Exh 3AAGENDA ITEM #3A
MARCH 10, 2003
March 3, 2003
MEMORANDUM
TO: The Honorable Mayor
and Members of the City Commission
FROM: Jim Hanso
SUBJECT: Follow-up Report
Code Enforcement Board Authority Dealing with Tree Mitigation; A question was raised at
the last commission meeting about why the Code Enforcement Board had not taken up the issue
of the tree mitigation required for the McDonald's restaurant construction on Atlantic Boulevazd.
The City Code gives the Code Enforcement Board the authority to set additional fines relating to
tree mitigation only if and when the applicant fails to either pay the approved mitigation amount
into the Tree Fund or refuses to follow the approved tree planting plan. In the case of the
McDonald's restaurant, the applicant planted the trees in accordance with the plan approved by
the Tree Board and paid into the fund an additional mitigation amount of $3,393.00. Because
the applicant complied with the requirements approved by the Tree Board, the issue was not
referred to the Code Enforcement Board for further action.
- Safetv of Radar Cart for SAeed Enforcement; A citizen appeared at the last commission
meeting questioning the safety of the use of the radar sign in residential areas or other areas that
may be in close proximity to the public. The safety of police radazs has been a subject of
considerable scientific inquiry over many years. A report on this dated February 27, 2003 from
John Campbell is attached. In summary, the radaz used by police departments for traffic
enforcement has been determined to be safe in numerous scientific studies.
Beach Renourishment; Since the last commission meeting, discussions have been held with
representatives from the Corps of Engineers, Jacksonville, Jacksonville Beach and Kevin Bodge.
While the sand quality appeazs to be acceptable and was approved by the Commission at the last
regular meeting, a new question has come up about the quantity of sand being available for the
Beach Renourishment Project. Finishing the currently designed project would require
approximately 300,000 cubic yards of beach quality sand. However, it appears that the amount
available through the "maintenance dredging" process in the St. Johns River would equal
170,000 cubic yazds. After discussion with all parties involved, it has been determined that the
best and fairest way to resolve the issue is to allocate the available sand to the areas in
Jacksonville Beach and Atlantic Beach that have the greatest need and thereby would be at
greatest risk from additional erosion in the case of major storms. A memo dated February 26,
2003 from Kevin Bodge to Steve Ross/Jerry Scarborough of the Corps of Engineers outlines the
proposed placement of the available sand. A copy is attached. Copies of this memo were also
distributed on February 27, 2003.
AGENDA ITEM #3A
MARCH 10, 2003
Possible Use of Shell from Beach Remediation Projects; A suggestion was made at the last
commission meeting about the possibility of the use of the excess shell being removed from
Jacksonville Beach for trail stabilization in Atlantic Beach parks. After discussion with staff, it
has been determined that the concept may have merit. City employees are testing material to see
if it would be suitable after being crushed. If determined to be useful, staff will request the
remediation contractor to stock pile some of the materials for future use.
Proposed Sculpture; Questions were raised at the last Commission meeting about the size and
construction of a proposed sculpture to be located on City property near the Police/ Fire
complex. One question was whether or not the public could climb on it. The proposed sculpture
would be approximately eight feet tall and made from concrete. Commission approval for the
sculpture is requested by the Recreation and Cultural Arts Committee later on this agenda.
AGENDA ITEM #3A
MARCH 10, 2003
Atlantic Beach Police Department
Memorandum
DATE: 02-27-2003
TO: David Thompson, Director of Public Safety
FROM: J. Campbell
COPY TO:
Subject: Hazards of Radio and Microwave Electromagnetic Wave Exposure
from Radar Speed Measuring Units.
The following information is taken from information provided by the Institute of Police
Technology and Management, including studies conducted by the U.S National Highway and
Transportation Safety Administration, American National Standards Institute,
Center for Devices and Radiological Health, an agency of the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration, the Occupational Safety and Health Agency, and the Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers.
Police radar was first introduced in the late 1940's as an offshoot of World War II Radar
Technology. From time to time, there has been controversy over health hazards from exposure
to the microwave energy of the radar units.
The properties of speed radar have been known for years. Police radar operates at X and
K-band frequencies (i.e., 10 - 35 GHz) with a continuous wave signal and is a nonionizing
Radiation. The output power ranges between 10 to 25 milliwatts. By comparison, the power
output of a child's walkie-talkie is 35 milliwatts, and a cellular hand-held telephone operates at
power levels of hundreds of milliwatts. In today's society many commonly used products use
similar technology and similar frequencies: alarm systems, automatic garage door openers,
motion detectors, computer networks, microwave ovens, and many operate at similar or
higher intensities and in a broad range of frequencies.
The limits of nonionizing radiation set forth by the American National Standards Institute, one of
the widely recognized institutes identifying safe limits of nonionizing radiation exposure,
AGENDA ITEM #3A
MARCH 10, 2003
recommends a maximum power density of 10.0 mW/cm 2 for the frequency bands on which
Kustom Signals traffic radar systems operate (ANSI C95.1-1994, "American National Standards
Safety Levels with Respect to Human Exposure to Radio Frequency Electromagnetic Fields,
300 KHz to 100 GHz).
The Center for Devices and Radiological Health, and agency of the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration (FDA), recommends similar limits (title 21, Code of Federal Regulations,
Subchapter J, Section 1030.10, ("Performance Standards for Microwave and Radio Frequency
Emitting Products"). "The 10.0 mW/cm2 limits is clearly acceptable by most reputable scientific
and medical authorities." The FDA has examined the possible health hazards of police radar and
made the following statement: "There is no evidence of a risk of cancer or other hazards from
exposure to the level and type or microwave radiation produced by police radar units." (1968)
Kustom Signal radar systems utilize microwave oscillators, which produce aperture power
densities, measured directly at the face of the antenna, in the range of approximately 0.3 to 2.3
mW/cm2. The majority of units produce values in the 0.3 to 0.6 mW/cmZ range. Kustom Signal
Testing Facilities states, "none of their units are capable of producing an aperture power density
in excess of 4.0 mW/cm2 ", still well below the safe limit. These levels measurements are taken
directly in the main beam of the antenna, and the power densities become lower as the beam
spreads and at the sides or the beam.
Another reference document on this is a DOT publication, "Field Strength Measurement of
Speed Measuring Radar Units" (NHTSA Technical Report # DOT-HS-805.9 8). This reports
states: "a series of tests performed on twenty-two commonly used traffic radar units, measured
aperture power density levels from 0.25 to 2.82 mW/cm2." This is well below the recommended
maximum of 10.0 mW/cm2. (See attachments of study fmdings)
In 1981, Dr. Fisher, P.D., Michigan State University, measured numerous radar units and
concluded, "maximum exposure during use of radar devices is less than 0.50 mW/cm2." The
newer radars tend to be at lower power than older ones included in the 1981 tests.
Measurements and analysis of microwave exposures near operating police radar units have
shown that even high exposure levels are well below the recommended safety limits. Exposure
near police radar is substantially below the limits set by recommended standards. Microwave
.w exposure near police radar are safe by existing standards, and that there is no scientific basis for
the alleged link between police radar, with cancer or other health hazards.
N
4-+
O
Q
~-+
NC
C
>U
N
O
fl.
,-i
N
N
O
C
c0
a~
n
a
m
L
Z
tD
L
N
L
7
(0
N
p
a
a
~.+
.~
a~
L
?~
Q.
L
~v
a
U_
L
N
N
F~-
p
n' N M Op l17 O I~ *-~ O O ~
U C r-1 M W M 1~ M N 01 rl !~
O~
M O O O Q O O O O O O
~
p
a
I~
Ll')
In
L(~
O1
N
~
O
00
O
U C d' lD Q1 O r-I d' O N N ri
Ifs ~ O *-~ O .--~ N O O N O N
U
~ a o 0 o a o o ~ o ~ o
L dl tp O n O O O O O d' O
,~ ~ O rl +-i N N O O M O M
L
N~ 1
O I
O 1
O 1
0 I
0 1
d` 1
O 1
O 1
O 1
O
a p ~ r~ ~n ~ ,-+ .-i in N tt ~o
Q d O +-I .-~ O N O O N O N
~ Q
~ a CO O n O d' d' O N O
~ ~ I~ tp C M d' I~ O ~ O
.--I ri ri N O O N O N
Q~
._.
~ ~ ~ w ~
T
.o
c
cp
X
X
Y
Y
Y
X
Y
Y
Y
Y
CO
0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o a
p ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
O
I
C
O
(0
LL
F-1
Z
i
(0
Y
Y
1
c
4J
Q~
a
LL
N
N
W
O
Y
1
p
a~
a
I
U
0
O
1
m
L(')
Y
Q
M
N
H
AGENDA ITEM #3A
MARCH 10, 2003
d' t~ c'n O
to ~ t1') ,
O d' d' ~'
X O o o
~ ~ ~ ~
O O O , '-I N N M
O O O O
C O O O
~ c+') ~' ~D M 01 t~
~ N .-i .-r 1 ~ O O tD
1
MI ~ O O O ~I , O O N
u ~
L
I- t
a ~
E
-I
'Q _
LL
N
2
'~
C
s
= _ _ _
~ ~ -L _ _ ,~ ,~ _ _
~
X
a~
.~
=
(0 X Y Y X X Y Y X
fYl
M
O
O
N
N
N
G
Q.
b
.~
i.,
U
N
d"
N
0
"~
cd
s..
U
E~
a
U
..~
rn
O
~.
N
4.
O
Q
c~
N d0 M O CO ~
N
N O M N N
tp tp d' M tp LA
O ~O t0 M M N
*-~ O O O O O
N I~ Q1 ~' OD d0
GO I~ M I~ ~ 0~
of
v ~ i
~. ~
o ~-
'~ ~ I
c z ~
O
=
_ _
Z
~ u.. _ = dS dS
~ ~
X Y Y X X Y
L
3
0
a
m
L!')
M
a
C
(p
C
L
r~
Y
O
M
t0
L
0
n
X
O
O
t0
.0
Z
co
L
3
a~
m
c
a~
a~
L
a~
E
.~
c
a~
.a
0
n
L
ca
~ .-:
N
U
F- ~
~' ~
°~v
a~
~ ~
v m
y
O t°
~
0 ~
rn o
,~-~
0 rn
o
~
M v 0 .~
~
U ~ M
~ tl)
O O
d' M
O
I.!) ~
u O N O N
c.
~ ~ ~ _
_ _
_
-~
~
Y
Y
X
Y
m
Z M N '~ ~--~
AGENDA ITEM #3A
MARCH 10, 2003
M
O
O
N
N
N
a
0
oq
ti
O
ti
FEB-26-2003 WED 05 54 PM OLSEN ASSOCIATES INC
MEMORANDUM
To: Steve Ross/tarry Scarborough
Cc: Creorge Forbes/Roy Paxson
Jim Hanson
Walter Hogrefc
From: Kevin R. Bodge, Ph.D., l'.E.
Date: February 26, 2003
Re: Jacksonville/Atlantic Beach Renourishtnent
Olsen
associates, inc.
Coastal EnginOering
4438 Herschel Street
Jacksonville. F132210
(904) 387.6114
The following summarizes my conversations today with the Gasps staff and the
Cities of A~tl.antic Beach and Jacksonville Beach.
It is my understanding; that all parties concur that the most prudent placement of
the estimated 170,000 cubic yards of beach-quality material that may be available from
dredging ot~Sections 1 and 2, above -4'1 ft, is as follows:
1. South Jacksonville Beach: approximately 2300 ft from 16`^ Ave. South to 10`"
Ave. South, R70-R72; 37,000 cy.
2. Atlantic Beach: approximately 4900 ft from 1't St, to 14`"/15' St., R47-R52;
90,000 cy.
3. North Jacksonville Beach: approximately 3800 ft from 4`~' Ave. North to 14'" Ave.
North, R61-ltb5; 43,000 cy.
Basod upon relative need, the preferred order of work is as listed above. !t is
recoguzed that there may be insufficient time and/or sand volume to place renourishment
material along the third reach (North Jacksonville Beach).
!t is recommended that the construction berm width be increased slightly (10 to
20 feet) a song the first reach (South Jacksonville Beach). This would improve
constructability and slightly increase the placed volume that is available to "feed" the
adjacent sh~~reline that is not filled (to the north) and from which shell is removed (to the
south). In the present circumstances, 1 believe that this modest change is consistent with
State permit allowances.
FAX N0, 904 384 7368 AGENDA ITEM #3A
MARCH 10, 2003
FEB-26-2003 WED 05 ~ 54 PM OLSEN ASSOC I RTES I NC FAX N0, 904 384 7368 AGENDA ITEM #3A
MARCH 10, 2003
S. Ross / 26 t~ebruary 2Q03
Page Two of Two
The City of Jacksonville Beach remains anxious that the infonmational flyers can
be printed and distributed prior to the commencement of remediation work (which may
be within a r.'ew days).
The City of Atlantic $each wauld likewise request that informational Byers
regarding the beach renourishment activity be printed and distributed to a affected beach
front residezits prior to comm~'ncement of work there.
I recommend that "mini" weekly meetings be held at the Beach beginning next
week, invr.~lving the Corps, City of Jacksonville, the Beaches cities, and the dredging
contractor ~,nd his .remediation subcontractor. These meetings need not be lengthy, but
would provide more fluid understanding of the work among ail parties. It may also allow
the Beaches cities to resolve potential conflicts with local activities, including other
onsoing construction work by the City of Jacksonville Beach, before problems arise.
I additionally explained the rationale and need for the proposed testing protocol
provided to Walt Hogrefe. It is my understanding that Atlantic Beach and Jacksonville
Beach cone:ur with the proposed methodology. While the "thresholds" for material
evaluation rhat I draRed may serve as a reasonable starting-out point, the standard of
evaluation should be flexible and modified if/as necessary based upon the observed
results from the placed dredge material.
Please call if you have any questions. Please also let me know if I have
misinterpr~~eed any parties' views, as expressed above.
KRB:rnbl