Loading...
Resolution 2013-28188 RESOLUTION NO. 2013-28188 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, ACCEPTING THE CITY MANAGER'S RECOMMENDATION WHICH WAS TRANSMITTED VIA. LTC 130-2013 DATED APRIL 16, 2013, (1)TO MAINTAIN THE CURRENT ROADWAY WIDTH AND EXISTING BICYCLE LANES ON PRAIRIE AVENUE BETWEEN 28TH TO 41ST STREETS; (2) TO DEPROGRAM THE PROPOSED ADDITIONAL FOUR FEET OF VALLEY GUTTER ON PRAIRIE AVENUE FROM THE CENTRAL BAYSHORE NEIGHBORHOOD IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT WHICH WOULD RESULT IN AN OVERALL CREDIT OF APPROXIMATELY $92,000.00; (3) TO SUPPRESS THE GRADE ELEVATIONS OF THE NEWLY INSTALLED GRATES AND INSTALL FLUMES AS NECESSARY TO COMPENSATE FOR THE REMOVAL OF THE VALLEY GUTTERS AND ENSURE THE EFFICIENT DRAINAGE OF STORM WATER; AND (4) TO CONTINUE TO INCLUDE THE ADDITION OF APPROXIMATELY 400 SHADE TREES IN THE PROJECT. WHEREAS, on March 13, 2013, the City Commission adopted Resolution No. 2013-28163, which approved Amendment No. 2 to the construction contract with Lanzo Construction Co.for Central Bayshore (Package A) and Lake Pancoast(Package C); said Amendment, in the amount of $3,723,986, to implement the proposed design change pursuant to the adopted Basis of Design Report (BODR) Amendment, dated July 18, 2012; and WHEREAS, during the City Commission meeting, concerns were raised by residents requesting that Amendment No. 2 also include (i) the reduction of Prairie Avenue to twenty (20) feet, plus two foot valley gutters (24 feet total), via the elimination of the current bicycle lane; and (ii) evaluation of the feasibility of including a bicycle facility along the BODR amended roadway width of Royal Palm Avenue; and WHEREAS, the City Commission directed the City Manager to proceed with Amendment No. 2, as presented and approved, concurrent with City staff further evaluating the possibility of incorporating the residents' aforestated requests, but without affecting the timelines and cost to the Central Bayshore (Package A) Project (the "Project"); the City Commission also referred this matter to the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee (FCWPC) for further discussion; and WHEREAS, in preparation for the FCWPC, City staff retained Atkins North America and Street Plans Inc., experts in the motor vehicle and bicycle traffic fields, respectively, in order to determine the feasibility of removing the existing bicycle lanes along Prairie Avenue, and instead providing a bicycle boulevard along Royal Palm Avenue; and WHEREAS, based on the preliminary review of the current conditions, as well as data previously obtained, the team determined that it was not feasible to remove a bicycle facility on Prairie Avenue and replace it with another bicycle facility on Royal Palm Avenue, as the Prairie Avenue lane provides for connectivity advantages within neighborhoods and to adjacent collectors; and WHEREAS, the Miami-Dade Public Works Traffic Engineering Division has opined that the removal of the bicycle lane along Prairie Avenue would not be considered because bicyclists have a legal right to travel on all streets in the State of Florida, except where specifically prohibited (e.g. interstate highways and other limited access facilities); and WHEREAS, on March 21, 2013, consultants Atkins North America, Inc. and Street Plans, Inc. and Staff presented two options to the FCWPC, which contemplated, in pertinent part: (1) maintaining the current width of Prairie Avenue as well as its respective bicycle lanes and retaining Royal Palm Avenue's design as proposed in the existing construction plans and (2) continuing to evaluate the narrowing of Prairie Avenue by eliminating the existing bicycle lanes and further studying the inclusion of an "advisory bicycle lane"; and WHEREAS, on April 17, 2013, the City Commission rejected the two options that had been presented to the FCWPC at its March 21, 2013 meeting; and WHEREAS, a third option, which was transmitted via LTC 130-2013 and presented by the City Manager during the City Commission meeting on April 17, 2013, would maintain current roadway width on prairie avenue between 28th to 41st Streets, remove the additional four feet of valley gutter resulting in a savings of approximately$92,000.00, ; and WHEREAS, to compensate for the removal of the valley gutters and ensure the efficient drainage of storm water, the grade elevations of the newly installed grates would be suppressed, and flumes would be installed where necessary; and WHEREAS, because the third option would result in preservation of green space, the addition of approximately 400 shade trees would remain in the Project; and WHEREAS, given the current advanced stage of construction on the Project, the third option would result in the most cost-effective manner to maintain the bicycle lanes on Prairie Avenue and still improve storm water drainage; and WHEREAS, the Administration recommends that the City Commission approve the Resolution adopting the third option. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DULY RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA that the Mayor and City Commission hereby accept the City Manager's recommendation which was transmitted via LTC 130-2013 dated April 16, 2013, (1) to maintain the current roadway width and existing bicycle lanes on Prairie Avenue between 28th to 41st Streets; (02) to deprogram 2 the proposed additional four feet of valley gutter on Prairie Avenue from the Central Bayshore Neighborhood Improvements Project which would result in an overall credit of approximately $92,000.00; (3) to suppress the current grade elevations of the newly installed grates and install flumes as necessary to compensate for the removal of the valley gutters and ensure the efficient draining of storm water; and (4) to continue to include the addition of approximately 400 shade trees in the Project. PASSED and ADOPTED this 17 day of April , 2013.. ATTEST: \ MAR 3 Dan Gelber, Mayor1 2023 Rafael E. ranado, City Clerk %% , kIMCORP ORATED)' APPROVED AS TO FORM&LANGUAGE &FOR EXECUTION aV U 3-13 -�-3 City Attorney Zyf). Date 1 This is an after-the-fact Resolution and is being signed by Mayor Dan Gelber as a formality. The Mayor at the time this Resolution was actually passed by the City Commission was Matti Herrera Bower. 3 COMMISSION ITEM SUMMARY Corldensed Title: A Resolution Of The Mayor And City Commission Of The City Of Miami Beach,Florida,Accepting The Recommendation By Staff And Respective Consultants Atkins North America, Inc.And Street Plans, Inc. Following A Presentation To The Finance And Citywide Projects Committee On March 21,2013 And Maintaining The Current Width Of Prairie Avenue As Well As Its Respective Bicycle Lanes,Pursuant To The.Regulations Established By Miami-Dade County Public Works,And Further Retaining Royal Palm Avenue's Current Design As Proposed In The Construction Plans,And As Approved Under Resolution 2013-28163 Via Amendment No.2 To Lanzo Construction A Resolution Of The Mayor And City Commission Of The City Of Miami Beach,Florida,Rejecting The Recommendation By Staff And Respective Consultants Atkins North America, Inc.And Street Plans, Inc. Following A Presentation To The Finance And Citywide Projects Committee On March 21,2013 And Directing Staff To Continue To Evaluate The Reduction Of Prairie Avenue To Eliminate The Current Bicycle Lanes And Study Further The Possibility Of Including An Advisory Bicycle Lane Along Both Prairie Avenue And Royal Palm Avenue; And Further Authorizing The City Manager To De- Program Work Associated In The Construction Of The Valley Gutters And Re-Grading And Milling And Resurfacing Along Prairie Avenue,As Authorized Under Resolution 2013-28163;Modifying Such Amendment To Add To The Contract Funds For A One Inch Overlay Of Asphalt Over The Current Existing Roadway And Resurface The Street To A Drivable Condition During The Experiment And Approval Process For An Advisory Bicycle Lane. Key Intended Outcome Supported: Ensure Value and Timely Delivery of Quality Capital Projects,Improve Storm Drainage Citywide,and Maintain City's Infrastructure Supporting Data(Surveys, Environmental Scan, etc.): The 2012 Customer Satisfaction Survey indicated that over 81% of residents rated recently completed capital improvement projects as "excellent" or"good". Recently completed capital improvement projects (81%), storm drainage(37%),and condition of roads(44%). Item Summary/Recommendation: On March 13, 2013 the City Commission adopted resolution 2013-28163, which approved the construction contract Amendment No.2 in the amount of$3,723,986 to implement the proposed design change pursuant to the adopted BODR Amendment of July 18th,2012. During the Commission meeting, concerns were voiced by residents requesting further that the adopted Contract Amendment include the reduction of Prairie Avenue via the elimination of the current bike lanes,while at the same time evaluating the feasibility of including a Bicycle facility along the BODR amended roadway width of Royal Palm Avenue.The Commission granted the authority to the City Manager to proceed.With Amendment No.2 as presented,contingent that staff evaluates further the possibility of incorporating these requests without affecting the timelines and cost to the current Bayshore A contract.A request was made also to further refer this matter to the March 21,2013 Finance and Citywide Projects Committee(FCWCP). The City retained the services of Atkins North America and Street Plans Inc.,experts in the motor vehicle and bicycle traffic fields,in order to determine the feasibility of removing the existing bicycle lane along Prairie Avenue and instead provide a bicycle boulevard along Royal Palm Avenue. In its preliminary review of the current conditions and based on data previously obtained,the team determined that it is not feasible to remove a bicycle facility on Prairie Avenue and replace it with another bicycle facility on Royal Palm Avenue,as the lanes provide for connectivity advantages within neighborhoods and to adjacent collectors. The Consultant team identified two alternatives,the possibility of including an advisory bicycle lane along both Prairie avenue and Royal Palm avenue or to explore the concept of a new bicycle boulevard on Royal Palm Avenue. Should the Commission choose to continue to explore the alternatives,City staff would have no option but to de-program certain portions of the construction of Prairie Avenue from the currently approved construction documents. Advisory Board Recommendation: Financial Information: Source of Amount Account Funds: 1 2 OBPI Total Financial Impact Summary: City Clerk's Office Legislative Tracking: Fernando Vazquez Ext 6399 Sign-Offs: Department Director Assistant Cit - •ger City M a er FV JGG /IP - JLM � A I A� A,v,I B EAC H AGENDA ITE R7 — Jv1 DATiE -1,1I m MIAMIBEACH City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive,Miami Beach, Florida 33139,www.miamibeachfl.gov COMMISSION MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Math Herrera Bower and Me bers of the ity Commission FROM: Jimmy L. Morales, City Manager DATE: April 17, 2013 SUBJECT: A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYO AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, ACCEPTING THE RECOMMENDATION BY STAFF AND RESPECTIVE CONSULTANTS ATKINS NORTH AMERICA, INC. AND STREET PLANS, INC. FOLLOWING A PRESENTATION TO THE FINANCE AND CITYWIDE PROJECTS COMMITTEE ON MARCH 21, 2013 AND MAINTAINING THE CURRENT WIDTH OF PRAIRIE AVENUE AS WELL AS ITS RESPECTIVE BICYCLE LANES, PURSUANT TO THE REGULATIONS ESTABLISHED BY MIAMI-DADE COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS, AND FURTHER RETAINING ROYAL PALM AVENUE'S CURRENT DESIGN AS PROPOSED IN THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS, AND AS APPROVED UNDER RESOLUTION 2013-28163 VIA AMENDMENT NO. 2 TO LANZO CONSTRUCTION CO. A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA, REJECTING THE RECOMMENDATION BY STAFF AND RESPECTIVE CONSULTANTS ATKINS NORTH AMERICA, INC. AND STREET PLANS, INC. FOLLOWING A PRESENTATION TO THE FINANCE AND CITYWIDE PROJECTS COMMITTEE ON MARCH 21, 2013 AND DIRECTING STAFF TO CONTINUE TO EVALUATE THE REDUCTION OF PRAIRIE AVENUE TO ELIMINATE THE CURRENT BICYCLE LANES AND STUDY FURTHER THE POSSIBILITY OF INCLUDING AN ADVISORY BICYCLE LANE ALONG BOTH PRAIRIE AVENUE AND ROYAL PALM AVENUE; AND FURTHER AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO DE-PROGRAM WORK ASSOCIATED IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE VALLEY GUTTERS, AS WELL AS PROPOSED RE- GRADING AND MILLING AND RESURFACING ALONG PRAIRIE AVENUE, AS OUTLINED IN AMENDMENT NO 2, AND AS AUTHORIZED UNDER RESOLUTION 2013-28163; MODIFYING SUCH AMENDMENT TO ADD TO THE CONTRACT FUNDS FOR A ONE INCH (1") OVERLAY OF ASPHALT OVER THE CURRENT EXISTING ROADWAY, AND RESURFACE THE STREET TO A DRIVABLE CONDITION DURING THE EXPERIMENT AND APPROVAL PROCESS FOR AN ADVISORY BICYCLE LANE, BY PROVIDING FOR ALL RESPECTIVE CREDITS AND CHARGES TO BE FURTHER DEFINED AND AMENDED INTO THE CONTRACT AT A LATER DATE. BACKGROUND On March 13, 2013 the City Commission adopted resolution 2013-28163, which approved the construction contract Amendment No. 2 in the amount of$3,723,986 to implement the proposed design change pursuant to the adopted BODR Amendment of July 18th, 2012. Central Bayshore A-Bicycle Lanes Memorandum April 17,2013 Page 2 of 5 During the Commission meeting, concerns were voiced by residents requesting further that the adopted Contract Amendment include the reduction of Prairie Avenue to twenty (20) feet plus 2 foot valley gutters (24 feet total) via the elimination of the current bike lanes, while at the same time evaluate the feasibility of including a Bicycle facility along the BODR amended roadway width of Royal Palm Avenue. The Commission granted the authority to the City Manager to proceed with Amendment No._ 2 as presented, contingent that staff evaluates further the possibility of incorporating these requests without affecting the timelines and cost to the current Bayshore A contract. A request was made also to further refer this matter to the March 21, 2013 Finance and Citywide Projects Committee (FCWCP) (See Exhibit A— Memorandum to FCWCP - Central Bayshore Bid Package 8A - Bicycle Lanes / Bicycle Boulevard on Prairie Avenue and Royal Palm Avenue) In preparation for the FCWCP, the City retained the services of Atkins North America and Street Plans Inc., experts in the motor vehicle and bicycle traffic fields, in order to determine the feasibility of removing the existing bicycle lane along Prairie Avenue and instead provide a bicycle boulevard along Royal Palm Avenue. In its preliminary review of the current conditions and based on data previously obtained, the team determined that it is not feasible to remove a bicycle facility on Prairie Avenue and replace it with another bicycle facility on Royal Palm Avenue, as the lanes provide for connectivity advantages within neighborhoods and to adjacent collectors, including the possibility of connecting a bike path within the swale area adjacent to Miami Beach High to the 8 foot multi-purpose path circulating the Par 3 Golf Course (potentially funded by safe routes to schools grants). Refer to Exhibit C — Par 3 Golf Course Plan. The Team did however emphasize the benefit of providing an additional bicycle facility along Royal Palm Avenue to support connectivity and as an enhancement to the overall bicycle network. As part of this review, the City also consulted with the Miami-Dade Public Works and Waste Management (PWWM) Traffic Engineering Division (TED), to obtain their input on this added request by the residents. As the agency responsible for traffic control countywide, the Miami Dade TED staff has opined that the removal of the bicycle lane along Prairie would not be considered because bicyclists have a legal right to travel on all streets in the State of Florida except where specifically prohibited, e.g. Interstate Highways and other limited access facilities. The conversion of one street (Royal Palm) into a more bicycle-friendly facility is not a justification to reduce safety for bicyclists on another street(Prairie). It is the TED's position that apart from being a violation to Federal, State and County regulations, the bicyclists would continue to use Prairie Avenue, due to its connectivity advantages, and without the proper protection granted by a separate assigned bike lane. The TED further indicated that in order to remove bike lanes, the City would need to be compliant with Federal and State requirements, would need subsequent approval by adjacent residents, and would need to prove that the existing bike lanes are ineffective and unsafe. It is important to underline that the TED's position has been identified in memos to the City Commission with respect to the same subject and concerns. Advisory Bicycle Lanes In an effort to accommodate the desire to narrow Prairie Avenue and still provide a bicycle facility, the consultant team proposed an experimental Feature named an Advisory Lane. Under FHWA criteria, an experimental feature is a material, process, method, equipment item, traffic operational device, or other feature that: (1) has not been sufficiently tested under actual service conditions to merit acceptance without reservation in normal highway construction, or (2) has been accepted but needs to be compared with alternative acceptable features for determining their relative merits and cost effectiveness. Advisory bicycle lanes, an experimental feature, • Central Bayshore A-Bicycle Lanes Memorandum April 17,2013 Page 3 of 5 share some similarities with conventional bicycle lanes, but they are typically only on roads with low volumes and low speed. (On Prairie Avenue, the volume is about 2,200 vehicles per day, and the average speed for this corridor decreased from 36.3 miles per hour to 25 miles per hour following the installation of traffic calming devices in January 2009.)Advisory bicycle lanes force vehicles to share a center unmarked space that is less than the standard width for two (2) travel lanes. Vehicles merge into the bicycle lane upon meeting oncoming traffic. Motor vehicles must operate cautiously and yield to any bike traveling on the bicycle lane at the merge point. (Refer to Exhibit B for the consultant's presentation including Illustrations of advisory bike lanes.) Unlike traditional bike lanes, the inside marking for advisory bike lanes is a dashed white line. This dashed marking gives bicyclists a dedicated space to ride but makes the space available to motorists to pass oncoming traffic. On roads with advisory bike lanes, the center marking is removed. (According to the 2009 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), a yellow center marking is not required on roads with less than 6,000 vehicles per day.) Although the concept of advisory bike lanes fits the existing traffic operations for the Prairie Avenue corridor, it remains an experimental process and it is untested and a significant federal and county approval process must be followed. Further, the Miami Beach Fire Department and Miami Beach Police Department would also need to approve the design, since these modifications could impact response times. Advisory bicycle lanes are currently being tested under a pilot project on East 14th Street in the Elliot Park Neighborhood in Minneapolis, Minnesota. This Administration (FHWA) facility performance test is for a period of three (3) years. As the project is still in the test phase, the City would need to obtain a similar FHWA approval. A similar process such as this would not fit within the current timelines of the Central Bayshore Project. In addition, the City would have to obtain approval from Miami Dade County for this facility type on Prairie Avenue. In preliminary conversations, TED staff has not been receptive to the concept of replacing the existing bike lanes with advisory bike lanes. Staff has expressed that the advisory bike lanes may decrease the safety of the corridor for bicyclists and increase conflict points between motor vehicles. The County has indicated that the City would have to study the area and prove that this practice will be qualitatively similar to the existing conditions for both motor vehicles and bicycles. Bicycle Boulevard The City also approached the TED with the concept of a bicycle boulevard on Royal Palm Avenue; the TED stated that bicycle boulevards are not part of their adopted bicycle facility standards or the currently adopted Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). Such a proposal would warrant an individual traffic flow analysis for which the County would have to further evaluate on its feasibility and technical functionality. The County would also require a traffic flow modification application which would warrant two thirds approval by residents or majority approval by the Miami Beach City Commission. In summary, the process for implementing the above revisions to the plans would be as follows: • A traffic flow analysis of the entire Central Bayshore neighborhood must be conducted. • Once the traffic study is conducted, and if warranted, a revised design for all intersections, including drainage, must commence. • Once the traffic flow analysis is conducted, and if warranted, approval by 2/3 vote from all residents within the Central Bayshore Neighborhood or majority approval by the City Commission must be obtained. Central Bayshore A-Bicycle Lanes Memorandum April 17,2013 Page 4 of 5 • If intersections are significantly affected by the new design, a 100% vote approval from residents at all intersections along Royal Palm Avenue between 28th Street and 40th Street or City Commission approval must be obtained. • Additional fees would need to be approved to the engineer of record, via Commission, to do the study and design. • Approvals from City of Miami Beach Fire Department and Police Department. • Permits from Miami-Dade County and CMB Public Works Department must be issued. • Additional construction cost for the project would require Commission approval. Timelines It would be anticipated that the process for approval of the Bicycle Boulevard could take anywhere from 7— 10 months. It would also be anticipated that the process to introduce a new concept such as an Advisory Bicycle Lane on either Prairie Avenue and/or Royal Palm Avenue, would not take place within the current construction time frame. CONCLUSION As stated above, because the timelines to obtain approvals for the alternative bicycle facilities are not feasible within the current construction timelines for Central Bayshore, should the Commission choose to continue to explore the alternatives, City staff would have no option but to de-program certain portions of the construction of Prairie Avenue from the currently approved construction documents, such as the construction of valley gutters and the milling and resurfacing of the roadway. Although the underground drainage system would remain as part of the project, the catch basin elevations would need to be reassessed and perhaps redesigned to be re-adjusted in the event the roadway would end up being narrowed and flumes would need to be constructed to achieve proper shallow concentrated flow into the drainage system. During this interim condition the bicycle connection to the respective facilities would also remain, including the connectivity to the current bike lanes along Prairie; however connectivity from the multipurpose parking facility within Par 3 to Royal Palm Avenue would need to be created once the alignment for such facility is properly defined. See Exhibit C. RECOMMENDATION My recommendation is to maintain the current width of Prairie Avenue as well as its respective bicycle lanes pursuant to the regulations established by Miami Dade County Public Works further retaining Royal Palm Avenue's current design as proposed in the construction plans and as approved under Resolution 2013-28163 via Amendment No. 2 to Lanzo Construction Co. This recommendation is consistent with the views expressed by my staff and our consultant Atkins North America. Pursuing the alternatives will significantly delay the project, increase the costs, and may not result in any improvement if the experiment fails. Should the City Commission direct staff to continue to explore the possibility of an alternative bicycle facility on Prairie Avenue such as an Advisory Bicycle Lane, we would have no option but to carve out portions of the currently approved and funded scope of work. This would entail not conducting the work associated in the construction of the valley gutters as well as proposed re-grading and milling and resurfacing of the street. Instead, the City would provide for a temporary condition during the experiment and approval process by resurfacing the street to a drivable condition by providing a one inch (1") overlay of asphalt over the current existing roadway. Installation of drainage would remain as part of the current contract, as the drainage permit requires the road to be designed to the currently approved level of service. The respective credits and charges associated to these modifications would have to be negotiated Central Bayshore A-Bicycle Lanes Memorandum April 17,2013 Page 5 of 5 further with the engineer of record and with the contractor via a credit change order to the current contract. ATTACHMENTS: Exhibit A: Finance and Citywide Projects Committee Memorandum 3-21-12 Exhibit B: Consultant Presentation Including Advisory Bicycle Lane Illustrations Exhibit C: Proposed Connection Points for Par 3, Prairie Ave, and Royal Palm JLM/JGG/FV/DM T:\AGENDA\2013\April 17\Bayshore Bicycle Lane Memo\Bayshore A-Bicycle Lanes-Memo.docx Exhibit A MIAMI BEACH City'of Miami Bpi:00700 Convenfion Center Drive,Miami B9cich,Florida 33139,wvvvy.mianibeachfl:§oy COMMITTEE MEMOkANDUM TO Finance and Citywide Projects Committee uFROMi Kathie G. Brooks, Interim gity.Manager/z - DATEt March 21, 2013 SUBJECT Central Bayshore-Bid Package 8A Bicycle Lanes/ BiCyole Boulevard on Prairie Avenue and Royal Palm Avenue Background i Ahleridnnerit to BODR: In early 2010, following completion of design and,permitting services for the Central Bayshore project area, the neighborhood association (HOA) requested that the 'City consider modifying the width of some streets in the project area as well as enhancing the landscaping presented as part of the original design.. On AugUst 2$, 2011,rnembers of the Bayshore HOA met with CIP to request that eleven (11)' items be considered for incorporation into the project, The requested changes required are amendments to the previous BODR, upon which the project design was developed, or were modificatiOns to the BODR. On July 9, 2012, the Administration presented the aforementioned revisions to the Finance and Citywide Projects Committee (FCWPC) regarding additional capital budget requests to include additional infrastructure needs for stormwater, roadway milling, reskifading, and valley gutter improvements. On July 18, 2012; the Mayor and City Commission approved the amendment to the BOOR as approved..by the FCWPC.. HOA Request Prairie Avenue/Royal Palm Avenue In October 2912 members of the Central Bayshore'HOA continued to request that City staff consider the removal of bicycle lanes on Prairie Avenue and the implementation of a "Bicycle Boulevard" on Royal Palm Avenue. A meeting took place on December 13, 201$ between City staff and members of the Central Bayshore HOA to discuss the possibility of re-introducing the narrowing of prairie Avenue by removal of.the biCycle lanes. That requeSt had previously been presented as part of the 11 HOA requests at the July 6, '2012 FCWPC meeting, however FCWPC did not recommend the change and, therefore, it was not included in the BODR design change adopted by Commission. The City subsequently executed a contract amendment with the engineer of record, CH2M Hill, on July 113, 2912 for the.BODR design changes excluding this request. On March 13, 2013, the Commission approved the construction contract Amendment in the amount of $3,723,986 as a result of the design change, but directed that the HOA request for the bicycle lanes be reviewed by FCWPC. Central Bayshore A-Bicycle Lane§'Memorandum March 18,'2013 Page 2 of 4 ` Royal.Palm Avenue.Bicycle Boulevard The definition of a bicycle boulevard as per "Fundamentals of Bicycle Boulevard Planning Design Guidebook, V9.-1, July 2009 is a "low-volume and low-speed street that has been .optimized for'bicycle travel through'treatments. such as traffic calming ,and traffic reduction,. signage and pavement markings, and intersections crossing treatment The'common theme of these facilities is of reducing the volume and speed.of motor vehicle traffic (particularly non- local, cut-through traffic), and creating a comfortable space where bicyclists, and often pedestrians as well, have priority along the street', The primary characteristics Of a Bicycle Boulevard'are.as follows: • Low motor Vehicle.volumes • Low motor vehicle.speeds • • Logical, direct, and continuous routes that are well marked and signed • Provide convenient access to desired destinations_ • Minimal-bicyclist.delay • Comfortable and safe crossings'for cyclist at.intersections Currently there.are no Bicycle Boulevards within.the. City of Miami. Beach. In order to create a bicycle facility such ae this on:Royal Palm Avenue under the current City Commission approved 20 feet, a design must be'considered where traffic is diverted from Royal Palm from .28`h'Street to'40w'Street an4-onto.side streets to give'priority-to a bicycle,facility: This design would allow'local traffic to turn on the closest corner, but not continue oh. Royal Palm, Traffic traveling north or south would be diverted to either Prairie or.Sheridan Avenues 'and away from Royal Palm. Traffic speeds on Royal Paim,would be reduced to 13—20 mph'. Previously staff had estimated a 'cost: of.approximately $500,000 to incorporate a. Bicycle Boulevard on Royal, Palm Avenue, but that cost included widening the roadway by 8 feet, removing driveways, swale areas, tree removal and replacing with roadway,.stabilizing the sub grade, adding lime rock,,re-grading the swale, adding '2 inches Of asphalt,-,Mill and resurface, adjust inlets; modify the.drainage system, and add striping and signag e, as well, as including, professional fees;permitting and contingency. This current option does not include'widening of the-roadway: Staff is currently re-evaluating a cost for tl%is,alternative. Either way, Miami-Dade County has stated that bicycle boulevards are not part of their adopted bicycle facility standards .orthe currently adopted Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices ,(MUTCD). Such non-standard facilities would warrant an individual traffic flow analysis for which the County would have to further evaluate on its feasibility and technical functionality. The County would also require a traffic flow modification application which would warrant two thirds approval by residents and/or majority approval by the Miami Beach City Commission. In summary, the process for implementing the above revisions to the.plans would be as follows: • Approval by 2/3 vote from all residents within the Central Bayshore Neighborhood and/or majority approval by the City Commission. • 100% vote approval from. residents at all intersections along Royal Palm Avenue between 28h' Street and 40th Street. • Once approved by residents and/or Commission, a traffic flow analysis of the entire Central Bayshore neighborhood must be conducted. Central Bayshore A-Bicycle Lanes Memorandurn March 18,2013- Page 3 of 4. • Once 'the' traffic study is. conducted, and if warranted, a revised design for all intersections,;including drainage, must commence; • Additional fees would need to be approved to the engineer of record,,via Commission,to implement the.design. • Approvals from City of Miami Beach Fire Department and Police.Department, • Permits from Miami-Dade County and OMB Public Works Department must be issued, • Additional construction cost for the project would,require Commission approval. 'It would be anticipated that the process for approval of the Bicycle Boulevard to be able to be constructed would take anywhere.from 7—10 months. Prairie Avenue Bicycle Lane Removal The scope of work for the removal of the bicycle lanes and reduction in the width of Prairie Avenue would require a revision to the storrnwater and paving design to include relocation of the catch basins,,removal of 8 feet of asphalt and replacing it with sod, re-grade all the swales, 'driveway reconstruction,and lifted grates. The-cost of this request le indicated in Tables A below: TABLE A Remove:Bike Lanes-Prairie.Avenue Construction Cost* $333,000,00 Construction Administration Fees $15,318.00 NE Fees $3-6,960.00. RPR/CEI. $9,090.00 CIP Fees . $21,645.00. plc) $6,660.00 Permitting . $3.330.00 Contingency $33,300:00 TOTAL. $463;203:00. 'Cost includes roadwork,driveway reconstruction and lifted grates. City; staff reached out to Miami Dade County Public Works '(MDCPW), Traffic Division, to request their .position on this proposed revisions-as any modifications of the .existing bicycle lanes along Prairie Avenue; as welt as introduction of a -bicycle boulevard', would require MDCPW approval. The summary of this discussion is_as follows: • MDCPW indicated that approval for the removal of bicycle .lanes would not be considered. MDCPW position is that the displacement of an established bicycle facility along a collector road would.be in violation of the Federal Highway Administration Bicycle Policy which states "under 23 USC Section 109(n), the U.S. Secretary of Transportation shall not approve any project under this title that will result in the severance or destruction of an existing major route for non-motorized transportation traffic and light motorcycles; unless such project provides a reasonable alternate route or such a route exist". • Florida Statute 335.065 states that "bicycle and pedestrian ways shall be given full consideration in the planning and development of transportation facilities, including the incorporation of such ways into state, regional and local transportation plan and programs". - Central Bayshore A-Bicycle Lanes Memorandum March 18,2013 Page 4 of 4 • The City of Miami Beach currently has a local bicycle transportation plan identified as the City of Miami Beach Atlantic 'Green way Network under which Prairie Avenue is an established.facility •_ The Federal- Roadway Functional Classification map shows Prairie a's a collector.road and the HQA has been made aware of such; nevertheless, there remains a concern that. Prairie.Avenue is the busiest'collector. in ;Bayshore, and that this should be the reason for removing the current bike lanes, • The design and construction of an in-road bicycle boulevard, on Royal Palm, could create traffic flow modifications,, which under the Miami-Dade. Criteria would warrant a traffic flow analysis. Given the current advanced stage of construction,'City staff anticipates that the pursuit Of these alternatives at this time, as well as any implementation of these two proposals, could not bp. recommended as part of the current construction project without significantly affecting the progress and cost of this project. KGB Q h Bayshore Bicycle Facility Analysis ." ' ! �,,. . . . ,, . ,: ►. -, ,.an‘. ."�.Middie,Schoo aleir �, ` N , , . s� ., , . � , .e Mid Seach'' �o � 4^ i� sr��gt 5,,�,�_ -Arthur GodfreyRd �. ." �' ! w 3 �y :` ;NSW:. ( i . 141. .'''41�l sr . ..„ '36 ., *i'1�'s J r`----- r 'Talmudic** ..//111'•, +'!'t .*' 11, ,vr ', ,y�`."7-' ;I , go, __,..„ -,. ,....., sr . (..),,,,;,,_ ,,,, %/,3 :. ..-•,! ...ig auseway t95" -► _ _ �.j iVi #trill -',.1 • :•w,., 4 �•- yI , I / �� ��� r. f ' t "�4-6:1711, _ � •,,,. � r� Qt'�38th.Sheet '� .�* a �y N ,* �• " r Palk L • t. ' - • tat• ,6- 40., , .< f. . ' a j o f �' t co -4,........to» lir • ++ ms....*_ • 6.—,.,. L !W•29th.St u` !j 'i IT3' w1 ' u,'‘f'it�. . •r ` i . • : ; "Scott R..ka . 1• "'_ l ----' I1'' YouthcFntrr. • ,•''-o't-7'-''i-f,...'..'.'.....'. .ti 12 . �a� .27th51L t ,r r —. « �' ;'.) i' 1 .0, SUnaBl ri.4.) T,I a it' s a#. ,1a fir• i; 4. 41TELI".14W.24ttiA ' wr', I^' r • ' ..Z" taw. * _ q 6r t j nd ti` ,', �r I1 'j ! #S ' r I r 'P ara / / `-11\ Q*14"4111,/,t ai 2.1 S ;I�� It + �. "a` ,� �O itr, 4 f ;. ,, t Ste,,, ,„, + wr " i Atkins + The Street Collaborative Alternatives Evaluated .....,.. . .4 r1 " , : . ur. ,' , • Keep bike facility on Prairie. ilk►•1�. � ,:......et .• :t ` % u.1 Install bike boulevard on Royal j =P ., -r -s , •` s ` . Palm (in addition to Prairie) •,. i.1,,, ...4. ,,, , ir ..„.., _, .,. t Remove bike lane on Prairie . i, ' ,;.....,.. .,:s -„,:- rir, .. „* .}"' .* _ ?tea:: ,�, � ', ,. A. ��.�... y.. =_ , .. • Alternative treatment on Pra irie , ,,,� r : .•". i . t •.�« I. ti p d ,.. .' ',It ., , ; „- - Proposed Bike Boulevard III 144hty 4,, . .„ c,•••-•..:.4 4. " . ,. �. z , ,� - .' ,� ' Existing Bike Lane it F, 44-. to • P, N. }'.i ,,, $,• .t-A t Existing Bike Path ".,x A c:: ' < ... or , - - Proposed Bike Path 4114 .t•'re ,, i t. 1 . . 1 t 1 :.4— am '. 4 I i— . �A l} F 4,f .. ^yam•«w... Bayshore Bicycle Facili Analysis Prairie Avenue ...„ . C Issues considered: � ir.'� ::: . • Safety — Crash history ......oat! : rt a{�' ' •.4-,a 1 f'1 I. *4::Awl 1- . • ii i ,, 7 44 P '*3 .: lif ra a • , . jw.+ r • Vehicular Volumes •r=' :11 ` -l. 014 t. ,.`it t a..` w. T� # ;s a • Vehicle Speeds / Traffic Calming . 1 1 _ ... _ w. .. 7 i t r IA J : • Connectivity with other bicycle facilities Et.5t, •f, 4 �' ` � `• Community input & concerns � , . - Y . t, • Benefit / Cost Analysis 4 i..• cf !1 t ' rar ' Ao I e. s "") s r L � ' � r• Engineering Judgment �- �� , r.. ._, re' /IS r f, fi Preliminary Observations • Low traffic volumes and speeds on both Praire and Royal Palm (between 28 Street and 41 Street) — Royal Palm = 376.35 ADT, 24.3 MPH — Prairie = 2,207 ADT, 25 .0 MPH • Both connections possible via proposed shared path along Meridian/28 St. • Handlebar survey conducted by our team found bike experience on Prairie had no concerns / issues. ,, ,�,• • Removing bike lanes does not mean y.a.17,1,7„, : `, . .* . removing1,4' t',';.*4 2`41'. ':f*%-f 4! t - 1,1:.4'f;‘ ,L.,., :-. ,- Cr --; 0 . bicycles. . ' x.� `i.IY ` " � : IPf Y : . 7. • Bicycles have every right to travel on • , . „I:4$1, , t5 - , , „!,, 'E- i ttt,y,,kvi .4r -, r r � t public streets including Prairie & Royal Palm �,�n• ,,•rL Ilt •} / 3t r z I /� ,,* ,. .ee •.# r : .�y 1 j f r r'i r ' '� s .• .r,. a, 4'' ~f _± � y, .r/. , •r. ?�i+j' I.•. �.. 4 4eitt PRAIRIE AVENUE BEFORE INSTALLATION OF SPEED CUSHIONS VEHICULAR VOLUME & SPEED SUMMARY (Year 2005) Volume(veh/day) Both Directions 2,858 Average Speed Average 36.3 AFTER INSTALLATION OF SPEED CUSHIONS VEHICULAR VOLUME & SPEED SUMMARY (Year 2009) Volume(veh/day) Both Directions 2207 Average Speed Average 25.0 REDUCTION IN VOLUME: 23% REDUCTION IN SPEED: 31 % Prairie Avenue Existing Roadway Cross-Section Right-of-way Line Right-of-way Line Sidewalk Sidewalk Bike Travel Lanes Bike 5' +/_ Swale Lane Lane Swale 5' +/- 14' 5' 122' ! 5' 14' 70' ROW NOT TO SCALE Bike Lane on Prairie �•: ,,. j ',,;,» r �rG — Pros: a� . — Low volume, low speed street. Ie.: ,.',ill"; .. e. — Bike lane already exists x, � " � r 5,,.., ;,. 1 , _ — Higher visibility 5 `=F1 v- _: i-ial- i- 1 i I — Seamless connection to Prairie bike lane N of 41 St. r. . , ='� 'a' .'' . tit '`- More directconnection with Dade Boulevard path z , '.'...i.- -, • - . .., ,.:., — Cons: ,1.iv: - -� , i — Wider street reduces traffic calming effect. , 41 o,T .4.ce!t-::4ti 1�` . i ;:� , ;; sr ': — Bike lane dead ends at 44 Street. • ;..1X. '•. _? e, .• � t`2, s: tV. t . Removing Bike Lane on Prairie ) .. , 4, ......_,, ,,,,,,.. $ a i — Pros: ,. , �� w , . r ;i 1 r _ .r — Narrow street, traffic calming effect — Closer tree canopy coverage — Cons: — Increases expense of project, project delay — Remove existing link in bike network — Need to justify changing current configuration per regulation — Time constraint • Bike Boulevard on Royal Palm `. . + _ - — Pros: :L..- ,{l I-,},f ► 4 t ,g — Low volume, low speed street. : '` ,' . ��1� . , C PO — No widening necessary. _ ..,.4.4 �,. ., . ' :I.. �y T - Seamless connection to Royal Palm bike lane �' '�' � ,:f.a �: north of 41 street. ', : �` T. i 17 _ s � 1 1� • ..i.t.r. . ,.,...,... r,..t.! 4,: ...,.,:ei, : , , ..,,, . . . f ' , . 1. .v!,,„, '''' g. — Cons. - . . . .., - . _i 4 — Not as visible a route as Prairie. ' , •,./ • — Bike Lane already exists on Prairie. y — Short distance (.6 mi) inconsistent with NACTO gulch ► ' - ; - =� — Less direct connection with Dade Boulevard path. , -,, 1 ., "`�'E-1. � tir • — Cost impacts unknown Bicycle boulevards • Key Characteristics: • Low-stress bikeway network • Best where local streets offer continuous & direct route along low-traffic streets • Should be about 2-5 miles, or the length of a typical urban bicycle trip • Less visible and intuitive than major parallel streets • Bicycle travel has priority on the roadway • 3,000 motor vehicles per day ( 1 ,500 preferred) and no more than 25 mph (20 mph preferred) • Bike route wayfinding and marking system approved by MUTCD • Median or refuge islands for bikeway crossings - Not a traffic control device, so no MUTCD restriction on its use i ' \\T"P 1 , • - A : R w aili.., #"*!.tow,. 1, ..Ji b i� ?� •,tI'�' A J' , .,..a ONLY . i + ' >: , ii�:ri !r •M •, . . f I aw r ` ram ,.. f . .."•Arm...®.. • /�..... i ''''' I ' Alt , tills., ....�F.. _IIOi Portland OR Bicycle bouleva • Main Elements: • Signage • Traffic calming devices along route • Traffic calming at intersections .... -: l't it..-- , . - rA.-1, 44. Y 4. }e "" 4 ... • _ 000. 11001, ... .* Conversion of Royal Palm Avenue to bike boulevard will require: 1 . Traffic study to justify it. 2. Approval by 2/3 of impacted residents or City Commission. 3 . Traffic flow analysis for the entire neighborhood. Signage - O I (AD Bicycle OtBIKE ROUTE Boulevard North to North fp Martin Luther Branding Shore Channel Trail thing Jr Shoreline 0.9 1 ba Coliseum 3.0 r Berkeley, CA Chicago, IL Oakland, CA &ila biti:�1 ots (NO Portland State 04,4 BIKE ROUTE asp u""` `'` f Gresham City Hag Decision © ♦Downtown Gresham ♦ Berkeley F,artt,tCentcy ♦Emerynle a t I. no ►tst 0.5 4 In MacArthurSpriograter Corridor Oakland, CA Concept Portland Metro Cities. OR ©Eoa Coast) 4- dqe Downtown 5 (:50 Turning r F Civic Center +- C Humboldt Park 2 @ 29 Street ` - 1 Concept Chicago, IL MUTCD Wayfinding Signs - every 2 to 3 blocks along bicycle facilities, unless another type of sign is used (e.g . , within 150 ft of a turn or decision sign) . Should be placed soon after turns to confirm destination (s) . Bicycle Boulevards — Signs/Wayfinding ., .., .. . •.. 4. .0 x,.. . • os, , ,. , _. .....,, . ...„. . ... t,,•.o.,,..• ... .x.. . _ . I ar . . .. . ..•?.t• N.•-••. f;II ••P .••• • i, ' • ..••:._. ..14.•••‘'.••1 1*:. r. : .114:41‘' * . .1.:' • . , •, . 1 ,0vt_. . , fr".':. _ .,, , ' ,,el,t• .....*,-,„t V....4,,N, .:-...;. • • /.. \,,,,„ ' *.-• '.'4:4* , • ., • .1.• 1,1 '.. •-. . r: . -• • -r•7.-• ;:.'14 ..vi., , Wive ' . - '• . : ' '' ; ' ''; - t.' ''-'' . '' '77 ' •• mv9 ,4,8.1 ' ..- ,., * -ftivi,'-• t 7 . , I. . . • . . e ,', • . • V. .4, , '•;4' ..: : ** : . , *4. f ,1- • 4... r' o.•1* • — '' Y' ;..: . V'- *. • ' `, - • . 1 . :',' '4: •• '' • •- • 10•/ •I:s.2.' s:- .,- , *.4 .• ':7-'.••,- .' 1 ,,, ,• I -v,•- ,k,- •••• ;,7. ,. .'N'' Psk.,• .:.. :4141 . , _..1, _-t ' 4.. .4.1 .:'4 i 4 Iti -' ii; . ! • /.. . r '••.,'' ,:.: \ ! - ,. •? '; '•,:',,* ...;,•''Ir",,, j*,.‘Ni&-:- I •' • • '. •,-v.. : r 1 fir Al .... ' 1 r ' ' . .', s.41.. '''• 41). 1 .N. t 4...,.. '. . . - it (46,1 se 0 • . 0 _ 4t,...;, x, , .. .. ..-. -lb *It BICYCLE „.,...., ir . %ea,ii,„--.4,,-4140%.• , ---4..,..-........, ' 411F 111W!..36...'41h...........-"1.1* Vokk.••.• lielle. , .... BOULEVARD „ . .. , :. ,.. .,.. . , . . .. . .„ ,\. .... _ ,. .... _ .. ,,,...4 ,,,, ,,, i ' • ..., . t.,• 1 I • .....4.....w , .. • • . • - " . " •"i. . ' --;'' • ;:it , .*J ••• - • . .1 . . .t• ,, ,1 ..--- •••0 `;,* -1 ..k. ,'14 -• :e... ' ' • . 0%,2 7 : i 1, 4 •... ' • k 11110.r. • ' 11: ' WO• .'• 1 .... 4 1 • , 4 . . . • %... • 1 ' .' 1 -,.. ;'..•' 0,..:..'. - .! — 0" : Cdo.. .. ' ' ' .4i"..-;,.-?. :. g • . . , . - . •:,. •-::,,,1:. .... ,..... 711 7141:11.. "' • 0 i elP"'. . ..- `` .... • _ _..• -.. .• i A' - 1 . —_ ..... ".... ..,isil - . ' - — , ...... •-•.'...... ---,..1011Frailler'10 .4 .000er .:..... •••-• boa.- . _•....- -as.. ',..• ., _. .-.. r: L...... —...—.. •, • _ • *lib. "iiir-- i _..,.,':- - •- .,- ' . , .. ....- . ,. . . , . • .. • / irlillik I •, -vv,, . ., Bicycle Boulevards - Median Refuge Islands ..., ,,,.....; i ,. .... ... .... „or- • - I A,... . - . . yipr 'Ak..... o.. i .4 i! .... -_ 1 •114'" .- ! 1!I . .... . •.. is. ,.."...'4.4 ^ --,, .. -r- . --,' ..7' 4'c" • .'' , 1 7 - r• . • — "' z. ..- ' ..‘' - 4 . Ne4. - ' : * .": : ;rt."-?:, 1 — - •', :•—.......„ d' • -aralle. .irrvib..--__ ...mi.., it • . 1111111.1111M1/ ....1116444/444.41*,- , . . I . .i.1 ., „.. ......_ - . 1. •.. '‘. -*,*: .; ,.•.3.-ar.. • ,, • ., 1.• -..,i \ . ...... r i k it...' San,,.,Luis‘ Obispo,CA ,,,,4\14 • .. maps pg.Adam 4utustima . „ ; 1 fig ---,—., Illmalpil II Mill ' I ..44. PH ' 1. • 1 • , - .. •F . i 1111/7. : ,,--,.. .',.,•...' . ik .:-...-:-1.---, I i.... , -•., L7 . ill ii, • , • _ ;.,. • . .,.• .e • \ -. -. ..1--; ! •' -.-- ..*& . ‘ift 1 - ', ;I .... . I l' '--1-717:17""ttJLIIIIIIIII*1- •,. _ .- , ... , ... . .. ,. 01 , . 21 ".' 3'.::'. t \ H 1 11. ' .'i .- 1. i iA -420,,...- ...1.!., 111, 4 '..: j . . ' I I I I I 1111111111111 „,„. ,..., 0 IMINIMIll ......--•-• ... -. . . . -111111111 .— Photo:pedlakalmages.ort Dan Dioa.m Bicycle Bou evar — Intersection Treatments , . ,.. ..,,,,,„,, ,,,, ,.. t , l� x 0'�..� • . t�.7, .,., �,i,.. � ` � ; � . al IL, 111 ' a , I. ,�:... _' y fir-. s r ., ..r, , "�" y_ 1 .04. 4.44:4, ' .i- .' . J I, :- - r XIII . eiri. ._.:,.... , \''�\_"cis„` ' ' .. `,i., OAllow a limited set of O Vertical deflection Wherepossible,provideabicycle O Design emergency vehicle- features should be placed route outside of the element to avoid friendly traffic calming regularly along a corridor bicyclists having to merge into traffic Guidance techniques on emergency to reduce speeds. at a narrow pinchpoint. response routes Speed Management r � ' . , it/JO MI' _ weer ..w ,........_..L41,,,12.1020.6am=10.. III" .....Are/V...A.‘ 1 , - , ---Fill I Viiii . 1 Speed Lump Speed Hump Chicane Medi OSpeed management lO A minimum clear treatments should width of 12 feet be used to reduce the for bi-directional street's target speed travel shall be to 20 mph. maintained. PlailLna' \ ' ' , lir „ ,.. ,,0 ..' 4111111‘1116N.71\ ,,. a r t�'L . '.,1 � wadaltartV t‘li • Vliallt ''. 15111.1111. Median Island Neighborhood Traffic Circle Pinchpoint Neckdown Alternative Treatment : Advisory BikeLane • Key Characteristics: • Bicycle travel shares priority on the roadway • No center striping • 6,000 motor vehicles per day (per MUTCD to remove center line) • An advisory bike lane is marked with a solid white line on the right (next to parked cars) and a dotted line to the left. No center line. t Yield to bikes before ,,,,r, merging into the bike lane Yield Motorists ;� share the gt "` _. . , center lane with oncoming vehicles Advisory Bike Lane • Key Characteristics: • Similar to a regular bike lane, but is used on narrow, low-volume streets. • Experimental facility (pilot in Minneapolis) • 2012 crash data reports no crashes (for bicyclists or motorists), average was previously 10 per year. • It is OK to drive in the advisory lane when a bicycle is not present. • Keeps visibility on main routes ,+ nw� a,,,,or - 7# r fir, r iik'SI . . . •Ir. . �t 1d .T a' • 1l 1 kftlitk i , - 1 -46 •'d' • , _. 4 r ft-0 W. . • '-..r. s P+ m � 0 !"-" Advisory Bike .., •-. ..,- ,..., .... ,.,.: % ;.,......,... .„ . ,.. . .„. . , .... ......... • .... •,,,. . ., .. „, .., ., ,, f , , ., .•• 4 '., ....r• •-- — .t . • i t , • . . - yy - . '-.,- s , .� S_ +A.t .�....�_ "!�� ..+. t' _ _ �„�..•. "IMP' -- .w 74,-:. 1111111111116k' IMP .' .,. .. . , L.,. '',."...* filli, , , , ,, ,, , , ...• 40.: Coe de ,,:.. N40--4,-Y._f'./t.-;- •'4?-'15--•Ar.!!'...'•:-„:„_,.:-..e ) 'I p 4 (., A ff Iii.Pt) r � ,. to - _t ' ` - 44. *. Advisory Bike Lane on Prairie � , l,r f — Pros: "' t.'�. . _ ,,,. ,.1�r f — Low volume, low speed street. 11, . `le t 3 y1. ' I — Bike lane already exists I ,� �.,' �, . -t y — Seamless connection to Prairie bike lane N of 41 St. r, :�' C 4 , FP ,j _:} 1 I — More direct connection with Dade Boulevardpath � " ' ' *r�` x � � t_ '' : + I /7 - Community support for narrow roadway �� ' �,; •1,. t. ; JP , . • „i! ,;:k ,z• . '4V-‘q. r,-. . ,, , . . — Cons: ;; >� w �»,�:; 'l - f •-.• . i,,:iii — Experimental facility — unknown process ' ` '.''"ti ; ,i . w .,j .kT2' f r~* ' t ' it . - Delay in FHWA Approval .rO. *( 1 • , : {h - Bike lane dead ends at 44 Street. -i'•.=— ' - Si nificant cost impact (due to stormwater changes) j 41,4 r'' . IJI g pg ) ,.1 1� ,r r i- hy.. i — Time delay/ Time constraints - - ,'' - ,IfriT "F'y- - Need to justify changing current configuration per regulation The Four Types of Bicyclists 1 Strong and Fearless- 1% Remaining questions/thoughts: • Who is using the bike lane currently? 0 Enthused and Confident 6%411 What is the bicycle volume on Prairie? On Royal Palm? ,14, Interested, But Concerned 60% ;,'� • In order to remove bike lanes off of Prairie, evidence to its ineffectiveness 'CI) ! No Interest 33% is required or that it is unsafe as well as majority approval for community. c Copyright The Street Plans Collaborative,Inc. Atkins + The Street Collaborative EXHIBIT C 8'ft Multi-Purpose Fairgreen Future Connectivity to Future-Connectivity Praire Royal Palm Points Avenue path within Par3 Drive Royal Palm Avenue 12Current _ ,_ , i � bike lanes I\: l': ` t I1h1BM40-1: 41 Connection Point to Raxo. . � ,n Center _ lStre� - Existing 8' Nlesti2 '.+,.:0''" ;,, rt• •ni sidewalk to Future bike b, — * �' Sheridan path IV \* **, ; \ Avenue 4 • \\--•, 4 r rq T 11-41111.4 iyAlogi tb. / i Open Play Area - Y / if, r „--;_ziz.,- --7# , d,„iiii II fThc 1 _ Sdewatk to Scott Route youth Center Parting lax e Co �. �,�.. a. r. �� y A.„„.ve Seer S. ,: • 1 I. 41° .' -4::''''-- -- . ' ° I'.\ lib, ' Ili‘..,._.;._,,,,,p4,:!i'Vf. . ,lip .,‘: ' ‘ i tft. tteL t. 7 y IP. ,_— - lir 0). i' ( sue,,f• -,.. ,..; ,i —__.., i ,...1 "W i'' i,g -"..""'- TIP Cga "!en 11 • r 1\ Possibility of connectivity bike path '_ • ` \ ,.. •' ., within swale area adjacent to Miami x : — Beach high as part of safe routes to ' schools grant.To be further °1 a Alkilik evaluated by the City Engineer. l Proposed Connection Points Par 3/Prairie/28t" Street/ Royal Palm m MIAMIBEACH OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER NO. LTC# 130-2013 LETTER TO COMMISSION TO: Mayor Matti Herrera Bower and Me ers of the C' Commission FROM: Jimmy L. Morales, City Manage , - ----------- DATE: April 16, 2013 SUBJECT: Central Bayshore Neighborhood I rovements - Prairie Avenue—28th to 41 n Street The purpose of this Letter to Commission (LTC)is to address concerns raised by residents during the last weeks as well as during the April 15, 2013 Capital Improvements Project Oversight Committee(CIPOC)meeting with respect to the current width of Prairie Avenue and its current accommodation of bike lanes as well as future accommodation of valley gutters. Summary As a result of discussions over the last two weeks with respect to the current width along Prairie Avenue,and the subsequent impact to green space associated with the installation of valley gutters on both sides of the street, staff is proposing a third alternative which would best balance all competing interests while retaining the current integrity of the roadway width and function, as well as the safe and current compliant use of the bicycle lanes on Prairie Avenue. In order to achieve this alternative, the City would remove the additional four feet of valley gutter and gain an overall credit of approximately$92,000 into the project. By de-programming the installation of valley gutters,the City would have to compensate for the efficient transport of water by suppressing the current grate elevations of the newly installed grates,and installing flumes where necessary. While not being the most favorable means of drainage conveyance, it would resolve the current concern associated with the loss of greenspace. This project continues to include the addition of approximately 400 shade trees. JLM\JMT\FV\DM