NATIONAL KEY DEER REFUGE

TRANSPORTATION STUDY

Transportation Study Report

Contract No: DTFH71-09-D-00001, Task Order: 10-009

Kimley-Horn

and Associates, Inc.

July 2011

US Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division

in cooperation with US Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Key Deer Refuge
NationalKeyDeerRefuge

TransportationStudyReport

ContractNo.DTFH7109D00001

TaskOrder10009

U.S.DepartmentofTransportation,

FederalHighwayAdministration,

EasternFederalLandsHighwayDivision

incooperationwiththeU.S.FishandWildlifeService

andtheNationalKeyDeerRefuge

July2011TableofContents

ExecutiveSummary.......................................................................................................................................1

1.Introduction..........................................................................................................................................4

1.1USFWSMissionandGoals.............................................................................................................4

1.2ProjectLocation............................................................................................................................5

1.3ProjectBackgroundandPurpose..................................................................................................5

1.4OverviewofTransportationStudy................................................................................................9

2.PublicInvolvement.............................................................................................................................10

2.1StakeholderandPublicMeetings...............................................................................................10

3.ExistingConditions..............................................................................................................................12

3.1RefugeHistory.............................................................................................................................12

3.2RegionalLocation........................................................................................................................12

3.3EntrancestotheRefuge..............................................................................................................12

3.4RefugeVisitorsCenter................................................................................................................13

3.5WaterTransportationAccess......................................................................................................14

3.6Refuge’sMajorPointsofInterest...............................................................................................14

3.7VisitationSummaryandProfile..................................................................................................14

4.TrafficNeedsandSafety.....................................................................................................................17

4.1RegionalRoadwayInfrastructure...............................................................................................17

4.2ParkingAreas..............................................................................................................................22

4.3RegionalTrafficVolumeSummary..............................................................................................23

4.4CrashSummary...........................................................................................................................23

4.5FutureLandUse..........................................................................................................................25

4.6PlannedAreaTransportationImprovementProjects.................................................................27

4.7FKOHTUserVolumeSummary...................................................................................................27

5.CommunityandEnvironment.............................................................................................................29

5.1CommunityFeatures...................................................................................................................29

5.2DemographicProfileofStudyArea.............................................................................................315.3EnvironmentalJusticeImpacts...................................................................................................32

5.4AirQuality...................................................................................................................................34

5.5Habitat.........................................................................................................................................34

5.6Floodplains..................................................................................................................................54

5.7CulturalResources......................................................................................................................55

6.AlternativesAnalysis...........................................................................................................................56

6.1PreliminaryAlternatives..............................................................................................................56

6.2ScreeningCriteria........................................................................................................................60

6.3PreliminaryCandidateAlternatives............................................................................................60

6.4ShortandLongRangeImplementationPlanAlternatives..........................................................62

6.5AdditionalRecommendations(NonroadwayImprovements)...................................................73

7.PreliminaryImpactScreening.............................................................................................................77

7.1SummaryofScreening................................................................................................................77

7.2PotentialImpactstoExistingConditions....................................................................................77

7.3PotentialImpactsforAlternatives..............................................................................................81

8.ImplementationPriorities...................................................................................................................85

9.ListofPreparers..................................................................................................................................88

Appendices

AppendixA:SupportingDocumentationandReferences

AppendixB:PublicInvolvementPlan

AppendixC:StakeholderMeetingNotes

AppendixD:SupportingDataTables

AppendixE:ConstructionCostEstimatesListofTables

Table3.1:NKDRVisitationSummary.........................................................................................................16

Table4.1:BridgeSufficiencySummary.......................................................................................................21

Table4.2:HistoricalDailyTrafficVolumesforStudyAreaRoadways........................................................23

Table4.3:RefugeAreaRoadwaysCrashSummarybyYear......................................................................27

Table4.4:FDOTWorkProgramSummary.................................................................................................27

Table4.5:FKOHTUserVolumeSummary...................................................................................................28

Table5.1:CommunityFeatures..................................................................................................................29

Table5.2:EstimatesofPopulationinMonroeCounty:April1,2008........................................................31

Table5.3:PovertyLevelinStudyareaandSelectMunicipalities...............................................................32

Table5.4:MedianHouseholdIncomeintheStudyAreaandSelectMunicipalities(indollars)................33

Table5.5:IndividualsbyRaceintheStudyAreaandSelectMunicipalities...............................................33

Table5.6:StateandFederallylistedspecies..............................................................................................40

Table5.7:FEMAMapPanels......................................................................................................................54

Table6.1:ProposedStakeholderResponsibilities.....................................................................................57

Table6.2:Alternative2cRoadwaySegmentPriorityList...........................................................................69

Table7.1:ImpactSummary.......................................................................................................................78ListofFigures

Figure1.1:OverallSiteLocationMapfortheNationalKeyDeerRefuge....................................................6

Figure1.2:LocationMapoftheNationalKeyDeerRefuge.........................................................................7

Figure2.1:October13,2010StakeholderKickoffMeeting.......................................................................10

Figure2.2:April7,2011PublicMeeting....................................................................................................11

Figure3.1:VisitorSignageatNKDR...........................................................................................................12

Figure3.2:WayfindingSignsattheintersectionofUS1andKeyDeerBoulevard...................................13

Figure3.3:ExistingVisitorsCenter............................................................................................................13

Figure3.4:FutureSiteofNewRefugeVisitorsCenteronUS1.................................................................14

Figure3.5:BlueHoleInterpretiveSite.......................................................................................................14

Figure3.6:JackWatsonNatureTrail.........................................................................................................14

Figure3.7:FredMannilloNatureTrail.......................................................................................................14

Figure4.1:SectionofKeyDeerFencingonUS1.......................................................................................18

Figure4.2:ExampleofKeyDeerUnderpass..............................................................................................18

Figure4.3:ExampleofKeyDeerGratesinFencedAreas..........................................................................18

Figure4.4:KeyDeerBoulevardnearSouthStreet....................................................................................19

Figure4.5:KeyDeerBoulevardSharedUsePathwayAdjacenttotheTravelLane..................................19

Figure4.6:WatsonBoulevardneartheNKDRAdministrativeoffices,westofKeyDeerBoulevard........20

Figure4.7:BlueHoleInterpretiveSiteParkingArea.................................................................................22

Figure4.8:GravelShoulderatWatsonBoulevardTerminusonNoNameKey.........................................22

Figure4.9:US1CrashSummarybyType..................................................................................................24

Figure4.10:FutureLandUseMap.............................................................................................................26

Figure5.1:CommunityServicesandPotential4(f)Resources..................................................................30

Figure5.2:NWIMap..................................................................................................................................36

Figure5.3:PinelandsafterRecentControlledBurn..................................................................................36Figure5.4:SaltMarshandButtonwood....................................................................................................38

Figure5.5:USFWSFocusAreaforKeyDeer..............................................................................................43

Figure5.6:USFWSFocusAreaforLowerKeysMarshRabbit....................................................................44

Figure5.7:USFWSFocusAreaforSilverRiceRat......................................................................................47

Figure5.8:USFWSFocusAreaforEasternIndigoSnake...........................................................................49

Figure5.9:HCPTierSystem.......................................................................................................................50

Figure5.10:KeyDeerMortalityandAverageDeerCount:19662010...................................................53

Figure6.1:MapofPreliminaryAlternatives..............................................................................................61

Figure6.2:ReconfigureParkingAreaatBlueHoleInterpretiveSite.........................................................64

Figure6.3:CreateMidBlockCrosswalkatBlueHoleInterpretiveSite.....................................................65

Figure6.4:SharrowStripingExample........................................................................................................66

Figure6.5:ExampleCrossSectionforRecommendedFacilityUpgrade...................................................67

Figure6.6:Alternative2cPotentialSegments...........................................................................................68

Figure6.7:ExtendSharedUsePathandAddShoulderonKeyDeerBoulevard.......................................70

Figure6.8:WidenExistingSharedUsePathonKeyDeerBoulevard........................................................71

Figure6.9:WidenSharedUsePathwayandSeparatefromKeyDeerBoulevard.....................................72

Figure6.10:SightDistanceTriangeExampleatNatureTrailEntrance/Exit..............................................74NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport1

ExecutiveSummary

TheFloridaKeysNationalWildlifeRefugesComplexisachainoffourNationalWildlifeRefuges(NWRs)

inMonroeCounty,Florida.ThisplanfocusesontheNationalKeyDeerRefuge(NKDR).TheNKDR

encompassesaseriesofislandswithintheLowerKeysthatincludeNoNameKey,BigPineKey,Little

TorchKey,RamrodKey,SummerlandKey,CudjoeKey,andSugarloafKey.Itistheprimaryhabitatfor

numerousfederallyendangeredorthreatenedspeciesincludingtheLowerKeysMarshRabbit,theSilver

RiceRat,andthewidelyrecognizedKeyDeer.TheRefuge’sapprovedacquisitionboundaryencompasses

over84,000acresoflandsandwaterswithnearly9,200acresoflandownedormanagedbytheUSFish

andWildlifeService(USFWS)oftheUSDepartmentoftheInterior.

TheTransportationStudyReportreviewedthesurroundingroadwaysandparkingareasoftheNational

KeyDeerRefuge(NKDR)andprovidesshort,medium,andlongrangerecommendationsforthe

improvementstotheexistingmultimodaltransportationsystem.Thestudyincludeddevelopmentofa

publicinvolvementplan,inventoryofexistingconditionsattheRefuge,andidentificationoftraffic

safetyandaccessneedsfortheRefuge.Basedonthesereports,preliminarycandidatealternativeswere

developedandresponsiblestakeholderpartnerswereidentified.Thepreliminarycandidatealternatives

weredividedintopotentialroadwayimprovementsandadditionalrecommendationsforinitial

screening.Theroadwayalternativeswerethenevaluatedinfurtherdetailtodeterminethepreferred

alternativesanddevelopedintoashort,medium,andlongrangeimplementationplan.The

implementationplanpresentedhereinincludesasummaryoftheenvironmental,social,andfinancial

impactsoftheconceptualroadwayalternatives.Additionaldetailedinformationontheplanningprocess

isprovidedinthisreport.

Basedontheresultsofthestudy,short,mediumandlongrangetransportationroadway

recommendationsfortheNKDRincludethefollowing:

ShortRange(2015)

Alternative1.ReconfigureBlueHoleInterpretiveSiteparkinglotwithdefinedentrancesandexits

Alternative2a.StripeandsignamidblockpedestriancrosswalkacrossKeyDeerBoulevardattheBlue

HoleInterpretiveSitefromtheexistingsharedpathwayonKeyDeerBoulevard

Alternative2b.Stripesharrows(sharedlanemarkingsforbicycles)onWatsonBoulevardfromKeyDeer

BoulevardtoAvenueB,WatsonBoulevardonNoNameKey,WatsonBoulevardfromKeyDeer

Boulevardtothewesternterminus,alongBigPineStreet,andalongKoehnAvenue

MediumRange(2020)/LongRange(2030)

Asidentifiedduringtheprojectprocess,Alternatives2c,3,and4haveimpactstotheenvironmentthat

maynotbeconsideredacceptabletothecommunity.UsingthediscussioninSection7andTable7.1as

aguide,theimplementationoftheremainingconsultantroadwayimprovementalternativesshouldbe

carefullyassessedagainstallpotentialphysicalimpactsandpublicconcerns,withadeterminationbyNationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport2

theRefugeandotherUSFWSstaffastowhetherornottheimplementationofthealternativesshould

moveforward.

Alternative2c.Thefollowingprioritieshavebeendevelopedforimprovementsto

bicycle/pedestrian/shoulderfacilitiesproposedinAlternative2:

Upgradeshoulder/widenWatsonBoulevardtostandardwidthfromKeyDeerBoulevardto

AvenueB

Upgradeshoulder/widenWatsonBoulevardtostandardwidthfromNoNameKeybridgeto

easternterminus

Upgradeshoulder/widenWatsonBoulevardtostandardwidthfromKeyDeerBoulevardtothe

westernterminus

UpgradeshoulderonKeyDeerBoulevardfromWatsonBoulevardtoBigPineStreet

UpgradeshoulderonKeyDeerBoulevardfromBigPineStreettoKyleBoulevard

Upgradeshoulder/widenentirelengthofBigPineStreettostandardwidth

Upgradeshoulder/widenentirelengthofKoehnAvenuetostandardwidth

Alternative3.ExtendthesharedpathwayonKeyDeerBoulevardtothenorthernterminusofKeyDeer

Boulevard(approximately0.25miles)andimprovetheshoulderfacilitiesonKeyDeerBoulevardinthat

area

Alternative4.WidenthesharedpathwayonKeyDeerBoulevardfromeighttotenfeettoallowfortwo

waybicycleandpedestriantraffic.Thisactionwouldimprovethesafetyofthepathforbothusers.An

associatedalternativemightconsidertherealignmentofthesectionsadjacenttothevehicletraveled

way.

Thenonroadwayimprovementstobeimplementedastimeandmoniespermitinclude:

Alternative5.Trimvegetationatpulloutsandintersectionstoincreasesightdistanceswhereneeded

(i.e.KeyDeerBoulevard)

Alternative6.Performroutinetrimmingofvegetationaroundsignsforvisibility

Alternative7.ReviewMonroeCounty’sUS1signinventorysignstudyandimplementsign

improvements

Alternative8.Onceconstructed,thenewVisitorsCentershouldtieintoexistingbicycleandpedestrian

facilitiesalreadyinplaceonUS1andalsopotentiallythebacksideoftheproperty

Alternative9.PurchasearadarspeedchecktrailertonotifydriversoftheirtravelspeedonCounty

roadswithintheRefugeareaNationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport3

Alternative10.PerformtrafficcalmingstudiesonkeyroadwaysaroundtheRefugetodetermineif

trafficcalmingmeasuresareappropriatetohelpreducevehiclespeeds

Alternative11.Incoordinationwithalocalvendor,implementabikerentalstationatthenewVisitors

CenterforRefugevisitors

Alternative12.UpgradeallexistingUSFWSRefugesignageforconformancewiththeManualon

UniformTrafficControlDevices(MUTCD)criteriaforstandardlettering,textmessage,signcolor,size

andplacement

Alternative13.SurveyRefugevisitorsattheexistingVisitorsCenterandtheBlueHoleInterpretiveSite

ontheirtripcharacteristicstodevelopvisitorpassbyinformation

Alternative14.InstallakioskatthenewVisitorsCenterwheremultipleentitiescouldprovide

informationtoreducesignageneeds

Alternative15.Update,add,relocate,replaceorremove,asappropriate,KeyDeerWarningSignsonUS

1throughentireKeyDeerhabitat(includingSugarloafKey,CudjoeKey,SummerlandKey,RamrodKey,

LittleTorchKey,andWestSummerlandKey)basedondiscussionswithUSFWS,FDOT,MonroeCounty,

andanimalvehiclecollisionexperts

Alternative16.ContinueawarenessofKeyDeerandotherthreatenedandendangeredspeciescrossing

arearoadways

Alternative17.ImplementIntelligentTransportationSystemapplicationtonotifydriversofdeer

enteringroadways

Alternative18.OngoingcoordinationwithstakeholdersNationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport4

1. Introduction

TheFloridaKeysNationalWildlifeRefugesComplexisachainoffourNationalWildlifeRefuges(NWR)in

MonroeCounty,Florida.ThisplanfocusesontheNationalKeyDeerRefuge(NKDR).TheNKDR

encompassesaseriesofislandswithintheLowerKeysthatincludeNoNameKey,BigPineKey,Little

TorchKey,RamrodKey,SummerlandKey,CudjoeKey,andSugarloafKey.Itistheprimaryhabitatfor

numerousfederallyendangeredorthreatenedspeciesincludingtheLowerKeysMarshRabbit,theSilver

RiceRat,andthewidelyrecognizedKeyDeer.TheRefuge’sapprovedacquisitionboundaryencompasses

over84,000acresoflandsandwaterswithnearly9,200acresoflandownedormanagedbytheUSFish

andWildlifeService(USFWS).

1.1 USFWSMissionandGoals

TheNWRSystemisadministeredthroughtheUSFWSundertheUSDepartmentoftheInterior.The

missionoftheUSFWSisto:

“Workwithotherstoconserve,protect,andenhancefish,wildlife,andplantsandtheirhabitatsforthe

continuingbenefitoftheAmericanpeople.”

ThegoalsoftheUSFWSareaimedatfulfillingthismission.PrimaryUSFWSgoalsareto:

Sustainfishandwildlifepopulationsincludingmigratorybirds,endangeredspecies,anadromous

fish,andmarineanimals;

Conserveanetworkoflandsandwaters,includingtheNWRSystem;and

ProvideAmericanstheopportunitytounderstandandparticipateintheconservationanduseof

fishandwildliferesources.

TheUSFWSmanagesrefugesacrossthecountry.ThepassageoftheNWRSystemImprovementActof

1997definesthemissionoftheNWRSystemasfollows:

“Toadministeranationalnetworkoflandsandwatersfortheconservation,management,andwhere

appropriate,restorationofthefish,wildlife,plantresourcesandtheirhabitatswithintheUnitedStates

forthebenefitofpresentandfuturegenerationsofAmericans.”

ThegoalsoftheWildlifeRefugeSystemareto:

Preserve,restore,andenhancethreatenedandendangeredspeciesintheirnaturalecosystems;

Perpetuatethemigratorybirdresource;

Preserveanaturaldiversityandabundanceoffishandwildlifeecology;

Helpthepublicgainanunderstandingandappreciationoffishandwildlifeecology;and

ProvideAmericanstheopportunitytounderstandandparticipateintheconservationanduseof

fishandwildliferesources.NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport5

TheNWRSystemImprovementActof1997identifiedsixwildlifedependentrecreationalusesthatare

recognizedasprioritypublicusesofrefugelands,including:

Hunting

Fishing

WildlifeObservation

WildlifePhotography

EnvironmentalEducation

EnvironmentalInterpretation

1.2 ProjectLocation

TheNKDRislocatedintheLowerKeysRegionoftheFloridaKeysinMonroeCounty,Florida.Theoverall

boundaryfortheNKDRisshowninFigure1.1.ThetransportationstudyareafortheNKDR(Figure1.2)

focusesonareasthatarereadilyaccessibletothepubliconBigPineKeyandNoNameKey.General

transportationissuessuchassignageandwayfindingwillbeaddressedforotherislandsaccessiblefrom

US1.

1.3 ProjectBackgroundandPurpose

TheTransportationStudydocumentstheexistingtransportationinfrastructurewithinandaroundthe

Refugeandlooksattheroadsandotherregionaltransportationfacilitiesadjacenttoorprovidingaccess

totheRefuge.TheTransportationStudyevaluatestheseexistingconditionsandproposesshort,

medium,andlongrangetransportationsolutionstoimprovethemobilityforvisitorsandstafftoand

withintheRefuge.Moreimportantly,itwilladdresssafetyconcernsassociatedwithdeervehicle

collisionsthatoccurinthevicinityoftheRefuge.Theinformationpresentedinthisreportcanbeused

inthenextComprehensiveConservationPlan(CCP)andUSFishandWildlifeServiceSoutheastern

RegionalLongRangeTransportationPlan.Thekeypointsandtheproposedalternativesinthisreport

shouldbeconsideredinthesefutureplanningeffortstoassistininvestmentdecisionsforthefuture.

DuringthedatacollectionandanalysisfortheTransportationStudy,thefollowingexistingstudiesand

datawerereviewedandreferenced.Thedataandresultsfromthesereportswereusedtoderivethe

methodologyappliedtotheTransportationStudy,andtoprovideabaselineofdatafortheanalysis.

Generalconsistencywiththesestudiesimprovedthelikelihoodofstakeholderconsensus,andshould

increasetheeaseofimplementationoftheoutlinedrecommendations.

URS.2010US1ArterialTravelTimeandDelayStudyMonroeCountyFlorida.December2010

MonroeCountyGrowthManagementDivision.ALayman’sGuidetoBigPineandNoNameKey.

Hellmuth,Obata+Kassabaum,Inc.BigPineKey/US1CorridorAreaEnhancementPlan.June

2003

FloridaDepartmentofEnvironmentalProtection,OfficeofGreenwaysandTrails.ContractPlans

fortheFloridaKeysOverseasHeritageTrailSpanishHarbortoSevenMileBridgeMM30.0to

40.0.October2009.Ramrod Key

Big Pine Key

Summerland Key

Bahia Honda Key

Little Torch Key

Middle Torch Key

Big Torch Key

No Name Key

Cudjoe Key

Sugarloaf Key £¤1

Location Map

National Key Deer Refuge

Transportation Study

Contract No.: DTFH71-09-D-00001

PROJECT NUMBER: 011675016 NOVEMBER 2010 FIGURE 1

K:\VRB_Environmental\011675016FHWAkeydeerrefuge\GIS\MXD

Raster data courtesy of Monroe County Property Appraiser

NOT TO SCALE

Ü

Project Location

Project Location

Legend

National Key Deer Refuge Congressional Boundary

National Key Deer Refuge Parcels

U.S. Highway 1 (State Road 5)

 Figure 1.1: Overall Site Location Map
Big Pine Key Street Map

National Key Deer Refuge

Transportation Study

Contract No.: DTFH71-09-D-00001

PROJECT NUMBER: 011675016 NOVEMBER 2010 FIGURE ##

£¤1

Watson Boulevard

Watson Boulevard

South Street

Wilder Road

Big Pine Street

Long Beach Drive

Avenue B

Key Deer Boulevard

 Higgs Rd

Koehn Avenue

K:\VRB_Environmental\011675016FHWAkeydeerrefuge\GIS\MXD

Raster data courtesy of Monroe County Property Appraiser

Legend

U.S. Highway 1 (State Road 5)

National Key Deer Refuge Boundary

Ü

1 inch = 4,000 feet

4,000

Feet

 Figure 1.2: Location Map
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport8

USFWSSoutheastRegion.5yearReview:SummaryandEvaluationEasternIndigoSnake

(DrymarchonCouperi).April2008.

USFWSSoutheastRegion.5yearReview:SummaryandEvaluationRiceRat(Oryzomyspalustris

natator).August2008.

USFWSSoutheastRegion.5yearReview:SummaryandEvaluationKeyDeer(Odocoileus

virginianusclavium).August2010.

USFWSSoutheastRegion.5yearReview:SummaryandEvaluation.LowerKeysMarshRabbit

(Sylvilaguspalustrishefneri).September2007.

MonroeCounty.HabitatConservationPlanforFloridaKeyDeer(Odocoileusvirginianus

clavium)andotherProtectedSpeciesonBigPineKeyandNoNameKey.MonroeCounty,

Florida.April2003:April2006Revision.

MonroeCountyPlanningandEnvironmentalResoucesDepartment.LivableCommuniKeys

MasterPlanforBigPineKeyandNoNameKey.OriginalBOCCAdoption08/2004:Amendedby

Ordinance0202009.

USFWSSoutheastRegion.LowerFloridaKeysNationalWildlifeRefugesComprehensive

ConservationPlan.October2009.

MonroeCounty.MonroeCountyComprehensivePlanUpdate2009.

USFWSSoutheastRegion.MultiSpeciesRecoveryPlanforSouthFlorida.May1999.

Parker,etal.EffectsofUS1ProjectonFloridaKeyDeerMortality.JournalofWildlife

Management,72(2):354359;2008

Schmidt,JasonA.;Lopez,RoelR.andSilvy,NovaJ.EvaluationofTheUS1CrossingProjectin

ReducingKeyDeerMortality(4YearPostProjectReport).TexasA&MUniversity,February2007.

FHWACentralFederalLandsHighwayDivision.TheRoadInventoryofNationalKeyDeer

NationalWildlifeRefuge.June2010.

URS.FloridaKeysCarryingCapacityStudy.September2002.

FDOT.ContractPlansStateRoadNo.5US1/OverseasHighwayatKeyDeerBoulevard.March

2010.

FDOT.FloridaGreenbook.May2011

AreaTrafficCounts

InternetResources:

2009AerialImagery:http://www.monroecountyfl.gov/Pages/MonroeCoFL_WebDocs/mcpa

Census2000Data:http://factfinder.census.gov/home/saff/main.html?_lang=en

CommunityServices,FEMAFloodZonesandNWIWetlandsdata:www.fgdl.org

EndangeredSpeciesActReviewoftheNationalFloodInsuranceProgramintheFloridaKeys:

http://www.fws.gov/verobeach/images/pdflibrary/FEMA%20Flood%20Insurance%20Biological

%20Opinion%20%20August%209,%202006%20Q&As.pdf

EstimatesofPopulationbyCountyandCityinFlorida:April1,2008:

http://www.bebr.ufl.edu/files/2008_Estimates_Table01_0.pdf

ExistingLandUse,FutureLandUse,HabitatandTierSystemData:http://www.monroecounty

fl.gov/Pages/MonroeCoFL_GIS/index
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport9

FactsAboutMonroeCounty:http://www.monroecounty

fl.gov/Pages/MonroeCoFL_admin/about

StateHistoricalPreservationOfficerMasterSiteFileData:

http://dhr.dos.state.fl.us/preservation/sitefile/

SpeciesFocusAreasandKeyDeerMortalitydata:http://www.fws.gov/verobeach/

AppendixA:SupportingDocumentation andReferencescontainsadditionalsupportingdocumentation

andreferenceinformation.

1.4 OverviewofTransportationStudy

TheTransportationStudyReport reviewsthesurroundingroadwaysandparkingareasoftheNKDRand

providesshort,medium,andlongrangerecommendationsforthetransportationsystem.This

documentisacompilationoffourpreviouslycompletedreports:

ExistingConditionsReport–January2011

TrafficNeedsandSafetyReport–February2011

PreliminaryCandidateAlternativesReport–March2011

ShortandLongRangeImprovementPlan–July2011

Thecommentsreceivedfromthestakeholderandpublicmeetingshavebeenincorporatedintothe

overallstudyandfinalrecommendations.NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport10

2. PublicInvolvement

Apublicinvolvementplanwascreatedtooutlinethepublicandstakeholderinvolvementeffortsforthe

study.Thepublicinvolvementplanincludingtheprojectstakeholderlistandnotesfromthethree

stakeholdermeetingsareincludedinAppendix B:PublicInvolvementPlanandAppendixC:

StakeholderMeetingNotes,respectively.

2.1 StakeholderandPublicMeetings

ThefirststakeholdermeetingwasconductedonOctober13,2010(Figure2.1)attheNKDR

HeadquartersinBigPineKey,Florida.Thefocusofthismeetingwastoinformthestakeholdersofthe

study,buildconsensusaroundthetransportationchallengesandopportunitiesattheRefuge,and

establishwhatavailabledataexistedfortheprojectteam.Majorprojecttasks,projectschedule,project

objectives,data/informationrequests,andthepublicinvolvementplanwerereviewed.Duringthe

meetingspecifictransportationissueswithintheRefugeincludingsafety,pedestrian/bicycleaccess,

circulation,parking,andassessmentofcurrentKeyDeerwarningsystemswerediscussed.

ThesecondstakeholdermeetingtookplaceonJanuary31,2011attheNKDRHeadquartersinBigPine

Key,Florida.Thepurposeofthismeetingwastodiscusstheprojectreportsthathadbeensubmittedto

dateandcollectfeedbackfromthestakeholdersonthepreliminaryrecommendations.Discussionatthe

meetingincludedawiderangeoftopicsincludingpotentialbicycleandpedestrianandshoulder

upgrades,currentlyplannedimprovements,trafficcalmingalternatives,andsomepossiblefunding

optionsforimprovements.

Figure2.1:October13,2010StakeholderKickoffMeeting

ThefirstpublicmeetingfollowedthestakeholdermeetingonJanuary31,2011.Theprojectwas

presentedandexistingconditionswerereviewed.Thepublicprovidedfeedbackonthestudy,existing

conditions,andpotentialopportunitiesaroundtheRefuge.NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport11

ThethirdstakeholdermeetingwasheldonApril7,2011attheNKDRHeadquartersinBigPineKey,

Florida.TheShortandLongRangeImprovementPlanrecommendationswerepresentedanddiscussed.

Discussionincludedbutwasnotlimitedtotheaspectsofeachalternative,thelimitationson

improvementsrelatedtotheHCP,thelocationofthenewVisitorsCenter,potentialimplementationof

sharrows,andtheMonroeCountysigninventory.Commentsreceivedduringthismeetingwere

incorporatedintothestudy’srecommendations.

Thesecondpublicmeetingfollowedthestakeholdermeeting(Figure2.2)onApril7,2011.Thedetails

oftheprojectwerepresentedagainaswellaspotentialconceptualalternativesforpublicfeedback.

ThepublicdiscussedissuesaroundtheRefugesuchasvehiclesspeedingonWatsonBoulevardonNo

NameKey.

Figure2.2:April7,2011PublicMeetingNationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport12

3. ExistingConditions

Existinginternaltransportationconditionsandexternaltransportationsystemsprovidingaccesstothe

NKDRwerereviewedasthefirststepofthisstudy.Thissectionidentifiesthefindingsofthisreviewand

presentstheexistingconditions.

3.1 RefugeHistory

TheNKDRwasestablishedin1957toprotectandpreserveKeyDeerandotherwildliferesourcesinthe

FloridaKeys.TheNKDRislocatedinthelowerFloridaKeysandcurrentlyconsistsofapproximately

9,200acresoflandthatincludespinerocklandforests,tropicalhardwoodhammocks,freshwater

wetlands,saltmarshwetlands,andmangroveforests.Thesenaturalcommunitiesarecriticalhabitatfor

hundredsofendemicandmigratoryspeciesincluding17federallylistedspeciessuchastheKeyDeer,

LowerKeysMarshRabbit,andSilverRiceRat.

3.2 RegionalLocation

TheNKDRislocatedintheLowerKeysRegionoftheFloridaKeysinMonroeCounty,Florida.Itsuplands

arecomprisedofaseriesofislandssomeofwhichareaccessiblefromUS1.

3.3 EntrancestotheRefuge

AccesstoRefugelandsisprovidedthroughvariousCountymaintainedpubicroadwaysandRefugetrails

asRefugelandsarenotcontiguous.ThemajorityofpublicaccesstotheNKDRonBigPineandNoName

KeysisprovidedviaUS1.SecondaryRefugeaccessroutesthatconnecttoUS1includeKeyDeer

Boulevard,WilderRoad,andLongBeachRoad.Therearedriving,bicycling,andwalkingactivities

availableatNKDRtoexperiencewildlifeobservationandphotography(Figure3.1).TheVisitorsCenter

providesopportunitiesforwildlifeeducationandinterpretation.Saltwaterfishingisallowed.Prohibited

activitiesinclude,butarenotlimitedto,hunting,camping,unleashedpets,andcampfires.

Figure3.1:VisitorSignageatNKDRNationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport13

AttheintersectionofUS1andKeyDeerBoulevard,thereisacollectionofrecreationalguidesigns

(Figure3.2)providingwayfindingmessagesfortheRefugeHeadquarters,theVisitorsCenter,andpoints

ofinterestincludingtheBlueHoleInterpretiveSiteandtheJackWatsonandFredMannilloWildlife

Trails.

Figure3.2:WayfindingSignsattheintersectionofUS1andKeyDeerBoulevard

3.4 RefugeVisitorsCenter

TheNKDRVisitorsCenter,showninFigure3.3,iscurrentlylocatedintheBigPineKeyPlazaonKeyDeer

Boulevardnearmilemarker(MM)30.5onUS1.ParkingfortheVisitorsCenterissharedwithretailuses

withintheplaza.

Figure3.3:ExistingVisitorsCenter

AoneacresiteforanewVisitorsCenterhasbeenacquiredalongUS1.ThesiteislocatednearMM

30.6onthenorthsideofUS1withvehicularaccessfromUS1.Figure3.4showsthesiteonUS1

plannedtobedevelopedasthenewVisitorsCenterfacility.Specificdetailsincludingthetotalsizeof

thenewfacilityhavenotbeenconfirmedsothenumberandtypesofparkingspacestobeprovidedat

thenewfacilitycannotbedeterminedatthistime.NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport14

Figure3.4:FutureSiteofNewRefugeVisitorsCenteronUS1

TheNKDRHeadquartersbuildingislocatedatthewesternterminusofWatsonBoulevard.Thefacility

providesadministrativeandmeetingspaceforRefugestaff.Gatedaccesstothefacilityandparkingare

provided.

3.5 WaterTransportationAccess

TherearenopublicboataccesspointsonRefugeproperty.However,apublicboatrampmaintainedby

MonroeCountyislocatedatthenorthernterminusofKoehnAvenuewithintheEdenPinescommunity.

TherearealsonumerousstateandcountyboatpublicboatrampswithintheNKDRboundary.

3.6 Refuge’sMajorPointsofInterest

Therearetwomajorpointsofinterestlocatedinthetransportationstudyarea,theBlueHole

InterpretiveSiteandtheJackWatsonandFredMannilloWildlifeTrails.

TheBlueHoleInterpretivesiteisanoldquarrywithfreshwaterwithaviewingplatformandinterpretive

kiosk.ItisshowninFigure3.5.

TheJackWatsonNatureTrailisa2/3miletrailthroughpinerocklandforestandfreshwaterwetlands,

Figure3.6.

TheFredMannilloNatureTrailisawheelchairaccessibletrailwithaviewingplatformatitsterminus,

Figure3.7.

3.7 VisitationSummaryandProfile

Approximately207,000peoplevisitedtheNKDRin2009.Theuniquegeographicalboundariesofthe

RefugeandtheinterspersedprivatelandswithintheRefugemakevisitorquantificationsdifficult.

VisitationdataistrackedfromvarioussourcesincludingVisitorsCentercountsandautomatedcounters

locatedatseveralRefugedestinationsincludingtheBlueHoleInterpretiveSiteandtheJackWatsonand

FredMannilloNatureTrails.Table3.1showstheestimatednumberofannualvisitorstotheRefugeover

thepast10years.NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport15

Figure3.5:BlueHoleInterpretiveSite

Figure3.6:JackWatsonNatureTrail

Figure3.7:FredMannilloNatureTrailNationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport16

Source:NKDRstaff

Table3.1:NKDRVisitationSummary

FiscalYearAnnualVisitors

200086,096

200193,440

200295,000

200375,000

200486,810

2005280,125

2006250,000

2007250,000

2008250,000

2009207,068NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport17

4. TrafficNeedsandSafety

ThecoreoftheRefugeisonBigPineKeyasthemajorityofaccessibleareas,pointsofinterest,and

Refugefacilitiesarelocatedthere.MostofpublicaccesstotheNKDRisprovidedonBigPineandNo

NameKeysviaUS1.RoadwaysonBigPineKeythatprovideprimaryaccesstotheRefugeincludeKey

DeerBoulevard,WilderRoad,andLongBeachRoad.

4.1 RegionalRoadwayInfrastructure

US1–US1functionsasbothalocalandregionalfacilitythroughouttheFloridaKeysregioncarrying

approximately20,000averageannualdailytraffic.Itisalifelinefortheregionaleconomyandtheonly

hurricaneevacuationrouteforKeysresidentsandvisitors.Forthepurposesofthisreportduetothe

orientationofUS1inthestudyarea,US1willbereferredtoasaneast/westfacility.Immediately

outsideofBigPineKey,thetypicalcrosssectionincludestwo(2)12fttravellaneswith4footshoulders.

FromShipsWay(MM29.8)to1stStreet(MM31.1),US1hasrecentlybeenwidenedtoprovidebetween

threeandfivetotallanes.Thethreelanesectionincludesacentertwoway,continuousleftturnlane.

WithinthefivelanesectionfromLomaLane(MM30.2)toChambersStreet(MM30.8),anadditional

eastboundthroughlaneisprovidedalongwithturninglanesattheintersectionofKeyDeerBoulevard.

TheproposedVisitorsCenterislocatedonthenorthsideofUS1,eastoftheKeyDeerBoulevard

intersectionwheretheeastboundtravellanesmergefromtwo(2)lanestoone(1)laneandthereisone

(1)laneinthewestbounddirection.

Thepostedspeedlimitwithinthisareais45mphwithanightspeedlimitof35mphasamitigation

measureprimarilytoreducedeervehiclecollisions.ThespeedlimitisstrictlyenforcedwithintheBig

PineKeyareaonUS1.TheFloridaKeysOverseasHeritageTrail(FKOHT)existsalongportionsofUS1

withintheNKDRandisdiscussedlaterinthisreport.

InanefforttoreducethenumberofvehicularcollisionswithKeyDeeralongtheUS1corridor,fencing

existsalongbothsidesoftheroadwayfromtheeastsideofBigPineKey(MM33)toapproximatelyMM

30.6nearSt.Peter’sCatholicChurch.Figure4.1depictsanexampleofthefencedarea.Twowildlife

underpasses(Figure4.2)existwithinthissectionofUS1,anddeergrates(Figure4.3)alsohavebeen

installedatallintersectingroadwaystodeterKeyDeerfromenteringtheroadway.

4.1.1 KeyDeerBoulevard

KeyDeerBoulevardservesastheprimaryaccesstoamajorityoftheRefugefacilitiesandareasof

interest,aswellasseveralchurchesandcommunitycenters,parksandresidentialneighborhoods.The

roadwayisgenerallyorientedinthenorthwestsoutheastdirectionandhasapostedspeedlimitof30

mph.Asignedspeedzonewithanoverheadflashingbeaconexistsapproximately50feetsouthof

SouthStreetforWatsonField(Figure4.4)whenitisinuseforsportsactivities.NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport18

Figure4.1:SectionofKeyDeerFencingonUS1

Figure4.2:ExampleofaKeyDeerUnderpass

Figure4.3:ExampleofKeyDeerGratesinFencedAreasNationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport19

Figure4.4:KeyDeerBoulevardnearSouthStreet

KeyDeerBoulevardterminatesintoNKDRlandstothenorthandintersectsUS1atasignalized

intersectionatitssouthernterminus.Thetypicalcrosssectionincludestwo11foottravellanes,no

pavedshoulders,andnoturnlanes.SignalizationfeaturesareprovidedattheUS1intersectionallowing

pedestrianstocrossKeyDeerBoulevardandUS1inthisarea.Unsignalizedcrosswalksalsoallow

pedestrianstocrossWilderRoadintheareaofthisintersection.

OriginatingfromtheexistingFKOHTalongUS1,aCountymaintainedsharedusedpathexistsonboth

sidesoftheroadwaytothenorthsideoftheBigPineKeyPlazawherethewestsidepathterminatesand

amidblockpedestriancrossingisprovided.

TheeastsidesharedusepathcontinuesnorthalongKeyDeerBoulevardtoKyleBoulevard.Inanumber

oflocations,thesharedusepathisimmediatelyadjacenttothetravellane(Figure4.5)ratherthan

physicallyseparatedfromtheroadway.AtKyleBoulevard,thesharedusepathwayends.

Figure4.5:KeyDeerBoulevardSharedUsePathwayAdjacenttotheTravelLaneNationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport20

4.1.2 WilderRoad

WilderRoadisanorthsouthorientedtwolaneroadwaywith10.5ftlanesand5ftshoulders

designatedasbicyclelanes.TheroadwayintersectsKeyDeerBoulevardjustnorthofthesignalized

intersectionwithUS1tothesouthandterminatesatafourwaystopcontrolledintersectionatSouth

Street/AvenueAtothenorth.Theroadwayhasapostedspeedof25mph.Thisroadwayprovides

accesstonumerousresidentialhomesaswellastheNKDRmaintenancefacilitylocatednearRaccoon

Run.

4.1.3 LongBeachRoad

LongBeachRoadhasastopcontrolledintersectionwithUS1,atMM32.9.TheintersectionofLong

BeachRoadatUS1iswithintherestrictedaccesssectionanddeergatedsectionofUS1onBigPine

Key.Theroadwayconsistsof25.5feetoftotalpavementwith3.5ftpavedshouldersdesignatedas

bicyclelanes.Thepostedspeedlimitis30mph.Speedhumpsexistalongtheroadwayintermittently.

ThisroadwayprovidesaccesstotheNKDR’sLongBeachTrailandprivateresidences.

4.1.4 WatsonBoulevard

WatsonBoulevard(Figure4.6)isagenerallyaneastwestorientedroadwayrunningfromBigPineKey’s

westernshoreattheRefugeHeadquarterstoapointneartheeastshorelineofNoNameKey.The

roadwaycrossesKeyDeerBoulevardandAvenueBatstopcontrolledintersections.Thepostedspeed

limitis30mph.Thetypicalcrosssectionincludes10ftlanesandunpavedshouldersfromthewestern

terminustoAvenueB.PavedshouldersareprovidedfromAvenueBeasttothebridgetoNoNameKey.

FromthebridgetotheeasternterminusonNoNameKey,shouldersaregravel.

Figure4.6:WatsonBoulevardneartheNKDRAdministrativeoffices,westofKeyDeerBoulevard

Threebridgesexistalongtheroadway:WatsonCutBridge,SR940LegABridge,andtheNoName

Bridge.TheWatsonCutBridgeislocatedneartheRefugeheadquarters.TheSR940LegAbridgeis

locatedimmediatelynorthoftheAvenueBintersection.TheNoNameBridgeconnectsBigPineKeyto

NoNameKey.EachbridgeisroutinelyinspectedandassignedasufficiencyratingbyMonroeCounty.ANationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport21

sufficiencyratingisdefinedasanumericalratingofabridgebasedonitsstructuraladequacyandsafety,

essentialityforpublicuse,anditsserviceabilityandfunctionalobsolescence.Theresultofthesufficiency

ratingformulaisapercentageinwhich100isanentirelysufficientbridgeand0isanentirelydeficient

bridge.Tobeeligibleforfederalaidtoreplacethebridge,thesufficiencyratingmustbelessthan50.

ThesufficiencyratingsforeachbridgeinthestudyareaaresummarizedinTable4.1.

Table4.1:

BridgeSufficiencySummary

BridgeNameBridgeNo.SufficiencyRating

(0to100)

WatsonCut90430574.5

SR940LegA90431039

NoName90432036

Source:MonroeCounty

4.1.5 SouthStreet

SouthStreetisaneastwestfacilitytraversingBigPineKey.TheportionofSouthStreetfromKeyDeer

BoulevardtoAvenueBwasconsideredaspartofthisreport.Thesectionoftheroadwayisanative

roadwayfromKeyDeerBoulevardtoAvenueB.Theroadwayprovidesaccesstoseveralcommunity

facilitiesincludingWatsonField,theSusannThislerTennisCourts,andtheBigPineKeyBoysandGirls

Club.Withinthisarea,therearenospeedlimitsignsposted.

SouthStreetisapavedroadwayfromAvenueBtoWilderRoadwithapostedspeedlimitof25mph.At

theintersectionofAvenueB,theeastboundapproachisstopcontrolled.Althoughthewestbound

approachoperatesunderfreeflowconditions,astopbarexistsonthepavement.Theintersectionof

SouthStreetandWilderRoadisfourwaystopcontrolled.

4.1.6 BigPineStreet

BigPineStreetisprimarilyaresidentialroadwayinthenorthernportionofBigPineKeyfromKeyDeer

BoulevardtoaresidentialcommunityeastofKoehnAvenue.Thepostedspeedis25mphandthetotal

pavementwidthis17.5feet.Theexistingpavementsurfaceiscoarseonthisfacility.

4.1.7 KoehnAvenue

KoehnAvenueisanorthsouthroadwayfromBigPineStreettothenorthshorelineofBigPineKey.A

MonroeCountyboatrampexistsatthenorthernterminus.Theroadwayis18feetwideandhasa

postedspeedlimitof25mph.ThepavementsurfaceissimilartoBigPineStreet.

4.1.8 AvenueB

AvenueBisanorthsouthroadwayconnectingSouthStreettoWatsonBoulevard.Theroadwayis

postedat25mphandhasatypicalcrosssectionthatincludes10ftlanesand4ftdesignatedbicycle

lanes.NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport22

4.2 ParkingAreas

Asdiscussed,parkingisavailableattheexistingVisitorsCenterandissharedwithretailusesatthe

plaza.Thereisa10spacepavedparkingareaattheBlueHoleInterpretiveSite(Figure4.7).Anunpaved

parkingareaexistsattheJackWatsonandFredMannilloWildlifeTrails.Parkingareasarenotprovided

atanyotherKeyDeerandwildlifeviewingareaswhicharetypicallygated.Visitorsoftenparktheir

vehiclesalongthegravelshouldersatkeyviewinglocationssuchasthenorthterminusofKeyDeer

BoulevardandtheeastterminusofWatsonBoulevard(Figure4.8) andentertheRefugebyfoot.Based

ontheRefuge’smissionofresourceprotectionandstakeholderinput,establishingparkingatthese

locationsisnotpreferred.

Figure4.7:BlueHoleInterpretiveSiteParkingArea

Figure4.8:GravelShoulderatWatsonBoulevardTerminusonNoNameKeyNationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport23

4.3 RegionalTrafficVolumeSummary

TrafficvolumeswithintheNKDRtransportationstudyareahavebeencollectedandmaintainedbythe

FloridaDepartmentofTransportation(FDOT).Table4.2showstheavailableaverageannualdailytraffic

(AADT)volumesfromthepastfiveyears,whereavailable.

SupplementaltrafficvolumeinformationwasobtainedattheintersectionofUS1andKeyDeer

Boulevard/WilderRoad.Intersectionturningmovementcounts(TMCs)wereconductedduringpeak

andnonpeakperiods.BaseduponhourlytrafficcountinformationcollectedbyFDOTalongUS1,the

peakperiodgenerallyoccursonaFridayfrom4:00PMto6:00PM.Anoffpeakcountwasalso

conductedfrom9:00AMto11:00AMonaFriday.Theturningmovementcountswereconductedon

Friday,November5,2010.Peaktimesduringthecollectionperiodwerefrom10:00AMto11:00AM

Table4.2:HistoricalDailyTrafficVolumesforStudyAreaRoadways

RoadwayLocation

2005

AADT

2006

AADT

2007

AADT

2008

AADT

2009

AADT

KeyDeer

Boulevard

NorthofGulfBoulevard700

NorthofWatsonBoulevard2,500

NorthofUS1/WilderRoad7,6009,90011,00010,70010,700

US1EastofNorthPineChannel18,00026,50020,00016,60018,600

Eastof1stStreet18,80018,70018,20016,30019,600

Source:FDOTTrafficInformation2009

Note:Indicatesdatawasnotavailable

andfrom4:45PMto5:45PM.Basedonthecountdatathereislimitedpedestriantravelatthis

intersection.KeymovementsatthisintersectionaretheeastboundleftturnfromUS1toKeyDeer

Boulevardanditsreciprocalmovement.Asummaryofthecollectedtrafficcountdataispresentedin

AppendixD:SupportingData.

4.4 CrashSummary

BasedondataobtainedfromtheMonroeCountySherriffOffice,90crashesoccurredalongtheportion

ofUS1withinBigPineKeyfrom2005through2009.Overthefiveyearperiod,16crashesoccurredat

oradjacenttothesignalizedintersectionatKeyDeerBoulevard.Nomorethantwocrashesoccurred

withinthefiveyearperiodatanyotherlocations.Overonethirdofthecrasheswithinthestudyarea

wererearendcrashes.Collisionswithananimalonlyaccountedforthreeofthe90crashesreported;

however,collisionswithanimalsareoftennotreportedtolawenforcementagenciesunlessproperty

damageoccurs.

CrashreportsummariesformajorRefugearearoadwayswereobtainedfromMonroeCounty’sSheriff

Office.Table4.3summarizescrashfrequencybystreet.Asshown,KeyDeerBoulevardhasthehighest

numberofcrashesfrom20052009.Figure4.9alsoshowscrashesbytype.
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

Source:MonroeCountySheriff’sDepartmentFigure4.9:US1CrashSummarybyTypeTransportationStudyReport24
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport25

Table4.3:

RefugeAreaRoadwaysCrashSummarybyYear

Roadway20052006200720082009Total

KeyDeerBoulevard3848383361218

WilderRoad1622112

LongBeachRoad000404

WatsonBoulevard3646524

SouthStreet022015

BigPineStreet212005

KoehnAvenue100001

AvenueB131117

Source:MonroeCountySheriff’sDepartment

4.5 FutureLandUse

ItisthegoalofMonroeCountytomanagefuturegrowthtopreservetheruralorlowdensity

communitycharacter,protectthenaturalenvironmentoftheLowerKeys,andmaintainandencourage

commercialrevitalizationalongUS1corridor,includingpromotionofsmallbusinesses.

Formanyyears,therewasamoratoriumonresidentialdevelopmentonBigPineKeyandNoNameKey

becausethesegmentofUS1thatpassesthroughBigPinehadbeenfoundtohaveaninadequatelevel

ofservice.Thishaslimitedresidentialdevelopmentandotherdevelopmentontheisland.

DuringtheLivableCommuniKeysProgramprocessthecommunityindicatedthatadditionalcommercial

developmentshouldbeorientedtothelocalcommunityratherthantheregionalortouristeconomy.1



Newdevelopmentshouldbekeptatasmallscaletomaintaintheruralandsuburbancharacterofthe

islandsenvisionedbythecommunity.Currently,BigPineKeyhasamixoflocallyownedbusinesses,

franchisesandnationalchainstores.Manyofthebusinesses,suchasgrocerystores,drugstores,banks,

andrestaurantsservenotonlytheresidentsofBigPineKey,butalsootherareasoftheLowerKeys.The

MonroeCountyFutureLandUseMapisshowninFigure4.10.Thetypesoflandusevaryfrom

ResidentialHigh(RH)densitytocommercialdesignationssuchasMixedUse/Commercial(MC).

FuturedevelopmentwithinthestudyareaisgovernedbytheHabitatConservationPlan(HCP)2

.The

HCPusesaPopulationViabilityAnalysismodeltoevaluatetheimpactsofdevelopmentscenariosonthe

KeyDeerpopulation.TheMasterPlanforFutureDevelopmentofBigPineKeyandNoNameKey,

developedinaccordancewiththeHCPandadoptedbyMonroeCountyinDecember2004,determines

therateofgrowthanddevelopmentstandardsintheprojectareaoverthenext20years.



1

 Monroe County Planning and Environmental Resources Department. Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big 

Pine Key and No Name Key Original BOCC Adoption 08/2004: Amended by Ordinance 020-2009. 2

 Monroe County. Habitat Conservation Plan for Florida Key Deer (Odocoileus virginianus clavium) and other 

Protected Species on Big Pine Key and No Name Key. Monroe County, Florida. April 2003: April 2006 Revision.
Big Pine Key

1£¤ Summerland Key Bah

Little Torch Key

Middle Torch Key

Big Torch Key

No Name Key

Key

Legend

U.S. Highway 1 (State RoNational Key Deer RefugeNational Key Deer Refuge

Monroe County - Land Use

RESOLUTION 217-1984ACCCAD -AIRPORTCD CONSERVATION DISCFA - COMMERCIAL FISCFSD - COMMERCIAL FICFV - COMMERCIAL FISDR - DESTINATION RESOI - INDUSTRIALINC - INCORPORATEDIS - IMPROVED SUBDIVIMF - MILITARY FACILITIEMI - MARITIME INDUSTRMN - MAINLAND NATIVEMU - MIXED USENA - NATIVE AREAOS - OFFSHORE ISLANDPR - PARK AND REFUGERV - RECREATIONAL VEResearchSC - SUBURBAN COMMESR - SUBURBAN RESIDESR-L - SUBURBAN RESIDSS - SPARSELY SETTLEUC - URBAN COMMERCUR - URBAN RESIDENTIURM - URBAN RESIDENTURM-L - URBAN RESIDE
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport27

4.6 PlannedAreaTransportationImprovementProjects

TheFDOThasnumerousprojectsprogrammedwithintheRefugeboundarywithinthenextfiveyears.

ProjecttypesincluderesurfacingaswellasimprovementstotheFloridaKeysOverseasHeritageTrail

(FKOHT).RelevantFDOTprojectsaresummarizedinTable4.4.

Table4.4:FDOTWorkProgramSummary

Financial

ManagementNo.FiscalYearProjectLimitsProjectType

42313612011US1fromE.CircleDrivetoCraneBoulevard Resurfacing

42313712011

US1fromWestIndiesDrivetoPalmetto

AvenueResurfacing

40561222011US1fromShipsWaytoSandRoad/from

SandsRoadtoWestofKeyDeerCrossing

Widen/Resurfacing

ExistingLanes

41839612012FKOHTKempChannelBridge(MM23.6)BikePath/Trail

42262912012FKOHTSouthPineChannelBridge(MM29) BikePath/Trail

25058932011US1BigSpanishCanal(BahiaHonda)BridgeRepair

42262812012FKOHTSpanishHarborBridge(MM33)BikePath/Trail

42540112011US1–SpanishHarborBridgeBridgeRepair

42611912012US1BahiaHondaBridgeBridgeRepair

42829812011US1fromMM0toMM106SignageImprovements

Source:FDOT

NoroadwaycapitalimprovementprojectsareprogrammedonBigPineKeyinthemostrecentversion

ofMonroeCounty’sCapitalImprovementProgram.

4.7 FKOHTUserVolumeSummary

TheFloridaDepartmentofEnvironmentalProtection(FDEP)maintainstheexistingFKOHTthatparallels

US1withinthestudyarea.Acountstationislocatedonthetrailwithinthestudyareaandtheuser

volumesaresummarizedinTable4.5.Notetherearetwospikesinthedatabutitisunderstoodthat

theequipmentwasworkingproperly.Alsonotethatthisareawasactivelyunderconstructionfrom

May2010toDecember2010.

Theaveragemonthlypedestrian/bicyclistvolumeonFKOHTwasover7,400peoplewiththeinclusionof

thepeakmonthsandover6,300peopleexcludingthepeakmonths.NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport28



n/a=notavailableorunderconstruction

Source:FDEP

Table4.5:FKOHTUserVolumeSummary

MonthVisitorVolumes

200920102011

Januaryn/a4,8223,729

Februaryn/a8,0884,855

Marchn/a8,3256,387

Apriln/a7,61514,335

May3,047n/a5,726

June7,040n/a9,202

July6,303n/an/a

August7,995n/an/a

September4,595n/an/a

October18,418n/an/a

November8,321n/an/a

December5,064n/an/aNationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport29

5. CommunityandEnvironment

5.1 CommunityFeaturesandPotential4(f)Resources

Areviewofparksandcampgrounds,placesofworship,communitycenters,socialservices,government

facilities,daycarefacilities,culturalcenters,cemeteries,schools,firestations,correctionalfacilities,law

enforcementfacilities,hospitalsandhealthcentersinthevicinityoftheNKDRwasperformedusingGIS

dataavailablefromtheFloridaGeographicLibrary(www.fgdl.org).Groundtruthingofthedatawas

performedduringthefieldreconnaissanceconductedonOctober26,2010.Asummaryoftheobserved

communityfeaturesonBigPineKeyandNoNameKeyisshowninTable5.1,withthelocationsdepicted

inFigure51.Itisexpectedthattheparkswouldbeconsideredpotential4(f)resources.

Table5.1:CommunityFeatures

CommunityFeatureNameLocation

ParksWatsonField/SusannThislerTennisCourtsKeyDeerBoulevard

BigPineCommunityPark 31009AtlantisDrive

BlueHeronPark WilderRoadandLyttonRoad

PlacesofworshipSaintPeterCatholicChurch31300US1

BigPineUnitedMethodistChurch280KeyDeerBoulevard

FirstBaptistChurchBigPine300KeyDeerBoulevard

VineyardCommunityChurch100CountyRoad

LordoftheSeasLutheranChurch1250KeyDeerBoulevard

SaintFrancisintheKeysEpiscopalChurch1600KeyDeerBoulevard

CommunitycentersLowerKeysChamberofCommerce31020US1

DallasMcDonaldSeniorCenter380KeyDeerBoulevard

LoyalOrderofMooseLodges21stSt&WilderRoad

ElksLodge28481KyleBoulevard

SocialservicesBoysandGirlsClub30150SouthStreet

HabitatforHumanity30320US1

GovernmentfacilitiesBigPineKeyU.S.PostOffice29959US1

FloridaDivisionofForestry400KeyDeerBoulevard

MonroeCountyAnimalShelterIndustrialStreet

DaycarefacilitiesKindtoKidsLearningCenter30070PondLane

CulturalcentersArtistinParadise221KeyDeerBoulevard

BigPineLibrary213KeyDeerBoulevard

CemeteryPinewoodMemorialCemetery31140US1

SchoolBigPineAcademy30220US1

FireStationBigPineKeyVolunteerFireDepartment400KeyDeerBoulevard

CorrectionalFacilityBigPineKeyRoadPrison450KeyDeerBoulevardBIG PINE KEY ROAD PRISON

G PINE KEY VOLUNTEER FIRE DEPARTMENT

PINEWOOD MEMORIAL CEMETERY

* WATSON FIELD /

SUSANN THISLER TENNIS COURTS

DALLAS MACDONALD SENIOR CENTER

LOWER KEYS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE

LOYAL ORDER OF MOOSE LODGES

ELKS LODGE

BOYS AND GIRLS CLUB

ARTIST IN PARADISE

BIG PINE LIBRARY

KIND TO KIDS LEARNING CENTER

U S POST OFFICE - BIG PINE KEY

FLORIDA DIVISION OF FORESTRY

* BIG PINE COMMUNITY PARK

* BLUE HERON PARK

FRANCIS IN THE KEYS EPISCOPAL CHURCH

LORD OF THE SEAS LUTHERAN CHURCH

SAINT PETER CATHOLIC CHURCH

VINEYARD COMMUNITY CHURCH

FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH BIG PINE

BIG PINE UNITED METHODIST CHURCH

HABITAT FOR HUMANITY

1£¤

Big Pine Key

Summerland Key B

Little Torch Key

Middle Torch Key

Big Torch Key

No Name Key

Legend

National Key DU.S. Highway National Key D

k Potential Sect

o

0 6,00 3,000
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport31

5.2 DemographicProfileofStudyArea

TheNKDRstudyareaonBigPineKeyislocatedinMonroeCountybetweenSunshineandRamrodKeys.

AccordingtotheUS.CensusBureau,thestudyareaislocatedwithinCensusBlocks9714and9715.The

populationofMonroeCountyhasdecreasedoverthepastdecade,experiencingalmost10%decline

from2000to2010.Notethatdetailed2010censusdatawasnotyetavailableforthisareaatthetime

ofpublicationofthisreport.

TourismandtouristrelatedindustriesarethemajorsourcesofrevenueinMonroeCounty.Accordingto

MonroeCountyGrowthManagementDepartment,2005sawaslightdecreaseinthenumberofcruise

shipsstoppinginKeyWest’sportandthenumberofvisitorsdrivingbycar.Thiscanbepartlyattributed

tofourhurricaneevents.3

However,theKeyWestInternationalAirportcontinuestoseeanincreasein

thenumberofpassengerenplanementsfromfivecommercialairlineservices.Toprecreationalactivities

intheareainclude(inorderbyranking)diningout/nightlife,sightseeing/attractions,beachactivities,

viewingwildlifeandmuseums/historicareas.US1onBigPineKeycarriestrafficvolumesapproaching

20,000vehiclesperday,withconsiderablyheaviervolumesduringpeakseason.

TheLivableCommuniKeysMasterplan,aplanningeffortcarriedoutbyMonroeCountybasedon

communityparticipation,indicatesthatmostofthepopulationonBigPineKeylivesnorthofU.S.1.

Nearly25%ofthepermanenthouseholdpopulationisinrentedunits.Duringthewinterseasonthe

populationincreasesbynearly38%toanestimated6,944people.Theaveragepersonsperhousehold

onBigPineKeyare2.21andonNoNameKeyitis2.48.The2000Censusreportsthatthepercapita

incomeonBigPineKeywas$23,169.ThepercapitaincomeofMonroeCountywas$26,102.Within

theCountyareported7,977individualshadincomesthatplacedthembelowthepovertylevel,roughly

10.2%.OnBigPineKeytheratioremainssimilar,with472individualsbelowthepovertylevel(roughly

9.5%)4

.Table5.2showsthepopulationfiguresinMonroeCountyandcitiesinproximitytoNKDR.

Table5.2:EstimatesofPopulationinMonroeCounty:April1,2008

LocationApril1,2008April1,2000TotalChangePercentChange

Monroe76,08179,5893,5084.4%

Islamorada7,1136,8462673.9%

KeyColonyBeach854788668.4%

KeyWest23,02425,4782,4549.6%

Layton2051861910.2%

Marathon10,09710,2551581.5%

UNINCORPORATED34,78836,0361,2483.5%

Source:EstimatesofPopulationbyCountyandCityinFlorida:April1,2008:

http://www.bebr.ufl.edu/files/2008_Estimates_Table01_0.pdf



3

 http://www.monroecounty-fl.gov/Pages/MonroeCoFL_admin/about 

4

 Monroe County Planning and Environmental Resources Department. Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big 

Pine Key and No Name Key. Original BOCC Adoption 08/2004: Amended by Ordinance 020-2009. 
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport32

5.3 EnvironmentalJusticeImpacts

AccordingtotheU.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency(EPA)ComplianceandEnforcementdepartment:

“EnvironmentalJusticeisthefairtreatmentandmeaningfulinvolvementofallpeopleregardlessofrace,

color,nationalorigin,orincomewithrespecttothedevelopment,implementation,andenforcementof

environmentallaws,regulations,andpolicies.EPAhasthisgoalforallcommunitiesandpersonsacross

thisNation.Itwillbeachievedwheneveryoneenjoysthesamedegreeofprotectionfromenvironmental

andhealthhazardsandequalaccesstothedecisionmakingprocesstohaveahealthyenvironmentin

whichtolive,learn,andwork.”5

Forthepurposesofthisreport,population,income,andraceinMonroeCountyandmunicipalities

surroundingtheNKDRarereportedinthefollowingsections.

5.3.1 Poverty

AccordingtotheU.S.CensusBureau,Census2000summarydata,thepercentageoffamiliesand

individualsbelowthepovertylevelatboththestateandnationallevelsis12%.Thepovertylevelof

MonroeCountyis10%,lowerthanbothstateandnationalpovertylevels.

Table5.3showsthepercentageofindividualsbelowthepovertylevelinthestudyareaandwithin

selectmunicipalitiesrelativetothenationaltotal.Detailedinformationonincomecanbefoundin

AppendixD:SupportingData.

Table5.3:PovertyLevelinStudyAreaandSelectMunicipalities

United

States

BigPine

Key

Islamorada

Key

Colony

Beach

Key

WestLaytonMarathon

Total:273,882,2324,9886,71874024,75724010,030

Incomein

1999below

povertylevel:

33,899,812472466552,535371,422

%below

povertylevel

12%9%7%7%10%15%14%

Source:USCensusBureau,2000Census

5.3.2 Income

BasedonUSCensusdata,medianhouseholdincomeinthestudyarea,$43,021,exceedsthenational

medianhouseholdincomeof$41,994.MedianhouseholdincomeinBigPineKeywas$44,514,

Islamorada,$41,552,andKeyWest,$43,021.



5

 www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/index.html 
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport33

Table5.4showsthemedianhouseholdincomeinthestudyareaandwithinselectmunicipalitiesrelative

tothenationalmedian.DetailedinformationonincomecanbefoundinAppendixD:SupportingData.

Table5.4:MedianHouseholdIncomeintheStudyAreaandSelectMunicipalities(indollars)

United

States

BigPine

KeyIslamorada

Key

Colony

Beach

KeyWestLaytonMarathon

Median

household

incomein1999

$41,994$44,514$41,522$45,577$43,021$53,750$36,010

Source:USCensusBureau2000

5.3.3 Race

Whitesmakeupthelargestracecategorywithinthestudyareaat88.98%.BlacksorAfricanAmericans

comprise6.12%.ThestateaverageofBlacksorAfricanAmericansis14.47%andthenationalaverageis

12.21%.Althoughnotthemajority,BlacksorAfricanAmericanscompriseasignificantportion(9.16%)

ofthepopulationinKeyWest.Nootherracecategoriesmakeupasignificantpercentageofthe

populationinthestudyarea.

Table5.5showsthenumberofindividualsbyraceinthestudyareaandwithinselectmunicipalities

relativetonationalvalues.DetailedinformationonincomecanbefoundinAppendixD:Supporting

Data.

Table5.5:IndividualsbyRaceintheStudyAreaandSelectMunicipalities

United

States

Big

Pine

Key

Islamorada

Key

Colony

Beach

Key

WestLaytonMarathon

Whitealone211,353,7254,7186,71673021,5752219,241

BlackorAfrican

Americanalone34,361,74089802,3350541

AmericanIndianand

AlaskaNativealone2,447,989073131015

Asianalone10,171,820823921991328

NativeHawaiianand

OtherPacific

Islanderalone

378,7820130000

Someotherrace

alone15,436,924391805380245

Twoormoreraces7,270,9261214697026124

Total:281,421,9065,0496,84774425,48024010,194

Source:USCensusBureau,2000CensusNationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport34

5.4 AirQuality

TheNKDRislocatedinMonroeCounty,Florida,whichiscurrentlyinattainmentforalloftheNational

AmbientAirQualityStandards(NAAQS)criteriapollutants(ozone,nitrogendioxide,particulatematter,

sulfuroxides,carbonmonoxideandlead).

5.5 Habitat

TheNKDRiscomprisedofsaltwaterwetlandsanduplandsconsistingofpinelands,hammock,salt,

marsh,buttonwood,mangroveandscrubmangrove.Thesehabitatsaretheprimaryhabitatfor

numerousfederallyendangeredorthreatenedspeciesincludingtheLowerKeysMarshRabbit,theSilver

RiceRat,andtheKeyDeer.

5.5.1 BioticCommunities

ThestudyareaisunderlainbyKeyLargoLimestone,formedfromancientreefsandmadeupofmostly

veryporousmaterial.TheLowerKeysareknownastheOoliticKeysbecausetheyareprimarily

composedofoolites,smallsphericalgrainsofcalciumcarbonatecementedtogethertoforma

limestone.GeologicalandbiologicalprocessesthatdatetothePleistocenePeriodwereinstrumentalin

formingthereefsandtheFloridaKeysoftoday.

ThewarmtemperaturesandshallowwaterstypicaltotheKeysprovideidealconditionsforthegrowth

ofcoralreefs,whichpredominatealongtheKeysislandchain.

AccordingtotheCounty’sAdvancedIdentificationofWetlands(ADIA)Program,themaintypesof

habitatinthestudyareaaresaltwaterwetlandsanduplandsconsistingofpinelands,hammock,salt,

marsh,buttonwood,mangroveandscrubmangrove.

Figure5.2showstheestuarineandmarinedeepwateraswellastheestuarineandmarinewetlands.

ThefollowinghabitatdescriptionswereexcerptedfromtheHCP6

.

5.5.1.1 Pineland

Pinelands(Figure5.3)areuplandforestcommunitieswithanopencanopydominatedbynativeslash

pine(Pinuselliottiivar.densa).Keyspinelandsarefireadaptedanddependentonperiodicfiresfor

theirlongtermpersistence.Surroundedbywetprairiehabitatsand/ormangroves,pinelandstypically

occuronlocallyelevatedareasofbedrock,whichmayfloodseasonallyorduringextremestormevents.

Xericconditionsinthishabitatarepartlycausedbylocallylowrainfallandtheexposedrockground

cover.

Theextentofsubcanopydevelopmentinapinelandisdependentuponthefrequencyofsurfacefires.

PinelandsonBigPineKeytypicallyhaveawelldevelopedsubcanopyconsistingofpalms(silverthatch



6

 Monroe County. Habitat Conservation Plan for Florida Key Deer (Odocoileus virginianus clavium) and other 

Protected Species on Big Pine Key and No Name Key. Monroe County, Florida. April 2003: April 2006 Revision.
Big Pine Key

Summerland Key Bah

Little Torch Key

Middle Torch Key

Big Torch Key

No Name Key

Key

1£¤

Legend

U.S. HigNational National ESTUARESTUAR
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport36

Figure5.3:Pinelands(typ.)afterrecentcontrolledburn

palm,Coccothrinaxargentata;Keythatchpalm,Thrinaxmorissii;thatchpalm,T.radiata;sawpalmetto

Serenoarepens)

7

.Otherspeciesfoundinthepinelandunderstoryincludestrongbark(Bourreria

cassinifolia),locustberry(Byrsonimalucida),silverthatchpalm,pinelandcroton(Crotonlinearis),rough

velvetseed(Guettardascabra),wildsage(Lantanainvolucrata),andlongstalkedstopper(Psidium

longipes).ShrubvegetationinLowerKeyspinelandsvariesincompositionanddensity.Forexample,

BigPineKeypinelandshavealowandsparsegroundcoveringofgrassesandbarelimestone,whereas

onCudjoe,LittlePine,andNoNameKeysacontinuoushardwoodunderstoryofsixmetersheightor

moreispresentduetoprolongedabsenceoffire.

MoretropicalplantspeciesalsooccurintheLowerKeyspinelandshrubstratumincludingCaesalpinia

(Caesalpiniapauciflora),dunelilythorn(Catesbaeaparviflora),pisonia(Pisoniarotundata),andpride

ofBigPine(Strumpfiamaritima).Plantspeciesfromadjacenthabitatsmayinvadeatthepineland

margins.Forexample,gumbolimbo(Burserasimaruba),inkwood(Exotheapaniculata),andwild

tamarind(Lysilomalatisiliquum)occurinpinelandssitedadjacenttoahammock.Onlyfourplant

speciesendemictoSouthFloridapinelands:partridgepea(Chamescistalineate),smallleaved

melanthera(Melantheraparvifolia),rocklandspurge(Chamaesycedeltoideavar.serpyllum)andsand

flax(Linumarenicola)occuronBigPineKey,likelyasaresultofwatertabledepth,salinity,andother

physicalvariables.

Pinelandsoccurthroughouttheprojectarea.KeyDeerpreferentiallyutilizethishabitatforthe

permanentfreshwatersourcesthatarecriticaltosurvivalofthespecies.KeyDeeralsofeedon

herbaceousspeciesandthefruitsofwoodyspeciesfoundinpinelands.TheUSFWSperformscontrolled

burnswithintheRefugetomaintainthepinelandhabitatwherepossible.



7

 Habitat Conservation Plan for Florida Key Deer (Odocoileus virginianus clavium) and other Protected Species on 

Big Pine Key and No Name Key, Monroe County, Florida. April 2003: April 2006 Revision. 
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport37

5.5.1.2 Hammock

TropicalhardwoodhammocksrepresenttheclimaxuplandcommunitytypeintheFloridaKeysandare

secondtopinelandsintermsofbiodiversity.TropicalhardwoodhammocksintheFloridaKeysare

closed,broadleavedforeststhatoccupyelevated,welldrainedandrelativelyfirefreeareas.

HammocksintheLowerKeysaremorewidespreadthanpinelands,exceptforBigPineKeywherethe

areaofpinelandisgreaterthanthatofhammock.Approximately560acresofhammockoccuronBig

PineKeyand385acresonNoNameKey.

CanopytreesoftheLowerKeyshammockstendtobesmallerthanthoseinhammocksoccurringin

otherpartsofFlorida,andareoftenreferredtoas“lowhammock”or“Keyshammockthicket.”Trees

commonlyfoundinlowhammockgenerallyhaveasmallertrunkdiameterandgrowclosertogether.

Speciesincludepoisonwood(Metopiumtoxiferum),buttonwood(Conocarpuserectus),blolly(Guapira

discolor),Keythatchpalm,Spanishstopper(Eugeniafoetida),wilddilly(Manilkarabahamensis),Jamaica

dogwood(Piscidiapiscipula),andwhitestopper(Eugeniaaxillaris).Otherspeciespresentonthe

windwardsideoflowhammocks,referredtoastransitionalhammockorthornscrub,includeblack

torch(Erithalisfruticosa),saffronplum(Bumeliacelastrina),seagrape(Coccolobauvifera),blackbead

(Pithecellobiumguadalupense),indigoberry(Randiaaculeata),tallowwood(Ximeniaamericana),darling

plum(Reynosiaseptentrionalis),joewood(Jacquiniakeyensis),barbedwirecactus(Cereuspentagonus),

andpricklypearcactus(Opuntiastricta).

HerbaceousplantsarelargelyabsentfromKeyshammocks.Grassesincludelowpanicum(Panicumspp.)

andsourpaspalum(Paspalumconjugatum).Inaddition,hammockssupportadiversefloraoforchids,

ferns,bromeliads,andotherepiphytes,andarehometothefederallyendangeredKeytreecactus

(Pilosocereusrobinii).

Tropicalhammocksprovideshelterformanyanimalsduringperiodsofhighwaterandalsonesting,

feedingandroostingsitesformanylocalandmigratorybirds.KeyDeerprimarilyutilizethishabitatfor

cover,coolshelter,fawningandbedding.Otherendangeredandthreatenedspeciesfoundinthese

areasintheFloridaKeysincludetheLowerKeysmarshrabbitandeasternindigosnake.Additionally,

tropicalhardwoodhammocksinsouthFloridaprovideessentialhabitatforthewhitecrownedpigeon

(Columbaleucocephala),Schaus’swallowtailbutterfly(Papilioaristodemusponceanus),andtreesnails

(Liguusspp.).

5.5.1.3 FreshwaterWetlands

FreshwaterwetlandsarerestrictedtoareaslandwardoftheseasonalhightidelineandintheLower

Keysarefoundinareasunderlainbyfreshwaterlenses.Thepersistenceoffreshwaterecosystemsis

limitedprimarilybyfreshwateravailability,tidalinfluence,andhumanactivities,includingdirectand

indirecteffectsofdevelopmentsuchasdrawdownandcontamination.Duringthedryseason,

freshwaterlensesofBigPineKeycandiminishbyasmuchas50percent.Freshwaterwetlandsare

locatedinthenorthernandcentralportionsofBigPineKeyandarepresentinoneparcelonNoName

Key,representing689.4and3.4acres,respectively.NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport38

Thishabitattypeisdominatedbysawgrass(Cladiumjamaicense)andspikerush(Eleocharisspp.).

ForestedfreshwatersystemsintheKeysaregenerallypinelandswithasawgrassunderstory.

Freshwaterwetlandsaretypicallyfoundinisolated,seasonallyfloodeddepressionswithelevationsof

+3.0feetNationalGeodeticVerticalDatum(NGVD)orlessandmaybefoundinconjunctionwith

pinelands.Freshwaterwetlandsprovidecriticalhabitatforseverallistedspecies,inparticulartheKey

DeerandLowerKeysmarshrabbit(Sylvilaguspalustrishefneri).Thesehabitatsandsurfacewaters

representtheonlydryseasonsourceoffreshwaterforwildlifeandplayanimportantroleinattenuating

nutrientsandothercontaminantsinsurfacewaterrunoff.

5.5.1.4 SaltMarshandButtonwood

Saltmarshesandbuttonwoodassociations(Figure5.4)occurincoastallocationssimilartomangrove

wetlands.Saltmarshesarenonwoody,salttolerantcommunitiesthatareoccasionallyinundatedwith

saltwater.TwotypesofsaltmarsharefoundintheFloridaKeys,lowmarshandhighmarsh.Low

marshspeciesincludesalttolerantherbssuchasglasswort(Salicorniaspp.)andKeygrass

(Monanthochloelittoralis),whilehighmarshisdominatedbyGulfcordgrass(Spartinaspartinae),fringe

rushes(Fimbrystylisspp.),andseaoxeyedaisy(Borrichiafrutescens).

Figure5.4:SaltMarshandButtonwood

Buttonwoodassociationsborderhighmarshcommunitiesandhavesimilarecologicalcharacteristics.

Plantspeciesthatinhabitthiscommunitypreferlowenergywaveswithlittletidaldisturbance.

Buttonwoodforestsaredominatedbythesilverbuttonwood(Conocarpuserectus).Otherspecies

includesalttolerantherbaceousperennialsandwoodyshrubssuchasfringerushes,Keygrass,Gulf

cordgrass,andseashoredropseed(Sporobolusvirginianus).Thereareapproximately685acresof

buttonwoodmarshonBigPineKeyand170acresonNoNameKey.

Saltmarsh/buttonwoodmarshcommunitiesprovideimportanthabitatforterrestrialspeciesincluding

theFederallyendangeredLowerKeysmarshrabbit,SilverRiceRat(Oryzomysargentatus),and

diamondbackterrapin(Malaclemysterrapin).Buttonwoodareasprovideherbaceousfoodsandloafing

areasforKeyDeer.Commonresidentsincludepolychaetes,gastropodmollusks,bivalvemollusksandNationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport39

crustaceans.Birdstendtousethemarshforfeedingratherthanfornesting.Afewspeciesofbirds,

fish,reptiles,ormammalscanbeconsideredresidentsofsaltmarshes;largerlongerlivedorganismsare

nottolerantoftheenvironmentalfluctuations.

5.5.1.5 Mangroveandscrubmangrove

Mangrovecommunitiesconsistoffacultativehalophytes,whicharetolerantofanaerobicsalinesoils

andtidalinundation.ThreespeciesarefoundinFlorida:theredmangrove(Rhizophoramangle),black

mangrove(Avicenniagerminans),andwhitemangrove(Lagunculariaracemosa).

Ingeneral,thezonationofmangrovecommunitiesisregulatedbyelevation.Redmangrovesoccurin

themiddleandlowerintertidalzoneanduppersubtidalzone.Blackmangrovesdominatetheupper

intertidalzoneandaregenerallyfoundbetweentheredandwhitespecies.Whitemangrovesoccuron

thelandwardedgeofmangroveforests,throughouttheintertidalandintheupperportionsofthe

swamp.Groundcoverwithinamangroveforestconsistsofleaflitteranddecomposingforestdebris.

ThroughouttheFloridaKeys,mangroveforestsformthepredominantcoastalvegetationcommunity.

Mangrovesarefoundalongtheedgesofshorelines,baysandlagoonsandonoverwashareas

throughouttheKeys.Majorlimitingfactorsonmangroveestablishment,growthandpersistenceinthe

FloridaKeysappeartobewaterquality,substrate,anddevelopment.Mangrovehabitatoccurson

approximately1,495acresofBigPineKeyand374acresofNoNameKey.

MangrovecommunitiesintheFloridaKeysprovideessentialhabitatfornumerousecologicallyand

economicallyimportantspecies.Theleavesandfruitsofredandblackmangrovesareaprimaryfood

sourcefortheKeyDeer,whichspendconsiderabletimeforagingintidalwetlands.InSouthFlorida,

mangrovesareimportanthabitatforatleast220fishspecies,24reptileandamphibianspecies,18

mammalspecies,and181birdspecies,andprovidenestinghabitatforanumberofthreatenedand

endangeredspecies.Dissolvedorganicmatterfrommangrovesservesasanalternatefoodsource,the

basisforheterotrophicmicroorganismfoodwebs,andasourceofchemicalcuesforestuarinespecies.

5.5.2 ListedSpeciesandU.S.FishandWildlifeServiceFocusAreas

AbiodiversitymatrixsearchoftheFloridaNaturalAreasInventorydatabasewasperformedandthe

CCP8

wasreviewedtodeterminethepotentialfortheoccurrenceoflistedspecieswithintheproject

vicinity.Asummaryofthestateandfederallylistedspeciespotentiallyoccurringwithintheproject

vicinityisincludedinTable5.6.

AspartofthereviewoftheNationalFloodInsuranceProgram’s(NFIP)activitiesintheFloridaKeys

USFWSreevaluatedhowitreviewstheimpactsonlistedspeciesfromtheFEMANFIP.Arevised

biologicalopinionwasprepared.Thereviewofimpactsoutlinedanimprovedstrategyforprotecting

threatenedandendangeredspeciesandtheirhabitats.Focusareasweredevelopedforfourspecies:

KeyDeer,EasternIndigoSnake,LowerKeysMarshRabbitandSilverRiceRat.Forthepurposesofthis



8

 USFWS Southeast Region. Lower Florida Keys National Wildlife Refuges Comprehensive Conservation Plan.

October 2009.
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport40

Table5.6:StateandFederallylistedspecies

thathavethepotentialtooccurwithintheprojectvicinity

CommonNameScientificNameFederalStatusStateStatus

Birds

PipingPlover*CharadriusmelodusTT

RoseateTernSternadougalliiTT

RedKnot*CalidriscanutusrufaCN

Kirtland’swarblerDendroicakirtlandiiE

LeastTernSternaantillarumNT

FloridaburrowingowlAthenecuniculariafloridanaNSSC

WhitecrownedPigeonPatagioenasleucocephalaNT

WadingBirds,Littleblue

heron,Tricoloredheron,

Snowyegret,Whiteibis,

Limpkin

Egrettacaerulea,Egrettatricolor,

Egrettathula,Eudocimusalbus,

Aramusguarauna

NSSC

Mammals

KeyDeerOdocoileusvirginianusclaviumEE

SilverRiceRatOryzomyspalustrisnatatorEE

LowerKeysMarshRabbitSylvilaguspalustrishefneriEE

WestIndianmanateeTrichecusmanatusEE

Reptiles

KeyRingneckSnakeDiadophispunctatusacricusNT

LowerKeysRibbonSnakeThamnophissauritusNT

LowerKeysBrownSnakeStoreriadekayiNT

EasternIndigoSnakeDrymarchoncouperiTT

AmericanalligatorAlligatormississippiensisT(S/A)SSC

AmericancrocodileCrocodylusacutusTT

GreenseaturtleCheloniamydasEENationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport41

Table5.6:StateandFederallylistedspecies

thathavethepotentialtooccurwithintheprojectvicinity

CommonNameScientificNameFederalStatusStateStatus

HawksbillseaturtleEretmochelysimbricateEE

Kemp’sridleyseaturtleLepidochelyskempiiEE

LeatherbackseaturtleDermochelyscoriaceaEE

LoggerheadseaturtleCarettacarettaTT

KeyMudTurtleKinosternonbauriiNE

Fish

Smalltoothsawfish(U.S.

DistinctPopulation

Segment)

PristispectinataE(NMFS)

Invertebrates

StockIslandtreesnailOrthalicusreses(notincluding

nesodryas)

T

Bartram’shairstreak

butterflyStrymonacisbartramiC

FloridaleafwingAnaeatroglodytafloridalisC

MiamibluebutterflyCyclargusthomasibethunebakerC

Plants

Blodgett’ssilverbushArgythamniablodgettiiC

BigpinepartridgepeaChamaecristalineatavar.KeyensisC

WedgespurgeChamaesycedeltorideaspp.Serpyllum C

Garber’sspurgeChamaesycegarberiT

SandflaxLinumarenicolaC

FloridasemaphorecactusConsoleacorallicolaC

KeytreecactusPilosocereusrobiniiE

*PossiblyoccurringbasedonLowerFloridaKeysNationalWildlifeRefugeComprehensiveConservationPlan

(USFWS,October2009).E=Endangered,T=Threatened,T(S/A)=Threatenedduetosimilarityofappearance,

C=CandidateSpecies,SSC=SpeciesofSpecialConcern,N=Notlisted.NMFS=NationalMarineFisheriesServiceNationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport42

study,draftcopiesofthespatialextentofthesehabitatswereobtainedfromtheUSFWSSouthFlorida

EcologicalServicesOfficeinArcGISshapefileformat.Thespatialextentofspeciesfocusareaswithin

thestudyareaaredepictedinthefollowingsubsections.AHCPwaspreparedandtheimpactstothese

habitatswerelimitedundertheHCP.Thefollowingprovidesadditionaldetailregardingthesefour

species.ThefollowinginformationisexcerptedfromtheUSFWS’sMultiSpeciesRecoveryPlanforSouth

Floridaandtheirrespective5yearreviewsbyUSFWS.

5.5.2.1 FloridaKeyDeer(Odocoileusvirginianusclavium)9

Figure5.5

KeyDeerutilizeallhabitattypesincludingpinerocklands,hardwoodhammocks,buttonwoodsalt

marshes,mangrovewetlands,freshwaterwetlands,anddisturbedanddevelopedlands.KeyDeeruse

disturbedanddevelopedlandsextensivelyforforaging,travel,loafing,andsocializing.TheKeyDeer

feedprimarilyonredandblackmangrove,butalsofeedonapproximately160otherplantstomeet

nutritionalrequirements.Theymayusethesehabitatsyearroundorseasonallyforforaging,cover,

shelter,fawning,andbedding.Pinerocklands,inparticular,areveryimportanttoKeyDeerbecause

theycontainpermanentfreshwatersourcesthatarecriticaltothelongtermsurvivalofthespecies.

OnlyBigPine,LittlePine,Sugarloaf,Cudjoe,andNoNameKeys,supportextensivepinerocklands.Key

Deerforageonmangrovesintidalwetlandsanduseopenareasforforagingandresting.KeyDeeralso

useresidentialandcommercialareasextensivelywheretheyfeedonornamentalplantsandgrassesand

wheretheycanseekrefugefrombitinginsects.

TheNationalKeyDeerRefugewasestablishedinthe1950s,andtheKeyDeerwasofficiallylistedas

federallyendangeredonMarch11,1967(32FR4001).TheKeyDeerwaslistedasanendangered

speciesbecauseofthelossofitshabitattoresidentialandcommercialconstructionandbecauseof

high,humanrelatedmortalityandhumandisturbances.

Historically,themaximumpopulationofKeyDeerwasprobablybetween600to700individuals

occupyingabout19,014acresofhabitatinthehistoricalrange.Basedonthe20105yearreviewforthe

KeyDeer,theestimatedpopulationis646.DuetocontinuedurbanizationofKeyDeerhabitat,thereis

littleopportunitytoincreasethecarryingcapacityoftheKeys,althoughhabitatenhancementon

outlyingislandsmayaffordsomeopportunities.Inadditiontohabitatloss,thepersistenceoftheKey

Deerishighlyvulnerabletonaturaleventssuchashurricanesandsealevelrise.

5.5.2.2 LowerKeysMarshRabbit(Sylvilaguspalustrishefneri)10–Figure5.6

LowerKeysMarshRabbits(LKMR)inhabitsaltmarshandbuttonwoodtransitionareas,freshwater

wetlands,andcoastalbeachberms.Asstatedpreviously,freshwaterwetlandsoccupy689.4and3.4

acres,respectively.TheLKMRbuildsmazesofruns,dens,andnestsincoastal(salinetobrackish)or

freshwater,inlandmarshhabitats.Twoplantspecies,fringerush(Fimbristylissp.)andbuttonwood

(Conocarpuserectus),areoftenpresentintherabbit'shabitat.Infreshwatermarshes,cattails(Typha



9

 USFWS Southeast Region. 5-year Review: Summary and Evaluation Key Deer (Odocoileus virginianus clavium).

August 2010. 

10 USFWS Southeast Region. 5-year Review: Summary and Evaluation. Lower Keys Marsh Rabbit (Sylvilagus 

palustris hefneri). September 2007. 
Big Pine Key

Summerland Key Bah

Little Torch Key

Middle Torch Key

Big Torch Key

No Name Key

Key

1£¤

Legen

UNND
Big Pine Key

1£¤ Summerland Key Bah

Little Torch Key

Middle Torch Key

Big Torch Key

No Name Key

Key

Legend

U.S. HNationNationDRAFT
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport45

latifolia),sawgrass(Cladiumjamaicense),andsedges(Cyperussp.)arecommonassociates.Sometimes,

spikerush(Eleocharissp.)isalsofound.Incoastalmarshes,commonassociatesincludecordgrass

(Spartinasp.),saltwort(Batismaritima),glasswort(Salicorniavirginica),sawgrass,andseaoxeyedaisy

(Borrichiafrutescens).Therabbit’sruns,dens,andnestsaremadeincordgrassorsedges.

TheLKMR’soriginalrangeextendedfromBigPineKeytoKeyWestencompassingalineardistanceof

about30miles.Historically,LKMRprobablyoccurredonalloftheLowerKeysthatsupportedsuitable

habitatbutdidnotoccureastoftheSevenmileBridgewhereitisreplacedbyS.p.paludicola.

Basedonthe5yearreview,threeseparatemetapopulationsexistintheBocaChicaarea(BocaChica,

Geiger,EastRockland,andSaddlehillKey),theBigPineKeyarea(BigPine,Annette,EastWater,Howe,

Johnson,LittlePine,Mayo,NewfoundHarbor,Porpoise,andNoNameKeys),andtheSugarloafarea

(SugarloafandSaddlebranchKeys).TherearealsopotentialhabitatsonCudjoe,Ramrod,theTorchKeys

andseveralothersmallkeys.

TheLKMRwaslistedasafederallyendangeredspeciesonJune21,1990(55FR25591).Themarsh

rabbitwaslistedbecauseofhabitatlossandfragmentation,predationbycats,androadmortalities

causedbyautomobiles;criticalhabitatwasnotdesignated.Therabbitwasalsolistedasendangeredby

theStateofFloridain1989(F.A.C.3927).Currentpopulationestimatesrangebetween100and300

rabbitsintheLowerFloridaKeysandnumbersappeartobedeclining.Rangewidesurveyswereinitiated

in2001.Therewere228patchesidentifiedand45%wereoccupiedduring2001–2003.Since2004,

suitablehabitatpatcheshavebeensurveyedannuallyforoccupancybytheLKMR.Basedonthe2007

USFWS5yearreview,annualpatchoccupancysurveysshowasteepdeclineinoccupancy.The5year

reviewnotedtheForysandHumphreystudyindicatedthatthepopulationviabilityanalysisestimated

thattherewas100%probabilityofextinctionin50years.Itwas,however,notedthatduetothelarger

habitatpatchsizesonBigPineKey,thismetapopulationwasthemostresilienttocatpredationand

catastrophes.

Asurbanizationhasincreasedoverthepast20years,constructionofnewroads,ortheimprovementof

existingroads,hasbeennecessarytoaccommodatemorevehicles.Theconstructionofroadsresultsin

twomainthreatstotheLKMR:interferencewithitsdispersalandincreasedroadmortality.Vehicular

trafficinterfereswithdispersalandmaypreventessentialinterchangebetweensubpopulations.

Dispersingmalesarethemostvulnerabletoroadmortality.Dispersalisneededforrepopulatingsites

whererabbitshavebeenextirpated.Sinceonlyaportionofthemalesbreedduringtheyear,thelossof

thesemalesmaylowerthelikelihoodofmatingandhencedecreasethereproductivepotential.The

threatofroadsandtraffichasincreasedinsignificancebecauseofthemagnitudeofhabitat

fragmentation:thesizeoftheremaininghabitatfragmentsforcesmoreadultmalestodisperseinorder

toestablishterritories,puttingthematagreaterriskofbeingkilledbycars.OtherthreatstotheLKMR

includedevelopment,prevalenceofhardwoodoverstoriesinLKMRpatches,hurricanestormsurges,sea

levelriseandinvasiveexoticplants.NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport46

5.5.2.3SilverRiceRat(Oryzomyspalustrisnatator)11–Figure5.7

TheSilverRiceRatisasmallwetlandrodentadaptedtotheuniqueislandhabitatsoftheLowerKeys.

TheSilverRiceRatdiffersfromthemorecommonmarshriceratbyitsrarity,largerbodysize,lower

fecundity,andlargerhomerangesize.Populationsofthesericeratsarefoundatextremelylow

densitieson12islandsintheLowerKeysandwerelistedasendangeredprimarilybecausetheirwetland

habitathadbeendestroyedbyresidentialandcommercialconstructionactivities.Withasmall

populationsizeandrestrictedgeographicrange,riceratsintheFloridaKeysaregreatlyimpactedbyloss

ofhabitat.TheRefugeconsidersblackrats,exoticsnakes,freerangingcats,sealevelrise,and

hurricanespotentialthreatstotheSilverRiceRat.

SilverRiceRatstypicallyusethreezonesthataredelineatedbytheirsalinityandtopography:(1)low

intertidalareas,(2)saltmarshfloodedbyspringorstormtidesand(3)buttonwoodtransitionalareas

thatareslightlymoreelevatedandonlyfloodedbystormtides.Thelowintertidalareaiscomprised

primarilyofredandblackmangroveswithwhitemangroves,buttonwoods,glasswort,saltwort,andKey

grassfoundonhigherelevatedareas.TheseareasareusedbySilverRiceRatsmainlyduringnocturnal

activityperiodsandalsoforforaging,movingbetweenhabitats,andnesting.Thelowsaltmarsharea

consistsofthegrassessaltgrass(Distichilisspp.)anddropseed(Sporobolusspp.);interspersedwithsea

oxeye(Borrichiafrutescens),whiteandblackmangrove,andbuttonwood,inadditiontodepression

areasthatcontainsaltwort,blackmangrove,andglasswort.SilverRiceRatsusethiszonemainlyfor

foragingandnesting.Thebuttonwoodtransitionalsaltmarshareaisatahigherelevationthanother

saltmarshhabitats,containsadensercoverageofsaltgrass,dropseed,andseaoxeye,andisusedfor

foragingandnesting.

The20085yearreviewnotedthatbasedonPerry’srangewidegeneralsurveybetween2004and2005

resultedincaptureson12keys(BigPine,BigTorch,Cudjoe,Howe,LowerSugarland,MiddleTorch,

Raccoon,Ramrod,Saddlebranch,Summerland,UpperSugarloaf,andWaterKeys)andriceratswerenot

detectedonLittlePine,BigCoppit,BocaChica,EastRockland,andGeigerKeys.

The5yearreviewdocumentedthatonericeratwasfoundonBigPineKeyandoneonRamrodKey.

FollowuptrappingonBigPineKeyresultedinnoadditionalcaptures.PerrysuggestedthattheRamrod

KeyandBigPineKeyindividualsmayrepresentisolateddispersalincidentsormayrepresent

populationsthat“persistatlownumbersorarefunctionalsinksinanislandmetapopulation”.Islands

suchastheContents,Muds,Sawyer,andtheSnipeKeysarelargepristineislandsbutdonotcontainthe

threevegetativecommunitiesusedbyriceratsnorsufficientfreshwatersources.SilverRiceRatsare

notfoundintheMiddleorUpperKeyspresumablybecauseofthelackofsuitablehabitat.

TheSilverRiceRatwaslistedasanendangeredspeciesonApril30,1991(56FederalRegister19814).At

thattime,theSilverRiceRatwasextirpatedfromonekeywhereitformerlyoccurredandwasbelieved

tobeextirpatedfromtwoadditionalkeys.TheSilverRiceRatwaslistedasendangeredbecauseits

wetlandhabitathadbeendestroyedbyresidentialandcommercialconstruction;becauseofpredation,



11 USFWS Southeast Region. 5-year Review: Summary and Evaluation Rice Rat (Oryzomys palustris natator).

August 2008. 
Big Pine Key

Summerland Key Bah

Little Torch Key

Middle Torch Key

Big Torch Key

No Name Key

Key

1£¤

Legend

U.NaNaDR
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport48

competition,andhabitatmodificationfromvariousintroducedmammalsandbecauseit’slow

populationsmakeitmoresusceptibletoreducedgeneticvariability.

5.5.2.4 EasternIndigoSnake12–Figure5.8

TheEasternIndigoSnakeseemstobestronglyassociatedwithhigh,dry,welldrainedsandysoils,

closelyparallelingthesandhillhabitatpreferredbythegophertortoise.TheEasternIndigoSnakecan

occurinmosttypesofhammockinFloridaandsoutheasternGeorgia,oftennearwetlands,andoftenin

associationwithgophertortoiseburrows.Itisalsoknowntooccurinmangroveswamps,seepage

swamp,flowingwaterswamp,pondswamp,wetprairie,xericpinelandsandscrub,flatwoods,dry

glades,tropicalhardwoodhammocks,beachdune/coastalstrand,pinerockland,andmucklandfieldsin

southernFlorida.Gophertortoiseburrows,treestumps,pilesofdebris,landcrabburrows,andother

subterraneancavitiesarecommonlyusedasdensandforegglaying.

Historically,thespeciesrangedthroughoutFlorida,exceptintheMarquesasandDryTortugas.Museum

recordsdocumentspecimensfromtheUpperKeysandtheLowerKeys,butnotfromtheintheMiddle

Keys.Thespecieshasdeclinedthroughoutitsrangeandhasbeenextirpatedfromsomeareasdueto

habitatfragmentation,declineinthegophertortoisepopulations,overcollecting,directhumanrelated

mortality,androadmortality.TheEasternIndigoSnakewaslistedbecauseofapopulationdecline

causedbyhabitatloss,overcollectingforthepettrade,andmortalityfromgassinggophertortoise

burrowstocollectrattlesnakes(43FR4028).Evenwithcontinuedhabitatdestructionandalterations,

thisspecieswillprobablypersistinmostlocalitieswherelarge,unfragmentedpiecesofnaturalhabitat

remain.Unfortunately,currentandanticipatedfuturehabitatfragmentationwillprobablyresultina

largenumberofisolated,smallgroupsofindigosnakes.Fragmentedhabitatpatchesprobablycannot

supportasufficientnumberofindividualstoensureviablepopulations.TheIndigosnakeshavenotbeen

documentedinBigPineKeyforseveralyears,despitethepresenceofsuitablehabitatthroughoutBig

PineandNoNameKeysandaccordingtothe2008USFWS5yearreviewfortheEasternIndigoSnake,

therearenorecentoccurrencerecordsfortheFloridaKeys.

5.5.3 HCPThreeTierSystemforDevelopment13

BasedontheKeyDeerstudiesdoneundertheHCP,MonroeCountydevelopedaconservationpriority

classificationforprivateundevelopedlandsinthestudyarea.Landsinthestudyareaareclassifiedinto

three“Tiers,”asillustratedinFigure5.9.Tier1arelandswhereallorasignificantportionoftheland

areaischaracterizedasenvironmentallysensitiveandimportantforthecontinuedviabilityofHCP

coveredspecies.TheselandsarehighqualityKeyDeerhabitat,generallyrepresentinglargecontiguous

patchesofnativevegetationthatprovidehabitatforotherprotectedspeciesinadditiontotheKey

Deer.MostoftheislandsareclassifiedasTier1becauseoftheirenvironmentalsensitivityand

importanceforthecontinuedviabilityoftheendangeredspecies.Tier2landsarescatteredlotsand



12 USFWS Southeast Region. 5-year Review: Summary and Evaluation Eastern Indigo Snake (Drymarchon 

Couperi). April 2008. 13 Monroe County. Habitat Conservation Plan for Florida Key Deer (Odocoileus virginianus clavium) and other 

Protected Species on Big Pine Key and No Name Key. Monroe County, Florida. April 2003: April 2006 Revision. 
Big Pine Key

1£¤ Summerland Key Bah

Little Torch Key

Middle Torch Key

Big Torch Key

No Name Key

Key

Spanish Harbor

Gulf of Mexico

Legend

U.S. NatioNatioDRA
Big Pine Key

1£¤ Summerland Key Bah

Little Torch Key

Middle Torch Key

Big Torch Key

No Name Key

Key

Legend

U.S. Highway 1 National Key DeNational Key De

Tier

0 - Submerged L1 - Conservation2 - Transition (B3 - Continued D4 MIL - Military LSPA - (Special P
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport51

fragmentsofenvironmentallysensitivelandsthatmaybefoundinplattedsubdivisions.Alargenumber

oftheselotsarelocatedoncanalsandareofminimalvaluetotheKeyDeerandotherprotectedspecies

becausethecanalpresentsabarriertodispersal.Tier3landsarescatteredlotswithinalreadyheavily

developedareasthatprovidelittlehabitatvaluetotheKeyDeerandotherprotectedspecies.Someof

theundevelopedlotsinthisTierarelocatedbetweenexistingdevelopedcommerciallotswithintheUS

1corridororarelocatedoncanals.AllofthebusinessesinTier3arelocatedintheUS1corridor.Most

oftheparcelsinTiers2and3areinterspersedamongdevelopedparcelsandamongcanals.Theseareas

providelittlehabitatvaluetothecoveredspecies.Thetierclassificationhelpedindeterminingthe

locationofpotentialnewdevelopmentandprioritizingmitigationareas.

Tiers1and2minimizedevelopmentimpactonnaturalresourcesandsparselysettledareas.Tier3

encouragesdevelopmentindisturbedareasalreadyheavilysettled.Itisenvisionedthatfuture

developmentpatternswillbeaccomplishedthroughtheapplicationofminimumeligibilityrequirements

forcompetinginthepermitallocationsystem.Tier3applicantswillbeimmediatelyeligibletocompete

whereasTier1andTier2applicantswillberequiredtoamasspointsvialandpreservationpriortobeing

eligibleforentryintothesystem.

TheLivableCommuniKeysMasterplanenvisionsissuanceof200residentialdwellingunitsoverthe

twentyyearplanninghorizon.Thefirst30ofthose200permitswillbeissuedtoapplicantswhohad

alreadyreceivedanallocationbutcouldnotbeissuedapermitduetoatrafficconcurrencymoratorium.

Theseapplicantswereawardedregulatoryreliefthroughbeneficialuseoradministrativereliefafter

waitingforatleastfiveyears.AllbuttwoofthepermitswillbeissuedforsinglefamilylotswithinTier3.

ThetworemaininglotsareinTier114.Intheprojectarea,commercialdevelopmentisprimarilyfound

alongUS1;theremainingprivatelandsareresidentialwithafewindustrialsites,suchasrockquarries.

NoNameKeyislessdevelopedandnopublicelectricalserviceisavailableontheisland.Accordingto

theHCP,15percentand4.5percentofthetotallandmassofBigPineKeyandNoNameKey,

respectively,aredeveloped.

TheHCPanticipatedtheFDOTwillcompletetheadditionofathirdlane,atwowayleftturnlane,onthe

developedsegmentofUS1onBigPineKey.Thisinvolvestheextensionofthenewlyconstructedturn

laneeastandwestoftheintersectionimprovementproject.Newdevelopmentwillbeconcentratedon

alreadydisturbedlandsinordertominimizethelossofprimehabitatforthecoveredspecies.New

commercialdevelopmentwillbelimitedtoinfillareasmainlyalongtheexistingcommercialcorridoron

US1.TheHCPestimatesthatnomorethan7acresofnativevegetationwillbeclearedoverthepermit

period.Wetlandimpacts,estimatedatnomorethan3acresover20years,willbelimitedtoroadside

swalesandditches.

TheLivableCommuniKeysMasterplanidentifiedtheneedtoimplementsolutionstothetraffic

congestiononUS1andminimizetheneedforlocaltripsonUS1,minimizetheneedforlocalvehicular

tripsonandacrossUS1(fromnorthtosouth),andimprovetheleveloftrafficserviceonUS1toa

standardthat,inaccordancewithlocalregulations,wouldallowsomedevelopmentandmaintainthat



14 Monroe County Planning and Environmental Resources Department. Livable CommuniKeys Master Plan for Big 

Pine Key and No Name Key. Original BOCC Adoption 08/2004: Amended by Ordinance 020-2009. 
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport52

levelofserviceoverthenext20years.ThepreferredalternativeidentifiedintheHCPprovidesfor

developmentactivitiesthatimprovethelevelofserviceonUS1,restorealowrateofgrowthinthe

studyarea,andoffercommunityandpublicfacilitiesimprovementsthatsatisfycommunityneeds.The

avoidance,minimization,andmitigationmeasuresdescribedinthisHCPshouldensurethatpopulations

ofthecoveredspeciesremainviable.AccordingtotheUSFWS’2001BiologicalOpinion,thecombined

effectoftheunderpassesandintersectionimprovementprojectscouldresultinninefewerhuman

relateddeerdeathsperyear.Themodelsuggeststhatsuchreductioninmortalitywouldamelioratea

significantportionoftheimpactoftheproposed20yeardevelopmentprogram.

InaccordancewithavoidanceandminimizationmeasuresoutlinesintheHCP,roadwideningactivities

alongUS1wouldoccurwithinexistingclearedandfilledportionsoftheFDOTrightofway.FDOTwill

avoidimpactstowetlandsduringUS1threelaning.

5.5.4 KeyDeerMortality

ThefollowingdataonKeyDeermortalityandtrendsisbasedonGISdatafrom1966–2010providedby

theUSFWSandthe2010USFWS’s5yearreviewoftheKeyDeer.Themajorityofthedeathscanbe

attributedtodeervehiclecollisions.Othercausesofdeathincludedrowning,disease,dogs,

entanglement,poaching,andcombatwithotherdeer.Thereisadistincttrendofdeervehiclecollisions

alongUS1onBigPine,LittleTorchandRamrodKeys,andonKeyDeerBoulevardandWatsonBoulevard

leadingtoNoNameKey,aswellasresidentialroadsonBigPineKey.BigPineandNoNameKeys

subpopulationsofKeyDeerconstitutethecoreoftheKeyDeermetapopulation.KeyDeernumberson

BigPineKeyandNoNameKeyin2000revealeda240percentincreasesince1971,apopulationgrowth

rateofabout5percentannually.15Deervehiclecollisionsaccountedforapproximately50%ofthe

knownmortalityfrom1968to1972andfrom1998to2000.Therewerealsoincreasedmortalitiesfrom

entanglement(predominatelyfences)from0to7.9%anddiseasefrom0to5.3%forthesesametwo

timeperiods,whilemortalitiesduetodrowningdecreasedbetweensampleperiodsfrom9.6to2.6%,

respectively.Figure5.10showstheKeyDeerabundanceandmortalityindiceswithinthecore(the

subpopulationsonBigPineKeyandNoNameKey)from1966to2010.

MortalityduetodeervehiclecollisionsishigherinthesouthernportionofBigPineKeyprimarilydueto

lowerqualityandquantityofhabitat,greaterhabitatfragmentation,andtheurbanlandscape(highway

length,roadlength,fencedareas,developedlandandtrafficonUS1).SurvivalwashighestonNoName

Key,intermediateonnorthernBigPineKeyandlowestonsouthernBigPineKey.Currently,northernBig

PineKeyservesasasourceforKeyDeerwhilesouthernBigPineKeyservesasasink.

ThehighoccurrenceofdeervehiclecollisionsalongthisroadsegmentpromptedUSFWSandFDOT

biologiststoaddressthisproblem.In20012002,FDOTconstructeda2.6kmlongsystemoffencing,

twounderpasses,andfourexperimentaldeerguardstoaddressdeervehiclecollisionsalongaportion

oftheUS1roadway.



15 USFWS Southeast Region. 5-year Review: Summary and Evaluation Key Deer (Odocoileus virginianus 

clavium). August 2010. 
Source:USFWS

Notes:1)LeftyaxisrepresentstheannualcountofknownNationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011TransportationStudyReport53

mortalities,rightyaxisrepresentstheyearlyaverageofmonthlyroadcountsconductedalongtheService’ssurvey

route2)Core=subpopulationsonBigPineKeyandNoNameKey

Figure5.10:KeyDeerAbundanceandmortalityindiceswithintheCore21966–2010

1

1NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport54

Basedonthefouryearsofpostprojectdata(January28,2003December31,2006),theUS1corridor

projectsuccessfullyreducedKeyDeermortalitywithintheprojectareaofUS116.KeyDeermortalities

withintheprojectareahavedecreasedfromanaverageof12–24mortalitiesperyeartotwo

mortalitiesin2003,onemortalityin2004,zeromortalitiesin2005,andthreemortalitiesin2006.

IncomparingKeyDeermortalitypreandpostprojectcompletion,researchersfoundthatdeervehicle

collisionsalongthefencedsegmentoftheUS1projectwerereducedby83%–92%.Improvementsto

theUS1corridorprojecthavesuccessfullyreduceddeervehiclecollisionsalongthefencedsegmentof

US1.Thisdecreasetranslatesintoincreasedhumansafetyandanincreaseintheoverallpopulation

viabilityofKeyDeer.BasedondiscussionswithUSFWS,therehas,however,beenanincreaseofdeer

mortalitiesintheunfencedsegmentofUS1.Basedonpostfenceconstructionmonitoring,the

increaseddeermortalitiesonUS1intheunfencedportionscouldbeattributedtopotentiallyseveral

factorsincludingnaturalincreasesinfencemortalityassociatedwithfenceends,theadditionoftraffic

lanes,habitatimprovementsconductedalongUS1andanincreaseinthedeerpopulation.17

5.6 Floodplains

TheFederalEmergencyManagementAgency(FEMA)administerstheNationalFloodInsuranceProgram

(NFIP)throughoutMonroeCounty,Florida.DuringconsultationontheeffectsofFEMA’sFederalaction

requiredunder7(a)(2)oftheEndangeredSpeciesAct(ESA),theUSFWSissuedabiologicalopinionon

June16,1997.TheUSFWSrecommendeda“reasonableandprudentalternative”wherebyMonroe

County,withtheassistanceoftheUSFWSandFEMA,wouldidentifyhabitatandassistwithregulationof

development.TheUSFWSandFEMAgeneratedalistadministeredbytheCountyofspecificlotsonBig

PineKeyandNoNameKey,whichwereconsideredtocontainimportantKeyDeerhabitat.TheCounty

coordinateswiththeUSFWSonbehalfofFEMAonpermitapplicationactivitiesonthedesignatedlots.

Table5.7liststheFEMA mappanelsinthestudyarea.

Table5.7:FEMAMapPanels

12087C1200H12087C1505H 12087C1517H 12087C1536H

12087C1225H12087C1506H 12087C1519H 12087C1537H

12087C1480H12087C1507H 12087C1526H 12087C1539H

12087C1485H12087C1508H 12087C1527H 12087C1545H

12087C1490H12087C1509H 12087C1528I12087C0450G

12087C1491H12087C1511H 12087C1529H 12087C1565G

12087C1492H12087C1512H12087C1535H

Source:CommunityServices,FEMAFloodandNWIWetlandsdatawww.fgdl.com



16 Jason A. Schmidt, Roel R. Lopez and Nova J. Silvy, Evaluation of The US 1 Crossing Project in Reducing Key 

Deer Mortality (4 Year Post-Project Report). Texas A&M University. February 2007. 17 Israel D. Parker, Anthony W. Braden, Roel R. Lopez, Nova J. Silvy, Donald S. Davis and Catherine B. Owen. 

Effects of US 1 Project on Florida Key Deer Mortality. The Journal of Wildlife Management 72(2):354-359; 2008. 
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport55

AccordingtotheFEMAmaps,portionsoftheRefugearelocatedwithinFloodZoneX500,betweenthe

limitsofthe100yearand500yearflood;FloodZoneAE,subjecttothe100yearflood;andFloodZone

VE,subjecttothe100yearfloodandadditionalvelocityhazard(waveaction).Lowlyingfloodplain

areaswithintheRefugearevulnerabletosealevelriseandfloodingeventssuchashurricanesandother

majorstorms.Areasthatarewithinthevelocityhazardzonearevulnerabletostormsurges.These

typesofeventscanresultinhabitatchangeswheresaltwaterinundatesfreshwatersystemsaffecting

thevegetativecompositionortheavailabilityoffreshwaterforwildlifeincludingtheKeyDeer.Lossof

floodplainfromdevelopmentoutsidetheRefugealsoaffectstheextentofflooding.

5.7 CulturalResources

TheComprehensivePlancontainsstandardsfordesignationofhistoricstructuresanddistrictswithinthe

County(Objective104).Theplanningareacontainsseveralarcheologicalsitesandolderstructuresthat

maybeoflocalhistoricimportance.Todate,onlyonestructurehasbeendesignatedpursuanttothe

Countyprocess.ThatstructureisontheeasternshorelineofBigPineKeyatthesiteofaformershark

fisheryandprocessingplant.Theremaybeotherstructuresandsitessuitablefordesignation.The

CountyiscurrentlyconductinganinventoryofhistoricalsitesCountywide.

DatawasobtainedfromtheStateHistoricPreservationOffice(SHPO),FloridaMasterSiteFile(FMSF)for

previouslyrecordedculturalresourceswithinNKDR.TheFMSFincludedtwohistoricstructures,24

archaeologicalsites,andoneresourcegroup.TheculturalresourcesidentifiedintheRefugearenot

listedontheNationalRegisterofHistoricPlaces(NRHP)andnonehavebeenevaluatedbySHPOfor

eligibilityforlistingontheNRHP.NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport56

6. AlternativesAnalysis

Basedonthefindingsfromtheexistingconditionsreview,theTrafficNeedsandSafetyReport,and

commentsfromstakeholders,potentialimprovementstotheRefuge’stransportationnetworkwere

reviewedandroadwayalternativesinitiallyscreened.Thesealternativeswerethenscreened

environmentally,socially,andfinanciallyinmoredetailtodevelopthepreferredalternativesforthe

Refuge.

Preliminaryalternativeswereinitiallydevelopedtheninitiallyscreenedtodevelopconceptual

alternatives.Thesearediscussedinthissection.Theconceptualalternativeswerefurtherreviewedfor

impactsinSection7.

6.1 PreliminaryAlternatives

Preliminaryalternativesforphysicalroadwayconstructionandotherimprovementswereselectedfor

theRefuge.Thesewerefurthercategorizedbyimplementationtimeperiodsofshort(2015),medium

(2020),andlongrange(2030).Thefollowingmatrix,Table6.1,wasdevelopedtoidentifypotential

alternativesandresponsiblepartners.Thepartneragenciesonthisprojectinclude:USFWS,theFlorida

DepartmentofTransportation(FDOT),MonroeCounty,FL,theFloridaFishandWildlifeConservation

Commission(FWC),theFloridaDepartmentofEnvironmentalProtectionOfficeofGreenwaysandTrails

–FloridaKeysOverseasHeritageTrail(FDEP/FKOHT),theLowerKeysChamberofCommerce,Friends

andVolunteersofRefuges(FAVOR),andtheKeyDeerProtectionAlliance(KDPA).Atstakeholder

meetings,thestakeholdershaveagreedtoworktogethertoimplementthealternatives.

6.1.1 RoadwaySegmentImprovements

Thefollowingrecommendationswereidentifiedaspotentialimprovementstotheroadwaysnearand

adjacenttotheRefuge.Thesuggestedresponsiblepartnersarelistedbyeachalternative.

ShortRangeAlternatives(2015)

ReconfigureBlueHoleInterpretiveSiteparkinglotwithdefinedentrancesandexits

ResponsiblePartner:USFWS,MonroeCounty

MediumRangeAlternatives(2020)

Bicycle,pedestrianandshoulderfacilityupgradesonRefugeaccessroadways

ResponsiblePartners:MonroeCounty,USFWS

LongRangeAlternatives(2030)

UpgradesharedpathwayonKeyDeerBoulevardincludingseparationfromKeyDeerBoulevard

ResponsiblePartners:MonroeCounty,USFWS

Continuebicycle,pedestrianandshoulderfacilityupgradesonRefugeaccessroadways

ResponsiblePartners:MonroeCounty,USFWSNationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport57

Table6.1:ProposedStakeholderResponsibilities

USFWS

FDOT

MonroeCounty

FWC

FDEP/FKOHT

LowerKeysChamber

FAVOR

KDPA

BlueHoleSiteParkingLotReconfigurationXX

KeyDeerBoulevardVegetationTrimming/SightDistanceXX

KeyDeerBoulevardVegetationTrimming/SignVisibilityXX

KeyDeerAwarenessCampaignsXXXXXXXX

MonroeCountySignInventoryRecommendations

Implementation

XXXX

IdentificationofMissingBicycle/PedestrianFacility

Segments

XX

PurchaseandDeploySpeedCheckTrailerXX

PerformTrafficCalmingStudiesXX

NewVisitorsCenterBicycleRentalProgram

Implementation

XXX

USFWSSignageUpgradesXX

VisitorTripCharacteristicsSurveyX

VisitorsCenterInformationKioskXX

US1DeerCrossingSignageImprovementsXXXXX

RefugeAccessRoadwaysUpgradesXX

StakeholderCoordinationXXXXXXXX

KeyDeerAwarenessCampaignsXXXXXXXX

IntelligentTransportationSystemsImprovementsXXXXX

KeyDeerBoulevardSharedPathwayExtension/KeyDeer

BoulevardReconfigurationNorthofKyleBoulevard

XX

KeyDeerBoulevardPathwayUpgradesXX

RefugeAccessRoadwaysUpgradesXX

KeyDeerAwarenessCampaignsXXXXXXXX

StakeholderCoordinationXXXXXXXX

ShortRangeAlternatives

MediumRangeAlternatives

LongRangeAlternativesNationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport58

6.1.2 AdditionalRecommendations

FourteenadditionalrecommendationshavebeenproposedattheNKDR.Theserecommendationsare

notanticipatedtohavedirectimpactstotheenvironment.Theseinclude:

ShortRangeAlternatives(2015)

Trimvegetationatpulloutsandintersectionstoincreasesightdistanceswhereneeded(i.e.Key

DeerBoulevard)

ResponsiblePartner:USFWS,MonroeCounty

Performroutinetrimmingofvegetationaroundallsignsforvisibility

ResponsiblePartners:USFWS,MonroeCounty

ContinueawarenessofKeyDeerandotherthreatenedandendangeredspeciescrossingarea

roadways.Thismayinclude:

1) Developmentofnewmaterials/exhibitsattheVisitorsCenter(existingorfuture)

2) Runnotificationsinthelocalnewspapers/radio/homeownerassociationnewsletters

3) CreateuniquesignageforsecondaryroadsnotifyingspecialtimesfortheKeyDeer

4) PerformworkshopsatVisitorscenterandschools

ResponsiblePartners:AllStakeholders

ReviewMonroeCounty’sUS1signinventorystudyandimplementsignimprovements

ResponsiblePartners:FDOT,MonroeCounty,USFWS,FDEP/FKOHT

IdentifymissingbicycleandpedestrianfacilitysegmentstoservekeyRefugeareasincluding

accesstothenewVisitorsCenter18

ResponsiblePartners:USFWS,MonroeCounty

PurchasearadarspeedchecktrailertonotifydriversoftheirtravelspeedonCountyroads

withintheRefugearea

ResponsiblePartners:USFWS,MonroeCounty

PerformtrafficcalmingstudiesonkeyroadwaysaroundtheRefugetodetermineiftraffic

calmingmeasuresareappropriatetohelpreducevehiclespeeds.

ResponsiblePartners:MonroeCounty,USFWS

Incoordinationwithalocalvendor,implementabikerentalstationatthenewVisitorsCenter

forvisitortousetovisittheRefuge

ResponsiblePartners:USFWS,ChamberofCommerce,FAVOR



18 Depending on the location of the bicycle and pedestrian paths leading to/from the Visitors Center, there may some 

environmental impacts. These should be reviewed at that time. 
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport59

UpgradeallexistingUSFWSRefugesignageforconformancewiththeManualonUniformTraffic

ControlDevices(MUTCD)criteriaforstandardlettering,textmessage,signcolor,sizeand

placement

ResponsiblePartners:USFWS,MonroeCounty

SurveyRefugeVisitorsattheexistingVisitorsCenterandtheBlueHoleInterpretiveSiteontheir

tripcharacteristics

ResponsiblePartner:USFWS

InstallationofakioskatnewVisitorsCenterwheremultipleentitiescouldprovideinformation

ratherthanhavemultiplesigns

ResponsiblePartners:USFWS,ChamberofCommerce

Update,add,relocate,replaceorremoveasappropriateKeyDeerWarningSignsonUS1

throughentireKeyDeerhabitat(includingSugarloafKey,CudjoeKey,SummerlandKey,Ramrod

Key,LittleTorchKey,SpanishandHarborKey)

ResponsiblePartners:FDOT,USFWS,MonroeCounty,FAVOR,KDPA

MediumRangeAlternatives(2020)

ContinueawarenessofKeyDeerandotherthreatenedandendangeredspeciescrossingarea

roadways.Thismayinclude:

1) Developmentofnewmaterials/exhibitsattheVisitorsCenter(existingorfuture)

2) Runnotificationsinthelocalnewspapers/radio/homeownerassociationnewsletters

3) CreateuniquesignageforsecondaryroadsnotifyingspecialtimesfortheKeyDeer

4) PerformworkshopsatVisitorsCenterandschools

ResponsiblePartners:AllStakeholders

ImplementIntelligentTransportationSystemapplicationtonotifydriversofdeerentering

roadways

ResponsiblePartners:FDOT,MonroeCounty,USFWS,FAVOR,KDPA

LongRangeAlternatives(2030)

ContinueawarenessofKeyDeerandotherthreatenedandendangeredspeciescrossingarea

roadways.Thismayinclude:

1) Developmentofnewmaterials/exhibitsattheVisitorsCenter(existingorfuture)

2) Runnotificationsinthelocalnewspapers/radio/churchbulletins/schoolpapersatthe

startofbreedingformalerunningseasons

3) CreateuniquesignageforsecondaryroadsnotifyingspecialtimesfortheKeyDeer

4) PerformworkshopsatVisitorsCenterandschools

ResponsiblePartners:AllStakeholdersNationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport60

Ongoingcoordinationwithstakeholders

ResponsiblePartner:USFWS

6.2 ScreeningCriteria

Thescreeningcriteriausedforselectionofthepreliminarycandidateroadwayalternativesaredetailed

below.Thesescreeningcriteriawereestablishedbasedontheconditionsandissuesthatfuture

improvementsaddressed.Theseweredividedintofourcategories:

EnvironmentalandCulturalImpacts–Environmentalandculturalimpactsincludeissues

pertainingtothephysicalenvironment(i.e.wetlands,floodplains,naturalwildlifehabitats)and

socialfeatures(i.e.demographics,environmentaljustice,livability).

Constructability–Constructabilityreferstothereasonableissuesandelementsinvolvedwith

thephysicalconstructionofarecommendation.Forexample:thiscriterionwouldreview

whetherornottheimprovementcouldbeeffectivelyimplementedwithinthephysical

constraintsofthestudyarea’sexistingconditions.

TransportationBenefit–Transportationincludesthereviewofthepropertiesandconditions

associatedwithexistingandfutureroadways,safety,connectivity,andcapacityofthe

transportationnetworkforthestudyarea.

Cost–Costincludesthefinancialobligationassociatedwithimplementingarecommendation

includingdesign,construction,maintenance,andrelatedexpenses.

6.3 PreliminaryCandidateAlternatives

Fivepreliminarycandidatealternatives(includingaNoBuildalternative)presentedinthePreliminary

CandidateAlternativesReportwereidentifiedaseithershortrange(2015),mediumrange(2020),or

longrange(2030).

Thesealternativesarenotexclusiveandshouldallbeconsideredforimplementationinthefuture.Also,

forsomeofthealternatives,improvementshavebeenbrokendownintosectionsandprioritized.This

allowsimprovementstobeimplementedinphasesasmoniesareavailable.Thesealternativesare

showninFigure 6.1.

6.3.1 Alternative1ReconfigureBlueHoleInterpretiveSiteParkingLotwithDefined

EntrancesandExits–ShortRange

ReconfiguringtheparkingareawouldpreventvehiclesfromenteringandblockingtravellanesonKey

DeerBoulevardwhileperformingparkingmaneuvers.Thissafetyimprovementcouldbeperformedata

relativelylowcostwithlimitedornoimpacttothesurroundingarea.Thisalternativewillpromote

livabilitybyaddingamultimodalresourcetothearea.Extend shared UpgradesharedExtend shared

pathwayonKey

DeerBoulevard

Reconfigure parking

pathwayonKey

DeerBoulevard

Reconfigure parking

areaattheBlue

HoleInterpretive

Center

GeneralRecommendations:

• Bicycle,pedestrian,shoulderfacilityupgradeson

KeyDeerBoulevard,WatsonBoulevard,BigPine

Street,andKoehnAvenue

• T i t ti t Wildlif T il t f Trimvegetationat WildlifeTrailentrancefor

sightdistance

• Upgradesigns(locationsandlettering)

• SpeedenforcementonKeyDeerBoulevardand

otherBigPineKeyandNoNameKeyroadways

• ITSapplicationsforwildlifedetection

• Availability of bike rentals at new Visitors Center Availability of bike rentals at new Visitors Center

 March 2011 . .

Figure 6.1: Map of Preliminary Alternatives 
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport62

6.3.2 Alternative2Bicycle,PedestrianandShoulderFacilityUpgradesonRefugeAccess

Roadways–MediumRange

PrioritiesshouldbedeterminedforRefugeaccessroadwayswithsubstandardornoshouldersbasedon

knownuseofRefugevisitorsandotherusers.Theseupgradeswillpromotemultimodaltransportation

andincreaselivability.Onceprioritized,improvementscanbemadebytheCountyinasystematic

mannerstartingwiththehighestpriorityprojectasmoneybecomesavailable.Therewouldbesome

impacttothenaturalenvironmentaspreviouslyclearedshoulderareamaynotbeavailableatall

upgradelocations.Costsincludedesign,construction,andmaintenanceofthefacilities.Theremaybe

constructabilityissuesatsomelocations.

6.3.3 Alternative3ExtendSharedPathwayonKeyDeerBoulevardNorthofKyleBoulevard

–LongRange

ThesharedpathwayonKeyDeerBoulevardcurrentlyterminatesatKyleBoulevard.Thisextension

wouldlengthenthepathwayapproximately0.25milestothenorthernterminusofKeyDeerBoulevard.

Whileextendingthispathway,itwouldbeconstructedtostandardsfor2waybicycleandpedestrian

traffic,expandingthemultimodaltransportationnetwork,increasinglivability.Costsincludedesign,

constructionandmaintenanceofthefacility.Limitedenvironmentalimpactisexpected.

6.3.4 Alternative4UpgradeSharedPathwayonKeyDeerBoulevardincludingseparation

fromKeyDeerBoulevard–LongRange

ThisalternativeupgradestheexistingsharedpathwayonKeyDeerBoulevard.

Alternative4a–Widenexistingpathwayto2waybicycleandpedestriantrafficstandards:This

alternativewouldhavesomeimpacttothenaturalenvironmentasitwouldincreasetheamountof

imperviousareawhenthetrailiswidened.However,itwouldallowfortwowaybicycleandpedestrian

traffictopasssafely,enhancingtheexistingmultimodalsystemonBigPineKey,increasinglivability.

Costswouldincludedesign,constructionandmaintenanceofthetrail.Thewideningofthepathwayis

adjacenttoKeyDeerBoulevardmaycreatesomeadditionalenvironmentalimpacts.

Alternative4b–Widenexistingpathwayto2waybicycleandpedestriantrafficstandardsand

separatesectionsadjacenttoKeyDeerBoulevard:Thisalternativewouldhaveimpactstothenatural

environmentbyaddingimperviousareaandwouldhavemoreimpactstothepathwaysectionsthatare

directlyadjacenttoKeyDeerBoulevard.AsinAlternative4a,itwouldallowfor2waybicycleand

pedestriantraffic,enhancingtheexistingmultimodalsystemonBigPineKey,increasinglivability.Costs

wouldincludedesign,constructionandmaintenanceofthetrail.

6.4 ShortandLongRangeImplementationPlanAlternatives

Thesealternativeswerefurtherscreenedbydevelopingpreliminaryconceptdrawingsandconstruction

costestimatesforthefiveroadwayimprovementalternativespriortotheimpactanalysis.TheNoBuild

alternativewasalsoreviewed.

Allconstructioncostestimatesareconceptual.TheEngineerhasnocontroloverthecostoflabor,

materials,equipment,orovertheContractor'smethodsofdeterminingpricesorovercompetitiveNationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport63

biddingormarketconditions.Opinionsofprobablecostsprovidedhereinarebasedontheinformation

knowntotheEngineeratthistimeandrepresentonlytheEngineer'sjudgmentasadesignprofessional

familiarwiththeconstructionindustry.TheEngineercannotanddoesnotguaranteethatproposals,

bids,oractualconstructioncostswillnotvaryfromopinionsofprobablecosts.

6.4.1 NoBuildAlternative

TheNoBuildalternativeprovidesnoimprovementstotheexistingtransportationfacilitiesinthestudy

area.Therefore,therealsowouldbenoimprovementcostsorimpactstothenaturalenvironmentin

thestudyarea.IntheNoBuildAlternative,theexistinghabitatwouldremain.However,therewouldbe

noimprovementsimplementedthatcouldminimizedeervehiclecollisions.

6.4.2 Alternative1ReconfigureParkingAreaatBlueHoleInterpretiveSite

Alternative1involvesreconfiguringtheparkingareaattheBlueHoleInterpretiveSitetoprevent

vehiclesfromenteringandblockingtravellanesonKeyDeerBoulevardwhileperformingparking

maneuvers(Figure6.2).Withthisreconfiguration,theparkinglotvehicleswillnotneedtomaneuver

ontoKeyDeerBoulevard.Thisalternativewouldresultinnoimpactstotheenvironment.The

constructioncostestimateforthisalternativeisapproximately$5,000forrestripingandthemedian

treatment.DetailedimpactsareidentifiedinSection7.

6.4.3 Alternative2Bicycle,PedestrianandShoulderFacilityUpgradesonRefugeAccess

Roadways

Asstatedinpreviousstudies,anumberoftheroadwaysaroundtheRefugehavesubstandardorno

shoulders.Alternative2involvesupgradingsegmentsoftheseroadwaysaroundtheRefuge.Alternative

2isbrokendownintovariousoptionsthatcanbeconstructeddependingonthecostand

implementationconstraints.DetailedimpactsareidentifiedinSection7.

6.4.3.1 Alternative2a–MidBlockCrosswalkacrossKeyDeerBoulevard

Figure6.3showsanunsignalizedpedestriancrossingalternativeattheBlueHoleInterpretiveSite.This

alternativewouldincludesigningandstripingandamidblockcrosswalkacrossKeyDeerBoulevardat

BlueHoleInterpretiveSite.Thiscrosswalkwillfacilitatevisitoraccessfromtheexistingsharedpathway

onKeyDeerBoulevardtotheBlueHoleInterpretiveSiteforbicyclesandpedestrians.

6.4.3.2 Alternative2b–SharrowStriping

Analternativetowideningtheroadwaysforbicyclelanesisthestripingofsharrowsontheroadwayand

theinstallationofappropriatesignage.AnexampleofsharrowstripinginMiami,Floridaisshownin

Figure6.4.ItisrecommendedthatsharrowimplementationbereviewedforWatsonBoulevardfrom

KeyDeerBoulevardtoAvenueB,WatsonBoulevardonNoNameKey,WatsonBoulevardfromKeyDeer

Boulevardtothewesternterminus,alongBigPineStreet,andalongKoehnAvenue.PROPOSED PLAN

NORTH

SCALE: 1" = 60'

Blue Hole

Parking Facility

Big Pine Street

Key Deer Boulevard

Figure 6.2: Reconfigure Parking Area at Blue Hole Interpretive Site 

NATIONAL KEY DEER REFUGE 

TRANSPORTATION STUDY

Reconfigure Parking Area at Blue Hole 

Interpretive Site
NORTH

SCALE: 1" = 50'

Blue Hole

Parking Facility

Big Pine Street

Key Deer Boulevard

For visualization purposes. 

.

NATIONAL KEY DEER REFUGE 

TRANSPORTATION STUDY

CREATE MID-BLOCK CROSSWALK AT 

BLUE HOLE INTERPRETIVE SITE

Figure 6.3: Create Mid-Block Crosswalk at Blue Hole Interpretive Site

Concept Only 

Not for Construction

For visualization purposes only *Specific

dimensions may vary on different roadway segments.

Proposed Alternative 2a 
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport66

Figure6.4–SharrowStripingExample

6.4.3.3 Alternative2c–ShoulderWidening

Shoulderwideningforbicyclelaneshasbeenidentifiedasanotheroptionofthisalternative.Figure6.5

showsanexampleofthewidenedsection.Roadwaysegmentsandassociatedimprovementshavebeen

prioritizedbasedontheirrelativelocationandprojectedtrafficvolume.Figure6.6showsthelocations

ofthesesegments.TheprioritizedlistshouldbesubmittedtotheCountyforinclusioninthecapital

improvementprogramasindicatedintheLivableCommuniKeysMasterplan.Asmoniesbecome

available,theCountythenhasasystematicmannerindeterminingtheorderinwhichprojectsshouldbe

completed.ItisexpectedthatthefirstthreelocationsonWatsonBoulevardwouldbemediumrange

improvementswiththeremaininglocationsaslongrangeimprovements.

AllimprovementsshouldbeconstructedconsistentwithMonroeCountystandardsasappropriate.

Whenupgradingforshoulders(8footshoulders)andwideningtostandardwidth(12foottravellanes),

resurfacingwilllikelyalsooccur.Resurfacingtheexistingroadwaypreservesthelifeexpectancyofthe

roadandenhancesthetravelers’experiencedrivingalongtheroad.

Limitedenvironmentalimpactsareexpectedforthestripingandmarkingalternative,whilesome

environmentalimpactsareexpectedfortheshoulderorwideningalternativesections.Detailedimpacts

arediscussedinSection7.Asthesefacilityupgradesoccur,someimpactstothenaturalenvironment

areexpectedaspreviouslyclearedshoulderareasmaynotbeavailableatallupgradelocations.

Thetotalconstructioncostestimateforthisalternativeisapproximately$4million.However,itis

expectedthattheseprojectswouldbecompletedinphases.Table6.2showsanestimatedbreakdown

ofeachofthesesegmentsinpriorityorderandtheassociatedprojectedconstructioncosts.TYPICAL SECTION

NORTH

SCALE: 1" = 500'

Blue Hole

Interpretive Site

Big Pine Street

Key Deer Boulevard

Koehn Avenue

NATIONAL KEY DEER REFUGE 

TRANSPORTATION STUDY

EXAMPLE CROSS SECTION FOR 

RECOMMENDED FACILITY UPGRADES 

Proposed Alternative 2c

*Concept only. Not for construction. Specific dimensions may vary on different segments of the roadways.

For visualization purposes Figure 6.5: Example Cross Section for Recommended Facility Upgrades 

Concept Only 

Not for Construction
Big Pine Key

No Name Key

Wilder Road

South Street

Avenue B

Watson Boulevard

Key Deer Boulevard

Big Pine Street

Koehn Avenue

Watson Boulevard

1£¤ DATE

PROJECT NUMBERSHEET NUMBER

MONROE COUNTY FLORIDA

National Key Deer Refuge

Transportation Study

Contract No.: DTFH71-09-D-00001

IMPROVEMENT PLAN

ALTERNATIVE 2

SCALE:

DESIGNED BY:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

METADATA:

No. REVISIONS DATE BY

Drawing path: K:\VRB_Environmental\011675016FHWAkeydeerrefuge\GIS\MXD Data courtesy of www.fgdl.org

orization and adoption by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. shall be without liability to Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. pecific purpose and the client for which it was prepared. Reuse of and improper reliance on this document without written auth This document, together with the concepts and designs presented herein, as an instrument of service, is intended only for the s 03/28/2011 011675016

.

AS NOTED

WILL.METCALFE

WILL.METCALFE

LYNN.KIEFER

o

Legend

Upgrade shoulder on Key Deer Boulevard from Big Pine Street to Kyle BoulevardUpgrade shoulder on Key Deer Boulevard from Watson Boulevard to Big Pine StreetUpgrade shoulder/widen to standard width Big Pine StreetUpgrade shoulder/widen to standard width Koehn AvenueUpgrade shoulder/widen to standard width Watson Boulevard from Key Deer Boulevard to Avenue BUpgrade shoulder/widen to standard width Watson Boulevard from Key Deer Boulevard to the westUpgrade shoulder/widen to standard width Watson Boulevard on No Name Key

0 2,000 4,000 1,000

Feet

Figure 6.6: Alternative 2c Potential Segments 
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

ShortandLongRangeImprovementPlanReport69

Table6.2:Alternative2cRoadwaySegmentPriorityList

PriorityDescriptionDistanceCost1

1Upgradeshoulder/widentostandardwidthWatsonBoulevard

fromKeyDeerBoulevardtoAvenueB3,950Feet$474,000

2Upgradeshoulder/widentostandardwidthWatsonBoulevard

fromNoNameKeyBridgetotheeastterminus7,400Feet$888,000

3Upgradeshoulder/widentostandardwidthWatsonBoulevard

fromKeyDeerBoulevardtothewestterminus3,400Feet$408,000

4UpgradeshoulderonKeyDeerBoulevardfromWatson

BoulevardtoBigPineStreet6,310Feet$663,000

5UpgradeshoulderonKeyDeerBoulevardfromBigPineStreet

toKyleBoulevard7,350Feet$772,000

6Upgradeshoulder/widentostandardwidthBigPineStreet1,500Feet$180,000

7Upgradeshoulder/widentostandardwidthKoehnAvenue4,900Feet$588,000

Notes:

1:OpinionsofProbableCosts,availableinAppendixE:OpinionsofProbableCost

6.4.4 Alternative3(Figure6.7)ExtendSharedPathwayandAddShouldersonKeyDeerBoulevard

NorthofKyleBoulevard

ThesharedpathwayonKeyDeerBoulevardcurrentlyterminatesatKyleBoulevard.Thisalternative

wouldextendthepathwayapproximately0.25milestothenorthernterminusofKeyDeerBoulevard.

Thepathwayextensionwouldbeconstructedtostandardsfortwowaybicycleandpedestriantraffic.

Thisalternativewouldalsoincludetheadditionofpavedshoulders(8footshoulders)andresurfacingof

theexistingroadway.Extendingthesharedpathwayandconstructingittostandardsfortwoway

bicycleandpedestriantraffichelptoprovideconnectivityandabetterbicycleandpedestriannetwork

forvisitorsaroundtheRefuge.Theadditionofpavedshouldersbringstheroadsegmentsinto

compliancewithCountystandards.Resurfacingtheexistingroadwaypreservesthelifeexpectancyof

theroadandenhancesthetravelers’experiencedrivingalongtheroad.Theenvironmentalimpactsto

nativehabitat,wetlandsandfloodplainsareminimalforthisalternativebecauseamajorityofthe

improvementswouldoccurwithintheexistingclearedandmaintainedroadwayandroadshoulders.

EnvironmentalimpactsaredetailedinSection7.Theconstructioncostisestimatedatapproximately

$238,000.

6.4.5 Alternative4(Figures6.8and6.9)–WidenSharedPathwayonKeyDeerBoulevard

CurrentlythesharedpathwayonKeyDeerBoulevardiseightfeetwide.Alternative4hastwooptions.

Alternative4aincludeswideningtheexistingpathwayto10feet,twofeetnarrowerthancurrent

MonroeCountystandardsandthereforewouldrequireadesignexception.Alternative4binvolves

wideningtheexistingpathwayto10feetandseparatingthepathwayfromKeyDeerBoulevardnorthof

WatsonBoulevard.WideningthesharedpathwayincreasesthenumberofvisitorswhocanTYPICAL SECTION

NORTH

SCALE: 1" = 400'

Key Deer Boulevard

Kyle Boulevard

Gulf Boulevard

For visualization purposes

*Specific dimensions may vary on different

segments of the roadway.

Proposed Alternative 3

Figure 6.7: Extend Shared Use Path and Add Shoulder on Key Deer Blvd. 

.

Concept Only 

Not for Construction

NATIONAL KEY DEER REFUGE 

TRANSPORTATION STUDY

Extend Shared Use Path and Add 

Shoulders on Key Deer Blvd.
TYPICAL SECTION

8'

EXISTING

PROPOSED

MILLING AND

RESURFACING

10'

NORTH

SCALE: 1" = 500'

Blue Hole

Interpretive Site

Big Pine Street

Key Deer Boulevard

Koehn Avenue

.

For visualization purposes

*Concept only. Not for construction.

Dimensions may be modified during detailed design.

Figure 6.8: Widen Existing Shared Use Pathway on Key Deer Blvd. 

NATIONAL KEY DEER REFUGE 

TRANSPORTATION STUDY

Widen Existing Shared Use Pathway on 

Key Deer Boulevard

Proposed Alternative 4a 
NORTH

SCALE: 1" = 50' Key Deer Boulevard

Proposed Alternative 4b

.

. Figure 6.9: Widen Shared Use Pathway and Separate from Key Deer Blvd. 

Concept Only 

Not for Construction

NATIONAL KEY DEER REFUGE 

TRANSPORTATION STUDY

Widen Shared Use Pathway and 

Separate from Key Deer Blvd.

For visualization purposes only. 

Dimensions may vary in the field 
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

ShortandLongRangeImprovementPlanReport73

safelyandcomfortablyusethepathway.Environmentalimpactsareexpectedforeachofthese

alternatives.DetailedimpactsarediscussedinSection7.TheestimatedconstructioncostforAlternative

4aisapproximately$562,000.TheestimatedconstructioncostforAlternative4bisapproximately

$873,000.

6.5 AdditionalRecommendations(NonroadwayImprovements)

Fourteenadditionaltransportationrecommendationswerefurtherdevelopedhavebeenproposedat

theNKDR.Theserecommendationsarenotanticipatedtohavedirectimpactstotheenvironmentwith

apotentialexceptionofAlternative8dependantonitsdesign.

6.5.1 Alternative5TrimVegetationatPulloutsandIntersectionstoIncreaseSight

DistancesWhereNeeded(i.e.KeyDeerBoulevard)

SeeFigure6.10foranexampleofthesightdistancetriangleonKeyDeerBoulevardattheNatureTrail

Entrance/Exit.Frequencyschedulewillbedeterminedbyvegetationgrowth.

6.5.2 Alternative6PerformRoutineTrimmingofVegetationAroundSignsforVisibility

SimilartoAlternative5,trimmingofvegetationaroundthesignswillincreasevisibility.Partnerwith

MonroeCountyandFDOTMaintenancestaffforassistance.

6.5.3 Alternative7ReviewMonroeCounty’sUS1SignInventorySignStudyand

ImplementSignImprovements

Theinventorytaskhasbeencompleted.TheRefugewillcoordinatewithMonroeCountyregardingnew

signlocationsidentifiedinAlternative15.

6.5.4 Alternative8OnceConstructed,theNewVisitorsCenterShouldTieIntoExisting

BicycleandPedestrianFacilitiesAlreadyinPlaceonUS1andAlsoPotentiallytheBack

SideoftheProperty.

Includethisbicycle/pedestrianconnectivityduringthedevelopmentofthenewVisitorsCenter.

Environmentalimpactsofthisalternativehavenotbeendeterminedbecausetheimpactissubjectto

morespecificdesignparameters(e.g.locationofthetrailatthebackoftheproperty,additionalparking

facilities,etc.).Itisexpectedthattherewouldbeimpactstouplandhabitatwiththeconstructionof

trailsorbicyclefacilitiesatthebacksideoftheproperty.Theseimpactscouldbeminimizeddepending

onthesizeandtypeoftrailthatisdesignedandconstructed.

6.5.5 Alternative9PurchaseaRadarSpeedCheckTrailertoNotifyDriversofTheirTravel

SpeedonCountyRoadsWithintheRefugeArea

CoordinatewithMonroeCountySheriff’sDepartmentpriortopurchase.Identifyifthereisopportunity

forshareduseofanexistingspeedchecktrailer.WorkwiththeSheriff’sDepartmentonimplementation

ofplacement.DRIVER'S EYE 14.5'

FROM EDGE OF

MAJOR ROADWAY

CLEAR SIGHT TRIANGLE

286.7'

330.8'

CENTER OF

LANE

CENTER OF

LANE

CLEAR SIGHT TRIANGLE

20' FROM CENTER OF

LANE TO DRIVER'S EYE

50'

10.1' CLEARING FROM ROADWAY

50'

9.4' CLEARING FROM ROADWAY

31' FROM CENTER OF

LANE TO DRIVER'S EYE

NORTH

SCALE: 1" = 80'

SIGHT DISTANCE EQUATION

ISD = 1.47 * Vmajor * tg

ISD = Intersection sight distance measured perpendicular from

the center of the lane of the major roadway (ft.)

Vmajor = Design Speed of the major road (mph)

t

g = Time gap for minor road vehicle to enter the major road (sec.)

Time gap for left turn from minor road (passenger car) = 7.5 seconds

Time gap for right turn from the minor road (passenger car) = 6.5 seconds

Source: FDOT Florida Greenbook, May 2007

Key Deer Boulevard

Jack Watson and Fred Mannillo

Wildlife Trail Parking

Figure 6.10: Sight Triangle at Nature Trail Entrance/Exit 

NATIONAL KEY DEER REFUGE 

TRANSPORTATION STUDY

Sight Triangle at Nature Trail 

Entrance/Exit
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

ShortandLongRangeImprovementPlanReport75

6.5.6 Alternative10PerformTrafficCalmingStudiesonKeyRoadwaysAroundtheRefuge

toDetermineifTrafficCalmingMeasuresareAppropriatetoHelpReduceVehicle

Speeds

FormallyrequestatrafficcalmingstudytobeperformedonKeyDeerBoulevard,WatsonBoulevard(on

BigPineKeyandNoNameKey),andanyotherroadwaysofinteresttoMonroeCounty.Whenfundingto

conductthisanalysisbecomesavailable,MonroeCountycanthenperformatrafficcalmingstudyfor

theseroadwaystodeterminewhattrafficcalmingmeasureswouldbeappropriate.Thiswasalso

recommendedasanactionitemintheLivableCommuniKeysMasterplan.

6.5.7 Alternative11InCoordinationWithaLocalVendor,ImplementaBikeRentalStation

attheNewVisitorsCenterforRefugeVisitors.

RecommendthistobecompletedwhenthenewVisitorsCenterisbuilt.

6.5.8 UpgradeallexistingUSFWSRefugesignageforconformancewiththeManualon

UniformTrafficControlDevices(MUTCD)criteriaforstandardlettering,textmessage,

signcolor,sizeandplacement

UpgradesignsattheBlueHoleInterpretiveSiteandtheNatureTrailtoMUTCDstandards.Examplesof

GeneralDirectionalGuidesignscanbeseeninFigure2M2onpage334oftheMUTCD,2009Edition.

Thissectioncanbeaccessedviathefollowingweblink:

http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/pdfs/2009/part2ithu2n.pdf

ExampleshavebeenprovidedtotheRefugeunderseparatecover.

6.5.9 Alternative13SurveyRefugeVisitorsattheExistingVisitorsCenterandtheBlue

HoleInterpretiveSiteonTheirTripCharacteristicstoDevelopVisitorPassBy

Information.

IfatrafficstudyisrequiredfortheVisitorsCenter,itisrecommendedthatasurveyquestionnairebe

preparedtodeterminevisitorpassbytripcharacteristics.Thissurveywillneedtobecoordinatedwith

theOfficeofManagementandBudget(OMB)forapprovalofthesurvey.Alsoaccesstothesiteshould

bereviewedincludingturnlanewarrantanalysesasnecessary.Theproposedsurveyquestionsare:

ThankyouforvisitingtheNationalKeyDeerRefuge.Inanefforttobetterunderstandingour

visitors,weaskthatyouanswerthefollowingquestionsrelatedtoyourtriptoday.

1. Areyouafulltimeresident,parttimeresident,orvacationer?

2. PriortoarrivingattheRefugetoday,whatcity,milemarker,orzipcodewasyourpreviousstop?

3. AftervisitingtheRefugetoday,willyougodirectlybacktoyourpreviousstop?

a. Ifyes,proceedtoquestion4.

b. Ifno,whatisthecity,milemarker,orzipcodeofyournextdestination?

4. IfyouhadnotstoppedattheRefugetoday,wouldyouhavetraveledonU.S.1throughBigPine

Key?
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport76

6.5.10 Alternative14InstallationofaKioskatNewVisitorsCenterWhereMultipleEntities

CanProvideInformationRatherThanHaveMultipleSigns

RecommendakioskbeinstalledwhenthenewVisitorsCenterisbuilt.

6.5.11 Alternative15Update,Add,Relocate,ReplaceorRemove,asappropriate,KeyDeer

WarningSignsonUS1ThroughEntireKeyDeerHabitat(includingSugarloafKey,

CudjoeKey,SummerlandKey,RamrodKey,LittleTorchKey,andWestSummerland

Key)

PartnerwithFDOTtodeterminethepermittingproceduresandsignstandardsonUS1.Suggest

placementofsignsatthestartoftheKeyDeerhabitatratherthanjustonBigPineKeytomake

motoristsawareofthepotentialdeercrossings.Recommendworkingwithstakeholdersondetermining

thelocationsandmessagesonsigns.

6.5.12 Alternative16ContinueAwarenessofKeyDeerandOtherThreatenedand

EndangeredSpeciesCrossingAreaRoadways

Continuepublicoutreachactivities.

6.5.13 Alternative17ImplementIntelligentTransportationSystemapplicationtoNotify

DriversofDeerEnteringRoadways

ITSapplicationsaremainlyresearchbased,withmanydifferenttechnologiesbeingtestedworldwide

withthemostsuccessbeingfoundwithlarge(elksize)migratoryanimals.Recommendcoordinating

withFDOT,MonroeCountyandanimal/vehiclesignexpertsonproperlocationofsigns.Somewell

knownanimal/vehiclesignexpertsareDr.MarcelP.HuijseratMontanaStateUniversityandPatricia

WhitewithDefendersofWildlife.Recommendcontactinganimal/vehiclecollisionexpertsandrequest

theRefugebeincludedinoneoftheresearchactivitiestohelpdeterminethepropertypeofITS

application.

6.5.14 Alternative18OngoingCoordinationWithStakeholders

Continuepartnershipswithstakeholders.NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport77

7. PreliminaryImpactScreening

Thissectiondescribestheimpactscreeningfortheroadwayimprovementalternativesproposedatthe

NKDRImpactsarebasedonthepreliminaryfootprintsoftheconceptualalternativespreviously

described.

7.1 SummaryofScreening

Thefollowingcategorieswereconsideredduringthepreliminaryimpactscreeningprocess.

LandUse,HabitatConservationPlan(HCP)ImpactsandapplicabilitytoLivableCommuniKeys

Masterplan–Changestoexistingandproposedlanduses.TheconditionsoftheFederalFishand

WildlifePermitNo.TE0834110andthesupportingHabitatConservationPlan(HCP)limitstheamount

ofclearingofnativevegetationthatcanoccuronBigPineKeyandNoNameKeyto7acresthroughyear

2023.CoordinationwithUSFWS’sEcologicalServicesDivisionwillberequiredifitisdecidedthat

alternativesdescribedhereinareselectedforimplementationandthususingportionsofthe7acre

threshold.TheLivableCommuniKeysMasterplanestablishedanumberofgoals,followonstrategies

andactionitemsrelatedtolanduseandredevelopment,environmentalprotection,community

character,economicdevelopment,trafficandtransportation,andcommunityparticipation.Thesegoals

willbereviewedrelativetothealternativespresented.

SocioeconomicandCommunityFeatures–Socioeconomiccompositionofaffectedcommunitiesand

impactstocommunityfeatures.

EnvironmentalJustice–Impactsonminorityorlowincomepopulations.

CulturalResources–Impactstohistoricorarchaeologicalresources.

TransportationandSafety–Changesintrafficpatternsandsafetyfordrivers,pedestrians,and

bicyclists.

VisitorUseandExperience–Changestovisitorfacilitiesandexperience.

Wetlands–ImpactstojurisdictionalwatersandwetlandsbasedonNationalWetlandInventory(NWI)

mapping.

Floodplains–ChangestoimperviousareawithinfloodplainsandfloodwaysbasedonFederal

EmergencyManagementAgency(FEMA)mapping.

ThefollowingsectionsbrieflydescribetheexistingnaturalandhumanenvironmentwithintheNKDR

andpotentiallyimpactedareas.Table7.1summarizesthescreeningfortheroadwayalternatives.

7.2 PotentialImpactstoExistingConditions

Impactstowetlands,habitatandfloodplainshavebeencalculatedforthealternatives.Thisstudyis

beingconductedprimarilyusingexistingGeographicalInformationSystemdata.Theimpactacreages

areapproximateandweredeterminedbasedonGISmappingandaerialinterpretation.TheacreagesNationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport78

Table7.1.ImpactSummary

ImpactResource

orCategory

Alternative

Alternative1Alternative2aAlternative2bAlternative2cAlternative3Alternative4aAlternative4b

Reconfigure

BlueHole

parking

Stripe

Crosswalkon

KeyDeerBlvd

StripeSharrows

Shoulderand

Widening

Improvements

ExtendShared

PathwayonKey

DeerBlvd.

WidenShared

PathwayonKey

DeerBlvd.

Widenand

Separate

Shared

PathwayonKey

DeerBlvd.

UplandHabitat

(acres)NoImpactNoImpactNoImpact0.50.050.130.14

Community

Features

Temporary

construction

impacttoBlue

Hole

Interpretive

site.

NoImpactNoImpactNoimpactNoImpactNoImpactNoImpact

Environmental

JusticeNoimpactNoimpactNoimpactNoimpactNoimpactNoimpactNoimpact

CulturalResourcesNoimpactanticipatedNoimpactanticipatedNoimpactanticipatedNoimpactanticipatedNoimpactanticipatedNoimpactanticipatedNoimpactanticipated

Transportation

andSafety

Improve

operationfor

visitorsusing

theparking

facilitiesand

travelerson

KeyDeerBlvd.

Enhances

bicycleand

pedestrian

crossingofKey

DeerBlvd.

Improves

bicycle

facilities

improves

bicycleand

pedestrian

facilities

Improves

bicycleand

pedestrian

facilities

Improve

shareduse

pathway

Improve

shareduse

pathwayand

provides

separation

fromtrafficon

KeyDeerBlvd.

VisitorUseand

ExperienceEnhancesEnhancesEnhancesEnhancesEnhancesEnhancesEnhances

Wetlands(acres)NoimpactNoimpactNoimpact0.09NoimpactNoimpactNoimpact

Floodplains(acres)NoimpactNoimpactNoimpact1.030.681.041.44NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport79

areprovidedforcomparativepurposesbutaresubjecttofieldevaluation,wetlanddelineationandfinal

engineeringduringfuturedesignandpermittingphasesincludingfurtherexaminationbytheUSFWS

locallyandtheEcologicalServicesDivisionasitrelatestoconsistencywiththeHCP.Itshouldbenoted

thatthisfuturescreeningmayresultintheeliminationofcertainalternativesfromimplementation.

Asstatedpreviously,theHCPdictatesthatthesevenacresincludeshabitatlossduetopublicand

privateprojectsincludingroadwayimprovementsforbicycles,pavingofdirtroads,threelaningofUS1

andprivatedevelopmentonpreviouslydisturbedland.Therearenospecificprojectsidentified,except

forthewideningofUS1.Therefore,ingeneraltheroadwayalternativespresentedfallwithintheHCP

andLivableCommuniKeysMasterplancomplianceifUSFWSiswillingtoutilizetheremainingacreagefor

thesetransportationimprovements.

LandUse,HabitatConservationPlan(HCP)Impacts,andapplicabilitytoLivableCommuniKeys

Masterplan–Thestudyareacontainsawiderangeofintensitiesandpatternsoflanduseincluding

largetractsofundevelopedlands,includingpropertyunderpublicownershiporprotectedthrough

conservationeasement;pocketsoflowdensityresidentialuse;moderatetohigherdensityresidential

developmentconcentratedinimprovedsubdivisions;andstripsofcommercialandindustrial

developmentalongstretchesofUS1.Theareaspotentiallyimpactedbytheproposedalternativesare

locatedprimarilyintheroadwayrightofwayownedbyeitherMonroeCountyorUSFWS.TheHCP

allowsfornomorethan7totalacresofnativevegetationtobeclearedthroughyear2023onBigPine

KeyandNoNameKey.TheHCPaccountsforthefutureroadwayimprovementstobothpavedand

unpavedroadwayswithintheRefugegenerallyconsistentwiththeproposedimprovements.However,it

isconceivablethatproposedalternativesmaynotbeimplementediftheacreageoftheremoved

vegetationexceedsthedesiredamountallocatedforimprovementstoroadwayfacilities.TheLivable

CommuniKeysMasterplanaddressesthesetypesofimprovementswithactionitemstopermitbicycle

andpedestrianfacilitiesinlimitedrightofway,whereappropriate.

SocioeconomicandCommunityFeatures–TheNationalKeyDeerRefugeislocatedinMonroeCounty

Florida.ThealternativesproposedwithintheRefugeareconcentratedontwooftheislandswithinthe

NationalKeyDeerRefugeBigPineKeyandNoNameKey.Itisnotexpectedthatanycommunity

featureswillbeadverselyimpactedbytheseimprovements.Twopublicinformationmeetingshave

occurredforthisprojectandcitizeninputonthealternativeshasbeenrequested.Advertisementand

notificationofthesemeetingshasbeenthroughmailerstostakeholders,newsannouncements,email

fromtheRefugetolocalcitizensandthroughtheprojectspecificwebpage.

EnvironmentalJustice–AlthoughtheRefugeisopentoallvisitors,residentsoftheFloridaKeysand

MonroeCountyaremorelikelytopassthroughtheRefuge.US1,themainarterialtotheRefuge,

functionsasbothalocalandregionalfacilitythroughouttheFloridaKeys.Itisalifelinefortheregional

economyandtheonlyhurricaneevacuationrouteforKeysresidentsandvisitors.Accordingto2000

Censusdata,6.5%ofresidentsinBigPineKeyareminority(primarilytwoormoreraces,Black,orAsian).

The2000USCensusindicatedthat10%offamiliesandindividualsinMonroeCountyand9%inBigPine

Keyarebelowthepovertylevel,whichislowerthanbothstateandnationalpovertylevels(12%).TheNationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport80

percentagesofminorityresidentsandthefamiliesbelowpovertyarelowerinMonroeCountyand

specificallyBigPineKeythanthestateasawhole.Eachofthealternativesproposedoccuralongexisting

roadsanddonotresultdisproportionateimpactstolowincomeorminoritypopulations.

CulturalResources–Theplanningareacontainsseveralarcheologicalsitesandolderstructuresthat

maybeoflocalhistoricimportance.NoculturalresourcesintheRefugearelistedontheNational

RegisterofHistoricPlaces(NRHP)andnonehavebeenevaluatedbySHPOforeligibilityforlistingonthe

NRHP.Therearenoexpectedimpactstoculturalresourcesforthealternativesconsideredinthisstudy.

TransportationandSafety–ThetransportationstudyareafortheprojectincludesUS1,KeyDeer

Boulevard,WatsonBoulevard,LongBeachDrive,BigPineRoad,SouthStreet,AvenueB,KoehnAvenue

andWilderRoad.SafetyconcernswithintheRefugeincludedeervehiclecollisions,visitorsbackingout

ofparkinglotsintooncomingtraffic,lackofstandardshoulders,andlackofstandardpedestrian/bicycle

facilities.

VisitorUseandExperience–VehicularaccesstoRefugelandsisprovidedthroughvariousCounty

maintainedpublicroadways.ThemajorityofpublicaccesstotheNKDRisprovidedonBigPineandNo

NameKeysviaUS1.RoadwaysonBigPineKeythatprovideprimaryaccesstotheRefugeviaUS1

includeKeyDeerBoulevard,WilderRoad,andLongBeachRoad.Mostentrancesfrompublicstreetsto

theNKDRaregatedandnotaccessibletothepublicbyvehicle.However,therearesmallunmarked,

unpavedparkingareaswherevisitorscanparkandentertheRefugebyfootatthenorthernterminusof

KeyDeerBoulevard,theeasternterminusofWatsonBoulevard,LongBeachTrail,andOhioKeyBeach

Trail.ParkingareasareprovidedfortheBlueHoleInterpretiveSiteandWatson/MannilloTrails.The

existingVisitorsCenterislocatednearUS1MM30.5onKeyDeerBoulevard.Aoneacresiteforanew

VisitorsCenterhasbeenacquiredalongUS1.Theshoulderandpathwaysalternativesareexpectedto

furtherenhancevisitormobilityandexperience.

Wetlands–BasedonNWIandGISlandcovermapping,wetlandsarelocatedthroughoutalltheislands

intheNationalKeyDeerRefuge.Impactstowetlandsareminimalforallalternatives.

Floodplains–FEMAmappingindicatesthatportionsoftheRefugearelocatedwithinFloodZoneX500,

betweenthelimitsofthe100yearand500yearflood;FloodZoneAE,subjecttothe100yearflood;

andFloodZoneVE,subjecttothe100yearfloodandadditionalvelocityhazard(waveaction).Lowlying

floodplainareaswithintheRefugearevulnerabletosealevelriseandfloodingeventssuchashurricanes

andothermajorstorms.Areasthatarewithinthevelocityhazardzonearevulnerabletostormsurges.

Thesetypesofeventscanresultinhabitatchangeswheresaltwaterinundatesfreshwatersystems

affectingthevegetativecompositionortheavailabilityoffreshwaterforwildlifeincludingthekeydeer.

LossoffloodplainfromdevelopmentoutsidetheRefugealsoaffectstheextentofflooding.Some

impactstofloodplainsareexpected.NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport81

7.3 PotentialImpactsforAlternatives

7.3.1 Alternative1–ReconfigureParkingAreaatBlueHoleInterpretiveSite

LandUse,HabitatConservationPlan(HCP)Impacts,andapplicabilitytoLivableCommuniKeys

Masterplan–Alternative1involvesreconfiguringtheparkingareaofanexistingpavedparkinglotat

theBlueHoleInterpretiveSite.Tenheadinparkingspaceswillbereplacedwithnineangledparking

spacesandamedianwillbeaddedtoseparatetheparkinglotfromKeyDeerBoulevard.Nonegative

impactsareanticipated.

SocioeconomicandCommunityFeatures–Thisalternativewillnotdirectlyimpactanyresidents,

communities,orcommunityfeatures.

EnvironmentalJustice–Therearenodisproportionateimpactstolowincomeorminoritypopulations

asaresultofthisalternative.

CulturalResources–NoimpactsareanticipatedasaresultofAlternative1.

TransportationandSafety–Alternative1willhelpimprovesafetyonKeyDeerBoulevardbypreventing

vehiclesfromenteringtheBlueHoleParkingFacilityandblockingKeyDeerBoulevardwhileperforming

parkingmaneuvers.Itwillalsopreventvisitorsfrombackingoutoftheirparkingspace,conflictingwith

KeyDeerBoulevardsouthboundtrafficpositivelyimprovingtrafficflow.

VisitorUseandExperience–TheimprovementsincludedaspartofAlternative1willenhancethe

visitorexperienceandsafetymakingiteasiertobothparkattheBlueHoleInterpretiveSiteandtravel

alongKeyDeerBoulevard.

Wetlands–Noimpactstowetlandsareanticipated.

Floodplains–Noimpactstofloodplainsareanticipated.

7.3.2 Alternative2–Bicycle,PedestrianandShoulderFacilityUpgradesonRefugeAccess

Roadways

7.3.2.1 Alternative2a–MidBlockCrosswalkacrossKeyDeerBoulevard

LandUse,HabitatConservationPlan(HCP)Impacts,andapplicabilitytoLivableCommuniKeys

Masterplan–Alternative2aincludesstripingamidblockcrosswalkattheBlueHoleInterpretiveSite.

Nonegativeimpactsareanticipated.

SocioeconomicandCommunityFeatures–Thisalternativewillnotdirectlyimpactanyresidents,

communities,orcommunityfeatures.

EnvironmentalJustice–Therearenodisproportionateimpactstolowincomeorminoritypopulations

asaresultofthisalternative.

CulturalResources–NoimpactsareanticipatedasaresultofAlternative2a.NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport82

TransportationandSafety–TheadditionofamidblockcrosswalkattheBlueHoleInterpretiveSitewill

helpimprovesafetybyprovidingpedestrianswithadesignatedpointtocrossKeyDeerBoulevard.

VisitorUseandExperience–Thebicycleandpedestrianfacilityupgradeswillmakeenhancepedestrian

andbicyclisttravelontheRefugeaccessroadways.

Wetlands–Noimpactstowetlandsareanticipated.

Floodplains–Noimpactstofloodplainsareanticipated.

7.3.2.2 Alternative2b–SharrowStriping

LandUse,HabitatConservationPlan(HCP)Impacts,andapplicabilitytoLivableCommuniKeys

Masterplan–Alternative2bprovidesbicycleandpedestrianupgradesbystripingsharrowsonkey

roadwayfacilitiesandinstallingtheappropriatesignage.ThisisconsistentwiththeHCPandtheLivable

CommuniKeysMasterplan.

SocioeconomicandCommunityFeatures–Thisalternativewillnotdirectlyimpactanyresidents,

communities,orcommunityfeatures.

EnvironmentalJustice–Therearenodisproportionateimpactstolowincomeorminoritypopulations

asaresultofthisalternative.

CulturalResources–NoimpactsareanticipatedasaresultofAlternative2b.

TransportationandSafety–Alternative2bwillprovideadesignatedareaforbicyclistsonkeyarea

roadways.

VisitorUseandExperience–ThebicyclefacilityupgradeswillenhancebicyclisttravelontheRefuge

accessroadways.

Wetlands–Noimpactstowetlandsareanticipated.

Floodplains–Noimpactstofloodplainsareanticipated.

7.3.2.3 Alternative2c–ShoulderWidening

LandUse,HabitatConservationPlan(HCP)Impacts,andapplicabilitytoLivableCommuniKeys

Masterplan–Alternative2cprovidesbicycleandpedestrianupgradesincludingaddingpavedshoulders

andwideningofsevenroadsegments.Approximately280,000squarefeetwouldbeimpactedforthe

shoulder/wideningprojects.Impactedareasareundevelopedareascontainingnativehabitatonthe

edgeofroadways.Fortheshoulderimprovements,approximately0.5acresofuplandhabitat(primarily

pinelandsandhammocks)areprojectedtobeimpacted.TheCommuniKeysMasterplanidentifies

wideningofspecificroadwaysforbicyclefacilitiesasagoalwithanactionitemtopermitthenecessary

roadwideningwithintherightofway.AlsoitwasnotedtoworkwiththeCounty’ssevenyearroadway

maintenanceplanforthesetypesofimprovements.Implementationofthisalternativeshouldbe

carefullyassessedbytheRefugeandotherUSFWSstaffforwillingnesstousesomeoftheremaining

HCPacreage.NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport83

SocioeconomicandCommunityFeatures–Thisalternativewillnotdirectlyimpactanyresidents,

communities,orcommunityfeatures.

EnvironmentalJustice–Therearenodisproportionateimpactstolowincomeorminoritypopulations

asaresultofthisalternative.

CulturalResources–NoimpactsareanticipatedasaresultofAlternative2.

TransportationandSafety–Thewideningofroadsegmentswillhelpvehiclesandbicycliststomore

safelysharetheroad.Theadditionofpavedshoulderswillbringtheroadsegmentsintocompliance

withCountystandardswhileresurfacingoftheroadsegmentswillenhancethesafetyoftheroadways.

VisitorUseandExperience–Thebicycle,pedestrian,andshoulderfacilityupgradeswillenhance

pedestrianandbicyclisttravelontheRefugeaccessroadways.

Wetlands–Approximately0.09acresofwetlandimpactswouldoccurwiththisalternative.Impactsto

wetlandswillneedtobeavoidedandminimizedtotheextentpracticalduringfinaldesignofthe

improvements.

Floodplains–Approximately1.03acresofimpacttofloodplainscouldoccurwiththisalternative.

Impactstofloodplainswillneedtobeminimizedtotheextentpracticalduringfinaldesignofthe

improvements.

7.3.3 Alternative3–ExtendSharedPathwayonKeyDeerBoulevardNorthofKyleBoulevard

LandUse,HabitatConservationPlan(HCP)Impacts,andapplicabilitytoLivableCommuniKeys

Masterplan–Alternative3wouldextendtheexistingsharedpathwayfromitscurrentterminusatKyle

BoulevardtothenorthernterminusofKeyDeerBoulevard.Thealternativeisanticipatedtoimpact

13,200squarefeetofland,primarilyundevelopedlandcontainingtreesandshrubs.Approximately0.05

acresofhabitatmaybepotentiallyimpactedbythisaction.ThisisconsistentwiththeLivable

CommuniKeysMasterplanasanenhancementtothebicyclefacilitysystem.Implementationofthis

alternativeshouldbecarefullyassessedbytheRefugeandotherUSFWSstaffforwillingnesstouse

someoftheremainingHCPacreage.

SocioeconomicandCommunityFeatures–Thisalternativewillnotdirectlyimpactanyresidents,

communities,orcommunityfeatures.

EnvironmentalJustice–Therearenodisproportionateimpactstolowincomeorminoritypopulationsas

aresultofthisalternative.

CulturalResources–NoimpactsareanticipatedasaresultofAlternative3.

TransportationandSafety–Alternative3wouldimprovebicycleandpedestriansafetybyallowing

bicyclistsandpedestrianstotravelonthenorthernmostsectionofKeyDeerBoulevardwithouthaving

tosharetravellaneswithvehicles.

VisitorUseandExperience–Extendingthesharedpathwaywillenhancethevisitorexperienceby

expandingthebicycleandpedestriannetworkavailabletoRefugevisitors.NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport84

Wetlands–Noimpactstowetlandsareanticipated.

Floodplains–Impactstoapproximately0.68acresofidentifiedfloodplainsmaypotentiallyoccurwith

thisaction.

7.3.4 Alternative4–WidenSharedPathwayonKeyDeerBoulevard

LandUse,HabitatConservationPlan(HCP)Impacts,andapplicabilitytoLivableCommuniKeys

Masterplan–Alternative4widensthesharedusepathalongKeyDeerBoulevardfromUS1toKyle

Boulevard.Alternative4aisanticipatedtoimpactapproximately45,000squarefeetofland,primarily

undevelopedlandcontainingtreesandshrubs.Alternative4awidensthepathwayattheexisting

locationwhileAlternative4balsoseparatesthepathwayfromKeyDeerBoulevardwhereitiscurrently

adjacent.Alternative4aisprojectedtoimpact0.13acresofpinelandandAlternative4bisprojectedto

impact0.14acresofpineland.Theenhancementofbicyclefacilitieswhereappropriatewithlimited

rightofwaypermittingisanoverallactionitemoftheLivableCommuniKeysMasterplan.

ImplementationofthisalternativeshouldbecarefullyassessedbytheRefugeandotherUSFWSstafffor

willingnesstousesomeoftheremainingHCPacreage.

SocioeconomicandCommunityFeatures–Thisalternativewillnotdirectlyimpactanyresidents,

communities,orcommunityfeatures.

EnvironmentalJustice–Therearenodisproportionateimpactstolowincomeorminoritypopulationsas

aresultofthisalternative.

CulturalResources–NoimpactsareanticipatedasaresultofAlternative4.

TransportationandSafety–Wideningthesharedpathwaywouldimprovefunctionalityofthepathway

forbicyclesandpedestriansbyallowingtwowaytravelontheexistingsharedusepathway.In

Alternative4b,itwouldfurtherprovideseparationofthebicyclistsandpedestriansfromvehicles

travelingonKeyDeerBoulevard.

VisitorUseandExperience–Wideningthesharedpathwaywillenhancethevisitorexperienceby

improvingbicycleandpedestrianfacilitiesneartheRefuge.

Wetlands–Noimpactstowetlandsareanticipated.

Floodplains–Alternative4awouldimpactapproximately1.04acresoffloodplainsandAlternative4b

wouldimpactapproximately1.44acresoffloodplains.NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport85

8. ImplementationPriorities

Basedonthepreliminaryimpactspresentedinthisreportandreflectiveofthegeneralconsensusof

localpublicandagencyrepresentatives,thefollowingshort,medium,andlongrangeroadway

improvementalternativesarerecommended:

ShortRange(2015)

Alternative1.ReconfigureBlueHoleInterpretiveSiteparkinglotwithdefinedentrancesandexits

Alternative2a.StripeandsignamidblockpedestriancrosswalkacrossKeyDeerBoulevardattheBlue

HoleInterpretiveSitefromtheexistingsharedpathwayonKeyDeerBoulevard

Alternative2b.Stripesharrows(sharedlanemarkingsforbicycles)onWatsonBoulevardfromKeyDeer

BoulevardtoAvenueB,WatsonBoulevardonNoNameKey,WatsonBoulevardfromKeyDeer

Boulevardtothewesternterminus,alongBigPineStreet,andalongKoehnAvenue

MediumRange(2020)/LongRange(2030)

Asidentifiedduringtheprojectprocess,Alternatives2c,3,and4haveimpactstotheenvironmentthat

maynotbeconsideredacceptabletothecommunity.UsingthediscussioninSection7andTable7.1as

aguide,theimplementationoftheremainingconsultantroadwayimprovementalternativesshouldbe

carefullyassessedagainstallpotentialphysicalimpactsandpublicconcerns,withadeterminationby

theRefugeandotherUSFWSstaffastowhetherornottheimplementationofthealternativesshould

moveforward.

Alternative2c.Thefollowingprioritieshavebeendevelopedforimprovementsto

bicycle/pedestrian/shoulderfacilitiesproposedinAlternative2:

Upgradeshoulder/widenWatsonBoulevardtostandardwidthfromKeyDeerBoulevardto

AvenueB

Upgradeshoulder/widenWatsonBoulevardtostandardwidthfromNoNameKeybridgeto

easternterminus

Upgradeshoulder/widenWatsonBoulevardtostandardwidthfromKeyDeerBoulevardtothe

westernterminus

UpgradeshoulderonKeyDeerBoulevardfromWatsonBoulevardtoBigPineStreet

UpgradeshoulderonKeyDeerBoulevardfromBigPineStreettoKyleBoulevardNationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport86

Upgradeshoulder/widenentirelengthofBigPineStreettostandardwidth

Upgradeshoulder/widenentirelengthofKoehnAvenuetostandardwidth

Alternative3.ExtendthesharedpathwayonKeyDeerBoulevardtothenorthernterminusofKeyDeer

Boulevard(approximately0.25miles)andimprovetheshoulderfacilitiesonKeyDeerBoulevardinthat

area

Alternative4.WidenthesharedpathwayonKeyDeerBoulevardfromeighttotenfeettoallowfortwo

waybicycleandpedestriantraffic.Thisactionwouldimprovethesafetyofthepathforbothusers.An

associatedalternativemightconsidertherealignmentofthesectionsadjacenttothevehicletraveled

way.

Thenonroadwayimprovementstobeimplementedastimeandmoniespermitinclude:

Alternative5.Trimvegetationatpulloutsandintersectionstoincreasesightdistanceswhereneeded

(i.e.KeyDeerBoulevard)

Alternative6.Performroutinetrimmingofvegetationaroundsignsforvisibility

Alternative7.ReviewMonroeCounty’sUS1signinventorysignstudyandimplementsign

improvements

Alternative8.Onceconstructed,thenewVisitorsCentershouldtieintoexistingbicycleandpedestrian

facilitiesalreadyinplaceonUS1andalsopotentiallythebacksideoftheproperty

Alternative9.PurchasearadarspeedchecktrailertonotifydriversoftheirtravelspeedonCounty

roadswithintheRefugearea

Alternative10.PerformtrafficcalmingstudiesonkeyroadwaysaroundtheRefugetodetermineif

trafficcalmingmeasuresareappropriatetohelpreducevehiclespeeds

Alternative11.Incoordinationwithalocalvendor,implementabikerentalstationatthenewVisitors

CenterforRefugevisitors

Alternative12.UpgradeallexistingUSFWSRefugesignageforconformancewiththeManualon

UniformTrafficControlDevices(MUTCD)criteriaforstandardlettering,textmessage,signcolor,size

andplacement

Alternative13.SurveyRefugevisitorsattheexistingVisitorsCenterandtheBlueHoleInterpretiveSite

ontheirtripcharacteristicstodevelopvisitorpassbyinformation

Alternative14.InstallakioskatthenewVisitorsCenterwheremultipleentitiescouldprovide

informationtoreducesignageneedsNationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport87

Alternative15.Update,add,relocate,replaceorremove,asappropriate,KeyDeerWarningSignsonUS

1throughentireKeyDeerhabitat(includingSugarloafKey,CudjoeKey,SummerlandKey,RamrodKey,

LittleTorchKey,andWestSummerlandKey)basedondiscussionswithUSFWS,FDOT,MonroeCounty,

andanimalvehiclecollisionexperts

Alternative16.ContinueawarenessofKeyDeerandotherthreatenedandendangeredspeciescrossing

arearoadways

Alternative17.ImplementIntelligentTransportationSystemapplicationtonotifydriversofdeer

enteringroadways

Alternative18.OngoingcoordinationwithstakeholdersNationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport88

9. ListofPreparers

FederalHighwayAdministration

ChristophJaeschke,P.E.–PlanningEngineer

NorahMOcel,EIT–CommunityPlannerTransportation

U.S.FishandWildlifeService

AnneMorkill–WildlifeRefugeManager,NationalKeyDeerRefuge

KimleyHornandAssociates,Inc.

JenniferBihl,P.E.–ProjectManager

JohnMcWilliams,P.E.–ProjectEngineer

LynnKiefer–ProjectBiologist
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport

APPENDIXA

SupportingDocumentationandReferencesSupportingDocuments:

URS.2010US1ArterialTravelTimeandDelayStudyMonroeCountyFlorida.December2010

MonroeCountyGrowthManagementDivision.ALayman’sGuidetoBigPineandNoNameKey.

Hellmuth,Obata+Kassabaum,Inc.BigPineKey/US1CorridorAreaEnhancementPlan.June2003

FloridaDepartmentofEnvironmentalProtection,OfficeofGreenwaysandTrails.ContractPlansforthe

FloridaKeysOverseasHeritageTrailSpanishHarbortoSevenMileBridgeMM30.0to40.0.October

2009.

USFWSSoutheastRegion.5yearReview:SummaryandEvaluationEasternIndigoSnake(Drymarchon

Couperi).April2008.

USFWSSoutheastRegion.5yearReview:SummaryandEvaluationRiceRat(Oryzomyspalustris

natator).August2008.

USFWSSoutheastRegion.5yearReview:SummaryandEvaluationKeyDeer(Odocoileusvirginianus

clavium).August2010.

USFWSSoutheastRegion.5yearReview:SummaryandEvaluation.LowerKeysMarshRabbit

(Sylvilaguspalustrishefneri).September2007.

MonroeCounty.HabitatConservationPlanforFloridaKeyDeer(Odocoileusvirginianusclavium)and

otherProtectedSpeciesonBigPineKeyandNoNameKey.MonroeCounty,Florida.April2003:April

2006Revision.

MonroeCountyPlanningandEnvironmentalResoucesDepartment.LivableCommuniKeysMasterPlan

forBigPineKeyandNoNameKey.OriginalBOCCAdoption08/2004:AmendedbyOrdinance0202009.

USFWSSoutheastRegion.LowerFloridaKeysNationalWildlifeRefugesComprehensiveConservation

Plan.October2009.

MonroeCounty.MonroeCountyComprehensivePlanUpdate2009.

USFWSSoutheastRegion.MultiSpeciesRecoveryPlanforSouthFlorida.May1999.

Parker,etal.EffectsofUS1ProjectonFloridaKeyDeerMortality.JournalofWildlifeManagement,

72(2):354359;2008

Schmidt,JasonA.;Lopez,RoelR.andSilvy,NovaJ.EvaluationofTheUS1CrossingProjectinReducing

KeyDeerMortality(4YearPostProjectReport).TexasA&MUniversity,February2007.

FHWACentralFederalLandsHighwayDivision.TheRoadInventoryofNationalKeyDeerNational

WildlifeRefuge.June2010.

URS.FloridaKeysCarryingCapacityStudy.September2002.FDOT.ContractPlansStateRoadNo.5US1/OverseasHighwayatKeyDeerBoulevard.March2010.

FDOT.FloridaGreenbook.May2011

AreaTrafficCounts

AmericanAssociationofStateHighwayandTransportationOfficials,APolicyonGeometricDesignof

HighwaysandStreets,5thEdition.WashingtonDC.2004.

U.S.DepartmentofTransportation,FederalHighwayAdministration.ManualonUniformTrafficControl

DevicesforStreetandHighways.2009Edition.

InternetResources:

2009AerialImagery:http://www.monroecountyfl.gov/Pages/MonroeCoFL_WebDocs/mcpa

Census2000Data:http://factfinder.census.gov/home/saff/main.html?_lang=en

CommunityServices,FEMAFloodZonesandNWIWetlandsdata:www.fgdl.org

EndangeredSpeciesActReviewoftheNationalFloodInsuranceProgramintheFloridaKeys:

http://www.fws.gov/verobeach/images/pdflibrary/FEMA%20Flood%20Insurance%20Biological%20Opini

on%20%20August%209,%202006%20Q&As.pdf

EstimatesofPopulationbyCountyandCityinFlorida:April1,2008:

http://www.bebr.ufl.edu/files/2008_Estimates_Table01_0.pdf

ExistingLandUse,FutureLandUse,HabitatandTierSystemData:http://www.monroecounty

fl.gov/Pages/MonroeCoFL_GIS/index

FactsAboutMonroeCounty:http://www.monroecountyfl.gov/Pages/MonroeCoFL_admin/about

StateHistoricalPreservationOfficerMasterSiteFileData:

http://dhr.dos.state.fl.us/preservation/sitefile/

SpeciesFocusAreasandKeyDeerMortalitydata:http://www.fws.gov/verobeach/
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport

APPENDIXB

PublicInvolvementPlanNational Key Deer Refuge September 17, 2010 

Transportation Study DTFH71-09-D-00001 

Public Involvement Plan Task Order 10-009 

Page1of11

Public Involvement Plan 

DTFH71-09-D-00001

TASK ORDER 10-009

NATIONAL KEY DEER REFUGE

BIG PINE KEY, FLORIDA

TRANSPORTATION STUDY

Prepared for: 

FHWA: Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division 

Prepared by: 

Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. 

710 Boundary Street, Suite 1D 

Beaufort, SC 29902 

September 17, 2010 
National Key Deer Refuge September 17, 2010 

Transportation Study DTFH71-09-D-00001 

Public Involvement Plan Task Order 10-009 

Page2of11

1. INTRODUCTION

The preparation of a transportation study for the National Key Deer Refuge is being performed 

to develop short- and long-range transportation enhancements for mobility to and within the 

Refuge.

2. BACKGROUND 

2.1. PURPOSE OF PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 

The purpose of the public involvement process is to promote and provide a variety of meaningful 

forums for citizens to learn about and comment on the project. A list of known stakeholders is 

detailed later in this plan. The outcome of this effort will be that stakeholders and interested 

citizens will have had meaningful opportunities to provide input regarding mobility in and 

around the National Key Deer Refuge.

2.2. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT OBJECTIVES 

Disseminate information about this project to the general public and to directly affected 

stakeholders. 

Identify and actively solicit input from stakeholder groups affected by and interested in this 

project.

Provide a variety of opportunities for public participation and involvement throughout the 

planning process. 

2.3. PRINCIPLES GUIDING THE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT 

The project team recognizes and embraces the important role of public involvement in this 

project’s process. Team members will be guided by the following principles when dealing with 

constituencies interested in this project: 

Two-way communication (i.e., the free exchange of information, ideas, and values between 

Federal Highway Administration: Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division (FHWAEFLHD), US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), the Consultant (KHA), and 

citizens/stakeholders) will be sought. A specific methodology to solidify two-way 

communication will be established early and used routinely (e-mail contact, comment forms, 

etc.)
National Key Deer Refuge September 17, 2010 

Transportation Study DTFH71-09-D-00001 

Public Involvement Plan Task Order 10-009 

Page3of11

Project information will be communicated to stakeholders and citizens identified within a 

defined study area through the website and public meetings. 

Reasonable input from the citizens will be given consideration by the project team. 

Citizen/public questions will be followed up on within two business days. This quick action 

builds trust and confidence. 

Public involvement activities and input will be documented. 

A series of formal public outreach actions including two public information meetings. Team 

members will be mindful of non-technical language, different cultures and the need for 

simple illustrations where possible. In addition, we will avoid the suit-and-tie look by using 

business-casual attire. 

Opportunities for multiple forms of input will be illustrated from the beginning. Interested 

citizens will be given the website information and the appropriate FHWA-EFLHD, FWS and 

KHA contact information. 

3. COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES 

To be effective, outreach efforts need to be tailored to the needs and concerns of specific 

constituent groups in a manner conducive to their involvement. Some communications can meet 

the diverse needs of stakeholders, such as through the use of newspaper columns. Other times, 

different strategies are more effective in accomplishing study objectives. 

The strategies of the public involvement plan are to: 

Establish the need for better connections in clear and concise terms. 

Provide forums to encourage discussion and dialogue between the public and project team 

members. 

4. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ACTION STEPS 

4.1. INFORMATION GATHERING 

4.1.1. PROJECT MAILING LIST 

A project mailing list, prepared by FHWA-EFLHD/FWS, will be used to announce each public 

information meeting. Citizens who request information about the project will be added to the 

study's database. The mailing list will be used to distribute targeted information important to the 

study and to track public comments and questions. A database of mailing addresses will be 

maintained through the project. 
National Key Deer Refuge September 17, 2010 

Transportation Study DTFH71-09-D-00001 

Public Involvement Plan Task Order 10-009 

Page4of11

KHA will add the local officials, agencies, and additional citizens to the mailing list. 

Deliverable: Project mailing list database 

Responsible: Develop original mailing list – FHWA-EFLHD/FWS 

Maintain and update mailing list – KHA 

4.2. INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION 

4.2.1. MEDIA RELATIONS 

KHA will develop a draft of black and white text and graphics for newspaper notices to 

announce the public information meetings. After review and approval by FHWA-EFLHD/FWS, 

KHA will submit public meeting notices to newspapers determined by the project team (see 

Appendix for listing of newspapers in the area).

Deliverable: Newspaper notices for public information meetings 

Responsible: Example from other studies of newspaper releases – FHWA-EFLHD 

Newspaper notices - KHA 

4.2.2. PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETINGS 

Two public information meetings are planned. The purpose of the first meeting is to present an 

overview of the project and begin gathering information. The purpose of the second meeting is 

to share the developed alternatives and receive feedback. Meetings will be structured to provide 

opportunities for attendees to express their preferences and ideas, both verbally and in writing. 

Comment sheets will be distributed to obtain input from attendees. Results of the comment 

sheets will be summarized by KHA for submittal to FHWA-EFLHD/FWS. 

The format for the meetings will be an informal walk-in session. Citizens may drop in any time 

during the workshop. A short powerpoint presentation may be available (on a loop) for viewing 

to provide general project information. Citizens are then encouraged to view large-scale maps 

and talk directly with the project team. 
National Key Deer Refuge September 17, 2010 

Transportation Study DTFH71-09-D-00001 

Public Involvement Plan Task Order 10-009 

Page5of11

Deliverable: Coordination, promotion and hosting of two meetings 

Responsible: KHA 

4.2.3. STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS 

Three stakeholder meetings will be held. The first meeting will explain the project process and 

identify constraints, key issues and expectations. The second meeting will solicit input from 

stakeholders on the alternative evaluations. The third meeting will review the results of the 

alternatives analysis and present final recommendations. A list of potential stakeholders is shown 

in the Appendix along with a list of notifications for other agency officials. 

Deliverable: Scheduling, development and presentation of project, summary of 

comments

Responsible: KHA 

4.2.4. WEBSITE

Project information will be developed and provided to EFLHD/FWS in pdf format to be posted 

on FHWA’s website. This posted information will be another avenue to disseminate information 

to the public. Information updates will be provided as appropriate.

Deliverable: Updated information as needed (up to 1 time per month) 

Responsible: Review of material– FHWA-EFLHD and FWS 

Website Information Updates - KHA 
National Key Deer Refuge September 17, 2010 

Transportation Study DTFH71-09-D-00001 

Public Involvement Plan Task Order 10-009 

Page6of11

APPENDIX

Table A-1: Media 

NAME ADDRESS PHONE WEBSITE 

Key West 

Citizen 

c/o Cooke Communications, LLC 

3420 Northside Dr., Key West, FL 

33040 

305-292-7777 www.keysnews.com 

Florida Keys 

Keynoter – 

Key West 

2720-A North Roosevelt Blvd., 

Overseas Market, Key West, FL 

33040 305-296-6989 www.keysnet.com 

Florida Keys 

Keynoter - 

Marathon 

3015 Overseas Hwy., Marathon, FL. 

33050 305-743-5551 www.keysnet.com 

WKWM91.5 FM 172 NE 15th Street, Miami, FL 33132 305-995-1717/ 

1-866-740-9596 www.wlrn.org 

Monroe 

County 

Television 

(MCTV/76) 

Harvey Govt. Center, Suite 211 

1200 Truman Ave 

Key West, FL 33040 

305-295-5128 http://www.monroecountyfl.gov/ 
National Key Deer Refuge September 17, 2010 

Transportation Study DTFH71-09-D-00001 

Public Involvement Plan Task Order 10-009 

Page7of11

Table A-2: Potential Stakeholders 

NAME AGENCY & 

POSITION 

ADDRESS PHONE EMAIL 

Jo Ann 

Clark

USFWS, SER 

Refuge Roads/FLH 

Program 

Coordinator 

1875 Century Blvd., Ste. 420

Atlanta, GA 30345 404-679-4114 JoAnn_Clark@fws.go

v

Anne 

Morkill 

USFWS, Manager, 

National Key Deer 

Refuge 

179 Key Deer Boulevard, 

Big Pine Key Plaza, Big 

Pine Key, FL 33043 

305-872-2239 Anne_morkill@fws. 

gov 

Karen 

Hillier

USFWS, Deputy 

Manager, National 

Key Deer Refuge 

179 Key Deer Boulevard, 

Big Pine Key Plaza, Big 

Pine Key, FL 33043 

305-872-2239 Karen_hillier@fws.

gov

Phillip 

Hughes 

USFWS, Ecologist, 

National Key Deer 

Refuge 

179 Key Deer Boulevard, 

Big Pine Key Plaza, Big 

Pine Key, FL 33043 

305-872-2239 Phillip_hughes@fws. 

gov 

Tom 

Wilmers 

USFWS, Sr. 

Biologist, National 

Key Deer Refuge 

179 Key Deer Boulevard, 

Big Pine Key Plaza, Big 

Pine Key, FL 33043 

305-872-2239 Thomas_wilmers@ 

fws.gov 

Chad 

Anderson 

USFWS, Refuge 

Biologist, National 

Key Deer Refuge 

179 Key Deer Boulevard, 

Big Pine Key Plaza, Big 

Pine Key, FL 33043 

305-872-2239 Chad_anderson@ 

fws.gov 

Jim Bell 

USFWS, Visitor 

Services, National 

Key Deer Refuge 

179 Key Deer Boulevard, 

Big Pine Key Plaza, Big 

Pine Key, FL 33043 

305-872-2239 James_bell@ fws.gov 

Steve

Berger 

USFWS, Law 

Enforcement 

Officer, National 

Key Deer Refuge 

179 Key Deer Boulevard, 

Big Pine Key Plaza, Big 

Pine Key, FL 33043 

305-872-2239 Steven_berger@fws.

gov 

John

Wrublik 

USFWS, 

Transportation 

Projects Liaison 

1339 20th Street, Vero 

Beach, FL 32960-3559 

772-562-3909 

x282 

john_wrublik@fws. 

gov 

Lt.

Elizabeth

Riesz

FWC, South Region 

– Marathon Office 

2796 Oversees Highway 

#100, Marathon, FL 33050 305-289-2320 Elizabeth.riesz@My

FWC.com 

Joe

Medallion 

Monroe County 

Public Works 

Department - Roads 

and Bridges 

Division 

Upper Keys Operations 

186 Key Heights Road 

Plantation Key, FL 

305-852-7161 

MedallionJoe@monroecountyfl.gov 

Judith 

Clark

Monroe County, 

Engineering 

Services Director 

1100 Simonton Street 

Suite 2-216 

Key West, FL 33040 

305-292-4426 ClarkJudith@monroecounty

-fl.gov 
National Key Deer Refuge September 17, 2010 

Transportation Study DTFH71-09-D-00001 

Public Involvement Plan Task Order 10-009 

Page8of11

Table A-2: Potential Stakeholders 

NAME AGENCY & 

POSITION 

ADDRESS PHONE EMAIL 

Jane

Tallman 

Monroe County, 

Scenic Highway 

Coordinator 

Marathon Govt. Center, 

Suite 400 

2798 Overseas Highway 

Marathon, FL 33050 

305-289-2521 

TallmanJane@monroecountyfl.gov 

Mitchell 

Harvey 

Monroe County, 

Comprehensive 

Planning Manager 

Marathon Govt. Center, 

Suite 400 

2798 Overseas Highway 

Marathon, FL 33050 

305-289-2514 HarveyMitchell@monroecou

nty-fl.gov 

Patricia

Smith 

Monroe County, 

Transportation 

Planner 

Marathon Govt. Center 

2798 Overseas Highway 

Suite 400 

Marathon, FL 33050 

305- 289-2562 

smithpatricia@monroecount

y-fl.gov 

Laura 

Kammerer 

Deputy, Bureau of 

Historic

Preservation 

500 South Bronough Street 

Room 305 

Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250 

850-245-6333 lkammerer@dos.state.

fl.us 

Steven

Craig 

James 

FDOT District 6, 

Environmental 

Administrator 

1000 NW 111th Avenue, 

Room 6109 

Miami, Florida 33172 

Office (305) 470-5221 

305-470-5221 steven.james@dot.

state.fl.us

Aileen

Boucle 

FDOT District6, 

Planning & 

Environmental 

Management 

Administrator 

1000 NW 111th Avenue, 

Room 6111-A 

Miami, Florida 33172 

305-470-5201 Aileen.boucle@dot.

state.fl.us

Patricia

Ivey 

FDOT District 6 

Project

Administrator 

3100 Overseas Highway 

Marathon, FL 33050 305-289-6106 patty.ivey@dot.state.fl.us 

Omar 

Meitin 

FDOT District 6 

Traffic Operations 

Engineer 

1000 NW 111th Avenue 

Room 6206A 

Miami, FL 33172 

305-470-5335 omar.meitin@dot.state

.fl.us 

Ken 

Jeffries 

FDOT District 6 

Planner & Bicycle 

Pedestrian 

Coordinator 

1000 NW 111th Avenue 

Room 6112 

Miami, FL 33172 

305-470-6736 ken.jeffries@dot.state.

fl.us 

Anthony 

Knott 

FDEP, Office of 

Greenways and 

Trails (OGT), FL 

Keys Overseas 

Heritage Trail 

Manager 

3 La Croix Court 

Key Largo, Florida 33037 305-853-3571 Anthony.knott@dep. state.fl.us 

Todd

McGee 

FDEP-OGT, FL 

Keys Oversees 

Heritage Trail 

Construction 

Manager 

3 La Croix Court 

Key Largo, Florida 33037 305-420-8432 Todd.mcgee@dep. state.fl.us 
National Key Deer Refuge September 17, 2010 

Transportation Study DTFH71-09-D-00001 

Public Involvement Plan Task Order 10-009 

Page9of11

Table A-2: Potential Stakeholders 

NAME AGENCY & 

POSITION 

ADDRESS PHONE EMAIL 

Carole 

Stevens 

Lower Keys 

Chamber of 

Commerce – 

Executive Director 

P.O. Box 430511 / Big Pine 

Key, FL 33043 305-872-2411 info@lowerkeyschamber.com 

Jerry 

Dykhuisen 

Key Deer 

Protection Alliance 

PO Box 430224 

Big Pine Key, FL 

33043-0224 

N/A jdykhuisen@aol.com

Alison 

Higgins 

Friends and 

Volunteers of 

Refuges (FAVOR – 

Florida Keys) 

P.O. Box 431840, Big Pine 

Key, FL 33043-1840 305-872-0774 ahiggins@tnc.org 

Chris 

Bergh 

The Nature 

Conservancy, 

Florida Keys 

Program Director 

4245 North Fairfax Drive, 

Suite 100 

Arlington, VA 22203-1606 

703-841-5300 cbergh@tnc.org 

Mark 

Songer 

Last Stand, 

President 

P.O. Box 146, 

Key West, FL 33041 305-296-3335 admin@last-stand.org 

July Hull 

Florida Keys 

Scenic/AllAmerican Highway 

Corridor Alliance, 

President 

P.O. Box 501930 

Marathon, FL 33050 305-289-2521 director@islamoradac

hamber.org 
National Key Deer Refuge September 17, 2010 

Transportation Study DTFH71-09-D-00001 

Public Involvement Plan Task Order 10-009 

Page10of11

Table A-3: Additional Notifications 

NAME AGENCY & 

POSITION 

ADDRESS PHONE EMAIL 

Paul Souza 

USFWS, Field 

Supervisor, South 

Florida Ecological 

Services

1339 20th Street, Vero 

Beach, FL 32960-3559 772-562-3909 Paul_souza@fws.gov 

Trish Adams 

USFWS, Habitat 

Conservation 

Program 

Coordinator 

1339 20th Street, Vero 

Beach, FL 32960-3559 

772-562-3909 

x262 trish_adams@fws.gov 

Dana Hartley 

USFWS 

Endangered Species 

Recovery 

Coordinator 

1339 20th Street, Vero 

Beach, FL 32960-3559 

772-562-3909 

x236 

dana_hartley@fws. 

gov 

Major Alfredo 

Escanio

FWC, Regional 

Law Enforcement 

Commander 

3200 NE 151st Street, 

Miami, FL 33181 305-956-2500 alfredo.escanio@MyF

WC.com 

Chuck Collins 

FWC, South 

Region, Regional 

Director

8535 Northlake Boulevard, 

West Palm Beach, FL 561-625-5130 chuck.collins@My 

FWC.com 

George 

Neugent 

Monroe County, 

District 2 

Commissioner 

25 Ships Way 

Big Pine Key, FL 33043 305-872-1678 

NeugentGeorge@monroecount

y-fl.gov 

Roman Gastesi Monroe County, 

Administrator 

1100 Simonton Street 

Key West, FL 33040 305-292-4441 

GastesRoman@Monroe 

County-fl.gov 

Dent Pierce 

Monroe County, 

Public Works 

Director

1100 Simonton Street, 

Suite 2-231 

Key West, FL 33040 

(305) 292-

4560 

Pierce-Dent@Monroe 

County-FL.gov 

Christine 

Hurley 

Monroe County, 

Growth 

Management 

Director

Marathon Govt. Center, 

Suite 400 

2798 Overseas Highway 

Marathon, FL 33050 

305- 289-2517 

HurleyChristine@monroecou

nty-fl.gov 

Townsley

Schwab

Monroe County, 

Planning and 

Environmental 

Resources Senior 

Director

Marathon Govt. Center, 

Suite 400 

2798 Overseas Highway 

Marathon, FL 33050 

305-289-2500 SchwabTownsley@monroeco

unty-fl.gov 

Kathy Grasser 

Monroe County, 

Comprehensive 

Planner (HCP) 

Marathon Govt. Center, 

Suite 400 

2798 Overseas Highway 

Marathon, FL 33050 

305-289-2526 

GrasserKathy@monroecounty

-fl.gov 
National Key Deer Refuge September 17, 2010 

Transportation Study DTFH71-09-D-00001 

Public Involvement Plan Task Order 10-009 

Page11of11

Table A-3: Additional Notifications 

NAME AGENCY & 

POSITION 

ADDRESS PHONE EMAIL 

Michael

Roberts 

Monroe County, 

Environmental 

Resources Sr. 

Administrator 

Marathon Govt. Center, 

Suite 400 

2798 Overseas Highway 

Marathon, FL 33050 

305-289-2502 

RobertsMichael@monroecoun

ty-fl.gov 

Rajendran 

Shanmugam 

Monroe County, 

Transportation 

Consultant (URS 

Corp.) 

The Exchange 

3343 West Commercial 

Boulevard, Suite 100 

Fort Lauderdale, FL, 33309 

954-739-1881 Raj_shanmugam@urs

corp.com 

Lt. Gen 

Thompson 

Monroe County, 

Sheriff’s Office, 

Traffic Safety 

Freeman Substation 

20950 Overseas Hwy. 

Cudjoe Key, FL 33042 

305-745-3184 gthompson@keysso. 

net 

Dpty. Linda 

Kohout 

Monroe County, 

Sheriff’s Office, 

Environmental 

Issues 

Freeman Substation 

20950 Overseas Hwy. 

Cudjoe Key, FL 33042 

305-745-3184 lkohout@keysso.net 

Mr. Scott M. 

Stroh III 

State Historic 

Preservation 

Officer, Division of 

Historical

Resources 

500 S. Bronough Street 

Room 305 

Tallahassee, FL 32399-0250 

850-245-6300 smstroh@dos.state. 

fl.us 

John Palenchar 

FDOT District 6, 

Environmental 

Permits Coordinator 

1000 NW 111th Avenue 

Miami, FL 33172 305-470-5223 John.palenchar@dot.state.fl.us 

Phil Frank 

FDOT District 6 

Consultant, 

Consulting, 

Engineering & 

Science, Inc. 

10700 N. Kendall Drive, 

#400, Miami, FL 33176 305-378-5555 ceskeys@bellsouth.net 

Omar Meitin 

FDOT District 6 

Traffic Operations 

Engineer 

1000 NW 111th Avenue 

Room 6206A 

Miami, FL 33172 

305-470-5335 omar.meitin@dot.state

.fl.us 

Rebecca Jetton 

Florida Dept. of 

Community Affairs, 

Areas of Critical 

State Concern 

Administrator 

2555 Shumard Oak 

Boulevard, Tallahassee, FL 

32399-2100 

850-922-1766 Rebecca.jetton@dca.st

ate.fl.us 
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport

APPENDIXC

StakeholderMeetingNotes

October13,2010

January31,2011

April7,20111

National Key Deer Refuge Transportation Study 

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division 

Federal Highway Administration 

Contract No. DTFH71-09-D-00001 

Stakeholder Meeting #1 

October 13, 2010, 1:00 PM 

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc 

5200 NW 33rd Avenue, Suite 109 

Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309 

MEETING NOTES 

Attendees: 

US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)

JoAnn Clark 

Anne Morkill 

Karen Hillier 

Phillip Hughes 

Jim Bell 

Tom Wilmers 

Dana Hartley* 

Mark Salvato* 

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)

Chris Jaeschke 

Norah Ocel 

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (KHA)

Larry Meisner 

Lynn Kiefer 

John McWilliams 

*Attended via conference call 

Monroe County

Judy Clarke 

Mike Roberts 

Jane Tallman 

FDOT District 6

Ken Jeffries* 

Ramon Sierra* 

Susanne Travis* 

Florida Keys Overseas Heritage Trail (FKOHT)

Anthony Knott 

Florida Department of Community Affairs 

(DCA)

Shane Laakso 

Florida State Division of Historical Resources

Alyssa McManus*

Jennifer Jones* 

Introduction

The first stakeholder meeting for the National Key Deer Refuge Transportation Study convened on 

October 13, 2010 at the National Key Deer Refuge Headquarters in Big Pine Key, Florida. Anne, 

the refuge manager, introduced herself and thanked the stakeholders for attending. Attendees 

introduced themselves and Chris Jaeschke provided a brief overview of FHWA’s role in the study. 

Chris indicated that the three main reasons for inviting the stakeholders this early in the study 

process was to inform them of the study, build consensus for the transportation challenges and 

opportunities, and request their assistance for any data they could contribute. Norah reviewed 
National Key Deer Refuge Transportation Study Stakeholder Meeting #1 Notes 

October 13, 2010 

2

major project tasks in final proposal. Larry Meisner and John McWilliams outlined the meeting’s 

agenda. 

Purpose of Meeting

The purpose of this meeting was to review the major project tasks, project schedule, project 

objectives, data/information requests, and public involvement plan. The meeting also outlined the 

specific transportation issues within the Refuge including safety, pedestrian/bicycle access, 

circulation, parking, and assessment of current Key Deer warning systems. 

Discussion

Discussion of particular agenda items occurred during the meeting. Specific items of discussions 

are outlined below. 

Study Overview/purpose 

KHA and FHWA staff provided a brief project overview and purpose. The project will 

include examination of access to, from, and within the Refuge and the development of 

improvements that address specific transportation issues unique to the Refuge. The 

objective of the study is to outline the transportation needs of the Refuge and evaluate 

those improvements with regards to cost and environmental impact. 

Project Schedule 

The group reviewed the project schedule indicating that the Existing Conditions Report 

would be completed in November, Alternatives Analysis completed in January, and the 

Recommendations Report completed in May. Once the reports are finalized, they will be 

posted on the project website. 

Stakeholder Concerns/Issues 

KHA staff presented the preliminary list of specific transportation issues identified in the 

Refuge which included the new visitor’s center, the Overseas Heritage Trail (OHT) along 

US 1, deer/vehicle collisions, parking, and bicycle/pedestrian issues. 

FDOT staff inquired about the location of the proposed visitor’s center. FWS staff 

indicated that the center would be located along US 1. The site is currently being used by 

FDOT for construction staging. The site will have vehicular access to US 1. 

KHA staff inquired about the location of the OHT on the eastern portion of Big Pine Key. 

Anthony Knott indicated that he can provide the plans or the contact for obtaining the plans 

for that section if KHA did not already have them. 

The group discussed the Monroe County traffic impact study requirements (i.e. US 1 Level 

of Service Study) of the visitor’s center. KHA staff indicated that this specific study was 

typically performed closer to the construction of the facility which is several years from 

now.
National Key Deer Refuge Transportation Study Stakeholder Meeting #1 Notes 

October 13, 2010 

3

FHWA staff suggested that this study provide some design criteria for the visitor’s center 

that would address access, parking, pedestrian/bicycle facilities, and bus maneuverability. 

FWS staff indicated a need for bus access for school children. 

The group discussed numerous events that impact traffic along US 1 in and around the 

Refuge. These events include the annual birding/wildlife festival, attracting approximately 

700 people, Boy Scouts Kid’s Carnival, Summerland Key’s astronomy event, the weekly 

flea market, the Bahia Honda’s Annual Earth Day event and the Seven-mile bridge race 

that attracts 1,000 people The group also discussed other events that increase traffic along 

US 1 including lobster mini-season, Fantasy Fest, and the poker runs. 

KHA staff inquired about transit service in the area. The group indicated that the City of 

Key West operates the Lower Keys Shuttle from Key West to Marathon stopping at Key 

Deer Boulevard. The City of Key West contact for this service is Myra Wittenberg. 

KHA staff indicated that ITS technologies addressing animal-vehicle collisions are 

available but relatively unproven in an urban environment. The study will examine 

preliminary options with regard to this approach. 

It was mentioned that based on the recently completed CCP, it was decided not to advertise 

the key deer more than it is currently done. 

Data Requirements 

KHA staff inquired about Refuge visitation data. Jim Bell indicated that he could provide 

the information that is available. Counters at the Blue Hole indicate that approximately 

138,000 people visited last year while the site typically averages 80,000 to 100,000 people 

per year. The existing visitor center has approximately 20,000 visitors per year. 

KHA staff indicated that they would be reaching out to stakeholders for additional 

available data as necessary including cultural resources, census data, and tourism data. 

Tourism data would be obtained from either the Big Pine Key Chamber of Commerce, or 

the Tourism Development Council. 

OHT staff indicated that trail use data is available. KHA staff will contact OHT staff to 

obtain this information. 

Stakeholders indicated that significant information/data was included in the 2009 Habitat 

Conversation Plan (HCP).

John McWilliams stated that he would formally request crash data and work program data 

from FDOT. A significant amount of traffic volume data has been collected and compiled 

by FDOT and is available online. 
National Key Deer Refuge Transportation Study Stakeholder Meeting #1 Notes 

October 13, 2010 

4

Monroe County staff is currently working on the Lower Keys Communi-Keys Study that 

may provide some more information/data in the area. 

Jane Tallman stated that Monroe County is currently working on a US 1 sign inventory 

project which may be of use in this study. 

Michael Roberts recommended that the group examine the Florida Keys Carrying Capacity 

Study.

Public Involvement Plan 

John McWilliams indicated that the project schedule called for a total of three (3) 

stakeholder meetings and two (2) public information meetings. The stakeholder’s group 

agreed that 1:00 P.M. was an acceptable time to hold future stakeholder meetings and 

evenings will be a good time for the public meetings. 

Open Discussion 

FWS discussed the potential for Podcast tours of the Refuge in the future. 
1

National Key Deer Refuge Transportation Study 

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division 

Federal Highway Administration 

Contract No. DTFH71-09-D-00001 

Stakeholder Meeting #2 

January 31, 2011, 2:00 PM 

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc 

5200 NW 33rd Avenue, Suite 109 

Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309 

MEETING NOTES 

Attendees: 

US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)

JoAnn Clark* 

Anne Morkill 

Karen Hillier 

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)

Norah Ocel 

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (KHA)

Jennifer Bihl 

John McWilliams 

*Attended via conference call 

Monroe County

Judy Clarke 

FDOT District 6

Ramon Sierra* 

Susanne Travis* 

Florida Department of Community Affairs 

(DCA)

Erin sitting in for Shane Laakso* 

Jo Penrose* 

Florida State Division of Historical Resources

Ginny Jones* 

Introduction

The second stakeholder meeting for the National Key Deer Refuge Transportation Study convened 

on January 31, 2011 at the National Key Deer Refuge Headquarters in Big Pine Key, Florida. 

Jennifer thanked the stakeholders for attending and attendees introduced themselves. 

Purpose of Meeting

The purpose of this meeting was to review the reports to date and to get feedback from the 

stakeholders on recommendations. 
National Key Deer Refuge Transportation Study Stakeholder Meeting #2 Notes 

January 31, 2011 

2

Discussion

Discussion of specific items occurred during the meeting and are outlined below. 

Bicycle and Pedestrian and Shoulder upgrades – Monroe County would get the 

request for these upgrades on County roads. The project should compile a list of 

priority locations and get it to Judy Clarke. 

The study will provide a typical cross section for the County to be used at these 

bicycle/pedestrian crossings. 

The resurfacing program in Monroe County is on hold due to bridge repair needs. 

There are about 5 to 6 years left to complete the needed bridge repairs in the 

County. We need to compile a list of priority resurfacing locations and get it to 

Judy Clarke. Note that before resurfacing, typically the sewer system needs to go in 

first, there are a few locations/neighborhoods on Big Pine Key where this would be 

an issue. Judy will provide their most recent list of priority roadways on Big Pine 

Key for resurfacing (this will be old). 

Bridges – SR 940 Leg A – This bridge has LAP funding, it is scheduled for design 

in the upcoming fiscal year and construction the year after. Requested from Judy 

that sidewalks be reviewed during design to add bicycle and pedestrian facilities on 

the bridge and add connectivity. 

Bridges – No Name Bridge – Not eligible for federal funding due to its functional 

classification. Design will begin in the fall. Construction will depend on future 

funding.

Judy Clarke will get an update from June on the status of the sign inventory and let 

the team know the status. 

Traffic calming – Speeds humps are not a standard practice on County roadways, 

discussed the recommendation of a traffic calming study to be performed to 

determine the appropriate traffic calming treatment. Speed enforcement is key to 

traffic calming. 

Bus Pullouts – The Refuge inquired if these be improved on Big Pine Key. Myra 

Wittenberg of Key West Transit has a grant to improve the one on Big Pine Key. In 

general, if there is not a pullout or a shelter it is because it could not physically be 

implemented. 

The Refuge indicated that the Visitor’s Center is scheduled for a 2013 design and a 

2014/2015 construction timeframe. 

Look at the potential for kiosks at the new Visitor’s Center for USFWS, FDEP, etc. 

to put their information on. Add to the recommendations in the report. 

Scenic Highway grants are in February/March every year. 

Refuge staff liked the idea of recommending dynamic flashing signs at least along 

Key Deer Boulevard. 

Other recommendation would be to have sporadic “speed check stations” 
1

National Key Deer Refuge Transportation Study 

Eastern Federal Lands Highway Division 

Federal Highway Administration 

Contract No. DTFH71-09-D-00001 

Stakeholder Meeting #2 

April 7, 2011, 2:00 PM 

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc 

5200 NW 33rd Avenue, Suite 109 

Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309 

MEETING NOTES 

Attendees: 

US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)

Anne Morkill 

Karen Hillier 

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)

Norah Ocel 

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. (KHA)

Jennifer Bihl 

John McWilliams 

Monroe County

Judy Clarke 

Trish Smith* 

Michael Roberts 

FDOT District 6

Ramon Sierra* 

Florida Department of Community Affairs 

(DCA)

Rebecca Jetton* 

Shane Laakso* 

Florida State Division of Historical Resources

Ginny Jones* 

Dan McClaren* 

The Last Stand/Key Deer Protection Alliance

Joyce Newman 

Deb Curlee 

*Attended via conference call 

Introduction

The third stakeholder meeting for the National Key Deer Refuge Transportation Study convened 

on April 7, 2011 at the National Key Deer Refuge Headquarters in Big Pine Key, Florida. KimleyHorn thanked the stakeholders for attending and attendees introduced themselves. 

Purpose of Meeting

The purpose of this meeting was to review the reports to date and to get feedback from the 

stakeholders on recommendations. 
National Key Deer Refuge Transportation Study Stakeholder Meeting #3 Notes 

April 7, 2011 

2

Discussion:

Discussion of specific items occurred during the meeting and is outlined below. 

Kimley-Horn provided a brief overview of the meeting agenda and the reports previously 

prepared as part of the overall transportation study. It was stated that the main focus of this 

meeting was to obtain input on potential alternatives presented in the Preliminary 

Candidates Report. 

Kimley-Horn discussed the proposed roadway alternatives including the Blue Hole 

Interpretive Site parking lot improvements. The conceptual plan for this improvement 

indicated a need to expand the concrete pavement 5-7 additional feet. Kimley-Horn 

provided background on the need for the expansion and the improvements to traffic 

flow/safety in and out of the parking area. Representatives from the Last Stand indicated 

that they did not support this improvement. They indicated that the improvement was not a 

priority and would use a portion of the limited allowable development outlined in the 

Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP).

Kimley-Horn presented the proposed improvements to the existing roadways to provide for 

standard bicycle facilities and roadway shoulders to improve safety. A majority of 

roadways around the Refuge do not meet current standards and the Refuge would need to 

prioritize the facilities would be upgraded first.

The group discussed the overall limitations on improvements within the Refuge as outlined 

in the HCP. It is not clear upgrading the existing roadway facilities up to current standards 

would be considered impacted area per the HCP. The group consensus was that it would be 

considered an impacted area because of the loss of habitat. Representatives from the Last 

Stand indicated that Key Deer often feed on the vegetation on the roadside that would be 

eliminated by roadway shoulder improvements. 

Kimley-Horn indicated that all of the proposed candidate improvements would be 

evaluated for environmental impacts and this evaluation would be included in the next 

report. It was reiterated that the planning process requires that all potential improvements 

be thoroughly reviewed and that not all candidate improvements would be implemented. It 

will be up to the stakeholders to determine which improvements provide a greater benefit 

despite the additional impacts the improvement would create. The final report will provide 

the information needed for stakeholders to make this determination. 

Rebecca Jetton voiced concerns over the compatibility of the improvements with the HCP. 

She asked how the future Visitors Center was related to this project. The Visitors Center 

project is independent of this report. Additionally, providing design criteria for the Visitors 

Center as part of the project was determined to be premature since the Visitors Center is 

not planned in the immediate future. Anne Morkill provided the group with a short 

overview of the future Visitors Center. 
National Key Deer Refuge Transportation Study Stakeholder Meeting #3 Notes 

April 7, 2011 

3

Mike Roberts indicated that he recalled that the HCP contemplated some roadway 

widening and that the USFWS office in Vero Beach would need to be contacted to confirm. 

The group discussed the limitations of the HCP and that only 7 additional acres could be 

impacted. The Last Stand indicated that a new gas station is currently being proposed on 

Big Pine Key. 

The representatives from The Last Stand provided several comments on the Preliminary 

Candidates Report. They had concerns over the future Visitors Center and the additional 

traffic it would generate. Kimley-Horn indicated that a visitor survey was being developed 

to assess the travel patterns of current visitors to better estimate the number of new trips 

that the Visitors Center would potentially generate. It is anticipated that a significant 

portion of visitor traffic originates from locals/tourists that are already traveling on the US 

1 corridor. 

The representatives from the Last Stand did not concur with the need to widen the existing 

8’ shared-use path to 10’ as the bicycle and pedestrian traffic volumes do not warrant such 

am improvement. They reiterated that any increase of pavement along the roadway would 

eliminate the foliage that serves as a food source for Key Deer. They indicated that 

standard engineering practices/standards are not applicable to this area and that the overall 

mindset is different in and around the Refuge. 

Trish Smith stated that improvements to widen the shared-use path along US 1 (Overseas 

Heritage Trail) often did not provide for a continuous 12’ wide bicycle path and, in some 

locations, the path was only constructed at 8 feet. It was clarified that the report 

recommends a 10’ minimum path width consistent with the minimum design standards and 

not the current 12’ FDOT requirement. 

Kimley-Horn discussed the potential of implementing share lane markings or “sharrows” 

along the Refuge roadways in lieu of widening of the roadway to provide bicycle lanes. 

The stakeholders were supportive of “sharrows” and the appropriate signage.

The group agreed that all alternatives would need to review the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service in Vero Beach, Florida. Anne Morkill said that USFWS Vero Beach staff is 

included on this project’s distribution list and they’ve received all meeting notifications 

with limited participation. 

Trish Smith suggested that the lead agency identified for each improvement be revisited. 

She indicated that any improvement that potentially impacts the HCP should be examined 

by the Refuge/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service before moving forward. If changes to the 

HCP are required, Monroe County would request these agencies to take the lead on that 

effort. 

Trish Smith provided and update on the US 1 signage inventory project. She stated that the 

inventory was recently completed and she expects a deliverable soon. This report will be 
National Key Deer Refuge Transportation Study Stakeholder Meeting #3 Notes 

April 7, 2011 

4

provided to Refuge staff. She also reiterated that any requests for changes to the existing 

Refuge signage along US -1 should be submitted to Monroe County as soon as possible. 

Representatives from Last Stand stated that Key Deer warning signs should also be 

considered on other minor roadways where signage does not exist including Crane Blvd. 

and Sugarloaf Blvd. on Sugarloaf Key, and Blimp Road on Cudjoe Key. 

Kimley-Horn suggested that stakeholders be identified and a workshop be conducted to 

review and discuss the existing signage. It was stated that it would be beneficial for 

stakeholders that we part of the development of the HCP and fencing project is present at 

that workshop. 

Kimley-Horn discussed the report recommendation for the Refuge to investigate 

purchasing a “speed check” trailer that could be operated by Refuge staff and moved 

around within the Refuge to improve driver awareness of their speeds. Representatives 

from Last Stand did not support this suggestion and stated that speeding motorists within 

the Refuge know they are speeding and the trailer would not be effective. The group agreed 

that increased speed enforcement on Key Deer Boulevard would be most effective. Anne 

Morkill stated that the Refuge, in partnership with the Key Deer Protection Alliance, has 

already purchased a speed indicator that will be modified to include custom cartoon 

messages about key deer crossing the road. 

Ramon Sierra stated that the speed study results may warrant an overall speed limit 

reduction from 45 mph to 40 mph on US 1. He also inquired about the enforcement of the 

nighttime speed limit of 35 mph. He suggested consideration for one (1) speed limit of 40 

mph. Several members of the group did not support this change.

Kimley-Horn discussed the report recommendation that the Refuge formally request to be 

included in a future research study examining the use of Intelligent Transportation Systems 

(ITS) technologies to improve safety/reduce deer collisions within the Refuge. 
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport

APPENDIXD

SupportingDataTablesCrosroads Engineering Data, Inc.

13284 SW 120th Street

Miami, Florida, 33186

Tel: 305-233-3997 Fax: 305-233-7720

File Name : BIG PINE @ US-1

Site Code : 00000000

Start Date : 11/5/2010

Page No : 1

CLIENT : KIMLEY-HORN

JOB NO : 2010-47

PROJECT: BIG PINE

COUNTY : MONROE

Groups Printed- AUTOS - HEAVY VEHICLES

US-1

From East

WILDER RD.

From South

US-1

From West

KEY DEER BLVD.

From Northwest

Start Time Right Bear Right Thru Left Peds Right Thru Bear Left Left Peds Right Thru Left Hard Left Peds Hard Right Bear Right Bear Left Peds Int. Total

09:00 AM 8 18 53 2 0 30240 9 66 7 23 0 29 4 24 3 255

09:15 AM 5 9 68 3 0 20150 8 75 6 13 0 25 2 19 0 241

09:30 AM 9 14 64 4 0 30400 0 99 10 26 0 30 5 33 3 304

09:45 AM 7 8 62 5 0 70010 3 99 17 15 0 37 5 17 0 283

Total 29 49 247 14 0 15 0 7 10 0 20 339 40 77 0 121 16 93 6 1083

10:00 AM 10 19 92 0 0 50000 2 97 16 26 0 29 3 19 0 318

10:15 AM 4 11 79 0 0 70020 3 83 5 18 0 29 1 22 0 264

10:30 AM 7 19 117 2 0 70550 15 122 5 22 0 27 1 25 0 379

10:45 AM 6 24 118 3 0 40310 6 112 8 51 0 26 1 25 0 388

Total 27 73 406 5 0 23 0 8 8 0 26 414 34 117 0 111 6 91 0 1349

*** BREAK ***

04:00 PM 11 29 138 1 0 61650 5 81 12 29 0 61 0 19 0 404

04:15 PM 0 20 126 3 0 11550 4 89 11 37 0 58 6 20 1 387

04:30 PM 15 35 141 2 0 10 2 2 7 0 4 98 17 49 0 36 3 30 0 451

04:45 PM 13 32 168 1 0 61420 7 101 14 51 0 54 0 24 1 479

Total 39 116 573 7 0 23 5 17 19 0 20 369 54 166 0 209 9 93 2 1721

05:00 PM 15 43 140 1 0 01250 10 89 23 42 0 36 2 34 0 443

05:15 PM 6 40 141 2 0 62230 6 90 20 34 0 60 0 43 0 455

05:30 PM 15 38 140 1 0 43270 8 90 36 59 0 55 1 42 2 503

05:45 PM 16 33 93 0 0 00320 5 69 23 46 0 44 1 21 0 356

Total 52 154 514 4 0 10 6 9 17 0 29 338 102 181 0 195 4 140 2 1757

Grand Total 147 392 1740 30 0 71 11 41 54 0 95 1460 230 541 0 636 35 417 10 5910

Apprch % 6.4 17 75.4 1.3 0 40.1 6.2 23.2 30.5 0 4.1 62.8 9.9 23.3 0 57.9 3.2 38 0.9

Total % 2.5 6.6 29.4 0.5 0 1.2 0.2 0.7 0.9 0 1.6 24.7 3.9 9.2 0 10.8 0.6 7.1 0.2

AUTOS 147 384 1675 29 0 71 11 41 54 0 94 1403 230 536 0 632 34 412 10 5763

% AUTOS 100 98 96.3 96.7 0 100 100 100 100 0 98.9 96.1 100 99.1 0 99.4 97.1 98.8 100 97.5

HEAVY VEHICLES 0 8 65 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 57 0 5 0 4 1 5 0 147

% HEAVY VEHICLES 0 2 3.7 3.3 0 00000 1.1 3.9 0 0.9 0 0.6 2.9 1.2 0 2.5
Crosroads Engineering Data, Inc.

13284 SW 120th Street

Miami, Florida, 33186

Tel: 305-233-3997 Fax: 305-233-7720

File Name : BIG PINE @ US-1

Site Code : 00000000

Start Date : 11/5/2010

Page No : 2

CLIENT : KIMLEY-HORN

JOB NO : 2010-47

PROJECT: BIG PINE

COUNTY : MONROE

US-1

From East

WILDER RD.

From South

US-1

From West

KEY DEER BLVD.

From Northwest

Start

Time Right Bear 

Right

Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Bear 

Left

Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Hard 

Left

Peds App. Total Hard 

Right

Bear 

Right

Bear 

Left

Peds App. Total Int. Total

Peak Hour Analysis From 09:00 AM to 11:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1

Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 10:00 AM

10:00 AM 10 19 92 0 0 121 50000 5 2 97 16 26 0 141 29 3 19 0 51 318

10:15 AM 4 11 79 0 0 94 70020 9 3 83 5 18 0 109 29 1 22 0 52 264

10:30 AM 7 19 117 2 0 145 7 0 5 5 0 17 15 122 5 22 0 164 27 1 25 0 53 379

10:45 AM 6 24 118 3 0 151 40310 8 6 112 8 51 0 177 26 1 25 0 52 388

Total Volume 27 73 406 5 0 511 23 0 8 8 0 39 26 414 34 117 0 591 111 6 91 0 208 1349

% App. Total 5.3 14.3 79.5 1 0 59 0 20.5 20.5 0 4.4 70.1 5.8 19.8 0 53.4 2.9 43.8 0

PHF .675 .760 .860 .417 .000 .846 .821 .000 .400 .400 .000 .574 .433 .848 .531 .574 .000 .835 .957 .500 .910 .000 .981 .869

AUTOS 27 72 369 4 0 472 23 0 8 8 0 39 26 394 34 116 0 570 110 6 90 0 206 1287

% AUTOS 100 98.6 90.9 80.0 0 92.4 100 0 100 100 0 100 100 95.2 100 99.1 0 96.4 99.1 100 98.9 0 99.0 95.4

HEAVY VEHICLES 0 1 37 1 0 39 00000 0 0 20 0 1 0 21 1010 2 62

% HEAVY VEHICLES 0 1.4 9.1 20.0 0 7.6 00000 0 0 4.8 0 0.9 0 3.6 0.9 0 1.1 0 1.0 4.6

 KEY DEER BLVD. WILDER RD. US-1 

 US-1 

 WILDER RD. 

Out In Total

61 0 61 

0 0 0 

61 0 61 

Right

27 

0 

27 

Right

Bear

72 

1 

73 

Thru

369 

37 

406 

Left

5 1 4 

Peds

0 0 0 

Out Total In

507 472 979 

21 39 60 

528 1039 511 

Left

8 

0 

8 

Bear

Left

8 

0 

8 

Thru

0 

0 

0 

Right

23 

0 

23 

Peds

0 

0 

0 

Out In Total

36 39 75 

1 0 1 

37 76 39 

Hard

Left

116 

1 

117 

Left

34 

0 

34 

Thru

394 

20 

414 

Right

26 

0 

26 

Peds

0 0 0 

Total Out In

487 570 1057 

38 21 59 

525 1116 591 

Hard

Right

110 

1 

111

Bear

Right

6 

0 

6

Bear

Left

90

1 

91 

Peds

0

0 

0 

Out

196 

2 

198

In

206

2 

208

Total

402

4 

406

Peak Hour Begins at 10:00 AM

AUTOS

HEAVY VEHICLES

Peak Hour Data

North
Crosroads Engineering Data, Inc.

13284 SW 120th Street

Miami, Florida, 33186

Tel: 305-233-3997 Fax: 305-233-7720

File Name : BIG PINE @ US-1

Site Code : 00000000

Start Date : 11/5/2010

Page No : 3

CLIENT : KIMLEY-HORN

JOB NO : 2010-47

PROJECT: BIG PINE

COUNTY : MONROE

US-1

From East

WILDER RD.

From South

US-1

From West

KEY DEER BLVD.

From Northwest

Start

Time Right Bear 

Right

Thru Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Bear 

Left

Left Peds App. Total Right Thru Left Hard 

Left

Peds App. Total Hard 

Right

Bear 

Right

Bear 

Left

Peds App. Total Int. Total

Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1

Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 04:45 PM

04:45 PM 13 32 168 1 0 214 6 1 4 2 0 13 7 101 14 51 0 173 54 0 24 1 79 479

05:00 PM 15 43 140 1 0 199 01250 8 10 89 23 42 0 164 36 2 34 0 72 443

05:15 PM 6 40 141 2 0 189 6 2 2 3 0 13 6 90 20 34 0 150 60 0 43 0 103 455

05:30 PM 15 38 140 1 0 194 4 3 2 7 0 16 8 90 36 59 0 193 55 1 42 2 100 503

Total Volume 49 153 589 5 0 796 16 7 10 17 0 50 31 370 93 186 0 680 205 3 143 3 354 1880

% App. Total 6.2 19.2 74 0.6 0 32 14 20 34 0 4.6 54.4 13.7 27.4 0 57.9 0.8 40.4 0.8

PHF .817 .890 .876 .625 .000 .930 .667 .583 .625 .607 .000 .781 .775 .916 .646 .788 .000 .881 .854 .375 .831 .375 .859 .934

AUTOS 49 148 587 5 0 789 16 7 10 17 0 50 30 363 93 185 0 671 203 3 143 3 352 1862

% AUTOS 100 96.7 99.7 100 0 99.1 100 100 100 100 0 100 96.8 98.1 100 99.5 0 98.7 99.0 100 100 100 99.4 99.0

HEAVY VEHICLES 05200 7 00000 0 17010 9 2000 2 18

% HEAVY VEHICLES 0 3.3 0.3 0 0 0.9 00000 0 3.2 1.9 0 0.5 0 1.3 1.0 0 0 0 0.6 1.0

 KEY DEER BLVD. WILDER RD. US-1 

 US-1 

 WILDER RD. 

Out In Total

149 0 149 

0 0 0 

149 0 149 

Right

49 

0 

49 

Right

Bear

148 

5 

153 

Thru

587 

2 

589 

Left

5 0 5 

Peds

0 0 0 

Out Total In

522 789 1311 

7 7 14 

529 1325 796 

Left

17 

0 

17 

Bear

Left

10 

0 

10 

Thru

7 

0 

7 

Right

16 

0 

16 

Peds

0 

0 

0 

Out In Total

38 50 88 

1 0 1 

39 89 50 

Hard

Left

185 

1 

186 

Left

93 

0 

93 

Thru

363 

7 

370 

Right

30 

1 

31 

Peds

0 0 0 

Total Out In

807 671 1478 

4 9 13 

811 1491 680 

Hard

Right

203 

2 

205 

Bear

Right

3

0 

3

Bear

Left

143 

0

143

Peds

3

0

3 

Out

343

6 

349

In

3522 

354 

Total

695 

8

703

Peak Hour Begins at 04:45 PM

AUTOS

HEAVY VEHICLES

Peak Hour Data

North
Page 1

CLIENT : KIMLEY-HORN

JOB NO : 2010-47

PROJECT: BIG PINE

COUNTY : MONROE

KEY DEER COMBINED

KEY DEER BLVD. SOUTH OF

WATSON BLVD.

Date Start: 12-Nov-10

Crossroads Engineering Data, Inc.

13284 SW 120th Street

Miami, Florida, 33186

PH: 305-233-3997 FAX: 305-233-7720

NB, SB

Start 1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71

Time 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 147 Total

11/12/1

00001014000000006

00:15 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10

00:30 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 11

00:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 6

0 0 0 1 0 7 18 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 33

01:00 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

01:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

01:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

01:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

02:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3

02:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

02:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5

03:00 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

03:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

03:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

03:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2

0 0 0 0 1 1 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 6

04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

04:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

04:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

04:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6

05:00 0 0 0 0 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6

05:15 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 8

05:30 0 0 0 0 1 2 5 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 12

05:45 0 0 0 0 0 5 8 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15

0 0 0 0 2 8 22 5 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 41

06:00 0 0 0 0 0 3 9 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 17

06:15 0 0 0 0 0 1 10 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 17

06:30 0 0 0 0 0 6 14 5 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 28

06:45 0 0 0 0 1 6 21 9 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 39

0 0 0 0 1 16 54 19 8 2 1 0 0 0 0 101

07:00 0 0 0 0 4 11 28 20 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 69

07:15 0 0 0 0 3 2 35 17 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 61

07:30 0 0 0 0 1 5 23 17 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 48

07:45 0 0 0 0 1 6 24 21 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 57

0 0 0 0 9 24 110 75 16 1 0 0 0 0 0 235

08:00 0 0 0 0 1 7 30 17 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 66

08:15 0 0 0 0 0 9 32 11 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 54

08:30 0 0 0 0 0 6 21 15 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 44

08:45 0 0 0 1 1 13 29 22 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 69

0 0 0 1 2 35 112 65 16 2 0 0 0 0 0 233

09:00 0 0 1 0 1 10 24 10 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 50

09:15 0 0 0 1 2 7 27 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 48

09:30 0 0 1 0 3 9 25 8 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 47

09:45 0 0 0 0 1 13 39 13 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 67

0 0 2 1 7 39 115 41 4 2 0 1 0 0 0 212

10:00 0 0 0 0 0 7 29 14 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 52

10:15 0 0 0 1 1 11 17 8 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 42

10:30 0 0 0 0 1 15 23 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 50

10:45 0 0 0 0 1 13 29 11 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 55

0 0 0 1 3 46 98 44 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 199

11:00 0 0 0 0 1 10 27 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 49

11:15 0 1 0 0 1 12 31 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 57

11:30 0 1 0 0 3 8 35 7 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 56

11:45 0 0 0 0 2 7 39 12 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 64

0 2 0 0 7 37 132 36 11 1 0 0 0 0 0 226

Total 0 2 2 4 32 214 669 296 65 12 2 1 0 0 0 1299
Page 2

CLIENT : KIMLEY-HORN

JOB NO : 2010-47

PROJECT: BIG PINE

COUNTY : MONROE

KEY DEER COMBINED

KEY DEER BLVD. SOUTH OF

WATSON BLVD.

Date Start: 12-Nov-10

Crossroads Engineering Data, Inc.

13284 SW 120th Street

Miami, Florida, 33186

PH: 305-233-3997 FAX: 305-233-7720

NB, SB

Start 1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71

Time 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 147 Total

12 PM 0 0 0 0 1 14 18 15 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 50

12:15 0 0 1 0 2 11 31 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 53

12:30 0 0 2 0 0 16 24 11 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 55

12:45 0 0 0 0 2 7 28 8 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 48

0 0 3 0 5 48 101 41 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 206

13:00 0 0 0 0 2 15 30 14 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 64

13:15 0 1 0 0 0 17 34 12 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 65

13:30 0 0 0 0 1 10 24 15 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 54

13:45 0 0 0 0 3 11 31 8 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 55

0 1 0 0 6 53 119 49 7 3 0 0 0 0 0 238

14:00 0 0 1 0 2 6 30 11 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 52

14:15 0 0 0 0 1 8 37 6 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 56

14:30 0 0 0 0 3 8 26 9 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 51

14:45 0 2 0 0 7 11 23 14 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 61

0 2 1 0 13 33 116 40 12 2 1 0 0 0 0 220

15:00 0 0 0 0 0 14 27 11 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 53

15:15 0 0 0 0 2 7 39 19 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 70

15:30 0 1 0 0 0 10 37 12 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 62

15:45 0 0 0 0 1 10 27 8 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 48

0 1 0 0 3 41 130 50 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 233

16:00 0 0 0 0 2 11 27 17 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 62

16:15 0 0 0 0 1 13 37 16 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 70

16:30 0 0 0 0 2 19 36 12 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 70

16:45 0 0 2 0 0 4 38 11 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 58

0 0 2 0 5 47 138 56 9 2 1 0 0 0 0 260

17:00 0 0 0 0 0 12 30 14 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 58

17:15 0 0 0 0 2 17 45 13 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 79

17:30 0 0 1 0 2 14 50 14 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 85

17:45 0 0 1 0 4 28 42 12 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 88

0 0 2 0 8 71 167 53 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 310

18:00 0 0 0 0 0 19 49 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 80

18:15 0 0 0 0 1 18 41 9 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 71

18:30 1 0 0 1 1 18 41 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 74

18:45 0 0 0 0 1 23 38 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 68

1 0 0 1 3 78 169 36 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 293

19:00 0 0 1 0 0 20 33 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 60

19:15 0 0 0 0 0 12 25 11 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 50

19:30 0 0 1 0 0 8 32 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 50

19:45 0 0 0 0 1 8 18 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36

0 0 2 0 1 48 108 31 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 196

20:00 0 0 0 0 0 11 16 7 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 37

20:15 0 0 0 0 0 3 22 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 32

20:30 0 0 0 0 0 12 12 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 30

20:45 0 0 0 0 2 8 12 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 26

0 0 0 0 2 34 62 21 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 125

21:00 0 0 0 0 0 3 13 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22

21:15 0 0 0 0 0 5 22 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36

21:30 0 0 0 1 0 7 21 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 36

21:45 1 0 0 0 0 7 11 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22

1 0 0 1 0 22 67 23 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 116

22:00 0 0 0 0 0 4 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16

22:15 0 0 0 0 2 3 11 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 21

22:30 0 0 0 0 2 0 7 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 11

22:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 15

0 0 0 0 4 7 37 12 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 63

23:00 0 0 0 0 0 2 13 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16

23:15 0 0 0 0 0 4 11 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 20

23:30 0 0 0 0 0 3 8 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16

23:45 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 13

0 0 0 0 0 14 37 12 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 65

Total 2 4 10 2 50 496 1251 424 73 11 2 0 0 0 0 2325

Total 2 6 12 6 82 710 1920 720 138 23 4 1 0 0 0 3624

Stats 15th Percentile : 29 MPH

50th Percentile : 33 MPH

85th Percentile : 38 MPH

95th Percentile : 40 MPH

 

Mean Speed(Average) : 33 MPH

10 MPH Pace Speed : 31-40 MPH

Number in Pace : 2640

Percent in Pace : 72.8%

Number of Vehicles > 30 MPH : 2806

Percent of Vehicles > 30 MPH : 77.4%
Page 1

CLIENT : KIMLEY-HORN

JOB NO : 2010-47

PROJECT: BIG PINE

COUNTY : MONROE

KEY DEER S. OF WATSON (NB)

KEY DEER BLVD. SOUTH OF

WATSON BLVD.

Date Start: 12-Nov-10

Crossroads Engineering Data, Inc.

13284 SW 120th Street

Miami, Florida, 33186

PH: 305-233-3997 FAX: 305-233-7720

NB

Start 1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71

Time 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 147 Total

11/12/1

00001013000000005

00:15 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10

00:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 10

00:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 6

0 0 0 1 0 6 17 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 31

01:00 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

01:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

01:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

01:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

02:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2

02:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

02:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4

03:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

03:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

03:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

03:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2

04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

04:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

04:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

04:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

05:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

05:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

05:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

05:45 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

0 0 0 0 0 1 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6

06:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

06:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

06:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

06:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

07:00 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4

07:15 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4

07:30 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6

07:45 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 7

0 0 0 0 2 4 11 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 21

08:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 12

08:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19

08:30 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9

08:45 0 0 0 1 0 2 11 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 17

0 0 0 1 0 3 36 13 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 57

09:00 0 0 1 0 0 2 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15

09:15 0 0 0 1 1 3 11 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 17

09:30 0 0 1 0 0 2 10 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16

09:45 0 0 0 0 0 4 19 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 27

0 0 2 1 1 11 49 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 75

10:00 0 0 0 0 0 2 19 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22

10:15 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 12

10:30 0 0 0 0 0 3 12 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19

10:45 0 0 0 0 0 8 12 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22

0 0 0 0 0 18 47 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 75

11:00 0 0 0 0 0 7 14 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24

11:15 0 1 0 0 0 5 20 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 30

11:30 0 1 0 0 1 4 19 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 31

11:45 0 0 0 0 0 2 20 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25

0 2 0 0 1 18 73 12 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 110

Total 0 2 2 3 4 62 241 56 12 2 1 0 0 0 0 385
Page 2

CLIENT : KIMLEY-HORN

JOB NO : 2010-47

PROJECT: BIG PINE

COUNTY : MONROE

KEY DEER S. OF WATSON (NB)

KEY DEER BLVD. SOUTH OF

WATSON BLVD.

Date Start: 12-Nov-10

Crossroads Engineering Data, Inc.

13284 SW 120th Street

Miami, Florida, 33186

PH: 305-233-3997 FAX: 305-233-7720

NB

Start 1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71

Time 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 147 Total

12 PM 0 0 0 0 1 10 12 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31

12:15 0 0 1 0 1 5 20 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29

12:30 0 0 2 0 0 6 14 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 27

12:45 0 0 0 0 0 5 19 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28

0 0 3 0 2 26 65 17 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 115

13:00 0 0 0 0 0 8 12 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 27

13:15 0 1 0 0 0 7 14 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26

13:30 0 0 0 0 0 3 14 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 27

13:45 0 0 0 0 1 7 13 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 25

0 1 0 0 1 25 53 22 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 105

14:00 0 0 1 0 2 3 20 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 31

14:15 0 0 0 0 1 6 20 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 30

14:30 0 0 0 0 1 7 14 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 29

14:45 0 2 0 0 4 6 15 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 36

0 2 1 0 8 22 69 18 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 126

15:00 0 0 0 0 0 3 10 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 17

15:15 0 0 0 0 0 4 25 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37

15:30 0 1 0 0 0 6 23 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35

15:45 0 0 0 0 0 7 19 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 31

0 1 0 0 0 20 77 20 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 120

16:00 0 0 0 0 1 6 15 11 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 38

16:15 0 0 0 0 0 6 20 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30

16:30 0 0 0 0 2 8 23 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 40

16:45 0 0 2 0 0 0 17 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27

0 0 2 0 3 20 75 29 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 135

17:00 0 0 0 0 0 8 17 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31

17:15 0 0 0 0 0 10 34 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 51

17:30 0 0 0 0 0 8 32 8 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 50

17:45 0 0 1 0 3 20 24 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 55

0 0 1 0 3 46 107 26 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 187

18:00 0 0 0 0 0 13 30 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51

18:15 0 0 0 0 1 16 29 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 51

18:30 1 0 0 1 0 18 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 46

18:45 0 0 0 0 0 16 25 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44

1 0 0 1 1 63 110 15 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 192

19:00 0 0 1 0 0 16 23 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 44

19:15 0 0 0 0 0 8 16 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 32

19:30 0 0 1 0 0 6 29 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 42

19:45 0 0 0 0 1 6 12 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26

0 0 2 0 1 36 80 22 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 144

20:00 0 0 0 0 0 9 14 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 31

20:15 0 0 0 0 0 1 17 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 24

20:30 0 0 0 0 0 11 9 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 25

20:45 0 0 0 0 2 6 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19

0 0 0 0 2 27 50 17 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 99

21:00 0 0 0 0 0 2 7 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13

21:15 0 0 0 0 0 4 18 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30

21:30 0 0 0 1 0 5 18 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 29

21:45 1 0 0 0 0 7 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19

1 0 0 1 0 18 51 18 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 91

22:00 0 0 0 0 0 4 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11

22:15 0 0 0 0 1 3 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14

22:30 0 0 0 0 1 0 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 8

22:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 14

0 0 0 0 2 7 28 8 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 47

23:00 0 0 0 0 0 2 11 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14

23:15 0 0 0 0 0 4 11 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18

23:30 0 0 0 0 0 3 6 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13

23:45 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 11

0 0 0 0 0 13 32 10 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 56

Total 2 4 9 2 23 323 797 222 34 1 0 0 0 0 0 1417

Total 2 6 11 5 27 385 1038 278 46 3 1 0 0 0 0 1802

Stats 15th Percentile : 28 MPH

50th Percentile : 33 MPH

85th Percentile : 37 MPH

95th Percentile : 40 MPH

 

Mean Speed(Average) : 33 MPH

10 MPH Pace Speed : 26-35 MPH

Number in Pace : 1423

Percent in Pace : 79.0%

Number of Vehicles > 30 MPH : 1366

Percent of Vehicles > 30 MPH : 75.8%
Page 1

CLIENT : KIMLEY-HORN

JOB NO : 2010-47

PROJECT: BIG PINE

COUNTY : MONROE

KEY DEER S. OF WATSON (SB)

KEY DEER BLVD. SOUTH OF

WATSON BLVD.

Date Start: 12-Nov-10

Crossroads Engineering Data, Inc.

13284 SW 120th Street

Miami, Florida, 33186

PH: 305-233-3997 FAX: 305-233-7720

SB

Start 1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71

Time 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 147 Total

11/12/1

00000001000000001

00:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

00:30 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

00:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

01:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

01:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

01:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

01:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

02:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

02:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

02:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

02:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

03:00 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

03:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

03:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

03:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4

04:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

04:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

04:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

04:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5

05:00 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5

05:15 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 7

05:30 0 0 0 0 1 2 4 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 11

05:45 0 0 0 0 0 4 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12

0 0 0 0 2 7 18 4 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 35

06:00 0 0 0 0 0 3 8 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 16

06:15 0 0 0 0 0 1 10 4 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 17

06:30 0 0 0 0 0 6 13 5 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 27

06:45 0 0 0 0 1 6 21 9 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 39

0 0 0 0 1 16 52 19 8 2 1 0 0 0 0 99

07:00 0 0 0 0 4 9 26 20 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 65

07:15 0 0 0 0 2 2 33 16 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 57

07:30 0 0 0 0 0 4 20 16 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 42

07:45 0 0 0 0 1 5 20 20 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 50

0 0 0 0 7 20 99 72 15 1 0 0 0 0 0 214

08:00 0 0 0 0 1 7 24 14 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 54

08:15 0 0 0 0 0 9 18 6 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 35

08:30 0 0 0 0 0 5 16 12 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 35

08:45 0 0 0 0 1 11 18 20 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 52

0 0 0 0 2 32 76 52 12 2 0 0 0 0 0 176

09:00 0 0 0 0 1 8 15 7 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 35

09:15 0 0 0 0 1 4 16 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 31

09:30 0 0 0 0 3 7 15 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 31

09:45 0 0 0 0 1 9 20 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40

0 0 0 0 6 28 66 31 3 2 0 1 0 0 0 137

10:00 0 0 0 0 0 5 10 13 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 30

10:15 0 0 0 1 1 6 13 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 30

10:30 0 0 0 0 1 12 11 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31

10:45 0 0 0 0 1 5 17 9 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 33

0 0 0 1 3 28 51 35 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 124

11:00 0 0 0 0 1 3 13 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 25

11:15 0 0 0 0 1 7 11 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 27

11:30 0 0 0 0 2 4 16 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25

11:45 0 0 0 0 2 5 19 9 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 39

0 0 0 0 6 19 59 24 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 116

Total 0 0 0 1 28 152 428 240 53 10 1 1 0 0 0 914
Page 2

CLIENT : KIMLEY-HORN

JOB NO : 2010-47

PROJECT: BIG PINE

COUNTY : MONROE

KEY DEER S. OF WATSON (SB)

KEY DEER BLVD. SOUTH OF

WATSON BLVD.

Date Start: 12-Nov-10

Crossroads Engineering Data, Inc.

13284 SW 120th Street

Miami, Florida, 33186

PH: 305-233-3997 FAX: 305-233-7720

SB

Start 1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71

Time 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 147 Total

12 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4 6 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 19

12:15 0 0 0 0 1 6 11 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 24

12:30 0 0 0 0 0 10 10 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28

12:45 0 0 0 0 2 2 9 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 20

0 0 0 0 3 22 36 24 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 91

13:00 0 0 0 0 2 7 18 8 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 37

13:15 0 0 0 0 0 10 20 8 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 39

13:30 0 0 0 0 1 7 10 6 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 27

13:45 0 0 0 0 2 4 18 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 30

0 0 0 0 5 28 66 27 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 133

14:00 0 0 0 0 0 3 10 7 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 21

14:15 0 0 0 0 0 2 17 5 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 26

14:30 0 0 0 0 2 1 12 3 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 22

14:45 0 0 0 0 3 5 8 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 25

0 0 0 0 5 11 47 22 6 2 1 0 0 0 0 94

15:00 0 0 0 0 0 11 17 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36

15:15 0 0 0 0 2 3 14 11 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 33

15:30 0 0 0 0 0 4 14 7 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 27

15:45 0 0 0 0 1 3 8 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 17

0 0 0 0 3 21 53 30 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 113

16:00 0 0 0 0 1 5 12 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24

16:15 0 0 0 0 1 7 17 12 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 40

16:30 0 0 0 0 0 11 13 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30

16:45 0 0 0 0 0 4 21 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 31

0 0 0 0 2 27 63 27 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 125

17:00 0 0 0 0 0 4 13 8 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 27

17:15 0 0 0 0 2 7 11 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 28

17:30 0 0 1 0 2 6 18 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 35

17:45 0 0 0 0 1 8 18 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33

0 0 1 0 5 25 60 27 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 123

18:00 0 0 0 0 0 6 19 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29

18:15 0 0 0 0 0 2 12 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 20

18:30 0 0 0 0 1 0 15 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 28

18:45 0 0 0 0 1 7 13 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24

0 0 0 0 2 15 59 21 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 101

19:00 0 0 0 0 0 4 10 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 16

19:15 0 0 0 0 0 4 9 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18

19:30 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 8

19:45 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10

0 0 0 0 0 12 28 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 52

20:00 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 6

20:15 0 0 0 0 0 2 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8

20:30 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5

20:45 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 7

0 0 0 0 0 7 12 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 26

21:00 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9

21:15 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6

21:30 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7

21:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

0 0 0 0 0 4 16 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25

22:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5

22:15 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 7

22:30 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

22:45 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

0 0 0 0 2 0 9 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 16

23:00 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

23:15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

23:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3

23:45 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

0 0 0 0 0 1 5 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 9

Total 0 0 1 0 27 173 454 202 39 10 2 0 0 0 0 908

Total 0 0 1 1 55 325 882 442 92 20 3 1 0 0 0 1822

Stats 15th Percentile : 29 MPH

50th Percentile : 33 MPH

85th Percentile : 39 MPH

95th Percentile : 42 MPH

 

Mean Speed(Average) : 34 MPH

10 MPH Pace Speed : 31-40 MPH

Number in Pace : 1324

Percent in Pace : 72.7%

Number of Vehicles > 30 MPH : 1440

Percent of Vehicles > 30 MPH : 79.0%
Page 1

CLIENT : KIMLEY-HORN

JOB NO : 2010-47

PROJECT: BIG PINE

COUNTY : MONROE

US-1 (EB) SPEED

US-1 AT MM 31.3/ EAST OF

KEY DEER BLVD.

Date Start: 12-Nov-10

Crossroads Engineering Data, Inc.

13284 SW 120th Street

Miami, Florida, 33186

PH: 305-233-3997 FAX: 305-233-7720

EB

Start 1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71

Time 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 147 Total

11/12/1

0 0 0 1 6 8 3 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22

00:15 0 0 0 2 8 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13

00:30 0 1 3 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13

00:45 0 0 0 3 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8

0 1 4 13 27 5 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 56

01:00 0 0 0 1 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8

01:15 0 0 1 4 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12

01:30 0 1 4 2 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15

01:45 0 0 0 1 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7

0 1 5 8 20 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 42

02:00 0 1 0 2 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10

02:15 0 0 1 0 5 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8

02:30 0 0 0 0 4 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9

02:45 0 0 1 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9

0 1 2 6 17 6 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36

03:00 0 0 1 0 2 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8

03:15 0 0 0 0 4 5 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 12

03:30 0 0 1 0 2 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10

03:45 0 0 0 2 5 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13

0 0 2 2 13 16 8 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 43

04:00 0 0 0 1 5 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12

04:15 0 0 0 0 6 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11

04:30 0 0 1 2 5 7 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20

04:45 0 2 2 1 5 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16

0 2 3 4 21 20 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 59

05:00 0 0 0 1 3 4 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12

05:15 0 0 0 0 8 5 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 20

05:30 0 0 0 1 5 11 4 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 25

05:45 0 0 0 3 4 4 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20

0 0 0 5 20 24 20 5 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 77

06:00 0 2 1 0 0 4 15 6 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 30

06:15 0 0 0 1 1 6 10 20 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 40

06:30 0 0 0 0 1 4 4 12 14 5 0 0 0 0 0 40

06:45 0 0 0 0 0 5 7 30 21 3 0 0 0 0 0 66

0 2 1 1 2 19 36 68 38 9 0 0 0 0 0 176

07:00 0 0 0 1 0 2 9 21 25 9 1 0 0 0 0 68

07:15 0 0 0 0 0 1 26 22 22 15 0 0 0 0 0 86

07:30 0 0 0 0 0 8 18 27 31 9 1 0 0 0 0 94

07:45 0 0 0 0 1 2 4 16 27 15 1 0 0 0 0 66

0 0 0 1 1 13 57 86 105 48 3 0 0 0 0 314

08:00 0 0 1 0 1 8 13 30 35 14 1 0 0 0 0 103

08:15 0 0 0 0 1 1 11 38 37 12 1 0 0 0 0 101

08:30 0 0 0 0 0 9 11 22 34 12 0 1 0 0 0 89

08:45 0 1 0 0 1 1 16 38 28 11 0 0 0 0 0 96

0 1 1 0 3 19 51 128 134 49 2 1 0 0 0 389

09:00 0 0 0 0 1 2 13 37 42 13 0 0 0 0 0 108

09:15 0 0 0 0 3 12 24 39 38 5 1 0 0 0 0 122

09:30 0 0 1 0 2 5 24 42 43 7 1 0 0 0 0 125

09:45 0 0 0 0 1 2 20 45 41 22 2 0 0 0 0 133

0 0 1 0 7 21 81 163 164 47 4 0 0 0 0 488

10:00 0 0 0 0 0 4 19 29 31 18 0 0 0 0 0 101

10:15 0 0 2 1 4 7 27 38 40 5 0 0 0 0 0 124

10:30 0 0 0 0 2 4 17 40 43 10 0 0 0 0 0 116

10:45 2 1 2 1 10 16 22 41 43 8 0 0 0 0 0 146

2 1 4 2 16 31 85 148 157 41 0 0 0 0 0 487

11:00 0 0 1 0 8 20 26 38 31 10 0 0 0 0 0 134

11:15 0 0 0 1 3 7 22 52 33 9 3 0 0 0 0 130

11:30 1 0 0 0 0 8 22 44 37 11 3 0 0 0 0 126

11:45 0 2 3 0 1 13 28 39 25 9 1 1 0 0 0 122

1 2 4 1 12 48 98 173 126 39 7 1 0 0 0 512

Total 3 11 27 43 159 230 452 775 727 234 16 2 0 0 0 2679
Page 2

CLIENT : KIMLEY-HORN

JOB NO : 2010-47

PROJECT: BIG PINE

COUNTY : MONROE

US-1 (EB) SPEED

US-1 AT MM 31.3/ EAST OF

KEY DEER BLVD.

Date Start: 12-Nov-10

Crossroads Engineering Data, Inc.

13284 SW 120th Street

Miami, Florida, 33186

PH: 305-233-3997 FAX: 305-233-7720

EB

Start 1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71

Time 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 147 Total

12 PM 0 0 1 0 3 10 32 47 27 6 0 0 0 0 0 126

12:15 0 0 0 0 3 20 26 46 38 12 1 1 0 0 0 147

12:30 0 0 0 0 1 0 15 38 40 11 0 0 0 0 0 105

12:45 0 0 0 0 2 4 22 26 45 15 4 0 0 0 0 118

0 0 1 0 9 34 95 157 150 44 5 1 0 0 0 496

13:00 0 0 0 1 2 5 18 28 43 15 0 1 0 0 0 113

13:15 0 0 1 0 3 13 29 39 29 17 2 0 0 0 0 133

13:30 0 0 1 1 4 7 30 40 28 9 3 1 0 0 0 124

13:45 0 0 0 1 1 4 15 39 31 13 2 0 0 0 0 106

0 0 2 3 10 29 92 146 131 54 7 2 0 0 0 476

14:00 0 0 1 1 1 10 23 39 41 7 5 1 0 0 0 129

14:15 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 22 42 20 2 0 0 0 0 100

14:30 0 0 0 0 1 4 8 32 46 19 1 1 0 0 0 112

14:45 1 0 0 0 4 4 24 36 32 11 1 0 0 0 0 113

1 0 1 1 6 25 62 129 161 57 9 2 0 0 0 454

15:00 0 0 0 0 0 4 13 35 40 13 2 1 0 0 0 108

15:15 0 0 0 0 1 4 18 45 36 13 2 2 0 0 0 121

15:30 0 0 0 0 0 8 27 46 42 13 0 0 0 0 0 136

15:45 0 0 0 0 4 13 31 29 45 19 0 0 0 0 0 141

0 0 0 0 5 29 89 155 163 58 4 3 0 0 0 506

16:00 0 0 0 0 0 12 25 38 40 17 0 0 0 0 0 132

16:15 0 0 0 0 1 11 22 36 39 18 2 0 0 0 0 129

16:30 0 0 0 0 3 6 20 32 54 13 2 0 0 0 0 130

16:45 0 0 0 0 1 8 27 53 42 14 0 0 0 0 0 145

0 0 0 0 5 37 94 159 175 62 4 0 0 0 0 536

17:00 0 0 0 0 3 6 21 48 40 22 0 0 0 0 0 140

17:15 1 0 0 0 3 0 16 46 45 15 2 0 0 0 0 128

17:30 0 0 0 0 2 9 15 40 44 15 2 0 0 0 0 127

17:45 0 0 0 0 1 5 31 47 25 10 0 1 0 0 0 120

1 0 0 0 9 20 83 181 154 62 4 1 0 0 0 515

18:00 0 0 0 0 0 16 42 46 16 1 0 0 0 0 0 121

18:15 1 0 0 0 1 14 45 30 9 4 1 0 0 0 0 105

18:30 0 0 0 0 1 7 38 46 11 2 1 0 0 0 0 106

18:45 0 0 0 1 0 3 39 33 7 2 1 0 0 0 0 86

1 0 0 1 2 40 164 155 43 9 3 0 0 0 0 418

19:00 0 0 0 0 0 4 28 36 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 75

19:15 0 0 0 0 1 4 30 22 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 69

19:30 0 0 0 0 4 13 28 11 5 4 0 0 0 0 0 65

19:45 0 1 0 0 1 4 16 21 13 5 1 0 0 0 0 62

0 1 0 0 6 25 102 90 36 10 1 0 0 0 0 271

20:00 0 0 0 0 1 1 22 13 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 44

20:15 0 1 0 0 0 9 17 25 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 61

20:30 0 0 0 0 0 2 31 27 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 69

20:45 0 0 0 0 0 4 22 8 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 41

0 1 0 0 1 16 92 73 25 7 0 0 0 0 0 215

21:00 0 0 0 0 0 1 21 18 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 49

21:15 0 0 0 0 0 4 10 20 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 46

21:30 0 0 0 0 1 2 13 16 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 37

21:45 0 0 0 0 0 7 22 9 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 44

0 0 0 0 1 14 66 63 26 6 0 0 0 0 0 176

22:00 1 0 0 0 2 4 14 14 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 40

22:15 0 0 0 0 0 3 6 8 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 21

22:30 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 13 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 31

22:45 0 0 0 0 0 3 15 6 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 32

1 0 0 0 2 10 46 41 18 6 0 0 0 0 0 124

23:00 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 13 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 19

23:15 0 0 0 0 0 4 13 13 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 36

23:30 0 0 0 0 0 1 18 4 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 29

23:45 0 0 0 0 0 1 13 9 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 27

0 0 0 0 0 7 48 39 13 4 0 0 0 0 0 111

Total 4 2 4 5 56 286 1033 1388 1095 379 37 9 0 0 0 4298

Total 7 13 31 48 215 516 1485 2163 1822 613 53 11 0 0 0 6977

Stats 15th Percentile : 31 MPH

50th Percentile : 38 MPH

85th Percentile : 44 MPH

95th Percentile : 48 MPH

 

Mean Speed(Average) : 38 MPH

10 MPH Pace Speed : 36-45 MPH

Number in Pace : 3985

Percent in Pace : 57.1%

Number of Vehicles > 40 MPH : 2499

Percent of Vehicles > 40 MPH : 35.8%
Page 1

CLIENT : KIMLEY-HORN

JOB NO : 2010-47

PROJECT: BIG PINE

COUNTY : MONROE

US-1 (WB) SPEED

US-1 @ MM 31.3/ EAST OF

KEY DEER BLVD.

Date Start: 11-Nov-10

Crossroads Engineering Data, Inc.

13284 SW 120th Street

Miami, Florida, 33186

PH: 305-233-3997 FAX: 305-233-7720

WB

Start 1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71

Time 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 147 Total

11/11/1

0****************

00:15 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

00:30 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

00:45 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

01:00 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

01:15 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

01:30 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

01:45 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

02:00 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

02:15 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

02:30 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

02:45 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

03:00 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

03:15 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

03:30 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

03:45 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

04:00 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

04:15 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

04:30 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

04:45 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

05:00 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

05:15 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

05:30 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

05:45 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

06:00 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

06:15 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

06:30 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

06:45 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

07:00 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

07:15 0 0 3 2 0 0 6 13 24 8 3 0 0 0 0 59

07:30 0 0 0 2 0 1 14 30 23 7 0 0 0 0 0 77

07:45 0 0 0 1 0 1 6 38 20 6 1 0 0 0 0 73

0 0 3 5 0 2 26 81 67 21 4 0 0 0 0 209

08:00 0 0 1 1 1 3 10 35 19 3 0 0 0 0 0 73

08:15 0 0 0 0 4 1 15 29 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 75

08:30 0 0 0 1 1 0 24 51 18 5 0 0 0 0 0 100

08:45 0 0 1 2 0 2 18 40 30 4 0 0 0 0 0 97

0 0 2 4 6 6 67 155 93 12 0 0 0 0 0 345

09:00 0 0 0 1 1 1 26 41 27 5 0 0 0 0 0 102

09:15 0 0 0 4 0 2 17 37 28 1 0 0 0 0 0 89

09:30 0 0 2 0 0 2 20 51 15 2 0 0 0 0 0 92

09:45 0 0 0 0 3 5 23 21 22 2 0 0 0 0 0 76

0 0 2 5 4 10 86 150 92 10 0 0 0 0 0 359

10:00 0 0 0 0 0 2 22 56 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 108

10:15 0 0 1 3 2 7 35 46 23 5 0 0 0 0 0 122

10:30 0 0 0 2 5 10 21 39 53 6 0 0 0 0 0 136

10:45 0 0 1 1 2 3 24 40 41 4 0 0 0 0 0 116

0 0 2 6 9 22 102 181 145 15 0 0 0 0 0 482

11:00 0 0 0 0 6 5 27 60 22 4 0 0 0 0 0 124

11:15 0 0 1 1 1 3 45 68 31 3 0 0 0 0 0 153

11:30 0 0 0 1 1 5 29 59 21 1 0 0 0 0 0 117

11:45 0 0 1 0 1 9 31 65 42 5 0 0 0 0 0 154

0 0 2 2 9 22 132 252 116 13 0 0 0 0 0 548

Total 0 0 11 22 28 62 413 819 513 71 4 0 0 0 0 1943
Page 2

CLIENT : KIMLEY-HORN

JOB NO : 2010-47

PROJECT: BIG PINE

COUNTY : MONROE

US-1 (WB) SPEED

US-1 @ MM 31.3/ EAST OF

KEY DEER BLVD.

Date Start: 11-Nov-10

Crossroads Engineering Data, Inc.

13284 SW 120th Street

Miami, Florida, 33186

PH: 305-233-3997 FAX: 305-233-7720

WB

Start 1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46 51 56 61 66 71

Time 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 147 Total

12 PM 0 0 0 1 1 2 29 62 38 4 1 0 0 0 0 138

12:15 0 0 1 0 0 1 23 63 35 6 0 0 0 0 0 129

12:30 0 0 0 0 2 2 33 85 43 2 0 0 0 0 0 167

12:45 0 0 1 0 0 8 31 69 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 150

0 0 2 1 3 13 116 279 157 12 1 0 0 0 0 584

13:00 0 0 0 1 1 9 49 71 42 1 0 0 0 0 0 174

13:15 0 0 0 2 1 1 27 62 37 5 0 0 0 0 0 135

13:30 0 0 0 1 1 7 24 73 45 3 0 0 0 0 0 154

13:45 0 0 1 2 2 7 45 77 36 3 0 0 0 0 0 173

0 0 1 6 5 24 145 283 160 12 0 0 0 0 0 636

14:00 0 0 3 0 3 5 21 88 43 8 0 0 0 0 0 171

14:15 0 0 1 0 0 13 43 61 48 6 0 0 0 0 1 173

14:30 0 0 1 1 2 6 48 77 20 4 1 0 0 0 0 160

14:45 0 0 1 2 1 18 73 66 20 5 0 0 0 0 0 186

0 0 6 3 6 42 185 292 131 23 1 0 0 0 1 690

15:00 0 0 2 3 6 21 42 72 29 3 0 0 0 0 0 178

15:15 0 0 0 1 1 9 50 81 37 3 0 0 0 0 0 182

15:30 0 0 1 0 5 6 34 83 55 0 0 0 0 0 0 184

15:45 0 0 0 2 6 18 57 59 35 9 0 0 0 0 0 186

0 0 3 6 18 54 183 295 156 15 0 0 0 0 0 730

16:00 0 0 1 4 0 9 43 80 31 5 1 0 0 0 0 174

16:15 0 0 1 1 0 9 59 64 20 3 0 0 0 0 0 157

16:30 0 0 0 1 0 2 34 73 34 4 0 0 0 0 0 148

16:45 0 0 0 1 1 8 22 55 44 7 0 0 0 0 0 138

0 0 2 7 1 28 158 272 129 19 1 0 0 0 0 617

17:00 0 0 1 3 2 2 38 73 27 4 0 0 0 0 0 150

17:15 0 0 1 0 0 6 36 69 29 1 0 0 0 0 0 142

17:30 0 0 0 2 2 15 62 51 19 1 0 0 0 0 0 152

17:45 0 0 0 1 2 15 54 43 19 3 0 0 0 0 0 137

0 0 2 6 6 38 190 236 94 9 0 0 0 0 0 581

18:00 0 0 0 0 3 16 75 31 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 126

18:15 0 0 0 0 1 16 79 29 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 127

18:30 0 0 1 1 1 12 56 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 89

18:45 0 0 0 1 2 13 56 35 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 108

0 0 1 2 7 57 266 113 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 450

19:00 0 0 1 0 6 15 49 13 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 85

19:15 0 0 0 1 1 23 44 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 77

19:30 0 0 0 1 13 15 20 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 52

19:45 0 0 0 0 7 34 11 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 53

0 0 1 2 27 87 124 24 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 267

20:00 0 0 0 1 11 28 29 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 73

20:15 0 0 0 2 17 24 13 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 57

20:30 0 0 0 1 8 21 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38

20:45 0 0 0 0 19 13 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37

0 0 0 4 55 86 54 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 205

21:00 0 0 1 5 34 10 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 52

21:15 0 0 2 1 9 20 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35

21:30 0 0 1 3 8 26 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45

21:45 0 0 1 1 8 16 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28

0 0 5 10 59 72 13 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 160

22:00 0 0 1 0 16 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26

22:15 0 0 0 0 4 10 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21

22:30 0 0 0 1 14 31 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48

22:45 0 2 0 0 6 8 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18

0 2 1 1 40 57 11 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 113

23:00 0 0 0 1 9 11 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22

23:15 2 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5

23:30 1 1 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13

23:45 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Total 3 4 24 49 236 582 1446 1802 833 90 3 0 0 0 1 5073

Total 3 4 35 71 264 644 1859 2621 1346 161 7 0 0 0 1 7016

Stats 15th Percentile : 31 MPH

50th Percentile : 37 MPH

85th Percentile : 42 MPH

95th Percentile : 45 MPH

 

Mean Speed(Average) : 36 MPH

10 MPH Pace Speed : 31-40 MPH

Number in Pace : 4480

Percent in Pace : 63.9%

Number of Vehicles > 40 MPH : 1515

Percent of Vehicles > 40 MPH : 21.6%
NationalKeyDeerRefugeJuly2011

TransportationStudyReport

APPENDIXE

OpinionsofProbableCost711-11-111 THERMOPLASTIC, WHITE SOLID, 6 INCHES NM 0.091 3,257.00 $ 296.40 $ 

711-11-421 THERMOPLASTIC, BLUE SOLID, 6 INCHES LF 54 0.84 $ 45.40 $ 

711-11-460 THERMOPLASTIC, BLUE, MESSAGE EA 1 150.00 $ 150.00 $ 

$ 491.80

$ 491.80

101-1 LS 10% - 50.00 $ 

102-1 LS 10% - 50.00 $ 

PE & CEI LS 30% - 147.54 $ 

CONTINGENCY LS 25% - 122.95 $ 

SMALL PROJECT PREMIUM LS 15% - 73.77 $ 

$ 936.06

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

UNIT TOTAL COST QTY.

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. has no control over the cost of labor, materials, equipment, or services furnished by others, or over methods of determining 

price, or over competitive bidding or market conditions. Any and all professional opinions as to costs reflected herein, including but not limited to professional 

opinions as to the costs of construction materials, are made on the basis of professional experience and available data. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 

cannot and does not guarantee or warrant that proposals, bids, or actual costs will not vary from the professional opinions of costs shown herein.

MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC

MOBILIZATION

SUBTOTAL

SIGNING & PM TOTAL

GRAND TOTAL

SIGNING AND PAVEMENT MARKING PAY ITEMS

 UNIT PRICE

 OPINION OF PROBABLE COST 

Restriping of Blue Hole Parking Lot

ITEM NUMBER DESCRIPTION

5200 NW 33rd Avenue

Suite 109

Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33309

FBPE Number: CA 00000696

T:\011675016 key deer nwr\short and long term needs\[Parking Striping OPC 03 02 11.xlsx]10 26 09
522-2 SIDEWALK, CONCRETE, 6" THICK SY 2 46.00 $ 92.00 $

$ 92.00

700-20-11 SIGN, SINGLE POST, FURNISH AND INSTALL AS 4 250.94 $ 1,003.80 $

711-11-123 THERMOPLASTIC, WHITE SOLID, 12 INCHES LF 44 2.04 $ 89.80 $

711-11-125 THERMOPLASTIC, WHITE SOLID, 24 INCHES LF 27 3.37 $ 91.00 $

711-11-180 THERMOPLASTIC, WHITE, YIELD LINE LF 44 1.20 $ 52.80 $

$ 1,237.40

$ 1,329.40

101-1 LS 10% - 133.00 $

102-1 LS 10% - 133.00 $

PE & CEI LS 50% - 664.70 $

CONTINGENCY LS 50% - 664.70 $

SMALL PROJECT PREMIUM LS 75% - 997.05 $

$ 3,921.85

$ 4,000

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

5200 NW 33rd Avenue

Suite 109

Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33309

FBPE Number: CA 00000696

K:\FTL_TPTO\011675016 - Deer Key Refuge\OPCs\[Crosswalk Striping.xlsx]10 26 09

ROADWAY PAY ITEMS

ROADWAY TOTAL

ITEM NUMBER DESCRIPTION UNIT TOTAL COST QTY.

Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. has no control over the cost of labor, materials, equipment, or services furnished by others, or over methods of determining

price, or over competitive bidding or market conditions. Any and all professional opinions as to costs reflected herein, including but not limited to professional

opinions as to the costs of construction materials, are made on the basis of professional experience and available data. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.

cannot and does not guarantee or warrant that proposals, bids, or actual costs will not vary from the professional opinions of costs shown herein.

MAINTENANCE OF TRAFFIC

MOBILIZATION

SUBTOTAL

SAY

SIGNING & PM TOTAL

GRAND TOTAL

SIGNING AND PAVEMENT MARKING PAY ITEMS

 UNIT PRICE

 OPINION OF PROBABLE COST

Crosswalk at Blue Hole Interpretive Site
Description Pay Item # Width (ft) Thickness (in) Length (ft) Unit Quantity Unit Price* Total Cost

CLEARING & GRUBBING 110-1-1 12 1 AC 0.000275 $15,350.42 $4.23

EMBANKMENT 120-6 21 12 1 CY 0.778 $10.47 $8.14

MILLING EXIST ASPH PAVT, 2" AVG DEPTH 327-70-5 22 2 1 SY 2.44 $1.65 $4.03

SUPERPAVE ASPHALTIC CONC, TRAFFIC C 334-1-13 22 1 1 TN 0.134 $94.05 $12.64

ASPH CONC FC,TRAFFIC C,FC-9.5,RUBBER 337-7-32 22 1 1 TN 0.134 $118.20 $15.89

SHOULDER NEW CONSTRUCTION/WIDENING (on each side: 4' Paved Shoulder and 2' Unpaved Shoulder)TYPE B STABILIZATION 160-4 12 1 SY 1.33 $4.30 $5.73

OPTIONAL BASE,BASE GROUP 08 (Shoulder) 285-708 8.67 1 SY 0.963 $13.49 $12.99

SUPERPAVE ASPHALTIC CONC, TRAFFIC C 334-1-13 8 1 1 TN 0.049 $94.05 $4.60

ASPH CONC FC,TRAFFIC C,FC-9.5,RUBBER 337-7-32 8 1 1 TN 0.049 $118.20 $5.78

THERMOPLASTIC, STD, WHITE, MESSAGE 711-11-160 1 EA 0.000758 $91.04 $0.07

$74.11$11.12$11.12

$3.71

$14.82

$100.05$105.00

OPINION OF PROBABLE COST

ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE

Add Paved Shoulder, Resurface Roadway

*** List of items not included in the Total Estimated Cost includes but is not limited to: Signals, Lighting, Landscaping, Structures, Utilities, R/W costs, Permits, Engineering or CEI fees, factorfor inflation.*** Because the Consultant does not control the cost of labor, materials, equipment or services furnished by others, methods of determining prices, or competitive bidding or market conditions,any opinions rendered as to costs, including but not limited to opinions as to the costs of construction and materials, shall be made on the basis of its experience and represent its judgment as anexperienced and qualified professional, familiar with the industry. The Consultant cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids or actual costs will not vary from its opinions of cost. If the* Unit costs are FDOT Item Average costs from February 2010 to January 2011 whenever available.Client wishes greater assurance as to the amount of any cost, it shall employ an independent cost estimator.

***Total

MILLING AND RESURFACING (Two 11' lanes)

***Say

Contingency (20%)

Roadway Sub-Total

Maintenance of Traffic (15%)

Mobilization (15%)

Signing and Marking (5%)

K:\FTL_TPTO\011675016 - Deer Key Refuge\OPCs\20110302 Key Deer Refuge -OPC - Add Shoulder Only.xlsx
Description Pay Item # Width (ft) Thickness (in) Length (ft) Unit Quantity Unit Price* Total Cost

CLEARING & GRUBBING 110-1-1 16 1 AC 0.000367 $15,350.42 $5.64

EMBANKMENT 120-6 16 12 1 CY 0.593 $10.47 $6.20

MILLING EXIST ASPH PAVT, 2" AVG DEPTH 327-70-5 20 2 1 SY 2.22 $1.65 $3.67

SUPERPAVE ASPHALTIC CONC, TRAFFIC C 334-1-13 20 1 1 TN 0.122 $94.05 $11.50

ASPH CONC FC,TRAFFIC C,FC-9.5,RUBBER 337-7-32 20 1 1 TN 0.122 $118.20 $14.45

ROADWAY WIDENING (on each side: 2' Pavement)TYPE B STABILIZATION 160-4 0 1 SY 0.0 $4.30 $0.00

OPTIONAL BASE,BASE GROUP 11 (Roadway Pavement) 285-711 4.67 1 SY 0.519 $22.00 $11.41

SUPERPAVE ASPHALTIC CONC, TRAFFIC C 334-1-13 4 1 1 TN 0.0244 $94.05 $2.30

ASPH CONC FC,TRAFFIC C,FC-9.5,RUBBER 337-7-32 4 1 1 TN 0.0244 $118.20 $2.89

SHOULDER NEW CONSTRUCTION/WIDENING (on each side: 4' Paved Shoulder and 2' Unpaved Shoulder)TYPE B STABILIZATION 160-4 12 1 SY 1.33 $4.30 $5.73

OPTIONAL BASE,BASE GROUP 08 (Shoulder) 285-708 8.67 1 SY 0.963 $13.49 $12.99

SUPERPAVE ASPHALTIC CONC, TRAFFIC C 334-1-13 8 1 1 TN 0.0489 $94.05 $4.60

ASPH CONC FC,TRAFFIC C,FC-9.5,RUBBER 337-7-32 8 1 1 TN 0.0489 $118.20 $5.78

THERMOPLASTIC, STD, WHITE, MESSAGE 711-11-160 1 EA 0.000758 $91.04 $0.07

$87.22$13.08$13.08

$4.36

$17.44

$117.74$120.00

OPINION OF PROBABLE COST

Add Paved Should and Widen Roadway

Contingency (20%)

Roadway Sub-Total

Maintenance of Traffic (15%)

Mobilization (15%)

Signing and Marking (5%)

MILLING AND RESURFACING (Two 10' lanes)

ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE

*** List of items not included in the Total Estimated Cost includes but is not limited to: Sigals, Lighting, Landscaping, Structures, Utilities, R/W costs, Permits, Engineering or CEI fees,factor for inflation.*** Because the Consultant does not control the cost of labor, materials, equipment or services furnished by others, methods of determining prices, or competitive bidding or marketconditions, any opinions rendered as to costs, including but not limited to opinions as to the costs of construction and materials, shall be made on the basis of its experience and represent itsjudgment as an experienced and qualified professional, familiar with the industry. The Consultant cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids or actual costs will not vary from itsopinions of cost. If the Client wishes greater assurance as to the amount of any cost, it shall employ an independent cost estimator.* Unit costs are FDOT Item Average costs from February 2010 to January 2011 whenever available.

***Total

***Say

K:\FTL_TPTO\011675016 - Deer Key Refuge\OPCs\20110302 Key Deer Refuge -OPC - Add Shoulder and Widen Roadway.xlsx
Description Pay Item # Width (ft) Thickness (in) Length (ft) Unit Quantity Unit Price* Total Cost

CLEARING & GRUBBING 110-1-1 30 1 AC 0.000689 $15,350.42 $10.57

EMBANKMENT 120-6 21 12 1 CY 0.778 $10.47 $8.14

MILLING EXIST ASPH PAVT, 2" AVG DEPTH 327-70-5 22 2 1 SY 2.44 $1.65 $4.03

SUPERPAVE ASPHALTIC CONC, TRAFFIC C 334-1-13 22 1 1 TN 0.134 $94.05 $12.64

ASPH CONC FC,TRAFFIC C,FC-9.5,RUBBER 337-7-32 22 1 1 TN 0.134 $118.20 $15.89

SHOULDER NEW CONSTRUCTION/WIDENING (on each side: 4' Paved Shoulder and 2' Unpaved Shoulder)TYPE B STABILIZATION 160-4 12 1 SY 1.33 $4.30 $5.73

OPTIONAL BASE,BASE GROUP 08 (Shoulder) 285-708 8.67 1 SY 0.963 $13.49 $12.99

SUPERPAVE ASPHALTIC CONC, TRAFFIC C 334-1-13 8 1 1 TN 0.0489 $94.05 $4.60

ASPH CONC FC,TRAFFIC C,FC-9.5,RUBBER 337-7-32 8 1 1 TN 0.049 $118.20 $5.78

SHARED USE PATH (10' Wide)TYPE B STABILIZATION 160-4 14 1 SY 1.56 $4.30 $6.69

OPTIONAL BASE GROUP 01 285-701 10.67 1 SY 1.19 $32.00 $37.93

SUPERPAVE ASPHALTIC CONC, TRAFFIC A (1") 334-1-11 10 1 1 TN 0.0611 $97.32 $5.95

THERMOPLASTIC, STD, WHITE, MESSAGE 711-11-160 1 EA 0.000758 $91.04 $0.07

$131.02

$19.65$19.65

$6.55

$26.20

$176.87$180.00

ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE

***Say

Contingency (20%)

Roadway Sub-Total

Maintenance of Traffic (15%)

Mobilization (15%)

Signing and Marking (5%)

OPINION OF PROBABLE COST

Extend Shared Use Path and Add Paved Shoulders, Resurface Roadway

*** List of items not included in the Total Estimated Cost includes but is not limited to: Signals, Lighting, Landscaping, Structures, Utilities, R/W costs, Permits, Engineering or CEI fees, factorfor inflation.*** Because the Consultant does not control the cost of labor, materials, equipment or services furnished by others, methods of determining prices, or competitive bidding or market conditions,any opinions rendered as to costs, including but not limited to opinions as to the costs of construction and materials, shall be made on the basis of its experience and represent its judgment as anexperienced and qualified professional, familiar with the industry. The Consultant cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids or actual costs will not vary from its opinions of cost. If the* Unit costs are FDOT Item Average costs from February 2010 to January 2011 whenever available.Client wishes greater assurance as to the amount of any cost, it shall employ an independent cost estimator.

***Total

MILLING AND RESURFACING (Two 11' lanes)

K:\FTL_TPTO\011675016 - Deer Key Refuge\OPCs\20110302 Key Deer Refuge -OPC - Shared Use Path Addition.xlsx
Description Pay Item # Width (ft) Thickness (in) Length (ft) Unit Quantity Unit Price* Total Cost

CLEARING & GRUBBING 110-1-1 8 1 AC 0.000184 $15,350.42 $2.82

EMBANKMENT 120-6 4 6 1 CY 0.0741 $10.47 $0.78

SHARED USE PATH (Widen 8' path to 10' - 2' Widening)TYPE B STABILIZATION 160-4 6 1 SY 0.667 $4.30 $2.87

OPTIONAL BASE GROUP 01 285-701 2.67 1 SY 0.296 $32.00 $9.48

SUPERPAVE ASPHALTIC CONC, TRAFFIC A (1") 334-1-11 2 1 1 TN 0.0122 $97.32 $1.19

THERMOPLASTIC, STD, WHITE, MESSAGE 711-11-160 1 EA 0.0 $91.04 $0.07

$17.20

$2.58$2.58$0.86$3.44

$23.22$25.00

OPINION OF PROBABLE COST

ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE

Widen Shared Use Path

*** List of items not included in the Total Estimated Cost includes but is not limited to: Signals, Lighting, Landscaping, Structures, Utilities, R/W costs, Permits, Engineering or CEI fees, factorfor inflation.*** Because the Consultant does not control the cost of labor, materials, equipment or services furnished by others, methods of determining prices, or competitive bidding or market conditions,any opinions rendered as to costs, including but not limited to opinions as to the costs of construction and materials, shall be made on the basis of its experience and represent its judgment as anexperienced and qualified professional, familiar with the industry. The Consultant cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids or actual costs will not vary from its opinions of cost. If the* Unit costs are FDOT Item Average costs from February 2010 to January 2011 whenever available.Client wishes greater assurance as to the amount of any cost, it shall employ an independent cost estimator.

***Total

***Say

Contingency (20%)

Roadway Sub-Total

Maintenance of Traffic (15%)

Mobilization (15%)

Signing and Marking (5%)

K:\FTL_TPTO\011675016 - Deer Key Refuge\OPCs\20110302 Key Deer Refuge -OPC - widen shared use path from 8 to 10 ft.xlsx
Description Pay Item # Width (ft) Thickness (in) Length (ft) Unit Quantity Unit Price* Total Cost

CLEARING & GRUBBING 110-1-1 20 1 AC 0.000459 $15,350.42 $7.05

EMBANKMENT 120-6 15 12 1 CY 0.556 $10.47 $5.82

MILLING EXIST ASPH PAVT, 2" AVG DEPTH 327-70-5 22 2 0 SY 0.00 $1.65 $0.00SUPERPAVE ASPHALTIC CONC, TRAFFIC C 334-1-13 22 1 0 TN 0.000 $94.05 $0.00ASPH CONC FC,TRAFFIC C,FC-9.5,RUBBER 337-7-32 22 1 0 TN 0.000 $118.20 $0.00

SHOULDER NEW CONSTRUCTION/WIDENING (on each side: 4' Paved Shoulder and 2' Unpaved Shoulder)TYPE B STABILIZATION 160-4 6 1 SY 0.67 $4.30 $2.87

OPTIONAL BASE,BASE GROUP 08 (Shoulder) 285-708 4.33 1 SY 0.481 $13.49 $6.50SUPERPAVE ASPHALTIC CONC, TRAFFIC C 334-1-13 4 1 1 TN 0.0244 $94.05 $2.30ASPH CONC FC,TRAFFIC C,FC-9.5,RUBBER 337-7-32 4 1 1 TN 0.024 $118.20 $2.89

SHARED USE PATH (10' Wide)TYPE B STABILIZATION 160-4 14 1 SY 1.56 $4.30 $6.69

OPTIONAL BASE GROUP 01 285-701 10.67 1 SY 1.19 $32.00 $37.93SUPERPAVE ASPHALTIC CONC, TRAFFIC A (1") 334-1-11 10 1 1 TN 0.0611 $97.32 $5.95

THERMOPLASTIC, STD, WHITE, MESSAGE 711-11-160 0 EA 0.000000 $91.04 $0.00

$77.98$15.60$15.60

$3.90

$15.60

$113.07$115.00

OPINION OF PROBABLE COST

Replace Existing Path with Shoulder and Construct Shared Use Path with Separation from Roadway

*** List of items not included in the Total Estimated Cost includes but is not limited to: Signals, Lighting, Landscaping, Structures, Utilities, R/W costs, Permits, Engineering or CEI 

fees, factor for inflation.*** Because the Consultant does not control the cost of labor, materials, equipment or services furnished by others, methods of determining prices, or competitive bidding or market conditions, any opinions rendered as to costs, including but not limited to opinions as to the costs of construction and materials, shall be made on the basis of its experience and represent its judgment as an experienced and qualified professional, familiar with the industry. The Consultant cannot and does not guarantee that proposals, bids or actual costs will not vary from its opinions of cost. If the Client wishes greater assurance as to the amount of any cost, it shall employ an independent cost estimator.* Unit costs are FDOT Item Average costs from February 2010 to January 2011 whenever available.

***Total

MILLING AND RESURFACING (Two 11' lanes)

ROADWAY AND DRAINAGE

***Say

Contingency (20%)

Roadway Sub-Total

Maintenance of Traffic (20%)

Mobilization (20%)

Signing and Marking (5%)

T:\011675016 key deer nwr\short and long term needs\20110422 Key Deer Refuge -OPC - Shared Use Path Shift.xlsx