Final Mary Avenue Phase II Improvements Sidewalk Feasibility Study


[PDF]Final Mary Avenue Phase II Improvements Sidewalk Feasibility Study...

1 downloads 125 Views 3MB Size

 

„  

 

 

 

Final Mary Avenue Phase II Improvements Sidewalk Feasibility Study (New Smyrna Beach, Florida)     January 2011            

Prepared for: Volusia TPO        

 

Final Mary Avenue Phase II Improvements Sidewalk Feasibility Study (New Smyrna Beach, Florida)

Prepared for: Volusia TPO

Prepared by: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 3930 S. Nova Road, Suite 300 Port Orange, FL 32127 (386) 761-2256 January 2011 ©Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 2011

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Mary Avenue Phase II Improvements Sidewalk Feasibility Study

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII.

INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................... 1 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES.................................................................................................. 1 STUDY METHODOLOGY........................................................................................................ 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS ......................................................................................................... 2 GENERAL DESIGN PRINCIPALS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................... 3 FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY ...................................................................................................... 6 DATA COLLECTION REFERENCES....................................................................................... 8

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE 1

ENGINEER’S OPINION OF PROBABLE COSTS .......................................................... 7

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1 FIGURE 2 FIGURE 3 FIGURE 4

LOCATION MAP ......................................................................................................... 10 EXISTING CONDITIONS AERIAL MAP .................................................................... 11 PROJECT DESIGN PLAN VIEW ................................................................................. 12 PROJECT DESIGN CROSS SECTIONAL VIEW ......................................................... 13

APPENDIX

APPENDIX A

Page i

FECR COST ESTIMATE .......................................................................................... 15 FECR COST ESTIMATE EXHIBIT B ...................................................................... 16 FECR COST ESTIMATE AERIAL MAP .................................................................. 17

January 2011

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

I.

Mary Avenue Phase II Improvements Sidewalk Feasibility Study

INTRODUCTION

The Volusia Transportation Planning Organization (VTPO) recognizes the importance of developing a cohesive transportation network that provides safe, efficient, and accessible pedestrian and bicycle facilities. One way to accomplish this goal is to expand the integrated bicycle and pedestrian transportation system by continuing the feasibility studies of prioritized projects. Mary Ave Streetscape Project – Phase II (FECR Right-of-Way Improvements) Sidewalk Feasibility Study is a VTPO prioritized XU Bicycle/Pedestrian project as requested by the City of New Smyrna Beach (City).

II.

PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this project is to assess the feasibility of adding a new sidewalk within Phase II of the City’s project. The City has previously prepared construction plans for the project known as Mary Avenue Streetscape – N. Myrtle Avenue to US-1 for the complete re-construction of the roadway to include curb and gutter with nested on-street parking, a 4-foot sidewalk on the south side and an 8 foot multi-use trail on the north side plus landscaping and irrigation. The improvements shown within these plans constitute Phase I of the City’s project and do not include the section of Mary Avenue within the railroad ROW. The City would like to implement Phase II of the project to ensure the continuity of the Mary Avenue project and to provide an enhanced safety pedestrian crossing at the railroad. Specifically, Phase II refers to surface improvements desired within 50’ of the Mary Avenue right-of-way centered upon the existing railroad crossing located just west of US-1. The City has negotiated a License Agreement with Florida East Coast Railway, LLC (FECR) for the railway improvements within Phase II. The objective of the study is to determine the conceptual alignment of sidewalk within the area to be licensed to FECR and to develop an estimate of the costs associated with the non-railway improvements. Completing this segment will fill-in the gap left in Phase I of the project and provide residents of the neighborhood to the west with connection to the US-1 corridor through a safe alternative to motorized transit alongside Mary Avenue. Currently, pedestrians and bicyclist are forced to cross the railway at the non-barrier, at-grade crossing. The project proposes to widen the crossing, extend the trail across the railway and provide a pedestrian barrier gate which will provide a separation of transportation uses within this facility. It is our understanding that the pathways designed in Phase I, including the 8-foot wide multi-use path along the north side and the 4-foot path along the south side of Mary Avenue right-of-way, will be adjusted, as necessary to adapt to the Phase II improvements conceptually developed in this study. The City of New Smyrna and the Community Redevelopment Agency submitted an application for funding for the project through the VTPO 2010 Surface Transportation Program (STP) Set-Aside (XU) Bicycle/Pedestrian Project Proposal form. The proposed project is included on the VTPO's Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan. Extension of the sidewalk/multi-use trail through the FECR ROW will provide safer connectivity between an urban residential neighborhood, Chisholm Elementary School, Head Start School and the US 1 commercial area. In addition, the need was identified in the VTPO Bicycle and Pedestrian School Safety Review Study for Chisholm Elementary School as providing safer connectivity between transit stops and existing sidewalks for school children.

Page 1

January 2011

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

III.

Mary Avenue Phase II Improvements Sidewalk Feasibility Study

STUDY METHODOLOGY

The following tasks were completed per the project scope to provide an informed feasibility report. 1. A project coordination meeting was held with the VTPO’s Project Manager and the City of New Smyrna Beach for the purpose of scoping the project and obtaining relevant project information. 2. Data collection consisted of obtaining copies of the Mary Avenue Streetscape – N. Myrtle Avenue to US-1, 100% BID & CONSTRUCTION SET, dated January 29, 2010, as well as CAD files of base drawings prepared by the City’s engineer; a cost estimate prepared by FECR’s designer, which included design and construction costs for the necessary warning device(s) and the crossing surface(s). This information served as the basemap by which the sidewalk/multi-use path design was determined 3. A site visit was conducted of the project site with the City and VTPO staff in order to assess the current constraints and opportunities along the proposed corridor. Photographs and aerial maps assisted in recording the important details of the project and document obstacles that might impede the project’s constructability. Together, with engineering and professional planning-level judgment, this information serves as the foundation for the recommendations included in this study. 4. A concept plan and typical cross section were formulated based on the results of the previous tasks and applicable design guidelines. The concept plan and the typical section are based on design criteria for pedestrian facilities contained in the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Pedestrian Facilities Planning and Design Handbook, the FDOT Plans Preparation Manual (PPM) and the Manual on Uniform Minimum Standards for Design, Construction and Maintenance for Streets and Highways, The Florida Greenbook. In accordance with these reference manuals, a feasible design for the project was determined. 5. An Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Costs (EOPC) for Construction based on the refined conceptual design was prepared to construct a sidewalk within the proposed corridor. The EOPC was formulated based on FDOT District Five standards using their historical cost data. 6. Preparation of a Final Report followed receipt of comments by the VTPO and the City.

IV.

EXISTING CONDITIONS

The project is located within the City of New Smyrna Beach, north of Canal Street and west of US Hwy 1. This urban area mainly consists of high density single family residences and commercial/institutional uses (See Location Map – Figure 1). Mary Avenue is a relatively busy road including motor vehicles, pedestrian, bicyclist and transit users. Figure 2 provides an Existing Conditions Aerial Map of the project area depicting present conditions within the vicinity of the railroad crossing. The roadway consists of approximately 24 feet of asphalt pavement and grassed shoulders. Conflict points consist of driveways, vertical utilities and signs, narrow sidewalks and lack of barriers, markings and signage for pedestrian/bicycle uses. Current conditions do not reflect the proposed improvements within the Mary Avenue Streetscape Phase I design drawings. The existing corridor is heavily utilized as part of the travel way for this urban neighborhood and separated facilities do not currently exist which would enhance the safety of the users. Safety is of paramount concern for the consideration of this project. All pedestrians and bicyclists are currently

Page 2

January 2011

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Mary Avenue Phase II Improvements Sidewalk Feasibility Study

forced to cross the railway at grade without proper separation. Widening the crossing and extending the proposed trail would provide a separate facility for each mode of travel. It is important to note that the potential for a bike/pedestrian and auto accident does and has occurred along the corridor. Mary Avenue is a well utilized road for automobiles and is heavily utilized by pedestrians and cyclists. Properly planned and constructed sidewalks, signage, and landscaping can increase pedestrian safety by separating pedestrians from vehicle traffic. V.

GENERAL DESIGN PRINCIPALS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The concept plan and typical cross section included within this report were formulated based on the results of compiling data regarding existing conditions; FECR requirements and proposed improvement design concept plans; City of New Smyrna Beach Mary Avenue Streetscape – N. Myrtle Avenue to US-1, Phase I design plans; and applicable FDOT design guidelines. In accordance with these references, a feasible design for the project was determined. The following outlines the requirements and the design recommendations for the project corridor depicted in Figure 3 – Project Design Plan View and Figure 4 – Project Design Cross Sectional View. All recommendations have been color coded for the ease of determining design criteria. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. design recommendations are in red. 1. The City of New Smyrna Beach provided the construction plans for Phase I improvements to the Mary Avenue Streetscape – N. Myrtle Avenue to US-1, dated January 29, 2010. AutoCAD files of base drawings prepared by the City’s engineer served as the basemap by which the sidewalk/multi-use path design was determined. The construction plans provided existing and proposed information on utilities, landscape, sidewalks/multi-use trail/cross walk locations, lighting and signage. This information was incorporated into the corridor design to provide reference and continuity to the two Phases of construction. The Phase I proposed street improvements are designated in blue on Figure 3 – Project Design Plan View. Conflicts between the survey and proposed Phase I plans should be resolved prior to construction. Potential conflicts and recommendations are shown on Figure 3 and discussed below. Utility poles and guy wires may not be located correctly on the plans for Phase I and may create a problem in consideration of future expansion of the south sidewalk. Proposed Phase I street light location along the north sidewalk conflicts with proposed oak tree. Thus, it is recommended the center street light between oak and crossbuck be shifted approximately 35’ from the crossbuck. Proposed street lights located along the west and east side of the southern sidewalk would serve more purpose on the north side of the Mary Ave. right of way, where the proposed sidewalk will cross the FEC right of way. Existing cobra lights on utility poles on the south side of the Mary Ave. right of way will continue to provide lighting on the south side. 2. The FECR right of way (ROW) is 165 feet according to the sketch provided by FECR. Proposed FECR improvements are shown in green on Figure 3 – Project Design Plan View. The Florida East Coast Railroad (FECR) provided a cost estimate prepared by FECR’s designer, which included design and construction costs for the necessary warning device(s) and the

Page 3

January 2011

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Mary Avenue Phase II Improvements Sidewalk Feasibility Study

crossing surface(s) proposed to be provided within Phase II of the project. The quote proposes to provide the City with Crossing Warning System (includes two new roadway gates at 22 feet each, and one pedestrian gate at 10 feet); and Crossing Resurfacing (includes remove/reset existing 24 foot (FEC type) concrete crossing surface (2 panels at 12 feet each) and install (1) new 10 foot concrete crossing surface (1 panel at 10 feet). See Appendix A – FECR Cost Estimate. The City will be required to provide a minimum of 6 foot wide sidewalk through crossing and realignment of sidewalk to avoid excessive setback of railroad warning devices. The setback is determined by FECR as shown in Figure 4 – Project Design Cross Sectional View as provided by FECR. In order to conform with the FEC Gate Warning Device Setbacks With Sidewalk Section, drawn by XO Rail, the multi-use trail needs to transition toward the edge of the road travel way. On the west side of the railway tracks, the suggested transition starts 88 feet back from the center of the rail line at the edge of the FECR ROW which will allow avoidance of the proposed relocated fire hydrant (Phase I) and an existing utility pole. The geometry is matched on the east side. The proposed sidewalk narrows from 8 feet to 6 feet during the transition with a distance of 4.75’ required from the back of the sidewalk to the crossbuck. The center of the crossbuck is approximately 10.75 feet from the back of curb, minus 4.75, giving an allowed sidewalk width of 6 feet with the sidewalk starting at back of curb. A 1 foot space is shown on the FECR section between the back of curb and sidewalk which is included in the total sidewalk width. It is recommended that the City revise their Phase I design to accommodate these requirements. Conformance with the 2010 FDOT Design Standards for Railroad Crossings Index No. 560, curbed roadway detail requires a minimum 8’ distance from the center of the railroad to the end of the curb and gutter. Proposed design plans show a 12 foot distance. A contradictory note provided by the FECR as Note 1 states that "curb & gutter, sidewalk or any other masonry construction shall not be constructed within 12 feet of C/L of track as measured perpendicular to the track." Therefore, shoulder pavement material is proposed within the 12 feet of C/L on each side of the tracks. Note 2 states that "Roadway authority will be responsible for trimming/clearing of all vegetation within FEC R.O.W. limits to maintain 2 foot height for a minimum distance of 325 feet from edge of roadway along track in each direction from the crossing." Therefore, any landscaping planted within the FEC ROW should meet the maximum height of 24 inches. It is recommended that the City revise their Phase I design to accommodate these requirements. 3. Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) provides several reference manuals utilized in roadway design. The following lists the referenced material utilized in the proposed design provided in Figure 3 - Project Design Plan View. In order to determine the feasibility of a mid block crossing for the south side sidewalk, the FDOT Plans and Preparation Manual – Section 8 Mid-block Crossings was reviewed. The Section requires a minimum distance of 300 feet between crossing locations.

Page 4

January 2011

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Mary Avenue Phase II Improvements Sidewalk Feasibility Study

There is an existing crosswalk at the intersection of Mary Ave and U.S. Hwy 1. The distance from this crosswalk is approximately 246’ to the FEC Right of Way. This does not allow for the addition of a crossing location between U.S. Hwy 1 and the FEC Right of Way. There is an existing crosswalk at the intersection of Mary Ave and Josie Street. This crosswalk is being relocated further west along Mary Ave, according to Phase I plans. The distance between the revised location and FECR ROW is approximately 297’. This does not allow for the addition of a crossing location between Josie Street and the FECR ROW. Two midblock crossings on both the east and west sides of the railway would create a crossing distance of approximately 198 feet between crossings. In addition, adequate stopping sight distance is provided per table 2.7.1, FDOT Plans and Preparation Manual. For the design speed of this section of Mary Ave, 135 feet from the tracks is required. Therefore, no midblock crossing is recommended. The south sidewalk, both to the East and West prior to the FECR ROW, is proposed to end at a substantial landscaped buffer. Signage is proposed to be added along the route warning pedestrians and bicyclist that the sidewalk will come to an end and not continue across the tracks. The north sidewalk will be the only pedestrian route across the FECR tracks. Proposed signage location and type has been shown on Figure 3 - Project Design Plan View. The FDOT Manual of Uniform Minimum Standards for Design, Construction and Maintenance for Streets and Highways (the “Florida Greenbook”), Chapter 7 Rail-Highway Grade Crossings was reviewed to determine safe site lines along the road right of way. Conformance to the required SITE LINE TRIANGLE with activated signal devices (page 7.3, table 7-1, & figure7-1 Case A), have been provided on the plans according to the posted speed limit of 20mph. This allows an approaching vehicle to see an oncoming train, and make an informed decision about crossing. Many existing items are located within the triangle including trees, utility poles and residential homes. However, safety may be improved by selecting a few existing palms to be removed in addition to tree removal proposed in Phase I , and by being careful with the proposed landscape. It is recommended that the City revise their Phase I design to address these requirements. The following recommendations have been depicted on Figure 3 Project Design Plan View: Avoid planting the eight (8) crape myrtles proposed closest to the tracks within the SITE LINE TRIANGLE. Shrubs or groundcover installed within the SITE LINE TRIANGLE should be maintained at no greater than 24” height. We note that there is opportunity for these to act as a deterrent to pedestrians who want to continue through the stop points on the south sidewalk. 4. The City of New Smyrna Beach Land Development Regulations, Section 604.12.Sidewalks was reviewed for consistency of the plans with the City requirements as follows. A. General requirements.

Page 5

January 2011

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Mary Avenue Phase II Improvements Sidewalk Feasibility Study

1) Sidewalks shall be constructed on both sides of all roadways except where a bike path is provided on one side of the roadway in conformance with the requirements of the right-of-way improvement design standards contained within this LDR. The location of the sidewalk within the right-of-way may vary if the alternative location is approved by the city engineer. 2) All developments shall have a sidewalk plan included to enable pedestrians to access the building(s) and parking lot, parking spaces and other accessory components of the site without walking through landscaped areas. The sidewalk plan shall be designed to provide direct pedestrian traffic, shall assume the pedestrians will take the most direct path to their destination, and shall assume that reasonable pedestrians will travel through grass or landscaping, if able to, before walking great distances to stay on the sidewalk. 3) The minimum width of sidewalks located along all local streets is four feet and collectors and arterials shall have five feet wide sidewalks. 4) Sidewalks shall be constructed of 3,000 psi 28-day concrete with a minimum thickness of four inches except that a minimum of six inches is required at driveways. Sidewalks shall be reinforced with six-inch by six-inch and 10/10 wire mesh. Wheelchair ramps for the handicapped shall be provided at all intersections and other points of pedestrian traffic flow. VI.

FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY

Table 1 provides an Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Cost to construct the proposed corridor based on FDOT 2010 Basis of Estimates Handbook. The item number and unit of measure are based on the FDOT Basis of Estimates manual, with historical cost information made available by the FDOT. Unit prices are predominantly derived from the Current 12-month Moving Area Average for Area 06, but Statewide Average Unit Prices may be utilized in some instances. In addition, unit prices of some quantities may have been inflated to account for the small nature of the project. As shown on Table 1, the projected total estimated cost for design and construction of the project during the year 2011 is $34,429.47. It is noted that additional improvements required for railroad signalization have been estimated at $281,464.15 in the FECR Cost Estimate previously obtained by the City, of which a copy has been included in Appendix A. These costs are in addition to the amounts shown on the Engineer’s Opinion of Probable Cost included in this report, as prepared for Phase II improvements.

Page 6

January 2011

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Mary Avenue Phase II Improvements Sidewalk Feasibility Study

Table 1 - Engineer's Opinion of Probable Costs Mary Ave. Streetscape - N. Myrtle Avenue to U.S. 1 - Phase II (For Design and Construction of Phase II Sidewalk & Multi-Use Trail Components over the FEC Railroad) New Smyrna Beach, FL

Pay Item Number

0101-1 0102-1 0104-10-3 0110-1-1 0327-70-1 0337-7-32 0520-1-10 0522-1 0570-1-2 0700-20-11

Description

Mobilization Maintenance of Traffic Sediment Barrier Clearing and Grubbing Milling Existing Asphalt, 1" Avg. Depth Asph. Conc. Friction Course, Traff C, FC9.5, Rubber Concrete Curb & Gutter, Type F Concrete Sidewalk, 4" Thick Performance Turf, Sod Single Post Sign, F&I, Less than 12 SF

Estimated Quantity

Unit of 2010 Unit Price Measure

1 1 70 1.00 95

LS LS LF LS SY

15% 30% $ $ $

7 54 80 50 6

TN LF SY SY AS

$ $ $ $ $

Inflation Factor

2011

Design (Including Bid Package) CEI

1 1

LS LS

2014

2015

1.02 800.00 35.00

5% 5% 5% 5% 5%

$ $ $ $ $

2,993.87 4,605.95 74.97 840.00 3,491.25

$ $ $ $ $

3,140.02 4,812.63 78.72 882.00 3,665.81

$ $ $ $ $

3,297.02 5,053.26 82.65 926.10 3,849.10

$ $ $ $ $

3,461.87 5,305.93 86.79 972.41 4,041.56

$ $ $ $ $

3,634.96 5,571.22 91.13 1,021.03 4,243.64

325.00 17.19 71.58 2.08 232.00

5% 5% 5% 5% 5%

$ $ $ $ $

2,388.75 974.67 6,012.72 109.20 1,461.60

$ $ $ $ $

2,508.19 1,023.41 6,313.36 114.66 1,534.68

$ $ $ $ $

2,633.60 1,074.58 6,629.02 120.39 1,611.41

$ $ $ $ $

2,765.28 1,128.31 6,960.47 126.41 1,691.98

$ $ $ $ $

2,903.54 1,184.72 7,308.50 132.73 1,776.58

CONSTRUCTION COSTS SUBTOTAL $ -

2012

Extended Cost Year 2013

22,952.98 $

24,073.47 $

25,277.14 $

26,541.00 $

27,868.05

$ $

9,181.19 $ 2,295.30 $

9,629.39 $ 2,407.35 $

10,110.86 $ 2,527.71 $

10,616.40 $ 2,654.10 $

11,147.22 2,786.81

SOFT COSTS SUBTOTAL $

11,476.49 $

12,036.73 $

12,638.57 $

13,270.50 $

13,934.03

TOTAL PROJECT COST $

34,429.47 $

36,110.20 $

37,915.71 $

39,811.50 $

41,802.08

40% 10%

NOTES: 1) THIS OPC IS BASED ON CONCEPTUAL DESIGN. 2) THIS OPC IS BASED ON HISTORICAL COST INFORMATION MADE AVAILABLE BY THE FDOT. UNIT PRICES ARE PREDOMINANTLY DERIVED FROM THE CURRENT 12-MONTH MOVING AREA AVERAGE FOR AREA 06, BUT STATEWIDE AVERAGE UNIT PRICES MAY BE UTILIZED IN SOME INSTANCES. UNIT PRICES OF SOME QUANITIES MAY HAVE BEEN INFLATED TO ACCOUNT FOR THE SMALL NATURE OF THE PROJECT. ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS WILL VARY. 3) **OMITTED** 4) THE COSTS FOR YEARS 2011 THROUGH 2015 WERE GENERATED USING A 5% INFLATION RATE. 5) THIS OPC IS BASED ON THE PHASE I SIDEWALK ALIGNMENT BEING REVISED TO ACCOMMODATE THE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN PREPARED IN THIS STUDY FOR PHASE II (NO OVERLAP). 6) THIS OPC DOES NOT INCLUDE THE COSTS FOR ANY RIGHT-OF-WAY OR EASEMENT ACQUISITIONS, AS THEY ARE NOT ANTICIPATED TO BE REQUIRED. 7) THIS OPC DOES NOT INCLUDE COSTS FOR RELOCATION OR INSTALLATION OF GUARDRAIL, AS THE PHASE I PLANS CALLED FOR RELOCATION OF EXISTING GUARDRAIL (PROPOSED LOCATION NOT IDENTIFIED). 8) THIS OPC DOES NOT INCLUDE THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH OBTAINING PERMITS. 9) PER SPECIFIC DIRECTION FROM THE CITY, THIS OPC DOES NOT INCLUDE COSTS FOR LANDSCAPING. 10) PER SPECIFIC DIRECTION FROM THE CITY, THIS OPC DOES NOT INCLUDE COSTS FOR IRRIGATION. 11) PER SPECIFIC DIRECTION FROM THE CITY, THIS OPC DOES NOT INCLUDE COSTS FOR LIGHTING.

THE ENGINEER HAS NO CONTROL OVER THE COST OF LABOR, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT, OR OVER THE CONTRACTOR'S METHODS OF DETERMINING PRICES OR OVER COMPETITIVE BIDDING OR MARKET CONDITIONS. OPINIONS OF PROBABLE COSTS PROVIDED HEREIN ARE BASED ON THE INFORMATION KNOWN TO ENGINEER AT THIS TIME AND REPRESENT ONLY THE ENGINEER'S JUDGMENT AS A DESIGN PROFESSIONAL FAMILIAR WITH THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY. THEENGINEER CANNOT AND DOES NOT GUARANTEETHAT PROPOSALS, BIDS, OR ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS WILL NOT VARY FROM ITS OPINIONS OF PROBABLE COSTS.

Page 7

January 2011

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Mary Avenue Phase II Improvements Sidewalk Feasibility Study

Clearing and Grubbing – This Item is included to account for the clearing that is necessary to build the sidewalk. Curb & Gutter Conc (Type F) –This item is included to extend curb to within 12 ft of the railroad crossing surfaces to be installed by FEC. Sidewalk Conc (4” Thick) –This item is included to account for the cost of placing the sidewalk along the proposed route. Detectable warning surfaces to be installed prior to the railroad crossing are included in this item. VII.

DATA COLLECTION REFERENCES

Data collection consisted of referencing readily available information including: City of New Symrna Beach LDR Section 604.12.Sidewalks Volusia TPO, http://www.volusiacountympo.com/ The Volusia County MPO Bicycle/Pedestrian Plan, January 25, 2005 Volusia County, http://www.volusia.org/ Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), http://www.dot.state.fl.us/Safety/ped_bike/brochures/ped_bike_brochures.htm http://www.dot.state.fl.us/ Florida Pedestrian Planning and Design Handbook, FDOT, 2000 Manual of Uniform Minimum Standards for Design, Construction and Maintenance for Streets and Highways, May 2005 American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), 1999 FDOT Plans Preparation Manuel (PPM), January 2007 FDOT 2010 Basis of Estimates Handbook

Page 8

January 2011

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Mary Avenue Phase II Improvements Sidewalk Feasibility Study

FIGURES FIGURE 1 – LOCATION MAP FIGURE 2 – EXISTING CONDITIONS AERIAL MAP FIGURE 3 – PROJECT DESIGN PLAN VIEW FIGURE 4 – PROJECT DESIGN CROSS SECTIONAL VIEW

Page 9

January 2011

Page 10

Page 11

0 SCALE

NOTE: ALL EXISTING INFORMATION SHOWN WAS OBTAINED FROM SURVEY & DESIGN CAD FILES PROVIDED BY GAI CONSULTANTS, INC. ON AUGUST 26, 2010 FOR THE PROJECT ENTITLED “ MARY AVENUE STREETSCAPE - N. MYRTLE AVENUE TO US-1 (100% BID & CONSTRUCTION SET - JANUARY 29, 2010) ”, WHICH IS ALSO KNOWN AS PHASE I OF THE PROJECT. IN ADDITION, IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN FOR THE F.E.C. RAILROAD ARE BASED ON THE CONCEPT PLAN ENTITLED, “ GRADE CROSSING IMPROVEMENTS ”, DATED 05/19/09, AS PREPARED BY XORail.

Page 12

20 FEET

PROJECT DESIGN PLAN VIEW MARY AVE PHASE II IMPROVEMENTS SIDEWALK FEASIBILITY STUDY NEW SMYRNA BEACH, FLORIDA AS SHOWN

149127005

10/16/2010

FIGURE 3

Page 13

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

Mary Avenue Phase II Improvements Sidewalk Feasibility Study

APPENDIX APPENDIX A – FECR COST ESTIMATE

Page 14

December 2010

Page 15

Page 16

Page 17