Loading...
Letter from DMJM+Harris, Inc.EA,1]M-';HARRJ$ May t2, 2004 Mr. Fred Beckman Director of Public Works City of Miami Beach 1700 Convention Center Drive Miami Beach, Florida 33139 Dear Mr. Beckman: We have finalized our initial comments submitted to you on May 5, 2004. Attached please find a copy of the final report. At this time I would also like to document the conversation we had last week regarding a potential conflict of interest. As I mentioned to you on our call of May 5, 2004, we had just been informed on that date by Spillis Candela DMJM that they were under contract by the developer of "Island Gardens" to prepare the construction plans for the project. Since DMJM+HARRIS and Spillis Candela DMJM are sister companies under the AECOM umbrella, I was concerned about the perception of a conflict of interest relative to the execution of our assignment. Based on DMJM+HARRIS' commitment to evaluate the report, like any other independent professional, and not to give advance notice of our findings to any other party before your approval, you have given us approval to continue in this engagement and advised us to move forward with finalizing our repod. Consequently, the repod has been finalized and submitted to you herewith. However, in the interest of avoiding any problems or delays in the future, I recommend that you discuss this issue with the City's Counsel and obtain their approval of the City's use of the report. Thank you for the oppodunity to do this work for you. We look forward to a continued role assisting the City of Miami Beach. Sincerely, D .M~M+HARRIS, Inc. G. M. Norona, P.E. Vice President GMN:jb DMJM.. I May 12, 2004 Mr. Fred Beckmann Direclor of Public Works City of Miami Beach 1700 Convention Cen~er Drive Miami Beach, FL 33139 Re: Review of "Transportation Assessment: Proposed Boundary Change to the Downtown Miami DRI Increment IF Report Dear Mr. Beckmann Our final comments are listed betow: Study Area: Review of the report indicates that only the corridors of Alton between 1'' and 15~ Street, 5t~ Street between Alton Road and Collins Avenue and the MacArthur Causeway (to Alton Road) we~'e analyzed. As indicated in section 1.1 page 5 of the report, the consultant defined the study area as '"all corridors leading to Miami Beach and all North, South, East and West roads (including Alton Road in Miami Beach)." However, the Final Pre-Application summary distributed by the South Flodda Regional Council (SFRC) staied that the project study area should include all corridors leading to Miami Beach and all North, Southl East and West Roads (including Alton Road) in Miami Beach. Therefore, the consultant did not analyze the study area as defined by the SFRC memorandum. Link Analysis Following is a review of the link analysis performed along Alton Road, 5"' Street, MacArthur Causeway: Alton Road Traffic reported in the report between 5~h Street and 15r" Street during the PM peak period appears lower than expected when compared to other traffic data collected recently (April 2004) within the same area. Also, DPA collected 24 hr counts on December 17, 2003 at one location between 10 Street & 11 Streel, We recommend 72-hour counts at at least two locations along the corddor. 5~h Street Alto~ Rd - Collins Ave A review of recent counts indicates that traffic is somewhat higher than the traffic shown in the report in the PM peak period. The traffic source in the report is FDOT 2002 count stations. The report indicates the Maximum Service Volume (MSV) for a 6LD road to be 2,580 vph in one direction. FDOT's 2002 table guidelines indicate a MSV of 2,330 vph for this type of road. This over-represents the capacity along 5~' Street. MacArthur Causeway A/ton Road - Bayshore Drive The report classified this section of road as a freeway instead of a 6LD state two-way arterial with an accepted level of service "E". MSV should be 2790 vph on MacArthur Causeway from Biscayne to Alton Road, The report indicates values ranging from 5,030 to 5.990. Higher v/c ratios were obtained using the "" DMJ M.,,I+ARR 2,790 MSV for this road and levels o[ service dropped in various segments, Person Trip Capacity analysis ks also based on ti~e traffic analysis and this error is carded forward. · Year 2009 conditions were re-calculated using 2790 MSV. The results are summarized in the table below and compared to the repod results (Table 2). As shown in Table I, v;c ratios are almost double compared to what was indicated in the report calculations, Table 1. Re-calculated Year 2009 Person Trip Conditions (MacArthur Causeway) } I Per'Trip I Proj From To [DIr [ Capacityl traffic MSV I vic I LOS I MSV ^,o~ ........... F;';'~';~%i~'"~=~i~e I 5a2- ' 9-- ~r,~ ...... 58~ 0.9~ Fishe~ Islan~ Ent Palm Island Ept ~EB ~ 3282 [ 256 5812 [ O~ ~ C ~ 4.40% IW~ ~56, I 2~9 ~a~ I ~.~3 Palm ~sland Ertl Watson island En~ ]~B ] 5269 I 2~ 5812 ~ 0.91 ~ t ~ 440% .. iW.'l 5749 I 239 5812 I o,~ I F: I 411% Watson island Eh{ Bay~l~ore Dr ~EH I 5822 ~ 809 5812 ] 100 ~ F ] 13 92% ],V~]_,,,6336 ,,[ 826 5812 J, ,109 trip~ , 5%I Table 2. DPA's Year 2009 Person Trip Conditions (MacArthur Causeway) | I Per'Trip I Pr°J I I = To [Dir l Capacity traffic I MSV vic [WB I 6177 239 9420 0.~ ~F~sher ~sland Ent Palm island E*~t EB ~ 3282 256 ~20 03~ , IW~l ~ I ~3~I~"~ I o7< 'Palm Island Ent Walson island Ent ED 5269 ~ 256 ~ 10956 ~ 0.4~ j,Vatson ~sland Ent Baysho[e Dr EB 5822 809 ~ 10956 0 5: ....... WB 633,6 826 10956 1,, 0 5 LOS ~ MSV Itrips> 5%i c 1 :?s4~/" I No D I 272% c ~ 738~'. ~ Yes · Based on the above, it appears that a segment of Macarthur Causeway from Watson Island to Bayshore Drive is significantly impacted. Growth Rate: The repod uses 0.84% as a weighted adjusted compound growth rate for Alton Road consistent with the weighted adjusted compound growth rated of the approved DDRI along SR 836/I-395tMacArthL!r Causeway. No indication was given as to a growth rate for 5"' Street. There is no analysis or justification for this growth rate. In fact. the 5' Street & Alton TIS dated April 2004 calculated a 205% growth rate for the south beach area based on historic [rafiic of Miami Beach roads (using FDOT count stations). Our review of traffic historical data in Miami Beach yielded an average growth rate of 494% per year, This review included five count stations, two on 5"' Street, one on Alton road and two on Collins Avenue. Along McArthur Causeway, lhe computed average growth rate per year based on histodc traffic was 27%. As such, the growth rate was underestimated for this analysis. Trip Generation: In reviewing the adjusted tdp generation analysis worksheets, there appears to be errors in the sproadsheet under reporting trips for "Attractions-Movie Theater". Ped/Bike Trip Reduction: DPA established a 3.5% reduction in trips for the Ped/Bike mode for the Island Garden Area. Thero is no justification to back this up, we believe, based on the area characteristics, there should be no reduction for ped,'bike mode. · mm )TM DMJM.. RI'JS Buildout Year: The study indicales the buildout year remains at 2009 (section 10, page 5 of DPA report) However, several documents dated May 6, 2003 indicated that the initial buildout year for Increment II had been changed from December 30, 2005 to May 20, 2014. If so, this will affect the projected traffic and impact ali tile traffic analysis This should be clarified and any necessary corrections made to the analysis, Committed Projects: Based on the review of the study, it appears that only Portofino Development was included in the analysis. We had requested information from DPA regarding their request for commitled development projects and what was provided by the City to them. The information received yielded little information. Section 3.2, page 49 of the report, states that the Parrot Jungle and other developments will not undergo DRi review but instead they will be included in the DDRI analysis as committed or background developments. Later, the report indicales that Parrot Jungle was not included as a committed development because il generates 500 trips/day less than the 400 pm peak threshold Again, it appears that only the Portofino Development was included as a committed development At this poinl it is obvious that a substantial number of committed trips were assigned to Miami Beach roads: however, it is unclear how Portofino trips were included and assigned. HCS Analysis - Alton Rdt5~' Street: · Initial findings indicate that there are some discrepancies in the input data for the analysis such as peak hour factors, lane widths etc.; however, those discrepancies will not significantly affect the output. The HCS analysis for 2009 does not appear to reflect any significant change in traffic~ There could be significant impacts to ti~is intersection when committed traffic, appropriate growth rate and build-out year among other items are corrected In summary, our review found vadous sources for discrepancies throughout the report with various degrees of ~mpact. Discrepancies that need to be addressed and corrected due to their systematic impact to lhe oversil project are: · Definition of Build-out Year, 2009 or 2014 and subsequent corrections to the analysis · Selection of appropriate growth year factor (2.5% to 5%) for the Miami Beach area and the McArthur Causeway and subsequent corrections to the analysis · Use the FDOT standard MSV and level of service for McArthur Causeway and subsequent corrections to the analysis · Include all committed trips to the roadway system and assess the impacts on MacArthur Causeway and the intersection of 5~' street at Alton Road. If you have any questions, please call me. Sincerely, DMJM+HARRIS+ INC. Cados Francis, P.E. Project Manager cc: File 046106165-4113