Martin MPO 2040 LRTP Table 7-9. Transit Needs Plan Moving Martin Forward Martin2040.Com

Prepared by Prepared for in conjunction with

043096004.14 Martin Metropolitan Planning Organization

presents

2040 Long Range Transportation Plan

Approved by MPO Governing Board on December 14, 2015

Prepared by: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

© Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. This document is the product of a study financed 2015 by the US Department of Transportation (US 043096004 DOT), Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), and Martin Metropolitan Planning in conjunction with Organization (MPO).

Table of Contents

Chapter 1: Introduction ...... 1 Chapter 2: Public Engagement ...... 3 Visualization Techniques ...... 3 Communication Tools ...... 4 Public Outreach ...... 5 Results ...... 6 Environmental Justice and Title VI ...... 7 Chapter 3: Goals, Objectives, and Perfomance Measures ...... 9 Chapter 4: Important Themes ...... 12 Roadway Maintenance Needs ...... 12 Bicyclist and Pedestrian Safety ...... 13 Congestion Management Process (CMP) / Livable Communities Initiative (LCI) ...... 14 Health and the Built Environment ...... 18 Freight Transportation ...... 24 Chapter 5: Data Compliation and Review ...... 28 List of Existing Plans, Studies, and Requirements ...... 28 Data Review Summary ...... 29 Chapter 6: Travel Demand Modeling ...... 33 Roadway Deficiencies ...... 33 Chapter 7: Needs Plan ...... 36 Roadway Needs Plan ...... 45 Transit Needs Plan ...... 49 Non-Motorized Needs Plan ...... 51 Chapter 8: Financial Resources ...... 57 Methodology ...... 57 Base Revenue Forecast ...... 61 Project Cost Estimates ...... 64 Chapter 9: Multimodal Cost Feasible Plan ...... 65 Cost Feasible Plan ...... 65 Chapter 10: Environmental Mitigation ...... 72 Chapter 11: Plan Implementation ...... 80

List of Figures

Figure 4- 1: Maintenance Funding Sources ...... 13 Figure 5- 1. Population Growth from 2010 to 2040 ...... 31 Figure 5- 2. Employment Growth from 2010 to 2040 ...... 32 Figure 6- 1. Roadway Deficiencies ...... 35 Figure 7- 1. Funded Transportation Improvement Program Projects ...... 43 Figure 7- 2. Roadway Needs Plan ...... 48 Figure 7- 3. Non-Motorized Needs Plan ...... 56 Figure 8- 1. Base Revenue Forecast ...... 61 Figure 8- 2. Federal/State (SIS) Funds ...... 62 Figure 8- 3. Federal/State (Non-SIS) Funds ...... 62 Figure 8- 4. Other Federal (TMA, TA, Transit) Funds ...... 63 Figure 8- 5. Local (Fuel Tax, Impact Fees, Transit from General Funds) Funds ...... 63 Figure 8- 6. Fuel Tax ...... 63 Figure 9- 1. Multimodal Cost Feasible Plan ...... 69 Figure 9- 2. Federal/State (SIS) Projects ...... 70 Figure 9- 3. Federal State (Non-SIS) Projects ...... 70 Figure 9- 4. Other Federal (TMA, TA, Transit) Projects ...... 71 Figure 9- 5. Local (Fuel Tax, Impact Fees, Transit from General Fund) ...... 71 Figure 10- 1. Martin County Ecosystems Restoration & Management 2015 Conservation Lands Status ...... 79

List of Tables

Table 3- 1. Goals, Objectives, & Policies ...... 10 Table 4- 1. Overview of Pedestrian and Bicyclist Fatality Data ...... 14 Table 7- 1. Martin MPO 2035 Cost Feasible Plan Projects (2016-2035) ...... 39 Table 7- 2. Amendment to Cost Feasible Plan Project ...... 39 Table 7- 3. Palm Beach MPO 2040 Cost Feasible Plan Projects ...... 40 Table 7- 4. Summary of TIP Roadway Projects ...... 42 Table 7- 5. Martin County Public Transit Capital/Operating Program, 2014-2023 ...... 44 Table 7- 6. Martin MPO 2015 Project Priorities ...... 45 Table 7- 7. Roadway Needs Plan ...... 46 Table 7- 8. SIS Needs Plan ...... 47 Table 7- 9. Transit Needs Plan ...... 50 Table 7- 10. Non-Motorized Needs Plan ...... 52 Table 8- 1. Federal and State Capacity Funding Projections (2021-2040) ...... 58 Table 8- 2. Local Source Revenue Projections (2021-2040) ...... 59 Table 8- 3. Inflation Factors ...... 64 Table 9- 1. Moving Martin Forward Prioritization Analysis ...... 67 Table 9- 2. Multimodal Cost Feasible Plan ...... 68 Table 10- 1. Environmental Mitigation ...... 74

List of Appendices

Appendix A: Public Engagement Appendix A-1: Public Involvement Plan Appendix A-2: Public Outreach Appendix A-3: Newsletter/Advertisement Appendix A-4: Steering Committee Meetings Appendix B: Data Compilation and Review Appendix C: Martin County 2040 Roadway Level of Service Appendix D: Financial Resources Appendix D-1: Supplement to the 2040 Revenue Handbook Appendix D-2: 2040 Revenue Estimates for Martin Metropolitan Area Appendix D-3: 2040 Revenue Forecast - Appendix for the Martin Metropolitan Area Long Range Plan Update Appendix D-4: Cost Estimates Appendix E: Cost Feasible Plan Appendix E-1: Prioritization Criteria Appendix E-2: Cost Feasible Plan Implementation Worksheets Appendix F: Model Plots Appendix F-1: Volume-to-Count Appendix F-2: E+C Laneage Appendix F-3: CFP Laneage Appendix G: LRTP Checklist Appendix H: Public Comments (30-day Public Review Period) Appendix I: Approval of Moving Martin Forward

iii

List of Acronyms

AADT……..Annual Average Daily Traffic LOGT……Local Option Gas Tax AASHTO…American Association of State LOS……..Level of Service Highway & Transportation Officials LRTP……Long Range Transportation Plan ADA………Americans with Disabilities Act MCPT…...Martin County Public Transit BDB………Business Development Board MOT…….Maintenance of Traffic BEBR…….Bureau of Economic and MPO…….Metropolitan Planning Business Research Organization BPAC…….Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory MPOAC…Metropolitan Planning Committee Organization Advisory Council CAC……..Citizens Advisory Committee NHTSA… National Highway Traffic Safety CEI………Construction Engineering and Administration Inspection OA………Other Arterials CDC……..Centers for Disease Control PE……….Preliminary Engineering CFP……...Cost Feasible Plan PIP………Public Involvement Plan CFR……...Code of Federal Regulations SHSP……Strategic Highway Safety Plan CMP……..Congestion Management SIS………Strategic Intermodal System Process SOV……..Single Occupancy Vehicle DHSMV… Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles TAC……..Technical Advisory Committee E+C………Existing+Committed TAP……..Transportation Alternatives Program ETDM…….Efficient Transportation Decision Making TCRPC…Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council FDOT……Florida Department of Transportation TCRPM…Treasure Coast Regional Planning Model FEC……..Florida East Coast TDP……..Transit Development Plan FHWA…...Federal Highway Administration TIP………Transportation Improvement FTA………Federal Transit Administration Program FTP………Florida Transportation Plan TMA ……Transportation Management Area FY………..Fiscal Year (TMA funds are also called SU funds) GIS………Geographic Information Systems TRIP……Transportation Regional Incentive HTS………Household Travel Survey Program ICTF……..Intermodal Container Transfer UPWP….Unified Planning Work Program Facility VMT…….Vehicles Mile Traveled ICWW……Intracoastal Waterway V/C…...…Volume-to-Capacity Ratio ILC……….Intermodal Logistics Center YOE…….Year of Expenditure LCI……….Livable Communities Initiatives

Chapter 1: Introduction

The Martin Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) is the primary agency responsible for transportation planning in Martin County. The MPO is comprised of elected officials representing local governments. The current Board consists of seven voting members representing the Martin County Commission, City of Stuart, and Town of Sewall’s Point. The MPO works to coordinate the improvement of all facets of the transportation network in Martin County. The MPO evaluates existing transportation conditions, develops improvement strategies to solve mobility and safety challenges, engages the public to inform and collect meaningful input, and prioritizes transportation funding strategies.

MPOs are designated and funded through Federal legislation directing the coordination of plans and improvements in areas with a population of 50,000 or more. The mission of the Martin MPO is to provide a continuing, comprehensive, and cooperative transportation planning – the “3C” planning approach towards projects.

Every five years, the MPO is required to review and update the Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP). The LRTP sets the vision for transportation for all modes of travel throughout the County and influences projects included in the 5-year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The update of the Martin LRTP every five years is one of the primary activities of the Martin MPO to meet federal and state requirements. The 2040 LRTP, also known as Moving Martin Forward, details how Martin County’s multimodal transportation system will evolve over the next 25 years.

The Martin MPO is one of the most active MPOs in Florida. According to the FDOT District Four M/TPO Public Awareness Survey, Martin County has the highest percentage of residents who are aware of the MPO and its activities of any county in the District Four area. The Martin MPO’s recent Household Travel Survey (HTS) resulted in one of the highest response rates in the nation for similar studies.

This tradition of effective public engagement has continued throughout the Moving Martin Forward project. This results in an LRTP that is responsive to local concerns, such as re-allocating funding from roadway expansion to system maintenance, adding bus routes over time that are feasible to operate with reasonably anticipated operations funding, retro-fitting the existing roadway system to accommodate pedestrians and bicyclists in a safe and effective manner, increasing funding for

Page 1 of 80 congestion management and livable communities, and ensuring that when roadway expansion does occur, multimodal facilities are included in the programming and design.

A major emphasis of the 2040 LRTP is the inclusion of projects that improve the operation of the existing system. The 2040 LRTP update includes in-depth consideration of multimodal improvement opportunities; “flexing” funds traditionally used for roadway expansion to go toward system maintenance; the utilization of quantitative metrics to measure the effectiveness of the LRTP and its impact on mobility, safety, and resiliency; and an increased focus on congestion management strategies designed to maximize the effectiveness and efficiency of the existing transportation system.

Page 2 of 80

Chapter 2: Public Engagement

The Martin Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) maintains a Public Involvement Plan (PIP) to meet the requirements of state and federal laws by providing opportunities for public involvement and input in the multimodal transportation planning process. Groups and individuals were engaged using a variety of methods and strategies to distribute information and encourage participation in the Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) process managed by the MPO. By developing a process that allows the public to ask questions and provide input during the development of the plan, the MPO was able to create a plan that is economically feasible, addresses needs and demands, and has community support. Appendix A-1 includes the specific PIP developed and executed for the LRTP.

Public engagement is a critical element of Moving Martin Forward because identifying an effective transportation system can only come from a true understanding of citizens’ diverse and far- ranging needs. Innovative techniques were developed to engage the public and implemented through the tools listed below to ensure the public was engaged throughout the planning process.

Visualization Techniques

Martin Mobility Bucks Interactive exercise at open house Events for the public to prioritize investment. If you had control of the transportation budget, how would you spend your dollars?

Interactive Automated Polling Response Polling devices showing instantaneous results used at open house events to display input on various aspects.

Page 3 of 80

Dot Map Game Interactive exercise at open house events for meeting participants to place dots on the maps provided as to where you live, work, attend school, and make other types of trips (shop, play, visit).

Interactive Project Needs Map Interactive exercise at open house events for the public to tell the project team about their ideas for transportation projects. The project team used a GIS-based interactive map to draw projects on the map identified by attendees.

Communication Tools

Interactive Website The project website, www.MARTIN2040.com provides electronic

information and documentation about the project, the Martin County 2040 LRTP Online Survey available in English and Spanish, link for comments/questions, and the LRTP informational videos.

Newspapers/Advertisements Open house events were promoted in the Treasure Coast area throughout various stages of the project in newspaper articles and paid advertisements.

Social Media The Facebook group, Moving Martin Forward provides dates, photos, and newsletters for the Visioning open house events and Cost Feasible Public open house Event.

Maps, Graphs Various graphic formats were used throughout the process to present information.

Page 4 of 80

Public Outreach

. Meetings with the MPO Governing Board, LRTP Steering Committee, MPO Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), MPO Citizens Advisory Committee (CAC), MPO Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC), and Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). . Focus group meetings and presentations to area stakeholders. o City of Stuart o Indiantown Chamber o Kane Center o Indianwood o United Way . Three open house events during the visioning stage, which specifically informed the development of the Goals and Objectives, and Needs Plan. . One Cost Feasible Plan open house event . Idea Database

Page 5 of 80

Results

Results from the Visioning Open House events interactive maps are located in Appendix A-2. Newspaper articles and advertisements are located in Appendix A-3. The online survey results, Martin Mobility Bucks results, automated polling response results, dot map games, and the Idea Database are also located in Appendix A-2. The Idea Database is a compilation of comments collected from various open house events, online survey, and comments cards. The comments are organized by topics such as bike lanes, buses, greenways, maintenance, new roads and widening, park-and-ride, pedestrian improvements, traffic calming, and Tri-Rail. Steering Committee Meeting Sign-In Sheets are located in Appendix A-4.

Dot Map Game

Martin Mobility Bucks

How would you spend your transportation dollars?

VISIONING OPEN HOUSE COST FEASIBLE PLAN OPEN EVENTS HOUSE EVENT

1. Bike Lanes 1. Bike/Ped Facilities 2. Pedestrian 2. Roadway Maintenance Improvements 3. Bus Services 3. Roadway Maintenance

Page 6 of 80

Automated Polling Response

If you had control over the transportation budget, what is your highest priority improvement? AUTOMATED POLLING RESPONSE 1. Enhanced maintenance of existing roadway conditions 2. Local bus service 3. Bike construction on roads and greenways

Environmental Justice and Title VI

Federal agencies and federally-funded transportation plans and projects must make environmental justice a key part of its mission by identifying and addressing the impacts of programs, policies, and activities on both minority and low-income populations. Throughout the 2040 LRTP study process, the provisions of environmental justice, as defined by the Federal Highway Administration, were followed to ensure consistency with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.

MPO staff and consultants made every effort to reach and serve disadvantaged populations during the Moving Martin Forward process, and to include all affected parties from varying socioeconomic groups to ensure that their input was equally considered in the 2040 LRTP update. An open house was held in Indiantown immediately following an Indiantown Neighborhood Advisory Committee (NAC) meeting, where there was an audience already gathered. The median per capita income for Indiantown area residents is approximately $11,000, and approximately 23% of residents live below the poverty line. Hispanics comprise approximately 50% of the population of Indiantown according to the U.S. Bureau of the Census. A Spanish-language interpreter was present at the Indiantown Visioning open house event and promotional materials were translated in Spanish.

The PIP team identified certain key groups serving low-income and transit-dependent populations in Martin County. The project team held focus group meetings with unique population groups, such as the Kane Center Day Club, which is a life center for elderly residents, as well as their families and caregivers. The same activities that were available at Visioning open house events,

Page 7 of 80 such as Martin Mobility Bucks and written comment cards were also available to focus group participants. Focus group meetings were at City of Stuart, Indiantown Chamber, Kane Center, Indianwood, and United Way. Public transportation issues are of particular importance to Kane Center attendees.

Open house events were held at times and places accessible by Martin County Public Transit. In addition, several meetings were held with open house formats beginning in the afternoon and extending into the evening so that those arriving by bus or with strict schedule demands (work, school, and/or family) could have ample time to arrive, participate in the project events, and return again within the transit schedule.

Page 8 of 80

Chapter 3: Goals, Objectives, and Perfomance Measures

Clear goals, objectives, and performance measures were set to a critical foundation for Moving Martin Forward. The goals set are developed with a focus on outcomes, rather than on activities or polices. Goals reflect agreed-upon system-wide priorities and relate to outcomes that matter to the public and not just to the agency. Table 3-1 depicts the goals, objectives, and performance measures. GOAL 1

An efficient multimodal transportation system that supports the local economy and

maintains the quality of life.

GOAL 2

A safe multimodal transportation system.

GOAL 3 Protect the existing transportation system and the natural environment, minimizing adverse community impacts.

GOAL 4

A transportation system that addresses the needs and concerns of the public.

Page 9 of 80 Table 3-1. Goals, Objectives, and Performance Measures

MAP-21 Goals 2060 Florida Transportation Plan Goals

Goal/Objectives Performance Measures Safety Condition Infrastructure Reduction Congestion Reliability System and Movement Freight Vitality Economic Environmental Sustainability Project Reduced Delays Delivery Economic Competitiveness Community Livability Environmental Stewardship and Security Safety and Maintenance Operations Mobility and Connectivity

Goal 1: An efficient multimodal transportation system that supports the local economy and maintains the quality of life. A. Prioritize improvements that maintain acceptable travel performance. Vehicle miles of travel operating at or better than the adopted level of u u u u u u service standard. (Higher is better) B. Support improvements to major roadway freight corridors. Percent vehicle miles of travel operating at or better than the adopted u u u u u u level of service standard on freight corridors. (Higher is better) C. Implement strategies to reduce per capita vehicle miles of travel. u u u u u Vehicle miles of travel per capita. (Lower is better) D. Prioritize funding to support smaller scale congestion management Dollars of funding to plan, design, and implement congestion u u u u u u u u u u projects and programs. management projects and programs. (Higher is better) E. Assume the established land use policies identified by the Cities and Consistent with established land use policies and projected growth u u u County. assumed by the plan. (Yes is preferred) F. Increase the sidewalk coverage on roadways serving concentrations of Miles of pedestrian facilities on the major roadway system. (Higher is u u u u u u u u u u population and employment in urban areas. better) G. Increase the bicycle facility coverage throughout the planning area. u u u u u u u u u u Miles of bicycle facilities on the major roadway system. (Higher is better) H. Plan projects that improve access to transit facilities. Percent of major roadways with transit service that include bicycle and/ u u u u u u u u u u or pedestrian facilities. (Higher is better) I. Prioritize projects that improve multi-modal access to community Percent of major roadways that access community places and services u u u u u u u u u u activities. with bicycle and pedestrian facilities. (Higher is better) J. Support projects that enhance the local economy. Transportation projects that are located in Indiantown or other u u u u u u u u u u u u community redevelopment areas. (More is better) K. Implement strategies that increase the miles of multi-use trails and Miles of multiuse trails. (Higher is better) u u u u u u support the trail network. L. Prioritize funding for projects that improve existing corridors that Percent of major roadways with appropriate bicycle and pedestrian u u u u u u u u u u u u address multimodal transportation needs with context sensitive designs. facilities. (Higher is better) M. Prioritize improvements that provide non-motorized access to Percent of major roadways that access recreational opportunities with u u u u u recreational opportunities. bicycle and pedestrian facilities. (Higher is better) N. Improve transit commuter access to employment. u u u u u Percent of population with access to transit. (Higher is better) Page 1 of 2 Table 3-1. Goals, Objectives, and Performance Measures (continued) MAP-21 Goals 2060 Florida Transportation Plan Goals

Goal/Objectives Performance Measures Safety Infrastructure Condition Reduction Congestion Reliability System Movement Freight Vitality and Economic Environmental Sustainability Project Reduced Delays Delivery Economic Competitiveness Community Livability Environmental Stewardship and Security Safety and Maintenance Operations Mobility and Connectivity

Goal 2: A safe multimodal transportation system. A. Prioritize projects that improve hurricane evacuation needs. Centerline miles of roadway on evacuation routes operating at or better u u u u u u u u than the adopted level of service standard. (Higher is better) B. Prioritize projects and programs that improve safety on corridors with Number of projects funded for corridor improvements with high number highest number of crashes with fatal and incapacitating injuries by u u u u u u u u u of fatal or incapacitating crashes corridors. (Higher is better) mode. C. Identify and continually monitor locations with a high occurrence of Fatal and incapacitating injury crashes. (Lower is better) fatal and incapacitating injury crashes and prioritize appropriate safety u u u u u u u u u improvements. Goal 3: Protect the existing transportation system and the natural environment, minimizing adverse community impacts. A. Minimize adverse impacts to the natural environment. Acres of impacted wetlands or significant wildlife habitat. (Lower is u u u u u better) B. Minimize adverse impacts to the minority and/or low income Centerline miles of six lane or undivided multilane roadways in u u u u u populations. environmental justice areas.* (Lower is better) C. Support funding for transportation operations and maintenance. Dollars of funding dedicated to transportation operations and u u u maintenance. (Higher is better) D. Implement elements of the MPO Waterways Plan to include projects MPO Waterways Plan projects addressed in the Plan. (Higher is better) u u that connect all aspects of the transportation network. Goal 4: A transportation system that addresses the needs and concerns of the public. A. Consider and be responsive to all public input in the development of Document significant public input and how it is recorded in the plan. u u u u u u u u u u u u u the plan. (N/A) B. Use proactive public involvement to avoid disproportionately high and Document how the plan identifies and addresses the needs of the adverse human health or environmental effects on minority populations u u u u u u u u u u u u u transportation disadvantaged and underserved populations. (N/A) and low-income populations.

*These types of roadways typically result in abnormally high pedestrian and bicycle crashes in minority and low income areas.

Page 2 of 2

Chapter 4: Important Themes

During the course of preparing the Moving Martin Forward project, several key themes became apparent to build upon the Goals and Objectives and the input heard from the community during public engagement events.

Roadway Maintenance Needs

Roads and streets are among the most important public assets in Martin County. Proper road maintenance contributes to reliable transportation at reduced cost, as there is a direct link between road condition and vehicle operating costs. Without regular roadway maintenance, roads can rapidly fall into disrepair, and postponing road maintenance results in high direct and indirect costs. Currently, 71% of the local fuel tax is invested in roadway operations and maintenance.

Roadway Maintenance is Funded in the Multimodal Cost Feasible Plan

Based on the results of multiple forms of public engagement techniques, it was found that the general public strongly supported maintenance of roadways and bridges (maintaining the existing system) and considered it as one of their top priorities when compared to other forms of transportation investment. Results from the general public are noted in the Public Engagement section and more information can be found in Appendix A-3. In the Multimodal Cost Feasible Plan (CFP), an additional 60% of flexible federal funding is recommended to go towards roadway maintenance utilizing Transportation Management Area (TMA) funds on federal aid roadways. This represents an additional $23.62 million of forecasted revenues over the 20-year span of the CFP. Figure 4-1 depicts the maintenance funding sources for Moving Martin Forward.

Page 12 of 80

Figure 4- 1: Maintenance Funding Sources

$200

$180 $23.62 $160

$140 Additional $120 Funding (TMA)

$100

in in Millions Fuel Tax $80 $163.26 (Roadway Operation + $60 Maintenance) $40

$20

Bicyclist and Pedestrian Safety

Walking is a basic human activity. Yet during the past 100 years or so, walking for transportation has been marginalized in the quest to build sophisticated systems for motorized vehicle efficiency. Bicyclist and pedestrian crashes and the resulting deaths and injuries are a serious problem as documented within crash data. Furthermore, Florida has consistently suffered the highest pedestrian and bicyclist fatality ratio in the United States according to National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) data; Martin County suffers similar fatality rates as the State of Florida as a whole except for Martin County’s percentage of pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities, which increasingly surpasses the state percentage, as demonstrated by the data in Table 4-1.

Page 13 of 80

Table 4- 1. Overview of Pedestrian and Bicyclist Fatality Data

Pedestrian Bicyclist Fatalities per Fatalities per Pedestrian Percentage of Bicyclist Percentage of Million Million Fatalities Total Fatalities Fatalities Total Fatalities Persons Persons United States 4735 14.5% 14.98 743 2.3% 2.35

Florida 501 20.8% 25.62 133 5.5% 6.80

Martin 4 26.7% 26.49 1 6.7% 6.62 Sources: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) Traffic Safety Facts 2013 Data; Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (DHSMV) Traffic Crash Facts Annual Report 2013; U.S. Bureau of the Census population data

Historically Florida has one of the highest if not the highest rate of bicycling deaths of any state in the nation according to historical NHTSA data. Florida’s bicycling mortality rate of 6.80 persons per 1,000,000 population is more almost triple the nationwide average of 2.35 persons per 1,000,000 population. In addition, a recent Centers for Disease Control (CDC) report finds that the rate of decline of bicyclist fatalities between 1975 and 2012 in Florida is far slower than other states, indicating that other areas are making bigger gains in reducing the safety problem. Bicyclists die on Florida roadways at a rate double that of vehicle occupants.

Martin County pedestrian and bicyclist data tend to be similar to the Florida statewide average. Approximately one in every three traffic fatalities in Martin County is a pedestrian or a bicyclist, despite mode share data that indicates that less than 5 percent of all trips are made on foot or by bicycle. These data underscore a need to improve bicycling and walking conditions in Martin County. Guidance from both the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) indicate a shift toward funding multimodal transportation projects that improve pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Furthermore, based on the results of multiple forms of public engagement, it was found that LRTP meeting participants strongly favored improvements to bicycle and pedestrian facilities in Martin County.

Congestion Management Process (CMP) / Livable Communities Initiative (LCI)

The Congestion Management Process (CMP) is a systematic procedure that provides for safe and effective management and operation of transportation facilities through the use of demand

Page 14 of 80 reduction and operational management strategies. CMP strategies are lower-cost alternatives to traditional roadway widening that typically involve traffic operational improvements. Demand reduction may include improving street and land use connectivity so that fewer local trips must use arterial roadways, as well as providing facilities for pedestrian and bicycle travel. Operational management strategies may include intersection and driveway improvements.

The Livable Communities Initiative (LCI) is defined in United States Code 49 Section 5309(a)(5) and (7). The objectives of the LCI are to improve mobility and quality of life through improvements that encourage the use of alternative transportation modes. These objectives are accomplished through broad-based strategies such as the following.

. Linking communities to public transportation . Creating a more positive environment for bicyclists and pedestrians . Obtaining support of stakeholders . Encouraging innovative urban design

Characteristics of livable communities include community participation in the decision-making process; well-planned mixed-use neighborhoods; transit, pedestrian, and bicycle access that is compatible with land use; facilities that are Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) compliant; and safety, security, and accessibility for all users of the transportation system.

Federal Guidance

Federal transportation legislation stipulated the requirement for the use of CMP in Transportation Management Areas. The CMP builds upon the accumulated knowledge of how greater availability of data, enhanced tools for data management and modeling, expanded use of intelligent transportation systems (ITS), and opportunities for regional collaboration. The CMP is a process that provides for effective management and operations and enhanced linkage to the planning process. It also includes the environmental review process, based on cooperatively developed travel demand reduction and operational management strategies as well as capacity increases for alternative travel modes.

The CMP uses a number of analytic tools to define and identify congestion within a region, corridor, and activity center or project area, and to develop and select appropriate strategies to reduce congestion or mitigate the impacts of congestion. The Federal Highway Administration

Page 15 of 80

(FHWA) has conducted several workshops and technical outreach events that address the CMP. In addition, FHWA has funded projects that developed guidebooks on the subject of the CMP.

Funding

Beginning with the 2035 LRTP, the Martin MPO funds CMP/LCI improvements by setting aside a “box” fund for these demand reduction and operational improvements, which serve as an alternative to traditional roadway widening. In 2011, the Martin MPO updated the CMP so that it resulted in a living document, written in plain language that is understandable to a broader audience. The new process also produced recommendations that could be implemented within a reasonable time. The new design separated the CMP into two tiers. Tier I is the planning process through which a segment of roadway is chosen for further study. Tier II analyzes the selected section of roadway to perform a detailed Operation Analysis. The Operational Analysis results in specific recommendations for reducing congestion. Ultimately, these recommendations would be funded by the CMP/LCI “box” funds. The 2040 LRTP Multimodal CFP proposes to increase the box funds for the CMP/LCI improvements to $600,000 per year using a Federal funding program called TMA funds.

Analysis

As part of the travel demand analysis conducted for the LRTP, corridors that appear to be approaching overcapacity conditions by 2040 were identified as being candidates for CMP improvements. Overcapacity conditions were determined using the volume-to-capacity (V/C) ratio, which is displayed on the 2040 roadway deficiencies map in Figure 6-1. Volume is the total number of vehicles passing a specific point on a roadway; capacity is the maximum number of cars that can pass a certain point at a reasonable traffic congestion level. Roadways analyzed to have a V/C between 0.8 and 1.0 are considered to be approaching capacity and are identified as CMP corridors. Roadways with a forecast future traffic volume equal to capacity are considered to have a V/C ratio of 1.0. Roadways analyzed to have a V/C greater than 1.0 are considered to be over-capacity.

CMP/LCI is Funded in the Multimodal Cost Feasible Plan

The Multimodal CFP includes funding for CMP/LCI strategies to address roadway capacity deficiencies where applicable.

Page 16 of 80

CMP strategies include improvements such as traffic signal timing optimization, adding intersection turn lanes, multimodal transportation solutions, and other traffic operational enhancements. CMP strategies are appropriate for roadways where overcapacity roadway deficiencies could be realistically addressed through operational enhancements or travel demand strategies. CMP strategies may also be appropriate where roadways are physically constrained from traditional roadway widening. The following corridors are identified based on the analysis.

. SR 710 (Warfield Boulevard) between CR 609 (Allapattah Road) and CR 726 (Citrus Boulevard) . SR 76 (Kanner Highway) between Jack James Drive and Cove Road – an alternative to future 8-lane widening . SR 76 (Kanner Highway) between Indian Street and SR 714 (Monterey Road) – an alternative to future 8-lane widening . Pomeroy Street between SR 76 (Kanner Highway) and Willoughby Boulevard . CR A1A (Dixie Highway) between Indian Street and Salerno Road . Mapp Road between Martin Highway and SR 714 (Martin Downs Boulevard) . SR 714 (Palm City Bridge) between Mapp Road and SR 76 (Kanner Highway) . SR 714 (Monterey Road) between US 1 and CR A1A (Dixie Highway) . SR 714 (Monterey Road) between Kingswood Terrace and SR A1A (East Ocean Boulevard) . SR A1A (East Ocean Boulevard) between SR 714 (Monterey Road) and MacArthur Boulevard . CR 707 (Indian River Drive) between Palmer Street and SR 732 (Jensen Beach Causeway) . NE Savannah Road between NE 24th Street and SR 732 (Jensen Beach Boulevard) . SR 732 (Jensen Beach Boulevard) between Green River Parkway and NE Candice Avenue

Initial Congestion Management Process (CMP)/ Livable Communities Initiative (LCI) Priority

The corridor for CR A1A (Dixie Highway) between Indian Street and Salerno Road was identified for the initial CMP/LCI priority. The range in the 2040 traffic volume consists from 4,000 to 15,500 which is less than a 3-lane undivided roadway. A lane elimination (road diet) for this corridor is

Page 17 of 80 feasible since the traffic volumes do not exceed the capacity; the excess space can be re- purposed to incorporate a better pedestrian environment and bicycle facilities. In addition, evaluating bus stop access with emphasis on measuring the quality of pedestrian and bicycle connectivity can improve this corridor. Reducing single occupancy vehicle (SOV) travel and developing and implementing strategies will truly improve the corridor to focus on enhancing the quality of life and improving safety and mobility, and improvements for land use, transit, biking, and walking.

Selection Criteria for Future Prioritization

The CMP/LCI corridors identified in the 2040 LRTP should be prioritized through the preparation of a study to develop a product to enhance criteria for project development. The study would be established to evaluate the corridors listed above with quantitative and qualitative measures for CMP/LCI opportunities.

Health and the Built Environment

The Martin MPO recognizes the importance of the relationship between public health and the built environment. Therefore, public health is one of the factors that play a key role in shaping the Moving Martin Forward 2040 LRTP project.

Historical Context

Industrialization in the nineteenth century highlighted the relationship between public health and the built environment, which led to the establishment of many reforms and practices, such as modern zoning codes, that significantly improved unsanitary conditions in urban environments. By the middle of the twentieth century, cognizance of the relationship between public health and the built environment began to diminish in part because of prior successes related to mitigating infectious diseases; therefore, the layout of cities and towns began to be seen in terms of land use economics and efficiency for automobile travel rather than as a matter of public health.

In the twenty-first century, there is growing concern that although infectious disease has been brought under control, the built environment is now contributing to modern society’s primary health concern – chronic illnesses. These changes have not eliminated the connection between public health and the built environment, but suggest a sharply different focus than that of a hundred years ago. Sparse population densities and the strict separation between residential and

Page 18 of 80 business areas were measures urged a hundred years ago to improve conditions associated with infectious disease and pollution. However, these conditions may contribute to chronic health problems. The sprawling design of suburbs increases reliance on the automobile. This in turn contributes to a sedentary lifestyle, obesity, and air pollution, with its detrimental effects including chronic respiratory ailments.

The Link to Transportation

Several aspects of the built environment can have an impact on chronic disease. These aspects include the provision of safe, well-lit open spaces and parks that encourage exercise; easily accessible nutritious food sources (such as grocery stores and community gardens); land use patterns that encourage active transportation (walking or bicycling) as a convenient option; and investment in transportation facilities that shorten trips, include non-motorized transportation facilities, or perhaps even incentivize non-motorized transportation by making it more convenient than the automobile for certain trip patterns. Since the purview of the MPO is transportation, the remainder of this section of Moving Martin Forward will focus on the link between healthy communities and transportation.

Potential Benefits

Many important benefits can be derived from shifting from an automobile-focused transportation planning process to a multimodal plan. These benefits relate to transportation efficiency, provision of mobility choices, economics, safety, social equity, and public health. This section focuses on the potential public health benefits to a multimodal transportation approach.

A multimodal transportation plan will provide options to increase the percentage of trips made by active transportation. The potential benefits of expanding Martin County’s bicycle and pedestrian network, including accessibility to public transit, include the following.

. Reduce incidences of chronic disease. Active transportation can reduce the risk of diseases impacted by sedentary lifestyles, including Type 2 Diabetes, heart disease, high blood pressure, stroke, dementia, breast and colon cancer, as well as those related to poor air quality such as impaired lung development, lung cancer, and asthma, among others.

Page 19 of 80

. Improve opportunities for active lifestyles. Sedentary lifestyles have been shown to result in negative health outcomes. Active lifestyles improve mental well-being in addition to reducing the likelihood of chronic illness. . Enrich the aging experience. Elder adults may become geographically limited over time if the built environment does not respond to their needs by providing safe and convenient walking and bicycling options. Communities with complete transportation networks are able to offer quality “aging-in-place” experiences that include enhanced mental well-being, and independence by maintaining high levels of mobility. . Develop active habits at a young age. Children are more likely to develop active lifestyle habits that last a lifetime if they have opportunities for outdoor play and active transportation at a young age. Providing walking and bicycling facilities, especially “safe routes to school,” can help curb childhood obesity and lead to a lifetime of positive outcomes including lower risk of heart disease and lower health care costs. A higher percentage of walk trips around schools leads to improved air quality around the schools, which can further lower the incidence of chronic illness such as asthma. . Create higher levels of social capital. Residents living in neighborhoods with a connected street grid with higher levels of bicycling and walking are more likely to have higher levels of social capital (know their neighbors, participate politically, trust others, and be socially engaged), which improves mental well-being and sense of opportunity. . Reduce health impacts associated with crash injuries. Although transportation safety is an important goal in its own right, recurring health impacts associated with crash injuries can reduce personal mobility as well as create a cost and resource burden on the healthcare system.

Age-Friendly Initiative

An age-friendly initiative enables the County to better adapt their structures and services to the needs of their aging population. It is an initiative that makes it easy for older people to stay connected to people and helps people to stay healthy and active even at the oldest ages.

Page 20 of 80

Age-friendly initiatives can include any of the following from the Age-Friendly Communities: An Introduction for Private and Public Finders.

. New urbanism which promotes walkable neighborhoods . Sustainable communities focuses on sustainable energy use, housing, transportation, education, health, job creation, and social factors such as Meals on Wheels . Complete Streets which seeks to make streets safe and accessible for drivers, walkers, bicyclists, and wheelchair users . Walkable communities designed “around the human foot, truly the only template that can lead to sustainability and future community prosperity”

The initiatives towards age-friendly will create places that support older adults and their families better, and enable older people to remain active, contributing members of their communities.

Martin County encourages living life to its utmost. The Kane Center, located in the City of Stuart, exemplifies this culture by embracing all elders. The Kane Center is a life center for the elders: their own space, designed to help them live happy, purposeful lives within a supportive social network of their peers and loved ones. It provides an Adult Day Club, the Kane Clinic (Health Clinic), and Kane Carriage (transportation provider) for elders in the area.

“Health begins with healthy communities and safe streets.” – Florida State Health Improvement Plan 2012-2015.

How Moving Martin Forward (2040 LRTP) Addresses Positive Health Outcomes

There is good evidence to indicate that the burden of chronic disease can be reduced through an active lifestyle combined with proper nutrition and reduced exposure to toxic conditions. However, many urban and suburban environments are not well designed to facilitate healthy behaviors or create the conditions for health.

Solutions that have the broadest impact may be found at the transportation network scale rather than at individual street segments. The design of the transportation network establishes the role

Page 21 of 80 of, and design parameters for, individual street or corridor designs. Therefore, the Martin 2040 LRTP encourages enhanced connectivity through projects such as the Willoughby Boulevard connector between Monterey Road and U.S. 1 and CMP Strategies that can include local street connectivity as an alternative to arterial roadway widening (such as the Kingswood Connector, which would allow local residents to access a major shopping center and library without traveling along busy arterial roadways). The proposed Kingswood Connector roadway provides connectivity benefits by connecting Kingswood Terrace to East Ocean Boulevard, including sidewalks and bike lanes, and bypassing the need to travel along busy arterials. Investing in additional street connectivity, with walking and bicycling facilities included, encourages more efficient travel patterns and provides the opportunity for shorter trips to be made on foot or by bicycle.

Goal 1 of the Martin 2040 LRTP provides for “an efficient multimodal transportation system that supports the local economy and maintains the quality of life.” The Martin 2040 LRTP includes specific objectives to meet this goal associated with increasing the coverage of bicycle facilities and sidewalks within Martin County. To achieve these objectives, the Martin 2040 LRTP Multimodal CFP includes an interconnected network of bike paths, on-road bike lanes, and sidewalks. Furthermore, the Multimodal CFP proposes to allocate over $50 million of transportation investment for bicycle and pedestrian facilities.

One of the most effective ways of extending the pedestrian and bicycle network is to add walking and bicycling facilities during roadway maintenance and capacity enhancement projects. These facilities are components of Complete Streets, which aims to design roadways for all users, transportation modes, and abilities. The Martin 2040 LRTP Multimodal CFP includes walking and bicycling improvements in the cost estimate for the roadway capacity projects, providing for sidewalks on both sides of the streets and bicycle facilities.

In addition to traditional roadway construction projects, the Martin 2040 LRTP proposes to increase the current funding level for the CMP Strategies and LCI box funds. CMP strategies are lower-cost alternatives to traditional roadway widening that typically involve traffic operational improvements and may include street connectivity and non-motorized transportation improvements. The objectives of the LCI are to improve mobility and quality of life through improvements that encourage the use of alternative transportation modes. These objectives are accomplished through broad-based strategies such as the following.

Page 22 of 80

. Linking communities to public transportation . Creating a more positive environment for bicyclists and pedestrians . Obtaining support of stakeholders . Encouraging innovative urban design

“Preventing disease with a healthy lifestyle is much more cost effective and better for all involved. The healthcare community understands that roadway design has a direct impact on Public Health, and we look forward to partnering with the Martin MPO to plan improvements to the community’s transportation network. Complete Streets provide safe facilities for all modes of transportation, especially pedestrians and bicyclists. This can be achieved incrementally as other improvements are being made to the existing roadways. Something as simple as adding lighting, shade trees or a multi-modal path can make people feel safer and more comfortable so they get out of their cars, enjoy the sunshine while getting the exercise they need for long-term health.” – Karlette Peck, MPH, PA, Health Officer for the Martin County Health Department

In addition, the Martin 2040 LRTP Multimodal Cost Feasible Plan continues to fund the U.S. 1 Corridor Retrofit Project, which identifies a context sensitive approach developed as a strategic alternative to roadway widening along U.S. 1 to achieve viable transportation options and enhanced efficiency. A selection of the project elements that may have direct positive health outcomes are listed below.

. Context sensitive design solutions that encourage alternative modes of transportation  Grid network of connecting streets utilizing traditional neighborhood design  Bus priority treatments including transit signal priority (TSP) and bus queue jump lanes at key intersection bottlenecks

These projects and others will help the transportation planning community link together its outcomes with public health outcomes to improve the overall quality of life for Martin County and its residents in the years to come.

“The U.S. Surgeon General issued a new call-to-action in September 2015 focused on encouraging cities and towns to design and build their roads and public places to make walking easier, safer, and more pleasant.”.” – Transportation for America.

Sources:

Page 23 of 80

Bell and Cohen. “The Transportation Prescription: How Transportation Policies and Plans Influence Health,” PolicyLink and Prevention Institute, 2009. Buchman et al. “Total Daily Physical Activity and the Risk of Alzheimer’s Disease and Cognitive Decline in Older Adults,” Neurology, 2012[78]. Cagney and Wen. “Social Capital and Health: Part II Chapter 11. Social Capital and Aging- Related Outcomes,” 2008. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “Physical Activity and Health,” 2015, http://www.cdc.gov/physicalactivity/basics/pa-health/ Cohen, L. et al. “Healthy, Equitable Transportation Policy Chapter 8 Traffic Injury Prevention: A 21st-Century Approach,” PolicyLink and Prevention Institute, January 2009. Frank, Andresen, and Schmid. “Obesity Relationships with Community Design, Physical Activity, and Time Spent in Cars,” American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2004, 27[2]. Grantmakers in Aging supported by the Pfizer Foundation, “Age-Friendly Communities: An Introduction for Private and Public Finders,” Community AGEnda, April 2013. Institute of Medicine, The Future of the Public’s Health in the 21st Century, 2002. Khan et al. “Recommended Community Strategies and Measurements to Prevent Obesity in the United States,” CDC Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, July 24, 2009. Lee, Folsom, and Blair. “Physical Activity and Stroke Risk: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of the American Heart Association, September 18, 2003. Leyden. “Social Capital and the Built Environment: The Importance of Walkable Neighborhoods,” American Journal of Public Health, September 2003. Perdue, Stone, and Gostin. “The Built Environment and its Relationship to the Public Health,” American Journal of Public Health, September 2003.

Freight Transportation

Freight and goods movement is an important component of the local economy. Critical goods and services are delivered primarily via truck to local retailers for purchase and consumption by local residents. In addition, western Martin County is an agricultural area supplying food products to the local, regional, state, and national economy. Improvements to Martin County roadways facilitate the efficient delivery of important goods and services and often serve as “Last Mile” connectors for truck movements. “Last Mile” involves the final leg of a truck move, which in the

Page 24 of 80 case of Martin County could generally include a lot of the off-system/local road moves for final delivery to the retailer or end consumer.

Truck Traffic Overview

The FHWA has forecasted a continued and accelerated growth in truck traffic over the next twenty-five years. Until the early 1990’s overall traffic and truck traffic changed at roughly the same rate. Since that time, the growth of trucks has been faster than that of overall traffic.

The primary mode of freight transportation in Martin County is truck, which is true for most of the United States. A recent study by the American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO) considered current and projected modal split among primary freight transportation modes. Trucks carry the majority of freight when measured by any metric including tonnage, value, and distance.

Freight Pass-Through Trips

Martin County experiences freight pass-through on Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) facilities including I-95, Florida’s Turnpike, SR 710 (Beeline Highway/Warfield Boulevard), the Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway, and Okeechobee Waterway. Martin County’s position in the Treasure Coast between the Southeast Florida region and the Central Florida region is the primary contributor to freight pass-through trips.

Southeast Florida Regional Freight Plan

The Southeast Florida MPOs (Broward, Miami-Dade, and Palm Beach) in conjunction with FDOT prepared the 2040 Southeast Florida Regional Freight Plan. The study area of the Regional Freight Plan was directly adjacent to Martin County, but did not include Martin County. The Regional Freight Plan identifies and prioritizes freight improvements for roadway, seaport, rail, and airport infrastructure. Several significant facilities studied in the Plan continue northward into Martin County including I-95, Florida’s Turnpike, SR 710, the CSX Railroad, and the FEC Railroad. It was noted that proposed intermodal logistics centers (ILCs) have advanced slowly, including one in St. Lucie County.

Several recent freight transportation improvements were highlighted in the Regional Freight Plan and set the context for future investments. Recent accomplishments include Port Everglades expanding the Southport Turning Notch, constructing a new intermodal container transfer facility

Page 25 of 80

(ICTF), and completing the Eller Drive grade separation project. I-595 has been reconstructed to include reversible express lanes. These lane are unique in the sense that not only do they allow truck traffic, which increases access to the Port, but they are also separate from the general purpose lanes. The Port of Palm Beach is reconstructing Slip 3 berths and developing a project for mixed use operations. Port Miami is deepening its channel to 50 feet, constructing an ICTF on-port, and FDOT recently opened the Port Miami Tunnel to connect directly to the interstate highway system. The FEC rail lead to Port Miami has been upgraded. Miami International Airport (MIA) remains a dominant player in air cargo within Florida and the nation. These investments position the region to meet future growth opportunities including the widening of the Panama Canal, shifts in key global manufacturing centers in Asia, and new and expanded trade opportunities, including recent free trade agreements with Colombia, Panama, and South Korea, and the potential reopening of Cuba.

While the highest priority roadway freight improvements were identified in Miami-Dade and Broward Counties, ITS and severe incident response systems along I-95 in Palm Beach County were prioritized in the regional top 25 as future investment needs. Intermodal cargo transfer facilities and off-port intermodal rail improvements were prioritized at the Port of Palm Beach. Prioritized rail needs included improved connectivity between the FEC and the CSX, key track upgrades, and yard improvements. Investment strategies include public private partnerships (P3s), maximizing use of grant funding programs for freight, and opening freight bottlenecks.

Railroad Traffic Increase

Rail freight passes through Martin County on the CSX Railroad and the FEC Railroad. Rail freight traffic is projected to increase on the FEC Railroad in part due to capacity expansions at Southeast Florida seaports to meet growing demands, as discussed in the previous section. The FEC Railroad passes through eastern communities, including downtown Stuart, and connects directly to Southeast Florida seaports. This increase combined with FEC-proposed inter-city passenger rail service in the corridor will increase the frequency of trains in the FEC corridor, which creates the need to conduct a future study of a roadway grade separation to facilitate vital east-west travel.

Agriculture

Indiantown is the center of agricultural interests in western Martin County. Dating back to the 1930’s Indiantown’s economic drivers have been farming and ranching. The growing and

Page 26 of 80 processing of citrus fruit was extensive throughout the area. Although the dominance of citrus to the local economy has waned, Indiantown remains a major provider of a broad range of agricultural products and diverse agribusiness interests. Martin County land use data shows that over 77,000 acres of land is classified as agricultural. According to the Martin County Business Development Board (BDB), primary products supplied include citrus, sweet corn, sugar cane, sod, tomatoes, and culinary herbs. In addition, there is a large egg farm supplying cage-free specialty eggs and an aquaculture company operating an inland shrimp hatchery producing chemical-free gulf white shrimp in their indoor recirculating raceway system.

Waterways

Although discussions of freight transportation often revolve around SIS roadway and railroad facilities, Martin County is home to two SIS waterways – The Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway (SIS) and the Okeechobee Waterway (emerging SIS). Emerging SIS waterway facilities are designated by a size criteria or an economic connectivity criteria. The Okeechobee Waterway links the St. Lucie Inlet to Lake Okeechobee via the St. Lucie River providing cross-state access. The SIS Plan describes the Okeechobee Waterway as having significant potential for future growth. Recent cargo reports indicate that the Okeechobee Waterway is currently primarily used for the movement of machinery. Drought concerns frequently close the channel section through Lake Okeechobee. The St. Lucie Inlet is used for navigation, commercial activity, and recreation.

Forecast

Based on recent trends and FHWA forecasts, freight traffic is likely to continue to grow relative to regional population growth. AASHTO identified four major drivers of freight demand: consumption, production, trade, and supply chain management. Consumption will increase as the population grows, although growth is expected to occur at a slower rate in Martin County than surrounding areas. Food production in the Indiantown area will continue to generate freight trips along SIS roadway facilities. There are currently no SIS freight terminals, such as deepwater seaports and cargo airports, in Martin County. This limits the impact of trade and supply chain management.

Page 27 of 80

Chapter 5: Data Compliation and Review

The data compilation and review provides an overview of plans, studies, legislation, literature, and data reviewed for Moving Martin Forward. Federal and state legislation and requirements that apply to LRTPs, as well as State and Regional plans and studies that should be considered when planning for 2040 are included. Additionally, collected data that are used in the planning process are listed below and summarized in more detail in Appendix B. This includes existing and planned transportation systems, demographic projections, zoning and land use maps, and financial data.

List of Existing Plans, Studies, and Requirements

Federal Plans, Legislation, and Initiatives

. MAP-21 Regulations (USDOT) . Department of Transportation Strategic Plan (FY 2014-2018) . Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Comments on the 2035 LRTP

State Plans and Legislation

. 2012 Florida Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) . 2060 Florida Transportation Plan (FTP) . FDOT Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) Strategic Plan . FDOT SIS Funding Strategy . Florida State Statute (Senate Bill 360) . Florida State Statute (House Bill 697) . Florida Department of Emergency Management Statewide Regional Evacuation Study . Florida Department of Transportation Metropolitan Planning Organization Program Management Handbook . Florida Metropolitan Organization Advisory Council: Metropolitan Planning Organization Long Range Plans Financial Guidelines . Florida Metropolitan Planning Organization Advisory Council: Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) . Florida Freight Mobility and Trade Plan, Investment Element

Page 28 of 80

Regional and Local Plans and Initiatives

. Martin MPO/St. Lucie TPO 2035 Regional LRTP . Martin MPO/St. Lucie TPO 2035 Regional LRTP Amendment for SR 710, June 2013 . Martin Infill Alternative Plan – 2035 LRTP . Evaluation and Appraisal Report of the Martin County Comprehensive Growth Management Plan, July 2008 . Comprehensive Plan, City of Stuart . Comprehensive Plan, Town of Jupiter Island . Comprehensive Plan, Town of Ocean Breeze Park . Palm Beach MPO 2040 LRTP . 2014 Martin and St. Lucie Regional Waterways Plan . Southeast Florida Regional Greenways and Trails Development Status . Bicycle & Pedestrian Action Plan, February 2012 . Martin County 2013 Transportation Concurrency Annual Report . Martin County Congestion Management Process Update 2011 . East Ocean Boulevard/SE Monterey Road Corridor Traffic Study, May 2014 . Martin MPO Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) FY 2014-15 – 2018/19 . Unified Planning Work Program (UPWP) (FY 14/15 – 15/16) . Martin County Transit Development Plan (TDP) 2014-2023 Major Update . Martin County Transportation Disadvantaged Service Plan, 2013-2018 . Martin County MPO 2015 Priority Projects . Martin MPO Household Travel Survey (HTS) . Martin Grade Scenic Highway, January 2015

Data Review Summary

An overview of the socioeconomic data development from the Data Review is provided in this section. The full Data Review is provided in Appendix B.

Socioeconomic Data

Actual data for the base year (2010) and estimates of the planning horizon year (2040) socioeconomic data are essential to the transportation planning effort. The socioeconomic data utilized in the 2040 LRTP was developed by FDOT based on estimates from the University of

Page 29 of 80

Florida (UF) Bureau of Economic and Business Research (BEBR). Martin County Growth Management staff provided important local reviews of the socioeconomic data to improve the accuracy of the geographic dispersion of anticipated future growth, which became the zonal data (ZDATA) used in the travel demand modeling. The socioeconomic data developed for the LRTP included estimates of population, employment, and other attributes. Figures 5-1 and 5-2 depicts the population and employment growth.

2040 2010 POPULATION, POPULATION, 183,500 142,388

2040 2010 EMPLOYMENT, EMPLOYMENT, 106,222 85,724

Page 30 of 80 Figure 5-1. Population Growth from 2010 to 2040

V AY BL USEW NE CA

Legend NW JENSEN BEACH BLV Jensen Beach N E

N O W C E D F OCEAN BREEZE PARK T R A NW BRIT E N D D B E R L R E H V North River ShAores A L N Y

H N W A H W V IE A IX Low Population Growth Y S NE D E N Rio Atlantic Ocean LV S B N S Medium Population Growth W EA St. Lucie County St. Lucie River C E

F O E M E SV L A D B A C E 1 A SW R A MAP SE OCEAN BLV SE EAN R P A OC High Population Growth T L R SEWALL'S POINT H

D H D U R W SW R Y Y M B

U T RPHY RD I L V

C STUART

A S

F A L W O MARTIN DOWNS BLV S N 95 R N I W D S E ST ST ¨¦§ A Palm City R AN N 'S I SO H ND R T I S E V W E F L U S E EF R J B Y F E SW MARTIN HWY N S E E I P D D I C R K E T E U IN T R L S S O A P W Y E O L T HO R S S H E H SE W R I M E O G PO H SE Y S E H S M E A RD D NO Port Salerno O ER D W AL R S VE A SE CO V E E S

S E D V I L X S I B E E

S H G W H C W O N Y M LO A C R E K B S Z R A D E SE A S V S E W W A R F IE LD SW 96 TH ST S E B LV G

D O

R M

D E

H R Z

T N A V T S

A E E

A L

R A

L R

A E

O S

W F A

S V

W SW BRIDGE RD E

JUPITER ISLS AND E

B SE BRIDGE RD Hobe Sound E A C H

R Indiantown D S W BLV S C RU O IT S C N W F SW N AR E M R RD S

H W Y ¨¦§95 F L Y O HW R R ID NE A AN 'S Lake Okeechobee K T SW U R N P IK E D R Y E N T Y I A

H W ND W A - L

T S

A E

R S

S Palm Beach County

0 5 10 Miles Figure 5-2. Employment Growth from 2010 to 2040

V AY BL USEW NE CA

Legend NW JENSEN BEACH BLV Jensen Beach N E

N O W C E D F OCEAN BREEZE PARK T R A NW BRIT E N D D B E R L R E H V North River ShAores A L N Y

H N W A H W V IE A IX Low Employment Growth Y S NE D E N Rio Atlantic Ocean LV S B N S Medium Employment Growth W EA St. Lucie County St. Lucie River C E

F O E M E SV L A D B A C E 1 A SW R A MAP SE OCEAN BLV SE EAN R P A OC High Employment Growth T L R SEWALL'S POINT H

D H D U R W SW R Y Y M B

U T RPHY RD I L V

C STUART

A S

S E D V I L X S I B E E

S H G W H C W O N Y M LO A C R E K B S Z R A D E SE A S V S E W W A R F IE LD SW 96 TH ST S E B LV G

D O

R M

D E

H R Z

T N A V T S

A E E

A L

R A

L R

A E

O S

W F A

S V

W SW BRIDGE RD E

JUPITER ISLS AND E

B SE BRIDGE RD Hobe Sound E A C H

R Indiantown D S W BLV S C RU O IT S C N W F SW N AR E M R RD S

H W Y ¨¦§95 F L Y O HW R R ID NE A AN 'S Lake Okeechobee K T SW U R N P IK E D R Y E N T Y I A

H W ND W A - L

T S

A E

R S

S Palm Beach County

0 5 10 Miles

Chapter 6: Travel Demand Modeling

A travel demand model is a computer-based mathematical representation of the regional transportation system, socioeconomic conditions, and travel patterns. The model is based on a validation process using known traffic counts and socioeconomic data from a prior year. The model will determine how much demand for transportation services (i.e. traffic or trips) the region should expect in the future, based on changing conditions. A regional travel demand model has been developed for the Treasure Coast area, which includes Indian River County, St. Lucie County, and Martin County. The Treasure Coast Area coordinated with each other to help develop the model. This model is known as the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Model 4.0 (TCRPM). Travel demand models are useful to project future transportation conditions and evaluate alternatives for future roadway system improvements. The travel estimates are then used to identify existing and projected deficiencies. The TCRPM created by FDOT is one of the tools utilized for travel demand forecasting for the Martin 2040 LRTP. The Martin County 2013 Roadway Level of Service Inventory Report was also utilized to assist with forecasting traffic volumes through the use of historical growth rates. Appendix C includes more information on the modified Martin County 2013 Level of Service (LOS) Inventory Report, which was developed to forecast 2040 traffic volumes using multiple sources of information. The annual historical growth rate was calculated using 2006 average annual daily traffic (AADT) to 2013 AADT. The model annual growth was calculated using the model’s 2010 AADT and 2040 AADT. The annual historical growth rate and the model annual growth rate were analyzed and the higher growth rate was utilized for a more conservative analysis. In special incidences, a blend of the historical growth rate and model growth rate was utilized in order to project the 2013 AADT to 2040 AADT and volume-to-capacity (V/C).

The 2010 transportation network is the base year and the network has been adjusted to replicate 2010 annual average daily traffic (AADT). The 2040 existing+committed (E+C) transportation network incorporated FDOT’s Five Year Work Program (2015-2019) and the Martin MPO’s Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) for fiscal years (FY) 2014/15 through FY 2018/19.

Roadway Deficiencies

The 2040 traffic demand projections developed using the TCRPM E+C network make the assumption that no capacity-producing roadway improvements would be implemented from the years 2020 through 2040. The TCRPM E+C model assesses the impact of 25 years of growth

Page 33 of 80 on the roadway network. Model data such as traffic volume and V/C ratio were examined to identify roadway deficiencies resulting from the growth in travel over the 25-year period. Deficient roadways are candidates for potential future roadway improvements. When estimating the V/C ratio, capacities corresponding to the 2012 FDOT Quality/Level of Service Handbook Tables were utilized. Roadway capacity was modified in the model to reflect local government comprehensive plans.

The Martin County Roadway 2013 Level of Service Inventory and TCRPM data were examined to identify roadway deficiencies resulting from the growth in travel demand over the 25-year time horizon of the LRTP on the E+C roadway network. The TCRPM E+C did not accurately display the deficiencies and the Martin County 2013 LOS Inventory Report was utilized to refine the data. The Martin County 2013 LOS Inventory Report was used for historical AADT’s, a blend of the county’s growth rate and the model growth rate to project the 2040 AADT along with V/C ratio. Various roadway network improvement alternatives were evaluated to identify which improvements would have the greatest impact on reducing future deficiencies. Figure 6-1 depicts the roadway deficiencies in Martin County. Appendix F includes model plots.

Page 34 of 80 Figure 6-1. Roadway Deficiencies

V AY BL USEW NE CA Legend Jensen Beach NW JENSEN BEAC H BLV N Volume/Capacity Ratio E

Incorporated N O W C E D Ocean Breeze Park 0-0.79 T R F A NW BR IT E N D Adjacent Counties D B E R L R H V 0.80-0.99 A A L N Y

H N W County Boundary A H W V XIE E A I 1.0-1.19 Y S N E D E N >1.20 North River Shores Rio Atlantic Ocean LV B S N A S W E St. Lucie County St. Lucie River C E

F O E M E SV L A D B A C E 1 S A A W R SE OCEAN BLV SE N MAP P EA R A O C T L R H

D H D U R W Sewall's Point SW R Y Y M B U T RPHY RD I L V

C Stuart

A S

F A L W O MARTIN DOWNS BLV S N 95 R N I W D E T T S S S ¨¦§ A Palm City R N N ' A O S DI S H N R T I S E V W E F L U S E EF R J B Y F E SW MARTIN HWY N S E E I P D D C I R K E T U N E R I S T L O S A P W Y E O L T HO R S S H E H SE W R I M E O G PO H SE Y S E H S M E A RD D NO Port Salerno O ER D W AL R S VE A SE CO V E E S

S E D V I L X S I B E E

S H G W H C W O N Y LO A M C R E K B S Z R A D E SE A S V E S W W A R F IE LD SW 96 TH ST S E B LV G

D O

R M

D E

H R Z

T A N V

W S E

A E

A R L A

L R

A E

O S

F A

S V

W SW BRIDGE RD E

Jupiter IslanS d E

B SE BRIDGE RD Hobe Sound E A C H

R Indiantown D S W BLV S C RU O IT S C N W F SW N AR E M R RD S

H W Y ¨¦§95 F L Y O HW R R ID NE A AN 'S Lake Okeechobee K T SW U R N P IK E D R Y E N T Y I A

H W ND W A - L

T S

S Palm Beach County 0 5 10 Miles

Chapter 7: Needs Plan

The Needs Plan identifies required improvement projects needed to maintain satisfactory mobility conditions to an area’s transportation network. The type of projects identified within the needs plan include roadway projects, transit projects and projects related to non-motorized (bicycle and pedestrian) improvements. A Needs Plan is fiscally unconstrained as funding requirements and anticipated revenue sources for the identified improvements are not taken into consideration until the development of the Multimodal Cost Feasible Plan (CFP). Project needs are separated into three major categories; Roadway, Transit, and Non-motorized improvements.

As part of the Data Review and Compilation process projects identified as programmed and committed within Martin County were included into the initial list of project needs for Moving Martin Forward. The following is a list of plans and data sources reviewed specific to the development of the Needs Plan.

FDOT Strategic Intermodal System Strategic Plan

Florida’s Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) was established in 2003 to enhance Florida’s economic competitiveness by focusing limited state resources on those transportation facilities that are critical to Florida’s economy and quality of life. Funding for projects on SIS facilities is identified in FDOT’s SIS Work Program. The SIS corridors and facilities – both existing and emerging – within Martin County are listed below and are shown on the Roadway Needs Plan map, Figure 7-1.

. I-95 . CSX Railway Corridor . SR 91/Florida’s Turnpike . South Central Florida Express . SR 710/SW Warfield Boulevard Railway Corridor . US 441/US 98/SR 15/SR 700/SW . Atlantic Intracoastal Waterway Conners Highway (ICWW) . Florida East Coast (FEC) Railway . Okeechobee Waterway Corridor

Page 36 of 80

FDOT SIS Funding Strategy

The FDOT Systems Planning Office produces a document set known as the SIS Funding Strategy, which includes three inter-related sequential documents that identify potential SIS capacity improvement projects in various stages of development. All projects identified within the SIS Funding Strategy are considered financially feasible for implementation within the next 25 year period. The currently adopted SIS Funding Strategy includes the following sequential documents.

. First Five Year Plan for Years 1 through 5 (currently fiscal year 2014/15 through 2018/19) . Second Five Year Plan for Years 6 through 10 (FY 2019/20 to FY 2023/24) . Cost Feasible Plan for Years 11 through 25 (FY 2040)

The First Five Year Plan illustrates projects on the SIS that are funded by the legislature in the Work Program (Year 1) and projects that are programmed for proposed funding in the next two to five years. SIS capacity projects that are funded in the First Five Year Plan in Martin County are listed below. Projects slated for construction phase funding are underlined.

. 413254-1 – I-95 from south of CR 708 (Bridge Road) to High Meadow Avenue o Add 2 lanes to build 8 lanes (Project Development & Environment [PD&E] phase) . 429786-1 – I-95 @ SR 76 (Kanner Highway) o Modify interchange (Construction phase) . 422681-1 – I-95 from south of High Meadow Avenue to north of Becker Road o Project Development & Environment (PD&E) phase . 432705-1 – SR 710 from east of SR 76 to Palm Beach County Line o Add 2 lanes to build 4 lanes (Construction phase) . 419348-3 – SR 710 from CR 609 (Allapattah Road) to east of SR 76 (Kanner Highway) o Project Development & Environment (PD&E) phase . 419252-2 – SR 710 from Martin Power Plant to CR 609 (Allapattah Road) o Add 2 lanes to build 4 lanes (Right-of-Way phase) . 432707-1 – SR 710 from M.P. 2.0 to west of Fox Brown Road o Add 2 lanes to build 4 lanes (Construction phase) . 419344-1 – SR 710 from Okeechobee County Line to CR 609 (Allapattah Road) o Project Development & Environment (PD&E) phase

Page 37 of 80

The Second Five Year Plan illustrates projects on the SIS that are planned to be funded in the five years beyond the Adopted Work Program (Years 6 through 10). Projects in this plan could move forward into the First Five Year Plan as funding becomes available. SIS capacity projects that are included in the Second Five Year Plan in Martin County are listed below. Projects slated for construction phase funding are underlined.

. 419252-2 – SR 710 from Martin Power Plant to CR 609 (Allapattah Road) o Add 2 lanes to build 4 lanes (Right-of-Way phase)

The SIS Cost Feasible Plan illustrates projects on the SIS that are considered financially feasible during the last fifteen years (Years 11 through 25) of the SIS Funding Strategy, based on current revenue forecasts. Projects in the plan could move forward into the Second Five Year Plan as funding becomes available or backwards into the Unfunded Needs Plan if revenues fall short of projections. SIS capacity projects that are included in the SIS Cost Feasible Plan in Martin County are listed below. Projects slated for construction phase funding are underlined.

. ID=1537 – I-95 from Palm Beach County Line to CR 708 (Bridge Road) o Add 2 lanes to build 8 lanes (Construction phase) . ID=1539 – I-95 from south of CR 708 (Bridge Road) to south of High Meadow Avenue o Add 2 lanes to build 8 lanes (Construction phase) . ID=1540 – I-95 from south of High Meadow Avenue to north of Becker Road o Add 2 lanes to build 8 lanes (Construction phase) . ID=1541 – SR 710 from Martin Power Plant to CR 609 (Allapattah Road) o Add 2 lanes to build 4 lanes (Construction phase) . ID=1542 – SR 710 from Okeechobee County Line to Martin Power Plant o Add 2 lanes to build 4 lanes (Construction phase)

Martin MPO/St. Lucie TPO 2035 Regional LRTP The Martin MPO 2035 LRTP was adopted in January 2011 by the Martin MPO Board to guide long-term transportation improvements in the County. The Cost Feasible Plan (CFP) developed for the Martin MPO/St. Lucie TPO 2035 Regional LRTP identified financially viable improvements to the transportation network of an area. Table 7-1 represents the Martin MPO 2035 Cost Feasible Plan Projects. An amendment was added to the 2035 Cost Feasible Plan Projects in June 2013 to include an additional project, identified in Table 7-2.

Page 38 of 80

Table 7- 1. Martin MPO 2035 Cost Feasible Plan Projects (2016-2035)

PROJECT FROM TO DESCRIPTION 2016 - 2020 US 1 Palm Beach County Line St. Lucie County Line Corridor Retrofit Congestion Management Strategies CMP Funds Livable Communities Initiative LCI Projects Kanner Highway Jack James Drive Salerno Road Widen from 4 lanes to 6 lanes Indian Street Kanner Highway Willoughby Boulevard Widen from 2 lanes to 4 lanes Martin Highway SW Martin Downs Boulevard Mapp Road Widen from 2 lanes to 4 lanes 2021 - 2025 US 1 Palm Beach County Line St. Lucie County Line Corridor Retrofit Congestion Management Strategies CMP Funds Livable Communities Initiative LCI Projects Kanner Highway Salerno Road Indian Street Widen from 4 lanes to 6 lanes Cove Road SR 76/Kanner Highway Willoughby Boulevard Widen from 2 lanes to 4 lanes Cove Road Willoughby Boulevard US-1 Widen from 2 lanes to 4 lanes 2026 - 2030 US 1 Palm Beach County Line St. Lucie County Line Corridor Retrofit Congestion Management Strategies CMP Funds Livable Communities Initiative LCI Projects Kanner Highway CR 711 SW Locks Road Widen from 2 lanes to 4 lanes Kanner Highway Indian Street Monterey Road Widen from 4 lanes to 6 lanes High Meadow Avenue I-95 Martin Highway Widen from 2 lanes to 4 lanes 2031 - 2035 US 1 Palm Beach County Line St. Lucie County Line Corridor Retrofit Congestion Management Strategies CMP Funds Livable Communities Initiative LCI Projects Martin Highway Citrus Boulevard SW Martin Downs Boulevard Widen from 2 lanes to 4 lanes High Meadow Avenue Martin Highway Martin Downs Boulevard Widen from 2 lanes to 4 lanes Willoughby Boulevard Monterey Road US-1 New 2 lane road

Table 7- 2. Amendment to Cost Feasible Plan Project

PROJECT FROM TO DESCRIPTION 2016 - 2020 SR 710 One mile east of SR 76 Martin/Palm Beach County Line Widen from 2 lanes to 4 lanes

Page 39 of 80

Evaluation and Appraisal Report of the Martin County Comprehensive Growth Management Plan, July 2008

The Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) is an assessment associated with the State growth management process and could be defined as a mechanism for determining whether the goals, objectives, and policies of the County’s Comprehensive Growth Management Plan are being met. The Local Growth Management Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, Chapter 163, Part II of the Florida Statutes (F.S.) requires local governments to evaluate and assess the overall performance of their Comprehensive Plans at least every seven years. The focus of the plan related to transportation planning are contained in the Future Land Use and Traffic Circulation Elements. The intersections listed below are the improvements identified in the plan that will be done to help reduce congestion and improve traffic flow along the study segment of SR 714. . SR 714 at Citrus Boulevard . SR 714 at Armellini Avenue . SR 714 at SW 42nd Avenue . SR 714 at Deggeller Court/Leighton . SR 714 at Florida’s Turnpike Farm Road

Palm Beach MPO 2040 LRTP

The Palm Beach MPO 2040 LRTP was adopted in October 2014 by the Palm Beach MPO to guide long-term transportation improvements in the County. Table 7-3 depicts the projects in the Palm Beach 2040 Cost Feasible Plan that potentially could affect Martin County.

Table 7- 3. Palm Beach MPO 2040 Cost Feasible Plan Projects

PROJECT FROM TO DESCRIPTION 2016 - 2020 SR 710 Martin/ Palm Beach County Line West of Indiantown Road Widen from 2 lanes to 4 lanes 2026 - 2030 West Palm Beach Intermodal Express Bus via I-95 Indiantown Road New Express Bus Service Center 2031 - 2040 Martin/ Palm Beach County I-95 Managed Lanes Indiantown Road Add Managed Lanes Line

Page 40 of 80

Southeast Florida Regional Greenways and Trails Development Status The Southeast Florida Regional Greenways and Trails Development Status was prepared by the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (TCRPC) and updated in March 2014. The document inventories the proposed greenways and trails in Martin County, as well as Indian River, St. Lucie, Palm Beach, Broward, and Miami-Dade Counties. For each greenway and trail, the document lists the development stage as either “Final Form,” “Needs Improvement,” or “Conceptual Planning.” The document lists twenty-one greenways and trails in Martin County including the East Coast Greenway, Treasure Coast Loop Trail, Florida National Scenic Trail, Ocean-to-Lake Trail, and Bridge Road. The greenways and trails listed in this document have been refined by Martin MPO planning activities and the updated priority greenways are listed in the Non-Motorized Needs Plan Table 7-10 and illustrated in Figure 7-3.

Bicycle & Pedestrian Action Plan, February 2012 The Martin MPO developed the Bicycle and Pedestrian Action Plan to propose a vision that embraces bicycling and walking as safe, enjoyable, and viable modes of transportation. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee reviewed the Draft 2000 Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, which was an update to the 1998 Plan. The list of prioritized projects included in the plan were reevaluated by the BPAC. The updated project list was incorporated into the Non-Motorized Needs Plan Table 7-10 and illustrated in Figure 7-3.

Martin MPO Transportation Improvement Program FY 2014/15 – 2018/19 The purpose of the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) is to provide a comprehensive and prioritized listing of transportation projects for fiscal years (FY) 2014/15 to 2018/19 that is uniform with the 2040 LRTP. It utilizes the State and Federal funding over the next five years located in Martin County MPO. The TIP is also used to correlate the transportation improvement projects for the U.S. Department of Transportation, the Florida Department of Transportation, and the local governments within the Metropolitan Planning Area. Table 7-4 and Figure 7-1 summarizes the roadway projects identified in the TIP.

Page 41 of 80

Table 7- 4. Summary of TIP Roadway Projects

ROADWAY PROJECT FM # NAME FROM TO DESCRIPTION 2309782 CR 714 (Martin Highway) SR 91 (Florida’s Turnpike) Mapp Road Widen to 4L from 2L 4226413 SR 76 (Kanner Highway) Jack James Drive Monterey Road Widen to 6L from 4L Palm Beach 4327051 SR 710 (Beeline Highway) SR 76 (Kanner Highway) Widen to 4L from 2L County Congestion Management 4351381 SR 714/Martin Highway Citrus Boulevard Florida’s Turnpike Strategies – 42nd Avenue Improvements Palm Beach/Martin County 4351391 CR 707/SE Beach Road SE Bridge Road Resurfacing Line Martin Downs 4354531 High Meadow Avenue Martin Highway Resurfacing Boulevard North of SE 5th 4316461 SR 707/ SE Dixie Highway South of Florida Street Sidewalks Street 4316491 CR A1A/ SE Dixie Highway US 1 Saturn Street Bike Lanes Sidewalk Extension and 4331701 Baker Road Landscape Beautification 4317301 Indiantown Sidewalks – various streets Sidewalk Priority

Page 42 of 80 Figure 7-1. Funded Transportation Improvement Program Projects

V AY BL USEW NE CA Jensen Beach Legend NW JENSEN BEAC H BLV N E

N O W C E D Ocean Breeze Park Funded-TIP (Construction) Incorporated T R F A NW BR IT E N D D B E R L R H V A A E L N Y Adjacent Counties H N W A H W V E A IXI Y S N E D E County Boundary North River ShorNes Rio Atlantic Ocean LV B S N A S W E St. Lucie County St. Lucie River C E O F E M E SV L A D B A C E 1 S A A W R SE OCEAN BLV SE N MAP P EA R A OC T L R H

D H U

D R

W SW Sewall's Point R Y Y M B

U T RPHY RD I L V

C Stuart

A S

K F W A L O MARTIN DOWNS BLV S N 95 R N I W D E T T S S S ¨¦§ A Palm City R AN ON 'S DI S H N R T I S E V W E F L U S E EF R J B Y F E SW MARTIN HWY N S E E I P D D C I R K E T E U IN T R L S S O A P W Y E O L T HO R S S H H SE E W R I M E O G PO H SE Y S E H S M E A RD D NO Port Salerno O ER W AL RD E S VE A S CO V E E S

S E D V I L X S I B E E S W H H G C W O N LO A Y M C R E K B S A Z R D E SE A S V S E W W A R F IE LD SW 96 TH ST S E B LV G

D O

R M

D E

H R Z

N A

T V T S W E A E

R A A

A E

O S

W F A

S V

W SW BRIDGE RD E

Jupiter IslanS d E

B SE BRIDGE RD Hobe Sound E A C H

R Indiantown D S W BLV S C RU O IT S C N W F SW N AR E M R RD S

H W Y ¨¦§95 F L Y O HW R R ID NE A AN 'S Lake Okeechobee K T SW U R N P IK E D R Y E N T Y I A

H W ND W A - L

T S

A E

S Palm Beach County

0 5 10 Miles

Martin County Transit Development Plan 2014-2023 Major Update The Martin County Transit Plan (2014-2023) embodies the strategic blueprint for public transportation in Martin County for the next ten years. This Transit Development Plan (TDP) conforms to the requirements of Rule Chapter 14-73, Florida Administrative Code (F.A.C.) – which allows jurisdictions to be eligible for Florida public transportation block grants – and is consistent with the FDOT Five-Year Work for public transportation in Martin County as well as approved local government comprehensive plans and the Martin County LRTP 2035.

Table 7-5 outlines Martin County Public Transit (MCPT) capital and operating expense over the next 10-years, 2014-2023.

Table 7- 5. Martin County Public Transit Capital/Operating Program, 2014-2023

CAPITAL EXPENSE Americans with Disability Acts (ADA) upgrades Bus Stop Improvements Bus Shelters Bike Racks Fleet Replacement Bus Acquisition New Buses – Service Expansion Transit Pass Holder Program Electronic Kiosks Park and Ride Lots Expansion of Existing PNR Lot(s) OPERATING EXPENSE Continue Existing Service – Indiantown Route Continue Existing Service – Treasure Coast Connector (TCC) Continue Existing Service – Stuart Route (including route re-alignment) Implement New Regional Bus Service – Treasure Coast Express (TCX) Complementary ADA Service

Several service improvement projects that are needed to enhance the public transportation system in Martin County could not be included within the 10-year plan period. The service improvements summarized below should be considered as long term improvements.

. Increase frequency on Indiantown route . Increase frequency on TCC . Increase frequency on Stuart route . Continue to operate new regional bus service implemented in first 10-year period – TCX . New cross-town Palm City bus route to serve the residents and business . New Hutchinson Island bus route to serve the beaches and key tourist destinations

Page 44 of 80

Martin County MPO 2015 Priority Projects In September of each year, MPOs in Florida are required to submit a priority projects list to the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT). The September priority projects submittal date allows FDOT time to consider the MPO priorities as the basis for the new Five Year Work Program. Projects from the 2015 Priority Projects Report are listed in Table 7-6. These projects were approved in September 2014 and were used in the planning process for Moving Martin Forward. Table 7- 6. Martin MPO 2015 Project Priorities

ROADWAY PROJECT NAME FROM TO DESCRIPTION Resurfacing (Additional Sidewalks & High Meadow Avenue Martin Highway Murphy Road Extension of Project Limits) Murphy Road Bridge (Construction CEI) Bridge Replacement Traffic Signal Modifications NW Federal Highway @ Barnes & Noble Traffic Signal Reconfiguration Hutchinson Island (From Lyons Bridge to Jensen SR A1A Roadway Improvements Lighting Beach Causeway SW Martin Downs SR 714 Widening Citrus Boulevard PD&E (Add 2 Lanes/CM) Boulevard Palm Beach County US 1 Corridor Retrofit St. Lucie County Line Planning Line

CR 714 Realignment Okeechobee County/ CR 15 B Connection PD&E (District 1 SR 710)

Additional existing plans are listed below and summarized in Appendix B.

. East Ocean Boulevard/SE Monterey Road Corridor Traffic Study, May 2014 . Martin County 2013 Transportation Concurrency Annual Report . Martin County Congestion Management Process Update 2011 . Unified Planning Work Program (FY 14/15 – 15/16) . 2035 Bicycle, Pedestrian, Greenways, and Trails Vision

Roadway Needs Plan

The following are projects identified through the data compilation and review process, and public outreach as 2040 Roadway Needs Plan projects. Table 7-7 details the projects illustrated in Figure 7-1. Projects located along the SIS corridor are listed in Table 7-8. It is noted that all roadway projects will include pedestrian and bicycle components consistent with FDOT and local government design guidelines and policies.

Page 45 of 80 Martin MPO 2040 LRTP Moving Martin Forward Table 7-7. Roadway Needs Plan martin2040.com Existing + Length Road Name From To Type Future Lanes Committed Lanes (Miles) New 2 Lane Road Willoughby Boulevard Monterey Road SR 5 (US 1) New 2 Lane Road 2 0.84 Widen from 2 to 4 Lane Cove Road SR 76 (Kanner Highway) Willoughby Blvd Widen to 4L from 2L 2 4 2.13 Cove Road Willoughby Blvd SR 5 (US 1) Widen to 4L from 2L 2 4 1.07 Cove Road SR 5 (US 1) CR A1A Widen to 4L from 2L 2 4 1.12 CR 713 (High Meadow Avenue) I-95 CR 714 (Martin Highway) Widen to 4L from 2L 2 4 2.64 SR 714 (Martin Highway) CR 76A (Citrus Boulevard) Martin Downs Boulevard Widen to 4L from 2L 2 4 0.88 Widen from 4 to 6 Lane Indian Street SR 76 (Kanner Highway) Willoughby Boulevard Widen to 6L from 4L 4 6 0.45 Corridor Retrofit Project SR 5 (US 1) Cove Road St. Lucie County Line 10.38 Congestion Management Process (CMP) CR 707 (Indian River Drive) CR 707 (Dixie Highway) CR 707A (Jensen Beach Boulevard) 2 1.75 CR 707A (Jensen Beach Boulevard) CR 723 (Savannah Road) Skyline Drive 2 0.46 CR 707A (Jensen Beach Boulevard) Pineapple Way CR 707 2 0.14 CR 723 (Savanna Road) NE 24th Street CR 707A (Jensen Beach Boulevard) 2 0.77 CR A1A (Dixie Highway) Salerno Road Indian Street 2 2.16 Mapp Road CR 714 (Martin Highway) SR 714 (Martin Downs Boulevard) 2 0.77 Pineapple Way CR 707A (Jensen Beach Boulevard) SR 732 2 0.51 Pomeroy Street SR 76 (Kanner Highway) Willoughby Blvd 2 0.77 SR 710 (Warfield Boulevard) CR 609 (Allapattah Road) Citrus Boulevard 2 1.71 SR 714 (Monterey Road) SR 5 (US 1) CR A1A 4 0.24 SR 714 (Palm City Bridge) Mapp Road SR 76 (Kanner Highway) 4 1.07 SR 732 (Jensen Beach Boulevard) Green River Parkway CR 723 (Savannah Road) 4 1.05 SR 76 (Kanner Highway) Indian Street SR 714 6 1.59 SR 76 (Kanner Highway) Jack James Drive Cove Road 6 0.85 SR A1A (Ocean Boulevard) Sewalls Point Road Macarthur Road 2 1.35 SR A1A (Ocean Boulevard) Monterey Road St. Lucie Boulevard 4 0.77 Martin MPO 2040 LRTP Moving Martin Forward Table 7-8. SIS Needs Plan martin2040.com Existing + Length Road Name From To Type Future Lanes Committed Lanes (Miles) Widen from 2 to 4 Lane SR 710 (Warfield Boulevard) Martin Powerplant CR 609 (Allapattah Road) Widen to 4L from 2L 2 4 8.82 SR 710 (Warfield Boulevard) Okeechobee/Martin County Line Martin Powerplant Widen to 4L from 2L 2 4 6.14 Widen from 4 to 6 Lane SR 91 (Florida's Turnpike) Jupiter/Indiantown Road SR 714/Stuart Widen to 6L from 4L 4 6 16.79 Widen from 4 to 8 Lane SR 91 (Florida's Turnpike) SR 714/Stuart St. Lucie County Widen to 8L from 4L 4 8 3.45 Widen from 6 to 8 Lane I-95 Palm Beach County Line Bridge Road Widen to 8L from 6L (Add 2 Special Use Lanes) 6 8 7.48 I-95 S of Bridge Road S of High Meadows Avenue Widen to 8L from 6L (Add 2 Special Use Lanes) 6 8 6.44 I-95 S of High Meadows Avenue St. Lucie County Widen to 8L from 6L (Add 2 Special Use Lanes) 6 8 10.88 Figure 7-2. Roadway Needs Plan

V AY BL USEW Legend- Roadway Needs Plan NE CA NW JENSEN BEACH BLV Jensen Beach N E SIS Needs Plan Incorporated New 2 Lane N O W C E D F OCEAN BREEZE PARK R A NW TT E 2 to 4L BR I N 2 to 4L Adjacent Counties D D B E E R L R H V North River ShAores A L N Y 4 to 6L 4 to 6L County Boundary H N W A H W V E A IXI Y S N E D E 4 to 8L N CMP Rio Atlantic Ocean LV B S N Corridor Retrofit Project 6 to 8L S W EA St. Lucie County St. Lucie River C E

F O E M E SV L A D B A C E 1 A SW R A MAP SE OCEAN BLV SE EAN R P A OC T L R SEWALL'S POINT H

D H D U R W SW R Y Y M B

U T RPHY RD I L V

C STUART

A S

K F W A L O MARTIN DOWNS BLV S N 95 R N I W D E T T S S S ¨¦§ A Palm City R AN ON 'S DI S H N R T I S E V W E F L U S E EF R J B Y F E SW MARTIN HWY N S E E I P D D I C R K E T U N E R I T L S S O A P W Y E O L T HO R H S S H E SE W R I M E O G PO H SE Y S E H S M E A RD D NO Port Salerno O ER D W AL R S VE A SE CO V E E S

S E D V I L X S I B E E S W H H G C W O N LO A Y M C R E K B S A Z R D E SE A S V S E W W A R F IE LD SW 96 TH ST S E B LV G

D O

R M

D E

H R Z

N A

T V T S W E A E

R A A

A E

O S

W F A

S V

W SW BRIDGE RD E

JUPITER ISLS AND E

B SE BRIDGE RD Hobe Sound E A C H

R Indiantown D S W BLV S C RU O IT S C N W F SW N AR E M R RD S

H W Y ¨¦§95 F L Y O HW R R ID NE A AN 'S Lake Okeechobee K T SW U R N P IK E D R Y E N T Y I A

H W ND W A - L

T S

S Palm Beach County 0 5 10 Miles

Transit Needs Plan

Table 7-9 details the projects identified through the data compilation and review process, and public outreach as 2040 Transit Needs Plan projects.

Page 49 of 80 Martin MPO 2040 LRTP Table 7-9. Transit Needs Plan Moving Martin Forward martin2040.com

Plan Public Project Description Location/Quantity Reference Comment Service

Continue to maintain and operate existing bus service Systemwide TDP - 2014-2023 Downtown Tram - Expand Expand route to Johnson Avenue (MCTS), Martin Memorial (ocean/Osceola), hospital and major employment areas Public Workshop Expansion of park-and-ride facility Florida's Turnpike - Mile Marker 133 TDP - 2014-2023 Hutchinson Island bus route New Service - 45 minute headway TDP - 2014-2023 Public Workshop Indiantown Route Increase frequency (45 minute headway) TDP - 2014-2023 Public Workshop New Regional Service Treasure Coast Express (90 minute headway) TDP - 2014-2023 Palm City bus Route New Service - 30 minute headway TDP - 2014-2023 Stuart Route Increase frequency (80 minute headway) TDP - 2014-2023 Transit Service Expand service hours to accommodate employment commuter trips Public Workshop Transit Service - New NW Jensen Beach Boulevard - US 1 to Indian River Drive Public Workshop Transit Service - New Add transit route from Sewall's Point to environmental studies center, Locations along Savannah Road Public Workshop Transit Service - New Create transit route that connects Indiantown to other communities (Stuart, Jensen Beach…) Public Workshop Transit Service - New Create route that connects vocational schools to high schools and community activity centers (YMCA, Kane Center) Public Workshop Transit Service - New SR-710 - Indiantown to Mangonia Park Tri-Rail Station 2040 SIS Needs Plan Public Workshop Treasure Coast Connector Increase frequency (30 minute headway) TDP - 2014-2023 Amenities

Add Bus Shelter SE Lantana Avenue, near Alamanda Banner Lake Community CRA Add Bus Shelter Florida Avenue, near Eucalyptus Banner Lake Community CRA Add Bus Shelter Florida Avenue, near Begonia Banner Lake Community CRA Add Bus Shelter SE Lantana Avenue, near Comus Banner Lake Community CRA Bus Stop Improvements 45 (shelters and ADA upgrades, new shelters, and bike racks) TDP - 2014-2023 Maintenance & Operations

APC software (including interface to AVL) Systemwide TDP - 2014-2023 Bus acquisition (fleet replacement and new buses) 15 buses TDP - 2014-2023 Bus equipment upgrade (AVL, APC, E-reader, Wi-Fi) 5 buses TDP - 2014-2023 Fixed route scheduling software (including hardware and CAD interface) Systemwide TDP - 2014-2023 Fleet parking and wash station 20 buses TDP - 2014-2023 New Administration and operations center 5,300 sqft TDP - 2014-2023 New Park-and-Ride lots 4 TDP - 2014-2023 Public Workshop Transit pass holder program 6 kiosks TDP - 2014-2023

Notes: Sources used include the Transit Development Plan 2014-2023 (TDP-2014-2013), public input gathered from workshops and comment cards, and FDOT Needs Plan.

Non-Motorized Needs Plan

The following are projects identified through the data compilation and review process, and public outreach as 2040 Non-Motorized (Bicycle, Pedestrian, Greenways, and Trails) Needs Plan projects. Table 7-10 details the projects illustrated in Figure 7-3.

Page 51 of 80 Martin MPO 2040 LRTP Table 7-10. Non-Motorized Needs Moving Martin Forward martin2040.com Length Plan Public Project From To Type Committed CRA (Miles) Reference Comment Sidewalks Anthione Way Florida Avenue End Sidewalks 0.1 Banner Lake Community CRA Yes Aurora Way Florida Avenue End Sidewalks 0.1 Banner Lake Community CRA Yes Baker Road Green River Parkway Braille Place Sidewalks 0.7 Yes BPAP Top 10 Begonia Way Lantana Avenue Florida Avenue Sidewalks 0.1 Banner Lake Community CRA Yes Bonita Street Birch Avenue St. Lucie Boulevard Sidewalks 0.6 BPAP Project List Bridge Road US 1 Gomez Avenue Sidewalks 0.5 BPAP Top 10 Public Workshop Yes Cardinal Avenue Baker Road Dixie Highway Sidewalks 0.1 BPAP Project List Public Workshop Cardinal Avenue Baker Road SE Seneca Avenue Sidewalks 0.1 Public Workshop Clayton Street Birch Avenue St. Lucie Boulevard Sidewalks 0.6 BPAP Project List Citrus Way Lantana Avenue Florida Avenue Sidewalks 0.1 Banner Lake Community CRA Yes CR 713 (High Meadow Avenue) Bane Berry Drive Swallowtrail Way Sidewalks 0.6 BPAP Top 10 Dixie Highway Wright Boulevard Existing Terminus Near Baker Road Sidewalks 0.4 BPAP Top 10 & 20 Dixie Highway Green River Parkway Savannah Road Sidewalks 0.6 BPAP Top 10 & 20 Public Workshop Dixie Highway Savannah Road Seahorse Place Sidewalks 1.0 BPAP Top 10 & 20 Yes Dixie Highway Eleanor Avenue Palmer Street Sidewalks 0.1 BPAP Project List Eucalyptus Way Lantana Avenue Florida Avenue Sidewalks 0.1 Banner Lake Community CRA Yes Fern Street Lantana Avenue Florida Avenue Sidewalks 0.1 Banner Lake Community CRA Yes Florida Avenue Bridge Road Comus Street Sidewalks 0.3 Banner Lake Community CRA Yes Mars Street Florida Avenue US 1 Sidewalks 0.2 Banner Lake Community CRA Yes Martin Highway Martin Downs Boulevard High Meadow Avenue Sidewalks 0.3 BPAP Top 10 Martin Highway Citrus Boulevard 42nd Avenue Sidewalks 0.5 BPAP Project List Neptune Street Florida Avenue US 1 Sidewalks 0.2 Banner Lake Community CRA Yes NW Alice Street Dixie Highway Existing Terminus Near Alice Road Sidewalks 0.3 BPAP Top 10 Yes Osprey Street Dixie Highway E of Railroad Sidewalks 0.2 BPAP Top 10 Psyche Street Florida Avenue End Sidewalks 0.1 Banner Lake Community CRA SE Alamanda Way Lantana Avenue Florida Avenue Sidewalks 0.1 Banner Lake Community CRA Yes SE Comus Street Lantana Avenue End Sidewalks 0.2 Banner Lake Community CRA Yes SE Date Street Lantana Avenue Florida Avenue Sidewalks 0.1 Banner Lake Community CRA Yes SE Flamingo Avenue SE 10th Street SE Ocean Boulevard Sidewalks 0.5 Public Workshop Yes SE Lantana Avenue Bridge Road Comus Street Sidewalks 0.3 Banner Lake Community CRA SE Seneca Avenue NE Cardinal Avenue NW Greenrip Parkway Sidewalks 0.3 Public Workshop SW Magnolia Street SW 173rd Avenue SW 168th Avenue Sidewalks 0.4 Public Workshop Willoughby Boulevard Monterey Road SR 5 (US 1) Sidewalks 0.8 BPAC

Notes: Sources used include Martin MPO Bicycle and Pedestrian Action Plan, 2012 (BPAP), FDEP Greenways and Trails Priority Corridors 2013-2017 shapefile, and public input gathered from workshops and comment cards. Martin MPO 2040 LRTP Table 7-10. Non-Motorized Needs Moving Martin Forward martin2040.com Length Plan Public Project From To Type Committed CRA (Miles) Reference Comment Bicycle Corridors 138th Street Bridge Road Powerline Avenue Bike Lanes 1.9 BPAP Project List Baker Road Green River Parkway Cardinal Avenue Bike Lanes 0.3 BPAP Project List Bridge Road Kanner Highway Flora Avenue Bike Lanes 10.4 BPAP Top 20 Public Workshop Canoe Creek Terrace Sand Avenue Murphy Road Bike Lanes 1.0 BPAP Project List Cardinal Avenue Baker Road Dixie Highway Bike Lanes 0.1 BPAP Top 10 Public Workshop Citrus Boulevard Martin Highway Hemingway Terrace Bike Lanes 16.0 BPAP Top 10 & 20 Public Workshop Commerce Avenue Market Place Salerno Road Bike Lanes 1.3 BPAP Top 10 & 20 Yes County Line Road NE Savannah Road Indian River Road Bike Lanes 0.4 BPAP Project List Cove Road Kanner Highway End of Cove Road Bike Lanes 5.8 BPAP Project List Public Workshop CR 713 (High Meadow Avenue) Martin Highway Murphy Road Bike Lanes 1.8 BPAP Top 10 & 20 CR 713 (High Meadow Avenue) I-95 CR 714 (Martin Highway) Bike Lanes 2.6 BPAC SR 714 (Martin Highway) CR 76A (Citrus Boulevard) Martin Downs Boulevard Bike Lanes 0.9 BPAC CR 714 (Martin Highway) SR 91 (Florida's Turnpike) Mapp Road Bike Lanes 2.2 Yes BPAC Dixie Highway Palmer Street Indian River Drive Bike Lanes 0.8 BPAP Project List Dixie Highway Green River Parkway Savannah Road Bike Lanes 0.4 BPAP Project List Public Workshop Dixie Highway Wright Blvd Green River Parkway Bike Lanes 0.4 BPAP Project List Public Workshop Dixie Highway SE Monterey Road Wright Boulevard Bike Lanes 3.1 Public Workshop Fisherman's Wharf Drive Pennsylvania Avenue Yachtsman Drive Bike Lanes 0.3 BPAP Project List Fork Road US 1 Pine Lake Drive Bike Lanes 0.8 BPAP Project List Indian River Drive Palmer Street St. Lucie County Line Bike Lanes 3.1 BPAP Project List Public Workshop Jensen Beach Blvd US 1 Roundabout Bike Lanes 2.8 BPAP Project List Public Workshop Kanner Highway Lost River Road Monterey Road Bike Lanes 5.6 Yes BPAP Project List Public Workshop Kanner Highway Monterey Road Warfield Boulevard Bike Lanes 1.1 BPAP Project List Kitchen Creek 138th Street Jonathan Dickinson State Park Path Bike Lanes 0.5 BPAP Project List Mapp Road Hidden River Avenue Martin Downs Boulevard Bike Lanes 3.0 BPAP Project List Yes Mapp Road Martin Downs Boulevard Silver Wolf Drive Bike Lanes 2.8 BPAP Project List Yes Market Place US 1 Commerce Avenue Bike Lanes 0.4 BPAP Project List Matheson Avenue Murphy Road Martin Downs Boulevard Bike Lanes 1.0 BPAP Project List MLK, Jr Drive Farm Road Warfield Boulevard Bike Lanes 0.7 BPAP Project List Yes Monterey Road Mapp Road Dixie Highway Bike Lanes 2.4 BPAP Top 20 BPAC Murphy Road SW Matheson Avenue St. Lucie County Line Bike Lanes 2.6 BPAP Project List Public Workshop Palm City Road Monterey Road US 1 Bike Lanes 1.2 BPAP Top 10 & 20 Public Workshop Palmer Street Dixie Highway Sewall's Point Road Bike Lanes 0.5 BPAP Project List Pennsylvania Avenue 96th Street/CR 711 Fisherman's Wharf Drive Bike Lanes 0.6 BPAP Project List Pine Lake Drive Fork Road Britt Road Bike Lanes 1.4 BPAP Project List

Notes: Sources used include Martin MPO Bicycle and Pedestrian Action Plan, 2012 (BPAP), FDEP Greenways and Trails Priority Corridors 2013-2017 shapefile, and public input gathered from workshops and comment cards. Martin MPO 2040 LRTP Table 7-10. Non-Motorized Needs Moving Martin Forward martin2040.com Length Plan Public Project From To Type Committed CRA (Miles) Reference Comment Bicycle Corridors - Continued Powerline Avenue 138th Street Bridge Road Bike Lanes 0.5 BPAP Project List Pratt Whitney Palm Beach County Line Kanner Highway Bike Lanes 12.7 Yes BPAP Project List Salerno Road US 1 Dixie Highway Bike Lanes 0.9 BPAP Top 10 & 20 Yes Salerno Road Kanner Highway Willoughby Boulevard Bike Lanes 1.6 BPAP Top 10 & 20 Sand Avenue Existing Paved Shoulder Canoe Creek Terrace Bike Lanes 0.9 BPAP Project List Sand Trail Sand Avenue Martin Downs Boulevard Bike Lanes 0.6 BPAP Project List Savannah Road Cardinal Avenue Jensen Beach Boulevard Bike Lanes 2.1 BPAP Top 20 Public Workshop SE County Line Road SE Girl Scout Camp US 1 Bike Lanes 3.0 BPAP Project List SE Horseshoe Road SE Anchor Avenue SE Kubin Avenue Bike Lanes 1.2 Public Workshop SE Ocean Boulevard Palm Beach Road Martin Avenue Bike Lanes 0.6 BPAP Top 10 & 20 Sewall's Point Road Ocean A1A Palmer Street Bike Lanes 1.6 BPAP Project List St. George Street Yachtsman Drive Locks Road Bike Lanes 0.2 BPAP Project List St. Lucie Boulevard Dixie Highway Ocean Boulevard Bike Lanes 1.2 BPAP Project List SW Adams Avenue SW Palm Way SW 150th Street Bike Lanes 0.3 BPAP Project List SW Farm Road Andalucia Court SW Famel Avenue Bike Lanes 1.7 BPAP Top 10 & 20 Public Workshop Yes SW Farm Road Warfield Boulevard Andalucia Court Bike Lanes 3.1 Public Workshop Yes US 1 Roosevelt Bridge Contractors Way Bike Lanes 1.6 BPAP Project List Willoughby Boulevard Cove Road Pomeroy Street Bike Lanes 1.5 BPAP Top 10 & 20 Willoughby Boulevard Monterey Road SR 5 (US 1) Bike Lanes 0.8 BPAC Yachtsman Drive Fisherman's Wharf Drive St. George Street Bike Lanes 0.8 BPAP Project List Multi-Purpose Trail & Greenways Allapattah Road SW Warfield Boulevard St. Lucie County Line Shared Use Path 12.1 BPAP Project List Public Workshop Beeline Highway Corridor Okeechobee County Line Palm Beach County Line Shared Use Path 23.3 Priority Trail Opportunities (2013-2017) Public Workshop C-44 Trail Beeline Highway Corridor St. Lucie County Line Shared Use Path 14.7 Priority Trail Opportunities (2013-2017) Public Workshop Dixie Highway Seahorse Place Langford Landing Roundabout Shared Use Path 0.9 BPAP Top 20 Dixie Highway/East Coast Greenway 5th Street St. Lucie County Line Shared Use Path 2.2 Priority Trail Opportunities (2013-2017) Dixie Highway/East Coast Greenway Florida Street 5th Street Shared Use Path 0.5 Yes Priority Trail Opportunities (2013-2017) Dixie Highway/East Coast Greenway Palm Beach County Line Florida Street Shared Use Path 19.5 Priority Trail Opportunities (2013-2017) Gomez Avenue Bridge Road Thru Crossrip Street to Osprey Street Shared Use Path 3.2 BPAP Project List Public Workshop Indian River Drive A1A St. Lucie County Line Shared Use Path 4.6 BPAP Top 20 Public Workshop Indian Street Dixie Highway St. Lucie Boulevard Shared Use Path 1.4 BPAP Top 10 & 20 Yes Martin East West Corridor Lake Okeechobee SE Beach Road Shared Use Path 32.6 Priority Trail Opportunities (2013-2017) New Route US 98 Jonathan Dickinson State Park Shared Use Path 26.3 BPAP Top 10 New Route Citrus Boulevard Citrus Boulevard via Canal, American Street, Indian Mound Drive Shared Use Path 2.3 BPAP Top 10 Public Workshop Yes New Route Sand Avenue Citrus Boulevard via Turnpike Underpass Shared Use Path 0.7 BPAP Top 10

Notes: Sources used include Martin MPO Bicycle and Pedestrian Action Plan, 2012 (BPAP), FDEP Greenways and Trails Priority Corridors 2013-2017 shapefile, and public input gathered from workshops and comment cards. Martin MPO 2040 LRTP Table 7-10. Non-Motorized Needs Moving Martin Forward martin2040.com Length Plan Public Project From To Type Committed CRA (Miles) Reference Comment Multi-Purpose Trail & Greenways - Continued New Route US 1 Old Dixie Highway Shared Use Path 0.6 BPAC New Route Jensen Beach Boulevard Thru Savannah State Park to St. Lucie County Line Shared Use Path 1.7 BPAP Top 10 New Route SW Osceola Street Indianwood Drive Shared Use Path 1.9 BPAP Project List New Route Palm Beach County Line St. Lucie County Line Shared Use Path 20.3 BPAC New Route Salerno Road Cove Road Shared Use Path 1.2 BPAP Project List New Route SW Osceola Street Indianwood Drive Shared Use Path 0.1 BPAC New Route Flamingo Terminus Thru Jonathan Dickinson State Park Shared Use Path 2.8 BPAP Project List New Route Locks Road Over Canal to Mapp Road Shared Use Path 1.8 BPAP Project List New Route Flora Avenue Terminus Thru Jonathan Dickinson State Park Shared Use Path 1.4 BPAP Project List New Route Kitchen Creek Road Terminus Thru Jonathan Dickinson State Park Shared Use Path 3.4 BPAP Project List New Route - Martin CR 609 SR 710 Shared Use Path BPAP Project List BPAC Ocean to Lake Trail Corridor Palm Beach County Line Bridge Road Shared Use Path 6.7 Priority Trail Opportunities (2013-2017) Old Dixie Highway Jonathan Dickinson State Park Entrance Thru Jonathan Dickinson State Park to County Line Road Shared Use Path 5.7 BPAP Top 10 Old Dixie Highway US 1 Bridge Road Shared Use Path 1.3 BPAP Project List Pratt & Whitney Trail Corridor Palm Beach County Line Old Jupiter Road Shared Use Path 1.2 Priority Trail Opportunities (2013-2017) Robert B. Jenkins C-23 Trail Corridor FEC Rail Corridor Murphy Road Shared Use Path 17.6 Priority Trail Opportunities (2013-2017) SW Osceola Street SW Warfield Boulevard Citrus Boulevard Shared Use Path 1.7 Public Workshop SW Warfield Boulevard MLK, Jr Drive SW Citrus Boulevard Shared Use Path 1.9 Public Workshop Yes Treasure Coast Loop Trail Corridor Ocean Boulevard/A1A St. Lucie County Line Shared Use Path 8.1 Priority Trail Opportunities (2013-2017) US 1 Sand Road Dixie Highway Shared Use Path 3.2 Public Workshop Willoughby Boulevard Salerno Road Pomeroy Street Shared Use Path 1.0 BPAP Top 10 & 20 Under Study New Route Ault Avenue Terminus Thru Atlantic Ridge State Park Shared Use Path 2.6 BPAP Top 10 New Route Halpatiokee Park Thru Atlantic Ridge and Jonathan Dickinson State Park Shared Use Path 13.3 BPAP Top 10 New Route N/A Thru Atlantic Ridge State Park Shared Use Path 1.2 BPAP Project List New Route Willoughby Boulevard Thru Atlantic Ridge State Park Shared Use Path 4.5 BPAP Top 10

Legend AY BLV USEW NE CA Existing Bike Lanes Proposed Sidewalks Committed Projects Incorporated NW JENSEN BEACH BLV Jensen Beach N E

N O W C Existing Shared Use Path Proposed Bike Lanes Railroad Adjacent Counties E

D F OCEAN BREEZE PARK T R A NW BRIT E N D B E D L R R V E Project Under Study Proposed Shared Use Path Martin County North River ShAores H L A Y

H N W N H W A XIE Y V I A NE D Proposed Trail/Greenway S E N Rio LV S B N S W EA St. Lucie County St. Lucie River C E

F O E M E SV L A D B A C E 1 A SW R A MAP SE OCEAN BLV SE EAN R P A OC T L R SEWALL'S POINT H

D F H U

D R L W O SW R Y Y R M B U T ID RPHY RD I L V

A ' STUART S M T L

A U S

R K N A P W I MARTIN DOWNS BLV S N K N E W E T 95 S ST S Palm City R N N DIA SO ¨¦§ H N R I S E W E F S E JEF V Y L SW MARTIN HWY F SE B E

D IE E C D R S T R S A U T W IN Y L O L PO R H E H T O E W H I M S S G S PO SE A E Y E R H O S H M SE t E l A RD a D NO Port Salerno O ER n W AL RD E S VE t A S CO i V E E S c

S E c

D e V I L X S a I B E E S H n W H G C W O N Y M LO A C R E K B S Z R A D E SE A S V E SW W AR F IE LD SW 96 TH ST S E B LV G

D O M

D E

R Z

A A

N T V

W S E

A E

A R L A

L R

A E

O S

F A

S V

W SW BRIDGE RD E

JUPITER ISLS AND E

B SE BRIDGE RD Hobe Sound E A C H

R Indiantown D S W BLV S C RU O IT S C N W F SW N AR E M R RD S

H W

Y §95 ¨¦ F L Y O HW R R ID NE A AN 'S Lake Okeechobee K T SW U R N P IK E D R Y E N T Y I A H W ND W A - L

T S

R S

0 5 10 Miles

Chapter 8: Financial Resources

Moving Martin Forward includes plans for future capital investment in transportation infrastructure as well as ongoing operating and maintenance expenses. The financial resources is a key component of the overall LRTP, as it provides an overview of the financial resources that are projected to be available through 2040. The financial resources identified in this section were used to prioritize future roadway and transit investments in a ‘constrained’ scenario limited to existing and reasonably likely funding sources. This includes information on the Federal funding programs for highways and public transportation, Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) funding programs and revenue estimates, and local option gas tax revenues and transportation impact fees. The information utilized are listed below and in Appendix D.

. 2040 Revenue Forecast and Supplement and Appendix . Metropolitan Planning Organization Advisory Council (MPOAC) Federal Guidelines . Local Government Financial Handbook

In general, transportation revenues have declined over the past several decades. The financial resources analysis conducted for the 2040 LRTP shows that trend is expected to continue. Fuel tax revenues have declined based on a dated federal funding mechanism. Although vehicle efficiency standards are desirable for the nation’s long term economic and environmental health, the increase in vehicle efficiency has also resulted in less fuel consumption and lower tax revenue based on the current fuel tax structure.

Methodology

According to Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA) regulations (Statewide and Metropolitan Planning Rule – 72 Federal Register 7224) adopted in 2007, the LRTP financial plan must be developed through a year of expenditure (YOE) approach, rather than in a base year approach as was done in the past. The rationale for this requirement is that cost estimates for transportation improvement projects in LRTPs have traditionally understated the costs of the improvements by not taking the effects of inflation into account.

Page 57 of 80

Converting the revenues and costs to YOE dollars presents a more accurate depiction of the financial resources associated with the LRTP.

FDOT’s guidelines for estimating and presenting future revenues, as described in the 2040 Revenue Forecast Handbook and subsequent supplements, revisions, and workshops, are followed in this review. The adopted Martin MPO Transportation Improvement Programs (TIP) is the source for near-term revenue forecasts. Funding levels and sources for long-range periods covered in the LRTP are identified in the Revenue Forecast Handbook. Revenue estimates in the Plan cover the 2021 to 2025, 2026 to 2030, and 2031-2040 periods. Revenue growth rates for key local revenue sources, including fuel taxes, impact fees, and transit funding (General Fund matches) were developed in consultation with local government staff. Revenue streams distributed by the State via FDOT include the following programs

. Strategic Intermodal System funding (SIS) . Other Arterials & Product Support (OA) . Transportation Management Area (TMA), also called SU funds . Technical and operating/ capital assistance for transit

Table 8-1 presents a summary of the Federal and State capacity funding projections for the 2040 Martin LRTP.

Table 8- 1. Federal and State Capacity Funding Projections (2021-2040)

Total Revenue Source (1, 2) (2021-2040) (Millions of Dollars)

Non-SIS / Other Arterials (OA) Right-of-Way (ROW) and $110.90 Construction Transportation Management Area (TMA) Funding (SU) (3) $35.56

Transportation Alternatives in TMA Areas (TALU) (3) $3.50

Transit $66.10

(1) FDOT Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) funding is shown in the Appendix for informational purposes.

(2) FDOT has reserved funds in the 2040 Revenue Forecast to carry out its responsibilities and achieve its objectives for the non- capacity programs on the State Highway System in each metropolitan area.

(3) Assumes 35% of the total TMA funds allocated to the Martin/St. Lucie Urbanized Area.

Page 58 of 80

Grant programs such as Transportation Regional Incentive Program (TRIP) are included in the Financial Resources Assessment, but are not included in the capacity revenue stream anticipated to be available for purposes of the Cost Feasible Plan in order to provide a conservative analysis.

In addition to Federal and State sources, there are several local level revenue sources for transportation improvements incorporated into the analysis including the 2nd local option fuel tax, transportation impact fees, and general fund matches for Transit. Most components of local option fuel taxes (other than the 2nd local option fuel tax) are typically used for roadway maintenance; therefore, these components of the fuel tax are not considered to be available for the capital revenue forecasts incorporated into the Cost Feasible Plan tables.

Table 8-2 presents a summary of the local level transportation revenue projections for the 2040 Martin LRTP.

Table 8- 2. Local Source Revenue Projections (2021-2040)

Total Revenue Source (2021-2040) Typical Uses (Millions of Dollars)

Fuel Taxes 1st Local Option Fuel Tax (6 Operations and $88.26 cents) Maintenance 2nd Local Option Fuel Tax (5 $66.19 Capital (1) cents) Operations and 9th Cent (1 cent) $17.79 Maintenance Operations and Constitutional (2 cents) $39.42 Maintenance Operations and County (1 cent) $17.79 Maintenance Impact Fees $62.00 Capital (1) Both Capital and Transit $13.50 Operations/Maintenance

(1) Only capital sources were used to estimate available local revenue for LRTP capacity projects.

The last two fuel taxes are imposed by the State and distributed to the Counties, while the remaining three are local option gas taxes that can be imposed by each county.

Page 59 of 80

1st Local Option Fuel Tax (6 cents) The 6-Cent Local Option Fuel Tax (LOFT) is a tax of 6.0 cents on every gallon of motor and diesel fuels sold within a county. Local option fuel taxes must be used for establishing, operating, and maintaining a transportation (including public transit) system. These funds may be used for both operating and maintenance expenditures.

2nd Local Option Fuel Tax (5 cents) The Second LOFT is a tax of 5.0 cents per gallon of motor fuel sold in a county. The State Department of Revenue administers the tax and distributes the net tax proceeds to the counties. The proceeds may be used for transportation expenditures needed to meet the requirements of the capital improvements element of an adopted comprehensive plan, including public transportation. The proceeds may not be used for operations and maintenance.

9th cent (1 cent) The Ninth-Cent Fuel Tax is a tax of 1.0 cent on every gallon of motor and diesel fuels sold within a county. Local option fuel taxes must be used for establishing, operating, and maintaining a transportation (including public transit) system. The proceeds are to be used for establishing, operating, and maintaining a transportation system, including both maintenance and operating expenditures. Counties are authorized to expend funds in conjunction with the state or federal government for joint transportation projects.

Constitutional Gas Tax The Constitutional Gas Tax is currently set at 2.0 cents per gallon. Twenty percent of revenues from this tax are returned to the county in which it was collected, while the remaining eighty percent is pledged back to the State’s roads and bridges bonds. If no such State bonds exist, then the remaining funds are remitted back to the county in which it was collected. By statute, the Constitutional Gas Tax must be used for the acquisition, construction and maintenance of roads.

County Gas Tax The County Gas Tax is a tax of 1.0 cent per gallon of motor fuel sold in a county. The State Department of Revenue administers the tax and distributes the net tax proceeds to the counties. This tax may be used solely for the acquisition of rights-of-way; the construction, reconstruction,

Page 60 of 80 operation, maintenance, and repair of transportation facilities, roads, bridges, bicycle paths, and pedestrian pathways; or at the reduction on bonded indebtedness incurred for transportation purposes.

Base Revenue Forecast

Figure 8- 1. Base Revenue Forecast

Local (Fuel Tax, Impact Fees, Transit from General Fund), 16%

Other Federal (TMA, TA, Transit), 12% Federal/State (SIS), 60%

Federal/State (Non-SIS), 12%

Page 61 of 80

Federal/State (SIS)

From the base revenue forecast, 60% of the transportation expenditure are anticipated to be Federal/State (SIS) funds. All of the funds are from Federal and State sources. Federal/State (SIS), 100%

Figure 8- 2. Federal/State (SIS) Funds

Federal/State (Non-SIS)

From the base revenue forecast, 12% of the transportation expenditure are anticipated to be Federal/State (Non-SIS) funds. All of the funds are from Federal and State sources.

Federal/State (Non-SIS), 100%

Figure 8- 3. Federal/State (Non-SIS) Funds

Page 62 of 80

Other Federal (TMA, TA, Transit) Figure 8- 4. Other Federal (TMA, TA, Transit) Funds

From the base revenue forecast, 12% of the transportation expenditure are anticipated to be Other Federal funds. The Other Federal funds consists of TMA, 34% 34% of Transportation Management Area (TMA), 3% of Transportation Alternatives (TA), and 63% of TA, Transit. Transit, 3% 63%

Local (Fuel Tax, Impact Fees, Transit from General Fund)

From the base revenue forecast, 16% of the transportation expenditure are anticipated to come from Local funds (Fuel Tax, Impact Fees, and Transit from General Funds). The Local funds consists of 47% of Fuel Tax, 10% of Transit, and 43% of Impact Fees. From the 47% of the Fuel Tax, 71% goes towards Roadway Operations and Maintenance and 29% for Roadway Capital.

Roadway Capital , Impact 29% Fees, Fuel 43% Tax, Roadway 47% Operations and Maintenance, 71% Transit, 10%

Figure 8- 5. Local (Fuel Tax, Impact Fees, Figure 8- 6. Fuel Tax Transit from General Funds) Funds

Page 63 of 80

Project Cost Estimates

Project costs estimates used in developing the Multimodal Cost Feasible Plan (CFP) are estimated in YOE dollars as outlined in the 2040 Revenue Forecast Handbook and subsequent supplements, revisions, and workshops. The YOE costs were estimated by applying inflation factors provided by FDOT. The inflation factors for a project cost in 2015 present day dollars are in Table 8-3. Moving Martin Forward uses the FY 2014/2015 as the base year and FY 2039/2040 as the horizon year.

Table 8- 3. Inflation Factors

Timeframe Inflation Factors 2021-2025 1.27 2026-2030 1.50 2031-2040 1.91

Summary of Cost Estimates for Needs Plan Projects

Cost estimates were developed based on generic cost per mile models. Per mile costs were identified for base construction costs and then multiplied by the length of the project (in miles). Then, percentages increases were applied for 10% for maintenance of traffic (MOT), mobilization, and scope contingency/project unknown. Right-of-way costs were estimated based on a generic land value and the approximate right-of-way needed to accommodate the proposed future number of lanes. Then, the total construction cost was increased by factors to represent 15% of preliminary engineering (PE) and 15% construction, engineering, and inspection (CEI) for state roads and 10% of CEI for county roads. The cost estimates for the Roadway Needs Plan are listed for the present day value of 2015 as well as the LRTP implementation timeframes of 2021 to 2025, 2026 to 2030, and 2031 to 2040. Steps for the Non-Motorized Needs Plan cost were similar. The transit cost information was developed from the Transit Development Program. The cost estimates for the SIS Needs Plan were taken from the SIS CFP 2024-2040 and Modal Unfunded Needs Plan. Appendix D-4 summarizes the Roadway Project Cost, SIS Project Cost, Transit Project Cost, and Non-Motorized Project Cost.

Page 64 of 80

Chapter 9: Multimodal Cost Feasible Plan

The Martin 2040 Cost Feasible Plan (CFP) is a multimodal plan that utilizes funding sources traditionally designated only for roadway improvements to fund projects including roadway needs, public transit, and non-motorized transportation projects identified in the Needs Plan. This “flexing” of roadway funding for use on multimodal transportation needs is in addition to the funding that is dedicated for Transit and grant programs such as the Transportation Alternatives Program.

In this CFP, roadway funding from sources such as Transportation Management Area (TMA), or SU funds, is applied for projects such as the Cove Road capacity enhancements. Furthermore, SU funds are identified for roadway maintenance purposes on the federal aid highway system. Maintenance was identified as one of the top priorities during the Public Engagement component of this Plan.

Furthermore, funding is set aside in the CFP for Congestion Management Process (CMP) strategies and Livable Communities Initiative (LCI). Some of the Non-SIS Other Arterials (OA) funding is allocated for projects such as the U.S. 1 Corridor Retrofit and Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities. This funding strategy is a realization that local and state governments cannot “build their way out of congestion.”

Cost Feasible Plan

The CFP was developed to guide transportation investments in Martin County to the year 2040. The CFP is based on guidance from the MPO, stakeholder agency input, public engagement outcomes, and project prioritization based on the approved LRTP Goals and Objectives. Table 9-1 depicts the Moving Martin Forward prioritization analysis and Appendix E-1 includes the prioritization criteria. Since transportation improvement projects that are programmed for implementation through 2020 have their funding sources already allocated, those projects were considered to be committed improvements and thus appear in the existing+committed (E+C) roadway network instead of in the CFP.

The CFP contains Needs Plan projects grouped into implementation timeframes based on funding availability and guided by the prioritization analysis. The implementation timeframes for planning purposes as provided in State and Federal guidelines for LRTP development are listed below.

Page 65 of 80

. 2021-2025 . 2026-2030 . 2031-2040

The projects included in the CFP will have positive outcomes for future transportation mobility in the Martin MPO area. The following outcomes are anticipated to be achieved by implementing the 2040 Multimodal CFP.

. Improve mobility and accessibility for transit and non-motorized transportation modes . Flex a portion of federal funds for roadway system maintenance on the federal aid highway system . Continue to work together with the FDOT and the St. Lucie TPO for implementation of the U.S. 1 Corridor Retrofit Project to improve mobility and accessibility . Achieve roadway level of service (LOS) standards for overcapacity roadways . Reduce travel times and the cost of travel to important destinations . Improve safety through reduced crashes, injuries, and fatalities

Page 66 of 80 Martin MPO 2040 LRTP Table 9-1. Moving Martin Forward Prioritization Analysis Moving Martin Forward martin2040.com

Existing + Future Emergency Environmental/ Consistency 2040 2040 Future Length Exist Capacity Transportation Truck Multimodal Regional Road Name From To Type Committed 2040 Evacucation Community with Goals and Prioritization Prioritization Lanes (Miles) V/C Benefit Disadvantaged Routes Connectivity Connectivity Lanes V/C Routes Impacts Objectives Score Total Rank

New 2 Lane Road Willoughby Boulevard Monterey Road SR 5 (US 1) New 2 Lane Road 0 2 0.84 0 0 5 0 7 0 10 0 5 10 37 7 Widen from 2 to 4 Lane Cove Road SR 76 (Kanner Highway) Willoughby Blvd Widen to 4L from 2L 2 4 2.13 2 6 10 7 4 5 10 5 5 10 64 2 Cove Road Willoughby Blvd SR 5 (US 1) Widen to 4L from 2L 2 4 1.07 2 6 10 7 4 5 10 5 5 10 64 2 Cove Road SR 5 (US 1) CR A1A Widen to 4L from 2L 2 4 1.12 0 2 10 7 4 5 10 5 5 10 58 6 CR 713 (High Meadow Avenue) I-95 CR 714 (Martin Highway) Widen to 4L from 2L 2 4 2.64 2 6 5 0 4 5 10 5 5 10 52 5 SR 714 (Martin Highway) CR 76A (Citrus Boulevard) Martin Downs Boulevard Widen to 4L from 2L 2 4 0.88 2 10 5 7 4 10 10 5 5 10 68 1 Widen from 4 to 6 Lane Indian Street SR 76 (Kanner Highway) Willoughby Boulevard Widen to 6L from 4L 4 6 0.45 0 2 5 7 7 5 10 0 10 10 56 4

Table 9-2 and Figure 9-1 depicts the Multimodal CFP. Figures 9-2, 9-3, 9-4, and 9-5 depicts the funding allocation for projects based on revenue forecast. Appendix E-2 includes further detailed information regarding planning timeframes, funding allocation, and cost projections. All of the Roadway Needs Plan projects are projected to be cost feasible through the revenue streams anticipated to be available through 2040.

Table 9- 2. Multimodal Cost Feasible Plan

Estimated Project Description Implementation Timeframe Corridor Retrofit US 1 2021-2040 Project Congestion Management Process Strategies / Livable CMP / LCI Funds 2021-2040 Communities Initiative Bicycle and Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities(1) 2021-2040 Pedestrian Trails Transit Projects Transit 2021-2040

System Maintenance(2) Maintenance 2021-2040 SR 714 (Martin Hwy) from CR 76A (Citrus Blvd) to Martin Widen from 2 lanes 2021-2025 Downs Boulevard to 4 lanes CR 713 (High Meadow Ave) from I-95 to CR 714 (Martin Widen from 2 lanes 2021-2025 Hwy) to 4 lanes Widen from 4 lanes Indian St from SR 76 (Kanner Hwy) to Willoughby Boulevard 2026-2030 to 6 lanes Willoughby Blvd from Monterey Road to SR 5 (US 1) New 2-lane road 2026-2030 Widen from 2 lanes Cove Rd from SR 76 (Kanner Hwy) to US 1(3) 2031-2040 to 4 lanes Widen from 2 lanes Cove Rd from US 1 to CR A1A 2031-2040 to 4 lanes Village Parkway Extension from Martin Highway to St. Lucie New 4-lane road Developer Funded County (1) Non-Motorized projects will be prioritized in a future Martin MPO Action Plan. (2) The application of Federal TMA funds to roadway maintenance needs will be for roadways on the federal aid highway system. (3) ROW and Design costs are included in the 2026-2030 planning timeframe.

Page 68 of 80 Figure 9-1. Multimodal Cost Feasible Plan

LV WAY B AUSE Legend NE C NW JENSEN BEACH BLV Jensen Beach N Year of Implementation US 1 Corridor Retrofit Incorporated E

N O W C E D F OCEAN BREEZE PARK 2021-2025 T R A N T E CMP Funds Adjacent Counties W BRI N D D B E R L R E H V 2026-2030 Developer Funded North River ShAores A County Boundary L N Y

H N W A H W V IE A IX 2031-2040 Non-Motorized Projects Y S NE D Local Roads E N Rio Atlantic Ocean V BL *Non-Motorized projects will be prioritized in a future Martin MPO Action Plan S N S W EA St. Lucie County St. Lucie River C E

F O E M E SV L A D B A C E 1 A SW R A MAP SE OCEAN BLV SE EAN R P A OC T L R SEWALL'S POINT H

D H D U R W SW R Y Y M B

U T RPHY RD I L V

C STUART

A S

S E D V I L X S I B E E

S H G W H C W O N Y M LO A C R E K B S Z R A D E SE A S V S E W W A R F IE LD SW 96 TH ST S E B LV G

D O

R M

D E

H R Z

T N A V T S

A E E

A L

R A

L R

A E

O S

W F A

S V

W SW BRIDGE RD E

JUPITER ISLS AND E

B SE BRIDGE RD Hobe Sound E A C H

R Indiantown D S W BLV S C RU O IT S C N W F SW N AR E M R RD S

H W Y ¨¦§95 F L Y O HW R R ID NE A AN 'S Lake Okeechobee K T SW U R N P IK E D R Y E N T Y I A

H W ND W A - L

T S

A E

R S

S Palm Beach County

0 5 10 Miles

Federal/State (SIS) Projects

Federal/State (SIS) funds are funding two facilities, 55% is allocated to I-95 from Palm Beach County line to St. Lucie County line and the remaining 45% is funding SR 710 (Warfield Boulevard) from Martin County Line to CR 609 SR 710 , (Allapattah Road). 45% I-95, 55%

Figure 9- 2. Federal/State (SIS) Projects

Federal/State (Non-SIS) Projects

Federal/State (Non-SIS) funds are funding a variety of different projects. Two facilities were identified; 13% is allocated to SR 714 SR 714, CR 713, (Martin Highway) from CR 76A (Citrus) to 13% 4% Martin Downs Boulevard and partial funding of 4% towards CR 713 from I-95 to CR 714 Multimodal, (Martin Highway). In addition, 41% funds the 41% U.S. 1 Corridor Retrofit with the remainder of 41% towards multimodal projects.

US 1,

41%

Figure 9- 3. Federal State (Non-SIS) Projects

Page 70 of 80

Other Federal (TMA, TA, Transit) Projects

Other Federal (TMA, TA, Transit) funds are funding a variety of different projects. Funds allocates 31% towards CMP/LCI and partial funding of 9% for Cove Road from SR 5 (U.S. CMP/LCI, 31% 1) to CR A1A, and 60% of roadway maintenance. The application of Federal TMA funds to roadway maintenance needs will be for Roadway Maintenance, roadways on the federal aid highway system. 60% Cove Road, 9%

Figure 9- 4. Other Federal (TMA, TA, Transit) Projects

Local (Fuel Tax, Impact Fees, Transit from General Fund)

Local (Fuel Tax, Impact Fees, Transit from General Funds) funds a variety of 5% 9% 21% different projects. Funds allocates partial funds of 21% for CR 713 (High 7% Meadows Avenue) from I-95 to CR 714 (Martin Highway), 58% for Cove Road from SR 76 (Kanner Highway) to CR A1A, 7% for Indian Street from SR 76 (Kanner Highway) to Willoughby 58% Boulevard, 9% for Willoughby Boulevard from Monterey Road to SR 5 CR 713 Cove Road (U.S. 1), and 5% towards multimodal Indian Street Willoughby Boulevard projects. Multimodal

Figure 9- 5. Local (Fuel Tax, Impact Fees, Transit from General Fund)

Page 71 of 80

Chapter 10: Environmental Mitigation

The Moving Martin Forward 2040 LRTP addresses potential environmental mitigation activities as required by federal regulations.

23 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 450.322:

(f) The metropolitan transportation plan shall, at a minimum, include:

(7) A discussion of types of potential environmental mitigation activities and potential areas to carry out these activities, including activities that may have the greatest potential to restore and maintain the environmental functions affected by the metropolitan transportation plan. The discussion may focus on policies, programs, or strategies, rather than at the project level. The discussion shall be developed in consultation with Federal, State, and Tribal land management, wildlife, and regulatory agencies. The MPO may establish reasonable timeframes for performing this consultation.

Transportation projects can significantly impact many aspects of the environment including wildlife and their habitats, wetlands, and groundwater resources. In situations where impacts cannot be completely avoided, mitigation or conservation efforts are required. Environmental mitigation is the process of addressing damage to the environment caused by transportation projects or programs. The process of mitigation is best accomplished through enhancement, restoration, creation and/or preservation projects that serve to offset unavoidable environmental impacts.

The Martin MPO is committed to minimizing and mitigating the negative impacts of transportation projects on the natural and built environment in order to preserve and enhance quality of life. Martin County has enacted wetland and upland protection measures to preserve wetlands and native upland habitats and maintain their ecological functions. All wetlands in unincorporated Martin County are protected. A 50 feet buffer zone (75 feet if the wetland is connected to waters of the State) is required around wetlands to provide an upland transition area which can protect the wetland from negative impacts. Where possible, these buffers contain native upland habitat. Upland protection measures have been implemented in Martin County to prevent the loss of native upland habitats to development or to the spread of exotic invasive plant species. In addition, Martin County is already addressing the negative effects of sea level rise and climate change through the flood plain process. Martin County recently updated all flood plain maps for sea level rise and adopted the modified maps on March 16, 2015.

In the State of Florida, environmental mitigation for transportation projects is completed through a partnership between the MPO, FDOT, and state and federal environmental resource and

Page 72 of 80 regulatory agencies, such as the Water Management Districts (WMDs) and the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP). These activities are directed through Section 373 Florida Statutes (F.S.), which establishes the requirements for mitigation planning as well as the requirements for permitting, mitigation banking, and mitigation requirements for habitat impacts. Under this statute, FDOT must identify projects requiring mitigation, determine a cost associated with the mitigation, and place funds into an escrow account within the Florida Transportation Trust Fund. State transportation trust funds are programmed in the FDOT work program for use by the WMDs to provide mitigation for the impacts identified in the annual inventory.

Section 373.4137, F.S., establishes the FDOT mitigation program that is administered by the state’s WMDs, which are responsible for developing an annual mitigation plan with input from Federal and State regulatory and resource agencies, including representatives from public and private mitigation banks. Each mitigation plan must focus on land acquisition and restoration or enhancement activities that offer the best mitigation opportunity for that specific region. The mitigation plans are required to be updated annually to reflect the most current FDOT work program and project list of a transportation authority. The FDOT Mitigation Program is a great benefit to MPOs because it offers them an additional method to mitigate for impacts produced by transportation projects and it promotes coordination between federal and state regulatory agencies, MPOs, and local agencies.

When addressing mitigation, there is a general rule to avoid all impacts, minimize impacts, and mitigate impacts when impacts are unavoidable. This rule can be applied at the planning level, when MPOs are identifying areas of potential environmental concern due to the development of a transportation project. A typical approach to mitigation that MPOs can follow is to:

. avoid impacts altogether; . minimize a proposed activity/project size or its involvement; . rectify the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment; . reduce or eliminate the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action; and . compensate for environmental impacts by providing appropriate or alternate environmental resources of equivalent or greater value, on or off-site.

Page 73 of 80

Sections 373.47137 and 373.4139, F.S. require that impacts to habitat be mitigated for through a variety of mitigation options, which include mitigation banks and mitigation through the Water Management District(s) and the DEP. Potential environmental mitigation opportunities that could be considered when addressing environmental impacts from future projects proposed by MPOs may include, but are not limited to, the items presented in Table 10-1.

Table 10- 1. Environmental Mitigation

Resource/Impacts Potential Mitigation Strategy Wetlands and Water Resources . Restore degraded wetlands . Create new wetland habitats . Enhance or preserve existing wetlands . Improve storm water management . Purchase credits from a mitigation bank Forested and other natural areas . Use selective cutting and clearing . Replace or restore forested areas . Preserve existing vegetation Habitats . Construct underpasses, such as culverts . Other design measures to minimize potential fragmenting of animal habitats Streams . Stream restoration . Vegetative buffer zones . Strict erosion and sedimentation control measures Threatened or Endangered . Preservation Species . Enhancement or restoration of degraded habitat . Creation of new habitats . Establish buff areas around existing habitat

Planning for specific environmental mitigation strategies over the life of the long range transportation plan can be challenging. Potential mitigation challenges include lack of funding for mitigation projects and programs, lack of available wetland mitigation bank credits, improperly assessing cumulative impacts of projects, and permitting issues with the county, local, state and federal regulatory agencies. These challenges can be lessened when MPOs engage their stakeholders, including regulatory agencies, the public and other interested parties, through the public involvement process. The public involvement process provides MPOs an efficient method to gain input and address concerns about potential mitigation strategies and individual projects.

In addition to the process outlined in the Florida Statutes and implemented by the MPO and its partner agencies, the Efficient Transportation Decision Making (ETDM) process is used for seeking input on individual qualifying long range transportation projects allowing for more specific

Page 74 of 80 commentary. This provides assurance that mitigation opportunities are identified, considered and available as the plan is developed and projects are advanced. Through these approaches, the State of Florida along with its MPO partners ensures that mitigation will occur to offset the adverse effects of proposed transportation projects.

Figure 10-1 depicts the approximate ownership of conservation lands in Martin County. Although it is appropriate to provide a general idea of the location and extent of conservation lands in Martin County, there may be discrepancies with legal descriptions. Roughly one-quarter of land in Martin County is in conservation.

The following is a list of plans and data sources reviewed specific to the development of the environmental mitigation documentation.

Allapattah Flats Management Area Ten-Year General Management Plan 2014-2024

The Allapattah Flats Management Area Ten-Year General Management Plan describes the historical, ecological, and managerial aspects of the area as a means to coordinate effective management programs. The plan guides District land management personnel toward ecological beneficial and cost-effective land management practices. Land has been purchased with funding from the Save our Everglades Trust Fund, Martin County, the Natural Resources Conservation Service Wetlands Reserve Program, and the District’s Everglades ad valorem tax. The primary drainage for Allapattah Flats was the C-23 canal that was constructed along the Martin County/St. Lucie County Line in 1942. A significant portion of the Allapattah Flats property in Martin County, known as the Allapattah Ranch, and its surrounding properties were evaluated in 1996 as a potential acquisition under the Conservation and Recreational Lands and Save Our Rivers programs.

The Central and Southern Florida Project Comprehensive Review Study: Restoring the Everglades, 2000

The lead agency for this study, Army Corps of Engineers, collaborated with scientists to create an innovative and experimental restoration plan for the Florida Everglades. The study embodies a paradigm for agency management of natural resources and ecosystem management. It focuses management on entire ecosystems rather than individual resources or distinct goals such as flood control and water quality.

Page 75 of 80

Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan Central and Southern Florida Project Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands, Phase I, 2011

As the first step in the restoration of the southeastern portion of the Everglades ecosystem, the Biscayne Bay Coastal Wetlands Project will modify the flow of freshwater to Biscayne Bay. In addition, it is a component of the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP). The CERP is a framework for preserving and protecting the South Florida ecosystem while providing for other water-related needs of the region, including water supply and flood protection. The project intends to redistribute freshwater runoff and will be accomplished through a series of pumps, culverts, spreader canals, and mosquito ditch plugs throughout the project area.

Florida Coastal Management Program Guide, 2015

The goal of the Florida Coastal Management Program is to promote the effective protection and use of the land and water resources of the coastal zone. It is based on a network of agencies implementing 24 statutes that protect and enhance the state’s natural, cultural, and economic coastal resources. One of the state’s aquatic preserves is located in Martin County from Jensen Beach to Jupiter Inlet.

Land Management Plan Amendment Savannas Preserve State Park, 2011

Savannas Preserve State Park is a public outdoor recreation and conservation area located in St. Lucie and Martin Counties. The southern portion of the park is in Martin County. Martin County and the Division of Recreation and Parks are working together to integrate the County’s development of enhanced bicycle and pedestrian trail facilities related to the East Coast Greenway. The East Coast Greenway (ECG) is a combined greenway and trail system and 600 miles of trail are planned to be developed along the east coast of Florida. Providing new opportunities for non-vehicular access to the state parks and enhancing the recreational experiences of the parks’ visitors will further the County’s goals.

Atlantic Ridge Preserve State Park Unit Management Plan, 2005

Atlantic Ridge Preserve State Park consists of two distinct sections, both sites of which are located in Martin County; Atlantic Ridge and the Medalist. An agreement in 2004 was reached with Martin County and an adjacent land developer to construct a shared entrance off Cove Road to the Atlantic Ridge. The Medalist does not have public access due to deed restrictions. The Medalist

Page 76 of 80 property is separated from the Atlantic Ridge property by agriculture and private hunting lands. The plan consists of two interrelated components, resource management and land use. The resource management component provides a detailed inventory and assessment of the natural and cultural resources of the park. The land use component is the recreational resource allocation plan for the unit.

Jonathan Dickinson State Park Unit Management Plan, 2012

Jonathan Dickinson State Park is located in Martin County and Palm Beach County. Access to the park’s main entry is from Federal Highway, U.S. 1. The park continues to provide Florida’s residents and visitors with a high-quality resource-based outdoor recreation experience. The purpose for acquiring the park was to protect, develop, operate, and maintain the property for public outdoor recreation, conservation, historic, and related purposes. The components of larger ecosystems are often parks because of their proper management can be affected by conditions and events that occur beyond park boundaries.

Loxahatchee River Science Plan, 2010

The development of a science plan for the Loxahatchee River to monitor effects of restoration efforts to support adaptive management of the system and fill knowledge gaps critical to ecosystem restoration success. It serves as a guide for scientific data collection and analysis to be conducted over the next five years and for the efficient application of resources to prioritize and implement the needed science to protect and restore the Loxahatchee River. The watershed ecosystem has experienced adverse environmental impacts due to alterations in watershed and hydrology and the opening of Jupiter Inlet. Implementation of the science plan requires a collaborative effort among the interagency team and Martin County Division of Environmental Quality was recognized as one.

Hobe Sound National Wildlife Refuge, 2006

The Hobe Sound National Wildlife Refuge is an asset of Martin County, which helps maintain its image and expands local support for conservation efforts. The future of this is dependent upon a public constituency that is knowledgeable of refuge resources and mandates, as well as environmental issues, and that is willing to work toward resolving them. This plan provides actions to protect, restore, and conserve wildlife habitat. In addition, this plan expands education and

Page 77 of 80 appropriate, compatible, wildlife-dependent recreational opportunities. This plan will be reviewed every five years to determine the need for change if significant information becomes available.

Conclusion

Martin MPO assessed the cost feasible plan to determine each project’s proximity to natural or sociocultural resources in an effort to evaluate potential environmental mitigation. In conclusion, Martin County and its municipalities have shown a commitment to and will continue to avoid impacts to environmentally sensitive lands by implementing environmental mitigation strategies such as those listed in Table 10-1.

Page 78 of 80 Jensen Beach Impoundment Jensen BeachI nWest et A Martin County Ecosystems Restoration & Management Dutcher Joe's River Park Muscara 2015 Conservation Lands Status Bob Graham Beach Beachwalk Paisley Gables

This Geographic Information System Map Product, received from Martin County ("COUNTY") in fulfillment of a public records request is provided "as is" without warranty of any kind, and the COUNTY Indian Riverside Park expressly disclaims all express and implied warranties, including but not limited to the implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose.The COUNTY does not warrant, guarantee, or make any representations regarding the use, or the results of the use, of the information provided to you by the COUNTY in terms of correctness, accuracy, reliability, timeliness or otherwise. The entire risk as to the results and performance of any information obtained Rio Nature Park River Cove from the COUNTY is entirely assumed by the recipient. This is not a Martin County Ecosystems Restoration & Management Conservation Lands; Full or Partial Ownerships survey. Santa Lucea Inset A Other Martin County Conservation Lands; Governmental and Private Perry Beach

Martin County Engineering Department Pendarvis Cove Ecosystems Restoration & Management Division 2401 SE Monterey Rd Palm City Park Stuart, FL 34996 Ph: 772-288-5927 Twin Rivers

Danforth Kiplinger Rocky Point

Delaplane FDOT Parcel Oxbow Hawk's Hammock Allapattah Flats WMA Inset B Gomez Phipp's Park Inset B

Halpatiokee Regional Park Peck Lake Park n

a Scrub Oak e c

O Jimmy Graham

c i t n a l t e Harmony Ranch e A b o

h Lake Okeechobee Ridge c

e Pal Mar East e k O

e k a L Pal Mar Cypress Creek

0 3.5 Jones H7ungryland WEA 14 Miles Ë Kitching Creek

Chapter 11: Plan Implementation

The Moving Martin Forward plan is intended to be a starting point for coordinated transportation investments for the next 25 years. It addresses the future multimodal needs and how it helps maintain and enhance Martin County’s quality of life. The multimodal aspects of this plan are a fundamental tenet of how the transportation plan will benefit Martin County. Comparing the outputs of the E+C model and the CFP model, a countywide decrease of $230,873 per day in total travel time cost is anticipated. Travel time costs refers to the cost of time spent on transport, including waiting as well as actual travel. It includes costs to consumers of personal (unpaid) time spent on travel, and costs to businesses of paid employee time spent in travel. It is the product of time spent traveling multiplied by unit costs. Moving Martin Forward is a living document and may be updated as needed in accordance with the Martin MPO Public Involvement Plan.

The following recommendations are made based on the analysis conducted during the LRTP. . Implement the multimodal Cost Feasible Plan. . Conduct a future detailed evaluation of roadway grade separation options over the FEC Railroad corridor to address impacts from expanded rail freight and inter-city passenger rail trains. . Prepare a bicycle and pedestrian facilities network master plan to identify and prioritize non-motorized transportation improvements. . Prepare a study to develop a product to enhance the quantitative and qualitative criteria for CMP/LCI project selection. The enhanced criteria would help identify priorities for future funding within the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). . Continue to work together with FDOT for implementation of the U.S. 1 Corridor Retrofit Project to improve mobility and accessibility in the County’s business corridor.

Total Travel Time Cost per Day (in 2040 Dollars) Decrease in Travel Time -$230,873 Cost per day

Page 80 of 80