From CR-A1A to Beach Road | Palm Beach County, Florida Financial Project ID 428400-2-22-01 | ETDM# 14199 Alternatives Public Workshop September 20, 2016

1 Location Map

2 Purpose of Tonight’s Meeting

§ Provide you with our data collection findings § Explain to you the alternatives considered § Provide information about these alternatives – Engineering – Environmental § Present the project schedule § Obtain your input

3 Project Development & Environment (PD&E) Study

The objectives of a PD&E study are to perform necessary social, environmental and engineering studies of a proposed transportation improvement to support decisions concerning if and where it should be built and what will be the basic design concepts.

4 History

§ Feasibility Study – Completed June 2014 – Concluded bridge should be replaced § Current rehabilitation – Pile jacketing to reinforce 13 existing piles – Construction underway

5 Existing Typical Section

Existing Bridge Typical Section

6 Existing Bridge

§ Structurally deficient – Substructure rated “Poor” – Superstructure rated “Poor” § Functionally obsolete – No sidewalks – No bicycle lanes

7 Existing Clearance

Existing Vertical Clearance - 25.0'

125'

90'

Existing Horizontal Clearance - 90.0’

Proposed Horizontal Clearance - 125.0' 8 PD&E Study Components

§ Public Involvement

§ Engineering

§ Environmental

9 Public Involvement Meetings § Elected Officials/ Agency Kickoff Meeting February 17, 2016 § Public Kick-off Meeting February 17, 2016 § Alternatives Public Workshop being held today § Public Hearing – early 2017 § Stakeholder Meetings (Cultural Resource Committee, Bridge Aesthetics Committee, HOA Meetings, etc.)

10 Engineering

§ Data Collection and Analysis

§ Bridge Structure

§ Design Alternatives

11 Data Collection and Analysis

§ Vehicular Traffic § Boat Traffic for Jupiter Bridge § Typical Section

12 Vehicular Traffic

Daily Vehicle Trips • 4-lane roadway or bridge can = 65,600 accommodate • Estimated future year 2040 volume = 23,400 on SR 5 Bridge

13 Data Collection and Analysis Boat Traffic for Jupiter Bridge*

From Tender Logs* 14 Data Collection and Analysis Boat Traffic for Jupiter Bridge*

From Tender Logs* 15 Data Collection and Analysis Boat Traffic for Jupiter Bridge*

BOATS REQUIRING BASCULE NUMBER OF % OF SPAN TO OPEN VESSELS OPENINGS

20 - 25 ft 7 12% 26 - 30 ft 8 14% 31 - 35 ft 9 15% 36 - 40 ft 3 5% 41 - 45 ft 9 16% 46 - 50 ft 6 10% 51 - 55 ft 8 14% 56 - 60 ft 4 7% 64 + ft 4 7% TOTAL 58 100%

From Field Survey* 16 Proposed Approach Span Typical Section

17 Proposed Bascule Bridge Typical Section

18 Proposed Roadway Typical Sections

South of SR 5/US1 Bridge

North of SR 5/US1 Bridge 19 Alternatives Analysis § No Build Alternative § Build Alternatives: – Vertical Alignment • 25’ bascule (same as existing) • 30’ bascule • 35’ bascule • 40’ bascule – Horizontal Alignment • Centerline same as existing

20 Data Collection and Analysis Boat Traffic for Jupiter Bridge

21 Data Collection and Analysis Boat Traffic for Bridges from Tender Logs

Number of Bridge Bascule Span Openings Jupiter Bridge and Indiantown Road Bridge Vertical Clearance 25 Feet 35 Feet 2014-2015 Jupiter US-1 Indiantown Road August 204 83 September 183 81 October 290 144 November 454 274 December 483 295 January 534 298 February 442 258 March 581 324 April 511 306 May 448 267 June 294 146 July 253 139

Average 390 218

# of openings reduction 172 44%

22 Reduction in Openings Compared to Existing Vertical Clearance Reduction 25' (Same as Existing) 0% 30' 25% 35' 44% 40' 49%

Vertical Clearance 23 Horizontal Alignment Alternative Proposed Centerline Same as Existing

SR5/US 1

Next Slide

24 Horizontal Alignment Alternative

Loxahatchee River

Observation Deck US 1 Existing Right-of-Way

25 Maintenance of Traffic Option 1 Close Bridge and Detour Traffic

Advantages § Faster completion § Less expensive § No chance old bridge will settle

26 Maintenance of Traffic Option 2 Phase Construction

Advantages § Provide one lane of traffic in each direction at all times § Less disruptive to residents and businesses adjacent to the bridge 27 Environmental Parks Recreation

Recreation Wildlife 28 Environmental

§ Social and Cultural Environment § Natural Environment § Physical Environment § Summarize results in Environmental Reports

29 Social and Cultural Effects § Socio-cultural effects evaluation § Cultural Resource Assessment Survey – Update and Effects Determination -on-going § Visual Impacts and Aesthetics evaluation § Section 4(f) Resources

30 Section 106 Consultation • Significant resources • US Navy Married Men’s Housing Quarters (Jupiter Lighthouse Museum) • Jupiter Bridge • Jupiter Midden #2 • Not Significant • Old US 1 Loxahatchee Bridge

31 Section 4(f) – Parks and Recreation

Lighthouse Park

Ocean to Loxahatchee River Trail Martin County Blueway Trail Florida Circumnavigational Paddling Trail 32 Section 4(f) – Parks and Recreation

Jupiter Outstanding Natural Area

33 Section 4(f) – NRHP Listed and Eligible Sites

§ Section 4(f) also applies to the NRHP Listed and Eligible Sites § US Navy Married Men’s Housing Quarters (Jupiter Lighthouse Museum) § Jupiter Bridge § Jupiter Midden #2 § Jupiter Lighthouse

34 Natural Effects – Wetlands

§ Essential Fish Habitat – Seagrass located NE, SE and SW of bridge – Includes Shoal, Paddle and Johnson seagrass – Mangrove fringe NE of bridge – 0.01 acres impact to seagrass and 0.01 acres of impact to mangrove § Sediment – 13,690 sf. pier impact § Water Column – 0.50 ac. over water 35 Natural Effects – Wildlife and Habitat • West Indian Manatee • Atlanta Bottlenose Dolphin • Sherman’s Fox Squirrel • Osprey • FL Mouse • American Oystercatcher • Southeastern Beach Mouse • Black Skimmer • Wood Stork • Various Sea Turtle Species • Florida Scrub-Jay • Eastern Indigo Snake • Piping Plover • FL Pine Snake • FL Burrowing Owl • Gopher Tortoise • Least Tern • Opossum Pipefish • Brown Pelican • Mangrove rivulus • White Ibis • Johnson’s Seagrass • Snowy Egret • Smalltooth sawfish • Roseate Spoonbill • Atlantic, Gulf and Shortnose Sturgeon • Reddish Egret • Scrub listed plant species • Little Blue Heron • Tri-colored Heron 36 Physical Effects • Noise Study will be conducted • Contamination Screening Evaluation • Eighteen sites evaluated • Majority of the sites – Low or No Risk • One High Risk Site Identified • Asbestos and Lead Based Paint evaluation conducted • No samples greater than 1% asbestos containing • No samples detected above EPA thresholds

37 Environmental Reports

§ Wetland Evaluation § Endangered Species Biological Assessment § Essential Fish Habitat Assessment § Cultural Resources Assessment Survey – update § Section 106 Determination of Effects § Section 4(f) Determination of Applicability § Contamination Screening Evaluation § Air Quality Memorandum § Noise Study Report 38 Evaluation Matrix

ALTERNATIVES 25’ 30’ 35’ 40’ No Build Bascule Bascule Bascule Bascule Total Project Cost 0 $112,745,000 $114,876,250 $117,540,000 $121,596,250 Evaluation Points -8 +1 +4 +6 +4

39 Tenderhouse Line of Sight Evaluation

40 Vertical Alignment

41 Tenderhouse – Option A

42 Tenderhouse – Option A

43 Tenderhouse – Option A

44 Tenderhouse – Option B

45 Tenderhouse – Option B

46 Tenderhouse – Option B

47 Tenderhouse – Option C

48 Tenderhouse – Option C

49 Tenderhouse – Option C

50 Tenderhouse Options

Option A Option B

Option C 51 Project Schedule

52 Contact FDOT Project Manager: Rita Bulsara, P.E. Florida Department of Transportation District Four 3400 West Commercial Blvd. Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33309 (954) 777-4680 or toll free (866) 336-8435 ext. 4680

www.jupiterus1bridge.com

53 Comments

54