Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutChapter 662: Concurrency Management SystemCodified May 1990 LDR ORDINANCE NO. 3-90 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL, FLORIDA, ESTABLISHING CHAPTER 662, CONCURRENCY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY; REPEALING ALL PORTIONS OF THE CODE IN CONFLICT HEREWITH; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Cape Canaveral, in compliance with Section 163.3202, Florida Statutes, must establish certain land development regulations to implement certain policies of its Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, as a key element of the land development regulations, the City shall implement a Concurrency Management System to measure the potential impact of any proposed development upon certain levels-of-service. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral as follows: SECTION 1 . Chapter 662 Concurrency Management System Sec. 662.01 . Purpose and Intent: A . As a key element of the City's Land Development Regulations (LDR's), the City shall implement a Concurrency Management System (CMS) to measure the potential impact of any proposed development upon the levels-of- service for the six types of critical public facilities---i.e. potable water, sanitary sewer, solid waste, recreation, drainage, and roadways---by evaluating that impact in comparison with available capacity and the City's adopted level-of- service standards for those facilities. No final development permit shall be approved unless this concurrency evaluation process has determined that adequate public facilities will be available at the time of development impact. B. The City also intends that at least annually after implementation of this mechanism, there will be follow-up monitoring and evaluation of its performance with the objective of improving the system and enacting necessary changes in the Concurrency Management Ordinance. C. The City intends that this Concurrency Management Ordinance provide the basic principles and guidelines for implementation of the CMS. However, it is not the intent of the City that this Ord' ice contain all of the detailed administrative procedures required for the day-to-day operation of the program. Instead, the City desires that the City officials responsible for the CMS possess a certain degree of flexibility and latitude to develop and employ such additional procedures, forms, etc. as they deem necessary for carrying out an effective and efficient concurrency management process. The City may develop and use a Concurrency Manual or Guide to assist City officials in the day-to-day administration of the program. D. It is not the intent of the City that the Concurrency Management System in any of its aspects, including concurrency evaluation and the issuance of the Concurrency Compliance Certification, replace any other development review criteria used by the City, unless those criteria are inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordj.nance. The CMS is to primarily complement and not supplant the other review criteria. This also means that the mere issuance of a Concurrency Compliance Certification does not guarantee approval of a development proposal if other project review criteria must also be satisfied. [Ord. No. 3-90, §1, 25 Jan 90] Sec. 662.03. Selected Definitions: ORDINANCE NO. 3-90 PAGE 1 OF 10 For purposes of this Chapter, certain terms or words herein shall be interpreted as follows: "Accepted Engineering Principles" means engineering concepts and practices generally accepted by the broad base of professionals in the particular engineering discipline under consideration. "Area of Development Influence" means the area of public facilities impact surrounding an existing or proposed project; this area of influence will vary according to the type and magnitude of the project. "Assured Construction" means construction improvements scheduled for critical public facilities in the City's Five-Year Schedule of Capital Improvements---provided that the Schedule is realistic, financially feasible, based upon currently available revenue sources, and contains targeted project completion dates; in addition, for final Development Orders or Permits, construction must be complete and operable for the following facilities: wastewater treatment, potable water supply, solid waste disposal, transportation, parks and recreation, and drainage. "Available" means that a public facility/service will be provided as follows: 1. The facility/service is in place to serve a proposed project at the time that the Development Order is approved; 2. The facility/service will be in place at the time of project impact; 3. The facility is under construction at the time a Development Order is approved; 4. The facility/service is the subject of a binding executed construction contract at the time that the Development Order is approved. 5. The facility/service is guaranteed through an enforceable Development Agreement; 6. The facility constitutes assured construction. "Average Daily Traffic" or "Existing Traffic": both terms mean the average of two consecutive 24-hour weekday traffic counts taken at one location. "Building Permit" means a written authorization issued by the Building Official which permits the construction or alteration of a building; it means the same thing as a "Final Development Order". "Buildout Period" means the time interval between the issuance of a Development Order and project completion. "Captured Trips" means motor vehicle trips which pass a project but which are not generated by the project. "Concurrency Compliance Certification" means the official City compliance document which is issued for a proposed project after a favorable concurrency evaluation has been completed resulting in a finding of no concurrency deficiency (non-deficiency) for the project's impact. "Concurrency Manager" means the City official who has been officially designated to be in charge of the Concurrency Management System; presently this responsibility is assigned to the City Manager. "Critical Public facilities" means the six types of public facilities which are subject to concurrency management: i.e. roadways, sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, potable water, and recreation (i.e.: open space and parks).' ORDINANCE NO. 3-90 PAGE 2 OF 10 "Developer's Agreement" means an agreement entered into pursuant to Section 163.3220, F.S., to which the City is a party and which requires and assures provision of a public facility/service. "Development" shall be defined as set forth in Section 380.04, F.S. "Development Order" means any official City directive which grants the issuance of a Development Permit or amendments thereto. "Development Permit" means any building permit, zoning approval, rezoning, preliminary plat approval, final plat approval, site plan approval, conditional use, or variance approving an exceedance of maximum lot coverages. This meaning does not include the term "certificate of occupancy". "Directly Accessed" means that a project is provided with adjacent ingress/egress from/to a principal roadway. "FDOT Guidelines" means the FDOT guideline document entitled the Florida Highway System Plan - Level of Service Standards and Guidelines Manual as issued in January, 1989, and as subsequently amended. "Final Development Order" means a building permit. "Insignificant Project" means a non-major project for which the project trips within the Area of Development Influence during the Buildout Period and at Project Completion are projected to be equal to or less than 10% above the number assigned to the adopted Level-of-Service Standard "E", as specified in the Comprehensive Plan. "ITE" means the Institute of Transportation Engineers. "Land Development Regulation" means any City ordinance regulating any aspect of development, including any zoning, rezoning, subdivision, building construction, site planning, sign regulation, landscaping, or other regulations controlling land development. -3 "Level-of-Service" means an indicator of the degree of service provided by a public facility based upon its operational characteristics and expressed as the capacity per unit of demand. "Level-of-Service Standard" means the minimum threshold level-of- service for a public facility below which the level-of-service should not be allowed to deteriorate without triggering restrictions on new development. "Major Project" means any project which is either: a Development of Regional Impact; a residential development of 250 or more dwelling units; or a commercial/industrial development of more than 50,000 sq. ft. of gross building area. "Open Space" means a primarily undeveloped tract of land, whether public or private, which is both suitable and available principally for "passive" recreation or conservation uses, regardless of whether or not such land is actually put to such uses; by definition, the term "open space" does not encompass the meaning of the term "park". "Park" means a tract of land which has been officially designated as such and which is either developed or scheduled to be developed for primarily "active" recreation uses; by definition, the term "park" does not encompass the meaning of the term "open space". "Project Completion" means the issuance of the final certificate of occupancy for a project. "Rendition" means the issuance of a written determination,'under the CMS, by the Building Official, Concurrency Manager, City Council or Planning Board, the date of execution of which shall be presumed to be the date affixed ORDINANCE NO. 3-90 PAGE 3 OF 10 to said document; this document shall be filed with the City Clerk on the same date. "Total Traffic" means the traffic count during the buildout period of a project. It consists of the sum of: existing traffic, traffic to be generated by the project minus captured trips, and background traffic. "Trip Generation Standards" means the guidelines contained in the document entitled "TRIP GENERATION, 4TH EDITION" prepared by ITE in 1987, and as amended. "Vested Right" means the entitlement to develop enjoyed y a project due to the fact that the City issued a Development Order/P4rrnit tor the project prior to the effective date of this Concurrency Management System. Such a project is not required to meet the concurrency requirements of this Chapter unless the project is significantly changed in terms of its density, intensity, or facility impact subsequent to the effective date of this Chapter---in which case it will lose its vested right and be obliged to undergo a review under this CMS. [Ord. No. 3-90, §1, 25 Jan 90] Sec. 662.05. Concurrency Management Policies and Procedures: A. Responsibility for Decision-Making in Concurrency Evaluation. Although the City Manager in his capacity as Concurrency Manager has basic oversight responsibility for the CMS, the immediate authority for making a concurrency evaluation and finding and the issuance of a Concurrency Compliance Certification shall rest with the Building Official; however, his determinations on these matters shall be reviewed by the Concurrency Manager. City officials may obtain assistance, opinions, and recommendations from qualified professional engineers and planners in reviewing and evaluating projects for concurrency purposes. The Planning and Zoning Board shall follow its usual review procedures for development proposals, except that any final approvals shall be contingent upon the issuance of a Concurrency Compliance Certification by the Building Official. B. Application for Concurrency Evaluation. As of the effective date of this Ordjxiance, any application for approval of a site plan, subdivision plat, or a building permit shall simultaneously request and trigger a concurrency evaluation of the proposed project, unless a separate application for concurrency evaluation of the project has previously been submitted. No development application shall be approved unless and until the Concurrency Management System has made a concurrency evaluation of the proposal, and the Building Official has made a finding of non-deficiency and issued a [note saying paragraph from next page] Concurrency Compliance Certification for it. Any party requesting a concurrency evaluation shall submit the following information to the Building Official, on a form provided by the City, and pay a scheduled fee established by resolution of the City Council: 1. Name, address, and telephone number of property-owner. 2. Name, address, and telephone number of applicant. 3. Legal description of property. 4. Size of property in square feet. 5. The proposed project's capacity need for water, sewer, transportation, parks and recreation, drainage and solid waste services. Total need shall be shown, as well as a breakdown of need for each phase or stage of the project. If capacity has been reserved, the applicant shall furnish a capacity reservation certificate from the provider entity; this certificate shall state the amount of capacity reserved, the period for which capacity is reserved and the beginning and ending dates for said reservation. 6. If access to the project is from a State Roadway, applicant must furnish a statement from the Florida Department of Transportation stating that access will be approved upon submittal of appropriate engineering and design exhibits for a driveway permit. 7. Specific use or uses. 8. Square footage or number of units for each use. ORDINANCE NO. 3-90 PAGE 4 OF 10 9. If a subdivision, the number and type of units for each phase. [star symbol around this paragraph] Any application for a development permit must be consistent with the information on which the concurrency evaluation is based. If the applicant increases the intensity or density of the project during any stage in the development approval process, a new concurrency evaluation will be required. C. Criteria for Evaluation. The following criteria shall be used to determine whether the levels-of-service of the various public facilities are adequate to support the specific impacts of the proposed development: 1. Building Permits of Insignificant Impact: a. ) Certain types of property improvements requiring the issuance of a building permit shall be presumed to have an insignificant concurrency impact, thus requiring only a minimal concurrency review. This is due to the fact that the improvements involved do not result in any significant increase in demand upon the levels-of-service of the critical public facilities. These improvements include, by way of example: remodelling or repair of an existing single-family dwelling unit which does not provide for an increase in the number of inhabitants of the property; addition of garages or small storage structures to existing dwelling units; repairs or installations to a property which do not involve enlargement of the facility; etc. 2. Transportation Facilities: from ord. no. 21-90[much text is crossed out] ORDINANCE NO. 3-90 PAGE 5 OF 10 Ord. No. 21-90[ much text is crossed out] 3. Sanitary Sewer Facilities: a.) The available capacity for sanitary sewer facilities shall be calculated by subtracting the current flow and previously committed capacity from the design capacity of the waste- water treatment facilities. If wastewater capacity is avail- able for the project, the City's Wastewater Treatment Department shall issue a capacity reservation certificate for it. b.) The impact on the treatment plant shall be determined by utilizing the City's adopted sanitary sewer level-of- service standard, which is currently 118 gallons per capita per day, equivalent to 400 gallons per day per equivalent residential unit. 4. Potable Water Facilities: a.) It shall be the responsibility of an applicant for development approval to obtain a potable water capacity reservation certificate, or equivalent certification, from the Water Department of the City of Cocoa. b.) The impact on water supply facilities shall be determined by utilizing the City's adopted potable water level-of-service standard, which is currently a usage of 264 gallons per capita per day. Determination of impact shall be coordinated with the Cocoa Water Dept. and shall be consistent with the capacity determination of the Cocoa Water Dept. 5. Solid Waste Facilities: ORDINANCE NO. 3-90 PAGE 6 OF 10 a.) It shall be the responsibility of an applicant for development approval to obtain a solid waste capacity reservation certificate, or equivalent certification, from Brevard County. b.) The impact on solid waste disposal facilities shall be determined by utilizing the City's adopted solid waste disposal standard of 7.51 pounds per capita per day. Determination of impact shall be coordinated with Brevard County and shall be consistent with their capacity determination. 6. Parks and Open Space: a.) The City shall determine the adequacy of public park and recreation facilities based upon the City's adopted level-of-service standards for parks and open space---i.e. one acre per 1000 population for parks, and the same for open space. b.) The impact of proposed development shall be determined by comparing the existing population of the City (as correlated with the existing parkland and open space throughout the City) with the estimated population of the City at the time of project impact (as correlated with the projected amount of parkland and open space to be available at that time). Only the population of proposed residential development shall be considered in calculating the impact of a specific project. In calculating the population of residential units, the most recent household-size figures contained in the data and analysis of the Comprehensive Plan shall be used as the multiplier. 7. Drainage Facilities: a .Adequacy of stormwater management facilities shall be determined at the time of engineering review based, at a minimum, on the City's adopted level-of-service standards for drainage. b. The applicant shall be required to submit a Stormwater Master Plan for the proposed project at the time of engineering review. This Plan shall meet, or preferably exceed, the on-site drainage level-of-service standards of this Code. It shall also include engineering calculations demonstrating that the off-site stormwater facilities to which the site will be connected possess adequate capacity to handle the projected site runoff impacting them. The form and degree of detail required in the Plan shall be established by the City Engineer in accordance with accepted engineering principles. The Plan shall be prepared, sealed and signed by a qualified professional engineer, licensed to practice in the State of Florida. D. Concurrency Evaluation Finding of Deficiency. 1 . If the concurrency management evaluation of a development proposal finds that the issuance of a development order or permit would cause a deficiency (with reference to the adopted standards) at the time of project impact in the level-of-service provided by one or more of the six critical types of public facilities, the City shall deny, defer, conditionally approve, or require modification of the proposal in order to ensure that no such deficiency emerges. ORDINANCE NO. 3-90 PAGE 7 OF 10 2. In the event that the concurrency evaluation results in a finding of deficiency as noted in the preceding paragraph, the applicant may, by paying a scheduled fee specified by the City, reserve priority for one year over subsequent applications competing for the same facility capacity. When adequate capacity becomes available, the City will notify those applicants with the highest priority and which have maintained their reservations that there is now a finding of non-deficiency on their application. This finding of non-deficiency (Concurrency Compliance Certification) shall be valid for 45 days from date of issuance subject to re-submission of the corresponding application for development permit during that time-frame. E. Duration of Non-Deficiency Finding (Concurrency Compliance Certification) After Issuance of Development Permit: A Concurrency Compliance Certification shall remain valid for a period of 45 days following issuance provided that the related application for a development permit has been submitted prior to the end of the 45-day period. Once the development permit is issued, the Compliance Certification shall continue in effect according to the following time frames: 1. For site development plan approval: The Concurrency Compliance Certification shall have a maximum duration of 18 months, unless the intensity or density of the proposed project is increased since the last concurrency evaluation, in which case the Compliance Certification shall become null and void and a new concurrency evaluation shall be required. 2. For a residential subdivision, or a phase or unit thereof, including planned unit developments: The Compliance Certification shall remain valid for a period not to exceed 60 months from the date of construction permit issuance, provided that authorized work proceeds in a timely manner. 3. For an individual single-family development: The Compliance Certification shall remain valid for a period not to exceed 24 months provided that a building permit is obtained during that period and that authorized work proceeds in a timely manner. Lots included within subdivisions which have not passed a concurrency evaluation or where the non-deficiency finding or vesting period has expired are included in this category. 4. For a commercial, industrial, or multi-family development: The Compliance Certification shall remain valid until construction has been completed and a certificate of occupancy has been issued; or for the life of the permit unless it is revoked or suspended. F. Expiration of Concurrency Compliance Certification: When any of the non-deficiency finding time-frames expire for a particular project, a new concurrency evaluation shall be required in conjunction with the next application for a development permit. Any vesting period relating to concurrency may be considered null and void if the applicant fails to perform in fulfilling all requirements to keep the vesting current, including the payment of all fees pursuant to a capacity reservation. If an applicant maintains a capacity reservation, the expiration of the Concurrency Compliance Certification shall not nullify the capacity reservation. G. Cumulative Level-of-Service Records: The concurrency management system shall maintain a cumulative record of the level-of-service capacity allocations permitted by the approval of final development ordetrs or permits. H. Operating Systems. Procedures. and Tasks: ORDINANCE NO. 3-90 PAGE 8 OF 10 1. Overall Concurrency Management. The City Manager shall have operating responsibility for the Concurrency Management System and in that capacity shall serve as the Concurrency Manager. The Concurrency Manager may delegate administrative responsibilities to others, particularly the Building Official. The Concurrency Manager may utilize the services of professional engineering and planning consultants to assist the City with such aspects of the CMS as project analysis, concurrency evaluations, and program monitoring. 2. Concurrency Monitoring. The City shall maintain written and/or computerized records of all capacities or volumes which are committed for developments as a result of the issuance of development orders or permits. Where another jurisdiction provides services to a project, the City shall obtain pertinent and up-to-date capacity/volume information from that jurisdiction. 3. Measuring Potential Impacts. For purposes of measuring the potential impact of a project, all previously committed capacities/volumes shall be taken into account on a cumulative basis and considered in conjunction with existing levels-of-service and adopted level-of-service standards. I. Conditional Approval of Development Orders or Permits: If the concurrency evaluation review indicates that the potential impact of a proposed development project will cause a deficiency in the level-of- service of one of the six critical public facilities, the City may conditionally approve the development order or permit under certain specific circumstances, as follows: 1. Subdivision Plats and Site Plans. Subdivision plats and site plans may be conditionally approved if the indicated public facilities deficiency will be corrected by the time of project impact through an adequate facility improvement included in the City's Capital Improvements Program and Budget or in that of another local government responsible for providing the service in question. 2. Building Permits. a.) Building permits may be conditionally approved if construction of the necessary public facility improvement is either: budgeted in the Annual Capital Improvements Budget; or is under binding contract for construction; or is already under construction; or is under some other binding financial commitment. b.) Building permits may be conditionally approved if the developer enters into a legally-binding financial commitment to construct all of the improvements necessary to concurrently accommodate the development impacts. c.) Building permits may be conditionally approved if the applicable impact fees or "fees-in-lieu-of", which relate to the needed public facility improvements scheduled within the Capital Improvements Program, are paid at the time of permit issuance to accommodate development impacts. J. Vested Rights: Any development order or permit approved prior to the effective date of this Ordinance for a project which has not undergone any subsequent changes significantly increasing its impact on critical public facilities shall not be subject to the concurrency management provisions of this Ordinance. Sec. 662.07 Appeals: Except as otherwise provided in this Code, appeals from the decisions of the Building Official, Concurrency Manager, or Planning Board or City Council making determinations ORDINANCE NO. 3-90 PAGE 9 OF 10 - hereunder, including, but not limited to, a finding of concurrency deficiency, refusal to issue a Concurrency Compliance Certification, project impact determination, refusal to issue a building permit, etc., shall be taken before the Board of Adjustment. Any such appeal must be filed in writing with the City Clerk within 20 calendar days of rendition of the decision in question, and the reasons for such appeal shall be set forth therein. The City Clerk shall arrange for an appeal hearing before the Board of Adjustment, and the Clerk shall notify the appellant in writing of the date, time and place of the hearing. A. The appellant shall have the burden of affirmatively demonstrating that the decision of the City official(s) was in error. Said official(s) shall have the opportunity to present information and argument to support their decision. B. The Board of Adjustment shall base its decision on the requirements of the City's Land Development Regulations. The Board shall make its decision based upon its usual voting procedures. The decision shall be issued in writing stating the reasoning involved, and it shall be rendered within 60 days of the close of the hearing. No further administrative appeal is available beyond this stage, though the appellant retains the right of appeal through the Judicial System as provided by law. [Ord. No. 3-90, §1, 25 Jan 90] SECTION 2. Severability. If any section, paragraph, phrase or word of this Ordinance for any reason is held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such holding shall not effect the remaining portions hereof and it shall be construed to have been the legislative intent to pass this Ordinance without such unconstitutional or invalid part. SECTION 3. Repeal. All ordinances or part of ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed. SECTION 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption. ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida this 25th day of January , 1990. [signature] Mayor ATTEST: [signature] City Clerk Approved as to Form: [signature] City Attorney NAME YES NO ARABIAN X PORTER X RANDELS Absent SALAMONE X THURM X First Reading 1-11-90 Posted: 1-12-90 Advertised: 1-15-90 Second Rending: 1-25-90 ORDINANCE NO. 3-90 PAGE 10 OF 10 To be Codified Codified May 1990 LDR ORDINANCE NO. 21-90 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 662, CONCURRENCY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF CAPE CANAVERAL, BY AMENDING THE EVALUATION CRITERIA FOR TRANSPOR- TATION FACILITIES ; PROVIDING SEVERABILITY; REPEALING ALL PORTIONS OF THE CODE IN CONFLICT HEREWITH ; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE . WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral has, by adoption of Ordinance No. 3-90, established Code Chapter 662, Concurrency Management System, of the Code of Ordinances; and WHEREAS, the City Council has retained a consulting firm to conduct a study on the City' s transportation system; and WHEREAS , as a result of said study, the consulting firm has recommended an amendment to the existing ordinance ; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral, Brevard County, Florida, as follows : SECTION 1 . Chapter 662, Concurrency Management System, of the Code of Ordinances is hereby amended by deleting Sub-section 662. 05 (C) ( 2) in its entirety and replacing with the following : Sec. 662 . 05 (C ) ( 2) Transportation Facilities : a) The capacity and level of service thresholds for arter- ial and collector transportation facilities shall be evaluated with thresholds established by the City. These thresholds are to be reevaluated by the City on an annual basis . All evaluations required in this Chapter shall be performed by an independent professional entity recognized in the field of transportation studies . b) The impact on the roadway system shall be determined by utilizing the trip generation standards contained in the report Trip Generation ( 4th Edition, Institute of Transpor- tation Engineers ) , or as amended. The evaluation of traffic impacts shall be for the p.m. peak hour or the a.m. peak hour, whichever is greater. c) The calculation of total traffic generated by a proposed project will assume 100 percent build-out and occupancy. Credit against the trip generation of non-residential land uses may be taken for the capture of passing trips (passerby trips ) . The use of passerby trip rates must be justified by the applicant and is subject to approval by City staff . For mixed-use developments, any trips that will be absorbed internally by the project shall be specified and justified by the Applicant . Should the development be replacing an existing use , credit for trips generated by the existing use shall be allowed , as long as the existing use was generating traffic at the time existing traffic counts were taken. Ordinance No. 21-90 Page 1 of 3 d) Traffic counts will be taken on an annual basis at specified city traffic count stations . Peak hour, direc- tional traffic counts will be determined for the mean of peak season and annual average basis conditions . The current traffic station count , as determined by the annual city traffic count program, will be the basis upon which available capacity is determined. e ) The following trip generation thresholds are established for determining available capacity: ( 1 ) For developments that are anticipated to generate two ( 2) new peak hour trips or less, no evaluation of road capacity is required . ( 2 ) For developments that are anticipated to generate three ( 3 ) to twenty ( 20) new peak hour trips, a determin- ation of excess capacity is required at four City traffic count stations : one shall be at the northern extreme of SR A1A within the City limits , one shall be at the southern extreme of SR AlA within the City limits, and the other two shall be taken at the stations nearest the development, which are not located on SR AlA. ( 3) For developments that are anticipated to generate twenty-one ( 21 ) to one hundred ( 100) new peak hour trips , the Applicant shall submit a traffic impact study that notes trip generation characteristics, trip distri- bution, and anticipated capacity impacts at five City traffic count stations : one shall be at the northern extreme of SR AlA within the City limits , one shall be at the southern extreme of SR AlA within the City limits, and the other three shall be taken at stations nearest the development , which are not located on SR A1A. ( 4 ) For developments that are anticipated to operate over 100 new peak new trips, the Applicant shall submit a traffic impact study that notes trip generation charac- teristics, trip distribution and anticipated capacity impacts at all City traffic count stations. ( 5) The evaluation of available capacity at each traffic count station must include an assessment of existing traffic volumes, previously approved project traffic volumes and existing Level of Service "E" service volumes . The evaluation for each traffic count station is to be on a p.m. peak hour or a.m. peak hour, whichever is higher , directional basis, unless otherwise specified by City staff . Analysis is to be conducted for the mean of peak season and annual average basis conditions . f ) Should a project 's capacity evaluation indicate defi- cient capacity at traffic count stations on the City' s arterial facility (SR A1A) , the Applicant may submit a travel time delay study according to procedures outlined in Chapter 11 of the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (Transporta- tion Research Board) . Results from this study will indicate the actual operational level of service for this facility. Prior to conducting a travel time delay study, the Applicant shall submit to the City proposed methodology for approval . Ordinance No. 21-90 Page 2 of 3 SECTION 2 . Severability. If any portion of this Ordinance for any reason is held to be unconstitutional or invalid, such holding shall not affect the remaining portions hereof and it shall be construed to have been the legislative intent to pass this Ordinance without such unconstitutional or invalid part. SECTION 3 . All portions of the Code in conflict herewith are hereby repealed . SECTION 4 . This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. ADOPTED BY the City Council of the City of Cape Canaveral, Florida, this 1st day of May , 1990 . [signature] Mayor ATTEST: [signature] City Clerk Approved as to Form: [signature] City Attorney First Reading: April 18, 1990 Posted: April 19, 1990 Advertised: April 21, 1990 Second Reading: May 1, 1990 NAME YES NO ARABIAN X PORTER X RANDELS Absent SALAMONE X THURM X Ordinance No. 21-90 Page 3 of 3 File History File Chapter 662 April 26, 1990 Proposed Amendments to Ordinance No. 21-90 (Recommended by City Manager ) Sub paragraph (e ) ( 2) be amended to read: ( 2) For developments that are anticipated to generate 3 to 20 new peak hour trips, a determination of excess capacity is required at four City traffic count stations: one shall be at the northern extreme of SR A1A within the City limits, one shall be at the southern extreme of SR A1A within the City limits, and the other two shall be taken at the stations nearest the development, which are not located on SR AlA. Sub-paragraph (e ) ( 3) be amended to read : ( 3) For developments that are anticipated to generate 21 to 100 new peak hour trips, the Applicant shall submit a traffic impact study that notes trip generation character- istics , trip distribution, and anticipated capacity impacts at five city traffic count stations : one shall be at the northern extreme of SR A1A within the City limits, one shall he at the southern extreme of SR A1A within the City limits, and the other three shall be taken at stations nearest the development, which are not located on SR AlA. Recommend that the numbers be changed in paragraph (e) as follows: (e) ( 1 ) - "For developments that are anticipated to generate two (2) new peak hour trips, or less..." Should the proposed ordinance be more specific in stating that traffic count/analysis be done by an independent consulting firm? add to end of sec. 662.05(c)(2)(a) All [illegible] in this Chapter shall be performed by an independant professional entity recognized in the field of [illegible] studies.