INTRODUCTION 82... · 2016. 9. 6. · Appendix B: Concept Plans ... Table 2.1 Pond Site Evaluation...

SR 82 ADDENDUM TO THE PROJECT DEVELOPMENT SUMMARY REPORT

Financial Project No. 430849-1 July 2016

1

State Road 82 PD&E Study

DRAFT Project Development Summary Report

Addendum

Design Segment 7 from Gator Slough Lane to SR 29

FPID: 430849-1

July 2016



2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................... 2

Appendix B: Concept Plans – Design Change Reevaluation LIST OF TABLES .......................... 2

LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................................... 3

1. INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................... 4

1.1 Purpose .................................................................................................................................................. 4

1.2 Project Description ............................................................................................................................... 5

1.3 Updated Recommendations & Commitments ................................................................................... 7 1.3.1 Recommendations ........................................................................................................................................... 7 1.3.2 Commitments .................................................................................................................................................. 7

2. LOCATION/DESIGN CONCEPT .............................................................................................. 10

2.1 Right of way ........................................................................................................................................ 10

2.2 Original PD&E Study Recommendation ......................................................................................... 11

2.3 Design Change Reevaluation Recommendation .............................................................................. 12

2.4 Drainage .............................................................................................................................................. 16 2.4.1 Pond Siting .................................................................................................................................................... 16

4. PUBLIC WORKSHOP ..................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Appendix A: Concept Plans – Original PD&E, Segment 3

Appendix B: Concept Plans – Design Change Reevaluation Concept



3

LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1 Pond Site Evaluation .................................................................................................. 17

Table 2.2 Pond Site Cost Estimates ............................................................................................ 18

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1-1: Design Segment 7 Project Location Map ..................................................................... 6

Figure 1-2: Original Study Segments ............................................................................................... 6

Figure 2-1 Original PD&E Study Limits .................................................................................... 11

Figure 2-2 Original PD&E Typical Section ................................................................................ 12

Figure 2-3 Design Change Reevaluation Typical Section.......................................................... 12

Figure 2-4 Original Signalized Intersection ............................................................................... 13

Figure 2-5 Roundabout Concept at SR 82/SR 29 ....................................................................... 14

Figure 2-6: Impact Matrix .............................................................................................................. 15

Figure 2-7: Regional Pond Site ...................................................................................................... 16

Figure 2-8 Regional Pond Site .................................................................................................... 19



4

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose

The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) District One is preparing a Design

Change and Right of Way (ROW) Authorization Reevaluation for 3.219 miles of State

Road (SR) 82 currently under design from 0.5 mile west of Gator Slough Lane extending

eastward to SR 29 (FPID# 430849-1-52-01), generally east of Lehigh Acres in Lee County

and north of Immokalee in Collier County. This segment was included in the Project

Development and Environment (PD&E) study for the widening of approximately 23 miles

of SR 82 from Lee Boulevard (County Road 884) to SR 29 in Lee, Hendry and Collier

counties (FPID#’s 419950-1-22-01/419950-2-22-01). The PD&E study Location and

Design Concept Acceptance (LDCA) was provided through a Type 2 Categorical

Exclusion (CE) approved by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) on October 23,

2009.

Within the project limits, SR 82 is classified as a rural minor arterial roadway. SR 82 is

also a hurricane evacuation route and a regional Emerging Strategic Intermodal System

(SIS) roadway connecting I‐75 in Lee County with SR 29 in Collier County.

The PD&E-approved typical section for the project is a 6-lane divided suburban roadway

within the existing 200 feet of ROW. It includes three, 12-foot (ft) travel lanes, a 6.5-ft

paved inside shoulder and 10-ft outside shoulder (5-ft paved) in each direction. The total

median width is 30 feet (including both 6.5-ft paved inside shoulders). Five foot sidewalks

are included along both sides of the roadway for this segment. Stormwater runoff was

proposed to be collected in roadside swales and directed to offsite stormwater ponds and

included three ponds identified during the PD&E study as required for the current limits.

The current design has gone through various changes to the typical roadway section, the

original roadway design, ROW, and adjacent property access compared to the approved

PD&E preferred alternative concepts. The current design for this segment consists of:

Widening SR 82 from an undivided 2-lane roadway to an interim 4-lane rural

divided roadway

Maintaining room for the future 6‐lane typical section (consistent with the approved

preferred alternative from the PD&E study) and

Adding a proposed roundabout (with associated turn lanes) at the intersection of

SR 29.

The proposed roundabout will widen 0.52 mile of SR 29 north and south of the SR 82



5

intersection from an undivided 2-lane roadway to a divided 4-lane facility. The length of

the improvements along SR 29 equal 0.9 mile, including the areas transitioning back from

four lanes to the existing two lanes. Additional changes to the typical section include

replacing the 5-ft sidewalk along the south side of SR 82 with a 10-ft multi-use trail. The

stormwater treatment system for the proposed improvements has been consolidated to

on-site dry linear retention area (open drainage) within the SR 82 and SR 29 ROW as well

as a Regional Stormwater Management Facility. This regional facility is a proposed off-site

regional wet detention area on the south side of SR 82, just east of Lamm Road and will

handle the project’s stormwater treatment and attenuation needs.

The approved PD&E concept required the acquisition of approximately 23.03 acres of new

ROW. However, the current design only requires the acquisition of 19.09 acres of ROW.

The reduction in ROW needs is from design changes to incorporate the Regional

Stormwater Management Facility and the proposed roundabout free flow right turn lanes

south bound to west bound and east bound to south bound movements. The divided

median along SR 29 south of the SR 82 intersection will result in minor driveway/property

access impacts.

Project ROW acquisition for this segment is funded in FDOT fiscal year 2016/2017.

Construction is not funded at this time.

1.2 Project Description

SR 82 is a component of the Florida Intrastate Highway System (FIHS) and the Strategic

Intermodal System (SIS) in Lee, Hendry and Collier Counties. SR 82 is a major east-west

arterial that provides a connection between I-75, Fort Myers, Florida Gulf Coast

University, the Southwest Florida International Airport and the Seminole Tribe’s

Immokalee and Big Cypress Reservations. Agriculture is transported along SR 82 from

Immokalee to the Farmers Market in Fort Myers and to distribution facilities in the Tampa

area via I-75.

The existing typical section for SR 82 between Gator Slough Lane and SR 29 is a two-

lane rural roadway. It includes two twelve-foot lanes with four-foot paved shoulders along

both sides of the road. Stormwater runoff is collected in roadside swales. The posted

speed limit along SR 82 through the project limits is 60 mph, but is reduced to 55 mph and

then 45 mph approaching the SR 29 intersection. The existing right-of-way width along

the SR 82 corridor is 200 feet.



6

Figure 1-1: Design Segment 7 Project Location Map

Figure 1-2: Original Study Segments



7

1.3 Updated Recommendations & Commitments

These Recommendations and Commitments are carried forward from the originally approved environmental document that was signed by FHWA on October 23, 2009.

1.3.1 Recommendations

It is recommended that the preferred alternative be implemented as identified

in this report.

1.3.2 Commitments

FDOT will adhere to the following commitments with regard to the proposed

improvements to SR 82:

1. To assure the protection of the Eastern indigo snake during construction, the FDOT will

incorporate the “Standard FDOT Construction Precautions for the Eastern Indigo

Snake” guidelines into the final project design and will require that the construction

contractor abide strictly to the guidelines during construction. The guidelines include

the following:

a. The FDOT shall provide Eastern indigo snake educational information, as

contained in the approved District One educational plan, to construction



8

employees prior to the initiation of any clearing, construction or gopher tortoise

relocation activities. The FDOT District One educational exhibit shall be posted

at sites immediately accessible to all employees.

b. All construction activities shall cease in the immediate vicinity of any live Eastern

indigo snake found within the project area. Work may resume after the snake,

or snakes, are allowed to leave the area on their own.

c. Location of live sightings shall be reported to USFWS Vero Beach Office at

(561) 562-3909.

d. If a dead Eastern indigo snake is found on the project site, the snake shall be

frozen as soon as possible and the FDOT shall notify the Vero Beach Field

Office immediately for further instructions.

2. Given the proximity of bald eagle nest SA013 to the project impact area and the

uncertainty of its status when construction may be scheduled to commence, the

FDOT will commit to resurveying this nest prior to construction. If the nest is

deemed active, The FDOT will act in accordance with the BGEPA and MBTA.

3. Due to the presence of gopher tortoise burrows within or adjacent to the existing

right-of-way, a gopher tortoise survey within construction limits will be performed

prior to construction. If tortoise burrows are identified within the proposed project

limits, the FDOT will contact the FWC in order to mitigate for any impacts to this

species. The FDOT will secure any appropriate permits needed for this species as

necessary.

4. Because of the potential for effects to the Florida panther, the FDOT is committed

to re-initiating Section 7 consultation prior to the permitting of the project. FDOT

also commits to further evaluate the need for and the location of a potential wildlife

crossing at that time.

5. Based on the proximity of five wood stork rookeries to the project site, the FDOT

commits to ensure that there will be no net loss of wetlands. The FDOT further

commits, where reasonable, to ensure that any wood stork habitat alteration is

mitigated within the foraging range of known habitat rookeries in the project area.

6. FDOT is committed to further consideration of a noise barrier adjacent to Noise

Sensitive Area (NSA) 1 - Sherwood at the Crossroads (STA 1377+00 to STA

1390+00), NSA 3 – Village of Stoneybrook (STA 1405+00 to STA 1418+00) and at

NSA 15 – three unnamed duplexes (STA 1885+00 to STA 1887+00) as identified in

the Noise Study Report prepared for this project.



9

7. A land use review will also be implemented during the design phase to identify

noise sensitive sites that may have received a building permit subsequent to this

noise study but prior to the date of public knowledge (i.e., date that the

environmental document has been approved by the Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA)). If the review identifies noise sensitive sites that have

been permitted prior to the date of public knowledge, then those noise sensitive

sites will be evaluated for traffic noise and abatement considerations.

8. Additional contamination investigations will be conducted prior to right-of-way

acquisition and construction to assess the potential for contamination impacts. For

all contamination sites identified in the Contamination Screening Evaluation Report

(CSER) that have a Low Contamination Risk Potential Rating (CRPR), the CSER

will be updated prior to right-of-way acquisition and construction. The update

would include a re-review of the Public Record to determine if any significant

changes in status have occurred at the Low risk sites since the report was

prepared. The sites identified as Medium or High risk for potential contamination

will be investigated further prior to construction. Investigative work may include

visual inspections, monitoring of ongoing cleanup activities, employment of Ground

Penetrating Radar and possible subsurface investigations. At known

contamination sites, estimated areas of contamination will be marked on design

drawings and, prior to construction, any necessary cleanup plans will be

developed. Actual cleanup will take place during construction, if feasible. Special

provisions for handling unexpected contamination discovered during construction

will be included in the construction plans package.



10

2. LOCATION/DESIGN CONCEPT

The Design and Right-of-Way changes that are the subject of this reevaluation

recommends constructing a 4-lane typical section with a 54-foot median that will

accommodate the future 6-laning in the median, constructing a roundabout at the

intersection of SR 82 and SR 29 instead of the traditional signalized intersection, and

constructing sidewalks on both sides of the roadway with the south side being a 10-foot

multi-use path. The decision to build an interim improvement of 4 lanes was derived from

a value engineering study completed February 9, 2011. This study stated that a

significant deferred cost could be incurred by staging the improvement and only

constructing 4 lanes at this time. The Right-of Way changes calls for treating all offsite

drainage coming to the project in roadside swales that can be accommodate within the

existing 200-foot right-of-way. It also discusses the creation of one regional off-site

retention pond in the southeast corner of Lamm Road and SR 82.

2.1 Right of way

Significant changes in right-of-way requirements have taken place during the design

phase. During the PD&E it was established that certain right-of-way was required to

accommodate off-site drainage coming to the project. A total of 10.337 acres (Roadway)

and 12.690 acres (3 recommended pond sites) for a total of 23.030 acres for the section

of Gator Slough Lane to SR 29. With the current design, those requirements of right-of-

way needed for off-site water were designed to be handled with-in the existing right-of-

way thus reducing the need for most of the linear parcels and the 3 ponds were design to

be handled in one regional pond site just southeast of Lamm Road.

Two alternatives during the reevaluation were considered at the intersection of SR 82 and

SR 29. A signalized intersection and a roundabout. The signalized intersection would not

require any roadway right-of way and would only require right-of-way for the regional pond

and two small easements for utilities for a total of 14.930 acres. The roundabout would

require some additional right-of-way at the intersection of SR 82 and SR 29 that would

total 19.090 acres including the regional pond and the utility easements. An additional

1.675 acres was identified on the northwest parcel of SR 82 and SR 29 intersection. This

right-of-way was identified as a need in the ongoing design of the SR 29 project to the

south and since we would be buying part of the parcel in the SR 82 project it would be

prudent to acquire the rest of the needed right-of-way one time instead of twice incurring

addition taxpayer dollars.

Appendix A below shows the concept plans from the original PD&E study and Appendix B shows the new concept identifying the regional pond and right-of-way needed for the



11

roundabout.

2.2 Original PD&E Study Recommendation

The original PD&E Study limits went from Lee Blvd. (CR 884) in Lee County to SR 29 in Collier

County. The original PD&E study was broken in to three segments: 1.) Lee Blvd. to Daniels

Parkway, 2.) Daniels Parkway to the Lee/Hendry County line, 3.) Lee/Hendry County Line to SR

29 in Collier County.

Figure 2-1 Original PD&E Study Limits



12

Figure 2-2 Original PD&E Typical Section

2.3 Design Change Reevaluation Recommendation

Figure 2-3 Design Change Reevaluation Typical Section



13

Figure 2-4 Original Signalized Intersection



14

Figure 2-5 Roundabout Concept at SR 82/SR 29



15

Figure 2-6: Evaluation Matrix



16

2.4 Drainage

2.4.1 Pond Siting

A regional pond alternative was analyzed in order to maximize FDOT funds and project needs

for the subject project as well as the adjacent SR 82 project (FPID No. 430848-1) and SR 29

project (FPID No. 417878-4).

Based on a review of the project area, the WBID basin areas, and contacts with multiple

owners adjacent to the project, it was determined that the most feasible site for a regional

pond alternative is at parcel number 00063440005 located at the southeast corner of SR 82

and Lamm Road. The 200-acre site is currently used for agriculture and also is currently for

sale for approximately $1.8 million. Based on discussions with the property owner, the owner

is willing to work with FDOT for the sale of the property.

Figure 2-7: Regional Pond Site

The proposed regional pond will treat and attenuate the project runoff for the SR 82 project

(430849-1) only. However, the project is located within three WBID basins:

Townsend Canal (Impaired)

Corkscrew Swamp (Impaired)

Cow Slough



17

The regional pond would only outfall to Cow Slough. A meeting was held with SFWMD to

discuss the permit feasibility for this regional pond. SFWMD stated that the regional pond can

be used for this project provided that the other outfalls would not be adversely impacted – no

new degradation.

Based on calculations provided, the regional pond would serve enough compensatory

treatment for the other basins that would assure the other project outfalls (Townsend Canal

and Corkscrew Swamp) would not be adversely impacted. The analysis also estimates right-

of-way needs using the NRCS hydrograph equations (formerly SCS) volumetric analysis,

which accounts for water quality treatment and water quantity for runoff attenuation for the

ultimate 6-lane configuration.

The right-of-way cost estimate found in this memorandum is a budget tool used by the

Department to estimate total acquisition costs associated with each pond site and to budget

the appropriate funds for acquisition. Right-of-way cost estimates are not real estate appraisals

and do not reflect market value. In addition, FDOT uses appraisals that comply with the

Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP) for acquisition purposes.

Furthermore, the regional pond site was analyzed with 5 different alternatives. Please see the

table below:

Table 2.1 Pond Site Evaluation

Regional Pond

Alternative

Area, ac Purpose

5A 9.85 Treatment/Attenuation for 430849-1 only

5B 13.02

Treatment/Attenuation for 430849-1

Provide roadway fill requirements for 430849-1

5C 32.45


Provide roadway fill requirements for 430849-1, 430848-1

5D

36.85


Provide roadway fill requirements for 430849-1, 430848-1,

417878-4

5E 17.31 Treatment/Attenuation for 430849-1, 417878-4

Based on the geotechnical pond borings, suitable fill (type A-3 and A-2-4 soils) for

embankment under the roadway extends up to 15 feet from the existing ground. To maximize

the excavation from the proposed pond alternatives to use for embankment under the roadway,

the regional pond bottoms would be 15 feet below the existing ground. Per preliminary

earthwork calculations, the amount of roadway fill needed are as follows:

SR 82, from Gator Slough to SR 29 (430849-1) ………………………219,508 CY

SR 82, from Hendry County Line to Gator Slough (430848-1) ………. 395,250 CY

SR 29, from SR 82 to Hendry County Line (417878-4) ………………. 90,000 CY

In order to determine whether the regional pond site alternatives (Ponds 5A through 5E) are

cost feasible to the department, the total cost of the preferred pond site alternatives from the

design PSR (Ponds 3A and 4A) were compared to the total cost of Ponds 5A through 5E. The

table below shows the cost comparison between all pond alternatives. Please see Appendix B

for the cost analysis matrix.

Table 2.2 Pond Site Cost Estimates

Preferred Pond Alternative Projects for

Embankment

Estimated Total Cost

3A & 4A 430849-1 $2,799,890.45

5A 430849-1 $1,802,308.70

5B 430849-1 $1,582,224.75

5C 430849-1, 430848-1 $3,487,720.33

5D 430849-1, 430848-1,

417878-4

$4,096,279.96

5E 430849-1, 417878-4 $2,004,665.53

Note: The estimated total cost includes the total cost of the project fill requirements.

Based on the estimated total cost comparison, it is recommended that Pond 5B be the

preferred pond alternative. This regional pond would provide the required treatment,

attenuation, and roadway embankment requirements for the SR 82 project (430849-1).

Please note that the recommendations were based on pond sizes and locations determined

from preliminary data calculations, reasonable engineering judgment, environmental analysis,

FDOT Stormwater Management Facility Handbook, and assumptions. Pond sizes and

locations may change as more detailed information on season high water table (SHWT),

wetland hydrologic information, and final roadway profile are developed during final design.

Figure 2-8 Regional Pond

APPENDIX A

CONCEPT PLANS – ORIGINAL PD&E

APPENDIX B

CONCEPT PLANS – DESIGN CHANGE REEVALUATION

INTRODUCTION 82... · 2016. 9. 6. · Appendix B: Concept Plans ... Table 2.1 Pond Site Evaluation...

Documents

Transcript of INTRODUCTION 82... · 2016. 9. 6. · Appendix B: Concept Plans ... Table 2.1 Pond Site Evaluation...