By DOTTY NIST
While acknowledging that it was not the perfect solution, county commissioners have decided on an option for improvements to a problem intersection in the Seagrove community.
This is the CR-395/CR-30A intersection, which is currently a three-way stop with blinking light and which is the cause of long lines of vehicles sitting on the two roads oftentimes during spring and summer.
The decision by the Walton County Board of Commissioners (BCC) took place at the Feb. 9 regular BCC meeting at the South Walton Annex.
Various alternatives to help traffic move through the intersection more efficiently have been under discussion and consideration over a number of years. At one time plans to build a roundabout at the intersection were approved by the county but later scratched. For the past few years the assistance of deputies and sheriff’s posse members has been enlisted at the intersection to direct traffic during some high-traffic periods during spring and summer, in order to alleviate congestion.
As directed by the BCC, on Feb. 9 Chance Powell, county engineer, brought forward three options for improvement of the intersection. All options had some features in common, including plans for a green-yellow-red traffic light. All called for a median along CR-395 approaching the intersection.
Many in the community have urged for the multi-use path (“the bike path”) along CR-30A to be shifted from the north side of the county road to the south side in order to avoid the need for cyclists and pedestrians to cross CR-395, which has contributed to congestion at the intersection. One of the options, labeled Option 1, called for the bike path to be moved to the south side, continuing eastward on the south side to the area of 723 Whiskey Bravo restaurant. With this plan, existing county right-of-way would be used for the intersection improvements.
Options 2 and 3 both provided for owners of property adjacent to the intersection to donate property located on the northeast quadrant of the intersection to be used with the intersection improvements. With these options, the road would move to the north at the intersection by about 12 feet. The plans also called for the county to, in exchange, abandon to those owners road right-of-way on the south side of CR-30A. The proposals detailed that the property owners would provide 0.215 acre and that the county would abandon 0.128 acre.
A difference explained by Powell between Option 2 and Option 3 was that the former would utilize a westbound “slip lane” on CR-30A, while, with Option 3, this lane would be a controlled one, coordinated for crossing by cyclists and pedestrians using the bike path.County Commission Chair Sara Comander was the first to comment on the options with the observation that it seemed safer to move the bike path to the south side. Powell said he would agree.However, asked how many driveways the bike path would cross if placed on the south side, he responded an additional 19 and potentially more driveways.
District 1 Commissioner Bill Chapman identified problems with Option 2 in that vehicles would accelerate with the slip lane and problems would thus be created in connection with conflicts with cyclists and pedestrians. He saw Option 3 as the safer of the latter two options.
District 5 Commissioner Cindy Meadows asked what would be the time line for putting the options in place. Powell responded that the plans were somewhat conceptual and that the final design would be done by one of the county’s continuing engineering consultants. He anticipated that the design could be completed within several months.
Meadows asked if there would be an opportunity to move utility installations underground as part of the project.
Powell responded that this could be done for an additional $350,000. Funds for the intersection improvement project itself have been identified from the county’s proportionate fair share account.
Larry Jones, county administrator, offered and agreed to put the undergrounding of the utilities on a future BCC agenda for consideration.
Local attorney Gary Vorbeck spoke on behalf of a group of people owning property on the south side of CR-30A in the vicinity of the intersection, including the Stephens and Brooke families.
Vorbeck warned that utilizing Option 1, the plan with the bike path on the south side, would create one of the most dangerous situations on CR-30A.
Jim Martelli, an engineer representing the same property owners, displayed a map showing driveways on the south side of CR-30A fronting on the county road in the vicinity of the intersection, as compared with the much-lesser number of driveways on the north side in the same section.
He reported 21 single-family gulffront homes along the south side of the section and identified the area of the homes as having the densest number of residential structures in place along CR-30A.
Martelli noted that many of the homes in the section were built in the 1950s and 1960s and have been enjoyed by multiple generations of families.
He said that backing out onto CR-30A has been a worry for these property owners and warned that putting the bike path on the south side would exacerbate safety issue for motorists and for cyclists and pedestrians as well. Martelli suggested that the county instead take his clients’ offer of property on the north side of the intersection for the improvements.
Martelli also commented that there are heritage oak trees on the south side of CR-30A that would be affected if the bike path were placed in that location.
Also representing the Stephens family, CR-30A homeowner Dixon Brooke said the home he and his wife own on the south side of CR-30A was purchased by a family member in 1949. The area had been attractive to the family partly because of the groves of trees, he noted. Brooke was in agreement that intersection improvements were needed.
He urged for consideration of the property owners’ offer to provide land for the improvements, maintaining that it would allow for the greatest flexibility in the future.
Victor Campbell, another owner on the south side, complained that moving the bike path to the south of CR-30A would put the path on his driveway and parking area. He was hopeful that the thoughts of the south side owners would be considered.
Mark Schnell, a planner and urban designer and resident of Seagrove, spoke about an alternative design for the intersection that he had submitted to the commissioners. He said his plan showed the sidewalk (bike path) on the south side but that this was not essential. Schnell suggested getting everyone involved together for dialog on the intersection.
Meadows said she had noticed parallel parking shown on Schnell’s plan on both sides of CR-395. She asked if he didn’t think that this would exacerbate problems.
Schnell responded that the amount of parking shown would not be enough to make a difference. It would create some friction, he said, but “that’s a good thing” in making drivers want to slow down. On-street parking, he continued, was the best way to keep people from parking in the neighborhoods, and it would create a protective barrier between motorists and pedestrians. Schnell did not favor the medians shown on Options 1, 2 and 3.
Chapman asked about the nine-foot-wide lanes shown on Schnell’s plans. The commissioner said he was in favor of wider lanes because the right-of-way belongs to the county and it should be used “to make it as safe as possible.”
Schnell warned that wider lanes tend to make drivers want to go faster. “We want traffic moving,” he said, but not at a speed of 80 miles per hour.
Gordon Ashdown, a part-time Seagrove resident, architect and urban designer, spoke in favor of moving the bike path away from the intersection so that cyclists and pedestrians would be crossing CR-395 at a safer point. Asked if the crossing he spoke of would have lights associated with it, he said no.
Meadows responded that the cyclists and pedestrians would still be likely to cross CR-395 at the intersection.
Lisa Boushy told the commissioners that she owns a home along CR-30A but does not live in it. She warned that, with the bike path on the south side, the people with the 21 driveways along CR-30A could be put in a position of not being able to get out onto CR-30A. Boushy said that a turn-around had been created on her property so that vehicles were able to drive out rather than back out on to CR-30A—but that many of the lots do not have sufficient room to do this. She had concerns that cyclists would not think about having to watch for people backing out onto CR-30A.
Jane Solomon said that she and her sister own property at Live Oak and Nightcap on the north side of CR-30A in Seagrove. She said they currently have the same problem that had been described of backing up and getting out onto CR-30A. Solomon recalled seeing over 20 major bicycle and car accidents in their vicinity.
Jim Bagby, former Walton County TDC director, who is also an engineer, said he had studied the intersection extensively. He warned against parallel parking in the intersection area. He said that, rather than being a three-way intersection, it is a five-way intersection when bicycles and pedestrians are taken into account.
Bagby called for a tunnel for bikes and pedestrians if the bike path stays on the north side. The problem with that, he said, is that there are utilities in the intersection. He agreed with Schnell that there should be no median along CR-395. There should only be a median if the bike path stays on the north, Bagby said. He recommended 10-foot-wide lanes.
Powell responded that 11-foot-wide lanes were shown on the plans per the current county requirements for major arterials.
Asked if moving the bike path to the south side would eliminate trees, Powell said there are no trees where the path would go, although there might be some overhanging tree limbs.
However, Vorbeck warned that tree roots are sensitive to traffic and could be damaged by a bike path on the south side. Trees in this area have been present for many decades, he commented. “This is the essence of Seagrove,” he told the commissioners.
Chapman said he thought Option 1 would be the best but instead moved, for discussion, for approval of Option 3. His motion was seconded.
Mark Davis, county attorney, noted that approval of this option would be contingent upon final agreement being reached with the property owners represented by Vorbeck for the land exchange.
Meadows said she thought it would be great if the bike path could go on the south side of CR-30A, but that the first few lots on the south side were not very deep and were getting smaller all the time with storms eating away at the beachfront.
She was of the opinion that Option 3 would provide for the stacking of a lot of vehicles at the intersection. Going with Option 3 would not preclude going with a bike path on the south side in the future, Meadows observed. She added that the option would “seem to accommodate most of our issues,” even though not perfect.
Davis advised that the possibility of putting the bike path on the south side at a future date would be something that would need to be included in the agreement with the property owners.
District 2 Commissioner Cecilia Jones emphasized the importance of moving forward with the agreement in a timely fashion.
Meadows agreed that the plans should be expedited so that the area would not have to go through another season (after the current upcoming one) without problems with the intersection being addressed.
Chapman’s motion in favor of proceeding with Option 3 was approved unanimously.
The Herald/Breeze contacted Powell on Feb. 10 for additional information on Option 3.
He explained that turn lanes associated with the plan included a left turn lane for east bound traffic on CR-30A to CR-395, a right turn lane for west bound traffic on CR- 30A to CR-395, and dedicated left and right turn lanes for south bound traffic on CR-395 to CR-30A. “All turn lanes will be signalized to optimize efficient operation, and the multi-use path crossing will be coordinated with the signal for push button activation of the pedestrian signal crossings,” he said.
Powell said cyclists on the bike path as well as pedestrians would be able to use the signal crossings.
He clarified that there would be no right-of-way parking associated with the plan and that the existing parking along CR-395 near the intersection would be eliminated.
Powell confirmed that the conceptual plan showed palm trees planted in the medians but said that he was not sure what the selected plants would be for the final design.
He said the final design for the intersection would be brought before the BCC before being bid out for construction.