FINAL NOISE STUDY REPORT For

FINAL NOISE STUDY REPORT for

SR 5/US 1 Bridge Over Loxahatchee River/Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (Bridge #930005) Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study From CR-A1A to Beach Road Milepost 10.567 – 11.127 Palm Beach County, Florida

Financial Project ID: 428400-2-22-01 Federal Aid Number: N/A ETDM Number: 14199

Prepared for:

Florida Department of Transportation District Four 3400 West Commercial Boulevard Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33309

February 2017

The environmental review, consultation, and other actions required by applicable federal environmental laws for this project are being, or have been, carried out by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) pursuant to 23 U.S.C. §327 and a Memorandum of Understanding dated December 14, 2016 and executed by the Federal Highway Administration and FDOT. FINAL NOISE STUDY REPORT

for

Financial Project ID: 428400-2-22-01 Federal Aid Number: N/A ETDM Number: 14199

Prepared for:

Florida Department of Transportation District Four 3400 West Commercial Boulevard Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33309

Prepared by: Bernard Kinney Associates, Inc.

February 2017 SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page

TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... i

LIST OF TABLES ...... ii

LIST OF FIGURES ...... ii

LIST OF APPENDICES ...... iii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...... 2

2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ...... 2

3.0 PURPOSE AND NEED ...... 4

4.0 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED ...... 5

4.1 Typical Section ...... 5

4.2 Horizontal and vertical alignment ...... 7

4.2.1 Horizontal Alignment ...... 7

4.2.2 Vertical Alignment ...... 7

5.0 LAND USE ...... 8

5.1 Existing Land Use ...... 8

5.2 Future Land Use ...... 8

6.0 METHODOLOGY ...... 9

6.1 Noise Metrics ...... 9

6.2 Traffic Data ...... 10

6.3 Noise Abatement Criteria ...... 10

6.4 Noise Abatement Measures ...... 12

7.0 TRAFFIC NOISE ANALYSIS ...... 12

7.1 Model Validation ...... 12

7.1.1 Methology ...... 14

7.1.2 Meteorological Conditions ...... 14

i SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

7.1.3 Field Measurement Data ...... 15

7.1.4 Model Validation Results ...... 15

7.2 PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS AND ABATEMENT ANALYSIS ...... 17

7.2.1 Data Sources ...... 17

7.2.2 Predicted Noise Levels ...... 17

7.2.3 Noise Sensitive Area 1 ...... 17

7.2.4 Noise Sensitive Area 2 ...... 21

7.2.5 Noise Sensitive Area 3 ...... 21

7.2.6 Noise Sensitive Area 4 ...... 21 7.2.7 Noise Impact Analysis ...... 22

8.0 CONCLUSIONS ...... 22

9.0 CONSTRUCTION NOISE AND VIBRATION ...... 23

10.0 COMMUNITY COORDINATION ...... 23

11.0 REFERENCES ...... 24

List of Tables

Table 1 – Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) Table 2 – Noise Receptor Location and Description Summary Table 3 – Acoustical and Meteorological Instrumentation Table 4 – TNM 2.5 Model Validation Results Table 5 – TNM 2.5 Predicted Noise Levels

List of Figures

Figure 1 – Project Location Map Figure 2 – Existing Bridge Typical Section Figure 3 – Proposed Bridge Typical Section

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

Figure 4 – Proposed South Roadway Approach Typical Section Figure 5 – Proposed North Roadway Approach Typical Section Figure 6 – Typical Noise Levels

List of Appendices

Appendix A – Existing and Proposed Bridge Typical Sections and Concept Plans Appendix B – Traffic Data for Noise Study Appendix C – Noise Receptor Aerials Appendix D – Noise Measurement Data Sheets Appendix E – Noise and Vibration Sensitive Sites Appendix F – Noise Contour Table

iii

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), District Four, has conducted a noise study for the Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study for the proposed replacement of the SR 5/US 1 (Federal Highway) Bridge (Bridge #930005) over the Loxahatchee River/Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (ICWW) in Jupiter, Palm Beach County, Florida. The project extends approximately 3,000 feet along US Highway 1 (SR 5) from US 1/ CR A1A/Jupiter Harbour entrance intersection to the south and US 1/Beach Road/SRA1A intersection to the north. See Location Map - Figure 1. The project was screened through the Efficient Transportation Decision Making (ETDM) Environmental Screening Tool (EST) and the programming screen was published April 3, 2015 (ETDM #14199 -https://etdmpub.fla-etat.org/est/).

The Noise Study utilized the Traffic Noise Model (TNM) version 2.5 which is the most current model available for the prediction of highway traffic noise levels for the Existing Year 2015, No- Build Alternative Design Year 2040, and the Build Alternative Design year 2040. Traffic noise impacts were evaluated for sixty-five (65) potential noise sensitive sites developed prior to the project’s Date of Public Knowledge (DPK). Based upon the DPK, Activity Category B, C, and E land uses were evaluated for potential noise impacts. The Noise Study Report was developed based upon the current regulatory criteria contained in Chapter 17 Noise (July 27, 2016) and the Traffic Noise Modeling and Analysis Practitioners Handbook, January 1, 2016. Additionally, the current regulatory criteria contained in the New Final Rule (23 CFR Part 772) dated July 13, 2010 is in compliance with the Department’s Noise Policy. The noise study evaluated one (1) Build Alternative (Recommended 35 foot Vertical Clearance Alternative) and the No-Build Alternative. No other alternatives were evaluated.

The sixty-five (65) noise sensitive locations, represent the four (4) noise sensitive areas below:

 The commercial area (outside restaurant patio areas)

 The Lighthouse Park bordering the east side of the corridor

 The residential areas (Jupiter Harbour Condominiums and Jupiter Cove Condominiums)

 The tennis courts and swimming pool bordering the west side of the study corridor.

The potential noise sensitive locations identified in this report are representative of Activity Category B, C, and E locations. Activity Category B (Residential areas) and Activity Category C (Lighthouse Park and Recreational areas) require potential noise abatement measures for computer predicted sound levels which approach or exceed 66 dB(A). Activity Category E (Commercial areas) require potential noise abatement measures for computer predicted sound levels which approach or exceed 71 dB(A).

The traffic noise levels predicted at the sixty-five (65) noise sensitive receptor locations under evaluation did not approach or exceed the FDOT NAC for each specific activity category therefore, potential noise abatement measures were not evaluated at the four (4) noise sensitive areas.

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), District Four, is currently conducting a Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study associated with the proposed replacement of the SR 5/US 1 (Federal Highway) Bridge (Bridge #930005) over the Loxahatchee River/Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (ICWW) in Jupiter, Palm Beach County, Florida. The project extends approximately 3,000 feet along US Highway 1 (SR 5) from US 1/ CR A1A/Jupiter Harbour entrance intersection to the south and US 1/Beach Road/SRA1A intersection to the north. See Location Map - Figure 1. The project was screened through the Efficient Transportation Decision Making (ETDM) Environmental Screening Tool (EST) and the programming screen was published April 3, 2015 (ETDM #14199 -https://etdmpub.fla- etat.org/est/).

Traffic noise impacts were evaluated for the potential noise sensitive sites identified in this study. Based upon the existing land uses, Activity Category B (Residential areas), Activity Category C (Lighthouse Park and Recreational areas), and Activity Category E (Commercial areas) noise sensitive locations were evaluated. The noise sensitive locations evaluated are representative of sixty-five (65) noise sensitive receptor sites.

The sixty-five (65) noise sensitive locations, represent the four (4) noise sensitive areas below:

 The commercial area (outside restaurant patio areas)

 The Lighthouse Park bordering the east side of the corridor

 The residential areas (Jupiter Harbour Condominiums and Jupiter Cove Condominiums)

 The tennis courts and swimming pool bordering the west side of the study corridor.

The noise study was developed based upon the current regulatory criteria contained in Part 2, Chapter 17 Noise (July 27, 2016), of the PD&E Manual, and the Traffic Noise Modeling and Analysis Practitioners Handbook dated January 1, 2016. Additionally, the current regulatory criteria contained in the New Final Rule (23 CFR Part 772) dated July 13, 2010 is in compliance with the Departments Noise Policy. A summary of the noise analysis may be found in the Type II Categorical Exclusion (CE) document for the project available under separate cover. 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION

This project will address the structural and functional deficiencies of the existing US-1/SR 5 (Federal Highway) bridge (#930005) over the Loxahatchee River/ICWW. The PD&E study evaluated vertical and horizontal alignment alternatives for the replacement of the bridge. The existing Jupiter Federal Bridge was originally constructed in 1958. It is a four-lane, divided low- level bascule bridge providing a connection between communities within the Town of Jupiter to the south and the Village of Tequesta to the north. While the Jupiter Federal Bridge itself is not part of Florida's Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) network, it crosses a designated SIS facility (the ICWW).

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

The current bridge typical section includes two eleven-foot inside travel lanes and two twelve- foot outside travel lanes; two-foot outside shoulders (both sides); bridge rail; and a seven-foot traffic separator. Traffic analysis was conducted and the results indicate that a 4-lane section is sufficient to accommodate future traffic. Dedicated sidewalks and bicycle lanes are not provided, nor does a barrier exist between vehicles and pedestrians travelling along the bridge.

Between CR A1A / Jupiter Harbour entrance to the southern end of the bridge, US-1/SR 5 (Federal Highway) is generally a four-lane, divided roadway consisting of eleven to twelve-foot travel lanes with exclusive southbound left and right-turn lanes and a northbound free-flow ramp from CR A1A; curb and gutter; a two to seven-foot traffic separator; and guardrail. North of the bridge to Alternate A1A/Beach Road, US-1/SR 5 (Federal Highway) remains a four-lane, divided facility consisting of eleven to twelve-foot travel lanes with exclusive left and right-turn lanes; curb and gutter; guardrail; and a four to seventeen-foot landscaped median. Right-of-way (R/W) along the bridge is predominantly 200 feet; R/W along US-1/SR 5 (Federal Highway) tapers to 183 feet south of the bridge and is 205 feet north of the bridge, tapering down to 114 feet just north of Beach Road. The total length of the project is approximately 3,000 feet (0.57 mile). (See Figure 2 – Existing Bridge Typical Section).

Figure 2 – Existing Bridge Typical Section

The bridge has been the subject of a variety of FDOT studies over the last several years, specifically those commissioned to review the need for major bridge rehabilitation. Project stakeholders including the Town of Jupiter and the Palm Beach Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), expressed that there is a significant need to provide sidewalks and accommodate bicycle traffic in the project area, as the existing bridge does not provide dedicated facilities for these modes of travel. Throughout the process, it was determined based on bridge inspection and engineering evaluation that it is not feasible to add these facilities to the existing bridge structure. As such, bridge rehabilitation does not satisfy one of the primary elements of the project's purpose and need; therefore, the FDOT has determined that bridge replacement alternatives be evaluated to include dedicated bicycle lanes and sidewalks (on both sides).

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

The proposed project includes replacement of the existing bascule bridge and construction of stormwater management facilities. The current center line will be maintained. No additional travel lanes are required. A new fender system will be constructed, which will result in dredging impacts in the channel. 3.0 PURPOSE AND NEED

Purpose

The purpose of this project is to address the structural and functional deficiencies of the existing bridge.

Needs

The need for the project is based on identified bridge deficiencies, including the deteriorating structural condition of the existing bridge, the substandard clearances at the navigable waterway channel, and the lack of adequate and safe pedestrian and bicycle accommodations for the surrounding community. In addition, a replacement bridge may reduce user delay costs and may provide consistency with adjacent project typical sections in the area. Each of the elements of need is described further below.

Structural Deficiencies

The Jupiter Federal Bridge was determined to be 'Structurally Deficient', with a sufficiency rating of 50.8 (a rating of 50.0 or lower is categorized as unsatisfactory and provides justification for replacement) based on a bridge inspection conducted in September 2014. While the deck and channel conditions of the bridge have satisfactory ratings, the bridge superstructure and substructure have a poor rating of 4; therefore, the bridge is deemed structurally deficient due to the substandard condition of the superstructure and substructure. The condition of the bridge is anticipated to deteriorate further as the existing structure is currently beyond its maximum service life of 50 years. Due to the naturally corrosive environment, the superstructure and substructure of the bridge will continue to degrade and need further repair in the future. In addition, the bridge is susceptible to scour during major storm events and is considered "Scour Critical". Replacement of the bridge will address the deteriorating condition of the structure and maintain the connection between communities within Jupiter and Tequesta.

Substandard Navigational Clearance Requirements

As the Jupiter Federal Bridge crosses the ICWW, it must meet all navigational guide clearance requirements set forth by the United States Coast Guard (USCG). The USCG minimum bridge horizontal clearance requirement is 125 feet; the minimum vertical clearance requirement [above the Mean High Water (MHW) elevation at the face of the fender system] for a bascule bridge is 21 feet and for a fixed bridge is 65 feet. Presently, the existing horizontal clearance between the fender systems of the Jupiter Federal Bridge over the ICWW is 90 feet; the existing vertical clearance is 25 feet over the MHW elevation at the face of the fenders and 28 feet at the center of the channel.

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

Based on these clearances, only the horizontal clearance of the bridge does not meet current USCG requirements for a bascule bridge. This substandard horizontal clearance adds to the further deficiency of the existing bridge structure.

Deficient Bicycle and Pedestrian Accommodations

There are no sidewalks or bicycle lanes provided on the Jupiter Federal Bridge. Existing signage is provided indicating that bicyclists share the road with motorists. On the west side of SR 5/US 1, north of CR A1A (Ocean Boulevard), there is an existing six-foot at-grade sidewalk path which terminates at an observation deck/fishing pier. A sidewalk and pedestrian crossing also exist at the intersection of SR 5/US 1 and CR A1A (Ocean Boulevard). North of the bridge, existing sidewalk facilities begin at the intersection of SR 5/US 1 with Alternate A1A/Beach Road and continue north of the study area. Despite the lack of sidewalks and bicycle lanes, some pedestrians and bicyclists still cross the bridge by using the two-foot wide raised curb along the sides or by using the raised median separator down the center of the bridge. The two- foot tall post and beam bridge railings do not meet standards and further exacerbate the safety of pedestrians.

Secondary Criteria - Hurricane Evacuation

The Florida Division of Emergency Management sets hurricane evacuation plans. This bridge currently meets hurricane evacuation requirements and would continue to meet them after replacement. In the event of an emergency evacuation, all four lanes of the bridge could be operated in the northbound direction, effectively doubling the capacity of the bridge. Therefore, a four-lane replacement bridge appears to be adequate to accommodate emergency evacuation traffic volumes. 4.0 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED

4.1 TYPICAL SECTION

Bridge Typical Section

The proposed bridge typical section has four 11-foot travel lanes, two in each direction, a 19.5- foot median, 8 foot shoulders which includes a buffered bicycle lane and 8 foot sidewalks. The sidewalk is separated from the shoulder using a raised traffic rail. Figure 3 and Appendix A shows the proposed bridge typical section for the bridge approach spans and proposed bascule span. There is an 11.5-foot side separation between the two-proposed bascule leaves to allow easy access for bridge inspection and maintenance.

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

Figure 3 – Proposed Bridge Typical Section

Roadway Typical

The south roadway approach begins at the north approach of the US 1/CR A1A intersection. The US 1 median to the south is 22 feet wide. The proposed typical median width for the south approach varies from 22 feet to 19.5 feet. Other features of the typical section are four 11-foot travel lanes, two lanes in each direction, and 7-foot buffered bicycle lanes, 2-foot curb and gutter and 8 foot sidewalks on each side. (See Figure 4 – Proposed South Roadway Approach Typical Section).

Figure 4 – Proposed South Roadway Approach Typical Section

The typical section for the north roadway approach is similar but the median varies from 19.5 feet to the US 1 Beach Road/SR A1A intersection. The median width north of the intersection is 15.5 feet. The transition occurs through the intersection. The roadway typical section also includes 7-foot buffered bicycle lanes and 8-foot sidewalks on both sides. Some of the roadway widening will be contained on retaining walls to avoid impacts to adjacent properties including

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

the Jupiter Inlet Lighthouse Park/Outstanding Natural Area (ONA). (See Figure 5 – Proposed North Roadway Approach Typical Section).

Figure 5 – Proposed North Roadway Approach Typical Section

No R/W acquisition is required for these roadway typical sections.

4.2 HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL ALIGNMENT

4.2.1 Horizontal Alignment

The centerline for the new bridge will be at the same location as the centerline of the existing bridge. The new bridge has a total width of 100.5 feet which is almost 36 feet wider than the existing bridge. The new bridge will extend 15.75 feet to the east and west of the existing bridge. The new bridge will be within existing FDOT R/W. The south roadway approach begins at the existing intersection of the US 1/CR A1A/Jupiter Harbour entrance and ends at the intersection of US 1/Alternate A1A/Beach Road. The horizontal alignment consists of an entrance tangent from begin project to 510 feet north of the bascule span of the proposed bridge. A horizontal curve with 5000-foot radius and normal crown is introduced and then a tangent section is used to the intersection at the end of the project (see Concept Plans in Appendix A). 4.2.2 Vertical Alignment

The vertical alignment of the proposed bridge is dictated by the vertical clearance of the bridge at the ICWW. The clearance is measured from MHW to the bottom of the bascule span at the fender system. Five vertical clearance alternatives were considered: 25 feet, 30 feet, 35 feet, 40 feet and 65 feet. The 25, 30, 35 and 40 foot options will require a bascule bridge. The 65-foot option is a fixed span bridge and was eliminated from further consideration because US 1 would be about 30 feet above the US 1/CR A1A/Jupiter Harbour entrance intersection. In addition, the Town of Jupiter has an ordinance that no structure can be over 50 feet within the Inlet Village Sector. Providing a connection to CR A1A to the east and Jupiter Harbour to the west has been determined by FDOT to be excessively impactive to the area and was not studied further.

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

5.0 LAND USE

The following section discusses the existing and future land uses within the project corridor. The existing study corridor conditions were reviewed prior to the noise analysis and prior to preparing the noise study report. The field reviews documented the study conditions for the purposes of identifying any potential land use changes which could result in new noise sensitive receptor locations. The field reviews took place on October 19, 2016 and January 18, 2017. The field reviews did not identify any new noise sensitive locations. 5.1 EXISTING LAND USE

The existing land use can be generally characterized by existing roadways, the Loxahatchee River/ICWW, retail sales and services, mixed commercial, marinas, high-density residential, and recreational. In addition, a major feature within the study area is the Jupiter Inlet Lighthouse Park/Outstanding Natural Area (ONA). This feature is located on the east side of SR 5/US 1 in the northern section of the project area. The property has been designated by Congress as an ONA and a portion of the property is leased by the Town of Jupiter as a park. This area includes numerous natural and cultural resources including the Jupiter Lighthouse, walking trails, ball fields, oak scrub, mangrove swamps, archaeological sites, WWII U.S. Navy Married Men’s housing quarters (now the museum) as well as other historic buildings and recreational facilities. The USCG has property that is not in the ONA but is on the site that is used for USCG family housing, ancillary support and a post exchange1. 5.2 FUTURE LAND USE

The project study area is built out. Thus, future land use is consistent with existing land uses except for the waterfront area at the south end of the bridge east of SR 5/US 1. This area is part of the Inlet Village Sector. This area is proposed for mixed use development and includes the Town’s Riverwalk. The future land uses are as follows: commercial, public/institutional, high- density residential, Inlet Village Flex, and Riverwalk Flex.

Should any noise sensitive development occur, the contents of this report should be considered before approving any potential noise sensitive land uses directly adjacent to the SR 5/US 1 study corridor limits from Ocean Boulevard (CR A1A) to South Beach Road (CR 707) in Jupiter, Palm Beach County, Florida.

FDOT is not responsible for future noise abatement measures for parcels or locations with building permits approved after the project’s Date of Public Knowledge (DPK). An active building permit request was submitted to the Town of Jupiter, Florida on November 7, 2016. The purpose of the request was to identify potential noise sensitive land uses within the study corridor limits. At that time, there was no response from the Town of Jupiter, Florida. A second active building permit request was submitted on February 13, 2017.

1 Jupiter Inlet Lighthouse Outstanding Natural Area Comprehensive Management Plan and Environmental Assessment, US Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management –Eastern States, 2010.

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

The Town of Jupiter, Florida provided an update on February 28, 2017 to the request for building permit status. There were no additional noise sensitive sites identified. 6.0 METHODOLOGY

The noise study was developed based upon the current regulatory criteria contained in Part 2, Chapter 17 Noise (July 27, 2016), of the PD&E Manual and the Traffic Noise Modeling and Analysis Practitioners Handbook dated January 1, 2016. Additionally, the current regulatory criteria contained in the New Final Rule (23 CFR Part 772) dated July 13, 2010 is reflected in the Departments Noise Policy. The technical criteria are provided in the Federal Regulations Title 23, Part 772 (23 CFR Part 772) entitled "Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction Noise" (1). Chapter 335.17 of the Florida Statute requires the use of 23 CFR Part 772 in the noise impact assessment process regardless of funding, and the FDOT PD&E Manual, Part 2, Chapter 17 Noise (July 27, 2016) (2). Additionally, technical guidance is provided in the Traffic Noise Modeling and Analysis Practitioners Handbook, January 1, 2016 (3).

Computer predicted noise levels were produced using the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Traffic Noise Model (TNM) version 2.5. The project alternatives evaluated in this noise study consist of one (1) Build Alternative and the No-Build Alternative. Traffic noise levels were predicted for the Existing Year Condition 2015 and the Design Year 2040 No-Build and Build Alternative conditions. No other alternatives were evaluated.

No consideration was given to potential noise sensitive land uses established after the DPK. Both the interior (where applicable) and exterior areas of potential noise sensitive locations were evaluated for potential noise impacts.

FDOT is not responsible for future noise abatement measures for parcels or locations with building permits approved after the DPK. The DPK is the approval date of the Type II CE document.

The Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) activity categories for the noise sensitive areas evaluated include Activity Category B, C, and E locations. The Activity Category B locations represent the residential areas (Jupiter Harbour Condominiums and Jupiter Cove Condominiums). The Activity Category C locations represent the Lighthouse Park and the tennis courts and swimming pool associated with the residential areas. The Activity Category E locations represent the commercial area (outside restaurant patio areas). No other activity categories were identified as of the date of this report. 6.1 NOISE METRICS

The noise level descriptor used by FDOT will be level equivalent (LEQ). LEQ is the equivalent steady-state sound level which in a stated period of time contains the same acoustic energy as the time-varying sound level during the same time period, with LEQ (h) being the hourly value of LEQ.

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

Title 23 CFR Part 772 specifies that either the LEQ(h) or L10(h) metric, but not both, may be used on a project. Consistent with this requirement, the FDOT elects to use the LEQ(h) metric.

The noise levels developed for this analysis are expressed in decibels (dB) using an “A”- scale [dB(A)] weighting. This scale most closely approximates the response characteristics of the human ear. 6.2 TRAFFIC DATA

Predicted traffic noise levels are primarily dependent on traffic volumes, vehicle mix, and vehicle speeds. The project traffic data developed for this study was prepared by the project traffic engineer and approved by the Department. The project traffic data was developed for the SR 5/US 1 corridor for the following conditions: Existing Year 2015 Condition and the Design Year 2040 No-Build and Build Alternative Condition. Traffic volumes representative of Level of Service (LOS) C or demand (whichever is less) was used as input data for the noise study and is consistent with the Traffic Noise Modeling and Analysis Practitioners Handbook dated January 1, 2016. This represents the highest traffic volume traveling at the highest average speed for this project.

Such conditions typically generate the highest noise levels at a given site during a normal day. A review of the traffic data for this study determined that the project traffic data (LOS C and demand) would be used for input into TNM version 2.5. The approved project traffic data developed for this study is presented in Appendix B. 6.3 NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA

Noise sensitive sites are defined in the PD&E Manual as any property (owner occupied, rented or leased) where frequent exterior human use occurs and where a lowered noise level would be of benefit. Consistent with the guidance provided in the PD&E Manual, unless the area of exterior frequent use is identified elsewhere, residential receptor sites were placed at the edge of the dwelling unit closest to the major traffic noise source as dictated by professional judgment. Examples of common outdoor and indoor activities and their associated noise levels are presented in Figure 6.

The FHWA has established specific noise levels for both exterior and interior locations where frequent human activity could occur. These noise levels vary by activity category and are presented in Table 1. The FDOT has also established an approach criterion based upon these activity categories. The FDOT approach criteria are one (1) decibel below the FHWA criteria.

Potential noise abatement measures must be considered for all activity categories (except Activity Category F and G) which either meet or exceed the FDOT NAC for a specific category or experience a substantial noise increase as a direct result of a transportation improvement project. The FDOT defines a substantial increase as 15 dB(A) or more over the existing conditions. A substantial increase in traffic-related noise usually occurs for new alignment transportation projects.

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

Table 1 NOISE ABATEMENT CRITERIA (NAC) [Hourly A-Weighted Sound Level-decibels (dB(A))]

Activity Activity Leq(h)1 Description of Activity Category Evaluation Category FHWA FDOT Location

Lands on which serenity and quiet are of extraordinary significance and serve an A 57 56 Exterior important public need and where the preservation of those qualities is essential if the area is to continue to serve its intended purpose.

B2 67 66 Exterior Residential

Active sports areas, amphitheaters, auditoriums, campgrounds, cemeteries, day care centers, C2 67 66 Exterior hospitals, libraries, medical facilities, parks, picnic areas, places of worship, playgrounds, public meeting rooms, public or nonprofit institutional structures, radio studios, recording studios, recreational areas, Section 4(f) sites, schools, television studios, trails, and trail crossings. Auditoriums, day care centers, hospitals, libraries, medical facilities, places of worship, D 52 51 Interior public meeting rooms, public or nonprofit institutional structures, radio studios, recording studios, schools, and television studios.

Hotels, motels, offices, restaurants/bars, and E2 72 71 Exterior other developed lands, properties or activities not included in A-D or F. Agriculture, airports, bus yards, emergency services, industrial, logging, maintenance F _ _ _ facilities, manufacturing, mining, rail yards, retail facilities, shipyards, utilities (water resources,

water treatment, electrical), and warehousing.

G _ _ _ Undeveloped lands that are not permitted.

(Based on Table 1 of 23 CFR Part 772)

1 The Leq(h) Activity Criteria values are for impact determination only, and are not design standards for noise abatement measures. 2 Includes undeveloped lands permitted for this activity category. Note: FDOT defines that a substantial noise increase occurs when the existing noise level is predicted to be exceeded by 15 decibels or more as a result of the transportation improvement project. When this occurs, the requirement for abatement consideration will be followed.

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

This study has identified that Activity Category B, C, and E locations were present as of the date of this report. The Activity Category B locations included 2nd and 3rd floor residential areas.

6.4 NOISE ABATEMENT MEASURES

The noise study identified four (4) noise sensitive areas which were evaluated for potential noise impacts for the following conditions: Existing Year 2015 Condition, No-Build Alternative Design Year 2040 Condition, and the Build Alternative Design Year 2040 Condition (Recommended 35 foot Vertical Clearance Alternative). The noise sensitive areas evaluated are representative of sixty-five (65) noise sensitive receptor locations. The computer modeled noise receptor locations are as follows: the residential areas bordering the west side of the corridor, the recreational areas bordering the east and west side of the corridor, and the commercial areas bordering the east side of the study corridor. The noise receptor location and description summary is presented in Table 2. The potential noise sensitive locations identified in this report are representative of Activity Category B, C, and E as shown in Table 1.

There are no other noise sensitive areas located within the project corridor as of the date of this report and was verified through two (2) field reviews and two (2) active building permit requests. There are no other noise sources located adjacent to the study corridor which could interfere with the existing ambient highway traffic noise levels. There are no other noise sources within the vicinity of this project that could potentially interfere with the predicted sound levels within the limits of the study corridor. First floor, second floor, and third floor receptors were assumed to be placed 5 feet, 15 feet, and 25 feet above ground, respectively. Consistent with Department Policy, residential receptors were placed at the edge of the dwelling unit closest to the major traffic noise source at the appropriate height. 7.1 MODEL VALIDATION

Field measurements were documented to evaluate the current noise conditions and to determine if TNM version 2.5 could accurately predict the noise levels for the study corridor under evaluation. Measurements of the ambient noise levels for the project corridor were documented using procedures defined in the FHWA report Measurement of Highway-Related Noise (FHWA-PD-96-046) (4). Noise level measurements, meteorological conditions, and traffic data were recorded at three (3) representative locations adjacent to the SR 5/US 1corridor. The study corridor limits extend from Ocean Boulevard (CR A1A) to South Beach Road (CR 707) in Palm Beach County, Florida. The field measurement locations are identified as ML1, ML2, and ML3 and are described below. The locations are also presented in the noise receptor aerials in Appendix C.

Table 2 Noise Receptor Location and Description Summary Build Alternative Recommended 35 Ft. Vertical Clearance Alternative

Noise Noise Receptor Noise Receptor FDOT Distance From Outside Distance From Outside Distance Noise Noise Receptor Noise Receptor FDOT Distance From Outside Distance From Outside Distance Receptor Station Number Description NAC Center Travel Lane (Ft.) Center Travel Lane (Ft.) Variance Receptor Station Number Description NAC Center Travel Lane (Ft.) Center Travel Lane (Ft.) Variance Number E=East Side of SR 5/US 1 (Ft.) Number E=East Side of SR 5/US 1 (Ft.) W=West Side of SR 5/US 1 W=West Side of SR 5/US 1

Existing Alignment Build Alternative Existing Alignment Build Alternative

R1E 533+41.38 Restaurant 71 226 214 12 R34W 532+34.95 Residential 66 202 190 12 R2E 533+39.84 Restaurant 71 273 261 12 R35W 533+05.08 Residential 66 234 221 13 R3E 533+38.59 Restaurant 71 324 311 13 R36W 533+11.41 Residential 66 312 300 12 R4E 533+49.47 Restaurant 71 460 447 13 R37W 527+40.77 Residential 66 442 434 8 R5E 533+45.20 Restaurant 71 478 466 12 R38W 529+44.06 Residential 66 496 483 13 R6E 533+39.11 Restaurant 71 499 486 13 R39W 531+19.12 Residential 66 595 586 9 R7E 533+17.04 Restaurant 71 608 595 13 R40W 532+85.41 Residential 66 645 633 12 R8E 533+07.42 Restaurant 71 638 626 12 R41W 541+78.81 Residential 66 115 103 12 R9E 532+97.11 Restaurant 71 675 663 12 R42W 541+82.72 Residential 66 157 143 14 R10E 532+85.59 Restaurant 71 709 696 13 R43W 542+51.31 Residential 66 175 162 13 R11E1 542+04.69 Historical Bldg. 66 140 126 14 R44W 543+26.93 Residential 66 209 199 10 R12E 546+06.96 Park 66 510 504 6 R45W 543+36.92 Residential 66 254 243 11 R12AE1 548+83.62 Lighthouse 66 938 926 12 R46W 543+39.87 Residential 66 337 324 13 R13E 541+71.15 Park 66 178 170 8 R47W 543+31.80 Residential 66 378 366 12 R14E 549+49.74 Park 66 155 145 10 R48W 543+71.25 Residential 66 465 453 12 R15E 546+80.67 Park 66 206 201 5 R49W 543+61.60 Residential 66 500 488 12 R16E 549+66.21 Park 66 245 236 9 R50W 542+07.99 Residential 66 92 80 12 R17E 551+84.23 Park 66 164 151 13 R51W 542+37.20 Residential 66 114 100 14 R18W 524+30.24 Tennis Court 66 142 130 12 R52W 542+65.18 Residential 66 130 118 12 R19W 524+42.28 Tennis Court 66 210 197 13 R53W 543+49.01 Residential 66 168 156 12 R20W 524+56.03 Tennis Court 66 277 263 14 R54W 543+81.26 Residential 66 240 228 12 R21W 524+68.63 Tennis Court 66 344 331 13 R55W 543+93.60 Residential 66 329 317 12 R22W 524+34.53 Residential 66 456 445 11 R56W 543+96.27 Residential 66 376 364 12 R23W 524+89.70 Residential 66 450 439 11 R57W 544+37.88 Residential 66 490 478 12 R24W 525+61.64 Residential 66 437 424 13 R58W 546+03.70 Tennis Court 66 194 184 10 R25W 527+14.38 Residential 66 230 218 12 R59W 546+07.33 Tennis Court 66 244 232 12 R26W 527+56.42 Residential 66 250 240 10 R60W 546+79.95 Swimming Pool 66 393 383 10 R27W 528+14.64 Residential 66 279 268 11 R61W 545+13.69 Residential 66 586 573 13 R28W 528+55.55 Residential 66 298 287 11 R62W 544+71.13 Residential 66 600 588 12 R29W 530+63.51 Residential 66 277 259 18 R63W 544+15.95 Residential 66 764 752 12 R30W 530+39.60 Residential 66 325 308 17 R64W 544+78.79 Residential 66 787 775 12 R31W 530+14.73 Residential 66 374 358 16 R32W 529+91.58 Residential 66 422 407 15 R33W 531+31.79 Residential 66 197 189 8

1 Potential vibration sensitive sites

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

 ML1 – Located on the west side of SR 5/US 1 adjacent to the Jupiter Harbour Condominiums. The measurement location is situated approximately 27 feet from the edge of pavement.

 ML2 – Located on the west side of SR 5/US 1 adjacent to the Jupiter Cove Condominiums. The measurement location is situated approximately 23 feet from the edge of pavement.

 ML3 – Located on the east side of SR 5/US 1 adjacent to the Lighthouse Park. The measurement location is situated approximately 49 feet from the edge of pavement. 7.1.1 Methodology

A series of three (3) repetitions of 10-minute measurement periods were acquired at the designated field measurement locations (ML1, ML2, and ML3). Noise levels were measured using the Larson Davis 831 Type I Real Time Sound Level Analyzer (SN 4153) for the purposes of field verification of the existing measured noise levels. The Larson Davis 831 instrumentation adheres to the following Acoustical Specifications IEC 61672-2013 (Class 1), IEC 60651-2001 (Type 1), IEC 60804-2000 (Type 1), IEC 61260-2001 (Class 1), IEC 61252-2002, ANSI S1.4- 2014 Class 1, ANSI S1.11-2004, 1/1 & 1/3 Octave Band Class 1, and ANSI S1.25-1991 (R2007).

The Larson Davis Model CAL 200 Calibrator (SN 8533) with two selectable calibration levels of 94.00 dB and 114.00 dB at 1 KHz was utilized in the measurement analysis and was the manufacturer’s specified calibrator. The Larson Davis Model CAL 200 Calibrator (SN 8533) adheres to the following Acoustical Specifications IEC 6LR61, NEDA 1604A, IEC 60942-2003 CLASS 1, and ANSI S1.40-2006. The entire acoustical system was calibrated before and after each ten (10) minute measurement period and received an annual factory calibration by the manufacturer’s representative. The sound level analyzer was calibrated at 114.00 dB at 1 KHz and was verified to be within the calibration tolerance. The acoustical and meteorological instrumentation is presented in Table 3.

The sound level meter was properly mounted on an instrument tripod approximately five (5) feet above the ground surface at each designated noise measurement location. The manufacturer’s specified wind screen was properly mounted on the sound level meter microphone during the field measurement period. Prior to each ten (10) minute measurement period, the sound level meter’s battery level was verified to be within the manufactures recommended tolerance. Vehicle speeds were measured with a Stalker Radar Gun (SN KE5356) which was calibrated before and after each ten (10) minute measurement period. 7.1.2 Meteorological Conditions

During each field noise measurement period, meteorological components, such as cloud cover, ambient temperature, wind speed, wind direction, and humidity, were documented.

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

The corresponding meteorological condition associated with each measurement period was recorded with a Kestrel hand held Pocket Weather Tracker. The Kestrel Model 4500NV (SN 678342) was utilized to record all field meteorological conditions associated with this study.

Table 3 Acoustical and Meteorological Instrumentation

Instrument Type & Model No. Manufacturer Serial No. Annual Calibration Calibration Laboratory

Larson Davis Model 831 Type I SLM Larson Davis 0004153 04/07/2016 Larson Davis Larson Davis PRM 831 Preamplifier Larson Davis 012499 04/06/2016 Larson Davis Larson Davis 377B02 Microphone Larson Davis 113988 04/07/2016 Larson Davis Larson Davis Cal 200 Calibrator Larson Davis 8533 10/03/2016 Larson Davis Kestrel 4500 NV Pocket Weather Tracker Kestrel 678342 N/A N/A

7.1.3 Field Measurement Data

Field noise measurements, meteorological conditions, and vehicle speeds were documented at three (3) representative locations (ML1, ML2, and ML3) situated along the SR 5/US 1 study corridor. Each measurement location represented the roadway segments adjacent to noise sensitive areas where potential noise barrier placement could be evaluated, if necessary. The noise measurement data sheets are presented in Appendix D. The field measured noise levels and corresponding vehicle classification information are depicted in the TNM 2.5 model validation results presented in Table 4. The noise levels are reported to the 1/10th of a decibel using the LEQ(h) noise descriptor. 7.1.4 Model Validation Results

In accordance with Part 2, Chapter 17 Noise (July 27, 2016), of the PD&E Manual, the acceptable range of error between the field noise level measurements and the predicted noise levels is +/- 3 dB(A). If this acceptable range of error can be achieved, TNM version 2.5 inputs can be relied upon for the purposes of predicting the noise levels for the project conditions. The difference between the field measured noise levels and the predicted noise levels for all measurement trials was within +/- 3 dB(A). Thus, the model inputs were determined to be valid for further use with this study. The first measurement period at monitoring location ML2 was not used due to ambient interference and atmospheric conditions. The remaining measurement periods were within the acceptable range of error for validation purposes.

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

Table 4 TNM 2.5 Model Validation Results

Field Aerial Distance Start Time Vehicle Classification Average Speed Field Computer Difference Model Trial Date Validation Receptor Sheet from 10 Minute NB/SB Vehicles / Hour NB/SB Measured Predicted (Measured (+/-) 3 Number Closest Period Outside Lane / Inside Lane Outside Lane/Inside Lane Noise Noise Level Predicted) dB(A) Edge of Level dB(A) dB(A) Travel dB(A) Lane (Ft.) Cars Medium Heavy Bus MC C/MT/HT/B/MC Trucks Trucks

ML1 1 27 1 10/19/16 10:21:12 264/204 12/0 18/18 0/0 0/6 34,34/24,0/34,27/0/ 0,24 67.0 65.4 - 1.6 YES 246/234 18/12 6/0 0/0 0/0 30,30/34,21/34,0/0/0

ML1 1 27 2 10/19/16 10:41:40 222/252 18/12 0/0 0/0 0/0 36,36/30,26/0/0/0 67.8 65.2 - 2.6 YES 348/360 6/12 6/0 0/0 6/18 36,36/34,32/36,0/0/29,32

ML1 1 27 3 10/19/16 11:02:38 336/282 6/18 0/12 0/0 6/6 38,38/26,29/0,29/0/30,21 66.9 66.8 - 0.1 YES 270/312 12/24 0/6 0/0 6/12 41,41/40,43/0,44/0/40,40

ML2 1 23 2 10/19/16 12:08:19 132/174 0/12 0/0 0/0 0/0 38,38/0,38/0/0/0 64.9 64.6 - 0.3 YES 246/288 12/0 6/0 0/0 0/6 38,38/35,0/20,0/0/0,34

ML2 1 23 3 10/19/16 12:29:03 312/282 0/6 0/0 0/0 0/0 39,39/0,32/0/0/0 66.8 67.1 0.3 YES 372/378 12/12 12/0 0/0 6/6 39,39/28,32/33,0/0/30,43

ML3 1 49 1 10/19/16 13:26:47 384/372 12/18 0/0 0/0 0/6 36,36/19,19/0/0/0,17 65.5 63.0 - 2.5 YES 210/210 0/6 12/18 0/0 0/0 36,36/0,19/22,22/0/0

ML3 1 49 2 10/19/16 14:42:56 252/330 0/6 0/0 0/0 12/6 31,31/0,20/0/0/41,41 61.7 61.1 - 0.6 YES 282/234 0/12 0/0 0/0 0/6 35,35/0,31/0/0/0,33

ML3 1 49 3 10/19/16 15:04:21 366/354 12/12 0/0 0/0 12/6 38,38/27,27/0/0/ 33,33 64.6 63.6 - 1.0 YES 276/270 6/0 6/6 0/0 6/0 38,38/37,0/25,25/0/33,0

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

7.2 PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS AND ABATEMENT ANALYSIS

The predicted noise levels and applicable abatement analysis measures were developed based upon the modeling criteria described in Part 2, Chapter 17 Noise (July 27, 2016), of the PD&E Manual and the Traffic Noise Modeling and Analysis Practitioners Handbook dated January 1, 2016. Specific input data for TNM version 2.5 is required to generate computer predicted noise levels associated with the project area under evaluation. The sixty-five (65) noise sensitive receptor locations evaluated are representative of the residential areas (Jupiter Harbour Condominiums and Jupiter Cove Condominiums), the tennis courts and swimming pool, the Lighthouse Park, and the commercial area (outside restaurant patio areas). The noise sensitive locations are depicted in the noise receptor aerials presented in Appendix C. 7.2.1 Date Sources

The data input sources that TNM version 2.5 relied upon for the purposes of predicting noise levels for this study are as follows: roadway and receptor data (state plane coordinates), project traffic data (i.e., vehicle volumes, vehicle mix, and vehicle speeds), distance(s) from the center of each roadway to the receptor, the widths of the roadway and lanes, the height of the receptor, barrier and buffer information including embankments, areas of water (e.g., ICWW), paved surfaces, building rows or other structures, the type of propagation paths (hard vs. soft), variations in terrain between the receptors and the roadway, and any changes in grade. Each of these factors can influence the predicted noise levels. The coordinate geometry for this study was derived from the State Plane Coordinate System. Elevation data was derived from the project survey data file. Supplemental survey data was established for the receptor locations identified within the project area. 7.2.2 Predicted Noise Levels

The TNM 2.5 predicted noise levels for the project area are presented in Table 5. The study evaluated the Existing Year 2015 Condition, the No-Build Alternative Design Year 2040 Condition, and the Build Alternative Design Year 2040 Condition (Recommended 35 foot Vertical Clearance Alternative). The predicted noise levels were evaluated for four (4) Noise Sensitive Areas which represent sixty-five (65) noise sensitive receptor locations. 7.2.3 Noise Sensitive Area 1

Noise Sensitive Area 1, which represents the outside restaurant patio areas on the southeast side of SR 5/US 1 will experience the following computer predicted sound levels:

 Existing Year 2015 Condition: 50.5 dB(A) to 59.7 dB(A)  No-Build Alternative Design Year 2040 Condition: 51.1 dB(A) to 60.2 dB(A)  Build Alternative Design Year 2040 Condition: 51.9 dB(A) to 60.2 dB(A)

Table 5 TNM 2.5 Predicted Noise Levels dB(A) Build Alternative Recommended 35 Ft. Vertical Clearance Alternative

Noise Number of Activity FDOT (2015) (2040) (2040) Difference Approach Consider Noise Number of Activity FDOT (2015) (2040) (2040) Difference Approach Consider Receptor Noise Sensitive Category NAC Existing No-Build Build Year Between or Exceed Abatement Receptor Noise Category NAC Existing No-Build Build Year Between or Exceed Abatement Number Sites Year Alternative Alternative Build and FDOT NAC Number Sensitive Sites Year Alternative Alternative Build and FDOT NAC Represented dB(A) dB(A) dB(A) Existing Represented dB(A) dB(A) dB(A) Existing dB(A) dB(A)

R1E 1 E 71 59.7 60.2 60.2 0.5 N N R34W 1 B 66 59.9 60.4 60.2 0.3 N N R2E 1 E 71 58.5 59.0 59.4 0.9 N N R35W 1 B 66 59.0 59.5 59.9 0.9 N N R3E 1 E 71 56.8 57.3 58.6 1.8 N N R36W 1 B 66 56.8 57.4 58.7 1.9 N N R4E 1 E 71 54.1 54.7 56.5 2.4 N N R37W 1 B 66 53.6 54.2 54.3 0.7 N N R5E 1 E 71 53.8 54.3 56.2 2.4 N N R38W 1 B 66 52.9 53.4 53.9 1.0 N N R6E 1 E 71 53.5 54.0 55.8 2.3 N N R39W 1 B 66 51.7 52.2 52.8 1.1 N N R7E 1 E 71 51.8 52.3 54.1 2.3 N N R40W 1 B 66 51.4 52.0 52.5 1.1 N N R8E 1 E 71 51.4 51.9 53.6 2.2 N N R41W 1 B 66 62.5 63.0 63.0 0.5 N N R9E 1 E 71 50.9 51.5 52.7 1.8 N N R42W 1 B 66 61.5 62.0 62.1 0.6 N N R10E 1 E 71 50.5 51.1 51.9 1.4 N N R43W 1 B 66 60.5 61.0 61.4 0.9 N N R11E 1 C 66 61.5 62.0 62.1 0.6 N N R44W 1 B 66 59.1 59.6 60.3 1.2 N N R12E 1 C 66 52.1 52.8 54.4 2.3 N N R45W 1 B 66 57.7 58.3 59.5 1.8 N N R12AE 1 C 66 48.4 49.0 50.1 1.7 N N R46W 1 B 66 55.5 56.1 58.1 2.6 N N R13E 1 C 66 60.0 60.5 59.8 -0.2 N N R47W 1 B 66 54.8 55.4 57.5 2.7 N N R14E 1 C 66 61.0 61.6 61.1 0.1 N N R48W 1 B 66 53.2 53.8 55.9 2.7 N N R15E 1 C 66 58.6 59.2 58.7 0.1 N N R49W 1 B 66 52.7 53.3 55.4 2.7 N N R16E 1 C 66 57.4 58.0 58.0 0.6 N N R50W 1 B 66 62.8 63.3 63.5 0.7 N N R17E 1 C 66 59.7 60.4 59.7 0.0 N N R51W 1 B 66 61.9 62.4 62.6 0.7 N N R18W 1 C 66 61.6 62.1 61.4 -0.2 N N R52W 1 B 66 61.2 61.7 62.0 0.8 N N R19W 1 C 66 58.6 59.1 58.5 -0.1 N N R53W 1 B 66 59.6 60.1 60.7 1.1 N N R20W 1 C 66 56.8 57.3 56.8 0.0 N N R54W 1 B 66 57.9 58.5 59.4 1.5 N N R21W 1 C 66 55.5 56.0 55.5 0.0 N N R55W 1 B 66 55.3 55.9 57.9 2.6 N N R22W 1 B 66 53.3 53.8 53.5 0.2 N N R56W 1 B 66 54.5 55.0 57.1 2.6 N N R23W 1 B 66 53.5 54.0 53.7 0.2 N N R57W 1 B 66 52.6 53.2 55.2 2.6 N N R24W 1 B 66 53.9 54.4 54.1 0.2 N N R58W 1 C 66 58.8 59.4 59.1 0.3 N N R25W 1 B 66 58.4 58.9 58.5 0.1 N N R59W 1 C 66 57.0 57.6 58.2 1.2 N N R26W 1 B 66 57.7 58.2 57.9 0.2 N N R60W 1 C 66 53.7 54.3 55.3 1.6 N N R27W 1 B 66 56.9 57.5 57.3 0.4 N N R61W 1 B 66 51.2 51.8 53.0 1.8 N N R28W 1 B 66 56.5 57.0 56.9 0.4 N N R62W 1 B 66 51.1 51.7 52.7 1.6 N N R29W 1 B 66 57.1 57.6 57.8 0.7 N N R63W 1 B 66 49.4 50.0 50.9 1.5 N N R30W 1 B 66 56.0 56.6 56.9 0.9 N N R64W 1 B 66 49.0 49.6 50.4 1.4 N N R31W 1 B 66 55.1 55.6 56.2 1.1 N N R32W 1 B 66 54.2 54.7 55.3 1.1 N N R33W 1 B 66 59.7 60.2 59.7 0.0 N N

Table 5 TNM 2.5 Predicted Noise Levels dB(A) Build Alternative Recommended 35 Ft. Vertical Clearance Alternative 2nd Floor Receptors (West Side SR 5/US 1)

R18W 1 C 66 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 R43W 1 B 66 62.9 63.4 61.6 -1.3 N N R19W 1 C 66 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 R44W 1 B 66 61.5 62.0 60.8 -0.7 N N R20W 1 C 66 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 R45W 1 B 66 60.1 60.6 60.0 -0.1 N N R21W 1 C 66 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 R46W 1 B 66 58.2 58.7 58.6 0.4 N N R22W 1 B 66 56.2 56.7 56.2 0.0 N N R47W 1 B 66 57.4 58.0 58.0 0.6 N N R23W 1 B 66 56.4 56.9 56.4 0.0 N N R48W 1 B 66 56.0 56.5 56.3 0.3 N N R24W 1 B 66 56.8 57.3 56.7 -0.1 N N R49W 1 B 66 55.4 56.0 55.9 0.5 N N R25W 1 B 66 61.3 61.8 61.5 0.2 N N R50W 1 B 66 65.4 65.9 63.8 -1.6 N N R26W 1 B 66 60.6 61.1 60.9 0.3 N N R51W 1 B 66 65.2 65.7 63.1 -2.1 N N R27W 1 B 66 59.9 60.4 60.0 0.1 N N R52W 1 B 66 64.7 65.3 62.5 -2.2 N N R28W 1 B 66 59.4 59.9 59.5 0.1 N N R53W 1 B 66 63.0 63.5 61.5 -1.5 N N R29W 1 B 66 59.7 60.3 59.9 0.2 N N R54W 1 B 66 60.4 61.0 60.1 -0.3 N N R30W 1 B 66 58.7 59.2 58.9 0.2 N N R55W 1 B 66 58.3 58.9 58.6 0.3 N N R31W 1 B 66 57.8 58.4 58.0 0.2 N N R56W 1 B 66 57.5 58.0 57.9 0.4 N N R32W 1 B 66 56.9 57.5 57.0 0.1 N N R57W 1 B 66 55.5 56.0 55.9 0.4 N N R33W 1 B 66 62.0 62.5 61.7 -0.3 N N R58W 1 C 66 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 R34W 1 B 66 61.9 62.4 61.2 -0.7 N N R59W 1 C 66 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 R35W 1 B 66 60.8 61.3 60.5 -0.3 N N R60W 1 C 66 N/A2 N/A2 N/A2 N/A2 N/A2 N/A2 R36W 1 B 66 58.8 59.3 59.1 0.3 N N R61W 1 B 66 53.9 54.5 54.7 0.8 N N R37W 1 B 66 56.5 57.0 56.5 0.0 N N R62W 1 B 66 53.9 54.4 54.6 0.7 N N R38W 1 B 66 55.6 56.1 55.7 0.1 N N R63W 1 B 66 52.2 52.8 53.0 0.8 N N R39W 1 B 66 54.3 54.8 54.7 0.4 N N R64W 1 B 66 51.8 52.4 52.7 0.9 N N R40W 1 B 66 53.8 54.3 54.3 0.5 N N R41W 1 B 66 65.9 66.4 63.4 -2.5 N N R42W 1 B 66 63.9 64.4 62.3 -1.6 N N

1 Tennis Court 2 Swimming Pool

Table 5 TNM 2.5 Predicted Noise Levels dB(A) Build Alternative Recommended 35 Ft. Vertical Clearance Alternative 3rd Floor Receptors (West Side SR 5/US 1)

R41W 1 B 66 66.5 67.0 63.9 -2.6 N N R42W 1 B 66 65.2 65.7 63.1 -2.1 N N R43W 1 B 66 64.5 65.0 62.7 -1.8 N N R44W 1 B 66 63.3 63.8 62.4 -0.9 N N R45W 1 B 66 61.7 62.3 61.7 0.0 N N R46W 1 B 66 59.5 60.0 59.7 0.2 N N R47W 1 B 66 58.6 59.2 58.8 0.2 N N R48W 1 B 66 56.9 57.5 57.3 0.4 N N R49W 1 B 66 56.4 57.0 56.7 0.3 N N R50W 1 B 66 67.3 67.8 64.4 -2.9 N N R51W 1 B 66 66.4 66.9 63.7 -2.7 N N R52W 1 B 66 65.7 66.3 63.3 -2.4 N N R53W 1 B 66 64.4 64.9 62.6 -1.8 N N R54W 1 B 66 62.1 62.7 61.9 -0.2 N N R55W 1 B 66 59.6 60.2 59.8 0.2 N N R56W 1 B 66 58.6 59.2 58.9 0.3 N N R57W 1 B 66 56.5 57.1 56.9 0.4 N N R58W 1 C 66 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 R59W 1 C 66 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 N/A1 R60W 1 C 66 N/A2 N/A2 N/A2 N/A2 N/A2 N/A2 R61W 1 B 66 55.2 55.8 55.6 0.4 N N R62W 1 B 66 55.1 55.7 55.4 0.3 N N R63W 1 B 66 53.1 53.7 53.6 0.5 N N R64W 1 B 66 52.8 53.4 53.3 0.5 N N

1 Tennis Court 2 Swimming Pool

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

7.2.4 Noise Sensitive Area 2

Noise Sensitive Area 2, which represents the Lighthouse Park on the northeast side of SR 5/US 1 will experience the following computer predicted sound levels:

 Existing Year 2015 Condition: 48.4 dB(A) to 61.5 dB(A)  No-Build Alternative Design Year 2040 Condition: 49.0 dB(A) to 62.0 dB(A)  Build Alternative Design Year 2040 Condition: 50.1 dB(A) to 62.1 dB(A)

7.2.5 Noise Sensitive Area 3

Noise Sensitive Area 3, which represents the Jupiter Harbour Condominiums on the southwest side of SR 5/US 1 will experience the following computer predicted sound levels: 1st Floor

 Existing Year 2015 Condition: 51.4 dB(A) to 61.6 dB(A)  No-Build Alternative Design Year 2040 Condition: 52.0 dB(A) to 62.1 dB(A)  Build Alternative Design Year 2040 Condition: 52.5 dB(A) to 61.4 dB(A)

Noise Sensitive Area 3, which represents the Jupiter Harbour Condominiums on the southwest side of SR 5/US 1 will experience the following computer predicted sound levels: 2nd Floor

 Existing Year 2015 Condition: 53.8 dB(A) to 62.0 dB(A)  No-Build Alternative Design Year 2040 Condition: 54.3 dB(A) to 62.5 dB(A)  Build Alternative Design Year 2040 Condition: 54.3 dB(A) to 61.7 dB(A)

7.2.6 Noise Sensitive Area 4

Noise Sensitive Area 4, which represents the Jupiter Cove Condominiums on the northwest side of SR 5/US 1 will experience the following computer predicted sound levels: 1st Floor

 Existing Year 2015 Condition: 49.0 dB(A) to 62.8 dB(A)  No-Build Alternative Design Year 2040 Condition: 49.6 dB(A) to 63.3 dB(A)  Build Alternative Design Year 2040 Condition: 50.4 dB(A) to 63.5 dB(A)

Noise Sensitive Area 4, which represents the Jupiter Cove Condominiums on the northwest side of SR 5/US 1 will experience the following computer predicted sound levels: 2nd Floor

 Existing Year 2015 Condition: 51.8 dB(A) to 65.9 dB(A)  No-Build Alternative Design Year 2040 Condition: 52.4 dB(A) to 66.4dB(A)  Build Alternative Design Year 2040 Condition: 52.7 dB(A) to 63.8 dB(A)

Noise Sensitive Area 4, which represents the Jupiter Cove Condominiums on the northwest side of SR 5/US 1 will experience the following computer predicted sound levels: 3rd Floor

 Existing Year 2015 Condition: 52.8 dB(A) to 67.3 dB(A)  No-Build Alternative Design Year 2040 Condition: 53.4 dB(A) to 67.8 dB(A)  Build Alternative Design Year 2040 Condition: 53.3 dB(A) to 64.4 dB(A)

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

7.2.7 Noise Impact Analysis

The traffic noise levels predicted at the sixty-five (65) noise sensitive receptor locations under evaluation did not approach or exceed the FDOT NAC at Noise Sensitive Area 1, Noise Sensitive Area 2, Noise Sensitive Area 3, and Noise Sensitive Area 4; therefore, potential noise abatement measures were not evaluated. 8.0 CONCLUSIONS

This noise study has been prepared for the PD&E Study associated with the SR 5/US 1 (Federal Highway) Bridge (Bridge #930005) over the Loxahatchee River/Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (ICWW) in Jupiter, Palm Beach County, Florida. The project extends approximately 3,000 feet along US Highway 1 (SR 5) from US 1/ CR A1A/Jupiter Harbour entrance intersection to the south and US 1/Beach Road/SRA1A intersection to the north. Traffic noise impacts were evaluated for potential noise sensitive locations which were developed prior to the project’s DPK. Based upon two (2) field reviews and two (2) active building permit requests from the Town of Jupiter, Florida, it was determined that Activity Category B, C, and E locations adjacent to the study corridor would be evaluated for potential noise impacts from the project area improvements. The Build Alternative Design Year 2040 Condition (Recommended 35 foot Vertical Clearance Alternative) was selected as the preferred alternative. No other alternatives were evaluated.

The sixty-five (65) noise sensitive receptor locations are representative of the residential areas (Jupiter Harbour Condominiums and Jupiter Cove Condominiums), the tennis courts and swimming pool, the Lighthouse Park, and the commercial area (outside restaurant patio areas). The computer modeled noise receptor locations are representative of forty (40) residential locations, seven (7) recreational areas, eight (8) park locations, and ten (10) outside restaurant patio areas.

The traffic noise levels predicted at the noise sensitive receptor locations under evaluation did not approach or exceed the FDOT NAC at Noise Sensitive Area 1, Noise Sensitive Area 2, Noise Sensitive Area 3, and Noise Sensitive Area 4; therefore, potential noise abatement measures were not evaluated.

The proposed improvements will result in a new bridge deck which will have a minimal alignment shift to the west. Additionally, there will be new pedestrian and bike lanes. The proposed improvements will result in a minimal noise level increase at some locations for the alternative year conditions evaluated.

There are no other noise sensitive areas located within the project corridor as of the date of this report and was verified through an active building permit request. There are no other noise sources within the vicinity of this project that could potentially interfere with the predicted sound levels within the limits of the study corridor.

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

9.0 CONSTRUCTION NOISE AND VIBRATION

The study corridor is situated in a medium densely populated area. The noise sensitive locations are comprised of residential areas, the tennis courts and swimming pool areas, the Lighthouse Park, and the outside patio areas of restaurants. The Lighthouse Park located on the northeast side of the bridge has a historical building and a lighthouse. These structures may require special noise and vibration control consideration during the construction process. Special consideration to these areas as it relates to ground borne vibration impacts may also be necessary.

The noise sensitive locations are depicted in the noise receptor aerials presented in Appendix C. Noise and vibration impacts may occur due to movement and operation of heavy equipment and construction activities.

Noise control measures will include those contained in FDOT Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction (5). Special consideration may be required to minimize noise and vibration impacts resulting from the expected bridge construction process.

These considerations could include any of the following: limitations on the construction activities, temporary noise abatement structures around noisy equipment, and methods to measure and reduce ground borne vibration impacts.

A list of typical construction noise and vibration sensitive sites can be found on page 17-46 of Chapter 17 (Topic No. 650-000-001, July 27, 2016). A summary of potential noise and vibration sensitive sites has been provided in Appendix E.

An assessment of these sites should take place prior to construction to mitigate potential impacts. Section 335.02, Florida Statutes, in 2003, exempts FDOT from compliance with local ordinances. However, FDOT policy is to follow the requirement of local ordinances to the extent that it is reasonable. If unanticipated noise and / or vibration issues arise during the construction process, the Project Engineer, in concert with the District Noise Specialist and the Contractor, may investigate additional methods of controlling these impacts on a case by case basis. 10.0 COMMUNITY COORDINATION

A copy of the Noise Study Report should be submitted to the appropriate local planning / zoning officials for their consideration in land use control once the Location and Design Concept Acceptance (LDCA) occurs. To assist local planning officials, the distances to the 66 dB(A) noise contours and the 71 dB(A) noise contours were estimated by evaluating the results of the computer modeled receptor location(s) identified in this analysis. The 66 dB(A) noise contour delineates the distance from the nearest edge of the travel lane that an approach of the NAC for Activity Category B and Category C is expected to occur for the 2040 design year traffic condition. The 71 dB(A) noise contour delineates the distance from the nearest edge of the travel lane that an approach of the NAC for Activity Category E is expected to occur for the 2040 design year traffic condition. This study has identified that Activity Category B, C, and E locations were present under the existing study corridor conditions.

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

For the Build Alternative, the estimated distance from the nearest edge of the travel lane to the 71 dB(A) noise contour is approximately 12 feet from the SR 5/US 1 corridor (southeast side). The estimated distance from the nearest edge of the travel lane to the 66 dB(A) noise contour is approximately 77 feet from the SR 5/US 1 corridor (northeast side). The estimated distance from the nearest edge of the travel lane to the 66 dB(A) noise contour is approximately 60 feet from the SR 5/US 1 corridor (southwest side). The estimated distance from the nearest edge of the travel lane to the 66 dB(A) noise contour is approximately 38 feet from the SR 5/US 1 corridor (northwest side).

The set-back distances referenced above account only for the traffic noise associated with the SR 5/US 1 study corridor and do not take into consideration the noise levels associated with other noise sources. The noise contours are depicted on the noise receptor aerials presented in Appendix C. The noise contour table is presented in Appendix F.

Further, the distances to the 66 dB(A) noise contours and the 71 dB(A) noise contours do not consider the effects of shielding from adjacent buildings, changes in roadway elevation, unusual topographic features, abnormal atmospheric conditions, or local traffic volumes from adjacent roadways. Each of these factors could either increase or decrease the estimated distance to the 66 dB(A) noise contours and the 71 dB(A) noise contours. Therefore, the setback distances shown in Appendix F are approximate values and should be considered as general guidance information. 11.0 REFERENCES

1. Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction Noise; FHWA; April 2001. 2. FDOT PD&E Manual, Part 2, Chapter 17 (Noise Policy); FDOT; Tallahassee, Florida; July 27, 2016. 3. The Traffic Noise Modeling and Analysis Practitioners Handbook; FDOT; Tallahassee, Florida; January 1, 2016. 4. Measurement of Highway-Related Noise (FHWA-PD-96-046); FHWA; May 1996. 5. Standard Specifications for Road and Bridge Construction; FDOT; Tallahassee, Florida; 2013.

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

FIGURE 1

PROJECT LOCATION MAP

Palm Beach County

End Project (Milepost 11.124)

Begin Project (Milepost 10.567)

SR 5/ US 1 Study Area

© OpenStreetMap (and) contributors, CC-BY- © SAOpenStreetMap (and) contributors, CC-BY-SA K:\VRB_Roadway\RoadwayExhibits\Fort Pierce10th Street& Pinecrestestates\GIS\MXD Raster data courtesy of www.labins.org Project Location Map SR 5/US 1 Bridge over Loxahatchee River/Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (Bridge #930005) Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study FPID: 428400-2-22-02 Town of Jupiter, Palm Beach County, Florida FIGURE 1 PROJECT NUMBER: 040006382 DATE: JANUARY 2017 SCALE: 1 inch = 660 feet SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

FIGURE 6 TYPICAL NOISE LEVELS

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

COMMON OUTDOOR NOISE LEVEL COMMON INDOOR ACTIVITIES dB(A) ACTIVITIES ---110--- Rock Band Jet Fly-over at 1000 ft ---100--- Gas Lawn Mower at 3 ft ---90--- Diesel Truck at 50 ft, at 50 mph Food Blender at 1 m (3 ft) ---80--- Garbage Disposal at 1 m (3 ft) Noise Urban Area (Daytime) Gas Lawn Mower at 100 ft ---70--- Vacuum Cleaner at 10 ft Commercial Area Normal Speech at 3 ft Heavy Traffic at 300 ft ---60--- Large Business Office Quiet Urban Daytime ---50--- Dishwasher Next Room

Quiet Urban Nighttime ---40--- Theater, Large Conference Room (Background) Quiet Suburban Nighttime Library ---30--- Bedroom at Night, Concert Hall (Background) Quiet Rural Nighttime ---20---

---10---

Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing ---0--- Lowest Threshold of Human Hearing Source: California Dept. of Transportation Technical Noise Supplement, Oct. 1998, Page 18.

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

APPENDIX A

EXISTING AND PROPOSED BRIDGE TYPICAL SECTIONS AND CONCEPT PLANS

0 10 50

Feet JUPITER HARBOUR CONDOMINIUMS

BEGIN PROJECT FPID 428400-2-22-02

STA.520 +90 ¡ CONST. S1 (FEDERAL HIGHWAY) SR5/U EXISTING R/W LINE

8' CONC.S IDEWALK

¡ CONST. + US1 (SR5)

521 522 523 524 525

525

8' CONC.S IDEWALK

EXISTING R/W LINE

REVISIONS Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. STATE OF FLORIDA SHEET DATE DESCRIPTION DATE DESCRIPTION DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Certificate Of Authorization No. 696 NO. James M. Sumislaski, P.E. ROAD NO. COUNTY FINANCIAL PROJECT ID CONCEPT PLAN P.E. License No. 38841 1920 Wekiva Way, Suite 200 5 PALM BEACH 428400-2-22-02 1 West Palm Beach, Florida 33411

brandon.kern 12/1/2016 4:38:29 PM K:\WPB_Design\02 - DESIGN PD&E\040006382_US 1 Bridge Jupiter\42840022202\Concepts\Concept Plans\PLANRD01.dgn N

0 10 50

Feet

JUPITER HARBOUR CONDOMINIUMS

BEGIN BRIDGE

EXISTING R/W LINE STA.532 +62 ¡ CONST.

RETAINING WALL W/ BARRIER RETAINING WALL W/ HANDRAIL

PEDESTRIAN RAIL

5' CONC.S IDEWALK

8' CONC.S IDEWALK DRAINAGE SWALE

8' CONC. SIDEWALK

00 .

20 US1 (SR5)

70 +

¡ CONST. + 526 527 528

525 529 530 531 532

532

N I

L I

RETAINING WALL W/ L

H HANDRAIL

H C PEDESTRIAN RAIL

C T

T A

A M

8' CONC.S IDEWALK M

¡ CONST. DRAINAGE SWALE

FUTURE LANDSCAPING EXISTING R/W LINE

A 1 A U TIKI BEACH

WATERFRONT

CR RESTAURANT & BAR

PAVEMENT REMOVAL

brandon.kern 12/1/2016 4:38:33 PM K:\WPB_Design\02 - DESIGN PD&E\040006382_US 1 Bridge Jupiter\42840022202\Concepts\Concept Plans\PLANRD02.dgn FUTURE RESTAURANT

UNDER DEVELOPMENT N

0 10 50

Feet

LOXAHATCHEE RIVER/ INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY

¡ CHANNEL

EXISTING R/W LINE

RETAINING WALL W/ HANDRAIL PROPOSED FENDER

5' CONC. SIDEWALK

DRAINAGE SWALE

8' CONC. SIDEWALK

70 US1 (SR5)

+ ¡ CONST. 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540

532

540

H PEDESTRIAN RAIL C

M 8' CONC. SIDEWALK M

DRAINAGE SWALE PROPOSED FENDER

BRIDGE SIGNAL CANAL BULKHEAD WALL W/ RAILING

8' SIDEWALK (CONNECT TO EXISTING)

EXISTING R/W LINE

LOXAHATCHEE RIVER/ U TIKI BEACH INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY WATERFRONT RESTAURANT & BAR

brandon.kern 12/1/2016 4:38:36 PM K:\WPB_Design\02 - DESIGN PD&E\040006382_US 1 Bridge Jupiter\42840022202\Concepts\Concept Plans\PLANRD03.dgn N

0 10 50

Feet

JUPITER COVE CONDOMINIUMS

JUPITER COVE PLAZA

END BRIDGE BRIDGE SIGNAL EXISTING R/W LINE STA. 542+80 ¡ CONST.

RETAINING WALL W/ HANDRAIL

8' CONC. SIDEWALK

00 .

PEDESTRIAN RAIL

20 US1 (SR5) £ SURVEY +

541 542 543 544 545 00 546 .

540 547

70 E

¡ CONST. 547

H PEDESTRIAN RAIL

E C

T N

I A

L M 8' CONC. SIDEWALK

5' CONC.S IDEWALK C

RETAINING WALL M W/ HANDRAIL DRAINAGE SWALE HANDRAIL

EXISTING R/W LINE ACCESS SIDEWALK TO MUSEUM

WWII U.S. NAVAL HOUSING BUILDING

LIGHTHOUSE PARK

brandon.kern 12/1/2016 4:38:39 PM K:\WPB_Design\02 - DESIGN PD&E\040006382_US 1 Bridge Jupiter\42840022202\Concepts\Concept Plans\PLANRD04.dgn N

E A S T

R I 0 10 50 V E R S I D E Feet

D R I V E WALGREENS WELLS FARGO BANK

EXECUTIVE SUITES

GRAVITY WALL EXISTING R/W LINE W/ HANDRAIL

8' CONC.S IDEWALK

GRAVITY WALL

W/ HANDRAIL

00 .

US1 (SR5) 8' CONC. SIDEWALK

70 + 548 549 550

547 551

552 E

0 N 553 0

RETAINING WALL W/ HANDRAIL .

L 554

PEDESTRIAN RAIL 555 20

+ H

C ¡ CONST. T

555 A 8' CONC. SIDEWALK

5' CONC SDWK. E

HANDRAIL

DRAINAGE SWALE H

EXISTING R/W LINE

LIGHTHOUSE PARK PAVEMENT REMOVAL

brandon.kern 12/1/2016 4:38:43 PM K:\WPB_Design\02 - DESIGN PD&E\040006382_US 1 Bridge Jupiter\42840022202\Concepts\Concept Plans\PLANRD05.dgn N

0 10 50 SHIPWRECK BAR & GRILLE Feet

END PROJECT

FPID 428400-2-22-02

)

A 1

A STA. 555+80 ¡ CONST

TE SR5/US1 (FEDERAL HIGHWAY)

LTE

(

LIGHTHOUSE DINER

811 JUPITER KITE

R PADDLE WAKE S

CITGO

GAS STATION

70 +

640

555

N I

L 556

A M

641 FUTURE PROJECT (CONSTRUCTION TO BEGIN NOVEMBER 2017)

EXISTING

R/W LINE

OAD R

JUPITER INLET LIGHTHOUSE )

H OUTSTANDING NATURAL AREA

707

(

brandon.kern 12/1/2016 4:38:48 PM K:\WPB_Design\02 - DESIGN PD&E\040006382_US 1 Bridge Jupiter\42840022202\Concepts\Concept Plans\PLANRD06.dgn SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

APPENDIX B

TRAFFIC DATA FOR NOISE STUDY

SR5/US1 Peak Hour Traffic Volumes For TNM 2.5 Model Existing Year 2015 Condition No Build Alternative 2040 Condition Build Alternative 2040 Condition 1998 VPH Cars = 1086 Cars = 866 2250 VPH Cars = 1222 Cars = 976 2250 VPH Cars = 1222 Cars = 976 Demand MT = 4 MT = 4 Demand MT = 5 MT = 4 Demand MT = 5 MT = 4 HT= 9 HT= 7 HT= 10 HT= 8 HT= 10 HT= 8 BUS = 3 BUS = 3 BUS = 4 BUS = 3 BUS = 4 BUS = 3 MC = 9 MC = 7 MC = 10 MC = 8 MC = 10 MC = 8

US1 S. of Beach Road 45 MPH 45 MPH 45 MPH Existing Year 2015 Condition No Build Alternative 2040 Condition Build Alternative 2040 Condition 2655 VPH Cars = 1446 Cars = 1154 3870 VPH Cars = 2108 Cars = 1682 3870 VPH Cars = 2108 Cars = 1682 Demand MT = 4 MT = 4 Demand MT = 6 MT = 5 Demand MT = 6 MT = 5 HT= 10 HT= 8 HT= 15 HT= 12 HT= 15 HT= 12 BUS = 4 BUS = 4 BUS = 6 BUS = 5 BUS = 6 BUS = 5 MC = 12 MC = 9 MC = 17 MC = 14 MC = 17 MC = 14

US1 N. of Beach Road 45 MPH 45 MPH 45 MPH Existing Year 2015 Condition No Build Alternative 2040 Condition Build Alternative 2040 Condition 265 VPH Cars = 260 265 VPH Cars = 260 265 VPH Cars = 260 LOS C MT = 1 LOS C MT = 1 LOS C MT = 1 1‐Way HT= 1 1‐Way HT= 1 1‐Way HT= 1 BUS = 1 BUS = 1 BUS = 1

Beach Road MC = 2 MC = 2 MC = 2 35 MPH 35 MPH 35 MPH Existing Year 2015 Condition No Build Alternative 2040 Condition Build Alternative 2040 Condition 265 VPH Cars = 261 265 VPH Cars = 261 265 VPH Cars = 261 LOS C MT = 1 LOS C MT = 1 LOS C MT = 1 1‐Way HT= 1 1‐Way HT= 1 1‐Way HT= 1 BUS = 1 BUS = 1 BUS = 1

Ocean Drive MC = 1 MC = 1 MC = 1 30 MPH 30 MPH 30 MPH SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

APPENDIX C

NOISE RECEPTOR AERIALS

R64W

R63W

R40W

R39W

R62W N R61W

0 50 200 R38W

R49W R22W R57W R23W R37W Feet R24W R48W R32W

FUTURE RESTAURANT R31W JUPITER HARBOUR NSA 3 UNDER DEVELOPMENT R60W R47W R21W CONDOMINIUMS R56W JUPITER COVE R30W CONDOMINIUMS R28W R46W R36W R55W R27W R20W R29W R26W NSA 4 R25W R45W R35W WELLS FARGO BANK R19W 66 dB(A) AT 60 FT R54W R59W FROM EDGE OF TRAVEL LANE R33W R34W R44W JUPITER COVE R58W BEGIN PROJECT E PLAZA A R18W R43W S T FPID 428400-2-22-02 R53W R R42W I V E BEGIN BRIDGE R STA. 522+80 ¡ CONST. S I R52W 66 dB(A) AT 38 FT D E

SR5/US1 (FEDERAL HIGHWAY) STA. 532+62 ¡ CONST. R41W R51W D FROM EDGE OF TRAVEL LANE R Z3 I V E R50W END BRIDGE

ML1 STA. 542+80 ¡ CONST. EXECUTIVE SUITES 525 Z4 ¡ CONST. 530 535

540 ML2 CL41 CL34 545 US1 (SR5)

CL35 550

Z1 Z1

CL36 CL40

71 dB(A) AT 12 FT ¡ CONST. FROM EDGE OF TRAVEL LANE

ML3

R11E CL39 66 dB(A) AT 77 FT U TIKI BEACH FROM EDGE OF TRAVEL LANE WATERFRONT R14E R13E R1E LOXAHATCHEE RIVER/ RESTAURANT & BAR R15E INTRACOASTAL WATER WAY R17E WWII U.S. NAVAL R2E HOUSING BUILDING R16E 25 R3E NSA 2

LIGHTHOUSE PARK

NSA 1 JETTY'S WATERFRONT R4E R5E

R6E

R12E

RUSTIC INN CRABHOUSE R7E

R8E

R9E

R10E

R12AE

SR-5/US-1 LEGEND APPENDIX C FLORIDA DEPARTMENT FROM CR A1A (OCEAN BOULEVARD) TO BEACH ROAD R#X - RECEPTOR NOISE CONTOUR LINE (66 dB(A)) FIGURE OF TRANSPORTATION PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA ML# - MONITORING LOCATION NSA - NOISE SENSITIVE AREA NOISE RECEPTOR AERIAL DISTRICT FOUR FINANCIAL PROJECT ID: 428400-2-22-01 NOISE CONTOUR LINE (71 dB(A)) EXISTING R/W LINE 1 FEDERAL PROJECT NO: TBD

brandon.kern 2/9/2017 8:34:50 AM K:\WPB_Design\02 - DESIGN PD&E\040006382_US 1 Bridge Jupiter\42840022202\survey\Noise\NOISE_PLANS01.dgn SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

APPENDIX D

NOISE MEASUREMENT DATA SHEETS

ML1-1

10/19/2016 Bernard Kinney Jr., INCE LD 001

SR 5 / US1 Jupiter Bridge FM No.: 428400-2-22-01

ML1 Jupiter Harbor Condominium Residential Area E/P = 27 Ft.

LAT= 26 56.689' LONG= -80 5.090' Elevation= 54.8' ' x

82.2 82.7

NE 045 NE055

0.0 2.8 1.9

0.0 2.0 1.6

52.8 57.5

Larson Davis 831-Type 1 0004153

SLM 4/7/16 PRM 831 4/6/16 MIC 4/7/16 CAL 200 10/3/2016

114.00 114.00 0.00

5.8 V 96.5% 5.3 V 80.5 %

A Slow

Larson Davis CAL 200 8533

67.0

SR 5 / US1 Traffic

MN PRM 831 SN 012499 MN 377B02 SN 113988 GPS 001 MN GR-213 PN 96039-XX ML1 1

See Table 4 NB Direction SB Direction ML1-2

10/19/2016 Bernard Kinney Jr., INCE LD 002

SR 5 / US1 Jupiter Bridge FM No.: 428400-2-22-01

ML1 Jupiter Harbor Condominium Residential Area E/P = 27 Ft.

LAT= 26 56.692' LONG= -80 5.092' Elevation= 16.1' x

83.5 83.8

NE 040 NE037

0.0 3.0 2.6

0.0 4.2 3.5

56.6 58.2

Larson Davis 831-Type 1 0004153

SLM 4/7/16 PRM 831 4/6/16 MIC 4/7/16 CAL 200 10/3/2016

114.00 114.00 0.02

5.3 V 77.9% 5.1 V 71.0 %

A Slow

Larson Davis CAL 200 8533

67.8

SR 5 / US1 Traffic

MN PRM 831 SN 012499 MN 377B02 SN 113988 GPS 001 MN GR-213 PN 96039-XX ML1 2

See Table 4 NB Direction SB Direction ML1-3

10/19/2016 Bernard Kinney Jr., INCE LD 003

SR 5 / US1 Jupiter Bridge FM No.: 428400-2-22-01

ML1 Jupiter Harbor Condominium Residential Area E/P = 27 Ft.

LAT= 26 56.692' LONG= -80 5.092' Elevation= 4.6' x

83.0 83.8

NE 039 NE041

0.0 6.3 3.8

0.0 5.2 2.9

56.8 58.0

Larson Davis 831-Type 1 0004153

SLM 4/7/16 PRM 831 4/6/16 MIC 4/7/16 CAL 200 10/3/2016

114.00 114.00 -0.02

5.1 V 68.8% 5.0 V 62.7 %

A Slow

Larson Davis CAL 200 8533

66.9

SR 5 / US1 Traffic

MN PRM 831 SN 012499 MN 377B02 SN 113988 GPS 001 MN GR-213 PN 96039-XX ML1 3

See Table 4 NB Direction SB Direction ML2-2

10/19/2016 Bernard Kinney Jr., INCE LD 005

SR 5 / US1 Jupiter Bridge FM No.: 428400-2-22-01

ML2 Jupiter Cove Condominium Residential Area E/P = 23 Ft.

LAT= 26 57.003' LONG= -80 5.125' Elevation= 32.2' x

83.2 85.5

NNW 334 N356

0.0 11.2 9.5

0.0 3.9 2.2

56.4 54.0

Larson Davis 831-Type 1 0004153

SLM 4/7/16 PRM 831 4/6/16 MIC 4/7/16 CAL 200 10/3/2016

114.00 114.00 -0.04

4.8 V 43.8% 4.7 V 35.5 %

A Slow

Larson Davis CAL 200 8533

64.9

SR 5 / US1 Traffic

MN PRM 831 SN 012499 MN 377B02 SN 113988 GPS 001 MN GR-213 PN 96039-XX ML2 2

See Table 4 NB Direction SB Direction ML2-3

10/19/2016 Bernard Kinney Jr., INCE LD 006

SR 5 / US1 Jupiter Bridge FM No.: 428400-2-22-01

ML2 Jupiter Cove Condominium Residential Area E/P = 23 Ft.

LAT= 26 57.003' LONG= -80 5.125' Elevation= 32.2' x

85.4 86.9

N354 NNE022

0.0 8.6 7.2

0.0 6.0 4.6

54.5 52.6

Larson Davis 831-Type 1 0004153

SLM 4/7/16 PRM 831 4/6/16 MIC 4/7/16 CAL 200 10/3/2016

114.00 114.00 -0.14

4.7 V 33.5% 4.7 V 30.3 %

A Slow

Larson Davis CAL 200 8533

66.8

SR 5 / US1 Traffic

MN PRM 831 SN 012499 MN 377B02 SN 113988 GPS 001 MN GR-213 PN 96039-XX ML2 3

See Table 4 NB Direction SB Direction ML3-1

10/19/2016 Bernard Kinney Jr., INCE LD 007

SR 5 / US1 Jupiter Bridge FM No.: 428400-2-22-01

ML3 Light House Park E/P = 49 Ft.

LAT= 26 57.065' LONG= -80 5.097' Elevation= 9.2' x

85.5 91.2

WNW293 W279

0.0 3.8 2.8

0.0 5.7 2.7

56.7 54.0

Larson Davis 831-Type 1 0004153

SLM 4/7/16 PRM 831 4/6/16 MIC 4/7/16 CAL 200 10/3/2016

114.00 114.00 0.03

5.4 V 82.6% 5.2 V 75.0 %

A Slow

Larson Davis CAL 200 8533

65.5

SR 5 / US1 Traffic

MN PRM 831 SN 012499 MN 377B02 SN 113988 GPS 001 MN GR-213 PN 96039-XX ML3 1

See Table 4 NB Direction SB Direction ML3-2

10/19/2016 Bernard Kinney Jr., INCE LD 008

SR 5 / US1 Jupiter Bridge FM No.: 428400-2-22-01

ML3 Light House Park E/P = 49 Ft.

LAT= 26 57.060' LONG= -80 5.096' Elevation= 36.7' x

87.2 86.3

W275 W271

0.0 7.9 3.6

0.0 5.7 5.1

53.2 53.7

Larson Davis 831-Type 1 0004153

SLM 4/7/16 PRM 831 4/6/16 MIC 4/7/16 CAL 200 10/3/2016

114.00 114.00 -0.13

4.9 V 47.5% 4.8 V 38.6 %

A Slow

Larson Davis CAL 200 8533

61.7

SR 5 / US1 Traffic

MN PRM 831 SN 012499 MN 377B02 SN 113988 GPS 001 MN GR-213 PN 96039-XX ML3 2

See Table 4 NB Direction SB Direction ML3-3

10/19/2016 Bernard Kinney Jr., INCE LD 009

SR 5 / US1 Jupiter Bridge FM No.: 428400-2-22-01

ML3 Light House Park E/P = 49 Ft.

LAT= 26 57.062' LONG= -80 5.096' Elevation= 25.9' x

90.1 86.6

W277 W273

0.0 4.2 1.9

0.0 3.3 1.8

50.4 56.3

Larson Davis 831-Type 1 0004153

SLM 4/7/16 PRM 831 4/6/16 MIC 4/7/16 CAL 200 10/3/2016

114.00 114.00 -0.03

4.7 V 36.4% 4.7 V 32.3 %

A Slow

Larson Davis CAL 200 8533

64.6

SR 5 / US1 Traffic

MN PRM 831 SN 012499 MN 377B02 SN 113988 GPS 001 MN GR-213 PN 96039-XX ML3 3

See Table 4 NB Direction SB Direction SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

APPENDIX E

NOISE AND VIBRATION SENSITIVE SITES

Construction Noise and Vibration Sensitive Sites (a partial listing of potential sites)

Noise Vibration Eye Centers/Clinics Eye Centers/Clinics Medical Centers Medical Centers Hospitals Hospitals Geriatric Centers Geriatric Centers Sound Recording Studios Sound Recording Studios TV/Radio Stations TV/Radio Stations Residences Residences Technical Laboratories Technical Laboratories Hearing Testing Centers Antiques Shops Theaters Museums Schools Historic Buildings Motels/Hotels Funeral Homes Libraries Meditation Centers Churches/Shrines Parks Day Care Centers Outdoor Theaters Note: This list is not meant to be all inclusive or exclusive, but rather an indication of the type of sites likely to be sensitive to construction noise and/or vibration. Source: FDOT Noise and Vibration Task Team; August 17, 1999.

SR 5/US 1 BRIDGE OVER THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER /ICWW PD&E STUDY NOISE STUDY REPORT

APPENDIX F

NOISE CONTOUR TABLE

Appendix F Noise Contours SR 5/US 1 From Ocean Blvd. to Beach Road

FDOT Roadway Segment Activity Number of Distance from Nearest Edge of NAC Alternative Category Travel Lanes Travel Lane* dB(A)

Ocean Blvd. to Beach Road – Southeast Side E 71 4 12 Ft. Build Alternative Ocean Blvd. to Beach Road – Northeast Side C 66 4 77 Ft. Build Alternative Ocean Blvd. to Beach Road – Southwest Side B, C 66 4 60 Ft. Build Alternative Ocean Blvd. to Beach Road – Northwest Side B, C 66 4 38 Ft. Build Alternative * Does not include the widths of the proposed bicycle lanes and pedestrian lanes.