Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAbout2007 Traffic Impact Analysis Report for Proposed Sonesta Key Biscayne ResortI" / Tra ffic Im pact A nalysis Report for Proposed Sonesta Key Biscayne Resort \J ' l r ( ( ( ( ( AGENDA IT EM 7 /J pi3)7 ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l l (_ l (._ l l \. l l l l l. \... \......, TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS REPOR T For Proposed Sonesta Key Biscayne Resort (191 Hotel Units and 63 Residential Units with Accessory Uses) Prepared By: THE CORRADINO GROUP 4055 NW 97th A venue Miami, FL 33178 8-24-06 ~~ ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l ( ( Table of Contents Intro duction and Su m m ary Page 3 l.. (,_ l.. l \.. Su m m ary of F in din gs A pp endices A - E xistin g T ra ffi c C ou nt D ata S h eets / Tra ffi c Signal D ata B - H C M L evel of S erv ice (L O S) M ethodology C - Intersection An alyses - E xisting C onditions D -A rt eri al An aly ses E - T ra ffi c Im pact S tudy M ethodology 4 A rea T ra ffi c C on ditions 7 C on curr ency 9 P ro p osed Project T ra ffi c 10 F in dings and R ecom m endations 12 ( ( ( ( 1.0 Introduction and Summary ( ( ( ( ( ( 1.1 Purpose of Report and Study Objectives The purpose of this study was to evaluate traffic-related impacts of the proposed Sonesta Key Biscayne Resort on the adjacent roadway network in Key Biscayne, Florida. The study methodology was reviewed and accepted by the Village of Key Biscayne. Please refer to appendix E for details on the methodology. ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l \ l \ C ( l l.. The study objectives are: documentation of existing traffic conditions in the vicinity of the site; evaluation of traffic conditions for the proposed resort; and determination of off-site improvements, if needed, to achieve acceptable Level of Service (LOS). 1.2 Site Location and Study Area The project site is located on Ocean Drive and Sonesta-East Drive off Crandon Boulevard in Key Biscayne, Florida. Figure 1-1 shows the site location and traffic analysis study area. This figure is complimented by an aerial photograph on the following page. The traffic impact study area includes the following intersections: ! Crandon Boulevard and Harbor Drive ! Crandon Boulevard and Key Colony ! Crandon Boulevard and Sonesta-East Drive ! Crandon Boulevard and Heather Drive ! Crandon Boulevard and McIntyre-Galen Drive 1.3 Proposed Development 1.3.1 Existing Land Use Currently the site is being used for the Sonesta Beach Hotel and Tennis Club which houses 292 units, tennis courts, spa, meeting rooms, retail shops, bars/lounges and restaurants. 1.3.2 Proposed Land Use The proposed project will consist of a resort that will house 191 hotel units, 63 residential units, plus accessory meeting rooms, spa, bars/lounges, restaurants and retail uses. Please refer to page 7 for details. Table 3-1 depicts information on the trip generation for both the AM and PM peak hours. l l l l TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS- SONESTA KEY BISCAYNE RESORT THE CORRADINO GROUP 3 L ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( \ ( ( ( \_ ( (._ l l 1.3.3 Proposed Project Phasing As indicated above, this project consists of 191 hotel units, 63 residential condominiums plus additional uses which will be constructed in one phase. 1.3.4 Traffic Impact Analysis Sphere of Influence The five intersections indicated above will serve as the traffic impact analysis area. 1.4 Summary of Findings The results of this study demonstrate that the proposed project will not have an adverse impact on the affected roadway network. In fact, there will be an overall trip reduction for both the AM and PM peak hours. With regards to Concurrency, the site's generated traffic will meet the Concurrency requirements. (._ ( l \ TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS - SONESTA KEY BISCAYNE RESORT THE C O R R A D IN O GROUP 4 ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( C '­ (._ (_ ( \. \. '­ '­ (,_ Figure 1-1 Location and Site Plan Map Figure 1-1 Location\ Site Plan Harbor Dr Buttonwood Dr /; Hampton Ln Woodcrest Ln w McIntyre St C') "ti ~ 5:. m iii' 0 ~ a;; ::i er - n :;o :;o C. c.. ) Site TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS - SONESTA KEY BISCAYNE RESORT THE CORRADINO GROUP 5 ) dn0H~ 0NI0VHH0O 3HJ.. ) ) ) ) uo1d ei1s \ uouoooj L - L eJn51:1 +Jose~ euAoosI9 Ae>t oiseuos s1sA1ou\7' ioodun O!JJOJl ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l l ( l l ( l \ 2.0 Area Traffic Conditions 2.1 Study Area and Intersections The following intersections were studied. These intersections would be the most impacted by the proposed site's generated traffic volumes. 1. Crandon Boulevard and Harbor Drive 2. Crandon Boulevard and Key Colony 3. Crandon Boulevard and Sonesta-East Drive 4. Crandon Boulevard and Heather Drive 5. Crandon Boulevard and Mclntyre-Galen Drive Crandon Blvd is a four-lane divided non-State principal arterial serving both local and longer regional trip purposes. It is also designated as a historic roadway. The other five intersecting roadways are functionally classified as local roads. 2.2 Existing Traffic Control Existing intersection numbers of lanes for the project study area are indicated in Figure 2-1. It also depicts their traffic movement designation. All intersections are controlled by a traffic signal, except Crandon Blvd and Heather Drive, which is controlled by stop signs on Heather Dr. 2.3 Current Traffic Volumes ( Refer to figure 2-1. It reflects both AM & PM peak hour traffic volumes.) 2.4 Existing Roadway Level of Service (LOS) Traffic analyses for all scenarios were performed in accordance with the methodology agreed upon with the Village's engineer; and using HCS 2000 software, which is based on the methodologies of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 2000 as explained in detail in Appendix B. Existing AM and PM peak hour operations have been evaluated for the study area intersections. The results of the analyses are summarized in Table 2-1. Existing intersection LOS calculations are based upon currently available peak hour turning movement counts. For the existing traffic conditions, the study area intersections, according to the analyses, are currently operating at LOS "D" or better during both peak hours with the exception of the intersection at Crandon Blvd and Galen-Mclntyre Dr, which operates at a LOS "F" in the AM and LOS "E" in the PM hours. Field observations actually showed a much better LOS for the intersection with Galen-Mclntyre. Furthermore according to field reviews, with the exception of construction related delays, Crandon Blvd is currently operating relatively well with no major vehicular delays during both the morning and afternoon typical commuting periods. Field observations made during the AM peak noted that northbound (NB) vehicles experienced more than one signal cycle delay at the intersection with Harbor Dr/Ocean Lane Dr.; however these delays were not continuous and occurred only sporadically between 8:00 and 8:30 am. Overall, both NB and SB vehicular traffic moved well during both the AM and PM peaks with speeds and delays typically reflective of LOS D. \.. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS- SONESTA KEY BISCAYNE RESORT THE CORRADINO GROUP 7 ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( \ ( ~- \, \ l l l \._ \ \ \._ \ Figure 2-1 Existing lnstersection Geometrics and Peak Hour Traffic f!. I" /8•18~. Harbor Dr j'r/, I L / ~:.:: 80140 +-__________ - I 40/79 74/17 1421118-__,,,---1 1-, ·-··;,;------ Ocean L 29124 -"41421118 t Pf t;:; --------- an 6011e2 -,. / I[!"' 1 ;:, ------ e Dr - .., Iii/ - ----. - I Pi i -------..::_,. lfli~! ~~~ ..,_ r,;: C j it I ~ "'1 t: I .,, •• :· 147/ 105 r·;--/--2!.!.~---- / J ; f- ta ·------- Key C , fl~ .,, il --------- .. Ofony 0 ~ C / /q ~ !! ---- ... _ r ;;;; I &f? -.:-;· ~,~/ /fJI ·:"'I 24112 ~-e- J t; ~-3/5 _ 717 <.- ~ iii t:::: .g t:::: I! () Sonesta Dr 48/ 59 / ", ,. , " 0/1-½ //I/,~ 5/11 : !!;i I Ojt, / ~ I iii ~t I t:::: qt.:: RJ 0 :J::j:,;, 20/9 'o j I I I r,--::,e, 23 t:::: '/-/;I ,.. I! i u ltt; I,.__ ..... I f!lj Il l! /it °' i'is le t:J /C K;~ ' t -1 "' / 119, ea w McIntyre S &.,_ / 1 1 +-3411 "' \; 25/ 16 ..=:_ ~ lr ........ 228/ 1i:1--'1; ~ j i: 16/19 ~ C: I a91s3 ; ft "~~ I I .., .,., 'i-,; E Heather Dr - Galen Dr Legend: (AM/PM) TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS- SONESTA KEY BISCAYNE RESORT T H E C O R R A D IN O GROUP 8 ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( \ ( l l l. \ l ( l \. \. Table 2-1 Intersection Analysis for Existing Current Conditions Traffic DELAY (SEC) LEVEL OF SERVICE Intersection Control AM/PM AM/PM C ra ndon Boulevard SIG H arbor D rive 51.1/41.0 D ID C ra ndon Boulevard SIG K ey C olony D rive 18.5 / 13.2 B / B C ra ndon Boulevard SIG Sonesta-E ast D rive 12.3 / 13.0 B/B C ra ndon Bo ulevard UNSIG H eather D rive WB 19.0 I 18.1 CIC C ra ndon Boulevard SIG M c Intyre-G alen D rive 105.8 / 57.3 F/E C oncurrency The Level-of-Service (LOS) standard adopted by the Village of Key Biscayne is LOS D for Crandon Blvd and all the intersections contained in this study. All the intersections are operating at LOS D or better, except the intersection of Crandon Blvd with McIntyre-Galen. However, the following observations and analyses are offered to demonstrate that operating conditions at this intersection are better than what is shown in the analyses and furthermore with signa timing modifications the LOS can be improved to meet the LOS D standard. Crandon Blvd / McIntyre-Galen Intersection. 1 - Field observations indicated that vehicular traffic moved at better LOS than reflected by the intersection capacity/level-of-service analysis. This could be attributed in part to the presence of an exclusive pedestrian signal phase which is not continuously used. The capacity/LOS analysis take into account the exclusive pedestrian phase on a theoretical continuous basis. Field observations confirmed that the exclusive pedestrian phase is only randomly activated by occasional pedestrian. This is evidenced by the fact that when the analyses were performed assuming no exclusive pedestrian phase, the resulting intersection LOS were C in the AM peak and LOS Din the PM peak hour. Obviously, this study would not recommend this pedestrian phase be eliminated. 2 - It should be noted that although the intersection is operating at LOS F in the AM and LOS E in the PM, all the approaches on Crandon Blvd operate at LOS D (according to LOS standards) except the southbound (SB) approach which operates at LOSE in the PM peak. With relatively minor changes to the traffic signal timing, the LOS for this SB approach improved to LOS D and the NB approach improved to LOS C. In fact, the whole intersection LOS improved to "D" for the PM period. Also modifications to the signal timing improved the intersection LOS to "E" foi the AM peak hour. Changing the signal cycle length along with timing changes will result in the intersection operating at LOS D during the AM period. This however, would require further detailed arterial studies to determine if overall arterial signal progression will not be adversely affected. 3 - A planning level arterial LOS analysis was performed on Crandon Blvd and the results indicated that the facility would operate at LOS D, thus conforming to Concurrency LOS standards. Please refer to appendix D for details. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS- SONESTA KEY BISCAYNE RESORT THE C O R R A D IN O GROUP 9 ( ( ( (' ( ( ( (' ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( (. (. l l \ \ \ \. \ l l ( l. 3.0 Proposed Project Traffic 3.1 Project Traffic 3. 1. 1 Trip Generation Trip generation rates were obtained from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook, 7th Edition. Based on these rates, AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes were calculated for both the existing Sonesta Beach Hotel and Tennis Club and the proposed Sonesta Key Biscayne Resort. The existing and proposed land uses are as follows: Existing Sonesta Beach Hotel and Tennis Club • Hotel units = 292 • Retail= 1,613 square feet (sf) • Restaurants= 5,730 sf • Bars/Lounges= 3,820 sf • Spa-Health-Fitness= 8,500 sf • Tennis Courts = 10 • Meeting Rooms = 16,280 sf Proposed Sonesta Key Biscayne Resort Hotel Units= 191 Residential Condos = 63 Retail = 4,715 sf Restaurants= 11,011 sf Bar/Lounges = 1,342 sf Spa-Health-Fitness= 15,406 sf Meeting Rooms= 16,927 sf Tennis Courts = 2 Table 3-1 on next page depicts the ITE's trip generation rates, the resulting generated trips (traffic volumes) for both the existing and proposed uses, as well as the net trip difference between the two. It should be noted that typical hotel accessory facilities such as meeting rooms, retail, restaurants, bars/lounges, spas and health fitness rooms as well as others are already accounted for in the trip generation rates for hotels. The Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, ?111 Edition, under Land Use Code# 310- Hotel on page 541, explains it the following way: "Hotels are places of lodging that provide sleeping accommodations and supporting facilities such as restaurants, cocktail lounges, meeting and banquet rooms or convention facilities, limited recreational facilities (pool, fitness room) and/or other retail and service shops." The trip generation rates for hotels already include these accessory facilities. However, Table 3-1 does reflect trip generation rates for these uses as separate uses for informational purposes and even if their individual trip generation were to be used (a very conservative approach) as also reflected by Table 3-1, it can be observed that the proposed project will not generate additional trips. In fact, even including these uses as separate generators results in an overall trip reduction for both the AM and PM peak hours. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS- SONESTA KEY BISCAYNE RESORT THE CORRADINO GROUP 10 \...-, l ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( Table 3-1 Project Trip Generation TRIP GENERATION RATES-Existing and Proposed Land Uses EXISTING Trip Generation ( vph) Trip Rates AM / PM AM Peak PM Peak ITE Land Use/ Units/ Code Total IN% OUT% Total IN OUT Total IN OUT Hotel / 292 Units / 310 .67 / .70 58/49 42/51 196 114 82 204 100 104 Retail/ 1.613K S.F. I 814-See Note 1 2.71 / 2.71 44/44 56/56 2 1 1 2 1 1 Restaurant/ 5.730K S.F. I 931-See Note 2 .81 / 7.49 67/67 33/33 2 1 1 22 15 7 Bar-Lounges/ 3.820K S.F. I 936 - See Note 3 0 / 11.34 0/66 0/34 0 0 0 22 15 7 Spa-Health-Fitness Club/ 8.5K S.F./ 492-See Note 4 1.21 / 4.05 42/51 58/49 5 2 3 17 9 8 Tennis Courts/ 10 courts/ 490- See Note 4 1.67 I 3.88 50/50 50/50 8 4 4 19 10 9 Meeting Rooms/ 16.28 K / 710-See Note 5 1.55 I 1.49 88/17 12/83 13 11 2 12 2 10 Total Trips 226 133 93 298 152 146 ( ( ( l ( l ( PROPOSED Trip Generation ( vph) Trip Rates AM / PM AM Peak PM Peak ITE Land Use/ Units/ Code Total IN% OUT% Total IN OUT Total IN OUT Hotel / 191 Units / 310 .67/.70 58/49 42/51 128 74 54 134 66 68 Condos/T. House/ 63 units/ 232 .34 I .36 19/62 81/38 21 4 17 23 14 9 Retail/ 4.715 K S.F. I 814-See Note 1 2.7112.71 44/44 56/56 4 2 2 4 2 2 Restaurant/ 11.011 K S.F. I 931-See Note 2 .81/7.49 67/67 33/33 4 3 1 41 27 14 Bar-Lounges/ 1.342 K S.F. I 936 - See Note 3 0 / 11.34 0/66 0/34 0 0 0 8 5 3 Spa-Health-FitnessClub/15.406KS.F./492-See Note 4 l.21/4.05 42/51 58/49 9 4 5 31 16 15 Tennis Courts/ 2 courts I 490 -See note 4 1.67 I 3.88 50/50 50/50 2 I I 4 2 2 Meeting Rooms/ 16.927 K / 710 -See Note 5 1.55 I I .49 88/17 12/83 13 11 2 13 2 11 Total Trips 181 99 82 258 134 124 Difference between Existing and Proposed Land Uses Trip Generation (vph) AM Peak PM Peak Total IN OUT Total IN OUT Existing 226 133 93 298 152 146 Proposed 181 99 82 258 134 124 Difference ~45 -34 - ll .~ 40 '-18 -22 l l \,__ l ( \. \. Notes I. l 2. 3. 4. 5. AM trip rates for peak hour of adjacent street were not available. Assume same rate as for PM (peak hour of adjacent street traffic). Trips reduced by 70 % to account for passer-by and the fact that hotel rates do account for ancillary uses such as restaurants, lounges, retails, meetinf rooms, pools, fitness rooms, etc. Therefore conservative approach. ITE 2" edition handbook, Table 5.21 average pass-by= 44%, with high = 62%. Used 50% trip reduction. Also see note# I above w/regards to fact that hotel rates include several ancillary uses. Therefore conservative approach. No trip data available for AM. Same trip reduction assumptions as in restaurant. See note# 2 above. No data available for pass-by trips. However, assumed 50% trip reduction to account for fact that hotel rates do account for ancillary uses such as restaurants, lounges, retails, meeting rooms, pools, fitness rooms, etc. Therefore conservative approach. !TE Trip Generation does not contain trip rates for meeting rooms. Therefore assumed trip rates from LUC 710, General Office facilities. Also used a 50 % trip reduction as in the other computations above. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS - SONESTA KEY BISCAYNE RESORT THE CORRADINO GROUP 11 ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( 4 .0 Fin d in g s an d R eco m m en d a tio n s ( 3.1.2 Net Project Traffic As reflected by Table 3-1 above, there is an overall trip reduction from the proposed project when compared with currently generated traffic volumes from the existing Sonesta Beach Hotel and Tennis Club. Technically, it will result in a negative trip distribution and assignm ent since there are no additional trips resulting from the proposed project. 3.2 Total Traffic Including Proposed Project. Even though there are no additional trips resulting from the proposed project, a conservative assu m ption was made to use currently available traffi c volumes as depicted by figure 2-1, even though there would be an actual overall trip reduction from the proposed project. ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l l l '--· l ( ( ( 4.1 Findings / Conclusion The results of this study demonstrate that the proposed project will not have an adverse impact on the affected roadway network. No additional trips would be generated. In fact, there will be an overall trip reduction for both the AM and PM peak hours. With regards to Concurrency, the site's generated traffi c will m eet the con currency requirem ents as recommended by this study, since there are no additional trips assigned to the roadway network. 4.2 R ecom m endation s / P roposed Im p rovem ents It is recommended that the Village of Key Biscayne pursue, in conjunction with Miami Dade County Public W orks Department, the potential traffi c signal modifications reflected by this report for the intersection of Crandon Blvd with Mclntyre-Galen, This modification consists of revising the traffic signal timings for both the AM and PM peak operations period, as well as increasing the signal cycle length for the AM peak. Please refer to appendix C for details. \. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS- SONESTA KEY BISCAYNE RESORT THE C O R R A D IN O GROUP 12 l ~ ( ( ( (" ( (' ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( Appendix A Existing Traffic Count Data Sheets / Traffic Signal Data ( \ ( ( l ( z l l C l C l \. ( ( C; C l,__ l.. THE CORRADINO GROUP r - r r r r r r r r r r -r ------------~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - APPENDl.Xill ·- CIVIL WORKS, INC. SUMMARY OF INTERSECTION VEIDCLE MOVE:MENTS LOCATION: Crandon Blvd. & Harbor Drive COMMENT: None COUNIT : Miami-Dade CITY: Village of Key Biscayne OBSERVER: Traffic Counts Plus DATE: May 28, 2003 PROJECT: Crandon Blvd. Streetscape Master Plan FILE: TMCOUNT8.WK4 PROJ. No.: 23132.00 AADT TIME NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND GRAND BEGIN END L T R PEDS Total L T R PEDS Total L T R PEDS Total L T R PEDS Total TOTAL 07:00AM 07:15AM 7 124 0 0 131 3 156 11 0 . 170 23 l 5 0 29 2 2 4 0 8 338 07:15AM 07:30AM 12 171 1 0 184 3 173 19 0 195 31 2 8 0 41 1 3 4 0 8 428 07:30 AM 07:45 AM 19 175 1 0 195 5 211 23 0 239 40 1 12 0 53 3 5 7 0 15 502 07:45 AM 08:00 AM 24 217 2 0 243 7 195 39 0 241 27 4 15 0 46 5 9 16 0 30 560 08:00 AM 08: 15 AM 29 221 1 0 251 10 229 52 0 291 64 2 17 0 83 3 12 20 0 35 660 08:15AM 08:30AM 26 299 2 0 327 9 283 28 0 320 91 9 20 0 120 7 18 17 0 42 809 08:30 AM 08:45 AM 33 332 7 0 372 11 245 45 0 301 69 7 12 1 89 15 16 20 0 51 813 08:45 AM 09:00 AM 27 208 1 0 236 14 258 50 0 322 59 11 11 0 81 15 28 23 0 66 705 11:00AM 11:15 AM 33 201 3 0 237 9 165 21 0 195 42 3 34 0 79 13 7 8 0 28 539 11:15AM 11:30AM 38 155 5 0 198 6 169 19 0 194 38 2 39 0 79 11 3 7 0 21 492 11:30AM 11:45AM 35 177 4 0 216 13 220 30 0 263 51 6 44 0 101 14 5 5 0 24 604 11 :45 AM 12:00 PM 47 183 6 0 236 7 193 24 0 224 57 5 51 0 113 19 4 10 0 33 606 12:00PM 12:15PM 52 207 3 0 262 17 182 29 0 228 54 7 56 0 117 23 5 13 0 41 648 12:15 PM 12:30 PM 48 199 4 0 251 6 186 32 3 227 44 6 53 0 103 14 3 6 0 23 604 12:30 PM 12:45 PM 32 155 6 0 193 8 239 27 0 274 59 5 36 0 100 16 8 6 0 30 597 12:45 PM 01:00 PM 52 203 5 0 260 13 197 30 0 240 54 2 43 1 100 16 6 6 0 28 628 04:00 PM 04:15 PM 47 227 13 0 287 15 224 38 0 277 72 7 50 0 129 24 2 13 0 39 732 04:15 PM 04:30 PM 40 205 7 0 252 24 246 51 3 324 51 3 42 0 96 17 2 9 0 28 700 04:30 PM 04:45 PM 45 219 11 0 275 28 252 53 0 333 59 5 49 0 113 20 3 11 0 34 755 04:45 PM 05:00 PM 43 208 6 0 257 17 217 44 0 278 53 9 41 0 103 18 4 7 0 29 667 05:00PM 05:15PM 40 185 3 0 228 19 208 47 l 275 57 7 53 0 117 23 5 8 0 36 656 05:15 PM 05:30 PM 42 189 11 0 242 25 174 40 4 243 57 10 43 0 110 13 4 18 0 35 630 05:30 PM 05:45 PM 35 158 9 0 202 26 241 59 0 326 38 4 37 1 80 17 4 11 0 32 640 05:45 PM 06:00 PM 23 142 12 0 177 29 244 44 0 317 43 10 25 3 81 19 3 10 0 32 607 SUMMARY OF PEAK HOUR VEIDCLE MOVEMENTS PEAKHOUR NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND GRAND FROM TO L T R PEDS Total L T R PEDS Total L T R PEDS Total L T R PEDS Total TOTAL AMPeak 08:00 AM 09:00 AM 115 1060 11 0 1186 44 1015 175 0 1234 283 29 60 1 373 40 74 80 0 194 2987 Peak Hour Factor 0.87 0.80 0.39 0.80 0.79 0.90 0.84 - 0.96 0.78 0.66 0.75 0.78 0.67 0.66 0.87 0.73 0.92 Midday Peak 12:00 PM, 01:00 PM 184 764 18 0 966 44 804 118 3 969 211 20 188 1 420 69 22 31 0 122 2477 Peak Hour Factor 0.88 0.92 0.75 0.92 0.65 0.84 0.92 0.88 0.89 0.71 0.84 0.90 0.75 0.69 0.60 0.74 0.96 PM Peak 04:00 PM 05:00 PM 175 859 37 0 1071 84 939 186 3 1212 235 24 182 0 441 79 11 40 0 130 2854 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.95 0.71 0.93 0.75 0.93 0.88 0.91 0.82 0.67 0.91 0.85 0.82 0.69 0.77 0.83 0.95 r- ,,,..... .,,-. - r ,--. - --------- --------~~-~~~~,~~~~ - - APPENL....,, III CNJL WORKS, INC. SUMMARY OF INTERSECTION VEHICLE MOVEMENTS LOCATION: Crandon Blvd. & Key Colony COMMENT: None COUNTY: Miami-Dade CITY: Village of Key Biscayne OBSERVER: Traffic Counts Plus DATE: May 29, 2003 PROJECT: Crandon Blvd. Streetscape Master Plan FILE: TMCOUNT7.WK4 PROJ. No.: 23132.00 AADT TIME NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND GRAND BEGIN END L T R PEDS Total L T R PEDS Total L T R PEDS Total L T R PEDS Total TOTAL 07:00AM 07:15AM 0 91 1 0 92 11 150 0 0 . 161 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 23 0 27 280 07:15AM 07:30AM 2 146 5 0 153 16 154 0 0 170 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 37 2 43 366 07:30 AM 07:45 AM 5 165 3 0 173 24 201 0 0 225 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 44 0 51 449 07:45 AM 08:00 AM 7 208 9 0 224 18 191 0 0 209 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 27 0 45 478 08:00 AM 08:15 AM 4 204 15 0 223 17 198 0 0 215 0 0 0 0 0 42 0 40 0 82 520 08:15AM 08:30AM 5 294 18 0 317 23 273 0 0 296 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 30 0 43 656 08:30 AM 08:45 AM 12 318 6 0 336 34 231 0 0 265 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 52 0 70 671 08:45 AM 09:00 AM 14 198 14 0 226 33 238 0 0 271 0 0 0 0 0 19 0 25 0 44 541 11:00 AM 11:15 AM 22 159 11 0 192 27 206 0 0 233 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 21 0 38 463 11:15 AM 11:30AM 19 163 13 0 195 25 186 0 0 211 0 0 0 0 0 16 0 22 0 38 444 11:30 AM 11:45 AM 17 163 16 0 196 21 230 0 0 251 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 15 0 30 477 11:45 AM 12:00 PM 29 207 18 0 254 35 225 0 0 260 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 25 0 45 559 12:00 PM 12:15 PM 15 194 17 0 226 35 244 0 0 279 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 23 0 36 541 12:15 PM 12:30 PM 25 133 12 0 170 43 250 0 0 293 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 19 0 27 490 12:30 PM 12:45 PM 16 164 5 0 185 35 217 0 0 252 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 20 0 33 470 12:45PM 01:00PM 20 171 7 0 198 31 179 0 0 210 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 17 0 28 436 04:00 PM 04:15 PM 8 225 10 0 243 46 270 0 0 316 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 24 0 37 596 04:15PM 04:30PM 9 171 15 0 195 39 235 0 0 274 0 0 0 0 0 13 0 21 0 34 503 04:30 PM 04:45 PM 20 208 9 0 237 38 237 0 0 275 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 21 0 35 547 04:45 PM 05:00 PM 17 155 16 0 188 25 241 0 0 266 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 25 0 37 491 05:00 PM 05:15 PM 20 156 21 0 197 39 281 0 0 320 0 0 0 0 0 19 1 25 0 45 562 05:15 PM 05:30 PM 14 143 23 0 180 49 249 0 0 298 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 32 0 43 521 05:30 PM 05:45 PM 13 180 21 0 214 49 278 0 0 327 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 23 0 43 584 05:45 PM 06:00 PM 12 131 23 0 166 41 294 0 0 335 0 0 0 0 0 15 0 25 0 40 541 SUMMARY OF PEAK HOUR VEHICLE MOVEMENTS PEAKHOUR NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND GRAND FROM TO L T R PEDS Total L T R PEDS Total L T R PEDS Total L T R PEDS Total TOTAL AM Peak 08:00 AM 09:00 AM 35 1014 53 0 1102 107 940 0 0 1047 0 0 0 0 0 92 0 147 0 239 2388 Peak Hour Factor 0.63 0.80. 0-.74 0.82 0.79 0.86 NA 0.88 NA NA NA NA 0.55 NA 0.71 0.73 0.89 Midday Peak 11 :30 AM, 12:30 PM 86 697 63 0 846 134 949 0 0 1083 0 0 0 0 0 56 0 82 0 138 2067 Peak Hour Factor 0.74 0.84 0.88 0.83 0.78 0.95 NA 0.92 NA NA NA NA 0.70 NA 0.82 0.77 0.92 ~ PM Peak i' .05:00 PM .06:00 PM , 59 610 88 0 757 178 1102 0 0 1280 0 0 0 0 0 65 1 105 0 171 2208 ,_ I,, . 0~74---- 0.85 0.26 0.88 0.91 0.94 NA 0.96 NA NA NA NA 0.81 0.25 0.82 0.95 0.95 Peak Hour Factor- · . r r r---rr-----------------~~-~~~~,~~~~~ APPENDJ.X III - CIVIL WORKS, INC. SUMMARY OF INTERSECTION VEHICLE MOVEMENTS LOCATION: Crandon Blvd. & East Sonesta Drive COMMENT: None COUNfY : Miami-Dade CITY: Village of Key Biscayne OBSERVER: Traffic Counts Plus DATE: May 28, 2003 PROJECT: Crandon Blvd. Streetscape Master Plan FILE: TMCOUNT6.WK4 PROJ. No.: 23132.00 MDT TIME NORTIIBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND GRAND BEGIN END L T R PEDS Total L T R PEDS Total L T R PEDS Total L T R PEDS Total TOTAL 07:00AM 07:15AM 8 119 3 1 131 1 115 2 0 . I 18 2 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 0 1 253 07:15AM 07:30AM 13 121 3 0 137 0 163 3 0 166 5 0 1 0 6 0 1 3 1 5 314 07:30 AM 07:45 AM 17 156 6 0 179 0 169 3 0 172 4 0 1 0 5 0 0 3 0 3 359 07:45 AM 08:00 AM 21 199 11 1 232 3 206 7 0 216 7 0 3 0 10 1 0 5 0 6 464 08:00AM 08:15AM 28 187 10 1 226 0 204 9 0 213 10 0 2 0 12 2 2 7 2 13 464 08:15 AM 08:30 AM 28 216 12 1 257 2 233 12 0 247 11 0 1 0 12 1 1 4 1 7 523 08:30 AM 08:45 AM 23 123 7 2 155 1 207 7 0 215 15 0 0 0 15 1 0 5 0 6 391 08:45 AM 09:00 AM 19 244 9 0 272 1 228 15 0 244 12 0 2 0 14 3 0 8 0 11 541 11:00AM 11:15AM 8 168 2 1 179 13 162 17 0 192 11 1 1 0 13 3 3 7 9 22 406 11:15AM 11:30AM 12 150 4 3 169 4 164 15 0 183 10 0 1 0 11 0 1 12 2 15 378 11:30AM 11:45AM 11 173 3 0 187 8 164 29 0 201 10 0 4 0 14 1 2 7 5 15 417 11 :45 AM 12:00 PM 15 166 2 1 184 6 197 14 0 217 8 1 1 0 10 3 2 20 4 29 440 12:00 PM 12:15 PM 17 169 4 1 191 6 170 16 0 192 15 0 3 0 18 4 2 17 3 26 427 12:15 PM 12:30 PM 12 173 3 3 191 7 173 19 0 199 12 1 1 0 14 2 1 11 2 16 420 12:30 PM 12:45 PM 9 177 2 2 190 9 181 23 0 213 II 1 1 0 13 3 1 9 4 17 433 12:45PM 01:00PM 11 174 3 2 190 11 192 29 0 232 13 0 2 0 15 1 3 15 2 21 458 04:00 PM 04:15 PM 7 214 1 0 222 14 262 12 0 288 12 0 2 0 14 0 2 20 4 26 550 04:15 PM 04:30 PM 7 175 0 1 183 20 245 21 0 286 10 0 3 0 13 3 2 12 3 20 502 04:30 PM 04:45 PM 31 178 4 3 216 15 272 30 0 317 16 1 5 0 22 2 1 23 0 26 581 04:45 PM 05:00 PM 10 161 2 5 178 20 241 22 0 283 21 0 1 0 22 2 0 17 5 24 507 05:00 PM 05:15 PM 13 189 5 0 207 18 237 23 0 278 18 0 4 0 22 3 2 19 3 27 534 05:15 PM 05:30 PM 5 145 1 2 153 15 197 18 0 230 II 1 2 0 14 2 0 10 2 14 411 05:30 PM 05:45 PM 7 147 2 2 158 22 252 32 0 306 15 0 3 0 18 2 2 13 1 18 500 05:45 PM 06:00 PM 8 151 2 1 162 27 304 35 0 366 12 0 3 0 15 1 1 9 3 14 557 SUMMARY OF PEAK HOUR VEHICLE MOVEMENTS PEAKHOUR NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND EASTBOUND WESTBOUND GRAND FROM TO L T R PEDS Total L T R PEDS Total L T R PEDS Total L T R PEDS Total TOTAL AM Peak 08:00 AM 09:00 AM 98 770 38 4 910 4 872 43 0 919 48 0 5 0 53 7 3 24 3 34 1919 Peak Hour Factor 0.88 0.79 0.79 0.84 0.50 0.94 0.72 0.93 0.80 NA 0.63 0.88 0.58 0.38 0.75 0.71 0.89 Midday Peak 12:00 PM 01:00 PM 49 693 12 8 762 33 716 87 0 836 51 2 7 0 60 10 7 52 11 69 1738 Peak Hour Factor 0.72 0.98 0.75 1.00 0.75 0.93 0.75 0.90 0.85 0.50 0.58 0.83 0.63 0.58 0.76 0.77 0.95 PMPeak 04:00 PM 05:00 PM 55 728 7 9 799 69 1020 85 0 1174 59 1 11 0 71 7 5 72 12 84 2140 Peak Hour Factor 0.44 0.85 0.44 0.90 0.86 0.94 0.71 0.93 0.70 0.25 0.55 0.81 0.58 0.63 0.78 0.92 0.92 ( ( ( r- ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l ( \ l l. (~ l l l l (. I ., Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 13117 NW 107 Ave, Suite4 Hialeah Gardens, FL 33018 File Name : am PH: 305.595.7505 FAX: 305.675.6474 Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 12/7/2005 Page No : 1 Grau s Printed- Unshifted CRANDON BLVD HEATHER DR EAST CRANDON BLVD HEATHER DR EAST From North From East From South From West Start Time Rig Thr Left Ped App. Rig Thr L ft Ped App. Rig Thr Left Ped App. Rig Thr Left Ped App. Int. ht u s Total ht u e s Total ht u s Total ht u s Total Total Factor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 07:00AM 0 84 2 0 86 3 0 1 4 8 2 170 0 6 178 0 0 0 3 3 275 07:15 AM 0 96 1 0 97 3 0 0 0 3 2 167 0 3 172 0 0 0 0 0 272 07:30AM 0 161 4 0 165 0 0 1 0 1 3 214 0 1 218 0 0 0 0 0 384 07:45AM 0 136 2 0 138 1 0 1 0 2 6 161 0 1 168 0 0 0 0 0 308 Total 0 477 9 0 486 7 0 3 4 14 13 712 0 11 736 0 0 0 3 3 1239 08:00AM 0 244 3 1 248 1 0 0 0 1 3 222 0 7 232 0 0 0 8 8 489 08:15AM 0 271 3 0 274 1 0 6 2 9 8 266 0 1 275 0 0 0 1 1 559 08:30AM 0 205 2 0 207 7 0 5 0 12 4 334 0 2 340 0 0 0 0 0 559 08:45AM 0 175 0 0 175 11 0 7 0 18 4 286 0 0 290 0 0 0 0 0 483 Total 0 895 8 1 904 20 0 18 2 40 19 110 0 10 1137 0 0 0 9 9 2090 8 Grand 0 137 17 1 1390 27 0 21 6 54 32 182 0 21 1873 0 0 0 12 121 3329 Total 2 0 Apprch % 0.0 98. 1.2 0.1 50. 0.0 38. 11. 1.7 97. 0.0 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 7 0 9 1 2 .0 Total% 0.0 41. 0.5 0.0 41.8 0.8 0.0 0.6 0.2 1.6 1.0 54. 0.0 0.6 56.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.4 2 7 cRANbbNSM OJt 0MB 1 Peds u~ ~~ ::,-N _..., T Oi'fil_j' North .J ,- 012 12/7/2005 7:00:00 ~ I ·;c(J .s::---. ~~ I- 112/7/2005 8:45:00 !!!. Unshlfted Ill (J) ~I~ ., 0.. \. \_ +i Peda ~ ,: ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l ( ( - ( l <~ ( ( \ ( l.. \. Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 13117 NW 107 Ave, Suite 4 Hialeah Gardens, FL 33018 PH: 305.595.7505 FAX: 305.675.6474 File Name Site Code Start Date Page No :am : 00000000 : 12/7/2005 :2 CRANDON BLVD HEATHER DR EAST From North I From East CRANDON BLVD HEATHER DR EAST From South I From West Start Time I Rig I Thr I Left I Ped I App. I Rig I Thr I Left I Ped I App. ht u s Total ht u s Total Rig I Thr I Left I Ped I App. I Rig I Thr I Left I Ped I App. I Int. ht u s Total ht u s Total Total Peak Hour From 07:00 AM to 08:45 AM - Peak 1 of 1 lntersectio OB:OO AM n Volume 0 895 8 1 904 20 0 18 2 40 19 110 0 10 1137 0 0 0 9 9 I 2090 8 Percent 0.0 99. 0.9 0.1 50. 0.0 45. 5.0 1.7 97. 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 100 0 0 0 4 .0 08:30 0 205 2 0 207 7 0 5 0 12 4 334 0 2 340 0 0 0 0 01 559 Volume Peak 0.935 Factor High Int. 08:15 AM 08:45AM 08:30AM 08:00AM Volume 0 271 3 0 274 11 0 7 0 18 4 334 0 2 340 0 0 0 8 8 Peak 0.825 0.556 0.836 0.281 Factor Bl 1 Left Ped s 4 i! '°~_1 T u~~ ;r~ ~~ 02 North i=--; 'f217!2005-8:00:00 AM 112/7/2005 8:45:00 AM I ,- ~ 8LJ lH~ .-iL(J Unshifted t, ~i 0. ~ Left Thru Rlaht Ped s 01 11081 191 10 G ~·l ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( <. ( ( l ( ( \ ( ( l ( \ \ \ Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 13117 NW 107 Ave, Suite4 Hialeah Gardens, FL 33018 PH: 305.595.7505 FAX: 305.675.6474 File Name Site Code Start Date Page No :pm : 00000000 : 12/7/2005 : 1 CRANDON BLVD HEATHER DR EAST CRANDON BLVD HEATHER DR EAST From North From East From South From West Start Time Rig Thr Left Pe~ App. Rig Thr Left Pe~ App, Rig Thr Left Ped App. Rig Thr Left Pe~ App. Int. ht u Total ht u Total ht u s Total ht u Total Total Factor 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1,0 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 04:00 PM 0 228 3 0 231 1 0 6 2 9 3 238 0 10 251 0 0 0 0 0 491 04:15 PM 0 191 3 0 194 3 0 4 5 12 4 248 0 15 267 0 0 0 0 0 473 04:30 PM 0 208 3 0 211 4 0 1 4 9 6 194 0 10 210 0 0 0 0 0 430 04:45 PM 0 237 8 0 245 3 0 9 9 21 6 220 0 1 227 0 0 0 0 0 493 Total 0 864 17 0 881 11 0 20 20 51 19 900 0 36 955 0 0 0 0 0 1887 G 05:00 PM 0 228 14 0 242 3 0 2 15 20 8 222 0 24 254 0 0 0 0 0 516 05:15 PM 0 229 5 0 234 1 0 7 9 17 6 174 0 9 189 0 0 0 0 0 440 05:30 PM 0 263 2 0 265 2 0 5 4 11 6 177 0 5 188 0 0 0 0 0 464 05:45 PM 0 164 12 0 176 4 0 5 5 14 6 70 0 3 79 0 0 0 0 0 269 Total 0 884 33 0 917 10 0 19 33 62 26 643 0 41 710 0 0 0 0 0 1689 Grand 0 174 50 0 1798 21 0 39 53 113 45 154 0 77 16651 0 0 0 0 al 3576 Total 8 3 Apprch % 0.0 97. 2.8 0.0 18. 0.0 34. 46, 2.7 92. 0,0 4.6 I o.o 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 6 5 9 7 Total% 0.0 48. 1.4 0,0 50.3 0.6 0.0 1.1 1.5 3.2 1.3 43. 0.0 2.2 46.6 I 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9 1 UL,h no o1".1J T .rFJ I ~s _, North 12/7/2005 4:00:00 PM ,- 112/7/2005 5:45:00 PM I ..r~~lO -i Unshifted -o Q ~ E. u, ~- Olw w w al C. l l ~ Left Peels o T7 l.. d ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( \ l. \ (_ l. ( ( ( ( Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 13117 NW 107 Ave, Suite 4 Hialeah Gardens, FL 33018 PH: 305.595.7505 FAX: 305.675.6474 File Name Site Code Start Date Page No :pm : 00000000 : 12/7/2005 :2 CRANDON BLVD HEATHER DR EAST CRANDON BLVD HEATHER DR EAST From North From East From South From West Start Time Rig Thr Left Ped App. Rig Thr Left Ped App. Rig Thr Left Pe~ App. Rig Thr Left Ped App. I Int. ht u s Total ht u s Total ht u Total ht u s Total Total Peak Hour From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM - Peak 1 of 1 lntersectio 04:45 PM n Volume 0 957 29 0 986 9 0 23 37 69 26 793 0 39 8581 0 0 0 0 o I 1913 Percent 0.0 97. 2.9 0.0 13. 0.0 33. 53. 3.0 92. 0.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1 0 3 6 4 05:00 0 228 14 0 242 3 0 2 15 20 8 222 0 24 254 0 0 0 0 01 516 Volume Peak 0.927 Factor High Int. 05:30 PM 04:45 PM 05:00 PM 3:45:00 PM Volume 0 263 2 0 265 3 0 9 9 21 8 222 0 24 254 Peak 0.930 0.821 0.844 Factor Out Total C@] ~ I I 01 es11 29! ol :r iru LC Peds 01"" _j­ ~ Oien "C ., 0.. u~Qo T ::tc.o ~s. ._;1 n North 2~ 12/7/2005 4:45:00 PM r .. ~ 12/7/2005 5:30:00 PM :w ~i Unshlfted [<,.) ,.._ C/) .... ~ T r Left Thru Righi Peda I Oj :;:i 26 1 39 ! I I ~ 858 I 18381 Out In Total ( G v l .. :,. ·~ . ··-.c,. ~ - _-.,.--- ·!"''7 ( ( ( > ( . ( C ( <1 ( I ( (I ( I <' <' <' ( I ( , I l (' I ( J J ( ( l ( l ( \ \ ",~!1111!11 ..... :. x;; .. au .. al$LAZ&S4M¥lQJtWWW .. Ki¥,4llil&W,U!LWWW ... ·, . .:-- . ,. . - . . . ' . . ~- • ~ . ~ 't:S 0 0 ~ Cl) u. W. Mclntyire St. f W. Enid Dr. \ (_ (_ \ \ "0 > iii C .... 0 = ,:, oi C :! C1C1 1G iO.... .. j ! U Grand Bay Dr. - ,.,._""" --- 7 l ~~ ""o t: .., 111 0 ... L 119168 ~34n ,2s116 1tr omen 1;~ .... ~ Galen Dr. L so14s ~27/8 _ ,2119 ,m ,JI t - -- ·- - · 814--+ 7 r Sunrise Dr. 43/35, . ........ 0 t!"'£::t ao !e .­ COl"I.- .o co E. Enid Dr. · .. ~ t,, ' l' t; l 1-; ;f r_ R A D IN O Key Biscayne Civic Center Traffi c Study .Future (2002) Peak Hour Traffic With Project Figure 12 ( ~FPIC S:/6/VAl- /).40 .-i ( ~ TIMING intersection Timing Plans for 3545 CRANDON,HARBOR & OCEAN ~wd,{C. ( w ~f , r{,;df/.1" 1>c),J'I _ NSG G Y R(§l Y R~ @ G Y R NSL Y ( PN SC EY MC OFF 1 8 0 37 1 4 1 15 4 1 7 5 1 4 1 6 3 r 2 8 0 43 1 4 1 15 4 1 7 4 1 4 1 6 3 r , l ~ ~--¾¾---- i : i -H~---1 f ~ ~ l---{--+- ~ ~ r 5 16 49 1 4 1 1s 4-1---rl()"r-··4-i_-"75-j 6 7 0 27 1 4 115 4 1 7 5 1 4 1 6 3 ( 23 6 0 21 1 4 1 7 4 1 7 20 1 4 1 5 3 24 7 0 21 1 4 1 7 4 1 7 20 1 4 1 5 3 ( Af>/\ ffi .. 1 i ming Pl an scihedul e: ( SUN PN MON PN TUE PN WED PN THU PN FRI PN N-S N-S N-S N-S N-S SAT PN MON PN TUE PN WED PN THU PN FRI PN 0 1 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 1 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 ( 100 23 600 1 315 24 600 1 600 1 600 1 100 23 600 1 315 24 600 1 600 1 600 1 700 1 700 3 345 23 700 3 700 3 700 3 700 1 700 3 345 23 700 3 700 3 700 3 ( 900 2 1000 1 600 1 1000 11000 11000 1 900 2 1000 1 600 1 1000 1 1000 11000 1 L200 1 1100 2 700 3 1100 2 1100 2 1100 2 2200 11100 2 700 3 1100 2 1100 2 1100 2 ( \ 1300 11000 1 1300 1 1300 11300 1 1300 11000 1 1300 1 1300 1 1300 1 . 1500 4 1100 2 1500 4 1500 4 1500 4 1500 4 1100 2 1500 4 1500 4 1500 4 ( 1900 2 1300 1 1900 2 1900 2 1900 2 1900 2 1300 1 1900 2 1900 2 1900 2 (. 2000 6 1500 4 2000 6 2000 6 2000 6 2000 6 1500 4 2000 6 2000 6 2000 6 1900 2 1900 2 2000 6 2000 6 ® ( ( ( ( lrP • 7" (.,lfAUYV"" ~ ~ j V-., 1j HAUN- d L ~1 ir Ir" C r1<.nJ A') --:i -f" &Iv~ ( ; (o 'Ii 17 15 3 --- ---- 'f lj ~ - -- --, - I I I ---- I --~~---------- .. I I z./; 3/ l l .r: cl ye.I-£:; ) DO sec: l-!ftlj~ ( v 2 l l "J --~-··· .. --·... - --- ( ~ l -------1- .. --~ t'f =~I ,,. __ ,,. ,_ .Y .,.,....--~~--~•1-•~.--,..,,..,••••--~1-,-~.n~l./ _,_...,__. .f- . . ..... , I I I -·--- . ----·--.,--- . ---~----------,_ _lf~+1 - \ l.-t.j tU :.. /00 (e(:; \ Page 1 (' ,1· uVA,l2 t'.-- ti -l w f,_I l.t- liLv! ~.Y-- SJ,{ WI,) 1. ur'li ' ,;,l•·'f ·· I w fl,ll pf(rJ~ ( - { ' _/. uJ TIMING (~ntersection Timing Plan fdr 4578 ~NOON@ KEY COLONY ( . Nsw@ y R<9 F G y R NSL y PN SC EV MC OFF ~- 77 33 20 4 2 7 7 1 4 1 8 3 81 38 20 4 2 7 7 1 4 1 8 3 . 8q 43_ 20 __ _4 -2 7 7 l 4 ... L ... 8 _.1_ AM _ 8 43 20 4 2 7 7 1 4 1 8 3 P/l!j 96 44 20 4 2 7 14 1 4 110 3 4·=,___ __ 0 8 20 4 2 7 7 1 4 1· 8 3 0 12 20 4 2 7 18 1 4 1 5 3 0 12 20 4 2 7 18 1 4 1 5 3 t'i ( ( 1 2 ( -{----- -·--- (~5 6 ( 23 24 7 ·6 7 iming Plan schedule: ( SUN PN MON PN TUE PN WED PN THU PN N-S N-S N-S N-S N-S FRI PN SAT PN MON PN TUE PN WED PN THU PN FRI PN 0 1 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 1 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 < 100 23 600 1 315 24 600 1 600 1 600 1 100 23 600 1 315 24 600 1 600 1 600 1 700 1 700 3 345 23 700 3 700 3 700 3 700 1 700 3 345 23 700 3 700 3 700 3 900 2 1000 1 600 11000 1 1000 1 1000 1 900 2 1000 1 600 1 1000 1 1000 11000 1 )200 11100 2 700 3 1100 2 1100 2 1100 2 2200 1 1100 2 700 3 1100 2 1100 2 1100 2 ( 1300 1 1000 1 1300 1 1300 1 1300 1 1300 1 1000 1 1300 1 1300 1 1300 1 1500 4 1100 2 1500 4 1500 4 1500 4 1500 4 1100 2 1500 4 1500 4 1500 4 1900 2 1300 1 1900 2 1900 2 1900 2 1900 2 1300 1 1900 2 1900 2 1900 2 2000 6 1500 4 2000 6 2000 6 2000 6 2000 6 1500 4 2000 6 2000 6 2000 6 1900 2 1900 2 2000 6 2000 6 i~ . ( ( ( \ ( ( ( l ( Ip ~ 1 (M,/M ~ k~}! ~~=== ____ ....,.,t#-• w f .. _.,, __ l. ( -~-+-+_ ( __1.J _ \ J -~L .... =. J f,~) 3,' t-- llct r Colrfr-/ I •~«_..,._,. . .,~.---·· .,,......----~ ® cycc-£ ...,. too s~c l l \ .--- ( G ') ( 'fl (o,? /~ l f ?, 'f y t.. I (_ (L. - I G I 7 ( - ® \. l._ \ CL( e,ll :: to {) k e- Page 1 (' ,i LV ~-- r-1 ' .{;. (Jl,il.,V\ ( , (' ,wBi o:1 I' \ . I ,- (} 1 TIMING Intersection Timing Plans for 6316 Cf{ANDON B & SONESTA DR (( ~ NSG G Y R t(WW'F G Y R NSL Y PN SC EY MC OFF C:J ( 1 44 5 2 1 4 1 7 10 1 4 1 6 3 2 38 55 1 4 1 7 12 1 4 1 6 3 ~_ J_, . -· _ _ · t.l.. -~.t ·. l .t-·1. -L · ~. '"'}----4- .1· --~ J .. ~~Eti. r i 7 ~~ ~~ i 1 i ~ fl i 1 i' f T .. ----- ( 23 ~ 83 22 1 4 1 7 15 1 4 1 5 3 24 7 0 22 1 4 1 7 15 1 4 1 5 3 ,,) ( iming Plan schedule: N-S N-S N-S N-S N-S SUN PN MON PN TUE PN WED PN THU PN FRI PN SAT PN MON PN TUE PN WED PN THU PN FRI PN 0 1 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 1 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 100 23 600 1 315 24 600 1 600 1 600 1 100 23 600 1 315 24 600 1 600 1 600 1 700 1 700 3 345 23 700 3 700 3 700 3 700 1 700 3 345 23 700 3 700 3 700 3 300 2 1000 1 600 1 1000 1 1000 1 1000 1 900 2 1000 1 600 1 1000 1 1000 11000 1 L200 1 1100 2 700 3 1100 2 1100 2 1100 2 2200 1 1100 2 700 3 1100 2 1100 2 1100 2 1300 1 1000 1 1300 11300 1 1300 1 1300 11000 1 1300 1 1300 1 1300 1 1500 4 1100 2 1500 4 1500 4 1500 4 1500 4 1100 2 1500 4 1500 4 1500 4 1900 2 1300 1 1900 2 1900 2 1900 2 1900 2 1300 1 1900 2 1900 2 1900 2 2000 6 1500 4 2000 6 2000 6 2000 6 2000 6 1500 4 2000 6 2000 6 2000 6 1900 2 1900 2 2000 6 2000 6 ~f ( ( ( ( ( ( ( .I <P 4 1 C(ltn~ I I _µ·i•-""J ~:r~ ca.n5-M 3cj If- .• 'L. .fot-X'~TT! ~ 1--­ ~ i~- ~~~f ~! 3 -v- ( ~ - I \ ( ' --~ --r I ® 0-ycte. =-- ioo .r~c... \ I I \ ~ __ ,---i-- \ y C ~----~~1- \. l ~ 3 -- tp(' ................ __ ___.. tf __ ..,..~, / lb ·--·-yo¼---• -- / C l \ \ \ <8) ft.:le ,;: /pt) fee.. Page 1 ( ~ t,JA LIL- pJftt.Y'\Me- .4 L,IL. ~: . . . ~~rf~~ct'-J f"'-\1~';,,.,,ww:~fl.JJ"'"~ Dou•f"' rrrter-sect i on T1m1ng lans for 3834 CRAND ,GALEN & MCINTI 6,(tf,J ( f-N,1 (:,.fr~~ _ wf!'f NSG G Y R W /p W Y RfWGJ Y R (PN SC EY MC OFF \.:., '::::::J '(J 1 18 40 23 1 4 2 8 23 7 4 1 12 4 1 ( 2 8 36 28 1 4 2 8 23 7 4 1 12 4 1 /1,l-'1 ( 3 .,8 42_ _ _13 J 4 2 a 23 2 · 4 J 12 _ _4 __ _1__ __ m _ ____._ .a_ __ .5..6__33 1 4 2 .. JL .. 2.3._L ... _L_L.l2 -4_l._ __ ....1.l1 ( 5 59 38 1 4 2 8 23 12 4 1 12 4 1 6 7 0 47 1 4 2 8 23 7 4 1 12 4 1 ( 23 6 0 31 1 4 2 8 23 7 4 1 7 4 1 24 7 0 31 1 4 2 8 23 7 4 1 7 4 1 ( ( iming Plan schedule: N-S N-S N-S N-S N-S ( SUN PN MON PN TUE PN WED PN THU PN FRI PN SAT PN MON PN TUE PN WED PN THU PN FRI PN ( 0 1 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 1 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 0 23 ( 100 23 600 1 315 24 600 1 600 1 600 1 100 23 600 1 315 24 600 1 600 1 600 1 700 1 700 3 345 23 700 3 700 3 700 3 700 1 700 3 345 23 700 3 700 3 700 3 ( 100 2 1000 l 600 1 1000 1 1000 1 1000 1 900 2 1000 1 600 1 1000 11000 1 1000 1 ,200 1 1100 2 700 3 1100 2 1100 2 1100 2 2200 1 1100 2 700 3 1100 2 1100 2 1100 2 ( 1300 11000 11300 1 1300 1 1300 1 1300 1 1000 11300 11300 1 1300 1 1500 4 1100 2 1500 4 1500 4 1500 4 1500 4 1100 2 1500 4 1500 4 1500 4 1900 2 1300 1 1900 2 1900 2 1900 2 1900 2 1300 1 1900 2 1900 2 1900 2 2000 6 1500 4 2000 6 2000 6 2000 6 2000 6 1500 4 2000 6 2000 6 2000 6 1900 2 1900 2 2000 p 3 ,.i . .1 2000 6 z..r I 'f \ 4 .fl ( ( ( 14 ( ( ( I pE--!) C.(l.ti &JpPJ \ Jf.7 - - --I _J ' I t I Mc lrvTYfll :.--, I ~ t-"i: 1 P t I t - - - - 3q g 7 __.. ........ -- ___ ...... y -2-3 ..J__ r - -¼ - --~--- I ~ 7.-, Ii ' ! \ L ~ 6AlA,J r -~-l ( G, ! (__L ( l l I 2-- B ~ y I( . I r· \ e--y cl E .:: /oo fee I ) \ \ ) I l ----~-,. .. ....--,.~--- --- ----· __ ........-- \ 4 ?f l? 7 rz._ -- ~- ~ ~ + z.. .5_ . ....i...--,~~·-·r_,,_. __ 'LI _:_ll!;y ...____ -- I __..<a ..... ---------·-·i-----1,~--- eye;.{.,,£ ::::.. I... l l ~ Page 1 \ dnOH8 o-novaaoo 3H..L ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) , ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) . ) ) C ) ) ) ( ( ( - ( ( ' ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( HCM Level of Service (LOS) Methodology Urban street level of service (LOS) is based on average through-vehicle travel speed for the segment, section, or entire urban street under consideration. The following general statements taken from the Year 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2000, Transportation Research Board) characterize LOS along urban streets. Refer to Exhibit 15-2 of the HCM 2000 ( copied on next page) for speed ranges for each LOS. • LOS A-describes primarily free-flow operations at average travel speeds, usually about 90 percent of the Free Flow Speed (FFS) for the given street class. Vehicles are completely unimpeded in their ability to maneuver within the traffic stream. Control delay at signalized intersections is minimal. • LOS 8-describes reasonably unimpeded operations at average travel speeds, usually about 70 percent of the FFS for the street class. The ability to maneuver within the traffic stream is only slightly restricted, and control delays at signalized intersections are not significant. { ( ( ( { ( \ \ ( (_ (. l ( \ ( \ \. l~ "' l • LOS C-describes stable operations; however, ability to maneuver and change lanes in mid-block locations may be more restricted than at LOS B, and longer queues, adverse signal coordination, or both may contribute to lower average travel speeds of about 50 percent of the FFS for the street class. • LOS D-borders on a range in which small increases in flow may cause substantial increases in delay and decreases in travel speeds. LOS D may be due to adverse signal progression, inappropriate signal timing, high volumes, or a combination of these factors. Average travel speeds are about 40 percent of FFS. • LOS E-is characterized by significant delays and average travel speeds of 33 percent or less of the FFS. Such operations are caused by a combination of adverse progression, high signal density, high volumes, extensive delays at critical intersections, and inappropriate signal timing. • LOS F-is characterized by urban street flow at extremely low speeds, typically one­ third to one-fourth of the FFS. Intersection congestion is likely at critical signalized locations, with high delays, high volumes, and extensive queuing. THE CO RRADINO GROUP r­ ( ( - ( (' ( ( ( ' ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( { ( ( ( ( ( ( l \. ( ( l l... l ( \ l '· ( \ l_ ~ EXHIBIT 15-2. URBAN STREET LOS BY CLASS Urban Street Class I II Ill IV Range of free-flow 55 to 45 mi/h 45 to 35 mi/h 35 to 30 mi/h 35 to 25 mi/h speeds (FFS) Typical FFS 50 mi/h 40 mi/h 35 mi/h 30 mi/h LOS Average Travel Speed (mi/h) A >42 > 35 > 30 > 25 B > 34-42 > 28-35 > 24-30 > 19-25 C > 27-34 > 22-28 > 18-24 >13-19 D > 21-27 > 17-22 > 14-18 >9-13 E > 16-21 > 13-17 > 10-14 >7-9 F s 16 s 13 s 10 S7 The Year 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2000, Transportation Research Board) also serves as a technical guide for the evaluation of "free-flow" and intersection traffic operations. The HCM defines Level of Service (LOS) as a qualitative measure which describes operational conditions within a traffic stream-generally in terms of such factors as speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort and convenience, and safety. The criteria used to evaluate LOS conditions vary, based on the type of roadway and whether the traffic flow is considered interrupted or uninterrupted. The definitions of LOS for uninterrupted flow (flow unrestrained by the existence of traffic control devices) are given in Exhibit 21-3 of the HCM 2000 as copied below: EXHIBIT 21-3. SPEED-FLOW CURVES WITH LOS CRITERIA 70 60 g ~ 50 l ~ 40 <'ti '-1 & 30 ~ ~ <'ti a.. 20 ~ s ~ 10 , , , , , , I , , , ,• , , , , . , , , , , , , , . FrP.P.-F! OW C:noorl = RO miJh , , , . 55 milh: , , , . , , . _, . , 7 , , , , , . . , 50 mi/h , , , , . - . 45 miln , , . ,• --;- , - , .-· LOSA , C . D , . F , B , •' .- , , , . , ~ ,, .. I ~, .. .. _,,' . .. , , -~,, ,, ,, -· ~~ ~~- ~~~~..- __ ,,. .. . ~, --~ ---~ ~<;; -f=ix-- • .. It , '°'.' i1o, • \\\'~--- \I" •• -~- ",, , ,• ~~9:'·~s~~I~--- _t"' ,' ,, -- , 1-<:S, ,' , .. .,,., , . . , , , ,,,- _, .. -- , , , , , ,, ,,, , , I I ,, , .. , , , , . , , . _ .. _ - , , , , ~--. ,;,~-;-:.-:. .. ~ 00 400 800 1200 Flow Rate (pc/h/ln) 1600 2000 2400 THE CORRADINO GROUP ( f - ( r~ ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( , ( ( ( ( { ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( The definitions of LOS for interrupted traffic flow (flow restrained by the existence of traffic signals and other traffic control devices) differ depending on the type of traffic control. The LOS are typically dependent on the quality of traffic flow at the intersections along a roadway. The HCM methodology expresses the LOS at an intersection in terms of delay time for the various intersection approaches. The HCM uses different procedures depending on the type of intersection control. The LOS determined in this study are determined using the HCM methodology. For signalized intersections, average total control delay per vehicle for the overall intersection is used to determine LOS. LOS at the signalized study area intersection have been evaluated using the "HCS" intersection analysis program. For stop-sign controlled intersections with stop control on the minor street only the calculation of LOS is dependent on the occurrence of gaps occurring in the traffic flow of the main street. The LOS criteria for this type of intersection analysis is based on average total delay per vehicle for the worst minor street movement(s). For all-way stop- (A WS) controlled intersections, the ability of vehicles to enter the intersection is not controlled by the occurrence of gaps in the flow of the main street. The LOS criteria for A WS­ controlled intersections is based on average total delay per vehicle for the overall intersection. The Levels of Service (LOS) are defined for the various analysis methodologies as follows: Level of Service (LOS) Standards LEVEL OF AVERAGE TOTAL DELAY PER VEHICLE SERVICE (SECONDS) SIGNALIZED UNSIGNALIZED A 0 to 10.00 0 to 10.00 B I 0.0 I to 20.00 10.01 to 15.00 C 20.0 I to 35.00 15.01 to 25.00 D 35.0 I to 55.00 25.0 I to 35.00 E 55.0 I to 80.00 35.0 I to 50.00 F 80.01 and up 50.01 and up ( f \ \ '­ \ \ '­ l '­ l l THE C O R RA D IN O GROUP dnOH8 ONIOVHHO:J 3Hi ) ) ) ) . ) ) ) ) ) suourpuo j ~uns,x3 - sasAJtmy uon:>asJaJUI :) xrpuoddv ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ). ) - ) . ) D e ta il e d R ep o rt P ag e 1 of 2 ( r " ( ,- ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l ( l l ( .. ' l ( l \ l l HCS2000™ DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Intersection C rand o n B lvd . an d H arbo r Analyst Krystal F o wler I R D A D r. Agency or Co. C orrad ino Area Type A ll o th er areas Date Performed 12/2 1/2 0 0 5 Jurisdiction Time Period A M wlo P roject Traffic Analysis Year 2 0 05 Project ID S o nesta Key B iscayne R esort Volume and Timing Input EB WB N B S B LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 Lane group L L T R L T R L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 28 3 29 60 40 74 80 115 10 60 11 44 10 15 17 5 - % Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 0 2 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 2 0 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.7 8 0.6 6 0.7 5 0.6 7 0.6 6 0.8 7 0.8 7 0.8 0 0.3 9 0.7 9 0.9 0 0.8 4 Pretimed (P) or actuated p p p p p p p p p p p p (A) Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2 .0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2 .0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2 .0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3 .0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.0 0 0 1.0 0 0 1.0 0 0 1.0 0 0 1.0 0 0 1.0 00 1.0 0 0 1.0 0 0 1.0 00 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR lvolurn es 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, N8 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 Min. time for pedestrians, 18 .5 18.5 14 .2 11.4 GD Phasing EB Only WB Only 03 04 Exel. Left NS Perm 07 08 G = 17.0 G = 15 .0 G= G= G = 6.0 G = 44.0 G= G= Timing Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 3 Y= 5 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.2 5 Cycle Length, C = 10 0.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 3 6 3 44 80 172 92 13 2 13 53 56 13 36 Lane group capacity, c 29 1 3 12 2 6 0 2 7 1 234 17 5 14 9 6 175 14 69 1.2 5 0.14 0.3 1 0.6 3 0.3 9 0.7 5 0.9 0 0.3 2 0.9 1 t " file:/ IC :\Documents and Settings\rdearazoza\Local Settings\ Temp\s2k23 7. tmp 1/10/2006 Detailed Report Page 2 of2 .-: ( ( " ( ( (' ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( { ( ( ( ( ( ( l l (_ l l (_ I" , t' ' v/c ratio , X T otal gree n ra tio , g/C 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.15 0.15 0.53 0.44 0.53 0.44 U n iform de la y , d1 41.5 35.3 36.3 39.9 38.4 20.0 26.0 18.7 26.1 P ro g re ssio n facto r, P F 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 D e la y calib ratio n , k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Incre m e nta l de la y, d2 136.7 0.9 3.0 10.8 4.9 25.6 9.4 4.8 9.9 Initia l qu e ue de la y, d3 C o ntro l de la y 178.2 36.2 39.4 50.8 43.3 45.7 35.4 23.4 36.0 L ane gro u p LO S F D D D D D D C D A pp ro a ch de la y 142.6 48.2 36.3 35.5 A pp roa ch L O S F D D D Inte rse ctio n de la y 51.1 Xe= 0.96 In terse ction LO S D ~I? vJ(? Ni? ff; H CS20 00™ Copyright © 20 00 University ofF lorida, All Rights Reserv ed l , l l file ://C: \Docum ents and Settings\rdearazoza \Local Settings\ Temp \s2k23 7. tmp Version 4.1 e 1/1 0/2006 l D etailed R eport Page 1 of2 ( (' - ( ( ( ( ( \ ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l \. C l l l l HCS2000™ DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information In te rsectio n Crandon Blvd. and Harbor A na lyst Krystal Fowler I R D A D r. A ge n cy or C o . Corradino A re a T yp e All other areas D a te P e rf orm e d 12/21/20 05 Ju risdictio n T im e P e rio d PM w/o Project Traffic A na lysis Y e a r 2005 Project ID Sonesta Key Biscayne Resort Volume and Timing Input E B W B N B S B LT T H R T LT T H R T LT T H R T LT T H R T N u m b e r of la n e s, N 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 L a ne gro u p L LT R LT R L TR L TR V olum e , V (vp h ) 235 24 182 79 11 40 175 860 37 84 939 186 % H e av y ve h icle s, %H V 2 0 2 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 2 0 P e a k-ho u r facto r, P H F 0.82 0.67 0.9 1 0.82 0.69 0.77 0.93 0.95 0.71 0.75 0.93 0.88 P retim e d (P ) or actua ted p p p p p p p p p p p p (A ) S ta rt -u p lo st tim e , 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 E xtensio n of eff ective green , e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 A rriva l typ e , A T 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 U n it exte n sio n , U E 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering /m e te rin g , I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 In itia l un m e t de m a n d , Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 P e d / B ike / R T O R vo lu m e s 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 La ne w id th 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 P a rkin g / G ra d e / Pa rkin g N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N P a rking m a ne uv e rs, N m B use s sto p p ing , N 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 M in . tim e for p e d e stria ns, 18.5 18.5 14.2 11.4 G P P ha sin g E B O nly W B O nly 03 04 Exel. Left N S P erm 07 08 G = 17.0 G = 15.0 G = G = G = 6.0 G = 44.0 G = G = T im ing y = 5 Y = 5 Y= Y= Y = 3 Y = 5 Y= Y= D uratio n of A na lysis, T = 0.25 C ycle Leng th , C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination E B W B N B S B LT T H R T LT T H R T LT T H R T LT T H R T A djuste d flo w rate , v 287 36 200 112 52 188 957 '- 112 1221 L a ne gro u p cap a city, c 291 312 260 264 234 175 1489 240 1466 0.99 0.12 0.77 0.42 0.22 1.07 0.64 0.47 0.83 l l \ fi le://C :\D ocum ents an d S ett ings\r dearaz oza\L ocal S ettings\T em p\s2k2 42.tm p 1/10/2006 Detailed Report ( ( ( r­ r ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( I ' ( ' ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l l l - v/c ratio, X Tot~I green ratio, g/C 0.17 0.17 0.17 0.15 0.15 0.53 0.44 0.53 0.44 Uniform delay, d1 41.4 35.1 39.6 38.6 37.4 23.2 21.9 14.8 24.8 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Incremental delay, d2 49.4 0.8 19.4 4.9 2.2 89.2 2.1 6.4 5.7 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 90.8 35.9 59.1 43.5 39.6 112.4 24.0 21.2 30.4 Lane group LOS F D E D D F C C C Approach delay 74.9 42.3 38.5 29.7 Approach LOS E D D C Intersection delay 41.0 Xe= 1.00 Intersection LOS D 6<? l)lf? t-J~ Page 2 of2 5f; I " HCS2000™ Copyright© 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved \ l l l I... l. l ( file://C:\D ocuments and Settings\rdearazoza\Local Settings\Temp\s2k242.tmp Version 4.le 1/10/2006 Detailed Report Page 1 of2 ( ,~ ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( (__ l l <.. <... ( l \ l \ l \_ ( l, HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Intersection Crandon Blvd. and Key Analyst Krystal F owler I R DA Colony Agency or Co. C orradino Area Type All other areas Date Performed 12/21/20 05 Jurisdiction Time Period AM w/o Project Traffic Analysis Year 2005 Project ID Sonesta Key Biscayne R esort Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 Lane group L R L TR L T Volume, V (vph) 92 147 35 1014 53 107 940 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 0 0 2 2 0 2 2 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.55 0.71 0.63 0.80 0.74 0.79 0.86 Pretimed (P) or actuated (A) p p p p p p p p Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 e Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, N8 0 0 0 3 0 3 Min. time for pedestrians, GP 18.5 18.5 8.7 8.7 Phasing WB Only 02 03 04 Exel. Left NS Perm 07 08 G = 15.0 G= G= G= G = 8.0 G = 63.0 G= G= Timing Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Y= 3 Y= 6 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB W B NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 167 207 56 1339 135 1093 Lane group capacity, c 271 234 367 2132 293 2147 v/c ratio, X 0.62 0.88 0.15 0.63 0.4 6 0.51 Total green ratio, g/C 0.15 0.15 0.74 0.63 0.74 0.63 ·' " file://C:\Documents and Settings\rdearazoza\Local Settings\Temp\s2k277.tmp 1/10/2006 D e t a il e d R e p o rt P a g e 2 o f 2 I ., ( ( ( ( - ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ff; vJ(? sf, ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l \ l ( (. {_ ( l l '­ l 1lP; Uniform delay, d1 39.8 41.7 5.2 11.3 8.1 10.1 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Incremental delay, d2 10.1 35.2 0.9 1.4 5.1 0.9 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 49.9 76.8 6.1 12.7 13.3 10.9 Lane group LOS D E A B B B Approach delay 64.8 12.5 11.2 Approach LOS E B B Intersection delay 18.5 Xc=0.73 Intersection LOS B HCS20 00™ Copyright© 20 00 U niversity of Florida, A ll Rights Reserv ed file:/ IC: \Documents and Settings\rdearazoza \Local Settings\ Temp \s2k277. tmp Version 4.le 1/10/2006 D e t a il e d R e p o rt P a g e 1 o f 2 ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( { ( ( \_ l ( l. l ( (, l (,__ HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Intersection Crandon Blvd. and Key Analyst Krystal Fowler I RDA Colony Agency or Co. Corradino Area Type All other areas Date Performed 12/21/2005 Jurisdiction Time Period PM w/o Project Traffic Analysis Year 2005 Project ID Sonesta Key Biscayne Resort Volume and Timina lnout EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 2 0 1 2 0 Lane group L R L TR L T Volume, V (vph) 65 105 59 610 88 178 1102 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 0 0 2 2 0 2 2 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.81 0.82 0.74 0.85 0.96 0.91 0.94 Pretimed (P) or actuated {A) p p p p p p p p Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 e Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 12.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, N8 0 0 0 3 0 3 Min. time for pedestrians, GP 18.5 18.5 8.7 8.7 Phasing WB Only 02 03 04 Exel. Left NS Perm 07 08 G = 15.0 G= G= G= G = 8.0 G = 63.0 G= G= Timing Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Y= 3 y = 6 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 80 128 80 810 196 1172 Lane group capacity, c 271 234 341 2115 478 2147 v/c ratio, X 0.30 0.55 0.23 0.38 0.41 0.55 Total green ratio, g/C 0.15 0.15 0.74 0.63 0.74 0.63 d file://C:\Documents and Settings\rdearazoza\Local Settings\Temp\s2k282.tmp 1/10/2006 Detailed Report ( ( ( r ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( f:(1 we, Uniform delay, d1 37.8 39.4 5.8 9.0 4.8 10.4 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Incremental delay, d2 2.8 8.9 1.6 0.5 2.6 1.0 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 40.6 48.3 7.4 9.5 7.4 11.4 Lane group LOS D D A A A B Approach delay 45.3 9.4 10.9 Approach LOS D A B Intersection delay 13.2 Xe= 0.61 Intersection LOS B fJ!> Page 2 of2 '5!; ' ., H CS20 00™ C opyri ght© 20 00 U niversity of Florida, A ll R ights R eserv ed ( ( ( l l ( \__ ( (__ ~- 1... l \. l.., file://C:\D ocum ents an d Settings\rdearazoza\L ocal Settings\Temp\s2k282.tmp V ersion 4. le 1/10/2006 D e ta il e d R e p o rt P age 1 of 2 ( (" ( r ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l l \._ ( ( ( ( l (__ l l l l. HCS2000™ DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Intersection C ran d o n B lvd. and S o ne sta Analyst Krystal F owler I R D A D r Agency or Co. C o rrad ino Area Type A ll o ther areas Date Performed 12/2 1/20 05 Jurisdiction Time Period A M wlo P roject Traffic Analysis Year 2005 Project ID S on e sta Key B iscayne R eso rt Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 Lane group L TR LTR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 48 0 5 7 3 24 98 1120 38 4 872 43 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 0 2 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 2 0 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.8 0 1.0 0 0.63 0.58 0.38 0.75 0.88 0.7 9 0.7 9 0.5 0 0.94 0.72 Pretimed (P) or actuated p p p p p p p p p p p p (A) Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.0 00 1.0 00 1.0 00 1.0 00 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, N8 0 0 0 3 0 3 Min. time for pedestrians, 18.5 18.5 8.7 8.7 GD Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 Exel. Left NS Perm 07 08 G = 16 .0 G= G= G= G = 6.0 G = 65.0 G= G= Timing Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Y= 3 Y= 5 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.2 5 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 68 52 111 14 66 8 988 Lane group capacity, c 20 5 252 385 2205 238 2198 0.33 0.2 1 0.29 0.6 6 0.03 0.4 5 ' ., l file:/ IC :\Documents and Settings\rdearazoza\Local Settings\ Temp\s2k2A3. tmp 1/10/2006 Detailed Report ( ( ( r ( £fl -w~ tJE? Page 2 of2 s fl; I ., ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( { ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l l... l l \ l \ \ \ l v/c ratio, X Total green ratio, g/C 0.16 0.16 0.74 0.65 0.74 0.65 Uniform delay, d1 37.3 36.5 4.9 10.8 6.9 8.7 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Incremental delay, d2 4.3 1.8 1.9 1.6 0.3 0.7 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 41.6 38.3 6.8 12.4 7.2 9.3 Lane group LOS D D A B A A Approach delay 41.6 38.3 12.0 9.3 Approach LOS D D B A Intersection delay 12.3 Xe= 0.64 Intersection LOS B HCS2000™ Copyright© 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved l,., file://C:\Documents and Settings\rdearazoza\Local Settings\Temp\s2k2A3.tmp Version 4. le 1/10/2006 D etailed R eport Page 1 of2 ( ( ( r­ ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l ( ( ( ( l l \. \. \ l \ HCS2000™ DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Intersection Crandon Blvd. and Sonesta Analyst Krystal Fowler I RDA Dr Agency or Co. Corradino Area Type All other areas Date Performed 12/21/2005 Jurisdiction Time Period PM wlo Project Traffic Analysis Year 2005 Project ID Sonesta Key Biscayne Resort Volume and Timina Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 Lane group LTR LTR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 59 1 11 7 5 72 55 728 7 69 1020 85 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 0 2 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 2 0 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.70 0.25 0.55 0.58 0.63 0.78 0.44 0.85 0.44 0.86 0.94 0.71 Pretimed (P) or actuated p p p p p p p p p p p p (A) Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, N8 0 0 0 3 0 3 Min. time for pedestrians, 18.5 18.5 8.7 8.7 GP Phasing EW Perm 02 03 04 Exel. Left NS Perm 07 08 G = 16.0 G= G= G= G = 6.0 G = 65.0 G= G= Timing Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= Y= 3 Y= 5 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 108 112 125 872 80 1205 Lane group capacity, c 182 252 310 2210 432 2187 0.59 0.44 0.40 0.39 0.19 0.55 I ,, \. L, fil e://C :\D ocum ents and S ett ings\r deara zoza \L ocal Settings\ Tem p\s2k2 B 1. tm p 1/10/2006 Detailed Report Page 2 of2 ( ( ( r ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( { ( ( ( ( ( ( ( r v/c ratio, X Total green ratio, g/C 0.16 0.16 0.74 0.65 0.74 0.65 Uniform delay, d1 39.0 38.0 6.2 8.2 4.4 9.5 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Incremental delay, d2 13.4 5.6 3.9 0.5 0.9 1.0 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 52.4 43.6 10.1 8.8 5.3 10.5 Lane group LOS D D B A A B Approach delay 52.4 43.6 8.9 10.2 Approach LOS D D A B Intersection delay 13.0 Xe= 0.60 Intersection LOS B fl; we, tJ P; 51) HCS2000™ Copyright© 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved ( ( \ l \. \ \. \ \ l "­ l L, file://C:\Documents and Settings\rdearazoza\Local Settings\Temp\s2k2B l .tmp Version 4.le 1/10/2006 T w o -W a y S to p C o n tr o l P ag e 1 of 2 ( ( ( ' ( ( ( ( ' ( ( ' ( ' ( ( ( ( ( ( ( { ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l ( \ \ ( '­ ( l \ \. \. l {._ TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Crandon Blvd and Heather ~nalyst Krystal Fowler I RDA Intersection ~gency/Co. Corradino Dr 1urisdiction Date Performed 12/21/2005 '"nalysis Year ~nalvsis Time Period AM wlo Project Traffic Project Description East/West Street: Heather Dr North/South Street: Crandon Blvd Intersection Orientation: North-South Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 1108 19 8 895 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 0.84 0.84 0.82 0.82 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 32 0 35 veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 2 -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 1 2 0 Configuration T TR L T Upstream Signal 1 1 Minor Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 1 f;3 0 20 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 9 1091 0 0 1319 22 veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 2 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service ~pproach Northbound Southbound Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LTR IV (veh/h) 9 67 C (m) (veh/h) 566 323 'I-J IG 0.02 0.21 95% queue length 0.05 0.77 Control Delay (s/veh) 11.5 19.0 LOS B C \...., file://C:\Documents and Settings\rdearazoza\Local Settings\Temp\u2k250.tmp 1/10/2006 Two-Way Stop Control Page 2 of2 ! ( ( ( ( ( ( pproach Delay s/veh 19.0 pproach LOS C Copyright© 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+ TM Version 5.2 Generated: 1/10/2006 11 :37 AM ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l l ( l ( ( \.. ( l C l l ~ (. file://C:\D ocuments and Settings\rdearazoza\Local Settings\Temp\u2k2 50.tmp 1/10/2006 T w o - W ay S to p C o n tr o l P ag e 1 of 2 ( ( ( r ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( (, ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l , ( ( \ ( \ l l l l TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY General Information Site Information Crandon Blvd and Heather !Analyst R DA Intersection IAaencv/Co. Corradino Dr lurisdiction Date Performed 12/21/2005 1"nalvsis Year IAnalvsis Time Period PM wlo Project Traffic Project Description East/West Street: Heather Dr North/South Street: Crandon Blvd Intersection Orientation: North-South Study Period (hrs): 0.25 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 794 26 29 958 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 0.84 0.84 0.93 0.93 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 0 0 0 28 0 10 veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 -- -- 2 -- -- Median Type Raised curb RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 2 0 1 2 0 Configuration T TR L T Upstream Siqnal 1 1 Minor Street Eastbound Westbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume (veh/h) 23 0 9 Peak-Hour Factor, PHF 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.82 0.82 0.82 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 31 1030 0 0 945 30 veh/h) Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 2 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Flared Approach N N Storage 0 0 RT Channelized 0 0 Lanes 0 0 0 0 1 0 Configuration LTR Delav. Queue Lenath, and Level of Service Approach Northbound Southbound Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Configuration L LTR V (veh/h) 31 38 C (m) (veh/h) 746 312 v/c 0.04 0.12 95% queue length 0.13 0.41 Control Delay (s/veh) 10 .0 18.1 L O S B C \.. \.. file://C:\Documents and Settings\rdearazoza\Local Settings\Temp\u2k256.tmp 1/10/2006 Two-Way Stop Control Page 2 of2 ( ( ( r ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( pproach Delay s/veh 18.1 pproach LOS C Copyright© 2005 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved HCS+ TM Version 5.2 Generated: 1/10/2006 11:37 AM ( ( ( ( ( l I l <. ( ( \ l ( \ \ ( l file://C:\D ocuments and Settings\rdearazoza\Local Settings\Temp\u2k2 56.tmp 1/10/2006 D etailed R eport Page 1 of2 ( ( ( r ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( \ ( t ( l l (, ( ( l l l.. l HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Intersection C rand on B lvd. and Analyst Krystal F o wler I R D A G alen/M clnty Agency or Co. C orrad ino Area Type A ll othe r areas Date Performed 12/2 1/20 0 5 Jurisdiction Time Period A M wlo P roject Traffic Analysis Year 200 5 Project ID S o n e sta Key B iscayn e R eso rt Volume and Timing Input EB WB N B S B LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 Lane group L TR LTR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph} 22 8 18 89 25 34 119 78 748 4 2 1 518 306 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 0 2 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 2 0 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.9 0 0.9 0 0.9 0 0.9 0 0.9 0 0.9 0 0.9 0 0.9 0 0.9 0 0.9 0 0.9 0 0.9 0 Pretimed (P) or actuated p p p p p p p p p p p p (A) Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2 .0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3 .0 Filtering/metering, I 1.0 0 0 1.0 0 0 1.0 0 0 1.0 0 0 1.0 00 1.0 00 1.0 00 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped/ Bike/ RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, N8 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 Min. time for pedestrians, 18 .5 18.5 8.7 11.4 Go Phasing EB Only WB Only 03 04 NS Perm Peds Only 07 08 G = 7.0 G = 12 .0 G= G= G = 34.0 G = 8.0 G= G= Timing Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 6 Y= 23 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.2 5 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 25 3 119 19 8 8 7 83 5 23 916 Lane group capacity, c 12 0 11 1 19 9 89 115 8 114 110 2 2.1 1 1.0 7 0.9 9 0.9 8 0.7 2 0.2 0 0.8 3 l L, fil e://C :\D ocum ents an d Settings\rdearaz oza\L ocal Settings\ Tem p\s2k2 00. tm p 1/10/2006 Detailed Report Page 2 of2 ( ( ( ( ( ( ( (' ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( { ( l l ( ( l l \__ l l \_ t~ 0P? vJ (? v/c ratio, X Total green ratio, g/C 0.07 0.07 0.12 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 Uniform delay, d1 46.5 46.5 44.0 32.6 28.9 23.4 30.4 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Incremental delay, d2 525.8 106.1 62.5 89.4 3.9 3.9 7.3 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 572.3 152.6 106.5 122.0 32.8 27.3 37.7 Lane group LOS F F F F C C D Approach delay 438.1 106.5 41.2 37.4 Approach LOS F F D D Intersection delay 105.8 Xe= 0.00 Intersection LOS F 5/;) HCS2000™ Copyright© 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved \_ l.., l file:/ IC: \Documents and Settings\rdearazoza \Local Settings\ Temp \s2k200. tmp Version 4.1 e 1/10/2006 Detailed Report Page 1 of2 ( .. ( ( F ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( { { ( ( ( l l l l l l l_ HCS2000™ DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Intersection Crandon Blvd. and Analyst Krystal Fowler I RDA Galen/Mclnty Agency or Co. Corradino Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Date Performed 12/21/2005 Analysis Year 2005 Time Period AM wlo Project Traffic Sonesta Key Biscayne Project ID Resort REVISED SIGNAL TIMING Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 Lane group L TR LTR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 228 18 89 25 34 119 78 748 4 21 518 306 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 0 2 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 2 0 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Pretimed (P) or actuated p p p p p p p p p p p p (A) Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, N8 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 Min. time for pedestrians, 18.5 18.5 8.7 11.4 GP Phasing EB Only WB Only 03 04 NS Perm Peds Only 07 08 G = 12.0 G = 10.0 G= G= G = 31.0 G = 8.0 G= G= Timing Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= y = 6 Y= 23 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 253 119 198 87 835 23 916 Lane group capacity, c 20 5 190 166 72 1056 90 1005 ' " l__ file://C:\Documents and Settings\rdearazoza\Local Settings\Temp\s2k2F4.tmp 1/10/2006 Detailed Report Page 2 of2 .1 ( ( ( r ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l ( l l l l (.__ l (.__ l l. l l. l .... l) ) v/c ratio, X 1.23 0.63 1.19 1.21 0.79 0.26 0.91 Total green ratio, g/C 0.12 0.12 0.10 0.31 0.31 0.31 0.31 Uniform delay, d1 44.0 41.9 45.0 34.5 31.5 25.9 33.2 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Incremental delay, d2 140.2 14.6 131.1 172.5 6.1 6.7 13.7 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 184.2 56.5 176.1 207.0 37.6 32.6 46.9 Lane group LOS F E F F D C D Approach delay 143.3 176.1 53.6 46.5 Approach LOS F F D D Intersection delay 74.6 Xe= 0.00 Intersection LOS E HCS2000™ Copyright© 2000 University ofFlorida, All Rights Reserved file://C:\Documents and Settings\rdearazoza\Local Settings\Temp\s2k2F4.tmp Version 4. le 1/10/2006 Detailed Report Page 1 of2 ( ( ( r ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l <... \ l "­ (_ \_ l l (__ HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Intersection Crandon Blvd. and Analyst Krystal Fowler I RDA Galen/Mclnty Agency or Co. Corradino Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Date Performed 12/21/2005 Analysis Year 2005 Time Period AM wlo Project Traffic Sonesta Key Biscayne Project ID Resort REVISED SIGNAL TIMING & Cycle Volume and Timina tnout EB W B NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 Lane group L TR LTR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 228 18 89 25 34 119 78 748 4 21 518 306 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 0 2 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 2 0 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 0.91 Pretimed (P) or actuated p p p p p p p p p p p p (A) Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, N8 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 Min. time for pedestrians, 18.5 18.5 8.7 11.4 GD Phasing EB Only W B Only 03 04 NS Perm Peds Only 07 08 G = 20.0 G = 16.0 G= G= G = 47.0 G = 8.0 G= G= Timing y = 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 6 Y= 23 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 130.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB W B N B SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 251 118 195 86 826 23 905 Lane group capacity, c 263 243 204 102 1231 126 1172 file:/ IC: \Documents and Settings\rdearazoza \Local Settings\ Temp \s2k32A. tmp 1/10/2006 Detailed Report Page 2 of2 ( ( ( F ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( \ l ( ( v/c ratio, X 0.95 0.49 0.96 0.84 0.67 0.18 0.77 Total green ratio, g/C 0.15 0.15 0.12 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 Uniform delay, d1 54.5 50.3 56.6 38.1 35.0 28.4 36.8 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Incremental delay, d2 44.9 6.8 52.5 53.8 2.9 3.2 5.0 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 99.5 57.1 109.1 91.9 37.9 31.5 41.7 Lane group LOS F E F F D C D Approach delay 85.9 109.1 43.0 41.5 Approach LOS F F D D Intersection delay 54.4 Xe= 0.00 Intersection LOS D HCS2000™ Copyright© 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved ( l l \. file:/ IC: \Documents and Settings\rdearazoza \Local Settings\ Temp \s2k3 2A. tmp Version 4. le 1/10/2006 D e ta iled R ep o rt Page 1 of2 ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( t ( t ( <.. <.. l HCS2000"' DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Intersection Crandon Blvd. and Analyst RDA Galen/M clnty Agency or Co. C orradino Area Type All other areas Date Performed 12/2 1/2005 Jurisdiction Time Period A M w/o P roject Traffic Analysis Year 20 05 Project ID Sonesta Key Biscayne Resort -Without Ped Phase Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 Lane group L TR LTR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 228 18 89 25 34 119 78 748 4 21 518 306 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 0 2 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 2 0 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.9 0 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Pretimed (P) or actuated p p p p p p p p p p p p (A) Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.0 00 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike/ RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, N8 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 Min. time for pedestrians, 18.5 18.5 8.7 11.4 GD Phasing EB Only WB Only 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G = 23.0 G = 23.0 G= G= G = 38.0 G= G= G= Timing Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= y = 6 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.2 5 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 253 119 198 87 835 23 916 Lane group capacity, c 394 364 382 120 1294 146 1232 0.6 4 0.3 3 0.52 0.73 0.65 0.16 0.74 file://C:\Documents and Settings\rdearazoza\Local Settings\Temp\s2k2CE.tmp 1/10/2006 Detailed Report Page 2 of2 ( ( ( r ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l l l v/c ratio, X Total green ratio, g/C 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 Uniform delay, d1 34.8 32.1 33.7 26.5 25.5 20.4 26.8 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Incremental delay, d2 7.8 2.4 5.0 31.5 2.5 2.3 4.1 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 42.6 34.4 38.6 58.0 28.0 22.7 30.9 Lane group LOS D C D E C C C Approach delay 40.0 38.6 30.8 30.7 Approach LOS D D C C Intersection delay 32.8 Xe= 0.65 Intersection LOS C HCS2000™ Copyright© 20 00 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved ( \. \. ( \. "- file://C:\Documents and Settings\rdearazoza\Local Settings\Temp\s2k2CE.tmp Version 4. le 1/10/2006 Detailed Report Page 1 of2 ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ' ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( (, ( (._ l C \. \. \. l \.. HCS2000'" DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Intersection Crandon Blvd. and Analyst Krystal Fowler I RDA Galen/Mclnty Agency or Co. Corradino Area Type All other areas Date Performed 12/21/2005 Jurisdiction Time Period PM w/o Project Traffic Analysis Year 2005 Project ID Sonesta Key Biscayne Resort Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 Lane group L TR LTR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 122 19 53 16 7 68 40 828 19 98 770 123 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 0 2 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 2 0 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Pretimed (P) or actuated p p p p p p p p p p p p (A) Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike / RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, N8 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 Min. time for pedestrians, 18.5 18.5 8.7 11.4 GD Phasing EB Only WB Only 03 04 NS Perm Peds Only 07 08 G = 7.0 G = 12.0 G= G= G = 34.0 G = 8.0 G= G= Timing Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 6 Y= 23 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 136 80 102 44 941 109 993 Lane group capacity, c 120 113 196 72 1155 82 1138 1.13 0.71 0.52 0.61 0.81 1.33 0.87 file ://C: \Documents and Settings\rdearazoza \Local Settings\ Temp \s2k216. tmp 1/10/2006 D e ta ile d R e p o rt ( ( ( r ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l ( ( ( ( ( ffJ vJf? N~ v/c ratio, X Total green ratio, g/C 0.07 0.07 0.12 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 Uniform delay, d1 46.5 45.5 41.3 27.5 30.1 33.0 31.0 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Incremental delay, d2 122.5 31.2 9.5 33.0 6.4 210.5 9.3 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 169.0 76.7 50.8 60.5 36.5 243.5 40.3 Lane group LOS F E D E D F D Approach delay 134.8 50.8 37.6 60.4 Approach LOS F D D E Intersection delay 57.3 Xe= 0.00 Intersection LOS E Page 2 of2 5PJ I •I H CS2000™ Copyright© 20 00 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved l C l l <.._ l l '-­ (. fil e://C:\D ocum ents and Settings\rdearazoza\Local Settings\Temp\s2k216.tmp Version 4. le 1/10/2006 Detailed Report Page 1 of2 ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l ( ( ( l ( ( ( l ( ( \. l l. HCS2000™ DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Intersection Crandon Blvd. and Analyst Krystal Fowler I RDA Galen/Mclnty Agency or Co. Corradino Area Type All other areas Jurisdiction Date Performed 12/21/2005 Analysis Year 2005 Time Period PM wlo Project Traffic Sonesta Key Biscayne Project ID Resort - REVISED SIGNAL TIMING Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 Lane group L TR LTR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 122 19 53 16 7 68 40 828 19 98 770 123 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 0 2 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 2 0 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Pretimed (P) or actuated p p p p p p p p p p p p (A) Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped / Bike/ RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, N8 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 Min. time for pedestrians, 18.5 18.5 8.7 11.4 GD Phasing EB Only WB Only 03 04 NS Perm Peds Only 07 08 G = 7.0 G = 10.0 G= G= G = 36.0 G = 8.0 G= G= Timing Y= 5 y = 5 Y= Y= Y= 6 Y= 23 Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = o:25 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 136 80 102 44 941 109 993 Lane group capacity, c 120 113 164 83 1223 98 1205 "­ l., l.., file://C:\Documents and Settings\rdearazoza\Local Settings\Temp\s2k2E9.tmp 1/10/2006 Detailed Report Page 2 of2 i',' ( ( ( ( ( ( r ( ( ( ( ( ( { ( ( ' ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( \ \ l ( l... l l. l l. v/c ratio, X 1.13 0.71 0.62 0.53 0.77 1.11 0.82 Total green ratio, g/C 0.07 0.07 0.10 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36 Uniform delay, d1 46.5 45.5 43.2 25.3 28.3 32.0 29.1 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Incremental delay, d2 122.5 31.2 16.5 22.1 4.7 124.4 6.5 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 169.0 76.7 59.6 47.5 33.0 156.4 35.6 Lane group LOS F E E D C F D Approach delay 134.8 59.6 33.7 47.5 Approach LOS F E C D Intersection delay 50.2 Xe= 0.00 Intersection LOS D H CS2000™ C opyright© 2000 U niversity of F lorida, A ll R ights R eserv ed file ://C: \Docum ents and Settings\rdearazoza \Local Settings\ Temp \s2k2E9. tm p V ersion 4 .le 1/10/2006 Detailed Report Page 1 of2 ( ( ( (- ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l ( l ( t ( t l l l I... l l \.. HCS2000™ DETAILED REPORT General Information Site Information Intersection Crandon Blvd. and Analyst RDA Galen/Mclnty Area Type All other areas Agency or Co. Corradino Jurisdiction Date Performed 12/21/2005 Analysis Year 2005 Time Period PM wlo Project Traffic Sonesta Key Biscayne Project ID Resort - Without Exel Ped Phase Volume and Timing Input EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Number of lanes, N 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 2 0 Lane group L TR LTR L TR L TR Volume, V (vph) 122 19 53 16 7 68 40 828 19 98 770 123 % Heavy vehicles, %HV 2 0 2 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 2 0 Peak-hour factor, PHF 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 Pretimed (P) or actuated p p p p p p p p p p p p (A) Start-up lost time, 11 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Extension of effective green, e 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Arrival type, AT 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Unit extension, UE 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Filtering/metering, I 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Initial unmet demand, Qb 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Ped /Bike/ RTOR volumes 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lane width 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 Parking / Grade / Parking N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N N 0 N Parking maneuvers, Nm Buses stopping, N8 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 Min. time for pedestrians, 18.5 18.5 8.7 11.4 Go Phasing EB Only WB Only 03 04 NS Perm 06 07 08 G = 23.0 G = 23.0 G= G= G = 38.0 G= G= G= Timing Y= 5 Y= 5 Y= Y= Y= 6 Y= Y= Y= Duration of Analysis, T = 0.25 Cycle Length, C = 100.0 Lane Group Capacity, Control Delay, and LOS Determination EB WB NB SB LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT LT TH RT Adjusted flow rate, v 136 80 102 44 941 109 993 Lane group capacity, c 394 370 377 97 1291 112 1271 1 ,: file://C:\Documents and Settings\rdearazoza\Local Settings\Temp\s2k2C3.tmp 1/10/2006 Detailed Report Page 2 of2 ' ·• ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l ( l ( \ \. . l l I l l \. l \. l \. \... v/c ratio, X 0.35 0.22 0.27 0.45 0.73 0.97 0.78 Total green ratio, g/C 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.38 0.38 0.38 0.38 Uniform delay, d1 32.2 31.2 31.6 23.2 26.6 30.5 27.3 Progression factor, PF 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 Delay calibration, k 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.50 Incremental delay, d2 2.4 1.3 1.8 14.5 3.6 78.1 4.8 Initial queue delay, d3 Control delay 34.6 32.5 33.4 37.8 30.2 108.6 32.2 Lane group LOS C C C D C F C Approach delay 33.8 33.4 30.6 39.7 Approach LOS C C C D Intersection delay 35.2 Xe= 0.61 Intersection LOS D HCS2000™ Copyright© 2000 University of Florida, All Rights Reserved file://C:\D ocum ents and Settings\rdearazoza\Local Settings\Temp\s2k2C3.tmp Version4.le 1/10/2006 a dnOH8 ONI0VHHO:J 3Hi l ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ' ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) } ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) _) ) ) J ...J ( ( ( ' ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( HCS+: Urban Streets Release 5.2 Phone: E-Mail: Fax: PLANNING ANALYSIS ---------------- ----------------- Analyst: Agency/ Co. : Date Performed: Analysis Time Period: Urban Street: Direction of Travel: Jurisdiction: Village of Key Biscayne Analysis Year: Current w/o project Project ID: Sonesta Key Biscayne Resort - Existing Conditions RDA TCG 1/7/2006 AM Peak Hour Crandon Blvd Traffic Characteristics ---------------- ------------------ Annual average daily traffic, AADT Planning analysis hour factor, K Directional distribution factor, D Peak-hour factor, PHF Adjusted saturation flow rate Percent turns from exclusive lanes 22000 0.080 0.510 0.940 1800 10 vpd pcphgpl % _______________ Roadway Characteristics _ l ( ( ( ( l Number of through lanes one direction, N 2 Free flow speed, FFS 35 Urban class 3 Section length 0.70 Median Yes Left-turn bays Yes mph miles _______________ Signal Characteristics _ (_ \. l l t l (_ '­ (,_ (. Signalized intersections Arrival type, AT Signal type (k = 0.5 for planning) Cycle length, C Effective green ratio, g/C 5 3 Actuated 100.0 0.530 sec Results ------------------- ------------------------ Annual average daily traffic, AADT Two-way hourly volume Hourly directional volume Through-volume 15-min. flow rate Running time v/c ratio Through capacity Progression factor, PF Uniform delay Filtering/metering factor, I Incremental delay Control delay 22000 1759 897 858 95.9 0.45 1907 1.000 14.5 0.893 0.7 15.2 vpd vph vph V sec vph sec sec sec/v L, ) ' J ' ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ~dw a l"v1 ) ) ) ) ) ~ ) ) so~ !aa~!s ueq~n 1e!o~ ) ES 'paads 1aAE~! 1e!o~ ) ( ( ( ,~ ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( (_ ( ( l ( l l l l l l l l l \. G HCS+: Urban Streets Release 5.2 Phone: E-Mail: Fax: ________________ PLANNING ANALYSIS _ Analyst: Agency/ Co . : Date Performed: Analysis Time Period: Urban Street: Direction of Travel: Jurisdiction: Village of Key Biscayne Analysis Year: Current w/o project Project ID: Sonesta Key Biscayne Resort - Existing Conditions - 130 cycl RDA TCG 1/7/2006 Peak Hour Crandon Blvd Traffic Characteristics ---------------- ------------------ Annual average daily traffic, AADT Planning analysis hour factor, K Directional distribution factor, D Peak-hour factor, PHF Adjusted saturation flow rate Percent turns from exclusive lanes 22000 0.080 0.510 0.940 1800 10 _______________ Roadway Characteristics _ Number of through lanes one direction, N 2 Free flow speed, FFS 35 Urban class 3 Section length 0.70 Median Yes Left-turn bays Yes _______________ Signal Characteristics _ Signalized intersections Arrival type, AT Signal type (k = 0.5 for planning) Cycle length, C Effective green ratio, g/C Annual average daily traffic, AADT Two-way hourly volume Hourly directional volume Through-volume 15-min. flow rate Running time v/c ratio Through capacity Progression factor, PF Uniform delay Filtering/metering factor, I Incremental delay Control delay 5 4 Actuated 130.0 0.530 vpd pcphgpl % mph miles sec Results ------------------- ------------------------ 22000 1759 897 858 95.9 0.45 1907 0.718 18.9 0.893 0.7 14.2 vpd vph vph V sec vph sec sec sec/v ( ( Total travel speed, Sa Total urban street LOS ( ( ·r ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l ( ( ( t 15.1 D mph (._ l. l C l. l l l (,__ L., I ; ~- ( ( ( r ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( \ ( ( ( ( ( { ( HCS+: Urban Streets Release 5.2 Phone: E-Mail: Fax: ________________ PLANNING ANALYSIS _ Analyst: Agency/ Co. : Date Performed: Analysis Time Period: Urban Street: Direction of Travel: Jurisdiction: Village of Key Biscayne Analysis Year: Current w/ project Project ID: Sonesta Key Bise Resort - Existing+ Site's - 130 cycle RDA TCG 1/7/2006 Peak Hour Crandon Blvd _________________ Traffic Characteristics _ Annual average daily traffic, AADT Planning analysis hour factor, K Directional distribution factor, D Peak-hour factor, PHF Adjusted saturation flow rate Percent turns from exclusive lanes 22800 0.080 0.510 0.940 1800 10 vpd pcphgpl % _______________ Roadway Characteristics _ Number of through lanes one direction, N 2 Free flow speed, FFS 35 Urban class 3 Section length 0.70 Median Yes Left-turn bays Yes mph miles ( Signal Characteristics -------------- ------------------ l ( \ ( ( ( Signalized intersections Arrival type, AT Signal type (k = 0.5 for planning) Cycle length, C Effective green ratio, g/C 5 4 Actuated 130.0 0.530 sec Results ------------------- ------------------------ { { ( l Annual average daily traffic, AADT Two-way hourly volume Hourly directional volume Through-volume 15-min. flow rate Running time v/c ratio Through capacity Progression factor, PF Uniform delay Filtering/metering factor, I Incremental delay Control delay 22800 1823 929 889 95.9 0.47 1907 0.718 19.1 0.882 0.7 14.4 vpd vph vph V sec vph sec sec sec/v ( ( Total travel speed, Sa Total urban street LOS ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( l ( 15.0 D mph l l l l C \... l l ~ ( ( ( { ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( t ( (._ (._ (._ (._ l l l \.. l l l \.. l ., Appendix E Traffic Impact Study Methodology THE CORRADINO GROUP E ( ( ( ( f­ ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( (._ (._ l l l (._ l l l l l SCOPE OF SERVICES/ METHODOLOGY Sonesta Key Biscayne Resort Proposed Project Task 1 Map / Graphics • Project Location • Trip Generation/Distribution/ Assignm ents • Capacity/Levels of Service (LOS) Task2 Existing Conditions • Examination of roadway conditions and traffic operations. • Capacity and LOS analyses for 5 intersections Intersections: Crandon Blvd / Harbor Dr; Crandon Blvd/ Key Colony; Crandon Blvd / Sonesta-East Dr; Crandon Blvd / Heather Drive and Crandon Blvd / McIntyre-Galan Dr. Analyses using HCM 2000 methodology (HCS) for AM & PM Peak hour of adjacent street traffic (Crandon Blvd) Using May 2003 traffic counts, supplied by the Village Consultant, for all intersections except Crandon/McIntyre. For this one, year 2002 traffic data will be utilized. For Crandon/ Heather new counts will be collected. Task3 Trip Generation • Using the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual-711' Edition, identify trip generation from proposed site. • Trip distribution and assignment to adjacent roads. Trip Generation credits for existing Sonesta Beach Hotel and Tennis Club - 292 hotel units, tennis courts, spa, retail shops, bar and restaurants. Trip Generation for proposed development: 191 hotel units, 63 condos, plus ball rooms, spas, bars, restaurants and retail use. Trip Distribution/Assignments using M-Dade MPO 2030 LRTP traffic zones trip distribution data. Task4 Future Conditions • Capacity and LOS analyses for same 5 intersections, as indicated in Task 2, to include traffi c from the proposed site Analyses using HCM 2000 methodology (HCS) for AM & PM Peak hour of adjacent street traffic (Crandon Blvd) Task5 Recommendations / Conclusions Task6 Report THE CORRADINO GROUP F