Loading...
CORRESPONDENCE %e City of 13oynton 13eac/i ~ ~tA.." ~ !~ 100 'E. 'Boynton 'Bead;' 'Boufevartf P.O. 'Bo;r.310 'Boynton 'Bead", :J[orU{a 33425-0310 City Jla[[: (407) 734-8111 '.J5lX: (407) 738-7459 July 20, 1993 Rick Chesser, P.E. District Secretary - District IV Department of Transportation 3400 West Commercial Blvd. Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33309-3421 SUBJECT: N . W . 22ND AVENUE (GATEWAY BLVD.) AND I -9 5 INTERCHANGE Dear Mr. Chesser: Enclosed herewith please find a copy of a letter dated July 13, 1993 from William R. Hammer, Vice President, Melvin Simon and Associates, Inc., on behalf of Quantum Simon Inc., reference the above noted subject matter. Said letter is in response to your letter dated June 28, 1993 directed to my attention; specifically relating to the contribution due FDOT by the developer per the provisions of the Development Order, sections 26 and 27. As noted in Mr. Hammer's letter, Quantum Simon Inc. is still in the process of reviewing the materials and gathering additional information, and will shortly be forwarding a formal response to the City on this matter. This office will notify you immediately upon receipt of a response from Quantum Simon. Thank you in advance for your patience on this matter. Sincerely, CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH ,/]. , / \ - /(/~ ___ (,tv v . -) ~-..- - RECEIVED J. Scott Miller City Manager JUt. :2. ~lN!I\I\j'G OCPi.. JSM:smb Enc. c: Mayor & City Commission Jim Cherof, City Attorney Chris Cutro, Director of Planning & William R. Hammer, VP, Melvin Simon Central File Zoning & Assoc. .9l.merka's (jateway to tfie (julfstream .., SIMON 'IfIIII1 \lELVDi S[\lO\ & ,\SSOrL\TES, 1\(. July 13, 1993 Mr. J. Scott Miller City Manager 100 East Boynton Beach Boynton Beach, Florida Boulevard 33425 Re: NW 22nd Avenue (Gateway Boulevard) and I-95 Interchange Dear Mr. Miller: As a result of our meeting on May 25, 1993, Quantum Simon, Inc., had requested Keith and Schnars, P. A., to review the open issues from the meeting. We received a preliminary report from Keith & Schnars, P.A., dated July 8, 1993. It crossed in the mail with your letter of July 6, 1993. Joe Stallsmith, Director of Engineering, is reviewing the information provided by Keith and Schnars, P. A., on behalf of Quantum simon, Inc. Once Joe has completed his review of the materials and obtains any additional information required, we will prepare a formal response for the City on this matter. I regret that this matter is taking some time to come to a conclusion, however, the process of reconstructing information without first hand knowledge of the events is rather tedious. We appreciate the assistance shown us by the City of Boynton Beach and hope to bring this matter to a conclusion shortly. Sincerely yours, MELVIN SIMON & ASSOCIATES, INC., on be~ANTUH SIMON, INC. ~lliam R'.~ Vice President WRH:dlm cc: Joseph Stallsmith ".~.~ ----'-".~.") . . . ~ .! 'I. '. _' ! " ".....;' ~. . ' -:-It\ y \ '+ 1993 CrrvMANAGERSOFRCE :\IERClI:\:\TS PLAZA P.O. BOX 70:n I',DL\:\..\POLIS. 1:\ 46207 I:H7j 6:16,U;OO ---\ fJJie City of tJ3oynton tJ3elUh 100 'E. 'Boynton 'Beadi 'BoukvQ.n{ P.O. 'Bo~310 'Boynton 'Bead!.! 1{orUfa 33425-0310 City '.Jfaff: (407) 734-8111 1AX: (407) 738-7459 July 6, 1993 William R. Hammer, Vice President Melvin Simon and Associates Merchants Plaza P.o. Box 7033 Indianapolis, Indiana 46207 RE: NW 22ND AVENUE (GATEWAY BLVD.) AND 1-95 INTERCHANGE Dear Mr. Hammer: Enclosed herewith please find a copy of a letter dated June 28, 1993 from Rick Chesser, P.E., District Secretary - District IV, FOOT, regarding the above referenced subject matter; specific- ally the contribution due FOOT by the developer per the provis- ions of the Development Order (DO), sections 26 and 27. At the close of our meeting held on May 25, 1993 you were planning on researching and documenting the costs involved for the design and right-of-way, and thereafter, report your results. At your earliest convenience would you please give me a call at (407)738-7400 to discuss this matter, and to provide to me a project report. Your prompt attention is appreciated. Sincerely, CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH RECEIVED JSM:smb Enc. c: Mayor & City Commission Jim Cherof, City Attorney Carrie Parker, Assistant City Manager Chris Cutro, Director of Planning & Zoning Rick Chesser, P.E., Distr. Secy. (IV) FOOT Central File JUL 6 ;~. ~f~NN1NG DEPT. - ..,. 5tmerica's (jateway to tfu (julfstream . ~~\i~ ~.~~ OF-rRANSPOKTATION ~j LAWTOI'l C"ILES OOVl'MOR BEl'! G. WAlTS SECKf:TARY DISTRlCf SECREfARY - DlSTRl(.'"T FOUR 3400 West Commercial Blvd, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33309-3421 Telephone: (305) 486-1400 June 28, 1993 Mr. J. Scott Miller City Manager City of Boynton Beach 100 East Boynton Beach Boulevard Boynton Beach, Florida 33425 Subject: WPW 4147530 - 22nd Avenue (Gateway Boulevard) Interchange Dear Mr. Miller: On May 26, 1993, my staff and I met with representatives of Melvin Simon, Inc., its consultants (Keith & Schnars) and city staff concerning the developer's commitment to pay a portion of the construction cost for the referenced project. After much discussion, we agreed that FDOT would accept the documented cost of the engineering design of the interchange (approximately $ 971,000) which was made by the developer on behalf of the project. FDOT would also consider the value of any right-of-way within the limited access line of Interstate 95 in excess of the three acres required by the Development Order (DO). FDOT expects the developer to pay the difference between the $ 1.8 million contribution required by the DO and the calculated credit for the design and right-of- way. The Melvin Simon representatives planned to research and document these costs and report their results. We have not received any update on this matter since our meeting. We are looking to the City as the enforcement agency for the DO to assist us in resolving this issue. Please advise us of the 3talus of this matter so that we can begin to prepare a payment schedule for the contributed funds. Sincerely, 7f2/ ~fL-' Rick Chesser, P. E. District Secretary District IV REC:JAC:c j,'~'_:- . : . "'-'.-'" ~. ."<:: \ - I... JUL 1 - 1993 C'.,;"". .:, ,,' ',';'(; '1:. "",.. II. I~:,., ,r',..._i j "" VI ... .. nlrI.RECYCLED WPAPER %e tity of 13oynton 13eac/i tA ~ p~ 100 'E. 'Boynton 'Bea.cn 'Boulevard P.O 'Bo;ll.31O 'Boynton 'Bea.cn, :f{oritfa 33425-0310 CityJfa[[. (407) 734-8111 :f.5fX. (407) 738 7459 February 18, 1993 Jamie A. Cochran, AICP District Manager of Programming & Contracts Florida Department of Transportation 780 SW 24 St Fort Lauderdale, FL 33315-2696 SUBJECT Gateway Boulevard (aka Northwest 22nd Avenue) Interchange at Interstate 95 Dear Ms. Cochran In response to your letter dated February 9, 1993 regarding the above noted subject matter, please be advised that the City is looking into this issue at this time through this office with the appropriate parties. I will keep you infonmed on the progress and results of this review. In the interim should you have any questions or additional comments, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH ~7~~ (.;cott Miller City Manager JSM cd cc Mayor and City Commission Chris Cutro, Planning Director Jim Cherof, City Attorney Peter Henn, Attorney at Law Centra 1 Fll e f\~C~\\f€.O \ ~ \~~~ ~l'a ~menca s (jateway to the (julfstream .. LAWTOI'l CnlLES GOVERI'lOR .. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT~!.!~!}'! . PROGRAMMING AND CONTRACfUAL SERVICES SECRET.'\RY ~ 780 Southwest 24th Street, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33315-2696 Telephone. (305) 524-8621 February 9, 1993 Mr J Scott Miller City Manager City of Boynton Beach 100 East Boynton Beach Blvd Boynton Beach, FL 33425 subject N.W. 22nd Avenue Interchanqe at Interstate 95 Dear Mr Miller I am attaching for your information a copy of my December 24, 1992 letter to Chris cutro regarding the referenced project As you can see, we believe that up to $ 1 8 million could be owed to the Department by the developer of the Quantum Office Park as required in the Development Order We can find no record that this obligation has been satisfied We have not received a response from your staff on the issue Anything you can do to expedite the resolution of this issue would be greatly appreciated Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions about my letter Sincerely, ~~OChran, AICP District Manager of Programming and Contracts JAC c cc Rick Chesser Joe Yesbeck Gus Schmidt RECEIVED '- -' CITY hil. .l-i...._ w \j .-,:a;E QRECYCLED ~PAPER OF TRANSPORTATION l"WTOro CnllES lif,~ G. \\<\ns GOVUlroOR "f'CIU.f.\R\ December 24, 992 Mr Chris Cutro Director of Planning City of Boynton Beach 100 East Boynton Beach Blvd Boynton Beach, FL 33425 Subject N.W. 22nd Avenue Interchanqe at Interstate 95 Dear Mr Cutro We have recently researched our records relating to the N W 22nd Avenue Interchange project and have determined that we have not received the committed financial contributions from the City and/or the developer of the Quantum Corporate Park toward this project On December 4, 1992, when we spoke on this subject, I had not yet been able to contact our project management staff on this subject Likewise, you indicated that you planned to research this issue with City staff since that time, I have not been able to find any evidence that Deutsch-Ireland, lnc , the current developer of Quantum Corporate Park, has met its funding requirements for our interchange project It appears clear that the developer intended to furnish a financial contribution toward the cost of right-of-way acquisition and construction of the interchange as part of the Development Order issued by the City of Boynton Beach on December 18, 1984 Two contributions of $ 900,000 each according to Conditions 26 and 27 of the Development Order should have been made to the Department prior to the commencement of construction of the N.W 22nd Avenue Interchange proj ect The construction letting date for this project was February, 1991 Conditions 26 and 27 of the Development Order are cited below "(26) When external trips generated by the project exceed 15,000 trips per day, the developer shall construct, or contribute to Palm Bec~h County the cost of constructing, two additional lanes on ongress Avenue, bringing it to a six-lane capacity, from Boynton Beach Boulevard to Miner Road If this improvement is constructed by others at no cost to the developer and if neither the state nor Federal government has indicated disapproval of the I-95 interchange at Northwest 22nd Avenue, the developer shall contribute $ 900,000 toward construction of the interchange in lieu ~IlICYC:LE, \V'AJOER ~ Letter to Chris Cutro December 24, 1992 Page Two of said Congress Avenue improvements, provided, however, that if the contribution is not required for the interchange due to the fact that the state or Federal Government has indicated disapproval, the developer shall provide $ 900,000 to the County to be used for improvements at the inter- section of Boynton Beach 30ulevard and Congress Avenue and at the intersection of Northwest 22nd Avenue and Congress Avenue to provide add1tional capac~ty required if the interchange at 1-95 and Northwest 22nd Avenue is not constructed The contribution under this condition shall not exceed $ 900,000 00 except as that amount is adjusted for changes in the cost of living by a construction cost index using 1985 as the base year (27) The developer shall contribute $ 900,000 00, in excess of any contribution made pursuant to Condition 26 above, for right-of-way acquisition and construction of an interchange at 1-95 and Northwest 22nd Avenue at such time that the funding is needed to commence with construction of the interchange The developer shall also dedicate to the appropriate governmental agencies any incidental right-of-way, not to exceed three acres, which is needed for the interchange and is located within the project boundaries If the interchange is disapproved by the responsible state and Federal agencies, the developer shall contribute $ 900,000 00 to Palm Beach County for improve- ments at the intersection of Congress Avenue and Boynton Beach Boulevard and the intersection of Congress Avenue and Northwest 22nd Avenue when the project generates in excess of 15,000 external trips daily This contribution shall not be required in the event that the $ 900,000.00 contribution required under Condition 26 above is allocated to improvements at these intersections The contribution under this condition shall not exceed $ 900,000 00 except as that amount is adjusted for changes in the cost of living by a construction cost index using 1985 as the base year It is also clear that the City recognized the developer's intention to contribute funds toward the project and stated in its Resolution No 88-PP dated June 21, 1988 that "Quantum Park has set aside a financial contribution for the construction of this interchange " We are also in receipt of an Annual Monitoring Report for Year 1990 on Quantum Park which indicates that payment for Condition 27 has been made This information was obtained in early December, 1992, from the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council. We believe this information is in error Letter to Chris Cutro December 24, 1992 Page Three Since the City of Boynton Beach is responsible for enforcing the requirements of its Development Order, we are asking for your assistance in obtaining the committed financial contributions for the N W 22nd Avenue Interchange and transferring them to the Department As you know, the Department was responsible for the costs of the right-of-way and construction phases of the inter- change project Please advise me on the best way to proceed with this matter If you have any questions, I can be reached at (305) 524-8621, extension 264 S'ncerely, ~ A $L_~~ Jamie A Cochran, AICP District Manager of Programming and Contracts JAC c cc Gus Schmidt, FDOT Joe Yesbeck, FOOT George Webb, Palm Beach County Dan Cary, Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council steven Deutsch, Deutsch-Ireland MEMORANDUM POLICE #91-057 TO Ms Tambri Heyden FROM Lt Dale S Hammack DATE July 15, 1991 RE Bergeron Compound As per our discussion at the Technical Review Board meeting of 11 July 1991, I am recommending the following 1 The physical location of the construction compound is at minimum over 2 miles from the construction site This distance (over public streets with heavy equipment during peak traffic times) places an undue risk to the general public In addition, the location is next to a residential neighborhood Noise from the site places an undue burden on those persons who reside there For these reasons, I feel the construction compound should not be located at the site proposed (Public Safety) rI!{) ~ <//..-- Lt Dale S Hammack DSH/cgm April 10, 1990 etJll( - U"~/UMA1I5S/~ ....t~n{,4~~1 { County Administrator Jan Winters Assre:'l.;t~ . I~' , .J.,. 11 Department of Engineering I....-l-71.Lt ~ and I'u b I ic Worb )./18 <10 cL r---;-'--- Board'of Count)' L'ommissioncrs Carnl J. Elmquist, Chairman Karen T. Marcus, Vice Chair Carol A. Roberts Ron I Inward Carole Phillips J. Scott Miller, City Manager City of Boynton Beach 100 East Boynton Beach Boulevard P.O. Box 310 Boynton Beach, FL 33425-0310 RE: REQUEST FOR COUNTY FUNDS TO ACCELERATE CONSTRUCTION OF THE INTERCHANGE AT 1-95 & N.W. 22ND AVENUE Dear Mr. Miller: I have discussed the request you stated in your letter of March 19, 1990 for County funding to accelerate construction of the interchange of 1-95 & N.W. 22nd Avenue with Mr. George Webb, Deputy County Engineer, and he concurs with my initial reaction to your request in that it would be extremely difficult for the County to provide the requested funding. Palm Beach County has adopted a Five Year Capital Road Construction Program and our road funding is committed by this program for the next several years. To provide funds for the requested interchange would require a deletion for other projects which the County is committed to construct. In addition, there is a projected shortfall in our impact fee revenues of approximately six million dollars for this fiscal year. While Palm Beach County supports the construction of this interchange, which is currently funded in the DOT Program for fiscal year 94-95, we do not feel that advancing this construction would have sufficient priority to require the postponement of other projects which Palm Beach County has committed to construct. I am sorry that 1 am not able to assist you in this matter. RECEIVED Sincerely, PIJ\NNl J. " RECEIVED APR 1 '7 1990 ~,fX IY1ANAGU~'S OJ fH~U F :,~E C UNTY E~ Charles R. Walker, Jr., P.E. Director Traffic Division CRW:te .' ......... '. cc: fil e - crw\miller George T. Webb, P.E., Deputy County Engineer Intersections - Proposed Interchanges for 1-95 ...~ ..... .. An Equal Opportunity' Affirmative Action Employer" BOX 2429 WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33402-2429 (407) 684-4000 CITY of BOYNTON BEACH 100 East Boynton Beach Boulevard P.O. Box 310 Boynton Bohach, Florida 33"25-0310 (407) 73~-a111 March 19, 1990 Mr. Charles Walker, Director Traffic Division Palm Beach County Engineering P. o. Box 2429 West Palm Beach, Fl 33402 Dear Mr. Walker: ~'-'. ~ ' Thank you for the time you afforded to me last Friday, March 16, 1990. May I again reiterate the dire need of the City and Quantum Park to some- how develop a feasible financing program so to construct the 1-95 and N.W. 22nd Interchange. This interchange provides the key door to generate devel- opment of the Corporate/Industrial Park, and its development equates to broadened tax base that will be realized by both the County and the City. This interchange project is currently listed on the FOOT tentative work program for FY 94-95. In order to attain an earlier construction date the state will agree to enter into a standard agreement with the City whereby the City would advance the necessary money in a lump sum to FOOT now for the project to be let for construction, and at the time the project comes due on the work program (FY 94-95) the City would be appropriately reim- bursed. In order to accomplish this interchange project at this time advance dollars in the amount of $14.6 million is required. The City is exploring numerous financing alternatives, and was wondering if the County could in anyway find it upon themselves to participate financially in this project from use of County Road Impact Fees. It is understood that the County has made commitments and developmental approvals for use of these funds, however, as noted previously, development of the Quantum Park will broaden the tax base and additional tax dollars ~ill be realized by Palm Beach County~ Any consideration would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. Sincerely, CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH , ;~'~'.I "-" , -"tllJ,,;-- /{dt.~ / .~---- . ~ Scott Miller, City Manager J SM: j b cc: Honorable Mayor & City Commission Central File Steven Deutsch, Quantum Associates BOB I'IAIlTII'II\Z GOVEKI'IOR DEPARTMENT p_: p~ ~ ..-' .- OF TRAr~I;OiiTATIO" BEN G. WATTS SI!CRIlTARY 780 Southwest 24th street Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33315-2696 Phone: (305) 524-8621 January 12, 1990 Tim Cannon Interim Planning Director Boynton Beach Planning Dept. P.O. Box 310 Boynton Beach, Florida 33425 Subject: State Project No. 93220-3435 Federal Aid Project No. I-95-1(388)59 Work Program Item No. 4147530 I-95/Northwest 22nd Avenue Interchange Dear Mr. Cannon, In response to requirements set forth in IIFederal Aid Highway Program Manual", Volume 7, Chapter 7, Section 3, and the Florida Department of Transportation1s IIproject Development & Environment ManualII, Part 2, Chapter 17, a copy of the noise study conducted for the above project is enclosed. The study contains generalized traffic noise levels at various distances from the highway as well as other related information which may be useful to local officials in planning for future land use in their respective communities. Noise abatement measures for already existing highway facilities will not normally be approved for FHWA funding participation for those activities and land uses that come into existance after May 14, 1976. However, noise abatement measures may be approved for activities and land uses which come into existance after May 14, 1976, provided local authorities have taken measures to exercise land use control over the remaining undeveloped lands adjacent to highways in the local jurisdiction to prevent further development of incompatible activities. ........ """', !."....,D -f!-':-" .,~~ ~ r' . ~ ~\I. ~ ,1 "; 1 " - f ',' l" :',\ \... \~. Ji.:":...L ''-.J-L<-''- . ./A..4 JAM 18 mga PLA1't1~'NG DEPT~ ~.i,', '" ~"-",..i< ,.,'u_ ~ Boynton Beach Planning Department Letter Page 2 A copy of the American Association of state Highway and Transportation Officials I (AASHTO) "Policy on Land Use and Source Control Aspects of Traffic Noise Attenuation is also provided for your information. sltfj ~rold W. Kerr, Jr., P.E. District Project Development and Environment Engineer Enclosures HWK:KC:kc ..: ~ -. s=..:~~...e."Cls..g~~(\l O'g \:f. ~ Po ~ ,g '0 %. ~ w ~ ~ [ g %. ~ e '"' ,.... ~ 0" -. ...., <'0 -. ~ ~~~~?.a~~~~~ a~~ (1l ... .... .... Of' .::1" ~ -, .... S 0 -' tt '0 ',", ~ ... '::; -, !" ~ e.... ~.... ... _.0 ;>!:l.. ",:;:I (0::1" 0" ~ ?+ ~ ~ %"Cl (0 go' s= ~.g (0 o ",0::1" ~ 'TI(O ""'(0-'" So....,~g...~%~ni!:.~...(Oo <;,. s= S ll} g, ~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 'i ~ '-< ~. s. a :;<. l'"' ~ e. ~ ::t< a s. s' g ~I:;'~ ~ S"Cl~" ... c;.~~ ~o<> 0 ..-~ ......"'~o<>:;:I..:O" "'..... (0 e.... '" 9- ... -. Po (0 (0 0- "Cl ~" .r'"(O~' (O(OPos~~ & -g '0 S ::1" 0 ~ ~ ~ a, 'g S. ~ (lQ S. ::::~~~~~S ~oo~~'6'~ f' c,~::TO"~ g ~_'(\~!' s'n~' o~a*(OS(llo;l~~ o<>e.o ::(i"s~~~g~~~~::t''Og ~ ll'l. S' Po ~ ... :;:l "'_.... ~ 0' 0 ~ ::t' ~~'" g '<'''' ~,~ 0 Po '6 '3 '(' 9.- !,~...(O(Oog%"'''''' (0..: -;; ...o,,_:;:l"''''<'O'e,S(O%Po ~ g 'l:; % ~. ~, ~ ~:% ~ % aq, "0" ~ Po$-",!'g .....o...\i'~~ ~ ~ 0 ~. ~ "Cl $- ~ a '" '!' ~ (0 << i II> Po"'. 0 (0 - 0.% :;: (O~' ~~Sn'6'~g~%g.,c.> ~ 0' ~ c.> ~. 0 te. Po e. (i' ~ ::!l ~ ...... 0" "'" ~ n :;:l. '" "Cl ~. ~ ~ n '-< t;'<< /::r e. % ~. .... e. ~ Po~~g.:;t.~(ll'C) c.>o"''''~ ~~~(Og~i(Os'3~n~~o ;;:.~o ",(O::!l o...e.~~ ..- (0';;' ... 0:;:1 Po,,(ll "'0:;:1 Po~~'" a... Po'C) (0 ~.~ go on<Po:;:l <:.....i;fPo?+.... (O...9~(O Poo(O(O:;:I........"< (0....... - ::1"Po:)......o g~i~il~~~i.S,%~~ ~ (tI ~ ea......... '"' Po ~ ~i %~. ~ ~ .... 'C) a' ~ '-< ! ;1 ,.(lQ~... (II g:~!t.~a... (ll ~ ~ ..... ~ ~. d g., cg: ~ ~ go~--::!'" s: (II ~ 5 g. g., (0 a ~, .., li ... g~e~aog sPo'li(Oo ass :;:lPo %. ~ -g ~ ~ ~ ... (O"Po (i' 1:;' 0 Po... ",i'~ o~ $0'% ?-.% ~ ~ sa%O"~'" ... ;::t .... ClO Po S. ll}~~so'" ~. l'!....... g e: ~. ~ S ~ '0 ~e~ClO~ClO ~O"e~....g '& ClO 0" ~ <<slo(O::t' to~""'ie. ~i'~t::l"Cl (q: .... ~ ~ "" . ~. c.> ~ 0 ~ o~~~~ ~ ~ S' .., \:i e"'OQ%=~ _" .... 0 s"ai'...... ... (i" 0, a a ~!i~.~ (0 ~ ~s: o 'e, %~ ~ ~ 8 o. '3? 19o ... (ll ~i!:. ~~ PoS iO (0 ~8 'Os ~, g '" .., ~ gPo ::t' ~ !2-'C) g.,'% ga i' ~ . (0 ~ ';;' ~, 0" -;; -~--~._---_. -- ,~-- --" ...a-g,g %~ g. a ~. v). 'R ~ ~ ~~a"'e.. ~ . c.>::!l Poo~..e:<; ~ 0 6 "Cl Po (0 -. a~~~~ ~ !!.-~~ ~~ooo ~ "Cl "& \': o' '0 ... '9 p: :) <: ~~. 0" ~e:..oo(O (0' ~... 0 .g _~o .... S' Po ... :;:l '; ~~~ a"'(O~(O ~~a~a ... .s '" Po -,S~. po s~~~S ...'S(O-,::;' ;::t (0 Po (lQ '-<:'o;ig. ~:)tb-'(O f:l:Oo:;::J... .... ~ ("J n Po ri (ll :;l ~. ~ ~o(O (ll ~..- !ii' ~ '6' II> (ll co 0 ~g'S~'.-t') aso"'''Cl ~~%S~ :--....a~':., ~ ~ eS '"' \lO Po O-,O"~ a ';:' (\l (0 ~ ~ ~ ~ - t~ ~ l ~~z~ tn i.i~~ ~:;) _' ::73 tn ~ ~ 1l~; z~ _:;)(J)~G')O~~ ~. ~ -::t- · .....o~ O~ 0. o(')ZZ.c. Ocr . :io~ ~..i( N' -n ~ o'(J)-n~ ~ oc:-- - o~(")O 0 ....~~ Z ~r- U\(J) t ~ ~ ~ U) 0 ~~:t f~ 9\ o~ cr-8 9-00609\ ~ 0 ii: 0 CD ....a:aso. ~<. '3 cr o (')! -' < % i '3 i t \ .---- - ~..,4ti~ li~\ ~. . !!!Oit_\~ - z(n(f) "8 9-00 C (J)~C () rn~:O -< ~(f)g>"o -40 zZ ~-ngor; c~~ Z ~ 0 ~~:o c o-nO (fJ 200' rn o :;) o i iQ' :s !,-... {1 ?:.~ e ~ '2 E :i. ":;;;; ..., 0 J;'S~Po OO"'o)~ ~~~~ ~&~$ ~;~-% c: ;::.. ...." ~ ~r'(Oo 0) .~O).,; p.S2. ~ ~ 0) 'CS '(; .~ .; ~('l~.s~ o """ u ~ U tQ (0 '" .. p,~"c'O 'OO)%~~ ...~~DIl"% ~ '" Jj .~ :::l e~:;:~~ sO) -~ -0 . p, '" ~~.$~~ ~"- p. :::l .::: (0 0 ~ ~ $ ~~.~ .~ oQ -.a ~ 00 ....-;~oQ~ ~ogo~ """ u ...... 0 u ~ ~ ~ (,) .~ .t'''' .., 'i=~~i~ ~~~odS ...... ~ tU -- .~ g 's ~ J?, ..",,,,~~~OO3:oe~ ~ 5 ~.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0) ~ '0)-% ~ ~::l !=; ~"'P- S 'Oe..."-~odi$ DIlOO :::: '" 0 p. ~ 00 ~ .S Po 0) ~~",O)~...cp.-g..~ ~ 0) s e 0) 0) ~ 0 ':::l ~ 0 ~ '(; e"';,-a.i~ .,;~Jj ~ '0 .s~~~ o~....OOO) . ..._...... .....~;:.~~?:e. ~ ,g p. ~ ~ .,; ~ ~ .a ~ 0) r' ~ ~ ~ ~.~ p. ~ ~ :::l~~ ,.c:; .::l.~ 0) ~~ e. "'., 0 :~l~'O{1'O~.g~ 0.... o ~... ~ -5 ',a .~ ~ 0) ~ 0 ~ ~oQ .......sO):-:=.oO)O) ~ .-;, 0 .' 1 .%- 0 ~ :. .... E g. ~:-:=.'?oe "'.... ~~~oQ (00) ",(0 ~~........ 0 ",.~-- ~ u ~ .~ oQ ~ <<I ...::a i .... :::l~DIl~0)~d3~P.~ ~ .~ "- 0 <<I - .... '" Q 0) ..... N .0;:::., 0) '" ... bh.... p ... ~ ~ 0) '" oQ .~ ... Jj 0.... 00) oQ~",::::,~,-",,,,: ;.-,..... S ,.;:::l 0) 'c1'~ 0 p,:::: ~-o2. e OoQ'~ ~$ or. ","a "'~~Po~go~SO)$ '0 ~ .,.g ...... .... 0 0 ~ <.) ~ 0 '0 Po~t'~ ",'~ s';S ~ .~ ..,"- .~ 'p "a E ~ p..s oQ ",~~.~<a'~~'~'O~0~ -ca ...o~o> -~...""oo .... ..... ~ d, ~ ~ ~ ~ '" '" .... 0) ~ <<I '" 0 (0 0).... 0) ~ ~ ~ \5 ~ ~ t::: a .~ ~ ... ~ ... ~ .'f!. o .. "a ::l 0 0) ~'o ~ '0 A -ca '0 d;:~ ~:p.9 dod p.~ <.) sg., ~ ~.~.~ 0:~'~ ~ Q,o>",,,s.pO) .~O)' 0) ..... ::p.~ .;;; ~ %' oQ ~ ~ .'f!. <.) %,='% s~:g 3'%,$g:;:6 (,). .,.,,~~?;' .:a~~~'TA il~~ o~ ~ o~~Jj '6h~ ~,-.e.e .....':;,..;:l"'0~""'0...~ .~~ ~~ '" Po~~ ~ ~2 ~-ooo ~""$...::l...tr ~ e ~ to ?: '0) ~ ;::.1 5 e E::l p,~ ~ E~".a 'a.'::l ~:;iS~:-:=.o~:i"O).s ~S~~$.~;",1~~ 1! ~ i-" .$ 0 ~..... ~ ~ .'<) ",;'.Cl .",~~ii.....~... -o~"'O) ....:cao ~ ~3"a:as',e.$ .. ~e.$.a'~oo~~~ ,$ .g ~ ~ ~ '0 .% ~ ~~ ~ ~ .;;; ~ ~ "'" -;:\ ..... i:lI ~O)- oo"''Ca-.a~.g~~ 3 ~ ~ .~ ~ .... ~ g ~ Po ~ .s ",~"'<as",~t:s""'~O)$~ .. ... d ~ '" .. O).........._~~~'S .......- ~ ; ~ -e ~ %. e e ~ ~ .%-:a ~~ p.-a..SOl)~...O)s~ '0 ~ . oS -.a ,$ ~ ~ ~ '(; '0 .~...~O)oSO) l<l0)0).... ~oO)Jjo Jj'" ~~o os.e;j''(;oo.....~.'f!.; ~'>oo~ ~ S -0 -; $ ~ ~ .% ::l ~ ~ Q;f ~~li ~:lll\.~ ~l o~o.<\ .... .S? -0 ~ l<l c;: ~... .... 0 0) ,j:::\...O).~~ot:: '0 ..,.~ ., po 0 '" ,~ 0 0 ... .i=" ;:. ~ ~-og~ ~ t:s__'-ar-od'C~" ..... ..... 0) u ~ .... ~ 0 0 .S <flg~t:::~p~tIl<.).r:::os _oo,-,,~ou< ""'.c. '8S~6$.~<$~~S u~~~~~ oo,~Jj~~~ ~~~~~'B .S ... .~ i:lD 0 (0 -p.~;"'''' ~~~o~::l ~.a'1'~~.e. ~...::a~eoo ~ .~ ~ ~ Q ~ .... t,.) ~ <.P ~ ~~ "'~ ~ ~ . 3 ~ .~_~~ii'~ ~ ... 0) ... ....,....s:;"'~~ ~~eJ.:;l~.... 3~~.,::a% O)-.a%~~'" a ... 0 .~ 0) ~ ~~ <.)"s~ ~~SoQ,-,e. ~~%~00) .~~~~~~ Q t;: ~ .;: ~ ~ ':'; .it ~ ~ Q 00 ~ -g 'i -o",-5t ~ ~.... ~ ... -.a u~:;:""-o~~ ~?> ~ ~ -0 .Q CQ ~ .....- 0 C,i.i '0 ~ (I) .~ ~ ... '0 t::: ~"'a'O .S.l!l.~ .... 0) l<l p...... ...'~ o P. -0 DIl ~ '0 -; '% ~ ~'B~~~ .3 s .OO ~ .~ .S".%~ 3'% Q ~g3oS.2~ ~oQ.,;-o~ .g s :a"% e <OS$f,~~~ ~ ..... '- ,~ o ~ 0 '" 0) sS -.a .~ .f1 '.. ~ g 5 c;: ~ p........ 00..... ~s'O"'~ ~'o ~ ~g ... .... 0 ". '" (IS s's"'-y;. ~ ~ 'p. ~ ~ O)>:;;lo"--- l~~~-5 o<os"'<OS~ .....~c:~dJ p.. 0 ...- ..... gg<;ii8 000) -o~' ~S-a'O.9~ ~ ,-,~~.e ~ ~ d .... -; <fl .. C<l 0 0) ~ 0) ~r.no~t:..e <i-:a~~~o .~ ~'6 iJ: 0) Q g,,-d;g~'" .,0 .!! ~1~ ~.sl ~",C;:"'~oQ ~'Oe-o~~ .:c~DIl~"'" -:-~ ~ e ..... .~ oS ~-o.p.e. ~~ ~-.a~'O~~ ~ Q ~ ...... Go) .s-o~'O~ s,g~p.'O t \.l;:l ~ < ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..,0 ~ o\.) t: )oo~ <- ~~~~ ~';) 0 &~ 7- C:l ~ ~ to ~ ~ Cl ~ ~ . oS ... Q '" ~ ~-ca e ... 0) 0) ..1'......,_.01.. o ~u~..;:...~~o~o ~~~.~~O .~ -0 ... 'A ~ ..... a. ~ -0 . ~......... .~~0)0).....;a.;:;,~ ~~~"'''':t ...'" ., '" d d ~ ~ .- .'~"",... ~ - 0 ~ ~~-g.~. .;!.o~8 ."1!.jj'il':\;;:% 111.B"Be~I.~II.1 u~oo'(;ooO) p....~'O~ d-iP. ..... .... ~ -0 :::! d '(; 00 .2 u S '- < .. ~ -' ~~ .~ ..~-.~~~ . .... ~~g....o>~~"''''A '" ~~ 1...0.....~....1~l\ p. ~ ~ ..... $ .;;; 0) ~ .... ~ :-:=. .., e .... ~ a s 0) ~ is t' .~ ~ -0 .... e ~ a ~ ,g -0 or. 0 _~~.....a..e- .-. ~~':::'c1'o""'oS c:"'c: ... ~.......;:. o.,O)...~"-~~~<<I~~~O)~~c: . ~ . Ii".- 0 ._ . e ~ 0 ';l.o · 0 ~ · ., .....",.l:l ~ u ~.,' or.s.... c;: ~ 0...-0 !II~II.II.IIAII;~ oe$~~O)oP,-.a~Q~,j:::\ ~-o<.) .~iI>~. .~ ..~I~O."~... ~P.Q~ p""...oo.;::u.d 'ii\ os'" S ~ ~ 0) ~ ~ ~""'..... ~'~ ~3-o~ &8~'~10)9!'O~ 1.~...tlo~..I~ ~. _...",oi-""'''' ~..~"'1~~5~ "... ."'i!.~o~'{\ e. 1'\ \! a " ~ 'i\ ..;; ~ ~ ~ .:i! I ~ 15'"11 a !g.I~lle~~~"'o' gl~'O '" "" ."" ~or."" ~ P. Q ~ <A dO)'" .... p .... s ...' 0) 0 0 ::l 7< oS ~ ~ -0 u e ; '" .~ ~ . ~ e ~ t~ e e.g ~ " e o 0) ~ ~ s ~p..g oS .'f!.-d (0 p. oS....... :1 11.1_..-g._~1.~'i\ "'~".. .0._00. ..e" ~~Io ~~...I.~eo... ~.~.I"~ ...~I."~ p. ~ ~ ..... .:c ~:<g, ~ 0) <l) .t:: 0 ;. .'f!.o "'" .....0 'f;! ....""'..._DIl....V.d"''''O'O)o Ii) u .e ,.. ~:a'" e~~'.~~.'.' 3d'Oi-.%~~01~ :::I 0 ... .... 0 ~ '7 e~~'B ~ ~l ;.~ p.~~"'IEJjt;:;~ ....~'O ~ <os:; e.....or. "':::I~!;;~e""~'% e-oo~'-o~p,~ .st::~o~~~- e;:l~~<1l -otap. ::l ~o~"ad~OO ~ . ... .... d ~ '" ~ ....~.,gO) . ~'" O)~ p,'(; 0 ~~- ~..... ~ ",'" o'~ '" "'" '" ..c;: .l:l ~ .. :::l ~ I ~,-.a"Cl-a.~'S .s:~ $ d g ~ ~.~.s ...\:: QaP,""~~ o ~ ~ ~ ~'O~ e.''O ~~g.e.~ ~'O.~ d ~'o g ~ ..D's e.-S ~~'-oa~O)Jj'- ~ .S $ I ''a .~ '% ~ ~ .,;.:a '.% ~ ,g e~ S .~ $ .... ~ 1: l<l , .~ ~..... ~ ;_~-:O)$.$~.s ~~O)oC;:::l~"''''' -:~''O 00 ~ ... p. ~ 0) e ,.c:;c;:~~e.ss:'~ QS ioo . ...~ %"a,'f!. 0 ~'O ~~o "O~~ c;:...e~~ ;:.O)~aor.~"'~~ ~ ~.~ .S p. ~ ..... .... ~e.~~a O)P 0 0) is 'tl\ ~ g..,,.c:; ... ... .~ ~ (OJ ~.... $ ~ ssi8E~8S .-a4~~~ ~~0.a'Z oG.>e~..:l <.) '(; o'~,.c:; O)",~oog ~..,c,-;'" ;:. .ta 0 ..... -o,!?~~d' ~ .. ~ '" ..... ~ ... ... '- ~ "" '0 ;a 0 0 ~ el:l:::l~'6b,t:) ooO).....e ~e~~~P. oS'" -0-0 .~ ~ ! .% -0 ~ ~ei-" ~~-% I/>,g ~OI)'" e ~ e. ~.$ .% ~~.a~~~ ~~~.s-o.e ~~dQ.a l~~s~..a ;.-,. 0) p..S ~ -0 i:lI ~ sa '" .S ,g~.s%~~ ....:a~-o(4e ~ ....O)I~ ~o $'~ ~~ .... . ~ ~ ~ '- ~ ~ 5 .g '6h o ~ :E '" '" '" e. '" 0) S :::l 0) O),g.~ O)~ ~Jj ~ ~ ~ -0 ~ ~ -;sor.~S ,g ....a.'O P.o -011 0 '" ~ $~~~ ~~.%.~ <i$ """ ~ C) :dp.&t- '" ~ .... ~ od '0 ~ ~ ~ ~ "'" .it. .....~~B ~"a%'P ~~ ~~ ~4>"""o ~;oct ~a'O-.a :::l,-"E.d o ~ .. ~~se ~.g ~ ~ e'~ ~ '1 p.~0)\ '- 'la bh o 0 .... ~ ~ )-0 ';:l :::I 3 0 ~:"" %~~ ,j:::\ .'f!. -: or. '" 1 .~ ~, ~ ~' e~ d .~ o~ \.) '0 .; ~ -- 'WIll .. ',." L I L- L I I l- L L L l I I '-- L L -L -L L L L -L -I '-- r---,1l1a I ~::::::: ?d":::;~ Ml :p ~' II. '::,. :'l *;:l :~ '~ i<:i .~' ';: ',' . l' ~~ . ~!! 1.\ .~ '. :. ,f,i 1:1 ~?:" i,... ~ 1.11: '*I<:I:~ :: -; 11i[, W~" , ;:;~ ~j,:~ ~j~ i '$) . r-\~ ; 1"1 Ih, . ~~l' Ir I ~I{ ~i i~~ . .~ / -- :~~)~ttl~~;~~~m~;j;;lmt*~*1f:t~lt~~~rf~;;~t1i~~~~1~j]tllti~it;~lmJMf~fWit,.~f:t~~~1j~~~lttiOO~~11@~j1~~j~trl~jlt*Ui:i$i;~*~)~mf~~~;;mt~;j~~~ij:~j:~j~~ .. ... .. .. .......... .' .. ... ... .............. .................. ,. .,.. ....... ,_....... ................ .......... - . '.... . ... ...... ....... .... .. .......... . . ,.......... ... :::~~:~ : ~li~1 : .. ~ '~i FLORIDA . DEPARTMENT OF TRArlSPORTATION OISTRICT FOUR ,~ Final Noise Study Report , : I~ 'I'z~~: .;'>:. ~~. 1-95/NW 22ND. AVE. INTERCHANGE "". : ::;:\ State Project No. 93220-3435 Federal Aid Project No. 1-95-1(388)59 Work Program Item No. 4147530 ~.., ~ Palm Beach County, Florida . '0' J ..~$ .: June 1989 . : . .!,' , :<.}t\~:'~':''''_'.':''':::~::_'''';;':';:::_~H':''~''i''::~~:lW':;:"~',:::'::"""""'~:""_""""""""""'"''''''''''''''''''''''''''.......;;;;..................'...."'.............."...."'... '.........'.......'", """" ..' ".: m:.' ;.$;'d.;:,;,~ '~::~~:'. :<,';:::::~ . .".'., : ..;.,.",;:.' .' .... . "y,'~"~~X' ..~..-:w:;%__~'*~M~<::&W.'x*:":~~;s::::::;&<~:~~'*':~::*'~~:!S.'$~wt:;~~''**@":;~'$:' '.. :;>.':=:" "' '... ,..::~"~. '... :::?:-::;;:;:,.:.:. :s;:: ..: . ., :' ,''':'''*~~ ,.... ."., , . .,' 'r.... .::::~~"_ ," ~~~~~*~~:~~~~~::::~t~~..::.-:~},,~. (Revised 08/09/89) AJ:2.J2:END_U~. FINAL NOISE STUDY REPORT (.June 1989) 1-95 Interchange at Northwest 22nd Avenue State Project Number: 93220-:~4:~5 Work Program Item Number: '1147530 Federal Aid Project Numher: 1-95-1(388)59 Palm Heach County The noise barrier wall (Noise Barrier 2) associated with Ramp B has been modified. Two separate noise barrier ,,,aIls with a 60-foot overlAp is recommended. The reason for this modification is because of the dra fnage design. A drai nage swale is located immediately west of the limited access right-of-way line and east of the retaining HaJ 1. The sWEde extends from Northwest 22nd Avenue north for the length of the project. The modifications to this noise wal.L include the following: o Noise wall located barrier (Sta. 874 proposed. on to top Sta. of retaining 878+50) No wall/safety change is o Transition of noise wall to the limited access right-of- way line (Sta~ 878+50 to Sta. 879). This transition has been eliminat~d. The portion of the noise wall along the right-of-way line will be extended south approximately 60 feet (to Sta. 877+90). To summarize: Two noise walls are recommended: o Noise Wall 2A - on top of the retaining/safety barrier (Sta. 874 to Stn. 878+50) o Noise Wall 2B - along limited access right-of-way line (Sta. 877+90 to Stn. 892) 'A 60-foot "overlap" of the noise barrier ,,,aIls will provide an affective distance to minimize noise impact caused by the "gap" between the two wall s. 'l'he distance between the two noise barrier walls is ~ 15 feet. DR FT '" FINAL NOISE ANALYSIS AND NOISE BARRIER RECOMMENDATIONS I-95 INTERCHANGE AT NORTHWEST 22ND AVENUE WORK PROGRAM ITEM NO.: 4147530 STATE PROJECT NO.: 93220-3435 FEDERAL AID PROJECT NO.: 1-95-1(388)59 Prepared for: FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION JUNE 1989 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION. . . . 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 3.0 NOISE ANALYSIS. . . . . . . . . . . 3.1 Methodolo~Y . . . . . . . . . 3.2 Noise Receptors. . ~ . . . . 3.3 Traffic Data . . . . . . 3.4 Noise Analysis Results .... 4.0 NOISE BARRIER ANALYSIS AND DESIGN . . .. .. ....... .. ....... .......... .......... .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.1 Noise Barrier Recommendations and Considerations ; 1 2 6 6 7 9 9 12 17 1..-' LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE NO. EMm 1 2 3 Project Location 2 Noise Receptor Site Location Map 8 18 Noise Barrier Wall Location Map LIST OF TABLES TABLE NO. PAGE 1 Year 2010 Traffic Volumes 9 2 Year 2010 Noise Levels Without Noise Barriers 10 3 Year 2010 Noise Analysis Summary 13 4 Summary of Noise Barrier Da.ta. 19 . I tL 1.0 INTRODUCTION A Project Development and Environment (PO&E) study was conducted for a new interchange at 1-95 and Northwest 22nd Avenue in Boynton Beach, Florida. Figure 1 illustrates the location of the project. Location/Design acceptance was granted by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) on December 8, 1988. As part of the PD&E study, a noise assessment was conducted for the project area and doc~mented in the Noise Study Report (September 1988). The Noise Study Report (September 1988) identified two noise impacted areas where construction of noise barrier walls were recommended. The two areas are comprised of single-family houses, located along the east side of the 1-95 both north and south of Northwest 22nd Avenue. The purpose of this report is to supplement the original Noise Study Report (September 1988) by providing documentation of the detai led noise analysis on the two noise impacted areas and to determine the final height, location and length of the recommended noise barrier walls. This noise analysis ;s based on final design plans at 30~ completion and year 2010 traffic volumes. 1 f~_~~~i}!~~;~\-~'~\f.:! -...-- J f"~) ~ . "' LA' l' j'I~I~:~'~~! =N~""~'''-A",.I ~Il; P~~. ..~t. ~= 'if1', \l t I e".::-J .. iN~..,,~ ,!.U' J. i~ . , · -~- ~ '.. '''6) -; f I ('::K' "'...., :t: , 6 .#1. A fl. ..411:"..-'-::):; I ~." IH-'..' -/ ..., I ...""_... .. . 6 6 6 . "C; · :r, ~-!.' ~ .~~ ~,'-I_.~ . .... f '7' ......'~L I Q ~ ~li.r: . 1. i 6~ 3 ;1 ~ ; "L"!~'''~: :~i() ~ ~. ~~~ ~'i~~,. _:'; .. O~ i(;,oJ ~ -!"_. n~~:~~~ ~ i&~~~m .i.((~~11!1,,~ 'Ii':' ': 11"l~t:~I -I ~~ g!~~J ,'~ ~. ',~,'-..<. 1'.-.'.'1 . r. Ii"j'iiII ~ fiiin .11 j ~ 7 .....-11. ~"'''.. ... . H.Y:OL~ll.~-:- RD. . 1X1UOn ~~. .1- II II ~~i:--r-' " I w l f:. .,.~... ::r;;;Jjl""1~1/1~:{': >on. flO':' ......re:: 1 eo .. { ../ ~ j ) :~Ef:~lJ -, .~ .,.~.$~JYliJi.~~:.~ ~~},: "Hili~~:JL"1. ~..~~ ~. .1, ~ i'j'( . . '~ !:<o, "f.'f',~ ~ ~~~., \95 ~ -' t ". i~I..-".ft." I ~ _.",~,' _~ .~..,~..~.:.. .' f!F.,...."}f . :' .: ,..," ! _!~. i~ ~~':~:~'J-'I[ ~ .,.r -' . ~.,.ft ":; :' ~ m_ll'''' .. ~ ,. ~ ::, !o~D:;,' lo... C '~I ... .~. ~I ~ ~ ~'. :~ ' ~..~. II'. C" 8 ~-:: t r (-v__' .~~- :..!: _', 'J(' ::0'; I'~ :! ~, I <:> ~ " il~~-.l~.i"" ~~. ,. >~ nl,lfUt,~.,. .i:::_~,~ I~ '(:iji ~...J~a: ~~. '-.:! . 'U'~'j:~t..{ I . ~_... A, : A":"" ~! Iii"::: . l~iR1. i/ I ~J ~~' ~~f .'-~ ...~'-:- - -,~.1!) l ~ i:....t-!L : Do i!t1~ ~. . ::,:!!: ....( 1M ~\~N A,.. ~ PAN ~ _ ..., rrn&.... ~~L'''''; ~ '/ tl"'=" "I L-:) r. - i', - ,::; ....... I It'! .u. ~ f 11 co ,-- - . .. .. . ." ,i", "., I ""("1; "'Ili.. n..... rJ. ~ .'!. ~ I ~I lJ M I I -, ....~~1;j.k l__' ('~':':I t;~f': ~End Project I " ~+ )JLtlt~~'~,. ~I~ .~lt:..' "1~: .Ult: - u:; '/~.. , _ t K I ,...~ I J \.. ,,, il 'HI .Il~r ,,.,..., ~ -., : I ':~J I 11 -. AU' :............ -~, J: - .. ~ ~iI:tt' ~:..- ,. . ..._. , .~.... /~,.. "I~""" .....:; "H"~- ... '" to B · P · t IJ .-v:- ,-- t;r~, - Pal.. ~ ~ eglD ro Jec 'I~ HJo'Ji R'DO~Ir.Il~:~.FI 'Ii ~ - < ' AI ' ' (Rolo.o,ocll. tl 1...1 ~ ~i ..."' ~. \~(Vacated~ ":" ...Pl!.. '1,-. .ou. ,,/ :~;~ .~ O~.. ~) -- \\ .11"', Ay 'USUN$ t:;t'j:' ~ ' : I" ""Tu,(ILA \ "Road . I" \''1''1 "l<i~ ::: ~ ~~TS.... ,.-::., ;;;/!!>:..,o.'.'<l I a. .'" H'ONh V ..(~ I:: ~ 11 .._ \ 0.. I .. 1 .. ~ u.r-J ,,,.1 ~ ~~ ~ J "rMO.I6_. .;'il:, :::.... a.:, if" / . '~' ~ "'~ ~ ,,~: · _ to"'lIo; , -~'-3f - ..~-- : ..;i:lj-t B 0 y'W.... ... -..IN[~:I~~~~..,~~':-:Z~~: j....; ~, . _ i!iJ..;.. .' r \/ !. ~I--" ~r 2..--rr::.. 0-'...."'... ~ (Ii .\n'u"iIt~ .olt.' (',I, ~ I u~ M.J......\\ ~ ~..._ ( ;:; tIOYIl1'Oll'=' I \'im:"?':;1 ~~~!l:":;"r"f~:' : w. ~j... :1. !:I;.~;:::-t... "1' j ~ :- ___ \\l1J ~I ....... ~I,.,. .. 1I"'~~ u..' -IN ""I"...{..... ... ~ ~ ....U _~. \\~', CI,~ Iw., . ~.., )M'A" - ~. i'. wr;;;=r :.~~ r ~ AlA .1101.1. .' : ~\~, . c .,....:;...!!L.. nr. I' f .,.., :~ I~'~ .~ ,..".1.., II..... .v' , ..... A:"-/,~~/.l5{ ,-- I' ~~~'''J~ -. i :; . ~ =~ ~'~~" A. /; .~I.' ~~'i .:fi. I".v i.' . "~N"" ~L".... ... f ,.. ,'1,:::= IJ..,E I ' ,~. ,.~"'!i .... ~IITII~ - .' c...~t.- ~___l' J[ ,,,.. c:. ,Ql',~~f'l tl 11- 0.. :<ll-'-I il<' ' ..',...."". I.... f3i..11~4~iF ,-. ~ ,~ Iv.... . I , I "..'lit..... !!!~04 ~OYNTON - ,-.... lIJ-- ~ jQi :&:;:.!~ CEIl _' _""~__~'I .~\- li"-'. ~~.......v..- ~ IKI. ~ I__~_ " ~ t" ~. . l....l I - ~CNIl "i' "",~, LIIsu",.,~!\...I' ~ :;l _' . .~ ' /"'..." ,; 'I:. = l ~ Ii" .., I :~....~... /. ~ . ... : ~ . v.:; II HUO'O;;-:;-) ;"'<0 ',.-J . , 1:\\" ,;;r.1u. ~o/., .... _ ~ _ .v '1'1". ,C"'_.~ I ~toCiD "" _ . -ihl. - ..l..~ ~ .... '" I "--- ~ f;'~ .., <0"" 'i ,.., :::~ 1ll>:ftIIIL ~ I"~ ... .. I ,.. I" : .. ....".. .' I t~.~~lm'~EG, - _J ;j ST A TE ROAD NO.: 9 W.P.I. NO.: 4147530 STATE PROJeCT NO.: 93220-3435. F.A.P. NO.: 1-95-1 (388)59 COUNTY: PALM BEACH .DESCRIPTION: LEGEND ... STUDY AREA . SCHOOL. . PARK 1-95- From: 3700 ft. South of N. W. 22nd Ave. To: 3700 ft. North of N. W. 22nd Ave. N.W. 22nd AVE. From: High Ridge Rd. To: Seacreat Blvd. NOT TO SCALE .. PROJECT LOCATION r 1-95 AT NW 22nd AVE INTERCHANGE Figure Boynton Beach, Florida ' MAP I 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION '-- The project involves construction of a standard diamond inter- change at 1-95 and Northwest 22nd Avenue. The limits of construc- tion along 1-95 are from approximately 3,700 feet south of Northwest 22nd Avenue to 3,700 feet north of Northwest 22nd Avenue. Minor design modifications have occurred to the Master Plans, 1...., which were developed for the PD&E Study. These modifications ..::..- include: - Extending the length of all ramps - Lowering the profile grade of Ramp C. within the limits of the bridge 1-95 is a six-lane divided expressway. within the construction limits of the project. No improvements will occur on 1-95 except '-- at the ramp termini. The ramps exiting from 1-95 will have three 12-foot lanes at the intersection of Northwest 22nd Avenue and the ramps entering 1-95 will have two 15-foot lanes at the intersection merging to a one-lane ramp. The ramps connecting with Northwest 22nd Avenue will be located approximately 250 feet apart and will be signalized. I i..- '- Ramps A, Band D (northwest, northeast and southwest Quadrants, respectively) will require the use of retained earth walls. Ramp C (southeast quadrant) .wi 11 use both retained earth wall sand structure. A 30-footc1ear zone is obtained for Ramps A and D and a 34-foot clear zone is obtained for Ramps Band C within the limits of the horizontal curve. All ramps meet the minimum design standards for clear zone requirements. 3 The existing Northwest 22nd Avenue bridge over 1-95 will be replaced with two new bridges along the same general alignment. One bri dge wi 11 be over the CSX Rai 1 road tracks and the other br i dge wi 11 be over 1-95. The bri dge over the ra; 1 road wi 11 be 152'1" wide and 125'6" long. The bridge over 1-95 will be 128'1" wi de and 128' 1" long. The vertical clearance over the CSX Railroad tracks will be increased to 23.5 feet and a minimum clearance of 22.5 feet over I-95. The bridge typical section over 1-95 consists of a 12-foot inside lane and a 14-foot outside lane in each direction and 12-foot dual left-turn lanes onto the 1-95 on-ramps. An additional 12-foot lane in each direction 1s required over the CSX due to the drop and add lanes for Ramps A and D. An a-foot combination sidewalk/bicycle path will be provided on the south side and a 5-foot sidewalk wi 11 be provided on the north side. Northwest 22nd Avenue, east of 1-95, will be widened to a 4-1ane divided facility. Inside lane widths will be' 12 feet and outside lane widths will be 14 feet. The median width varies from 9 feet to 28.5 feet. An a-foot sidewalk will be provided on the north side. A left-turn lane will be provided at Seacreast Boulevard. West of 1-95 an additional 12-foot outside lane will be provided in each direction. The median width varies from 11 feet to 15 feet.' All other features are similar to the typical section east of 1-95. Dual left-turn lanes (11.25 feet each) will be provided at High Ridge Road. 4 No right-of-way acquisition is required. Construction easements and/or restoration agreements will be required west of 1-95. '-- L \.., '-, 5 3.0 NOISE ANALYSIS The final noise analysis concentrated on those two areas that were identified for abatement measures (i.e. noise barrier walls) in the previous noise study. The two areas are identified as follows: 1. Along the east side of 1-95; from Northwest 22nd Avenue south approximately 750 feet. 2. Along the east side of 1-95; from approximately 700 feet north of Northwest 22nd Avenue and continuing north for approximately 1700 feet. Both areas consist of single-family residences with the front row of houses abutting the 1-95 limited access right-of-way line. 3.1 MethodoloQv The basis of this report has been derived from the preliminary Noise Study Report (September 1988) conducted as part of the Project Development and Environment Study. Modifications to the preliminary noise analysis have occurred based on the final design plans (Phase I) and revised traffic volumes. The PC version of STAMINA 2.0/0PTIMA (STAMREV/OPTIMA18) was utilized for traffic noise prediction and noise barrier wall design. The STAMREV model projects the noise contributions of roadway segments to selected receptors based on vehicle loads, vehicle mix and vehicle speeds. STAMREV can also project the noise attenuation by barriers for use in the program OPTIMA18, which performs noise level and cost calculations for varying scenarios of barrier design. 6 I - Measurements from aerial photographs showing spatial relationships between noise sensitive sites and. roadway were also used as input. Noise levels for this analysis are reported in decibels on the A Scale (dBA). This scale most closely approximates the response characteristics of the human ear for the low level sound. Since noise fluctuates significantly over time, several statistical descriptors have been developed to measure and evaluate the noise environment. Noise levels in this analysis are reported as Leq (h) values which contain the same amount of acoustic energy as the actual time-varying A-weighted sound level, over a one-hour period. 3.2 Noise Receotors Eleven (11) receptors were used to predi ct des i gn year (2010) noise levels, including five (5) receptors utilized for the original noise assessment. All receptors were located along the east side of 1-95 both north and south of Northwest 22nd Avenue. The receptors ~re representative of the first row of houses, abutting the 1-95 1 imited access right-of-way 1 ine. Generally, placement of the receptors coincided with the areas of noise impact (i.e. recommended noise barrier wall locations). The receptors were placed in order to determine the extent of impact and define the best location, height and length of the noise barrier walls. Figure 2 illustrates the location of the noise receptors. 7 .~ .' ". " - (" - ~~ ~.... It:. ... '~~, ~,;,~'.., ~; ~~~:'~:--~. ---- ..;"-' 'f'.... "1l " ~ END ~ONSTRUCTION~ - ~. ,.,. It.I-95 ", ~ ~,,' ,"- s n. 902 .,. 29 5 - ..... ~t ',90'5 "". ,I';";!' . k. ~ SCALE I". 2/Jo - . -.' 01; . .I. '- ... '.s~:.~ ~, .. ,.... 9\)0 '" .'" ,'~ ", 4. II- .l!l. ~ L;.;;::' 28~5 ~ :: --~~:;;-;~.-:-- -' "- -C' L' ,J:)' t- ,_ ~ !~'~~ . .. .... .;. ~~, .. . ~ ~' "+~..:'~ .":''''~ ~'~... ~...~..~,:,'!' .... "~.'''''._-..!:'., ' , ,.;at"n .~, -;,;..!~,.., :;,;F..~';' .., 4:' ";' '.;' - . . ..-. :. . .~-,...'!',. .,........... . ....i . A. '.''-~~ ~~._',-~ ....J~...-...-_-- !IL~..~,., , 690 2890 ~* );'O;;t '0: ,..:.~ '1 ': ~~:-:'''--! __ tt. ...ij ~ :. J . -.1 -~~ -} ;~ ..,J ~ .,:....-.. - -,"" .>t." " ..j J;""/ ~ ...." -~~ "~' _~. ' -~ r. , "...-1'1 f--- ,s;':" .. J. ~ ...... .~~t..oi>"-- ..i ':-ot:'~,."" KEITH ,Q SCHNARS. P.A. Engineers. Planners. Surveyors Ft. L..d.rd.... FIe. f ~ ;I~'~ ,-~,., _ ",."",-: "!;iItP: _"_,,,.,"~ ~,~ . J.,U, -~-'-~~. .tC;~1>'''''''''''''''' ,..,=,1._ IIJ,,,,,,,,,. -- -~ ==-- >::--- "'ita- ~ .",.,_~"""'":''' ~ ...... , I J \ J . NO\se Receptor Site location . ~~~_ ~P- - - ~--~~ _",..J~!!!!!:!::;:!:':::;:~:;---~~- --,.---- 3.3 Traffic Data The revised traffic volumes (Average Daily Traffic (ADT) and peak hour] along with the K and T factors, for the contributing roadways utilized in this study, are presented below in Table 1. TABLE 1 1-95 Interchange at Northwest 22nd Avenue Year 2010 Traffic Volumes ROADWAY A.D.T. K PK. HR. T SEGMENT VOLUME 1-95 NB 51,521 0.088 4534 0.087 1-95 58 55,504 0.088 4884 0.087 1-95 NB 11 ,930 0.088 1050 0.02 OFF RAMP 1-95 N8 11,795 0.088 1038 0.02 ON RAMP Source: FOOT, FSUTMS.for Palm Beach County Traffic speeds utilized for the study are as follows: o 1-95: Cars, medium trucks (MT) and heavy trucks (HT) = 55 mph o 1-95 On- and off-ramps: cars = 35 mph; MT and HT = 30 mph The vehicle mix used for the analysis was 91.3~, 4.35~ MT, and 4.35~ HT. 3.4 Noise Analysis Results Design year (2010) conditions were analyzed at the eleven (11) receptors. The p roj ect was ana 1 y zed with and without no i se barrier walls. The computer predicted noise levels for the project without noise walls are shown below in Table 2. The 9 . . '-- \ '-- L results indicate that noise levels at seven (7) of the eleven (11) receptors exceed the FHWA design noise level (or noise abatement criteria) for land use category B (i.e. 67 dBA). TABLE 2 1-95 INTERCHANGE AT NORTHWEST 22ND AVENUE YEAR 2010 - NOISE lEVElS+ WITHOUT NOISE BARRIER WALLS RECEPTOR R1 R2 R3 R4 R5 R6 R7 R8 R9 R10 R11 PROJECT 64 73 73 64 56 64 69 72 70 75 70 W/O NOISE WALLS + Noise levels are reported as Leq (h) values The four (4) receptors that are below the FHWA criteria are generally located behind the retaining walls for Ramps B or C. The retaining walls act as noise barriers at these locations, therefore, the noise levels are significantly lower. Note that noise levels at these four locations would be similar to the other seven (7) receptors without construction of the interchange. Receptors 1 - 4 (R1 - R4) are located south of Northwest 22nd Avenue. Receptors 2 and 3 are representative of 9 houses that are ,I located within the limits of the structure portion of Ramp C, immediately adjacent to 1-95. The predicted noise level at both these receptors is 73 dBA. The major contributor of noise is from the 1-95 mainline. A noise barrier wall, located at ground level along the 1 imited access Right-of-way 1 ine is 10 \ '- recommended. A 14-foot high noise barrier wall would reduce the noise levels at R2 and R3 to 63 dBA and 65 dBA, respectively. An 8 to 10 dBA insertion loss would be achieved. See Section 4.0 for detailed discussion. Receptors 5 - 11 (R5 - R11) are located along the east side of I-95, north of Northwest 22nd Avenue. Noise levels are above the FHWA noise abatement criteria at the five (5) northern receptors (R7 R11). Genera 11 y, these five (5 J receptors are 10cated north of the ramp retaining walls. Therefore, the ramps do not reduce the noise levels, as with Receptors 5 and 6. An "-foot high noise wall would provide a 5 - 9 dBA insertion loss and reduce noise levels to below the FHWA abatement criteria. See Section 4.0 for a detailed discussion. 11 L \.... ~ 4.0 NOISE BARRIER ANALYSIS AND DESIGN A number of barrier designs (height, location, length) were analyzed to determine the most effective barrier for each of the two noise impacted areas. The final analysis for barrier height, location and length is discussed below. Table 3 Summarizes the noise levels at each of the receptors for the scenarios without noise walls and with the recommended noise walls. In determining the best location, length and height for each of the noise walls, the following design elements were considered: - Drainage - Reflection of sound waves - Constructability - Right-of-way constraints Insertion Loss (dB~) - Maintenance of Barrier and Right-of-Way - Effectiveness of barrier - Aesthet i cs - Underground utilities # 12 , - TABLE 3 YEAR 2010 - NOISE ANALYSIS SUMMARY+ RECEPTOR W/O NOISE WALLS W/ NOISE WALLS* INSERTION LOSS R1 64 60 4 ..". ~~......."....."... .............. ."'3"."......".."..' "".."..'1ti.3'" . "....."..1'.,.................. ::?:.:::.~:~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::):::::::::::::'::::::'.:::::~<'. .::;:::::::::::::::::::::::::::;:::::;: :::::::::::::::::::::~:'.. :::: " " ':', <:::::::::::::::::::: .:~::::::::::::::::::\:::::::: .:::::::::::~.;:3':::::::::;::::::::::::::::;::::.:;:;: ,:::::::::::::::::;:::::::.::::::1::~::;::::::::.::/;:::::;:::::::;::::: ':::::}::?:.:::~:~:...:::::::::::::::::::::.:::::::::::; ,:::;::;:'::::;.::::::;:::$.;:::::;::::::::::::;::::::::: '-- R4 R5 R6 64 61 56 63 3 o 56 64 1 ;::::::/R7:X... .:.: .::::::::::::::::;:::::;;:::::;::~:~::::::}:::}:::;::::::::::;:::::: ::::::;:::::::::::::~4(:{:::::::::::::::::::::::::\:::::::::::::::::::::::::::!r:::::::::::::::;:::::::::: ;::::::::.R:EI:>::::;::;::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::\::::::::::::::::7:::~::::::::::::::::::::;::::::>::::::::::::::;::::::::::::~A:::::::::::::::::::::::::;::::::::::.:::::::::::.:::::::.:;::J;l:::::::::::::::::::::::.::::: :::.:::::::~,~:::::::::::::;::;::::::::::::::::::::::::::;:::;;:;::::::::::::;::::::r:q;:::::;:::::::;:::::::::::/:::{::;;::::::.::::::::::::~~;::::::::::::}::::::}:::;:::::::;::::.::::}::::;::;:.~::::::::::::::;:::;:::::;::::: .:::'::::RJ,O::::::::;:::::::::::;:/:::::::::;:;:::::::::::::::::::::::::7.5.::::::::::::::::(::::::::::::::.:.:;:::::::::::::::;:;:66:;::::::::::;:::::;::::::::::::.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::9.::::::::;::::::.:::::::::::: ...... '" ................... ..................................-..... ......................".......... ................,............. ......R'1..1'....."......... ................7:0.."................ ......."'&."1....."............. "... .......9.' ,,,..........',, ...... .. ..,............. .....,........... . .................. .........., . ................" ............. .............. .:::::::::::,...::.:::..:::::::;:::;:::;:;:::::;::::::::: .:::::;:::::::::::::::::::::::::::.::....::::::::::::;::::::::::::::::::::::::: .::::::::::::::::::::.":::.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::\..::::::::-::::::::::::::::::::: ABATEMENT CRITERIA 67 67 61 61 61 61 67 67 61 67 67 + Noise levels are reported as Leq Values (dBA) * Recommended Noise Barrier Wall Heights: Barrier 1 (south of Northwest 22nd Avenue) = 14 feet Barrier 2 (north of Northwest 22nd Avenue) = 11 feet NOTE: Noise wall heights are based on ground level at the limited access right-of-way line. ~ '- Noi~e Barrier 1 This noise barrier ;s located on the east side of 1-95, south of Northwest 22nd Avenue, along the structure portion for Ramp C. The noise barrier will extend from approximately 720 feet south of Northwest 22nd Avenue [Station 3858+46 or end of retaining wall (Rt.)) north to the retaining wall for Northwest 13 I L , L \ ' L 22nd Avenue (approximately Station 3865+65). This noise barrier will directly mitigate (i.e. provide a minimum 5 dBA reduction) the noise impact caused from the 1-95 mainline for nine (9) first-row houses, immediately adjacent to the 1-95 limited i \ -.:. l access right-of-way 1 i ne. Three (3) additional houses will receive minimal benefit (;.e. less than 5 dBA noise reduction) I I I , L due to the construction of this noise barrier wall. These three houses will be located behind the retaining wall portion of the l ramp. The design year noise levels at the three houses will be below the FHWA noise abatement criteria without the noise wall. A major concern in determining the most effective height and location for this barrier is the potential of sound wave reflection off the structure (i.e. beams) portion of the ramp. Initially, two noise barrier options were developed and ',- analyzed. 80th options provided a noise wall for the length of the structure portion of Ramp C. Ootion 1 ,"-, This option provided for a noise wall between the structure columns of the ramp. The noise wall extended from ground level to the lower elevation of the structure. The '-. height of the wall ranged from approximately 14 feet to 25 ! feet. A 13 - '17 dB insertion loss was achieved at the 9 '- houses located adjacent to the structure. The cost for this wall was estimated at $210,100.00, based on $15.00 per square foot. This option was developed in order to eliminate 14 potential reflection of sound waves off the underside of the structure. Ootion 2 This option provided for a noise wall extending along the limited access right-of-way line. The noise wall would begin at Station 3858+46 [or end of Ramp C retaining wall (Rt.)] and extend north to tie intQ the retaining wall at Northwest 22nd Avenue. The noi se wall would para 11 e 1 the 1 i mi ted access right-of-way line. Required drainage structures (i.e. inlets) will dictate the exact location of the wall. At this time the wall has been located approximately 3 feet inside the limited access right-of-way line. Reflection of sound waves off the underside of the ramp structure could cause an amplification of noise to the adjacent residences. It has been determined that the reflective sound could cause an approximate 3 dBA increase. This was taken into consideration when determining an effective height for the noise wall. Various wall heights were analyzed to determine the most effective height. A 12-foot high noise wall would reduce the no; se 1 eve ls at the two receptors to, or be 1 ow, the FHWA abatement criteria (R2 = 65 dBA; R3 = 67 dBA) and provide_la 6 dBA to 8 dBA insertion loss. However, if the reflection of sound, off the underside of the structure is considered the FHWA abatement criteria at either receptor is not obtained and 15 L l_ L. the insertion loss wi 11 range between 3 dBA to 5 dBA). Therefore a higher noise wall was analyzed. A 14-foot high noise wall was determined to be the most effective. An 8 dBA to 10 dBA insertion loss is achieved and noise levels are reduced to 64 dBA and 65 dBA at receptors 2 and 3, respectively. Only minimal reduction of the noise levels is achieved if the barrier height is increased to 15 or 16 feet (i.e. less than 1 dBA reduction). The cost of this noise barrier wall is estimated at $151,200.00. . l._.', L. ...... ,-, Noise Barrier 2 This noise barrier wall is located on the east side of 1-95, north of Northwest 22nd Avenue. The noi se wa 11 wi 11 extend along a portion of the retaining wall/safety barrier (Rt) for Ramp B, transition toward the limited access right-af-way line and extend north parallel to the limited access right-af-way line for approximately 1300 feet. The total length of the noise wall is approximately 1800 feet. The noise wall will mitigate the noise impact, caused by the 1-95 mainline traffic, to the adjacent residential area. Twenty J (20) houses immediately adjacent to 1-95 will directly benefit (i.e. minimum 5 dBA noi~e level reduction) from the noise wall. An additional five (5) first-row houses will receive minimal benefit (i.e. less than 5 dBA reduction) due to the noise wall. 16 I \ ... I I L I i L.. An 11-foot high noise wall (ground elevation to top of barrier) would provide a 5 dBA to 9 dBA insertion loss. Noise levels would be reduced to 61 dBA to 66 dBA. I L Only one option was developed for this noise wall. This noise wall wi 11 begin on top of the retaining wall/safety barrier (Rt.) approximately 700 feet north of Northwest 22nd Avenue (Station 2874 or where combined height of retaining wall/safety L barrier is 11 feet above ground level) and extend along the retaining wall/safety barrier to Station 2878+50 (or end of retaining wall (Rt.)]. At this point the wall will transition toward the limited access right-of-way line (Station 2878+50 to Station 2879+00) and extend north paralleling the limited access right-of-way line for approximately 1300 feet and ending at Station 2892+00. Ne'cessary drainage structures (i.e. inlets) wi 11 di ctate the di stance off the ri ght-of-way 1; ne that the wall can be placed (approximately 3 feet). The cost of this wall is estimated at $253,463.00, based on $15.00 per square foot. 4.1 Noise Barrier Recommendations and Considerations Discussed below and summarized in Table 4 are the final recommendations for the two noise barrier walls. Fi gure 3 illustrates the locations of the noise barrier walls. 17 - ,. ~. ~ ~ ~~~:-...." ~ ;-~;'.' .......... Noise Barrier Wall Locations Note: I Does not reflect modification to Noise Barrier Wall 2 (Ramp B) ...... Noise Barrier Location Map ) ~ ,~,--_..,'" ..' '.- ....,~,.' -. ."..,.- -,...... ~~?,'~ -P""",,,,,, .,..,~ -- - ,_. ,'~~ ,...","""_........~-~'" ." ,"""",' .;'"'.,~~ \c. ~ . ..... .w;<.I. . c- ~f."" 1il- '. .. . _,-."'~ " S~... 2l!b~ ~NQ...CON~RY~~" .... ~. 4; <t. 1. - 95 - "'1" , ./.... : "- STA 902 '\':2.9 57 ~ . - ~. \ . 'II. ,It' ','900 ~'l; .!- ,,~~r' CC..: ;~4 r ~ +1 t .,:OM? 'e '"," ...J r-\ _ 0'; ;::,0)\ 1;;t <((.' ~ t;~, lit -.. ./;- ,1 4"- f-'~':;~ ",~A~ - ..-"- \ ~S--...~_.. ~~ .---, ;2ilQ ",~".1\ {II .....Ii.'.. ~-~~;""'~ ~.. '!' . ~ t. ~ ...."" ~ ~. . ...~ "", , _ '4\,. . ~ .... .... . 'A . . _ ,~k.. I>~J,~'~ ~ ",,,,,_ .....:.10 . ,~,;. ...~. , :' ,~,,' '.,' . -~'~ " .. .'.-,. ..;~.~~~~,." .' ~ -M , . ,'i.J''::':'~''''''~'''' . '.t,'" ...- ,-,' ' .~.. ",..: ., . .,.,lA ' ". . , '-' .~....... ...,_...-" ~,' "~-_.,~.--;.....,,,... saO .~ 1. .g'!) == -::sIf ~ ._1'.: -. KS IT,", & SC,",NAFlS. P.A. fi D enolneers. Planners. surveyors . \ fA -=-J fl. LOud.rd"" fl.. . lL ."f?~"- ~.- i :..c--- - ~ J~~~ L I I L I .. TABLE 4 SUMMARY OF NOISE BARRIER DATA 'Of' TOTAL BARRIER BARRIER INSERTION DWELLING BARRIER NOISE NOISE BARRIER LENGTH HEIGHT LOSS UNITS (OU) COST/OU COST BARRIER WALL LOCATION (FEET) (FEET) (dBA) PROTECTED. ("III) ($1911) 1 East side of 720 14 a - 10 1+(13 )++ $18.800+ $151.200 1-85. wall be- ".1I31}++ gin. 720 Ft south of NW 22nd Ave. and extend. north - to NW 22nd Ave along 1-95 It.ited access right-of-way. 2 East .ide of 1800 11 5 - 1 20+(25}++ $12.873+ $253.483 1-95. wall be- (10.131)++ gin. 700 Ft north of HW 22nd Ave. on top of re- tatning wall. transitiona to 1-15 liMited access right- of-way and extends north for 1.350 Ft. .' . First-row hou..s + Includes only hou... that obtain. at a .ini.UM, a 5 dBA nohie l.vel reductfon ++ Includ.. a" hou..s that benefit frOlll noi.. wan Noise Barrier 1 Ootion 2 Noise Barrier 1, south of Northwest 22nd Avenue will be placed at ground level for the length of the structure portion of Ramp c. The wall will begin at Station 3858+46 [or end of retaining wa 11 ( Rt. ) ] . At this point, the noise wall will tie into the end of the retaining ,and extend north paralleling the limited access right-of-way line, for approximately 720 feet. On the 19 I I I L , '- , i... north end, the noise wall will tie into the retaining wall at Northwest 22nd Avenue. The height of the noise wall is 14 feet (minimum) from ground level. Due to necessary drainage l '- structures (i.e. inlets) on the east side of the noise wall, the noise wall will need to be placed three feet, at a minimum, west of the limited access right-of-way line. 1.., Noise Barrier 2 Noise Barrier 2, north of Northwest 22nd Avenue, will extend along the northern portion of the retaining wall CRt) for Ramp B, transition to the limited access right-of-way line and extend north paralleling the limited access right-of-way line for approximately 1,300 feet. The total length of the noise wall is 1 ,800 feet. The total area for the noise wall is 16,897.5 The: height of the noise wall or noise square feet. wall/retaining wall will be 11 feet (minimum) above ground level The noise wall will begin on top of the retaining wall/safety barrier (Rt) at Station 2874 (or where combined height of retaining wall/safety barrier is 11 feet above ground level). The noise wall will extend north on top of the safety barrier to Station 2878+50 (or end of retaining wall/safety barrier (Rt). At this point, an approximate 50-foot transition will be utilized to locate the barrier toward the limited access right- Of-way line (Station 2879). The noise wall will then extend north paralleling the limited access right-of-way line (on the west side) for 1,300 feet (Station 2892). As with Noise Barrier 20 1, this noise wall will need to be located approximately 3 feet west of the limited access right-of-way line, due to placement of drainage structures (i.e. inlets). For aesthetic purposes, the end of the noise wall (Station 2892) should be "stepped down" in 2-foot increments or other adeQuate treatment. '-- 21 KEITH and SCHNARS, P.A. ENGINEERS PLANNERS"SURVEYORS December 5, 1988 Mr. Carmen Enunziato City of Boynton Beach Planning Department POBox 310 Boynton Beach, FL 33425 Re 1-95 Interchange at Northwest 22nd Avenue Public Hearing K & S Project No 12453 1A Dear Mr Enunziato, This letter will serve as a follow-up to our previous conversations and correspondence on using the City s Commission chambers for the purpose of holding a public hearing for the subject project The Ci ty Commission chambers, through your assistance, was set aside on December 7, 1988 at 7 00 to hold the public hearing However, based on subsequent meetings with the FDOT (Project Development and Environment Section), it was determented that the December 7 date did not allow for sufficient time to complete all necessary requi remen ts for the hearing In addi tion, the F I a Dept of Transportation PD&E would not advertise the public hearing until after FDOT s top management approved the recommended al ternate. Approval on the recommended al ternate should occur prior to advertising for the hearing A meeting wi th FHWA is scheduled for December 6. Based on the above events, the public hearing date required rescheduling A new date for the hearing has not been finalized, we are, however, looking at the last week of January or beginning of February I appreciate your assistance on this project If you have any questions or need further clarification, let me know Sincerely, KEITH AND SCHNARS, P A ~g1neeCS~~YDCS Wendy M yriacks Project anager RECEIVED WMC/bh wp16 DEe 9 1988 DII AM' ,. ,'\., - .'{,:. rW'\.~N4~'lG eJE'1', 6500 North Andrews Avenue Ft. Lauderdale FL 33309 2132 · (305) 776 1616 ~ ~-;. CITY of BOYNTON BEACH -;. ----- 200 N. Seacrest Blvd. Post Office Box 310 Boynton Bearh, FL 33435 (305) 738-7490 ~~~~~::.-~~-~ =- ,-'-~; .~?~~ '. ~~ ft;.~..'.;;;;;;;;;-;;~~~;...~ -n~ ii.,.i('5~lIr. .'''~ .. ~~ .., 41 ~... ~~-,: --=~~~ .i1i ~~ ~;,~~ ~~..~. ~- - ~~ ~. - ~r. ~ t,t --~~ ~~~~_~~C:~-::... =-~ -"L._ OFFICE OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR 18 October 1988 Ms Wendy Cyriacks Project Manager Keith and Schnars PA 6500 North Andrews Avenue Ft Lauderdale, FL 33309-2132 RE I-95 Interchange at Northwest 22nd Avenue Dear Ms Cyriacks I have discussed the matter of using the City Commission Chambers for a public hearing in connection with the proposed interchange at NW 22nd Avenue and I-95 with the City Clerk and the City Manager. I Please be advised that the City has set aside December 7th in the City Commission Chambers at Prime Bank Plaza, 211 South Federal Highway, at 7 00 p.m. to hold the public hearing I am assuming that you will be responsible for advertising the hearing. Please advise if you require any additional effort from this office Very truly yours, CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH Lc:4- ____/~ Carmen S Annunziato, AICP Planning Director /bks cc City Manager Central File - - ~~- KEITH and SCHNARS, P.A. __~ ENGINEERS-PLANNERS-SURVEYORS October 13, 1988 Mr Carmen Enunziato City of Boynton Beach Planning Department POBox 310 Boynton Beach, FL 33425 RE 1-95 Interchange at Northwest 22nd Avenue Public Hearing Keith and Schnars' Project No 12453.1A Dear Mr Enunziato In conjunction with the Florida Department of Transportation, we are planning to hold a Public Hearing for the subject pro- ject Tentatively, the hearing is scheduled for Wednesday, December 7, 1988 Substitute days for the hearing are Tuesday, December 6 or Thursday, December 8 As per our previous conversations, you stated that the City would be willing to secure a meeting room for the public hear- ing We would appreciate your assistance on this matter The meeting will begin at 7 00 pm, and we anticipate it will last approximately three hours We would need to get into the room to set up at least one hour prior to the start of the meeting The meeting room needs to be large enough to accomo- date, at a minimum, 100 people In order to meet the advertisement requirements, I will need to have confirmation on a meeting site by Wednesday, October 26 Again, I appreciate your assistance on this matter If I can assist you in any way, or if you have any questions, do not hesitate to contact me Sincerely, \-JMC k rf cc Richard Pereira (FDOT) Harold Kerr (FDOT) Murray Thornbu rg 6500 North Andrews Avenue Ft. Lauderdale FL 333092132 · (305) 776 1616 .- - /, r vI' ....,1__ 1 4 (-,.~<- , J O 0 N LA 1\' :\ IIl\J G 0 ~..... ^ '\ J I'"":' ,- ,~ iV1 ETR P LIT Ai P I"J lo,i 11 '. . ;.,;:;-.1 .L.i-: - OF PALiV1 BEACH COUNTY May 27, 1988 -J' .1 C~ ,3C3 ::~,l - - ~ / ) I'\, IV ~ IJ\ · ~ '{'I tY " I ," ,',,/ ,tv' \. ~ C~ I d I~~(;} v 1 Q) / E'i\!\ ~ 160 Australian Avenue Suite 301 West Palm Beach. Flor:da 33406 Te Mr William K Fowler, P E Deputy Assistant Secretary Florida Department of Transportation 780 S W 24th Street Ft Lauderdale, Florida 33315-2696 RE Interstate 95 Interchange at N W 22nd Avenue Boynton Beach Dear Bill f The MPO has reviewed the proposed interchange at Interstate 95 and N W 22nd Avenue Development activity in the area is occurring at a rapid rate and adding to existing capacity problems at Hypoluxo Road and Boynton Beach Boulevard In rpviewing the Department's Five-Year Work Program, no activity is s now II r 0 l< ... .\ _ ; n: I} r c r. 2. - - ~ At its meeting on May 19, the MPO adopted a resolution supporting this interchange and requested its inclusion in the Work Program Enclosed is a copy of that resolution If you have any questions, please contact me Sincerely, {andy M Director cc City of Boynton Beach..,/'/ Deutsch-Ireland Properties RECEIVED ~_~ ~\\ 19i ' \v0---l JUN 2 1988." .<V /<,,/ pr-r"l r"'" I .. 'G DC "__\..., I;. PLAr-~N\.'.; I f _I , L ~ trIll 1 .-- I \';,-,,'1 _ ~~.... '~y :: CITY OF BOYNTON BIA.cH~'- <;r CJIY CLERx' :::- ,.. ", . " ,/ / ...../, I / I --"' \ . '/ -------- RMW er Enclosure - !_~ "I RESOLUTION MPO 2-88 A RESOLUTION OF THE METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY SUPPORTING THE PROPOSED INTERCHANGE AT INTERSTATE 95 AND N W 22ND AVENUE AND REQUESTING THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO PROGRAM ITS CONSTRUCTION WHEREAS, the adopted Year 2000 Transportation Needs System Plan of the Metropolitan Planning Organization has identified an interchange at Interstate 95 and N W 22nd Avenue as needed to provide adequate levels of service on the roadway network; and, WHEREAS, development activity in the area has increased the traffic demand on the arterial roadway network and created congestion at interchanges north and south of the proposed interchange; and, WHEREAS, the Tri-County Commuter Rail Organization proposes to operate a station in the northwest quadrant of the proposed interchange and requires convenient access for success of the rail project, and, ~ WHEREAS, appropriate engineering and environmental studies will be complete in the near term NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY THAT Ii 1 The Metropol itan Planning Organization supports the 1\ construction of the interchange at Interstate 95 and tI W 22nd Avenue 2 The Florida Department of Transportation is requested to program the construction of the interchange in its Five Year Work Program ~-\ '- ' <' ,/' , -,""'l I , ~ I 9-j 'J" i..:i\' 1 _ CITY ( /\ " -.:j~/ .-< '~_---:--\\ \ \ ' "----~ \l The foregoing Resolution as offered by Commissioner Karen Marcus who moved its adoption The motion was seconded by Commissioner Elmauist. and upon being put to a vote, the motion passed The Chairman thereupon declared the Resolution duly adopted this 19th day of Mav 1988 METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY ByJ) ~~ . Chairman ATTEST APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGAL SUFFICIENCY ,. ?' :;;((J-~ Assistant County Attorney ~'" ~, "~c'~ ~' ".. ,........- .....,. ~ QUANTUM CORPORATE PARK AN AFFILIATE OF DEUTSCH/IRELAND PROPERTIES June 6, 1988 Mr Carmen Annunziato, City Planner City of Boynton Beach 211 S. Federal Highway Boynton Beach, Florida 33435 Dear Carmen In accordance with our telephone conversation earlier today, I am enclosing herewith a status report on the I-95/N W 22nd Avenue Interchange The date of the report is April 1, 1988 It outlines the current design configuration and support we've had from the City of Boynton Beach and other public bodies in pursuit of the Interchange We will be prepared to provide you with another update as soon as the Legislature completes their deliberation on the budget and the Five Year Plan is formally announced Also enclosed herewith construction schedule will be complete on questions concerning please do not hesitate is a copy of the latest Ryan/Jackson As you can see, the N W 22nd Avenue paving November 15, 1988 If yo have any further completion of the Quantum Park improvements, to call AN Development GWZ aem CC Mr Steven W Deutsch Mr Michael J Toll Mr Michael Jones, Ryan/Jackson 2455 EAST SUNRISE BOULEVARD SUITE 1106, FORT LAUDERDALE. FLORIDA 33304 BROWARD (305) 564-5114 . PALM BEACH (305) 734-3555 PROPOSED N W 22ND AVENUE INTERCHANGE STATUS REPORT APRIL 1, 1988 Location Northwest 22nd Avenue presently crosses Interstate 95 in Boynton Beach (Palm Beach County) The proposed interchange would be located between the existing Boynton Beach Boulevard and Hypoluxo Road interchanges Need for Interchange The Palm Beach County Metropolitan Planning Organization has recognized the need for the proposed interchange and placed it on their Year 2000 Transportation Needs Plan (approved September 19, 1985) The City of Boynton Beach, in its approval of Quantum Corproate Park, has also recognized this nGed and required Quantum Associates to prepare all environmental and design documents necessary to proceed with construction They have also required the developer to provide up to $900,000 in local share funds Recent development in the area west of 1-95, between the existing interchanges, has caused extreme congestion at those locations Relief is needed as more development is completed In the recent past, Boynton Beach has experienced unprecedented growth along the 22nd Avenue corridor as the following developments started construction or were announced Boynton Beach Mall Expansion (Macy's) Quantum Corporate Park (6 million square feet) Catalina Square (Shopping Center) Savannah Square (Shopping Center) Major multi-family development Publix Distribution Facility (1 million square feet) In addition, Motorola Paging Division opened on N W 22nd Avenue in late 1984 Substantial expansion potential exists on their site Palm Beach County and the Tri-County Rail Commission have also approached the developer of Quantum to secure a train station location in the northwest quadrant of the proposed interchange This development further demonstrates the critical need for the interchange / Design Concept A standard diamond interchange will be constructed requlrlng no new right-of-way Current cost estimates are in the range of $6 million and construction is expected to take 18 to 24 months with no disruption to 1-95 Status of Design and Approvals The Interchange Justification Report was approved by the Federal Highway Administration in September of 1986 In June of 1987, the Florida DOT and FHWA jointly determined that the interchange required an environmental assessment action and evaluated its impacts as minimal A final Environmental Assessment is currently being prepared for submittal and approval Construction drawings for the project are approximately 25 percent complete Construction Schedule It is anticipated that final environmental approvals and construction drawings can be prepared to allow a construction start date of June/July, 1989 / HYPOLU UJ :::J Z UJ ~ (/) (/) UJ MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT c:: (!) z o t) NW 22nd CATALINA CLUB HOLIDAY INN BOYNTON BEACH MALL 1.3 MILLION SQUARE FEET ROAD TO WEST PALM BEACH 562 ACRES (/) :::J MULTI-FAMILY DEVELOPMENT ~ SAVANNAH SQUARE QUANTUM CORPORATE PARK \ I PROPOSED INTERCHANGE ENUE MOTOROLA LO CJ) I BOYNTO BEACH BLVD. TO BOCA RATON RECENT DEVELO MENTS NEAR THE PROPOSED INTERCHANGE / I r ~........... -" -..,.,.""...~ ~ ~ ::- ~ ~ 'i - '" ~ - a '8 cs =' Clo ~e ..e~ ~ ~ ~ 100. ~::- ct.~ &~ ~~ U~ ~~ ';;lID ~ '~ o \ \ \ 1 \ i \ \ "'," ",..,.,'," ~~~..~ ~~~/Q' ::::> =1,wD!>> C.nol L-II KEY PLAN LEGEND MSP-l -- . ,... ,.. .- I -' -' .- .- ~~~-:;~<~~;:::~ ~~~-~'~=I::::, ~!"-!~; _ l...c....ul.I--~._. -_. ---U4.5 K. , R....lc.h . 1l.".lop...C\' lcMI"...,.,-- ."_6 u ----=--- __ Open Spece-- ."..--] U... - .-. u.., --IOO.2ac. --._- "'..1.....--- .... __ O...nllo.. -- 111 -- - __ 5...4 PIM Pn."'.... ---- --. laON - _ tI",.d. ." .llc ~~ -..---. lOt.". .,M'..... C--- .:.-:::; :::-~::::~::. ~~~ ~~.';; ~ t _~::-- . Quantum Associates ~:~:t~ :?~.t"l~~~~~IC...~~~t.~~:... I ::: .~~. _ .-:'~ ~~:-~:.O:-- , QUANJ LJM ':',t~ = ...~~.~.:~!~.~.:c;_ ~~.. ., .....ll'" .-c. .,<",..~..ll:'" -~t..?r"'1' Palm Beach County Metropolitan Planning Organization Adoption of Proposed Interchange I ....., ....., ...., ~ I -, -, L ~ ~ , . MINUTES OF THE METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION, SEPTEMBER 19, 1985 Page 12 V NEW BUSINESS A 2000 Transportation Needs Plan Modification - N W 22nd Avenue and Interstate 95 Interchange MR WHITFIELD advised it has been requested for the MPO to look at the addition to the 2000 Needs Plan of an interchange at N W 22nd Avenue and Interstate 95 in Boynton Beach He advised a study had been performed, which has been reviewed by the staff, as well as PBC Engineering Department and the City of Boynton Beach The Technical Advisory Committee received a presentation at their meeting and they do recommend the addition to the Year 2000 Needs Plan of this interchange at 1-95 and N W 22nd Avenue After approval by the MPO, it would go to DOT for review of the justifica- tion study and the Federal Highway Administration for consideration for funding of construction of the interchange A motion was made to approve the addition to the Year 2000 Needs Plan by COUNCILMAN ZIMMERMAN, seconded by COUNCILMAN JOHNSTON The motion carried unanimously MOTI ON TO APPROVE B 1984 Hydrocarbon Emissions Inventory MR WHITFIELD advised since Palm Beach County is a non-attainment area, a Hydrocarbon emissions inventory must be performed each year This inventory is done jointly by the MPO for mobile sources and Palm Beach County Health Department for stationary sources This is being compared to the base year 1977 and future projections He stated for the mobile sources, the Year 2000 Plan and a version of the computer model developed by EPA, which projects future emissions As we maintain a level below the 41,900 tons per year emissions, we meet EPA standards This is a non-attainment area because we are tied into an air shed with Dade and Broward Counties, and Dade is having problems with their emission levels A special study was performed last summer in Palm Beach and Broward Counties collecting data on a daily basis MR EUGENE SACCO, Palm Beach County Health Department, advised the results of the study have not been received at this time CHAIRMAN KISELEWSKI inquired what does the MPO have to do with the air quality studies, how does a decision from the MPO affect anything MR WHITFIELD advised if the levels go over standards, EPA will attempt to cut off highway funds, cut urban development funds, stop the flow of water and sewer funds, but they would not touch public transit funds CHAIRMAN KISELEWSKI inquired if there is anything we should do in the way of public education before a problem develops MR WHITFIELD stated we should not do anything at this time City of Boynton Beach Resolution RESOLUTION NO BB-ff A RFSOlUTlOtl OF THE CIT'i CO~\l~ISSION OF THE CITY OF BOINTON BEACH FLORIDA RELATIVE TO AN INTERCHAt;GE AT 1-95 AND N W 22nd AVENUE , I' I I' WHEREAS on Oe,e~bcr 18 1984 vclopment Order was issued for Quantum Corporate Par~ with that Development Order mandating cer- tain activities by Quantum Associates in connection with the proposed interchange including the preparation of an Interchange Justification Report the preparation of an Environ~ental Assessment the prepara- tion of design plans and the commitment of appropriate financial contributions toward the cost of construction and WHEREAS in September 1985 the Palm Beach County Metropolttian Planning Organization met to update the year 2000 transportation needs plan for Palm Beach County and added to that plan the proposed 22nd Avenuell 95 InterChange which action rpcognized that it is necessary in the near future that this interchang~ be constructed in order to allow for the orderly development of property In the area and WHEREAS in 1986 the Interchange Justification Report as pre- pared by Kimley-Horn and Associates unoer contract to Quantum was reviewpd by the Federal Highway Administration and approved by the Oiv ion Administrator and the District Engineer of the Federal Htgh,.ay ~dml~istratlon which action thus indicated th~t additional acc~ss points to the Interstate (I 95) arc accepted by the Federal Highway Administration and WHEREAS E~vironmental Assessment studies were undertaken jointly ~j Pc ;ources En;)ineering and Planning Inc and Kimley-Horn Associates 'Jndec contract to Quantum with the draft document being presented at a p'J~l ic information meeting in the Spring of 1987 and that draft d:' '-" t bein;) cevlew',; by t~e Fe:Jerel II1gnl</ay Adm;nistrati~n which rES i',eo in a ruling that there will he an Environmental AS5e<,sment the m:l5t lenient Environmental Impact analY5is requirement under Federal Guidelines and \/HEREAS in the fall of 1981 the Environmental Assessment was revised to ref ect t~e u~dJtes for the Transportation Madel for Palm Beach County and to reflect comnpnls received from FOOT, with that I I i I I I I ! Envlromrental Assessment beIng available for transmIssIon to the Federal Highway Administration in February of 1988 and a Public Hearing to be subsequently held and WHEREAS currently the design of the interchange has been started by Kimley Horn and AssocIates under contract to Quantum wIth the completion of Phase 1 of the desiQn act ivity being completed in February of 1988 and Phase II of the design has been started by KeIth and Schnars under contract to Quantum and wIll be completed by August of 1988 NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA THAT Section 1 The Palm Beach County Board of County Commission and the MetropolItan PlannIng Organization consider the poInts made In thIs resolution Section 2 Acknowledge that the interchange is already on the year 2000 tr~nsportation nped~ p\~n Section,]. Add the Interchange to the most current Palm Beach County Five Year Road Program and the Metropolitan Planning Organization Transportation Impr ovemenl Plan TIP) so tMt authorlza tlon for early funding and construction of this Interchange can con- tinue under the most expeditious process as Is possIble Section 4 That copies of this resolution are to be forwarded to the Bcard of County Commission of Palm Beach County the Palm Beach County Metropolitan Planning Organization the Florida Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration , J/d PASSED AND ADOPTED thIS ~_day of Februar'y I9BB. CITY Of BOYNTON BEhCH FLORIDA " v'.lj3r---" / .1 I. VlcT'~i~r I I \ ~..: ,it ConlTli 5S ioner \ ;- >:./ (__.(.LL \,,, i ,/ ~ -)\\~ COl1liiissioner ~. I I ,I t ( t .4 I ( (Oi~li;ssioiiii;:----'"---'- ATTEST 1 / ,M ,(L{j~~~~t<- City C IjErk' ICoroofa te Sea 1) Chamber of Commerce Endorsement ----~-----_.--_.- l l BD- ~~~~ead~oI~ FIRST FINANCIAL PLAZA. SUITE 108 639 E. OCEAN AVENUE, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA 33435 305/7329501 INCLUDING OCEAN RIDGE AND BRINY BREEZES l l =1 of of 1 I --. A RESOLUTION OF THE GREATER BOYNTON BEACH CHAMBER OF COMMERCE BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA IN SUPPORT OF AN INTERCHANGE AT 1-95 AND N W 22ND AVENUE BE IT RESOLVED that the Greater Boynton Beach Chamber Commerce and its Transportation Committee are in full support an interchange at 1-95 and N W 22nd Avenue in Boynton Beach l -1 1 -1 1 1 1 1 ~!-z.= .-.:..~. -..;:.&<,"' -4r.I. ~ .-:o:-tJ !....... ;. ~ _ {., r . !:- "' . I;.;J ~\ ,~""a. .:, . f I'~' ~ i: .l .), 1:.Ar.:a '{~~. ,.__...:; ,:'1 L;o..e.' JUL 9 1985 This recommendation is made and position taken because 1 Boynton Beach has been experiencing rapid population growth that has increased its City population from 18,115 in 1970 to 44,062 in 1984 Projected popu- lation 152,000 in year 2000 2 The area west of the proposed 1-95 interchange to Congress Avenue and on both sides of N W 22nd Avenue from Miner Road and the L-20 Canal on the north to the C-16 Canal on the south, except for approximately 90 acres in the NW corner of this area,is zoned P1D for industrial, commercial, warehouse, and office use Motorola, 1nc , Paging Division on 90 acres has been in operation since September, 1984 3 The new regional shopping center, The Boynton Beach Mall, with 140 stores in a 1,300,000 sq ft center opens for business in October, 1985, and is located on the west side of Congress Avenue immediately south of the C-16 Canal A strip center of stores, offices and bank in front of the Mall has already opened, and a Motel-Hotel Mini Convention Complex with 50 stores is in the planning stage for the 25 acres on the north side of the C-16 Canal and on the west side of Congress Avenue 4 Total projected, permanent, new jobs in these developments and the Motorola, Inc , plant exceed 22,109 in the next 30 years The collective employee and customer traffic to this area originating away from the area and using 1-95 as its main artery of north-south movement, 1.'f'~LF'J I.rh\~i r .\ If' fl~:"'-.' .1\__. l 1,- w...., \\... - . ,':1 r. l ; i .- .., I , !.., ) -- ~!. ~ I.~ ......f l"~\j! :~ , l ~ l -2- ../ will swamp the existing 1-95 interchanges at Hypoluxo Road and Boynton Beach Boulevard It appears that a new 1-95 interchange at N W 22nd Avenue will solve this traffic problem through the diffusion of traffic through three 1-95 interchanges Approved by action of the Executive Committee of the Greater Boynton Beach Chamber of Commerce on July 3. 1985, on behalf of its Board of Directors 6 l ~ I 1 , , , 1 I o~Q~ , \ 1 Owen A Anderson, CCE Executive Vice President \) I '! I \ \ 1 1 1 J i Summary of Interchange Justification Report / -, -, ;iii , -1 L INTERCHANGE JUSTIFICATION STUDY 1-95 AND NW 22ND AVENUE BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, Prepared for: UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION Transmitted by: State of Florida Department of Transportation July 1985 Revised April 1986 ., -, -, CHAPTER SIX SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ~ As a means of summarizing the results of this study, it is perhaps best to answer directly the questions posed at the beginning of this report. -, , o Is the interchange cost effective? The cost effectiveness is well demonstrated by user benefit ratios varying from 6.27 to 14.25 for the candidate alternatives. A ratio of 1.0 or more is required for cost effectiveness. , , o Will the interchange concept operate effectively under forecast peak period traffic conditions? The proposed interchange concept with the recommended number of lanes and conceptual geometrics will operate at Level of Service C-D range under peak traffic conditions. '11 11 o Can an interchange be constructed under heavy 1-95 traffic conditions? Construction can be accomplished, but it is recommended that precast structural members be used to the extent possible. It is also recommended that detailed plans for management of traffic during construction be developed consistent with construction planning . o Will connecting facilities be able to feed and discharge projected interchange volumes? The supporting roadway network adjacent to and in the vicinity of the interchange will be able to feed and discharge traffic even during peak hours and most intersection operations are improved. In all cases, those intersections with Level of Service E were improved with an interchange. 1 1 . o Is there a feasible interchange concept that is environmentally attainable? It would appear that both diamond interchange concepts are environmentally attainable but the narrow diamond concept seems slightly better I o Will the project's impacts on the local economy, neighborhoods, and social fabric jeopardize the feasibility of the project? No, it appears that the interchange can have a positive impact for the City of Boynton Beach, the neighborhood, and the local economy. A detailed Environmental Assessment will be required prior to final design. I I o Is the proposed project consistent with other local plans, programs and priorities? Yes, this project has been previously anticipated and is included in the County's Comprehensive Plan. It has also been approved unanimously by the MPO and the Boynton Beach Chamber of Commerce (A ttachment A). , . -40- ~ "I -, o Does the project have local support and has it been coordinated on a preliminary basis with key officials? Yes, preliminary project coordination has been accomplished and it is anticipated that continuing liaison will be maintained with appropriate agencies such as the City of Boynton Beach, Palm Beach County, the MPO, FDOT, and the FHWA. ~ -, o Will main line 1-95 and adjacent sections be adversely affected? No, a sufficient number of ramp lanes and auxiliary lanes are proposed for the interchange to allow main line operation within acceptable levels of service. Analyses assumed four lanes in each direction on 1-95 -, L o Are HOY lanes proposed in this area in the future and would the interchange affect such plans? Currently, no 1-95 HOY lanes are proposed or anticipated in the Boynton Beach area. -, 1 In conclusion, an additional interchange on 1-95 at NW 22nd Avenue in Boynton Beach will have a positive impact on traffic operations on the surrounding street network and the most heavily loaded intersections. The life of the two adjacent interchanges on 1-95 (at Boynton Beach Boulevard and at Hypoluxo Road) will be significantly extended as traffic is lowered by approximately ten percent on each one Yehicle miles, vehicle hours, and therefore, person hours of travel will be reduced with the interchange. Accessibility and directness of travel will be improved. Economic impacts are positive while environmental impacts for either alternative appear to be manageable. The user benefit analysis showed extremely positive results. Conclusions from this study would indicate the proposed interchange to be urgently needed by 1990 or soon thereafter, consistent with anticipated development of the area. I . . . -41- FHWA Approval Interchange Justification Report ---- FO"M za,.,. ./1. STATE 0,. FLORID'). DEV^'RTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TRANSMI1TAL MEMORANDUM ~ ~. ~ ~ v-' 6l' \.l "~\O \'1) V (.t\ 0\ o 1 M"'''. STATION DIST"ICT ~\I "1~ To Ms Mimi Howard From Bruce 0 Seiler Date March 20, 1987 CI HANDLE CI SEI: M I: CI IItI:'LY 0 mv signature RECEIVED CJ AS "aOUESTKD CJ ",PPIltOVI: NOT I: AND MAR 2 5 1987 D rl!turn n f.ift:I,laru RESOURCE EN j ND GINEI:.[(!N" I I 1,1" . PlANNINC I'JC u ~yt~r PALM BEA . ,: ' D.STA..UTI: CI1, r LORIO" OA o. Clc Cl off ice TI:L.I:~HONI: CAL.L. - from I . I no ~~~- am ._...........pm i.;.:'\......,..;.l!.. - - ,_ 181-10 DATE TO nOM COPIES TO Septeuber 16, 1986 -crr~ I~ ;..j"..~/d. MEMORA~~DUfVt Sla.. 01 Florida De........n. 01 "''''''''''f t3r.+ 10 )'k Cf r:::; l t:=. Don Henderson ~ SUB.JJ;CT JUSTIFICATION REPORT FOR AN ADDmONAL rnrERat\NGE Kr N W 22nd AVENUE AND 1-95 PAIM BEACH <X>UNlY Attached is the approval letter fran FHWA for the above interchange If you have any questions, please call Ire DLB/pk '-..... ., ~ ~epte~her 8, 1986 HA-P!. '1r. H. '~al Pill1arC' neputy ~ssistant ~ccrp.tary for Oper~tionn r10ricla Department of Tr~nsport~tion Ta11nha3sce, Florica 3~304 Attention: Hr. George T.>. ~ee(' ~eur Mr. ~lll!ar~: Suhjcct: Florina - Justification Report r.c1r i tiona 1 Intprch"ng~ at I-~, anr't T. N. , 2nd l\vcntl~ ~~L~ ~each rounty Pcfercnce ID ~3dc to ~our letter "f June 5, 1ge~ whic~ tranE- mitt~~ a ~usti~ic~tion ~eport for the propos en int0rr~~P00 ~t !'."7. '"l:r-"! ......~nuc. ,HIC"! I-C1S in Pnlm !leach "ounty. Thi~ i~ to advise that the addition~1 access points for t~e propose~ ~i~rnon~ interchanq~ h~ve been ~P?rovc~. ~, Slncer~ly, P. E. C~rr>entcr nivi~ion Acrninistrator ~ ....a~ , , ' ~ tr. V. Fobcrtoon District Engineer For thQ Division ~dmlnigtrator cel Mr. W. K. Fowler (~OOM, Dint.t.4) i. ~I ~ Ca.~. ~~~... I~.>>-~~,,- \ FDOT /FHWA Environmental Determination RECEIVED ~~~>~~~ . ~ I' fORM SOB-Ol Page ) of 2 04/86 SE P 1 ~ 1981 r;. tl.<J SJ ~~ ~l~ J;j l~esour("ilEnQJ~erwg_a_nd. PI~nfJ.lI1g't.ln't t t' PAL~ ~~ lMf\tlJ!~~IO ranspor a ,on (UVInOtU1UlT^l OETEPJiJUATIOU 1. GEflERAl JUFORHATIOR Project rl~ Interchange at 1-95 and N \oJ. 22nd Avenue, Boynton Beach, Project Uctts. S Boynton Beach Blvd~ N Hypoluxo Road~ E Seacrest Blve Project IluJcl)ers. 93220-1435 ,!,-95-1 (388)59 W High R~dge Road Stllte Fedenl WPA 4147530 2. PROJECT OEScnIPTIOU Bo}nton Beach, Palm Beach County ~. Existing 1-95 hus three, 12-foot lanes in each direction separated b} a 64-foot mediall Total right-of-way width is 300 feet minimum The CSV railroad occupies 55 feet of R-O-H adjacent to 1-95 on the west N W 22nd Avenue is a two lune, east-west facility over 1-95 on u _five-spun bridge Fight -of-\vcJY for N W 2~nd AvenL!c var fr-o m 1 00 fee::. 0 n tile eLls t t 0 1 7 0 fee ton the we 5 t, w ~ tll 3 2 0 tee tor bPr-oposed Improven-!!!nts the b rid ge The proposed L1ction is provision of access ramps between 1-95 and N H 22nd Avenue 1hc intcrchLlnge would be of either the d3amond or urbJn diamond type within existing rights-of-way 3. ClASS OF ACTIOn 4. Class of Action --1l- Environmental Assessoent Env1romr.ent4I Imp4ct Statement ::::: Categorical [~clusion b. Other Actions Section 4(f) Statement ----- Section 106 Consultation :::::: Endangered Species Assessment 4 nEVI [hIR' S-51 GKATlJREr;Ql:OCK (~f/. (I i )1t ii, I-))U, ~ Toor roject Engineer O'fl." '1(i-l?~l"I/,."t t nVlron nt~l Sp~ciallst N. F R~ Tli\!A Area Engineer C. I I 1'-6 7 Date , 5 1.)1 I '?1 DDte 6 I f' I (7 DAte 5. nil/A COIlCURRr"C~ 8l0if ~ _I ~ ?!ft1:.-.- <~~ 4 IHvl~fon Gm nlstr~tor ~ r: C ~W-E-O. PLANNING AUG 28 1987 fLA DEPr OF TRANSPORTATlOU FT LAUDERDAlE t&-I/tlg? OoSte / FOro1 509-01 Page '1 of 2 04/86 ~ 6. InPACT EVAlUAT I on Topical Categories s " " t 1 0 9 n n n c REJ1ARkS A. Sotl^l WPACTS 1. l~"d Use ChAnges 2. C~~nity Cohesion 3. RelocDtion Potential 4 Churches 4nd Schools 5 Title VI tonsideretions 6 Controversy Potential 1 Energy Residential to commercial-long term ~.o.nq Tp-rm \nntfiih\lt~nn tn 60mmer~r91 de xi1ncr trafflc tlroug nelgh orhoeQ UO') Xj . { {f{~S1aent:s ease u~ llllen;hdI19l;.: dlulII~ NH2 cOllcerneQ aeaut: t:rattic,r X B. CutTlJAAl IMPACTS 1. Section 4(f) 14nds 2 Hi~toric Sites/Districts 3 Archeolooic41 Sites 4 Recreation Areas PH[] rlHL C. rtATlJRAt EUVIROHH(ICT 1 Wetlands f ] I ( 2 Aquatic Preserves t 3 w~ tcr Qua Ii ty 4 Outs tanding Fh \.'aters f 5 Stream Modifications 6 Wild/Scenic Rivers I 7. Floodplains 8. Co~sLaI Zone Consistency 9 Coastal Barrier Island L I . 10. (ndang IThreat. Species 11 hrmhnds O. PHYSiCAl IMPACTS 1. Noise 2 Air 3. Construction ~j~X~~jl'1LtiQ(lted bv off/on ramps:m fill t ~xj t< T:~mrnr;'ry ;dr nni!';p tr='lfFiro.,.i~"""l E. PERMITS REQUInEO FDER Permit (ch 403 F S ) & Wier Quality Certification (P L 92-500) South Florida Water Milnngeme~ District 7. \fETlAAOS fIHDIUG. (Applies to Categorica 1 Cxclusions only) -,--------------~--- ,"--- ------- 1\. " II .. }- ,j1.,t I 0 ~ --, ~ .--- --- 0 0 ~ 0 - (1 11 - - r" Z " ~ {f\ - c , " -\ :P t LtLnti.c c {f\ -<. {f\ 0 Z ~ ... 0 ~ r-> 'P' . v , :n ~ '\ \ \ en v ' - , '- ~~ , \' \X\ r \ ----~ ----_.------~ Letter from Motorola ~COPY FOR MR PETER FLOTZ @ MOTOROLA INC. April 25, 1988 ,.,. Kaye Henderson Secretary Florida Department of Transportation Burns Building Tallahassee, FL 32399 Dear Secretary Henderson, The Motorola paging Division encourages you to include the proposed S W 22 Avenue exit off of 1-95 in Boynton Beach, Florida in your 5 year plan Our property is bordered on the west by Congress Avenue, the north by 22 Avenue and the east by the Quantum Park Development and on the south by unimproved pasture The Quantum Park property goes to 1-95 on the west and borders 22 Avenue on both the north and south The major exits for our employees and delivery vehicles is Hypoluxo Road to the north and Boynton Beach Boulevard to the south All traffic now flows onto Congress to reach our facility which will occur to go into the Quantum Park property. It is our understanding that publix has acquired 40 acres in Quantum Park, next to 1-95 and plans to construct a 1 million square feet dry goods storage warehouse The volume of tractor trailer traffic into and out of that facility alone will be substantial The only options the trucks will have to access the warehouse will be from Congress on the west or through residential neighborhoods from the east or U S 1 north, Hypoluxo. The facility is projected to be completed within the next 2 years. Tri-County Commuter Rail stop is proposed to be located at 1-95 and 22 Avenue which will again increase traffic through the rcsidcntinl ureas or off Congress Avenue An exit at 22 Avenue from 1-95 within the next several years is necessary to accommodate the growth and traffic demands of the immediate area We strongly urge you to include this as a priority in your 5 year transportation plan. Sincerely, ., l.~ /, C t://,- Pamela Jo Davis Government Relations/ Business Planninq Manager i? J D ~!.1i1 C Ed ~utsch , o~antulll pa r k Paging DiVISion 1500 N,W 22"d Avenue Boynton Be;>rh Florida 31426'8753, (305; "q ~MO - Tri-County Commuter Rail Resolution 0".::-OE-21 FFI 10:~::1E HI...;.D",.lL E-~++! U F 0;::" TRI-CQUNTY COfvt,\1UTER RAil ORGANIZATION RESOLUTION ~O 88-6 WHEREAS a location for the Boynton Beach Tri-County Commuter Rail Station has been selected and WHFRFAS this location is adjacent to 22nd Avenue and Itlterstate 1-95 1n P~lm Beach County, and WHEREAS an 1-95 interchange has been proposed for this location, and WHEREAS future access to the rrop~se1 Commuter Rail Station would be enhanced by the construction of said Interchange, HOV~ THEREFOPE BE IT RESOLVED bi- the Board of the Tri-Countj" Commuter Rail Organization that it supports the inclusion of said IntRrchange on the Five Year Program of the State of Florida Department of Transportation "" __ ,~;~;:;~:~C;=i~ ~^~::::~=--- Current Design Concept \\ '0 ~.~ , , . , ..- \ .----.--- ~ ......... ,"..... ....... \ <i.~ \ 0-:;. t~ ,~ ., t.. C !II:. ~\ " th~ ~~ ellS.. \ {i\ " -m% \ ':t. \ .; ~ ----------- .; ~ ~ ~ ~ .z. \ 'i. .. % '0 ~ -'- ---~ -~ ~ 1 \ \ \ \ \ , \ \ \ ) ------ J:S:i '.'11 ~ . "- a: .. ..l __ ~~ :=-__~-{!1~J.)'! ~.~--~----- - ''''V'f~ ~.~ )11"1.. ~.:.:-~ ,....M1v,oG ~ ~,~'_--=====---2".-=~:7-- -- =--- /~ -- - .:::'::--- .-::::~"D....I'VfQ'Wft.".1sdy ......---...----,-- ~.., --- Olt ~~~?""":>' ---7-='==~- -..---- ==-=====-~::;;;j~-~~::'_,;~- ~~ .~o--~~~~)\'~~7~:2 ':~~;::~- f~ - "".-' .....M ~ ~ _----...:. . ~:"'l"tlf.~;;;;;;;;;,:;: -:=.-=;;;;;:::---. "- ~_. .1 "f'"\ " 3NI"\ ./11 t.~_=~,"-;~;'::~~:~}: __~' ::"-::=~-"~:__:=_--._____=-:_==.'----:?l ~7Mr.1~1;P1~Vf::;= --=;:--,::-=,. --- ~_._~ '~;;=i"i~"'----_ ---'-;~'-56;-,-"F~--..";i -..--y-----.. i..- ~----.-'----~ -=--:-=: ,--, -:"'-~, ----.-:---:=,~"--,....-=~~,.- .-. laov.9( _~/ ". on - .- -"._-~~~~'jij~~~ "",0( -- -~....~~;;~~;=:.~~~~~ -~ ~"':lA".no"f1.tL.::.~ . ~.- w._ -"W,,1i:'li1VYi'~c y=-- -~~ ~_-=---_ -. __--::;:.3Nl, ,y., , 3M' 1l/11"lrlf - OYOll'UYll X'S", '1/:S':) O~OIl"\\~lI --iI---- -------..- -' II' ... . '"' ~ -' ~~ ~--r- \1'\1' _- '31'l1"l./\I' -,'-- ~ - ;j \ \ --'- ------"- ----- ---------- I \ i i I I .. / rrr ~1J E J), NW Z~Np ~YEli.\lE_ ~-. ~- -- . ~ ='I-"-r ~!l i ,I \ i i ! s ~ I ~ :\ !II \, .1 'I ;1 I il I. !! ___~ ___ ___ .__w_.____._. -_-.._---_.._._--~-~. -- w ~ I t:) ,i z I I ~ <{ ! I \o/t ' :I: .... I uLf) . I ~. 5 0::0'\ " I w I.L a: ... r I ~~ . I-W W .J 0.... , zl- Ii ..., l- I Ill> -<{ 1.1Ij -," ct Ii L 0'" .ill wI- Z I ~ ~- Ccn ":* :JVl a:: ~ I a -nffi ;~ zO:: w ~ to! ~~ WW l- I >1- -.J . G.. en.J <( <Xl ,.", <{z \" J ..~ I cffi , I I r>!l! NO Q)~ ~ f I .,:w ~ N I I ~ . :1 z li 1 )H Pl tH I 0- J ... ~ ~l 0 ----- a: -----, ~~ J' I' ~ .~ -- lOc e- O< - -" ---,,/' "- :=: .--.----- i .--::::: ~ "- "'..J W/ --- ..: \ '1 I ~ .:!=:- N l/ -- - I; -,. I 1% \ oil ;In ~( '- ~I H, a\, .. I ~I II I b I . .' . .- ': ~ J u &1 VI I ~ I ~ I .... i' ~ II: il !:! I I I I 0.00 11100 lJ'l ~ ~ ,;' II ::J lJ :x: III L " u lJ1 <! . c Q. 0 ~ III I: a. :J E 0 I- U "" Z .... ~(( U III \r :J ..., Q , cO' I ~(X) I ." -1 I -r 1 -rL1 ---------------------------------------------------------~I--~ ~~ T I..l.. .J o ~ l.j -----------------------------------------------T~ ------1---i Ti I ~m T ~ 11 ----------1--'---:F--- ----'------i T ~ J j ----------~---------~--- ------------------- -----~ F T~ r- ~ ------ ---j[---I-----------~------------- _________________t . ~.,...,3. 1 o ,11 l l----'--~ --I---------~~-------l----------f -I _______ ___________________._____...__ L l ! ~ ::J(X) <I: , ';~ ." r JI(X) ~(X) I: l!l -z- L(X) I I a.(X) lJ1 (( Z lL. -1- L(Xl lU(Xl l: T _____________________________________--J.-_~________... J -1 1 T I " ~ I a .... (( ~ W ~ Q. I t;j ~ ~ ~ g I : ~ [1~ ~ I (( C III ~ C III C III ~ C III a.:> c5 I III I~oU 01 ~oU 01 1II1II 01 1-1I1II 01 ((t.1I a I III Q. CJIl: c OIl: c CJlI: C Z OIl: c II ooQ::J"'O 'tl ...J ~ (JI.- 3 l\I (JI.- It (JI.- (( 111 (JI.- lJ1 L III a;;: . ~ II ~CIICIII CIICIII CllclII ~CIICIII W...JI1l- 110 I L lJ:> -u-III Z-U-III -u-III O-u-III Q.~::JU~-~ IIICJ1I11 :>((.LI CJl'\.I1lL'tlO.LI 01 l\l1..1J0.LI awl\lL1JO.LI 01 lIIt.lJO.LI OOUCTL:>(( I -.LIlli - W L C LOI1lLLC C'LOl\lLt.C C~t.Ol\lLLC C'LO~LLC C...J-lJ1-- ~ , - ::J a. III m1J1x: III ::J -walL. LU ::J 0 .- alL. t.U ::J 0 -Z0lL. I..U ::I 0 - alL. LU ::J 0 .-lJ'lD: UlD1l Ol I .-U'l 0 ~ 01 c~ IIU.x a....J l!l U- CUl: l!l U.- ow Cl U.- c.o Cl U.- a. I-L clJ lL. -CJICC EN:J- - lIIU" ~ ~ 1110" ~ ~ 1II~" ~ ~ l\IO::" ~ .... lIIUJUI1lEEN- I ~lJ1 C 11-- ::INC3~' 1II (JIU" L'-' 1II OIu Lo-' III CJlu([ L.-' l\I CJlu .t:.-, III CJluYUJ C::J :JNo:: ~II -ECJI ~ lJ'l- ]CIII-LI..III::J (JICIIIOI..LIII::J (JICIII LLIII::J CllCIIIWLLIII::J CllCIII((...JC........ YUIIIICIIlJ C -GlII-lJUIIGI-lJGI--1J IIII-lJII--lJlJGlII-lJlI--lJClIIIII-lJlI--lJ...JWl\ICC L ...JI " 1II L.x L III III 1II3J:.- llIlJ :> C ].... C C 1111.. :> c, ].... C C III L :> C C ]~ C C III L :> cO ].... C C III L :> C :> 1II1ll3._I:l'(Z'!) k([. 'I a L.~ .. ::J 1II LUl::J ~~ '11- 19 1III: 11/19'- 0 1\11.. 'II 1\1 11'11- 0 .. L. co l\lN 1Il\l.- 0 19 L. l\ll\l- Gl<lS.- 0 l\l L. <IS <lSClr <IS :J :J 3I-Ul...JmWoWC3ZZ~mUlQ....J:JUl3~Um-Q....JoUl3~um-Q....JNlJ'l3~um-Q....Jlx:lJ13~um-Q....JZ([lJ1C30ZI_ Ix: I Cl Z I- ~ -3 aIDO I- 0 (( Z...J I 00 -Z" ~ ~ ~ ~ m 3 ~ ~~ O::Cl; l:l m $ G C3 ? r tJ'IiY m;nl'l I!. (~ ./ ) ; ~ ------ M E M 0 RAN DUM April 22, 1988 TO FROM SUBJECT Mayor and City Commission Peter L. Cheney, City Manager MPO Reports Commissioner Marchese has placed in the Commission Office a number of documents that he obtained at the MPO meeting on Thursday, April 21, 1988. Several of these reports are of particular interest to the City and therefore 1 am distri- buting them to you. The rest of the material is in the Commission Office. The reports attached are 1) NW 22nd Avenue interchange at 1-95, 2) the Preliminary 2010 plan, 3) the status report on Tri-County Commuter Rail Stations. e I 1 / /t .// Peter L. Cheney City Manager /- (- Li''1 Attachment PLC lat cc Carmen Annunziato Tom Clark RECI:"\~-::-) f\PR 2f1 i8~~ PLANN\i~G DE.PT. ~ - -- f V-A r .. METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORC':'., "IIZATJO(; OF PALM BEACH COUNTY " 160 Australian Avenue, SUIte 301 West Palm Beach, Florida 33~C6 Tei ;305 684 - H E H 0 RAN D U H TO Metropolitan Planning Organization Members FROM Randy M Whitfield, P E ~~\.\ Director \'NVV DATE April 14, 1988 /- RE' N W 22nd Avenue Interchange with Interstate 95 \ The City of Boynton Beach has transmitted a request regarding the proposed N W 22nd Avenue interchange with Interstate 95. The request is inclusion of the interchange in the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) The TIP includes projects which are funded for a phase of project development within the five-year time frame of the Program Projects which have no funded ph~ses are not included The N W 22nd Avenue interchange is conta i ned in the currently adopted 2000 Transportation Needs Plan The developer of the Quantum Park of Commerce has performed the appropriate justification study and is preparing the Environmental Assessment and design pl ans As a condition for development approval, the developer will also contribute $900,000 towards construction of the interchange as matching for federal Interstate funds The attached letter from FOOT indicates the Interstate funds are not available at this time ::J 0 3e,)' 2.:.29 ~Sf ?'llF11 Bt.!?cn ;: j"'~~ 33'+'J2 .2':'29 l .: ; MPO Members April 14, 1988 Page 2 The interchange at Hypoluxo Road to the north and Boynton Beach Boulevard to the south both experience congestion problems This proposed interchange would provide relief for both In addition, a significant level of truck traffic is anticipated from the Quantum Park of Commerce in the near future A need for the interchange currently exists Staff recommendation" The MPO requests the Department of Transportat i on to i ncl ude the N W 22nd Avenue interchange with Interstate 95 in its work program and expedite construction RMW er Attachment F;LORIDA ~ _~z ~Il It DEPARTMENT OF TRAi'I.5?ORTATION MYE 1'1. IIEl'IDEII501'1 SECIlETAKY 780 Southwest 24 Street Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33315-2696 Telephone (305) 524-8621 April 12, 1988 I F r;(' ~P1J:'D BV 1 I L -~. \ .~ 1 Metrq;u:l:iiil Pi~r:r.!r:~ i);g3:;IZ3MrI I APR 1 j 1988 Mr Randy Whitfield Executive Secretary Metropolitan Planning Organization of Palm Beach County Post Office Box 2429 West Palm Beach, Florida 33402-2429 ! I I I _____J Dear Mr ~~itfield Subject Northwest 22 Avenue Interchange with 1-95, Boynton Beach This letter is to reaffirm our recent discussion regarding Interstate "4R" funding for the proposed interchange of Northwest 22 Avenue with 1-95 in Boynton Beach Interstate "4R" or "IR" funds are for additions to or upgrades of the interstate system that are not required as part of the completion of the originally designated interstate system These funds are different from regular Interstate or "I" funds. For example, the recently completed "missing link" of 1-95 in Palm Beach and Martin Counties was part of the original designation of the interstate system and was eligible for funding with regular :nterstate "I" funds. Any upgrades to the existing interstate svstem such as resurfacing, reconstruction, restoration or rehabilitation (thus the 4-Rs) or the addition of new interchanges like Northwest 22 Avenue, or additional lanes are eligible for interstate "IR" funds. The "IR" funds are a stateTN'ide allocation of funds with programming and priorities established on a statewide basis by our Central Office Beginning with Fiscal Year 1992-93, these "IR" funds are to be distributed to the Districts based on the statutory formula and programming and priorities are to be established bv the Districts. The interstate "IR" program as presently adopted in the Work Program is overprogrammed This is due to reduced apportionment in the "IR" category and obligating constraints rut on this fund category as well as substantial cost increases to those projects in the adopted Work Program. The adopted "IR" Program for Fiscal Years 1987-88 through 1991-92 statewide represents a total of $871 5 million. Projected revenues for this same time frame, considering the . I Mr. Randy Whitfield April 12, 1988 Page Two constraints on the funding, are estimated to be $677 million Thus you can see that the program is overprogrammed by approximately $200 million statewide The Department undertook an exercise in February of this year to balance the program to projected revenues Revenues available related to the adopted program represent approximately 78% of the program. Each of the Districts' programs were reduced to 78% of the adopted program level with first priority given to protecting as much of the adopted Work Program and commitments as possible. To do this the first call on revenues in the present and future years will be towards projects in the adopted Work Program. As a result, dollars for additional projects, under the present funding levels, do not exist Projects like the Northwest 22 Avenue interchange with 1-95 are eligible candidates for "IR" funding but will require new sources of revenue to be funded, either federal or state. Some references have been made to the proposed interchange at Congress Avenue and 1-95 in Boca Raton, to be constructed in conjunction with the 1-95 High Occupancy Vehicle (ROV) lane extension and park ~nd ride facility. The October, 1987 approval of the interchange at this location established "IR" eligibility for the interchange bud did not guarantee "IR" funding. With the reduction in the program this interchange would have been deferred also but due to the language in the 1977 Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act and colloquy by Congressman Dan Mica, the Department was allowed the flexibility of building either direct access to the park and ride facility or the interchange with "I" funds By pairing back the proposed design to the Boca Raton park and ride site to only have the interchange and to use this interchange for access to the park and ride facility in lieu of the direct access ramps, the interchange can be funded with "I" funds This is our course of direction and the means bv which this interchange is funded If I can provide you with further information on this subject, olease contact me Sincerely, -.., \.~,.; -' I r ...- t!:-",:t;. _~.....~... Rick Chesser, P.E District Director Planning and Programs RC ml w -. - --:---l R~Cl' t · j) d \' J Meticpolitan fl""l1lil~ U:~ai .lJti!ln cc Gustavo Schmidt APR 1 2 1983 J 1 ~ METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION OF PALM BEACH COUNTY 160 Australian Avenue, Suite 301 West Palm Beach, Florida 33406 Tel. {3051 684-4170 M E M 0 RAN DUM TO Metropolitan Planning Organization Members FROM Randy M Whitfield, P E~ Director DATE April 15, 1988 RE Preliminary 2010 The enclosed map of the Preliminary 2010 Needs Transportation Network should be included in your packet which was mailed yesterday for April 21, 1988 meeting RMW er Enclosure PO Bm 2479 W~"'I Pillm BP.ilCh. FI",,,la 33402 2429 ....._-, Ntr3:JO -........ .:J I..L N ", 7.L II" -----_..~;----- ....JiO---;r-----]____ ... ~!L,-,-,- -.~.-,-~:,:-]------------,.-------.----- .~-'-' -;-~ '-.-:'-'-.7 . ... - -------------___ I I .. I . . I I I I I I . . : .--: , : , i ! i GO ----- ._--------~--------:~~------ --------- . .... ...~i.................................~~ . . , , ., -----:~--=:---~~-------------------------: J ! , , , 'i ., " ., I I I I ., ~I ~I I \ - .,.' 1 ....................~. -......IIft. ....... --------------------- ~- ~ .. ._.......-:~;;.". I I . I I ;.----...--- I , . ! ~I O:---i'LV'-:-----::'iio---.. ___ :1: ~ .:1. :--....::;;;---,-"T",_.,_p'.-----__I ... ,______________ &~ :; ~;i ,-I f--------~... -~-. ----,;:.:o;i~ "---.. j (0 ' I \ ... ' \" -~ ) .~,) ~ '-- ~~ Ie 7rJlrtJ"rllJIII ~: __...,____~.-~~tr.--, 4: :" ~'. :o......-;r;;:--_..-..:.~--";~..:. t~ -.-.-. -.-.-:.:::;::::~E:::::::;;-?:...:7:.::.:. ---------llr- )AI"!, . f ~. . - '~ ""\T.---------. ---~;:.rJ--f!.--.~...- T~---------- --h:~--.~~-----_~ ~-.,-.f~ i -- ..- - ~= I ~ I';. . 4 1iI J( f,' .:.I ~t:4.. ,.' (-- 1 t:...-___ ...., ~ .- j) i~~f ,-,:.,(: ~..;.r t' ..J(. .,., :I fl ~ . H ~ : ~ : ~ : ~~n ~-'-'-' 2at~.. 0 en Z I w Cl ~ W ..J '" III ; i · i : i : i : i : ~ i , ,. ~ i ~ ~ "'w"'~ ;:; ~~~~~~~ -'~-'~~-'~ ."""''''NN .. ... c ii! ... .. lE C a i :I D a : . i1 I i J; I .I ~. ~: >- = c' z - :E - -' ..., ~ ~ !lr/- ~ . J z <( ..J a. ~ LL1 r- ~ en <( w a:: <( b ~ en z <( OJ a:: ::> :c u <( w OJ ~ ...J ~ <(.... o:::ffl t- '3: UJ C lLI W Z z o - f(( ~ .~a:: o a.. 'UJ z I~ 1ft ,.: .. .c o .. o w !~ "'g 8~ 3>- ~! . - ~- - ---- ~ ,;. - lIJ en z J. . . . . . -- ~ I I r--.--" I I -------------l-------~L&~----r------- a' -----------. ': .... ~r__./.:"p iit '''I.'.ru~..... '...--___.. _.!'__~:_ nllll.1. !!.f I r----.. .ii" I. .... ,. :: :..L :ii. !,,: " ;:'" ~.. l!!'," :101 ,!,. .11''' ,,__ II ~: " u~ 4 -t.. --~~-.1.-- t o . I --~--------~=~~------ . :- : I . . , , I i~ . I I . --1..-.. -.------- o . ---r----.':.'; I , , , , . , , , . , , , , , , . I , I 11 I .=e I i JI ,I -, I , -, II , i - ~. '-, .... ......... ~~.___....................r. .-. ~..................".T........ . . I I ~. ---------------------:t--o:---; 1 I -p...- ------------- .)9" .,.. 1...0. , "- ........... . f ~ : I I . I I I . , , , , , . , , , 1..._______ . I . I 1_ "- #>0 ~ " ... y ----------1 -----~ ... /'~ " ~ >- a: c z - :E -- -' W = A. , ---- ______-_______, L---.ci:,.- ....... II --------------~---~--~-~-------~~~ ..- .::. ~ w en z "'4."0 .~-........ ..' '. \I) ~ ~ 0- \Il .;, ..... -" '" i J .. .:Z.J~ ., . TYo," , , ~ ....",;:..~~-~- , ' I ..---_..---~-------- _---,:-r.:----- .. .' .. ,', " I .t=.. ." o --- /~.--- ~ _,,'...000--".... , , , , , , ".. I I I , o o c. I . I I . . I . . . :. .. ii, ,. :, .g . ',I ..,.' : f/ ...-J / . ./( . ' : --/ ! .......... ,:,;::-"'T:S':"':~;" /,{ . " /1. of ...... I.....,. ~ J _____ : I -----.I . . ~ 10 L .,i .. . - 0 ~!; !.- T i-l . .. . i . ...----- ., .. . I ., ~ ~ ! . i ~ ~ >- = c z - :e -- .... La.I = A. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I . 1 1 I 1 1 I . 1 1 1 1 I . 1 1 1 . 1 1 I 1 . 1 1 I' 1 1 1 ------------------------------------ . 1 , . 1 .' !I: 1 I . 1 . I I I o' -. I . I , . I , . I I I I ---------------------------------------- I' , ~ .,. ,. " 'It".. ..' .~~ .. ~ ~ ~ ~ I, \V--4 !~ , l' 'J METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATlO~j OF PALM BEACH COUNTY 160 Australian Avenue, Suite 301 West Palm Beach, Florida 33406 Tel \30S} 68~.': - M E M 0 RAN DUM TO FROM. Metropolitan Planning Organization Members Randy M. Whitfield, P E ~ I Executive Secretary ~ DATE. RE April 13, 1988 Tri-County Commuter Rail Stations Status Report West Palm Beach Amtrak Station Plans to renovate the existing station and upgrade the facilities have been completed. The station platform design work is 100% complete The easement agreement is expected to be accepted and signed no later than April 18 The construction contract is scheduled to be advertised by May 1 Palm Beach International Airoort The site is Interstate 95 is complete advertised on located on Mercer Avenue under the overpass The station design work and the construction contract was Tuesday, April 12 lake Worth The Tri-Rail Station is located at lake Worth Road under the Interstate 95 overpass in conjuction with student parking for lake Worth High School The lease agreement as well as the station design has been revised and submitted to Palm Beach County School Board for comments and review p 0 Sex 2429 N,=~. P~!m ~,=a - F ar:r:a 33..02 2429 " \ t Hr. Randy Whitfield April 13, 1988 Page 2 ~'1 Bovnton Beach The station is Commerce on N completed the receptive to service road located in the Quantum Park of W 22nd Avenue The developer has conceptual design The developer is constructing the station and its Further discussions are underway Oelrav Beach The stat ion site is located in the Del ray Park of Commerce north of Lake Ida Road between Congress Avenue and 1-95 Presently, the developer cannot commi t to the proposed easement agreement FOOT is scheduling a meeting between FOOT, the involved developers, and the Palm Beach County Planning staff to resolve the minor details in the easement agreement Boca Raton The station site is located at the 1-95/Yamato Road interchange Station design is 100% complete and 1 ease agreements have been signed by 2 of the 3 property owners The th i rd property owner is expected to sign shortly RHW.er M E M 0 RAN D U ~ ;Jcc n1wr 15, 1987 nr Peter c1,rT_y City unager ~, l {( 1 Tom Clark City Engineer I{F preliwinary "Punctlonal" Plan for I-95/N W 22nd Avenue Interchange FOJ_~arded herewith is a letter from Kimley-Horn and Associates, Tnc , dated Decewber 10, 1987, and a color coded prlnt of the 3nbject plan for your information Tim" 1 her set of prints is avallable for review In my office by jn~erested parties rh se plans are also belng reviewed by the DOT and Palm !3p ,,-h County ~ / ---- />// (; y~~~ Tom Clark J'l ( ck -1 t l '1chrnent t C Chief Ed Hlllery Chief Jim Rhoden Carmen Annunziato John Guidry Lt. Dan Thrasher ."I~--'Dj ~ ,. 19&1 v. ...... (~\.:. r~ ~ r r I J ( I I i I I ( , I ;' It / r'~ ,.- - .1- ,\ '- \ ~ .....h, FL .33...07 (~,.., ~ [. ..) (1L.,55 , _ [ L r 1. r" to{ f . ,,1.1..... _ rJ_I..... .., l. ( r " , j , . . Ie , r- ,. ~ t._ L ~t.,31 r- :: C~~C 0 C I~ .;_ p tIE "C' .c, C ~ ~:- ,_J- -::v Ft ! Vc ~;o ~r I' h T _'I, I DOLe ber 10, 1987 Mr Thomas Clark, City Engineer city of Boynton Beach 120 East Boynton Beach Boulevard Boynton Beach, YL 33435 Re. 1-95/~~ 22nd Avenue Interchange 4757 03 03 Enclosed, for your review and comment, are two interchange functional plan One copy has together and colored to clar lfy the proposed The color code is as follows' copies of the been spliced construction Yellow - Orange - Green Traffic Lanes and Shoulders Raised Traffic Islands and Sidewalks Earth The design speed used for NW 22nd Avenue is 40 mph. This was used, instead of the requested 45 mph, because through lane tapers required between High Ridge Road and Seacrest Boulevard cannot be acco~~odated while providing the required turn lane storage lengths The 40 mph design speed for this segment of NW 22nd Avenue appears justified for the following reasons o This 1800 foot roadway segment contains four signalized intersections with significant turning, merging and weaving movements o This segment provides a transition between land uses, wi th widely spaced intersections and limi ted driveway approaches to the west permitting higher running speeds, and closely spaced intersections with frequent driveway approaches to the east mandating lower speed limitations. i' C ;5, S, F; ox . -~ \ ,(', J' l (i ;\\~' i \ / J , .\ \ \ I l'\:.' " I , Ii .,J/ II Building client relationships since 1967 I 1 i '-' JI -' II r;\( las Clark Ij \ 1) ,- 1 0, 1987 ;~ 11' 0 Pjl'~~ ) ('view the functional plan and provide us with your Cl In "ll'i by DeceITtber 18, 1987 The plan is also being '-- L" ic_ _Q by Palm Beach County and FDOT Should there be ,~unflict ing comments, we will arrange a meeting of all Ici '- tics to resolve all conflicts KIHLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES, IHC. 92t<~ -0/?;j~'Zvh Denis L Richards, P E. DT,Hjph r 47') 70303-12-10 DLR l: Mr Stephen J Oenbrink, Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. Mr. Peter Flotz, Quantum Associates .~ i I I j "'", l/ I J \ I (; I rI '.' ( !' ~ (cJlt~~>~/(} u{r Kim/ey-Horn and AssociatesJ Inc. 4431 Embarcadero Drive. West Palm B~ach. FL 3340J. (305) 845-0665 ") \ I 1\ Raleigh, Durham, Charlone, Nashville, VirginIa Beach, Washington, Dallas, I 'vi V West Palm Beach, Tampa, Orlando, Ft Lauderdale, Vero Beach, Ft Myers, Phoenix I \ :~0 ~j\;.~~0 i I' \ ~ / '! . ,d \ ' ' 1 ,\ '\ c::\fl J) / December 10, 1987 Mr Thomas Clark, City Engineer City of Boynton Beach 120 East Boynton Beach Boulevard Boynton Beach, FL 33435 Re I-95/NW 22nd Avenue Interchange 4757 03 03 Enclosed, for your review and comment, are two interchange functional plan. One copy has together and colored to clarify the proposed The color code is as follows. copies of the been spliced construction Yellow - Orange - Green Traffic Lanes and Shoulders Raised Traffic Islands and Sidewalks Earth The design speed used for NW 22nd Avenue is 40 mph. This was used, instead of the requested 45 mph, because through lane tapers required between High Ridge Road and Seacrest Boulevard cannot be accommodated while providing the required turn lane storage lengths. The 40 mph design speed for this segment of NW 22nd Avenue appears justified for the following reasons: o This 1800 foot roadway segment contains four signalized intersections with significant turning, merging and weaving movements o This segment provides a transition between land uses, with widely spaced intersections and limited driveway approaches to the west permitting higher running speeds, and closely spaced intersections with frequent driveway approaches to the east mandating lower speed limitations. "",.l~. 'T"o,... "'""'"7"" T"'-' f~ , 'D A. "- IL' f L ~ 5 1981 .3 DEPT. ~, - Building client relationships since 1967 - ~------- ------------ -~-----...... ------- -------- I ~-~- I r:::-;r~.G~':\!r'of;f!@[][JiJ i UUUL.'LJU:""" _ 6 -' L..' '\ i Mr Thomas Clark December 10, 1987 Page Two Please review the functional plan and provide us with your comments by December 18, 1987 The plan is also being reviewed by Palm Beach County and FDOT. Should there be conflicting comments, we will arrange a meeting of all parties to resolve all conflicts. KIMLEY-HORN & ASSOCIATES, INC. cClaA". _ ~Z: IJ I ft/Lvp~ L/ r.o?-~ Denis L Richards, P E DLR/ph L47570303-12-10.DLR cc: Mr. Stephen J. Oenbrink, Kim1ey-Horn & Associates, Inc. Mr. Peter Flotz, Quantum Associates "I .' /<.f...-,;L ,/~~ r 'J? -r./ ! -J~ ;>' ~ ;, ~r' / ~^<: QUANTU1\1 PARK August 28, 1987 Mr Peter Cheney, City Manager City of Boynton Beach 120 N E 2nd Avenue POBox 310 Boynton Beach, FL 33435 R E ,r\7'] T'1 r--<ry" , , ,.., . . _ '. ,;,\._. ..Li:... \ -'.-. (;;E? 2 1:181 V''\'\'' '\ .. W"",, '11. ~.i i ~ U LJ_ Re The Closing of N W 22nd Avenue for Quantum Park construction activities Dear Peter In accordance with the agreements that we have reached with the City of Boynton Beach, we now request that you and the various city departments schedule closing of N W 22nd Avenue to occur on or about September 15, 1987 We have checked recently with Tom Clark in the city, and also the county on the progress of construction of Seacrest Blvd We understand that the bridge Is complete, and that the roadway should be opened within the next week, If it has not already been opened Attached hereto Is my letter to Rlc Rossi directing him to take whatever steps are necessary for notification of the public and all required agencies as to the proposed closing of N W 22nd Avenue If you would like us to make any further notifications or have any difficulty with this proposed date, please let me know Thank you for your consideration Very truly yours, ~ ~ Z,mtr<-U/ /ruM- / Ca.o GEORGE W ZIMMERMAN Vice President of Development GWZ/cas cc Ric Rossi Mike Jones, Ryan, Inc Carmon Annunziato Tom Clark Steven W Deutsch Peter Flotz Steven Oenbrlnk, Kimley-Horn 2455 EAST SUNRISE BOULEVARD . SU'TE 1106 . FORT LAUDERDALE, FLORIDA 33304 BROWARD (305) 564-5114 . PALM BEACH (305) 734-3555 Kim/ey-Horn and Associates, Inc. 4431 Embarcadero Drive. West Palm Beach. FL 33407 · (305) 845-0665 "\ Raleigh, Durham, Charlotte, Nashville, Virginia Beach. Washington, Dallas, West Palm Beach, Tampa, Orlando, Fl Lauderdale, Vera Beach, Ft. Myers, Phoenix r August 26, 1987 -"'''''''Ui] , .. .. '. - ~. -........ ., ~ w J981 Ms virginia Ugi Land Acquisition section Palm Beach County Department of Engineering P.O Box 2429 West Palm Beach, FL 33402 PLA, .." t ..... .., :~T.I ~\ - 1'1 ! Re: I-95/NW 22nd Avenue Interchange City of Boynton Beach 4757.03.08 Your request for information on right-of-way requirements for the subject interchange has been passed to us for response. A Preliminary Engineering ReEort and Environmental Assessment have been prepared for submittal to the FOOT and FHWA The studies and analyses for alternatives presented in these reports reveal that there is no apparent requirement for additional rights-of-way. There does appear to be a need for temporary rights to enter adj acent properties in all four quadrants of the interchange in order to construct the interchange ramps. Also, a permit to construct within the CSX Railroad right-of-way will be necessary for widening NW 22nd Avenue and the structures over the railroad. We trust that this responds to your question Should you require additional information, please do contact us. KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, IRC. {)~~ Denis L. Richards, P.E DLR/ph cc: Mr. Carmen Annunziato, City of Boynton Beach Mr. George Zimmerman, Quantum Associates Mr. Peter Flotz, Quantum Associates Mr. Stephen Oenbrink, Kimley-Horn Building client relationships since 1967 LAW OFFICES MOYLE, FLANIGAN, KATZ, FITZGERALD & SHEEHAN, P A. KAREN LEVIN ALEXANDER THOMAS M BEASON PETER L, BRETON ROBERT BRODY E, COLE FITZGERALD, ill JOHN F FLANIGAN ANDREW FULTON, ill JAMES PATRICK GARRITY MYRA GENDEL TIMOTHY P HOBAN MARTIN V KATZ WILLIAM B, KING RONALD K, KOLlNS LISA MILLER LAYMAN STEVEN A, MAYANS JON C, MOYLE DAVID S, PRESSLY MARK E, RAYMOND THOMAS A, SHEEHAN, ill DONNA H STINSON MARTA M SUAREZ MURIAS VIRGINIA L, VANCE NANCY KAREN VORPE 9TH FLOOR, BARNETT CENTRE 625 NORTH FLAGLER DRIVE POST OFFICE BOX 3888 WEST PA.LM BEACH, FLORIDA. 33402 TELEPHONE (305) 659 7500 TELECOPIER (305) 659 1789 TALLAHASSEE OFFICE SUITE 100 THE PERKINS HOUSE 118 NORTH GADSDEN STREET TALLAHASSEE. FLORIDA 32301 TELEPHONE (904) 681 3828 ~_=CT'I"",~r~J July 27, 1987 II 'I ~ q 1987 PLl~r~ i. j u 0t:.r>T Carmen Annunziato 120 E Boynton Beach Blvd. Boynton Beach, FL 33435 RE N.W. 22nd Avenue - Out Parcel Dear Carmen Enclosed please find a copy Insurance dated July 10, 1987, N.W. 22nd Avenue right-of-way. of a letter to me from Ticor Title regarding the out parcel for the Please let me know the status of this matter at your earliest convenience. Sincerely, ~.-4 ~(tlL David S. Pressly DSP/wp Enclosure cc Steven W. Deutsch, Esq (w/enc.) 1781P/4 . TICOR TITLE INSURANCE July 10, 1987 David S. Pressly, Esq Moyle, Flanigan, Katz, Fitzgerald & Sheehan 625 N Flagler Dr , qth Floor West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 Re Search No 7799 Right of .,1ay for NW 22nd Avenue Dear David Pursuant tG your request, we have searched the property descrited on attached Exhibit "A" through June 26, 1987 @ 8 00 A.M and have four,d the fcllor...tng Apparent O\\'ner David Minkin, Elias T~a1l and Dorothy Thall, husband and wife, and The Estate of Sigmund S Briger, deceased by ~arranty Deed recorded in Deed Book 1142 page 309 Subjec..t to Notice of Federal Tax Lien again~t the Estate of Sigmund S. Briger recorded in Official RecGrd Book 4965 page 712 in the amount of $61,153 11 Taxes are paie to and including the year 1986 The li.en of the Geceral Taxes fcr the year 1987 and thereafter, which became a lien on the lands on January 1, 1987, but are not due and payable until November 1, 1987, and subsequent years yours, ,.......- Carels, CLS CLC' Manager Ticor Title Insurance Company 5601 Corporate Way West Palm Beach, Florida 33407 (305) 684-6966 I CIT/4f BOjYNTON B~ACH I , K t" ) f\ /""'; C/.; ,rj. rd/f_," ',.I./'-<-- ~ ~~ ~;. . _;.a,,;;:;:~ ----- --" -- ----- -". lr-r..;; ~:=-~-~?-~=.....:::~t::, l~..:.';:';j: ,-_ '... ...-- J ...- rr.~fi-.".~~" ~~";~~=::~ :t;~.~", ~"_i~"" " ...... . _ " "!f"'-;I MiJ'" " { ::j<ii I \ ~.., -..i:"-~ ~ :-.:.:.... ~ - -"" a .!. ~~ f!.- " ""~ ~___ ___t....._-,-~~ .,- :-_:~__ ,/.,_ - ~--- . ~-:~ -:r~~ --.......- ~-'~- 200 N Seacrest Blvd. Post Office Box 310 Boynton Beach, FL 33435 (305) 734-8111 OFFICE OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR 12 June 1987 James Vance, Esquire Suite 200 Barristers Building 1615 Forum Place West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Dear Jim Enclosed is the Right-of-Way Deed for additional land for N W 22nd Avenue, per our discussion Please have this executed and returned to me for recording purposes Yours very truly, CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH c~ Carmen S Annunziato, AICP Planning Director /bks Enclosure cc Central File 60987-2 l685P CRD NO ROAD N.W. 22ND AVE. RIGHT-OF-WAY DEED THIS INDENTURE Made this _ day of , 198_, between DAVID MINKIN, a single man, ELIAS THALL and DOROTHY THALL, husband and wife, and PAUL H. BRIGER, as Personal Representative of the Es tate of Sigmund S. Br iger, deceased, as Party of the first part, and CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, a Municipal Corporation of the State of Florida, as Party of the second part. WITNESSETH, that the Party of the first part, for and in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00) and other valuable considerations paid, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, does hereby grant, remise, release, quit claim and convey unto the Party of the second part, its successors and assigns forever, for the ultimate right-of-way of N.W. 22nd Ave., the following described land (hereinafter referred to as "the Property"), si tuate, lying and being in the County of Palm Beach, State of Florida, to-wit: See Exhibit "A," attached hereto and made a part hereof. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD THE SAME, together with all and singular the appurtenances thereto belonging or in anywise incident or appertaining, and all the estate, right, title, interest, and claim whatsoever of the Party of the first part, in law or in equity, to the benefit of the said Party of the second part, its successors and assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Party of the first part has caused these presents to be duly executed on the date first above written Signed, sealed and delivered in the presence of: DAVID MINKIN, a single man As to David Minkin THIS INSTRUMENT PREPARED BY: DAVID S PRESSLY, ESQUIRE P. O. BOX 3888 WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33402 ELIAS THALL As to Elias and Dorothy Thall DOROTHY THALL PAUL H. BRIGER as Personal Representative of the Estate of Sigmund S. Briger As to Paul H. Briger STATE OF COUNTY OF The foregoing Right-of-Way Deed was acknowledged before me this day of , 198_, by DAVID MINKIN, a single man. NOTARY PUBLIC (NOTARY SEAL) My Commission Expires STATE OF COUNTY OF The foregoing Right-of-Way Deed was acknowledged before me this _ day of THALL, husband and wife. , 198_, by ELIAS THALL and DOROTHY NOTARY PUBLIC (NOTARY SEAL) My Commission Expires: STATE OF COUNTY OF The foregoing Right-of-Way Deed was acknowledged before me this day of , 198_, by PAUL H. BRIGER, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Sigmund S. Briger, deceased. NOTARY PUBLIC (NOTARY SEAL) My Commission Expires: -2- 1685P/2 060887-1 1685P/3 EXHIBIT "A" TO RIGHT-OF-WAY DEED A parcel of land for road right-of-way purposes lying in Section 17, Township 45 South, Range 43 East, County of Palm Beach, State of Florida and more particularly described as follows: Commencing at the East one-quarter (E 1/4) corner of said Section 17; thence, South 89008' 39" West along the East-West one-quarter (EW 1/4) line of said Section 17 a distance of 913.38 feet to a point on the existing North right-of-way line of Northwest 22nd Avenue, as said existing North right-of-way line is described in Official Record Book 1738, page 1686 of the Public Records of said County; said point also being the point of beginning; thence, continue along said East-West one-quarter (EW 1/4) line on a bear ing of South 89008' 39" West a distance of 12.41 feet to a point on an arc of a curve (a radial line passing through said point bears North 19051'50" West) concave to the South, having a radius of 1691.02 feet and a central angle of 10058'56"; thence, Northeasterly along the arc of said curve, which is a curve lying 4.00 feet North of and parallel with said existing North right-of-way line of Northwest 22nd Avenue, a distance of 324.13 feet to the East line of that certain parcel descr ibed in Deed recorded in Deed Book 1065, page 421 of the Public Records of said County; thence, South 12002'41" West along said East line a distance of 4.28 feet to a point on an arc of a curve (a radial line passing through said point bears North 08056'01" West) concave to the South, having a radius of 1,687.02 feet and a central angle of 10031'55"; thence, Southeasterly along the arc of said curve, which is also the existing North right-of-way line of Northwest 22nd Avenue, a distance of 310.10 feet to the point of beginning. .. .' DESCRIPTION A PARCEL OF LAND FOR ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY PURPOSES LYING IN SECTION 17 TOWNSHIP 45 SOUTH, RANGE 43 EAST, COUNTY OF PALM BEACH, STATE OF FLORIDA AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS COMMENCING AT THE EAST ONE-QUARTER (Ek) CORNER OF SAID SECTION 17, THENCE, SOUTH 890 08' 39" WEST ALONG THE EAST-WEST ONE-QUARTER (Ewk) LINE OF SAID SECTION 17 A DISTANCE OF 913 38 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EXISTING NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTHWEST 22ND AVENUE, AS SAID EXISTING NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE IS DESCRIBED IN OFFICIAL RECORD BOOK 1738, PAGE 1686 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; SAID POINT ALSO BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING, THENCE, CONTINUE ALONG SAID EAST-WEST ONE-QUARTER (Ewk) LINE ON A BEARING OF SOUTH 890 08' 39" WEST A DISTANCE OF 12 41 FEET TO A. POINT ON AN ARC OF A CURVE (A RADIAL LINE PASSING THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 190 51' 50" WEST) CONCAVE TO THE SOUTH, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1691 02 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 100 58' 56"; THENCE , NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, WHICH IS A CURVE LYING 4 00 FEET NORTH OF AND PARALLEL WITH SAID EXISTING NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTHWEST 22ND AVENUE, A DISTANCE OF 324 13 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL DESCRIBED IN DEED RECORDED IN DEED BOOK 1065, PAGE 421 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF SA I D COUNTY; TH ENCE , SOUTH 1 20 02' 41" WES T ALONG SA IDEAS T LINE A DISTANCE OF 4 28 FEET TO A POINT ON AN ARC OF A CURVE (A RADIAL LINE PASSING THROUGH SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 080 56' 01" WEST) CONCAVE TO THE SOUTH, HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,687 02 FEET AND A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 100 31' 55"; THENCE, SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE, WHICH IS ALSO THE EXISTING NORTH RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE OF NORTHWEST 22ND AVENUE, A DISTANCE OF 310 10 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING ~ CONTAINING 0 02912 ACRES( MORE 0 LESS DESCRIPTION P"FI'A~E\D\'~~'r ,~J~) / \ '\ lr~AFAEL ~VALA1;lRIGAS, P L S ) ) '\ . I ~ I" I \ ) I ) ,1) \ FLORIDA CERTIFI~A~E MO " 2345 } I II ) ) DATE "" , \ ) J) , JUNE 9, 19&711 \ : ) IN 2 SHEETS SHEET NO I "',; ,'r" 1\:')R ;' :.. "\ I :' ..' I~ (j.~ I ;~ lOCO ~~ WI :t u.i~ 01'- W - :I:o:Z ....IJJQ Uzt- 0'0:0 OW Q.:O(/) c::: J-Z-< ( RAD N08056'OJ"W R=168702 ..... z50' ~ o W (/) ~ o +\ '& ~ c-1 C;; c-1 o. o " ~ u.. a (/l U .J <t o (,) oJ &&Set &&su o -to ~ c-1 to " 4. -.0 t'I.... .0 ::~ III " 4<t 'co J()IW 'z J()_ OiJ Z o i= o W - (/) \0. ~ ~ :d ~ d. (/)~ , IJJ .U :i. uJ ..,' .'.- .-( '. cD CD ~ o 0- ~ co ~ t- - ~ " '-N o '=' \ ,=,0 ~ \9 \'09\ 07.. ~~ \p \--6.~' ':. ~ 't"":00- EAST LiNE W 1/2 OF i ~ cS NE. 14 OF SECTION 17 i.~';"\ ~ ~ :. ~cS. SOoo03' 05" E '-.:\..\ "'-\ f~~.. IN 2 SHEETS SHEET NO 2 PL..AT \:.' ;\ F.R S. & ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS, LAND SURVEYORS, LAND PLANNERS WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA SCALE: N T S APPROVED BY DRAWN BY P.B.M. DATE: 6/9/87 R.S. REVISION RIGHT OF WAY DESCRIPTION AND SKETCH FOR N W 22 NO AVENUE FOR R/W PURP.OSES REFER TO QUANTUM PARK AT BOYNTON B. SID 87-5-27 DRAWING NUMBER A-1I4 -87-5 LAW OFFICES MOYLE, FLANIGAN, KATZ, FITZGERALD & SHEEHAN, P A. KAREN LEVIN ALEXANDER THOMAS M SEASON PETER L, SRETON ROSERT SRODY E, COLE FITZGERALD, ill .JOHN F FLANIGAN ANDREW FULTON, III .JAMES PATRICK GARRITY MYRA GENDEL TIMOTHY P HOSAN MARTIN V KATZ WILLIAM S, KING RONALD K, KOLiNS LISA MILLER LAYMAN STEVEN A, MAYANS ..JON C, MOYLE DAVID S, PRESSLY MARK E, RAYMOND THOMAS A, SHEEHAN, III DONNA H STINSON MARTA M SUAREZ MURIAS VIRGINIA L VANCE NANCY KAREN VORPE 9T~ FLOOR, BARNETT CENTRE 625 NORTH FLAGLER DRIVE POST OFFICE BOX 3888 WEST PALM: BEACH, FLORIDA 33402 TELEPHONE (305) 659 7500 TELECOP'ER (305) 659 1789 TALLAHASSEE OFFICE 5UITE 100, THE PERKINS HOUSE 118 NORTH GADSDEN STREET TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA 32301 TELEPHONE (904) 681 3828 June 10, 1987 Mr. Carmen Annunziato City Planner 120 E Boynton Beach Blvd. Boynton Beach, FL 33435 Re: Northwest 22nd Avenue - Additional Right-of-Way Dear Carmen: Enclosed please find a Right-of-Way Deed between David Minkin, Elias and Dorothy Thall, and Paul H. Briger, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Sigmund S. Briger, collectively as grantor, and the City of Boynton Beach as grantee. Also enclosed is a signed and sealed Right-of-Way description and sketch for the subject right-of-way, prepared by Rafael Saladrigas. It is my understanding that you will take care of obtaining the necessary signatures. For your convenience, I requested that Ticor Ti tIe Insurance Company verify that the collective grantors set forth in the enclosed Deed are the fee simple owners of the subject property. If you have any questions, please call Sincerely, )>~'*' t:~ David S. Pressly DSP/dc Enclosures cc Steven W Deutsch, Esq 0981Z/1 ~ - pyj:...~ ~ ~@~@l1J]~@ ~[Jl)~O[Jl)@@[JO[Jl)~ @l[Jl)~ [F)~@l[Jl)[Jl)O[Jl)~~ ~[Jl)~D -- --- Hazardous Materials Management Environmental Engineering Planning May 1, 1987 RECEIVED Mr Bruce D Seiler, P.E District Transportation Planning Administrator Florida Department of Transportation 780 Southwest 24th Street Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33315-2696 IMY 6 1981 PLANNING DEPT. RE: N.W. 22nd AvenuejI-95 Interchange W.P.I No. 4147530 State Project No. 93220-1435 Federal Aid Project No 1-95-(388)59 Palm Beach County Dear Mr. Seiler The following documents are enclosed for the above referenced project: Draft Environmental Assessment (2 copies) Traffic Technical Report (1 copy) Engineering Report (1 copy) Air Quality Report (1 copy) Noise Study Report (1 copy) These documents have been revised to incorporate the results of the District's courtesy review and are ready for official processing by FDOT and FHWA as soon as the District has provided any additional comments We appreciate the assistance given us by you to date, and we hope the District will expedite this review as well. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to give me a call. We still need a Determination of Effect, by the way Please let me know the status of this as soon as you can Sincerely, RESOURCE ENGINEERING AND PLANNING, INC. ~ ~.<L Mary Merle Howard, AICP President cc Mr. Peter Flotz, Quantum Mr Carmen Annunziato, City of Boynton Beach Mr. Ja ck Bagby, Kimley-Horn . REPllnc. 5800 Corporate Way Suite 200 West Palm Beach, Florida 33407 It 305.471.0666 u~ (J;; PO L H. );ncl of COlI nt' Corn IllISSloner's i ./ I I Co u nt' Ad 1111 n I ! I ! I r jan \\ n \. ,H(l! \ Hohert ~ <. hair h.an n r "'1;nell' e amI J I Il1lr)lll~t I )orodl\ \VlIken h. t lIlll t h M -\dalJl~ t Apri 1 14, 1987 Ms Mary Merle Howard, AICP President Resource Engineering and Planning, Inc 5800 Corporate Way, Suite 200 W Palm Beach, FL 33407 ~ tiV Depart men! of Lngi 11 \ rl _ and Public \\nrk, H F "ahlert C aunt\ I::ngirll't'r SUBJECT DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, PROPOSED N W 22nd AVENUE/I-95 INTERCHANGE ~\i~ ~\\ ~~ <,' '/ "- ::-" ?J.Ct.\\jH) ~,\ 2 0 \9'01 ~- p..? ~ , ptt-C~-I ~ l' pO'{~1{)li / --- / ..,.> ~\Ii 0 c.\TI' c,-'t.R" <V .,~')' ~~ Dear Ms Howard Palm Beach County Traffic Division staff would like to thank you for the opportunity to review the pre-final draft environmental assessment for the proposed N W 22nd Avenue/I-95 Interchange in Boynton Beach The following comments are provided for your consideration in finalizing this report 1) The year 1990 traffic assignment without interchange does not appear realistic because it shows virtually no growth from existing volumes For example, the 1986 year ADT for Congress Avenue between Boynton Beach Boulevard and N W 22nd Avenue was 21,532 whereas the 1990 assignment is shown as only 17,500 Although it is realized that only 1985 year traffic counts were available at the time you prepared the projections, the opening of the Boynton Beach Mall and expansion of employment in the Motorola area should have been anticipated Some adjustments would be advisable to make these numbers more realistic 2) I have attached a copy of the latest UTPS speed/capacity table for Palm Beach County The percentage of average daily traffic in the peak hour should be taken as 9% Roadway link levels-of-service for future years should be adjusted as necessary to reflect these Please feel free to contact us if you have any Questions concerning these comments Sincerely, OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ENGINEER /4LUtL Charles R Walker, Jr , P E Director, Traffic Division CR~jd cc City of Boynton Beach Fi 1 e N W 22nd Avert($l5qual9!pportunity Affirmative Action Employer BOX 2429 WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33402-1989 (305) 684-4000 ,~ ~ " 'D' '{~ ,,-~. T"T~ r~ T"o;~ ,ji.'<...,;;_.. .. MF\R RECEIVED r" t ;~ i , I ~ 1987 CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE C.C \'V\ Ie:. _ c:, ~ p\b-.- (' , V\ Y March 27, 1987 ----- RE: State Project No.: 93220-1435 Federal Aid Project No.: 1-95-1(388)59 Work Project No.: 4147530 Interchange at 1-95 & N.W. 22nd Avenue Boynton Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida Dear Sir or Madam: You recently received a letter dated March 16, 1987, from Harold W.Kerr of the Florida Department of Transportation notifying you of a public information mee~ing to discuss the proposed imp~ovements for the subject project. The letter referenced a display notice which was to be included with the letter; the notice was inadvertently left out. Enclosed please find the display notice which was to be included with the March 16, 1987, letter. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused you and look forward to your input in this project. -- cc: Harold W. Kerr, Jr., P.E. - FOOT ./ ,~ ; .. ~ c.. ( INFORMATION COPY The Florida Department of Transportation will conduct a pUblic information meeting on proposed improvements to N.W. 22nd Avenue at 1-95 in Boynton Beach. The meeting will be held on Thursday, April 2, 1987, with an open house from 4:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m. and a brief technical presentation at 7:00 p.m., followed by an opportunity for public questions and comments. The location of the meeting will be the Boynton Beach City Hall at Boynton Beach Boulevard and Seacrest. The proposed improvement involves construction of an interchange for 1-95 at N.W. 22nd Avenue. Off and on ramps to 1-95 will be added for northbound and southbound lanes. The information meeting is being held in order to receive comments from the general public as well as to inform the public of the project's progress. Aerial maps will be on display and Department representatives will be on hand to discuss the project and to answer questions. Residents are encouraged to come in and review this transportation improvement proposal. PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING DATE: Thursday, April 2, 1987 TIME: 4:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. -. - PLACE: Boynton Beach City Hall 120 N.E. Boynton Beach Boulevard Boynton Beach, Florida / 1'7-- "f ~ ~....P.J U:7- - _0 ~ n7 n B f'Y ''1 . . ~~L-~ 2~~'- ~~r/-o~ ,M ___ J..->- ~ (J JJ ~?-- -c..) ~ ...-- ~ ,6.15,{J ~ ~ ~..PI <--..J Co- <-I 0 ^ .L 0---- CJL;~...A ~AJ.~ ~~... ~~~~ 7'~~f- ~ A~~ rr..:T~ / tJ ,--7 2-0 :i~.J-? J ~ -- //~ r-- 20, 2 :;L 73 J r 2(J/t.l ~,..-? ~ s- 1-/J ~ I, M ........--- ~ I rd 2--- 3 ~ 2-~ '17 30 1/ .3.1 ~} fir r h J13b(t?1 -------------- . ~,' p , I I I .--- I P~(0~- 0( p. J u L~,_ ~~~L L.- i i~i, L! u '- J! II ! i ! :J ~ Hazardous Matenals Management Environmental Engineering )Iannlng u~rTIT'I"PD" ' .L~L'''-JL.... l ..II-< March 23, 1987 MAR ~o 19rfr ~ . .~,frl PLAr'<t W\\;J u...r ---~ Mr Carmen Annunziato City of Boynton Beach 120 N E 2nd Avenue POBox 310 Boynton Beach, Florida 33435 Re NW 22nd Avenue Interchange Dear Mr. Annunziato Enclosed please find one (1) set of the figures prepared for the draft EA for the subject project. Please call me if you have any questions Sincerely, RESOURCE ENGINEERING AND PLANNING, INC. 11.-' ~~ Mary Merle Howard, AICP President MMH cac Enclosure REP/lnc, 5800 Corporate Way SUite 200 West Palm Beach Florida '34u7 u 305 71 0666 t -H- I -- -\ \ '-- r"\_ I - "'tl FDOT District Two District Three MARTIN COUNTY - - , PALM BEACH COUNTY I L PALM BEACH FIGURE 1 LOCATION MAP BROWARD COUNTY STUDY AREA J-U/NW UND AVENUE IHTERatAHOE BOYNTON BEAOi, FLORIDA NOT TO SCALE Florida Deparlmenl 01 Transportallon -, 1\ -r )0 ... ... =- o ~ .. n )0 ,.. m i I: ;: m .. - iff' <~IIT"j, /1 ~. i, - I: f"-':'h~(~o~~;m.I' '~::':' i :: ~~~:~:~. ". A "I' ~r =,~ o . ~~:.mIL ""lL'~~i:.. ' '''"' 1"";,1, " f"-' ~ 5_ I",,;. ~ ~ ~ '~'"' g~" -'I '.c"".. "0,," e . ,'1'"' , '~,"1 i~ l j :A ll.- l 'J r;~ -!:'ffil _ <., . n: ,~~E~t~li~.' ,i i ~ ~ FfJ 802 .l~~l:: ",~E.. \: ~~j;, ' I ~ , 'l' +!,. 'r'"' ~ ..~. /_ ~ j 1 : 1m ~, "~'~f ~""'~E! ''''CJ~'!!'~m29'' ~~I'l~~". -",- i ~-: ll. "~;" :--".:'", ,,", ",;",:rlL- · - · i! ..' . G'~" C '~.~~ - ~~l~ir~ ~,,~ [ > i S .;, . '" " " ". b"la, ~. , ; i""~:. I, II .'.", 1;1 1 ~ h ~11~l tr ; ,_~a i' ~" r- H\ ~... ~I ~ l' ,..~ " ... ~ _~ __ f , ~ '",:1 :'I\. \~ r : ~: ~J2i~if "Al.M UACH "A"i~~, f( " .. .... III .,~ L '~<B',~TL~k( ~I . I ' ~. .~I. ' ~ """) l i ; . I., : .':I"'l~;; ~ ~: ,AI Z J ..... .... I l ' \ ~I J E Iii z Z' z ..1:--.. .. .... . o :'~. -:::=;t(K; ~ -; -. ':M-CrRTH! , .: .~-,. , Wo~h ~. .-' G ;PALMi , . I .. . _. BEACH ~ ,.... ~ II ~ 1H~EWQjtrH ,~ .. ..".... I.~, ',fUA HONING CENIlIf i~ ... _ .. ~~ III 15 ~~~~~~~'::. ~UT'-J; ~,': I '" G HOUE'~ -"_ !!Ill" "..Jb ~ . I ~~~~ ~ IV{ ~"" __", "/ ~~. , :: ~ ''''~ M... ~ ., ~ lr,:-. :" .:~ ",:'!'.~ ' \fl; i".'... ~~~, r' .: i\\ L:, _ ~ r"-'-~ N '\u I ff!j; '. :'K~ ': J '~', i ~ ! ::J!~"' ~. ".. ~~ I !~ i~-.-.;l . .. ~. 1--":.,,-J ! I ~Tn._ ..,. -, '. ." -.- U l!!: r: '----, k'" 'e, ': ! :; ..-l/J""'ft~:";g, i- -~. . ~ ;."'" !' ~ N L___J .. f i r~ ~. J 10 : ~.,. f/I pol'laf~!~1 . I m _ -.~ I I l1 . .t!I..IJ.KES"!i -Oil: C , ~ -------:L__ lHf.fAD..!!ft_ilt_~, I,'~~ I 'a - 9~~r.. ! ,., NA PAN (5LII~ .~ i . I i~ en ' "~: : ( jl:l-'r: I ..; - ,. : , -=- ~~-, I :; -~ ~ I .~ ,-1" ~ :' ,I: !to ~.. I ~ H'H ~ ! 1m l: .' '.,;z'..... Ju ___ ~---ILak4 - , : ';.-;. L.m.__ ~ , :IJr- J". ,jWr>rtA · .. 1-" ?- I r._,..~ '. I _: (j i - · '" · *.... k/ ..... ~ -. __, " ,fj'J-,l"""'0-' 1- "'tI ' - .. ,- II . j,jli... <"'i~', : ~ ~_" .... · ~-, -'~..C .n, '".. i · IV. -~mi !~.;: "'.. " · '/SEACH .;.'" I ~: ~ " .. . '"'' , .! " ,. K I";; ."' "" . , IN* AY ~ -1!.2!1!.. eL- , ... i " ,--"--", ". {u , , I E I I ~ .. -~ = .-l-.. ~. ~. .h .__..~ - c:rJ\s:m ,- ~.~.: - ~ OUtIniy~J!i 0..\.1 ~}. "'CL IlII - COftaE:n ItO ..r "UR!!!lO ----.OR ATLANrrS 1:5 l' t': i ~.._-" 0 AT~NTIS ~. l, -./" "': ~ u,"",';'f\ eu...... '! tl = ! o' .'~~"~_l '0" . L1e,V <t . ~e """"!~,,, r-- _ 1::.:.... In g~ ~ri/;:l~,' CDU"" _Q:U' ~~ ~r ~ ~~~. 0: ~, :_ !r-~~ N ___ ---=- _ ,,~__ ~ ..\' ''b ...... t..,;.r= " ~~,~ ~"~'AR c~rl, "YPOL"X WOOOH,"~~ '" : .. o -s i OR '--.-. DR 12 II ,I $ , ~ :~ R t~ , 'R"~ _r!... ~ ~rP I ~ . ,~~ ENIlIt~ ~ ..... \} ./.,<" ,.~ _S:l" ~ANABJ ~~ PINfS w p -- I LEAR LN "'M " ......... ." i EW;-l!:Si !to , . -""- Il Ii f ! o ~ . ="'- ~ $ANrA LUCU " COMMUNITY "~OOL : , , , ____..J o , -"- i c.2.. CANA ----.M I'tlIN t.:. .n.:W ~ o I) lHOLWOOD .'-i:@~ ... O~,,~' 'F -L- " · Mol.trAlfrrllAlL GOIJCUM . ! -""- ~ RAlM_ IJ.lfS I A"" 'f ~'RROI IlIIfIA ~I[ESL 0 a C'fnfES'rCllEEIC . LM ~CLIJ8 2" ~ 5 7:.mr~ ~:~,,'1u~.e .. 20 M*;r: ~ ~ fAY ...) 95 .. i II ) .. , RD CEA , ID~. e, WAU , "' " lIT .. 4 v Isr v DSON 2ND AV '!r..=----xv- AY~S':n~~ST "' "' '~:1.;.... IlOA DR.. 8 )l~, . '\~, ~IST:;;A ~I~ S J....2"OihRO 5 0 T~'" ~~;: ~7Ttt 21AVSEt ! :7TK.g ....: ~ ~: ~~: A: SE ~ 5* 1JTH AY::.. \'f: AY In ~ ~:~ 8L .., ''''''' ;- POINT ~;-~"~: s. 5* ","y sw i ,; 21 a ~ :: W \lJTHAV W ~ "'-'= I ny, CA:f .. vo~ =Volm a:r...-, K " ~ r-: i :-BRINY r'--~ BREEZES R;J ~~~ _-" === - OUfISE~ _ :: -,. ! ..,. III - .1 I ...: l'4lJ~DfI 3 t GU.. ~~=' " /0 ) A tlan ~c ! 1t"1., SnlfAM- I '~~;.J ,I EAMI .<c. "'" : ~ b (mAlA Ocean TAlP"Uil'/)... l y 'L:...." ISTN lLAI( AY I SW1..iTH , ... 25TH 4114111 AY . . . :IE :j ~== en 0 :!! ~- C) c:~ c: C -t ::D << m :IE 3C I\) it C o :IE I E DflN 1:2j/ 'Y, :, _ ': ';:_ .", .~5 i ...._ ~.J7r_;Jl~ IUI [PTUNEC!R"'!i~'- .... _ Sf .. ~'-~~'_n~~ ~ _ - J fJl jI';r, ir LA! .. - '? tBrl,. jll!!! == , ' I:~l- J (1m'"~ 'l'>< ~~ ::: "'6 I III ~ - : ~ ' <!:E I~I t" :'1_ I ""IT I~ GOFLVIEW HARIOR m, r- m ~ C) C m ~ z C ~ z c o ~ co o .. z .. o z CO .. n o % :... CO !C !' z :IIi N N .. ~ u. ~ !" 14.4 ~ .... ~ .;./ ~ .. .. ~ 15.2 $1," . 7.0 - ~ t~ r:: CONGRESS AVI. 12,1 ~ ~t~ ~ .. CD HIGH RIDGE AD. 18 .. ~ 0; ~ .. :.., 4..- 77.5 91.8 -- ;., ;.. - ~ !e r:: ~ 84,4 1-15 92,1 ~101.1 ~ t~ - ... ,.... .. ;., ... '" .. ... SEACAEST BLVD 176 .. 8,8 -- 4_ ~ I!-' ,.. t'" ...a. CO IX) N T 01 .. ~ 0 "'" l.D ~. '11 0 m '11 0' (JI :Il .. >< 0 a: 1XI Z ~ ?< III 0 :E <.... Z ~ c -< N O:E Z .... Z ~ III N EO m r- "tl .... Z :0 ." m ~ III 0 C ~~ 0 r- G) .. Z G) - :t m 3 1XI ~ (1)-( ):0 -t C III 3- m m ::::N Z m ::D :n ~ Z Z~ C> )> 2- c m Z m ;t m J!:t C ." N :;I og ." W .. "'" z 0 0 III I .... C:O ~ ::J 0 (I).... en m "tl :0 :0 ):0:0 < 0 6 0 Z):o 0 .. ):0 :t C"'" - ~ ):0 ~"'" r- "ft Z (; C m 0' m .. ::J C> :: ~ C>> m 0 ~ m (JJ ......- '2 ~ :e< N "i =im .. 'X> 1 0 ." C!. 10 ~ . O:D 0' (JI ... ~ ... Z ;,. eN s: OJ III Q :E <-4 ~ ~~ ~ 0 N O:E ~o ~ :z I'\) ~ "0 -4 8 EO m 'X~ C!. III 0 Q ." m ... ~~ r- m:D .. Z - 3 l m .,,> C) ~ OJ (I)~ ~ c ~ m m :;1'\) ~." .. ~ :z Z" ~ m o~ ~ 0 c: % m - ;t m -4:X: 0 ~o N ~ ~ :x: 0 ,I:lo .. ." OC (J)~ 0 III r- c:::D C!. ~ 0 III ::D ~ (1)-4 m(J) "& 0 ~::D c- ... :x: 0> G') .. }to III ~ (I)'" ~z "Tl .. ......." m g" 0 !!1 .. ~ .....s: ClO 0 _m C!. 0% z"'" ~z~ -~--~----- .. g :& ... z 0 ll! z .. ~ iO .. ~ z ... z :... 0 ;. ... .. !l - ~ ? !" ~ ~ \:: 'r 54.2 ;:J 44,0 74.4 50.6 i1 30,7 40,7 COMGRE.SS AVE. 37,2 y~ 38,5 - - ~\: G ~ ~ \; r:; .. iJ~ .. . .. :... :... ~ ... 12.8 HIGH '''DGE RD. 13,3 14.5 ~ ~ ... .. 111.1 ...~ 129.3 - ~ !1= (5" ~ .. ~ 114,6 ,-IS 124,1 - 135.8 .. ... ~1~ fl .. P .. ..~ ... of' ... 0 .. ." 22.2 ," '" tJ 23.5 SEACflEST 8L"O. 13,2 19.0 .. ~ 19.3 ~t: (f =- '" .. .. -< .. =em lQ r .. T =4~ 0 -n ~ 0' \D ~. "ll UI :1:1\) :D ... Z ~ s: OJ :E ....0 III 9 <-t Z :&c5 ~ 0 z fI,) 0:= -t m-t CD fI,) ~ '0 -t Z EO ~ r ." 1ft O. III 0 0 ~~ r ~:D ... z 0 - 3 ~ :t m :D')> G') CD OJ (I)~ ~ G') 0." C ~ rn rn ;::fI,) ~." :D - I1 z z~ ~ m 0 c Z o- m - ;t m ~5 0 U)O .. ~ Z m')> (It .. -n oc 0 III 5 -t cJJ OU) ~ ~ III m ~~ U) -g JJ JJ l)i5 0 0 z> ... )> :t g-n \ iii )> ....Z "" ~ ,: - z -~ -~ 1ft 0" 0 1ft ~ G') om -4 0 m Zz ~ -t ____z~ ,--------------- ---------- . Jj lUA --." ~ -- ..~-, -----., ~ >>>:'" ,.,.....'"'-..., ..,.~~-~~ '71 L~' -.~4~<.__,- ~~ ". '-"r~ .".....l~.~.:::...'l..:..~.:.:...::.....: ' ~.-...... ........'....'..,.._........._"'......~.....u... :..~~...,-... ......... _"....."..," '.' -'....._.# '~.~,._~ t--. .,._"-- "'~_.~ ..~--~.,.. -"'.~,.~ --.--...=....~- ._----~. -, .--.. .~... """ ... r; . '. .... ... ...... .-:Uj. .. ~ ...~ ~,-, ~ . fill "1'<':-. __L. ~ 7"~N .LIll:, '';''':-~'fN.Y ~.-:-X'-:<.-~w,-- ..8:<; 1~ 1I~_,.. ~''''(i; ! ) ~. -.-.--.. ~,...., ~: - -- . II a.....,. -- _...-...-~ -. .;~ .1..;' " .......... ,,"y ~........... . '" i~. ~. .... . '7"'" " .- ~"'":f".""""";.-'....-xw. ~ A ,~ ~CALE: /" --/00.;': 4757.01. #, ; ./ ,/ ~ ~- .. \!iO;<..~.. 'ii'!O"." i_ """IIi ....".J "......,~...~..~',.".M_'o~.... ""-'~'_"'~=M~ ~---ll-.iJl'W_~ -:...r.x::::.>"!'l-- ~.~~~~~.~ -~itlt.m<-::'~~#;~,:."lW>>:' ~~'-'~-4._,";'~_>-X'*::=> --.. -.-... & I . ~>>' "" '" ~. "'v>.,~ ~ _ ...____~___. f'. + JII'l", *.! "',:'" .' -1~.,.... _ :s~ l . .' .. . '<it ~ --. 1 . . :~'::--'- --'-- '- - - _ <<fl d~. . ~ q - \ +i?%j' -.:.. " to; -~ tI J......... '.' ,.... ~ - .~ ~,...:< ,,------=-, D.;,:" '",,*- ~:;.. .. '* ~~ ..-.l .. - . . ~ (j) ~ ~ eft - * "ft "ft ~ - "ft \ - c/) ~ ~ 0 (J\ ~ eft Cl ... GS~ O"O'JI' - \ 0- ~ O~"O Z 0 CD O~ ~O"O ~ 0 -n ~ 0 -<...., ~"O~ - ~ -0 - ~ . Z"" CO~ "ft r- ',13 G') '0 -'Z -,w,- ~ "ft ~ C CD 00 "'O~ ~ 0 ... ',13 .. Z ~ !4 - 0. 9 GS~ ~ - t1\ -0 t1'1 . ~~'" ~ a 0 ~ ",,,, "'-f"" ~ 0 .,.Z t= ho '" ~ % 0 OC eft '" - 1-'" -,00 - ~ 0 ",c~ 0 -' - '" 0 ~ ... "ftZ ~Z- Cl CD f""-' ~-'o Z '" r- 0- ::I 0'" z-<'Z -' Z ~ ~ - -' a~ ~ - 0 00 ~ 0 ~ <<A ... ",::to "ft 0 .. CD ~ ~ ~ .. c - ~ ~ ~ '" Cl % 0. ~2~ ------ ---~ ----------------- ~ 0 \ \ ... !'! 0 ~ ~ .. \~ \ " ~ " \ n .. \l\ .. .. ~ .. ' '\ \ \ ~ \ " " ~ ~\ \ 0 ... ;I g .. " 0 ~ c ~ .. \ l " " \ ~ .. ~ 1ft ~ .. \ ~ .. ~\ ... " ... 1ft ,. ; ~ .. \ .. ~ ... :t " r" r" ~ "- ~ ... -4 " \ " 0 ... .. "i " .. " .. a " ... "i 1ft .. ~ ~.. ~~ .. _r" i ..1:, .. .. " ~Ift " .. ...0 ... to- n ..~ .. .. \#\ .. " " ... 4/ \ 0 .. ~ " ~ .. g\ \ .. n .. 1ft Z .. /# \ .. ... .. 1ft ;j/ \ \ ; .. .. 1ft .. ; ... " /// \ \ \ " .. I " " .. .. ~/ \ \ " a .. " % \" 0 - 1\ to \\ \ \ Wt 0 CJ\ . .... to%. \ ~ \ 0 o~ \ 0 ~ r-,) \ 0 ~ %.r-,) 'Z ~ 66 t"" -l 3 %. r-,)r-,)r-,)~ ~ g tO~ o 0 c ..,.~..."'" ~ tntn coc~ -c, a. tt\ s. ~%. J'J'%%. 6 .:t~ ~~OGl ~ ~ 1\%. tnf'l\"'O ':J):n';D l>> '0-4 zZO % ':::J 'et'et~ -'8 ;a~ .... o~ <:2~ ~. J' ):J rnrn - % r-,).... \ 0 ~ (Q '=' (J1 ------------ --------~-~ --~_.-- \ s !I) ... " 0 0 ~ i .. '" ~ ~ \ c: " .. " ... Cl .. " ~ 0 0 0 C n \ .. ~ ~ 2\ c S ." .. ; 0 .. ~ II> .. ~ ~ 0 .. 0 ~ 1: .. E ... ~~ ... ~ ~ ... .... -.. ... '" ns 0 ~ ~" 1.\ s1: " ~!" \ \ ~ '\" ~ -... ~ ~ ~ ""'", ~ ~ :-- --.. ~ --- --- _l'" sm :=--:::::: _ ___ ~ ___..._ Q. 0 - --- .--- -.--- - . .- .--- -' . . .. ~ Cl 0 ~ 0 \ ::: % ." ", ~ % ~ .. 0 0 :r. \ //// /// 1// /;// III /1 // I ( // ,/ / / ... o o % 0 - ~ - 0 \ \ \ 0 "1\ to \\ ~ 0 ~ \ .... O3Z . ~ \ g O~ \ \ 0 ~1'0) :c, ~ ~1'0) a 05 1'0)1'0) 1'0) ~ ~ 3 % ~ 03~ <:) <:) <:) ~ .......... ..... Ui (\) <:) <:) <:) -a. rnrn ~ g ~% 'JI''JI' % % 6 0 ,:t'ffl ~~ 0 G'> - ""'" ~~ "0 ~ "1\% ~ ~ Q) b.-\ ZZ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ 60 '2.'2. ~ I\) .... }:O'X rnrn , }:O 1'0) .... ~ ~. z 0 ~ =' c ~ t \ ------ ------------- ---- -$- -$- ---- z 0 - - Wt '1\ , ~ 0 cD Gl (J\ ?it 0 ... ~ ~ 0- mZ '1) OJ o~ ;,;J~ ~ orn -0 () -n ~ 0 ..(to:l CD Zto:l oo~ ~ - ." -"z rnrn 0 r- C> OJ 00 r- -0 )<. ~ C ... -"- -' ~ ... Z 0; '33 a m~ ~~ ~ CD rn \'1'1 ~ rnrn c::.~ 6 ... ~~ (/)rn ... 0 rnr- r- .- - ~rn 00 0 Gl -" - _0 () ... '1\'%. z~ 0 OJ ~ ~ '0; z- ~ ~ ~~ 00 (i)Z - 0 00 0 <A ... ... ,..~ rno Z ~ OJ ~ '1\ ... ~ - (/) '" 0 % Q ~ rn ~~~ A:l- ------------ r-;:::::\I ~-' 'r,=', ~ -. ~ l j: ~;;J~. ,- ',-;1(:------.::-1011,' ; II ~ :::=-- LJ L. ~ '-~~' \.S~ ~ ':::Y \ r- --...... ~i .-...., l' _> I r !! --:~I ~ -'1- -: l' ,'I' L; II I! -- I' 0'11 - ill r- ~ ~ I J LJ \~ I - r.~ - i I !' - _ cJ Hazardous Materials Management Environmental Engineering Plannmg March 19, 1987 n ":"rrIVED i~~v~: )~AR 23 1981 PLAf"j'.Jlj'~G DEPT. ., Mr Carmen Annunziato City Planner City of Boynton Beach 120 N E 2nd Avenue P O. Box 310 Boynton Beach, Florida .... 33435 RE N W 22nd Avenue Interchange - 4757 01 Dear Mr Annunziato Enclosed is a pre-final draft environmental assessment for your informal review and comment We are working on the graphics now but I am enclosing prints of the traffic assignments and the Proposed Action Alternatives to assist your review We have scheduled an informal public meeting for Thursday, April 2, 1987, at the Boynton Beach City Hall You will receive a letter invitation to the meeting early next week Our schedule is such that I would like to have your comments or suggestions on the environmental document sometime during the week of March 30 - April 3 These comments can be delivered informally, by telephone or in a meeting, if you would like Thank you for your interest and assistance with this project If you have any questions, please give me a call Sincerely, RESOURCE ENGINEERING AND PLANNING, INC - ~. ~Jl Mary Merle Howard, AICP President MMH/dlh Enclosure cc Mr Peter Flotz, Quantum, without enclosure . REPflnc, 5800 Corporate Wa\ Suite 200 West Palm Beach Flonda 33407 fi' 305 471 0666 . . - ~o.~~' ~ -'(Q)o' ~n' r;J. r,:::~;':0 ~('-',~ "'ll ~ 1 GCJ J ~ ~7 s-" 2;!i~ -'i i=' :~lfU~:~~GuG\ 'C:::::::: , I" -----=:J ~ I:::=.J 1 ::'U", (~;- - i.;::-: :~ 3 _!-~::;'--_II~ . -:: " I I 'I I --'~' , ,ii, I,! ~--==:JLJ \~ j i -----" ---.-/J L,J~__ ..:~ ~ : i ~ cJU Li ~~ ~ --- Hazardous Matenals Management Environmental Engineenng Planning RECEIVED February 25, 1987 F~B n.... 1 C ~ ,.987 PLAN/'\il' .,; --? , ~~ Uc.?T - Mr. Carmen Annunziato City Planner City of Boynton Beach 120 N E 2nd Avenue POBox 310 Boynton Beach, Florida 334345 RE N W 22nd Avenue Interchange Dear Carmen We appreciate your meeing with us yesterday to review the alternatives for the proposed interchange We will be providing additional documentation as it is prepared and will appreciate any comments you may have Thanks for your interest in this project Sincerely, RESOURCE ENGINEERING AND PLANNING, INC - n- - - Mary Merle Howard, AICP President MMH/dlh cc Mr Peter Flotz, Quantum Associates REP/lnc. 5800 Corporate Way Suite 200 West Palm Beach FlOrida 33407 u 305471 0666 MEMORANDUM OF MEETING NW 22ND AVENUE/I-95 INTERCHANGE February 24. 1987 At 9 00 am on February 24, 1987, a meeting was held at the Palm Beach County Engineer's offices to review the alternatives proposed for the NW 22nd Avenue interchange. Attendees Charles R. Walker Director, Traffic Division Palm Beach County Carmen Annunziato City Planner, City of Boynton Beach Randy M. Whitfield Director, Palm Beach County Metropolitan Planning Organization Peter Flotz Quantum Associates Don Hicks John Benditz Roger Parenteau Mimi Howard Kimley-Horn and Associates Kimley-Horn and Associates Kimley-Horn and Associates REP/1nc M. Howard opened the meeting by explaining that the project was now at the point of presenting three alternatives, (two "Build" alternatives plus the "No Project" alternative), to the FDOT and the public, and completing the documentation (environmental assessment). She stated that the purpose of this meeting was to informally discuss the alternatives with the City, the County, and the MPO for their suggestions and input M. Howard reminded the group that, while this work is being funded by Quantum Associates, the environmental assessment (EA) is an FDOT document, to be developed and processed according to Tallahassee and the FHWA procedures. The "Build" alternatives, a diamond interchange and an urban interchange, were presented on 1"=100' aerials by Don Hicks The diamond interchange provides for double left turns and two through lanes in each direction, with signals at each end of the bridge. The urban interchange provides for two through lanes in each direction with cross-over lefts at a central signal Project limits are Seacrest Boulevard on the east and High Ridge Road on the west Mr. Hicks also reported that costs are estimated at $7-9 million for the diamond interchange and $13-15 million for the urban interchange. He stated that the primary difference in cost comes from the need to rebuild most, if not all, of the existing bridge to accommodate the urban configuration Mr. Benditz reported that in 2010, Level of Service (LOS) C would be provided with the urban interchange and LOS D would result with the diamond interchange Mr. Waker noted that, by 2010, most of the interchanges on 1-95 would likely be at LOS D or Minutes of Meeting February 24, 1987 Page 2 worse, and that construction at NW 22nd should at least alleviate the Hypoluxo and Boynton Beach interchanges Mr Walker asked if such information would appear in the EA, and M Howard confirmed that the No Project alternative would address LOS at other locations Mr Annunziato asked if the right-of-way (R-O-W) shown on the aerials reflected the latest R-O-W information D. Hicks and M Howard responded affirmatively but agreed that property information for parcels recently deeded to the City by Riteco will be checked Mr Annunziato provided M Howard with a copy of the deeds (copy attached) for the properties in question P Flotz asked if LOS at Seacrest and NW 22nd Avenue had been checked to see if the improvements to NW 22nd on the west side of the intersection would be adequate Mr Benditz indicated that such an analysis had not been made but could be done, although factors other than the interchange may come into play C Walker suggested that it might be reasonable to consider the intersection as a Phase 2 element to allow the interchange to progress forward, particularly if the 5-lane section now proposed is not adequate and additional R-O-W is required. C Annunziato expressed concern about the residents of the two houses north and south of NW 22nd at Seacrest. Even if the additional R-O-W is not taken, widening will bring traffic much closer to the houses M Howard responded that the EA will include consideration of that impact and mitigation opportunities C Walker remarked that he liked the urban interchange but recognized the cost differential was probably excessive. C. Annunziato asked what steps now need to be taken to get the project on the State and County programs. C. Walker replied that the EA approvals need to be obtained and construction plans done Then the project can be placed on the respective programs, as it may become a joint County/State construction project M. Howard described the schedule for approval as follows: Draft EA submitted mid to late March; Draft approval late summer or early fall 1987; Final EA submitted fall 1987; FHWA approval winter of 1988 Design plans can begin in March of 1987 and should be ready by the time FHWA approval is received. Minutes of Meeting February 24, 1987 Page 3 C. Annunziato asked about the progress of the Knight Center interchange and its effect on this project. C Walker and R. Whitfield replied that the Knight Center project is well behind the Quantum/NW 22nd effort. Mr. Flotz mentioned that Quantum has agreed to donate property for a Tri-County Rail station in the NW quadrant of the interchange Mr. Annunziato suggested that discussion of the station be included in the EA. C. Walker to see it All three prepared. stated that the County supports the project and wants go forward. R. Whitfield and C Annunziato concurred requested copies of any documentation as it is P. Flotz and M. Howard agreed. Mr. Hicks gave P 1"=100' aerials Flotz a copy of the "Build" alternatives on The meeting was adjourned at 10 10 am Prepared by MMH~~ cc C. R Walker w/out attachment C. Annunziato w/out attachment R M Whitfield w/out attachement P. Flotz with attachment D Hicks w/out attachment J. Benditz w/out attachment R Parenteau w/out attachment Southern Bell 5 40 Co~g'ess Avenue 8.xa Ralo~ Fio"aa ''3431 RECEIVED February 5, 1987 FEB 17 1981 PLANNII\iu DEPT File 820 0100 Mr Thomas A Clark, P E City Engineer 120 NE 2nd Avenue Boynton Beach, FL 33435-0310 RE Street Abandonment Request for High Ridge Road North of NW 22nd Avenue Dear Hr Clark Southern Bell has no objection to the abandonment of the subject public right-of-way If we can be of any further assistance, please call Mr Mike Spahn on 734-1606. Yours truly, ~~ ~or: t1ES/bc A:: t.5OJTH Company I 1 (. - ~ lJ \i~/ \ r;V\ ( \ , ' I L,.. l ~ . ~ .. Kim/ey-Horn and Associates, Inc. 5800 Corporate Way. West Palm Beach, Fla. 33407 · (305)683-5500~ Raleigh. West Palm Beach. Tampa. Orlando, Nashville. Dallas I August 9, 1985 _', 447905(09)T01";12 ..ft. .....__ ...... _J JiG 1985 Mr CarI:len Annunziato City Planner City of Boynton Beach 120 NE Second Avenue Boynton Beach, Florida 33435 hJ t ,L~ ii,..i'L.... T. \ ~ RE: 1-95/NW 22nd Avenue Interchange Environmental Impact Assessment (EIS) Boynton Beach, Florida Dear Carmen: Transmitted herewith is a copy of the draft scope of services for an EIS of the proposed interchange at 1-95 and NW 22nd A venue in Boynton Beach We are aware that this draft document, which is currently under review by FDOT, may need certain revisions to comply with FHW A requirements concerning EIS preparation Therefore, your review and comment on this draft scope of services before it is finalized would be most appreciated Should you have any questions, please give me a call Thank you for your assistance in this matter BDC/nan Enclosure cc Wade Riley fV70 n ,,17 wD[JfJDu'@'l!loLrzJ@[J'fJi) EXHIBIT A SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT STUDY PROPOSED INTERCHANGE AT 1-95 AND NW 22ND AVENUE BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA ( Prepared by: KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Prepared for: RITECO DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION COPR JUNE 1985 .. co ;:: ; -=~ >c e "'- ee _co - .. ... ::Ii => ... -' co e co .. -' ... ... - .. ... ::Ii .. co ~ ... ~ ~ .. ... .;:i~ :!co e t= 5-:;; "'.... 0:= on'" = ...... ........ '" ... iii ~ <II: % <II: % Cl iii ... " >- 0:: <II: ~ ...i5 ",oJ on'" ...'" -"" filn~ ~ ~ !~ l!j ~ on ;;; !:: ... .. ... -' ... .... .. ... ::Ii .... ...co "'~ on- ..... ....... ~= illM ill: 0M ill= ~= _.; = = ~ A: ~= e~ -= .. ~ - :;-u ~~ .:: ~ ~ :: ~:. o...~ ~ Y:......, ... .: - M ~~ co.. ~~~ 0~ 0! ~: i 0~ ~i ~,~l ~~~ ill! illi ~'S ;::. ~:; ::;:;: :2= "Ue :: -= :3a -' .. ~~ ...e '"'- c; e ... iii ~ <II: Z <II: ... ... > ~ .. Z NO: ...... =~ - M M U - .. - - - ;~ j~ ill w 0 Z < J: 0 a: i~ w I- ~ uJ ....~ ~ :a:: ~:E 0 Z z~ ill Q:: I-Z <- d I-Itl ceO) :E :: O.L a. a: <t iii cnO a: ... Zu.. ... <( C) .c ce~<t 0 I-:::J- 0 u...t-Q en Oen en 1-...J3: ... .c a: 0 zi50 :;) !:! z: UJZ...I 4 ~Wu. ... z t-:: a: ceZ~ 0 < g a: x: 0.- I UJ>O >- oa5:;: ... ...I <0 ~ 9z :0.: - ce< - OI- I ...Jz LL..UJ :: - u D- O ~~ ~ ...J W M > ~ ~ w .:= - c ~~ ~ .=ii: ... I- 0 W a - a: .. a. ... :E ~ ... ... -' '" - ~ ..u ",::; ~~ on'" Z-; e=> -.... ___ _~~_ ___ _~n______~._-------------~-------- INTRODUCTION This proposal has been prepared at the request of the RITE CO Development Corporation to assess the environmental impact of a new interchange on 1-95 at NW 22nd A venue in Boynton Beach, Florida. Before a new interchange can be built on 1-95, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) requires that an economic analysis be undertaken to determine whether or not the interchange can be justified from the standpoint of cost-effectiveness. This justification study has been completed and now awaits review and approval by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) and FHWA An assessment of environmental, social, and other economic issues surrounding the project must also be made to determine the environmental impacts of the project. This analysis of environmental issues will provide a basis for a decision by FHWA concerning the impacts of the proposed project. In this case, it is also appropriate to perform a more detailed analysis of alternatives. The purpose of this analysis will be to refine and define an interchange configuration that best represents a solution to the engineering problems. This exercise will also be utilized to establish the geometric and operational feasibility of the proposed plans. Since this study involves the environmental assessment process, preferred alternatives and geometric analyses will be prepared. Analyses in this proposal are preliminary, but sufficient geometric studies will be performed to assure implementation according to FHWA standards. 1-95/22ndA venue/197-2 PROJECT APPROACH AND SCHEDULE Kimley-Horn and Associates has carefully reviewed the requirements for an interchange at 1-95 and NW 22nd A venue in Boynton Beach, and has prepared a detailed work program summarizing our approach to the project. To facilitate review of our proposal, we have organized our technical approach into six principal tasks: o Task 1 o Task 2: o Task 3 o Task 4: o Task 5 o Task 6: Project Start-up and Data Collection Alternatives Analysis Preliminary Design Analysis Public Involvement Environmental Analysis Environmental Documentation The proposed work plan organizes the study approach into a series of related work tasks and subtasks, as illustrated in the work flow diagram (Figure 1). The subsequent sections describe our proposed approach for accomplishing each task. 1-95/22ndA venue/197-3 TASK 1: PROJECT STARTUP AND DATA COLLECTION Notice-to-Proceed Meetin~ The primary objectives of the notice-to-proceed meeting will be the following: o Obtain all relevant information which may be available from the FOOT, Palm Beach County, and the City of Boynton Beach. This will include existing aerial photography, existing right-of-way and utility information, copies of planning studies for the area, existing site plans, previous correspondence, traffic data, and other available information. o Establish ground rules for the study o Develop an understanding of the key concerns of all project participants. o Establish proper communication channels between the Consultant team and the FOOT staff The notice-to-proceed meeting is an important element of the overall project approach. It will ensure that the consultant team and the FOOT have common expectations and concerns on the project. Data Collection A well-designed data collection effort is important in keeping a project on schedule and within budget and in accomplishing the ultimate project objectives. The tasks described here will allow us to gather all the necessary data initially, (including agency and Kimley-Horn files), thereby avoiding time consuming second trips to the same data source Data will be closely checked by the Project Manager for accuracy, reliability and believability 1-9 5/22ndA venue/197-5 Aerial Photography The use of aerial photography is extremely helpful in carrying out an environmental assessment study Although detailed field reconnaissance will be necessary, reviews of aerial photography can greatly facilitate the identification of possible problem areas. Additionally, aerial photography will be used as a base for showing interchange alternatives and design concepts. Using aerial photography to illustrate proposed improvements will also be very helpful in public meetings. Existing Highway Characteristics. Information will be collected in this subtask to adequately describe the general characteristics of the highway system in the study area so that engineering and environmental evaluations may be undertaken. Kimley-Horn has considerable experience with the data sources from which the required highway information can be obtained. Information will be researched with the FOOT district office personnel, the City of Boynton Beach, Palm Beach County, and, if necessary, the FOOT central office data sources. Field checks will be performed to verify the reasonableness of all data collected, and information from secondary sources will be corrected, when necessary, to reflect observed field conditions. 1-9 5/22ndA venue/ 197-6 The inventory of existing highway characteristics will include the following: o Typical sections and alignments o Existing roadway right-of-way o Major rights-of-way, including intersections, drainage and utility easements, and railroad rights-of-way o Street lighting o Intersection geometry o Traffic signal locations, signal timing and phasing o Railroad crossing data o Posted speeds o Structural and operational conditions Traffic Data. The use of a sound traffic data base will be an integral part of the development of this project. Our team has experienced personnel and the equipment necessary to conduct a count program where necessary, to supplement available counts from FDOT, Palm Beach County, and Kimley-Horn's traffic data files. We would use machine counters for the volume counts that produce a tape which may be read directly into an Apple computer to receive a printout of the volume readings. Accident Data. Kimley-Horn is familiar with the FDOT accident records system FDOT programs PSFAC05 and PSFAC08 have been accessed on several past Kimley-Horn projects. These computer records will be used, together with information from local sources where necessary, to analyze accidents by type of accident, traffic control feature, and vehicle speed to determine the major cause of accidents in the study area. I-95/22ndA venue/197-7 Land Use and Socioeconomics Data will be collected regarding current land usage, future land use plans, proposed development, zoning, and growth projections. Documentation of land use around the proposed interchange will be based on city and county data files, DRI studies, review of aerial photography, and field verification. Land uses will be identified and mapped for the following types of uses: residential, commercial, industrial, public/institutional, agricultural, undeveloped, and parkland. Socioeconomic data obtained from the MPO, city, and county agencies will be supplemented by on-site observations of neighborhood characteristics. Cultural Resources Data Documentary Sources. Documentary resources to be consulted will include materials at or available from The National Trust for Historic Preservation; Historic American Buildings Survey; Historic American Engineering Record; National Archives, Washington, DC; Library of Congress Maps Division, and other available holdings of the Library of Congress; American Institute of Architects; Smithsonian Institution; regional libraries; historical societies; and the National Register of Historic Places, Florida Historic Preservation Office Field Survey Preliminary investigations suggest that no historic structures exist within the project area. However, a more definitive field survey will be conducted. 1-95/22ndA venue/ 197-8 Survey methodology will consist of an initial reconnaissance survey to determine the extent of cultural resources, if any, including buildings, structures, or sites which are potentially eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. A list of target areas or structures will be compiled and these sites, or structures will be surveyed to collect the data necessary for determination of eligibility It is anticipated that FDOT's staff archeologist will survey for possible archeological sites. Community Services and Facilities Data will be collected on community services and facilities, including: o Medical facilities o Fire stations o Educational facilities o Religious insti tutions o Cemeteries o Public buildings o 4(f) lands (preliminary data) As part of this task, preliminary data will be obtained regarding parklands, recreational areas, and wildlife refuges protected under Section 4(f) to assist in the assessment of potential 4(f) involvement. If a 4(f) Statement is required, detailed data will be collected as part of a supplemental task. We will also coordinate with public service organizations and determine their operational practices and the significance of alternative improvement projects. I-95/22ndA venue/197-9 Natural Environment. All pertinent information regarding natural features will be collected to facilitate engineering and environmental evaluations undertaken in the study, including the items discussed below Drainage, Floodways, and Floodplains. All information relating to highway drainage such as floodplain involvement, drainage problems, and potential high water due to flooding will be collected. Drainage charactenstics and the handling of storm water runoff are of key importance in the environmental analysis. We will coordinate with the FDOT and local maintenance personnel to identify any historic problems related to drainage or flooding. Floodways and base (lOO-year) floodplains will be identified and mapped based on data obtained from the Flood Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and other sources. Outstanding Florida Waters. Any outstanding florida waters in the project area will be identified. Wetlands. Wetlands (if any) potentially affected by the project will be identified and any wetland encroachment quantified. For each wetland identified, we will determine dominant floral species, faunal species, and amount and type of previous disturbance Permit-related information about wetland sites that may require dredge and fill/water quality permits will be collected and organized. Soils and Terrain. We will review Soil Conservation Service maps and will summarize the general soils composition in the study area. In addition, the morphology of the land and the underlying geology of the project area will be identified, based on field reviews and secondary data sources. I-95/22ndA venue/197-1O Threatened and Endangered Species Impacts. assessment will be conducted to determine A biological threatened or endangered species that may be impacted by the proposed project. Data will be obtained based on site inspections, interviews with recognized experts, and a literature review Floral and Faunal Communities. We and FOOT staff will jointly determine the significance of biotic communities in the study area. Based on this determination, the botanical and wlldlife species prevalent in the study area will be identified. Prime and Unique Agricultural Lands. We will coordinate with the Soil Conservation Service and will identify any federally designated prime or unique farmlands in the project area. Utilities We will identify existing and proposed utility locations within the construction limits of the various alternatives. This will include municipal utility services such as water supply, sanitary sewers, storm water drainage, municipal electric, and private utilities. Transportation Plans Current plans for all models of transportation will be obtained, including the West Palm Beach Urban Area Transportation Study, and other available plans. 1-95/22ndA venue/ 197 -11 Relocation Impact Data Data necessary for preliminary assessments relative to relocation impacts will be collected prior to requesting an official Conceptual Stage Relocation P Ian from the FDOT This data will include information on neighborhoods and racial/ ethnic groups potentially affected, estimated number of relocations required, and representative property values in the area. Noise Impact Data. We will determine the nOIse sensitive sites within 500 feet of existing 1-95 or N W 22nd A venue at the proposed interchange. We will review maps and aerial photos of the study areas to locate historic sites, residences, schools, churches, hospitals, parks, playgrounds, libraries, motels, and any other noise-sensitive land uses. All sites will be verified, and additional sites located, by a windshield survey of the study area prior to conducting noise measurements. Existing noise conditions in the study area will be determined through measurements. Noise measurements will be performed at a maximum of four sites within the study area. Precision noise measurement instrumentation and FH W A-approved procedures will be used. Our instruments include portable noise monitors (Digital Acoustics 607) and precision (ANSI Type 1) sound level meters (Bruel and Kjaer 2230). The portable noise monitors are capable of sampling the sound eight times per second, computing the noise metrics necessary to describe the traffic noise such as statistical levels and Leq, and printing out the levels in the field. The sound level meters can be used for noise sampling according to the FHWA-approved method. 1-95/22ndA venue/ 197-12 Air Quality Impact Data. Data on traffic volumes and estimated background concentrations will be evaluated to determine the appropriate level of impact analysis. In addition, intersections and variations in traffic volume, speed, and proximity of receptors will be investigated to determine the "worst-case" intersection. Sensitive sites will be identified for detailed study Public Involvement Data We will prepare a mailing list of agencies, community organizations, and individuals who might be expected to have an interest in the project. The mailing list will be updated throughout the study process. The list will include the following: o All persons owning property within one mile of the center of the proposed interchange This wHl include all existing businesses, residences, and other uses. o Elected and appointed officials, including city, county, state and federal o Possible permit and review agencies. o Local media. o Representatives of all churches and schools in the project vicinity o Community organizations, such as school PT A's, neighborhood civic organizations, and business organizations. Identify and Inspect Public Meeting Sites We will identify, inspect and catalog potential meeting sites which may be used for the public involvement meeting(s) and public hearing. I-95/22ndA venue/ 197-13 Collect Public Input The collection of public input, in addition to the public involvement meetings and the public hearing, is a vital part of the public involvement process. We propose to have the following activities for this project: 1 Assign a professional for the public involvement meetings. This person will be available to answer questions from the general public and conduct meetings with public agencies. 2. To be available to meet with public officials and the general public on an as-needed basis during the course of the project. 3. To receive a local daily paper and maintain a file of all pertinent newspaper clippings. 1-9 5/22ndA venue/197 -14 TASK 2: ALTERNATIVES ANAL YSIS Establish Need for Improvement Kimley-Horn will summarize the need for the project considering the results of the Interchange Justification Study Five basis criteria will be used: 1. Traffic volume forecasts 2. 3 4 5 Traffic operations and safety User benefit analysis EconomIc considerations Environmental impacts Define Alternatives. The purpose of this work element is to identify possible alternative interchange designs and develop detailed geometric layouts. Our expectation is that alternative interchange designs will be limited to no more than three alternatives, although minor variations to each alternatlVe are possible We will identify available rights-of-way through which reasonable alternatives may be developed. This effort will consider cultural, ecological and natural features as well as socioeconomic and other impacts. 1 Cultural Features - We will identify the anticipated impacts on medical facilities, educational and religious facilities, public buildings, and parks and recreational areas. The impacts considered will be broadly defined and may include air and noise pollution, pedestrian safety and others 2. Ecological Characteristics - Impacts of each alternative will be identified with respect to wetlands, threatened and endangered species, and water quality impacts. 3. Natural Features - all significant drainage and floodplain impacts will be determined. I-95/22ndA venue/ 197 -15 4. Socioeconomic Impacts - We will evaluate the impacts on neighborhood cohesiveness, access routes to community facilities and the potential development impacts of each alternative. 5 Preliminary Cost Estimates - We will utilize unit costs to prepared order of magnitude estimates of costs associated with each alternative These estimates will include design, signalization, construction, and operating and maintenance costs. Right-of-way cost estimates will be provided by the FOOT. Based on the evaluation of each interchange design alternative, alternatives will be screened and the viable alternatives will be identified for further analysis. I-95/22ndA venue/ 197 -16 TASK 3: PRELIMINARY DESIGN ANAL YSIS Prepare Base Maps Base maps will be prepared using aerial photographs, and will show the existing rights-of-way, street names, surface features, and other pertinent information. Establish Design Traffic Volumes The development of good design year traffic volumes will be the key factor in the execution of the project. Without good future traffic projections, the project cannot be completed to best serve the public. Our approach is to use the results of the Justification Study with further input from the Urban Area Transportation Study process on this data becomes available. The FDOT will be responsible for providing Year 2000 and 2010 systems traffic with K, D and T factors. This future traffic will be compared to existing traffic counts and peak hour data. We will consider the new West Palm Beach Urban Area Transportation Study update presently being conducted by the MPO This study is to establish Year 2010 traffic volumes on an adopted roadway network for 2010 While there may not be an adopted plan until this study is nearly complete, the MPO is now in process of adopting the 2010 land use plan. This land use plan will be used in our evaluation of the 2010 volumes developed in the Justification Study We will also utilize traffic volumes from some of the "test" networks to evaluate the 2010 volumes if this data becomes available. I-95/22ndA venue/197 -17 Establish Desi~n Alternatives Initially, we will generate a range of alternatives for subsequent evaluation. These will include multi-lane ramps, structure alternatives, retaining wall alternatives, fill alternatives (which will require more ROW), and other viable concepts. This is a trial-and-error process which includes conceiving of various plausible alternatives and developing them to sufficient detail to determine their viability At the outset of this work element, an intensive "tracing paper" generation of alternatives is envisioned. It is anticipated that the most viable alternatives will be identified by us with FOOT input, and that the alternatives will be developed to sufficient detail to permit quantitative evaluation of the full range of impacts. Specifically, we will define: o Horizontal Alignment Features - These will be depicted on 1" = 50' scale aerial photographs and will include the roadway centerline, edge of pavement, and approximate rights-of-way limits. o Vertical Alignment Features - These will be depicted by means of roadway center line profiles at a scale appropriate to ease of presentation. o Typical Cross Sections - These will indicate typical roadway elements, including shoulders, paved areas, medians, lane delineations, and other features. The development of various typical sections is a major consideration in this study o Major Intersection Design Features - These will depict number of lanes, channelization characteristics and signal placement. o Structures Various superstructures and substructure alternatives will be evaluated and considered. Preliminary plans showing plan views and elevations of viable alternatives will be prepared, and a recommendation will be made. 1-95/22ndA venue/ 197-18 Perform Comparative Analysis of Design Alternatives Following the definition of feasible design alternatives in the preceding task, we will perform a comparative analysis of the alternatives. This work element will make extensive use of the environmental analysis performed in Task 5 and the preliminary work contained in the Justification Study When this work activity is completed, a public involvement meeting will be conducted to enable the general public to provide input to the study process. In comparing the alternatives, the following factors will be considered: o Preliminary Cost Estimate - Unit costs will be used to prepare order of magnitude estimates of costs associated with each alternative Estimates will include preliminary engineering and construction costs. Estimated right-of-way costs will also be included. o Relocation Plan - Estimated displacements resulting from each alternative will be prepared by the FDOT o Economic Evaluation - Benefit/cost analysis. o Environmental Impacts - This will include the complete range of detailed environmental impacts described in Task 5 An Alternatives Report will be prepared which will describe the alternatives graphically and verbally and present the results of the comparative analysis. Twenty (20) copies of the Alternatives Report will be provided to the client for distribution to, and review by, the various state and federal agencies. FHWA Determination of Significance As part of Task 3, issues involved in the project will be listed and reviewed with the FHWA to establish the type of environmental documentation required. This proposal has been prepared based on the assumption that the documentation will be an environmental assessment. 1-9 5/22ndA venue/ 197 -19 Coordination with the FOOT We will meet with the Department on a monthly basis and provide written progress reports which describe the work performed on each task. Value Engineering Our project manager and chief engineer will meet with the FDOT to identify and select value engineermg areas of concern. In preparing for this meeting, we will review cost components associated with each alternative and be prepared to discuss the relative advantages and disadvantages of specific design and implementation elements. In conjunction with the FDOT's Value Engineering Study team, we will perform value engineering studies for the identified areas of concern, using standard life-cycle costing techniques and investigative analyses as required to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of various options. The value engineering studies will be performed in accordance with the approved value engineering job plans and guidelines used by the FDOT I-95/22ndA venue/ 197 -20 TASK 4: PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT An effective public involvement program is an integral part of any roadway design study This process requires the use of highly professional presentations, displays, and audiovisuals. Our staff members have worked with the District Public Involvement Section on some of the more publicly visible projects the FDOT District Four office has handled. We are very aware of the need for high quality presentations and graphics. Prepare Public Involvement Plan Kimley-Horn will prepare a Public Involvement Plan pursuant to the Florida Action Plan for Transportation and Development 1978 for this project. This plan will give details on our approach to the public information process for this project. The major aspects of the plan can be summarized as follows: Introduction or Kick-Off Meetmg This meeting will be held shortly after we have received notice- to-proceed and during the data collection portion of the project. Its purpose will be to afford an opportunity early in the project for the general public, elected officials, and agency staffs to become informed and enable them to offer their input at the initial stages of the project. It is anticipated that an announcement will be mailed to all organizations and individuals on the mailing list, advising them of the meeting. In addition, press releases, publicity, and other forms of public notice will be utilized. We suggest that the meeting be held at a suitable site in the project area. Likely candidate sites will include area schools and churches. The consultant will be responsible for rental of the 1-95/22ndA venue/ 197 -21 to: meeting room The meeting room will be open to the public one hour before the beginning of the formal presentation. Agendas, displays, graphics and handouts will be available, as well as knowledgeable staff members. The meeting will begin with a formal presentation, followed by questions and answers and general discussions. The consultant team will also be available after the meeting for one-on-one discussions. We will carefully note comments and input received at the meeting. These will be summarized in a memorandum and forwarded to the FOOT for their records and for future reference during the study We will handle all preparation and tear down, and supply all the necessary equipment. The sign-in sheet will include spaces for name, address, and an indication whether the person would like to receive future notices. The results of this meeting will include a better informed general public. The FOOT and the consultant will also be better informed on the issues and concerns. Most important, the kick-off meeting will emphasize and be structured to establish a network of communication throughout the study period. Coordination with the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) Two presentations will be made, one each prior to the public workshop and the public hearing. These presentations will utilize graphics prepared for the respective meetings and are for the purpose of informing the MPO of the project's status and to solicit their input. 1-9 5/22ndA venue/ 197 -22 Public Hearin~ We will prepare exhibits and materials for a formal public hearing, which will be held at the completion and approval of the draft environmental document. The draft document and the public hearing will present a detailed comparative analysis of the engineering and environmental consequences of the most viable alternative The general activities to be performed will consist of: o Preparing all materials for display o Preparing all scripts for the meeting o Reviewing the materials and presentation with the FDOT prior to the public hearing o Attending and participating in the hearing; this will include the key staff members of our team Specific responsibilities of our team will include preparation of legal and display advertisements, notification letters to parties on the public involvement mailing list, property owner letters, news releases, all public hearing material, setup and dismantling of all materials, and identifying and responding to all issues raised. I-95/22ndA venue/ 197-23 Continuous Public Information In addition to the formal public meeting requirements of the project, we are committed to a high level of continuous public information on the project. We expect to make informal presentations concerning the project to various community organizations, e g., Kiwanis, Rotary, neighborhood civic organizations, and others as may be desired by the FOOT This activity would be limited to four (4) presentations during the course of the study Public meetings often bring only the persons who are opposed to a project or who have a large stake in the outcome It is important that not only the organized interests but also the less organized interests be represented in the evaluation process. We believe that the public involvement procedures outlined here can obtain meaningful input from the community at large I-95/22ndA venue/ 197 -24 Land Use Impacts on land use and growth trends will be evaluated. The analysis will consider direct impacts on land uses adjacent to or near the interchange and indirect impacts of induced or inhibited growth as a result of highwa y changes. Noise Impact Analysis We will predict existing and future noise levels in each of the noise-sensitive areas or communities in the study area. Initially, we will use traffic counts to predict noise levels at the measurement sites. This will serve to validate the noise prediction model. We plan to use the FLAMOD noise prediction computer program. We will provide coded input forms to the FOOT for execution of FLAMOD on the FOOT computer system We will use traffic data and alignment maps to develop the input for noise prediction. The traffic data used in the predictions are the worst-hour vehicle volumes and speeds, including percentage of medium and heavy trucks, for each major segment of each alternative. The maps will show nearby buildings so that shielding effects can be accurately included in the modelling. We will develop the FLA MOD input for noise prediction for the existing case, and the opening year and design year for the build and no-build alternatives. The FOOT will run FLAMOD for each of these cases and provide output to us. Based on this output, we will determine the appropriate noise contour distances for each major road segment and each alternative I-95/22ndA venue/ 197 -26 We will conduct an inventory of the noise impact caused by each of the project alternatives. In the case of residential land use, the number of people exposed to impact will be estimated from a house count The degree or severity of the noise impact will be addressed as well as the extent of the impact. Noise impact will be assessed according to FHWA criteria, addressing impact with respect to both absolute and relative criteria. The absolute "Noise Abatement Criterion" for residential land use outdoors is 70 dBA LIO, or 67 dBA Leq. The relative criterion is based on the increase in existing noise levels, and will be evaluated according to the FHWA guidelines published in Jerry Reagan's "Traffic Noise Impact/Mitigation Criteria." We will provide full documentation of the noise analysis including a summary of the findings, a land use map, a map of noise-sensitive sites, all data used in the analysis, the results of the noise analysis, and a discussion of the conclusions. This material will be used in the preparation of the noise section of the Draft Environmental Document. Fifteen (15) copies of the noise report will be submitted to the client for distribution to the FDOT. It is planned that our noise analyst will attend one meeting in the study area in addition to any scheduled during the noise measurement program It is expected that this meeting would involve public participation, and that presentations of noise issues and study results will be made Air Quality Impact Analysis Existing data bases will be reviewed to determine the baseline emission inventory, ambient air quality monitoring data, and pertinent traffic data. Historical data on ambient air quality will help define the extent of the air pollution problem in the area. Meteorological data for the time periods when high concentrations are measured will be reviewed to determine the worst- case meteorological conditions. A number of combinations of traffic volume, I-95/22ndA venue/ 197 -27 speed, and receptor distance may need to be evaluated in order to determine "worst-case" condition for each of the alternatives. Any trends in air quality data that can be correlated with changes in traffic and! or emission data will be identified. Projected traffic patterns and traffic generation characteristics will be reviewed and projections of future pollution levels will be made using the CALlNE3 computer model. These projections will enable an analysis of ambient pollution concentrations for future years. FIfteen (15) copies of the Air Quality Report will be submitted to the Client for distribution to FDOT A esthetics/V isual Analysis The environmental document will identify all visually sensitive activities in the potential viewing area of the alternatives and will describe changes in the visual environment compared to the no-build case Community Facilities Evaluation of community facilities will be both site-specific and community- wide appraisals of project alternatives and their impact on residents, social institutions, and neighborhood life styles. Subjects to be addressed include neighborhood cohesion! disruption, relocation (if required), and service to the elderly and handicapped. The methodology to be followed in evaluating pedestrian activity zones as indicators of neighborhood cohesion consists of evaluating: I Physical constraints on alignment placement 2 Strength of neighborhood activity patterns, which involves identification of neighborhood facilities, service areas and activity patterns. 3. Level of neighborhood pedestrian dependency I-95!22ndA venue/197-28 Economic impacts on neighborhoods, both in the long- and short-term impacts on local businesses as a result of detours/traffic disruption during construction, will be discussed. The FDOT's Conceptual Stage Relocation Plan will be used as the basis for the analysis of relocation impacts. Potential relocation problems will be discussed and information included in the environmental document on FHWA and FDOT policies and procedures for relocation assistance and compensation. Natural Features In keeping with the State of Florida's efforts to demonstrate a positive image of environmental stewardship, all natural resources in the project area as recognized in Task I will be soundly evaluated. These evaluations will be organized for application to project engineering and environmental tasks including alternative analyses, environmental quality control permitting, and environmental documentation. Wetlands in the project area, if any, will be initially identified through existing inventories and aerial interpretations. Once distinguished, site- specific, biographic surveys will be conducted for each wetland parcel, identifying the abiotic and biotic components, as well as the functional values of each. All discussions and classifications will be in accordance with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service classification system Surveys and evaluations will be conducted early in project operations to allow mitigation and enhancement measures to be incorporated in project designs. In case of significant impacts, mitigative measures will be developed which draw from the extensive experience (and not theory) of the FH W A I-95/22ndA venue/ 197 -29 An assessment of Base (lOO-year) Floodplain involvements will determine the risk and significance of any encroachment upon any such flood areas. A Location Hydraulic Report will be prepared in coordination with the FDOT's drainage engineer and five copies submitted to the FDOT Base flood evaluations for the project corridor will be interpolated from FIRM, FHBM, Florida Water Management ~istrict and FOOT drainage mappings, where available, or determined by the FOOT's drainage engineer in coordination with the FOOT The report will define each drainage structure, floodplain, floodway and wetland in the vicinity of the interchange Drainage structures will be investigated for adequacy based on evidence of scouring, sedimentation, damage, high water marks, etc. The analysis will also discuss nay transverse or longitudinal encroachment, historic or existing drainage- related problems or the necessary replacement of structures. For consideration in impact assessment, any areas of floodplains to be impacted, or potential effects on backwater and upstream/downstream controls, or increased development potential of adjacent flooplains will be indicated. Alternative analysis and impact assessment will also consider the effects of any encroachment on the natural values of the floodplain; including groundwater recharge and discharge, flood storage and desynchronization, sediment trapping, and wildlife habitat. A biological assessment of the Floral and Faunal Communities within the interchange study area will be conducted. The significance of these communities will be determined in consultation with the FDOT's staff. If significant impacts to associated species or their habitats are anticipated, alternative designs and/or mitigation plans will be prepared. Of special consideration will be a specific inventory of Threatened and Endangered Species, conducted in coordination with the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Literature searches and field investigations will be conducted to cite individuals or identify any viable habitat of those protected species listed I-95/22ndA venue/ 197 -30 September 30, 1984 by the FWS Should investigations reveal any protected species and/or habitat that may be impacted by project operations, mitigative measures will be developed in close coordination with the FWS All consultation with the FWS will be provided in a summary document. In consultation with the Soil Conservation Service, USDA, any Prime and Unique Agricultural Lands subject to impact by project designs will be evaluated and the significance of impacts determined. Encroachment upon such lands will be avoided in alternative designs if possible, or if not a mitigation plan will be prepared. Potential Water Quality impacts resulting from construction and operation of the corridor will be evaluated in respect to baseline settings of hydrology and water quality Where potential impacts are identified, mitigative measures will be developed to protect the aquatic resource Historic Resources Assessment In this subtask, each candidate structure will be evaluated as to architectural and/or historical significance, as well as any historic sites in the study area. Effects on historical and archeological resources by implementation of the proposed alternatives will be determined. The work will be coordinated through the FOOT and will be conducted in accordance with professional standards and federal and city requirements. Guidelines for Local Surveys: A Basis for Preservation Planning, the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (P.L 89-665), Executive Order 11593, and 36 CFR Part 800 I-95/22ndA venue/197 -31 Products of this subtask are: 1 A cultural resource package for each significant or potentially significant historic structure. This package will include an 8 X 10 black and white photograph of each significant or potentially significant structure, description, explanation of those features which qualify the structures as significant or potentially significant, and completed Florida Master Site File form for each. 2. Input into the environmental assessment on historic and archeological resources in the project area and discussion of potential impact. Survey methodology will consist of an initial reconnaissance survey to determine the extent of cultural resources, including buildings, structures, si tes, or districts which are potentially eligible for inclusion on the National Register of Historic Places. A list of target areas or structures will be compiled and these sites, structures or districts will be surveyed to collect the data necessary for determination of eligibility The FOOT's staff archeologist will survey for possible archeological sites. Oata collected in Task 1 will be analyzed and its interpretation presented to assist in the overall analysis of the project area. A summary cultural resource description and assessment of impact will be prepared, based on the results of the historical assessment and the archaeological survey All contacts with the Florida SHPO will be made through the FOOT Attendance at meetings with the SHPO and FHWA will be at the FOOT's request. Costs for attending such meetings are not included in this proposal, but can be negotiated when needed. It has been assumed that the FOOT will provide Florida Master Site File forms. I-95/22ndA venue/197 -32 TASK 6: ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION Prepare Draft Report A draft environmental (EA/FONSI) document reflecting the findings of previous data collection and analysis tasks will be prepared In format and content sufficient to the FOOT and requirements of FHPM 7-2-2 (23 CFR 771). The following elements will be included in the draft reports: Graphics o Project location map o Study area map o Interchange design alternatives o Existing and future land use o Noise analysis receptor locations o Air analysis receptor locations o Wetland location map o Other graphics which may be required for the clear presentation of study findings Discussion of the Following Subjects: o The proposed action o Planning basis for the action o Transportation demand o Social demands and economic development o Modal interrelationships o Safety I-95/22ndA venue/ 197 -33 r' o Deficiencies of the existing system o Emergency services o System linkage o Highway planning objectives o Do-nothing alternative o Build alternatives: alignments and design alternatives 0 Major intersections 0 Maintenance of traffic 0 Land use 0 Biotic communities 0 Endangered and threatened species 0 Wetlands 0 Flood plains 0 Coastal zone impacts 0 Prime and unique agricultural lands 0 Air quali ty 0 Noise 0 Cultural resources 0 Aesthetics 0 Community impacts 0 Relocation impacts 0 Construction impacts o Comments and coordination, to include a summary of public involvement efforts and comments I-95/22ndA venue/197 -34 Ten (10) copies of the Pre-draft Environmental Document will be submitted for review and comments by the client and the FOOT In response to FOOT comments, the document will be refined and 15 copies resubmitted as a Draft Environmental Document acceptable for FHWA review FHWA comments will be accommodated and 15 copies of the Final Draft Environmental Document will be submitted for FHWA approval. Prepare Final Report Following a formal public hearing, a final report will be prepared which considers a selected alternative and addresses engineering and environmental comments from general public, various review agencies, the FOOT and the FHWA Revisions to the Draft Report will include: o Impact Section reflecting selected alternative o Public Hearing/Review comments and responses to same o Community Involvement Section reflecting public hearing and general comments received o Summary Reports Wetland Findings, Floodplain Findings, Endangered and Threatened Species Coordination with U.S Fish and Wildlife Service Six (6) copies of the Pre-Final Environmental Document will be submitted for FOOT and FHWA review and/or approval. Any FOOT or FHWA comments resulting from final document review will be included in a revised Final Environmental Document. Fifty (50) copies of the Final Report, together with one camera-ready copy for future use, will be provided. 1-9 5/22ndA venue/ 197 -35 Roadway Improvement Plan In addition to the Final Environmental Document, a Roadway Improvement Plan will be developed. This document will com pend the engineering data developed during the preferred alternative study and will include, at a minimum, the following: o Overall Project Development Plan o Traffic Forecasts o Traffic Design o Proposed Roadway and Structure Improvements o Maintenance of Traffic Considerations o Right-of-Way Requirements o Utility Adjustments o Estimated Costs o Construction Scheduling and Funding Twenty-five (25) copIes of this report, prepared in an 8Yz x II format, will be provided. Schedule of Events We propose a 12-month schedule for completion of the project, assuming timely review and approval of submittals. This time frame is predicated on the schedule for individual activities shown in Figure 4 I-95/22ndA venue/197 -36 PROJECT TASKS * 1 CALENDAR MONTHS 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 Data Collection 2. Corridor Analysis 3. Concept Design Analysis 4 Public Involvement ~ U i.~ 01~ O. Activities ! 5 Environmental Analysis 6 Environmental Document Draft Final - LEGEND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ACTIVITIES * NOTICE TO PROCEED ... PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PLAN (SUBMITTED WITH PROPOSAL) . EARLY NOTIFICATION o MPO COORDINATION MEETING D. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT MEETINGS/WORKSHOP . PUBLIC HEARING FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY FOR 1-95/NW 22ND AVE. INTERCHANGE SCHEDULE OF EVENTS FIGURE 2 KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES. INC. MEMORANDUM 28 June 1985 TO Betty Boroni, City Clerk FROM: Carmen S. Annunziato, Planning Director RE: SAND PINE SCRUB AT BOYNTON BEACH PARK gF COMMERCE (BBPOC) Accompanying this memo you will find a copy of a cover letter and a survey which depicts the 40-acre scrub set-aside which was required by Council as a part of the approval of the BBPOC. eA~J~ ,KARMEN S ANNUNZ TO /bks cc. City Manager Forester/Horticulturist MEMORANDUM 28 June 1985 TO Betty Baroni, City Clerk FROM: Carmen S Annunziato, Planning Director RE SAND PINE SCRUB AT BOYNTON BEACH PARK 9F COMMERCE (BBPOC) Accompanying this memo you will find a copy of a cover letter and a survey which depicts the 40-acre scrub set-aside which was required by Council as a part of the approval of the BBPOC t"!L~p<f~ rf. ~->U~ ~ARMEN S ANNUNZ TO {/ /bks cc City Manager Forester/Horticulturist ,-. '- Suite 201 1300 West Lantana Road Lantana, Florida 33462 Phone, (305) 533-0902 RITECO DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION R rr'IMT~ r""n -.-- ~..- -_~.i' JUN PLAr'~ r~ I . u LL::.r j t June 25, 1985 .... ... Carmen Annunziato City of Boynton Beach POBox 310 Boynton Beach, FL 33435 Dear Carmen Pursuant to Paragraph 32 of the Development Order of the Boynton Beach Park of Commerce Ordinance No 84-51, enclosed is the legal description of the 40 acre scrup habitat area to be preserved Sincerely yours, 2: (:~/ ~~- Vice President WR/gd cc Nate L Adams encl DESCRIPTION 40 ACRE SAND PINE TRACT SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 45 SOUTH, RANGE 43 EAST PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA BEING A PARCEL OF LAND LYING IN SECTION 17, TOWNSHIP 45 SOUTH, RANGE 43 EAST, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA AND BEING MORE PARTlCULARL Y DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 17, THENCE WITH A BEARING OF SOUTH 890 16' 39" WEST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SECTION 17 A DISTANCE OF 1254 27 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE WITH A BEARING OF SOUTH 00 43' 21" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 54 00 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE WITH A BEARING OF SOUTH 00 02' 11" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 2539 38 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE WITH A BEARING OF NORTH 670 24' 56" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 272.80 FEET; THENCE WITH A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADUIS OF 105500 FEET, A CHORD BEARING OF NORTH 080 12' 28" WEST, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 610 35' 04" AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 1133.97 FEET; THENCE WITH A BEARING OF SOUTH 510 00' 00" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 415 00 FEET; THENCE WITH A BEARING OF NORTH 390 00' 00" WEST, A DISTANCE OF 440 00 FEET; THENCE WITH A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 650 00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 650 45' 39", AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 746.03 FEET TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVE; THENCE WITH A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 1315.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 230 25' 41 ", AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 53770 FEET TO A POINT ON THE PROPOSED SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF MINOR ROAD; THENCE WITH A BEARING OF NOR TH 810 25' 56" EAST, ALONG THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF MINOR ROAD, A DISTANCE OF 279 14 FEET; THENCE WITH A CURVE TO THE RIGHT HAVING A RADIUS OF 185586 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 70 50' 43", AND AN ARC LENGTH OF 254 12 FEET TO A POINT; THENCE WITH A BEARING OF NORTH 890 16' 39" EAST, A DISTANCE OF 412 07 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 40 02 ACRES MORE OR LESS AND SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS OF WAY OF RECORD I WDfJJJDO@'i!7ofJ{]@[l[JD 1 r Kim/ey.Horn and Associates, Inc. 5800 Corporate Way West Palm Beach, Fla, 33407 . (305)683-5500 I Raleigh, West Palm Beach, Tampa, Orlando, Nashville, Dallas January 22, 1985 4479 01( 069) Mr Wade Riley RITECO Development Corporation 1300 ~ Lantana Road, Suite 201 Lantana, Florida 33462 p 1':;~ rp :.~T't7D. <. 2-.j;,_~ ...........:.~ ~- i: ~ .1 !'JJ ,~ 1qgA F'!~>h. ~"l DE-Pi Re I-95/N W 22nd Avenue Interchange Dear Wade Enclosed are three copies of our agreement for the Engineering Study and Justification Report for the above referenced These agreements are ready for execution and include revisions based on comments by Palm Beach County Engineering The Florida Department of Transportation will also be asked for comments by Charlie Walker If they have any additional requests, we can make supplemental agreements if necessary However, if we do get started based on this agreement, we should be able to maintain the required schedule If you want us to begin work as soon as possible please execute the agreements and return one copy to us Please let me know if you have any questions Very truly yours, KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC JRZ tll Enclosures (3) cc Charlie Walker (w/1 encl) Carmen AflnuntlatGf (w/1 encl) -- es R Zook, P E President l SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN RITE CO DEVELOPMENT CORPORA nON AND KIMLE Y -HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES FOR AN ENGINEERING STUDY AND JUSTIFICATION REPORT OF A PROPOSED INTERCHANGE AT 1-95 AND NW 22ND AVENUE IN BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA }. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT made and entered into this day of , 1985, by and between RITECO DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, hereinafter called the Client, and Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc., hereinafter called the Engineer, a Florida corporation of 5800 Corporate Way, West Palm Beach, Florida. WITNESSETH WHEREAS, the Client and Engineer heretofore on February 28, 1983, entered into an agreement whereby the Engineer was retained to furnish certain professional services to the Client. WHEREAS, the Client now desires to expand the scope of the proposed services (see attached scope of work - EXHIBIT "A"); and WHEREAS, it has been determined that a lump sum fee of Sixty Three Thousand Six Hundred Forty and No/100 ($63,640.00) is reasonable and just compensation for the additional services described in Task Groups One (1) through Nine (9). WHEREAS, it has been determined that additional services described under Task Group 10 in Exhibit A may be required, and that these services will be reimbursable at current hourly rates plus expenses times 1 15 NOW THEREFORE, THIS INDENTURE WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the mutual benefits to flow from each to the other, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1 The Engineer agrees to produce the required interchange justification report and provide such other services as described in EXHIBIT "A" of this Supplemental Agreement. 2 The Client agrees to pay the Engineer a lump sum fee of $63,640.00 for these additional services described in Task Groups 1 through 9, inclusive. 4479.01/133 Page I of 2 3 The Client agrees to reimburse the engineer for services rendered under Task Group 10 (Additional Follow-up Services) on the basis of the Engineer's hourly rates in effect at the time the work is accomplished plus 1 15 times direct expenses. Except as hereby amended, changed or modified, all other terms and conditions at the original Agreement dated February 28, 1983, and supplements thereto shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have made and executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. OWNER: RITECO DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION ENGINEER: KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. By: By: Title: President/Vice President Title: Senior Vice President Date: Date: ATTEST: Secretary/Assistant Secretary Secretary Date: Date: (Affix Corporate Seal) (Affix Corporate Seal) 4479.01/133 Page 2 of 2 EXHIBIT "A" SCOPE OF SERVICES FOR INTERCHANGE JUSTIFICATION REPORT PROPOSED INTERCHANGE AT 1-95 AND NW 22ND AVENUE BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA Prepared by: KIMLEY -HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Prepared for RITE CO DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION COPR JANUARY 1985 INTRODUCTION This proposal has been prepared at the request of the RITECO Development Corporation to determine the feasibility of a new interchange on 1-95 at NW 22nd Avenue in Boynton Beach, Florida. Before a new interchange can be built on 1-95, the FHWA requires that an economic analysis be undertaken to determine whether or not the interchange can be justified from the standpoint of cost-effectiveness. In other words, a determination as to whether the public will receive benefits, over the life of the project, to offset the costs, must be made A cursory review of environmental, social and other economic issues surrounding the project must also be made to determine the overall "environmental attainability" of the project. Analysis of environmental attainability does not pre-empt nor presume any final environmental determinations. An in-depth environmental analysis will be conducted in the near future In this case, it is also appropriate to perform a preliminary analysis of alternatives. The purpose of this analysis should be to refine and define an interchange concept and configuration that best represents a solution to the engineering problems. This exercise should also be utilized to establish the geometric and operational feasibility of the proposed plans. Since this study precedes the environmental assessment process, no final decisions or quantified geometric analysis can be prepared. All analyses in this proposal are preliminary and all geometric studies will be graphic in nature 4479.01/133 -1- OVERVIEW This proposal is designed to answer a number of key issues that are critical to the FHWA, FOOT, and the County These include o Is it cost-effective to construct an interchange on 1-95 providing direct access to the NW 22nd Avenue? o On a prelimmary basis, what is the best configuration for such an interchange? o Is there a proposed interchange concept that will operate effectively under forecast peak period traffic conditions? Can it be constructed under heavy 1-95 traffic conditions. o Is there an interchange configuration that is geometrically feasible and acceptable from the standpoint of Federal-Aid Interstate design standards. o Will connecting facilities be able to adequately feed and discharge projected interchange volumes? o Is there a feasible interchange concept that is environmentally attainable? o Will the project's impacts on the local economy, neighborhoods, and social fabric jeopardize the feasibility of the project? o Is the proposed project consistent with other local plans, programs and priorities? o Does the project have local support and has it been coordinated, on a preliminary basis, with key officials that might have an interest in it? This proposal identifies the methodologies and framework for attacking and resolving these issues. It provides for the publication of the appropriate documenta tion to secure appropriate and necessary approvals of the FHW A, FOOT and local government. 4479.01/133 -2- TECHNICAL APPROACH The following pages contain a task-by-task description of the important elements essential to the success of the interchange justification project. This technical approach contains sufficient technical analysis effort to secure the necessary economic justification approvals required. This approach simultaneously suggests sufficient analysis to assure that a workable interchange configuration can be developed, within reasonable and tolerable social/economic/environmental constraints. The tasks in this approach have been organized into nine (9) major categories or "Task Groups," as follows: o Task Group 1 - Transportation Systems Analysis o Task Group 2 - Traffic Engineering Analysis o Task Group 3 - Engineering Analysis o Task Group 4 - Preliminary Social, Economic and Environmental Studies o Task Group 5 - Relationships to Other Plans and Programs o Task Group 6 - Economic Analysis o Task Group 7 - Alternatives Analysis o Task Group 8 - Meetings and Conferences o Task Group 9 - Documentation Each of these Task Groups is described in greater detail in the pages that follow 447901/133 -3- T ASK GROUP 1 TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS ANALYSIS This task wi11 involve the overall collection and verification of the transportation systems da ta required for an interchange justification report. The purpose of this effort is to collect and organize all of the relevant and necessary data that will be used in subsequent tasks. TASK 1.1 - COLLECT AND ANALYZE DATA This task is organized into seven (7) subtasks as follows: Subtask 1.1.1 - Obtain existing network Existing and available urban area transportation data relative to the existing transporta tion networks will be collected, evaluated and verified for reasonableness. Subtask 1.1.2 - Obtain forecast network(s) Available urban area transportation data for the future transportation system in the project area will be collected, classified and organized. Subtask 1.1.3 - Acquire trip tables Available trip making characteristics of the urban area will be collected for both existing and forecast conditions. Subtask 1.1.4 - Inventory number of lanes/capacity characteristics The accuracy of the da ta in the urban area transportation study statistics will be field-verified. 447901/133 -4- Subtask 1.1.5 - Collect socio-economic data and travel models The socio-economic forecasts and trip generation models will be acquired and reviewed. Subtask 1.1.6 - Inventory current land-use/development plans/proposals Current land-use plans and major development proposals will be inventoried to upda te the trip-making models, as needed. Subtask 1.1.7 - Summarize Data All preceding data will be summarized into usable formats. TASK 1.2 - DEVELOP BASE MICRONETWORKS This task will involve the identification of the portion of the existing and future roadway systems that will be relevant to the analysis. It will also involve the preparation of microscale graphics, network formatting and coding for subsequent computer analysis. Subtask 1.2.1 - Base Micronetworks Detailed micronetworks for both existing and future conditions will be identified, mapped and coded for subsequent computer analysis. One-way coding of the interchange system will be undertaken to insure the adequacy and level of detail necessary to perform weaving analyses, and movement-by- movement capacity analysis. This coding activity will include the pre para tion, compilation and recording of capacity characteristics, operating speeds, link length, number of lanes, turn prohibitions, and similar operating data, for each link and node in each of the micronetworks. One network will be coded with no interchange to serve as the base case for comparison purposes. 4479.01/133 -5- I - Subtask 1.2.2 - Check and Verify Base Micronetworks Both the future and forecasts micronetworks will be checked for mapping and coding errors prior to computer analysis. This double check will minimize expensive computer time spent finding and debugging network coding errors at a later time TASK 1.3 - DEVELOP MICRO-TRIP TABLE FOR STUDY AREA This task will involve the acquisition of base year and horizon year trip tables and socio-economic data These trip tables will be modified into the desired format. Zones external to the study area will be compressed into "macro-zones" since they are not relevant to the micro-analysis. At the same time traffic zones in the study area will be subdivided, as appropriate, to insure an adequate level of detail for the micronetwork analyses. This task will also involve the redistribution of trips within the new zonal framework for the existing and forecasts trip tables. Trip generation rates for high-growth zones will also be checked and adjusted, if needed. The analysis area will extend to include, approximately, all facilities within a five-mile radius of the project. Subtask 1.3.1 - Collect and Review Data Existmg and available trip tables for existing and forecast conditions will be collected In addition, socio-economic data, and trip productions and attractions will be analyzed to determine their reasonableness in view of current land use developments and development proposals in the study area. Meetings with local planning officials will be arranged to collect and review recent development proposals, and modifications to land use plans. Comprehensive plans and other relevant data will also be collected and discussed with local officials. 4479 01/133 -6- Subtask 1.3.2 - Modify Trip Tables Trip generation rates will be modified as needed and the trip table modified accordingly Growth factors will be applied to upda te the forecast trip table to the desired horizon year (2010). TASK 1.4 - TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT After all trip tables have been prepared, and transit/carpool splits established, auto, transit and carpool trips will be assigned to the micronetwork for existing and planning horizon years. Subtask 1.5.1 - Load Auto Trips Auto trips will be loaded to the micronetwork using automated traffic assignment models Subtask 1.5.2 - Load Carpool and Transit Trips Transit and carpool vehicular trips will also be loaded to the network. TASK 1.5 - SUMMARIZE TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT DATA Traffic assignment statistics will be summarized in tabular form suitable for incorpora tion into the final report. These statistics will also become the primary source of road user data for input into the road user benefit analysis. These statistics will include vehicle miles of travel (VMT), vehicle hours of travel (VHT) and person-hours of travel (PHT). TASK 1.6 - SUMMARY MEMO A summary memorandum covering all of the information generated within this Task Group will be prepared. 4479 01/133 -7- TASK GROUP 2 TRAFFIC ENGINEERING ANALYSIS The traffic engineering task group is designed to assure the operational integrity and feasibility of the plans under study Results of this effort will also play an important role in the project's final justification by pinpointing the operational benefits of the project. TASK 2.1 - UPDATE TRAFFIC DATA Existing and available traffic counts in the area will be updated and supplemented with new available data generated since earlier studies. Where necessary, and where needed traffic count information is absent, additional traffic counts will be taken, as required. TASK 2.2 - DEVELOP MICRO-ASSIGNMENT OF PEAK HOURLY VOLUMES The results of the preceding analysis will be assigned and displayed in a graphic single-line format to illustrate the critical peak volume loadings for individual directional links in the various interchange configurations. The directional peak hour exhibiting the highest volume will be displayed on each link. TASK 2.3 - ANALYZE CAPACITY OF INTERCHANGE CONCEPTS Once the controlling peak hour volumes are graphically displayed on each of the inte rchange configurations under study, an in-depth analysis of the capacity of each configuration can be undertaken. The purpose of this analysis is twofold: first, it is to determine those components of each interchange 4479.01/133 -8- configuration that may be deficient from a capacity and level-of-service (LOS) standpoint; second, it is to identify those remedies that can be implemented to reduce or eliminate the capacity problems so identified. Sub task 2.3.1 - Preliminary Screening To undertake this analysis effort, it is important to discard unneeded analyses. For example, certain sections and components of the various interchange concepts will be obviously sufficient from a capacity analysis viewpoint. These sections will not be subjected for unneeded in-depth quantita tive analysis. Subtask 2.3.2 - Execute Capacity Studies Capacity studies will be conducted for the following types of freeway segments: o Basic freeway mainline segments o Basic freeway ramp segments o Isola ted on-ramp o Isola ted off-ramp In addition to the studies listed above, critical lane analyses for critical signalized intersections will also be performed. These will include the following 1 1-95 Ramps and Hypoluxo Road 2 1-95 Ramps and Boynton Beach Boulevard 3 1-95 Ramps and N W 22nd Avenue (Proposed) 4 Congress Avenue and Hypoluxo Road 5 Congress Avenue and Boynton Beach Boulevard 6. Congress Avenue and N W 22nd Avenue 7 Congress Avenue and Major Access Intersections to Boynton Beach Park of Commerce 8 Seacrest Boulevard and N W 22nd Avenue Subtask 2.3.3 - Determine Levels of Service Based upon the preceding effort expended in Subtask 2.3 2, the level- of-service of each roadway segment and intersection will be classified in accordance with its corresponding level-of-service, using the following ca tegories: o o o Level of Service "C" or better Level of Service "0" Level of Service "E", or worse 447901/133 -9- Subtask 2.3.4 - Plot and Display Level of Service Results Based upon the results of Subtask 2 3 3, these results will be graphically displayed on single-line representations of the interchange configura tions. TASK 2.4 - ANALYZE CAPACITY OF SURROUNDING FACILITIES TO FEED AND DISCHARGE INTERCHANGE VOLUMES In recent years, the FHW A, and the traffic engineering community, in general, have become acutely concerned with upstream/downstream capacity problems. In many cases in the past, massive investments have been made into major freeway or highway expansion projects, only to find that these improvements were underutilized, due to the inability of connecting facilities to feed and discharge the volumes associated with the improvement. Subtask 2.4.1 - Upstream/Downstream Capacity Studies To avoid this problem, it is important to analyze the capacity of the facilities connected to the planned improvement. This analysis will involve a study area bounded by Hypoluxo Road on the north, Boynton Beach Boulevard on the south, Congress Avenue on the West, and Seacrest Boulevard on the east. In this case, the capacity of several connecting facilities will be analyzed against the capacity of the proposed interchange o 1-95 - and connecting facilities, south of the proposed interchange o 1-95 - and connecting facilities, north of the proposed interchange o NW 22nd Avenue, east and west of the proposed interchange These will include the following intersections: 1 1-95 Ramps and Hypoluxo Road 2 1-95 Ramps and Boynton Beach Boulevard 3. 1-95 Ramps and N W 22nd Avenue (Proposed) 4 Congress Avenue and Hypoluxo Road 5 Congress Avenue and Boynton Beach Boulevard 6. Congress Avenue and N W 22nd Avenue 7 Congress Avenue and Major Access Intersections to Boynton Beach Park of Commerce 8 Seacrest Boulevard and N W 22nd Avenue 4479 01/133 -10- TASK 2.5 - SAFETY ANALYSIS One of the key factors in any economic analysis is the costs associated with accidents. Normally, improved facilities can significantly enhance the safety characteristics of a transportation system This task will be composed of several key subtasks: Subtask 2.5.1 - Collect Accident Records Accident records for 1-95 and connecting facilities in the area will be collected and analyzed. Subtask 2.5.2 - Analyze Accident Data Accident statistics will be categorized as fa tal, property-damage only (PDO) or injurious. Subtask 2.5.3 - Develop Unit Costs Unit costs for the various types of accidents will be researched and developed. Subtask 2.5.4 - Develop Accident Forecasts Forecasts of accident rates under the various improvement scenarios will be prepared These alternatives will include the "Do-Nothing" alternative Subtask 2.5.5 - Develop Accident Cost Profiles ACCIdent cost profiles for the various alternatives will be prepared by accident ca tegory 4479.01/133 -11- L TASK 2.6 - CONCEPTUAL MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Maintaining interstate traffic during massive interchange construction and 1-95 reconstruction is a complex and oftentimes expensive undertaking. The design concepts must be sensitive to this factor, and will be evaluated for their ability to be constructed under heavy traffic conditions. The objective of this task will be to conceptually analyze mamtenance of traffic schemes that maintain the existing number of lanes of traffic wherever possible At the same time, design concepts will be revIewed and modified to accommodate sensible, cost-effective maintenance of traffic schemes. TASK 2.7 - PREPARE TRAFFIC ENGINEERING TECHNICAL MEMO A technical memo summarizing the results of the Traffic Engineering Task Group will be prepared 4479.01/133 -12- .J. TASK GROUP 3 ENGINEERING ANALYSIS This task is essential to the development of a reasonable and practical concept that will be subjected to the various analyses. The concepts must be workable, geometrically, and the purpose of this analysis is to assure that this is the case. To accomplish this, "desirable" federal-aid interstate design criteria should be followed to the maximum extent feasible. If these criteria cannot be met, strong reasons for nonconformity must be clearly established. In this case, detailed typical section studies are required in the vicinity of potential right-of-way problems in order to understand the order-of-magnitude of the project's impacts. Likewise, bridge span arrangement studies must be undertaken to grasp the technical feasibility of several concepts, and to get a handle on costs. This task group will also include the important task of cost estimating which is essential to the process of securing federal justification. TASK 3.1 - GEOMETRIC FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS A number of geometric tests must be performed to assure that the concepts under consideration are geometrically feasible. TASK.3.2 - ADJUST GEOMETRIC PLANS Based upon the analysis completed in Task 3 1, the alternative concepts will be modified and re-drafted to better accommodate desirable design criteria. These adjustments may include longer weaving areas, improved gore arrangements, improved span arrangements, enhanced geometric conditions, and improved merging conditions. A recommended plan (to scale) will be produced. 4479 01/133 -13- TASK 3.3 - PREP ARE COST ESTIMATE This task will involve several subtasks; as follows: Subtask 3.3.1 - Acquire Unit Cost Data Current FOOT unit cost information will be obtained. Subtask 3.3.2 - Develop Preliminary Construction Quantities Preliminary quantities for major cost items such as lane-miles of pavement, square-footage of bridge (by category), cubic yards of embankment, and linear feet of retaining wall will be developed. A gross parametric percentage unit estimate for incidental engineering and contingencies will be used. Subtask 3.3.3 - Estimate Right-of-Way Costs Local unit land costs for industrial/residential acreage and structures will be obtained for the area by contacting local realtors. A rough estimate of total acreage and square feet of structures will be made for each al terna te TASK 3.5 - PREPARE TECHNICAL MEMO A technical memo summarizing the findings of the engineering analysis will be prepared. 4479 01/133 -14- T ASK GROUP 4 PRELIMINARY SOCIAL, ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES This task group involves a preliminary examination of the environmental a ttainability of the various alternatives. This is not a final environmental assessment and will not result in any final environmental determinations. However, this analysis will answer the question "Is the project environmentally attainable?" This analysis will also identify significant social, economic and environmental issues and their order-of-magnitude The relative impact of the various alternatives will be analyzed in a preliminary way, and unfeasible concepts will be modified or discarded. TASK 4.1 - INSPECT PROJECT SITE FOR SENSITIVE AREAS An inspection of the project site will be performed to inventory classify, and assess the sensitivity of potential impacts. TASK 4.2 - ANALYZE SOCIAL IMPACTS The impact of the various alternatives on local neighborhoods, parks, recreation facilities, police/fire facilities, churches, minority groups, schools, historic sites, archaeological sites, hospitals, nursing homes, medical serVIces, and the like, will be assessed in a preliminary way 4479.01/133 -15- TASK 4.3 - ECONOMIC IMPACT STUDY The economic impact of the project on the local economy will be assessed in a general way The impact of the project on local businesses and employment, in the short, and long term will be identified. This analysis will include conclusions regarding project impacts on the following ca tegories: o Highway construction employment o General employment o Local businesses displaced o Overall economic condition of metro area o Indirect benefits TASK 4.4 - ANALYZE ENERGY IMPACTS The effect of the project on overall energy consumption will be analyzed and addressed, in a qualitatIve manner Motor fuel consumption will be addressed quantitatively. TASK 4.5 - ANALYZE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS A cursory assessment of environmental impacts will be made by visual inspection of the project area and by conferences with local environmental officials. Environmentally-sensitive receptors and habitats for endangered species will be identified, if any, and the impact of the project on local waters and wetlands will be addressed. In addition, the general effect of the project on air quality, noise and local hydrology will be addressed 4479.01/133 -16- TASK 4.6 - IDENTIFY MITIGATIVE COUNTERMEASURES If noise or other impacts are identified as being significant, the appropriate mitigative countermeasures will be suggested, and identified. The effectiveness of the countermeasure will be addressed. TASK 4.7 - TECHNICAL MEMO A technical memo summanzmg the findings of the preliminary social, economic and environmental assessment will be prepared. 4479.01/133 -17- T ASK GROUP 5 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PLANS AND PROGRAMS To receive federal approval for a new interchange on 1-95, it must be demonstrated that the proposed improvement is consistent with other local plans and programs. The purpose of this task group is to provide that documentation. TASK 5.1 - INVENTORY PLANS AND PROGRAMS Other local plans, programs and goals will be collected and examined. These plans will include local land use plans/comprehensive plans, transportation plans, transportation improvement programs, transit development programs, capital improvement programs and so forth. TASK 5.2 - EVALUATE COMPATIBILITY The compatibility of the proposed project with other plans and programs will be analyzed. TASK 5.3 - TECHNICAL MEMO A technical memo summarizing the findings of this task group will be prepared. 4479.01/133 -18- T ASK GROUP 6 ECONOMIC ANALYSIS The central part of this study is the economic analysis. This analysis must be conducted in accordance with the 1977 AASHTO Manual on User Benefit Analysis. Any deviations from the procedures in this manual must be documented and justified. If such modifications are found to be appropriate, more efficient, and justifiable, they will be documented. Otherwise, this analysis process will be executed in accordance with the AASHTO manual. This analysis will be conducted for two scenarios: o "Do-nothing" alterna tive o One interchange concept TASK 6.1 - DATA SELECTION AND DEVELOPMENT STUDIES A host of unit cost factors most be researched, developed and formatted for input into the economic analysis program This will involve several subtasks. Subtask 6.1.1 - Update Cost Factors Cost factors must be updated to current year costs using the Consumer Price Index or other indices of inflation. Some of the factors, that must be researched and updated, in accordance with AASHTO requirements, will include 4479.01/133 o o o o o o o o o Gasoline costs Idling cost factors Unit value of motorists' time Oil costs Tire costs New car depreciation factors Repair and maintenance costs Inte re st ra tes Section cost factors -19- ,- Subtask 6.1.2 - Identify and Classify Roadway Sections The AASHTO procedures provide for the stratification of user costs and benefits in accordance with the classification of each roadway segment. Roadway segments can be subclassified by a variety of characteristics, including design, speed, grades, curvature and so forth. This classification procedure will be undertaken in compliance with AASHTO guidelines. Subtask 6.1.3 - Develop User Cost Factors and Related Data Once unit cost factors are updated to the current year, and roadway sections have been classified, user cost factors will be developed and sorted for applica tion to each category of roadway This procedure will include the development of the following da ta for input into the analysis process o Roadway variables affecting running costs o Vehicle miles of travel o Passenger hours of travel o Vehicle class mix o Passenger car running cost consumption factors: - fuel - maintenance/repair - oil - depreciation - tire wear o Truck running costs o Truck class mix o Accident costs o Other data, as required Subtask 6.1.4 - Format Input Data The above data will be assembled and compiled into a usable format for computer analysis purposes. 4479.01/133 -20- TASK 6.2 - EXECUTE BENEFIT - COST ANALYSIS A comprehensive benefit cost analysis will be executed in accordance with AASHTO guidelines. It is anticipated that this analysis will be executed using a computer program available from the DOT that is based upon AASHTO procedures and that has the approval of the FOOT and FH W A The purpose of this task is to determine the relative economic merit of the project, as a whole This analysis will also produce some preliminary comparisons among the alternatives subjected to the analysis. The proposed procedure will be a present worth analysis. The current value of the user benefit stream will be computed and divided by the present worth of the capital and operating/maintenance costs of the proposed improvement packages. The user benefit stream will be computed by subtractmg the user costs of the proposed improvements, from the "do-nothing" alternative, over a twenty year planning period. If the net present value (NPV) resulting from this computation is grea te r than zero, then the projec t is justified. TASK 6.3 - SUMMARIZE FINDINGS The findings of this economic analysis task group will be summarized in a technical memo. This memo will include single line graphic representations of the alterna tives analyzed and a listing of all of the assumptions used in the analysis. 4479 01/133 -21- T ASK GROUP 7 ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS The task group will involve a preliminary evaluation of each alternative using all of the criteria and analytic data assembled in previous tasks. Both quantitative and qualitative data will be used to establish the general relationship of each alternative to each other in a comprehensive format. A matrix analysis procedure is proposed. TASK 7.1 - DEVELOP EVALUATION CRITERIA Broad project goals and objectives will be subdivided into specific criteria for evaluation purposes. These criteria will include subdivisions of such items as level of transportation service, safety, economic impacts, environmental impacts, social/neighborhood impacts, and costs. TASK 7.2 - ANALYZE AL TERNA TlVES AGAINST CRITERIA Each alternative will be arrayed in matrix format against the evaluation criteria. Subjective and objective data will be displayed in the matrix. These data will then be used to judge the relative value of one alternative versus another TASK 7.3 - SUMMARIZE FINDINGS A graphic display of the matrix analysis will be prepared. A technical memo summarizing the principal findings of the analysis will also be prepared. 4479.01/133 -22- T ASK GROUP 8 MEETINGS AND CONFERENCES This task group includes all of the meetings and conference required for the study effort. TASK 8.1 - CONDUCT MEETINGS WITH GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS Multiple meetings (up to 10) with a number of government agencies will be required at various stages of the analysis process. Some meetings will be held during the data collection phase and others will be held during key technical analysis activities. Very important meetings will also be held with the lead agencies (i.e , the FDOT and Palm Beach County) prior to publication of findings, for review purposes. Agencies tha t will be contacted will include o FOOT - District 4 o FOOT - Tallahassee o Palm Beach County Oepartment of Engineering o Palm Beach County Planning o MPO staff o FHW A o City of Boynton Beach o Florida Department of Environmental Regulation 4479.01/133 -23- TASK 8.2 - CONDUCT MEETINGS WITH LOCAL ENVIRONMENTALISTS Meetings with local people intimately familiar with environmental issues will also be arranged. These people will include local archaeologists, historic site personnel, wildlife experts, marine biologists and general environmentalists. Leaders of local organized environmental groups such as the Audobon Society will be sought and contacted. TASK 8.3 - CONDUCT MEETINGS WITH LOCAL BUSINESS LEADERS Several meetings will be held with local chambers of commerce and/or local business leaders. Individual neighborhood leaders and businessmen directly affected by the project will also be contacted, as appropriate TASK 8.4 - PREPARE MINUTES OF MEETINGS Summary minutes of all meetings will be prepared, filed and maintained. 447901/133 -24- T ASK GROUP 9 DOCUMENT A nON This task group will include the compilation and pre para tion of all study documenta tion. TASK 9.1 - PREPARE DRAFT REPORT A draft of the final report will be prepared for circulation to the County, FOOT and FHW A for review and comment. TASK 9.2 - REVIEW DRAFT REPORT A meeting will be held to coordinate and discuss review comments. Conflicting comments will be resolved. TASK 9.3 - PREPARE FINAL REPORT The draft report will be rewritten as needed based upon the results of Task 9.2 Appendices will be included as needed. The final report will be submItted to the appropria te agencies. 447901/133 -25- TASK GROUP 10 ADDITIONAL FOLLOW-UP SERVICES Additional services may be required to secure a final decision regarding approval or disapproval of the interchange These services will be provided on a reimbursable, as-needed basis. 4479.01/133 -26- PROJECT SCHEDULE We propose to execute this assignment within eighteen (18) weeks of your notice to proceed. 4479 01/133 -27-