Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-74-1149Meath 10/10/74 RESOLUTION WO. ._744149 A RESOLUTION DECLARING THE INTENT OF Tit MIAMI CITY COMMISSION IN RELATION TO THE DADE COUNTY TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT . PROGRAM WHEREAS. the Miami Area Transportation Study was completed in 1969, and the Dade County Transit Technical Study was completed in 1972 both of which establish the need for improved transportation facilities to serve Metropolitan Dade County; and WHEREAS, the electorate of Metropolitan Dade County, on November 7, 1972, overwhelmingly approved the concept of an uniformed transportation system for the County, and authorized funding of the local share of $132.5 million dollars of the cost of providing rapid transit facilities; and WHEREAS, Metropolitan Dade County and the United States Department of Transportation, Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA), have entered into a Grant Contract dated January 9, 1973; and WHEREAS, the UMTA has agreed to pay two-thirds of the cost of the preliminary engineering for the improvement program (but not more than $1.6 million dollars), and Dade County and the State of Florida Department of Transportation have entered into an inter -local agreement dated September 14, 1973, whereby the State agreed to participate in the cost of the work in an amount equal to one -sixth of the total cost (but not more than $400,000.); and WHEREAS, upon completion of the preliminary engineering phase, adequate funding must be generated for final design, real estate acquisition and construction;d DaCUME NT IN. CITYCOMMISSION MEETING OF 0 C T 1 0-/ f)tyr SEAS, the aforesaid final design, real estate acquieition and oonstruotion May only be aeooMplisbed with the financial participation of the State of Florida; WHEREAS, the State of Florida has not committed any funding for the aforesaid project beyond the preliminary engineering phase; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA: Section 1. The Commission of the City of Miami strongly urges the Governor of the State of Florida to support a firm and continuing commitment by the Florida Department of Trans- portation, the sharing with Dade County of the funding necessary to match Federal Funding for the final design, real estate acquisition and construction phases of the Dade County Transit Improvement Program. Section 2. The City Clerk is authorized and directed to transmit a copy of this resolution to the Governor of the State of Florida and to the Board of County Commissioners of Dade County. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 10 day of OCTOBER 1974. PREPARED AND APPROVED BY: MIXELE CARTER Assistant City Attorney APPROVED AS TO F AND CORRECTNESS: 1 , EN S. LLOYD l TY ATTORNEY MAURICE A. FERRE -2- f DRAFT MILESTONE 1 REPORT GENERAL SYSTEM CONCEPT AND CRITERIA Addendum (Preliminary) DADE COUNTY TRANSIT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM • CONSULTANTS: HARK MEYER ASSOCIATES, INC. EV CUT ASSOCIATES. INC. SEPTEMBER, 1974 1 ■ 1 1 1 Draft Milestone 1 Report General System Concept and Criteria Addendum (Preliminary) TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures i I. Introduction I-1 II. Conclusions and Recommendations II-1 A. Service Criteria II-1 B. Service Network and Core System II-2 III. Service Criteria III-1 A. Additional Citizen Inputs and III-1 Consultant Analysis III-4 B. Recommended Changes to Draft Report Service Criteria IV. Service Network and Core System IV-1 V. Other Citizen Comments and Consultants V-1 Notes • LIST OF FIGURES IV-1 The 1985 Service Network (Modified) IV-2 Core System Plus Supporting Services (Modified) i Iv-6 i 1 1 I: INTRODUCTION Beginning August 5, 1974, the Citizens Panels and Public Forums organized uan- nderthe Citizens Participation Program ofre therDadetCounty Transitwith data nImpro alysis pertaining to the first Milestone vement Program. This information, covering General System Concepts (tran- sit corridors and operational modes) and Service Presentation Data wMilestoneas given tl the public in the forms of a �'i and oral presentations by members of the consultant team. After considering and discussing this material, the citizens provided com- ments a general ments and recommendations to the consultants and to the County the con- sultants on August 17th. These recommendations were considered by was on - so presented intheirodevelopment pblcin written andtverbaltone formseinra,second series al- so presented to thep of meetings during the first re°weeks receivedfatSeptember. second generalCitizen meeting on n the Draft Milestone Report September 21st. This addendum to the Draft Milestone Report rt presents tsgall of r withthe cthe itizens' comments and recommendations on the DraftP consul- tants' tants' analysis and recommendations as to changes to be made in the rep I-1 II. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The most important conclusion that can citizens' participation in Milestone 1 succeeded in meeting its objectives of the planning process and of reflecting of the system concepts and criteria. be drawn from the results of is that the program to date has obtaining citizens' inputs to these inputs in the development As expected, many of the comments received related to the specific needs and desires of the individual neighborhoods submitting the comments. One of the major purposes of the Citizens Participation Program was to identify and consider these local requirements to insure adequate tran- sit coverage for the entire county. A somewhat surprising result of the program, however, was the degree to which all citizens panels and forums addressed the broader issues of providing service to regional areas of present and projected growth and development, of meeting the social needs of the people and of providing job mobility, especially for the economically disadvantaged. A. SERVICE CRITERIA In general, it appears that the service criteria, as presented in the Draft Milestone Report and reflecting the first round of citi- zens' inputs, are acceptable to the public as well as being tech- nically sound from the point of view of the consultants. A total of 14 additional comments on the service criteria was re- ceived after review of the Draft Milestone Report. Eight of these related to matters to be addressed later in the design process and have been accepted and reserved for such later considerations. Four of the suggestions are believed to be already covered 'in the criteria as written. One comment resulted in a modification to the criterion for Vehicle Seat -to -Standee Ratios and one comment relating to re- liability has been accepted as reflecting a desirable goal without a change to the criterion. The consultants recommend the adoption of the criterion as modified herein, subject to later refinement as preliminary and final design proceed. B. SERVICE NETWORK AND CORE SYSTEM Consideration of the comments on transit corridors•has resulted in three changes to the recommended Service Network and one change to the Core System. Noting the projected rate of growth in the southern portion of the County, including recent annexation actions and development plans in the vicinity of Homestead, several public forums have recommended extension of the Core System along the South Dixie Corridor to Home- stead. After reanalyzing the requirements the consultants have again concluded that projected population density and ridership in this area does not justify the expenditure of funds necessary to provide grade -separated or nongrade-separated exclusive busway ser- vice south of Cutler Ridge. The consultants feel, however, than an improved level of bus service, to include express service on South Dixie Highway and/or the Florida Turnpike, should be provided to the Homestead/Florida City area. It is recommended, therefore, that the Service Network be extended southward from Cutler Ridge to Homestead and that express bus ser- vice be provided in this corridor. If further growth and transit ridership warrant, consideration should be given at a later date to provision of exclusive bus lanes in the corridor. • Numerous comments have been received concerning the need for an east - west tie across the County other than in the Flagler Street Cor- ridor, and for more direct service to the large 103rd Street shop- ping center. As a result of analysis of these comments, the con- sultants have concluded that some type of improved east -west ser- vice in the northern part of the County is probably warranted. It is noted that the 1O3rd Street Corridor has been recommended by the Transit Engineering Development Subcommittee of the Transit Advisory Committee and included as a transportation corridor in the Planning Department's year 2000 Development Pattern. Two changes in the Service Network and one in the Core System are recommended: It is proposed that the Service Network be extended to include the 163rd Street Corridor from Golden Glades to Sunny Isles and the 103rd Street Corridor from I-95 eastward to the vicinity of Red Road and thence southward to link with the terminus of the Okeechobee Road Corridor. 'Levels of bus service on the 163rd Street Corridor should be improved, with consideration of express service along this corridor and continuing southward along the 1-95 busway corridor. Tentatively, and subject to modification after completion of more detailed ridership and impact studies, it is proposed that the 103rd Street Corridor provide nongrade-separated exclusive busway service to link all of the north -south elements of the Core System. The recommended Core System has been modified to include this corridor. II-2 With respect to comments related to improved service on corridors other than the above, the consultants have concluded that the Ser- vice Network and Core System as amended provide adequate levels of service under projected 985 conditions. Therefore, no additional changes to these networks • 11-3 III. SERVICE CRITERIA The Draft Milestone 1 Report contained recommended criteria to be used for each of the service characteristics discussed. The criteria were prepared after consideration of 33 comments received from the citizens program (see pages VI-1 through VI-22 of Draft Report). In review of the Draft Report, additional citizen inputs have been received, and, in a similar manner to that shown in the Draft, these are analyzed and reasons for acceptance or rejection given with recommended changes to the Draft criteria being made where appropriate. A. ADDITIONAL CITIZEN INPUTS AND CONSULTANT ANALYSIS The additional comments and recommendations received from the citizens participation program are grouped and quoted below according to the District that provided the inputs, and in the order used by each dis- trict. The first comment is numbered (34) as 33 previous comments were analyzed in the Draft report. District 1 Passenger Comfort (34) "For the best scenic experience - Planning ahead for landscaping at the earliest possible time." • This comment is accepted and will be reflected in Milestone 7, Architecture. District 2 Direct User Cost (Fare Structure) (35) "Recommend a low -flat fare (not zoned)." • This comment is noted for future oonsideration in fare policy decisions. (36) "Recommend a coin -token combination or automated fare system." • This comment is noted for future use in design criteria. System Operating Hours (37) "Recommend 24 hour service with reduced frequency during late night hours." • Please refer to comments (3), (16), and (25) in Draft, and to recommended criterion on pages VI-14/15 in Draft. Security (38) "Recommend that specific attention be given to security on plat- forms and parking lots." s 1 • Criterion 10 (page VI-21 in Draft) provides for such specific at- tention. Milestone 6 of this program will cover this topic in detail. District 5 Passenger Comfort (39) "Not stand more than 15 minutes, less than 10. (Average 12 minutes)." e • This comment is interpretedto nhourthat shouldgnote toxceed 12 min r core system passengers during thepeak utes, with a desirable maximum of 15 minutes. The comment is anexcel- lent one and reflects an additional perception of the standing pre m. The longest corridor (from downtown area outward) of the The downtown to CutlerrRidgee tpeakem s the South Corridor to Cutler Ridge. minutes. If it is assumed that hour journey will take approximately 35 into a vehicle is filled with passengersat 2tseatntoorm rate as it standee ratio inathesvehicle, the downtown area, then with all seats would be taken during the first 12 minutes or so of dhen, jour- ney. If it is further assumed that all persons arexe traveling2 minutes, then persons would on avert�ebwo ldstanding 2bfor minutes under the same However, maximum standing as- sumptions. To alleviate this problem, and also to better balance line haul capacity to peak hour volumes, some vehicles could be reversed part way along a corridor. Again, using the South Corridor as an ex- ample, if every second ttain or' vehicle were turned back at say the Dadeland station, then these vehicles would be emptied at this point and would proceed back towards the downtown area. Thiswould fprovide passengers who board north of Dadeland with theopportunityitthe load- ing g a seat. It would also reduce maximum standingx� aesely n8 (under minuews coax- ing assumptions previously mentioned) to tines for all passengers imum, but would, however, double waiting board- ing or alighting south of Dadeland. Because of the high departure fre- quency anticipated for the peak hours (see criterion 2 inn the Dr9afsere port), this average waiting time increase would only be and range and this is deemeedsenronableh traof de off for the added com- fort and convenience for passengers d. The vehicle seat -to -standee ratios criterion (7f) has been modified as a result of this comment. Please see section III. B for the revised criterion. i i� Direct User Cost (Fare Structure) (40) "Flat fare structure as opposed to zone fare." • This comment is noted for future consideration in fare policy decisions. III-2 District 7 Trip Convenience (41) "(a) Under Passenger Convenience: we recommend that considera- tion be made for passengers traveling with small children to the ex- tent that strollers would be maneuverable and that some strollers be provided for passengers without their own." • This is a valid comment. It is believed, however, that if thestein is designed to accomodate the elderly and handicapped, including peo p wheelchairs (see Criterion 11 on page VI-21 of the Draft report), it will be easily usable by those having small children in strollers. Provision of strollers for those without their own is an operational matter rather than a design criterion and should be addressed as part of the operating procedures for the system. Reliability (42) "(b) Reliability be increased from 92.5% to 97%." • Please refer to the comment on this same subjectcommencineg that at the base of page VI-10 in the Draft report. Also, please the criterion is written to reflect a minimum required reliability of 92.5%. Every reasonable attempt will be made during the design and construction programs, tc exceed this figure so as to minimize any delay or inconvenience caused passengers. It should further be noted that failures external to the system (such as primary electrical power system failures) are included within the reliability criterion but are in fact beyond the control of the rapid transit system, designers and operators. (This assumes that the core system will use electric power generated by Florida Power and Light). No change has been made in the reliability criterion as a result of this comment. Facilities for the Elderly and Handicapped (43) "(g) A11 facilities be usable from a wheelchair." • The criterion. as stated will require that people in wheelchairs be capable of using the rapid transit system facilities. Direct User Cost (Fare Structure) (44) "(c) The elderly be allowed to ride at half fare." (45) "(d) Children.below the age of four (4) be allowed to ride free." (46) "(e) Children between the ages of four (4) and 18 be allowed to ride at half fare." (47) "(f) A differential fare structure be employed rather than a flat fare." • These comments are noted for future consideration in fare policy decisions. 11I-3 B. RECOMMENDED CHANGES TO DRAFT REPORT SERVICE CRITERIA As a result sed and alyzed ove, he -1 owing changeeto the recommended servicecriteria shown onpagesVI12thrcugh VI-22 of the Draft report, should be made. Criterion 7f (Vehicle Seat -to -Standee Ratios) on page VI-19 of the Draft report should be revised to read as follows: • In peak hour periods, buses and rapid transit vehicles will be designed to include provisions for standees but the seat -to -standee ratio -will not exceed 1 to 2. In off-peak hour periods, sufficient vehicle capacity will be operated on the transit system to provide all normally expected passengers with a seat. Consideration will be given to the turnback of vehicles on the core system corridors during peak hours so as to provide an average standing time for standing pas- sengers of approximately 10 minutes and a maximum desirable standing time of approximately 20 minutes. • IV. SERVICE NETWORK AND CORE SYSTEM' The Draft Milestone 1 Report recommended a general system concept made up of two parts: (1) (2) a 117 mile Service Network of corridor transit improvement as shown on page III-2 of the Draft report a 61 mile Core System of grade separated rapid transit facilities (9 miles currently under construction) with 20 miles of nongrade-separa- ted supporting services, and an extensive network of collector - feeder -distribution systems as shown on page III-3 of the Draft re- port. The draft Service Network and Core System were prepared after considera- tion of 41 alternative networks developed by the consultants, the seven citizens districts and the Office of the Transportation Coordinator. The selection of network corridorswas also strongly influenced both by the recommended Service Networks of the Transit Engineering Development Sub- committee of the Transit Advisory Committee, and by the Proposed 1985 Metropolitan Development Pattern and Proposed 2000 Conceptual Metropoli- tan Development Pattern as prepared by the Dade County Planning Depart- ment. In review of the Draft report, additional citizen inputs concerning the Service Network and Core System have been received. These are reproduced and analyzed below, and reasons for acceptance or rejection are given. The comments and recommendations received from the Citizens Participation Program are grouped and quoted below according to the district that pro- vided the inputs, and in the order used by each district. Each comment is numbered consecutively starting with (la), and the consultants analysis and recommendation is preceded by a •. District 1 (la) "We endorse the desirability of a connection to Broward County to 1. effect a truly regional concept. 2. Provide service from south Broward to the Airport. We chose the S-9 - I-95 corridor as the highest priority." • Please refer to item (8) on page III-4 of the Draft report. It is, however, worth restating that the Service Network does provide for maxi- mum flexibility for future rapid transit expansion to the Broward County line and also provides, as part of the 1985 Service Network, substantially improved transit service to the county line. No changes have been made in the Networks as a result of this comment. IV-1 (2a) "We endorse to change the corridor along Okeechobee Road to go north along the LeJeune Corridor to 21st Street and west along the 21st Street F.E.C. Corridor to Okeechobee Road. 1. To better serve the Hialeah Springs area. 2. (Comment) The Race Track is willing to dedicate property for a station and park ride service." • This suggested change in the location of the Northwest Corridor would result in substantially longer access times (and reduced access conveni- ence) to the Core System for the Miami Springs and Virginia Gardens area. The Core System corridor location appears to offer reasonable access both for Hialeah residents and Miami Springs and Virginia Gardens residents. (Please refer to comment (8a) for a description of recommended improve- ment for east -west travel in the Hialeah area). The precise alignment of the Okeechobee Corridor will be subject to investigation during the de- velopment of the route alignments presented in Milestone 5. No change in the Okeechobee Corridor has been made as a result of this comment. (3a) "We endorse a connection between the LeJeune and 27th Avenue Cor- ridors. We determined it could be either at 21st Street - 74th Street or the Airport Expressway." • This link exists in the recommended Service Network and could be served by express bus service (please see comment lla). Please refer to item (2) page III-.L of the Draft report, and the analysis of extension "f" of the Core System on page X-7 of the Draft report. No changes in the Networks have been made as a result of this comment. (4a) "We endorse an extension to Homestead. We decided to promote this extension as soon as it was technically and economically feasible as the 'second highest priority'." • This comment, along with comment (20a), has led to a change in the Service Network. Although the projected ridership figures do not warrant the provision of a Core System rapid transit corridor to Homestead, (please refer to pages X-k and X-5 of the Draft report) the extension of the Ser- vice Network down to that area would provide for significantly improved transit service by 1985from the Homestead area to the rapid transit sta- tion in the Cutler Ridge area. As a result of this and comment (20a) a change in the Service Network has been made to extend the South Dixie Highway Corridor south to the Home- stead area. It is recommended that express bus service be provided from the Homestead/Florida City area to the end of the Core System at Cutler Ridge, via.U.S. 1 or the Turnpike Extension. IV-2 it (2a) "We endorse to change the corridor along Okeechobee Road to go north along the LeJeune Corridor to 21st Street and west along the 21st Street F.E.C. Corridor to Okeechobee Road. 1. To better serve the Hialeah Springs area. 2. (Comment) The Race Track is willing to dedicate property for a station and park ride service." • This suggested change in the location of the Northwest Corridor would result in substantially longer access times (and reduced access conveni- ence) to the Core System for the Miami Springs and Virginia Gardens area. The Core System corridor location appears to offer reasonable access both for Hialeah residents and Miami Springs and Virginia Gardens residents. (Please refer to comment (8a) for a description of recommended improve- ment for east -west travel in the Hialeah area). The precise alignment of the Okeechobee Corridor will be subject to investigation during the de- velopment of the route alignments presented in Milestone 5. No change in the Okeechobee Corridor has been made as a result of this comment. (3a) "We endorse a connection between the LeJeune and 27th Avenue Cor- ridors. We determined it could be either at 21st Street - 74th Street or the Airport Expressway." • This link exists in the recommended Service Network and could be served by express bus service (please see comment lla). Please refer to item (2) page III-4 of the Draft report, and the analysis of extension "f" of the Core System on page X-7 of the Draft report. No changes in the Networks have been made as a result of this comment. We decided to e his (t) "We asdorse an soon as ittwaslon to technicallytand•economically feasibletastthe extension 'second highest priority'." in the • This comment, along with comment ()ridership figuresadoenot warrant Service Network. Although the projected the provision of a Core System rapid transit corridor to Homestead, (please refer to pages X-4 and X-5 of the Draft report) the extension of the Ser- vice Network down to that area would provide for significantly improved transit service by 1985from the Homestead area to the rapid transit sta- tion in the Cutler Ridge area. As a result of this and comment (20a) a change in the Service Network has been made to extend the South Dixie Highway Corridor south to the Home- stead area. It is recommended that express bus service be provided from the Homestead/Florida City area to the end of the Core System at Cutler Ridge, via.U.S. 1 or the Turnpike Extension. IV-2 i i 9 1 t (5a) "We endorse a new concept of service which would serve Palmetto by-pass. We suggest a Road Runner bus service." • An increase in level of bus service along the Palmetto Expressway may be warranted within the overall Transit Improvement Program framework. However, such service is deemed not to be required at the levels neces- sary to justify inclusion in either the Service Network.or the Core Sys- tem. (Please refer to the second paragraph of page IX-8 in the Draft re- port). This comment will be noted for future consideration in improvements in bus service. No changes in the networks have been made as a result of this comment. District 2 (6a) "1. 163rd Street (Collins Avenue to Golden Glades to be included as corridor, not a feeder system." • This corridor was originally deemed suitable as a feeder route from the end of the•Core System Corridor at Golden Glades to the 163rd Street shop- ping center. However, as a result of this and other comments (8a, 22a) a cross county corridor including this element is recommended (see 8a). Thus, the levels of service on the SR826 corridor should be increased to a point where its inclusion in the Service Network becomes appropriate. Figure IV-1 shows this revision. (7a) "2. Biscayne Boulevard - F.E.C. Corridor from CBD to Hallandale be included as corridor, if not included, the bus service should be substan- tially improved." • Please refer to the discussion of extension "j" on page X-8 in the Draft report. Significantly improved bus service along Biscayne Boulevard is shown as a part of the Service Network. No changes have been made in the networks as a result of this comment. (8a) "3. Blue Dash type service from 1-95 to Palmetto by-pass via 103rd Street, then south to Okeechobee Road to connect with fixed guideway sys- tem." IV-3 • • As a result of this comment and comments (6a, 14a and 22a) a corridor of nongrade -separated transit service has provisionally been added to the Core System to provide for major cross county movements in the North Dade area. This cross county corridor would run west from Collins Avenue in Sunny Isles along the SR826 corridor to the Golden Glades Interchange. It would then swing south on the 1-95 busway to NW 103rd Street Corridor and then contin- ue west on 103rd Street Corridor to the Red Road Corridor. The route would then turn south on the Red Road Corridor and would terminate at the end of the core system in the Okeechobee Road area. The corridor could have major transfer points with the Core System at the Okeechobee Road area, the NW 27th Avenue area, the Golden Glades Interchange area and the Collins Avenue area at Sunny Isles on Miami Beach. The corridor could be used by both express line haul and feeder bus service. The addition of the nongrade- separated corridor is subject to detailed study and modification in later stages of the program, due to the lack of patronage forecasts and system impact for this new corridor element. The nongrade -separated segments in the 103rd Street Corridor should be coordinated with the arterial widening in this area. Please see Figure IV-1 and IV-2 for this revision. (9a) "14. Feeder system shown for District II is very inadequate." • It is beyond the scope of the rapid transit preliminary engineering pro- gram to establish the exact routes to be used for feeder -collection -dis- tribution systems. This coin ent is' noted, however, so that action can be taken by the appropriate agency at the appropriate time. No changes in the networks were made as a result of this comment. (10a) "5. Provide on -off bus access to I-95 at major cross streets." • This operating concept of the I-95 busway has been proposed byhe eoe o-x con- sultants in Alternative 0 on page VIII-6 of the Draft report. traffic movement and engineering problems likely to be encountered in the design of this system will be studied and the concept modified if necessary in Milestone 5. No changes in the networks have been made as a result of this comment. IV-14 i 5 SERVICE NETWORK BROWARO COUNTY _ . __ . _ , _, J DADE COUNTY 2 p 1 2 3 /Miles I U.S. 41 6F S.W. 8th ST N. KENDALL `DR. S.W. 184th ST. a N. 4.4 W a GOLDEN GLADES EXPWY. N.W. 36th ST MIAMI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT W. FLAGLER ST. CORAL WAY otpOR? N.W. 79th ST. E.167th J� JULIA TUTTLE CSWY. RICKENBACKER 9/25/74 1-,:. •,. SYSTEM PLUS,SUPPORTiNG.,SERVICES r• mi. • ili•O • 41••••• • am • ••••ip • ••••• • aim • *MD • 41.11. • Am • •••••• • ••••••11,• *iv 4. AMY 41.00 • OEM • Iliffi• Ina • •11•11N6 • lift • •04•10 • •••••• • •••••• • Mai* • mom • OB. • ON. • od BROWARD COUNTY i • OM. DADE COUNTY 7 2 3 4 Wel U.S. 41 ele S W 8th ST. • " GOLDEN GLADES EXPWY. N W 36th ST MIAMI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT xit. 0. >4 w CC° 1W . 79th ST. ; I • N.E. `4%.167th 41' .. t.1 Q." Tr i1 o . o \ i , • -•:'''.,..„ „,..... Vi FLAGLER ST. 4 • (1 i ' ........... ........., .. . •;C S W 58th ST. oPR OR.. EXPWY. JULIA TUTTLE CORAL WAY fitCKENBACKER LEGEND: CORE SYSTEM: 1,10••,•••••••••••• Grade Separated System Busway System / Grade Separated SUPPORTING SERVICES: " ' ' Non -Grade 2 --- 4,- Separated System Feeder Bus Service d) • 2 YSTEM PLUS SUPPORTING SERVICES BROW90 FOUNTY DADE COUNTY 2 3 4 u oes a. U.S 41 N. KENDALL-DR S.W. 184th ST. re.. 6 ran. *OM • iinle • dam& • MINN • mom • •emia • email. • dd. • • i•••• • alms • MIMI. GOLDEN GLADES EXPWY. *-1 *'N x 1- c) ,- f 1 0 .,- 1 . I , 3 .V. 79th ST. AIRPORT clocio. N.W. I .- 361h S1 ,t,\,:„;,„--PROP EXPWY. MNI7TAEMF:NANTION.A1.L W. FLAGLER ET. n i,ICKENBACKER CSWY LEGEND: CORE SYSTEM: Grade Separated System Busway System / Grade Separated SUPPORTING SERVICES: Non -Grade ,- L Separated System Feeder Bus Service 9/ 25/74 SERVICE NETWORK BROWARD COUNTY DADE COUNTY ?,> y0, 0 1 2 3 4 Mlles W U.S. 41 W. 8th ST. w a ti vi S.W. 58th ST. N. KENDALL DR. S.W. 184th ST. 441 GOLDEN GLADES EXPWY. N.W. 36th ST. MIAMI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT ' W. ft AGLER ST. CORAL WAY E N.W. 79th ST. EXPWY. N., 1671h JULIA TUTTLE KICKENBACKEP CSWY. District 3 A (lla) "..include in the ach�Juliare System Tuttlerapid Causewayand Altonconnecting via theterminalandMiami 36th Street Airport Expressway and Julia Tuttle Causeway Corridors." • This link was included as a part of the Service Network, but was not in- cluded in the Core System (see the discussion of extension "f" of the Core Sys- tem on page X-7 of the Draft report). As a result of this and other com- ments (3a and lla)it is recommended that express bus service be instituted between the terminal area of Miami International Airport and Alton Road in Miami Beach via the Airport Expressway and Julia Tuttle Corridors. This service could stop for transfer passengers at both the NW 27th Avenue area and the I-95 area. The need and desire for this service on the part of airline passengers visiting Miami Beach must, as a result of a market sur- vey conducted for the State of Florida, Department of Transportation, as part of the Miami International Airport -Miami Beach sitOn Connector paecStStudy, Interim Report 2, February 1973, be seriously questioned. this report the following statements appear: • Air passengers visiting Miami Beach show a strong reluctance to transfer at a central terminal when given the alternative of a trip with no transfer. This implication is the strongest finding of the market survey." However, it is recommended that such service be provided on a trial basis. No changes in the networks were made as a result of this comment. District 4 District 4 accepted the Service Network and Core System as proposed in the Draft Milestone 1 Report. District 5 (12a) "1. LeJeune Road Corridor should be renamed the Douglas Road East Corridor ." • This comment is interpreted to mean that the LeJeune Corridor should be moved to Douglas Road and should be renamed Douglas Road East. This will be given consideration in Milestone 5 when the actual route alignment will be studied. No changes have been made as a result of this comment. IV-7 (13a) "1. Moving the Flagler Street Corridor north to 836." • Please refer to the second to last paragraph on page IX-6 of the Draft report for an applicable comment. No changes to the networks were made as a result of this comment. (14a) "II. Turning North from Okeechobee Road along Red Road to 103rd Street commercial business center in Hialeah...." • Please refer to comment (8a). (15a) "Extend 27th Avenue up SR9 and I-95 to Broward." • Please refer to comment (la) • (16a) "Link between 27th Avenue and LeJeune along 36th Street." • Please refer to comments (3a) and (lla). (17a) "Extend East-West Corridor to Palmetto." • Please Milestone along the Service N patronage year 1985 could be sitate a No change refer to the discussion of extension "c", page X-6 of the Draft Report. The Core System has provided nongrade-separated systems East-West Corridor and improved transit service is shown on the etwork extending west to SW 117th Avenue. Based on the.forecasted of this area, a higher capacity system is not necessary for the . The extension of the grade -separated system to the Palmetto subject to change if future growth patterns and development neces- higher capacity system. has been made in either network as a result of this comment. iv-8 (18a) "Add Palmetto Expressway to Service Network from Dadeland to North- west 103rd Street." • Please refer to comment (5a). District 6 (19a) "3. Immediate bus service be provided along a SW 117th Avenue Cor- ridor connecting F.I.U., Miami Dade South and tie South Dade Government Center." • The increase in the level of service along the route mentioned is rec- ommended by the consultants on a trial basis because forecasted patronage data for that service is not available. The relative increase in service would not qualify this corridor for inclusion in the Service Network at this time. However, if under this trial basis the ridership does merit sub- stantially improved service, then it could be included in the Service Net- work at a later date. No changes have been made in either network as a result of this comment. (20a) "4. Extend Core Corridor to Homestead/Florida City a. All rites of way, station and parking lot land is to be acquired immediately -An express bus service is to be provided immediately to Home- stead/Florida City. -Agreement to all points above, with the stipulation that the core system not be built until population and ridership war- rant that system." • Please refer to comment (la) (21a) "5. Stress linkage of Core System to Broward County as briefly mentioned in the Milestone Report." • Please refer to comment (la) District 7 (22a) "1. We still Core System to meet We still advocate a Street, West across Palmetto Expressway have serious reservations about the adequacy of the the mass transportation needs of Dade County in 1985. loop system with a corridor extending to Northeast 167th the Golden Glades Interchange and North/South along the .11 • Please refer to comments (5a), (6a) and (8a). IV-9 • V. OTHER CITIZEN COMMENTS AND CONSULTANT NOTES Many of the comments received from the citizens participation program district at the general meeting held on September 21, 1974, did not pertain directly to either the service criteria or system corridors, but were more general in nature or dealt with other aspects of the overall transportation function. Each of these citizen district com- ments is shown below and is followed by a consultants note. District 1 (16) "An observation that the designation of transfer points in this General System and Criteria is premature and should be reserved under operational concepts at a later time." • This comment shows a legitimate concern for over definition of the General System Concept. However, it should be noted that the defini- tion of operating structure and transfer points is a necessary requirement in the determination of the feasibility of a network of corridors. Core System Criteria 2a (see page X-1 of the Draft report) states, "The Core System must be operationally viable ", and thus it has been neces- sary to identify operational structure and general transfer points. These points are tentative at this time and subject to later refinement. (26) "We endorse to urge consideration of the movement of goods as well as persons for a more total utilization of the system. While a number of problems have been mentioned, we recognize the additional value of re- moving these goods from the overcrowded highway and roadway system." • Fixed guideway urban rapid transit systems generally do not have pro- vision for carriage of any goods other than those normally carried by pas- sengers. The reasons for this center not so much on the movement of the goods over the network, but more on the transfer of goods to and from the rapid transit mode. The provision and operation of extra vehicles to carry goods does not pose an insurmountable problem (provided gross goods vehicle weights do not become the controlling factor in guideway design and provided goods vehicles movements are made in off peak hours.) Use of the rapid transit network would require two additional transfers of the goods than that currently undertaken in any origin -destination movement. This transferring of goods to and from the fixed guideway rapid transit vehicles is so costly as to make the use of the network wholly uneconomic in comparison to the railway or highway modes. District 2 (36) "Discussion materials to be provided earlier for forum consideration. Use lower -grade paper and summary books rather than complete books to all participants." • Discussion materials (i.e., Presentation of Data Reports and Draft Mile- stone Reports) are presently'distributed to citizens (at District Meetings) v-1 within one to four working days after they are received from the printer. Also, copies are hand -delivered to each Citizen Panel President the same day the printer delivers the material. Because of the costs involved, the limited number of books available and the desire to encourage maxi- mum citizen attendance at District Meetings, we feel this is the earliest and most appropriate method of distributing discussion materials to Forum members. However, as a result of a recent suggestion by District 2 Panel Officers, additional copies of discussion materials will be provided in the future to all Panel Presidents so that they may distribute these in advance to each Forum Chairperson in their districts. The suggestion to use a lower -grade of paper for our reports represents a mutual concern to minimize costs. However, it should be pointed out that the grade of paper currently being used for our discussion materials is the lowest and cheapest quality available that will accomodate printing on both sides of a page. Thus, we will continue to use this lower grade of paper. The recommendation to provide a summary for each report instead of a com- plete book reflects a valid concern about the amount of information citi- zens are asked to analyze and about the cost of printing a large report. The reasons for including a sizeable quantity of data in each book have been threefold: 1) to ensure that citizens have immediate access to all of the pertinent facts on each Milestone proposal, 2) to provide "secon- dary" readers (county, state, and federal officials) with sufficient data to properly perform their review functions, and 3) to furnish readers with adequate supporting reference material. It should be noted that a summary section, along with conclusions and recommendations are included in each Milestone Draft Report. As a result of this comment, a change in procedure has been made to include Forum Chairpersons in the advance distribution of discussion materials. No change has been made in the grade of paper used. Consideration is be- ing given to preparing both a summary version and a complete version, with all public participants receiving a summary and each forum receiving only a limited number of complete reports. District 3 (46) "A referendum is suggested at a public election to determine by straw vote the preference of the voters in regard to the use of mass transit in place of private autos." • This comment requires analysis and discussion by county officials. Ac- cordingly, it has been forwarded to the Office of the Transportation Coordin- ator for a reply. V-2 (56) "Dixie Downtown Rail Ride" lb This proposed plan was presented at a Transportation Seminar at the Univ- ersity of Miami in the fall of 1973. The proposed plan was for an interim commuter rail system between Cutler Ridge and downtown Miami using the exist- ing Florida East Coast Railroad paralleling t'.S.l (South Dixie Highway) from S.W. 7th Street to S.W. 200th Street. Five stations were proposed for the 20-mile corridor and the use of self-propelled rail diesel cars was recommended. The service was proposed as essentially a commuter one, with northbound service in the a.m. peak hours and southbound service in the p.m. peak hours. The service that such a proposed plan would have offered is largely dupli- cated (and improved) by the current Blue Dash express -bus service. The Blue Dash offers a far more flexible service than the'Rail Ride", with more routes, more stopping locations, park and ride facilities and service into the heart of the downtown area. District 4 (6b) "Since there is an on -going Master Plan for the Jackson Hospital Com- plex which.includes the future of the entire Civic Center. The Consultants are working on the Master Plan at this tire. The Civic Center Forum believes that there should be Established a formal arrangement whereby the Transit Planners feed information into the Master Plan effort. The Planners need this information. At the same time, the needs of Jackson Memorial Hospital should be incorporated intc*the o-:erail Mass and Rapid Tranc-it plans for the Civic Center. The Medical Center is not only important to the citizens who utilize it, but, also to the thousands of employees at Jackson and other facilities." • This important comment is taken under consideration. Specific arrangements will be made to establish direct coordination between the consultants and the Civic Center Master Planners. (7b) "For later consideration, the Civic Center Forum feels that there should, be included in the overall plan, a "MINI SYSTEM" which might include a connecting loop within the C.C.". • This comment is taken under consideration and will be subject to more detailed consideration later in the program. (Milestones 5 and 7) V-3 s 1 1 District 5 (8b) "2. Suggest purchase of additional right-of-way for possibility of third express lane at areas where this is needed." • This comment is noted for further consideration in Milestone 5. District 6 (9b) "2. We address to Dr. Dyer and the County Coordination Office that marine and air service be considered between the southern extremity of Dade County (Homestead area) and the Downtown Miami Area. • This comment has been forwarded to Office of the Transportation Coordinator. v-4 TIME Cordrol Canlrol Point 111.9 Pe�inf /0 �i9 2/Z MAY DEC..I�Iai�l. FE E3. OCT. NOV...^ g �,� � 2 9 /�, 2312 0 /( 23 3C1� G� /3 20 2? 4 // /8 2$ �o 13 20 27 � 3 /0 17 24 � ! O /5 ftc 291 5 12 / � � I 1 . 1 'Y ,°fr $rssE + CONCEPT 1.1 VEILICLE TECHNOLOGY f�9 j ........._ . f�� 'AL LAND U5E k RELOCATION i29 2 r�. .. .. _.._ a. .... , ... 1 105 ALIGNMENT r/Z 1 j I ! 3/9 '1 /12 SAFETY` e SECURITY p t ' ! e i . '�� ,ARCHITECTURE i 3/9 I 1 el 73/3a 1 FINAL. 5YTE 5J(1 CONCEPT Z25. �V s F"/NAL ! REPOTer 4 T/15K D-7-3 PLANS PROFILE • 0• 1'#* s 0 0 0 A 0 CR/r!CAL PATH 5/C (;WIL131/R SMtTk f/s GRAOE/0/112EIKROVAID sway silts FLA . D.O.T. IMINAriY APPLICATION '/5 .5. D.O•T: AIRPORT STUDY_i '0s • se LEGEND Critical Po//i Mi/Ca/o1?C Auxiliary 5/udics UI I!IIIIIIIII II 1111111 1'pllll 1 FINAL APPLICATION TO UMTA -FINAL 0E516N S K. Yfr I MILESTONE PE PROJECT SCHEDULE Oct 4, /974 Iil II �T. rina opotf