Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />II <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />If the proposed bridge could be designed without any support columns in the water, the environmental <br />permitting process (particularly the federal process) could be simplified. If there are no structures <br />proposed in the water (clearspan), a dredge and fill permit would not be required by the Corps. In the <br />absence of the need for a Corps permit, the federal commenting agencies would not be involved in the <br />review if the application (specifically the NMFS and EPA). A more streamlined endangered species <br />review may be required for manatees, sea turtles and the smalltooth sawfish if there is any barge <br />activity needed for construction of the bridge. Permits however would still be required by the SFWMD <br />(ERP) and by DERM (Class I), but the overall permitting timeframes could be reduced by 3 to 6 <br />months. Under this scenario, it would be advantageous to separate the project into a bridge portion with <br />a separate application for the boardwalk (which would require permits from all three agencies). <br /> <br />Project Approach <br /> <br />It will be extremely important to approach this project is a very systematic and linear way to ensure that <br />all of the design decisions can build upon each other towards the ultimate completion of the project. <br />Towards that goal, we would propose to treat this project similar to an FDOT Project Development and <br />Environment (PD&E) study. This systematic process will force us to set aside any pre-conceived <br />notions and proceed step-by-step through the decision making progression. <br /> <br />The project would begin with an intense data gathering phase that would include surveying, property <br />data, geotechnical, environmental assessments, utility locations and any other available pertinent data. <br />This phase will also involve consultation with the permitting agencies to determine the projected <br />impacts and establish a course of action. When all of the pertinent data is available, the PD&E <br />process outlines the development of alternates with a determination of their impacts. In addition to <br />environmental issues, these impacts can also include effects on the community, traffic, noise, historical <br />significance and other important concerns <br /> <br />The traditional FDOT PD&E study involves a thorough Public Involvement phase where information is <br />distributed and input is received. Considering the residential density of this neighborhood, we strongly <br />recommend a thorough Public Involvement procedure to ensure that the public is brought into the <br />development process. We have facilitated these efforts for FDOT on numerous occasions and are <br />prepared to offer these services to the City. <br /> <br />In conjunction to the PD&E study, we would perform a Bridge Development Report (BDR) to explore <br />options for the structure. With the geometric data firmly established, we would look at several <br />alternates of span arrangement and structure type to provide as many possible options as practical. <br />This study would include preliminary member sizing, geometry, cost estimating and scheduling for a <br />complete comparison of all options. <br /> <br />Once this study phase is complete, the resulting preliminary design will be comprehensive and well <br />conceived. With all of the design decisions made soundly, the development of construction documents <br />can precede quickly without the need for second guessing. This two phase approach will result in a <br />logical and linear approach where all issues can be dealt with and incorporated in a timely manner. <br /> <br />Page 6 of 7 <br />