SR-997/Krome Avenue SR-997/Krome Avenue SR-997/Krome Avenue - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
sr 997 krome avenue sr 997 krome avenue sr 997 krome
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

SR-997/Krome Avenue SR-997/Krome Avenue SR-997/Krome Avenue - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Nov 26, 2023 199 likes •496 views

SR-997/Krome Avenue SR-997/Krome Avenue SR-997/Krome Avenue SR-997/Krome Avenue th Avenue (South) th Avenue (South) SW 177 th SW 177 Avenue (South) SW 177 th SW 177 Avenue (South) th Street to SW 136 th Street) th Street to SW 136 th Street)

slide-1
SLIDE 1

SR-997/Krome Avenue SR-997/Krome Avenue SW 177 SW 177 th

th Avenue (South)

Avenue (South)

(From SW 296 (From SW 296 th

th Street to SW 136

Street to SW 136 th

th Street)

Street)

FM # 249614-4-22-01 FM # 249614-4-22-01

SR-997/Krome Avenue SR-997/Krome Avenue SW 177 SW 177 th

th Avenue (South)

Avenue (South)

(From SW 296 (From SW 296 th

th Street to SW 136

Street to SW 136 th

th Street)

Street)

FM # 249614-4-22-01 FM # 249614-4-22-01 Public Informational Workshop Public Informational Workshop May 31, 2006 May 31, 2006 Public Informational Workshop Public Informational Workshop May 31, 2006 May 31, 2006

slide-2
SLIDE 2

PLANNING RIGHT OF WAY ACQUISITION CONSTRUCTION PROJECT DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENT STUDY (PD & E) DESIGN

Project Phases Project Phases Project Phases Project Phases

slide-3
SLIDE 3
  • Identification of study area
  • Corridor definition and analysis
  • Environmental analysis and assessment

– Wetlands, Endangered Species, Cultural Features, Contamination Assessment, Air/Noise, and Parks/Recreation

  • Community Features assessment

– Schools, Churches, Cemeteries, Emergency facilities, etc.

  • Preliminary conceptual engineering
  • Coordination with federal, state and local agencies and

governmental entities

  • Public Involvement Process
  • Identification of study area
  • Corridor definition and analysis
  • Environmental analysis and assessment

– Wetlands, Endangered Species, Cultural Features, Contamination Assessment, Air/Noise, and Parks/Recreation

  • Community Features assessment

– Schools, Churches, Cemeteries, Emergency facilities, etc.

  • Preliminary conceptual engineering
  • Coordination with federal, state and local agencies and

governmental entities

  • Public Involvement Process

What is a PD& E Study? What is a PD& E Study? What is a PD& E Study? What is a PD& E Study?

slide-4
SLIDE 4

PD& E Study Process PD& E Study Process Diagram Diagram PD& E Study Process PD& E Study Process Diagram Diagram

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Location Map Location Map Location Map Location Map

BEGIN PROJECT BEGIN PROJECT END PROJECT END PROJECT

  • From SW 296th Street

to SW 136th Street

  • Approximately 10

miles

  • Rural Principal

Arterial

  • Land Uses
  • Agricultural
  • Commercial
  • Residential
  • Protected Land
  • From SW 296th Street

to SW 136th Street

  • Approximately 10

miles

  • Rural Principal

Arterial

  • Land Uses
  • Agricultural
  • Commercial
  • Residential
  • Protected Land
slide-6
SLIDE 6

Begin Project End Project

Project Corridor Project Corridor Project Corridor Project Corridor

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Need for the Project Need for the Project Need for the Project Need for the Project

  • Florida Intrastate Highway System (FIHS)
  • Strategic Intermodal System (SIS)
  • Krome Avenue is the only north-south artery on the western

fringes of Miami-Dade County

  • Important route for hurricane evacuation and post-disaster

recovery

  • Transitions with projects at both ends of the corridor
  • Corridor consistently fails crash Safety Ratios
  • Florida Intrastate Highway System (FIHS)
  • Strategic Intermodal System (SIS)
  • Krome Avenue is the only north-south artery on the western

fringes of Miami-Dade County

  • Important route for hurricane evacuation and post-disaster

recovery

  • Transitions with projects at both ends of the corridor
  • Corridor consistently fails crash Safety Ratios
slide-8
SLIDE 8
  • Roadway Safety
  • Traffic Mobility
  • Roadway Capacity
  • Traffic Congestion & Delays
  • Travel Time Delays
  • Intersection Geometry & Operations
  • Access Management
  • Water Quality & Drainage Issues
  • Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities
  • Economic - Transport of Goods & Services
  • Regional Connectivity
  • Roadway Safety
  • Traffic Mobility
  • Roadway Capacity
  • Traffic Congestion & Delays
  • Travel Time Delays
  • Intersection Geometry & Operations
  • Access Management
  • Water Quality & Drainage Issues
  • Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities
  • Economic - Transport of Goods & Services
  • Regional Connectivity

Need for Improvement Need for Improvement Need for Improvement Need for Improvement

Physically and Functionally Deficient Areas Physically and Functionally Deficient Areas Physically and Functionally Deficient Areas Physically and Functionally Deficient Areas Physically and Functionally Deficient Areas Physically and Functionally Deficient Areas

slide-9
SLIDE 9

BEGIN PROJECT BEGIN PROJECT END PROJECT END PROJECT

13,900 13,900 (21,600) (21,600) 17,300 (31,400) 17,300 17,300 (31,400) (31,400)

Traffic Volumes Traffic Volumes Traffic Volumes Traffic Volumes

14,800 14,800 (27,900) (27,900) 15,700 15,700 (20,800) (20,800)

SW 136th St. SW 136th St. SW 184th St. SW 184th St. SW 232nd St. SW 232nd St. SW 296th St. SW 296th St. 2004 (2030) No-Build Conditions 2004 2004 (2030) (2030) No No-

  • Build Conditions

Build Conditions Percent Trucks 16.9% Percent Trucks 16.9%

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Crash Data Summary Crash Data Summary from 1999 to 2004 from 1999 to 2004 Crash Data Summary Crash Data Summary from 1999 to 2004 from 1999 to 2004

125 68 121 2004 2.2 2 127 65 104 Avg./Year 14 12 762 390 625 TOTAL 3 2 134 61 106 2003 2 2 106 60 91 2002 4 3 157 74 116 2001 3 3 120 64 94 2000 2 2 120 63 97 1999

Number of Fatalities Number of Fatal Crashes Number of Injuries Number of Injury Crashes Number of Crashes Year

SOURCE: FDOT Crash Analysis Reporting (CAR) System SOURCE: FDOT Crash Analysis Reporting (CAR) System

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Safety Ratios Safety Ratios Safety Ratios Safety Ratios

2.211 2.077 2.432 1.932 2.052 2.152 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 YEAR Safety Ratio

Safety Ratio Safety Ratio = 1.0

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Crash Rates Crash Rates

(Crashes/MVM) (Crashes/MVM)

Crash Rates Crash Rates

(Crashes/MVM) (Crashes/MVM)

2.211 1.891 2.336 1.707 1.799 1.835 0.677 0.623 0.665 0.615 0.615 0.615 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 YEAR Crash Rate (per MVM)

Corridor Crash Rate Statewide Crash Rate

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Project Consistency Project Consistency Project Consistency Project Consistency

The proposed project has been found consistent with:

Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) approved Miami-Dade Comprehensive Development Master Plan Miami-Dade MPO Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) 2004 Miami-Dade MPO Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) FDOT Work Program Miami-Dade MPO-approved Congestion Management System

The proposed project has been found consistent with:

Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA) approved Miami-Dade Comprehensive Development Master Plan Miami-Dade MPO Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) 2004 Miami-Dade MPO Transportation Improvement Plan (TIP) FDOT Work Program Miami-Dade MPO-approved Congestion Management System

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Krome Avenue Krome Avenue Action Plan Action Plan

  • R/W Protection
  • Rural Character Preservation
  • Environmental Preservation
  • Access Management
  • Intersection Improvements

Corridor split into 5 segments

  • Short-term improvements
  • Long-term improvements

MPO approved 1999

  • R/W Protection
  • Rural Character Preservation
  • Environmental Preservation
  • Access Management
  • Intersection Improvements

Corridor split into 5 segments

  • Short-term improvements
  • Long-term improvements

MPO approved 1999 MPO approved 1999

Project History Project History Project History Project History

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Existing Typical Section Existing Typical Section Existing Typical Section Existing Typical Section

2 2-

  • Lane Undivided Roadway

Lane Undivided Roadway – – Typical Section Typical Section

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Action Plan Typical Section Action Plan Typical Section Action Plan Typical Section Action Plan Typical Section

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Resurfacing Resurfacing-

  • 296

296th

th Street To 288

Street To 288th

th Street

Street Letting April 2006 Letting April 2006 Intersections Intersections – – 288th, 216th, 200th, & 184th 288th, 216th, 200th, & 184th Streets Streets Letting April 2006 Letting April 2006 Intersections Intersections -

  • SW 272nd, 256th, 192nd,

SW 272nd, 256th, 192nd, 168th & 136th Streets 168th & 136th Streets Construction Complete 2005 (Design Construction Complete 2005 (Design-

  • Build)

Build)

Scope includes: Safety Enhancements, Intersection & Signal Modification, Limited Access Management, Shoulder Widening, Pavement Markings, Resurfacing, Drainage Improvements. Scope includes: Safety Enhancements, Intersection & Signal Modification, Limited Access Management, Shoulder Widening, Pavement Markings, Resurfacing, Drainage Improvements.

Short-Term Improvements / Current Projects Short-Term Improvements / Current Projects Short-Term Improvements / Current Projects Short-Term Improvements / Current Projects

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Four Alternative Typical Sections Four Alternative Typical Sections

Best Fit Alignments Best Fit Alignments

Four Alternative Typical Sections Four Alternative Typical Sections

Best Fit Alignments Best Fit Alignments

  • Two-Lane Rural
  • Three-Lane Rural
  • Passing Zones
  • Two-Lane Rural
  • Three-Lane Rural
  • Passing Zones
  • Four-Lane Rural
  • Florida Intrastate Highway System
  • Four-Lane Rural
  • Florida Intrastate Highway System
  • Four-Lane Rural
  • Plans Preparation Manual
  • Four-Lane Rural
  • Plans Preparation Manual
slide-19
SLIDE 19

Alternative #1 Alternative #1 Alternative #1 Alternative #1

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Alternative #2 Alternative #2 Alternative #2 Alternative #2

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Alternative #3 Alternative #3 Alternative #3 Alternative #3

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Alternative # 4 Alternative # 4 Alternative # 4 Alternative # 4

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Evaluation Criteria Evaluation Criteria

  • Engineering
  • Environmental

– Natural – Physical – Socio-cultural

  • Community Input
  • Cost
  • Engineering
  • Environmental

– Natural – Physical – Socio-cultural

  • Community Input
  • Cost
slide-24
SLIDE 24

Evaluation Matrix Evaluation Matrix Evaluation Matrix Evaluation Matrix

No Build Action Plan Action Plan Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 Existing Conditions (Two-Lane) (Two-Lane - Modified) (Two-Lane) (Two-Lane with Passing Zone) (Four-Lane) (Strategic Intermodal System) Median Width None None 2' Painted Buffer 2' Painted Buffer 40' Depressed 40' Depressed 54' Depressed Lane Width 12' 12' 12' 12' 12' 12' 12' Pedestrian Provisions None None 8' Shared Use Path 8' Shared Use Path 12' Shared Use Path 12' Shared Use Path 12' Shared Use Path Bicycle Provisions None None 8' Shared Use Path 8' Shared Use Path 12' Shared Use Path 12' Shared Use Path 12' Shared Use Path Shoulder Width (Paved Width) Varies 0' to 5' 12' (5') 8' (5') 8' (5') 12' (5') 12' (5') 12' (5') Total Right of Way 35'-200' (varies) 35'-200' (varies) 62' (minimum) 78' (minimum) 148' (Minimum) 160' (Minimum) 206' (Minimum) Border Width Not defined due to R-O-W variations Not defined due to R-O-W variations Reconstruction criteria requires 8' minimum - not defined Reconstruction criteria 8' minimum - provided New construction criteria requires 40' - Proposed 30' - requires design variation New construction criteria requires 40' - Proposed 30' - requires design variation 40' provided Typical Section & Geometric Issues Inadequate shoulder width.Insufficient storage lanes. Lack of turning lanes. Non- Standard Clear Zone and Border Width. No median separation. No passing lanes. Non-Standard Clear Zone and Border
  • Width. No median separation, two-foot
center painted buffer. No passing lanes. Sub-standard shoulder width.No median separation, two-foot center painted buffer. No passing lanes. Sub-standard shoulder width.No median
  • separation. No passing lanes.
No passing lanes. Requires design variation for Border Width. Limited passing zones. Requires design variation for Border Width. None. Safety No Improvements Limited (shoulders, turn lanes, storage lanes, Limited (shoulders, turn lanes, storage lanes, two-foot center painted buffer) Limited (shoulders, turn lanes, storage lanes, two-foot center painted buffer, provides 8' minimum border width) Moderate Improvements since it does not accommodate passing maneuvers. Meets all other safety standards. Moderate Improvements since it accommodate passing maneuvers only in
  • ne area. Meets all other safety
standards. Considerable Improvements SIS Standard width open Median. More Capacity. Passing maneuvers accommodated throughout the project corridor. Traffic Operations No Improvements Provides adequate turn and storage
  • lanes. Opposing traffic friction remains.
Provides adequate turn and storage
  • lanes. Opposing traffic friction remains.
Provides adequate turn and storage
  • lanes. Opposing traffic friction remains.
Provides adequate turn and storage
  • lanes. Eliminates opposing traffic friction.
Precludes passing maneuvers. Provides adequate turn and storage
  • lanes. Eliminates opposing traffic friction.
Provides limited passing opportunities. Considerable Improvements. SIS Standard width open Median. More Capacity. Passing maneuvers accommodated throughout the project corridor. Capacity No Improvements Minimal improvement due to turn lane and shoulder implementation. Minimal improvement due to turn lane and shoulder implementation. Minimal improvement due to turn lane and shoulder implementation. Minimal improvement due to turn lane and shoulder implementation. Minimal improvement due to turn lane and shoulder implementation. Considerable improvements due to the additional thru lanes in each direction. Level of Service (2030 Overall) LOS "E" LOS "E" LOS "E" LOS "E" LOS "E" LOS "E" LOS "D" Access Management No Improvements Limited improvements, consolidate driveway connections whenever possible. Limited improvements, consolidate driveway connections whenever possible. Limited improvements, consolidate driveway connections whenever possible. Considerable improvements with implementation of median and consolidation of driveways. Considerable improvements with implementation of median and consolidation of driveways. Considerable improvements with implementation of median and consolidation of driveways. Drainage System None None Minimal Improvements Swales (some locations) Minimal Improvements Swales (some locations) considerable Improvements Swales & French Drains considerable Improvements Swales & French Drains considerable Improvements Swales & French Drains Multimodal Accommodations None None Shared Use Path Equestrian Path Shared Use Path Equestrian Path Shared Use Path (as required by the Miami-Dade Greenways Plan) Shared Use Path (as required by the Miami-Dade Greenways Plan) Shared Use Path (as required by the Miami-Dade Greenways Plan) Utility Impacts None None Some relocation of power lines required. Some relocation of power lines required. Will require relocation of power lines. May provide opportunity for implementation of FPL policy regarding underground placement. Will require relocation of power lines. May provide opportunity for implementation of FPL policy regarding underground placement. Will require relocation of power lines. May provide opportunity for implementation of FPL policy regarding underground placement. Maintenance of Traffic During Construction None Minimal Impacts Moderate Impacts Moderate Impacts Temporary Impacts at MOT phase changes. Temporary Impacts at MOT phase changes. Temporary Impacts at MOT phase changes. Roadway Maintenance High due to continued deterioration of existing pavement condition High due to continued deterioration of existing pavement condition Medium due to unimproved roadway base and subbase Medium due to unimproved roadway base and subbase Low due to newly constructed roadway Low due to newly constructed roadway Low due to newly constructed roadway Law Enforcement Issues No Shoulders Traffic Congestion No U-turn Access No Passing Zones Traffic Congestion No U-turn Access No Passing Zones Traffic Congestion No U-turn Access No Passing Zones Traffic Congestion No U-turn Access No Passing Zones Traffic Congestion No Passing Zones Traffic Congestion Limited Passing Opportunities None TSM Alternatives F E A T U R E S Evaluation Parameters E N G IN E E R IN G Hurricane Evacuation Issues No Shoulders Traffic Congestion No Passing Zones Traffic Congestion No Passing Zones Traffic Congestion No Passing Zones Traffic Congestion No Passing Zones Traffic Congestion No Passing Zones Traffic Congestion Limited Passing Opportunities None Cultural Facilities and Community Services None None Minimal impacts to parcel owned by one church due to R-O-W acquisition. No impacts to buildings or facilities. Minimal impacts to parcel owned by one church due to R-O-W acquisition. No impacts to buildings or facilities. Minimal impacts to parcels owned by two churches due to R-O-W acquisition. No impacts to buildings or facilities. Minimal impacts to parcels owned by two churches due to R-O-W acquisition. No impacts to buildings or facilities. Minimal impacts to parcels owned by three churches and one school due to R- O-W acquisition. No impacts to buildings
  • r facilities.
Compatibility with Agricultural Practices and Rural Character Yes, rural typical section "as is" Yes, rural typical section "as is" Yes, rural typical section proposed Yes, rural typical section proposed Yes, rural typical section proposed Yes, rural typical section proposed Yes, rural typical section proposed Transportation Plans Compatibility (based of 2002 CDMP amendments, which are currently being challenged) Not compatible with the Miami-Dade County CDMP Not compatible with the Miami-Dade County CDMP Not compatible with the Miami-Dade County CDMP Not compatible with the Miami-Dade County CDMP Not compatible with the Miami-Dade County CDMP Not compatible with the Miami-Dade County CDMP Compatible with the Miami-Dade County CDMP Indirect Effects None None None, no additional roadway capacity being provided None, no additional roadway capacity being provided None, no additional roadway capacity being provided None, no additional roadway capacity being provided The 2002 CDMP amendments are designed to limit any increased indirect effects from roadway widening. Landscaping/Aesthetics None None None None Limited Landscaping Opportunities Limited Landscaping Opportunities Limited Landscaping Opportunities Business and Residential Relocation Impacts None None Residential - TBD Business - TBD Residential - TBD Business - TBD Residential - TBD Business - TBD Residential - TBD Business - TBD Residential - TBD Business - TBD Farmlands (# of acres) None None Acres needed - TBD Acres needed - TBD Acres needed - TBD Acres needed - TBD Acres needed - TBD Number of ownerships rendered not viable for agriculture? None None Number -TBD Number -TBD Number -TBD Number -TBD Number -TBD Wetland Impacts None None None None None None None Water Quality No Treatment No Treatment Some Improvements due to limited swales Some Improvements due to limited swales Considerable Improvements Area provided for Treatment of All Impacts Considerable Improvements Area provided for Treatment of All Impacts Considerable Improvements Area provided for Treatment of All Impacts Surface Water Impacts (Canals) None None None Unknown 0.14 acres of impacts due to bridge widening over canals 0.14 acres of impacts due to bridge widening over canals 0.34 acres of impacts due to bridge widening over canals Contamination Issues None None High Risk - 4 sites Medium Risk - 2 sites Low Risk - 6 sites Testing recommended in vicinity of High and Medium Risk sites High Risk - 4 sites Medium Risk - 2 sites Low Risk - 6 sites Testing recommended in vicinity of High and Medium Risk sites High Risk - 4 sites Medium Risk - 2 sites Low Risk - 6 sites Testing recommended in vicinity of High and Medium Risk sites High Risk - 4 sites Medium Risk - 2 sites Low Risk - 6 sites Testing recommended in vicinity of High and Medium Risk sites High Risk - 4 sites Medium Risk - 2 sites Low Risk - 6 sites Testing recommended in vicinity of High and Medium Risk sites Air Quality Meets attainment area standards Meets attainment area standards Meets attainment area standards Meets attainment area standards Meets attainment area standards Meets attainment area standards Meets attainment area standards Noise Issues None None None None Decibel level increases -- TBD Decibel level increases -- TBD Decibel level increases -- TBD Section 4(f) / 106 None None EEL Property - Acres TBD Golf Course - Acres TBD EEL Property - Acres TBD Golf Course - Acres TBD EEL Property - Acres TBD Golf Course - Acres TBD EEL Property - Acres TBD Golf Course - Acres TBD EEL Property - Acres TBD Golf Course - Acres TBD T&E Species Impacts None None No direct impacts - temporary impacts to foraging only during construction No direct impacts to wildlife - temporary impacts to foraging only during construction - direct impacts to State- listed plant species only in EEL property No direct impacts to wildlife - temporary impacts to foraging only during construction - direct impacts to State- listed plant species only in EEL property No direct impacts to wildlife - temporary impacts to foraging only during construction - direct impacts to State- listed plant species only in EEL property No direct impacts to wildlife - temporary impacts to foraging only during construction - direct impacts to State- listed and Federal Candidate plant species in EEL property Construction $0 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Right of Way $0 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD Total Cost $0 TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TO BE DETERMINED (TBD) S O C IO
  • E
C O N O M IC S E N V IR O N M E N T A L C O S T
  • Engineering
  • Socio-Economics
  • Environmental
  • Cost
slide-25
SLIDE 25

Preferred Alternative Public

Local Governments

Review Agencies

Project Coordination Project Coordination

slide-26
SLIDE 26

2010/11 – 2012/13

Right of Way*

2012/13 – 2014/15

Construction*

2009/10 – 2011/12

Final Design

2003/04 – 2007/08

PD&E

ACTIVITIES FISCAL YEAR WORK PROGRAM SCHEDULE

Work Program Schedule Work Program Schedule Work Program Schedule Work Program Schedule

* Partially Funded

slide-27
SLIDE 27

More Information More Information More Information More Information

Vilma Croft, P.E. Project Manager Florida Department of Transportation 1000 NW 111 Ave., Room 6111A Miami, Florida 33172 Tel: 305-470-5240 Fax: 305-470-5205 vilma.croft@dot.state.fl.us Julio Bouclé, P.E. Consultant Project Manager URS Corporation 7650 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 400 Miami, Florida 33126 Tel : 305-514-2419 Fax: 305-261-4017 Julio_Boucle@URSCorp.com Mike Ciscar, P.E. Consultant Public Involvement Manager The Corradino Group 4055 NW 97th Avenue Miami, Florida 33178 Tel: 305-594-0735 Fax: 305-594-0755 mciscar@corradino.com

www.kromesouth.com

slide-28
SLIDE 28

THANK YOU THANK YOU