3. Introduction  Experience of Team – PD&E projects for FDOT statewide – CEMO general services consultant – District One experience  I-75 Sarasota  I-75 Lee/Charlotte  US 17 re-evaluation  SR 29  PD&E D/W

4. Introduction  Project Manager – Degree in Environmental Engineering – Environmental services – Design – Planning  D7 SIS Districtwide  D1 Planning services – PD&E project management  D1: I-75 PD&Es  D7: I-75 PD&E

5. Approach and Understanding  General – Project history – Categorical exclusion – Main issues  Babcock Webb  Moveable/fixed bridge  Indirect & cumulative effects analysis  Traffic analysis

6. Approach and Understanding  Public Involvement – Scope  Project Initiation Letter  Four newsletters  Public workshop and public hearing (both with FAW ads)  Project video  Comments and coordination report  MPO and committee meetings  Bilingual materials – Staffing  Cella Molnar – project and context knowledge  Jacobs – D1 knowledge

7. Approach and Understanding  Public Involvement – Issues  Bridge  Development  Plan consistency  Traffic analysis  Access Management  Construction Cost – Stakeholders  Residents and Property Owners  Kitson/Babcock Ranch  ALVA, Inc.  East Lee County Council  Concerned Citizens of Bayshore

8. Approach and Understanding  Public Involvement – Techniques  Standard – newsletters, videos, meetings, hearing, website  Innovative – iTownhall meetings, social media, 3D rendering – Process  Knowledge of District 1 preferences and practices  Pre-meeting rehearsals with District 1  FAW Ad prior to meeting and hearing

9. Approach and Understanding  Engineering Analysis – Scope  Existing conditions analyses  3 alternatives each (minimum) for roadway and bridge  Cost estimation  Suggest PAAM to document alternative screening – Staffing  Jacobs – roadway engineering and fixed structures  Hardesty & Hanover – moveable bridge  AIM – traffic analysis  FTE – traffic counts

10. Approach and Understanding  Existing Traffic Analysis – Data collection – Existing roadway conditions – Smoothing of the existing traffic volume – Existing LOS will be calculated using HCS Key 8-Hour Turning Movement Counts 24-Hour Tube Counts 72-Hour Tube Counts

11. Approach and Understanding  Traffic Forecasting for Opening & Design Year  Historical Counts & TRENDS Analysis

12. Approach and Understanding  Traffic Forecasting for Opening & Design Year – Lee County’s approved joint Lee-Collier model – Model growth rates are compared to the TRENDS growth rate – DDHVS for opening & design year are developed by multiplying AADTS by the K & D factors

13. Approach and Understanding  LOS will be determined by using SYNCHRO/SimTraffic/HCS – No build alternatives for opening year – Build alternatives for opening & design year – Comparison of no build and build alternatives FromTo2-LaneLOS4-LaneLOS Lee/Charlotte County Line35,100F C Nalle RoadSR 7823,400F35,200C SR 78Caloosahatchee River23,400F37,400C Caloosahatchee Bridge26,000F38,100C Caloosahatchee RiverSR 8026,000F28,600B The following Levels of Services are based on Urbanized Areas: 2-Lane LOS D = 15,100 (Uninterrupted Flow Highway) 4-Lane LOS B = 31,400 (Uninterrupted Flow Highway) 4-Lane LOS C = 45,400 (Uninterrupted Flow Highway)

14. Approach and Understanding Safety analysis (2009 data) 11-15 Intersection Crashes 5-7 Intersection Crashes 1 Motorcycle Crash 1-2 Lane Departure Crashes 2-4 Lane Departure Crashes

15. Approach and Understanding  Engineering Analysis – Roadway Design Criteria – Urban minor arterial from SR 80 to Old Rodeo Dr. – Rural minor arterial from Old Rodeo Dr. to CR 78 – Non-SIS – Design Speed  45 – urban  55 – rural/suburban – Hurricane Evacuation Route

16. Approach and Understanding  Engineering Analysis – Multimodal Considerations – Lee County Greenways Master Plan (2005)  Segment IV of the Pine Island-Hendry Trail Greenway  Connector Trail  Painted delineation of route as paved shoulder meets guidelines – FDEP Florida Trails Network  High Priority Multi-Use Opportunity Corridor  “Opportunity Corridor” = swath of land not yet analyzed – Lee County MPO 2030 LRTP  No bike or pedestrian projects listed – Alva Planning Community Plan Update  Multi-modal pedestrian path on North River Road “wherever possible” – LeeTran  Route #100 on SR 80 near the SR 31 intersection  No existing service on SR31  No plans to add service on SR 31

17. Approach and Understanding  Engineering Analysis – Typical sections – SR 80 to Old Rodeo Dr. – urban

18. Approach and Understanding  Engineering Analysis – Typical sections – Old Rodeo Dr. to CR 78 – suburban

19. Approach and Understanding  Engineering Analysis – Typical sections – Old Rodeo Dr. to CR 78 - rural

20. Approach and Understanding  Engineering Analysis – Roadway alignment alternatives  East – minimize number of parcels impacted  Centered – Intersection analysis and alternatives  SR 80  Marina Access  SR 78

21. Approach and Understanding  SR 78 – Alternative 1 – Keeps essential existing configuration – Additional storage vs. existing – Flattens existing curve

22. Approach and Understanding  SR 78 – Alternative 2 – Dual-left turn SR 78 to SR 31 – Facilitates left turn movement

23. Approach and Understanding  SR 78 – Alternative 3 – Allows NB traffic to flow concurrent with SR 78 to NB SR 31 single left turn – Could facilitate event traffic control at Civic Center

24. Approach and Understanding  Engineering Analysis – Access Management – Public involvement sensitivity – Access Class 5  2640’ full  660’ directional – Civic Center  Consideration for event traffic control  Possible temporary opening

25. Approach and Understanding  Engineering Analysis - Structures – Existing structure deficient – posted weight restriction – 3 alternatives – low and mid-level moveable, high-level fixed – Minimum 21’ vertical clearance moveable/55’ fixed – Minimum 90’ channel width – Coast Guard coordination and possible boat survey – Horizontal alternatives  Parallel existing alignment  Straighten structure

26. Approach and Understanding  Engineering Analysis – Structure profile

27. Approach and Understanding  Engineering Analysis - Structures – Move high point?  Benefits touch-down point on south end  Additional cost – New 3-lane structure  Provides truck access SB  Additional cost  Profile considerations  Safety considerations

28. Approach and Understanding  Engineering Analysis - Utilities – Florida Gas Transmission (26” high-pressure gas) – TECO Peoples Gas (8” high-pressure gas) – Comcast – FGUA/North Ft Myers Utility – Florida Power and Light – Level 3 Communications – Lee County Signal Department – Lee County Electric Coop – Lee County Utilities – CenturyLink

29. Approach and Understanding  Drainage Overview – Tidal Caloosahatchee River Basin  5 Sub-basins  Impaired Waters  TMDLs established  Estuary – Deliverables  Preliminary PSR  LHR  WQIE checklist W.P. Franklin Lock & Dam Project Location

30. Approach and Understanding  Preliminary Pond Siting Report – Historic maintenance issues  Flooding  Past Hydraulic Performance – Floodplain compensation sites  1 per encroachment – Preliminary pond sizes  Potential Outfall Locations  1 pond per basin  Design Criteria – Attenuation – Standard – Treatment – Dynamic

31. Approach and Understanding

32. WBID 3240C WBID 3240N PROJECT LOCATION TMDLs

33. Approach and Understanding  Location Hydraulic Report – 5 cross drains  Floodplains  Zone AE  Tidal  FEMA Coordination  Significance of Encroachment  Wilson Pigott Bridge Crossing – Conveyance Analysis – S-79 Franklin Lock & Dam BEGIN PROJECT END PROJECT

34. Approach and Understanding  SFWMD Permitting – Pre-application meeting  9/17 with Carmen Quan  November 2009 Memo  Tidal Floodplain Compensation  Pre/Post Attenuation 25yr/72hr  OFW – Caloosahatchee National Wildlife Refuge – 3 miles downstream

35. Approach and Understanding  Environmental Analyses – Scope  Plan consistency  Aesthetics  Tribal Coordination (Seminole & Miccosukee) – Staffing  Jacobs: Land Use and Planning  ACI – Cultural Resources  AIM – Noise and Air Quality  Scheda – Wetlands and T&E species  Tierra – Contamination

36. Approach and Understanding  Existing Conditions – Mostly rural undeveloped – Riverine system – No aquatic preserves or class I/II waters – Big Cypress-fisheating Creek critical linkage

37. Approach and Understanding  Wetlands – Caloosahatchee River  Essential fish habitat – Red Mangroves – Seagrass – Critical habitat for the smalltooth sawfish  Consultation with NMFS for potential impacts to water column and tidal flats – Herbaceous and Forested Wetlands – Mitigation  Direct secondary impacts  Senate bill  Little Pine Island Mitigation Bank

38. Approach and Understanding  Threatened and Endangered Species – Consultation Areas  Grasshopper Sparrow  Red Cockaded Woodpecker  Caracara  Bald Eagle – East ~ 1.6 miles  Woodstock – CFA  Manatee – Historical observations – Mortality  Panther – Outside focus area

39. Permits Required  Environmental Resource Permit (SFWMD) – Sovereign Submerged Lands  Section 404 Dredge and Fill Permit (USACE)  National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System – Coordination with USCG

40. Approach and Understanding  Traffic Noise Analysis – Changes to FHWA Guidelines (23CFR772) – Changes to Chapter 17 PD&E Manual (due 1/11) – Isolated Residents  Impacts  Barriers not likely to be reasonable/feasible – Bridge = perception issue Map in MicroStation Model in TNM 2.5

41. Approach and Understanding BB = 64.8 HL = 66.0 BB = 64.2 HL = 64.9 BB = 51.3 HL = 50.8 BB = 55.8 HL = 55.6 BB = 54.6 HL = 54.1 BB = 55.2 HL = 55.3 BB = 54.4 HL = 54.5 I BB = 51.6 HL = 50.8 Legend BB = bascule bridge noise level in dBA. HL = high-level bridge noise level in dBA.  Build Alternative Noise Levels - Compared noise levels of – bascule bridge (BB) – high-level fixed (HL)  Impacts (66.0 dBA or higher)? – At marina, a special use  Can it be mitigated? – Yes, with parapet or bridge barrier (railing) – technically not a noise barrier  Public perception, which bridge is noisier? – the same…difference <3 dBA is the same to human ear

42. Approach and Understanding  Environmental Analyses – Cultural Resources  Bridge – Over 50 yrs old – Historical integrity likely intact, but – Not likely to be eligible for FRHP – ACI doing update of statewide historic bridge inventory  Tribal Coordination – Contamination  Historic and existing petroleum and drum concerns  Further investigation and coordination required during PD&E – Section 4(f)  No impacts anticipated  Will perform SOS/DOA activities, if needed  Familiar with de minimis requirements and process

43. Management  External and Internal Coordination – Proven efficient and proactive communication style – Existing relationships with subs ease coordination  Quality Control – Culture of quality – Project-specific QC plan – Checking of subconsultant products

44. Management  Schedule – 17 months – Critical path – traffic

45. Management  Availability – Key staff all available and committed to project – Project manager >70% available throughout project  I-75 Sarasota PD&E complete – no other projects in D1  I-75 Hillsborough PD&E nearly complete – final documents submitted in August – Proven commitment and integrity  No ‘bait and switch’  We finish what we start

46. Conclusion  Strong, Capable, Available Team  Proven Track Record – Solid Foundation of District 1 and Florida PD&E Experience  Organized and Proactive Management  Innovative Approach to Problem Solving  Experience with changing standards  Successful, efficient Type II CE experience