Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutIII Tab 2 - Traffic Impact Analysis06/16/2005 09:07 FAX FRS 1002/004 • • • MIS June 16, 2005 Via Fax and US Mail Ms. Lilla 1, Medina, AICP Assistant Transportation Coordinator City of Miami, Office of the City Manager!Transportation 444 SW 21'd Avenue (10`" Floor) Miami, Florida 33130 Re: The Boulevard MUSP Sufficiency Letter — WO. fi 110 Dear Ms. Medina: Subsequent to our May 27tt' 2005 review comments for the subject project, we have received responses dated June 2nd and June 10th 2005, both prepared by Richard Garcia and Associates (RGA). Photocopy of both the response letters are attached herewith. At this time, we conclude that the traffic Impact report along with the subsequent submittal meets all the traffic requirements and the study is found to be sufficient. Should you have any questions, please call Quazi Masood or me at 954.739.1881. Sincere) UR a#' • n Southern Raj .hanu".E_ Seni.r Traffic Engineer Attachment cc: Mr. Kevin Watford, Planner 1, City of Miami (Fax - 305.416.1443) Mr. Richard Garcia, P.E., RGA Inc. (Fax— 305.675.6474) URS Corporation Lakeshore Complex 5100 NW 33rd Avenue, Suite 150 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309-6375 Tel: 954.739.1881 Fax: 954.739.17 B9 • • THE BOULEVARD • Major Use Special Permit (MUSP) Traffic Impact Study 234-264 NE 34th Street Miami, Florida RICHAR.D GARCIA & ASSOCIATES, Irw Final: June 2005 The $oulevard MUSP Traffic Impact Study • • • iN ER 'ERTIFICATION I, Richard Garcia, P.F. # 54886, certify that I currently hold an active Professional Engineers License in the State of Florida and am competent through education and experience to provide engineering services in the civil and traffic engineering disciplines contained in this report. In addition, the firm Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. holds a Certificate of Authorization # 9592 in the State of Florida. I further certify that this report was prepared by me or under my responsible charge as defined in Chapter 61 G15-18.001 F.A.C. and that all statements, conclusions and recommendations made herein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and ability. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The Boulevard (formerly Avant Towers) - MUSP Traffic Impact Study PROJECT LOCATION: 234-264 NE 34th Street Miami, Florida Eli- ,, 9uAARO `Florida Registration No, 54886 i & ASSOCIATES, !NCr The Boulevard MUSP Traffic Impact Study • • • TABLE OF CONTENTS ENGINEER'S CERTIFICATION EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 111 1 2 3.0 TRIP GENERATION 4 4.0 TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTION 6 5.0 TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT 7 6.0 TRAFFIC COUNTS 8 7.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 12 8.0 TRANSIT SERVICES 14 9.0 PLANNED ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS 15 10.0 COMMITTED DEVELOPMENTS 16 11.0 CORRIDOR LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS 17 12.0 INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS 19 13.0 RECOMMENDATION 21 1.0 INTRODUCTION 2.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION / LOCATION a ARCLA & ASSOCIATE ?TE , t,'sC. ii The Boulevard 11 USP Traffic impact Study • • • Executive Summary The subject project is located on NE 34th Street just west of Biscayne Boulevard in the City of Miami, Florida. The subject development is a high-rise residential condominium with 127 dwelling units and 15 thousand square feet of specialty retail. The existing use is an Apartment Building with 6 ©welling Units. The Trip Generation calculations of this project reveal there will be 53 net vehicles per hour (vph) in the PM peak hour. The subject project is located in TAZ 503 and has had the traffic assigned to the surrounding roadway and transit system using the MUATS Cardinal distribution. Link and intersection traffic counts were collected, averaged and adjusted for seasonal variations and used in the link analysis and intersection analysis. This analysis was performed for the existing condition, background, committed and background and with the cumulative effects of the above and the project traffic. The results indicated the corridor person trip analysis will not fall below LOS B for all scenarios. The intersection analysis indicates that all the surrounding intersections will be at LOS A for the existing and proposed (3ARaA& ASSOCIATES, 1 The Boulevard MUSP Traffic Impact Study • • • condition. At the intersection of Biscayne Boulevard and NE 34th Street certain movements yielded results that were not consistent with the field observations made during the data collection phase. Therefore, this location as well as the four corners surrounding the subject project were simulated using the SimTraffic micro -simulation software. The Synchro software as well as the Highway Capacity Software does not model the two -stage left turn movement as well as through movements well at two-way stopped controlled locations. The step -wise cumulative algorithm of a micro - simulation software such a SimTraffic is much better at simulating these existing as well as future conditions. Table 1 provides the summary of these analyses. Table 1: Intersection LOS Summary Level of Service Summary Intersection Biscayne Blvd & NE 34th Street Biscayne Blvd & NE 33'' Street NE 2nd Avenue & NE 34t Street NE 21'd Avenue & NE 33"' Street NE 34th Street & Driveway Proposed Delay LOS Delay LOS 6.5 A 10.4 B 7.4 A 7.9 A 1.1 A 1.7 A 0.8 A 0.8 A 0 A 13.2 B Existing AP <a AR�".a c, ASSOCIATE6.'INC. iv The Boulevard MUSP Traffic Impact Study • • In summary, the results of the analysis contained in this report find that the levels of service thresholds are maintained within the LOS standard of E. Therefore, this project does not contribute any significant traffic impact, as sufficient roadway capacity exist. E RiCHAFZD GARCIA ASSOCIA_MS, iNC_ The Boulevard MUSP Traffic Impact S dy • • • 1.0 Introduction The purpose of this study is to evaluate the associated traffic impacts with the proposed development of the site located at approximately 234-264 NE 34th Street in the City of Miami. This project was formerly submitted for a Major Use Special Permit (MUSP) as the Avant Towers. However, due to the sale of the property and reassignment of the development figures a new report and analysis was completed. As such this report follows the methodology for MUSP utilized throughout the City of Miami. This development is located between Biscayne Boulevard (US 1 / SR 5) and NE 2nd Avenue on NE 34th Street at the address stated above. The traffic impacts to the adjacent roadways were evaluated as well as signalized and unsignalized intersections that were most affected by this development. This analysis was performed for the existing and proposed conditions during the PM Peak Hour. This report follows the methodologies adopted by the City of Miami's Person -Trip Analysis and conforms to the Institute of Transportation Engineer's (ITE) Trip Generation, and Traffic Impact Studies Manual. Lastly, this report has evaluated the following: Trip Generation Proposed Level of Service Traffic Distribution Existing Intersection LOS Traffic Assignment Proposed intersection LOS Traffic Counts: ATR & TMC Recommendations Existing Level of Service RICHA3RD GAFW A & ASSOCEATES. P�]C. The Boulevard MUSP Traffic impact Study • 2.0 Project Description / Location The subject project is located on the Southwest corner of Biscayne Boulevard (US 1 / SR 5) and NE 341h Street in the City of Miami, Florida. The subject development is a mixed use project with a high-rise residential condominium component that has 127 dwelling units and approximately 15,000 square feet of commercial. The existing use is a one story free standing building with approximately 2,700 square feet. The following land use, as identified by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), most closely resembles the proposed development. This land use is as follows: Land Use 232: High-rise Residential Condo wi 127 DU (Dwelling Units) Land Use 814: Specialty Retail i 15,0O% Square Feet Site access is provided via a single driveway on NE 341h Street. Additionally, a loading entrance is proposed adjacent to the vehicular access driveway. Figure 1 depicts the site's location mop. ICKARD G ,i GIA & ASSocAATES, isle. W _ .... The Boulevard MUSP Traffic Impact S dv Figure 1: Location Map • 3 The Boulevard MUSP Traffic Impact Stu • • 3.0 Trip Generation The trip generation characteristic for the subject project was obtained from ITE's Trip Generation Manual, 7th Ed. ITE's Land Use 232: High -Rise Residential Condominium and Land Use 814: Specialty Retail Center were used to determine the trip generation rates and totals for the proposed development. The Trip Generation calculations results of the proposed improvements are summarized below. The ITE rates and percentages for PM Peak Hour Trips are included in Corresponding tab. Table 1 below summarizes the greatest traffic impact associated with the subject development, which occurs during the PM peak. No existing traffic was assumed for the six (6) existing apartments. Therefore, this report did not deduct the existing traffic from the future trip generation results. Lastly, the trip generation was converted to net vehicle trip by utilizing the City's Person Trip Methodology. This methodology uses a 16 % vehicle occupancy and a 14.9 % transit reduction factors. Lastly, the pedestrian and bicycle trip reduction was 10 %. These factors are consistent with the values used in the City's DRI - Increment II for the Omni Area. \ RtCHARD GARCIA & SSO IATES, C. 4 The Boulevard MUSP Traffic Impact Study • • • Table 1: Trip Generation Land Use (LU) Units ITE LU CODE PM PEAK HOUR TRIPS IN OUT TOTAL Trips Trips TRIPS High -Rise Residential Condo / Townhouse Specialty Retail Center Existing Apartments (Not used, Informational) Gross Vehicle Trips 127 DU 15 TGSF 6 DU 232 814 220 30 18 14 48 18 23 7 41 48 41 21 89 Vehicle Occupancy Adjustment @ Transit Trip Reduction @ Pedestrian/Bicycle Trip Reduction @ Net Vehicle Trips 16.0% Of Gross Trips 14.9% Of Gross Trips 10.0% Of Gross Trips 8 7 5 29 6 6 4 24 14 13 9 53 Net Person Trips in Vehicles @ Net Person Trips in Transit @ 1.40 1.40 40 10 34 8 74 19 Net Person Trips (Vehicle and Transit Modes) 59 42 92 Net Person Trips (Walking/Bicycling) @ 1.40 7 6 12 iA \ CHARQ GARCIA & ASSOMATES, The Bouteva MUSP Traffic Impact Study • • • 4.0 Traffic Distribution The Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) for the subject development is TAZ 503 as assigned by the Metropolitan Planning Organization's (MPO). The County's TAZ are included in the Corresponding tab. The corresponding traffic distribution being assigned to the following directions are outlined in Table 2. The Corresponding tab includes a TAZ Map and the corresponding Directional Distribution Summary for this zone utilizing the 2005 Cost Affordable Plan. Table 2: Cardinal Distribution DIRECTION DISTRIBUTION % NNE ENE ESE SSE SSW WSW WNW NNW 13.19 5.12 5.60 9.40 14.63 21.54 13.78 16.75 TOTAL 100.00 Vic::.' -BAR GARCIA & "ASSO1ATS, 6 The Boulevard USP Traffic Impact Study • • • 5.0 Traffic Assignment The PM peak hour trips from Table 1 have been distributed and assigned to the existing adjacent roads. As evident from trip generation calculations, the PM peak hour represents the worse case. Table 3 was developed to depict the PM Peak Hour Assignments. The Corresponding tab includes the ingress and egress traffic distribution with the corresponding assignments to the North, South, East and West for the PM peak hour and Daily Trips. Table 3 is the cardinal traffic assignments which are further grouped as indicated into the four primary quadrants. Table 3: PM Peak Hour Traffic Assignments ....... PM Peak Trips . DIRECTION IN OUT Total NNE 4 3 7 ENE 1 1 2 ESE 2 1 3 SSE 3 3 6 SSW 4 4 ........... 8 WSW 6 5 11 WNW 4 3 7 NNW 5 4 9 TOTAL 29 24 53 DIRECTION IN North East South West 4+5=9 1+2=3 3+4=7 6+4=10 OIJT 3+4=7 TOTAL 16 1+1=2 3+4=7 5+3=8 5 14 18 TOTAL 53 G RCaA AssocrATE 7 The Boulevard MUSP Traffic Impact Study Figure 2 includes the project traffic assignment to the driveways and intersections analyzed during the PM peak hour condition. This figure provides the turning movements assigned for the proposed condition analysis. Since other routes and patterns exist the most conservative was utilized here. The Intersection Analysis tab of the appendix provides this figure as generated from the Synchro/ Simtraffic software. Figure 2: Traffic Assignments • o The Boulevard MUSP S dy • • • 6.0 Traffic Counts For the purposes of the corridor analysis, continuous 48 hour Automatic Traffic Recorder (ATR) were collected on Wednesday May 4, 2005 and Thursday May 5, 2005. These counts were averaged, adjusted for seasonal variations and corrected for multi - axle traffic by utilizing the Florida Department of Transportation Seasonal Factor (SF) and Axle Correction Factors of 0.99 and 0.98, respectively. Table 4 depicts the results of the seasonally adjusted PM Peak hour. Lastly, these calculations were similarly performed for the Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) and are included in the tab labeled TMC's/ATR in the appendix. Table 4: PM Peak Hour Volumes :ink ROAD AY NAME AT DIR PM PEAK HOUR VOLUME 1 EXISTING CONDITION (Seasonally Adjusted) Biscayne Blvd North of 33 Street NB 1,305 SB LINK 1,337 2,642 2 NE2Ave North of 33 Street NB $22 SB 565 LINK 1,387 3 NE 34 Street West of Biscayne Blvd. EB 111 WB 74 LINK 185 HAR GARCL & ASSOCIATES., iNC, The Boulevard MUSP Traffic Impact S dy • • • For the purposes of the intersection analysis, additional traffic data collection was performed consisting of vehicular and pedestrian two-hour manual Turing Movement Counts (TMC) at the following intersections during the PM peak hour: Biscayne Boulevard & NE 34th Street Biscayne Boulevard & NE 33'd Street NE 2"d Avenue & NE 33'd Street NE 2nd Avenue & NE 34h Street The tab labeled TMC's/ATR in the appendix contains the TMC raw data sheets for the above intersections. Additionally, Table T-3 provides Existing and Proposed PM Peak Hour TMC's, This sheet has been developed to summarize the data, provide seasonal factor utilized to seasonally adjust the counts to an average yearly condition and calculate the background traffic. Lastly these tables provide the future traffic condition by adding the site traffic from the traffic Assignments above, the background traffic and the committed traffic that will be addressed in the following sections of this report. C A ASSOCIATES, aNC. if) The Boulevard MUSP Traffic Impact Study • • Existing TMC The following turning movement counts are summarized after having been seasonally adjusted with the weekly seasonal factor obtained from FDOT. The following TMC's were entered in the Existing Condition analysis performed using the Synchro/Simtraffic software. The Intersection Analysis tab of the appendix provides this figure as generated from the Synchro/Simtraffic software. Figure 3; Seasonally Adjusted TMC's ,CHARD GARc A & ASSOC A.i S, C. 11 • • The Boulevard . fUSP T i affic Impact Study 7.0 Existing Conditions Geometry: Biscayne Boulevard Biscayne Boulevard / US 1 is State Road 5, a 4 lane divided arterial. It provides connectivity in the north -south direction and has auxiliary left turn lanes at most intersections. On -street parking is not allowed. The following Figure 4 graphic depicts the roadway lane assignments for the intersections and corridors analyzed. 5��=, fl •' Figure 4: Existing Lane Geometry RICHAR i GARCIA & ASSOCIATES, 4dc, 12 The Boulevard MUSP Traffic Impact Study • • • Geometry: NE 2nd Avenue NE 2 Avenue is a focal 4 lane divided arterial. It provides connectivity in the north -south direction and has a mixture of two- way left turn lane and auxiliary left turn lanes at most intersections. Near the subject project only southbound left turn lanes are provided due to the T-intersection configuration. On -street parking is not permitted, however bus routes/stops do exist. Signalization: Biscayne Boulevard & NE 33rd Street The existing signal timing was obtained from Miami -Dade County Signals and Signs division. The existing PM Peak hour condition has a 115 second cycle length. The Signal Operating Plan (SOP) consists of a simple two-phase operation. The first phase provides for a north/south through with permissive left turns. This phase has a 94 seconds of green indication followed by 4 seconds of yellow. The second phase is the East-West through movement which allows permissive left turns. This phase has 13 seconds of green indication followed by 4 seconds of yellow. This is further documented in the Timing/Factors tab as Asset ID 3598. A Rfl GAR °:A & A.SSO GATES, INC, 13 The Boulevard MUSP Traffic Impact Study • 8.0 Transit Services For the purposes of the Person Trip methodology, transit services were obtained from Miami -Dade Transit Agency. The following table depicts the existing bus volume and capacity that provides services to the subject project. These volumes and capacities were utilized in the person trip corridor analysis. The Corresponding tab contains the existing transit volume to capacity calculations. Table 5: Existing Transit Volume to Capacity TRANSIT CORRIDOR TRANSIT ROUTE ROUTE PM PEAK CAPACITY PM Peak Volume Transit vlc Biscayne Blvd. 3 194 111 0.57 16 198 99 0.50 36 276 32 0.12 62 369 21 0.06 T 276 152 0.55 BM 345 14 0.04 95 258 100 0.39 TOTAL 1916 529 0.28 NE 2nd Ave 9 276 78 0.28 10 138 36 0.26 TOTAL 414 114 0.28 m3C A ASSOCIATES, NC. 14 The Boulevard MUSP Traffic Impact Study • • • 9.0 Planned Roadway Improvements The 2005 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) was reviewed for possible roadway improvements. However, neither Biscayne Boulevard nor NE 2 Avenue are programmed for improvements within the area of the subject project. As such, the proposed conditions will be based on the existing roadway geometry. GARCIA & ASSOCIATES, INC. 5 The Boulevard MUSP Traffic impact Study • • 10.0 Committed Developments At the request of the City of Miami's Traffic Engineer, the planning department was contacted with a list of committed developments taken from the most recent City of Miami Large Scale Development Report: 1995-Present. Excerpts from that report are included in the tab labeled Committed along with the summary of the committed developments utilized here. F €CHkRr .RCPA ASSOCATE5 16 The Boulevard MUSP Traffic Impact S d e • • 11.0 Corridor Level of Service Analysis A corridor analysis was performed that follows the City of Miami's Person Trip Methodology. This methodology has been utilized in the City's Development of Regional Impact (DRI) - Increment II and has been accepted by both the FDOT and the South Florida Regional Planning Council. lastly, this methodology is further detailed in the City's document: Transportation Corridors: Meeting the Challenge of Growth Management in Miami. The results of the corridor analysis reveal that all levels of service thresholds remain at LOS B for the roadway and segment. Table 6 is a summary of the results while the Person Trip tab contains the spreadsheet utilized to compute the seasonally adjusted existing condition, the future year (i.e. 2008) background condition, the background and committed condition and finally, the proposed condition containing the cumulative effects. k D GARC A 8, 11SSOC . €N>C. The Boulevard MUSP Traffic Impact Study • Table 6: Person Trip Corridor Analysis Summary ROADWAY MODE SEGMENT TOTAL ROADWAY FROM TO DIR ROADWAY PERSON TRIP SEGMENT PERSON TRIP 11/C LOS VIC LOS TINC [ f7Nrl1TtlN dtsted} Biscayne Blvd + NE 29 St NE 36 St NB 0.63 B 0.49 B NE 36 St NE 29 St SB 0.65 B 0.50 B NE 2 Ave NE 29 St NE 36 St NB 0.42 B 0.40 B NE 36 St NE 29 St SB 0.29 B 0,29 B NE 34 St Biscayne Bay NE 2 Ave EB 0.11 A 0.11 A NE 2 Ave Biscayne Bay WB 0.08 A 0.08 A WITH RAt t PflIlHCI TR' FF f2t]fltt)'':: Biscayne Blvd NE 29 St NE 36 St NB 0.67 B 0.52 B NE 36 St NE 29 St SB 0.69 B 0.53 B NE 2 Ave NE 29 St NE 36 St NB 0.45 B 0.43 B NE 36 St NE 29 St SB 0.31 B 0.30 B NE34St Biscayne Bay NE 2 Ave EB 0.12 A 0,12 A NE 2 Ave Biscayne Bay WB 0.08 A 0.08 A BACKGROUND & CO MITTED TRAFFIC Biscayne Blvd NE 29 St NE 36 St NB 0.72 B 0.56 B NE 36 St NE 29 St SB 0.80 C 0.60 B NE 2 Ave NE 29 St NE 36 St NB 0.46 B 0.44 B NE 36 St NE 29 St SB 0.32 B 0.32 B NE 34 St Biscayne Bay NE 2 Ave EB 0.12 A 0.12 A NE 2 Ave Biscayne Bay WB 0.08 A 0.08 A WITH PROJECT AND BACKGROUND '& COMM ED TRAFFIC Biscayne Blvd NE 29 St NE36St NE 36 St NE 29 St NB SB 0.72 0.81 0.57 0.60 B NE 2 Ave NE 29 St NE 36 St NB NE 36 St NE 29 St SR NE 34 St Biscayne Bay NE 2 Ave EB NE 2 Ave - Biscayne Bay WB MuFx''ar-.R.?.f GARCPA & AS SO FATEW ai ... 0.46 0.33 B B 0.45 B 0.32 B 0.15 B 0.11 A 0.15 B 0.11 A is The Boulevard MUSP Traffic Impact Study • 12.0 Intersection Level of Service Analysis Intersection analyses were performed for the seasonally adjusted existing condition and the proposed condition at the stop controlled and signalized intersections using the Synchro/SimTraffic software. The results indicate the LOS are within acceptable guidelines for these types of facilities. Table 7 provides a summary of the results while the Corresponding tab provides the program output. Future fuming movement counts were taken from the Intersection Approach Volumes worksheet included in the Corresponding tab. At the intersection of Biscayne Boulevard and NE 349h Street certain movements yielded results that were not consistent with the field observations made during the data collection phase. These movements were the Eastbound through and left turns which yielded delays of 520.2 and 442.6 seconds of delay for the existing condition, respectively. However, the delays in the field were in the order of 10 seconds. Therefore, this location as well as the four corners surrounding the subject project were simulated using the SimTraffic micro -simulation software. The Intersection tab contains the results of the simulations performed. 0'1 m{CHARi,3 GARCIA & ASSOCIATES, C. 19 The Boulevard MUSP Traffic impact Stu • • • Table 7: Intersection LOS Summary ve o ServiceSomrtraa Existing Proposed Intersection Delay LOS Delay LOS Biscayne Blvd & NE 34th Street 6.5 A 10.4 B Biscayne Blvd & NE 33rd Street 7.4 A 7.9 A NE 2nd Avenue & NE 34T Street 1.1 A 1.7 A NE 2nd Avenue & NE 33r11 Street 0.8 A 0.8 A NE 34th Street & Driveway 0 A 13.2 B The following TMC's were utilized in the Proposed Condition Analysis. This condition consisted of the seasonally adjusted existing condition, the background growth, the committed developments and the site traffic. Figure 5: Proposed TMC's A i RICHARD GARCIA & soc§ATEs. 20 The Boulevard 1 "USP Traffic Impact Study • • • 13.0 Recommendation The results of the analysis contained in this report find that the levels of service thresholds are maintained within the LOS standard of E+20 for the vehicle methodology analysis and LOS E for the Person -Trip method. As such, sufficient roadway and transit capacity exist to support this development. Therefore, this project does not contribute any significant traffic impact, as sufficient roadway capacity exist. As such, this development should be granted development approval. n MCI -$?SRO GARCip, & ASS C A ES, I C 21 The Boukvard WISP dy TRIP GEN RICHARD GARCEA & ASSOCIATES, N.C. Appendix • • • The Boulevard Project Trip Generation Analysis Land Use LU High -Rise Residential Condo / Townhouse Specialty Retail Center Gross Vehicle Trips Vehicle Occu.anc Ad'ustment Transit Tri. Reduction Pedestrian/Bic cle Tri. Reductio Net Vehicle Tri•s Net Person Tris in Vehicles Net Person Tri.s in Transit Net Person Tri is Vehicle and Transit Modes Units 127 DU 15.0 TGSF ITE LU CODE 16.0% Of Gros 14.9% Of Gros 10.0% Of Gros Net Person Tri.s Walkin./Bic cling . 1.40 NOTES: Trip Generation from 1TE 7th ED. Transit trip reduction from DRI Increment 11 for Omni Area. PM PEAK HOUR TRIPS Trips Trips TOTAL TRIPS The Boulevard MUSE' Traffic Impact Study • E GF F & S S # �HC�ifiL' ��a�GAt� �5"�iC3r�T�`a TRIP DIST Appendix • • • The Boulevard Project Cardinal Distribution (TAZ 503) PM Peak Trips DIRECTION DISTRIBUTION IN OUT Total 13.19 5.12 5.60 9,40 14.63 21.54 13.78 16.75 4 3 1 1 2 1 3 3 4 4 6 5 4 3 5 4 7 2 3 6 8 11 7 9 TAL 100.00 29 24 53 Note: Based on MUATS & Year 2025 Plan Update, Technical Report: Directional Trip Distribution Year 1999 Model Validation and 2005-2025 Cost Affordable Plan, Date: December 31, 2001 obtained from Miami Dade APO. Traffic Assicznment Percentage North 29.94 East 10.72 South 24.03 West 35.32 Total 100. • • • The Boulevard Traffic Assignment Direction IN OUT TOTAL North 4+5=9 3+4=7 16 East 1+2=3 1+1=2 5 South 3+4=7 3+4=7 14 West 6+4=10 5+3=8 18 TOTAL 53 The Boulevard MUSP Traffic Impact Study • TIMING / FACTORS CHARD' ARCIA & ASSOCpA F . tNC. i:ap • ENTER TEE CONTROLLER iUM9ER f / = STOP} 35980 TIMING DATA FOR 3598 PAT OF 1 SG G Y EWP 1 T 30 67 1 4 14 2 T 40 66 1 4 15 3 T 32 52 5 4 25 4 M 30 67 1 4 14 5 M 30 67 1 4 14 6 98 11 4 13 98 11 4 8 61 4 9 93 4 10 88 4 11 67 4 12 61 4 13 93 4 16 88 4 17 88 4 18 93 4 19 30 4 20 4 21 4 4 4 4 M 49 M 49 T 53 T 45 T 49 T 30 T 59 M 45 T 46 T 49 T 38 T 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 M 49 98 11 T 0 30 1 22 M 61 73 1 23 T 0 30 1 24 T 0 24 1 MIN: 20 13 20 13 13 14 20 13 13 13 13 12 13 12 18 12 12 12 U5 1 & NE 33 ST 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 (SEC: 3 TYPE: SA} S Y M CYC 90?VG M2 0/3 WERE AM M2 0/ 90POS7 PM M2 0 90MIAMI AREA 90MIAMI ARENA 130BEACH EGRESS 130BE,ACH INGRES 90AM PEAK M2 0 115PBE PM PEAK 110APT MI 0/3 90EP.BLY KITE M 90AM ?ELK M1 1159RE PM PEAT{ 110MID MORN M2 110NOON ? �2 0/3 115PM PEAK 142 0 6 51DAWN M2 14 /2 130TEST (NOON M 6 51NITE M2 8/3 100f4CARTHOR BLO 6 51LATE NIGHT 1 7 45RECALL TEST UUS5 Printl)ate= May 07, 20UJ k1011Cla Department 0a iransponation Transportation Statistics Office 2003 Weekly Axle Factor Category Report Comity; 87 -- BADE 'nary: S702 SR 5!US-11BRICKE .L Week Datea ACT 1 01/0112003 - 01/04/2003 0.98 2 01/05(2003 - 01/11(2003 0.98 3 01/12/2003 - 01/18/2003 0.98 4 01/19/2003 - 01/25/2003 0.98 5 01/26/2003 02/01/2003 0.98 6 02/02/2003 - 02/08/2003 0.98 7 02/0912003 -02/15/2003 0.98 8 02/1612003 - 02/22/2003 0.98 9 02/23/2003 - 03/01/20003 0.98 10 03/02/2003 - 03/08/2003 0.98 11 03/09/2003 - 03/15/2003 0.98 12 03/16/2003 - 03/22/2003 0.98 13 03/23/2003 - 03/29/2003 0.98 14 03/30/2003 - 04/05/2003 0.98 15 04/0612003 -04/12/2003 0.98 16 04/13/2003 - 04/19/2003 0.98 17 04/20/2003 - 04/26/2003 0.98 18 04/27/2003 - 05/03/2003 0.98 19 05/04/2003 - 05/10/2003 0.98 20 05/11/2003 - 05/17/2003 0.98 21 05/18/2003-05/24/2003 0.98 22 05(25(2003 - 05/31/2003 0.98 23 06/01/2003 - 06/07/2003 0.98 24 06/08/2003 - 06114/2003 0.98 23 06/15/2003 - 06/21/2003 0.98 26 06/22/2003 - 06/28/2003 0.98 27 06/2912003 - 07/05/2003 0.98 28 07/06/2003 - 07/12/2003 0.98 29 07/13/2003 - 07/19/2003 0.98 30 07/20/2003 - 07/26/2003 0.98 31 07/27/2003-08/02/2003 0.98 32 08/03/2003 - 08/09/2003 0.98 33 08/10/2003 - 08/16/2003 0.98 34 08/17/2003-08/23/2003 0.98 35 08/24/2003 - 08/30/2003 0.98 36 08(31/2003 - 09/06/2003 0.98 37 09/07/2003 - 09/13/2003 0.98 38 09/14/2003 - E09/20/2003 0.98 39 09/21/2003 - 09/27/2003 0.98 40 09/28/2003 - 10/04/2003 0.98 41 10/0522003 - 10/11/2003 0.98 42 10/12/2003 - 10118/2003 0.98 43 10/19/2003 - 10/25/2003 0.98 44 10/26/2003-11/01/2003 0.98 45 11/02/2003 - 11/08/2003 0.98 46 11/09/2003 - 11/15/2003 0.98 47 11/1612003 - 11/22/2003 0.98 48 11/23/2003 -11/29/2003 0.98 49 11/30/2003 - 12/06/2003 0.98 50 12/07/2003 - 12/13/2003 0.98 51 12/14/2003 - 12120/2003 0.98 52 12/21/2003 - 12/27/2003 0.98 53 12/28/2003 - 12/31/2003 0.98 • '1x nsportatton 8tatistrsuroce 2003 Peak Season Faetor Category Report 31DA11ff DADS NORTH O itegors: 8700 • Weelt Dates SF 1SCF 1 01/01/2003 - 01104/2003 1.01 1.02 2 01/05/2003-01111/2003 1.01 1.02 3 01/12/2003 - 01/18/2003 1.02 1.03 4 01/19/2003 - 01/25/2003 1.01 1.02 5 01/26/2003 - 02/01/2003 1.00 1.01 6 02/02/2003 - 02/08/2003 0.99 1 00 * 7 02/09/2003 - 02/ 15/200 3 0.98 0.99 * 8 02/16/2003 - 02/22/2003 0.99 1.00 * 9 02/23/2003 - 03/01/2003 0.99 1.00 * 10 03/02/2003 - 03/08/2003 0.99 1.00 * 11 03/09/2003 - 03/15/2003 1.00 1,01 * 12 03/16/2003 - 03/22/2003 0.99 1.00 * 13 03/23/2003 - 03/29/2003 0.99 1.00 * 14 03/30/2003 - 04/05/2003 0.99 1.00 * 15 04/06/2003 -- 04/12/2003 0.99 1.00 * 16 04/13/2003 - 04/19/2003 0.99 1.00 * 17 04/20/2003 04/2612003 0.99 1.00 * 18 04/27/2003 - 05/03/2003 0.99 1.00 * 19 05/04/2003 -05/10/2003 0.99 1.00 20 05/11/2003 - 05117/2003 0.99 1.00 21 05/18/2003 - 05%24/2003 0.99 1.00 22 05/25/2003 - 05/31/2003 0.99 1.00 23 06/01/2003 - 06/07/2003 0.99 1.00 24 06/08/2003 -06/14/2003 1.00 1.01 25 06/15/2003 - 06/21/2003 1.00 1.01 26 06/22/2003 - 06/28/2003 1.00 1.01 27 06/29/2003 - 07/05/2003 1_00 1.01 28 07/06/2003 -07/12/2003 1.01 1.02 29 07/13/2003 - 07/19/2003 1,01 I.02 30 07/20/2003 - 07/26/2003 1.01 1.02 31 07/27/2003 - 08/02/2003 1.02 1.03 32 08103/2003 - 08/09/2003 1.02 1.03 33 08/1012003 - 0811612003 1.02 1.03 34 08/17/2003-08/23/2003 1.02 1.03 35 08/2412003 - 08/3012003 1_02 1.03 36 08/31/2003 - 09/06/2003 1.02 1.03 37 09/07/2003 - 09/1312003 1.01 1.02 38 09/14/2003 -09/20/2003 1.01 1.02 39 09/21/2003 -09/2 7/2003 1.01 1.02 40 09/28/2003 - 10/0412003 1.01 1,02 41 10/05/2003-10/11/2003 1.01 1.02 42 10/12/2003-10/18/2003 1.00 1.01 43 10/19/2003-10/25/2003 1.00 1.01 44 10/26/2003-11/01/2003 1.01 1.02 45 1/102/2003-11/0812003 1.01 1.02 46 11/0912003-11/15/2003 1.01 1.02 47 11/16/2003-1112212003 1.01 1.02 48 11/23/2003 - 11/29/2003 1.01 1.02 49 11/30/2003 - 12/06/2003 1.01 1.02 50 12/07/2003 - 12113/2003 1.01 1.02 51 12/14/2003 - 12/20/2003 1.01 1.02 52 12121/2003 - 12/27/2003 1.01 1.02 53 12/28/2003 - /2/31/2003 1.02 1.03 MOC14 0.99 The Boulevard MUSP Traffic Impact Study • ATR ICI -MR GARCIA x ASSOC TES, INC. BA • • • Table: T•3 The Boulevard INTERSECTION APPROACH VOLUMES NTERSECTION NO- INTERSECTION NAME APPROACFE MOVEMENT PM PEAK HR COUNT Date of Count Sfi PEAK SEASONAL ADJUSTMENT BACKGROUND GROWTH @ 2% FOR 3 Years Committed Developments Net Traffic wlo Project Sit Traffic (VPH) Site Traffic in Person. Trlps (Transit) Total Traffic (VPIH1 2 3 4 6 8 9 16 1t Biscayne Blvd. & NE 34 ST 50UTHBOUND SBR 7 ................................ Wednesday. May 04. 2005 0.99 7 7 7 5 0 12 SBT 982 0.99 972 1032 228 1260 0 1260 59L 81 0.99 80 85 85 0 85 TOTAL 1070 1059 1124 22B 1352 5 0 1357 WESTBOUND WOR 61 0.99 60 64 64 0 0 64 WBT 3 0.99 3 3 3 1 4 WBL 17 0,99 17 18 18 0 18 TOTAL 81 80 85 0 85 1 0 88 NORTHBOUND NBR 61 0.99 60 64 64 0 0 64 NBT 1329 0.99 1316 1396 95 1491 0 1491 NBL 18 0.99 19 19 19 6 25 TOTAL 1408 1394 1479 95 1574 6 0 1580 EASTBOUND EBR 12 0.99 12 13 13 5 0 18 EBT 3 0.99 3 3 3 1 4 EIL 13 0.99 13 14 14 4 16 TOTAL 28 28 29 0 29 10 0 39 TOTAL 2687 2561 2718 323 3041 22 0 3063 2 Biscayne Blvd. & NE33ST SOUTHBOUND 5814 11 0 ct m „ s 0 .2 0,99 11 12 12 0 0 12 SET 1128 0.99 1117 1185 228 1413 4 1417 SBL 41 0.99 41 43 43 1 44 TOTAL 1180 1168 1240 228 1468 5 0 1473 WESTBOUND WBR 23 0.99 23 24 24 2 0 26 WBT 7 0.99 7 7 7 0 7 MI. 45 0.99 45 47 0 47 0 47 TOTAL 75 74 79 0 79 2 0 81 NORTHBOUND NBR 16 0.99 1S 17 17 0 0 17 NOT 1174 0.99 1162 1233 95 1328 4 1332 NBL 41 0.99 41 43 43 0 43 TOTAL 1231 1219 1293 95 1388 4 0 1392 EASTBOUND EBR 28 0.99 28 29 29 0 0 29 FBI 30 0.99 30 32 32 0 32 EBL 25 0.99 25 26 26 0 26 TOTAL 83 82 87 0 87 0 0 87 TOTAL 2569 2543 2699 323 3021 11 0 3033 ©Richard Garcia and Associates, Inc., 2005 6/17/2005 • • • The Boulevard INTERSECTION APPROACH VOLUMES 2 C U vs z INTERSECTION NAME APPROACH MOVEMENT PM PEAK HR COUNT Date of Count SF PEAK SEASONAL ADJUSTMENT BACKGROUND GROWTH @ 214 FOR 3 Years Committed Developments Net Traffic wlo Project Site Traic (VPH) Site Traffic in Person - Trips (Transit) Total Traiilc (VPH) if 2 3 a 1 e 9 1a 320 S& NE NE 2 AVE SOUTHBOUND SBR 0 0 m 0.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 MIIEIMIIIII momTOTAL WBR 368 0.99 0 387 24 ® 0 4110 10 0.99 10 20 Man 34 374 421 0 430 WESTBOUND 0.99 34 36 0 43 num MUMB 0.99 �0- 68 25 � 7 0 24 0.99 75 61 0 81 14 0 75 NORTHBOUND 0.99 20 8 0 28 NBT 939 0.99 930 987 1008 1008 0 0.99 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 948 1008 1027 8 0 1035 EASTBOUND EBR 0 © 0 0.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 EBT 0.99 0 0 0 0.99 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1394 Wednesday, May 04. 2005 1380 1465 = 1510 39 0 1541 SBR 0.99 0 0 4 NE 2AVE & NE 33 ST SOUTWBOUNDSBL 7 397 0.99 417 24 441 448 0.99 10 0 q 1 MEMO 407 403 MEI 452 7 0 459 35 0.99 33 0 IIIIIIIIIIIII0 35 16 0 © 4 0 WESTBOUNDWOL WEIR 33 0 WBT 0 0.99 15 0.99 16 TOTAL50ME 48 0 50 0 0 S0 NORTHBOUND NOR 17 0 0.99 0.99 899®� 18 18 0 0 18 MM.908 983 0.99 0 0 0 0 0 925 918 972En 993 8 0 1001 EASTBOUND ESR 0 0 0.99 0 0 0 0 a 0 MEAN0 0.99 ��- 0 0 EEIL 0.99 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1380 1366 1450 45 1495 15 0 1510 Notes: 1 TMC data provided by RGA, Inc. 2 Seasonal factor obtained from FDOT's FTI2002 3 PM Peak Hour Seasonally Adjusted 4 Project is expected to have a build -out in 3 years. 5 Committed Development Traffic. 6 Net Traffic with seasonally adjusted, background and committed. 9 Site Traffic €n Vehicles per hour. 10 Site Traffic in P-T Transit 11 Total Traffic in vehicles per hour @Richard Garcla and Associates, Inc., 2005 5/17/2005 • • • Table T-1 The Boulevard LINK AADT ESTIMATES Link ROADWAY sl (40 E 2 m ir M vt`i u. ¢ RIR ADT ADT AVE ADT AADT Calculation NAME AT AM COUNT PM COUNT DAILY COUNT AM COUNT PM COUNT DAILY COUNT EXISTING CONDITION Seastrnall Ad tested - t y � �` - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 © 9 10 11 4 10 11 12 13 1 Biscayne Blvd North of 33 Street CD ti» v En Le u3 a NO 5611 11237 16848 6281 12666 18947 17898 17364 SB 8553 11002 19555 9476 11785 21261 20408 19800 LINK 14164 22239 36403 15757 24451 40208 38306 37164 2 NE 2 Ave North of 33 Street RGA a F a ci NB 2012 5389 7401 2245 4507 6752 7077 6866 SO 3473 3368 6841 3518 4727 8246 7544 7319 LINK 5485 8757 14242 5764 9234 14998 14620 14184 3 NE 34 Street West of Biscayne Blvd. Q u`� u7 `n p o EB 318 618 936 440 660 1100 1018 988 WO 207 459 666 136 466 602 534 615 LINK 525 1077 1602 576 1126 1702 1652 1603 Note 9. 1 1 Roadway Noma 2 Location of Count 3 Source of Deta: RGA=Ric114rd Garcia 4 Associates. Inc, 4 Beginning of data taunt 5 Ending of data count 0 Season Factor ohtained from 2002 Florida Traffic Information CD, Miami -Dodo South Category 6701 7 Axle Correction Factor obtained from 2002 Florida Traffic Information CD B Link Direc5ion 11 Raw Data 12 Average of Count 13 Seaaanaily Adjusted AADT Calculation^AverageSF'ACE 14 Rounded MDT as per AASH1OI D07 guidelines © Richard Garcia and Associates, Inc. 2005 • • • Table: T-2 The Boulevard PM PEAK HOUR VOLUMES Link ROADWAY NAME AT DIR PM PEAK HOUR VOLUME 1 EXISTING CONDITION (Seasonally Adjus Biscayne Blvd North of 33 Street NB 1,305 SB 1,337 LINK 2,642 2 NE 2 Ave North of 33 Street NB 822 SB 565 LINK 1,387 3 NE 34 Street West of Biscayne Blvd. EB 111 WB 74 LINK 185 Notes: 1 Roadway Name 2 Location of Court 3 Source of Data: RGA=Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 4 Beginning of data count 5 Ending of data count 6 Season Factor obtained from 2003 Florida Traffic Information CD, Miami -Dade South Category 8701 7 Axle Correction Factor obtained from 2003 Florida Traffic Information CD 8 Link Direction 9, 10, 11 Raw Data 12 Average of Count 13 Seasonally Adjusted Calculation=Average*SF°ACF © Richard Garcia and Associates, Inc. 2005 The Boulevard MUSP Traffic Impact Study • • 1;)if COMMITTED • • • The Boulevard Committed Developments Linn ROADWAY NAME i DA Project Name Total CornmEOed Traffic Pemba TIp Volume [ 14 PPV Mass Transit in Person -Trip 4 14.1% 3050 Boyrnelgreen Biscayne Bay Tower (Blue) Cultural Center Miramar Canter 11 1800 Club Biscayne Tulle Village , Siraet Sky Residences Bey 25 (Star) Platinum Condo Metropolis Beyshore (Quantum) Edgewater Tower (Rosabelle) Biscayne Bay Lofts (Onyx) RAC Projeairi I 3 3 4 g 6 'r 8 9 1a ti t2 13 14 15 3 6 T 1 Biscayne Blvd N8 14 0 0 26 0 6 e 7 5 2 11 13 5 0 95 134 22 S8 14 83 0 40 0 11 I 28 5 11 6 15 25 10 0 229 319 52 LINK 28 83 0 67 0 17 34 12 18 B 26 38 15 0 324 453 74 2 NE 2 Ave AFB 2.1 0 D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 29 5 S8 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 34 6 friii- LINK 40 0 9 0 0 0 ! e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 A5 03 10 3 NE 34 Street ES 0 0 0 0 0 0 i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0, WB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LINK 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Nolan: 1 Roadway Name 2 Direction 3 Table 3 from TAP 4 No data available 5 Figure 4 & 6 Corradino (20% assigned due 1. lock of proximity) 8 Project le exempt front T10 7 From DPA Exhibit no 8 8 From DIA Exhibit na e 9 From Jachsan Ahlsledl Figure 4 10 From Jachsan Ahlstedl Fgure E 11 Fran Jachsan Ahlatedl Figure 7 12 From Jachsan Ahlstedl Figure 5 (2015 assigned due a Zack of proximity) 13 From Jachsan Ahlsledt Figura 8 14 From Jachaan Ahlstedl Figure 7 15 Various figures from KFIA stedles • • . . 2/ 3' ceaKiDo r%7/ i/'/ f >' `Y 1z Table 3 shows that in year 2001 with project traffic included, the combined person -trip capacity for automobiles and transit (bus) is above the trip demand during the PM peak hour. Table 3 Analysis of Corridor Capacity Using Person -Trips Biscayne Corridor Roadway Capacity (vehicles): Vehicle Occupancy: Roadway Capacity (persons): Transit Capacity (local bus): Corridor Capacity: 8,160 vehicles per hour' 1.40 persons per vehicle 11,424 persons per hour 1,000 person trips per hour 12,424 person trips per hour Year 2001 Conditions (without project) Roadway Volume (Vehicles): Current Occupancy: Roadway Volurne (persons): Transit Usage_ Excess Capacity iri Corridor: 6,376 vehicles 7persons per vehicle 8,926 trips per hour 700 person trips per hour 2,798 person trips per hour Year 2001 Plus Project Roadway Volume (vehicles): Current Occupancy: Roadway Volume (persons): Transit Usage: 6,501 vehicles 1.4 persons per vehicle 9,101 person trips per hour 1,000 person trips per hour (100% of existing) Excess Capacity in Corridor: 2,673 person trips per hour — (�j 3 7 (Z S V `l Combined maximum LOS volume of all three roadways (3' 2,72O 3,160 vph) x Estimate provided by City of Miarni Planning Department 00'4 16, e:Fliikt OPY Sao) • CORRADIN•O CARR SMITH CORIADINO Miramar Centre Phases 11 and 111 Future (2003) Peak Season Traffic Without Project :5- Figure 4 v : V • • '_ 212 4-39 ■ 4-42 /N. N/ 32 . 31 --Y 24'1,, E —i LEGEND O Signalized �- • Unsignalized CORRADINO CAM SMITH COR°', . Miramar Centre Phases 11 and 111 Future (2003) Peak Season Traffic With Project Trips Figure 6 • NE 19 ST • NE21 ST 3 4 39 ef 1 06> BISCAYNE RENTALS MUSP TRAFFIC STUDY '41F'M PEAK PROJECT TRIP ASSIGNMENT Page 12 TITLE BISCAYNE/ NE 38 STREE 1 MUSP TRAFFIC STUDY 1,8 9 ST $ 38 ST PM PEAK PROJECT TRIP ASSIGNMENT LEGEND Primary Trip 6t Pass -by Trip (61) Page 13 • • 367t1 STREET I 36111 MEET u5� PE3$THStt�t.I 1 1 1 1 1 33RDSTREET SCAYNE BLVD HAI►EL.TON HOUSE 1-195 kg PROJECT BAY PARK TOWERS STREET TE3QTH ;nt !E29ThSiREET 49n Mast PEAK Hi7UR PROJECT TRAFFIC INVPH BISCAYN E BAY FIGURE 4 AM AND PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT TRAFFIC JAc KSON AL AHLSTEDT. P.E, 'TfHE SKY RESIDENCES Mardi 15, 2002 • NE 2)TH STREET NE 217H STREET A NE 2 TTH STREET w.R Form - tiEzam-rTERRACE 26TI-1 STREET 4, 1115 2/13 NE 25T'H STREET NE 24TH STREET NE 23110 STREET NE 22ND STREET 0 NE21ST STREET :.swam 4.4.40 215 AI.MPM PEAK HOUR PROJECT TRAFFIC IN VPN NORTH SSTs PROJECT i3$SCAYNE BAY FIGURE 6 AM AND PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT TRAFFIC JACKSON P4. AI- LSTED # y P E,. BAY 25 member 9, 2002 Page 23 • 2 BISCAYNE BAY 3 W/20 Aiv T?M PEAK HOUR PROJECT TRAFFIC FIGURE 7 AM AND PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT TRAFFIC .3ACKSON M. AHLSTEDT, P.E. • PLATINUM CONDOMINIUM February 6, 2D03 Page 24 • • NE 2OTH STREET NE 19TH STREET 81/72 22/95 NE 15TH7STREET E 17TH 17/73 17/73 4- FERR iNt a*74, 4/49144 14/59 49/44 NE 2ND AVE 14/59 9/8 co m LU 45/99 AM1fPivt PEAK HOUR PROJECT TRAFFIC IN VP: -I A,YSHORE DR z PROJECT FIGURE 6 AM AND PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT TRAFFIC t`Z JACKSON M. AHLSTEDT, P.E. METROPOLIS BAYSHORE. CONDOMINIUM April 29, 2093 Page 22 cc, j T • 1 1' NE 23 St NE22St NE21 St NE20Ter NE19St NE 26 St 5 NE25St NE 84mg. wog w `. • ■ ••• • 1 1.0 R 11.111Mi Mb PPP Ns mim mmt PP NE18 St NE17Tee" 19184 m c» N qs • FIGURE 6 AM AND PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT TRAFFIC ! 11 1*[ k i t K 1 Project NTS WY OM IMF r ea am NEk as 19184 :HOUR PEAK :PROJECT :TRAFFIC JACKSDN M. All STEM, P.E. f3 EDGEWATER TOWER August 4. 2003 Page 22 LU G3 w NE2ITH STREET H STREET Mom 1Y. 10 i- 1 HE 27T14 STREET NE26TH TERRACE 6' NE 20TH STREET i 1 1 1 1 WIC 14-444 110- tr-13)5 NOk I H ITT $ PROJECT M U NE25rH STREET NE Z4TH S iREET NE 21aRD STREET NE 22ND STREET _NE 2iST STREET LG 3,11 ANYPIJ PEAK HOUR NET )00 SITIONA.L TRAFFIC S. LIE TO PROJECT FIGURE 6 AM AND PM PEAK HOUR PROJECT TRAFFIC JACKSON N, AHLSThDT, P.E. '4 BISCA (P E SAY LOFTS September IZ 20D3 Page 22 i eg'Scale Figure 7 Shops at Midtown Miami - Midblock Project Turning m, Movement Volumes 0.1 alley -Horn and Assodares, I Juty 27, 2004 i 1 1 1 �15(15) ; �--- t4(S4) hF Proxosed Nt34th St Extension 7 I r ' CRo� r 1 r r 0 t t i 1 r 1 1 r 1 0 t 5(l6}--� 0 6 AM Peak HowVolume (21) PM Peak Hour Vo?ume GA Figure 4� Buena Vista East Tract H (Parcel 2) Project Turning .;.."�P r,� �s Movement Volumes �; 0.025 0.05 0.075 0.1 Seale Octobe 27, 2004 E 36th St WS Z7 6 AM Fexk Hour Volume (19) PM Peak Hour Volume Figure 5 //5a61 Buena Vista West Tract A (North Bloc k) 8' Scale Project Turning Kirriby-Hom �; � ffiT3 ASsoCates, Miles Movement Volumes October 27, 204 0_025 0.45 0-075 0.1 Figure 6 , T Buena Vista West Tract C (Mid Black West) ` Scale Project Turning .•s Associates,andInc. Aisles Movement Volumes a,�b 0.02s 0.05 0.075 a-� Nvi 34t4h St &th St (US 27 Jai. � 1 yi_21}---+i 1 t,,, I 5(153 0�1- =to [_7 1 ni 1 1 QI I 1 1 1 1 oc>—i7( 9} t o�+d fyth at Extert5€awn,,,# d�� r Pm l a5(17) a..4.ram'~--r '".'. c I t I a1g fr n 1 ra 1 ! 4 .m.. .0 t1 n t I 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I t 1 ' Scale 0,025 0.05 0.075 5(19)--11 Legend 7 AM Peak tour V ol'x e (25) PM Peak Fleur Volume Figure 7 Buena Vista East Tract F (Parcel 4) Project Turning Mies Movement Volumes 0.1 pPri Krrtetlionl ®!__I Associ.las . October 27, 2004 `7 Scale NW 34th St —0(11 a 541 b'' r 1(3)---- 1(3) al^r R 3(1a)- i^ r 1 1 1 1 _1 r ;r r CO rwr..---- -- �1 f e, r 1 1 ct i r r . m1 ! 1 1 a1 1 1 uj 1 1 81 i i a r [L 1 1 r f it____g(161 1 )Q 1 PrcPcsed N134th St EXtensian 13(Z$i .. ,...�.., ...... - _,,,--, w r :1 t .....� .. r, w_ 1 I4 ,,, 1 1 J, - 1 . f , �- `x I I ., �r • ' � 1 k. :1 1 'j1 1-I 1 I. NE 36th St (US 27 0) 1 1 Legend 3 AM ?eak Hour Volume (10) PM Peak Hour Volume -1 -F - FEC Railroad Existing Roads - -- - Proposed Roads ?roject Boundary Figure 9 w Buena Vista West Tract D (Mid Block East) Project Turning Mites Movement Volumes 0.025 0.05 Q_075 0.1 7 1 6- Pon andAasocelf,1 October 27. 2004 NW 34th St 0 "' I ?(24)•1 , 1 ! 0 "1r�uo 1 I I a I I ,ras(:s) — 14(14) ProposedN34th 5t Extension �E I r N 36th St (US 27) t I o__-: 1 I I 0� cca- 1 r i ► 1 1 I 1 x I 1 1 i it I I 1 i I I I _..._.... Pry—ozd.3.121.5LEZ. I I I I 1 I I I I l I 1 I I ccf I g I t I I Legend 6 AM Peak Hour volume (21) PM Peak Hour Volume 1 f— FEC Railroad Existing Roads — — " "' i'ropeaed Roads Site Boundary Scale Figure 4 Buena Vista East Tract H (Parcel 2) Project Turning Movement Volumes Mik s 0,025 DAIS 0.075 0.1 BM" _ landCiln*-1-brnAssociates, October 15. 2004 a d + 1 Pr0 aced rid34th Silwxieasic ... 1 1 f I 1 ► 1 11 1 11 1 11 f f 1 1 1 pro oswd [ ^d 5t FxtgL' ;4ZL1-. .e...,�i„� j1 M...r.....�... —1 1 1 f 1 1 bf mf [ Cl of f tij 21 Q.=44�xgS.-�§3sn-goy t � f f c 1 1 0 1 f g vl of 6 AM Peak Hour Volume (19) PM Peak Hour Volume Figure 5 r Buena Vista West Tract A (North Block) ate o jec Tu i"t7 ! fl C, �" Way -Horn ®j and Assizzles, Inc. oclobar 15, 2004 NW 34tih S 5(17) Scale 1(2) 0 Miles 0.025 0.05 0.075 0.1 7(17) Project Turning Movement Volumes 36tts S1(US 27 5 AM Peak Hour volume (17) PM Peak Hour volume -i —3- £EC Railroad Fisting Road a s • Proposed Roads ":r Project Boundary October 15, 2004 1 1 1 ;W 34th St 0 0_025 ram cica ca '' 0 (2) k Gi21) 36th Si (US 27 } r I 0 6{2 ).---.1 (, I 0- 5[!� 4— I'_ a I I I 1 1 "g1 1 cio 1 i..rrer _ 1 1 "-'"------ �`�i 1 1 co f 1 1 ra � 1 1 f z gI 1 1 Y1 1 I A [ 1 I 1 i 1 A. --0 i {l9) { Proposed N 344SI Extension 1 4 Nr 1 1. ..— 11 #2: - 1 1 1 1 1 1 11 1 1 11 ........... r...a.,.._ I 1 1 1 1 I I 1i I -cal i Legend 7 AM Peak Hour Volume (25) ?tvt Peak Hoar Volume —i —I - FEC Railroad ••--••••- Existing Roads • ,• .► •- • Proposed Roads 111f4. `-`�' Project Boundary 5(19)----'4 0 Figure S Buena Vista East Tract F (Parcel Scale Project Turning Kies Movement Volumes 0.05 0.075 0.1 ®o i-Ftarn Na.A111111L..1 aid Assadales, Inc October 15, 20C4 NW 34ti1 St n� z�- 4(12)— Scale Q 0 0 4w—. a 1 1 .......momPrcsop r 1 cd 4( is)--' dam^ k iE 35t17 SI . JS 27 I 1 Legend 5 AM Peak Hour Volume (19) PM Peak Hour volume - -I- FEC Railroad Existing Roads - .. - Proposed Roads >.t Site Bmadary Figure 5 Buena Vista East Tract H (Parcel 2) 0,025 005 Miles 75 0.1 Project Turning Movement Volumes bast Ey-1 Orn and Associates, Inc. November 5. 20c4 3i } I )•.-..-� fY Scale 0 o--► 0--y j 1 �rs 4 Proposed N .4th St Extension r r r i + i i f r 1 a i i r i a i r 4q Legend 4 AM Peak Hour Volume (15) PM Peak Hour Vctume 1 1 FEC Railroad -'-^� Existing Roads W - Proposed Roars Project Boundary Figure 6 Buena Vista West Tract A (North Block) Project Turning ►® Kr Movement Volumes b._Enr ar4 "sS°"a`M int Novernbsr 5. 2004 toles 0.025 0.t75 0.075 0.f NW 34th St' cca a —0 ) 14) I #� 1 I0----N i`' 6 _ X onj� N # 1 I I 1 i f 1 m j__ f 1 c re d aE 1 1 a1 1 21 I -1y1 + QI 1 I r ©r. � 3116) 1 4 I Proposed Ng34th Si Extension 4 r. nr t .t a c _ k� # '� 1 1T w r g ... .fit I r t f ,ram '. fix" �V- it € .:' o 1 ro I �� ▪ 2ndSt..illalil.r+r.,�„ I 1 ",...,yam x j I # I # IA -?I Ens 'IE 36d) $ (US 27 10.1.1 I(4)- 2(9) —' 1 1 1 1 31 of b1 ct# I 1 a 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 r 1 I I I 3 (83 Legend AM Peak Hour Volume PM Peak 11eur Volume —i---{-- FEC Railroad -••"""P Existing Roads — — " " Proposed Roads Project Boundary Figure 7 Buena Vista West Tract C (Mid Block West) Scale Project Turning Mites Movement Volumes 0.025 0.05 0.075 IF/S ®'. rBifu dcy-Horn . 1 and Asscdates. irc. November 5. 2004 4{t5h—" fi s o n! (aW 34th st 3 i L 0 4(4) 5(t 9) :NE 36:h St EUS 27 ,r 5(!9) ►i I I 1 1 1 0—yl,y' ! 1 ! i ! ?1 1 '1 1 ! � ! If i p1 1 I 01 1 0!1 ! a At r ! ! ! 1 1 1 1 1 . -0 1 )! Proposed Sri 341h St Ex:ersi 5(17)—/' ! 1 Legend 6 AM Peak Flour Volume (22) PM Pe & Hour Volume —t---1— FEE Raihoad Existing Roads s e - Proposed Roads Project Boundary Figure 8 Buena Vista East Tract F (Parcel 4) Scale Project Turning �,� �ycm Scale Movement Volumes f tl� it ,!`e, 0 025 0.05 0_075 0,1 November 5, 2004 th 0- -" G—�, 3 AM Peak Hour Vokum (10) PM Peek flour Volum Figure 9 w Buena Vista West Tract D (Mid Block East) Scale Project Turning Miles Movement Volumes 0.025 0,05 0.075 0.1 ® VII Kir*J y-Ham Ems' 1111111 and Assxiabes, lnc November 5, 2004 The Boulevard MUSP Traffic impact S d • TRANSIT .icHARD GAR.c.9A & ASSOC TES, INC. • • • The Boulevard EXISTING TRANSIT (BUS) VOLUME TO CAPACITY TRANSIT CORRIDOR TRANSIT ROUTE Additional Description 2004- 2005 Peak Hr. Headway NUMBER OF TRANSIT VEHICLES IN PM PK HOUR TRANSIT VEHICLES NUMBER OF SEATS TRANSIT VEHICLE LOAD @ 150% CAPACITY ROUTE PM PEAK CAPACITY PM Peak Volume Transit vic Biscayne Blvd. 3 20 3 43 65 194 111 0.57 16 20 3 44 66 198 99 0.50 36 15 4 46 69 276 32 0.12 62 10 6 41 62 369 21 0.06 T 15 4 46 69 276 152 0.55 BM Bisc Max 12 5 46 69 345 14 0.04 95 DT Civic Cntr 15 4 43 65 258 100 0.39 TOTAL 1916 529 0.28 NE 2nd Ave 9 15 4 46 69 276 78 0.28 10 30 2 46 69 138 36 0.26 TOTAL 414 114 0.28 Note: Capacities are in each direction from DT Miami DRI Table 21.A3. Ridership information obtained from Table 21.A4 of the DT Miami DRI Increment II. Where no volumes existed a nominal value of 100 was input for conservatism. The BoulevardMUSP Traffic Impact Study • PERSON TRIP -tfiaR€3GA.RCir & ASSOCIATES, NC„ • • • M1 25 as 10b45', .544 The Bauhevatd PERSON TRIP VOLUME ANp CAPACITY ANALYSIS TABLE Av IAN 8'ITVw00 MO R0AUNAY ROM Tn.LN EMi9TIR0'CONORION IB155.55 101520 f04Mtll.' &3c.211. atw NE 23 s; NE 3541 rvE 56 2391 N¢ de A 55 ROADWAY PE101ON TRIP 5RS . C311.90N• TRIP 3XC555 MOM ROADWAY TRW OOMWAY I VOLL,5 4278E+2 ADOPTEDOCRR1000 VE7IIC2LPR [,A,PAGRY 4ER10ULARj 5 '.4 1 TRIP .fl9 TYPE !! DARACITY 51,5 PPV� VOLUME 1 PiTa G4P5CR1 410 E 4158 ! l78! 2800 1 1005 1 1e27 522 1052 253 LOS 1005 9,tl5 5343. TRIP TRIP CFPPOI'ry C,p0'045, TOTAL 9R PF RIP CAPACITY 515 TRANSIT PERSON-TT4P VQ.VME 0V'S 529 ETR0. 12OVER M5TRORAL 1.3 997 13E 753 SM SEO ENT :DENT PEA63.N 8AW AE :AEIR 1 SEGMENT P 15:30 PER-mia 1 CEsn VOLUME CRPAGry 1 V!C 2358 24SI 2442 0 46 2395 5,5J LOS 13091 NE2241 NE 3551 58 LU 0701 19 791 160 0.42 11345 l4 4 120a 191e Pay NE2 Ave E0 81eca8rre 40y We m(9AM00190001009 YRp2FI G WOW 819ero£Nva NP 231;I Nf3991 z Ave NP2581 950 553 550 41b I458 1355 1013 05 0.:1 25R 0.05 2.tl9 416 1216 91 54 531 55 3E9 IN 1520 0,4E 0225 1205 "1 0.11 1255 2235 2246 NE3661 Ne295€ 348[ N5 *1 96 E 716 118 2J35 2005 e40 'e 1 121 41a8 2LIi ,350 135 850 1550 tb 12 WRH BACilOR0LIN0.-'6'Go.tixmeo eleaeylatRw N526 :ve0713 10 NE vE 02 41—DE f1E 2 Ave NE 22 1 RE 3fi 51 =E29 093 349[ '4125+4 P.y A[ i+P2 Av EA NES 5 E.., Ha we NC DE .0 1'E34x YF.29 0.18C[ 0901A484874 U M.O. DM O.d C5111MW*TE11124+4HC VE3551 rva 0:0144re891: :9E2 Ave 5E 3e SI 56 0312 e 4 E 1 4 • 4 2072 Sal 11a 1250 2 19'S 9. 21)3 2122 650 1390 1350 9S 1R00 € 2Seo ia.r DEC 134 500 c4 414 416 19 57 181 !2? 571 )IU 05 12Y1 1435 a. 107 NE 2An Ur e1e:a,s, ayl_wR 2735 244 • T 23d 050 E aw 221 1300 14A 1Qe] Soy 1 116E 1.010 26 37 243 449 12 1355 937 .300 35U 479 1012 119 a. u. A 2335 3203 051 207E 122E a 30 14U5 1142 'd 1lUW _I_ £021 2122 a.3.3 ...� :19C 1050 2 5C�U.1S • • • Table: T-4A The Boulevard PERSON TRIP VOLUME AND CAPACITY ANALYSIS TABLE ROADWAY MODE ROADWAY FROM TO DIR •:as4traa;�t;;-: MAMI ADOPTED LOS CORRIDOR TYPE ROADWAY VEHICULAR CAPACITY PERSON• TRIP CAPACITY 1.6 PPV ROADWAY VEHICULAR VOLUME PERSON - TRIP VOLUME 1.4 PPV EXCESS PERSON TRIP CAPACITY ROADWAY PERSON TRIP VIC LOS Biscayne Blvd NE 29 St NE 36 SI NB E 41.6 1800 2880 1305 1827 1053 0.63 B NE 36 St NE 29 5t SB E 4LD 180E 288E 1337 1872 1008 0.65 B NE 2 Ave NE 29 St NE 36 SC NS E 4LU 1710 2736 822 115E 1586 0.42 B NE 36 St NE 29 St 56 E 4LU 1710 2736 565 791 1945 0.29 B NE 34 St Biscaynq Bay NE 2 Ave ES E 2LU 850 1360 111 155 1205 0.11 A NE 2 Ave Biscayne Bay WB E 2LU 850 1360 74 104 1256 0.08 A ITI4 IaSCKrsa[531 Jf TRAFF1C 12©081 Biscayne Blvd NE 29 61 NE 36 St N6 E 4LD 1800 2880 1385 1939 941 0.87 8 NE 36 St NE 29 St SS E 41,D 1800 2880 1419 1986 894 0.69 8 NE 2 Ave NE 29 S1 NE 36 St NB E 4LU 1710 2736 872 1221 1515 0.45 B NE 36 SI NE 29 St 58 E 4LU 1710 2736 600 840 1896 0.31 B NE 34 St Biscayne Bay NE 2 Ave ES E 2LU 850 13E0 117 184 1196 0.12 A NE 2 Ave Biscayne Say WB E 2LU 850 1360 79 110 1250 0.08 A lrr4 Re!'�Iirsn t1I L l `x: A Biscayne Blvd NE 29 SI NE 36 St NB E 4LD 1600 2880 1480 2072 808 0.72 B NE 36 SI NE 29 at SB E 4L0 1800 2880 1647 2306 574 0.80 C NE 2 Ave NE 29 SI NE 36 St NE E 4LU 1710 2736 893 1250 1486 0.46 B NE 36 SI NE 29 at SB E 4LU 1710 2736 624 873 1863 0.32 B NE3481 Biscayne Say NE2Ave EB Iw 2LU 850 1360 117 164 1196 i 0,12 A NE 2 Ave Biscayne Bey WO E 2LU 850 1360 79 110 1250 0.08 A ITN PROJECT ANLOBACKGROUND &C MMITTED.TRAFFIC Biscayne Blvd NE29St NE36St NE36St NE29St NB SB E 4L0 4LD 180E 1800 2880 288E 149E 1657 2086 2320 794 560 0.72 0.81 B NE 2 Ave NE29St NE 36 SI NE36St NE29St NB SB E 4LU 4LU 1710 1710 2736 2735 906 640 1271 696 1465 1840 0.46 0.33 e 8 NE34St Blsceyne Bay NE 2 Ave EB NE 2 Ave Biscayne Bay WB Notes E 2LU 2LU 850 850 1360 144 136E 105 202 1158 147 1213 0.15 0.11 B A • • • Table: T-48 The Boulevard PERSON TRIP VOLUME AND CAPACITY ANALYSIS TABLE ROADWAY MODE SEGMENT TOTAL ROADWAY FROM TO EXISTING'CL NDITION i NE 29 St NE 36 St Biscayne Blvd DIR MIAMI ADOPTED CORRIDOR LOS TYPE analy Adjusted) NE2951 NE 2 Ave NE36St NB E NE 29 St SS E 4LO 4LD ROADWAY VEHICULAR CAPACITY 1600 1800 PERSON TRIP CAPACITY 1.6 PPV 2880 2680 ROADWAY VEHICULAR VOLUME 1305 1337 PERSON- TRiP VOLUME QQ 1.4 PPV 1827 1872 ROADWAY PERSON TRIP EXCESS PERSON TRIP CAPACITY 1053 1038 V/C LOS 0,63 8 0.65 SEGMENT PERSON TRIP CAPACITY 4796 4796 SEGMENT PERSON TRIP VOLUME 2356 2401 SEGMENT PER -TRIP EXCESS CAPACITY 2440 SEGMENT PERSON TRIP VIC 0.49 2395 0.50 LOS NE 36 St Biscayne Bay NE 2 Ave NE34St NE36St NB E NE29Si SB E 4LU 4LU 1710 2736 1710 2736 NE 2 Ave EB Easeayne Bay WB WITH BACKGROUND TRAFFIC$: Biscayne Blvd NE 29 5t NE 36 S1 NB NE305t NE29Slj SB NE 2 Ave E E E 2LU 2LU 4LD 4LD 850 L 1360 850 1360 1800 1800 822 565 1150 791 1586 1945 0.42 0.29 B 8 3150 1264 3150 905 1686 2245 0.40 0.29 B B 2860 2880 11t 74 1385 1419 155 194 1939 1988 1205 1256 941 894 0.11 0.08, 0.87 6,89 A A B B 1360 1360 4796 4796 155 104 2500 2548 1205 1256 2296 2248 0.11 0,08 0.52 0.53 A 8 B 872 1221 1515 0.45 3150 1342 1710 2736 NE 36 St NE 29 St SB E 4LU 1710 2736 600 840 1896 0.31 B 3150 961 NE 29 St NE 38 St NB NE 34 St 4LU 1808 2169 0.43 0.30 B B NE 2 Ave EB E 2LU 650 Blecayne Bay NE 2Ave Biscayne Bay WB E 2LU 850 WITI'I BACKGROUND'&•COMMITTED TRAFFIC Biscayne Blvd NE 29 St NE 36 St N NE 36 St NE 29 St SB NE 29 St NE36St NE 2 Ave 1360 117 164 1196 0.12 A 1360 79 110 1250 0.08 A 1360 1360 4796 164 110 2706 4LD 1800 2880 1480 2072 808 0.72 9 1647 2306 574 0.80 C 4798 2872 4LD 1800 2880 1196 1250 2088 1924 0.12 0.08 0.56 0.60 A A 8 NE36St NB E 4LU 1710 NE29S1 SB E 4LU 1710 2736 2736 893 1250 1486 0,46 8 3150 624 873 1863 0,32 B 3150 NE 34 Si Biscayne Bey NE 2 Ave EB E 2LU 850 ~ 1380 117 164 NE 2 Ave Biscayne Bey we E 2LU 850 1380 79 110 1250 0.08 A 1360 110 WITH PROJECT AND BACKGRE UN 1382 994 ii. & CQMMFTTED.TRAFF e. Biscayne Blvd NE29St NE36St NE 36 5t NE 29 St NE 2 Ave NB E SB E 45D 4LD 1800 1800 2880 2880 1490 1857 2086 2320 1196 0.12 A 794 560 0.72 0.81 8 C 1360 164 4796 2728 4796 2890 1766 2156 0.44 0.32 1196 1250 2088 1906 0.12 0.08 0,57 0.60 NE 29 St NE 36 5t NE 36 St NE 29 st NE34St NB E SB 4LU 4LU r.. 1710 2736 1710 I 2736 908 640 1271 898 1465 1840 0.48 0.33 8 3150 1408 3150 1021 1742 2129 0.45 0.32 B B A A B B B Biaceyne Bey NE 2 Ave NE 2 Ave Blscayne Say WB E y 2LU 850 1360 105 Notes. EB E 2LU 850 1360 144 202 147 1158 0,15 1213 0,11 B 1360 202 1158 0.15 1360 147 1213 0.11 B • • • Table: T-5 The Boulevard Project Traffic ROADWAY FROM Site Traffic NE 29 St NE 36 St NE 29 St TO DIR Percent ingress Percent E[resss Net Vehicle Trips - 1N Net Vehicle Trips - OUT Net Vehicle Trips - TOTAL Net Transit Trips - TOTAL Biscayne Blvd NE 36 St NE 29 St NB SB 15.00 12.00 15, 00 12.00 6 5 4 5 10 10 6 4 NE 36 St NE 2 Ave NE 36 St NE 29 St NB SB 15.00 12.00 15.00 12.00 8 9 7 7 15 16 6 4 NE 34 St Biscayne Bay NE 2 Ave NE 2 Ave Biscayne Bay EB WB 10.00 36.00 10.00 36.00 PROPOSED DM CONDITION: NE 34 ST: EB: 111+27= 138 VPH WB: 74+26= 100 VPH NBL: 14 VPH NBR: 10 VPH 17 12 10 14 27 26 4 13 • • • LEVEL OF SERVICE TABLE CLASSIFICATION TYPE FDOT'S 2002 Q/LOS PERSON -TRIP LOS A B C D E A B C D E CLASS 1 1LU 0 220 720 860 890 0.00 0.25 0.81 0,97 1.00 2LD 0 1530 1810 1860 1910 0.00 0.80 0.95 0,97 1,00 3LD 0 2330 2720 2790 2840 0,00 0.82 0.96 0.98 1.00 4LD 0 3030 3460 3540 3590 0,00 0,84 0.96 0.99 1.00 CLASS II 1LU 0 100 590 810 850 0.00 0.12 0.69 0,95 1,00 2LD 0 220 1360 1710 1800 0.00 0.12 0,76 0.95 1.00 3LD 0 340 2110 2570 2710 0.00 0.13 0.78 0.95 1.00 4LD 0 440 2790 3330 3500 0.00 0.13 0.80 0.95 1.00 CLASS III 1LU 0 0 280 660 810 0.00 0,00 0.35 0,81 1.00 2LD 0 0 650 1510 1720 0,00 0.00 0.38 0.88 1.00 3LD 0 0 1020 2330 2580 0.00 0.00 0.40 0.90 1.00 4LD 0 0 1350 3070 3330 0,00 0,00 0.41 0.92 1.00 CLASS 1V 1LU 0 0 270 720 780 0.00 0.00 0.35 0.92 1,00 2LD 0 0 650 1580 1660 0.00 0,00 0,39 0.95 1.00 3LD 0 0 1000 2390 2490 0,00 0.00 0.40 0.96 1,00 4LD 0 0 1350 3130 3250 0.00 0.00 0,42 0.96 1.00 NOTES: DERIVED BY DIVIDING THE FDOT's 2002 LOS BY THE LOS 'E' FOR EACH TYPE OF ROADWAY. LOS 'E' DETERMINED BY INCREASING LOS D BY 50 VPH CAPACITY WHICH CAN EASILY BE ACHIEVED BY OPTIMIZATION AND OTHER TECHNIQUES. The Boulevard MUSP Traffic impact Study • A R]CH ARE) GARCIA & ASSOCIATF-S, INT. ANALYSIS iffi pe fiJ The Boulevard MUSP Proposed PM Condition (Background, Committed & Project) Turning Movements • • Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. • Seasonally Adjusted • • • ervice Sumimar Intersection Biscayne Blvd & NE 34 fh Street Biscayne Blvd & NE337d Street NE 2' Avenue & NE 34 to Street NE 2' Avenue & NE 33 id Street NE 34 t" Street & Driveway Existing Proposed Delay LOS Delay LOS 6.5 A 10.4 B 7.4 A 7.9 A 1.1 A 1.7 A 0.8 A 0.8 A 0 A 13.2 B • • The Boulevard MUSP HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Proposed PM Condition (Background, Committed & Project) 1: NE 34 St & Biscayne Blvd WNW 1137,50MMTIOWWW: War Lane Configurations , Grade Peak Flour Factor Pedestrians L U :, Walking Speed (ftls) Pere Right turn flare (veh) Median storage veh) t vC1, stage 1 cont vol tC, single (s) t (s) ; Iue r s cM capacity (ve 4 . Volume Left GSH Queue Length (ft) Lane LOS Approach LOS uur Average Delay 0% 7 7.5 6.5 6.9 7.5 6.5 6.3 4.0 3 5 310 341 20 27 0 11 341 1700 ���b.✓''Cd..��pwn, 412.2 4.1 4/ 0% .92 0.92 0.92 0.92 4.1 700 260 0 "..,.,.. Richard Garcia & Assocites, Inc. floridlvt7-AA51 Synchro 5 Report The Boulevard MUSP HCM Signalized intersection Capacity Analysis Proposed PM Condition (Background, Committed & Project) 2; NE 33 St & Biscayne Blvd WOW Lane Configurations Total Lost time (s) La'i F ;v F t.t Setd. Flow (prof) Satd. Flow (perm) Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 Lane Group Flow (vph) Protected Phases Actuated Green, G Actuated g!C Ratio Lane Grp Cap (vph) • 4.0 0.14 3i ,... ;.tit..., -- k ft§ ft 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1770 3535 0.92 226 )(is Ratio Perm OE06 Uniform Delay, di 46.6 Incremental Delay, d2 Level of Service Approach Los 184 47.0 8.5 201 2803 3.1.".:.4_3 224 0_17 8 3.1 4.5 0.8 HCIVI Average Control Delay 7.9 Actuated Cycle Lem (s) c Critical Lane Group HCM Level of Service Sum of lost time (s) r t :* 8.0' Richard Garcia & Assocites, Inc. floridiv17-AA51 • Synchro 5 Report • • 2.2 419 The Boulevard MUSP HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Proposed PM Condition (Background, Committed & Project) 3: NE 34 St & NE 2 Ave ,sr" t *-36019MPOIEWAII Lane Configurations tir ii+ ' ' - Grade0% Y-§1iiiiilve4i/V:i.,j.::,,iii:;.. ':::-.1:43.!.f.:: -::-:1-i-... '':'::.'..0414.S; Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0_92 0.92 0_92 0.92 t....OW1k*1.0W6*RD' Pedestrians WoivigkiWtftitraitriy:::,,,,,,,,,,,:, Walking Speed (Mt) :Art*Pftia#D0.4:,:;:::. Right turn flare (veh) Median storage veh) ti vC1, stage 1 cont vol 0 ,„ , tC, single (s) 6.8 6.9 4,1 -70k" tF (s) 3.5 3.3 ................ cM capacity (veh/h) 129, .47_0_ Volume Left 35 0 0 22 0 0 , cSH 1700221 .,, 1700 419 1700 1700 0 Queue Length 91) 40 0 0 4 0 — ' ' ' - " ' ::-•-,ft..'.7..:j'W.:'L.:' UkAggr„..,:...,.: 141B Lane LOS ._. ..,......, . .... .-: Zlat;..„1--4t0,g17:7":"!"--"VgZ.---- D Approach LOS „,,MEti gigreVerg 7-giri406MIATL-ORSOIrifiL t8V ........ . ' Average Detay 1.7 4*464.01146: Ut�r " Richard Garda & Assocites, inc. floridIvI7-AA51 Syrtchro 5 Report The Boulevard MUSP HCM Unsignaiized Intersection Capacity Analysis Proposed PM Condition (Background, Committed & Project) 4: NE 33 St & NE 2 Ave • Lane Configu Grade #e (rot ..,.. Peak Hour Factor Pedestrians ............... Walking Speed (ft/s) Right turn flare Median storage veh) vC1,stage 1 iontvol tC, single (s) tF (s) 4 pOE cM capacity (vehih) d% 0% 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Volume Left CSH .- Queue Length (ft) POt.4rt,'y Lane LOS Approach LOS Sa Average Delay 6.8 6.9 3.5 3.3 3 272 1700 1 i 0.5 0.92 4.1 2.2 433 0.92 1 ' VW -a" Richard Garcia & Assocites, Inc. floridiv17-AA51I • Synchro 5 Report • • • The Boulevard MUSP Proposed PM Condition (Background, Committed & Project) 1: NE 34 St & Biscayne Blvd Performance by movement Delay /Veh (s) SimTraffic Performance Report EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 592.1 38.9 151.1 263.7 72.5 142.5 13.2 2.8 5.1 18.9 1.4 3.4 1: NE 34 St & Biscayne Blvd Intersection Performance EB WB NB SB Total Delay / Veh (s) 108.7 173.4 3.0 2.6 10.4 2: NE 33 St & Biscayne Blvd Performance by movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Delay /Veh (s) 33.2 59.5 19.5 53.5 34.3 15.3 7.5 14.4 15.1 6.5 6.3 2: NE 33 St & Biscayne Blvd Intersection Performance EB WB NB SB Total Delay /Veh (s) 37.3 45.8 7.9 6.8 9.5 3: NE 34 St & NE 2 Ave Performance by movement WEL WBT WBR Nb1 NBR SBL SBT Delay /Veh (s) 18.5 0.5 5.7 0.5 3.7 4.8 0.0 3: NE 34 St & NE 2 Ave Intersection Performance WB NB SB Total Delay / Veh (s) 7.0 0.6 0.3 0.9 4: NE 33 St & NE 2 Ave Performance by movement WBL WBT WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Delay / Veh (s) 51.3 0.7 9.1 0.4 2,7 9.8 0.3 4: NE 33 St & NE 2 Ave Intersection Performance WB NB SB Total Delay /Veh (s) 20.1 0.5 0.6 1.2 5: NE 34 St & DIW Performance by movement EBT WBT NBL NBR Delay / Veh (s) 16.6 1.7 3_0 100_4 Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc_ florldlvl7-AA51 • • • The Boulevard MUSP Proposed PM Condition (Background, Committed & Protect) SimTraffic Performance Report 5: NE 34 St & D/W intersection Performance EB WB NB Total Delay f Veh (s) 16.6 1.7 30,8 1 • Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. floridlvl7-AA51 The Boulevard MUSP Existing Condition Lane Assign ents ="4-1 'chard Garcia & Associates, Inc. The Boulevard MUSP Project Traffic PM Peak lio Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. • The Boulevard MUSP Ming PM Condition Seasonally Adjusted Turning Movements Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. • The Boulevard MUSP Seasonally Adjusted Proposed PM Condition (Backgr nd, Committed & Project) Turning Movements Richard Garcia & Associates, inc, • The Boulevard IvIUSP Existing Condition PM Peak • Lane Configurations st Grade 0% MAtiOgNaigNiiE .,„, Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Pedestrians On1.031140bAlfialigirf Walking Speed (Ws) Right turn flare (yeti MR-444-NOCIVant:nr : Median storage veh) V.:gift7.1444.301.41ACii* §:";;.: 1*-i'a 27.-V-,104' - vC1, stage 1 conf vol 6 11420S tc, single (s) 7_5 6.5 6.9 7_5 65 6_9 ' ............................................................................................................ tF (s) 3.5 4.0 3.3 3.5 4.0 WI capacity (veh/h) 16 13 492 14 T,-?-1.-4,p,:-;.,,---p-,--:?•,*,,.. - i:0.-*;::::7..:, ,:-:..,.,.1.--.t•Aa.w..•-?pw- ,,,,,a:::::i.:;•:::<•„;,..: 1: HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis NE 34 St & Biscayne Blvd te 4— k- 4\ \*. 0% 0% 60 ... „ 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 = Volume Lett cSH :40):Attig***7 Queue Length(19 Lane LOS OrtiO4, Ut1414:7:7 Approach LOS • ,•s 4 18 91 4.1 3.3 2.2 13 355 442 20 0 0 87 0 0 442 1700 1700 302 1700 1700 . . . . 210 3 0 0 ... 0 4.1 2.2 302 mmrEm:m.,mmaga-• • -.-7-jak......,..,,-;,..;::;:;,::::::#),Et'A51,tiltligi!!%.11.1:Witift ft Average Delay 21.9 fiffits-e-A(4.ite4 - ................... ia.4g2g:4=;, De.e.AV I Los A -7-7,rraL, Sc-j,.(4t.,-T Richard Garcia & Assooltes, Inc. floridiv17-AA51 • Synchro 5 Report • • • vph) Actuated gIC-Ratio The Boulevard MUSP Existing Condition PM Peak Lane Configurations Total Lost time (s) ti. row Satd. Flow (prof) vatd_- Flow (Dean) 1625 Peak -hour factor, PHF 0.92 Lane Group Flow Protected Phases Actuated Green, G (9 16,5 4 T 0.14 HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 2: NE 33 St & Biscayne Blvd 1349 Lane Grp Cap (vph) Ws Ratio Perm Uniform Delay, di 46.5 Incremental Delay, d2 POKisnl. i Level of Service W10514.0i0e' *NM Approach LOS 'NNW 3tC.X 226 0.06 16.5 0.14 188 0 > 3532 382 3532 4.0 1 T70 3534 358 3534 0.92 0.92t {0.92� 0.920.92 0.92 0.92 45 1280 \7- 94.0 94. 0.79 0.79 c0.06 46.7 52 7.2 303 2802 0.12 2.9 4.0 .0 0. 94.D 94.0 0.79 0.79 284 2803 0.13 2.9 3.9 12 0.5 A A HCM Average Control Delay A�jctuatedy�Cawycle Length (s) c Critical Lane Group 7_4 HCM Level of Sewice Sum of Masi time (s 8.0 Richard Garcia & Assocites, 1tle. floridiv17 AA51 Synchm 5 Report The Boulevard MUSP Existing Condition PM Peak Lane Configurations Grade --- Peak Hour Fedor 0.91 U.91 0.91 0. k..***44#4#41:-* ) 26 37 1022 Pedestrians Walking Speed (ftis),_ Right tumMedian; Median storage veh) vC1, stage 1 conf voi VOX4404: "A:7,c000MMORFIPPINVIGFENDINVEMPANT'"'"'"' tc. single (s) 6.8 6.9 4.1 :47441:061ZIMMINERRIPMEHERRitiEZENAUA& ............ tF (s) 3.5 3,3 2.2 g0'0.40****ktia:R533 igigAVINCEIDNEEEMERIkt„MiiiiiiiiiMEZE"Mtk„ cM capacity (vehth) 160 500• 451 :OEFAINGEMOZ.r-g.M.MEMEREM&: HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 3: NE 34 St & NE 2 Ave "4#32.1Y Volume Left 26 0 0 11 0 - CSH 266 1700 1700 451 1700 1700 Queue Length (ft)• 23 darataitigkg*N Lane toS #047.41:P*(s)"-:". Approach LOS c pa641, 7A: ...2•4*!. fititifitaiREENSAi 'v:"EARMagetE, wimegga- Average Delay fi.kif*)**r4iiabitkbfir4Ar* 1.1 MM. Richard Garcia & Assocites, Inc. floridIv17-AA51 • Synchro 5 Report The Boulevard MUSP Existing Condition PM Peak t p \ Lane Configurations Grade Peak Hour Factor 5�..�..Y..�.ri " .f.3 .. 5..... Pedestrians Walking Speed (Ws Right turn flare (veh) Median storage veh) vC1, stage 1 conf vol ytC, single (s) 6.8 tF (s) 3.5 .0b04000'.67,r y._ cM capacity, (vehlh) 168 518 ). Volume Left Queue l..ength () Lane LOSE 4/#70401 Approa .�h LOS 69 3.3 0.92 0.92 0.92 ?.....:. j.z 0 4.1 2.2 470 •o-:�k� ��'. 11 MOT 1700 470 1700 1700 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 4: NE 33 St & NE 2 Ave • -�3`K�, §SIX .1`�;,'{ h-�-?'t„ ,.--: hi Avisa ...,tt....:3 gitiM Average��Delay 04j 0_8 �+ a Richard Garcia & Assocites, Inc. floridlv17-AA51 • Synchro 5 Report • • The Boulevard MUSP Existing Condition PM Peak 'a* \ Lane Configurations Grade Peak Hour Factor ROMAiiiii**1:0010: Pedestrians 0.1**401#0., Walking Speed (ft/s) Ptoc Right turn flare (veh) Median storage vett) vC1, stage 1 conf vol tc, single (s) aof - tF (s) cm capacity (veh/h) 0.92 0.92 0.92 0..92 0.92 0.92 4,1 6.4 6.2 2,2 3.5 3.3 148' 7.. 787 931 HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis 5: NE 34 St & latiN r JuhtagnWifiaggittsig'Iretitt Volume Total 121 80 81464e,73*111122ERENCEFOR-RF Volume Right 0 0 - 'Ll-I,MMOWE-;::::74,544,87/..' •-,-:.z::-::,,-,.1.,:z.,:v.:E.3,--,,,TE.::-ff,-K,,,,,,,,- Volume to Capacity 0,07 0.00 0.00 :21:L.:1447.70Kge.gaNMENAKMECANNIERViiieggtl! .rammsr.o.:iwo,....:-...:::: Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 0.0 • . Intersection Capacity UtilizationICU Level of Service ,i12.11MNIVINIE Richard Garcia &Assocites, Inc. floridiv17-AA51 Synchro 5 Report • • The Boulevard MUSP Existing Condition PM Peak 1: NE 34 St & Biscayne Blvd Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s) SimTrafl"ic Performance Report EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NEL NBT NBR 139.1 9.2 31.6 178.1 240.7 113,6 13.1 1.6 5.0 13.3 1.2 5.5 1: NE 34 St & Biscayne Blvd Intersection Performance Delay / Veh (s) EB WB NB SB Total 18.6 120_4 2_0 2.2 6.5 2: NE 33 St & Biscayne Blvd Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s) SBL SBT SBR EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NEL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR 35.4 61.0 30.8 34.5 17.1 20.7 18.3 4.1 4.5 17.3 4.0 5.4 2: NE 33 St & Biscayne Blvd Intersection Performance EB WB NB SB Total Delay / Veh (s) 47.5 23.5 4.6 4.4 6.3 3: NE 34 St & NE 2 Ave Performance by movement WBL WBT WBR NBT NBR SBL SBT Delay 1 Veh (s) 10.0 0.0 3.5 0.5 4,6 9.6 0.1 3: NE 34 St & NE 2 Ave Intersection Performance WB NB SB Tc4al Delay / Veh (s) 6.3 0_5 0.7 1.0 4: NE 33 St & NE 2 Ave Performance by movement WE3L WBT WBR NBT NBR SBT Delay ! Veh (s) 7.4 0.6 7_0 0.3 42 0.3 4: NE 33 St & NE 2 Ave Intersection Performance WB NB SB Total Delay !Veh (s) 5.0 0.4 0.3 0.6 5: NE 34 St & DAW Performance by movement EBT WBT Delay 1 Veh (s) 0.3 0.5 Richard Garcia & Associates, inc. fioriclfvl7-AA51 • • • The Boulevard MUSP Existing Condition PM Peak SimTraffic Performance Report 5: NE 34 St & DIW intersection Performance EB WB Total Delay 1 Veh (s) 0.3 0.5 0.d Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. floridiv17-AA51 The Boulevard INAUSP HCM Unsignalizec# Intersection Capacity Analysis Proposed PM Condition (Background, Committed & Project) 1: NE 34 St & Biscayne Blvd COW Lane PCs o n fig a rat i o n s Grade ...:.:::.:,:.,._.._..........__. �.. _................. Peak Hour Factor 0. Pedestrians { yam: tt _V -, - Walking Speed (Ws) Right turn flare(veh Median storage veh vC1, stage 1 conf �vol tC, single (s) 7.5 6.5 6.9 • 3.5 4.0 3.3 tF (s) c►A capacity (veh 418 0% 1 18 w' 4 2 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 7.5:. 6..5 5.9 4.1 4.1 3.5 4.0 3.3 2.2 2.2 kickttk Volume Left 20...... 20 92 :ir. •o3{E�. v 1760 261 1700 1700 Average Delay 423.7 . `s s-�{G .S *s♦:*'?... 4, .92 0.92 261 c r t<s Richard Garcia & Assocites, Inc. flondtv17-AA51 • Synchro 5 Report • • The Boulevard MUSP HCM Signalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Proposed PM Condition (Background; Committed & Project) 2: NE 33 St & Biscayne Blvd k t P "jr Lane Configurations Total l jjt+.�iirne (s) -ti C Frt Said. Flow (prot) Sand. Row 4.0 0.95 0.96 1752 1620 Peak -hour factor, PH I= 0.9 0.92 0.92 d.,, Lane Group Flow (vph) 0 95 0 0 87 4.0 1731 1318 i�rotecled Phases Actuated Green, G Actuated g/C Ratio 0.14 0.14 is kn'$ #>hr 'rTi� rti" Jti - z Lane Grp Cap (vph) 226 184 0.06 vl�sK Ratio Perm Uniform Delay, d1 u . 46.6 Incremental Delay, d2 5.7 Level of Service Approach LOS HCM Average Control Delay Actuated Cycle Length (s) c Critical Lane Group ♦ `- c0.07 47.0 4.0 4.0 1.00 1.00 1770 3533 283 3533 4.0 4.0 1.00 1.00 1770 3535 3 6 284 3535 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 1 5 47 1463 ...> ..... 2 0.79 0.79 ,.r {^'J[Y 8.5 7.8 HCM Level 118.5 SUM of lost time (s) Level: ,.. 224 2803 0.79 0.79 225 2804 .\..b.. ... .. fi,.., s>.. �,... icy ....,... 0.17 }� 0.17 yyy IRKS 3.0 4.3 3.0-rt 4.3 Z1 0.7 of Service A 8 2. 0.7 • Richard Garcia & Assocites, Inc. f oridivl7 AA51 Synchro 5 Report • The Boulevard MUSP HCM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Proposed PM Condition (Background, Committed & Project) 3: NE 34 St & NE 2 Ave LaneConfigurations Grade 0% 0% Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Pedestrians Waking Speed .(ft/s) Right turn flare .,(veh) MantpeNoiW Median storaper!1) O..,,,:,_ ittinA147At,..„ vC1, stage tC. ArAft!,40),AttwAraft,,,,,,,36. 3.3 clki capacity (ve in) 0 4.1 2.2 410 Volume Left 35 0 0 22 0 0 ViAWARCRigignMa... - - ' - - CYSI:H " 210 1700 1700 410 1700 1700 4:1911,0630-$6Wrigti.44764#5E- „— 0 0 Lane LOS AVE.*70.0040:::t Approadi LOS ID „,. .4-044:::311011-fiti% Average Delay 17 ir4(41,„.WrOcrikitiV2' Richard Garcia & Assocites, Inc. florkilvI7-AA51 Synchro 5 Report • • The Boulevard MUSP I-ICM Unsignalized Intersection Capacity Analysis Proposed PM Condition (Background, Committed & Pro'ect 4: NE 33 St & NE 2 Ave ',WM 00 Lane Configurations + ,......ft3e4'.01;*:WRNgk Grade 0% 0% 0% g#10.07.*:04.W.gigniititilAfgrAgE444M-VV:g.N.FIVP-41.5,NEN,:i1A1 Peak Hour Factor 0_92 0_92 0.12 0_92 0.92 0.92 4.41410*0.:YA:Aq:1'7Ru38g.ilipo2g:-:::tit8Ems:12gif$109:,,:ziM5ift:&:ii,.,,..„ Pede.strians :1.4.iftki*#it.W1,igVdggRagaetkgnttRtit:'E6:::ME:,t:',PQER,:h. Walking Speed (ft/s) P0104,(Pre0,440.4iglii:7-"''''lltr ' - Right turn flare (veh) Median storage veh) L......i=cora*KIMOVal vel, stage 1 coat vol :'",-.-AA--40-44VOKOVE--7a....ffirfftgerEgraiegg.AVgirOU.iggnagia5;-,Agg,,, tC, single (s) 6_8 6,9 41 .1Z:1:, ''''1:t*E.Vegtffir.-tIttan-POIRMEENEMAXS:gaiitik,., if (s) 3.5 33 22 '' ',404dee7 i'ZI.NINNIE16':sii:MV-M.R;92FERE,Oiat.22114124,:, cM capacity (vehih) 131 475 425 14111gligniaar '.--15:7' '''''"•-•VggiT:ti,i0R4V.Y.037.0aglegfik,-, di.,&.,,,,AtiaV.Seiftafa.igtNtCf&Q&E,ftt-Zi;;tlitSitiebg:ggdhtittidih.gtt.M1?'- A, Volume Left 17 0 0 12 0 '-:!..',:'-W,;,!,..:i,..:::.i,T;,::.'h?..W.:':MS'.0.'s.,ft,':. cSH 260 1700 1700 425 1700 1700 Queue Length (ft) 20 0 0 2 0 0 Lane LOS 77A0)*'. di-D1445Y Approach LOS Average Delay 0.8 ,„. Richard Garcia & Assocites, Inc. flOridivi7-AA51 Synchro 5 Report The Boulevard MUSP HCM Unsignalized intersection Capacity Analysis Proposed PM Condition (Background, Committed & Project) 5: NE 34 St & DAN —0" -* 46\ p Lane Configurations - Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0_92 0_92 0.92 0_92 092 Pedestiians Grade Watking Speed (Ws) ekae Right turn flare (veh) Median storage i0ZW0114140:0.08gUiRatkiik-_, vC1, stage 1 confvO #P4.:1040e7 tC, single (s) :40:440iWn.tr' tF (s) 7..:1K7,4fggienilafit1:24;;;_ggiaiga;04, 4.1 6.4 6.2 2.2 3.5 3.3 010*10L,..,.,...... ,....., ::,24„-ggili;:44igi:f-K. „ . ,7-;.]':'..iiali-71.E.34.04.agi.99Ra2-il2-itEreflffiggit.ligigigilaN., chil capacity (vehiti) 1431 730 896 Volume Total VolumeRight O 0 11 OWNIMiiii,, 4.3-v.;-• Volume to Caps 150 109 0.092 0.00 0.03 Z.7,:74-WiffAVIPARMIONAFEit 4E1: -ttaz Control Delay (s) 0.0 0.0 9.7 4,0*.S:Pg5:FtntligAMidtd:414-elkfakt: Approach Delay (s) 0.0 0 0 9.7 Win 26 IrateRRWRIPSSE-E 'i.,!ttiteNCOMMISit intersection Capacity Utilization 17.9% ICU Level of Service A =RR -3" Richard Garcia & Assocites, inc. floridlvf7-AA51 Synchro 5 Report • • The Boulevard MUSP Proposed PM Condition (Background, Committed & Pro.ec 1: NE 34 St & Biscayne Blvd Performance by movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Delay 1 Veh (s) 167.3 10.0 128.9 250.1 289.8 160.0 7.4 2,0 5.4 20.3 1.4 4.4 I : NE 34 St & Biscayne Blvd intersection Performance ES WB NB SimTrafic Performance Report SB Total Delay I Veh (s) 36.7 190.3 2.2 2.7 2: NE 33 St & Biscayne Blvd Performance by movement 9.5 EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Delay I Veh (s) 66.0 33.9 21.6 70.6 52.5 31.3 11.0 6.2 5.5 29.9 3.7 5.3 2: NE 33 St & Biscayne Blvd Intersection Performance EB WB NB SB Total Delay 1 Veh (s) 37.5 53.7 3: NE 34 St & NE 2 Ave Performance by movement 6.3 4.5 WBL WBT WBR Ni3T NBR SBL SBT Delay / Veh (s) 182 0.3 11.9 0.5 4.6 8.7 0,2 3: NE 34 St & NE 2 Ave Intersection Performance WB NB SB Total 7,6 Delay / Veh (s) 11.2 0.6 0.6 1.2 4: NE 33 St & NE 2 Ave Performance by movement WBL WBT WBR NBT NBR Delay 1 Veh (s) 1 0_6 0.2 5.0 0.3 4.5 4: NE 33 St & NE 2 Ave intersection Performance WB NB SB Total Delay 1 Veh (s) 5,6 0_4 0.4 0.5 5: NE 34 St & DM Performance by movement EBT WBT NBL NBR Delay 1 Veh (s) 0.3 0.7 1.0 0.8 Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. fIoridlv17-AA51 The Boulevard MUSP Proposed PM Condition (Back9round, Committed & Project), 5: NE 34 St & DAW Intersection Performance Delay / Veh (s) EB WB NB Total 0.3 0.7 0.9 0.4 15: Signalized & Performance by movement SimTraffic Performance Report Delay / Veh (s) 19: Stop Sign & Performance by movement Delay / Veh (s) • Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. floridlvl7-AA51 • HigtrevCry Lcxpacrry Manual zvuu • LOS criteria utilization, and left -turn treatment alternatives. it is important to note that some of these configurations may be considered unacceptable by some operating agencies from a traffic safety point of view. The safety aspect of signalized intersections cannot be ignored, and the provision in this chapter of a capacity and LOS anplysis methodology for a specific operational configuration does not imply an endorsement of the suitability for application of such a configuration_ EXH i31T 16-1. SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION METHODOLOGY Inpot Parameters - Geometric Traffic - Signal Lame Grouping and Demand Flow Rate - Lane grouping - PLIF RTOR Saturation Elow Rate - Basic equation - Adjustment factors Capacity aril Wt..- Capacity -vie Performance Measures 'Delay - Progression adjustment LOS - Back of queue LOS The average control delay per vehicle is estimated for each lane group and aggregated for each approach and fox the intersection as a whole_ LOS is directly relaxed to the control delay valve_ The criteria are listud in Exhibit 16-2. EXHIBIT 15-2, LOS CRITERIA FOR SIGNALIZED INTERSECTIONS LOS A s C a E F Control Delay per Vehicle (slva'i} S10 > 10-20 . 20-35 >'35--55 > 55--B0 > BO Chapter i 6 - Signaized Intersectioris 16-2 Mothodolo9y