November 3, 2021 CTAC Virtual Workshop
Download as PPTX, PDF0 likes168 views
The Miami-Dade TPO Citizens’ Transportation Advisory Committee (CTAC) held a virtual workshop on November 3, 2021, to discuss updates on the NW 36th Street Multimodal Corridor and the FDOT Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) policy plan. The workshop included guidelines for engagement, a review of public concerns from previous meetings, and strategies for project implementation, including capacity improvements and operational enhancements. Attendees received presentations and were encouraged to participate through comments and questions regarding the discussed transportation plans.
November 3, 2021 CTAC Virtual Workshop
- 1. Miami-Dade TPO Citizens’ Transportation Advisory Committee (CTAC) Virtual Workshop Wednesday, November 3, 2021
- 2. CTAC Agenda I. Rules of Engagement II. NW 36th Street Multimodal Corridor Phase III Update Study III. FDOT Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) Policy Plan Update
- 3. 3 MIAMI-DADE TPO CTAC VIRTUAL WORKSHOP NOVEMBER 3, 2021 Rules of Engagement I. RULES OF ENGAGEMENT
- 4. MIAMI-DADE TPO CTAC VIRTUAL WORKSHOP NOVEMBER 3, 2021 GUIDELINES 4 Rules of Engagement • This workshop is being held virtually and is being recorded. • If you experience technical difficulties, please contact Lisa Juan at 617 453 4269 or at lisa.juan@kimley-horn.com so that a member of our technical support team may assist you. • All Attendees will remain muted throughout the duration of this workshop. If you wish to provide a comment, please use the “Raise Hand” button. The Chair will first acknowledge you then your microphone will be unmuted. Please proceed by first providing your full name, agency represented, and then your comment. Your microphone will remain unmuted until the comment has been fully addressed. • In compliance with all applicable rules and regulations, no actions or motions shall be permitted. • Discussions shall be limited to matters listed in the published workshop agenda. • Permissible discussions include: • Presentations • Questions and answers • Comments related to the presentation(s) • Any committee member deviating from these guidelines will be reminded as to the limitations on any such discussion. • Please hold comments until presentations are concluded.
- 5. 5 MIAMI-DADE TPO CTAC VIRTUAL WORKSHOP NOVEMBER 3, 2021 NW 36th Street Multimodal Corridor Phase III Update Study II. NW 36TH STREET MULTIMODAL CORRIDOR PHASE III UPDATE STUDY
- 6. MULTIMODAL CORRIDOR STUDY S R 9 4 8 / N W 3 6 S T R E E T F R O M S R 8 2 6 / P A L M E T T O E X P R E S S W A Y T O S R 5 / U S 1 FM NO. 436426-1-12-01 Citizens’ Transportation Advisory Committee (CTAC) 5:30 p.m., November 3, 2021 DISTRICT SIX 6
- 7. Meet our Team FDOT PROJECT MANAGER Carlos Castro CONSULTANT PROJECT MANAGER Daphne Spanos, P.E. EXP U.S. Services Inc. COMMUNITY OUTREACH SPECIALIST Monica Diaz ISC Group • Janus Research • Metro Consulting Group • Tindale Oliver • PE Engineering Subconsultants • CDM Smith • CH Perez & Associates • CTS Engineering • ISC Group • Lochner • IF Rooks 7
- 8. Welcome - Meeting Agenda 1. Overview: • Introductions • Project Location Map • Previous Studies • Summary of Previous Meetings 2. Alternatives Process: • Discussion of Strategies • Macroscopic Level Modeling • Comparative Matrix • Discussion of Alternatives • Concepts • Traffic Analysis • Pros/Cons • Next Steps • Schedule • Questions? 8
- 9. Project Location Map The Study area is 8.6 miles long from SR 826/Palmetto Expressway to SR 5/US 1 DORAL VIRGINIA GARDENS MIAMI SPRINGS HIALEAH 4 CITY OF MIAMI Western Segment Eastern Segment Iron Triangle
- 11. Summary of Previous Meeting 11 Meeting with CTAC • TPO member asked if project was an elevated roadway/viaduct and if there is method to quantify whether project improved conditions • Stated that improvements should go further west than Palmetto Expressway • TPO member asked if SR 112 would be extended and suggested extending over Perimeter Rd instead of NW 36 St • TPO member mentioned keeping transit and bike lanes • TPO member stated support for midblock crosswalks JULY 7, 2021
- 12. 12 PAT Meeting #1: • Elevated section considered in the Western Segment • Interest in smart lights • Iron Triangle recommendations • Review emergency evacuation • Review land use changes in City of Miami • Integrate land use and transportation decisions Summary of Public Meetings (#1) Public Workshop #1: • Missing or unsafe bicycle and pedestrian facilities • Consistent sidewalks throughout the corridor • Integration with SMART plan • Improvements to exit SR 112/I-195 and US 1 • Potential impacts to businesses and residences • Intersection improvements Miami Springs City Council Meeting: • Inquired about study timeline • Asked about Iron Triangle Interchange Study and any plans to connect SR 112 to SR 826 • Concerned about freight traffic • Asked to consider light rail on the corridor Main Conclusions: • Concerns from cities about elevated section • Need for bicycle/pedestrian facilities • Project impacts to businesses and residences • Concerns about freight traffic increasing • Incorporation of light rail transit
- 13. 13 Summary of Public Meetings (#2) Main Conclusions: • Concerns from cities about elevated section • Need for bicycle/pedestrian facilities • Concerns about freight traffic increasing • Preference for Traffic Operations/TSM&O improvements PAT Meeting #2: • Concerns with Iron Triangle Study and proposed extension bringing challenges to the community • Increase in freight mobility causing more air/noise pollution • Consider SR 836 more viable to expand for east- west movements • Concerned about travel speeds with no buffer between the sidewalk • Information needed for the bike network plan • Sidewalks should have buffer from roadway • Midblock crossings can be added without a raised median Public Workshop #2: • Trucks from NW 25 Street should be rerouted to avoid Miami Springs • Goal to increase freight traffic or make it flow faster • Concern using the Palmetto Expressway on/off ramps • Don’t want overpass on NW 36 Street • Recommend traffic operations improvements • Focus should not be on bicycle/pedestrian • Resident proposed turbo lanes on NW 36 Street • Better sidewalks and beautification Elected Officials Briefings: • Miami Springs: Like TSM&O options, against elevated roadways, for wider sidewalks on north side, and focus on SR 836 • Virginia Gardens: Opposed any elevated road in area, focus on NW 25 Street, and extend SR 112 ramps past Le Jeune Road • City of Miami: Crucial to balance multimodal needs in east, and evaluate I-195 ramps • District Five: Interest in transit connectivity, against sharrows, better bike facilities, and improve signage at Iron Triangle
- 14. Discussion of Strategies DORAL VIRGINIA GARDENS MIAMI SPRINGS HIALEAH 8 CITY OF MIAMI Western Segment Eastern Segment Iron Triangle 1. Capacity – Widening or Grade Separation 2. Potential Lane Repurposing – for parking/buffered bicycle/transit 3. TSM&O – Use Right of Way more effectively
- 15. Multiple Strategies Were Considered in the Western Segment 15
- 16. Multiple Strategies Were Considered in the Eastern Segment 16
- 17. At-Grade Build Capacity Improvements Widening At Grade (8 Lane) Elevated Build (4+2) Elevated Build (6+2) Strategies to provide additional capacity N Y Y M Y M - if transit Strategies to reduce SOV N Y N N N Y Strategies to increase transit usage N M Maybe - if transit lane N Y M - if transit TSMO/ITS N Y Y Y Y Y Traffic Demand management N N N N N M - if transit Pedestrian, Transit, Bicycle N Y Maybe - if widening includes enhancements to bike/ped facilities Y Y Y Strategies for Safety Deficiencies N Y Maybe Y Y Y Strategies for Future land use to encourage transit and reduce SOV N N N N N Y Strategies to improve freight mobility and accessibily N Y Y Y Y N Truck parking considerations N M N N N N Fullfillment of Purpose and Need Poor Good Fair Fair Fair Fair Public Perception/Feedback Fair Good Fair Fair Fair Fair Emergency Vehicles Times Saving Poor Fair Good Fair Good Poor Safety and Connectivity Poor Fair Poor Fair Good Good High Level Project Costs Good Good Poor Poor Poor Good Cultural Environment Good Good Poor Fair Fair Good Physical Environment Good Good Poor Poor Poor Fair Traffic Operations and Safety Poor Good Good Poor Fair Fair Multimodal Fair Good Good Good Good Good Constructability Good Good Fair Poor Poor Fair Lane Repurposing * Elevated Build Capacity No-Build TSM&O 11 Matrix A preliminary matrix was developed for GO, No-Go, and possible consideration
- 18. Discussion of Alternatives DORAL VIRGINIA GARDENS MIAMI SPRINGS HIALEAH 12 CITY OF MIAMI Western Segment Iron Triangle Eastern Segment • No-Build Alternative • TSM&O Alternative • Capacity Build Alternative - 6+2 Elevated • Lane Repurposing Build Alternative Two Build Alternatives
- 19. No-Build Alternative 13 Existing Conditions: NW 36 Street and Perimeter Drive • Projects already programmed in the 2045 Miami-Dade County Cost Feasible LRTP such as: • Iron Triangle • I-195 • Projects under construction by Miami-Dade County • NE 2 Avenue NE 36 St./NE 2 Ave. I-195 Iron Triangle
- 20. No-Build Alternative Pros/Cons 14 PROS: • Less costly than Build Alternatives • Supported by Virginia Gardens/Miami Springs • Less disruptive to businesses/community CONS: • Does not address Purpose and Need • Does not address future traffic conditions • Does not improve bicycle/pedestrian conditions • Does not improve high crash locations
- 21. Capacity Build Alternative – 6+2 Elevated SR 948/NW 36 St. from SR 826 to NW 42 Ave./Le Jeune Rd. DORAL VIRGINIA GARDENS MIAMI SPRINGS HIALEAH 15 CITY OF MIAMI Capacity Build Alternative 6+2 Elevated Iron Triangle TSM&O/Minor Operational Improvements
- 22. Capacity Build Alternative – 6+2 Elevated SR 948/NW 36 St. from SR 826 to NW 42 Ave./Le Jeune Rd. 16
- 23. 17 PROS: • Previous Studies and Plans have recommended it (Superarterial/ grade separations) • NW 72 Avenue/Milam Dairy Road and Le Jeune Road identified as high crash locations for motorized and non-motorized • Beneficial for freight, trade, and Miami International Airport • Industrial/commercial land use • Increases capacity and reliability • Economic growth/Support for MIA, Cargo Expansion • May increase safety and reduce delays • Is on the National Highway Freight Network • Is an evacuation route • 2045 LRTP Need • Bicycle/pedestrian facilities can be improved and enhanced at-grade • Can provide improved regional connectivity (east-west) as supported by Connecting the Highways Missing Links • Can provide future Automated Vehicle Corridor CONS: • Cost • Not favored by Virginia Gardens/Miami Springs • Visual/aesthetics • Visibility of local businesses • Traffic passing through area without stopping to support local business • Constructability • Noise Capacity Build Alternative – 6+2 Elevated SR 948/NW 36 St. from SR 826 to NW 42 Ave./Le Jeune Rd. Pros/Cons
- 24. Lane Repurposing Build Alternative NW 37 Ave. to SR 5/US 1 • On-street Parking • Transit Lane • Bicycle Lane DORAL VIRGINIA GARDENS MIAMI SPRINGS HIALEAH 18 CITY OF MIAMI TSM&O/Minor Operational Improvements Iron Triangle Lane Repurposing NW 37th Ave to US 1
- 25. 25 Existing No-Build Lane Repurposing Build Alternative – Transit Lane NW 37 Ave. to NW 17 Ave. (sample view shown from NW 25 Ave. to NW 23 Ave.)
- 26. 20 Existing No-Build Lane Repurposing Build Alternative – Bicycle Lane NW 37 Ave. to NW 17 Ave. (sample view shown from NW 25 Ave. to NW 23 Ave.)
- 27. 21 PROS • Safety, Reduction of Crashes and Speed • Economic Development • Vision Zero FDOT • Supportive of Transit, Bicycle and Pedestrian improvements • Connections to Tri-Rail, Coastal Link, Metrorail, Brightline, municipal trolleys, future SMART Plan, future Park and Ride • TIP • 2045 LRTP • Miami-Dade Bike Plan • City of Miami Bike Plan • Local land use changes CONS • Worse Traffic Congestion • Construction/affect businesses • Cost Lane Repurposing Build Alternative Pros/Cons
- 28. Transportation Systems Management and Operations (TSM&O) Alternative SR 948/NW 36 St. from SR 826/Palmetto Expwy to SR 5/US 1 DORAL VIRGINIA GARDENS MIAMI SPRINGS HIALEAH 22 CITY OF MIAMI TSM&O Iron Triangle
- 29. 23 TSM&O Alternative SR 948/NW 36 St. from SR 826/Palmetto Expwy to SR 5/US 1 NW 36 Street TSM&O Improvements Along NW 36 Street TSM&O Improvements NW 72 Avenue Signal Optimization & retiming Additional NB Through Lane Extend SB Left turn lane Extend NB Left turn lane NW 67 Avenue Signal retiming Additional EB/WB through lane NW 57 Avenue Add Extra SB right turn lane Additional EB/WB through lane NW 42 Avenue EB right turn permissive + overlap phase South River Drive Optimize Signal timing from LeJeune Road to NW North River Drive Provide Exclusive WB right turn lane Optimize Signal Timing NW 37 Avenue Add SB left turn lane NW 32 Avenue Extend EB left turn lane NW 27 Avenue Extend EB/WB left turn lane Add one NB right turn lane Optimize Signal Timing NW 18 Avenue Optimize Signal Timing NW 17 Avenue Extend WB left turn lane Optimize Signal Timing NW 14 Avenue Extend EB left turn lane Optimize Signal Timing NW 12 Avenue Optimize Signal Timing NW 10 Avenue Optimize Signal Timing NW 7 Avenue Optimize Signal Timing NW 5 Avenue Conver northbound approach to one left turn lane, one through lane, and one right turn lane Optimize Signal Timing NW 2 Avenue Extend EB left turn lane NE 2 Avenue SB right turn only at NE 2nd Avenue approach (County intersection project) US 1/Biscayne Blvd Optimize Signal timing Add SB Right turn lane Add WB through movement
- 30. 24 • Previous Studies • Doral Freight Plan, National Highway System Intermodal Connectors Signal Retiming Study, 2045 LRTP, TIP, Grade Separation Study, Connecting the Highways Missing link, Superarterial Network Study, SR 112 Extension Study • Existing Roadway Conditions including Context Classification • Existing Traffic Conditions • Safety/High Crash Location at NW 77 Ave. and NW 72 Ave. • Public/Agency Involvement • Access management/Driveways (Potential Median/Driveway Modifications) • Most of this segment is not compliant with access management standards regarding driveways and median spacing connections • The study team recommends the consolidation of some driveways and medians • One median closure recommended between NW 74 Ave. and NW 72 Ave. to improve access management • Supports superarterial • Safety TSM&O Alternative SR 948/NW 36 St. from NW 77 Ave. to NW 72 Ave./Milam Dairy Rd. Potential Potential Potential
- 31. TSM&O Alternative SR 948/NW 36 St. at NW 72 Ave (Milam Dairy Rd.) 1. Extend NB left turn lane up to the bridge to avoid impacts to it. 2. Add NB through lane. This will require converting the current right turn “trap lane” into the through lane and widening the road to add a designated right turn lane. 3. Eliminate the WB merge lane. 4. Extend the SB left turn lane up to NW 41 St. This will require pushing/realigning the NB lanes to the east. 5. Provide High Emphasis Crosswalks at the intersection. 25 2 1 3 4 5
- 33. 27 TSM&O Alternative Right Turn Lanes
- 34. 28 PROS • Previous Studies and Plans have recommended it repeatedly • It is a low-cost solution • Maximizes existing roadway • Is relatively quick to implement • Can increase safety and capacity • Can be implemented with other FDOT or local and county projects • Is not as disruptive to community • Favored by Virginia Gardens/Miami Springs CONS • Does not fully address Purpose and Need TSM&O Alternative Pros/Cons
- 35. Short Term Improvements – Possible Options SR 948/NW 36 St. from SR 826/Palmetto Expwy to SR 5/US 1 29
- 36. 30 • No-Build Alternative • 2 Build Alternatives • Capacity Elevated 6+2 • Lane Repurposing • TSM&O • Does alternative meet Purpose and Need? ‒ Mobility for: Freight, Bicyclists, Pedestrians, Auto ‒ Environment ‒ Economic • Technical Analysis (Traffic Modeling, Design) • Short Term, Mid-Term, and Long-Term Solutions • Continuous Public and Agency Input – Alternatives Public Workshop and Final Public Workshop Next Steps
- 37. Project Schedule June 2021: Jan 2021 – Oct 2021: October 2021: January 2022: April 2022: 2020 2022 Public Outreach 31 PAT and Hybrid Corridor Workshop #2 Travel Forecasting, Conceptual Analysis and Development PAT and Stakeholder Group Meetings Hybrid Alternatives Corridor Workshop #3 Final Public Workshop and Recommendations
- 38. Questions? For More Information: FDOT PROJECT MANAGER Carlos Castro E-mail: carlos.castro@dot.state.fl.us COMMUNITY OUTREACH SPECIALIST Monica Diaz E-mail: monica@iscprgroup.com Phone: (305) 573-0089 Join us on Social Media: Facebook and YouTube: @MyFDOTMiami Instagram and Twitter: @MyFDOT_Miami Visit the Project Website: www.fdotmiamidade.com/nw36stplanning CONSULTANT PROJECT MANAGER Daphne Spanos, P.E. E-mail: daphne.spanos@exp.com Phone: (305) 631-2208 32
- 39. 39 MIAMI-DADE TPO CTAC VIRTUAL WORKSHOP NOVEMBER 3, 2021 FDOT Strategic Intermodal System (SIS) Policy Plan Update III. FDOT STRATEGIC INTERMODAL SYSTEM (SIS) POLICY PLAN UPDATE
- 40. presented by presented to SIS Policy Plan Update Shereen Yee Fong District 6 SIS Coordinator Florida Department of Transportation November 3, 2021 Miami-Dade County Transportation Planning Organization – Citizens Advisory Committee
- 41. Today’s Purpose • Describe process for updating SIS Policy Plan • Share initial working list of potential policy changes • Receive input from regional and local partners • SIS Virtual Room
- 42. Today’s Agenda • Introductions • SIS Policy Plan update overview • Requirements, process, schedule • Questions of clarification • SIS Policy Plan focus areas • Working list of potential policy changes • Discussion • Next steps
- 43. s. 339. 64, F.S. Strategic Intermodal System Plan (1) The department shall develop, in cooperation with metropolitan planning organizations, regional planning councils, local governments, and other transportation providers, a Strategic Intermodal System Plan. The plan shall be consistent with the Florida Transportation Plan developed pursuant to s. 339.155 and shall be updated at least once every 5 years, subsequent to updates of the Florida Transportation Plan. (3)(a) During the development of updates to the Strategic Intermodal System Plan, the department shall provide metropolitan planning organizations, regional planning councils, local governments, transportation providers, affected public agencies, and citizens with an opportunity to participate in and comment on the development of the update.
- 44. Strategic Intermodal System Plan Statutory Requirements, F.S. 339.64 Required Elements Where Covered Needs assessment • SIS Policy Plan (policy direction) • Multimodal Unfunded Needs Plan • Work Program Funding Eligibility Guidance Prioritization process • SIS Policy Plan (policy direction) • Work Program Funding Eligibility Guidance Map of SIS facilities • SIS Policy Plan (policy direction) • Adopted Criteria • SIS Atlas Finance plan based on anticipated revenues, including 10- and 20-year cost feasible components • SIS Policy Plan (policy direction) • SIS Funding Strategy (5-Year Plan, Second 5-Year Plan, Cost-Feasible Plan Highway Component) Assessment of impacts of proposed improvements to SIS corridors on military installations • SIS Policy Plan (policy direction) • Periodic Study
- 45. How Is the SIS Policy Plan Developed? Review FTP goals and objectives Review current trends and conditions Gather input from partners and public Final plan adopted
- 46. Alignment with State, Regional, Local Plans
- 47. SIS Policy Plan Focus Areas Align with FTP 47
- 48. Schedule Targeted Outreach Final SIS Policy Plan Adopted Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Early 2022 Draft the SIS Policy Plan Post Draft SIS Policy Plan for Public Comment
- 49. Statewide Partner and Public Input 49 • FTP/SIS Implementation Committee • MPOAC • Florida Regional Councils Association • Florida Association of Counties • Florida League of Cities • Statewide modal partners • Florida Defense Alliance • Environmental Partners Working Group
- 50. Anticipated 2022 SIS Policy Plan Elements OBJECTIVES FOCUS AREAS POLICIES/STRATEGIES IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE
- 51. 2016 SIS Policy Plan Objectives Ensure the efficiency and reliability of multimodal transportation connectivity between Florida’s economic regions and between Florida and other states and nations Expand transportation choices and integrate modes for interregional trips Provide transportation systems to support Florida as a global hub for trade, tourism, talent, innovation, business, and investment INTERREGIONAL CONNECTIVITY INTERMODAL CONNECTIVITY ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
- 52. SIS Policy Questions DESIGNATION POLICIES What types of facilities should be part of the SIS? What types of criteria should be used to identify these facilities? NEEDS & PRIORITIZATION POLICIES What types of investments should be funded by statewide SIS funds? What factors should be considered in setting priorities? PLANNING & COLLABORATION POLICIES How should FDOT work with partners to accomplish SIS objectives?
- 53. Designation Criteria (examples) Facility Criterion Urban fixed guideway transit corridor • Connecting multiple urbanized area counties and serving as a regionally significant facility within a region. Highway corridor • Interstate or high capacity tolled facility. • Limited access facility (access level 1) with a SIS facility or limited access facility (access level 1) at each end • NHS facility that connects to an urbanized area outside of Florida that is not already served by a SIS facility. • Controlled access facility (access level 2 or 3) connecting two or more urbanized areas with a SIS facility at each end. • Corridor connecting one or more urbanized areas with or through a Rural Area of Opportunity (RAO) and having an AADT of at least 6,000 or an AADTT of at least 1,000 with a SIS facility at each end.
- 54. Defining Interregional • Statutory guidance • S. 339.61, F.S.: “facilities and service of statewide and interregional significance” • Application • Designation initially tied to Enterprise Florida economic regions; amended following 2016 plan to be based on urbanized area definitions • Interregional connectivity one of three primary objectives for identifying needs/setting priorities • 2022 Policy Plan update • Clarify/redefine interregional for designation and planning purposes
- 55. Funding Eligibility (examples) Facility Type Eligible Uses Railroad corridors Planning, design, and construction of sidings; spurs; double tracking; rail yards; new rail line; track upgrade; grade separation; capital improvements for new passenger service along a SIS rail corridor; and raising or replacement non-SIS bridges that create a clearance and capacity constraint of a SIS corridor Urban fixed guideway transit Road based systems: Planning, design, and construction of additional lanes; new facilities; enlarged bridges; intersection/interchange modifications; and special use lanes Rail-based systems: Planning, design, and construction of sidings; spurs; double tracking; rail yards; new rail line; track upgrade; and grade separation Highways Capacity projects (added lanes, special use lanes, interchange/intersection improvements, new facilities, etc.) Supporting facilities (e.g., park n ride lots, truck parking) with capacity benefits Infrastructure-based ITS capital projects with capacity benefits on constrained corridors
- 56. Defining Capacity • Statutory guidance • S. 339.64, F.S.: objectives of economic development, improved mobility, and increased intermodal connectivity • S. 339.135, F.S.: primary FDOT work program funding through discretionary highway capacity funds • Application • Multiple state and federal funding sources, each with unique definitions and requirements • SIS funding generally focused on adding physical capacity; some ability to fund TSMO or other operational improvements • SIS funding generally limited to designated SIS facilities; some ability to fund projects “in support of the SIS” • 2022 SIS Policy Plan update • Expand flexibility to support emerging mobility solutions, increase emphasis on safety, reliability, resilience
- 57. Urban Mobility & Connectivity 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 MILLIONS 7 Largest Urban Areas Other Urban Areas Rural Areas SIS DELAY FOCUSED IN LARGE URBAN AREAS
- 58. Urban Mobility & Connectivity Potential Policy Changes Redefine capacity projects; include mobility and reliability projects Balance interregional and regional/local needs; expand multimodal travel options both within and between regions Provide flexibility for emerging mobility solutions Provide flexibility for use of SIS funds off-SIS to improve performance of SIS (e.g., transit, parallel arterials) Strengthen collaboration with MPOs, local governments to support end-to-end trips Strengthen collaboration with MPOs, local governments on multimodal corridor plans addressing SIS and non-SIS facilities Improve coordination with land use decisions Reassess definition of interregional; focus on people and freight movement by better identifying which facilities carry significant interregional flows of people and goods DESIGNATION POLICIES NEEDS & PRIORITIZATION POLICIES PLANNING & COLLABORATION POLICIES
- 59. Discussion • Comments on this draft working list? • Are we on the right track? • Anything missing? • Suggested additions/revisions? • Major concerns?
- 60. Flooding (100-year) SIS Corridors and Hubs Resilience 2020 HURRICANE SEASON MAY 2020 NOAA FORECAST 13-19 NAMED STORMS 6-10 HURRICANES 3-6 MAJOR HURRICANES ACTUAL 30 NAMED STORMS 13 HURRICANES 6 MAJOR HURRICANES
- 61. Resilience Potential Policy Changes Identify resilience strategies as part of capacity needs and projects Expand SIS funding eligibility for adaptation/retrofit of existing infrastructure Expand definition of capacity to include increasing redundancy or providing alternatives to mitigate vulnerabilities Expand collaboration with MPOs, RPCs, water management districts, local governments, regional collaboratives on resilience strategies Strengthen coordination with other state agencies (DEO, DEM, DEP) to leverage programs and funding Consider vulnerabilities in SIS community and environmental screening process DESIGNATION POLICIES NEEDS & PRIORITIZATION POLICIES PLANNING & COLLABORATION POLICIES
- 62. Technology & Innovation Electric Vehicle Deployment Scenarios
- 63. Technology & Innovation Potential Policy Changes DESIGNATION POLICIES NEEDS & PRIORITIZATION POLICIES Redefine SIS capacity projects to include technology solutions for improving efficiency and reliability Expand SIS funding eligibility to accommodate technology infrastructure (EV charging stations, smart signals, locational reference markers, etc.) Provide more flexibility for funding emerging mobility solutions PLANNING & COLLABORATION POLICIES Develop technology deployment plan for SIS Expand partnerships with technology providers, manufacturers, and R&D institutions No recommended changes
- 64. Discussion • Comments on this draft working list? • Are we on the right track? • Anything missing? • Suggested additions/revisions? • Major concerns?
- 65. Safety 4,182 4,593 4,740 4,073 3,881 715 741 739 765 813 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 Fatalities/Serious Injuries ALL ROADWAYS SIS ONLY 1.43 Fatalities per 100M VMT 1.10 Fatalities per 100M VMT Roadway Fatalities (2015-2019 Average)
- 66. Safety Potential Policy Changes Increase emphasis safety as factor for setting priorities Increase flexibility for including safety features in SIS capacity projects Address emphasis areas (lane departure, commercial vehicle, bottlenecks, modal conflicts) Provide safe alternatives to highways for interregional travel Support aggressive deployment of in-vehicle and roadside safety technologies Work with partners to identify targeted strategies for improving safety on SIS facilities DESIGNATION POLICIES NEEDS & PRIORITIZATION POLICIES PLANNING & COLLABORATION POLICIES No recommended changes
- 67. Rural Mobility & Connectivity 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 DAILY VMT MILLIONS 7 Largest Urban Areas Other Urban Areas Rural Areas VMT GROWTH ON THE SIS STRONGEST IN LARGE URBAN AREAS AND RURAL AREAS
- 68. Rural Mobility & Connectivity Potential Policy Changes Redefine capacity projects to include rural connectivity and mobility improvements Improve connectivity to rural activity centers Expand funding eligibility for broadband/technology solutions for rural connectivity Strengthen rural corridor planning to identify programs of projects for SIS and regional corridors Strengthen collaboration with local governments on rural connectivity to support economic, community, environmental priorities Align SIS, NHS, freight network, evacuation route, other corridor designations Reassess SIS highway corridor criteria consistent with statutory emphasis on controlled access standards Consider context classification in community and environmental screening process DESIGNATION POLICIES NEEDS & PRIORITIZATION POLICIES PLANNING & COLLABORATION POLICIES
- 69. Discussion • Comments on this draft working list? • Are we on the right track? • Anything missing? • Suggested additions/revisions? • Major concerns?
- 70. Implications for Southeast Florida 70 • Develop integrated approach for enhancing both interregional and regional mobility • Expand ability to leverage SIS and other funding sources to support alternatives to traditional highway capacity expansion • Expand ability to use SIS funds on non-SIS facilities to improve performance of the SIS • Increase emphasis on improving safety, reliability, and resilience of the SIS • Accommodate impact of emerging technologies on the SIS
- 71. What’s Next? • Complete SIS Policy Plan in early 2022 • Update detailed SIS policies and criteria • Designation Criteria and Thresholds • SIS Funding Eligibility Guidance • Update SIS long-range plans • Cost Feasible Plan • Unfunded Needs Plan • Collaborate with MPOs, RPCs, other partners to demonstrate new approaches (e.g., flexibility)
- 72. How to Provide Additional Comments • Complete public comment form and submit via email at any time to SISinfo@dot.state.fl.us • Share additional thoughts through upcoming scheduled briefings • Provide comments via the SIS Virtual Room • SIS Virtual Room Florida Transportation Plan • https://youtu.be/ZeGGzOxmMeE
- 73. Questions? GERALD GOOSBY Systems Implementation Office Florida Department of Transportation Gerald.Goosby@dot.state.fl.us 850-414-4287 www.fdot.gov/planning/systems
- 74. 74 MIAMI-DADE TPO CTAC VIRTUAL WORKSHOP NOVEMBER 3, 2021 NEXT MEETING Next Meeting Wednesday, December 8, 2021