Resolution 347-1989
RESOLUTION NO. 347-1989
1-' U')
~
c 0\
-=::c
r- .
'. -
N
'. ~
, J
,
..'
.~
~ :z:
k .::0 0
.I::
A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COM-
MISSIONERS OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA, RE-
QUESTING THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT-
ATION TO INCORPORATE INTO ITS 5-YEAR WORK
PROGRAM AN OVERALL CORRIDOR STUDY ALONG U.S. 1
IN DADE AND MONROE COUNTIES FROM FLORIDA CITY TO
KEY WEST, SETTING FORTH THE BOARD'S CONSIDERATION
THAT SUCH CORRIDOR STUDY IS THE HIGHEST PRESENT
PRIORITY TRANSPORTATION NEED IN MONROE COUNTY
AND DIRECTING THE CLERK TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS TO FORWARD COPIES OF THIS RESOLU-
TION AND ATTACHMENTS TO CERTAIN NAMED OFFICIALS.
WHEREAS, Monroe County is required under the provisions of ~9J-12.006(24},
Florida Administrative Code, to submit its revised local government comprehensive
plan to the State land planning agency by June 1, 1990, which revised plan shall be-
made consistent with Chapter 9J-5, F.A.C. and Chapter 163, Florida Statutes; and
WHEREAS, Monroe County has set forth its intent, by and through adoption by
the Monroe County Board of County Commissioners on June 6, 1989 of Resolution NO.
325-1989, to execute an agreement with the Florida Department of Transportation
whereby that agency will prepare, pursuant to ~163.3177(6}(b}, F.S., a traffic
circulation element of the aforementioned revised local government comprehensive
plan; and
WHEREAS, Monroe County, by action of its Board of County Commissioners on
June 6, 1989 has approved a revised version of a Concurrency Management Agreement
with the Florida Department of Community Affairs and has further authorized, by
adoption of Resolution No. 346-1989, execution of an agreement with said agency to
effectuate the requirements of Chapter 380, F.S. and to assist the County to
implement the Comprehensive Plan and Land Development regulations; and
WHEREAS, the Florida Department of Transportation, under the provisions of
~339.135, F.S., is developing a Five Year Transportation Plan for the State's fiscal
year July 1, 1989 to June 30, 1990, and the four succeeding years, which plan
continuously undergoes tentative revisions that are formally adopted annually as
funding becomes available and project priorities, locations and magnitudes change
through initiatives by local government and the Florida Legislature and will likely
undergo major revision following the proposed special session of the Florida
Legislature on Transportation issues to be held in October, 1989, if it is held at that
time; and
WHEREAS, on November 18, 1988, Monroe County Mayor Michael H. Puto (then
Mayor Pro-tern), county staff and consulting engineer made a presentation to the
Florida Transportation Commission and Secretary of Transportation Kaye Henderson
at their meeting in Naples, Florida, of certain facts, statistics and documents
concerning U.S. 1 in the Florida Keys, which materials are attached hereto and, by
reference, made a part hereof, with the County's request that the Florida Department
of Transportation undertake, and incorporate into its five year transportation plan, an
overall corridor study of U.S. 1 in the Florida Keys from Florida City to Key West to
identify needed right-of-way and required highway improvements on a short and long
term comprehensive basis, with fully coordinated State and Local government
participation, so that State and County plans can achieve consistency and highway
capacity will be available concurrently with the orderly, controlled growth and
steadily increasing tourism usage that will occur along the Keys singular lifeline
highway; now, therefore
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF MONROE
COUNTY, FLORIDA, that:
1. The Florida Department of Transportation is hereby requested to
incorporate into its five year work program an overall corridor study along U.S. 1 in
Dade And Monroe Counties from Florida City to Key West, the specific scope of which
shall be first agreed upon by Department and County Staff and subsequently approved
by Department management and this Board.
2. This Board considers the need for the comprehensive, coordinated
transportation planning approach that will result from the proposed U.S. 1 corridor
study to be the highest present priority Transportation need in the County in order to
achieve planning consistency and Transportation infrastructure capacity concurrency
in accordance with statutory and regulatory mandates, rather than continuing the
piecemeal, uncoordinated transportation planning that has occured to date in Monroe
Coun ty.
3. The Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners is hereby directed to
forward certified copies of this resolution with attachments to Governor Bob
Martinez, Secretary of Transportation Kaye Henderson, Secretary of the Department
of Community Affairs Tom Pelham, Florida Transportation Commission Chairman
David Kerr, District 6 FDOT Deputy Secretary Charles Baldwin, Senator Larry
Plummer and Representative Ron Saunders.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of Monroe
County, Florida, at a regular meeting of said Board held on the 6th day of June,
A.D. 1989.
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
OF MONROE COUNTY, FLORIDA
By
////~
MA YOif'~AN
(SEAL)
Attest: DANNX 1.. KOLI.IAGE, ~lerk
~~"f/)~
ERK
~_1_ 1Il~.-'"
6V ~"
tAtttJllNy'. ~
PRESENTATION TO
THE FLORIDA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
BY
:\10NROE COUNTY
ON
NOVEMBER 18, 1988
AT
THE COLLIER COUNTY COURTHOUSE-NAPLES, FLORIDA
OPENING REMARKS BY MONROE COUNTY MA YOR PRO-TEM MIKE PUTO
CHAIRMAN KERR, GOVERNOR MIXSON, SECRETARY HENDERSON, MEMBERS OF
THE COMMISSION, STAFF AND LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, MY NAME IS
COMMISSIONER MIKE PUTO, I SERVE AS MA YOR PRO-TEM OF MONROE
COUNTY AND CHAIRMAN OF OUR BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER'S
TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE. ON BEHALF OF OUR COUNTY COMMISSION I
WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR MAKING AVAILABLE THIS TIME FOR A
PRESENTATION BY MONROE COUNTY DURING YOUR BUSY AGENDA
CONSIDERING TRANSPORTATION ISSUES OF STATE WIDE IMPORTANCE.
WITH ME TODA Y IS CAPTAIN TOM BROWN, OUR COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, WHO
WILL LEAD OUR PRESENTATION, OUR ASSISTANT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
FOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT, DON CRAIG AND BOB HARRIS OF OUR GENERAL
CONSULTING ENGINEERING FIRM, POST, BUCKLEY, SCHUH & JERNIGAN, INC.
MR. CRAIG, MR. HARRIS AND I WILL BE A V AILABLE TO P ARTICIP ATE IN THE
QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD FOLLOWING CAPTAIN BROWN'S MAIN
PRESENTATION.
1
ALTHOUGH IT IS 30MEWHAT OF AN OVER-USED TER~ TO THOSE OF US THAT
LIVE IN THE KEYS, OUR COUNTY IS INDEED "UNIQUEfI WHEN COMPARED WIT:!
THE 66 OTHER COUNTIES IN FLORIDA. WE ARE AN ;\.RCHIPELAGO OF ISLANDS.
ABOUT 115 MILES LONG WITH A SINGLE LIFELINE, US1, CONNECTING US
TOGETHER AND TO THE MAINLAND. I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THE TERM
"LIFELINE" BECAUSE UNLIKE OTHER PARTS OF THE STATE PRIMARY HIGHWA Y
SYSTEM ON THE MAINLAND, WE ABSOLUTELY HAVE ONLY ONE ROAD _-\ND
WILL NEVER HAVE AN ALTERNATE LAND ROUTE. IN ADDITION TO MOVING
VIRTUALLY ALL OF THE PEOPLE, GOODS AND SERVICES THAT MAKE UP AND
ARE VITAL TO THE SURVIVAL OF OUR RESIDENT AND TOURIST POPULATION,
USl IS OUR ONLY EVACUATION ROUTE BY LAND THAT SERVES THE
HURRICANE-PRONE AND EXPOSED FLORIDA KEYS.
THE SOUTH FLORIDA MEDIA HAS FOR MANY YEARS NOW PORTRA YED MONROE
COUNTY AS AN AREA OF THE STATE WHERE RAMPANT, UNCONTROLLED
GROWTH IS THE RULE, RATHER THAN THE EXCEPTION. THIS UNFORTUNATE
CR USADE OF MISINFORMATION RESULTED IN THE FLORIDA KEYS BEING
DECLARED AN AREA OF CRITICAL STATE CONCERN UNDER CHAPTER 380,
FLORIDA STATUTES BY THE GOVERNOR AND CABINET AS EARLY AS 1974
WHICH CONTINUES TO THIS DA Y. THE REALITY IS, AND CAPTAIN BROWN WILL
SHOW YOU THE FIGURES WHICH PROVE IT, THAT RAMPANT GROWTH OF OUR
RESIDENT POPULATION SINCE 1970 HAS SIMPLY NOT OCCURRED, NOR IS IT
PROJECTED TO IN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE. WHAT HAS OCCURRED,
PARTICULARLY SINCE THE MAJOR CUTBACKS IN MILITARY FORCE
COMMITMENTS BY THE NAVY IN THE KEY WEST AREA HAPPENED IN 1974, IS A
DRAMATIC INCREASE IN TOURISM, WHICH IS STRONGLY SUPPORTED BY THE
STATE OF FLORIDA AND OUR LOCAL BUSINESS COMMUNITY, BUT_. WHICH,
2
:'l'EVERTI-IELESS, _-\DDS A CONTI::l'UALL Y INCREASING 3URDEN ON THE
CAP ACITY AND SAFETY OF USlo
AS IT RELATES TO :\10NROE COUNTY, WE HAVE REVIEWED THE FDOT'S
STRATEGIC TRANSPORTATION PLAN WHICH WAS COMPLETED LATE LAST YEAR
AND CARRIES A 40 BILLION DOLLAR STATEWIDE PRICE TAG WITH ONLY 15
BILLION DOLLARS OF IDENTIFIED FUNDING IN PLACE. WE CERTAINLY AGREE
WITH THE PLANS GOALS AND OBJECTIVES AND WANT TO DO OUR PART IN
SUPPORTING FDOT'S PROGRAM AS THE PLAN IS IMPLEMENTED. IN ORDER FOR
THE STRATEGIC PLAN TO BE ACHIEVABLE IN THE KEYS, AND, AS YOU
PROBABL Y KNOW, IT CALLS FOR FOUR LANING OF MOST OF THE PRESENT TWO
LANE SECTIONS OF USl, EXCLUDING THE BRIDGES, WE STRONGLY BELIEVE
THAT AN OVERALL CORRIDOR STUDY FROM FLORIDA CITY TO KEY WEST,
NEEDS TO GET UNDERWAY NOW. WITH THE CONTINUALLY ESCALATING
VALUE OF USABLE REAL ESTATE IN THE KEYS, THE ADDITIONAL RIGHT-0F-
WA Y REQUIREMENTS FOR THESE FUTURE FOUR LANING PROJECTS AS WELL AS
THE SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES THAT MUST BE ADDRESSED MUST
BE IDENTIFIED SO THAT ACQUISITION, WHERE NECESSARY, CAN BEGIN WELL IN
ADV ANCE OF CONSTRUCTION FUNDING BECOMING A V AILABLE.
I WILL NOW TURN OUR PRESENTATION OVER TO OUR COUNTY ADMINSTRATOR
CAPTAIN BROWN, WHO WILL PRESENT YOU WITH SOME ENLIGHTENING FACTS
WHICH WE BELIEVE WILL LEAD YOU TO A SIMILAR CONCLUSION THAN THAT
WHICH WE HAVE REACHED AND CONVINCE YOU TO CONCUR WITH OUR
REeo MMEN DA TIONS.
3
? age 1
;.rOV'S;ilBER 13, 1938
Address by :\t1onroe County .-\dministrator, Capt. Tom Brown to the Florida -
Transporta tion Com mission.
COMMISSIONERS, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN:
THANK YOU, :vIA YOa PUTO. I AM PLEASED TO BE HERE TI-IIS MORNING WITH
COMMISSIONER PUTO AND MY STAFF TO SHARE WITH YOU OUR IDEAS AND
DESCRIBE THE TRANSPORTATION CRISIS FACING THE FLORIDA KEYS.
"UNIQUE" IS AN OFTEN USED WORD THESE DAYS BUT, IT CERTAINLY DOES
APPL Y TO THE STRING OF 42 CORAL ROCK ISLANDS CONNECTED BY A SINGLE
TENUOUS THREAD OF MOSTLY TWO LANE HIGHWAY. THE KEYS ARE
(MAP)
INHABITED BY A GROUP OF FIERCELY INDEPENDENT INDIVIDUALS WHO VALUE
NOT ONLY THEIR HERITAGE THAT STRETCHES BACK TO THE EARLY 18TH
CENTURY, BUT THE NATURAL TROPICAL HARDWOOD FOREST, EXTENSIVE
WETLANDS AND THE CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES' ONLY LIVING CORAL
REEF. THESE NATURAL HISTORIC RESOURCES HAVE ALSO SIGNIFICANTLY
CONTRIBUTED TO THE TRANSPORTATION CRISIS WE NOW FACE. EVERY
POTENTIAL VISITOR TO THE KEYS BRINGS WITH THEM A NEED FOR GREATER
NUMBER OF SERVICES WHICH PLACES UNCONTROLLABLE STRAINS ON THE
DELICATE ECOLOGY AND INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE KEYS.
(BOARD 1)
WHY A CORRIDOR STUDY?
LET ME ILLUSTRATE THESE POINTS BY WAY OF SOME SPECIFIC STATISTICS.
P~ge ~
,-\. Rapid Zscala tion of 'lisi tor Yehicular Traffic Density
(SLIDES 1 &2) THIS CHAJ1T AND GRAPH SHOWS THAT RESIDE:-TT POPULATION GROWTH IN T~-IE
KEYS HAS ONLY AVERAGED 2.6% IN THE P c\.ST 13 YRS. IN COMPARISON TO
OTHER AREAS OF SOUTH FLORIDA THAT HAVE GROWN AT A MUCH :vIORE
RAPID RATE, "VtONROE COUNTY GROWTH IS RELATIVELY LOW.
(SLIDES 3&4) THE SECOND CHART AND GRAPH ILLUSTRATES THE, GROWTH IN TOTAL
TRAFFIC WHICH INDICATES THE REAL ROOT OF OUR PROBLEM-THE GROWTH
RATE FOR TRAFFIC IS SOME 4.6 TIMES THE GROWTH IN POPULATION
INDICATING THAT THE VAST MAJORITY OF OUR TRAFFIC PROBLEMS
ORIGINATE OUTSIDE THE KEYS.
B. Advertisement &: Promotion of Keys Recreation Facilities
WHILE THE COUNTY CERTAINLY HAS PROMOTED TOURISM AS ITS PRIME
INDUSTRY AND ITS ONLY REAL ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY SINCE THE U.S.
ARMED FORCES REDUCED THEIR HUGE MILITARY PRESENCE IN THE EARLY
1970'S, STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES CONTINUE TO DEVELOP AND PROMOTE
RECREATIONAL LANDS, PROVIDING ADDITIONAL FACILITIES, AND INCREASING
TRAFFIC AND DEMAND FOR SERVICES.
C. South Florida Metropolitan Population Explosion
THE POPULATION PRESSURE FROM METROPOLITAN SOUTH FLORIDA WILL NOT
DECREASE BUT WILL CONTINUE TO PLACE DISPROPORTIONATE BURDENS ON
THE COUNTY'S ABILITY TO PROVIDE REASONABLE LEVELS OF SERVICE ON ITS
MAJOR ROADS.
(SLIDE 5)
(SLIDE 6)
P~ge ;;
D. u.s. 1 - Low Capacity, iTIOStiy two lane, dangerous
THE OVERSEAS HIGHWA Y, U.S. 1, THE LIFELINE OF THE :rEYS IS, FOR THE }lOST .
P ART, AN OLD ROAD PLACED ON THE FORMER BED OF HENRY FLAGLER'S
RAILROAD WHICH WAS WASHED A WA Y IN THE GREAT HURRICANE OF 1935.
ALTHOUGH IT =-IAS BEEN GaEATL Y IMPROVED, PORTIONS OF THE .:lOAD ARE
EXTREMEL Y DANGEROUS - BEING ONE OF THE MOST LETHAL STRETCHES OF
TWO LANE ROAD IN THE ENTIRE STATE OF FLORIDA. THESE MILEAGE
STATISTICS ON THIS CHART SHOW CURRENT AND PROJECTED STATISTICS PER
THE FDOT'S STRATEGIC 20-YEAR PLAN. NEARLY TWO THIRDS OF THE
HIGHWA Y ARE AT LEVEL OF SERVICE "D" DURING CRITICAL PERIODS FOR THE
DA Y AND AT TIMES THE ENTIRE HIGHWAY IS CLOSED FOR BRIDGE REPAIRS.
MAJOR IMPROVEMENTS IN THE CAPACITY OF HIGHWAY 1 ARE NEEDED NOW IF
THE COUNTY IS NOT TO FACE AN ECONOMICALLY DEVASTATING
MORATORIUM IMPOSED BY THE STATE MANDATED LAND USE PLAN FOR THIS
AREA OF CRITICAL STATE CONCERN AND THE CONCURRENCY REQUIREMENTS
OF THE STATE GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT.
E. Portions of highway flood well in advance of hurricanes.
DEALING WITH THE REAL POSSIBILITY OF IMMEDIATE' LOSS OF LIFE IN THE
EVENT OF A HURRICANE OF EVEN MODERATE STRENGTH IS OF PARAMOUNT
IMPORTANCE TO THE RESIDENTS OF THE KEYS. THIS MAP SHOWS THAT ABOUT
ONE HURRICANE EVERY THREE YEARS DIRECTLY AFFECTED THE KEYS
DURING THE 60 YEAR PERIOD FROM 1906 TO 1966. THE SITUATION IS ONLY
MADE MORE DIFFICULT BY THE FACT THAT SIGNIFICANT PORTIONS OF ROUTE
ONE WOULD BE UNDER WATER MANY HOURS BEFORE A HURRICANE
LANDFALL, PREVENTING EVACUATION AND INCREASING THE RISK OF LOSS OF
LIFE.
Page-l:
1;'
.. .
u.s. 1 ;)nly lrtery lifeline for '111 islands.
U~LIKZ OT~-IER MORE FORTUNATE COMMU:NITIES HIGHWA Y 1 SERVES 1,1ULTI- .
PURPOSE DUTY AS THE COUNTY'S ONLY ARTERIAL ROAD _\S WELl.. AS THE
jlAJOR COLLECTOR FOR ALL OF THE EXISTING POPULATION ON OUR -!2
3EP c-\RA TE ISLANDS.
:{o ALTERNATE ROUTZ C:XISTS NOW, :-lOR WILL
GEOGRAPHY AND E~TVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITY PERMIT AN ;\LTERNATE !N
(SLIDE 7)
THE FUTURE. THE MONROE COUNTY FALL TERM GRAND JURY LlEPORT
WHICH WAS RELEASED LAST MONTH REFERRED TO THE "CARNAGE" ON U.S. 1
AND MADE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BETTER ENFORCEMENT OF TRAFFIC
LA WS BY THE FHP AND OUR SHERIFF'S AND CITY POLICE FORCES. DUE TO
THE "PARTY TOWN" ATMOSPHERE OF THE KEYS CAUSED, FOR THE MOST PART,
BY OUR TWO MILLION ANNUAL TOURISTS, MONROE COUNTY, THE 33RD
RANKED COUNTY IN FLORIDA IN TERMS OF POPULATION, WAS RANKED
NUMBER ONE IN THE STATE IN DRUNK AND DRUGGED DRIVING PROBLEMS. OF
THE 34 FATALITIES THAT OCCURRED ON U.S. 1 FROM JAN 1 TO OCT 12 THIS
YEAR, ONLY HALF WERE MONROE COUNTY RESIDENTS AND 60% OF THESE
DEATHS OCCURRED ON TWO-LANE PORTIONS OF THE HIGHWAY. BETTER
ENFORCEMENT IS CLEARLY NEEDED, BUT ENFORCEMENT IS ONLY PART OF
THE ANSWER. CAPACITY AND SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS TO THE HIGHWAY ARE
CRITICAL IF IMPROVED ENFORCEMENT IS TO HAVE ANY POSITIVE IMPACT AT
ALL.
G. State mandated comprehensive plan impacts.
NEW COMMUNITY PLAN STUDIES WHICH ARE REQUIRED TO IMPLEMENT STATE
LAW IN THE KEYS WILL SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACT FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION PROGRAMMING AND FUNDING AND MUST BE EFFECTIVELY
COORDINATED IN ORDER TO ASSURE COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LA W.
P B.g~ ;)
a:. ?rotection of "?(~deral inv~stment in orids-es.
DURING THE LATS 1970'S, n-iE KEYS 3RIDGES REPL,\CZ:i1ENT ?ROGJ1AM WAS.
SPECIF!CALL Y FUNDED BY CONGRESS THROUGH THE FEDERAL HIGHWA Y
ADMINISTRATION AND FDOT TO THE TUNE OF OVER $200 MILLION DOLLARS,
FURT~1ER EMPHASIZING 7HZ >fATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE OF THE CONTINUED
'lIABILITY OF THE QVERSE.\3 HIGHWA Y. THIS ',1EGAINVE3T~,1ENT .';lUST 3E
.\1AINTAINED, ENHANCED AND PROTECTED FOR POSTERITY.
I. Coordinating the expenditures of public funds.
THESE ISSUES REQUIRE UNUSUAL METHODS FOR RESOLUTION. THUS A
PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE CORRIDOR ANAL YSIS IS NEEDED NOW WHICH WILL
FOCUS ON THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION
IMPROVEMENTS IN THE ENTIRE 128 MILE LONG CORRIDOR RATHER THAN ON A
PROJECT BY PROJECT BASIS. SUCH CONCERTED ACTION ON A BROAD SCALE
IS NEEDED SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THE GEOGRAPHY AND SPECIAL
ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITY OF THE KEYS, THE EXTERNAL SOURCE OF THE
TRAFFIC IMPACTS ON THE KEYS AND THE NECESSITY OF COORDINATING ON A
MULTIAGENCY SCALE THE MOST COST EFFECTIVE FUTURE EXPENDITURE OF
REQUIRED PUBLIC FUNDING.
(BOARD 2)
WHAT WILL THE CORRIDOR ANALYSIS ACCOMPLISH?
A.
Early right-of-way acquisition.
IDENTIFICATION OF NEEDED IMPROVE-MENTS FOR LONG TERM CAPACITY
UPGRADES COUPLED WITH THE STATE'S NEW ABILITY FOR BONDING GAS
TAX MONIES WILL ALLOW THE EARLY ACQUISITION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY
WITH SIGNIFICANT COST SAVINGS.
o
Page 6
3. :Vlultipie :lg~ncy ?lans :md )rograms eoordination.
:)
IN f}IIS ERA OF INC:lEASED DEi'/IAND FOR .?LA;TNING AND IN
RECOGNITION OF THE STATE MANDATES, A COMPLETE C8RRIDOR
ANAL YSIS WILL PROMOTE AND REQUIRE COORDINATION OF MULTIPLE
STATE AND LOCAL AGENCY PLANS.
C.
Reduction of environmental impacts.
A THOROUGH CORRIDOR ANALYSIS WILL IDENTIFY MEANS OF REDUCING
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS BY TAKING A COMPREHENSIVE LONG RANGE
APPROACH TO PREDICTING ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND ADDRESSING
APPROPRIATE MITIGATION MEASURES AND SPECIFIC FUNDING
MECHANISMS.
o
D.
Equitable distribution of highway improvement costs.
VERY IMPORTANTLY, THE CORRIDOR WILL IDENTIFY THE NEED AND
METHOD FOR EQUITABLY DISTRmUTING THE COSTS OF HIGHWAY
IMPROVEMENT TO ALL THOSE WHO VISIT AND UTILIZE THE RESOURCES
OF THE KEYS.
o
E.
Prioritization of highway improvement costs.
TO MEET THE REQUIREMENT OF EFFECTIVELY SPENDING THE PUBLIC'S
TAX DOLLARS THE ANALYSIS WILL ALLOW FOR THE PRIORITIZATION OF
THE IMPROVEMENTS TO SERVE THE GREATEST NEED RATHER THAN TO
SIMPL Y TREAT HIGHWA Y CONSTRUCTION AS ANOTHER CASE OF TRIAGE.
THE CORRIDOR STUDY WILL DEAL WITH THE REAL NEED TO SAVE LIVES
BY PROMOTING THE COMPLETION OF IMPROVEMENTS TO HURRICANE
EVACUATION ROUTES.
o
'.
Page 7
~
.
... .
tden tify altarna te :netl1ods 01 cr:lnspor:a tion.
o
:?H-L\;"L Y THE CORRIDOR _UTAL YSIS WILL REQUIRE US TO LOOK TO 'I'HE .
FUTURE TO IDENTIFY ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION \1ETHODS TO
SERVE THE VISITOR POPULATIONS WITHOUT RELYING TOTALLY ON THE
ROAD NETWORK. INCREASED AIR TRAVEL AND SURF ACE SHIP FERRIES
OR HYDROFOILS ~I1A Y 3E ACCEPTABLE MEANS ALONG WITH CONVENIENT
EXPRESS BUS SERVICE TIED TO OUTLYING PARKING LOTS.
(BOARD 3)
HOW IS THE CORRIDOR ANALYSIS COMPLETED?
THE COMPLETION OF A SOPHISTICATED CORRIDOR ANALYSIS SUCH AS THAT
COMTEMPLATED WILL REQUIRE PARTICULARLY INNOVATIVE COMMITMENTS
ON THE PART OF THE STATE, REGIONAL AND LOCAL AGENCIES.
A. Additional Federal de State Highway Administration funding.
FIRST. ADDITIONAL FEDERAL AND STATE FUNDING WILL BE REQUIRED FOR
INCORPORATION INTO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FIVE
YEAR PROGRAM.
B. Complete comprehensive work program.
SECOND. THE LEGISLATURE SHOULD CREATE AND FUND A NEW ENTITY, "THE
FLORIDA KEYS INTERGOVERNMENTAL TRANSPORTATION TASK FORCE" TO
COMPLETE A COMPREHENSIVE WORK PROGRAM AND MANAGE THE ANALYSIS.
THIS ENTITY SHOULD HAVE A DURATION CONSISTENT WITH THE PERIOD OF
TIME NECESSARY TO COMPLETE THE ANALYSIS.
P~ge 3
c. Consultan t 3election.
tHIRD, THE TASK FORCE-, THE STATE AND THE C8UNTY WOULD .3ELECT "-1. -
CONSULTANT TEAM TO COMPLETE THE PLANNING, ENGINEERING, ECONOMIC
AND INSTITUTIONAL STUDIES THAT ARE PA:aTS OF THE ANALYSIS.
D. Legislature authorized implementation.
FOURTH, AND MOST IMPORTANT, THE LEGISLATURE MUST BE 3.EADY TO HEAR
INNOV ATIVE PROPOSALS TO IMPLEMENT JOINT STATE AND LOCAL
IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS ADMINISTERED BY A SUCCESSOR THE TASK FORCE
OR THROUGH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FIVE YEAR
PROGRAM.
E. Incorporate into Five Year FDOT Program
FIFTH. AS THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CORRIDOR STUDY AND R/W
RESERVATION PROGRAM BECOME AVAILABLE, THE ANNUAL UPDATE OF THE
DEPARTMENT'S 5-YEAR WORK PROGRAM WOULD INCORPORATE IDENTIFIE))
R/W ACQUISITION AND FINAL DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS.
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN IT HAS BEEN A SINCERE PLEASURE FOR ME AND MY
STAFF TO BE HERE TODAY TO EXPLAIN THE INTRICACIES OF THE TRAUMA
THAT FACES THE KEYS IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF GOOD TRANSPORTATION
PLANNING AND IMPROVEMENTS. THE CORRIDOR ANALYSIS APPROACH
PROPOSED PROVIDES THE STATE AND THE COUNTY WITH A ONCE IN A
LIFETIME OPPORTUNITY TO ACT TO PLAN OUR PUBLIC EXPENDITURES WISELY
P'1~e J
?OR j" ',VHOL2 SUBREGION "i.~lD :? !lESERVE TaE 'fR UL Y UNIQUE FLORIDA, :C~YS
FOR 30TH THOSE WHO \VAl-IT TO CONTINUE ~O MAi{E IT THEIR HOME .-\ND POR
THOSE MILLIONS OF VISITORS THAT WISH TO EXPERIENCE THEIR NATIONAL
AND NATURAL HERITAGE AS r't1ANIFESTED BY THE KEYS FRAGILE ECOLOGY OF
CORAL REEFS, HARDWOOD FORESTS ,\ND PRISTINE WETLANDS.
AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, 1 WILL NOW TURN OUR PRESENTATION
BACK TO MAYOR PRO-TEM PUTO AND HE WILL CALL ON THE APPROPRIATE
MEMBERS OF OUR TEAM TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTIONS.
NOTES To ACCOMPANY
..
PRESENTATION
To
THE FLORIDA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
By
-
MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
COMMISSIONERS:
EUGENE LYTTON, SR.
MICHAEL PUTO
JOHN STORMONT
WILHELMINA HARVEY
DOUGLAS JONES
-
COMMISSIONERS-ELECT:
-
AT
COllIER COUNTY COURTHOUSE - NAPLES, FLA. - NOVEMBER 18, 1988
PRESENTATION TEAM:
MAYOR PRO-TEM MIKE PUTO
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CAPT. TOM BROWN
ASST. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR - GROWTH MGMT. DON CRAIG
COUNTY CONSULTING ENGR. BOB HARRIS (PBS&J, INC.)
RES 1 D F N T PO? U L A T ION
-,r"R l)"P"L '\Tl' C\~ '" ,... ~ " · ~G r- 'lE"J f"R'''IT'l ",r"R
i c.; I '-.J U ;11 1 I .0 ~;1Mr C I' 111 'J UI I ill j c..~
1970 5" r ~6 N/,~ N/A
L,)(S
1972 55,100 4.8% 2.39%
1973 56,400 2.4% 2.40%
1974 53,600 - 5.0% - 4.96%
1975 55,700 3.9% 3 . 92%
1975 53,300 13.5% 13.54%
1977 63,200 - o '"'f1! - 0.16%
.Lio
1978 62,800 - 0.5% - 0.63%
1979 64,000 1.9% 1. 91%
1980 63,188 - 1.3% - 1.26%
1981 64,200 1.6% 1. 55%
1982 65,700 2.3% 2.34%
1983 66,600 2.9% 2.94%
1984 68,800 3.3% 3.30%
1985 70,700 2.8% 2,76%
1986 72,500 2.5% 2.54%
1987 74,500 2.8% 2.76%
1988 77,000 3.4% 3. 35 %
(1990) (78,800) (2.3%) ( 1.17%)
(2000) (86,800) (10.2%) ( 1. 02%)
(2010) (95,800) (10.4%) (1. 04%)
(2020) (106,200) (10.9%) (1. 09%)
( ) = PROJECTIONS
CURRENT AVERAGE GROWTH PER YEAR (1970-1988) = 2.6% ~
PROJECTED AVERAGE GROWTH PER YEAR (1988-2020) = 1.2% +
SOURCES: MONROE COUNTY STATISTICAL ABSTRACT, 1987.
FLORIDA STATISTICAL ABSTRACT, 1987.
1
0
r; C\I
\ a. \ , I 0
>- \ , \ C\I
\ I-
\ '-' \ , \
\ z \ \ \
\ 0 \ \ \
\ t- \ \ \
<(
\ --J \ \ ,
\ ::) \ , \
a.
\ 0 \ , \
\ a. \ , I 0
\ Cl \ , \ T""
\ \ I 0
\ W \ \ , C\I
\ t- \
0 \ ,
\ W \ \ ,
\ J \ \ ,
\ 0 \ \ I Z
a:
\ a. \ , I 0
\ \) \ \ , en
\ \ I -
\ ' I a:
\ \ I 0 <(
\ , 0 0-
\ \ II 0 ~
\ \ C\I
\ , I 0
\ \ II ()
\ \ 'I >-
\ \ :1 I- Z
\ \ >- ,I z 0
\ ::)
\ >- \ 1-11 0 -
\ I- Z 'I a:.-
\ Z \ ::) 'I 0 <(<(
\ ::) \ 8 h W W....J
\ 0 \ 0 >-::::>
\ 0 \ W 'I a: g 0-
\ Cl , Cl II Z 0) 0
\ <( ~ 0 T""
\ a: , ~ 0-
<( Cl
~ .-
0 Z
a: W
CD 0
-
en ......
w co
0)
a: T""
0
co I-
0) 0
>- T"" ~
t-
Z a:
I-
::) en
0 m
0 4:
a: ...J
!:!J 4:
....J 0
....J ;-
0 en
0 0 I-
...... 4:
0) l-
T"" en
4:
a
a:
"0
W...J
Uu.
a::
:J
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 (/)
co 10 -.:t ('I) ~ T""
OL6 ~ V'JOCl.::f 3SV'3ClONI lN30Cl3d 2
YEAR
FLORIDA DEPARTI1ENT OF TRANSPORTATION
AVERAGE TRAfFIC COUNTS
(STATION QOOi, 0101, 0045, 0015)
AVERAGE
DAILY TRAFFIC
% CHANGE
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
4,877
5, 922
5,807
7,066
6,300
7,639
8,548
10,094
9,294
9,118
8,679
9,997
10,108
11.372
11.579
11.532
15,472
14,641
15,397
I AVERAGE INCREASE PER YEAR = 12.0% :!: I
SOURCE: F.D.O.T. DISTRICT 6 PLANNING
N/A
41.9%
16.1%
21. 7%
10.8%
21.3%
11.9%
18.1%
7.9%
1.9%
4.8%
15.2%
1.1%
12.5%
1.8%
0.4%
34.2%
5.4%
5.2%
3
, I~
,
,
1
, z
, 0
, j::
\ <(
....J
, :) (f)
, 0- f-
, 0 0 Z
0- ....
, 0 ::J
\ I- C\I 0
Z
, UJ ()
\ a
00 ()
\ UJ -
\ a: LL
\ a LL
, UJ <(
I- 0:
\ () f-
, UJ 0
I "'"') 0 w
0 0
I a: C\I (!J
I 0- <(
1/ a:
CJ) w
I- Z >
Z 0 <(
:) I i= a:
0 I <( <( (f)
() I ....J UJ >
() :) >-
u::: I 0- 0 Z
I 0 Cl)
u.. Cl) 0
<( I 0-
.... -
a: I l- f-
l- " Z <(
, UJ
UJ ,
, a -J
Cl ,
'" 00 ::J
<( ......
a: . UJ a. ,....
.
UJ . a: 0 co
~ . Cl)
'. a.. .....
,
~'. f- I-
0 Z u
co <((!)
, Cl) W ~z
. .... C
,
. en-
, - COZ
. (/) <(~
,
" w
, a: ~~
. <(a.
, ,
. " S2<D
. I-t-
. , ~u
.
. , 1--
<(0:
, t-
o r-C/')
00-
,.... <(0
Cl)
.... o~
en - .
W 0:0
U Q'
0: ~q
:l u.u.
0
C/')
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
~ ('I) C\I ....
OL6 ~ Vl.JOtf;J 3SV3tf8Nl IN383tf3d 4
MIL E AGE B REA K D 0 ~ ~
U.S. 1 (S.R. 5)
FLORIDA CITY (DADE COUNTY) THROUGH KEY }JEST C;10NROE CmmT'{)
TOTAL LENGTH U.S. #1
(KEY ~EST TO FLORIDA CITY)
128 MILES :t
TOTAL LENGTH OF BRIDGES
(ON U.S. #1)
19.4 MILES :t
TOTAL NUMBER OF
BRIDGES ON U.S. #1
43
TOTAL LENGTH OF LAND
PORTION OF U.S. #1
108.6 MILES :t
% OF EXISTING ROADWAY THAT IS 2-LANE
(INCLUDING BRIDGES)
67.2%
86 MILES :t
% OF EXISTING ROADWAY THAT IS 3-LANE
6.2%
8 :..,ILES :t
% OF EXISTING ROADWAY THAT IS 4-LANE
(INCLUDING BRIDGES)
26.6%
34 MILES :t
F.D.O.T. SCHEDULE OF
PROPOSED ADDITIONAL LANES (2)
..
1988 - 1993
1993 - 1998
1992 - 2008
NOT FINALIZED IN STRATEGIC PLAN
23.8 MILES :t
10.8 :1!LES ::
')Q ;) 'J I L = S +
L...J. . i-I __ _
30.0 MILES :t
SOURCES: MONROE COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
F.D.O.T. STRATEGIC TRANSPORTATION PLAN
MONROE COUNTY STATISTICAL ABSTRACT
5
1966
\
MELBOURNE
WEST PALM BEACH
1941
1965
1919
1919
1910
1945
HURRICANES AFFECTING MONROE COUNTY 1906-1966 (19)
A VERAGES ONE EVERY THREE YEARS DURING 60 'lEAR PERIOD
SOURCE: MONROE COUNTY HURRICANE EMERGENCY PLAN
6
D E A T.H---c~_~'7'.~~tc~~~..-.,
. - - ~ ' .~
. - .;-,.
· .' ." ..f
. ~ ~ :;;;'-:~. .
'",,"' . /;.~
..--~;n""mrrRE- -...-...
. . ~... -
. .'
HIGHW
. <L
r
There may be
little that can
,be done to end.
. the 'carnage'
along U.S; 1.
By j,\MES F_ CARNEY
H.rald SIG" W,",ln
Wilh Ntw ,"t.r'S E,'e Mill
10'\\'~("k!Al\"'v. thenum~r
. 01 people who have died in
IntUlc: .tddent! "lIhe Keys. --'
tbi. year has reached 34. two
more than in an 01 1987.
TI..t and the fact thot
Mnnrnf' Counlv mnks Ii"" in-
the sI3te in drunk and
druglled dri,in~ prohlems Ip.d
the loc.,1 ."rand JUry to is.~ue a
sC:1lhinq rrport on tht:' ~t~re
01 Kevs roads.
Reie'-sed 10 davs OliO, the
, linnd jury's report referred
10 Ihe "carnage" on ~lonroe
. Countv roads_ <oecifican.
U.S, r; ..here 32 of the 34
{atalitie~ hav~ occurred.
FrOm a shortage ofFlori<la
. Highway Patrollroopers to .
poor manOllement of officers'
lime. the llTand ~lry offered a
seriM of complaints. and
recommendations for
imprcyement, indudin"lr.
. Making trofflnnd DUI
enfoi-cement a prioritY for th~ .
Sheriffs Department. the. .;:
. Key West Police Oepartment":~;.
and FHP. .
. IIirinll six more FliP
trooper!' for :hr Ken.
. Ih\"lnr: Ih!' ~i:~:,!!r::.
r",n to TRAFFIC i 2fl
.;.-::.;.~'i
~
H.r..... the tocattoM and
descrlD"OftI of the 28 acdOerlt, that
claimed 34 ttvM so 1ar thls year In
MonroeCOunfy. more than.U of last
year.
1 U.s. 1.9.1 mn.onoru. 01 Key
. W"'At1:20a.m.onJan.. t, ~
M_P.~.21,of
Ramrod Key, WU Qrtvjng north
when 8 southbound car drtW'IlITby,:
Edwin s.ncss III; 23. of HOl'MStIed.
crossed ,",0 her 18ne. 80th were
kllll!d.
2. ~r~?~~~r'~:~~:~:~
'NO drMnO aoutIlln tM
northbOtn:t lane and COIHded
hf'ad-on WIth. car ctrtven by Paula
K. Soone. 29. of Tavernier. that wu
heeding north. Both Wright end
Boone... klRed.
3 u.s. 1. 1S "".... north 01 Key
. West.At6:45p.m.on Ftlb.1.
T_LyndonHond.27,ol
Key WPSlIrIed \0 ao.U_s. 11n the
path of 8 ear driving north.
4. ~i~;.;:~~~~r2~u:..::,,:0
on Feb. 1. Raloh Bowmnter.
69. of Seward. Neb. was drMnq hi!
wile and tl'M!ir friendS. JOhn and
RUlhGarnby, bOth 71, 01 SI81...,
MO.. north on U.S. 1 When a
southbound car crossed the
centerline end coll)ded heecs..on wtth
them. Bowmaster and Ruth Gamby
Wf'rekil~.
5 U_S.l..5milesnorthol
. Summer1and Key on NMeI
Ch.nnel Bridge_ AI 1:55 D_m_ on
Ftb. 5, WllIl.m T_ 600\1SI._I, 57,
of Summenand Key was drMng
soulh when a Shentf's Department
c.r drtvan by d.ouly Phillip
Greflnwood. 24. COfI~ed hnd..on
With BOQUStawskrS car.
BoguSl8Wl6d was killed Inst..tty.
Chllrges against Greenwood
eventuafty were dropped.
6. ;;'~~==.~i::':m.
on Feb. 27, Waller MOOdy
GrehAm. 35. of HO'I'T'IeSfead....
drl\linQ al es mph wnen ne lOSt
control 01 tuscar. Gr8nam.no.
pao:~p"qfll'. RudolDh Espinosa. 38.
aJsoof HomeStuCf:were klUed,
7., ~~~~:I~~~'rO~J-:~:ri:~~:~ ~ ;
oassenger In a car W1ttl two
lrlllndl_lhedtt_ol'hecat
===:::~:"C:;~lne \.~
ShtoaNaa died... daya.I.I....
0- OIel.BOo. 0Nci Ro-.I onBoca' ,1
Q.. CIlI6A~e;..Al 1 "m, onMlIrch._,,\
. 19. ScaltAvantwaadrMng hi. < '
motor(:ycie~ltruck.tenCe.... ','
POle. .. ;.,.- :" ,'. '. .:
9 U_S.1:oItl.,.mor.d;,.6O<lIMt '
. north of ~haMt Herbor Bridge. .;;
Al 7:55 b.nt. onAprtl3, Gr.1g , -_~
CoeI>ran, 30, 01 Homeslead, ....
drMng toUlhbound wilen hi. car
cUDDeCllhe__olhlm.
Cocllran cro..,Unto tile.
-_lcieandcbt_wtlh
anMoCOmtnOcar; I July 7, Dorl. Prtce.33, 01
1 O. U.S: 11'; Marathon, .2 ",Ues lS.I,morlda. did nOl see I car
. nonh otlntwMction wtth' c~lng when ahe tried to cross Iro",
. 122ndStAt2:1Sp.m.on _Ater1lerOflhehlghway,nlothe
ADfll29. M~ ReYes. 27. of t<ey ~~thbOu"d.lane. Theear hit her.
~=:':'n:~~: rn~o the . 18. ~a~~,;4;'~~o":.': ~~ Aug.
rear 0' a car tn-front 01 him. I 1. Ralph Wright. Jr.. 49. of
11 U S 1 4 S miles south of " Maralhon. apparentlv sullered a
. ~vton. At 1:55 a.m. on.tA8Y heart attack while he was driVing.
Mla",I,~"a;~~~;~;~'i~~%truck. 19~ ~.n1~~~~~~~~::A~~~ue.
~~1~;::' ~:.:~~~~~:~e , '.,; A~ ~:.~~~0\1~.'~8~:~~1~;'ln the
head-on With. Mack lrut:k. middle lane \\IMn 8 car strUCk him.
1_2. u.s. 1. Key Largo. 476 f~t ;..;\ U.S. 1. four miles north of
. nonn 01 Uncle Drive. AI1 'U. Maratnen, At 4:35 a.m. on
a.m. on June 6. RObert Aug, t4, Eric Lenetl. 30. was
Halsey. 40. of Kev t..atoo. wa. driving when tie lost contref 01 hIS
W8Jklng south alOtto ttie hignwlY car. which went otf 1he road and
wtlen 8 Pining vehicle 'truCk hIm. slammed Imo severallrees bel ore
13 U_5.1,twomllestoUlhOIBIg: O1ooolng.
. j7,:~~s~~~~~~on' ; 21~ ~e~'28:~~~~~~~~.~~
Fearon, 35, 'of Summertand Key, . Aug. 1 S. Margaret FItzgerald.
wurtdlngnts motorcycle north 28. Of Jamaica. N.Y.. was I
When n. colllOed heed.on With. car ~ passenger in 8 car heading south at
. ::..~r P....~~:tt.lOUthbound f;. ~::'S~~:i~~e;r:~~C:~~~ or
14; ~i~e ~:V.5A7~~~:' Blg ~~~~.~:r':;ldt~~=r~~'lhe car.
"~~~Ch;I~~~;~j ~~:':ls:~~~~~nQ 22. ~'I~~!1~~~J8hcO~r~~~'I~~~~ At 8
souttlwhen hecrosa.ed Into 'tie . C.m. on'AuQ. 17. ThBlie
Satn1eus. 42, ot Duck Key. was a
passenger In a car tra~ltng in II
marina oarklng lot 811 30 mOho The
OrtV(!1" lost control, end the car went
001 of the lot, across a DatCl'l 0'
grasa and II cement dOCkakSe.
through the 1Iir. onto the deck of.
dOClred. 22.loot 110.'. and Into tile
water. Salnt8uI and tM drh'W were
Puned 'rom the sunken car. bul
Sllnleus died Sept. 5.
23. ~i~.;.;._I~I~~:~~:::":~ ~~':'
21. Larry Fletchef. 44. or
Ct"dar Ke~. wajked Inlo the "af" of
an oneominQ car,
24 u.s_ 1. on long Key Bridge.
. A12:40 p.m. on SeDt. t. Kathy
Ann Simmons. 24. was.
passenger In a Plek-up lrudt thlt
hid stOOped In I conslrucUon ar..
on tne bridge. A he8VY truck
rear-ended the camper being pulled
by Simmona' car.
25. ~.~~:~~.l~~~.~~.
AI 4 p.m. on Sepl. 5.
Fernando Alton!o ESlupln8n. 23. of
Miami. crossed the center line on a
curve and collided heed-on With an
oncoming car. EstuDlnan and a
passenger in his car. Darling Ivcnne
Lopez. 23. of College Point. N.Y..
"'ere killed.
26. ~:~~:'~:~~I:~~~~nsK~.
~ 2, James Kendall. 39. ot Key
WeS1 was riding his motorcyCle in
the rain around what Is known a.
"Dead Man's Curve" when his
brakes locked. He slid 200 feel
acrosslhe tour-lane road and
smaShed Into 11'18 guardrait.
27. ~O~h1of~~~nL~;R:'. .~t~~~
a.m. on Oct. 1 t.loutsand
Inez Landry. 80 and S4. ot SlIdeft.la.
crossed the highway dlreclly Into the
Dath of an oncominQ car.
28. ~~~i~~~~~='8~~::les
':48 8.m. on Oct 12. Mary
Ann West. :9. Of Key LaTQO. crossed
the rllQhw8V direcUy inlo t"'e DA1h or
It" ""Comlno. northbound car.
l
1 RM'Fit it,",. 18
'. :.!-22.:~-n',::~'-"
Drf'wrm~nt Invf'stiR'$ttf' ,nin.."
:\r('irif"nf~. I"~n-;"r. Fl1P trnrtN"r!ll free fn ""trot U.S. 1.
. Tr:llnjn~ technicians to give br~;illh3tl"Zer testslnd
llivt Sh.riff. !ltpartment .~quate l.cilili.. ror h.n.
rllioR drunk drh..~u.
.. ~1n'JntintP ",ide') c~mer:1' t:'!'I nt!;!~r! t('l Mli("~ r"l"
rn"'nilor r1rivin~ patterns oi nUl !IlU,pe-cts.
1:1 r('''r''TU:e t" tl1,. r~~ft. ~lflfh ~,hI1PJ'" CrIH;t\" 5!,er.
iff \"illi:1ll. Fp'{"n1Jf1. ;1'10 th" !rv:-tl Flnrid."l Hi,gI\\\';'Ir i';1.
lrol dllof. Lt. Willi.m R. lI.s., ackhow~dRed Ih.1 Ihi.
ye:'ll h:!!Ii hc~n II danl!erOl.J1i ~ on county rMds :1nd "ct.
rri .,nirkly to inJft~ment ~omp ofth~ S!r:lnd ~lfv.:"i ft"('''",.
m"'nd:Jlions.
Frt'''m;'tn'~ tlf"PUtie-t now write "~horr form," on mi.
Ilor ~fXitle-nt~. a pr;tctice th,.t wt1l allow FJJr Iroopen
n1llre time to pl'lrolthe highw3yS tor drunk driven and
tn in\'('~fiR:'ttf" more ~ri~ accident".
^nd fb!ll~ lIJr'!"dv hlll~ IWf) nl')re tr~rs on th!
Slr~f'l~. hrlnlt1n~ hi~ total to 20 in lhr Krv~. Untler th~
~~~I~~~~?:I~::~~ ~~11~f"h:~~'~~~\'~1;'~~d=i'r~~:
r-~ili'1'I~.
Still, r-fnnme Count, l:'Iw ,..,fnrCfOmPnt flffH"'i:d" ill:'''
Il"'r~;~ nil'" V1 rml('h th(,l' (':'In dn.
.., lip ror:md ;un"s r~('ommM1lI:tli(ln!ll ar~ ~n '1:f'II~
l:lk('"." ". rr~a,; ~id. ""'"1 ~e o( ttt"m :trf" ~
""":f.df,.~ti'.'e::.t 'hi"t time."
t.l(\nr~ (('I'!ft"Ity. whtch r:mb J:lrd in P"f'U1:Uirwt in
thl"' ~':tt~. ..,.,,~ ~tt"d nUtrlf)er ~ tn d"mk "ri\inc prof)..
It>m!! h~!w,.~ l~P~ ~nd 1987 nv ttlt !C-11IItf" OiYl~ion of
I"1l1.1ic C:::l(,."'. ~ hr thi" v~~r. to"f th~:l1 f"',,1i11"" ;n~
. ..,.., ,I <:,,,,,,....,,. ririvif1(' ",,-1,... th'" ;Ilnlll"ftf'"t".
northbound lane end collided
heed..on with an on-cominQ car
15~ ~O;h1~~J:I~:;~i~~~:1:~~38
p.m;OnJUne25~Ch les
ROn. 52. oUi'Manda.., I control
of ht. car White trevetino QUnd a
bend In the nlghw.y. Hear WW11 off
f/'Mt rOlld, Jlrlking :~rous Ir...
.~d' Utility pole b~se:loppjng.
.16. ~a~q~: ~i2:J(15 ;.r::~~ ~~~ey
- 25. Ahtho/lyGeorge. 41. 01
~';~~.~t~;tsa~a~r~~~~:~~~,7e
the road. WIitl8n George trIed to get
beckon th,road, he croned Inlo
thenonhllbund lane and crashed
Il'\to an O'lCOming C8r.
17 --r':;i~m~r~:;'::t~b"8~~. on
;:ut lin1e;~ Hi;' ~~~t 10 week; ~j.(" r~rtiriJbjiy h:td. . ---=------.:-~---
l!lill \"f':'tr s tramr r!r:nJlI01l. while tll)O\"l'I:"l'l;f H':"'~ will
!VJt her"rn~ th(' worC;! c\'cr in fh~ Kn'~. ^cr'lrrli'r;~ to
FliP f('('orrls d:ltiT1~ bck tn 1977. the ~,r.5t deadly )"I::'IT
W~~ 1980. wh~ 55 peopl~ perished in ~lI'nmohile ll!ccj-
dr'flts.
Since the new S\"'v"" Mile P.rir1~,. f "'f'hl"~rl lIs h:'lr.
:-"W1n[! rrrdrC("-::SN i~ Dcn'm!)~r ~ :1~2. :lle lIumhcr nf
Ir:"l(fic tl~:1th~ in thr Krv~ h,~ bC''''n H1 till' thirti~~.
j!ll\V mwi! r:"ln he d,.,n" 10 ff'rillr" '111t nllmhrr i-:: ,1;ro.
C!llt In C;:1Y. p'lVen th(' r'Tlh;'1rllir~ nf 'l1e Kf'\"c; ;'Ip,j !Ie;
one hi~hwav.
Of the 34 f'f'Of1le '9,'ho died in traffic ;tcridrnts frn",
J~n. ] to Oct. 12 thi!;, )'(':\r. onlv hilll \\"r:-rt" rr~idrr\1! of
Monroe County. Whil~ some o( lhe \'ic;ilor5 who died
WNe (rom MiAmi or ot her nearby r"1!inn~ ", South Flor.
id:'!. nlhen C;ilmt from Californi:t. Loui~i:1na. New York.
e\"~n J~pan.
The Ke-ys IIttrl'lct w("J! o\'cr 2 milTion tOUr1!t!i I Vf':'tr.
:lnd few Ctln be expected to know the contour! of U.S. 1.
nr H!I m~t d:1ngerous !if1Ols..
.. Any time you h'Jve people who 'Ire unfamm~r wit h
the roads it mlllkes I bi~ diHerence. ,. Fl,r It. D.ns 5=1\"5.
"Th~y rio~'~ know ""hat to e):~c;,t ~hcn ifs d~rk Ollt ;il.t~
fhC')' r~ dnVlnsr do":n for the flrd 1.,"(':'
0nlv 7 rerc~nt of "II h:tffic ~c("j.J,..nt~ in\'('!;lill'Jterl "r
th,.. Fltr in th~ Key", betw~n Juh' I. J?Q7. i'nd J"ne .10.
1~P;". occurret1 helwf'f'n 11 r.m. :mrl 7 ;t.nt. U'lt of the
!:It~t ;'t('cld('nt!ll in the ~'me ~f1rwi. 52 !",rr"nl h~rp-'n"'rI
rillrine th~e 5'tme n1~httime hour~.
"w~ h.n~ ~ tYo'o-l:tne h~hl\-."r, ;'lnd w~ h;'1l'C hum.,"
err,.,,:' <::a"~ rre~m.'n. "!~ ,,-.,m~nl!' ':til.("~ th('ir mim1 nff
th~ rn::t" for,. m,"Il'~. It'~;, rl;mgernut:; !IIlfll:1tinn."'
7
I
,I
d'. (-,,\
I , II
. : I
I,.. tL ~!_Il
:-. [I 1
1. ..
I ,t. ' . I
'J- .
::n - ~_.. ....uz... ......L.u.:..
.... 1
"'f"
'~
.~"'...
l-
..
Jo
't....,
...-:..........\.1.1
t..."'...._....:
.....
................ I
....~..c...
\
~\~
I
^
,
, ,
'<:1\
(::i
CARD SOUND ROAD
2
'If':';''!~:~
, ti_....~..~,
. .:.~..
.",.,., ~.tff"~,,,. elM..1 ,urf
$'"'' ~..,,. ,.._,r.,.. ..,.)
· · · . 32.85 MILES
,,~-, 19.10 MILES
1.2 MILES
MONROE COUNTY EV ACUA TION ROUTES
6
A eRE AGE 0 F M 0 ~ ROE C 0 U N T Y
ARE.i\ ACRES
TOTAL MONROE COUNTY L 144,791 (100%)
MAINLAND MONROE COUNTY L 070,162 (93.5%)
EVERGLADES NATIL PARK 943,725
FEDERAL 943,574
PRIVATE 51
BIG CYPRESS NATIL PRESERVE 126,437
OFFSHORE ISLANDS 9,629 (0.8%)
FORT JEFFERSON-DRY TORTUGAS 64,657
PLANNING AREA ACREAGES (UNINCORPORATED) 60,656 (5.3%)
PUBLIC 14,932 (1. 3%)
PRIVATE 45,724 (4%)
INCORPORATED AREAS OF MONROE COUNTY 4,344 (0.4%)
CITY OF KEY WEST 4,005
PRIVATE 3,057
MILITARY 948
CITY OF LAYTON 85
CITY OF KEY COLONY BEACH 254
NOTES: INCLUDES INLAND BAYS, WATERWAYS, RIVERS AND LAKES. FORT
JEFFERSON NA T I L MONUMENT EXCLUDED FROM TOTALS; OVER 95% IS
WATER.
SOURCE: MONROE COUNTY STATISTICAL ABSTRACT, 1987.
9
......
co
co
(j)
,..
......
o
z
w
::.::
w
w
~
>-
<:
o
a::
o
CD
<:
..J
......
I'-
CO
(j)
,..
......
o
z
w
::.::
w
w
~
>-
<:
o
o
u..
u..
~
a:
I-
>-
:::!
~
o
~
~
UJ
a.
o
o
o
o
~
......
CO
CO
(j)
,..
......
o
z
w
::.::
w
w
~
>-
<:
o
..J
<:
a::
o
:E
w
:E
o
u..
u..
~
a:
I-
>-
-J
~
o
UJ
CJ
~
a:
UJ
>
~
>-
-J
J:
~ I
o I
\J
I
,
I
I
I
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
o
o
o
6
'"
J
I
I
I
I
I
\
\
\
1
,
I
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
a..
w
U)
~
:J
<:
o
o
o
6
('I)
..J
:J
...,
Z
:J
...,
>-
<:
:E
a::
a..
<:
a::
<:
:E
CD
w
u.
ZCO
<co
...,~
<.)
w
o
>
o
Z
l-
t)
o
a..
w
U)
~
:J
<:
o
u..
u..
~
a:
I-
>-
-J
~
o
I-
{j)
UJ
~
o
J
..J
:J
...,
.
.
.
.
.
Z
:J
...,
>-
<:
:E
a::
a..
<:
a::
<:
:E
en
w
u.
zl'-
<:co
...,~
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
o
o
o
6
,..
SlNn08 81:l:fv'I:U
o
(!)
a:
<(
-.J
>-
W
~
J:
I-
Z
o
~
,......
.~
Z<o
..-
IZ
Cf)O
1-1-
Z~
~t;
0'-'
()
()
U.
IJ..
<(
a:
I-
~
z
z
z
<:
..J
a..
<0
l-
t)
a::
I-
en
o
I-
o
o
u.
w
<.)
a::
:J
o
en
10
0-
f . w
. CI)
I .
. C)
, .
. ::l
, . ~
.
, .
. -l
, . ::l
. .
I .
. z
I .
. ::l
\ . .
.
\ . >-
.
, . ~
:E
0:
0-
~ I-
0: CJ)
0 ~ w
u.. ~ ~
u.. co
<{ w >-
a: u.
.- ZCO W
>- ~CO ~ ,--.
:d .0) L()
,..
<{ u I CD
0 ..-
w J: C/)
LU 0 t- I- z
CJ > z Z 0
<{ 0 0 .-
a: 52 z ~ ::) <{
LU L1. 0 t-
O > u.. I- 0 CJ)
u: < <( U '-'
a: 0
u.. >- t- O
<{ .....J 0-
a: J: >- w lJ..
.- t- :d CI) lJ..
>- z <{ ,C) <(
:d 0 Q ::l a::
<{ ~ .- ~
Q V CJ) -l I-
~ . W ::l
. 3: .
<{ .
LU . 0 Z C)
a.. . .....J Z
. ::l
I U . z
z
, >- ~
I ~ -l
f . ~ 0-
f . 0: ~
.
I . 0- l-
. ~ u
I .
I . 0: 0:
.
\ . ~ l-
. ~ CI)
\ .
. a
, . m
. w I-
\ . u..
\ . 0
. zr--.
\ . ~co a
.
.0) U.
,..
W
U
0:
0 0 0 ::l
0 0 0 0 0
q 0 0 0 CI)
0 0 0 0
'<t C'1 C\I ,..
SlNn08 81.:H'v'Hl
1 1
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
TRAFFIC COUNTS
(STATION 0001 - NORTH KEY LARGO)
ANNUAL AVERAGE
YEAR DAILY TRAFFIC % CHANGE
1970 4,755 N/A
1971 8,215 72.8%
1972 6,776 17.5%
1973 6,759 0.3%
1974 8,001 18.4%
1975 10,4Ll 30.3%
1976 8,343 20.0%
1977 I L 433 37.0%
1978 9,298 18.7%
1979 8,698 6.5%
1980 8,453 2.8%
1981 9,033 6.9%
1982 9,560 5.8%
1983 10,852 13.5%
1984 10,981 1.2%
1985 10,546 4.0%
1986 13,100 24.2%
1987 15,346 17 .1%
1988 13,039 15.0%
AVERAGE INCREASE PER YEJ\R = 9.7% :!:
SOURCE: F.D.O.T. DISTRICT 6 PLANNING
1 ~
0
C\l
, 0
, C\l
\
,
,
, z
\ 0
j::
, <(
, -.J
, ::>
a. 0
, 0 ,... (/)
, a. 0
\ I- C\l I-
,..... Z
0 , z
CJ , w ::J
a: , a 0
<( , en ()
~ , w
a:
>- , a ()
ill ,
~ ill LL
, I-
:r: , 0 u..
I- W 0 <(
a: , ., 0 a:
0 , 0 0
. a: C\l I-
z
I I a. .
or- V (/)
0 z
0 >
0 0
<( , I- Z
l- I <( a: 0
(J) , -.J <( -
'-J ::> l-
I W
(J) I a. >- <(
l- I 0 0 ....J
Z a. 0)
::> I 0) ::J
I I- ,... a..
0 . z 0
0 .. w
.. a..
0 .. . a f"-
..
Ll.. .. (J) I- co
.. 0)
Ll.. . W Z ,...
<( . a: W
.
a: . 0 l-
I- . U
. -
~.. (/) ~ .
0 a:Cl
co W I-~
. 0) a: Cf)Z
. ,... COz
.
. .. ~~
.. ..J..J
. . . ~c..
. . Uta
.. 1-1-
... 00<..:>
.
.. - -
1-0:
. ~1-
.
.. 1-00
....... 0 00-
f"- 0
0) ~
.. 01-
,... 00
w a:o
U o.
a: ..J~
~ u.u.
0
00
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
'It C') C\l ,..
OL6~ v.J08.:l 3SV380NI lN3083d 1~
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
TRftFF Ie COUNTS
(STATION 0002 - CARD SOUND ROAD)
ANNUAL AVERAGE
YEAR DAILY TRAFFIC % CHANGE
1970 L010 N/A
1971 693 31.4
1972 1,540 136.7%
1973
1974
t... 1975
1976 1,293 21.2%
1977 2,220 71. 7%
1978 1,563 29.5%
1979 1,685 7.8%
1980 1,523 9.6%
1981 1,788 17.4%
1982 2,675 49.6%
1983 1,995 25.4%
1984 2,202 10.4%
1985 2,351 r 8111
O. io
1985 2,090 11.1%
1987 2,624 26.6%
1988 2,387 9.0%
I AVERAGE I NCREASE PER YEAR = 7. 6% :t l
SOURCE: F,n,O.T. DISTRICT 6 PLANNING
14
r-..
o
<(
o
ex:
o
-z
::::>
o
en,
..0
ex:
<(
o
I
C\J
a
a
a
<(
I-
en
"-J
,
\
,
\ z
, ~
1 <(
, .....I
, ::::>
\ ~
, a..
, I-
1 z
, ill
, 0
, en
, ill
, a:
, 0
, ill
, I-
1 ~
, -,
, 0
, ex:
lJ
,
I
,
,
,
,
I
I
en
I-
Z
::::>
o ..
o .e.
..
o :.
u: .:
u. ..
<( ..~
a: ..-
I- .
~:.
.
.
....
..: .
.....
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.....
o
o
~
o
o
('I)
o
o
N
o
o
...
OL6 ~ V'J08~ 3SV380NI lN3083d
z
o
i=
<(
.....I
::::>
a..
o
a..
I-
Z
ill
o
Ci5
ill
a:
o
C\/
o
C\/
o
...
o
C\/
o
o
o
C\/
o
0)
0)
...
o
co
0)
...
o
,.....
0)
...
a:
<(
ill
>-
(f)
f-
Z
::::)
o
o
()
-
lJ..
lJ..
<
a:
f-
(f)
>
Z
o
-
f-
<
-J
::::)
a..
o
0-
f-
Z
W
o
-
(f)
w
a:
r-....
co
0)
.-
t-
o
<(Cl
~z
t-_
C/'Jz
COz
<(<(
-J-J
<(0..
OCD
~I-
C/'Jo
~-
<(cr:
t-I-
Cf)S2
o
<( .
01-
~ a: 0
O 0 .
-Jq
~ U. Ll..
o
C/'J
15
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
TRAFFIC COUNTS
(STATION 0101 - ISLAMORADA)
ANNUAL AVERAGE
YEAR DAILY TRAFFIC % CHANGE
1970 4,947 N/A
1971 8,341 58.5%
1972 6,219 25.4%
1973 8,340 34.1%
.... 1974 6,620 20.6%
1975 7,820 18.1%
1976 9,345 19.5%
1977 10,165 8.8%
1978 9,215 9.3%
1979 9,290 0.8%
1980 10,328 11. 2%
1981 11, 838 14.6%
1982 1 L 403 3.7%
1983 12,581 10.3%
1984 12,512 0.5%
1985 12,601 0.7%
1986 15,609 23.9%
1987 16,618 6.5%
1988 18,648 12.2%
I AVERAGE I NCREASE PER YEAR = 15. 4% ~ r
SOURCE: F.D.O~T. DISTRICT 6 PLANNING
1€
FLORIDA DEPARTI1ENT OF TRANSPORTATION
TRftFFIC com.lTs
(STATION 0045 - MARATHON)
ANNUAL AVERAGE
YEAR DAILY TRAFFIC % CHANGE
1970 6,273 N/A
1971 6,955 10.9%
1972 5,494 21.0%
1973 9,296 69.2%
1974 6,680 28.1%
1975
1976 10,500 57.2%
1977 13,283 26. 5 %
1978 12,813 3.5%
1979 12,675 1.1%
1980 9,898 21.9%
1981 13,073 32.1%
1982 13,825 5.8%
1983 15,020 8.6%
1984 15,551 3.5%
1985 15,948 2.6%
1986 17,706 11.0%
1987
1988 17,345 2.0%
I AVERAGE INCREASE PER YEAR = 9.8% :t I
SOURCE: F.D.O.T. DISTRICT 6 PLANNING
18
0
C\I
\ 0
, C\I
\
,
, z
, 0
\ i=
\ <t:
, ~
::)
, 0- 0
, 0 ,...
, 0- 0 (f)
, I- C\I
, z I-
, w Z
, 0 :::>
, en 0
w
, a: ()
, 0 ()
'""'" , w
z , I- -
U.
0 , () 0 u.
::r; W
t- , -, 0 <(
<t: I 0 0 a:
C\I
a: I a: I-
<t: I 0-
::E L/ (f)
I
1.0 >
~
0 z Z
0 I 0
< I i= a: 0
I <t: <t: -
t- I W I-
en ~
>o....J I ::) >- <(
I 0- 0 -.J
en 0 <>>
l- I 0- <>> :::>
z , ,... Cl.
::) . I- 0
0 . z
() . w a..
. 0
. I-
a . en
.
u: . w Z
.
u. . a: W I"-
<t: . co
a: . 0 <>>
t- . - ,...
. (J')
. l-
. . . 0 w u
. . co a: ~
. . <>> a:CJ
.. ,...
. I-Z
w-
. coZ
... ~~
~~
~a..
2<0
1-1-
~u
1--
~o:
0 1-1-
I"- cn~
<>> ~c
,... c .
en -~
lJJ 0:0
CJ o .
a: ~q
::J u.u.
0
en
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
'It ('I) C\I ,...
OL6 ~ VlJOt:l,j 3SV'3t:18NI IN38t:13d 19
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
TRAFFIC COUNTS
(STATION 0015 - BIG PINE KEY)
ANNUAL AVERAGE
YEAR DAILY TRAFFIC % CHANGE
1970 3.532 N/A
1971 4.177 18.3%
1972 4.739 13.5%
1973 3.868 18.4%
.. ~~ 1974 3.900 0.8%
1975 4.670 19.7%
1976 6.005 28.6%
1977 5.493 8.5%
1978 5,848 6.5%
1979 5.810 0.6%
1980 6.035 3.9%
1981 6,045 0.2%
1982 5.645 6.6%
1983 7.035 24.6%
1984 7.271 3.4%
1985 7.031 3.3%
1986
1987 11. 959 70.1%
1988 12.556 5.0%
I AVERAGE INCREASE PER YEAR = 14.2% :l: r
,
SOURCE: F.D.O.T. DISTRICT 6 PLANNING
20
0
I C\l
0
I C\l
t
I
,
, z
, 0
, I-
<(
, .....J
, ::::>
a..
, 0 0
T-
, a.. 0
, I- C\l C/)
, z .-
, w Z
, Q :J
Ci5
, w 0
, a: 0
,....., , Q
>- , 0
w w
~ , l- LL
, 0
LU , W 0 u..
z -, 0 <(
a: I 0 0 a:
I a: C\l
CJ I a.. .-
jjj 1/ C/)
I
<0 >
.....
0 Z
0 I 0 Z
< I i= a: 0
l- I <( <( -
en I .....J ill .-
'-' I ::::> >- <(
en I a.. 0 -J
0 0)
l- I 0) :J
z a..
I T- o..
::::> I-
0 . 0
. Z
0 .. . ... ill a..
. . . 0
0 . . . Ci5 .-
u:: ..
lL. . LU Z
. a: l"-
<( . W co
a: .. 0 0)
l- . .-
. -
. C/) l-
. 0 W
. ()
. co a: ~
0) oct?
. .-
. 1-2::
. en-
. COZ
. ~Z
. ~
.. ....J....J
. ~Q.
. S2co
1-1-
~()
1--
~o:
0 1-1-
en~
l"- ~c
0)
.- o .
en -I-
0: .
W oq
() ....Jq
a:
:> u.u.
0
en
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
~ C') C\l .-
o L 6 ~ v-JOtf.:J 3SV3tf8NJ lN38tf3d 21
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
TRAFFIC COUNTS
(STATION 0009 - XEY JEST/STOCK ISLAND)
ANNUAL AVERAGE
YEAR DAILY TRAFFIC % CHANGE
1974 12,125 N/A
1975 20,303 67.4%
.'
1976 16,671 17.9%
1977 12,231 26.6%
1978 15,306 25 .1%
1979 16,078 5.0%
1980 1 L 971 25.5%
1981 16,480 37 .7 %
1982 14,930 9.4%
1983 17 , 454 16.9%
1984 18,750 7.4%
1985 18,037 3.8%
1986 18,058 0.1%
1987 19,748 9.4%
1988 19,996 1.3%
I AVERAGE INCREASE PER YEAR = 4.6% :t I
SOURCE: F.D.O.T. DISTRICT 6 PLANNING
2~
o
o
-.:t
1""'"\
o
z
<{
~
en
~
()
o
I-
en
.......
I-
en
w
~
>-
w
~
I
0)
o
o
o
-ct:
I-
en
'--'
,
I
I
,
1
I
, Z
, 0
, i=
I <{
, ~
, ~
, 0
I a-
, l-
I Z
, W
~ ~
I W
I a:
, 0
, ~
I ()
, w
, ..,
I 0
I a:
I a-
V
,
I
I
I
I
,
,
I
z
o
I-
<{
~
::>
a-
o
a-
I-
z
W
o
en
w
a:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
o
o
C')
o
o
N
o
o
,...
P16 ~ V'JOH::J 3S't3l:f:JNI lN3:Jl:f3d
o
,...
o
N
o
o
o
N
o
0)
0)
,...
o
co
0)
,...
-.:t
....
0)
,...
o
N
o
N
a:
<{
W
>-
(f)
f-
Z
:J
o
o
o
-
u.
u.
<(
'0:
l-
(/)
>
Z
o
-
l-
e:(
-.J
:J
0-
o
0-
I-
Z
W
Q
-
oo
W
0:
....
co
0)
,...
I-
U
~ (ry
~~
00-
COZ
~~
....J....J
~a.
UCD
i=1-
~U
1--
~a:
1-1-
oo~
C
~ .
01-
~ ~O
,.. 0 .
'I..J ....Jq
a: u. u.
:J
o
00
23
~be;i~iami~i~eralo
...:.55 ;; ~G=::
Si,JNDAY. :~CV=;'/~2=;:: ~2. ~9SE
~~...".--......
"'::=:'fiS
Rev deer: Wild no more
v
, --'~,. ~>.;:;;;;l:-:;:~. --'.;~
'''.'~''
TIM CHAPMAN / Miami Heralcl5taH
Once tough enough to survive the isolation of the Lower Keys, the remaining Key deer .ha ve become
docile and too trusting.
Development ma)i mean extinction for endangered
. 1
arumal
By DA VI VOl" DREHLE
H eraic S ~C:~ 'v n te,..
BIG PINE KEY - it happens every week.
?rom the tangje~ uncierbrusr.. a tiny rieer steps
ol:t:Jeh' onte the ~oaC:. EraKe~ iO:::i;, tlres
s~~ea:. ~:1e ae~~ S:2nc~ :roze:: :n ie2~_
:~;'lG 2notne:- r\e\' Gee: lS ce2C.
The sIgn on ~.Je 5houJde~ of he\' Dee~ Bouie-
\"2;"C say~ 46 :eac :~i5 \'e2:-. 65 i;1S: '.~e3:.
i~~:. ie~~~~~~;Ci:o:cC~~~~_ ~~~~r:;~~;~~ ~~:~~s~
forests of the Lower Keys. eA"tinction is in sight
;0::- these miruature. :::ousins 0: :ne comma::
wnne-taiied rieer,
"The Ke\' aeer is in serious trouble. no
doubt aoout :t." says W.::. Klil'I1St:7., Amem:z's
:nost lillowiedgeaoie ~xpe:: on :he ~e\' oee~.
"Whetner we car; ::.r.-n l~ aroun::.. : ,:lst oar::
~ow," .
. -:-he \atJOna: Ke::pee::- \Viid}ie Keiu::--e was
:nter:aea ~0 sa\'e t:~e :.e:; cee~. ;: r:asr. :.
::":ssc7"cssec j~: ~~aci.s~ ~OCr~ec: by sl:Jmvi-
1
sions. it is a refug~ inmarne more than fact.
Withm the supposec boundaries 0: the Kev
ciee::- relUge it rerna:ns m easy thing to buiid ;:;
nouse, moo::- ;) boat mc ,etire to a nail-acre JOt.
-:-ht "~eu?t" ieatu.~es t Wirm-Dixie. ;:; ilOUC~
stort_ ,~ cnOlce or ~stallrants :mc ;: place :e
;er.~ ':Ioees.
7n~ cee:- :.ha: ~jven~ been i1attenec D\'
:;-~:;c r:?ye been ~";;ec tt; wei]-rneal11;H:: tour-
24
-:-:lry; totKE~' DEER, : G.-,
, 6~ -::' ,.._oy_ "''''''J~'1E=='~ 'gee
It :::i'";~AM;~ER.':'~ ....
~ S?EClES iji T~OUBLE
Extinction in sight fDr too-tame Key deer
v ttI ;
Thp O-neTn\;.'.
....... V'......J. _..._. .
.....
road kills,
developers
..
KEY DEER / jrom 1..4
ists and retirees. Once-tough ani-
mals that survived for centuries in
the harsh. salt...., isolated Florida
Keys, the Key (jeer have recently
become chubby. docile and too
trusting. They walk up to humans
:and nuzzle.
Sometimes they get an Oreo
cookie or a slice of enriched white
brud. Sometimes they get whacked
over the head with a poacher's two-
by-four.
The wildlife is no longer wild.
This story of the Key deer is, in
many respects. the story of the
Keys. Scores of plants, animals. fish
. and birds are endangered or threat-
ened by the burning desire of mare
and more people to grab a piece of a
tiny paradise.
Dying along with the Key deer are
the Keys tree cactus, manatee. Key
Largo wood rat, Key Largo cotton
mouse, Keys silverside, crocodile
. and Schaus swallowtail butterfly.
Snakes (indigo, Big Pine ringneck,
Florida brown, rim rock. Florida rib-
bon), turtles (loggerhead. green, I
hawksbill. Key mud. ridley) and
birds (peregrine falcon, bald eagle,
Southeast snowy plover, white
crowned pigeon, wood stork, great
. heron. roseate tern). Of plants,
more than 4-0 species are in danger.
Ecology is delicate
All are disapoearing for the same
basic reason. The ecology of these
scattered islands is a delicate mix-
. ture of sun, heat. salt water, fresh
, water and just a little bit of land.
This mixture simply doesn't exist
anywhere else. Humans - in large
numbers - find it alluring, but
there isn't enough room for every-
one.
"The Key deer are just an indica-
tor. like the canaries that coal min-
. --' ers used to carr.' down into the
mines." says Deocirah Holie. the di-
rector 0: the Key deer refuge.
; "When tne air ouality got really bad.
; the canaries would die first. If the
mmers were paymg attenuon. they
mIght SUTVIVe.
"The dying Key deer are telling
. us that we're losmg the ecology 01
the Keys."
Forty years ago. after ce.:ades of
;>caching, the :\ey aeer w;:s on the
verge of extmctlon. Experts
guessed that ~he herd numbered
fewer than 50. and many longtime
Kevs residents had never seen one.
Some even dismissed the tinv deer
- full-grown. they're the siZe of a
midsize dog - as a figment of the
imagination.
Then public support smited to the
Kev deer. no doubt fueled bv the dis-
tinct resemblance of the cine little
creature to Bambi, Walt Disnev's
1942 cartoon hero. In the late '40s.
the Key deer held the spotlight that
would later fall on other photogenic
threatened animals: whales, pandas,
harp seals and so on.
MerCiless warden I
Under pressure, the U.S. Fish i
and Wildlife Service came up with a
few thousand dollars in 1953, which
was wisely spent on a game warden
named Jack Watson. Watson, chew- I
ing a cigar and toting a Thompson
submachine gun. declared war on
the poachers. He hounded them
mercilessly, shooting out their tires
and killing their trained dogs.
According to one story, the crusty
game warden awroached a notori-
ous poacher and asked if he was kill-
ing Key deer.
"'Yes," came the reply. "'And I'm
going to keep killing them till there
aren't any left. The only way to stop
me is to shoot me."
So Watson shot him..
Congress. meanwhile, was caught
between supporters of a Key deer
refuge and landowners who pre-
ferred shops and subdivisions. The
refuge prevailed in 1957. Congress
drew a huge rectangle on a map and
authorized the purchase of any land
inside the line ior the good of the
Kev deer.
Money to buy the land was a dif-
ferent matter. That came in dribs
and drabs over the years from a va-
riety of government agencies and
private groups - never enough to
buy out the develooers.
Watson. the warden. built the Key
deer herd to an estimated 450 ani-
mals before development got seri-
ous on Big Pine Key. The herd has
been dwindling ior a decade.
Lounge on lawns
Today, the theoretical refuge
boundaries include all 0: Bit: Pine
;(e','. all of No Name Key: the Torch
_(e~;s; Ramrod. Summerianc. K.'lock-
emoown and Cudjoe keys: and I'nany
smaller isiands. But the refu~e owns
0:1i'; :;bout '7.000 ac:-es - less than
a tSird of Big P:ne - most oi which
:s ;,:ncomfcr::;.;::i:; ,:iost: to civiliza-
:ion.
So the deer iounge on lawns. r.lV-
age .....egetable :;ardens. graze on
roadsides and die by the score on
highways. in canals. at the hands of
poa~hers. attacked by dogs.
Now the Monroe County Com-
mission intends to pave a road
through the heart of Big Pine Kev
parallel to U.S. 1. Developers like
the project because it would link two
existing subdivisions and would. no
doubt. encourage more houses and
shoos.
~iany isiand residents also suo-
port the pian. because they could
run errands without iighting traffic
on the main highway.
Conservationists and state regu-
lators oppose the road, partly be-
cause it might mean more dead
deer, and partly because they see it
as the latest example of cavalier de-
velopment in the one-of-a-kind Flor-
ida Keys.
Even in this battle, the deer are
!ncidental. The real fight is for polit-
Ical power, the state of Florida vs.
Monroe County.
'Fight for survival'
The state maintains that paving
the three-mile road is a violation of
the Monroe comprehensive devel-
opment plan, and therefore subject
to an arduous review process. But
the Monroe commission doesn't like
arduous review. For them. the road
on Big Pine has become a symbol of ;
the power of the people.
"We feel this is a fight for the sur-
vival of local government." says
Monroe Mayor Gene Lytton. "'The
state is treating private land as if it
were its own. They don't want to
spend the money to buy land for the
Key deer, so they' re trying to take it
away through regulations."
The state is threatening a lawsuit
to prove that counties must follow
their master plans. but the Monroe
commission is unfazed. Feelings run
strong - somebody has been
creeping around Big Pine pamting
gun sights and bull's-eves on the
le3ping silhouettes of "Deer Cross-
ing" signs.
No matter who wins. the Kev
deer is in a lot oi trouble. .
"What spelled doom for the Key
deer was the arrivai of the Wino-
Dixie." says refuge director Holle.
speaking of the Keys' largest super-
market and its attendant striP shoo-
;)1ng at the corner of l" .S. 1 and Kev
Deer Boulevard. -
25
;-.i ew b:-eeci :n Xeys
"Beiore that. the people '.l,'hr:
:ived on Big E':ne had to be the t':pt
.vho didn't mmd dm,ing to Key ',,'e:;i.
.)r Marathon ior groceries. When
the store came, it attracted a new
breed: people who need a ".ideo
store and a rec center and a choice
'of fast food. People who need
schools and ball fields. ?eople who
need more roads."
As time runs out for the Key deer
- and the scores of other dying
species in the Keys - government
. agencies and private ccmservation
groups are racing to buy' more real
estate. But prices are rising. and the
supply is getting short.
There is talk of moving some deer
to remote keys. but few of the is-
lands have the mixture of oine ror-
ests and year-round fresh water
. that the deer need to thrive.
There has also been talk of relo-
cating the deer to the mainland, but
biologists oppose such a 'move. On
the mainland, the Key deer would be
certain to mate with common, full-
size deer, and gradually the distinc-
tive traits of the subspecies would
be obliterated, says Klimstra, the.
deer expert.
Gene Riepe is a Big Pine resident
who loves the Key deer but scoffs at
the idea that they can be preserved
in the wild, "There's nowhere on
this island where they won't come in
contact with humans." he says.
Odocoileus virginianus cjavium
is a subspecies of the common
North American white-tailed
deer. distinguished by its smaller
size, its wider head and the con-
figuration of its teeth.
At birth, a Key deer weighs just
3'1z pounds and makes a hoof
print the size of a thumbnail. A
full-grown Key deer stands no
more than 30 inches at the shoul-
der and weighS less than 80
pounds.
In the wild, Key deer are more
solitary than their bigger cousins.
Males avoid each other, each one
staking claim to at least 300 acres
of private domain. The deer are
strong swimmers. and once
ranged from Marathon to Key
West. Fewer than 300 remain,
concentrated mostly on Big Pine
and No-Name keys.
Fence the deer in?
His proposal: "If they really want
to save the Key deer. they'll put up a
fence around the refuge property
and.keep the deer off the road. They
can feed them and waterthem. and
the deer would befme."
That horrifies Klimstra. _to A zoo!"
he says. "You feed them corn and
oatmeal as if they were cows. And
there is nothing ieft of the life that
made these animals wharthev are."
Conservationists spea~: or com-
promise. or finding a v.-ay ror hu-
mans. plants ami animals to live to-
gether in the Florida Keys. But hope
is iading.
"As long as it's warm-and sunnv
here, people are going to want to
come." Holle savs. ttAndwhen thev
get here, they're going to want all
the conveniences close at hand.
"The same thing is happening all
ove~ the country. But in the Keys.
you can see the ene. The reef is
stressed. the fishing is bad. the deer
is aimos: gone.
.. A de~r can't live in ;J condominI-
um.
,":":'>-".-;:",-. _.-"'~ ..;.
:;::::::;~;';.;:;:; :,;::,-:,,.:;:~,-:.:
.,-,.<,,0___.,:'_::.
\:)pt'.-.....
'<"MllES::\:?--,h,-,'~.:."'..'"
......... ,':.,'<"-,-,-..
....................... ....
............................
TIM CHAPMAN I Miami Herald Stitt
Main causes of death: road
kills. dog attacks. drowning in ca-
nals and poaching.
26
TIM CHAPMAN I Miami Herald St.
.g-size Key deer feeds in yard of a house trailer on Big Pine Key, in National Key Deer Wildlife Refuge.
27
~~~<,-~-'~\~ I ~
-)~:':::~~.
?--~)~
~i-'( ,
.:'\
r .1 ~c.'" '.
jj . ~~"
\~.... 't.:,_ -'<
......-" '>>~
'~~,,,,,
~- \ l
.J ~ j
.\ 0- T i: -
~.a
i
I,
I,
!l
- -- 1- ---- - --- - - - - -- -- - - --- -
J, 11 0"
i II! II ~ 1IIIf If illilll
H II ,1J jt mh'~'-h~ J IJL_li
~ ~Ut~~~,. 11 LMg~~~~;~~~lmJ~
I. - - !!~~ilii!~ --~j;mmf_Eilimmi-~
~u J
U.
- l! C I ) \ ,i j j I ~' I.. i 4
.~ i iil1Wlij IH~!!lmHdijj .Iii1li 'A HiH j. d'!!'I~J ltj)JnJP,JiH
g ~ 1IIBIHH_____1Hlul UnmlUUUU Jj nUL. L ulullh _jm1jil!l~ud
~J J ." , ·
~! 1111 il!llllH 1.1111i If f.!
~ 1m r Ii uull 'rnm i il
> 'If! ~tH! j~rHf fH~~~~~~~! ~~ ~:~~m
.."......~........~"'~.."""'I....... ...."'............."''1~ .... ."''''''''''''.''-1
!;i~ji~; i!! liijiiij~-_i~ iiiiimT H ==js 1!,H
()
.
1
J
1
.J
cO
"
i
I
,
i
)
<f~
A
t L~
~.::J
i
I
'-\,')
i
I
CI
(~!.. -_.
\
a '"
J "
o
\I
l
t
J\
t- /../--..)1.
I (/ /',
u i ..<.-....)
. .~/tl ".. ".
\ " \.) . ,
.,:< \''c<' d)I!1
~\ ! 0()~ il \ hI {)(-J
\ .. !. " !I"r III ~:?,)_
\. J j-' D\-~ '\l<'~"""'~ _lU
/;-:{'c!iii J!l Ji J!ll "
'-.., ',' I~ '1 ~
/_ ~ I ! CAe:. "J." i I'l i
I~' (IIJ -e-J]. .~}h i if
t J ) _ ___ _ _ _ ~~ i~ Ifij
l~~ ~I.J I~
(/ () Ii L-i. II
,/ -.------. Jl l! I i ("
-':~:>-<~ c~ ~ W i
.." ~_J" "(;,/ ~) \J DJ
.____,j__-' 0
i
I
J _ /\... Q
--')1
-I
H
if
<C:J
",~
,
o
l3 ..
v
//
.- -.----.--,----- --
!
f i
",' il I
'G JI I
~J \]
I
. -~--"-----f~
f I II
, I
Lc
\
~
Ii
,
\
I
f
j
l
j i
~
t. ~~I \./~I \ I
,.~), J
" t. \ :
. /:_..', \(/."'.':~ _u-j;
t l "I~(': '\~). /
( I'; .
I .. J ~ /
J..~ \" ._";,J'//
-' l~'/
, - /
M":-"'--
,/ I
).. I:,';
J. , . .
.. :,:
. I, ~
.
il:1 L.'ii h, 'if!
:-lui-,:i!! ~H "1~
d-L-J~ L
I
1 iI' Ot!!
. i '}
, I ~: I ! .
i :~9~ !,j
; . ,"I;,
. it
I ,
\., ,
> '.' '.
.- -I' I~~ \t. r~} IU
<) J Y I \, ''-'.
u '.( ".'.".' I
uJ ''(. ~\'" :
, '<\ I i
; \,y .3
,I. <\\ t
" , '~ \, ~~.( {~
(~i) u
,
,
!
~-.L i
,
I..
ji
I
'<J
i
i
D
<j
iqt
1 Ii
U
<l
.
,
h !
l: "'II
:~ ."
IljH I
~ =Q~!
~-'
I
,I
'l!
, JH
j in
,pI:
--..;.;J ;
___1
1 .
hi:
I~I I
if)
Jh
t
: I
1;1
- .
. t. ;
!~ j i
'I 1 a
~~~ b \1(:,
___ __.~_..u__._.___,___._________ __ .._
f . !
11 Hf filjllliiilljl
II II! !.I! II 'I 'I!I! ,I
~! - JJ__ __.JU J-,J _ tlJ J.
!.. ~! h__ !m ~1l_,_~n_Hjm~!,~
~,~ ~"'I~I"t... ao ~''''''''''........._ ...~..........."Itt,,""'l"''''
!l . m;:r-~T'm~~~ 31 '~-=!Em~m-~ ~
I'li,) '!J
'Ilil,
(
f .. . I
j 11"11
\ II ..
I " . I
I IF: i
~; ~~ '~J_l~ ~~
'. "0 . , ~, ". .,
t
I
:J
'.'
.1,
'.',,',
\ '~-, ~.
, -', \:-
" \-
," \
'" '. x-' ".. :.
.... I'- \. ."
, \....
\. ,.-,
. !
'.)
c! ,'. ~~~~~~l~
J I ,h. .
j, '.. ... \ J
11 i~ iHUHip
~~ .HHhllld 1
H
r.ji f"'j JUji
,.: .If. I., .... III )1,
t \ ,.....1 ,h.
,..liL',j JU n__
~~l:~I ~~.~,t ~II
~~~:- .:;..--:.:~::(.: ~ " ;~;:, ..-~'.
mmi:ilisWJ;j:jC
:.. a ~ I- ;~ S
... ~
i ~ ~
ilr)" Ii ·
v ~
~ .. ~ :
d ~. ,. - H
u ~'gft ~
I- II . I <I
lJ u ! ~
> u ~ ~ 9 · (I
.. 0 - ~ ~ ,(
u ~ to ~ o!J L.J
!! lEt ~ ~ (I
tt..(~~ .
G u ., ... r ..
l
n
o
I
Uj
i 4 f- 'j J... 'j, ,J 'j': ~J 't "\ t,
~Ii:'il:jlt Url.,pl! IIi' JJjjd Id liihj :illJi .H.iii l~i )!I
HhHHtlhHH~lhJtljhlidlfiJ ldw JddlLlllliHJ1U1L
! j I i fl' j /,1[1 ]tll f,ll/l,1 r n lir Ilill
! !ILLJdJliL}ll)1 WIll L ,1lUJ Jili.
~~ I I'! . . ' I
:> f:. ~ U'i't'! ", i.J-'!/" · J ~.ll;.l J Ii.. ~ I! i-'
L f 1 d,'U!4ihiAWldIH ~u Hi I !).Ih III ~1~ll'i~Hi'~~ i
a ~ i "I. i -. f 1 ,Ii' I! i ~ 'j Iii n: :'1 ~. E
o. ! I ____1 L _ _ _!l _. L ! __"- _ _ I I:~ 1
1-' ~ ': ,. ., ~ i
if) G, i . I,' ~I ' i j i.' } ~
~ \ 1:1: 1.';1 UIUt i!lIH I Hili 11 Ii,;,.' t ',i!!)i
> : ": .!l1 !:.,. l ) I',' -!?,;I ~l H ~,I "HI Ii JII
':. i;'- i ~\"'t {, I' ~h 1'1 1\ j II 1.\ \ ," il\
\.) . ;'L"}ililjln LtW__JWtJJ~ Lt ul ,~.:)hl LI,U!II. jiW~
)-
a
<l
r ---
L
:J
II)
I
~ :; .... "I ~ ~
(J
" r
:! ~
5 i I
e f, .j
~ ; I"
I' ! I (J
:J ~ ~ g I
! ~ ~ ~
~ c', ~ ~
\0' ~ (, :.
a !t ~ ;
~ r : ~
~y ~~~J
.. c ~ 0
It :. r ,..
:;
0:
.j ~
~ ~
J
>
I.J
, '
.\
i;: ; li
~, I ~ I \
iH ,'-
, : ~. t
,I.
l' ~ i
:l~
i 'j I 'I' . i ; 'j' .
~l' '!'1 .l~:.. " , ),
I lltl 1i, II! 1'\1 Jtdw i ~U Je ii
\ ~ t', 111!.llt-~ I "~ ,':'
; i, I.; i ..- J.. q I'
:lii ~ illr; -~!L___I.l .:i
I
L
1..1
~-1 ~
j. J ~
n 0
): {,
ex ~:
o I'
1_' I
() J ~
:;
I
(~ ;.,
a r
I, I "
I. IJ ;' ".
II
,/
i; ,n
i ;', ;, ~ 'I (
Iii;!.:,
!lW I,
'.' 1;
'. ~, i
, ,
. ~
,
Ii. :.
,
;!i
lIJ
..
1.1
,; U)
c'l
,I ~ ~
I! \, ,
P 1
1,1 h j'
I 0) "
() ~ l:
ii, "
I ) U
I ~.J .. j .:
. t .. : :.1.
.. I "" j
I { . I :: I
Ii! I I l5 i i ['i
,. f! u"
I I) .,
r J'
.,
. ,
\,1 (
l) . ,
I I
-I
~~: ; ,
1.1.'
II
, ;
. ; :/
. .
IX)
N
'-.
!
\)\
I; \:
\\
..---~-~.
Page 22
SOUTH FLORIDA BUSINESS JOURNAL
May'989
Florida Keys: Public safety or rampant growth?
By Robert S. Harris
SPECIAL TO THE BUSINESSJOURNAl
Dnt' of the most unique areas of penin-
sular Florida, Ihe Keys portion of Monroe
County, is an archipelago of islands about
115 miles long with a single life line,
U.S_ 1, connecting them together and 10
the mainland at the southeaslern tip of
Dade County_
The term "lifeline" cannot be overem-
phasized. There will never be an alternate
land roule to the Keys. U _5_ 1 is the singu-
lar anerial road that must move all of the
people, goods and services that make up
and are vilal to the survival of the resident
and tourist population.
Perhaps more importantly, this one
highway must also serve as the only land
evacuation route for the hurricane-prone
and exposed Florida Keys.
The media, for many years now, has
portrayed the Keys as an area of the state
where rampant, uncontrolled growth is
the rule rather than the exception. Since
1974. the Keys pOrlion of unincorporated
Monroe County and rhe county's three
municipalities (Key West. Key Colony
Beach and Layton) have heen designated
by the slale of Florida a~ Areas of Critical
SI.lle Concern (ACSCl, due in part to Ihp
perteption that growth wa~, and is, out of
hand_
The ACSC status has, in many respects,
resulted in the Keys being a laboratory for
slate planning initiatives which finally
resulted in a new Comprehensive Growth
Mana~ement Plan being adopted by
county government in September 1986,
after a (our and a half year moratorium on
major development projpcts.
The rcalities of grov-..'lh that h~15 o((ureo.
in lerms o( the current 77,000 re~ioent
population o( the Keys, do not, however,
coincide with the widesrre.ld media-
induced perception of uncontrolled devel-
opment.
All of Monroe County conlains
1,144.791 ao('s. Only 4_3 r,erc('nt of that,
or 49.120 acres, i~ in privat<, ownE'r~hip.
The rf'm~lining 95.7 percent is m.ldl? up of
state and federal I><Hks, ledpral wildlife
refuges, military installations, schools,
loc.ll govf>rnment and utility projects and
sunmerged state lands.
The residenl population throughout the
Keys has only grown an average of 2.6
percent per year since 1970 and is pro-
jected to grow at only 1.2 percent per year
through 2020.
And the Keys economy ha, dramatically
shihed_ With malor cutbacks on the U_S.
Navy presence in the Key West area In
1974 and a more recent downturn in
commercial fishing activilies, the number
one economic activity has become tour-
ism.
This change occurred with the full sup-
port of state and local government. There
has also b~n ~ome federal help. in lerm~
of promoting the "laid-back" Keys lifestyle
for 10urist!io and 1he important recreational
opportunities available at stale and fE'deral
Robert Harris is .l
vice president of
Pos/, Buckley,
Schuh &. Jernigan
Inc., Monroe
Count)' consu/Ung
engineers.
parks, federal wildlife preserves and other
Keys attractions.
Growth o( tourism, in ~1~Hk contr..lst to
growth of resident population, is perhaps
best illustrated by actual Florida Oeparl-
meot of Transportation (FOOT) traffic
counts_ For the period 1970 Ihrough 1988,
~lverage 1ra((ic volume along U.S. 1
increased at 1he rilte of 12 percent per
year, while the resident population was
only growing at the rate of 2_6 percent per
year.
The Keys are now attracting well over 2
million tourists a year. or some 26 times
their local population.
U.5_ 1 is the Keys lifeline, but it is also a
life-taker, with annual traffic fatalities aver-
ageing in the high thinies. The Keys high-
way is one of the most deadly in Florida_
In 1988, less than half of tnese U_S_ 1
fatalities were local residents_
The 2 million plus visitors a year can
hardly be expected to know the Keys high-
way, and many are observed taking their
eyes off the road al highway speeds 10
marvel at the spectacular views of islands,
water wildlife and other sights so abun-
dant along U_S. l_
And Monroe County, the 33rd-ranked
county in the state in terms of population,
was rated number one in drunk and
drugged driving problems between 1985
and 1987 by the slate ~ivision of Public
Safety_
Keys law enforcement agencies and the
Florida Highway Patrol have recently
taken steps (0 improve traffic enforce.
ment. and the county commission passed
an ordinance in March prohibiting the sale
of alcohol between 4 a_m. and 7 a.m.
These are important measures and will
hopefully reduce IraHie (atalities. but
sa(('ty imrlfovements and widening of the
highway lifeline is also essential if a quality
lifestyle (or residents and tourists is to be
maintained.
Th" !lO-mile slrptch of US 1 from Key
We~t to Isl<1nlorada and its eonti~uou~
developed areas is the only emerging
urbanized area in Florida that is 50 miles
or more (rom the nearest point on the
interstate highway system or Florida's
Turnpike.
U.S. 1 al~o must serve as a national
defense highway, being the only land link
from Homestead Air Force Base and the
Florida mainland to Boca Chica Naval Air
Station and other Key West area Naval
installations, as well as the several Coast
Guard slat ions along the Keys involved in
drug interdiction and interception of ille-
gal immigrants_
Keys residents have vivid memories of
the military traffic jams that occurred all
along the highway during the Cuban mis-
sile crisis in 1962.
From Florida City in south Dade County
to mile marker zero in old town Key West,
US 1 h" 43 bridges, lotaling 19.4 miles.
Of Ihe 108_6 miles of the land portion, 86
miles, or 67.2 percent, is two-lane; 8
miles, or 6.2 percent is three-lane; and 34
miles, or 26_6 percent has already been
four-Ianed_
The FOOT's revised five year work plan
calls for four-Ianeing 14.5 miles of the
presently two-lane portioo by 1993, with
MONROE COUNTY
LEGEND
AdDpfal Fint To klJ~nth To
ACTIVITY 6Y...,. T~IIl" Tw~ntieth
lVor" Y~a" Year
Pro".."", 1915-1998 1999-l!JOO8
Add LaDe. - - .......,."..~
New Ezpre"..7' :...,"""'~ ~"""','\: ~'::'~~"'~7x:'
Hew .Arterial.
Conoidor- ........ ...........
Acqui.ition
New P....npr
Service
f37J
a
00 ~ cI
DO
Q~
KEY WEST
another 11 miles rn the unfunded 10 year
plan to be four-Ianed ny 1998.
The 20-year S1rategic plan addresses
additional unfunded four-Ianing beyond
1998, but ~pt"C1fic lociltion~ within lhe
remaining ff>.5 miles of two-l.lne higl1\\'ily
are not identifiC"d. Besides U.S. 1, Monroe
Counly has ,ome 460 mile' of local roads
within its juri~dlction, and the city of Kf>Y
W('st maintain~ ~om(> (l7 miles oi citv
strf;'els.
Because o( en\'ironmf'nt.ll (onslraint~ In
certain ~H{'as a:ong U.S. 1 :r.uch a~ the
need to preserve \"etland and hardwood
hammock resources .lncl to protpct endan-
gered sp(>ci('~ like the K<,y Dt'(>r .1nd
oth('rs. it may nol bC' fea~ihle or de~irablC'
to four-lane all of the bO.5 miles of t\\lO-
lanes portion~ not presently scheduled for
widening.
There are many safely improvements.
however, along these I\....o.lane ~egmen15
that need to be identified and incorpo-
rated in the FOOT's scheduled work pro-
gram_ These include reflective pavement
marking devices. striping, improved sig-
nage, centerline barrier walls. smoothln~
of sharp curves. lighting and creation of
new, and improvements to existing, (ron.
lage roads, among other items_
In November 1988, representatives of
the Monroe County Commission made a
presentation to the Florida Transportation
Commission requesting that an overall
corridor study of U.5. 1 be made as soon
as possible to identify needed righl-of-way
and required highway improvements.
II is hoped Ihat the future FOOT work
program will include this important long-
range master planning effort, so that for
the first time since Henry Flagler first
planned his railroad to Key Wesl - which
became the "Overseas Highway" - a
comprchcn~ive approach, project sched-
ule and funding can bl' clp\.ploped ann
ide"l ified.
DADE COUNTY
(Miami)