Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPre-publication Submittals for PZAB Mtgse P. 305< ` The Lasarte Law Firm F. -�� 3250 N.E.First Avenue Lasarte Miami, Iy I �iami, FL FL33i37 www.lasartelaw.com January 13, 2021 VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL Mr. Charles Garavaglia, Chairman Planning, Zoning & Appeals Board (PZAB) City of Miami 3500 Pan American Drive Miami, FL 33133 Re: Clarification of Record/Item No. P-20-076 ("Application")/ City of Miami Planning, Zoning & Appeals Board ("PZAB") Dear Mr. Garavaglia, Our office represents Macarthur Properties ITI, LLC ("MacArthur") and we would like to provide this letter to affirmatively clarify the public record on the Application. We are retained as counsel to monitor and express our concerns to the Application which was filed by Miami Design District Associates Et al. ("Applicant") for an amendment to the previously approved Miami Design District Retail Street Special Area Plan ("Design District SAP"). MacArthur owns property located on the east side of Biscayne Boulevard across from the Application site. On November 18, 2020, the Application was presented to the PZAB for their recommendation and approval. My client's concerns and continents were raised on the record and we asked the PZAB to defer the item to have dialogue with the Applicant to address better planning for the entire area. The Applicant's counsel, Mr. Neisen Kasdin, stated that our objection was predicated on sour grapes because of a zoning application that MacArthur filed in 2015 ("MacArthur Application") proposing to "increase density and intensity" which his client objected to at the time because his client "was concerned about the neighborhood". The application that Mr. Kasdin is referring to is application 15-00975zc requesting a rezoning from T6-12-L to T6-12-0 for a two-story building plus parking. I believe that it is important to highlight the following to clarify the record: MacArthur was not seeking any increase in density or intensity. I am attaching a letter of intent and proffered covenant as Exhibit "A" that limits the development to T6-12-L standards. McArthur was only seeking to waive the 25% commercial building cap. Specifically, the City of Miami's interpretation of the T6-12-L code at the time was that commercial uses must be less than twenty-five percent (25%) of the building's floor area total, which the T6-12-0 did not limit. The MacArthur application proposed a two-story commercial building with two stories of parking; it was not seeking to increase intensity or density. Although, the MacArthur Application enjoyed the support of neighborhood activist, Elvis Cruz, his comments are attached as Exhibit "B" and it received the favorable support of the PZAB, Mr. Kasdin's client objected to the MacArthur application. They appeared before the City of Miami Commission and requested deferrals pending additional traffic analysis of our application. It was their way of creating paralysis by analysis. The deferrals started on October 22, 2015 and continued throug January 26, 2017. MacArthur tried to provide solutions to the issues raised and those solutions fell on deaf ears. In all, there were more than nine Commission hearings where the matter was deferred. On May 16, 2017 MacArthur withdrew the application because they realized that this was not about resolving a traffic issue. Despite numerous prior attempts, MacArthur would welcome dialogue with Mr. Kasdin's clients to explore better planning solutions for the entire area for all parties concerned. We look forward to hearing from Mr. Kasdin and working with him to address all concerns and to develop solutions that would benefit all interested parties and the City of Miami as a whole. Since , Felix M. Lasarte, Esq. Exhibit "A" BE Rccw RADE LL & FERNAN D EZ 7;"O"1"C3_ 1_^IV1::) USE ANa e[4V1RC7NM1=—NTAL LAW DIRECT LINE: (305) 377-6227 E-Mail; mtapanes@a hrzoninglaw.com VIA HAND -DELIVERY July 13, 2015 Ms. Olga Zamora Chief of Hearing Boards Section Planning and Zoning Department Miami Riverside Center (MRC) 444 SW 2nd Avenue, 3rd Floor Miami, Florida 33130 Re: Letter of Intent for the Miami Highline Rezoning Application Relating to 3701 Biscayne Boulevard in Miami, Florida - Dear Ms. Zamora: This law firm represents MacArthur Properties I11, LLC ("Applicant" or "Owner") with regard to the properties located at 3701 Biscayne Boulevard, 3737 Biscayne Boulevard, 306 NE 38th Street, and 316 11,1E 38th Street in Miami, Florida (the "Property"). See Exhibits A and B. Please allow this letter to serve as the required letter of intent in connection with a request for rezoning of the Property. Description of Property, The Property is located at 3701 Biscayne Boulevard, 3737 Biscayne Boulevard, 306 NE 38th Street, and 316 NE 381h Street in Miami, Florida, and identified by Miami -Dade Tax Folio Nos. 01-3219-019-0230, 01-3219-019-0190, 01- 3219-011-0310, and 01-3219-011-0290, respectively. The Property is approximately 37,392 square feet in size, and located on the southeast corner of the Biscayne Boulevard and NE 38th Street intersection. Currently, the Property contains two (2) structures. The Property is zoned T6-12-L. The Property's future land use is designated on the Future Land Use Map ("FLUM") as General Commercial, The Property is not historically designated, nor within a historic district. Further, the Property is not located within an archeological conservation area. To the west of the Property is a ground level parking lot that is zoned T6-12-0. To the north of the Property is the Biscayne Medical Plaza, including Jackson Health System and Pasha's Restaurant, which is zoned T6-12-L. To the south of the Property is SOUTHEAST FINANCIAL CENTER • 200 SOUTH BISCAYNE BOULEVARD, SUITE 850 • MIAMI, FLORIDA 33131 PHONE. 305-374,5300 • FAH. 305.377.6222 • WWW.BRZONINGLAW.COM Ms. Olga Zamora Chief of Hearing Boards Section July 13, 2015 Page 2 of 4 1-195. The Property is also bordered to the east by the I-195 on -ramp. Further east of the Property are T5-R zoned properties. Request. The Applicant seeks a rezoning of the Property from T6-12-L to T6-12-0 in order to construct a two-story retail structure. The Applicant is requesting the rezoning primarily due to the fact that the building area allowed for commercial use on a T6-1.2-L property is limited to two (2) stories for the principal building, and office and commercial uses must be less than twenty-five percent (25%) of the building floor area total, whereas said limitation does not apply to T6-12-0 zoned properties. As part of the rezoning application, the Applicant intends to proffer a covenant running with the land requiring that the Property be developed in accordance with the T6-12-L regulations, with the exception of the twenty-five percent (25%) limitation. Section 7.1.2.8(c) of Miami 21 states that a rezoning of land will only be considered where the proposal involves an extension of an existing transect boundary, unless the rezoning involves at least 40,000 square feet of land area or 200 feet of street frontage. The Applicant is requesting an extension of an existing transect boundary for the Property, which has approximately 226 feet of street frontage (excluding a 14 foot alley) on Biscayne Boulevard. As further required by Section 7.1.2.8(c)(1)(d) of Miami 21, the owner of the Property, the Applicant, is applying for the rezoning of said Property. .For the analysis pursuant to Article 7, Section 7.1.2.8(c)(2)(g) of Miami 21, please refer to Exhibit C. Criteria. Section 7.1.2.8(f) of Miami 21 provides the criteria for amendments to Miami 21. The provision provides as follows "[f]or all amendments: (a) The relationship of the proposed amendment to the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, with appropriate consideration as to whether the proposed change will further the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; the Miami 21 Code; and other city regulations. (b) The need and justification for the proposed change, including changed or changing conditions that make the passage of the proposed change necessary." The proposed amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan ("MCNP"). For instance, Objective LU-1.3 states as follows: The City will continue to encourage commercial, office and industrial development within existing commercial, office and industrial areas; increase the utilization and enhance the BERcow RAI; F_LL & FERNAN DEZ ZC)rJI NCa. L^N L7 USE ANO E"V d R CJ F+1N E"T^L_ l_AW Ms. Olga Zamora Chief of Hearing Boards Section July 13, 2015 Page 3 of 4 physical character and appearance of existing buildings; encourage the development of well -designed, mixed -use neighborhoods that provide for a variety of uses within a walkable area in accordance with neighborhood design and development standards adopted as a result of the amendments to the City's land development regulations and other initiatives; and concentrate new commercial and industrial activity in areas where the capacity of existing public facilities can meet or exceed the minimum standards for Level of Service (LOS) adopted in the Capital Improvement Element (CIE). The Property is located within an area designated on the FLUM as General Commercial. The Applicant requests a rezoning from the T6-12-L transect zone to T6-12-0 in order to enhance the commercial character of the Property and better utilize the already commercially designated area. Thus, approval of this application would encourage commercial development within an existing commercial area. Further, Policy LU-1.3.15 of the MCNP states, "[t]he City will continue to encourage a development pattern that enhances existing neighborhoods by developing a balanced mix of uses including areas for employment, shopping, housing, and recreation in close proximity to each other." To the west, the Property is abutted by properties included in the Miami Design District Detail Street Special Area Plan ("SAP"), which has become a center for retail establishments in the surrounding area. As previously discussed, the Property is also abutted to the east by T5-R zoned residential properties. Thus, approval of this application, which would allow a two- story retail structure, would encourage a development pattern that would enhance the existing neighborhood continuing to develop the balanced mix of uses. The Applicant respectfully requests the rezoning in order to construct a two- story retail use structure. Unlike the T6-1.2-0 transect zone, T6-12-L limits the building area for commercial use on each lot to two (2) stories of the principal building, and office and commercial uses must be less than twenty five percent (25%) of the building floor area total. The properties to the west of the Property are part of the Miami Design District Retail Street SAP, which was approved by the City Commission on July 26, 2012 through Ordinance 13334. As discussed in said legislation, the area contained underutilized buildings and vacant lots. The Miami Design District SAP set out to facilitate the redevelopment in order to benefit the area by creating residential units, hotel rooms, commercial uses, as well as civic and open space for the enjoyment of the general public. As a result, the area has been economically revitalized and improved. BERCow RADELL & FGRNAN DEZ Zar4l"Cl, L.41-4L7 LJSL= R"r;) GNVOPIC?NMr_-WriL. t-^VV Ms. Olga Zamora Chief of Hearing Boards Section July 13, 2015 Page 4 of 4 As such, the changed and changing conditions make this request necessary in order to best utilize the Property as a retail establishment to further benefit the neighborhood. For rezoning, "[a] change may be made only to the next intensity Transect Zone or by a Special Area Plan, and in a manner which maintains the goals of this Miami 21 Cade to preserve Neighborhoods and to provide transitions in intensity and Building Height." See Section 7.1.2.8(f)(2), Miami 21. The Applicant requests a change from T6- 12-L to T6-12-0, which is a request in category of transect zone, not the succeeding intensity transect zone. As explained above, the T6-12-L zone limits the building area for commercial use on each lot to two (2) stories of the principal building, and office and commercial uses must be less than twenty five percent (25%) of the building floor area total, unlike the T6-12-0 transect zone. The Applicant requests the rezoning in order to construct a two-story retail structure. Approval of the Applicant's request would allow for enhanced utilization of the Property within the T6-12 transect zone, not for increased intensity. Therefore, the Applicant's request maintains the goals of Miami 21 to preserve neighborhoods and continue providing for transitions in intensity and building height. Conclusion. We look forward to your prompt review and favorable recommendation. Should you have any questions or concerns regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to phone my direct line at (305) 377-6227. Very truly yours, eelXissa Tapanes Llahues Enclosures cc: Antony Contomichalos Viena Margulies Gianeli Mestre, Esq. BERCow RADELL & FERNANDEZ �. C7NIP4G, LANLu LJSE ^tqn ENVIRC?NTNICNTAL LAW Exhibit "B" City of Miami Planning, Zoning and Appeals Board Meeting September 2, 2015 Item No.: PZAB 7 (Elvis Cruz) - Elvis Cruz, 631 NE 57 Street. Quick question. I heard the attorney for the applicant say it's going to be two stories but the last speaker said it was four stories? What's the... (Melissa Tapanes Llahues) - What I mentioned was two stories commercial with structured parking. We anticipate that it would be the height of a four story building with the structure parking. (Elvis Cruz) - Okay so it's a four story building. Well four story is a heck of a lot better than twenty-four stories which is what conceivably be built here for reasons I will never be able to logically understand. That neighborhood was originally a single family neighborhood named by Magnolia Park you may remember if you are familiar with the area. I know Mr. Young is but there is actually a single family homes that was demolished as part of this area and that T612 under Miami 21 could conceivably be over 340 feet tall less than a block from a single family neighborhood of Bay Point so I think this is a wonderful thing. To have only a four story building is a lot more logical, a lot more in scale as it should have been there all along. Again, for strange reasons SD 8 was created which was hugely intense and completely inappropriate for the Design District and so apparently T6 12 is a remnant of that. I'm curious as to why the Planning Department even had Miami 21 zone this property as T612 L and not an O from the beginning. Does the Planning Staff know that? (Melissa Tapanes Llahues) - I think the concept is if you are going to go twenty stories which is allowed through T612 so a public benefits bonuses you go up to twenty stories. The concept was you didn't want a twenty story office tower or a twenty story vertical commercial hub something of that magnitude. That was my thought and what we tried to incorporate into the draft covenant so that the worst case scenario would be under the T612 L vs the T612 O. (Elvis Cruz) - So, in closing yeah I think this is a good idea much better four stories than 12, 20 or 24. Thank you akerman January 15, 2021 Via Electronic Mail Felix M. Lasarte, Esq. The Lasarte Law Firm 3250 NE 1" Avenue, Suite 334 Miami, FL 33137 Neisen O. Kasdin Akerman LLP Three Brickell City Centre 98 Southeast Seventh Street Suite 1100 Miami, FL 33131 Re: Amendments to Miami Design District Retail Street Special Area Plan Dear Mr. Lasarte: As you know, Akerman LLP represents Miami Design District Associates (Del.) LLC and its affiliated entities (collectively, "Applicant") in the above -referenced modifications to the Design District Retail Street Special Area Plan ("DD SAP") and modifications to the Regulating Plan, Concept Book and Development Agreement between Applicant and the City ("Development Agreement") (collectively the "Application"). We appeared before the Planning, Zoning and Appeals Board ("PZAB") on November 18, 2020 ("PZAB Meeting") to present the above mentioned Application. Since the November PZAB meeting, we have been engaging in community outreach regarding the Application. We received a copy of your email dated January 13, 2021 addressed to Chairman Garavaglia. We welcome additional dialogue and would be happy to meet with you and your client. Please propose a few dates and times that work for your schedule and we can coordinate a meeting. Sinee e Neisen 0. Kasdin cc: Mr. Charles Garavaglia, Planning, Zoning & Appeals Board Art Noriega, City Manager Todd Hannon, City Clerk Cesar Garcia -Pons, Planning Department David Snow, Planning Department Kevin Martin, Planning Department Olga Zamora, Hearing Boards Erica Lee, Hearing Boards Craig Robins, Miami Design District Associates, LLC Alex Schapiro, Development Manager, Miami Design District Associates, LLC 56089144;1 Kimley>»Horn February 1, 2021 Mr. Alex Schapiro Miami Design District Associates 3841 NE 2nd Avenue, Suite 300 Miami, Florida 33137 Re: Miami Design District Trip Generation Analysis Dear Mr. Schapiro: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. has performed a trip generation analysis for the proposed amendment to the previously approved Miami Design District Special Area Plan (SAP) generally bounded by NE 43rd Street to the north, NE 38t" Street to the south, North Miami Avenue to the west, and Biscayne Boulevard to the east in Miami, Florida. Please note that the Miami Design District SAP was previously amended and approved as part of the Miami Design District Special Area Plan Amendment Traffic Impact Analysis, May 2013. The previously approved SAP amendment consisted of a development program contemplating approximately 1,089,833 square feet of retail space, 181,146 square feet of office space, 52 hotel rooms, 561 multifamily residential units, and 32,267 square feet of restaurant space. The proposed SAP amendment contemplates a potential development program of approximately 806,152 square feet of retail space, 703,644 square feet of office space, 110 hotel rooms, 764 multifamily residential units, and 108,820 square feet of restaurant space. TRIP GENERATION ANALYSIS A trip generation analysis was conducted for the previously approved SAP amendment and the proposed SAP amendment using the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10t" Edition. Consistent with the previously approved SAP amendment, trip generation calculations were prepared for the P.M. peak hour. Trip generation for the previously approved and proposed SAP amendment was determined using ITE Land Use Code (LUC) 820 (Shopping Center), LUC 710 (General Office Building), LUC 310 (Hotel), LUC 220 (Multifamily Housing [Low -Rise]), and LUC 932 (High Turnover [Sit -Down] Restaurant). A multimodal (public transit, bicycle, and pedestrian) factor based on US Census Means of Transportation to Work data was reviewed for the census tracts in which the SAP is located. An average multimodal factor of 9.3 percent (9.3%) was applied to the trip generation calculations to account for the urban environment in which the project site is located. It is expected that employees, residents, patrons, and guests will choose to walk, bike, or use public transit to and from the site. Detailed trip generation calculations and US Census Means of Transportation to Work data are included in Attachment A. A portion of the trips generated by the SAP will be captured internally on the site. Internal capture trips were determined based on the methodology contained in ITE's Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition. Pass -by capture trip rates were determined based on average rates provided in the ITE's Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition. Kimley>>> Horn Mr. Alex Schapiro, February 1. 2021. Page 2 As shown in Table 1, the proposed SAP amendment represents an increase of 18 net new P.M. peak hour trips as compared to the previously approved SAP amendment. Detailed trip generation calculations are included in Attachment A. Table 1: Net New P.M. Peak Hour Trip Generation Summary Development Plan In Out Total Previously Approved 969 1,069 2,038 SAP Amendment Currently Proposed 884 1,172 2,056 SAP Amendment Net Change -85 103 18 PROPOSED ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS It should be noted that numerous improvements are planned and fully funded in the area of the SAP boundary that are expected to improve access and overall traffic operations in the area. These improvements include (1) modifications to simplify traffic operations/signal phasing at the intersection of NE 36th Street and NE 2nd Avenue/Federal Highway and (2) the construction of new railroad crossing at NE 42nd Street at Federal Highway that will provide additional access to the SAP area and surrounding neighborhood. CONCLUSION In conclusion, as the proposed SAP amendment results in an increase of 18 net new P.M. peak hour trips as compared to the previously approved SAP amendment, further study is not warranted for the proposed SAP amendment's trip impact. If you have any questions regarding this analysis, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, KIMLEY-HORN AND ASSOCIATES, INC. I li� John J. McWilliams, P.E. Attachments SEP H.. M clv �•.•�,CENSF .� fC,• 7 O: No 62541 ul STATE OF lv�� i0'c RC O R 1 O P•.••N FS` '' ........... ' /,�ONAL` EN���� John J. McWilliams, P.E. Florida Registration Number 62541 Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 8201 Peters Road, Suite 2200 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33324 Registry 00000696 This document has been digitally signed and sealed by John J. McWilliams, P.E., on the date adjacent to the seal. John J Dig ita%signedbyJohn J McWilliams McWilliams Date: 2021.02.0114:5148 -05,00, Printed copies of this document are not considered signed and sealed and the signature must be verified on any electronic copies. \\ftlfp01\FL_FTL1\FTL_TPTO\043505008 - MDD SAP 2021\correspondence\02 01 2021 Miami Design District Trip Generation Statement.docx Attachment A Trip Generation Calculations and U.S. Census Data ►viI:jNe1:4:1011jMIV11r]AL1IAM11101L1We] ►viI:E1Nl;'%7LI PREVIOUSLY APPROVED WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRIP GENERATION ITE TRIP GENERATION CHARACTERISTICS DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION BASELINE TRIPS MULTI M ODAL REDUCTION GROSS TRIPS INTERNAL CAPTURE EXTERNAL VEHICLE TRIPS PASS -BY CAPTURE NET NEW EXTERNAL TRIPS Land Use ITE Edition ITE Cotle Scale ITE Units Percent In Out In Out Total Percent MR Trips In Out Total Percent IC Trips In Out Total Percent PB Trips In Out Total 1 Shopping Center 10 820 1089.833 ksf 48% 52% 1,527 1,655 3,182 9.3% 296 1,385 1,501 2,886 8.6% 248 1,270 1,368 2,638 34.0% 897 838 903 1,741 2 General Office Building 10 710 181.146 ksf 16% 84% 32 168 200 9.3% 19 29 152 181 29.3% 53 13 115 128 0.0% 0 13 115 128 3 Hotel 10 310 52 room 51 % 49 % 7 6 13 9.3% 1 6 6 12 91.7 % 11 0 1 1 0.0% 0 0 1 1 4 Multifamily Housing (Low -Rise) 10 220 561 du 63% 37% 173 101 274 9.3% 26 156 92 248 63.7% 158 61 29 90 0.0% 0 61 29 90 G 5 High -Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaurant 10 932 32.267 ksf 62% 38% 195 120 315 9.3% 29 177 109 286 52.4% 150 99 37 136 43.0% 58 57 21 78 R 6 O 7 U 8 P 9 10 1 11 12 13 A172162!01,443 14 15 ITE Land Use Code Rate or Equation Total: 1,934 2,050 3,984 9.3% 371 1,753 1,860 3,613 1,550 2,993 31.9 % 955 969 1,069 2,038 710 LN(Y) = 0.95*LN(X)+0.36 310 Y=0.75*(X)+-26.02 220 LN(Y) = 0.89*LN(X)+-0.02 932 Y=9.77(X) PROPOSED WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR TRIP GENERATION ITE TRIP GENERATION CHARACTERISTICS DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION BASELINE TRIPS MULTI M ODAL REDUCTION GROSS TRIPS INTERNAL CAPTURE EXTERNAL VEHICLE TRIPS PASS -BY CAPTURE NET NEW EXTERNAL TRIPS Land Use ITE Edition ITE Cotle Scale ITE Units Percent In Out In Out Total Percent MR Trips In Out Total Percent IC Trips In Out Total Percent PB Trips In Out Total 1 Shopping Center 10 820 806.152 ksf 48% 52% 1,222 1,324 2,546 9.3% 237 1,108 1,201 2,309 25.6% 590 814 905 1,719 34.0% 584 537 598 1,135 2 General Office Building 10 710 703.644 KSF 16% 84% 116 611 727 9.3% 68 105 554 659 22.6% 149 65 445 510 0.0% 0 65 445 510 3 Hotel 10 310 110 ROOM 51 % 49 % 29 27 56 9.3% 5 26 25 51 90.2 % 46 1 4 5 0.0% 0 1 4 5 4 Multifamily Housing (Low -Rise) 10 220 764 DU 63% 37% 227 134 361 9.3% 33 206 122 328 67.4% 221 70 37 107 0.0% 0 70 37 107 G 5 High -Turnover (Sit -Down) Restaurant 10 932 108.82 ksf 62% 38% 659 404 1,063 9.3% 99 598 366 964 45.6% 440 370 154 524 43.0% 225 211 88 299 R 6 O 7 U 8 P 9 10 2 11 12 13 14 15 ITE Land Use Code Rate or Equation Total: 2,253 2,500 4,753 9.3% 442 2,043 2,268 4,311 33.5 % 1,446 1,320 1,545 2,865 28.2 % 809 884 1,172 2,056 820 LN(Y) = 0./4"LN(7,)+2.89 710 LN(Y) = 0.95*LN(X)+0.36 310 Y=0.75*(X)+-26.02 220 LN(Y) = 0.89*LN(X)+-0.02 932 Y=9.77(X) K:\FTL TPTO\043505008- MDD SAP 2021\Calcs\TRIP GEN 10 Scenario 1.xlsx: PRINT -PM PEAK HOUR 1212021,7:09 AM IN I OUT TOTAL NETNEWTRIPS 1 -85 103 1 18 Internal Capture Reduction Calculations Methodology for A.M. Peak Hour and P.M. Peak Hour based on the Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers Methodology for Daily based on the average of the Unconstrained Rates for the A.M. Peak Hour and P.M. Peak Hour SUMMARY (EXISTING) GROSS TRIP GENERATION Land Use P.M. Peak Hour Enter Exit Office 29 152 Retail 1,385 1,501 d Z Restaurant 177 109 Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 Residential 156 92 Hotel 6 6 1,753 1,860 INTERNAL TRIPS Land Use P.M. Peak Hour Enter Exit Office 16 37 d Retail 115 133 Restaurant 78 72 O Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 Residential 95 63 Hotel 6 5 310 310 Total % Reduction 17.2% Office 29.3% dRetail 8.6% Restaurant 52.4% Cinema/Entertainment 0 Residential 63.7% Hotel 91.7% EXTERNAL TRIPS Land Use P.M. Peak Hour Enter Exit Office 13 115 d Retail 1,270 1,368 Restaurant 99 37 O Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 Residential 61 29 Hotel 0 1 1,443 1,550 Internal Capture Reduction Calculations Methodology for A.M. Peak Hour and P.M. Peak Hour based on the Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers Methodology for Daily based on the average of the Unconstrained Rates for the A.M. Peak Hour and P.M. Peak Hour SUMMARY (PROPOSED) GROSS TRIP GENERATION Land Use P.M. Peak Hour Enter Exit Office 105 554 Retail 1,108 1,201 d z Restaurant 598 366 Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 Residential 206 122 Hotel 26 25 2,043 2,268 INTERNAL TRIPS Land Use P.M. Peak Hour Enter Exit D Office 40 109 d Retail 294 296 Restaurant 228 212 O Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 Residential 136 85 Hotel 25 1 21 723 723 Total % Reduction 33.5% Office 22.6% dRetail 25.6% Restaurant 45.6% D Cinema/Entertainment 0 Residential 67.4% Hotel 90.2% EXTERNAL TRI PS Land Use P.M. Peak Hour Enter Exit D Office 65 445 d Retail 814 905 Restaurant 370 154 O Cinema/Entertainment 0 0 Residential 70 37 Hotel 1 4 1,320 1,545 1 /5/2021 https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=B08301&g=140000OUS12086002100&tid=ACSDT5Y2019.B08301 &hidePreview=false United States" MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION TO WORK Census Bureau Note: This is a modified view of the original table produced by the U.S. Census Bureau. This download or printed version may have missing information from the original table. (27+0+11)/1,229 — 3.1 % Census Tract 21, Miami -Dade County, Florida Label Estimate Margin o v Total: 1,229 v Car, truck, or van: 1,010 Drove alone 939 v Carpooled: 71 In 2-person carpool 71 In 3-person carpool 0 In 4-person carpool 0 In 5- or 6-person carpool In 7-or-more-person carpool v Public transportation (excluding taxicab): 0 0 27 Bus 14 Subway or elevated rail 13 Long-distance train or commuter rail Light rail, streetcar or trolley (carro p6blico in Puerto Rico) Ferryboat Taxicab 0 0 0 I 25 Motorcycle 0 Bicycle F:11: Walked Other means 59 Worked from home 97 https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=BO8301&g=1400000US12086002100&tid=ACSDT5Y2019.BO8301 &hidePreview=false 1 /3 1 /5/2021 https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=B08301&g=140000OUS12086002100&tid=ACSDT5Y2019.B08301 &hidePreview=false Table Notes MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION TO WORK Survey/Program: American Community Survey Universe: Workers 16 years and over Year: 2019 Estimates: 5-Year Table ID: B08301 Although the American Community Survey (ACS) produces population, demographic and housing unit estimates, it is the Census Bureau's Population Estimates Program that produces and disseminates the official estimates of the population for the nation, states, counties, cities, and towns and estimates of housing units for states and counties. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates 2019 ACS data products include updates to several categories of the existing means of transportation question. For more information, see: Change to Means of Transportation. Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. The degree of uncertainty for an estimate arising from sampling variability is represented through the use of a margin of error. The value shown here is the 90 percent margin of error. The margin of error can be interpreted roughly as providing a 90 percent probability that the interval defined by the estimate minus the margin of error and the estimate plus the margin of error (the lower and upper confidence bounds) contains the true value. In addition to sampling variability, the ACS estimates are subject to nonsampling error (for a discussion of nonsampling variability, see ACS Technical Documentation). The effect of nonsampling error is not represented in these tables. Workers include members of the Armed Forces and civilians who were at work last week. The 2015-2019 American Community Survey (ACS) data generally reflect the September 2018 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) delineations of metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas. In certain instances, the names, codes, and boundaries of the principal cities shown in ACS tables may differ from the OMB delineation lists due to differences in the effective dates of the geographic entities. Estimates of urban and rural populations, housing units, and characteristics reflect boundaries of urban areas defined based on Census 2010 data. As a result, data for urban and rural areas from the ACS do not necessarily reflect the results of ongoing urbanization. Explanation of Symbols: An "**" entry in the margin of error column indicates that either no sample observations or too few sample observations were available to compute a standard error and thus the margin of error. A statistical test is not appropriate. An "-" entry in the estimate column indicates that either no sample observations or too few sample observations were available to compute an estimate, or a ratio of medians cannot be calculated because one or both of the median estimates falls in the lowest interval or upper interval of an open-ended distribution, or the margin of error associated with a median was larger than the median itself. An "-" following a median estimate means the median falls in the lowest interval of an open-ended distribution. An "+" following a median estimate means the median falls in the upper interval of an open-ended distribution. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=BO8301&g=1400000US12086002100&tid=ACSDT5Y2019.B08301 &hidePreview=false 2/3 1 /5/2021 https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=B08301&g=140000OUS12086002100&tid=ACSDT5Y2019.B08301 &hidePreview=false An "***" entry in the margin of error column indicates that the median falls in the lowest interval or upper interval of an open-ended distribution. A statistical test is not appropriate. An "*****" entry in the margin of error column indicates that the estimate is controlled. A statistical test for sampling variability is not appropriate. An "N" entry in the estimate and margin of error columns indicates that data for this geographic area cannot be displayed because the number of sample cases is too small. An "(X)" means that the estimate is not applicable or not available. Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Technical Documentation section. Sample size and data quality measures (including coverage rates, allocation rates, and response rates) can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Methodology section. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=BO8301&g=1400000US12086002100&tid=ACSDT5Y2019.B08301 &hidePreview=false 3/3 1 /5/2021 https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=B08301 &g=140000OUS12086002201 &tid=ACSDT5Y2019.B08301 &hidePreview=false United States" MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION TO WORK Census Bureau Note: This is a modified view of the original table produced by the U.S. Census Bureau. This download or printed version may have missing information from the original table. 1 (39+0+233)/2,124 Census Tract 22.01, Miami -Dade County, Florida Label Estimate Margin v Total: 2,124 v Car, truck, or van: Drove alone 1,560 1,429 v Carpooled: 131 131 In 2-person carpool In 3-person carpool 0 In 4-person carpool 0 In 5- or 6-person carpool 0 In 7-or-more-person carpool 0 v Public transportation (excluding taxicab): 39 Bus 39 Subway or elevated rail 0 Long-distance train or commuter rail 0 Light rail, streetcar or trolley (carro p6blico in Puerto Rico) 0 Ferryboat 0 Taxicab 12 Motorcycle 93 Bicycle E233 Walked Other means 58 Worked from home 129 https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=BO8301 &g=1400000US12086002201 &tid=ACSDT5Y2019.BO8301 &hidePreview=false 1 /3 1 /5/2021 https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=B08301 &g=140000OUS12086002201 &tid=ACSDT5Y2019.B08301 &hidePreview=false Table Notes MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION TO WORK Survey/Program: American Community Survey Universe: Workers 16 years and over Year: 2019 Estimates: 5-Year Table ID: B08301 Although the American Community Survey (ACS) produces population, demographic and housing unit estimates, it is the Census Bureau's Population Estimates Program that produces and disseminates the official estimates of the population for the nation, states, counties, cities, and towns and estimates of housing units for states and counties. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates 2019 ACS data products include updates to several categories of the existing means of transportation question. For more information, see: Change to Means of Transportation. Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. The degree of uncertainty for an estimate arising from sampling variability is represented through the use of a margin of error. The value shown here is the 90 percent margin of error. The margin of error can be interpreted roughly as providing a 90 percent probability that the interval defined by the estimate minus the margin of error and the estimate plus the margin of error (the lower and upper confidence bounds) contains the true value. In addition to sampling variability, the ACS estimates are subject to nonsampling error (for a discussion of nonsampling variability, see ACS Technical Documentation). The effect of nonsampling error is not represented in these tables. Workers include members of the Armed Forces and civilians who were at work last week. The 2015-2019 American Community Survey (ACS) data generally reflect the September 2018 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) delineations of metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas. In certain instances, the names, codes, and boundaries of the principal cities shown in ACS tables may differ from the OMB delineation lists due to differences in the effective dates of the geographic entities. Estimates of urban and rural populations, housing units, and characteristics reflect boundaries of urban areas defined based on Census 2010 data. As a result, data for urban and rural areas from the ACS do not necessarily reflect the results of ongoing urbanization. Explanation of Symbols: An "**" entry in the margin of error column indicates that either no sample observations or too few sample observations were available to compute a standard error and thus the margin of error. A statistical test is not appropriate. An "-" entry in the estimate column indicates that either no sample observations or too few sample observations were available to compute an estimate, or a ratio of medians cannot be calculated because one or both of the median estimates falls in the lowest interval or upper interval of an open-ended distribution, or the margin of error associated with a median was larger than the median itself. An "-" following a median estimate means the median falls in the lowest interval of an open-ended distribution. An "+" following a median estimate means the median falls in the upper interval of an open-ended distribution. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=BO8301 &g=1400000US12086002201 &tid=ACSDT5Y2019.B08301 &hidePreview=false 2/3 1 /5/2021 https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=B08301 &g=140000OUS12086002201 &tid=ACSDT5Y2019.B08301 &hidePreview=false An "***" entry in the margin of error column indicates that the median falls in the lowest interval or upper interval of an open-ended distribution. A statistical test is not appropriate. An "*****" entry in the margin of error column indicates that the estimate is controlled. A statistical test for sampling variability is not appropriate. An "N" entry in the estimate and margin of error columns indicates that data for this geographic area cannot be displayed because the number of sample cases is too small. An "(X)" means that the estimate is not applicable or not available. Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Technical Documentation section. Sample size and data quality measures (including coverage rates, allocation rates, and response rates) can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Methodology section. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=BO8301 &g=1400000US12086002201 &tid=ACSDT5Y2019.B08301 &hidePreview=false 3/3 1 /5/2021 https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=B08301&g=140000OUS12086002202&tid=ACSDT5Y2019.B08301 &hidePreview=false United States" MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION TO WORK Census Bureau Note: This is a modified view of the original table produced by the U.S. Census Bureau. This download or printed version may have missing information from the original table. (166+115+32)/2,630 Census Tract 22.02, Miami -Dade County, Florida Label v Total: v Car, truck, or van: Drove alone v Carpooled: In 2-person carpool In 3-person carpool In 4-person carpool In 5- or 6-person carpool In 7-or-more-person carpool v Public transportation (excluding taxicab): Bus Subway or elevated rail Long-distance train or commuter rail Light rail, streetcar or trolley (carro p6blico in Puerto Rico) Ferryboat Taxicab Motorcycle Bicycle Walked Other means Worked from home Estimate 2,630 2,199 1,975 224 203 21 0 0 0 166 166 0 0 0 0 0 115 32 82 36 Margin https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=BO8301&g=1400000US12086002202&tid=ACSDT5Y2019.BO8301 &hidePreview=false 1 /3 1 /5/2021 https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=B08301&g=140000OUS12086002202&tid=ACSDT5Y2019.B08301 &hidePreview=false Table Notes MEANS OF TRANSPORTATION TO WORK Survey/Program: American Community Survey Universe: Workers 16 years and over Year: 2019 Estimates: 5-Year Table ID: B08301 Although the American Community Survey (ACS) produces population, demographic and housing unit estimates, it is the Census Bureau's Population Estimates Program that produces and disseminates the official estimates of the population for the nation, states, counties, cities, and towns and estimates of housing units for states and counties. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2015-2019 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates 2019 ACS data products include updates to several categories of the existing means of transportation question. For more information, see: Change to Means of Transportation. Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. The degree of uncertainty for an estimate arising from sampling variability is represented through the use of a margin of error. The value shown here is the 90 percent margin of error. The margin of error can be interpreted roughly as providing a 90 percent probability that the interval defined by the estimate minus the margin of error and the estimate plus the margin of error (the lower and upper confidence bounds) contains the true value. In addition to sampling variability, the ACS estimates are subject to nonsampling error (for a discussion of nonsampling variability, see ACS Technical Documentation). The effect of nonsampling error is not represented in these tables. Workers include members of the Armed Forces and civilians who were at work last week. The 2015-2019 American Community Survey (ACS) data generally reflect the September 2018 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) delineations of metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas. In certain instances, the names, codes, and boundaries of the principal cities shown in ACS tables may differ from the OMB delineation lists due to differences in the effective dates of the geographic entities. Estimates of urban and rural populations, housing units, and characteristics reflect boundaries of urban areas defined based on Census 2010 data. As a result, data for urban and rural areas from the ACS do not necessarily reflect the results of ongoing urbanization. Explanation of Symbols: An "**" entry in the margin of error column indicates that either no sample observations or too few sample observations were available to compute a standard error and thus the margin of error. A statistical test is not appropriate. An "-" entry in the estimate column indicates that either no sample observations or too few sample observations were available to compute an estimate, or a ratio of medians cannot be calculated because one or both of the median estimates falls in the lowest interval or upper interval of an open-ended distribution, or the margin of error associated with a median was larger than the median itself. An "-" following a median estimate means the median falls in the lowest interval of an open-ended distribution. An "+" following a median estimate means the median falls in the upper interval of an open-ended distribution. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=BO8301&g=1400000US12086002202&tid=ACSDT5Y2019.B08301 &hidePreview=false 2/3 1 /5/2021 https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=B08301&g=140000OUS12086002202&tid=ACSDT5Y2019.B08301 &hidePreview=false An "***" entry in the margin of error column indicates that the median falls in the lowest interval or upper interval of an open-ended distribution. A statistical test is not appropriate. An "*****" entry in the margin of error column indicates that the estimate is controlled. A statistical test for sampling variability is not appropriate. An "N" entry in the estimate and margin of error columns indicates that data for this geographic area cannot be displayed because the number of sample cases is too small. An "(X)" means that the estimate is not applicable or not available. Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Technical Documentation section. Sample size and data quality measures (including coverage rates, allocation rates, and response rates) can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Methodology section. https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=BO8301&g=1400000US12086002202&tid=ACSDT5Y2019.B08301 &hidePreview=false 3/3