2Public Hearing State Road 710 (Warfield Boulevard) Big John Monahan Bridge ReplacementProject Development and Environment StudyThe State of Florida Department of Transportation welcomes you to the State Road 710, Warfield Boulevard, Public Hearing. This Public Hearing is relative to the Big John Monahan Bridge Replacement Project Development and Environment, or PD and E, Study, for Financial Management NumberDecember 10, 2008Financial Management Number:
3Civil Rights Act, Titles VI and VIII Your Civil RightsMartha Anderson,District Equal Opportunity Compliance Manager3400 West Commercial BoulevardFort Lauderdale, FloridaPhone: (954)Toll Free: (866) ext. 4389orPublic participation at this Hearing is solicited without regard to race, color, religion, sex, age, national origin, disability or family status. Persons wishing to express their concern or opinion relative to Titles VI and VIII of the Civil Rights Act may do so by contacting the offices shown in the handout available here this evening or at the addresses shown on the screen. This information is also available at the registration desk where you signed in this evening.Equal Opportunity Office605 Suwannee Street, MS #65Tallahassee, Florida
4Notice of this Public Hearing The Stuart News & Indiantown NewsNovember 19, 2008December 1, 2008Florida Administrative WeeklyNovember 14, 2008This Public Hearing was advertised consistent with federal and state requirements. Notices appeared in the Florida Administrative Weekly on November 14th, 2008 and in both the Indiantown News and the Stuart News on November 19th and December 1st, 2008.
6Purpose of this Public Hearing Express your views on the project’slocation and designeffects and impactsThe purpose of this Hearing is to provide you, the public, an opportunity to express your views regarding the specific location, design, socio-economic effects and impacts on the environment or the community due to this project; and also to address the reclassification of the existing access management classification from an Access Class 6 to an Access Class 5 from Southwest Trail Drive to Southwest Citrus Boulevard and from an Access Class 4 to an Access Class 3 from Southwest Citrus Boulevard to the State Road 76 connector ramps.
7Purpose of this Public Hearing The Reclassification of Access Management on SR 710Change from Class 6 to 5Change from Class 4 to 3The purpose of this Hearing is to provide you, the public, an opportunity to express your views regarding the specific location, design, socio-economic effects and impacts on the environment or the community due to this project; and also to address the reclassification of the existing access management classification from an Access Class 6 to an Access Class 5 from Southwest Trail Drive to Southwest Citrus Boulevard and from an Access Class 4 to an Access Class 3 from Southwest Citrus Boulevard to the State Road 76 connector ramps.7
8Project Location BEGIN PROJECT END PROJECT The project limits for this State Road 710 PD and E Study extend from Southwest Trail Drive to east of the State Road 76 connector ramps in unincorporated Martin County, Florida. The study corridor is located adjacent to the eastern boundary of the community of Indiantown and crosses the C-44 or Saint Lucie Canal. The length of the project study area is approximately one and three-quarter miles.END PROJECT
9Separation of Studies Bypass Corridors Bridge Replacement Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)In order to meet the necessary bridge replacement schedule, it was decided through coordination with the Federal Highway Administration, or FHWA, to split the original PD and E study into two separate studies. The study of the bridge replacement and approaches is continuing with reduced project limits from Southwest Trail Drive to east of the State Road 76 connector ramps. The evaluation and comparison of bypass corridors around Indiantown to the widening of State Road 710 through Indiantown will be part of a new higher–level PD and E study, which will begin early next year. This higher-level study will investigate roadway improvements needed to accommodate projected traffic volumes through the year 2040.
10Major Stakeholders Indiantown CRA Neighborhood Advisory Committee CSX RailroadSouth Florida Water Management DistrictIndiantown MarinaShipyard Planned Unit DevelopmentRiverland Mining & Reservoir ProjectU.S. Coast GuardMajor stakeholders within the study corridor include the community of Indiantown with a population of over 6,000 residents and represented by the Indiantown CRA Neighborhood Advisory Committee; CSX Railroad; South Florida Water Management District; the Indiantown Marina; the Shipyard Planned Unit Development; and the Riverland Mining and Reservoir project.
11Existing 3-Lane Roadway Section SW Trail Drive to SW Citrus Blvd.Beginning at SW Trail Drive to Southwest Citrus Boulevard, the existing five-lane undivided roadway transitions to three lanes and encompasses two 12-foot wide travel lanes, a 12-foot wide two-way left turn lane, and an open drainage system. There are no sidewalks east of Southwest Trail Drive on the north side of State Road 710 and no sidewalks east of Southwest Fernwood Forest Road on the south side of State Road 710.
12Existing 2-Lane Roadway Section SW Citrus Blvd. to SR 76 Connector RampsFrom Southwest Citrus Boulevard to east of the State Road 76 connector ramps, the existing two-lane undivided roadway consists of two-12 foot travel lanes, and an open drainage system. Paved shoulders between Southwest Citrus Boulevard and the west end of the bridge accommodate bicyclists.
13Existing Bridge Section The Big John Monahan Bridge over the Saint Lucie Canal was built in The overall length of the bridge is 1,951 feet. The bridge has 14 foot lanes with no shoulders, an obsolete traffic railing, and no sidewalks or bike lanes. The bridge is nearing the end of its service life and requires safety and geometric improvements.
14Existing Traffic Conditions (“Level of Service” = measure of congestion)Current Daily Traffic Volumes = 14,000 vpdExisting Level of Service = “D”Level of Service Standard = “C”Recent traffic counts indicate that this portion of State Road 710 is currently handling 14,000 vehicles per day. As a result, the level of service for this roadway is classified as “D”, which is below the level of service standard of “C” for this roadway.
15Future Traffic Volumes Level of Service: "F"Traffic projections indicate that travel demand on State Road 710 between Southwest Trail Drive and the State Road 76 connector ramps is expected to increase to 24,000 vehicles per day by the year 2015; and to 32,000 vehicles per day by the year If no additional roadway capacity is provided, this facility will be operating at a level of service of “F”, or failing.
16Project Need Increased traffic demand Congested operating conditions Existing safety and geometric deficiencies on bridgeHurricane Evacuation RouteStrategic Intermodal System HighwayLack of pedestrian and bicycle facilitiesObstacle to economic developmentDue to the increase in traffic demand and congested operating conditions, as well as the need to correct the safety and geometric deficiencies of the existing bridge, the project need for this corridor has been established. Other factors concerning the project need include the importance of this corridor as a hurricane evacuation route and as a Strategic Intermodal System highway, the lack of adequate pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and the obstacle to development in Indiantown due to the lack of capacity on State Road 710 and concurrency requirements.
17PD&E Study GoalsAddress mobility for all modes of transportation within the corridorImprove safetyMinimize impactsComply with NEPAConsistent with state and local plansThe goals of this, and other PD and E studies, is to address the mobility and needs of all modes of transportation within the corridor, provide for improved safety, minimize impacts, comply with the National Environmental Policy Act – or “NEPA”, and be consistent with state and local plans.
18PD&E Study Process Collect data Develop alternatives Analysis of alternativesSelect preferred alternativeContinued public involvementThe PD and E process consists of data collection, development of alternative concepts, analysis of alternatives, and the selection of a preferred alternative. Public participation is a key component in the decision making process.
19Agency Coordination Indiantown CRA/NAC Community of Indiantown Another key element of the PD and E process is agency coordination. Throughout the duration of the project, the Florida Department of Transportation has engaged in extensive coordination with the Federal Highway Administration, the Martin Metropolitan Planning Organization, the Martin County Engineering Department, the Community of Indiantown, Indiantown Community Redevelopment Agency or CRA Neighborhood Advisory Committee, and the South Florida Water Management District.Community ofIndiantown
20“No-Build” Alternative Project Alternatives“Build” Alternative“No-Build” AlternativeOne Build Alternative is being considered as part of this study. And, as with all PD & E studies, a No-Build Alternative is also being considered.
21“No-Build” Bridge Alternative The No-Build Alternative assumes that no action will be taken to widen SR 710 within the limits of this study. However, due to the condition of the existing bridge and its safety and geometric deficiencies, it is necessary to replace the existing bridge to maintain the existing two-lane facility. Therefore, the No-Build Alternative includes the replacement of the existing two-lane bridge with a new two-lane bridge with two 12-foot travel lanes, 10-foot wide shoulders on each side, a 6-foot sidewalk with bicycle/pedestrian railing on the north side of the bridge, and concrete traffic barriers. The new bridge would be constructed parallel and to the north of the existing bridge. The new bridge would provide 55 feet of vertical clearance and 100 feet of horizontal clearance for navigation. The existing bridge would be demolished after the new bridge was open to traffic.
22“No-Build” Bridge Alternative The No-Build Alternative assumes that no action will be taken to widen SR 710 within the limits of this study. However, due to the condition of the existing bridge and its safety and geometric deficiencies, it is necessary to replace the existing bridge to maintain the existing two-lane facility. Therefore, the No-Build Alternative includes the replacement of the existing two-lane bridge with a new two-lane bridge with two 12-foot travel lanes, 10-foot wide shoulders on each side, a 6-foot sidewalk with bicycle/pedestrian railing on the north side of the bridge, and concrete traffic barriers. The new bridge would be constructed parallel and to the north of the existing bridge. The new bridge would provide 55 feet of vertical clearance and 100 feet of horizontal clearance for navigation. The existing bridge would be demolished after the new bridge was open to traffic.22
24“No-Build” Alternative ADVANTAGESIncreased Bridge Service LifeImproved SafetyImproved Navigational ClearancesDISADVANTAGESThe advantages of the No-Build alternative include:Increasing the service life of the bridge by 50 years or more;Improving the safety of the bridge with wider shoulders, sidewalks, and current traffic barriers; and,Improving navigational clearances to current Coast Guard requirements.The disadvantages of the No-Build alternative include:Not meeting the Level of Service “C” standard for SR 710;State Road 710 becoming increasingly congested resulting in increased delays and road user costs;Air quality deteriorating due to traffic congestion; andThe function of State Road 710 as an evacuation route being impaired.Not meeting Level of Service Standard “C”Increased Congestion, Delays, Road User CostsDeterioration of Air QualityEvacuation Route Function Impaired
25“Build” Bridge Alternative The twin bridges for the Build Alternative would be constructed within the 200 feet of right of way with each having two 12-foot travel lanes, a 6-foot inside shoulder, a 10-foot outside shoulder, and a 6-foot sidewalk on the outside separated from the travel lanes by a barrier wall. A pedestrian / bicycle railing would be provided on the outside of the sidewalk. There will be a 42 foot separation between the two bridges. This separation allows for a widening of the bridges to the inside if needed in the future. The new bridges would provide 55 feet of vertical clearance and 100 feet of horizontal clearance for navigation. The posted speed limit across the bridge will be 45 miles per hour, which is the same as it is today.
26“Build” Roadway Alternative The roadway approaches to the bridge for the Build Alternative would be constructed within the 200 to 225 feet of existing right of way and will provide two 12-foot travel lanes, a 6 and a half foot paved outside shoulder, and a 5 foot wide concrete sidewalk for each direction of travel, separated by a 57 and a half foot wide median. The median area is comprised of two 4-foot paved shoulders and 45 feet of sod.
27Future Widening Roadway Section The bridge and roadway typical sections are designed to accommodate a future widening to the inside. This was done to minimize the cost of a future widening of State Road 710 by positioning the retaining walls on the bridge approaches to their ultimate location. Other advantages of an inside widening include a more spacious median that can easily accommodate landscaping in conformance with the Indiantown Vision Plan. The curbs, driveways, sidewalks and outside landscaping improvements would be in their ultimate locations and would not need to be disturbed in the future.
28Access Management Florida Statute 335.18 Rules Establish Minimums For: Rule and 14-97Rules Establish Minimums For:Driveway Connection SpacingDirectional Median Opening SpacingFull Median Opening SpacingTraffic Signal SpacingAs part of the evaluation process for this corridor, the Department of Transportation performed a review of the access management conditions. Florida Statute , regarding Access Management, was adopted in 1988 and revised in 1992 to improve the safety and operation on state highways. The Department of Transportation has instituted Administrative Rule 14-96, regulating the access permitting process, and Administrative Rule 14-97, defining the Access Management Classification System and Standards. These rules establish the minimum spacing for driveway connections, median openings and traffic signals.
29Access Management Reclassification (SW Trail Drive to SW Citrus Blvd.) MedianTypeDrivewayConnectionSpacing (feet)Median OpeningSignal Spacing(feet)DirectionalFullProposed5Restrictive2456601320Existing6Non-Restrictive----As a result of this review, an access management reclassification for State Road 710 is proposed as part of the Build Alternative. The existing access classification from Southwest Trail Drive to Southwest Citrus Boulevard is Access Class 6. The proposed access classification for this segment is Access Class 5. As you can see from the table, the only change is that Access Class 5 establishes a minimum spacing for full median openings at 1,320 feet and 660 feet for directional median openings.
30Access Management Reclassification (SW Citrus Blvd Access Management Reclassification (SW Citrus Blvd. to SR 76 Connector Ramps)AccessClassMedianTypeDrivewayConnectionSpacing (feet)Median OpeningSignal Spacing(feet)DirectionalFullProposed3Restrictive44013202640Existing4Non-Restrictive----The existing access classification from Southwest Citrus Boulevard to the State Road 76 connector ramps is Access Class 4. The proposed access classification for this segment is Access Class 3. As you can see from the table, the only change is that Access Class 3 establishes a minimum spacing for full median openings at 2,640 feet and 1,320 feet for directional median openings.
31SW Trail Dr., SW Fernwood Forest Road & SW Seminole Drive Intersections Because a restrictive median is being constructed along most of the project, access to some of the intersections will be different than it is today. A two-way left-turn lane is still provided for the intersections of Southwest Trail Drive and Southwest Fernwood Forest Road. No median opening will be provided at Southwest Seminole Drive, so access to this intersection will be right-in and right-out only.
32SW Citrus Blvd. & SR 76 Ramps Intersections Full median openings are provided at the intersections of Southwest Citrus Boulevard and at the State Road 76 connector ramps. As soon as they are warranted, traffic signals will be constructed at these two intersections. All of the intersections will be re-evaluated during the forthcoming higher-level PD and E study.SW Citrus Blvd.SR 76 Connector Ramps
33“Build” Alternative ADVANTAGES Improved Traffic Flow Enhanced Mobility for Pedestrians and BicyclistsImproved SafetyImproved Evacuation TimesImproved Stormwater QualityExtended Bridge Service LifePromotion of Economic DevelopmentThe advantages of the Build Alternative are to improve traffic flow in the corridor, enhance mobility for pedestrians and bicyclists, improve safety, improve evacuation times, improve storm water quality, extend the service life of the bridge, and promote economic development. The disadvantage of the Build Alternative is short-term inconveniences to the community during construction.DISADVANTAGESShort-Term Construction Inconveniences
34Aesthetics Aesthetics to be coordinated during the Design Phase. LandscapingSoddingStreet LightingMulti-Column Bridge PiersRetaining WallsAesthetics for the project may include landscaping in medians and along borders, sodding, decorative street lighting, multi-column bridge piers, and decorative finishes on retaining walls.
35Consistency with Local Plans Martin Metropolitan Planning OrganizationIndiantown Vision PlanThe Build Alternative is consistent with all state and local plans and is on the Martin Metropolitan Planning Organization’s list of transportation improvement projects. The project is also consistent with the Indiantown Vision Plan.
36Environmental Impact Assessment NaturalPhysicalSocialCulturalThe Build Alternative was evaluated with regard to environmental impacts in four primary categories: natural, physical, social, and cultural.
37Environmental Impact Assessment Evaluated according to:Title 50, CFR Part 402Executive Order 11990Executive Order 11988Title 23, CFR1990 Clean Air ActConcerning the natural environment, wildlife, habitat, wetland, floodplain, and air quality impacts within the corridor were evaluated in accordance with applicable state and federal standards. Based on these activities, it has been determined that the Build Alternative will have no significant adverse impacts on these elements.Conclusion:No adverse impacts
38Water Quality Impacts Conclusion: Stormwater quality would be improved as a result of the projectA Water Quality Impact Evaluation was conducted for the Build Alternative. The proposed storm water treatment design will improve the water quality by providing storm water retention areas and treating the storm water runoff from the bridge prior to discharging it to the Saint Lucie Canal.
39Noise Receptors and Impacts Impacts evaluated in accordance with Title 23, CFR Part 772Noise impacts were evaluated in accordance with Title 23, Code of Federal Regulations Part As part of this analysis, two noise receptor locations were identified for potential roadway impacts. These locations were the Potter’s House (a residential rehabilitation center) and the Kingdom Hall of Jehovah’s Witnesses.Predicted future traffic noise levels were determined at these locations and noise abatement measures were considered, where appropriate. Noise abatement measures, such as noise barriers, were found to be cost prohibitive.Abatement measures found not to be feasible
40Contamination Three potential sites Additional testing recommended in the futureThe study corridor was evaluated with respect to potential contamination sites. A review of the sites adjacent to the project corridor revealed three parcels with past or present contamination due to leaking underground storage tanks or the abrasive blasting of the Big John Monahan Bridge. Additional testing is recommended if construction activities occur adjacent to these sites.
41Social & Cultural Impacts No adverse impacts toParks or recreation facilitiesHistoric or archaeological sitesBased on a thorough review of the corridor, it is evident that the Build Alternative will have no adverse impacts with respect to parks or recreation facilities, Section 4(f) properties, historic or archaeological sites, or other community facilities.
42Land Use Existing Future Also, this project will not cause any unanticipated changes in land use.
43Right of Way Requirements and Relocations No Right of Way Acquisition and No Business or Residential RelocationsThe Build Alternative will be constructed within the existing right of way and will not displace any residences or businesses within the community. There is the possibility that minor impacts to access of businesses will occur during construction.
44Preferred Bridge Alternative As a result of the previously described analyses and evaluations, the Build Alternative has been selected as the “Preferred” Alternative.
45Preferred Roadway Alternative This decision was based upon the following criteria: improved mobility for all modes of transportation in the corridor, improved safety, consistency with state and local plans, and no significant adverse impacts.However, it is important to remember that no final decision or selection will be made until the Department of Transportation receives your input as part of this Public Hearing process.
46Estimated Project Costs (in $ millions*)Preliminary Engineering Right of Way Design-Build Construction SupportThe estimated project costs for the Preferred Alternative are as shown in this table and can be found in your Public Hearing handout.TOTAL*Present Day Costs (2008)
47Project Schedule Completion of PD&E Study June 2009 Completion of Design-Build Criteria Package June 2011Begin Design-Build Phase Summer 2011Completion of Construction Summer 2014The PD and E phase of this project will be completed by June The next phase, which would be the preparation of the Design Build criteria package, is scheduled to be completed by June The Design Build phase will begin in the Summer of 2011 and will be completed by the Summer of 2014.
48Previous Public Involvement Indiantown Neighborhood Advisory CommitteeMartin MPO Policy BoardMartin MPO TAC/CACMartin MPO BPACIndiantown Town MeetingPublic Kickoff MeetingAlternatives Public WorkshopPrevious public involvement for this project included presentations to the Indiantown Neighborhood Advisory Committee and the Martin Metropolitan Planning Organization Policy Board with their Technical Advisory Committee, Citizens Advisory Committee, and Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee.Other meetings include a Town Meeting in Indiantown, a Public kickoff meeting, and an Alternatives Public Workshop.
49PD&E Study DocumentsAdditional information regarding the engineering and environmental analyses can be found in the reports and documents prepared as part of this study. These draft reports are on display at the Department of Transportation offices in Fort Lauderdale which are located at 3400 West Commercial Boulevard, at the Elisabeth Lahti Library at Southwest Adams Avenue here in Indiantown, and they are available here this evening for your review.
50Staff Available to Answer Questions Representatives from the Department of Transportation are here this evening to answer your questions on an individual basis following the public testimony portion of the Public Hearing.
51Public Testimony Speak at the microphone Speak individually with the court reporterYou have three opportunities to have your input recorded as an official part of this Public Hearing. First, you may complete and submit a speaker request card to one of the Department’s representatives. Second, you may provide your comments directly to the court reporter.
52Public Testimony Submit here today Submit by mail, email, or fax Or third, you may complete and submit one of the comment forms that were made available to you as you entered the meeting this evening. Extra copies are available for your use at the registration desk. These comment forms can be completed and submitted this evening or mailed to the Florida Department of Transportation. Other written statements submitted are also acceptable.
53Mail Comments To: Patrick Glass, P.E. FDOT Project Manager Florida Department of Transportation, District IVPlanning and Environmental Management3400 West Commercial BoulevardFort Lauderdale, FloridaFax (954)All comments must be received by Monday, December 22, 2008Comments sent by mail should be sent to the address shown on the screen or found on the comment form. You may also submit your comments via or fax. All comments must be received by Monday, December 22nd, 2008 to become part of the official record.
54Public Hearing State Road 710 (Warfield Boulevard) Big John Monahan Bridge ReplacementProject Development and Environment StudyDecember 10, 2008Financial Management Number:Public HearingState Road 710 (Warfield Boulevard)We look forward to receiving your commentsPlease Review the Plans and documents here todayWe hope that you have found this evening’s Public Hearing to be both friendly and informative. We look forward to receiving your comments. If you have not already done so, please take a moment to review the plans and documents on display here this evening.
55Thank You!This concludes our presentation for the State Road 710 / Big John Monahan Bridge Replacement PD and E Study. Thank you for your attendance at this evening’s Public Hearing.
56This Public Hearing is being held in accordance with: Chapter 23 of United States CodeTitle 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations Volume 31, Chapter V, PartsTitle 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations Chapter I PartTitle 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations Chapter I Part 450Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 771, SectionTitle 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Subtitle A, Part 24Federal Highway Act of 1968, as amendedFlorida StatuteFlorida StatuteFlorida StatuteFlorida StatuteFlorida Statute (1)Florida Statute , Amended – HB 27323 USC, Section 12823 USC, Section 13542 USC, Chapter 126, Section 1210142 USC, Subchapter V, Sections 2000d-2000d-742 USC, Title 42, Chapter 55, Section 4321Florida Statute 120Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amendedTitle VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amendedFlorida Statute , “Access Management”Public Law as amended by Public LawPublic Law , Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), August 25, 2005TEA-21, Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, June 9, 1998ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, 1991Executive Order Number 11988, “Floodplain Management”Executive Order Number 11990, “Protection of Wetlands”Executive Order Number 12898, “Environmental Justice”Executive Order Number 13166, “Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency”Technical Advisory AU.S. Department of Transportation Act of 1966Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations, “Highways”Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, “Protection of Environment”Title 50 of the Code of Federal Regulations, “Wildlife and Fisheries”