Bicycle/Pedestrian Feasibility Study
City of South Daytona Reed Canal Road Multi-Use Path (south side) and Sidewalk (north side)
FINAL REPORT Prepared By: Reynolds, Smith and Hills, Inc.
Prepared For: Volusia TPO
April 2012
DRAFT REPORT
Page
Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... 1 1.
INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 4
2.
PROJECT PURPOSE AND SCOPE ............................................................................................... 4
3.
PHYSICAL INVENTORY AND ASSESSMENT OF RIGHT-OF-WAY ................................................ 7
3.1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION .................................................................................................... 7 3.2. NORTH SIDE ...................................................................................................................... 8 3.3. SOUTH SIDE .................................................................................................................... 10 4. SIDEWALK/TRAIL CONCEPT PLAN .......................................................................................... 15 Multiuse Trail Typical Section ................................................................................................... 15 Alignment .................................................................................................................................. 16 5. FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY .......................................................................................................... 19
Tables and Figures Table 1 – Cost Estimates by Alternative by Phase .......................................................................20 Table 2 – Quantities and Cost Estimates for Alternatives 1 & 2, Phase 1 Segment ....................21 Table 3 – Quantities and Cost Estimates for Alternatives 1 & 2, Phase 2 Segment ....................22 Table 4 – Quantities and Cost Estimates for Alternatives 1 & 2, Phase 3 Segment ....................23 Table 5 – Quantities and Cost Estimates for Alternative 1, Phase 4 Segment ............................24 Table 6 – Quantities and Cost Estimates for Alternative 1, Phase 5 Segment ............................25 Table 7 – Quantities and Cost Estimates for Alternative 2, Phase 4 Segment ............................26 Table 8 – Quantities and Cost Estimates for Alternative 2, Phase 5 Segment ............................27 Figure 1 – Project Location Map ................................................................................................... 6 Figure 2 – Trail Pavement Markings for Obstructions .................................................................12
FINAL REPORT
Page i
Appendix A – Project Site Photos B – Oak Lea Bridge Plan Sheets (courtesy of Quentin Hampton Associates) C – FDOT U.S.1 Intersection Plan Sheets (courtesy of CES, Inc.) D – Proposed Typical Sections E – Concept Plans on Aerial Map Series F – Roadway Crossing Details G – Tideflex® Valve Information H – FEC Railroad Correspondence I – Utilities and Installations Map Series J – Soils Map K – Drainage Coordination Meeting Notes L – FDOT Inflation Factors
FINAL REPORT
Page 2ii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of South Daytona requested this study for a proposed 10-foot wide shared use path on the south side of Reed Canal Road, and a 5-foot wide sidewalk with enhanced protection (raised curbing) for pedestrians on the north side of the road. The 10-foot width for the proposed two-way multiuse trail was selected due to the minimal horizontal distance from the edge of the travel lane to the slope of Reed Canal. The project limits are from Nova Road to U.S. 1, a distance of approximately 8,000 feet (1.5 miles). During the course of the study, several significant constraints to the location and design of the trail were observed and noted through various coordination efforts with FDOT, Florida East Coast Railroad (FECR), Volusia County, the St. Johns Water Management District (SJRWMD), and the City of South Daytona. These constraints are summarized below.
The paved trail would require a cantilever section using a sheet pile wall due to the close proximity of the canal slope to the roadway travel lane; The City’s desire to remove the existing guardrail would require vehicular crash barrier walls installed as part of the trail project; To minimize cost and potential partial reduction in the capacity of Reed Canal, a 12-foot wide trail plus the appropriate horizontal clearance is not feasible; The U.S. 1 intersection with Reed Canal Road is being redesigned to widen the eastbound approach to incorporate an additional turn lane; The Oak Lea Road bridge over Reed Canal has been redesigned, however, incorporation of the proposed trail will require modifications to the design and construction; FECR indicated they would not support a trail crossing of their freight rail line along the south side of the road as it would require significant and expensive modifications to the existing trestle bridge over the canal, and would increase the potential for pedestrians to illegally cross the railroad trestle bridge; Volusia County and the SJRWMD both stated that any improvements for the trail must not result in a rise in the mean high water level of the canal.
Three typical sections were developed to gain concurrence from the City. Each typical section required the incorporation of a sheet pile wall to support the cantilever trail section which extends well beyond the beginning of the canal slope. The alignment of the trail had to be altered, as it was originally envisioned to be a continuous trail along the south side of Reed Canal Road from Nova Road to U.S. 1. Since the trail could not introduce a new crossing of the FECR line, the alignment needed to cross the roadway at a location west of the rail line. Two alignment alternatives were developed, with varying locations for the crossing of Reed Canal Road. The existing sidewalk crossing of the FECR line along the north side of the road will be utilized, and widened to accommodate the shared use path.
FINAL REPORT
Page 1
The FDOT widening of the U.S. 1 intersection includes pavement widening westward from the intersection to beyond the Banana Cay Drive intersection. After reviewing the preliminary engineering plans, there appears to be insufficient clearance to provide for the 12-foot wide shared use path. As a result, the trail will terminate west of Banana Cay Drive, which will then connect to the proposed six-foot wide sidewalk that will be part of the FDOT improvement project. The recommended improvement for the sidewalk along the north side, from Nova Road to where the shared use path begins, is to reconstruct the existing sidewalks to incorporate a sixfoot wide sidewalk at the back of a Type F non-mountable curb. This will provide additional protection for pedestrians from vehicles. The pay items and cost estimates include items that are required to accommodate the recommended typical section elements, including sheet pile walls and their protective treatment, crash barriers, drainage infrastructure, relocations of traffic signals, and relocation of railroad crossing signals and gate structures. Cost estimates for the multiuse trail along the south side of the road, and estimates for the sidewalk along the north side were developed for the two alignment alternatives. The total cost for the multi-use trail for Alternative 1 is $5,777,768, and for Alternative 2 is $6,370,573. As this project will likely be implemented in phases, the cost estimates were re-calculated for the following segments: Nova Road to Reed Canal Park Reed Canal Park to Sauls Street Sauls Street to Lantern Drive Lantern Drive to the crossing of Reed Canal Road (Anastasia Dr. for Alternative 1, and just west of the FECR crossing for Alternative 2) Crossing of Reed Canal Road to west of Banana Cay Drive. The table on the following page summarizes those phased cost estimates by the multi-use trail alternative, by phase.
FINAL REPORT
Page 2
Table ES-1- Cost Estimates by Alternative by Phase Segment/Phase ALTERNATIVE 1 – Crossing of Reed Canal Road at Anastasia Dr. Trail Sidewalk Ph. 1 – Nova Rd through $1,070,050 $84,602 entrance at Reed Canal Park Ph. 2 – Reed Canal Park $1,995,357 $206,763 through Sauls St. Ph. 3 – Sauls St through $1,070,604 $113,513 Lantern Dr. Ph. 4 – Lantern Dr. to Reed $1,293,826 $142,055 Canal Road Crossing Ph. 5 – Reed Canal Road $317,438 Crossing to west of Banana Cay Dr.
FINAL REPORT
ALTERNATIVE 2 – Crossing of Reed Canal Road just west of FECR Crossing Trail Sidewalk
1,955,676
$204,003
$230,988
Page 3
1. INTRODUCTION The City of South Daytona filed a 2011 Priority Application to the VTPO for this project. The project elements include a proposed 10-foot wide shared use path on the south side of Reed Canal Road, and a 5-foot wide sidewalk on the north side of the road. The 10-foot width for the proposed two-way multiuse trail was selected due to the physical constraints of the corridor along the south side of the roadway, as the trail would be located over the canal slope and potentially over a portion of the water. While a 12-foot multiuse trail is the standard minimum width, it may be reduced to 10-feet under severe constraints. The application noted that the existing 4 and 5-foot wide sidewalk along the north side of Reed Canal Road had no curbing or other separation from the travel lanes, which makes it unattractive for pedestrians. Further, there are no bicycle lanes or paths along the roadway within the study limits (Nova Road to U.S. 1). The project length is approximately 8,000 feet (1.5 miles). The City and Volusia County have agreed that Reed Canal Road and the adjacent canal from Nova Road eastward to South Ridgewood Avenue should be transferred to City ownership. Volusia County recently removed the roadway from its Thoroughfares Plan. The City anticipates maintaining the roadway, the canal, and the proposed multiuse trail and sidewalk. This transfer is not part of the feasibility study or part of the proposed project.
2. PROJECT PURPOSE AND SCOPE The City’s objective of the project is to provide improved pedestrian and bicycle access between the various residential areas along Reed Canal Road, and to connect these areas to Reed Canal Park and to Ned Wagner Park. Several roadway bridges cross the canal on the south side of the road, including the timber bridge at Reed Canal Park, bridges at Sauls Street, Lantern Drive, and Oak Lea Drive. The FEC Railroad also has a structure crossing the canal just west of Carmen Drive. Final design plans have been prepared for the Oak Lea Drive Bridge, and construction has begun as of the date of this report. Final design plans have been completed for the Lantern Park Bridge replacement project, which is currently ranked as the second highest rated project on the VTPO Project Priority List, and is anticipated to be funded in 2012. The project location map is provided as Figure 1. A cost estimate was also prepared as part of this study for Volusia TPO’s budgeting and planning purposes. For the purposes of data collection, concept development, corridor evaluation and cost estimation, three field visits were conducted.
FINAL REPORT
Page 4
The analysis conducted was essential to develop a preliminary feasibility assessment. It is recognized that a preliminary engineering study is recommended prior to the final determination of the ability to permit and construct this bicycle/pedestrian facility. Our research and investigations have indicated that the concepts portrayed in this document are feasible, however, further engineering design and investigations will be required to provide a final recommendation. The graphics within this report include notes, diagram and callouts identifying constraints and opportunities for the proposed improvements. Considerations include conformance to the requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), appropriate signage along the facility and at roadway and/or driveway crossings. This study required coordination with several agency representatives and stakeholders which the Study Team would like to thank for their continuing interest in this project and their assistance: Mr. Les Gillis and Mr. Tim Devine – City of South Daytona Public Works Ms. Judy Grim – Volusia County Public Works, Road & Bridge Mr. Joseph (Leslie) Schonder – FEC Railway Engineering Mr. Jim Ganey – FDOT District 5 Railroad Coordinator Mr. Todd Alexander - FDOT District 5 Project Manager Mr. David King - Quentin Hampton Assoc. Engineers Mr. Perry Jennings and Mr. Gary Haddle – St. Johns River Water Management District Ms. Irene Sadowski – US Army Corps of Engineers Mr. Stephan Harris – Volusia TPO.
FINAL REPORT
Page 5
Figure 1 – Project Location Map
FINAL REPORT
Page 6
3. PHYSICAL INVENTORY AND ASSESSMENT OF RIGHT-OF-WAY 3.1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION The study area is located in the City of South Daytona. The adjacent land uses are largely residential, with a few small service and retail businesses accessing Reed Canal Road. Connecting Nova Road (S.R. 5A) with Ridgewood Avenue (U.S. 1), Reed Canal Road is a two-lane collector facility that has a 2010 average daily volume of approximately 10,000 vehicles and a posted speed limit of 30 mph. Currently, there exists a four to five-foot wide sidewalk along the north side of the road. There is no sidewalk along the south side of the road, and no bicycle lanes in either direction. The City has noted the inadequacy of the existing sidewalk to comfortably accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists. A typical section of the existing roadway and sidewalk is provided in Appendix D. A school crossing exists near the intersection of Anastasia Drive. This crossing has pedestrian signage and is manned by crossing guards during school arrival and departure times. We also observed students from Atlantic High School crossing Nova Road and heading east on Reed Canal Road, using the existing sidewalk. Two parks are located just south of Read Canal Road: Ned Wagner Park (located on Oak Lea Drive) and Reed Canal Park (located just east of Nova Road). Ned Wagner Park includes a small playground, open play field and an outdoor basketball court. This park is primarily used by the local community for open play and practice for the City’s Flag Football and baseball programs. Reed Canal Park is a 35-acre natural area which includes a small lake, walking trails, picnic facilities and restrooms, multipurpose field, playground area, a disc golf course, and a pavilion. Used by residents throughout the South Daytona area, this park is a significant regional attraction. There is a crossing of the Florida East Coast (FEC) railroad approximately 1,500 feet west of U.S. 1. Consisting of a single track, the crossing includes a trestle bridge over Reed Canal. There are traffic gates for both directions of Reed Canal Road, as well as a pedestrian crossing gate for the sidewalk along the north side of the road. Photos of this crossing are provided in Appendix A. The roadway right-of-way along the corridor is prescriptive, limited to the roadway surface itself and the limits of County maintenance on either side. Coordination with the Volusia County Engineering Department revealed that no definitive right-of-way records are available, as the County has been researching this roadway for some time as part of the proposed transfer of the road and canal from the County to the City. Field measurements indicate that the roadway consists of two 10-foot wide traffic lanes with
FINAL REPORT
Page 7
a 2-foot paved shoulder. Horizontal distance along the south side from the edge of the travel lane to the guardrail ranges from two up to six feet. Along the north side, the existing sidewalk is located within two to fourteen feet of the travel lane. The exception is near the Riverwood Village condominiums, where the sidewalk veers away from the road, and is directly adjacent to the condos/apartments. It was noted during the Project Kickoff Meeting that the Florida Department of Transportation has proposed improvements to the U.S. 1 and Reed Canal Road intersection that would impact the proposed bicycle/pedestrian improvements. These roadway geometric improvements include adding an eastbound left turn lane on Reed Canal Road. Coordination with the FDOT Project Manager, Mr. Todd Alexander, revealed that the project is currently in the preliminary engineering phase. FDOT intends on holding the existing southern edge of pavement line along Reed Canal Road, so the required roadway widening will be to the north. As of the date of this report, the approved concept includes roadway widening from approximately 300 feet west of Banana Cay Drive eastward to U.S. 1. The concept plan sheets are provided in Appendix C. All widening will occur along the north side of Reed Canal Road, and the typical section shows a 6-foot wide sidewalk at the back of the roadway curb. This feasibility study is addressing an improvement to the existing sidewalk along the north side of the road, as well as the potential construction of a multiuse trail along the south side of the road. To facilitate the discussion of the existing conditions for both of these proposed improvements, the remaining portion of this section will separately discuss the north and the south sides of Reed Canal Road. Select photos from the field visits are provided in Appendix A.
3.2. NORTH SIDE The first field review was conducted on December 7, 2011. Tim Devine of the City of South Daytona Public Works Department accompanied the RS&H staff for the corridor assessment. The field review started at the U.S. 1 intersection, the eastern limits of the study. Approaching Banana Cay Drive, there is a 10-foot grass buffer between the 5-foot wide sidewalk and the travel lane and, further west, the right turn lane. There are overhead power poles between the sidewalk and the road, located within this grass buffer. These poles continue only to Carmen Drive.
FINAL REPORT
Page 8
Approaching the Riverwood Village Condominiums, the 5-foot sidewalk has rather sharp horizontal curves/bends, as the sidewalk diverts away from the roadway toward and directly adjacent to the condo units. The sight distance along the sidewalk is partially obscured by the existing trees and ground shrubbery. The tight curves and the existing foliage may create a sight visibility hazard for bicyclists using the sidewalk. The FEC railroad crossing includes a traffic gate for westbound vehicles that also crosses the sidewalk, blocking westbound pedestrians. In addition, there is a separate pedestrian crossing gate on the west side of the railroad tracks to block pedestrian crossings from the west (eastbound). From this point westward, the 5-foot wide sidewalk is located only two feet from the travel lane. There is no curbing or any other buffer between the vehicles and the pedestrians. A consistent characteristic of the sidewalk is the lack of pavement markings or signage where the sidewalk crosses larger commercial driveways. Examples include the Marcel Gardens Apartments and the Circle S Short Stop store located east and west of Anastasia Drive, respectively. During our field visits, we noted that a pedestrian on the sidewalk is suddenly walking across a large paved driveway which has no pavement markings to indicate to motorists the continuation of the sidewalk facility. From the Circle S Short Stop to the west, the sidewalk width is reduced from 5-feet down to 4 feet. There is generally a 14-foot wide grass buffer between the sidewalk and the travel lane from Anastasia Drive west to Florida Boulevard. A school crossing exists from Oak Lea Drive across to just west of Anastasia Drive, which includes high emphasis pavement markings and school crossing signage. The sidewalk along Anastasia is located on the west side of the road, providing access to South Daytona Elementary School. West of Florida Boulevard, the sidewalk shifts toward then away from the roadway, including the new section located at the City’s stormwater treatment pond west of Lantern Drive. West of the pond site, from the Reed Canal Mobile Home Park through Pope Avenue to Sauls Street, Volusia County has constructed 6-foot wide sidewalks that include a 2 ½ foot wide non-mountable curb, providing protection to pedestrians. From this point west toward Nova Road, the sidewalk varies from 4 to 5-feet wide, and is located three feet from the travel lane with no physical barrier/curbing.
FINAL REPORT
Page 9
3.3. SOUTH SIDE Reed Canal Road is separated from the canal by a guardrail that is located approximately two feet from the travel lane. However, from the U.S. 1 intersection westward toward the FEC railroad crossing, the distance between the guardrail and the travel lane is approximately six to seven feet. The horizontal grade (the relatively level section) from the back of the guardrail to the point of tangency for the slope of the canal is approximately 3 feet, but reduces to less than that in some locations toward the west section of the corridor. From Nova Road to the FECRR tracks, there exists a raised cubing, which is constructed of asphaltic concrete (as opposed to the traditional concrete curb and gutter). The condition of this curbing is good to fair, with some deterioration noted in several locations. East of the FECRR, there is no curbing. It was also observed that the asphalt base for the guardrail is deteriorating, and stormwater flow washouts are evident at several locations east of the FECRR. Overhead power poles are located outside of the guardrail from the FEC railroad westward to Nova Road. Some of the poles have guy wires, which may be mounted either perpendicular or parallel to the roadway. Also beginning at the FECRR crossing, the guardrail is located within two feet of the travel lane. During the field review with City staff, it was noted that the City desires to replace this guardrail with a more decorative railing or low wall concept as part of the proposed trail project. The City and their design consultant have prepared design plans for the replacement of the bridges at Oak Lea Drive and at Lantern Drive. The Oak Lea project is under construction as of the date of this report. This project will include a pre-engineered arch culvert over the canal, roadway lighting, and wingwalls extending out on the north side toward the roadway. The bridge design plan sheet is provided in Appendix B. While the bridge design does not currently incorporate a sidewalk or multiuse trail along Reed Canal Road, the wingwalls and existing guardrail may be modified and removed to accommodate the proposed pedestrian facility. The Lantern bridge project is under design, however, is not funded for construction. It is on the Volusia TPO’s project priority list. The proposed improvements are similar to the Oak Lea bridge project. Stephens Canal is a local drainage facility that connects to Reed Canal just west of Florida Boulevard. At Reed Canal, there is a headwall that is approximately 6.5 feet from the back of the guardrail.
FINAL REPORT
Page 10
During the field review, the City stated that they want two canal maintenance access points along the south side of the canal. These access points would incorporate concrete steps that are a minimum of six-feet wide, which would allow the City’s maintenance crews to hand-launch a small jon boat with an electric motor to allow navigation for debris clean-up and other maintenance activities. One location is proposed just west of Lantern Drive, and one just west of the Reed Canal Park entrance. These concepts are not part of this multiuse trail feasibility study. Sauls Street incorporates a physically separated pedestrian feature for the northbound approach to the canal bridge. The 5-foot wide raised median provides separation for the 8-foot wide pedestrian path from the northbound travel lane. The entrance to Reed Canal Park includes a timber bridge with a wood plank deck and timber rails. The bridge is wide enough to incorporate pedestrian features providing access to the proposed trail. There is a relatively large curve radius and flare of the bridge railing at the roadway intersection, which would also benefit the tie-in to the trail. Approaching Nova Road, there exists soil-cement stabilization from the back of the guardrail toward the canal slope. And just west of this are headwalls for the box culvert that transverses Nova Road. The existing guardrail on Nova Road is 16 feet from the box culvert structure. This guardrail will likely need to be moved toward the canal away from Nova Road to connect the proposed trail to the existing Nova Road sidewalk. RIGHT-OF-WAY Right-of-way information was unavailable from Volusia County and from the City of South Daytona. The roadway right-of-way along the corridor is prescriptive, limited to the roadway surface itself and the limits of County maintenance on either side. Coordination with the Volusia County Engineering Department revealed that no definitive right-of-way records are available, as the County has been researching this roadway for some time as part of the proposed transfer of the road and canal from the County to the City. This transfer is not part of this feasibility study or the proposed project. As a result, the parcel information from the Volusia County Property Appraiser’s Office was obtained, and was used as an overlay layer on aerial photography to determine the approximate right-of-way. This parcel layer only provided property lines that resulted in a single apparent right-of-way corridor for both the roadway and for the canal. UTILITIES & INSTALLATIONS The utilities assessment was made through the field visits and coordination with City public works staff. Utilities and installations along the corridor include overhead power lines, roadway stormwater drainage flumes and outlet pipes, traffic signal equipment (at
FINAL REPORT
Page 11
Carmen Drive and at U.S. 1), railroad crossing gates and equipment, fire hydrants, and intermittent roadway lighting. Map sheets provided in Appendix I provide the location of these utilities and installations. The poles supporting the overhead power lines along the south side of the roadway present an obstacle for trail users. These poles extend from Nova Road eastward to the FEC railroad. While the City is interested in relocating these lines underground or installing them in a duct bank along the canal, the cost is currently prohibitive for this option. As such, the current location of the power poles requires the trail deck to be constructed with openings just large enough for the poles. Appropriate pavement markings consistent with Section 9C.06 of the Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) are recommended to guide the trail user around the obstruction. Figure 2 Trail Pavement Marking for Obstructions
Source: Figure 9C-8, MUTCD, 2009 edition, page 815.
There are also overhead power poles located along the north side of the road, from the FEC railroad eastward to U.S. 1. Seven hydrants directly adjacent to the existing sidewalk are also located along the north side. Stormwater runoff from Reed Canal Road is currently conveyed directly to the canal via concrete flumes along the south side of the road, and through ditch bottom inlets on the north side, conveyed underneath the roadway through drainage pipes. The Reed Canal was originally constructed in uplands and it is classified as a surface water. There is little to no aquatic vegetation present. The canal banks are regularly mowed and sprayed with herbicide to control vegetative growth. In early December 2011, observed water flow was approximately 1 foot per second, and the water depth was approximately one-half foot to two feet along the canal’s length. RAILROAD CROSSING A freight rail line of the Florida East Coast Railroad (FECRR) crosses Reed Canal Road just west of Carmen Drive. This crossing includes a trestle bridge over Reed Canal, active crossing gates for the eastbound and westbound roadway approaches, and a separate
FINAL REPORT
Page 12
pedestrian crossing gate at the sidewalk along the north side of Reed Canal Road. This bridge is located within 12 feet of the existing edge of pavement of the travel lane. TRAFFIC INFORMATION Reed Canal Road is a relatively high volume collector facility, with average daily traffic volume of 9,960 vehicles east of Nova Road, and a volume of 8,850 vehicles east of Sauls Street. Recognizing that traffic volumes have decreased the past several years, we note that the 2007 volumes for these segments area 11,690 and 10,860, respectively. Average daily traffic volumes on U.S. 1 south of Reed Canal Road for 2010 are 25,500 vehicles, with a K (peak to daily) value of 10.39 and a D (peak period distributional factor) value of 62.46. From this information, we may derive the peak period peak direction volume for U.S. 1 of 1,665. These same factors may be applied to the Reed Canal Road daily volume of 9,960 vehicles, deriving the peak period peak direction volume of 646 vehicles. SOILS INFORMATION The proposed multiuse trail traverses through primarily nearly level, pooly drained sandy soils (Tuscawilla Fine Sand and Immokalee Sand) west of the FECRR line. East of the railroad, the soils are predominately Daytona Sand (moderately well drained) and Cocoa Sand (narrow sandy ridges that parallel the coast). Soils along the north side of Reed Canal Road and west of Florida Boulevard are predominately Tuscawilla-Urban land complex, and have been used for urban development. A soils survey map prepared from Volusia County GIS information is provided in Appendix J. DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS At the Project Kickoff Meeting, Judy Grim, Volusia County Road and Bridge, stated that a primary concern about any installation work performed in Reed Canal is the potential raise in the water level above the existing ordinary high water elevation. RS&H team members subsequently met with representatives of the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) and coordinated with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to discuss permitting requirements and associated stormwater drainage issues. Perry Jennings and Gary Haddle of the SJRWMD stated that the trail project would require a standard general permit, and that the impact to the water surface elevation of the Reed Canal as a result of the proposed project will need to be documented. RS&H proposed to use CDM’s model of the Nova Canal Basin which contains the Reed Canal to demonstrate the impact of the proposed project. As the Nova Canal has a known flooding problem, SJRWMD would like to see no rise in water surface elevation from the proposed project. If the canal water surface elevation does rise as a result of this project, then the impacts to upstream properties would need to be assessed. It was
FINAL REPORT
Page 13
also recommended that as part of preliminary engineering the existing drainage conditions and trail design criteria be documented. The RS&H staff then conducted a conference call with Irene Sadowski of the USACE, who regulates Reed Canal. The project may be permitted with a Letter Permit or a Nationwide Permit. Direct dredge or fill impacts would be considered below the Mean High Water (MHW) elevation for the tidally-influenced portion of the canal and below the Ordinary High Water (OHW) elevation for the non-tidally-influenced portion of the canal. Secondary shading impacts could be considered from the overhanging portion of the cantilevered pedestrian trail. The meeting notes from the SJRWMD and the USACOE meetings are provided in Appendix K.
FINAL REPORT
Page 14
4. SIDEWALK/TRAIL CONCEPT PLAN Multiuse Trail Typical Section The City’s application for this project identified a 10-foot wide multiuse trail along the south of if Reed Canal Road from Nova Road to U.S. 1, and an improved 5-foot wide sidewalk along the south side of the road covering the same limits. The minimum width for a two-way multiuse trail is 12 feet, except where there are significant constraints. The City’s standpoint for requesting a 10-foot wide trail is the physical constraint along the south side of Reed Canal Road of the existing guardrail and the proximity of the canal to the edge of roadway pavement. The design concept required a paved surface, able to accommodate various trail users. A boardwalk concept was dismissed by the City and the Volusia TPO as being unaccommodating to all trail users, and requiring excessive maintenance and replacement of the decking material. The design concept developed by the Consultant incorporates a sheet pile wall with a cantilever trail deck, which minimizes disruption of the canal’s stormwater conveyance capacity while ensuring an adequate horizontal width for accommodating various trail users. Several typical section designs were prepared for consideration by City staff which are provided in Appendix D. Each typical section had to provide a vehicular crash barrier between the roadway travel lane and the canal, and each included a sheet pile wall and a cantilever trail section, which would support the requested paved surface. Other characteristics of each typical section are summarized below. Alternative 1 Removal of the existing guardrail Installation of a non-mountable curb between the travel lane and the trail Installation of a crash barrier on the outside (canal side) of the trail A 14-foot wide trail, to provide for horizontal clearance from the crash barrier. Alternative 2 Existing guardrail remains Installation of 54-inch high bicycle railing on both sides of the trail A 14-foot wide trail, to provide for horizontal clearance between the two bicycle railings. Alternative 3 Removal of the existing guardrail Installation of a crash barrier wall on the outside of the vehicular travel lane Installation of a bicycle railing on top of the crash barrier wall
FINAL REPORT
Page 15
Installation of a 54” tall bicycle railing on the outside (canal side) of the trail Installation of barrier wall stormwater inlets and a drainage pipes to convey the roadway drainage to the canal. A 14-foot wide trail, to provide for horizontal clearance from the crash barrier and the bicycle railing.
After consultation with City staff and staff of the Volusia TPO, it was decided that Alternative 1 would be recommended for implementation. A primary constraint of the trail restriction stated by Volusia County and by SJRWMD regarding no changes to the ordinary high water elevation of the canal. The most cost efficient and least intrusive structure for accommodating the proposed 10-foot wide paved multiuse trail is the installation of sheet pile walls with a maximum allowable cantilever over the canal. To minimize impact to the canal’s ordinary high water elevation, the typical section for Alternative was revised to incorporate a 6-foot cantilever section. To accommodate the required vehicular crash barrier on the outside of the trail, the concrete depth of the cantilever section was increased to 10-inches. These elements are shown in the Typical Section Alterative 1 shown in Appendix D.
Alignment The City’s original concept was to provide a multiuse trail along the south side of Reed Canal Road from Nova Road eastward to U.S. 1. As the feasibility study progressed, the Consultant coordinated with FEC Railroad personnel, as well as with the FDOT District 5 Railroad Coordinator. It was recognized that the trail would require a new crossing of the FECRR line on the south side of Reed Canal Road just west of Carmen Drive. Field reviews and coordination efforts revealed that not only was their minimal available horizontal clearance for the trail, but the trail would also require improvements to the existing railroad trestle bridge over the canal. Another concern by FECRR staff was introducing additional pedestrian traffic along the south side of the rail line, which may induce persons to trespass on the trestle bridge. There is an existing sidewalk crossing of the FEC rail line along the north side of Reed Canal Road, and there was concern over providing a second pedestrian crossing. Finally, the potential cost of providing a new pedestrian crossing which requires active crossing gates, relocation of numerous existing utilities and installations, and improvement to the existing trestle bridge made this alignment infeasible for further consideration. FECR provided documentation of their thoughts on a potential new crossing, as provided in Appendix H. It was determined that the multiuse trail would have to cross Reed Canal Road at a location west of the FECRR line. And it was further determined that once located on the
FINAL REPORT
Page 16
north side of the road, the trail should continue along the north side to U.S. 1 due to various factors, including the following: The existing utilities and installations in the southeast quadrant of the U.S. 1 intersection that would have to be relocated The number of trees along the south side that would have to be removed There are no access points from the FECRR line east to U.S. 1 along the south side, versus opportunities for residents of the Riverwood Villages and Bristol Bay along the north side of the road to directly access the trail. The revised alignment for the multiuse trail included two optional locations for crossing Reed Canal Road from the south to the north side. Alternative Alignment 1 has a pedestrian/trail crossing east of the Oak Lea Bridge, and west of Anastasia Drive. This location is also the current location of a school crossing, which is advantageous as drivers and local residents are aware of existing pedestrian crossings. On the north side of Reed Canal Road, the trail becomes a 12-foot wide multiuse trail, crossing Anastasia Drive, and continuing north. A potential right-of-way constraint exists at the Marcel properties (apartment and warehouse) just west of the FECR crossing. As noted in the project site photographs in Appendix A, the location of the existing sidewalk, existing driveways, and a chain-link fence indicates inadequate room for a 12-foot wide trail plus adequate horizontal clearance. As the local agencies do not have roadway right-of-way information, this potential constraint may require a reduction in the width of the trail adjacent to these properties (a distance of approximately 165 feet). At the FECR crossing, the existing active gates, the signal mast arm base, and the traffic signal controller assembly are proposed to be relocated further away from the roadway, to allow the necessary horizontal clearance from the trail. The FECR requirements for the location of the gates requires a 4.75 feet distance from the gate base to the edge of the travel way. The costs for these relocations are included in the project cost estimate. As noted previously in this report, the FDOT has developed conceptual plans for the U.S. 1 intersection improvement, which includes roadway widening and an associated 6-foot wide sidewalk at the back of curb. As the improvements include pavement widening and sidewalk reconfiguration to a point approximately 165 feet west of Banana Cay Drive, the proposed multiuse trail will terminate at this location. The Alignment Concept Maps are provided in Appendix E. Alternative 1 shows the 10foot wide multiuse trail from Nova Road to just east of the Oak Lea bridge. The trail then continues along the north side of Reed Canal Road to the termination point west of Banana Cay Drive. For Alignment Alternative 2, concept maps 7-2 and 8-2 are provided in Appendix E. These maps show the alternate crossing point of Reed Canal Road, just
FINAL REPORT
Page 17
west of the FECR crossing. The alignment concept shown for Alternative 2 is similar to Alternative 1 for sheets 1 through 6, and sheets 9 and 10. For the north sidewalk improvements, the typical section recommends a 6-foot wide sidewalk at the back of new non-mountable curbing. This improvement is shown on the Alternative Alignment Maps. The City staff noted, and we observed during our field visits, that the existing pavement striping for the FECR crossing may need to be re-evaluated to improve the queuing of vehicles. We would also recommend that as part of any preliminary engineering effort for the trail a detailed traffic evaluation of the turning volumes at the Carmen Drive intersection be conducted to assess safety issues associated with projected increases in pedestrian traffic. This report also noted that the existing overhead power distribution poles along the south side of Reed Canal Road would have to be accommodated. City staff stated that they would consider enclosing the power lines within a conduit under the trail, or relocate them underground, but they recognize the associated costs for this option. We have noted that special pavement marking be employed along the trail to define and warn trail users of the presence of these poles. Preliminary engineering of the trail must ensure that the poles do not restrict access for persons with disabilities, that they are easily visible, especially in low light conditions (reference MUTCD Section 9C.03), and permit easy passage for adult tricycles, wheelchairs, and similar non-motorized vehicles. The pole guy wires and their anchor locations will have to be evaluated on a case by case basis as part of the preliminary engineering phase.
FINAL REPORT
Page 18
5. FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY The tables on the following pages provide a preliminary cost estimate for the design and construction of the proposed multiuse trail and the improvements to the existing sidewalk along the north side of the road. Table 1 is for Alignment Alternative 1 (the trail crosses Reed Canal Road near Anastasia Drive), and Table 2 represents Alignment Alternative 2 (trail crossing just west of the FECR line). These cost estimates are to be considered an opinion of probable cost based solely on the results of this feasibility study. The item number and unit of measure are based on the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Basis of Estimate Manual. The unit prices are based on the average costs for each pay item as provided by FDOT. The cost estimate does not include right‐of‐way, underground utility relocation, relocation of overhead utilities and power poles, tree removal or permitting fees that may be associated with the final design phase. The cost estimates for both the multiuse trail and for the 6-foot sidewalk include drainage features such as inlets and pipe. The recommendation to provide a raised curb between the roadway travel lane and the trail and sidewalk implies a closed drainage system in this urban setting. As a result, these drainage features are included, but not double counted, in the cost estimates. The pay items and cost estimates also include required crash barriers, and modifications to existing traffic signals and to existing railroad crossing signals and gates. Cost estimates have also been included as provided by FECR for their engineering services related to any modification of the rail crossings. Cost estimates for the multiuse trail along the south side of the road, and estimates for the sidewalk along the north side were developed for the two alignment alternatives. The total cost for the multi-use trail for Alternative 1 is $5,777,768, and for Alternative 2 is $6,370,573. As this project will likely be implemented in phases, the cost estimates were re-calculated for the following segments: Nova Road to Reed Canal Park Reed Canal Park to Sauls Street Sauls Street to Lantern Drive Lantern Drive to the crossing of Reed Canal Road (Anastasia Dr. for Alternative 1, and just west of the FECR crossing for Alternative 2) Crossing of Reed Canal Road to west of Banana Cay Drive. The table on the following page summarizes those phased cost estimates by the multiuse trail alternative, by phase.
FINAL REPORT
Page 19
Table 1- Cost Estimates by Alternative by Phase Segment/Phase ALTERNATIVE 1 – Crossing of Reed Canal Road at Anastasia Dr. Trail Sidewalk Ph. 1 – Nova Rd through $1,070,050 $84,602 entrance at Reed Canal Park Ph. 2 – Reed Canal Park $1,995,357 $206,763 through Sauls St. Ph. 3 – Sauls St through $1,070,604 $113,513 Lantern Dr. Ph. 4 – Lantern Dr. to Reed $1,293,826 $142,055 Canal Road Crossing Ph. 5 – Reed Canal Road $317,438 Crossing to west of Banana Cay Dr.
ALTERNATIVE 2 – Crossing of Reed Canal Road just west of FECR Crossing Trail Sidewalk
1,955,676
$204,003
$230,988
The detailed cost estimates showing the pay items, quantities, unit costs, and total costs are provided in Tables 2 through 8 on the following pages. To adjust for potential future increases in the project's cost estimate, an annual inflationary factor may be applied. The Florida Department of Transportation provides annual inflation factors for roadway construction costs which may be used as a guideline for this project. The 2012 cost estimates provided in Tables 2 through 8 provide the inflation-adjusted cost estimates based on the most recent FDOT inflationary factors for the years 2013 through 2015.
FINAL REPORT
Page 20
Table 2 - Quantities and Cost Estimates for Alternatives 1 & 2, Phase 1 Segment ALTERNATIVE 1 & 2 / PHASE 1 - NOVA THROUGH PARK ENTRANCE PAY ITEM NO.
101-1 102-1 104-10-3 104-11 110-1-1 125-1 425-1-361 430-174-118 430-174-124 430-174-130 455-133-3 460-70-2 520-1-10 0521 5 1 522-2 522-2 527-1 536-73 561-1 649-34-000 670-5520 700-20-11 711-11-123 N/A N/A N/A
101-1 102-1 104-10-3 110-1-1 425-1-361 430-174-118 430-174-124 430-174-130 520-1-10 522-1 522-2 527-1 570-1-2 700-20-11 711-11-123
ITEM DESCRIPTION MULTIUSE TRAIL ELEMENTS MOBILIZATION MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC SEDIMENT BARRIER FLOATING TURBIDITY BARRIER CLEARING AND GRUBBING EXCAVATION FOR STRUCTURES INLETS, CURB, TYPE P-6, <10' PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 18"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 24"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 30"SD SHEET PILING STEEL, F&I PERMANENT ALUMINUM BULLET RAILINGS, DOUBLE RAIL CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER, TYPE F CONCRETE TRAFFIC RAILING, BRIDGE 32" F SHAPE CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 7" THICK CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 10" THICK DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE GUARDRAIL REMOVAL COATING EXISTING STRUCTURAL STEEL MAST ARM RELOCATE TRAFFIC CONTROLLER ASMBLY RELOCATE SIGN, SINGLE POST (LESS THAN 12 SF) 12" WHITE SOLID STRIPE (THERMOPLASTIC) RR CROSSING GATE RELOCATE (CONTINGENCY) "TIDEFLEX" CHECK VALVES FECR PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING MULTIUSE TRAIL TOTAL NORTH SIDEWALK ELEMENTS MOBILIZATION MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC SEDIMENT BARRIER CLEARING AND GRUBBING INLETS, CURB, TYPE P-6, <10' PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 18"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 24"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 30"SD CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER, TYPE F CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 4" THICK CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 6" THICK DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE PERFORMANCE TURF, SOD SIGN, SINGLE POST (LESS THAN 12 SF) 12" WHITE SOLID STRIPE (THERMOPLASTIC) NORTH SIDEWALK TOTAL
UNIT
BASE QTY
BASE UNIT COST
LS LS LF LF AC CY EA
1 1 1114 1114 0.10 138 3
LF
1114 $
LF
104 $
LF SF LF LF
22 $ 27850 $ 1114 1114 $
LF SY SY EA LF LS EA EA AS LF EA EA LS
LS LS LF AC EA
1114 28.88148 61.88889 3 1114 1 0 0 8 178 0 3 0
1 1 774 0.07 2
$ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 0.90 $ 6.38 $ 5,132.71 $ 24.65 $ 3,668.74
TOTAL COST
$ $ $ $ $ $ $
10,000.00 10,000.00 1,002.60 7,107.32 525.05 3,396.22 11,006.22
46.21
$
51,477.94
143.67
$
14,941.68
315.22 28.97 $25.04 13.92
$ $ $ $
6,934.84 806,814.50 27,894.56 15,506.88
$ 60.65 $ 44.31 $ 59.38 $ 332.44 $ 1.43 $ 2,296.82 $ 14,239.90 $ 905.62 $249.72 $ 1.90 $ 25,000.00 $ 7,900.00 $ 15,000.00
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
67,564.10 1,279.68 3,675.18 997.32 1,593.02 2,296.82 1,997.76 338.20 23,700.00 -
$
1,070,050.00
$ $ $ $ $
5,000.00 5,000.00 696.60 364.80 7,337.48
$ $ $ $
5,000.00 5,000.00 0.90 5,132.71 $3,668.74
LF
774 $
46.21
$
35,766.54
LF
72 $
143.67
$
10,344.24
315.22 13.92 26.05 36.77 332.44 $1.77 $249.72 $1.90
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
10,774.08 5,839.89 1,164.38 997.32 20.13 749.16 547.20 84,602.00
LF LF SY SY EA SY AS LF
0 774 224.18 31.66667 3 11.371 3 288
$ $ $ $ $
MULTIUSE TRAIL ANNUAL INFLATION COSTS FDOT Inflation-Adjusted Estimate Year 1 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2013) Year 2 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2014) Year 3 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2015)
Inflation PDC Factor Multiplier 3.3% 1.033 3.3% 1.067 3.3% 1.102
Adjusted Cost Estimate $ 1,105,362.00 $ 1,141,743.00 $ 1,179,195.00
Inflation PDC Factor Multiplier 3.3% 1.033 3.3% 1.067 3.3% 1.102
Adjusted Cost Estimate $ 87,394.00 $ 90,270.00 $ 93,231.00
SIDEWALK ANNUAL INFLATION COSTS FDOT Inflation-Adjusted Estimate Year 1 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2013) Year 2 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2014) Year 3 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2015)
FINAL REPORT
Page 21
Table 3 - Quantities and Cost Estimates for Alternatives 1 & 2, Phase 2 Segment ALTERNATIVE 1 & 2 / PHASE 2 - PARK ENTRANCE THROUGH SAULS ST PAY ITEM NO.
101-1 102-1 104-10-3 104-11 110-1-1 125-1 425-1-361 430-174-118 430-174-124 430-174-130 455-133-3 460-70-2 520-1-10 0521 5 1 522-2 522-2 527-1 536-73 561-1 649-34-000 670-5520 700-20-11 711-11-123 N/A N/A N/A
101-1 102-1 104-10-3 110-1-1 425-1-361 430-174-118 430-174-124 430-174-130 520-1-10 522-1 522-2 527-1 570-1-2 700-20-11 711-11-123
ITEM DESCRIPTION MULTIUSE TRAIL ELEMENTS MOBILIZATION MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC SEDIMENT BARRIER FLOATING TURBIDITY BARRIER CLEARING AND GRUBBING EXCAVATION FOR STRUCTURES INLETS, CURB, TYPE P-6, <10' PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 18"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 24"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 30"SD SHEET PILING STEEL, F&I PERMANENT ALUMINUM BULLET RAILINGS, DOUBLE RAIL CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER, TYPE F CONCRETE TRAFFIC RAILING, BRIDGE 32" F SHAPE CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 7" THICK CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 10" THICK DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE GUARDRAIL REMOVAL COATING EXISTING STRUCTURAL STEEL MAST ARM RELOCATE TRAFFIC CONTROLLER ASMBLY RELOCATE SIGN, SINGLE POST (LESS THAN 12 SF) 12" WHITE SOLID STRIPE (THERMOPLASTIC) RR CROSSING GATE RELOCATE (CONTINGENCY) "TIDEFLEX" CHECK VALVES FECR PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING MULTIUSE TRAIL TOTAL NORTH SIDEWALK ELEMENTS MOBILIZATION MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC SEDIMENT BARRIER CLEARING AND GRUBBING INLETS, CURB, TYPE P-6, <10' PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 18"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 24"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 30"SD CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER, TYPE F CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 4" THICK CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 6" THICK DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE PERFORMANCE TURF, SOD SIGN, SINGLE POST (LESS THAN 12 SF) 12" WHITE SOLID STRIPE (THERMOPLASTIC) NORTH SIDEWALK TOTAL
UNIT
BASE QTY
BASE UNIT COST
LS LS LF LF AC CY EA
1 1 2135 2135 0.20 264 3
LF
2135 $
LF
199 $
LF SF LF LF
43 $ 53375 $ 2135 2135 $
LF SY SY EA LF LS EA EA AS LF EA EA LS
2135 55.35185 118.6111 2 2135 1 0 0 8 178 0 3 0
$ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 0.90 $ 6.38 $ 5,132.71 $ 24.65 $ 3,668.74
TOTAL COST
$ $ $ $ $ $ $
10,000.00 10,000.00 1,921.50 13,621.30 1,006.28 6,510.34 11,006.22
46.21
$
98,658.35
143.67
$
28,590.33
315.22 28.97 $25.04 13.92
$ $ $ $
13,554.46 1,546,273.75 53,460.40 29,719.20
$ 60.65 $ 44.31 $ 59.38 $ 332.44 $ 1.43 $ 2,296.82 $ 14,239.90 $ 905.62 $249.72 $ 1.90 $ 25,000.00 $ 7,900.00 $ 15,000.00
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
129,487.75 2,452.52 7,043.55 664.88 3,053.05 2,296.82 1,997.76 338.20 23,700.00 -
$
1,995,357.00
$ $ $ $ $
5,000.00 5,000.00 1,921.50 1,006.28 22,012.44
LS LS LF AC EA
1 1 2135 0.20 6
LF
2135 $
46.21
$
98,658.35
LF
199 $
143.67
$
28,590.33
315.22 13.92 26.05 36.77 332.44 $1.77 $249.72 $1.90
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
29,719.20 11,691.24 1,164.38 664.88 37.80 749.16 547.20 206,763.00
LF LF SY SY EA SY AS LF
0 2135 448.8 31.66667 2 21.354 3 288
$ $ $ $
$ $ $ $ $
5,000.00 5,000.00 0.90 5,132.71 $3,668.74
MULTIUSE TRAIL ANNUAL INFLATION COSTS FDOT Inflation-Adjusted Estimate Year 1 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2013) Year 2 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2014) Year 3 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2015)
Inflation PDC Factor Multiplier 3.3% 1.033 3.3% 1.067 3.3% 1.102
Adjusted Cost Estimate $ 2,061,204.00 $ 2,129,046.00 $ 2,198,883.00
Inflation PDC Factor Multiplier 3.3% 1.033 3.3% 1.067 3.3% 1.102
Adjusted Cost Estimate $ 213,586.00 $ 220,616.00 $ 227,853.00
SIDEWALK ANNUAL INFLATION COSTS FDOT Inflation-Adjusted Estimate Year 1 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2013) Year 2 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2014) Year 3 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2015)
FINAL REPORT
Page 22
Table 4 - Quantities and Cost Estimates for Alternatives 1 & 2, Phase 3 Segment ALTERNATIVE 1 & 2 / PHASE 3 - SAULS STREET THROUGH LANTERN DRIVE PAY ITEM NO.
101-1 102-1 104-10-3 104-11 110-1-1 125-1 425-1-361 430-174-118 430-174-124 430-174-130 455-133-3 460-70-2 520-1-10 0521 5 1 522-2 522-2 527-1 536-73 561-1 649-34-000 670-5520 700-20-11 711-11-123 N/A N/A N/A
101-1 102-1 104-10-3 110-1-1 425-1-361 430-174-118 430-174-124 430-174-130 520-1-10 522-1 522-2 527-1 570-1-2 700-20-11 711-11-123
ITEM DESCRIPTION MULTIUSE TRAIL ELEMENTS MOBILIZATION MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC SEDIMENT BARRIER FLOATING TURBIDITY BARRIER CLEARING AND GRUBBING EXCAVATION FOR STRUCTURES INLETS, CURB, TYPE P-6, <10' PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 18"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 24"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 30"SD SHEET PILING STEEL, F&I PERMANENT ALUMINUM BULLET RAILINGS, DOUBLE RAIL CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER, TYPE F CONCRETE TRAFFIC RAILING, BRIDGE 32" F SHAPE CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 7" THICK CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 10" THICK DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE GUARDRAIL REMOVAL COATING EXISTING STRUCTURAL STEEL MAST ARM RELOCATE TRAFFIC CONTROLLER ASMBLY RELOCATE SIGN, SINGLE POST (LESS THAN 12 SF) 12" WHITE SOLID STRIPE (THERMOPLASTIC) RR CROSSING GATE RELOCATE (CONTINGENCY) "TIDEFLEX" CHECK VALVES FECR PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING MULTIUSE TRAIL TOTAL NORTH SIDEWALK ELEMENTS MOBILIZATION MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC SEDIMENT BARRIER CLEARING AND GRUBBING INLETS, CURB, TYPE P-6, <10' PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 18"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 24"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 30"SD CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER, TYPE F CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 4" THICK CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 6" THICK DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE PERFORMANCE TURF, SOD SIGN, SINGLE POST (LESS THAN 12 SF) 12" WHITE SOLID STRIPE (THERMOPLASTIC) NORTH SIDEWALK TOTAL
UNIT
BASE QTY
BASE UNIT COST
LS LS LF LF AC CY EA
1 1 1115 1115 0.10 138 3
LF
1115 $
LF
104 $
LF SF LF LF
22 $ 27875 $ 1115 1115 $
LF SY SY EA LF LS EA EA AS LF EA EA LS
1115 28.90741 61.94444 2 1115 1 0 0 8 178 0 3 0
TOTAL COST
$ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 0.90 $ 6.38 $ 5,132.71 $ 24.65 $ 3,668.74
$ $ $ $ $ $ $
10,000.00 10,000.00 1,003.50 7,113.70 525.53 3,398.96 11,006.22
46.21
$
51,524.15
143.67
$
14,941.68
315.22 28.97 $25.04 13.92
$ $ $ $
6,934.84 807,538.75 27,919.60 15,520.80
$ 60.65 $ 44.31 $ 59.38 $ 332.44 $ 1.43 $ 2,296.82 $ 14,239.90 $ 905.62 $249.72 $ 1.90 $ 25,000.00 $ 7,900.00 $ 15,000.00
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
67,624.75 1,280.83 3,678.48 664.88 1,594.45 2,296.82 1,997.76 338.20 23,700.00 -
$
1,070,604.00
$ $ $ $ $
5,000.00 5,000.00 1,003.50 525.53 11,006.22
LS LS LF AC EA
1 1 1115 0.10 3
LF
1115 $
46.21
$
51,524.15
LF
104 $
143.67
$
14,941.68
315.22 13.92 26.05 36.77 332.44 $1.77 $249.72 $1.90
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
15,520.80 5,845.62 1,164.38 664.88 20.14 749.16 547.20 113,513.00
LF LF SY SY EA SY AS LF
0 1115 224.4 31.66667 2 11.381 3 288
$ $ $ $
$ $ $ $ $
5,000.00 5,000.00 0.90 5,132.71 $3,668.74
MULTIUSE TRAIL ANNUAL INFLATION COSTS FDOT Inflation-Adjusted Estimate Year 1 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2013) Year 2 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2014) Year 3 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2015)
Inflation PDC Factor Multiplier 3.3% 1.033 3.3% 1.067 3.3% 1.102
Adjusted Cost Estimate $ 1,105,934.00 $ 1,142,334.00 $ 1,179,806.00
Inflation PDC Factor Multiplier 3.3% 1.033 3.3% 1.067 3.3% 1.102
Adjusted Cost Estimate $ 117,259.00 $ 121,118.00 $ 125,091.00
SIDEWALK ANNUAL INFLATION COSTS FDOT Inflation-Adjusted Estimate Year 1 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2013) Year 2 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2014) Year 3 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2015)
FINAL REPORT
Page 23
Table 5 - Quantities and Cost Estimates for Alternative 1, Phase 4 Segment ALTERNATIVE 1 / PHASE 4 - LANTERN DRIVE TO ANASTASIA DRIVE PAY ITEM NO.
101-1 102-1 104-10-3 104-11 110-1-1 125-1 425-1-361 430-174-118 430-174-124 430-174-130 455-133-3 460-70-2 520-1-10 0521 5 1 522-2 522-2 527-1 536-73 561-1 649-34-000 670-5520 700-20-11 711-11-123 N/A N/A N/A
101-1 102-1 104-10-3 110-1-1 425-1-361 430-174-118 430-174-124 430-174-130 520-1-10 522-1 522-2 527-1 570-1-2 700-20-11 711-11-123
ITEM DESCRIPTION MULTIUSE TRAIL ELEMENTS MOBILIZATION MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC SEDIMENT BARRIER FLOATING TURBIDITY BARRIER CLEARING AND GRUBBING EXCAVATION FOR STRUCTURES INLETS, CURB, TYPE P-6, <10' PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 18"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 24"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 30"SD SHEET PILING STEEL, F&I PERMANENT ALUMINUM BULLET RAILINGS, DOUBLE RAIL CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER, TYPE F CONCRETE TRAFFIC RAILING, BRIDGE 32" F SHAPE CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 7" THICK CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 10" THICK DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE GUARDRAIL REMOVAL COATING EXISTING STRUCTURAL STEEL MAST ARM RELOCATE TRAFFIC CONTROLLER ASMBLY RELOCATE SIGN, SINGLE POST (LESS THAN 12 SF) 12" WHITE SOLID STRIPE (THERMOPLASTIC) RR CROSSING GATE RELOCATE (CONTINGENCY) "TIDEFLEX" CHECK VALVES FECR PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING MULTIUSE TRAIL TOTAL NORTH SIDEWALK ELEMENTS MOBILIZATION MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC SEDIMENT BARRIER CLEARING AND GRUBBING INLETS, CURB, TYPE P-6, <10' PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 18"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 24"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 30"SD CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER, TYPE F CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 4" THICK CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 6" THICK DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE PERFORMANCE TURF, SOD SIGN, SINGLE POST (LESS THAN 12 SF) 12" WHITE SOLID STRIPE (THERMOPLASTIC) NORTH SIDEWALK TOTAL
UNIT
BASE QTY
BASE UNIT COST
LS LS LF LF AC CY EA
1 1 1355 1355 0.12 168 4
LF
1355 $
LF
126 $
LF SF LF LF
27 $ 33875 $ 1355 1355 $
LF SY SY EA LF LS EA EA AS LF EA EA LS
1355 35.12963 75.27778 2 1355 1 0 0 16 178 0 3 0
TOTAL COST
$ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 0.90 $ 6.38 $ 5,132.71 $ 24.65 $ 3,668.74
$ $ $ $ $ $ $
10,000.00 10,000.00 1,219.50 8,644.90 638.64 4,130.24 14,674.96
46.21
$
62,614.55
143.67
$
18,102.42
315.22 28.97 $25.04 13.92
$ $ $ $
8,510.94 981,358.75 33,929.20 18,861.60
$ 60.65 $ 44.31 $ 59.38 $ 332.44 $ 1.43 $ 2,296.82 $ 14,239.90 $ 905.62 $249.72 $ 1.90 $ 25,000.00 $ 7,900.00 $ 15,000.00
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
82,180.75 1,556.52 4,470.26 664.88 1,937.65 2,296.82 3,995.52 338.20 23,700.00 -
$
1,293,826.00
$ $ $ $ $
5,000.00 5,000.00 1,219.50 638.64 14,674.96
LS LS LF AC EA
1 1 1355 0.12 4
LF
1355 $
46.21
$
62,614.55
LF
126 $
143.67
$
18,102.42
315.22 13.92 26.05 36.77 332.44 $1.77 $249.72 $1.90
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
18,861.60 7,221.06 1,164.38 3,989.28 24.30 2,996.64 547.20 142,055.00
LF LF SY SY EA SY AS LF
0 1355 277.2 31.66667 12 13.727 12 288
$ $ $ $
$ $ $ $ $
5,000.00 5,000.00 0.90 5,132.71 $3,668.74
MULTIUSE TRAIL ANNUAL INFLATION COSTS FDOT Inflation-Adjusted Estimate Year 1 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2013) Year 2 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2014) Year 3 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2015)
Inflation PDC Factor Multiplier 3.3% 1.033 3.3% 1.067 3.3% 1.102
Adjusted Cost Estimate $ 1,336,522.00 $ 1,380,512.00 $ 1,425,796.00
Inflation PDC Factor Multiplier 3.3% 1.033 3.3% 1.067 3.3% 1.102
Adjusted Cost Estimate $ 146,743.00 $ 151,573.00 $ 156,545.00
SIDEWALK ANNUAL INFLATION COSTS FDOT Inflation-Adjusted Estimate Year 1 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2013) Year 2 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2014) Year 3 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2015)
FINAL REPORT
Page 24
Table 6 - Quantities and Cost Estimates for Alternative 1, Phase 5 Segment ALTERNATIVE 1 / PHASE 5 - ANASTASIA DRIVE TO W. OF BANANA CAY DRIVE PAY ITEM NO.
101-1 102-1 104-10-3 104-11 110-1-1 125-1 425-1-361 430-174-118 430-174-124 430-174-130 455-133-3 460-70-2 520-1-10 0521 5 1 160-4 285-704 334-1-12 522-2 522-2 527-1 536-73 561-1 649-34-000 670-5520 700-20-11 711-11-123 N/A N/A N/A
101-1 102-1 104-10-3 110-1-1 425-1-361 430-174-118 430-174-124 430-174-130 520-1-10 522-1 522-2 527-1 570-1-2 700-20-11 711-11-123
ITEM DESCRIPTION MULTIUSE TRAIL ELEMENTS MOBILIZATION MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC SEDIMENT BARRIER FLOATING TURBIDITY BARRIER CLEARING AND GRUBBING EXCAVATION FOR STRUCTURES INLETS, CURB, TYPE P-6, <10' PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 18"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 24"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 30"SD SHEET PILING STEEL, F&I PERMANENT ALUMINUM BULLET RAILINGS, DOUBLE RAIL CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER, TYPE F CONCRETE TRAFFIC RAILING, BRIDGE 32" F SHAPE STABILIZATION, TYPE "B" (12") (MIN LBR 40) BASE, OPTIONAL GROUP 4 SUPERPAVE ASPHALTIC CONC, TRAFFIC B CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 7" THICK CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 10" THICK DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE GUARDRAIL REMOVAL COATING EXISTING STRUCTURAL STEEL MAST ARM RELOCATE TRAFFIC CONTROLLER ASMBLY RELOCATE SIGN, SINGLE POST (LESS THAN 12 SF) 12" WHITE SOLID STRIPE (THERMOPLASTIC) RR CROSSING GATE RELOCATE (CONTINGENCY) "TIDEFLEX" CHECK VALVES FECR PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING MULTIUSE TRAIL TOTAL NORTH SIDEWALK ELEMENTS MOBILIZATION MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC SEDIMENT BARRIER CLEARING AND GRUBBING INLETS, CURB, TYPE P-6, <10' PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 18"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 24"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 30"SD CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER, TYPE F CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 4" THICK CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 6" THICK DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE PERFORMANCE TURF, SOD SIGN, SINGLE POST (LESS THAN 12 SF) 12" WHITE SOLID STRIPE (THERMOPLASTIC) NORTH SIDEWALK TOTAL
UNIT
BASE QTY
BASE UNIT COST
LS LS LF LF AC CY EA
1 1 1476 1476 0.14 183 4
LF
1476 $
LF LF SF LF LF LF SY SY TN SY SY EA LF LS EA EA AS LF EA EA LS
LS LS LF AC EA
TOTAL COST
$ $ $ $ $ $ $
10,000.00 10,000.00 1,328.40 9,416.88 695.67 4,502.73 14,674.96
46.21
$
68,205.96
138 $
143.67
$
19,826.46
30 $ 0 $ 0 1476 $
315.22 28.97 $25.04 13.92
$ $ $ $
9,456.60 20,545.92
60.65 3.03 8.54 80.17 44.31 59.38 332.44 1.43 2,296.82 14,239.90 905.62 $249.72 1.90 25,000.00 7,900.00 15,000.00
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
7,950.72 16,806.72 9,860.91 3,989.28 14,239.90 905.62 5,993.28 338.20 50,000.00 23,700.00 15,000.00
$
317,438.00
0 2,624 1,968 123 0 0 12 0 0 1 1 24 178 2 3 1
0 0 0 0.00 0
$ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 0.90 $ 6.38 $ 5,132.71 $ 24.65 $ 3,668.74
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
$ $ $ $
5,000.00 5,000.00 0.90 5,132.71 $3,668.74
$ $ $ $ $
-
LF
0 $
46.21
$
-
LF
0 $
143.67
$
-
315.22 13.92 26.05 36.77 332.44 $1.77 $249.72 $1.90
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
-
LF LF SY SY EA SY AS LF
0 0 0 0 0 0.000 0 0
$ $ $ $ $
MULTIUSE TRAIL ANNUAL INFLATION COSTS FDOT Inflation-Adjusted Estimate Year 1 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2013) Year 2 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2014) Year 3 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2015)
Inflation PDC Factor Multiplier 3.3% 1.033 3.3% 1.067 3.3% 1.102
Adjusted Cost Estimate $ 327,913.00 $ 338,706.00 $ 349,817.00
Inflation PDC Factor Multiplier 3.3% 1.033 3.3% 1.067 3.3% 1.102
Adjusted Cost Estimate $ $ $
SIDEWALK ANNUAL INFLATION COSTS FDOT Inflation-Adjusted Estimate Year 1 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2013) Year 2 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2014) Year 3 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2015)
FINAL REPORT
-
Page 25
Table 7 - Quantities and Cost Estimates for Alternative 2, Phase 4 Segment ALTERNATIVE 2 / PHASE 4 - LANTERN DRIVE TO FECR X-ING PAY ITEM NO.
101-1 102-1 104-10-3 104-11 110-1-1 125-1 425-1-361 430-174-118 430-174-124 430-174-130 455-133-3 460-70-2 520-1-10 0521 5 1 522-2 522-2 527-1 536-73 561-1 649-34-000 670-5520 700-20-11 711-11-123 N/A N/A N/A
101-1 102-1 104-10-3 110-1-1 425-1-361 430-174-118 430-174-124 430-174-130 520-1-10 522-1 522-2 527-1 570-1-2 700-20-11 711-11-123
ITEM DESCRIPTION MULTIUSE TRAIL ELEMENTS MOBILIZATION MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC SEDIMENT BARRIER FLOATING TURBIDITY BARRIER CLEARING AND GRUBBING EXCAVATION FOR STRUCTURES INLETS, CURB, TYPE P-6, <10' PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 18"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 24"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 30"SD SHEET PILING STEEL, F&I PERMANENT ALUMINUM BULLET RAILINGS, DOUBLE RAIL CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER, TYPE F CONCRETE TRAFFIC RAILING, BRIDGE 32" F SHAPE CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 7" THICK CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 10" THICK DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE GUARDRAIL REMOVAL COATING EXISTING STRUCTURAL STEEL MAST ARM RELOCATE TRAFFIC CONTROLLER ASMBLY RELOCATE SIGN, SINGLE POST (LESS THAN 12 SF) 12" WHITE SOLID STRIPE (THERMOPLASTIC) RR CROSSING GATE RELOCATE (CONTINGENCY) "TIDEFLEX" CHECK VALVES FECR PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING MULTIUSE TRAIL TOTAL NORTH SIDEWALK ELEMENTS MOBILIZATION MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC SEDIMENT BARRIER CLEARING AND GRUBBING INLETS, CURB, TYPE P-6, <10' PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 18"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 24"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 30"SD CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER, TYPE F CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 4" THICK CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 6" THICK DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE PERFORMANCE TURF, SOD SIGN, SINGLE POST (LESS THAN 12 SF) 12" WHITE SOLID STRIPE (THERMOPLASTIC) NORTH SIDEWALK TOTAL
UNIT
BASE QTY
BASE UNIT COST
LS LS LF LF AC CY EA
1 1 2076 2076 0.19 257 6
LF
2076 $
LF
194 $
LF SF LF LF
42 $ 51900 $ 2076 2076 $
LF SY SY EA LF LS EA EA AS LF EA EA LS
2076 53.82222 115.3333 4 2076 1 0 0 16 178 0 3 0
TOTAL COST
$ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 0.90 $ 6.38 $ 5,132.71 $ 24.65 $ 3,668.74
$ $ $ $ $ $ $
10,000.00 10,000.00 1,868.40 13,244.88 978.47 6,332.31 22,012.44
46.21
$
95,931.96
143.67
$
27,871.98
315.22 28.97 $25.04 13.92
$ $ $ $
13,239.24 1,503,543.00 51,983.04 28,897.92
$ 60.65 $ 44.31 $ 59.38 $ 332.44 $ 1.43 $ 2,296.82 $ 14,239.90 $ 905.62 $249.72 $ 1.90 $ 25,000.00 $ 7,900.00 $ 15,000.00
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
125,909.40 2,384.75 6,848.90 1,329.76 2,968.68 2,296.82 3,995.52 338.20 23,700.00 -
$
1,955,676.00
$ $ $ $ $
5,000.00 5,000.00 1,868.40 978.47 22,012.44
LS LS LF AC EA
1 1 2076 0.19 6
LF
2076 $
46.21
$
95,931.96
LF
194 $
143.67
$
27,871.98
315.22 13.92 26.05 36.77 332.44 $1.77 $249.72 $1.90
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
28,897.92 7,221.06 1,164.38 3,989.28 24.30 3,496.08 547.20 204,003.00
LF LF SY SY EA SY AS LF
0 2076 277.2 31.66667 12 13.727 14 288
$ $ $ $
$ $ $ $ $
5,000.00 5,000.00 0.90 5,132.71 $3,668.74
MULTIUSE TRAIL ANNUAL INFLATION COSTS FDOT Inflation-Adjusted Estimate Year 1 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2013) Year 2 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2014) Year 3 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2015)
Inflation PDC Factor Multiplier 3.3% 1.033 3.3% 1.067 3.3% 1.102
Adjusted Cost Estimate $ 2,020,213.00 $ 2,086,706.00 $ 2,155,155.00
Inflation PDC Factor Multiplier 3.3% 1.033 3.3% 1.067 3.3% 1.102
Adjusted Cost Estimate $ 210,735.00 $ 217,671.00 $ 224,811.00
SIDEWALK ANNUAL INFLATION COSTS FDOT Inflation-Adjusted Estimate Year 1 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2013) Year 2 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2014) Year 3 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2015)
FINAL REPORT
Page 26
Table 8 - Quantities and Cost Estimates for Alternative 2, Phase 5 Segment ALTERNATIVE 2/ PHASE 5 - FECR X-ING TO W. OF BANANA CAY DRIVE PAY ITEM NO.
101-1 102-1 104-10-3 104-11 110-1-1 125-1 425-1-361 430-174-118 430-174-124 430-174-130 455-133-3 460-70-2 520-1-10 0521 5 1 160-4 285-704 334-1-12 522-2 522-2 527-1 536-73 561-1 649-34-000 670-5520 700-20-11 711-11-123 N/A N/A N/A
101-1 102-1 104-10-3 110-1-1 425-1-361 430-174-118 430-174-124 430-174-130 520-1-10 522-1 522-2 527-1 570-1-2 700-20-11 711-11-123
ITEM DESCRIPTION MULTIUSE TRAIL ELEMENTS MOBILIZATION MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC SEDIMENT BARRIER FLOATING TURBIDITY BARRIER CLEARING AND GRUBBING EXCAVATION FOR STRUCTURES INLETS, CURB, TYPE P-6, <10' PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 18"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 24"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 30"SD SHEET PILING STEEL, F&I PERMANENT ALUMINUM BULLET RAILINGS, DOUBLE RAIL CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER, TYPE F CONCRETE TRAFFIC RAILING, BRIDGE 32" F SHAPE STABILIZATION, TYPE "B" (12") (MIN LBR 40) BASE, OPTIONAL GROUP 4 SUPERPAVE ASPHALTIC CONC, TRAFFIC B CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 7" THICK CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 10" THICK DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE GUARDRAIL REMOVAL COATING EXISTING STRUCTURAL STEEL MAST ARM RELOCATE TRAFFIC CONTROLLER ASMBLY RELOCATE SIGN, SINGLE POST (LESS THAN 12 SF) 12" WHITE SOLID STRIPE (THERMOPLASTIC) RR CROSSING GATE RELOCATE (CONTINGENCY) "TIDEFLEX" CHECK VALVES FECR PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING MULTIUSE TRAIL TOTAL NORTH SIDEWALK ELEMENTS MOBILIZATION MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC SEDIMENT BARRIER CLEARING AND GRUBBING INLETS, CURB, TYPE P-6, <10' PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 18"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 24"SD PIPE CULVERT, OPTIONAL MATERIAL, ROUND, 30"SD CONCRETE CURB & GUTTER, TYPE F CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 4" THICK CONCRETE SIDEWALK, 6" THICK DETECTABLE WARNING SURFACE PERFORMANCE TURF, SOD SIGN, SINGLE POST (LESS THAN 12 SF) 12" WHITE SOLID STRIPE (THERMOPLASTIC) NORTH SIDEWALK TOTAL
UNIT
LS LS LF LF AC CY EA
BASE QTY
BASE UNIT COST
1 1 755 755 0.07 95 2
TOTAL COST
$ 10,000.00 $ 10,000.00 $ 0.90 $ 6.38 $ 5,132.71 $ 24.65 $ 3,668.74
$ $ $ $ $ $ $
10,000.00 10,000.00 679.50 4,816.90 355.85 2,341.75 7,337.48
LF
755 $
46.21
$
34,888.55
LF
70 $
143.67
$
10,056.90
LF SF LF LF
30 $ 0 $ 0 755 $
315.22 28.97 $25.04 13.92
$ $ $ $
9,456.60 10,509.60
60.65 3.03 8.54 80.17 44.31 59.38 332.44 1.43 2,296.82 14,239.90 905.62 $249.72 1.90 25,000.00 7,900.00 15,000.00
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
4,066.93 8,596.93 5,044.03 2,659.52 14,239.90 905.62 5,993.28 338.20 50,000.00 23,700.00 15,000.00
$
230,988.00
LF SY SY TN SY SY EA LF LS EA EA AS LF EA EA LS
LS LS LF AC EA
0 1,342 1,007 63 0 0 8 0 0 1 1 24 178 2 3 1
0 0 0 0.00 0
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
$ $ $ $
5,000.00 5,000.00 0.90 5,132.71 $3,668.74
$ $ $ $ $
-
LF
0 $
46.21
$
-
LF
0 $
143.67
$
-
315.22 13.92 26.05 36.77 332.44 $1.77 $249.72 $1.90
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
-
LF LF SY SY EA SY AS LF
0 0 0 0 0 0.000 0 0
$ $ $ $ $
MULTIUSE TRAIL ANNUAL INFLATION COSTS FDOT Inflation-Adjusted Estimate Year 1 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2013) Year 2 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2014) Year 3 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2015)
Inflation PDC Factor Multiplier 3.3% 1.033 3.3% 1.067 3.3% 1.102
Adjusted Cost Estimate $ 238,611.00 $ 246,464.00 $ 254,549.00
Inflation PDC Factor Multiplier 3.3% 1.033 3.3% 1.067 3.3% 1.102
Adjusted Cost Estimate $ $ $
SIDEWALK ANNUAL INFLATION COSTS FDOT Inflation-Adjusted Estimate Year 1 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2013) Year 2 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2014) Year 3 Inflation-adjusted Estimate (2015)
FINAL REPORT
-
Page 27
APPENDIX A PROJECT SITE PHOTOS
PHOTO 1 Nova Road approach, south side of Reed Canal Road, facing west
PHOTO 2 Nova Road tie-in point for trail, facing west
PHOTO 4 Reed Canal Park bridge, facing west PHOTO 3 EB approach to Reed Canal Park bridge, facing west
PHOTO 5 Reed Canal Park bridge, facing east
PHOTO 7 Sauls Street bridge, facing south, showing pedestrian path
PHOTO 6 Reed Canal Park bridge approach from west, facing east
PHOTO 8 Sauls Street bridge approach, facing east
PHOTO 9 FECR trestle bridge at Reed Canal Road crossing, facing south
PHOTO 11 U.S. 1 approach, south side of Reed Canal Road, facing east
PHOTO 10 FECR crossing, south side of Reed Canal Road, facing west
PHOTO 12 U.S. 1 bridge, sewer pipe, guardrail, and signal installations in SE quadrant of intersection, facing north
PHOTO 13 Existing sidewalk and fence along Marcel properties, north side of Reed Canal Road, facing east
PHOTO 14 Existing driveway and sidewalk along Marcel Apartments, north side of Reed Canal Road, facing west
PHOTO 15 FECR pedestrian crossing approach, north side of Reed Canal Road, facing east
PHOTO 16 FECR pedestrian crossing approach, north side of Reed Canal Road, facing west
APPENDIX B OAK LEA BRIDGE PLAN SHEETS
APPENDIX C FDOT U.S.1 INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS PLAN SHEETS
APPENDIX D PROPOSED TYPICAL SECTIONS
APPENDIX E CONCEPT PLAN SHEETS ON AERIALS
Alignment 1 Map Series
Alignment 2 Maps (Only Changes are to Map Sheets 7 and 8)
APPENDIX F ROADWAY CROSSING DETAILS
APPENDIX G TIDEFLEX® VALVE INFORMATION
Kern, Greg From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments:
Patrick Mangold [
[email protected]] Monday, January 30, 2012 2:19 PM Kern, Greg Fwd: Re: Tideflex Check Valve request 300_CM_pr.pdf; 300_TF.pdf;
[email protected]
Greg, See below for pricing. Let me know if you need any more information. Thanks for letting me stop by. Patrick ---------- Forwarded message ---------From: "Girard Mitchell"
Date: Jan 30, 2012 12:39 PM Subject: Re: Tideflex Check Valve request To: "Patrick Mangold" Cc: "Tim Dempsey" Duckbill Ends Vertical - TF-1 has a flat bottom design. TF-2 has a concentric flare. The 35" OD valve is built on a 30" mandrel Checkmate has a lower headloss Option 1 13 qty - TF-1 for 30" OD HDPE (35.10" OD) $9,984.00 Each Curved Bill End - Added Sealing Neoprene Elastomer 304SS Band Clamp Option 2 13 qty - TF-2 for 30" OD HDPE (35.10" OD) $7,900.00 Each Straight Bill End Neoprene Elastomer 304SS Band Clamp UNIT ADDER: Curved Bill End $1,400.00 Each Option 3 13 qty - Tideflex CheckMate Inline (30" Pipe ID) $8,400.00 Each Neoprene Elastomer 304SS Band Clamp Delivery: 8-10 wks FFA Net 30 Days
1
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 9:30 AM, Patrick Mangold wrote: Girard, Can you help me put together a budget quote for this guy. THis is that lead you sent me last week! All the info should be in his response below...if not, let me know. I may go by and see this guy later today as well to follow up and talk about what else we do. Thanks man. Looks like Job Name: Reed Canal Multiuse Trail Location: City of South Daytona, FL 13 qty - TF-1 for 30" OD HDPE 13 qty - TF-2 for 30" OD HDPE Patrick ---------- Forwarded message ---------From: Kern, Greg Date: Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 9:22 AM Subject: RE: Tideflex Check Valve request To: Patrick Mangold
Thanks Patrick. This will be for HDPE pipe, new installation. And the pricing is for preliminary budgeting purposes only at this point. Ultimately the project will be bid out from the City of South Daytona likely through the FDOT District 5, as it will be using federal funds. The project name and location is Reed Canal Road Multiuse Trail, located along Reed Canal Road between Nova Road and US 1. Volusia County already has some of your Tideflex values installed in this area. I appreciate your help on this.
Greg Kern, AICP Senior Transportation Planner 1000 Legion Place, Suite 800 Orlando, FL 32801 Phone: 407-893-5842 / Fax: 407-648-2128 www.rsandh.com
__________ 2
APPENDIX H FEC RAILROAD CORRESPONDENCE
Kern, Greg From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject:
Kern, Greg Thursday, February 16, 2012 10:43 AM 'Schonder, Leslie (FECR.GPRK)' '[email protected]'; [email protected]; Stone, Charles (FECR.BWY); Fowler, Andy (FECR.BWY); Powell, James (FECR.BWDY); 'Stephan Harris'; 'Les Gillis' RE: Reed Canal Road, Volusia County, City of South Daytona
Thank you for the follow‐up Leslie. The feasibility study that we are preparing for the City of South Daytona and the Volusia TPO will recommend the trail cross the FECR line along the north side of Reed Canal Road. Currently there is a sidewalk crossing there, with accompanying active crossing gates. As you noted, some installations may have to be relocated a minimal distance away from the roadway to accommodate the proposed trail. All costs of the trail crossing, including installation relocations, is being developed as part of the feasibility study. We typically use the most current FDOT Listing of Master Pay Items costs. If the City and the Volusia TPO decide to pursue this project, and additional funding is made available, preliminary engineering will occur. At that point, these agencies will coordinate with FECR on the required design issues, use of existing equipment, etc. We appreciate your assistance and coordination on this feasibility study. From: Schonder, Leslie (FECR.GPRK) [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2012 10:02 AM To: Kern, Greg Cc: '[email protected]'; [email protected]; Stone, Charles (FECR.BWY); Fowler, Andy (FECR.BWY); Powell, James (FECR.BWDY) Subject: RE: Reed Canal Road, Volusia County, City of South Daytona
Greg, I apologize for taking so long to respond in writing to your request and wanted to document our phone conversation regarding the proposed mixed use pedestrian path. As discussed, the Railway would not approve a path on the south side of the crossing because of the limited space and close proximity of the Railroad Bridge. We feel this would create a dangerous situation as there would not be a way to keep pedestrians from accessing our bridge or falling down the embankment since the guardrail cannot be continuous through the right‐of‐way. The Railway will approve a path on the north side of the crossing provided it meets MUTCD, FEC, and FDOT standards. The Railway does not like to approve pathways greater than 8’ in width because the motoring public tends to use them for an additional traffic lane. It is hard to determine the cost of the improvements that will be required to accommodate the path without a set of plans. The first step in this process is to begin the Preliminary Engineering which requires the City/County to fill out an application and pay the $15,000.00 fee. We will do a field survey and determine if the existing crossing warning devices and electronics can be used or if the project will require new signals. We will at a minimum have to widen the crossing surface and relocate the existing warning devices. We will provide a drawing and cost estimate as part of our PE package. The Railway will oversee or construct any improvements to our tracks, crossing surface, or crossing warning devices. The roadway authority will be responsible for the approaches to our crossing surface and any roadway improvements required as part of the project. The existing License Agreement dated October 20, 2004, is between the Railway and Volusia County. I believe our attorney is working with the County to transfer this agreement to the City of South Daytona. The proposed improvements may require a new license agreement to be executed, again, this will be reviewed and determined during the PE process. Let me know if you want me to forward you the PE funding letter and application. As information, the 1
PE process takes approximately 90 days to complete and, if new signal equipment is necessary, the lead time for procuring this material can take up to 180 days. Please give me a call if you have any questions. Joseph (Leslie) Schonder Public Projects Engineer FEC Engineering Department 7150 Philips Highway Jacksonville, FL 32256 904-279-3196 Office 904-256-0426 Fax
From: Kern, Greg [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, December 12, 2011 5:32 PM To: Schonder, Leslie (FECR.GPRK) Cc: 'Stephan Harris'; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Reed Canal Road, Volusia County, City of South Daytona
Leslie – It was good speaking with you earlier today. As we briefly discussed, the City of South Daytona in coordination with the Volusia Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) is evaluating the potential to construct a 10 ft‐wide bicycle and pedestrian path along the south side of Reed Canal Road from SR 5A (Nova Road) to Ridgewood Avenue (U.S. 1), in the City of South Daytona. The study being conducted is a feasibility study, where we determine the potential project constraints, prepare conceptual drawings of the bicycle/pedestrian path, and provide an engineering and construction cost estimate. At this point, we are coordinating with FECRR to determine the issues involved with a new bicycle/pedestrian crossing of the railway tracks along the South side of Reed Canal Road. The trail is anticipated to be a cantilever structure, using sheet pile to locate the proposed 10‐foot wide facility at the back of the roadway, possibly extending over the canal slope. The existing guardrails that are located 2 feet from the edge of the travel lane are anticipated to be replaced by a 42‐inch barrier wall. We are just beginning the study, and thus have not developed any typical sections/cross sections of what the trail would look like in the vicinity of the railway crossing. Two of the attached photos (FECRR bridge2.jpg and FECRR looking west.jpg) show the proposed railway crossing at the south side of the roadway. The 3rd photo (FECRR EB approach north side) shows the existing crossing of a 5‐foot sidewalk at the railway. The City and the Volusia TPO are proposing a “multi‐use trail” that is a minimum of 10‐feet wide. This specification will allow the use of federal funds to design and construct the trail, and expand the existing multi‐use trail system that is being constructed throughout Volusia County. The proposed trail will provide improved safe access to a regional park (Reed Canal Park) which is heavily used by area residents. Please let me know if you need additional information. My contact information is below, and my cell number is 407‐ 353‐4455. I appreciate your time in reviewing this information, especially given your significant workload.
Greg Kern, AICP Senior Transportation Planner 1000 Legion Place, Suite 800 Orlando, FL 32801 2
Kern, Greg From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments:
Kern, Greg Wednesday, February 01, 2012 2:55 PM 'Les Gillis' 'Stephan Harris'; 'Ganey, Jim' FECRR crossing info at Reed Canal Road FECRR Crossing.pdf
Les – I received a call today from Leslie Schonder of the FECRR. FEC was very pleased to hear about our alignment change to the north side at the RR crossing. Leslie also noted that our separation from the center of the gate foundation to the back of sidewalk should be 4.75 feet. This is a greater separation than we had originally thought based on the Plans Prep Manual and other related information. Also, FECRR typically discourages wide mixed‐use trails across their tracks. 10‐feet wide may be the maximum at this location, which is consistent with the City’s initial request, however, is 2 feet more narrow than the desired 12‐foot wide mixed use trail in an unconstrained location. Based on Leslie’s comments (which he will follow‐up with email documentation), we will likely have to recommend moving the gates away from the sidewalk/proposed trail. FECRR will provide a rough cost estimate for this item (Jim – if you have an estimate, that would really help also). I’ve attached the exhibits that I originally sent to Jim Ganey and to Leslie Schonder. I wanted to keep you in the loop as you had mentioned that you would review the site and provide your own comments on what may be accommodated along the north side from Anastasia Dr. to Carmen Dr. Feel free to contact me with any additional information that you may have on this segment of the proposed trail.
1
Kern, Greg From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject:
Ganey, Jim [[email protected]] Tuesday, January 31, 2012 5:14 PM Kern, Greg [email protected]; 'Stephan Harris' RE: Reed Canal Road multiuse trail option
Greg, I believe installing the trail on the north side of Reed Canal Road is the most prudent and cost efficient choice, being that there is currently a sidewalk and the necessary warning signals in-place. Keep in mind that FEC must approve the widening of the sidewalk area through the crossing, to accommodate the wider trail. The normal set-back for traffic control devices is 2’-0” behind the sidewalk, so if the trail will fit in the existing footprint between the edge of pavement and the Rail signals, the only improvement needed would be the sidewalk widening. With this in mind, I would estimate your costs incurred to be somewhere in the range of $10,000 to $20,000 for preliminary engineering and the cost to widen the sidewalk. I hope this helps. Jim Jim Ganey District Five Railroad Coordinator Florida Department of Transportation 719 S. Woodland Blvd. -- MS# 3-562 DeLand, FL 32720-6834 386-943-5331 Office 386-785-3754 Cell 386-736-5349 Fax [email protected] Work Schedule: Monday - Thursday 7:00 AM to 5:30 PM Would it kill you to wait? Lose a minute...not your life !
From: Kern, Greg [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 2:40 PM To: Ganey, Jim Cc: [email protected]; 'Stephan Harris' Subject: Reed Canal Road multiuse trail option
Jim – we greatly appreciated your information about the potential issues and costs associated with the proposed trail along the south side of Reed Canal Road and the FECRR required new crossing. Based on that information and continuing coordination with the City of South Daytona and the Volusia TPO, it has been decided that the proposed trail will be situated along the north side of Reed Canal Road in the vicinity of the FECRR crossing. This revised alignment may require no modifications to the existing crossing gates which are located to the north and to the south of the FECRR. I have attached some photos and notes of the existing conditions and of the proposed location of the trail. It looks like we can accommodate a 14‐foot wide trail section between the back of curb and the existing gate installations. The 2009 MUTCD Figure 8C‐5 shows the application of a gate for both a sidewalk and a roadway, and only shows the requirement 1
for a 7‐foot offset from the inside edge of the curb to the gate structure. I wanted to check with you on any other requirements, including FDOT standards and guidelines, that might be violated by our proposed trail application. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. And I have copied Leslie from FECRR on this message in case he has any concerns about this proposal. Thanks Jim and Leslie.
Greg Kern, AICP Senior Transportation Planner 1000 Legion Place, Suite 800 Orlando, FL 32801 Phone: 407-893-5842 / Fax: 407-648-2128 www.rsandh.com
__________
2
Kern, Greg From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject:
Ganey, Jim [[email protected]] Wednesday, December 28, 2011 5:08 PM Kern, Greg [email protected]; 'Stephan Harris'; Fowler, Andy (FECR.BWY) RE: Reed Canal Road Multiuse Trail, Volusia County - Crossing # 271954-T
Greg, I researched my files, but I don’t have a copy of the agreement pertaining to the last time the railroad signals were installed. Andy Fowler and Leslie Schonder can verify the following, but if the signals are 15 to 20 years old, they won’t support the addition of pedestrian gates. If this is the case, in order to install the proposed pedestrian gates, all of the signals must be replaced at a ballpark estimate of approximately $250,000 to $350,000. In addition to the signals, it will cost approximately $15,000 to $20,000 to extend the sidewalk (using asphalt) through the crossing. When any contractor is working within approximately 25’ of the FEC right of way, a Rail-certified flagger must be secured (for safety reasons) at approximately $850 per 8-hour day. You will also want to design the concrete sidewalk to be constructed no closer than 12’0” from the centerline of the closest track. I hope this helps, but please feel free to contact me with any questions. Jim Jim Ganey District Five Railroad Coordinator Florida Department of Transportation 719 S. Woodland Blvd. -- MS# 3-562 DeLand, FL 32720-6834 386-943-5331 Office 386-785-3754 Cell 386-736-5349 Fax [email protected] Work Schedule: Monday - Thursday 7:00 AM to 5:30 PM Would it kill you to wait? Lose a minute...not your life !
From: Kern, Greg [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2011 2:27 PM To: Ganey, Jim Cc: [email protected]; 'Stephan Harris' Subject: Reed Canal Road Multiuse Trail, Volusia County
Our company is working with the City of South Daytona and the Volusia TPO on a proposed multiuse trail along Reed Canal Road, within the City of South Daytona. I am currently coordinating with Leslie Schonder of FEC Railway (see contact info below) and wanted to touch base with you also. Our TPO feasibility study is evaluating a 1.5‐mile multiuse trail that would cross the FECRR along the south side of Reed Canal Road. There is currently a 5‐foot wide sidewalk along the north side of Reed Canal Road, with a pedestrian crossing gate. The proposal is to construct a 14‐foot wide path along the south side of the roadway. 1
I’ve attached some photos, a conceptual typical section, and other information to assist your understanding of the proposed trail. We want to ensure that all necessary coordination for this proposed RR crossing occurs, and that our feasibility study accurately reflects the potential impacts and costs for the design and construction of the project. Please contact me at your earliest convenience so we may discuss this further. I am in the office the rest of this week (through Dec. 30th) but will be out of the state during the week of Jan. 5th. We appreciate your assistance on this project.
Joseph (Leslie) Schonder Public Projects Engineer FEC Engineering Department 7150 Philips Highway Jacksonville, FL 32256 904-279-3196 Office 904-256-0426 Fax [email protected]
Greg Kern, AICP Senior Transportation Planner 1000 Legion Place, Suite 800 Orlando, FL 32801 Phone: 407-893-5842 / Fax: 407-648-2128 www.rsandh.com
__________
2
FECR Photo 1 – facing west
Existing condition (south of FECR)
FECR Photo 2 – facing east Location reference
Shared Ped/Roadway Gate on north side of FECRR
5’
Pedestrian-only gate on south side of FECRR (Roadway gate is located on other side of road)
8’
15’ (to E.O.P.)
Existing condition (north of FECR) FECR Photo 3 – facing east
15’ (to E.O.P.) 7’
5’
FECR Photo 4 – facing west
Proposed 10-ft wide trail w/ 4’ horizontal clearance from RR Gate (total 14’ wide)
14’ Trail 2’ Curb
APPENDIX I UTILITIES AND INSTALLATIONS MAP SERIES
J
¬ «
SW Drainage
NIA
P
Hydrants
P Utility rackP
Park
K LA
IEW EV
US CT
MH NT PE
P
O FR
E PL AP
P
P
IEW EV
K LA
CA
P
S
M EL
Poles
¬ «
P
GO BE
RU CIT
Parcels
HO BIS
Legend
¬ «
EXHIBIT I Sheet 1
REED CANAL ROAD SHARED USE PATH AND SIDEWALK Exhibit I - Utilities and Installations Map Series
P
¬ «
P
NT
¬ «
P P AL
P
REED CANAL PARK
VE CA
¬ «
N YA BR
P
ED RE
N CA
VA NO
¬ « ¬ «
0
90
180
360 Feet
PROJECT LENGTH = 8,000 FT (1.515 MI.)
¬ «
J Legend
S LL WE
¬ «
Parcels
SW Drainage
L PA
M
¬ «
E OV GR
POPE
Poles
LS
L Hydrants WE
P
G MA
¬ «
EXHIBIT I Sheet 2
¬ PATH AND SIDEWALK « REED CANAL ROAD SHARED USE Exhibit I - Utilities and Installations Map Series
NO
Park
P
P
¬ «
P
P
P
LIA
P P
¬ «
¬ « E PIK
AL
KG OA
UN CO
YM TR
AN
OR
N LE
LS
HO BIS
P
R
AN
P
U SA
P
DC EE
P
P
¬ « P
¬ «
0
90
180
360 Feet
PROJECT LENGTH = 8,000 FT (1.515 MI.)
¬ «
J
¬ «
O LW NI KE
SW Drainage
ANASTASIA
LE
H RT
IO OR
Parcels
YALE
¬ «
Legend
CALHOUN
Poles
¬ «
¬ «
Hydrants ID A
Park
FL OR
¬ «
EXHIBIT I Sheet 3
¬ « REED CANAL ROAD SHARED USE PATH AND SIDEWALK Exhibit I - Utilities and Installations Map Series
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
¬ «
LANTERN
OAK LEA
P PP P
REED CANAL
P
P
NED WAGNER PARK
BROOK
¬ « GASLIGHT
0
¬ «
90
180
360 Feet
PROJECT LENGTH = 8,000 FT (1.515 MI.)
¬ «
J
¬ «
Parcels
O ILR
¬ «
¬ «
P
P P
P
P
P RR gate Ped head P RR gate Mast arm
P
¬ «
P
REED CANAL
P
P
BANANA CAY
AD
Park
¬ « P
EN RM
RA
Hydrants
¬ «
CA
SW Drainage Poles
¬ «
¬ «
¬ «
Legend
¬ «
EXHIBIT I Sheet 4
REED CANAL ROAD SHARED USE PATH AND SIDEWALK Exhibit I - Utilities and Installations Map Series
¬ «
P
JOY
¬ «
NED WAGNER PARK
DAVEY
¬ « BR
K OO
¬ « 0
¬ «
90
180
360 Feet
PROJECT LENGTH = 8,000 FT (1.515 MI.)
¬ «
J Legend
EXHIBIT I Sheet 5
REED CANAL ROAD SHARED USE PATH AND SIDEWALK Exhibit I - Utilities and Installations Map Series
¬ « ¬ «
Parcels
¬ «
¬ «
¬ «
SW Drainage Poles Park
SANDY
P
P
¬ «
P
P
REED CANAL
P P
¬ «
HYDROLOGY
RID
¬ «
P
Hydrants BANANA CAY
¬ «
O WO GE D
¬ « JOY
D SAN
USK
Y
¬ « DAVEY
¬ « 0
90
180
360 Feet
PROJECT LENGTH = 8,000 FT (1.515 MI.)
APPENDIX J SOILS MAP
JOY
ANASTASIA
YALE
ID A FL OR
S
A LE
NT CE ES
RS DO
E
ET
BRISTOL
AVE LINE E D MA
AM
D
N JA
0
375 750
4TH
CLAIRMONT
5TH
LE
NT
KRISTY KAY
WINDLE
LE AUBREY
FOXCROFT
ND
I DG
AD
K OA
CR
T
CA
C
BR AM
ER
CK
GA
N
AK
A EB DL
TIN
HU
LD WI
CA PE
H LIG
E
INN SP JIB
LS
D SA
R MA
X FO
K AL YW TR
IN SK DE
BE
OA
N SU
R VA
D OL
NO
RO
UN CO
VA NO
VE CA
U SA
N YA BR
R KE EC H GE K OR OA E G G N RI SP
AR PIZ
IAG
RN TE
ER TT OE
NT GE RE
RR
N LA
NT
E PL AP
S GA
CA
US CT
OK RO
O ILR
B
DAVEY
RA
E PIK
GLEN OAK
P
IEW EV
O FR
CA
HO BIS
K LA
TUSCAWILLA FINE SAND ISY DA IA TUSCAWILLA-URBAN ONLAND EG B M EL
D
REED CANAL ROAD
REED CANAL
O WO GE
CALHOUN
A CAY
TAR INE
RID
BANAN
E OV GR
EN RM
M
AN
LE
L PA
M ER H S
CA
IO OR
LIA
RU CIT
NEC
IAN
OD WO BAY
LE
S LL WE
NO
IN ML K HA E COCOA M SAND, 0 TO 5% IN S Y JA RE DAYTONA ESAND, 0 TO 5% Y CA V I E KL IMMOKALEE SAND UC S S LL EY WE PITS HON
P Classification EL
C
EY AR
RT MY
BR
SA
G MA
PO
O ER ND
IN ML HA
PE PO
S
N MO
N
EN
MO LE
RU CIT
Soils
N DU Parcel
N CA
E GR
Legend
3RD
J
EXHIBIT Sheet 1 of 1
REED CANAL ROAD SHARED USE PATH AND SIDEWALK Exhibit - Soils Map
1,500 Feet
PROJECT LENGTH = 8,000 FT (1.515 MI.)
APPENDIX K DRAINAGE COORDINATION MEETING NOTES
MEETING NOTES Subject:
Reed Canal Road Trail SJRWMD Coordination Meeting
Date:
January 12, 2012
Meeting Location:
St. Johns River Water Management District Meeting Date: Maitland Service Center Meeting Time: 601 South Lake Destiny Road, Suite 200 Maitland, FL 32751
January 5, 2012 10:00 AM
Meeting Participants: Perry Jennings, PE Gary Haddle Jeff Glenn, PE, D.WRE, CFM Katherine Luetzow, EI, CFM
Professional Engineer Regulatory Scientist II Water Resources Discipline Leader Water Resources Engineering
SJRWMD SJRWMD RS&H RS&H
Distribution: Meeting Participants Greg Kern, AICP
Project Manager
RS&H
Following are the Notes from this Meeting: Please review these notes and direct any required revisions to Katherine Luetzow at 407-893-5814, 407648-2128 (fax), or [email protected] within one week from the above date. Thank you.
The following is a summary of the discussions that occurred during the Coordination Meeting for the Reed Canal Road Trail project in Volusia County along Reed Canal Road from Nova Road to US 1. 1. The project will require a standard general permit. Even though the project involves construction of a minor roadway safety feature (sidewalk) and a recreational trail on either side of Reed Canal Road, the project will not be exempted from permitting for stormwater management systems under Chapter 40C-42.0225(5)(a) and (6), FAC, respectively. See Item 3, below, for more information. 2. The impact to the water surface elevation of the Reed Canal as a result of the proposed project will need to be documented. RS&H proposed to use CDM’s model of the Nova Canal Basin which contains the Reed Canal to demonstrate the impact of the proposed project. As the Nova Canal has a known flooding problem, SJRWMD would like to see no rise in water surface elevation from the proposed project. RS&H agreed that no rise would be ideal, but suggested that goal may be unattainable. If the canal water surface elevation does rise as a result of this project, then the impacts to upstream properties would need to be assessed. 3. Treatment volume requirements could be waived under Chapter 40C-42.024(2)(c), FAC, as long as the project demonstrated a net improvement. Additionally, if treatment is being provided in the existing condition by swales or ponding areas adjacent to Reed Canal Road and this existing treatment volume would be reduced or eliminated in the proposed condition, then compensation for the loss of the existing treatment volume will need to be provided. This treatment volume compensation, as well as the
Meeting Notes January 5, 2012 Page 2
demonstration of a net improvement, could be in the form of treatment swales or other Best Management Practices (BMPs), such as baffle boxes, development of public information literature describing the benefits of Low Impact Development, reducing fertilizer usage, etc. 4. Demonstration that attenuation of the proposed stormwater discharge from the project can be accomplished by documenting the pre-development and post-development discharges of the Reed Canal at US 1. 5. The Reed Canal was originally constructed in uplands and it is classified as a surface water. No mitigation is necessary for surface water impacts. 6. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) may require standard manatee conditions for a portion of the project. 7. It is unlikely that the Reed Canal is considered Sovereignty Submerged Lands (SSL) by the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund (TIITF). SJRWMD will submit a SSL determination request to FDEP during the ERP application process. 8. The project is not located within a 100-year floodplain, with the exception of approximately 400 feet at the end of the project west of US 1. SJRWMD is only concerned with the 10-year floodplain. 9. SJRWMD requested that existing drainage conditions and trail design criteria be documented.
MEETING NOTES Subject:
Reed Canal Road Trail USACE Coordination Meeting
Date:
January 9, 2012
Meeting Location:
Conference Call
Meeting Date: Meeting Time:
January 6, 2012 2:30 PM
Meeting Participants: Irene Sadowski Jeff Glenn, PE, D.WRE, CFM
Team Leader Water Resources Discipline Leader
USACE RS&H
Distribution: Meeting Participants Greg Kern, AICP Katherine Luetzow, EI, CFM
Project Manager Water Resources Engineering
RS&H RS&H
Following are the Notes from this Meeting: Please review these notes and direct any required revisions to Jeff Glenn at 407-893-5820, 407-648-2128 (fax), or [email protected] within one week from the above date. Thank you.
The following is a summary of the discussions that occurred during the Coordination Meeting for the Reed Canal Road Trail project in Volusia County along Reed Canal Road from Nova Road to US 1. 1. The USACE regulates the Reed Canal. The project may be permitted with a Letter Permit or a Nationwide Permit. 2. Direct dredge or fill impacts would be considered below the Mean High Water (MHW) elevation for the tidally-influenced portion of the canal and below the Ordinary High Water (OHW) elevation for the non-tidally-influenced portion of the canal. Secondary shading impacts could be considered from the overhanging portion of the cantilevered pedestrian trail. 3. The Reed Canal was originally constructed in uplands and it is classified as a surface water. There is little to no aquatic vegetation present. It is very likely that no mitigation would be necessary for impacts to this water resource.
APPENDIX L FDOT INFLATION FACTORS
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TRANSPORTATION COSTS REPORTS
Inflation Factors _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
This “Transportation Costs” report is one of a series of reports issued by the Office of Policy Planning. It provides information on inflation factors and other indices that may be used to adjust project costs. Please note that the methodology for Inflationary adjustments relating to specific transportation projects should be addressed with the district office where the project will be located. For general use or non-specific areas, the general guidelines provided herein may be used for inflationary adjustments. Construction Cost Inflation Factors The table below includes the inflation factors and present day cost (PDC) multipliers that are applied to the Department’s Work Program for highway construction costs expressed in Fiscal Year 2012 dollars. Fiscal Year
Inflation Factor
PDC Multiplier
2012 Base 1.000 2013 3.3% 1.033 2014 3.3% 1.067 2015 3.3% 1.102 2016 3.3% 1.139 2017 3.3% 1.176 2018 3.3% 1.215 2019 3.3% 1.255 2020 3.3% 1.297 2021 3.3% 1.339 2022 3.3% 1.384 Source: Office of Financial Development, (Fiscal Year 2012 is July 1, 2011 to June 30, 2012)
Other Transportation Cost Inflation Factors Other indices may be used to adjust project costs for other transportation modes or non construction costs. Examples are as follows:
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
This report is one in a series on transportation costs. The latest version of this and other reports are available at www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/policy/costs 8/2/2010 Page 1 of 2
The Consumer Price Index (CPI, also retail price index) is a weighted average of prices of a specified set of products and services purchased by wage earners in urban areas. Restated, it is a price index which tracks the prices of a specified set of consumer products and services, providing a measure of inflation. The CPI is a fixed quantity price index and a reasonable cost-of-living index. The Employment Cost Index (ECI) is based on the National Compensation Survey. It measures quarterly changes in compensation costs, which include wages, salaries, and other employer costs for civilian workers (nonfarm private industry and state and local government). The Producer Price Index for Highways and Streets (PPI) is maintained annually by the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). It is part of the National Income Product Accounts Table. Unfortunately, the U.S. Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) has recently discontinued the monthly series, Producer Price Index for Highway and Street Construction. Although a new monthly series, Producer Price Index for Other Non-residential Construction, is now available from BLS, we recommend the BEA’s PPI as a record of cost escalation in highway construction costs since 1997.
Advisory Inflation Factors For Previous Years Another “Transportation Costs” report is available covering highway construction cost inflation for previous years. “Advisory Inflation Factors For Previous Years (1987-2011) provides Present Day Cost (PDC) multipliers that enable project cost estimates from previous years to be updated to FY 2011. For the table and text providing this information, please go to http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/policy/costs/RetroCostInflation.pdf.
This report is one in a series on transportation costs. The latest version of this and other reports are available at http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/policy/costs/default.asp August 2, 2011 Page 2 of 2
