Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutIII - Tab 2 Sufficiency Letter-Traffic Impact Analysis(Appendix A to K)06/22008 15:15 FAX URS 4j 002/002 June 29, 2006 Ms. Lilia L Medina, AICP Assistant Transportation Coordinator City of Miami, Office of the City Manager/Transportation 444 SW 2r4 Avenue (10th Floor) Miami, Florida 33130 Re; OMNI (WO # 16P) Sufficiency Letter Via Fax and US Mai Dear Ms. Medina: Subsequent to our May 18, 2006 review comments for the subject project, we have received a revised traffic report along with a formal response from Kimley-Hom and Associates Inc. (KHA) on June 20, 2006. We have also received a revised site plan showing the turning radius of the delivery trucks from KHA. Photocopy of the response letter and revised site plan from KHA are attached herewith. The applicant has proposed to modify the signal timing/phasing at NE 17th Terrace/Biscayne Boulevard, NE 151h Street/Biscayne Boulevard, NE 1.5t Street/N. Bayshore Drive intersections_ The applicant needs to coordinate with the Miami Dade County Traffic Control and Signs Division to secure appropriate approval as this project goes through the review process. Please note that the development plan included in the traffic impact report accounted for 4,228 units of high-rise condominium and 350,200 sq. ft. of shopping center. At this time, we conclude that the revised traffic report along with the subsequent submittal meets all the traffic requirements and the report is found to be sufficient. Should you have any questions, please call Quazi Masood or me at 954.739.1881. Since U ` Carp • ra; on Sou R• j Shanmug.E. S nior Traffic Engineer Attachment Cc: ern Mr. Kevin Watford, Planner it City of Miami Planning (Fax - 305.416.1443) Mr Manny A. Vega, Engineer.), City of Mi rnl Zoning (Fax M 305.41 O 2153) Mr John McWilliams, PE, (KHA) (Fax: 954.7392247) UR3 Corporation Lakeshore CornDiex 5140 T$W 33rd Avenue, Suite 150 Fort LsuCefaale, F. 33305i-6375 Tor 954.739.1881 Fax: 954.739.1789 06/29/06 THC3 14:05 [TX/RX NO 88651 • • • Revised Traffic Impact Analysis for Submittal to the City of Miami Omni Mixed -Use Project Miami, Florida Prepared for: Downtown Miami Mali, LLC Downtown Miami Hotel, LLC New York, New York Prepared by: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Fort Lauderdale, Florida Kim ear -Horn and Associates, Inc. 02006 Kinneyorn and Associates, inc. June 2006 042688000 • Revised Traffic impact Analysis for Submittal to the City of Miami Omni Mixed -Use Project Miami Florida Prepared for: 1111 Downtown Miami Mall, LLC Downtown Miami Hotel, LLC New York, New York • Prepared by: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. Fort Lauderdale, Florida ©2006 Kimley-Hom and Associates, Inc. June 2006 042688000 • • • :21111•© 10mley-llom and Associates, Inc, Traffic Impart Analysis -- Omni TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 DATA COLLECTION 3 CAPACITY ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY 7 Levelof Service Standard7 Transportation Corridor Level of Service Methodology 7 Intersection Level of Service Methodology 7 EXISTING CONDITIONS (2006) CAPACITY ANALYSIS 9 Transportation Corridors 9 Intersections 15 BACKGROUND TRAFFIC 16 Background Area Growth 16 Committed Developments 16 PROJECT TRAFFIC 19 Existing and Proposed Land Uses 19 Project Access 19 Trip Generation 19 Trip Distribution and Assignment 22 FUTURE CONDITIONS (2020) CAPACITY ANALYSIS 26 Future (2020) Background Traffic Conditions 26 Future (2020) Total Traffic Conditions 28 PROJECT DRIVEWAY ANALYSIS 32 TRANSPORTATION CONTROL MEASURES PLAN 34 FUTURE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS 35 CONCLUSIONS 36 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A: Methodology Correspondence Appendix B: Traffic Count Data Appendix C: Miami -Dade Transit Data Appendix D: Existing Conditions (2005) SYNCHRO 6.0 Outputs Appendix E: Growth Trend Analyses Appendix F: Cardinal Distribution Appendix G: Volume Development Worksheets Appendix H: Future Conditions (2008 Without Project) SYNCHRO 6.0 Outputs Appendix I: Future Conditions (2008 With Project) SYNCHRO 6.0 Outputs Appendix I: Driveway Queuing Analysis Appendix K: FDOT Future Project Info, illation G;1042688000-OMNI MUSP\Report\I2evised_TIAJun e2006.doc Page - i June 2006 imiey-Horn and Associates, inc. Traffic Impact Analysis -- Ornni Figure 1: Project Location Map LIST OF FIGURES 7 Figure 2: Intersection Lane Configurations 4 Figure 3: 2006 P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 6 Figure 4: 2020 P.M. Peak Hour Background Traffic 18 Figure 5: Project Trip Distribution & Assignment 23 Figure 6: Detailed Project Trip Distribution & Assignment 24 Figure 7: 2020 Peak Hour Total Traffic 25 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Transportation Corridor Level of Service Thresholds 8 Table 2: 2006 P.M. Peak Hour Roadway Volumes 9 Table 3: P.M. Peak Hour Miami -Dade Transit Conditions -- Bayshore Drive 11 Table 4: P.M. Peak Hour Miami -Dade Transit Conditions --- NE 15th Street 12 Table 5: P.M. Peak Hour Miami -Dade Transit Conditions — Biscayne Boulevard 13 Table 6: 2006 P.M. Peak Hour Transportation Corridor Segment Conditions 14 Table 7: 2006 P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Conditions 15 Table 8: Existing Trip Generation 20 Table 9: Proposed Trip Generation 20 Table 10: Trip Generation Comparison 21 Table 11: Cardinal Trip Distribution 22 Table 12: Future (2020) Background P.M. Peak Hour Transportation Corridor Segment Conditions 27 Table 13: Future (2020) Background P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Conditions 28 Table 14: Future (2020) Total P.M. Peak Hour Transportation Corridor Segment Conditions 30 Table 15: Future (2020) Total P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Conditions 31 G:\\042688000-OMNI MUSF\Report\Revised_TIA_June2006.doc Page - ii June 2006 • • • nd y-Horn rillilL_.1 and Associates, Inc. Trek. impact Analysis— Omni INTRODUCTION The Downtown Miami Mall, LLC and Downtown Miami Hotel, LLC are proposing a mixed -use development (Omni) in Miami, Florida. The proposed development is bounded by North Bayshore Drive to the east, Biscayne Boulevard to the west, NE 15h Street to the south, and NE 17th Terrace to the north. Currently, the site is occupied by a hotel and a culinary school, and in the past a shopping center and other uses also operated at the site. The project proposes to redevelop the site with 4,208 condominium units and 330,200 (+/-) square feet of retail space. This analysis conservatively assumed 4,228 condominium units and 350,200 square feet of retail space. Construction is expected to be completed and fully occupied by the year 2020, as the project will be developed in phases. Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. has completed this traffic impact analysis for submittal to the City of Miami as part of the Major Use Special Permit (MUSP) application. The purpose of the study is to assess the project's impact on the surrounding roadway network and deteuiiine if adequate capacity is available to support future demand. The study's methodology is consistent with the requirements outlined by the City of Miami for traffic studies. A methodology meeting was conducted with the City of Miami's traffic consultant on August 22nd, 2005. Methodology correspondence is included in Appendix A. This report summarizes the data collection, project trip generation and distribution, and capacity analyses. G:\042688080-01vfNIMUSP\ReportiRevised_TIA_June2006.doc Page - I June 2006 \ ,..... « lt *SO- FIGURE 1 . ^ : PROJECT LOCATION .. z MAP moV1° In • • in Kiley -Horn and Associates. Inc. Traffic impact Analysis -Omni DATA COLLECTION A study area was examined for this traffic impact analysis commensurate with the anticipated increase in traffic associated with the project. The study area for this project is defined as: • 1-195 (north) • 1-395 (south) 1-95 (west) • Biscayne Bay (east). Additionally, the following intersections within the study area were examined: • NE 17th Terrace and Biscayne Boulevard • NE 17th Terrace and NE 4th Avenue • NE 17th Terrace and North Bayshore Drive • Biscayne Boulevard and NE 15th Street ▪ North Bayshore Drive and NE 15th Street • Biscayne Boulevard and NE 17th Street/ Project Driveway The following corridors were identified for analysis: • Biscayne Boulevard • North Bayshore Drive • NE 15th Street • NE 17th Street Lane configurations for each of the examined intersections within the study area are provided in Figure 2. G:\042688000-0MNi MUSP\Report\Revised_T1A_June20©6.doc Page - 3 June 2006 D L 0 0 m 0 c 0 0 NE 17th NE 17th Terrace Parkin Li z 0 0 Street • NE 16th Street • O Garage NT 15th Street Qr �Dp 0°\ N Bayshore Drive • FIGURE 2 INTERSECTION LANE CONFIGURATIONS LEGEND LANE OONHCURATfQN � � fl KlmieyHorn on&l6eorAnfne Inn J • • • Krniey-Horn 1:1:11111111F__3 and Associates, Inc, Traffic Impact Analysis — Omni P.M. peak period (4:00 PM to 6:00 P.M.) turning movement counts were collected in the study area on August 31, 2005 (Wednesday). The study area peak hour was deteimined to be from 5:00 to 6:00 P.M. The traffic count data is included in Appendix B. The FDOT peak season conversion factor was applied to the traffic counts to adjust the traffic to peak season volumes. The appropriate peak season conversion factor for when the traffic counts were collected is 1.07. The peak season conversion factor table is also provided in Appendix B. Figure 3 presents the 2006 peak season transportation corridor volumes (person -trips including transit riders) and peak season turning movement volumes at the study intersections. G: ;042688000-OMNI MUST' \Report\Revised_TIA_June2006.doc Page - 5 June 2006 w co co c c N N m NE 17t5 Streetillji 88----110. 33� 2s� 34 J 255 15 138 4 36 27 A. � I 8 251--.-..-.-.- * c LEGEND XX P.M. PEAK HOUR VOLUMES (VEHICLES) P.M. PEAK HOUR VOLUMES (PERSON --TRIPS) X,XXX 111 ao 197 4.—,.-.-.-197 251-1110, 2 252 it.._--- 197 251—AO- NE 15th Street 11.394 — —► 233 74 m N n FIGURE 3 2005 P.M. PEAK HOUR —PEAK SEASON TRAFFIC Iimley-Horn onel Aeenriatee Ine J 0 0 z 0 n � N N 0 119 44--167 38 • • • iGmley-Hom noir and Associates, Inc. Traffic Impact Analysis— Omni CAPACITY ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY Level of Service Standard Level of service (LOS) is the traffic performance measure generally used in traffic impact analysis. Levels of service range from LOS A (free flow with negligible delays) to LOS F (heavily congested with long delays). The City of Miami has adopted LOS E as its minimum level of service standard. Transportation Corridor Level of Service Methodoloiy Transportation corridor traffic conditions were examined applying the methodology outlined in the Miami Comprehensive Neighborhood Plan. This methodology considers the person -trip capacity (including transit) for transportation corridors rather than evaluating only the vehicular roadway capacity. Level of service analyses were perfoiuied to assess the capacity of the transportation corridors evaluated in this study based on a comparison between person -trip volume and person -trip capacity within the corridors. The analyses of person -trip volumes and person -trip capacities account for both passenger vehicle and transit service within the corridors. Table 1 illustrates the level of service thresholds for each study corridor. The corridor level of service thresholds, measured in volume (v) to capacity (c) ratios, were developed from the 2002 version of FDOT's Quality/Level of Service Handbook. Intersection Level of Service Methodology Level of service analyses were performed for study intersections using Trafcware's SYNCHRO 6.0 Software, which applies methodologies outlined in the Highway Capacity Manual, 2000 Edition. G:1042688000-OMNI MUSP\Report\RevisedTIA June2006.doc Page- 7 June 2006 • �♦� 1Gmley-Horn and Associates, Inc, • • Traffic Impact Analysis — Omni Biscayne Table 1: Transportation Corridor Level of Service Thresholds evard Rayshore "Drive Peak Hour Directional Volume Thresholds keak Hour Directional..: Volu ne Thresholds (1); A (2) (2) (2) (2) Peak Hour Directional .` Volume Tliresh,ltis (1) (2) reef (2) Peak Hour I)ireetianal Volume Thresholds (1) (2) (2) 13 D (2) 650 1,510 (2) 0.38 0.88 (2) 580 1,140 (2) 0.44 (2) 480 0.86 760 (2) 0.59 0.94 (2) 263 (2) 0.38 557 0.80 1,720 1.00 1,320 1.00 810 1.00 693 1.00 >1.00 >1.00 >1.00 >1.00 (1) Peak hour directional volumes adjusted for median type, presence of turn lanes, and one-way operation. (2) Cannot be achieved per "Table 4-7" from FDOT's 2002 Quality/Level of Service Handbook. 0:1042688000-©MINI MUSP\Report\Revised_TIA_June2006.doc Page - 8 June 2006 • • • tCmieyHorn and Associates, 'srtc. Traffic Jrnpact. nr iysis --- Omni EXISTING CONDITIONS (2006) CAPACITY ANALYSIS Transportation Corridors Vehicular roadway conditions and transit ridership were examined to determine the current level of service for the transportation corridors examined in this study. Table 2 presents the unadjusted 2006 P.M. peak hour directional traffic volumes, peak season conversion factors, and the 2006 peak season P.M. peak hour directional traffic volumes for the study corridors. Table 2: 2006 P.M. Peak Hour Roadway Volumes Biscayne Boulevard North Bayshore Drive NE 15`n Street NE 17 Street 2006 P. Peak Hour Volumes F1)0T-:Peak Season Conversion Factor NB 726* 1.07 20:06 Peak Season P M. Peak Hour VoI.►znie> 777 SB NB SB EB WB EB WB 621* 475* 427* 255* 1.07 1.07 1.07 1.07 309* 59* 80* 1.07 1.07 1.07 2005 counts were adjusted to reflect 2006 conditions using a growth rate of 0.25 percent. 664 508 457 273 331 63 86 Existing transit conditions were examined considering the ridership and capacity of the Miami - Dade Transit (MDT) service operating in the corridors. MDT staff was contacted to obtain the P.M. peak hour ridership and capacities. The only information readily available was the ridership by route on a typical weekday. Therefore, additional research was conducted to detezunine the transit ridership and capacities in the study corridors. Two (2) Miami -Dade Metrobus routes presently serve the North Bayshore Drive corridor adjacent to the project site during the P.M. peak hour. G:1042688000-OMNI MUSP\Report\Revised TTA, June2006.doe Page - 9 June 2006 • • • Iimiey-Horn and Associates, Inc. Traffic Impact Analysis — Oman • Route 32 operates with 15 minute headways in both directions. • Route T operates with 20 minute headways in the southbound direction. One (1) Miami -Dade Metrobus routes presently serve the NE 15th Street corridor adjacent to the project site during the P.M. peak hour. Route 101 A operates with 20 minute headways in both directions. In addition, the NE 15th Street corridor is served by the Metromover which operates with 1.5 minute headways in a loop {eastbound). Six {6) Miami --Dade Metrobus routes presently serve the Biscayne Boulevard corridor adjacent to the project site during the P.M. peak hour. • Route 3 operates with 15 minute headways in both directions. ■ Route 16 operates with 15 minute headways in both directions. Route 62 operates with 20 minute headways in both directions �* Route 95 operates with variable headways in the northbound direction. In the southbound direction, there is no P.M. operation within the study area. Route Biscayne Max operates with 15 minute headways in both directions. ■ Route T operates with 20 minute headways in the northbound direction. in addition, the Biscayne Boulevard corridor is served by the Metromover which operates with 1.5 minute headways in a loop (northbound). MDT staff indicated that the Metrobus routes on the studied corridors sometimes use different bus types on the same route with variable capacities. For purposes of this analysis, an average capacity for each route was determined using data obtained from Miami -Dade County. The ridership capacities for the bus routes were calculated for the P.M. peak hour using the G:\042688000-OMNI MUSP\Report\Revised_ 1A_June2006.doc Page - JQ June 2006 • • • 12 rig Kmley-Horn r and Associates, Inc, Traffic Impact Anatysis Omni appropriate headways and capacities. Metrobus route maps are included in Appendix C. Tables 3, 4, and 5 summarize the transit capacity provided by the routes. Data were obtained to determine the existing P.M. peak hour ridership for the identified transit routes. The data reflect typical ridership on the routes using the most recent ridership information. The P.M peak hour ridership data is also presented in Tables 3, 4, and 5. This ridership data is also included in Appendix C. Table 3: P.M. Peak Hour Miami -Dade Transit Conditions — Bayshore Drive Transit Rt)tite Infortriation North Bayshore Drive Route 32 Northbound P.M. Peak Hour Headways 15 minutes rinses per Hour 4 Aver.age Bus Cal.)acity, (riders) 53 P.1‘1. Peak Hour Directional Person -Trip Capacity 212 1).M. Peak Hour Average • • IJItreetrotial Route Itidershii3 28 (7 riders per bus) Southbound 15 minutes 4 53 212 8 (2 riders per bus) Route T Southbound 20 minutes 3 53 159 51 (17 riders per bus) Total Northbound 4 212 28 (7 riders per bus) Southbound 7 371 59 (8 riders per bus) G:‘,042688000-0MNI MUSP1Report\Revised_11A_June2006.cloc Page - 11 June 2006 • • • ffirrriey-Horn and Associates, Inc, Traffic Impact Analysis - Omni NE 15th Street Table 4: P.M. Peak Hour Miami -Dade Transit Conditions — NE 15th Street Transit Route I formation Route Route 101 A Direction of Travel Eastbound P.N1 Peak .':Hour eadways .: 20 minutes • eliicle per our 3 Average P.M. Peak Vehicle Hour Capacity Directional (riders) Person -Trap 41 Capacity 123 ak Average Directional Route idership:: 12 (4 riders per bus) Westbound 20 minutes 3 41 123 12 (4 riders per bus) Metromover Total Eastbound Westbound Eastbound Westbound 1.5 minutes 1.5 minutes 40 40 43 43 75 3000 75 3000 3123 3123 1000 (25 riders per train) 920 (23 riders per train 1012 (24 riders per vehicle) 932 (22 riders per vehicle ) G:l042688000-OMIT MUSP\Report\Revised_TIA_June2006.doc Page-12 June 2006 • • • EGrniey-Horn and Associatss, I Traffic Impact Analysis Omni Table 5: P.M. Peak Hour Miami -Dade Transit Conditions — Biscayne Boulevard Transit Route Information Route 3 Route 16 Route 62 P.M. Peak Hour eadways Northbound 15 minutes Southbound 15 minutes Northbound 15 minutes Southbound 15 minutes Northbound 20 minutes Southbound 20 minutes Route 95 Northbound Variable Vehicles: per our 4 4 4 4 3 3 8.5 Average Vehicle Capacity (riders) 53 56 53 56 58 53 P.M.,Peak Hour Directional Person -Trip Capacity 212 224 212 212 168 174 451 P.I. Pea Hour Average Directional Route dership';r 96 (24 riders per bus) 68 (17 riders per bus) 72 (18 riders per bus) 44 (11 riders er bus 27 (9 riders per bus) 12 (4 riders er bus 0 (0 riders per bus) Southbound Variable 8.5 No P.M. operation within the study area Route Biscayne Max Northbound 15 minutes Southbound 15 minutes Route T Northbound 20 minutes Metromover Northbound 1.5 minutes 4 59 236 4 40 61 53 75 244 159 3000 76 (19 riders per bus) 92 (23 riders per bus) 45 (15 riders per bus) 680 (17 riders per train) Total Northbound 66.5 4438 996 (15 riders per vehicle) Southbound 23.5 854 216 (9 riders per bus In order to determine person -trip level of service for the study area's transportation corridors, total person -trip volumes (vehicular and transit) were compared to the total person -trip capacities. The person -trip volume to capacity (vie) ratios were compared to the person -trip vie level of service designations outlined in Table 1. Table 6 presents the existing transportation corridor level of service. As indicated in Table 6, the transportation corridors have excess person -trip capacity during the P.M. peak hour and operate at acceptable levels of service. G:1042688000-OMNI MUSP\Report\Revised_TIA_June2006.doc Page - 13 June 2006 • ©mr, Kimley-Horn .. and Associates, Inc. • • Traffic Impact Analysis — Omni Table 6: 2006 P.M. Peak Hour Transportation Corridor Segment Conditions rincipal Roadways. Peak Season P.M. Peak Hour Roadway Volumes Vehicles Person Trips (x) Peak.:: our Trail Ridership• ,. lour Total Volume;(' Person-" Trips, . Directional Peak ionr Vchk-utar Capacity Person - Trips lti P M Peak our Transit Capacity P.M. "'eak Hour Total Capacity (C) :::Peak': our ",ess :Capacity Person - Trips Person - Trips V/C Ratio OS NB 777 1,088 996 2,084 1,720 2,408 4,438 6,846 4,762 0.30 SB 664 930 216 1,114 1,720 2,408 854 3,262 2,148 0.34 C z NE 15`h Street NB SB EB VVB 739 1,320 699 1,320 1,394 810 1,395 810 1,848 1,848 1,134 1,134 NE 17th Street EB WB 63 86 88 120 88 120 693 693 970 970 212 371 3,123 3,123 2,060 2,219 4,257 4,257 970 970 0.36 0.32 0.33 0.33 0.09 0.12 (1) Volumes (vehicles) were converted to person -trips using 1.4 person/vehicle occupancy (2) Directional peak hour capacity derived from the 2002 FDOT Quality/LOS Handbook and the Miami -Downtown DRI. G:1042688000-OMN1 MUSP\Report\Reviseci_TIA_June2006.doc Page - 14 June 2006 • • • Kelley -Horn and Associates, ine. Traffic Impacr Analysis - Omni Intersections P.M. peak hour capacity analyses were also performed for the study intersections. Table 7 presents the results of the analyses. As indicated, the study intersections operate at acceptable levels of service. Detailed SYNCHRO 6.0 outputs are included in Appendix D, along with existing intersection traffic signal timing plans. Table 7: 2006 P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Conditions US 1/Biscayne Boulevard and NE 17th Terrace 2005 P.M. Peak flour Overall Level of Service (Existing Timings) LOS Delay (s) A 8.5 USUBiscayne Boulevard and NE 17th Street A 4.9 US 1/Biscayne Boulevard and NE 15th Street 24,0 North Bayshore Drive and NE 17th Terrace C (1) 15.5 (1) North Bayshore Drive and NE 15th Street 19.2 NE 4th Avenue and NE 17th Terrace A (1) 9.0 (1) NE 17th Terrace and Connector B (1) 13.4 (1) NE 4th Avenue and Connector A (1) 9.5 (1) (1) Overall intersection LOS not provided for two-way stop controlled intersections. The worst minor street movement is indicated. G:1042688000-OlVENI MUSP\Report!Revised_TIA_June2006.doc Page - 25 June 2006 • • • Kmley-Haas and Associates, Inc. Traffic Impact Analysis — Omni BACKGROUND TRAFFIC Background traffic conditions are defined as the expected traffic conditions on the prevailing roadway network in the year 2020 (corresponding to the total build out of Omni) without the development of the proposed project. The background traffic volumes are the sum of the existing traffic and additional "background" traffic to account for expected traffic growth in the study area. Background Area Growth Future traffic growth on the transportation network was detei wined based upon historic growth trends at nearby FDOT traffic count stations. The nearest FDOT count stations referenced for this analysis are located along Biscayne Boulevard (US-1/SR 5): count station number 5053 is located on Biscayne Boulevard north of NE 13th Street and count station number 5056 is located on Biscayne Boulevard north of NE 19th Street. The growth rate analysis calculated a growth rate of -4.67 percent (-4.67%) for count station number 5053 and a growth rate of -1.72 percent (-1.72%) for count station number 5056. To be conservative in the traffic analysis, an annual growth rate of 0.25 percent (0.25%) was applied annually to traffic counts to attain future (2020) background conditions. Historical traffic count data and growth trend calculations are included in Appendix E. Committed Developments The City of Miami staff was contacted to determine if any projects that have been approved but not yet completed in the vicinity of the project site should be accounted for in this analysis. The April 2006 Large Scale Development Report was reviewed and seventeen (17) major use special permits (MUSP) projects were identified. These seventeen (17) projects are listed below. 1. Performing Arts Center of Greater Miami 2. 1800 Club 3. Quantum on the Bay (Metropolis at Bayshore) G:1042688000-OMNI MUSP\Report\Revised_TIA_June2006.doc Page -16 June 2006 • • • f 1ey-Horn and Associates, Inc. Traf t:.Impact Analysis — Omni 4. Bay -view Market 5. Ellipse 6_ Miramar Centre - Phases IT and III 7. Paramount Bay (Paramount at Edgewater Square) 8. 1650 Biscayne Boulevard (Cardinal Symphony) 9. Portico 10. Hotel de l'Opera 11. Tiziano 12. City Square 13. Chelsea 14. 1490 Biscayne Boulevard 15. Urbana Tower 16. City Square Parcel 1 17. City Square Parcel 3 The projected traffic from the committed projects was added to the background traffic. Please refer to Appendix G for committed project trip assignments to the Omni project study intersections. Figure 4 presents the 2020 background traffic for the study area. G:1042688000-OMNI MUSP\Report\Revised_TIA_June2006.doc Page- 17 June 2006 c CN z c 0) 0 ]N NE 17th Street Y 73 56� O O 0) fl 60 313 —OP 20 143 447 221 — 14 4- 6 3 k— 155 4-- 231 121 a3 0 ID w z N 45 310® 411--289 310 -... , 2 r°� 4 1111 279 L2c' 289 —289 310 NE 15th Street 1) O CO a) 128 c0 r'7 N 192 1*j 40 co 97 34t1 •. IM 77 co FIGURE 4 FUTURE (2020) NON —PROJECT P.M. PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC 1111111 limley-Horn and Acenriafee In 1 • • • kmiey-Hom and Associates, Inc. Traffic Impact Analysis — Omni PROJECT TRAFFIC Project traffic is defined as the vehicle trips expected to be generated by the project (Omni), and the distribution and assignment of this traffic over the roadway network. Existing and Proposed Land Uses As previously indicated, the project site is currently occupied by a 529-room hotel and a culinary school. This project proposes to demolish the existing structures and construct 4,208 condominium units and 330,200 (+/-) square feet of retail space. This analysis conservatively assumed 4,228 high-rise residential condominium/townhouse units and 350,200 square feet of retail space. The build out and occupancy of the project is expected to occur by 2020. Project Access The site will be accessed via eight (8) driveways. One site driveway is proposed along NE 17th Terrace, two site driveways are proposed along NE 17th Street (Biscayne Promenade), and five site driveways are proposed along NE 16th Street. Trip Generation Existing and proposed vehicular trip generation for the project site was calculated using rates and equations contained in the Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Trip Generation, Seventh Edition. The trip generation for the existing hotel was determined using ITE Land Use 310. The trip generation of the existing culinary school could not be determined, as the enrollment was not available for this analysis. Therefore, the trip generation estimate for the existing land uses is conservative because it does not include traffic generated on the culinary school. As Table 8 shows, the existing hotel generates approximately 312 trips during the P.M. peak hour. The trip generation for the proposed land uses was determined using ITE Land Use 232 (High -Rise CondominiutnlTownhouse) and ITE Land Use 820 (Shopping Center). As Table 9 shows, the G:1042688000-OMNI MUSP\Report\Revised_TIA_June2006.doc Page - 19 June 2006 • T1Kimiey-Harr, and Associates, lnc, Traffic impact Analysis O' nth proposed land uses are expected to generate approximately 2,237 net new external trips during the P.M. peak hour. Table 8: Existing Trip Generation Existing; Land Use (ITE Code) Scale P.M. Peak Hour Driveway Volumes Trips Entering Exit'ng % Trips % Trips Hotel (310) 529 room 312 53% 165 47% 147 Table 9:.Proposed Trip Generation Future Land Use (ITE Code) 4.3 41 cl i P.M Peak Hour Driveway Volumes Gross Total Trips Internal Capture Reduction Net External Trips Pass -By Capture Reduction Net New External Trips Entering Exiting % Trips %Trips High -Rise Condominium (232) 4,228 du.10.4% 1.302 - 1,302 62% 812 38% 490 Shopping Center PP € (820) 350.2 1 k.s. f. 1,432 10.5% 1,281 27% 935 48°/n 452 52% 483 Total 2,885 2,583 2,237 1,264 973 Internal capture calculations were performed in accordance with the methodology outlined in the ITE Trip Generation Handbook. A pass -by capture trip reduction was also applied to the commercial retail land use consistent with the ITE Trip Generation Handbook methodology. In order to determine the net increase in P.M. peak hour trip generation at the project site, the existing and proposed trip generation results were compared. As Table 10 shows, the proposed development (Omni) will generate 1,925 additional net new external trips during the P.M. peak hour. G:1042688000 OMNI MUSP\Reportlitevised_TIA_June2006.doc Page - 20 June 2006 • • • K miey-Horn: and Associates, Inc, Trqaic Impact Ar lysis Qrnni Table 10: Trip Generation Comparison Existing Land Uses M: Peak: Entering Trips Driveway N'olnn Exiting Trips al Trips::; 165 147 312 Proposed Land Uses 1,264 973 2,237 ITEIMiami vehicular occupancy adjustment (16% reduction) 923 vph 826 694 vph 1,617 vph Person -Trip Conversion (1.4 persons per vehicle) 1292 person - trips 972 person- trips 2,264 person - trips Please note that ITE trip generation assumes a vehicle occupancy rate of 1.2 persons per vehicle; however, the City of Miami has determined that 1.4 persons per vehicle are more appropriate for the local area. Therefore, net new vehicular trips shown in Table 10 were reduced by 16 percent to adjust for these vehicle occupancy assumptions. G:1042688000-OMN] MUST' \Reportlitevised_TIA_June2006.doc Page - 21 June 2006 • • • IQtniey-Horn and Associates, inc. Traffic Impact Analysis-- Omni Trip Distribution and Assignment The likely distribution of project traffic was forecast for the trips expected to be generated by the project. The trip distribution was based on a cardinal trip distributio-n obtained from the 2005 Cost Affordable Plan for the project site's traffic analysis zone (TAZ 507). The cardinal trip distribution for TAZ 507 is provided in Table 11. The detailed cardinal distribution is included in Appendix F. Table 11: Cardinal Trip Distribution Cardinal Direction Percentage of Trips North -Northeast 10.33% East -Northeast 5.38% East -Southeast 5.05% South -Southeast 3.43% South -Southwest 18.90% West -Southwest 21.46% West -Northwest 19.29% North -Northwest 16.15% Total 100.00% Figure 5 and 6 show the project trip distribution and assignment at the project driveways and adjacent intersections. As part of the directional person -trip distribution, the maximum project traffic assignment was determined for the transportation corridor segment. G:1042688000-0MNI MUSP\ReportlRevised_TIA_June2006.doe Page - 22 June 2006 • w N 1I GC c 0 U 0 a 8%/56 9%/62 0 7 cor7 r,� e'or. 110. 17%/118—,._... 8%/56 c 0 0 0 2%/14 , 448%/56 / 85/74- N li----- 8% 1N/103 11% IN/142---* 1%/7 16%/148-_______________® 7%/55 _,._ ► Service 7%/65--i NE 17th Street N � 0 4111-- 2%/14 tD `I 5%/35 0) 0� N0 — 0 O O Drive Service Drive 4--- 1%/7 5%/35 See Figure 6 for Detailed Site Traffic Distribution and Assignment 7 , Service Drive Service NE 15th Street N 0) to 0 0 5%/47 2%/18 --� • 1%/9 1 %/9 LEGEND XX%/XX<XX> NEW DISTRIBUTION/NEW ASSIGN MEN T<PASS—BY ASSIGNMENT> €XX% IN/XX EPERSON TRIP DISTRIBUTION/ASSIGNMENT (MAXIMUM) 10 000 rn N ♦— 7% OUT/68 10% I N /129 - ---- * 10%/92 —5 t i cv FIGURE 5 TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT r_n Kimley-Horn ^rail Annnninfnn Inn ) Project drivetrnes (Entering and Exiting) reflect otal traffic volumes expected et the driveways (Table 9). All other volumes shown are based on the net increase (proposed — existing) in traffic volume (Table ID) 0 CO v A G 2%/18* ---14, *<0g>89V%6Z NE 17th Terrace w z 3%/21* 1%/7* 6%/42* 8%/63 Slj NE 17th Stree 4%/37 4%/37 3C%/208<54>* 2 0%/139 <50>* (Biscayne Promenade) 5%/46- 6%/55 T 00 \'4 ul or 4. 5%/46 4--34%/235 <104> 5%/46 tD � P • n 03 ✓ V itJ 2%/14*---t 40 L 0 k-----7%/65<38> 4-10% INi5% OUT/127 21%/194<69> 4%/37<31> 570/46 NE 16th Street CFI n V 5%/46--i 36%/333<104> —÷ 5%/46--,ir al Q1 A 17%/157<61> 5% IN+4% OUT/74---I► 14%/130<43> • cn • A A Vc V V 17%/118<69> —÷ 5%/46 SI LEGEND XX%/XX<XX> NEW DISTRIBUTION/NEW ASSIGNMENT<PA5S--BY ASSIGNMENT> 4\44, XX% IN/XX PERSON TRIP DISTRIBUTION/ASSIGNMENT (MAXIMUM) 8%/56<36>*-. 14%/97<33>* U rn FIGURE 6 DETAILED PROJECT TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT IC= Kimsey -Horn and Associates, Inc. ,...,01 c‘i uJ d 0 €`7 7 Lioo. 199 , 109 221 N � LLI 4 f--407 Cyor, --345 293 1 345 CD N NE i 7th Street �--325 1 227—► 45 458 ► 375 -----� 85 —� V 35 �45 262 �189 N O 155 238 �156 375 Biscayne 00 Ln j cn Promenade 14 49� 0 oo NE 16th Stree ICE 15th Street 92 130 co a) Q T O 07 z E c7Ln N N 175 1— 192 �40 XX k,xxxi 69 322 ---OP 20� LEGEND P.M. PEAK HOUR VOLUMES (VEHICLES) P.M. PEAK HOUR VOLUMES (PERSON —TRIPS) 4-----1, 716 1,621—► 189 340 ---OP' 77� m c* (n 0 FIGURE 7 2020 P.M. PEAK HOUR TOTAL TRAFF[C �►'", Kimiey-Horn nnii Annnnin+nn Inn . • • • — K..r ey-Ntitn —T 1 arid Associatese rc. Traffic Impact Analysis — Omni FUTURE CONDITIONS (2020) CAPACITY ANALYSIS Two separate future conditions peak hour capacity analyses were performed. A transportation corridor capacity analysis was performed examining person -trip volumes and capacity. ■ Intersection capacity analysis was performed at the study intersections. The future conditions analysis were performed for the 2020 background traffic conditions and the 2020 total traffic conditions, which included the 2020 background traffic and the new trips expected to be generated by the project. Future (2020) Background Traffic Conditions Table 12 presents the results of the transportation corridor capacity analysis for the 2020 P.M. peak hour background traffic conditions. As indicated in Table 12, the corridors have sufficient capacity and are expected to operate at acceptable levels of service (LOS D or better). Table 13 presents the results of the intersection capacity analysis for the 2020 P.N.I. peak hour background traffic conditions. The intersection timings were optimized to reflect the change in traffic patterns in the year 2020. All the intersections operate at LOS D or better. Detailed SYNCHRO 6.0 outputs are included in Appendix H. Cy:1042688000-0MNI MUSP\Report\Revised_TJA_June2006.doc Page - 26 June 2006 • • [ Kirby -Horn [r 1 and Associates, Inc, Revised Traffic mpact 4nalysis— Omnii Table 12: Future (2020) Background P.M. Peak Hour Transportation Corridor Segment Conditions Principal: Roadway 0 oc/a 44 Irk dl 0.1 EB W13 2020 Peak dour Background' Volume cl 2,158 1,154 91 124 2020 P.M Peak Hour Total Volume (3) 3,103 2,088 962 892 amuiitted Peak Hour oltime 2) 945 934 92 20.20.P.11. Peak Hour Total.. Capacity () {4 Person- Trips 6,846 3,262 2,060 2,219 4,257 4,257 970 970 2020;P.119[. 2020 '.. -- Peak Hour Peak Hour Excess Total Level Capacity of Service Persoin Trips, 3,743 1,174 1,098 1,327 2,670 2,704 787 846 SIC Ratio LOS 0.45 D 0.64 D 0.47 D 0.40 C 0.37 0.36 0.19 0.13 (1) An annual growth rate (0.25 percent) was applied to the 2006 P.M. peak hour total volume to determine the 2020 background volume. (2) Total traffic generated along the corridors by committed developments (3) The summation of 2020 peak hour background volumes and committed trips. (4) Total capacity determined in Table 6. G:1042688000-OMNI MUSP\Report\Revised_TIA_June2006.doc Page - 27 June 2006 • • • i lmiey-Hom 1 and Associates, Inc. Table 13: Future (2020) Background P.M. Peak Hour Intersection Conditions P .:Peak:Huur .O cra' Level cif Service SOS Delay (s) Eadstiang Timings ings US 1/Biscayne Boulevard and NE 17th Terrace US I/Biscayne Boulevard and NE 17n' Street US 1/Biscayne Boulevard and NE 156' Street North Bayshore Drive and NE 17th Terrace North Bayshore Drive and NE 15th Street NE 4tn Avenue and NE 17th Terrace NE 17th Terrace and Connector NE 4te Avenue and Connector A (1) B (1) 108.4 57.3 20.3 (1) 9.6 (1) 16.7 (1) 10.0 (1) Optimized Signal Timings US 1/Biscayne Boulevard and NE 17th Terrace US 1/Biscayne Boulevard and NE 15th Street North Bayshore Drive and NE 15th Street 27.6 36.1 20.9 (1) Overall intersection LOS not provided for two-way stop controlled intersections. The worst minor street movement is indicated Future (2020) Total Traffic Conditions Table 14 presents the results of the transportation corridor capacity analysis for the 2020 P.M. peak hour total traffic conditions. As indicated in Table 12, the corridors have sufficient capacity and are expected to operate at acceptable levels of service (LOS D or better). Table 15 presents the results of the intersection capacity analysis for the 2020 P.M. peak hour total traffic conditions. The intersection timings were optimized to reflect the change in traffic patterns in the year 2020. The intersection of NE 17th Terrace and US 1/Biscayne Boulevard is expected to operate at LOS E. All the other signalized intersections will operate at LOS D or better. The stop -controlled approaches of the intersections Biscayne Boulevard and NE 16th G:1042688000-OMNI MUSP1Report\Revised_TIA_June2006.doc Page - 28 June 2006 • • • rl KGmley-Horn and Associates. lne. Street, and Bayshore Drive and NE 16th Street, are expected to operate at LOS F. This result is common where a stop -controlled minor approach intersects with a high -volume major street. Detailed SYNCHRO 6.0 outputs are included in Appendix I. G:i042688000-OMNI MUSP\Report\Revised_TIA_June2006.dae Page - 29 June 2006 • ©=1© KnRim�leA/yy,,,-Homyy Inc.and Associates, I • • Revised Traffic Impact Analysis — (3rrrnii ets � fl NB Table 14: Future (2020) Total P.M. Peak Hour Transportation Corridor Segment Conditions 020 P.'ii. PeaklTpur Background) 9 ulnL' (t)" Committed Peak flour Voll»ne (2) eirson- Person:- Trips Trips. 2,158 945 20n_ Peak Hour Total Volurtne.ta> Person- Trips" Project P.M. Peak Hour Distribution (Maximum) 3,103 30% IN Project P M. Peak "Hour. .Assignttnept 2020 P. i. Peak Roux Total Volume (') 4' P.M.Peak Hour Total Capacity (()t5J 2020 P.M. Peak flour Excess Capacity 2020 I). Peak Hour Total LeN:el of Service:. 388 Person Trips 3,491 er'son Trips" 6,846 Person - Trips 3,355 V/C Ratio 0.51 LOS SB 1,154 934 2,088 41% 1N 530 2,618 3,262 644 0.80 D NB 765 197 962 25% IN 323 1,285 2,060 802 0.62 SB 724 168 892 21% OUT 204 1,096 2,219 1,123 0.49 EB 1,444 143 1,587 10% IN 129 1,716 4,257 2,541 0.40 c 1,445 108 1,553 7% OUT 68 1,621 4,257 2,636 0.38 EB 91 92 183 11% IN 142 325 970 645 0.34 WB 124 124 8% IN 103 227 970 743 0.23 (1) An annual growth rate (0.25 percent) was applied to the 2006 P.M. peak hour total volume to determine the 2020 background volume. (2) Total traffic generated along the corridors by committed developments (3) The summation of 2020 peak hour background volumes and committed trips. (4) 2020 P.M. peak hour total volume (V) is defined as the sum of the project P.M. peak hour assignment and the background volume, (5) Total capacity determined in Table 5. G:1042688000-0MNI MUSPIReportiRevised_TIA_June2006.doc Page - .30 June 2006 • • • !7 �tmley-Hom MINT 1 and Associates, Inc, Traffic Impact Analysis - Omni Table 15: Future (2020) Total P.M. Peak Hour intersection Conditions M.:Peak Hour Overall Levetof., Service LOS I Belay (s Existing Tiirungs US 1/Biscayne Boulevard and NE 17`t' Terrace US 1/Biscayne Boulevard and NE 17`r Street US 1/Biscayne Boulevard and NE 15th Street 459.9 12.4 76.3 North Bayshore Drive and NE 17th Terrace C (1) 24.7 (1) North Bayshore Drive and NE 15th Street 21.4 NE 4th Avenue and NE 17th Terrace NE 17th Terrace and Connector NE 4`h Avenue and Connector NE 17th Terrace and Project Driveway US 1/Biscayne Boulevard and NE 16th Street North Bayshore Drive and NE 16th Street North Bayshore Drive and NE 17th Street (Biscayne Promenade) Optimized Signal Timings US 1/Biscayne Boulevard and NE 17th Terrace B (1) C (1) B (1) C (1) F (1) F (1) B (1) US 1/Biscayne Boulevard and NE 15th Street North Bayshore Drive and NE 15th Street 71.2 50.6 21.3 (I) Overall intersection LOS not provided for two-way stop controlled intersections. The worst minor street movement is indicated * Delay not reported in Synchro G:\042688000-OMNI MUSP\Report\Revised_TIA_June2006.doc Page - 3 ] June 2006 • • • iCmiey-Ham and Associates, inc, Traffic Impaci Analysis -- Omni PROJECT DRIVEWAY ANALYSIS As previously indicated, eight driveways are proposed to provide access to the project site (see Figure 6). One driveway will connect to NE 17`h Terrace, two driveways will connect to NE 17th Street (Biscayne promenade), and five driveways will connect to NE 16`h Street. All driveways will have gated entries. Therefore, a queuing assessment was perfoiined for the driveways. The driveway analysis is included in Appendix J. Figure 6 presents the number of vehicles that are expected to enter and exit the parking areas during the P.M. peak hour. The gate service rates for the entries were assumed as follows: 300 vehicles per hour for residential parking and 550 vehicles per hour (two entry lanes) for retail parking. The expected 90 percentile queue length results are as follows: • Southeast entry located on NE 16th Street: This is one of two access connection for a residential parking structure that will serve approximately 1,455 units. The expected 90 percentile queue length is less than one (1) vehicle. • North central entry located on NE 16th Street: This access connection is for a commercial parking structure that will serve approximately 99,050 (+/-) square feet of retail space. The expected 90 percentile queue length is three (3) vehicles. • South central entry located on NE 16th Street: This access connection is for a commercial parking structure that will serve approximately 140,050 square feet of retail space. The expected 90 percentile queue length is one (1) vehicle. • Northwest entry located on NE 16th Street: This is one of two access connection for a residential parking structure that will serve approximately 1,430 units. The expected 90 percentile queue length is less than one (1) vehicle. • Southwest entry located on NE 16th Street: This is one of two access connection for residential parking structure that will serve approximately 1,455 units. The expected 90 percentile queue length is less than one (1) vehicle. • North entry located on NE 17th Street (Biscayne Promenade): This is one of two access connection for a residential parking structure that will serve approximately 1,345 units. The expected 90 percentile queue length is less than one (1) vehicle. G:1042688000-OMNI MUSP\\ReportiRevised_T1A_June2006.doc Page - 32 June 2006 • • • pP7 Fri Kimley-Horn aid Associates, Inc, Traffic Irnpact Analysis - Otnn • South entry located on NE 17rh Street (Biscayne Promenade): This is one of two access connection for a residential parking structure that will serve approximately 1,430 units. The expected 90 percentile queue length is less than a vehicle_ • Entry located on NE 17"` Terrace: This is one of two access connection for a residential parking structure that will serve approximately 1,345 units, The expected 90 percentile queue length is less than one (1) vehicle. Page - 33 June 2006 G:1042688000-OMNI MUSP\Report\Revised_TI.4June2006.doc • • • Krniey-Horn and Associates, 41e. Traffic. Impact Analysis Omni TRANSPORTATION CONTROL MEASURES PLAN A Transportation Control Measures Plan is required for this site to demonstrate how the developer plans to alleviate traffic from the proposed site on the surrounding roadway network. Miami -Dade County provides public transit in close proximity to the project site. In addition, other measures of transportation control can be used by the developer to encourage people to use public transportation, promote bicycling and walking, encourage car/vanpooling and offer alternatives to the typical workday hours. Examples of these incentives include, but are not limited to: ▪ Provide transit subsidies for residents of the site Provide transit information within the site including route schedules and maps ▪ Provide convenient and secure areas for bicycles Provide other transit -oriented amenities The applicant intends to make the site pedestrian- and transit -friendly and will consider these features for incorporation into the site. Page - 34 June 2006 G:\042688000-OMNI MUSP\ReportRevised June2006.doc • • • Con Kimsey-Hom and Associates, Traffic Impact Analysis -- Omni FUTURE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS As part of this traffic impact analysis, future transportation improvements (programmed and planned) were identified within the corridors adjacent to the project site. Project documentation is included in Appendix K. The following projects were identified: Premium Transit — According to Miami -Dade County Long Range Transportation Plan (2030 LRTP), there is a project that will provide premium transit service between Downtown Miami and the Broward County line along the U.S.1/ FEC Rail corridor. This project is a Priority IV project scheduled for implementation between 2021-2030. 6:1042688000-OMNI MUSP\ReportiRevised_TJA_June2006.doc Page - 35 June 2006 • • Kfmley-Horn and Associates, Inc, Traffic Impact Analysis --- Ornrri CONCLUSIONS This traffic impact study assessed the impacts of the Omni project on the surrounding transportation network. The analysis was conducted in accordance with the City of Miami requirements and included data collection; project trip generation, distribution, and assignment; transportation corridor segment capacity analysis; and intersection capacity analysis. This report is being submitted as part of a MUSP application. Transportation corridor capacity analyses and intersection capacity analyses were performed for the existing 2006 peak season conditions. Results of the analyses demonstrate that the transportation corridors and intersections in the vicinity of the project site currently have sufficient capacity and operate at acceptable levels of service. Trip generation calculations indicate that the project is expected to generate 1,617 new vehicular trips and 2,264 person -trips during the P.M. peak hour. These trips were assigned to the roadway network based on a cardinal trip distribution obtained from the 2005 Cost Feasible Plan. Capacity analyses were also performed for the future (Year 2020) with project conditions. Results of these analyses demonstrate that the transportation corridors and major intersections will continue to have sufficient capacity and operate at acceptable levels of service. G:\042688000-OMNI MUSP\Report\Revised_TIA_7une2006.doc Page - 36 .tune 2006