Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTraffic Impact Study II• • October 4, 2004 Ms. Lilia !. Medina, AlCP Assistant Transportation Coordinator City of Miami, Office of the City Manager/Transportation 444 SW 2nd Avenue (10'h Floor) Miami, Florida 33130 Re: River Front (West) Sufficient Letter — W.O. # 71 Via Fax and US Mail Dear Ms. Medina: ) We have reviewed the traffic impact study ass©ciat Asted July sociates, cfor (DPAj River Please note project prepared by David Plummer an supplemental September 22nd 2004, we contacted DPA over the phone and requested information in order to complete the review. Attached please find our detail review comments and the supplemental information provided by DPA. We conclude the traffic report, along with the supplemental information provided by DPA adequately addresses all the traffic issues and are found to be sufficient. Please note the report does not provide any information regarding delivery vehicle maneuverability within the project site. As this project progresses through the review process, the applicant must submit an acceptable site circulation plan for approval by the City staff. This project is located immediately adjacent to the Metrorail line. As such, a Metrorail station along the western periphery of this project with an internal access from the project will help to encourage the use of mass transit in downtown accommodat+ng aiami. Metrorail We recommend the applicant should explore the feasibility of station within their site plan. Should you have any questions, please call me or Quazi Masood at 954.739.1881. tion Southern Ra Shanm. •a , P.E. Se for Traffic gineer cc: Mr. Kevin Watford, Planner (, City of Miami Ms. Sonia Shreffler-Bogart, PE, David Plummer & Associates Atta 6Ke°ration a shore Complex 5100 NW 33rd Avenue, Suite 150 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309-6375 Tel: 954.739.1881 Far• q 7. _1789 ViA FAX and US Mail MEMORANDUM To: !ilia I. Medina From: Raj Shanmugam, P.E. Date: October 1, 2004 Subject: River Front (West) USP Traffic Impact Analysis Review W.O.W # 71 TIA report prepared by David Plummer & (West) project, dated March Plummer Please We have reviewed a )for Impact eiver Front )) p and corrections l the Asociates, Inc. the(Dinitial for the on initial review, we noted several omissions ra 2004 and requested note that upover thephone on September 23 report and contactedformation TAP order to complete the review process. The original report was accompanied in site drawings (dated June 24th 2004), was accompanied by fixed -use development and located on hestlsicde of The proposed project will beam 3rd Street and Miami River. Theproject is within ed South Miami Avenue between Downtown B buildof 1,350 projectectiis of the Downt©wn Miami Area -Wide DRI. Build out of the anii the boundaries2012.report indicates that the applicantapartments, residential dueling in of which The care feet of 900 are residential condominiums club, r5,000 square 15, 0g units ace, 5,000 square feet feet of ee 1 usupermarket feet , retail space, square feet of restaurant and 80,000 squaren shows at l of office1,867 uspace, 5,000 plan. The site p which is consistent with the site and they will be distributed in the nine space, provided for this project parking spaces will be p level parking garage built within the project boundary. Our findings are as follows: h two t adequate) The report includes a location p, whicwhit k 1 General yLdeon identifiesMap' the project location and surrounding (Exhibit 1). Study Area: According to the traffic report, SE/SW 2pd Street to the north, Sto o the south, South Miami Avenue to he�Ne t, ane wd W 2 8 Sht t area boundaries. agreith �d AAvvenue too the westdefineboundary. rystudy the selection of the study bon d URS Corporation Lakeshore Complex 5100 NW 33rd Avenue, Suite 150 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309-6375 • • Ms. Lilia 1. Medina River Front (West) - Traffic Impact Analysis Review Memo October 1, 2004 Page 2 of 4 The report identifies three signalized (South Miami Avenue/I-95 exit ramp, South Miami Avenue/S 7th Street and SW 3rd Street/SW 2n` Avenue) and one un-signalized intersections (South Miami Avenue/S 3rd Street) and four -roadway facilities (South Miami Avenue, SW 2nd Avenue, SW 7th Street and SW 8th Street) as most significant to the project. We agree with the selection of intersections and roadway facilities. 3. Site Access: Primary access to the site is provided via a two-way driveway, connecting to SW 3rd Street. An additional secondary access to the project site will be provided through South Miami Avenue via a right -in and right -out driveway. The report does riot provide any information about maneuvering of delivery trucks to the project site. However, as this project progresses through the review process, the applicant must submit an acceptable site circulation plan and approved by the City staff. 4. Data Collection: Two-hour turning movement counts were collected during P.M. peak hour at all four -study intersections during the second week of March 2004. Also, 24-hour bi-directional machine counts were collected at five different locations on SW 2" d Avenue, SW 7th Street, SW 8th Street and couple on South Miami Avenue during the week of March 11th 2004. The existing signal timing data was collected from the Miami Dade County Traffic Control Center and the information is appended with the report. A schematic of existing lane geometry at the study intersections is also included in the report. 5. Adjustment Factors: Year 2003 FDOT peak season weekly volume adjustment factor of 1.00 was used correctly. 6. Existing Conditions Capacity Analysis: An existing level of service analysis of four roadway facilities and all four study intersections was performed. We agree with the use of "person -trip methodology" for the roadway facility and HCS-2000 for the intersection capacity analyses. The report shows all the four intersections operate within acceptable LOS standards at existing traffic condition. A revised intersection analysis at South Miami Avenue/SW 3rd Street is provided and the analysis shows the intersection operates within acceptable LOS standard. The roadway facilities also operate at an acceptable V/C ratio, such as, South Miami Avenue at 0.23 between SW 3rd Street and SW 6th Street, SW 2nd Avenue at 0.51 between SW 2nd Street and SW 8th Street, SW 7th Street at 0.50 between SW 1st Avenue and Brickell Avenue and SW 8th Street at 0.33 between Brickell Avenue and South Miami Avenue. Roadway vehicular capacity and Transit (Metrobus and Metrorail) information were obtained from FDOT Q/LOS Handbook and Downtown Miami Area -Wide DRI Increment II respectively, and it is acceptable. • • Ms. Lilia I. Medina River Front (West) - Traffic Impact Analysis Review Memo October 1, 2004 Page 3 of 4 7. Planned Roadway Improvements: The 2003 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and 2025 Metro -Dade Transportation Plan Long Range Element (LRTP) were reviewed for planned or programmed roadway and transit improvements within the study area. No officially programmed or planned capacity improvement projects were identified. We agree with the findings. 8. Background Traffic: A two -percent (2.0%) background growth rate, compounded annually, was applied to account for future growth of un- identified developments in the area, based on existing (2004) traffic count data. 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 Report on Private Development from 1996 to present (updated March, 2004). The committed developments are as follows: • Brickell on the River; • Brickell Commons; • The Beacon Brickell Village; • Neo II; • Miami River Renaissance; • One Riverview Square; • Latitude on the River. We agree with the applicant's list of committed developments. The trip generation, trip distribution and the Land Use Codes (LUC) for each committed developments listed above is included at the back of the report. The intersection and roadway facilities analyses for the future condition without project scenario are included in the report. The report shows all the four intersections operate within acceptable LOS standards at the build -out year traffic condition without the project. A revised intersection analysis at South Miami Avenue/SW 3rd Street is provided and the analysis shows the intersection would operate within acceptable LOS standard. The roadway facilities also operate at an acceptable V/C ratio, such as, South Miami Avenue at 0.30 between SW 3`d Street and SW 6th Street, SW 2` 1 Avenue at 0.80 between SW 2hd Street and SW 8th Street, SW 7th Street at 0.75 between SW 1st Avenue and Brickell Avenue and SW 8th Street at 0.54 between South Miami Avenue and SW 1st Avenue. I.D. Trip Generation: The trip generation for the site is calculated from the ITE Trip Generation Manual. The supplemental document explains the reason for using average trip rates instead of the fitted curve while calculating the trips for general office land use (LUC 710). We accept the approach. The gross trips were adjusted correctly by using the vehicle • • i Ms. Lille 1. Medina River Front (West) - Traffic Impact Analysis Review Memo October 1, 2004 Page 4 of 4 occupancy adjustment factor (16%), transit trip reduction factor (22.6%) and pedestrian/bicycle trip reduction factor (10.0%). All the adjustment factors were obtained from the Downtown Miami DRI Increment II. 11. Trip Distribution: The supplemental document shows that the current Miami Urban Area Transportation Study (MUATS) does not include any trip assignment for the corresponding TAZ. However, according to MPO's recommendation DPA used the trip assignment for the corresponding TAZ 662 based on the previous Long Range Transportation Program (LRTP). We agree with the findings. 12. Future Conditions with Project: The intersection capacity and roadway facilities analyses for the future build -out year with project scenario are included. The report shows all the four intersections operate within acceptable LOS standards at the build -out year traffic condition with the project. The roadway facilities also operate at an acceptable V/C ratio, such as, South Miami Avenue at 0.32 between SW 3rd Street and SW 6th Street, SW 2nd Avenue at 0.81 between SW 2hd Street and SW 8th Street, SW 7th Street at 0.77 between SW 1St Avenue and Brickell Avenue and SW 8th Street at 0.54 between South Miami Avenue and SW 15t Avenue. The report includes analysis of both the project driveways. A revised intersection analysis at project driveway/South Miami Avenue is provided and the analysis shows the driveway would operate within acceptable LOS standard. The Transportation Control Measures Plan (TCMP) was provided as a supplemental document. 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. ft 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 western boundary of the property is immediately adjacent to the elevated Metrorail guideway. Therefore a Metrorail station along the western 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 western periphery of the project. w, < r 1 .t...Ueav J. 5444498E, DAVID PL.UMMERANDASSO PAGE Si • TRANSPORTATION • CIVIL • STRUCTURAL • ENVIRONMENTAL • DAVID PLUMMER & ASSOCIATES, INC. To: Affiliation: From: RE: cc: i Facsimile Transmission Mr. Quazi Masood URS Corporation Scoria Shreff er-Bogart River Front West Parcel - 404103 file Fax #: Phone #: Date: Pages: (954) 739-1789 (954) 739-1881 September 27, 20d4 12 page(s), Meinding cover Quazi: Per our telephone conversation 1 am forwarding responses to your comments: 1. The peak hour factor has been revised at South Miami Avenue/SW 3 Street. The result HCM analysis output has been revised. did not change. 2. The analysis for the South Miami Driveway has been revised; there was a typo in the input. 3. The 1'1 E rate was used for trip generation of LUC 710, General Office, based on the size office which is 80,000 SF. When estimating trips for general office less than appro,xtzna the equation gives results that are counterintuitive. For example, according to the e office.is estimated to generate 79 PM peak hour trips (calculation attached). Since it is the i'1'E Trip Generation Manual, I have included a graph which shows the difference equation and rate for smaller sized offices. 4. The cardinal distribution used for this project was based, as referenced in Exhibit 10 in study, on the Long Range Transportation Plan Update. The current Miami Urban Are Study shows no assigned trips for the corresponding TAZ. According to the MP explanation for this and recommended that we use the assignments for the eorresponl'j previous LRTP model. Copies for the appropriate TAZ 662) for years 2005, 201, included. Project trips would result in the same assig nment in any of the three year iimited area roadway network and project access routes. 5, A Traffic Control Measures Plan has been included. Thank you, an ija 092404 doc i 1750 PONCE DE LEON 6OUl,EVARD CORAL GAaLES, FLORIDA 33i34 TELEPHONE; 305 447-0900, FAX: 3QFAX: 305 444-4 )35 E-MAIL; dga©dplummer.cbm sPits' of the proposed :ely 200,000 SF, nation a 1.0 SF got as evident in tweet) the 1TE e traffic impact Transportation they have no ing TAZ in the and 2015 are because of the a 09/27/2004 14:36 3054444986 DAVID PLUMMERANDASSO PAGE 02 HCS2000: Unsignalized TWO-WAY Intersections STOP CDNTROL SUMMARY PM PEAK MIAMI AVE/SW 3 ST #04103 3 ST MIAMI AVENUE NS Study Volumes and Adjustments Northbound 1. 2 3 1 L T R I Release 4.1d alyst: DPA gency/Co.: Date Performed.: 9/23/2004 Analysis Time Period: EXISTING Intersection: S Jurisdiction: Units: U. 5. Customary Analysis Year: 2004 Project ID: RIVER VILLAGE- East/Wet Street: SW North/South Street: SOUTH Intersection Orientation.: Vehicle period (hrs) : 0.2 Major Street: Approach Movement Southbound 4 5 6 L T R. Volume Peak -Hour Factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Median Type/Storage RT Channelized? Lanes configuration 1stree.m Signal? -- -- Undivided No 263 415 8 0.95 0.95 0.95,..,' 276 436 8 0 _- ..'_. / 0 2 0 LT TR No oiL Minor Street: Approach Movement Westbound 7 8 9 I L T R I Eastbound 10 11 12 L T R Volume Peak Hour Factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Percent Grade (%) 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage Lanes Configuration 78 0.95 82 0 0 / 1 R / Delay, Queue Length, and Level SB Westbound 4 ( 7 8 9 LT I of Service Approach NB Movement 1 Lane Config Eastbound I 10 11 I 12 R v (vph) C(m) (vph) v/ c 95i queue length Control Delay Bp proach Delay Approach LOS 276 1636 0.17 0.61 7.6 A 9.9 A 82 823 0.10 0.33 9-9 A .ono444qybe DAVID PLUMMERANDASSQ PAGE 03 HCS2000: CJnsignalized Intersections Release 4.1d TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY 411Calyst: DPA ency/Co.: Date Performed: 9/23/2004 Analysis Time Period: FUTURE WITH PROJECT PM PEAK Intersection: S MIAMI AVE/Sw 3 ST Jurisdiction: Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: 2004 Project III: RIVER VILLAGE- #04103 East/West Street: SW 3 ST North/South Street: SOUTH MIAMI AVENUE Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street; Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L T R i L T R Volume Peak -Hour Factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Median Type/Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration stream Signal? Undivided No 328 0.95 345 0 / 652 9 0.95 0.95 686 9 c 0 2 0 LT TR Na nor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 1 10 11 12 L T R I L T R Peak Hour Factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0.95 123 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 (%) 0 Percent Grade 0 0 Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage / Lanes Configuration 1 Volume 117 R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 1 10 11 Lane Config LT v (vph) C(m) (vph) v/c 95% queue length Control Delay L !roach Delay oach LOS 345 23 1636 0.411 21 00 0.80 .18 7.8 .63 A 1.2 8 11,2 e/ Z r / "% 4 14: 36 3054444986 DAVID PLUMMERANDASSO PAGE 04 HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1d TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY alyst: DPA gency/Co.: #04103 Date Performed: 9/2004 Analysis Time Period: FUTURE WITH PROJECT PM PR Intersection: DRIVEWAY / $ MIAMI AVENUE Jurisdiction: Downtown Miami Units: U. S. Customary Analysis Year: 2012 Project ID: RIVER VILLAGE #04103 East/West Street: DRIVEWAY North/South Street: SOUTH MIAMI AVENUE Intersection Orientation. NS Study period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 1 4 5 6 L P R I L T R Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0. 95 c'1 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 588 110 Percent Heavy Vehicles Median Type/Storage Undivided / RT Channelized? Lanes 2 0 configuration T TR tream Signal? No No Volume 559 105 Minor Street: Approach. Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 { 10 11 12 L T R 1 L T R Volume Peak Hour Factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Percent Grade Os) Flared Approach: Lanes Conf igure ti.on Exists?/Storage / 0 R 1 112 0.95 117 3 Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 1 7 8 9 I 10 11 Lane Config 1 v (vph) C(m) (vph) v/c 95% queue length Control Delay L 11 oach Delay Approach LOS 11.3 13 117 692 0.17 0.61 11.3 8 JYJ:.7444Widb DAVID PLUMMERANDASSO PAGE 05 • • Summary of Trip Generation Calculation For .001 Th.tir.Sq.Ft. of General Office Building September 27, 2004 Average Standard Adjustment Driveway Rate Deviation Factor Volume Avg. Weekday 2-Way Volume 188.44 7-9 AM Peak Hour Enter 16.51 7-9 AM Peak Hour Exit 2,25 7-9 AM Peak Hour Total 18.76 4-5 PM Peak Hour Enter 13397.89 4-6 PM Peak Hour Exit 65413.23 4-6 PM Peak Hour Total 78811.12 Saturday 2-Way Volume 18472.14 Saturday Peak Hour Enter 1.78 Saturday Peak Hour Exit 1.52 Saturday Pea Hour Total 3.30 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0,00 0.00 0.00 1,00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.40 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 0 0 0 13 65 C79S= 18 0 0 0 Note: A zero indicates no data available, The above rates were'calculated from these equations: 24-Hr_ 2-Way Volume: 0.8 7-9 Am Peak Hr. Total: 4-6 PM Peak Hr. Total: AM Gen Pk Hr. Total: PM Gen Pk Hr. Total: Sat. 2-Way Volume: Sat_ Pk Hr. Total: Sun. 2-Way Volume: Sun. Pk Hr. Total: LN(T) _ .77LN(x) + 3.65, R^2 = LN(T) _ .8LN(X) + 1.55 RA2 = 0.83 , 0.88 Enter, T = 1.12(X) - 78.81 RA2 = 0.82 , 0.17 Enter, EN(T) _ .81,N(X) + 1.55 RA2 = 0.83 � 0.88 Enter, RA2 = 0.82 , 0.17 Enter, T = 2.14(X) + 18.47, RA2 TN(T) = .81LN(X) + -.12 RA2 = 0.59 , 0.54 Enter, 0.46 Exit LN(T) _ .86LN(X) + .31, RA2 = 0.5 LN(T) = .61LN(X) + -.23 RA2 = 0.56 , 0.58 Enter, 0,42 Exit 0.12 0.83 0.12 0.83 0.66 Exit Exit Exit Exit Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation, 7th Edition, 2003. TRIP GENERATION BY MICROTRANS • • 800 700 600 CO 'xa c w a. 600 0 U f 400 a 300 4 it N 200 100 �yo cc:3o wo m000 ,`a° coo General Office Building Land Use 710 PM Peak Hour �QD �o ry�o ��o q, X =1000 SF GFA [—Rate Equation �90 O O Cbo ADO txry0 © b@K/L'G/GP A W m OSSdGNV33WW-Ild Cl/WC mmmmm 621 VW 624 �rt..3 u. b Jirn4444'ibb DAVID P! UMMERANDASSD R Z 626 828 F 627.-- i , 837 638 i 642 640 ? 641 PAGE r7 7' 636 636 643 1 848 644 646 634 647 • RIVER FRONT WEST PARCEL YEAR 2006 Dirrcif TAZ 662 ENE ESE SSE SSW WSW WNW NNW 1&64% 4.21 % 211% 8A2% 29.47% 1E79% TOTAL 100.00% TAZ Q6R NOTE mimeos FROM OF LON3 RAN% TRA21 cRTAm14 PWJ A.C113'E 1 5ORED ERROR IN 1A2 FOR AMMO 1ERYIOf1, N14E WGcce Pita W .O RIVER FRONT WEST PARCEL YEAR 2010 VANNAlon TAZ612 NNE ENE ESE $SE SSW WSW WNW NNW 1212% 7.67% EOM 15.13% 215.2E TOTAL 100.CO% TAZ 662 RIVER FRONT WEST PARCEL, YEAR 2016 tErmeetian NNE ENE ESE SSE SSW WSW WNW NNW TAZ 642 TOTAL 100.01% TAZ 612 .72% 74% b0EZ/LZ/63 986GVp17506 OSS"QNVd3WWPld QIA i ical75-TAZ RIR TA2-*2 R. xis 3 ibl444986 DAVID PLUMMERANDASSO PAGE e9 Mtrs-D,'s Trs#: ortn/ion MA. lea l�,r ys VJenrsni /o t4t Year 2015 ORIGIN ZONE 661 TRIPS PERCENT 662 T- '5 PERLr;NI' 663 TRIPS PERCENT 664 TRIPS. PERCENT 665 TRIPS PERCENT 666 TRIPS PERCENT 667 TRIPS PERCENT 668 TRIPS PERCENT 569 TRIPS PERCENT 670 TRIPS PERCENT 671 TRIPS PERCENT 672 TRIPS PERCENT 673 TRIPS PERCENT 674 TRIPS PERCENT 675 TRIPS PERCENT • 2005 STAGE OF 2015 LRTP - ALTERNATIVE 05U DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION SUMMARY -- ENE ECSSEDINSSEDIRSS IONS ---------- NNE WSW 13.9172 10.16 2.124 21 4.7 75 4 16.84 4.21 2.1.1 6.32 360 14.63 993 1.1.25 12.47 380 6.51 1.348 12.25 6.62 457 5.18 6 59 226 3.87 4.56 201 172 5.59 4.78 4022 1091 14,99 4.07 18.94 3.86 2887 344 38.60 4.60 653 203 32.58 10.13 21.63 6.83 3390 18.82 5.13 1822 706 15.02 5.82 109 314 170 8.93 25.72 12.92 20_ 3 28 15 zs 8.42 29.47 /5.79 16_ 84 2.56 6,95 8.25 23.04 17.76 20.20 11_67 1.39 12.94 22 6.40 20.81 20. 7 7 .33 1_31 12.63 25.31 21.01 20.36 120 82 593 1653 1453 13.33 2.05 1.40 10.15 28.30 24.88 22.83 87 115 1202 2738 2242 2771 .79 1.04 10.92 24.88 20.37 25. 1,8 7 32 306 868 935 10 7 . 19 .89 8.50 24.12 25.99 29. 3 22 . 08 7 .15 .29 .30 ,77 1 565 3.21 1.80 207 1.14 44 .93 . 72 1.80 1.13 1.61 4504 1587 7006 5646 71 5 5.91 26.11 21.04 26, 6 125 1105 977 2.65 23.44 20.73 101 1267 1298 1.35 16.94 17.35 2.99 9 4 18.75 1 14.42 5.23 1076 6,11 1039 8.56 23,86 18.19 4650 3083 26.42 17.52 2842 2193 23.42 18.07 29.3 20.1 1 0 7 5 383 19.1,1 22.85l 2 .412 372j6 21,((217 2389 . TOTAL 39 1221 2461 8827 1837 5840 11005 3598 26836 4714 7480 2004 3805 17598 12134 u�r L rr X. rain-+ lit. JO .iCi 4444`iib DAVID PLUMMERANDASSO PAGE 1E1 M*fro-Pais Tr,,ipor tins PI:R: Legg hop Els resat to the ye,r 20/5 2010 STAGE OF 2015 LRTP - ALTERNATIVE IOU DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBCJTION SUMMARY ORIGIN f CARDINAL DIRECTIONS ZONE NNE ENE ESE SSE SSW WSW WNW 661 TRIPS PERCENT 662 TT,-S PERL..�,VT 12.12 663 TRIPS 365 PERCENT 14.24 664 TRIPS 1033 PERCENT 11.01 665 TRIPS 251 PERCENT 12.68 666 TRIPS 381 PERCENT 6,17 667 TRIPS 1406 PERCENT 12,15 668 TRIPS 215 PERCENT 5.70 669 TRIPS 4198 PERCENT 14.84 67G TRIPS PERCENT 671 TRIPS PERCENT 672• TRIPS PERCENT 673 TRIPS PERCENT 674 TRIPS PERCENT 675 TRIPS PERCENT • 1.99 135 34 56 125 309 203 $68 14.95 10.14 2.55 4.36 9.39 23..22 15.25 20 14 7 7 27 13 26 7,07 .00 6.06 8.utS 27.27 13.13 26 26 162 59 180 244 594 439 .21. 6.32 2.30 7.02 9.52 23.17 17.12 20 32 491 148 128 1234 2485 1956 1 04 5.24 1.58 1.36 13.16 26.50 20.86 20.30 122 6 30 239 515 410 07 6.16 .30 1 52 12.07 26.01 20.71 20.56 219 116 80 660 1760 1573 1385 3.55 1.88 1.30 10.69 28.51 25.4822. 3 508 89 117 1295 2903 2331 29 6 4,39 .77 1.01 11.19 25.08 20.14 25. 8 172 6 34 323 940 971 1112 4.56 .16 .90 8.56 24.91 25.74 29.47 1098 21 311 1778 7415 5967 75b32 3.88 .07 1.10 6.28 26.21 21.09 26.52 938 182 7 45 145 1144 992 14iZ6 19.23 3.73 .14 .92 2.97 23.45 20,33 29.23 2999 344 23 55 111. 1306 1327 15 9 38.88 4.46 .30 .71 1.44 16.93 17.20 20. 8 667 207 6 41 63 399 304 3 5 32.04 9.94 .29 1,97 3.03 19,16 14.60 18. 7 864 264 24 36 224 956 728 8 9 21.74 6.64 .60 .31 5.64 24.05 18.31 22. 1 3454 912 593 293 1183 4932 3220 38 3 18.69 4.94 3.21 1.59 6.40 26.69 17.42 21 7 1900 723 232 527 1140 3035 2322 29 '7 14.85 5.65 1.81 4.12 8.91 23.72 18.15 22.180 FA P Aw TOTAL 1 1331 2564 9379 1980 617} 17575 3773 28290 4879 7714 2082 3 975 18480 12796 """ 14;Jb-3054444986 ➢AVI➢ PLUMMERAN➢ASSO PAGE 11 • • Matre-Pads Tr/ ort,Mre, Flat, loig R, r gi f/snras1 to his Kw 2015 2015 COST PEASIBLE PLAN ALTERNATIVE 15U DIRECTIONAL DISTRIBUTION SUMMARY OZONEN ! CARDINAL DIRECTIONS TOTAL NNg •ENE ESE SSE SSW WSW WNW. 561 TRIPS 220 171 42 69 ,138 363 213 22 1498 PERCENT 14.69 11.42 2.80 4.61 9.21 24.23 14.22 18.83 662 TRIPS MPC� PERCENT 10 12 11 43 22 31 202 23.27 11.39 4.95 5.94 5,45 21.29 10.89 16.8 663 TRIPS 393 170 65 183 263 622 470 55 2719 PERCENT 14,45 6.25 2.39 6.73 9.67 22.8E 17.29 20.3 664 TRIPS 1051 487 152 129 1370 2646 2078 197 PERCENT 10.63 4.93 1.54 1.30 13.86 26.76 21.02 19.91 988E 665 TRIPS 263 130 8 34 275 541 434 44 2126 PERCENT 12.37 6,11 .38 1.60 12.94 25.45 20.41 20.7 566 TRIPS PERCENT 403 235 124 83 708 1833 1676 146 6530 6.17 3.60 1.90 1.27 10.84 28.07 25.67 22.4 667 TRIPS 1452 521 91 120 1450 3118 2446 304 PERCENT 11.86 4.26 .74 .98 11.84 25.47 19.98 24.80 668 TRIPS 206 176 5 39 341 950 1029 111 PERCENT 6.34 4.56 .13 1.01 8.83 24.61 26.65 28.8:. 669 TRIPS 4356 1137 24 327 2051 7860 6279 794 PERCENT 14.53 3.79 .08 1.,09 6.84 26.21 20.94 26.5 670 TRIPS 1038 190 8 50 178 1245 1104 159 PERCENT 19.20 3.51 .15 .92 3.29 23.03 20.42 29.4 671 TRIPS 3091 355 20 59 132 1357 1357 159• PERCENT 38.80 4.46 .25 .74 1.66 17.03 17.03 20.0 672 TRIPS 684 208 6 37 61 407 302 40 PERCENT 32.42 9.86 .28 1.75 2.89 19.29 14.31 19.13 673 TRIPS 914 274 30 44 264 1028 772 920 PERCENT 21.53 6.45 .71 1.04 5.22 24.21 18.18 21.67 47 23 674 TRIPS 3584 943 612 315 1372 5265 3452 41111 PERCENT 18.24 4.80 3.11 1.60 6.98 26.79 17.56 20.9 675 TRIPS 1963 736 242 568 1251 3180 2472 3097 PERCENT 14.53 5.45 1.79 4.20 9.26 23.54 18.30 22,913 12243 3861 29983 5406 7966 2110 4246 19654 13509 cd.)r tJt i 14:..YC) J474444`i b DAVID PLUMMERANDASSO PAGE 12 RIVER FRONT WEST PARCEL TRAFFIC CONTROL MEASURES PLAN The project's design and location will reduce the project vehicular traffic volu follows: s as • The project is a proposed residential development which includes some retail and office components. This type of development will result in a portion of the trips being captured within the development, or internal to the site. • The project will also provide residential units with accessibility to mass transit. This feature will allow residents to use mass transit for their trip to work, The development will also do the following to further reduce peak hour vehicle trips: • Will encourage employers/landlords to participate in ridesharing programs through South Florida Commuter Services, Available information will be obtained and distributed to all employers/landlords in the development. • Miami -Dade County Transportation Agency current local and regional mass trait route and schedule information will be provided to potential transit users n a prominent public area of the development. The information provided and main ed on the premises will be updated, when necessary, at no less than six month intern s. • Promote mass transit use by encouraging employers/landlords to purchase tr'Insit passes and make them available to employees and residents at discounted prices or no charge, or in lieu of subsidized parking. • Encourage employers to implement staggered work hours. Implementation of these items will result in a minimum of ten percent (1O%a) reducti peak hour vehicle trips. The performance of the plan will be monitored by mean actual afternoon peak hour volumes at the project driveways and comparing the ca against total project trips based on the institute of Transportation Engineers (I.TE generation rates. TRAFFIC CONTROLDOC • n of ring tints trip tlHu111 rLUf'iMGMH!`[UHJJU rut t • Land Use: 710 General Office .Building Description A general office building houses multiple tenants; it is a location where affairs of businesses, commercial or Industrial organizations, or professional persons or firms are conducted. An o building or buildings may contain a mixture of tenants including professional services; Insure ce companies; investment brokers; and tenant services, such as a bank or savings and loan institution, a restaurant or cafeteria and service retail facilities. Nearly all of the buildings surveyed were in suburban locations. Corporate headquarters (Land Use 714), single tenan office building (Land Use 715), office park (Land Use 750), research and development cente (Land Use 780) and business park (Land Use 770) are related uses. if information is known about individual buildings, it is suggested that the general offs e building category be used rather than office parka when estimating trip generation for ne or more office buildings in a single development. The office park category is more ge eral and should be used when a breakdown of individual or different uses is not known. if he general office building category 1s used and If additional buildings, such as banks, reataurants, or retail stores are included In the development, then the development sh uld be treated as a multiuse project. On the other hand, if the office park category IS used Internal trips are already reflected in the data and do not need to be considered, When the buildings are Interrelated (defined by shared parking facilities or the ability easily walk between buildings) or house one tenant, it is suggested that the total area r employment of all the buildings be used for calculating the trip generation. When the individual buildings are isolated and not related to ono another. it 1s suggested than trip generation be calculated for each building separately and then summed. Additional Data ce Average weekday transit trip ends — Transit service was either nonexistent or negligible at the majority of the sites surveyed in this land use. Users may wish to modify trip generation rates presented in this land use to reflect the presence of public transit, carpools and other transportation demand management (TDM) strategies. information has not been analyzed to document the impacts of TOM measures on the total site generation. See the ITE Trip Generation Handbook for additional Information on this topic. The average building occupancy varied considerably within the studies where occupancy data was provided. For buildings with occupancy rates reported, the average Percent of occupied gross leasable area was 88 percent. AMP Some of the regression curves plotted for this land use may produce €llog€cal trip end estimates for srnnll office buildings. When the proposed site size is significantly smaller than the average - sized facility published In this report, caution should be used when applying these statistics. For more information, please refer to Chapter 3, "Guidelines for Estimating Trip Generation," of the Trip Generation Handbook. In some regions peaking may occur earlier or later and last somewhat longer than the traditi na 7;00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. peak period time frames. The sites were surveyed from the 1980s to the 2000s throughout the United States. Trip Generation, 7ttt Edition 1149 Institute of 'transportation Engineers