Skip to main content

Martin County

File #: 26-0646   
Type: Departmental Status: Agenda Ready
In control: Board of County Commissioners
On agenda: 3/24/2026 Final action:
Title: DISCUSS POTENTIAL SCHOOL ZONE ON SW NEWFIELD PARKWAY AT CITRUS GROVE ELEMENTARY
Attachments: 1. Presentation

PLACEMENT: Departmental

TITLE:

title  

DISCUSS POTENTIAL SCHOOL ZONE ON SW NEWFIELD PARKWAY AT CITRUS GROVE ELEMENTARY

end

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

executive summary

This discussion with the Board of County Commissioners will provide information regarding requests for a school zone on SW Newfield Parkway at Citrus Grove Elementary and general information about school zones.

body

DEPARTMENT: Public Works                     

PREPARED BY:                      Name: Erik Ferguson, PE, PTOE                     

                     Title:                     Traffic Engineering Administrator                     

REQUESTED BY: The Honorable Board of County Commissioners                                          

 

PRESET:     

PROCEDURES: None                     

 

BACKGROUND/RELATED STRATEGIC GOAL:

 

SW Newfield Parkway (formerly known as SW Citrus Boulevard) from SR-714 (SW Martin Highway) to SW Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Citrus Grove Elementary School were constructed between 2008 and 2009.

At the time SW Newfield Parkway opened to traffic, there were no completed residential units within the Canopy Creek subdivision. However, a traffic signal, marked crosswalk, and sidewalk were installed on the north approach of the SW Newfield Parkway / Citrus Grove Elementary School driveway intersection to accommodate anticipated pedestrians, including students expected to walk from Canopy Creek.

At least one crossing guard assists students, pedestrians, and cyclists (children) across SW Newfield Parkway during school arrival and dismissal periods.  The crossing guard has control over the traffic signal and crosses the children only after motorists traveling on SW Newfield Parkway come to a complete stop.

As the Canopy Creek subdivision has continued to build out, pedestrian and cyclist activity associated with Citrus Grove Elementary has increased.  Consequently, the County has received requests to establish a reduced speed school zone along SW Newfield Parkway at the signalized crossing.

After re-examining the configuration of the intersection and to improve safety of the children, staff added an additional sidewalk and crosswalk on the south approach of the school driveway.  This new crosswalk is further from the traffic signal and provides children access to the school’s entrance without having to cross the school driveway’ thereby eliminating potential conflict.  Staff has also added fluorescent-yellow SCHOOL warning signs and a second advanced warning sign with warning beacons that flash when the traffic signal turns yellow to warn southbound motorists of the impending red (or stop) condition.  SCHOOL messages exist in the pavement in advance of the traffic signal to warn motorists of the school’s presence.

Staff also reviewed the reported crashes for the last 10 (ten) years and found only 7 (seven) crashes along SW Newfield Parkway in the vicinity of Citrus Grove Elementary School.  No crashes involving pedestrians or bicyclists were reported.

Florida Statute Section 316.1895 authorizes roadway authorities to establish school zone speed limits. School zone speed limits are generally most effective at uncontrolled crossings where children must directly evaluate and interact with moving traffic.  The applicable statutes and standards do not require or prohibit school zone speed limits at signalized intersections. Therefore, the decision remains a matter of engineering judgment and policy consistency.  The County Engineer’s longstanding policy is to deploy school zone speed limits only at non-signalized, midblock crosswalks where a crossing guard must enter into oncoming traffic to assist students across the roadway.  The rationale for this policy includes:

                     Lack of benefit at signalized intersections:  At a traffic signal-controlled crossing, motorists are required to come to a full stop on red indication before the crossing guard will allow students, pedestrians, and cyclists to cross the road.  A reduced school speed limit does not provide additional operational or safety benefits at the controlled crossing.

                     Driver focus and sign clutter:  The addition of school zone speed reduction signage and flashing beacons at a signalized intersection may contribute to sign clutter and potentially reduce driver focus on the primary traffic control device, the traffic signal.

                     Cost considerations:  Implementation of a school zone speed reduction requires installation of flashing beacons and associated electrical or solar infrastructure. There are ongoing costs for maintenance, repair, and timing adjustments consistent with school schedules.

Based on current operating conditions, the presence of a fully signalized intersection and the crossing guard during school arrival and dismissal periods, staff has not identified an operational deficiency or crash pattern that necessitates establishing a reduced school zone speed limit on SW Newfield Parkway at Citrus Grove Elementary School.

Options for discussion

1.                     Accept Staff’s determination and leave the status quo.

2.                     Consider establishing a 20 mile per hour school zone speed limit on SW Newfield Parkway in the vicinity of Citrus Grove Elementary School.  The cost is approximately $80,000 and can be implemented prior to the start of the 2026-27 school year with available funds in the Traffic Safety Capital Improvement Program.

3.                     Consider installing a pedestrian overpass of SW Newfield Parkway from Canopy Creek to Citrus Grove Elementary School.  The cost will exceed $5,000,000 and cannot be implemented until funds for design and construction are identified and programmed.

4.                     Consider other options presented by members of the Board.

 

ISSUES:

 

None

 

LEGAL SUFFICIENCY REVIEW:

 

None

 

RECOMMENDED ACTION:

 

RECOMMENDATION

Provide staff direction.

 

ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS

None

 

FISCAL IMPACT:

 

RECOMMENDATION

Dependent upon Board direction

                     

ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS

None

 

DOCUMENT(S) REQUIRING ACTION:

Budget Transfer / Amendment                      Chair Letter                                                               Contract / Agreement

Grant / Application                                          Notice          Ordinance                     Resolution

Other: