November 3, 2021 CTAC Virtual Workshop

Miami-Dade TPO
Citizens’ Transportation
Advisory Committee (CTAC)
Virtual Workshop
Wednesday, November 3, 2021

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
MIAMI-DADE TPO CTAC VIRTUAL WORKSHOP NOVEMBER 3, 2021
Rules of Engagement
I.
RULES OF ENGAGEMENT

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
NW 36th Street
Multimodal Corridor
Phase III Update Study
II.
NW 36TH STREET MULTIMODAL CORRIDOR PHASE III UPDATE STUDY

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

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

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

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

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
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
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

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

Multiple Strategies Were Considered in the
Western Segment
15

Multiple Strategies Were Considered in the
Eastern Segment
16

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

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

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

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

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

16

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
Pros/Cons

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
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.)

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.)

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

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

23
TSM&O Alternative
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
NW 18 Avenue Optimize Signal Timing
NW 17 Avenue
Extend WB left turn lane
NW 14 Avenue
Extend EB left turn lane
NW 5 Avenue
Conver northbound approach to one left turn
lane, one through lane, and one right turn
lane
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

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

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

TSM&O Alternative
Curb Extensions
26

27
TSM&O Alternative
Right Turn Lanes

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

Short Term Improvements – Possible Options
29

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

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

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
FDOT Strategic
Intermodal System (SIS)
Policy Plan Update
III.
FDOT STRATEGIC INTERMODAL SYSTEM (SIS) POLICY PLAN UPDATE

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

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

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

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.

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

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

Alignment with State, Regional, Local Plans

SIS Policy Plan Focus Areas Align with FTP
47

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

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

Anticipated 2022 SIS Policy Plan Elements
OBJECTIVES
FOCUS AREAS
POLICIES/STRATEGIES
IMPLEMENTATION GUIDANCE

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

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?

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.

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

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

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

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

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

Discussion
• Comments on this draft working list?
• Are we on the right track?
• Anything missing?
• Suggested additions/revisions?
• Major concerns?

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

Resilience
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

Technology & Innovation
Electric Vehicle Deployment Scenarios

Technology & Innovation
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

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)

Safety
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

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

Rural Mobility & Connectivity
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

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

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)

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

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
NEXT MEETING
Next Meeting
Wednesday, December 8, 2021

November 3, 2021 CTAC Virtual Workshop

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Ähnlich wie November 3, 2021 CTAC Virtual Workshop

Ähnlich wie November 3, 2021 CTAC Virtual Workshop (20)

Mehr von Miami-Dade Transportation Planning Organization

Mehr von Miami-Dade Transportation Planning Organization (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

November 3, 2021 CTAC Virtual Workshop