Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTraffic Review Analysis08/13/2004 17:42 FAX U S '+ 4111Vr111l1%iU1 •;;jvvri vvv • • URS August 13th, 2004 Ms. Lilia I. Medina Assistant Transportation Coordinator Office of Transportation, City Manager's Office City of Miami 444 SW 2nd Avenue Miami, Florida 33130 Re: ToearlfCSF� . Sufficient Letter — W.O. # 74 Dear Ms. Medina: We have reviewed the traffic impact study dated July 2004 for the Columbus Tower project prepared by Transport Analysis Professionals, Inc. (TAP). Please note that on July 29th 2004, we contacted TAP over the phone and requested supplemental information in order to complete the review. Attached please find our detail review comments and the supplemental information provided by TAP. At this time, we conclude that the traffic report, along with the supplemental information provided by TAP adequately addresses all the traffic issues and were found to be sufficient. As per City's requirement to promote the use of mass transit within the downtown area a metromover station along the northern periphery of the project with an internal access from the project will help to encourage the use of metromover. Should you have any questions, please call me or Quazi Masood at 954.739.1881. Sincerely, UR Cor or. ion Southern Raj ha ugam, P E. Seni r Traffic gineer Attachment cc: Kevin Walford, Planner 1, Department of Planning & Zoning, City of Miami Henry A. Fanderi, PE, PTOE, Transport Analysis Professionals URS Corporation Lakeshore Complex 5100 NW 33rd Avenue, Suite 150 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309.6375 lei: 954.739.1881 Fax: 954.739.1789 08/13/2004 17:42 FAX URS URS MEMORANDUM To: Li€ia I. Medina From: Raj Shanmugam, P.E. Date; August 13th, 2004 Subject: Columbus Tower MUSP Traffic Impact Analysis Review — W.Q. # 74 We have reviewed the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) report prepared by Transport Analysis Professionals (TAP) for the Columbus Tower MUSP project, dated July 2004. The report is accompanied by site drawings (dated July 71h 2004) and a supplemental response letter (dated July 29th 2004). Please note that this is an updated TPA to address the modification of original report due to the changed land use from office space to residential condominium units. The original report named as Columbus Office Tower was submitted by TAP in November 2003 to the City of Miami and was approved. The proposed project will be a single --phase mixed -use development located on the western side of Biscayne Boulevard and east of NE 3rd Avenue, between East Flagler Street and NE 1st Street. The project is located within the Downtown Miami CBD area. The project is scheduled for completion by early 2007. Currently, the project site is occupied by 26,047 square feet of retail space. The report indicates that the applicant is proposing to build approximately 16,000 square feet of mixed -use retail space, "up -to" 525 residential condominiums and a parking garage. Please note that the modified project is still under review stage by the City of Miami and there is a possibility that the final size of retail area and residential units may change. But to eliminate the potential for underestimating the project traffic, the traffic report assumed an increased land use (22,000 square feet of retail space and 600 residential condominium units) for analyses. The site plans show that a total of 722 parking spaces will be provided for the proposed project. The report includes reduced copies of street level plan and a landscaping plan. Our findings are as follows: 1 General Location Map: The report includes a location map, which adequately identifies the project location and surrounding street network (Figure 1). 2. Study Area: According to the traffic report, NE 8th Street to the north, Miami River to the south., Biscayne Bay to the east, and NW/SW 4:1, Avenue to the west define' the study area boundaries. We agree with the selection of the study boundary. LA5 Corporation Lakeshore Complex 5100 NW 33rd Avenge, Suite 150 Fort Lauderdete, FL 33309-6375 Tel: 954.739.1881 Fax; 954.739.1789 08/13/2004 17:42 FAX URS -+ i:11YVkDt1A�11 C V U 4/ U U a • • URS Ms. L(Jia L Medina Columbus Tower - Traffic impact Analysis Review Memo August i3°', 2004 Page 2 of 4 The study identifies three signalized intersections (Biscayne Boulevard/Flagler Street (east), Biscayne Boulevard/Flagler Street (west) and Biscayne Boulevard/NE Is` Street), one un-Signalized intersection (NE 1`t Street/NE 3rd Avenue) and two -roadway (Biscayne Boulevard and East Flagler Street) as most significant to the project. The intersection at Biscayne Boulevard/East Flagler Street functions as two separate intersections for a very wide median located on Biscayne Boulevard. According to the supplemental response letter provided by TAP dated July 29th 2004, the intersection at East Flagler Street/NE 3rd Avenue was excluded from the analysis due to the absence of any conflicting movements. Currently both NE 3rd Avenue and East Flagler Street operate as one-way roadway in the northbound and westbound directions respectively. In the future build -out year the operating condition of NE 3r1:1 Avenue will remain unchanged in the northbound movement; whereas the East Flagler Street will operate as two-way roadway with a prohibited left turn at NE 3`d Avenue. Therefore, the applicant concludes that there will be no conflicting movements in either the existing or the future conditions and so the said intersection can be excluded from the capacity analysis. We agree with the findings. 3. Site Access: The primary access to the on -site parking garage is proposed via two separate two-way entry/exit driveways along NW 3rd Avenue near the north and south end of the building. The report includes an HCS analysis of both the project driveways. The analyses show that both the proposed project driveways will operate within acceptable LOS standards in the future build -out year with project scenario. The report also demonstrates that an additional service driveway along NE 1s1 Street will also be provided for the project. From the site plan it appears that delivery vehicles will. have to back in to the service drive from NE 'lst Street. 4. Data Collection: Two-hour turning movement counts were collected during the P.M. peak hour at the study intersections during the first week of July 2003 for the original report. The counts were then adjusted correctly by applying appropriate multiplication factor to reflect the existing field condition (year 2004). No 24-hour machine counts were collected for this project. However, the daily traffic volumes gathered from FDOT's traffic database is included in the report. The report also includes the existing signal timing data, collected from the Miami Dade County traffic control computer system and a schematic of lane geometry at the analyzed intersections. 5. Adjustment Factors: Year 2002 FDOT adjustment factors were incorporated into the analysis, which is acceptable. We agree with the use of peak season adjustment factor of 1.02. O8/13/2004 17:42 FAX iitc5 4 A 1 1 S!1' L11 A1i11 URS Ms. Like t. Medina Columbus rower - Traffic Impact Analysis Review Memo August 1t, 2004 Page 3 of 4 6. Existing Conditions Capacity Analysis: An existing level of service analysis of three study intersections and two roadway links were performed. We agree with the use of HCS software program and person - trip methodology for the intersection and link analyses respectively. The intersection capacity analysis shows that all the study intersections, signalized and un-signalized both, operate within acceptable LOS standards. The capacity analysis for the roadway corridors show that both Biscayne Boulevard and East Flagler Street operate at acceptable LOS standards. We agree with the findings. 7. Planned Roadway Improvements: The 2005 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) was reviewed for planned or programmed roadway improvements within the study area. The report identifies five roadway improvements (access improvements of Port of Miami, mufti -lane construction of Biscayne Boulevard/US 1 from NE 5th Street to NE 13th Street, conversion of roadway operation of Flagler Street from one-way to two-way, resurfacing of SE/SW 15t Street from SW 2nd Avenue to Biscayne Boulevard and NE 1st Street from Biscayne Boulevard to NW 3rd Avenue). Please note among the five projects listed herein, only the Flagler Street two-way conversion project will have an impact within the study area. We agree with the findings and its application. 8. Background Traffic: FDOT projections for East Flagler Street, west of Biscayne Boulevard and SE 1st Street show no growth in the build -out year 2007. However, to perform a conservative analysis, one -percent (1.0%) background growth rate, compounded annually, was applied to all streets except Biscayne Boulevard. An average linear rate of three - percent (3.0%) per year was applied to Biscayne Boulevard. We agree with the growth rate and its application. 9. Committed Developments: Seven recent major committed developments were included in the analysis, based on information from the City of Miami Planning and Zoning Department development report dated June 1st 2004. The committed developments are as follows: • Mist; • Dupont Towers; • One Miami; • Everglades on the Bay; • The Lofts Downtown; • Miami River Renaissance. • Met 1; We agree with the applicant's list of committed developments. The trip generation and Land Use Codes (LUC) for each committed developments listed above is included in the back of the report. 08/13/2004 17:43 FAX urca • • • URS Ms. Lilia L Medina Columbus Tower - Traffic impact Analysis Review Memo August 13'^, 2004 Page 4 of 4 The report includes the capacity analyses for the study intersections for the future condition without project scenario. The intersection capacity analysis section reveals that the study intersections would operate at acceptable LOS standards. 10. Trip Generation: The trip generation for the site is calculated based on ITE Trip Generation Manual (seventh edition), The LUC's for the proposed project, 230 and 814 were used correctly in calculating the PM peak hour gross trips for residential condominium and specialty retail store respectively. The gross trips were then adjusted or reduced by the vehicle occupancy adjustment factor (16%), transit trip reduction factor (22.6%) and pedestrian/bicycle trip reduction factor (10%) based on Downtown Miami DRI-II. There was no additional adjustment to trip generation for internalization of traffic within the CBD. 11. Trip Distribution: The project is located within new TAZ 543. The cardinal distribution obtained from Miami -Dade County was correctly used to distribute the project traffic. 12. Future Conditions with Project: Under the future conditions with project scenario, both the Biscayne Boulevard and East Flagler Street function at acceptable LOS standard. Afi the intersections near the project site are anticipated to function within the accepted LOS threshold. The study includes the queuing analyses at both the project driveways. The report illustrates that the project will not create an unacceptable delay or queuing within the project. The parking and loading area information for the proposed project will be provided separately to the City of Miami in architectural plans. The study also includes a section describing the Transportation Control Measures Plan (TCMP). According to section 14.182D of the City Code, the City requires the applicant should encourage the use of mass transit for projects located within the downtown area. it is anticipated that by providing the transit shelters, transit turnout lanes, or other physical improvements intended to improve the safety, comfort, and convenience encourages the use of mass transit. Note that the northern boundary of the property is immediately adjacent to the elevated metromover guideway. Therefore a metromover station along the northern boundary of this project will be consistent with the intent of City Code 14.182D_ Further, an internal connection to this transit station within the project building will benefit the future residents and the visitors. We conclude that the traffic report, along with the supplemental information provided, adequately addresses all the traffic issues. In addition, we emphasize the potential greater benefit that can be realized by adding a transit station along the northern periphery of the project.