Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutTraffic Impact Analysis06/10/2004 13:37 FAX 'j 002 URS June 9, 2004 Ms. Lilia I. Medina Assistant Transportation Coordinator Office of Transportation, City Manager's Office City of Miami 444 SW 2"d Avenue Miami, Florida 33130 Re: Opus Traffic impact Analysis Review — W.O. # 56 Dear Ms. Medina: We have reviewed the Traffic Impact Analysis report for the Opus project. Our detailed review comments are included in the attached memorandum. In summary, additional information is needed to complete the review of this report. Specifically: 1. The adjustments to the raw collected traffic data have errors and result in volumes that are too low, which need a variety of corrections. The background traffic growth did not include the full build out period (it should be up to 2007 not 2006), which must be revised. 2, The capacity analyses have technical errors that must be addressed (including peak hour calculation, transit data, service volume conversion table, signal timing, geometry, and volumes). 3. Two committed developments in the area were not noted in the report, which must be included in the analyses. 4. The trip generation calculation has typos that must be corrected and far underestimates the office use, which must be revised. There is a discrepancy in the trip distribution that must be addressed. 5. The future analyses have technical issues that must be addressed and the Traffic Control Measures Plan is missing entirely, which is required, Should you have any questions, please call me at 954.739.1881 extension 223. Sincerely, URS Corporation Southern .Tenn L. King, P.E. Senior Transportation Engineer cc: Sonia Shreffler-Bogart (DPA) attachment URS Corporation Lakeshore Complex 5100 NW 33rd Avenue, Suite 150 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309-6375 Tel: 954. 739.18131 Fax: 954.739.1789 06/10/2004 13:38 FAX ig1003 MEMORANDUM To: Lilia 1. Medina From: Jenn L. King, P.E. Date: June 9, 2004 Subject: Opus Traffic Impact Analysis Review — W.O. # 56 We have reviewed the Traffic Impact Analysis report prepared by David Plummer and Associates (DPA) for the Opus project, dated April 2004. The report is accompanied by site drawings, dated March 23, 2004. The proposed development will be located on N.E. 13 Street between Biscayne Boulevard and North Bayshore Drive. This project is within the Downtown Miami DRI. Build out of this proposed project is anticipated in 2007. The project will be composed of 408 residential units, 11,720 square feet of office space, and 5,400 square feet of retail space. The project also includes a 556 space parking garage. Our findings are as follows: 1. General Location Map: The report includes a location map, which adequately identifies the project location and surrounding street network (Figure 1). 2. Study Area: As agreed upon via a preliminary methodology discussion, the study analyzes six intersections: five signalized intersection (N.E. 2nd Avenue with N.E. 12th Street, Biscayne Boulevard with N.E. 14th Street and with N.E. 13th Street, and North Bayshore Drive with N.E. 14th Street and with N.E. 13th Street) and one unsignalized intersection (Biscayne Boulevard with N.E. 12th Street). In addition, the project driveway intersection is analyzed. The study analyzes four corridors: N.E. 2nd Avenue, Biscayne Boulevard, North Bayshore Drive, and N.E. 14th Street. 3. Site Access: Access to the site is provided via a two-way driveway connecting onto N.E. 13th Street, which is one-way westbound. There were no details provided of the location of the garage access control gate arms, which must be addressed to avoid queuing into the roadway, which also must be included in the analysis. Given the possibly confusing URS Corporation Lakeshore Complex 5100 NW 33rd Avenue, Suite 150 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33309-6375 Tel: 954.739,1881 Fax: 954.739.1789 06/10/2004 13:38 FAX a 004 vRs Ms. Lille L Medina Opus - Traffic impact Analysis Review Memo June 9, 2004 Page 2of4 geometry of the entrance to the garage and loading area, this must be reviewed and addressed by the applicant. 4. Data Collection: Two hours of P.M. turning movement count (TMC) data were collected at the six study intersections. The data are provided in Appendix B. Since the Performing Arts construction has affected local traffic patterns, additional older data for Biscayne Boulevard with N.E. 13th Street was also used, which is acceptable. However, no adjustments were made for seasonal factors or growth at Biscayne Boulevard with N.E. 13th Street, so the volumes are too Iow, which must be corrected. Additionally, the southbound through volumes at Biscayne Boulevard with N.E. 12th Street are miscalculated and too Iow, which must be corrected. Automatic 24-hour traffic data was collected on all of the corridor study segments. The calculation of the average of the two highest hours to determine the peak hour traffic has errors that must be corrected, along with a data entry error on North Bayshore Drive between N.E. 13" Street and N.E. 14th Street. Signal timing data provided by Miami Dade County is also provided in the report. A schematic of lane geometry at the study intersections has been included, along with detailed descriptions of the study roadways. Exhibit 3, southbound on Biscayne Boulevard with N.E. 14th Street does not agree with the analysis in Appendix D, which must be reviewed and/or revised. The note on Exhibit 2 has a typo referring to the "east" leg, versus the "west" leg. 5. Adjustment Factors: Year 2002 FDOT adjustment factors were incorporated into the analysis, which is acceptable. As noted above, they must be applied to the Biscayne Boulevard with N.E. 13th Street data, along with growth factors. 6. Existing Conditions Analysis: An existing conditions analysis for the corridors (person trip) and intersections (HCS2000) was conducted. The existing conditions corridor analysis must be revised. Exhibit 4: the Raw PM Peak Hour Volume must be correctly calculated, as noted above; bus and metromover ridership data is not consistent with Appendix C, Table 21.A7, which must be corrected; bus capacities were reversed on Biscayne Boulevard; and the data source for North Bayshore Drive must be provided/cited. Exhibit 5: based on Exhibit 4, which is expected to change; and the LOS column is based on table in Appendix C, which must be revised to reflect all of the different roadway conditions (N.E. 2nd Avenue, North Bayshore Drive, and N.E. 14t" Street are not State Class 4 Arterials). The existing conditions intersection analysis must be revised. Exhibit 6: the LOS column is based on the analysis in Appendix D, which must be corrected. Appendix D: N.E. 2nd Avenue with N.E. 12tt' Street applies the wrong signal timing and the RTOR are too high and must either be justified or revised; Biscayne Boulevard with N.E. 14th Street 06/10/2004 13:38 FAX VI005 • URS Ms. Oa I. Medina Opus • Traffic impact Analysis Review Memo June 9, 2004 Page 3 of 4 southbound geometry is not consistent with Exhibit 3, which must be reviewed and revised: and Biscayne Boulevard with N.E. 13th Street volumes are too low and must be revised. 7. Planned Roadway Improvements: The 2003 TIP and the 2025 LRE were reviewed. There are no planned projects in the study area that may improve capacity. 8. Background Traffic: A two -percent background growth rate was applied to account for unidentified projects, which is acceptable, however it was applied for the wrong number of years (it should be from 2004 to 2007), which must be corrected in both the corridor and intersection analyses (Exhibit 12 and Appendix E). 9. Committed Developments: The traffic from five committed development projects in the area was included in the analysis. The projects are based on information provided by the City, however no date of the information source was provided, which must be included. The five projects are: • Performing Arts Center • Quantum • Miramar Center • Biscayne Village. • 1800 Club While we agree with these projects and the distribution/assignment information in Appendix E, two additional projects should be included: • Biscayne Tower • The Mist. It is not clear why Exhibit 8 (Biscayne Rentals) is included in Appendix E, which should be clarified. 10. Trip Generation: The trip generation for the site is from the 6th Edition of the 1TE Trip Generation manual, which is still acceptable, however the 7th Edition is currently available. The directional splits for LAC 710 have typos that must be corrected. The use of the average rate far underestimates the office trip generation (9 net vehicle trips in the peak hour), which is not acceptable, and the equation must be used in Exhibit 9 instead. 11. Trip Distribution: The project is located within new TAZ 509. We generally agree with the project distribution in Exhibit 11 and the vehicular volumes in Exhibit 13, however there is a discrepancy at N.E. 2nd Avenue with N.E. 12th Street, which must be reviewed and revised. Note the typo 06/10/2004 13:39 FAX IC uuti fio URS • • Ms. Lilia I. Medina Opus -Traffic impact Analysis Review Memo June 9, 2004 Page 4 of 4 in Exhibit 11 for exiting eastbound left turns at North Bayshore Drive with N.E. 14th Street. 12. Future Conditions without and with Project: The analyses of future conditions with project are consistent with the existing conditions analyses. The intersection analysis indicates that signal -timing modifications at Biscayne Boulevard with N.E. 13th Street will be required. Exhibit 12 needs to be revised: column (b) should include growth to year 2007; footnote 2 should be 2007 not 2006; column (e) is not referenced anywhere and has a significant impact on the capacities, which must be discussed in the report and/or added to Appendix C; column (f) Biscayne Boulevard southbound south of 1-395 capacity is too high; column (h) clarification, possibly a sample calculation, should be included. A Traffic Control Measures Plan must be included. Once the above noted changes have been incorporated throughout the report, the results of the final analyses are expected to change. We conclude that the report has inconsistencies, errors, and omissions as noted above. These items need to be addressed to complete this review.