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-