 331 Resolution No. 2025-XX File No.: PD-2408-000048 Page 2 policies of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. 6) The proposed project, with conditions of approval, 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. 7) All reasonable steps, with the enclosed conditions of approval, have been taken to minimize any adverse effect of the proposed project on the immediate vicinity through building design, site design, landscaping, and screening. 8) The proposed project, with the enclosed conditions of approval, 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. 9) The proposed project will be served by St. Lucie County Utilities for water and wastewater services. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida: ZONING MAP AMENDMENT A. The property on which the Zoning Map Amendment, or change in zoning, from the PUD (Planned Unit Development, lapsed) Zoning District to PUD (Planned Unit Development) is being granted is described as follows: Legal Description: Property lying in the southeast one quarter of the northwest one quarter of Section 13, Township 34 South, Range 39 East, St. Lucie County, Florida and more particularly described as follows: Block 1, Lots 1-64 inclusive together with: Block 2, Lots 1-22 inclusive together with: Block 3, Lots 1-22 inclusive together with: Block 4, Lots 1-22 inclusive together with: Block 5, Lots 1-56 inclusive All according to the PLAT of Fort Pierce, Florida Garden Estates, recorded in PLAT book 10, Page 55, of the public records of St. Lucie County, Florida. Less the Right-Of-Way for roads and canals. Page 37 of 331 Resolution No. 2025-XX File No.: PD-2408-000048 Page 3 Parcel ID Numbers:1313-601-0065-000-2, 1313-601-0087-000-2, 1313-601-0109-000-3, 1313-601-0131-000-6,1313-601-0001-000-6, & 1313-601-0087-000-2. PRELIMINARY PUD SITE PLAN B. Pursuant to 11.02.05(B) of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, the PUD (Planned Unit Development) Preliminary Site Plan for the project known as the Indrio Gardens PUD is hereby approved/denied, for the subject property described in Part A above, as shown on the preliminary site plan drawings for the project, Exhibit B, Site Plan prepared by Cotleur & Hearing and dated April 24, 2025, providing for up to 232 townhome lots, and subject to the following conditions: Planning & Development Services 1. The Final Site Plan shall: a. Include design standards preventing similar models/floor plans next to & across from each other, and varying front & rear façade depths. b. Allow for reduction of front setbacks to 17.5’ to allow for front porches in the non-garage front façade. c. Include final traffic analysis, detailing the scope of off-site improvements (i.e. DeLeon extension to the project entrance, turn lanes serving site entrance(s), school bus stop, etc.). d. Consider a nominal shift of Buildings 32-34 to the west to address line of sight from the historic Binney Estate across Indrio Rd. e. Provide for sidewalks on both sides of the proposed streets, unless the internal sidewalk plan is updated to reflect the connections provided in Figure 9: Recommended Pedestrian Plan. f. Supplement R.O.W. street trees in each townhome front yard with four shade trees, understory trees, or palm clusters. g. Provide foundation plantings for townhome building fronts and sides. h. Provide enhanced tree plantings at rear of townhomes along Indrio Rd. with the intent of further mitigating noise/proximity to Indrio Road, enhance buffering from Historic Binney Estate, and support shade along Indrio Rd., a canopy road in past years. i. Provide a sidewalk along the Miramar Ave frontage, unless the Board of County Commissioners approves a fee-in-lieu. 2. Prior to Final Site Plan approval, the applicant shall secure the abandonment of the platted street rights-of-way within project boundaries, excluding the ROW for Royal Palm Avenue, West Pineapple Avenue, Grapefruit (Miramar) Street, and Indrio Road, along the entire perimeter. Alternatively, a condition of approval shall be a replat of the Fort Pierce, Florida Garden Estates Plat adhering to the same. Environmental Resources Department 3. Prior to Final Site Plan approval, a finalized landscape plan consistent with Land Development Code 7.09.00 shall be provided. 4. Prior to Final Site Plan approval, a finalized tree mitigation plan consistent with Land Development Code 6.00.05.D shall be provided. 5. Prior to commencement of development, including, but not limited to clearing, filling, excavation, grading, or planting of vegetation, as defined in LDC 2.00.00, the developer shall provide executed Conservation Easements over all preserved areas, along with the approved Preserve Area Monitoring and Management Plan (PAMMP), with an attached Page 38 of 331 Resolution No. 2025-XX File No.: PD-2408-000048 Page 4 affidavit and cashier's check (payable to the Clerk of the Court for recording fees) to the County Attorney. The applicant shall also provide a georeferenced GIS shapefile or CAD file of the conservation easements’ boundaries to St. Lucie County. 6. Prior to commencement of development, including, but not limited to clearing, filling, excavation, grading, or planting of vegetation, as defined in LDC 2.00.00, an Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) from South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) shall be provided to verify the limits of the wetlands. Should the limits of the wetland substantially deviate from the environmental consultant’s delineation, a new Wetland Waiver application shall be submitted in accordance with Comprehensive Plan Policy 6.1.14.4. 7. Prior to commencement of development, including, but not limited to clearing, filling, excavation, grading, or planting of vegetation, as defined in LDC 2.00.00, updated listed species surveys shall be provided per state and/or federal survey protocol. Should any listed species be found as a result of these surveys, appropriate permits from state and federal agencies shall be required. 8. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, all Category I listed invasive plants shall be eradicated from the site. Public Works Department 9. A Site Development Permit is required prior to performing site improvement activities. 10. For plat approval prior to completion of required improvements, a Subdivision Improvement Agreement and appropriate bonding is required. C. The developer is advised as part of this approval that the property owner( s), developer, etc., including any successors in interest, shall obtain all applicable development permits and construction authorizations from the appropriate State and Federal and local regulatory agencies including, but not limited to, the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Florida Department of Transportation, South Florida Water Management District, St. Lucie County Fire District and the St. Lucie County Environmental Resources, Public Works, and Building Departments prior to the commencement of any development activities on the property described in Part A. Issuance of this authorization or permit by the County does not in any way create any rights on the part of the developer to obtain a permit from a State or Federal agency and does not create any liability on the part of the County for issuance of this permit if the developer fails to obtain requisite approvals or fulfill the obligations imposed by a State or Federal agency or undertake actions that may result in a violation of State or Federal law. D. The conditions set forth in Part B are an integral and non-severable part of the Preliminary PUD site plan approval granted by this Resolution. If any condition set forth in Part B is determined to be invalid or unenforceable for any reason and the developer declines to comply voluntarily with that condition, the site plan approval granted by this Resolution shall become null and void. E. A Concurrency Deferral Affidavit, a copy which is attached to this Resolution as Exhibit C was signed by the applicant on August 2, 2024. F. A copy of this Resolution shall be mailed to the owner the of record as identified on the application. Page 39 of 331 Resolution No. 2025-XX File No.: PD-2408-000048 Page 5 G. This Resolution shall be recorded in the Public Records. H. ADOPTION After the motion and second, the vote on this Resolution was as follows: Jamie Fowler, Chair XXX Larry Leet, Vice-Chair XXX James Clasby, Commissioner XXX Erin Lowry, Commissioner XXX Cathy Townsend, Commissioner XXX PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED this ___________, 2025. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA BY Chair ATTEST APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS Deputy Clerk County Attorney Page 40 of 331 Resolution No. 2025-108 File No.: PD-2308-000030 EXHIBIT A (LOCATION MAP) Page 41 of 331 Resolution No. 24-138 File No.: PD-2308-000030 Page 7 EXHIBIT B (PRELIMINARY PUD SITE PLAN) Page 42 of 331 Resolution No. 24-138 File No.: PD-2308-000030 Page 8 EXHIBIT C CERTIFICATE OF CAPACITY Page 43 of 331 INDRIO GARDENS PUBLIC NOTICE Page 44 of 331 Page 45 of 331 Page 46 of 331 Page 47 of 331 Page 48 of 331 Page 49 of 331 INDRIO RD. TU R N P I K E FE E D E R N K I N G S H W Y PUD Plan LOCATION MAP N by agreement in writing with the architect. Immediately report any discrepancies to the architect. SHEET COTLEUR & HEARING, INC. These drawings are the property of the architect and are not to be used for extensions or on other projects except OF DESIGNED DRAWN APPROVED JOB NUMBER REVISIONS DATE In d r i o G a r d e n s S H G NV R H o m e s St L u c i e C o u n t y , F l o r i d a Landscape Architects Land Planners Environmental Consultants www.cotleurhearing.com 1934 Commerce Lane Suite 1 Jupiter, Florida 33458 561.747.6336 · Fax 747.1377 Lic# LC-26000535 ACE ACE LAH 24-0425 07-29-24 3SP-1 02-05-25 04-24-25 North 40' Scale: 1" = 80' 80'240'160'320'0' THIS SITE *NOTE:SEE SP-2 FOR REC TRACT AREAS LEGEND HC LB SB SW TYP ROW REC VG DE STP HANDICAP LANDSCAPE BUFFER SETBACK SIDEWALK TYPICAL RIGHT OF WAY RECREATION TRACT VALLEY GUTTER DRAINAGE EASEMENT SUBJECT TO PAMMP HC SIGN STOP SIGN DO NOT ENTER PEDESTRIAN CROSSING PARKING LIGHT PEDESTRIAN LIGHT FPL COACH LIGHT PRESERVE SIGN BARRICADE S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS W W W W W W W W W W W W WWWWWWWWWW W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W SSSS UPLAND OPEN SPACE AREAS SA N I B E L A V E . LA S A L L E S T R E E T KI L L A R N E Y A V E . EA S T W O O D D R I V E MIRAMAR AVE DE L E O N A V E . INDRIO ROAD WE S T P I N E A P P L E A V E . LAWN CAT III PRESERVED WETLAND 3.54 AC PRESERVE AREA 10.01 AC2.13 AC R35' 5' SW 11' 10' 98' 64.1' SB190.5' 5' SW 10' 11' 20' 9.3' 10' ZONING: RM5 FUTURE LAND USE: RU ZONING: CG FUTURE LAND USE: COM ZONING: RM9 FUTURE LAND USE: RM ZONING: RS4 FUTURE LAND USE: RM ZONING: RM5 FUTURE LAND USE: RU SUBJECT TO PAMMP (STP) (STP) .05 AC 1167.2' 12 3 8 . 5 ' 1167.3' 12 3 9 . 3 ' ZONING: RS4 FUTURE LAND USE: RM 7 UNITS 7UNITS 7UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7UNITS 7UNITS 6 UNITS 6 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS7 UNITS 7UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS7 UNITS 7 UNITS6 UNITS 6 UNITS 6 UNITS 7 UNITS #1 #2 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9#12 #13 #14 #15 #16 #17 #18 #19 #20 #21 #22#23#24#25 #26 #27 #28 #29 #30 #31 #32 #33 #34 UPLAND OPEN SPACE AREAS 3.37 AC SUBJECT TO PAMMP (STP) 7 UNITS #11 7 UNITS #10 R37' 5' SW 11' 10' R37' 20' R3' R35'R3' R23' 10' 10' 22' 25' WETLAND BUFFER 50' ROW 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 50'70' 50' ROW 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 98' 24' 50' ROW24' 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 24'24' 16'5' SW 25'20' 22' 11'24' 10' 5' SW 50' ROW 10' 24' 11'5' SW 98' 22' 63.1' SB 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 15' 15' 22' 39.5' 30' 30' 20' LME 10' LITTORAL SHELF 25' WETLAND BUFFER 10' UTZ BUFFER 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 15' 479.7' 52' 50' ROW 10' 24' 11' 5' SW 24'50' ROW 10' 10' 22' 10' 10' 20'12' 5' 10' 20' 12'5' 24' 10' 94' 22' 12' MULTI-USE TRAIL 12' MULTI-USE TRAIL 5' SW 5' SW 5' SW 10' 10' 22' 10' 10' ESMT CANAL ROW UPLAND OPEN SPACE AREAS BUS STOP MAIL KIOSK & SHADE SAIL PASSIVE REC TRAILS LIFT STATION DRAIN TYP. SEWER TYP. WATER TYP. DRAIN TYP. SEWER TYP. WATER TYP. DRAIN TYP. SEWER TYP. WATER TYP. PASSIVE REC TRAILS T-TURN AROUND CONNECTION TO SLCU FORCE MAIN COVERED VIEWING AREA LAKE 3.12 AC (WET DETENTION) 6' PVC FENCE *ARTICULATION IN DEPTH OF FENCE TO BE PROVIDED THROUGH LANDSCAPE PLANTINGS 45.2' SB46' 101' 45.9' SB 45.9' 45.8' SB 25' 29.9' 30' 38.9' 29.7' 38.4' PRESERVE SIGN TYP. PRESERVE SIGN TYP. 6UNITS #3 13.4' 25' POCKET PARK POCKET PARK 39.3' R35' R75' R100' R35' VG TYP. D CURB VG TYP. 20' 10' BUS STOP CONNECTION TO SHOPPING PLAZA 5' SW R35'40' 12'12' 10 9 8 7 7 2 149.2' 6' PVC FENCE *ARTICULATION IN DEPTH OF FENCE TO BE PROVIDED THROUGH LANDSCAPE PLANTINGS 5' STABILIZED PATH TYP. .27 AC IMPACT Page 50 of 331 SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS 10 9 8 7 7 2 7 UNIT TOWNHOME TYPICAL FRONT SETBACK 22' 57' 19' REAR YARD 7.5' SIDE SETBACK 127' 98' LOT LINE ROW LINE 112' 23.5'16'16'16'16'16'23.5' 9' OPTIONAL LANAI/ PATIO ROOF OVERHANG TYP. CL FINISHED GRADE 50' ROW 23'27' 11' TREE LAWN 2' VALLEY GUTTER 10' CL 2' VALLEY GUTTER 10'10' TREE LAWN 5' SIDEWALK STABILIZED SUBGRADE LIMEROCK BASE OR COMPACTED CRUSHED CONCRETE ASPHALTIC CONCRETE 2%2% 6 UNIT TOWNHOME TYPICAL FRONT SETBACK 22' 57' 7.5' SIDE SETBACK 98' LOT LINE ROW LINE 96.1' 16'16'16'16' 111' 19' REAR YARD 9' OPTIONAL LANAI/ PATIO ROOF OVERHANG TYP. 23.5'23.5' CL FINISHED GRADE 50' ROW 23'27' 11' TREE LAWN 2' VALLEY GUTTER 10' CL 2' VALLEY GUTTER 10'20' PARKING SPACE 7' SIDEWALK STABILIZED SUBGRADE LIMEROCK BASE OR COMPACTED CRUSHED CONCRETE ASPHALTIC CONCRETE 25% MAX. 10% MAX. IN LOT ACCESS AREAS & DRIVEWAYS 2% 60' D CURB 10' 2' OH by agreement in writing with the architect. Immediately report any discrepancies to the architect. COTLEUR & HEARING, INC. These drawings are the property of the architect and are not to be used for extensions or on other projects except DESIGNED DRAWN APPROVED JOB NUMBER REVISIONS DATE Landscape Architects Land Planners Environmental Consultants www.cotleurhearing.com 1934 Commerce Lane Suite 1 Jupiter, Florida 33458 561.747.6336 · Fax 747.1377 Lic# LC-C000239 ACE ACE LAH 21-0703 03-08-24 VI S T A O A K S St . L u c i e , F l o r i d a ME R I T A G E P U D P L A N OF 2SP-2SHEET 07-29-24 05-01-25 02-05-25 PUD Typical Details OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT 50' ROW 50' ROW WITH PARKING REC TRACT 2 5.33 AC CONSERVATION TRACT 10.01 AC REC TRACT 3 1.65 AC REC TRACT 1 1.86 AC WALKWAY TYP. WALKWAY TYP. LOOK-OUT TYP. LOOK-OUT TYP. BUILDING SPACING EXHIBIT BUILDING TO BUILDING BUILDING TO PROPERTY STABILIZED PATH TYP. Page 51 of 331 NTS ADA SIGN DETAIL 36" 2 1/2" 1" 12" R1'-8" R5'' NOTE: SYMBOL TO BE 4" WIDE WHITE TRAFFIC PAINT ON PAVEMENT OR COLORED PAVERS . TYPICAL @ ALL HANDICAP STALLS ADA SYMBOL DETAIL NTS 1" - 1.5" SETTING BED 4" AGGREGATE BASE EXISTING STABILIZED SUBGRADE TRANSFORMER DETAIL PEDESTRIAN PAVER DETAIL NTS D CURB DETAIL NTS ELEVATION VIEW PLAN VIEW TRANSFORMER HEDGE MATERIAL (COCOPLUM, WAX MYRTLE OR SANDANKWA VIBURNUM) OPEN FOR ACCESS TRANSFORMER OPEN FOR ACCESS HEDGE MATERIAL (COCOPLUM, WAX MYRTLE OR SANDANKWA VIBURNUM) 8" 6" 6" BASE 18" 2" RAD. PAVEMENT VEHICULAR PAVER DETAIL NTS 2.5" THICK PAVERS 3" THICK PAVERS IN LENGTHWISE RUNNING BOND PATTERN PAVEMENT PAVEMENT #4 REBAR ALONG CENTER 2" CL MIN. CLASS I CONCRETE STRIP ON EACH SIDE (12" X 12" DEEP) SIDEWALK DETAIL NTS 1" - 1.5" SETTING BED 10" AGGREGATE BASE EXISTING STABILIZED SUBGRADE 3,000 PSI CONCRETE SUBGRADE COMPACTED TO 98% MAX. DRY DENSITY PER AASHTO T-99 METHOD 12" STABILIZED SUBGRADE (LBR 40), COMPACTED TO A MINIMUM OF 98% MAX. DRY DENSITY PER AASHTO T-180. 1" TYPE SP 9.5 ASPHALTIC CONCRETE OVER PRIMED BASE & 1" TYPE SP 9.5 ASPHALTIC CONCRETE 8" 12" 6"6" NOTE: PAVEMENT SHALL HAVE MARSHALL STABILITY OF 1,000 LBS. 8" LIMEROCK BASE OR 8" CRUSHED CONCRETE COMPACTED TO A MIN. 98% MAX. DRY DENSITY PER AASHTO T-180 METHOD, MIN % CARBONATE 60%, VEHICULAR PAVEMENT DETAIL NTS 4" (6" AT DRIVEWAYS) FINAL SITE DETAILS F CURB DETAIL NTS 1/4" MAX. 6" 12"6" R2" R3" 8"16"24"3000 PSI CONCRETE ASPHALT 6" M I N . NOTE: WHEN USED ON HIGH SIDE OF ROADWAYS, THE CROSS SLOPE OF THE GUTTER SHALL MATCH THE SLOPE OF ADJACENT PAVEMENT AND THICKNESS OF THE LIP SHALL BE 6 INCHES. 7 12" PVC FENCE DETAIL NTS WHITE PVC FENCE, 6' TALL TYPICAL GUEST AND ADA PARKING DETAIL NTS NTS 12'-0" 1:12 MA X . D O W N 1:12 MA X . D O W N 6-8' CLEARANCE MA X I M U M 2 % GRA D E U P 5'-0" 12'-0" NOTE: IN THIS APPLICATION RAMPS CAN BE SEPARATED AND SIDEWALK CAN BE FLUSH ACROSS ALL HC SPACES NOTE: HCR#3-MOD MEANS ONLY 1 RAMP BUILT TO REQUIRED SIDE OF SIDEWALK. OR RAMPS SEP. TO ENDS OF HC SPACES MAX I M U M 2 % GRA D E U P FPUA TRADITIONAL POST TOP FIXTURE G.E. TC-100R LUMINARY WITH HIGH PRESSURE SODIUM LAMP ROUND, FIBERGLASS POLE, 12' HEIGHT (BURY 5' IN DEPTH). COACH LAMP (STREETLIGHTS) N.T.S. SURFACE COURSE OVER TACK COAT AND LBR 100 VALLEY CURB DETAIL NTS WEARING SURFACE 7 12"6" 24" 12"12" BASE R34" 14" NOTE: SAWCUTS REQUIRED AT 10' CENTERS HEADER CURB DETAIL NTS PAVEMENT 10" 24"14" 3"3" NO.4 BAR PLACED ON PAVEMENT SIDE 3000 PSI CONCRETE NOTE: SUBGRADE TO EXTEND 6" BEYOND HEADER CURB BENCH DETAIL NTS Drawing: AG109-01 Patent Pending Product Drawing © 2015 LANDSCAPE FORMS, INC. FGP BENCH, BACKED, 70", WOOD, END ARMS Date: 6/8/2015 Ph: 800.521.2546 2 1 4" 70" 14 12" 28 1 8" 18"22 1 2" 30 3 8" 1" www.landscapeforms.com TYPE: COLOR: FINISH: LANDSCAPE FORMS FPG BIKE RACK DARK GREY/SILVER POWDER COATALUMINUM CASTING 2' - 7" 6" 2' - 6" 3-1/2" 1-1/4" BIKE RACK DETAIL NTS Product Drawing © 2015 LANDSCAPE FORMS, INC. FGP BIKE RACK Date: 6/8/2015 Ph: 800.521.2546 www.landscapeforms.com by agreement in writing with the architect. Immediately report any discrepancies to the architect. SHEET COTLEUR & HEARING, INC. These drawings are the property of the architect and are not to be used for extensions or on other projects except OF DESIGNED DRAWN APPROVED JOB NUMBER REVISIONS DATE In d r i o G a r d e n s S H G NV R H o m e s St L u c i e C o u n t y , F l o r i d a Landscape Architects Land Planners Environmental Consultants www.cotleurhearing.com 1934 Commerce Lane Suite 1 Jupiter, Florida 33458 561.747.6336 · Fax 747.1377 Lic# LC-26000535 ACE ACE LAH 24-0425 07-29-24 3SP-3 02-05-25 04-24-25 F.S. 318.14 $250 FINE PARKING BY DISABLED PERMIT ONLY 18" 6" 12" COLORS: TOP SYMBOL & BORDER = WHITE BOTTOM TEXT & BORDER = BLACK TOP BACKGROUND = BLUE BOTTOM BACKGROUND = WHITE COLORS: TEXT & BORDER = BLACK BACKGROUND = WHITE NTSADA RAMP DETAIL 20'-0" STANDARD PARKING SPACE 6" 6" PAINTED (BLUE) STRIPES HANDICAP MARKINGS AS PER CODE 7'-0" SIDEWALK HANDICAP PARKING SIGN PER ADA REQUIREMENTS EDGE OF PAVEMENT CURB RAMP 6" WHITE STRIPE PER FDOT INDEX 6" 6" PAINTED (WHITE) STRIPE SOLID WHITE 6"6"6" SPACED EQUALLY 2'-0" OH Page 52 of 331 SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WWWWW SSSS W W W W W W SSSSSSSSSSSSSS W W W W W W CANAL ROW 98' 50' ROW 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER A 50'70' 50' ROW 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER B 50' ROW 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER B 50' ROW 98' LIFT STATION 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER A DRAIN TYP. SEWER TYP. WATER TYP. DRAIN TYP. SEWER TYP. WATER TYP. DRAIN TYP. SEWER TYP. WATER TYP. 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER B 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER B SA N I B E L A V E . LA S A L L E S T R E E T KI L L A R N E Y A V E . EA S T W O O D D R I V E MIRAMAR AVE DE L E O N A V E . INDRIO ROAD WE S T P I N E A P P L E A V E . LAWN ZONING: RM5 FUTURE LAND USE: RU ZONING: CG FUTURE LAND USE: COM ZONING: RM9 FUTURE LAND USE: RM ZONING: RS4 FUTURE LAND USE: RM ZONING: RM5 FUTURE LAND USE: RU .05 AC 1167.2' 12 3 8 . 5 ' 1167.3' 12 3 9 . 3 ' ZONING: RS4 FUTURE LAND USE: RM CAT III PRESERVEDWETLAND 3.54 AC PRESERVE AREA 10.01 AC2.13 AC UPLAND OPEN SPACE AREAS PASSIVE REC TRAILS SUBJECT TOPAMMP (STP) (STP) .05 AC UPLAND OPENSPACE AREAS 3.37 AC SUBJECT TO PAMMP (STP) PASSIVE REC TRAILS 25' WETLAND BUFFER 25' WETLAND BUFFER CAT III PRESERVEDWETLAND 3.54 AC PRESERVE AREA 10.01 AC2.13 AC UPLAND OPEN SPACE AREAS PASSIVE REC TRAILS SUBJECT TOPAMMP (STP) (STP) .05 AC UPLAND OPENSPACE AREAS 3.37 AC SUBJECT TO PAMMP (STP) PASSIVE REC TRAILS 25' WETLAND BUFFER 25' WETLAND BUFFER CAT III PRESERVEDWETLAND 3.54 AC PRESERVE AREA 10.01 AC2.13 AC UPLAND OPEN SPACE AREAS PASSIVE REC TRAILS SUBJECT TOPAMMP (STP) (STP) .05 AC UPLAND OPENSPACE AREAS 3.37 AC SUBJECT TO PAMMP (STP) PASSIVE REC TRAILS 25' WETLAND BUFFER 25' WETLAND BUFFER 64.1' 50' ROW 63.1' 50' ROW 50' ROW 12' MULTI-USE TRAIL 12' MULTI-USE TRAIL 5' SW 5' SW 5' SW 10' ESMT BUS STOP MAIL KIOSK & SHADE SAIL CONNECTION TO SLCU FORCE MAIN COVERED VIEWING AREA 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER B 20' LME 10' LITTORAL SHELF 10' UTZ BUFFER LIFT STATION CONNECTION TO SLCU FORCE MAIN LAKE 3.12 AC (WET DETENTION) 6' PVC FENCE *ARTICULATION IN DEPTH OF FENCE TO BE PROVIDED THROUGH LANDSCAPE PLANTINGS 38.9' PRESERVE SIGN TYP. POCKET PARK POCKET PARK BUS STOP 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7UNITS 6UNITS 6 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS7 UNITS 7UNITS 7UNITS 7UNITS 7 UNITS7 UNITS 7 UNITS6 UNITS 6UNITS 6UNITS 7 UNITS #1 #2 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9#12 #13 #14 #15 #16 #17 #18 #19 #20 #21 #22#23#24#25 #26 #27 #28 #29 #30 #31 #32 #33 #34 7UNITS #11 7UNITS #10 6 UNITS #3 20' 9.3' 10' 24'24' 16' 39.3' 40' 12'12' 45.8' SB 29.9' CONNECTION TO SHOPPING PLAZA 98'6' PVC FENCE *ARTICULATION IN DEPTH OF FENCE TO BE PROVIDED THROUGH LANDSCAPE PLANTINGS 5' STABILIZED PATH TYP. PUD Landscape Plan LANDSCAPE DATA TOTAL SITE AREA: 33.18 AC PRESERVED WETLAND AREA: 3.54 AC WETLAND BUFFER AREA: .92 AC REGENERATED PINE FLATWOODS AREA: 5.55 AC (16.72% OF SITE) TOTAL PRESERVE AREA: 10.01 AC (30.18% OF SITE) BUFFER PLANTINGS CODE: 1 NATIVE CANOPY TREE PER 30 LF, NATIVE HEDGE 2' H AT TIME OF PLANTING EAST REQUIRED: 1189/30 = 40 TREES, HEDGE EAST PROVIDED: 25' BUFFER; SEE LP-2 SOUTH REQUIRED: 1058/30 = 35 TREES, HEDGE SOUTH PROVIDED: 25' BUFFER; SEE LP-2 WEST REQUIRED: 727/30 = 24 TREES, HEDGE WEST PROVIDED: 25' BUFFER; SEE LP-2 VUA PLANTINGS CODE: 1 SF OF LANDSCAPE AREA PER 18 SF OF VUA 1 NATIVE CANOPY TREE PER 180 SF LANDSCAPE REQUIRED: 110,373/18 = 6,132 SF LANDSCAPE AREA, 6,132/180 = 34 TREES PROVIDED: AT TIME OF SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL; SEE LP-3 LITTORAL/UPLAND PLANTINGS CODE: 10 SF OF LITTORAL AREA & UPLAND AREA PER 1 LF OF LAKE SHORELINE AREA, MIN. 10' WIDTH REQUIRED: 1,576 LF * 10 = 15760 SF PROVIDED: 15,760 SF LITTORAL, UPLAND AREA OPEN SPACE CALCULATIONS CODE: 35% OF TOTAL SITE REQUIRED: 11.61 AC PROVIDED: 18.85 AC REC 1: 1.86 AC REC 2: 5.33 AC REC 3: 1.65 AC CONSERVATION AREA: 10.01 AC *SEE SP-2 FOR REC TRACT AREAS NOTE: FULL LANDSCAPE PLAN WITH FOUNDATION PLANTINGS TO BE PROVIDED AT TIME OF SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL. by agreement in writing with the architect. Immediately report any discrepancies to the architect. SHEET COTLEUR & HEARING, INC. These drawings are the property of the architect and are not to be used for extensions or on other projects except OF DESIGNED DRAWN APPROVED JOB NUMBER REVISIONS DATE In d r i o G a r d e n s S H G NV R H o m e s St . L u c i e C o u n t y Landscape Architects Land Planners Environmental Consultants www.cotleurhearing.com 1934 Commerce Lane Suite 1 Jupiter, Florida 33458 561.747.6336 · Fax 747.1377 Lic# LC-26000535 ACE ACE LAH 21-0425 07-29-24 3LP-1 02-05-25 03-08-24 05-01-25 North 40' Scale: 1" = 80' 80'240'160'320'0' LEGEND HC LB SB SW TYP ROW REC VG DE STP HANDICAP LANDSCAPE BUFFER SETBACK SIDEWALK TYPICAL RIGHT OF WAY RECREATION TRACT VALLEY GUTTER DRAINAGE EASEMENT SUBJECT TO PAMMP HC SIGN STOP SIGN DO NOT ENTER PEDESTRIAN CROSSING PARKING LIGHT PEDESTRIAN LIGHT FPL COACH LIGHT PRESERVE SIGN BARRICADE Page 53 of 331 PUD Typical Buffers BUFFER TYPICAL A: 25' BUFFER & MIN. 2' BERM NTS NTS BUFFER TYPICAL B: 25' BUFFER; WITHOUT BERM OR FENCE by agreement in writing with the architect. Immediately report any discrepancies to the architect. SHEET COTLEUR & HEARING, INC. These drawings are the property of the architect and are not to be used for extensions or on other projects except OF DESIGNED DRAWN APPROVED JOB NUMBER REVISIONS DATE In d r i o G a r d e n s S H G NV R H o m e s St . L u c i e C o u n t y Landscape Architects Land Planners Environmental Consultants www.cotleurhearing.com 1934 Commerce Lane Suite 1 Jupiter, Florida 33458 561.747.6336 · Fax 747.1377 Lic# LC-26000535 ACE ACE LAH 21-0425 07-29-24 3LP-2 02-05-25 03-08-24 05-01-25 25' BUFFER ON 2-3' BERM WITH 6' OPAQUE FENCE UNDERSTORY & GROUNDCOVERS REQUIRED UNDERSTORY & GROUNDCOVERS REQUIRED HEDGE TO BE MIN. 2' TALL HEDGE TO BE MIN. 2' TALL ACCESS & IMPROVEMENTS; DE & UE TO BE DETERMINED AT TIME OF FINAL SITE PLAN 6'-8' OPAQUE PVC FENCE 200' TYP. 30' BETWEEN LARGE TREES 30' BETWEEN LARGE TREES CLUSTER OF 3 SABAL PALMS MAY COUNT AS 1 LARGE TREE 3 PALM TREES MAY COUNT AS 1 SHADE TREE2'-3' BERM 1:3 1:3 1-5' VARIES CANOPY LAYER SHRUB LAYER GROUNDCOVER PROPERTY LINE OR ROW HEDGE 6' OPAQUE FENCE W/ 2' BERM OR 8' OPAQUE FEATURE W/O BERM 25' BUFFER CANOPY LAYER SHRUBS / GROUNDCOVERS PROPERTY LINE OR ROW HEDGE 25' BUFFER 25' BUFFER 30' BETWEEN LARGE TREESHEDGE TO BE MIN. 2' TALL HEDGE TO BE MIN. 2' TALL ACCESS & IMPROVEMENTS; DE & UE TO BE DETERMINED AT TIME OF FINAL SITE PLAN 200' TYP. SHRUBS / GROUNDCOVERS TO BE MIN. 2' TALL PINE TREES TO BE ARRANGED IN A CLUSTER Page 54 of 331 VUA Tree Planting Exhibit NOTE: 34 VUA TREES ARE REQUIRED BY CODE FOR THE SITE STREET/ROW TREES SHOWN IN ABOVE TYPICALS ARE TO COUNT TOWARDS VUA TREES REQUIREMENT. STREET/ROW TREES IN EXCESS OF THE 34 MINIMUM MAY COUNT TOWARDS OTHER LANDSCAPE AND MITIGATION TOTALS IN ORDER TO MEET CODE REQUIREMENTS. FULL LANDSCAPE PLAN WITH FOUNDATION PLANTINGS TO BE PROVIDED AT TIME OF SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL. *4 TREES TO BE PROVIDED PER 7 UNIT BUILDING *TREES MAY RELOCATED FROM ROW TO FRONT YARDS OR COMMON AREAS IF IN CONFLICT WITH UTILITIES *NO LESS THAN 2 TREES TO BE LOCATED IN FRONT OF BUILDING *3 PALMS MAY COUNT AS 1 CANOPY TREE *3 TREES TO BE PROVIDED PER 6 UNIT BUILDING *TREES MAY RELOCATED FROM ROW TO FRONT YARDS OR COMMON AREAS IF IN CONFLICT WITH UTILITIES *NO LESS THAN 1 TREES TO BE LOCATED IN FRONT YARD OR ROW *3 PALMS MAY COUNT AS 1 CANOPY TREE by agreement in writing with the architect. Immediately report any discrepancies to the architect. SHEET COTLEUR & HEARING, INC. These drawings are the property of the architect and are not to be used for extensions or on other projects except OF DESIGNED DRAWN APPROVED JOB NUMBER REVISIONS DATE In d r i o G a r d e n s S H G NV R H o m e s St . L u c i e C o u n t y Landscape Architects Land Planners Environmental Consultants www.cotleurhearing.com 1934 Commerce Lane Suite 1 Jupiter, Florida 33458 561.747.6336 · Fax 747.1377 Lic# LC-26000535 ACE ACE LAH 21-0425 07-29-24 3LP-3 02-05-25 03-08-24 05-01-25 7 UNIT TOWNHOME VUA STREET TYPICAL 22' FRONT YARD 57' BUILDING 19' REAR YARD LOT LINE 118' 5' SW 10' TREE LAWN VUA TREES MAY BE RELOCATED FROM ROW TO COMMON AREAS IF IN CONFLICT WITH UTILITIES VUA TREES MAY BE RELOCATED FROM ROW TO FRONT YARDS IF IN CONFLICT WITH UTILITIES 101' 22' FRONT YARD 57' BUILDING 19' REAR YARD LOT LINE 5' SW 10' TREE LAWN VUA TREES MAY BE RELOCATED FROM ROW TO COMMON AREAS IF IN CONFLICT WITH UTILITIES 6 UNIT TOWNHOME VUA STREET TYPICAL VUA TREES MAY BE RELOCATED FROM ROW TO FRONT YARDS IF IN CONFLICT WITH UTILITIES Page 55 of 331 Indrio Townhomes Traffic Impact Analysis St. Lucie County, FL November 2024 Page 56 of 331 Indrio Townhomes Traffic Impact Analysis St. Lucie County, FL Prepared by: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. November 2024 ©Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2024 Alex Memering, P.E. PE #91501 Page 57 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. i CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Study Area Intersections ............................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Study Area Roadway Segments .................................................................................................. 1 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS ANALYSIS – YEAR 2024 ...................................................................... 4 2.1 Existing Traffic ............................................................................................................................... 4 2.2 Existing Intersection Conditions ................................................................................................... 4 2.3 Existing Roadway Segment Conditions ....................................................................................... 7 3.0 DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC ........................................................................................................... 9 3.1 Trip Generation .............................................................................................................................. 9 3.2 Trip Distribution and Trip Assignment ........................................................................................ 10 4.0 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS ANALYSIS – YEAR 2027 ........................................................... 13 4.1 Background Traffic ...................................................................................................................... 13 4.2 Committed Improvements ........................................................................................................... 13 4.3 Background Intersection Analysis .............................................................................................. 13 4.6 Background Roadway Segment Analysis .................................................................................. 16 5.0 BUILDOUT CONDITIONS ANALYSIS – YEAR 2027 .................................................................. 18 5.1 Buildout Traffic ............................................................................................................................. 18 5.2 Buildout Intersection Analysis ..................................................................................................... 18 5.3 Buildout Roadway Segment Analysis ........................................................................................ 23 6.0 EXISTING TURN LANE ANALYSIS ............................................................................................ 25 7.0 SITE ACCESS ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................... 27 8.0 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................ 29 Page 58 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. ii TABLES Table 1: Significance Test ....................................................................................................................... 3 Table 2: Existing (2024) AM Peak Hour Intersection Conditions .............................................................. 5 Table 3: Existing (2024) PM Peak Hour Intersection Conditions .............................................................. 6 Table 4: Existing (2024) AM Peak Hour Roadway Segment Analysis ....................................................... 8 Table 5: Existing (2024) PM Peak Hour Roadway Segment Analysis ....................................................... 8 Table 6: Trip Generation Summary.......................................................................................................... 9 Table 7: Background (2027) AM Peak Hour Intersection Conditions ...................................................... 14 Table 8: Background (2027) PM Peak Hour Intersection Conditions ...................................................... 15 Table 9: Background (2027) AM Peak Hour Roadway Segment Analysis .............................................. 17 Table 10: Background (2027) PM Peak Hour Roadway Segment Analysis ............................................ 17 Table 11: Buildout (2027) AM Peak Hour Intersection Conditions .......................................................... 19 Table 12: Buildout (2027) PM Peak Hour Intersection Conditions .......................................................... 20 Table 13: Buildout (2027) AM Peak Hour Roadway Segment Analysis .................................................. 24 Table 14: Buildout (2027) PM Peak Hour Roadway Segment Analysis .................................................. 24 Table 15: 2024 Existing Traffic Conditions Turn Lane Summary ............................................................ 25 Table 16: 2027 Background Traffic Conditions Turn Lane Summary ...................................................... 26 Table 17: 2027 Buildout Traffic Conditions Turn Lane Summary ............................................................ 26 FIGURES Figure 1: Project Location ....................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2: Project Trip Distribution .......................................................................................................... 11 Figure 3: Project Trip Assignment ......................................................................................................... 12 Figure 4: Buildout (2027) AM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes ............................................................. 21 Figure 5: Buildout (2027) PM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes ............................................................. 22 Figure 6: Site Access ............................................................................................................................ 28 Page 59 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. iii APPENDICES Appendix A: Conceptual Site Plan Appendix B: Excerpts from St. Lucie TPO Traffic Counts and Level of Service Report Appendix C: Turning Movement Counts Appendix D: FDOT’s Florida Traffic Online 2023 Peak Season Factor Category Report Appendix E: Turning Movement Volume Worksheets Appendix F: Signal Timing/Phasing Plans Appendix G: Synchro Outputs Appendix H: Excerpts from ITE Trip Generation Manual Appendix I: Treasure Coast Regional Planning Model (TCRPM) Model Plots Appendix J: Growth Rate Calculations Appendix K: Vested Developments Appendix L: NCHRP Report 457 Outputs Page 60 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION Kimley-Horn has been retained to analyze and document the traffic impacts associated with the development of Indrio Townhomes in St. Lucie County, Florida. The following is a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) that generally conforms to the policies and guidelines of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code Section 11.02.09 and the St. Lucie Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) Standardized Traffic Impact Studies (TIS) Methodology and Procedures. The proposed residential development will include the following uses: • Single-Family Townhome: ±278 dwelling units The site is generally located in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of Indrio Road & Turnpike feeder Road in St. Lucie County, Florida. The site is currently vacant. The development is anticipated to be built by Year 2027 and is proposed to consist of approximately ±278 residential dwelling units. Access to the site will be provided via one (1) full access driveway on Indrio Road and one (1) full access driveway on Deleon Avenue/Royal Palm Avenue. This access points are shown on the conceptual site plan provided in Appendix A. 1.1 STUDY AREA INTERSECTIONS Based upon St. Lucie County LDC, the study area included an operational analysis at the following intersections, as shown in Figure 1: • Indrio Road & Emerson Avenue (Signalized) • Indrio Road & Turnpike Feeder Road/ Kings Highway (Signalized) • Turnpike Feeder Road & Miramar Avenue/ Kings Highway (Unsignalized) • Turnpike Feeder Road & Palomar Parkway (Unsignalized) • Turnpike Feeder Road & Winter Garden Parkway (Signalized) • Indrio Road & Deleon Avenue (Unsignalized) The project driveways will also be analyzed. 1.2 STUDY AREA ROADWAY SEGMENTS To determine roadway segments to be included in this TIA, a significance test was performed for all major roadway segments within a 2-mile radius of the project site. Any road segment to which development traffic makes its first connection to the major road network, provided the development traffic consumes one percent or more of the existing or committed two-way peak-hour service capacity, major road segment on which the two-way peak-hour traffic consumes 5% or more of the existing or committed two-way peak-hour service capacity. The results of the significance test are shown in Table 1. The percent significance for project trips was determined by comparing the maximum directional peak hour project trips to the directional peak hour service capacity as provided in the latest St. Lucie TPO Traffic Counts and Level of Service Report. Excerpts from the St. Lucie TPO traffic count report are included in Appendix B. • Indrio Road from Kings Highway to Slash Pine Trail Page 61 of 331 N NOT TO SCALE KI N G S H I G H W A Y INDRIO ROAD 7 8 LEGEND Project Location Study Intersection Project Driveway Study Area EM E R S O N A V E N U E 21 3 4 5 © 2024 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 200 S Orange Ave, Suite 600, Orlando, FL, 32801 Phone: (407)-898-1511Indrio Townhomes | St. Lucie County, Florida Project No: 147584005 Page 2 November 2024 Figure 1: Project Location PALOMAR PARKWAY WINTER GARDEN PARKWAY MIRAMAR AVENUE 6 Page 62 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 3 Table 1: Significance Test To Volume LOS V/C Volume LOS V/C Orange Avenue Angle Road 12,000 1,720 572 C 0.33 572 C 0.33 11%11 0.6% Angle Road St. Lucie Boulevard 12,600 856 585 C 0.68 585 C 0.68 14%13 1.6% St. Lucie Boulevard Indrio Road 15,300 1,490 711 D 0.48 711 D 0.48 17%16 1.1% Indrio Road Indian Pines Blvd 15,100 1,224 701 C 0.57 701 C 0.57 14%13 1.1% Indian Pines Blvd Turnpike Feeder Rd SB Ramp 12,800 1,110 594 C 0.54 594 C 0.54 17%16 1.5% Turnpike Feeder Rd SB Ramp US 1 12,800 1,110 594 C 0.54 594 C 0.54 17%16 1.5% Emerson Avenue Seminole Road 14,700 1,070 683 C 0.64 683 C 0.64 23%22 2.1% Seminole Road Kings Highway 14,700 1,810 683 C 0.38 683 C 0.38 28%27 1.5% Kings Highway Slash Pine Trail 5,773 790 365 C 0.46 359 C 0.45 18%17 2.2% Slash Pine Trail US 1 5,773 920 365 C 0.40 359 C 0.39 15%14 1.6% Notes: (1) Obtained from St. Lucie Transporation Planning Organization Traffic Counts and Level of Service Report 2024 (2) Data obtained from FDOT's Florida Traffic Online as the SLTPO Traffic Counts and Level of Service Report 2024 omitted this segment's traffic volumes Indrio Road Kings Highway/Turnpike Feeder Road Roadway AADT Directional Peak Hour Service Capacity AM Peak Hour Directional PM Peak Hour Directional % Project Distribution Max Directional Peak Hour Project Trips % Project SignificanceFrom Page 63 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 4 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS ANALYSIS – YEAR 2024 2.1 EXISTING TRAFFIC Turning movement counts (TMCs) were collected at the study intersections on Wednesday, February 7th, 2024, Wednesday, May 29th, 2024, and Wednesday, November 6th, 2024 and are provided in Appendix C. Data was collected during both the AM (7:00AM to 9:00AM) and PM (4:00 PM to 6:00 PM) peak periods. The existing turning movement volumes were adjusted by applying a seasonal factor (SF) published by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). The data referenced from FDOT’s Florida Traffic Online 2023 Peak Season Factor Category Report is included in Appendix D. Turning movement volume worksheets for all intersections are included in Appendix E. 2.2 EXISTING INTERSECTION CONDITIONS Intersection operational analyses were performed for 2024 existing conditions during the AM and PM peak hours using procedures outlined in the Highway Capacity Manual 7th Edition with Synchro (v12) software. Signal timing and phasing plans were provided by St. Lucie County staff and are included in Appendix F. A summary of intersection level of service (LOS), delay, and maximum volume/capacity (V/C) ratios for the AM and PM peak hour existing conditions are provided in Tables 2 and 3, respectively. Synchro outputs are provided in Appendix G. As shown in the Tables 2 and 3, all the study area intersections are expected to operate at an acceptable LOS overall in the 2024 existing conditions except for Turnpike Feeder Road and Palomar Parkway which operates with a failing LOS and delay during the PM peak hour. Page 64 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 5 Table 2: Existing (2024) AM Peak Hour Intersection Conditions Approach LOS Max V/C Movement Max V/C EB B EBL 0.38 WB B WBT 0.46 NB --- SB B SBL 0.32 Overall B (15.0 sec)WBT 0.46 EB B EBR 0.47 WB C WBT 0.14 NB C NBL 0.67 SB C SBT 0.66 Overall C (25.4 sec)SBT 0.67 EB B EBR 0.22 WB B WBR 0.01 NB --- SB --- Overall B (12.1 sec)EBR 0.22 EB C EBL/T/R 0.22 WB D WBL/T/R 0.25 NB A NBL 0.06 SB A SBL 0.01 Overall D (34.8 sec)WBL/T/R 0.25 EB D EBL 0.72 WB D WBL 0.32 NB B NBR 0.38 SB B SBT 0.55 Overall C (20.8 sec)EBL 0.72 EB A EBL/T 0.00 WB --- NB --- SB A SBL/R 0.00 Overall A (0.0 sec)EBL 0.00 Turnpike Feeder Rd & Miramar Ave Unsignalized (TWSC) Turnpike Feeder Rd & Palomar Pkwy Unsignalized (TWSC) Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Signalized Turnpike Feeder Rd/ Kings Hwy & Indrio Rd Signalized Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter Garden Pkwy Signalized Indrio Rd & Deleon Ave Unsignalized (TWSC) Exisitng Condition - 2024 Intersection Control Type Approach AM Peak Hour Page 65 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 6 Table 3: Existing (2024) PM Peak Hour Intersection Conditions Approach LOS Max V/C Movement Max V/C EB B EBL 0.65 WB C WBR 0.63 NB D NBR 0.30 SB C SBL 0.32 Overall C (20.5 sec)EBL 0.65 EB C EBL 0.44 WB C WBR 0.36 NB C NBL 0.82 SB C SBR 0.67 Overall C (27.7 sec)NBL 0.82 EB B EBR 0.10 WB B WBR 0.02 NB --- SB --- Overall B (14.5 sec)EBR 0.10 EB D EBL/T/R 0.28 WB F WBL/T/R 0.25 NB A NBL 0.14 SB A SBL 0.01 Overall F (50.3 sec)EBL/T/R 0.28 EB C EBL 0.45 WB C WBL 0.30 NB B NBL 0.63 SB C SBT 0.86 Overall C (21.9 sec)SBT 0.86 EB A EBL/T 0.01 WB --- NB --- SB B SBL/R 0.11 Overall B (14.0 sec)SBL/R 0.11 Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter Garden Pkwy Signalized Deleon Ave & Indrio Rd Unsignalized (TWSC) Turnpike Feeder Rd & Miramar Ave Unsignalized (TWSC) Turnpike Feeder Rd & Palomar Pkwy Unsignalized (TWSC) Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Signalized Turnpike Feeder Rd/ Kings Hwy & Indrio Rd Signalized Exisitng Condition - 2024 Intersection Control Type Approach PM Peak Hour Page 66 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 7 2.3 EXISTING ROADWAY SEGMENT CONDITIONS A roadway segment analysis was performed within the study area to determine existing AM and PM peak hour conditions. The analysis was conducted by comparing Year 2024 peak hour peak direction (PHPD) traffic volumes to the PHPD service capacities per the latest St. Lucie TPO Traffic Counts and Level of Service Report provided within Appendix B. The existing roadway segment data is included in Tables 4 and 5 for AM and PM peak hour roadway segment conditions, respectively. As shown in the tables, all study area roadway segments are expected to operate acceptably during 2024 AM and PM peak hour existing traffic conditions. Page 67 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 8 Table 4: Existing (2024) AM Peak Hour Roadway Segment Analysis Table 5: Existing (2024) PM Peak Hour Roadway Segment Analysis From To NB/EB SB/WB Indrio Road Kings Hwy Slash Pine Trl Minor Arterial U 2 790 2023 301 170 5.39%302 171 0.38 No Notes: 1. Obtained from St Lucie County TPO Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). Roadway 3. Field collected traffic counts were used. Existing PHPD Conditions - 2024 2024 VolumesYear of Count Most Recent PHPD Volumes3 SB/WBNB/EB 2. Data obtained from St Lucie TPO Traffic Counts and Level of Service Report (2024). Functional Classification1 Area Type1 Number of Lanes PHPD MSV2 V/C Ratio Roadway Characteristics Growth Rate Deficient? From To NB/EB SB/WB Indrio Road Kings Hwy Slash Pine Trl Principal Arterial U E 2 790 2023 289 417 5.39%290 418 0.53 No Notes: 1. Obtained from City of Port St Lucie Road Function Classification GIS web app. 2. Data obtained from St Lucie TPO Traffic Counts and Level of Service Report (2024). 3. If field collected traffic counts are not available, data was obtained from the St Lucie TPO Traffic Data Management System GIS Web App. Existing PHPD Conditions - 2024 Functional Classification1 Area Type1 Adopted LOS2 Number of Lanes PHPD MSV2 Year of Count NB/EB SB/WB 2024 Volumes3 V/C Ratio Deficient? Roadway Characteristics Most Recent PHPD Volumes3 Growth Rate Page 68 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 9 3.0 DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC 3.1 TRIP GENERATION Trip generation for the proposed project was calculated per procedures published in the 11th Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) Trip Generation Manual. Land use code 215 – Single-Family Attached Housing was referenced to determine the appropriate trip rates for the project. Table 6 provides the Daily, AM peak hour, and PM peak hour trip generation summary for the project. Relevant excerpts from the ITE Trip Generation Manual are included in Appendix H. Table 6: Trip Generation Summary Total In Out Total In Out Proposed Development Single-Family Attached Housing 278 DU 2,068 139 43 96 163 93 70 2,068 139 43 96 163 93 70 2,068 139 43 96 163 93 70 Simgle-Family Attached Housing [ITE 215] Daily T = 7.62*(X)-50.48; (X is number of dwelling units) AM Peak Hour of Adjacent Street T = 0.52*(X)-5.70; (X is number of dwelling units); (31% in/ 69% out) PM Peak Hour of Adjacent Street T = 0.60*(X)-3.93; (X is number of dwelling units); (57% in/ 43% out) Subtotal TOTAL NET NEW TRIPS Note 1: Trip Generation was calculated using the data from ITE's Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition. PM Peak Hour of Adjacent StreetLand Use Intensity Daily Trips AM Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Page 69 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 10 3.2 TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND TRIP ASSIGNMENT Projected traffic demand of project trips on study roadways was derived with the use of the adopted regional travel demand model. Land use data for the project was entered into a new traffic analysis zone (TAZ) within the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Model (TCRPM) set and situated within the existing roadway network to appropriately represent project access. The model was used to assign trips for all trip purposes between allocated origin and destination pairs using project buildout year model data. Trip distribution for the project was extracted from the completed model assignment and reviewed for logic. The resulting model plots showing the percent of daily project distribution are provided in Appendix I. Daily model project distribution was referenced to manually assign project distribution at the study area intersections and driveways in general accordance with model outputs as shown in Figure 2. Project trip distribution percentages were used to assign anticipated project trips to the study area roadways and intersections. Figure 3 shows the anticipated AM and PM peak hour project volumes at the study area intersections. Page 70 of 331 Figure 2: Project Trip Distribution © 2024 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 200 S Orange Ave, Suite 600, Orlando, FL, 32801 Phone: (407)-898-1511Indrio Townhomes | St. Lucie County, Florida N NOT TO SCALE Project No: 147584005 Page 11 LEGEND Project Location % Project Trips In % Project Trips Out Percent Project Distribution Study Intersection Project Driveway XX% 30% 7 18 % 22 % 5% 5% 23% 1 23% INDRIO RD EM E R S O N A V E DR W Y 1 INDRIO RD 18% 26% November 2024 KI N G S H I G H W A Y INDRIO ROAD 7 EM E R S O N A V E N U E 21 3 4 5 6Indrio Rd 3 8% N KINGS HWY MIRAMAR AVE 8% 2 28%16 % INDRIO RD TURNPIKE FEEDER RD N K I N G S H W Y TURNPIKE FEEDER RD De l e o n A v e 16% 18% 8% 23% 5% PALOMAR PARKWAY WINTER GARDEN PARKWAY MIRAMAR AVENUE 28% 16%30% 8% 8 8 DRWY 2 De l e o n A v e 30 % Ro y a l P a l m A v e 6 4 38% 22% 26 % PALOMAR PKWY TURNPIKE FEEDER RD 10 % 8% 30 % 20 % 5WINTER GARDEN PKWY TURNPIKE FEEDER RD 30 % 22 % 26% 26% 22% Page 71 of 331 Figure 3: Project Trip Assignment © 2024 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 200 S Orange Ave, Suite 600, Orlando, FL, 32801 Phone: (407)-898-1511Indrio Townhomes | St. Lucie County, Florida Project No: 147584005 Page 12 7 17 ( 1 2 ) 21 ( 1 5 ) 2 ( 5 ) 5 (4) 22 (16) 1 10 (21) INDRIO RD EM E R S O N A V E DR W Y 1 INDRIO RD 8 (17) 11 (24) November 2024 KI N G S H I G H W A Y INDRIO ROAD EM E R S O N A V E N U E 21 3 4 5 9 ( 1 9 ) 5WINTER GARDEN PKWY 3 3 (7) N KINGS HWY MIRAMAR AVE 3 ( 7 ) 2 12 (26)7 ( 1 5 ) INDRIO RD TURNPIKE FEEDER RD N K I N G S H W Y TURNPIKE FEEDER RD TURNPIKE FEEDER RD 16% 18% 8% 23% 5% PALOMAR PARKWAY WINTER GARDEN PARKWAY MIRAMAR AVENUE 27 (20) 15 (11)29 (21) 8 ( 6 ) LEGEND Project Location Project Trips In | AM (PM) Project Trips Out | AM (PM) Percent Project Distribution Study Intersection Project Driveway XX% PM (93 IN) (70 OUT) TRIP GENERATION AM 43 IN 96 OUT 7 8 6 N NOT TO SCALE 30% 4PALOMAR PKWY TURNPIKE FEEDER RD 4 ( 9 ) 8 (6) 29 ( 2 1 ) 6Indrio Rd De l e o n A v e 21 ( 1 5 ) 8 DRWY 2 13 ( 2 8 ) Ro y a l P a l m A v e 36 (27) 22 (16) 11 ( 2 4 ) 11 (24) 11 (24) 29 ( 2 1 ) 21 (15) De l e o n A v e Page 72 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 13 4.0 BACKGROUND CONDITIONS ANALYSIS – YEAR 2027 4.1 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC Background traffic conditions, without the impact of project trips on the roadway network, were evaluated for Year 2027. To develop background volumes, the seasonally adjusted existing TMCs will be forecasted to Year 2027 volumes by applying an annual growth rate of 5.39%. The growth rate calculations are provided in Appendix J. Turning movement volume worksheets for all intersections are provided in Appendix E. Vested traffic from nearby developments were also considered to develop background volumes. Vested trip data for four developments (Bedner Farms NW Neighborhood, Bedner Farms East Neighborhood, Sugar Sands Apartments, and Sabal Palm Grove) is included in Appendix K. 4.2 COMMITTED IMPROVEMENTS After review of roadway and/or intersection improvements funded for construction, no transportation improvements were identified near the study intersection by developers or within the latest St. Lucie County Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) Transportation Improvements Program (TIP), St. Lucie County 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), and Florida Department of Transportation’s (FDOT) Five- Year Work Program. 4.3 BACKGROUND INTERSECTION ANALYSIS Intersection operational analyses were performed for Year 2027 background conditions during the AM and PM peak hours using procedures outlined in the Highway Capacity Manual 7th Edition with Synchro (v12) software. Signal timing and phasing plans were provided by St. Lucie County staff and are included in Appendix F. A summary of intersection level of service (LOS), delay, and maximum volume/capacity (V/C) ratios for AM and PM peak hour background conditions is provided in Tables 7 and 8. Synchro outputs are provided in Appendix G. As shown in Tables 7 and 8, all the study area intersections are anticipated to operate acceptably during 2027 future background traffic conditions with the exception of Turnpike Feeder Road and Palomar Parkway which operates with a failing LOS and delay. Additionally, the intersection of Turnpike Feeder Road/ Kings Highway & Indrio Road operates with a V/C greater than 1.0 (V/C>1) during the PM peak hour conditions. Page 73 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 14 Table 7: Background (2027) AM Peak Hour Intersection Conditions Approach LOS Max V/C Movement Max V/C EB B EBL 0.47 WB B WBT 0.58 NB --- SB B SBL 0.40 Overall B (15.5 sec)WBT 0.58 EB C EBR 0.61 WB C WBT 0.23 NB C NBL 0.75 SB C SBT 0.70 Overall C (28.8 sec)NBL 0.75 EB B EBR 0.29 WB B WBR 0.03 NB --- SB --- Overall B (13.5 sec)EBR 0.29 EB D EBL/T/R 0.42 WB F WBL/T/R 0.55 NB A NBL 0.09 SB A SBL 0.02 Overall F (87.4 sec)WBL/T/R 0.55 EB D EBL 0.82 WB D WBL 0.35 NB B NBR 0.51 SB C SBT 0.68 Overall C (24.1 sec)EBL 0.82 EB A EBL/T 0.001 WB --- NB --- SB B SBL/R 0.04 Overall B (10.9 sec)SBL/R 0.04 Indrio Rd & Deleon Ave Unsignalized (TWSC) Intersection Control Type Approach AM Peak Hour Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Signalized Turnpike Feeder Rd/ Kings Hwy & Indrio Rd Signalized Turnpike Feeder Rd & Palomar Pkwy Unsignalized (TWSC) Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter Garden Pkwy Signalized Turnpike Feeder Rd & Miramar Ave Unsignalized (TWSC) Background Condition - 2027 Page 74 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 15 Table 8: Background (2027) PM Peak Hour Intersection Conditions Approach LOS Max V/C Movement Max V/C EB C EBL 0.74 WB C WBT 0.66 NB D NBR 0.31 SB C SBL 0.42 Overall C (21.4 sec)EBL 0.74 EB C EBL 0.65 WB C WBT 0.54 NB F NBL 1.24 SB C SBR 0.78 Overall D (47.4 sec)NBL 1.24 EB B EBR 0.13 WB C WBR 0.05 NB --- SB --- Overall C (17.2 sec)EBR 0.13 EB F EBL/T/R 0.63 WB F WBL/T/R 0.63 NB B NBL 0.20 SB A SBL 0.02 Overall F (159.8 sec)WBL/T/R 0.63 EB D EBL 0.55 WB D WBL 0.33 NB B NBL 0.78 SB C SBT 0.89 Overall C (26.5 sec)SBT 0.89 EB A EBL/T 0.01 WB --- NB --- SB C SBL/R 0.21 Overall C (17.8 sec)SBL/R 0.21 Turnpike Feeder Rd & Palomar Pkwy Unsignalized (TWSC) Deleon Ave & Indrio Rd Unsignalized (TWSC) Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter Garden Pkwy Signalized Turnpike Feeder Rd/ Kings Hwy & Indrio Rd Signalized Turnpike Feeder Rd & Miramar Ave Unsignalized (TWSC) Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Signalized Intersection Control Type Approach PM Peak Hour Background Condition - 2027 Page 75 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 16 4.6 BACKGROUND ROADWAY SEGMENT ANALYSIS A roadway segment analysis was performed within the study area to determine background AM and PM peak hour conditions. The analysis was conducted by comparing Year 2027 peak hour peak direction (PHPD) traffic volumes to the PHPD service capacities (excerpt included in Appendix B). Year 2027 PHPD volumes were derived by applying a 5.39% annual growth rate to Year 2024 PHPD volumes. AM and PM peak hour background roadway segment conditions are shown within Tables 9 and 9, respectively. All study area roadway segments are expected to operate acceptably during 2027 background traffic conditions. Page 76 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 17 Table 9: Background (2027) AM Peak Hour Roadway Segment Analysis Table 10: Background (2027) PM Peak Hour Roadway Segment Analysis From To NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB Indrio Road Kings Hwy Slash Pine Trl 790 302 171 5.39%47 16 398 215 0.50 No Notes: 1. Obtained from St Lucie TPO Traffic Counts and Level of Service Report (2024). 2. Background volumes obtained by adding vested trips. Additionally, a 5.39% growth rate was applied. 3. Vested trips are from Bedner Farms Neighborhood, Sabal Palm Grove, And Sugar Sand Apartments 4. Future non-project traffic volumes are the summation of the existing peak season volumes, ambient background growth, and vested trips. Roadway Applied Growth Rate 2 Vested Trip Volumes 3 V/C Ratio Background PHPD Conditions - 2027 2027 Volumes42024 VolumesPHPD MSV 1 Roadway Characteristics Deficient? From To NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB Indrio Road Kings Hwy Slash Pine Trl 790 290 418 5.39%27 51 367 540 0.68 No Notes: 1. Obtained from St Lucie TPO Traffic Counts and Level of Service Report (2024). 2. Background volumes obtained by adding vested trips. Additionally, a 5.39% growth rate was applied. 3. Vested trips are from Bedner Farms Neighborhood, Sabal Palm Grove, And Sugar Sand Apartments 4. Future non-project traffic volumes are the summation of the existing peak season volumes, ambient background growth, and vested trips. Background PHPD Conditions - 2027RoadwayPHPD MSV 1 Existing 2024 Volumes Applied Growth Rate 2 Vested Trip Volumes 3 Volumes 4 V/C Ratio Deficient? Page 77 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 18 5.0 BUILDOUT CONDITIONS ANALYSIS – YEAR 2027 5.1 BUILDOUT TRAFFIC Buildout traffic conditions were evaluated for Year 2027. Buildout volumes were developed by adding anticipated project trips to background volumes. Turning movement volume worksheets for all intersections are included in Appendix E. 5.2 BUILDOUT INTERSECTION ANALYSIS Intersection operational analyses were performed for 2027 buildout conditions in the AM and PM peak hours using procedures outlined in the Highway Capacity Manual 7th Edition with Synchro (v12) software. Signal timing and phasing plans were provided by St. Lucie County staff and are included in Appendix F. A summary of intersection level of service (LOS), delay, and maximum volume/capacity (V/C) ratios for AM and PM peak hour buildout conditions are provided in Tables 11 and 12, respectively. An additional 3 seconds of green time was given to northbound left turn movement at the intersection of Turnpike Feeder Road/ Kings Highway & Indrio Road in order to address the background capacity deficiency. Options were considered to address the existing deficiency at the intersection of Turnpike Feeder Road & Palomar Parkway such as an addition of a westbound left turn lane, median storage, and signalization. The intersection does not meet minimum distance requirements from the adjacent signal, the additional turn lane did not have a major impact on intersection delay, and median storage is not possible due to limited space at the intersection. Synchro outputs are provided in Appendix G. As shown in the Tables 11 and 12, all the study area intersections are expected to operate at an acceptable LOS overall in the 2027 buildout AM and PM peak hour traffic conditions with the exception of Turnpike Feeder Road and Palomar Parkway which operates with a failing LOS and delay and v/c ratio greater than 1.0. No additional deficiencies due to project traffic were identified. AM and PM peak hour intersection turning movement volumes at buildout for the study area intersections are illustrated in Figures 4 and 5. Page 78 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 19 Table 11: Buildout (2027) AM Peak Hour Intersection Conditions Approach LOS Max V/C Movement Max V/C EB B EBL 0.48 WB B WBT 0.59 NB --- SB B SBL 0.41 Overall B (15.6 sec)WBT 0.59 EB C EBR 0.62 WB C WBT 0.28 NB C NBL 0.75 SB C SBT 0.70 Overall C (28.9 sec)NBL 0.75 EB B EBR 0.29 WB B WBR 0.09 NB --- SB --- Overall B (13.6 sec)EBR 0.29 EB E EBL/T/R 0.44 WB F WBL/T/R 0.71 NB A NBL 0.09 SB A SBL 0.02 Overall F (123.3 sec)WBL/T/R 0.71 EB D EBL 0.82 WB D WBL 0.35 NB B NBR 0.54 SB C SBT 0.68 Overall C (24.1 sec)EBL 0.82 EB A EBL/T 0.01 WB --- NB --- SB B SBL/R 0.07 Overall B (10.7 sec)SBL/R 0.07 EB A EBL/T 0.01 WB --- NB --- SB B SBL/R 0.07 Overall B (12.0 sec)SBL/R 0.07 EB --- WB A WBL 0.06 NB --- SB A SBL/T 0.01 Overall A (8.8 sec)WBL 0.06 Deleon Ave/Royal Palm Ave & Driveway 2 Unsignalized (TWSC) Indrio Rd & Deleon Ave Unsignalized (TWSC) AM Peak Hour Buildout Condition - 2027 Approach Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Signalized Turnpike Feeder Rd/ Kings Hwy & Indrio Rd Signalized Turnpike Feeder Rd & Miramar Ave Unsignalized (TWSC) Turnpike Feeder Rd & Palomar Pkwy Unsignalized (TWSC) Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter Garden Pkwy Signalized Indrio Rd & Driveway 1 Unsignalized (TWSC) Intersection Control Type Page 79 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 20 Table 12: Buildout (2027) PM Peak Hour Intersection Conditions Approach LOS Max V/C Movement Max V/C EB C EBL 0.75 WB C WBT 0.67 NB D NBR 0.31 SB C SBL 0.44 Overall C (21.4 sec)EBL 0.75 EB C EBL 0.68 WB C WBT 0.60 NB D NBL 0.95 SB C SBR 0.79 Overall C (34.8 sec)NBL 0.95 EB B EBR 0.14 WB C WBR 0.11 NB --- SB --- Overall C (18.1 sec)EBR 0.14 EB F EBL/T/R 0.67 WB F WBL/T/R 0.89 NB B NBL 0.20 SB A SBL 0.03 Overall F (250.3 sec)WBL/T/R 0.89 EB D EBL 0.57 WB D WBL 0.34 NB B NBL 0.83 SB D SBT 0.93 Overall C (30.1 sec)NBL 0.93 EB A EBL/T 0.04 WB --- NB --- SB C SBL/R 0.27 Overall C (19.6 sec)NBL 0.27 EB A EBL/T 0.03 WB --- NB --- SB C SBL/R 0.09 Overall B (16.5 sec)SBL/R 0.09 EB --- WB A WBL/R 0.05 NB --- SB A SBL/R 0.02 Overall A (9.1 sec)WBL/R 0.05 Indrio Rd & Driveway 1 Unsignalized (TWSC) Deleon Ave/Royal Palm Ave & Driveway 2 Unsignalized (TWSC) Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Signalized Turnpike Feeder Rd/ Kings Hwy & Indrio Rd Signalized Intersection Control Type Approach AM Peak Hour Buildout Condition - 2027 Deleon Ave & Indrio Rd Unsignalized (TWSC) Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter Garden Pkwy Signalized Turnpike Feeder Rd & Miramar Ave Unsignalized (TWSC) Turnpike Feeder Rd & Palomar Pkwy Unsignalized (TWSC) Page 80 of 331 Figure 4: Buildout AM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes © 2024 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 200 S Orange Ave, Suite 600, Orlando, FL, 32801 Phone: (407)-898-1511Indrio Townhomes | St. Lucie County, Florida Project No: 147584005 Page 21 1Indrio Rd Em e r s o n A v e November 2024 INDRIO ROAD EM E R S O N A V E N U E 21 3 4 5 2Indrio Rd Ki n g s H w y 3Kings Hwy Turnpike Feeder Rd 7 DR W Y 1 INDRIO RD 8 DE L E O N A V E DRWY 2 KI N G S H I G H W A Y 5 WI N T E R G A R D E N P K W Y TURNPIKE FEEDER RD 136+[22]+{0}+(0) =158 10+[2]+{0}+(0)=12 155+[25]+{0}+(0) =180 134+[22]+{21}+(0) =177 288+[47]+{144}+(10) =489 1+[0]+{0}+(0)=1 168+[27]+{65}+(0) =260 151+[24]+{40}+(12) =227 177+[29]+{40}+(0) =246 145+[23]+{0}+(3) =171 0+[0]+{0}+(11)=11 284+[46]+{47}+(0)=377 5+ [ 1 ]+ { 3}+ ( 0)= 9 0+ [ 0 ] + { 0 } + ( 1 1 ) = 1 1 115= (5)+{3}+[15]+92 409= (22)+{58}+[46]+283 1=(0)+[0]+1 35=(0)+{0}+[5]+30 161= (27)+{25}+[15]+94 66= (15)+{7}+[6]+38 45=(29)+{9}+[1]+6 8=(8)+{0}+[0]+0 204= (0)+{16}+[26]+162 7=( 0)+ { 7}+ [ 0] + 0 13 = ( 1 3 ) + { 0 } + [ 0 ] + 0 10= (0)+{0}+[1]+9 14= (0)+{0}+[2]+12 28= (0)+{0}+[4]+24 20 9 = (0 ) + { 2 2 } + [ 2 6 ] + 1 6 1 0= ( 0 ) + { 0 } + [ 0 ] + 0 17 0 = (2 ) + { 8 } + [ 2 2 ] + 1 3 8 16 4 = (0 ) + { 2 0 } + [ 2 0 ] + 1 2 4 43 7 = (0 ) + { 0 } + [ 6 1 ] + 3 7 6 13 4 = (3 ) + { 1 } + [ 1 8 ] + 1 1 2 51 = ( 0 ) + { 0 } + [ 7 ] + 4 4 52 7 = (0 ) + { 1 8 } + [ 7 1 ] + 4 3 8 16 = (9 ) + { 0 } + [ 1 ] + 6 9= (8 ) + { 0 } + [ 0 ] + 1 80 9 = (0 ) + { 2 0 } +[ 1 1 0 ] + 6 7 9 21 = ( 2 1 ) + { 0 } + [ 0 ] + 0 17 = ( 1 7 ) + { 0 } + [ 0 ] + 0 0+ [ 0 ] + { 0 } + ( 0 ) = 0 0+ [ 0 ] + { 0 } + ( 0 ) = 0 0+ [ 0 ] + { 0 } + ( 0 ) = 0 15 7 + [ 2 5 ] + { 1 4 } + ( 0 ) =1 9 6 25 9 + [ 4 2 ] + { 2 } + ( 0 ) =3 0 3 21 + [ 3 ] + { 0 } + ( 7 ) = 3 1 44 9 + [ 7 3 ] + { 6 1 } + ( 0 ) =5 8 3 42 + [ 7 ] + { 6 } + ( 0 ) = 5 5 48 + [ 8 ] + { 0 } + ( 0 ) = 5 6 36 4 + [ 5 9 ] + { 5 3 } + ( 2 9 ) =5 0 5 4+ [ 1 ] + { 0 } + ( 0 ) =5 LEGEND Project Location Study Intersection Project Driveway Existing + [Background Growth] + {Vested Trips} + (Project Traffic) = Buildout Total Traffic PALOMAR PARKWAY WINTER GARDEN PARKWAY MIRAMAR AVENUE Miramar Ave 36= (36)+{0}+[0]+0 22= (22)+{0}+[0]+0 7 8 6 N NOT TO SCALE 4Palomar Pkwy Turnpike Feeder Rd 12+[2]+{0}+(0)=14 4+[1]+{1}+(0)=6 49+[8]+{6}+(0)=63 8=(0)+{2}+[1]+5 2=(0)+{0}+[0]+2 43=(8)+{0}+[5]+30 5= ( 0 ) + { 0 } + [ 1 ] + 4 69 0 = (0 ) + { 1 6 } +[ 9 4 ] + 5 8 0 22 = (4 ) + { 2 } + [ 2 ] + 1 4 49 + [ 8 ] + { 1 8 } + ( 0 ) = 7 5 40 2 + [ 6 5 ] + { 5 3 } + ( 2 9 ) =5 4 9 10 + [ 2 ] + { 0 } + ( 0 ) = 1 2 6Indrio Rd De l e o n A v e 0+[0]+{1}+(11)=12 363+[59]+{40}+(11)=473 8=(0)+{2}+[1]+5 231= (21)+{14}+[27]+169 39=( 21 )+ { 18 }+ [ 0] + 0 7=( 0)+ { 7}+ [ 0] + 0 Page 81 of 331 Figure 5: Buildout PM Peak Hour Intersection Volumes © 2024 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 200 S Orange Ave, Suite 600, Orlando, FL, 32801 Phone: (407)-898-1511Indrio Townhomes | St. Lucie County, Florida Project No: 147584005 Page 22 1Indrio Rd Em e r s o n A v e November 2024 INDRIO ROAD EM E R S O N A V E N U E 21 3 4 5 2Indrio Rd KI N G S H W Y 3Kings Hwy 7 DR W Y 1 INDRIO RD 8 DRWY 1 DE L E O N A V E KI N G S H I G H W A Y 245+[40]+{28}+(0) =313 357+[58]+{105}+(21) =541 3+[0]+{0}+(0)=3 187+[30]+{52}+(0) =269 143+[23]+{27}+(26) =219 152+[25]+{27}+(0) =204 69+[11]+{0}+(7)=87 0+[0]+{0}+(24)=24 273+[44]+{31}+(0)=348 23 + [ 4 ]+ { 10}+ ( 0 )= 37 0+ [ 0 ] + { 0 } + ( 2 4 ) = 2 4 237= (4)+{9}+[31]+193 603= (16)+{163}+[59]+365 2=(0)+{0}+[0]+2 127= (0)+{0}+[18]+109 342= (20)+{50}+[38]+234 75= (11)+{4}+[8]+52 35=(21)+{5}+[1]+8 17=(17)+{0}+[0]+0 510= (0)+{51}+[64]+395 52=( 0)+ { 4}+ [ 7] + 4 1 28 = ( 2 8 ) + { 0 } + [ 0 ] + 0 12 7 = (0 ) + { 2 7 } + [ 1 4 ] + 8 6 0= ( 0 ) + { 0 } + [ 0 ] + 0 14 8 = (5 ) + { 5 } + [ 1 9 ] + 1 1 9 25 4 = (0 ) + { 6 8 }+ [ 26]+ 1 6 0 31 5 = (0 ) + { 0 } + [ 4 4 ] + 2 7 1 97 = (7 ) + { 4 } + [ 1 2 ] + 7 4 7= (6 ) + { 0 } + [ 0 ] + 1 80 1 = (0 ) + { 6 8 } +[ 1 0 2 ] + 6 3 1 15 = ( 1 5 ) + { 0 } + [ 0 ] + 0 12 = ( 1 2 ) + { 0 } + [ 0 ] + 0 0+ [ 0 ] + { 0 } + ( 0 ) = 0 2+ [ 0 ] + { 0 } + ( 0 ) = 2 2+ [ 0 ] + { 0 } + ( 0 ) = 2 29 4 + [ 4 8 ] + { 4 4 } + ( 0 ) =3 8 6 38 9 + [ 6 3 ] + { 7 } + ( 0 ) =4 5 9 57 + [ 9 ] + { 0 } + ( 1 5 ) =8 1 75 9 + [ 1 2 3 ] + { 4 1 } + ( 0 ) =9 2 3 19+[ 3] + { 1 8 } + ( 0 ) = 4 0 27= (27)+{0}+[0]+0 16= (16)+{0}+[0]+0 PALOMAR PARKWAY WINTER GARDEN PARKWAY MIRAMAR AVENUE Miramar Ave Turnpike Feeder Rd LEGEND Project Location Study Intersection Project Driveway Existing + [Background Growth] + (Project Traffic) = Buildout Total Traffic 7 8 6 N NOT TO SCALE 5 WI N T E R G A R D E N P K W Y TURNPIKE FEEDER RD 79+[13]+{0}+(0) =92 16+[3]+{0}+(0)=19 81+[13]+{0}+(0) =94 16 7 = (0 ) + { 0 } + [ 2 3 ] + 1 4 4 64 4 = (0 ) + { 5 8 } + [ 8 2 ] + 5 0 4 36 = (1 9 ) + { 0 } + [ 2 ] + 1 5 19 6 + [ 3 2 ] + { 0 } + ( 0 ) =2 2 8 37 9 + [ 6 1 ] + { 3 5 } + ( 2 1 ) =4 9 6 11 + [ 2 ] + { 0 } + ( 0 ) =1 3 4Palomar Pkwy Turnpike Feeder Rd 11+[2]+{0}+(0)=13 6+[1]+{4}+(0)=11 47+[8]+{17}+(0)=72 21 = ( 0 ) + { 0 } + [ 3 ] + 1 8 70 7 = (0 ) + { 5 1 } +[ 9 1 ] + 5 6 5 28 = (9 ) + { 7 } + [ 2 ] + 1 0 14 4 + [ 2 3 ] + { 1 1 } + ( 0 ) =1 7 8 59 3 + [ 9 6 ] + { 3 4 } + ( 2 1 ) =7 4 4 14 + [ 2 ] + { 0 } + ( 0 ) = 1 6 6Indrio Rd De l e o n A v e 6+[1]+{3}+(24)=34 240+[39]+{27}+(24)=330 20=(0)+{0}+[3]+17 520= (15)+{51}+[63]+391 48= (15 )+ { 10}+ [ 3 ] + 2 0 28=( 0)+ { 4}+ [ 3] + 2 1 10= (0)+{0}+[1]+9 27= (0)+{0}+[4]+23 17= (0)+{0}+[2]+15 9=(0)+{1}+[1]+7 5=(0)+{0}+[1]+4 25=(6)+{0}+[3]+16 Page 82 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 23 5.3 BUILDOUT ROADWAY SEGMENT ANALYSIS A roadway segment analysis was performed within the study area to determine buildout AM and PM peak hour conditions. The analysis was conducted by comparing Year 2027 peak hour peak direction (PHPD) traffic volumes to the PHPD service capacities (excerpt included in Appendix B). Year 2027 PHPD volumes were derived by adding anticipated project trips to background volumes. AM and PM peak hour buildout roadway segment conditions are shown within Tables 13 and 14, respectively. All study area roadway segments are expected to operate acceptably. No deficiencies were identified as a result of project traffic. Page 83 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 24 Table 13: Buildout (2027) AM Peak Hour Roadway Segment Analysis Table 14: Buildout (2027) PM Peak Hour Roadway Segment Analysis From To NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB Indrio Road Kings Hwy Slash Pine Trl 790 28%27 12 425 227 0.54 No Notes: 1. Peak hour peak directional service volumes were obtained from the St Lucie TPO Traffic Counts and Level of Service Report (2024). 2. The percent project traffic is the maximum across the segment. 3. Buildout project traffic volumes are the summation of future non-project traffic and project traffic. % Assign 2 V/C Ratio Deficient? Roadway PHPD MSV 1 Buildout ConditionsPeak Hour Trips = 139 Buildout VolumesProject Trips From To NB/EB SB/WB Indrio Road Kings Hwy Slash Pine Trl 790 28%20 26 387 566 0.72 No Notes: 1. Peak hour peak directional service volumes were obtained from the St Lucie TPO Traffic Counts and Level of Service Report (2024). 2. The percent project traffic is the maximum across the segment. 3. Buildout project traffic volumes are the summation of future non-project traffic and project traffic. % Assign 2 NB/EB SB/WB Volumes 3 V/C Ratio Deficient? Roadway PHPD MSV 1 Peak Hour Trips = 163 Buildout PHPD Conditions - 2027 Page 84 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 25 6.0 EXISTING TURN LANE ANALYSIS Turn lane criteria provided in the latest FDOT Design Manual (FDM) was reviewed against future conditions to determine turn lane requirements at study area intersections. Existing turn lanes at the study area intersections were evaluated to determine if sufficient deceleration and storage is provided to accommodate buildout project traffic volume projections. The total turn lane length is required to accommodate the minimum deceleration required in the 2023 FDOT Design Manual, Exhibit 212-1 and the expected 95th percentile queue as calculated using Synchro (v12). As shown within Tables 15, 16 and 17, the southbound left turn lane at the intersection of Turnpike Feeder Road & Winter Garden Parkway does not have sufficient storage to accommodate project traffic upon buildout of the development. It should be noted that the southbound storage lengths are deficient during existing traffic conditions and therefore not deficient due to project traffic. However, extension of the southbound left-turn lane is not recommended as the 95th percentile queue can be accommodated within the turn lanes (excluding the deceleration length). Table 15: 2024 Existing Traffic Conditions Turn Lane Summary Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Southbound Left-Turn Lane 330 290 25 Y Indrio Rd & Turnpike Feeder Rd/ Kings Hwy Southbound Left-Turn Lane 480 290 50 Y Northbound Right-Turn Lane 480 350 50 Y Westbound Right-Turn Lane 360 120 75 Y Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter garden Pkwy Southbound Left-Turn Lane 140 290 0 N 150 Notes: 1. Based on the 2023 FDOT Design Manual. 2. Based on the 95th percentile back of queue length as reported in Synchro 12. Queue length was rounded up to the nearest 25 ft to accommodate for the average length of one vehicle. Required Deceleration (ft) 1 3. The existing storage length was determined to be sufficient if the turn lane could accommodate the addition of the required deceleration length and 95th percentile queue length. 95th Percentile Queue Length (ft) 2 Existing Storage Length Sufficient? (Y/N) 3 Required Additional Queue Length (ft) Intersection Existing Total Turn Lane Length (ft) Page 85 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 26 Table 16: 2027 Background Traffic Conditions Turn Lane Summary Table 17: 2027 Buildout Traffic Conditions Turn Lane Summary Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Southbound Left-Turn Lane 330 290 50 N 10 Indrio Rd & Turnpike Feeder Rd/ Kings Hwy Southbound Left-Turn Lane 480 290 75 Y Northbound Right-Turn Lane 480 350 50 Y Westbound Right-Turn Lane 360 120 100 Y Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter garden Pkwy Southbound Left-Turn Lane 140 290 0 N 150 Notes: 1. Based on the 2023 FDOT Design Manual. 95th Percentile Queue Length (ft) 2 Existing Storage Length Sufficient? (Y/N) 3 Required Additional Queue Length (ft) 2. Based on the 95th percentile back of queue length as reported in Synchro 11. Queue length was rounded up to the nearest 25 ft to accommodate for the average length of one vehicle. 3. The existing storage length was determined to be sufficient if the turn lane could accommodate the addition of the required deceleration length and 95th percentile queue length. Intersection Existing Total Turn Lane Length (ft) Required Deceleration (ft) 1 Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Southbound Left-Turn Lane 330 290 50 N 10 Indrio Rd & Turnpike Feeder Rd/ Kings Hwy Southbound Left-Turn Lane 480 290 75 Y Northbound Right-Turn Lane 480 350 50 Y Westbound Right-Turn Lane 360 120 125 Y Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter garden Pkwy Southbound Left-Turn Lane 140 290 25 N 175 Notes: 1. Based on the 2023 FDOT Design Manual. 95th Percentile Queue Length (ft) 2 Existing Storage Length Sufficient? (Y/N) 3 Required Additional Queue Length (ft) 2. Based on the 95th percentile back of queue length as reported in Synchro 11. Queue length was rounded up to the nearest 25 ft to accommodate for the average length of one vehicle. 3. The existing storage length was determined to be sufficient if the turn lane could accommodate the addition of the required deceleration length and 95th percentile queue length. Intersection Existing Total Turn Lane Length (ft) Required Deceleration (ft) 1 Page 86 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 27 7.0 SITE ACCESS ANALYSIS Access to the site will be provided via one full access driveway on Indrio Road and one full access driveway on Deleon Avenue/Royal Palm Avenue. Driveway turn lane criteria provided in FDOT’s Access Management Guidebook and National Cooperative of Highway Research Programs (NCHRP) Report 457 were reviewed under future traffic conditions to determine turn lane requirements at project access points. NCHRP outputs are provided in Appendix L. The projected ingress turning volumes at the proposed project driveways were compared to the thresholds of the NCHRP Report 457 for determination of whether a major road left-turn lane is required at a stop- controlled minor street intersection. Report NCHRP 457 compares the major street speed, approach volume, opposing volume, and left-turning volume to determine whether a dedicated left-turn lane is warranted on the major street approach. Based on the ingress left-turn volumes projected at the project driveways during the AM and PM peak hours, an exclusive eastbound left-turn lane is not warranted at the driveway connection (Project Driveway 1) on Indrio Road. A southbound left-turn lane is not warranted at the driveway connection (Project Driveway 2) on Deleon Avenue/Royal Palm Avenue. The projected ingress turning volumes at the proposed project driveways were compared to the thresholds of the NCHRP Report 457 for determination of whether a major road right-turn lane is required at a stop- controlled minor street intersection. Report NCHRP 457 compares the major street speed, approach volume, and right-turning volume to determine whether a dedicated right-turn lane is warranted on the major street approach. Based on the low ingress right-turn volumes projected at the project driveways, and existing traffic volumes on Indrio Road and Deleon Avenue/Royal Palm Avenue during the AM and PM peak hours, exclusive right-turn lanes at the project driveways are not warranted. Site Access is shown in Figure 6. Page 87 of 331 Figure 6: Site Access © 2024 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 200 S Orange Ave, Suite 600, Orlando, FL, 32801 Phone: (407)-898-1511Indrio Townhomes | St. Lucie County, Florida N NOT TO SCALE Project No: 147584005 Page 28 November 2024 DE L E O N AV E N U E INDRIO ROAD7 8 LEGEND Project Location Project Driveway RO Y A L P A L M AV E N U E Page 88 of 331 Indrio Townhomes │Traffic Impact Analysis November 2024 │Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 29 8.0 CONCLUSION This TIA was completed to assess the transportation impacts associated with the development of Indrio Townhomes in St. Lucie County, Florida. The site is generally located in the northeast quadrant of the intersection of Indrio Road & Turnpike Feeder Road. The site is currently vacant. The development is anticipated to be built by Year 2027 and is proposed to consist of ±278 single-family attached dwelling units. The development is expected to generate 2,068 daily new external vehicular trips, 139 (43 in/96 out) net new AM peak hour external trips, and 163 (93 in, 70 out) net new PM peak hour external trips based on ITE trip generation data and procedures. Project trips were distributed onto the surrounding roadway network using the latest adopted regional travel demand model and manual assignment at the study area intersections. AM and PM peak hour roadway segment capacity analyses was performed for study area roadway segments for existing (2024), background (2027), and buildout (2027) conditions. All study area roadway segments are expected to operate acceptably during 2024 existing traffic conditions. Upon review, no transportation improvements were identified near the study intersection by developers or within the latest St. Lucie County Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) Transportation Improvements Program (TIP), St. Lucie County 2045 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), and Florida Department of Transportation’s (FDOT) Five-Year Work Program. AM and PM peak hour operational analyses for existing (2024), background (2027), and buildout (2027) conditions were performed at the study area intersections. The analyses identified no deficiencies except for Turnpike Feeder Road & Palomar Parkway which operates with a failing LOS and delay and v/c ratio greater than 1.0 during 2024 existing and 2027 future background and buildout traffic conditions. Access to the site will be provided via one full access driveway on Indrio Road and one full access driveway on Deleon Avenue/Royal Palm Avenue. Turn lane criteria provided in NCHRP Report 457 was reviewed against future conditions to determine turn lane requirements at project driveways. Based on NCHRP Report 457 output, no additional ingress turn lanes are warranted at the proposed driveway connections on Indrio Road and Deleon Avenue/Royal Palm Avenue. Existing turn lanes at the study area intersections were evaluated to determine if sufficient deceleration and storage is provided to accommodate buildout project traffic volume projections. The southbound left turn lanes at the intersections of Indrio Road & Emerson Avenue and Turnpike Feeder Road & Winter Garden Parkway do not have sufficient storage to accommodate project traffic upon buildout of the development. It should be noted that the southbound storage lengths are deficient during existing traffic conditions and therefore not deficient due to project traffic. In addition, extension of the southbound left-turn lanes is not recommended as the 95th percentile queue can be accommodated within the turn lane (excluding the deceleration length). The results within this report satisfy the requirements set forth by St. Lucie County for evaluating proposed development impacts. Page 89 of 331 APPENDIX A Conceptual Site Plan Page 90 of 331 PUD Plan LOCATION MAP N by agreement in writing with the architect. Immediatelyreport any discrepancies to the architect. SHEET COTLEUR & HEARING, INC.These drawings are the property of the architect and arenot to be used for extensions or on other projects except OF DESIGNED DRAWN APPROVED JOB NUMBER REVISIONS DATE In d r i o G a r d e n s S H G NV R H o m e s St L u c i e C o u n t y , F l o r i d a Landscape Architects Land Planners Environmental Consultants www.cotleurhearing.com 1934 Commerce LaneSuite 1 Jupiter, Florida 33458 561.747.6336 · Fax 747.1377 Lic# LC-26000535 DTS/ACE ACE/JS DTS 24-0425 07-29-24 2SP-1 North 40' Scale: 1" = 80' 80'240'160'320'0' INDRIO RD. TU R N P I K E FE E D E R N K I N G S H W Y THIS SITE *NOTE:SEE SP-2 FOR REC TRACT AREAS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SSSSSS SS SS SSSSSSSS SS SS SS SS SS SSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WWWWWWWWWWWWWWW W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WWWWWWWWWWW WWW W W W W W WRESTORED PINEFLATWOODS LAKE 3.12 AC SA N I B E L A V E . LA S A L L E S T R E E T KI L L A R N E Y A V E . EA S T W O O D D R I V E MIRAMAR AVE CANALROW RO Y A L P A L M A V E . INDRIO ROAD WE S T P I N E A P P L E A V E . LAWN7 UNITS PRESERVED WETLAND 3.00 AC PRESERVE AREA 5.59 AC 1.99 AC RESTORED PINE FLATWOODS .15 AC R35' 5' SW 10' 11' 98' 15' TYP. 5' SW 11' 10' 98' 64.1' 190.5' BUS STOP R35' 5' SW 10' 11' MAIL KIOSK & SHADE STRUCTURE 24' ACCESS 24' ACCESS 24' ACCESS24' ACCESS 15' TYP. 24' 12' 12' PASSIVE REC TRAILS 98' 46.8' VIEWING AREA 7UNITS 7UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 5UNITS 5UNITS 6 UNITS 6 UNITS 6 UNITS 6 UNITS 6 UNITS 6 UNITS 6 UNITS5 UNITS5 UNITS 6 UNITS 6 UNITS 6 UNITS 6 UNITS 6 UNITS6 UNITS 7UNITS 6UNITS LIFT STATION 6UNITS 6UNITS 6UNITS 7UNITS 7UNITS 7UNITS 7UNITS7UNITS7UNITS 6UNITS6UNITS 6UNITS 6UNITS ZONING: RM5 FUTURE LAND USE: RU ZONING: CG FUTURE LAND USE: COM ZONING: RM9 FUTURE LAND USE: RM ZONING: RS4 FUTURE LAND USE: RM ZONING: RS4 FUTURE LAND USE: RM ZONING: RM5 FUTURE LAND USE: RU 6UNITS 25' WETLAND BUFFER 50' ROW 50' ROW 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 50'70' 50' ROW 12.2' 50' ROW 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 98'15' TYP. 24' 24' 50' ROW24' 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 24'24' 16'5' SW 20'20' 22' 22' 11' 24' 10' 5' SW 50' ROW 10' 24' 11' 5' SW 98'22' 63.1' 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 15' TYP. 15' TYP. 18.7' 15' TYP. 22' 20' 15.2' 22' 20'20'20' 20' 15' TYP. 15' TYP. 20' 20' LME 10' LITTORAL SHELF 25' WETLAND BUFFER 10' UPLAND TRANSITION 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER DRAIN TYP. SEWER TYP. WATER TYP. DRAIN TYP. SEWER TYP. WATER TYP. DRAIN TYP. SEWER TYP. WATER TYP. Page 91 of 331 APPENDIX B Excerpts from St. Lucie TPO Traffic Counts and Level of Service Report & St. Lucie County TPO Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) Page 92 of 331 Page 93 of 331 APPENDIX C Turning Movement Counts Page 94 of 331 I-95 SB ON RAMP I-95 SB OFF RAMPINDRIO ROADINDRIO ROAD (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:1 I-95 SB ON RAMP & INDRIO ROAD AM Wednesday, February 7, 2024Date: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles Peak Hour - Bicycles Peak Hour - Pedestrians Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour:07:00 AM - 08:00 AM Peak 15-Minutes:07:15 AM - 07:30 AM Heavy Vehicle Percentage and Peak Hour Factor 116 0 800 115 0784 52 69 0.87 N S EW 0.85 0.90 0.00 0.58 ()(234) (1,371) (237) (131) (107) ()(1,344) 26 090 0 43 756 28 24 0 1 0 0 0 0 00 INDRIO ROAD INDRIO ROAD I-95 SB ON RAMP I-95 SB OFF RAMP 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrian Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 13 00 0 5 0 170 20 212 0 0 0 09684 0 0 0 7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 26 00 0 14 0 217 6 279 0 0 0 095010 0 0 6 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 22 00 0 2 0 201 12 258 0 0 0 087312 0 0 9 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 29 00 0 3 1 168 5 219 0 0 0 07972 0 0 11 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 18 10 0 8 1 147 6 194 0 0 0 07445 0 0 8 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 25 10 0 8 0 142 6 202 0 0 0 08 0 0 12 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 24 00 0 10 1 128 11 182 0 0 0 03 0 0 5 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 19 00 0 8 0 120 9 166 0 0 0 05 0 0 5 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 0 0 7 0 00 2 2 3 1 0 150 0 0 0 Lights 0 0 0 77 0 50 10 7 734 21 0 8550 1 0 0 Mediums 0 0 0 6 0 210 12 19 19 21 0 980 0 0 0 Total 0 24 28 756 43 0 0 0 0 90 0 26 9680 1 0 0 Left Thru Right Total Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 14.4% 0.0%0.0% 0.0% 58.3% 0.0% 2.9% 51.2% 11.7%75.0% 0.0% 0.0% 80.8% Heavy Vehicle % Heavy Vehicle % Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Factor 67.3% 5.5% 0.0% 29.3% 11.7% 0.87 0.58 0.90 0.00 0.85 0.87 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.83 0.500.00 0.00 0.85 0.75 0.87 0.540.60 0.00 0.00 0.83 Page 95 of 331 I-95 NB OFF RAMP I-95 NB ON RAMPINDRIO ROADINDRIO ROAD (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:2 I-95 NB OFF RAMP & INDRIO ROAD AM Wednesday, February 7, 2024Date: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles Peak Hour - Bicycles Peak Hour - Pedestrians Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour:07:00 AM - 08:00 AM Peak 15-Minutes:07:15 AM - 07:30 AM Heavy Vehicle Percentage and Peak Hour Factor 0 95 845 658 5930 117 802 0.89 N S EW 0.00 0.90 0.89 0.89 (232)() (1,502) (1,170) (1,373) (237) (1,036)() 0 00 77 768 0 0 100 17 0 0 0 34 1 55 8 0 INDRIO ROAD INDRIO ROAD I-95 NB OFF RAMP I-95 NB ON RAMP 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrian Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 7:00 AM 0 13 1 0 0 00 3 16 0 0 177 330 0 0 0 01,5550 12 108 0 7:15 AM 0 7 0 0 0 00 8 30 0 0 217 435 0 0 0 01,5540 13 160 0 7:30 AM 0 6 0 0 0 00 1 22 0 0 206 416 0 0 0 01,4350 29 152 0 7:45 AM 0 8 0 0 0 00 5 32 0 0 168 374 0 0 0 01,3210 23 138 0 8:00 AM 0 3 0 0 0 00 8 18 0 0 149 329 0 0 0 01,2200 29 122 0 8:15 AM 0 4 0 0 0 00 9 25 0 0 146 316 0 0 0 00 27 105 0 8:30 AM 0 4 1 0 0 00 7 27 0 0 134 302 0 0 0 00 27 102 0 8:45 AM 0 9 0 0 0 00 6 20 0 0 122 273 0 0 0 00 23 93 0 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 2 0 11 0 0 00 9 0 0 2 9 330 0 0 0 Lights 18 1 515 0 0 05 85 0 0 739 65 1,4280 0 0 0 Mediums 14 0 32 0 0 012 6 0 0 27 3 940 0 0 0 Total 17 100 0 0 768 77 34 1 558 0 0 0 1,5550 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 0.0% 47.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%0.0% 70.6% 15.0% 0.0% 0.0% 3.8% 8.2%0.0% 15.6% 7.7% 0.0% Heavy Vehicle % Heavy Vehicle % Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Factor 23.1% 4.9% 9.9% 0.0% 8.2% 0.89 0.89 0.90 0.89 0.00 0.89 0.00 0.65 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.000.00 0.83 0.80 0.00 0.00 0.880.00 0.93 0.89 0.00 Page 96 of 331 KOBLEGARD ROAD KOBLEGARD ROADINDRIO ROADINDRIO ROAD (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:3 KOBLEGARD ROAD & INDRIO ROAD AM Wednesday, February 7, 2024Date: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles Peak Hour - Bicycles Peak Hour - Pedestrians Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour:07:15 AM - 08:15 AM Peak 15-Minutes:07:30 AM - 07:45 AM Heavy Vehicle Percentage and Peak Hour Factor 113 12 715 722 00 665 759 0.88 N S EW 0.75 0.78 0.00 0.90 (32)(260) (1,326) (1,304) (1,416) (1,166) ()() 44 069 0 715 0 0 653 12 0 0 0 0 0 00 INDRIO ROAD INDRIO ROAD KOBLEGARD ROAD KOBLEGARD ROAD 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrian Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 11 00 2 120 0 0 159 302 0 0 0 01,4650 0 0 10 7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 11 00 1 184 0 0 157 362 0 0 0 01,4930 0 0 9 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 14 00 1 167 0 0 229 425 0 0 0 01,4500 0 0 14 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 20 00 8 169 0 0 170 376 0 0 0 01,3570 0 0 9 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 24 00 2 133 0 0 159 330 0 0 0 01,2870 0 0 12 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 18 00 4 130 0 0 157 319 0 0 0 00 0 0 10 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 35 00 8 120 0 0 160 332 0 0 0 00 0 0 9 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 37 00 6 111 0 0 135 306 0 0 0 00 0 0 17 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 00 18 0 0 16 0 340 0 0 0 Lights 0 0 0 68 0 4411 602 0 0 669 0 1,3940 0 0 0 Mediums 0 0 0 1 0 01 33 0 0 30 0 650 0 0 0 Total 12 653 0 0 715 0 0 0 0 69 0 44 1,4930 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.4% 0.0%0.0% 8.3% 7.8% 0.0% 0.0% 6.4% 6.6%0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Heavy Vehicle % Heavy Vehicle % Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Factor 7.8% 6.4% 0.0% 0.9% 6.6% 0.88 0.90 0.78 0.00 0.75 0.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.77 0.000.00 0.69 0.89 0.00 0.00 0.780.00 0.00 0.00 0.71 Page 97 of 331 JOHNSON ROAD JOHNSON ROADINDRIO ROADINDRIO ROAD (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:4 JOHNSON ROAD & INDRIO ROAD AM Wednesday, February 7, 2024Date: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles Peak Hour - Bicycles Peak Hour - Pedestrians Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour:07:15 AM - 08:15 AM Peak 15-Minutes:07:30 AM - 07:45 AM Heavy Vehicle Percentage and Peak Hour Factor 355 423 529 464 7765 711 720 0.86 N S EW 0.89 0.82 0.87 0.93 (771)(664) (947) (847) (1,328) (1,294) (163)(122) 26 4 054 64 446 19 9 389 313 0 0 37 10 46 210 INDRIO ROAD INDRIO ROAD JOHNSON ROAD JOHNSON ROAD 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrian Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 7:00 AM 0 1 8 0 9 70 75 52 0 3 100 336 0 0 0 01,6103 11 4 63 7:15 AM 0 3 7 0 5 80 83 100 0 1 112 383 0 0 0 01,6720 16 2 46 7:30 AM 0 4 16 0 13 110 89 101 0 10 135 485 0 0 0 01,6612 16 6 82 7:45 AM 0 2 9 0 16 60 76 93 0 1 104 406 0 0 0 01,5234 22 7 66 8:00 AM 0 1 14 0 20 120 65 95 0 7 95 398 0 0 0 01,4583 10 6 70 8:15 AM 0 3 18 0 13 60 56 99 0 5 98 372 0 0 0 01 6 6 61 8:30 AM 0 4 10 0 10 90 70 81 0 6 82 347 0 0 0 01 8 8 58 8:45 AM 0 5 13 0 13 80 58 82 0 3 81 341 0 0 0 05 15 6 52 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 57 11 0 0 11 0 340 0 0 0 Lights 9 44 21 53 35 246296 357 7 18 420 63 1,5690 0 0 0 Mediums 1 2 0 1 2 1310 21 2 1 15 1 690 0 0 0 Total 313 389 9 19 446 64 10 46 21 54 37 264 1,6720 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 0.0% 10.0% 4.3% 0.0% 1.9% 5.4%0.0% 5.4% 8.2% 0.0% 5.3% 5.8% 6.2%22.2% 1.6% 0.0% 6.8% Heavy Vehicle % Heavy Vehicle % Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Factor 7.2% 5.3% 3.9% 5.9% 6.2% 0.86 0.93 0.82 0.87 0.89 0.86 0.00 0.65 0.79 0.00 0.78 0.770.00 0.91 0.96 0.00 0.58 0.840.50 0.74 0.84 0.85 Page 98 of 331 EMERSON AVENUE EMERSON AVENUEINDRIO ROADINDRIO ROAD (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:5 EMERSON AVENUE & INDRIO ROAD AM Wednesday, February 7, 2024Date: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles Peak Hour - Bicycles Peak Hour - Pedestrians Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour:07:30 AM - 08:30 AM Peak 15-Minutes:07:30 AM - 07:45 AM Heavy Vehicle Percentage and Peak Hour Factor 344 260 432 491 01 486 510 0.89 N S EW 0.84 0.84 0.50 0.93 (462)(697) (757) (894) (945) (846) (3)(2) 18 5 0 15 9 106 325 0 1 331 154 1 0 0 0 0 00 INDRIO ROAD INDRIO ROAD EMERSON AVENUE EMERSON AVENUE 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrian Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 41 00 18 48 0 0 67 249 0 0 0 01,2070 27 0 48 7:15 AM 0 0 1 0 42 00 25 68 0 0 52 285 0 0 0 01,2440 23 0 74 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 41 00 30 101 0 0 106 355 0 0 0 01,2620 22 0 55 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 45 00 41 74 1 0 86 318 0 0 0 01,1630 29 0 42 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 34 00 37 78 0 0 65 286 0 0 0 01,0961 26 0 45 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 39 00 46 78 0 0 68 303 0 0 0 00 29 0 43 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 32 00 24 75 0 0 58 256 0 0 0 01 26 1 39 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 31 00 37 64 0 0 51 251 0 0 0 00 21 1 46 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 0 0 1 0 02 10 0 0 12 0 250 0 0 0 Lights 0 0 0 149 0 177139 309 1 0 300 99 1,1750 1 0 0 Mediums 0 0 0 9 0 813 12 0 0 13 7 620 0 0 0 Total 154 331 1 0 325 106 0 0 0 159 0 185 1,2620 1 0 0 Left Thru Right Total Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 6.3% 0.0%0.0% 9.7% 6.6% 0.0% 0.0% 7.7% 6.9%0.0% 6.6% 0.0% 4.3% Heavy Vehicle % Heavy Vehicle % Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Factor 7.6% 7.4% 0.0% 5.2% 6.9% 0.89 0.93 0.84 0.50 0.84 0.89 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.94 0.000.00 0.84 0.82 0.25 0.00 0.770.50 0.95 0.50 0.74 Page 99 of 331 NEW KINGS HWY NEW KINGS HWYINDRIO ROADINDRIO ROAD (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:6 NEW KINGS HWY & INDRIO ROAD AM Wednesday, February 7, 2024Date: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles Peak Hour - Bicycles Peak Hour - Pedestrians Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour:07:15 AM - 08:15 AM Peak 15-Minutes:07:45 AM - 08:00 AM Heavy Vehicle Percentage and Peak Hour Factor 704 508 186 319 502684 570 451 0.93 N S EW 0.88 0.87 0.92 0.93 (972)(1,263) (366) (559) (779) (1,070) (934)(1,323) 14 3 8 12 1 34 108 44 203 174 168 0 25 43 2 17 5 29 8 245 INDRIO ROAD INDRIO ROAD NEW KINGS HWY NEW KINGS HWY 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrian Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 7:00 AM 2 37 62 1 19 1042 27 24 0 11 25 415 0 0 0 01,89959 7 9 26 7:15 AM 0 39 62 4 22 1154 38 38 0 16 21 456 0 0 0 01,96249 13 8 27 7:30 AM 1 51 78 1 30 1098 40 42 0 5 32 499 0 0 0 01,94245 6 7 44 7:45 AM 1 39 82 2 43 1215 35 51 0 11 24 529 0 0 0 01,88265 9 6 35 8:00 AM 3 46 76 1 26 878 55 43 0 12 31 478 0 0 0 01,73444 6 3 37 8:15 AM 1 26 64 0 21 945 46 29 0 18 23 436 0 0 0 060 14 4 31 8:30 AM 2 30 89 2 28 905 40 36 0 8 16 439 0 0 0 056 8 3 26 8:45 AM 0 29 67 2 23 745 22 36 1 12 24 381 0 0 0 048 13 7 18 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 10 7 0 0 3 03 2 4 0 1 0 311 0 0 0 Lights 148 276 23 114 416 137155 163 190 42 102 30 1,83124 0 3 8 Mediums 17 15 1 7 13 610 9 9 2 5 4 1000 0 2 0 Total 168 174 203 44 108 34 175 298 24 121 432 143 1,96225 0 5 8 Left Thru Right Total Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 40.0% 15.4% 7.4% 0.0% 5.8% 3.7%4.0% 7.7% 6.3% 0.0% 4.5% 5.6% 6.7%6.4% 11.8% 4.2% 4.2% Heavy Vehicle % Heavy Vehicle % Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Factor 6.7% 6.5% 10.4% 4.1% 6.7% 0.93 0.93 0.87 0.92 0.88 0.93 0.58 0.86 0.87 0.50 0.70 0.930.81 0.80 0.85 0.25 0.69 0.860.87 0.73 0.83 0.84 Page 100 of 331 I-95 SB ON RAMP I-95 SB OFF RAMPINDRIO ROADINDRIO ROAD (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:1 I-95 SB ON RAMP & INDRIO ROAD PM Wednesday, February 7, 2024Date: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles Peak Hour - Bicycles Peak Hour - Pedestrians Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour:04:30 PM - 05:30 PM Peak 15-Minutes:05:15 PM - 05:30 PM Heavy Vehicle Percentage and Peak Hour Factor 152 0 579 172 0622 79 16 0.92 N S EW 0.92 0.88 0.00 0.64 ()(295) (1,123) (330) (31) (118) ()(1,175) 7 0 14 1 0 9 570 48 31 0 0 0 4 0 0 00 INDRIO ROAD INDRIO ROAD I-95 SB ON RAMP I-95 SB OFF RAMP 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrian Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 34 00 0 4 0 116 3 162 0 0 0 07563 0 0 2 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 40 00 0 2 0 134 5 190 0 0 0 07816 0 0 3 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 34 10 0 8 0 161 4 212 0 0 0 08103 0 0 1 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 38 20 0 6 0 136 0 192 0 0 0 07927 0 0 3 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 35 00 0 11 0 119 1 187 0 0 0 078020 0 0 1 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 34 10 0 6 0 154 4 219 0 0 0 018 0 0 2 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 36 00 0 4 0 148 0 194 0 0 0 06 0 0 0 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 28 00 0 10 0 136 2 180 0 0 0 04 0 0 0 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 0 0 6 0 00 2 0 3 0 0 110 0 0 0 Lights 0 0 0 129 4 60 29 44 553 9 0 7740 0 0 0 Mediums 0 0 0 6 0 10 0 4 14 0 0 250 0 0 0 Total 0 31 48 570 9 0 0 0 0 141 4 7 8100 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 8.5% 0.0%0.0% 0.0% 6.5% 0.0% 3.0% 0.0% 4.4%8.3% 0.0% 0.0% 14.3% Heavy Vehicle % Heavy Vehicle % Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Factor 7.6% 2.9% 0.0% 8.6% 4.4% 0.92 0.64 0.88 0.00 0.92 0.92 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.92 0.500.00 0.00 0.70 0.00 0.89 0.600.64 0.00 0.00 0.75 Page 101 of 331 I-95 NB OFF RAMP I-95 NB ON RAMPINDRIO ROADINDRIO ROAD (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:2 I-95 NB OFF RAMP & INDRIO ROAD PM Wednesday, February 7, 2024Date: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles Peak Hour - Bicycles Peak Hour - Pedestrians Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour:04:30 PM - 05:30 PM Peak 15-Minutes:04:30 PM - 04:45 PM Heavy Vehicle Percentage and Peak Hour Factor 0 153 713 886 7320 172 578 0.94 N S EW 0.00 0.88 0.92 0.96 (276)() (1,366) (1,622) (1,123) (329) (1,326)() 0 00 139 574 0 0 158 14 0 0 0 4 0 72 8 0 INDRIO ROAD INDRIO ROAD I-95 NB OFF RAMP I-95 NB ON RAMP 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrian Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 4:00 PM 0 2 0 0 0 00 1 37 0 0 126 346 0 0 0 01,5190 33 147 0 4:15 PM 0 1 0 0 0 01 1 40 0 0 129 353 0 0 0 01,5840 32 149 0 4:30 PM 0 3 0 0 0 00 4 37 0 0 164 431 0 0 0 01,6170 38 185 0 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 00 5 40 0 0 133 389 0 0 0 01,5850 31 180 0 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 00 4 41 0 0 125 411 0 0 0 01,5020 41 200 0 5:15 PM 0 1 0 0 0 00 1 40 0 0 152 386 0 0 0 00 29 163 0 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 00 1 39 0 0 150 399 0 0 0 00 24 185 0 5:45 PM 0 3 0 0 0 00 5 32 0 0 133 306 0 0 0 00 26 107 0 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 0 4 0 0 02 6 0 0 2 3 170 0 0 0 Lights 3 0 714 0 0 012 146 0 0 559 134 1,5680 0 0 0 Mediums 1 0 10 0 0 00 6 0 0 13 2 320 0 0 0 Total 14 158 0 0 574 139 4 0 728 0 0 0 1,6170 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 0.0% 25.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%0.0% 14.3% 7.6% 0.0% 0.0% 2.6% 3.0%0.0% 3.6% 1.9% 0.0% Heavy Vehicle % Heavy Vehicle % Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Factor 8.1% 2.8% 2.0% 0.0% 3.0% 0.94 0.96 0.88 0.92 0.00 0.94 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000.25 0.70 0.98 0.00 0.00 0.880.00 0.87 0.91 0.00 Page 102 of 331 KOBLEGARD ROAD KOBLEGARD ROADINDRIO ROADINDRIO ROAD (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:3 KOBLEGARD ROAD & INDRIO ROAD PM Wednesday, February 7, 2024Date: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles Peak Hour - Bicycles Peak Hour - Pedestrians Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour:04:30 PM - 05:30 PM Peak 15-Minutes:04:30 PM - 04:45 PM Heavy Vehicle Percentage and Peak Hour Factor 124 52 669 905 00 881 717 0.95 N S EW 0.76 0.93 0.00 0.94 (98)(235) (1,260) (1,659) (1,356) (1,618) ()() 48 076 0 667 0 0 827 52 2 2 0 0 0 00 INDRIO ROAD INDRIO ROAD KOBLEGARD ROAD KOBLEGARD ROAD 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrian Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 17 02 18 161 0 0 141 345 0 0 0 01,5620 0 0 6 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 16 00 12 177 0 0 160 371 0 0 0 01,6460 0 0 6 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 22 00 13 209 0 0 179 442 0 0 0 01,6740 0 0 19 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 20 01 14 206 0 0 153 404 0 0 0 01,6360 0 0 10 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 18 00 12 222 2 0 166 429 0 0 0 01,5510 0 0 9 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 16 01 13 190 0 0 169 399 0 0 0 00 0 0 10 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 17 01 13 209 0 0 149 404 0 0 0 00 0 0 15 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 16 00 3 141 0 0 141 319 0 0 0 00 0 0 18 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 00 8 0 0 5 0 130 0 0 0 Lights 0 0 0 75 0 4852 803 0 0 647 0 1,6292 2 0 0 Mediums 0 0 0 1 0 00 16 0 0 15 0 320 0 0 0 Total 52 827 0 0 667 0 0 0 0 76 0 48 1,6742 2 0 0 Left Thru Right Total Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% 0.0%0.0% 0.0% 2.9% 0.0% 0.0% 3.0% 2.7%0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Heavy Vehicle % Heavy Vehicle % Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Factor 2.7% 3.0% 0.0% 0.8% 2.7% 0.95 0.94 0.93 0.00 0.76 0.95 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.86 0.000.38 0.79 0.93 0.25 0.00 0.930.00 0.00 0.00 0.72 Page 103 of 331 JOHNSON ROAD JOHNSON ROADINDRIO ROADINDRIO ROAD (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:4 JOHNSON ROAD & INDRIO ROAD PM Wednesday, February 7, 2024Date: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles Peak Hour - Bicycles Peak Hour - Pedestrians Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour:04:30 PM - 05:30 PM Peak 15-Minutes:04:30 PM - 04:45 PM Heavy Vehicle Percentage and Peak Hour Factor 503 460 516 687 120125 909 776 0.96 N S EW 0.90 0.98 0.88 0.97 (849)(942) (972) (1,262) (1,454) (1,672) (219)(240) 35 5 074 78 407 31 20 567 322 0 0 74 14 60 460 INDRIO ROAD INDRIO ROAD JOHNSON ROAD JOHNSON ROAD 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrian Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 4:00 PM 0 4 8 0 21 181 56 123 0 3 75 412 0 0 0 01,8913 14 3 83 4:15 PM 0 7 17 0 10 180 74 105 0 8 99 450 0 0 0 01,9935 21 9 77 4:30 PM 0 6 13 0 12 200 83 150 0 9 107 534 0 0 0 02,0481 16 9 108 4:45 PM 0 2 11 0 25 130 76 139 0 10 105 495 0 0 0 02,02211 19 13 71 5:00 PM 0 3 15 0 18 220 94 137 0 8 104 514 0 0 0 01,9143 21 13 76 5:15 PM 0 3 21 0 19 190 69 141 0 4 91 505 0 0 0 05 22 11 100 5:30 PM 0 2 17 0 17 200 78 137 0 13 101 508 0 0 0 06 18 12 87 5:45 PM 0 2 10 0 16 140 59 114 0 5 82 387 0 0 0 02 17 8 58 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 22 6 1 0 3 0 140 0 0 0 Lights 14 60 46 74 69 346306 548 15 30 396 78 1,9820 0 0 0 Mediums 0 0 0 0 5 714 13 4 1 8 0 520 0 0 0 Total 322 567 20 31 407 78 14 60 46 74 74 355 2,0480 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 6.8%0.0% 5.0% 3.4% 0.0% 3.2% 2.7% 3.2%25.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.5% Heavy Vehicle % Heavy Vehicle % Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Factor 4.4% 2.3% 0.0% 2.8% 3.2% 0.96 0.97 0.98 0.88 0.90 0.96 0.00 0.68 0.76 0.00 0.79 0.850.25 0.87 0.95 0.00 0.67 0.970.57 0.91 0.94 0.82 Page 104 of 331 EMERSON AVENUE EMERSON AVENUEINDRIO ROADINDRIO ROAD (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:5 EMERSON AVENUE & INDRIO ROAD PM Wednesday, February 7, 2024Date: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles Peak Hour - Bicycles Peak Hour - Pedestrians Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour:04:45 PM - 05:45 PM Peak 15-Minutes:04:45 PM - 05:00 PM Heavy Vehicle Percentage and Peak Hour Factor 236 506 643 551 43 695 518 0.96 N S EW 0.87 0.97 0.50 0.94 (919)(488) (1,168) (1,030) (974) (1,265) (8)(6) 99 0 13 7 222 419 0 3 410 282 2 0 0 0 2 20 INDRIO ROAD INDRIO ROAD EMERSON AVENUE EMERSON AVENUE 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrian Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 35 00 49 95 0 0 70 304 0 0 0 01,4410 28 1 26 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 35 10 42 84 1 0 95 353 0 0 0 01,5161 56 1 37 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 30 01 73 90 0 0 92 374 0 0 0 01,5640 56 1 31 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 34 00 67 116 0 0 109 410 0 0 0 01,5781 56 1 26 5:00 PM 0 0 1 0 33 00 54 103 0 0 108 379 0 0 0 01,4882 52 0 26 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 40 00 77 101 0 0 99 401 0 0 0 00 59 0 25 5:30 PM 0 0 1 0 30 00 84 90 2 0 103 388 0 0 0 00 55 1 22 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 33 00 63 72 0 1 80 320 0 0 0 00 46 1 24 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 0 0 1 0 01 9 0 0 3 0 140 0 0 0 Lights 0 2 2 130 0 98280 389 3 0 405 219 1,5300 2 0 0 Mediums 0 0 0 6 0 11 12 0 0 11 3 340 0 0 0 Total 282 410 3 0 419 222 0 2 2 137 0 99 1,5780 2 0 0 Left Thru Right Total Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.1% 0.0%0.0% 0.7% 5.1% 0.0% 0.0% 3.3% 3.0%0.0% 1.4% 0.0% 1.0% Heavy Vehicle % Heavy Vehicle % Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Factor 3.3% 2.6% 0.0% 3.4% 3.0% 0.96 0.94 0.97 0.50 0.87 0.96 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 0.86 0.250.25 0.84 0.88 0.25 0.25 0.960.50 0.94 1.00 0.81 Page 105 of 331 NEW KINGS HWY NEW KINGS HWYINDRIO ROADINDRIO ROAD (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:6 NEW KINGS HWY & INDRIO ROAD PM Wednesday, February 7, 2024Date: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles Peak Hour - Bicycles Peak Hour - Pedestrians Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour:04:45 PM - 05:45 PM Peak 15-Minutes:04:45 PM - 05:00 PM Heavy Vehicle Percentage and Peak Hour Factor 581 773 454 312 850551 554 803 0.97 N S EW 0.95 0.96 0.97 0.91 (1,420)(1,122) (833) (572) (1,429) (1,054) (1,521)(1,109) 18 4 778 125 269 55 175 164 194 5 21 31 2 32 9 44 7 659 INDRIO ROAD INDRIO ROAD NEW KINGS HWY NEW KINGS HWY 1 0 0 1 N S EW 0 0 00 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrian Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 4:00 PM 2 59 73 0 16 604 58 29 2 18 60 466 1 1 0 22,21225 21 11 28 4:15 PM 3 69 97 1 10 999 41 38 0 18 61 568 0 1 0 02,36549 26 11 36 4:30 PM 2 68 109 2 17 1018 36 40 1 8 45 551 1 0 0 12,39735 28 13 38 4:45 PM 5 90 112 3 22 737 48 48 3 16 65 627 1 0 0 12,43935 34 13 53 5:00 PM 0 74 118 2 15 775 59 46 0 12 71 619 0 0 0 02,31843 34 18 45 5:15 PM 3 84 101 1 24 855 38 45 2 10 56 600 0 0 0 046 33 17 50 5:30 PM 1 81 116 1 17 774 49 25 0 17 77 593 0 0 0 051 24 17 36 5:45 PM 2 55 88 5 24 8211 37 36 3 10 53 506 0 0 0 044 25 9 22 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 1 2 0 0 4 10 0 8 1 1 0 180 0 0 0 Lights 325 436 63 78 295 180189 162 163 51 264 123 2,37020 5 9 7 Mediums 3 9 2 0 13 35 2 4 3 4 2 511 0 0 0 Total 194 164 175 55 269 125 329 447 65 78 312 184 2,43921 5 9 7 Left Thru Right Total Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 0.0% 1.2% 2.5% 0.0% 0.0% 5.4%4.8% 2.6% 1.2% 0.0% 7.3% 1.9% 2.8%6.9% 1.6% 3.1% 2.2% Heavy Vehicle % Heavy Vehicle % Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Factor 3.6% 2.4% 2.0% 3.6% 2.8% 0.97 0.91 0.96 0.97 0.95 0.97 0.60 0.91 0.95 0.45 0.83 0.870.81 0.82 0.93 0.50 0.83 0.870.90 0.95 0.90 0.88 Page 106 of 331 TURNPIKE FEEDER RD TURNPIKE FEEDER RDMIRAMAR AVENUE-KINGS HWY MIRAMAR AVENUE-KINGS HWY (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:1 TURNPIKE FEEDER RD & MIRAMAR AVENUE-KINGS HWY AM Wednesday, May 29, 2024Date: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles Peak Hour - Bicycles Peak Hour - Pedestrians Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour:07:15 AM - 08:15 AM Peak 15-Minutes:07:15 AM - 07:30 AM Heavy Vehicle Percentage and Peak Hour Factor 654 438 6 40 472792 139 1 0.97 N S EW 0.95 0.58 0.97 0.71 (906)(1,164) (9) (72) (2) (245) (969)(1,407) 1 00 6 0 0 139 0 0 0 0 65 3 0 43 2 400 MIRAMAR AVENUE-KINGS HWY MIRAMAR AVENUE-KINGS HWY TURNPIKE FEEDER RD TURNPIKE FEEDER RD 0 2 0 0 N S EW 1 1 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 110 0 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrian Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 7:00 AM 0 0 105 0 0 1510 0 0 0 0 0 300 0 0 1 01,26234 0 10 0 7:15 AM 0 0 117 0 0 1730 0 0 0 0 0 326 0 1 0 01,27125 1 10 0 7:30 AM 0 0 89 0 0 1650 0 0 0 0 0 319 0 1 0 01,22651 3 10 1 7:45 AM 0 0 118 0 0 1540 0 0 0 0 0 317 0 0 0 01,18535 1 9 0 8:00 AM 0 0 108 0 0 1610 0 0 0 0 0 309 0 0 0 01,12528 1 11 0 8:15 AM 0 0 120 0 0 1250 0 0 0 0 0 281 0 0 0 026 2 8 0 8:30 AM 0 0 119 0 0 1280 0 0 0 0 0 278 0 0 0 025 0 6 0 8:45 AM 0 0 121 0 0 1050 0 0 0 0 0 257 0 0 0 021 1 8 1 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 7 0 0 4 00 0 0 0 0 0 110 0 0 0 Lights 0 393 38 0 621 10 0 138 0 0 6 1,1970 0 0 0 Mediums 0 32 2 0 28 00 0 1 0 0 0 630 0 0 0 Total 0 0 139 0 0 6 0 432 40 0 653 1 1,2710 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 0.0% 0.0% 9.0% 0.0% 0.0% 4.9%0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.8%0.7% 0.0% 5.0% 0.0% Heavy Vehicle % Heavy Vehicle % Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Factor 0.7% 0.0% 8.7% 4.9% 5.8% 0.97 0.71 0.58 0.97 0.95 0.97 0.00 0.00 0.97 0.00 0.00 0.940.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000.71 0.58 0.91 0.25 Page 107 of 331 TURNPIKE FEEDER RD TURNPIKE FEEDER RDPALOMAR PKWY PALOMAR PKWY (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:2 TURNPIKE FEEDER RD & PALOMAR PKWY AM Wednesday, May 29, 2024Date: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles Peak Hour - Bicycles Peak Hour - Pedestrians Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour:07:15 AM - 08:15 AM Peak 15-Minutes:07:15 AM - 07:30 AM Heavy Vehicle Percentage and Peak Hour Factor 575 404 36 27 444634 63 53 0.94 N S EW 0.93 0.70 0.94 0.79 (817)(1,031) (62) (49) (112) (113) (902)(1,130) 4 013 5 2 29 47 4 12 0 0 55 8 47 38 7 100 PALOMAR PKWY PALOMAR PKWY TURNPIKE FEEDER RD TURNPIKE FEEDER RD 0 2 2 1 N S EW 1 1 11 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 010 0 0 1 0 0 N S EW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrian Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 7:00 AM 0 8 96 0 1 1280 3 1 0 3 1 253 0 0 0 01,0979 0 2 1 7:15 AM 0 15 104 0 2 1520 4 0 0 7 0 298 1 0 1 01,1189 2 2 1 7:30 AM 0 8 76 0 5 1430 4 0 0 5 0 257 0 2 1 01,07613 0 3 0 7:45 AM 0 12 108 0 4 1320 3 2 0 11 1 289 0 0 0 01,0728 2 3 3 8:00 AM 0 12 99 0 2 1310 1 2 0 6 1 274 0 0 0 01,01117 1 2 0 8:15 AM 1 18 103 0 1 1110 0 1 0 8 0 256 1 0 0 09 0 3 1 8:30 AM 0 7 102 0 4 1120 5 3 0 5 3 253 0 0 0 08 1 1 2 8:45 AM 0 15 97 0 0 940 5 0 0 2 2 228 0 0 0 06 1 5 1 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 7 0 0 4 00 0 0 0 0 0 110 0 0 0 Lights 42 355 7 11 531 411 3 42 29 2 5 1,0420 0 0 0 Mediums 5 25 3 2 23 01 1 5 0 0 0 650 0 0 0 Total 12 4 47 29 2 5 47 387 10 13 558 4 1,1180 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 0.0% 10.6% 8.3% 0.0% 15.4% 4.8%0.0% 8.3% 25.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 6.8%10.6% 0.0% 30.0% 0.0% Heavy Vehicle % Heavy Vehicle % Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Factor 11.1% 0.0% 9.0% 5.0% 6.8% 0.94 0.79 0.70 0.94 0.93 0.94 0.25 0.72 0.95 0.00 0.65 0.920.00 0.88 0.67 0.00 0.68 0.500.69 0.63 0.55 0.50 Page 108 of 331 TURNPIKE FEEDER RD TURNPIKE FEEDER RDWINTER GARDEN PKWY WINTER GARDEN PKWY (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:3 TURNPIKE FEEDER RD & WINTER GARDEN PKWY AM Wednesday, May 29, 2024Date: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles Peak Hour - Bicycles Peak Hour - Pedestrians Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour:07:15 AM - 08:15 AM Peak 15-Minutes:07:15 AM - 07:30 AM Heavy Vehicle Percentage and Peak Hour Factor 469 490 44 20 400593 290 100 0.91 N S EW 0.86 0.71 0.98 0.87 (945)(812) (75) (41) (184) (526) (799)(1,042) 42 06 9 12 23 149 10 131 0 0 42 1 46 35 0 40 WINTER GARDEN PKWY WINTER GARDEN PKWY TURNPIKE FEEDER RD TURNPIKE FEEDER RD 0 0 0 1 N S EW 0 0 00 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 010 0 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrian Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 7:00 AM 0 8 83 0 2 830 22 2 0 5 1 257 0 2 0 01,16441 2 1 7 7:15 AM 0 10 96 0 2 1230 40 4 0 5 1 330 0 0 0 01,20336 0 2 11 7:30 AM 0 5 76 0 1 960 31 5 0 7 2 277 0 0 0 01,13948 2 0 4 7:45 AM 0 13 95 0 2 990 30 0 0 8 7 300 0 0 0 01,12632 3 0 11 8:00 AM 0 18 83 0 1 1030 30 1 0 3 2 296 1 0 0 01,04833 4 2 16 8:15 AM 0 11 94 0 2 720 26 3 0 7 2 266 0 0 0 034 4 2 9 8:30 AM 0 15 89 0 1 830 35 2 0 1 1 264 0 0 0 030 3 0 4 8:45 AM 0 11 84 0 2 650 12 3 0 2 2 222 0 0 0 026 1 1 13 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 7 0 0 4 00 0 0 0 0 0 110 0 0 0 Lights 43 319 3 6 397 39129 10 147 20 12 5 1,1300 0 0 0 Mediums 3 24 1 0 20 32 0 2 3 0 4 620 0 0 0 Total 131 10 149 23 12 9 46 350 4 6 421 42 1,2030 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 0.0% 6.5% 8.9% 0.0% 0.0% 5.7%0.0% 1.5% 0.0% 0.0% 13.0% 0.0% 6.1%1.8% 33.3% 0.0% 12.0% Heavy Vehicle % Heavy Vehicle % Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Factor 1.4% 15.9% 8.8% 5.8% 6.1% 0.91 0.87 0.71 0.98 0.86 0.91 0.00 0.79 0.95 0.00 0.88 0.860.00 0.82 0.55 0.00 0.78 0.460.88 0.75 0.38 0.84 Page 109 of 331 TURNPIKE FEEDER RD TURNPIKE FEEDER RDMIRAMAR AVENUE-KINGS HWY MIRAMAR AVENUE-KINGS HWY (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:1 TURNPIKE FEEDER RD & MIRAMAR AVENUE-KINGS HWY PM Wednesday, May 29, 2024Date: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles Peak Hour - Bicycles Peak Hour - Pedestrians Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour:04:30 PM - 05:30 PM Peak 15-Minutes:04:30 PM - 04:45 PM Heavy Vehicle Percentage and Peak Hour Factor 608 738 8 18 748673 67 2 0.99 N S EW 0.92 0.50 0.95 0.81 (1,416)(1,169) (14) (47) (3) (144) (1,449)(1,310) 1 00 8 0 0 66 0 0 0 1 60 7 0 73 0 180 MIRAMAR AVENUE-KINGS HWY MIRAMAR AVENUE-KINGS HWY TURNPIKE FEEDER RD TURNPIKE FEEDER RD 0 0 0 1 N S EW 0 0 00 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 020 0 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrian Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 4:00 PM 0 0 162 0 0 1300 0 0 0 0 0 324 1 0 0 01,40420 1 10 1 4:15 PM 0 0 166 0 0 1690 0 0 0 0 0 356 1 0 0 01,42714 0 7 0 4:30 PM 0 0 179 0 0 1610 0 0 0 0 0 363 0 0 0 01,43116 2 4 1 4:45 PM 0 0 183 0 0 1501 0 0 0 0 0 361 1 0 0 01,39815 4 8 0 5:00 PM 0 0 174 0 0 1440 0 0 0 0 0 347 0 0 0 01,37224 1 4 0 5:15 PM 0 0 194 0 0 1520 0 0 0 0 0 360 0 0 0 011 1 2 0 5:30 PM 0 0 171 0 0 1320 0 0 0 0 0 330 0 1 0 021 1 5 0 5:45 PM 0 0 173 0 0 1290 0 0 0 0 0 335 0 0 0 022 4 7 0 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 1 0 0 2 00 0 0 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 Lights 0 712 18 0 588 10 0 65 0 0 7 1,3921 0 0 0 Mediums 0 17 0 0 17 00 0 1 0 0 1 360 0 0 0 Total 0 0 66 0 0 8 0 730 18 0 607 1 1,4311 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 0.0% 0.0% 2.5% 0.0% 0.0% 3.1%0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.7%1.5% 12.5% 0.0% 0.0% Heavy Vehicle % Heavy Vehicle % Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Factor 1.5% 12.5% 2.4% 3.1% 2.7% 0.99 0.81 0.50 0.95 0.92 0.99 0.00 0.00 0.94 0.00 0.00 0.920.25 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000.81 0.50 0.73 0.50 Page 110 of 331 TURNPIKE FEEDER RD TURNPIKE FEEDER RDPALOMAR PKWY PALOMAR PKWY (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:2 TURNPIKE FEEDER RD & PALOMAR PKWY PM Wednesday, May 29, 2024Date: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles Peak Hour - Bicycles Peak Hour - Pedestrians Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour:04:30 PM - 05:30 PM Peak 15-Minutes:05:15 PM - 05:30 PM Heavy Vehicle Percentage and Peak Hour Factor 570 588 26 29 721603 62 159 0.99 N S EW 0.91 0.80 0.93 0.70 (1,118)(1,096) (57) (63) (305) (108) (1,379)(1,154) 17 010 7 4 15 45 6 11 0 0 54 3 13 8 57 0 130 PALOMAR PKWY PALOMAR PKWY TURNPIKE FEEDER RD TURNPIKE FEEDER RD 2 0 3 1 N S EW 0 0 21 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 020 0 0 0 0 1 N S EW 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrian Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 4:00 PM 0 35 121 0 4 1070 3 2 0 5 0 296 1 0 0 01,3258 3 4 4 4:15 PM 0 27 126 0 2 1490 1 2 0 7 2 337 1 0 0 01,36612 1 5 3 4:30 PM 0 35 137 0 4 1500 1 0 0 1 1 346 0 0 0 11,37910 2 1 4 4:45 PM 0 36 154 0 2 1250 0 3 0 7 3 346 1 0 2 11,34711 0 4 1 5:00 PM 0 33 138 0 2 1280 7 1 0 3 0 337 0 0 1 01,31514 3 2 6 5:15 PM 0 34 141 0 2 1400 3 2 0 4 0 350 0 0 0 010 2 6 6 5:30 PM 0 31 135 0 2 1170 2 0 0 4 3 314 0 0 0 28 1 4 7 5:45 PM 0 27 137 0 3 1210 0 0 0 5 0 314 1 0 0 08 0 6 7 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 1 0 0 2 00 0 0 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 Lights 135 554 13 10 527 1711 5 45 14 4 7 1,3420 0 0 0 Mediums 3 15 0 0 14 00 1 0 1 0 0 340 0 0 0 Total 11 6 45 15 4 7 138 570 13 10 543 17 1,3790 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 0.0% 2.2% 2.8% 0.0% 0.0% 2.9%0.0% 0.0% 16.7% 0.0% 6.7% 0.0% 2.7%0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Heavy Vehicle % Heavy Vehicle % Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Factor 1.6% 3.8% 2.6% 2.8% 2.7% 0.99 0.70 0.80 0.93 0.91 0.99 0.00 0.96 0.93 0.00 0.75 0.920.00 0.43 0.58 0.00 0.71 0.500.84 0.58 0.75 0.93 Page 111 of 331 TURNPIKE FEEDER RD TURNPIKE FEEDER RDWINTER GARDEN PKWY WINTER GARDEN PKWY (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:3 TURNPIKE FEEDER RD & WINTER GARDEN PKWY PM Wednesday, May 29, 2024Date: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles Peak Hour - Bicycles Peak Hour - Pedestrians Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour:05:00 PM - 06:00 PM Peak 15-Minutes:05:30 PM - 05:45 PM Heavy Vehicle Percentage and Peak Hour Factor 637 449 45 40 563577 169 348 0.94 N S EW 0.88 0.90 0.95 0.90 (895)(1,196) (76) (67) (622) (335) (1,109)(1,132) 13 8 014 9 22 14 78 15 76 0 0 48 5 18 8 36 4 110 WINTER GARDEN PKWY WINTER GARDEN PKWY TURNPIKE FEEDER RD TURNPIKE FEEDER RD 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrian Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 4:00 PM 0 38 81 0 1 1010 8 1 0 3 2 284 0 0 0 01,30223 3 2 21 4:15 PM 0 38 94 0 1 1300 19 1 0 2 1 342 0 0 0 01,35121 2 3 30 4:30 PM 0 37 97 0 4 1300 15 6 0 3 3 341 0 0 0 01,37922 1 1 22 4:45 PM 0 49 103 0 2 910 21 2 0 2 7 335 1 1 0 01,41327 2 3 26 5:00 PM 0 41 99 0 2 1110 19 5 0 3 6 333 0 0 0 01,41418 3 0 26 5:15 PM 0 42 94 0 2 1370 14 5 0 5 7 370 0 0 0 019 1 2 42 5:30 PM 0 56 94 0 4 1180 21 2 0 4 4 375 0 0 0 027 3 3 39 5:45 PM 0 49 77 0 6 1190 22 3 0 2 5 336 0 0 0 014 2 6 31 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 1 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 Lights 187 353 11 14 472 13676 13 78 14 22 9 1,3850 0 0 0 Mediums 1 10 0 0 13 20 2 0 0 0 0 280 0 0 0 Total 76 15 78 14 22 9 188 364 11 14 485 138 1,4140 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 0.0% 0.5% 3.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.7%0.0% 0.0% 13.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.1%0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 1.6% Heavy Vehicle % Heavy Vehicle % Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Factor 1.2% 0.0% 2.1% 2.4% 2.1% 0.94 0.90 0.90 0.95 0.88 0.94 0.00 0.84 0.95 0.00 0.58 0.890.00 0.86 0.75 0.00 0.70 0.860.73 0.50 0.56 0.88 Page 112 of 331 DELEON AVE DELEON AVEINDRIO RDINDRIO RD (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:1 DELEON AVE & INDRIO RD AM Wednesday, November 6, 2024Date: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles Peak Hour - Bicycles Peak Hour - Pedestrians Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour:07:15 AM - 08:15 AM Peak 15-Minutes:08:00 AM - 08:15 AM Heavy Vehicle Percentage and Peak Hour Factor 0 5 166 346 00 346 161 0.96 N S EW 0.38 0.94 0.00 0.96 (14)(9) (365) (618) (363) (621) ()() 0 00 5 161 0 0 346 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 INDRIO RD INDRIO RD DELEON AVE DELEON AVE 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrian Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 1 00 1 84 0 0 40 129 0 0 0 05080 1 0 2 7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 87 0 0 40 127 0 0 0 05120 0 0 0 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 85 0 0 35 120 0 0 0 05040 0 0 0 7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 90 0 0 40 132 0 0 0 04910 2 0 0 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 84 0 0 46 133 0 0 0 04870 3 0 0 8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 01 0 62 0 0 54 119 0 0 0 00 1 0 1 8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 1 00 1 50 0 0 51 107 0 0 0 00 1 0 3 8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 1 01 2 73 0 0 49 128 0 0 0 00 2 0 0 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 00 3 0 0 1 0 40 0 0 0 Lights 0 0 0 0 0 00 327 0 0 135 5 4670 0 0 0 Mediums 0 0 0 0 0 00 16 0 0 25 0 410 0 0 0 Total 0 346 0 0 161 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 5120 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%0.0% 0.0% 5.5% 0.0% 0.0% 16.1% 8.8%0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Heavy Vehicle % Heavy Vehicle % Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Factor 5.5% 15.7% 0.0% 0.0% 8.8% 0.96 0.96 0.94 0.00 0.38 0.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.50 0.000.50 0.38 0.96 0.00 0.00 0.930.00 0.58 0.00 0.33 Page 113 of 331 DELEON AVE DELEON AVEINDRIO RDINDRIO RD (303) 216-2439www.alltrafficdata.net Location:1 DELEON AVE & INDRIO RD PM Wednesday, November 6, 2024Date: Peak Rolling Hour Flow Rates Peak Hour - Motorized Vehicles Peak Hour - Bicycles Peak Hour - Pedestrians Traffic Counts - Motorized Vehicles Note: Total study counts contained in parentheses. Peak Hour:04:15 PM - 05:15 PM Peak 15-Minutes:04:30 PM - 04:45 PM Heavy Vehicle Percentage and Peak Hour Factor 39 22 388 249 00 235 391 0.84 N S EW 0.75 0.85 0.00 0.83 (30)(67) (716) (454) (729) (430) ()() 19 020 16 372 0 0 229 6 0 0 0 0 0 00 INDRIO RD INDRIO RD DELEON AVE DELEON AVE 0 0 0 0 N S EW 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 000 0 0 1 0 0 N S EW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total EastboundInterval Start Time Rolling Hour West East South North Pedestrian Crossings U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 3 00 1 42 0 0 66 118 0 0 0 06200 0 0 6 4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 2 00 1 55 0 0 91 157 0 0 0 06620 3 0 5 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 7 00 3 68 0 0 111 198 0 0 0 06590 3 0 6 4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 8 00 1 50 0 0 82 147 0 0 0 06050 4 0 2 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 3 00 1 56 0 0 88 160 0 0 0 05930 6 0 6 5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 4 00 0 54 0 0 92 154 0 0 0 00 2 0 2 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 3 00 0 51 0 0 86 144 0 0 0 00 2 0 2 5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 2 00 1 46 0 0 78 135 0 0 0 00 2 0 6 Vehicle Type Left Thru Right Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound TotalLeftThruRightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-TurnLeftThruRightU-Turn Articulated Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 01 1 0 0 1 0 30 0 0 0 Lights 0 0 0 19 0 184 221 0 0 351 15 6280 0 0 0 Mediums 0 0 0 1 0 11 7 0 0 20 1 310 0 0 0 Total 6 229 0 0 372 16 0 0 0 20 0 19 6620 0 0 0 Left Thru Right Total Eastbound U-Turn Westbound Northbound Southbound Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn Left Thru RightU-Turn 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 5.0% 0.0%0.0% 33.3% 3.5% 0.0% 0.0% 5.6% 5.1%0.0% 6.3% 0.0% 5.3% Heavy Vehicle % Heavy Vehicle % Peak Hour Factor Peak Hour Factor 4.3% 5.7% 0.0% 5.1% 5.1% 0.84 0.83 0.85 0.00 0.75 0.84 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.69 0.000.00 0.50 0.84 0.00 0.00 0.840.00 0.67 0.00 0.79 Page 114 of 331 APPENDIX D FDOT’s Florida Traffic Online 2023 Peak Season Factor Category Report Page 115 of 331 2023 PEAK SEASON FACTOR CATEGORY REPORT - REPORT TYPE: ALL CATEGORY: 9401 CEN.-W OF US1 TO I95 MOCF: 0.93 WEEK DATES SF PSCF ================================================================================ 1 01/01/2023 - 01/07/2023 1.00 1.08 2 01/08/2023 - 01/14/2023 0.98 1.05 * 3 01/15/2023 - 01/21/2023 0.95 1.02 * 4 01/22/2023 - 01/28/2023 0.94 1.01 * 5 01/29/2023 - 02/04/2023 0.93 1.00 * 6 02/05/2023 - 02/11/2023 0.92 0.99 * 7 02/12/2023 - 02/18/2023 0.91 0.98 * 8 02/19/2023 - 02/25/2023 0.91 0.98 * 9 02/26/2023 - 03/04/2023 0.92 0.99 *10 03/05/2023 - 03/11/2023 0.92 0.99 *11 03/12/2023 - 03/18/2023 0.92 0.99 *12 03/19/2023 - 03/25/2023 0.93 1.00 *13 03/26/2023 - 04/01/2023 0.94 1.01 *14 04/02/2023 - 04/08/2023 0.95 1.02 *15 04/09/2023 - 04/15/2023 0.96 1.03 16 04/16/2023 - 04/22/2023 0.97 1.04 17 04/23/2023 - 04/29/2023 0.98 1.05 18 04/30/2023 - 05/06/2023 0.98 1.05 19 05/07/2023 - 05/13/2023 0.99 1.06 20 05/14/2023 - 05/20/2023 1.00 1.08 21 05/21/2023 - 05/27/2023 1.01 1.09 22 05/28/2023 - 06/03/2023 1.02 1.10 23 06/04/2023 - 06/10/2023 1.03 1.11 24 06/11/2023 - 06/17/2023 1.04 1.12 25 06/18/2023 - 06/24/2023 1.05 1.13 26 06/25/2023 - 07/01/2023 1.06 1.14 27 07/02/2023 - 07/08/2023 1.06 1.14 28 07/09/2023 - 07/15/2023 1.07 1.15 29 07/16/2023 - 07/22/2023 1.07 1.15 30 07/23/2023 - 07/29/2023 1.07 1.15 31 07/30/2023 - 08/05/2023 1.06 1.14 32 08/06/2023 - 08/12/2023 1.06 1.14 33 08/13/2023 - 08/19/2023 1.06 1.14 34 08/20/2023 - 08/26/2023 1.06 1.14 35 08/27/2023 - 09/02/2023 1.07 1.15 36 09/03/2023 - 09/09/2023 1.07 1.15 37 09/10/2023 - 09/16/2023 1.07 1.15 38 09/17/2023 - 09/23/2023 1.06 1.14 39 09/24/2023 - 09/30/2023 1.06 1.14 40 10/01/2023 - 10/07/2023 1.05 1.13 41 10/08/2023 - 10/14/2023 1.05 1.13 42 10/15/2023 - 10/21/2023 1.04 1.12 43 10/22/2023 - 10/28/2023 1.04 1.12 44 10/29/2023 - 11/04/2023 1.03 1.11 45 11/05/2023 - 11/11/2023 1.03 1.11 46 11/12/2023 - 11/18/2023 1.02 1.10 47 11/19/2023 - 11/25/2023 1.02 1.10 48 11/26/2023 - 12/02/2023 1.01 1.09 49 12/03/2023 - 12/09/2023 1.01 1.09 50 12/10/2023 - 12/16/2023 1.00 1.08 51 12/17/2023 - 12/23/2023 0.98 1.05 52 12/24/2023 - 12/30/2023 0.97 1.04 53 12/31/2023 - 12/31/2023 0.95 1.02 * PEAK SEASON 09-MAR-2024 18:41:41 830UPD 4_9401_PKSEASON.TXT Page 116 of 331 APPENDIX E Turning Movement Volume Worksheets Page 117 of 331 INTERSECTION VOLUME DEVELOPMENT Emerson Ave @ Indrio Rd AM Peak Hour Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 2/7/24 Observed Volumes 0 0 0 159 0 185 154 331 1 1 325 106 Peak Season Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2024 Peak Season Volumes 0 0 0 146 0 170 142 305 1 1 299 98 Growth Factor 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 2027 Peak Season Volumes 0 0 0 170 0 198 165 354 1 1 347 114 Vested Trips Sabal Palm Grove 23%45%45%23% OUT OUT IN IN 8 16 5 3 Bedner Farms East 5%5%46%46% IN OUT OUT IN 3 8 69 23 Bedner Farms NW 5%5%46%46% IN OUT OUT IN 3 8 71 24 Sugar Sand 30%30% IN OUT 4 11 2027 Non-Project Traffic 0 0 0 178 0 220 186 498 1 1 405 117 Project Assignment 0.0%0.0%0.0%5.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%23.0%0.0%0.0%23.0%5.0% ------IN ------IN ----OUT OUT Project Traffic (Net New Trips)0 0 0 2 0 0 0 10 0 0 22 5 Total Build-Out Volumes 0 0 0 180 0 220 186 508 1 1 427 122 Raw-To-Peak Season Factor: 0.92 Applied Growth Rate: 5.39% Existing Year 2024 Build-Out Year: 2027 Growth Factor: 1.16 Emerson Ave Emerson Ave Indrio Rd Indrio Rd Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Page 118 of 331 INTERSECTION VOLUME DEVELOPMENT N Kings Hwy @ Indrio Rd AM Peak Hour Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 2/7/24 Observed Volumes 180 298 24 129 432 143 193 174 203 44 108 34 Peak Season Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2024 Peak Season Volumes 166 274 22 119 397 132 178 160 187 40 99 31 Growth Factor 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 2027 Peak Season Volumes 193 318 26 138 461 153 207 186 217 46 115 36 Vested Trips Sabal Palm Grove Bedner Farms East 13%20%20%13%13%13% IN IN OUT OUT OUT IN 7 10 30 20 20 7 Bedner Farms NW 13%20%20%13%13%13% IN IN OUT OUT OUT IN 7 10 31 20 20 7 Sugar Sand 20%10%30%20%30% IN IN IN OUT OUT 2 1 4 7 11 2027 Non-Project Traffic 207 320 26 139 461 173 272 226 257 53 140 36 Project Assignment 0.0%0.0%16.0%8.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%28.0%0.0%16.0%28.0%0.0% ----IN IN ------IN --OUT OUT -- Project Traffic (Net New Trips)0 0 7 3 0 0 0 12 0 15 27 0 Total Build-Out Volumes 207 320 33 142 461 173 272 238 257 68 167 36 Raw-To-Peak Season Factor: 0.92 Applied Growth Rate: 5.39% Existing Year 2024 Build-Out Year: 2027 Growth Factor: 1.16 N Kings Hwy Turnpike Feeder Rd Indrio Rd Indrio Rd Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Page 119 of 331 INTERSECTION VOLUME DEVELOPMENT Turnpike Feeder Rd @ Miramar Ave AM Peak Hour Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 5/29/24 Observed Volumes 0 432 40 0 653 1 0 0 139 0 0 6 Peak Season Factor 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 2024 Peak Season Volumes 0 441 41 0 666 1 0 0 142 0 0 6 Growth Factor 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 2027 Peak Season Volumes 0 512 48 0 774 1 0 0 165 0 0 7 Vested Trips Sabal Palm Grove Bedner Farms East 20%20% OUT IN 30 10 Bedner Farms NW 20%20% OUT IN 31 10 Sugar Sand 50%25% IN OUT 6 9 2027 Non-Project Traffic 0 573 54 0 794 1 0 0 165 0 0 16 Project Assignment 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%8.0%0.0%0.0%8.0%0.0%0.0%30.0% ----------OUT ----IN ----OUT Project Traffic (Net New Trips)0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 3 0 0 29 Total Build-Out Volumes 0 573 54 0 794 9 0 0 168 0 0 45 Raw-To-Peak Season Factor: 1.02 Applied Growth Rate: 5.39% Existing Year 2024 Build-Out Year: 2027 Growth Factor: 1.16 Turnpike Feeder Rd Turnpike Feeder Rd N Kings Hwy Miramar Ave Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Page 120 of 331 INTERSECTION VOLUME DEVELOPMENT Turnpike Feeder Rd @ Palomar Pkwy AM Peak Hour Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 5/29/24 Observed Volumes 47 387 10 13 558 4 12 4 47 29 2 5 Peak Season Factor 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 2024 Peak Season Volumes 48 395 10 13 569 4 12 4 48 30 2 5 Growth Factor 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 2027 Peak Season Volumes 56 459 12 15 661 5 14 5 56 35 2 6 Vested Trips Sabal Palm Grove Bedner Farms East 5%15%15%5% OUT OUT IN IN 8 23 8 3 Bedner Farms NW 5%15%15%5% OUT OUT IN IN 8 23 8 3 Sugar Sand 5%20%20%10%5% OUT OUT IN OUT OUT 2 7 2 4 2 2027 Non-Project Traffic 74 512 12 17 677 5 14 9 62 35 2 8 Project Assignment 0.0%30.0%0.0%10.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%8.0%0.0%0.0% --OUT --IN ----------OUT ---- Project Traffic (Net New Trips)0 29 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 Pass-By Traffic 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Build-Out Volumes 74 541 12 21 677 5 14 9 62 43 2 8 Raw-To-Peak Season Factor: 1.02 Applied Growth Rate: 5.39% Existing Year 2024 Build-Out Year: 2027 Growth Factor: 1.16 Turnpike Feeder Rd Turnpike Feeder Rd Palomar Pkwy Palomar Pkwy Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Page 121 of 331 INTERSECTION VOLUME DEVELOPMENT Turnpike Feeder Rd @ Winter Garden Pkwy AM Peak Hour Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 5/29/24 Observed Volumes 46 350 4 6 421 42 131 10 149 23 12 9 Peak Season Factor 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 2024 Peak Season Volumes 47 357 4 6 429 43 134 10 152 23 12 9 Growth Factor 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 2027 Peak Season Volumes 55 415 5 7 498 50 156 12 177 27 14 10 Vested Trips Sabal Palm Grove Bedner Farms East 15%15% OUT IN 23 8 Bedner Farms NW 15%15% OUT IN 23 8 Sugar Sand 20%20% OUT IN 7 2 2027 Non-Project Traffic 55 468 5 7 516 50 156 12 177 27 14 10 Project Assignment 0.0%30.0%0.0%20.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% --OUT --IN ---------------- Project Traffic (Net New Trips)0 29 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pass-By Traffic 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Build-Out Volumes 55 497 5 16 516 50 156 12 177 27 14 10 K:\ORL_TPTO\147584005_Indrio TH Due Diligence\TIA\03_Excel\[Indrio TH v1.xlsx]Turn Lanes (Buildout)11/13/2024 Raw-To-Peak Season Factor: 1.02 Applied Growth Rate: 5.39% Existing Year 2024 Build-Out Year: 2027 Growth Factor: 1.16 Turnpike Feeder Rd Turnpike Feeder Rd Winter Garden Pkwy Winter Garden Pkwy Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Page 122 of 331 INTERSECTION VOLUME DEVELOPMENT Deleon Ave @ Indrio Rd AM Peak Hour Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 11/6/24 Observed Volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 346 0 0 161 5 Peak Season Factor 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 2024 Peak Season Volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 356 0 0 166 5 Growth Factor 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 2027 Peak Season Volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 414 0 0 193 6 Vested Trips Sabal Palm Grove Bedner Farms East 13%13% OUT IN 20 7 Bedner Farms NW 13%13% OUT IN 20 7 Sugar Sand 20%50%10%20% OUT OUT IN IN 7 18 1 2 2027 Non-Project Traffic 0 0 0 7 0 18 1 454 0 0 207 8 Project Assignment 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%22.0%26.0%26.0%0.0%0.0%22.0%0.0% ----------OUT IN IN ----OUT -- Project Traffic (Net New Trips)0 0 0 0 0 21 11 11 0 0 21 0 Pass-By Traffic 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Build-Out Volumes 0 0 0 7 0 39 12 465 0 0 228 8 K:\ORL_TPTO\147584005_Indrio TH Due Diligence\TIA\03_Excel\[Indrio TH v1.xlsx]Turn Lanes (Buildout)11/13/2024 Raw-To-Peak Season Factor: 1.03 Applied Growth Rate: 5.39% Existing Year 2024 Build-Out Year: 2027 Growth Factor: 1.16 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Deleon Ave Deleon Ave Indrio Rd Indrio Rd Page 123 of 331 INTERSECTION VOLUME DEVELOPMENT 0 @ Indrio Rd AM Peak Hour Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 1/0/00 Observed Volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 327 0 0 186 0 Peak Season Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2024 Peak Season Volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 301 0 0 171 0 Growth Factor 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 2027 Peak Season Volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 350 0 0 199 0 Vested Trips Sabal Palm Grove Bedner Farms East 13%13% OUT IN 20 7 Bedner Farms NW 13%13% OUT IN 20 7 Sugar Sand 20%20% OUT IN 7 2 2027 Non-Project Traffic 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 397 0 0 215 0 Project Assignment 0.0%0.0%0.0%18.0%0.0%22.0%26.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%18.0% ------OUT --OUT IN --------IN Project Traffic (Net New Trips)0 0 0 17 0 21 11 0 0 0 0 8 Pass-By Traffic 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Build-Out Volumes 0 0 0 17 0 21 11 397 0 0 215 8 K:\ORL_TPTO\147584005_Indrio TH Due Diligence\TIA\03_Excel\[Indrio TH v1.xlsx]Turn Lanes (Buildout)11/13/2024 Raw-To-Peak Season Factor: 0.92 Applied Growth Rate: 5.39% Existing Year 2024 Build-Out Year: 2027 Growth Factor: 1.16 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound 0 Driveway 1 Indrio Rd Indrio Rd Page 124 of 331 INTERSECTION VOLUME DEVELOPMENT Deleon Ave @ Driveway 2 AM Peak Hour Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 1/0/00 Observed Volumes 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peak Season Factor 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 2024 Peak Season Volumes 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Growth Factor 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 2027 Peak Season Volumes 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vested Trips Sabal Palm Grove Bedner Farms East Bedner Farms Sugar Sand 30%20% IN OUT 3 7 2027 Non-Project Traffic 0 9 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Assignment 0.0%0.0%26.0%30.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%22.0%0.0%38.0% ----IN IN ----------OUT --OUT Project Traffic (Net New Trips)0 0 11 13 0 0 0 0 0 22 0 36 Pass-By Traffic 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Build-Out Volumes 0 9 11 13 7 0 0 0 0 22 0 36 K:\ORL_TPTO\147584005_Indrio TH Due Diligence\TIA\03_Excel\[Indrio TH v1.xlsx]Turn Lanes (Buildout)11/13/2024 Raw-To-Peak Season Factor: 1.02 Applied Growth Rate: 5.39% Existing Year 2024 Build-Out Year: 2027 Growth Factor: 1.16 Deleon Ave Deleon Ave Driveway 2 Driveway 2 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Page 125 of 331 INTERSECTION VOLUME DEVELOPMENT Emerson Ave @ Indrio Rd PM Peak Hour Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 2/7/24 Observed Volumes 0 2 2 137 0 99 282 410 3 2 419 222 Peak Season Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2024 Peak Season Volumes 0 2 2 126 0 91 259 377 3 2 385 204 Growth Factor 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 2027 Peak Season Volumes 0 2 2 146 0 106 301 438 3 2 447 237 Vested Trips Sabal Palm Grove 23%45%45%23% OUT OUT IN IN 5 10 18 9 Bedner Farms East 5%5%46%46% IN OUT OUT IN 8 5 46 75 Bedner Farms NW 5%5%46%46% IN OUT OUT IN 9 5 48 82 Sugar Sand 30%30% IN OUT 11 6 2027 Non-Project Traffic 0 2 2 151 0 133 329 543 3 2 610 246 Project Assignment 0.0%0.0%0.0%5.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%23.0%0.0%0.0%23.0%5.0% ------IN ------IN ----OUT OUT Project Traffic (Net New Trips)0 0 0 5 0 0 0 21 0 0 16 4 Total Build-Out Volumes 0 2 2 156 0 133 329 564 3 2 626 250 Raw-To-Peak Season Factor: 0.92 Applied Growth Rate: 5.39% Existing Year 2024 Build-Out Year: 2027 Growth Factor: 1.16 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Emerson Ave Emerson Ave Indrio Rd Indrio Rd Page 126 of 331 INTERSECTION VOLUME DEVELOPMENT Turnpike Feeder Rd @ Indrio Rd PM Peak Hour Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 2/7/24 Observed Volumes 338 447 65 85 312 184 215 164 175 60 269 125 Peak Season Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2024 Peak Season Volumes 311 411 60 78 287 169 198 151 161 55 247 115 Growth Factor 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 2027 Peak Season Volumes 361 478 70 91 333 196 230 175 187 64 287 134 Vested Trips Sabal Palm Grove Bedner Farms East 13%20%20%13%13%13% IN IN OUT OUT OUT IN 21 32 20 13 13 21 Bedner Farms NW 13%20%20%13%13%13% IN IN OUT OUT OUT IN 23 36 21 14 14 23 Sugar Sand 20%10%30%20%30% IN IN IN OUT OUT 7 4 11 4 6 2027 Non-Project Traffic 405 485 70 95 333 264 282 202 214 68 337 134 Project Assignment 0.0%0.0%16.0%8.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%28.0%0.0%16.0%28.0%0.0% ----IN IN ------IN --OUT OUT -- Project Traffic (Net New Trips)0 0 15 7 0 0 0 26 0 11 20 0 Total Build-Out Volumes 405 485 85 102 333 264 282 228 214 79 357 134 Raw-To-Peak Season Factor: 0.92 Applied Growth Rate: 5.39% Existing Year 2024 Build-Out Year: 2027 Growth Factor: 1.16 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound N Kings Hwy Turnpike Feeder Rd Indrio Rd Indrio Rd Page 127 of 331 INTERSECTION VOLUME DEVELOPMENT Turnpike Feeder Rd @ Miramar Ave PM Peak Hour Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 5/29/24 Observed Volumes 0 730 18 0 607 1 0 0 66 0 0 8 Peak Season Factor 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 2024 Peak Season Volumes 0 745 18 0 619 1 0 0 67 0 0 8 Growth Factor 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 2027 Peak Season Volumes 0 866 21 0 719 1 0 0 78 0 0 9 Vested Trips Sabal Palm Grove Bedner Farms East 20%20% OUT IN 20 32 Bedner Farms NW 20%20% OUT IN 21 36 Sugar Sand 50%25% IN OUT 18 5 2027 Non-Project Traffic 0 907 39 0 787 1 0 0 78 0 0 14 Project Assignment 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%8.0%0.0%0.0%8.0%0.0%0.0%30.0% ----------OUT ----IN ----OUT Project Traffic (Net New Trips)0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 7 0 0 21 Total Build-Out Volumes 0 907 39 0 787 7 0 0 85 0 0 35 Raw-To-Peak Season Factor: 1.02 Applied Growth Rate: 5.39% Existing Year 2024 Build-Out Year: 2027 Growth Factor: 1.16 Turnpike Feeder Rd Turnpike Feeder Rd N Kings Hwy Miramar Ave Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Page 128 of 331 INTERSECTION VOLUME DEVELOPMENT Turnpike Feeder Rd @ Palomar Pkwy PM Peak Hour Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 5/29/24 Observed Volumes 138 570 13 10 543 17 11 6 45 15 4 7 Peak Season Factor 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 2024 Peak Season Volumes 141 581 13 10 554 17 11 6 46 15 4 7 Growth Factor 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 2027 Peak Season Volumes 164 675 15 12 644 20 13 7 53 17 5 8 Vested Trips Sabal Palm Grove Bedner Farms East 5%15%15%5% OUT OUT IN IN 5 15 24 8 Bedner Farms NW 5%15%15%5% OUT OUT IN IN 5 16 27 9 Sugar Sand 5%15%20%10%5% OUT OUT IN OUT OUT 1 3 7 2 1 2027 Non-Project Traffic 175 709 15 19 695 20 13 9 70 17 5 9 Project Assignment 0.0%30.0%0.0%10.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%8.0%0.0%0.0% --OUT --IN ----------OUT ---- Project Traffic (Net New Trips)0 21 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 Total Build-Out Volumes 175 730 15 28 695 20 13 9 70 23 5 9 Raw-To-Peak Season Factor: 1.02 Applied Growth Rate: 5.39% Existing Year 2024 Build-Out Year: 2027 Growth Factor: 1.16 Turnpike Feeder Rd Turnpike Feeder Rd Palomar Pkwy Palomar Pkwy Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Page 129 of 331 INTERSECTION VOLUME DEVELOPMENT Turnpike Feeder Rd @ Winter Garden Pkwy PM Peak Hour Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 5/29/24 Observed Volumes 188 364 11 14 485 138 76 15 78 14 22 9 Peak Season Factor 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 2024 Peak Season Volumes 192 371 11 14 495 141 78 15 80 14 22 9 Growth Factor 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 2027 Peak Season Volumes 223 431 13 16 575 164 91 17 93 16 26 10 Vested Trips Sabal Palm Grove Bedner Farms East 15%15% OUT IN 15 24 Bedner Farms NW 15%15% OUT IN 16 27 Sugar Sand 20%20% OUT IN 4 7 2027 Non-Project Traffic 223 466 13 16 633 164 91 17 93 16 26 10 Project Assignment 0.0%30.0%0.0%20.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0% --OUT --IN ---------------- Project Traffic (Net New Trips)0 21 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Build-Out Volumes 223 487 13 35 633 164 91 17 93 16 26 10 Raw-To-Peak Season Factor: 1.02 Applied Growth Rate: 5.39% Existing Year 2024 Build-Out Year: 2027 Growth Factor: 1.16 Turnpike Feeder Rd Turnpike Feeder Rd Winter Garden Pkwy Winter Garden Pkwy Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Page 130 of 331 INTERSECTION VOLUME DEVELOPMENT Deleon Ave @ Indrio Rd PM Peak Hour Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 11/6/24 Observed Volumes 0 0 0 20 0 19 6 229 0 0 372 16 Peak Season Factor 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 1.03 2024 Peak Season Volumes 0 0 0 21 0 20 6 236 0 0 383 16 Growth Factor 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 2027 Peak Season Volumes 0 0 0 24 0 23 7 274 0 0 445 19 Vested Trips Sabal Palm Grove Bedner Farms East 13%13% OUT IN 13 21 Bedner Farms NW 13%13% OUT IN 14 23 Sugar Sand 20%50%10%20% OUT OUT IN IN 4 10 3 7 2027 Non-Project Traffic 0 0 0 28 0 33 10 301 0 0 496 26 Project Assignment 0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%22.0%26.0%26.0%0.0%0.0%22.0%0.0% ----------OUT IN IN ----OUT -- Project Traffic (Net New Trips)0 0 0 0 0 15 24 24 0 0 15 0 Total Build-Out Volumes 0 0 0 28 0 48 34 325 0 0 511 26 Raw-To-Peak Season Factor: 1.03 Applied Growth Rate: 5.39% Existing Year 2024 Build-Out Year: 2027 Growth Factor: 1.16 Deleon Ave Deleon Ave Indrio Rd Indrio Rd Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Page 131 of 331 INTERSECTION VOLUME DEVELOPMENT 0 @ Indrio Rd PM Peak Hour Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 1/0/00 Observed Volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 314 0 0 454 0 Peak Season Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 2024 Peak Season Volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 289 0 0 418 0 Growth Factor 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 2027 Peak Season Volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 336 0 0 486 0 Vested Trips Sabal Palm Grove Bedner Farms East 13%13% OUT IN 13 21 Bedner Farms NW 13%13% OUT IN 14 23 Sugar Sand 20%20% OUT IN 4 7 2027 Non-Project Traffic 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 367 0 0 537 0 Project Assignment 0.0%0.0%0.0%18.0%0.0%22.0%26.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%18.0% ------OUT --OUT IN --------IN Project Traffic (Net New Trips)0 0 0 12 0 15 24 0 0 0 0 17 Total Build-Out Volumes 0 0 0 12 0 15 24 367 0 0 537 17 Raw-To-Peak Season Factor: 0.92 Applied Growth Rate: 5.39% Existing Year 2024 Build-Out Year: 2027 Growth Factor: 1.16 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound 0 Driveway 1 Indrio Rd Indrio Rd Page 132 of 331 INTERSECTION VOLUME DEVELOPMENT Driveway 2 @ Miramar Ave PM Peak Hour Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right Left Thru Right 1/0/00 Observed Volumes 0 22 0 0 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Peak Season Factor 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 2024 Peak Season Volumes 0 22 0 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Growth Factor 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 1.16 2027 Peak Season Volumes 0 26 0 0 46 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Vested Trips Sabal Palm Grove Bedner Farms East Bedner Farms Sugar Sand 30%20% IN OUT 10 4 2027 Non-Project Traffic 0 36 0 0 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Project Assignment 0.0%0.0%26.0%30.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%0.0%22.0%0.0%38.0% ----IN IN ----------OUT --OUT Project Traffic (Net New Trips)0 0 24 28 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 27 Total Build-Out Volumes 0 36 24 28 50 0 0 0 0 16 0 27 Raw-To-Peak Season Factor: 1.02 Applied Growth Rate: 5.39% Existing Year 2024 Build-Out Year: 2027 Growth Factor: 1.16 Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Driveway 2 0 Miramar Ave Miramar Ave Page 133 of 331 APPENDIX F Signal Timing/Phasing Plans Page 134 of 331 Page 135 of 331 Page 136 of 331 Page 137 of 331 APPENDIX G Synchro Outputs Page 138 of 331 Timings Exisitng 1: Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Timing Plan: AM Existing Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR Ø4 Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)142 305 1 1 299 98 146 0 170 Future Volume (vph)142 305 1 1 299 98 146 0 170 Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Split NA pt+ov Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 8 8 8 1 4 Permitted Phases 6 2 Detector Phase 1 6 6 5 2 2 8 8 8 1 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)7.0 10.0 10.0 7.0 10.0 10.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Minimum Split (s)14.8 17.8 17.8 14.8 25.8 25.8 14.8 14.8 14.8 Total Split (s)20.0 50.0 50.0 20.0 50.0 50.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Total Split (%)16.7% 41.7% 41.7% 16.7% 41.7% 41.7% 20.8% 20.8%21% Yellow Time (s)4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 All-Red Time (s)3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Min Min None Min Min None None None Act Effct Green (s)8.4 25.4 25.4 7.1 11.6 11.6 8.7 8.7 25.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.49 0.49 0.14 0.22 0.22 0.17 0.17 0.48 v/c Ratio 0.31 0.21 0.00 0.00 0.45 0.23 0.31 0.31 0.14 Control Delay (s/veh)22.1 10.0 0.0 23.0 20.3 2.1 23.3 23.3 1.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)22.1 10.0 0.0 23.0 20.3 2.1 23.3 23.3 1.8 LOS C A A C C A C C A Approach Delay (s/veh)13.8 15.8 11.8 Approach LOS B B B Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length: 52.3 Natural Cycle: 75 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.45 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 13.9 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 39.6%ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 1: Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Page 139 of 331 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Exisitng 1: Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Timing Plan: AM Existing Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)142 305 1 1 299 98 0 0 0 146 0 170 Future Volume (veh/h)142 305 1 1 299 98 0 0 0 146 0 170 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1752 1796 1900 1900 1781 1796 1900 1900 1900 1811 1900 1841 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 160 343 1 1 336 110 0 0 0 164 0 191 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Percent Heavy Veh, %10 7 0 0 8 7 0 0 0 6 0 4 Cap, veh/h 426 1177 556 4 729 328 4 4 0 515 0 876 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.35 0.35 0.00 0.22 0.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.15 Sat Flow, veh/h 3237 3413 1610 1810 3385 1522 1810 1900 0 3450 0 3120 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 160 343 1 1 336 110 0 0 0 164 0 191 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1618 1706 1610 1810 1692 1522 1810 1900 0 1725 0 1560 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.1 3.4 0.0 0.0 4.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.1 3.4 0.0 0.0 4.0 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 426 1177 556 4 729 328 4 4 0 515 0 876 V/C Ratio(X)0.38 0.29 0.00 0.26 0.46 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.32 0.00 0.22 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 850 3101 1463 475 3076 1383 670 704 0 1278 0 1566 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 18.4 11.1 10.0 23.1 15.9 15.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.6 0.0 12.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.5 0.1 0.0 31.5 0.5 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.0 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 1.2 1.7 0.0 0.1 2.3 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 1.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 19.0 11.2 10.0 54.6 16.3 16.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.0 0.0 12.9 LnGrp LOS B B A D B B B B Approach Vol, veh/h 504 447 0 355 Approach Delay, s/veh 13.7 16.3 0.0 15.3 Approach LOS B B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.9 17.8 0.0 7.9 23.8 14.7 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 12.2 42.2 17.2 12.2 42.2 17.2 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.1 6.0 0.0 2.0 5.4 4.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.3 2.5 0.0 0.0 2.2 1.0 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 15.0 HCM 7th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. Page 140 of 331 Timings Exisitng 2: N Kings Hwy/Turnpike Feeder Rd & Indrio Rd Timing Plan: AM Existing Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)178 160 187 40 99 31 166 274 22 119 397 132 Future Volume (vph)178 160 187 40 99 31 166 274 22 119 397 132 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 7 4 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 6 2 2 4 8 Detector Phase 1 6 6 5 2 2 7 4 4 3 8 8 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)6.0 15.0 15.0 6.0 15.0 15.0 6.0 10.0 10.0 6.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s)13.1 22.1 22.1 13.1 22.1 22.1 13.0 17.0 17.0 13.0 17.0 17.0 Total Split (s)30.0 50.0 50.0 30.0 50.0 50.0 15.0 45.0 45.0 15.0 45.0 45.0 Total Split (%)21.4% 35.7% 35.7% 21.4% 35.7% 35.7% 10.7% 32.1% 32.1% 10.7% 32.1% 32.1% Yellow Time (s)5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time (s)2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Min Min None Min Min None None None None None None Act Effct Green (s)33.7 26.0 26.0 22.1 15.1 15.1 8.1 16.1 16.1 7.8 15.8 15.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.42 0.33 0.33 0.28 0.19 0.19 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.20 0.20 v/c Ratio 0.39 0.15 0.32 0.12 0.16 0.09 0.58 0.43 0.06 0.40 0.62 0.34 Control Delay (s/veh)17.7 22.6 5.6 16.0 29.7 0.4 44.0 30.1 0.3 39.2 33.5 7.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)17.7 22.6 5.6 16.0 29.7 0.4 44.0 30.1 0.3 39.2 33.5 7.6 LOS B C A B C A D C A D C A Approach Delay (s/veh)14.9 21.1 33.6 29.2 Approach LOS B C C C Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 140 Actuated Cycle Length: 79.4 Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.62 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 25.4 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 61.8%ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 2: N Kings Hwy/Turnpike Feeder Rd & Indrio Rd Page 141 of 331 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Exisitng 2: N Kings Hwy/Turnpike Feeder Rd & Indrio Rd Timing Plan: AM Existing Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)178 160 187 40 99 31 166 274 22 119 397 132 Future Volume (veh/h)178 160 187 40 99 31 166 274 22 119 397 132 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1781 1811 1811 1826 1811 1722 1678 1796 1841 1811 1841 1841 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 191 172 201 43 106 33 178 295 24 128 427 142 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, %8 6 6 5 6 12 15 7 4 6 4 4 Cap, veh/h 523 966 431 396 731 310 265 659 301 261 649 290 Arrive On Green 0.12 0.28 0.28 0.05 0.21 0.21 0.09 0.19 0.19 0.08 0.19 0.19 Sat Flow, veh/h 1697 3441 1535 1739 3441 1459 3100 3413 1560 3346 3497 1560 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 191 172 201 43 106 33 178 295 24 128 427 142 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1697 1721 1535 1739 1721 1459 1550 1706 1560 1673 1749 1560 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.0 2.7 7.6 1.3 1.8 1.3 3.9 5.4 0.9 2.6 8.0 5.8 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.0 2.7 7.6 1.3 1.8 1.3 3.9 5.4 0.9 2.6 8.0 5.8 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 523 966 431 396 731 310 265 659 301 261 649 290 V/C Ratio(X)0.36 0.18 0.47 0.11 0.14 0.11 0.67 0.45 0.08 0.49 0.66 0.49 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 876 2092 933 876 2092 887 351 1837 840 379 1883 840 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 17.9 19.2 21.0 19.8 22.6 22.4 31.3 25.2 23.3 31.2 26.7 25.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.4 0.1 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.1 3.1 0.5 0.1 1.4 1.1 1.3 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 4.0 1.8 4.6 1.0 1.3 0.7 2.6 3.6 0.6 1.8 5.6 3.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 18.3 19.3 21.8 19.9 22.7 22.5 34.4 25.6 23.4 32.6 27.8 27.0 LnGrp LOS B B C B C C C C C C C C Approach Vol, veh/h 564 182 497 697 Approach Delay, s/veh 19.9 22.0 28.7 28.5 Approach LOS B C C C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.3 22.1 12.5 20.6 10.5 26.9 13.0 20.1 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 7.1 7.1 7.0 7.0 7.1 7.1 7.0 7.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 22.9 42.9 8.0 38.0 22.9 42.9 8.0 38.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.0 3.8 4.6 7.4 3.3 9.6 5.9 10.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.4 0.8 0.1 1.8 0.1 1.8 0.1 3.1 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 25.4 HCM 7th LOS C Page 142 of 331 HCM 7th TWSC Exisitng 3: Turnpike Feeder Rd & N Kings Hwy /Miramar Ave Timing Plan: AM Existing Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 142 0 0 6 0 441 41 0 666 1 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 142 0 0 6 0 441 41 0 666 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized --None --Stop --None --None Storage Length --0 --0 --0 --- Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 1 0 0 0 0 9 5 0 5 0 Mvmt Flow 0 0 146 0 0 6 0 455 42 0 687 1 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All --344 --455 -0 0 --0 Stage 1 ------------ Stage 2 ------------ Critical Hdwy --6.915 --6.2 ------ Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------------ Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------------ Follow-up Hdwy --3.3095 --3.3 ------ Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 655 0 0 610 0 --0 -- Stage 1 0 0 -0 0 -0 --0 -- Stage 2 0 0 -0 0 -0 --0 -- Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver --655 --610 ------ Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------------ Stage 1 ------------ Stage 2 ------------ Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v12.06 10.97 0 0 HCM LOS B B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)--655 610 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio --0.223 0.01 -- HCM Control Delay (s/veh)--12.1 11 -- HCM Lane LOS --B B -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)--0.9 0 -- Page 143 of 331 HCM 7th TWSC Exisitng 4: Turnpike Feeder Rd & Palomar Pkwy Timing Plan: AM Existing Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 2.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 12 4 48 30 2 5 48 395 10 13 569 4 Future Vol, veh/h 12 4 48 30 2 5 48 395 10 13 569 4 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length ------123 --546 -- Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 Heavy Vehicles, %8 25 11 0 0 0 11 8 30 15 5 0 Mvmt Flow 13 4 51 32 2 5 51 420 11 14 605 4 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1159 1168 607 1163 1165 426 610 0 0 431 0 0 Stage 1 635 635 -528 528 ------- Stage 2 523 533 -635 637 ------- Critical Hdwy 7.18 6.75 6.31 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.21 --4.25 -- Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.18 5.75 -6.1 5.5 ------- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.18 5.75 -6.1 5.5 ------- Follow-up Hdwy 3.572 4.225 3.399 3.5 4 3.3 2.299 --2.335 -- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 168 175 480 173 196 633 927 --1063 -- Stage 1 457 438 -538 531 ------- Stage 2 526 489 -470 474 ------- Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 154 163 480 141 183 633 927 --1063 -- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 154 163 -141 183 ------- Stage 1 451 433 -508 502 ------- Stage 2 491 462 -410 468 ------- Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v19.49 34.77 0.97 0.19 HCM LOS C D Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)927 --316 160 1063 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.055 --0.215 0.246 0.013 -- HCM Control Delay (s/veh)9.1 --19.5 34.8 8.4 -- HCM Lane LOS A --C D A -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.2 --0.8 0.9 0 -- Page 144 of 331 Timings Exisitng 5: Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter Garden Pkwy Timing Plan: AM Existing Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)10 152 12 47 357 6 429 43 Future Volume (vph)10 152 12 47 357 6 429 43 Turn Type NA Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA pm+ov Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 2 6 6 Detector Phase 4 4 8 5 2 6 6 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)11.0 11.0 10.0 5.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Minimum Split (s)17.5 17.5 17.2 11.8 17.8 17.8 17.8 17.5 Total Split (s)20.0 20.0 20.0 15.0 60.0 45.0 45.0 20.0 Total Split (%)20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 15.0% 60.0% 45.0% 45.0% 20.0% Yellow Time (s)4.0 4.0 3.4 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.0 All-Red Time (s)2.5 2.5 3.8 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.5 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)6.5 6.5 7.2 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None Max None None None Act Effct Green (s)12.5 12.5 10.3 53.9 53.9 46.0 46.0 68.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.12 0.60 0.60 0.51 0.51 0.76 v/c Ratio 0.63 0.43 0.25 0.12 0.38 0.01 0.51 0.04 Control Delay (s/veh)50.7 7.5 36.6 10.5 12.3 18.3 21.7 0.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)50.7 7.5 36.6 10.5 12.3 18.3 21.7 0.1 LOS D A D B B B C A Approach Delay (s/veh)28.5 36.6 12.1 19.7 Approach LOS C D B B Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 100 Actuated Cycle Length: 89.5 Natural Cycle: 75 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.63 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 19.9 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.9%ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 5: Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter Garden Pkwy Page 145 of 331 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Exisitng 5: Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter Garden Pkwy Timing Plan: AM Existing Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)134 10 152 23 12 9 47 357 4 6 429 43 Future Volume (veh/h)134 10 152 23 12 9 47 357 4 6 429 43 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1900 1870 1707 1900 1411 1796 1767 1900 1900 1811 1722 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 147 11 65 25 13 3 52 392 1 7 471 28 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, %2 0 2 13 0 33 7 9 0 0 6 12 Cap, veh/h 203 15 191 79 41 9 392 1028 3 547 850 860 Arrive On Green 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.04 0.58 0.58 0.47 0.47 0.47 Sat Flow, veh/h 1689 126 1585 1110 577 133 1711 1761 4 1007 1811 1459 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 158 0 65 41 0 0 52 0 393 7 471 28 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1816 0 1585 1821 0 0 1711 0 1766 1007 1811 1459 Q Serve(g_s), s 7.6 0.0 3.4 2.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 10.9 0.3 17.0 0.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 7.6 0.0 3.4 2.0 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 10.9 0.7 17.0 0.7 Prop In Lane 0.93 1.00 0.61 0.07 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 218 0 191 129 0 0 392 0 1031 547 850 860 V/C Ratio(X)0.72 0.00 0.34 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.38 0.01 0.55 0.03 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 269 0 235 256 0 0 477 0 1031 547 850 860 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 38.6 0.0 36.8 40.2 0.0 0.0 12.4 0.0 10.1 13.1 17.4 7.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 7.2 0.0 1.1 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.8 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 6.8 0.0 2.5 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 6.9 0.1 10.6 0.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 45.8 0.0 37.8 41.6 0.0 0.0 12.6 0.0 11.2 13.2 18.1 7.8 LnGrp LOS D D D B B B B A Approach Vol, veh/h 223 41 445 506 Approach Delay, s/veh 43.5 41.6 11.4 17.5 Approach LOS D D B B Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 60.0 17.5 10.5 49.5 13.7 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.8 6.5 6.8 6.8 7.2 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 53.2 13.5 8.2 38.2 12.8 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.9 9.6 3.3 19.0 4.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.3 0.3 0.0 2.7 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 20.8 HCM 7th LOS C Page 146 of 331 HCM 7th TWSC Exisitng 6: Indrio Rd & Deleon Ave Timing Plan: AM Existing Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 356 166 5 0 0 Future Vol, veh/h 0 356 166 5 0 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length ----0 - Veh in Median Storage, #-0 0 -0 - Grade, %-0 0 -0 - Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96 Heavy Vehicles, %6 6 16 16 0 0 Mvmt Flow 0 371 173 5 0 0 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 178 0 -0 546 176 Stage 1 ----176 - Stage 2 ----371 - Critical Hdwy 4.16 ---6.4 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ----5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ----5.4 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.254 ---3.5 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1374 ---502 873 Stage 1 ----860 - Stage 2 ----702 - Platoon blocked, %--- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1374 ---502 873 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ----502 - Stage 1 ----860 - Stage 2 ----702 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 0 0 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)1374 ---- HCM Lane V/C Ratio ----- HCM Control Delay (s/veh)0 ---0 HCM Lane LOS A ---A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0 ---- Page 147 of 331 Timings Existing 1: Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Timing Plan: PM Existing Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)259 377 3 2 385 204 2 126 0 91 Future Volume (vph)259 377 3 2 385 204 2 126 0 91 Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm NA Split NA pt+ov Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 4 8 8 8 1 Permitted Phases 6 2 Detector Phase 1 6 6 5 2 2 4 8 8 8 1 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)7.0 10.0 10.0 7.0 10.0 10.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Minimum Split (s)14.8 17.8 17.8 14.8 17.8 17.8 14.8 14.8 14.8 Total Split (s)20.0 50.0 50.0 20.0 50.0 50.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Total Split (%)16.7% 41.7% 41.7% 16.7% 41.7% 41.7% 20.8% 20.8% 20.8% Yellow Time (s)4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 All-Red Time (s)3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Min Min None Min Min None None None Act Effct Green (s)10.5 33.1 33.1 7.6 13.6 13.6 7.6 8.7 8.7 22.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.60 0.60 0.14 0.25 0.25 0.14 0.16 0.16 0.41 v/c Ratio 0.41 0.19 0.00 0.01 0.47 0.39 0.02 0.25 0.26 0.08 Control Delay (s/veh)25.3 10.8 0.0 29.0 22.1 6.3 25.0 28.2 28.2 2.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)25.3 10.8 0.0 29.0 22.1 6.3 25.0 28.2 28.2 2.6 LOS C B A C C A C C C A Approach Delay (s/veh)16.6 16.7 25.0 17.5 Approach LOS B B C B Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length: 55.3 Natural Cycle: 65 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.47 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 16.8 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 47.7%ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 1: Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Page 148 of 331 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing 1: Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Timing Plan: PM Existing Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)259 377 3 2 385 204 0 2 2 126 0 91 Future Volume (veh/h)259 377 3 2 385 204 0 2 2 126 0 91 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1885 1826 1900 1900 1856 1885 1900 1900 1900 1826 1900 1885 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 270 393 3 2 401 212 0 2 2 131 0 95 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, %1 5 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 5 0 1 Cap, veh/h 418 1138 528 7 747 338 14 7 7 412 0 762 Arrive On Green 0.12 0.33 0.33 0.00 0.21 0.21 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.12 0.00 0.12 Sat Flow, veh/h 3483 3469 1610 1810 3526 1598 1810 872 872 3478 0 3195 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 270 393 3 2 401 212 0 0 4 131 0 95 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1742 1735 1610 1810 1763 1598 1810 0 1743 1739 0 1598 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.3 4.9 0.1 0.1 5.8 6.9 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.0 0.0 1.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.3 4.9 0.1 0.1 5.8 6.9 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.0 0.0 1.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 418 1138 528 7 747 338 14 0 13 412 0 762 V/C Ratio(X)0.65 0.35 0.01 0.29 0.54 0.63 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.32 0.00 0.12 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 739 2545 1181 384 2586 1172 541 0 521 1040 0 1339 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 24.1 14.7 13.0 28.6 20.2 20.6 0.0 0.0 28.4 23.2 0.0 17.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.7 0.2 0.0 21.4 0.6 1.9 0.0 0.0 12.5 0.4 0.0 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 2.9 2.9 0.0 0.1 3.8 4.3 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.3 0.0 0.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 25.8 14.8 13.0 50.0 20.8 22.5 0.0 0.0 40.9 23.7 0.0 17.3 LnGrp LOS C B B D C C D C B Approach Vol, veh/h 666 615 4 226 Approach Delay, s/veh 19.3 21.5 40.9 21.0 Approach LOS B C D C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.7 20.0 8.2 8.0 26.7 14.6 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 12.2 42.2 17.2 12.2 42.2 17.2 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 6.3 8.9 2.1 2.1 6.9 4.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.4 3.2 0.0 0.0 2.5 0.6 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 20.5 HCM 7th LOS C Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. Page 149 of 331 Timings Existing 2: N Kings Hwy/Turnpike Feeder Rd & Indrio Rd Timing Plan: PM Existing Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)198 151 161 55 247 115 311 411 60 78 287 169 Future Volume (vph)198 151 161 55 247 115 311 411 60 78 287 169 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 7 4 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 6 2 2 4 8 Detector Phase 1 6 6 5 2 2 7 4 4 3 8 8 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)6.0 15.0 15.0 6.0 15.0 15.0 6.0 10.0 10.0 6.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s)13.1 22.1 22.1 13.1 22.1 22.1 13.0 17.0 17.0 13.0 17.0 17.0 Total Split (s)30.0 50.0 50.0 30.0 50.0 50.0 15.0 45.0 45.0 15.0 45.0 45.0 Total Split (%)21.4% 35.7% 35.7% 21.4% 35.7% 35.7% 10.7% 32.1% 32.1% 10.7% 32.1% 32.1% Yellow Time (s)5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time (s)2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Min Min None Min Min None None None None None None Act Effct Green (s)33.0 22.9 22.9 22.6 15.3 15.3 8.1 18.2 18.2 7.2 14.4 14.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.42 0.29 0.29 0.29 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.23 0.23 0.09 0.18 0.18 v/c Ratio 0.42 0.15 0.30 0.15 0.37 0.28 0.90 0.52 0.13 0.25 0.47 0.40 Control Delay (s/veh)17.4 23.7 6.1 15.6 30.5 6.1 66.2 30.5 0.6 37.0 31.1 7.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)17.4 23.7 6.1 15.6 30.5 6.1 66.2 30.5 0.6 37.0 31.1 7.8 LOS B C A B C A E C A D C A Approach Delay (s/veh)15.7 21.8 42.4 24.6 Approach LOS B C D C Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 140 Actuated Cycle Length: 78.2 Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.90 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 28.3 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 64.2%ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 2: N Kings Hwy/Turnpike Feeder Rd & Indrio Rd Page 150 of 331 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing 2: N Kings Hwy/Turnpike Feeder Rd & Indrio Rd Timing Plan: PM Existing Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)198 151 161 55 247 115 311 411 60 78 287 169 Future Volume (veh/h)198 151 161 55 247 115 311 411 60 78 287 169 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1885 1796 1796 1870 1870 1885 1856 1856 1900 1826 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 204 156 166 57 255 119 321 424 62 80 296 174 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh, %3 1 7 7 2 2 1 3 3 0 5 2 Cap, veh/h 461 977 415 411 746 333 390 737 329 235 568 260 Arrive On Green 0.12 0.27 0.27 0.06 0.21 0.21 0.11 0.21 0.21 0.07 0.16 0.16 Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 3582 1522 1711 3554 1585 3483 3526 1572 3510 3469 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 204 156 166 57 255 119 321 424 62 80 296 174 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 1791 1522 1711 1777 1585 1742 1763 1572 1755 1735 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.3 2.4 6.4 1.8 4.4 4.6 6.4 7.7 2.3 1.6 5.6 7.4 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.3 2.4 6.4 1.8 4.4 4.6 6.4 7.7 2.3 1.6 5.6 7.4 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 461 977 415 411 746 333 390 737 329 235 568 260 V/C Ratio(X)0.44 0.16 0.40 0.14 0.34 0.36 0.82 0.58 0.19 0.34 0.52 0.67 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 816 2150 914 862 2133 951 390 1874 836 393 1845 843 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 18.3 19.8 21.2 19.9 24.0 24.1 31.0 25.4 23.3 31.8 27.3 28.1 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.7 0.1 0.6 0.2 0.3 0.6 13.3 0.7 0.3 0.9 0.7 3.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 4.4 1.7 3.8 1.3 3.3 2.9 5.7 5.3 1.5 1.2 3.9 5.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 19.0 19.8 21.8 20.0 24.3 24.8 44.4 26.1 23.6 32.7 28.1 31.1 LnGrp LOS B B C C C C D C C C C C Approach Vol, veh/h 526 431 807 550 Approach Delay, s/veh 20.1 23.9 33.2 29.7 Approach LOS C C C C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.7 22.1 11.8 21.9 11.2 26.6 15.0 18.7 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 7.1 7.1 7.0 7.0 7.1 7.1 7.0 7.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 22.9 42.9 8.0 38.0 22.9 42.9 8.0 38.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.3 6.6 3.6 9.7 3.8 8.4 8.4 9.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.5 2.3 0.1 2.7 0.1 1.5 0.0 2.3 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 27.7 HCM 7th LOS C Page 151 of 331 HCM 7th TWSC Existing 3: Turnpike Feeder Rd & N Kings Hwy /Miramar Ave Timing Plan: PM Existing Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.6 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 67 0 0 8 0 745 18 0 619 1 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 67 0 0 8 0 745 18 0 619 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized --None --Stop --None --None Storage Length --0 --0 --0 --- Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 2 0 0 13 0 3 0 0 3 0 Mvmt Flow 0 0 68 0 0 8 0 753 18 0 625 1 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All --313 --753 -0 0 --0 Stage 1 ------------ Stage 2 ------------ Critical Hdwy --6.93 --6.395 ------ Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------------ Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------------ Follow-up Hdwy --3.319 --3.4235 ------ Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 683 0 0 387 0 --0 -- Stage 1 0 0 -0 0 -0 --0 -- Stage 2 0 0 -0 0 -0 --0 -- Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver --683 --387 ------ Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------------ Stage 1 ------------ Stage 2 ------------ Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v10.85 14.51 0 0 HCM LOS B B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)--683 387 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio --0.099 0.021 -- HCM Control Delay (s/veh)--10.8 14.5 -- HCM Lane LOS --B B -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)--0.3 0.1 -- Page 152 of 331 HCM 7th TWSC Existing 4: Turnpike Feeder Rd & Palomar Pkwy Timing Plan: PM Existing Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 11 6 46 15 4 7 141 581 13 10 554 17 Future Vol, veh/h 11 6 46 15 4 7 141 581 13 10 554 17 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length ------123 --546 -- Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 Heavy Vehicles, %0 17 0 7 0 0 2 3 0 0 3 0 Mvmt Flow 11 6 46 15 4 7 142 587 13 10 560 17 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1462 1473 568 1461 1475 593 577 0 0 600 0 0 Stage 1 588 588 -878 878 ------- Stage 2 874 885 -583 597 ------- Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.67 6.2 7.17 6.5 6.2 4.12 --4.1 -- Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.67 -6.17 5.5 ------- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.67 -6.17 5.5 ------- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4.153 3.3 3.563 4 3.3 2.218 --2.2 -- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 108 118 526 104 128 509 997 --987 -- Stage 1 498 473 -336 368 ------- Stage 2 347 343 -490 495 ------- Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 87 100 526 76 108 509 997 --987 -- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 87 100 -76 108 ------- Stage 1 493 468 -288 316 ------- Stage 2 290 294 -436 490 ------- Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 26.5 50.26 1.77 0.15 HCM LOS D F Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)997 --230 105 987 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.143 --0.276 0.25 0.01 -- HCM Control Delay (s/veh)9.2 --26.5 50.3 8.7 -- HCM Lane LOS A --D F A -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.5 --1.1 0.9 0 -- Page 153 of 331 Timings Existing 5: Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter Garden Pkwy Timing Plan: PM Existing Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)15 80 22 192 371 14 495 141 Future Volume (vph)15 80 22 192 371 14 495 141 Turn Type NA Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA pm+ov Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 2 6 6 Detector Phase 4 4 8 5 2 6 6 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)11.0 11.0 10.0 5.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Minimum Split (s)17.5 17.5 17.2 11.8 18.3 17.8 17.8 17.5 Total Split (s)20.0 20.0 20.0 15.0 60.0 45.0 45.0 20.0 Total Split (%)20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 15.0% 60.0% 45.0% 45.0% 20.0% Yellow Time (s)4.0 4.0 3.4 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.0 All-Red Time (s)2.5 2.5 3.8 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.5 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)6.5 6.5 7.2 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None None None None Act Effct Green (s)12.3 12.3 10.6 42.6 42.6 26.7 26.7 46.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.16 0.16 0.14 0.55 0.55 0.34 0.34 0.59 v/c Ratio 0.35 0.20 0.19 0.61 0.40 0.04 0.83 0.15 Control Delay (s/veh)39.2 1.1 33.3 19.8 12.7 18.9 36.6 1.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)39.2 1.1 33.3 19.8 12.7 18.9 36.6 1.9 LOS D A C B B B D A Approach Delay (s/veh)21.6 33.3 15.1 28.7 Approach LOS C C B C Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 100 Actuated Cycle Length: 77.8 Natural Cycle: 80 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.83 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 22.6 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.2%ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 5: Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter Garden Pkwy Page 154 of 331 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Existing 5: Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter Garden Pkwy Timing Plan: PM Existing Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)78 15 80 14 22 9 192 371 11 14 495 141 Future Volume (veh/h)78 15 80 14 22 9 192 371 11 14 495 141 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1707 1900 1900 1900 1900 1885 1856 1900 1900 1856 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 83 16 30 15 23 4 204 395 10 15 527 70 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, %0 13 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 3 2 Cap, veh/h 186 36 218 51 78 14 322 931 24 425 615 740 Arrive On Green 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.10 0.52 0.52 0.33 0.33 0.33 Sat Flow, veh/h 1374 265 1610 656 1005 175 1795 1802 46 996 1856 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 99 0 30 42 0 0 204 0 405 15 527 70 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1639 0 1610 1836 0 0 1795 0 1847 996 1856 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.2 0.0 1.2 1.6 0.0 0.0 5.3 0.0 10.3 0.8 20.1 1.9 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.2 0.0 1.2 1.6 0.0 0.0 5.3 0.0 10.3 0.8 20.1 1.9 Prop In Lane 0.84 1.00 0.36 0.10 1.00 0.02 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 222 0 218 142 0 0 322 0 955 425 615 740 V/C Ratio(X)0.45 0.00 0.14 0.30 0.00 0.00 0.63 0.00 0.42 0.04 0.86 0.09 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 292 0 287 310 0 0 344 0 1296 596 935 1013 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 30.2 0.0 28.9 33.0 0.0 0.0 17.0 0.0 11.3 17.2 23.7 11.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.4 0.0 0.3 1.1 0.0 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.3 0.0 5.1 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 3.0 0.0 0.9 1.4 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0 6.3 0.3 13.4 1.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 31.6 0.0 29.2 34.2 0.0 0.0 20.4 0.0 11.6 17.2 28.8 11.3 LnGrp LOS C C C C B B C B Approach Vol, veh/h 129 42 609 612 Approach Delay, s/veh 31.0 34.2 14.6 26.5 Approach LOS C C B C Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 46.0 16.8 14.1 31.9 13.1 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.8 6.5 6.8 6.8 7.2 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 53.2 13.5 8.2 38.2 12.8 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.3 6.2 7.3 22.1 3.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.4 0.3 0.0 3.0 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 21.9 HCM 7th LOS C Page 155 of 331 HCM 7th TWSC Existing 6: Indrio Rd & Deleon Ave Timing Plan: PM Existing Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.9 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 236 383 16 21 20 Future Vol, veh/h 6 236 383 16 21 20 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length ----0 - Veh in Median Storage, #-0 0 -0 - Grade, %-0 0 -0 - Peak Hour Factor 84 84 84 84 84 84 Heavy Vehicles, %4 4 6 6 5 5 Mvmt Flow 7 281 456 19 25 24 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 475 0 -0 761 465 Stage 1 ----465 - Stage 2 ----295 - Critical Hdwy 4.14 ---6.45 6.25 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ----5.45 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ----5.45 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.236 ---3.545 3.345 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1077 ---369 591 Stage 1 ----626 - Stage 2 ----748 - Platoon blocked, %--- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1077 ---366 591 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ----366 - Stage 1 ----621 - Stage 2 ----748 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 0.21 0 13.98 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)45 ---450 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.007 ---0.109 HCM Control Delay (s/veh)8.4 0 --14 HCM Lane LOS A A --B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0 ---0.4 Page 156 of 331 Timings Background 1: Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Timing Plan: AM Background Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR Ø4 Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)186 498 1 1 405 117 178 0 220 Future Volume (vph)186 498 1 1 405 117 178 0 220 Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Split NA pt+ov Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 8 8 8 1 4 Permitted Phases 6 2 Detector Phase 1 6 6 5 2 2 8 8 8 1 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)7.0 10.0 10.0 7.0 10.0 10.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Minimum Split (s)14.8 17.8 17.8 14.8 25.8 25.8 14.8 14.8 14.8 Total Split (s)20.0 50.0 50.0 20.0 50.0 50.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Total Split (%)16.7% 41.7% 41.7% 16.7% 41.7% 41.7% 20.8% 20.8%21% Yellow Time (s)4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 All-Red Time (s)3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Min Min None Min Min None None None Act Effct Green (s)9.5 29.2 29.2 7.1 14.2 14.2 9.6 9.6 27.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.51 0.51 0.12 0.25 0.25 0.17 0.17 0.47 v/c Ratio 0.39 0.32 0.00 0.00 0.55 0.25 0.37 0.37 0.17 Control Delay (s/veh)24.9 10.4 0.0 26.0 21.8 2.7 26.7 26.7 1.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)24.9 10.4 0.0 26.0 21.8 2.7 26.7 26.7 1.9 LOS C B A C C A C C A Approach Delay (s/veh)14.3 17.6 13.0 Approach LOS B B B Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length: 57.1 Natural Cycle: 75 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.55 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 15.0 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 44.9%ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 1: Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Page 157 of 331 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Background 1: Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Timing Plan: AM Background Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)186 498 1 1 405 117 0 0 0 178 0 220 Future Volume (veh/h)186 498 1 1 405 117 0 0 0 178 0 220 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1752 1796 1900 1900 1781 1796 1900 1900 1900 1811 1900 1841 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 209 560 1 1 455 131 0 0 0 200 0 247 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Percent Heavy Veh, %10 7 0 0 8 7 0 0 0 6 0 4 Cap, veh/h 442 1249 589 4 783 352 4 4 0 501 0 880 Arrive On Green 0.14 0.37 0.37 0.00 0.23 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.15 Sat Flow, veh/h 3237 3413 1610 1810 3385 1522 1810 1900 0 3450 0 3120 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 209 560 1 1 455 131 0 0 0 200 0 247 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1618 1706 1610 1810 1692 1522 1810 1900 0 1725 0 1560 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.9 6.0 0.0 0.0 5.7 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.5 0.0 3.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.9 6.0 0.0 0.0 5.7 3.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.5 0.0 3.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 442 1249 589 4 783 352 4 4 0 501 0 880 V/C Ratio(X)0.47 0.45 0.00 0.27 0.58 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.00 0.28 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 822 2996 1414 459 2972 1337 648 680 0 1234 0 1543 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.1 11.6 9.7 23.9 16.4 15.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 18.6 0.0 13.5 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.8 0.3 0.0 33.9 0.7 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.2 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 1.7 3.0 0.0 0.1 3.3 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 1.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 19.9 11.8 9.7 57.8 17.1 16.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.2 0.0 13.6 LnGrp LOS B B A E B B B B Approach Vol, veh/h 770 587 0 447 Approach Delay, s/veh 14.0 17.0 0.0 16.1 Approach LOS B B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.4 18.9 0.0 7.9 25.4 14.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 12.2 42.2 17.2 12.2 42.2 17.2 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.9 7.7 0.0 2.0 8.0 5.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.4 3.4 0.0 0.0 3.7 1.3 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 15.5 HCM 7th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. Page 158 of 331 Timings Background 2: N Kings Hwy/Turnpike Feeder Rd & Indrio Rd Timing Plan: AM Background Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)272 226 257 53 140 36 207 320 26 139 461 173 Future Volume (vph)272 226 257 53 140 36 207 320 26 139 461 173 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 7 4 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 6 2 2 4 8 Detector Phase 1 6 6 5 2 2 7 4 4 3 8 8 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)6.0 15.0 15.0 6.0 15.0 15.0 6.0 10.0 10.0 6.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s)13.1 22.1 22.1 13.1 22.1 22.1 13.0 17.0 17.0 13.0 17.0 17.0 Total Split (s)30.0 50.0 50.0 30.0 50.0 50.0 15.0 45.0 45.0 15.0 45.0 45.0 Total Split (%)21.4% 35.7% 35.7% 21.4% 35.7% 35.7% 10.7% 32.1% 32.1% 10.7% 32.1% 32.1% Yellow Time (s)5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time (s)2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Min Min None Min Min None None None None None None Act Effct Green (s)39.0 27.4 27.4 22.6 15.1 15.1 8.1 18.9 18.9 8.0 18.8 18.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.45 0.31 0.31 0.26 0.17 0.17 0.09 0.22 0.22 0.09 0.22 0.22 v/c Ratio 0.55 0.23 0.41 0.17 0.26 0.11 0.79 0.47 0.06 0.49 0.66 0.39 Control Delay (s/veh)21.1 25.0 5.5 17.8 34.6 0.6 61.9 32.4 0.3 45.8 36.3 7.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)21.1 25.0 5.5 17.8 34.6 0.6 61.9 32.4 0.3 45.8 36.3 7.2 LOS C C A B C A E C A D D A Approach Delay (s/veh)17.0 25.4 41.9 31.5 Approach LOS B C D C Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 140 Actuated Cycle Length: 87.1 Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.79 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 28.6 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.7%ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 2: N Kings Hwy/Turnpike Feeder Rd & Indrio Rd Page 159 of 331 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Background 2: N Kings Hwy/Turnpike Feeder Rd & Indrio Rd Timing Plan: AM Background Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)272 226 257 53 140 36 207 320 26 139 461 173 Future Volume (veh/h)272 226 257 53 140 36 207 320 26 139 461 173 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1781 1811 1811 1826 1811 1722 1678 1796 1841 1811 1841 1841 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 292 243 276 57 151 39 223 344 28 149 496 186 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, %8 6 6 5 6 12 15 7 4 6 4 4 Cap, veh/h 536 1018 454 345 644 273 296 772 353 241 710 317 Arrive On Green 0.16 0.30 0.30 0.05 0.19 0.19 0.10 0.23 0.23 0.07 0.20 0.20 Sat Flow, veh/h 1697 3441 1535 1739 3441 1459 3100 3413 1560 3346 3497 1560 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 292 243 276 57 151 39 223 344 28 149 496 186 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1697 1721 1535 1739 1721 1459 1550 1706 1560 1673 1749 1560 Q Serve(g_s), s 10.4 4.3 12.4 2.1 3.0 1.8 5.6 7.0 1.1 3.5 10.6 8.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 10.4 4.3 12.4 2.1 3.0 1.8 5.6 7.0 1.1 3.5 10.6 8.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 536 1018 454 345 644 273 296 772 353 241 710 317 V/C Ratio(X)0.54 0.24 0.61 0.17 0.23 0.14 0.75 0.45 0.08 0.62 0.70 0.59 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 745 1842 821 748 1842 781 309 1618 740 334 1658 740 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.1 21.4 24.2 23.9 27.7 27.2 35.3 26.7 24.4 36.1 29.7 28.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.9 0.1 1.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 9.6 0.4 0.1 2.6 1.3 1.7 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 7.1 3.0 7.6 1.5 2.2 1.1 4.2 4.7 0.7 2.5 7.6 5.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 20.0 21.5 25.5 24.1 27.9 27.4 45.0 27.1 24.5 38.7 30.9 30.6 LnGrp LOS B C C C C C D C C D C C Approach Vol, veh/h 811 247 595 831 Approach Delay, s/veh 22.3 26.9 33.7 32.3 Approach LOS C C C C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 20.1 22.1 12.8 25.1 11.4 30.8 14.6 23.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 7.1 7.1 7.0 7.0 7.1 7.1 7.0 7.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 22.9 42.9 8.0 38.0 22.9 42.9 8.0 38.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.4 5.0 5.5 9.0 4.1 14.4 7.6 12.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.6 1.2 0.1 2.1 0.1 2.5 0.0 3.7 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 28.8 HCM 7th LOS C Page 160 of 331 HCM 7th TWSC Background 3: Turnpike Feeder Rd & N Kings Hwy /Miramar Ave Timing Plan: AM Background Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.5 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 165 0 0 16 0 573 54 0 794 1 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 165 0 0 16 0 573 54 0 794 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized --None --Stop --None --None Storage Length --0 --0 --0 --- Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 1 0 0 0 0 9 5 0 5 0 Mvmt Flow 0 0 170 0 0 16 0 591 56 0 819 1 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All --410 --591 -0 0 --0 Stage 1 ------------ Stage 2 ------------ Critical Hdwy --6.915 --6.2 ------ Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------------ Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------------ Follow-up Hdwy --3.3095 --3.3 ------ Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 594 0 0 511 0 --0 -- Stage 1 0 0 -0 0 -0 --0 -- Stage 2 0 0 -0 0 -0 --0 -- Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver --594 --511 ------ Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------------ Stage 1 ------------ Stage 2 ------------ Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v13.47 12.28 0 0 HCM LOS B B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)--594 511 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio --0.286 0.032 -- HCM Control Delay (s/veh)--13.5 12.3 -- HCM Lane LOS --B B -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)--1.2 0.1 -- Page 161 of 331 HCM 7th TWSC Background 4: Turnpike Feeder Rd & Palomar Pkwy Timing Plan: AM Background Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 5.4 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 14 9 62 35 2 8 74 512 12 17 677 5 Future Vol, veh/h 14 9 62 35 2 8 74 512 12 17 677 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length ------123 --546 -- Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 Heavy Vehicles, %8 25 11 0 0 0 11 8 30 15 5 0 Mvmt Flow 15 10 66 37 2 9 79 545 13 18 720 5 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1462 1474 723 1470 1470 551 726 0 0 557 0 0 Stage 1 759 759 -709 709 ------- Stage 2 703 715 -761 762 ------- Critical Hdwy 7.18 6.75 6.31 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.21 --4.25 -- Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.18 5.75 -6.1 5.5 ------- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.18 5.75 -6.1 5.5 ------- Follow-up Hdwy 3.572 4.225 3.399 3.5 4 3.3 2.299 --2.335 -- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 103 113 412 107 128 538 838 --951 -- Stage 1 390 383 -428 440 ------- Stage 2 419 402 -401 417 ------- Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 89 100 412 73 114 538 838 --951 -- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 89 100 -73 114 ------- Stage 1 382 376 -388 399 ------- Stage 2 371 364 -322 409 ------- Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v33.66 87.37 1.21 0.22 HCM LOS D F Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)838 --214 88 951 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.094 --0.423 0.547 0.019 -- HCM Control Delay (s/veh)9.7 --33.7 87.4 8.9 -- HCM Lane LOS A --D F A -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.3 --2 2.4 0.1 -- Page 162 of 331 Timings Background 5: Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter Garden Pkwy Timing Plan: AM Background Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)12 177 14 55 468 7 516 50 Future Volume (vph)12 177 14 55 468 7 516 50 Turn Type NA Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA pm+ov Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 2 6 6 Detector Phase 4 4 8 5 2 6 6 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)11.0 11.0 10.0 5.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Minimum Split (s)17.5 17.5 17.2 11.8 24.8 24.8 24.8 17.5 Total Split (s)20.0 20.0 20.0 15.0 60.0 45.0 45.0 20.0 Total Split (%)20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 15.0% 60.0% 45.0% 45.0% 20.0% Yellow Time (s)4.0 4.0 3.4 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.0 All-Red Time (s)2.5 2.5 3.8 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.5 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)6.5 6.5 7.2 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None Max None None None Act Effct Green (s)13.0 13.0 10.4 53.6 53.6 42.8 42.8 64.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.11 0.57 0.57 0.46 0.46 0.69 v/c Ratio 0.74 0.50 0.30 0.18 0.52 0.02 0.69 0.05 Control Delay (s/veh)59.4 10.9 39.1 12.0 15.9 18.7 29.6 0.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)59.4 10.9 39.1 12.0 15.9 18.7 29.6 0.1 LOS E B D B B B C A Approach Delay (s/veh)34.4 39.1 15.5 26.9 Approach LOS C D B C Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 100 Actuated Cycle Length: 93.6 Natural Cycle: 80 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.74 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 25.0 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 65.8%ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 5: Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter Garden Pkwy Page 163 of 331 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Background 5: Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter Garden Pkwy Timing Plan: AM Background Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)156 12 177 27 14 10 55 468 5 7 516 50 Future Volume (veh/h)156 12 177 27 14 10 55 468 5 7 516 50 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1900 1870 1707 1900 1411 1796 1767 1900 1900 1811 1722 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 171 13 93 30 15 4 60 514 2 8 567 36 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, %2 0 2 13 0 33 7 9 0 0 6 12 Cap, veh/h 209 16 196 86 43 12 319 1014 4 439 834 852 Arrive On Green 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.04 0.58 0.58 0.46 0.46 0.46 Sat Flow, veh/h 1687 128 1585 1113 556 148 1711 1759 7 899 1811 1459 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 184 0 93 49 0 0 60 0 516 8 567 36 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1816 0 1585 1818 0 0 1711 0 1765 899 1811 1459 Q Serve(g_s), s 9.1 0.0 5.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 16.1 0.5 22.7 1.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.1 0.0 5.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 16.1 5.9 22.7 1.0 Prop In Lane 0.93 1.00 0.61 0.08 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 224 0 196 141 0 0 319 0 1018 439 834 852 V/C Ratio(X)0.82 0.00 0.47 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.51 0.02 0.68 0.04 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 266 0 232 252 0 0 398 0 1018 439 834 852 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 39.4 0.0 37.6 40.3 0.0 0.0 14.4 0.0 11.7 16.7 19.6 8.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 15.8 0.0 1.8 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 1.8 0.0 2.3 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 8.6 0.0 3.7 2.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 9.8 0.2 13.9 0.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 55.2 0.0 39.4 41.8 0.0 0.0 14.7 0.0 13.5 16.7 21.8 8.2 LnGrp LOS E D D B B B C A Approach Vol, veh/h 277 49 576 611 Approach Delay, s/veh 49.9 41.8 13.6 20.9 Approach LOS D D B C Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 60.0 17.9 10.7 49.3 14.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.8 6.5 6.8 6.8 7.2 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 53.2 13.5 8.2 38.2 12.8 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 18.1 11.1 3.6 24.7 4.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 3.2 0.3 0.0 2.9 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 24.1 HCM 7th LOS C Page 164 of 331 HCM 7th TWSC Background 6: Indrio Rd & Deleon Ave Timing Plan: AM Background Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.4 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 1 454 207 8 7 18 Future Vol, veh/h 1 454 207 8 7 18 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length ----0 - Veh in Median Storage, #-0 0 -0 - Grade, %-0 0 -0 - Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 1 473 216 8 7 19 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 224 0 -0 695 220 Stage 1 ----220 - Stage 2 ----475 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 ---6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ----5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ----5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 ---3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1345 ---408 820 Stage 1 ----817 - Stage 2 ----626 - Platoon blocked, %--- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1345 ---408 820 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ----408 - Stage 1 ----816 - Stage 2 ----626 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 0.02 0 10.87 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)4 ---639 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 ---0.041 HCM Control Delay (s/veh)7.7 0 --10.9 HCM Lane LOS A A --B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0 ---0.1 Page 165 of 331 Timings Background 1: Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Timing Plan: PM Background Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)329 543 3 2 610 246 2 151 0 133 Future Volume (vph)329 543 3 2 610 246 2 151 0 133 Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm NA Split NA pt+ov Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 4 8 8 8 1 Permitted Phases 6 2 Detector Phase 1 6 6 5 2 2 4 8 8 8 1 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)7.0 10.0 10.0 7.0 10.0 10.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Minimum Split (s)14.8 17.8 17.8 14.8 17.8 17.8 14.8 14.8 14.8 Total Split (s)20.0 50.0 50.0 20.0 50.0 50.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Total Split (%)16.7% 41.7% 41.7% 16.7% 41.7% 41.7% 20.8% 20.8% 20.8% Yellow Time (s)4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 All-Red Time (s)3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Min Min None Min Min None None None Act Effct Green (s)12.6 38.1 38.1 7.2 19.6 19.6 7.2 9.3 9.3 30.0 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.19 0.56 0.56 0.11 0.29 0.29 0.11 0.14 0.14 0.44 v/c Ratio 0.53 0.29 0.00 0.01 0.63 0.40 0.02 0.35 0.35 0.11 Control Delay (s/veh)31.4 10.9 0.0 35.0 24.5 5.1 29.5 34.2 34.3 3.7 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)31.4 10.9 0.0 35.0 24.5 5.1 29.5 34.2 34.3 3.7 LOS C B A C C A C C C A Approach Delay (s/veh)18.6 19.0 29.5 19.9 Approach LOS B B C B Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length: 67.8 Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.63 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 18.9 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 56.6%ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 1: Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Page 166 of 331 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Background 1: Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Timing Plan: PM Background Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)329 543 3 2 610 246 0 2 2 151 0 133 Future Volume (veh/h)329 543 3 2 610 246 0 2 2 151 0 133 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1885 1826 1900 1900 1856 1885 1900 1900 1900 1826 1900 1885 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 343 566 3 2 635 256 0 2 2 157 0 139 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, %1 5 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 5 0 1 Cap, veh/h 461 1387 644 7 956 433 14 7 7 374 0 767 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.40 0.40 0.00 0.27 0.27 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.11 0.00 0.11 Sat Flow, veh/h 3483 3469 1610 1810 3526 1598 1810 872 872 3478 0 3195 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 343 566 3 2 635 256 0 0 4 157 0 139 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1742 1735 1610 1810 1763 1598 1810 0 1743 1739 0 1598 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.1 7.6 0.1 0.1 10.4 9.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.7 0.0 2.2 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.1 7.6 0.1 0.1 10.4 9.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.7 0.0 2.2 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 461 1387 644 7 956 433 14 0 13 374 0 767 V/C Ratio(X)0.74 0.41 0.00 0.29 0.66 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.42 0.00 0.18 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 656 2259 1049 341 2296 1040 480 0 463 923 0 1271 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 27.0 14.0 11.7 32.2 21.0 20.5 0.0 0.0 32.0 27.0 0.0 19.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.8 0.2 0.0 21.5 0.8 1.3 0.0 0.0 12.6 0.8 0.0 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 4.5 4.5 0.0 0.1 6.9 5.5 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.9 0.0 1.3 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 29.8 14.1 11.7 53.7 21.8 21.8 0.0 0.0 44.6 27.8 0.0 19.7 LnGrp LOS C B B D C C D C B Approach Vol, veh/h 912 893 4 296 Approach Delay, s/veh 20.0 21.9 44.6 24.0 Approach LOS C C D C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.4 25.4 8.3 8.0 33.7 14.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 12.2 42.2 17.2 12.2 42.2 17.2 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.1 12.4 2.1 2.1 9.6 4.7 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.5 5.2 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.8 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 21.4 HCM 7th LOS C Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. Page 167 of 331 Timings Background 2: N Kings Hwy/Turnpike Feeder Rd & Indrio Rd Timing Plan: PM Background Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)282 202 214 68 337 134 405 485 70 95 333 264 Future Volume (vph)282 202 214 68 337 134 405 485 70 95 333 264 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 7 4 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 6 2 2 4 8 Detector Phase 1 6 6 5 2 2 7 4 4 3 8 8 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)6.0 15.0 15.0 6.0 15.0 15.0 6.0 10.0 10.0 6.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s)13.1 22.1 22.1 13.1 22.1 22.1 13.0 17.0 17.0 13.0 17.0 17.0 Total Split (s)30.0 50.0 50.0 30.0 50.0 50.0 15.0 45.0 45.0 15.0 45.0 45.0 Total Split (%)21.4% 35.7% 35.7% 21.4% 35.7% 35.7% 10.7% 32.1% 32.1% 10.7% 32.1% 32.1% Yellow Time (s)5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time (s)2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Min Min None Min Min None None None None None None Act Effct Green (s)40.1 28.1 28.1 24.8 16.9 16.9 8.1 18.7 18.7 7.5 18.1 18.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.46 0.32 0.32 0.28 0.19 0.19 0.09 0.21 0.21 0.09 0.21 0.21 v/c Ratio 0.57 0.18 0.35 0.19 0.51 0.33 1.30 0.67 0.16 0.33 0.48 0.50 Control Delay (s/veh)21.0 24.5 5.4 17.4 36.3 8.3 192.5 37.2 0.8 44.3 33.6 7.6 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)21.0 24.5 5.4 17.4 36.3 8.3 192.5 37.2 0.8 44.3 33.6 7.6 LOS C C A B D A F D A D C A Approach Delay (s/veh)17.2 27.0 100.1 25.2 Approach LOS B C F C Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 140 Actuated Cycle Length: 87.9 Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 1.30 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 48.5 Intersection LOS: D Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.4%ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 2: N Kings Hwy/Turnpike Feeder Rd & Indrio Rd Page 168 of 331 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Background 2: N Kings Hwy/Turnpike Feeder Rd & Indrio Rd Timing Plan: PM Background Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)282 202 214 68 337 134 405 485 70 95 333 264 Future Volume (veh/h)282 202 214 68 337 134 405 485 70 95 333 264 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1885 1796 1796 1870 1870 1885 1856 1856 1900 1826 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 291 208 221 70 347 138 418 500 72 98 343 272 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh, %3 1 7 7 2 2 1 3 3 0 5 2 Cap, veh/h 450 1007 428 355 647 289 338 892 398 229 767 350 Arrive On Green 0.16 0.28 0.28 0.06 0.18 0.18 0.10 0.25 0.25 0.07 0.22 0.22 Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 3582 1522 1711 3554 1585 3483 3526 1572 3510 3469 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 291 208 221 70 347 138 418 500 72 98 343 272 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 1791 1522 1711 1777 1585 1742 1763 1572 1755 1735 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 10.3 3.6 10.1 2.7 7.3 6.4 8.0 10.2 3.0 2.2 7.0 13.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 10.3 3.6 10.1 2.7 7.3 6.4 8.0 10.2 3.0 2.2 7.0 13.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 450 1007 428 355 647 289 338 892 398 229 767 350 V/C Ratio(X)0.65 0.21 0.52 0.20 0.54 0.48 1.24 0.56 0.18 0.43 0.45 0.78 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 664 1866 793 731 1851 826 338 1627 726 341 1601 731 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 20.7 22.6 24.9 24.8 30.5 30.2 37.2 26.8 24.1 37.0 27.7 30.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.6 0.1 1.0 0.3 0.7 1.2 128.8 0.6 0.2 1.3 0.4 3.7 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 7.5 2.7 6.2 2.0 5.7 4.3 15.3 7.1 1.9 1.7 5.0 8.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 22.3 22.7 25.9 25.0 31.2 31.4 166.0 27.3 24.3 38.3 28.1 33.9 LnGrp LOS C C C C C C F C C D C C Approach Vol, veh/h 720 555 990 713 Approach Delay, s/veh 23.5 30.5 85.6 31.7 Approach LOS C C F C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 20.0 22.1 12.4 27.8 11.9 30.3 15.0 25.2 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 7.1 7.1 7.0 7.0 7.1 7.1 7.0 7.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 22.9 42.9 8.0 38.0 22.9 42.9 8.0 38.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.3 9.3 4.2 12.2 4.7 12.1 10.0 15.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.6 3.1 0.1 3.2 0.1 2.1 0.0 2.9 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 47.4 HCM 7th LOS D Page 169 of 331 HCM 7th TWSC Background 3: Turnpike Feeder Rd & N Kings Hwy /Miramar Ave Timing Plan: PM Background Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.6 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 78 0 0 14 0 907 39 0 787 1 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 78 0 0 14 0 907 39 0 787 1 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized --None --Stop --None --None Storage Length --0 --0 --0 --- Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 2 0 0 13 0 3 0 0 3 0 Mvmt Flow 0 0 79 0 0 14 0 916 39 0 795 1 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All --398 --916 -0 0 --0 Stage 1 ------------ Stage 2 ------------ Critical Hdwy --6.93 --6.395 ------ Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------------ Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------------ Follow-up Hdwy --3.319 --3.4235 ------ Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 602 0 0 309 0 --0 -- Stage 1 0 0 -0 0 -0 --0 -- Stage 2 0 0 -0 0 -0 --0 -- Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver --602 --309 ------ Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------------ Stage 1 ------------ Stage 2 ------------ Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v11.87 17.19 0 0 HCM LOS B C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)--602 309 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio --0.131 0.046 -- HCM Control Delay (s/veh)--11.9 17.2 -- HCM Lane LOS --B C -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)--0.4 0.1 -- Page 170 of 331 HCM 7th TWSC Background 4: Turnpike Feeder Rd & Palomar Pkwy Timing Plan: PM Background Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 7.3 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 9 70 17 5 9 175 709 15 19 695 20 Future Vol, veh/h 13 9 70 17 5 9 175 709 15 19 695 20 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length ------123 --546 -- Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 Heavy Vehicles, %0 17 0 7 0 0 2 3 0 0 3 0 Mvmt Flow 13 9 71 17 5 9 177 716 15 19 702 20 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1823 1835 712 1822 1838 724 722 0 0 731 0 0 Stage 1 751 751 -1077 1077 ------- Stage 2 1072 1085 -745 761 ------- Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.67 6.2 7.17 6.5 6.2 4.12 --4.1 -- Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.67 -6.17 5.5 ------- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.67 -6.17 5.5 ------- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4.153 3.3 3.563 4 3.3 2.218 --2.2 -- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 60 70 436 58 76 429 880 --882 -- Stage 1 406 397 -259 298 ------- Stage 2 269 275 -398 417 ------- Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 43 54 436 33 60 429 880 --882 -- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 43 54 -33 60 ------- Stage 1 397 389 -207 238 ------- Stage 2 206 220 -319 408 ------- Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v64.72 159.76 1.97 0.24 HCM LOS F F Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)880 --146 50 882 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.201 --0.634 0.63 0.022 -- HCM Control Delay (s/veh)10.1 --64.7 159.8 9.2 -- HCM Lane LOS B --F F A -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.7 --3.4 2.5 0.1 -- Page 171 of 331 Timings Background 5: Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter Garden Pkwy Timing Plan: PM Background Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)17 93 26 223 431 16 575 164 Future Volume (vph)17 93 26 223 431 16 575 164 Turn Type NA Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA pm+ov Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 2 6 6 Detector Phase 4 4 8 5 2 6 6 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)11.0 11.0 10.0 5.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Minimum Split (s)17.5 17.5 17.2 11.8 18.3 17.8 17.8 17.5 Total Split (s)20.0 20.0 20.0 15.0 60.0 45.0 45.0 20.0 Total Split (%)20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 15.0% 60.0% 45.0% 45.0% 20.0% Yellow Time (s)4.0 4.0 3.4 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.0 All-Red Time (s)2.5 2.5 3.8 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.5 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)6.5 6.5 7.2 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None None None None Act Effct Green (s)12.3 12.3 10.5 48.4 48.4 32.9 32.9 52.3 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.12 0.55 0.55 0.38 0.38 0.60 v/c Ratio 0.46 0.25 0.25 0.85 0.46 0.05 0.88 0.17 Control Delay (s/veh)44.9 1.5 36.9 44.9 14.5 18.9 42.3 1.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)44.9 1.5 36.9 44.9 14.5 18.9 42.3 1.8 LOS D A D D B B D A Approach Delay (s/veh)24.9 36.9 24.6 33.1 Approach LOS C D C C Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 100 Actuated Cycle Length: 87.5 Natural Cycle: 90 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.88 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 28.8 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.0%ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 5: Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter Garden Pkwy Page 172 of 331 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Background 5: Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter Garden Pkwy Timing Plan: PM Background Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)91 17 93 16 26 10 223 431 13 16 575 164 Future Volume (veh/h)91 17 93 16 26 10 223 431 13 16 575 164 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1707 1900 1900 1900 1900 1885 1856 1900 1900 1856 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 97 18 44 17 28 5 237 459 12 17 612 94 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, %0 13 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 3 2 Cap, veh/h 176 33 205 51 84 15 304 985 26 431 685 787 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.10 0.55 0.55 0.37 0.37 0.37 Sat Flow, veh/h 1382 256 1610 624 1028 184 1795 1800 47 937 1856 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 115 0 44 50 0 0 237 0 471 17 612 94 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1638 0 1610 1836 0 0 1795 0 1847 937 1856 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.5 0.0 2.1 2.2 0.0 0.0 6.5 0.0 13.1 1.0 26.1 2.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.5 0.0 2.1 2.2 0.0 0.0 6.5 0.0 13.1 1.0 26.1 2.7 Prop In Lane 0.84 1.00 0.34 0.10 1.00 0.03 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 209 0 205 150 0 0 304 0 1011 431 685 787 V/C Ratio(X)0.55 0.00 0.21 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.78 0.00 0.47 0.04 0.89 0.12 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 263 0 258 279 0 0 304 0 1167 511 842 921 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 34.5 0.0 33.0 36.5 0.0 0.0 18.6 0.0 11.6 17.1 25.0 11.3 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.3 0.0 0.5 1.3 0.0 0.0 12.2 0.0 0.3 0.0 10.4 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 4.1 0.0 1.5 1.8 0.0 0.0 5.9 0.0 8.0 0.4 17.9 2.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 36.7 0.0 33.5 37.8 0.0 0.0 30.8 0.0 11.9 17.1 35.4 11.4 LnGrp LOS D C D C B B D B Approach Vol, veh/h 159 50 708 723 Approach Delay, s/veh 35.8 37.8 18.2 31.8 Approach LOS D D B C Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 52.9 17.2 15.0 37.9 14.1 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.8 6.5 6.8 6.8 7.2 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 53.2 13.5 8.2 38.2 12.8 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 15.1 7.5 8.5 28.1 4.2 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.9 0.3 0.0 2.9 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 26.5 HCM 7th LOS C Page 173 of 331 HCM 7th TWSC Background 6: Indrio Rd & Deleon Ave Timing Plan: PM Background Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.3 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 10 301 496 26 28 33 Future Vol, veh/h 10 301 496 26 28 33 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length ----0 - Veh in Median Storage, #-0 0 -0 - Grade, %-0 0 -0 - Peak Hour Factor 84 84 84 84 84 84 Heavy Vehicles, %4 4 6 6 5 5 Mvmt Flow 12 358 590 31 33 39 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 621 0 -0 988 606 Stage 1 ----606 - Stage 2 ----382 - Critical Hdwy 4.14 ---6.45 6.25 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ----5.45 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ----5.45 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.236 ---3.545 3.345 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 950 ---270 492 Stage 1 ----539 - Stage 2 ----683 - Platoon blocked, %--- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 950 ---266 492 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ----266 - Stage 1 ----530 - Stage 2 ----683 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 0.28 0 17.77 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)58 ---354 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.013 ---0.205 HCM Control Delay (s/veh)8.8 0 --17.8 HCM Lane LOS A A --C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0 ---0.8 Page 174 of 331 Timings Buildout 1: Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Timing Plan: AM Buildout Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR SBL SBT SBR Ø4 Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)186 508 1 1 427 122 180 0 220 Future Volume (vph)186 508 1 1 427 122 180 0 220 Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Split NA pt+ov Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 8 8 8 1 4 Permitted Phases 6 2 Detector Phase 1 6 6 5 2 2 8 8 8 1 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)7.0 10.0 10.0 7.0 10.0 10.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Minimum Split (s)14.8 17.8 17.8 14.8 25.8 25.8 14.8 14.8 14.8 Total Split (s)20.0 50.0 50.0 20.0 50.0 50.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Total Split (%)16.7% 41.7% 41.7% 16.7% 41.7% 41.7% 20.8% 20.8%21% Yellow Time (s)4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 All-Red Time (s)3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Min Min None Min Min None None None Act Effct Green (s)9.6 29.8 29.8 7.1 14.7 14.7 9.9 9.9 27.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.17 0.51 0.51 0.12 0.25 0.25 0.17 0.17 0.47 v/c Ratio 0.40 0.33 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.26 0.37 0.37 0.17 Control Delay (s/veh)25.5 10.5 0.0 27.0 22.1 2.9 26.9 26.9 1.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)25.5 10.5 0.0 27.0 22.1 2.9 26.9 26.9 1.9 LOS C B A C C A C C A Approach Delay (s/veh)14.5 17.9 13.1 Approach LOS B B B Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length: 58 Natural Cycle: 75 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.57 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 15.3 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 45.2%ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 1: Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Page 175 of 331 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Buildout 1: Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Timing Plan: AM Buildout Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)186 508 1 1 427 122 0 0 0 180 0 220 Future Volume (veh/h)186 508 1 1 427 122 0 0 0 180 0 220 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1752 1796 1900 1900 1781 1796 1900 1900 1900 1811 1900 1841 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 209 571 1 1 480 137 0 0 0 202 0 247 Peak Hour Factor 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 0.89 Percent Heavy Veh, %10 7 0 0 8 7 0 0 0 6 0 4 Cap, veh/h 438 1275 602 4 813 366 4 4 0 495 0 870 Arrive On Green 0.14 0.37 0.37 0.00 0.24 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.14 0.00 0.14 Sat Flow, veh/h 3237 3413 1610 1810 3385 1522 1810 1900 0 3450 0 3120 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 209 571 1 1 480 137 0 0 0 202 0 247 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1618 1706 1610 1810 1692 1522 1810 1900 0 1725 0 1560 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.9 6.1 0.0 0.0 6.1 3.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 3.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.9 6.1 0.0 0.0 6.1 3.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.6 0.0 3.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 438 1275 602 4 813 366 4 4 0 495 0 870 V/C Ratio(X)0.48 0.45 0.00 0.27 0.59 0.37 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.41 0.00 0.28 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 812 2960 1396 454 2936 1320 640 672 0 1219 0 1525 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.4 11.5 9.6 24.2 16.4 15.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.0 0.0 13.7 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.8 0.2 0.0 34.8 0.7 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5 0.0 0.2 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 1.7 3.1 0.0 0.1 3.5 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 1.5 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 20.3 11.7 9.6 59.0 17.1 16.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.5 0.0 13.9 LnGrp LOS C B A E B B B B Approach Vol, veh/h 781 618 0 449 Approach Delay, s/veh 14.0 16.9 0.0 16.4 Approach LOS B B B Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 14.4 19.5 0.0 7.9 26.0 14.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 12.2 42.2 17.2 12.2 42.2 17.2 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 4.9 8.1 0.0 2.0 8.1 5.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.4 3.6 0.0 0.0 3.8 1.3 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 15.6 HCM 7th LOS B Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. Page 176 of 331 Timings Buildout 2: N Kings Hwy/Turnpike Feeder Rd & Indrio Rd Timing Plan: AM Buildout Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)272 238 257 68 167 36 207 320 33 142 461 173 Future Volume (vph)272 238 257 68 167 36 207 320 33 142 461 173 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 7 4 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 6 2 2 4 8 Detector Phase 1 6 6 5 2 2 7 4 4 3 8 8 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)6.0 15.0 15.0 6.0 15.0 15.0 6.0 10.0 10.0 6.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s)13.1 22.1 22.1 13.1 22.1 22.1 13.0 17.0 17.0 13.0 17.0 17.0 Total Split (s)30.0 50.0 50.0 30.0 50.0 50.0 15.0 45.0 45.0 15.0 45.0 45.0 Total Split (%)21.4% 35.7% 35.7% 21.4% 35.7% 35.7% 10.7% 32.1% 32.1% 10.7% 32.1% 32.1% Yellow Time (s)5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time (s)2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Min Min None Min Min None None None None None None Act Effct Green (s)39.0 26.9 26.9 23.1 15.1 15.1 8.1 18.8 18.8 8.0 18.8 18.8 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.45 0.31 0.31 0.27 0.17 0.17 0.09 0.22 0.22 0.09 0.22 0.22 v/c Ratio 0.56 0.24 0.42 0.21 0.30 0.11 0.79 0.47 0.08 0.50 0.66 0.39 Control Delay (s/veh)21.3 25.6 5.6 18.1 35.0 0.6 61.9 32.4 0.3 46.0 36.3 7.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)21.3 25.6 5.6 18.1 35.0 0.6 61.9 32.4 0.3 46.0 36.3 7.2 LOS C C A B D A E C A D D A Approach Delay (s/veh)17.4 26.2 41.4 31.6 Approach LOS B C D C Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 140 Actuated Cycle Length: 87.1 Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.79 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 28.7 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 69.7%ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 2: N Kings Hwy/Turnpike Feeder Rd & Indrio Rd Page 177 of 331 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Buildout 2: N Kings Hwy/Turnpike Feeder Rd & Indrio Rd Timing Plan: AM Buildout Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)272 238 257 68 167 36 207 320 33 142 461 173 Future Volume (veh/h)272 238 257 68 167 36 207 320 33 142 461 173 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1781 1811 1811 1826 1811 1722 1678 1796 1841 1811 1841 1841 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 292 256 276 73 180 39 223 344 35 153 496 186 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, %8 6 6 5 6 12 15 7 4 6 4 4 Cap, veh/h 523 997 445 354 644 273 296 771 353 242 710 317 Arrive On Green 0.16 0.29 0.29 0.06 0.19 0.19 0.10 0.23 0.23 0.07 0.20 0.20 Sat Flow, veh/h 1697 3441 1535 1739 3441 1459 3100 3413 1560 3346 3497 1560 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 292 256 276 73 180 39 223 344 35 153 496 186 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1697 1721 1535 1739 1721 1459 1550 1706 1560 1673 1749 1560 Q Serve(g_s), s 10.4 4.6 12.5 2.6 3.6 1.8 5.6 7.0 1.4 3.6 10.6 8.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 10.4 4.6 12.5 2.6 3.6 1.8 5.6 7.0 1.4 3.6 10.6 8.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 523 997 445 354 644 273 296 771 353 242 710 317 V/C Ratio(X)0.56 0.26 0.62 0.21 0.28 0.14 0.75 0.45 0.10 0.63 0.70 0.59 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 732 1842 821 746 1842 781 309 1618 740 334 1658 740 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.2 21.8 24.7 23.7 27.9 27.2 35.3 26.7 24.6 36.1 29.7 28.9 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.9 0.1 1.4 0.3 0.2 0.2 9.6 0.4 0.1 2.7 1.3 1.7 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 7.1 3.2 7.7 2.0 2.7 1.1 4.2 4.7 0.9 2.6 7.6 5.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 20.1 22.0 26.1 24.0 28.2 27.4 45.0 27.1 24.7 38.8 30.9 30.6 LnGrp LOS C C C C C C D C C D C C Approach Vol, veh/h 824 292 602 835 Approach Delay, s/veh 22.7 27.0 33.6 32.3 Approach LOS C C C C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 20.1 22.1 12.8 25.1 11.9 30.3 14.6 23.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 7.1 7.1 7.0 7.0 7.1 7.1 7.0 7.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 22.9 42.9 8.0 38.0 22.9 42.9 8.0 38.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 12.4 5.6 5.6 9.0 4.6 14.5 7.6 12.6 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.6 1.4 0.1 2.1 0.1 2.6 0.0 3.7 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 28.9 HCM 7th LOS C Page 178 of 331 HCM 7th TWSC Buildout 3: Turnpike Feeder Rd & N Kings Hwy /Miramar Ave Timing Plan: AM Buildout Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 168 0 0 45 0 573 54 0 794 9 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 168 0 0 45 0 573 54 0 794 9 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized --None --Stop --None --None Storage Length --0 --0 --0 --- Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 1 0 0 0 0 9 5 0 5 0 Mvmt Flow 0 0 173 0 0 46 0 591 56 0 819 9 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All --414 --591 -0 0 --0 Stage 1 ------------ Stage 2 ------------ Critical Hdwy --6.915 --6.2 ------ Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------------ Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------------ Follow-up Hdwy --3.3095 --3.3 ------ Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 591 0 0 511 0 --0 -- Stage 1 0 0 -0 0 -0 --0 -- Stage 2 0 0 -0 0 -0 --0 -- Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver --591 --511 ------ Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------------ Stage 1 ------------ Stage 2 ------------ Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v13.61 12.75 0 0 HCM LOS B B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)--591 511 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio --0.293 0.091 -- HCM Control Delay (s/veh)--13.6 12.8 -- HCM Lane LOS --B B -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)--1.2 0.3 -- Page 179 of 331 HCM 7th TWSC Buildout 4: Turnpike Feeder Rd & Palomar Pkwy Timing Plan: AM Buildout Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 7.1 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 14 9 62 43 2 8 74 541 12 21 677 5 Future Vol, veh/h 14 9 62 43 2 8 74 541 12 21 677 5 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length ------123 --546 -- Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 94 Heavy Vehicles, %8 25 11 0 0 0 11 8 30 15 5 0 Mvmt Flow 15 10 66 46 2 9 79 576 13 22 720 5 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1502 1513 723 1509 1510 582 726 0 0 588 0 0 Stage 1 768 768 -739 739 ------- Stage 2 734 746 -770 770 ------- Critical Hdwy 7.18 6.75 6.31 7.1 6.5 6.2 4.21 --4.25 -- Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.18 5.75 -6.1 5.5 ------- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.18 5.75 -6.1 5.5 ------- Follow-up Hdwy 3.572 4.225 3.399 3.5 4 3.3 2.299 --2.335 -- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 97 107 412 100 122 517 838 --926 -- Stage 1 386 379 -412 426 ------- Stage 2 402 389 -396 413 ------- Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 83 94 412 68 108 517 838 --926 -- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 83 94 -68 108 ------- Stage 1 376 370 -373 386 ------- Stage 2 357 352 -317 403 ------- Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v35.77 123.27 1.15 0.27 HCM LOS E F Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)838 --205 79 926 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.094 --0.441 0.714 0.024 -- HCM Control Delay (s/veh)9.7 --35.8 123.3 9 -- HCM Lane LOS A --E F A -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.3 --2.1 3.4 0.1 -- Page 180 of 331 Timings Buildout 5: Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter Garden Pkwy Timing Plan: AM Buildout Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)12 177 14 55 497 16 516 50 Future Volume (vph)12 177 14 55 497 16 516 50 Turn Type NA Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA pm+ov Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 2 6 6 Detector Phase 4 4 8 5 2 6 6 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)11.0 11.0 10.0 5.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Minimum Split (s)17.5 17.5 17.2 11.8 17.8 17.8 17.8 17.5 Total Split (s)20.0 20.0 20.0 15.0 60.0 45.0 45.0 20.0 Total Split (%)20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 15.0% 60.0% 45.0% 45.0% 20.0% Yellow Time (s)4.0 4.0 3.4 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.0 All-Red Time (s)2.5 2.5 3.8 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.5 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)6.5 6.5 7.2 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None Max None None None Act Effct Green (s)13.0 13.0 10.4 53.6 53.6 42.8 42.8 64.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 0.11 0.57 0.57 0.46 0.46 0.69 v/c Ratio 0.74 0.50 0.30 0.18 0.55 0.05 0.69 0.05 Control Delay (s/veh)59.4 10.9 39.1 12.0 16.5 19.1 29.6 0.1 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)59.4 10.9 39.1 12.0 16.5 19.1 29.6 0.1 LOS E B D B B B C A Approach Delay (s/veh)34.4 39.1 16.1 26.7 Approach LOS C D B C Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 100 Actuated Cycle Length: 93.6 Natural Cycle: 80 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.74 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 25.0 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 67.3%ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 5: Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter Garden Pkwy Page 181 of 331 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Buildout 5: Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter Garden Pkwy Timing Plan: AM Buildout Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)156 12 177 27 14 10 55 497 5 16 516 50 Future Volume (veh/h)156 12 177 27 14 10 55 497 5 16 516 50 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1900 1870 1707 1900 1411 1796 1767 1900 1900 1811 1722 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 171 13 93 30 15 4 60 546 2 18 567 36 Peak Hour Factor 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Percent Heavy Veh, %2 0 2 13 0 33 7 9 0 0 6 12 Cap, veh/h 209 16 196 86 43 12 319 1014 4 415 834 852 Arrive On Green 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.04 0.58 0.58 0.46 0.46 0.46 Sat Flow, veh/h 1687 128 1585 1113 556 148 1711 1759 6 873 1811 1459 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 184 0 93 49 0 0 60 0 548 18 567 36 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1816 0 1585 1818 0 0 1711 0 1765 873 1811 1459 Q Serve(g_s), s 9.1 0.0 5.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 17.6 1.2 22.7 1.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 9.1 0.0 5.0 2.4 0.0 0.0 1.6 0.0 17.6 8.0 22.7 1.0 Prop In Lane 0.93 1.00 0.61 0.08 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 224 0 196 141 0 0 319 0 1018 415 834 852 V/C Ratio(X)0.82 0.00 0.47 0.35 0.00 0.00 0.19 0.00 0.54 0.04 0.68 0.04 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 266 0 232 252 0 0 398 0 1018 415 834 852 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 39.4 0.0 37.6 40.3 0.0 0.0 14.4 0.0 12.0 17.8 19.6 8.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 15.8 0.0 1.8 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.3 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 8.6 0.0 3.7 2.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 10.5 0.4 13.9 0.7 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 55.2 0.0 39.4 41.8 0.0 0.0 14.7 0.0 14.0 17.8 21.8 8.2 LnGrp LOS E D D B B B C A Approach Vol, veh/h 277 49 608 621 Approach Delay, s/veh 49.9 41.8 14.1 20.9 Approach LOS D D B C Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 60.0 17.9 10.7 49.3 14.4 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.8 6.5 6.8 6.8 7.2 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 53.2 13.5 8.2 38.2 12.8 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 19.6 11.1 3.6 24.7 4.4 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 3.5 0.3 0.0 3.0 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 24.1 HCM 7th LOS C Page 182 of 331 HCM 7th TWSC Buildout 6: Indrio Rd & Deleon Ave Timing Plan: AM Buildout Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.8 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 12 465 228 8 7 39 Future Vol, veh/h 12 465 228 8 7 39 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length ----0 - Veh in Median Storage, #-0 0 -0 - Grade, %-0 0 -0 - Peak Hour Factor 96 96 96 96 96 96 Heavy Vehicles, %6 6 16 16 0 0 Mvmt Flow 13 484 238 8 7 41 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 246 0 -0 751 242 Stage 1 ----242 - Stage 2 ----509 - Critical Hdwy 4.16 ---6.4 6.2 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ----5.4 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ----5.4 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.254 ---3.5 3.3 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1297 ---381 802 Stage 1 ----803 - Stage 2 ----607 - Platoon blocked, %--- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1297 ---376 802 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ----376 - Stage 1 ----793 - Stage 2 ----607 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 0.2 0 10.66 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)45 ---684 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.01 ---0.07 HCM Control Delay (s/veh)7.8 0 --10.7 HCM Lane LOS A A --B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0 ---0.2 Page 183 of 331 HCM 7th TWSC Buildout 7: Indrio Rd & Driveway 1 Timing Plan: AM Buildout Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.8 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 11 397 215 8 17 21 Future Vol, veh/h 11 397 215 8 17 21 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length ----0 - Veh in Median Storage, #-0 0 -0 - Grade, %-0 0 -0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 12 432 234 9 18 23 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 242 0 -0 693 238 Stage 1 ----238 - Stage 2 ----455 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 ---6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ----5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ----5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 ---3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 1324 ---409 801 Stage 1 ----801 - Stage 2 ----639 - Platoon blocked, %--- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 1324 ---404 801 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ----404 - Stage 1 ----792 - Stage 2 ----639 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 0.21 0 11.99 HCM LOS B Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)49 ---557 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.009 ---0.074 HCM Control Delay (s/veh)7.7 0 --12 HCM Lane LOS A A --B HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0 ---0.2 Page 184 of 331 HCM 7th TWSC Buildout 8: Deleon Ave/Royal Palm Ave & Driveway 2 Timing Plan: AM Buildout Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 6.2 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 22 36 9 11 13 7 Future Vol, veh/h 22 36 9 11 13 7 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length 0 ----- Veh in Median Storage, #0 -0 --0 Grade, %0 -0 --0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 24 39 10 12 14 8 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 52 16 0 0 22 0 Stage 1 16 ----- Stage 2 36 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 --4.12 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 --2.218 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 957 1064 --1594 - Stage 1 1007 ----- Stage 2 987 ----- Platoon blocked, %--- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 949 1064 --1594 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 949 ----- Stage 1 1007 ----- Stage 2 978 ----- Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 8.77 0 4.73 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)--1017 1170 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio --0.062 0.009 - HCM Control Delay (s/veh)--8.8 7.3 0 HCM Lane LOS --A A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)--0.2 0 - Page 185 of 331 Timings Buildout 23: Royal Palm Ave & Miramar Ave Timing Plan: AM Buildout Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Lane Group Ø4 Ø8 Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph) Future Volume (vph) Turn Type Protected Phases 4 8 Permitted Phases Detector Phase Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)5.0 5.0 Minimum Split (s)22.5 22.5 Total Split (s)22.5 22.5 Total Split (%)100% 100% Yellow Time (s)3.5 3.5 All-Red Time (s)1.0 1.0 Lost Time Adjust (s) Total Lost Time (s) Lead/Lag Lead-Lag Optimize? Recall Mode Max Max Act Effct Green (s) Actuated g/C Ratio v/c Ratio Control Delay (s/veh) Queue Delay Total Delay (s/veh) LOS Approach Delay (s/veh) Approach LOS Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 22.5 Actuated Cycle Length: 22.5 Offset: 0 (0%), Referenced to phase 2: and 6:, Start of Green Natural Cycle: 40 Control Type: Pretimed Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.00 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 0.0 Intersection LOS: A Intersection Capacity Utilization 0.0%ICU Level of Service A Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 23: Royal Palm Ave & Miramar Ave Page 186 of 331 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Buildout 23: Royal Palm Ave & Miramar Ave Timing Plan: AM Buildout Conditions AM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)0 0 0 0 0 0 Future Volume (veh/h)0 0 0 0 0 0 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 0 0 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 0 0 0 0 Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, %2 0 0 2 Cap, veh/h 1496 0 0 1496 Arrive On Green 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Sat Flow, veh/h 1870 0 0 1870 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 0 0 0 0 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1870 0 0 1870 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.00 0.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 1496 0 0 1496 V/C Ratio(X)0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 1496 0 0 1496 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS Approach Vol, veh/h 0 0 Approach Delay, s/veh 0.0 0.0 Approach LOS Timer - Assigned Phs 4 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 22.5 22.5 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.0 18.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 0.0 0.0 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.0 0.0 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 0.0 HCM 7th LOS A Page 187 of 331 Timings Buildout 1: Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Timing Plan: PM Buildout Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)329 564 3 2 626 250 2 156 0 133 Future Volume (vph)329 564 3 2 626 250 2 156 0 133 Turn Type Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm NA Split NA pt+ov Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 4 8 8 8 1 Permitted Phases 6 2 Detector Phase 1 6 6 5 2 2 4 8 8 8 1 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)7.0 10.0 10.0 7.0 10.0 10.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Minimum Split (s)14.8 17.8 17.8 14.8 17.8 17.8 14.8 14.8 14.8 Total Split (s)20.0 50.0 50.0 20.0 50.0 50.0 25.0 25.0 25.0 Total Split (%)16.7% 41.7% 41.7% 16.7% 41.7% 41.7% 20.8% 20.8% 20.8% Yellow Time (s)4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 All-Red Time (s)3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Min Min None Min Min None None None Act Effct Green (s)12.6 38.8 38.8 7.3 20.2 20.2 7.3 9.4 9.4 30.2 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.18 0.57 0.57 0.11 0.29 0.29 0.11 0.14 0.14 0.44 v/c Ratio 0.54 0.30 0.00 0.01 0.63 0.40 0.02 0.36 0.37 0.11 Control Delay (s/veh)32.1 10.9 0.0 35.5 24.5 5.0 30.0 34.9 34.9 3.8 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)32.1 10.9 0.0 35.5 24.5 5.0 30.0 34.9 34.9 3.8 LOS C B A D C A C C C A Approach Delay (s/veh)18.6 19.0 30.0 20.6 Approach LOS B B C C Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 120 Actuated Cycle Length: 68.6 Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.63 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 19.1 Intersection LOS: B Intersection Capacity Utilization 57.2%ICU Level of Service B Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 1: Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Page 188 of 331 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Buildout 1: Emerson Ave & Indrio Rd Timing Plan: PM Buildout Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)329 564 3 2 626 250 0 2 2 156 0 133 Future Volume (veh/h)329 564 3 2 626 250 0 2 2 156 0 133 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1885 1826 1900 1900 1856 1885 1900 1900 1900 1826 1900 1885 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 343 588 3 2 652 260 0 2 2 162 0 139 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, %1 5 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 5 0 1 Cap, veh/h 460 1404 652 7 974 442 14 7 7 371 0 763 Arrive On Green 0.13 0.40 0.40 0.00 0.28 0.28 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.11 0.00 0.11 Sat Flow, veh/h 3483 3469 1610 1810 3526 1598 1810 872 872 3478 0 3195 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 343 588 3 2 652 260 0 0 4 162 0 139 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1742 1735 1610 1810 1763 1598 1810 0 1743 1739 0 1598 Q Serve(g_s), s 6.2 7.9 0.1 0.1 10.7 9.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.9 0.0 2.3 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 6.2 7.9 0.1 0.1 10.7 9.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 2.9 0.0 2.3 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 460 1404 652 7 974 442 14 0 13 371 0 763 V/C Ratio(X)0.75 0.42 0.00 0.29 0.67 0.59 0.00 0.00 0.31 0.44 0.00 0.18 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 650 2240 1040 338 2276 1031 476 0 459 915 0 1263 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 27.3 13.9 11.6 32.5 21.0 20.4 0.0 0.0 32.3 27.4 0.0 19.8 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.9 0.2 0.0 21.5 0.8 1.3 0.0 0.0 12.6 0.8 0.0 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 4.5 4.7 0.0 0.1 7.1 5.6 0.0 0.0 0.2 2.0 0.0 1.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 30.2 14.1 11.6 53.9 21.8 21.7 0.0 0.0 44.9 28.2 0.0 19.9 LnGrp LOS C B B D C C D C B Approach Vol, veh/h 934 914 4 301 Approach Delay, s/veh 20.0 21.8 44.9 24.4 Approach LOS C C D C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 16.4 25.9 8.3 8.0 34.3 14.8 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 12.2 42.2 17.2 12.2 42.2 17.2 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.2 12.7 2.1 2.1 9.9 4.9 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.5 5.3 0.0 0.0 3.9 0.8 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 21.4 HCM 7th LOS C Notes User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. Page 189 of 331 Timings Buildout 2: N Kings Hwy/Turnpike Feeder Rd & Indrio Rd Timing Plan: PM Buildout Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Lane Group EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)282 228 214 79 357 134 405 485 85 102 333 264 Future Volume (vph)282 228 214 79 357 134 405 485 85 102 333 264 Turn Type pm+pt NA Perm pm+pt NA Perm Prot NA Perm Prot NA Perm Protected Phases 1 6 5 2 7 4 3 8 Permitted Phases 6 6 2 2 4 8 Detector Phase 1 6 6 5 2 2 7 4 4 3 8 8 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)6.0 15.0 15.0 6.0 15.0 15.0 6.0 10.0 10.0 6.0 10.0 10.0 Minimum Split (s)13.1 22.1 22.1 13.1 22.1 22.1 13.0 17.0 17.0 13.0 17.0 17.0 Total Split (s)30.0 47.0 47.0 30.0 47.0 47.0 18.0 45.0 45.0 18.0 45.0 45.0 Total Split (%)21.4% 33.6% 33.6% 21.4% 33.6% 33.6% 12.9% 32.1% 32.1% 12.9% 32.1% 32.1% Yellow Time (s)5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 All-Red Time (s)2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.1 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 7.0 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None Min Min None Min Min None None None None None None Act Effct Green (s)41.0 28.6 28.6 26.1 17.7 17.7 11.2 19.9 19.9 8.4 17.1 17.1 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.45 0.31 0.31 0.29 0.19 0.19 0.12 0.22 0.22 0.09 0.19 0.19 v/c Ratio 0.59 0.21 0.35 0.22 0.54 0.33 0.98 0.65 0.19 0.32 0.53 0.53 Control Delay (s/veh)22.4 25.9 5.6 18.4 37.7 8.4 81.3 37.8 2.0 44.5 36.9 8.2 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)22.4 25.9 5.6 18.4 37.7 8.4 81.3 37.8 2.0 44.5 36.9 8.2 LOS C C A B D A F D A D D A Approach Delay (s/veh)18.5 28.1 52.8 27.2 Approach LOS B C D C Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 140 Actuated Cycle Length: 91 Natural Cycle: 70 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.98 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 33.7 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 72.4%ICU Level of Service C Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 2: N Kings Hwy/Turnpike Feeder Rd & Indrio Rd Page 190 of 331 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Buildout 2: N Kings Hwy/Turnpike Feeder Rd & Indrio Rd Timing Plan: PM Buildout Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)282 228 214 79 357 134 405 485 85 102 333 264 Future Volume (veh/h)282 228 214 79 357 134 405 485 85 102 333 264 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1856 1885 1796 1796 1870 1870 1885 1856 1856 1900 1826 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 291 235 221 81 368 138 418 500 88 105 343 272 Peak Hour Factor 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 0.97 Percent Heavy Veh, %3 1 7 7 2 2 1 3 3 0 5 2 Cap, veh/h 430 970 412 340 614 274 441 992 442 223 757 346 Arrive On Green 0.16 0.27 0.27 0.06 0.17 0.17 0.13 0.28 0.28 0.06 0.22 0.22 Sat Flow, veh/h 1767 3582 1522 1711 3554 1585 3483 3526 1572 3510 3469 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 291 235 221 81 368 138 418 500 88 105 343 272 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1767 1791 1522 1711 1777 1585 1742 1763 1572 1755 1735 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 11.1 4.4 10.8 3.3 8.3 6.8 10.3 10.3 3.7 2.5 7.4 14.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 11.1 4.4 10.8 3.3 8.3 6.8 10.3 10.3 3.7 2.5 7.4 14.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 430 970 412 340 614 274 441 992 442 223 757 346 V/C Ratio(X)0.68 0.24 0.54 0.24 0.60 0.50 0.95 0.50 0.20 0.47 0.45 0.79 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 618 1646 700 689 1633 729 441 1543 688 445 1519 694 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 22.6 24.7 27.0 26.9 33.1 32.5 37.6 26.1 23.7 39.2 29.4 32.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.9 0.1 1.1 0.4 0.9 1.4 29.8 0.4 0.2 1.5 0.4 4.0 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 8.1 3.3 6.7 2.5 6.5 4.6 9.9 7.2 2.4 1.9 5.3 9.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 24.5 24.8 28.1 27.2 34.1 34.0 67.4 26.5 24.0 40.8 29.9 36.0 LnGrp LOS C C C C C C E C C D C D Approach Vol, veh/h 747 587 1006 720 Approach Delay, s/veh 25.7 33.1 43.3 33.8 Approach LOS C C D C Timer - Assigned Phs 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 20.8 22.1 12.5 31.4 12.2 30.6 18.0 25.9 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 7.1 7.1 7.0 7.0 7.1 7.1 7.0 7.0 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 22.9 39.9 11.0 38.0 22.9 39.9 11.0 38.0 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 13.1 10.3 4.5 12.3 5.3 12.8 12.3 16.1 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.6 3.2 0.1 3.3 0.2 2.2 0.0 2.9 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 34.8 HCM 7th LOS C Page 191 of 331 HCM 7th TWSC Buildout 3: Turnpike Feeder Rd & N Kings Hwy /Miramar Ave Timing Plan: PM Buildout Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.9 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 85 0 0 35 0 907 39 0 787 7 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 85 0 0 35 0 907 39 0 787 7 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized --None --Stop --None --None Storage Length --0 --0 --0 --- Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 Heavy Vehicles, %0 0 2 0 0 13 0 3 0 0 3 0 Mvmt Flow 0 0 86 0 0 35 0 916 39 0 795 7 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All --401 --916 -0 0 --0 Stage 1 ------------ Stage 2 ------------ Critical Hdwy --6.93 --6.395 ------ Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ------------ Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ------------ Follow-up Hdwy --3.319 --3.4235 ------ Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 0 0 600 0 0 309 0 --0 -- Stage 1 0 0 -0 0 -0 --0 -- Stage 2 0 0 -0 0 -0 --0 -- Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver --600 --309 ------ Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ------------ Stage 1 ------------ Stage 2 ------------ Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 12 18.13 0 0 HCM LOS B C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)--600 309 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio --0.143 0.114 -- HCM Control Delay (s/veh)--12 18.1 -- HCM Lane LOS --B C -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)--0.5 0.4 -- Page 192 of 331 HCM 7th TWSC Buildout 4: Turnpike Feeder Rd & Palomar Pkwy Timing Plan: PM Buildout Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 10 Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 13 9 70 23 5 9 175 730 15 28 695 20 Future Vol, veh/h 13 9 70 23 5 9 175 730 15 28 695 20 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized --None --None --None --None Storage Length ------123 --546 -- Veh in Median Storage, #-0 --0 --0 --0 - Grade, %-0 --0 --0 --0 - Peak Hour Factor 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 99 Heavy Vehicles, %0 17 0 7 0 0 2 3 0 0 3 0 Mvmt Flow 13 9 71 23 5 9 177 737 15 28 702 20 Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 1862 1875 712 1862 1877 745 722 0 0 753 0 0 Stage 1 769 769 -1098 1098 ------- Stage 2 1093 1106 -763 779 ------- Critical Hdwy 7.1 6.67 6.2 7.17 6.5 6.2 4.12 --4.1 -- Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.1 5.67 -6.17 5.5 ------- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.1 5.67 -6.17 5.5 ------- Follow-up Hdwy 3.5 4.153 3.3 3.563 4 3.3 2.218 --2.2 -- Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 57 66 436 54 72 417 880 --866 -- Stage 1 397 390 -252 291 ------- Stage 2 262 269 -389 409 ------- Platoon blocked, %---- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 40 51 436 30 56 417 880 --866 -- Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 40 51 -30 56 ------- Stage 1 384 377 -202 232 ------- Stage 2 200 215 -308 396 ------- Approach EB WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 72.6 250.27 1.92 0.35 HCM LOS F F Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBREBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h)880 --138 42 866 -- HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.201 --0.672 0.885 0.033 -- HCM Control Delay (s/veh)10.1 --72.6 250.3 9.3 -- HCM Lane LOS B --F F A -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.7 --3.7 3.5 0.1 -- Page 193 of 331 Timings Buildout 5: Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter Garden Pkwy Timing Plan: PM Buildout Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Lane Group EBT EBR WBT NBL NBT SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (vph)17 93 26 223 487 35 633 164 Future Volume (vph)17 93 26 223 487 35 633 164 Turn Type NA Perm NA pm+pt NA Perm NA pm+ov Protected Phases 4 8 5 2 6 4 Permitted Phases 4 2 6 6 Detector Phase 4 4 8 5 2 6 6 4 Switch Phase Minimum Initial (s)11.0 11.0 10.0 5.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Minimum Split (s)17.5 17.5 17.2 11.8 18.3 17.8 17.8 17.5 Total Split (s)20.0 20.0 20.0 17.0 60.0 43.0 43.0 20.0 Total Split (%)20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 17.0% 60.0% 43.0% 43.0% 20.0% Yellow Time (s)4.0 4.0 3.4 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.0 All-Red Time (s)2.5 2.5 3.8 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.5 Lost Time Adjust (s)0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Lost Time (s)6.5 6.5 7.2 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.5 Lead/Lag Lead Lag Lag Lead-Lag Optimize?Yes Yes Yes Recall Mode None None None None None None None None Act Effct Green (s)12.1 12.1 10.2 53.6 53.6 36.5 36.5 55.4 Actuated g/C Ratio 0.13 0.13 0.11 0.58 0.58 0.39 0.39 0.60 v/c Ratio 0.49 0.26 0.27 0.85 0.50 0.11 0.93 0.17 Control Delay (s/veh)46.8 1.7 37.7 48.8 14.8 21.1 49.1 1.9 Queue Delay 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Delay (s/veh)46.8 1.7 37.7 48.8 14.8 21.1 49.1 1.9 LOS D A D D B C D A Approach Delay (s/veh)25.9 37.7 25.3 38.7 Approach LOS C D C D Intersection Summary Cycle Length: 100 Actuated Cycle Length: 92.5 Natural Cycle: 90 Control Type: Actuated-Uncoordinated Maximum v/c Ratio: 0.93 Intersection Signal Delay (s/veh): 31.9 Intersection LOS: C Intersection Capacity Utilization 75.0%ICU Level of Service D Analysis Period (min) 15 Splits and Phases: 5: Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter Garden Pkwy Page 194 of 331 HCM 7th Signalized Intersection Summary Buildout 5: Turnpike Feeder Rd & Winter Garden Pkwy Timing Plan: PM Buildout Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Volume (veh/h)91 17 93 16 26 10 223 487 13 35 633 164 Future Volume (veh/h)91 17 93 16 26 10 223 487 13 35 633 164 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane Width Adj.1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT)1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1900 1707 1900 1900 1900 1900 1885 1856 1900 1900 1856 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 97 18 44 17 28 5 237 518 12 37 673 94 Peak Hour Factor 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 0.94 Percent Heavy Veh, %0 13 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 3 2 Cap, veh/h 169 31 197 50 82 15 287 1019 24 427 721 810 Arrive On Green 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.10 0.56 0.56 0.39 0.39 0.39 Sat Flow, veh/h 1382 256 1610 624 1028 184 1795 1806 42 887 1856 1585 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 115 0 44 50 0 0 237 0 530 37 673 94 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1638 0 1610 1836 0 0 1795 0 1848 887 1856 1585 Q Serve(g_s), s 5.8 0.0 2.2 2.3 0.0 0.0 6.6 0.0 15.4 2.3 30.6 2.7 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 5.8 0.0 2.2 2.3 0.0 0.0 6.6 0.0 15.4 2.3 30.6 2.7 Prop In Lane 0.84 1.00 0.34 0.10 1.00 0.02 1.00 1.00 Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 201 0 197 147 0 0 287 0 1043 427 721 810 V/C Ratio(X)0.57 0.00 0.22 0.34 0.00 0.00 0.83 0.00 0.51 0.09 0.93 0.12 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 251 0 247 267 0 0 319 0 1118 447 764 847 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I)1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 36.4 0.0 34.8 38.2 0.0 0.0 19.4 0.0 11.7 17.2 25.8 11.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.6 0.0 0.6 1.4 0.0 0.0 14.9 0.0 0.4 0.1 17.8 0.1 Initial Q Delay(d3), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(95%),veh/ln 4.3 0.0 1.6 1.9 0.0 0.0 6.3 0.0 9.2 0.8 22.0 2.1 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh LnGrp Delay(d), s/veh 39.0 0.0 35.4 39.6 0.0 0.0 34.3 0.0 12.1 17.2 43.6 11.2 LnGrp LOS D D D C B B D B Approach Vol, veh/h 159 50 767 804 Approach Delay, s/veh 38.0 39.6 19.0 38.6 Approach LOS D D B D Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 5 6 8 Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 56.4 17.3 15.4 41.0 14.3 Change Period (Y+Rc), s 6.8 6.5 6.8 6.8 7.2 Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 53.2 13.5 10.2 36.2 12.8 Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 17.4 7.8 8.6 32.6 4.3 Green Ext Time (p_c), s 3.3 0.3 0.1 1.6 0.1 Intersection Summary HCM 7th Control Delay, s/veh 30.1 HCM 7th LOS C Page 195 of 331 HCM 7th TWSC Buildout 6: Indrio Rd & Deleon Ave Timing Plan: PM Buildout Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 1.9 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 34 325 511 26 28 48 Future Vol, veh/h 34 325 511 26 28 48 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length ----0 - Veh in Median Storage, #-0 0 -0 - Grade, %-0 0 -0 - Peak Hour Factor 84 84 84 84 84 84 Heavy Vehicles, %4 4 6 6 5 5 Mvmt Flow 40 387 608 31 33 57 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 639 0 -0 1092 624 Stage 1 ----624 - Stage 2 ----468 - Critical Hdwy 4.14 ---6.45 6.25 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ----5.45 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ----5.45 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.236 ---3.545 3.345 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 935 ---234 480 Stage 1 ----529 - Stage 2 ----624 - Platoon blocked, %--- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 935 ---221 480 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ----221 - Stage 1 ----499 - Stage 2 ----624 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 0.85 0 19.63 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)170 ---336 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.043 ---0.27 HCM Control Delay (s/veh)9 0 --19.6 HCM Lane LOS A A --C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.1 ---1.1 Page 196 of 331 HCM 7th TWSC Buildout 7: Indrio Rd & Driveway 1 Timing Plan: PM Buildout Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0.7 Movement EBL EBT WBT WBR SBL SBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 24 367 537 17 12 15 Future Vol, veh/h 24 367 537 17 12 15 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length ----0 - Veh in Median Storage, #-0 0 -0 - Grade, %-0 0 -0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 26 399 584 18 13 16 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor2 Conflicting Flow All 602 0 -0 1044 593 Stage 1 ----593 - Stage 2 ----451 - Critical Hdwy 4.12 ---6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ----5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ----5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy 2.218 ---3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 975 ---254 506 Stage 1 ----552 - Stage 2 ----642 - Platoon blocked, %--- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 975 ---245 506 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ----245 - Stage 1 ----533 - Stage 2 ----642 - Approach EB WB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 0.54 0 16.47 HCM LOS C Minor Lane/Major Mvmt EBL EBT WBT WBRSBLn1 Capacity (veh/h)110 ---343 HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.027 ---0.085 HCM Control Delay (s/veh)8.8 0 --16.5 HCM Lane LOS A A --C HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)0.1 ---0.3 Page 197 of 331 HCM 7th TWSC Buildout 8: Deleon Ave/Royal Palm Ave & Driveway 2 Timing Plan: PM Buildout Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 3.3 Movement WBL WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 16 27 36 24 28 50 Future Vol, veh/h 16 27 36 24 28 50 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length 0 ----- Veh in Median Storage, #0 -0 --0 Grade, %0 -0 --0 Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 17 29 39 26 30 54 Major/Minor Minor1 Major1 Major2 Conflicting Flow All 167 52 0 0 65 0 Stage 1 52 ----- Stage 2 115 ----- Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 --4.12 - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 ----- Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 ----- Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 --2.218 - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 823 1015 --1537 - Stage 1 970 ----- Stage 2 910 ----- Platoon blocked, %--- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 806 1015 --1537 - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 806 ----- Stage 1 970 ----- Stage 2 891 ----- Approach WB NB SB HCM Control Delay, s/v 9.09 0 2.65 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBT NBRWBLn1 SBL SBT Capacity (veh/h)--926 646 - HCM Lane V/C Ratio --0.05 0.02 - HCM Control Delay (s/veh)--9.1 7.4 0 HCM Lane LOS --A A A HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)--0.2 0.1 - Page 198 of 331 HCM 7th TWSC Buildout 23: Royal Palm Ave & Miramar Ave Timing Plan: PM Buildout Conditions PM Synchro 12 Report Kimley-Horn Intersection Int Delay, s/veh 0 Movement EBT EBR WBL WBT NBL NBR Lane Configurations Traffic Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 0 0 0 Future Vol, veh/h 0 0 0 0 0 0 Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 Sign Control Free Free Free Free Stop Stop RT Channelized -None -None -None Storage Length ----0 - Veh in Median Storage, #0 --0 0 - Grade, %0 --0 0 - Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 Heavy Vehicles, %2 2 2 2 2 2 Mvmt Flow 0 0 0 0 0 0 Major/Minor Major1 Major2 Minor1 Conflicting Flow All 0 ---2 1 Stage 1 ----1 - Stage 2 ----1 - Critical Hdwy ----6.42 6.22 Critical Hdwy Stg 1 ----5.42 - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 ----5.42 - Follow-up Hdwy ----3.518 3.318 Pot Cap-1 Maneuver -0 0 -1020 1083 Stage 1 -0 0 -1022 - Stage 2 -0 0 -1022 - Platoon blocked, %-- Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ----1020 1083 Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ----1020 - Stage 1 ----1022 - Stage 2 ----1022 - Approach EB WB NB HCM Control Delay, s/v 0 0 0 HCM LOS A Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBLn1 EBT WBT Capacity (veh/h)--- HCM Lane V/C Ratio --- HCM Control Delay (s/veh)0 -- HCM Lane LOS A -- HCM 95th %tile Q(veh)--- Page 199 of 331 APPENDIX H Excerpts from ITE Trip Generation Manual Page 200 of 331 237 Land Use: 215 Single-Family Attached Housing Description Single-family attached housing includes any single-family housing unit that shares a wall with an adjoining dwelling unit, whether the walls are for living space, a vehicle garage, or storage space. Additional Data The database for this land use includes duplexes (defined as a single structure with two distinct dwelling units, typically joined side-by-side and each with at least one outside entrance) and townhouses/rowhouses (defined as a single structure with three or more distinct dwelling units, joined side-by-side in a row and each with an outside entrance). The technical appendices provide supporting information on time-of-day distributions for this land use. The appendices can be accessed through either the ITETripGen web app or the trip generation resource page on the ITE website (https://www.ite.org/technical-resources/topics/trip- and-parking-generation/). The sites were surveyed in the 1980s, the 1990s, the 2000s, and the 2010s in British Columbia (CAN), California, Georgia, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, Ontario (CAN), Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin. Source Numbers 168, 204, 211, 237, 305, 306, 319, 321, 357, 390, 418, 525, 571, 583, 638, 735, 868, 869, 870, 896, 912, 959, 1009, 1046, 1056, 1058, 1077 General Urban/Suburban and Rural (Land Uses 000–399) Page 201 of 331 Single-Family Attached Housing(215) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:Dwelling Units On a:Weekday Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:22 Avg.Num.of Dwelling Units:120 Directional Distribution:50%entering,50%exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 7.20 4.70 -10.97 1.61 Data Plot and Equation 0 200 400 6000 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 Average RateStudySiteFittedCurve Fitted Curve Equation:T =7.62(X)-50.48 R²=0.94 X =Number of Dwelling Units T = T r i p s E n d s 238 Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition • Volume 3 Page 202 of 331 Single-Family Attached Housing(215) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:Dwelling Units On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:46 Avg.Num.of Dwelling Units:135 Directional Distribution:31%entering,69%exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.48 0.12 -0.74 0.14 Data Plot and Equation 0 200 400 600 8000 100 200 300 400 500 Average RateStudySiteFittedCurve Fitted Curve Equation:T =0.52(X)-5.70 R²=0.92 X =Number of Dwelling Units T = T r i p s E n d s 239General Urban/Suburban and Rural (Land Uses 000–399) Page 203 of 331 Single-Family Attached Housing(215) Vehicle Trip Ends vs:Dwelling Units On a:Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban Number of Studies:51 Avg.Num.of Dwelling Units:136 Directional Distribution:57%entering,43%exiting Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.57 0.17 -1.25 0.18 Data Plot and Equation 0 200 400 600 8000 100 200 300 400 500 Average RateStudySiteFittedCurve Fitted Curve Equation:T =0.60(X)-3.93 R²=0.91 X =Number of Dwelling Units T = T r i p s E n d s 240 Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition • Volume 3 Page 204 of 331 APPENDIX I Treasure Coast Regional Planning Model (TCRPM) Page 205 of 331 (Licensed to Kimley Horn and Associates Inc) TCRPM 5.1 - 2015 Project Distribution - June 2024 Indrio Townhomes TIA Project Location Number of Lanes = 1 Number of Lanes = 2 Number of Lanes = 3 Number of Lanes > 3 10 1 03 0 4 3 6 64 SR 713 7 SR 71330 46 18 CR 614 23 CR 614 23 CR 61428 5 SR 713 17 SR 713 17 SR 713 1 SR 7137 8 S R 7 1 329 29 SR 71329 18 SR 71329 SR 71329 SR 71324 18 1 8 0 0 Page 206 of 331 (Licensed to Kimley Horn and Associates Inc) TCRPM 5.1 - 2015 Project Distribution - June 2024 Indrio Townhomes TIA Project Location Number of Lanes = 1 Number of Lanes = 2 Number of Lanes = 3 Number of Lanes > 3 0 000 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 30 0 1 0 0 2 8 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 3 6 64 JO H N S O N R D 0 0 0 6 CR 614 16 6 6 0 CR 611 6 6 6 0 6 CR 614 16 JOHNSON RD 0 16 SR 713 7 SR 71330 46 18 7 8 0 0 SR 607 7 CR 614 23 SR 607 7 SR 607 7 SR 607 SR 607 7 SR 607 7 7 SR 607 7 0 7 23 23 CR 614 28 5 14 17 CR 6082 CR 608 0 SR 713 17 17 17 SR 713 17 1 7 8 29 CR 608 2 182929SR 71324 SR 71316 JENKINS RD 1 SR 713161614 14 8 7 0 S R 7 1 38 CR 608 1 C R 6 0 5 03 U S 1 1 4 RAM P 7 US 114 US 1 8 C R 6 0 5 0 U S 1 1 4 U S 1 0 U S 1 8 C R 6 0 5 0 CR 6081 U S 1 0 0 C R 6 0 5 0 CR 6080 2 1 20T H A V E 2 2 15 0 HIGHLAND DR0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 8 2 00 0 0 0 Page 207 of 331 (Licensed to Kimley Horn and Associates Inc) TCRPM 5.1 - 2015 Project Distribution - June 2024 Indrio Townhomes TIA Project Location Number of Lanes = 1 Number of Lanes = 2 Number of Lanes = 3 Number of Lanes > 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 1 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 30 0 1 0 0 2 8 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 1 3 6 64 20TH AVE 0 20TH AVE 0 1 CR 606 0 0 0 0 CR 614 10 CR 606 3 0 0 0 6 CR 614 16 6 6 0 CR 611 6 6 6 0 CR 611 6 6 CR 611 6 CR 611 6 CR 606 0CR 611 2 CR 611 2 CR 614 16 CR 6060 16 SR 713 7 SR 71330 46 18 7 8 0 0 SR 607 7 CR 614 23 SR 607 7 SR 607 7 SR 607 5 SR 607 5 SR 607 7 SR 607 5 SR 607 7 7 5 SR 607 7 0 7 2 2 2 2 SR 607 2 2 2 23 0 CR 606 0 0 23 CR 61428 5 17 17 SR 713 17 1 7 8 CR 606 0 CR 606 0CR 606 0 0 29 18 29 SR 71324 16 C R 6 0 5 1 16 1 C R 6 0 5 0 US 1 10 U S 1 1 0 1614 U S 1 11 0 14 U S 1 1 1 1 1 C R 6 0 5 0 8 1 2 1 2 7 U S 1 1 2 0 S R 7 1 38 0 U S 1 1 2 3 C R 6 0 5 03 U S 1 1 2 U S 1 1 4 RAM P 7 US 114 US 1 8 C R 6 0 5 0 U S 1 1 4 U S 1 0 U S 18 C R 6 0 5 0 U S 1 0 0 C R 6 0 5 0 C R 6 0 5 0 0 U S 1 1 4 20TH AVE 0 00 0 2 1 2 3 2 15 2 17TH ST0 0 HIGHLAND DR 0 0 HIGHLAND DR 0 0 1 0 1 000 0 0 8 2 00 0 0 0 Page 208 of 331 (Licensed to Kimley Horn and Associates Inc) TCRPM 5.1 - 2015 Project Distribution - June 2024 Indrio Townhomes TIA Project Location Number of Lanes = 1 Number of Lanes = 2 Number of Lanes = 3 Number of Lanes > 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 0 1 0 1 0 30 0 1 2 8 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 6 64 ANGLE RD JOHNSON RD 0 JO H N S O N R D 0 0 CR 614 ANGLE RD 0 0 0 0 6 CR 614 16 6 6 0 I 950 CR 614 16 I 95 0 0 JOHNSON RD 0 16 SR 713 7 SR 71330 46 18 7 8 0 0 SR 607 7 CR 614 23 SR 607 7 SR 607 7 SR 607 I 950 0 0 I 95 0 0 0 W ANGLE RD 0 23 23 CR 614 28 5 I 950 I 95 0 SR 713 11 SR 713 11 CR 607A0 SR 713 14 SR 713 11 11 SR 713 14 14 17 CR 608 2 CR 608 0 SR 713 17 17 17 SR 713 17 1 7 8 I 95 0 0 0 029CR 607A 0 CR 608 2 18 29 SR 71324 16 JENKINS RD 1 1 JENKINS RD 1 1 16 U S 1 1 4 1614 0 1 0 0 14 8 1 1 CR 608 1 C R 607 A 1 JUANUTA AVE 0 U S 1 0 C R 6 0 5 0 C R 607 A 1 CR 6081 1 1 0 1 U S 1 0 0 1 0 0 C R 6 0 5 0 C R 6 0 5 0 CR 608 0 0 U S 1 1 414 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C R 6 0 5 0 0 15 I 9 5 0 I 950 I 9 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 8 0 0 Page 209 of 331 (Licensed to Kimley Horn and Associates Inc) TCRPM 5.1 - 2015 Project Distribution - June 2024 Indrio Townhomes TIA Project Location Number of Lanes = 1 Number of Lanes = 2 Number of Lanes = 3 Number of Lanes > 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 8 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 6 0 0 3 6 64 SR 6140 CR 614 0 R A M P 3 I 9 50 I 9 5 2 0 0 0 3 R A M P0 0 0 3 0 3 0 RA M P 2 0 0 02 CR 6143 I 9 50 I 9 5 0 R A M P 0 CR 614 3 0 0 10 62 CR 614 10 6 0 0 0 6 CR 614 16 6 6 0 CR 614 16 JOHNSON RD 0 CR 614 16 SR 713 7 SR 71330 46 18 7 8 0 0 SR 607 7 CR 614 23 SR 607 7 SR 607 7 SR 607 7 23 23 CR 614 28 5 SR 713 SR 713 17 17 SR 713 17 1 7 8 2929 29 18 29 29 S R 71324 SR 71316 I 9 5 0 0 1 0 1 8 2 6 0 0 Page 210 of 331 APPENDIX J Growth Rate Calculations Page 211 of 331 PIN#948505 Location 6 Year Count*Trend** 2019 5300 5200 2020 5100 5300 2021 5600 5500 2022 5600 5600 2023 5800 5800 2024 N/A 5900 2025 N/A 6100 150 2027 N/A 6400 73.05% 2.88% 2.59% 14-Jun-24 Traffic Trends - V2.0 EMERSON AVE -- N of Indrio Rd County: Station #: St. Lucie (94) 94009000 Traffic (ADT/AADT) 2025 Mid-Year Trend EMERSON AVE Trend R-squared: Highway: 2024 Opening Year Trend Straight Line Growth Option *Axle-Adjusted 2027 Design Year Trend TRANPLAN Forecasts/Trends ** Annual Trend Increase: Trend Growth Rate (2023 to Design Year): Printed: Trend Annual Historic Growth Rate: 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 2019 2024 2029 2034 Average Daily Traffic (Vehicles/Day) Year Observed Count Fitted Curve Page 212 of 331 PIN#948505 Location 6 Year Count*Trend** 2019 3600 3500 2020 3400 3500 2021 3400 3400 2022 3400 3400 2023 3400 3400 2024 N/A 3300 2025 N/A 3300 -40 2027 N/A 3200 50.00% -0.71% -1.47% 14-Jun-24 Straight Line Growth Option *Axle-Adjusted 2027 Design Year Trend TRANPLAN Forecasts/Trends ** Annual Trend Increase: Trend Growth Rate (2023 to Design Year): Printed: Trend Annual Historic Growth Rate: Traffic (ADT/AADT) 2025 Mid-Year Trend FT. Pierce Blvd Trend R-squared: Highway: 2024 Opening Year Trend Traffic Trends - V2.0 FT. Pierce Blvd -- S of Winter Garden Hwy County: Station #: St. Lucie (94) 0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 2019 2024 2029 2034 Average Daily Traffic (Vehicles/Day) Year Observed Count Fitted Curve Page 213 of 331 PIN#948505 Location 6 Year Count*Trend** 2019 5400 4800 2020 5200 5500 2021 5200 6200 2022 7400 6800 2023 7600 7500 2024 N/A 8100 2025 N/A 8800 660 2027 N/A 10100 72.21% 14.06% 8.67% 14-Jun-24 Traffic Trends - V2.0 INDRIO RD -- E of SR 713/Kings Hwy County: Station #: St. Lucie (94) 0 Traffic (ADT/AADT) 2025 Mid-Year Trend INDRIO RD Trend R-squared: Highway: 2024 Opening Year Trend Straight Line Growth Option *Axle-Adjusted 2027 Design Year Trend TRANPLAN Forecasts/Trends ** Annual Trend Increase: Trend Growth Rate (2023 to Design Year): Printed: Trend Annual Historic Growth Rate: 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 2019 2024 2029 2034 Average Daily Traffic (Vehicles/Day) Year Observed Count Fitted Curve Page 214 of 331 PIN#948505 Location 6 Year Count*Trend** 2019 11200 9400 2020 8600 10700 2021 11000 11900 2022 13900 13100 2023 14700 14300 2024 N/A 15600 2025 N/A 16800 1,230 2027 N/A 19300 62.96% 13.03% 8.74% 14-Jun-24 Straight Line Growth Option *Axle-Adjusted 2027 Design Year Trend TRANPLAN Forecasts/Trends ** Annual Trend Increase: Trend Growth Rate (2023 to Design Year): Printed: Trend Annual Historic Growth Rate: Traffic (ADT/AADT) 2025 Mid-Year Trend INDRIO RD Trend R-squared: Highway: 2024 Opening Year Trend Traffic Trends - V2.0 INDRIO RD -- W of SR 713/Kings Hwy County: Station #: St. Lucie (94) 0 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000 2019 2024 2029 2034 Average Daily Traffic (Vehicles/Day) Year Observed Count Fitted Curve Page 215 of 331 PIN#948505 Location 6 Year Count*Trend** 2019 14900 14000 2020 13200 14100 2021 14200 14200 2022 13500 14300 2023 15300 14400 2024 N/A 14600 2025 N/A 14700 110 2027 N/A 14900 3.80% 0.71% 0.87% 14-Jun-24 Traffic Trends - V2.0 KINGS HWY -- S of Indrio Rd County: Station #: St. Lucie (94) 940081 Traffic (ADT/AADT) 2025 Mid-Year Trend KINGS HWY Trend R-squared: Highway: 2024 Opening Year Trend Straight Line Growth Option *Axle-Adjusted 2027 Design Year Trend TRANPLAN Forecasts/Trends ** Annual Trend Increase: Trend Growth Rate (2023 to Design Year): Printed: Trend Annual Historic Growth Rate: 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 2019 2024 2029 2034 Average Daily Traffic (Vehicles/Day) Year Observed Count Fitted Curve Page 216 of 331 PIN#948505 Location 6 Year Count*Trend** 2019 13200 12800 2020 12400 13300 2021 14900 13800 2022 13600 14300 2023 15100 14800 2024 N/A 15300 2025 N/A 15800 500 2027 N/A 16800 47.60% 3.91% 3.38% 14-Jun-24 Traffic Trends - V2.0 SR 713/Kings Hwy -- N of Indrio Rd County: Station #: St. Lucie (94) 940745 Traffic (ADT/AADT) 2025 Mid-Year Trend SR 713/Kings Hwy Trend R-squared: Highway: 2024 Opening Year Trend Straight Line Growth Option *Axle-Adjusted 2027 Design Year Trend TRANPLAN Forecasts/Trends ** Annual Trend Increase: Trend Growth Rate (2023 to Design Year): Printed: Trend Annual Historic Growth Rate: 0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 2019 2024 2029 2034 Average Daily Traffic (Vehicles/Day) Year Observed Count Fitted Curve Page 217 of 331 PIN#948505 Location 6 Year Count*Trend** 2019 11200 11200 2020 11200 11500 2021 12600 11900 2022 11500 12200 2023 12800 12600 2024 N/A 12900 2025 N/A 13300 350 2027 N/A 14000 50.37% 3.13% 2.78% 14-Jun-24 Traffic Trends - V2.0 SR 713 -- SW of SR 5/US 1 County: Station #: St. Lucie (94) 0 Traffic (ADT/AADT) 2025 Mid-Year Trend SR 713 Trend R-squared: Highway: 2024 Opening Year Trend Straight Line Growth Option *Axle-Adjusted 2027 Design Year Trend TRANPLAN Forecasts/Trends ** Annual Trend Increase: Trend Growth Rate (2023 to Design Year): Printed: Trend Annual Historic Growth Rate: 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 2019 2024 2029 2034 Average Daily Traffic (Vehicles/Day) Year Observed Count Fitted Curve Page 218 of 331 PIN#948505 Location 6 Year Count*Trend** 2019 3400 3300 2020 3200 3300 2021 3200 3200 2022 3200 3200 2023 3200 3200 2024 N/A 3100 2025 N/A 3100 -40 2027 N/A 3000 50.00% -0.76% -1.56% 14-Jun-24 Traffic Trends - V2.0 WINTER GARDEN PKWY -- N of Indrio Rd County: Station #: St. Lucie (94) 940081 Traffic (ADT/AADT) 2025 Mid-Year Trend WINTER GARDEN PKWY Trend R-squared: Highway: 2024 Opening Year Trend Straight Line Growth Option *Axle-Adjusted 2027 Design Year Trend TRANPLAN Forecasts/Trends ** Annual Trend Increase: Trend Growth Rate (2023 to Design Year): Printed: Trend Annual Historic Growth Rate: 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 2019 2024 2029 2034 Average Daily Traffic (Vehicles/Day) Year Observed Count Fitted Curve Page 219 of 331 APPENDIX K Vested Developments Page 220 of 331 Page 221 of 331 Page 222 of 331 Attachment 2 - Trip Generation - Indrio East Neighborhood Daily In Out In Out Total Single Family Detached 210 182 DU Ln(T) = 0.92Ln(X) + 2.68 50% 50% 876 875 1,751 Single Family Attatched 215 154 DU T = 7.62(X) - 50.48 50% 50% 562 561 1,123 TOTALS 1,438 1,436 2,874 Source: ITE 11th Edition Trip Generation Rates AM Peak Hour In Out In Out Total Single Family Detached 210 182 DU Ln(T) = 0.91Ln(X) + 0.12 25% 75% 32 96 128 Single Family Attatched 215 154 DU T = 0.52(X) - 5.70 25% 75% 19 55 74 TOTALS 51 151 202 Source: ITE 11th Edition Trip Generation Rates PM Peak Hour In Out In Out Total Single Family Detached 210 182 DU Ln(T) = 0.94Ln(X) + 0.27 63% 37% 110 64 174 Single Family Attatched 215 154 DU T = 0.60(X) - 3.93 59% 41% 52 36 88 TOTALS 162 100 262 Source: ITE 11th Edition Trip Generation Rates Land Use ITE Code Trip Generation Rate Directional Split Intensity Units Intensity Units Intensity Units Net New TripsLand Use ITE Code Trip Generation Rate Directional Split Net New TripsDirectional SplitLand Use ITE Code Trip Generation Rate Net New Trips C6 - Table 1 - TripGen - Bedner Farms - NE Neighborhood Susan E. O'Rourke, P.E., Inc. Page 223 of 331 Page 224 of 331 Page 225 of 331 Page 226 of 331 Page 227 of 331 Page 228 of 331 APPENDIX L NCHRP Report 457 Outputs Page 229 of 331 Figure 2 - 5. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. 2-lane roadway (English) INPUT Value 25 65% 20 20 OUTPUT Value 418 CALIBRATION CONSTANTS Value 3.0 5.0 1.9 Advancing volume (VA), veh/h: Opposing volume (VO), veh/h: Variable Variable Variable 85th percentile speed, mph: Percent of left-turns in advancing volume (VA), %: Critical headway, s: Average time for left-turn vehicle to clear the advancing lane, s: Limiting advancing volume (VA), veh/h: Guidance for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay: Left-turn treatment NOT warranted. Average time for making left-turn, s: 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700Opposing Volume (VO), veh/h Advancing Volume (VA), veh/h Left-turn treatment warranted. Left-turntreatmentnotwarranted. Deleon Ave/Royal Palm Ave & Driveway 2 Left Turn AM Peak Hour Page 230 of 331 Figure 2 - 5. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. 2-lane roadway (English) INPUT Value 25 3% 408 223 OUTPUT Value 969 CALIBRATION CONSTANTS Value 3.0 5.0 1.9 Advancing volume (VA), veh/h: Opposing volume (VO), veh/h: Variable Variable Variable 85th percentile speed, mph: Percent of left-turns in advancing volume (VA), %: Critical headway, s: Average time for left-turn vehicle to clear the advancing lane, s: Limiting advancing volume (VA), veh/h: Guidance for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay: Left-turn treatment NOT warranted. Average time for making left-turn, s: 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700Opposing Volume (VO), veh/h Advancing Volume (VA), veh/h Left-turn treatment warranted. Left-turntreatmentnotwarranted. Indrio Rd & Driveway 1 Left Turn AM Peak Hour Page 231 of 331 Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. INPUT Value 25 20 11 OUTPUT Value ########## right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway: Do NOT add right-turn bay. Roadway geometry: Variable Variable Guidance for determining the need for a major-road Major-road speed, mph: Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h: Right-turn volume, veh/h: Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h: 2-lane roadway 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Ri g h t -Tu r n V o l u m e , v e h / h Major-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h Add right -turn bay Deleon Ave/Royal Palm Ave & Driveway 2 Right Turn PM Peak Hour Page 232 of 331 Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. INPUT Value 25 223 8 OUTPUT Value 251469 right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway: Do NOT add right-turn bay. Roadway geometry: Variable Variable Guidance for determining the need for a major-road Major-road speed, mph: Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h: Right-turn volume, veh/h: Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h: 2-lane roadw ay 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Right-Turn Volume, veh/h Major-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h Add right - turn bay Indrio Rd & Driveway 1 Right Turn AM Peak Hour Page 233 of 331 Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. INPUT Value 25 554 17 OUTPUT Value 901 right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway: Variable Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h: Guidance for determining the need for a major-road Do NOT add right-turn bay. Roadway geometry: Variable Major-road speed, mph: Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h: Right-turn volume, veh/h: 2-lane roadw ay 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Right-Turn Volume, veh/h Major-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h Add right - turn bay Indrio Rd & Driveway 1 Right Turn PM Peak Hour Page 234 of 331 Figure 2 - 6. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road right-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. INPUT Value 25 60 24 OUTPUT Value 849523813 right-turn bay for a 2-lane roadway: Variable Limiting right-turn volume, veh/h: Guidance for determining the need for a major-road Do NOT add right-turn bay. Roadway geometry: Variable Major-road speed, mph: Major-road volume (one direction), veh/h: Right-turn volume, veh/h: 2-lane roadway 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Ri g h t -Tu r n V o l u m e , v e h / h Major-Road Volume (one direction), veh/h Add right -turn bay Deleon Ave/Royal Palm Ave & Driveway 2 Right Turn PM Peak Hour Page 235 of 331 Figure 2 - 5. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. 2-lane roadway (English) INPUT Value 25 6% 391 554 OUTPUT Value 459 CALIBRATION CONSTANTS Value 3.0 5.0 1.9Average time for left-turn vehicle to clear the advancing lane, s: Limiting advancing volume (VA), veh/h: Guidance for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay: Left-turn treatment NOT warranted. Variable Average time for making left-turn, s: Critical headway, s: Variable 85th percentile speed, mph: Percent of left-turns in advancing volume (VA), %: Advancing volume (VA), veh/h: Opposing volume (VO), veh/h: Variable 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700Opposing Volume (VO), veh/h Advancing Volume (VA), veh/h Left-turn treatment warranted. Left-turntreatmentnotwarranted. Indrio Rd & Driveway 1 Right Turn PM Peak Hour Page 236 of 331 Figure 2 - 5. Guideline for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay at a two-way stop-controlled intersection. 2-lane roadway (English) INPUT Value 25 36% 78 60 OUTPUT Value 395 CALIBRATION CONSTANTS Value 3.0 5.0 1.9Average time for left-turn vehicle to clear the advancing lane, s: Limiting advancing volume (VA), veh/h: Guidance for determining the need for a major-road left-turn bay: Left-turn treatment NOT warranted. Variable Average time for making left-turn, s: Critical headway, s: Variable 85th percentile speed, mph: Percent of left-turns in advancing volume (VA), %: Advancing volume (VA), veh/h: Opposing volume (VO), veh/h: Variable 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700Opposing Volume (VO), veh/h Advancing Volume (VA), veh/h Left-turn treatment warranted. Left-turntreatmentnotwarranted. Deleon Ave/Royal Palm Ave & Driveway 2 Left Turn PM Peak Hour Page 237 of 331 ϭ ^d>h/ KhEdz s >KWD EdZ s/ tKDD Ed^ ŝƐĐŝƉůŝŶĞ͗dƌĂĨĨŝĐ ŶŐŝŶĞĞƌŝŶŐ ZĞǀŝĞǁĞĚďLJ͗ ^ĂůŵĂŶZĂƚŚŽƌĞ͕W ZĞǀŝĞǁĂƚĞ͗ ƉƌŝůϮϰ ƚŚ͕ϮϬϮϱ WŚŽŶĞ͗;ϰϬϰͿϱϰϮͲϰϵϰϴ &Ădž͗;ϵϱϰͿϵϮϭͲϴϴϬϳ WƌŽũĞĐƚEĂŵĞ͗ /ŶĚƌŝŽdŽǁŶŚŽŵĞƐ 'WƌŽũĞĐƚEƵŵďĞƌ͗ ϮϬͲϰϭϭϯͬϭϰͲϭϬϴ ŽŵŵĞŶƚƐďĂƐĞĚŽŶƌĞǀŝĞǁŽĨƌĞƐƉŽŶƐĞƚŽĐŽŵŵĞŶƚƐĚĂƚĞĚ&ĞďƌƵĂƌLJϭϭƚŚ͕ϮϬϮϱƉƌĞƉĂƌĞĚďLJŽƵƚůĞƵƌĂŶĚ ,ĞĂƌŝŶŐĂŶĚ ƌĞǀŝƐĞĚdƌĂĨĨŝĐ /ŵƉĂĐƚŶĂůLJƐŝƐ ĚĂƚĞĚ EŽǀĞŵďĞƌ ϭϵ ƚŚ͕ ϮϬϮϰ ƉƌĞƉĂƌĞĚ ďLJ <ŝŵůĞLJ ,ŽƌŶ ĂŶĚ ƐƐŽĐŝĂƚĞƐ͕/ŶĐ͘ EŽĐŽŵŵĞŶƚƐ y ŽŵŵĞŶƚƐĂƐĨŽůůŽǁƐŽƌĂƚƚĂĐŚĞĚ 1. Pg 1 / Study area roadway segments –No analysis is performed to include roadways that are significantly impacted by project traffic. As per County’s STANDARDIZED TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDIES (TIS) METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES, Include significance table based on the above criteria and accordingly analyze impacted roadway segments and intersections. Coutleur and Hearing response (February 11th, 2025) - A significance test was conducted to analyze the roadway segments to identify the impacted segments. The significance test can be found in Table 1 of the revised TIA. CGA Comment (April 24th, 2025) – Satisfied. Page 238 of 331 Ϯ 2. Tables 1, 2, 6, 7, 12 & 13 – Include LOS results for individual approaches of the intersections. Propose mitigation if any individual approach shows a failing LOS. Coutleur and Hearing response (February 11th, 2025) - LOS results for individual approaches are represented in the intersection analyses tables in the revised TIA CGA Comment (April 24th, 2025) – Satisfied. 3. Committed development – Include the following traffic impact studies as part of committed development. a. Bedner Farms NW Neighborhood b. Bedner Farms East Neighborhood c. Sugar Sand Apartments d. Sabal Palm Grove Coutleur and Hearing response (February 11th, 2025) - The committed developments were used in the background scenarios and can be found in Appendices E and K. CGA Comment (April 24th, 2025) – Satisfied. 4. Pg 8 / Trip Generation Table – The PM peak hour trips (in, out) are not correct. Please revise the table and related analysis accordingly. Coutleur and Hearing response (February 11th, 2025) - The trip generation calculations were corrected and can be found in Table 6 of the revised TIA. CGA Comment (April 24th, 2025) – Satisfied. 5. Tables 3, 4, 8, 9, 14, 15 – (Reference to above comments) The tables are likely to get modified with significance analysis, committed development and revised PM peak trip generation. Coutleur and Hearing response (February 11th, 2025) - The roadway segment analysis tables have been updated and can be found in the revised TIA. CGA Comment (April 24th, 2025) – Satisfied. 6. Tables 3, 4, 8, 9, 14, 15 – Provide supporting documents for the information and numbers included in the Tables for the below categories. The information and numbers provided in these tables were not completely found and cross checked in Appendix H. Coutleur and Hearing response (February 11th, 2025) - Supporting documents for the table can be found in Appendix B in the revised TIA. CGA Comment (April 24th, 2025) – Satisfied. Page 239 of 331 ϯ 7. Pg. 27 / Site Access Analysis – Include a figure to show project driveways and proposed turn lanes. Coutleur and Hearing response (February 11th, 2025) - A site access analysis figure can be found in Figure 6 in the revised TIA. CGA Comment (April 24th, 2025) – Satisfied. Date: April 24th, 2025 Salman Rathore, PE Project Manager, Transportation & Mobility Department Calvin Giordano & Associates Page 240 of 331 EW Consultants, Inc. Natural Resource Management, Wetland, and Environmental Permitting Services 1000 SE Monterey Commons, Suite 208 • Stuart, FL 34996 • 772-287-8771 • Fax 772-287-2988 www.ewconsultants.com ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND WETLAND WAIVER INDRIO GARDENS ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA Prepared for: NVR/Ryan Homes Prepared by: EW Consultants, Inc. January 2025 © 2025 EW Consultants, Inc. Page 241 of 331 PROJECT: INDRIO GARDENS January 2025 EIR AND WETLAND WAIVER St. Lucie County, FL 1 I. INTRODUCTION - This Environmental Impact Report documents the various regenerated and man-made resources present on a project site referred to as Indrio Gardens located within unincorporated St. Lucie County, Florida. It includes a preliminary inventory of the vegetative communities present and an assessment of the potential impacts to natural resources with special emphasis on listed fauna, wetland impact avoidance/minimization, site plan alternatives examined, and proposed wetland mitigation. The Indrio Gardens project site, as shown on Figures 1 and 2 in Appendix A, is 33.2+ acres, and located north of Indrio Road and east of and adjacent to Delon Avenue. It is bounded by Indrio Road, vacant wooded lands to the south and the Binney Estate south of Indrio Road, Miramar Avenue and residences to the north, a canal to the east, and Delon Avenue, a retail shopping center and vacant land to the west. Figure 3, Aerial Photograph, in Appendix A is an aerial view of the subject property and immediate surroundings. II. GENERAL PROPERTY DESCRIPTION – Based on site visits conducted in March of 2024 by staff from EW Consultants, Inc., the subject site consists of patches of invasive vegetation (Australian pine), regenerated wooded uplands and a freshwater wetland area in the north-central portion. The site consists of a mixture of native and non-native trees with no intact native upland habitat on-site as the entire site was historically a citrus grove. III. SOIL TYPES – A Soils Report for the subject site produced by the United States Department of Agriculture/Natural Resources Conservation Service is provided in Appendix B of this report. Soil types are typical for this region of St. Lucie County. Since the site was once in citrus production, soil profiles described in this report likely differ significantly from those found in the report. IV. EXISTING LAND COVER TYPES – The following is a summary of the vegetation cover types found on the project site. Vegetative cover type classifications on-site have been divided into two general categories: Wetlands and Uplands. The uplands include Australian pine (437) and Disturbed Lands (740). The wetland category has been broken down into Mixed Wetland Hardwoods (617) and Willow and Elderberry (618). These categories have been mapped based on the March 2024 field reconnaissance and aerial photograph interpretation. The extent of the wetland area as shown on Page 242 of 331 PROJECT: INDRIO GARDENS January 2025 EIR AND WETLAND WAIVER St. Lucie County, FL 2 Figure 4 in Appendix A does not represent a wetland jurisdictional determination by any regulatory agency. The included FLUCCS graphic, Figure 4 in Appendix A, provides the approximate extent of and the nomenclature for the types of land covers/FLUCCS which currently exist within the Indrio Gardens site limits. The land cover types found on the project include: Wetlands - ±3.8 Acres (Category III) #617 – Mixed Wetland Hardwoods- ± 3.1 Acres There is a wetland area located within the north-central portion of the project site extending to the north property line, and contains wetland plants such as primrose willow, melaleuca, torpedo grass, various bluestem and broomsedge grasses, maidencane, pickerelweed, cabbage palm, laurel oak, among other species. It is in fair ecological condition and appears to have been regenerated from the historic citrus grove. #618 – Willow and Elderberry- ± 0.7 Acres At the northern edge of the wetland area is a dense stand of Carolina willow. This portion of the on-site wetland is deeper than the remaining wetland accounting for the difference in plant make- up. Carolina willow, while a native species, tends to dominate deeper portions of wetlands, preventing more desirable herbaceous species from establishing. Uplands - ±29.6 Acres #437 – Australian Pine- ± 3.1 Acres There are two areas dominated by Australian pines, one large area in the south-central area of the site and a smaller one located along the western boundary immediately east of the shopping center buildings, although this species is scattered throughout the upland portions of the site. These canopy trees tend to dominate altered landscapes where conditions are favorable (such as spoil mounds) preventing the establishment of other plant species, even other invasive trees and bushes. Typically, the forest floor beneath Australian pines is open consisting only of pine needle litter and tree roots. #740 – Disturbed Lands – ±26.5 Acres The remainder of the site is described as Disturbed Lands, as no intact native upland habitat communities remain due to the historic citrus operation. However, there are a significant number Page 243 of 331 PROJECT: INDRIO GARDENS January 2025 EIR AND WETLAND WAIVER St. Lucie County, FL 3 of native canopy trees, including cabbage palm, slash pine, and laurel oak, scattered throughout this land cover type. Understory and groundcover vegetation typically includes ruderal weeds and vines. Invasive vegetation exists throughout. Invasive species include melaleuca, Brazilian pepper, Australian pine, and earleaf acacia. V. LISTED AND NON-LISTED SPECIES DISCUSSION – Because of the types and of land covers found on the project site, it potentially provides foraging and nesting habitat for a variety of state and federally listed wildlife species. In particular, listed species which may utilize the project site include the Eastern indigo snake, Florida pine snake, and gopher tortoise. Due to the presence of the wetland, there is the potential for listed wading birds to nest or forage on-site, albeit minimal due to the quality of the wetland area and the presence of the Carolina willow in its northern portion. As with most sites in south Florida, sandy uplands serve as potential burrowing and foraging habitat for the state threatened gopher tortoise. Although no potentially occupied burrows of this species were observed during the March 2024 site visit, a systematic gopher tortoise survey meeting Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC) guidelines will be required within the entire development footprint’s upland area prior to new construction activities. Should such burrows be discovered during this survey, resident tortoises will have to be relocated to a state-approved receiver site. Although the bald eagle has been de-listed, the bird, its nests and nest trees remain protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. No birds or nests were observed on the subject site during the March 2024 site investigation. Figure 5 in Appendix A shows the locations of recorded bald eagle nests in relation to the project site. The closest recognized nest is SL002 located approximately two due east of the Indrio Gardens site just west of Indian River Drive. While the wetland area on-site is not ideal wading bird habitat due to the relatively closed canopy, foraging opportunities may exist during periods of high water. As the foraging range of the state and federally threatened wood stork is recognized as 18.6 miles, a graphic has been generated to show all such recorded colonies within 20 miles of the project site (see Figure 6 in Appendix A). Although there are no such colonies near the site, it is within the foraging range of the recorded wood stork colonies which tend to occur within the North Fork of the St. Lucie River and the Indian River Lagoon. No listed wading birds were observed foraging or nesting on-site during the March, 2024 field investigation. Page 244 of 331 PROJECT: INDRIO GARDENS January 2025 EIR AND WETLAND WAIVER St. Lucie County, FL 4 VI. PROPOSED SITE PLANS/WETLAND IMPACT AVOIDANCE – Based on input from St. Lucie County Environmental Resources Department (ERD) staff, three (3) iterations of the proposed site plan have been evaluated, with the third being the “preferred alternative” option included as part of this development application. Please refer to the six SP figures in Appendix A for each site plan and corresponding site data table. Each is discussed/evaluated in the following section, while the table below displays the relevant site data for the three plans. INDRIO GARDENS PRESERVE DATA BY SITE PLAN Total Site Area 33.2 Wetland Areas (unverified)3.8 Uplan Area (non-native but restorable)26.5 SP-1 SP-2 SP-3 Wetland Preserve 3.1 3.54 3.54 Wetland Buffer Preserve 0.43 0.9 0.9 Upland Habitat (Restored)2.15 5 5.55 Total Preserve Area 5.68 9.44 9.99 Percent Wetland Preserved 81.58 93.16 93.16 Percent Upland Restored 21.43 35.62 37.70 Percent Upand Restored - Overall Site 6.48 15.06 16.72 Unit Count 278 232 232 Page 245 of 331 PROJECT: INDRIO GARDENS January 2025 EIR AND WETLAND WAIVER St. Lucie County, FL 5 SITE PLAN #1 – SP-1 for the Indrio Gardens project was submitted to St. Lucie County as part of the July, 2024 submittal package. It took into account preservation of the native wetland habitats located in the northern portion of the site by preserving approximately 80% of the estimated extent of the wetland area. The associated buffer to the wetland was expanded (greater than the required 25- foot minimum for Category III wetlands) on its west side; there was no buffer proposed along the wetland’s south and east sides. The expanded upland buffer and preserve to the west of the wetland consisted of restored native pine flatwood upland habitat. In all, SP-1 called for over 81% wetland preserve, 21% upland habitat restoration, and 6% of the total site in upland habitat restoration. Total proposed unit count was 278. SITE PLAN #2 – SP-2 for the Indrio Gardens project was a revised concept based on County feedback with regard to SP-1. It was not submitted to St. Lucie County, but reviewed with ERD staff informally. In this iteration, more of the wetland area (92%) was preserved in its southern portion, and the 25- foot wetland buffer was expanded to the east side of the wetland increasing it to 0.9 acres. Finally, the restored upland habitat increased to 5.0 acres which represented 35% of the restorable upland areas on-site and 15% of the overall site. The unit count dropped from 278 on SP-1 to 232 for SP-2. SITE PLAN #3 - With SP-3, the site plan submitted with this application package, the preserve assemblage was re-designed based on input from County staff. As a result, 92% of the wetland is being preserved with 0.9 acres of 25-foot wetland buffer surrounding it on its east and west sides. The restored upland area expanded to 5.5 acres representing 38% of the restorable uplands on-site, and 16.7 percent of the overall site. In addition, the trail system throughout the restored upland habitat areas has been expanded east and west of the wetland preserve. In all, 30% of the total site area will be preserved and subject to the Indrio Gardens Preserve Area Management and Maintenance Plan (PAMMP). The preserve has been configured as a large “block” of habitat located in the northern portion of the site focused on the wetland area; there are no fragmented slivers of preserve scattered throughout the project site. In addition, the preserved portion of the wetland will be enhanced so that the opportunity for wading birds, both listed and non-listed, will be increased via the removal of invasive and nuisance plants, as well as the reduction in overall coverage of tall bushes, such as Carolina willow, allowing for additional open wetland areas. Proposed wetland impacts as shown on Figure 4-1 in Appendix A are now minimal (0.25 acres), and occur at the southern tip of the estimated wetland area. While this area generally contains desirable native vegetation, it is separated by a remnant trail used as part of the historic citrus Page 246 of 331 PROJECT: INDRIO GARDENS January 2025 EIR AND WETLAND WAIVER St. Lucie County, FL 6 operation, and may likely be considered “isolated” from the northern portion of the wetland by the regulatory agencies. Should this be the case, mitigation for impacts to this portion of the wetland would not be required by such agencies. Mitigation for the proposed wetland impact will be four-fold, three being on-site and one being potentially off-site within St. Lucie County: 1) Placement of the preserved/enhanced wetland area and surrounding upland restored habitat in conservation easement in favor of St. Lucie County; 2) Enhancement of the on-site wetland in the form of invasive and nuisance plant species removal, in particular species which form a crowned canopy preventing wading birds from foraging, such as Carolina willow; 3) Restoration of the preserved upland areas adjacent to the wetland by eradicating invasive and nuisance species and planting native understory and groundcover plant species typically found in a healthy pine flatwood habitat, and, if needed; 4) The purchase of the appropriate amount of freshwater herbaceous wetland credits at a regional wetland mitigation bank located in St. Lucie County. It is estimated that the Wetland Rapid Assessment Procedure (WRAP) score for impacted area of the on-site wetland will be between 0.55 and 0.65 on a scale of 1.00. Finally, the associated site plan shows the future locations of the lake littoral and upland transition zone (UTZ) planting areas. Such zones are located around the entire perimeter of the central lake. This will allow for a more uniform distribution of native plants, as well as allow vegetative maintenance crews easy access to both zones for invasive and nuisance plant species control in the future. As the perpetual management of the preserve area will be dictated by the provisions set forth in the project’s PAMMP, so will the management of the planted littoral and UTZ in the form of a Lake Area Management Plan included in the PAMMP. VII. POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - During the 2024 site visit, preliminary observations were made for potential nesting and foraging of state and federally-listed species. Although no gopher tortoises, a state threatened species, were observed on-site, a formal survey for their burrows will need to occur within 90 days of site alteration. Should such burrows be discovered during that survey, a relocation permit from the Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) guidelines prior to land alteration. The Eastern indigo snake may inhabit sites with gopher tortoise burrows, as well as sandy upland areas found on the project site. Protection measures for this species, such as signage during construction activities, should be taken. Please see the accompanying Preserve Area Management and Maintenance Plan (PAMMP) for the Indrio Gardens project for additional details. Page 247 of 331 PROJECT: INDRIO GARDENS January 2025 EIR AND WETLAND WAIVER St. Lucie County, FL 7 Although the impact to the on-site wetland (approximately 0.25 acres) could result in indirect impacts to listed wading bird foraging area, it will be sufficiently mitigated through the enhancement of the preserved wetland area. In addition, over three acres of constructed lake along with the planted littoral zones and UTZ areas described previously will offset that impact. VIII. WAIVER for WETLAND AND BUFFER IMPACTS JUSTIFICATION - As stated in this EIR, the on-site wetland is in poor to fair ecological condition. According to the proposed site plan, only 7% of the subject wetland will be impacted. The southern portion of the on-site wetland, due to the historic use of the site as a citrus grove, may likely be considered “isolated” by the state regulatory agencies, thereby not requiring mitigation. Therefore, the entire central and northern portions of the on-site wetland, approximately 3.5 acres, will be preserved and enhanced. In doing so, the deeper pocket of the Carolina willow area will be preserved and enhanced through vegetation removal thereby creating a larger open marsh habitat within the northern portion of the wetland. Mitigation for the proposed wetland impact will be four-fold as previously described: 1) Placement of the preserved/enhanced wetland area and associated upland restored habitat in conservation easement in favor of St. Lucie County; 2) Enhancement of the on-site wetland in the form of invasive and nuisance plant species removal, in particular species which for a canopy crown preventing wading birds from foraging, such as Carolina willow; 3) Restoration of the preserve upland areas adjacent to the wetland by eradicating invasive and nuisance species and planting native understory and groundcover plant species typically found in a healthy pine flatwood habitat, and, if necessary; 4) The purchase of the appropriate amount of freshwater herbaceous wetland credits at a regional wetland mitigation bank located in St. Lucie County. In addition, the planted lake littoral zones will offset the partial loss of the on-site wetland by providing appropriate slopes and native vegetation for foraging by various wading birds. Adjacent areas to the south of the on-site wetland are not native uplands, so the buffer associated with it (should it have been preserved) would have had a low ecological value, as well. Page 248 of 331 © OpenStreetMap (and) contributors, CC-BY-SA 1000 SE Monterey Commons Blvd., Suite 208 Stuart, FL 34996772-287-8771 Fax 772-287-2988www.ewconsultants.com INDRIO GROVE SHGLOCATION MAP EW Consultants, Inc.JUNE 2024 FIGURE 1 $0 2,000 FeetLEGEND - SITE (33.2+/- AC) Page 249 of 331 1000 SE Monterey Commons Blvd., Suite 208 Stuart, FL 34996 772-287-8771 Fax 772-287-2988 www.ewconsultants.com FIGURE EW Consultants, Inc. QUAD 2 JUNE 2024 INDRIO GROVE SHG 0 SCALE IN FEET 2000 USGS QUAD MAP "OSLO", SECTIONS 13, TOWNSHIP 34 SOUTH, RANGE 40 EAST, FORT PIERCE, ST LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA,LATITUDE 27°31'21.71" LONGITUDE -80°23'32.67" LEGEND - SITE (33.2± AC) Page 250 of 331 1000 SE Monterey Commons Blvd., Suite 208 Stuart, FL 34996 772-287-8771 Fax 772-287-2988 www.ewconsultants.com FIGURE EW Consultants, Inc. AERIAL 3 JUNE 2024 INDRIO GROVE SHG 0 SCALE IN FEET 600 FDOT AERIALS DATED 2023 INDRIO RD KI N G ' S H I G H W A Y Page 251 of 331 617 740 740 740 437 437 618 0 SCALE IN FEET 300 FDOT AERIALS DATED 2023 INDRIO RD DE L O N A V E LEGEND 437 - AUSTRALIAN PINE (3.1± AC) 617 - MIXED WETLAND HARDWOODS (3.1± AC) 618 - WILLOW & ELDERBERRY (0.7± AC) 740 - DISTURBED LANDS (26.5± AC) TOTAL SITE (33.2± AC) 1000 SE Monterey Commons Blvd., Suite 208 Stuart, FL 34996 772-287-8771 Fax 772-287-2988 www.ewconsultants.com FIGURE EW Consultants, Inc. FLUCFCS 4 JUNE 2024 INDRIO GROVE SHG DISCLAIMER: THE LIMITS OF THE ON-SITEWETLAND ARE APPROXIMATEBASED ON RECENT LIMITEDFIELDWORK. THEY HAVE NOTBEEN VERIFIED BY ANY REGULATORY AGENCY OR SURVEYED BY A PSM. Page 252 of 331 0 SCALE IN FEET 200 SITE PLAN BY OTHERS LEGEND - WETLAND IMPACT (0.25± AC) 1000 SE Monterey Commons Blvd., Suite 208 Stuart, FL 34996 772-287-8771 Fax 772-287-2988 www.ewconsultants.com FIGURE EW Consultants, Inc. WETLAND IMPACT 4-1 JAN 2025 INDRIO GROVE SHG Page 253 of 331 ¢0 3 Miles 1000 SE Monterey Commons Blvd., Suite 208 Stuart, FL 34996772-287-8771 Fax 772-287-2988www.ewconsultants.com INDRIO GROVE SHG EAGLES EW Consultants, Inc.JUNE 2024 FIGURE 5 SITE LEGEND [b FFWCC EAGLE NESTING 2016 10 MILES Page 254 of 331 ¢ 0 7 Miles 1000 SE Monterey Commons Blvd., Suite 208 Stuart, FL 34996772-287-8771 Fax 772-287-2988www.ewconsultants.com INDRIO GROVE SHGWADING BIRDS MAP EW Consultants, Inc.JUNE 2024 FIGURE 6 SITE LEGEND [®FFWCC WOST COLONIES 2009-2018 [®FFWCC 1999 WOODSTORK NESTINGCOLONIES & WADING BIRD ROOKERY 30 KM Page 255 of 331 SP-1 Page 256 of 331 SP-1 Site Data Table Page 257 of 331 SP-2 Page 258 of 331 SP-2 Site Data Table Page 259 of 331 SP-3 Page 260 of 331 SP-3 Site Data Table Page 261 of 331 APPENDIX B USDA Soils Report Page 262 of 331 Soil Map—St. Lucie County, Florida (INDRIO GROVE SHG) Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 6/27/2024 Page 1 of 3 30 4 4 2 1 0 30 4 4 2 8 0 30 4 4 3 5 0 30 4 4 4 2 0 30 4 4 4 9 0 30 4 4 5 6 0 30 4 4 6 3 0 30 4 4 7 0 0 30 4 4 7 7 0 30 4 4 2 1 0 30 4 4 2 8 0 30 4 4 3 5 0 30 4 4 4 2 0 30 4 4 4 9 0 30 4 4 5 6 0 30 4 4 6 3 0 30 4 4 7 0 0 30 4 4 7 7 0 559790 559860 559930 560000 560070 560140 560210 559790 559860 559930 560000 560070 560140 560210 27° 31' 31'' N 80 ° 2 3 ' 4 0 ' ' W 27° 31' 31'' N 80 ° 2 3 ' 2 4 ' ' W 27° 31' 12'' N 80 ° 2 3 ' 4 0 ' ' W 27° 31' 12'' N 80 ° 2 3 ' 2 4 ' ' W N Map projection: Web Mercator Corner coordinates: WGS84 Edge tics: UTM Zone 17N WGS84 0 100 200 400 600 Feet 0 40 80 160 240 Meters Map Scale: 1:2,790 if printed on A portrait (8.5" x 11") sheet. Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Page 263 of 331 MAP LEGEND MAP INFORMATION Area of Interest (AOI) Area of Interest (AOI) Soils Soil Map Unit Polygons Soil Map Unit Lines Soil Map Unit Points Special Point Features Blowout Borrow Pit Clay Spot Closed Depression Gravel Pit Gravelly Spot Landfill Lava Flow Marsh or swamp Mine or Quarry Miscellaneous Water Perennial Water Rock Outcrop Saline Spot Sandy Spot Severely Eroded Spot Sinkhole Slide or Slip Sodic Spot Spoil Area Stony Spot Very Stony Spot Wet Spot Other Special Line Features Transportation Rails Interstate Highways US Routes Major Roads Local Roads Background Aerial Photography The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000. Warning: Soil Map may not be valid at this scale. Enlargement of maps beyond the scale of mapping can cause misunderstanding of the detail of mapping and accuracy of soil line placement. The maps do not show the small areas of contrasting soils that could have been shown at a more detailed scale. Please rely on the bar scale on each map sheet for map measurements. Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey URL: Coordinate System: Web Mercator (EPSG:3857) Maps from the Web Soil Survey are based on the Web Mercator projection, which preserves direction and shape but distorts distance and area. A projection that preserves area, such as the Albers equal-area conic projection, should be used if more accurate calculations of distance or area are required. This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of the version date(s) listed below. Soil Survey Area: St. Lucie County, Florida Survey Area Data: Version 17, Sep 6, 2023 Soil map units are labeled (as space allows) for map scales 1:50,000 or larger. Date(s) aerial images were photographed: Jan 18, 2022—Jan 30, 2022 The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were compiled and digitized probably differs from the background imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting of map unit boundaries may be evident. Soil Map—St. Lucie County, Florida (INDRIO GROVE SHG) Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 6/27/2024 Page 2 of 3Page 264 of 331 Map Unit Legend Map Unit Symbol Map Unit Name Acres in AOI Percent of AOI 2 Ankona and Farmton sands 0.6 1.8% 16 Hilolo loamy sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes 2.9 8.7% 21 Lawnwood and Myakka sands 24.3 73.0% 23 Malabar fine sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes 2.4 7.3% 44 Tantile and Pomona sands 0.3 0.9% 50 Waveland and Immokalee fine sands 2.7 8.2% Totals for Area of Interest 33.2 100.0% Soil Map—St. Lucie County, Florida INDRIO GROVE SHG Natural Resources Conservation Service Web Soil Survey National Cooperative Soil Survey 6/27/2024 Page 3 of 3 Page 265 of 331 Environmental resources Development Review Letter TO:Thad Crowe, Planning & Development Services Department THROUGH:Aimee L. Cooper, Environmental Regulations Manager Amy E. Griffin, Environmental Resources Director FROM:Brian J. Arbeiter, Sr. Environmental Planner DATE:March 27th, 2025 SUBJECT:Indrio SHG Preliminary Development Plan PD-2408-000048 Background The Environmental Resources Department (ERD) is in receipt of the February 14th, 2025, date-stamped submittal, transmitted on February 14th, 2025, with comments due February 27th, 2025, from Planning and Development Services. The applicant is seeking approval of a Planned Development (PD) that proposes 232 townhome units, one (1) lake, a preserve area, and associated site improvements. A Planned Unit Development, which has since expired, was previously approved on June 19th, 2006 (PUD-05008, Resolution 06-164), and the site was previously platted as a sixty-four (64) lot subdivision on July 3rd, 1956 (Book 10, Page 55), and The project is located at the northwest intersection of Indrio Rd & Taylor Dairy Rd, and currently consists of five (5) vacant parcels (Parcel IDs 1313-601- 0001-000-6, 1313-601-0065-000-2, 1313-601-0087-000-2, 1313-601-0109-000-3, and 1313-601-0131-000-6) totaling approximately 33.2 acres, zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD), with a future land use of Residential Medium, 9 dwelling units/acre (RM). Findings The following items are required to be addressed, prior to approval: 1) Provide the limits and elevations of the wetland, including bearing and distance information used in determining the extent of the area, on the boundary survey in accordance with LDC 11.02.10.A.2. A note stating the wetland limits are ‘as delineated by EW Consultants, Inc.’ or ‘others’ within the survey is acceptable since the jurisdictional determination will not be finalized until the issuance of an Environmental Resource Permit (ERP). 2) Provide a Wetland Waiver application within EnerGov for the proposed wetland and indirect wetland buffer impacts. 3) The southern portion of the wetland and associated buffer partially lie within interior road right-of-way as currently depicted. If that portion of right-of-way area is required to remain, instead of meandering around the wetland, please account for those impacts within the EIR, Wetland Waiver application, and supporting documentation since it would not be able to be placed under a conservation easement. 4) Specify/depict a retaining wall and a permanent safety barricade, such as a guardrail, where the interior road abuts the southern part of the preserved wetland. 5) Remove the note ‘VUA trees may be relocated from ROA to front/rear yards if in conflict with utilities’ from the VUA Tree Planting Exhibit (LP-3). As an alternative, VUA trees may be relocated to common open space areas throughout the development if in conflict with utilities. Future enforcement of VUA plantings within individual lots becomes problematic as the lots fall under individual ownership. Conditions of Approval 1) Prior to Major Site Plan approval, a finalized landscape plan consistent with Land Development Code 7.09.00 shall be provided. Page 266 of 331 2) Prior to Major Site Plan approval, a finalized tree mitigation plan consistent with Land Development Code 6.00.05.D shall be provided. 3) Prior to commencement of development, including, but not limited to clearing, filling, excavation, grading, or planting of vegetation, as defined in LDC 2.00.00, the developer shall provide executed Conservation Easements over all preserved areas, along with the approved Preserve Area Monitoring and Management Plan (PAMMP), with an attached affidavit and cashier's check (payable to the Clerk of the Court for recording fees) to the County Attorney. The applicant shall also provide a georeferenced GIS shapefile or CAD file of the conservation easements’ boundaries to St. Lucie County. 4) Prior to commencement of development, including, but not limited to clearing, filling, excavation, grading, or planting of vegetation, as defined in LDC 2.00.00, an Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) from South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD) shall be provided to verify the limits of the wetlands. Should the limits of the wetland substantially deviate from the environmental consultant’s delineation, a new Wetland Waiver application shall be submitted in accordance with Comprehensive Plan Policy 6.1.14.4. 5) Prior to commencement of development, including, but not limited to clearing, filling, excavation, grading, or planting of vegetation, as defined in LDC 2.00.00, updated listed species surveys shall be provided per state and/or federal survey protocol. Should any listed species be found as a result of these surveys, appropriate permits from state and federal agencies shall be required. 6) Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, all Category I listed invasive plants shall be eradicated from the site. Please contact Brian Arbeiter at 772-462-2866 if you have any questions. Page 267 of 331 Natural Resource Management, Wetland, and Environmental Permitting Services 1000 SE Monterey Commons Blvd., Suite 208 • Stuart, FL 34996 772-287-8771 • Fax 772-287-2988 www.ewconsultants.com INDRIO GARDENS PRESERVE AREA MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE PLAN Prepared for: RYAN HOMES Prepared by: EW CONSULTANTS, INC. January 2025 © 2025 EW Consultants, Inc. Page 268 of 331 PROJECT: INDRIO GARDENS JANUARY 2025 PRESERVE AREA MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE PLAN ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FL E W C O N S U L T A N T S, I N C. 1 INTRODUCTION AND INTENT - The Indrio Gardens project site, as shown on Figure 1 is 33.2+ acres, and located in northeastern St. Lucie County north of Indrio Road and east of Delon Avenue. The preserve area on-site consists of a freshwater wetland (3.54 acres), associated 25-foot wetland buffer (0.92 acres), and surrounding restored upland pine flatwoods (5.55 acres). This Preserve Area Monitoring and Maintenance Plan (PAMMP) has been prepared to fulfill the requirements of the St. Lucie County, Florida, Land Development Code, Section 6.00.05.D.3.b. - Environmentally Sensitive Lands. The intent of this PAMMP is to ensure that the proposed project will provide a sufficient amount of on-site preserve area and that such preserve areas will be properly managed. This will be achieved by eradicating invasive vegetation, and restoring non-native preserve areas to native habitat. With proper management, the upland preserve and restoration areas will provide foraging and nesting opportunities for a variety of wildlife. IMPLEMENTATION AND RESPONSIBLE PARTIES - Responsibility for the implementation of the requirements set forth in this Plan will lie with the applicable Property Owners’ Association (POA), Community Development District (CDD), or other similar entity. Should another entity assume control of the site, all obligations described herein will become the responsibility of that new entity. Land management guidelines detailed in this PAMMP are to be carried out in perpetuity by the responsible party. PRESERVE AREA PROTECTION PLAN DURING CONSTRUCTION - In order to protect the preserve areas from potential damage during the land alteration process, the following minimum standards for vegetation protection shall be applied within the project site: A conspicuous, suitable protective barrier constructed of orange safety fencing or other durable material shall be placed and maintained around the perimeter of the preserve areas to form a continuously unbroken boundary. This fencing shall be placed either a minimum of ten (10) feet from the edge of the protected vegetation or from the radius of the dripline from all protected trees, whichever is greater. All special conditions included in the Vegetation Removal permit will be closely followed. In addition, protective signage will be installed around the perimeter of the preserve areas at intervals of no more than one sign every 200 feet of preserve boundary. See attached site plan for preserve area sign locations. Page 269 of 331 PROJECT: INDRIO GARDENS JANUARY 2025 PRESERVE AREA MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE PLAN ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FL E W C O N S U L T A N T S, I N C. 2 Special care shall be taken so that the preserve areas are properly marked and highly visible so that equipment operators can see the limits of permitted removal activity. Protective barriers or protective designations shall remain in place until removal is authorized by the Environmental Resources Department Director, or designee. In the event that any protective barriers are removed or altered and clearing activities are conducted within an area identified for preserve under the issued Vegetation Removal Permit, the Environmental Resources Department Director, or designee, is authorized to direct that all land clearing and site alteration work at the site be stopped until the barriers are restored and any necessary corrective actions taken to repair or replant any vegetation removed or damaged as a result of these encroachments. All preserve areas shall be maintained in their natural (or restored) state so as not to alter the water and oxygen content of the soil and impair its natural function. No grade changes or excavation of any sort may be made within the upland preserve areas that requires trenching or cutting of roots, except in compliance with the terms of special conditions in an approved Vegetation Removal Permit. If underground utilities must be routed through a protected root zone area, tunneling under the roots shall be required. Irrigation shall be installed outside of the dripline of all protected trees. No soil shall be removed from within the upland preserve areas. No fill material, construction material, concrete, paint, chemicals, or other foreign materials shall be stored, deposited or disposed of within the limits of the preserve areas. No signs, permits, wires, or other attachments, other than those of protective and non-damaging nature, shall be affixed or attached to protected vegetation. If landscaping is to be installed within the preserve areas after removal of protective barriers or designations, installation shall be accomplished using hand labor, unless use of light machinery is proven to be necessary and the methodology is approved by the Environmental Resources Department Director, or designee. Any equipment, including passenger vehicles, shall not be driven, parked, stored or repaired within designated preserve areas. Native vegetation destroyed or damaged as part of the development of a site or parcel shall be replaced by native vegetation of equal environmental value as specified by the Environmental Resources Department Director, or designee, before any occupancy or final use permit authorizations are issued. The authorized removal of any non-protected vegetation in the preserve areas shall be accomplished using hand tools, unless use of light machinery is proven to be necessary and the methodology is approved by the Environmental Resources Department Director, or designee. Only the above-ground portions of the non-protected vegetation may be removed and the stump shall be properly treated with an approved herbicide; the root systems of the protected vegetation must remain undisturbed. If any roots of protected vegetation are exposed or damaged, the applicant shall immediately correct the situation by covering the roots with a high-quality soil to match the existing grades, pruning any splintered roots and providing water until the vegetation has recovered. Page 270 of 331 PROJECT: INDRIO GARDENS JANUARY 2025 PRESERVE AREA MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE PLAN ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FL E W C O N S U L T A N T S, I N C. 3 The applicant shall provide the Environmental Resources Department Director, or designee, a written plan to control erosion which may be expected to occur as a result of the proposed removal of protected vegetation. The erosion control plan must be approved by the Environmental Resources Department Director, or designee, prior to the commencement of any removal of protected vegetation. All provisions of the plan shall be incorporated as conditions of any Notice of Vegetation Removal issued under this paragraph. USE OF PRESERVE AREAS - Activities allowed within the on-site preserve areas include bird watching, at-grade trail development consisting of native sand or grasses, hiking, and general nature enjoyment. Activities prohibited in preserve area easements include, but are not limited to: construction or placing of building materials on or above the ground; dumping or placing soil or other substances such as garbage, trash, and cuttings; removal or destruction of native trees, shrubs or other native vegetation; excavation, dredging or removal of soil materials; diking or fencing; vehicular traffic including use by non-motorized vehicles, recreational vehicles and off-road vehicles; permanent irrigation; the use of fertilizers; and any other activities which may be detrimental to native vegetation and wildlife. All hazardous materials, in particular fuel for refueling on-site heavy equipment, shall be stored a minimum of twenty-five (25) feet from any Preserve Areas and shall be removed upon completion of construction work. MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES WITHIN ON-SITE PRESERVES - The upland preserve areas as shown on the submitted site plan will be kept free of nuisance and invasive vegetation in perpetuity. All Category I and II nuisance and invasive vegetation as listed by the Florida Invasive Species Council will be treated within such areas. All treatment will be through the application of the appropriate herbicide approved for use within aquatic environments. The criterion for acceptance of eradication for Category I and II invasive vegetation will be 100 percent treatment/kill and 95 percent treatment/kill for nuisance species. If initial efforts do not achieve this criterion, follow up treatments will be conducted. The preservation areas will be enhanced as described below. Woody invasive vegetation occurs within the preserve area. o All woody species will be eradicated by cutting or girdling of the trunk and treatment of the stump or trunk with an appropriately labeled herbicide. o The criterion completion of the woody invasive eradication will be 100 percent kill. If initial eradication efforts do not achieve this criterion, follow up treatment will be conducted. Page 271 of 331 PROJECT: INDRIO GARDENS JANUARY 2025 PRESERVE AREA MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE PLAN ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FL E W C O N S U L T A N T S, I N C. 4 The invasive vegetation present within the preserves also includes non-woody species. o All eradication of non-woody invasive vegetation will be through application of appropriately labeled herbicide and left in-situ. o The criterion for acceptance of eradication for all non-woody invasive vegetation will be 100 percent kill. If initial eradication efforts do not achieve this criterion, follow up treatment will be conducted. Should the invasive vegetation eradication program generate vegetative debris, it will be disposed of in a County-approved facility or burned on-site with the appropriate burn permits. o Herbicides are required for the treatment of all stumps and/or trunks of woody vegetation to prevent re-growth, and for eradication of non-woody invasive and nuisance vegetation. o All herbicide application activities will be conducted under the supervision of a Florida Department of Agriculture licensed applicator who is licensed for application of aquatic herbicides. o All herbicides applied within aquatic areas must be properly labeled for application in such areas. o All herbicides applied must include a visible tracer dye in the mix to facilitate observation of treated vegetation. In addition, should the invasive vegetation eradication effort result in barren areas within the preserves, a re-vegetation program will be implemented. Barren areas will be re-planted with appropriate native plants in consultation with St. Lucie County ERD staff. A typical pine flatwoods re-planting plan is included in this PAMMP. It shall be the responsibility of the POA, CDD or other similar entity or its assigns to maintain the preserve areas subject to this PAMMP in accordance with the vegetative success criteria described in this PAMMP in perpetuity. St. Lucie County will be notified within 30 days of any transfer of such responsibilities. VIII. PRESERVE AREA MONITORING AND SCHEDULE - The wetland and upland preserve areas shown on the site plan for Indrio Gardens will be monitored. The vegetation at each monitoring station will be measured in percent coverage of the canopy/understory layer and ground cover. The total percent cover will not exceed 100 percent, and each species documented will be reported in both common and Latin names. The coverage will be measured by visual observation in each of four quadrats from the fixed monitoring point. Observations will extend approximately 25 feet from the observer in each direction. The data from each quadrant will be included in the monitoring reports. The transects will be marked with PVC pipe to ensure consistency in data collection. Photos will be collected from each transect to provide documentation of vegetative coverage. In addition to vegetative coverage Page 272 of 331 PROJECT: INDRIO GARDENS JANUARY 2025 PRESERVE AREA MANAGEMENT AND MAINTENANCE PLAN ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FL E W C O N S U L T A N T S, I N C. 5 documentation, observed wildlife utilization or indicators of wildlife (e.g. tracks, scat, etc.) will also be noted. The monitoring will be conducted on an annual basis. Dates for field data collection will be provided in advance to St. Lucie County Environmental Resources Department staff so that arrangements can be made to accompany the field biologist during the monitoring, if desired. Reports will be provided to the St. Lucie County Environmental Resources Department on an annual basis during the first five years so that maintenance activity can be closely tracked. The following is the proposed schedule associated with the on-site monitoring and maintenance activities: Activity Date_______________ Submit Baseline Monitoring Report 1 Month after Veg. Removal Permit Initial Invasive Eradication w/in On-site Preserves Prior to Release of First C.O. Submit Time-Zero Report 1 Month after First C.O. Conduct 1st Semi-Annual Maintenance Event 6 Months after Initial Invasive Tx. Conduct 2nd Semi-Annual Maintenance Event 12 Months after Initial Invasive Tx. Pine Flatwood Restoration Plantings 12 Months after Initial Invasive Tx. Submit 1st Annual Report 12 Months after Time-Zero Submittal Conduct 3rd Semi-Annual Maintenance Event 18 Months after Initial Invasive Tx. Conduct 4th Semi-Annual Maintenance Event 24 Months after Initial Invasive Tx. Submit 2nd Annual Report 24 Months after Time-Zero Submittal Conduct 5th Semi-Annual Maintenance Event 30 Months after Initial Invasive Tx. Conduct 6th Semi-Annual Maintenance Event 36 Months after Initial Invasive Tx. Submit 3rd Annual Report 36 Month after Time-Zero Submittal Conduct 7th Semi-Annual Maintenance Event 42 Months after Initial Invasive Tx. Conduct 8th Semi-Annual Maintenance Event 48 Months after Initial Invasive Tx. Submit 4th Annual Report 48 Months after Time-Zero Submittal Conduct 9th Semi-Annual Maintenance Event 54 Months after Initial Invasive Tx. Conduct 10th Semi-Annual Maintenance Event 60 Months after Initial Invasive Tx. Submit 5th Annual Report 60 Months after Time-Zero Submittal Page 273 of 331 © OpenStreetMap (and) contributors, CC-BY-SA 1000 SE Monterey Commons Blvd., Suite 208 Stuart, FL 34996772-287-8771 Fax 772-287-2988www.ewconsultants.com INDRIO GROVE SHGLOCATION MAP EW Consultants, Inc.JUNE 2024 FIGURE 1 $0 2,000 FeetLEGEND - SITE (33.2+/- AC) Page 274 of 331 INDRIO RD. TU R N P I K E FE E D E R N K I N G S H W Y PUD Plan LOCATION MAP N by agreement in writing with the architect. Immediatelyreport any discrepancies to the architect. SHEET COTLEUR & HEARING, INC.These drawings are the property of the architect and arenot to be used for extensions or on other projects except OF DESIGNED DRAWN APPROVEDJOB NUMBER REVISIONSDATE In d r i o G a r d e n s S H G NV R H o m e s St L u c i e C o u n t y , F l o r i d a Landscape ArchitectsLand PlannersEnvironmental Consultants www.cotleurhearing.com 1934 Commerce LaneSuite 1Jupiter, Florida 33458561.747.6336 · Fax 747.1377 Lic# LC-26000535 ACEACEDTS24-042507-29-24 3SP-1 02-05-25 North 40' Scale: 1" = 80' 80'240'160' 320'0' THIS SITE *NOTE: SEE SP-2 FOR REC TRACT AREAS LEGEND HCLBSBSWTYPROWRECVGDESTP HANDICAPLANDSCAPE BUFFERSETBACKSIDEWALKTYPICALRIGHT OF WAYRECREATION TRACTVALLEY GUTTERDRAINAGE EASEMENTSUBJECT TO PAMMP HC SIGN STOP SIGN DO NOT ENTER PEDESTRIAN CROSSING PARKING LIGHT PEDESTRIAN LIGHT FPL COACH LIGHT PRESERVE SIGN SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WWWWWWWWWWWWWWW W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WWWWWWWWWWW UPLAND OPENSPACE AREAS SA N I B E L A V E . LA S A L L E S T R E E T KIL L A R N E Y A V E . EA S T W O O D D R I V E MIRAMAR AVE DE L E O N A V E . INDRIO ROAD WE S T P I N E A P P L E A V E . LAWN CAT III PRESERVEDWETLAND 3.54 AC PRESERVE AREA 10.01 AC2.13 AC R35' 5' SW 11' 10' 98' 64.1' SB 190.5' R35' 5' SW 10' 11' 24' ACCESS24' ACCESS 24' 12' 12' ZONING: RM5 FUTURE LAND USE: RU ZONING: CG FUTURE LAND USE: COM ZONING: RM9 FUTURE LAND USE: RM ZONING: RS4 FUTURE LAND USE: RM ZONING: RM5 FUTURE LAND USE: RU SUBJECT TOPAMMP (STP) (STP) .05 AC 1167.2' 12 3 8 . 5 ' 1167.3' 12 3 9 . 3 ' ZONING: RS4 FUTURE LAND USE: RM 7 UNITS7UNITS 7UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS6 UNITS 6 UNITS 6 UNITS 6 UNITS 7UNITS 6UNITS 6UNITS 6UNITS 7UNITS 7UNITS 7UNITS 7UNITS7UNITS 6UNITS 6UNITS 6UNITS 7 UNITS7 UNITS 6 UNITS6 UNITS 7UNITS 7UNITS 7 UNITS #1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #12 #13 #14 #15 #16 #17 #18 #19 #20 #21 #22#23#24#25 #26 #27 #28 #29 #30 #31 #32 #33 #34 #35 UPLAND OPENSPACE AREAS 3.37 AC SUBJECT TOPAMMP (STP) 7UNITS #11 6UNITS #10 R37'R61' R15'5' SW 11' 10' R37'R61' R15' 20'R3' R75'R35' R100' R35' R35'R3' R23' 10' 10' 22' 25' WETLANDBUFFER 50' ROW 25' LANDSCAPEBUFFER 50'70' 50'ROW 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 98' 15' TYP. 24' 50' ROW24' 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 24'24' 16'5'SW 25'20' 22' 11' 24' 10' 5' SW 50'ROW 10' 24' 11' 5' SW 98'22' 63.1' SB 25' LANDSCAPEBUFFER 15' 15' 22' 42.4' 35' 30' 35' 20' LME 10'LITTORALSHELF 25' WETLANDBUFFER 10'UTZBUFFER 25' LANDSCAPEBUFFER 25' LANDSCAPEBUFFER 15' 479.7' 36.3' 50'ROW 10' 24' 11' 5' SW 24'50' ROW 10' 10' 22' 10' 10'20'12' 5' 10'20' 12'5' 24' 10' 94' 22' 10'20' 12' MULTI-USETRAIL 12' MULTI-USETRAIL 5' SW 5' SW 5' SW 10' 10' 22' 10' 10' ESMT CANALROW UPLAND OPENSPACE AREAS BUS STOP MAIL KIOSK & SHADE SAIL PASSIVE REC TRAILS LIFTSTATION DRAIN TYP. SEWER TYP. WATER TYP. DRAIN TYP. SEWER TYP. WATER TYP. DRAIN TYP. SEWER TYP. WATER TYP. PASSIVE RECTRAILS T-TURNAROUND CONNECTIONTO SLCUFORCE MAIN COVERED VIEWING AREA COVEREDVIEWINGAREA LAKE 3.12 AC(WET DETENTION) 6' PVCFENCE 6' PVCFENCE 45.2' SB51.4' 101' 45.9' SB 45.9' 46.1' SB 30' 20.3' 32.2' 30'30' 35.3' 42.1'30' PRESERVESIGNTYP. PRESERVESIGNTYP. Page 275 of 331 -PRESERVE AREA- This area is a protected preserve area for native vegetation and wildlife. No alterations to this area are allowed without prior permission from Saint Lucie County NO DUMPING ALLOWED 14" 11" 4"x4" WOODEN POST 1000 SE Monterey Commons Blvd., Suite 208 Stuart, FL 34996 772-287-8771 Fax 772-287-2988 www.ewconsultants.com FIGURE EW Consultants, Inc. PRESERVE AREA SIGN JULY 2024 INDRIO GARDENS Page 276 of 331 72" T-POST DRIVEN 20" MIN. BELOW GRADE8' 4'EXISTING GRADE PRESERVE AREA METAL REBAR SILT FENCE TO BE PLACED 5' FROM ORANGE BARRICADE FLOW FLOW FLOW 48" HIGH DENSITY ORANGE POLYETHELENE SAFETY FENCE WIRE OR ZIP TIES TO SECURE SAFETY FENCE TO POST PRESERVE AREA FILTER FABRIC ATTACHED SECURELY TO UPSTREAM SIDE OF POST FLOW 48" HIGH DENSITY ORANGE POLYETHELENE SAFETY FENCE 5' 1000 SE Monterey Commons Blvd., Suite 208 Stuart, FL 34996 772-287-8771 Fax 772-287-2988 www.ewconsultants.com FIGURE EW Consultants, Inc. ORANGE BARRICADE & SILT FENCE JULY 2024 INDRIO GARDENS NTS Page 277 of 331 50' 50' Groundcover - (3' - 5' o.c., liners or 1 gal) Spartina bakeri - Sand Cordgrass Vaccinium myrsinites - Shiny Blueberry Andropogon virginicus - Broomsedge Aristida stricta - Wiregrass Andropogon floridanus - Bluestem Grass Understory - (5' - 10' o.c., 1 or 3 gal) Serenoa repens - Saw Palmetto Myrica cerifera - Wax Myrtle Lyonia spp. - Fetterbush Ilex glabra - Gallberry NOTES: - DENSITY/QUANTITIES TO BE BASED ON EXISTING CONDITIONS WITHIN UPLAND HABITAT RESTORATION AREA & FIELD-ADJUSTED ACCORDINGLY. - NO CANOPY TREES PROPOSED AS MATURE SLASH PINES EXIST WITHIN UPLAND HABITAT RESTORATION AREAS. - REFERENCED SPECIES MAY BE SUBSTITUTED WITH OTHER APPROPRIATE NATIVE SPECIES BASED ON AVAILABILITY. - PLANTS TO BE INSTALLED AS TO MIMIC NATURAL OCCURRENCE. 1000 SE Monterey Commons Blvd., Suite 208 Stuart, FL 34996 772-287-8771 Fax 772-287-2988 www.ewconsultants.com FIGURE EW Consultants, Inc.JULY 2024 TYPICAL PINE FLATWOODS RESTORATION DETAIL INDRIO GARDENS TYPICAL PINE FLATWOODS RESTORATION DETAIL Page 278 of 331 EW Consultants, Inc. Natural Resource Management, Wetland, and Environmental Permitting Services 1000 SE Monterey Commons Blvd, Suite 208 Stuart, FL 34996 772-287-8771 Fax 772-287-2988 www.ewconsultants.com INDRIO GARDENS LAKE AREA MANAGEMENT PLAN St. Lucie County, Florida January 2025 The following Lake Area Management Plan is provided for the stormwater lake within the Indrio Groves project site located in unincorporated St. Lucie County, FL. It is to be used in conjunction with the littoral zone/Upland Transition Zone (UTZ) planting plans and the project engineer’s construction drawings. Extent and Types of Proposed Littoral Zone and UTZ Plantings – Based on St. Lucie County land development codes, the areal extent of planted littoral zone and UTZ is based on the linear footage of the proposed lake’s shoreline within the project site. For every linear foot of shoreline, 10 square feet of littoral zone and UTZ is to be planted with desirable native wetland and upland plants, typically ranging from 10 feet above the designed control elevation of the lake to 3 feet below it. Such plants typically include readily available wetland and transitional plants such as sand cordgrass, muhly grass, sawgrass, bulrush, pickerelweed, lanceleaf arrowhead, jointed spikerush, blue flag iris, swamp lily, and water lilies in deeper depths in the littoral area, and pine flatwood species in the UTZ. Lake Bank Erosion Control and Water Management Provisions – In order to facilitate littoral zone planting, the operator shall use Best Management Practices (BMP’s) to minimize erosion. The use of native top-soils is encouraged, especially in areas reclaimed for aquatic or wildlife habitats. Where topsoil is not used, the operator shall use a soil or growing medium, including amendments, suitable for the type of vegetative communities planned. Should washes or rills develop after re-vegetation and before final release of the area, the operator shall repair the eroded areas and stabilize the slopes. Page 279 of 331 EW Consultants, Inc. Natural Resource Management, Wetland, and Environmental Permitting Services 1000 SE Monterey Commons Blvd, Suite 208 Stuart, FL 34996 772-287-8771 Fax 772-287-2988 www.ewconsultants.com Best Management Practices also apply to water quality within the constructed lake so as to protect the health of the plant material. Turbid water will be kept to a minimum so that sunlight may reach the littoral shelf floor promoting submerged aquatic vegetation recruitment. The water levels within the lake has been designed to a specific elevation based on the engineer’s construction plans. Such elevations will be staked along the littoral shelves in order to provide the plant installation contractor a reference from which to install the appropriate plant material. Should water levels within the completed lake drop to elevations potentially harmful to the planted littoral plants, temporary irrigation will be established by using a small pump and spray-rig situated within the lake. Water from the lake will be sprayed onto the planted littoral zones as needed in order to keep such plants healthy. Installation of Native Plant Material – The installation of the native plant material within the littoral zone and UTZ will be in substantial conformance with the approved planting plans; there may be variations in species type and plant size based on availability and unique site conditions. Planting of such material will be conducted at the appropriate time after the lake banks are sloped in accordance with the approved construction drawings. Plants are to be installed in accordance with the spacing and quantities detailed on the approved planting plans. All plant material will be of appropriate type for the soils found on site. An Environmental Professional familiar with aquatic plant installation will oversee this activity. Maintenance of Littoral Zone and UTZ Areas - The littoral zone and UTZ areas will be kept free of non-native invasive vegetation in perpetuity by the HOA, POA or similar entity. All Category I and II non-native invasive vegetation as listed by the Florida Invasive Species Plant Council will be treated within such areas. All treatment will be through the application of the appropriate herbicide approved for use within aquatic environments. The criterion for acceptance of eradication for Category I and II invasive vegetation will be 100 percent treatment/kill and 95 percent treatment/kill for nuisance species. If initial efforts do not achieve this criterion, follow up treatments will be conducted. No invasive woody vegetative material will be left in the littoral zone and UTZ area. All herbicide application activity will be conducted under the supervision of a Florida Department of Agriculture certified applicator, licensed for application of aquatic herbicides. All herbicide applied within aquatic systems on-site must be properly labeled for such use and include a visible tracer dye in the mix to facilitate observation of treated vegetation. Within the littoral zones, the areal extent of desirable native plants shall cover at least 80% of the surface area by the end of the second year after installation. Page 280 of 331 EW Consultants, Inc. Natural Resource Management, Wetland, and Environmental Permitting Services 1000 SE Monterey Commons Blvd, Suite 208 Stuart, FL 34996 772-287-8771 Fax 772-287-2988 www.ewconsultants.com Re-Vegetation Provisions - Re-vegetation of the lake littoral zone areas will occur using aquatic plant species native to the region in accordance with the attached planting plans. The operator has developed a plan for the proposed re- vegetation, including the species to be planted, and the spacing of vegetation. Lake shorelines shall be re-vegetated with a variety of native littoral zone plant species as specified in the attached planting plans. The littoral zones will be planted no longer than 60 days after the final grade is completed and certified by the project surveyor/engineer. It shall be unlawful to alter the approved slopes, contours, or cross sections or to chemically mechanically, or manually remove, damage, or destroy any plants in the littoral zone areas of affected constructed lake except upon the written approval from the St. Lucie County. It is the responsibility of the owner, or property owners’ association, its successors or assigns to maintain the required survivorship and coverage of the planted littoral zone areas and to ensure ongoing treatment of prohibited and invasive non-native plant species from these areas. END OF DOCUMENT Page 281 of 331 PUD Plan LOCATION MAP N by agreement in writing with the architect. Immediatelyreport any discrepancies to the architect. SHEET COTLEUR & HEARING, INC.These drawings are the property of the architect and arenot to be used for extensions or on other projects except OF DESIGNED DRAWN APPROVEDJOB NUMBER REVISIONSDATE In d r i o G a r d e n s S H G NV R H o m e s St L u c i e C o u n t y , F l o r i d a Landscape ArchitectsLand PlannersEnvironmental Consultants www.cotleurhearing.com 1934 Commerce LaneSuite 1Jupiter, Florida 33458561.747.6336 · Fax 747.1377 Lic# LC-26000535 DTS/ACEACE/JSDTS24-042507-29-24 2SP-1 North 40' Scale: 1" = 80' 80'240'160' 320'0' INDRIO RD. TU R N P I K E FE E D E R N K I N G S H W Y THIS SITE *NOTE: SEE SP-2 FOR REC TRACT AREAS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SSSSSS SS SS SSSSSSSS SS SS SS SS SS SSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WWWWWWWWWWWWWWW W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WWWWWWWWWWW WWW W W W W W W SSSSSS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SSSSSS SS SS SSSSSSSS SS SS SSSS SS SS SSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SS SSS SS SS SS SS SSSSS SS SS SS SS SSSSSS SS SS SS SS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW W W W W RESTORED PINEFLATWOODS LAKE 3.12 AC SA N I B E L A V E . LA S A L L E S T R E E T KIL L A R N E Y A V E . EA S T W O O D D R I V E MIRAMAR AVE CANALROW RO Y A L P A L M A V E . INDRIO ROAD WE S T P I N E A P P L E A V E . LAWN7 UNITS PRESERVED WETLAND 3.00 AC PRESERVE AREA 5.59 AC1.99 AC RESTOREDPINE FLATWOODS .15 AC R35' 5' SW 10' 11' 98' 15' TYP. 5' SW 11' 10' 98' 64.1' 190.5' BUS STOP R35' 5' SW 10' 11' MAIL KIOSK& SHADE STRUCTURE 24' ACCESS 24' ACCESS 24' ACCESS24' ACCESS 15' TYP. 24' 12' 12' PASSIVE REC TRAILS 98' 46.8'VIEWINGAREA 7UNITS 7UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 7 UNITS 5UNITS 5UNITS 6 UNITS 6 UNITS 6 UNITS 6 UNITS 6 UNITS 6 UNITS 6 UNITS5 UNITS5 UNITS 6 UNITS 6 UNITS 6 UNITS 6 UNITS6 UNITS6 UNITS 7UNITS 6UNITS LIFTSTATION 6UNITS 6UNITS 6UNITS 7UNITS 7UNITS 7UNITS 7UNITS7UNITS7UNITS 6UNITS6UNITS6UNITS 6UNITS ZONING: RM5 FUTURE LAND USE: RU ZONING: CG FUTURE LAND USE: COM ZONING: RM9 FUTURE LAND USE: RM ZONING: RS4 FUTURE LAND USE: RM ZONING: RS4 FUTURE LAND USE: RM ZONING: RM5 FUTURE LAND USE: RU 6UNITS 25' WETLANDBUFFER 50' ROW 50'ROW 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 25' LANDSCAPEBUFFER 50'70' 50' ROW 12.2' 50'ROW 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 98'15' TYP. 24' 24' 50' ROW24' 25' LANDSCAPE BUFFER 24'24' 16'5'SW 20'20' 22' 22' 11' 24' 10' 5' SW 50'ROW 10' 24' 11' 5' SW 98'22' 63.1' 25' LANDSCAPEBUFFER 15' TYP. 15' TYP. 18.7' 15' TYP. 22' 20' 15.2' 22' 20'20'20' 20' 15' TYP. 15' TYP. 20' 20' LME 10'LITTORALSHELF 25' WETLANDBUFFER 10'UPLANDTRANSITION 25' LANDSCAPEBUFFER 25' LANDSCAPEBUFFER DRAIN TYP. SEWER TYP. WATER TYP. DRAIN TYP. SEWER TYP. WATER TYP. DRAIN TYP. SEWER TYP. WATER TYP. Page 282 of 331 SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW 5 UNIT TOWNHOME TYPICAL6 UNIT TOWNHOME TYPICAL7 UNIT TOWNHOME TYPICAL FRONTSETBACK22' 57'BUILDABLEAREA 19'REARSETBACK 7.5' SIDE SETBACK 132' 98' LOT LINE ROW LINE 15' MIN.BETWEENBUILDINGS 118' 26'16'16'16'16'16'26' FRONTSETBACK22' 57'BUILDABLEAREA 19'REARSETBACK 7.5' SIDE SETBACK 98' LOT LINE ROW LINE 15' MIN.BETWEENBUILDINGS 101' 26'16'16'16'16'26' 57'BUILDABLEAREA 19'REARSETBACK 7.5' SIDE SETBACK 98' LOT LINE ROW LINE 15' MIN.BETWEENBUILDINGS 26'16'16'16'26' FRONTSETBACK22' 85' 116'100' CL FINISHED GRADE 50' ROW 23'27' 11'TREE LAWN 2' VALLEYGUTTER 10' CL 2' VALLEYGUTTER 10'10'TREE LAWN 5' SIDEWALK STABILIZED SUBGRADE LIMEROCK BASE ORCOMPACTEDCRUSHED CONCRETE ASPHALTIC CONCRETE 2%2% CL FINISHED GRADE 50' ROW 23'27' 11'TREE LAWN 2' VALLEYGUTTER 10' CL 2' VALLEYGUTTER 10'20'PARKING SPACE 5' SIDEWALK STABILIZED SUBGRADE LIMEROCK BASE ORCOMPACTEDCRUSHED CONCRETE ASPHALTIC CONCRETE 25% MAX.10% MAX. IN LOTACCESS AREAS &DRIVEWAYS 2% 60' D CURB 10' by agreement in writing with the architect. Immediatelyreport any discrepancies to the architect. COTLEUR & HEARING, INC.These drawings are the property of the architect and arenot to be used for extensions or on other projects except DESIGNED DRAWNAPPROVEDJOB NUMBER REVISIONS DATE Landscape ArchitectsLand PlannersEnvironmental Consultants www.cotleurhearing.com 1934 Commerce LaneSuite 1Jupiter, Florida 33458561.747.6336 · Fax 747.1377 Lic# LC-C000239 DTS/ACE LAH/PRP/ACEDTS21-070303-08-24 VI S T A O A K S St . L u c i e , F l o r i d a ME R I T A G E P U D P L A N OF 2SP-2SHEET 05-30-24 PUDTypical Details OPEN SPACE EXHIBIT 50' ROW 50' ROW WITH PARKING REC TRACT 35.57 AC CONSERVATION TRACT5.59 AC REC TRACT 21.47 AC REC TRACT 12.90 AC REC TRACT 12.90 AC Page 283 of 331 Page 284 of 331 Page 285 of 331 Page 286 of 331 Page 287 of 331 CHAPTER VII - DEVELOPMENT DESIGN AND IMPROVEMENT STANDARDS 7.01.00. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT St. Lucie County, Florida, Land Development Code Created: 2025-04-07 13:39:13 [EST] (Supp. No. 30) Page 1 of 11 7.01.00. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 7.01.01. Purpose. The Planned Unit Development (PUD) District is intended to achieve residential land development of superior quality through the encouragement of flexibility and creativity in design options that: A. Permit creative approaches to the development of residential land reflecting changes in the technology of land development; B. Allow for the efficient use of land, which can result in smaller networks of utilities and streets and thereby lower development costs; C. Allow design options that encourage an environment of stable character, compatible with surrounding land uses; and D. Permit the enhancement of neighborhoods through the preservation of natural features, the provision of underground utilities, and the provision of recreation areas and open space. 7.01.02. Authorized Uses. A.Permitted Uses. 1. Any permitted, conditional or accessory use in the Agricultural-1 (AG-1); Agricultural-2.5 (AG-2.5); Agricultural-5 (AG-5); Residential/Conservation in the Agricultural-1 (AG-1); Agricultural-2.5 (AG-2.5); Agricultural-5 (AG-5); Residential/Conservation (RC); Residential, Estate-1 (RE-1); Residential, Estate-2 (RE-2); Residential, Single-Family-2 (RS-2); Residential, Single-Family-3 (RS-3); Residential, Single- Family-4 (RS-4); Residential, Multiple-Family-5 (RM-5); Residential, Mobile Home-5 (RMH-5); Residential, Multiple-Family-7 (RM-7); Residential, Multiple-Family-9 (RM-9); Residential, Multiple- Family-11 (RM-11); and Residential, Multiple-Family-15 (RM-15) zoning districts of this Code may be permitted in a Planned Unit Development District subject to complying with the residential densities described in Section 7.01.03(B). 2. Any Planned Unit Development including any development that has been granted final Planned Unit Development approval may place on empty lots, a single story, conventionally built single-family detached dwelling that complies with the building code, meets all setbacks and does not exceed the maximum size of the mobile home that would have been allowed. B.Nonresidential Development Uses. Uses of the types permitted in the Commercial, Neighborhood (CN) District are also permitted up to an amount not to exceed three percent (3%) of the gross area of the Planned Unit Development or ten (10) acres, whichever is less. In addition, playgrounds, public and non- public parks, golf courses, country clubs, bicycle paths, racquet sports facilities, riding stables, marinas, clubhouses, and lodges may be permitted in a Planned Unit Development District. 7.01.03. Standards and Requirements. Standards and requirements for a Planned Unit Development shall be as follows: A.Minimum Size. A Planned Unit Development shall be a minimum of five (5) contiguous acres of land under common ownership or control. Non-contiguous parcels can also be included in the PUD application for the purpose of transferring density into the developed area. Page 288 of 331 Created: 2025-04-07 13:39:13 [EST] (Supp. No. 30) Page 2 of 11 B.Density. The maximum possible permitted density of a Planned Unit Development shall not exceed the density reflected in the Future Land Use Maps of the Comprehensive Plan. On North and South Hutchinson Island, the provisions of Section 3.01.03(AA)(8) shall govern. C.Area, Yard, and Height Requirements. Area, yard, and height requirements shall be determined at the time of Preliminary and Final Development Plan approval, except that for any structure on North or South Hutchinson Island that has not been occupied, constructed, or has not received a building permit, site plan or other County development approval as a permitted use prior to January 10, 1995 the requirements of Section 4.01.00, Hutchinson Island - Building Height Overlay Zone shall apply. D.Public Facilities. 1. The Planned Unit Development shall be designed and located so there will be no net public cost for the provision of water lines, sewage lines, storm and surface drainage systems, and other utility systems. 2. The minimum size of all water mains used, or intended for use, in fire protection activities is six (6) inches. Actual water main requirements will be determined by the St. Lucie County-Ft. Pierce Fire Prevention Bureau. 3. The minimum size of all water mains used, or intended for use, in fire protection activities, that are located on a dead-end water main is eight (8) inches. Actual water main requirements will be determined by the St. Lucie County-Ft. Pierce Fire Prevention Bureau. The maximum number of fire hydrants that may be located on any dead end water main is one (1). 4. Fire hydrants shall be provided at a minimum spacing of one (1) every six hundred (600) feet unless otherwise approved by the St. Lucie County-Ft. Pierce Fire Prevention Bureau. E.Traffic and Pedestrian Circulation. 1. Every dwelling unit, or other use permitted in the Planned Unit Development shall have access to a public street either directly or through an approved private road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. 2. Principal vehicular access points shall be designed to permit smooth traffic flow with controlled turning movement and minimum hazards to vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Minor streets within the Planned Unit Development shall not be connected to streets outside the development so as to encourage their use by through traffic. 3. The proposed Planned Unit Development shall be designed so that it will not create traffic congestion on the arterial and collector roads surrounding the project, or such surrounding collector or arterial roads shall be improved so that they will not be adversely affected. 4. All non-residential land uses within the Planned Unit Development shall have direct access to a collector or arterial street without creating traffic hazards or congestion on any street. 5. Streets in a Planned Unit Development may be dedicated to public use or retained under private ownership. Said streets and associated improvements shall comply with all pertinent County regulations and ordinances, however, variations to the standard minimum right-of-way widths may be considered as part of the Planned Unit Development if it is shown to the satisfaction of the Board of County Commissioners, that the requested variation is consistent with the intent of the County's roadway construction standards and necessary for the design of the Planned Unit Development. 6. All roads and streets shall intersect at an approximate 5° angle of ninety (90) degrees unless circumstances acceptable to St. Lucie County indicate a need for a lesser angle of intersection. Page 289 of 331 Created: 2025-04-07 13:39:13 [EST] (Supp. No. 30) Page 3 of 11 7. Street jogs or centerline offsets between any local street or road with another local street or road, shall be no less than one hundred fifty (150) feet. 8. The intersection of any two (2) local roads or streets with a Major Collector or Arterial Roadway shall be separated by a minimum distance of six hundred sixty (660) feet, as measured from centerline to centerline. 9. Permanent dead-end streets shall not exceed one thousand (1,000) feet in length. Cul-de-sacs shall be provided at the end of all dead end roads or streets greater than five hundred one (501) feet in length. The length of a dead-end street shall be measured along the centerline of the street from its point of perpendicular intersection with the centerline of intersecting street to the end of the dead-end street or roadway. All cul-de-sacs shall have a minimum right-of-way diameter of one hundred (100) feet. If the dead end roadway is five hundred (500) feet or less in length, a "Y" or "T" type of turn around may be approved. If a dead end street is temporary in nature then a temporary cul-de-sac shall be required until the roadway is connected to another street or road. In the center of the cul-de-sac an unpaved island, surrounded by a curb, improved with grass and landscaping that will not interfere with sight distance, may be provided. Center islands shall have a diameter of not less than seventeen (17) feet, unless otherwise approved through the review of the Planned Unit Development. 10. All roadways, exclusive of interior parking and access aisles areas, regardless of ownership, shall be located a minimum of ten (10) feet from any exterior building walls, except for security gate houses or similar security structures located in a private street or road right-of-way. 11. Any pedestrian circulation system and its related walkways shall be insulated from the vehicular street system. This shall include, when deemed to be necessary by the Board of County Commissioners, pedestrian underpasses or overpasses in the vicinity of playgrounds and other recreation areas, local shopping areas, and other neighborhood uses which generate a considerable amount of pedestrian traffic. 12. Access points on all collector or arterial streets serving a Planned Unit Development shall be located and spaced so that traffic moving into and out of the arterial streets do not cause traffic congestion. F.Parking and Loading. 1.General Provisions. a. The number, type, and location of parking spaces shall be determined at the time of final Planned Unit Development plan approval. The determination of the number of spaces required shall be based on Section 7.06.01(F) of this Code. The number of parking spaces required by this section may be reduced based on substantial competent evidence that the reduced number of spaces is adequate for the proposed use or that parking may be shared by proximate uses that operate at different times or on different days. b. Reserved parking spaces may be provided, in lieu of paved spaces, subject to Section 7.06.02(C) of this Code. 2.Off Street Parking and Loading. Off-street parking and loading requirements are governed by Sections 7.06.02 and 7.06.03 of this Code, and the following standards: a. Off-street parking and loading areas shall be designed to provide travelways between adjacent uses while discouraging through traffic. Page 290 of 331 Created: 2025-04-07 13:39:13 [EST] (Supp. No. 30) Page 4 of 11 b. Off-street parking and loading areas shall be screened from adjacent roads and pedestrian walkways with hedges, dense planting, or changes in grades or walls. 3.On Street Parking. In Planned Unit Developments, on street parking may be used so long as the road on which the on-street parking is proposed lies entirely within the limits of the defined Planned Unit Development and such parking would not contravene any other provision of this Code or the St. Lucie County Code of Ordinances. Where such on street parking and loading is used, it shall be consistent with the following design standards: a. The minimum size of a parking stall shall be as follows: parallel 8 feet × 23 feet angled 10 feet × 18 feet handicapped (parallel) 12 feet × 23 feet handicapped (angled) 12 feet × 18 feet b. Handicapped parking spaces shall be appropriately marked. c. Access for emergency fire vehicles shall be in accordance with NFPA standards. d. No more than fifteen (15) parking spaces shall be permitted in a continuous row without being interrupted by a minimum landscape area of three hundred sixty (360) square feet. G.Lighting. All lighting facilities shall be arranged in such a manner so as to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or properties. H.Landscaping and Natural Features. 1. Native trees and vegetation and other natural features shall be preserved to the extent practicable. 2. All sensitive environmental vegetation, trees and areas shall be preserved to the extent practicable. 3. Landscaping for off-street parking and loading areas shall meet the minimum requirements of Section 7.09.00. I.Open Space Standards. 1. A Planned Unit Development that is proposed in any Agricultural, Residential, Conservation, Special District or Mixed Use Future Land Use Category shall conform to the following open space standards: a. A minimum of thirty-five percent (35%) of the gross area of land to be committed to a Planned Unit Development must be for use as common open space, which may include, parks, recreation areas, bicycle and pedestrian paths and facilities, marinas, swimming beaches, common open space, common landscaping and planting areas, stormwater retention areas, or other areas of public purpose or use. Common open space may not include street, road or drainage rights-of-way, above ground utilities, or parking areas. A minimum of fifteen percent (15%) of any existing native upland habitat on the property must be preserved in its natural condition as part of the required thirty-five percent (35%) common open space. For each acre of preserved native habitat above the required minimum fifteen percent (15%) that is preserved in its original state, credit shall be given at a rate of one hundred fifty percent (150%) per acre towards the remaining common open space requirement. Page 291 of 331 Created: 2025-04-07 13:39:13 [EST] (Supp. No. 30) Page 5 of 11 All areas to be dedicated for common open space shall be identified as part of the Preliminary Development Plan for the Planned Unit Development. Areas that are floodways, lakes, wetlands, and stormwater retention areas may be applied to satisfy the total common open space requirement, subject to the requirement that fifteen percent (15%) of any existing native habitat on the property must be included as part of the required thirty-five percent (35%) common open space. As part of the Final Planned Unit Development submission process, the developer or petitioner for the Planned Unit Development shall provide for one (1) of the following: 1. The advance dedication of all common open space to a public, or acceptable private, agency that will, upon acceptance, agree to maintain the common open space and any buildings, structures or improvements that have been placed on it. All such dedications or conveyances shall be completed prior to the issuance of any building permits, including land clearing, for any portion of the Planned Unit Development; or 2. A phased conveyance of the land to a public or acceptable private agency that will, upon acceptance, agree to maintain the common open space and any buildings, structures or improvements that have been placed on it. The schedule for the phased conveyance of any such lands to be used for common open space shall be a specific condition of approval for the Planned Unit Development. 3. The identification of restrictive easement or plat dedication that would serve to create a perpetual conservation or use restriction easement over those portions of the properties that are to be kept as open space meeting the requirements of this section. b. No parcel of land identified for use as a park or common open space shall be less than one (1) contiguous acre, and all such areas shall be physically part of the Planned Unit Development. c. Areas provided or reserved to meet any other environmental preservation or protection requirement of this code or other lawful regulatory authority may be counted towards the overall common open space requirement, provided that the common open space meets the requirements of this Code. J.Setbacks from Agricultural Land. Planned Unit Developments adjacent to land used for agricultural purposes, or designated for agricultural use on the Future Land Use Map of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, shall provide setbacks from the agricultural land sufficient to protect the function and operation of those uses from the encroachment of Urban activities or uses. K.Development Design. Planned Unit Developments in all Future Land Use Categories are required to design the project in a manner to avoid, to the extent reasonable, impacts to wetlands, native vegetative communities and protected species habitats. L.Phasing. 1. A Planned Unit Development may be developed in more than one (1) stage or phase. 2. If a Final Development Site Plan approved by the Board of County Commissioners is to be developed in stages or phases, each successive phase shall be constructed and developed in a reasonably continuous fashion. No more than two (2) years shall elapse between the completion of any stage or phase, and the final stage or phase shall be completed within ten (10) years of the date of Final Development Site Plan approval. Extensions of the above requirements are subject to approval by the Board of County Commissioners. Unless otherwise amended by the Board of Page 292 of 331 Created: 2025-04-07 13:39:13 [EST] (Supp. No. 30) Page 6 of 11 County Commissioners through the Final Development Site Plan review process, the following sequence of development must be adhered to: a. One (1) or more major recreation facilities and other major amenities, planned to serve the entire development, shall be completed or adequate security posted prior to the issuance of building or mobile home permits of more than forty percent (40%), or other percentage as determined by the Board to be appropriate based on circumstances that include the size of the project and the proposed phasing schedule, of the total number of authorized dwelling units. Recreation facilities or facilities and other amenities planned to serve one (1) phase of a multi-phased development shall be completed or appropriate security posted prior to issuance of building or mobile home permits or the recording of any final plat within that phase. b. No commercial facility shall be permitted prior to the completion of at least forty percent (40%) of the total number of authorized dwelling units; and c. For Planned Unit Developments to be constructed in stages or phases, the net density of an individual stage or phase may vary from the approved Final Site Plan subject to the requirements in Section 11.02.05. M.Signs. 1. Signs within any Planned Unit Development, less than or equal to two hundred (200) acres in overall area, shall comply with the provisions of Chapter IX of this Code, provided however, that the Board of County Commissioners may condition approval of a Planned Unit Development upon compliance with more stringent sign regulations in order to ensure design consistency throughout the proposed development, to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses, to ensure public safety and prevent public harm, and to ensure compliance with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. 2. Signs within any Planned Unit Development, greater than two hundred (200) acres in overall area may submit a general signage plan for the Planned Unit Development, as part of the Final Planned Unit Development Plan submissions. The general signage plan shall be based on the general dimension and size standards applicable to other similarly designated residential property; provided, however, that the Board of County Commissioners may condition approval of a Planned Unit Development upon compliance with more stringent sign regulations in order to ensure design consistency throughout the proposed development, to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses, to ensure public safety and prevent public harm, and to ensure compliance with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. (Ord. No. 13-037, Pt. A, 8-6-2013) 7.01.04. Hamlet Planned Unit Developments (PUDS). A.Applicability. As provided in Section 4.04. of this Code, a Hamlet PUD is a development option permitted within the TVC Overlay. Unless otherwise provided in Sub-section 7.01.04, a Hamlet PUD shall comply with all other applicable provisions of this Code and the St. Lucie County Code of Ordinances. B.Standards and requirements for Hamlet PUDs. 1.Minimum Size. A Hamlet PUD shall have a minimum of five hundred (500) acres. 2.Density. The maximum density of a Hamlet PUD shall not exceed the density provided in Table 7-1. Table 7-1 Standards and Requirements for a Hamlet PUD Page 293 of 331 Created: 2025-04-07 13:39:13 [EST] (Supp. No. 30) Page 7 of 11 Size Minimum Land Area: 500 acres Maximum Land Area: None Open Space a. Common Open Space required: 60% b. Common Open Space required when the Hamlet open space includes active and passive recreation within one-quarter mile of the majority of the residential units: 50% c. Common Open Space required when the Hamlet provides a mix of residential, civic uses, common open space including active and passive recreation within one-quarter mile of the majority of the residential units, and at least one local store that supports the daily needs of its residents:(1) 40% Density (1) Maximum Average Density allowed when at least nine percent (9%) of the dwelling units are workforce housing:(2) or (2) Density may be achieved by acquisition of Development Rights through the TDR Program:(3) 2 dwelling units/acre (1) Maximum Average Density allowed when at least ten percent (10%) of the dwelling units are workforce housing units:(2) or (2) Maximum Average Density allowed when at least nine percent (9%) of the dwelling units are workforce housing units(2) and an on-site day care facility is provided:(2) or (3) Density may be achieved by acquisition of Development Rights, through the TDR Program:(3) 3 dwelling units/acre Notes to Table 7-1 (1) A third-party lease agreement is not required for the local store. (2) In a Hamlet, workforce housing must meet the following standards: a. Affordability must be maintained for a minimum of twenty (20) years, or the period of affordability specified by the funding secured by the developer, whichever is longer. b. The workforce housing units may be rental units or for-sale units and may be constructed as the same unit type (i.e., apartments, townhouses, etc.) but shall include a variety of unit sizes and price ranges. Workforce housing units must be complementary in exterior design to the market rate units. Workforce units may have alternative exterior and interior finishes, so long as the energy efficiency of these units is not diminished. c. The workforce housing units shall be completed and receive a certificate of occupancy prior to the completion and issuance of a certificate of occupancy of sixty percent (60%) of the market rate units. d. In the event the County develops alternative methodologies to address affordable and workforce housing, the Board of County Commissioners may consider these alternative methodologies, at the applicant's request. e. The County may establish a payment-in-lieu program for workforce housing unit reduction. The amount of payment-in-lieu shall be established by St. Lucie County and updated on a yearly basis. (3) The details of the TVC Transfer of Development Rights Program are provided in Section 4.04.05., LDC. Page 294 of 331 Created: 2025-04-07 13:39:13 [EST] (Supp. No. 30) Page 8 of 11 3.Area, Yard, and Height Requirements. Area, yard, and height requirements shall be determined during review and approval of the Preliminary and Final Development Plan. The Preliminary Development Plan shall propose the typical dwelling types, lot areas, setbacks, and building heights. 4.Public Facilities. a. The Hamlet PUD shall be designed so there will be no net public cost for the provision of water lines, sewage lines, storm and surface drainage systems, and other utility systems. b. The minimum size of all water mains intended for fire protection is six (6) inches. Actual water main requirements will be determined by the St. Lucie County Fire District. c. The minimum size of all water mains intended for fire protection that are located on a dead-end water main is eight (8) inches. Actual water main requirements will be determined by the St. Lucie County Fire District. No more than one (1) fire hydrant may be located on a dead end water main. d. Fire hydrants shall be provided at a minimum spacing of one (1) every six hundred (600) feet unless otherwise approved by the St. Lucie County Fire District. 5.Traffic and Pedestrian Circulation. a. Each dwelling unit and all other uses permitted in the Hamlet PUD shall have access to a public street either directly or through an approved road, a pedestrian way, or other area dedicated to public or private use. b. Connectivity between streets, pedestrian paths and bicycle routes interior to the Hamlet PUD and existing, planned and anticipated streets, pedestrian paths and bicycle routes outside the Hamlet is strongly encouraged. Landscaping, on-street parking, posted speeds, and lane width are among the techniques that shall be used to discourage excess through-traffic or speed. c. The proposed Hamlet PUD shall be designed so that it will not create traffic congestion on the arterial and collector roads surrounding the project, or such surrounding collector and arterial roads shall be improved so that they will not be adversely affected. d. Streets in a Hamlet PUD may be dedicated to public use or retained under private ownership. Said streets and associated improvements shall comply with all pertinent County regulations and ordinances. However, variations to the standard minimum right-of-way widths may be considered as part of the Hamlet PUD, if it is demonstrated that the requested variation is consistent with the intent of the County's roadway design and construction standards and necessary for the design of the PUD. e. The intersection of any two (2) local roads or streets with a Major Collector or Arterial Roadway shall be separated by a minimum distance of six hundred sixty (660) feet, as measured from centerline to centerline, unless otherwise approved by the County Engineer. f. Permanent dead-end streets should be avoided. If no reasonable alternative exists, dead-end streets shall not exceed one thousand (1,000) feet in length. Cul-de-sacs shall be provided at the end of all dead-end roads or streets greater than five hundred one (501) feet in length. The length of a dead-end street shall be measured along the centerline of the street from its point of perpendicular intersection with the centerline of intersecting street to the end of the dead-end street or roadway. All cul-de-sacs shall have a minimum right-of-way diameter of one hundred (100) feet. If the dead-end roadway is five hundred (500) feet or less in length, a "Y" or "T" type of turn-around may be approved. If a dead-end street is temporary in nature, then a temporary cul-de-sac or T-type turn shall be required until the roadway is connected to another street or road. In the center of the cul-de-sac an unpaved island, surrounded by a curb, improved with grass and landscaping that will not interfere with sight distance, may be provided. Center islands Page 295 of 331 Created: 2025-04-07 13:39:13 [EST] (Supp. No. 30) Page 9 of 11 shall have a diameter of not less than seventeen (17) feet, unless otherwise approved for the Hamlet PUD. g. All roadways, exclusive of interior parking and access aisles areas, regardless of ownership, shall be located a minimum of twenty-two (22) feet from any exterior building walls, except for security gate houses or similar security structures located in a private street or road right-of-way and except for residential or non-residential structures in which garage parking is provided in the rear and residential structures which provide side-loaded garages, in which case the front setback may be reduced below twenty-two (22) feet. h. Any pedestrian circulation system and its related walkways shall be protected from the vehicular traffic. i. Modifications to the roadway alignment or network shown on an approved Preliminary Development Plan for a Hamlet PUD may be approved subject to Section 11.02.05.B.2. j. All driveways shall comply with County standards as approved by the County Engineer. k. The incorporation into Hamlet PUDs of street sections and standards provided in Section 3.01.03.EE.2.k., including alleys and lanes, is encouraged. 6.Parking and Loading. a.General Provisions. i. Unless otherwise provided in this Sub-section 7.01.04, the parking and loading standards in Subsections 7.06.01 through 7.06.03 shall apply in Hamlet PUDs. The number, type, and location of parking spaces shall be determined at the time of Final Development Plan approval. The number of spaces provided shall comply with Section. 7.06.02. of this Code, except that each detached single-family or townhouse dwelling shall be provided a minimum of two (2) off-street parking spaces. ii. Pervious parking spaces may be provided, in lieu of paved spaces, subject to Sections 7.06.02(B) and 7.06.03. of this Code and approval of the County Engineer. iii. A limited portion of required parking spaces designated for compact vehicles or larger vehicles, with appropriate signage, may be provided, subject to approval by the County Engineer. b.Off-Street Parking and Loading. Off-street parking and loading requirements are governed by Sections 7.06.02 and 7.06.03 of this Code, and the following standards: i. Off-street parking and loading areas shall be designed to provide travelways between adjacent uses while discouraging through traffic. ii. Off-street parking and loading areas shall be screened from adjacent roads, pedestrian walkways and adjacent properties with landscaping that, at a minimum, complies with Section 7.06.02. and Section 7.09.04. c.On-Street Parking. On-street parking may be used so long as the road on which the on-street parking is proposed lies entirely within the limits of the Hamlet PUD and such parking would not contravene any other provision of this Code or the St. Lucie County Code of Ordinances. Where on-street parking is used, it shall be consistent with the following design standards: i. The minimum dimensions of an on-street parking stall shall be as follows: Right-Angle—Ten (10) feet by eighteen (18) feet Parallel—Eight (8) feet by twenty-three (23) feet Page 296 of 331 Created: 2025-04-07 13:39:13 [EST] (Supp. No. 30) Page 10 of 11 Angled—Nine and a half (9.5) by eighteen (18) feet ii. Handicapped parking spaces shall comply with FDOT and ADA standards. iii. Access for emergency fire vehicles shall be in accordance with NFPA standards. iv. No more than ten (10) parking spaces shall be permitted in a continuous row without being interrupted by a minimum landscape area of three hundred sixty (360) square feet. 7.Lighting. All lighting facilities shall be designed and installed to prevent direct glare or hazardous interference of any kind to adjoining streets or properties and will be approved during Final Development Plan applications. All pedestrian walkways shall be illuminated. 8.Landscaping and Natural Features. a. Native trees and vegetation and other natural features shall be preserved to the extent practicable. b. All sensitive environmental vegetation, trees and areas shall be preserved to the extent practicable. c. Unless otherwise expressly provided in Section 7.01.03, Chapter 6 of this Code, Resource Protection Standards, shall apply in Hamlet PUDs. d. Unless otherwise expressly provided in Section 7.01.03, Section 7.09. of this Code, Landscaping and Screening, shall apply in Hamlet PUDs. 9.Open Space Standards. a. A Hamlet PUD shall provide common open space consistent with Table 7-1. Open space may include parks, recreation areas, lakes, floodways, wetlands, stormwater retention areas, bicycle and pedestrian paths and facilities, common landscaping and planting areas, or other areas of public purpose or use. Common open space shall not include street, road or drainage rights-of- way, above ground utilities or parking area landscaping. No open space provided on any individual residential lot shall be counted towards required common open space. b. The establishment of a healthy ecosystem within the required open space, diverse vegetation, elevations, and drainage conveyances are encouraged to promote the sustainability of both native and migratory species. Lakes, floodways, wetlands, and stormwater retention areas shall be interconnected to the maximum extent possible and shall include littoral and upland buffering plantings to provide habitat value and improve water quality before such water leaves the Hamlet. c. All areas to be dedicated for common open space shall be identified as part of the Preliminary Development Plan. As part of the Hamlet PUD application review and approval process, the Applicant shall provide for one (1) of the following: i. The advance dedication of all common open space to a public or acceptable private organization that will, upon acceptance, agree to maintain the common open space and any structures or improvements that have been placed on it. All such dedications or conveyances shall be completed prior to the issuance of any building permits, including land clearing, for any portion of the PUD; or ii. A phased conveyance of the land to a public or acceptable private organization that will, upon acceptance, agree to maintain the common open space and any structures or improvements that have been placed on it. The schedule for the phased conveyance of the lands to be used for common open space shall be a specific condition of approval for the PUD. Page 297 of 331 Created: 2025-04-07 13:39:13 [EST] (Supp. No. 30) Page 11 of 11 iii. The identification of the restrictive easement or plat dedication that will create a perpetual conservation or use restriction easement over the land to be preserved as open space. 10. No parcel of land identified for use as a park or common open space shall be less than one (1) contiguous acre, and all such areas shall be physically part of the PUD. 11. Areas provided or reserved to meet any other environmental preservation or protection requirement of this Code or other lawful regulatory authority may be counted as common open space provided that the area meets the open space requirements of this Code. C.Setbacks from Agricultural Land. A Hamlet PUD adjacent to land used for agricultural purposes or designated for agricultural use on the Future Land Use Map of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan shall provide setbacks from the agricultural land sufficient to protect the function and operation of those uses from the encroachment of Urban activities or uses. D.Development Design. A Hamlet PUD is required to design the project in a manner to avoid, to the extent reasonable, impact to wetlands, native vegetation communities, and protected species habitats. E.Water and Wastewater. All Hamlet PUDs are required to provide centralized potable water and sanitary sewer systems. Such centralized services shall be coordinated with St. Lucie County. F.Phasing. 1. A Hamlet PUD may be developed in more than one (1) stage or phase. 2. If a Preliminary Development Site Plan approved by the Board of County Commissioners is to be developed in stages or phases, each successive phase shall be constructed and developed in a reasonably continuous fashion. No more than three (3) years shall elapse between the completion of any stage or phase and the beginning of the next. The final stage or phase shall be completed, including completion of all required infrastructure and obtaining approval of all Record Plats, within twenty (20) years of the date of Preliminary Development Site Plan approval. Extensions of the above requirements are subject to approval by the Board of County Commissioners, unless otherwise provided by law. For Hamlet PUDs to be constructed in stages or phases, the net density of an individual stage or phase may vary from the approved Preliminary Site Plan subject to the requirements in Section 11.02.05. G.Signs. Signs within a Hamlet PUD may submit a general signage plan for the development, as part of the Final PUD submissions. The general signage plan shall be based on the general dimension and size standards applicable to other similarly designated residential property; provided, however, that the Board of County Commissioners may condition approval of a PUD upon compliance to ensure design consistency throughout the proposed development, to ensure compatibility with surrounding land uses, to ensure public safety and prevent public harm, and to ensure compliance with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. (Ord. No. 2024-28, § Pt. B(Exh. B), 8-6-2024) Page 298 of 331 Created: 2025-04-07 13:39:14 [EST] (Supp. No. 30) Page 1 of 4 7.04.03. Building Spacing Formula. A.Purpose. The purpose of this section is to insure the minimum distance between any multiple-family (except two- and three-family structures), hotel, or motel building, two (2) floors or greater in height, and any other building or any property line shall be regulated according to the length and height of such multiple-family, hotel, or motel building. B.Applicability. These requirements shall apply to all multiple-family dwellings, hotels, and motels, and to all accessory uses with two (2) or more floors that are customarily associated with and subordinate to the principal use. C.Maximum Horizontal Dimension. The maximum horizontal dimension of any building shall be three hundred (300) feet, including all deck areas and enclosed and covered walkways, as measured between the farthest points of such buildings. D.Formulas for Minimum Distance Between Buildings and Property Lines. 1.Between Buildings. The formula regulating the required minimum distance between two (2) buildings (referred to as Building A and Building B) is as follows: D = [L A + L B + 2(H A + H B )]/4 2.Between Building and Property Line. The formula regulating the required minimum distance between a building (referred to as Building A) and a property line is as follows: D = [L P L + 2(H A )]/4 Page 299 of 331 Created: 2025-04-07 13:39:14 [EST] (Supp. No. 30) Page 2 of 4 Page 300 of 331 Created: 2025-04-07 13:39:14 [EST] (Supp. No. 30) Page 3 of 4 3.Formula Symbols and Definitions. The symbols used in the formula described in Section 7.04.03(D)(1) and (2) mean the following: a. D is the required minimum horizontal distance between any wall of Building A and any wall of Building B (or the vertical extension of either) or between any wall of any building and a property line. b. L A is the total length of Building A. The total length of Building A is the length of that portion or portions of a wall or walls of Building A from which, when viewed directly from above, lines drawn perpendicular to Building A will intersect any wall of Building B. c. L B is the total length of Building B. The total length of Building B is the length of that portion or portions of a wall or walls of Building B from which, when viewed directly from above, lines drawn perpendicular to Building B will intersect any wall of Building A. Page 301 of 331 Created: 2025-04-07 13:39:14 [EST] (Supp. No. 30) Page 4 of 4 d.L P L is the total length of the property line. The total length of the property line is the length of that portion or portions of the property line from which, when viewed directly from above, lines drawn perpendicular to the property line will intersect any wall of any building. e. H A is the height of Building A. f. H B is the height of Building B. g. Length of walls or property lines shall be measured as the horizontal distance from corner to corner. Wall length of a circular building shall be construed as the diameter or longest chord of the building, with the exception of ground floor area. h. The term "wall or walls" shall include porches, balconies, deck areas, and enclosed or covered walkways with the exception of ground floor area. Page 302 of 331 ITEM NO. (ID # 2025-4199) DATE: 5/15/2025 AGENDA REQUEST TO: Planning and Zoning Commission PRESENTED BY: Benjamin Balcer, Planning & Development Services Director SUBMITTED BY: Planning & Development Services SUBJECT: Land Development Code Text Amendment to require community participation meetings for certain types of development applications and allow certain permitted as-of-right uses in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code, as well as development applications that are in substantial conformity with an approved Preliminary Planned Development Plan, and any Live Local Affordable Housing applications meeting the provisions of Section 125.01055, F.S. to be processed as a Minor Site Plan. BACKGROUND: The Board of County Commissioners have expressed the desire to increase public participation in the planning process and has recommended requiring community participation meetings for certain development applications, prior to the application being heard at a Public Hearing. The proposed Ordinance ensures community participation in the development review process and establishes requirements for public participation meetings within the Land Development Code. The proposed Ordinance also establishes that uses which are permitted as-of-right, which do not require special permits or variances, can proceed as a minor site plan and are therefore eligible for administrative approval. Also, the proposal seeks to allow development applications that are in substantial conformity with a Preliminary Planned Development Plan approved by the Board of County Commissioners to be processed as a minor site plan. This proposal also recognizes the Live Local Act, which was approved by the Florida Legislature in 2023 (Ch. 2023-17, LOF) and further refined in 2024 (Ch. 2024-188, LOF) to increase the availability of affordable housing options. The Live Local Act preempts local regulations for certain housing developments in areas zoned for commercial, industrial, or mixed use and requires administrative approval and no further action by the Board. Therefore, this proposal looks to update our Land Development Code accordingly by allowing all Live Local projects meeting the provisions of Section 125.01055, F.S. to be reviewed and approved administratively through a Minor Site Plan. Lastly, the proposal includes deleting provisions pertaining to Developments of Regional Impact that are no longer consistent with Florida Statutes and updating obsolete department names and titles in Sections 11.02.04, 11.02.06, 11.02.08 and 11.02.09. Page 303 of 331 PREVIOUS ACTION: On April 22, 2025, the St. Lucie County Board of County Commissioners granted permission to advertise this County-initiated Land Development Code Amendment. FINANCIAL IMPACT: N/A RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning & Zoning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the Board of County Commissioners. COMMISSION ACTION: RESULT: MOVER: None SECONDER: None AYES: None NAYS: None EXCUSED: None Coordination/Signatures Date: May 07, 2025 Benjamin Balcer, Planning & Development Services Director Date: May 07, 2025 Katherine Barbieri, Assistant County Attorney III Date: May 09, 2025 Mayte Santamaria, Deputy County Administrator Page 304 of 331 Planning and Development Services Department Planning Division M E M O R A N D U M TO:Planning and Zoning Commission FROM:Ben Balcer, AICP, Planning & Development Services Director DATE:May 7, 2025 SUBJECT:Text Amendment to the Land Development Code LDC Sections 11.02.01, 11.02.02, 11.02.04, 11.02.06, 11.02.08, & 11.02.09 File Number: TLDC-2505-000040 The County initiated a Text Amendment to the Land Development Code (LDC) proposing to require community participation meetings for certain types of development applications and allow certain permitted as-of-right uses in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code, as well as development applications that are in substantial conformity with an approved Preliminary Planned Development Plan, and any Live Local Affordable Housing applications meeting the provisions of Section 125.01055, F.S. to be processed as a Minor Site Plan. The proposal includes deleting provisions pertaining to Developments of Regional Impact that are no longer consistent with Florida Statutes and updating obsolete department names and titles in Sections 11.02.04, 11.02.06, 11.02.08 and 11.02.09. BACKGROUND The Board of County Commissioners have expressed the desire to increase public participation in the planning process and has recommended requiring community participation meetings for certain development applications, prior to the application being heard at a Public Hearing. The Board previously provided direction to PDS staff on drafting an Ordinance requiring community participation meetings at their March 11, 2025 Informal Board meeting. At the meeting, the Board determined community participation meetings were appropriate for all Planned Development, Conditional Use Permit, and Development Agreement applications. These applications generally require a site plan identifying conceptual design details that are ultimately considered by the Board through quasi-judicial public hearings. At these hearings, the Board can hear from the applicants and residents and provide input and adopt conditions of approval to improve the project’s compatibility and design. These application types differ from a straight rezoning application, as a site plan is not required at that stage and is not subject to the review. The recommended application types also differ from major site plans, which are reviewed for compliance with the standards in the Land Development Code and heard as a regular agenda item before the Board. The Draft Ordinance includes standards for noticing and hosting these required meetings including the following: •The applicant shall coordinate with the Planning and Development Services Director or designee regarding the date, time and location of the proposed community meeting; however, all meetings are to be held on a weekday evening at a location close to the project site or a County facility if a location does not exist nearby, between 20 and 120 days prior to the first of any public hearings required for development application approval. Page 305 of 331 Project Name: LDC Text Amendment File No.: TLDC-2505-000040 2 Additional community meetings may be held by the applicant or their authorized representative but are not required. •The community meeting shall be noticed at least 15 days prior to the meeting date by mailing of notice to surrounding property owners within 500 feet of the petition site. The Planning and Development Services Department shall provide the applicant with a mailing list. The applicant shall mail these notices with proper postage a minimum of fifteen (15) days before the community meeting. •New public notice consistent with the subsection above shall be provided for any rescheduled community meeting. •The applicant shall pay the cost of the mailed notice for the community meeting and provide proof of proper notice to the Planning and Development Services Director or designee. •The community meeting shall be facilitated by the applicant or their authorized representative and Planning and Development Services staff shall be notified to attend. The applicant shall provide Planning and Development Services staff with a summary of the materials presented at the community meeting, the issues or suggestions raised by those in attendance, and a copy of the sign-in sheet. •If an applicant fails to hold a required community meeting, the Planning and Development Services Department shall not proceed with scheduling for a public hearing for the development application. The Draft Ordinance looks to allow certain permitted as-of-right uses, which do not require special permits or variances, as well as development applications that are in substantial conformity with an approved Preliminary Planned Development Plan, and a Live Local Affordable Housing application meeting the provisions of Section 125.01055, F.S. to be processed as a Minor Site Plan. These amendments look to streamline the development approval process. Additionally, the Live Local Act, which was approved by the Florida Legislature in 2023 (Ch. 2023-17, LOF) and further refined in 2024 (Ch. 2024-188, LOF) to increase the availability of affordable housing options. The Live Local Act preempts local regulations for certain housing developments in areas zoned for commercial, industrial, or mixed use and requires administrative approval and no further action by the Board. Therefore, this proposal looks to update the Land Development Code accordingly by allowing all Live Local projects meeting the provisions of Section 125.01055, F.S. to be reviewed and approved administratively through a Minor Site Plan. Lastly, the proposal includes deleting provisions pertaining to Developments of Regional Impact that are no longer consistent with Florida Statutes and updating obsolete department names and titles in Sections 11.02.04, 11.02.06, 11.02.08 and 11.02.09. TEXT AMENDMENT STANDARDS OF REVIEW AS SET FORTH IN SECTION 11.06.03, ST. LUCIE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE Pursuant to St. Lucie County Land Development Code (LDC) Section 11.06.03, the Development Review Committee (DRC) has reviewed the proposed Text Amendment to LDC Sections 11.02.01, Page 306 of 331 Project Name: LDC Text Amendment File No.: TLDC-2505-000040 3 11.02.02, 11.02.04, 11.02.06, 11.02.08, & 11.02.09, and found it to meet the technical requirements and standards of review. In reviewing this application for a text amendment to the LDC, the Planning and Zoning Commission shall consider and make the following determinations: A. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with any applicable portions of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code; The proposed text amendment is internally consistent with the Land Development Code. The amendment will streamline the regulatory process and increase public participation in the planning process. The draft ordinance is consistent with the following LDC Section. Land Development Code Section 12.03.04 – All meetings of the Local Planning Agency shall be public meetings and all agency records shall be public records. The Local Planning Agency shall encourage public participation. B. Whether the proposed amendment is in conflict with all elements of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan; The proposed text amendment is consistent with all elements of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. The following specific goals, objectives, and policies from the Comprehensive Plan support the proposed Land Development Code Text Amendment: The proposed amendments are consistent with the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. The following specific goals, objectives, and policies from the Comprehensive Plan support the proposed Land Development Code Text Amendment: Goal 1.1: Ensure the highest quality living environment possible, through a mixture of land uses reflecting the needs and desires of the local residents and how they want their community to develop. The goal shall be implemented by strictly enforced building, zoning and development codes based on objectives and policies that will enhance St. Lucie County's natural and man-made resources while minimizing any damage or threat of degradation to the health, safety and welfare of the county's citizens, native wildlife and environment, through incompatible land uses. Objective 1.1.4: Implementing Land Development Code. Review and amend, as required, the County's Land Development Code which support the implementation of the Future Land Use Element, and the other components of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. C. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment is inconsistent with the existing and proposed land uses; The proposed text amendment is consistent with existing or proposed land uses. The proposed Land Development Code Text Amendment streamlines the regulatory process and is consistent with Florida Statutes. D. Whether there have been changed conditions that require an amendment; The proposed Land Development Code Text Amendment is drafted to provide a streamlined development review process and increase the ability for public participation in the planning process. Over the years, the County has experienced an increase in development applications, necessitating more public outreach for certain types of development proposals. Page 307 of 331 Project Name: LDC Text Amendment File No.: TLDC-2505-000040 4 The text amendment looks to eliminate outdated references to the Development of Regional Impact (DRI) process, which was eliminated in 2015 by the Florida legislature. Further changes to DRI’s occurred in 2018 with the legislature removing state and regional review of DRI’s, transferring the responsibility for reviewing and amending DRI development orders to local governments. E. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in demands on public facilities, and whether or to the extent to which the proposed amendment would exceed the capacity of such public facilities, including but not limited to transportation facilities, sewage facilities, water supply, parks, drainage, schools, solid waste, mass transit, and emergency medical facilities; The proposed text amendment will not result in additional demands on public facilities. Site specific facility impacts are addressed at the time of development application, with applicable permitting requirements remaining in-place. All development is required to adhere to the adopted Level of Service (LOS) and concurrency standards. F. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in significant adverse impacts on the natural environment; The proposed text amendment would not result in adverse impacts on the natural environment. The proposed text amendment is not expected to increase development pressures on natural areas and does not modify or exempt improvements from any of the County’s natural resource protection standards. G. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would adversely affect the property values in the area; The proposed amendment is not anticipated to have an adverse impact on property values in the area. H. Whether and the extent to which the proposed amendment would result in an orderly and logical development pattern specifically identifying any negative effects of such patterns; The proposed ordinance does not request an amendment to the Official Zoning Atlas and will maintain an orderly and logical development pattern. Pursuant to LDC Section 7.04.00. – Area, Yard, Height, and Open Space Requirements specifically, Table 7-10 addresses the maximum density and lot overage and minimum lot width and yard requirement (i.e. setbacks) for each zoning district for accessory uses. I. Whether the proposed amendment would be in conflict with the public interest, and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this code; The proposed amendment is not in conflict with the public interest and is in harmony with the purpose and intent of this code. J. Any other matters that may be deemed appropriate by the Planning and Zoning Commission or the Board of County Commissioners, in review and consideration of the proposed amendment. The Planning and Zoning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners may raise other matters regarding the proposed Land Development Code Text Amendment. Page 308 of 331 Project Name: LDC Text Amendment File No.: TLDC-2505-000040 5 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds this petition to meet the standards of review as set forth in Section 11.06.03 of the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, and is not in conflict with the goals, objectives, and policies of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. Staff recommends the Planning and Zoning Commission forward this petition to the Board of County Commissioners with a recommendation of approval. Page 309 of 331 Page 1 of 18 ORDINANCE No. 2025-## FILE NO.: TLDC-2505-000040 AN ORDINANCE BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 11.02.01 TO ESTABLISH THE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION MEETINGS; SECTION 11.02.02 TO ALLOW CERTAIN PERMITTED AS-OF-RIGHT USES IN CONFORMITY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS THAT ARE IN SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMITY WITH A PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO BE PROCESSED AS A MINOR SITE PLAN AND TO INCLUDE LIVE LOCAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING APPLICATIONS MEETING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 125.01055, F.S. AS A MINOR SITE PLAN AND TO DELETE PROVISIONS PERTAINING TO DEVELOPMENTS OF REGIONAL IMPACT THAT ARE NO LONGER CONSISTENT WITH FLORIDA STATUTES; AND SECTIONS 11.02.04, 11.02.06, 11.02.08 AND 11.02.09 TO UPDATE OBSOLETE DEPARTMENT NAMES AND TITLES; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; AND PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION. ____________________________________________________________________________________ WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida has made the following determinations: WHEREAS, the Legislature of the State of Florida has, in Chapter 125 – County Government, Florida Statutes, conferred upon local governments the authority to adopt regulations designed to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of its citizenry; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Article 8 of the Florida Constitution and Section 125.66, Florida Statutes, St. Lucie County possesses the police powers to enact ordinances in order to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the County’s citizens; and WHEREAS, Chapters 125, and 163, F.S., provide for the adoption and enforcement of the comprehensive plan and codes; and enforcement to ensure development undertaken is consistent with the plan and codes; and WHEREAS, on August 1, 1990, the Board of County Commissioners adopted the St. Lucie County Land Development Code (Code); and WHEREAS, to ensure community participation in the development review process and streamline the regulatory process with public input it is proposed to include requirements for public participation through a community meeting in the Code; and Page 310 of 331 Page 2 of 18 WHEREAS, permitted as-of-right uses in zoning regulations are land uses allowed under the local zoning ordinance without needing special permits or variances; and WHEREAS, permitted as-of-right uses are generally development proposals that strictly conform to zoning codes and may receive approval and qualify for construction without requiring discretionary approval and it is proposed that these development applications are processed as a minor site plan; and WHEREAS, Preliminary Planned Development Plan (PPDP) development proposals require review by the Development Review Committee, and review and public hearings before the Planning and Zoning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners (Board) to determine whether the proposal satisfies the requirements of the Comprehensive Plan and Code; and WHEREAS, development applications that have been reviewed and approved by the Board and that are in substantial conformity with an approved PPDP are proposed to be processed as a minor site plan; and WHEREAS, the Florida Legislature passed the Live Local Act in 2023 (Ch. 2023-17, LOF) and further refined some provisions in 2024 (Ch. 2024-188, LOF) to increase the availability of affordable housing options, including preempting local regulations for certain housing developments in areas zoned for commercial, industrial, or mixed use and requiring administrative approval and no further action by the Board; and WHEREAS, on______________, the Local Planning Agency/Planning and Zoning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed ordinance after publishing due notice in the St. Lucie News Tribune and recommended that the proposed ordinance be forwarded with a recommendation for approval/denial; and WHEREAS, on _____________, this Board held the first public hearing on the proposed ordinance, after publishing due notice in the St. Lucie News Tribune; and WHEREAS, on _____________, this Board held its second public hearing on the proposed ordinance, after publishing due notice in the St. Lucie News Tribune; and WHEREAS, the Board has determined that the proposed amendments to the St. Lucie County Land Development Code are consistent with the general purpose, goals, objectives and standards of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, are internally consistent with the remainder of the Land Development Code and are in the best interest of the health, safety and public welfare of the citizens of St. Lucie County, Florida. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County, Florida: SECTION 1. RATIFICATION OF RECITALS. The foregoing recitals are hereby ratified and confirmed as true and correct and are hereby made a part of this Ordinance. SECTION 2. This ordinance specifically amends St. Lucie County Land Development Code, as follows: Page 311 of 331 Page 3 of 18 11.02.01. Pre-Application Conferences and Community Participation Meetings. A. Prior to filing for site plan development application review, the applicant is encouraged to meet with the Growth Management Director request a pre-application meeting with the St. Lucie County Development Review Committee by submitting an application and applicable fee. The applicant shall provide a written description of the existing and proposed development, including its character, location and magnitude in the application submission. The purpose of this meeting is to discuss the development review process and to be informed of which staff members to confer with about the application. Staff will provide the applicant with information about the potential Land Development Code and Comprehensive Plan requirements, as well as may provide initial comments about the proposal and recommend specific items to address prior to submitting a development application. B. Applicants requesting approval for a Preliminary Planned Development Rezoning, a Conditional Use Permit, a Future Land Use Map Amendment to a Mixed Use or Special District, or a Development Agreement pursuant to this Section shall provide for public participation through a community meeting. The purpose of a community meeting is to ensure citizen participation in an informal forum and to provide an applicant with the opportunity to understand scope of the development application and any potential impact it may have on an affected community. 1. The applicant shall coordinate with the Planning and Development Services Director or designee regarding the date, time and location of the proposed community meeting; however, all meetings are to be held on a weekday evening at a location close to the project site or a County facility if a location does not exist nearby, between 20 and 120 days prior to the first of any public hearings required for development application approval. Additional community meetings may be held by the applicant or their authorized representative but are not required. 2. The community meeting shall be noticed at least 15 days prior to the meeting date by mailing of notice to surrounding property owners within 500 feet of the petition site. The Planning and Development Services Department shall provide the applicant with a mailing list. The applicant shall mail these notices with proper postage a minimum of fifteen (15) days before the community meeting. 3. New public notice consistent with the subsection above shall be provided for any rescheduled community meeting. 4. The applicant shall pay the cost of the mailed notice for the community meeting and provide proof of proper notice to the Planning and Development Services Director or designee. 5. The community meeting shall be facilitated by the applicant or their authorized representative and Planning and Development Services staff shall be notified to attend. The applicant shall provide Planning and Development Services staff with a summary of the materials presented at the community meeting, the issues or suggestions raised by those in attendance, and a copy of the sign-in sheet. 6. If an applicant fails to hold a required community meeting, the Planning and Development Services Department shall not proceed with scheduling for a public hearing for the development application. Words in strike through type are deletions from existing text. Words in underlined type are additions to existing text. Asterisks (***) indicate existing text not shown. Page 312 of 331 Page 4 of 18 11.02.02. Designation of Minor Site Plan, Major Site Plan, or Preliminary Planned Development Plan. A.Generally. For purposes of these review procedures, all site plans shall be designated as either a Minor Site Plan, a Major Site Plan, or a Preliminary Planned Development Plan according to the criteria below. B.Minor Site Plan. A proposed development shall be designated as a Minor Site Plan if it is: 1. Any use permitted as-of-right between six thousand (6,000) and one hundred thousand (100,000) square feet or one hundred (100) dwelling units that does not involve platting residential lots, provided the use is developed in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code. 1.2. Any division of land located outside of the Urban Service Boundaries into less than ten (10) parcels but more than two (2) parcels in accordance with the provisions of Section 11.03.00. 2.3. Any division of land located within the Urban Service Boundary into less than fifty (50) parcels but more than two (2) parcels in accordance with the provisions of Section 11.03.00. 3. Any multi-family residential development of less than one hundred (100) units, that does not involve platting. 4. Any development application that is in substantial conformity with a Preliminary Planned Development Plan approved by the Board of County Commissioners. 4.5. Any nonresidential use, including additions to existing structures of six thousand (6,000) to one hundred thousand (100,000) square feet. 5. Any non-residential use, less than fifty thousand (50,000) square feet, that provides drive through or walk up services. 6. Any nonresidential non-residential use, less than fifty thousand (50,000) square feet, that provides drive through or walk-up services. 7.6. Any non-residential use, including additions to existing structures up to five hundred thousand (500,000) square feet for development included within the St. Lucie County Targeted Industry List. 8.7. Any commercial lodging establishments having less than six (6) units for rent or lease. 8. Live local affordable housing applications meeting the provisions of Section 125.01055, F.S. C.Major Site Plan. A proposed development shall be designated as a Major Development Site Plan if it is: 1. Any division of land located outside the Urban Service Boundary into ten (10) or more parcels, in accordance with the provisions of Section 11.03.00. 2. Any division of land located within the Urban Service Boundary into fifty (50) or more parcels, in accordance with the provisions of Section 11.03.00. 3. Any multi-family residential development of one hundred (100) or more dwelling units. 4. Any nonresidential use, of Oone hundred thousand and one (100,001) or more square feet of non- residential floor space. 5. Any nonresidential use, of Ffive hundred thousand and one (500,001) or more square feet of non- residential floor space for any development included within the St. Lucie County Targeted Industry List. 6. All commercial lodging establishments including six (6) or more units available for rent or lease. 7. Any development of land, including Final Planned Development Site Plans,. a. Wwhere the proposed development should be more thoroughly considered and reviewed because of its location or potential for impact on public facilities, natural resources, and public safety. The Planning and Development Services Director or designee shall make this determination. Page 313 of 331 Page 5 of 18 D.Preliminary Planned Development Plan. A proposed development shall be designated as a Planned Development Site Plan if it is: 1. A Planned Unit Development (Per Section 7.01.00); 2. A Planned Non-Residential Development (Per Section 7.02.00); 3. A Planned Mixed-Use Development (Per Section 7.03.00). 4. A Planned Town or Village (Per Section 3.01.03(FF)); 5. A Planned Country Subdivision (Per Section 3.01.03(GG)); 6. A Planned Retail/Workplace (Per Section 3.01.03(HH)); 7. A Development of Regional Impact, as defined in F.S. § 380.06, and in accordance with Section 11.02.02(E). E.Developments of Regional Impact. 1. A Development of Regional Impact (DRI) must meet the definition of, and the provisions provided in Section 380.06, F.S. Application for a binding letter of determination from Department of Community Affairs required. A developer shall be required to submit an application to and receive a determination from the Department of Community Affairs as to whether or not such development is a development of regional impact as defined in F.S. § 380.06, under the following circumstances: a. If the development is at a presumptive numerical threshold or up to twenty percent (20%) above a numerical threshold in the guidelines and standards in F.S. Ch. 380, or administrative rules promulgated thereunder; or b. The development is between a presumptive numerical threshold and twenty percent (20%) below the numerical threshold, and St. Lucie County is in doubt as to whether the character or magnitude of the development at the proposed location creates a likelihood that the development will have a substantial effect on the health, safety or welfare of the citizens of more than one (1) county. 1. In the event that a development is between a presumptive numerical threshold and twenty percent (20%) below the numerical threshold, the developer shall submit a request in writing to the Growth Management Director for a determination as to whether or not St. Lucie County will require that an application for a binding letter of interpretation will be required to be submitted in regard to such development. The procedure for processing such requests in St. Lucie County shall be as follows: 2. Within thirty (30) days after receipt of the developer's written request, the Growth Management Director shall make a determination in writing as to whether the County will require that the developer submit an application for a binding letter of interpretation. The Director shall provide by mail (certified, return receipt) or hand delivery, copies of the written determination to the developer and to the Board of County Commissioners. Any person may appeal the determination of the Director to the Board of County Commissioners by filing a written notice of intent to appeal with the County Director within fifteen (15) days of the date of receipt of the Director's written determination. 2.Application Requirements. a. As to any development which is required by the provisions of Section 11.02.02(E) to submit for a binding letter of interpretation or for which the developer for any reason has submitted for a binding letter of interpretation, the application to St. Lucie County for any of the following: Page 314 of 331 Page 6 of 18 1. Comprehensive plan amendment; 2. Rezoning; 3. Planned Unit Development approval; 4. Site Plan approval; 5. Conditional Use approval; 6. Special Exception; or 7. for any other development permit, as defined in F.S. § 380.031, shall be accompanied by a certified copy of the final determination by the Department of Community Affairs or any court judgment which constitutes a final judgment entered as a result of an appeal from a final order of the Department of Community Affairs making a determination on the Development of Regional Impact status of the project. St. Lucie County shall not receive or process any applications for Development Permits for any project or portion thereof, for which a binding letter of interpretation is required or is actually sought by the developer, until a final binding determination has been made as to the Development of Regional Impact status of the project. b. In any application for a Development Permit to St. Lucie County for a proposed development as to which a final binding determination has been made that the proposed development is not a Development of Regional Impact and that determination has been made in part or in whole based upon various commitments or limitations as to development made in the applicant's request for a binding letter, agreed to by the applicant, or otherwise imposed by the Department of Community Affairs to restrict the development in a way that it shall not constitute a Development of Regional Impact, such commitments, limitations or conditions shall be incorporated as conditions into all Development Permits issued by St. Lucie County, as if such conditions were fully set out in each Development Permit. 3.Filing Requirements. If a proposed development has been determined to be a Development of Regional Impact or if the developer has waived the right to request a binding letter of interpretation or otherwise agreed to the Development of Regional Impact status of a proposed development, then, as to such proposed development, any application to St. Lucie County as to the first Development Permit sought from St. Lucie County for such development shall be accompanied by, and there shall be filed simultaneously with it, an application for development approval seeking Development of Regional Impact review and approval as required in F.S. § 380.06. No final action will be taken by St. Lucie County on any St. Lucie County Development Permit application as to a project for which Development of Regional Impact approval is being sought, until St. Lucie County is in a position to concurrently act upon the application for development approval. 4.Proposed Modification to a Development. In the event of a proposed modification to a development for which a binding letter of interpretation has been received by St. Lucie County indicating that the development was not a Development of Regional Impact, the following shall apply: a. In the event that the modification increases the size or scope of the development so that when the proposed modification is aggregated with the prior approved development that was determined not to be a Development of Regional Impact, that the aggregated development is at a presumptive numerical threshold or up to twenty percent (20%) above a numerical threshold in the guidelines and standards of F.S. Ch. 380.06, or administrative rules promulgated thereunder, then the developer shall be required to submit an application for a binding letter of interpretation. b. In the event that the modification increases the size or scope of the development so that when the proposed modification is aggregated with the prior approved development that was Page 315 of 331 Page 7 of 18 previously determined not to be a Development of Regional Impact, that the aggregated development is at a presumptive numerical threshold or twenty percent (20%) below the numerical threshold, then the provisions of Section 11.02.02(E)(1)(b) shall apply. c. The provisions of Sections 11.02.02(E)(2) and (3) shall also apply in the event of a modification to a development which falls within the parameters of subparagraphs a and b above. * * * * * 11.02.04. Review of Applications for Major Site Plans. A.General Procedures. 1. An application for a Major Site Plan shall be submitted to the Growth Management Planning and Development Services Director in a form established by the Director along with an applicable fee as established in Section 11.12.00. 2. Within twenty (20) working days of receipt of the Site Plan, the Director shall: a. Determine that the application is complete and direct the application to the Development Review Committee for further review; or, b. Determine that the application is incomplete and inform the applicant in writing of the missing components. The applicant may submit a revised plan within thirty (30) working days without payment of any additional processing fee, but, if more than thirty (30) days have elapsed, must thereafter reinitiate the review process and pay additional fees as identified in Section 11.12.00. An application shall be determined to be complete only if the required submittals of Section 11.02.09 are provided. 3. The Development Review Committee shall review the application for Site Plan and determine whether the application proposal complies with the requirements of this Code within twenty (20) working days. In reviewing the application and making a determination of compliance, the Development Review Committee shall use the standards in Section 11.02.07. 4. After the completion of the review by the Development Review Committee, the Chairman of the Development Review Committee shall: a. Recommend that the Growth Management Planning and Development Services Director determine that the application complies with the standards of Section 11.02.07; b. Inform the applicant and the Growth Management Planning and Development Services Director in writing of the deficiencies of the application. The applicant shall notify the Growth Management Planning and Development Services Director within thirty (30) working days of this notice of deficiency of his/her intent to address the cited deficiencies. The applicant shall have a maximum of one hundred twenty (120) days to respond to the cited deficiencies without payment of any additional processing fee. Upon the applicant's response to the cited deficiencies the revised application shall be reviewed by the Development Review Committee pursuant to Section 11.02.03(A)(3) and (4). If the applicant fails to respond to the cited deficiencies within one hundred twenty (120) days the applicant must thereafter reinitiate the review process and pay an additional fee, as identified in Section 11.12.00 of this Code. 5. The Chairman of the Development Review Committee shall notify the Growth Management Planning and Development Services Director that the Site Plan is ready for presentation to the Board of County Commissioners and request that this application for major site plan approval be placed on the next available regular County Commission agenda. Page 316 of 331 Page 8 of 18 6. The Chairman of the Development Review Committee shall issue a written report to the Growth Management Planning and Development Services Director setting forth findings and conclusions supporting a recommendation to the Board of County Commissioners for approval, approval with conditions, or denial of the Site Plan. 7. The Growth Management Planning and Development Services Director shall issue a report to the Board of County Commissioners citing the recommendations of the Development Review Committee and provide a recommendation of approval, approval with conditions or denial of the site plan. 8. The Board of County Commissioners shall consider the Site Plan at a regularly scheduled public meeting. In reviewing the application for site plan approval, the Board of County Commissioners shall consider the report of the Growth Management Planning and Development Services Director and shall determine whether the proposed development specified in the application meets the provisions of this Code, and in particular the standards and criteria of Section 11.02.09; the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan; and any other applicable County ordinances. Within a reasonable time of the conclusion of its review, the Board of County Commissioners will approve, approve with conditions or deny the application. The decision on the application shall be by resolution setting forth the findings of the Board of County Commissioners and any condition, limitation, or requirement of such decision. 9. Notification of the Board of County Commissioners' decision shall be mailed to the applicant and filed with the Office of the Department of Community Development in accordance with Section 11.00.04(F). B.Appeals. Any final action by the Board of County Commissioners made in accordance with the provisions of this Section may be appealed as provided in Section 11.11.00. C.Minor Adjustment to Major Site Plans: 1. The Planning and Development Services Director may authorize minor adjustments to the approved Major Site Plan. Such minor adjustments shall be consistent with the intent and purpose of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, the standards and requirements of this Code, and the development as approved, and shall be the minimum necessary to overcome the particular difficulty. Such minor adjustments shall be limited to the following: a. Increasing any dimension of any one (1) structure by not more than twenty-five percent (25%); or b. Altering the location of any one (1) structure or group of structures by not more than one hundred (100) feet; or c. Altering the net density of any one (1) stage or phase by not more than ten percent (10%); or d. Altering the location of any circulation element by not more than fifty (50) feet. Relocation of any circulation element by more than fifty (50) feet will be considered a major adjustment unless the relocation results in a reduction in impervious surface area; or e. Altering the location of any open space by not more than fifty (50) feet; or f. Reducing the total amount of open space by not more than five percent (5%) or reducing the yard area or open space associated with any single structure by not more than five percent (5%); or g. Altering the location, type, or quality of landscaping elements. h. The addition or relocation of any accessory structure or use so long as the proposed addition or relocation does not conflict with any portion of any required open space, building separation requirements or other provisions of this Code. Page 317 of 331 Page 9 of 18 i. The Planning and Development Services Director may approve other proposed alterations that do not exceed any of the thresholds listed above as a Minor Adjustment. 2. A Development Permit may be issued for the following without submitting a formal application for Minor Adjustment to a Major Development Site Plan issued pursuant to this Code: a. The alteration of or addition to an existing structure or impervious surface area less than one thousand (1,000) square feet that is otherwise in compliance with the applicable provisions of this Code. b. The erection of a sign on a previously developed site independent of any other development activity on the site. c. The re-surfacing of a vehicular use area that conforms to all requirements of this Code. d. Development activity on existing, previously approved developments for the sole purpose of complying with F.S. ch. 553, pt. II, Accessibility by Handicapped Persons, so long as the improvements do not contravene the Land Development Code. 3. Notice of the authorization of such minor adjustments shall be provided to the Board of County Commissioners. D.Major Adjustments to Major Development Site Plans. Any other adjustment to the approved site plan shall be considered a Major Adjustment and shall be granted only upon application to and approval by the Board of County Commissioners. The review and processing procedures for the major adjustment review shall be consistent with Section 11.02.04(A). * * * * * 11.02.06. Expiration of Final Site Plan Approval. A.Effective Approval Period for a Site Plan: 1. Except as provided in this Section, a Minor Site Plan approval or a Major Site Plan approval shall be valid for purposes of securing a building permit for twenty four (24) months from the date of approval. Unless a building permit is secured within twenty four (24) months, the site plan shall expire automatically. A Minor Site Plan approval or a Major Site Plan approval may be conditioned so that the period of validity is less than twenty four (24) months, if it is demonstrated through the issuance of a Certificate of Capacity that necessary public services required for that development are not guaranteed by the service provider for more than the identified period of time. 2. A Preliminary Planned Development Site Plan approval issued consistent with Section 11.02.05(A) shall be valid for a period of twenty four (24) months from the date of approval. Failure to obtain a Final Planned Development Site Plan approval within twenty four (24) months of the Preliminary Planned Development Site Plan approval shall void the Preliminary Planned Development Site Plan approval or an extension of Preliminary Planned Development Site Plan approval according to the provisions of Section 11.02.06(B)(3)(a) of this Code. A Preliminary Planned Development Site Plan approval may be conditioned so that the period of validity is less than twenty four (24) months, if it is demonstrated through the issuance of the elective Certificate of Capacity that necessary public services required for that development are not guaranteed by the service provider for more than the identified period of time. 3. Except as provided in this Section, a Final Planned Development Site Plan approval shall be valid for purposes of securing a building permit for twenty four (24) months from the date of approval. Page 318 of 331 Page 10 of 18 Unless a building permit is secured within twenty four (24) months, the Final Planned Development Site Plan shall expire automatically. A Final Planned Development Site Plan approval may be conditioned so that the period of validity is less than twenty four (24) months, if it is demonstrated through the issuance of a Certificate of Capacity that necessary public services required for that development are not guaranteed by the service provider for more than the identified period of time. B.Site Plan Extensions: 1. Minor Site Plan Extensions: a. Notwithstanding the other provisions of this Code, a Minor Site Plan approval may be extended by the Growth Management Planning and Development Services Director, for periods of up to twelve (12) months, from its date of expiration. Any request for site plan extension shall be submitted in writing to the Director at least two weeks prior to the date of site plan expiration. All requests for site plan extension shall be accompanied by a complete explanation of the reasons that the site plan extension is necessary. b. No Minor Site Plan shall be extended for any period beyond 12 months of the date of original expiration as set forth in the Final Development Order for that Minor Site Plan without undergoing a complete re-review in accordance with the provisions of Section 11.02.00 and demonstration of compliance with all applicable codes in effect at that time. 2. Major Site Plan Extensions: a. Notwithstanding the other provisions of this Code, a Major Site Plan approval may be extended by the Board of County Commissioners, for periods of up to twelve (12) months, from its date of expiration. Any request for site plan extension shall be submitted in writing to the Growth Management Planning and Development Services Director at least two weeks prior to the date of site plan expiration. All requests for site plan extension shall be accompanied by a complete explanation of the reasons that the site plan extension is necessary. b. No Major Site Plan shall be extended for any period beyond 24 months of the date of original expiration as set forth in the Final Development Order for that Major Site Plan without undergoing a complete re-review and demonstration of compliance with all applicable codes in effect at that time. * * * * * 11.02.08. Conditions on Site Plan Approval. A.Minor Site Plan Approvals. The Growth Management Planning and Development Services Director shall attach any reasonable condition, limitation, or requirement to a Minor Site Plan approval as is necessary to effectuate the purposes of this Section and to carry out the spirit and purpose of this Code and the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. Such conditions shall be set forth expressly in the Final Development Order approving the site plan and shall include the following: 1.Traffic Control Devices. Whenever, as the result of additional traffic generated by a proposed development, it is determined based on the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices that there is a need for installation of traffic control devices (including traffic signals, signing, and pavement markings) to ensure safe traffic circulation onto and off of the site, the site plan shall not be approved except upon the condition that the applicant be responsible for installing all said devices and signs, or make an equitable contribution toward such installation. In the case of those developments accessing onto any portion of the State Highway system, concurring approval, in the form of a Notice of Intent or other authorized conceptual approval, from the Florida Department of Transportation Page 319 of 331 Page 11 of 18 about any signals or other regulatory devices is required to be obtained before any Final Development Order is issued. 2.Access Improvements. A site plan shall not be approved except upon the condition that the applicant provide the access (ingress and egress) improvements determined to be necessary as a result of traffic generated by the development. 3.Water and Sewer Dry Line Improvements. If the proposed development is within a water or sewer utility's five (5) year service area, the developer shall construct and dedicate to the County, or at the County's discretion, the applicable service provider, dry water and sewer lines in accordance with standards and specifications of the County and the applicable service provider 4.Connected to Regional Utility Systems. A site plan shall not be approved except upon the condition that the development connect to a regional potable water distribution and/or wastewater collection system when the system becomes available to service the development. 5.Right-of-Way Dedications. A site plan shall not be approved that does not provide for dedication of the necessary right-of-way as required in Section 7.05.02. 6.Projects Requiring Other Regulatory Approval. a. For developments requiring any permit from the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, the Florida Department of Natural Resources, or any other state or federal regulatory authority, the Growth Management Planning and Development Services Director shall not approve unconditionally a Minor Site Plan until it has received from such agency notice of either issuance of or intent to issue the required regulatory permit. b. The Growth Management Planning and Development Services Director may approve a Minor Site Plan conditioned upon receiving notice of either issuance of or intent to issue any required regulatory permit if it can make, on a tentative basis and subject to confirmation, the findings required in Section 11.02.07(E). A site plan approval conditioned upon receiving notice of either issuance of or intent to issue any required regulatory permit shall not preclude the Board of County Commissioners, after reviewing the regulatory permit application and other information, from revoking such conditional site plan approval based solely upon an inability to confirm the findings required in Section 11.02.07(F) or from protesting the permit application. 7.Comprehensive Plan and Code. The Growth Management Planning and Development Services Director may add any condition deemed necessary to ensure compliance with the provisions of this Code, the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan and the St. Lucie County Code and Compiled Laws. B.Major Site Plan Approvals. The Board of County Commissioners shall attach any reasonable condition, limitation, or requirement to a site plan approval as is necessary to effectuate the purposes of this Section and to carry out the spirit and purpose of this Code and the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan. Such conditions shall be set forth expressly in the Final Development Order approving the site plan and shall include the following: 1.Traffic Control Devices. Whenever, as the result of additional traffic generated by a proposed development, it is determined based on the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices that there is a need for installation of traffic control devices (including traffic signals, signing, and pavement markings) to ensure safe traffic circulation onto and off of the site, the site plan shall not be approved except upon the condition that the applicant be responsible for installing all said devices and signs, or make an equitable contribution toward such installation. In the case of those developments accessing onto any portion of the State Highway System, concurring approval, in the form of a Notice of Intent or other authorized conceptual approval, from the Florida Department of Transportation Page 320 of 331 Page 12 of 18 about any signals or other regulatory devices is required to be obtained before any Final Development Order is issued. 2.Access Improvements. A site plan shall not be approved except upon the condition that the applicant provide the access (ingress and egress) improvements determined to be necessary as a result of traffic generated by the development. 3.Water and Sewer Dry Line Improvements. If the proposed development is within a water or sewer utility's five (5) year service area, the developer shall construct and dedicate to the County, or at the County's discretion, the applicable service provider, dry water and sewer lines in accordance with standards and specifications of the County and the applicable service provider. 4.Connected to Regional Utility Systems. A site plan shall not be approved except upon the condition that the development connect to a regional potable water distribution and/or wastewater collection system when the system becomes available to service the development. 5.Right-of-Way Dedications. A site plan shall not be approved that does not provide for dedication of the necessary right-of-way as required in Section 7.05.02. 6.Projects Requiring Other Regulatory Approval. a. For developments requiring any permit from the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, the Florida Department of Natural Resources, or any other state or federal regulatory authority, the Board of County Commissioners shall not approve unconditionally a site plan until it has received from such agency notice of either issuance of or intent to issue the required regulatory permit. b. The Board of County Commissioners may approve a site plan conditioned upon receiving notice of either issuance of or intent to issue any required regulatory permit if it can make, on a tentative basis and subject to confirmation, the findings required in Section 11.02.07(E). A site plan approval conditioned upon receiving notice of either issuance of or intent to issue any required regulatory permit shall not preclude the Board of County Commissioners, after reviewing the regulatory permit application and other information, from revoking such conditional site plan approval based solely upon an inability to confirm the findings required in Section 11.02.07(F) or from protesting the permit application. 7.Reduction In Maximum Residential Density. The Board of County Commissioners shall require a reduction from the maximum density permitted in the zoning district in which a proposed development is to be located when such allowable maximum residential density: a. Would impose an excessive burden, as determined by recognized engineering or other professional standards, on public facilities that would serve the proposed development; or b. Would contravene any goal, objective, or policy of the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan, or of Chapter VIII, "Natural Environment Analysis", of the St. Lucie County Barrier Island Study Analysis of Growth Management Policy Plan, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (August, 1982). 8.Comprehensive Plan and Code. The Board of County Commissioners may add any condition deemed necessary to ensure compliance with the provisions of this Code, the St. Lucie County Comprehensive Plan and the St. Lucie County Code and Compiled Laws. 11.02.09. Submittals for Minor and Major Site Plans. A.Minor and Major Site Plan Requirements. Site Plan submittals shall include the following materials: 1. General Information: a. The applicant's name and address. Page 321 of 331 Page 13 of 18 b. The applicant's interest in the subject property. c. The owner's name and address, if different from the applicant, and the owner's signed consent to the filing of the application. d. The street address and a legal description of the property. e. The present zoning classification and existing uses of the subject property proposed to be reclassified. f. Information on land areas adjacent to the proposed development and an indication of the relationships between the proposed development and existing and proposed adjacent areas, including land uses, zoning classifications, densities, circulation systems, public facilities, and unique natural features of the land. g. A development schedule indicating the approximate date construction of the development or stages of the development can be expected to begin and be completed. h. A statement of the applicant's intentions with regard to the future selling or leasing of all or portions of the development, such as land areas, dwelling units, and commercial facilities. i. A statement describing whether the project will utilize existing water and sewer facilities and if so a letter from the service provider stating capacity will be available for the project. 2. Existing Conditions: a. An aerial photograph of the property on which the development activity is to take place. The aerial photograph used to satisfy this requirement may be obtained from the St. Lucie County Property Appraiser. b. Detailed location sketch of the proposed development designating the section, township and range. c. A topographic survey of the entire project site, prepared in accordance with the current standards of Chapter 61G17-6 FAC, which shall include, at a minimum: the project boundaries, a north arrow, a scale indicator, bench mark information (NGVD) and; 1. One (1) foot contours shall be shown and shall extend at least 50 feet around the project site, except that the Growth Management Planning and Development Services Director may authorize partial relief from this standard when the following conditions exist: a. Existing grade conditions, throughout the site are such that one foot contours would not be discernable. In these instances, contours at two (2) foot intervals may be provided; and/or, b. Existing grade conditions, over the entire site, vary less then two feet above base elevation. 2. A sufficient number of spot elevations shall be shown to support the contour information and to accurately reflect the site topography. All topographic surveys shall be submitted on a sheet size twenty-four (24") by thirty-six (36") inches and shall be the same scale as the project site plan. All topographic surveys shall have been prepared within the 24 months prior to the application for site plan being filed and shall reflect current property conditions. d. A boundary survey and legal description prepared in accordance with the current standards of Chapter 61G17-6 FAC. All boundary surveys shall be submitted on a sheet size twenty-four (24) inches by thirty-six (36) inches and shall be the same scale as the project site plan. All Page 322 of 331 Page 14 of 18 boundary surveys shall have been prepared within the 12 months prior to the application for site plan being filed and shall contain at a minimum the following information, as applicable: 1. location of the Coastal Construction Control Line, along with all necessary recording data, 2. The location of the Mean highwater, or safe upland line, along with a description of how these lines were determined, 3. The location of all submerged lands, 4. The limits and elevations of any jurisdictional wetlands, which shall contain bearing and distance information used in determining the extent of these areas, along with the identification of the agency or agencies claiming jurisdiction. 5. The location of all existing improvements. 6. Acreage certifications of all lands lying above mean high water or the safe upland line; and, 7. All boundary surveys are to be tied to a monumented section line or the nearest 1/4 section line, and shall be so noted on the boundary survey. e. Identification of legal positive outfall, if applicable. f. The boundaries of the one hundred (100)-year floodplain, including all sub-zones within the one hundred (100)-year floodplain and an identification of the minimum required first floor elevations for all parts of the proposed development site. g. Drainage basin or watershed boundaries identifying locations of the routes of off-site waters onto, through, or around the project. h. Available preliminary drainage information that is to be submitted to the South Florida Water Management District intended to serve as the basis for issuance of its permit under Chapter 62- 330 F.A.C., if applicable. i. An illustrative plan of the existing vegetative conditions on the project site, including an identification of what areas will be impacted by the proposed development activity and what areas are proposed for protection/preservation. All vegetative survey information shall be submitted on a sheet size twenty-four (24) inch by thirty-six (36) inch and shall be the same scale as the project site plan. 3. Proposed Development Activity and Design. All site detail sheets shall be submitted on a sheet size twenty-four (24) by thirty-six (36) inches and at a scale no smaller than one (1) inch equals fifty (50) feet, all dimensions in decimals, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Growth Management Planning and Development Services Director during the pre-application conference. For large projects, a smaller scale generalized plot plan may be submitted as a cover sheet to the detail sheets. Detail sheets shall include the following information: a. The location of the property by lot number, block number, and street address, if any. b. The boundary lines of the property, the dimensions of the property, existing subdivision easements, roadways, rail lines, and public rights-of-way. c. The location and dimensions, including height, of all buildings and structures. This shall include types of uses, density per type of structure and the type of construction as indicated in Table 600 of the Standard Building Code, 1994 ed. d. The identification of the maximum buildable area of each lot or parcel within the proposed development, based upon the minimum building setbacks of the particular zoning district in which the development is located. Page 323 of 331 Page 15 of 18 e. The location and dimension of parking and loading areas. Fire Lanes shall be required for all buildings that are set back more than one hundred and fifty (150) feet from any roadway (public or private) or any structure more than thirty feet (30) in height, which is setback fifty feet (50) or more feet from any roadway. Variations to this requirement may only be approved by the St. Lucie County - Fort Pierce Fire Bureau of Fire Prevention. All fire lanes shall be a minimum of twenty (20) feet in width and shall be located a minimum of ten (10) feet from any exterior building wall. All fire lanes shall be appropriately marked and shall be posted as no parking areas. Dead end fire lanes exceeding three hundred (300) feet or more shall be provided with a cul- de-sac, to the requirements of the St. Lucie County-Ft. Pierce Fire Prevention Bureau. f. The location of water disposal and water supply facilities. The site plan shall indicate the size and location of all water distribution lines, (existing and proposed) and shall identify the location of all fire hydrants (existing and proposed) on the proposed development site and within one thousand (1000) feet of the proposed development site. g. The locations of existing (site plans and subdivisions) and proposed (subdivision only) easements for utility systems, including sewage facilities and water supply facilities, electric, gas, and telephone lines. h. The location of all drainage retention areas and major drainage improvements. i. The location and configuration of all public and private roadways for a distance of one hundred fifty (150) feet from all project access points. j. The location of the existing and proposed circulation system of arterial and collector streets and any other transportation improvements. k. The location and size of all areas to be conveyed, dedicated or reserved as common open space, parks, recreational areas, school sites, rights of way and other public uses. l. The pedestrian circulation system, including its interrelationship with the vehicular circulation system. m. Proposed landscaping, including the types, location, and quantity of all plants or materials, and the location of fences or screen plantings. n. The location, size, and arrangement of all existing or proposed signs or lighting. o. Boundaries depicting construction phases, if applicable. p. The approximate location and dimension of all proposed lots and all yard requirements, if applicable. q. The location and dimension all paved areas within one hundred (100) feet of the outside property boundaries. r. The location, dimension and type of construction of all buildings or structures within one hundred (100) feet of the outside property boundaries. s. A transportation impact report in accordance with the requirements of Section 11.02.09(A)(4), if applicable. t. An environmental impact report in accordance with the requirements of Section 11.02.09(A)(5), if applicable. Page 324 of 331 Page 16 of 18 u. A location map, which shall delineate the project boundaries on the St. Lucie County Tax Assessment Maps. v. A driveway location which shall show the location of all driveways, public streets and private drives within six hundred and sixty (660) feet of the development, along any private or public street that will serve the project. w. Any other information deemed necessary by the Growth Management Planning and Development Services Director for the reasonable review of the proposed development. 4. Transportation Impact Report: a. Applicability: 1. Whenever submission of a site plan is required, a transportation impact study shall be provided for any project not categorized as having a de minimis impact, or any proposed development on North or South Hutchinson Island. 2. Project with de minimis impact: In order for a project to be classified as de minimis, the Planning and Development Services Director must determine whether the trips generated would not affect more than one percent (1%) of the adopted level of service capacity. No impact will be de minimis if the sum of existing roadway volumes and the trips generated from the project would exceed one hundred ten percent (110%) of the adopted level of service capacity of the affected road facility. A Traffic Statement, prepared with published and acceptable transportation impact data shall be provided, with appropriate distribution assumptions to provide for a de minimis impact determination. b. Contents. The transportation impact report shall demonstrate conformance with the latest version of the "STANDARDIZED TRANSPORTATION IMPACT STUDIES METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES," as adopted by the St. Lucie County Transportation Planning Organization. 5. Environmental Impact Report: a. Applicability: 1. Whenever a submission of a site plan is required, an environmental impact report shall be provided if the proposed development meets any of the following: a. The property is ten (10) acres or over; b. The property, regardless of size, contains any wetland, or; c. The property is identified on the "Inventory of Native Ecosystems for St. Lucie County," or; d. The proposed development is located in whole or part within the One Hundred (100) Year Flood Plain, or; e. The property is located anywhere on North or South Hutchinson Island. 2. The Environmental Resources Director may authorize total or partial relief from the requirement of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Documentation shall be provided by the applicant requesting relief from the EIR. The applicant shall demonstrate that based on conditions unique to the proposed development all of the information foregone by such relief is not needed to determine environmental impact of the proposed development. b. Contents. The environmental impact report shall contain the following information: 1. A vegetation and substrate survey including: Page 325 of 331 Page 17 of 18 a. Extent and acreage of any areas in which vegetation typical of the primary dune extends landward of the Coastal Construction Control Line. b. Extent and acreage of all marsh and mangrove forest areas, including substrate conditions. c. Extent and acreage of all upland hammock forests. d. Extent and acreage of wetlands. 2. The required first floor elevation, and whether all floor elevations will be above this level. 3. The identification of any area that has experienced overwash of the primary dune. 4. The identification of any area subject to breach during storm conditions. 5. An assessment of the impacts upon onsite vegetation and wildlife, and onsite and off-site natural resources; a description of the planned approach that will be used to minimize these impacts; a description of the proposed alterations or disturbances to any of the areas identified in response to Sections 11.02.09(A)(5)(b)(1)(c) and (d) above; and the mitigation that will be provided. 6. In addition to the requirements of Section 11.02.09(5)(b) above, the following information shall be required for development within the unincorporated areas of Hutchinson Island in St. Lucie County. a. A vegetation and landscape plan and written assessment which demonstrates consistency with the appropriate policies set out in this Code for all areas of the subject parcel of land, including a description of the techniques to protect the existing onsite native vegetation. Recommendations should be obtained from the St. Lucie County Soil and Water Conservation District or the St. Lucie County Urban Forester. b. A soil and water conservation plan and written assessment which outlines a system of best management practices to control soil erosion, reduce sediment loss, and protect the water quality on the subject parcel of land during all phases of development. These best management practices shall consider the impacts of onsite development activity on adjacent parcels of land, so as to avoid soil erosion, sediment loss, and degraded water quality on the adjacent parcels of land. Recommendations should be obtained from the St. Lucie County Soil and Water Conservation District. c. A plant and animal survey for onsite federal and state protected species as defined in Chapter II. A compiled list of these plants and animals shall be maintained by the Growth Management Environmental Resources Director. Locations of all identified species shall be depicted on a map. d. A surface water management plan and written assessment which demonstrates consistency with the appropriate policies set out in this Code, including a description of the techniques to be used to prevent both the potential degradation of surface water resources and an increase in flood hazard damage. e. A shoreline stabilization plan and assessment which demonstrates consistency with the appropriate policies set out in this Code, including beach or dune restoration and maintenance or Indian River Lagoon shoreline stabilization to reduce or control erosion. Page 326 of 331 Page 18 of 18 SECTION 3. CONFLICTING PROVISIONS. Special acts of the Florida legislature applicable only to unincorporated areas of St. Lucie County, and adopted prior to January 1, 1969, County ordinances and County resolutions, or parts thereof, in conflict with this ordinance are hereby superseded by this ordinance to the extent of such conflict. SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY AND APPLICABILITY. If any portion of this ordinance is for any reason held or declared to be unconstitutional, inoperative, or void, such holding shall not affect the remaining portions of this ordinance. If this ordinance or any provision thereof shall be held to be inapplicable to any person, property, or circumstance, such holding shall not affect its applicability to any other person, property, or circumstance. SECTION 5. FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE. The Clerk is hereby directed forthwith to send a certified copy of this ordinance to the Department of State. SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE. A certified copy of this ordinance shall be filed with the Department of State by the Clerk of the Board of County Commissioners of St. Lucie County within ten days after enactment by the Board, and this ordinance shall take effect upon filing with the Department of State. SECTION 7. CODIFICATION. Provisions of this ordinance shall be incorporated in the St. Lucie County Land Development Code, and the word “ordinance” may be changed to “section”, “article”, or other appropriate word, and the sections of this ordinance may be renumbered or re-lettered to accomplish such intention. SECTION 8. ADOPTION. After motion and second, the vote on this ordinance was as follows: Jamie Fowler, Chair ___ Larry Leet, Vice Chair ___ Commissioner James Clasby ___ Commissioner Erin Lowry ___ Commissioner Cathy Townsend ___ PASSED AND DULY ADOPTED this ____ day of _________________, 2025. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA _________________________ BY: _____________________________ Deputy Clerk Chair APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: BY: _____________________________ County Attorney Page 327 of 331 Page 328 of 331 Page 329 of 331 BUSINESS IMPACT ESTIMATE Before the enactment of a proposed ordinance, the County shall prepare or cause to be prepared a business impact estimate in accordance with Section 125.66(3), Florida Statutes. BOCC Meeting Dates: permission to advertise _4/22/2025_ 1st hearing 6/3/2025_2nd hearing 7/1/2025 Proposed Ordinance Title/Reference: AN ORDINANCE BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION 11.02.01 TO ESTABLISH THE REQUIREMENTS FOR COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION MEETINGS; SECTION 11.02.02 TO ALLOW CERTAIN PERMITTED AS-OF-RIGHT USES IN CONFORMITY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS THAT ARE IN SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMITY WITH A PRELIMINARY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO BE PROCESSED AS A MINOR SITE PLAN AND TO INCLUDE LIVE LOCAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING APPLICATIONS MEETING THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 125.01055, F.S. AS A MINOR SITE PLAN AND TO DELETE PROVISIONS PERTAINING TO DEVELOPMENTS OF REGIONAL IMPACT THAT ARE NO LONGER CONSISTENT WITH FLORIDA STATUTES; AND SECTIONS 11.02.04, 11.02.06, 11.02.08 AND 11.02.09 TO UPDATE OBSOLETE DEPARTMENT NAMES AND TITLES; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTING PROVISIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AND APPLICABILITY; PROVIDING FOR FILING WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; AND PROVIDING FOR ADOPTION. The Proposed Ordinance ☐ does ☒ does not fall under one of the following enumerated exceptions:1 ☐ The proposed ordinance is required for compliance with Federal or State law or regulation; ☐ The proposed ordinance relates to the issuance or refinancing of debt; ☐ The proposed ordinance relates to the adoption of budgets or budget amendments, including revenue sources necessary to fund the budget; ☐ The proposed ordinance is required to implement a contract or an agreement, including, but not limited to, any Federal, State, local, or private grant or other financial assistance accepted by the county government; ☐ The proposed ordinance is an emergency ordinance; ☐ The ordinance relates to procurement; or ☐ The proposed ordinance is enacted to implement the following: a. Development orders and development permits, as those terms are defined in s. 163.3164, and development agreements, as authorized by the Florida Local Government Development Agreement Act under ss. 163.3220-163.3243; b. Comprehensive plan amendments and land development regulation amendments initiated by an application by a private party other than the county; c. Sections 190.005 and 190.046, Florida Statutes, regarding community development districts; d. Section 553.73, Florida Statutes, relating to the Florida Building Code; or e. Section 633.202, Florida Statutes, relating to the Florida Fire Prevention Code. A business impact estimate is not required for the above exceptions. The County initiated a Text Amendment to the Land Development Code (LDC) proposing to require community participation meetings for certain types of development applications and allow certain permitted as-of-right uses in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code, as well as development applications that are in substantial conformity with an approved Preliminary Planned Development Plan, and any Live Local Affordable Housing applications meeting the provisions of Section 125.01055, F.S. to be processed as a Minor Site Plan. The proposal includes deleting provisions pertaining to Developments of Regional Impact that are no longer consistent with Florida Statutes and updating obsolete department names and titles in Sections 11.02.04, 11.02.06, 11.02.08 and 11.02.09. 1 F.S. 125.66(3)(c)(2023) Page 330 of 331 Estimate of Direct Economic Impact on Private/For Profit Businesses: a. Estimate of Direct Business Compliance Costs: The amended regulations will require the applicants of certain development applications to conduct mandatory public outreach meetings with surrounding property owners. There is a direct cost to planning and engineering firms, who generally host these meetings, which will ultimately be transferred to the applicant. b. New Charges/Fees on Businesses Impacted: None, the amendments do not impose new fees or charges on existing businesses. The amendment increases the number of development permit applications that could be processed as minor site plans, instead of major site plans, providing for a cost savings to the applicant. c. Estimate of Regulatory Costs: None Good Faith Estimate of Number of Businesses Likely Impacted: None. Any Additional Information: None Page 331 of 331