1-1 I-75 Master Plan

October2009

SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION

The Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), District 2, has prepared this Master Plan for Interstate Highway 75 (I-75) in north Florida. Master planning of major transportation facilities is essential to ensuring available capacity on the transportation network to support and sustain mobility and intermodal connectivity in the region and across the state.

1.1 PURPOSE OF THE MASTER PLAN

The major purpose of an Interstate Master Plan (IMP) is to guide the development of an intermodal interstate system that will serve the mobility needs of people and freight and foster economic growth and development, while minimizing fuel consumption and noise pollution.

FDOT interstate policy outlines in broad terms the limits of Interstate expansion and support of mobility objectives and transit initiatives on the Florida Intrastate Highway System/Strategic Intermodal System (FIHS/SIS). The policy seeks to address a range of policy objectives, not only highway capacity needs. Consequently, an IMP will consider the “people and goods” movement capabilities of the corridor, constructability and affordability of improvements, the reliability of a plan that local and regional governments can relate to, and economic, growth management, and environmental elements of the corridor.

Accordingly, this I-75 Master Plan addresses these FIHS/SIS policy goals:

• Implement the Interstate Highway Policy

• Enhance the mobility of residents, businesses and visitors in the corridor

• Support regional commerce and the efficient movement of goods

• Develop financially feasible improvement plans

• Support the development of livable communities

• Incorporate environmental quality factors into the plan

Generally, the interstate master planning study process is one in which opportunities for public participation are woven through a technical analysis that examines existing and anticipated conditions, identifies improvement alternatives that might address these conditions and identified deficiencies, evaluates those alternatives based on agreed-upon goals and objectives, and recommends a thirty-year improvement program of improvements that optimizes the public investment required to fund the improvements. The master plan serves as a core element of regional transportation and economic development plans, and provides input into the FIHS 2030 Long Range Cost Feasible Plan.

1.2 PROJECT STUDY AREA

The I-75 study corridor extends a distance of almost 100 miles from the Marion/Alachua County Line (Alachua County) to the Florida/Georgia State Line (Hamilton County). Within these limits, I-75 is a six-lane limited access facility. It accommodates regional mobility and significant truck traffic. The truck traffic is anticipated to continue to increase in volume into the foreseeable future, thus ensuring the continued importance of the corridor as a major freight corridor. There are fifteen interchanges in the study area including a major I-10/I-75 systems interchange.

The interchanges from south to north are CR 234, SR 331/SR 121, SR 24, SR 26, SR 222, US 441, SR 236, US 41, SR 47, US 90, I-10, SR 136, US 129, SR 6 and SR 143. The interchanges of SR 331/SR 121, SR 24, SR 26, SR 222 in the Gainesville area (Alachua County) are classified as urbanized and the interchanges of SR 47 and US 90 in the Lake City are (Columbia County) are classified as urban. The remaining interchanges are classified as rural.

Two of the interchanges are the subject of separate studies. The I-10 / I-75 interchange was addressed in the I-10 Master Plan. The I-75 / US 441 interchange was addressed in the PD&E study of the interchange.

The study corridor of the I-75 Master Plan is illustrated on the following page in Figure 1-1.

90

75CORRIDOR BOUNDARY

10

10

75

75

41

90

44190

41

129

441

27

129

129

301

20

C O L U M B I AC O L U M B I AGainesville

Lake City

CORRIDOR BOUNDA RY

234

121

24

26

222

236

47

136

6 143

A L A C H U AA L A C H U A

L E V YL E V Y

S U W A N N E ES U W A N N E E

H A M I L T O NH A M I L T O N

U N I O NU N I O N

M A D I S O NM A D I S O NG I L C H R I S TG I L C H R I S T

L A F A Y E T T EL A F A Y E T T E

B A K E RB A K E R

B R A D F O R DB R A D F O R D

D I X I ED I X I E

P U T N A MP U T N A M

M A R I O NM A R I O N

C L A YC L A Y

T A Y L O RT A Y L O R

FIGURE1-1

SHEET 1 OF 1

Florida Department of Transportation District 2

I-75 Master PlanLegend I-75 Corridor Overview Source: Tele Atlas North America, Inc./

Geographic Data Technology Inc., ESRI

GEORGIAGEORGIA

0 7.5 15Miles

RoadsLimited AccessHighwayMajor Road

InterchangesExisting InterchangeUrban Area

AtlanticOcean

Gulf ofMexico

0 130 260Miles

CORRIDOR BOUNDARY

1.3 REPORT ORGANIZATION

The Master Plan is the fourth and final report of the Summary Report documents the existing mainline and interchange design and traffic conditions and identifies the improvements needs based on design year traffic. evaluation process and the Tier 2 redocuments the preferred CMAs for the mainline and interchanges. Sections 1 through 7 described and provided herein constitute the I-75 Master Plan.

Executive Summary of the Master

Section 1 serves as the introduction, presents and outlines the purpose of the master plan for the Icorridor and describes the organization of the report.

Section 2 presents the design standards and criteria appropriate to each of the Ielements that are used to evaluate the viability of the various alternatives.

Section 3 summarizes the need for corridor improvements. This section identifies design, mobility and safety deficiencies, environmental impacts and freight mobil

Section 4 describes the corridor improvement goals and study objectives as well as the method in which they were developed.

Section 5 summarizes the results of the Tier interchange is presented and described.

Section 6 summarizes the results of the Tier interchange is presented and described.

Section 7 documents the public invol

Section 8 summarizes the implementation,study with on-going efforts and projects as well as the impact of potential policy changes are provided this section.

RGANIZATION

and final report of the master plan process for Summary Report documents the existing mainline and interchange design and traffic conditions and identifies the improvements needs based on design year traffic. The Tier 1 report documents the mainline evaluation process and the Tier 2 report documents the interchange evaluation process. The Master Plan documents the preferred CMAs for the mainline and interchanges. Sections 1 through 7 described and

75 Master Plan.

aster Plan.

serves as the introduction, presents and outlines the purpose of the master plan for the Icorridor and describes the organization of the report.

presents the design standards and criteria appropriate to each of the Ielements that are used to evaluate the viability of the various alternatives.

summarizes the need for corridor improvements. This section identifies design, mobility and safety deficiencies, environmental impacts and freight mobility considerations.

describes the corridor improvement goals and study objectives as well as the method in which

summarizes the results of the Tier 1 mainline evaluation. The preferred CMA for each interchange is presented and described.

summarizes the results of the Tier 2 interchange evaluation. The preferred CMA for each interchange is presented and described.

documents the public involvement opportunities and results for this study.

summarizes the implementation, phasing strategies and associated costgoing efforts and projects as well as the impact of potential policy changes are provided

1-4

I-75. The Data Analysis Summary Report documents the existing mainline and interchange design and traffic conditions and

The Tier 1 report documents the mainline port documents the interchange evaluation process. The Master Plan

documents the preferred CMAs for the mainline and interchanges. Sections 1 through 7 described and

serves as the introduction, presents and outlines the purpose of the master plan for the I-75 study

presents the design standards and criteria appropriate to each of the I-75 transportation system

summarizes the need for corridor improvements. This section identifies design, mobility and

describes the corridor improvement goals and study objectives as well as the method in which

evaluation. The preferred CMA for each

interchange evaluation. The preferred CMA for each

vement opportunities and results for this study.

and associated cost. Coordination of this going efforts and projects as well as the impact of potential policy changes are provided in

I-75 Master Plan

October2009