South Miami Intermodal Transportation Plan Final_01.15Prepared by
Prepared for
0 4 3 59 6 0 00.1 4
January 2015
FINAL
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | i
A
c
k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
Ac
k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
AcknowledgementsAcknowledgements
City of South Miami Mayor and
Commission
Philip K Stoddard, Mayor
Walter Harris, Vice Mayor
Gabriel Edmond, Commissioner
Josh Liebman, Commissioner
Robert Welsh, Commissioner
City of South Miami Staff
Steven Alexander, City Manager
Christopher Brimo, AICP, Planning Director
Jennifer Korth, LEED-GA, Grants & Sustainable
Initiatives Administrator
Ricardo Ayala, P.E., Capital Improvements
Project Manager
Bike 305
Bike SOMI
City of Coral Gables
FDOT District Six
MDX
Miami-Dade County Public Works
Miami-Dade County Transit
Miami-Dade MPO
Miami-Dade Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces Department
somi Magazine
Urban Health Partnership
Village of Pinecrest
A Special Thanks to:
South Miami Green Task Force
Funding Agencies:
Citizen’s Independent Transportation Trust (CITT)
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)
SMITPii | JANUARY 2015
A
c
k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
Ac
k
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e
m
e
n
t
s
JANUARY 2015 | iii
South Miami Intermodal
Transportation Plan
(SMITP)
Section PageTable of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................1
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................9
Timeline of Signifi cant Events ................................................................................................13
SMITP Vision ..............................................................................................................................17
Goals and Objectives ...............................................................................................................21
Benefi ts of Complete Streets ..................................................................................................25
Transportation Mobility Data Collection, Review, and Analysis .....................................29
Public Engagement ..................................................................................................................49
Inter-Agency Coordination .....................................................................................................61
Recommendations ...................................................................................................................65
Street Type Diagrams and Exhibits .....................................................................................125
Design Considerations and Cost ..........................................................................................157
Implementation Plan .............................................................................................................167
Appendix A – Bicycle Parking Inventory ............................................................................175
Appendix B – Survey Results ................................................................................................179
SMITPiv | JANUARY 2015
T
a
b
l
e
o
f
C
o
n
t
e
n
t
s
Ta
b
l
e
o
f
C
o
n
t
e
n
t
s
Figure PageTable of Contents
Figure 1 - Network Plan .............................................................................................................7
Figure 2 - Community Features ..............................................................................................35
Figure 3 - Existing Facilites......................................................................................................36
Figure 4 - Metrobus Ridership Range Per Stop ...................................................................37
Figure 5 - Number of Travel Lanes .........................................................................................38
Figure 6 - 2010 Census Population Density .........................................................................39
Figure 7 - 2010 Automobile Ownership .............................................................................40
Figure 8 - Bicycle Level of Service (BLOS) .............................................................................41
Figure 9 - Pedestrian Level of Service (PLOS) .....................................................................42
Figure 10 - Bicycle & Pedestrian Crashes (‘05-’11) ..............................................................43
Figure 11 Bicycle Crashes (‘05-’11) .......................................................................................44
Figure 12 - Pedestrian Crashes (‘05-’11) ..............................................................................45
Figure 13 - Bicycle Parking Inventory ...................................................................................46
Figure 14 - 2010 Future Land Use Map .................................................................................47
Figure 15 - Bike Path Inspection Hot Spot Map ..................................................................57
Figure 16 - Summary of Improvements .............................................................................122
Figure 17-18 - SW 56th Street Section & Plan ..................................................................129
Figure 19-20 - SW 64th Street Section & Plan ...................................................................133
Figure 21-22 - SW 72nd Street Section & Plan ..................................................................137
Figure 23-24 - SW 57th Avenue Section & Plan ................................................................141
Figure 25-26 - SW 58th Avenue Section & Plan ...............................................................145
Figure 27-28 - SW 58th Avenue Section & Plan ...............................................................149
Figure 29-30 - SW 62nd Avenye Section & Plan ................................................................153
Figure 31-37 - Design Considerations and Cost Exhibits ................................................159
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 1
I
n
t
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
In
t
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
I n t r o d u c t i o nIntroduction
SMITP
I
n
t
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
In
t
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 3
The City of South Miami desires to enhance the existing transportation system and mobility choices
available to residents, workers, and visitors to the City. Despite its many positive attributes, challenges exist
within the transportation system making it diffi cult for the City to maintain the Pleasant Living ideal. The
beginnings of a greenway network are in place; however, connectivity improvements need to be identifi ed
to solve challenges presented by signifi cant gaps in the greenway network. The Miami-Dade Metrorail
passes through the City with the South Miami station located just north of Sunset Drive; yet, pedestrian
access to the station is severely limited by the US 1/South Dixie Highway barrier that runs through the
City. Sidewalks are found on many streets within South Miami, although the infrequency of well-designed
crosswalks leads to accessibility and safety challenges. A grid network of streets is in place in most parts
of the City, but there is a traffi c calming challenge associated with ensuring that motorists travel at a
respectful speed in and around South Miami.
The City is attempting to re-integrate
these functions through complete streets
principles, which seek to provide a
comfortable transportation system for all
modes and users of all ages and abilities.
An integral component of this eff ort is to
establish and approve this Plan, which
identifi es an interconnected network of
mobility and safety improvements based
on smart growth and complete streets
principles. The SMITP is a community-
based transportation plan that provides for
convenient and effi cient use of motorized
and non-motorized transportation
and addresses issues such as vehicular
circulation, parking, pedestrian/bicyclist
movements, and public transportation,
resulting in short- and long-term strategies
for implementation of the resultant plan.
Outcomes
The primary outcomes of the plan, once implemented, are to:
Provide people with sustainable, safe, and eff ective alternatives to personal motorized vehicles;
Reduce vehicle trips; and
Reduce vehicular congestion.
Increase transit ridership.
I
n
t
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
In
t
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
IntroductionIntroduction
Participants of the SMITP Bike Path Inspection riding
through the streets of South Miami
SMITP4 | JANUARY 2015
Principles and Strategies
The plan accomplishes these outcomes through the following principles and strategies.
Focus on pedestrian and bicycle transportation projects, as well as enhancing access to public
transportation with the goal of providing a blueprint for developing a citywide system that serves all
modal user groups, including commuting, recreational, and utilitarian trips.
Develop a comprehensive intermodal transportation plan based on smart growth principles that
improve accessibility for all modes of transportation with an emphasis on safety and to provide
recommended improvements based on current and projected future conditions.
Provide for convenient and effi cient use of motorized and non-motorized transportation and
address issues such as vehicular circulation, parking, pedestrian/bicyclist movements, and public
transportation, resulting in short- and long-term strategies for implementation of the resultant plan.
Review and analyze existing trails, sidewalks, bicycle paths, activity nodes, and the roadway network
within the City and coordinate with neighboring communities to ensure connectivity for a larger
bicycle, pedestrian, and trails network.
Review and analyze earlier transit related studies.
Review and analyze capital improvement projects to ensure that the needs of non-motorized users,
including pedestrians, bicyclists, and persons with disabilities, are considered in programming,
planning, maintenance, construction, operations, and project development activities.
Enhance and expand the network of new trails, sidewalks, and bicycle paths, to provide safe non-
motorized connections to activity nodes such as schools, parks, hospitals, transit, and shopping
centers.
Enhance pedestrian crossings, landscaping, lighting, directional signage, and other amenities.
Defi ne the “spine” of the greenway system along the existing and future travel network.
Defi ne the priority for greenways implementation.
Recommend a plan for future trailheads and trail amenities (locations and types of benches, trash
cans, etc.).
Recommend improvements to existing roadways, sidewalks, bike lanes, sharrows, and bioswales.
Recommend locations for additional sidewalks, bike lanes, sharrows, and bioswales.
Recommend traffi c calming improvements on neighborhood streets.
Provide recommendations for way-fi nding (signage) and pavement markings, to direct users to
preferred and nearby destinations, as well as alert drivers of non-motorized users.
I
n
t
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
In
t
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 5
Green Sustainability Values
The SMITP will help to fulfi ll the South Miami Carbon-Neutral Resolution No. 23-09-12833 and will also be
built upon green sustainability values. Sustainability in transportation is the ability to meet the needs of
the present generation and to provide for the movement of people and goods without compromising the
ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Transportation is the largest user of fossil fuels and
one of the largest emitters of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. The SMITP is developed around the
following green sustainability values.
Provide viable mobility options to be given opportunities to drive less (walking, bicycling, access to
public transit, etc.).
Increasing opportunities for walking and bicycling in the City will lead to enhanced public health and
fi tness.
Provide urban design and landscape techniques to enhance the City’s street rights-of-way and open
spaces.
Provide local merchants with better multimodal connectivity to South Miami neighborhoods.
Provide a multimodal transportation system designed around people, not cars, will help promote the
South Miami Hometown identity.
Increase education strategies will help supplement engineering improvements to connect with
residents, neighborhoods, business owners, schools, and advocacy groups to promote sustainable
transportation.
SMITP Network Plan
The recommendations of the SMITP are summarized in the Figure 1 Network Plan, which shows the
recommended future network of non-motorized transportation facilities. The Network Plan includes
existing facilities, such as bike lanes and paved paths, as well as recommended projects such as proposed
crosswalks, sidewalks, bike lanes, sharrows, shared use paths, neighborhood greenways, and traffi c circles.
The SMITP Network Plan was developed throughout the course of the SMITP process, which included
several forms of public engagement, inter-agency coordination, technical analysis, use of complete streets
design elements, and adherence to the vision, goals, and objectives of the this Plan These elements will be
discussed throughout the SMITP report. Refer to Figure 1 Network Plan on the following page.
I
n
t
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
In
t
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
SMITP6 | JANUARY 2015
I
n
t
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
In
t
r
o
d
u
c
t
i
o
n
nm
nm
nmnmnm
nm
nm
nmnmnmnm
nm
nmnm
nm
nm
nm
nm
nm
nm
GF
GF
GF GF GFGFGF
GF
GF
GF
89:m 89:m
89:m
89:m89:m
89:m
89:m
89:m
89:m89:m
89:m
89:l 89:l 89:l 89:l89:l89:l
89:l
89:l89:l89:l89:l89:l89:l
89:l
89:l 89:l 89:l 89:l
89:l89:l
89:l
89:l89:l
89:l89:l®M
"½l
"½l
"½l
"½l
"½l
S
W
5
7
T
H
A
V
E
S
W
6
7
T
H
A
V
E
S
W
6
2
N
D
A
V
E
S DIXIE HWY SW 80TH ST
SW 40TH ST
SW 72ND ST SW 88TH ST
SW 64TH ST
SW 56TH ST
AL
H
A
M
B
R
A
C
I
R
SW 48TH ST
SW
5
8
T
H
A
V
E
SR 878 SW 70TH AVE
SA
N
A
M
A
R
O
D
R
SW
6
7
T
H
A
V
E
SW
6
2
N
D
A
V
E
RE
D
RD
S DIXIE HWY
SW
5
7
T
H
A
VE
SW 80TH ST
SW 56TH ST
SW 64TH ST
SW 40TH ST
AL
H
A
M
B
R
A
C
I
R
SW 48TH ST
SW 88TH ST SW 92ND ST
S
W
6
9
T
H
A
V
E
SW 72ND ST SW 71ST AVE
SW 49TH ST
SW
6
3
R
D
C
T
SW 70TH ST
SW 50TH ST
SW 39TH TER
SW 82ND ST
SW 37TH ST
SW 69TH ST
SW 36TH ST
SW 47TH ST
SW 35TH ST
SW 60TH ST
SW 62ND ST
SW 44TH ST
BLUE RD
SW 55TH AVE SW 78TH ST
SW
6
0
T
H
C
T
SW 46TH TER
SW 79TH ST
SW 38TH ST
SW
64
T
H
P
L
SR-878
SW
6
0
T
H
PL
SW 46TH ST
SW
5
9
T
H
A
V
E
SW 91ST ST
SW 51ST ST
SW 81ST ST SW 76TH STSW 83RD ST SW 78TH TER SW 77TH TER
SW 41ST ST
SW 68TH ST
BIRD RD
SW 56TH AVE
SW 42ND ST
SW 50TH TER
SA
N
A
M
A
R
O D
R
SW 73RD ST
SW
6
5
T
H
A
VE
SW 58TH TER
S
W
6
3
R
D
A
VE
SW 62ND CTBANYAN DR SW 76TH TER
SW
5
8
T
H
C
T
SW 66TH ST
SNAPPER CREEK DR
SW
6
4
T
H
A
V
E
SW 75TH TER
SW 67TH ST
SW 45TH ST
SW 59TH ST
SIENA AVE
SW 63RD PLSW 62ND PL
SW 52ND ST
SW 64TH CT SW 69TH CT
SW 53RD ST
SW 69TH TER
SOPERA AVE
SW 57TH TER
SW 44TH TER
SW 60TH AVE SW 68TH CT
S
W
6
6
T
H
A
V
E
SW 52ND TER
ALGARDI AVE
CECILIA AVE
TRILLO AVE
ROBBIA AVE
S
W
6
1
S
T
C
T
MANTUA AVE
URBINO AVE
SW
6
1
S
T
A
V
E
SW
70T
H
A
V
E
CANTORIA AVE
ANCONA AVE
SW 65TH PL MANOR LN
ZULETA AVE
MADR
U
G
A
A
V
E
LEVA
N
T
E
A
V
E
BARACOA AVE
SW 62ND TER
SUNSET DR
SW 68TH AVE
S WATER
W
A
Y
DR
SW 84TH ST
SW 45TH LN
SW 39TH ST
COM
M
E
R
C
E
LN
PRO
G
R
E
S
S
R
D
SW 63RD ST
PLA
S
E
N
T
I
A
A
V
E
ALBENGA AVE
SW 85TH ST
SW 57TH DR
VENERA AVE
SW 86TH ST
ZORETA AVE
CONSOLATA AVE
SW 43RD ST
SW 61ST ST
SW 74TH STSW 87TH ST
SW 55TH ST
SW 54TH ST
SW 59TH PLSW 59TH CT
SW
58
T
H
PL
PON
C
E
D
E
L
E
O
N
B
L
V
D
SW
5
7
T
H
P
L
SW 65TH ST
SW
5
7
T
H
C
T
SW 84TH TER
SW 61ST TER
SW 68TH TER
SW
6
5
T
H
C
T
SW 42ND TER
SW 48TH TER
S
W
58T
H
A
V
E
SW 56TH TER
SW 58TH ST
SW 74TH TER
SW 63RD TER
SW 93RD ST SW 81ST TER SW 68TH PL
SW 65TH TER
SW 71ST ST
ALCALA AVE
SW 90TH ST
SW
6
9
T
H
P
L
SW 64TH TER
SW 45TH TER
MURCIA AVE
SW 89TH TERSW 61ST CT
C
I
R
TOWNHOMES AT OAK LN SW 57TH PATH SW 67TH CT
SW
6
5
TH
R
D
SW 88TH TERSW 87TH TERSW 86TH STSW 86TH ST
S
W
63R
D
AV
E
SW 62ND TER
SW
5
8
T
H
P
L
SW 63RD CTSW 78TH ST
SW
6
2
N
D
P
L
SW
6
3
RD
A
V
E
SW
6
5
T
H
A
VE
SW
6
8
T
H
A
V
E
SW
62
N
D
C
T
SW 50TH TER
SW 81ST ST
SW
6
9
T
H
A
V
E
SW 42ND TER
SW 64TH CT
SW
6
4
T
H
PL
SW
6
9
TH
P
L
SW 50TH ST
SW 49TH ST
SW
5
9
T
H
P
L
SW 88TH ST
SW
6
6
T
H
AV
E
SW 43RD ST
SW
6
2
N
D
C
T
SW
5
9
T
H
A
V
E
SW 75TH TER
S
W
6
3R
D
A
V
E
SW 56TH TER
SW
60
T
H
A
V
E
SW 58TH CT
SW 38TH ST
SW
6
9
T
H
A
V
E
SW 63RD ST
SW
64
T
H
P
L
SW 74TH ST
S
W
7
0
T
H
A
V
E
SW 62ND TER
SW 42ND TER
SW 41ST ST
SW 62ND PL
SW
6
8
T
H
C
T
SW 63RD ST
SW 52ND ST
SW 60TH ST
SW 46TH ST
SW 55TH ST
SW 61ST ST
S
W
64
T
H
C
T
SW 61ST ST
MANOR LN
SW
6
1
S
T
A
V
E
SW 81ST ST SW 83RD STSW 60TH AVE
S
W
6
5
T
H
A
V
E
SW 59TH CTSW 77TH TER
SW
6
0T
H
PL
SW 42ND ST
SW 78TH ST
SW
6
3
R
D
A
V
E
SW 62ND TER
SW 82ND ST
SW
5
9
T
H
A
V
E
SW 66TH AVE
SW
5
8
T
H
A
V
E
SW 68TH ST
SW 62ND CT
SW 46TH TER
SW
6
4
T
H
A
VE
SW
6
0
TH
A
V
E
S DIXIE HWY
SW
6
5
T
H
AV
E
SW 57TH TER
SW
69
T
H
AVE
SW
63R
D
C
T
SW 85TH ST SW 61ST AVESW 58TH AVE
SW 59TH ST
SW 6
8
T
H
C
T
SW 84TH ST
SW 45TH ST
SW 68TH CT
SW
6
3
R
D
C
T
SW 68TH AVE SW 69TH AVE
SW
6
4
T
H
C
T
SW 63RD TER
SW 60TH ST
S
W
6
4
T
H
C
T
SW 51ST ST
BIRD RD
SW 39TH ST
SW 42ND ST
SW
6
4
TH
A
V
E
SW
5
9
TH
P
L
SW 42ND ST
SW
69
T
H
A
V
E
SW 85TH ST
SW
6
1
S
T
C
T
SW
6
4
T
H
C
T
SW 57TH CT SW 61ST AVE
SW 43RD ST
SW 59TH CTSW 87TH ST
SW
5
9
T
H
C
T
SW 61ST CTSW 60TH AVE
S
W
6
9T
H
C
T
SW 63RD CT
SW
6
2
N
D
CT
SW 42ND ST
SW 66TH ST
S
W
5
8
T
H
C
T
SW 40TH ST
SW
6
2
N
D
C
T
SW 69TH CT
SW
6
9
T
H
AV
E
SW 44TH ST
SW 69T
H
CT
SW 71ST ST
SW 59TH ST
SW 62ND TER
SW 41ST ST
SW 61ST AVESW 87TH ST
SW 41ST ST
SW
6
0
TH
P
L
SW 65TH ST
SW 57TH CT SW 59TH AVE
SW 62ND ST
SW 35TH ST
SW 62ND CT
SW 39TH ST
SW 65TH AVESW 63RD CT SW 81ST ST
SW
6
4
T
H
C
T
SW 61ST ST
SW
5
9
T
H
A
VE
SW 66TH ST
SW 84TH ST
SW 44TH ST
SW 86TH ST
SW
5
8
T
H
A
V
E Ü
00.250.5 0.125Miles
FIGURE 1: NETWORK PLAN
SOUTH MIAMI INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Existing Facilities
Bike Racks
nmSchools
Existing Bike Lanes
Existing Paved Path
ÆbMetrorail Station Major Roads Other Roads ParksWaterCity of South Miami Other Jurisdictions
LEGEND
Future Facilities
Future Bike Lanes
Future Sharrows
Future Shared-Use Path
Future Sidewalk
Neighborhood Greenways
Buffered Bike Lane
Ludlam Trail Corridor
89:mFuture Crosswalk
"½lGreen Bike Lane and/or Bike Box
®MM-Path Crossing Improvements
Neighborhood Traffic Circle
GFNon-Motorized Connection
Traffic Circle
Pedestrian Wayfinding Sign System
89:lNeighborhood Greenway
Crossing Treatment
Future One-Way Loop Circulation
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 9
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
Ex
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
E x e c u t i v e S u m m a r yExecutive Summary
SMITP10 | JANUARY 2015
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
Ex
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 11
The approach is to identify a coordinated set of phased multimodal improvements with a focus on
pedestrian and bicycle mobility. The recommended improvements and implementation plan will serve as a
tool to guide short- and long-term intermodal transportation improvements.
Some of the key opportunities that have been identifi ed include:
Connecting to neighboring municipalities, as well as to the regional system of planned and existing
greenways, such as:
Snapper Creek Trail
M-Path
Red Road Linear Park
Old Cutler Trail Bike Path (Bike Route 1)
FEC Ludlam Corridor
Identifying pedestrian crossing strategies to reduce the barrier that US 1 (South Dixie Highway) forms
between the east and west side of town.
Understanding that bus stops should have a safe and convenient crosswalk nearby.
Enhancing and expanding the network of paved paths and trails within City street rights-of-way.
Identifi cation of missing gaps in the sidewalk network.
Distinguishing strategies to better link the downtown district with the South Miami Metrorail Station.
Expanding the network of traffi c calming that has been identifi ed on local streets, to encourage
motorists to drive through the City at respectful speeds.
The following is a list of tasks that were completed for this project:
Transportation Mobility Data Collection, Review, and Analysis (February 2014)
Bike Path Inspection (March 2014)
Public Engagement (March 2014)
Inter-agency Coordination (February and July 2014)
Vision, Goals, and Objectives (June 2014)
Master Plan Diagrams and Exhibits (July 2014)
Design Considerations and Cost (July 2014)
Implementation Plan (September 2014)
Master Plan Report Preparation (September-November 2014)
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
Ex
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
Executive SummaryExecutive Summary
SMITP12 | JANUARY 2015
E
x
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
Ex
e
c
u
t
i
v
e
S
u
m
m
a
r
y
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 13
T i m e l i n e o f Timeline of
S i g n i f i c a n t E v e n t sSignificant Events
T
i
m
e
l
i
n
e
o
f
S
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
E
v
e
n
t
s
Ti
m
e
l
i
n
e
o
f
S
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
E
v
e
n
t
s
SMITP14 | JANUARY 2015
H
e
a
d
i
n
g
He
a
d
i
n
g
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 15
SMITP History
September 6, 2011: A resolution recognizing the importance of bicycling in transportation and
recreation for the betterment of the residents and for the environment was approved by Commission
April 10, 2012: Draft Greenways proposal was prepared by Green Task Force
September 24, 2012: Green Task Force requested to develop greenway systems for walkability and
showed Draft Greenways Plan. The Commission approved $100,000 from PTP funds to create an
Intermodal Transportation Plan
January 17 2013: MPO grant application submittal for the SMITP with Letter of Support from Green
Task Force
April 12, 2013: RFQ #PW-S2013-10 released for the SMITP
May 2013: MPO grant awarded $21,000 for SMITP
June 18, 2013: Commission approved resolution authorizing the City Manager to negotiate a
professional service agreement for the SMITP
December 18, 2013: SMITP Contract signed by both the City and Kimley-Horn
February 20, 2014: Interagency Coordination Meeting #1
March 3, 2014: Green Task Force Workshop
March 8, 2014: Bike Path Inspection
March 20, 2014: Public Charrette
July 15, 2014: Presentation to Green Task Force
July 17, 2014: Interagency Coordination
Meeting #2
August 12, 2014: Presentation to Green Task
Force
September 2014: Draft SMITP Master Plan
Report
October 22, 2014: Revised draft SMITP
resubmitted for adminstrative review
December 4, 2014: Revised draft SMITP Report submittal
T
i
m
e
l
i
n
e
o
f
S
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
E
v
e
n
t
s
Ti
m
e
l
i
n
e
o
f
S
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
E
v
e
n
t
s
Timeline of Significant EventsTimeline of Significant Events
SMITP16 | JANUARY 2015
T
i
m
e
l
i
n
e
o
f
S
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
E
v
e
n
t
s
Ti
m
e
l
i
n
e
o
f
S
i
g
n
i
f
i
c
a
n
t
E
v
e
n
t
s
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 17
S
M
I
T
P
V
i
s
i
o
n
SM
I
T
P
V
i
s
i
o
n
S M I T P V i s i o nSMITP Vision
SMITP18 | JANUARY 2015
H
e
a
d
i
n
g
He
a
d
i
n
g
S
M
I
T
P
V
i
s
i
o
n
SM
I
T
P
V
i
s
i
o
n
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMI
HeadingHeading H
e
a
d
i
n
g
He
a
d
i
n
g
JANUARY 2015 | 19
The genesis of the South Miami Intermodal
Transportation Plan (SMITP) began with the Green
Task Force discussing a system of neighborhood
greenways and trails for the City of South Miami.
This idea was further galvanized on September
6, 2011, when the City Commission passed a
resolution recognizing the importance of bicycling
in transportation and recreation for the betterment
of the residents and for the environment. The
SMITP is part of a continuing eff ort to enhance the
transportation system and mobility choices for
residents and visitors to the City of South Miami.
The vision is to establish a network of sidewalks, trails, roadway improvements, neighborhood greenways,
and bicycle lanes throughout the City that will provide residential areas with a safe and comfortable
connection to downtown shopping and dining, transit facilities (Metrorail and Metrobus), and the M‐
Path, available to everyone: young and old; motorists and bicyclists; walker and wheelchair users; and
bus and Metrorail riders alike. Based on smart growth and complete streets principles, the Plan will focus
on pedestrian and bicycle transportation projects, as well as enhancing access to public transportation
through complete streets principles, which seek to provide a comfortable transportation system for users
of all transportation modes and all ages and abilities.
Complete Streets is a relatively new term for an idea from decades past. Long before regulations and
requirements promoting rapid automobile movement began dictating street design, streets were built
and developed to serve the destinations surrounding them. Some of the greatest streets in America
still maintain this century-old character. New, enhanced streets, built to evolving standards, are being
constructed throughout the country through Complete Streets programs. Complete Streets facilitate
pedestrian street crossings, walkability, and biking. Furthermore, it improves transit connectivity and safety
for all users.
Sustainability in transportation is the ability to meet the needs of the present generation and to provide
for the movement of people and goods without compromising the ability of future generations to meet
their own needs. Transportation is the largest user of fossil fuels and one of the largest emitters of carbon
dioxide into the atmosphere. The SMITP will help to fulfi ll South Miami’s desire to be carbon-neutral by
following sustainability values:
People deserve viable mobility options to be given opportunities to drive less (walking, bicycling,
access to public transit, etc.).
Enhancement of street rights-of-way and open spaces through good urban design and landscape
techniques.
Better multimodal connectivity will provide economic benefi ts to local merchants.
A multimodal transportation system designed around people, not cars, will help promote the South
Miami Hometown identity and reinforce its City of Pleasant Living ideals.
Educating users of the system improvements will encourage and promote sustainable transportation.
S
M
I
T
P
V
i
s
i
o
n
SM
I
T
P
V
i
s
i
o
n
SMITP VisionSMITP Vision
SMITP20 | JANUARY 2015
The SMITP will try to balance functionality, maintenance, and cost, while focusing on solutions to reduce
environmental impact. As projects recommended in the SMITP Network Plan are implemented, some
options that can be included in these projects consistent with sustainability principles include:
Rain gardens and bioswales (to capture stormwater runoff )
Solar lighting for bus stops and sidewalks
LED street lighting
Car share locations
Bike service kiosks
Pervious concrete and porous asphalt
Many of the features noted above can be considered as an alternative to more extensive infrastructure
changes, resulting in major costs savings.
S
M
I
T
P
V
i
s
i
o
n
SM
I
T
P
V
i
s
i
o
n
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 21
G
o
a
l
s
a
n
d
O
b
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
Go
a
l
s
a
n
d
O
b
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
G o a l s a n d O b j e c t i v e sGoals and Objectives
SMITP22 | JANUARY 2015
H
e
a
d
i
n
g
He
a
d
i
n
g
G
o
a
l
s
a
n
d
O
b
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
Go
a
l
s
a
n
d
O
b
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 23
The goal of the SMITP is to develop an interconnected network plan of
multimodal streets that promote sustainable transportation and identify
design solutions that:
Provide for multiple transportation modes, such as pedestrian,
bicycle, transit, and automobile, and include environmentally
sustainable, context-sensitive solutions;
Recognize the diff erences between street types; and
Support fl exibility to accommodate future needs and allow change
to occur incrementally within budgetary constraints.
The following objectives will drive the development of the SMITP as a
means towards achieving the above stated goals:
Establish new street design processes, policies, and standards that
provide the opportunty to integrate Complete Streets and Integrated
Stormwater Management (ISWM) principles.
Provide eff ective and timely opportunities for community
stakeholder input on the design priorities and cost/benefi t of the
proposed street improvements.
Develop a strategy for systematic and phased implementation over
time through both public and private improvements.
G
o
a
l
s
a
n
d
O
b
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
Go
a
l
s
a
n
d
O
b
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
Goals and ObjectivesGoals and Objectives
SMITP24 | JANUARY 2015
G
o
a
l
s
a
n
d
O
b
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
Go
a
l
s
a
n
d
O
b
j
e
c
t
i
v
e
s
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 25
B e n e f i t s o f C o m p l e t e S t r e e t sBenefits of Complete Streets
B
e
n
e
f
i
t
s
o
f
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
Be
n
e
f
i
t
s
o
f
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
SMITP26 | JANUARY 2015
H
e
a
d
i
n
g
He
a
d
i
n
g
B
e
n
e
f
i
t
s
o
f
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
Be
n
e
f
i
t
s
o
f
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 27
Embracing Complete Streets
principles would enhance the
everyday quality of life for South
Miami residents. Complete Streets
drive both infrastructure and cultural
changes. Shifting demographic
trends show more people are
choosing to live in walkable urban
areas and desire access to a variety
of transportation modes. This gives
an increasing number of people the
option not to choose automobiles for
everyday travel.
Data from the 2012 National Household Travel Survey
indicate that within the Miami urbanized area,
approximately 25 percent of all vehicular trips are one
mile or less in length and nearly half of all trips are
three miles or less. This indicates that one-quarter of
trips are within walking range for most people and
almost half of all trips are within bicycling range for
most people. Roadway congestion seems to grow
despite a continual investment in roadway capacity
infrastructure. The demand for alternative methods
to move around the City is increasing.
Complete Streets design also encourages a shift in
the City’s modal split increasing the use of transit,
biking, and walking. By diversifying modes of
transportation, like transit and rail, more people
can move through a corridor by means other than
solely using motor vehicles. Another critical benefi t
is the incorporation of green features. These design
elements can improve the visual impact of the
roadway, assist in stormwater management, combat
pollution from emissions, reduce exposed pavement,
and lead to a decrease in the City’s heat island eff ect.
Complete Streets will benefi t the City of South Miami
in the following ways:
Improve safety by designing and
accommodating for all travel modes, including
bicyclists, pedestrians, drivers, transit users,
childen, seniors, and persons with disablities
thus reducing accidents.
Be
n
e
f
i
t
s
o
f
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
Benefits of Complete StreetsBenefits of Complete Streets
SMITP28 | JANUARY 2015
Increase the overall capacity of the transportation network while off ering options to avoid traffi c
Create more walking and bicycling opportunities which improves public health and wellbeing
Provide social equity to those who choose to not own or drive a car
Encourage children and elder adults to be more physically active
Create increased social, civic, and economic activity on streets
Provide incentives for economic revitalization by reducing transportation costs and travel time while
increasing property values and job growth
Reduce the demand on existing infrastructure by incorporating stormwater management into street
designs
Improve the return on infrastructure investments by integrating sidewalks, bike lanes, transit
amenities, and safe crossings into the initial design of a project sparing the expense of later retrofi ts
Improve the quality of place by creating vibrant livable centers through increased walking and
bicycling, and by promoting suitable denser development patterns where appropriate
Provide environmental benefi ts from reduced congestion through the use of alternative
transportation options and increased stormwater management
B
e
n
e
f
i
t
s
o
f
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
Be
n
e
f
i
t
s
o
f
C
o
m
p
l
e
t
e
S
t
r
e
e
t
s
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 29
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
M
o
b
i
l
i
t
y
D
a
t
a
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
,
R
e
v
i
e
w
,
a
n
d
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
M
o
b
i
l
i
t
y
D
a
t
a
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
,
R
e
v
i
e
w
,
a
n
d
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n M o b i l i t y Transportation Mobility
D a t a C o l l e c t i o n , R e v i e w , Data Collection, Review,
a n d A n a l y s i sand Analysis
SMITP30 | JANUARY 2015
H
e
a
d
i
n
g
He
a
d
i
n
g
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
M
o
b
i
l
i
t
y
D
a
t
a
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
,
R
e
v
i
e
w
,
a
n
d
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
M
o
b
i
l
i
t
y
D
a
t
a
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
,
R
e
v
i
e
w
,
a
n
d
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 31
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
M
o
b
i
l
i
t
y
D
a
t
a
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
,
R
e
v
i
e
w
,
a
n
d
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
Transportation Mobility Data Collection, Transportation Mobility Data Collection, Review, and AnalysisReview, and Analysis
Locally and across the nation, recent trends in development have changed the approach to roadway
planning, allowing for greater fl exibility in thoroughfare design that better complements surrounding land
uses. This emerging practice is based upon the principles of Context Sensitive roadway design. Designing
Walkable Urban Thoroughfares: A Context Sensitive Solutions (CSS) Design Manual, prepared by the
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and the Congress for the New Urbanism (CNU), provides a guide
on how this emerging practice can be implemented during the thoroughfare planning process.
Opportunities for multimodal corridors that advance economic development and create a safer, more
effi cient transportation system arise when the context of a roadway is taken into account during the
planning and design processes.
People who live in cities and towns throughout the country have a strong interest in ensuring that
transportation investments provide for safe travel of everyone using the road. Across the country,
Complete Streets policies have been gaining traction as more communities realize the benefi ts of safe,
accessible, and healthy streets. Of all the trips within the U.S., 40 percent are less than two miles; of these,
99 percent are by automobile. Nationwide, people
are open to using viable transportation alternatives,
if available. Trends also show that vibrant bike- and
transit-friendly cities attract the youth and creative
class—people who are integral to building tomorrow’s
workforce.
In 2011, 125 jurisdictions adopted a Complete Streets
policy, up from the 80 jurisdictions that committed to
Complete Streets in 2010. In total, as of 2011, 330 regional
and local jurisdictions, 26 states, the Commonwealth of
Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia have made a
commitment to Complete Streets implementation.
Transit Related Studies
During the evaluation process, we addressed prior City of South Miami transit‐related studies in order to
develop a comprehensive intermodal transportation plan based on smart growth principles that improve
accessibility for all modes of transportation with an emphasis on safety and to provide recommended
improvements based on current and projected future conditions. It was important to review available
existing pedestrian, bicycle, and transit studies conducted by the City; surrounding municipalities, MPO,
FDOT, and others; in addition to reviewing the City’s Capital Improvements Plan, in order to recommend
ways to enhance the multimodal transportation network through low-cost additions to projects that are
already programmed. As part of the Data Collection and Analysis task, we evaluated the City’s existing
transportation network in conjunction with the City’s Comprehensive Plan, Land Development Codes, and
the County’s Unifi ed Planning Professional Architectural and Engineering Services Request for Qualifi cation
Work Program, as well as addressed prior transit‐related studies conducted by the City.
SMITP32 | JANUARY 2015
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
M
o
b
i
l
i
t
y
D
a
t
a
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
,
R
e
v
i
e
w
,
a
n
d
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
M
o
b
i
l
i
t
y
D
a
t
a
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
,
R
e
v
i
e
w
,
a
n
d
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
We conducted a transportation mobility analysis to identify and map bicycle and pedestrian trip patterns
throughout the City boundaries, utilizing client-provided geographic information systems (GIS) data. We
then collected the following bicycle and pedestrian levels-of-service data for arterials and major collector
roads: During fi eld reviews, we photo documented key features, such as existing bicycle lanes, bicycle
parking, identifi ed defi ciencies, sidewalks, crosswalks, curb ramps, signage, and bicycle and pedestrian
activity.
Presence of a bike lane or paved shoulder
Presence and width of a sidewalk
Width of outside travel lane
Number of lanes
Posted speed limit
Median type
Separation width between the sidewalk and the travel lanes
Traffi c volume
Truck volume
One of the biggest obstacles faced in addressing bicycle and pedestrian safety issues is the lack of
information on bicycle and pedestrian activity levels, often referred to as exposure data. While motor vehicle
count data are routinely being collected and maintained, bicycle count data are not typically collected by
public agencies in a systematic manner. To address this issue, we performed formal two-hour bicycle and
pedestrian counts at six locations within the City. These bicycle and pedestrian counts helped us to monitor
locations, better defi ne safety issues, develop improvements, and prioritize locations for implementation. In
addition, bicycle and pedestrian counts will be used to defi ne bicycle safety issues (i.e., crashes) in relation to
exposure. We also collected the available bicycle and pedestrian crash data within the City.
Through fi eld reviews and surveys, we assessed the current bicycle parking level-of-service within the City,
including typical bicycle rack types and sizes, location of bicycle parking, number of bicycles parked, and
general observations on the usage of bicycle racks. Based on experience, it is also important to inventory
the “unoffi cial” bicycle parking, such as bicycles parked at bus stop signs, utility poles, trees, and any other
“unoffi cial” locations observed in the fi eld. The “unoffi cial” bicycle parking can often give a good indication
of latent demand and trip patterns.
Transportation Mobility Analysis
A general transportation mobility analysis was conducted to identify bicycle and pedestrian mobility issues
through data analysis in the City of South Miami. The purpose of this task is to collect data that will allow
the study team to properly assess the existing conditions of alternative travel modes in South Miami and to
analyze the future bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure needs.
BICYCLING AND WALKING A CTIVIT Y LE VELS
USDOT data from the National Household Travel Survey (2009) indicate that bicycling and walking account
for approximately 10 percent of all trips in the Miami-Dade urbanized area, with walking representing
approximately 9 percent and bicycling representing approximately 1 percent. The USDOT NHTS data are
collected on daily trips taken in a 24-hour period for all trips, all modes, all purposes, and all trip lengths.
Florida’s participation in the NHTS Add-On Program allows suffi cient data collection to be analyzed at the
urbanized area level.
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 33
The United States Bureau of the Census measures transportation data for work trips only using a sampling
of respondents that complete the census long form as part of the annual American Community Survey
(ACS). Updated socioeconomic, demographic, and housing information is now available on an annual
basis. The 2008-2012 ACS 5-Year Estimates were used for this analysis.
Work trip characteristics in the City of South Miami demonstrate that residents are more likely to make
work trips on foot or by bicycle than in the County, State, and Country as a whole. “Drove alone” is still
the dominant journey-to-work mode within the City of South Miami; however, the percentage of single
occupant vehicles at about 0.75 percent less than in the County as a whole and about 3.5 percent less than
in the State as a whole.
Table 1: Journey to Work Data
City of South MiamiMiami-Dade CountyState of FloridaUnited States
DescriptionNumberPercentNumberPercentNumberPercentNumberPercent
Car, truck, or van4,70882.22%964,18086.44%7,256,08289.50%120,551,90486.17%
Drove Alone4,35576.06%857,01476.83%6,443,85979.48%106,519,50876.14%
Carpooled3536.16%107,1669.61%812,22310.02%14,032,09910.03%
Public Transportation4557.76%60,0075.38%164,6982.03%6,967,6894.98%
Taxicab00.00%1,6410.15%6,5140.08%159,4860.11%
Motorcycle120.21%2,4030.22%29,2000.36%316,9920.23%
Bicycle1843.00%5,8020.52%51,9970.64%785,6650.56%
Walked2144.55%24,3652.53%126,7181.75%3,938,4183.27%
Other means150.26%11,6271.04%92,8451.15%1,195,8560.85%
Worked at home1382.00%45,3994.07%379,4224.68%5,977,6294.27%
GIS DA TA MAP SERIES
Using geographic information systems (GIS), a map series was prepared to illustrate existing transportation
mobility conditions and community features in South Miami that help form the background conditions for
improving the City’s bicycle and pedestrian mobility.
Figures 2 through 13, listed below, present the GIS Data Map Series.
Figure 2. Community Features
Figure 3. Existing Facilities
Figure 4. Metrobus Ridership Range per Stop
Figure 5. Number of Travel Lanes
Figure 6. 2010 Census Population Density
Figure 7. 2010 Census Automobile Ownership
Figure 8. Bicycle Level of Service (BLOS)
Figure 9. Pedestrian Level of Service (PLOS)
Figure 10. Bicycle/Pedestrian Crashes (‘05-‘11)
Figure 11. Bicycle Crashes (‘05-‘11)
Figure 12. Pedestrian Crashes (‘05-‘11)
Figure 13. Bicycle Parking Inventory
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
M
o
b
i
l
i
t
y
D
a
t
a
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
,
R
e
v
i
e
w
,
a
n
d
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
M
o
b
i
l
i
t
y
D
a
t
a
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
,
R
e
v
i
e
w
,
a
n
d
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
SMITP34 | JANUARY 2015
As shown in Figure 8, the majority of the major
roadways within the City of South Miami have a
BLOS of D or E. On the contrary, Figure 9 shows that
the majority of the major roadway segments within
the City of South Miami have a PLOS of D or better,
indicating the result of a much greater investment
over the years in pedestrian infrastructure than bicycle
facilities, which is consistent with fi ndings from the
County as a whole.
High crash corridors were identifi ed based on
geographic information systems (GIS) crash data
mapping. Figures 10, 11, and 12 depict the bicycle-
related and pedestrian-related crashes within the City
of South Miami area from 2005 to 2011. As shown on
these maps, the vast majority of bicycle-related and
pedestrian-related crashes occurred along the major
roadways within the City, including SW 40th Street, SW
64th Street, SW 72nd Street, SW 67th Avenue, SW 57th
Avenue, and S. Dixie Highway.
BICYCLE PAR KING INVENTORY
A fi eld inventory of existing bicycle parking facilities
within the commercial areas of the City of South Miami,
including typical bicycle rack types and sizes, location
of bicycle parking, number of bicycles parked, and
general observations on the usage of bicycle racks was
conducted in July 2014. The inventory also included
“unoffi cial” bicycle parking, such as bicycles parked at
street signs, fences, utility poles, trees, and any other
“unoffi cial” location observed in the fi eld.
Figure 13 depicts the locations where either designated
parking facilities (bike racks) were available or
undesignated bicycle parking was observed. The majority
of the observed undesignated bicycle parking was adjacent to business-related uses. Detailed bicycle
parking data collection sheets are included in Appendix A.
PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT
Kimley-Horn conducted an online public survey regarding attitudes and opinions on bicycle and
pedestrian mobility. The online public survey served a dual purpose as both a data collection mechanism
and a public engagement tool to obtain street users’ perspectives about the quality of existing bicycle
and pedestrian conditions and ideas for network improvements. A total of 113 people responded to the
online survey. The survey included qualitative and quantitative questions regarding the use of streets
and areas within South Miami for walking and bicycling. Other public engagement events included Bike
Path Inspection, Green Task Force Workshops, Public Workshop and Public Presentation.The results of the
online public survey and deleted discriptions of the listed public engagemtns are presented in the Public
Engagement section of this report.
T
r
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
M
o
b
i
l
i
t
y
D
a
t
a
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
,
R
e
v
i
e
w
,
a
n
d
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
Tr
a
n
s
p
o
r
t
a
t
i
o
n
M
o
b
i
l
i
t
y
D
a
t
a
C
o
l
l
e
c
t
i
o
n
,
R
e
v
i
e
w
,
a
n
d
A
n
a
l
y
s
i
s
Bicycles along fence outside of Winn Dixie
on SW 73rd Street and SW 59th Avenue
Bike rack at the NW corner of
Red Road and San Remo
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 49
P u b l i c E n g a g e m e n tPublic Engagement
P
u
b
l
i
c
E
n
g
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Pu
b
l
i
c
E
n
g
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
SMITP50 | JANUARY 2015
P
u
b
l
i
c
E
n
g
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Pu
b
l
i
c
E
n
g
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 51
In order to help broaden the master plan process
and facilitate greater and more immediate
interaction among City offi cials and stakeholders,
the master planning team scheduled and held public
engagement events for the project. SMITP public
engagement strategies included a public workshop,
several presentations to the Green Task Force, a
bike path inspection(public meeting on bikes), and
an online public survey. This section of the report
describes the various events and outcomes of the
public engagement process.
Community Aspirations
Residents and other South Miami stakeholders participated in an on-line survey regarding their perception
and use of transportation in South Miami. Residents also attended public meetings to discuss how they
would like to see their streets designed in the future. The following statements refl ect general desires
expressed by South Miami citizens and stakeholders during the public engagement process.
Supports sustainable economic development that fosters neighborhoods with more transportation
choices; are closer to shops, schools, and jobs; and are more energy effi cient.
Supports complete streets that encourage citizen safety, public health, and economic viability
by promoting pedestrian safety, limiting widening of existing streets, and providing public
transportation options.
Supports public-private partnerships for the implementation of complete streets.
Supports safer streets, an improved economic environment, and enhanced walking and biking
conditions in future street investments.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Mobility Survey
In January 2014, an online survey link was added to the City of South Miami main web page. This link
explained that the City of South Miami desires to enhance the existing transportation system and mobility
choices available to residents, workers, and visitors to the City. An integral component of this eff ort is
to establish and implement a South Miami Intermodal Transportation Plan (SMITP), which identifi es an
interconnected network of mobility and safety improvements based on smart growth and complete
streets principles. The goal of this Plan is to identify and prioritize pedestrian and bicycle transportation
projects throughout the City, as well as enhancing access to public transportation.
One of the questions in the survey was to rank a set of bicycle-pedestrian amenities in order of importance:
(1) being the most important and (6) being the least important. The composite results indicate that
respondents believe that crosswalks are the most important elements for South Miami. Table 2 shows the
results of this survey question. Detailed survey results are included in Appendix B.
P
u
b
l
i
c
E
n
g
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Pu
b
l
i
c
E
n
g
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Public EngagementPublic Engagement South Miami IntermodalTransportation Plan
T
H
I
S
I
S
P
L
E
A
S
A
N
T
LI
V
I
N
G
!
I
SOUTH
MIAMI
Are you satisfi ed with your existing transportation
system and mobility choices in South Miami?
Your opinion is critical and encouraged as a part of the
process to determine any future changes. Please provide us with
your input on the South Miami Intermodal Transportation Plan
(SMITP) by participating in the following event:
SMITP ƸUBLIC ǨHAR5EƼ7E
Th ursday, March 20, 2014
Stop by between 12:00 pm to 8:00 pm
South Miami Community Center
5800 SW 66th Street
6130 Sunset Drive, South Miami, FL 33143-5093
305-663-2514 • 305-663-6345 • www.southmiamifl .gov
We look forward to your participation!
Postcard.indd 1Pdidd1 3/5/2014 3:04:34 PM3/5/201430434PM
SMITP52 | JANUARY 2015
Table 2: Bicycle/Pedestrian Infrastructure Survey Results Ranking
RankingInfrastructure
1Crosswalks
2Traffi c Calming
3Bicycle Lanes/Vehicle Lane Share
4Canopy Trees/Shade
5Street Lighting
6Wayfi nding & Signage
Bike Path Inspection
The master planning team along with City staff conducted and led a three-hour bicycling tour on March
8, 2014. Other interested parties such as citizens, other stakeholders, inter-agency representatives, and
city offi cials also participated in the bike path inspection. During the bike path inspection, comments and
concerns were collected from tour participants regarding specifi c opportunities and constraints within the
City street network.
SMITP bicycling tour “Hot Spots” included the following:
Avenues:
57th Avenue and US 1
58th Avenue - implement as a major north/south neighborhood
greenway
58th Place at Community Center - one way/no bikes
58th Avenue - route to get to Dante Fascell Park
62nd Avenue - Miller to 48th Street - spotty or missing sidewalk
62nd Avenue and US 1
63rd Court - 63rd Street to Miller - needs traffi c calming
67th Avenue south of Miller - no sidewalk
M-Path at Manor Lane
Streets:
60th Street near South Miami K-8
61st Street - 67th Avenue to 65th Avenue
64th Street
68th Street and 59th Place - due to park, school
Sunset Drive north side of 67th Avenue
Sunset Drive - 59th Avenue to 70th Avenue
73rd Street at US 1 (westbound) - no bike access to M-Path, need curb cut
80th Street
Connection to Banyan Boulevard between Snapper Creek Canal and Church
P
u
b
l
i
c
E
n
g
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Pu
b
l
i
c
E
n
g
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Participants of the SMITP Bike Path
Inspection riding through the streets of
South Miami
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 53
Following the bike path inspection, comments and concerns were collected as listed below.
Need for curb ramps and sidewalk channels at the East side of SW 74th Street and SW 63rd Avenue to
allow for barrier free bike mobility through that intersection. An existing catch basin is in confl ict with
bike mobility.
The standard catch basins and drainage structure covers for the City Public Works manual should be
bike friendly and that the grate openings should be perpendicular to the edge of the pavement.
A good solution for bike mobility (through street ends that are blocked-off to vehicular traffi c) at the
intersection of Manor Lane and SW 64th Court where a gap in a raised curb allows for easy movement
of bikes and pedestrians.
The need to adjust and add signage to the M-Path at the corner of SW 80th Street and US 1. Part of
the M-Path dead ends into 80th Street without drop curbs and crosswalks. Also, a better pedestrian
and bike connection needs to happen between the M-Path and the crosswalk at the North side of US
1 and SW 80th Street. Vehicular signage needs to be added at all the intersections of the M-Path with
roadways to alert the drivers that they are approaching a bike/pedestrian path.
There is a need for a pedestrian crossing at the intersection of US 1 and SW 63rd Avenue. Pedestrians
are currently crossing US 1 unsafely because the nearest existing crosswalks are at SW 62nd Avenue
and SW 80th Street. Mayor Philip Stoddard tried to get this approved by FDOT last year, but the idea
was rejected by Miami-Dade PWWM. This item needs to be revisited.
The M-Path needs to be adjusted at the intersection of SW 62nd Avenue and US 1, making it easier
for bikers to cross this intersection at the correct location with drop curbs. Also, the existing concrete
“pork chop” makes it tricky for bikers to navigate across the intersection. The MDT construction plans
designed by Kimley-Horn, showing revisions to the M-Path including this item, have been completed
and will begin construction soon.
The need for a crosswalk at the intersection of SW 73rd Street and US 1. Mayor Philip Stoddard
explained that this is another item he tried to get approval for last year but was rejected by Miami-
Dade PWWM. This item needs to be revisited.
The need to have both a vehicular and a pedestrian/bike connection between City Hall driveway and
SW 73rd Street.
Possible crosswalks at all sides of the signalized intersections of US 1 with other roadways.
The need to adjust the crosswalk at the north side of US 1 and SW 72nd Street.
Pu
b
l
i
c
E
n
g
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
SMITP54 | JANUARY 2015
The need to adjust the M-Path surrounding the drive into the South Miami Metrorail station from US
1. This current design does not properly address potential confl icts between bikers, pedestrians, and
buses.
The need to have a pedestrian and bike path connection between SW 70th Street and the South
Miami Metrorail Station bus boarding area. A paved path can be added along the east edge of the
parking garage or along the east edge of the bus exit drive. An existing fi re hydrant at the edge of the
bus exit drive is blocking the walkway along the east end of the parking garage.
The need to add a crosswalk along the north side of SW 58th Avenue, SW 70th Street, and US 1.
The need to provide a bike lane starting at the east side of US 1 and SW 58th Avenue and heading
east along SW 58th Avenue and removing one of the SW 58th Avenue westbound turn lanes and
adjusting the existing landscape area along the west side in order to add a two-way bike lane along
the west side of SW 58th Avenue.
Possibly adding parking bumpers wherever parked cars overhang adjacent walkways or bike paths.
Possibly adding a bike lane or sharrows along the SW 80th Street.
The need to have better bicycle access into the west side of Dante Fascell Park at the intersection
of SW 87th Street and SW 58th Avenue. The current paved connection is diffi cult to maneuver via
bicycles.
Possibly building a separate paved bicycle path connecting the east and west ends of Dante Fascell
Park. The existing path is paved with the rubber material which is more suited for exercise and
pedestrians than for bicycles.
The need to have a paved connection that continues south along the Snapper Creek (C-2) Canal
SFWMD right-of way at SW 88th Street and SW 57th Avenue to Banyan Drive Park and Banyan Drive.
A short, approximately 500-linear-foot, connection of trail to low-volume Banyan Drive would off er
convenient access via a shared road to Miami-Dade County Matheson Hammock Park Trail that
connects to Old Cutler Trail. The Matheson Hammock Park Trail connects to the 10.3 mile Old Cutler
Trail which itself ties into a larger 26.5 regional network of trails that expand all the way from Black
Point Park and Marina to Bill Baggs Cape Florida State Park. Note that this is outside of the City of
South Miami city limits and, therefore, would need to be implemented by the City of Coral Gables.
Possibly removing the on-street parking along the south side of 74th Street in order to add a bike
lane.
P
u
b
l
i
c
E
n
g
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Pu
b
l
i
c
E
n
g
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 55
The need to revisit the pedestrian and bicycle connections at the intersection of SW 58th Place and
SW 68th Street adjacent to the South Miami Community Pool currently under construction.
The need for an east/west bike path across Marshal Williamson Park between SW 62nd Avenue and
SW 61st Court.
The need to improve the bike mobility which is currently cumbersome due to multiple transitions in
elevation at the east edge of SW 58th Place and SW 67th Street.
The opportunity to add bike lanes and canopy trees along SW 64th Street between SW 57th Avenue
and SW 67th Avenue.
Opportunities to connect to the Ludlam Trail going west along SW 64th Street past SW 69th Avenue.
Opportunities to add street trees along SW 63rd Avenue between SW 64th Street and SW 57th
Avenue.
The need to improve bicycle travel along SW 62nd Avenue between SW 40th Street and SW 64th
Street.
Problematic angles of the pedestrian/bicycle path along the south side of Miller Drive where it
crosses north/south roads and the need for these angles to be adjusted for easier bike movement
across these intersections.
Pros and cons of expanding the existing
walk in order to create a shared bike/
pedestrian path versus adding bike lanes
along the existing edges of pavement.
The desire to reduce turning radii in order
to help slow down vehicular traffi c exiting
Miller Drive and, therefore, reducing
possible confl icts between vehicles and
pedestrian/bicycles.
Pu
b
l
i
c
E
n
g
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
SMITP56 | JANUARY 2015
Green Task Force Workshop
The workshop process is a highly collaborative exercise to engage the participants. During the workshop,
information and ideas were exchanged with the purpose of generating a common vision for the project.
The fi rst meeting was on March 3, 2014, with a formal presentation to the Green Task Force members about
the SMITP tasks. Information was presented for the bike path inspectction and “Hot Spot” locations were
determined as shown on the Figure 15 on the follo. Additional formal presentations to the Green Task Force
were conducted on July 15, 2014 and August 12, 2014 during which progress on the SMITP was discussed.
The following information was discussed and gathered during the July and August presentations:
There is a bike/vehicular confl ict area due to a bike lane merge at 62nd Avenue, SE of 70th Street, in
front of the hospital. A possible solution was shown on a YouTube video sent by Douglas Thompson.
At 57th Avenue and Miller Drive, cars turning south and turning right have to cross the bike lane.
Flooding at SW corner of 57th Avenue and Miller Drive.
Include “Street Classifi cation Map” as per Buck Riley’s email.
Possibly add crosswalk section in the Master Plan report addressing where crosswalks are needed,
including mid-block crossings and crosswalks at bus stops as well.
63rd Avenue and Bird Road is wide and a good location for a mid-block crosswalk.
Possibly show suggested artistic crosswalk ideas in Master Plan report.
Possibly show 50th Street as an east/west greenway.
Along 57th Avenue, add crosswalks at Cecilia (name on Coral Gables side), at the Montessori school,
at 53rd Terrace, and at Ancona Street (name on Coral Gables side).
Suggestion to remove median along 57th Avenue where it intersects with Ponce De Leon Boulevard
and add a traffi c circle. May be too close to US 1 for this.
Possible use of “Bike Boxes” at signalized intersections.
Right-of-way width of 48th Street may be wide enough for proposed bike lanes and not just sharrows.
Bird Road between 57th Avenue and 67th Avenue suggest reducing cross section to two lanes each
way plus a median similar to how it is east of 57th Avenue.
Suggest reducing posted speed limits in residential streets from 30 MPH to 25 MPH.
Suggest adding a traffi c circle at 62nd Avenue and Miller Drive, and removing the traffi c signal.
Suggest adding a “Pedestrian Strategies” section in the Master Plan report with a focus on pedestrian
links to and from the downtown area into the surrounding neighborhoods.
Extend the 64th Avenue greenway north to connect to 44th Terrace.
In addition to the three meetings listed above, monthly Green Task Force meetings were attended by the
Master Planning Team in order to inform and update the Green Task Force members on the progress of the
SMITP.
P
u
b
l
i
c
E
n
g
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Pu
b
l
i
c
E
n
g
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 59
P
u
b
l
i
c
E
n
g
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Pu
b
l
i
c
E
n
g
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Public Workshop
A facilitated Public Workshop was attended by City residents, stakeholders, and staff in order to help
identify a vision and guiding principles for the project. A briefi ng of the existing City streets and their
characteristics was held. A PowerPoint of Complete Streets best practices and analogues, as well as current
standards, impacts, costs, methodologies, and trends that relate to the SMITP was presented. The workshop
format was structured for individuals to come at their leisure, work directly with the team, and take part
in creating the draft network plan. The information collected was depicted on maps and aerials. Maps
included information such as where bike facilities currently exist and where they do not. This gaps analysis
enabled participants to look for route alternatives based on where facilities do or do not exist. Participants
could also look for ways to fi ll in short gaps instead of selecting a route requiring all new facilities, such as
bike lanes or a separated path. The fi ndings of the workshop helped frame the project recommendations
and proposed network plan map.
Public Presentation
Following the Public Workshop, a Public
Presentation was held during which
information was presented on the data
collection and analysis, bicycle tour, and
information gathered during the Green
Task Force Committee Workshop, and
from the Public Workshop attendees.
SMITP Public Workshop Comment Card
Contact Information (Optional)
Name: ________________________________________________________________________
Address: _______________________________________________________________________
Email: _________________________________________________________________________
Representing: ____________________________________________________________________
Comments:
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________________
Please return to a project representative during the Workshop
__________________________
__________________________
__________________________
__________________________
__________________________
__________________________
__________________________
__________________________
__________________________
__________________________
__________________________
__________________________
__________________________
Please return to
Exhibits and comment card used during
the Public Workshop
SMITP60 | JANUARY 2015
P
u
b
l
i
c
E
n
g
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Pu
b
l
i
c
E
n
g
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 61
I n t e r -A g e n c y C o o r d i n a t i o nInter-Agency Coordination
I
n
t
e
r
-
A
g
e
n
c
y
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
In
t
e
r
-
A
g
e
n
c
y
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
SMITP62 | JANUARY 2015
H
e
a
d
i
n
g
He
a
d
i
n
g
I
n
t
e
r
-
A
g
e
n
c
y
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
In
t
e
r
-
A
g
e
n
c
y
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 63
In addition to public engagement activities, the master plan team also coordinated and scheduled an inter-
agency committee. This committee was comprised of staff from other local agencies in order to ensure
connectivity to projects that may be ongoing, through other agencies or in neighboring jurisdictions.
The committee also discussed concurrence for SMITP recommendations that impact other agencies. The
agencies that participated in the Inter-Agency Coordination Committee include:
Miami-Dade Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO)
Miami-Dade County Public Works and Waste Management Department
Miami-Dade County Parks, Recreation, and Open Spaces Department
Miami-Dade Expressway Authority (MDX)
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT)
City of Coral Gables
Bike 305
Bike SOMI
Miami-Dade County Transit
The fi rst inter-agency coordination meeting was held on February 20, 2014, during which a formal
presentation was given regarding the tasks associated with the SMITP. The following items were discussed
during this meeting.
FDOT’s 57th Avenue project (from 40th Street to US 1) is under way. This project includes sharrows
and bike/pedestrians sidewalks. The City of South Miami installed approximately 15 bike racks in
2012, when the parking meters were removed, and intends to install more bike facilities for residents
and visitors. The possibility of a BRT/Trails project along the old Ludlam railroad tracks, just west of
the City limits. Research, showed that people in Miami-Dade will not walk more than ¼ to ½ mile.
South Miami Metrorail station is one of three stations that allow for overnight parking, up to 30 days,
for $4.50 per day. Miami-Dade County has similar crash data statistics as the rest of urban areas in
Florida. SMITP survey was available on the South Miami main webpage.
Making Sunset Drive (from US 1 to SW 57th Avenue) pedestrian only (no vehicles) was discussed
and suggested the installation of bike corrals in some car parking spots, as well as rumble striping. A
paved ramp down to the Snapper Creek Canal at Dante Fascell Park and sharrows along 62nd avenue.
Crossing US 1 for both pedestrians and bicycles came up several times. It divides the City and hinders
pedestrians from walking and biking. The City, County, and FDOT need to work together to fi nd a
solution for crossing US 1.
Colored pavement for bike lanes (green) and the County is leaning towards the green pavement only
in confl ict zones.
The second inter-agency coordination meeting was held on July 17, 2014. Progress since the last
meeting was discussed, Green Task Force workshops attended, bicycle tour, public workshop held,
the development of the SMITP vision, goals and objectives, and the recommended improvements
master plan diagrams and exhibits. At the conclusion of the meeting, next steps were discussed
including design consideration and costs, and draft and fi nal master plan report.
I
n
t
e
r
-
A
g
e
n
c
y
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
In
t
e
r
-
A
g
e
n
c
y
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
Inter-Agency CoordinationInter-Agency Coordination
SMITP64 | JANUARY 2015
I
n
t
e
r
-
A
g
e
n
c
y
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
In
t
e
r
-
A
g
e
n
c
y
C
o
o
r
d
i
n
a
t
i
o
n
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 65
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
R e c o m m e n d a t i o n sRecommendations
SMITP66 | JANUARY 2015
H
e
a
d
i
n
g
He
a
d
i
n
g
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 67
Bicycle and pedestrian mobility recommendations have been developed for the City of South Miami based
on the prior work tasks of this Plan, including the online survey results, fi eld observations from the bike
path inspection, public engagement events, and inter-agency coordination meetings. All improvements
have been developed under an overarching principle to support and prioritize pedestrians and bicyclists
within South Miami through the use of context sensitive solutions (CSS) and complete streets principles
as discussed in the National Trends component of this report. The recommendations are fi rst summarized
by type (pedestrian design, street design, intersection design, and green streets). At the end of this section
includes a list of recommended specifi c improvment projects based on strategies identifi ed to promote
safe, healthy, and sustainable bicycle and pedestrian mobilty within the City of South Miami.
Pedestrian Design Elements
A safe pedestrian zone is an essential component of a well-designed street. The pedestrian zone is
composed of several elements including the sidewalk, the landscaping/street furnishings area between the
sidewalk and the street, and in some cases the building frontage on the outside of the sidewalk. In addition
to the provision of a basic sidewalk, the walking experience is aff ected by numerous elements that are
contained within this pedestrian zone, such as driveways, utilities, transit stops, street furniture, and public
art. This section covers the essential design elements of the pedestrian zone ensuring that people can
safely and comfortably walk along streets throughout South Miami. It provides a menu of components and
specifi c guidance to make the pedestrian experience more welcoming and safe.
NEW SIDEWALKS
Creating a place for pedestrians to walk comfortably
and safely while providing pedestrian elements such
as landscape and street furnishing. Sidewalks are an
important part of the streetscape and pedestrian zone.
Below are a list of applications and recommendations
for new sidewalk connections within the City.
Applications
Sidewalks should be provided along both sides of
all streets except those residential streets where
pedestrians can comfortably walk within the street due
to the low-volume, low-speed characteristics of the
street (shared space). In particular, the City and partner
agencies, such as Miami-Dade County Public Works and
Waste Management Department (MDCPWWM) and
the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), should
ensure that sidewalks are provided along both sides of
arterial and collector roadways. In addition, streets with
Metrobus service should have sidewalks connecting to all
bus stops.
Southwest corner of Miller Drive
and SW 58th Avenue
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
RecommendationsRecommendations
SMITP68 | JANUARY 2015
Recommendations
The following new sidewalk projects were recommended as part of the SMITP. It should be noted that this
is not an exhaustive list of all streets missing sidewalks, but rather a listing of critical pedestrian mobility
gaps for residents of the City.
SW 56th Street (Miller Drive) – north side between SW 65th Avenue and SW 58th Avenue (portions
located in unincorporated Miami-Dade County, shown for illustrative purposes due to mobility
benefi ts identifi ed in SMITP)
SW 80th Street (Davis Road) – south side between US 1 and SW 63rd Place
SW 80th Street (Davis Road) – south side between SW 63rd Court and SW 57th Avenue
SW 80th Street (Davis Road) – north side between US 1 and SW 57th Avenue
SW 62nd Avenue – both sides between SW 56th Street and SW 50th Street (located in unincorporated
Miami-Dade County, shown for illustrative purposes due to mobility benefi ts identifi ed in SMITP)
SW 62nd Avenue – both sides between SW 80th Street and SW 78th Street
WIDER SIDEWALKS
Typical sidewalk widths in South Miami vary from 5 to 6 feet (if adjacent to roadway curb-and-gutter).
Wider sidewalks should be provided as a matter of course along downtown commercial streets, mixed-use
streets, key school walking routes, streets with frequent transit service, all streets within ¼-mile radius of
the South Miami Metrorail Station, and in any location where the sidewalk is likely to be shared between
pedestrians and bicyclists. Other factors to consider when determining sidewalk widths include materials,
placement of trees and landscaping, ensuring continuous walking surfaces, and transitioning between
diff erent street types, and between the sidewalk and building entrances. In addition, the sidewalks should
be designed in coordination with the placement of utilities to minimize potential obstructions.
SHARED USE PATHS
Shared use paths are non-motorized transportation
trails that are typically used by pedestrians,
bicyclists, and in-line skaters. Shared use paths can
be paved trails in separate rights-of-way (such as
canal banks and transit corridors) or in street rights-
of-way as a wide sidewalk.
Applications
Examples of shared use paths in or near South
Miami include the M-Path along the Miami-Dade
Transit (MDT) Metrorail corridor, the Red Road Linear
Park along the east side of SW 57th Avenue south
of SW 88th Street, and the Miller Drive shared use
path on the north side of SW 56th Street west of
SW 67th Avenue. Shared use paths are distinct from sidewalks in that they are designed for shared use by
pedestrians, bicyclists, and skaters. Modern shared use path design standards call for path widths of 10 to
14 feet depending on expected usage. Older paths are sometimes more narrow and should be widened to
modern standards as funding becomes available.
Bicyclist riding through the M-Path
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 69
Recommendations
The following proposed new shared use paths were recommended as part of the SMITP to help meet the
goal of creating a more robust network of off -road greenway trails suitable for users of all ages and abilities.
SW 56th Street (Miller Drive) – south side between SW 67th Avenue and SW 57th Avenue
Snapper Creek Trail – north side of Snapper Creek Canal bank between SW 62nd Avenue and SW 57th
Avenue with connections to Dante Fascell Park
Part of the adopted Miami-Dade County Greenways Network and included within the overall
Snapper Creek Trail Segment B project which would link K-Land Park, Dadeland North Metrorail
Station, South Miami, Dante Fascell Park, and the Red Road Linear Park
Theoretical SW 58th Avenue – unbuilt street right-of-way between the Snapper Creek Canal right-of-
way and SW 87th Street
Future SW 64th Avenue – unbuilt street right-of-way between SW 85th Street and SW 84th Street
(located in unincorporated Miami-Dade County, shown for illustrative purposes due to mobility
benefi ts identifi ed in SMITP)
Ludlam Trail – shared use path rails-to-trails project consistent with Miami-Dade County Parks,
Recreation, and Open Spaces Department (MDPROS) master plan (located in unincorporated Miami-
Dade County, shown for illustrative purposes due to mobility benefi ts identifi ed in SMITP)
The Ludlam Trail right-of-way is currently privately-owned by Florida East Coast Industries (FECI)
SIGNAGE/WAYFINDING
Vehicle and pedestrian wayfi nding signs direct people to
destinations within a city and infl uence the safe travel of all street
users. Messages typically include guidance toward important
destinations, landmarks, and parking areas.
Signs intended for vehicles should be placed in the curb zone or
the median. A limited number of messages should be included on
these signs for ease of reading while driving. Pedestrian signs are
intended to be read while walking and may be placed in either
the edge, curb, or furnishing zones. Bikeway wayfi nding signs are
intended for bike users and may include route options, direction of
travel, time/distance to destinations, and bicycle safety information.
Informational signs are intended to give more detail about the City
surroundings. They may include parking information, location maps,
area business directories, and other public information.
Applications
The downtown South Miami area is an ideal area to implement a
pedestrian wayfi nding sign system to identify streets, walking routes, and
to direct pedestrians to points of interest (such as City Hall, the Library, and
hospitals), the South Miami Metrorail Station, parking lots, bicycle parking,
and other local amenities.
Sample wayfi nding signs in an urban
environment
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
SMITP70 | JANUARY 2015
Recommendations
It is recommended that the City implement a pedestrian wayfi nding sign system for downtown South
Miami that identifi es the location of the user, nearby points of interest, and includes maps and walking
radii distances and times. The following downtown streets should be included in the design of the
pedestrian wayfi nding program.
Sunset Drive between SW 63rd Avenue and SW 57th Avenue
SW 70th Street between SW 62nd Avenue and US 1
SW 73rd Street between US 1 and SW 57th Avenue
SW 74th Street between US 1 and SW 57th Avenue
SW 62nd Place between SW 74th Street and Sunset Drive
SW 62nd Avenue between US 1 and SW 70th Street
SW 61st Court between Sunset Drive to SW 70th Street
SW 61st Avenue between Sunset Drive and SW 70th Street
SW 59th Place between Sunset Drive and SW 70th Street
SW 59th Avenue between SW 74th Street and Sunset Drive
SW 58th Court between SW 74th Street and Sunset Drive
SW 58th Avenue between SW 74th Street and US 1
SW 57th Court between SW 74th Street and Sunset Drive
SW 57th Avenue between SW 74th Street and US 1
South Miami Metrorail Station
South Miami City Hall
South Miami Library
M-Path
Considerations
Overuse of wayfi nding should be avoided as to not create a cluttered streetscape.
Design of wayfi nding signs can enhance a distinctive corridor or district identity by use of a standard
design, format, color scheme, and logo.
TREES AND GREENSPACE
Trees and other greenscape plantings have a variety of
functions. They can provide shade, buff er pedestrians
from passing vehicles, and provide aesthetic
enhancements. Trees and other plantings must conform
to the South Miami Development Code. When placing
trees, consideration should be given to the placement
and interaction of pedestrian lighting utilities and street
furniture. Tree and plant selection is very important,
including consideration to the tree’s anticipated
mature canopy height, which will aff ect the clearance
for pedestrians, buses, and utilities. With proper
considerations of all of these elements, they can function together effi ciently.
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
South corner of Miller Drive and SW 63rd Avenue
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 71
STREET FURNITURE
Well-designed street furniture makes the sidewalk realm more comfortable. Benches provide places to rest,
catch-up with neighbors, or have lunch. Properly distributed trash receptacles help to keep the street clean
and presentable. Appropriately located bicycle racks and shelters are easier to use than improvising with
meters and fences. In addition to providing amenities, street furniture can also provide a buff er from the
noise and commotion of vehicles in the street. Street furniture that is not thoughtfully laid out can result
in obstructions and clutter in the sidewalk environment. This section provides design guidelines for street
furniture that is frequently located in the pedestrian zone, including bicycle parking and waste receptacles.
Street furniture is normally installed in the buff er/furnishing zone, although it can also be installed in the
frontage zone, on curb extensions, and on medians.
A key goal of these guidelines is to organize the City’s street furniture in a way that maximizes safety,
comfort, and function for all users. In addition to location considerations, the design of street furniture
should be simple and compatible with the existing environment. Street furniture should be durable,
maintenance-free, and should utilize green material (recycled plastics and metals), whenever possible.
Ultimately, City staff will review and approve all proposals for the placement of street furniture in the public
right-of-way and may request the addition of street furniture for some projects.
SEAT ING
Providing a place to sit is a basic necessity, particularly for
mixed-use streets in South Miami. Seating gives pedestrians
a place to rest, wait, or simply to relax and enjoy street life.
Providing comfortable, inviting places to sit can transform
a sidewalk into a gathering area and enhance its role as a
public space. Providing a shaded seating area is particularly
important during hot weather. Seating is also important to
provide for seniors who may be walking between transit
and their destination.
Applications
Seating comes in a variety of temporary and permanent
forms, such as chairs, benches, seating walls, steps,
monuments, planters, and raised tree beds. People enjoy
watching others move about, and the design and location
of seating should respond to how the surrounding space is
used.
Recommendations
Where possible, seating should be arranged to defi ne social spaces. The following considerations apply to
seating areas in the public right-of-way.
Seating should be affi xed in such a way that it is not easily damaged or removed. Care should be
exercised to ensure that seating does not interfere with entrances to buildings, heavily used loading
zones, parked vehicles, access to fi re hydrants, and other potential confl icts.
Seating should accommodate a minimum of two people. Seating can be integrated into buildings
and building frontages.
Seating should be situated to enable pedestrians to view street activity while being outside of
Street furniture along Sunset Drive in downtown
South Miami
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
SMITP72 | JANUARY 2015
the immediate fl ow of pedestrian traffi c and should be buff ered from noise and vehicle exhaust
whenever available. Where possible, seating should provide a sense of protection to the person seated.
Benches at bus stops with no shelter should be located at the back of the sidewalk and face the
street.
The following clear widths must be maintained when installing benches:
3’ minimum on either side of the bench
5’ minimum from fi re hydrants
2’ recommended clearance from all utilities and utility appurtenances
5’ minimum, ideally 6’ clear path in front of the bench when located at the back of the sidewalk,
facing the curb
Where the back of the bench abuts a building, wall, or other obstruction, a one-foot minimum
clear width should be provided for maintenance and debris removal
Considerations
Seating should be provided with and without armrests, if possible. Armrests provide stability for those
who require assistance sitting and standing. Armrests in the middle prevent sleeping while still allowing
access from the side. Seating without armrests allows a person in a wheelchair to maneuver adjacent to
seating or to slide on easily. Climatic conditions should be taken into consideration when seating materials
are determined. Bare metal and other heat absorbing materials should not be used. Movable seating
allows the fl exibility for an individual to control the amount of sun exposure or an allowance for groups to
determine their desired seating arrangement. Movable seating may be most appropriate for plazas, street
parks, or in association with certain retailer groups where activities may spill out into streets. However,
movable seating requires a commitment to continually maintain and replace elements that become
damaged or stolen.
BIC YC LE RACKS
Providing ample, well-designed bicycle parking is a key component
of the City’s strategy to increase bicycling. When bike parking is
provided, bicyclists are less likely to lock their bikes to sign posts,
trees, or railings, which can cause damage or create obstructions.
Applications
The following guidelines cover the design of bicycle racks in the
public right-of-way. They can be sculptural or utilitarian, and hold
one or multiple bicycles. Good bicycle parking designs allow bicycles
to be securely locked and support the bicycle frame with two points
of contact while maintaining an orderly appearance. Bicycle rack
designs should meet the following criteria:
The rack should be securely affi xed with theft-resistant
hardware to a paved surface
The rack should support the frame of the bicycle at two points
(in consideration of diff erent frame sizes and styles)
The rack should be simple and easy to use
The rack should permit the parking of two bicycles parallel to each other facing in opposite directions
Bike rack in front of South Miami
City Hall
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 73
The rack should allow easy locking of the frame and at least one wheel with a standard size U-shape
lock
The rack should be placed so that bicycles
park parallel to the curb or building frontage,
or angled if there is additional space
available, while still meeting the minimum
clearances
The rack should meet ADA guidelines to be
detected with a cane
Considerations
Some bicycle rack designs that are commercially
available do not meet these criteria and, therefore,
should not be used. The dimensions that follow
represent the recommended minimum clearance
between the nearest emergent of an unoccupied
bicycle rack and the adjacent object. Racks should
be installed so that parked bicycles do not obstruct the pedestrian through zone or access to fi re hydrants.
Refer to Figure 1 and Figure 13.
The rack should be placed in such a way to maintain at least 6 feet of unobstructed width in the
sidewalk between the rack and the far edge of the sidewalk The rack should be placed in such a way
to maintain an access aisle of at least 4 feet in width for the user to park and remove the bike
Racks placed in series should be parallel and separated by a minimum of 30 inches
Minimum clearance dimensions:
5’ from ADA ramp and fi re hydrant
4’ from curb, loading zone, bus stop, bus shelter, bus bench
3’ from other vertical elements including signs, utility poles, parking meters, mailboxes, waste
receptacle, utility meter, and other sidewalk obstructions
Wall/fence setbacks:
For racks set parallel to a wall/fence:
24 inches minimum; 36 inches preferred
For racks set perpendicular to a wall/fence:
28 inches minimum; 36 inches preferred
BUS STOPS
Bus stops are the interface between the pedestrian mode and the transit mode and should be comfortable,
safe, and accessible. Bus stop accommodations improve operations, ridership, and the value of transit to
the community. Accommodations can include shelters, benches, trash and recycling receptacles, lighting,
bicycle racks, bus schedules, maps, real-time next bus arrival information, newspaper boxes, and public art.
Stops should be visible, providing a clear sight line between bus operators and users of the system. Simple
stops without shelters are appropriate for lower volume routes. Installation of bus stop infrastructure
with the City should be done in consultation with Miami-Dade County, as most amenities will require
maintenance agreements between the City and the County.
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Bike rack along Sunset Drive in downtown South Miami
SMITP74 | JANUARY 2015
Applications
The length of the bus stop depends on the length of the vehicle, as well as the placement of the stop
(i.e., nearside, farside, or midblock). In general, bus stops should be a minimum of 40’ in length (80’
long if midblock). The pedestrian walking zone of the sidewalk should extend to the curb at stops so
that passengers may access the sidewalk directly from the bus doors. The area on the sidewalk where
passengers load and unload at bus doors is called the landing pad. The landing pad at the front of the
bus stop must provide a clear zone 5’ long, parallel to the curb, and a minimum of 8’ deep. The landing
pad should consist of ADA accessible surface materials, such as concrete or asphalt. Trees should not be
planted within the landing pad or door zones of a bus stop. Bus stops should be set back a minimum of 5’
from crosswalks. Where feasible, a 10’ setback is preferred. Where possible, trash and recycling receptacles
should be placed to the front of the bus stop, at a minimum of 18” from the landing pad, a minimum of 3’
away from benches, and in the shade. Bus stop infrastructure should also be anchored to the pavement
with theft resistant hardware.
Considerations
Curb extensions can provide additional pedestrian space and improve bus travel time by reducing the
time needed for loading and unloading. The width of the curb extension is determined by the width of the
adjacent parking lane, and the length should be long enough to allow passengers to board and exit at all
doors of the bus.
BUS SHELTERS
Well-designed bus stops can help make transit use
more comfortable and convenient. Transit shelters
should be provided on all key bus routes, if sidewalk
space allows. When providing a bus shelter, the
bus stop must be ADA compliant with a 5’ long
(parallel to the curb) by 8’ deep landing pad and
a 4’ minimum clear path. Shelter placement must
allow for unobstructed loading, unloading, and
unimpeded pedestrian through movements on the
sidewalk.
Applications
The following minimum clear widths for shelter placement must be maintained:
1’ from the building face
4’ from the back of curb
15’ from crosswalks at nearside bus stops for visibility
1’ from any ground obstruction (i.e., manhole, tree pit, sign)
10’ from fi re hydrants
3’ from the landing pad (maximum 25’ to the right of the landing pad)
Considerations
Bus shelters should be prioritized and installed based on ridership, with the goal of benefi tting the largest
number of riders. Special consideration should be given to areas where high numbers of transfers are
expected, where waiting times for riders may be longer, or where stops are close to facilities such as
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Example of a “bus shelter” along a city street
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 75
schools, medical centers, rehab centers, or high density housing and senior centers. Other considerations
include the physical constraints of bus stop sites,
preferences of adjacent property owners, bus stop
requests by riders, and construction costs.
DRIVE WAYS AND CURB CUTS
Driveways cross through the pedestrian zone and
put vehicles in direct confl ict with people who
are walking. Therefore, driveway design and the
number of driveways have a considerable infl uence
on pedestrian safety and comfort. Generally, the
frequency of driveways should be minimized and
access should be provided via alleys, where possible.
Driveway consolidation should be evaluated where
driveway spacing is less than 50 feet. Vehicles entering
the right-of-way are required to yield to all cross traffi c,
including pedestrians. It is important to convey this
requirement through design of the driveway/sidewalk interface. Driveways should be designed to look like
driveways, rather than like roadway intersections.
Applications
Diff erent roadway types require distinct driveway treatments, depending on the adjacent property use,
the relationship between the property and the street, and the type of vehicles using the driveway. The
following guidelines should be applied:
The sidewalk should be clearly delineated across the driveway and maintain the grade, slope, and
material of the adjacent sidewalk on either side of the driveway.
Driveway design should meet current ADA guidelines.
Maintain a 5’ minimum sidewalk across driveways with no more than a 2% cross slope.
The driveway apron should be contained within the buff er/furnishings zone to avoid a cross slope
on the sidewalk. Where no buff er/furniture zone is present, the sidewalk approaches and crossing of
driveway should be pulled back to ensure no more than a 2% cross slope.
Considerations
Place driveways a minimum of 20’ from crosswalks to provide good sight lines between vehicles and
pedestrians and so that vehicles do not block the visibility of pedestrians. Consolidate driveways whenever
possible to minimize the number of confl ict points along the sidewalk.
PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING
Appropriate pedestrian lighting facilitates safe movement and provides a sense of safety and security for
pedestrians. Adequate street lighting lends character to a street and, by highlighting salient features, can
reveal a unique identity. Pedestrian lighting is particularly important in business districts along mixed-use
street types where it can enhance the environment and highlight businesses.
Applications
Lighting is critical to ensure the safety of intersections and midblock pedestrian crossings. Lamps
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Driveway along Sunset Drive in downtown South Miami
SMITP76 | JANUARY 2015
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
are needed on both sides of crosswalks. Pedestrian-scale
lighting (lampposts lower than 20’ tall) should be used
alone or in combination with roadway scale lighting in high
activity areas.
Light poles should typically be located in the
furnishing zone and should not impede the
pedestrian zone. The location of light poles must
coordinate with landscape, civil, utility, and traffi c
control plans to ensure that appropriate clearances
are maintained and that lighting is not obscured by
tree canopies.
Light poles should be placed a minimum of 3’ from
the curb face and 5’ from fi xed objects such as fi re
hydrants.
Lighting should coordinate with structures.
Coordinate the position of light poles with current and
future planned street trees.
Overhead pedestrian lighting should be 12-15’ above the sidewalk.
Light spacing should be determined by the type of light fi xture and amount of light emitted to
maintain continuous illumination along the sidewalk and to avoid dark spots between light poles.
Banners and plants must be installed parallel to the roadway.
Minimum vertical clearance for attachments are as follows:
15’ banner brackets
9’ bottom of banner
13’ hanging plant brackets
9’ bottom of hanging plant
Considerations
Paired alignment of light poles across a street provides a more formal look, while staggered arrangement
of light poles provides a less formal look that may allow for fewer lights. Lighting designs on neighborhood
residential streets are often aff ected by existing utilities. Staggered spacing is preferred to provide
more uniform lighting. As LED technology develops, future consideration should be given to providing
network control devices to allow for dimming and/or color control as a way to highlight locations during
emergencies or to reduce energy consumption and dark sky impacts during periods of lowest activity (12
a.m. to 5 a.m.).
Street Design/Biking Elements
Street design elements consist of features within the road traveled way including on-road bicycle facilities,
neighborhood greenways, traffi c calming, on-street parking, and shared streets.
ON-ROAD BIC YC LE FACILITIES
Bicyclists should be considered and anticipated on all streets in South Miami. The bicycle is an ideal vehicle
for trips that are too far to comfortably walk, but are still fairly short. Bicycling is an excellent option for
Pedestrian light along Sunset Drive in downtown
South Miami
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 77
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
trips that are less than three miles in length,
which are almost half of all trips made on a daily
basis. Like pedestrians, bicycles are vulnerable
road users who can be seriously injured in a
simple collision. For many people, bicycling in
close proximity to faster moving traffi c can be
an uncomfortable experience. Lack of bicycle
accommodations on the street can increase
the number of bicyclists riding on the sidewalk,
which confl icts with pedestrian traffi c and may
increase the likelihood of an intersection crash
due to reduced visibility from the perspective
of motorists. Well-designed bikeways reduce
these confl icts and create a more predictable
traffi c environment for everyone. Bikeways can
be divided into two general categories: exclusive
facilities, where roadway space is designated for bicycle use; and shared facilities, where bicycles and other
vehicles share roadway space. In general, shared facilities are more appropriate in low speed environments
where motorists are going slow enough to be able to see and react to the presence of bicyclists. As
vehicular speeds increase, so does the need for greater separation between the bicyclists and motor
vehicles.
General Design Considerations for Bicyclists
In order to provide adequate space for bicycle facilities, road diets (lane eliminations), and lane diets
(lane width narrowing) should be considered. Bicyclists provide their own energy and, as such, are
sensitive to distance and frequent stops. They typically choose the most direct, continuous route that
does not require a lot of stops and starts. Bicycle facility designers should always keep this in mind.
Bicyclists are more sensitive to broken or uneven pavement, which can cause them to lose balance
or swerve suddenly. This includes potholes, uneven or sunken drainage structures, and utility access
covers. Where possible, the installation of bicycle
facilities should be coupled with an evaluation
of pavement conditions and improvements, as
necessary, to ensure a smooth riding surface.
Drainage inlets should be safe for bicycle wheels.
Refer to the AASHTO Guide for the Development
of Bicycle Facilities and the Florida Department
of Transportation drainage inlet design
standards for additional guidance on bicycle-
friendly drainage grates.
More detailed information on several common
on-road bicycle facility types is provided on
the following pages, including a list of project
recommendations specifi c to South Miami.
BIKE LANES
Bike lanes provide an exclusive space for bicyclists through the use of edge lines and pavement
marking symbols on the roadway surface. Bike lanes are for one-way travel and are normally
Graphic representation of sharrow street markings
Bike lanes along SW 57th Avenue (Red Road)
SMITP78 | JANUARY 2015
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
provided on both sides of two-way streets or on one side of one-way streets. Bicyclists are not required to
remain in a bike lane when traveling on a street and may leave the bike lane, as necessary, to make turns,
pass other bicyclists, or to properly position themselves for other necessary movements. Bike lanes may
only be used temporarily by vehicles accessing parking spaces, and entering and exiting driveways and
alleys.
Applications
Bike lanes are normally placed on the right-hand side of the road to refl ect the general traffi c
principle of slower traffi c keeping to the right.
The minimum width of a bike lane next to an on-street parking space or right-turn lane is fi ve feet.
Bike lanes on open shoulders or adjacent to a curb-and-gutter drainage system may be a minimum of
four feet wide.
Bike lanes are typically installed by reallocating existing street space narrowing other travel lanes,
removing travel lanes, and/or reconfi guring parking lanes.
Bike lanes require on-going maintenance to ensure debris does not collect in the lane.
Refer to the Manual on Uniform Traffi c Control Devices (MUTCD) and the AASHTO Guide for the
Development of Bicycle Facilities for more information on bike lane design.
Recommendations
The following bike lane projects were recommended as part of the SMITP to improve bicycle mobility and
safety in the South Miami area.
SW 67th Avenue – Snapper Creek Drive to SW 40th Street
SW 62nd Avenue – SW 64th Street to SW 40th Street (portions located in unincorporated Miami-Dade
County, shown for illustrative purposes due to mobility benefi ts identifi ed in SMITP)
SW 57th Avenue – SW 88th Street to Sunset Drive (includes a segment of buff ered bike lanes, see below)
SW 80th Street – SW 69th Avenue to SW 57th Avenue
SW 72nd Street (Sunset Drive) – SW 69th Avenue to SW 64th Court
SW 64th Street – SW 69th Avenue to SW 57th Avenue (includes a segment of buff ered bike lanes, see
below)
SW 56th Street – SW 67th Avenue to SW 57th Avenue
SW 48th Street – SW 67th Avenue to SW 57th Avenue (portions located in unincorporated Miami-
Dade County, shown for illustrative purposes due to mobility benefi ts identifi ed in SMITP)
SW 40th Street – SW 67th Avenue to SW 57th Avenue
Considerations
On one-way streets and streets with wide medians, a left-side bike lane can be advantageous, particularly
in locations with heavy bus traffi c or frequent right-turns.
Where additional space is available, consider providing a buff ered bike lane (three-foot minimum
buff er recommended). The buff er can either be placed between the bike lane and the travel lane
(in locations with higher speeds and volumes), or between the bike lane and the parking lane (in
locations with a high rate of parking turnover).
Where there is insuffi cient space to provide a buff ered bike lane on a street with designated on-street
parking, off setting the bicycle symbol to encourage bicyclists to ride in the left side of the bike lane,
away from the door zone of parked vehicles, should be taken into consideration.
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 79
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Contra-fl ow bike lanes, a bike lane that is in the opposite direction to traffi c fl ow, may be used on
one-way streets to provide more convenient connections for bicyclists, where other alternative routes
are less desirable or inconvenient.
Wider bike lanes enable bicyclists to pass one another on heavily traveled corridors and increase
separation from faster traffi c.
C YC LE TRACKS
Cycle tracks are a portion of the right-of-way
contiguous with the traveled way but separated
from motor vehicles by a barrier. Cycle tracks (also
known as separated bike lanes) generally enhance
the experience of bicycling on streets due to the
physical separation, which can be achieved through
a variety of methods. Some cycle tracks are placed
at a higher elevation than the adjacent street (i.e.,
curb height or at an intermediate height between
the curb and the street level). Other cycle tracks are
placed at street level, but are physically separated
from the adjacent travel lane by a raised median,
a row of parked cars, fl exible bollards, or some
combination of these elements.
Applications
Cycle tracks may be placed between the parking zone and the pedestrian zone. Other confi gurations
are acceptable as well, such as a cycle track that is separated from the adjacent motor vehicle lane by
a concrete curb or when adjacent to on-street parking, a minimum 3-foot buff er should be provided
between parking and the cycle track. The buff er serves as a pedestrian loading and unloading zone.
Cycle tracks can either be one-directional (one-way on each side of a street) or two-directional (two-
way on one side of a street).
Cycle tracks can be useful on streets that provide connections to off -street trails, since bicyclists on
these streets may be more accustomed to riding in an area separated from traffi c.
Considerations
Cycle tracks require more space than conventional on-road bicycle facilities because of the additional
space needed to achieve physical separation from the adjacent motor vehicle lane. In addition, cycle
track lanes are generally wider than conventional bike lanes since bicyclists cannot deviate from the
cycle track, if needed, to avoid pedestrians, slower moving bicyclists, open car doors, debris, and
other objects.
Intersection design for cycle tracks is very complex and requires careful attention to confl icts with
turning vehicles. For example, turning movements across cycle tracks should be carefully assessed to
reduce or eliminate confl icts. If intersection confl icts cannot be adequately addressed, it is likely that
a cycle track will not be a feasible solution due to safety concerns.
Cycle tracks require increased parking restrictions as compared to bike lanes to provide for visibility
at intersection transitions. Frequency of driveway crossings is a factor in determining if a cycle track is
feasible. Frequent driveway crossings are incompatible with cycle track design.
Colored pavement can be benefi cial to highlight the presence of a cycle track, particularly at
Example of a “cycle track” along a city street
SMITP80 | JANUARY 2015
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
intersections and other locations where motor vehicle traffi c crosses the cycle track. When a cycle
track is provided on the same side of the road as transit operations, transit stops, and waiting areas
should be provided between the cycle track and the roadway to reduce confl icts with pedestrian load
in and unloading.
The presence of drainage and utility structures along the curb may reduce the eff ective width of the
cycle track.
Although no street in South Miami was identifi ed during the SMITP process specifi cally for cycle track
implementation, future consideration for cycle tracks warrants their inclusion within the report as a tool in
the bicycle facility strategy list.
BUFFERED BIKE LANES
Buff ered bike lanes are conventional bike lanes
paired with a designated striped buff er space
separating the bicycle lane from the adjacent
motor vehicle travel lane and/or parking lane.
A buff ered bike lane is optional for all bike lane
facilities per MUTCD guidance for buff ered
preferential lanes found in the 2009 MUTCD
Section 3D-01. Buff ered bike lanes tend to
require less space within the street traveled
way than cycle tracks.
According to Evaluation of Innovative Bicycle Facilities: SW Broadway Cycle Track & SW Stark/Oak Street
Buff ered Bike Lanes (Portland State University, Center for Transportation Studies, 2011), nine in ten bicyclists
preferred a buff ered bike lane to a conventional bike lane, seven in ten bicyclists indicated they would go
out of their way to ride on a buff ered bike lane over a conventional bike lane, and bicyclists indicate they
Example of a “buff ered bike lane” on a city street
Plan showing buff ered bike lane between travel lane
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 81
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
feel lower risk of being “doored” in the buff ered bike lanes when adjacent to on-street parking.
Applications
Buff er space may be used to separate the bike lane
from the adjacent motor vehicle lane or to separate
the bike lane from an adjacent on-street parking lane.
When used adjacent to motor vehicle travel lanes,
buff ered bike lanes provide greater shy distance
between bicyclists and motor vehicles. In addition,
the buff er space provides an area for faster moving
bicyclists to pass slower moving bicyclists without
having to encroach into the motor vehicle travel lane.
When used adjacent to on-street parking, buff ered
bike lanes provide a “door zone” space to encourage
bicyclists to ride in a safe lateral placement within the
street and provide space for pedestrians to get in and
out of parked cars without walking and standing in the bike lane.
The buff er should be marked with a wide solid single white line along both edges of the buff er space.
Buff ered bike lanes provide greater space for bicycling without making the bike lane appear so wide
that it might be mistaken for a travel lane or a parking lane.
The buff er should be at least 2 feet in width (minimum), 3 feet (preferred).
Diagonal hatching should be used within the buff er if the buff er space is wider than 2 feet.
Buff ered bike lanes appeal to a wider range of bicyclists and encourage bicycling.
Recommendations
The following buff ered bike lane projects were recommended as part of the SMITP to improve
Plan showing buff ered bike lane between parking lane
Sample “buff ered bike lane” on a city street
SMITP82 | JANUARY 2015
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
bicycle mobility and safety in the South Miami area.
SW 57th Avenue (Red Road) – between SW 74th Terrace and Sunset Drive
This project would be implemented by modifying the existing angled on-street parking to
proposed conventional parallel on-street parking. The additional space gained from modifying
the parking could be used to provide buff ered bike lanes separating the parallel parking spaces
from the bike lane.
SW 64th Street – between SW 59th Place and SW 57th Avenue
This project would be implemented by narrowing the existing wide lanes and
striping a buff ered bike lane.
Considerations
Buff ered bike lanes can be considered anywhere a standard bike lane is being considered.
Although there are no standard criteria for when buff ered bike lanes are required, in general, buff ered
bike lanes should be provided on streets with on-street parking, high travel speeds, high traffi c
volumes, high percentage of trucks or buses, and streets with extra space within the traveled way.
Consider dashing the inside buff er boundary where cars are expected to cross, such as adjacent to
on-street parking.
Where buff ers are used, bike lanes can be narrower because the shy distance function is assumed by
the buff er. For example, a 4-foot bike lane and a 3-foot buff er could be provided adjacent to on-street
parking since the “bike lane width” would be considered 7 feet.
SHARED L ANE MARKINGS (SHARROWS)
Shared lane markings, or sharrows, are pavement markings that are placed within the vehicular travel
lane of the roadway to indicate a shared lane. Unlike bike lanes, shared lane markings do not designate a
particular part of the roadway for the exclusive
use of bicyclists. The pavement marking symbols
alert motorists to the expected lateral placement
of bicyclists within the shared lane, and encourage
safer passing behaviors.
Applications
Shared lane markings are typically used
on streets where space constraints make it
impractical to provide designated bike lanes.
Sharrows should not be used on streets with
speed limits higher than 35 MPH.
Sharrows make motorists aware of the
expectation to fi nd bicyclists sharing the
travel lane.
Sharrows recommend proper lateral spacing guidance for
bicyclists.
Sharrows show bicyclists the correct direction of travel.
On streets with narrow lanes (12 feet wide or less), the shared
lane marking is typically placed in the center of the lane to
indicate that motorists must change lanes to pass bicyclists.
Sample “sharrows” on a city street
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 83
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
When used adjacent to on-street parking, shared lane markings should be placed in a location that is
outside of the door zone of parked vehicles. This is typically in the center of the travel lane. Sharrows
remind bicyclists to ride farther from parked cars to prevent “dooring” collisions.
Refer to the MUTCD and the AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities for more
information on the application of shared lane markings.
Recommendations
The following shared lane markings projects were recommended as part of the SMITP to improve bicycle
mobility and safety in the South Miami area.
Sunset Drive – between SW 64th Court and SW 57th Avenue
It is recommended that the sharrows on Sunset Drive be combined with innovative use of green
colored pavement backing to make sharrows more conspicuous and since Sunset Drive is the
focal street for downtown South Miami
SW 62nd Avenue – between SW 76th Street and SW 70th Street
Sharrows recommended in constrained corridor to fi ll in bike lane gap
SW 57th Avenue – between Sunset Drive and SW 64th Street
Sharrows recommended in constrained corridor to fi ll in bike lane gap
All Neighborhood Greenways
See section below for more details
Considerations
Shared lane markings should not be considered a substitute for bike lanes, cycle tracks, buff ered bike
lanes, or other designated bicycle facilities where these types of facilities are otherwise warranted or
space permits.
Shared lane markings are less eff ective on streets with an on-street parking lane that is frequently
unoccupied, because bicyclists often feel more comfortable riding in the parking lane.
Shared lane markings can be used in constrained corridors as a temporary solution to complete
connections between bike lanes and other facilities.
Shared lane markings should be accompanied by a “Bicycles May Use Full Lane” sign (MUTCD R4-11
sign).
Shared lane markings can be used as the standard element in the development of neighborhood
greenways (bicycle boulevards), which is discussed in more detail in the next section.
NEIGHBORHOOD GREENWAYS
Neighborhood greenways, also called bicycle boulevards, are enhanced shared streets. Neighborhood
greenways are streets with low motor vehicle speeds that are designed with a variety of elements,
including shared lane markings, traffi c calming, bike route signage, and wayfi nding signs, to allow
bicyclists to travel comfortably in a low-stress environment. Neighborhood greenways often give priority
to bicycle use and discourage through-traffi c by motor vehicles. Ideally, they are designed to minimize the
number of stops that a bicyclist must make along the route through the use of neighborhood traffi c circles
or re-orienting stop signs at intersections so bicyclists can ride with fewer interruptions. Separated bicycle
facilities (i.e., bike lanes) are not necessary on neighborhood greenways because motor vehicle speeds and
traffi c volumes are low.
SMITP84 | JANUARY 2015
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Applications
Neighborhood greenways are usually
more feasible in neighborhoods with
a grid street network (one street
is chosen as the neighborhood
greenway), but can also be
accomplished by combining a series
of road and trail segments to form
one continuous route.
At major street crossings,
neighborhood greenways may need
additional crossing measures for
bicyclists, such as bicycle-sensitive
loop detectors (at signalized
intersections), actuated fl ashing
beacons (at unsignalized intersections),
median refuge islands, and/or curb
extensions.
Traffi c calming measures, such as neighborhood traffi c circles, speed cushions, and diverters can be
used to maintain low speeds (ideally 25 MPH or less) on neighborhood greenways.
Recommendations
Numerous neighborhood greenway projects were recommended as part of the SMITP to improve bicycle
mobility and safety in the South Miami area. Most neighborhood greenways were originally identifi ed
by the South Miami Green Task Force and studied during the course of the SMITP. The map in Figure
1 identifi es the network plan of neighborhood greenways, although too many to list. A few of the key
neighborhood greenways are listed below.
Manor Lane/SW 63rd Avenue – between SW 80th Street and SW 74th Street
SW 64th Court/SW 64th Avenue/SW 63rd Court – between Manor Lane and SW 44th Street
SW 59th Place – between Sunset Drive and SW 64th Street
SW 59th Avenue – between SW 87th Street and
Sunset Drive
SW 58th Avenue/SW 70th Street/Commerce Lane/
SW 58th Place/SW 58th Court/SW 58th Avenue –
between SW 87th Street and SW 40th Street
SW 78th Street/SW 77th Terrace – between U.S. 1
and SW 57th Avenue
SW 68th Street – between SW 64th Avenue and
SW 57th Avenue
Includes non-motorized path connection
in Marshal Williamson Park to join the two
pieces of SW 68th Street for bicyclists and
pedestrians
SW 50th Street – between SW 64th Avenue
and SW 57th Avenue (portions located in Sample “sharrow” on a city street
SW 58th Avenue Featured Greenway
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 85
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
unincorporated Miami-Dade County, shown for illustrative purposes due to mobility benefi ts
identifi ed in SMITP)
Considerations
Ideally, neighborhood greenways should not carry more than 3,000 motor vehicles per day to be
compatible with a broad range of bicyclist skill levels.
Each neighborhood greenway may be designed
with diff erent elements depending on the
needs of that particular street; however, shared
lane markings, “Bicycles May Use Full Lane”
signs (MUTCD R4-11 signs), wayfi nding signs,
and bicycle crossing improvements where
neighborhood greenways cross major roadways
should be considered basic elements consistent
with all neighborhood greenways.
Where the neighborhood greenway crosses
high-speed or high-volume streets, providing
neighborhood greenway crossing treatments
such as the following to help bicyclists cross.
Signals, where a traffi c study has shown
that a signal will be safe and eff ective.
To ensure that bicyclists can activate the
signal, bicycle-sensitive detection should be
installed where bicyclists ride.
Roundabouts where appropriate.
Median refuges wide enough to provide
refuge for a bicyclist (8 feet minimum) and
with an opening wide enough to allow
bicyclists to pass through (approximately 6 feet
wide). The design should allow bicyclists to see the travel lanes they must cross.
Neighborhood traffi c circles, diverters, speed cushions, and other traffi c management devices are
typically used to discourage motor vehicle through-traffi c, while still enabling local traffi c access to
the street.
Replacing stop-controlled intersections with neighborhood traffi c circles and mini-roundabouts help
reduce the number of stops bicyclists have to make and assist with traffi c calming.
Neighborhood greenways should be long enough to provide connectivity between neighborhoods
and common destinations, such as downtown South Miami.
BIC YC LE ROUTE SIGNAGE
A bicycle route wayfi nding system consists of comprehensive signing and/or pavement markings to
guide bicyclists to their destinations along preferred bike routes. A bike route is a term used for planning
purposes or to designate recommended bicycle transportation or recreation routes. A bike route is
not a facility type. A bike route can be any bikeway type. Bicycle route signs are wayfi nding signs that
guide bicyclists along preferred, designated routes to destinations within the City of South Miami
and throughout the region. The intent is to create a single, integrated signing system that is instantly
recognizable by bicyclists.
Old Cutler Trail bicycle route wayfi nding signage
SMITP86 | JANUARY 2015
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Applications
It is expected that as the South Miami bike network is built out over time that many bicycle facilities will
have bicycle route signage. Shared use paths, bike lanes, and neighborhood greenways should all be
incorporated into the bicycle route signage system.
Wayfi nding signs are typically placed at decision points along bike routes.
There are three general types of wayfi nding signs.
Confi rmation signs indicate to bicyclists that they are on a designated bikeway. Confi rmation
signs can include destinations and distance/time but do not include arrows. Confi rmation signs
have an added benefi t of making motorists aware of the bicycle route.
Turn signs indicate where a bikeway turns from one street to another street. Turn signs include
arrows, and may include destinations and distance/time. Turn signs should be placed on the
near-side of intersections and may be supplemented with pavement markings.
Decision signs mark the junction of two or more bike routes. Decision signs inform bicyclists of
the designated bike route to access key destinations. Decision signs include destinations and
arrows. Distances and travel times are recommended but are optional
Recommendations
The City should work with MDCPWWM to incorporate South Miami bike routes into the overall
Miami-Dade County bike route numbering and signing system.
Neighborhood Greenways
PARKLETS
A parklet is a small space, typically along a commercial street, serving as an extension of the sidewalk to
provide amenities and green space for people using the street. Parklets are most often implemented by
replacing one to three on-street parking spaces; therefore, they are the width of the adjoining on-street
parking spaces. Parklets are intended for people rather than cars.
Applications
Parklets off er a place to stop, sit, and rest while taking in the activities of the street.
Parklets often provide café seating for nearby eating establishments or coff ee houses.
Sample “parklet” within existing on-street parking
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 87
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Parklet design is somewhat fl exible in that parklets may
also provide greenery, art, or some other visual amenity
instead of café seating.
A parklet may accommodate bicycle parking, or bicycle
parking may be located adjacent to it.
The purpose of parklets is to benefi t local businesses,
residents, and visitors by providing unique public spaces
that attract customers and foster community.
Recommendations
Sunset Drive is one of the top streets in Miami-Dade
County to enjoy local businesses, restaurants, and
street life. However, many areas of Sunset Drive are
characterized by narrow, crowded sidewalks, especially
near café seating. Parklets can provide additional space
for seating while maintaining pedestrian walking zones
on the sidewalk. In addition, parklets have been shown
to enhance the economic vitality of the businesses
along a street by attracting customers and encouraging
people to stay longer and enjoy the street. Ultimately
for a parklet to be successful, the benefi ts need to outweigh the loss or relocation of one to three on-street
parking spaces.
It is recommended that the City install parklets on Sunset Drive within the downtown area to enhance
personal experience along the street. Initially consider providing two parklets, one on the north side of the
street and one on the south side of the street.
Traffic Calming Elements
Managing vehicular speed is particularly important on streets where pedestrian and bicycle use is desired.
In crashes involving these more vulnerable
users, vehicular speed at the point of impact
is directly related to pedestrian or bicyclist
survival. For example, a pedestrian who is
hit by a motor vehicle traveling at 20 MPH
has a 95 percent chance of survival, whereas a
pedestrian hit by a motor vehicle traveling at
40 MPH has a 15 percent chance of survival.
Studies have also shown that motor vehicle
crashes decline where roadway speed is
reduced. In addition, drivers are far more
likely to yield to pedestrians at crosswalks
when speeds are lower. Mixed-use and
residential streets in South Miami should
be designed for a target design speed of 25
MPH. The context of an individual street should factor into whether or not adjustments to this base design
speed are appropriate. Target design speed will be lower at intersections and crossings.
Sample “parklet” within existing on-street parking
a
Traffi c circle along SW 48th Street and Alhambra Circle
SMITP88 | JANUARY 2015
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Planning and Street Operations should take the lead on determining target design speeds during the
corridor planning stage of the Complete Streets design process in the context of the community vision.
For major roadway construction and reconstruction projects, the geometric design of the roadway should
be such that excessive speeds feel uncomfortable. This can be accomplished through a creative approach
to roadway design. Curves (chicanes) should be incorporated, long vistas should be broken with vertical
elements, such as street trees, and traffi c calming features should be introduced.
The following speed-reduction strategies should be considered for traveled way design.
Lane width narrowing
Road diets (lane elimination)
Center medians/islands
Midblock curb extensions (neckdowns)
Bikeways
Transit lanes
On-street parking
Paving treatments
Shared streets
Chicanes
Speed tables
Street lighting
ROAD DIETS (L ANE ELIMINATION)
Some streets may be wider than necessary given the volume of traffi c that they carry during peak
hours. Therefore, road diets are a solution that can be useful for the purpose of implementing a bicycle
facility, wider pedestrian zone, and/or landscaping. A road diet reduces the number of travel lanes on a
roadway, typically removing one lane of traffi c in each direction. Road diets not only provide additional
space necessary to build a Complete Street, but they also provide measurable safety benefi ts to all users.
Research has shown that road diets reduce the total crashes from 81 to 53 percent. Road diets are offi cially
recognized by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) as a proven safety countermeasure. In a
January 2012 memorandum, FHWA division offi ces were advised to advance the use of road diets with
their State DOT counterparts.
Applications
Road diets are an important measure in the implementation of Complete Streets principles. The following
issues should be considered when reducing travel lanes on streets:
Four-lane roads with average daily traffi c volumes up to 20,000 and six-lane roads with up to 35,000
vehicles per day are candidates for road diet treatments. An intersection capacity analysis may be
necessary to ensure the reduction of travel lanes does not create signifi cant delays for motor vehicles.
Road diets should also be considered for roadway sections that have capacity constraints on either
side of the section.
On four-lane undivided roadways, road diets typically remove two travel lanes and convert the road
to a two-lane road with a center-turn lane and bike lanes. However, many of the roads that are eligible
for road diets already have left-turn lanes, thus the additional space can be used for buff ered bike
lanes, transit lanes, and expanded streetscape improvements.
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 89
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Some road diets will be implemented as a part of the roadway repaving/reconstruction process, as
this off ers an opportunity to reconfi gure the roadway with new pavement markings.
Particular to the individual project, a thoroughfare plan amendment might be necessary.
Road diets require special attention to public involvement of surrounding communities. Bringing
public support is a key aspect the success of a road diet. A low-cost road diet reconfi gures existing
roadway space and does not require curb reconstruction. While sidewalk width remains the same,
these types of road diets still benefi t pedestrians due to the increased buff er between the sidewalk
and the nearest motor vehicle travel lane.
Where road diets are implemented through the repaving/reconstruction process, consideration
should be given to the long-term maintenance needs of the resulting bike lanes. They will need
periodic maintenance to remove debris and ensure that they are usable facilities. Road diet projects
require careful attention to motor vehicle capacity issues and intersections.
Recommendations
In South Miami, one road diet candidate is SW 40th Street (Bird Road) between SW 67th Avenue and SW
57th Avenue. SW 40th Street is a six-lane divided roadway in the South Miami area. However, east of SW
57th Avenue in Coral Gables, SW 40th Street narrows down to a four-lane divided roadway. The City should
coordinate with FDOT regarding the possibility of matching the capacity of the Coral Gables section of Bird
Road throughout the South Miami area between SW 67th Avenue and SW 57th Avenue. The re-purposed
space from the proposed road diet can be utilized to provide designated bike lanes and enhanced
landscaping to provide a viable pedestrian experience along the corridor.
CENTER MEDIANS/ISL ANDS
Medians are raised barriers in the center portion of
the roadway. Median width can vary greatly, from
a minimum of 6’ to 20’ or more along parkways
and light rail transit lines. Medians with street
trees or other landscaping can be used to add
prominence to a segment of road, extend a park-
like environment along a corridor, and to reduce
the heat island eff ect. Medians can also provide
a location for transit and a refuge for pedestrians
crossing multi-lane roadways. Studies show that
intermittent (midblock) islands can result in up
to a 7 percent reduction in motor vehicle speeds.
Concrete medians were mainly constructed to
channelize turning movements and to control access to adjacent land uses. Through a Complete Streets
approach, medians on roadways should be pedestrian-friendly, reduce travel speeds, and should provide
landscaping whenever possible.
Applications
Medians are particularly helpful as pedestrian refuges at controlled and uncontrolled crossings. When
designed properly, medians off er protection to pedestrians crossing the road.
The minimum width for a center median is 6 feet. This width is necessary to ensure the median
serves as an adequate pedestrian refuge. A wider median is necessary if it will serve a dual purpose
as a left-turn lane, to accommodate both the width of a turn lane, as well as adequate space
for the pedestrian refuge.
Landscape median along Sunset Drive South Miami City Hall
SMITP90 | JANUARY 2015
Signalized intersections with medians should be designed to allow pedestrians to cross the entire
roadway during a single signal cycle.
Pedestrian cut-through medians should be of at least equal width to the approaching sidewalks. At
midblock locations, consider angling the pedestrian cut to direct pedestrian sight lines to on-coming
traffi c.
Care should be taken to ensure median plantings do not limit the sight lines for pedestrians and
motorists at intersections.
Center medians should be carefully designed to ensure proper drainage and maximize potential for
on-site stormwater retention and fi ltration. Drought resistant and low-maintenance plant species
should be used.
Trees and landscaping should be maintained for sight lines and vehicle operation.
Sidewalks should not be reduced in width, and bike lanes should not be eliminated, to provide space
or additional width for medians.
MIDBLOCK CURB E XTENSIONS (NECKDOWNS)
At midblock locations with on-street parking, curb extensions, also called neckdowns, can be installed
on both sides of the road to create a visual pinch-point, helping to calm motor vehicle traffi c. They are
particularly useful on streets with longer block lengths where motorists tend to gain speed at midblock
locations. They can be combined with midblock pedestrian crossings to further enhance pedestrian safety
by lowering motor vehicle speeds, reducing crossing distances, and increasing visibility.
Applications
Midblock curb extensions should only be used on streets with on-street parking. They can be used
on two-way streets with one lane in each direction, and one-way roads. Where used on streets with
multiple lanes in one direction, other crossing enhancements, such as crossing islands which allow
pedestrians to cross the street in two stages and rapid fl ashing beacons, should be considered.
Midblock curb extensions are sometimes combined with intermittent medians to reduce speeds
along the length of a roadway and provide a crossing refuge in the center of the street, allowing
pedestrians to cross the street in two stages.
Where curb extensions provide pedestrian crossings, ADA compliant curb ramps, tactile warning
strips, and cross slopes must be provided.
Street trees are encouraged within midblock curb extensions. However, sight distances are a primary
issue at midblock pedestrian crossings. Therefore, shrubs and other types of vegetation that would
block drivers’ views of approaching pedestrians should be avoided.
Midblock curb extensions can be combined with speed tables to provide raised crossings for
pedestrians.
Bicycle lanes should not be eliminated at midblock curb extensions. In constrained spaces, care
should be taken to avoid suddenly squeezing bicyclists into the traffi c fl ow on streets with higher
volumes of traffi c, particularly in locations with steep uphill grades where bicyclists may be travelling
considerably slower than motor vehicle traffi c.
On low-volume residential streets, midblock curb extensions can reduce the street to one lane,
requiring on-coming drivers to alternate passage through the midblock curb extensions, while
keeping enough space for fi re trucks and other large vehicles.
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 91
Recommendations
The following midblock pedestrian crossings were
recommended as part of the SMITP.
SW 40th Street - East of SW 64th Avenue
SW 40th Street - East of SW 60th Avenue
S Dixie Highway - North of SM Hospital Exit
Driveway
ON-STREET PARKING
On-street parking is clearly a key to the success of small
business districts and can add energy and excitement
to the street. This encourages the concept of park once.
On-street parking has a very positive impact on the
pedestrian realm—research shows that pedestrians feel
far more comfortable and safe on streets with occupied on-street parking. Parked cars provide a traffi c
calming eff ect by visually narrowing the roadway and increasing friction along the edge of the roadway.
It is important to get the ingredients right to achieve the maximum benefi t from on-street parking. When
on-street parking is underutilized, the result is a wider street with faster speeds.
On-street parking is most appropriate for mixed-use and residential streets. In these types of streets, it can
provide a traffi c-calming eff ect and convenience to local shops and residences. On-street parking is ideally
created by these parking types: parallel, angle, reverse angle, and unmarked parallel spaces. Parking lanes
should be a minimum of 7-feet wide, with 8 feet being the desired width. The potential hazard of opening
car doors should be considered when developing an appropriate design. Crashes can occur in locations
with high parking turnover, such as main streets and commercial streets with restaurants and businesses.
Adjacent to a narrow parking lane (7 feet) with high turnover, a six-foot bicycle lane is recommended.
In mixed-use, a parking lane can be designated for diff erent purposes throughout the day, such as
commercial loading during the morning, public parking during the day, and valet at night. On-street
parking should be prohibited, approaching intersections or driveways, since it can obscure site lines for all
users of the road. Angled parking maximizes the parking supply and is appropriate when suffi cient curb-
to-curb widths are available. Where angled parking is used, the preferred orientation is back-in angled
parking. This confi guration has been shown to provide numerous safety benefi ts for pedestrians, bicyclists,
and motorists. It provides more visibility when pulling back into traffi c, and more visibility between
bicyclists and motorists. Back-in angled parking requires the use of wheel stops to ensure parked vehicles
do not encroach upon the sidewalk. Consideration should be given to outdoor cafes and seating areas
adjacent to back-in parking. Parallel parking is appropriate on streets with narrower curb-to-curb widths
and when trying to accommodate other elements, such as bicycle lanes and wider sidewalks. Higher
volume arterial streets should primarily use the parallel confi guration.
SHARED STREETS
Streets where the curb and gutter are eliminated create roadways with no designation between the
traveled way and the side of the road. These are often called shared streets since all roadway users share
the same space. Shared streets work well when the total right-of-way is relatively narrow and motor vehicle
speeds and volumes are low. They create zones of extreme traffi c calming ensuring that the diff erence
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
On-street parking along Sunset Drive in downtown
South Miami
SMITP92 | JANUARY 2015
in speed between diff erent modes of travel is minimal. Shared streets maintain vehicular access for and
emergency vehicles, but otherwise function as extensions of the sidewalk to accommodate free-fl owing
pedestrian movements bicyclists, street vendors and cafes, and occasionally on-street parking. Shared
streets can be paved with special materials to help indicate the special type of low-traffi c zone, described
later in this chapter, can be used to ensure speeds are low on shared streets.
Shared streets, or secondary networks, can be a permanent installation or can be shared for events or
on certain days of the week. Planters, bollards, or other vertical markers can be used to designate zones
within a shared street. Paint and roadway materials can also delineate zones of the street. Since the goal of
a shared street is to mix roadway uses and pedestrians as much as possible, treatments to delineate space
should be limited. In addition, care should be taken when using bollards to delineate space, since they
can become tripping hazards for pedestrians during crowded events. Shared streets are also appropriate
for some residential streets, as well as in subdivisions, campuses, and parks, where there is a desire to
limit motor vehicle traffi c while placing a high priority on non-motorized traffi c. A system of linked shared
streets or alternating shared streets with standard streets can create a pedestrian-oriented district that
maintains access for local traffi c.
Applications
Parking is sometimes allowed on shared streets. Paint or special paving can be used to demarcate a
parking zone or individual spaces.
Because there are no curbs, shared streets require special drainage treatments and grading to
prevent ponding of water.
Recommendations
Although no street in South Miami was identifi ed during the SMITP process specifi cally for shared streets
implementation, future consideration for shared streets warrants their inclusion within the report as a tool
in the bicycle facility strategy list.
CHICANES
Chicanes are curb extensions that alternate from
one side of the street to the other, creating an “S”
curve that drivers must weave through. Chicanes
provide opportunities to increase sidewalk space
and introduce green street elements in the
right-of-way. Chicanes can be created with curb
extensions, tree pits or planters, or by alternating
parking from one side of the roadway to the
other. In addition to slowing vehicular traffi c,
chicanes can provide opportunities to increase
sidewalk space and introduce landscaping in the
right-of-way. They can be used in combination
with other traffi c calming devices, such as speed
tables, discussed below, and with midblock
neckdowns or center islands.
Applications
Chicanes are appropriate for mixed-use and residential streets.
Sample “chicane” on a neighborhood street
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 93
On residential streets, chicanes can serve as an alternative to speed tables and provide additional
areas for landscaping or neighborhood amenities.
Chicanes and neckdowns can be used on two-way streets with one lane in each direction and one-
way roads with no more than two lanes.
The amount of horizontal defl ection in a chicane should be based on the target design speed of the
roadway.
Vegetation used in chicanes should generally be low-growing (less than two-feet tall) and low-
maintenance. In locations with midblock pedestrian crossings, sight lines should be maintained.
Bikeways should be continuous through chicanes so that bicycles are not squeezed into the traffi c
fl ow. Shared bikeways are appropriate on streets with chicanes that result in low-speed environments.
Chicanes can serve in conjunction with SWM Principles as bioswales.
Recommendations
Although no street in South Miami was identifi ed during the SMITP process specifi cally for chicanes
implementation, future consideration for chicanes warrants their inclusion within the report as a tool in the
bicycle facility strategy list.
SPEED TABLES
Speed tables are raised pavement areas that are placed at midblock locations to reduce vehicle speeds.
They are gentler than speed bumps (which are not recommended for public streets) but have been shown
to eff ectively reduce 85th percentile speeds by 13 to 15 MPH. Well-designed speed tables enable vehicles
to proceed comfortably over the device at the intended speed, but cause discomfort when traversed
at inappropriately high speeds. Speed tables are a good tool for retrofi tting streets with traffi c calming
devices. If full reconstruction is planned, consider achieving traffi c calming with horizontal devices, such as
roadway width and chicanes, which are more subtle and require less signage. Speed tables should be used
in combination with other traffi c calming devices such as curb extensions, chicanes, and crossing islands.
Applications
Residential streets and mixed-use are appropriate locations for speed tables.
Speed tables are usually 3 inches higher than the roadway surface. They are typically 10- to 14-feet in
length and extend the full width of the roadway, although sometimes they are tapered at the edges
to accommodate drainage patterns.
Speed tables should be designed with a smooth leading edge and a parabolic profi le, which provides
a smoother transition for bicyclists.
Speed tables should be clearly marked with refl ective pavement markings (per the MUTCD)
and signage that motorists and bicyclists are aware of their presence and can adjust their speed
accordingly. Speed tables are generally not appropriate for streets with bus routes. However, they can
be installed on streets with school bus service.
Longer speed tables (up to 22’ in length) have a design speed of 25 to 30 MPH and are easier for large
vehicles to negotiate.
Avoid placing speed tables at the bottom of steep inclines where bicyclists travel at higher speeds
and may be surprised by their presence.
When used alone without complimentary traffi c calming devices, speed tables may result in speed
spiking where motorists may travel at higher speeds between tables.
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
SMITP94 | JANUARY 2015
Recommendations
Although no street in South Miami was identifi ed during the SMITP process specifi cally for speed table
implementation, future consideration for speed tables warrants their inclusion within the report as a tool in
the bicycle facility strategy list.
STREET LIGHTING
Street lighting is an important consideration
in the design of the traveled way. A well-lit
street contributes to the safety and comfort
of vulnerable users, but is also a factor in
economic development. It is important
to provide increased illumination where
modes merge or cross paths, such as at
intersections, bus stops, and midblock
crossings.
Applications
The street type, hours of activity, and
adjacent uses are all important factors in
setting street lighting levels.
Mixed-use streets require the highest level of illumination. These streets are designed to encourage
all modes of travel, especially those along the edges of the traveled way. Street activity is encouraged
to extend into the evening.
Parkways may require lower overall levels of illumination. However, trail crossings and intersections
should meet the recommended safety standards for light levels. It may also be appropriate to
operate street lights on parkways for longer periods than on other street types, since side-paths have
increased recreational activity at dawn and dusk.
Residential streets should have lower levels of illumination, except in the vicinity of transit stops,
schools, other public buildings, and parks. Meeting illumination minimums is essential in order to
encourage pedestrian travel, particularly for trips to and from school and transit which may occur
around dawn and dusk. Dimming the lights during the middle of the night when there is very low
activity on residential streets, can cut down on light pollution and energy costs. Street lighting should
illuminate the public right-of-way, but be shielded from private property.
Over-illumination should be avoided to diminish light pollution and conserve energy.
Requests for lighting above the guidelines in the Street and Pedestrian Lighting Criteria require cost
participation for the portion in excess of the City’s standard expenditure.
Street lighting and pedestrian lighting fi xtures may be combined in some locations.
Special fi xtures are allowed in historic districts and plazas. Where possible, they should meet the same
energy standards as other types of fi xtures.
Tree growth can reduce the amount of light that reaches the roadway or side of the road. Regular tree
maintenance is recommended so that crossings and critical points along the traveled way, such as
neckdowns or chicanes, are suffi ciently illuminated. Pedestrian-scaled lighting along the side of the
road closer to pedestrians and bicycles can also mitigate heavy foliage along the traveled way.
Sample street lighting on a neighborhood street
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 95
Intersection Design Elements
Intersections are where streets converge, modes come together, and most confl icts occur on the roadway.
Traditionally, intersection design has been focused on maximizing the effi cient movement of vehicles
through the City. The Complete Streets approach expands this focus so that safety is the primary driver
of intersection design. All intersections must safely accommodate people whether they are walking,
bicycling, driving, or riding transit. Intersections should be designated and planned in context with the
existing land uses, as well as cultural and environmental considerations. Intersections should highlight
the unique spaces where streets converge, making seamless connections from one street type to another.
These street guidelines emphasize the need to create multimodal intersections that are vibrant public
spaces, balance the needs of all users, and enhance the quality of street life.
MULT IMODAL INTERSECTIONS
Multimodal safety, with an emphasis on safety for vulnerable users, should be the driving factor for
intersection design in South Miami. It is important to recognize that non-motorized users are more
vulnerable, and suff er far greater injuries in the event of a crash. Regardless of whether a trip is made on
foot by bicycle, via transit, or in an automobile, people should feel safe, comfortable, and experience a
minimal amount of delay during all trips. Extensive guidance exists to design streets for motor vehicles.
Specifi c engineering factors, such as horizontal and vertical alignments, sight distance calculations,
capacity, and coordinated signal timing, are covered by a range of design manuals. Traditionally, the
manuals listed below have been used by engineers to design intersections and roadways:
U.S. Access Board’s Public Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG)
AASHTO’s Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets
Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Greenbook
Highway Capacity Manual (HCM)
Manual on Uniform Traffi c Control Devices (MUTCD)
Institute of Traffi c Engineers (ITE) Traffi c Signal Timing Manual
The National Association of City Transportation Offi cials (NACTO) has published recent design guidance
aimed at a more balanced transportation system that focuses on vulnerable user safety. The NACTO
manuals listed below off er guidance to engineers regarding urban intersection design.
Urban Bikeway Design Guide
Urban Street Design Guide
INTERSECTION CONTROL T YPES
Uncontrolled and midblock crossings can be the most challenging places to provide safe pedestrian
crossings.
Uncontrolled Intersections
Uncontrolled intersections are those where no traffi c control devices facilitate the movement of traffi c,
and users yield the right-of-way to those who have already been established in the intersection, or those
approaching from the right. Intersections may also have uncontrolled approaches where the minor street
has a stop sign(s) and the major street has no traffi c control.
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
SMITP96 | JANUARY 2015
An example of an uncontrolled intersection approach is SW 57th Avenue (Red Road) at SW 73rd Street.
SW 57th Avenue traffi c does not stop, while SW 73rd Street traffi c is controlled by a stop sign (see image
below).
By Florida law, any intersection of two public streets is a legal pedestrian crossing, even if it is an
uncontrolled approach.
Midblock Crossings
A midblock crossing is a pedestrian crossing that is not located at a roadway intersection. If a midblock
crossing is not designated by a marked crosswalk, then pedestrians must yield the right-of-way to
motorists. Specifi c warrants provided in the MUTCD must be met in order to create signalized midblock
crossings.
Applications
Crosswalks at uncontrolled intersections and midblock crossings should aim to maximize safety for all
users by providing the following:
Clear sight lines
Appropriate lighting levels
Regulatory and warning signage
Marked crosswalks, as determined by an
engineering study (see Crosswalk Markings
at Uncontrolled Locations)
Traffi c calming strategies
Stop-Controlled Intersections
Stop-controlled intersections are easiest for
pedestrians to cross because motorists and
cyclists must stop, encouraging them to yield to
pedestrians and reducing pedestrian wait time.
However, the use of STOP signs must balance
safety with effi cient traffi c fl ow for all modes,
including bicycles and transit vehicles. STOP
sign installation on a major street requires that
specifi c certifi cations be met, as determined by the
MUTCD. In general, STOP signs may be appropriate if one or more of the following conditions exist:
Where the application of the normal right-of-way rule (yield to those already in the intersection or to
those approaching from the right) would not provide reasonable compliance with the law
A street entering a highway or through street
An unsignalized intersection in a signalized area
High speeds, restricted view, or crash records indicate a need for control by a STOP sign. STOP
signs should be installed in a manner that minimizes the number of vehicles having to stop. At
intersections where a full stop is not necessary at all times, consideration should be given to using
less restrictive measures, such as YIELD signs. Where feasible, the use of STOP signs should also be
limited on streets with bikeways, especially on bicycle boulevards, as it requires signifi cant energy to
stop and start for bicyclists, resulting in lower levels of compliance.
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Uncontrolled intersection approach along
SW 57th Avenue at SW 73rd Street
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 97
Signalized Intersections
All signalized intersections should contain signals for motor vehicles and pedestrians. Additionally, bicycle
signals and transit signals should be considered where appropriate. Signal phasing and timing should
be designed to make the unique needs of all users at the intersection. By optimizing signal phasing and
timings, multiple modes are able to move safely and comfortably through the intersection with limited
confl icts and delay. Signalized intersections should conform to the latest version of the MUTCD, HCM,
and the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s Traffi c Signal Timing Manual. The MUTCD contains specifi c
warrants for the installation of a traffi c signal at an intersection. South Miami Public Works Department
reviews and approves all proposed signal designs.
Signal Timing
The overall goal of signal timing is to minimize cycle lengths to reduce delay for all users. Long cycle
lengths make walking less convenient and may encourage unsafe behavior, such as pedestrians not
obeying pedestrian signals and bicyclists running red lights. Signals should be optimized to balance the
needs of all users and to minimize delay for pedestrians, bicyclists, motor vehicles, and transit vehicles.
Signal timing is a tool used to optimize safety and effi ciency for all modes of travel through an intersection.
Over time, traffi c volumes and patterns change. Retiming signals requires evaluating changes in traffi c
patterns to minimize signal cycle lengths, reduce delay, improve safety, and reduce fuel consumption and
emissions.
Applications
In South Miami, signal timing is controlled by the Miami-Dade County Public Works and Waste
Management Department, Signals and Signs Division.
Signal retiming should be considered to optimize intersection operations and to globally coordinate
the function of signals in relation to one another. This will allow groups or platoons of vehicles to
effi ciently travel through a series of intersections along a corridor. Vehicles can progress along a
corridor at a set speed in order to obtain green lights at signalized intersections. Signal progression at
slower speeds can help calm traffi c, but should be used in conjunction with other methods to deter
speed spiking in between signals.
Proper optimization of a traffi c signal system is performed by a traffi c engineer. The process
includes taking an inventory of the system, collecting traffi c and pedestrian volume data, reviewing
intersection safety, and updating signal timing software.
Traffi c changes, which can occur due to new development along a street, may require the adjustment
of traffi c signal timing.
Signal retiming should be evaluated regularly to better optimize the performance of signalized
intersections due to changing development and traffi c fl ow patterns.
Technology improvements in signal timing hardware and software should be considered during
system upgrades.
Changes in the number of travel lanes, switching direction of traffi c, and other travel way
enhancements can be considered with the signal retiming process.
Factors of eff ective signal timing include a lack of travel way capacity, a high use of midblock access
points, irregular signal spacing, transit/rail infl uence, and pedestrian signal demands. These should be
assessed during the regular reviews of the system performance.
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
SMITP98 | JANUARY 2015
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Traffi c Circles and Modern Roundabouts
Traffi c circles or modern roundabouts are circular intersections designed for yield-controlled entry and
typically channelized approaches. Traffi c circles can reduce delay for all users when compared to signalized
intersections at low and moderate traffi c volumes.
Applications
Traffi c circles should be designed to encourage slow entry speeds.
Traffi c circles should include splitter islands on all approaches, which serve to properly align entering
traffi c, to slow vehicles on the approaches, and to provide a pedestrian refuge for the crosswalks.
Multi-lane roundabouts require accessible pedestrian signals at all crosswalks. Care should be
exercised to provide safe pedestrian crosswalks with splitter island refuges at traffi c circles.
Another type of circular intersection is a neighborhood traffi c circle, which is a smaller type of
roundabout, and generally used for low-speed residential street types.
Roundabouts and traffi c circles provide an opportunity to incorporate stormwater management
techniques through bioretention or other techniques.
Recommendations
An example of a traffi c circle in South Miami is the intersection of SW 62nd Avenue and SW 48th Street (see
image above).
The following traffi c circle projects were recommended as part of the SMITP to improve multimodal
intersection safety in the South Miami area.
SW 62nd Avenue at SW 56th Street
Conversion of existing signalized intersection
SW 62nd Avenue at SW 64th Street
Conversion of existing signalized intersection
SW 62nd Avenue at SW 80th Street
Conversion of existing signalized intersection
SW 57th Avenue at SW 68th Street/Ponce de Leon Boulevard
This is a potential long-term strategy to re-open access to SW 68th Street from SW 57th Avenue
and improve general circulation in the area. However, the impact of the proximity of the U.S. 1
intersection must be evaluated.
Considerations
When determining whether to install traffi c circles, general considerations would include the
design vehicle, pedestrian volumes, and eff ects on pedestrian route directness. Traffi c circles are not
recommended if they would create greater vehicle delay or increased diffi culty for pedestrians navigating
the intersection. Intersections with more than four legs can be good candidates for conversion to modern
roundabouts. However, an engineering study must be conducted in order to determine whether a
modern roundabout would be appropriate. Modern roundabout designs should reduce relative speeds
and improve traffi c fl ow. ADA compliant pedestrian crosswalks with detectable warning strips and ramps
at least 20’ from the entry of the roundabout should be provided. Sight distance for drivers entering
the roundabout must be maintained to the left so that drivers are aware of vehicles and bicycles in the
circle (visibility across the center of the circle is not critical). Proper signing and pavement markings must
conform to the latest version of the MUTCD.
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 99
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Yield lines should be provided at the entry of the roundabout.
High pedestrian volumes may require larger crosswalk widths.
At-grade pedestrian cut-throughs should be provided at splitter island medians with ADA compliant
detectable warning strips.
Where there are high pedestrian
volumes, signal controls should be
considered.
Permitting bicyclists to use the
sidewalk at roundabouts should be
considered for comfort and safety of
all types of bicyclists, such as young
children. Ramps from the street to
the sidewalk, as well as appropriate
signage to inform pedestrians of a
mixing zone, should be installed.
Visibility and sight distances must
not be obstructed due to plant
growth.
Neighborhood Traffi c Circles
Neighborhood traffi c circles are smaller
versions of traffi c circles and should only
be utilized on low-volume, low-speed
roadways. The typical application of
a neighborhood traffi c circle is at the
intersection of two local streets in a
residential neighborhood. Neighborhood
traffi c circles serve to provide traffi c
control at intersections while eliminating
ineffi cient stop signs and helping to
control vehicular speeds. Whereas
speeding vehicles may violate stop signs,
neighborhood traffi c circles cause the
motorist to make a physical alteration of the
vehicle’s path, thereby helping to control speeds.
Applications
Neighborhood traffi c circles can be useful street crossing treatments along neighborhood greenways
because they provide traffi c calming eff ects, as well as allow bicyclists to maintain pedaling momentum
rather than stopping at stop signs.
An example of a neighborhood traffi c circle in South Miami is at the intersection of SW 66th Street and SW
64th Avenue (see image above).
Recommendations
The following neighborhood traffi c circle projects were recommended as part of the SMITP to provide
traffi c calming and neighborhood greenway crossing treatments in the South Miami area.
Traffi c circle along SW 62nd Avenue and SW 48th Street
Neighborhood traffi c circle along SW 66th Street and SW 64th Avenue
SMITP100 | JANUARY 2015
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
SW 62nd Avenue at SW 85th Street
SW 69th Avenue at SW 75th Terrace
SW 65th Avenue at SW 60th Street
SW 58th Avenue at SW 50th Street
SW 65th Avenue at SW 44th Street
KE Y GEOMETRIC DESIGN GUIDANCE
Well-designed intersection geometry is crucial for creating safe, effi cient, and multimodal intersections.
Changes in geometry can help to reduce vehicle turning speeds, increase pedestrian comfort and safety,
and create space for dedicated bicycle facilities. Intersections must combine well-designed geometry with
effi cient traffi c control measures to maximize safety for all users.
Curb Radii
Corner design has a signifi cant impact on how well an intersection serves the diversity of roadway users.
Larger curb radii typically result in higher-speed turning movements by motorists, while smaller curb radii
require sharper turns that reduce speeds, shorten crossing distances for pedestrians, and improve sight
distances. Two of the most important corner design elements are the eff ective radius and the actual curb
radius. Actual curb radius refers to the curvature along the curb line. Eff ective radius refers to the curvature
that vehicles follow when turning, which may be aff ected by on-street parking, bicycle lanes, medians, and
other roadway features.
The smallest practical actual curb radii shall be chosen to accommodate the design vehicle while balancing
the needs of pedestrians. When designing the actual curb radii to accommodate the chosen design vehicle,
assessments should be based on how the eff ective radius interacts with the design vehicle’s turning radius.
An actual curb radius of 5’ to 10’ should be used wherever possible, including where:
There are higher pedestrian volumes
There are low volumes of large vehicles
Bicycle and parking lanes create a larger eff ective radius
The desired maximum eff ective curb radius is 35’ for large vehicles
There are several factors that may aff ect the curb radii and must be taken into consideration. These include:
The street types
The angle of the intersection
Curb extensions
The receiving lane width
Where there are high volumes of large vehicles making turns, inadequate curb radii could cause large
vehicles to regularly travel across the curb and into the pedestrian waiting area.
A variety of strategies can be used to accommodate large vehicles while preserving benefi ts for
pedestrians:
Adding parking and/or bicycle lanes increases the eff ective radius of the corner.
Striping advance stop lines on the destination street of multi-lane roadways (at least two lanes in
each direction) enables large vehicles to make the turn by encroaching into the opposing lane.
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 101
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Installing a textured, at-grade paving treatment discourages high-speed turns while permitting turns
by larger vehicles.
Varying the actual curb radius over the length of the turn, also known as a compound curve, creates a
radius that is smaller as vehicles approach a crosswalk and larger as they make the turn.
Restricting access and operational changes prohibit certain turning movements.
Curb Ramps
A curb ramp is a ramp that provides a smooth
transition from the sidewalk to the street.
Appropriately designed curb ramps are critical
for providing access across intersections for
people with mobility and visibility disabilities.
One of the key considerations of intersection
geometry is the location of curb ramps and
crossings relative to desired lines and vehicle
paths.
Title II of the ADA requires that all pedestrian
crossings be accessible to people with disabilities
by providing curb ramps. Curb ramps must comply
with standards established by the South Miami
Public Works Department. Curb ramps, not including fl ares, must be a minimum of 4’ wide and contained
within the marked crosswalk. Curb ramps shall have a slope of no more than 8.33 percent, a minimum 2’
detectable warning strip, and level landing pads at the top and bottom of the ramp. Detectable warning
strips include a series of truncated domes and are colored to contrast with the surrounding pavement.
Intersection geometry should be infl uenced by the following curb ramp design principles:
Wherever feasible, curb ramps should be located to refl ect pedestrians’ desired path of travel through
an intersection, while also considering sight lines of approaching motor vehicles.
If possible, two separate curb ramps should be provided at corners instead of a single ramp that
opens diagonally at the intersection.
Curb ramps should be designed to avoid an accumulation of water or debris to the maximum extent
feasible.
Drainage inlets should be considered with the design of curb ramps.
There are a variety of standard curb ramp designs, including perpendicular ramps and parallel ramps. The
appropriate design for a particular location is determined on a site-by-site basis. Key factors to consider
include pedestrian desire lines, sidewalk widths, buff er widths, curb heights, street slopes, and drainage
patterns. Raised crossings extend the sidewalk environment across a roadway and do not require people
to navigate curb ramps. Consider installing raised crossings at locations with high pedestrian volumes, and
where low speeds are desired. Detectable warning strips are also required at crossings where there is no
grade separation between the sidewalk and the roadway, such as at raised crossings and intersections
Curb Extensions
Curb extensions, also known as neckdowns or bulbouts, reduce the eff ective width of the street by
extending the curb line across a parking lane to the beginning of the adjacent travel lane. Curb extensions
have a variety of potential benefi ts:
Curb ramp along Sunset Drive and SW 57th Avenue
SMITP102 | JANUARY 2015
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Additional space for pedestrians to queue before crossing.
Improved safety by slowing motor vehicle traffi c and emphasizing pedestrian crossing locations.
Less exposure for pedestrians by reducing crossing distances.
Space for ADA compliant curb ramps where sidewalks are narrow.
Enhanced visibility between pedestrians and other roadway users.
Restricting cars from parking too close to the crosswalk area.
Space for utilities, signs, and amenities, such as bus shelters or waiting areas, bicycle parking,
public seating, street vendors, newspaper stands, trash and recycling receptacles, and stormwater
management elements or street parks.
Curb extensions should be considered only where on-street parking is present, including at corners
and midblock.
A typical curb extension extends 6’ from the curb (the approximate width of a parked car).
The minimum length of a curb extension shall be the width of the crosswalk, allowing the curvature
of the curb extension to start after the crosswalk. Note that the angle of curvature should deter
parking, supplemented by NO STOPPING signs. The length of a curb extension can vary depending
on the intended use (i.e., stormwater management bus bulb, restrict parking).
Curb extensions should not reduce a travel lane or a bicycle lane to an unsafe width.
Curb extensions at intersections may extend into either one or two legs of the intersection,
depending on the confi guration of parking. Street furniture, trees, plantings, and other amenities
must not interfere with pedestrian fl ow, emergency access, or visibility between pedestrians and
other roadway users.
Curb extensions are particularly valuable in locations with high volumes of pedestrian traffi c, near
schools, where there are demonstrated pedestrian safety issues.
The turning needs of larger vehicles should be considered in curb extension design. When curb
extensions confl ict with turning movements, they should be reduced in size rather than eliminated.
Emergency access is often improved through the use of curb extensions, if intersections are kept clear
of parked cars.
Curb extension installation may require the relocation of existing storm drainage inlets.
Curb extensions may also impact underground utilities, curbside parking, delivery access, garbage
collection, and street sweepers. These impacts should be evaluated when considering whether to
install a curb extension.
Curb extensions are not desirable on arterials that have peak hour parking restrictions to move traffi c
more effi ciently.
Crossing Islands
Crossing islands are raised, protected areas within a crosswalk that divide a roadway into segments
so pedestrians only have to cross one direction of traffi c at a time. Crossing islands reduce pedestrian
exposure and are particularly valuable when used along multi-lane roadways. Crossing islands can be used
at signalized intersections, but signal timing should always be designed to allow pedestrians to cross the
entire roadway in one stage.
Crossing islands design should:
Include at-grade pedestrian cut-throughs as wide as the connecting crosswalks, and detectable
warning strips, and be gently sloped to prevent ponding and ensure proper drainage.
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 103
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Direct pedestrians at an angle to face on-coming traffi c.
Be at least 6’ wide, but preferably 8’ wide.
Accommodate turning vehicles, if applicable.
Extend beyond the crosswalk at intersections.
Incorporate diverging longitudinal lines on approaches to crossing islands, per MUTCD standards.
Crossing islands should be considered where crossing distances are greater than 50’.
Where possible, stormwater management techniques should be utilized on crossing islands with
adequate space, but not in the pedestrian clear path to and from crosswalks.
Plantings should not obstruct sight lines.
Diverters
Diverters are curb extensions or traffi c islands at intersections used specifi cally to restrict motor vehicle
access and deter heavy volumes of through vehicle traffi c on residential street types. All diverters should
maintain pedestrian and bicycle access. There are many types of diverters:
Full-closures - restricts travel in both directions
Half-closures - restricts travel in one direction on an otherwise two-way street
Diagonal diverters - placed diagonally across an intersection, preventing through traffi c by forcing
turns in one direction
Forced turns - forces travel in a specifi c direction
Diverters should be installed on streets where eliminating cut-through traffi c is desired.
Diverters should only be considered as part of an overall traffi c calming strategy. Include street
direction changes for an area when less restrictive measures, such as signs, are not eff ective. Diverters
should be designed to impact motor vehicle movement, but should facilitate bicycle and pedestrian
access.
The design of diverters must consider impacts to emergency vehicle response times. Designs that
allow emergency vehicle access are preferred and should be coordinated with a local emergency
response program.
Diverter designs should be carefully thought out to ensure proper drainage and maximize the
potential for on-site stormwater retention and infi ltration.
Vegetation used in diverters should be low growing to maintain sight lines and also be drought-
resistant.
Diverters directly aff ect people living in the neighborhood and so require strong local support. A
highly interactive public input process is essential.
Diff erent elements can be used as a diverter, including concrete medians, stormwater planters,
public art sculptures, etc. Diverters provide excellent opportunities to introduce green elements at
intersections, and can be used to absorb stormwater and reduce the heat island eff ect.
Temporary diverters can be installed to test how permanent diverters might aff ect traffi c fl ow.
Diverters are an important component of bicycle boulevards, which allow through bicycle traffi c but
discourage through motor vehicle traffi c. A diverter’s impact on speeding is generally limited to the
intersection. Additional countermeasures are usually necessary to address speeding at mid-block
locations.
SMITP104 | JANUARY 2015
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
KE Y PEDESTRIAN TREATM ENTS
Pedestrians are the most vulnerable users of the transportation system. As a pedestrian, motor vehicle
speeds greatly aff ect the severity of crashes and impact fatality rates. Streets with high pedestrian activity
should maintain slow motor vehicle speeds, which can be achieved through roadway design and traffi c
calming strategies. In addition, areas close to parks, schools, and similar pedestrian destinations require
special pedestrian consideration. Pedestrian-oriented designs should also aim to minimize confl icts with
other modes and exposure to motor vehicle traffi c. Intersections must be designed for pedestrians of all
ages and abilities. ADA compliant curb ramps, crosswalks, and accessible pedestrian signals should be
provided to the maximum extent feasible following the minimum guidelines set by the U.S. Access Board
PROWAG.
Crosswalk Design
Well-designed crosswalks are crucial to creating pedestrian-friendly walking environments. Crosswalks
may be marked or unmarked. While most intersections have marked crosswalks at each approach, other
locations can be marked specifi cally to emphasize unique pedestrian desire lines and to ensure safe access
to local institutions, parks, and housing for the elderly. Safety for all pedestrians, especially for those with
disabilities, is the single most important criteria informing crosswalk design. Crosswalks serve a dual
function of guiding pedestrians to locations where they should cross the street and alerting drivers of
pedestrian movements.
Applications
All crosswalk designs must conform to the latest edition of the MUTCD.
Crosswalks should be at least 10’ wide or the width of the approaching sidewalk, if it is greater. In
areas of heavy pedestrian volumes, crosswalks can be up to 25’ wide.
ADA-compliant curb ramps should direct pedestrians into the crosswalk and the bottom of the ramp
should lie within the area of the crosswalk. Flares do not need to fall within the crosswalk.
The MUTCD provides guidance on crosswalk markings for an intersection with an exclusive
pedestrian phase that permits diagonal crossings.
The location of crosswalk markings should be designed at right angles where practical and must be
balanced with pedestrian desire lines, accessibility requirements, and the constraints of the site. Particularly
at complex intersections, crosswalks should be placed at locations that refl ect pedestrian desire lines
while also considering the safest location to cross—that is, where there is the least amount of exposure
to confl icts with other modes. Crosswalk placement should also maximize the visibility of pedestrians to
turning vehicle movements. Crosswalk markings should consist of non-skid, thermoplastic, retro-refl ective
material. Durability and ease of maintenance must be a consideration in material selection. Signalized
intersections generally should have crosswalk markings on all approaches.
Recommendations
The following new crosswalk projects at signalized intersections were recommended as part of the SMITP.
These signalized intersections are missing crosswalks on at least one approach.
U.S. 1 @ SW 70th Street
Add crosswalk across the north leg of the intersection.
U.S. 1 @ SW 73rd Street
Add crosswalk to at least one of the north or south legs to cross U.S. 1. No crosswalk is currently
provided.
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 105
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
The following crosswalks are recommended at locations that are currently unsignalized. These crosswalks
may require design techniques that are described in the section below regarding crosswalk markings
at uncontrolled locations. An engineering study would determine the appropriate technique for each
location ranging from signage to full signalization.
U.S. 1 between South Miami Hospital exit driveway and SW 62nd Avenue
Serves pedestrian trip pattern between hospital and shopping center/restaurants on the east
side of U.S. 1. Likely will require pedestrian hybrid beacon (HAWK) or rectangular rapid fl ashing
beacons (RRFBs).
SW 57th Avenue at SW 76th Street
SW 57th Avenue at SW 73rd Street (see street section diagram)
SW 57th Avenue at SW 60th Street
SW 57th Avenue at SW 53rd Terrace
SW 57th Avenue at SW 50th Street
SW 40th Street east of SW 64th Avenue
SW 40th Street east of SW 60th Avenue
Crosswalk Markings at Uncontrolled Locations
This section presents guidance as to when
and where it is appropriate to provide marked
crosswalks at uncontrolled locations, as well
as when additional safely enhancements are
required to increase visibility, awareness, and
yielding to pedestrians. The NCHRP Report 562,
Improving Pedestrian Safety at Unsignalized
Intersections, found that “the safest and most
eff ective pedestrian crossings use several traffi c
control devices or design elements to meet the
information and control needs of both motorists
and pedestrians.” Additional safely improvements,
which are discussed on the following pages,
include:
Raised crossings and intersections
Advance yield markings and signs
In-street YIELD TO PEDESTRIAN signs
Rectangular rapid-fl ashing beacons (RRFBs)
Pedestrian signal leads
Signal phases for pedestrians
Pedestrian hybrid beacon (HAWK) signals
Accessible pedestrian signals
An engineering study should be performed to determine the feasibility of a marked crosswalk at
uncontrolled locations. Components of such a study include the following:
Sample “fl ashing beacon” at a midblock crossing
SMITP106 | JANUARY 2015
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Traffi c speeds and volumes
Crossing distances
Need or demand for crossing
Distance from adjacent signalized intersections and other crosswalks, and the possibility to
consolidate multiple crossing points
Sight distance and geometry of the location
Availability of street lighting
Locations of drainage structures
Locations where crosswalk markings alone are insuffi cient to address pedestrian safety include any street
where any of the following conditions exist:
The roadway has four or more lanes of travel without a raised median or pedestrian crossing island
and an ADT of 12,000 vehicles per day or greater
The roadway has four or more lanes of travel with a raised median or pedestrian refuge island and an
ADT of 15,000 vehicles per day or greater
The speed limit exceeds 35 MPH
There are a number of measures that can be used at uncontrolled locations, in addition to marked
crosswalks, to improve the safety of pedestrians crossing the street:
Reduce the eff ective crossing distance for pedestrians by providing curb extensions, providing raised
pedestrian crossing islands, and/or performing road diets or lane diets
Install traffi c calming measures to slow vehicle speeds
Provide adequate nighttime lighting for pedestrians
Using various pedestrian warning signs, advance stop lines, rapid-fl ashing beacons, and other traffi c
control devices to supplement marked crosswalks (see the following sections for more details)
Install traffi c signals with pedestrian signals where warranted
Sample “specialty paving treatment” on a city street
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 107
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Special Paving Treatments
Special paving treatments can be used on roadway surfaces to reduce speeds, increase durability, manage
stormwater, or to demarcate a special zone like a bike lane, bus stop, or speed table. A change of color
or material can produce a traffi c calming eff ect. Examples of special roadway materials include colored
asphalt or concrete, textured asphalt or concrete, pervious pavement stamped patterns, and pavers. The
location and extent of special paving materials depends on the design of the roadway and the expected
vehicle types and volume. The choice of a contrasting paving material aff ects the safety and maintenance
of the road. Diff erent materials have diff erent qualities with respect to road noise, porosity, heat
absorption, surface friction, bicyclist comfort, and maintenance.
Applications
Light colored asphalt and concrete should be utilized wherever possible to reduce heat.
Colored pavement can be used to delineate special lanes for transit, bicycles, or parking on mixed use
streets. Limits to durability make this treatment less appropriate for lanes on parkways, industrial, and
commercial streets. On these street types, colored pavement may be more appropriate for confl ict
zones, such as merge areas and intersections, or for special districts, shared paths, or streets meant for
slower speeds.
Special paving treatments may be used on crosswalks, in special districts such as Downtown South
Miami to delineate the distinct streets designed for slower speeds, and streets intended to be shared
with pedestrians.
Consideration should be given to long-term maintenance of porous pavement materials.
Care must be taken to ensure textured pavements are structurally sound and able to support the type
and volume of vehicles that are likely to use the street.
Particular care should be taken with placing diff erent materials adjacent to each other (for example,
concrete pavers adjacent to an asphalt roadway). Over time, the edges between the two pavement
materials can become uneven.
Noise can be a concern with textured pavements.
Recommendations
The following specialty paving treatment projects were recommended as part of the SMITP to provide
traffi c calming and neighborhood greenway crossing treatments in the South Miami area.
SW 58th Avenue between U.S. 1 and SW 71st Street
SW 58th Avenue between SW 80th Street and SW 72nd Street
SW 62nd Avenue between SW 64th Street and SW 56th Street
SW 72nd Street between U.S. 1 and SW 57th Avenue
SW 64th Street between SW 62nd Avenue and SW 57th Avenue
SW 56th Street between SW 62nd Avenue and SW 57th Avenue
SW 57th Avenue between SW 74th Terrace and SW 72nd Street
Advance Yield Markings and Signs
Advance yield markings are yield markings that are striped further back from the crosswalk and used in
conjunction with YIELD HERE TO PEDESTRIAN signs. Advance yield markings make it easier for pedestrians
and motorists to see one another. On multi-lane roadways, they help reduce multi-threat collisions.
Multiple-threat collisions occur when blocking the view of the motorist in the far lane.
SMITP108 | JANUARY 2015
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Advance yield marking and signs can be used on two-lane, three-lane and four-lane roadways. They are
less eff ective on four-lane roadways unless vehicle operating speeds are 25 MPH or less. On four-lane
roads with higher speeds, the fl ashing beacon may be a better solution. Yield markings on unsignalized
crossings should be accompanied by YIELD HERE TO PEDESTRIAN signs. Advance yield markings and signs
should be placed 20’ to 50’ in advance of crosswalks on unsignalized multi-lane approaches. Parking should
be prohibited in the area between the yield line and the crosswalk. Pavement markings can be used to
reinforce NO PARKING signage. Yield lines should not be used at locations where drivers are required to
stop in compliance with a STOP sign, a traffi c control signal, or other traffi c control device.
When determining where to place advance yield marking and signs with the 20’ to 50’ range, consideration
should be given to the number of lanes pedestrians must cross, motor vehicle speeds, sight lines, on-street
parking and turning movements. Advance yield markings may be staggered so that yield markings in
one lane are closer to the crosswalk than the yield markings in an adjacent lane. Staggered yield lines can
improve a driver’s view of pedestrians, provide better sight distance for turning vehicles, and increase the
turning radius for left-turning vehicles.
In-street STOP FOR PEDESTRIAN Signs
A variety of signs may be used to indicate locations where drivers must yield to or stop for pedestrians.
In-street pedestrian crossing signs (MUTCD sign R1-6a) have been found to be particularly eff ective at
increasing motorist yielding compliance. In-street pedestrian crossing signs are placed in the roadway
to alert drivers to be aware of the crossing and to eff ectively yield to pedestrians. In-street signs can be
permanently installed in the roadway or mounted on a portable base. In-street STOP FOR PEDESTRIAN
signs are a cost-eff ective treatment to increase motorists’ compliance to pedestrian laws.
In-street STOP FOR PEDESTRIAN signs must only be used at unsignalized intersections. They are prohibited
from use at signalized intersections. In-street STOP FOR PEDESTRIAN signs should be placed in the roadway
prior to the crosswalk location on the center line, on a lane line, or on a median island. They should not
obstruct the crosswalk and should be designed to bend over and bounce back when struck by a vehicle. In-
street STOP FOR PEDESTRIAN signs work best on low speed, two-lane streets. They are not recommended
on roads with high motor vehicle speeds or volumes, where drivers are less likely to see them.
In-roadway STOP FOR PEDESTRIAN signs require regular monitoring and should be replaced when
damaged. Damaged signs send the message to pedestrians that a crossing is not safe.
KE Y PEDESTRIAN SIGNALS
At some unsignalized crossings, particularly those with four or more lanes, it can be very challenging
to get drivers to yield to pedestrians. Vehicle speeds and poor pedestrian visibility combine to create
conditions in which very few drivers stop. One type of device proven to be successful in improving yielding
compliance at these locations is the rectangular rapid fl ashing beacon (RRFB). The rectangular rapid
fl ashing beacon’s eff ectiveness has been confi rmed by multiple studies, including an FHWA study called
the Eff ects of Yellow Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacons on Yielding at Multilane Uncontrolled Crosswalks.
Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons
Rectangular rapid fl ashing beacons are placed curb side below the pedestrian crossing sign and above the
arrow indication pointing at the crossing. They should not be used without the presence of a pedestrian
crossing sign. The LED fl ash is an irregular fl ash pattern. The beacons are activated by a pedestrian call
button. Another LED panel should be placed facing the pedestrian to indicate that the beacon has
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 109
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
been activated. The push-button and other components of the crosswalk must meet all other MUTCD
accessibility requirements.
Design of rapid fl ashing beacons should be in accordance with FHWA’s Interim Approval for Optional
Use of Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons issued July 16, 2008.
Rectangular rapid fl ashing beacons can be used when a signal is not warranted at an unsignalized
crossing. They are not appropriate at intersections with signals or STOP signs.
Rectangular rapid fl ashing beacons are installed on both sides of the roadway at the edge of the
crosswalk. If there is a pedestrian refuge or other type of median, a beacon should be installed in the
median rather than the far side of the roadway.
Rectangular rapid fl ashing beacons are considerably less expensive to install than mast-arm mounted
signals, but they are more expensive than signs alone. They can also be installed with solar-power
panels to eliminate the need for a power source.
Rapid fl ashing beacons should be used in conjunction with advance yield pavement markings and
signs.
Many examples of RRFB installations can be found in Miami-Dade County including at the intersection of
Bayshore Drive and Darwin Street in the Coconut Grove district of Miami.
Pedestrian Hybrid Beacons
A pedestrian hybrid beacon is a special type of hybrid beacon used to warn and control traffi c at an
unsignalized location to assist pedestrians in crossing a street or highway at a marked crosswalk. A
pedestrian hybrid beacon may be considered for installation to facilitate pedestrian crossings at a location
that does not meet traffi c signal warrants for full pedestrian signalization.
The beacon head is distinct from conventional
signal heads, which helps to provide notifi cation
to motorists of a special type of signal. The beacon
head consists of two red lenses above a single yellow
lens. The beacon is not lit until a pedestrian desires
to cross the street. At this point, the pedestrian
will push a button that activates the beacon.
After displaying brief fl ashing and steady yellow
intervals, the device displays a steady red indication
to drivers and a “WALK” indication to pedestrians,
allowing them to cross a major roadway while traffi c
is stopped. After the pedestrian phase ends, the
“WALK” indication changes to a fl ashing orange
hand to notify pedestrians that their clearance time
is ending. The hybrid beacon displays alternating
fl ashing red lights to drivers while pedestrians fi nish
their crossings before once again going dark at the
conclusion of the cycle.
Applications
The pedestrian hybrid beacon is a good intermediate option between the operational requirements and
eff ects of a rectangular rapid fl ashing beacon and a full pedestrian signal because it provides a positive
Sample “pedestrian hybrid beacon” on a city street
SMITP110 | JANUARY 2015
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
stop control in areas without the high pedestrian traffi c volumes that typically warrant the installation of
a signal. In addition, the alternating red signal heads allows vehicles to proceed once the pedestrian has
cleared their side of the travel lane, thus improving vehicle traffi c fl ow.
Installation of the pedestrian hybrid beacon has been shown in FHWA studies to provide the following
safety benefi ts:
Up to a 69 percent reduction in pedestrian crashes; and
Up to a 29 percent reduction in total roadway crashes
Recommendations
The pedestrian hybrid beacon should be considered for future mid-block crosswalks across busy arterials
such as U.S. 1 and SW 40th Street.
Pedestrian Signal Heads
Well-designed signalized intersections help reduce delay for all modes, minimize confl icts between modes,
and help reduce risk-taking behavior. Pedestrian signal heads display each part of the pedestrian phase as
listed below:
The WALK indication, represented by a walking person symbol, signifi es the WALK interval.
The Flashing DON’T WALK indication, represented by a fl ashing upraised hand, signifi es the
pedestrian change interval. Typically, the fl ashing DON’T WALK indication is accompanied by a
countdown display depicting how much time is left to cross the street. Countdown displays are
required on new installations to encourage pedestrians to fi nish crossing before the DON’T WALK
indication and better serves pedestrians with faster walking speeds.
The DON’T WALK indication, represented by a steady upraised hand, signifi es that pedestrians are not
permitted to cross. The DON’T WALK indication should be displayed for a three-second buff er interval
prior to the release of any confl icting motor vehicle movements.
Accessible pedestrian signals are discussed later in this chapter and on the next page.
Pedestrian signal heads should be provided at all signalized intersections for all marked crosswalks.
Additionally, it is highly recommended to install crosswalks on all legs of a signalized intersection unless
determined otherwise by an engineering study. The timing for each phase must account for the walking
speeds of people of all ages and abilities, especially children, the elderly, and disabled.
One of the primary challenges for designers is to balance the goal of minimizing confl icts between turning
vehicles with the goal of minimizing pedestrian and motorist delay. Requiring pedestrians to wait for
extended periods can encourage crossing against the signal. The 2010 Highway Capacity Manual states
that pedestrians have an increased likelihood of risk-taking behavior (i.e., jaywalking) after waiting longer
than 30 seconds at signalized intersections. Strategies to achieve this balance include minimizing signal
cycle lengths, restricting right-turn-on-red, introducing leading pedestrian intervals, and reducing turning
speeds to increase yielding times. Opportunities to provide a WALK indication should be maximized,
whenever possible. Vehicular movements should be analyzed at every intersection in order to utilize
non-confl icting movements to implement WALK indications. For example, at a four-leg intersection with
the major road intersecting a one-way street, when the major road has the green indication, pedestrians
can always cross the approach where vehicles cannot turn. Pedestrian signal head intersection geometry
and traffi c controls should facilitate turning vehicles, yielding to pedestrians unless providing an exclusive
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 111
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
turning internal or protected/exclusive pedestrian phase. At unsignalized intersections, turning vehicles
yield to pedestrians. The expectation should be carried over to signalized intersections to the greatest
extent possible.
Accessible Pedestrian Signals
Accessible pedestrian signals (APS) and accessible detectors are devices that communicate the WALK and
DON’T WALK intervals with nonvisual indications at signalized intersections to people with visual and/
or hearing disabilities. Accessible pedestrian signals and detectors may include features such as audible
tones, speech messages, detectable arrow indications, and/or vibrating surfaces. The major functions of
accessible pedestrian signals are to provide information for:
Location of push buttons, if used
Beginning of WALK indication
Direction of crossing
Location of destination sidewalk
Intersection street name in Braille or raised print
Intersection signalization with speech messages
Intersection geometry through detectable maps or diagrams or through speech messages
Push-button locator tones are used for locating the pedestrian push-button needed to actuate the WALK
indication. Vibrotactile devices vibrate to communicate when the WALK indication is in eff ect. Detectable
arrows indicate the direction of travel on the crosswalk.
All pedestrian signal designs must conform to the latest edition of the MUTCD.
Accessible pedestrian signals and detectors must be used in combination with pedestrian signal
timing.
The proposed Accessibility Guidelines for Pedestrian Facilities in the Public Right-of-Way require
accessible pedestrian signals and push buttons when pedestrian signals are newly installed, when the
signal controller and software are altered, or when the signal head is replaced. The MUTCD currently
states that accessible pedestrian signals shall be provided based on engineering judgment.
Information provided by an accessible pedestrian signal must clearly indicate which pedestrian
crossing is served by each device.
At corners where two push buttons are present, to the maximum extent feasible, they should be
separated by at least 10 feet.
Accessible pedestrian signal detectors may be push buttons or passive detection devices. At locations
with pre-timed traffi c control signals or non-actuated approaches, pedestrian push-buttons may be
used to activate the accessible pedestrian signals.
APS are typically integrated into the pedestrian push-button, and the audible tones and/or messages
come from the push-button housing. APS also have a push-button locator tone and detectable arrow,
and can include audible beaconing and other special features.
Detectable arrows should be aligned toward the destination across the street; they should not point
toward the beginning of the crosswalk or the curb ramp location. Misalignment of the arrow may
direct pedestrians with disabilities into the center of the intersection.
Audible WALK indications should coincide with the pedestrian WALK. If the pedestrian signal rests
SMITP112 | JANUARY 2015
in the WALK phase, the audible indication should be provided in the fi rst seven seconds of the WALK
phase.
Detailed information on accessible pedestrian signals is also provided through the United States
Access Board.
Signal Phases for Pedestrians
There are three ways to time a pedestrian phase:
A concurrent pedestrian phase occurs when pedestrians have the WALK indication while parallel and
confl icting (turning) vehicular traffi c is permitted.
A protected pedestrian phase occurs when pedestrians have the WALK indication while confl icting
movements are prohibited by a signal or NO TURN ON RED sign.
An exclusive pedestrian phase occurs when pedestrians have the WALK indication while all other
movements are prohibited by a signal or NO TURN ON RED sign.
Concurrent pedestrian phases are the most common application at signalized intersections where
pedestrian accommodations exist. Protected pedestrian phases can be used when there are high volumes
of vehicle turning movements confl icting with pedestrian traffi c. This phasing will provide a pedestrian
WALK indication at the same time as the through movement in the same direction, while prohibiting the
confl icting turning movements that could cross an active crosswalk. Exclusive pedestrian phases can be
used when there is a very high volume of pedestrians. This phase allows all pedestrian movements at once
and may increase motorist delay. It may not be ideal at intersections with high volumes of motor vehicle
traffi c. Exclusive pedestrian phases and protected pedestrian phases should generally be considered at
intersections where:
Sight distance is restricted
Intersection geometry is complex
The intersection is near elderly housing, schools, recreational areas, medical facilities, or other
facilities within a safety zone
The intersection is near special event locations with high pedestrian volumes
Exclusive pedestrian phases increase pedestrian safety, but also increase delay for vehicular
intersection users.
Leading pedestrian intervals may be considered for concurrent phasing where appropriate and are
discussed in Signalization Strategies to Reduce Confl icts.
NO TURN ON RED signs should be considered at intersections with exclusive pedestrian phases.
TURNING VEHICLES YIELD TO PEDESTRIANS and WATCH FOR TURNING VEHICLES signs may be used to
provide additional awareness at intersections with concurrent pedestrian phases where confl icting
vehicle/pedestrian movements are present.
Signalization Strategies to Reduce Confl icts
There are several signalization strategies to reduce confl icts between pedestrians and other modes of
transportation.
These typically involve separating movements, including the following:
Exclusive and protected pedestrian signal phases
Leading pedestrian intervals
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 113
Lagging vehicle turn arrow
Restricting turns on red
Exclusive and protected signal phasing separates pedestrian traffi c and reduces confl icts between
pedestrians and motorists; however, there are signifi cant impacts to signal cycle lengths that need to be
considered. Another strategy is called the Leading Pedestrian Interval (LPI), which initiates the pedestrian
WALK indication three to seven seconds before motor vehicles traveling in the same direction are given
the green indication. This technique allows pedestrians to establish themselves in the intersection in front
of turning vehicles, increasing visibility for all modes. Left-turn arrow indications can be provided before
the opposite direction through movements (leading left-turn) or after the opposite direction through
movements (lagging left-turn). NO TURN ON RED signs can also be used to restrict vehicles from turning
right or from turning left on intersecting one-way streets during the red indication. Restricting this
movement eliminates confl icts with pedestrians crossing in front of vehicles making turns.
The LPI should be used at intersections with high volumes of pedestrians and confl icting turning vehicles,
and at locations with a large population of elderly or school children who tend to walk slower. The LPI
should be at least three seconds to allow pedestrians to cross at least one lane of traffi c to establish
their position ahead of turning traffi c. The FHWA has determined that the LPI currently provides a crash
reduction factor of 5 percent. Newly-installed LP should provide accessible pedestrian signals to notify
visually-impaired pedestrians of the LPI. Additionally, without an accessible pedestrian signal, visually-
impaired pedestrians may begin to cross with the vehicular movement when motorists are not expecting
them. Accessible pedestrian signals are discussed further on pages 184. NO TURN ON RED signs should be
considered when one or more of the following conditions apply:
An exclusive pedestrian phase is provided
LPI is provided
Poor sight distances reduce visibility
Geometry of the intersection may result in unexpected confl icts
More than three accidents are reported in a 12-month period between pedestrians and vehicles
where turns-on-red are permitted that could be prevented with this action
NO TURN ON RED signs can be provided at all times or by a dynamic sign that changes when
pedestrians are present, by time of day, by a call made by an emergency vehicle, and/or at rail or light
transit crossings.
If concurrent phasing is provided in conjunction with NO TURN ON RED signs, there may be an
increase of confl icts with pedestrians by forcing motorists to turn only when the green indication and
pedestrian WALK indication overlap. At locations with high volumes of pedestrians crossing during a
concurrent pedestrian phase, permitting turns on red or implementing exclusive pedestrian phasing
should be considered.
In general, concurrent pedestrian phasing should appropriately match the motor vehicle signal
phasing. At intersections with high pedestrian volumes where drivers have diffi culty fi nding gaps to
turn, the green time can be intentionally extended past the DON’T WALK indication in order to allow
the turning movement.
Intersections with LPIs should be accompanied by appropriate signage, such as TURNING VEHICLES
YIELD TO PEDESTRIANS.
In addition to LPIs and NO TURN ON RED signs, bicyclists traveling in the same direction as
pedestrians may be provided a leading bicycle interval using a bicycle signal head.
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
SMITP114 | JANUARY 2015
KE Y BIC YC LE TREATM ENTS
The majority of motor vehicle crashes involving bicycles occur at intersections. In Florida, on-street bicycles
are operating vehicles and are required to follow the same rules of the road as motorists. Yet traditionally,
intersection designs do not take into account the needs of bicyclists. Well-designed intersections that
make bicycling more convenient and attractive, minimize delay, reduce confl icts with motor vehicles and
pedestrians, and contributed to reduced crashes and injuries are of critical importance in order to increase
bicycling. The following principles are applied to intersection design in order to accommodate bicyclists:
Provide a direct, continuous facility to the intersection
Provide a clear route for bicyclists through the intersection
Reduce and manage confl icts with turning vehicles
Provide signal design and timing to accommodate bicyclists, based on an engineering study
Provide access to off -street destinations.
Bicycle Lanes at Intersections
Bicycle lanes provide a dedicated space for bicyclists to predictably ride along roadways and at
intersections. When designing intersections for bicyclists, the approaches should be analyzed and designs
should maintain continuity of bicycle facilities to the maximum extent possible. Streets with dedicated
bicycle lanes may continue striping through unsignalized and complicated intersections to provide
additional guidance and safety measures for bicyclists. This design principle is especially important at
intersections where there are confl icting vehicular movements, unsignalized crossings, and/or crossings
of more than four moving traffi c lanes. Signalized intersections may not require striping through each
intersection, and should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
Standard details for bicycle lane markings at intersections are provided in the MUTCD and MSHTO
Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities.
Dedicated bicycle lanes should be provided on all major intersection approaches on street types that
support on-street bicycle lanes and are recommended in the South Miami Bike Plan. For higher speed
roadways, dedicated bicycle lanes may not be well-suited for the context and land-use of the street
type, and grade separated cycle tracks or off -street facilities may be more appropriate. Also, shared
lane markings may be appropriate on residential, lower volume roadways.
At intersections with a dedicated right-turn lane, bicycle lanes should be provided to the left of the
right-turn-only lane, unless bicycle signals and dedicated phasing is provided.
Bicycle lane markings, including green colored pavement shared lane markings, dashed bicycle lane
lines, and signage, may be provided through intersections, per engineering judgment.
Selective removal of parking spaces may be needed to provide adequate visibility and to establish
suffi cient bicycle lane width at approaches to intersections.
Shared lane markings may be used where space is not available for bicycle lanes at intersections.
Although the preferred recommended width of a bicycle lane is 5 feet, 4-foot minimum bicycle lanes
may be considered at constrained intersections, in order to provide a dedicated space for bicyclists,
per engineering judgment.
Bicycle lanes at the entrance and exit of a roundabout should allow direct access to a shared-use
bicycle/pedestrian path around the perimeter of the roundabout through properly designed ramps.
They should also enable bicyclists to mix with traffi c and proceed through the roundabout as a
vehicle.
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 115
Bicycles at Signalized Intersections
Bicycles have diff erent operating characteristics than motor vehicles, and special considerations are
necessary to design traffi c signals that serve both motorists and bicyclists. In general, bicyclists have slower
acceleration and velocity than motorists. To off set this disadvantage, traffi c signal design should include
considerations of minimum green intervals, clearance time, and extension time to ensure that bicyclists
can safely traverse South Miami’s intersections. Signal progression should balance the needs of all users
with appropriate design speeds and traffi c signal coordination settings. Appropriate signal timing can also
minimize cyclist delay, discourage red-light running, and reduce potential crashes.
Where actuated signals (loop or video detectors) are present, the signal system should detect bicycles as
well as motor vehicles. In order for bicyclists to prompt the green indication at these intersections, loop or
video detectors should be adjusted to detect bicycles, or separate bicycle-detectors should be installed.
Detection devices should be located within bicycle lanes or bicycle boxes, marked with a bicycle
detector symbol, and supplemented by appropriate signage according to the MUTCD.
When it is not feasible for the detection device to be located within the bicycle lane or bicycle box,
detection devices should be located prior to the stop bar and span an appropriate distance to
provide for left-, through-, and right-turning bicyclists.
Bicycle signals can be used to separate confl icting movements, provide leading bicycle intervals,
provide controls at shared-use paths, or to accommodate an exclusive left-turn phase.
Please reference the latest edition of the AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities for
more details on the signal timing needs of bicyclists at intersections. Special attention should be given to
signal timing at locations with higher vehicular speeds and longer crossing distances. At these locations,
bicyclists are more likely to have diff erent signal timing needs than motorists. Bicycle signal heads can be
used to provide dedicated signal indications to bicyclists and should be positioned to maximize visibility
to bicycle traffi c. They should be coordinated with pedestrian and non-confl icting vehicular movements to
increase safety and minimize overall delay. Bicycle signal heads should be installed on a case-by-case basis
determined by an engineering study.
Bicycle Boxes
A bicycle box is dedicated space located
between the crosswalk and the motor
vehicle stop line used to provide bicyclists
a dedicated space to wait during a red light
at signalized intersections. Placing bicyclists
ahead of stopped vehicular traffi c at a red
light improves visibility and reduces confl icts
among all users. Bicycle boxes also provide
bicyclists a head start to get through an
intersection, which aids in making diffi cult
turning movements and improves safety and
comfort due to the diff erence in acceleration
rates between bicycles and motor vehicles. In
all cases, the bicycle box places bicyclists in front of motor vehicles, allowing them to “claim the lane,” if
desired. Bicycle boxes also provide more space for multiple bicyclists to wait at a red light, as opposed to
being constrained to a fi ve-foot wide bicycle lane.
Sample “bike box” at an intersection
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
SMITP116 | JANUARY 2015
Applications
In locations with high volumes of turning movements by bicyclists,
a bicycle box should be used to allow bicyclists to shift towards
the desired side of the travel way. Depending on the context of
the bicycle lane—left or right side of the road—bicyclists can
shift sides of the street to align themselves with vehicles making
the same movement through the intersection. In locations where
motor vehicles can continue straight or turn right and cross a
right side bicycle lane, the bicycle box allows bicyclists to move to
the front of the traffi c queue and make their movement fi rst. This
minimizes confl icts between the right turning motorist and the
bicyclist. In order to successfully minimize this confl ict, right-turn-
on-red movements should be prohibited.
Bicycle boxes are currently an experimental treatment that
requires FDOT and FHWA approval.
Bicycle box design should be supplemented with
appropriate signage according the latest version of the
MUTCD.
Where right-turn-only lanes for motor vehicles exist, bicycle
lanes should be designed to the left of the turn lane.
If right-turn-on-red is desired, consider ending the bicycle box at the edge of the bicycle lane to allow
motor vehicles to make this turning movement.
Recommendations
The following bicycle box projects were
recommended on existing bike lane corridors
as part of the SMITP. If approval for the bicycle
box installation is not received, the optional
use of green color pavement in the intersection
confl ict areas can be used as an alternative
treatment.
SW 62nd Avenue at SW 70th Street
SW 57th Avenue at SW 64th Street
SW 57th Avenue at SW 56th Street
SW 57th Avenue at SW 48th Street
SW 57th Avenue at SW 40th Street
M-Path Crossing Improvements at Sunset Drive
Operational challenges exist at the intersection of U.S. 1 and Sunset Drive. Several of these operational
challenges impact the experience of M-Path users traversing the west leg of the intersection. Three primary
concerns include the unprotected bend in the crosswalk near the center of the M-Path crossing; visibility
challenges due to the narrowness and alignment of the curb ramps; and the protrusion of the center island
into the crosswalk, which forces a pinch-point in crosswalk traffi c very close to U.S. 1 traffi c.
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
W11-15 (trail crossing warning)
and W16-7P signs
M-Path Crossing at Sunset Drive and U.S.1 in South Miami
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 117
Recommendations
The following improvements were identifi ed for the M-Path intersection across Sunset Drive to correct ADA
defi ciencies and to address traffi c operational concerns. The improvements recommended below are
consistent with other M-Path intersections already implemented by the M-Path Extension project south of
SW 67th Avenue.
Correct ADA cross-slope defi ciencies in the west side
crosswalk across Sunset Drive.
Provide a median refuge (raised concrete island with
accessible cut-through) in the median of Sunset Drive to
address the unprotected change of direction in the west side
crosswalk.
Re-build the curb ramp on the southwest corner of the
channelized right-turn lane from eastbound Sunset Drive
to southbound U.S. 1 to address running slope defi ciencies.
Provide detectable warning surface per FDOT Standard Index
304.
Widen curb cut ramps to shared-use path standards
throughout the west side crosswalk per PPM Volume I,
Chapter 8, Section 8.3.2. Provide detectable warning surface
per FDOT Standard Index 304.
Correct ADA cross-slope defi ciencies in the path between the
channelized eastbound right-turn lane and the eastbound through lane.
Consider the possibility of sign relocation to address sign clutter causing obstructions within the
M-Path between the channelized eastbound right-turn lane and the eastbound through lane.
Replace the overhead text-only R10-15 sign on the southbound mast arm with the graphic R10-15
(modifi ed) signage on the southbound U.S. 1 approach consistent with the M-Path Extension project.
Replace the R1-2 YIELD sign on the eastbound channelized right-turn lane with an R1-1 STOP sign to
be consistent with the existing STOP BAR pavement marking.
Replace W11-2 (pedestrian warning) signs throughout the west side of the intersection with W11-15
(trail crossing warning) signs. Provide W16-7P supplemental
plaques where not already provided.
Provide STOP HERE ON RED (R10-6) sign for the eastbound Sunset Drive lanes.
Green Street Elements
Green Streets are defi ned as urban transportation rights-of-way that provide source control of stormwater,
limit its transport and pollutant conveyance to the collection system, and provide environmentally
enhanced roads. Green streets improve water quality through the integration of stormwater treatment
techniques using natural processes and landscaping. All of this works to reduce the heat island eff ect.
Cities across the country are looking for more sustainable solutions to handle stormwater. The most
effi cient and cost eff ective way to manage stormwater is to collect it where the water falls. Many cities
are shifting their thinking on how to manage stormwater and are replacing conventional stormwater
infrastructure with green infrastructure within the street right-of-way, as well as on development sites.
R10-15 (modifi ed) sign
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
SMITP118 | JANUARY 2015
These types of stormwater fi ltering and holding systems allow water to infi ltrate into the soil instead of
rushing into storm sewers and streams, carrying a toxic mixture of pollutants and chemicals. This type of
treatment potentially reduces infrastructure costs, as more water is treated and fi ltered at the source. By
using bioretention areas, permeable surfaces, bioswales, and other green techniques, roadways can be
built to help reduce runoff into the stormwater system.
This section summarizes some of the techniques that can be used when developing buff ers, sidewalks,
paths, parking areas, medians, and other street facilities.
BENEFITS OF GREEN STREETS ELEMENTS
Green street elements reduce the need for stormwater infrastructure. Greenscape practices provide trees,
shrubs, grasses, and other landscape plantings that play an important role in making streets inviting,
comfortable, and sustainable. Used appropriately, they can help defi ne the character of a street or plaza,
provide shade and cooling in strategic locations, reduce energy consumption in buildings, and absorb and
clean stormwater. They also absorb greenhouse gases and help fi lter airborne pollutants.
In addition to providing environmental benefi ts, a healthy greenscape provides psychological and social
benefi ts. Plants help reduce stress and restore a sense of calm and focus. Studies have shown that people
are attracted to places that have well-maintained plantings. Healthy greenscapes are good for City life and
business.
POROUS/PERMEABLE PAVEMENT
Permeable paving materials allow stormwater runoff to infi ltrate through the material, unlike traditional
paving materials that divert runoff to the storm sewer system. Water permeates through the material into
the ground and recharge the water table or local waterway. Permeable materials fi lter pollutants, reduce
fl ow rate, improve water quality, and reduce the volume of infrastructure necessary to direct and convey
stormwater off site. Permeable pavements are typically
underlaid with an infi ltration bed and subgrade soil.
Permeable materials come in fi ve basic varieties:
Soft paving, such as grass, bark, mulch, crushed shells,
and loose aggregate (gravel)
Permeable concrete paving, created by mixing
concrete with fewer fi ne particles, creating void spaces
that allow air and water to navigate throughout the
material or porous asphalt
Open joined and open cell unit pavers fi lled with
porous aggregate or turf
Plastic grid systems covered with pavers, soil and
grass, or gravel
Bound resin with aggregates or bound recycled
material, such as glass, rubber, and plastic
Permeable paving can be utilized in a broad variety of settings. All designs must consider the drainage
characteristics of the underlying soils, the depth of the water table, and the slope of adjacent land.
Permeable pavements can be used in sidewalks, plazas, cafes, overfl ow parking areas, emergency access
roads, and other low-traffi c areas. Soft paving materials and loose aggregate are only appropriate for the
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Sample “bio-swale” along a neighborhood street
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 119
greenscape/furnishing zone or frontage zone, typically around trees, planters, and enclosed greenscape
elements. Permeable concrete pavement can be used in the pedestrian zone, as long as the resulting
surface is smooth, stable, slip resistant, and meets all other accessibility guidelines. Porous unit pavers that
utilize gaps are only appropriate in the greenscape/furnishing zone or the frontage zone (except where
there is active pedestrian use). In specifi c locations where infi ltration is not desired, such as adjacent to
building foundations, a geo-textile liner can prohibit infi ltration and redirect discharge to an appropriate
location while still providing the other benefi ts of permeable paving.
Permeable pavements provide increased traction when wet because water does not pool; nevertheless,
permeable paving requires regular maintenance, including the following:
Annual inspection of paver blocks for deterioration
Periodic replacement of sand, gravel, and vegetation
Annual vacuuming of pavements to unclog
Permeable Asphalt/Concrete
Permeable concrete is a concrete mixture using minimal cementitious materials to coat the aggregate,
using little or no sand, leaving substantial void content through which water can drain. Porous asphalt is
mixed at conventional asphalt plants, but fi ne aggregate is omitted from the mixture. The remaining large
aggregate particles leave open voids that lend the material its porosity.
Permeable asphalt and concrete should be used on a level street above the high water table with low
pedestrian traffi c and no vehicular encroachment. There must be adequate subsurface conditions to detain
stormwater.
This is not appropriate for use where there is water-sensitive subsurface infrastructure, or where there
is the potential for soil contamination since porosity can convey harmful materials to the soil. Pervious
concrete is not intended for use at greater than fi ve percent slope. Routine vacuuming of the surface may
be necessary to maintain porosity. Special features, such as the underlying stone bed, are more expensive
than conventional pavements, but these costs are often off set by the elimination of many elements of a
conventional storm drain system.
Permeable Brick Pavers
Permeable brick pavers enable stormwater to fi lter into
the soil instead of draining into storms and rivers. They
diff er from conventional pavers in that they create more
spacing between the pavers—a higher void area—
which allows water to infi ltrate through the pavement
surface. The support system should consist of coarser
aggregates found in conventional construction.
Commercial and residential applications are available
and both can meet ADA requirements.
A system that uses permeable pavers can help
developers obtain LEED credits.Sample “permeable pavers”
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
SMITP120 | JANUARY 2015
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
BIO-SWALES
Bio-swale areas are shallow stormwater basins or landscaped areas that utilize engineered soils and
vegetation to capture and treat runoff . Bio-swale areas function like stormwater planters, but generally
have fewer structural elements. They may appear more like conventional landscaped areas, but are
depressed rather than elevated from the surrounding area. They can be used in areas where a more natural,
garden aesthetic is desired. Bio-swale areas feature high pollutant removal and good absorption of wind,
noise, and sunlight.
Applications
Bio-swale areas are commonly used in residential areas and urban settings with planting room, such as
bulbouts, medians, and landscape areas. They are often larger and more diverse in plant community than
planters. A maximum contributing drainage area of
less than two hours is recommended.
Bio-swale areas have very small drainage areas
They provide fl exible siting and are good for
highly impervious areas
Bio-swale areas are good options for retrofi ts
They require relatively low levels of
maintenance
They do, however, require extensive
landscaping, if in public areas
A maximum contributing drainage area of less
than two hours is recommended
Recommendations
The following bio-swale projects were recommended
as part of the SMITP to provide improved treatment of
runoff in the South Miami area:
SW 72nd Street between SW 62nd Avenue to 69th Avenue
SW 57th Avenue between SW 74th Terrace and SW 72nd Street
SW 58th Avenue between SW 80th Street and SW 72nd Street
SW 62nd Avenue between SW 64th Street and SW 56th Street
SW 64th Street between SW 62nd Avenue and SW 57th Avenue
SW 56th Street between SW 62nd Avenue and SW 57th Avenue
Infi ltration Trenches
An infi ltration trench is an area of soil that is covered with mulch, ground cover, grass, trees, or other
plantings. Trenches are generally located in the furnishing zone, though they can also be located in the
frontage zone. For stormwater benefi ts, the sidewalk should be pitched toward the open trench. Nonlinear
open areas can also be used for planting trees in clusters. Trees planted in open trenches and areas with
a suffi cient amount of soil that is not compacted have the greatest chance of surviving and thriving in an
urban environment.
Landscape median along Sunset Drive in Downtown South
Miami
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 121
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Curbside open trenches are commonly used on neighborhood residential street types. Wide trenches
provide suffi cient rooting volume while maintaining appropriate sidewalk clearances. The trench should be
fi lled to sidewalk level to avoid creating a tripping hazard.
Areas with heavily-used, high-turnover curbside parking are not ideal for open trenches, as the soils
become compacted over time and will need to be replaced. Consideration should be given to planting
bare-root trees, where permissible.
Enhanced Swales
Enhanced vegetated swales are linear bioretention areas that convey runoff that can be used to augment
traditional pipe and gutter systems. They do this by slowing runoff velocity, fi ltering stormwater pollutants,
reducing runoff temperatures, and-in low volume conditions-recharging groundwater.
Grasses are the most common plants in vegetated swales. Check dams, placed periodically along the
length of the swale, slow runoff and promote infi ltration. The bottom width of the swale should be 2 to 8
feet with side slopes 4:1 recommended.
Plant selection should refl ect maintenance capacity, stormwater sources, and context. Low fl ow conditions
may require a 100-year overfl ow path and engineered section. Combine stormwater treatment with runoff
conveyance system. Swales are less expensive than curb and gutters; however, maintenance costs may be
higher.
Landscaping in Medians
Landscaped medians are an eff ective way to improve the safety and accessibility of arterial streets. For
pedestrians, a raised and landscaped median decreases the total crossing width of the street. Additionally, it
gives the street a more natural, shaded appearance. Bio-swale areas can be located in landscaped medians.
Landscaped medians are most useful on high volume, high speed roads.
Landscaping in medians should not obstruct the visibility between pedestrians and approaching
motorists. Landscaped medians should be at least six feet wide to allow enough room for a pedestrian and
a wheelchair to meet within a pedestrian refuge while crossing the street. Desired turning movements
need to be carefully provided so that motorists are not forced to travel on inappropriate routes, such as
residential streets or an unsafe U-turn condition.
Underground Detention
In relatively dense urban areas where a large percentage of the landscape may already be developed,
underground facilities may be the most practical way to achieve substantial fl ow volume and rate
reductions. Although costs for constructing underground storage practices may be high, it may be the
most economical way to detain stormwater in urban settings where land values are high. There are
a number of types of underground storage available. In the simplest system, oversized pipes replace
standard pipes in a storm drain, providing temporary storage of water. More storage can be achieved by
using a series of interconnected pipes or a single, large storage vault.
The use of underground stormwater storage would be driven by project economics. Land cost, cost to
remedy an inadequate receiving stormwater system, or some other unique condition or opportunity would
warrant the typically substantial additional cost to construct such a system.
SMITP122 | JANUARY 2015
Underground storage is eff ective for reducing stormwater runoff , however, little reduction of sediments or
pollutants occurs without supplemental means to fi lter stormwater. The size of the system will largely be
defi ned by the amount of stormwater to detain the size of the site and the elevation of tie-in points. Large
continuous areas are more suited to large vault-type systems, while more linear, angular sites are better
suited for pipe-based system. Construction materials are infl uenced by the usable depth and size of the
site. Sites requiring more shallow construction should use pipes, because corrugated steel and plastic must
be surrounded by more fi ll.
Network Plan
The recommendations of this Plan are summarized in the Network Plan (refer to Figure 1), which shows
the recommended future network of non-motorized transportation facilities. The Network Plan includes
existing facilities, such as bike lanes and paved paths, as well as recommended projects such as proposed
crosswalks, sidewalks, bike lanes, sharrows, shared use paths, neighborhood greenways, and traffi c circles.
The SMITP Network Plan was developed throughout the course of the SMITP process, which included
several forms of public engagement, inter-agency coordination, technical analysis, use of complete streets
design elements, and adherence to the vision, goals, and objectives of this Plan.
Project Listing
Figure 16 is a summary of the specifi c improvement projects recommended in the SMITP based on the
strategies identifi ed above to promote safe, healthy, and sustainable bicycle and pedestrian mobility
within the City of South Miami.
Figure 16 - Summary of Improvements
Facility TypeCorridorLocation
Bike Lanes
SW 40th Street/Bird RoadLudlam Trail Corridor to SW 57th Avenue/Red Road
SW 48th StreetLudlam Trail Corridor to SW 57th Avenue/Red Road
SW 56th Street/Miller DriveLudlam Trail Corridor to SW 57th Avenue/Red Road
SW 64th Street/Hardee DriveLudlam Trail Corridor to SW 57th Avenue/Red Road
SW 72nd Street/Sunset DriveLudlam Trail Corridor to SW 64th Court
SW 80th StreetLudlam Trail Corridor to SW 57th Avenue/Red Road
SW 67th Avenue/Ludlam RoadSW 40th Street to Snapper Creek Drive
SW 62nd AvenueSW 40th Street to SW 64th Street/Hardee Drive
SW 57th Avenue/Red RoadSW 72nd Street/Sunset Drive to SW 88th Street
Sharrows
SW 72nd Street/Sunset DriveSW 64th Court to SW 57th Avenue/Red Road
SW 62nd AvenueSW 70th Street to SW 76th Street
SW 57th Avenue/Red RoadSW 64th Street/Hardee Drive to SW 72nd Street/Sunset Drive
Buff ered Bike
Lanes
SW 64th Street/Hardee DriveSW 59th Place to SW 57th Avenue/Red Road
SW 57th Avenue/Red RoadSW 72nd Street/Sunset Drive to SW 74th Terrace
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 123
Facility TypeCorridorLocation
Shared-Use
Paths
SW 56th Street/Miller DriveSW 67th Avenue/Ludlam Road to SW 57th Avenue/Red Road
Palmer ParkLudlam Trail Corridor to SW 67th Avenue/Ludlam Road
Snapper Creek Trail – Segment BU.S. 1/South Dixie Highway to SW 57th Avenue/Red Road
SW 58th Avenue (theoretical)SW 87th Street to Snapper Creek Trail – Segment B
SW 64th Avenue (theoretical)SW 84th Street to SW 85th Street
Sidewalks
SW 56th Street/Miller Drive
(north side)SW 65th Avenue
SW 80th Street (south side)U.S. 1/South Dixie Highway
SW 80th Street (south side)SW 63rd Court
SW 80th Street (north side)U.S. 1/South Dixie Highway
SW 62nd AvenueSW 56th Street/Miller Drive
SW 62nd Avenue SW 80th Street
Crosswalks
SW 57th Avenue/Red RoadAt SW 50th Street
SW 57th Avenue/Red RoadAt SW 53rd Terrace
SW 57th Avenue/Red RoadAt SW 60th Street
SW 57th Avenue/Red RoadAt SW 73rd Street
SW 57th Avenue/Red RoadAt SW 76th Street
U.S. 1/South Dixie HighwayAt SW 70th Street/SW 58th Avenue
U.S. 1/South Dixie HighwayAt SW 73rd Street
Mid-Block
Crosswalks
SW 40th StreetEast of SW 64th Avenue
SW 40th StreetEast of SW 60th Avenue
U.S. 1/South Dixie HighwayNorth of South Miami Hospital exit driveway
Green Bike
Lane and/or
Bike Box
SW 57th Avenue/Red RoadAt SW 40th Street
SW 57th Avenue/Red RoadAt SW 48th Street
SW 57th Avenue/Red RoadAt SW 56th Street/Miller Drive
SW 57th Avenue/Red RoadAt SW 64th Street/Hardee Drive
SW 62nd AvenueAt SW 70th Street
Shared-Use
Path Crossing
Improvements
M-PathAt SW 72nd Street/Sunset Drive
Neighborhood
Greenways See Network Map.
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
SMITP124 | JANUARY 2015
Facility TypeCorridorLocation
Neighborhood
Greenway
Crossing
Treatments
SW 44th TerraceAt SW 62nd Avenue
SW 45th StreetAt SW 62nd Avenue
SW 58th AvenueAt SW 48th Street
SW 48th TerraceAt SW 67th Avenue/Ludlam Road
SW 50th StreetAt SW 62nd Avenue
SW 64th PlaceAt SW 56th Street/Miller Drive
SW 64th AvenueAt SW 56th Street/Miller Drive
SW 63rd CourtAt SW 56th Street/Miller Drive
SW 58th AvenueAt SW 56th Street/Miller Drive
SW 58th StreetAt SW 62nd Avenue
SW 69th AvenueAt SW 64th Street/Hardee Drive
SW 65th AvenueAt SW 64th Street/Hardee Drive
SW 63rd CourtAt SW 64th Street/Hardee Drive
SW 59th AvenueAt SW 64th Street/Hardee Drive
Neighborhood
Greenway
Crossing
Treatments
SW 58th PlaceAt SW 64th Street/Hardee Drive
SW 58th AvenueAt SW 64th Street/Hardee Drive
SW 68th StreetAt SW 62nd Avenue
SW 69th CourtAt SW 72nd Street/Sunset Drive
SW 69th AvenueAt SW 72nd Street/Sunset Drive
SW 64th CourtAt SW 72nd Street/Sunset Drive
SW 75th TerraceAt SW 67th Avenue/Ludlam Road
SW 78th TerraceAt SW 67th Avenue/Ludlam Road
SW 69th AvenueAt SW 80th Street
SW 59th AvenueAt SW 80th Street
SW 58th AvenueAt SW 80th Street
Neighborhood
Traffi c Circles
SW 65th AvenueAt SW 44th Street
SW 58th AvenueAt SW 50th Street
SW 65th AvenueAt SW 60th Street
SW 69th AvenueAt SW 75th Terrace
SW 62nd AvenueAt Snapper Creek Drive
ParkletsSW 72nd Street/Sunset Drive Replace two existing on-street parking spaces on both sides of
the street
R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
Re
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
a
t
i
o
n
s
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 125
S t r e e t T y p e D i a g r a m s a n d Street Type Diagrams and
E x h i b i t sExhibits
S
t
r
e
e
t
T
y
p
e
D
i
a
g
r
a
m
s
a
n
d
E
x
h
i
b
i
t
s
St
r
e
e
t
T
y
p
e
D
i
a
g
r
a
m
s
a
n
d
E
x
h
i
b
i
t
s
SMITP126 | JANUARY 2015
H
e
a
d
i
n
g
He
a
d
i
n
g
S
t
r
e
e
t
T
y
p
e
D
i
a
g
r
a
m
s
a
n
d
E
x
h
i
b
i
t
s
St
r
e
e
t
T
y
p
e
D
i
a
g
r
a
m
s
a
n
d
E
x
h
i
b
i
t
s
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 127
In order to graphically depict the recommendations of this Plan, maps, sections, elevations, character
images, and before and after images were developed. These graphics include plan and cross section views
of each street type showing relevant street features, such as sidewalks and bike lanes, on-street parking,
bioswales, tree locations, specialty paving, and street lighting.
The street type diagrams consist of:
Streets
SW 56th Street (Between SW 62nd Avenue and SW 57th Avenue) Figure 17-18
SW 64th Street (Between SW 62nd Avenue and SW 57th Avenue) Figure 19-20
SW 72nd Street (Between U.S. 1 and SW 57th Avenue) Figure 21-22
Avenues
SW 57th Avenue (Between SW 74th Terrace and SW 72nd Street) Figure 23-24
SW 58th Avenue (Between U.S. 1 and SW 71st Street) Figure 25-26
SW 58th Avenue (Between SW 80th Street and SW 72nd Street) Figure 27-28
SW 62nd Avenue (Between SW 64th Street and SW 56th Street) Figure 29-30
Street Type Diagrams and ExhibitsStreet Type Diagrams and Exhibits S
t
r
e
e
t
T
y
p
e
D
i
a
g
r
a
m
s
a
n
d
E
x
h
i
b
i
t
s
St
r
e
e
t
T
y
p
e
D
i
a
g
r
a
m
s
a
n
d
E
x
h
i
b
i
t
s
SMITP128 | JANUARY 2015
S
t
r
e
e
t
T
y
p
e
D
i
a
g
r
a
m
s
a
n
d
E
x
h
i
b
i
t
s
St
r
e
e
t
T
y
p
e
D
i
a
g
r
a
m
s
a
n
d
E
x
h
i
b
i
t
s
(
B
e
t
w
e
e
n
S
W
6
2
n
d
A
v
e
.
&
S
W
5
7
t
h
A
v
e
.
)
S
W
6
4
t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
P
l
a
n
6’
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
B
I
O
-
S
W
A
L
E
B
I
O
-
S
W
A
L
E
5’
B
I
K
E
L
A
N
E
5’
B
I
K
E
L
A
N
E
3’
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
B
U
F
F
E
R
3’
L
A
N
D
S
C
A
P
E
B
U
F
F
E
R
11
’
L
A
N
E
6’
S
I
D
E
W
A
L
K
S
P
E
C
I
A
L
T
Y
P
A
V
I
N
G
C
R
O
S
S
W
A
L
K
EXISTING TREE PROPOSED TREE57-71’ R/W VARIES
KE
Y
:
SW
6
4
T
H
S
T
R
E
E
T
SW 58TH AVENUE
NORTH
S
W
6
4
t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
I
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
s
F
i
g
u
r
e
2
0
:
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 157
D e s i g n C o n s i d e r a t i o n s Design Considerations
a n d C o s tand Cost
D
e
s
i
g
n
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
C
o
s
t
De
s
i
g
n
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
C
o
s
t
SMITP158 | JANUARY 2015
D
e
s
i
g
n
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
C
o
s
t
De
s
i
g
n
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
C
o
s
t
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 159
We developed a programming level opinion of probable costs for the street type diagrams. The following
are individual opinions of probable costs for each street type diagram.
D
e
s
i
g
n
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
C
o
s
t
De
s
i
g
n
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
C
o
s
t
Design Considerations and CostDesign Considerations and Cost
D
e
s
i
g
n
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
C
o
s
t
De
s
i
g
n
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
C
o
s
t
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 161
D
e
s
i
g
n
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
C
o
s
t
De
s
i
g
n
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
C
o
s
t
SMITP162 | JANUARY 2015
D
e
s
i
g
n
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
C
o
s
t
De
s
i
g
n
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
C
o
s
t
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 163
D
e
s
i
g
n
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
C
o
s
t
De
s
i
g
n
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
C
o
s
t
SMITP164 | JANUARY 2015
D
e
s
i
g
n
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
C
o
s
t
De
s
i
g
n
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
C
o
s
t
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 165
D
e
s
i
g
n
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
C
o
s
t
De
s
i
g
n
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
C
o
s
t
SMITP166 | JANUARY 2015
D
e
s
i
g
n
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
C
o
s
t
De
s
i
g
n
C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
C
o
s
t
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 167
I m p l e m e n t a t i o n P l a nImplementation Plan
I
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
Im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
SMITP168 | JANUARY 2015
H
e
a
d
i
n
g
He
a
d
i
n
g
I
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
Im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 169
Implementation of this Plan will likely occur over time through a variety of diff erent projects, funded
through a broad range of sources, and built by several diff erent agencies including the City and its
transportation partners at FDOT and Miami-Dade County. The implementation plan respects the limits of
aff ordability and provides a strategy that the City could potentially follow to maximize the user benefi t
while keeping costs within reason of available funding sources.
It should be noted that many of the recommendations may be implemented through resurfacing,
maintenance, or other transportation projects that would occur anyway and, therefore, would incur only
an incremental cost associated with the additional intermodal transportation infrastructure. In addition,
the City along with public and private sector stakeholders should seek grant funding to implement key
components of the SMITP. The future availability of grant funding could impact the timing and priority
order of the projects listed herein.T
he priority list assumes the City has approximately $100,000 to implement “early-win” projects within
the fi rst fi scal year in advance of receiving any outside grant funding or
assistance from transportation partner agencies.
Priority One Scenario
SW 58th Avenue traverses the City from north to
south and provides a people-friendly alternative to
busier streets, such as SW 57th Avenue and SW 62nd
Avenue. Neighborhood greenways are streets with low
motor vehicle speeds that are designed with a variety
of elements, including shared lane markings, traffi c
calming, bike route signage, and wayfi nding signs, to
allow bicyclists to travel comfortably in a low-stress
environment. Neighborhood greenways often give
priority to bicycle use and discourage through-traffi c by
motor vehicles.
NEIGHBORHOOD GREENWAYS
Project:
Implement an “early-win” neighborhood greenway
on SW 58th Avenue
The SW 58th Avenue neighborhood greenway passes
through Downtown South Miami and includes the
proposed contra-fl ow bike lane to provide southbound bicycle continuity on SW 58th Avenue immediately
south of US 1/South Dixie Highway. Note that some portions of the SW 58th Avenue neighborhood
greenway north of SW 64th Street are in unincorporated Miami-Dade County. The City should coordinate
with the County to ensure a consistent design treatment throughout the County’s portion of the
neighborhood greenway.
I
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
Im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
Implementation PlanImplementation Plan
SW 58th Avenue neighborhood greenway
SMITP170 | JANUARY 2015
I
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
Im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
Participants of the SMITP Bike Path Inspection riding through the streets of South Miami
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 171
Im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
Priority Two Scenario
Sunset Drive is one of the paramount streets in Miami-Dade
County to enjoy local businesses, restaurants, and street life.
However, many areas of Sunset Drive are characterized by
narrow, crowded sidewalks, especially near café seating. A parklet
converts the space of several (typically one to three) on-street
parking spaces into an extension of the sidewalk to provide
space for seating, landscaping, public art, and other activities. It is
recommended that the City install two parklets initially, one on the
north side of the street and one on the south side of the street.
SUNSET DRIVE
Project:
Placemaking improvements through the installation of two
parklets and associated landscaping
Specialty paving improvements at cross walks
Green-backed sharrow bicycle markings between SW 64th Court and SW 57th Avenue
Permeable pavers improvements at existing on-street
parking
Special paving treatments can be used on roadway surfaces
to reduce speeds, increase durability or to demarcate
a special zone or district. A change of color or material
can produce a traffi c calming eff ect. Examples of special
roadway materials include, colored asphalt and concrete,
textured asphalt or concrete, and pervious pavement
and pavers. It is recommended that the City install special
paving treatments to the crosswalks and on-street parking
on Sunset Drive in order to help signify Sunset Drive as the
iconic street of Downtown South Miami.
Shared lane markings, or sharrows, are pavement markings
that are placed within the vehicular travel lane of the
roadway to indicate a shared lane. The pavement marking
symbols alert motorists to the expected lateral placement
of bicyclists within the shared lane and encourage safer
passing behaviors. Sharrows can be installed in corridors
where providing space for designated bicycle lanes
may impact other street elements such as landscaping,
pedestrian bulb-outs at intersections, or on-street parking.
Sharrows are particularly eff ective on corridors with on-
street parking because they encourage bicyclists to ride
outside of the “door zone” adjacent to parked cars.
It is recommended that sharrows be installed on Sunset
Drive between SW 64th Court and SW 57th Avenue. In or
Sample “parklets” within existing on-street parking
Sample “parklets” within existing on-street parking
Sample “sharrow” pavement markings
SMITP172 | JANUARY 2015
I
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
Im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
der to help signify Sunset Drive as the iconic street of
Downtown South Miami, and to improve the visibility
of the sharrow markings, it is recommended that
the sharrows on Sunset Drive be combined with the
innovative use of green colored pavement backing.
Bicycle detector markings, along with R10-22 signs,
should be installed to indicate to bicyclists the optimum
location to queue at traffi c signals for detection
purposes.
Priority Three Scenario
Priority three scenario lists three projects that are
recommended in this Plan based on the strategies
identifi ed above to promote safe, healthy, and sustainable
bicycle and pedestrian mobility with the City of South Miami.
SW 62ND AVENUE
Project:
Fill in missing sidewalk gaps between SW 56th Street and SW 50th Street
Extend existing bike lanes from SW 64th Street to SW 40th Street
Note that SW 62nd Avenue is a Miami-Dade County roadway
SW 57TH AVENUE
Project:
Implement complete street improvements
between SW 74th Terrace and SW 72nd Street
Buff ered bike lanes
New crosswalk at SW 73rd Street
Median pedestrian refuge
Convert angled parking to conventional
parallel parking
Install on-road bike lanes by building paved
shoulders and marking them as bike lanes
between SW 88th Street and SW 74th Terrace
Install sharrow pavement markings in the
constrained portion between SW 72nd Street and
SW 64th Street
Install new crosswalk with safety features across Red Road at SW 76th Street
SW 57th Avenue
SW 62nd Avenue
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 173
I
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
Im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
NE W CROSSWALKS
Project:
Work with FDOT to install new crosswalks and safety features at priority locations identifi ed in this Plan
Signalized intersections missing crosswalks
US 1 @ SW 73rd Street
US 1 @ SW 70th Street (northeast leg)
Uncontrolled intersections
Red Road @ SW 60th Street
Red Road @ SW 53rd Terrace
Red Road @ SW 50th Street
Mid-block locations
US 1 north of the South Miami Hospital exit driveway
SW 40th Street east of SW 64th Avenue
SW 40th Street east of SW 60th Avenue
Remaining Projects
The remaining projects not listed in Priorities One through Three identifi ed in the Network Plan map and
table provided in the Recommendations section of this Plan are important to the mobility of the City and
should be implemented by the City or its transportation partner agencies as funding becomes available in
future years or through grant funding.
SMITP174 | JANUARY 2015
I
m
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
Im
p
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
t
i
o
n
P
l
a
n
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 175
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x
A
–
B
i
c
y
c
l
e
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x
A
–
B
i
c
y
c
l
e
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
A p p e n d i x A – B i c y c l e Appendix A – Bicycle
P a r k i n g I n v e n t o r yParking Inventory
SMITP176 | JANUARY 2015
H
e
a
d
i
n
g
He
a
d
i
n
g
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x
A
–
B
i
c
y
c
l
e
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x
A
–
B
i
c
y
c
l
e
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 177
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x
A
–
B
i
c
y
c
l
e
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x
A
–
B
i
c
y
c
l
e
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
Appendix A – Bicycle Parking InventoryAppendix A – Bicycle Parking Inventory
South Miami Intermodal Transportation Plan - Bicycle Parking Inventory
Date:7/1/2014
Site #LocationType of ParkingCapacityUsage
(For mapping purposes)(Street or nearest intersection)(Bike rack or undesignated, e.g. tree or sign post)(Number of bike parking spaces)(Number of bikes parked)
001SW 72nd St and SW 61st CtBike Hitch20
002In front of Executive National BankBike Hitch20
003SW 61st Ct "6141"Undesignated (fence for building)-1
004SW 61st Ct and SW 72nd StBike Hitch20
005SW 61st Ctcr and SW 72nd StBike Hitch20
006City of South Miami City HallBike Hitch21
007City of South Miami City HallBike Hitch20
008South Miami Branch Library "6000"Bike Hitch20
009South Miami Branch Library "6000"Serpentine40
010Outside Bank UnitedBike Hitch20
011Outside Mack CycleSchool Yard80
012SW 72nd St "5975"Bike Hitch20
013Across from "5975" SW 72nd StBike Hitch20
014SW 71st StUndesignated on fence-1
015SW 72nd St and SW 59th Av(2) Bike Hitches40
016Outside Sunset Tavern(4) Bike Hitches83
017Outside Harris Travel Service(2) Bike Hitches40
018Outside Chocolate FashionBike Hitch20
019SW 58th Ave and SW 72nd St(2) Bike Hitches41
020SW 58th Ave and SW 72nd StBike Hitch20
021Outside Blush "5784"Bike Hitch20
022Outside Respice "5770"(2) Bike Hitches40
023SW 72nd St and SW 57th CtUndesignated (on a street sign)-1
024SW 72nd St and SW 57th AveInverted U20
025Outside CVS, SW 72nd St and SW 57th AveSerpentine20
SMITP178 | JANUARY 2015
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x
A
–
B
i
c
y
c
l
e
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x
A
–
B
i
c
y
c
l
e
P
a
r
k
i
n
g
I
n
v
e
n
t
o
r
y
South Miami Intermodal Transportation Plan - Bicycle Parking Inventory
Date:7/1/2014
Site #LocationType of ParkingCapacityUsage
(For mapping purposes)(Street or nearest intersection)(Bike rack or undesignated, e.g. tree or sign post)(Number of bike parking spaces)(Number of bikes parked)
026Outside CVS, SW 72nd St and SW 57th AveSerpentine40
027Red Road and San RemoSerpentine42
028In front of Panera on 72nd St(2) Bike Hitches40
029In front of CVS, on SW 72nd StBike Hitch20
030In front of Sunset Business Plaze "5825"(2) Bike Hitches40
031In front of American Apparel "5855"(2) Bike Hitches40
032SW 73rd St and SW 58th Ct(2) Bike Hitches42
033SW 73rd St and SW 58th Av(2) Bike Hitches40
0345714 SW 23rd St, Public Parking LotSerpentine40
035SW 73rd St and SW 57th Ct(2) Bike Hitches40
0365850 Winn DixieSerpentine40
0375850 Winn DixieUndesignated (fence for building)-2
038METRORail StationInverted U's203
039METRORail StationInverted U's120
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 179
A p p e n d i x B – S u r v e y R e s u l t sAppendix B – Survey Results
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
SMITP180 | JANUARY 2015
H
e
a
d
i
n
g
He
a
d
i
n
g
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 181
The following are highlights of the survey questions:
1. South Miami is where I … (check all that apply)
Live
Work
Shop/Dinning
Play
2. When you and your family are working, shopping, or playing in South Miami, how do you get around?
OftenOccasionallySeldomNever
Car
Public Transit
Walk
Bicycle
3. What are the GOOD things about WALKING AND BIKING in South Miami?
4. What specifi c streets currently present challenges and could be improved related to WALKING AND
BIKING in South Miami? (ie, light pole in middle of sidewalk, no bike lane, no street lighting, need
traffi c calming, etc.)
5. Please describe the routes and destinations that you and your family WALK AND BIKE to in South
Miami.
6. How many times per week do you or your family take a fi ve (or more) minute WALK in South Miami?
Less than 3 times a week
3 to 5 times a week
More than 5 times a week+
7. When you or your family WALK in South Miami, primarily where do you go?
Work
Schools
Shops/Restaurants
Sports/Entertainment
Parks
Bus Stops
Metrorail Station
City Hall/Library
Downtown
University of Miami
General Recreation
Other
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
Appendix B – Survey ResultsAppendix B – Survey Results
SMITP182 | JANUARY 2015
H
e
a
d
i
n
g
He
a
d
i
n
g
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
8. How many times per week do you or your family BIKE in South Miami?
Less than 3 times a week
3 to 5 times a week
More than 5 times a week
9. When you or your family BIKE in or near to South Miami, primarily where do you go? (check all that
apply)
Work
Schools
Shops/Restaurants
Sports/Entertainment
Parks
Bus Stops
Metrorail Station
City Hall/Library
Downtown
University of Miami
General Recreation
Other ________________
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 183
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
10. Please rank the following bicycle-pedestrian infrastructure in order of importance to you.
12345678910
Benches/Bus Shelters
Bicycle Lanes
Bicycle Parking
Bike/Vehicle Lane Share
Crosswalks
Canopy Trees/ Shade
Traffi c Calming
Traffi c Signals
Wayfi nding & Signage
Street Lighting
Wide Sidewalks in Downtown
11. What is your gender?
Male
Female
Prefer not to answer
12. Which category describes your age?
Younger than 20
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70 or older
Prefer not to answer
SMITP184 | JANUARY 2015
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
Constant Contact Survey Results
Survey Name: Bicycle/Pedestrian Survey for the South Miami Intermodal Transportation Plan
Response Status: Partial & Completed
Filter: None
Aug 20, 2014 4:57:10 PM
Number of
Response(s)
Response
Ratio
9684.9%
3732.7%
8171.6%
6557.5%
113100%
Top number is the count of respondents
selecting the option. Bottom % is percent of the
total respondents selecting the option.OftenOccasionallySeldomNever
84963
82%9%6%3%
12152337
14%17%26%43%
4744105
44%42%9%5%
23411125
23%41%11%25%
Number of
Response(s)
Response
Ratio
4035.3%
3732.7%
3530.9%
1<1%
113100%
Less than 3 times a week
3 to 5 times a week
More than 5 times a week
No Responses
Total
97 Response(s)
4. What specific streets currently present challenges and could be improved related to
WALKING AND BIKING in South Miami? (ie, light pole in middle of sidewalk, no bike
lane, no street lighting, need traffic calming, etc.)
99 Response(s)
5. Please describe the routes and destinations that you and your family WALK AND
BIKE to in South Miami.
98 Response(s)
6. How many times per week do you take a five (or more) minute WALK or BIKE in South
Miami?
2. When you and your family are working, shopping, or playing in South Miami, how do you get
around?
Car
Public Transit
Walk
Bicycle
3. What are the GOOD things about WALKING AND BIKING in South Miami?
1. South Miami is where I... (check all that apply)
Live
Work
Shop/Dine
Play
Total
Page 1 of 12
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 185
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
Number of
Response(s)
Response
Ratio
1816.0%
1513.3%
8374.1%
2320.5%
5549.1%
76.2%
4641.0%
3329.4%
4842.8%
2421.4%
3531.2%
1614.2%
112100%
MOST
123456
252415141417
23%22%14%13%13%16%
2528212492
23%26%19%22%8%2%
211527151714
19%14%25%14%16%13%
252021221011
23%18%19%20%9%10%
0109133146
0%9%8%12%28%42%
131216212819
12%11%15%19%26%17%
Number of
Response(s)
Response
Ratio
4640.7%
5649.5%
119.7%
00.0%
113100%
Number of
Response(s)
Response
Ratio
00.0%
65.3%
1916.8%
3127.4%
2623.0%
1412.3%
87.0%
97.9%
00.0%
113100%
Prefer not to answer
No Responses
Total
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70 or older
Female
Prefer not to answer
No Responses
Total
10. Which category describes your age?
Younger than 20
Traffic Calming
Wayfinding & Signage
Street Lighting
43 Comment(s)
9. What is your gender?
Male
Total
8. Please rank the following bicycle-pedestrian infrastructure in order of importance to you (1=MOST Important, 6=LEAST Important;
use the "Comment" box for additional infrastructure):
Top number is the count of respondents
selecting the option. Bottom % is percent of the
total respondents selecting the option.
Bicycle Lanes/Vehicle Lane Share
Crosswalks
Canopy Trees/Shade
Metrorail Station
City Hall/Library
Downtown
University of Miami
General Recreation
Other
Work
Schools
Shops/Restaurants
Sports/Entertainment
Parks
Bus Stops
7. When you or your family WALK or BIKE in South Miami, primarily where do you go?
(check all that apply)
Page 2 of 12
SMITP186 | JANUARY 2015
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
Constant Contact Survey Results
Survey Name: Bicycle/Pedestrian Survey for the South Miami Intermodal Transportation Plan
Response Status: Partial & Completed
Filter: None
Aug 20, 2014 4:57:10 PM
Answer
[No Responses]
Answer
Downtown shops and restaurants are very walkable, with the exception of Sunset Place. Metrorail station located in the heart of South Miami makes it convenient to
Improves health, allows neighbors to meet, one less car on the road is a good thing.
exercise for me, MD orders
Saves on gas...too expensive to drive and public transit not convenient
The side streets are OK for biking.
Walking is great exercise, and doesn't require expensive infrastructure to accommodate.
Bicycling is dangerous in dense urban areas such as South Miami - even with bike paths.
Get to appreciate the morning scents in the air; I don't get caught up in bottle-neck traffic; I can park my bike near where I'm shopping/dining; I save time/gas++; it's
Nice wide shady sidewalks downtown. I enjoy bicycling on the neighborhood streets and I have found routes to go anywhere I want. the M-Path is terrific, particularly
with new bridge over Snapper Creek x-way entry. New crosswalks on US 1 at Ludlam and 80th street work well.
Once you cross the US1 and get to Downtown, walking becomes a very relaxing experience, enhanced by the increasing charm of the area due to the increasingly
sophisticated gastronomic and commercial offering.
before walking there needs to be sidewalk repair and holes in the street repair espically in the cra area
That I get excercise
There are a lot of great restaurants and venues within walking distance of City Hall. The Metro-Trail is a wonderful resource.
There are few bike lanes on major streets. Sidewalks are oftentimes blocked, obstructed, too narrow and hard to maneuver for biking. All major streets should have
sidewalks, although more emphasis should be placed on having walkable destinations. Slow streets if mapped and promoted, could be a parallel network for biking and
The exercise. However, it is unsafe to walk in neighborhoods with no sidewalks. I won't ride a bike (even though I would like to) because of the bad driving habits of so
many. Crossing US1 is always an adventure.
I generally never have a problem finding a place to park and lock my bike. Things are also generally pretty pedestrian accessible.
everything is close: you don't have to worry about traffic ebbing and flowing: and you don't have to worry about a parking space.
Walking in my area is pleasant because of the sidewalks. I do not go to other areas of South Miami on a regular basis.
There are few good things if any. The problem is the car culture; no one will yield for other users which makes for a dangerous situation.
I live very close and so it is very convenient.
Safe, easy to move around.
none
Sidewalks are plentiful.
Low vehicular traffic in the South portion of South Miami.
Places where there are wide, protected sidewalks make South Miami a paradise to walk through. Bike lanes also make bicycling possible in an aggressive traffic
Nice neighborhoods, some official bike routes, slightly higher than average Miami pedestrian/cyclist awareness.
Walking - meet your neighbors.
Biking - nothing good. Kids like it though.
there are none, no infrastructure to walk and bike in the city of south miami. please see 2000 city of south miami northside charette
Great weather. Down town feel.
Walking is healthy, clean, and it slows things down a bit. Always good these days. Biking works too.
pleasant but unsafe streets; tree canopy
the tree canopy. Many areas need more shade.
Usually shade. Great vegetation to look at. No hills. Interesting landscaping of people's houses.
The proximity of the South Miami Town Center (downtown)is walking and/or biking distance to many of the residential neighborhoods in the city. Many tree-lined streets
provide a shady retreat from the beaming sun, however, the urban canopy has much room for improvement.
Our house is close to downtown so we can get places quickly (often faster than with a car since traffic and parking are so horrible).
Good exercise - being out in the community
2. When you and your family are working, shopping, or playing in South Miami, how do you get around? - Comments
3. What are the GOOD things about WALKING AND BIKING in South Miami? - Responses
Page 3 of 12
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 187
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
Access to a variety of destinations.
Interconnected street network
The sidewalks are okay
The M-Path
The Metrorail station
The connectivity of the street and sidewalk network is great and other than Route 1, many of the roads have relatively low speed limits.
there is a lot to see and do
Convenience and variety of the restaurants, shops and exercise studios.
Biking and walking are healthier and a lot more fun than driving. I would bike all the time if I weren't terrified about crossing US 1 or Sunset Drive.
I love my neighborhood and have purchased a very nice bicycle.
I am 75 years old and can't just fly across an intersection nor do I have any faith in motorists to look for a cyclist.
Bike parking is the best.. jumping from restaurant to shop on bike is definitely easier than if in a car and no worries about parking tickets.
Walking around Sunset and Red is great.
Walking: friendly environment, streetscape (although sidewalks need cleaning and trees are uprooting sidewalks).
Biking: convenience, although definitely a cycling skill-set is needed to negotiate the traffic.
shopping, dining and metro are within walking distance of our home
Nothing... it is extremely dangerous, especially crossing US 1 and SW 57th Ave.
great parks
Plesant, safe, clean, trendy environment
narrow streets in downtown keep traffic slow, buildings with stores that face the street, accessibility from the metrorail station
Less Stressful and convenient.
It is possible. Just US1 causes a bit of a distraction. Very busy street and don't always feel comfortable crossing it on bike on foot for that matter.
I can do them
It's damn healthy.
Minimal cross traffic. Lots of four way stops. Beautiful old growth trees, quiet.
I love that South Miami is about family.
We have a four month old daughter and like taking her to the park, brewer park specifically as we live across the street.
downtown area is close
bike path under metrorail
Proximity to places we want to go. A great selection of businesses and a pretty good selection of parks.
Good path under metro-rail and decent sidewalks and crossings.
Everything is close so you don't have to worry about going too far when getting around.
South Miami is too expensive
serenity - somewhat sufficient street lights
Not many other than that it is a beautiful neighborhood. Best time to walk is during the day. Bad lighting at night and now sidewalks or bike lanes on many areas.
Pleasant neighbors, neighborhood, safety and police presence during day.
social contact
beauty of nature
health benefits
Sunset and Red Road shopping areas are easy to navigate on foot.
good to have the business area so compact for easy shopping to various places with one visit.
exercise and donot have to worry about tickets
Pleasant surroundings, relatively light traffic.
There is a major mall, restaurants and drug stores close by. For biking, the path along 57th ave is convenient and safer than riding on the road.
The good thing about walking is seeing the trees that reside in our city. We have Sunset Place and a lot of choices for activities during weekend. The neighborhood feels
Some WIDE sidewalks and Lighting
It's relatively safe in the downtown area. There is a good network of streets and good connectivity.
safe, friendly, fun
South Miami is one of the cities in Miami that has a town feel...however with all the car traffic that is quickly going away. I have owned my home in South Miami for over
15 years and have watched this city grow. The car traffic is a growing problem. The lack of bike paths is not good to encourage a different sort of transportation.
Convenience of not Parking and traffic.
Sidewalks...
Everything is so close in proximity to our homes. If we lost our cars because of some event, we are not worried at all because we can bike or walk to anything sustaining
our lives. Everything we do is in South Miami or within walking distance of neighboring cities. we feel very fortunate to live here.
From where I live the city is in total walking distance. The schools, city hall, the libary and the downtown district and medical facilities are assessible by foot. It is a great
Page 4 of 12
SMITP188 | JANUARY 2015
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
none
That I feel safe.
I don't have a bike. I walk for excerise or see # 7. There is little traffic where I walk, except for Miller Road, but there is a sidewalk and a wide swale.
Crosswalks at Across US1
Good sidewalks in downtown - pleasant landscape
great exercise, wonderful residential streets to bike in, once you get to the bikepath at US1 it's safe and easy.
The walking/biking path that follows the metro is nice.
There are side walks and crosswalks in many parts of SM which provide for safety in walking and bicycling. Many areas (north of Miller Road) do not have street lights or
Feels like a small, tight knit community
it's easy, small enough to make it enjoyable. The number of pedestrians and cyclists appears to be growing
don't have to pay for parking
sidewalks
It's a pleasant walk from my neighborhood to shops and restaurants such as Deli Lane for breakfast. I live east of US 1.
things are generally close by
All of the interesting things to do and see. Slow Traffic!
Being able to walk to shopping, dining, movies, and not have to get in a car to drive to these places. The less I have to drive, the happier I am.
Downtown area/Sunset Place
You don't have to deal with the horrible parking
The nature, trees, and safety provided by the police.
Good sidewalks in most of the city.
Answer
US1 - crossing US1 is scary.
The crosswalks in front of City Hall could be a more prominent color or there could be better signage.
US1 crossing, downtown Sunset Dr, 62 Ave between Miller Rd ad Bird Rd, Bird Rd, 80th St, 62 VAve South of US1.
84th st...and definitely 80 th street
sunset drive,...I have to ride on sidewalk.
s.w. 64th street I have to ride on sidewalk
Utility poles in sidewalks of major streets. Not all big intersections are fully signalized. People blow red lights on US 1 (we need red-light cameras). Sidewalks are not as
shady as they should be. No sharrow symbols to remind drivers to think about bikes. Sidewalk edges are sometimes sharp with a drop-off.
SW 80th Street
Manor Lane
Sunset Drive
62 Avenue off Sunset with power poles - can't be handicapped accessible at all!
Sunset Drive & US1 - that's a very dangerous intersection!
These are suggestions: We need shaded, safe, well-populated sidewalks linking the neighborhoods to downtown. We need well-marked zebra crossings downtown with
signage. Perhaps close Sunset Drive on Sundays. Red-light cameras on US 1 to make the intersections safer. Move utility poles off sidewalk. Develop neighborhood
longer light system and a sensor to tell when someone is already crossed to the other side of the street.
63rd Ave desperately needs traffic calming solutions. The sidewalk right next to the Hospital's parking lot is extremely narrow an presents several obstacles (mostly poles)
that makes biking difficult. Biking lanes wold be greatly appreciated throughout South Miami. Also, US1 crossings could be improved (pedestrian bridges, longer crossing
all in the cra area
Lack of canopy makes walking/ biking hot. Careless drivers. Lack of bike and pedestrian crossings .
Night riding is un safe
Sunset Drive near 59th Place is a scary place to be a pedestrian. Drivers often ignore pedestrians in the cross walk at this intersection and also at the other cross walks
near the library/city hall. It would be GREAT if there were a light up crosswalk signs, similar to the ones on 70th street near Larkin Community Hospital.
Streets like Bird, Miller, 80th St, Ludlam, Hardee, 62nd Ave (to Sunset and Bird), 67th Ave, Sunset Drive should have clear definable bike infrastructure. There should be
trees on all major roads (ie Red Road) as part of the bike infrastructure improvements. The M Path should be more welcoming, beautiful, and reasonably lit.
The street I live on SW78 Terrace and most surrounding streets have no sidewalks. US1 is a nightmare, especially at 80th street and at Ludlam.
South Miami could really use a bike lane along Ludlam Road. I commute on my bike on this road everyday and it is very dangerous without a bike lane. I also think that
the Ludlam Trail would be an amazing way to connect South Miami to some awesome green areas like Tropical Park or A.D. Barnes. Also, sidewalks on Miller Dr. need
This would be a good question to come back to or have kind of a pot hole hotline since I have dealt with the obstacles for so long, I don't even think or remember them
Don't know
Most of the streets in the area are problematic.
The corner of 76th Street and 59th Avenue is very dark at night. There should be a light installed there. It is even very hard to see when driving since there are curbs at
that intersection, and if not careful, it is easy to drive up onto the curb.
Crossing the street from and to Sunset Place, the specific location is where the Z Gallerie is located.
4. What specific streets currently present challenges and could be improved related to WALKING AND BIKING in South Miami? (ie, light pole in middle of sidewalk, no bike lane, no street lighting, need
Page 5 of 12
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 189
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
none
No bike lanes or sidewalk down 62AVE area close to bird road area of South miami connecting to the sunset area. Must ride and walk in the street. Cars travel at high
rate of speed between the traffic circle and Miller dr.
Would like to be able to bike to downtown S. Miami. Currently there is no safe way to do so from this part of the city.
Sidewalks along 59th Ave, south of SW 73 St. have trees that are overgrown into the sidewalk. In some locations abandoned utiltiy poles have been cut short but left in
place adjacent to new utlility poles thus reducing the effective/usefull width of the sidewalk. Is is particulary bad as it is very near the shopping district.
62nd Ave.
Miller Drive
Train track land path
Around Ludlam Elementary school there is a bus stop sign and a garbage can in the same area of the sidewalk narrowing flow to one person, staggering these could allow
Need traffic calming on 62 court and 63 ave close to SW 40 Street. Cars speed through there like crazy. A median on 63rd Ave would be nice, and it would make that
street look less like a speedway that invites people to speed there. Bike lanes, that would be nice, all over the place. Biking to school with my daughter is do-able, but
all avenues and streets see above
Dont know
More places to lock bikes would be good. A few more sidewalks in certain areas East of US1. Some sidewalks are barely passable. Close to the city there is more trash.
All streets as they traverse through downtown: Sunset Drive between US1 and 57 Ave.; 57 Ave between US1 and 74 St.; 73 Street between US1 and 57 Ave.
In areas without bike lanes, the sidewalks are narrow with obstacles like light poles, bus benches, etc. that make
Crossing at the intersection of Sunset and 62 Avenue. I think the signal is broken.
A BIKE LANE is needed on SW 62 AVE, between MILLER DR and SW 64 ST. Of metro-Miami's many areas, South Miami seems to have among the highest levels of
cycling activity and is above the average in walking. However, the bike lane and sidewalk infrastructure is inadequate for providing safe passage for the city's volume of
Crossing US 1 is (literally) life threatening. We need an over/under pass or a safer way to cross!! This should be located at US1 / Sunset intersection. It's tough to bike
down Sunset between Red and US1 because of the restaurants on the sidewalks and terrible traffic. Would be great if this were a pedestrian mall!
US 1 and 57th Avenue; US1 and 62nd Avenue; US1 and 67th Avenue are large and the lights are too short to go across US1. Trees and hedges block sidewalks on both
sides and bikers or walkers have no line of vision or must walk/ride on the swale. Dangerous sidewalks because of foliage!
The location of the bus shelters at the SM Metrorail station creates pinch points and conflicts between people waiting and those moving through to/from the station.
Need a crosswalk at US-1 and SW 73 St to cross US-1.
The M-Path needs lighting at night.
Route 1 - drivers block the box and pedestrian crosswalks frequently. In order to cross the street, one often has to walk in front of cars stopped (or moving) in the
crosswalk even when pedestrians have the right of way.
Sunset Drive at Route 1: many drivers traveling north on 1 and making a right onto Sunset ignore the crosswalk.
crossing us1 is tricky
Sunset; 76th Street; Red Road are the major challenges as they
are the major roads. The access roads are also challenging, but
easier to dodge the traffic.
2. we desperately need traffic calming in the High Pines neighborhoodâ¦. crazy children from Lourdes get their morning coffee and race through the neighborhood to
be on time for school
Crossing US1 is definitely the most pressing issue.
Develop the abandoned Florida East Coast railway right-of-way. The trail will provide a safe dedicated and direct route for cyc lists and pedestrians to schools, parks, work
and shopping.
US1 & Sunset Drive. Cars are turning off US1 at 40mph and need to then observe a 20mph posted speed limit.
Light pole at 62 & Sunset (SE corner): impassable.
I could go on and on....
No established walking paths like 57th Ave South of 88th st. With rare exception, there are no bike paths. traffic calming seems to be a buzz word around here. But this
goes against managing demand. Where else will the traffic go? I'd rather have smooth traffic flow than cars running red lights or blocking intersections as a result of
The problem crossing US 1 at SW 57th Ave is that the light turns green for the cars at the same time the pedestrian "walk" sign goes on. There's only 22 to cross & cars
are zipping in front & back of pedestrians. It says "NO Turn on RED when pedestrian in crosswalk" What about "on green?" There needs to be a red turn arrow when
improvements to other parks like dante fascell track
US1 is a barrier, many streets in the city do not have sidewalks, high speed travel on the main streets makes biking scary. wider sidewalks for biking would be great.
making sure that crosswalks are aligned across the street
Sunset Drive has no bike lane as well as Red Road.
US1
We walk all the time on 62nd Ave. from 80th Street to US1. The sidewalks need to be better paved on both sides of the street. Also, it is very stressful to cross US1 on
59th avenue needs traffic calming: a circle or all way stop sign at 79th street
Sunset Dr., Miller Rd. Red Rd, Ludlam Rd.
Page 6 of 12
SMITP190 | JANUARY 2015
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
I think 62 ave needs more stop signs (like 59th Ave) and also 84 needs speed bumps or something as there is a lot of cross traffic to get to/from Red Road from there (it is
an alternate to 80th).
Miller Drive is becoming a nightmare. We live on Miller and 63rd and my wife has almost been hit two times coming out of the drive way. Just last week there was a 3
car accident right infront of our house. It is becoming too dangerous.
Crossing 62nd Ave by McDonalds to get across US 1 in the morning and to walk to train in the morning is extremely dangerous and the cars take the red lights due to
We'd like to see a SAFER way to cross U.S. 1 somewhere near Sunset Drive. Realistic Project - a more defined and enforced cross walk system of some kind. Dream
project - a bridge from the SM Metro Station area to Sunset Shops.
None that I can think of.
It is a challenge to drive down Sunset Dr. and SW 58 Ave. where the side entrance is to Sunset Plaza. Pedestrians walk across the street holding up traffic as if they
Bike lanes
My age
59th avenue (from 85th street to 73rd street): not provided with enough street lighting. Probaby the same on 58th avenue.
No street lighting on 59th Avenue, on 79th Avenue, 78th Avenue and this is very dangerous. We have to walk with flashlight and night gear. The park on 59th avenue
and 78th is also dark and dangerous. 90% of the time you have to walk on the street and there are no speed bumps to cars continuously speed and come too close to
59th Avenue, 62 Avenue
LITTER everywhere from fast food,smoothie,gyms services,etc on roads,sidewalks,lawns.
Fines not enforced for littering!!!
Still no street sign on the actual residential block of 61st ave!!!
Need police monitoring,etc. of car crossing and ensuing illegal lane crossing at 62nd and US 1 (south Miami Hospital)afternoons 3-6 pm week days.
The amount of cars on Sunset Drive is daunting. Very difficult to cross streets on foot with drivers blocking intersections. The number of "reserved" spots for restaurants
red road from US 1 to the Exxon service station... that streetscape can be made more safe and freindly to both pedestrians, bikers and vehicles with safe street design
no bike lane,speeding,need more sidewalks
don't walk or bikeggpypy
times even drive on it.
US1!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The city should build a bridge over US1 (on 72nd) for walkers, runners and bike riders. It is so annoying crossing and hearing all the cars because US1
is so conjested. A nice little bridge for those of us that are to the other side of US1.
SW 80th Street and Ludlam rd
Southwest 59th at SW 73rd is a dangerous intersection because the streets are not aligned properly. Cars often blow the stop sign and ignore pedestrians. Northbound
drivers on route 1 turning right at Sunset Drive also tend to ignore pedestrians in the crossswalk. Northbound traffic on Route 1 backs up in the morning and cars block
58th and 59th Avenue
59th Avenue needs a sidewalk between 76th street and Davis!
Davis needs a sidewalk. Although I gather that is in the works, it cannot come too soon.
South Miami is small and compact enough to be the ideal walking and biking community. Quiet neighborhoods and shaded streets are a plus, but on many of these, the
city lacks infrastructure needed to do so comfortably and safely - namely all the things you mention: sidewalks, bike lanes (protected or otherwise), sufficient street
no bike lane...no lights telling drivers to slow down and stop at pedestrian crossings. we should improve the street lighting in the neighborhood...the lights go out and it
takes months sometimes years to replace. it's a hazard for the walking pedestrians.
US 1 is a dangerous road to cross especially for kids.
SW 62nd Avenue from Bird Rd. south needs sidewalks badly (whether owned by the City or the County.
SW 80th St. from US1 south needs sidewalks for everyone.
All city sidewalk areas need foliage cutting. There is too much over growth and it's dangerous for everyone.
Brick sidewalk by Deli Lane (SW 59th Ave) Not ADA approved at all.
South Miami is a cut through for all traffic. Drivers do not go the speed limit and stop in crosswalks. US 1 by both SW 72nd St and SW 70th St is very diffcult to cross.
Cars do not stop at stop signs i.e. SW 74th ST and SW 62n Place. Also SW 64th Street is very dangerous for the school children who cross at 65th Ave to go school.()
Sidewalk is inadequate.
There should be more street lighting and bike lanes in the SMRCA area
davis has no side walk or bike lane. manor lane has horrible traffic and as no sidewalks.
The only "challenge" is not enough shade.
More Bike Lanes
Not much in the way of bike lanes. traffic calming needed in our area although we do walk around in the evening for exercise
no bike lane.
Page 7 of 12
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 191
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
The crosswalk by the Tire Kingdom at 70th St and Dixie Hwy has tons of trash in the grass. Also, the South Miami Metro station parking garage is the ugliest structure. It
also appears rundown. Metal bars are bent, gates are open all the time, and it is way overpriced. $4+ for parking plus the metro fee makes it difficult for many people to
We need sidewalks and street lights in the SM blocks north of Miller road and between 58 ave and 57 ave.
Lower speed limits in residential areas (25 mph) would be a welcome change along with enforcement. Many SM public servants do not even know the SM north of Miller
No bike lanes in main thoroughfares (Red/Sunset). The Red/Sunset Intersection dangerous and unpredictable. Need traffic calming measures.
Bicycle lanes, bicycle racks, pedestrian zones with no vehicular access would be very nice - so extending beyond the Sunset Blvd. Mall.
Vehicles drive very fast within residential areas
A pedestrian/cyclist bridge over US 1 and 72nd would be extremely useful
Sunset no bike lane
the highschool and middle school is to far for kids to walk
Bike lanes
US 1 is dangerous and obnoxious. How am I supposed to feel ok crossing that?
There are too any streets without bike lanes to list here.
too wide a question
Sidewalks in residential area. Many areas do not have sidewalks. More bike lanes.
the walk from the west on sunset to the metro station conflicts with the traffic turning left from sunset to go north towards the post office especially in the morning.
currently, the sidewalk on the east side of 62nd ave just south of sunset are partially blocked by utility poles. only skinny people can pass.
Answer
I do not bike in the area, however I do walk:
- From City Hall to and from Metro Station to go to downtown meetings during office hours.
- From City Hall to downtown to eat lunch and/or shop.
Any route, especially North of US1.
59th street
the post office, winn-dixie, the movies
Hometown & Metrorail station via 70th St.
City Hall via 70th St & 61st Ct.
Tropical Park via Miller sidewalk.
Dante Fascell Park via numerous sidestreets.
see above
As a commuter cyclist, I have several routes I use during my usual work schedule - too many to innumerate. Who designed your survey?!
I bike down 70th St. to Downtown. Behind Metro station is dangerous at night. 59th Ave to link with Red Road bike path. Also 59th ave north to South Miami Park.
64th Street to Univ. of Miami. I bike through Mango Terrace to Dadeland. 64th Court to Manor Lane, then cross US 1 at Ludlam to go to Joanna's Market. 65th Ave,
We mostly use 63rd Ave and surroundings and, when running or biking, we usually cross Sunset Dr. and head towards Brewer's Park. Then we often walk to Downtown
using Sunset Dr. In addition to that, I walk from Metrorail to my house almost every day (Sunset Dr. and make a left at 63rd Ave)
cra area
Walking varies mostly our own streets and parks.
Walking and Biking to metro rail.
Sunset Tavern, MetroRail Station, Library, City Hall (/Farmer's Market on Sunday), Winn Dixie, UM Campus, Sunset Place,
Biking: Metrorail, office, restaurants, post office, downtown.
Walking: When kids were younger, we walked to school. Now, there is a lack of destinations for dining and shopping within walking distance. This is a major problem
for most of our neighborhoods. Walking to Walgreens is 15 minutes; the grocery store is 30 minutes.
Walk downtown. Down Manor Lane to Sunset, go across US 1 and go to restaurants and shops in downtown Sunset.
I bike to University of Miami, Miracle Mile, Sunset, Dadeland Mall, Tropical Park, A.D. Barnes Park, and my local grocery store.
70th street to Sunset Place, South on 62nd ave to City Hall.
If you are talking about downtown South Miami, as stated before I do not go there. I walk in the neighborhood of Miller Drive and Brewer Park Betwen SW 61 Ave and
SW 63 Ave north to SW 58 ST
I don't bike in south Miami and I only walk in and around downtown and the hospital districts
76th Street to 59th Avenue towards Winn Dixie.
59Place, 74Street, Sunset Drive.
none
5. Please describe the routes and destinations that you and your family WALK AND BIKE to in South Miami. - Responses
Page 8 of 12
SMITP192 | JANUARY 2015
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
Fairchild Elementary. Unfortunately there is no park in our area accessible by bike or walking.
WE WANT A PARK. This is a general consensus of all the neighbors in the area. Especially since the YMCA has been gone for years.
Brewster park is not only far but cannot be ridden to by bike due to lack of sidewalks or bike path.
Entire south section of South Miami (Sunset and south and over into the Gables to the east).
Sunset Place
University of Miami
Bird Road Design District
We often bike ride to the South Miami Library, and Ludlam Elementary School. We occasionally walk and frequently bike ride to the sunset place area.
Fairchild Elementary,old ymca soccer fields.WOULD bike to Brewer Park but there is no sidewalk on SW62Ave,no bike lane either.And crossing Miller with kids?True
you could go thru the back street (SW 64 Ave?)but it's a one-way street,no sidewalk,kind of isolated, and you still have to cross Miller.Also it's a bit of a long bike ride for
Avenue 57, 58, 62, 64, 67
Street 40, 42, 48, 49, 50, 56, 62, 64, 66, us1, 72, 74, 76, 80, 88
Down town
up 59th ave from Dante Fascell neighborhood toward Deli Lane. Up 58th Ave. 62nd Ave would be good for a sidewalk from 80th street north. And we need a Sunset
and US1 pedestrian overpass.we specifically plan bike routes avoiding/around downtown due to lack of paths and unsafe streets. Although downtown has many destinations of interest, it is not a safe
biking environment.
Usually, SW 62 Ave N-S, then SW 84 ST to Dante Fascel Park and beyond. Occasionally, SW 56 st E-W.
Mostly along Sunset from 64th Court to City Hall and the Library.
With our children, we mostly weave through different routes of residential streets to and from Brewer Park.
From our house (6840 SW 64 CT) to Ludlam Elementary, to the Library/ City Hall, to the Sunset Drive area between US1 and Red, to parks such as Brewer Park and
up and down SW 62nd Avenue and primarily in the north end of SM
From the UM to Mack Cycle on the M-Path.
On Red Road south of US-1 to Ace Hardware.
Sunset Dr to Sunset Place or Deli Lane
Across Route 1 at Sunset Drive
entire Downtown area around Sunset Drive
62 ave south into the downtown area
From Highpines walking: walk 74th Street west to Red Road; walk part way up Red Road to cross the street - usually avoiding the light at Red; walk through 73rd
Street to destination. Returning home: we usually walk down Sunset; cross Red Road at the light on Sunset, then walk east on Sunset to Highpines.
Biking: Bike west on 76th Stree
1. Sunset to Red Road
2. 76th Street to Red Road
3. 80th Street to Red Road
4. Need to cross US 1 to U. of Mâ¦. Bank United Center
Destinations include: The Towne, Starbucks, Shops, Whole Foods,
Publix on Monza, U of M Wellness Center and Bank United Center
From our house on Sunset & 69 Ave in to the shops along sunset.
We also make use of the Defunct railroad for quiet riding / walking
Miami Senior High to South Miami Middle to South Miami K-8 to Datran could all be served if the rail way is converted to a trail!!
Sunset Drive to 59 Place to USPO; USPO to 70 Street to Sunset Drive - hitch bike and walk.
Sunset Drive to 59 Ave - hitch and walk.
Mostly home to Downtown/Sunset Place
To Sunset Shopping or Whole Foods or Wendys
too many to list
Red Road
Sunset Drive
from my house to downtown south miami, or south miami station. making sure it is easy to ride bike to these locations is key.
Sunset Drive and Red Road.
Live on the west side of US 1, so crossing US 1 is always an issue.
We walk all the time on 62nd Ave. from 80th Street to US1 to go to the mall. We also walk along US 1 on the east side. US 1 (South Dixie Hwy) should be more "walker
friendly." I would like to walk from 80th Street and 62nd Ave. to 80th Street & S. Dixie, but 80th Street is totally not "walker friendly."
downtown from area of 80th street on 59th avenue
Page 9 of 12
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 193
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
Ace Hardware, Phil Stoddard's house, Mac Cycle.
Mostly around Dante Facell, up to Sunset place and across 87th street and other streets that border the canal.
Miller Drive.
Across 62 to US to SM Metrorail and back 5 days a week
From our home near Ludlam Elementary to:
- downtown South Miami
- Wall's Ice Cream/Big Cheese
- Fuch's Park
- Across 67th Ave to friends'
Bike down Miller to Tropical Park. Bike to and around Shops at sunset and Barnes park. Walk mainly around sunset area, or Barnes Park area.
We walk down Sunset Dr. and also SW 73rd St. to the different eating places along the way.
Sunset dr and red road
None
See 4., above. Also, 59th avenue to 72nd st and, then, westward to S, Miami Library. then, westward to S. Miami Hospital main entrance (all, by bicycle). Another route:
85th st, 58th ave, 83rd or 82nd st westward through Catholic church complex to 80th st, then, through C. Gables to Publix market and return. Also, to Chevron gas
Up and down 58th Avenue all the way to Deli Lane and Shops at Sunset. Bike down 57th Avenue to 112th. Walk down 62 Avenue to Petco.
Walk to Winn Dixie, Petco, throughout neighboring streets, take trail by Danti Fasel park in front of the old Parrot Jungle and bike through Pinecrest where it is much
safer than South Miami
-61st ave to 80th to Matheson Hammock
-76thstreet to 57th ave
-78th street to 57th /red road/winn dixie/south
-miami bank/Petco on 62nd ave
mostly red road and sunset
74th terr to downtown and red road
don't walk or bike
We walk on 57th and 58th avenue from 74th street to Sunset Place as well as down 72nd to Sunset Elementary. We also bike down red road.
We cross US1 to get to Sunset place and the other shops.
Fuchs park
We often walk across Route 1 at Sunset Drive to the metrorail station.
58th and 59th avenue to Sunset Place
Our most common trek is up and down 59th Ave to get to Sunset, and from there we go in various directions. Sometimes we take 58th Ave because it has a sidewalk,
but we cannot get there without walking on roads w/out sidewalks.
Downtown South Miami to Ludlam via Sunset (and the reverse).
62nd Pl to 64th St, to 72nd Ave down to Sunset and back, and other routes around my neighborhood for exercise and recreation. Also Red Road to Dante Fascell Park
and south into Pinecres. This is for walking (don't own a bike right now). I would love to walk from my house to the Metrorail Station but it is not a comfortable walk.
through out town center and just south , west and east of red road
a bike path along red road would be helpful...I don't know if it could take place on sunset because of the room but that would be amazing as well.
Crossing over from West of South Miami to East.
Biking though back city streets because 62nd avenue does not have a sidewalk from the north side to the south side. Walk to Winn Dixie on 67 Ave. Bike to YMCK park
Use SW 62nd to go to South Miami Hospital. Use Sunset to go to the library and City Hall. SW 64th Street between SW 67th Avenue and SW 62nd Avenue needs to be
slowed down. We can not even cross the street in the morning hours or evening hours. Cross US 1 to go into the city.
64th Street, Sunset Drive
sunset drive or davis
Mostly residential streets.
Sunset Place, Festivals
Walk around downtown for shopping/dining after parking car. Walk around our area (Mango Terrace) for exercise.
up and down Sunset Drive, to downtown South Miami and to the Metrorail (which I often take to work) or down Ludlam to 64th Street (and towards UM). then in and
around my neighborhood - I'm very satisfied with these routes, much safer and quieter than the more transited roadways.
I walk from the South Miami Metro Station to Sunset Place and to UM.
University of Miami
Brewer Park
Tropical Park
Walking my dog around my neighborhood (no destination)
From and to SW 53 Terrace via 57 Ave to SW 72 Avenue and E or W
Red/Sunset and adjacent streets
Page 10 of 12
SMITP194 | JANUARY 2015
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
SW 69th st - 72nd St to Cocoplum
69th St, 62nd Ave to 57th to Publix and Whole Foods
Sunset to Whole foods
From house on 81st and 59 ave to Deli Lane for breakfast
I also bike down Old Cutler to the Deering estate
Mostly around the central business district.
I walk on Sunset Monday through Friday to the Metrorail station to go to work.
walk downtown, and in neighborhood....bike nowhere...drivers unreliable and unsafe
From Downtown to 80 Street
from 64th court to the metro every morning and back in the evening.
from 64th court to down S Miami to restaurants or movies or even Winn Dixie shopping - also round trip.
Answer
south miami hospital
Around the neighborhood for fitness
Doctor's office
In my own neighborhood Do not to go to the above places
nowhere
Excercise; Art Shows.
around the neighborhood
church
bank
Exercise around Twin Lake
Exercise in the morning.
to the mailbox
dog walks/neighborhood functions/visits
don't walk or bike
Post Office, drug stores, doctors
neighborhood
Answer
some of these items do not apply
Shade is especially important for walking.
Thank you for the survey
I know my way around so I don't need signage. Other people do. I appreciate shade, respectful traffic, and pleasant surroundings. Crosswalks are less nerve-wracking
than trying to cross US 1 surrounded by cars. I like a dark sky. Biking at night is beautiful.
It would be really great if you could have a trolley system in south Miami. I can't get to South Miami hospital unless someone brings me or I use a cab/special
transportation. I am sure if you had a system the hospital workers would be using it all the time.
The corner of 63rd Ave and Sunset Dr. needs to be reviewed for possible traffic improvements. The vehicles that are allowed to park on Sunset Dr. make it impossible for
a driver on 63rd Ave. to see the vehicles that are coming full speed. One needs to move forward too much to catch a glimpse of the road and this presents a risk of
While walk and bike infrastructure and tree lined streets are very important, the most important message to convey is that no speeding or reckless motoring will be
tolerated in South Miami. Enforcement and driver education must be stressed, as well as pedestrian and bike safety at our schools. The culture of walking and biking
could be reinforced when our local kids and families can safely bike and walk to school.
Bike lanes are so important in this city because drivers are often careless and do not look for pedestrians or bikers! They text, eat, talk on the phone, etc. but the last thing
they do is focus on driving! That is why it is so important to give pedestrians and bikers their own space in the form of sidewalks and bike lanes.
Pedestrian crosswalks need signage; signals/flashers and enforcement.
Sidewalks at least in our area.
We are part of South Miami too. It seems we only are visited when elections are near, promises are made and then nothing until the next election cycle.
Traffic calming is good if properly designed. Circles at SW 84 St and 58 Ave. & 59 Ave. are so small that traffic barely slows down as it goes thru. A rolling stop is more
effective. At SW 58 Ave. and 84 St., no utiltity lines above and no tall shade tree. At SW 59th Ave. and 84 St. constructed at same time, utitlity lines above and trees
below. Makes no sense. AT SW 59th Ave. between SW 82 St. and 83rd St., median is constructed but poorly maintained. If we can not maintain do not build.
Excessive street lighting is detrimental to plant life and sleep patterns of residents.
I only use existing bicycle lanes when I am riding alone. With my family i use side streets and (regrettably) sidewalks. More lanes would only marginally improve bike
safety. Separate lanes are much better! No one in Miami seems to understand that they are supposed to stop at a crosswalk....
7. When you or your family WALK or BIKE in South Miami, primarily where do you go? (check all that apply) - Other responses
8. Please rank the following bicycle-pedestrian infrastructure in order of importance to you (1=MOST Important, 6=LEAST Important; use the "Comment" box for additional infrastructure): - Comments
Page 11 of 12
South MiamiSouth MiamiSouth Miami IntermodalIntermodal TRANSPORTATION PLAN
I
SOUTH
MIAMIJANUARY 2015 | 195
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
They could make our neighborhood prettier with a nice median all along sw 63 ave,with trees and landscaping.And if they could find a place for a park,maybe at the old
ymca,where they were SUPPOSED to make something nice,or on that vacant land by Coral Lake on sw 44th street and 64 ave,it would make walking & biking more
pleasant.Of course all of this involves going outside,which sucks in our neighborhood because of the mosquitoes in the storm drains year-(#*ing round.
I never ride at night, so street lighting is moot.
See note above about ways to safely cross US 1 for children/ old people.
Shade trees are good but not in the sidewalk. Take away on-street parking for canopy.
it would be great to have a trolly system like the grove and gables
Thank you for asking! I love South Miami, but it is becoming increasingly difficult to navigate in car, bike and on foot. Parking is an issue. I love to bike and walk, but
crossing Sunset Drive, Red Road and especially US 1 are extremely challenging and are significant deterrents. I would love to bike to the library, which I regularly use,
but I won't risk crossing US 1. South Miami has basically no bike racks!!!!!!!!!!
Convert the abandoned Florida East Coast Railway corridor that runs from Dadeland Station north to the Miami International Airport into bike paths, parks & community
gardens.
The green belt of land is between 25 and 100 yards wide with only 13 road crossings along the entire 6.2 mile length. The trail runs next to 4 public schools and through
Thank you.
park
please dont waste our money on "vehicle lane share"... we want protected, off road paths, and continuous sidewalks. keep us away from high moving traffic.
I wish South Miami would become more walker friendly. Everyone focuses on bikes, but the bikers usually ride on the sidewalks and interfere with the walkers.
Sidewalks are a waste of money and require constant maintenance to avoid trip hazards
We need to do something on Miller.
Can we place round abouts that are often found in Coral Gables?
PLEASE, DO SOMETHING!
Coconut Grove has started cross walk awareness with the little yellow signs that caution drivers to stop for pedestrians. Something like that would be nice in S.M..
Generally, facilities are good and already very underutilized. No need to spend significant sums and increase taxes to pay for it.
7. Places to park to go into businesses.Never enough places unless you go out of your way.
8. Business places should give special discounts to the retired elderly and disabled people that have contributed to society for so many years.
Need better cemented sidewalks so one is not forced to go on the street
Need much better lighting throughout the city at night. Parks need lighting. Especially that nature preserve that they have on 59 Avenue. Very dark at night and have
seen individuals lurking around there at night. A lot of our neighbors avoid that area since it is not safe.
Traffic calming is essential to ensure the quality of life somi professes. My street is a speed cut thru for frustrated commuters on 62nd ave!!! pets and people face their
demise daly just stepping out the door!
This city has BEAUTIFUL trees and nature. Please preserve them. That is the charm of our city.
Traffic is horrible on SW 80th street and crossing US1 at the SW 80th street intersection is dangerous because the light changes to quickly
I notice that sidewalks don't appear at all on this list!
Street lighting is an issue in some areas, but I think that generally the city should look into lighting that reduces light pollution and casts light where it is needed, at the
My children and I ride our bikes on the sidewalk because I am afraid to share the rode with cars.
Sidewalks and traffic calming! I see kids walking down the middle of my street coming home from school all the time... it scares me that the ocassional speed nut (of
which I also see many) will plow into them...
it's difficult to select for this are all very important
If traffic were any calmer, I wouldn't be able to drive anywhere. There is too much congestion downtown. The worst is getting home from Publix/Whole Foods (to 63 Ave
Bicycles and vehicles, because of their disparity in speeds, do not share facilities well. FDOT recommends not employing shared facilities for bikes and cars, particularly
on arterial roadways Bad design - poor safety.
Too car centric, whatever solutions encourage people to park and walk within Somi
I really don't bike or walk much b/c too hot most of the year & my primary shopping here is for groceries. don't even walk to Metro for getting to work b/c sweating too
much by time get there. freq. shuttle bus around central area along Sunset to Metro & mall would be best option for me. then I might use Metro to go to work.
I would list all of the above a 1, but the system does not allow. All of these items are a "1" to me, because they all can pose safety problems.
Page 12 of 12
SMITP196 | JANUARY 2015
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s
Ap
p
e
n
d
i
x
B
–
S
u
r
v
e
y
R
e
s
u
l
t
s