Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Traffic Calming Speed Limits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee clears measure letting municipalities seek 20–25 mph limits, with study requirements
Summary
The Miami-Dade Transportation, Planning and Mobility Committee approved two items allowing municipalities to pursue lower speed limits and traffic-calming measures, while reiterating that state study requirements and local consultation remain necessary.
The Miami-Dade Transportation, Planning and Mobility Committee voted to approve two items (2B and 2E) that give municipalities a formal mechanism to request lower speed limits and other traffic-calming measures, including 20- or 25-mph limits where appropriate.
The measures passed on a voice vote after Commissioner Regalado moved the items and Commissioner Bastian seconded. Three members present — Vice Chairwoman Regalado, Commissioner Bastian and Chairwoman Higgins — voted in favor; two members (Commissioner Bermudez and Senator Garcia) were absent.
The items do not automatically change any speed limits; they grant municipalities an avenue to pursue local reductions, subject to state law and any required field studies. “This is not something we are doing automatically. This is only giving the ability,” Commissioner Steinberg said, adding that municipalities would still need to request action and comply with state-required studies.
Committee members and staff discussed how the new authority would be implemented in practice. Commissioner Regalado, who said she would co-sponsor both items, told the committee she expects neighborhood requests to drive most work and that commission offices frequently receive petitions from residents and associations for traffic calming near schools, parks and libraries. “When people come to us, then we can go to the department and start this process,” Regalado said.
County staff advised members that a memo under development will describe the full process, including field assessments, cost estimates for sign replacement and related work. Staff also encouraged municipalities to enter into interlocal agreements with the county to handle mitigation where appropriate. A county official said the administration does not intend for departments to duplicate work if a separate internal directive is already nearing completion.
Committee members emphasized public outreach and local consultation. A commissioner asked how the county will ensure communities are surveyed or consulted before changes are implemented; Steinberg replied that the change provides tools, not automatic action, and that community groups and neighborhood associations will be part of the petition and review process.
The committee’s action sends the items to the full Board of County Commissioners for final consideration. Staff indicated it would revise language if needed before the board hearing to avoid duplicative work with other directives already in progress.
More detailed implementation steps, cost estimates, and any interlocal agreement language will be provided to the full board when the items return for a final vote.
