HomeMy WebLinkAboutTab 1. Modified Traffic Impact•
•
•
DAVID PLUMMER & ASSOCIATES
October 5, 2006
Mr. Quazi 111asood
l.)RS Corporation
5100 NW 33rd Avenue. Suite 150
Fort Lauderdale. FL 33309
T: 954 73Q.1881
I': 954.739.1789
RE: Li a MUM' Modified Traffic Impact Analvsis - #05203
Dear Quazi:
sufficiency letter for the MUSP Traffic Impact Analysis was received for the LIMA project on
December 5, 2005. The development program for the project was 211 residential dwelling units with
7,600 SE of retail. The development program has been modified to 206 residential dwelling units, a
1.323 SE coffee shop and 3,202 SE of retail, see attached site plan. The modification of the
development program results in eleven (11) additional afternoon peak hour trips generated. This change
in trips does not increase any impacts in the roadway and intersection analysis.
Primary access to the project is still provided on NE 4 Avenue with the secondary access fir the retail
component on Biscayne Boulevard via a right -in / right -out driveway. This site plan also provides for
access from NE 30 Street via a two-wa.y driveway. This access point was to the service/loading area in
the original site plan. Access to the service/loading area is now provided from NE 4 Avenue.
Per your request. an updated analysis has been completed. The analysis consists of updating or
providing the following, which are provided as attachments,
• trip generation comparison,
• assignment of project trips.
• segment analysis under future with project conditions for Biscayne Boulevard,
• intersection analysis under future with project conditions for the following intersections and all
proposed project driveways:
• NE, 29 Street / Biscayne Boulevard (signalized)
o NE 30 Street! Biscayne Boulevard
o NE 29 Street / NE 4 Avenue
(7., NE 30 Street / NE 4 Avenue
Biscayne Boulevard Driveway
o NE 30 Street Driveway
NE 4 Avenue Driveway
•
•
•
1.r, Quari Masood
RE: Lima MLJSP Modified Traffic Impact Analysis - #05203
Page 2
• 1'rojci I'1 Peak Hour Vehicular Volumes, Exhibit 13
•
re with Project PM Peak Hour Vehicular Volumes, Exhibit 14
This change in trips does not increase impacts in the roadway and intersection analysis. Analysis results
show that the project area corridors are projected to operate within the established corridor threshold.
Results of the future intersection analysis show that all intersections operate within the standard adopted
by the city.
have any questions you ca.n contact me at { 05- 447-0900.
Sonia Shreffler-Bogart, PE
Project Manager
cc: Kobi Karp
Marisol Gonzalez
File
Attachments
PROPOSED SUHSTANTIAL MUSP CHANGE
NTH STR ET
u.eE ss. .....
S.
.?y:..."..:'m... •xill: �:::�
!t
jt,F.94:i'�."i;.i�y�<t»,,�(
1
-,,,1
i
r,'�'
c.i
�'
II*9
k'
4
r
as rxr .. .irc::
S
:
p.`.
k:
z es,'. "9'.a
�ry -eT_
l.. W�... ..�
a.
•::
h^`�I'":5,,:
.,1I:
"v
`•i;3�a�
kiy.z�ly!",Sh3+.:1;
.•,fw '..;a .
.xlf'�'�
:4�`yyr E:r• .1'
..I'
i
9
`
Z�:".....R'"i
.`'
SC
»>»?t I);,,i7:,
,<
I
—
�
I
Jam'
is
t�,.
'��
Pe- \\
�1,,„ iii
-
h1
PROPOSED 39 STORY TOWER
><;)„i .t Y>� ..:?\ 1','iz(y�ii
. i•pl
i
y' iP.
, dat/PTER
b'
N.E..
"
vuixFc cauvFrFoa
.,?,�,::y:.,'.,.'-%�33',-''.'i, y.,, ,' ,.�, .. z,�',"ii.,•.,.=4.s.,�;,
ir?®
m,THT.
If
�
STANDARD SPACES q
It4'DIGAP54:1Gs5 ]
w_
_
•0'M SPACES 49
.. .. '' ..
E
t.'
E
n n
;3;;,::;, fie :, c;,,;,as➢`�`-:
1
'
t:13a:
,y1\
COhtMERCIALf RETAIL
i.r
51�iis
,,:s
,.,:..
SERVICE
♦ �.
3::1:%;:`,,,i. :S:•i.:..:;„;
r,.,,
�s:=ES'��s
)y1 ,
,
.,, , s u<i f,,,iil*, '32%>
CIRCULATION
gg RESIDENI1AL
RESIDENTIAL BALCONIES
ARCHITECTURE &
INTERIOR DESIGN
OBI K A R P
KRESIDENTIAL
i
AMENITIES
= P• 1- w IFY WOISSF,
3 • PARKING IDROP OFF AREAS
Li—L_/
,
�R's ;.r�cy MANACiEMENI'fLOBBIES
k�er Port,
O k
�..,�...,.�
SITE PLAN
....... ............ ....... ...... ........: ......... ................ ................... _......_. .__ ..—...__...__._...—.___.... ......._......_. ................. ......... .. _...... __y .................... ....... ..... SCALE:1 _40'4
NITII 2 TFI STREET
•
•
•
•
•
Lima MUSP
PM Peak Hour Trip Generation Comparison Analysis
USES
UNITS
ITE Land Use Code
PM PEAK HOUR TRIPS
IN
OUT
TOTAL
%
Trips
%
Trips
Trips
High -Rise Condominuim
211 DU
232
62%
51
38%
30
81
Specialty Retail
7,600 SF
814
44%
9
56%
12
21
GROSS VEHICLE TRIPS
59%
60
1 41%
42
102
Vehicle Occupancy Adjustment @
16.00% of Gross External Trips
(1)
59%
10
41%
7
16
Transit Trip Reduction @
14.90% of Gross External Trips
(2)
59%
9
41%
6
15
Pedestrian / Bicycle Trip Reduction 6
10.00% of Gross External Trips
(3)
59%
6
41%
4
10
NET EXTERNAL VEHICLE TRIPS
59%
35
41%
25
60
Net External Person Trips in Vehicles @
1.40 Persons/ Vehicle
59%
50
41%
35
84
Net External Person Trips using Transit @
1.40 Persons/ Vehicle
59%
13
41%
9
21
Net External Person Trips (vehicles and transit modes)
59%
62
41%
44
106
Net External Person trips walking / using bicycle
1.40 Persons/ Vehicle
1 59%
8
J 41%
6
14
Modified October 2006
USES
UNITS
ITE Land Use Code
PM PEAK HOUR TRIPS
IN
OUT
TOTAL
%
Trips
%
Trips
Trips
High -Rise Condominuim
206 DU
232
63%
49
37%
29
78
Specialty Retail
3,202 SF
814
44%
4
56%
5
9
Coffee Shop
1,323 SF
933
53%
20
470/a
18
38
SUBTOTAL VEHICLE TRIPS
58%
73
42%
52
125
Intematization (f7E Trip Generation Handbook, March 2001) 4%
3
2
5
GROSS VEHICLE TRIPS
I 58%
70
42%
50
( 120
ehicie Occupancy Adjustment @ 16.00% of Gross External Trips
(1)
58%
11
42%
8
19
Transit Trip Reduction @ 14.90% of Gross External Trips
(2)
58%
10
42%
7
16
Pedestrian / Bicycle Trip Reduction @ 10.00% of Gross External Trips
(3)
58%
7
42%
5
12
NET EXTERNAL VEHICLE TRIPS
58%
41
42%
30
71
I
Net External Person Trips in Vehicles @ 1.40 Persons/ Vehicle
58%
58
42%
41
99
Net External Person Trips using Transit @ 1.40 Persons/ Vehicle
58%
15
42%
10
25
Net External Person Trips (vehicles and transit modes)
58%
73
42%
52
124
i
Net External Person trips walking 1 using bicycle 1.40 Persons/ Vehicle
1 58%
10
j 42%
7
..................................
I 17
Notes
(1) A 16% reduction to adjust for the difference between ITE auto occupancy and local data (Miami's 1.4 vs. ITE's 1.2 pers/veh)
(2) Transit trip reduction based on projected modal splits used in the Downtown Miami DRI Increment II
(3) Pedestrian and bicycle trip reductions based on Downtown characteristics used in the Downtown Miami DRI Increment I]
10/5/2006
•
•
•
805203 • PM
Lima MUSP - PM intersection Assignment
1
iNTERSEOTFON MOVEMENT
Project Trips
F0 i Ow Total
41i 30 i 71
TOTAL ;
VOLUMES `
FUTURE %NMI
PROJECT E
148E
0.000 0.000 . 0
50
NBT
0.100 0.000 5
1197
NBR
0.100 i 0.000 4
33
BBL
0.050 1 0.000 2
34
587
0.000 ! 0.900 0
1113
NE 29 Street i i
SBR
0000 i 0.000 0
64
Biscayne Slvd 1
E11_
0.100 I 0000 4
69 1
i
E81
0 300 1 0000 - 12
60 f
EBR
WBL
00_ 0.000 0
0000 _ 0.200 6
53
j00
66 €
VJBT
0.900 i 0.400 12
50
_..
VuBR
0 090 0.000 0
,�_. �__.....
19
...... .r
�.
TOTAL
0850 1 6600 45
2609
NBL
0000 i 0000 0
8
NBT
0.000 '. 0.150 4
1410
jj
NER
0.000 1 0.000 0
25
SBL
0.350'. 0.000 14
66
SBT
0.050 ` 0.000 2
1161
NE 30 Street / I
SBR
0.000 i] 0.000 0
42
Biscayne Blvd i
EBL
0.000 0.000 0
14
EBT
0.000 1 0.000 0
4
EBR
0.000 0.000 0
16
WBL
0000 ''I 0.000 0
15
WBT
0.000 0 000 0
1
1
W9R
0_000 +
0.250
58-
......................................_ ____
TOTAL
0400
...,..,....8,..,_..._
0.400 27
2822
I
NBL
0_000 0000 0
0
NBT
0.00D 0.000 0
0
'..
NBR
0.000
0.000 0
0
SBL
0.000
0.000 0
10
SST
0.000 0.000
0
0
_ NE 29 Street !
SBR
0.000 0.600
18
63
NE 4 Avenue
ESL
0 450 0.000
18
63
EBT
0.000 '', 0.000
0
21
EBR
0.000 '. 6 000
0
0
WEL
0.000 0.000
0
0
NBT
0.000 i 0.000
0
22
WBR
10.000 0.000
0
3
TOTAL
0.450 1 0.600
36
182
I
Nei_
0.000 t 0.200
0
14
NBT
0.000 0.000
0
21
NBR
0.000 0.000
0
7
li
SOL
0.000 [ 0.000
0
13
SBT
0-000 ; 9.600
0
14
j NE 30 Street /
SBR
0_000 i 0.000
0
22
NE 4 Avenue 1
EBL
0.000 = 0.000
0
7
EBT
0.000 0.000
0
28
EBR
0.200 0.250
16
21
MIL
0.000 _ 0,000
0
18
WBT
0.000
0.000
0
38
1NBR
0.000
0.000
0
..._.............._.._______.__..
TOTAL
0200
0.450
22
,...._16
218-1
N8L
0.000 0.000
0
0
NBT
0.000 10.000
0
1219
NBR
0.200
0.000
9
0
SBL
0.000
0.000
0
0
SBT
0000
0.000
0
1041
Biscayne Blvd 1 1
SBR
0.000 ' 0.000
0
0
Driveway i
EBL
0.000 ' 0000
0
0
EST
0_000 0_000
0
0
EBR
0.000 0.000
0
0
WBL
0000 0000
0
0
V88T
0_000 0000
0
0
WBR
0-000 0.150
4
4
TOTAL
0.200 j 0.150
13
2272
NBI.
0450 0.000
18
18
NBT
0.000 i 0.000
0
47
NBR
0.000 0000
0
0
SBL
O.000 0.000
0
0
SST
0.000 i 0.250
7
43
NE4Avenue) f
SBR
0.200 ' 0.000
9
9
Driveway
EBL
0.000 =. 0200
5
6
EBT
0.000 i 0.000
0
0
EBR
0.000 0.350
11
1 T
"
W8L
0.000 0.000
0
0
WET
0.000 ? 0.000
0
0
WBR
0.000 i 0.000
0
0
TOTAL
0.650 10,800
51
134
',.
NBL
0.000 ' 0.050
2
2 -
NBT
0.000 ` 0.000
0
47
',...
NBR
0.000 10.250
7
7
SBL
0000 0.000
0
0
SBT
0.000 0.000
0
36
NE 30 Street 1
SBR
0.000 i 0.000
0
0
Driveway '',
EBL
0.000 3 0.000
0
0
EBT
0.200 i 0.000
9
9
EBR
0.150 i 0.000
0
6
WEL
0.000 ? 0.000
0
0
[ I,...
VBBT
0.000 !. 0.200
6
6
i
WBR
7O00
= 0_000
0
'
0
TOTAL
0.35010.500
__._._�_
......_2929
113
Intersection analysis October 2006 xis
• • •
LIMA
Person -Trip Volume and Capacity
Future Conditions Matrix
Without Project
With Project
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(8
(9)
(h)
(r)
Q)
(k)
Existing
Future
Committed
Future
Projected
Future
Future wfout Proj
Project
Total
Future
Future with Proj
Corridor
Dir
Pers-Trip
8kg.
Development
Pers-Trip
Transit
Pers-Trip
Pers-Trip
Pers-Trip
Pers-Trip
Pers-Trip
Pers-Trip
Volumes
Pers-Trip
Pers-Trip
Volumes
Capacity
Capacity
v/c
LOS
Volume
Volumes
Capacity
vlc
LOS
1.0%
From To
3
(b)+(c)
(d)/(f)
(d)+(h)
(t)/( )
till
[2f
Pi
(4]
(51
PI-
[4€
151
Biscayne Blvd
1-395 NE 14 Street
NB
2949
3038
301
3339
42
6692
0.50
D
15
3354
6692
0.50
D
SB
2123
2187
45
2232
1494
8924
0.25
C
10
2243
8924
0,25
C
NE 14 Street NE 15 Street
NB
2591
2670
105
2774
154
4798
0.58
D
15
2789
4798
0.58
D
SB
2224
2291
66
2357
1606
7030
0.34
C
10
2367
7030
0.34
C
NE 15 Street NE 19 Street
NB
2355
2426
144,85
2571
81
5166
0.50
D
15
2586
5166
0.50
D
S8
2122
2186
102.7
2289
1533
7398
0.31
C
10
2299
7398
0.31
C
NE 19 Street NE 20 Street
NB
2392
2464
144,85
2609
78
4206
0.62
D
15
2624
4206
0.62
D
SO
2102
2165
102.7
2268
1530
6438
0.35
C
10
2278
6438
0.35
C
NE 20 Street NE 29 Street
NB
2678
2759
183.45
2942
78
4206
0.70
D
15
2957
4206
0.70
D
58
1974
2034
196.35
2230
1530
6438
0.35
C
10
2241
6438
0.35
C
NE 29 Street NE 36 Street
NB
2835
2921
192.2
3113
78
4206
0,74
D
24
3137
4206
0.75
D
SB
2657
2737
242.3
2979
1530
6438
0.46
D
29
3009
6438
0.47
D
Notes:
1] The Existing Person Trip Volume is obtained from Exhibit 5, column 0)
2] Year 2008 Background Person Trip Volume is derived by applying a 1 % growth factor to the existing person -trip volume
3] Projected Transit Capacity was obtainers from the Downtown Miami DRI Increment II
4] The Total Future Peak Hour Person Trip Capacity is obtained 6y adding all modes of transportation (Exhibit 5, column (I)) and the projected transit capacity (Exhibit 12. column e)
5] The Person Trip LOS is provided consistent with the FDOT's Quality/Level of Service Handbook (see Appendix C)
6] Project Person Trip Volumes are derived from Trip Generation Analysis
MODIFIED TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 10/512006
•
NE 31 ST
W
❑
0
m
111
ti
NE 2 AVE
NE 30 ST
z
a
o
m
1
r I._
A
8
- 6
W
a
W
z
N E 29 ST-
I—
U�...........
N
W
z
�}
N h
16I
co
9
ti
o) ti
'� !
11
6 .____ i
rt-
co
co
rn
-.._....
12
6
r
NE 28 ST
4
12
#
18
}-
IN = 41
OUT = 30
..`':JJEC :
LIMA MUSP
MUSP TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY
PROJECT PM PEAK HOUR
VEHICULAR VOLUMES
EXHIBIT No.
13
Page 22
NE 2 AVE
z z
m m
w w
0 --�
0
42
--_1161
T ss BISCAYNE BOULEVARD
11.
01
0) CO
a
-41
L 22
-K14
13 NE 4 AVE
...............
14--- ----
�.
4 -.--
16
m Q
5
N r
7
28 ---.—/--
N
M
21
N
al
in
CA
k
,t
i
LU
11
Z
CD Of
C°PO
a
N
19
8, '7.",
50
COo
68
3
NE 29 ST
-
r
.�
22
69
63
60
1 '
u4 psi
cn
M
21
53— T
.-
NE 28 ST
P fOJECT:
LIMA MUSP
MUSP TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY
FUTURE WITH PROJECT
PM PEAK HOUR
VEHICULAR VOLUMES
EXHIBIT No.
14
Page 23
FiCS2000: Si :.alined Intersections Release 4.1f
Analyst: JPA Inter.: NE 29 STREET / BISCAYNE BLVD
Agency: Area Type: All other areas
Date: 9/15/2005 Jurists: MIA'I, FL
Weriod: FUTURE WITH PROJ PM PEAK HOOT Year. : 2008
Project ID: LIMA - 9 05203
E/W St: NE 29 STREET N/S St: BISCAYNE BOULEVARD
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
1 Eastbound Westbound I Northbound 1 Southbound
1 L T R L R 1 L T R I L T R
I 1 1
No. Lanes 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 2 0 I 1 2
LGConfig I LTR LI`R 1 L TR 1 L TR
Volume 169 60 53 €68 50 19 150 1197 33 134 1113 64
Lane Width I 12.0 12.0 112.0 12.0 112.0 12.0
RTOR Vol I 0 0 I 0 0
Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8
EB Left A NB Left A
Thru A Thru A
Rielit A 1 Right A
_eds 1 ?eds
WB Left A 1 SB Left A
Thru A 1 Thru A
Right A 1 Right A
?eds 1 Peds
NB Right 1 EB Right
410B Right 1 WE Right
reen 14.0 91.0
Yellow 4.0 4.0
Ali Red 1.0 1.0
Cycle Length: 115.0 secs
Intersection Performance Summary
Appr/ Lane Ach Sat Ratios Lane Group Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp Capacity is) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
LTR 167 1374 1.15 0.12 166.1 F 166.1 F
Westbound
LTR 133 1093 1.09 0.12 154.8 F 154.8 F
Northbound
5 302 382 0.18 0.79 3.2 A
TR 2795 3532 0.46 0.79 4.1 A 4.0 A
Southbour_d
L 282 357 0.13 0.79 3.0 A
TR 2784 3518 0.45 0.79 4.0 A 4.0 A
Intersection Delay = 21.9 {sec/veh) Intersection LOS = C
•
HCS2000: Signalized Intersections Release 4.1f
Analyst: DPA Inter.: NE 29 STREET / BISCAYNE BLVD
Agency: Area Type: All other areas
Date: 9/15/2005 Jurlsd: MIAMI, 55
or
UT W/ PROJ WIMP PM PEEK :OUR Year_ 2008
Project ID: LIMA - # 05203
E/W St: NE 29 STREET
No. Lanes
LGConfig
Volume
Lane Width
RTOR Vol
N/S St: BISCAYNE BOULEVARD
SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION SUMMARY
Eastbound Westbound I Northbound
L T R L R I L _ R
0 1 0 0 1 0 3 1 2 0
5TR I LT'R L TR
!69 60 53 168 50 19 I50 1197 33
12.0 I 12.0 12.0 12.0
0 1 0
Southbound
R
L TR
134 1113 64
112.0 12.0
0 0
Duration 0.25 Area Type: All other areas
Signal Operations
Phase Combination 1 2 3 4 1 5 6 7 8
EB Left A I NB Left A
Thru A Thru A
Right A Right A
Peds Peds
WB Left A SB Left A
Thru A Thru A.
Right A Right A
Peds I Peds
NB Right I EB Right
AmiB Right I WB Right
Teen
Yellow
All Red
200 85.0
4.0 4.0
1.0 1.0
Cycle Length: 115.0 secs
Intersection Performance Summary
Appr/ Lane Adj Sat Ratios Lane Croup Approach
Lane Group Flow Rate
Grp Capacity (s) v/c g/C Delay LOS Delay LOS
Eastbound
LTR 245 1409 0.78 0.17 60.7 8 60.7 E
Westbound
LTR 208 1198 0.70 0.17 54.5 D 54.5 D
Northbound
L 268 362 0.20 0.74 4.9 A
TR 2611 3532 0.50 0.74 6.3 A 6.3 A
Southbound
L 248 336 0.15 0.74 4.7 A
TR 2600 3518 0.48 0.74 6.2 A 6.1 A
Intersection Delay = 12.1 (sec/veh) Intersection LOS = B
•
3CS2000: Uns xgr a:' ized intersections Release 4 . r
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
DPA
gen.y/Co . :
Date Performed: 10/2006
Analysis Time Period: FUTURE WITH PROJ PM PEAK HOUR
Intersection: NE 30 STREET / BISCAYNE BLVD
Jurisdiction: MIAMI, FL
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2008
Project I0: LIMA - 6 05203
East/West Street: NE 30 STREET
North/South Street: BISCAYNE BOULEVARD
Intersection Orientation: NS
Study period (hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 2 3 I 4 5 6
T R I T R
Volume 8 1410 28 66 1161 42
Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 8 1484 29 69 1222 44
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- --- 2
Median Type/Storage Undivided /
R5' Channelized?
Lanes 1 2 0 1 2 0
Configuration L T TR T TR
Upstream Signal? No No
•inor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
T R
Volume 16 1 58 14 4 16
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Hourly Flow Rate, HER 16 61 14 4 16
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2
Percent Grade (9) 0 0
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage No / No /
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Configuration LTR LTR
Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound
Movement 1 4 7 8 9 I 10 11 12
Lane Config L L i LTR I LTR
v (vph) 8 69 78 34
C(m) (vph) 545 438 56 31
v/c 0.01 0.16 1.39 1.10
95% queue length 0.04 0.55 6.96 3.76
Control Delay 11.7 14.7 377.0 383.3
LOS B B F F
Approach Delay 377.0 383.3
•roac
h LOS F _
51152000: Inslgna1i'ed intersections Release 4.1f
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Ena ys`: DPA
�gency/Co.:
Date Performed: 10/20O6
Analysis Time Period: FUTURE WITH PROJ PM PEAK HOUR
Intersection: NE 29 STREET / NE 4 AVENUE
Jurisdiction: MIAMI, FL
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2008
Project ID: LIMA - # 05203
East/West Street: NE 29 STREET
North/South Street: NE 4 AVENUE
Intersection Orientation: EN
Major Street:
Study period (hrs): 0.25
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Approach Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L T R
Volume 63 21 22 3
Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 66 22 23 3
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- -- --
Median Type/Storage Undivided /
RT Channelized?
Lanes 0 1 1 0
Configuration LT TR
Upstream Signal? No No
•inor Street:
Approach Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
T R 1T T R
Volume
Peak Hour Factor, PHF
Hourly Flow Rate, HER
Percent Heavy Vehicles
Percent Grade ;o)
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes
Configuration
0
10 63
0,95 0.95
10 66
2 2
0
No
0 0
LE
Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 17 8 9 I 10 11 12
Lane Config LT I I LR
v (vph) 66 76
C(m) {vph) 1588 1005
v/c 0.04 0.08
95% queue length 0.13 0.24
Control Delay 7.4 8.9
LOS A A
Approach Delay 8.9
•PProach
LOS A
5CS2000: Onsignalized Intersections Release 4.1f
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Ira1yst:
DPA
gency/Co.:
Date Performed: 10/2006
Analysis Time Period: FUTURE WITH PROJ PM PEAK HOUR
Intersection: NE 30 STREET / NE 4 AVENUE
Jurisdiction: MIAMI, EL
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2008
Project ID: LIMA - # 05203
East/West Street: NE30 STREET
North/South Street: NE 4 AVENUE
Intersection Orientation: ETA Study period (hrs): 0.25
Major Street:
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Approach Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6
L T R L - R
Volume 7 28 21 16 38 16
Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Hourly Flow Rate, HER 7 29 22 16 40 16
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 -- 2
Median Type/Storage Undivided /
RT Channelized?
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Configuration LTR LTR
Upstream Signal? No No
•inor Street:
Approach Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12
L T R I L T R
Volume i4 21 7 13 14 22
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 14 22 7 13 14 23
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2 2 2
Percent Grade (o) 0 0
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage No / No /
Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0
Configuration LTR LTR
Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
Approach 55 WB Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 17 8 9 I 10 11 12
Lane Config LTR LTR I LTR I LTR
v (vph) 7 16 43 50
C(m) (vph) 1549 1555 787 861
v/c 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.06
95% queue length 0.01 0.03 0.17 0.18
Control Delay 7.3 7.3 9.8 9.4
LOS A A A A
Approach Delay 9.8 9.4
•pproach LOS A A
0CS2000: Unsi(nalized Iritersecti.ons Release 4.1f
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst: DPI.
•geiicy/Cc:.
:
Date Performed: 10/2006
Analysis Time Period: FUTURE WITH PROJ PM PEAK HOUR
Intersection: BISCAYNE BLVD / DRIVEWAY
Jurisdiction: MIAMI, FL
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2008
Project ID: LIMA - # 05203
East/West Street: DRIVEWAY
North/South Street: BISCAYNE BOULEVARD
Intersection Orientation: NS Study period ;hrs): 0.25
Major Street:
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Approach •Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6
L T R I L T R
Volume 1276 9 1193
Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95
Hourly Flow Rate, HER 1343 9 1255
Percent Heavy Vehicles -- - --
Median Type/Storage Undivided /
RT Channelized?
Lanes 2 0 2
Configuration T TR T
Upstream Signal? No No
•irTlor Street: Approach Westbound
Movement 7 8
9
Eastbound
10 11 12
L T R
Volume 4
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 4
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2
Percent Grade (%) 0 0
_fared Approach: Exists?/Storage
Lanes 1
Configuration R
Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
Approach NB SE Westbound Eastbound
Movement 1 4 17 8 9 I 10 11 12
Lane Contig I R I
v (vph) 4
C(m) (vph) 396
v/c 0.01
95% queue length 0.03
Control Delay 14.2
LOS B
Approach Delay 14.2
•PProch
LOS B
HOS2000: Unsignaiized Intersections Release 4.
TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
,nalys DPA
gency/Co. DPA
Date Performed: 10/5/2006
Analysis Time Period: PM PK FUTURE W/ PROJ
Intersection: NE 30 STREET / DWY
Jurisdiction: CITY OF MIAMI
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2008
Project ID: LIMA 405203
East/West Street: NE 30 STREET
North/South Street: DRIVEWAY
Intersection Orientation: OW Study period (hrs): 0.25
Maior Street:
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Approach Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6
L T R L R
Volume 93 5 0 74
Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 93 5 0 74
Percent Heavy Vehicles -- -- 0 --
Median Type/Storage Undivided /
RT Channelized?
Lanes 1 0 0 1
Configuration TR LT
Upstream Signal? No No
•inor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12
Volume 2 7
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 2 7
Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0
Percent Grade (o) 0 0
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage No / /
Lanes 0 0
Configuration LR
Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
Approach EB KB Northbound Southbound
Movement _ 4 17 8 9 I 10 11 12
Lane Config LT I LR I
v (vph) U 9
C (m) (vph) 1508 931
v/c 0.00 0.01
95% queue length 0.00 0.03
Control Delay 7.4 8.9
LOS A A
Approach Delay 8.9
4101pproach LOS A
HCS2000: Unsignalized intersections Release 4.1f
WO -WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY
Analyst: DPA
10k
"DatecPerform:ed: 10/2006
Analysis Time Period: FUTURE WITH PROJ PM PEAK HOUR
Intersection: NE 4 AVENUE / DRIVEWAY
Jurisdiction: MIAMI, FL
Units: U. S. Customary
Analysis Year: 2008
Project ID: LIMA - 4 05203
East/West Street: DRIVEWAY
North/South Street: NE 4 AVENUE
Intersection Orientation: EW Study period (hrs): 0.25
Major Street:
Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments
Approach Eastbound Westbound
Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6
L T R I L T R
Volume 6 0 11
Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95
Hourly Flow Rate, HER 6 0 11
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 --
Median Type/Storage Undivided
RT Channelized?
Lanes 0 0 0
Configuration LTRLR
Upstream Signal? No
No
•inor Street: Approach Northbound Southbound
Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12
L _ R I L T R
Volume 18 48 42 9
Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0.95 0.95 0.95 0.95
Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 18 50 44 9
Percent Heavy Vehicles 2 2 2 2
Percent Grade (o) 0 0
Flared Approach: Exists?/Storage / No /
Lanes 0 1 1 0
Configuration LT TR
Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service
Approach EB WB Northbound Southbound
Movement 1 4 17 8 9 I 10 11
Lane Config LTR j LT I
12
TR
v (vph) 6 68 53
C(m) (vph) 1623 883 898
v/c 0.00 0.08 0.06
95% queue length 0.01 0.25 0.19
Control Delay 7.2 9.4 9.3
LOS A A A
Approach Delay 9.4 9.3
reproach LOS A A