(e) street trees, street furniture, and landscaping, (f) wide sidewalks, (g) crosswalks, and/or (h) gridded street system of short blocks.
Numerous provisions in the Section 407.140 (Street Network Standards) a and b of the land development code implement external connectivity of street networks. For example, direct access is prohibited from any lots in subdivisions or outparcels in retail centers to any street or highway on the county or state system, functionally classified as major collector or higher. if an internal street is not technically feasible as determined by the development review committee. Exceptions may be provided if the development review committee decides an internal street is not technically feasible or the development creates only two lots fronting on the street with frontage greater than 250 feet that are served by a common driveway. Section 407.140(a)(8) indicates that the layout and types of streets in a development must provide for the continuation or appropriate projection of stub streets and sidewalks to adjacent properties by constructing them as close to the property line as possible, and signs must be posted advising residents of the intent and purpose of the stubbed street. In addition, where a proposed development abuts an existing development with a stub street, the street system in the proposed development must connect to the existing stub street. The continuation of existing streets must be designed to discourage cut-through traffic through existing or planned development, while providing for convenient movement of traffic, effective fire protection and other public service providers and efficient provision of utilities. The requirement to extend streets or provide a secondary access may be waived where impractical or undesirable and provision for pedestrian and bicycle interconnectivity between the developments is provided. Section 407.140(b) Layout of lots and Streets establishes the ideal street pattern as internally connected and may be in a gridiron, curvilinear, organic, radial or any other style that provides for internal connections and external linkages with an intersection a minimum of every 1000 feet. Summary The review of current corridor management practices in Florida suggests few changes in the fundamental practices of developing a future right of way map and implementing it through corridor management regulations. Counties continue to rely on robust authority for implementing right-of-way preservation and other corridor management practices provided to them under Florida planning law. An observation on Florida thoroughfare plans, as compared to the plans reviewed nationally, is a less detailed emphasis on integrating area type or context, non-auto modes, and complete streets design concepts at the thoroughfare planning level. Nonetheless, steps are being taken to address those issues and especially in the context of mobility planning practices. In the process, local governments are broadening their impact fees and mitigation methods to strengthen corridor management plans and practices from a multimodal perspective. A general summary of thoroughfare planning practices in Florida counties reviewed is provided in Table 20. The next section further examines selected Florida and national thoroughfare planning practices relative to context and multimodal elements.
82
Made with FlippingBook Learn more on our blog