07/17 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE AND … 41-Fruitville...1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE AND NEED: a. ... The proposed improvements for the Roundabout include the reconstruction

STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STATE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FORM

650-050-43 ENVIRONMENTAL

MANAGEMENT 07/17

1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE AND NEED:

a. Project Information: Project Name: US at Fruitville Road Intersection Improvements

Project Limits: The project is in Sections 19, 24, Township 36 South, and Ranges 17, 18 East.

The limits of the project extend along US 41 from 1st Street through the intersection to 5th Street.

County: Sarasota

ETDM Number (If applicable): 14262

Financial Management Number: 439025-1-22-01

Project Manager: Joshua Jester, EI

b. Proposed Improvements: As a result of this study, the Recommended Build Alternative consists

of a Roundabout configuration. The proposed improvements for the Roundabout include the reconstruction of the intersection with a partial 3-lane roundabout raised up to 2.5 feet above existing grade. The roundabout alternative will utilize high-intensity activated crosswalk (HAWK) signals for pedestrian and bicycle crossings. The Recommended Alternative includes expansion of the existing closed drainage system with retention facilities for flood mitigation. In addition, a 10-foot minimum width shared use path on the west side of US 41 with connections through the intersection to the existing bike lanes on Fruitville Road, and a 5-foot to 6-foot-wide sidewalk on the east side are provided. See Appendix D.2 for the Roundabout typical sections.

c. Purpose and Need: The purpose of this project is to identify intersection improvements at US 41 and Fruitville Road to enhance non-motorized connectivity and access, as well as vehicular traffic flow and operations, between the City of Sarasota's Downtown Central Business District and the Bayfront area. Improvements to the existing signalized intersection, including the consideration of a roundabout alternative, will be evaluated. As a major arterial roadway with high traffic volumes and speeds, US 41 currently poses a physical and visual barrier to residents, employees, and visitors by separating the primary community and regional focal points of Downtown Sarasota form amenities and destinations along the waterfront. Fruitville Road is additionally a wide arterial that divides portions of the City of Sarasota's Downtown CBD. The proposed improvements at the intersection of US 41 and Fruitville Road complement several other contiguous improvements identified at intersections along US 41 that are intended to improve traffic flow and the unfriendly pedestrian character of the roadway by emphasizing multimodal investments in the corridor.

The need for the project is based on the following criteria:

PRIMARY CRITERIA

AREA WIDE NETWORK/SYSTEM LINKAGE: Improve Non-Motorized Mobility

The overall goal of the Connecting Downtown to the Bayfront Project is to improve mobility for non-motorized modes of transportation, such as pedestrians and bicyclists, between the Downtown and Bayfront areas of the City of Sarasota with an emphasis on pedestrian comfort. This project is intended to provide a safe, convenient and attractive crossing for pedestrians

DRAFT



MANAGEMENT 07/17

and bycyckusts at the intersection by improving travel conditions along US 41 and Fruitville Road. The intersection improvements will complement those planned for other intersections along US 41 to improve traffic flow throughout the corridor.

SECONDARY CRITERIA

OPERATIONS: Enhance Intersection Operational Performance The project is anticipated to enhance intersection operational performance both for

motorists traveling along US 41 and for thos utilizing Fruitville Road at its western terminus with US 41. Travelers pass through this intersection to access Lido Key, as well as the other barrier islans to the west of the mainland of Sarasota County. In addition, both roadways accommodate heavy truck traffic as they are designated Regional Freight Mobility Corridors in the Sarasota/Manatee MPO 2040 LRTP; US 41 is also a designated Freigh Distribution Route. According to the Sarasota.Manatee MPO 2040 LRTP and the City of Sarasota Capital Improvements Plan, the US 41 at Fruitville Road intersection is a hot spot of congestion and is presently operating below acceptabel Level of Service (LOS) standards. The Sarasota/Manatee MPO 2040 LRTP indicates that without improvements to the US 41 at Fruitville Road intersection, LOS at the intersection in the future [2018] will continue to deteriorate.

It should be noted that vacant parcels with construction underway or planned surround the intersection. An Embassy Suites hotel is currently under construction in the southeast quadrant of the intersection. A large-scale multiuse development (to include nearlu 700 condominius, 175 hotel rooms, 200,000 square feet of retail and 39,000 square feet of office with buildings randing as high as 18 stories) is also planned on the 14-acre former Sarasota Quay site immediately west of the intersection. Overall, the project is anticipated to support the future development density planned at the intersection and, consequently, the increased traffic volumes generated as a result.

SAFETY: Enhance Safety Conditions The project is expected to enhance safety conditions for all travelers, particularly for

non-motorists crossing US 41. Due to the high travel speeds on US 41, the roadway creates a physical and visual barrier that separates the primary community and regional focal points of Downtown Sarasota from natural waterfront amenities and destinations. A total of 33 non-fatal crashes were recorded at the intersection during the five-year period from 2008 through 2013. As the project is part of the US 41 Multimodal Emphasis Corridor Program, the intersection improvement will help establish a linkage along US 41 between land use and transportation strategies (connecting identified community focal points) through urban design solutions that improve walking, bicycling, and transit accessibility conditions. The Sarasota/Manatee MPO noted that, in recent years, many of the crashes at the intersection were left turn crashed in the southbound to eastbound direction. The project is intended to 1) reduce the number and severity of conflict points between motorists, as well as motorists and non-motorists, and 2) provide smaller, more manageable crossings for non-motorists at the intersection.

SOCIAL AND ECONIMIC DEMAND: Community Expressed Need Through the development of the City of Sarasota's Downtown Master Plan (beginning

in 1999), community residents have continuously worked with the City of Sarasota to identify transportation improvement strategies along US 41 to reconnect the City of Sarasota's Downtown CBD and the Bayfront areas. The intent of the City of Sarasota's Downtown Master

DRAFT



MANAGEMENT 07/17

Plan is to guide the development of a better integrated transportation system for all travel modes while maintaining the character and theme of the downtown area. The proposed project is an integral part of this plan, as well as the Connecting Downtown to the Bayfront Projec and US 41 Multimodal Emphasis Corridor Program, envisioned from extensive public involvement and supported by the community. The project is additionally supported by the developers surrounding the intersection..

d. Project Planning Consistency: disregard providing historical details, instead focus on future phases of segments being advanced. If more than one segment is being advanced additional tables should be added.

Currently Adopted CFP-LRTP

COMMENTS

Yes (If N, then provide detail on how implementation and fiscal constraint will be achieved)

PHASE Currently Approve

d Currently Approved

TIP/STIP TIP/STIP

COMMENTS If phase completed, note as such otherwise provide comments describing status and activities needed to achieve consistency TIP STIP $ FY

PE (Final Design)

Yes No $ 17/18 Funding currently being allocate and TIP and STIP will be amended. Values/dates shown are estimated. See Attachment A.

ROW No No $ 17/18 Funding currently being allocate and TIP and STIP will be amended. Values/dates shown are estimated. See Attachment A.

Construction No No $ 17/18 Funding currently being allocate and TIP and STIP will be amended. Values/dates shown are estimated. See Attachment A.

*Include pages from current TIP/STIP/LRTP

DRAFT



MANAGEMENT 07/17

2. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Issues/Resources *Substantial Impacts? **Supporting Information Yes No Enhance No Inv

A. SOCIAL and ECONOMIC

1. Social See Attachment B.1 2. Economic See Attachment B.2

3. Land Use Changes See Attachment B.3 4. Mobility See Attachment B.4 5. Aesthetic Effects See Attachment B.5 6. Relocation Potential See Attachment C

B. CULTURAL 1. Historic Sites/Districts See Attachment D 2. Archaeological Sites See Attachment D 3. Recreational Areas See Attachment B.6

C. NATURAL 1. Wetlands and Other See Attachment E.1

Surface Waters 2. Aquatic Preserves and Outstanding FL Waters See Attachment E.1 3. Water Quality and Water Quantity See Attachment E 4. Wild and Scenic Rivers See Attachment E 5. Floodplains See Attachment E

6. Coastal Barrier Resources See Attachment E

(unless federal funds sought in the future) 7. Protected Species and Habitat See Attachment E 8. Essential Fish Habitat See Attachment E

D. PHYSICAL 1. Highway Traffic Noise See Attachment F 2. Air Quality See Attachment G 3. Contamination See Attachment H 4. Utilities and Railroads See Attachment I 5. Construction See Attachment J 6. Bicycles and Pedestrians See Attachment B 7. Navigation

* Substantial Impacts?: Yes = Substantial Impact; No = No Substantial Impact; Enhance = Enhancement;

NoInv = Issue absent, no involvement. **Supporting information is documented in the referenced attachment(s).

DRAFT



MANAGEMENT 07/17

. 9. APPROVAL OF FINAL DOCUMENT

This project has been developed without regard to race, color, national origin, age, sex, religion, disability, or family status.

The final SEIR reflects consideration of the PD&E Study and the public hearing. _____________________________ _____ ____________ District Secretary or Designee Date

DRAFT



MANAGEMENT 07/17

10. SUPPORTING INFORMATION Attachment A. Transportation Plan Excerpts Attachment B. Social / Economic Evaluation Attachment C. Conceptual Stage Relocation Plan Summary Attachment D. Cultural Resources Screening Summary Attachment E. Natural Resources Evaluation Attachment F. Noise Evaluation Summary Attachment G. Air Quality Evaluation Summary Attachment H. Contamination Screening Evaluation Summary Attachment I. Utility Information Attachment J. Construction Attachment K.Engineering Analysis Attachment L. Attachment M.

DRAFT

DRAFT | SEIR ATTACHMENTS US 41 at Fruitville Road Intersection Improvement PD&E Study

Sarasota County, Florida | FPID No.: FPID: 439025-1-22-01

DRAFT

DRAFT

DRAFT | October 4, 2017 i

List of Attachments

ATTACHMENT A. TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM / LRTP .......................................................................................... 1

ATTACHMENT B. SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC EVALUATION .................................................................................................................... 1

B.1 SOCIAL .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 1

B.1.1 RACE/ETHNICITY ........................................................................................................................................................................ 1

B.1.2 AGE .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 1

B.1.3 ENGLISH LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY ....................................................................................................................................... 1

B.1.4 OCCUPIED HOUSING UNITS WITHOUT A VEHICLE ................................................................................................................ 1

B.1.5 HOUSING VALUES ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1

B.1.6 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AND TITLE VI AND VIII CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................... 2

B.1.7 COMMUNITY FACILITIES ........................................................................................................................................................... 3

B.2 ECONOMIC ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 1

B.2.1 AREA DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................................................................................ 1

B.2.2 RELATED TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS ................................................................................................... 2

B.3 LAND USE ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 1

LAND USE CHANGES ............................................................................................................................................................................... 1

B.4 MOBILITY AND TRANSIT ..................................................................................................................................................................... 1

B.4.1 MOBILITY PLANNING .................................................................................................................................................................. 1

B.4.2 EXISTING TRANSIT ..................................................................................................................................................................... 1

B.4.3 EMERGENCY SERVICES ........................................................................................................................................................... 2

B.4.4 IMPACTS ON MOBILITY .............................................................................................................................................................. 2

B.5 AESTHETIC EFFECTS ......................................................................................................................................................................... 1

B.6 PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FEATURES ........................................................................................................................................ 1

B.6.1 PARKS.......................................................................................................................................................................................... 1

B.6.2 COMMUNITY AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES ...................................................................................................................... 1

ATTACHMENT C. CONCEPTUAL STAGE RELOCATION PLAN .............................................................................................................. 1

C.1 RIGHT-OF-WAY REQUIREMENTS AND RELOCATIONS .................................................................................................................. 1

C.1.1 PRELIMINARY RIGHT-OF-WAY REQUIREMENTS .................................................................................................................... 1

C.1.2 COMMUNITY EFFECTS .............................................................................................................................................................. 3

ATTACHMENT D. ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES .............................................................................................. 1

D.1.1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................. 2

ATTACHMENT E. NATURAL RESOURCES EVALUATION SUMMARY .................................................................................................. 1

E.1 WETLANDS AND ESSENTIAL FISH HABITAT ................................................................................................................................... 1

E.2 WATER QUALITY ................................................................................................................................................................................. 2

E.3 SPECIAL DESIGNATIONS ................................................................................................................................................................... 3

E.4 WILDLIFE AND HABITAT ..................................................................................................................................................................... 3

E.5 FLOODPLAINS/FLOODWAYS ............................................................................................................................................................. 5

ATTACHMENT F. NOISE EVALUATION SUMMARY ................................................................................................................................ 1

ATTACHMENT G. AIR QUALITY SUMMARY ............................................................................................................................................. 1

ATTACHMENT H. CONTAMINATION SCREENING SUMMARY ............................................................................................................... 1

H.1 GEOTECHNICAL DATA ....................................................................................................................................................................... 1

H.2 CONTAMINATION ................................................................................................................................................................................. 2

DRAFT

DRAFT | SEIR ATTACHMENTS US 41 at Fruitville Road Intersection Improvement PD&E Study

Sarasota County, Florida | FPID No.: FPID: 439025-1-22-01

DRAFT | October 4, 2017 ii

ATTACHMENT I. UTILITIES AND RAILROADS SUMMARY .................................................................................................................... 1

I.1 UTILITIES AND ITS INFRASTRUCTURE ............................................................................................................................................. 1

I.1.1 INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS (ITS) ................................................................................................................. 1

ATTACHMENT J. CONSTRUCTION IMPACT SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................ 1

K.1 DESIGN ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................................................................................. 1

K.1.1 DESIGN CRITERIA ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1

K.1.2 DESIGN VARIATIONS ................................................................................................................................................................. 1

K.2 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................................................... 2

K.2.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS ............................................................................................................................................................. 2

K.2.2 FUTURE CONDITIONS ................................................................................................................................................................ 2

K.2.3 CRASH DATA ............................................................................................................................................................................... 2

K.2.4 SIGNALIZATION .......................................................................................................................................................................... 3

K.3 DRAINAGE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................................................ 4

K.3.1 EXISTING DRAINAGE ................................................................................................................................................................. 4

K.3.2 LOCATION HYDRAULICS ........................................................................................................................................................... 4

K.3.3 POND SITING .............................................................................................................................................................................. 5

K.3.4 FLOOD MITIGATION ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................................................. 5

ATTACHMENT M. FDOT RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE ...................................................................................................................... 2

M.1 INTERIM 2-LANE ROUNDABOUT ....................................................................................................................................................... 2

M.1.1 INTERIM 2-LANE ROUNDABOUT TYPICAL SECTIONS ........................................................................................................... 4

M.2 ULTIMATE PARTIAL 3-LANE ROUNDABOUT ................................................................................................................................... 4

M.2.1 ULTIMATE PARTIAL 3-LANE ROUNDABOUT ............................................................................................................................ 6

M.2.2 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE FACILITIES .................................................................................................................................. 7

M.3 RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE USER BENEFITS .......................................................................................................................... 7

DRAFT | October 4, 2017 A-1

ATTACHMENT A. TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

/ LRTP

The PD&E study for the project is included in the FY 2015/2016 - FY 2019/2020 Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT)

Work Program and the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP); however, funding for design nor construction has been

identified in these programs.

The project is identified in the Sarasota/Manatee Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Adopted 2040 Long Range

Transportation Plan (LRTP) and FY 2015/2016 – FY 2019/2020, Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), last amended on

December 14, 2015, on pages ES-31, ES-49, and ES 63), with funding anticipated through boxed Transportation Management

Area (TMA) funds.

The project is currently identified within the Sarasota County Comprehensive Plan (adopted October 26, 2016) FY 16-20 Capital

Improvement Program Appropriation Plan, Traffic Circulation (Table 14-1H, page V2-643) noted with $4.3 million in “Prior

Funding”, signifying the amount appropriated for active capital projects through August 26, FY-15 which will incur expenditures in

FY15 and beyond. The County further noted that projects with “Prior Funding” are noted to provide a complete picture of capital

project activity in the Comprehensive Plan.

FDOT District One will coordinate with Sarasota County and the Sarasota/Manatee MPO, respectively, to ensure that the project

is consistent with the local government comprehensive plan and that required project funding is identified in the TIP, LRTP, STIP,

and Work Program. Excerpts of the TIP, LRTP, FDOT Work Program, and STIP listing the project and anticipated funding are

provided in Attachment A.

This is one of several improvements identified to enhance access and travel conditions for alternative transportation modes along

the US 41 corridor as part of the City of Sarasota’s Connecting Downtown to the Bayfront Project (2010), which stems from the

City of Sarasota's Downtown Master Plan. Furthermore, US 41 is designated by the Sarasota/Manatee MPO as a Multimodal

Emphasis Corridor (MMEC), with guiding principles that require improvements to address mobility, connectivity, or congestion

needs; improve safety; encourage economic development; have local support, and qualifying project elements that include

improvements to pedestrian and bicycle facilities, multi-use trails, and traffic calming. Details of proposed improvements along

the US 41 corridor, and at the US 41 and Fruitville Road intersection, recommended by the City of Sarasota though the Connecting

Downtown to the Bayfront Project and included in the Sarasota/Manatee MPO 2040 LRTP; the City of Sarasota Downtown-

Bayfront Connection Project Summary; and Potential Multimodal Emphasis Projects in the City of Sarasota are also provided in

Attachment A.

DRAFT


ATTACHMENT A.1 FDOT State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP)

DRAFT


ATTACHMENT A.2 Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Work Program

DRAFT


ATTACHMENT A.3.1 Sarasota/Manatee MPO Adopted 2040 LRTP and FY 2015/2016 – FY 2019/2020, TIP

DRAFT


ATTACHMENT A.3.2 Sarasota County Comprehensive Plan (adopted October 25, 2016) FY 16-20 CIP, Traffic Circulation

(Table 14-1H, page V2-643)

DRAFT

DRAFT | October 4, 2017 B.1-1

ATTACHMENT B. SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC EVALUATION

B.1 Social

Data from the U.S. Census Bureau 2011-2015 American Community Survey (ACS) and ETDM EST Sociocultural Data Report

were analyzed for a 1000-foot buffer from the intersection, and roughly 500-foot buffer from the project termini.

B.1.1 Race/Ethnicity

The demographic characteristics of the project

area are similar to that for Sarasota County, with

a large White population percentage of 93%,

and Black and Hispanic populations of 3% and

4%, respectively. See Figure B.1-1.

B.1.2 Age

Within the buffer area, more than 65% of

individuals are age 65 and over, compared with

33% Countywide. This is an upward trend

compared with data from 2010. See Figure B.1-

2.

B.1.3 English Language Proficiency

There is a low percentage (1%) of individuals

with limited English language proficiency.

B.1.4 Occupied Housing Units Without a

Vehicle

The percentage of occupied housing units within

the buffer area that do not have a vehicle is more

than three times higher than the County. See

Figure B.1-3.

B.1.5 Housing Values

U.S. Census Bureau 2011-2015 American

Community Survey (ACS) five-year estimates of

housing trends indicate that the number of multi-

family units and owner-occupied units within a

project buffer of 1,000 feet is higher than that of

Sarasota County; furthermore, the median

housing value of homes at $634,000 is nearly

three times the median value of homes

countywide. See Figure B.1-4.

Figure B.1-1 | Race and Ethnicity Trends

Figure B.1-2 | Race and Ethnicity Trends

Figure B.1-3 | Occupied Units with No Vehicles Available

Figure B.1-4 | Occupied Units with No Vehicles Available

DRAFT

DRAFT | SEIR ATTACHMENTS B.1-2

B.1.6 Environmental Justice and Title VI and VIII Considerations

In February 1994, the President of the United States issued Executive Order 12898 (Environmental Justice) requiring federal

agencies to analyze and address, as appropriate, disproportionately high adverse human health and environmental effects of

federal actions on ethnic and cultural minority populations and low income populations, when such analysis is required by the

National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA). An adverse effect on minority and/or low-income populations occurs when:

(1) the adverse effect occurs primarily to a minority and/or low-income population; or, (2) the adverse effect suffered by the minority

and/or low-income population is more severe or greater in magnitude than the adverse effect suffered by the non-minority and/or

non-low-income populations. An evaluation of environmental, public health and interrelated social and economic effects of

proposed projects on minority and/or low-income populations is required. All proposed projects should include measures to avoid,

minimize, and/or mitigate disproportionately high and adverse impacts and provide off-setting benefits and opportunities to

enhance communities, neighborhoods, and individuals affected by these activities.

The 17 Environmental Justice criteria identified in Executive Order 12898 are: (1) air pollution;

(2) noise; (3) water pollution; (4) soil contamination; (5) destruction of manmade resources;

(6) destruction of natural resources; (7) diminution of aesthetic values; (8) detriment to community cohesion; (9) diminution of

economic viability; (10) detriment to facilities access - public and private; (11) detriment to services access - public and private; (12)

vibration; (13) diminution of employment opportunities; (14) displacement; (15) traffic congestion and impairment to mobility; (16)

exclusion, isolation, or separation; and, (17) diminution of US Department of Transportation (USDOT) benefits.

In addition to compliance with Executive Order 12898, any proposed federal project must comply with the provisions of Title VI of

the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968. Title VI and related nondiscrimination

regulations provide that no person shall, on the grounds of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, marital status, disability, or

family composition be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subject to discrimination under

any program of the federal, state, or local government. Title VIII guarantees each person equal opportunity in housing.

In August 2000, the President of the United States issued Executive Order 13166 (Improving Access to Service for Persons with

Limited English Proficiency), to clarify Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Its purpose was to ensure accessibility to programs

and services to eligible persons who are not proficient in the English language.

The purpose of this project is to provide enhancements to the non-motorized connectivity and access, as well as vehicle traffic flow for

the US 41 at Fruitville Road intersection (regardless of status or classification). Right-of-way acquisition for the project will be minimal

and not directly affect any existing residences, businesses or institutional properties. Therefore, FDOT does not anticipate that the

proposed project will result in any disproportionate adverse impacts to any minority, ethnic, elderly or handicapped groups, and/or low-

income populations in accordance with the provisions of Executive Order 12898 and FHWA Order 6640.23a. No further

Environmental Justice analysis is required. Title VI information is being made available at the Public Hearing (discussed on the

following page).

This project has been developed in accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by Title VIII of the Civil

Rights Act of 1968, and in accordance with Executive Order 12898 (Environmental Justice). This project has been developed

without regard to race, color, national origin, age, sex, religion, disability, or family status. Title VI provides that no person shall

be, on the grounds of race, color, religion, sex, age, national origin, disability or family status, be excluded from participating in,

be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subject to discrimination under any program of the federal, state or local government.

No comments have been received during this study regarding conflicts with Title VI or related statutes. Furthermore, the project

is not anticipated to negatively affect community resources important to elderly persons, disabled individuals, non-drivers, transit-

dependent individuals, or minorities.

DRAFT


Based on the socioeconomic evaluation of potential effects of the Recommended Alternative, no minority, low-income, older,

disabled or other underserved populations will be impacted by this project.

B.1.7 Community Facilities

Community features within a 200-foot project buffer, include the Bay Area MURT and historic sites, as well as the Florida State

University College of Medicine, located at 201 N. Cocoanut Avenue. While the early screenings of the project using the ETDM

Environmental Screening Tool (EST) indicated that one religious center and one social service facility was near the project, these

community features were not identified within the 200-foot project buffer during this PD&E Study. The following community facilities

were identified as near the project (outside of the 200-foot project buffer but within approximately one-half mile of the project):

Sarasota County Fire Station 1 | Fire Station 1 located at 1445 4th Street (just under one-half mile east of the project), provides

emergency services for the area surrounding the project. The County Fire Department administrative offices are in downtown

Sarasota.

Church of Scientology | located at 1224 Boulevard of The Arts, east of the US 41 at Boulevard of the Arts intersection.

Sarasota Garden Club | located at 1131 Boulevard of the Arts on the northwest corner of Boulevard of the Arts and US 41, the

Garden Club is a non-profit volunteer organization that offers educational programs to members and the community.

Sarasota Institute of Lifetime Learning (SILL) | located at 1001 Boulevard of the Arts, approximately west of the intersection of

US 41 and Boulevard of the Arts, SILL is an all-volunteer organization that provides lectures by renowned musical experts.

Sarasota Municipal Auditorium | located at 801 North US 41 and 0.2 miles north of the project, is a historic multi-purpose facility

built in 1938 that is also known as the Municipal Auditorium-Recreation Club.

Bayfront Community Center | the "John Chidsey” Bayfront Community Center is attached to the west side of the historic

Sarasota Municipal Auditorium

McCown Towers | located at 1300 Boulevard of the Arts (0.13 miles east of US 41) is a Section 8 residential facility with 75 units

that is managed by the Sarasota Housing Authority

Selby Public Library | Downtown Sarasota’s public library is located one-quarter mile southeast of the project at 1331 1st Street.

DRAFT


Figure B.1-5 Community Facilities

Social

The proposed intersection improvement is one of several contiguous improvements identified along US 41 and on Fruitville Road

intended to transform the unfriendly pedestrian character of the roadway to that of a multimodal emphasis corridor enhancing

travel and safety conditions for all users of US 41 (particularly pedestrians and bicyclists). The recommended alternative is

anticipated to better connect community and regional focal points of Downtown Sarasota to amenities and destinations along the

waterfront enhancing social interaction and community cohesion.

While access to proximate residences, businesses, and recreational features could be temporarily affected during project

construction, minimal negative effects on the social environment are anticipated.

Ringling Bridge Causeway Park

Centennial Park

Gillespie Park

Bayfront Parkand Marina

Island Park

Little Five Points Park

Payne Park

FSU College of Medicine

Garden Club

Legend

Study Area

Rosemary Historic District(1)

Greater Main Street District(1)

Palm Avenue District(1)

Burns District(1)

Park(2) Library

Community Facility

Educational Institution

Religious Institution

Fire Station

Sources:(1) Downtown Sarasota Alliance

(2) City of Sarasota Parks Department

Not to Scale

DRAFT


B.2 Economic

B.2.1 Area Development

The immediate and surrounding project area is experiencing extensive development and redevelopment, shown in Figure B.2-1.

Fruitville Road is bordered by the Rosemary Historic District and Community Redevelopment Area (CRA) to the north and the

Greater Main Street CRA to the south. Major developments within a project buffer of 200 feet include:

Figure B.2-1 | Area Hotels and Multi-Family Residential Developments

Embassy Suites | a 180-room hotel on the southeast quadrant of the US 41 at Fruitville Road intersection that is currently

under construction, with an estimated completion in late 2017.

Quay Development | To the immediate west of the intersection, the former Quay site was purchased by GreenPointe

Holdings, LLC in 2015 and is moving forward with development plans for a mixed-use development featuring 695

residences, 175 hotel rooms, and 40,000 square feet office and retail space.

Marriott | Palsar Developments purchased a 1.4-acre site northeast of the intersection at 332 N. Tamiami Trail in 2011

and in 2015 announced plans to construct the Sarasota Marriott Hotel and Condominium Project, which would feature

200 hotel rooms, 40 condominiums, a restaurant, spa, meeting rooms, and retail and ballroom space.

BLVD | an 18-story project planned for the southeast corner of U.S. 41 and Boulevard of the Arts by Core Development,

Inc. will include a total of 51 condominiums over two phases, space for a restaurant and an interior parking garage.

Existing and Planned Developments

Legend

Study Area




Existing Hotel

Planned Hotel

Existing Multi-Family Residential

Planned Multi-Family Residential(2)

Note: not all locations have

approved zoning or permitting.

Notes:(1) Source: City of Sarasota – Downtown

Community Redevelopment Authority Real Estate Development Report

(2) Not all locations have received zoning

approval or permitting(3) Under Construction

Not to Scale

Fruitville Road

Ritz Carlton Hotel

Ritz Carlton Tower

The VueOne Watergate

Westin Hotel

Bay Plaza

Marina Tower

Library Mews

The Encore

MarqueeEn Ville

Marriott

Greenpoint(Quay)

Hyatt RegencyBeau CielCondos

Condos on the Bay I & II

Hotel Indigo

Embassy Suites (3)

Valencia

McCown Towers

Cityside

Ridson

Vanguard

Hotel Sarasota (3)

Sarasota Modern

BLVD

DRAFT


Imminent developments on Fruitville Road include, but are not limited to:

Hampton Inn & Suites | a 163-room hotel is being built at the corner of Fruitville Road and Cocoanut Avenue.

Choice Hotels | plans to build a 118-room hotel with street-level parking at 1351 Fruitville Road (just east of Cocoanut

Avenue) were announced in December 2016.

Urban Flats | formerly named Sarasota Flats, construction began in late 2016 on a five-story development with 228

residential units and 3,700 square feet of retail space at 1401 Fruitville Road.

1515 Fruitville | a retail center at the address of its namesake, approximately one-quarter mile east of the project,

featuring 15,000 square feet of retail space is currently under construction.

U.S. Census Bureau 2011-2015 American Community Survey (ACS) five-year estimates of housing trends indicate that the

number of multi-family units and owner-occupied units within a project buffer of 1,000 feet is higher than that of Sarasota County;

furthermore, the median housing value of homes at $634,000 is nearly three times the median value of homes countywide.

Detailed reports on the 2011-2015 ACS housing and demographic estimates are provided in Attachment B.1.

The City of Sarasota has conducted several studies to establish economic development strategies, including:

A study of the “Economic Geography for Downtown Sarasota” conducted in 2011 by Dr. Roger Barry for the Sarasota

Chamber of Commerce provided an evaluation of the economic geography of downtown Sarasota. Tasks identified by

this study that would enhance downtown economic development included recruiting and developing pedestrian

generators in downtown, developing strategies to increase downtown densities, and linking clusters of pedestrian

generators downtown as well as the Bayfront area.

As part of the City’s strategic planning exercise for 2014-2016, a market analysis was conducted to identify the optimal

business mix for several key areas of the city, including the Rosemary District that is bordered by both US 41 and Fruitville

Road. The analysis indicates that there is sufficient demand for additional retail within each study area.

The results and recommendations from these studies underscore the important role that the US 41 at Fruitville Road intersection

plays in promoting the economic vitality of the City of Sarasota and Sarasota County.

Economic Impacts

No adverse effects of the project outside of the temporary impacts of construction were identified as having a negative impact on

the economic viability of the residents and businesses within the project area and the vicinity of the project.

B.2.2 Related Transportation Improvement Projects

Projects in close proximity to and influencing the development of the alternatives for the US 41 at

Fruitville Road intersection improvements are described below, with their locations illustrated in

Figure B.2-2.

US 41 at Gulfstream Avenue Intersection PD&E Study, FPID 438137-1 | FDOT District One

began the US 41 at Gulfstream Avenue Intersection Improvement State-Wide Acceleration

Transformation (SWAT) project in June 2016. US 41 at Gulfstream Avenue is located three blocks

south of the US 41 at Fruitville Road Intersection.

Alternatives under consideration for the Gulfstream Avenue project include a roundabout and

improvements to the existing signalized intersection. The study teams are working concurrently with FDOT District One traffic

operations to ensure that system wide implications of proposed improvements are coordinated.

Above: SCAT Bus DRAFT


A public information meeting for the US 41 at Gulfstream Avenue Intersection PD&E Study was held on March 28, 2017.

Members of the US 41 at Fruitville Road PD&E Study project attended the public meeting. In addition, as detailed in Section 8 of

this PER, information about the US 41 at Gulfstream Avenue project was provided at the US 41 at Fruitville Road public

information meeting held on April 11, 2017. FDOT is advancing the preferred alternative (Multi-lane roundabout) for the US 41

at Gulfstream Avenue project from PD&E and into the Design Phase via the SWAT process.

Figure B.2-2 | Related Transportation Improvement Projects

Fruitville Road Corridor / Streetscape Enhancements Project | The City of Sarasota is currently evaluating options to make

Fruitville Road a more pedestrian-friendly street. The City is considering alternatives that focus on widening sidewalks, potentially

narrowing the street to two lanes between Cocoanut and Lemon Avenues, and constructing roundabouts on Fruitville Road at

Cocoanut, Central, and Lemon Avenues. Workshops for the Fruitville Road Corridor / Streetscape Enhancement Project were

held in 2016 and additional workshops are planned through 2017.

US 41/SR 45 from Browning Street to 11th Street FPID 431311-1 | This FDOT resurfacing project, also referred to as the “US

41 Traffic Separator Project”, involves resurfacing US 41 along with access management, sidewalk, intersection, and other safety

improvements. During design, FDOT reviewed traffic information for the corridor and determined that a northbound right-turn lane

US 41 at Gulfstream Avenue

Intersection PD&E Study

FPID 438137-1

US 41 at Fruitville Road


FPID 439025-1

Lemo

n Ave

US 41 Resurfacing/Traffic Separator

Project FPID 431311-1

US 41 Roundabouts Project

(10th Street and 14th Street)

FPID 428383-1

Bayfront Multi-Use

Recreational Trail

Legend

Study Area

US 41 10th St and 14th St

Roundabout Project

Bayfront MURT

Fruitville Road Corridor

Streetscape Enhancements

Projects

US 41 Resurfacing/Traffic

Separator Project

US 41 at Gulfstream Avenue


Not to Scale

Fruitville Road Corridor /

Streetscape Enhancements Project

DRAFT


is needed to help with traffic flow from Gulfstream Avenue to Fruitville Road. To construct the right- turn lane, a traffic separator

is being constructed from Gulfstream Avenue to south of Fruitville Road, approximately 1,200 feet. Construction of the traffic

separator will eliminate left-turn movements from US 41 onto side streets and driveways as well as left-turn movements from side

streets and driveways onto US 41. Construction began in 2016 and is expected to be complete in 2018. This project is therefore

included in the no-build condition for this PD&E study.

US 41 Roundabouts Study (10th Street to 14th Street), FPID 428383-1 | FDOT District One is constructing improvements

along US 41 from 10th Street to 14th Street in Sarasota. This half-mile project that is located roughly 0.4 miles north of the US

41 at Fruitville Road intersection (shown In Figure 1-2), is to reconstruct the signalized intersections of 10th Street and 14th

Street along US 41 and replace these with roundabouts, as well as widen the roadway between the intersections to include bike

lanes, turn lanes, a 10-foot shared use path along the west side, and a 6-foot-wide sidewalk along the east side. Construction

began in 2017 and is expected to be complete in 2019.

Bayfront Multi-Use Recreational Trail | The Bayfront Multi-Use Recreational Trail (MURT) is a long-term City of Sarasota project

to provide a multi-use recreational trail along the Sarasota Bay from Shelby Botanical Gardens to the Van Wezel Performing Arts

Center/Centennial Park. The Bayfront MURT Segment from The Ritz-Carlton to north City limit (running north-south through this

project on the west side of US 41) is now in the planning and design phase, and with FDOT funding, the MURT will include a

bicycle/pedestrian accommodation

DRAFT


B.3 Land Use Changes

Existing land use surrounding the project is highly urbanized and either developed or planned for development. As shown in

Figure B-1, the City of

Sarasota’s planned

future land use within the

200-foot project buffer is

classified as Downtown

Bayfront and Downtown

Core.

Per the City of Sarasota’s

Future Land Use Plan

and Map (FLUM), the

purpose of the

Downtown Bayfront and

Downtown Core land use

classifications are

founded upon the

concepts of “New

Urbanism” whereby a

mixture of land uses

facilitate development

that is compact and diverse within a walkable environment. The City of Sarasota’s action strategies for the Bayfront include re-

establishing a pedestrian connection to downtown and creating a significant pedestrian space and destination.

Land Use Changes

It is anticipated that the proposed improvements to the intersection of US 41 at Fruitville Road will complement the City of

Sarasota’s current and future Downtown Bayfront and Downtown Core land use classifications for property within and surrounding

the project. These land use classifications are intended to facilitate “New Urbanism” development that is compact and diverse,

within a walkable environment, and therefore will help to re-establish a pedestrian connection between the Bayfront and

downtown.

Figure B-1 | City of Sarasota Land Use Map

DRAFT


B.4 Mobility

In this area, US 41 is a major 4-lane arterial highway that runs through Downtown Sarasota. It serves as a north-south hurricane

evacuation route, and the study intersection is located in a Florida Department of Environmental Management (FDEM) Category

2 Evacuation Area, where evacuation is called for when the anticipated wind is 96-110 miles per hour (mph) and an anticipated

storm surge of 10 feet.

Fruitville Road is an east-west, 4-lane divided roadway that also serves as a hurricane evacuation route. To the east of the project,

between US 301 and I-75, Fruitville Road is designated as SR 780.

B.4.1 Mobility Planning

In January 2016, Sarasota County adopted the Sarasota County Mobility Fee Ordinance No. 2015-051 and Sarasota Mobility

Plan and Fee Technical Report. Concurrent with the development of a County Mobility Plan, the City of Sarasota developed a

citywide strategy for enhancing mobility and addressing the development review process through the Sarasota Citywide Mobility

Study. Through that effort, Mobility Districts were defined and incorporated into the City’s FLUM and Sarasota City Plan

(Comprehensive Plan).

The US 41 at Fruitville Road intersection is within the Sarasota Downtown Mobility District. The City’s development goal of the

Downtown Mobility District is “continued infill, redevelopment, and diversification of uses; however, as population and employment

growth continue to rise within this area, increased attention to alternative transportation modes is needed.”

As part of the Citywide Mobility Plan, the City of Sarasota conducted the Sarasota Circulator Study to analyze the feasibility of a

transit circulator system that would serve the Downtown Sarasota Area. The proposed circulator routes evaluated in this study

are shown to the right. Modal choices considered in the study included streetcar and rubber-tire vehicles.

B.4.2 Existing Transit

Existing Sarasota County Area Transit (SCAT) features present within the 200-foot project buffer of the project are listed below

and illustrated in Figure B.4-1.

Figure B.4-1 | Existing Transit Facilities

DRAFT


Route 99 | this route, called the Downtown SRQ Airport Bradenton Connector, serves north Sarasota County

and into Manatee County. Route 99 operates on 30-minute headways on weekdays and Saturdays (except for

major holidays) between 5:15 AM and 9:10 PM. Near the project, Route 99 runs north/south on Cocoanut

Avenue, east-west on Boulevard of the Arts (6th Street), and west on Fruitville Road. Nearby bus stops are at

the northwest corner of the intersection of Fruitville Road at Cocoanut Avenue and the northeast corner of US

41 and 6th Street.

Route 215S | this route, called the Downtown/SRQ Airport/Lakewood Ranch Route, operates on 60-minute

headways on Sundays from 9:15 AM until 10:29 PM. Near the project, Route 215S runs north/south on

Cocoanut Avenue and west on Fruitville Road, with a bus stop at the northwest corner of the intersection of

Fruitville Road and Cocoanut Avenue.

Route 100X | this SCAT Express bus route, called the SRQ Airport/Downtown/I-75 to North Port Express,

provides weekday service (5:42 AM until 8:22 PM) between North Port and the Sarasota Bradenton International

Airport. Route 100X runs through the project corridor on US 41, turning east at Fruitville Road.

SCAT Plus currently provides paratransit services through Ride Right Transit, LLC for eligible disabled persons.

SCAT Veteran’s Transportation offers veterans weekday transportation to two out-of-county medical facilities,

Bay Pines VA Healthcare System in Bay Pines and James A. Haley Veterans’ Hospital in Tampa.

B.4.3 Emergency Services

US 41 and Fruitville Road are designated hurricane evacuation routes, and the project lies within the Florida Department of

Emergency Management (FDEM) Evacuation Zone A. In the event of a community emergency, Sarasota County has identified

21 emergency shelters. The nearest emergency shelter to the project is Bishop Nevins Academy, which is located at 4380

Fruitville Road in Sarasota, approximately four miles east of the project.

The Sarasota County Fire Station 1, located at 1445 4th Street, just under one-half mile east of the project, provides emergency

services for the area surrounding the project.

Sarasota Memorial Hospital’s main campus that includes an emergency room and trauma center is located at 1700 S. Tamiami

Trail, approximately five miles southeast of the project. Approximately 8.5 miles northeast of the project is the Sarasota Memorial

Healthcare Center, located at 5350 University Parkway.

B.4.4 Impacts on Mobility

As described above, the proposed intersection improvement is one of several contiguous improvements identified along US 41

intended to transform the unfriendly pedestrian character of US 41 to that of a multimodal emphasis corridor. The improvement is

expected, in part, to control vehicular traffic and enhance pedestrian/bicycle circulation and safety conditions along and across

the US 41 corridor. Specifically, the project is anticipated to enhance intersection traffic flow and operations, as well as reduce

vehicle-to-vehicle and vehicle-to-non-motorist conflict points.

The intersection improvement is anticipated to enhance travel conditions and mobility for all users of the US 41 corridor by

enhancing pedestrian and bicycle connectivity for the City of Sarasota's CBC and the Bayfront areas. Coordination with SCAT,

the Sarasota County Fire Department, and Emergency Services Department is needed to ensure that mobility is maintained for

these important public services during construction.

DRAFT


B.5 Aesthetic Effects

Examples of existing landscaping and aesthetic treatments within the project limits are shown below. As previously mentioned,

the City of Sarasota is currently evaluating options to make Fruitville Road a more pedestrian-friendly street through the ongoing

Fruitville Road Corridor / Streetscape Enhancements Project.

Trail wayfinding signage in a grass strip on the MURT

Cluster of palm trees in the City-owned northeast quadrant of the

US 41 at Fruitville Road intersection

Brick pavers in the US 41 median near 1st Street

Decorative lamp post with City banner on Fruitville Road near Cocoanut

Avenue

The Florida Scenic Highways Program was established to showcase the outstanding cultural, historic, archaeological,

recreational, natural and scenic resources that can be found along Florida's highway system. The program is intended to promote

awareness of Florida's unique resources that are valued by the residents of Florida and the millions of tourists who visit the state

each year. US 41/Tamiami Trail is one of the 26 State-Designated Scenic Highways (70 miles from North Port to St. Petersburg),

and is also a Federally-Designated Scenic Byway by the National Scenic Byways Program (Note: terms such as Scenic Highway

and Scenic Byway are used interchangeably). Tamiami Trail’s State and Federal scenic-highway designations underscore the

important role that the US 41 at Fruitville Road plays in defining the aesthetic context of Downtown Sarasota and the community

at-large.

Every effort will be made to avoid harming existing shrubs and trees because of the project. It is anticipated that the recommended

alternative will result in the removal of approximately ten existing trees located behind the existing sidewalks, including six to eight

palm trees in the northeast quadrant of the intersection. The City of Sarasota is to provide guidance prior to design as to their

expectations for landscaping concepts for the preferred alternative roundabout center island as well as for Fruitville Road, which

is currently under study for pedestrian and streetscape enhancements.

DRAFT


B.6 Parks and Recreational Features

B.6.1 Parks

Within the 200-foot project buffer, parks and recreational features include the City of Sarasota Bayfront Multi-Use Recreational

Trail (MURT) and the Sarasota Bay Trail Corridor, which is identified as an Office of Greenways and Trails multi-use trail

opportunity/hiking trail priority. Area parks and recreational facilities are illustrated in Figure B.6-1. Within a half-mile of the project,

are several parks, including:

Causeway Park | a City park is located at the Ringling Bridge, southwest of the project on Causeway Drive

Little Five Points Park | A half-acre City park located one-quarter-mile east of the project north of 1st Street

Bayfront Marina and Island Park | are a City marina and park areas located just south US 41 at Gulfstream Avenue

Centennial Park and Boat Ramp | This City park is part of a community park complex that includes the Lawn Bowling facility.

Figure B.6-1 | Area Parks and Community Facilities

B.6.2 Community and Recreational Facilities

The project is intended to better connect community and regional focal points of Downtown Sarasota

to cultural and recreational amenities and destinations along the waterfront. Since access to and

enjoyment of the recreational features in the area could temporarily be affected, and the Bayfront

MURT will be modified as a result of the project, temporary short-term impacts during construction is

anticipated.

FDOT will coordinate with the City of Sarasota Parks and Recreations Department and the traffic

control plan for construction will be developed with an emphasis on both ensuring public safety and

minimizing stakeholder inconvenience.

Ringling Bridge Causeway Park

Centennial Park

Gillespie Park

Bayfront Parkand Marina

Island Park

Little Five Points Park

Payne Park

FSU College of Medicine

Garden Club

Legend

Study Area




Burns District(1)

Park(2) Library

Community Facility

Educational Institution

Religious Institution

Fire Station

Sources:(1) Downtown Sarasota Alliance

(2) City of Sarasota Parks Department

Not to Scale

Above: MURT Trail Signage

DRAFT


Figure B.6-2 | Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Multi-Use Facilities

The Sarasota/Manatee MPO’s US 41 MMEC extends from 17th Street in Palmetto to the Sarasota/Charlotte County line. The

MMEC may include improved signage, pavement markings, modern roundabouts and other intersection modifications, medians,

lane modifications or additions (including narrower or fewer lanes, wider sidewalks and bike lanes), on-street parking, transit

facilities, operational strategies, curb extensions and other measures to enhance multimodal mobility and accessibility that best

fit the character and right-of-way constraints for each segment. Specifically, for the segment of US 41 from 14th Street to Osprey

Avenue, the MMEC vision calls for a series of roundabouts, reduced lane widths, enhanced pedestrian crossings, wider and

continuous sidewalks (6-foot minimum width), Bayfront MURT connections, enhanced bus stops, and 15-minute bus frequency

and limited stop, express bus service during the AM and PM peak periods.

There are currently no designated on-street bicycle facilities along US 41 through the project limits. City of Sarasota’s published

bike routes near the project include north-south designated bicycle lanes along Cocoanut Avenue, east-west non-designated

bicycle lanes along Boulevard of the Arts (6th Street), and bike lanes exist along Fruitville Road extending for approximately 8.6

miles east of US 41 (to east of the I-95 / Fruitville Road Interchange).

Legend

Study Area

SCAT Bus Stop (1)

Bayfront Multi-Use

Recreational Trail(2)

Sarasota Bay

Recreational Trail(3)

Designated Bicycle Lanes(3)

Non-Designated Bicycle Lanes(3)

Proposed Bicycle Lanes or

Bicycle Route (3)

Fruitville Road

Sources:

(1) Sarasota County Area Transit (SCAT)

(2) Bayfront Multi-Use Recreational Trail Plan(3) City of Sarasota Bike Routes

Not to Scale

DRAFT

DRAFT | October 4, 2017 C-1

ATTACHMENT C. Conceptual Stage Relocation Plan

The existing US 41 right-of-way ranges from approximately 70 feet to 95 feet: from the southern terminus, the existing US 41

right-of-way is 95 feet wide south of the Joey D’s Chicago Style Eatery and Pizzeria property (hereinafter referred to as the “Joey

D’s property”), which is located on the southwest quadrant of the intersection at 211 North US 41/Tamiami Trail; the right-of-way

transitions to 70 feet wide just south of the intersection; is approximately 81 feet wide just north of Fruitville Road; and is about 70

feet wide at the north end of the project (5th Street).

C.1 Right-of-Way Requirements and Relocations

C.1.1 Preliminary Right-of-Way Requirements

The Recommended Alternative will require the acquisition of right-of-way at various locations within the project area to

accommodate the intersection improvements. The recommended alternative was selected due to the operational performance,

multi-modal benefits, the ability to provide drainage solutions and overwhelming public support. The need for right-of-way has

been mitigated through footprint reduction, coordination with the City, County and developers to reduce the expected impacts and

costs associated.

The FDOT will carry out a right-of-way and relocation program in accordance with Florida Statutes (F.S.) 339.09 and the Uniform

Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-646, as amended by Public Law 100-

17). FDOT produced brochures that describe in detail the Department’s relocation assistance program and right-of-way acquisition

program called “Your Relocation: Residential”, “Your Relocation: Business, Farms and Nonprofit Organizations”, “Your Relocation:

Signs”, and “The Real Estate Acquisition Process.” Each of these brochures was made available and distributed as needed at

the public information workshop and at the public hearing, and also were made available upon request to any interested person.

There is one proposed relocation associated with the Recommended Alternative. It is anticipated that eight parcels will be required

for roadway improvements, as tabulated in Table C.1-1 and illustrated in Figure C.1-1.

Parcel 1 | The proposed project will require a right-of-way taking of 0.01 acres from the Ritz-Carlton.

Parcel 2 | The proposed project will require a right-of-way taking of 0.215 acres from the Kanadiana Enterprise parcel,

which in conjunction with the drainage alternatives analysis, is a total take. This take will necessitate the relocation of

the Joey D’s Chicago Style Eatery and Pizza which occupies the existing structure.

Table C.1-1 | Right-of-Way Comparison for Alternatives

Alternative

Map Parcel # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Parcel Owner Occupant/

Use

Rit

z C

arlt

on

H

ote

l

Kan

adia

na

En

t. -

Jo

ey

Ds

Qu

ay

Ven

ture

L

LC

V

acan

t

No

rth

Tra

il S

RQ

V

acan

t M

ote

l

Pal

sar

Dev

. V

acan

t

Cit

y o

f S

aras

ota

V

acan

t

Cit

y o

f S

aras

ota

V

acan

t

Pal

sar

Dev

. V

acan

t/R

es.

Cit

y o

f S

aras

ota

D

rain

age

Can

al

Right-of-way (sf)

Ultimate Partial 3-Lane Roundabout

45 8,406 19,564 460 1,293 6,050 10,396 425 19,132

Interim 2-Lane Roundabout 45 sf 8,406 19,564 460 1,293 6,050 10,396 425 19,132

Total Right-of-Way sf (Acres) 65,769 sf (1.51 acres) DRAFT


Parcel 3 | The proposed project will require a right-of-way taking of 0.472 acres from the Quay Venture LLC parcel. The

property owner has entered a development agreement which requires the developer to provide right-of-way for the

development and construction of a minimum 2-Lane roundabout.

Parcel 4 | The proposed project will require a right-of-way taking of 0.01 acres from the North Trail SRQ parcel.

Parcels 5 & 8 | The proposed project will require a right-of-way taking of 0.036 acres from the Palsar Development

parcel. The property owner has entered a development agreement which requires the developer to provide right-of-way for

the development and construction of a minimum 2-Lane roundabout.

Parcels 6 & 7 | The proposed project will require a right-of-way taking of 0.14 acres from the City of Sarasota parcel

located on the Northeast quadrant and 0.24 acres from the City of Sarasota parcel located on the Southeast quadrant.

Please refer to the drainage section for details of the proposed works.

Parcel 9 | The proposed need for this right-of-way will be managed via a Joint Project Agreement (JPA) between City of

Sarasota, Sarasota County and FDOT. Please refer to the drainage section 7.6 for details of the proposed works.

The FDOT will carry out a Right-of-Way and Relocation Program in accordance with Florida Statute 339.09 and the Uniform

Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-646 as amended by Public Law 100-

17). The brochures that describe in detail the FDOT’s Relocation Assistance Program and Right-of-Way acquisition program are

“Residential Relocation Under the Florida Relocation Assistance Program”, “Relocation Assistance Business, Farms and Non-

profit Organizations”, “Sign Relocation Under the Florida Relocation Assistance Program”, “Mobile Home Relocation Assistance”,

and “Relocation Assistance Program Personal Property Moves”. All of these brochures were made available at the Public Hearing

Figure C.1-1 | Recommended Alternative Preliminary Right-of-Way Requirements

DRAFT


and upon request to any interested persons. Therefore, although there are no residential or business relocations, this section

considers ROW acquisition and the impacts with this acquisition are not expected to be substantial.

C.1.2 Community Effects

As most of the proposed right-of-way lies on vacant land and land where there is proposed development, the effects to the

community are limited with respect to these parcels. The main effects are related to the potential relocation of a business (Joey

D’s) from the Kanadiana parcel which is intended to be a total take. The Sarasota Bayfront and Downtown area provides ample

restaurant opportunities to residents, visitors and tourists along with opportunities for the relocation of the restaurant.

There are minor environmental considerations associated with the proposed right-of-way relating to wetlands and contamination.

The expansion of the intersection affects the outfall ditch. The Kanadiana and Quay Development parcels may have contamination

concerns, which will be further investigated via a Level II analysis. This analysis will be concluded prior to the Final PER.

Thus, the overall community effects are mitigated with the design of the proposed roadway and drainage improvements. The

positive effects associated with drainage improvements for flooding and reduction of pollution discharged to Sarasota Bay will be

achieved through the right-of-way acquisition process.

As previously noted in Attachment B, US 41/Tamiami Trail is one of the 26 State-Designated Scenic Highways and is also a

Federally Designated Scenic Byway by the National Scenic Byways Program. It is anticipated that the Recommended Alternative

will achieve several of the goals of the Corridor Management Entity for the entire Tamiami Trail Scenic Highway, as well as several

of the objectives and strategies drafted by the City of Sarasota Scenic Highway Committee for the segment of US 41/Tamiami

Trail within the City limits.

DRAFT

DRAFT | October 4, 2017 D-1

ATTACHMENT D. Archaeological and Historical Resources

A Cultural Resources Assessment Survey (CRAS) was prepared in accordance with Chapter 267, Florida Statutes (F.S.) and

FDOT procedures for the project to locate and identify any historic resources, including sites and/or districts, occurring within the

project area of potential effect (APE) and to assess their significance in terms of their potential eligibility for listing in the National

Register of Historic Places (NRHP). .

The historic resources survey resulted in the identification of seven historic resources within the area of potential effect (APE)

(shown in Figure D-1), including four previously recorded resources (8SO294, 8SO295, 8SO6119, 8SO6120), two newly identified

resources (8SO7034, 8SO7035), and a newly recorded segment of US 41/Tamiami Trail (8SO1853).

The previously recorded Normandy Motel/400 N. Tamiami Trail (8SO6119) and 430 N. Tamiami Trail (8SO6120) were determined

National Register–ineligible by the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) in 2006.

Figure D-1 | Existing Recorded Historic Sites

The two newly recorded buildings, Joey D’s Chicago Style Eatery and Pizzeria/211 N. Tamiami Trail (8SO7034) and Coldwell

Banker/100 N. Tamiami Trail (8SO7035), are examples of common Masonry Vernacular style commercial buildings and do not

possess sufficient historical or architectural significance to be considered eligible for individual listing in the National Register.

These buildings have sustained non-historic modifications that compromise their integrity. Additionally, none of the buildings are

in an area that would comprise a National Register–eligible historic district. The newly identified segment of US 41/Tamiami Trail

(8SO1853) within the project APE has been modified and expanded from its original configuration, no longer retains its historic

integrity, and is considered National Register–ineligible.

DRAFT

DRAFT | October 4, 2017 D-2

Two of the previously recorded historic resources, the J.B. Turner Residence/1225 Fruitville Road (8SO294) (originally recorded

in the FMSF as 1225 3rd Street), and the J.E. Battle Home/1226 Fruitville Road (8SO295) (originally recorded in the FMSF 1226

3rd Street) are historically designated by the City of Sarasota and considered individually eligible for listing in the National Register.

Although this is a state-funded project, a US Army Corps of Engineers permit could be required for impacts to Henderson Creek

and associated wetlands. Therefore, the CRAS was also prepared in accordance with Section 106 of the National Historic

Preservation Act in addition to Chapter 267, F.S.

The Recommended Alternative is not expected to result in substantial impacts to historical resources.

D.1.1 Archaeological and Historical Resources

No archaeological sites were identified as a result of the current survey. A pedestrian survey documented in the Project Traffic

Report confirmed the low potential of impact to archaeological resources within the APE and indicated that subsurface testing

was not feasible within most the APE due to paved roadway, sidewalk, hardscape, landscaping, and buried utilities. Where

subsurface testing was conducted confirmed the low site potential for archeological resources and indicated a high level of

subsurface disturbance.

The historic resources survey resulted in the identification of seven historic resources within the APE, including four previously

recorded resources (8SO294, 8SO295, 8SO6119, 8SO6120), two newly identified resources (8SO7034, 8SO7035), and a newly

recorded segment of Tamiami Trail (8SO1853).

Two of the previously recorded historic resources, the J.B. Turner Residence/1225 Fruitville Road (8SO294) (originally recorded

in the FMSF as 1225 3rd Street), and the J.E. Battle Home/1226 Fruitville Road (8SO295) (originally recorded in the FMSF 1226

3rd Street) are historically designated by the City of Sarasota. The Historical Resources Survey of Sarasota, Florida (Kise Straw,

& Kolodner, Inc. 2003; FMSF Manuscript No. 9746) considered these resources to be potentially National Register–eligible.

Although the settings of these buildings have been compromised, the buildings retain their integrity of design, workmanship, and

materials and remain individually eligible for listing in the National Register.

Two other previously recorded sites, Normandy Motel/400 N. Tamiami Trail (8SO6119) and 430 N. Tamiami Trail (8SO6120),

were determined National Register–ineligible by the SHPO in 2006.

The two newly recorded buildings, Joey D’s Chicago Style Eatery and Pizza/211 N Tamiami Trail (8SO7034) and Coldwell

Banker/100 N Tamiami Trail (8SO7035), are examples of common Masonry Vernacular style commercial buildings and do not

possess sufficient historical or architectural significance to be considered eligible for individual listing in the National Register.

Furthermore, these buildings have sustained non-historic modifications that compromise their integrity, such as the application of

modern stucco treatments; the replacement of windows and doors; and construction of unsympathetic additions that alter their

historic form. They do not meet National Register Criteria A, B, C, or D. Additionally, none of the buildings are in an area that

would comprise a National Register–eligible historic district. The newly identified segment of Tamiami Trail (8SO1853) within the

project APE has been modified and expanded from its original configuration, no longer retains its historic integrity, and is

considered National Register–ineligible.

FMSF forms were completed for the two newly identified resources, Joey D’s Chicago Style Eatery and Pizza/211 N Tamiami

Trail (8SO7034) and Coldwell Banker/100 N Tamiami Trail (8SO7035). An updated FMSF form for Tamiami Trail (8SO1853)

was completed to include the previously undocumented segment of the historic roadway that falls within the APE. An updated

FMSF form was also prepared for one previously recorded resource, 430 N. Tamiami Trail (8SO6120), due the changes that

have taken place since this resource was previously recorded. DRAFT

DRAFT | October 4, 2017 E-1

ATTACHMENT E. Natural Resources Evaluation Summary

A Natural Resources Evaluation (NRE) was prepared as part of this PD&E study. The NRE report reviews the possible impacts

to surface waters and federal- and state-protected species. The identification of measures to avoid, minimize, and mitigate for any

potential impacts is also discussed. A summary of the analysis of potential project impacts for the improvements to US 41 at

Fruitville Road is presented below; complete details including figures and appendices are contained in the NRE.

E.1 Wetlands and Essential

Fish Habitat

Pursuant to Presidential Executive

Order 11990 entitled “Protection of

Wetlands,” the United States

Department of Transportation

(USDOT) has developed a policy,

(DOT Order 5660.1A),

Preservation of the Nation’s

Wetlands, dated August 24, 1978,

which requires all federally funded

or permitted highway projects to

protect wetlands to the fullest

extent possible. In accordance with

this policy, as well as Part 2,

Chapter 18 (Wetlands and Other

Surface Waters) of the FDOT Project Development and Environment Manual, the study area was evaluated for wetlands and

surface waters that have potential involvement with the proposed improvements.

A Natural Resources Evaluation (NRE) dated August 31, 2017 was prepared under separate cover in order to identify existing

wetlands and other surface waters within the project area and describe potential impacts to these wetlands and other surface

waters resulting from implementation of the proposed project.

No wetlands were identified within the project area; therefore, no wetlands will be impacted by construction of the proposed US

41 at Fruitville Road intersection improvements and no compensatory mitigation for wetland impacts is required.

One surface water was identified. The surface water is an 0.36 acre excavated ditch with seawalls that serves to channel

stormwater away from US 41. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) classification is estuarine, intertidal, forested, broad

leaved evergreen, excavated (E2FO3x) and the Florida Land Use Cover Forms Classification System (FLUCFCS) classification

is 510, streams and waterways.

Plant species within Surface Water 1 include red mangroves (Rhizophora mangle), black mangroves (Avicennia germinans), white

mangroves (Laguncularia racemosa), Brazilian pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius), carrotwood (Cupaniopsis anacardioides),

torpedo grass (Panicum repens), water pennywort (Hydrocotyle spp.), creeping oxeye (Sphagneticola trilobata), common

dayflower (Commelina diffusa), climbing hempvine (Mikania scandens), and cowpea (Vigna luteola). Wildlife observed within or

adjacent to the project area during field reviews include the Green Heron, Brown Pelican, Osprey, and Black Vulture.

Sediment characteristics varied within the ditch. At the eastern end, sediments were mucky and progressed to sandy muck,

mucky sand, and finally sandy at the western mouth of the ditch.

Figure E-1 | Surface Water 1 and Essential Fish Habitat

Legend

Study Area

Limits of Surface Water 1

NMFS Spiny Lobster EFH

NMFS Coastal Migratory Pelagics,

Stone Crab, Shrimp, Reef Fish,

and Red Drum EFH

Not to Scale

N Tam

iamiTrail

Fruitville Road

DRAFT


Water appeared turbid within the eastern portion of the ditch nearest to US 41. Water levels within the ditch vary depending on

rainfall and tides. During lower tide cycles and low rainfall, the eastern portion of the ditch has the potential to exhibit dry to moist

soils. During high tide cycles, the western portion of the ditch that opens into the man-made boat basin has the potential to be

inundated with over five feet of water.

Patchy areas of shoalgrass (Halodule wrightii) were present at the mouth of the ditch, but are located outside of the limits the

project study area. Areas of oysters were observed along the seawall at the western end of the ditch. No rocky or other hard

bottom substrate was observed.

The preferred alternative will impact 0.02 acres of the man-made ditch (Surface Water 1) that receives run-off from the adjacent

roadway. The direct impacts will occur on the eastern-most, freshwater-influenced portion of the ditch, immediately near US 41

in a highly disturbed area of the ditch.

Installation of a weir structure and flap gate to convert the ditch (Surface Water 1) into a stormwater storage facility would affect

an additional 0.34 acres of the ditch and 0.26 acres of mangroves in its current state. However, for this study, it is assumed that

the City of Sarasota will have completed its ditch improvement project (permitted under ERP 44040881.000) and would have fully

impacted the ditch and will have purchased wetland mitigation credits for vegetation and habitat impacts. Under this assumption

it is not anticipated that further mitigation credits would be required for the weir structure and flap gate installation.

Table E-1 provides surface water impacts by alternative.

ID FLUCFCS1 & USFWS2

Impact acreage for Interim 2-Lane Roundabout

Impact acreage for Ultimate Partial 3-Lane Roundabout

Impact acreage for Ditch Conversion

Surface Waters

1 510 / E2FO3x 0.02 0.02 0.34

Total Surface Waters Impacts 0.02 0.02 0.34

Source: 1FDOT. 1999; 2Cowardin, et al., 1979 USFWS Wetland Descriptions: E2FO3x: Estuarine, intertidal, forested, broad leaved persistent, excavated

For this project, the impacts to Surface Water 1 resulting from the preferred alternative will not require mitigation and no UMAM

assessment was performed. It is not anticipated that mitigation credits will be required for the US 41 roadway improvement

It is anticipated that a Nationwide Permit (NWP) will be required from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) for the impact

due to the preferred alternative. A NWP authorizes a category of minor activities with minimal cumulative adverse impacts on the

aquatic environment and are valid for an individual project only if the conditions of the appropriate permit type are met. NWPs

are activity specific and some activities authorized by NWPs require pre-construction notification to the USACE District Engineer

before commencing with the work. The NWP 14 for Linear Transportation Projects includes allows up to 0.30 acres of impact in

tidal waters.

Southwest Florida Water Management District (SWFWMD) requires an Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) when construction

of any project results in the creation of a new or modification of an existing water management system or results in impacts to

Waters of the State. An individual ERP is anticipated.

40 CFR Part 122 prohibits point source discharges of stormwater to waters of the U.S. without a National Pollutant Discharge

Elimination System (NPDES) permit. Under the State of Florida’s delegated authority to administer the NPDES program,

construction sites that will result in greater than one acre of disturbance must file for and obtain either coverage under an

appropriate generic permit contained in Chapter 62-621, F.A.C., or an individual permit issued pursuant to Chapter 62-620, F.A.C.

Table E-1 Proposed Surface Water Impact Summary

DRAFT


A major component of the NPDES permit is the development of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). The SWPPP

identifies potential sources of pollution that may reasonably be expected to affect the quality of stormwater discharges from the

site and discusses good engineering practices (i.e., best management practices) that will be used to reduce the pollutants.

E.2 Water Quality

The effects of the project on water quality were considered per part 2 Chapter 20 of the FDOT Project Development and

Environment Manual to ensure compliance with the Clean Water Act, particularly the National Pollution Discharge Elimination

System (NPDES) program administered by DEP under Section 403, Florida Statutes, and state water quality regulations under

Chapter 62 of the Florida Administrative Code. A water quality impact evaluation (WQIE) checklist was completed for this project.

Sarasota Bay is a designated OFW and is located about 1,300 feet to the west of the project study area (see Figure E-1). Surface

Water 1, the drainage ditch, outfalls to another man-made feature which is directly adjacent to the Bay. However, Surface Water

1 itself is not directly adjacent to OFWs. Sarasota Bay is a 303(d) listed impaired waters, impaired for dissolved oxygen (nutrients),

fecal coliform, mercury (in fish tissue) and nutrients (chlorophyll a). There are no other wetlands or surface waters in the project

study area.

E.3 Special Designations

The project study area was assessed for the presence of specially-designated areas such as OFW, Aquatic Preserves, and Wild

and Scenic Rivers. There are none of these within the project limits. However, Sarasota Bay, which is about 1,300 feet west of

the project study area, is an OFW.

The ditch (Surface Water 1) was assessed for sovereign submerged lands. Surface Water 1 is a man-made drainage feature that

outfalls to another man-made feature-a boat basin-which is adjacent to Sarasota Bay. It has been determined that Surface Water

1 is not sovereign submerged lands. A copy of the title determination correspondence is included in the NRE.

E.4 Wildlife and Habitat

This project was evaluated for potential impacts to wildlife and habitat resources, including protected species in accordance with

50 CFR Part 402 of the Endangered Species

Act of 1973, as amended; 50 CFR 17

(federal animal list); 379.2291 F.S.,

Endangered and Threatened Species Act;

Chapter 68A-27.003 F.A.C. (Endangered

and Threatened species list); 68A-27.005

F.A.C. (Species of Special Concern list), and

Part 2, Chapter 27 of the FDOT’s Project

Development and Environment Manual,

Protected Species and Habitat.

A Natural Resources Evaluation (NRE)

(dated April 2017) was prepared under

separate cover for this project to document

current environmental conditions along the

corridor and potential impacts to wildlife,

habitat, or listed species; evaluate the

project area’s current potential to support species listed as endangered, threatened or of special concern; identify current

permitting and regulatory agency coordination requirements for the project; and request comments from regulatory agencies with

jurisdiction over the study.

Table E-2 Protected Species Impact Determinations

Project Impact Determination Federal Listed Species

May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect

West Indian Manatee (Trichechus manatus)

Wood Stork (Mycteria americana)

No Effect

Florida Scrub Jay (Aphelocoma coerulescens)

Eastern Indigo Snake (Drymarchon corais couperi)

Piping Plover (Charadrius melodus)

Project Impact Determination State Listed Species


Little Blue Heron (Egretta caerulea)

Reddish Egret (Egretta rufescens)

Tricolored Heron (Egretta tricolor)

Roseate Spoonbill (Platalea ajaja) Project Impact Determination Other Species of Concern


Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)

Osprey (Pandion haliaetus) DRAFT


Coordination with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), and the Florida

Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) will occur throughout the course of this PD&E study. This evaluation also

included literature reviews, database searches, and field assessments of the project area to identify the potential occurrence of

protected species and/or presence of federal-designated critical habitat.

Based on evaluation of collected data and field reviews, the federal- and state-listed species discussed below were observed as

having the potential to occur within or adjacent to the project study area. An effect determination was then made for each of these

federal- and state-listed species based on an analysis of the potential impacts of the proposed project on each species. (see

Table E-2).

Federal Species

West Indian Manatee (Trichechus manatus)

Sub-optimal habitat is present in the surface water ditch. The potential for manatees to be present in the project study area has

been determined to be low. The surface water ditch could be modified to store stormwater and would include the addition of a

weir structure and flap gate at the mouth of the ditch. The project will be designed to avoid injuring or trapping manatees within

the ditch using manatee exclusion devices. The contractor will be required to conform with the Standard Manatee Condition for

In-Water Work 2011, and this requirement will be noted in the plans. Given the potential for work within the surface water ditch, it

has been determined the project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the manatee.

Wood Stork (Mycteria americana)

The project area falls within the core foraging areas (CFAs) of three documented Wood Stork nesting colonies (Ayers Point,

Blackburn Bay and Casey Key Sorrento Inlet). The nearest colony is located approximately 11.0 miles south of the project area.

The surface water within the project right-of-way may provide foraging for the Wood Stork. Impacts associated with the

alternatives are anticipated to impact less than 0.5 acres of suitable foraging habitat (SFH). Referencing the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers, Jacksonville District, USFWS, Jacksonville Ecological Services Field Office and State of Florida Effect Determination

Key for the Wood Stork Central and North Peninsular Florida (2008), a project that impacts less than or equal to 0.5 acre of SFH

may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the Wood Stork.

Little Blue Heron (Egretta caerulea)

The surface water ditch may provide occasional foraging habitat; however, no other areas of suitable habitat for foraging, nesting

or roosting are present in the project area. The probability of occurrence of the Little Blue Heron within the project area has been

determined to be low. Impacts to aquatic habitat resulting from the project are de minimis and will have insignificant individual or

cumulative adverse impact to wading bird foraging habitat. It has been determined the project may affect, but is not likely to

adversely affect the Little Blue Heron.

Reddish Egret (Egretta rufescens)


or roosting are present in the project area; therefore, the probability of occurrence of the Reddish Egret within the project area

has been determined to be low. Impacts to aquatic habitat resulting from the project are de minimis and will have insignificant

individual or cumulative adverse impact to wading bird foraging habitat. It has been determined the project may affect, but is

not likely to adversely affect the Reddish Egret.

Tricolored Heron (Egretta tricolor)


or roosting are present in the project area; therefore, the probability of occurrence of the Tricolored Heron within the project area


DRAFT



not likely to adversely affect the Tricolored Heron.

Roseate Spoonbill (Platalea ajaja)


or roosting are present in the project area; therefore, the probability of occurrence of the Roseate Spoonbill within the project area



not likely to adversely affect the Roseate Spoonbill.

Other Protected Species

Bald Eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus)

The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) Bald Eagle Nest Locator website was consulted to determine the

reported history of nesting Bald Eagles in the vicinity. There are no known nest locations in the project corridor (FWC, undated),

no pine trees or cell towers are present for nesting opportunity. There have been no observations made of Bald Eagles in the

project area, and no nests have been reported within one mile of the project study area. However, given that foraging habitat is

present adjacent to the project study area, the probability of occurrence for this species has been determined to be low. Therefore,

it has been determined that the project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect the Bald Eagle.

Osprey (Pandion haliaetus)

There are no known nest locations in the project corridor; and no large trees or cell towers are present for nesting opportunity.

However, Ospreys were observed in flight over in the project study area during field reviews. Given the observation of Ospreys

during field reviews, the potential for this species to occur in the project area has been determined to be high. With the presence

of foraging habitat but no nesting habitat, it has been determined that the project may affect, but is not likely to adversely affect

the Osprey.

The NRE was submitted to the US Fish and Wildlife Service and they have indicated their concurrence with these findings in a

letter dated _____. The effect determination for the state-listed species was concurred with by the FFWCC in a letter dated

______.

E.5 Floodplains/Floodways

Protection of floodplains and floodways is required by Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management; USDOT Order 5650.2, Floodplain Management and Protection; and Federal-Aid Policy Guide 23 CFR § 650A. The discussion that follows is consistent with part 2 Chapter 24 of the FDOT Project Development and Environment Manual.

Floodplain areas were identified within the study are using the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). The FIRM map number is 12115C0133F for Sarasota County, Florida with an effective date of November 4, 2016. The existing intersection is located entirely within the Sarasota Bay Coastal Watershed, designated as Zone AE with a 100-year base flood stage elevation of 10.0 feet, as illustrated in the floodplains map provided in the PD&E Study Location Hydraulics Analysis. DRAFT

DRAFT | October 4, 2017 F-1

ATTACHMENT F. Noise Evaluation Summary

Federal Noise Regulation Applicability | The project was reviewed for applicability of 23 CFR 772, Procedures for Abatement

of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction Noise. FDOT policy and procedures for traffic noise analysis are documented in the

PD&E Manual, Part 2, Chapter 18. The applicability requirements in the PD&E Manual are consistent with the requirements of 23

CFR 772. A traffic noise analysis is required for all Type I projects as defined in 23 CFR 772. By definition, a Type I project involves

any of the following:

1. Construction of a highway on new location

2. Addition of a through traffic lane

3. Addition of an auxiliary lane except for when the auxiliary lane is a turn lane

4. Addition or relocation of interchange lanes or ramps

5. Restriping existing pavement for the purpose of adding a through-traffic lane or an auxiliary lane

6. Addition or alteration of a weigh station, rest stop, ride-share lot or toll plaza

7. A physical alteration of an existing highway involving either a substantial horizontal alteration or substantial vertical

alteration

As evident from the description of the project, the proposed improvements would not include or provide Items 1 through 6 above.

To determine if Item 7, a substantial physical alteration would occur, the project alternatives were evaluated further and is

documented in the PD&E Study Noise Study Technical Memorandum.

A restaurant (currently named Joey D’s Chicago Style Eatery and Pizzeria) is located on the southwest quadrant of the intersection

at 211 North US 41/Tamiami Trail (identified by the Sarasota County Property Appraiser

as Parcel ID Number 2009160007). This location is the only noise sensitive site with a

potential to be affected by project improvements. The recommended alternative requires

the property on which the restaurant is located to be acquired as part of the project.

Therefore, regardless of the change in the horizontal or vertical alignment of either US

41 or Fruitville Road near the roundabout, the project would not meet the definition of a

Type I project.

Additionally, there is an Embassy Suites Hotel currently under construction on the

southeast quadrant of the intersection. At the time of this analysis, the location of any

exterior use areas of the hotel could not be determined. However, an artist rendering of

the hotel obtained from the hotel’s website depicts a swimming pool, and per the website,

is located on the 8th floor. Since the maximum elevation change of the roundabout is two feet, the project would not result in a

substantial physical alteration of the roadway; therefore, the FDOT Noise Policy is also not applicable to the project (i.e., no

highway traffic noise assessment is required).

Above: Artist rendering of the future Embassy Suites (source: www.embassysuites.com)

DRAFT

DRAFT | October 4, 2017 G-1

ATTACHMENT G. AIR QUALITY SUMMARY

The project is located within an area that is designated as being in attainment for the air pollutants for which there are National

Ambient Air Quality Standards. Therefore, the conformity requirements of the Clean Air Act are not applicable to the project.

Additionally, as defined in 23 CFR 772, the project is not a Type I project.

According to the FHWA, roundabouts often provide air quality benefits by reducing vehicle delay and the number and duration of

vehicle stops compared with signalized or all-way stop-controlled alternatives. Even when there are heavy volumes, vehicles

continue to advance slowly in moving queues rather than coming to a complete stop. This can reduce air quality impacts and fuel

consumption significantly by reducing the number of acceleration/deceleration cycles and the time spent idling. Because the air

quality impact screening model, CO Florida 2012, evaluates only intersections and other similar facilities where vehicles come to

a complete stop and idle, roundabout intersections are not evaluated and are presumed to benefit air quality. Further, because

the project is in an area that is designated as attainment for all of the NAAQS, the conformity requirements of the Clean Air Act

(CAA) do not apply. Furthermore, the project is expected to improve traffic flow, as discussed above, which should reduce

operational greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

DRAFT

DRAFT | October 4, 2017 H-1

ATTACHMENT H. CONTAMINATION SCREENING SUMMARY

H.1 Geotechnical Data

A soil survey map is shown in Figure H-1 and is provided as a full-size image in the PD&E Study Soil Survey Report. Based on

a review of the Sarasota County Soil Survey published by USDA-NRCS, it appears that there are two soil-mapping units noted

within the project limits ( EauGallie and Myakka Fine Sands (Map Unit 10) and Orsino fine sand (Map Unit 29)).

General Soil Properties

The soils and groundwater conditions for the above soil mapping units was obtained from the Sarasota County Soil Survey

published by USDA-NRCS and the Web Soil Survey and is presented in the tables below:

Map No.

Soil Name Hydrologic Soil Group Depth to High Water

Table Typical Soil

Types

10 EauGallie and Myakka Fine Sands B/D 0.5 feet – 1. 5 feet Fine Sand

29 Orsino Fine Sand A 4.0 feet – 5.0 feet Fine Sand

Figure H-1 | Soil Survey

Table H-1 | Sarasota County USDA NRCS Soil Survey Information DRAFT


Map No.

Soil Name Soil Classification Permeability

(inch/hour) Depth (in) USCS AASHTO

10 EauGallie and Myakka Fine

Sands

0-6 SP, SP-SM A-3 6.0 – 20.0

6-22 SP, SP-SM A-3 6.0 – 20.0

22-44 SM, SP-SM A-2-4, A-3 0.6 – 6.0

44-48 SP, SP-SM A-2-4, A-3 6.0 – 20.0

48-66 SC, SC-SM, SM A-2-4, A-2-6 0.1 – 0.6

66-80 SC, SC-SM, SM A-2-4, A-2-6 0.6 – 6.0

0-6 SP, SP-SM A-3 6.0 – 20.0

6-24 SP, SP-SM A-3 6.0 – 20.0

24-42 SM, SP-SM A-2-4, A-3 0.6 – 6.0

42-80 SP, SP-SM A-3 6.0 – 20.0

29 Orsino Fine Sand

0-4 SP A-3 20 – 40.0

4-18 SP A-3 20 – 40.0

18-22 SP A-3 20 – 40.0

22-80 SP, SP-SM A-3 20 – 40.0

Groundwater Conditions

Per the USDA-NRSC Soil Survey, much of the project vicinity consists of moderately to poorly drained soils. The seasonal high

groundwater table is near the ground surface throughout the project limits. Within the project vicinity, the Seasonal High

Groundwater Table (SHGWT) levels in their natural condition are estimated to range from 6 inches to 5.0 feet below natural

grades.

H.2 Contamination

A Level 1 contamination evaluation was conducted and documented in a Contamination Screening Evaluation Report (CSER) in

general accordance with the FDOT PD&E Manual, Part 2, Chapter 22 . The report presented the results of findings from site

reconnaissance, review of historic aerial photographs, topographic maps, and regulatory databases.

Twenty-two mainline facilities/sites were investigated for current or past operations that may present the potential for finding

petroleum contamination or hazardous materials, and therefore may impact the proposed improvements for this project. The

following risk rankings have been applied: one “High” rated site, one “Medium” rated site, 15 “Low” rated sites, and five sites rated

"No” for potential contaminaion concerns.

Site Name(s) & Address Facility ID No. Distance & Direction Concern Risk Rating 2 Former Chevron 211 N

Tamiami Trl 8520822 Within US 41 proposed ROW Petroleum High(2)

3 Former BP #00376053 231 N Tamiami Trl

8520836 Within US 41 proposed ROW Petroleum Medium(3)

Notes: (2) According to the EDM database report, four USTs were removed in 1985: 1x8,000-gallon unleaded gasoline, 1x8,000-gallon leaded gasoline, 4,000-gallon leaded

gasoline, 550- gallon waste oil. According to an FDEP Storage Tank Facility Complaint Site Inspection Report dated 5/5/2010, petroleum odors were noted approximately 10 feet west of US 41 during a sewer line excavation. A copy of the report is included in CSER-Appendix F. Reportedly, no cleanup has been initiated and no further information is available on the OCULUS database. Based on the close proximity, lack of reported remedial efforts and possible petroleum constituents within the proposed right-of-way, this facility is given an initial potential contamination risk rating of "High."

(3) According to the EDM database report, five (5) USTs were removed in 1986: 3x4,000-gallon unleaded gasoline, 1x4,000-gallon leaded gasoline, 550-gallon waste oil. Two discharges are reported: unleaded gasoline (quantity not specified) discharge date 10/2/1985 and waste oil (quantity not specified) discharge date 10/1/1994 - an NFA was issued for both discharges on 1/19/2001. According to the most recent sampling event detailed in the Additional Soils and Groundwater Sampling and Analysis Report dated 9/8/2000, although petroleum related soil and groundwater concentrations were below the applicable SCTLs and GCTLs, several analytes of concern were detected at elevated levels on the property. Given the close proximity and possible residual petroleum constituents within the proposed right-of-way, this facility is given an initial potential contamination risk rating of "Medium."

Table H-2 | Sarasota County USDA NRCS Soil Survey Information

Table H-3 Summary of Potential Contamination Sites DRAFT


A summary for each site is outlined in the Potential Contamination Sites table below and detailed in Section 7.1 of the CSER. For

the sites ranked “No” for potential contamination, no further action is planned. The site has been evaluated and determined not

to have any potential environmental risk to the study area at this time. For sites ranked “Low” for potential contamination, no

further action is required at this time. These sites/facilities have the potential to impact the study area, but based on select variables

have been determined to have low risk to corridor improvements at this time.

Should any of these variables change, additional assessment of the facilities would be conducted. For those locations with a risk

ranking of “Medium” or “High”, a Level II field screening completed in coordination with the FDOT’s District Contamination Impact

Coordinator is warranted and will be conducted for this project.

DRAFT

DRAFT | October 4, 2017 I-1

ATTACHMENT I. UTILITIES AND RAILROADS SUMMARY

I.1 Utilities and ITS Infrastructure

For this project, the following activities were undertaken to identify utilities within the project envelope and make a preliminary

determination on the impacts that each of the build alternatives would have on utilities:

• A Sunshine State One Call Design Ticket was created in December 2016, identifying eight utility agency owners (UAOs)

with facilities in the limits of the study. These are listed in Table I.1-1.

• Field surveys were conducted to identify above-ground and buried utilities on the corridor

• UAOs were contacted and asked to return information relating to the size, type, and location of their facilities within the

limits of the project

• Utility Work Schedules (UWSs) and Red-Green-Brown (RGB)

markups of plans for the US 41/SR 45 from Browning Street

to 11th Street FPID 431311-1 depicting existing utilities and

proposed adjustments necessitated by that project, which is

currently under construction, were reviewed

The utility information collected based on these activities is

considered Levels C and D. The preliminary locations of existing

utilities were identified on Utility Maps and analyzed for utility

conflicts. Based on this information, potential utility conflicts for the

Interim 2-Lane and Ultimate Partial 3-Lane Roundabout

Alternatives were identified and are summarized in Table I.1-2.

During design, measures should be taken to minimize impacts to

utility infrastructure to the greatest extent possible.

I.1.1 Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS)

Existing ITS infrastructure on the project shown on the Sarasota County regional advanced traffic

management system (ATMS) as-built plans (FPID 420974-1-58-01) was evaluated as part of the

utility impact assessment. ITS cable runs are present on both US 41 and Fruitville Road, with

splice boxes and cabinets on the southwest and northeast quadrants of the intersection. An FDOT

portable traffic count station (ATS#174055) is located east of the intersection on Fruitville Road.

Table I.1-1 | Utility/Agency Owners (UAOs)

UAO Utility Type

City of Sarasota Water, Sewer

Comcast Cable Television (CATV)

Fibernet Direct Fiber Optic

FDOT Traffic Count Station

Fibernet Direct Fiber Optic

FP&L Distribution Power

Level 3 Fiber Optic

Sarasota County Traffic / ITS

TECO Peoples Gas Natural Gas

Above: Existing ITS facilities at the intersection

Table I.1-2 | Summary of Potential Utility Conflicts

Utility/Agency Owner

Utility Type Utility Size Conflict Description

City of Sarasota

Water Fire Hydrants

Two fire hydrants (one located on the northeast quadrant of the intersection, and one located on the southeast quadrant) will require relocation along with

their connecting water lines.

Sewer Manholes Manholes in the intersection and on US 41 and Fruitville Road may require lid adjustments to the new profile.

DRAFT

DRAFT | October 4, 2017 I-2

Utility/Agency Owner

Utility Type Utility Size Conflict Description

Comcast Cable

BFO/CATV Cable, Splice Boxes and Manholes

Running along the east side of US 41 (assumed location behind the curb) and through the intersection. Running along south side of Fruitville Road.

Adjustments and relocation of facilities may be necessitated due changes in the horizontal and vertical geometry of US 41 and Fruitville Road.

FDOT Traffic 174055 – ATS Located on Fruitville Road just east of the intersection, this portable count station may require relocation due to the addition of the left-turn lane on

Fruitville Road.

Fibernet Direct BFO Buried Fiber Optic, Splice Boxes, Sidewalk Vault

Running along the east side of US 41 (assumed location behind the curb) and through the intersection. Adjustments and relocation may be necessitated

due changes in horizontal and vertical roadway geometry.

Florida Power & Light Distribution

OE <50kv

Overhead Electric, Power Poles

Overhead electric and a power pole line running along the north side of Fruitville Road behind the curb from west of Cocoanut to just east of the

Intersection may require adjustment due to the addition of a left turn lane on Fruitville Road at the Intersection.

BE

<50kv

Buried Electric Buried electric along US 41 and Fruitville behind/under the curb, assumed providing power for street lighting, will require relocation with light poles.

Frontier Communications

BFO Buried Fiber Optic, Splice Boxes

Running along the west side of US 41 assumed behind the curb and crossing the Quay driveway. Adjustments and relocation may be necessitated due

changes in horizontal and vertical roadway geometry.

Level 3 Communications

BFO Buried Fiber Optic, Splice Boxes

Running along the east side US 41 behind the curb and crossing the Quay driveway. Adjustments and relocation may be necessitated due changes in

horizontal and vertical roadway geometry.

Sarasota County Traffic/ITS

BFO/OFO Buried Fiber Optic, Splice Boxes,

Traffic Cabinets

Running along the north side Fruitville Road behind the curb, crossing US 41 and running along the west side of US 41 for the length of the project.

TECO Peoples Gas

G Buried 2” Natural Gas Line

Located south of the intersection on both the west and east sides of US 41 between the curb and ROW line. There is a short section of the line on the

west side that will conflict with new curb and drainage that must be relocated.

Sarasota County

Intelligent Transportation Systems

(ITS)

signal equipment, drop fiber,

potential relocation or replacement of Bluetooth devices,

fiber pull boxes, splice vaults, and trunk fiber optic

cable

Located within the limits of the intersection and along US 41 and Fruitville Road. Note: While there are no CCTV cameras currently at the intersection, Sarasota County would prefer that CCTV be installed with the relocation of

the other ITS components. All ITS devices will be integrated to the Sarasota County ATMS trunk fiber for access at the Traffic Management Center. The City of Sarasota preference is to integrate the proposed pedestrian hybrid

beacons into the ATMS system.

DRAFT

DRAFT | October 4, 2017 J-1

ATTACHMENT J. CONSTRUCTION IMPACT SUMMARY

Construction activities for the proposed US 41 at Fruitville Road improvements may have minor and temporary air, noise, vibration,

water quality, traffic flow, and visual impacts for those residents and travelers in the immediate vicinity of the project.

Potential air quality impacts would be temporary and would primarily occur in the form of emissions from diesel-powered

construction equipment and dust from construction activities. Air pollution associated with the creation of airborne particles will be

effectively controlled using watering or the application of other controlled materials in accordance with the FDOT Standard

Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction, as directed by the FDOT Project Engineer.

Potential noise and vibrations impacts could result from the use of heavy equipment. Noise control measures used during

construction should include those contained in the FDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction. The

construction contractor will also be required to adhere to local construction noise and/or vibration ordinances.

Potential water quality impacts resulting from erosion and sedimentation will be controlled during construction in accordance with

the FDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction and using best management practices. temporary erosion

control features as specified in the standard specifications, Section 104, and should consist of temporary grassing, sodding,

mulching, sandbagging, slope drains, sediment basins, sediment checks, artificial coverings, and berms.

Access to all businesses and residences should be maintained to the extent practical through controlled construction scheduling,

and signage, delineating business driveways, should also be a consideration.

The present traffic congestion may become worse during stages of construction where narrow lanes may be necessary. Traffic

delays should be controlled to the extent possible where many construction operations are in progress at the same time. The

contractor should be required to maintain two lanes of traffic in each direction of US 41 always and to comply with FDOT best

management practices.

Recommended public information activities during construction include:

• Conducting a public construction kickoff meeting that informs stakeholders of planned construction activities and the

construction schedule

• Advertising the name, address, and telephone of an FDOT contact person both at the construction site and through

media outlets to assist the public in obtaining immediate answers to questions and logging complaints about project

activity

• Providing ample notice of road closures and other pertinent information to the traveling public through signage, media

press releases, postings on www.SWFLRoads.com and partner agency websites and social media outlets

• Maintaining open lines of communication with emergency services and transit providers throughout the duration of

construction

• Providing regular updates to property owners and tenants in the immediate vicinity of the intersection through flyers,

regular construction updates, and door-to-door visits

DRAFT

DRAFT | October 4, 2017 L-1

ATTACHMENT K. ENGINEERING ANALYSIS SUMMARY

The development of alternatives began with understanding the deficiencies of the existing intersection (both traffic operations and

drainage) and the goals the City of Sarasota as set forth for the area through their Connecting Downtown to the Bayfront plans.

From there, the following initial set of Alternatives were studied:

1. No-Build

2. Traffic Signal Improvements

3. 2-Lane Roundabout

4. 3-Lane Roundabout

During the initial feasibility assessment, the roundabout alternatives were refined to:

3a. Minimized 2-Lane Roundabout Alternative | This alternative was examined with the express intent to reduce the overall

footprint and avoid/reduce right-of-way impacts. This alternative was presented at the project Public Meeting and was labeled

“Interim 2-Lane Roundabout Alternative”.

4a. Ultimate Partial 3-Lane Roundabout Alternative | This alternative was examined due to its operational benefits, which

are equivalent to a full three-lane alternative, but has a reduced overall footprint. This alternative was presented at the project

Public Meeting and was labeled “Ultimate 3-Lane Roundabout Alternative”.

K.1 Design Analysis

K.1.1 Design Criteria

The roadway design criteria used in the development of the evaluated alternatives are based on design parameters outlined in

the FDOT Plans Preparation Manual (PPM) Volume 1, January 2017 edition.

K.1.2 Design Variations

The design speeds for US41 are 40/35 mph design speeds. Therefore, the controlling design elements for design exceptions are

limited to design speed and design loading capacity. These elements are either not applicable or do deviate from criteria, therefore

there are no design exceptions required for this project. The following table lists potential design variations required for the

preferred alternative.

Design Element Description Notes

Travel Lane Width 10-foot (11-foot required) lanes are present to match the existing lane width within the project limits.

Lanes widen from the existing width to 13-16 feet depending on location due to accommodation of the design vehicle.

Bicycle Lanes Bicycle lanes are omitted on US 41 as improvements are limited to the intersection and there no current plans to construct lanes up and downstream of the project.

Existing 5-foot bicycle lanes are maintained on Fruitville Road. 10-foot shared use path (MURT) to be installed on west side US 41 to accommodate bicyclists.

Border Width Border width along east side of US 41 is 10.75 feet minimum (12 feet required) due to existing right-of-way and proximity to existing building.

Table K.1-1 | Design Variations

DRAFT

DRAFT | October 4, 2017 K-2

K.2 Traffic Analysis Summary

The following summarizes the results of the Project Traffic Report (PTR) as they pertain to the study intersection:

K.2.1 Existing Conditions

Existing Intersection Operating Conditions | The overall average weekday peak hour delays result in level of service (LOS) D

operations; however, traffic demands are near the available capacity for some individual movements.

Existing Multimodal Facilities | There are no on-street bicycle facilities existing or proposed on US 41 and 5-foot-wide bicycle

lanes exist along Fruitville Road. There are existing 5-foot-wide sidewalks on both sides of US 41 and Fruitville Road. The existing

multi-use recreational trail (MURT) is located on the west side of US 41 and is in the same location as the sidewalk. Pedestrians

have crosswalks and pedestrian count down signals available at the existing signalized intersection to utilize for crossing US 41

and Fruitville Road. Pedestrians experience significant wait times at this intersection currently due to its existing operations.

Bicyclists are currently underserved on US 41 and pedestrians are underserved at the intersection.

K.2.2 Future Conditions

AADT Volume Forecasts | Upon a comprehensive review of the historical, population, and model growth rates, the areawide

model growth rate of 0.56% was used on all study segments. The applied growth rate results in a total AADT growth of

approximately 13.44% between 2016 and 2040 (24 years).

Peak-Hour Turning Movement Volume Forecasts | The average peak-to-daily ratio along US 41 during the AM peak hour was

6.5%. Using the Standard K of 9% artificially inflated the DDHVs, and because this corridor is already congested, the artificial

inflation resulted in overly conservative analyses. Therefore, a separate set of design factors (K factor and D factor) specific to

the AM peak hour was used. An 8% K factor for the AM peak hour was utilized. Based upon direction from FDOT staff, future

2040 peak hour volumes were developed for a no-build scenario and a build scenario.

Future Intersection Operating Conditions | A partial 2-Lane Roundabout and a partial 3-Lane Roundabout were evaluated,

using SIDRA and HCM 6th Edition methodologies. The HCM 6th Edition methodology could not be used for the partial 3-Lane

roundabout and was found to be overly conservative for the partial 2-Lane Roundabout. According to SIDRA modeling results,

the partial 2-Lane Roundabout was found to significantly reduce the afternoon PM peak-hour intersection delay (95.6 sec/veh to

34.2 sec/veh). However, the AM peak-hour delay increased from 55.0 sec/veh to 66.0 sec/veh, and the intersection exceeded

capacity with a v/c ratio of 1.21 for the southbound approach. The partial 3-Lane Roundabout was found to be far more effective

with intersection delays of 11.9 sec/veh for the AM peak-hour and 14.0 sec/veh for the PM peak hour. The maximum V/C ratios

are 0.69 in the AM peak-hour and 0.73 in the PM peak-hour.

Multimodal Analysis | Pedestrian and bicyclists are considered equal users under a Complete Streets and Multimodal type

analyses. There are no on-street bicycle facilities existing or proposed on US 41 and 5-foot-wide bike lanes are located on Fruitville

Road. As a result, and in conjunction with the existing MURT, we have proposed to place bicyclists on the proposed minimum 10-

foot-wide wide multi-use trail along the west side of US 41 throughout the project limits. In addition, we have provided, in all

alternatives, connection from the Fruitville Road bike lanes across the intersection to the MURT. Pedestrians will use the MURT

on the west side and a minimum 5-foot-wide sidewalk on the east side and cross the intersection at the same points as bicyclists.

Roundabout alternatives will utilize HAWK signals for pedestrian and bicyclists crossings.

K.2.3 Crash Data

Collision data was downloaded from the FDOT’s Collision Analysis Reporting System (CARS) and Signal Four Analytics for the

five-year period of 2011 to 2015. DRAFT


One hundred ninety (190) collisions were reported within the vicinity of the intersection for the five years studied. These collisions

included 82 rear end crashes, 39 sideswipe crashes, 22 angle crashes, 15 left-turn crashes, 13 right-turn crashes, 6 pedestrian

crashes, 3 bike crashes, 2 head-on crashes, 2 parked car crashes, 2 hit sign/sign post crashes, 1 backed-into crash, 1 hit barrier

wall, 1 other-fixed-object crash, and 1 ran into ditch/culvert crash. The collisions resulted in 50 injuries and no fatalities. Twenty-

five percent of the crashes occurred during low light level conditions, and 11% of the crashes occurred on a wet roadway surface.

The collision statistics are summarized by year in Table K.1-1. Collision summaries for each year of data are provided in the PTR.

K.2.4 Signalization

US 41 at Fruitville Road operates under a modified FDOT Signal Operating Plan (SOP) 9, which includes a protected/permissive

southbound left turn, northbound and southbound through phases, and sequential eastbound and westbound phases. Pedestrian

indications, pushbuttons, and crosswalks are provided across the north, south, and east approaches. The pedestrian indications

operate concurrently with adjacent vehicle through phases.

This signal is included in a coordinated system that includes US 41 from Gulf Gate Drive to College Drive/

General Spaatz Boulevard and SR 789/Gulf Stream Avenue at Sunset Drive/Golden Gate Point. The signal operates in

coordinated mode with cycle lengths of 170 seconds from 6:30 AM to 6:30 PM on weekdays, 9:30 AM to 7:00 PM on Saturdays,

and 10:00 AM to 6:30 PM on Sundays; 130 seconds from 6:30 PM to 10:30 PM on weekdays; and 120 seconds from 6:30 AM to

9:30 AM and 7:00 PM to 11:00 PM on Saturdays, and 8:30 AM to 10:00 AM and 6:30 PM to 9:30 PM on Sundays. The existing

signal timings are included in the PTR.

Table K.1-1 | Collision Statistics

Collision Type Total Contributing Cause Total Severity Total Lighting Total

Rear End 82 Careless Driving 80 Fatalities 0 Daylight 124

Sideswipe 39 FTYRW 32 Injuries 50 Dark (SL) 39

Angle 22 Improper Lane Change 21 Road Surface Unknown 19

Left Turn 15 Disregarded Traffic Signal 19 Dry 150 Dusk 4

Right Turn 13 Followed Too Closely 14 Wet 21 Dark (No SL) 3

Pedestrian 6 Driver Distraction 7 Unknown 19 Dawn 1

Bike 3 Improper Turn 6 Totals 190 Totals 190

Head-On 2 Improper Passing 4

Parked Car 2 No Improper Driving 2

Hit Sign/Sign Post 2 All Other 2

Backed Into 1 Improper Backing 1

Hit Barrier Wall 1 Alcohol-Under Influence 1

Other Fixed Object 1 Failed to Maintain Equipment

1

Ran Into Ditch/Culvert

1

Totals 190 Totals 190

DRAFT


K.3 Drainage Summary

K.3.1 Existing Drainage

The intersection of US 41 at Fruitville Road is located within a highly urban watershed that routinely floods from the stormwater

runoff generated during summer rainfall events. Drainage basins (and their basin divides) within the watershed that contribute

stormwater runoff through the project site were analyzed to determine their volume and impact of flooding. The outfall for the

watershed is via a trapezoidal ditch, referred to as the Quay Ditch, which links the storm drain collection and conveyance system

along US 41 to a marina within Sarasota Bay. The following is a summary of the information obtained as well as the process and

analysis performed to determine the volume of stormwater runoff that flows through the intersection and corresponding flooding

elevations.

24-hour storm events were included in the modeling provided by Sarasota County: 100-year, 25-year, 10-year, 5-year, and Mean

Annual. The total accumulated volume through Link RH2901A-P for the Mean Annual 24-hour storm event is more than 21 acre-

feet (945,000 feet3). With limited storage capacity within the basin, shorter duration storm events were also simulated to evaluate

drainage improvements.

The 2-year 1-hour and the 3-year 1-hour storms were selected and simulated. The Zone 6 Intensity Duration Frequency (IDF)

curves were used to determine the 2-year 1-hour and 3-year 1-hour rainfall intensities of 2.3 inches per hour and 2.54 inches per

hour, respectively. New hydrology simulations using these rainfall totals and the FDOT 1-hour distribution were generated and

hydraulic simulations were run using this hydrologic output. The total cumulative volume for the 1-hour storm events was taken at

hour 2.5 in the simulation and for the 24-hour storm events was taken at hour 20.

In addition to the CF3 Model, Sarasota County has developed plans to improve to the Quay Ditch through the US 41 Drainage

Outfall Improvement Project. These improvements to the Quay Ditch have been permitted through the Southwest Florida Water

Management District (SWFWMD) under ERP No. 440-40881.000 (Application No. 654521), dated June 25, 2013. The existing

conditions ICPR model for this project was created using survey provided by the County and supplemented by the County’s GIS

drainage database and drainage maps from the City of Sarasota. Drainage basins were delineated using the County’s LIDAR

information. The permitted model delineated 32 basins (46 acres) contributing runoff to the Quay Ditch. In this model, the

boundary conditions were set downstream of the Quay Ditch, so that the flow through this ditch could be modeled.

The boundary conditions for the permitted ICPR model (Node: TIDAL) were determined by the Mean High Water (MHW and Low

High Water (LHW) elevations taken from survey of the project area. The MHW elevation used to set the maximum tailwater stage

for this model for the boundary conditions was 0.17 feet NAVD88. The LHW elevation of -1.10 feet NAVD88 was used as the

initial stage and low tailwater condition.

When comparing the peak stages between the CF3 model and the permitted model for the US 41 Drainage Outfall Improvement

Project, it shows that the CF3 model generated lower peak stages. Since the US 41 Drainage Outfall Improvement Project ICPR

model analyzes flow through the Quay Ditch, has higher peak stages, and has been reviewed by Sarasota County and permitting

agencies, it will be used to analyze the improvements to mitigate the existing flooding issues within the US 41 at Fruitville Road

project limits. Additional drainage data is provided in the PD&E Study Location Hydraulics Report.

K.3.2 Location Hydraulics

A preliminary location hydraulics assessment was conducted for the study. Based on this evaluation, the US 41 at Fruitville Road

intersection improvements recommended build alternatives are feasible. The proposed project will reduce the existing amount of

impervious area, therefore reducing stormwater runoff. In addition, the improvements should not encourage floodplain

development due to the local (FEMA) floodplain and SWFWMD regulations. The project’s drainage design will be consistent with

local County, FDOT and SWFWMD design guidelines, and there will therefore be no significant changes in the areas base flood

elevation within the Sarasota Bay Watershed coastal flood zone. Based on the information collected during this study, the

DRAFT


proposed improvement can be categorized as a Type-5 project: projects on existing alignment involving replacement of drainage

structures in heavily urbanized floodplains. Note that all proposed drainage solutions are preliminary and are subject to change.

K.3.3 Pond Siting

Sarasota County is located next to the Gulf of Mexico along the southwest coast of Florida. The topography in the study area is

relatively flat with elevations ranging from two to four feet near the US 41 at Fruitville Road intersection. All elevations are

referenced to the National Geodetic Vertical Datum (NGVD 29). The intersection improvements along this portion of US 41 are

located within the Sarasota Bay Coastal Watershed.

The existing collection and conveyance system consists of curb and gutter with inlets and a closed/piped storm sewer system

discharging to an existing channel. The overall drainage pattern within the watershed is from east to west.

In accordance with the Chapter 5.5 of the 2017 Florida Department of Transportation Drainage Manual, a pond siting evaluation

is only required if additional right-of-way is obtained for a stormwater management facility (pond). Typically, ponds are used to

provide water quality treatment and/or to control the discharge of stormwater (attenuation). The proposed intersection

improvements for the US 41 at Fruitville Road constitute a reduction in impervious area, from the existing intersection condition,

for both the Interim 2-Lane and the Ultimate Partial 3-Lane Roundabout alternatives. This reduction in impervious area will result

in a decrease in stormwater runoff and no additional pollutant loading. Therefore, water quality treatment will not be required. In

addition, the intersections’ existing stormwater collection and conveyance system discharges into an adjacent channel which has

a direct connection to Sarasota Bay. Sarasota Bay is directly connected to the Gulf of Mexico and is tidally influenced. Attenuation

will not be required because water quantity and rate control criteria are not applicable for projects that discharge directly into tidal

areas. Thus, no stormwater management facilities (ponds) are required.

K.3.4 Flood Mitigation Analysis

A flood mitigation analysis was conducted for the study area to identify potential stormwater drainage solutions that would reduce

flooding at the intersection during storm events. The results of this analysis are documented in the PD&E Study Flood Mitigation

Analysis Technical Memorandum.

DRAFT

DRAFT | October 4, 2017 L-1

ATTACHMENT L. PROJECT COMMITMENTS

FDOT has made the following commitments:

To be completed after the Public Hearing.

DRAFT

DRAFT | October 4, 2017 M-2

ATTACHMENT M. FDOT RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVE

Based on the environmental and engineering analyses conducted for the PD&E Study, the Recommended Alternative for

improvements to the US 41 at Fruitville Road intersection is the build alternative that consists of an Interim 2-Lane Roundabout

Alternative, followed by an Ultimate Partial 3-Lane Roundabout configuration. The interim 2-lane roundabout configuration will

provide immediate capacity and is to be designed to accommodate the Ultimate Partial 3-Lane Roundabout Alternative, in the

future, as traffic demand warrants the additional capacity.

The Interim 2-Lane Roundabout includes the reconstruction of the intersection with a 2-lane roundabout raised one to 2.5 feet

above existing grade, The roundabouts will utilize high-intensity automated crosswalk (HAWK) signals for pedestrian and bicycle

crossings. In addition, a 10-foot minimum width shared use path on the west side of US 41 with connections through the

intersection to the existing bike lanes on Fruitville Road, and a 5-foot to 6-foot-wide sidewalk on the east side will be provided.

The Recommended Alternative includes expansion of the existing closed drainage system with retention facilities for flood

mitigation.

M.1 Interim 2-Lane Roundabout

The proposed improvements, illustrated in Figure M-1, include the reconstruction of the intersection with a 2-Lane Roundabout

raised one to two feet above existing grade and a new closed drainage system. The roundabout will utilize HAWK signals for

pedestrian crossings. This alternative includes expansion of the existing closed drainage system with retention facilities for flood

mitigation. In addition, a 10-foot minimum width shared use path on the west side of US 41 and connections through the

intersection to the existing bike lanes on Fruitville Road, along with 5 to 6-foot-wide sidewalks on the east side are provided.

The advantages of the 2-Lane Roundabout Alternative include:

• The overall intersection delays are improved over the No Build and Traffic Signal Alternatives

• Average travel speeds along the corridor and through the intersection will be controlled and decreased

• Connectivity between the Bayfront and Downtown areas will be improved

• Pedestrian crossing times will be improved

• Operation and Maintenance costs are less than the Traffic Signal Alternative

• Crashes are expected to be reduced in number and less in severity

• Drainage improvements for the area

The disadvantages of the 2-Lane Roundabout Alternative include:

• Right-of-way areas and costs will be more than the No Build and Traffic Signal alternatives

• Construction costs will be more than the No Build and Traffic Signal alternatives

o “Inside-out” construction is typically a costlier construction sequence compared to “Outside-In” methodology

where outside curb lines are established in the initial construction phase.

o A two-lane alternative, as demonstrated by the traffic analysis, has a limited timeline for acceptable LOS due to

the expected increase in traffic volumes associated with development growth.

DRAFT

DRAFT | PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING REPORT

US 41 at Fruitville Road Intersection Improvement PD&E Study Sarasota County, Florida | FPID No.: FPID: 439025-1-22-01


Figure M-1 | Recommended Alternative - Interim 2-Lane Roundabout

DRAFT




M.1.1 Interim 2-Lane Roundabout Typical Sections

The typical sections for the Interim 2-Lane Roundabout Alternative (shown below) utilizes a 4-lane divided typical section for both

US 41 and Fruitville Road with an additional auxiliary lane for right-turns in the northbound direction and left-turns in the westbound

direction. Lane widths vary from the existing 10-foot to 13-16 feet at the roundabout approach to accommodate the design vehicle.

Five foot sidewalks are provided along the east side of US 41 and a 10-foot shared-use path is provided along the west to

accommodate the MURT. Design variation for border width is anticipated along the east side of US 41. Additionally, there are no

proposed bike lanes along US 41, requiring a design variation. The design speed is 40 mph for the south approach and 35 mph

for the north approach.

Figure M.1-2 | Interim 2-Lane Typical Section – US 41 (North Approach)

Figure M.1-3 | Interim 2-Lane Typical Section – Fruitville Road (East Approach)

M.2 Ultimate Partial 3-Lane Roundabout

The proposed improvements for the Ultimate Partial 3-Lane Roundabout, illustrated in Figure M.2-1, include the reconstruction

of the intersection with a partial 3-lane roundabout raised up to 2.5 feet above existing grade and a new closed drainage system.

The roundabout will utilize HAWK signals for pedestrian crossings. This alternative includes expansion of the existing closed

drainage system with retention facilities for flood mitigation. In addition, a 10-foot minimum width shared use path on the west

side of US 41 and connections through the intersection to the existing bike lanes on Fruitville Road, along with 5 to 6-foot-wide

sidewalks on the east side are provided.

DRAFT




Figure M.2-1 | Ultimate Partial 3-Lane Roundabout

DRAFT




The advantages of the Ultimate Partial 3-Lane Roundabout Alternative include:

• The overall intersection delays are improved over all other Alternatives

• Average travel speeds along the corridor and through the intersection are expected to be controlled and decreased

• Connectivity between the Bayfront and Downtown areas will be improved

• Pedestrian crossing times will be improved

• Operation and Maintenance costs are less than the Traffic Signal Alternative

• Crashes are expected to be reduced in number and less in severity

• Drainage improvements for the area

• Lifetime costs are less than No Build, Traffic Signal, and 2-Lane Roundabout Alternatives

The disadvantages of the Ultimate Partial 3-Lane Roundabout Alternative include:

• Right-of-way areas and costs will be more than the No Build and Traffic Signal alternatives

• Construction costs will be more than the No Build, Traffic Signal, and 2-Lane Roundabout Alternatives

M.2.1 Ultimate Partial 3-Lane Roundabout

The typical sections for the Ultimate Partial 3-Lane Roundabout shown below remain the same as the Interim 2-Lane Roundabout,

except for the additional third lane, which results in a reduced median width in the southbound direction.

Figure M.2-2 | Ultimate Partial 3-Lane Roundabout Typical Section – US 41 (North Approach)

Figure M.2-3 | Ultimate Partial 3-Lane Roundabout Typical Section – Fruitville Road DRAFT




M.2.2 Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities

The proposed typical section provides a 5-foot sidewalk along the east side of US 41 and a 10-foot shared-use path (MURT)

along the west side of the US-41. Additionally, the 5-foot sidewalk is widened to 10 feet between adjacent crosswalks to encourage

bicyclists to utilize the off-street facilities as opposed to navigating through the roundabout.

As there are no on-street bike lanes on US 41 within this segment, none are proposed with this intersection improvement project.

Existing bike lanes on Fruitville Road are maintained and bike ramps are provided to allow cyclists to exit the roadway prior to the

roundabout.

High emphasis crosswalks are provided on all approaches and departures of the roundabout. HAWK signals are recommended

for the US 41 and Fruitville Road approaches.

M.3 Recommended Alternative User Benefits

Passenger Vehicles | The proposed roundabout improvements provide improved LOS and reduced delay along with a U-turn

movement that does not exist with the No-Build condition. This significantly reduces travel times associated with all vehicles.

Trucks/Emergency Vehicles | The proposed roundabout improvements provide improved LOS and reduced delay along with a

U-turn movement that does not exist with the No-Build condition. This significantly reduces travel and response times associated

with large vehicles and emergency vehicles in particular.

Pedestrians/Bicyclist/Transit Mobility | The proposed typical section provides a 5-foot sidewalk along the east side of US 41

and 10-foot shared-use path (MURT) along the west side of the US-41. Additionally, the 5-foot sidewalk is widened to 10 feet

between adjacent crosswalks to encourage bicyclists to utilize the off-street facilities as opposed to navigating through the

roundabout. As there are no on-street bike lanes on US 41 within this segment, none are proposed with this intersection

improvement project. Existing bike lanes on Fruitville Road are maintained and bike ramps are provided to allow cyclists to exit

the roadway prior to the roundabout. High emphasis crosswalks are provided on all approaches and departures of the roundabout.

HAWK signals are recommended are recommended for the US 41 and Fruitville Road approaches.

Transit | Access to adjacent bus transit stops is improved via the above pedestrian and bicyclists improvements.

DRAFT

Documents

07/17 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE AND … 41-Fruitville...1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE AND NEED: a. ... The proposed improvements for the Roundabout include the reconstruction