technical advisory committee (tac) · 5/16/2018 · establishing speed limits. image result for...

Technical Advisory

Committee (TAC)

August 15, 2018 CareerSource Heartland

Sebring, FL

1) Roll Call

2) Public Comment

3) Approval of Minutes*

May 16, 2018 Meeting

4) FDOT Update

a.US 27 Speed Studyb.SR 31 Extension Alternative Corridor

Evaluation (ACE) Feasibility Study c.SR 70 Corridor Study

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

TRAFFICOPERATIONS


SPEED STUDIESTO DETERMINE THE APPROPRIATE SPEED

LIMIT FOR A LOCATION

ESTABLISHING SPEED LIMITS


TOPICS OF DISCUSSION

• FLORIDA STATUTE 316

• FDOT SPEED ZONING MANUAL

• DATA COLLECTION

• DATA ANALYSIS

• POSTED SPEED LIMIT

• US 27 SPEED STUDY, SEBRING


SECTION 316.006

THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SHALL HAVE ALL ORIGINALJURISDICTION OVER ALL STATE ROADWAYS THROUGHOUT THESTATE.

SECTION 316.187FLORIDA STATUTES REQUIRE AN ENGINEERING AND TRAFFICINVESTIGATION TO BE CONDUCTED FOR ANY ALTERATION OF SPEEDLIMITS. THESE INVESTIGATIONS WOULD INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOTLIMITED TO, THE MEASUREMENTS OF VEHICULAR SPEED AND OTHERTRAFFIC ENGINEERING EVALUATIONS. ALTERED SPEED LIMITSESTABLISHED SOLELY ON THE BASIS OF INDIVIDUAL OR GROUPOPINIONS ARE CONTRARY TO THE INTENT OF THE STATUTE.

LAW: FLORIDA STATUE 316


MANUALS

• THE SPEED ZONINGMANUAL

• MANUAL ON UNIFORMTRAFFIC STUDIES



PURPOSE AND INTENT• THE PRIMARY INTENT IN THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A SPEED ZONE IS TO

PROVIDE IMPROVED VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY BY

REDUCING THE PROBABILITY AND SEVERITY OF CRASHES.

• FDOT ENCOURAGES THE CONSIDERATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF

FACILITIES THAT ARE DESIGNED AND OPERATED TO ENABLE SAFE

ACCESS FOR ALL USERS, INCLUDING PEDESTRIANS, BICYCLISTS,

MOTORISTS AND TRANSIT RIDERS OF ALL AGES AND ABILITIES.



SPEED DATA COLLECTION

THE LOCATION OF A SPEED STUDY IS CHOSEN SO THATSPEEDS REFLECT HOW VEHICLES TYPICALLY TRAVELUNDER FREE FLOW CONDITIONS

PNEUMATIC ROAD TUBES SPEED GUNS


https://www.r-bloggers.com/googleformr-at-work-pneumatic-road-tube-allegory/


SPEED STUDY ANALYSIS

A SPEED STUDY INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING:

• REVIEW OF THE ROAD’S ENVIRONMENT, FEATURES, TRAFFICCHARACTERISTICS AND CRASH HISTORY

• MEASURMENT OF VEHICLE SPEEDS AT ONE OR MORE LOCATIONSALONG THE ROAD UNDER FREE-FLOWING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS

• ANALYSIS OF VEHICLE SPEEDS TO DETERMINE THE 85THPERCENTILE SPEED, 10 MPH PACE AND OTHER CHARACTERISTICS



• THE DEPARTMENT USES THE NATIONALLY ACCEPTED PROCEDURES CALLED85TH PERCENTILE SPEED AND THE UPPER LIMIT OF THE 10 MPH PACE FORESTABLISHING SPEED LIMITS.

• THE SPEED LIMIT IS SET AT THE 85TH PERCENTILE SPEED OR UPPER LIMIT OFTHE 10 MPH PACE, WHICHEVER IS LESS.

• THE SPEED ZONING MANUAL STATES THAT A SPEED LIMIT SHOULD NOTDIFFER FROM THE 85TH PERCENTILE SPEED OR UPPER LIMIT OF THE 10 MPHPACE BY MORE THAN 3 MPH AND IT SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN 8 MPH, UNLESSA SUPPLEMENTAL INVESTIGATION IDENTIFIES THE NEED FOR A CHANGE.

SPEED DATA ANALYSIS



WHAT IS 85th PERCENTILE SPEED?

THE SPEED AT OR BELOW WHICH 85 % OF THE OBSERVED FREE FLOWING VEHICLES ARE TRAVELING

PROCEDURE: DATA ANALYSIS


IN OTHER WORDS…..

85TH

PERCENTILE SPEED

85% TRAVELING AT OR SLOWER

15% TRAVELING FASTER



• STUDIES HISTORICALLY HAVE SHOWN THAT THE OBSERVED 85TH PERCENTILE SPEED GENERALLYREFLECTS THE COLLECTIVE JUDGMENT OF THE VAST MAJORITY OF DRIVERS AS TO A REASONABLESPEED FOR GIVEN TRAFFIC AND ROADWAY CONDITIONS.

• RESEARCH HAS SHOWN THAT VEHICLES TRAVELING BETWEEN THE 50TH AND 90TH PERCENTILE OFSPEED HAVE THE LOWEST RISK OF CRASHING DUE TO SPEED. DRIVERS WHO EXCEED THE 90THPERCENTILE HAVE A SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER RISK OF CRASHING.

• WHEN DRIVERS TRAVEL AT THE SAME SPEED IN THE SAME DIRECTION, EVEN AT HIGH SPEEDS, THEYARE NOT PASSING ONE ANOTHER AND CANNOT COLLIDE AS LONG AS THEY MAINTAIN THE SAMETRAVELLING SPEED. CONVERSELY, WHEN DRIVERS TRAVEL AT DIFFERENT RATES OF SPEED, THEFREQUENCY OF CRASHES INCREASES, ESPECIALLY CRASHES INVOLVING MORE THAN ONE VEHICLE. THEKEY FACTOR IS SPEED VARIANCE. THE GREATER THE SPEED VARIANCE OR THE DISTRIBUTION OF SPEEDSTHE GREATER THE NUMBER OF INTERACTIONS AMONG VEHICLES. THUS, DRIVERS ATTEMPTINGPASSING MANEUVERS DUE TO SPEED VARIANCE INCREASE THE RISK OF HAVING COLLISIONS.

• SETS REALISTIC SPEED LIMITS THAT 85% OF DRIVERS OBEY.

• MEANINGFULLY ENFORCEABLE & LEGALLY DEFENSIBLE.

85TH PERCENTILE SPEED



WHAT IS THE TEN MPH PACE?

THE 10 MPH PACE IS THE 10 MPH RANGECONTAINING THE HIGHEST NUMBER OF SUCHVEHICLES CONTAINED IN THE STUDY SAMPLEDATA



TEN MPH PACE ……..

< 52 mph 52 - 61 mph > 61 mph



REVIEW:

• FLORIDA STATUTES SET MAXIMUM SPEED LIMITS.

• DRIVERS SET THEIR OWN SPEED BASED ON CURRENT ROADWAY CONDITIONS.

• DRIVER’S WILL NOT OBEY ARBITRARILY SET (LOW) SPEED LIMITS.

• SPEED DIFFERENTIALS CONTRIBUTE TO CRASHES. INDIVIDUAL SPEEDS AT THE 85TH PERCENTILE LEVEL ARE BY DEFINITION THE SAFES SPEED FOR TRAVEL.


US 27 SPEED STUDY SEBRINGFROM US 98 TO POLK COUNTY LINE


US 27 SPEED LIMIT QUESTIONS

A COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT SITUATIONS.


MOORE HAVEN

• SIDEWALK

• CURB AND GUTTER

• ROW MOSTLY AT BACKOF SIDEWALK

• 7’ MEDIAN IN 35MPHAREA

MOORE HAVEN


MOORE HAVEN (LOOKING EAST)


MOORE HAVEN (LOOKING WEST)


MOORE HAVEN SPEED LIMITS


Clewiston

• NO MEDIAN – 5 LANE SECTION

• CURB AND GUTTER WITH SIDEWALK APPROX. 21’ FROM TRAVEL LANE TO ROW FLARED TURNOUTS AND NO TURN LANES

CLEWISTON


CLEWISTON (LOOKING EAST)


CLEWISTON (LOOKING WEST)


CLEWISTON SPEED LIMITS


AVON PARK

AVON PARK

• VERY LITTLE 14’ MEDIAN,MOSTLY LEFT TURN LANESWITH 4’ SEPARATOR

• WIDER MEDIAN LEADING INTO CITY CURB AND GUTTER WITH SIDEWALK APPROX. 13’ FROM TRAVEL LANE TO ROW FEW RIGHT TURN LANES


AVON PARK (LOOKING NORTH)


AVON PARK (LOOKING SOUTH)


AVON PARK SPEED LIMITS


SOUTH BAY

SOUTH BAY

• VERY LITTLE 14’ MEDIAN,MOSTLY LEFT TURN LANESWITH 4’ SEPARATOR

• WIDER MEDIAN LEADING INTO CITY CURB AND GUTTER WITH SIDEWALK APPROX. 15’ FROM TRAVEL LANE TO ROW FEW RIGHT TURN LANES


SOUTH BAY (LOOKING NORTH)


SOUTH BAY (LOOKING SOUTH)


SEBRING

SEBRING

• 20-50’ FROM EDGE OF TRAVEL WAY TO ROW

• 6 LANES WITH 5’ SHOULDER

• FLUSH SHOULDERS

• NO SIDEWALK

• DESIGNED AND BUILT AS SIS/TRUCK ROUTE

• CONSISTENT WIDE MEDIANS (APPROX. 28’)

• REGULAR TURN LANES


SEBRING (LOOKING NORTH)


SEBRING (LOOKING SOUTH)


SEBRING SPEED LIMITS


THANK YOU

HRTPO PresentationAugust/September 2018

District One FPID No. 431298-1-22-01 ETDM No. 14316 1

• Northeast quadrant of the US 17 intersection with SR 70, just northeast of downtown Arcadia

• SR 31 is an urban minor arterial with two 12-foot travel lanes and 21% trucks (1450 per day)

• The posted speed limit on SR 31, near its intersection with SR 70, is 45 mph

• No bicycle or pedestrian facilities are present in this portion of the study area

2

Study Area

Purpose and Need

• Support the economic development goals of northeast Arcadia

• Improve traffic operations

• Improve safety conditions in downtown Arcadia

• Improve transportation network connectivity

• Enhance multi-modal mobility

3 3

• Ten corridors evaluated east of

Arcadia from SR 70 to US 17

• Corridors are between 2.5 and 5

miles long

• Connections to US 17 are

between Fiveash Street and

Moore Avenue

4

Alternative Corridors Studied

5

Evaluation Criteria

• Satisfies Purpose and Need

• Receives Public and Stakeholder Support

• Minimizes Potential Environmental Impacts

• Demonstrates Engineering Feasibility

• Minimizes Costs

• DeSoto County

• City of Arcadia

• Heartland Regional TPO

• Arcadia Crossing

• Arcadia Village

• Big Tree RV Resort

• Walmart

• Publix

• Stevenson Family

• Turner Family

• Arcadia Rodeo Association

• Redlands Christian Migrant

Association (RCMA)

6

Stakeholder Coordination Efforts

• All Florida Championship Rodeo• March 10, 2018

• Project booth beside main entrance

• Arcadia Mosaic Arena

• 7,501 visitors on Saturday (24,249 total)

• 561 contestants, 62 vendors, and 40 volunteers total

• Positive reaction from the public

• Majority of public commentswere in support of Corridor J

7

Community Engagement

Thursday, October 4th, 2018

5 p.m. to 7 p.m.

Turner Agri-Civic Center

Exhibition Hall

2250 NE Roan Street, Arcadia, Florida 34266

Project website

www.swflroads.com/sr31extension/sr70tous17

8

Corridor Public Information Meeting

• 1,279 newsletters mailed

• Residents/tenants/property owners

• Consideration given to seasonal residents

9

Public Meeting Outreach

• Hold Public Information Meeting on October 4th, 2018

• Finalize Alternative Corridor Evaluation Report (ACER) based on public input and add recommended corridors

• Publish ETDM Planning Screen Summary Report with ACER

• Approval of final ACER and ETDM Planning Screen Summary Report

• Transition into PD&E Study phase early 2019

10

Next Steps

presented to

presented by

SR 70 Multimodal Corridor

HRTPO

Central Office

SR 70 Corridor

Limits» From I-75 to I-95

Counties» Manatee» De Soto» Highlands» Okeechobee» St. Lucie

Approximately 140 miles

Existing Conditions Data Study

SR 70 Facility Data

Typical Sections

» Lanes

» Urban/Rural

» AADT

» LOS – Tables

» ROW

Roadway Structures

» Horizontal Clearances

» Vertical Clearances

» Embankment

Safety/Crash Data

Evacuation Routes

Rail Road Crossings

Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities

Major Utilities

Drainage Structures

» Water Body

» Structure Size

» Flow Direction

» WBID

Potential Truck Stop/Rest Areas

Grade Separation Opportunities

Roadway Characteristics

4

Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities

5

Crash Data

6

Crash Data

7

DISCUSSION

8

5) 2045 Strategic Intermodal

System (SIS) Plan Overview

Page 7

What is a Strategic Intermodal

System?

• Established in 2003

• Florida’s highest priority of transportation hubs,

corridors, and connectors

• Primary focus for implementing the Florida

Transportation Plan

• Focus on moving people and freight

▪ Between Florida and other states and nations

▪ Between regions of Florida

• Re-evaluated every 3 years

SIS Facilities

US 17 US 27

US 441 SR 29

SR 31 SR 64

SR 70 SR 80

SR 82 SR 710

Strategic Intermodal System (SIS)

Cost Feasible Plan

• Evaluates SIS needs in light of revenues

• Represents a phased plan for capacity

improvements to the SIS

• Utilizes forecasted revenues

• Guided by objectives in the Florida

Transportation Plan (FTP)

• 16 year planning timeframe (FY 2029-2045)

• Divided into 3 funding bands

SIS Designation Criteria Update

2045 SIS Long Range Cost

Feasible Plan (Page 11)

Strategic Growth Criteria

• Must meet one of the following:

▪ Meet SIS minimum activity levels within 3 years of

designation

▪ Determined to be of compelling state interest

• Must meet all of the following:

▪ Have a current master plan and prioritized list of ready

projects

▪ Identified within local government comprehensive plan,

long range transportation plan, comprehensive

economic development strategy, transit development

plan

▪ Have partner and public consensus

▪ Meet community and environment screening criteria

Proposed Changes to Rail

Corridor Designation

14

Rail Corridors Existing Designation Proposed Designation

CSX Transportation, Osceola County Line to Hillsborough County

LineSIS SIS

CSX Transportation, CSX Transportation Line (Lakeland) to Pasco

County LineSIS SIS

CSX Transportation, CSX Transportation Line (Lakeland) to Arcadia SIS SIS

CSX Transportation, CSX Transportation Line (Lakeland) to Palm

Beach CountySIS SIS

CSX Transportation, CSX Transportation Line (Bartow) to South

Polk CountyNot Designated SIS

CSX Transportation, Bradenton to Oneco Not Designated SIS

Seminole Gulf Railway, CSX Transportation Line (Oneco) to

SarasotaNot Designated Strategic Growth

Seminole Gulf Railway, Arcadia to Estero Emerging SIS Strategic Growth

South Central Florida Express, CSX Transportation Line (Sebring) to

Palm Beach County LineEmerging SIS Strategic Growth

CSX Transportation, CSX Transportation Line (West Bartow) to CR

555 SIS Not Designated

CSX Transportation, CSX Transportation Line (Bradley Junction) to

Hooker’s Prairie Mine Rd.Emerging SIS Not Designated

15

Pro

po

sed

SIS

Rail

Co

rrid

ors

-D

RA

FT

Proposed Waterway Corridor

Designation

16

Waterways Existing Designation Proposed Designation

Inland

Okeechobee Waterway Emerging SIS Not Designated

Projects ContinuingRoadway From To Improvement

SR 29 Cowboy Way (CR 80A) Whidden Rd 2 Lanes to 4 Lanes

SR 29 Spencer (F Rd) North of Cowboy Way 2 lanes to 4 lanes

SR 29 CR 832 (Keri Rd) Spencer (F Rd) 2 Lane to 4 Lane

SR 29 Collier / Hendry C/L CR 832 (Keri Rd) 2 Lane to 4 Lane

SR 70 Manatee / DeSoto C/L Jefferson Ave (Arcadia) 2 to 4 Lanes

SR 70 Singletary Rd / DeSoto C/L American Legion Dr (Arcadia) 2 Lane to 4 Lane

SR 70 SR 72 West of Peace River 2 Lane to 4 Lane

SR 70 American Legion Dr (Arcadia) Jefferson Ave (Arcadia) 2 Lane to 4 Lane

SR 70 CR 29 US 98 (Eagle Bay Dr) 2 Lane to 4 Lane

SR 70 Jefferson Ave CR 29 2 Lane to 4 Lane

SR 70 CR 29 Highlands / Okeechobee C/L 2 to 4 Lanes

SR 710 East of L-63 Canal Sherman Wood Ranches 2 Lane to 4 Lane

SR 710 Sherman Wood Ranches Martin / Okeechobee C/L - CR 714 2 Lane to 4 Lane

SR 710 US 441 L-63 Canal New Road

Project AdditionsRoadway From To Improvement

SR 64 US 17 SR 636 2 Lanes to 4 Lanes

SR 64 Hardee / Highlands C/L US 27 2 lanes to 4 lanes

SR 64 Old Town Creek Rd Hardee / Highlands C/L 2 lanes to 4 lanes

SR 70 East of SR 31 Jefferson Ave 2 lanes to 4 lanes

SR 70 Lonesome Island Rd NW 38 Ter 2 Lane to 4 Lane

SR 70 CR 760 DeSoto / Highlands C/L 2 Lane to 4 Lane

US 17 SR 70 Hickory St Highway Capacity

US 17 Hickory St DeSoto ave Highway Capacity

US 27 South of Skipper Rd US 98 4* lane to 6 lanes

US 27 Glades / Highlands C/L SR 70 4* lane to 6 lanes

US 27 Hendry / Palm Beach C/L SR 80 Freight Capacity

US 98 /

US 441 18th Ter 38 Ave 2 Lane to 4 Lane

Project DeletionsRoadway From To Improvement

SR 29 SR 78 US 27 2 Lane to 4 Lane

SR 29 Bermont Rd (CR 74) US 27 2 Lane to 4 Lane

SR 29 Whidden Rd (CR 731) Bermont Rd (CR 74) 2 Lane to 4 Lane

Public Comment Period

Public Comment Survey is available online at:

http://www.fdot.gov/planning/systems/SISPublicComment.htm

FDOT will be collecting public and partner comments through

August 30, 2018

20

http://www.fdot.gov/planning/systems/SISPublicComment.htm

6) Heartland Rural Mobility Plan

Update

Page 13

Heartland Rural Mobility Plan Update

HRTPO Technical CommitteeSebring - August 15, 2018

Presentation Agenda

1. Overview of Original 2009 Heartland Rural Mobility Plan (HRMP)

2. HRMP Update Process◦ A. HRTPO Mobility Advisory Committee (MAC)

◦ B. Review Original Recommendations◦ C. Update Socio-Economic Data◦ D. Detail Mobility Options◦ D. Update Plan Analysis◦ E. Develop Priorities and Strategies

3. Heartland Rural Mobility Plan (HRMP) Update◦ A. Mobility Management and Coordination

◦ B. Mobility Service Concept Priorities◦ C. Funding◦ D. HRMP Implementation Strategies

Heartland Rural Mobility Plan Update

HRMP Planning Process

Strategies

• HRTPO Process / Procedures

• Regional Mobility Management

• TD / CTC Structure

Goals

Service Concepts

• Previous HRMP Corridors

• Previous HRMP Circulators

• Coordination with TDP

• Focus on Mobility Management

Technical / SCOT

Assessment

• Strengths

• Challenges

• Opportunities

• Threats

• Service Types / Market

• New Technologies

Data & Analysis

•Updated Socio-Economic

•Updated Commuter Data

• Internal / External Regional Trips

1) To Maintain A Pronounced Mobility Management Approach In Coordinating Rural Transportation Services Emphasizing Customer Characteristics, Needs And Communication Outreach.

2) To Support An On-Going Coordination Of Rural Public Transportation Planning To Maintain and Enhance Mobility Services

3) Establish A Rural Public Transportation Project Development Program Utilizing Service Concepts In The HRMP

4) Develop a Technical Assistance and Project Management Program for Rural Transportation Services Maintenance and Implementation

HRMP Strategies

Demographics: Population

-3.0%

-2.0%

-1.0%

0.0%

1.0%

2.0%

3.0%

4.0%

5.0%

6.0%

DeSoto Glades Hardee Hendry Highlands Okeechobee

Percent Population Change

In the past five years, the overall trend of growth has slowed with several counties losing population since 2010 and only Glades and DeSoto County experiencing population growth since 2010. In spite of this recent trend, analysis by BERB predicts a 16.7% growth with nearly 60,000 more people to over 400,000.

5

Senior Population Growth

6

Income

County Name Median Inc 2015 Median Inc 2010 Change Percent Change

DeSoto County 35,165$ 35,979$ (814)$ -2.3%

Glades County 34,877$ 39,429$ (4,552)$ -11.5%

Hardee County 35,457$ 37,466$ (2,009)$ -5.4%

Hendry County 36,771$ 37,298$ (527)$ -1.4%

Highlands County 35,093$ 34,946$ 147$ 0.4%

Okeechobee County 35,405$ 38,339$ (2,934)$ -7.7%

County Name2015 Percent Pop

Below Poverty

2012 Percent Pop

Below Poverty

DeSoto County 30.6% 26.8%

Glades County 20.2% 25.3%

Hardee County 27.4% 29.7%

Hendry County 26.4% 28.7%

Highlands County 19.4% 19.0%

Okeechobee County 27.7% 27.2%

Existing Mobility Services

▪ Transportation Disadvantaged Services

▪ Transportation Disadvantaged Service Plans

▪ Community Transportation Coordinators (CTCs)

▪ DeSoto-Arcadia Regional Transit (DART) Flex Route Service

▪ ClewBelle Community Bus Route

▪ Commuter Assistance

▪ Inter-County / Inter-Region Services

▪ Health, Education and Other Programs

Regional Mobility Management Alignment

Heartland Mobility Management

FDOT Federal and State Transit Programs

FTA 5310, 5311, Discretionary

grants, Etc.

Commuter Assistance Program

HRTPO Planning Process

Urban and Rural Synergy

CTC Services and

Coordination

CTD Trips & Equipment

Social Service and Health Programs

Florida Dept. Health

Dept. Elderly Affairs

Family & Children Services

Private Sector / Technology

Services

TNC’s

Ridesharing

Mobility Management Support

Mobility management

▪ Encourages innovation and flexibility to reach the "right fit" solution for customers

▪ Plans for sustainability

▪ Strives for easy information and referral to assist customers in learning about and using services

▪ Continually incorporates customer feedback as services are evaluated and adjusted

Mobility management is an approach to designing and delivering transportation services that starts and ends with the customer. It begins with a community vision in which the entire transportation network—public transit, private operators, cycling and walking, volunteer drivers, and others—works together with customers, planners, and stakeholders to deliver the transportation options that best meet the community's needs.

Coordinated System

✓ CTD Funded Service

✓ FTA / FDOT Capital and Operating

✓ Social Service Programs

✓ Health Care Services

✓ Local Government Services

✓ Private Sector Partnerships

✓ Commuter Assistance Program

✓ Mobility Management / MaaS Services

✓ CFRPC/HRTPO Coordination / Technical Support

Heartland Rural Mobility Coordinated System Plus

Funding

➢ Mobility Management – FDOT / CFRPC

➢ Regional Commuter Assistance Program (FDOT)

➢ Coordinated System (CTCs)➢Human Services➢TD Trip and Equipment Grants

➢ FTA / FDOT Grant Programs➢5307 - Urban➢5310 - Seniors / Persons with Disabilities➢5311 - Rural➢5339 – Bus / Facilities➢State Block Grant➢State Corridor Grants➢Service Development➢Discretionary Grants

➢Local Funding

➢Private Sector Services / TNC

➢Volunteer / In-Kind Services

Comprehensive Coordination of existing resources and queue of needs for discretionary and new initiatives funding

12

Strategy 1: To Maintain A Pronounced Mobility Management Approach In Coordinating Rural Transportation Services Emphasizing Customer Characteristics, Needs And Communication Outreach.

▪ Operating transportation brokerages to coordinate service providers, funding resources, and customer needs;

▪ Coordinating transportation services for older adults, individuals with disabilities, and individuals with low incomes;

▪ Supporting local partnerships that coordinate transportation services;

▪ Staffing for the development and implementation of coordination plans;

▪ Providing travel training and trip planning activities for customers;

▪ Developing and operating traveler call centers to coordinate travel information, manage eligibility requirements, and arrange customer travel; and

▪ Planning and implementing the acquisition and purchase of intelligent transportation technologies to operate a coordinated system

Strategy 2: To Support An On-Going Coordination Of Rural Public Transportation Planning To Maintain and Enhance Mobility Services

➢Urban / Rural Transportation Planning Coordination

➢Alignment of Service Planning TDP/TDSP/Grant Opportunities

➢Mobility Management / Commuter Assistance Functions

14

Strategy 3: Establish A Rural Public Transportation Project Development Program Utilizing Service Concepts In The HRMP

HRMPM Service Concepts

•Customer Market

•Service Type

•Mobility Management

Rural Transportation Improvement

Program

•Technical Analysis

•Operational Plan

Project Proposals

• Grants

• Regional / Local Initiatives

15

Strategy 4: Develop a Technical Assistance and Project Management Program for Rural Transportation Services Maintenance and Implementation

Project Management

FDOT

HRTPO

Service Providers

Public Participation

Local Agencies

CTCs

Discussion: Executive Report / Plan Endorsement

I. Background and Purpose

II. Original HRMP Recap

III. Socio-Economic Data

IV. Existing Services

V. Update Plan Analysis

VI. Priorities and Strategies

17

Next Steps – Project Schedule

Refine Concepts / Draft Update

MAC II

MAC III

HRTPO Committees

HRTPO Endorsement

Complete by Early June

Late June

TAC => Wednesday, August 15th

CAC => Thursday, August 23rd

TPO Endorsement => Wednesday, September 19th

MAC III Endorsement – August 9th

18

Consideration for Endorsement

▪ Rob Gregg [email protected]

▪ Jay Goodwill [email protected]

▪ Martin Catala [email protected]

▪ Mitch Spicer [email protected]

▪ Paul Simmons, Modal Development Administrator, District One: [email protected]

▪ Michelle Peronto, Transit Programs Administrator, District One: [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]




