Scenic 30A and 395 Intersection in Seagrove Beach

They may just be clearing the right of way. The prisoner is probably a trustee the county uses for outdoor maintenance.

When the Veridian hotel is built how will the additional traffic generated that close to the intersection be handled?

If the idiots on the BCC can't line their pockets they're not interested in a solution.

I'm fairly sure I heard one of the presenters mention that a pedestrian tunnel could be worked in to the intersection change, though I don't think that's currently part of either roundabout or non-roundabout design. That would take pedestrians completely out of the confusion.

I'm fairly sure I heard one of the presenters mention that a pedestrian tunnel could be worked in to the intersection change, though I don't think that's currently part of either roundabout or non-roundabout design. That would take pedestrians completely out of the confusion.

You're so right. We used the pedestrian tunnel many times when we used to stay in Sandestin.

That was before we discovered 30A.

I'm fairly sure I heard one of the presenters mention that a pedestrian tunnel could be worked in to the intersection change, though I don't think that's currently part of either roundabout or non-roundabout design. That would take pedestrians completely out of the confusion.

Not unless it was a network of tunnels. There is a public beach access on south side. Pedestrians need to be able to cross in several directions.

Not unless it was a network of tunnels. There is a public beach access on south side. Pedestrians need to be able to cross in several directions.

:scratch:

It would be an even simpler solution if the bike path were moved to the south side of 30A through that intersection.

It would be an even simpler solution if the bike path were moved to the south side of 30A through that intersection.

That won't happen, although I agree with you, because of the influence of the property owners on the South side who would lose the use of county right of way and includes the Comer family.

That won't happen, although I agree with you, because of the influence of the property owners on the South side who would lose the use of county right of way and includes the Comer family.

Even if 30A is moved north a bit to make room for the bike path on the south so that net-net they wouldn't lose any property?

Even if 30A is moved north a bit to make room for the bike path on the south so that net-net they wouldn't lose any property?

They would still have to put up with riff-raff walking or biking in front of their homes.

The rest of us who live on the Timpoochee Trail put up with all who use it every day and are realitively happy to do so, except for the few idiots who traverse it. Why are the people at the 395 & 30A intersection any different? Do the right thing and move the bike path to the South side of the road.

Not unless it was a network of tunnels. There is a public beach access on south side. Pedestrians need to be able to cross in several directions.

Good point. Guess it would take two tunnels then.

Or the bike path on the south side.

Or the signalized intersection.

Or a dude in a reflective vest directing traffic for a few hours on Saturdays in the high season.

Even if 30A is moved north a bit to make room for the bike path on the south so that net-net they wouldn't lose any property?

I believe the property owners argument against a south-side bike trail was that backing into the intersection for them is dangerous enough without adding path traffic into the mix. If there's a beach access right there however, that may be unavoidable anyway.

Being back in the area after almost 2 yrs, what a mess there. Maybe a right turn lane, going west on 30a, onto 395 would speed things along and still make it safe for people walking and riding.

I've seen those round-abouts and I don't see that working there. This place has become more popular w/all the new construction.

It is nice being back for a bit.

A variety of solutions to this problem have been proposed here and apparently our Einsteins in Defuniac have chosen the least popular option - roundabout. The easiest and cheapest would be to station a deputy there on week-ends and all during the high season to keep things moving.

Update from SWCC by email:

CR 30-A and CR 395 Intersection-Agenda Item 5 (g) under Administration. As you know from previous emails, the County has been fluctuating on the best approach to maintain a better traffic flow at this intersection during peak useage. A roundabout, traffic signal, policeman during peak periods, for example, have all been discussed. This Agenda item involves a draft report from a company called "Southern Traffic Services".

The Company was retained to conduct a "traffic operational analysis" to evaluate the current intersection operation and determine if the addition of a westbound right turn lane would improve the operation." The report is detailed but it generally provides their data collection information (July 13-19, 2013), analysis of information from their reports and others, projections of future traffic and the following conclusion: " Results of the CR 30A at CR 395 intersection operational analysis (SYNCHRO) show the overall intersection, westbound, and southbound approach LOS (Level of Service) would decrease with construction of a westbound right turn lane.

Addition of the turn land would help the overall intersection and westbound approach operation for an estimated 5-year time period." We are not sure exactly what this means-whether the Board is retreating from the controversial roundabout or exactly what direction is now being considered. Undoubtedly more information will be provided at the meeting.

Sounds like they've been reading this thread.

Another agenda item seems to clarify the next step.

g. Request to consider utilizing a phased approach to intersection improvements, with phase one being a right, west bound turn lane at the CR 30A and CR 395 Intersection

Where does this "another agenda item" come from? Is this a recommendation from the study, or a recommendation officially before the board, being seriously considered?

Where does this "another agenda item" come from? Is this a recommendation from the study, or a recommendation officially before the board, being seriously considered?

It's on the BCC agenda.

As reported on WZEP AM 1460:

Larry Jones said they could put in a right turn lane that could be added to to help with the Highways 30A and 395 intersection. This is where they were considering the roundabout. Jones said this will help for about 5 years and will cost much less. Commissioner Sara Comander said they have had rejection to the roundabout and she asked the engineer to take another look. She said this will help for about five years then they can update the intersection as needed. The turn lane will be a westbound right turn lane.

BCC replaced roundabout idea with right turn lane westbound for lot less money and a better solution IMO. Unfortunately the bike path stays on the north side which will negate some of the advantage of turn lane. People owning property east of intersection on south side (Comer) apparently have a lot of influence in this county.

Guess what! Panhandling scheduled for weekends this fall! I love how the requests of a few organizations have been taken as more important that over a year of public outcry.

Can we protest panhandlers without a permit?

I thought the roundabout plan was approved by the BCC a long time ago, and was put to vote again fairly recently, and did not have the votes to be defeated (2-2). Was it put to a vote again this week and officially defeated? Is the current plan simply a right turn lane with yield sign, and no traffic light, or other enhancements?