The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About11261991BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA AGENDA JOINT MEETING OF BOARD OF COUNTY COMMIS-( AND CITY OF SEBASTIAN TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 26, 1991 2:00 P.M. - FIRST FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 18U, 0 25TH STREET VERO BEACH, FLORIDA COUNTY COMMISSIONERS Richard N. Bird, Chairman Gary C. Wheeler, Vice Chairman Margaret C. Bowman Carolyn K. Eggert Don C. Scurlock, Jr. James E. Chandler, County Administrator Charles P. Vitunac, County Attorney Jeffrey K. Barton, Clerk to the Board SEBASTIAN CITY COUNCIL Robert McClary. City Manager Charles Nash. City Attorney W. E. Conyers, Mayor Frank Oberbeck, Vice MayOr Peter R. Holyk Lonni Powell George G. Reid 2:00 P.M. Joint Meeting of the Indian River County Board of Commissioners and City of Sebastian City Council to discuss: CR512 ROAD WIDENING THROUGH CITY OF SEBASTIAN PAGE 1 - 85 ANYONE WHO MAY WISH TO APPEAL ANY DECISION WHICH MAY BE MADE AT THIS MEETING WILL NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE WHICH INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL WILL BE BASED. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: James E. Chandler, County Administrator James W. Davis, P.E., Public Works Director CR512 Road Widening Through City of Sebastian November 15, 1991 FILE: 512cos .agn DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS Since the December 5, 1990 Joint Meeting of the Board of County Commissioners and the City of Sebastian City Council, there have been numerous discussions conducted by both parties and the County Transportation Planning Committee on the proposed CR512 Corridor Alignment between US 1 and the Sebastian Elementary School (approx. 3800 lineal feet). At the July 10, 1991 Transportation Planning Committee meeting, the Committee requested the City's position as to whether the One-Way Twin Pairs Alignment is a viable option or whether it is completely not an acceptable alternative so that a~ scope of work could be recommended to the Board of County Com/nissioners to initiate further study. On July 24, 1991, the City of Sebastian City Council approved the following ........... 1) The One-Way Twin Pairs Alignment to provide additional capacity along the eastern portion of CR512 is not a recommended alternative. 2) Construction of the four-laning of the western portion of CR512 between Roseland Road and the Sebastian Elementary School should proceed as soon as possible. 3) Further discussion of an FEC Railroad bridge over CR512 should not occur until the alignment issue is resolved. On Sept. 17, 1991, the Board of County Commissioners considered a Sept. 11, 1991 recommendation of the Transportation Planning Committee that the entire CR512 widening project be suspended until an acceptable plan for the eastern portion is approved. This decision by the Committee was based on available revenues being used where traffic counts were greatest and maximizing potential capacity expansion options. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS The staff is of the opinion that there are four (4) key issues that must be considered in any plan to expand roadway capacity along the CR512 Corridor. These issues are: I. CAPACITY EXPANSION NEEDS Traffic history and projections Average Daily Traffic (VPD) Count at FEC RR 1989 8,500 1990 9,900 Roseland Rd. 6,800 7,500 Projected Future Traffic Counts 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 10,600 11,300 12,000 12,700 13,400 14,10.0 8,200 8,900 9,600 10,300 11,000 11,700 Page two - Capacity of existing road 14,500 LOS "D" based on Peak Hour/Peak Season, - 630 VPH will be the projected Peak Hour Volumes prior to 1995 - The CR512/US1 and Barber Street/US1 intersections are currently stressed. Conclusion Based on projected traffic counts, any plan to increase capacity should be implemented prior to 1995 and should address the eastern portion of CR512 as a first priority due to higher traffic counts in that area. Alternatives (1) The Florida DOT District 4 Traffic Operations Division has stated preferance for the One-Way Pairs Alignment or widening the existing roadway and do not prefer adding two full movement intersections along US 1 due to multiple phasing required (northbound and · eastbound left turn movements). The National Association of County Engineers (NACE) Action Guide Series and American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Geometric Design Guide for Streets and Highways both recognize the one-way pairs alternative as a viable alternative to "greatly increase capacity". The traffic operational advantages of the one-way pairs alignment are: (a) Left-turn movements are handled by two two-phase traffic signals along US 1. These signals can be interconnected such that they maximize the through movement along US1 and provide minimal delay. (b) Accident potential is minimized since conflicting turn movements are segregated. (c) Driveways near the intersections are more safe because left-turn conflicts are minimized. (2) studies to Perform further engineering develop an acceptable alignment. II. COST At the current time, approximately $2,500,000 is available in the District 3 Traffic Impact Fee Fund. During the 1990/91 Fiscal Year, yearly revenue was approximately $ 360,000. The cost estimate of the various options for the east 3800' of the project is based upon Florida DOT estimating data and are as follows: East 3800' portion of Project One-Way Pairs Alignment $ 778,700 Widen Existing CR512 Roadway $1,548,800 plus severance damages and stormwater treatment tracts Western 2.5 mile portion of project = $1,946,250 Conclusion If the western portion of the project is constructed as a first phase, funds may not be available to construct the eastern portion of the project where'the LOS need is the most critical. Page three III. IMPACTS ON SURROUNDING AREA (a) Widening Existing Roadway (1) Right-of-way acquisition may result in the County taking required private stormwater tracts, parking areas, and commercial land use resulting in significant impacts to existing land use. (2) Stormwater retention/detention requirements may require separate stormwater tracts near US 1. Increased discharge of stormwater to the Indian River Lagoon will result. (b) One-Way Pairs Alignment (1) Traffic patterns will be modified resulting in possible inconvenience to certain landowners/motorists (2)Additional railroad crossing required. (3) Additional two-phase traffic signal required at US 1. (c) Two Two-Way Roads along Existing Alignment and Railroad Right-of-Way (1) Two multi-phase traffic signals on US 1. (2) Additional traffic signal on CR512 east of the School where the two roads merge into the divided two way roadway. (3) Additional railroad crossing required. (4) Traffic patterns will be modified. ,. IV. DESIGN CONSTRAINTS (a) FEC Railroa~ Crossing (1) Tunnel - not feasible due to topography and groundwater. (2) Grade Separated Road overpass over Railroad and US 1 - Cost is estimated at over $15 million. May be as high as $25 million. Given time, FDOT participation is possible. - Extensive right-of-way acquisition. - Maintenance of traffic will be a problem. - Eliminates access to abutting property. - Stormwater mitigation (3) Grade Separated Railroad Overpass over Roadway - Cost estimate $7 million. - Time of Completion 7-9 years - Stormwater Mitigation - Limit Old Dixie Highway connection and property access. (4) Widen Existing Roadway - Extensive Right-of-way acquisition - Stormwater Mitigation - Maintenance of Traffic (5) One-Way Pairs Alignment - Traffic patterns will change by split roadway (6) Two Two-Way Roads along Existing Alignment and Railroad Right-of-Way - Need for additional signalized inter- sections - Traffic Operations less efficient - Traffic patterns will change by -split roadway - Places major roadway in same location as One-Way Pairs Alignment (b) Stormwater Treatment (c) Structures and buildings along existing alignment (d) Maintenance of Traffic for future capacity improvements (e) Utility adjustments Page four ATTACHMENT 1) Excerpt from Minutes of the Board of County Commissioners Meeting dated Sept. 17, 1991 2) Letter from City of Sebastian to Richard Bird, dated Aug. 7, 1991 3) Summary of Actions, Transportation Planning Committee meeting dated Sep. 11, 1991 4) Newspaper article from June 27, 1991 Vero Beach Press Journal 5) Excerpt from Minutes of the Transportation Planning Committee Meeting dated June 12, 1991 6) Excerpt from Minutes of the Transportation Planning Committee Meeting dated May 8, 1991 7) Excerpt from Minutes of the Board of County Commissioners Meeting dated April 16, 1991 8) Agenda Item from James Davis to James Chandler for April 2, 1991 meeting 9) Memorandum from Roger Cain to James Davis dated March 14, 1991 10) Excerpt from Minutes of the Transportation Planning Committee Meeting dated March 13, 1991 11) Summary of Actions, Transportation Planning Committee meeting dated March 13, 1991 12) Excerpt from.Minutes of -the Transportation Planning Committee Meeting dated Feb. 13, 1991 13) Agenda Item from Roger Cain to James Chandler for Jan. 29, 1991 meeting 14) _Memorandum from Bruce Cooper, City of Sebastian, to Planning and Zoning Commission dated Jan 4, 1991 15) Excerpt from Minutes of meeting between the Board of County Commissioners and City of Sebastian City Council dated Dec. 5, 1991 Memorandum from Charles Cramer to Roger Cain dated Nov. 15, 1990 Memorandum from James Davis to James Chandler dated Aug. 8, 1990 Copy of Article from Impact of Land Development on the Highwa~y System, May 1986 Traffic Count of CR512 dated Jan, 1987 thru May, 1991 Articles from Public Works Maqazine dated August, 1988 and July 1991 Options 1 and 2 Road Impact Fee Printout 16) 17) 18) 19) 20) 21) 22) APPROVED AGENDA ITEM FOR 11-26-91 BY r/ ~Indian River Co[Approved[ Date I~. I I TRANSPORTATION PLANNII~G COMMITTEE SU~ARY OF ACTIONS September 11, 1991 The following is a summary of actions of the Transportation Planning Committee meeting of 9/11/91: 1. CR-512 Update After hearing that' the City of Sebastian rejected the twin pairs project as an option for the eastern portion of CR-512, and-'we are basically back to a study.phase, the ,committee members unanimously recommended to the Board of County Commissioners that they put the western portion on hold until there is an acceptable plan for the eastern portion.- , JWD:aw xc: Jim Davis City of Sebastian POST OFFICE BOX 780127 o SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32978 TELEPHONE (407) 589*5330 tn FAX (407} 589-5570 August 7, 1991 Honorable Richard N. Bird, Chairman indian River County Commission 1840 25th Street : Vero Beach, FL 32960 Dear Chairman Bird: By request of the City Manager this date, I wish to inform you that the Sebastian City Council, at its July 24, 1991 Regular City Council'meeting,"made the following motions in regard to CR 5!2 and tho proposed twin pairs concept: "MOTION by 0berbeck/Holyk I move that,this Council take a position of,"NO" as far as the twin pairs within the City of Sebastian in particular 512. ROLL CALL: Mayor Conyers nay Councilman Holyk aye Vice Mayor Oberbeck aye Councilman Reid aye MOTION CARRIED 3-1 (Conyers - nay). MOTION by Holyk/Oberbeck I move that any further discussion of the railroad bridge, who is going to fund it, what it is going to look like, what it's going to cost is going to wait until we resolve exactly what that roadway's going to look like since we've just said no to a twin pairs. · ROLL CALL: Councilman Holyk Vice Mayor Oberbeck Councilman Reid Mayor Conyers CARRIED 4-0." aye aye aye aye Honorable Richard N. Bird August 7, 1991 Page Two If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact City Manager, Robert McClary. Sincerely, Kath_~-yn" M. O'Halloran, CMC/AAE City Clerk KOH/sam cc: Sebastian City Council Robert McClary, City Manager James W. Davis, Indian River County PW Director Roger Cain, P.E., Indian River County Engineer Honorable Maggie Bowman, Chairperson Transportation Planning Committee ' TRANSPORTATION PLANNING CC&~ITTEE - SU,%~N4ARY OF ACTIONS Corrrnissioner Bowman read aloud the following summary of actions: 'T~-ANSPORTATION PLANNING COMMITTEE SUMMARY OF ACTIONS September 11, 1991 The following is a summary of actions of the Transportation Planning Committee meeting of 9/11/91: xc: Jim Davis ~R-512 Update " After hearing that the City of Sebastian rejected the twin pairs project as -an-'Op6io~' for the eastern portion of CR-512, and we are basically back to a study phase, the committee members unanimously recommended to the Board of County Commissioners tha~.'they put the western portion on hold until there is an acceptable plan for the eastern portion. Corrrnissioner Scurlock felt it is time for this Corrmission to either go ahead and build the twin-pair project that is our staff and consultant,s recommendation or go ahead and abandon that and defer to the wishes of the Sebastian City Council. As for further Studies, he didn't believe any study would ever convince the City Council that the twin pair project Would be the best approach. Public %','orks Director Jim Davis reported that he spoke informally to the City staff and they are considering the concept of building two 2-way roads that would WOrk similar to Royal Palm Boulevard and Royal Palm Place here in Ver(> i~eact~, lie notc~d that traffic projections i~dica~e tl~at wil:l~i~ 3 years we will be at the Level of Service D capacity, which Would trigger a look at further developme~t in that area. Tl~e Sebdstia~ City Cou~cil recently Voted not to support the twin-pairs project and not to include it in the study. The TPC are in favor of going ahead :vith the twin~pairs project because it is the best approach ecenomical ly. They want to (.jet (joing on it. 32 Commissioner Scurlock stressed that was the unanimous decision at the TPC meeting he attended, so we are back to the point of making a decision on going with the City's preference and making peace with them or roi lowing the recon~endation of our staff and consultants. Commissioner Wheeler suggested having another meeting with the City of Sebastian and laying it all out to them agair~ because ii: seems it is a question that has to be addressed. ON MOTION by Commissioner Wheeler, SECONDED by Contnissioner Eggert, that the Board directed staff to coordinate a joint meeting with the City of Sebastian and staff for sometime in November to .. discuss the CR-512-twin-pa-i.-r.-p. roject. Commissioner Wheeler want.ed this' meeting publicized so that we get input from the public, and Director Davis suggested that we also invite the Transportation Planning Committee. DISCUSSION REGARDING THE DISINCORPORATION OF THE CITY OF FELLSMERE AND THE TOWN OF ORCHID Commissioner Eggert advised that she added this item to today's Agenda at the request of State Representative Charles Sembler who has received a petition signed by 125 people from a citizen's group in Fellsmere who are trying to get the city dissolved either throUgh a special act of legislature or through a referendum. Dawn Smith, Sembler~s legislative assistant, called the attorneys in Tallahassee wh~ sai8 that if it is both a special act and a ref-erendum anybody can pay for having the signatures counted and verified because it doesn't become a referendum until there isn't a special act involved any more. If it is going just to referendum, then an action committee is going to have to pay for the"counting of signatures. Representative Sembler would like to know what the opinion of the Board is on this and would like the County Attorney to put togother a special act for the disincorporation. Co~missioner Scurlock wondered why the County would draft the legislation rather than the state representative's office, and Attorney Vitunac explained that when he was contacted by some citizens of Fellsmere, he advised them he couldn't help th.em unless they came before the County. Con~ission and received approval. He further advised them that their avenue was through CR-512 direct formal communication to the State and Legislators outlining the need for four-laning SR-60. Mr. Davis explained that he met with representatives of the Florida East Coast Railroad a few weeks ago and discussed the possibility of a grade separation between the roadway and the railroad. It was agreed that it would be a costly project of at least $7,000,000 to $9,000,000. It was also agreed that the County staff would look at some of the road design operations and problems while the railroad staff would look at their design and problems concerning the railway. The time frame to complete the project would be at least 7-10..years. The chief engineer of the railroad said he would see if there are ahy funds available from State or Federal government. Mr. Davis then showed drawings of his staff's study pertaining to %he grade separated roadway. Each design brought out other problems that would have to be addressed including structural retaining walls to contain the railroad elevation, and access to the buildings adjacent to the roadway. He went on to say traffic will still need to be maintained in the interim, and he feels the twin'pairs project should go ahead. Mr. McClary said the Sebastian. City Council would like the first phase of CR-512 improvements completed as soon as possible, however, there is some concern about the twin Pairs. He stated that there has never been a formal public hearing where council could receive public comments. The City would like whatever is constructed there today to be compatible with the grade separation. He said the City Council has not taken a formal vote on this, but it is the general feeling that they would like a grade separation. He mentioned that he would like to see the matter go to an independent consultant who is not committed to the t%.zin pairs, and he feels it is the County's responsibility to do this. :.Ir. Dudeck said the latest traffic count was over 8,000 during the peak season; CR-512 ~ill be a maj.or collector. // Mr. Woodard said the County has been waiting for 3 months fcr formal action from the Sebastian City Council. Mr. Polverari suggested that the City Council be asked to give a formal request to go ahead with phase I and hold phase Ii until the study is completed. Mrs. Young stated that this committee has to look at the County as a whole, and prior to endorsing the raised railroad brid~e in Sebastian, the committee should decide if this is where the County should put their money. Mr. McClary reiterated that they would like'to see phase I of the CR-512 project continue and get out to bid, and in the meantime have the County to take a look, from an engineering standpoint, at whether or not a grade separation possibility, o~ are there other alternatives. He said, "This has not been studied; everyone has the conclusion that we have studied the twin pairs to death, that there has been more money thrown at engineering of this thing to justify the twin pairs, that there have been public hearings held on a zillion occasions, and none of that is true; there hasn't been a study done." "What was presented today is the most evaluation that has been done on the twin pairs." He said he will make a report of this committee's action to the Council at their meeting tonight and recommend that they make a formal motion. Traffic Enqineerin~ Rq.port and Update Mr. Dudeck gave an update on SR-60 and 82nd Avenue, US#i and Highland Drive SW; 66th and 58th Avenues, CR-60 to CR-510; and SR-60 Median Improvements program. There being no further discussion, the meeting adjourned at 10:26 a.m. Mr. Woodard suggested that FDOT be asked to set aside some time at the May 22 meeting (~5 on thc report) to meet with this committee and staff to make a presentation on the SR-60 median improvements. Chairman Bowman instructed the secretary to contact all committee members to remind them of the meeting. She will also put a notice of the meeting in the press box in the County Commission office. Sebastian Twin Pairs Project Mr. Dudeck mentioned the daily volumes on CR-512 west of the railroad are over 11,000 vehicles per day now. This means that anytime .any development comes in now, they will have to have a traffic impact analYSis,accomplished. Mr. Oberbeck said there was a large turnout at the last Council meeting in Sebastian, and all the organizations and business people'in the community objected to the twin pairs. When asked if the Council had taken a position on the railroad bridge, he said there hasn't been a formal endorsement but it was the consensus that they would like to see the elevated railroad bridge, however, it is not financially feasible at this time. He said any alternative to the twin pairs is what the people are asking for. The western portion is already funded', but not the eastern portion - that is under review. SR-A1A Mr. Davis reported that the City of Vero Beach has decided not to widen A1A to 5-lanes. That may put the unincorporated area of the County and Indian River Shores in an untenable position on concurrency. Mr. Schoen asked what the recent traffic counts were on A1A. Mr. Dudeck replied, in the first quarter of 1991 the traffic count was 15,002 at the north City limits; at J. C. Park it was 17,008, and south of J. C. Park it was 20,000. South of CR-510 it was 6,400 and north of CR-510 it was 5,500. Chairman Bowman asked what the counts were on South A1A and 17th Street bridgc. CR512 TWIN PAIRS ~qIDENING AND lB] ROBERT BRODIE PROPOSAL frescheduled from 4-2-91 meetinq] TO: FROM: SUBJECT: James E. Chandler, County Administrator James W. Davis, P.E.,z_x~~ Public Works Director~ CR512 Twin Pairs Widening DATE: March 26, 1991 FILE: twinprs.agn DESCRIPTION'AND CONDITIONS During the March 13, 1991 meeting of the County Transportation Planning Committee, the Committee recommended that a study be commissioned to determine if the current .Twin Pairs Widening project is qompatible with a long-range plan to construct a railroad overpass at the existing CR512 . location. -Future conceptual plans proposed by Architect Robert Brodie of Sebastian include widening the existing CR512 roadway at an elevation 9'± below the existing elevation and raising the railroad approximately 12' above the existing grade. The study is to consider alternatives that may be feasible to accommodate a widened roadway and grade separated railroad crossing. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS Staff has considered an appropriate scope of work for a study to accomplish the Committee's objective. To perform a complete, detailed analysis, a Consultant would need both major highway design experience and railroad engineering design experience. Extensive right-of-way acquisition affecting major building would be necessary, and appraisal work should be included in the scope. The following alternatives are presented: Alternative ~ 1 Direct staff to prepare a Request for Proposals and initiate CCNA procedures for selecting consultant(s) to perform a detailed study of possible options to widen CR512, including the construction of a railroad overpass located at the existing CR512 alignment. The selection process would take at least 45-60 days and the study would take approximately 60-90 days. Alternative ~2 Authorize the County's current CR512 'Consulting Engineer, Kimball-Lloyd, Inc. and staff to meet with the FEC Railroad Chief Engineer, W.S. Stokely, and determine if the proposed Twin Pairs design is compatible with the possible future implementation of a grade separated railroad crossing to be located at the current CR512 location. 15 A conceptual plan would be presented to the FEC Chief Engineer, and a joint conceptual design meeting would be held to discuss future alternatives. A concise report would be prepared to address the current Twin Pairs compatibility with possible future options. This alternative would be minimal in cost and could be scheduled within the next 30 days. RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING Staff recommends Alternative #2 be approved. An amendment to the original CR512 Engineering Services Agreement with Kimball-Lloyd, Inc. will be prepared for future Board approval. Hr. Frank'Oberbeck. Sebastian City Liaison IRC Transportation Planning Committee c/o Oberbeck & Associates 1013 U.S. Highway One -Sebastian, Florida '32958 THE VILLAGE ARCHITECTS P February 28, l! Dear Frank: ,! am requesting that ! be placed on the Transportation Planning Committee' Agenda for Wednesday March 13, 1991 at 9:00 AN in the County Administration Building, Veto Beach. I am writing you at .this time because 2im Davis has informed me that you would be the person to place me on that agenda. I thought that I would take. then, this opportunity to list the pertinent da regarding my proposal for a RAILWAY BRIDGE OVER CR512 and for a RE-ANALYSIS THE CONNECTION OF I30TH STREET (in Roseland) TO GIBSON STREET (in Sebastian) R~tILIJAY BRIDGE OVER CR512: I.) A RAILWAY BRIDGE over CR512 Will allow increasing traffic to"- escape the confrontation of )ong and repetitive FEC trains near the end of this current decade. II.) A RAILWAY BRIDGE over CRSI2 will preclude the need for an expensive future F.D.O.T. Raised Highway Interchange in Sebastian by the end of this decade: an interchange constructe( to solve disruptive congestion emanating from the negative co-existence of Train and Auto at grade-level. III.) A RAILNAY BRIDGE over CRSI2 will preclude the need for CLOSING two existing rai Iway grade-crossings. 16 IV.) If no RAILNAY BRIDGE is constructed over CR512, the County's "Twin-Pair" Configuration has the following NEGATIVE aspects: A.) The SCALE of the current "Twin-Pair" design is too NARROU and TIGHT for the County-prescribed location in Sebastian: (IV. A. 4.) (IV. A.] I.} No matter how well co-ordinated the various signalized intersections of the "Twin-Pair" become.. the constant projected interference of a soon-to-be-constructed 2-track FEC Rail System renders the proposed "Twin-Pair" legs less than efficient. 2.) Moreover."the immediate proximity and project, ed "automobile-attraction" of a soon-to-be-developed Historic Riverfront Area, in addition to the immediate proximity and "automobile-attraction" of Historic Louisiana Avenue just west of the FEC Rail System (not to mention the forced appendage of traffic signals ~here this avenue would cross the Twin-Pair ). renders this same "Twin-Pair" Road System a "stop and go" handicap for this rapidly growing area. 3.) Furthermore. and perhaps the most critical, is the prop.osed ,CLOSING of.Residential. Rose./.and's,Bay S,%~[Q.~e~ Emergency-Hospital-Access-Route (please see attached letters from the Humana Executive Director and the RPOA President). The Roseland and Fellsmere Residents ~would then be required to back-track along a 7-mile, ]5-minute convoluted path to Humana's entrance. 4.) Finally. the creation of the two necessary "Twin-Pair" consecutive signals on U.S.I (1100 f. eet apart), gives Sebastian a limited stacking length (used by northbound traffic turning left onto the north-leg) between the two U.S.I signalized 'intersections. a.) 'Assuming the disruptive influence of long and frequent trains, the amount of cars in.this stacking area {a maximum of 53 cars) would continue to increase, being continually auqmented by cars arriving from South U.S.I, By the end of the decade, the . resulting stacking could foreseeabIy back-up into the southernmost of the two intersections, thereby creating BLOCKAGE for traffic attempting to travel northward through Sebastian via U.S.I. b.)' Assuming future growth of the Histori.c. Louisiana Area just north of the propos'ed--- CRSI2 north-leg, with resultant Louisiana traffic needing to cross the "Twin-Pair" north-leg in order to access Southbound U.S.] via the proposed CR512 south-leg, the potential for BLOCKAGE between the two U.S.1 intersections increases, due to possible accidents occuring at these Louisiana cross-over points. c.) F.D.O.T, prefers a MINIMUM of '1320 feet between signalized intersections on U.S.I. 17 [IV.] B.) c.) The affect of the County's -Twin-Pair" Configuration on Louisiana Avenue (a wagon trail just after the Civil War with houses of the period) would indeed be RUINOUS. unwittingly encouraging it to become a business corridor for Sebastian, because the southernmost segment-.of ~- Louisiana would, indeed, HAVE TO BE the business corridor connection between the north and south legs of the "Twin-Pair" The affect of the County's "Twin-Pair" Configuration on the Natural Sand Ridge would be DETRIMENTAL, The Ridge. an environmentally important sand scrub habitat containing the aquifer for the region, is the home of rare and endangered plant and animal species. The County "Twin-Pair" north-leg would require a 17-foot deep slice into the Ridge in order to create a 4% maximum slope recommended by F.D.O.T. Certainly the Department, of Natural Resources would be interested in an act of 'this kind. The,affect of the ~ounty's "Twin-Pair" Configuration on the established Orange Heights Residential Community would be CRIPPLING. The necessary traffic signal for Louisiana {at the "Twi.n-Pair"°s north-leg) would be located at a congestive 90 feet from Temple Avenue: the ONLY exit 'point into Louisiana Avenue for I00 Hobile Home Families, many of whom are composed of elderly residents. Horeover. noise and pollution created by a County-proposed "Twin-Pair" north-leg for these same families is extremely NEGLIGENT of the rights of people who have settled this quiet area for as much as 20 years. v.) If a RAILWAY BRIDGE should be constructed over both legs of the County's "Twin-Pair" Configuration, the impact of the BRIDGE over the north-leg has the following NEGATIVE aspects: A.) The existing rail ties at Hain Street would need to be elevated 4 Feet g Inches above their existing elevation of 18,8! NGVD, in order to obtain the required .3Z slope fOE the elevated railroad as it "comes back down to grade'; about I000 feet north of Hain Street. The Natural Sand Ridge'would need to be cut a depth of approximately 32 feet to create the needed 15-foot State Road minimum clearance under the north-leg's RAILWAY BRIDGE. C.)- The F.D.O.T. would need to lower the existing elevation of U.S.! as it runs between Hartin Avenue to Cleveland Stree~ so that the resultant crown of U.S.[ in that location will equal that of the existing intersection serving the "Twin-Pair" south-leg. D.) The two "Twin-Pair" bridges would require the construction of a 1000-foot LINK BRIDGE connecting the two bridges. Cost of this construction is (per railway costing estimates) approximately $3500 per linear .foot: i.e. $3.5 million dollars (Iggo pricing), indeed, the costing of a "Twin-~ridge" scenario would be approximately $5 million dollars HORE 'than that of a "Single-Bridge" scenario. VI.) The sole-widening of the existing CRS12, with a single RAILWAY BRIOGE at U.S.i has the following POSITIVE benefits: 13.) A Single Signalized Intersection with 4-Phase Operation, according to F.D.O.T., can easily handle HUCH MORE than the projected $0,000 cars/ per day. This type of single signalized intersection is indeed used throughout the nation in cities of much more intensive activity. A stacking area for 72 vehicles (in the U.S.1 segment running from Walmart northward 1450 feet) gives an easier breathing space for automobiles needing to turn west onto CRSI2. C.) Closing Fellsmere Road within an enlarged City Park Area reduces the number of Cars/ per Day at this intersection .'by preventing the projected circulation within the Riverfront Area from feeding into U.S,! at this signalize location. An ARCHITECTURAL SIMPLICITY is achieved, creating a singl visual-axis from the sole-widened CR512 directly into the new City Park, carrying the.eye further beyond into..the Indian'River Lagoon An iNCREASE I'M VALUE' to'the land surrounding Historic Louisiana Avenue is'achieved, creating NOT a business corridor, but a continuance of the non-signalized, quaint venue (and, yes, reoaired venue) that is its natural birthright. F.) A NICE CAPIT~L G~INS is achieved by Indian River County when the FEC R.O.W. is sold back to the private sector for development in Sebastian s new historic area. A GENTLE 1.5Z SLOPE is obtained by grading the existing CR512 from Louisiana Avenue (21.81NGVD) to the existing crown of U.S.I (10.0 NGVD). A MUCH-OESIRED RESIDENTIAL DI'STRICT is made possible in the High Street Area (sealed from the new single CR512) not only because of its proximity to quaint Historic Louisiana Avenue and Main Street. but also because of its clear view of the Indian River Lagoon up on the Natural Sand Ridge, GOOD WILL from the'Majority of the Residents of Sebastian If the truth of this be doubted, a referendum would i~dee provide the proof. RS-ANALYSIS OF THE CONNECTION OF 130TH STREET TO GIBSON STREET: The Roseland Residents have long desired that their area remain a BEDROOH COMMUH[TY. The Roseland Property Owners Association is adamantly opposed to the infusion of Sebastian business corridor traffic (please see attached letter from RPOA President). 19 II.} The North County attachment of 130th Street to Roseland Road should not be encouraged to become a future intersection of business corridor traffic. 130th Street enters Roseland Road just 800 feet west of the existing FEC railway ties: this woul be potentially the same poor planning that the County has been trying to escape at the existing Intersection of CRSI2 and U.S. III.) The County should do everthing in its power to encourage the Ci of Sebastian to connect its Gibson Street (next to City Hall) with Jackson Street east of U.S.I. The County would be thereby promoting the development of the County's historic past.' as wel as saving itself from countless FUTURE dollars in attempting, to deal with a congestive 130th Street / Roseland Road intersectio close to two future railroad tracks. Additionally, the County could be most. helpful to the City by encouraging the procuremen of State and Federal funds for a RAILWAY BRIOGE at CR$[2. there allowing the City_to add,.its."given-up" grade-crossing at CR$12 to that of the County's at 87th'Street: producing the viabilit of the new Gibson / Jackson railway grade-crossing from FEC. I¥.) Oeveloper Carl Julian (St. Sebastian PU0) has noted by telephon, that he sees no .objection to a Gibson / Jackson connection, as would be a "good thing for both his development in Sebastian as well as the new Historic Riverfront Area": also. he has noteQ that he has no objection to AV0[OING ANY CONNECTION of Gibson Street with 13Otb Street in Roseland. It is my hope that this general outlin~ will aid the Transportation Pianning Committee in assessing the value of: - a RAILWAY BRIDGE, but more specifically: A SOLE-UIDENED CR512. a RAILWAY BRIDGE OVI - an AVOIDANCE of a Gibson / 130th' Street connection, but more specifically: the CREATION OF A NEW GIBSONi~' JACKSON BUSINE~ CORRIDOR. Sincerely yours, Robert T. Brodie, A.I.A. 10753 HIGH[JAY ONE. SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32958 FAX407-589-2134 / 407-589-4468 2O I · Stop-Light at Powerllne Road & CR512: 2 · Stop-Light at Powerllne Road Hain Street: 3 · Stop-Light at Jackson Street & U.S.I: 4 · New City Park with Sta'tues & Fountain:7 $ ~ Stop-Light at Hain Street & U,S.I; ~ · Ferry to Sebastian Inlet; '7 · Police Station'; 8 · Orange Heights= 9 · Louisiana Ave: lO · Railway Bridge'at U.S.I; · · Parking 700 cars; b ·,Parking 200 cars: c · Parking 2BS cars; d · Hew Grade-Crossing: · · 15 HPH River Orlve: f · Trolley & Buggy Terelnai: g · 2-way (teeporary 2-lane) CR512: h · Ne~ 2-way (2-lane) Powerllne Business Corridor; J .· Future 2-way (2-1a~ Jackson Business Corridor= L · Proposed aoorlng of Historic Spanish Ships; i -' Eleientary School with Hl~ Powerl'lne Entry; n · New 2?way (4-lane) CRS Chairman Bird indicated Mr. Brodie was not in the audience and was informed by Administrative Secretary Liz Forlani that he would not appear. Commissioner Eggert asked whether City of Sebastian has spoken to this issue and was told there is a letter from City of Sebastian. Chairman Bird suggested discussion on both items, (a) and (b) and recognized there were people wishing to speak. Co~issioner Scurlock, recognizing staff's position, commented that we need to be extremely careful that we do not delay things to the extent where service levels become a problem. We need to extend the contract with our existing engineer on the prOject in a timely fashion because the future of Sebastian and its orderly growth is contingent on meeting comp plan requirements, one of which is service levels. Public Works Director Jim Davis presented staff's perspective on railroad bridges by citing some articles in the Public Works magazine dated August, 1988, which reported on a project in Grand Rapids, Michigan to raise a railroad above an existing roadway; it was a 7-year project which had been expedited and was considered record time for construction of a railroad grade separation; the cost was three million. He pointed out that the projects are similar except CR512 in the future possibly should be expanded to seven lanes instead of five lanes. Director Davis felt he was educated on the-subject from reading the article as to what the process was like. He feels our project is more complex due to some existing buildings in the area and the need for more retaining wall. Director Davis reported the funding sources for the Michigan project were the Federal Highway Commission, the CSX Railroad, which is the railroad company in Michigan, as well as the Kent County Road Commission. Commissioner Scurlock pointed out that funds in this district or zone are being generated in the amount of about half a million dollars a year and Mr. Brodie had indicated a cost in the range of five to seven million dollars, which means a fourteen-year period of collecting impact fees to fund that activity; in the meantime we have to keep current with our open road system for the Comp Plan. Commissioner Bowman felt we are not thinking of that as a short range plan but rather a ten or twelve year plan and feels impact fees are going to increase without doubt in the next ten years. Commissioner Scurlock described a cycie of inadequate service levels causing no new building permits and no new impact fees. Chairman Bird also commented that you cannot earmark all the money that goes into the fund just for the railroad bridge because the other road sYstems need maintenance. Commissioner Scurlock understood at that intersection we are at nine-thousand..trips and.in his understanding when we reach thirteen thousand we have started to exceed our transportatio~ and service levels and historically that is not very far off. He asked how much would that particular improvement cost. Director Davis estimated the twin pairs project would be eight hundred thousand dollars. Commissioner Bowman asked how many years would that adequately take care of the traffic. 22 Director Davis said it's difficult to predict the growth rate tkere, but historically that shculd serve the Sebastian area for approximately five to ten years, after which we probably look at seven-laning the roadway. Chairman Bird opened the public hearing. Fred ~.Iensing came before the Board and asked if the Board would consider consolidating the discussion of this item with Public ~orks Item 1 since they cover the same project. Director Davis explained the item Mr. Mensing is referring to is a Florida DOT needs assessment item. DOT has had a series of meetings recently with the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council to'identify transportation needs in the District Four area. Staff has communicated to the DOT, and DOT has included in its needs assessmenti'program this'project of the ~ailroad crossing over'the CR512 corridor. Commissioner BoWman clarified it's not on their ten-year work plan but simply an assessment of need. Chairman Bird asked Mr. Mensing to proceed. Fred Mensing stated, for.the record, he is a resident of Roseland and represents himself, not any body or organization specifically. He spoke in favor of the railroad separation at ~R512 and enumerated his reasons as follows: (1) public safety versus trains at grade crossings; (2) with trains of 75 cars reaching a mile in length, crossings could be blocked by a train accident causing delays in getting emergency vehicles to and from ~he scene; (3) the land east of the twin pairs project which is presently owned by the County could be sold and land west of the t~in pairs project could be sold or held as a hedge for future light rail lines to the west County to connect with high-speed rail lines running north and south in Osceola County, if it is ever built. He thought the cost of the grade separation is overstated because many railroads store usable but abandoned bridges, and by contacting the chief mechanical officers of track and structures, an inventory of these bridges could be found and probably a bridge could be bought for the project where we would only have to b~ild the necessary head walls. He felt a six-lane bridge would last our lifetime, plus, and with proper contracting and engineering, the work~.:-~m Louisiana Avenue to U.S.1, including the bridge, could be completed in six months, during the off-tourism season. He men=icned alternate routes that could be used as detours during ccnstruction. Mr. Mensing felt we can ill-afford the saving of dollars by building the twin pairs and if the funds are not all available now, he would advise building the four lanes west of L~u'siana~' 1 Avenue on the present right-of-waz now and the bridge 23 later. This also would prevent the closing of other Florida East Coast Railroad crossings. He concluded by cautioning the Board members to keep in mind the best interests of the voters in making decisions. Attorney Steven Lulich, North County resident, came before the Board and believed the Board has not been privy to all of the discussions that have gone on in the city of Sebastian regarding the twin pairs and the bridge raising the railroad. He wanted to inform the Board of some of the issues that are being discussed by the citizens. He said there are two different groups of people that are very upset with this splitting of CR512. One group is the · residents of Orange Heights residential community. Their problem is that the north leg of the twin pairs would go right through their..front-dQor..-. Additionally,~ the .commercial.property owners along CR$12 feel the'y are being cheated out of two-way traffic. Attouney.Lulich said the concern is putting traffic from CR512 onto U.S.1 without causing a major traffic jam in the future. He reported one of the residents has a simple solution and that is, at CR510, there is no sign indicating that as a bypass north through Wabasso, and there is no sign on CR512 at CR505 indicating, if you want to get to the North County near Roseland or if you want to go to Brevard County, that is another bypass. These are ways of getting the traffic count down which are not expensive; just the cost of a sign. In addition, if you construct this bridge over twin pairs you are elevating the tracks in two places, making it more costly. ._- Attorney Lulich next directed the Board's attention to a memo to the Transportation Planning Committee which covered the subject of Powerline Road. Between Powerline Road and U.S.1 there is a whole commercial area that has not been developed, and he felt traffic should be directed in that direction to take pressure off U.S.1, which would then aid in preservation of the Sebastian Riverfront. The suggestion is, rather than twin pairs as planned, perhaps the north leg could be two-way traffic running parallel to U.S.1 and diverted off Main Street further north, off of Jackson Street and Davis Street and getting to Gibson Street and right up to Roseland Road. Attorney Lulich encouraged the Board to consider this alternative plan by getting a conceptual for the Powerline Road plan and holding off on the engineering for the twin pairs long enough to get a traffic study of the Powerline Road plan and then make a decision. He felt this would not cause a delay for more than a month. Attorney Lulich concluded by mentioning even though there are no pressure groups, there are people from the 24 historical society and from Sebastian who also believe the twin pairs would destroy a lot of historical area. Arlene Westfahl, 754 Rolling Hill Drive, representing the Sebastian Riverfront Historical Society, came before the Board and related that five or six years ago when the twin pairs plan was being devised~the society was a small organization but it has grown into a large organization which has done detailed examinations of the nature and history of Sebastian; and she felt that putting anything any closer to the center of town would be detrimental to the basic nature of Sebastian. She described various historical structures and their relationship to the route of the north leg of the' twin pairs'and the fact that there are many historical structures Which have la~ted, are very usable and compatible with the new ~buildings in ~$ebastian,..ali~.of ~whi'ch 'lends character ~o Sebastian and "retains. the aura"of 'a small town, a "simPle, a p~eas~nt place. She said another bad feature.of the twin pairs is. the fact that the route is along Louisiana Avenue, which is one of'" the original streets~ after'Main Street; land has many historicai buildings. She felt that to'bring any more large traffic pattern closer to Main Street means we will lose this particular flavor-- that we would like to keep in Sebastian. A1 Valardi, 4445 Georgia Boulevard, Sebastian, was critical of the present design for CR512 with the twin pairs because he felt it was not eliminating a problem but rather replacing it because when the train comes all the gates are going down, traffic is going to be backed up on CR512, it's going to be backed up on U.S.1, and you have one heck of a time. Frank DeJoia, 11625 Roseland Road, came before the Board and. spoke against the bringing of traffic from CR512 into Roseland, whether it be Gibson Street, Powerline Road, or any other road. He added that the Property Owners' Association of Roseland, at a recent general meeting, agreed that the people who live in Roseland do not want to see traffic diverted to Roseland; they would like to see that traffic get to U.S.1 somewhere before it gets into the Roseland area. Commissioner Bowman advised that the present plan is for traffic to come out at Jackson Street. Peter Holyk, Sebastian City Councilman, came before the Board and reported that just a couple of weeks ago the point made by Mr. DeJoia came up at the City Council meeting, regarding the traffic pattern being diverted and connecting to streets in Roseland, and he understands the concern that Roseland Property Owners have with regard to increasing traffic in their small community. Mr. Holyk would like the Commission to keep this in mind in deliberating over 25 the project because there is a lot of industrial property that sits on the northeast corner of Sebastian parallel to Route One between 130th Street and Gibson Street and that road is almost unavoidable and it's a shame, and we must keep in mind the interests and wishes of the Roseland Property Owners but we should not make a mistake as far as how we're going to route that traffic in an industrially important property. Fred Mensing, representing himself, reappeared to discuss the points brought up by Mr. DeJoia and Mr. Holyk. He wanted to mention, for the record, that there is over a hundred acres of land along 130th Street and the road is zoned industrial, and opening this road up into Sebastian and a residential development is obviously going to create an industrial traffic flow over the years as that industrial landdevelops.'' He said'he is not ih Powerline Road. He described consequences and cautioned the Board Commissioner Eggert asked what studies, if any, have been done on Powerline-Gibson by staff or by the City of Sebastian. Director Davis reported-'the initial phase of the County Road 512 project contained a traffic study that was conducted by Keith and Schnars which is a well-known consulting firm in Florida with a specialty in traffic engineering and in master planning. In this study they looked at the built-out condition of the area, particularly Sebastian Highlands. They also looked at the peripheral roads around CR512 including Gibson Street and Powerline Road and some of the other roads that have been discussed and that study was approved by the City Council of Sebastian in 1988. It was a part of their resolution when they supported the twin pair projec~ and that is basically the document that has preceded the design phase and has driven the design phase. Commissioner Scurlock stressed that this has not been done in a vacuum but rather there has been extensive analyses of the entire area. Director Davis agreed and added that there has been debate both within the Transportation Planning Committee and City Council meetings and before this Board. Chairman Bird asked Director Davis if we backed off of the twin pairs and didn't do the northern leg and went ahead and utilized the existing alignment and the existing crossing, and so forth, just did a widening, what would we be talking about to satisfy our immediate, short term needs. Director Davis demonstrated with a conceptual drawing and indicated the twin pairs alignment actually is a very short stretch of the project, only four thousand feet. If we went with the one- 26 hundred-foot railroad right-of-way acquisition along the existing portion of County Road 512, that may involve severance damages to possibly six buildings to the south. .The alternative to that is acquiring right-of-way only to the north, which would probably impact the used ca~ lot to the north on the U.S.1 side. If we need more than five lanes in the future -- and the impact statement of the Sebastian Highlands area is indicating that we will -- then we would have to acquire even more right-of-way for a seven-lane facility and that would dump a tremendous amount of traffic onto U.S.1 in that key intersection. Another point is that intersection does not operate as a classic four-way intersection because there is very'little length between the river and U.S.1. By separating the left turn movements with the eleven or twelve hundred feet we have ~on the twin~pair--project, we can mitigate a lot of this. problem.' Commissioner. Wheeler wanted to.know how much right-of-way we will need currently at CR512 and U.S.1 under the current plan of the twin.pairs, and-how much if you put it. all into one section. Director Davis said no acquisition is needed with the twin pairs and probably fifty to seventy feet for the alternate of~five to seven lanes. 'Commissioner Wheeler commented that there would be opposition no matter where we go. Chairman Bird recalled debating the issues last .time and the basic questions were two. The first being economics and it was indicated that twin pair project was much more cost-effective. The other factor was safety and transportation or traffic flow, and it was staff's opinion the twin pairs would help traffic to move more safely and easily off of U.S.1 east and west. Those were two main things that convinced him to go with the twin pair. Director Davis believed that discussions between the FEC railroad, the consultant, and our staff would zero in on some of those possible circumstances and we would come back to you with a recommendation as to whether the twin pairs project would be compatible with a future grade separation for the railroad bridge. Discussion ensued as to alternatives 1 and 2 and Commissioner Scurlock wished to knew what exactly is Sebastian City Council's formal position; have they backed off from the twin pairs concept. Commissioner Eggert felt it is set out in Mayor Conyers, letter that they just wish to determine if the twin pairs is compatible with the railroad bridge concept. The Chairman did not see where Alternate 2 does anything b~t keep our options open and Commissioner Eggert and Commissioner Wheeler both suggested representatives of Sebastian City Council 27 should be included in the joint conceptual design meeting so they can get the information firsthand. .. ON MOTION by commissioner Scurlock, SECONDED by Commissioner Eggert, the Board unanimously authorized the County,s current CR512 Consulting Engineer, Kimball Lloyd, Inc., and staff to meet with the FEC Railroad Chief Engineer, W. S. Stokely along with representatives from Sebastian City Council and submit a report on compatibility'of the current Twin Pairs concept with possible future options, as recommended by Staff. · . BELLSOUTH MOBILITY, iNC. REOUEST FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE APPROVAL FOR A TRANSMISSION TOWER _.Planning~Director. Stan Boling made the following presentation: TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: James E. Chandler County Administrator DIVISION HEAD CONCURRENCE: Robert M. Keat~ng,~CP Community Developme%ft Director THROUGH: Stan Boltng, AICP Planning Director Christopher D. Rison Staff Planner, Current Development April 8, 1991 BELLSOUTH MOBILITY, INC.'S REQUEST FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE APPROVAL FOR A TRANSMISSION TOWER SP-MI-91-03-20 It £s requested that the data herein presented be given formal consideration by the Board of County Commissioners at its regular meeting of April 16, 1991. This item was originally scheduled for consideration on the April 2, 1991, agenda, but was deferred to this April 16 meeting. PROPOSED DEVELOPS~ENT AND LOCATION: BellSouth Mobility, Inc. has submitted a request for site plan and special exception approval for a 350' transmission tower to be located at 3955 65th Street (South Winter Beach Road), southwest of the Solid Waste Transfer Station. The subject property is owned by Indian River County with a small portion leased by BellSouth Mobility, Inc. 28 INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA ME:~ORANDU~4 TO: James E. Chandler, County Administrator James W. Davis, P.E., ~ Public Works Director .... ~ CR512 Twin Pairs Widening March 26, 1991 FILE: FRO:4: SUBJECT: DATE: twinprs.agn DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS During the March 13, 1991 meeting of the County Transportation.Planning Committee, the Committee recommended that a study be commissioned to determine if the current Twin Pairs Widening project is compatible with a long-range plan to construct a railroad overpass at the existing CR512 location. Future conceptual plans proposed by Architect Robert Brodie of Sebastian include widening the existing CR512 roadway at an elevation 9'± below the existing elevation and raising the railroad approximately 12' above the existing grade. The study is to consider alternatives that may be feasible to accommodate a widened roadway and grade separated railroad crossing. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS Staff has considered an appropriate scope of work for a study to accomplish the Committee,s objective. To perform a complete, detailed analysis, a Consultant would need both major highway design experience and railroad engineering design experience. Extensive right-of-way acquisition affecting major building would be necessary, and appraisal work should be included in the scope. The following alternatives are presented: Alternative # 1 Direct staff to prepare a Request for Proposals and initiate CCNA procedures for selecting consultant(s) to perform a detailed study of possible options to widen CR512, including the construction of a railroad overpass located at the existing CR512 alignment. The selection process would take at least 45-60 days and the study would take approximately 60-90 days. Alternative ~2 Authorize the County's current CR512 Consulting Engineer, Kimball-Lloyd, Inc. and staff to meet with the FEC Railroad Chief Engineer, W.S. Stokely, and determine if the proposed Twin Pairs design is compatible with the possible future implementation of a grade separated railroad crossing to be located at the current CR512 location. A conceptual plan would be presented to the FEC Chief Engineer, and a joint conceptual design meeting ~ould be held to discuss future alternatives. A concise report would be prepared to address the current T%~in Pairs compatibility with possible future options. This alternative would be minimal in cost and could be scheduled within the next 30 days. Page two RECOMMENDATIONS AND FUNDING Staff recommends Alternative #2 be approved. An amendment to the original CR512 Engineering Services Agreement with Kimball-Lloyd, Inc. will be prepared for future Board approva!. DISTRIBUTION Joseph A. Baird, Budget Director APPROVED AGENDA ITEM FOR 4-2-91 BY rt JAdmln. ~ )Budget IPub. Wk. INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: James W. Davis, P.E. Public Works Director Roger D. Cain, P.E. County Engineer .. ~.-~j:'!~ CR512 Construction ~ March 14, 1991 Here are some suggestions on choosing the engineer for study of the compatibility of the twin pairs with the RR overpass protection. This should be a multi-disciplinary approach including, appraisers, financial experts who have experience in dealing with grant acquisition to assess the possibility of grant money being available for this RR structure project, as well as cash flow of impact fees and other revenue sources. An engineering firm who has experience with coordinating new highway and RR grade separation construction as well as design. This approach may require more than one consulting firm participation, but only one firm should be in charge of producing the report on schedule. The RFP should emphasize and the selection process reinforce the actual experience of the people who will work on the study relevant to our circumstance. A critical assessment of the cash flow, concurrency, construction compatibility problems, and an assessment of the real possibility for construction of the overpass and timing and reasonable cost estimate of the RR structure. Recommendation of a course of action based on the results of the above studies including: a. Whether the westbound CR512 lanes need to be built now or; b. Acquire right-of-way and build a 5 lane section with RR structure now. Page 2 CR512 Construction March 14, 1991 The risk of having concurrency problems depending on the answers to "a" and "b". If "a" is affirmative, how construction of the structure will affect the crossing 1. Temporary underpass 2. Temporary grade raising at grade. Total cost for alternatives. /gfk memo512.rdc %~as not present, a~prcval of the February 13 minutes was delayed.~ Fre.~entaticn on Rq~!r~c.,qd__.Bl_:i_dge over CP,-512, and Gibson Street/~ JacksoD Street Business Corridor Mr. Robert Brodie asked the committee for a letter of support for his conceptual plan for a railroad bridge over CR-512, and asked the conm~ittee to ]]alt the continuation of the one-way pair project in Sebastian. He also asked the committee to reconsider the hookup of 130th Street in Roseland to a business corridor in Sebastian to create a business corridor in ~oseland. He said the 7 page report he submitted a week ago pointed out the negative aspects of the twin pair project, and the positive aspects of a single CR-512 with a bridge over it. He said at first he th'ought the overhead ibridge' plan would cost one million dollars, however, after going over the plan again, he found some mistakes and now feels the plan may cost two and one-half million. He felt the County should take the $778,000 that would be spent on the north leg of the twin pair project and use that money to create a t~vo-way system where Main Street and CR-512 would be the two-way pair system; it would be better to use the funds to build a new business corridor and encourage development in the city, which would also increase impact fees in Sebastian. He then referred to a map. He said, residential -~:treets should be encouraged to feed into Powerline. Road. He. stated, we want to get people from 1-95 to CR-512, which will be a major connection to US~I. He referred to the historic area where the City of Sebastian first began. Commissioner Scuriock informed the conu~ittee members that whatever pi.an is chosen has to be matched with available dollars. If you dcn't keep service levels up to meet the comprehensive plan and n~atch the money with ~mprovements, you will have a moratorium. Chairman ~o%~r.~ar asked %.;hat the presc~nt service level is fcr the intersection of CR-5!2/US~i. ~-~r. Davis re[~lied ~-l~.~t ~-~,c ~Dtersection is approaching level ef service D. He said, the level of service in the County's Comprehensive Plan, and he believed the City of Sebastian has a similar level of service in their Comprehensive Plan, is that during the average annual condition throughout the year, we try to maintain a level of service C. Level ef service C is a level where you are not delayed a long period of time either waiting for a traffic signal to cycle through, or if you are on a straight section of roadway, not necessarily having to reduce speeds for a long period of time in order to use the corridor. Level of service D is a more degrading situation. He then gave a history of traffic counts on the intersection: 1985 6400/day ,.1986 7100/day .... 1987 7300/day '~' 1988 7800/day 1989 8500/day 1990 980Q/day Mr. Davis said the level of service C and D threshold is around 13,000; if this progression continues, it is feasible that we could reach level of service D in the thoroughfare within the next three years. He stated that the level of service in the intersection would degrade quicker than that. Commissioner Scurlock asked what improvements would be necessary to keep the service level. Mr. Davis responded, widening the roadway and improving the' intersection. It would cost approximately $100,000 to improve the intersection itself if we go with the twin pairs. If we try to go with an expanded intersection at the current CR-512 location it would require right-of-way acquisition, which would be a real expensive item. The County has acquired all the righ~-of-way necessary to implement the twin pairs project. Commissioner Scurlock asked if the right-of-way acquisition would be more tkan $778,000. Mr. Davis said, if you look at the entire corridor and not ~ust the intersection, he projected that it would be. He went on to say that he doesn't disagree with Mr. Brodie's plan, but he feels it should be considered as a long term objective for Ccuntv, not only in the City of Sebastian, but in the City of '.'ero Beach also. He talked to ~.~r. Stokel,.,, Florida East Coast Railroad, about the project; the t%~o and one-half million dollar ficure he helped develop is only a figure to raise the railroad track; it does not involve any of the cut work that needs to be done to !cwer CR-5!2 approximately eleven or twelve feet in some areas, and as much as twenty or twenty one feet in other areas. It would cost another t~o and one-half to three million dollars to physically raise the road in some locations and lower it in others. He estimated that the total cost of the plan would be bet~;een five to seven million dollars. IIe %.lent on to say that two million dollars have been generated since 1986 in District 3. He then refer~ed to the current CR-512 project, which is getting close to final engineering, and he said all the right-of-way acquisition has been orchestrated; to put that project on hold and allow the traffic count to get up to level of service D would have some implications that both the City of Sebastian and the County ~.;ould have to struggle with, particularly with the Department of Community Affairs, to justify allowing the ccrmunitv to grow. When Commissioner Scurlock asked him if he had a figure for redoing the grade, Mr. Davis replied that he hasn't really done any indepth figures other than to raise or lower the road. Com~issioner Scurlock said, in orfer to keep I4r. Brodie's option available to develop his concept, certain things have to be done in certain projects that wouldn't preclude that from haupenin9 in the future; he asked if ~,~r. Davis had any estimate of ~¢hat it would take to accomplish this purpose. ~-~r. Davis replied that they are actually doing very little tc the existing roadway at the r~i]way in the current CR-512 alirnment; they will probably %.gidcn the rc~d a little, add some pa'.-ed shculders and restripe it and resurface it, but that is maintenance activity that needs to be done regardless. Ccr~issicner Scur!ock asked, is there anything in the 4 current projcct that ~ould preclude ~r. Brcdie's concept in the future? Mr. Brodie remarked that Commissioner Scurlock is referring to the north leg of the project. Roger Cain said we wouldn't have to do anything now about raising the grade, and it %.;ou!dn't preclude the future proposal. If it is done now, there will be a problem ~ith clearance going under the railway. ~4r. Davis stated, to build the north leg of the twin pairs as the project is currently in engineering, for a period of time, say both the twin pairs legs were open to traffic and we wanted to make a decision to raise the railroad and lower CR-512 and wi~en that'corridor to six lanes, we could divert traffic to the westbound twin pairs alignment while all that was under construction; once you had an ultimate section along the existing CR-512 corridor, you Could eliminate the railroad crossing on the' westbound CR-512 leg. Mr. Mensing asked if there is enough distance between the two crossings for the railroad to elevate at one crossinc without tearing the other one up; he did not think so. Mr. Davis said it would be possible, but very expensive to raise the railroad under both legs at one time. Mr. Brodie stated that he did not think it was possible to have the one way pair and to have one bridge. Mr. Mensin~ said, from a construction point of view, for the railroad to keep operating and to keep the roads open, it will be virtually impossible because you %.~ill reach all the way to Main Street on the northbound approach to the raised railroad. ~r. Brodie remarked, 227 feet north of ~.lain Street if we build one bridge; if we have two brid~es it is about 1,150 feet. ~lr. Davis said the railroad company has a device that can raise the railroad a mile and three inches a day; the machine actually compacts the rock under the tracks. ~r. ~ensing said, if the railroad reises to do the middle tlr. Davis stated that he did not think it %vould be wise to try to raise the railroad over both locations. ~Ir. Brodie said you can't just raise it over one. ~!r. Davis explained, you would not have the westbound alignment once the railroad was raised; all of the traffic would be consolidated at the existing alignment and only use the westbound alignment to maintain traffic during construction. When construction was completed, you wouldn't have the twin pairs; you would have a widened CR-512 along the existing alignment, and the railroad would be raised above that location. The Main Street crossing would be elevated a little bit. Chairman Bowman asked Mr. Davis, "What you are doing there would not affect this long range plan?" ~r. Davis replied, in his opinion, we would have to spend the money to put the corridor...in to maintain traffic while the construction was going on in the future, so it is money well spent - we would be opening up the corridor to immediate capacity to get away from the concurrency problem, plus we would provide a corridor to some day, if this is implemented, maintain traffic and bypass all the construction while it is being built. Chairman Bowman remarked, she liked the new corridor paralleling US#l, which would take a lot of local traffic off US#!. She doesn't see much possibility of widening US#I through the central part of Sebastian. She also likes the ~dea of the future business corridor, which would take people up to the shopping center at Roseland, or very close to it. ~lr. Davis stated, if funding could be orchestrated to implement the grade-separated crossings, staff is supportive of it. They feel it will be a long-range project that may take ten years or longer to get funding for, and to get permitting, design and ri~ht-of-way acquisition. There is going to be lengthy right-of-way acquisition along C~-512 to drop the roadway, because we need slopes to transition it to the existing grades. He felt this needs more study. He is not in favor of stopping the t~.~in pairs project now. Randy Mosby addressed thc ccm~ittee saying that thc design of the twin pairs has not considered the proposed plan. He said, putting in one brid~e, you cannot maintain a temporary access. maintain railroad operations, and maintain traffic on CR~512" You cannot physically do it and keep that westbound lane open as a temporary CR-512 with the current design. The key is not to' shut down the desiqn of the t%~in pairs; you need to go back and lcok at the overall design to implement tP~s design. He said he has seen the drawings and there is no way physically that you can do this future Plan %~ithout major disruption. Mr. Davis explained, while this was being constructed, perhaps a steeper grade of 23% Could occur south of the westbound twin pair alignment on an interim measure; that would keep the railroad down while you are maintainin? traffic across it, rise it a little steeper, build tko bridge so the railroad could operate, then come back once you have the grade separated railroad and grade crossing and raise the westbound 'aliqnment and' put the track on a permanent grade. Mr. Mosby asked if the County's consultants have done a feasibility study to see if the two plans are compatible. -Mr. Davis said that is why we need a ten year plan horizon to look at all these options. Mr. Mosby asked, why go to final design on the twin p~irs %;hen·you haven't looked at this? Mr. Davis asked if he was wil!inq to accept a moratorium. Mr. 51osby questioned, what is a couple of months evaluation by the engineers; delay it a month to do some evaluation. Attorney COllins explained it-is not just an engineering design prcb!em, this bypass system of US#i would have to go through a comprehensive plan amendment for the traffic circulation of the City of Sebastian; they would have to see whether their capital improvements element can finance it; the Ccunty would have to look at the impact of a comprehensive plan amendment on its capital improvements program; it would be at !~ast a 'z'epr's process just to run this through the bcoks and see if the Department of Con~,unity Affairs would accept comprehensive plan amendment. ~!r. ~!csby said he is not asking for a change in the design; he is asking for some studies to see if th~ current design will prohibit what is being proposed for the future. He felt enough engineering analysis has not been done to see if the current design wculd prohibit it. Attorney Collins asked, is it more expensive 'to go through an engineering design feasibility study or to run it through a comprehensive plan amendment and see if you have the money to implement it even if you could redesign it. ~r. Mosby stated that you can't go through a comprehensive plan amendment until you know if it is going to work. There should be some more detailed engineering analysis to match "the two plans. Mr. Davis commented, the County's consultant has iooked at both the tunnel under the tracks and raising the tracks. They concluded that it was not cost effective. Mr. Oberbeck stated that everyone feels the long_range. project is the best thing. Are we preparing now to .accept it ten years from now; some kind of engineering study should be made; if we are saying it is a great program and we are going to need it, let's look into it now and make sure the money we spend today is not wasted ten years from now. He said, you harp about the twin pairs west leg; we still have Main Street; if we have to reroute traffic we can go through the design and then there is no reason to do it this way other than the fact that we don't have the money to proceed with the bridge right now. There are ways to get around it without that second leg, but to comply with ~he comp plan and meet our requirements, it looks like we are going to have to go %~;ith the one way pairs. He would like to see some consideration given to that project being able to be adapted to the bridge at a later date and he would like to see us look forward to the brid~e at a later date. Chair~an Bc~man asked how much it would cost to ask our consultant to look at this, not from a ccst benefit point of view, but frcm a long range planning point of Mr. Davis replied that he is not sure that one consultant would be the best choice to look into this; a consultant that is somewhat versed in railroad design would be needed. He said he. is not sure our consultant has done a railroad rising project such as this. He talked to :4r. Stoke!y at the Florida East Coast Railroad and he feels they could recommend a consultant that could look into raising tke railroad, and they could assist a little bit in some typical 'section or something like that. Perhaps a drainace consultant would be needed to determine what the impacts of cutting the ridge down twenty to thirty feet would be. In his opinion, it would cost between $100,000 and $200,000 for railroad, roadway and drainage design. · - Chairman Bowman asked if the railroad would be interested in hiring a consultant. -~i' Mr. 'Oberbeck stated,, all they are asking for is, will the two plans match. Mr. Davis said, in his opinion, the money spent today on the twin pairs project would solve the short term capacity problem and would give some optiens to maintain traffic while you build the ultimate widening and grade 'separation. Mr. Oberbeck asked, if this one plan is built today, the money we spend to build it will not be wasted and will match up when we put the bridge in? Mr. Davis replied affirmatively; that is his opinion. Mr. Dudeck said he is very much concerned about going back to the one corridor and having a six-lane rcadway with maybe 50,000 cars a day going through that US~i/CR-512 intersection; you are going to have to put a partial interchange in there and ~otally expand the intersections in all directions, and it might affect the fccal fountain and park that Sebastian is talking about; that has not been totally analyzed either. Mr. Oberbeck said ~¢e are creating a situation with the t~¢in pairs where we will have t%..'o major intersections; he doesn't think %ce are benefitting ourselves by putting another major intersection in the middle of the City. Mr. Brodie said, with the 10,000 cars and the D level we are getting near, if we have that many and we do the Powerline Road connection with a signalized intersection there, everybody that gets to the existing CR-512 intersection today will not all make a right turn. He feels, as people come from 1-95 and they get to that signalized intersection, it will give them two choices; they can go through Powerline to Main Street or to the existing CR-512. That will let us avoid building the north leg, which he still feels is insanity with the riverfront area going in. iThat way we are not wasting our money; we can put the $778,000 into a road th~at' will not become obsolete in ten years. It will help the impact fees develop. He asked why the one way pair is being done in the first place. _ ~ ~._ Mr. Davis.explained that it is a cost effective alternative; the DOT has proven it is a very effective way to manage traffic through an urbanized area; we have all the right-of-way acquisition currently acquired to implement the project. The concept of an alternate to the Gibson Street corridor is an issue other than raising the railroad over CR-512. The' County has tried not to have a heavy influence on the local road system in Sebastian; our County Commission just recently indicated to the City that, if they have an alternate plan, they sho'uld go ahead and develop that plan, run it through the City Council, get their blessing on it and bring it to the County; this committee would then entertain any changes Sebastian felt were appropriate. The situation in Sebastian is, they have a ne%~ planner coming on board, and they don't have an engineer at the current time. If they have some alternate plans, the City staff should develop them and bring them to the City Council; if the Council has a very strong support of that, this committee would entertain some changes in the collector road net%~ork within the City of Sebastian. County staff will certainly help Sebastian with that if they ~ish. He said it would not be wise for us to just draw 10 some lines on a map here today without some good traffic engineering data to support it and the plannin9 documents behind it. He said, "You talk about a business corrJder; I don't think that is commercial!l, zoned property through there. It may be a residential corridor and the planners may not want that." It is his feeling that the City staff and City Council need to develop that. He said he %.gould be glad to attend any meetings and assist them. Chairman Bowman said the City of Sebastian should decide what they want and then come back to the County. Mr. oberbeck said he ~.;ill. ask the City Council that some consideration be given 'to'.~ study to make sure we are'not wasting $778,000. He just wants to make sure we can .blend these two projects together. Chairman Bowman asked what the committee can do to help the City Council. Mr. Oberbeck responded,.'he thought the committee should plan for the ten year plan. He said he hated to think about spending $200,000 for a feasibility study, but he would like to see some consideration given to a limited study to be sure we are not doing something that will be detrimental to the program ten years from now. ~,Ir. ~!i!ler said he was an engineer for 30 years. He advised the committee not to sell itself short on proper engineering; you should not ignore professional advice. Ckarlie Stachel, Sebastian, said he would like to see what an engineer would say about a cloverleaf in Sebastian. · Chairman Bo%-~an asked how much money weuld be available for an engineering study. ~.Ir. Davis thought $100,000 might do it; it could possibly ccme out of the impact fee fund. He said he would like to look at the program and come back ~ith a rocommendation. ~4r. ~oodard asked when the t~'in pairs would start. ~.~r. Davis replied, from the school to the west would start ~his summer; from the school to the east would be programmed to 11 Yeqin later this year. .~lr. Oberbeck said this is probably one of the most critical issues in the City of Sebastian. He thouaht we shculd consider something that the future qnnerations will have to live with. He -..~as in favor of saying, lets qo shead and get some consideration for engineering to lock this thing over. ON ~lOTIO~! Walter Jackson, it was requested that the County Commission approve funding to have an engineering study for alternatives for the CR-512 project. ' - Under discussion, Mr. Davis asked, is the engineering only involved in the railroad and the CR-512 situation. Isn't there a City budget to have a traffic engineering study done over the City? Mr. Oberbeck replied that their traffic engineering is applied to the speed on the road. He said, "What I'm considering right here is that major intersection; how we are going to handle the traffic; %~hat options do we have? Do we elevate the. railroad, elevate the cars - let's consider the whole options." ~{r. Mensing suggested that all three (County/City/Railroad) cet together to talk before getting a consultant. Mr. Davis asked, if the motion is approved that additional engineering effort be put into looking at some of these options, do we assume that the timing for the engineering for tke eastern uroject of the twin pairs would somewhat be delayed? Mr. Oberbeck said, "Those consultants will determine how long the delay %-;ill be because they will probably be the ones you ~-~iil talk to. I would say it would cause a short delay on the eastern portion." Mr. Davis said it is the County staff's feeling not to delay the ti.gin pairs project, but that %-;hatever money was spent in the interim would be, in their opinions, money well spent for a nu~ker cf reasons, particularly to handle the concurrency ~rck!ems that would be arisinq in the next two years. >;r. Obcrkeck asked if he thought it would take t%.;o years for 12 ~r. Oberbeck asked if ke thought it would take two years for tkc engineers to come up %~ith a report. ~lr. Davis did not think it %~oul¢! take two years; he thought it might take ninetI, days. Mr. Oberbeck said he didn't think ninety days %~ould put us in any problem with our concurrency. ~.!r. Davis said if we delay our engineering project, our consultants will probably %cant more meney due to the delay in addition to more money to dc the study. Mr. Oberbeck stated, we have a problem and we need to solve it; %.~hat is ninety days. Mr.' Davis' said. he just wants to get some direction. Mr. Oberbeck · asked ~ if ~ the'~ consultant likes · being 'a consultant for Indian River County. Mr. Davis replied that he thought that he does. Mr. Oberbeck said, then he ought to forget about waiting ninety days and not charge us anything. Mr. Dudeck interjected, realistically to go through the process of selecting a ~onsultant after meeting with the railroad, we are talking about a minimum of nine months to get study results back. Mr. Oberbeck said, we are talking about the future of a comanunity. Mr. Davis asked if there is a consensus on the City Council that the CR-512 project be delayed. Mr. Oberbeck stated, "The questicn of waiting hasn't been brought up, but the consensus has been that this concept appears to be one of the better things that could happen to our ccm3nunitv. That ~as by u~snimoug Council approval at our last meeting." ~:r. Davis said, "As long as tkere is an understanding between the City and the County that this is going to take some time and will prebably delay engineering on the current CR-512 ~ the eastern portion; we don't know Mr. Oberbeck st~cd, "On if that is what ~e want any~-~ay. alternatives.', Mr. Oberbeck CALLED FOR THE QUESTION. The Motion ~vas restated by }Ir. Oberbeck: The motion is to go ahead and approve funding to get engineering to study the alternatives to the twin pairs project, in particular the elevated overpass. The committee voted 5-1 in favor of the motion; Mr. Woodard voting in opposition. Approval of Tentative Agenda Inasmuch as there was 'now a' quorum present, asked fOr approval of the tentative' agenda. Obviously we've got these other the Chairman Mr. possibility of a four way stop sign at Old Dixie and 41st Street. ON MOTION by 'Juliana Young, SECONDED by Frank Oberbeck, the committee unanimously voted 6-0 to add the discussion to the agenda. A~pproval of Minutes of 2/13/91 Meeting Chairman Bowman then asked if there were any corrections to the minutes of the February 13, 1991 meeting. Hearing none, she said the minutes would stand approved as submitted. Discussion of Street Lighting Policy Mr. Davis stated that street lights cost $120/year per light in the rural areas. The National Association of County Engineers has developed a ne%~ policy which County staff will test to see if it works for our County. He has been in communication with ~[rs. Geyer from thc School Board on this matter. No action ~as required. Traffic Control at Old Di:~ie and South Cifford Road (41st Street) Jackson asked permission to add discussion of the Mr. Jackson said the traffic going north and south is very heavy and it is hard to get across Old Dixie. He requested a four-~¢ay stop at that intersection. ~r. Dudeck advised that this intersection is on the list to 14 TRANSPORTATION PLANNING COMMITTEE SUM~RY OF ACTIONS March 13, 1991 The following is a summary of the Transportation Committee meeting of 3/13/91: Planning Presentation by Robert Brodie for Railroad Bridge over CR-512; and new business corridor in Sebastian. Mr. Brodie gave a presentation on his plan for a railroad bridge over CR-512; and for a new business corridor west of Sebastian (Gibson St./Jackson St.) The committee recommended that the County Commission approve funding to do an engineering study on alternatives for the CR-512 project, and to determine if the CR-512 project is compatible with Mr. Brodie's plan. The vote was 5-1. Florida DOT Intrastate program. It was the consensus of the committee that the County Con~ission should be asked to write a letter to FDOT requesting tha~ SR-60 be widened to a ~-lane divided highway as soon as possible, even if they have to make it a toll road to p~y for the improvements. JWD:aw xc: Jim Davis Dudeck said he is going to obtain additional counts and forward them to DOT to show them how long the deceleration lane should be. Updat~ on Mer~i_l_l___B_a_r_b_e..r__B_r_i.~e.._R.ep_l_a.~c_e_~se3~_~;__~]999~~ Use for Existing. Merrill Barber Bridge Mr. Davis sa~d DOT has completed an environmental impact statement on the Merrill Barber Bridge replacement, and the report is favorable; there are ~o significant impacts on the area; they will do some mitigation. (Excerpts from the report are on file in the County Commission office.) Royal Palm Blvd. will become a desd end street and there is a possibility of making it into a pedestrian mall. DOT will take down as much of the old bridge as requested, and they will transfer ownership of the right-of-way on the east Side of the bridge to the City of Vero Beach for incorporation into McWilliams Park to expand the park. Mr. Davis said he thought they would probably transfer ownership of right-of-way to thee City on the west side as well. Chairman Bowman asked if DOT is going to mitigate with the same impoundments as the County is going to mitigate on Indian River Blvd. Mr. Davis replied, it wi] 1 not be exactly the same mitigation plan; the County will mitigate within the impoundment and DOT has plans to mitigate outside the impoundment. There is one acre impact of wetlands they have identified. They plan to scrape down 3.39 acres of the northern portion of the spoil area to allow native vegetation to establish itself; they will do some plantings there and eliminate any nuisance species that would be in that area. Request from Citizens in S_e_b_a_s_t._i.a..n__f_o~_.G_r_a_qe___S_e~a.rated Railroad Crossinq a~ CR-512/F.E.C. Railroad Mr. Davis reported that he received a request from a man in Sebastian who has been working with the Riverfront Conunittee. He has been looking into elevating the railroad track to go over CR-512. Mr. Davis said he agrees with the concept, however, h~ feels the cost is prohibited at this time. INDIA[i }{I'.,'ER COUNTY, FLORIDA M E 14 O R A N D U M OPY' TO: THROUGH: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: James Chandler County Administrator James W. Davis, P.E. Public Norks Directory Roger D · Cain, P.E./ County Engineer January 18, 1991 CR 512 Corridor Improvements DESCRIPTION AND CONDITIONS: Indian River County has a Professional Services Agreement with Kimball-Lloyd, Inc. to do the design work for the CR 512 Corridor Improvements, Projects I and II, dated May 31, 1988. Due to the resolution of the Florida East Coast Railroad crossing situation, we have decided to divide the project into two separate portions, Project I and Project II, because of the ability to get the work done on the western portion of the roadway at an earlier date than that on the '~astern portion, which will require an approval of a crossing design for the Florida East Coast Railroad and consequently will take longer to have plans finished. An ammendment has been prepared.that will accomplish this change to the professional services agreement. As a result of this division of the project, some additional work will be required to provide a transition section near the location ~f the Elementary School on CR 512 for the interim period until the eastern portion is finished. The additional cost for this is $3885.00. The total for both projects is now $230,841.00. ALTERNATIVES AND ANALYSIS: Alternative # 1 - To approve this first ammendment to the professional engineering services agreement for CR 512. Alternative # 2 - To not approve the first ammendment to the profess!onal engineering services agreement for CR 512. RECOMMENDATION AND FUNDING: Alternative # 1 is recommended by staff and funding will come from account # 101-153-541-067.13. ~TTAC~LMENTS: 1) 2) Copy of Professional Services Agreement First A~endment to the Professional Services Agreement DISTRUBUTION: 1) 2) 3) James W. Davis, P.E., Public Works Director Roger D. Cain, P.E., County Engineer Beth Jordan, Risk Manager, Risk Management AP PROV~._D__A_G EN DA ITEM BY RDC/rk C.L2 ~ .... DATE: TO: FROH: REFERENCE: City of Sebastian POST OFFICE BOX 780127 o SEBASTIAN, FLORIDA 32978 TELEPHONE (407) 589-5330 ri FAX (407) 589-5570 H E M O R A N D UH January 4, 1991 Planning & Zoning Commission Bruce Cooper . ~9_~~~ Director of Community Developme Conceptual Site Plan for Food Lion (Chesser's Gap) Dr. Henry Fischer is requesting conceptual approval for what is known as the Food Lion Shopping Center. The site plan represents Tract 7 and Out Parcel C of the Preliminary Development Plan of Chesser's Gap. The original Preliminary Plan indicated a supermarket of 29,000 square feet and a retail facility of 8,400 square feet. The Conceptual Site Plan now indicates a supermarket of 32,162 square feet (3,160 square feet net additional) and 13,9OO square feet (5,500 square feet net additional). The Conceptual Site Plan does indicate parking based on 5.5 per 1,OO0 square feet of total area whereas, the original Preliminary Plan separated the supermarket from the retail area. The Conceptual Site Plan also indicates a 40 x 60 retail area on the north end with a 10 foot drive through window. The parking ordinance requires 6 parking stalls for stacking unless the applicant can demonstrate that the intended use generates a low volume of drive up traffic and does not require the standard 6 stacking spaces. The applicant intends to provide something similar to a dry cleaningt service. Until the actual site plan indicates the type of use and specific site data indicating the window location, I will reserve comments concerning the drive through at this time. The Conceptual Site Plan also has changed to indicate rows of parking stalls in excess of 20 without any landscape strip. This is minor and can be changed in the actual site plan development or waived by the Planning and Zoning Commission. I have no objection to the Conceptual Site Plan subject to the above mentioned comments. CCUNTY ROAD 5 1 2 IMPROVEMENTS (.~, k' ( C:.,-,,,:--'~', C Public ~,?orks Director Jim Davis referred to the preliminary drawings of the project that begins at the southwest corner of town, just west of Roseland Road and goes from the existing two-lane road to a 4-lane divided highway, which will be expandable to 6 lanes. Phase one of the project is to construct a divided 4-lane, median-type roadway that will progress northeasterly to a point where the County purchased the old railroad right-of-way that goes through Sebastian. Back "in the mid 1980s when the opportunity arose to purchase that railroad right-of-way, the County paid $300,000 for a 100-ft. wide corridor which transverses all the w. ay through the Highlands community. There is approximately two and a half mi les of corridor, and only a short section, roughly 4,000 feet, lies in the controversial area in the portion where it actually splits from the road right-of-way. Most of that raj iroad r/w is alongside the existing CR-S12 r/w except in the eastern area. There is a very narrow strip of utility r/w owned by GDU, but we would have to go to court for that, and it is so narrow it really isn't usable. The City of Sebastian adopted a resolution in 1988 supporting the project, including the split pair design. The County then began to negotiate with the FEC with regard to getting a new crossing. We are at a point now where the rai Iroad is amenable to giving a new crossing if the County gives up the Day Street crossing and the 87th Street crossing. Those negotiations are in the final stages, and although we prefer not to give up any rai Iroad crossings, it appears that we must do"so. Basically, the engineering is done, and we already have sent out a reouest for proposal for getting a portion of the pavement done. County staff feels comfortable that the split design is the most effective ,way to provide a 4-lane highway at this time and the ability to expand it to a 6-lane faci I i ty in the future. The two intersections on U.S. #1 would be tied togett~er with synci~ronization. Director Davis presented graphs showing the design of tile two intersections, and noted that there are very few commercial uses fronting the short section of the existing CR-512 roadway. We are taking measures to buffer the mobile home park in that area as we have 100 feet of r/w and 76 feet of green area to work with. We could bui Id a masonry wall or a vegetation type buffering, which has worked well in other areas of the county, particularly along indian River Boulevard. Co,~nissioner Bird wanted to make it clear that the County has stuck by the concept of the spl it pair design because it is the most Cost effective way and the safest way to get traffic off of CR-512 onto U.S. #1, and' not just because we bought the railroad right-of-waY several years ago. ..... County Engineer Roger Cain explained how the updated cost estimates on the project made the split pair design the most cost effective, the major reason being that it follows the existing CR-512 alignment most of the way. He pointed out that there will have to be a crossing expansion regardless of which crossing ts used. Dr. Henry Fischer disagreed that there is just limited con~nercial in that short stretch of CR-512 before it reaches U.S. #1. He emphasized that there are 23 retail businesses right on CR-512 west of the railroad tracks. Vice Chairman Oberbeck felt those property owners along CR-512 would be happy to sell that r/w so that the road could be expanded along there rather than l)ein~ split, but Director Davis defended his position of the split pair being the most cost effective design. Dr. Fischer felt that nobody will buy the argument that you can build two roads cheaper than just one, but Director Davis stressed that we actually are building only one 2-lane road. He explained that widening CR~512 would be more expensive. Ti~ere is a difference of approximately .$~00,000 between the two alternatives. 10 Discussion ensued regarding the split pair design, and several people in attendance who did not give their names voiced their concerns about the alignment and the possibility of expanding the existing crossing. Commissioner Scurlock suggested that the new City Council adopt a new resolution supporting 'the split pair design, but ' ' Mayor Conyers felt that wasn't necessary since nothing really has changed and since there would be significant savings with the split pair design. He did see some difficulty in a 2-lane road coming over the hill there by the railroad and coming to a dead' stop at U.S. #1. He personally liked the idea of the twin pair design. Some people in attendance wanted to know when the public hearings would be held on this matter because they felt that this design had been shoved down their throats the I-ast time that Director Davis had come to Sebastian. Co,,~issioner ~¥heeler remembered t~o joint public hearings that were held in Sebastian that were attended by both the County Com~.iss,on and the City Council where the engineering staff explained the County's intent to go with the spl it pair desi.o.n. if there is a problem with the design of the road and the people don't want this design, he would suggest that they go back to City Council and make their preferences known. The County,s professional staff has given their professional opinion that the split pair design is the most cost effective and safest way to bui Id the road. He felt that many options have been considered and that Director Davis would be will lng to present his arguments again at another public hearing. Cornaissioner Scurlock concurred that if the people need another publ ic meeting on this matter, we should schedule one, but the Board feels that our staff has recorrrnended a good I) ro~..'r am. 11 Mayor Conyers asked if there is any part of this over project that can he started no~,:, and Director Davis explained that we have broken the project into two pieces from west of the new elementary school. One project will be southwesterly and will involve a q-lane highway and they will proceed just as fast as possible to get this out to bid in 90-120 days. After the bids are in, it would be 6 months before we can start construction, probably by next June. That stretch will cost $1.? million. There will be enough money to fund that portion and then as revenues come in, we will have $300 000 and then whatever comes in through other revenue sources will be used to fund the next phase. Administrator Chandler advised that based on the last Couple of years, the monies coming in would amount to approximately $500,000, so there would be sufficient monies to build phase two. Con'~.issioner Scurlock offered again to hold another public hearing in Sebastian or have Director Davis and his staff go up to Sebastian to explain the alternatives to the people. Vice Chairman Oberbeck agreed that another meeting would be worthwhile with Director Davis and his staff representing the County to explain to the people the alternatives and the cost difference. Co~,,,issioner Scurlock pointed out that the Council will have to take under consideration the time loss in redesigning the road, and Director Davis es-imated ~hat if everyone cooperated on the right-of-way, it would probably take at least one year to accom:~I!sh the redesign, engineering, etc. George Metcalf, former councilman, recalled that long before this ever got going he was appointed by the mayor at that time to help the original consultant and there was opposition from ~wo groups, one being the North County Businessmen's Association. However, a lot of the businessmen bacI(ed down and ended up supporting the split pair design. He emphasized that Director 12 Davis and all the County engineers and planners gave unlimited time to keeping people informed on the impacts of the proiect. He believed there had been 3 public hearings going as far back as 1986. There wasn't any problem then, but now all of a sudden there is, and he cannot help but feel that those who have spoken against the project tonight have a personal interest. Chairman Eggert noted that the following letter was received from Lambert Real Estate, Inc.: LiST~' · , ~'~-~%% DISTRIBUTION t~,' ' ~'~.eC,/'~°~°/):' ' $f''- Adminifrntor ~~. R L"ESTA I eP k¢~ II "F~SI STIAN RIVER AREA Pe, sonnel ~l &~'6~ ' Community OeV'r ~ Utilities Financel ! ~- ~ ,,, · /,,- fy -z,~z ~pr~.BOX780187 Other/~-'~'-'~-" '~' ' 'ASTIAN. FLORIDA 32978.0187 ~ t .~.-: ~. (305) 58~.87oo Novembe~ 30,1990 ~.,..~.~ County Commissioners Sebastian City Council Re: Parcel ~ 07-31~39-00000-3000-00007.O As the owners of one of the few impacted properties on CR 512, we take this opportunity to express our opinion of the on-going hassle over the twin pair portion of CR 512. Our Property has 300' fronting existing CR 512 with 176' fronting on the County owned Railroad R/W. Our first preference would be to put all four lanes on the Railroad R/W, leaving that portion of existing CR 512 from Old Dixie to just Wes~ of the elementary school as a service road to serve the commercial businesses along that span. This would have several desirable results: (1) The need for the 74' portion of commercial CR please those owners, who property. setback currently required on that 512 would be eliminated. This should could than utilize their entire (2) The proposed new FEC Railroad crossing would be at grade. Closing the existing crossing at US 1 and CR 512 would eliminate the hill and the difficult, if no~ dangerous, crossing. (3) The entire ROW, from CR 510 to U.S.~I is already owned by the County. 13 (4) Louisiana St. COuld be widened between "old 512" and "new an~ would Provide excellant access to the commerical distri :hus created. (5) All traffic from intersection 512 would enter U.S #1 at and the problem ' a bli¢ eliminated, of oncoming traffic would Our second Preference is the twin Pair concept. The Worst senario, in. our opinion, would be to have 4 lanes existing CR 512. The several curves would still be there, t dangerous BEC Railroad crossing and US # 1 intersectiom would compounded and the cost of acquiring additional right-of-way a the disposition of the large lake East of the Town St Convenience store Wou]d be horrendous.~ Our elected officia]s aJ the caretakers of our ' taxdo] ] additional, and un,necessary ars and we' fee]' that th 'inexcusab]e e · . .. . , expense to the taxpayers would We have a hard time Understanding why a few people hay consistently taken a position qf..-opposing either Putting all leu · ' lanes on the -Railroad R/W' or.-the twin'Pairs concept. To ou knOW]edge, none of these Pe'°P]e making statements to the pres and at public meetings OWn any property in the impacted area None of the businesses in this area depend or~ transien- .... :-' customers. A]'] are 9eared to local CUstomers. . . We have more travelers stopping at our Real Estate office for, directions maps and OCcasionally to inquire about Property. Nevem the less~ we definitely support the twin pairs ' over '4' laninu existing OR 512. We have sat in on Public hearings '. ,regarding. CR 512 and We applauded the action of Sebastian City Council when they adopted Resolution No. R-88-77. CR §12 has bee~l bandied around since ~g84. Construction costs are going up every · -Year. Let's get on With it before we are Pa~ H.- Lambert all too old to use-itl Mike Dudeck of Engi,neering pointed out that if the split pair design is not used, the old alignment would result in the road terminating right ~n the middle of the Indian River Drive/riverfront project. The split pair design would divert that traffic and give more fle×ibil t¥ in developing the river-~ront'project. lq Consideral) le disct~ssion enst~ed on the northern section of the alignment. Corrmiss~oner Scurlock felt that the Co~mission is not going to change its position on the design of the roadway unless we get some direction from the Sebastian City Council, but Vice Chairman Oberbeck stressed that they were not here tonight to change the position, but only to get information. Con-missioner Wheeler emphasized that the Board did not want to give up two crossings for one, but the bottom line is time and ...~., dollars 'and our chances of Winning 'that fight with the FEC is less than even. We.started out with the FEC wa. nt. ing 4..crossings,- then 3, and now we have negotiated it down to two crossings. Chairman Eggert felt the direction to staff tonight is to continue with the split pair design unless we hear differently from the City Council. ADDED ITE~t - AIRPORT Vice Chairman Oberi~eck ~vished to add an item to the Agenda regarding recent legislation that has to do with airport zoning reoulations. The Board agreed to add this item for informational purposes only. Bruce Cooper of the City's Corrm, unity Development Department distributed copies of a small map and excerpts from Chapter g0-136 of Florida Statutes. He explained that recent legislation requires that the County adopt some kind of zoning ordinance that would restrict incompatible uses on property adjacent to airports, ~hich most likely ~vould be residential development. Realistically, he didn't feel it ~'~as going to he too m,~ch of an in.pact to the County itself at this point because of the nature of the pro~erty adiacent to the airporti ~hey would be ~orking ~ith Ro]~ert Keati~g, the Co~nty's Com~uni ty Development Director, and his staff to v~ork ot~t an i~terim zoning ordinance. 'i. '"'- . -" Ii, DIAN RI~,E~' COUNTY, FLORIDA .;'.-b-L'. - .. ...'..',""i' .., M E M O R A N D U M ,~:... .,-~ ;~.,~,-. - ~ ,..-:]~..~. ~; .. :,- ._ ., .,~..-~ ..- -.: . . . ~'~,- . ., ,. '.:,,-,..TO: ..... ~.'".". .... ,-'~',- - ~,'-' ,.r~-...'~ - ~.~&.. -,...-:,.,... z,,.,:::.?.... Roger D. Ca3n, P E -'-"'. ' ". :.',, ~'t:'- ..: .;,?.-;'.;:~::.~.'.'!:~!.:.~!,;~:;~,!:;"-!-..Ooupty Enn ineer ...'.'.':'::" '.'l~.'..:t,~-~i· "- .... ',.' :' · '.'.tT.,.;-~., !,, .;;::.?j:~' '::.~ '..~'~'?':;:---~,.~%.;~ ...... .,, ,...~.t,, ,. , -.~,'2~'- -· .... "~:." "' :~.',", ,"~'~^;. "~;'-'~ '.-'?,;" ' 'Y"~':"'~-'..". ,"-~'~Z- ..... ~. ¢:t.~.,.,.. , ',~:-,,-~.... ._' ........ . ....~-:~.r~i~ :~-~_-.-"Ch~ ~ ~ - '~' -' ~ ' " ' "~'" -':~'"'"' ' · "~: ' ' '"~;"~'-' "" "~-"' ' - ~ ~ r ' ,~:-,.,, .,......,,t..,~ ..~¢,~,~.~z~,,.~£~,.,:~-..,..~,~?~s.,-: .;-..?£~ .. ,; , , .., ~.~;~ ...... . ,, .-~.,. . · _ .... , ; '~., ..~....~,-.,..,z-, ...... ~,.~..,,~;~£ .,_ .~,~.~.,.., -,. .,~.~ · .~,~.; . , ~ -.,~- ~ - .-~, - . "":"i ' ~' ,-~"Jz='."'vDATE · ' '..~.~."'.':."-', --' ' ' ;' .... '"-" "~'"' :' '"':": ~,~:'- ..... ~'..~"'..'~',~." ,.,,, "';~: *' .', ' '.-.~;" ~,~;~fJ-'~t'~ ~'~.",."',~.*.'~.'-, · c. ~ W '~' -: ' · '"~ ~ ..... · . . ~ ..~._ .,.-. ,_, ~J~ ~ .-~,' , . .... , .,.--~-,. , ..-.~,~,.. , · ,' ~.-;': ..... .',%¢ .,.~,-'-'. ~, ,~ .'- ;;".~;-,~,z*¢,,~, -~,'~.,~,-_.'~;'~-_;' ~.l~,..~t ,~;;.':-~.;. : .,. t~" ,Y. * -. ·, ;~, [';~¢ .... : ..' :',~.~'..' i,.' ,.ta:-~¢~,~:-'.:. ,~.., ,_'0 .... -,~. . ~_ ' '.~;. '. "..' ' - - ,,~,j~.~' '~,, ',~- ,:~,~,.~...~.,{~L~'~.-.¢~.~'~.~,.-'~*~-~.'~';,.., ~.~.:~,,;..,. ... , ~-~.~ _ -~ .,f ~. . ~. ,; . [.'* , ~. 1 0 map, and FDOT ""-'".' ".L.F.' intersection"'~ith Dela~ap~"Avenue in Sebastian '" '. :':.:~Unit 12, at sta 444+20, to sta 452+96.85, there ~s a dedicated '_ right-of-way on the South (right) side of GO feet from the FDOT · baseline, and a maintained right-of-way on the North (left) side ':'averaging about 26 feet, for a total of 86 feet more or ]ess, for Station 452+96/85 is the end of one FDOT Pro3ect, and the beginning of another, this one assigned sta 27+0 as its origin. From sta 27+0'to ~ta '' ' Sebastian Highlands 45+50t, the intersection with the East line of Unit 12.(and the Sebastian City · continues to be a GO-foot dedicated right-of-way on the ]in~, there South side, and a maintained right-of-way varying between 26 and 31 feet on the North side, for a total ran9ing around 88 feet of right-of-way for 1850 feet. From sta 45+50± to sta 50+0, there exists a maintained right-of-way of 50 feet more or ]ess, for 450 feet. From sta 50+0 to sta 55+0, there exists a dedicated right-of-way 33 feet each side of the FDOT baseline for 66 feet of right-of-way, for 500 feet. From sta 55+0 to sta 58+75, there continues to be a 33~foot dedication on the North (left~ side, with a maintained right-of-way averaging between 17 feet and 2'2 feet f=on the South (right) side for 52 feet more or less of right-of-way, for 375 feeti' From Sta 58+75 to the West right-of-way of US #1, Which is approximately from the centerline intersection of Old Dixie Highway, there exists 80 feet of dedicated right~of-way, for .400 feet more or- less. CAC/r ~; CR5 1 2ROW. 0 I ~o INDIA/'! RIVER COUNTY, FLORIDA MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: James Chandler County Administrator James W.~Davis, 'P.'E. Public Works Director August 8, 1990 CR 512 Widening Improvements Status Recent inquiries have been made by North County residents on the status of the CR 512 Widening Project through the City of Sebastian. Staff has been requested to provide an update on the status of the project and to document past decisions on the proposed Twin Pairs Alignment through the eastern portion of the .project. 1985 HISTORY OF PROJECT '\ County purchased the 100' wide Gulf and Western Railroad right-of-way through a four mlle segment of the City of Sebastian for approximately $200,000. 1985 County Traffic Engineering Staff conducted an Intersection Study of CR 512/U.S.1 intersection that recommended a Twin Pairs alignment for widening CR 512 along the easterly 3000' section of the project, similar to the F.D.O.T. SR-60 Twin Pairs Project scheduled for construction in 1990. August - October 1985 The North Indian River County Businessmen's Association, Inc. and Orange Heights Property Owners Association objected to the Twin Pairs Alignment and requested an Economic Study of the alternatives (letter dated August 19, 1985). October 1985 Indian River County Public Works Department conducted an Economic Feasibility Study. on tile cost to implement, i) the Twin Pairs Alignment, to widen the 'existing CR 512 roadway, and 3) to construct a new four lane road in the railroad right-of-way (copy attached). A presentation was made to the North County Businessman,s Associations monthly luncheon meeting by James W. Davis. stat512.jwd 08/09/90 Page 2. September 1986 March 1987 County Staff sent letters to Property owners fronting the existing CR 512 roadway asking their opinion on the feasibility of exchanging fronting portions of the County owned railroad right-of-way for additional right-of-way along the property owners CR 512 frontage. Most property owners objected to exchanging land with the County (see attached letter from Richard and Pat Lambert dated August 23, 1986). Staff recommended to the Transportation Planning Committee that a consultant be retained to Study the three options of widening CR 512. The Board of County Commissioners approved this study and appointed Mayor Harris of Sebastian on 'the Consultant Selection Committee (memo to Board of County Commissioners from James W. Davis dated June 4, 1987 attached). September 27, 1988 County Staff transmitted a copy of Consultant,s Study to City Manager Rob McClary (letter attached). December 5, 1988 Public Works Director attended City of Sebastian City Council meeting to discuss and receive input on CR 512 Corridor and Thoroughfare Plan (agenda of meeting attached). December 28, 1988 Staff transmitted comments received at the Sebastian City Council Meeting to Consultant for incorporation into 'the project. February, 1989 City Manager McClary transmitted to the County, City of Sebastian Resolution R~88-77 approving the CR 512 Traffic Study (COpy attached). November 1, 1989 Status Report sent to City Manager Robert McClary. (COpy attached.) February 9, 1990 Letters received from City of Sebastian Staff regarding new railroad crossing for CR 512 Twin Pairs Alignment. stat512.jwd 08/09/90 Page 3. attachments: June 5, 1990 The. Board of COUntY CommiSsioners instructed st~ff to Continue negotiations with"the F.E.c' Railway co. so that a new railroad crossing can be' obtained 'at the 'proposed westbound align~nent without giving up three other crossings in~ the County. .{minutes.attached) ~.~, From the above history, Staff haM' received and' 'responded t'0' public input in the North County area. As evidenced by City of Sebastian Resolution R-88-77 the City is supporting the Twin Pairs Alignment. ' The current status of the project is that the County's consultant, Kimball/Lloyd, Inc. is currently splitting the project into two phases. Phase One will include widening CR 512 west of the Pelican Island Elementary School (west of the Twin Pairs section) and will be implemented as soon as possible. Phase Two will include constructing the new westbound lanes within the railroad right-of-way along the Twin Pairs Alignment. Since the railroad crossing issue is still unresolved, a schedule for the Phase Two work has not been established. Staff is currently negotiating with the F.E.C D.O.T. staff. · Railway Co. and Florida Please contact me if you wish to discuss this project \blp ' 1} Letter requesting an Economic Study, dated August 19, 1985. 2) An Economic Feasibility Study done by Indian River County, Public Works Department. 3) Letter from Richard and Pat Lambert, dated August 23, 1986. 4) Memo to Board of County Commissioners from James W. Davis, dated June 4, 1989. 5) Transmittal of Consultant Study sent to City Manager Rob McClary. 6) Agenda of Sebastian City Council meeting. 7) Copy of Resolution R-88-77. 8} Status report.. 9) Minutes of June 5, 1990, Board of County Commissioners meeting. Roger D. Cain, P.E., County Engineer cc: 6. Deficiencies and Their Relief Traffic volumes at or near the capacity of a ening, and median construction are of little highway or intersection cause poor operating con- benefit if the congestion arises because of conflicts ditions: slow speeds, congestion, .frequent stops, ...at intersections. Similarly, intersection improve- delays, and safety hazards. Your goal in rev'iewing~.. ~: ::.:ment projects, such as signalization left-turn bays, plans for new development is to ensure tha-t such poor conditions are not ·caused by the new development. If traffic volumes projected to result from a new development are greater than the county highway system can handle, something' must be done to improve the highway system or to control the development. HIGHWAY CAPACITY Highway capacity, as measued by maximum service flow (MSF), is defined by the Highway Capacity Manual, cited earlier, as the maximum number of vehicles that reasonably expect to pass over a given section of a roadway in a given time under prevailing conditions of roadway and traffic. Capacity is expressed as an hourly volume of passenger cars, or the equivalent. Capacity is affected by roadway characteristics, such as lane width, number of lanes, presence of medians, volume of opposing traffic, etc. A representative value for a rural two-lane road is 1,000 vehicles per hour in each direction. Capacity ..ccan often be increased by widening the 'roadway. Where there are parallel t.Wo-wa_y r0ads,~_~on- refuting each to one-way qperation__w.i!.l_ g_reatly increase capacity. Capacity also denends on the volume of conflicting traffic movements. Suppose a county road wide enough to carry 1,200 vehicles per hour has a traffic signal on it. If the road has a green light half the time, then a maximum of 600 cars will be able to pass through in an hour. No road improvements short of adding a second lane will increase the road's capacity. However~ adjus_ting the signal to give the road more green time will increase theroad's .... capactt~' ro or tionatcly. When congestion appears, the county engineer must determine whether it is the result of roadway limitations or traffic conflicts, ltoadway improvement projects such as widening, straight- Impact of Land Development on the Highway System 6-i · and overpasses will be of little value if the Congestion arises because of a high ratio Of traffic volume to roadway capacity. . '. · Because capacity is a function of roadway design, traffic characteristics, and control measures, such as signals and signing, prediction of actual traffic flow conditions is difficult. As a rule of thumb, if traffic projected on county highways subject to the impact of land development exceeds 70 percent of capacity, you may have problems. Further study by a traffic engineer may be warranted. In this case you may seek the assistance of the staff of other agencies, or require that the developer conduct a thorough traffic analysis. ROADWAY HAZARDS Even when traffic volumes are low, roadway conditions may create safety hazards. Any increase in traffc will then increase the risk of accidents. To identify hazards, a review should be made of roadway conditions in areas of planned developments or through which externally generated new traffic will pass to identify hazards. For more detailed discussion of hazard analysis and hazard reduction, refer to NACE Action Guide entitled Safety Improvements. SOLUTIONS FOR DEFICIENCIES There will typically be a variety of ways to relieve problems associated with the impact of land development on the highway system. Possible solutions to projected traffic problems are of four general types: Control traffic routing and flow conditions, to redirect traffic from problem areas to areas of excess capacity. Implement minor improvements such as turning lanes, driveway redesign, and signal May' 198~6 ~ installation, to relieve localized safety or con- gestion problems. · .e__Implement major improvements such as construction of new lanes and highway 'links, and reconstruction of interchanges. · Control travel demand through measures to -. encourage· use. of'transit· and · location of buildings to reduce the need. for .a vehicle. During the plan review, you can work with a developer to encourage the maximum possible use of traffic control.and demand control -which tend to be less costly - to solve or avoid potential future problems. Such methods are most useful for larger developments or concentrations of development activity. If physical improvements are needed to accommodate traffic growth associated with a specific development, you should consider how the devetoper...may participate-in making.' these improvements. Many jurisdictions now, as a matter of course, require developers to construct or repay the county for construction of intersection reconstructions and signal placements, as a condition for plan approval. Impact of Land Development on the [lighway System 6-2 May 1986 TY = .TYPE _. RA = RIGHT ANGLE LT = LEFT TURN., · 'P.,E = REAR END ' ...... OC = OUT OF CONTROL" HO = HEAD ON PA = PARKED SS =SIDESWIPE BA = BACKING PE = PEDESTRIAN BI = BICYCLE FO = FIXED OBJECT MI = MISCELLANEOUS LI = LIGHTING D = DAY N = NIGHT DR = DRUGS Y = YES N= NO CLEAR CLOUDY RAIN FOG WET CO = CONTROL N = NO Y = YIELD S = STOP T = TRAFFIC SIGNAL M = MANUAL CONTROL R = RAILROAD F = FLASHING BEACON IN = INJURY NONE INJURY FATALITY ~ATS NOIYES/FATAL TYPE ALCOHOL LIGHT WEATHER /aCC. A"' ! F /ACC. RELATEO CONdITIOnS CO~D!T. 05~7-122 0~11818Z ...... LT 0 C I ~.E D C I LT y ~ C LT ,~ C N $ S $ 07E~-141 07iZ~i~9 S S S . ~. :.... ; . :,, .. . ~,,,~.~,,,,.~':.:.,,...~ . 2.~.,d ..... ........... ._. , ,qCCIDENT ,.n.,qTE h'OIYES/F~T~L TYF'E ALCSH;:)L LZGNT WEATHER TRAFFIC I.)),.m /ACC, ' ' i F /ACC. RELATED CONDITIONS CONDIT. CONTROL C .....AT BARBER YEAR :' 90 $l r~5,~ AT ~ISCAYNE" !.,O-,dO Ii/01/90 ~ N D L ,,gO u~9 I1/07/f0 N O C N LT N ] YEA~ :' 90 - / {{ CR,i: AT BLUE ,c,.~, 05~0-024 05/04/90 i RE N 0 C N YEAR .~.,. AT ~REEZE~A¥ YEAR YEAR :' ~7 YEAR :' BB 01~7-004 01/01/87 DC N R N ~'- ...... ~ ...... I ~A N C N 0~7~0~ 05/05/~7 I RE D C ~ 05~7-I&2 ¢5/25/~7 : OC Y D C ~ 0997-!03 C~122/~7 RE 9 L q I0~7-II~ 10/24/87 I RA D C : ~1~,-.~, 1!/27/87 ~E D C )I 4C£I~£NT D~T£ 07~-0~ 07112i8~ 0290-034 02/07/90 0390-008 03/02/?0 03~0-t50 03/24/~0 P'~ D C S D C S N C N N '~ D C -, ,, N '~; C N I RA N D C S N ; ~E ? N L N I ~E y N C ~: 01~,3-0~? 01/07/90 D C D C ~ L' R N N C t '"EAR :' ~9 ~! ~522 AT 2ELA~AgE 3,1 D C ~j DATE ~,;DI¥'E~/FATAL TYPE ALCOHOL k'EANER TRAFFIC , -C~. ~ELATE~ CD~JgIT. CD,,TnuL i YEA..i' .,' ='8 -- -, ! YEaR :' ~9 - 0)8%104 03/07/89 LIGHT CONOITION$ F,.E ~ C N RE O R N YEAR :' 90 ._ - ~.,,~ AT UI6H ; FO · ~; R' N O C $ FO F,E D C $ D C ,~: L L C STATUS/ .... ~,AI TYPE ~LC ..... LIGHT WEATHER TRAFFIC : /~CC. RELATED CO,~D .... N5 CONDIT. CO~TROL rl, p D C L T yj D D r' :j AC~,C~N, 'D~TE ~]O/YEE/FRTAL TYFE ALCOHOL LZEHT 07~7-!31 07/2~/~7 F OC ¥ 0E~7~006 O~/Ol/B7 N OC 1170-012 I LT ,~ .... 'x~z 06/01,'E8 l., ~/~ I ~' LT ..:.:E ~EATHER TRAFFIC CO~DIT. CONTROL lllllll C C D C ~ C S :J L ~. 0 L ,; O L ~ TRAFFIC CONTROL YEAR :' 88 YEAR :' ~9 FO D C R R R R .~ C 8 YEAR :' EO -- $ 0287-06~ ~E D ~ C C L L ~ tll ~2~7-1~7 12i24/87 ~0 fy 04SS-Il8 04/22/58 ..... - ..... 09DD-098 ^9/,~o,~ 02Bg-jg~ 0289~20~ 02127/~9 0989-026 0989-081 09/12i89 i,_.-~0~ ¢1q0~~ 01/25/90 02~0-111 02/!9/90 0390-101 0311~190 04~0-!52 :'590-:.57 ~E~THER CB~IT. RE D RE ¥ ~ W C C C L P, C C L C L C R C C C C r' C C C : C C C L C C C ,-. ,: TRAFFIC CONTROL N f T T N T T T f r T ,; T T T T ...... AT-,.,,E,,~LL, · CONSTRUCTION was accelerated by use of prefabricated girder assemblies consisting of 84.fi-long bridge beams. THOMAS J. BYLE, P.E. Assistant Director of Engineering, Kent County Road Commission, ROY VELDERMAN, P.E. Project Engineer, and JAMES W. GRAUBERGER ."~t ' _ .=, '~' ' ' Marketing Coordinator, . Grand Rapids, Michigan ON' any given weekday late in 1980 in Grand Rapids, Michigan, an average of 10.a00 cars and trucks drove down two-lane Patterson Av- enue and across the CSX railroad tracks. On that same given day, 20 to 24 trains crossed Patterson Avenue, bringing down the crossing gates and stopping already congested traffic every time. With a traffic study that revealed these statistics, the Kent County Road Commissmn confirmed ,,'.'hat it already suspected: the botdeneck at the Patterson Avenue crossing would have to be eliminated or ~mportant cconollllc ;4rowth in the area would be stifled. CSX Corporation had also realized that something needed to be done. However, both the Kent County Road Commission and CSX knew that con- xlructlon would hkcly me;m disrnptc, d service for rail and for vehicular traf- fic, but both favored completing a railroad grade separation nonethe- less. When the road commission took its concerns to CSX in 1980. the rail- road was forced to stipulate one thing: any construction toward a grade sep- aration could not interrupt rail service on this main line Chicago-Detroit track for more than eight hours at a time, and that on a very limited basis. The railroad's constraints aside, the Kent County Road Commission knew that construction would have to be completed in one season, not only to minimize inconvenience to vehicular traffic, but more importantly, to avoid having the project sit unfinished all winter. On October 23. 1987. a new five- lane Patterson Avenue ~ with a new CSX bridge above it ~ re-opened for traffic. In the end, the Kent Cotmty Road Commission had completed a $3-million project, which included not only a $2.2-~nillion railroad grade sep- aration and 0.a mile of approach ro;Jdw;ty, }:)ut also utility relocations and an i,dditional 0.8 mile of Widened roadway. The construction was eom- pleted in one season rind. in the end. interrnpted rail service only twice, once for seven hours anti once for four. The story of the Patterson Av- enue railroad grade separation shows how extensive pre-design and active communication between the road commission, Williams & Works (a local engineering firm}, and CSX cut project time to an absolute minimum and allowed the road commission to beat stringent time constraints· Community Perceives a Need Patterson Avenue services Grand Rapids as a major access route from 1-96 and M-il 128th Street) ~ both state highways -- to the Kent County International Airport, 44th Street, and to a growing industrial and eom- mercial .area. The Grand Rapids met- ropolitan area, which occupies much of Kent County. is. in terms of Michi- gan's urban areas, second only to De- troit in size. In 1980, the Kent County Road Commission performed a system-wide sufficiency rating and as a result put Patterson Avenue at the top o£ its priority projects list. In 19S0. with an average of 10,300 cars and 20 trams crossing paths each day, the road commission had begun talking to CSX. ttowever, by 1984 the problem had gotten worse. The aver- age daily traffic count had risen t~ 16,500 and during rush hour, cars and trucks from adjacent businesses and properties could not enter two-lane Patterson Avenue because of nearly standstill traffic. Sehimpler-Cor- radino, of Louisville, Kentucky, a consulting firm hired by the Grand Rapids Environs Traffic Study (GRETS), concluded early in 1985 that if some sort of solution were not carried out soon, roughly 1,500 jobs would be lost in the area and roughly 1,600 truck trips impeded each day. Even without identified or commit- ted funding sources, the Kent County Road Commission began planning for a full railroad grade separation and for widening Patterson Avenue to five lanes. On November 26, 1985, the commission sent out requests for pro- posals for engineering studies, and not until February 6, 1986 did the Michigan Department of Transporta- · tion deliver a grant from the Federal government for the grade separation and one mile of roadway. Having seen the need for the project long before, several local agencies and munici- palities also contributed to its funding, among them the Kent County Aeronautics Board, the Kent County Road Commission. Kent County, and the cities of Grand Rapids, Kentwood. and Cascade Township. CSX Corporation also contributed to ~ the project. The request for proposals had gone out on November 26, 1985, and on De- cember 1Sth Williams & Works was hired to study alternative ways of completing the grade separation and to do the design work. The road commission realized that it was im- portant to have both the study phase completed and the project desi/4n done and approved by November 1986. Only then would the road com- mission have time to receive hids, hire a contractor, and be prepared to start construction as early in the spring as weather would permit. With only 11 months in which to xvork, the road commission knew that CSX and the Michigan Department of Transportation woukt have to be able to approve the plans without making major revisions. The road com,mssion urged the consuhant to put expe- diency above Ibrmality and to discuss by phone each stage of the design with CSX en.,./,ineers. A nornml ap- prov:ll pcrind si)JillS nlllllltls. :ill¢l Ibis %%'a~/, IlO[ all Op[illll. 'l'ht. submitted to CSX each phase of its desmn -- including ali calculations as that phase was completed. The tire communicatmn resulted in a three-day formal ;q)provaj The plans CSX Rafir.ad received on Tuesday, November 17, 1986they ap- proved as submitted on Fri}lay, November 21. 1986. PUBLIC WORKSf. r Azzgust. 1988 Patterson Avenue runs north. south, and two CSX railroad tracks-- a through-track and a switch/passing track -- intersect it in an east-west direction. Engineers saw that the project should be completed in two phases. In the fi?st phase, crews from the grading subcontractor, Equip~ ment& Gravel Company, Grand Rapids, moved the rail bed south of its original position using temporary em- bankments. Using bulldozers, rail- road crews with the help of the con- tractor carefully but quickly pushed and pulled a section of the main line track 24 ft over onto the temporary bed.. Then. moving into the empty space created by the diverted tracks, the prime contractbr, Argersinger- Morse, Ann Arbor, Michigan, in- stalled two. prerdesigned cofferdams 35 ft deep and just 8 ft from the active track in order to begin constructing the abutments. Pre-designing the cofferdams along with the rest of the project eliminated the usual step of having the contractor independently solicit those designs and having the railroad approve them. In this instance, CSX had al- ready approved the design, and all contractors bid on the same design. Abutment construction proceeded immediately without delay. In addition to pre-designed coffer- dams, prefabricated girder as- semblies account, too, for the accel- erated construction schedule. Moving · the through-track just a short distance from what would soon be the now gir- der deck not only minimized interrup. tion in rail service, but it also provided ABUTMENT under construction a convenient means ofdelivedld a re- long bridge beams that hmlpitde- pre-painted and prefabrieate¢ollee- assemblies of two to three be"3CM each. Each assembly weighed up t~n- tons. With the railroad's help in rte scheduling some of its trains, the as- semblies were placed during a four- hour period on June 2, 1987. Within two weeks of setting the assemblies, CSX crews were ready to begin lay- ing the tracks back on the finished half of the new bridge, which would complete phase one. Under normal circumstances, this whole process would have taken at least six to eight weeks. -.. Timely Completion Threatened Completing phase one of the project before the critical path date of July 17 was essential. Only after the first half of the bridge was in place could ex- cavating crews begin clearing away earth from underneath in preparation for the road. The road crew knexv it would have to pave the new Patterson Avenue underpass before November 15 or risk having the project sit un- finished all winter. Having it sit un- finished would leave the road com- mission a chance between two evils -- either maintain traffic on the very congested detour route or divert it back to a gravel road. neither of which would be popular with the pub- lic. In addition to other potential sources of delay that threatened the project's accelerated schedule'~ such as the uncertainty of getting traf- fic lights installed quickly at a detour in a cofferdam close to the active track. intersection and the uncertainty of getting an expedited contract ap- proval -- the estimated delivery time for the structural steel posed a'prob- lam the Kent County Road Commis- sion had to overcome. The normal de- livery, time for a project of this size is six months, but like a lengthy design approval time, this was not an option. The road commission suggested, and got. Michigan Department of Trans- portation and Feder, I ltighway Ad~ ministration approval to offer the steel contractor $2.000 for every day before July 17 top to 15 daysl that trains coukl er.ss the completed first half of'the bridge. The plan worked. The struc- tural steel was ordered within a week of the bid opening {January 17, 1987J and delivered to the fabricator during the first week of March. The fab- ricator, Phoenix Steel, Eau Claire Wisconsin. met the tight time con- straints and had tile girder assemblies ready to ship in about 12 weeks. The beams were delivered by rail to the local CSX rail yard during the first week of May an~l stored uniil needed. Crews put the beams in place by June 2, and trains crossed the completed first half of the bridge on June 18. Project Completion' ~ While the bridge crews began in- .stalling the cofferdams and construct- mg the abutments for the second half of the bridge, road crews began clear- ing away dirt from underneath the completed first half. This allowed crews to install the new storm sewer system to drain the roadway. Crews also finished relocating an' existing sanitary sewer, the flow of which bad to be maintained. Performing all of these tasks concurrently cut 23 days off the road construction schedule. In its initial plan, Kent County had scheduled a reopening dat~ for November 15. 1987. The project that had started on February 28 with the construction of temporary embank- ments was completed several weeks ahead of its already tight schedule when. on October 23. cars drove under the CSX tracks for the first time. In all. the design phase took 12 months, the bidding and award of contract 3 months, and the actual con- struction 8 months, the sum of which may be a record time for a railroad grade separation. W. lq. VanderVeer, CSX Assistant Director of Engineer- int~ and Division Manager commented that "CSX Transportat,on is certainly pleased as this project was handled i~ an expeditious way with the coopers. t,on ut' the contractors, and all other personnel that worked on it. It is one of the finest and smoothest Pr~jects we have noted in many a year in rail- road operat,ons." ' ' 52 Recyciing ?akes the Lo;sd ,i,.':; ::: KEVlN MURRAy Solid Waste Planner, .,~.,., BCM Eqgioe_ers. Plymouth Meeting, Pennsylvania "['N the last Several ~'ears, many coun- ties. municipalitieS~ and private qiu'4nesses have discovered linanciai as well as environmental benefits in reCycling &solid waste. Though there are many' reasOns, the major factor that the cost of landfiIling of solid waste has skyrocketed. In addition, the cost of developing resource re- cove~ facilities has encouraged the separation of noncombustible items. Regulatory pressure for govern- ments and private indust~ to develop recycling programs is also increasing. Frequently, officials seeking provai for landfills and resource re- covery facilities must show they are implementing recyeling programs are investigating recycling as a means of reducing the amount of solid waste disposed. Then again, budget con- scious and environmentally thinking officials and industD, leaders have come to recognize that recycling sim- ply makes very good sense. These new realities are causing communities across the country to study various recycling strategies in attempts to determine what will work best for them. Many factors, including population density, disposal fees, waste generation rates, existing waste handling practices and facilities, available markets for re- eyclable materials, and public senti- ment. must be taken into account in selecting the best approach. Only after carefully considering alternative strategies and comparing the cost and effectiveness of each can a snccessful program be i~nplemented. ~lanning a Program BCM has been involved ~ the de- velopment of recycling systems for several communities. These projects typically begin with an analysis of the amount and type of waste generated by the eommumty. This is necessary as the amount and type of waste has a direct bcarin~ on potential coIlechon and processing systems. The analysis m accomplished by bringing all 'the waste to a central stiltion where it is sorted and weighed by type and the percent,ge of recycl,ble matertal is determined. It' is best to peribrm 'this analysis once in the summer and once in the'winter; to reflect seasonal var- iations in waste generation. In lieu of a waste compOsition ,analysis, recyclable material genera- tion estimates can be derived by idea--' tifying the amount of waste produced · by the commt,nity on a yearly or daily basis and using composition, percent- ages developed' by the U.S. EPA to determine the amount of each :orthe recyelable materials. To rrna-tune this figure, local distributors can be eon- tacted to determine how many bot- tles, cans, or newspapers are actually sold within the community. A more precise method is to conduct a pilot recycling program. Once the approximate amount of recyelablo material is known, poten- tial purchasers in the secondary ma- terials markets can be contacted to determine what local outlets exist. In some cases, revenues from pur- chasers can nearly offset the cost of collection and processing. Processors and end-users of reeyelable materials should be asked how much material they can use, a range of prices they are willing to pay, whether they will pick the material up, and what condi- tion 'the material must be in. This in- formation determines the level essing the commun, ity will have to achieve and the amount of potential revenues it can expect from the sale of materials. While it makes sense to start with potential purchasers within a 100-mile radius, searching further afield can sometimes result in more favorable terms. If the amount of ma- terial is large enough, for example, a major purchaser outside the 100-mile radius may be willing to come and pick it up, at considerable savings to the community. BCM enters this information into a multi-dimensional spreadsheet with an array of headings. This allows easy update and quick reference and pro~ rides the groundwork for a market sensitivity analysis. It is important to maintain current market data. so col lection and processing systems can be adjusted to rellect a change in Prices. Collection Options Several options for collecting recy- clable material exist, including c,',rbside collection by recycling crews, drop-off centers where resi- dents bring their reeyclables, buy- back centers where residents are paid in cash for their recyclables, or Bi AERIAL view of the College Road/U.S. Route 1 grade separated interchange shows the three.loop arrangement. Relow, variable depth girders with sloped face abutments were used on the College Road Overpass to give the slructure an overall arch effect. JOHN URBAN President, Edwards and Kelcey, Livingston, New Jersey pRIVATIZATION--the infusion of private capital into public works pro- jects to meet local and regional needs-- can pave the road to the success of any new development in more ways than one. At College Road in Plainsbor0, New Jersey, adjacent to Princeton Forrestal ... Village, a needed overpass and inter- change at Route I was funded and built by two private organizationsc-Princeton University and The Robert Wood John- son Foundation. The process. .brought together both public and private interests in a construction plan that designates the New Jersey Department of Transporta- tion (NJDOT) the inheritor of the over- pass. Ownership of the $20 million pro- ject, completed in only two and a half years, is presently being transferred to the NJDOT. During the approval process for Prince- ton Forrestal Village, a shopping mall and hotel facility, Princeton University ex- amined long term traffic needs in the area. The University agreed to construct a grade-separated interchange based on this study. The interchange then became part of the Plainsboro Planning Board approval process for Princeton Forrestal Village. Although it has a goal to eliminate the signals on Route I with grade separations, the NJDOT was eco- nomically restrained by other roadway priorities and was unable to pay for the project. A much overused intersection, College Road and Route I had been an over- burdened crossing for years. Originally built for rural traffic, the four-lane Route I could no longer adequately service the rapidly expanding north-south corridor with at-grade intersections. Princeton University got involved in the issue when it became apparent that the interchange was needed to better serve the region and the University's corporate of- fice and research park, the Princeton For- festal Center, much of which is built along College Road on both sides of Route 1. The University, owner of the land on which Forrestal Center is built, offered to fund 84 percent of the project and The Robert Wood Johnson Founda- tion, a philanthropic organization located on the southeast corner of the inter- change, agreed to pay the balance of the cost. Shifting the cost and burden of the pro- ject to the private sector had the effect of speeding the entire design and construc- tion process and reducing the red tape that is inherent in any public project. For one, the complicated bid process, man7 of .lit n- :bt he dated by public agencies was eliminated. This cut down on the cost of advertising and the time it taken to select contractors. As private entities, the sponsors of the project had the autonomy to make quick decisions, unlike public agencies that mast go through time-consuming selec- tion and auditing procedures.' Unforeseen engineering design and construction problems were'also able to be resolved quicldy~'·0ften on the spot or within a week. For example, during the construction phase of the project, the field engineers and contractors en- countered the existence of unrecorded utilities such as water lines and telephone wires. These situations were resolved with a single phone call to the sponsor who made a fast &~cision to either compensate the utility company or build around the utility element. The state's review process was also ac- celerated. Even though the project was privately developed, it was designed and built to DOT standards. Although the NJDOT applied its usual four-phase review standards to the project, the private sponsor's ability to make· fast decisions kept the process moving along. As a result, the project ended with minimal contractors' claims for delays or stoppage. Moreover, because the two organiza- ( tions behind the project owned all of the land at the intersection, the right-of-way negotiations and purchase process that are ordinarily necessao' for land assem= blage were totally eliminated. Technical Challenges The $20 million grade-separated inter* change was desi~aed to meet a regional need to case an increased How of traffic in the vi~Snity and to provide additional capacity for future development in the area. The l$7-ft, nine-lane structure and corresponding r~-nps replaced a signal- ized, at-grade intersection that had been temporarily improved to accommodate traffic from the newly opened Princeton FortestaJ Village, an office and shopping complex. Related hnprovements included widening and rcsurfacing Route 1, install- lng high mast tower lighting, relocating utilities, an upgraded landscaping plan with extensive planting of trees, bushes, and flowering shrubs, and a detention basin within the interchange loops to meet regulatory reclui~cments. Along with the sponsor's technical con- eerns were its esthetic concerns about the appearance of the bridge. The structure would be readily identified with the Princeton Foreestal Comer, making it desirable for the bridge design lo make a statement that reflects the area's development design. To make the bridge a distinctive sight on the horizon, Edwards and Kelcey designed a "variable depth girder" that gives the bridge an overall arch effect. PUBLIC WORKS for July. 1991 This is accomplished by the varied depths of the girders ranging from 74 in. at mid- span to 96 in. at the abutments. To com- plement the arch effect, sloped face con- crete abutments along with concrete cheek walls to hide the bridge bearings create a rigid frame appearance. Because of the long span, the structure remains pleasing- ly slender d_espite the deep girders. A major consideration during the course of design was ~hether or not to introduce a center pier resulting in a two- span structure. Four different concepts were developed for the two-span alter- native with various architectural treat- · ments of the pier, abutments, and super- structure. To aid the sponsor in selecting a bridge design, computer aided design and drafting was utilized to create three- dimensional renderings of the four con- cepts as well as for the single span alternative. An evaluation of the two-span scheme indicated that Route I would have to be The success of the Princeton Forr Center, enhanced by the new interchange, has resulted in significant economic benefits for the entire community of Plainsboro and its environs. The activities of the center translate into hundreds of jobs for local residents and an increase in the town's tax base. Real estate values are enhanced by the improvements to the area, including the beautiful landscaping that now lines the highway corridors. Because of its interest in the community, the sponsor will continue to maintain the many plantings even after the DOT takes ownership. Traffic Conflicts ~:". ~:- Elimina ted T~e' W'~lfare of :the c0'mmUnit~ ha~ al's~ been improved by the reduction in the potential for accidents at the for.mcr at-' grade intersection. The new grad'e-~ep- stated intersection eliminates traffic con- flicts arising from left and right turns. . . BI THE 158-foot girders were installed without Interrupting trafttc flow. realigned to provide for proper shoulder widths. Moreover, staging requirements to permit traffic to proceed during con- struetion would be costly and compli- cated; therefore, the single span structure was chosen. Attention to efficiency and cost reduc- tions continued through all phases of the project. Careful planning and follow-up kept steel fabrication and material deliv- eries on a tight schedule, allowing con- struction work to proceed at an impres- sive clip. The bridge superstructure, for example, was completed just 16 weeks after work began on Ihe foundation, with 14 steel beams being lifted into place in a single night between 9:30 p.m. and 4:00 a.m. During the work. Route i traffic was not interrupted. A series of ramps and connectors were used, staged to allow for the rerouting. Moreover, the increased free flow of traf- fic on Route I (with the elimination of signals) serves to lessen the level of air pollution because vehicles are now mov- ing more freely. All parties involved in the project stress the importance of cooperation between the public and private sector in reaching a common goal. The timely completion and success of the College Road project will provide many benefits. As the Mayor of Plainsboro. Peter Cantu, noted at the ribbon-cutting ceremony, the project's speedy conclusion was a real boon not on- ly to the private organizations behind the project, but to those who live and work in the area. Edwards and Kelcey is a Livingston, New Jersey engineering firm that was responsible for designing the new interchange, supervising its construction, and coordinating the Option 1 - Use Existing 512 Alignment Only First Phase: Construct 4 lanes with .center, turn tane on existing alignment (Urban SectiOn) r ~.. Const~ruction CoSt ,.. . .~,~,,. (' 96,oo- 16 *oo) = Use: ½ cost of new construction (Rural) for 3rd lane as :: storm drains are.included i.n'..,a~ding 2 lane to existing 2 lane 788,500 ' 3600 ' = ~ $268,8-00 ...... 5280 1,464,300 · 3600 = _998..,400 528O .. C~onstruction Sub Total $1,267,20~"-'--- Right-of-Way: (163+00 to 179+00) = 1600, 108, - 94' = 14' x 14, x 1600 x $3.00 = (179+00 to 189+50) = 1050, 108 - 66 = 42' 42, x 1050 x $3.00 = (189~50 to 193+00) = 350' 108 - 65' = 43' 43, × 350 x $4.00 (193+00 to 195+00) Existing R/W & RR R/W (195+00 to 196+30) = 130 108 - 80 = 28, 28 x 130 x $6.00 = Sub Total 14' additional needed 94' existing ~67,2Q0 66, existing R/W varies 55'-80' ~60.200 Use 65' 80' existing ~21,900 $ 281,600 CONSTRUCTION SUB-TOTAL R/N SUB-TOTAL TOTAL $1,267,'200 2s_~jL6oo $1,548,800 Phase 2 Construction only Add' 2 lanes to 4 lane Urban 3600 x 1,647,400 = 5800 .. $1,123,200 PHASE 1 & 2 TOTAL $1,548,800 1,123,200 $2,672,000 Option 2 - Use Both CR 512 and Railroad Right-of-Way First Phase Construct-new. 2 lane on Railroad Right-of-Way, improve existing CR 512 for EB traffic Rural Sections Construction New Road 2550 x 788,500 = 5280 Existing CR 512 3600 x 144,400 = 528O Construct Connecting Roads 2000 x 788,50~00 5280 resurface and $530,200 $ 98,500 1~!~ 000 No Right-of-Way Required TOTAL $778,700 Add 1 lane to existing CR 512 and to Railroad Right-of-Way use Urban Section on CR 512. For existing CR 512 80' Right-of-Way minimum for 3 lanes. 3600 x ~ x 1,647,400 = $ 562,000 5280 2 Railroad Road 355Q x ! x 1,253,100 = $ 421,300 5280 2 Right-o f-Way On CR 512 (189+50 to 193+00) (80' - 65') x 350' x $3.00 = (80' - 66') x 1050' x $3.00 = Phase 2 Subtotal $15,750 1oo $59,850 60.~000 $1,043,300 Total, Option 2, Phase 1 & 2 $ 778,700 ~1.04.3,300 OPTION 2 TOTAL $1,822,000 Compare with Option 1, Phase 1 & 2 Total $2,672,000 Per Mile Costs Used: 2 Lane Rural Roads (New) Add 2 lanes to existing (Urban) Add 2 lanes to existing 4 lane (Urban) Milling and Resurfacing 2 lanes (Rural) $ 778,500 $1,464,300 $1,647,400 $ 114,000 /gfk options.rdc - Telephone: (407)$67-8000 - BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS I840 25th Street, Vero Beach, Florida 32960 November 4., 1991 Press Journal Newspaper 1801 U.S. Highway 91 VetO Beach, FL 32960 Gentlemen: Please publish the following notice on NOVEMBER 19, 1991 under Public Notices in the Classified Section. Suncom Telephone: 224-1011 NOTICE PUBLIC MEETING The Board of County Commissioners of Indian River County will hold a joint meeting with the City of Sebastian City council to discuss the expansion of County Road 512 from U.S. 1 to Easy Street. All interested members of the public are invited to attend and participate in the meeting .scheduled for TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 26, 1991 AT 2:00 o'clock P.M. in the First Floor conference Room located in the Administration Building at 1840 25th Street, Vero Beach, FL. Anyone who may wish to appeal any decision which may be made at this meeting will need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which includes testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is based. Please send the original proof of publication to Forlani, Executive Aide to the Board Commissioners, 1840 25th street, VetO Beach, you have any questions, you can contact me Ext.433. Liz of' County FL 32960. If at 567-8000 if ' CHAPTER 91-107 House Bill No. 2251 An act relating to elections; amending s. 99.092, F.S.; increasing the filing fee for persons seeking to qualify for nomination or election to certain of- fices; providing for a specified percentage of the fee to be transferred to the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund; amending s. 99.093, F.S.; increasing the election assessment for municipal candidates; providing for a specified percentage of the assessment amount to be transferred to the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund; creating s. 99.0965, F.S.; providing signature requirements for ballot position in apportionment years; amending s. 99.103, F.S.; providing conforming changes relating to the increase in filing fees; amending s. 105.031, F.S.; increasing the quali- fying fee for certain judicial candidates; providing for a specified percent- age of the fee to be transferred to the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund; amending s. 106.04, F.S.; excluding interest income from the per- centage requirement for qualification of committees of continuous exist- ence; requiring such committees to remit a portion of certain contribu- tions to the Division of Elections for deposit into the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund; amending s. 106.07, F.S.; revising the reporting dates for certain candidates; requiring political committees to remit a portion of certain contributions to the filing officer for deposit into the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund; amending s. 106.29, F.S.; re- quiring state and county executive committees of each political party to remit a porti.o.n of certain contributions to the filing officer for deposit into the Elect~on Campaign Financing Trust Fund; amending s. 106.011, F.S.; redefining "contribution" and "independent expenditure"; amending s. 106.021, F.S.; restricting a candidate who is changing the designation of office sought from using campaign funds of the prior candidacy for the subsequent candidacy; requiring certain notice; clarifying that candidates for the office of Governor and Lt. Governor are considered a single candi- date for the purpose of appointing a campaign treasurer and designating a campaign depository; amending s. 106.08, F.S.; revising the limitations on contributions to candidates and political committees; providing a sep- arate limit on contributions by minors; providing limitations on contribu- tions from political parties; providing penalties; reenacting ss. 106.04(5), 106.075(2), 106.19(1)(a), and 106.29(4), F.S., relating to contributions by committees of continuous existence, contributions to pay loans, penalty for acceptance of contributions in excess of limits, and contributions by executive committees, to incorporate the amendment to s. 106.08, F.S., in references thereto; creating s. 106.085, F.S.; requiring persons or groups making certain independent expenditures on behalf of or in opposition to any candidate to give notice thereof; providing a penalty; amending s. 106.11, F.S.; removing the requirement that "thank you" advertising must be placed in the communications media to be a qualified expenditure af- ter a candidate withdraws, becomes unopposed, or is eliminated or elect- ed; amending s. 106.141, F.S.; revising requirements for disposing of sur- 1 CODING: Words st~ek~ are deletions; words ~ are additions. Ch. 91-107 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 91-107 plus funds; amending s. 106.143, F.S.; allowing for political advertise- ments to be provided in a language other than English; amending s. 106.15, F.S.; prohibiting the making, solicitation, and knowing acceptance of campaign contributions in buildings owned by a governmental entity; providing an exception; providing a penalty; amending s. 106.25, F.S., re- lating to confidentiality of complaints filed with the Florida Elections Commission, to provide that complainants are not bound thereby; amending s. 106.32, F.S.; providing for deposit into the Election Cam- paign Financing Trust Fund of a portion of certain filing fees and assess- ments; providing for transfer of funds into the trust fund from general revenue under certain circumstances; amending s. 106.33, F.S.; revising election campaign financing eligibility provisions; amending s. 106.34, F.S.; revising the expenditure limits for candidates for Governor and Lt. Governor or Cabinet officer who accept contributions from the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund; amending s. 106.35, F.S.; revising elec- tion campaign financing provisions relating to reporting and to certifica- tion and distribution of funds, including matching requirements; provid- ing rulemaking authority; creating s. 106.353, F.S.; requiring candidates voluntarily abiding by election campaign financing limits but not request- ing public funds to file an irrevocable statement to that effect with the Secretary of State; providing a penalty; creating s. 106.355, F.S.; provid- lng for release from the expenditure limits when opposing nonparticipat- ing candidates exceed the limits; amending s. 106.36, F.S., to conform; amending s. 199.052, F.S.; requiring the annual intangible tax return to permit a voluntary contribution to the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund; amending s. 320.02, F.S.; requiring the application form for motor vehicle registration to permit a voluntary contribution to the Elec- tion Campaign Financing Trust Fund; amending s. 322.08, F.S.; requiring the driver's license application form to permit a voluntary contribution to the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund; amending s. 327.25, F.S.; requiring the application form for boat registrations to permit a vol- untary contribution to the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund; amending s. 607.1622, F.S.; requiring the annual report form for domestic and foreign corporations to permit a voluntary contribution to the Elec- tion Campaign Financing Trust Fund; amending s. 99.012, F.S.; providing restrictions on persons qualifying for public office; providing exceptions; providing definitions; providing for removal of a person's name from the ballot for his failure to comply with the restrictions under certain circum- stances; amending s. 99.061, F.S.; requiring all candidates to file financial disclosure at the time of qualifying; amending s. 163.566, F.S., to correct a cross reference; requiring the Department of Revenue to conduct a study for the purpose of recommending a suitable form for voluntary con- tributions to the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund; requiring, to the extent permitted by federal law, radio and television stations, includ- lng cable television stations, to make air time available to candidates for public office at the lowest unit rate; providing severability; providing el- fective dates. WHEREAS, the Legislature finds a compelling state interest in'strengthening the integrity of, and public confidence in, the electoral process, and 2 CODING: Words ~ are deletions; words ~ are additions. Ch. 91-107 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 91-107 WHEREAS, the Legislature seeks to serve that compelling state interest through campaign finance reform and by establishing public funding of political campaigns, and WHEREAS, the Legislature has determined that the measures set forth below are narrowly tailored to serve the compelling state interest in public confidence in the electoral process, and that they are the least restrictive alternatives for the fol- lowing reasons: (1) They do not significantly burden any individual's right to political expres- sion or symbolic political communication; (2) They do not compel political speech from individuals who wish to refrain from such speech (e.g., apolitical taxpayers), or otherwise unduly burden the pub- lic treasury; (3) As to filing fees, candidates retain a viable alternative to paying the filing fees prescribed herein; (4) The measures enacted below are less expensive to collect; and (5) Other measures than those enacted below would inhibit the state's ability to perform its governmental functions, NOW, THEREFORE, Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida: Section 1. Effective July 1,1991, subsection (1) of section 99.092, Florida Stat- utes, is amended to read: 99.092 Qualifying fee of candidate; notification of Department of State.-- (1) Each person seeking to qualify for nomination or election to any office, ex- cept a person seeking to qualify pursuant to s. 99.095 and except a person seeking to qualify as a write-in candidate, shall pay a qualifying fee, which shall consist of a filing fee and election assessment, to the officer with whom he qualifies, and any party assessment levied, and shall attach the original or signed duplicate of the receipt for his party assessment or pay the same, in accordance with the provi- sions of s. 103.121, at the time of filing his other qualifying papers. The amount of the filing fee is 4.5 ~ percent of the annual salary of the office. ~,~ the filine fee eaual to 1.5 nercent of the annual salary of the office shall be trsn~.. ferred to the Election CAmoaien FinAncine Trust Fund, The remainder AhAll b~ distributed pursuant to s. 99.103. The amount of the election assessment is 1 per- cent of the annual salary of the office sought. The election assessment shall be de- posited into the Elections Commission Trust Fund. The amount of the party as- sessment is 2 percent of the annual salary. The annual salary of the office for pur- poses of computing the filing fee, election assessment, and party assessment shall be computed by multiplying 12 times the monthly salary, excluding any special qualification pay, authorized for such office as of July 1 immediately preceding the first day of qualifying. No qualifying fee shall be returned to the candidate unless he withdraws his candidacy before the last date to qualify. If a candidate dies prior to an election and has not withdrawn his candidacy before the last date to qualify, his qualifying fee shall be returned to his designated beneficiary, and, if the filing fee or any portion thereof has been transferred to the political party of the candi. date, the Secretary of State shall direct the party to return that portion to the des. ignated beneficiary of the candidate. 3 CODING: Words ~ are deletions; words ~ are additions. Ch. 91-107 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 91-107 Section 2. Effective July 1, 1991, subsection (1) of section 99.093, Florida Stat- utes, is amended to read: 99.093 Municipal candidates; election assessment.-- (1) Each person seeking to qualify for nomination'or election to a municipal office shall pay, at the time of qualifying for office, an election assessment. The election assessment shall be an amount equal to 145 $ percent of the annual salary of the office sought. Within 30 days after the close of qualifying, the qualifying offi- cer shall forward two-thirds of the amount ~mmm~ts collected pursuant to this section to the Department of State for deposit in the Elections Commission Trust Fund ~tnd one-third of the amount collected oursuant to this section shall be trans- ferred to the Election Camoaign Financing Trust Fund. Section 3. Effective July 1, 1991, section 99.0965, Florida Statutes, is created to read: 99.0965 Signature requirements for ballot nosition in year of anDortionment.-- (1} ~ln a year of an~ortionment, any candidate for ranresentative to Con~ress. state Senate. or state House of Representatives seekingballot position bv the alter- native method or as an indenendent candidate or any minor natty seeking ballot position shall obt~_~p at least the number of signatures eoual to 1 percent of the ideal ponulation forthe district of the office beingsought~ (2} For the ~ur~oses of this section. ~ideal ~o~ulation~ means the total nooula- tion of the state based uoon the most recent decennial census divided bv the num~ bet of districts for representative to Congress. state Senate. or state House of Re~- resentatives. For the ~urooses of this section, ideal no~ulation shall be calculated aa.of July 1 of the year prior to aonortionment. The ideal nonulation for astate Senate district and a state representative district shall be calculated by dividing the. total nonulation of the statebv 40 for a state Senate district and bv dividing by 120 for a state renresentative district. (3) Signatures may be obtained from any registered voter in Florida regardless of natty affiliation or district boundaries. (4) Petitions shall state the name otthe~ffice the candidate is seeking, but shall not include a district number. ~5~ Exceot as otherwise orovided in this section, all requirements and proce- dures relating to the oetition orocess shall conform to the reouirements and proce~ dures in nonapportionment years. Section 4. Section 99.103, Florida Statutes, is amended to read: 99.103 Department of State to remit part of filing fees and party assessments of candidates to state executive committee.-- (1) If more than three-fourths of the full authorized membership of the state executive committee of any party was elected at the last previous election for such members and if such party is declared by the Department of State to have recorded on the registration books of the counties, as of the first Tuesday after the first Monday in January prior to the first primary in general election years, 5 percent of the total registration of such counties when added together, suc. h committee shall receive, for the purpose of meeting its expenses, all filing fees collected by the. Department of State from its candidates less the amount transferred to the Elec- 4 CODING: Words ~ are deletions; words ~ are additions. Ch. 91-107 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 91.107 tion Campaign Financing Trust Fund oursuant to s. 99.092 and an amount equal to 15 percent of the filing fees after such transfer, which amount the Department of State shall deposit in the General Revenue Fund of the state. (2) Not later than 20 days after the close of qualifying in even-numbered years, the Department of State shall remit 95 percent of all filing fees, less ~ transferredto the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund 0ursuant to s. 99.092 and the amount deposited in general revenue pursuant to subsection (1), or party assessments that may have been collected by the department to the respective state executive committees of the parties complying with subsection (1). Party as- sessments collected by the Department of State shall be remitted to the appropri- ate state executive committee, irrespective of other requirements of this section, Provided such committee is duly organized under the provisions of chapter 103. The remainder of filing fees or party assessments collected by the Department of State shall be remitted to the appropriate state executive committees not later than the date of the first primary. Section 5. Effective July 1, 1991, subsection (3) of section 105.031, Florida Statutes, is amended to read: 105.031 Qualification; filing fee; candidate's oath.-- (3) QUALIFYING FEE.--Each candidate qualifying for election to judicial office, except write-in judicial candidates, shall, during the time for qualifying, pay to the officer with whom he qualifies a qualifying fee, which shall consist of a filing fee and an election assessment, or qualify by the alternative method. The amount of the filing fee is 4,5 ~ percent of the annual salary of the office sought. The amount of the election assessment is 1 percent of the annual salary of the office sought. The qualifying officer shall forward all filing fees to the Department of Revenue for deposit in the General Revenue Fund. One-third of all filing fees de, posited into the General Revenue Fund shall be subseauently transferred to the Election CamnaignFinancing Trust Fund. The election assessment shall be depos- ited into the Elections Commission Trust Fund. The annual salary of the office for purposes of computing the qualifying fee shall be computed by multiplying 12 times the monthly salary authorized for such office as of July I immediately pre- ceding the first day of qualifying. This subsection shall not apply to candidates qualifying for retention to judicial office. Section 6. Effective July 1,1991, subsections (1) and (4) of section 106.04, Flor- ida Statutes, 1990 Supplement, are amended to read: 106.04 Committees of continuous existence.-- (1) In order to qualify as a committee of continuous existence for the purposes of this chapter, a group, organization, association, or other such entity which is in- volved in making contributions to candidates, political committees, or political parties, shall meet the following criteria: (a) It shall be organized and operated in accordance with a written charter or set of bylaws which contains procedures for the election of officers and directors and which clearly defines membership in the organization; and (b) At least 25 percent of the income of such organization, 'excluding interest, must be derived from dues or assessments payable on a regular basis by its mem- bership pursuant to provisions contained in the charter or bylaws. 5 CODING: Words strieke~ are deletions; words ~ are additions. Ch. 91-107 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 91.107 (4)(a) Each committee of continuous existence shall file an annual report with the Division of Elections during the month of January. Such annual reports shall contain the same information and shall be accompanied by the same materials as original applications filed pursuant to subsection (2). However, the charter or by- laws need not be filed if the annual report is accompanied by a sworn statement by the chairman that no changes have been made to such charter or bylaws since the last filing. (b)l. Each committee of continuous existence shall file regular reports with the Division of Elections at the same times and subject to the same filing conditions as are established by s. 106.07(1) and (2) for candidates' reports. 2. Each committee of continuous existence shall nay a 1.5 percent assessment on .~11 contributions, excluding in-kind contributions. The assessment shall be re- mitted to the Division of Elections at the time contribution reoorts are due. The Division of Elections.shall devosit the oroceeds of the ~_ssessment into the Election ~.m0ai~n Financing Trust Fund~ 3. Any committee of continuous existence failing to so file a report with the Di- vision of Elections pursuant to this paragraph on the designated due date shall be subject to a fine for late filing as provided by this section. (c). All committees of continuous existence shall file the original and one copy of their reports with the Division of Elections. In addition, a duplicate copy of each report shall be filed with the supervisor of elections in the county in which the com- mittee maintains its books and records, except that if the filing officer to whom the committee is required to report is located in the same county as the supervisor no such duplicate report is required to be filed with the supervisor. Reports shall be on forms provided by the division and shall contain the following information: 1. The full name, address, and occupation of each person who has made one or more contributions to the committee during the reporting period, together with the amounts and dates of such contributions. However, if the contribution is $100 or less, the occupation of the contributor need not be listed, and only the n~me and address are necessary. However, for any contributions which represent the pay- merit of dues by members in a fixed amount pursuant to the schedule on file with the Division of Elections, only the aggregate amount of such contributions need be listed, together with the number of members paying such dues and the amount of the membership dues. 2. The name and address of each political committee or committee of continu- ous existence from which the reporting committee received, or the name and ad- dress of each political committee, committee of continuous existence, or political party to which it made, any transfer of funds, together with the amounts and dates of all transfers. 3. Any other receipt of funds not listed pursuant to subparagraph 1. or sub- paragraph 2, including the sources and amounts of all such funds. 4. The name and address of, and office sought by, each candidate to whom the committee has made a contribution during the reporting period, together with the amount and date of each contribution. (d)(e~ The treasurer of each committee shall certify as to the correctness of each report and shall bear the responsibility for its accuracy and veracity. Any 6 CODING: Words strleke~ are deletions; words ~ are additions. Ch. 91-107 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 91-107 treasurer who willfully certifies to the correctness of a report while knowing that such report is incorrect, false, or incomplete commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. Section 7. Effective July 1, 1991, subsections (1) and (3)of section 106.07, Flor- ida Statutes, 1990 Supplement, is amended to read: 106.07 Reports; certification and filing.-- (1) Each campaign treasurer designated by a candidate or political committee pursuant to s. 106.021 shall file regular reports of all contributions received, and all expenditures made, by or on behalf of such candidate or political committee. Reports shall be filed on the 10th day following the end of each calendar quarter from the time the campaign treasurer is appointed, except that, if the 10th day fol- lowing the end of a calendar quarter occurs on a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the report shall be filed on the next following day which is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday. Quarterly reports shall include all contributions received and ex- penditures made during the calendar quarter which have not otherwise been re- ported pursuant to this section. (a) Exce~ as provided in paragraph (b) following the last day of qualifying for office, the reports shall be filed on the 32nd, 18th, and 4th days immediately preceding the first primary and on the 18th and 4th days immediately preceding the second primary and general election, for a candidate who is opposed in seeking nomination or election to any office, for a political committee~ or for a committee of continuous existence. lb} Followin~ the last day of qualifying for office, any statewlde candidate who has reauested to receive contributions from the Election CAmnaign Finat~ciRg Trust Fund or any stateWide candidate in a race with a candidate who h~ request ed to receive contributions from the trust fund shall file reports on the 4th. llth. 18th. 25thLand 32nd days ~rior to the first ~rimar¥ and general elections and the 4th. llth. 18th. and 25th days nrior to the second primary. (c}(~} Following the last day of qualifying for office, any unopposed candidate need only file a report within 90 days after the date such candidate became unop- posed. Such report shall contain all previously unreported contributions and ex- penditures as required by this section and shall reflect disposition of funds as re- quired by s. 106.141. ~cl)(~l. When a special election is called to fill a vacancy in office, all political committees and committees of continuous existence making contributions or ex- penditures to influence the results of such special election shall file campaign trea- surers' reports with the filing officer on the dates set by the Department of State pursuant to s. 100.111. 2. When an election is called for an issue to appear on the ballot at a time when no candidates are scheduled to appear on the ballot, all political committees mak- ing contributions or expenditures in support of or in opposition to such issue shall file reports on the 18th and 4th days prior to such election. ~e}~ The filing officer shall provide each candidate with a schedule designat- ing the beginning and end of rePorting periods as well as the corresponding desig- nated due dates. 7 CODING: Words ~ are deletions; words ~ are additions. Ch. 91-107 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 91-107 (3)(a) Reports required of a political committee shall be filed with the agency or officer before whom such committee registers pursuant to s. 106.03(3) and shall be subject to the same filing conditions as established for candidates' reports. Only committees that file with the Department of State shall file the original and One copy of their reports. Incomplete reports by political committees shall be treated in the manner provided for incomplete reports by candidates in subsection (2). (b) Each political committee sb~ll pay a 1.5 ~ercent assessment on all contribu- tions, excluding in.kind contributions..The assessment shall be remitted to the fil- ing officer at the time contribution reoorts are due. The filing officer shall transfer the assessmentrevenues to the Division of Elections for deposit into the Election ~amoaign Financing Trust Fund. Section 8. Effective July 1, 1991, subsection (1) of section 106.29, Florida Stat- utes, 1990 Supplement, is amended to read: 106.29 Reports by political parties.-- (1)(a) The state executive committee and each county executive committee of each political party regulated by chapter 103 shall file regular reports of all contri- butions received and all expenditures made by such committee. Such reports shall contain the same information as do reports required of candidates by s. 106.07 and shall be filed on the 10th day following the end of each calendar quarter, except that, during the period from the last day for candidate qualifying until the general election, such reports shall be filed on the Friday immediately preceding the first primary election, the second primary election, and the general election. Each state executive committee shall file the original and one copy of its reports with the Divi- sion of Elections. Each county executive committee shall file its reports with the supervisor of elections in the county in which such committee exists. Any political party failing to file a report on the designated due date shall be subject to a fine as provided in s. 106.07 for submitting late reports. No separate fine shall be as- sessed for failure to file a copy of any report required by this section. (bi Each state executive committee and county executive cow_mittee of each oolitical party sh~ll oay a 1,5 oercent assessment on all contributions' excludin~ contributions received from oolitical committees and committees of continuou~ existence and excluding in.kind contributions and filing fees, The.assessment shah be remitted by the political party executive committee to the ~ing officer at th~ ~me contribution reoorts are due. The filine officer shall transfer the assessment revenues to the Division of Elections for denosit into the Election Camnai~n Fi- nancing Trust Fund. Section 9. Subsections (3) and (5) of section 106.011, Florida Statutes, 1990 Supplement, are amended to read: 106.011 Definitions.--As used in this chapter, the following terms have the fol- lowing meanings unless the context clearly indicates otherwise: (3) "Contribution' means: (a) A gift, subscription, conveyance, deposit, loan, payment, or distribution of money or anything of value, including contributions in kind having an attributable monetary value in any form, made for the purpose of influencing the results of an election. 8 CODING: Words stt-leke~ are deletions; words ~ are additions. Ch. 91-107 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 91-107 (b) A transfer of funds between political committees, between committees of continuous existence, or between a political committee and a committee of contin. uous existence. (c) The payment, by any person other than a candidate or political committee, of compensation for the personal services of another person which are rendered to a candidate or political committee without charge to the candidate or committee for such services. (d) The transfer of funds by a campaign treasurer or deputy campaign treasur- er between a primary depository and a separate interest-bearing account or certifi- cate of deposit, and the term includes any interest earned on Such account or certif- Scare. Notwithstanding the foregoing meanings of ~contribution,~ the word shall not be construed to include services, including, but not limited to. legal and accountin~ ~ provided without compensation by individuals volunteering a portion o~ all of their time on behalf of a candidate or political committee. This definition shall not be construed to include editorial endorsements. (5) "Independent expenditure~ means an expenditure by a person for the pur- pose of advocating the election or defeat of a candidate or the approval or rejection of an issue, which expenditure is not controlled by, coordinated with, or made upon consultation with, any candidate, political committee, or agent of such candidate or committee. An exnenditure for such ouroose by a nerson having a contract with the candidate, nolitical committee, or agent of such candidate or committee in s given election oeriod shall not be deemed an indeoendent exnenditure. Section 10. Subsection (5) is added to section 106.021, Florida Statutes, 1990 Supplement, and paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of said section is amended to read: 106.021 Campaign treasurers; deputies; primary and secondary depositories.-- (1)(a) Each candidate for nomination or election to office and each political committee shall appoint a campaign treasurer. Each person who seeks to qualify for nomination or election to, or retention in, office shall appoint a campaign treas- urer and designate a primary campaign depository prior to qualifying for office. Any person who seeks to qualify for election or nomination to any office by means of the petitioning process shall appoint a treasurer and designate a primary deposi- tory on or before the date he obtains the petitions. Each candidate shall at the same time he designates his campaign depository and appoints his treasurer also designate the office for which he is a candidate. If the candidate is running for an office which will be grouped on the ballot with two or more similar offices to be filled at the same election, the candidate must indicate for which group or district office he is running. Nothing in this subsection shall prohibit a candidate, at a later date, from changing the designation of the office for which he is a candidate at~ .... b ......... ~,b ....................... acy. However. ifa candidate changes the designated office for which he is a candidate~ he must notify all contribu~tors in writing of hiz intent to seek a different office and offer to return nfo rata. u0on their request, those contributions given in sunt~or~ of the original~°ffice sought,, This notification shall be given within 15 days after the filln~ of the change of ~es. ignation and shall include a standard form develoved bv the Division of Election~ for reouesting the return of contributions. The notice reauirement shall not annl¥ 9 CODING: Words ~ are deletions; words ~ are additions. Ch. 91-107 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 91-107 hn i n mri 1 e' io r i I ' ' ' . · i n iff ni f '' ' for the newly designated office~ No person shall accept any contribution or make any expendi{ure with a view to bringing about his nomination, election, or reten- tion in public office, or authorize another to accept such contributions or make such expenditure on his behalf, unless such person has appointed a campaign treasurer and designated a primary campaign depository. A candidate for an office voted upon statewide may appoint not more than 15 deputy campaign treasurers, and any other candidate or political committee may appoint not more than $ depu- ty campaign treasurers. The names and addresses of the campaign treasurer and deputy campaign treasurers so appointed shall be filed with the officer before whom such candidate is required to qualify or with whom such political committee is required to register pursuant to s. 106.03. Each candidate who qualifies with the Department of State for an office not voted upon statewide shall, at the s~me time, file a copy of the name and address of the campaign treasurer with the supervisor of elections in the county in which the candidate resides. ~(§) .._For ourposes of anoointing a c~mnaign treasurer and designating a can~ naign deoositorv, candidates for tee offices or Governor and Lieutenant Governo, o- n~he s~me ticket shall be considered a single candidate. Section 11. Subsection (1) of section 106.08, Florida Statutes, 1990 Supple- ment, is amended, present subsection (5) is renumbered as subsection (6) and amended, present subsections (2), (3), (4), (6), and (7) are redesignated as subsec- tions (3), {4), (5), (?), and (8), respectively, and a new subsection (2) is added to said section, to read: 106.08 Contributions; limitations (1)(a~ No person, political committee, or committee of continuous existence shall make contributions to any candidate or political committee in this state, for any election, in excess of the following amounts: 1.(a~ To a candidate for countywide office or to a candidate in any election con- ducted on less than a countywide basis, $500 2.(4~ To a candidate for legislative or multicounty office, ~ $1-~. 3.(e~ To a candidate for statewide office, ~ Sg~)(~. Candidates for the of- rices of Governor and Lieutenant Governor ~a .the same ticke& shall be considered a single candidate for the purpose of this section. 4.{el~ To a political committee supporting or opposing one or more candidates, 10 CODING: Words ~a4eke~ are deletions; words ~ are additions. To a candidate for county court judge or circuit judge, $500 $-1s000. To a candidate for retention as a judge of a district court of appeal, To a candidate for retention as a justice of the Supreme Court, Ch. 91-107 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 91-107 (b) The contribution limits provided in ~ ~a~gra~g t_~ ~~x et., not apply to contributions made by a s~te or county exeeutiv~ eommitto~ of a po- litical party regula~d by chapter 103 or to amoun~ contribu~d by a candida~ to his o~ campaign. Not~ithstandine the limits nrovided in this subsection, no unem~eivated child under the aec of 18 years of age may maks a contribution.to any c~didate or to any volitical committee sunpor, ting one or mor~ eandida~s in excess of $100. The limitations provided by this subsection sh~ apply ~ each election. ~ For purposes 0f this subsection the first primary, second prim~, and gen- er~ election sh~l be deemed separate elections so long ~ the candida~ is not ~ unopposed candidate as defined in s. 106.011(15). However, for the purple of con- tribution limi~ with respect to candidates for retention as a justice of the Supreme Court or judge of a district court of appeal, there shall be only one election, which shall be the general election, and ~th respect to candidates for circuit judge or county court judge, there shall be only two elections, which sh~ be tho first prima- ~ election ~d general election. ~(a) A candidat~ may not accent contributions from nation~, sta~. and county executive committees ofa volitical party, which contributions in th~ ag~re gate exceed $50.000. no more than $25.000 of which may be accepted prior ~-t~:': 28-day verigd immediately oreceding the. date of th~ general election. ~l For the vurposes of this subsection: 1. Print. broadcsst, cable, and mailing advert~ements are contributions in ~, ~ount eoual to their fair market value and shall be counted toward the contribu tion limi~ of this subsection, ~ Polling services, research ser~ces, technical assistance, and voter mobiliza tion effor~ are not contributions to be coun~d toward the con~ibution llmi~ .of this subsectfon. ~ Any person who knowingly and willfully makes a contribution in ~ola- tion of subsection (1) or subsection ~ ~, or any person who kno~ngly and will- fully fails or refuses to return any contribution as required in subsection ~ ~, is ~ilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, p~ishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. If any corporation, partnership, or other business entity or ~y politi- cal committee or commit~e of continuous existence is convicted of knowingly and willfully violating this section, it shall be fined not less than $1,000 and not more than $10,000. If it is a domestic entity, it may be ordered dissolved by a court of compe~nt jurisdiction; if it is a forei~ or nonresident business entity, i~ right to do business in this state may be forfei~d. Any officer, partner, ~ent, at~rney, or other representative of a corporation, partnership, or other b~ine~ entity or of a politic~ committee or committee of continuous existence who aids, abe~, ad- vises, or participates in a violation of this section is guilty of a misdeme~or of the first de~ee, punishable ~ provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. ~ Any person who knowingly and willfully violates the provisions of this section shall, in addition to any other penury prescribed by this chap~r, pay ~ the sta~ a sum equal to twice the amount contributed in violation of this chap~r. Each campaign treasurer shall pay aH amoun~ contributed in ~ola~ion of this sec- tion to the state for deposit in the General Revenue Fund. 11 CODING: Words strielom are deletions; words ~ are additions. Ch. 91-107 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 91-107 Section 12. For the purpose of incorporating the amendment to section 106.08, Florida Statutes, 1990 Supplement, in references thereto, the sections or subdivi- sions of Florida Statutes set forth below are reenacted to read: 106.04 Committees of continuous existence.-- (5) No committee of continuous existence shall contribute to any candidate or political committee an amount in excess of the limits contained in s. 106.08(1) or participate in any other activity which is prohibited by this chapter. If any viola~ tion occurs, it shall be punishable as provided in this chapter for the given offense. No funds of a committee of continuous existence shall be expended on behalf of a candidate, except by means of a contribution made through the duly appointed campaign treasurer of a candidate. No such committee shall make expenditures in support of, or in opposition to, an issue unless such committee first registers as a political committee pursuant to this chapter and undertakes all the practices and procedures required thereof; provided such committee may make contributions in a total amount not to exceed 25 percent of its aggregate income, as reflected in the annual report filed for the previous year, to one or more political committees regis- feted pursuant to s. 106.03 and formed to support or oppose issues. 106.075 Elected officials; report of loans made in year preceding election; limi- ration on contributions to pay loans.-- (2) Any person who makes a contribution to an individual to pay all or part of a loan incurred, in the 12 months preceding the election, to be used for the indi- vidual's campaign, may not contribute more than the amount which is allowed in s. 106.08(1). 106.19 Violations by candidates, persons connected with campaigns, and polit- ical committees.-- (1) Any candidate; campaign manager, campaign treasurer, or deputy treasur- er of any candidate; committee chairman, vice chairman, campaign treasurer, dep- uty treasurer, or other officer of any political committee; agent or person acting on behalf of any candidate or political committee; or other person who knowingly and willfully: (a) Accepts a contribution in excess of the limits prescribed by s. 106.08; is guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. 106.29 Reports by political parties.-- (4) No state or county executive committee, in the furtherance of any candi. date or political party, directly or indirectly, shall give, pay, or expend any money, give or pay anything of value, authorize any expenditure, or become pecuniarily liable for any expenditure prohibited by this chapter. However, the contribution of funds by one executive committee to another, to established party organizations for legitimate party or campaign purposes, or to individual candidates of that party in general elections in amounts exceeding those set forth in s. 106.08 is not prohib- ited, but all such contributions shall be recorded and accounted for in the reports of the contributor and recipient. Section 13. Section 106.085, Florida Statutes, is created to read: 12 CODING: Words ~ are deletions; words ~ are additions. Ch. 91-107 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 91-107 1 6. In ndi r s' nfai s r I n 'n 'i 1 ro r niz i 't k' n' ~oenditure in excess of $1.000 on behalf of or in opposition to a candidate deliver notice in writing of such indenendent exoenditure, as well a~ the Amoua~, ~ffsuch expenditure and a detailed descriotion of the media twoe or use of such ex oenditure, within 24 hours, after obligating any funds for such expenditure. An ~enditure is obligated uoon the ourchase of any political advertising or the enter ing into any agreement, either oral or written, to nurchase any ~oliticAl advertising. Such notice shall be delivered to all of the candidates in the ~ffected race and t~ the qusllfving officer of such candidates. The notice shall specifically state thc name of the candidate whom the indenendent expenditure is designed to su~o~l or opnose._For our~oses of this subsection, notice shall include, but is not li~-ite, to. ~ersonal hand delivery or overnight mail. Each new exoenditUre shall reauir~ the deliw~ or filing of an additional new notice. /2) A ~erson who violates any nrovision of this section shall he liable for a civl fine of u~ to $5.000 to be determined bv the Florida Elections Commission or amount e~ual to 10 ~ercent of the exnenditure not noticed, whichever is greater.~ Section 14. Paragraph (a) of subsection (4) of section 106.11, Florida Statutes, is amended to read: 106.11 Expenses of and expenditures by candidates and political committees. Each candidate and each political committee which designates a primary cam- paign depository pursuant to s. 106.021(1) shall make expenditures from funds on deposit in such primary carapalgn depository only in the following manner, with the exception of expenditures made from petty cash funds provided by s. 106.12: (4) A candidate who withdraws his candidacy, becomes an unopposed candi- date, or is eliminated as a candidate or elected to office may expend funds from the campaign account to: (a) Purchase ~thank you" advertising :- -~- .... m"r-:~- i~-' ~.cdia for up to 75 days after he withdraws, becomes unopposed, or is eliminated or elected. Section 15. Paragraph (a) of subsection (4) of section 106.141, Florida Statutes, 1990 Supplement, is amended to read: 106.141 Disposition of surplus funds by candidates.~ (4)(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b), a~y candidate required to dispose of funds pursuant to this section shall, at the option of the candidate, dispose of such funds by any of the following means, or any combination thereof: 1. Return pro rata to each contributor the funds which have not been spent, or have not been obligated to be spent, with respect to a campaign which has been conducted. 2. Donate the funds which have not been spent or have not been obligated to be spent to a charity organization or organizations which meet the qualifications of s. 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, with respect to a campaign which has been conducted. 3. Give the funds which have not been spent or have not been obligated to be spent to the political party of which such candidate is a registered member. 13 CODING: Words ~ are deletions; words ~ are additions. Ch. 91-107 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 91-107 4. Give the funds which have not been spent, or have not been obligated to be spent, with respect to a campaign which has been conducted: a. In the case of a candidate for state office, to the state, to be deposited in ei- ~ the General Revenue Fund, as designated by the candidate; or b. In the case of a candidate for an office of a political subdivision, to such po- litical subdivision, to be deposited in the general fund thereof. Section 16. Subsection (1) of section 106.143, Florida Statutes, 1990 Supple- ment, is amended, subsection (6) is renumbered as subsection (7), and a new sub. section (6) is added to said section, to read: 106.143 Political advertisements circulated prior to election; requirements.-- (1) Any political advertisement and any campaign literature published, dis- played, or circulated prior to, or on the day of, any election shall: (a) Be marked "paid political advertisement" or with the abbreviation Upd. poi. adv."~ (b) identify the persons or organizations sponsoring the advertisement,~ (c)l.a. State whether the advertisement and the cost of production is paid for or provided in kind by or at the expense of the entity publishing, displaying, broad- casting, or circulating the political advertisement; or b.~. State who provided or paid for the advertisement and cost of production, if different from the source of sponsorship. 2.~. This paragraph shall not apply if the source of the sponsorship is patently clear from the content or format of the political advertisement or campaign litera- ture. This subsection does not apply to campaign messages used by a candidate and his supporters which messages are designed to be worn by a person. l'i · ih' i · r · Section 17. Subsection (4) of section 106.15, Florida Statutes, is renumbered as subsection (5) and amended, and a new subsection (4) is added to said section, to read: 106.15 Certain acts prohibited.-- f ~ ~ n ~ , n t r ~ nt I ti n n 1 v- i i r. (5)~ Any person violating the provisions of this section ~ :~ --:~,-. -e a misdemeanor in the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. 14 CODING: Words ~ are deletions; words ~ are additions. Ch. 91-107 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 91-107 Section 18. Subsection (6) of section 106.25, Florida Statutes, 1990 Supple- ment, is amended to read: 106.25 Reports of alleged violations to Department of State; disposition of findings.-- ' (6) Every sworn complaint filed pursuant to this chapter with the Division of Elections or the Florida Elections Commission, every division investigation and in- vestigative report or other paper of the division or commission with respect to a violation of this chapter, and every proceeding of the commission with respect to a violation of this chapter is confidential, is exempt from the provisions, of ss. 119.07(1) and 286.011, and is exempt from publication in the Florida Administra- tire Weekly of any notice or agenda with respect to any proceeding relating to such violation except under the following circumstances: (a) As provided in subsection (5); (b) Upon a determination of probable cause or no probable cause by the com- mission; (c) After a finding of no probable cause is made by the division and the case is not appealed; or (d) For proceedings conducted with respect to appeals of fines levied by filing officers for the late filing of reports required by this chapter. However, acomplainant is not bound by. the confidentiality nrovisions of this sec. tion. In addition, confidentiality may be waived in writing by the person against whom the compi~int has been filed or the investigation has been initiated. If a find- lng of probable cause in a case is entered within 30 days prior to the date of the election with respect to which the alleged violation occurred, such finding and the proceedings and records relating to such case shall not become public until noon of the day following such election. When two or more persons are being investigat- ed by the division with respect to an alleged violation of this chapter, the division or the commission may not publicly enter a finding of probable cause or no proba- ble cause in the case until a finding of probable cause or no probable cause for the entire case has been determined. However, once the confidentiality of any case has been breached, the person or persons under investigation have the right to waive the confidentiality of the case, thereby opening up the proceedings and records to the public. Any person who discloses any information or matter made confidential by the provisions of this subsection commits a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083. This exemption is subject to the Open Government Sunset Review Act in accordance with s. 119.14. Section 19. Effective July 1, 1991, section 106.32, Florida Statutes, is amended to read: 106.32 Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund.-- LI~ There is hereby established in the State Treasury an Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund to be utilized by the Department of State as provided in ss. 106.30-106.36. If necessary, each year in which a general election is to be held for the election of the Governor and Cabinet, additional funds shall bi trRn~ferred the -~b .............. app~pria~e to the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund from general revenue in an amount sufficient to fund qualifying candidates pursu~ 15 CODING: Words ~ are deletions; words ~ed are additions. Ch. 91-107 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 91-107 ant to the provisions of ss. 106.30-106.36. ~-~ ,~- (~) Proceeds from filing fees ~urs~ant to ss. 99[092. 99.093. and 105.031 shall be deposited into the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund as designa~d those sections. (3~ Proceeds from assessmen~ pursuant to ss. 106.04. 196.07. and 106.29 shsll be deposited into the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund as desi~ated those sections. Section 20. Section 106.33, Florida Statutes, 1990 Supplement, is ~ended read: 106.33 Election c~paign financing; eligibility.--Each candidate for the office of Governor or member of the Cabinet who desires to receive contributions from the Election Campaign Fin~cing Trust Fund shall, upon qu~ifying for office, file a request for such contributions with the filing officer on forms prodded by the Division of Elections. If a c~dida~ requesting contributions from the fund desires to have such funds d~tributed by electronic fund transfers, the request shsll in- clude information necessary to implement that procedure. For the purposes of ss. 106.30-106.36, candidates for Governor and Lieu~nant Governor on the ~me tick- et sh~l be considered as a single candidate. To be eligible ~ receive contributions from the fund, a c~didate sh~l not be an unopposed c~didate 106.011(15) and sh~l: (1) A~ee to abide by the expenditure limi~ provided in s. 106.34. (2) Raise .... ~:~--: .... ~ ..... ~,-~ ........... ~ contributions as follows: $150.~0 for a candidate for Governor. $100.000 for a candidate for. Cabinet office. Limit loans or contrib~tion~ from the candidate's personal funds ~ $25.0~0 ~d contributions fr~ national, state, and county executive comm~t~es of a ~olit. ical natty ~ $25.000 in the a~regate, which loans or contributions sh~l not auali~v for meeting the threshold amoun~ in subsection ~2), ~ Submit to a postelection audit of the c~pai~ account by the div~ion. Section 21. Section 106.34, Florida Statutes~ 1990 Supplement, is ~ended to read: 106.34 Expenditure limits.-- 16 CODING: Words stricke~ are deletions; words ~ are additions. Ch. 91-107 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 91-10~ (1) Any candidate for Governor and Lieutenant Governo~ or Cabinet officer who requests contributions from the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund shall limit his total expenditures as follows: (a) Governor and Lieutenant Governor: ~ ~ (b) Cabinet officer: ~ ~ (2) The expenditure limit for any candidate with primary election opposition only shall be 60 percent of the limit provided in subsection (1). (3) The expenditure limit shall be adjusted by the Secretary of State quadren. nlsJly to reflect the rate of inflation or deflation as indicated in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers, U.S. City Average, All Items, 1967=100, or succes- sor reports as reported by the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of La- bor Statistics. r ' ' u . aRf~ , 1 I · 1 Section 22. Section 106.35, Florida Statutes, 1990 Supplement, is amended to read: 106.35 Distribution of funds.-- (1) The division shall review each request for contributions from the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund and certify whether the candidate is eligible for such contributions. Notice of the certification decision shall be provided to the candidate. An adverse decision may be appealed to the Florida Elections Commis- sion. The division shall adopt rules providing a procedure for such appeals. (2)fa} Each candidate who has been certified to receive contributions from the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund shall be entitled to distribution of funds i ' i one-to-one basis · · . . ' .' ' on a 1' ' i tri i r o f o i ' ' r' ' o in 'vi 1 ' k 1 i '' 1 · ' i · ' in ma h k r n '' ' 'v' I 1 ' 17 CODING: Words ~ are deletions; words underliner] are additions. Ch. 91-107 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 91-107 (3)(a} Certification and distribution of funds shall be based on contributions to the candidate reported ~ to ~he division for such puroos~, s~q4}6A~. The division shall review each report and verify the amount of funds to be distributed prior to authOrizing the release of funds. The division may prescribe separate re- porting forms for candidates for Governor and Cabinet officer. (b) Notwithstanding the provisions of s. 106.11. a candidate who is eligible.for a distribution of funds based unon oualifving matching contributions received and certified to the division on the report due on the 4th day nrior to the election may obligate funds not to exceed the amount which the camoaien treasurer's reoo~ shows the candidate is eligible to receive from the Election ~Amoai~m Financin_~ Trust Fund. without the funds actually being on denosit in the camn~ign account v~ ........c, nly, Distribution of funds shall be made within 7 days after the close of qualifying, ~&~d v,. ,~ ....... ~ ................~,v,,~, and every v~*J~ 7 days (5) The division shall adopt rules orovidin~ for ~he weekly reports and certifi. cation and distribution of funds pursuant thereto reo~uired by this section. Such rules shall, at a minimum, provide for: (al Specifications for printed campaign treasurer's reports outlinin~ the for- mat for such reports, including size of paner, t~vp_ eface, color of print, and _pn!ac~.-. ment of reouired information on the fo.r~. (b}l. Specifications for electronically transmitted camoai_~n treasurer,s report..~ outlinin~ communication narameters and protocol, data record formats, and orovi- sions for ensuring security of data and transmission. 2. All electronically transmitted campaign treasurer's reports must also be filed in nrinted format. Printed format shall not include camoai_~n tre~s.urer's re. ports submitted by electronic facsimile transmission. Section 23. Section 106.353, Florida Statutes, is created to read: 106.353 Candidates voluntaril~v abiding by election campaign financlnF llmit.~ but not reouesting~ublic ftmds: irrevocable statement required: nenaltv.~ (1} Not later than qualifvin~ for office, each candidate for the office o£ Gover- nor or member of the Cabinet.who has not made a reouest to receive contributio~ from the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund. but who wishes to voluntaril~ abide bv the annlicable exnenditure li~t set forth in s. 106.34 and the contribution limits on personal and party funds .set forth in s. 106.33. shall file an irrevocable statement to that effect with the Secretary of State (2} Any candidate who files such a statement and subseuu~ntlv exceeds such limits shall nay to the Election Campaign Financin~ Trust Fund an amount eousl t~rthe amount of the excess contributions or expenditures. Such nenaltv shAll-n~ 18 CODING: Words strlek-e~ are deletions; words ~ are additions. Ch. 91-107 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 91-10'~ w m in n hll ' di . .o v if on a ii 'n ' i r i ' i ex e th limi 'h ' · Section 24. Section 106.355, Florida Statutes, is created to read: t ' ' i 'n i r '' . ' 1 i r lii r ' ' i '. · Ii ' .. · . h 'i r . m f h ' th x' x n i ira' i ' · Section 25. Section 106.36, Florida Statutes, 1990 Supplement, is amended to read: 106.36 Penalties; fines.--In addition to any other penalties which may be ap- plicable under the election code, any candidate who receives contributions from the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund and who exceeds the applicable ex- penditure limitLexceot as authorized in ss, 106.353 and 106.355. or falsely reports qualifying matching contributions and thereby receives contributions from the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund to which he was not entitled shall be fined an amount equal to three times the amount at issue, which shah be deposited in the Election Campaign Financing TruSt Fund. Section 26.' Subsection (13) is added to section 199.052, Florida Statutes, to read: 199.052 Annual tax returns; payment of annual tax.-- Section 27. Subsection (13) is added to section 320.02, Florida Statutes, 1990 Supplement, to read: 320.02 Registration required; application for registration; forms.-- i i '1 ' ' · .. ' . 1 i ' · · 19 CODING: Words st-vleken are deletions; words ~ are additions. Ch. 91-107 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 91-107 Section 28. Subsection (6) is added to section 322.08, Florida Statutes, as amended by chapter 89-282, Laws of Florida, to read: 322.08 Application for license.-- (6) The aoolication form for a driver's license or duolicate thereof shall includ~ language permitting a voluntary contribution of $5 per apnlicant, which contribu. tion shall be transferred into the Election C~moaign Financing Trust Fund. A statement oroviding an exnlanation of the ournose of the trust fund shall also b~ Section 29. Subsection (7) of section 327.25, Florida Statutes, 1990 Supple- ment, is amended to read: 327.25 Classification; registration; fees and charges; surcharge; disposition of fees; fines.-- (7) VOLUNTARY CONTR1BUTiONS.--The application form for boat regis- tration shall include a provision to allow each applicant to indicate his desire to pay an additional voluntary contribution to the Save the Manatee Trust Fund for manatee and marine mammal research, protection, and recovery. This contribu- tion shall be in addition to all other fees and charges. Provisions for collecting this contribution shall begin with the boat registrations for fiscal year 1985. The amount of the request for a voluntary contribution solicited shall be $1 per regis- trant. Beginning with boat registration in fiscal year 1993, the request for a volun- tary contribution solicited shall be $2 per registrant. All voluntary contributions shall be deposited in the Save the Manatee Trust Fund for use in accordance with the provisions of s. 370.12(5). Thee_form shall also include language nermitting ~ voluntary contribution of/;5 ~er a~licant, which contribution ~hall be transferee,,] into the Election Campaign Financing Trust Fund. A statement t~roviding an ex olanation of the ouroose of the trust-fund shall also be included~ T -- Section 30. Subsection (1) of section 607.1622, Florida Statutes, 1990 Supple- ment, is amended to read: 607.1622 Annual report for Department of State.-- (1) Each domestic corporation and each foreign corporation authorized to transact business in this state shall deliver to the Department of State for filing a sworn annual report on such forms as the Department of State prescribes that sets forth: (a) The name of the corporation and the state or country under the law of which it is incorporated; (b) The date of incorporation or, if a foreign corporation, the date on which it was admitted to do business in this state; (c) The address of its principal office and the mailing address of the corpora- tion; (d) The corporation's federal employer identification number, if any, or, if none, whether one has been applied for; (e) The names and business street addresses of its directors and ~)rincipal offi- cers; 20 CODING: Words sieicke~ are deletions; words ~ are additions. Ch. 91-107LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 91-107 (0 The street address of its registered office and the name of its registered agent at that office in this state; ami (h)(~ Such additional information as may be ne. cessary or appronria~,~ to eh. able the Department of State to carry out the provisions of this act.'- Section 31. Section 99.012, Florida Statutes, is amended to read: ~99.012. F.S.. for vresent texl~l ~.the s~ r . r ~]ifv ..,, ,, ,.o..,.~. ~ wlh i n' ~ The written res~ i · . ~office. if elected: ox ' i ui' 1 21 CODING: Words ~ are deletions; words ~ are additions. Ch. 91-107 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 91-107 3. All other officers must submit their resi~gnations to the Governor with a coon to the Denartment of Sta~ (DI. With regard to an elective office, the resignation creates a Vacancy in of- rice to be filled by election. Persons may oualifv as candidates for nomination and election as if the public officer's term were otherwise scheduled to ex0ire, 2. With regard to an elective charter, county office or elective m~micioal office. the vacanc? created bv the officer's resignation _m~_V be filled for that portion cf his unexnired term in a manner nrovide~! by the resnective charter. The office deemed vacant unon the effective date of the resignation submitted by the official in his letter of resi_~nation. (~) Any officer who s~hmits his resi~,n~tion, effective imm__ediatelv or effective. nrta date nrior tothe date of his a-~.lifyin= f.o.r office, may then ouAllfv for aaa nonofficeholder.and the nrovis~ons of th~s subsecti°n do no{ apply C4)(a) Anvofficer who o~ualifies for federal nublic office mu~t resi_zn from th~. office he presently holds if the terms or any hart thereof run concurrently wi~..h (b) The resignation is irrevocable. (c) The resignation must be submitted no later than the date upon which aualifies for office. id) The written resi_~,nation must be effective no later ~.hAn the earlier of the 1. The date the officer would take office~if elected: or 2. ~he date the officer,s successor is required to take office. (e)l. An elected district, county, or municipal officer must submit hi~ resi_~,n~ tion to the officer before whom he ~ualified for the office he holds, with a cony to the Governor and the Denartment of State. 2. An annointed district, county, or municipal officer must submit his resi~na... tion rathe officer or authorltv which appointed him to the office he holds, with a co~nv to the Governor and the Department of State. 3. All other officers must submit their resignations to the Governor with a cony to the Department of State, ~ - (f)l, The failure of an officer who aualifies for federal public office to submit aresi~znation nursuant to this subsection constitutes an automatic irrevocable res, i~nation, effective immediately, from the office he nresentlv holds. 2. The Department of State shall send a notice of the automatic resiznation to, he Governor. and in the case of a district, county, or municipal officer, a cody a. The officer before whom he qualified if the officer held an elective office: or b, The nerson or authority who aonointed the officer if the officer held an ao- pointive office. (~) The provisions of any special act to the~contrarv notwithstanding, with re- gard to an elective office, the resignation creates a vacancy in office to be filled by 22 CODING: Words ~ are deletions; words und~ined are additions. Ch. 91-107 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 91-107 election, thereby nermitting nersons .to oualifv as candidates for nomination an, l election as if the officer's term were otherwise scheduled to exnire. With re~ard t~ an elective charter county office or elective municipal office. She vacancy create, b~ the officer's resignation may be filled for that nortion of his unexnired term i~ a manner Provided by the resnective charter. The office is deemed vacant unon thy effective date of the resignation submitted by the official in his letter of resigna tion. - T (5} A person who is a subordinate officer, deputy sheriff, or police officer need not resign pursuant to this section unless he is seeking to ouAlifv for a nublic office which is currently held bv an officer who has authority t-0 annoint, emnloy, nfo mote. or othe~wlse super~se that person and who has ouAllt~e8 ss a candidat~ fo reelection to that office. However. unon oualifvinu, the ~ubordinate officer, denut3~ sheriff, or nolice officer must take a leave-of ab-sence without nay durin~ the nerim I in which he is a candidate for office. (6) The n~me of any person who does not comnly with thi~ section may be r~ moved from every ballot on which it anoears when ordered by a circuit court upor the petition of an elector or the Denartment of State. (Ti This section does not avolv t~ (a} Political natty offices. (b} Persons serving without salary as members of an apnointive board or au.~ thoritv. (8} Nothing contained in subsections ~3} and (4} relates to nersons holdin~ ar~y Section 32. Subsections (4), (5), (6), and (7) of section 99.061, Florida Statutes, 1990 Supplement, are renumbered as subsections (5), (6), (7), and (8), respectively, and a new subsection (4) is added to said section, to read: 99.061 Method of qualifying for nomination or election to federal, state, coun- ty, or district office.~ C4} At the time of oualifvin~ for office, each candidate for a constitutional of rice shall file a full and public disclosure of financial interests nursuant to Sectior 8 of Article ii of the State Constitution~ and a candidate for any other office, in eluding local elective office, shall file a statement of financial interests nursuar~t Section 33. Subsection (4) of section 163.566, Florida Statutes, is amended to read: 163.566 Definitions.~As used in this part, and unless the context clearly indi- cates otherwise: (4) ~Director~ means a person appointed to the board by a member. No person who serves without salary as a director or in any other appointed position of the authority shall be in violation of s. 99.012(~ by reason of holding such office. Section 34. T~The Department of Revenue shall conduct a study to determ~ne what tax or combination of taxes are reouired to be naid by ever~ taxnayer in th~ state and to review the forms by which these taxes a~e assessed for the nuroose of recommendinz to the .Legislature a form bv which a taxnaver could ~olu~tar~ly contribute money to the Election CAmpaign Financin~ Trust Fund. ' 23 CODING: Words ~ are deletions; words underlined are additions. Ch. 91-107 LAWS OF FLORIDA Ch. 91-107 Section 35. To the extent oerm~tted by federal law. all broadcast radio and television stations and all cable television stations shall make air time available tc candidates for 0ublic office at the lowest unit ra~ Section 36. Ifany nrovision of this act or the a~onlication thereof to any nerson or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity shall not affect~other nrovisions o~ aoolications of the act which can be giveneffect without the invalid orovision o~ apolication, and to this end the 0rovisions of thisact are~declared severable. Section 37. ExCept as otherwise provided herein, this act shall take effect Janu- ary 1, 1992. Approved by the Governor May 24, 1991. Filed in Office Secretary of State May 24, 1991. This publication was produced at a base cost of $25.75 per page for 1500 copies or $.0171 per single page for the purpose of informing the public of Acts by the Legislature. 24 CODING: Words strick~ are deletions; words ~ are additions.