STATE ROAD (SR) 5/US 1/DIXIE HIGHWAY FROM SR 94/SW 88 STREET/ KENDALL DRIVE TO SR 9/I-95
MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA FDOT FINANCIAL PROJECT ID: 434845-1-22-01 WWW.FDOTMIAMIDADE.COM/US1SOUTH
March 2019 Final Summary Report ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Thank you to the many professionals and stakeholders who participated in and contributed to this study. From the communities along the corridor to the members of the Project Advisory Team, everyone played a crucial role in forming the results and conclusions contained in this study.
2 STATE ROAD (SR) 5/US 1/DIXIE HIGHWAY FROM SR 94/SW 88 STREET/KENDALL DRIVE TO SR 9/I-95 This report compiles the results of the State Road (SR) 5/US 1/ Dixie Highway from SR 94/SW 88 Street/Kendall Drive to SR 9/I-95 Corridor Study and includes: ›› Findings from the study ›› Recommendations for walking, bicycling, driving, and transit access needs along US 1 between Kendall Drive and I-95 ›› Next steps for implementing the recommendations This effort is the product of collaboration between the Florida Department of Transportation District Six and its regional and local partners. FDOT and its partners engaged the community at two critical stages of the study – during the identification of issues and during the development of recommendations. The community input helped inform the recommended strategies but the collaboration cannot stop here. Going from planning to implementation will take additional coordination and, in some instances, additional analysis. FDOT is able and ready to lead the effort but will continue seeking the support of community leaders, transportation and planning organizations, and the general public! To learn more, please read on and visit:
www.fdotmiamidade.com/us1south
WWW.FDOTMIAMIDADE.COM/US1SOUTH 3 CONTENTS 1. STUDY BACKGROUND 7 A. REQUEST FROM PARTNERS 8 B. STUDY EXTENTS, SCHEDULE, AND PROCESS 9 2. ENGAGEMENT 11 A. PROJECT ADVISORY TEAM (PAT) 12 B. STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS 13 C. COMMUNITY LEADERSHIP OUTREACH AND BRIEFINGS 13 D. MIAMI-DADE TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ORGANIZATION (TPO) BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN ADVISORY COMMITTEE 13 E. GENERAL PUBLIC OUTREACH 13 3. US 1 CONDITIONS 18 A. CORRIDOR EXISTING AND FUTURE CHALLENGES 20 B. CORRIDOR OPPORTUNITIES 33 4. PROCESS FOR DEVELOPING RECOMMENDATIONS 34 A. NEEDS AND OBJECTIVES 35 B. SCREENING PROCESS 36 5. PROPOSED MULTIMODAL STRATEGIES 37 A. TIER 1 SCREENING RESULTS 38 B. TIER 2 SCREENING RESULTS 41 6. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND IMPACTS 45 A. STUDY TIME PERIODS 46 B. ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS 46 C. STUDY INTERSECTIONS 47 D. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY 50 E. BASELINE AND FUTURE CONDITIONS 51 F. STRATEGY ADJUSTMENT RECOMMENDATIONS 54 7. ALIGNMENT WITH CURRENT EFFORTS 55 A. RESURFACING, RESTORATION, AND REHABILITATION (RRR) PROJECTS 56 B. THE UNDERLINE 57 C. SMART PLAN 62 D. BRINGING IT TOGETHER 66 8. A PACKAGE OF RECOMMENDATIONS 70 A. STRATEGIES TO MEET THE USER’S NEEDS ALONG US 1 72 B. CONSIDERATIONS FOR NEXT STEPS 72 C. AS WE MOVE FORWARD 75
4 STATE ROAD (SR) 5/US 1/DIXIE HIGHWAY FROM SR 94/SW 88 STREET/KENDALL DRIVE TO SR 9/I-95 FIGURES
FIGURE 1 STUDY CORRIDOR 9 FIGURE 2 PROJECT SCHEDULE 10 FIGURE 3 STUDY DECISION-MAKING FRAMEWORK 12 FIGURE 4 VARIOUS ELEMENTS ANALYZED 19 FIGURE 5 US 1 TRIP LENGTH STATISTICS 21 FIGURE 6 TRAVEL MODE PREFERENCES FOR US 1 COMMUTERS 21 FIGURE 7 US 1 PEAK DIRECTIONAL AVERAGE TRAVEL SPEED 21 FIGURE 8 TRANSIT SERVICE 22 FIGURE 9 AVERAGE WEEKDAY METRORAIL RIDERSHIP BY STATION 22 FIGURE 10 ALL CRASH LOCATIONS FOR 2011 THROUGH 2015 24 FIGURE 11 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLIST CRASH LOCATIONS FOR 2011 THROUGH 2015 24 FIGURE 13 WHERE US 1 STUDY AREA RESIDENTS WORK 25 FIGURE 12 COMMUTING TRAVEL PATTERNS 25 FIGURE 14 WHERE US 1 STUDY AREA EMPLOYEES LIVE 26 FIGURE 15 CONTEXT CLASSIFICATION MAP 27 FIGURE 16 US 1 ROADWAY TYPICAL SECTIONS 28 FIGURE 17 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE NETWORK MAP 29 FIGURE 18 METRORAIL AND BUSWAY PARK-N-RIDE LOT UTILIZATION 30 FIGURE 19 PROJECT NEEDS 35 FIGURE 20 TIERED SCREENING 36 FIGURE 21 TIER 2 STRATEGY FAMILIES 41 FIGURE 22 LIST OF FEATURES IDENTIFIED PER STRATEGY 42 FIGURE 23 INTERSECTIONS ANALYZED 48 FIGURE 24 TRAFFIC OPERATIONS PERFORMANCE RESULTS 54 FIGURE 25 BREAKDOWN OF STRATEGIES INCORPORATED INTO RRR PROJECTS 56 FIGURE 26 THE UNDERLINE PROJECT PHASING 60 FIGURE 27 SMART PLAN OPENINGS AND CONSTRUCTION 63 FIGURE 28 BREAKDOWN OF STRATEGIES PER NEED IDENTIFIED 72
WWW.FDOTMIAMIDADE.COM/US1SOUTH 5 TABLES
TABLE 1 MOBILE SESSION LOCATIONS AND DATES 15 TABLE 2 NEED #1: REDUCE EFFECTS OF DAILY TRAFFIC CONGESTION SCREENING RESULTS 38 TABLE 3 NEED #2: REDUCE AUTO CRASHES SCREENING RESULTS 39 TABLE 4 NEED #3: INCREASE SAFETY & CONVENIENCE FOR PEDESTRIANS & BICYCLISTS SCREENING RESULTS 39 TABLE 5 NEED #4: IMPROVE ACCESS TO METRORAIL, METROBUS & DESTINATIONS BY ALL MODES SCREENING RESULTS 40 TABLE 6 SUMMARY OF STRATEGY PACKAGES 42 TABLE 7 SUMMARY OF STRATEGY PACKAGES BY MUNICIPALITY 43 TABLE 8 SUMMARY OF STRATEGY PACKAGES BY CONTEXT CLASSIFICATION SEGMENTS 43 TABLE 9 2040 FUTURE BASELINE (NO-BUILD) SCENARIO INTERSECTION CONDITIONS SUMMARY 52 TABLE 10 2040 FUTURE (BUILD) SCENARIO INTERSECTION CONDITIONS SUMMARY 53
6 STATE ROAD (SR) 5/US 1/DIXIE HIGHWAY FROM SR 94/SW 88 STREET/KENDALL DRIVE TO SR 9/I-95 SECTION 1 STUDY BACKGROUND
WWW.FDOTMIAMIDADE.COM/US1SOUTH 7 1. STUDY A. REQUEST FROM PARTNERS BACKGROUND In March 2013, the Florida Department of US 1 is a critical corridor for north-south travel Transportation (FDOT) held their first Annual in Miami-Dade County. Through the Cities of Listening Session where transportation partner Miami, Coral Gables, and South Miami, as well agencies throughout the region were invited as the Village of Pinecrest, US 1 serves as the to share their opinions on transportation needs main link between residential communities along the State Highway System. During that and Miami’s urban core. In addition to serving Listening Session three themes emerged for as the main route for those traveling by car, US 1: (1) the existing level of congestion along it also serves as one of the region’s major the corridor is a primary issue, (2) there is transit routes with the South Dade Busway and a growing desire for better pedestrian and Metrorail running parallel to the roadway. It is bicycle access along and across US 1, and also anticipated that this corridor will become a (3) improving and expanding existing transit regional destination for pedestrians and cyclists service should be a high priority. In 2016 FDOT as the M-Path transforms into a world-class initiated this US 1 Corridor Study to holistically shared-use path, the Underline. assess transportation needs and develop and evaluate strategies to improve mobility for all Over 60,000 residents live and 100,000 users. employees work within one mile of the US 1 study area. By 2040, residents are projected to increase by 25%; and jobs are expected to increase by more than 33%. Employment today is particularly concentrated around Metrorail stops, and is especially dense in Dadeland, South Miami, Coral Gables, and Coconut Grove. Employment is expected to increase almost universally along the corridor, especially in areas such as The Falls, Dadeland, South Miami, Coral Gables, Coconut Grove, and with greater intensity towards Downtown Miami.
2013 LISTENING SESSION
2013 LISTENING SESSION 2013 LISTENING SESSION
8 STATE ROAD (SR) 5/US 1/DIXIE HIGHWAY FROM SR 94/SW 88 STREET/KENDALL DRIVE TO SR 9/I-95 B. STUDY EXTENTS, The study process included four main steps: collaborate with stakeholders, SCHEDULE, AND transportation partner agencies, and 1 the general public at key milestones PROCESS throughout the project At the start of the study in 2016, the US 1 study area extents were from SR 992/SW 152 Street/ analyze existing and future conditions Coral Reef Drive to SR 9/I-95, in Miami-Dade 2 (including both recurring and non-recurring County. However, several months after the congestion) study was initiated the southern study limit changed to SR 94/SW 88 Street/Kendall Drive evaluate multimodal transportation 3 improvement needs (see Figure 1) to align with the Strategic Miami Area Rapid Transit (SMART) Plan initiative led identify multimodal strategy by Miami-Dade County and the Miami-Dade 4 recommendations Transportation Planning Organization (TPO). The study lasted nearly three years and had four main steps (see Figure 2).
Fgurei 1 STUDY CORRIDOR
RIVIERA VILLAGE OF MIAMI COUNTRY MERRICK PARK CLUB
UNIVERSITY VIZCAYA OF MIAMI MERCY HOSPITAL CORAL COCONUT GROVE BAPTIST SOUTH MAIMI GABLES HOSPITAL HOSPITAL SOUTH MIAMI/ SUNSET PLACE SOUTH DADELAND MIAMI
PINECREST MATHESON HAMMOCK COUNTY PARK
FAIRCHILD TROPICAL BOTANIC GARDEN THE FALLS JACKSON SOUTH SNAPPER CREEK PARK COMMUNITY HOSPITAL PALMETTO GOLF COURSE PALMETTO BAY CHAPMAN FIELD PARK
LEGEND DESTINATIONS
RECREATION APPROX. CITY LIMITS
HOSPITAL ORIGINAL STUDY LIMITS COLLEGE / UNIVERSITY 2ND PHASE SOUTHERN LIMIT CHANGE TO SW 88TH STREET/KENDALL DRIVE ACTIVITY CENTER
WWW.FDOTMIAMIDADE.COM/US1SOUTH 9 Fgurei 2 PROJECT SCHEDULE
Stakeholder and Public Outreach
10 STATE ROAD (SR) 5/US 1/DIXIE HIGHWAY FROM SR 94/SW 88 STREET/KENDALL DRIVE TO SR 9/I-95 SECTION 2 ENGAGEMENT
WWW.FDOTMIAMIDADE.COM/US1SOUTH 11 2. ENGAGEMENT A. PROJECT The study team established a Public ADVISORY TEAM Involvement Plan (PIP) for the study that outlined when and how they would seek (PAT) feedback from corridor stakeholders (including The Project Advisory Team (PAT) was formed agencies, transit customers, members of to act as a sounding board throughout the life the public, and community leaders). The PIP of the study. The PAT included representatives was created on the premise that proactively from: engaging communities and stakeholders ›› Miami-Dade County Department of throughout the entirety of a corridor study Transportation and Public Works (DTPW) promotes successful problem solving, creates community partnerships, yields diverse voices ›› Miami-Dade County Regulatory and and new ideas, and provides the opportunity Economic Resources (RER) for stakeholders to own and advance solutions. Further details are found under the Documents ›› Miami-Dade TPO and Publications page of the study website. ›› Miami-Dade Expressway Authority Several groups, shown in Figure 3, were ›› The Underline involved in the decision-making process at various points during the study. ›› University of Miami
›› FDOT staff
Fgurei 3 STUDY DECISION-MAKING FRAMEWORK
FDOT EXECUTIVE TEAM
FDOT PROJECT MANAGEMENT TEAM
STAKEHOLDERS MIAMI-DADE PROJECT AND GENERAL TPO BPAC ADVISORY TEAM PUBLIC
12 STATE ROAD (SR) 5/US 1/DIXIE HIGHWAY FROM SR 94/SW 88 STREET/KENDALL DRIVE TO SR 9/I-95 ›› Village of Pinecrest C. COMMUNITY ›› City of South Miami LEADERSHIP ›› City of Coral Gables
›› City of Miami OUTREACH AND Aside from acting as a sounding board, BRIEFINGS The study team met with and briefed elected the other major roles of the PAT were to officials and FDOT leadership at each phase help implement the PIP, share information of public outreach which coincided with the to and from their respective agencies, study milestones. During these meetings, the and to ensure that their constituents were study team was able to gain knowledge on local aware of the study and the decisions under happenings which increased the study team’s consideration. To accomplish this, the study awareness and alignment with community team met with the PAT three times to gather desires. feedback at key milestones covering the data and analysis conclusions, the initial list of strategies to be considered, and the final list of recommendations to move forward into next D. MIAMI-DADE phases. TRANSPORTATION B. STAKEHOLDER PLANNING INTERVIEWS ORGANIZATION Concurrent with data collection efforts, one- (TPO) BICYCLE on-one interviews were conducted with key area stakeholders to understand the issues PEDESTRIAN and opportunities that need to be considered throughout the study. A total of 55 interviews ADVISORY were conducted and over 500 comments received covering all aspects from landscaping COMMITTEE The study team presented to the Miami-Dade issues to traffic congestion and safety issues. TPO Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Committee All PAT members were interviewed, along with (BPAC) at key milestones to gain feedback representatives of community organizations and input. At the conclusion of the study, the and institutions. The study team conducted committee made a motion to commend FDOT’s targeted meetings with Chamber South, City of effort and the set of recommendations to move Coral Gables, City of South Miami, Continental forward. Park HOA, Dadeland North Shopping Center, Dover, Kohl and Partners Town Planning, Florida Turnpike, Greater Miami Chamber of Commerce, Green Mobility Network, Jackson E. GENERAL PUBLIC South Community Hospital, Kendall I Plaza, Mack Cycles, MDX, Miami-Dade County OUTREACH While the study process was ongoing, the (DTPW, Public Schools, and RER), Miami- general public could provide feedback in a Dade TPO, Neat Streets Miami, Palmetto Bay variety of ways such as an online survey, via Police Department, Prado Shopping Center, phone and/or email, or through the project Shops at Sunset Place/Coconut Grove Metro website. The project team got the ‘word out’ by Development, South Florida Regional Council, using social media, electronic newsletters, and South Miami CRA, South Miami Hospital, by holding mobile sessions. The Underline, University of Miami, Village of Palmetto Bay, Village of Pinecrest, and Vizcaya Museum and Gardens.
WWW.FDOTMIAMIDADE.COM/US1SOUTH 13 To better understand survey respondents, each SURVEY survey also included questions such as how Two surveys were created (via MetroQuest frequently they use US 1, what their preferred software) and distributed during the study mode of travel is (via car, bus, rail, foot, bike, process. The goal of the first survey was to etc.), and why they use the corridor (i.e., to get collect input on community priorities in terms to work, school, shopping, access freeways, of general transportation issues and needs as etc.). Lastly, each survey contained an optional well as their thoughts on specific geographic section where respondents could leave areas of concern. The study team used this information about themselves including race, feedback as another source of input when residential zip code and email address. The finalizing the project needs and objectives that findings from both surveys are found in the ‘US guided the development of strategies. 1 Conditions’ section as well as the ‘A Package The goal of the second survey was three-fold: of Recommendations’ section of this report. to re-advertise to the community the purpose of the study; to inform survey participants about the types of recommendations being considered; and to gauge their opinion regarding how important they felt the types of recommendations were and how often they would use them.
PUBLIC INPUT ROUND 1
443 SURVEYS COLLECTED BETWEEN AUG. 3RD - SEPT. 9TH
PUBLIC INPUT ROUND 2
483 SURVEYS COLLECTED BETWEEN SEP. 3 RD - OCT. 31ST
14 STATE ROAD (SR) 5/US 1/DIXIE HIGHWAY FROM SR 94/SW 88 STREET/KENDALL DRIVE TO SR 9/I-95 business cards (containing the study website, MOBILE SESSIONS link to the survey, as well as study team contact As one method to get the word out, the study information); ‘about the project’ factsheets team participated in Mobile Sessions where in both English and Spanish; literature on the they set-up an informal kiosk in strategic SMART Plan provided by the Miami-Dade TPO; locations throughout the corridor. Using iPads and large display boards with the website and cell phones, the study team asked passers- address. Five sessions were conducted in Phase by to take the online survey. At these informal 1 and six sessions in Phase 2. kiosks, the team also had study-specific
Tblea 1 MOBILE SESSION LOCATIONS AND DATES
SESSION PHASE 1 PHASE 2
Date: Tuesday, 8-15 @ 3-5 p.m. Date: Tuesday, 9-4 @ 4–6 p.m.
Location: Shops at Sunset Place: First Location: University of Miami Metrorail #1 Floor Outdoor, 5701 Sunset Dr, South Station, 5400 Ponce De Leon Blvd, Coral Miami, FL 33143 Gables, FL 33146
Date: Thursday, 8-17 @ 3-5 p.m. Date: Wednesday, 9-5 @ 8–10 a.m.
Locations: Dadeland North Metrorail Locations: Douglas Road Metrorail #2 Station, 8300 S Dixie Hwy, Miami, FL Station at 3060 SW 37 Court in Miami, FL 33143; Dadeland South Metrorail Station, 33146 9150 Dadeland Boulevard, Miami, FL 33156
Date: Wednesday, 8-23 @ 9-11 a.m. Date: Thursday, 9-6 @ 8–10 a.m.
Location: University of Miami Metrorail Location: Dadeland North Metrorail Station, 5400 Ponce De Leon Blvd, Coral Station, 8300 S Dixie Hwy, Miami, FL #3 Gables, FL 33146 33143; Dadeland South Metrorail Station, 9150 Dadeland Boulevard, Miami, FL 33156
Date: Thursday, 8-24 @ 3-5 p.m. Date: Friday, 9-7 @ 4–6 p.m.
Location: Frankie Shannon Rolle Center, Location: Frankie Shannon Rolle Center, #4 3750 S Dixie Hwy, Miami, FL 33133 3750 S Dixie Hwy, Miami, FL 33133
Date: Thursday, 8-31 @ 3-5 p.m. Date: Saturday, 9-8 @ 3–5 p.m.
Location: Douglas Road Metrorail Station Location: Shops at Sunset Place: First #5 at 3060 SW 37 Court in Miami, FL 33146 Floor Outdoor, 5701 Sunset Dr, South Miami, FL 33143
Date: Monday, 9-10 @ 11 a.m.-1 p.m.
Location: University of Miami Student #6 Center Complex; UC Canopy
WWW.FDOTMIAMIDADE.COM/US1SOUTH 15 STUDY WEBSITE STUDY WEBSITE SNAPSHOT SNAPSHOT
STUDY BUSINESS CARD SNAPSHOT
US 1 CORRIDOR US 1 Corridor Study FDOT is conducting a study to identify and evaluate STUDY multimodal transportation improvements along US 1. Visit our project website to learn more: State Road (SR) 5/US 1/Dixie Highway www.fdotmiamidade.com/us1south from SR 94/SW 88 Street/Kendall Drive to SR 9/I-95
Miami-Dade County, Florida For additional information, please contact: STUDY TEAM’S Financial Project No. 434845-1-22-01 Jessica Josselyn, Project Manager Kittelson & Associates, Inc. PHOTOS FROM 954-828-1730 | [email protected] MOBILE SESSIONS
16 STATE ROAD (SR) 5/US 1/DIXIE HIGHWAY FROM SR 94/SW 88 STREET/KENDALL DRIVE TO SR 9/I-95 WWW.FDOTMIAMIDADE.COM/US1SOUTH 17 SECTION 3 US 1 CONDITIONS series of strategies for FDOT to advance into 3. US 1 future phases such as design or operations. Several elements were assessed during this CONDITIONS process (see Figure 4) further allowing the study team to develop a comprehensive The study team reviewed the corridor’s existing snapshot in time for how the corridor and and projected future conditions to serve as surrounding land uses function. Further details the basis for the development of the projects’ on the assessment can be found on the study’s needs and objectives, which were used to website under Documents and Publications. ultimately develop, screen, and recommend a
Fgurei 4 VARIOUS ELEMENTS ANALYZED
TRAVEL PATTERNS, LAND USES AND SYSTEM OPERATIONS, REDEVELOPMENT INFRASTRUCTURE AND SAFETY POTENTIAL (FOR ALL MODES) CONDITIONS (FOR ALL MODES)
PAST AND ON-GOING RELATED AND/ ENVIRONMENTAL, COMMUNITY AND OR INFLUENTIAL CULTURAL STAKEHOLDER EFFORTS WITHIN AND HISTORIC INPUT THE CORRIDOR FEATURES AND REGION-AT- LARGE
WWW.FDOTMIAMIDADE.COM/US1SOUTH 19 OPERATIONS A. CORRIDOR ›› US 1 is a 6-lane divided facility carrying just EXISTING under 100,000 vehicles per day. ›› The peak-period AM and PM congestion AND FUTURE timeframe is spreading and the average CHALLENGES peak directional travel speed = 7 mph (see US 1 is a roadway that serves many roles and Figure 7). it faces unique challenges in balancing those ›› Daily traffic congestion is caused primarily roles. Below are key findings: by delay at traffic signals, too much auto demand for the number of lanes provided, and because of incidents or crashes in the TRAVEL PATTERNS, corridor. OPERATIONS, AND SAFETY • Almost 65% of all intersections along the CONDITIONS (FOR ALL corridor are at ‘level-of-service (LOS) F in MODES) the AM Peak and 50% of intersections are TRAVEL PATTERNS at LOS F during the PM Peak. ›› US 1 provides access to and from local ›› Traffic volumes and off-peak speeds along neighborhoods, employment centers, the roadway are high, causing US 1 to act as activity centers, as well as regional a barrier between the neighborhoods and expressways. destinations on the southeast side of the ›› Today, US 1 is serving primarily shorter corridor and those on the northwest side distance trips (see Figure 5). Study of travel (including access to transit). patterns found that about 89% of auto trips ›› The US 1 corridor has extensive transit are travelling 7 miles or less on US 1 with coverage that provides travel along the about half of those trips travelling less than corridor, to the corridor, and to regional 3 miles on US 1. Only 2% of trips were end- destinations beyond the study area (see to-end trips through the corridor. Figure 8). Transit in the corridor consists of ›› Existing transportation options for local bus service, premium bus service on commuters favor automobile travel (see the South Dade Busway that is separated Figure 6). Despite the extensive transit from general traffic, and Metrorail. All of coverage in and near the corridor, only 5.5% these services are schedule-based, with of study area commute trips are made by peak-hour frequencies of 8 to 30 minutes transit. Factors that may be depressing and off-peak frequencies of 8 to 60 minutes. the number of trips made by transit likely Miami-Dade County also operates demand- include: based paratransit and the University of Miami and area municipalities are • Transfers are needed for many trips, operating shuttles serving their constituent including a forced transfer for premium populations. transit trips that cross Dadeland South;
• Less frequent transit service during non- peak times;
• Disrupted pedestrian and bicycle access to existing stops and stations; and
• Lack of available parking at the Metrorail park-and-ride locations.
20 STATE ROAD (SR) 5/US 1/DIXIE HIGHWAY FROM SR 94/SW 88 STREET/KENDALL DRIVE TO SR 9/I-95 Fgurei 5 US 1 TRIP LENGTH STATISTICS ONLY 2% OF TRIPS ARE TRAVELLING THROUGH THE ENTIRE STUDY CORRIDOR
45% OF TRIPS TRAVEL LESS THAN 3 MILES
Trip length data based on the original corridor limits from SW 152nd Street/Coral Reef Drive to I-95. Similar conclusions were drawn from the data for the shortened study corridor limits from SW 88th Street/ Kendall Drive to I-95.
Source: Bluetooth Data Collection, Winter 2016/2017
Fgurei 6 TRAVEL MODE PREFERENCES FOR US 1 COMMUTERS
Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates
Fgurei 7 US 1 PEAK DIRECTIONAL AVERAGE TRAVEL SPEED
SW 37 AVE MIAMI
SOUTH KENDALL DR MIAMI CORAL GABLES
PINECREST
LEGEND
APPROX. CITY LIMITS SW 152 ST AVERAGE PEAK-DIRECTIONAL TRAVEL SPEED = 7 MPH
2ND PHASE SOUTHERN LIMIT CHANGE TO PALMETTO TH BAY SW 88 STREET/KENDALL DRIVE
WWW.FDOTMIAMIDADE.COM/US1SOUTH 21 • Beyond a half-mile radius near the Fgurei 9 AVERAGE WEEKDAY METRORAIL Busway and Metrorail routes, most areas RIDERSHIP BY STATION are served only by local bus service. Assuming an acceptable walking access radius of a ¼ mile, transit coverage is relatively complete within the service area. Local transit service is not as frequent as premium transit service, so premium transit trips that are accessed by local transit are likely to have longer wait times than those accessed by bicycle or walking.
• Transit ridership exceeds capacity available in the peak periods (see Figure 9 for transit ridership).
Source: Miami-Dade County DTPW, 2016 Fgurei 8 TRANSIT SERVICE
Source: Miami-Dade County DTPW, 2016
22 STATE ROAD (SR) 5/US 1/DIXIE HIGHWAY FROM SR 94/SW 88 STREET/KENDALL DRIVE TO SR 9/I-95 SAFETY • From SW 88th Street to I-95 specifically, ›› The whole corridor is considered a High there were a total of 7,092 crashes, with Crash Corridor by FDOT. Safety studies and 13 of those resulting in a fatality (none of projects are currently occurring along the which occurred during the peak period). corridor. 10 (77%) of the fatal crashes occurred during dark-lighted conditions (occurring ›› From 2011 to 2015, there were a total of at nighttime in areas that are illuminated 9,851 crashes, with 24 of those resulting by streetlamps). in a fatality and 2,120 (22%) resulting in at least one injury (see Figure 10). Crashes per ›› From 2011 to 2015, 1.4% of crashes involved year along the corridor have been steadily pedestrians and cyclists (81 pedestrian and increasing over the five-year study period. 61 bicycle crashes); however, they made up The highest crash type was rear-end (57%) 30% of the fatalities along the corridor (7 of with sideswipe (15%) and angle (9%) being the 24 fatal crashes) – see Figure 11. the 2nd and 3rd highest crash types. The • From 88th Street to I-95 specifically, peak crash period coincides with the peak 1.6% of crashes involved pedestrians and congestion period, between 3:00 and 7:00 cyclists (61 pedestrian and 52 bicycle pm. Congestion is a factor in the prevailing crashes); however, they made up 38% of rear-end crash types. the fatalities along the corridor (5 of the 13 fatal crashes).
THE CORRIDOR EXPERIENCED AN AVERAGE OF 4 CRASHES PER DAY, EQUATING TO ~$650,000~ PER DAY IN COST AND UP TO 2 HOURS OF IMPACT TO TRAVELERS.1
1 Average crash cost of Moderate Injury of $162,240 per crash (FDOT FDM Table 122.6.2 ). Time impact calculated based on the District Six’s historical average annual roadway clearance per year from 2011-2015.
WWW.FDOTMIAMIDADE.COM/US1SOUTH 23 Fgurei 10 ALL CRASH LOCATIONS FOR 2011 THROUGH 2015
SW 37 AVE MIAMI
DOUGLAS RD CORAL GABLES SOUTH MIAMI S BAYSHORE DR KENDALL DR GRAND AVE SUNSET DR
PINECREST
OLD CUTLERLEGEND RD
APPROX. CITY LIMITS
SW 152 ST LEAST
GREATEST PALMETTO BAY X FATALITY
Source: FDOT CARS, 2011 - 2015
Fgurei 11 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLIST CRASH LOCATIONS FOR 2011 THROUGH 2015
SW 37 AVE MIAMI
DOUGLAS RD CORAL GABLES SOUTH MIAMI KENDALL DR GRAND AVE S BAYSHORE DR SUNSET DR
PINECREST
LEGEND OLD CUTLER RD APPROX. CITY LIMITS
SW 152 ST LEAST BUSWAY
GREATEST METRORAIL PALMETTO BAY X FATALITY
Source: FDOT CARS, 2011 - 2015
24 STATE ROAD (SR) 5/US 1/DIXIE HIGHWAY FROM SR 94/SW 88 STREET/KENDALL DRIVE TO SR 9/I-95 SURROUNDING CONTEXT, LAND Fgurei 12 COMMUTING TRAVEL PATTERNS USES AND REDEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL ›› The US 1 study area is home to over 60,000 106,400 WORKING POPULATION residents and over 100,000 jobs (see Figure 6% OF COUNTY RESIDENTS 12). For the County, population is expected 10% OF COUNTY JOBS to increase by ~24%~ over the next 25-years. Employment is expected to increase by ~32%~ for the same period.
• ~49,240~ people travel out of the study area to go to work whereas ~~95,000 WORK INFLOW / OUTFLOW (WITHIN 1 MILE OF STUDY CORRIDOR) people travel into the study area for work. In addition, ~~11,400 people live and work in ~ 95,000 ~ 11,400 ~ 49,240 the study area. Those who live and work in EMPLOYEES RESIDENTS RESIDENTS COMING INTO LIVE & WORK LEAVING THE the study area may benefit the most from THE STUDY IN THE STUDY STUDY AREA multimodal solutions along the corridor. AREA TO WORK AREA TO WORK Others would require network multimodal solutions. Figure 13 and Figure 14 show
the general placements of residents and Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates workers within the study area.
Fgurei 13 WHERE US 1 STUDY AREA RESIDENTS WORK
Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates
WWW.FDOTMIAMIDADE.COM/US1SOUTH 25 ›› Destinations along US 1 serve both study Coral Gables, and is planned in some areas area residents and the Southeast Florida south of the corridor. Land use decisions are region. The destinations include recreational the domain of local governments; therefore, facilities; shopping and entertainment areas; this need will be addressed through local educational institutions; and employment land use controls and decisions. locations, but often serve as anchors to concentrations of activity and drivers of LOCAL PLANNING EFFORTS transportation demand. The study area tends to support more mixes of land uses INDICATE THAT US 1 IS A FOCUS and is projected to become more mixed OF REDEVELOPMENT INTO with higher densities in the future. Transit oriented development is occurring around HIGHER INTENSITY LAND USES the Dadeland, South Miami, Douglas Road, THAT REQUIRE AND SUPPORT and Coconut Grove Metrorail stations. Redevelopment in this manner is also TRANSIT AND MULTIMODAL occurring in Downtown Miami, Little Havana, TRAVEL.
Fgurei 14 WHERE US 1 STUDY AREA EMPLOYEES LIVE
Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2011-2015 5-Year Estimates
26 STATE ROAD (SR) 5/US 1/DIXIE HIGHWAY FROM SR 94/SW 88 STREET/KENDALL DRIVE TO SR 9/I-95 ›› From SW 88th Street to I-95 specifically, US • US 1 from Granada Boulevard to I-95 1 has two differing context classifications would be considered Context Classification with varying ranges of allowable design 4, also known as “Urban General”. Based speeds according to the FDOT Design on the FDM, the allowable design speeds Manual (see Figure 15): range from 30 to 45 mph for Context Classification 4. • US 1 from SW 88th Street to Granada Boulevard would be considered Context Classification 5, also known as “Urban Center”. Based on the FDM, the allowable design speeds range from 25 to 35 mph for Context Classification 5.
Fgurei 15 CONTEXT CLASSIFICATION MAP
C1 - C2 - C2T - NATURAL RURAL C3R - C3C - C4 - C5 - C6 - RURAL SUBURBAN SUBURBAN URBAN URBAN URBAN TOWN Source: FDOT RESIDENTIALCOMMERCIAL GENERAL CENTER CORE
MIAMI SOUTH
MIAMI CORAL 37 SW I-95
GABLES 42 SW GRANADA BLVD TH AVE ND SW 62 SW SW 80 SW AVE KENDALL DR KENDALL ND TH AVE ST
LEGEND PINECREST C4 – URBAN GENERAL
SW 152 ST (30-45 MPH ALLOWABLE DESIGN SPEED RANGE)
C5 – URBAN CENTER (25-35 MPH ALLOWABLE DESIGN SPEED PALMETTO RANGE) BAY
WWW.FDOTMIAMIDADE.COM/US1SOUTH 27 SYSTEM INFRASTRUCTURE (FOR Fgurei 16 US 1 ROADWAY TYPICAL SECTIONS ALL MODES) SW 152ND ST TO SW 98TH ST ›› US 1 is a 6-lane divided facility with 42 signalized intersections within the original study limits and 27 from the truncated
study limits. 10’ 32’ 16’ 11’ 12’ 23’ 12’ 11’ 16’ 2’ Multiuse 4’ 2 Bus Drive Drive Drive Median Drive Drive Drive Curb 6’ Lane Curb Lanes Lane Lane Lane Lane Lane Lane Sidewalk ›› Lane widths generally vary from 10 to 12 feet (see Figure 16). In general, US 1 roadway design and typical sections are not SW 98TH ST TO 67TH AVE always consistently supportive of adjacent land uses.
2’ 13’ 12’ 14’ 18’ 14’ 12’ 13’ 7’ ›› There are intermittent sidewalks along 5’Curb Drive Drive Drive Median Drive Drive Drive Curb 6’ US 1, including the M-Path/the Underline Sidewalk Lane Lane Lane Lane Lane Lane Sidewalk along the northwest side under Metrorail. Sidewalks along US 1 and connecting to 67TH AVE TO CABALLERO BLVD US 1 are generally in poor shape. There is a noted lack of shade, and sidewalks lack a buffer to traffic lying directly adjacent to the road throughout much of the corridor. 100’ 22’ 12’ 10’ 11’ 17’ 11’ 10’ 12’ 6’ Elevated Median Drive Drive Drive Median Drive Drive Drive Curb 7’ Pedestrians were observed crossing mid- Rail Lane Lane Lane Lane Lane Lane Sidewalk block. This could be due to distances between crossings, long signal lengths, or CABALLERO BLVD TO RIVIERA DR inconvenient crossing locations.
• Average distance between signalized pedestrian crossings = 1,500 feet. 100’ 22’ 101/2’ 10’ 101/2’ 18’ 101/2’ 10’ 101/2’ 7’ Elevated Median Drive Drive Drive Median Drive Drive Drive Sidewalk • Typical pedestrian out-of-direction Rail Lane Lane Lane Lane Lane Lane travel (based on origins and destinations located 500’ from the intersection) is ~4.8 ~ RIVIERA DR TO BIRD AVE minutes.
• On-street bike lanes do not exist along US 1, there are no bike facilities along 5’ 10’ 10’ 10’ 19’ 10’ 10’ 10’ 6’ the southeast side of the corridor, 5’ Curb Drive Drive Drive Median Drive Drive Drive Curb 5’ Sidewalk Lane Lane Lane Lane Lane Lane Sidewalk and crossings of US 1 are difficult (see Figure 17). Therefore, bicycle access to destinations on the southeast side of US 1 BIRD AVE TO 27TH AVE is limited. There are currently well-utilized bicycle facilities near the study area, including those on Old Cutler Road and 80’ 25’ 11’ 10’ 11’ 11’ 11’ 10’ 11’ 5’ Bayshore Drive. The lack of connectivity Elevated Median Drive Drive Drive Median Drive Drive Drive Curb 5’ between US 1 and these facilities (as well Rail Lane Lane Lane Lane Lane Lane Sidewalk as across US 1) was a frequent issue raised by stakeholders. 27TH AVE TO I-95 • In general, there is a well-connected network of local streets, offering a number of potential routes for bicyclists. ‘However, 70’ 20’ 10’ 10’ 10’ 10’ 10’ 10’ 10’ Elevated Median Drive Drive Drive Median Drive Drive Drive these streets lack designated facilities Rail Lane Lane Lane Lane Lane Lane under existing conditions.
28 STATE ROAD (SR) 5/US 1/DIXIE HIGHWAY FROM SR 94/SW 88 STREET/KENDALL DRIVE TO SR 9/I-95 Fgurei 17 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE NETWORK MAP GRANADA BLVD SW 22 SW
HOMESTEAD EXT. OF FL TURNPIKE ND AVE
BIRD RD
REED RD S BAYSHORE DR GRAND AVE
SUNSET DR
SNAPPER CREEK EXPY
KENDALL DR LEGEND
OLD CUTLER RD
LUDLAM RD LUDLAM BUSWAY STATION
DON SHULA EXPYKILLIAN DR METRORAIL STATION
BIKE LANE
SHARED USE PATH
SW 152ND ST BIKE FACILITY GAP
NARROW SIDEWALK ON THE NARROW SIDEWALK ON BICYCLISTS USING SOUTH SIDE OF US 1 DOUGLAS RD CROSSWALK TO CROSS US 1
WWW.FDOTMIAMIDADE.COM/US1SOUTH 29 ›› Many Metrorail riders access the service by some cases, these lots are close to or over driving and parking at a park-and-ride lot. In capacity (see Figure 18).
Fgurei 18 METRORAIL AND BUSWAY PARK-N-RIDE LOT UTILIZATION
Source: Miami-Dade County DTPW, 2017
30 STATE ROAD (SR) 5/US 1/DIXIE HIGHWAY FROM SR 94/SW 88 STREET/KENDALL DRIVE TO SR 9/I-95 ›› Metrorail and Busway transit stations ›› The SMART Plan was developed by Miami- are bounded by busy arterials which act Dade County and the TPO and adopted as barriers to access. These arterials are by the TPO Governing Board on April often wide, designed for high speeds and 21, 2016 – mid-process of this study. The volumes, and are uninviting. Drivers were SMART Plan is a comprehensive plan which observed not yielding to pedestrians. There advances six rapid transit corridors to the is poor or no pedestrian connectivity within Project Development and Environment park-and-ride lots and between the lots and (PD&E) study phase to determine the costs the stations, forcing pedestrians to walk in benefits and potential sources of funding the street. for the projects. The South Dade Transitway northern limits is SW 88th Street/Kendall PAST AND ON-GOING RELATED Drive. Due to this, the US 1 Corridor Study AND/OR INFLUENTIAL EFFORTS southern limit changed from SW 152nd WITHIN THE CORRIDOR AND Street to SW 88th Street once the SMART REGION-AT-LARGE plan was adopted. › There is currently a plan to construct › ›› Local Governments Comprehensive Plans The Underline, an urban trail and linear acknowledge US 1 as a major thoroughfare park, along the M-Path from Dadeland to that provides direct links to transit and Downtown Miami. The Underline Framework controlled-access highways. Plan identified the need for improvements to cross US 1 and has identified grade ›› Local and regional planning efforts separated crossings for five intersections consistently indicate a desire for more and other types of improvements for almost efficient automobile travel, better pedestrian every intersection along the corridor. and bicycle access along and across US 1, and better access to transit.
BEFORE AND AFTER IMAGES OF THE UNDERLINE
BRICKELL BACKYARD PROMENADE NOW BRICKELL BACKYARD PROMENADE AFTER
Source: www.theunderline.org/ Source: www.theunderline.org/
WWW.FDOTMIAMIDADE.COM/US1SOUTH 31 COMMUNITY AND STAKEHOLDER INPUT ›› Feedback was collected via 50+ stakeholder interviews, two technical meetings with the PAT, and nearly 450 survey responses that highlighted traffic and pedestrian/bicyclist safety as the top priorities.
PUBLIC INPUT ROUND 1
443 SURVEYS COLLECTED BETWEEN AUG. 3RD – SEPT. 9TH 24 4 HOW FREQUENTLY DO YOU USE US 1? Few times a week Rarely