Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutORC ReportObjections, Recommendations, and Comments Report for City of Miami Amendment 03-2 November 25, 2003 OBJECTIONS TO AMENDMENT 03-2 1 Land Use Allocations for Analysis of Impacts from Proposed Future Land Use Map Change The amendment describes a preferred allocation of land uses within the proposed Buena Vista Yard Regional Activity Center (RAC), which is the basis of the impact analysis for the proposed Future Land Use Map (FLUM) change from Industrial and General Commercial to Restricted Commercial. However, this preferred RAC development program is only one of a very large number of possible development scenarios that could occur on the property under the proposed FLUM designation. For example, under the proposed FLUM designation of Restricted Commercial, the site could be developed wholly for commercial retail (the Miami comprehensive plan does not appear to set an intensity standard for retail development in Restricted Commercial) or wholly for high density residential uses (maximum density of 150 dwelling units per acre). Either of these scenarios could generate more peak hour vehicle trips and other impacts than calculated in the data and analysis supplied with the amendment package. Without accounting for more intense or dense development scenarios than the particular one proposed by the City, the City will not be prepared to adequately address the several impacts and facility and service requirements of such development scenarios. As a result of these assumptions, the supporting analysis is not based on the maximum potential development allowed by the land use designations. Citations Florida Statutes: § 163.3177(6)(a) and 163.3177(8) Florida Administrative Code: Rules 9J-5005(2), 9J-5.005(6), 9J-5.006(3)(c)7, and 9J-5.006(4)(c) Recommendations 1. The City should include in the comprehensive plan the desired development program and allocations for the Buena Vista Yard RAC site. This program should be included in the section of the comprehensive plan designating the Buena Vista Yard RAC; or 2. The City should modify the underlying FLUM category definitions to establish intensity standards for commercial uses and percentage mix of uses. Pager of 37 RESPONSE: Proposed Policy LU-3.1.2 has been revised pursuant to the Department's recommendations as follows: Policy LU-3.1.2: * * * Buena Vista Yards Regional Activity Center Permitted uses shall be as for the underlying land use classification..-; however, the following minimum and maximum development thresholds shall apply: Residential: 2,000 units minimuml4,500 units maximum Commercial: 500,000 square feet minimum/1,200,000 square feet maximum Office: Compatibility: The City shall develop and implement design standards to address compatibility of development within the Buena Vista Yards Regional Activity Center with the surrounding area, which design standards should further the following concepts: • New streets and avenues should connect to the existing street grid. • Sidewalks., as principal pedestrian thruways, should be designed to create a comfortable outdoor public space to accommodate a range of active and passive pedestrian activities. • Buildings should have ground floor uses that activate the street and relate new development to surrounding areas. • The context and scale of new development should be reflected in new building design, including the setting back of upper floors in order to accommodate height while maintaining human scale at the pedestrian level. 80,000 square feet minimuml100,000 square feet maximum 2 Phasing of Regional Activity Center Development The supplemental transportation impact analysis assumes complete build -out of the RAC site will not occur until 2025 without supporting this build -out date with data and analysis. The impact analysis and associated mitigation measures must be based on a build -out date supported by adequate data and analysis. Page 2 of 37 Citations Florida Statutes: § 163.3177(6)(j) and 163.3177(8) Florida Administrative Code: Rules 9J-5005(2) and 9J-5.019(2) and (3) Recommendation Provide supporting documentation for the assumption that the RAC will not reach build -out until 2025. Alternatively, alter the build -out date to one which can be supported by data and analysis. RESPONSE: The proposed build -out for the Buena Vista Yards Regional Activity Center is ten years (2013). The data and analysis supporting this build -out date is provided as Exhibit 1.1 to this response. 3 Transportation Element and Transportation Concurrency Exception Area The City has not adopted its EAR -based Transportation Element, which was reviewed in an Amendment 02-1ER ORC report issued by the Department last year (note: the City's EAR was prepared in 1995). The current Transportation Element in the comprehensive plan does not comply with the administrative rule requirements (Rule 9J-5.019, F.A.C.) that are now required for the transportation element, including peak hour LOS standards. The subject amendment is therefore premature. Conclusions from the impact analysis submitted with the amendment appear to be based on the draft transportation element, which has not been adopted or found in compliance by the Department. The amendment is also internally inconsistent with the currently adopted comprehensive plan. However, because the current comprehensive plan has not been amended to meet new statutory and rule requirements, it would not be appropriate to base the RAC amendment on the outdated provisions of the current transportation element. Rather, the RAC and new transportation element must comply with revised statutory and administrative rule requirements. The proposed 02-1ER Transportation Element describes the City's proposed Transportation Concurrency Exception Area, which would include the area of the proposed Buena Vista Yard RAC. Because the Transportation Element and the TCEA are not yet effective, they do not apply to the proposed 03-2 amendment. Citations Florida Statutes: s. 163.3177(6)(j) and 163.3180(5) Florida Administrative Code: Rules 9J-5.0055(6) and 9J-5.019 Recommendation Adopt the proposed Transportation Element with the revisions recommended in the Department's ORC report and submit to the Department for compliance review before adopting the proposed 03-2 Amendment. Page 3of37 RESPONSE: The proposed Transportation Element, including revisions recommended in the Department's ORC report, will be adopted concurrently with the proposed 03-2 Amendment on November 25, 2003. The Transportation Element will comply with all revised statutory and administrative rule requirements. The 03-2 Amendment is based upon the provisions of the updated Transportation Element. 4 Transportation Data and Analysis The supplemental transportation impact analysis does not use peak hour in its analysis of the road impact of the proposed amendment. It uses average annual daily trips (AADT). Peak hour LOS standards are required for roads and public transit facilities in comprehensive plans pursuant to Rule 9J-5.019(4)(01, F.A.C., and must be addressed in the new transportation element. Assumed growth rates for each of the roadway segments were not provided for verification of volumes. The methodology provided in the Background Traffic (page 29 of the supplemental transportation impact analysis) states that 2008 and 2025 average annual daily traffic count volumes were grown using annual compound growth rates calculated from the observed increase in traffic volumes reported for the 1999 validation and 2005 interim Miami Urban Area Transportation Study (MUATS) models. Roadway segments with a calculated negative growth rate were applied with a nominal 0.5 percent growth rate. Verification checks of the 2008 and 2025 volumes within Tables 9 through 12 of the supplemental transportation impact analysis do not result in consistent growth rates across the study years for each of the segments. Citations Florida Statutes: § 163.3177(6)(j) and 163.3177(8) Florida Administrative Code: Rules 9J-5005(2) and 9J-5.019(4)(c)1 Recommendation 1. Provide analysis of the proposed FLUM change on peak hour level of service information. 2. Provide assumed growth rates for each of the roadway segments, as noted above. RESPONSE: 1. The Buena Vista Yards Regional Activity Center Transportation Impact Analysis was completed using daily volumes based the meeting with the FDOT. However, at the request of the Department of Community Affairs, the City is also providing the peak hour level of service information for the Regional Activity Center study area. As the land use change is limited to the development intensities of the RAC, the level of service information is based upon the RAC's maximum development, and provided as Exhibit 1.1. 2. In response to Recommendation #2, the assumed growth rates for each of the roadway segments are shown in Exhibit 1.2 of this response. Page 4 of 37 5 Mitigation of Transportation Impacts The supplemental transportation impact analysis suggests, on page 65, that mitigation for the identified road impacts from development of the RAC could be to- 1. Increase bus service along existing transit corridors in the study area 2. Consider new transit service for N. Miami Avenue, where no service exists today 3. Other means to aimed at increasing vehicle occupancy rate for motorists However, the City has not committed to specific mitigation measures that satisfy concurrency requirements, pursuant to Rule 9J-5.0055, F.A.C. Citations Florida Statutes: § 163.3180 Florida Administrative Code: Rule 9J-5.0055 Recommendation Provide specific mitigation measures that satisfy transportation concurrency requirements, pursuant to Rule 9J-5.0055, F.A.C. RESPONSE: The City is proposing specific mitigation measures that satisfy the transportation concurrency requirements as part of this ORC Response; the proposed measures are provided as Exhibit 2 to this response. As further evidence of the City's commitment to implementing projects that reduce the impacts of the City's transportation concurrency exception area, Developments of Regional Impact, and proposed Buena Vista Yards Regional Activity Center, also included under a separate cover is a copy of the Miami Downtown Transportation Master Plan (MDTMP) Executive Summary. The MDTMP provides a three-phase strategy for implementing transportation improvements in and around downtown, generally including improving transit service, developing an network of pedestrian -oriented corridors, extending Metromover lines, and implementing Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS). The plan anticipates the City's sales surtax proceeds from the %2 cent transit sales tax, approved through the People's Transportation Plan, as dedicated funding to enable implementation of many of the MDTMP's recommendations by 2020. In addition, pursuant to City of Miami Resolution No. 02-641, the City will prepare "a comprehensive transportation master plan for the FEC Corridor [including the Regional Activity Center], including an analysis of needed transportation improvements for all modes including highways and streets, mass transit, taxi and jitney, and pedestrian, and presenting recommendations together with priorities, preliminary cost estimates, sources of funding, and proposed scheduling." This project is anticipated to commence in early 2004. Finally, near -term improvements are being implemented pursuant to the People's Transportation Plan. In particular, improved bus service in the vicinity of the Regional Activity Center already is being implemented, with the establishment of a new circulator along NE 2 Avenue in 2002 (with improved headways slated for 2004) and with the Page 5 of 37 expansion to 24-hour service of service along NW 2 Avenue in 2003 (with improved headways slated for 2004). 6 Regional Activity Center Criteria in Comprehensive Plan The proposed RAC criteria to be added to the comprehensive plan, in new Policy 3.1.2, do not satisfy the Rule 28-24.014(10), F.A.C., requirements. It is important that the City's RAC requirements satisfy the administrative rule requirements, not only for the Buena Vista Yard RAC, but for future RACs that may be designated in the City of Miami. Rule 28-24.014(10), F.S., requires that the designated RAC shall be consistent with the local government comprehensive plan and future land use map intensities. The City's proposed RAC language in proposed Policy 3.1.2 does not specify that the designated RAC shall be consistent with future land use map intensities. Second, the administrative rule requires that the RAC shall contain adequate existing public facilities as defined in Chapter 9J-5, F.A.C., or committed public facilities, as identified in the capital improvements element of the local government comprehensive plan. The City's proposed RAC language in proposed Policy 3.1.2 does not appear to contain anything similar. Third, the administrative rule requires that the RAC shall routinely provide service to, or be regularly used by, a significant number of citizens of more than one county. The City's requirement in proposed Policy 3.1.2 is similar, in requiring that Regional Activity Centers shall include mixed land uses of regional significance, but should be revised to match more closely the rule requirement. Citations Florida Statutes: § 163.3177(6)(a) and 380.06(2)(e) Florida Administrative Code: Rules 9J-5.005(6), 9J-5.006(3)(c)7, 9J-5.006(4)(c), and 28- 24.014(10) Recommendations 1. Revise proposed Policy 3.1.2 to specify that a designated RAC shall be consistent with future land use map intensities. 2. Revise proposed Policy 3.1.2 to specify that a designated RAC shall contain adequate existing public facilities as defined in Chapter 9J-5, F.A.C., or committed public facilities, as identified in the capital improvements element of the local government comprehensive plan. 3. Revise proposed Policy 3.1.2 to specify that a designated RAC shall routinely provide service to, or be regularly used by, a significant number of citizens of more than one county. RESPONSE: Proposed Policy LU-3.1.2 has been revised pursuant to the Department's recommendations as follows: Policy LU-3.1.2: Create Regional Activity Centers if appropriate in Urban Infill Areas and Urban Redevelopment Areas to facilitate mixed -use development, encourage mass transit, reduce the need for automobile travel, provide incentives for quality development Page6of37 and give definition to the urban form. The permitted uses and density and intensity of uses within a RAC shall be governed by the underlying future land use map designations of the subject property. A designated RAC shall routinely provide service to, or be regularly used by, a significant number of citizens of more than one county; contain adequate existing public facilities as defined in Rule 9J-5, F.A.C., or committed public facilities, as identified in the capital improvements element of the City's comprehensive plan; and shall be proximate and accessible to interstate or major arterial roadways. 7 School Capacity The City has proposed a program of development for the Buena Vista Yard Regional Activity Center that includes 4,500 dwelling units. However, the proposed new FLUM category for the site, Restricted Commercial, could allow up to 8,400 dwelling unit (56 acres x 150 du/acre) on the site. The residential population of 8,400 dwelling units could include sufficient school -age children to have a large impact on vicinity public schools. Proposed Amendment 03-2 is generally inconsistent with the Strategic Regional Policy Plan for South Florida because of the significant additional demand that would be placed on schools by the proposed land use change. See Regional Goals 1.1 and 2.3 and Regional Policies 1.1.6 and 2.3.19 of the Strategic Regional Policy Plan for South Florida. The South Florida Regional Planning Council's report on Amendment 03-2 notes that because an analysis of the potential impacts to the school system is not part of the concurrency process, the amendment requires careful scrutiny at this stage. Additional coordination with the Miami -Dade County Public Schools is also necessary in order to respond to the South Florida Regional Planning Council's concerns. The Department notes that the City has not completed updates to the Intergovernmental Coordination Element that were due several years ago. These should be completed to incorporate required coordination policies related to school planning before proceeding with the adoption of the RAC amendment. Citations Florida Statutes: 163.3177(6)(h) Strategic Regional Policy Plan for South Florida: Regional Goals 1.1 and 2.3 and Regional Policies 1.1.6 and 2.3.19 Recommendations 1. The City should include in the comprehensive plan the desired development program and allocations for the Buena Vista Yard RAC site, limiting the residential component to 4,500 dwelling units. This program should be included in the section of the comprehensive plan designating the Buena Vista Yard RAC; or the City should modify the underlying FLUM category definitions to establish intensity standards for commercial uses and percentage mix of uses in order to accomplish the same limit on the residential component of the RAC. 2. The City should complete the updates to the Intergovernmental Coordination Element that were due several years ago, before proceeding with the adoption of the RAC amendment. These updates should incorporate required coordination policies related to school planning. Page 7 of 37 3. The City should work closely with Miami -Dade County Public Schools to reconcile the outstanding issue of potential impacts of the proposed amendment on the school system. RESPONSE: Proposed Policy LU-3.1.2 has been revised pursuant to the Department's Recommendation #1 as follows: Policy LU-3.1.2: * * * Buena Vista Yards Regional Activity Center * * * Permitted uses shall be as for the underlying land use classification-; however, the following minimum and maximum development thresholds shall apply: Residential: 2,000 units minimum/4,500 units maximum Commercial: 500,000 square feet minimum/1,200,000 square feet maximum Office: 80,000 square feet minimum/100,000 square feet maximum As directed in Recommendation #2, the Intergovernmental Coordination Element of the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan has been updated to meet the requirements of Chapter 163.3177(6)(h), F.S. and is included as Amendment C, Attachment A. Specific to the school coordination requirement, the element has been revised as follows: Policy IC-1.1.6: Continue implementation activities associated with the Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning in Miami -Dade County, effective February 27, 2003, including, but not limited to, coordinating City, County, and School Board plans upon consistent projections of the amount, type, and distribution of population growth and student enrollment; participating in decision -making, through floating membership on the School Board's School Site Planning and Construction Committee, regarding potential sites for new schools and proposals for significant renovation, the location of relocatables or additions to existing buildings, and potential closure of existing schools; and collaborating to identify options aimed to provide the capacity to accommodate anticipate student enrollment demand associated with increases in residential development potential. In accordance with Recommendation #3, the City of Miami has been working and will continue to work diligently to ensure the highest degree of effective coordination between the City and the School Board of Miami -Dade County both in general and as relates to the proposed comprehensive plan amendments that are the subject of this ORC report. In general. In March 2003, the City of Miami, the School Board of Miami -Dade County, Miami -Dade County, and all other non-exempt Miami -Dade municipalities entered into the Page 8 of 37 Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning in Miami -Dade County. This culminated months of coordinative effort, facilitated by the Miami -Dade Planners' Technical Committee and with the leadership and active participation of the City of Miami, in negotiating and drafting the Agreement. In addition, the City of Miami assisted in establishing, actively participates in, and assists in facilitating (through provision of meeting notices and meeting locations) the Staff Working Group, established pursuant to the Interlocal Agreement, which is charged with meeting: to discuss issues and formulate recommendations regarding public education in the School District, and coordination of land use and school facilities planning, including such issues as population and student projections, development trends, a work program for five, ten and twenty year intervals and its relationship to the local government comprehensive plans, particularly as it relates to identification of potential school sites in the comprehensive plan's future land use map series, school needs (school capacity and school funding), collocation and joint use opportunities, and ancillary infrastructure improvements needed to support the school and ensure safe student access. With this group the City of Miami has assisted in drafting a procedures manual for implementation of the Agreement, and is in the process of organizing the first annual Elected Officials Joint Workshop pursuant to the Agreement. The City of Miami has established internal controls and procedures for ensuring that information is provided to School Board staff in a timely and user-friendly manner and that collaboration between the City, the School Board, and members of the development community takes place in accordance with the Interlocal Agreement. Furthermore, the City has hosted and will continue to host meetings with School Board staff to facilitate better understanding of the respective organizations and their operating procedures; to identify needs; to share data and other resources; to discuss constraints (such as state -mandated "no school" airport zoning districts) with the aim of identifying solutions to apparent roadblocks; and to strategize about how the availability (relative to projected population growth) and quality of schools within the City of Miami might be enhanced. Through representation on the City's internal Large Scale Development Committee, which is a technical review committee that comments on new projects prior to formal approval, the School Board is an active participant in the approval process of all large development projects in the City of Miami. Through formal membership on the City's Planning Advisory Board, which is the City's local planning agency, the School Board actively participates in reviewing and providing information on land use plan amendments as well as all major planning initiatives in the City. Also pursuant to the Agreement, the City is represented on the School Board's School Site Planning and Construction Committee when deliberating projects located within City limits. These and related coordinative efforts will be ongoing. Specific to the proposed plan amendments. On July 18, the City transmitted a copy of the proposed amendments to the School Board for review. School Board staff responded with a report dated July 31 indicating that the proposed plan amendments might result in negative impacts on the capacity of those schools within whose attendance boundaries the subject site is located. A meeting between City and School Board staff, as well as agents of the owner of the subject property, took place on August 21, 2003 pursuant to Section 7.5 of the Interlocal Page 9 of 37 Agreement. Issues discussed at this meeting included attendance boundaries (although the school district's analysis indicates that the elementary and middle schools serving the site are at 107% and 119% of capacity, respectively, excess capacity currently exists at several existing elementary and middle schools within two miles of the site. The senior high school serving the site is under capacity, at 72%.) Though school district staff cannot administratively modify attendance boundaries to provide for a more equal distribution of students across available student stations, it was suggested that possible modifications to school boundaries be examined and recommended to the appropriate external committee responsible for final decision -making. Also discussed was available district -owned property, including a former elementary school structure located two blocks from the site; district staff indicated that this site was to be converted for use as district offices but has subsequently indicated that they will investigate the option of re -opening the school. The availability of privately -owned land surrounding the site, including a large number of vacant parcels, nearly all of which lie within future land use districts permitting educational facilities, was discussed, as was the availability of City -owner land proximate to the site, including a potential future school site located ten blocks away. In view of the fact that the Buena Vista project and other new developments in the City of Miami will generate significant impact fees paid to the school district, the possibility of donating land for educational facilities in exchange for an impact fee credit was explored. Following the meeting the City conducted a survey of property within a two-mile radius of the subject property; this has been provided to the School Board as well as to the Department of Community Affairs. A follow-up collaboration meeting on October 21, 2003 included discussion of all of the above issues in greater depth and ended with mutual agreement to continue to pursue creative and effective solutions to the capacity issues associated with the subject amendments as well as with the broader increase in residential development throughout the City of Miami. In particular, City and School Board have agreed to work together to establish a mechanism and procedures for securing land in appropriate locations and funding and constructing school facilities to meet present and projected needs. A letter from the school district affirming the progress of these collaborative sessions is included as Exhibit 3 to this response. Regarding the Regional Planning Council's finding that the proposed land use change is "generally inconsistent with the Strategic Regional Policy Plan for South Florida" (specifically, Regional Goals 1.1 and 2.3 and Regional Policies 1.1.6 and 2.3.19) due to limited school facility capacity, the City of Miami finds this conclusion vexing. The Regional Planning Council's reasoning that "because an analysis of the potential impacts to the school system is not part of the concurrency process, the amendment requires careful scrutiny at this stage" is specious in light of both Chapter 163 and the Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning, which are the only two commitments to which the City of Miami is legally bound in the comprehensive plan amendment process. Chapter 163.3180(1)(a) clearly states that "Sanitary sewer, solid waste, drainage, potable water, parks and recreation, and transportation facilities, including mass transit, where applicable, are the only public facilities and services subject to the concurrency requirement on a statewide basis." Any desire to pay "careful scrutiny", no matter how well-intentioned, to an item not on this list, can end only in advice, not a binding mandate. Section 7.5 of the Interlocal Agreement for Public School Facility Planning states: Page 1 o of 37 If sufficient capacity is not available or planned to serve the development at the time of impact, the School Board will determine and specify the options available to it to meet the anticipated student enrollment demand. Alternatively [emphasis added], the School Board, local government, and developer will use their best efforts to collaboratively develop options that aim to provide the capacity to accommodate new students generated from the new residential development. ... This Section shall not be construed to obligate a City or County to deny a development [emphasis added] should the School Board fail to identify options to meet anticipated demand or should the collaborative process described in this Section fail to yield a means to ensure sufficient capacity. In view of the provisions of these documents, as well as the considerable array of options open to the school district to assist in meeting any additional capacity needs arising from the increased development potential of the site, and the willingness of the City of Miami to serve as an active partner in identifying and bringing to bear available resources and crafting intelligent solutions to our community's educational facilities needs, it is hoped that the Department will consider that sufficient scrutiny has been paid to the issue of school capacity as related to these proposed plan amendments. COMMENTS ON AMENDMENT 03-2 1 Impact Analysis from Existing versus Proposed FLUM Designations The impact analysis does not directly compare the maximum potential impacts to be generated from the site under its existing Industrial and General Commercial FLUM designations with the maximum potential impacts to be generated from the site under the proposed Restricted Commercial FLUM designation. RESPONSE: The impact analysis for the Regional Activity Center compares the existing level of service information for the study area with the demand for public facilities that will be generated by the proposed development intensities of the RAC. The proposed amendment has been revised to include maximum development intensities for the RAC area, therefore, the proposed RAC intensities are the maximum potential impacts to be generated from the site under the FLUM and land use designation. As part of the transportation impact analysis provided earlier, the City developed a methodology with the Florida Department of Transportation for the provision of daily trip information. As requested by the Department of Community Affairs, the peak hour level of service information is provided as part of the ORC Response in Exhibit 1.1. 2 Transit Capacity Table 3 (page 16) of the supplemental transportation impact analysis illustrates the link analysis of the daily bus capacity of MDT bus routes serving the study area. The daily bus capacity for each roadway segment has been calculated by multiplying the total number of buses serving that segment in a 24-hour period with the maximum person carrying capacity of a full-size, standard bus. The daily bus capacity is then compared against the annual average weekday ridership (of the routes serving the segment) to obtain the remaining daily capacity. The average weekday Page 1 of 37 ridership volumes for each roadway segment have been obtained from averaged annual daily ridership statistics for weekday periods covering March 2002 through February 2003 (see Transportation Data and Analysis Appendix — MDT Ridership Information), The calculated remaining daily capacity of each of the MDT bus services within the study area is representative of the remaining capacity over a 24-hour period. This capacity does not, however, reflect the available remaining capacity during the peak hours of service. The amendment does not demonstrate how the project will meet adopted transit LOS standards which will be required under the new transportation element. RESPONSE: Public transit in Miami is provided by the Miami -Dade Transit Agency, independent of the City of Miami. However, the City of Miami does and will continue to diligently coordinate transit efforts with the MDTA. In addition, the City is revising the Transportation Element of its comprehensive plan to include goals, objectives, and policies to provide assurance that the project will meet the adopted transit LOS standards. 3 Number of Lanes and Roadway Classifications Tables 9 through 12 of the supplemental transportation impact analysis should be revised to include the assumptions as to the number of lanes and roadway classifications for verification of roadway capacity. RESPONSE: The modeling effort utilized to develop Tables 9 through 12 of the supplemental transportation impact analysis included the assumptions of the number of lanes in the analysis. However, the tables have been revised to include the information regarding the number of lanes and roadway classification and are provided as Exhibit 4 to this response. 4 LOS for Background Trips and Background plus Project Trips Tables 9 through 17 of the supplemental transportation impact analysis currently illustrate LOS for the total trips. The LOS should be provided for both background trips (which includes committed trips) and background plus project trips. This information will enable the reviewer to determine the cause of the failure. RESPONSE: Each set of tables in the supplemental transportation impact analysis (Tables 9 through 17) has the background trips for 2003, 2008, and 2025, as well as the background trips plus project trips for the three planning years provided. However, additional tables have been prepared to include the background trips and background plus project trips on one table for quick reference. The new tables are provided as Exhibit 5.1 (Vehicle Trip Capacity) and 5.2 (Person Trip Capacity) of this response. Page 12of37 5 City and County Roadways Providing Access to the Site The description of the study area (page 3 of the supplemental transportation impact analysis) appears to be reasonable with regard to the state roadways; however, it should also identify any major city or county roadways that provide access to the site. RESPONSE: A graphic depicting the major city and county roadways in the City of Miami providing access to the RAC is provided as Exhibit 6 of this response. CONSISTENCY WITH THE STATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The amendment is not consistent with following provisions of the State Comprehensive Plan (Chapter 187, F.S.): Land Use Goal, s. 187.201(15)(a) and (b) RESPONSE: The Land Use Goal provides: In recognition of the importance of preserving the natural resources and enhancing the quality of life of the state, development shall be directed to those areas which have in place, or have agreements to provide, the land and water resources, fiscal abilities, and service capacity to accommodate growth in an environmentally acceptable manner. The amendment is entirely consistent with this goal. The proposed RAC amendment area is an urban infill parcel that is of little environmental value. There are no wetlands on site or other meaningful natural resources. In fact, the site currently serves as a container storage yard and is in need of remediation for existing contamination. The remediation will be conducted in conjunction with the redevelopment effort. As demonstrated in the land use plan amendment application materials, there are adequate public facilities either existing or proposed to serve the amendment area. The proposed amendment will facilitate redevelopment of an underutilized infill parcel which will result in significant fiscal and economic benefits for the City and County in terms of increased ad valorem property taxes, sales taxes and 2,000+ badly needed jobs in an area that has experienced declining employment over the last several years. Urban and Downtown Revitalization Policies 6 and 7, s. 187.201(16)(b) RESPONSE: Urban and Downtown Revitalization Policy 6 provides: Enhance the linkages between land use, water use, and transportation planning in state, regional, and local plans for current and future designated urban areas. Page 13 of 37 The proposed amendment is an example of linked land use and transportation planning. The City is in the process of availing itself of a planning tool available under state law by designating a Traffic Concurrency Exception Area (TCEA) which is meant to foster urban infill and redevelopment. In addition, the City is also availing itself of another planning tool available under state law for stimulating urban infill and redevelopment by adopting enabling provisions for designation of Regional Activity Centers (RACs). The proposed Buena Vista RAC will be within the TCEA. The proposed goals, objectives and policies of the Transportation Element and the Future Land Use Element are designed to increase mobility in the TCEA and RAC, and the densities and intensities afforded by the RAC designation will provide the needed critical mass to make transit alternatives feasible. Urban and Downtown Revitalization Policy 7 provides: Develop concurrency requirements that do not compromise public health and safety for urban areas that promote redevelopment areas. The only concurrency requirement that is being altered in connection with the amendment is traffic concurrency via the exception to traffic concurrency that will be afforded to development within the RAC by virtue of the TCEA. The Florida legislature has already determined by its establishment of the TCEA enabling legislation that there are public welfare benefits that accrue from urban infill and redevelopment that outweigh the detriment to public welfare that may result from any increase in traffic. Transportation Goal, s. 187.201(19)(a) RESPONSE: The Transportation Goal provides: Florida shall direct future transportation improvements to aid in the management of growth and shall have a state transportation system that integrates highway, air, mass transit, and other transportation modes. The City is uncertain how this goal, which speaks to State transportation improvements, is relevant to the amendment. Page 14 of 37 EXHIBIT 1.1- CONTINUED ADOPTED AND CURRENT LOS STANDARDS VEHICLE TRIPS Roadway Segment Adopted LOS Capacity 2002 Volume V/C Ratio Curr en LOS Biscayne Boulevard Interstate 395 to Venetian Causeway E+50 (U 4,456 4,022 (4) 0.90 E Biscayne Boulevard Venetian Causeway to NE 20th Street E+50 41 4,456 3,656 (5) 0.82 D Biscayne Boulevard NE 20th Street to NE 29th Street E+50 (t) 2,964 3,510 1.18 E+50 Biscayne Boulevard NE 29th Street to I-195 / NE 36th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 4,144 (4) 1.40 E+50 Biscayne Boulevard Interstate 195 to NE 54th Street E+50 (I) 2,964 4,314 (4) 1.46 E+50 NE 2nd Avenue NE 29th Street to NE 36th Street E+20 (2) 2,340 1,445 (6) 0.62 B N Miami Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+20 (2) 2,340 1,850 0.79 C Interstate 95 South of Interstate 395 / SR 836 D (3) 13,420 10,610 0.70 (7) D (9) Interstate 95 1-395 / SR 836 to I-195 / SR 112 D c3) 16,980 14,877 0.77 (7) C (9) Interstate 95 North of Interstate 195 / SR 112 D (3) 16,980 17,304 0.90 (1) D (9) NW 7th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 1,979 (5) 0.67 B NW 7th Avenue NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 1,979 0.67 B NW 7th Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 1,843 (') 0.62 B NW 7th Avenue NW 36th Street to NW 54th Street E+50 (I) 2,964 1,706 0.58 B NW 12th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street E+20 (2) 2,964 2,243 {'} 0.76 C NW 12th Avenue NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street E+20 (2) 2,964 2,243 0.76 C NW 12th Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+20 (2) 2,964 2,218 (5) 0.75 C NW 12th Avenue NW 36th Street to SR 112 E+20 (2) 2,964 2,194 0.74 C NW 12th Avenue SR 112 to NW 54th Street E+20 (2) 2,964 2,194 (') 0.74 C SR 112 (Airport Expressway) West of lnterstate 95 D (3) 13,420 8,824 0.58 (7) B (9) Interstate 195 Interstate 95 to N Miami Avenue D (3) 9,840 7,242 (5) 0.65 (`) B (9) Interstate 195 N Miami Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard D (2) 9,840 7,242 (i) 0.65 (1) B " Interstate 195 East of Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 9,840 6,818 0.61 (`) B (9) NW 36th Street NW 7th Avenue to N Miami Avenue E+50 (1) 1,544 1,046 (6) 0.68 B NE 36th Street N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue E+50 (t) 1,544 1,174 (6) 0.76 C NE 36th Street NE 2nd Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard E+50 (1) 2,964 1,740 (6) 0.59 B NE 29th Street N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue E+20 (2) 2,340 670 0.29 B SR 836 (Dolphin Expressway) NW 12th Avenue to Interstate 95 D (3) 13,420 9,982 0.65 ") B (9) Interstate 395 Interstate 95 to Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 9,840 7,012 0.63 (t) B (9) Interstate 395 East of Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 9,840 6,718 0.60 (7) B (9) (1) This road is allowed to reach 150% of capacity forLOS E due to its location in the an infill area with extraordinary transit service (2) This road is allowed to reach 120% of capacity forLOS E due to its location in the urban infill area and the presence of transit service operating with less than 20 minute headways (3) These roadway facilities are idented as part of the Florida Intrastate Highway System (FIFIS) as noted on FDOT System Map dated January 2003 (4) Multiple count stations located on this link,- therefore, counts are averaged (5) No carat data available on this link therefore comets on two adjacent links averaged (6) Count data collected by Kimley-Horn and Associates04/08/2003 dim 04/10/2003 (7) On FIHS roadways, v/c based on LOS E' capacity. (8) Level of service for major thoroughfares were measured using volume to capacity (v/c) ratios defined in the Miami -Dade Transportation Plan for the year 2025 (Figure 3). (9) Pet- Chapter 163.3180(10) of the Florida Statutes, the minimum level of service standard for FIRS roadways within the city is LOS Sources: FDOT Traffic Count Information CD (2002), Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Notes: Page 15 of 37 EXHIBIT 1.1- CONTINUED SHORT-TERM (2008) LOS MEASUREMENTS VEHICLE TRIPS Roadway Segment AdoptedLOS Capacity V2008 olume(41 V/C Ratio LOS (7) Biscayne Boulevard Interstate 395 to Venetian Causeway E+50 (1) 4,456 3,966 (5) 0.89 D Biscayne Boulevard Venetian Causeway to NE 20th Street E+50 (1) 4,456 3,812 0.86 D Biscayne Boulevard NE 20th Street to NE 29th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 3,652 1.23 E+50 Biscayne Boulevard NE 29th Street to I-1951NE 36th Street E+50 (l) 2,964 4,060 1.37 E+50 Biscayne Boulevard Interstate 195 to NE 54th Street E+50 (I) 2,964 4,568 1.54 F NE 2nd Avenue NE 29th Street to NE 36th Street E+20 (2Y-- 2,340 1,426 0.61 B N Miami Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+20 (2) 2,340 1,825 0.78 C Interstate 95 South of Interstate 395 / SR 836 D (3) 13,420 10,371 0.68 (6) S (8) Interstate 95 I-395 / SR 836 to I-195 / SR 112 D (3) 16,980 14,937 0.77 (6) C 18) Interstate 95 North of Interstate 195 / SR 112 D (3) 16,980 17,364 0.90 (6) D IS) NW 7th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street E+50 (I) 2,964 2,086 0.70 C NW 7th Avenue NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 1,900 0.64 B NW 7th Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+50 (I) 2,964 1,850 0.62 B NW 7th Avenue NW 36th Street to NW 54th Street E+50 (') 2,964 1,755 0.59 B NW 12th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street E+20 (2) 2,964 2,229 0.75 C NW 12th Avenue NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street E+20 (2) 2,964 2,212 (5) 0.75 C NW 12th Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+20 (2) 2,964 2,187 (5) 0.74 C NW 12th Avenue NW 36th Street to SR 112 E+20 (2)- 2,964 2,164 (5) 0.73 C NW 12th Avenue SR 112 to NW 54th Street E+20 (2) 2,964 2,1641" 0.73 C SR 112 (Airport Expressway) West of Interstate 95 D (3) 13,420 10,126 0.66 (6) B (a) Interstate 195 Interstate 95 to N Miami Avenue D (3) 9,840 7,437 0.67 (6) B (8) Interstate 195 N Miami Ave to Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 9,840 7,513 0.67 (6) B l8i Interstate 195 East of Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 9,840 6,919 0.62 (6) B (8) NW 36th Street NW 7th Avenue to N Miami Avenue E+50 (1) 1,544 1,097 0.71 C NE 36th Street N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue E+50 (1) 1,544 1,152 (5) 0.75 C NE 36th Street NE 2nd Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard E+50 (1) 2,964 1,708 (5) 0.58 B NE 29th Street N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue E+20 f2T 2,340 680 0.29 B SR 836 (Dolphin Expressway) NW 12th Avenue to Interstate 95 D (3) 13,420 9,681 0.64 (6) B (8) Interstate 395 Interstate 95 to Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 9,840 7,133 0.64 (6) B (8) Interstate 395 East of Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 9,840 6,496 0.58 (6) B (8) Notes: (1) This road is allowed to reach 150% of capacity for LOSE due to its location in the urban infill area with extraordinary transit service (2) This road is allowed to reach 120% of capacity for LOSE due to its location in the urban irfll area and the presence of transit service operating with less than 29 minute headway's (3) These roadway facilities are identfed aspart of the Florida Intrastate Highway System (FINS) as noted on FDOT System Map dated January 2003 (4) 2008 vohane based on growth rate derived from comparison of 2005 FSU7 SS model to 1999 FSUTRIS validation model, applied exponentially to 2002 AADT volume (5) The growth rate for this Ink is negative; therefore a nominal gnawih rate of 0.5% was applied (6) On FIHS roadways, v/c based on LOS E. capacity. (7) Level of service for major thoroughfares es were measured rasing volume to capacity (v/c) ratios defined in the Miami -bode Transportation Plan for the year 2025 (Figure 3). (8) Per Chapter 163.3180(10) of the Florida Statutes, the minimum level of service standard forFIRS roadways within the city is LOS 'D'. Solaces: MUATS 2005 Model Run, FDOT Traffic Count Information CD (2002), Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 16 of 37 EXHIBIT 1.1- CONTINUED SHORT-TERM (2008) LOS MEASUREMENTS WITH RAC DEVELOPMENT VEHICLE TRIPS Roadway Segment ALoOptted Capacity 2008 Volume) V/C Ratio LOS (7) Biscayne Boulevard Interstate 395 to Venetian Causeway E+50 (1) 4,456 4,045 (5) 0.91 E Biscayne Boulevard Venetian Causeway to NE 20th Street E+50 (1) 4,456 3,908 0.88 D Biscayne Boulevard NE 20th Street to NE 29th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 3,752 1.27 E+50 Biscayne Boulevard NE 29th Street to I-195/NE 36th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 4,104 1.38 E+50 Biscayne Boulevard Interstate 195 to NE 54th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 4,690 1.58 F NE 2nd Avenue NE 29th Street to NE 36th Street E+20 i 2,340 1,827 0.78 C N Miami Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+20 (2) 2,340 2,511 1.07 E+20 Interstate 95 South of Interstate 395 / SR 836 D (3) 13,420 10,436 0.68 (6) B (a) Interstate 95 I-395 / SR 836 to 1-195 / SR 112 D i3l 16,980 15,094 0.78 (6) C (g) Interstate 95 North of Interstate 195 / SR 112 D (' 16,980 17,611 0.91 (6) E (8) NW 7th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 2,130 0.72 C NW 7th Avenue NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street E+50 (3) 2,964 1,944 0.66 B NW 7th Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 1,850 0.62 B NW 7th Avenue NW 36th Street to NW 54th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 1,772 0.60 13 NW 12th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street E+20 ( 2,964 2,250 0.76 C NW 12th Avenue NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street E+20 (2) 2,964 2,233 (') 0.75 C NW 12th Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+20 (2) 2,964 2,187 `'i 0.74 C NW 12th Avenue NW 36th Street to SR 112 E+20 (2) 2,964 2,220 (5) 0.75 C NW 12th Avenue SR 112 to NW 54th Street E+20 i 2,964 2,220 '} 0.75 C SR I12 (Airport Expressway) West of Interstate 95 D (3) 13,420 10,396 0.68 (6) B (8) Interstate 195 Interstate 95 to N Miami Avenue D (3) 9,840 8,068 0.72 (6) C (8) Interstate 195 N Miami Ave to Biscayne Boulevard D T35.- 9,840 7,595 0.68 (6) B (g) Interstate 195 East of Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 9,840 7,084 0.63 (6) B (8) NW 36th Street NW 7th Avenue to N Miami Avenue E+50 (1) 1,544 1,219 0.79 C NE 36th Street N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue E+50 (1) 1,544 1,234 (5) 0.80 C NE 36th Street NE 2nd Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard E+50 (t) 2,964 2,042 (5) 0.69 B NE 29th Street N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue E+20 (2) 1 770 0.33 B SR 836 (Dolphin Expressway) NW 12th Avenue to Interstate 95 D ( 13,420 9,789 0.64 (6) B (a) Interstate 395 Interstate 95 to Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 9,840 7,154 0.64 (6) B (8) Interstate 395 East of Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 9,840 6,540 0.58 (6) Big) Notes: (I) This road is allowed to reach 130% of capacity for LASE due to its location in the urban infrll area with extraordinary transit service (2) This road is allowed to reach 120% of capacity for LOSE due to its location in the urban inftll area and the presence of transit service operating with less than 20 minute headways (3) These roadway facilities are identified as part of the Florida Intrastate Highway System (FINS) as noted an FDOT System Map dated January 2003 (4) 2008 volume based on growth rate derived from comparison of 2005 FSU"LMS model to 1999 FSUTMS validation model, applied exponentially to 2002 AADT, plus project trufc assigned to the roadway network using select zone analysis performed with 2005 FSUTMS model, see Table I (5) The growth rate for this link is negative; therefore a nominal growth rate of 0 5% was applied (6) On FIBS roadways, v/c based an LOS 'E' capacity. (') Level of service for major thoroughfares were measured using volume to capacity (v/c) ratios defined in the Miami -Dade Transportation Plan for the year 2025 (Figure 3). (8) Per Chapter 163.3180(10) of the Florida Statutes, the minimum level of service standardfor FIHS roadways within the city is LOS 'D'. Sources: IvIUATS 2005 Model Run, FDOT Traffic Count Information CD (2002), Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 17 4f 37 EXHIBIT 1.1 - CONTINUED BUILDOUT YEAR (2013) BACKGROUND LOS MEASUREMENTS VEHICLE TRIPS Roadway Segment ALOS d Capacity 2013 Volume (4) Ra'tio LOS (7) Biscayne Boulevard Interstate 395 to Venetian Causeway E+50 (1) 4,456 4,089 0.92 E Biscayne Boulevard Venetian Causeway to NE 20th Street E+50 (1) 4,456 3,968 0.89 D Biscayne Boulevard _ NE 20th Street to NE 29th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 3,752 1.27 E+50 Biscayne Boulevard NE 29th Street to I-195 / NE 36th Street E+50 (1) _ 2,964 4,250 1.43 E+50 Biscayne Boulevard Interstate 195 to NE 54th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 4,997 1.69 F NE 2nd Avenue NE 29th Street to NE 36th Street E+20 (2) 2,340 1,453 0.62 B N Miami Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+20 (2) 2,340 2,037 0.87 D Interstate 95 South of Interstate 395 / SR 836 1-395 / SR 836 to 1-195 / SR 112 _ D (3) D (3) 13,420 16,980 10,279 14,846 0.67 (6) 0.77 (6) B (8) C (8) Interstate 95 Interstate 95 North of Interstate 195 / SR 112 D (') 16,980 17,174 0.89 (6) D (8) 7th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 2,120 0.72 C _NW 7th Avenue NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 1,977 0.67 B _NW NW 7th Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+50 (t) 2,964 1,928 0.65 B 7th Avenue NW 36th Street to NW 54th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 1,820 0.61 B _NW NW 12th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street _ E+20 (2) 2,964 2,222 0.75 C NW 12th Avenue NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street E+20 (`) 2,964 2,267 (5) 0.76 C NW 12th Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+20 (2) 2,964 2,243 (5) 0.76 C NW 12th Avenue NW 36th Street to SR 112 E+20 (2) 2,964 2,102 0.71 C NW 12th Avenue SR 112 to NW 54th Street E+20 (2) 2,964 2,258 0.76 C SR 112 (Airport Expressway) West of Interstate 95 D (3) 13,420 10,558 0.69 (6) - B (8) Interstate 195 Interstate 95 to N Miami Avenue D (3} 9,840 7,784 0.70 (6) B (s) Interstate 195 N Miami Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 9,840 7,792 0.70 (6) B (8) ~Interstate 195 East of Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 9,840 7,046 0.63 (6) B (8) NW 36th Street NW 7th Avenue to N Miami Avenue E+50 (1) 1,544 1,160 0.75 C NE 36th Street N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue E+50 (i) 1,544 1,187 (5) 0.77 C NE 36th Street NE 2nd Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard E+50 (1) 2,964 1,786 0.60 _ B NE 29th Street N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue E+20 (2) 2,340 681 0.29 B SR 836 (Dolphin Expressway) NW 12th Avenue to Interstate 95 D (3) 13,420 9,983 0.66 (6) B (B) Interstate 395 Interstate 95 to Biscayne Boulevard D 0) 9,840 7,326 0.66 (6) B (8) Interstate 395 East of Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 9,840 6,580 0.59 (6) B (3) (1) This road is allowed to reach 150% of capacityfor LASE due to its location in the urban inftlt area with extraordawry transit service (2) This road is allowed to reach 1204 of capacity for LOS E due to its location in the urban infll area and the presence of transit service operating with less than 20 minute headways (3) These roadway facilities are identified as part of the Florida Intrastate Highway System (FHIS) as noted on FDOT System Map dated January 2003 (4) 2013 volume based on growth rate derived frorn comparison of 2015 FSUIMS model to 1999 FNUTMS validation model, applied exponentially to existing volume (5) The growth rate for this link is negative,. therefore a nominal growth rate of 0.5% was applied (6) On FIHS roadways, v/c based on LOS 'E' capacity. (7) Level of service for major thoroughfares were measured using volume to capacity (v/c) ratios defined in the Miami -Dade Transportation Plan for the year 2025 (Figure 3). (8) Per Chapter 163.3180(10) of the Florida Statutes, the minimum level of service standard for FIHS roadways within the city is LOS 'D'. Sources: MUATS 2025 Model Rim without RAC project, FDOT Traffic Count Information CD (2002), Kimsey -Horn and Associates, Inc. Notes: Page 18 of 37 EXHIBIT 1.1 - CONTINUED BUILDOUT YEAR (2013) LOS MEASUREMENTS WITH BUILDOUT OF RAC VEHICLE TRIPS Roadway Segment Adopted LOS Capacity 2013 Volume (4) C Rao LOS (7) Biscayne Boulevard Interstate 395 to Venetian Cat seway E+50 (1) 4,456 4,204 0.94 E Biscayne Boulevard Venetian Causeway to NE 20th Street E+50 (t) 4,456 4,103 0.92 E Biscayne Boulevard NE 20th Street to NE 29th Street E+50 (I) 2,964 3,896 1.31 E+50 Biscayne Boulevard NE 29th Street to 1-195 / NE 36th Street E+50 (t) 2,964 4,309 1.45 _ E+50 Biscayne Boulevard Interstate 195 to NE 54th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 5,135 1.73 F NE 29th Street to NE 36th Street E+20 (2) 2,340 1,835 0.78 C NE 2nd Avenue N Miami Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+20 (2) 2,340 2,584 1.10 E+20 Interstate 95 South of Interstate 395 / SR 836 D (3) 13,420 10,376 0.68 (6) B (8) Interstate 95 I-395 1 SR 836 to 1-195 / SR 112 D csl 16,980 15,060 0.78 (6) C (8) Interstate 95 of Interstate 195 / SR 112 D (3) 16,980 17,431 0.90 (6) E (x) NW 7th Avenue _North SR 836 to NW 20th Street E+50 (t) 2,964 2,138 0.72 C NW 7th Avenue NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street E+50 ()) 2,964 2,015 0.68 B _ NW 7th Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+50 (I) 2,964 1,928 0.65 B JNW 7th Avenue NW 36th Street to NW 54th Street E+50 (t) 2,964 1,849 0.62 B C NW 12th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street E+20 (1) 2,964 2,281 0.77 NW 12th Avenue _ NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street E+20(2) 2,964 2,267 (s) 0.76 C NW 12th Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+20 (2) 2,964 2,243 (5) 0.76 C NW 12th Avenue NW 36th Street to SR 112 E+20 (2) 2,964 2,161 0.73 C NW 12th Avenue SR 112 to NW 54th Street E+20 (2) 2,964 2,317 0.78 C SR 112 (Airport Expressway) West of Interstate 95 D (2) - 13,420 10,938 0.72 (6) C (8) Interstate 195 Interstate 95 to N Miami Avenue D (s) 9,840 8,586 0.77 (6) C (" Interstate 195 N Miami Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 9,840 7,930 0.71 (6) C ") Interstate 195 East of Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 9,840 7,242 0.65 (6) B (s). NW 36th Street NW 7th Avenue to N Miami Avenue E+50 (t) 1,544 1,397 0.91 _ E _ NE 36th Street l N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue E+50 (I) 1,544 1,392 (') 0.90 E NE 36th Street NE 2nd Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard E+50 ul 2,964 2,207 0.74 C N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue E+20 (2) 2,340 731 0.31 B NE 29th Street SR 836 (Dolphin Expressway) NW I2th Avenue to Interstate 95 D (3) 13,420 10,091 0.66 « B (8) Interstate 395 Interstate 95 to Biscayne Boulevard D {'} 9,840 7,335 0.66 (6) B (8) Interstate 395 East of Biscayne Boulevard D I') 9,840 6,639 0.59 (6) B (b) _ Notes: (1) This road is allowed to reach 150% of capacity for LOSE' due to its location to the urban rote area with l ertraarrrnary transit serice (2) This road is allowed to reach 120% of capacity for LOSE due to its location in the urban infrll area and the presence of transit service operating with less than 20 minute headways (3) These roadway facilities are identified as part of the Florida Intrastate Highway System (FIHS) as noted on FDOT System Map dated January 2003 (4) 2013 person trips based on growth rate derived from comparison of2015 FSUhI S model to 1999 FSUIMS validation model, applied exponentially to existing volumes, plus project traffic assigned to the roadway network using select zone analysis performed with 2013 FSUTMS model, see Table I (5) The growth rate for this link is negative; therefore a nominal growth rate of 0.5% was applied (6) On FINS roadways, v/c based on LOS E. capacity. (7) Level of service for major thoroughfares were measured using volume to capacity (Vic) ratios defined in the Miami -Dade Transportation Plan for the year 2025 (Figure 3). (8) Per Chapter 163.3180(10) of the Florida Statutes, the minimum level of service standard for FLYS roadways within the city is LOS 'D'. Source: MUATS 2025 Model Run without RAC project, FDOT Traffic Count Information CD (2002), Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc Page19of37 Roadway Segr Inter: Boulevard Biscayne Vent Biscayne Boulevard Biscayne Boulevard NE NE Biscayne Boulevard Inter Biscayne Boulevard NE NE 2nd Avenue NW N Miami Avenue Sou Interstate 95 EXHIBIT 1.1 - CONTINUED LONGTERM (2025) LOS MEASUREMENTS VEHICLE TRIPS ent to 395 to Venetian Causeway an Causeway to NE 20th Street Adopted LOS E+50 (1) E+50 Capacity 4,456 4,456 2025 Volume (4) 4,223 3,838 V/C Ratio 0.95 0.86 LOS (7) th 20th Street to NE 29th Street 29th Street to 1-195 / NE 36th Street state 195 to NE 54th Street 29th Street to NE 36th Street 29th Street to NW 36th Street of Interstate 395 / SR 836 1SR836to1-195/SR112 h of Interstate 195 / SR 112 36 to NW 20th Street 20th Street to NW 29th Street 29th Street to NW 36th Street 36th Street to NW 54th Street 36 to NW 20th Street 20th Street to NW 29th Street 29th Street to NW 36th Street 36th Street to SR 112 12 to NW 54th Street t of Interstate 95 state 95 to N Miami Avenue fiami Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard of Biscayne Boulevard 7th Avenue to N Miami Avenue liami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue 2nd Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard Riami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue 12th Avenue to Interstate 95 rstate 95 to Biscayne Boulevard t of Biscayne Boulevard E+50 (') E+50 (1) E+50 E+20 (2) E+20 (2) D (3) D (3) D (3) E+50 (') E+50 (1) E+50 (1) E+50 (1) E+20 (2) E+20 (2) E+20 (2) E+20 (2) E+20 (2) D(3) D (3) D (3) D (3) E+50 (1) E+50 (1) E+50 (1) E+20 (2) D(3) D(3) D (3) 2,964 2,964 2,964 2,340 2,340 13,420 16,980 16,980 2,964 2,964 2,964 2,964 2,964 2,964 2,964 2,964 2,964 13,420 9,840 9,840 9,840 1,544 1,544 2,964 2,340 13,420 9,840 9,840 4,050 4,308 5,257 1,669 2,213 11,308 17,075 19,126 2,361 2,121 2,086 1,904 2,410 2,408 (5) 2,236 2,355 (5) 2,197 12,319 8,530 8,574 7,712 1,625 1,267 2,040 799 11,738 8,974 7,167 1.37 1.45 1.77 0.71 0.95 0.74 (6) 0.88 (6) 0.99 (6) 0.80 0.72 0.70 0.64 0.81 0.81 0.75 0.79 0.74 0.81 (6) 0.76 (6) 0.77 (6) 0.69 (6) 1.05 0.82 0.69 0.34 0.77 (6) 0.80 (6) 0.64 (6) Notes: (1) This road is allowed to reach 150% of capacity for LOSE due to its location m the urban mlru area wttn esimorranary erure+u ,rr���c (2) his road is allowed to reach 120% of capacity for LOS E due 10 its location in the urban infill area and the presence of transit service operating with less than 20 minute headways (3) These roadway facilities are identified as part of the Florida Mntrasude Highway System (FIHS) as noted on FDOT System Map dated January 2003 (4) 2025 volume based on growth rate derived from comparison of 2025 FSUTMS model to 1999 FSUTMS validation model, applied exponentially to 2008 background volume (5) The growth rate for this link is negative, therefore a nominal growth rate of 0.5% was applied (6) On FIRS roadways, i/c based on LOS 'E' capacity. (7) Level of service for major thoroughfares were measured using volume to capacity (v/c) ratios defined in the Miami -Dade Transportation Plan for the year 2025 (Figure 3). (8) Per Chapter 163.3180(10) of the Florida Statutes, the minimum level of service standard forFlHS roadways within the city is LOS Sources: MUATS 2025 Model Run without RAC project, FDOT Traffic Count Information CD (2002), Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. E+50 E+50 F c (6) D (a) E (8) c c B D D D (6) c (e) c (a) B (a) E+50 D c (6) D ($) B (6) Page 20 of 37 EXHIBIT 1.1- CONTINUED LONGTERM (2025) LOS MEASUREMENTS WITH BUILDOUT OF RAC VEHICLE TRIPS Roadway Segment Adopted LOS Capacity 2025 Volume (4) WC Ratio LOS (7) Biscayne Boulevard Interstate 395 to Venetian Causeway E+50 (1) 4,456 4,338 0.97 E Biscayne Boulevard Venetian Causeway to NE 20th Street E+50 41) 4,456 3,944 0.89 D Biscayne Boulevard NE 20th Street to NE 29th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 4,176 1.41 E+50 Biscayne Boulevard NE 29th Street to I-195 / NE 36th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 4,337 1.46 E+50 _ Biscayne Boulevard Interstate 195 to NE 54th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 5,395 1.82 F NE 2nd Avenue NE 29th Street to NE 36th Street E+20 (2) 2,340 2,105 0.90 D N Miami Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street _ E+20 (2) 2,340 3,149 1.35 F 95 South of Interstate 395 ! SR 836 D (3) 13,420 11,396 0.75 (6) C (8) _Interstate Interstate 95 1-395 / SR 836 to I-195 / SR 112 D (3) 16,980 17,192 0.89 (6) D (8) Interstate 95 North of Interstate 195 / SR 112 D (3) 16,980 19,293 1.00 (6) E (8) NW 7th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 2,399 0.81 D NW 7th Avenue NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 2,150 0.73 C NW 7th Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 2,086 0.70 C NW 7th Avenue NW 36th Street to NW 54th Street E+50 (1) 2,964 1,933 0.65 B NW 12th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street E+20 (2) 2,964 2,439 0.82 D NW 12th Avenue NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street E+20 (2) 2,964 2,408 « 0.81 D NW 12th Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+20 (2) 2,964 2,236 0.75 C NW 12th Avenue NW 36th Street to SR 112 E+20 (2) 2,964 2,414 (') 0.81 D NW 12th Avenue SR 112 to NW 54th Street E+20 (2) 2,964 2,256 0.76 C SR 112 (Airport Expressway) West of Interstate 95 D (') 13,420 12,699 0.83 (6) D (8) Interstate 195 Interstate 95 to N Miami Avenue D (3) 9,840 9,244 0.83 (6) D () Interstate 195 N Miami Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard D") 9,840 8,635 0.77 (6) C (a) Interstate 195 East of Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 9,840 7,888 0.71 (6) C (8) NW 36th Street NW 7th Avenue to N Miami Avenue E+50 (4) 1,544 1,889 1.22 E+50 _ NE 36th Street N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue E+50 (l) 1,544 1,308 0.85 D NE 36th Street NE 2nd Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard E+50 (1) 2,964 2,353 0.79 C NE 29th Street N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue E+20 (2) 2,340 878 0.38 B SR 836 (Dolphin Expressway) NW 12th Avenue to Interstate 95 D (') 13,420 11,876 0.78 (6) C (8) Interstate 395 Interstate 95 to Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 9,840 9,033 0.81 (6) D (8) Interstate 395 Fact of Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 9,840 7,235 0.65 (6) B (I) This road is allowed to reach 150% of capacity for LOSE due to its location in the urban tnfill area with erfrao�dmary ttrmstt serene (2) This road is allowed to reach 120% of capacity for LOS E due to its location in the urban infill area and the presence of transit service operating with less than 20 minute headrtrrys (3) These roadway facilities are identified as part of the Florida Intrastate Highway System (FIRS) as noted on FDOT System Map dated January 2003 (4) 2013 person trips hated on growth rate derivedfrom comparison of 2015 FSUTAIS model to 1999 FSUThfS validation model, applied exponentially to existing volumes, plus project traffic assigned to the roadway network using select zone analysis performed with 2013 FSUTRfS model, see Table I (5) The growth rate for this link is negative; therefore a nominal growth rate of 0.5% was applied (6) On FIBS roadways, We based on LOS 'E' capacity. (7) Level of service for major thoroughfares were measured using volume to capacity (v/c) ratios defined in the Miami -Dade Transportation Plan for the year 2025 (Figure 3). (8) Per Chapter 163.3180(10) of the Florida Statutes, the minimum level of service standard for FIHS roadways within the city is LOS 'D'. Source: MUATS 2025 Model Run without RAC project, FDOT Traffic Count Information CD (2002), Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Notes: Page21 of37 Roadway Biscayne Boulevard Biscayne Boulevard Biscayne Boulevard Biscayne Boulevard Biscayne Boulevard NE 2nd Avenue N Miami Avenue EXHIBIT Li - CONTINUED ADOPTED AND CURRENT LOS STANDARDS PERSON TRIPS Segment Interstate 395 to Venetian Causeway Venetian Causeway to NE 20th Street NE 20th Street to NE 29th Street NE 29th Street to I-195 / NE 36th Street Interstate 195 to NE 54th Street NE 29th Street to NE 36th Street NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street Interstate 95 Interstate 95 Interstate 95 NW 7th Avenue NW 7th Avenue South of Interstate 395 / SR 836 I-395 / SR 836 to 1-195 / SR 112 North of Interstate 195 / SR 112 NW 7th Avenue NW 7th Avenue NW 12th Avenue NW 12th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street NW 36th Street to NW 54th Street NW 12th Avenue NW 12th Avenue NW 12th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street NW 36th Street to SR 112 SR 112 to NW 54th Street SR 112 (Airport Expressway) Interstate 195 Interstate 195 Interstate 195 NW 36th Street NE 36th Street West of Interstate 95 Interstate 95 to N Miami Avenue N Miami Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard East of Biscayne Boulevard NW 7th Avenue to N Miami Avenue NE 36th Street NE 29th Street SR 836 (Dolphin Expressway) Interstate 395 Interstate 395 N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue NE 2nd Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue NW 12th Avenue to Interstate 95 Interstate 95 to Biscayne Boulevard East of Biscayne Boulevard Adopted LOS E+50 t4 E+50 (1) E+50 (1) E+50 (1) E+50 (i) E+20 (2) E+20 (2) D (3) D (3) D (') E+50 (1) E+50 (I) E+50 (1) E+50 (1) E+20 (2) E+20 (2) E+20 (2) E+20 (2) E+20 (2) D (3) D (3) D(3) D(3) E+50 (1) E+50 (1) E+50 (1) E+20 (2) D (3) D (3) D (3) Capacity 8,515 10,447 7,945 7,945 6,496 3,966 3,276 19,685 24,669 24,669 5,116 5,116 5,116 5,116 6,151 6,427 5,599 5,599 4,702 19,685 13,776 13,776 14,190 3,265 3,127 5,116 3,276 19,340 14,466 15,570 2002 Person Trips 7,240 (4) 8,081 (5) 7,525 8,413 (4) 8,181 (4) 2,741 (b) 2,590 14,977 20,951 24,349 3,725 (5) 3,687 3,496 (5) 3,304 4,145 (5) 4,411 3,825 (2) 3,792 (') 3,639 12,507 (6) 10,139 10,139 (6) 9,753 (6) 2,415 (6) 2,442 3,234 938 14,120 10,285 11,061 V/C Ratio 0.85 0.77 0.95 1.06 1.26 0.69 0.79 0.67 (`) 0.75 (t) 0.87 (1) 0.73 0.72 0.68 0.65 0.67 0.69 0.68 0.68 0.77 0.56 (7) 0.65 (1) 0.65 (7) 0.61(7) 0.74 0.78 0.63 0.29 0.65 (`) 0.63 (') 0.63 (7) Notes: (1) This road is allowed to reach 150% of capacity for LOS E due to its location in the urban infill area with extraordinary transit service (2) This road is allowed to reach 120% of capacity for LOS E doe to its location in the urban infill area and the presence of transit service operating with less than 20 minute headways (3) These roadway facilities are identified as part of the Flordalntrastate Highway System (FIHS) as noted an FDOT System Map dated January 2003 (4) Multiple count stations located on this link; therefore, counts are averaged (5) No count data available on this link therefore counts on two adjacent links averaged (6) Count data collected by Kimley-Horn and Associates04/08/2003 thrn 04/10/2003 (7)On FIHS roadways, y/c based on LOS E' capacity_ (8)Level of service for major thoroughfares were measured using volume to capacity (v/c) ratios defined in the Miami -Dade Transportation Plan for the year 2025 (Figure 3). (9) On Per Chapter 163.3180(10) of the Florida Statutes. the minimum level of service standard for FJHS roadways within the city is LOS 'D'. Sources: FDOT Traffic Count Information CD (2002), Kimley-liorn and Associates, Inc. Current LOS (8) D E+50 E+50 B C B (9) C (9) D (9) C B (9) B (9) B (9) B(y) C B (9) B (9) B (9) Page 22 of 37 Roadway Biscayne Boulevard Biscayne Boulevard Biscayne Boulevard Biscayne Boulevard Biscayne Boulevard NE 2nd Avenue N Miami Avenue Interstate 95 Interstate 95 Interstate 95 NW 7th Avenue NW 7th Avenue NW 7th Avenue NW 7th Avenue NW 12th Avenue NW 12th Avenue NW 12th Avenue NW 12th Avenue NW 12th Avenue SR 112 (Airport Expressway) Interstate 195 Interstate 195 Interstate 195 NW 36th Street NE 36th Street NE 36th Street NE 29th Street SR 836 (Dolphin Expressway) Interstate 395 Interstate 395 Notes: EXHIBIT 1.1- CONTINUED SHORT-TERM (2008) LOS MEASUREMENTS PERSON TRIPS Segment Interstate 395 to Venetian Causeway Venetian Causeway to NE 20th Street NE 20th Street to NE 29th Street NE 29th Street to I-195/NE 36th Street Interstate 195 to NE 54th Street NE 29th Street to NE 36th Street NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street South of Interstate 395 / SR 836 1-3951 SR 836 to 1-195 / SR 112 North of Interstate 195 / SR 112 SR 836 to NW 20th Street NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street NW 36th Street to NW 54th Street SR 836 to NW 20th Street NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street NW 36th Street to SR 112 SR 112 to NW 54th Street West of Interstate 95 Interstate 95 to N Miami Avenue N Miami Ave to Biscayne Boulevard East of Biscayne Boulevard NW 7th Avenue to N Miami Avenue N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue NE 2nd Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue NW 12th Avenue to Interstate 95 Interstate 95 to Biscayne Boulevard East of Biscayne Boulevard Adopted LOS E+50 (') E+50 (t) E+50 (`) E+50 (() E+50 (') E+20 (2) E+20 (2) D (3) D (3) D (3) E+50 (1) E+50 (') E+50 (4) E+50 (4) E+20 (4) E+20 (2) E+20 (2) E+20 (2) E+20 (2) D (3) D (3) D (3) D (3) E+50 (') E+50 (') E+50 (1) E+20 (2) D (3) D (') D (3) Capacity 8,515 10,447 7,945 7,945 6,496 3,966 3,276 19,685 24,669 24,669 5,116 5,116 5,116 5,116 6,151 6,427 5,599 5,599 4,702 19,685 13,776 13,776 14,190 3,265 3,127 5,116 3,276 19,340 14,466 15,570 2008 Person Trips (4) 7,196 8,364 7,781 8,352 8,582 2,730 2,555 14,645 21,038 24,436 3,895 3,596 3,526 3,393 4,148 4,396 3,798 O) 3,766 3,609 14,332 10,412 10,518 9,900 2,508 2,428 (5) 3,206 952 13,701 10,464 10,786 VIC Ratio 0.84 0.79 0.97 1.04 1.31 0.69 0.78 0.66 (6) 0.75 (6) 0.87 (6) 0.76 0.70 0.69 0.66 0.67 0.68 0.67 0.67 0.77 0.64 (6) 0.67 (6) 0.67 (6) 0.62 (6) 0.76 0.77 0.62 0.29 0.63 (6) 0.64 (6) 0.62 (6) (1) This road is allowed to reach 150% of capacity forLOS E due to its location in the urban infill area with extraordinary transit service (2) This toad is allowed to reach 120% of capacity for LOS E due to its location in the urban infill area and the presence of transit service operating with less than 20 minute headways (3) These roadway facilities are identified as part of the Florida Intrastate Highway System (FIRS) as noted on FDOT System Map dated January 2003 (4) 2008 volume based on growth rale derived from comparison of 2005 FS(17714S model to 1999 FSUIMS validation model, applied exponentially to 2002 AADT volume (5) The growth rate far this link is negative; therefore a nominal growth rate of 0.5% was applied (6) On FIRS roadways, We based on LOS 'E' capacity. (7) Level of service for major thoroughfares were measured using volume to capacity (v/c) ratios defined in the Miami --Dare Transportation Plan for the year 2025 (Figure 3). (8) Per Chapter 163.3180(10) of the Florida Statutes, the minimum level of service standard for FIRS roadways within the city is LOS 'D Sources: MOATS 2005 Model Run, FDOT Traffic Count Information CD (2002), Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. LOS (7) D E+50 E+50 B C B (8) c (8) D (8) C c B B (8) B (8) B (8) C B (8) B (8) B (8) Page 23 of 37 Roadway Biscayne Boulevard Biscayne Boulevard Biscayne Boulevard Biscayne Boulevard Biscayne Boulevard NE 2nd Avenue EXHIBIT 1.1- CONTINUED SHORT-TERM (2008) LOS MEASUREMENTS WITH RAC DEVELOPMENT PERSON TRIPS Segment Interstate 395 to Venetian Causeway Venetian Causeway to NE 20th Street NE 20th. Street to NE 29th Street NE 29th Street to I-1951NE 36th Street N Miami Avenue Interstate 195 to NE 54th Street NE 29th Street to NE 36th Street NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street Interstate 95 Interstate 95 Interstate 95 NW 7th Avenue NW 7th Avenue NW 7th Avenue South of Interstate 3951 SR 836 1-395 /SR 836 tot-195/SR112 North of Interstate 195 / SR 112 NW 7th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street NW 36th Street to NW 54th Street NW 12th Avenue NW 12th Avenue NW 12th Avenue NW 12th Avenue NW 12th Avenue SR 112 (Airport Expressway) Interstate 195 Interstate 195 Interstate 195 NW 36th Street NE 36th Street SR 836 to NW 20th Street NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street NW 36th Street to SR 112 SR 112 to NW 54th Street West of Interstate 95 Interstate 95 to N Miami Avenue N Miami Ave to Biscayne Boulevard East of Biscayne Boulevard NW 7th Avenue to N Miami Avenue NE 36th Street NE 29th Street N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue NE 2nd Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard SR 836 (Dolphin Expressway) Interstate 395 Interstate 395 Notes: N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue NW 12th Avenue to Interstate 95 Interstate 95 to Biscayne Boulevard East of Biscayne Boulevard Adopted LOS E+50 (') E+50 (1) E+50 (') E+50 (t) E+50 (') E+20 (2) E+20 (2) D (3) D (j) E+50 (') E+50 (t) E+50 (`) E+50 (1) E+20 (2) E+20 (2 E+20 (2) E+20 (2) E+20 (2) D (3) D(-4) D (') E+50 (1) E+50 (') E+50 (1) E+20 (2) D (3) D (') D (j) Capacity 8,515 10,447 7,945 7,945 6,496 3,966 3,276 19,685 24,669 24,669 5,116 5,116 5,116 5,116 6,151 6,427 5,599 5,599 4,702 19,685 13,776 13,776 14,190 3,265 3,127 5,116 3,276 19,340 14,466 15,570 2008 Person Trips (4) 7,307 8,499 7,921 8,414 8,753 3,291 3,516 (') 14,736 21,257 24,782 3,957 3,658 3,526 3,417 4,178 4,426 (') 3,798 (') 3,845 3,688 14,710 11,295 10,633 10,131 2,679 2,543 (') 3,673 1,078 13,852 10,494 10,848 VIC Ratio 0.85 0.81 0.99 1.05 1.34 0.83 1.07 0.66 (6) 0.76 (6) 0.89 (6) 0.77 0.71 0.69 0.67 0.67 0.68 0.67 0.68 0.78 0.66 (6) 0.72 (6) 0.68 (6) 0.63 (6) 0.81 0.81 0.72 0.33 0.63 (6) 0.64 (6) 0.62 (6) LOS (7) D D E E+50 E+50 D E+20 B (8) C (a) D (8) C D (8) C(8) B (8) B(8) D D B (8) B (8) B (8) (I) This road is allowed to reach 150% of capacity for LOS E due to its location in the urban inftll area with extraordinary transit service (2) This road is allowed to reach 120% of capacity for LOS E due to its location in the urban infill area and the presence of transit service operating with less than 20 minute headways (3) These roadway facilities are identified as part of the Florida Intrastate Highway System (F1HS) as noted on FDOT System Map dated January 2003 (4) 2008 volume based on growth rate derived from comparison of 2005 FSUTMS mode! to 1999 FSUTMS validation model, applied exponentially to 2002 A/IDT, plus project traffic assigned to the roadway network using select zone analysis performed with 2005 FSUT_tvLS model, see Table 1 (5) The growth rate for this link is negative; therefore a nominal growth rale of 0.5% was applied (6) On Fria roadways, sic based on LOS 'E' capacity. (7) Level of service for major thoroughfares were measured using volume to capacity (r/c) ratios defined in the Miami -Dade Transportation Plan for the year 2025 (Figure 3). (8) Per Chapter 163.3180(10) of the Florida Statutes, the minimum level of service standard for FIRS roadways within the city is LOS 'D'. Sources: MUATS 2005 Model Run, FDOT Traffic Count Information CD (2002), Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 24 of 37 EDIT 1.1 - CONTINUED BUILDOUT (2013) LOS MEASUREMENTS PERSON TRIPS Roadway Segment LOSAdopted Capacity 2 Trips>r(�s} n V/C Ratio LOS (7) Biscayne Boulevard Interstate 395 to Venetian Causeway E+50 (1) 8,515 7,404 0.86 D Biscayne Boulevard Venetian Causeway to NE 20th Street E+50 (t) 10,447 8,647 0.81 D Biscayne Boulevard NE 20th Street to NE 29th Street E+50 lu 7,945 7,977 0.98 E Biscayne Boulevard NE 29th Street to I-195 / NE 36th Street E+50 (1) 7,945 8,674 1.07 E+50 Biscayne Boulevard Interstate 195 to NE 54th Street E+50 (1) 6,496 9,230 1.40 E+50 NE 2nd Avenue NE 29th Street to NE 36th Street E+20 (2) 3,966 2,783 0.70 B N Miami Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+20 (2) 3,276 2,852 0.87 D Interstate 95 South of Interstate 395 / SR 836 D (') 19,685 14,519 0.65 (6) B (8) Interstate 95 I-395 / SR 836 to I-195 / SR 112 D (3) 24,669 20,912 0.75 (6) C ($) Interstate 95 North of Interstate 195 / SR 112 D (3) 24,669 24,172 0.86 (6) D (8) NW 7th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street E+50 (1) 5,116 3,963 0.77 C NW 7th Avenue NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street E+50 i'S 5,116 3,724 0.72 C NW 7th Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+50 (1) 5,116 3,655 0.71 C NW 7th Avenue NW 36th Street to NW 54th Street E+50 (1) 5,116 3,504 0.68 B NW 12th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street E+20 (=) 6,151 4,160 0.67 B NW 12th Avenue NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street E+20 (2) 6,427 4,500 (5) 0.69 B NW 12th Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+20 (2) 5,599 3,891 (5) 0.69 B NW 12th Avenue NW 36th Street to SR 112 E+20 (2) 5,599 3,694 0.65 B NW 12th Avenue SR 112 to NW 54th Street E+20 (2) 4,702 3,753 0.79 C SR 112 (Airport Expressway) West of Interstate 95 D (3) 19,685 14,941 0.67 (6) B (8) Interstate 195 Interstate 95 to N Miami Avenue D (s) 13,776 10,898 0.70 (6) B 00. Interstate 195 N Miami Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard D (3J 13,776 10,909 0.70 (6) B (8) Interstate 195 East of Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 14,190 10,081 0.63 (6) B (s) NW 36th Street NW 7th Avenue to N Miami Avenue E+50 (1) 3,265 2,616 0.79 C NE 36th Street N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue E+50 (1) 3,127 2,495 (6) 0.79 C NE 36th Street NE 2nd Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard E+50 (1) 5,116 3,333 0.65 B NE 29th Street N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue E+20 (2) 3,276 953 0.29 B SR 836 (Dolphin Expressway) NW 12th Avenue to Interstate 95 D (3) 19,340 14,127 0.64 (6) B (8) Interstate 395 Interstate 95 to Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 14,466 10,744 0.66 (6) B (8) Interstate 395 East of Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 15,570 10,940 0.62 (6) B (8) (1) This road is allowed to reach 150% of capacity forLOS E date to its location in the urban infill area with extraordinary transit service (2) This road is allowed to reach 120% of capacity for LOS E due to its location in the urban infill area and the presence of tram' service operating with less than 20 minute headways (3) These roadway facilities are identffied as part of the Florida Intrastate Highway System (FINS) as noted on FDOT System Map dated January 2003 (4) 2013 volume based on growth rate derived from comparison of 2015 FSU"IMSmode! to 1999 FSUTMS validation model, applied exponentially to existing volume (5) The growth rate for this link is negative; therefore a nominal growth rate of 0.5% was applied (6) On FIHS roadways, v/c based on LOS 'E' capacity. (-) Level of service for major thoroughfares were measured using volume to capacity (v/c) ratios defined in the Miami -Dade Transportation Plan for the year 2025 (Figure 3). (8) Per Chapter 163.3180(10) of the Florida Statutes, the minimum level of service standardfor FIHS roadways within the city is LOS 'D'. Sources: MUATS 2025 Model Run without RAC project, FDOT Traffic Count Information CD (2002), Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. Notes: Page 25 of 37 EXHIBIT 1.1 - CONTINUED BUILDOUT (2013) LOS MEASUREMENTS WITH BUILDOUT OF RAC PERSON TRIPS Roadway Segment Adopted LOS Capacity 2013 Person Trips (a) V/C Ratio LOS (7) Biscayne Boulevard Interstate 395 to Venetian Causeway E+50 (1) 8,515 7,565 0.88 D Biscayne Boulevard Venetian Causeway to NE 20th Street E+50 (1) 10,447 8,836 0.83 D Biscayne Boulevard NE 20th Street to NE 29th Street E+50 (11 7,945 8,178 1.01 E+50 Biscayne Boulevard NE 29th Street to I-195 / NE 36th Street E+50 (1) 7,945 8,756 1.08 E+50 Boulevard Interstate 195 to NE 54th Street E+50 ('l 6,496 9,423 1.43 E+50 _Biscayne NE 2nd Avenue NE 29th Street to NE 36th Street E+20 (2) 3,966 3,318 0.83 D rN Miami Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+20 (2) 3,276 3,617 1.10 E+20 Interstate 95 South of Interstate 395 / SR 836 D (') 19,685 14,654 0.66 (6) B (s9 Interstate 95 1-395 / SR 836 to I-195 / SR 112 D (sl 24,669 21,212 0.76 (6) C (B) Interstate 95 North of Interstate 195 / SR 112 D (I) 24,669 24,532 0.88 (6) D (a) NW 7th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street E+50 (1) 5,116 3,988 0.77 C NW 7th Avenue NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street E+50 (9 5,116 3,777 0.73 C NW 7th Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+50 (tl 5,116 l 3,655 0.71 C NW 7th Avenue NW 36th Street to NW 54th Street E+50 (') 5,116 3,545 0.69 B NW 12th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street E+20 (2) 6,151 4,242 0.68 B NW 12th Avenue NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street E+20 (2) 6,427 4,500 (') 0.69 B NW 12th Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+20 (2) 5,599 3,891 (5) 0.69 B NW 12th Avenue NW 36th Street to SR 112 _ E+20 (2) 5,599 3,776 0.67 B NW 12th Avenue SR 112 to NW 54th Street E+20 (2) 4,702 3,835 0.81 D SR 112 (Airport Expressway) West of Interstate 95 D (3) 19,685 15,473 0.69 (6) D (s) Interstate 195 Interstate 95 to N Miami Avenue _ D (3) 13,776 12,021 0.77 (6) C ts? Interstate 195 N Miami Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 13,776 11,102 0.71 (6) C (s) Interstate 195 East of Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 14,190 10,356 0.64 (6) B (s) NW 36th Street NW 7th Avenue to N Miami Avenue E+50 (1) 3,265 2,948 0.89 D NE 36th Street N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue E+50 (1) 3,127 2,782 (6) 0.88 D NE 36th Street NE 2nd Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard E+50 (9 5,116 3,922 0.76 C NE 29th Street N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue E+20 (2) 3,276 1,023 0.31 B SR 836 (Dolphin Expressway) NW 12th Avenue to Interstate 95 D (3) 19,340 14,278 0.65 (6) B (s) Interstate 395 Interstate 95 to Biscayne Boulevard D (-9 14,466 10,757 0.66 (6) B (6) Interstate 395 East of Biscayne Boulevard D (" 15,570 11,022 0.63 (6) B (8) (I) This mad is allowed to reach 150% of capacity for LOS E due to as location in the urban mfll d area wnh ex or transn serve (2) This road is allowed to reach 120% of capacity for LOSE due to its location in the urban infill area and the presence of transit service operating with less than 20 minute headways (3) These roadway facilities are identified as part of the Florida Intrastate Highway System (FIRS) as noted on FDOT System Map dated January 2003 (4) 2013 person trips based on growth rate dernsed from comparison of 2015 FSUIMS model to 1999 FSUIMS validation model, applied exponentially to existing volumes, plus project traffic assigned to the roadway network using select zone analysis performed with 2013 FSUIMS model, see Table 1 (5) The growth rate for this link is negative; therefore a nominal growth rate of 0.5% was applied (6) On FIRS roadways, r/c based on LOS E' capacity. (7,) Level of service for major thoroughfares were measured using volume to capacity (i/c) ratios defined in the Miami -Dade Transportation Plan for the year 2025 (Figure 3). (8) Per Chapter 163.3180(10) of the Florida Statutes, the minimum level of service standard for FIHS roadways within the city is LOS 'D'. Source: MUATS 2025 Model Run without RAC project, FDOT Traffic Count Information CD (2002), Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Notes: Page 26 of 37 EXHIBIT 1.1 - CONTINUED LONG-TERM (2025) LOS MEASUREMENTS PERSON TRIPS Roadway Segment ALO S Capacity 25 Pe 20T psr(4son V/C Ratio LOS (7) Biscayne Boulevard 395 to Venetian Causeway E+50 (1) 8,515 7,675 0.88 D Biscayne Boulevard _Interstate Venetian Causeway to NE 20th Street E+50 (1) 10,447 8,619 0.79 C Biscayne Boulevard NE 20th Street to NE 29th Street E+50 (1) 7,945 8,530 1.03 E+50 Biscayne Boulevard NE 29th Street to I-195 / NE 36th Street E+50 (1) 7,945 8,891 1.07 E+50 Biscayne Boulevard Interstate 195 to NE 54th Street E+50 (1) 6,496 9,705 1.44 E+50 NE 2nd Avenue NE 29th Street to NE 36th Street E+20 (2) 3,966 3,124 0.77 C N Miami Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+20 (2) 3,276 3,098 0.95 E South of Interstate 395 / SR 836 D (3) 19,685 15,966 0.72 (6) C (a) Interstate 95 Interstate 95 I-395 / SR 836 to I-195 / SR 112 D (3) 24,669 24,040 0.86 (6) D (g) Interstate 95 North of Interstate 195 / SR 112 D (2) 24,669 26,911 0.96 (6) E (8) NW 7th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street E+50 (1) 5,116 4,350 0.84 D NW 7th Avenue NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street E+50 ()) 5,116 3,972 0.76 C NW 7th Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+50 (1) 5,116 3,923 0.75 C NW 7th Avenue NW 36th Street to NW 54th Street E+50 t1t 5,116 3,669 0.70 C NW 12th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street E+20 (2) 6,151 4,475 0.71 C NW 12th Avenue NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street E+20 (2) 6,427 4,763 tyi 0.72 C NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street E+20 « 5,599 3,919 0.68 B NW I2th Avenue NW 12th Avenue NW 36th Street to SR 112 E+20 (2) 5,599 4,086 t'l 0.71 C NW 12th Avenue SR 112 to NW 54th Street E+20 (2) 4,702 3,697 0.78 C SR 112 (Airport Expressway) West of Interstate 95 D (s) 19,685 17,415 0.78 (6) C (8) Interstate 195 Interstate 95 to N Miami Avenue D (31 13,776 11,942 0.76 (6} C (s) _ Interstate 195 N Miami Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 13,776 12,004 0.77 (6) CI'll Interstate 195 East of Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 14,190 11,025 0.68 (6) B (8) NW 36th Street NW 7th Avenue to N Miami Avenue E+50 (1) 3,265 3,317 0.98 E NE 36th Street N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue - E+50 (1) 3,127 2,648 0.82 D NE 36th Street NE 2nd Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard E+50 t11 5,116 3, 0.72 C NE 29th Street N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue E+20 (2) 3,276 1,119 0.34 B SR 836 (Dolphin Expressway) NW 12th Avenue to Interstate 95 D (3) 19,340 16,592 0.76 (6) C (s) Interstate 95 to Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 14,466 13,077 0.80 (6) B (.8) Interstate 395 Interstate 395 East of Biscayne Boulevard D (3) 15,570 11,848 0.67 (6) B (x) (1) This road is allowed to reach 150% of capacity for LOS E due to Its location m the urban in fnll area with extraorximary tmoist service (2) This road is allowed to reach 120% of capacity for LOSE due to Its location in the urban infill area and the presence of transit service operating with less than 20 minute headways (3) These roadway facilities are identified as part of the Florida Intrastate Highway System (FIRS) as noted on FDOT System Map dated January 2003 (4) 2025 volume based on growth rate derived from comparison of 2025 FSUIMS model to 1999 FSUTMS validation model, applied exponentially to 2008 background volume (5) The growth rate for this link is negative; therefore a nominal growth rate of 0.5% was applied (6) On FIRS roadways, v/c based on LDS E' capacity. (') Level of service for major thoroughfares were measured using volume to capacity (v/c) ratios defined in the Miami -Dade Transportation Plan for the year 2025 (Figure 3). (8) Per Chapter 163.3180(10) of the Florida Statutes, the minimum level of service standard for FIHS roadways within the city, is LOS 'D'. Sources: MUATS 2025 Model Run without RAC project, FDOT Traffic Count Information CD (2002), Kimley-lion and Associates, Inc. Notes: Page 27 of 37 Roadway Biscayne Boulevard Biscayne Boulevard Biscayne Boulevard Biscayne Boulevard Biscayne Boulevard NE 2nd Avenue N Miami Avenue Interstate 95 Interstate 95 Interstate 95 NW 7th Avenue NW 7th Avenue NW 7th Avenue NW 7th Avenue -NW 12th Avenue NW 12th Avenue NW 12th Avenue NW 12th Avenue NW 12th Avenue SR 112 (Airport Expressway) Interstate 195 Interstate 195 Interstate 195 NW 36th Street NE 36th Street NE 36th Street NE 29th Street SR 836 (Dolphin Expressway) Interstate 395 Interstate 395 EXHIBIT 1.1- CONTINUED LONGTERM (2025) LOS MEASUREMENTS WITH BUILDOUT OF RAC PERSON TRIPS Segment Interstate 395 to Venetian Causeway Venetian Causeway to NE 20th Street NE 20th Street to NE 29th Street NE 29th Street to I-195 / NE 36th Street Interstate 195 to NE 54th Street NE 29th Street to NE 36th Street NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street South of Interstate 395 / SR 836 1-3951 SR 836 to I-195 / SR 112 North of Interstate 195 / SR 112 SR 836 to NW 20th Street NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street NW 36th Street to NW 54th Street SR 836 to NW 20th Street NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street NW 36th Street to SR 112 SR 112 to NW 54th Street West of Interstate 95 Interstate 95 to N Miami Avenue N Miami Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard East of Biscayne Boulevard NW 7th Avenue to N Miami Avenue N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue NE 2nd Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue NW 12th Avenue to Interstate 95 Interstate 95 to Biscayne Boulevard East of Biscayne Boulevard Adopted LOS E+50 (1) E+50 (1) E+50 (1) E+50 (1) E+50 (1) E+20 (2) E+20 (2) D (3) D (3} D (3) E+50 (1) E+50 (1) E+50 (1) E+50 (1) E+20 (2) E+20 (2) E+20 (2) E+20 (2) E+20 (2) D (3) D (3) D (3) D (') E+50 (1) E+50 (1) E+50 (1) E+20 (2) D (3) D (3) D (3) Capacity 8,515 10,447 7,945 7,945 6,496 3,966 3,276 19,685 24,669 24,669 5,116 5,116 5,116 5,116 6,151 6,427 5,599 5,599 4,702 19,685 13,776 13,776 14,190 3,265 3,127 5,116 3,276 19,340 14,466 15,570 2025 Person Trips (4) 7,835 8,767 8,707 8,932 9,897 3,735 4,409 16,089 24,204 27,145 4,403 4,013 3,923 3,710 4,516 4,763 (') 3,919 4,168 (5) 3,779 17,948 12,941 12,089 11,271 3,686 2,705 4,168 1,229 16,784 13,159 11,943 V/C Ratio 0.90 0.81 1.05 1.08 1.47 0.93 1.35 0.72 (6} 0.86 (6) 0.97 (6) 0.85 0.77 0.75 0.71 0.71 0.72 0.68 0.73 0.79 0.so (6) 0.83 (6) 0.77 (6) 0.70 (6) 1.09 0.84 0.80 0.38 0.76 (6) 0.80 (6) 0.68 (6) LOS (7) D D E+50 E+50 E+50 E E+20 C (8) D (I} E (8) D D (s) D (s} C (8) B (8) E+50 ID D B c (SI D (8) B (x) Notes: (1) This road is allowed to reach 150% of capacity for LOSE due 10 its location in the urban infll area with extraordinary transit service (2) This road is allowed to reach 120% of capacity for LOSE due to its location in the urban infrll area and the presence of transit service operating with less than 20 minute headways (3) These roadway facilities are identified as part of the Florida Intrastate Highway System (FIRS) as noted on FDOT System Map dated January 2003 (4) 2025 volume based on growth rate derived front comparison of 2025 FSUT1vlS model to 1999 FSUTMS validation model, applied exponentially to 2008 background volumes, plus project 1rvic assigned to the roadway network using select zone analysis performed with 2025 FSU"1M5' model, see Table 1 (5) The growth rate for this link is negative; therefore a nominal growth rate of 0.5% was applied (6) On FIRS roadways, v/c based on LOS 'E' capacity. (7) Level of service for major thoroughfares were measured using volume to capacity (v/c) ratios defined in the Miami -Dade Transportation Plan for the year 2025 (Figure 3). (8) Per Chapter 163.3180(10) of the Florida Statutes, the minimum level of service standard for FIHS roadways within the city is LOS 'D Source: MUATS 2025 Model Run without RAC project, FDOT Traffic Count Information CD (2002), Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 28 of 37 EXHIBIT 1.2 GROWTH RATES VEHICLE AND PERSON TRIP Roadwa y Se ment g Short Term 2008 (1) Buildout 2013 (2) Long Range 2025 (3) Biscayne Boulevard Interstate 395 to Venetian Causeway 0.50% (4) 0.55% 0.37% Biscayne Boulevard Venetian Causeway to NE 20th Street 1.44% 1.15% 0.04% Biscayne Boulevard NE 20th Street to NE 29th Street 1.40% 1.01% 0.61 % Biscayne Boulevard NE 29th Street to 1-195 / NE 36th Street 0.39% 0.63% 0.35% Biscayne Boulevard Interstate 195 to NE 54th Street 1.70% 1.75% 0.83% NE 2nd Avenue NE 29th Street to NE 36th Street 0.62% 0.45% 0.93% N Miami Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street 0.50% (4) 1.28% 1.14% Interstate 95 South of Interstate 395 / SR 836 0.35% 0.11% 0.51% _ Interstate 95 I-395 / SR 836 to I-195 / SR 112 0.80% 0.38% 0.79% Interstate 95 North of Interstate 195/ SR 112 0.79% 0.33% 0.57% NW 7th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street 1.62% 1.03% 0.73% NW 7th Avenue NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street 0,05% 0.39% 0.65% NW 7th Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street 0.80% 0.81% 0.71% NW 7th Avenue NW 36th Street to NW 54th Street 1.21% 0.99% 0.48% NW 12th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street 0.63% 0.31% 0.46% NW 12th Avenue NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street 0.50% (4) 0.50% (4) 0.50% (4) NW 12th Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street 0.50%-(4) 0.50% (4) 0.13% NW 12th Avenue NW 36th Street to SR 112 0.50% (4) 0.01% 0.50% l4i NW 12th Avenue SR 112 to NW 54th Street 0.50% (4) 0.66% 0.09% SR 112 (Airport Expressway) West of Interstate 95 3.07% 2.05% 1.16% Interstate 195 Interstate 95 to N Miami Avenue 1.18% 1.06% 0.81% Interstate 195 N Miami Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard 1.35% 1.07% 0.78% _ Interstate 195 East of Biscayne Boulevard 0.98% 0.70% 0.64% NW 36th Street NW 7th Avenue to N Miami Avenue 1.85% 1.35% 2.34% NE 36th Street N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue 0.50% (4) 0.50% (4) 0.56% NE 36th Street NE 2nd Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard 0.50% (4) 0.64% 1.05% NE 29th Street N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue l .18% 0.55% 0.95% SR 836 (Dolphin Expressway) NW 12th Avenue to Interstate 95 0.22% 0.40% 1.14% Interstate 395 Interstate 95 to Biscayne Boulevard 1.02% 0.80% 1.36% Interstate 395 East of Biscayne Boulevard 0.17% 0.21% 0.58% Notes: (1) Short term growth rates calculated by comparing 2005 Short Range model volumes to 1999 validation model volumes. (2) Buildout year growth rates calculated by comparing 2015 interim model volumes to 1999 validation model volumes. (3) Long range growth rases calculated by comparing 2025 Long Rouge model volumes to 1999 validation model volumes. (4) Growth rate calculated to he negative; therefore a nominal 0.5% growth rale was used. Page29of37 Exhibit 2 Specific Mitigation Measures & Miami Downtown Transportation Master Plan — Executive Summary Mitigation measures included in Transportation Element Goals, Objectives, and Policies: Policy TR-1.1.4: As part of the Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR) on the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan (MCNP) scheduled for completion in 2004, and the subsequent comprehensive revision by amendment of the MCNP, the Transportation Element of the MCNP will be revised to introduce the Miami Intermodal Transportation (MIT) plan, replacing the former Transportation Corridors plan. The MIT plan will identify, describe, measure, and evaluate the multimodal transportation corridors, facilities and terminals in the City of Miami and recommend measures to enhance vehicular and mass transit operations, provide for greater pedestrian access and amenity, and offer incentives for use of alternative transportation modes. The MIT plan will pay particular attention to the differing characteristics of Miami's neighborhoods such as land use, population density, economic activity, housing and business type and quality, and neighborhood plans, and will develop detailed standards for transportation facilities and services that will complement neighborhood development, redevelopment, and conservation. Miami's downtown will be the subject of special attention, to ensure that its new residential development will enjoy the benefits of an improved multimodal transportation system as described in the Miami Downtown Transportation Master Plan. Policy TR-1.1.5: The City, through its membership on the Transportation Planning Council (TPC) and its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, will support the County's efforts to increase the efficiency and enhance the safety of the existing thoroughfare network by such methods as improved signal timing, better intersection and street design, car pooling, and encouraging staggered work schedules. Policy TR-1.1.6: The City, through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, will encourage Miami -Dade County to expand its public bus transit system, including the expansion of neighborhood -based local circulator services, and will work with Miami -Dade County in the formulation of bus system policies, and encourage Miami -Dade County not to adopt level of service standards or land use patterns that are incompatible with the cost effective operation of a public mass transit system. Policy TR-1.1.9: Require new development in downtown to implement transportation control measure provisions in accordance with Section 14-182, "Transportation Control Measures" of the City Code, to promote a general reduction in vehicular traffic by increasing auto occupancy and transit ridership. Policy TR-1.1.15: Through enforcement of minimum and maximum on -site parking limitations, as provided for in Section 14-182 "Transportation Control Measures" of the City Code, the City will manage the downtown parking supply to maintain an appropriate balance among the need to promote economic growth, to facilitate local traffic circulation, and to encourage public transportation use. Page 3oof37 Policy TR-1.1.16: Through enforcement of applicable provisions of Section 14-182 "Transportation Control Measures" of the City Code, regarding downtown parking requirements, together with the powers of the City's Off -Street Parking Authority Department, the City will promote the development of public and private peripheral parking garages near the expressway and arterial entrances to downtown in order to reduce congestion in the core area, and will increase the supply of low cost, short-term parking in public facilities near retail and commercial nodes to encourage shopping trips and other business activity in downtown. Policy TR-1.5.2: The City's land development regulations will encourage high density commercial and residential development and redevelopment in close proximity to Metrorail and Metromover stations, consistent with the Station Area Design and Development Plan for each station. Because many transit riders begin and end their trips as pedestrians, the City, through its land development regulations and with Miami - Dade County concurrence, will require, as appropriate, continuous sidewalks to the transit station, and pedestrian -oriented amenities such as shade trees, awnings, and other weather protection. Policy TR-1.5.6: The City of Miami will, through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, assist Miami - Dade County in the completion of the planning and construction of Metrorail Phase II by using the City's land development regulations to help direct development where it will support the densities required for urban rail transit systems. Policy TR-1.5.11: Through enforcement of applicable provisions of Section 14-182 "Transportation Control Measures" of the City Code, the City will seek to require new large-scale development to adopt and enforce measures that will reduce the generation of new single -occupant passenger car trips in areas of high -density development, and encourage the use of multiple -occupant vehicles, including mass transit, for home -based work trips. Policy TR-1.5.12: The City, through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, will support Miami -Dade County in its implementation of individual projects described above in order to achieve the Regional objective to increase the share of transit ridership by 50 percent of total person trips during the peak hour and 30 percent during the off-peak hours. Objective TR-1.6: The City shall through its Intergovernmental Coordination Policies, coordinate its transportation plans and its mass transit planning for transportation disadvantaged people, with those of Miami -Dade County, other local municipalities, and the State of Florida. Policy TR-1.61: The City shall annually review subsequent Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT) Five -Year Transportation Plans, and the Metropolitan Planning Organization's Long Range Transportation Plan Update and coordinate the City's transportation planning with these plans. Page 31of37 Mitigation measures proposed for inclusion in Transportation Element Goals, Objectives, and Policies: Policy TR-1.1.17: The City of Miami will coordinate with South Florida Commuters Services and the Florida Department of Transportation to support and encourage City employee participation in the Downtown Miami Transportation Management Initiative (TMI1 established to increase the use of alternative modes of transportation by offering Downtown employers and their employee's alternatives to driving to work alone. The City will also work with the Downtown TMI to ensure consistent implementation of the City's Section 14-182 "Transportation Control Measures" and provide assistance to employers and businesses required to implement the measures. Policy TR-1.1.18: The City will work with representatives of the Miami -Dade Transit Agency to increase the number of MDT bus routes operating_within the City that participate in the Agency's Bike and Ride Program. Policy TR-1.1.19: Prior to submittal of the 2005 Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR), the City will amend the Transportation Element to incorporate recommendations of the Miami Downtown Transportation Master Plan, particularly those relating to the Buena Vista Yards Regional Activity Center. Policy TR-1.1.20: Prior to submittal of the 2005 Evaluation and Appraisal Report (EAR), the City will identify funding mechanisms for the cost of studies, plans and programs contained herein as well as targeted physical improvements to serve the residents, employees and visitors of and to the RAC. Page 32 of 37 Exhibit 3 School Board Letter Regarding Collaborative Process Page 33 of 37 Miami -Dade County Public Schools giving our students file world Ana RIJO*Conde, interim Assistant Superintendent • Facillrips Operations. Maintenance and Planning October 28, 2003 Mr, Ken Metcalf Regional Planning Administrator Division of Community Planning Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100 Re: City of Miami Proposed Regional Activity Center Mlemi-Dade County School Board Dr. Michael M. Krop, Choir Dr. Robert B. Ingram, Vice Chair Agustin J. Samara Frank J. Bolalfos Frank J. Cobo Perte rebores Hangman Betsy H. Kaplan Dr. Marta Ptirez Dr. Solomon C, Stinson Superintendent of Schools Merrett R. Slier -helm Dear Mr. Metcalf: In accordance with the Interlocal Agreement for School Facilities Planning, two dialogue meetings have been held between the School Board, City of Miami (City) and representatives of the proposed development to collaboratively develop options that alm to provide additional student capacity to accommodate new students generated by the proposed Regional Activity Center. We are pleased to indicate that the meetings have bean productive and we are currently exploring various alternatives that would Increase the availability of additional student stations to mitigate the impact associated with the subject application, as well as for other developments within the general urban !Will area of the City. Such options include, but are not limited to, developer land donations, expanding exisling schools and exploring acquisition of available govemment surplus lands. The. District Is grateful that the City and development representatives have taken the time 10 communicate with the District and we look forward to continuing the dialogue sessions on this matter. The District will advise the Department of Community Affairs in writing in the event the District formalizes a mitigation option with the affected stakeholders to address the school Issues. Please be advised that any options proffered are subject to School Board approval. Should you have any questions or comments, please do not hesitate to contact me at (305) 995- 7286, Sincerely, Vivian G. V. ffaamil Supervisor VGV:mo L-1906 cc: Mr. Fernando Albuerne Mr. Michael Levine •Mr. Ivan Rodriguez School Board Administration Building • 1450 N.F. 2nd Avenue, Suite 525 • Miami, Florida 33132 305-995-7285 • FAX 305-995-4760 • www.ARljo@facll.dade.k12.fl.us 2.d 09LtSBbSDE 9NIWWH 1d B.LIS Wd92:C 6002 Ll nohl Roadway Biscayne Boulevard Biscayne Boulevard Biscayne Boulevard Biscayne Boulevard Biscayne Boulevard NE 2nd Avenue N Miami Avenue Interstate 95 Interstate 95 Interstate 95 NW 7th Avenue NW 7th Avenue - NW 7th Avenue NW 7th Avenue NW 12th Avenue NW 12th Avenue NW 12th Avenue NW 12th Avenue NW 12th Avenue SR 112 (Airport Expressway) Interstate 195 Interstate 195 Interstate 195 NW 36th Street NE 36th Street NE 36th Street NE 29th Street SR 836 (Dolphin Expressway) Interstate 395 Interstate 395 EXHIBIT 4 LEVEL OF SERVICE DETERMP4ATION Segment Interstate 395 to Venetian Causeway Venetian Causeway to NE 20th Street NE 20th Street to NE 29th Street NE 29th Street to I-195 / NE 36th Street Interstate 195 to NE 54th Street NE 29th Street to NE 36th Street NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street South of Interstate 395 / SR 836 I-395 /SR 836 toI-195/SR112 North of Interstate 195 / SR 112 SR 836 to NW20thStreet NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street NW 36th Street to NW 54th Street SR 836 to NW 20th Street NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street NW 36th Street to SR 112 SR 112 to NW 54th Street West of Interstate 95 Interstate 95 to N Miami Avenue N Miami Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard East of Biscayne Boulevard NW 7th Avenue to N Miami Avenue N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue NE 2nd Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue NW 12th Avenue to Interstate 95 Interstate 95 to Biscayne Boulevard East of Biscayne Boulevard No. Lanes 6 4 4 4 4 4 4 8 10 10 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 6 6 6 6 2 2 2 4 8 6 6 Jurisdiction State State State State State County County State State State State State State State State State State State State State State State State State State State County State State State Classification Arterial -Class III Arterial -Class III Arterial -Class III Arterial -Class III Arterial -Class III Major City/County Major City/County Freeway -Class II Freeway -Class II Freeway -Class 11 Arterial -Class 11 Arterial -Class II Arterial -Class II Arterial -Class II Arterial -Class III Arterial -Class IlI Arterial -Class III Arterial -Class III Arterial -Class III Freeway -Class II Freeway -Class II Freeway -Class II Freeway -Class II Arterial -Class III Arterial -Class III Arterial -Class III Major City/County Freeway -Class II Freeway -Class II Freeway -Class II Divided? No No No No No No No Yes Yes Yes No No No No No No No No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Yes Yes Yes Turn Lanes? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No Page 34 of 37 EXHIBIT 5.1 COMPARISON OF BACKGROUND AND BACKGROUND+PROJECT CONDITIONS VEHICLE TRIPS Roadway Segment Capacity Short -Term (2008) Buildout 2013) Long -Range Background (2025) With Project Background Wtth Project Background With Project Biscayne Boulevard Interstate 395 to Venetian Causeway 4,456 D D E E E E Biscayne Boulevard Venetian Causeway to NE 20th Street 4,456 D D D E D D Biscayne Boulevard NE 20th Street to NE 29th Street 2,964 E+50 E+50 E+50 E+50 E+50 E+50 Biscayne Boulevard NE 29th Street to I-195 / NE 36th Street 2,964 E+50 E+50 E+50 E+50 E+50 E+50 Biscayne Boulevard Interstate 195 to NE 54th Street 2,964 F F F F F F NE 2nd Avenue NE 29th Street to NE 36th Street 2,340 B B B C C D N Miami Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street 2,340 C C D E+20 E F Interstate 95 South of Interstate 395 / SR 836 13,420 B (8) B (8) B (8) B (8) C ce) C (8) Interstate 95 1-395 / SR 836 to I-195 / SR 112 16,980 C (8) C (8) C ") C (8) D (8) D (8) Interstate 95 North of Interstate 195 / SR 112 16,980 D (8) D (8) D (8) E of E (8) E Cs) NW 7th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street 2,964 C C C C C D NW 7th Avenue NW loth Street to NW 29th Street 2,964 B B B B C C NW 7th Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street 2,964 B B B B C C NW 7th Avenue NW 36th Street to NW 54th Street 2,964 B B B B B B NW 12th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street 2,964 C C C C D D NW 12th Avenue NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street 2,964 C C C C D D NW 12th Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street 2,964 C C C C C C NW 12th Avenue NW 36th Street to SR 112 2,964 C C C C C D NW 12th Avenue SR 112 to NW 54th Street 2,964 C C C C C C SR 112 (Airport Expressway) West of Interstate 95 13,420 B (8) B (8) B (8) C c8) D (8) D (8) Interstate 195 Interstate 95 to N Miami Avenue 9,840 B (8) B (8) B (e) C (8) C (8) D (8) Interstate 195 N Miami Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard 9,840 B c8i B (8) B (8) C (8) C c" C (8) Interstate 195 East of Biscayne Boulevard 9,840 B (8) B (8) B (8) B (8) B (8) C (8) NW 36th Street NW 7th Avenue to N Miami Avenue 1,544 C C C E E+50 E+50 NE 36th Street N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue 1,544 C C C E D D NE 36th Street NE 2nd Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard 2,964 B B B C B C NE 29th Street N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue 2,340 B B B B B B SR 836 (Dolphin Expressway) NW 12th Avenue to Interstate 95 13,420 B (8) B c8) B (8) B (8) C c8) C (8) Interstate 395 Interstate 95 to Biscayne Boulevard 9,840 B (8) B (8) B (8) B (8) D (8) D (8) Interstate 395 East of Biscayne Boulevard 9,840 B (8) B (8) B (8) B (8) B (8) B (8) Page 35 of 37 EXHIBIT 5.2 COMPARISON OF BACKGROUND AND BACKGROUND+PROJECT CONDITIONS PERSON TRIPS Roadway Segment Capacity Short -Term (2008) Buildout (2013) Long -Ran e (2025) Background With Project Background with Project Background With Project Biscayne Boulevard Interstate 395 to Venetian Causeway 8,515 D D D D D D Boulevard Venetian Causeway to NE 20th Street 10,447 C D D D C D _Biscayne Biscayne Boulevard NE 20th Street to NE 29th Street 7,945 E E E E+50 E+50 E+50 Biscayne Boulevard NE 29th Street to 1-195 / NE 36th Street 7,945 E+50 E+50 E+50 E+50 E+50 E+50 Biscayne Boulevard Interstate 195 to NE 54th Street 6,496 E+50 E+50 E+50 E+50 E+50 E+50 NE 2nd Avenue NE 29th Street to NE 36th Street 3,966 B D 13 D C E N Miami Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street 3,276 C E+20 D E+20 E E+20 Interstate 95 South of Interstate 395 / SR 836 19,685 B B B B C C Interstate 95 I-395 / SR 836 to 1-195 / SR 112 24,669 C C C C D D Interstate 95 North of Interstate 195 / SR 112 24,669 D D D D E E NW 7th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street 5,116 C C C C D D NW 7th Avenue NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street 5,116 C C C C C C NW 7th Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street 5,116 B B C C C C NW 7th Avenue NW 36th Street to NW 54th Street 5,116 B B B B C C NW 12th Avenue SR 836 to NW 20th Street 6,151 B B B B C C NW 12th Avenue NW 20th Street to NW 29th Street 6,427 B B B B C C NW 12th Avenue NW 29th Street to NW 36th Street 5,599 B B B B B B NW 12th Avenue NW 36th Street to SR 112 5,599 B B B B C C NW 12th Avenue SR 112 to NW 54th Street 4,702 C C C D C C SR 112 (Airport Expressway) West of Interstate 95 19,685 B D B D C D Interstate 195 Interstate 95 to N Miami Avenue 13,776 B C B C C D Interstate 195 N Miami Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard 13,776 B B B C C C Interstate 195 East of Biscayne Boulevard 14,190 B B B B B B NW 36th Street NW 7th Avenue to N Miami Avenue 3,265 C D C D E E+50 NE 36th Street N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue 3,127 C D C D D D NE 36th Street NE 2nd Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard 5,116 B C B C C D NE 29th Street N Miami Avenue to NE 2nd Avenue 3,276 B B B B B B SR 836 (Dolphin Expressway) NW 12th Avenue to Interstate 95 19,340 B B B B C C Interstate 395 Interstate 95 to Biscayne Boulevard 14,466 B B B B B D Interstate 395 East of Biscayne Boulevard 15,570 B B B B B B Page 36 of 37