Marlin Engineering provides guidance on a proper shared path. This is important for Coral Reef Drive & 184 – and the specifications demonstrate that the 136th Shared Path is more a mess than a safe path – important details.

Do it right, or don't do it at all. The current mayor and this council should not repeat the mistakes made in redesigning the SW 136th Street project. The photos at the bottom serve to shine light on poor planning and defines the term forcing a square peg in a round hole - who is really happy with SW 136th Street? The results really do not fit in this particular place or situation. 

Important point: There is no legal requirement to make profound changes to either SW 184 or Coral Reef Drive - so the Palmetto Bay mayor and council should resist temptation to spend the tax dollars, unless the project brings quality improvements to those streets. Don't sacrifice historic coral rock walls and magnificent shade and clean air producing canopy trees to a vanity project.

The first question is whether a shared path properly fit in the existing street right of way.  This Coral Reef / 184 project is not one of a pre-planned area. These areas will require significant work arounds due to many existing obstacles such as power poles, coral rock walls and many, many historic trees. Marlin Engineering* has provided recommended specifications regarding a proper shared path (see figure and description posted below). This is important for Coral Reef Drive & 184 – and the specifications demonstrate that the 136th Shared Path is more a mess than a safe path – important details.

The following is the Marlin Engineering planner's specifications contained in slide 16.

• The standard width is 10 to 12-Feet, may be 8-Feet in areas where space is restricted or if it is not heavily used.
• The path must be at least 6-Feet from roadway and have a 2-Foot clearance on each side.

See Page/slide 16 of the Multi-Use Trail & SMART Plan Connectivity Study, Bicycle & Pedestrian Advisory Committee Meeting, November 16, 2021

Why is the above important?

Because here are some photos taken of the SW 136th Street path where you can clearly see significant portions of the path where these important guidelines are not met:

Observable issues (above). The path at these points are neither 6 feet from the roadway nor is there the stated recommended two feet clearance on the other side (backs up to a thick hedge - you can see why that would be a problem when dealing with handlebars, etc.)

Immediately above and below - there is no explaining splitting the path into two separate 4 foot sections. Does it really equal a useable 8 feet? Is the sidewalk traffic really that bad that Palmetto Bay officials feel the need to created a divided pathway to separate oncoming users? There is no 2 foot buffer to the inside portion as well as a lack of 6 feet buffer from the street. The only way to describe this is the useable swale area (water runoff) and resident/guest parking is gone, essentially the entire right of way has been paved over.

Above - twisting and turning with an abrupt reduction from 6-8 feet to a standard 5 foot sidewalk, clearly not within the Marlin Engineering guideline.

Below - where is the safety buffer from traffic? Cars can and will easily pull off the road and onto the pathway, placing users at risk.

CLICK HERE to view prior related posts on shared paths including 136th Street, Red Road and Old Cutler Road, both in Palmetto Bay as well as in Cutler Bay.

*Marlin Engineering is facilitating Palmetto Bay's Multi-Use Trail & SMART Plan Connectivity Study