REPORTS & PRESENTATIONS AGENDA ITEM #III-3 CORTEZ BRIDGE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENT (PD&E) STUDY

Transcription

1 NOTES REPORTS & PRESENTATIONS AGENDA ITEM #III-3 CORTEZ BRIDGE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENT (PD&E) STUDY Presenter: Summary: Tony Sherrad, FDOT Project Manager The Cortez Bridge in Manatee County, which connects the City of Bradenton Beach with the mainland, was constructed in the 1950s and will require extensive rehabilitation or replacement. The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) is currently conducting a Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study of various alternatives. This item will be a presentation on the PD&E Study effort to date. Attachments: Recommended Action: 1) Alternatives Analysis Matrix 2) Bridge Height Comparison 3) Questionnaire 4) FDOT s Cortez Bridge Informational Pamphlet Possible Comments to the FDOT TAC Meeting Agenda Item Prepared By: David Hutchinson AGENDA ITEM #III-3

2 Cortez Bridge Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study Sarasota/Manatee Metropolitan Planning Organization Technical Advisory Committee October 13, 2014

3 Location Map

4 Purpose of Study Address deteriorating structural condition Superstructure - deck deficiencies, concrete beam deficiencies/cracks, movable span steel rusting, beam supports (steel bearings) rusting Substructure - bridge support (piling) deterioration/cracks, seawall & fender deficiencies Address substandard design features Lack of shoulders: inoperable vehicle impedes traffic flow Traffic railing: not crash-tested Curbs: safety hazard Will not add traffic capacity Constrained to 2 lanes Address existing bridge, not new corridor

5 Bridge Condition

6 Bridge Condition Piles and Bents not designed for vessel impact Superstructure/Deck not designed to withstand storm surge and could become dislodged from the substructure

7 Alternatives No build (repair) Continued repairs and routine maintenance to keep bridge safe and operable for up to an additional ten years (2035) following current ten-year repair project Replace beams and deck on six spans in worst condition; existing piles and pile caps remain Keeps same functionally obsolete, substandard roadway width Requires closure of the bridge for nine weeks and detour via Anna Maria Bridge or Ringling Bridge Bridge will need to be replaced by 2035

8 Alternatives Rehabilitation Major repairs to extend life of bridge for an additional 25 years (2050) following current ten-year repair project Replacement of all concrete beams and deck to address condition and improve reliability; existing piles and pile caps remain Keeps same functionally obsolete, substandard roadway width Temporary bridge will maintain traffic ($14.6M) Bridge will need to be replaced by 2050

9 Alternatives Bridge Replacement Long-term solution with 75-year life (2100) following the current ten-year repair project Only two-lane bridge studied; within study limits, Cortez Road classified as constrained by Sarasota/Manatee MPO; no plans to add lanes Modern typical cross section Two 12-foot lanes Two 10-foot shoulders for bicyclists and disabled vehicles Eight-foot sidewalks on both sides

10 Proposed Typical Section

11 Replacement bridge alignments North (9 feet from existing bridge) South (15 feet from existing bridge) Center (eliminated due to long detour or $14.6 million temporary bridge) Alignment

12 Replacement designs Bridge Heights Low-level drawbridge (21-foot vertical clearance) Mid-level drawbridge (45-foot vertical clearance) Allows about 50% of boats that currently require the bridge to open to pass without opening the bridge High-level fixed bridge (65-foot vertical clearance) Allows 98 percent of boats that currently use channel to pass under the bridge

13 Bridge Deck Elevations

14 Alternatives Matrix

15 Alternatives Public Meeting August 28, people attended 57 comment sheets returned Repair 11% Rehabilitation 23% Replacement 72% Low-level drawbridge 16% Mid-level drawbridge 33% High-level fixed bridge 21% Other 19% (New bridge to Longboat Key)

16 Review public comments Refine viable build alternatives What s Next? Conduct thorough analysis of environmental effects Document findings in several reports Coordinate with local government entities (preferences)

17 What s Next? Public hearing spring 2015 Present recommended and no build (repair) alternatives Submit recommended alternative to FHWA for approval Study completion summer 2015 Design funded FY 2016 ROW (if needed) and construction - unfunded

18 Cortez Bridge Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study Questions?

19 Cortez Bridge Preferences Comments Repair Rehab Replace Low Mid High Other Survey #1 (Cortez Fishing Festival) 168 N/A 55% 36% 33% 24% 34% 2% February 16/17, 2013 Survey #2 (Public Kickoff Meeting) 851 N/A 51% 43% 33% 19% 38% 4% April 30 - Sept. 26, 2013 Alternatives Public Meeting 57 11% 23% 72% 16% 33% 21% 19% August 28 - Sept. 8, 2014 TOTAL 1,076 N/A 50% 43% 32% 21% 36% 5%

20 Alternatives Analysis Matrix Attachment #1 North Alignment South Alignment No-Build (Repair) (1) Rehabilitation (2) Low-Level Drawbridge Mid-Level Drawbridge High-Level Fixed Low-Level Drawbridge Mid-Level Drawbridge High-Level Fixed Navigational Clearance at Fender When Bridge is in Closed Position: 17.5 ft 17.5 ft 21 ft 45 ft 65 ft 21 ft 45 ft 65 ft Life of Alternative (years) Right-of-Way Impacts Parcels Impacted Relocations Additional Submerged Lands (ac) Natural, Environmental and Physical Resource Involvement Species/Habitat (Potential Impacts) None None Low Low Low Low Low Low Potential Contamination Sites (high/medium risk) 0/0 0/0 0/1 0/1 0/1 0/2 0/2 0/2 Wetlands (ac) Seagrasses (ac) Archaeological and Historic Sites Potential Noise Sensitive Sites Potential Section 4(f) Sites Projected 2036 Average Travel Delay (EB/WB) (sec/veh) 58.2/ / / /24.0 0/0 58.2/ /24.0 0/0 Bridge Closure Required (days) Estimated Utility Impacts Bright House Networks Manatee None None Impacted Impacted Impacted None None None Florida Power & Light None None Impacted Impacted Impacted Minor Minor Minor Verizon Florida Inc. None Minor Impacted Impacted Impacted Impacted Impacted Impacted Manatee Co. Transportation Dept. None None Impacted Impacted Impacted Impacted Impacted Impacted Manatee Co. Utility Operations None Minor Impacted Impacted Impacted None None None TECO-Peoples Gas-Sarasota None None None None None None None None Estimated Capital Costs (2014 Dollars) Design (10% of Construction) $811,279 $3,012,596 $7,778,916 $8,022,264 $4,859,712 $7,781,424 $8,024,773 $4,857,233 Roadway Right-of-Way $0 $0 $16,000 $16,000 $2,748,000 $16,000 $16,000 $2,675,000 Wetland & Seagrass Mitigation (3) $0 $0 $107,572 $107,572 $107,572 $178,261 $178,261 $177,001 Roadway Construction $0 $330,830 $1,695,886 $1,695,886 $2,653,975 $1,720,973 $1,720,973 $2,629,187 Bridge Construction $8,112,792 $29,795,130 $76,093,270 $78,526,755 $45,943,146 $76,093,270 $78,526,755 $45,943,146 CEI (10% of Construction) $811,279 $3,012,506 $7,778,916 $8,022,264 $4,859,712 $7,781,424 $8,024,773 $4,857,233 Total Cost $9,735,350 $36,151,152 $93,470,559 $96,390,741 $61,172,117 $93,571,352 $96,491,534 $61,138,800 Life of Alternative (years) (1): Repairs include replacement of all concrete beams, deck and traffic railing on six spans; installing cathodic protection pile jackets, repairing the concrete (sealing cracks, patching spalls, etc.) in the piles, pile caps, deck, beams, and traffic railing; repairing the fender system; repairing the bascule span operational machinery; upgrading the bascule span electrical systems; paint; and repairing the bascule span aluminum and steel in order to extend the service life 10 years. Costs do not include annual maintenance and operating costs. (2): Rehabilitation includes replacement of all concrete beams, deck, and traffic railing; movable span aluminum and steel repairs; replacement of mechanical and electrical systems; new fenders; and a temporary bridge. Does not include annual operating and maintenance costs over 25 years of $6.2M or $247,000 per year for concrete repairs to piles and bulkheads; sealing cracks; neoprene pad replacement; paint; 60 pile jackets, and 10 crutch bents when needed. (3): Wetland and seagrass mitigation includes additional mitigation for Essential Fish Habitat, and assumes seagrass mitigation construction concurrent for this project and Anna Maria Island Bridge.

21 Attachment #2 Bridge Height Comparison

22 Attachment #3 E3./0F-:-<;,-6:4<-=-2;7G84;;.6-/31=6,/5-=-2;G/0:A./0:1H-;/F--901:;C I/G:-5-:A,4G9,1AB- D-641, D-8491:1;4;1/2 J1A:-5-:A,4G9,1AB- D-6:4<-=-2; K1B8:-5-:31L-A9,1AB- QUESTIONNAIRE M--2</0,4B-./0,</==-2;F,-B4,A12B;81F6,/N-<;O ' () * $!"#$% & '

23 WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? Following the alternatives public meeting, FDOT will review comments received and, together with engineering neering and environmental analyses, refine the viable build alternatives. We will complete a thorough analysis of potential environmental effects and document findings in several reports. We will also continue coordination n with local government entities. FDOT will present the recommended alternative and the no-build/repair alternative at a formal public hearing where we will solicit people s comments. The hearing is tentatively scheduled for spring Following the hearing, we will submit the recommended alternative for approval to the Federal Highway Administration, the lead federal agency for the study. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Public involvement is a very important part of this PD&E study. FDOT uses several ways to provide information to and receive information from public officials, agencies and interested people. They include newsletters and presentations to neighborhoods, small groups and organizations. Following development of options, we hold an alternatives public meeting. A formal public hearing is conducted to present the recommended alternative and the no-build/repair alternative. A project website is available for you to share comments with FDOT and the study team. Please review the study schedule below for future public involvement events. WORK PROGRAM SCHEDULE Following completion of the PD&E study, whether the no-build/repair, the rehabilitation, or the replacement option is selected, the design phase (preparation of construction plans) is funded in fiscal year 2016 of FDOT s Five-Year Work Program. Right-of-way acquisition (if needed) and construction phases are not currently funded in the program, which runs through mid STUDY SCHEDULE Notice to Proceed Public Involvement Data Collection Design Concepts Engineering and Environmental Analysis Select Recommended Alternative Draft/Final Project Documents Draft/Final Project Document/FHWA Review Location and Design Concept Acceptance (LDCA) JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG LEGEND: = NEWSLETTER = PUBLIC MEETING = PUBLIC HEARING STAY INFORMED We urge you to participate in this study and invite your comments and questions. If you would like to add a name and/or address to the PD&E study mailing list, please contact: Tony Sherrard Project Manager Florida Department of Transportation 801 North Broadway Avenue P.O. Box 1249 Bartow, FL antone.sherrard@dot.state.fl.us CORTEZ BRIDGE N STUDY LIMITS Gulf of Mexico 789 9th St. N. 7th St. N. Gulf Dr. N. 6th St. N. Cortez Rd. 2nd ds St. N. 1st St. N. Bridge St. Anna Maria Sound 684 Cortez Bridge Bradenton Beach City Pier Gulf Intracoastal I Waterway 27th St. t. W. Sarasota Bay WELCOME The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), District One, welcomes you to the alternatives public meeting that is part of the Project Development and Environment (PD&E) Study of State Road (SR) 684 (Cortez Road) from SR 789 (Gulf Drive) to 123rd Street West in Manatee County. The one-mile long study includes Cortez Bridge over the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway. This meeting is an open house format where you can view the video presentation that explains the various alternatives, review the project displays, and ask questions and provide comments to FDOT representatives in a one-on-one setting. You can complete a comment sheet today or take it home, complete and mail it to the FDOT by September 8, You also can go to the study website to submit comments. Your comments will assist the Department in determining viable alternatives to consider during the remainder of the PD&E study. BRIDGE ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS ONGOING In January 2013, FDOT began the PD&E study of Cortez Bridge on Cortez Road, a designated hurricane evacuation route. The engineering and environment study determines whether the bridge is repaired, rehabilitated or replaced. If replacement is selected, the type of structure is identified. We are looking at low-level drawbridge, mid-level drawbridge and high-level fixed bridge designs. Only two-lane alternatives are studied because Cortez Road, within the study limits, is a constrained roadway according to the Sarasota/Manatee Metropolitan Planning Organization. This means there are no long-term plans to widen Cortez Road within the study limits th St. W Financial Project Number: th St. W. 124th St. Ct. W. 124th St. W. 123rd St. Ct. W. 123rd St t. W. 123rd St. W. Cortez Village Meeting Handout - August 28, st St. Ct. W. STUDY LIMITS The purpose of the project is to address the deteriorating structural condition and substandard features of the bridge, not to add traffic capacity. Therefore, no additional lanes are proposed, and no improvements outside the existing corridor were considered. Attachment # th Ave. W th St. W. 119th St. W. Cortez Rd.

24 NO-BUILD/REPAIR ALTERNATIVE The FDOT is currently doing a short term repair project, which began in May 2014, to keep Cortez Bridge safe and operable for up to ten years, or until While no one can precisely predict how long repairs will last, the no-build/repair alternative includes continued repairs and routine maintenance of Cortez Bridge to keep it safe and operable for up to an additional ten years following the current ten-year repair project, or until After the 10-year repair, the bridge would need to be replaced. The nobuild/repair alternative would not prevent the need to potentially restrict heavy vehicles meaning that heavy trucks such as commercial delivery or moving trucks could be restricted. Repairs include replacement of the beams and deck on the six spans in the worst condition to address beam deficiencies. The existing piles and pile caps will remain. The no-build/repair project would require closure of the bridge for nine weeks and a detour via Anna Maria Bridge or Ringling Bridge to maintain traffic during construction. The no-build/repair alternative will keep the same functionally obsolete, substandard roadway width. The roadway width is not sufficient to provide any shoulders and the brush curbs do not meet current safety standards. Despite repairs, the existing bridge would continue to deteriorate. Furthermore, the bridge would remain susceptible to damage from ship impact and storm surge due to its substandard foundations and low profile, respectively. The no-build/repair alternative will remain viable throughout the analysis and evaluation process. REHABILITATION ALTERNATIVE The rehabilitation alternative includes performing major repairs to the fixed and moveable portions of the bridge. While no one can precisely predict how long these repairs will last, the rehabilitation alternative is intended to extend the service life of the bridge for up to an additional 25 years following the current ten-year repair project, or until After the 25-year rehabilitation life, the bridge will need to be replaced. The rehabilitation alternative was evaluated after FDOT conducted an extensive inspection and testing program. Rehabilitation includes the complete replacement of all the beams and deck to address their condition and improve their reliability. The existing piles and pile caps will remain. However, the rehabilitation alternative would keep the same functionally obsolete, substandard roadway width. The original piles and foundation would remain and would continue to be affected by the extremely corrosive saltwater environment. Additional repairs would be required periodically on the piles and other structural components to maintain structural adequacy. While the rehabilitation alternative would extend the service life of the bridge by up to 25 years, the foundation, piles, and pile caps will have exceeded their design life by over 60% in those 25 years. The bridge piles would continue to deteriorate, and the bridge would continue to be susceptible to damage from ship impact and storm surge, damage that, if severe, could close the bridge for several weeks. The rehabilitation alternative will keep the same functionally obsolete, sub-standard roadway width and brush curbs since widening to accommodate additional shoulder areas is not viable due to the existing structural capacity and the capacity of the electrical and mechanical systems of the movable span. A temporary bridge is required to maintain traffic during construction, but the potential to restrict heavy vehicles would be avoided. The temporary bridge will also result in additional temporary construction and environmental impacts. BUILD ALTERNATIVES The replacement alternatives provide a long-term solution designed to last up to 75 years following the current ten-year repair project, or until FDOT is studying low-level and mid-level drawbridges and high-level fixed replacement alternatives. Evaluation of all build alternatives included a center alignment, a north alignment, and a south alignment. The project length is not significantly different for the alignments; therefore, construction costs will not be significantly different between the north and south alignments. The north alignment is about 9 feet north of the existing bridge, and the south alignment is about 15 feet south of the existing bridge. Since the center alignment requires a long detour or $14.9 million temporary bridge, FDOT dropped it from further consideration. The existing vertical clearance of the Cortez Bridge is 17½ feet at the Intracoastal Waterway. The U.S. Coast Guard establishes minimum navigational guide clearances at this location. They are a 21-foot vertical clearance for a new drawbridge and a 65-foot vertical clearance for a new fixed bridge. The horizontal guide clearance for all bridge replacements is 90 feet perpendicular between fenders. However, FDOT is considering a 100-foot wide channel, which is a 10-foot increase over the existing condition, to match the clearance at Ringling Bridge and the proposed Anna Maria Bridge. FDOT developed the following conceptual bridge designs: Low-level drawbridge, similar to the existing bridge, with 21-foot vertical clearance when the bridge is closed. Mid-level drawbridge with 45-foot vertical clearance when the bridge is closed. This clearance allows 50% of boats that currently require the bridge to open to pass underneath without requiring the bridge to open, reducing delays for vehicles and vessels. High-level fixed structure with 65-foot vertical clearance allows 98 percent of all vessels that currently use the channel to pass under the bridge, resulting in no delays. All bridge replacement alternatives use the existing bridge to maintain traffic during construction and include the removal of the existing bridge once traffic shifts to a new bridge. There are currently no plans to leave any portion of the existing bridge intact for recreational or any other use. VIABLE REPLACEMENT ALTERNATIVES In order to quantify the costs and potential effects associated with the alternatives, FDOT is analyzing the no-build/repair alternative, rehabilitation, and build alternatives that include two alignments and three bridge replacement heights. An alternatives matrix is displayed with results of the analysis, and aerial photographs with the alternatives are displayed for your review. Representations of the bridge heights are also displayed. HOW THE BRIDGE WILL LOOK If the bridge replacement option is selected, the new bridge includes two 12-foot lanes and two 10-foot shoulders, which can accommodate bicyclists and disabled vehicles. Eight-foot sidewalks are included on both sides of the bridge. The design speed is 40 miles per hour. 9 ½ 8 SIDEWALK 1-6 BARRIER WALL 10 SHOULDER 12 C L ½ 32-3 ½ 10 SHOULDER 8 SIDEWALK 1-6 BARRIER WALL 9 ½ 9 ½ Drawbridge C L 1-6 BARRIER WALL 1-6 BARRIER WALL SIDEWALK SHOULDER 32-3 ½ 32-3 ½ SHOULDER SIDEWALK 64-7 TUNNEL ALTERNATIVE FDOT considered a tunnel alternative. The estimated construction cost for a tunnel is approximately $161 million, not including additional costs for right-of-way, or annual operations and maintenance. Based on this estimate, the tunnel alternative cost far exceeds the cost of any of the bridge replacement or rehabilitation alternatives. The study team also considered environmental effects resulting from the tunnel alternative. Possible effects to the natural environment caused by dredging and the high cost of a tunnel, among other factors, resulted in elimination of the alternative from further consideration. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS The study evaluates potential environmental effects associated with the proposed build alternatives. Detailed analyses of wetlands, floodplains, threatened and endangered species, water quality, hazardous materials, recreational sites, noise, air quality, historic structures, and archaeological sites are an important part of this study. Based on our studies to date, we do not expect significant effects associated with the proposed build alternatives. 9 ½

25 PQRS [Z\]^_Z` TUVWXYZ cwxde TaXbZ fz_z PQRS