Handout-Don Jacobovitz 7-11-16 °et/h . 4,?' cJl sJe '=J
7//i/i
STAFF REPORT
City of Atlantic Beach
Commission Meeting
AGENDA ITEM: Safe Routes to Schools Route Selection
DATE: July 11, 2016
A(71,)
SUBMITTED BY: Donald D. Jacobovitz, P.E., Public Works Director
BACKGROUND:
The Safe Routes to Schools (SRTS) Route Selection was discussed at the June 27, 2016
Commission Meeting and a Workshop preceding that meeting. At those meetings, the
Public Works (PW)recommendation was to select the path that followed the east side of
Sherry Drive and Seminole Road for many reasons including that it was the safest route
of the various routes considered, it provided the least amount of uncontrolled crossings,
sufficient right-of-way exists, and surveying and design for this alternative is
approximately 30% complete.
During discussions at the above mentioned meetings, it was suggested that students may
be coming from other directions than supported by the proposed path. I mentioned that
demographics change from year to year. A path selected and built this year, may not
support the greatest number of users in future years, but from all the information we
have, it does support the greatest number of users at this time. A SRTS should be
selected based upon the best known facts available at the time of its construction. It was
suggested that east-west routes leading to and from the school from its rear entrance
using David Street and Seaspray Avenue should be evaluated. It was also suggested that
the City may consider building more than one alternate route to branch out where the
students live.
I discussed the selection of alternate routes with the Florida Department of Transportation
(FDOT), the Atlantic Beach Elementary School (ABE), the Jacksonville Transportation
Authority(JTA), and the City's Consultant who has supervised this project design. I also
inspected the proposed alternative routes. The following are the results of these
discussions and my inspection.
The FDOT representative, Roosevelt Petitihomme, reiterated his comments he had given
the City in the past. The path provided already to FDOT can be changed, the amount of
funding for this SRTS project remains the same, and it is good that the City has engaged
the public on this project. With this in mind, the amount spent to date would be coming
from the entire project budget of$671,034 ($125,000 for design, $461,974 for
construction, and $84,060 for CEI services). Any additional funds expended above this
amount to complete, change, or extend the path would be the responsibility of the City.
This includes the design fees as well.
The FDOT representative was not supportive of using four or five feet wide sidewalks as
a SRTS or to extend a SRTS. The right-of-ways on David and Seaspray up to Seminole
are limited in width and will not support a multi-purpose path (MPP) of 8 feet or more in
width which is preferred by the FDOT. The Seaspray right-of-way widens after crossing
Seminole Road to the west. A MPP could be constructed here; however, there would be
telephone utility and tree conflicts all along this path. These conflicts would be more
than on the currently proposed path. The path could eventually meet up with Sailfish
Drive and travel north to tie into the existing MPP on Plaza Drive. This path could go
east to the five-way intersection at Seminole Road. The MPP could then travel down
Sherry Drive to the ABE. As I mentioned, the FDOT representative was not supportive
of the SRTS along the portion of Seaspray with limited right-of-way. Any improvements
in this area or any other path than the originally proposed route would probably be the
responsibility of the City especially if any of the design, survey, and utility coordination
fees exceed the amount originally programmed for the project.
I then met with the Principal of Atlantic Beach Elementary School (ABE), Mindy
McLendon. Mrs. McLendon was well aware of the proposed path down Seminole Road
and Sherry Drive. The information she gave me was based upon her observations and
was not an official policy of the ABE or the School District. The following comments
represent the results of our meeting:
• Mrs. McClendon said she could not give us information from where the students
originate. It does seem that 80% or more of the ABE students are residents of Atlantic
Beach.
• The school only has one bus to pick up its students.
• There is a large percentage of walkers and bike riders, perhaps greater than 50%.
• Of the other students, approximatelyhalf ride the bus and half are brought to school in
private vehicles.
• Students can enter the rear gate of the school in the morning and leave by that gate after
school; however, the school does not endorse that mainly because of the neighborhood's
complaints of the restrictions in their access on Seaspray Avenue and Poinsettia Street. If
the back gate becomes part of the SRTS project, the increased traffic on Seaspray and
Poinsettia will exacerbate the access problems (and complaints). It appears that most of
the students who enter that gate are being dropped off by private vehicles. There is a
Crossing Guard posted at that gate in the mornings, and the gate is locked during the day.
• Based on Mrs. McClendon's observations each day, she feels the majority of the students
who walk or ride to school would be best served by the SRTS route recommended by
City Staff because they appear to be coming from the north and east of ABE
I next spoke with Chris LeDew of the JTA. The JTA is the Local Agency Program
(LAP) coordinator for projects in our area which use FDOT, or in this case, Federal
Highway Administration funding to complete. Our SRTS project has been coordinate.d
through them. Mr. LeDew was concerned that we had not progressed further through the
design scope of our originally selected path. He made several points which we should
keep in mind while moving forward with this project. These points are as follows:
• We performed our due diligence in selecting this project, qualifying it through the LAP
process, and getting it awarded.
• At some point, the City needs to let our residents know that the City does own the right-
of-way through which the SRTS MPP will follow and it intends to complete this project.
• Minor changes in the deviation of the path would be acceptable, but the cost of major
route changes would most likely have to be borne by the City.
• The drainage and utility reviews for the proposed path have already been completed
through the design process so far. The cost of these activities for any other route would
be significant and would become the responsibility of the City.
• The JTA is willing to wait until the end of this month for the City to move forward with
this project. After that, they most likely would put the City on notice that significant
progress needs to be made to ensure the design of this project(which has been placed on
hold at the 30%mark) occurs so that construction can be completed in the next fiscal
year.
• The funding of this project plans for the construction to occur in the State's 2017-2018
fiscal year which begins next July 1St. Funding for this program has been affected by a
movement from the SRTS program to a new "Safety Walk"program. Since this project
is one of the first of this kind within FDOT's District 2, it is being significantly observed
as a way to program and expend funds for safer transportation alternatives. Construction
may actually become available before July 1St, 2017.
I also spoke with Derek Gil of our consulting firm, ELEMENT Engineering Group, who
is designing our SRTS project. He told me their work began after the City had already
selected the path along the east side of Sherry and Seminole. Their survey, design work,
and utility coordination were all performed for the east side of these roads. Their design
work was based upon a need for the 449 of 461 enrolled students at ABE that lived on or
near the selected path. This information was provided by the City in their application for
the SRTS grant. They received a further work request after a Town Hall Meeting to draw
a proposed path along the west side of Seminole from Five Points to 15th Street. This
Alternate Design was drawn without additional survey or utility coordination being done.
That would have to be completed if this path is chosen for the SRTS.
While not specifically mentioned by either Mr. Petitihomme or Mr. LeDew, I firmly
believe that the City's resolve, or lack thereof, in completing this project as originally
requested may seriously impact our ability to receive future grant funding through the
FDOT or other funding sources managed by the JTA for roadway and off-roadway
projects. Our request for these funds was taken by each of their agencies as a genuine
need for improvements. Now that we are several years down the road from their
approval of these funds, and we haven't shown progress towards agreeing on what we
want to do, they may be hesitant to review our future requests because they may not
believe we would accomplish what we sought out to do.
BUDGET: The negotiated public involvement support fee ($6,136.57) is being paid from the
Public Works Professional Services account (001-5002-541-3100) with no additional
funding required. The City will be obligated for design fees ($50,000) if the project is
canceled, funding source to be determined, if needed. FDOT has budgeted $687,000 for
design, construction and construction support efforts.
RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends the Commission approve the original route
keeping the entire multi-purpose path on the eastern side of Sherry Drive and Seminole
Road.
ATTACHMENTS: None
REVIEWED BY CITY MANAGER: