Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
25
THE CITY OF PLEASANT LIVING CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM To: The Honorable Mayor & Members of the City Commission VIA: Steven J. Alexander, City Manager FROM: Jane K. Tompkins, AICP, Planning and Zoning Direc ~ DATE: March 20, 2018 SUBJECT: An Ordinance amending the Official Zoning Map; amending the designation of the northern portion of the property located at 6075 SW 72 nd Street, from "TODD (MU-4)" to "TODD (MU- S)", BACKGROUND: The property known as 6075 Sunset Drive is 1.6-acres in size and has frontages on SW 72 nd Street, SW 6pt Avenue, and SW 7pt Street; it makes up approximately one-half of the block. Currently, it's developed with a 20,371 sq. ft. multi-story office building and surface parking lot. The southeast corner of the lot is open space and there are several mature trees on the site. According to the City's Official Zoning Map, the property is zoned both TODD (MU-4) "Transit- Oriented Development District (Mixed-Use 4)" and TODD (MU-5) "Transit-Oriented Development District (Mixed-Use 5)", with the lot being split roughly in half north to south. The Future Land Use Map designation for the property is TODD (4+4 Story), which is consistent with both zoning districts. Alta Developers lLC/6075 Sunset Zoning Map Amendment March 20, 2018 Page 2 of 13 PROJECT PROPOSAL Property Location .' Alta Developers, LLC, (the "applicant"), has submitted three (3) applications for the property: (1) a zoning map amendment for the northern portion of the property, changing it from TODD MU- 4 to TODD MU-5; (2) a special exception for a large-scale development of more than 40,000 square feet and four (4) stories; and (3) a variance to reduce the number of required parking spaces. The application package, which includes, among other things, the application, the letter of intent, a survey with legal description, renderings, a zoning chart, floor plans and roof plan (pages A-1.01 through A-1.07), elevations of the four fa~ades (pages A-2.01 and A-2 .02), a Tree Disposition Plan (sheet TO-i) and landscape plans (pages L-l through L-4) is provided as an Attachment. If the applications are approved, the applicant will demolish the existing improvements and develop a multi-story, mixed-use (commercial/residential) building. Commercial space, consisting of 3,678 square feet of restaurant and 2,441 square feet of retail uses, will be located on the ground floor of the Sunset Drive fa~ade, and wrap around the corner of the building to also face onto SW 61 st Avenue. JKT Z:\Commission Items\2018\03-2o-2018\607S Sunset\607S Sunset staff memo.docx ... Alta Developers LLC/607S Sunset Zoning Map Amendment March 20, 2018 Page 3 of 13 A total of 203 residential units will be located on the upper levels of the building and the ground floor level of the northern portion of the building. The unit mix consists of town homes, studios, and one-, two-, and three-bedroom units of varying sizes as follows: BREAKDOWN OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS Unit Type Number of Units Average Size Unit Mix (%) (SF) 1 Bedroom 102 738 50% 2 Bedrooms 72 1,077 35 3 Bedrooms I 8 1,433 4 Studio 14 566 7 Townhomes 7 I 931 3 I UNIT TOTAL 203 I 100 Six of the townhome units will be located on the ground floor adjacent to SW 7pt Street and the seventh adjacent 6pt Avenue. These units will be accessed from both the ground floor parking area and from the right-of-way. Tenant amenities including a dog park, pool deck, and common areas are provided on the upper levels of the building. A total of 303 on-site parking spaces will be provided to serve the building. Access to the parking garage is obtained via SW 71 st Street and parking makes up the second through fifth levels of the northern portion of the building. Ground-level parking and loading areas are accessed via 6pt Avenue. The building will be eight (8) stories in height along Sunset Drive and step down to fifty-two (52) feet along 71 st Street. ApPLICATION REQUESTS The applicant has submitted three zoning applications: (1) a zoning map amendment from TODD (MU-4) to TODD (MU-5); (2) a Special Exception to allow a large-scale development of more than four stories and 40,000 square feet; and (3) a Variance to allow a reduction in the number of parking spaces. The zoning map amendment requires two readings of the ordinance while the special exception and the variance are approved by resolution, which only requires one reading. Consequently, the resolutions will not be voted on until the second reading of the ordinance. All three applications are discussed below, to allow a complete understanding of the proposal. JKT Z:\Commission Items\2018\03-20-2018\6075 Sunset\6075 Sunset staff memo.docx Alta Developers llC/6075 Sunset Zo nin g M ap A m e ndme nt M arc h 20, 2018 Page 4 of 13 1. Zoning Map Amendment TODD (MU-4) to TODD (MU-5) In order to develop the proposed mixed-use building, the northern portion of the property must be rezoned from TODD (MU-4) to TODD (MU-5). Excerpts of the existing and proposed zoning map are provided below: Existing Zoning Map , UJ(---1 I 'v'. I -'I ~~,~ r 1 i \ 703 1 :a , \. -< Ii1 II Cl , I \ ~ 7000 M' n -, ~ \ I, Cl I CJ) \lI J-__ .---..1 . -_----d 7100 1 .~ ~.-S.W-7..,.e-T-s;r~ I 7051 I 7090 \ -----.,--I 'I 1'\ -I I I \ i \ I 7171 I ~I TODD \MU~4 I I --___ .l., t:;; I --1 .... i --------, 6161 ~~-....... \~---... 6075 J,() r I' -,II I -----'(0 I \ §l ! ~ I I I 6101 s: \ '" I 6193 I ,_--len ; __ ' . I ) Mu'-S:_._._~~-?':!!~_~2'_'=~-=l __ ._ l Per the LDC, the TODD's purpose is to maximize the presence of the mass transit center that's within walking distance of the districts' boundaries . The district is made up of five (5) subcategories and it's intended to provide for the development of office uses , office services, office-related retail , retail, retail services , and residential uses in multi-story and mixed use projects that are characteristic of transit-oriented developments (Sec. 20 -3.1(B)(16)). TODD MU-4 and TODD MU -5 are both described as "mixed use". The major difference between the two categories is in the allowable building height . MU-4 is limited to two stories. MU-5, on the other hand, requires a minimum of two stories with four stories allowed by right; up to eight stories are allowed if the building is designed in a way that makes it eligible for certain bonuses . These height bonuses are discussed in more detail in the discussion on the Special Exception request . There are also minor differences between MU-4 and MU-5 in the types of uses permitted: banks and saving institutions are allowed by -right in MU-5 and reupholstery and furniture repair is allowed as a special use in MU-5. Neither use is allowed in MU -4. Further, free - standing garages are allowed in MU-5, but not MU-4. As shown on the excerpt of the Zoning Map, above, the MU-4 district makes up essentially the northern half of the lots between SW 59 th Place and SW 6pt Court . This enclave of MU-4 is surrounded by MU-5, Medium Intensity Office (MO) and TODD (PI). The mixed-use TODD and MO district are very similar in terms of land uses allowed, with the main differences being that MO doesn't allow the range of residential dwelling types or the retail uses found in the TODD . JKT Z:\Co mmiss io n Items\2 01 8\03 -20-201 8\607 5 Sun se t \60 75 Sun se t st aff m em o.docx Alta Developers LLC/6075 Sunset Zoni ng M ap A m e ndment March 20, 20 18 Page 5 of 13 The table below provides the dimensional standards for the three districts : Comparison of Dimensional Requirements TODD (MU-4) TODD (MU-S) MO Minimum Size NA NA 10,000 sq. ft. Frontage NA NA 100' Setback Front Vary based on Vary based on 15 * Rear location location 10 Side (Interior) 0 Side (Street) 10 Between Buildings 20 Maximum Height 2 stories/28' 2 stories minimum/4 4 stories/50' story maximum; up to 8 stories with bonuses per Sec. 20- 8.10 Building Coverage NA NA NA- Impervious NA NA 85% Coverage FAR NA NA 1.6 As both MO and TODD (MU -5) allow for greater building heights and similar use s, the requested zoning change would not be incompatible . Staff has also reviewed the City's Comprehensive Plan and determined the requested rezoning furthers the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and, more specifically, the following goals and policies of the Future Land Use element: JKT Policy 1.1.2 In reviewing proposed amendments to this plan and the Zoning Map, compatibility with adjacent uses shall be the major determinant. Goal 3 To achieve a tax base adequate to support a high level of municipal services via increased mixed-use projects and flexible building heights in designated Tronsit Oriented Development Districts (TODD), to the extent that development and redevelopment in these districts does not adversely impact surrounding neighborhoods and uses. Policy 3.1.1 Zone for new development and redevelopment in accordance with the Future Land Use Map, including multi-story and mixed-used districts . Z:\Co mmiss io n Items\2 0 18\03-20-20 18\6075 Sun set\6075 Sun set st aff m emo.d ocx Alta Developers llC/6075 Sunset Zoning Map Amendment March 20, 2018 Page 6 of 13 Policy 3.1.4 The City of South Miami encourages development and redevelopment in the Transit-Oriented Development District. Existing streetscape widths along SW 62 Avenue and Sunset Drive will permit increased building heights that are aesthetically-pleasing. The City encourages transparent street-level retail with a mix of retail services, office uses, office services, and residential uses in mixed-use and multi-story prajects, as well as encouraging a district-wide mix of land uses via multiple projects. Finally, a concurrency analysis (see attachment) was completed to determine compliance with the various Level of Services standards. The standards will be satisfied by the proposed project. 2. Special Exception for a Large-Scale Development The applicant's second request is for approval of special exception for large-scale development. Pursuant to the TODD regulations (Sec. 20-8.9 Special Exceptions), any site larger than 40,000 square feet or any development taller than four (4) stories shall be designated as a Large-Scale Development and reviewed under the Special Exception provisions of the Code. The proposed project exceeds both thresholds. Essentially, this section provides conditions and design requirements that a project must satisfy for approval; it is provided in its entirety as an Attachment. Staff Observations Based on Section 20-8.9 1. Residential uses are not permitted on the first floor within that portion of the building fronting on the main street. The phrase "main street" means the thoroughfare that abuts the property line of the development and which has the most traffic, as compared to any other street that abuts the property. The proposed project includes first floor residential on SW 61 st and SW 7Pt. As these roadways do not have as much traffic as Sunset Drive, the project complies with this requirement. 2. The proposed uses are of a compatible and complementary nature with the existing and planned surrounding uses. The property is surrounded by buildings of various heights and land uses, including retail, office, a private club, a school and a mixed-use building. JKT Z:\Commission Items\2018\03-20-2018\6075 Sunset\6075 Sunset staff memo.docx Alta Developers llC/6075 Sunset Zoning Map Amendment March 20, 2018 Page 7 of 13 Property North East South West Comparison with Surrounding Properties land Use Zoning Office TODD MU-4 and TODD MU-S Office MO Commercial TODD MU-4 and TODD MU-S City Hall and Miami-Dade TODD-PI I County Library Multi-family residential, TODD MU-4, TODD MU-S Office, and Private Club and MO 3. The proposed development will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity nor will it be detrimental to the public welfare, property or improvements in the neighborhood. 4. The MU-S district allows four stories by right, and up to four more under Section 20-8.10 Bonus allocations, as follows: Action Bonus For everyone (1) floor of residential use One (1) additional floor of residential use with I the minimum parking requirement (two (2) cars per residential use) I Public plaza-min. five thousand (S,OOO) sq. ft. One (1) additional floor i and art work in plaza setting I Develop full frontage with street-design as One (1) additional floor part of pedestrian walkway system Develop "cross-thru's" from street to public One (1) additional floor open space system as part of pedestrian walk- system, on owner's property (maintenance required in Section 20-8.1S) With three levels of residential, the project is entitled to an additional three floors. The full- frontage street design along Sunset Drive entitles the project to a fourth bonus floor, bringing the total project to a height of eight (8) stories. The fac;:ade proposed for SW 71 st Street is only fifty-two (S2) feet in height, which is comparable to the four stories/fifty (SO) feet limit ofthe MO district across the street. JKT Z:\Commission items\2018\03-20-2018\6075 Sunset\6075 Sunset staff memo.docx Alta Developers llC/6075 Sunset Zoning Map Amendment March 20, 2018 Page 8 of 13 5. The project must comply with other applicable Code provisions, including the TODD Regulating Plan. The Regulating Plan classifies streets in the district as either Main or Minor; and further provides design standards such as the location and dimensions of build-to lines and requirements for awnings or arcades based on these street types. The site plan for this property, which is challenged by having three (3) street frontages, was designed to comply with the regulations for a Main Street (i.e., Sunset Drive), which is treated as the front of the building. Further, the facades along SW 6pt Avenue and SW 71 st Street, which are designated as Minor Streets, are treated as the side of the building. The building lacks the required awning or arcade on the north elevation but staff notes that the townhouse type residential units do not lend themselves to an awning or arcade, and that the landscaped areas in front of the units and the street trees will serve the same purpose as an arcade. Finally, Staff notes that the building at the east end of the block which also has frontage on three (3) streets, treats the71st Street fac;ade as the rear of the structure and lacks an arcade or awning. Staff recommends that this be resolved with the Environmental Review and Preservation Board during their review. 6. The Traffic Impact Study and the Parking Study prepared by Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc., were reviewed on behalf of the City by Juan Calderon of CALTRAN Engineering Group, Inc. Mr. Calderon determined that the studies were acceptable (please see Attachments). 7. A Development Agreement and a Maintenance Covenant shall be prepared and approved by the Commission, in accordance with Section 20-8.9(1) and (J). 3. Variance to reduce the total number of parking spaces The final application is for a variance to reduce the required number of off-street parking spaces for the proposed development. As designed, the project has 303 spaces on-site and gets credit for eleven (11) spaces on the adjacent streets for a total of 314 spaces. With 203 residential units and 6,119 square feet of ground floor commercial/retail space, the project would be required to provide a total of 466 spaces: JKT Residential: 2 spaces per unit plus 1 visitor space per 10 units (203 x 2) + (203/10) = 406 + 21 = 427 Retail: 1 space per 300 sq. ft. gross floor area 2,441/300 = 9 Restaurant: 1/100 sq. ft. of patron area plus 1/300 of non-patron area 2,452/100 = 25 1,226/300 = 5 TOTAL: 427 + 9 + 25 + 5 = 466 Z:\Commission Items\2018\03-20-2018\6075 Sunset\6075 Sunset staff memo.docx Alta Developers LLC/6075 Sunset Zoning Map Amendment March 20, 2018 Page 9 of 13 With 466 spaces required and 314 provided, the project has a deficit of 152 spaces. The applicant proposes providing the required spaces for the retail and restaurant uses and the required visitor spaces, but reducing the residential parking to 1.3 spaces per unit for 275 residential spaces. Pursuant to Section 20-5.9 of the LOC, a variance for off-street parking can be reviewed and permitted by the City Commission at a public hearing, after a recommendation by the Planning Board. Variance decisions shall be based on an affirmative finding as to each of five criteria presented below along with Staff's findings. Please note that the Applicant's letter of intent includes their comments on how each of the criteria are satisfied. JKT 1. The variance is necessary to relieve particular extraordinary conditions relating to a specific property; Staff Response: The LDC requires properties in the TODD to have their parking located at the side or rear of the building, so street frontages can be developed with uses that maximize the pedestrian experience. Since this property has three street frontages all three have retail/restaurant and/or residential uses. Those liner uses result in the parking being limited to a smaller area of the ground level and the upper levels. With the four-story height limit of the MO district to the north, and to limit its bulk, the building is not designed to the full permitted height. These considerations result in even less space being available for parking and the inability to comply with the code requirements for parking. 2. Denial of the variance would result in hardship to the owner. Hardship results if the restriction of the zoning ordinance, when applied to a particular property, becomes arbitrary, confiscatory or unduly oppressive because of conditions of the property that distinguish it from other properties under similar zoning restrictions; Staff Response: One hundred sixteen units, or over half of the total, are either studio apartments or one-bedroom units. Imposing the code required parking of two (2) spaces per unit for these small units, seems unduly oppressive. 3. The extraordinary conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant; Staff Response: The condition of having three (3) adjacent streets is not the result of an action of the applicant. Z:\Commission Items\2018\03-20-2018\6075 Sunset\6075 Sunset staff memo.docx Alta Developers LLC/6075 Sunset Zoning Map Amendment March 20, 2018 Page 10 of 13 4. The requested variance is the minimum variance necessary to make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure; Staff Response: Given the mix of unit sizes, the cost of the additional parking and the impact of the additional floors on the building's design, the variance requested is the minimum necessary to make possible the reasonable use of the land. 5. That the approval of the variance will be in consistent with the general intent and purpose of the Land Development Code, and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Staff Response: Allowing a reduction in parking in the urban area close to the Metrorail, shopping and employment centers is consistent with the general intent and purpose of the LDC and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or detrimental to the public welfare. It is worth noting that it's common in development regulations to provide lower ratios for smaller units such as studios, and for transit oriented projects such as this one. Further, the Parking Study prepared by Richard Garcia & Associates demonstrates that the proposed parking will be sufficient for the needs of the development. PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATION Following a public hearing on December 12, 2017, the Planning Board voted as follows to recommend approval of the applications, inclusive of staff's recommended conditions listed below, and the following additional conditions: (1) ensure that the Landscape Plan comply with the mitigation requirements of the LDC; and (2) the applicant to consider a minimum of four (4) units of affordable housing via a covenant. JKT 1) Zoning Map Amendment from TODD (MU-4) to TODD (MU-5): Vote: six ayes, two nays (2) Special Exception to allow a project of more than four (4) stories and more than 40,000 square feet in size: Vote: six ayes, two nays (3) Variance to reduce the amount of required parking: Vote: six ayes, two nays Z:\Commission Items\2018\03-20-2018\6075 Sunset\6075 Sunset staff memo.docx Alta Developers llC/6075 Sunset Zoning Map Amendment March 20, 2018 Page 11 of 13 STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Staff recommends approval, with the conditions listed below, of the proposed changes: (1) an amendment to the Official Zoning Map changing the designation from TODD MU-4 to TODD MU- 5 for the northern portion of the property; (2) a Special Exception to allow a large-scale development; and (3) a Variance to reduce the required number of parking spaces. General Conditions 1. Any development of the property will be in substantial compliance with the documents submitted including: Letter of Intent from Ines Marrero-Priegues dated August 11, 2017; Application Book consisting of a survey prepared by Fortun, Leavy, Skiles, Inc. dated 7/27/17; Renderings dated 9/20/17 (Sheets R-1.0 through R-1.2L Site Photographs (Sheets CP-1.0 and CP- 2.0); a Zoning Chart dated 8/11/17 (Sheet A-O.l) a site plan data sheet (A-l.00); Floor and Roof Plans (Sheets A-1.00 through 1.07); building elevations (Sheets A-2.01 and A-2.02); a building section drawing (Sheet A-3.01); and Planter Details (Sheet A-4.0) all signed and sealed by Roberto Behar (9-20-17); and a Tree Disposition Plan dated 10/10/17 (Sheet TD-l) and landscape plans (Sheets L-l through L-4) dated 8/8/17 prepared by Witkin Hults Design Group; and a Traffic Impact Study and Parking Study both prepared by Richard Garcia & Associates. 2. All documents submitted with this application are to be made part of the record. 3. Any improvements in the Public Right-of-Way shall be approved by the applicable agency (FOOT, Miami-Dade County and/or City of South Miami). 4. All impact fees shall be paid prior to issuance of building permit. 5. The Applicant shall provide a letter acknowledging compliance with the applicable Level of Services requirements prior to the issuance of final permit to the property. If any concurrency approvals expire a re-review shall be required by the appropriate agency. 6. Any changes that increase densities, intensities or population shall require a new Concurrency Analysis. 7. Applicant shall submit verification from Miami-Dade County that the proposed new development has been reviewed and approved for all access management considerations prior to site plan approval. 8. Flood elevations shall be reviewed and approved for consistency with FEMA requirements and the City's National Insurance Flood Program Ordinance prior to building permit approval. JKT Z:\Commission Items\2018\03-20-2018\6075 Sunset\6075 Sunset staff memo.docx Alta Developers LlC/607S Sunset Zoning Map Amendment March 20, 2018 Page 12 of 13 9. The Applicant shall comply with applicable conditions and requirements by Miami-Dade County Public Works Department, Fire Rescue Department, Department of Regulatory and Economics Resources -DERM (DRERL Miami-Dade County Water and Sewer Department, and FDOT. 10. The Applicant shall execute and record in the public records of Miami-Dade County, a Development Agreement and a Maintenance Covenant, in a form approved by the City Commission and City Attorney, which complies with the requirements of Land Development Code Section 20-8.9. 11. The Applicant shall execute and record in the public records of Miami-Dade County, a restrictive covenant, in a form approved by and subject to the review and approval of the City Manager and City Attorney, which contains all commitments made and conditions imposed as part of the approval of the Applications. Construction General Conditions 12. A Construction and Maintenance of Traffic (MOT) Plan shall be provided by the Applicant to the Public Works Departments for approval prior to start of construction. Access points by construction vehicles shall be provided within the MOT. 13. The Applicant shall provide a Construction Air Quality Management Plan to the Department prior to the start of construction. 14. A Construction, Demolition and Materials Management Plan (CDMMP) must be submitted by the Applicant at time of building permit. 15. Construction shall only take place Monday through Friday during the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. landscaping 16. The Applicant shall meet all of the minimum requirements of the City Code, Chapters 18 and 24 of the Miami-Dade County Code and specifically comply with all conditions imposed by Miami-Dade County Department of Regulatory and Economic Resources - DERM (DRERL if any. 17. The property shall be landscaped in accordance with the landscape plan, included with the site plan submittal, and approved by the Environmental Review and Preservation Board. 18. Pursuant to Sec. 20-4.5, as may be amended, the Applicant shall provide mitigation for all trees to be removed in accordance with City requirements. JKT Z:\Commission Items\2018\03-20-2018\6075 Sunset\6075 Sunset staff memo.docx Alta Developers LLC/6075 Sunset Zoning Map Amendment March 20, 2018 Page 13 of 13 Environmental 19. The Applicant shall meet the requirements of the Miami-Dade County Water-Use Efficiency Standards Manual, effective January 2009, as may be amended from time to time. 20. All storm water drainage systems shall be maintained in working order at all times to avoid localize flooding during and after a storm. Parking shall be prohibited on top of any drainage inlet or drainage manhole. Architecture 21. Final approval of all plans must be obtained from the Environmental Review and Preservation Board, as required by Code. ATTACHMENTS: * Application Package * Application * Letter of intent * Application booklet * Concurrency Analysis * Land Development Code Section 20-8.9 Special Exceptions * Traffic Impact Study prepared by Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. * Parking Study prepared by Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. * Email from Juan Calderon of CALTRAN Engineering Group, Inc. * Draft Ordinance approving the Zoning Map amendment * Copy of Applicant's Notification Letter and Affidavit of Mailing * Notice of Public Hearing * Legal Ad * Mailing Label Affidavit with Location Map (Property Owners within 500 Feet) dated 8/8/18 * Mailing Label Affidavit with Location Map (Abutting Property Owners) dated 8/8/17 * Excerpt of Planning Board meeting minutes, December 12, 2017 JKT Z:\Commission Items\2018\03-20-2018\6075 Sunset\6075 Sunset staff memo.docx ORDINANCE NO. 1 2 3 4 5 An Ordinance amending the Official Zoning Map; amending the designation of the northern portion of the property located at 6075 SW nnd Street, from "TODD (MU-4)" to "TODD (MU-5)". 6 7 WHEREAS, Alta Developers, LLC, (the "Applicant"), submitted an application (PB-17-032) to 8 amend the City of South Miami Official Zoning Map to change the designation ofthe northern portion of 9 the property located at 6075 SW nnd Street, and as shown in Exhibit 1, from "TODD (MU-4)" Transit- 10 Oriented Development District (Mixed Use-4) to "TODD (MU-5)" Transit-Oriented Development District 11 (Mixed-Use 5); and 12 13 WHEREAS, the Local Planning Agency has reviewed the proposed amendment to the Official 14 Zoning Map, and it has held an advertised public hearing and provided for public participation in the 15 process and rendered its recommendation of approval to the City Commission on a vote of four (4) ayes 16 to two (2) nays. 17 18 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF 19 SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA AS FOLLOWS: 20 21 Section 1. The City of South Miami hereby adopts an amendment to the Official Zoning Map 22 changing the designation for the northern portion of the property located at 6075 SW nnd Street and as 23 set forth below, from "TODD (MU-4)" Transit-Oriented Development District (Mixed Use-4) to "TODD 24 (MU-5)" Transit-Oriented Development District (Mixed-Use 5). 25 26 27 28 29 30 Existing Official Zoning Map 7031 ~ """~ ;:j I " I ~ 7000 ! Cl I ___ ~ 7109 1 'VI? S'W--1-'1.S.!-s~T~ 7051 -1 7090 ~, TODD I MU-41 l,' 7171 l .... .i I It--"' ... .-.............. --_ ............ , 6161 ___ --w-6075 , 6101 \; I m ~ " 6193 jJ) , I I .. ) M'U-5 Proposed Official Zoning Map 31 Section 2. Codification. The provisions of this Ordinance shall become and be made part of the 32 Official Zoning Map of the City of South Miami as amended. 33 34 Section 3. Severability. If any section, clause, sentence, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any 35 reason held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, this holding shall not affect 36 the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance or the Guidelines adopted hereunder. 37 38 Section 4. Ordinances in Conflict. All ordinances or parts of ordinances and all sections and parts 39 of sections of ordinances in direct conflict herewith are hereby repealed. 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 Section 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective upon enactment. PASSSED AND ENACTED this __ day of ______ , 2018. ATIEST: CITY CLERK 1'\ Reading 2 nd Reading READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM: LANGUAGE, LEGALITY AND EXECUTION THEREOF CITY ATIORNEY APPROVED: MAYOR COMMISSION VOTE: Mayor Stoddard: Vice Mayor Harris: Commissioner Gil: Commissioner Liebman: Commissioner Welsh: City of Sou.th Miami Planmng & Zoning Department City Hall, 6130 Sunset Drive, South Miami, Florida 33143 Telephone: (305) 663-6326 ; Fax : (305) 668-7356 Application for Public Hearing before Planning Board & City Commission Address of Subject Property: 6075 Sunset Drive Lot(s) 1r1:::./3 Block _1 __ Subdivision Rosswood PB Meets & Bounds: See complete legal, Attached l.L-...6£ Applicant: . Alta Developers LLC Phone: (786) 230-1040 RepresentativeHolland & Knight , LLP Organization: (305) 789 -7 782; (305) 789 -7776 Joseph Goldstein, EsqJlnes Marrero-Priegues,Esq. joseph .goldstein@hk!aw.com Address: 701 Brickell Ave., #3300, Miami, FL 33131 Phone: ines .marrero@hklaw.com Property Owner: SUNSET -MIAMI INVESTMENTS INC Signature: c/ 0 Frank Quesada, Esq. Mailing Address: 1313 PONCE DE LEON BLVD #200 Phone: (305) 446-251 7 CORAL GABLES , FL 33134 -3343 Architect/Engineer: Robert Behar , AlA, Phone: (305 ) 740-544 2 Behar Font Partners , P.A. AS THE APPLICANT ,. PLEASE INDICATE YOUR RELATIONSHIP TO THIS PROJECT: -Owner _Owner's Representative ~ Contract to purchase _Option to purchase _Tenant/Lessee APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE FOR THE FOLLOWING: SUBMITTED MATERIALS PLEASE CHECK THE APPROPRIATE ITEM : PLEASE CHECK ALL THAT APPLY: -Text Amendment to LDC Variance ~ Letter of intent ..x Zoning Map Amendment _Special Use .x Justifications for change _ PUD Approval >' Special Exception _Statement of hardship _ PUD Major Change _Other (Waiver of Plat) ~ Proof of ownership or letter from owner _ Power of attorney Briefly explain application and cite specific Code sections : _ Contract to purchase l Current survey (1 original sealed and Zoning Map Change of a portion of the Property from TODD -4 to TODD -5 signed/1 reduced copy @ 11" x 17") .x 15 copies of Site Plan and Floor Plans 24 x 36", 1 reduced copy @ 11" x 17" .!. Affidavit-Receipts attesting to mail notices sent Section : --Subsection : --Page #: __ Amended Date: Article V, Section 20-5, et seq. ~ Mailing labe ls (3 sets) and map ..x Required Fee(s) The undersigned has read t~i,$ completed application . and represents that the information and all submitted materials are true and correct to he best of the appllb nt's knowledge and brehef. . E . ! nes Marrero -Pnegues, sq. p / _~-:;;:'~----..t.~~~~~. ~V~\'A'~:,,::"~"""'=-___ Authorized Legal Representative 1I!IJ I iJ 0/7- itle (J Print Name Da1e • Upon receipt, applications and all submitted materials will be reviewed for compliance with the Land Development Code and other applicable regulations . Applications found not in compliance will be rejected and returned to the applicant OFFICE USE ONLY: Date Filed. ____ _ Date of PB Hearing, ______ Date of Comm ission _____ _ Petition Required, __ _ Petition Accepted _____ _ Method of Pa ment Z:\Forms\Current Planning Department Forms\Planning Department Forms\Planning Board\PB -Rezoning Application -Revised 2- 20-2013 .doc City of South. Miami Plannzng & Zoning Department City Hall, 6130 Sunset Drive, South Miami, Florida 33143 Telephone: (305) 663-6326; Fax: (305) 668-7356 Application for Public Hearing before Planning Board & City Commission Address of Subject Property 6075 Sunset Drive Lot(s) 1\:.6:/3 Block _1_ Subdivision Rosswood PB LL-62 Meets & Bounds See complete legal, Attached Applicant: Phone: Alta Developers LLC (786) 230-1040 RepresentativeHolland & Knight, LLP Organization: (305) 789-7782; (305) 789-7776 Joseph Goldstein, Esq'/Ines Marrero-Priegues,Esq. joseph.goldstein@hklaw.com Address 701 Brickell Ave., #3300, Miami, FL 33131 Phone: ines.marrero@hklaw.com Property Owner: SUNSET-MIAMI INVESTMENTS INC Signature: clo Frank Quesada, Esq. Mailing Address: 1313 PONCE DELEON BLVD #200 Phone: (305) 446-2517 CORAL GABLES, FL 33134-3343 ArchitecUEngineer Robert Behar, AlA, Phone: (305) 740-5442 Behar Font Partners, P.A. AS THE APPLICANT, PLEASE INDICATE YOUR RELATIONSHIP TO THIS PROJECT: -Owner _Owner's Representative ~ Contract to purchase _Option to purchase _TenanULessee APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE FOR THE FOLLOWING: SUBMITTED MATERIALS PLEASE CHECK THE APPROPRIATE ITEM PLEASE CHECK ALL THAT APPLY: -Text Amendment to LDC X Variance ~ Letter of intent _ Zoning Map Amendment _Special Use -.X Justifications for change _ PUD Approval X Special Exception xStatement of hardship _ PUD Major Change _Other (Waiver of Plat) ~ Proof of ownership or letter from owner _ Power of attorney Briefly explain application and cite specific Code sections: _ Contract to purchase Variance to reduce offstreet parking requirements for property within 1060 ft of l Current survey (1 original sealed and South Miami Metro Station signed/1 reduced copy @ 11" x 17") ..x. 15 copies of Site Plan and Floor Plans 24 x 36", 1 reduced copy @ 11" x 17" ~ Affidavit-Receipts attesting to mail notices sent Section' --Subsection --Page #: __ Amended Date Section 20-8.8(C) ~ Mailing labels (3 sets) and map ..K Required Fee(s) The undersigned has read this completed application and represents that the information and all submitted materials are true and correcttoithe best of the applicant's knowledge and belief. . . ,/ "." f ',i" Ines Marrero-Pnegues, Esq. . f !' . ":.".. /'<~·:(.,:.,<,o. ./r,.:~ Authorized Legal Representative '('//! /~2(j! '-;:" Applicant's Sig~~ture and'title Print Name Date ' Upon receipt, applications and all submitted materials will be reviewed for compliance with the Land Development Code and other applicable regulations. Applications found not in compliance will be rejected and returned to the applicant. OFFICE USE ONLY: Date Filed ____ _ Date of PB Hearin9 ______ Date of Commission _____ _ Petition Required __ _ Petition Accepted _____ _ Method of Pa ment Z:\Forms\Current Planning Department Forms\Planning Department Forms\Planning Board\PB -Rezoning Application -Revised 2- 20-2013.doc Exhibit "A" Legal Description 6075 Sunset Drive All of Tract A, less the East 118 feet of the North 129.07 feet, in Block 1, and Lot 3, in Block 1, of Rosswood, according to the Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 13, at Page 62, in the Public Records of Miami Dade Count Florida, less the South 25 feet of said Block 1. Address: . 6075 Sunset Drive South Miami Folio No. 09-4025-011-0010 Exhibit "A" Legal Description 6075 Sunset Drive All of Tract A, less the East 118 feet of the North 129.07 feet, in Block 1, and Lot 3, in Block 1, of Rosswood, according to the Plat thereof, recorded in Plat Book 13, at Page 62, in the Public Records of Miami Dade Count Florida, less the South 25 feet of said Block 1. Address: 6075 Sunset Drive South Miami Folio No. 09-4025-011-0010 #53278588_ vI IHIolRand & JKnigli)t 701 Brickell Avenue, Suite 3300 I Miami, FL 33131 I T 305.374.8500 I F 305.789.7799 Holland & Knight LLP I www.hklaw.com August 11,2017 VIA HAND DELIVERY Ms. Jane Tompkins Planning Director City of South Miami 6130 Sunset Drive South Miami, Plorida 33143 Re: Letter of Intent and Hardship Statement Ines Marrero-Priegues 3057897776 ines.manero@hklaw.com Application by Alta Developers LLC for Partial Rezoning of 6075 Sunset Drive, request for Special Exception and companion Variance application to reduce offstreet parking for proposed mixed use multifamily project Dear Ms. Tompkins: This letter of intent accompanies the application by Alta Developers, LLC ("Developer") with the express authorization of Sunset-Miami Investments, Inc. ("Owner"), collectively, the "Applicant" for an application to rezone the property at 6075 Sunset Drive (the "Property") from TODD 4 and TODD 5 to TODD 5. As required by Section 20-8.9 of the Land Development Regulations, the Applicant requests a Special Exception for approval of a project within the TODD District of more than four (4) stories and more than 40,000 square feet. The application also includes a request for a variance of the offstreet parking requirements of the TODD 5 District to permit a mixed use residential project of 202 residential units and 6,124 sq. ft. of ground floor commercial space with 313 parking spaces. The Property is located on the north side of Sunset Avenue (S. W. 72 Street), immediately east of SW 6Pt Avenue~ It consists of approximately 1.61 acres and until recently, was used as an office building and commercial bank. The Property is located west of the Mack Cycle building, a long standing business in the City and across South Miami City Hall. The Property is also located to the east of the Metro South Senior Apartment project. More importantly, the Property lies one block west of the South Miami MetroRail Station, a unique characteristic that is the basis for its inclusion in the City's Transit Oriented Development Designation in the Future Ms. Jane Tompkins Planning Director August 11,2017 Page 2 Land Use Plan Map and the foundation for the mixed use residential project that accompanies this Rezoning and parking Variance request. A. REZONING REQUEST (from TODD 4 and TODD S to TODD S) The Applicant requests the rezoning of the northern half of the Property from TODD-4 to TODD-S. This will establish one uniform zoning designation for the entire Property that is consistent with the Property's designation of Transit Oriented Development District. The increased height that is possible via the TODD-S zoning will optimize the unique location of the Property immediately to the west of the South Miami Metrorail Station. An image of the current zoning map is included, below with the Property outlined in green border. The following Goals and Policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan will be furthered by this rezonmg: FLU GOAL 3 -To achieve a tax base adequate to support a high level of municipal services via increased mixed use projects and flexible building heights in designated Transit Oriented Development Districts [TODD}, to the extent that development and redevelopment in these districts does not adversely impact surrounding neighborhoods and uses. FLU Policy 3.1.1 Zone for new development and redevelopment in accordance with the Future Land Use Map, including multi-story and mixed- use districts. FL U Policy 3.1.3 Pursue traffic policies, parking policies and pedestrian amenity policies that enhance downtown, and thereby the tax base. Ms. Jane Tompkins Planning Director August 11,2017 Page 3 FLU Policy 3.1.4 The City shall maintain and, as appropriate, expand the Transit Oriented Development Districts delineated on the Future Land Use Plan Map. Development and redevelopment in these districts shall occur in accordance with adopted development and redevelopment plans and the land development regulations, and shall not adversely impact surrounding neighborhoods and uses. The rezoning request will permit the development of a well-designed mixed use multifamily residential project that will support the City'S tax base and will not adversely impact any established residential neighborhood in the City. The project's proximity to mass transit will not only promote the goal of pedestrian friendly, transit oriented development but will also encourage walkability to and support of the Hometown District's shops and restaurants. The Future Land Use Map Designation of the Property is consistent with the request to rezone the entire Property to TODD 5. The Property is designated "Transit-Oriented Development District [TODD] (Flexible Height up to 8 Stories)" This category "is intended to provide for the development of ... residential uses in multi-story and mixed use projects that are characteristic or transit oriented developments." The mixed use multi-family development furthers Housing Goal 1 of the Comprehensive Plan: "[tjo assure the viability of sound and affordable housing for all current and future residents of the City of South Miami with special focus on infill and redevelopment and to include housing units in the Hometown District. ... " The proposed project will provide 202 housing units within walking distance to the businesses of the City as well as housing opportunities for, among others, healthcare workers, teachers, police officers and young individuals and families wishing to reside in South Miami. On behalf of the Applicant, we respectfully submit that the rezoning of the Property complies and promotes the policies and objectives of the City's Comprehensive Plan and urge your favorable recommendation. B. SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPROVAL PER 20-8.9 The application for rezoning is accompanied by plans for the proposed development of a mixed use muti-family residential project of more than 4 stories. As per Section 20-8-9 of the Land Development Regulations, the project requires Special Exception Approval. The plans for the project propose 202 residential dwelling units and 6,124 square feet of ground floor commercial uses. The project has been designed with attention to the entrance on Sunset Drive. This principal frontage provides active commercial space. In addition, seven (7) residential units are included at the ground floor level along S.W. 7pt Street, the Property's secondary frontage. These walk-in units provide close access to the MetroRail station and are preferred for residents who opt for a lifestyle with minimal or no motor vehicle dependence. Ms. Jane Tompkins Planning Director August 11,2017 Page 4 C. V ARlANCE TO REDUCE OFF STREET PARKING The Applicant's last request is a variance to reduce the total number of parking spaces for the proposed mixed use residential development. The project consists of 202 residential units and 6,124 square feet of ground floor commerciallretail space. The Land Development Code requires 2 spaces per residential unit, 1 additional visitor parking space for each 10 residential units and 1 space per 300 sq. ft. of commercial/retail use. Per these requirements, the project would have to provide 446 total parking spaces. The parking reduction requested is based on providing the required parking for visitors and for the commercial area, but reducing the parking for the residential units to 1.3 spaces per unit instead of 2 per unit for a total of 313 spaces, including 7 on-street parking spaces (446 spaces required). (1) HARDSHIP CRITERIA ANALYSIS The following analysis supports of the hardship criteria for the parking reduction variance: 1. The variance is necessary to relieve particular extraordinary conditions relating to a specific property. The subject property is located within the City's Transit Oriented District, a specially created zoning category that seeks to capitalize on proximity to mass transit. The Property is less than a 1,1 00 (less than a 4 minute walk -door to door) from the South Miami MetroRail Station. Providing the number of parking spaces required by the Code will result in a condition that is contrary to the intent of the TODD district. The residential project is intended to attract residents who either do not own a vehicle, share a vehicle or intend to have minimal use of their vehicle because of the close proximity to MetroRail. 2. Denial of the variance would result in hardship to the owner. Providing 142 parking spaces for the project will result in additional construction cost, will have adverse impacts on abutting streets and unintended traffic increase. 3. The extraordinary conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant: As stated above, the TODD District exists to incentivize mixed use developments in close proximity -walking distance -to mass transit. The subject property is uniquely situated one block west of the South Miami MetroRail station. 4. The requested variance in the minimum variance necessary to make possible the reasonable use of land, building or structure: The existing conditions and proximity between the subject property proposed for development as a mixed use residential project and the South Miami MetroRail Station are unique. The developer's experience in similar projects confirms that the proposed number of parking spaces will be sufficient and amply adequate to serve the needs of the proposed residents of the development. The City's recent decision approving a parking reduction for senior housing recognized that certain types of housing do not need more than one space per unit. Ms. Jane Tompkins Planning Director August 11,2017 Page 5 5. The approval of the variance will be consistent with the general intent and purpose of the Land Development Code, and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Approval of the variance will promote the public welfare by promoting the use of mass transit, reducing traffic impacts, reducing carbon emissions and by encouraging and incentivizing developments that promote these characteristics. Based on the foregoing, we respectfully request your favorable review and recommendation of the rezoning, special exception and parking variance. Should you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at (305) 789-7776. Very truly yours, HOLLAND & KNIGIIf!:LP a /0'o.-)4--:L Ines Mar;erd. Priegues U cc: Mr. Henry Pino, Alta Developers Mr. Raimundo Onetto. Alta Developers Mr. Frank Quesada, Esq. Joseph G. Goldstein, Esq. 53271591vl CONCURRENCY ANALYSIS Parcel Address: 6075 SW 72 Street December 12, 2017 Sout~iami THE CITY OF PLEASANT LIVING Request: Development of 203 residential units and 6,119 square feet of retaiJJrestaurant on a 1.6-acre parcel. The area is currently developed with a multi-story office building and surface parking that will be demolished to accommodate the project. The property is designated both Transit-Oriented Development District MU-4 and MU-5 on the Zoning Map. The applications request a change in the designation of the entire parcel to MU-4 and a special exception for a large-scale development. Change in Number of Units: + 203 residential units Change in Non-Residential Square Footage: -14,252 Change in Number Persons (2.46 persons per household): 0 to 499 = +499 persons LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS The impacts of build-out, based on the proposed submittal, on the City's ability to meet its adopted Level of Service standards are summarized below. As can be seen, the City will continue to meet its Level of Service standards. This analysis is based on those standards contained in the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan. Transportation: See Traffic Study Source: Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. Potable Water: Residential LOS Standard 117.5 gallons per capita per day Non-residential LOS Standard -No Standard Estimated impact -+ 58,633 gallons per day based on residential population only Source: City of South Miami 2015 Water Supply Plan Sanitary Sewer: INF Policy 1.1.4 Sanitary sewer level-of-service for sewered areas shall be as follows: the project flow plus the maximum day flow (the average ofthe five highest daily flows) of the preceding calendar year shall not exceed 98 percent of the county treatment system's rated capacity. Otherwise, septic tanks shall be the level-of service. Source: South Miami Comprehensive Plan, Infrastructure Element •• _ 0"' _____ ._ •• __________ •• _ City of South Miami I 6130 Sunset Drive I South Miami, FL 33143-5093 305.663.6338 I southmiamifl.gov Drainage INF Policy 1.3.2 The City's adopted Level of Service Standard for stormwater drainage shall be protection from the degree of flooding that would result from a flood that has a one-percent chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year. Source: South Miami Comprehensive Plan, Infrastructure Element Solid Waste: INF OBJECTIVE 1.2 Maintain solid waste collection services to residents and businesses within the City at the current level of service measurability. INF Policy 1.2.1 Pursuant to the City's interlocal agreement with Miami-Dade County for use of the County Solid Waste Management System, the County shall insure that the System, which includes County-owned solid waste. disposal facilities and those operated under contract with the County for disposal, for a minimum of five years, collectively maintain an amount of solid waste disposal capacity sufficient to accommodate waste flows committed to the system through long-term interlocal agreements or contracts with municipalities and haulers, and anticipated non-committed waste flows. Source: South Miami Comprehensive Plan, Infrastructure Element Parks & Recreation: REC Policy 1.1,1 Retain the existing park acreage (includes City and School Board recreation acreage) and facilities, thereby providing a level-of-service standard of 4 acres per 1,000 popUlation. Based on 2010 Census -11,657 LOS Standard -4 acres/ 1,000 residents Estimated impact of additional residents: +1.96 acres Current park acres required to meet LOS Standard -46.63 acres Projected acres required to meet LOS Standard at maximum build Out: 48.63 acres Existing park acreage (City, 47.84 acres and MDCPS, 3.77 acres): 51.61 acres Projected Surplus -+ 2.98 acres Sources: City's Park List; 2010 Census Schools: See School Concurrency Determination Memo (Dated 11 122/2017) superintendent of Schools Alberto M Carvalho November 22 ,2017 VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL Ines Marrero Holland & Knight 701 Brickell Avenue, Suite 3300 Miami , Florida 33131 ines .marrero@hklaw.com RE: PUBLIC SCHOOL CONCURRENCY PRELIMINARY ANALYSIS 6075 SUNSET DRIVE -SITE REDEVELOPMENT APPLICATION LOCATED AT 6075 SUNSET DRIVE PH091709210 -FOLIO No.: 0940250110010 Dear Applicant: Miami-Dade County School Board Perla Tabares Hantman , Chair Dr. Martin Karp, Vice Chair Dr. Dorothy Bendross-Mindingall Susie V. Castillo Dr. Lawrence S. Feldman Dr. Steve Gallon //I Lubby Navarro Dr. Marta Perez Man Tere Rojas Pursuant to State Statutes and the Interlocal Agreements for Public School Facility Planning in Miami- Dade County, the above-referenced application was reviewed for compliance with Public School Concurrency. Accordingly, enclosed please find the School District's Preliminary Concurrency Analysis (Schools Planning Level Review). As noted in the Preliminary Concurrency Analysis (Schools Planning Level Review), the proposed development would yield a maximum residential density of 202 multifamily units , which generate 21 students : 10 elementary, 5 middle and 6 senior high students . At this time, all school levels have sufficient capacity available to serve the application . However, a final determination of Public School Concurrency and capacity reservation will only be made at the time of approval of final plat, site plan or functional equivalent. As such , this analysiS does not constitute a Public School Concurrency approval. Should you have any questions , please feel free to contact me at 305-995-7287. Best regards, . ~~ Supervisor NS :ns L-149 Enclosure cc: Ms . Ana Rijo-Conde , AICP Mr. Michael A. Levine Mr. Ivan M. Rodriguez City of South Miami School Concurrency Master File Planning, Design & Sustainability Ms . Ana Rijo-Conde, Deputy Chief Facilities & Eco-Sustainability Officer· 1450 N.E. 2nd Ave .• Suite 525' Miami, FL 33132 305-995-7285' 305-995-4760 (FAX) oarijo@dadeschools.net MDCPS Application Number: Date Application Rece ived: Type of Application: Applicant's Name: Address/Location : Master Folio Number: Additional Folio Number(s): PROPOSED # OF UNITS SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED UNITS: SINGLE -FAMILY ATTACHED UNITS : MULTIFAMILY UNITS: 3061 6881 6881 SOUTH MIAMI MIDDLE SOUTH MIAMI MIDDLE Miami-Dade County Public Schools Concurrency Management System Preliminary Concurrency Analysis PH0917092101268 9/21/201712:21 :46 PM Public Hearing 6075 Sunset Drive Lo cal Government (LG): LG Applicati on Number: Sub Type: 6075 Sunset Drive, Miami FL 33143 0940250110010 , Net Availabl e : Capacity ------- 10 10 -163 5 o o 5 o NO NO South Miam i Site Redevelopment Application Redevelopment Current CSA Current CSA Current CSA Five Year Plan [ DCPS has conducted a preliminary public school concurrency review of this application; please see results .above . A final dete. rmination of public school concurrency and capacity reservatio n will be made at the time of pproval of plat, site plan or functional equ ivalent. THIS ANALYSIS DOES NOT CONSTITUTE PUBLIC SCHOOL CONCURRENCY APPROVAl. .. -.... -•. -------~-----' 1450 NE 2 Avenue, Room 525, Miami, Florida 33132/305-995-7634/305-995-4760 fa x / concurrency@dadeschools .ne t 20-8.9 -Special exceptions. (A) A Special Exception as used in the T.ODD shall mean a permitted use that complies with all the conditions and standards for the district as well as those set forth below. For those eXisting uses in this district, any alterations or additions to those buildings that result in the building being designated as a Large Scale Development, shall conform to the provisions of this ordinance. Existing heights of existing buildings and existing floors may remain in their current condition; however, additional floors, if authorized, may be added in accordance with this ordinance. (B) Any site that is in excess of forty thousand (40,000) square feet or any development, as defined in section 380.04, Florida Statutes (hereinafter referred to as "Development"), in excess of four (4) stories shall be deSignated as a Large Scale Development it shall be reviewed by the Planning Board and it shall require approval by the City Commission. The square footage of an alteration or addition to an existing site and the square footage of the existing site that is being altered or to which an addition is being proposed shall be included in the computation of the size of the Development project in order to determine if it is a Large Scale Development. Special exceptions, if granted, shall be valid if new construction commences within eighteen (18) months from the date of final approval and is substantially completed within two (2) years from the date of issuance of the first building permit. The time for substantial completion may be extended by the city commission upon application filed prior to the expiration of the substantial completion period and upon demonstration of good cause 2. For the purpose of this section 20-8.9, substantial completion shall mean the stage in the progress of the project where the work on the project or designated portion of an approved phased project is sufficiently complete in accordance with the Contract Documents so that the Owner can occupy or utilize the project, or designated portion of an approved phased project, for its intended use, or the project has received either a temporary certificate of occupancy or a certificate of occupancy In order to be an "approved phased project" the Owner must obtain City Commission approval for the phases of the project. 3. Any property deSignated as a Large Scale Development may have residential uses on the first floor, however, residential uses are not permitted on the first floor within that portion of the building or development fronting on the main street The phrase "main street" means the thoroughfare that abuts the property line of the building or development and which has the most traffic, as compared to any other street that abuts the property. (C) General Requirements. A Large Scale Development shall be approved and permitted by the City Commission at a public hearing, after the planning board makes its recommendation, provided that such use is specifically listed as a permitted use in the appropriate district column in the Permitted Use Schedule of the Land Development Code (section 20-3.3D, as may be amended), and that such use complies with the following general requirements and any other requirements that the City Commission may consider appropriate and necessary. 1. All such uses shall comply with all requirements established in the appropriate zoning use district, unless additional or more restrictive requirements are set forth below or by the City Commission. 2. All such uses must be of a compatible and complementary nature with any existing or planned surrounding uses. 3 The City Commission shall determine the overall compatibility of the development with the existing or planned surrounding uses. 4. If during the review process it is determined that the development, as proposed, will potentially cause adverse impact, the Planning Department shall recommend remedial measures to eliminate or reduce, to the extent possible, these impacts. Development projects that are recommended for remedial measures will not be required to submit a new application unless it is determined by the Department that additional changes which would have the effect of increasing densities, square footage or altering the height or use of a Development have been made Remedial measures may include, but are not limited to I Additional screening or buffering, II Additional landscaping, iii Building orientation; iv Relocation of proposed open space, or alteration of the use of such space; v Pedestrian and bicycle safety and access; VI. Changes to ingress and egress; vii Addressing traffic flow to and from the development to avoid intrusion on local streets in nearby single family residential areas; or viii. Improvement of the streets adjacent to the project, if applicable (D) Project Approval (a) Required Conditions. Prior to approving a Large Scale Development the City Commission must find that the development meets the requirements set forth in subsection (C) above and that it Will not adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity of the proposed use; 2. Will not be detrimental to the public welfare, property or improvements in the neighborhood; and 3. Complies with all other applicable Code provisions. (b) Additional Conditions. The City Commission may designate such additional requirements in connection with the approval of a Large Scale Development as will, in its opinion, assure that such development will conform to the foregoing requirements. (E) Reapplication for Development Review No reapplication for a Large Scale Development review under section 20-8.9 shall be accepted by the City within six (6) months of the date of final disapproval by the City Commission of a previous application involving the same or substantially the same project, unless evidence is submitted and accepted by the City Commission which Justifies such reconsideration. (F) No single use in the TO.DD. Zone shall exceed a gross floor area of eighty thousand (80,000) square feet, except residential uses. (G) Within the MU-5 subcategory, the maximum height of new buildings or existing building with additions shall be limited to a maximum of four (4) stories, as permitted, unless the development earns a bonus as set forth in section 20-8.10 However, in no event shall a development exceed eight (8) stories, as permitted with bonus, nor shall it exceed one hundred (100) feet (H) Where there is no minimum distance between adjacent buildings, nor a minimum building setback from a property line, one (1) of the first two (2) of the following conditions shall be met: 1. If the distance from the exterior wall to the property line is less than five (5) feet, the applicant must provide the Planning Department with a copy of a maintenance easement applicable to the adjacent property; or 2 The structure shall be built on the property line and the owner shall give an attachment easement to the adjacent property owner(s). 3. In no instance shall a roof overhang extend beyond the property line, except in the front of the building. (I) The granting of a special exception shall be conditioned on the Applicant signing an agreement with the City, in a form acceptable to the City, which shall include all of the conditions required for the granting of the special exception ("Development Agreement") The Development Agreement, after it has been drafted by the City Attorney shall be subject to approval by the City Commission. A separate agreement or covenant ("Covenant") that provides for maintenance of common elements and any other condition specified as a prerequisite to approval of the special exception ("Maintenance Covenants") shall be signed by the owner of the property in question. The Maintenance Covenant shall be treated as a covenant running with and binding the land upon which the Development is situated and it shall be recorded in the land records of Miami-Dade County and, at the option of the City and if allowed by law, the Maintenance Covenant may be re-recorded when necessary or required to maintain, uninterrupted, the effectiveness of the covenant running with the land. The Covenant shall provide that the owner and his/her/its grantees, heirs, successors and assigns ("Owner") shall comply with the Maintenance Covenants at the Owner's expense and without any cost to the City. (1) In the event that any special exception condition includes the development of any common areas ("Common Areas"), the Maintenance Covenant shall include the following provisions (a) the Common Areas shall continue in existence, as part of the structure and those Common Areas shall be operated and maintained at the expense of the Owner of the property so long as the Development continues to exist, in whole or in part; (b) the operation and maintenance of the Common Areas shall include a provision for landscaping in accordance with an approved site and development plan, approved by the City Commission and the Environmental Review and Preservation Board, or as amended from time to time with approval of the City Commission, the maintenance of the landscape as well as other maintenance services and private security protection of the Common Areas; (c) the Owner shall continue, operate and maintain the Common Areas in such a manner as to keep such areas in good order, clean, attractive, fully functional (subject to interruption for maintenance, repair, restoration and renovation) and, generally, so as not to create a nuisance to owners, occupants and users of the adjacent land and surrounding areas and to the general public. (2) The Maintenance Covenant shall define the phrase "continue, operate and maintain", as it applies to landscaping, to include, but not limit it to, the following activities (a) The monitoring of the landscape areas by a recognized landscape expert, acceptable to the City, and the preparation of reports by such expert certifying that the landscaping is in compliance or is not in compliance with the approved Landscape Plan and all provisions included in such plan pertaining to pruning, fertilizing and general maintenance; the reports shall be prepared annually; and (b) The replacing of plants, trees, shrubs or the like, at the Owner's sole expense, as determined by the landscape expert to be necessary in order for the landscaping to perpetually be in compliance with the Landscape Plan (c) In the event that the City disagrees with the opinion of the landscape expert hired by the Owner, the City shall have the right to hire its own landscape expert whose decision shall be finaL If the City's expert agrees with the expert hired by the Owner, the City shall pay the cost of its own expert, otherwise, the Owner shall pay the cost of the City's expert (3) The Development Agreement and the Maintenance Covenant shall contain the following provision: (a) In the event the Owner breaches its agreement ("a Default") and fails to cure the default within thirty (30) days ("the Cure Period") after receiving written notice of the default or fails to use all due diligence in commencing the cure and in proceeding to effectuate the cure. If the Owner is unable to timely cure the default after receiving written notice, the Owner may request an extension of time from the City Commission which shall be granted ("Extended Cure Period") upon presentation of substantial competent evidence establishing the Owner's good faith and due diligence, justifiable reasons for the delay and the amount of time needed to cure the default. In the event that the Owner fails to cure the default within the Cure Period, or within the Extended Cure Period, whichever is greater, a fine shall be assessed against the owner in the amount of one hundred fifty dollars ($150.00), or such amount as may be set forth in the City Fee Schedule , for each day the owner remains in default thereafter. (b) In the event that a fine is assessed against the Owner, or the City incurs any expense towards curing the default, the City shall have the right to file a lien , or a continuing special assessment lien , as may be applicable , against the property and file a lien foreclose action for the full amount of money incurred by the City for said expense as well as for any fine that has been assessed . The City's lien sha ll be perfected upon being recorded in the land records in Miami-Dade County , Florida and shall be of equal rank and dignity as the lien of City's ad valorem taxes and superior in rank and dignity to all other liens, encumbrances , titles and claims in, to, or against the land in question , unless in conflict with state statutes or Miami-Dade County code. (c) The City shall have the right to proceed against the Owner to collect the above-described costs and expenses without resorting to a li en and/or lien foreclosure The City's remedies shall inc lude all those available in law or in equity , including injunctive relief. The exercise of one available remedy shall not be deemed a waiver of any other ava ilabl e remedy . (d) Invalidation of any of the covenants identified in this section 20-8 .9 , by judgment of court shall not affect any of the other provisions , which shall remain in full force and effect. In the event of a violation of the Development Agreement or the Maintenance Covenant, in addition to any other remedies available , the City of South Miami is hereby authorized to withhold any future permits , and refuse to make any inspections or grant any approval , until such time as the declaration of restrictive covenants in lieu of unity of title are comp lied with All rights , remedies and privileges granted pursuant to the Development Agreement and/or Maintenance Covenant shall be deemed to be cumulative and the exercise of anyone or more shall neither be deemed to const itute an election of remedies , nor shall it preclude the party exercising the same from exercising such other additional rights, remedies or privileges (J) Development Agreements , as well as all amendments and revocations thereto , shall comply with F.S §§ 163 .3220-163 .3243 , as amended by the Florida Legislature . (K) This ordinance shall apply to all projects that commence the plan review process with the City's Planning and Zoning Department on or after May 16 , 2012. (Ord. No. 9-97-1630 , § 1,4-1-97 ; Ord . No. 20-99-1694 , § 3, 11-16-99 ; Ord. No . 26-10-2051 , § 1,9-7-10 ; Ord. No. 13-11-2086 , § 1,3-1-11 ; Ord. No . 08-12-2124 , § 1,6-5-12) Traffic Impact Study & Review Comments & Responses 6075 Sunset Drive 6075 Sunset Drive South Miami, Florida Revised November 8th , 201 7 6075 SLJnsei Drive Traffic. Impact Study Engineer's Certification I, Carlos X. Valentin, P.E. # 78422, certify that I currently hold an active Professional Engineers License in the State of Florida and am competent through education and experience to provide engineering services in the civil and traffic engineering disciplines contained in this report. In addition, the firm Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. holds a Certificate of Authorization # 9592 in the State of Florida. I further certify that this report was prepared by me or under my responsible charge as defined in Chapter 61 G 15-18.001 F.A.C. and that all statements, conclusions and recommendations made herein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and ability. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: PROJECT LOCATION: Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 6075 Sunset Drive -Traffic Impact Study 6075 Sunset Drive South Miami, Florida Florida Registration No. 78422 Date Page I 1 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact Study Table of Content Review Comments & Responses ................................................................................. 4 Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... 9 Introduction ................................................................................................................. 12 Project Description / Location ................................................................................... 12 Existing Condition (2017) ............................................................................................ 14 Turning Movement Counts (TMC's) ........................................................................... 14 Operational Analysis -Intersection Level of Service (LOS) ................................... 14 Project Traffic ............................................................................................................... 1 7 Trip Generation ............................................................................................................ 17 Trip Distribution ............................................................................................................. 18 Trip Assignment ............................................................................................................ 20 Proposed Future Condition (2019) ............................................................................. 23 Background Traffic Growth ........................................................................................ 23 Committed Development ......................................................................................... 23 Future Traffic Volumes -AM & PM Peak Hour ......................................................... 23 Operational Analysis -Intersection LOS ................................................................... 23 Trip Generation Comparison ...................................................................................... 26 Proposed Development vs. "As-of-Right" Development ....................................... 26 Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 27 Page I 2 Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact Study List of Figures Figure 1: Location Map ................................................................................................................ 12 Figure 2: Site Plan ........................................................................................................................... 13 Figure 3: Existing Seasonally Adjusted TMC's (2017) -AM Peak Hour ................................... 15 Figure 4: Existing Seasonally Adjusted TMC's (2017) -PM Peak Hour ................................... 16 Figure 5: Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) Map ................................................................................... 19 Figure 6: Site Traffic (project Net Trips) -AM Peak Hour .......................................................... 21 Figure 7: Site Traffic (Project Net Trips) -PM Peak Hour ........................................................... 22 Figure 8: Future Condition with Project Trips (2019) -AM Peak Hour .................................... 24 Figure 9: Future Condition with Project Trips (2019) -PM Peak Hour. .................................... 25 List of Tables Table 1: Level of Service (LOS) Summary .................................................................................. 11 Table 2: Existing Condition LOS & Delay (Intersections) -AM & PM Peak Hour .................. 16 Table 3: Trip Generation -AM Peak Hour .................................................................................. 18 Table 4: Trip Generation -PM Peak Hour ................................................................................... 18 Table 5: Directional Trip Distribution Percentages ................................................................... 19 Table 6: Directional Trip Assignment ........................................................................................... 20 Table 7: Future Condition LOS & Delay (Intersections) -AM & PM Peak Hour .................... 25 Table 8: Trip Generation Comparison ........................................................................................ 26 Appendices Appendix A: Trip Generation Appendix B: Trip Distribution / Assignment Appendix C: Growth Rate & Adjustment Factor Appendix D: Traffic Counts (TMC's) & Committed Developments Appendix E: Level of Service (LOS) Appendix F: Trip Generation Comparison Appendix G: Site Plan Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. Page I 3 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact Study Review Comments & Responses We have reviewed the traffic comments from Caltran Engineering Group dated October 9th , 2017 for the referenced project. We hereby offer the following responses in an effort to address the comments made. 1.0 Introduction: Please include the approved study methodology in an Appendix. RGA Response: A traffic impact study methodology was not coordinated with the City of South Miami due to time constraints. However, the Traffic Study for the subject project was prepared consistent with other traffic studies previously performed by our firm and submitted to the City of South Miami. Project Description / Location 1. On page 7, include the Gross Floor Area (GFA) of the existing Drive -in Bank. RGA Response: The gross floor area (GFA) of the exist ing drive-in bank was included in the revised traffic study . 2. Figure 2: The proposed driveways on SW 61 st A venue are separated by approximately 50 feet. These two driveways are proposed to have a two-way operation. Please expand on the need for a two-way operation for these driveways and indicate if existing vehicular queues on southbound SW 61 st Avenue approaching SW 72 nd Street would have an impact on their operation . RGA Response : The two-way operation at both driveways on SW 61 st Avenue will allow loading vehicles to maneuver in and out of the loading areas efficiently and without disrupting the through traffic on SW 61 st Avenue. Also, it will improve traffic flow within the site as well as vehicular access to the parking spaces at ground level. The operational analysis documented in this report revealed that southbound queues on SW 61 st Avenue approaching SW 72 nd Street will not exceed 2 vehicles for the existing and proposed conditions. Therefore, the driveways location and proposed traffic operation will not have a negative impact on the traffic operations of the southbound approach at SW 72 nd Street/SW 6 lSt Avenue. Note, the southbound approach is restricted to right-turns only and the traffic signals along SW 72 nd Street provide sufficient gaps that allows southbound right-turn vehicles to enter SW 72 nd Street without creating significant queues on SW 6 lSt Avenue. Page I 4 Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact Study 3. Please provide a Site Plan of the proposed development in an Appendix. The site plan should include the following: >-Lot Size >-Gross Floor Area >-Breakdown of the GFA of the different land uses offered by the proposed development >-Driveway locations >-Park ing Spaces provided RGA Response: The site plan was included in the report for illustrative purposes only. The Applicant has submitted a full set of plans to the City of South Miami and therefore, the reviewer should request said site plans from the City as part of the reviewing process. Nonetheless, Appendix G of the revised Traffic Study includes several site plan sheets for ease of review. 2.0 Existing Conditions (2017): Turning Movement Counts (TMC's) On Page 9, please use the PSCF instead of SF and modify the analysis accordingly . RGA Response: We respectfully disagree with the reviewer. The appropriate traffic data adjustment is the Seasonal Factor (SF) and not the Peak Season Conversion Factor (PSCF) as indicated by the Florida Department of Transportation (FOOT), which is the agency responsible for developing the adjustment factors and their respective uses. FOOT has stated to us the following : "Unless you are feeding your data into and urban model. use the Seasonal Factors to turn your counts into AADT estimates. " Nevertheless, the turning movement counts were adjusted with the PSCF in an effort to satisfy the reviewer's concerns and the operational analysis was revised accordingly. 3.0 Project Traffic: Trip Generation 1. Page 12. Table 3 -Trip Generation AM Peak hour, for Land Use 912 -Drive-in Bank , use the rate based on the GFA. For Land Use 220 -Apartment, use the given equation. For Land Use 826 -Specialty Retail, use the equation given for PM peak hour (i.e., between 4 and 6 pm) and invert the directional distribution. RGA Response: Although it was not documented in the original report, both the ITE rates and equations as well as the available variables for each land use were Page I 5 Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact study considered in the trip generation analysis and the most reasonable and conservatives results were utilized in the analysis. The revised trip generation table includes trip calculations for Land Use 912 (Drive -in Bank) using the gross floor area and ITE rates. Also, it includes the trip calculations for LU 220 (Apartment) using the ITE equation. Moreover, we disagree with the reviewer in regards to calculating the AM peak hour trips for LU 826 (Specialty Retail) using the ITE equation for PM peak hour and inverting the directional distribution. Specialty Retail typically generates significantly more traffic during the PM peak hour (between 4:00 -6:00 PM) and will not be a reasonable estimation of AM peak hour trips for LU 826. The analysis documented in the report utilizes the ITE rate for LU 820 (Shopping Center), which is a related use and thus , yielded reasonable AM peak hour results for Specialty Retail. This methodology has been used by our firm and approved by various agencies. 2. Page 13, Table 4 -Trip Generation PM Peak hour, for Land Use 912 -Drive-in Bank. Use the rate based on the GFA . For Land Use 220 -Apartment, use the given equation and for Land Use 826 -Specialty Retail, use the equation given for PM peak hour (Le., between 4 and 6 pm). RGA Response: The revised trip generation table includes the trip calcu lations for Land Use 912 (Drive -in Bank) using the gross floor area and ITE rates. Note, the PM peak hour trip generation calculations for LU 220 (Apartment) and LU 826 (Specialty Retail) were originally performed using the ITE equation. Trip Assignment 1. Pages 14 through 16 : Trip Assignment at the intersection of SW 59 th Place and SW 71 5t Street should be re-evaluated . Based on existing counts and the current roadway network, the distribution of traffic for the eastbound left-turn movement should not be that high . Please revise the trip distribution for left-turn and right turn movements at this intersection, and modify the report accordingly. RGA Response : See revised trip distribution. The trip distribution was performed consistent with the TAZ, current roadway network, local knowledge of the existing traffic patterns and location/use of the proposed driveways. Note, traffic always find the path of least resistance and therefore, an increase in traffic at the intersection of SW 71 5t Street and SW 59 th Place is expected, especially once the subject project is fully operational. 2. Pages 15 and 16 , Figures 6 and 7 -Project Net Trips . The cardinal distribution from Table 6 indicates that 30 .08% of the trips were assigned to/from the west, explain why only a few trips were assigned to Driveways 1 and 2. Also , show the distribution percentages in the Figures 6 and 7. Page I 6 Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact study RGA Response: The driveways on SW 6 lSI Avenue (Driveways 1 & 2) will provide vehicular access to the parking spaces (64 of 303 spaces) at ground level and loading areas. It is assumed that most of these parking spaces at ground level will be used by patrons of the retail and restaurant, which are the land uses generating less peak hour traffic for the subject project when compared to the residential component. Therefore, the majority of the peak hour trips were assigned to the driveway on SW 71 sl Street (Driveway 3). Lastly, Figures 6 and 7 are print screens from the actual Synchro software model and cannot be edited to include the trip percentages. However, Appendix B includes an exhibit depicting an aerial with the trip distribution percentages. 4.0 Proposed Future Condition (2019): Future Traffic Volumes -AM & PM Peak Hour The Study does not consider any committed developments. Please indicate if there are any committed developments that should be considered for this study. RGA Response: The revised study has considered committed developments as provided by the City of South Miami. Level of Service (LOS) The HCM states "LOS is not defined for the major-street approaches or for the overall intersection , as major-street through vehicles are assumed to experience no delay"; therefore, please remove the overall intersection LOS shown in Tables 1,2 and 7. RGA Response: We agree with the reviewer; however, the overall intersection LOS for unsignalized intersections (two-way stop control) is provided as a guide to the entire intersection's quality of traffic service and is based on the HCM delay criteria. Please note we have included this measure for years in most of our traffic studies and find the information useful. The reason is to document understandable results for policy makers that do not understand the "Critical Approach LOS" and may compare the critical approach LOS with the overall intersection results of the signalized intersections. Lastly, the LOS tables documented in the report summarize the LOS and average vehicle delay for each intersection's Critical Approach. 5.0 Trip Generation Comparison: Table 8. Please revise trip generation calculations based on the comments provided under the trip generation section . RGA Response: See revised table. 6.0 Parking Analysis Page I 7 Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact Study Based on the ITE parking Generation Manual and City of South Miami, please provide a parking compliance analysis for the proposed facility. RGA Response: The parking calculations based on the City of South Miami requirements are included in the set of plans (Sheet A-O.1) submitted to the City. Lastly, a Parking Study was performed using the ITE Parking Generation Manual as requested and is provided as a separate document. 7.0 Conclusions Please provide a clos ing statement for the following : ~ Existing conditions (LOS) The studied intersections have an existing overall LOS A while the critical approach at each intersection resulted in LOS 0 or better. ~ Maximum number of trips that could be generated by the proposed facility The proposed development will generate 109 gross trips during the AM peak hour, 184 gross trips during the PM peak hour and 1,827 daily trips . ~ Future conditions (LOS) The studied intersections will operate at overall LOS B or better during the future peak hours while the critical approach at each intersection resulted in LOS E or better. ~ Parking Analysis The Parking Study based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parking Generation Manual revealed that 289 and 277 parking spaces are required for the subject project during the weekday and weekend condition, respectively. Therefore, the total 303 parking spaces provided within the site are sufficient to satisfy the parking demand. ~ Proposed improvements, if necessary Off-site improvements are not required or recommended at this time . 8.0 Appendix E: The results of the capacity analysis included in the appendix were prepared using the HCM 6th version, please provide the results using HCM 2010 version. RGA Response: HCM 6th version is the latest Highway Capacity Manual edition and supersede the HCM 2010 version. Therefore, the LOS results using HCM 2010 version are not necessary. Page I 8 Richard Garcia & As sociates , In c. 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact Study Executive Summary This study was prepared to determine the vehicle trips associated with the subject project and to evaluate the traffic impacts to the most impacted intersections. The subject site is located on the northeast corner of SW 72 nd Street (Sunset Drive) and SW 6 pI Avenue in the City of South Miami, Florida. This site has a drive-in bank (6,701 square feet) with two (2) drive-in lanes and 13,670 square feet of office. The existing building will be demolished while the proposed redevelopment consists of rental apartments with 203 units, 2,441 square feet of retail and a restaurant with 3,678 square feet. This project is expected to be comp leted by 2019. For vehicular access, the subject project will have two driveways on SW 6 pI Avenue and one driveway on SW 71 51 Street. The trip generation characteristics for the subject project were obtained from ITE's Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. The trip generation analysis was performed for a typical weekday's AM and PM peak hour. The following land uses, as identified by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), most closely resemble the subject project. These land uses (LU) are as follows: Existing: • LU 710: General Office with 13,670 Square Feet (SF) • LU 912: Drive-In Bank with 2 Drive-in Lanes (6,701 SF) Proposed: • LU 220: Apartment with 203 Dwelling Units • LU 826: Specialty Retail with 2,441 Square Feet • LU 931: Quality Restaurant with 3,678 Square Feet Based on the trip generation calculations, the subject project will generate 69 net vehicle trips (-5 trips-in & 74 trips-out) during the AM peak hour and 98 net vehicle trips (80 trips-in & 18 trips-out) in the PM peak hour. Additionally, the trip analysis for the Daily Condition resulted in 1,827 gross trips. Note, these vehicle trips are likely to be reduced based on the rate and extent of pass-by , internalization, transit and pedestrian/bicycle, since neither of these adjustments were utilized in the analysis as a conservative approach . The trip distribution was performed consistent with the trip distribution percentages of TAZ 1118 and by interpolating between the 2010 and 2040 TAZ data for the projected design year of 2019 . Manual Turning Movement Counts (TMC's) were taken at the intersections identified in Table 1. These turning movement counts were performed on Tuesday, May 23 rd , 2017 during the typical weekday's AM peak period of 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM and PM peak period of 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM. Subsequently, the AM and PM peak hour volumes were determined, adjusted for peak seasonal variations and utilized in the operational Page I 9 Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact Study analysis for the existing condition. The analysis revealed that all the studied intersections are operating at LOS A during the AM and PM peak hour. Based on historical trends regression analysis, the existing seasonally adjusted turning movement counts were augmented with a compounded the background growth rate of 1.06 percent and committed trips to develop the traffic volumes for the future condition without project in 2019 (no build condition). Similarly, the traffic volumes for the future condition with project (build condition) include background growth, committed trips and the project net trips. The future traffic volumes with project (Build Condition 2019) were evaluated to determine the Level of Service at the studied intersections. As a result, the operational analysis revealed that all the studied intersections will operate at LOS A during the AM peak hour and LOS B or better during the PM peak hour. Also, the project's driveways were evaluated and resulted in LOS A. Table 1 summarizes the LOS and delay per approach for the most impacted intersections and project's driveways. In addition, a trip generation comparison was performed between the proposed development and a medical office building with 205,260 square feet that could be developed "As-of-Right." Based on the trip generation comparison, the proposed development will generate at least 76 percent less traffic than the medical office building ("As-of-Right" development) during the a typical weekday's Daily Condition, AM and PM peak hour. Therefore, it is fair to conclude that the traffic impacts for the proposed development are significantly less than the "As-of-Right" development. Moreover, traffic counts were taken at the Valencia South Miami Condominium located at 6001 SW 70 th Street. The purpose of these counts was to gather "Local" trip generation data of a similar site located in a similar urban setting. The Valencia South Miami site is comprised of 301 residences (i.e. dwelling units) and was built in 2004. Therefore, it is of a similar size, use and meets the requirements of ITE Trip Generation Manual for data collection. The results of the Valencia South Miami counts indicate it generates 73 AM peak hour trips and 68 PM peak hour trips. This relates to a trip generation rate of 0.243 during the AM Peak and 0.226 during the PM peak. As compared to the published data by ITE, used in our analysis, the Valencia South Miami generates 52 percent fewer trips in the AM Peak and 63 percent fewer trips in the PM peak. Likewise, it can be concluded that our analysis uses a conservative approach to the traffic generated; and, it is highly likely that our project will have approximately 30 percent less traffic than Valencia South Miami. Page I 10 Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact study In conclusion, the studied intersections have an existing overall LOS A while the critical approach at each intersection resulted in LOS D or better. The operational analysis for the future condition revealed that all the studied intersections will operate at overall LOS B or better during the peak hours whi le the critical approach at each intersection resulted in LOS E or better. Therefore, off-site traffic mit igation measures are not needed or recommended at this time. Lastly, it is fair to conclude that sufficient roadway capacity exists to support the subject project. Table 1: Level of Service (LOS) Summary ExistIng Condition (2017) PM Peak Hour Location Intersection O\lef"all • Critical Approach TWSC O\lef"aU • Critical Approach TWSC Control I LOS Delay (sec) I Approach LOS ! Delay (s.ec) LOS Delay (sec) I Approach LOS Delay (sec) 1 SW 72 Street (SR 986) & SW 59 Place Tw;:ay A 4.6 SB B 11 .1 A 9.1 SB D 30 .7 2 SW 72 Street (SR 986) & SW 61 Avenue Tw;:ay A 0.2 SB B 10.1 A 1.1 SB C 16.6 3 SW 71 Street & SW 61 Avenue Tw;:ay A 2.2 WB A 9.3 A 5.8 WB B 10.2 4 SW 71 Street & SW 59 Place Tw;:ay A 0.4 EB B 10.3 A 1.2 EB B 14.0 I Future l(withProjectTrI.)(2019) ~ PM Peak Hour . Intersection . Overall' Critical ~h TWSC Location Control I LOS Delay (sec) I Approach LOS I Delay (sec) I LOS. Delay (sec) Approach. LOS Delay (sec) 1 SW 72 Street (SR 986) & SW 59 Place Tw;:ay A 4.6 SB B 11 .4 B 12.1 SB E 45.5 12 SW 72 Street (SR 986) & SW 61 Avenue Tw;:ay A 0.4 SB B 10.6 A 1.3 SB C 18.9 131SW 71 Street & SW 61 Avenue Tw;:ay A 2.9 WB A 9.5 A 6.1 WB B 11.0 141SW 71 Street & SW 59 Place Tw;:ay A 0.7 EB B 13.7 A 1.5 EB C 15.1 Is !SW 61 Avenue & Driveway 1 (DW1) Tw;:ay A 1.7 WB A 9.0 A 2.0 WB A 9.4 16 SW 61 Avenue & Driveway 2 (DW2) Tw;:ay A 0.8 WB A 9.0 A 1.2 WB A 9.2 17 SW 71 Street & Driveway 3 (DW3) Two-Way A 4.4 NB A 8.9 A 2.1 NB A 9.5 Stop Notes : • Crilical Approach for TWSC. Page I 11 Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact Study Introduction The main objective of this report is to determine the vehicle trips associated with the subject project and to evaluate the traffic impacts to the most impacted intersections. As such, an operational analysis was performed to determine the Level of Service during the typical weekday's AM and PM peak hour. Project Description / Location The subject site is located on the northeast corner of SW 72 nd Street (Sunset Drive) and SW 61 sf Avenue in the City of South Miami, Florida. This site has a drive-in bank (6,701 square feet) with two (2) drive-in lanes and 13,670 square feet of office. The existing building will be demolished while the proposed redevelopment consists of rental apartments with 203 units, 2,441 square feet of retail and a restaurant with 3,678 square feet . This project is expected to be completed by 2019. For vehicular access, the subject project will have two driveways on SW 61 sf Avenue and a driveway on SW 71 sf Street. Figure 1 depicts the site's location map while Figure 2 is the site plan included for illustrative purposes only . Figure 1: Location Map Page I 12 Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 6075 Sunset Drive Figure 2: Site Plan r-----.IJ"L.-_i ------ I I I I I I JlOU!I ....... ,- I I I t I I I I I I Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. Traffic Impact Study -------------------~~--------------N SW 71 sf Street Pag e I 13 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact Study Existing Condition (2017) This section of the report identifies the current operational and geometric characteristics of the most impacted intersections by the subject project. The purpose of this section is to provide a basis of comparison to future conditions. Turning Movement Counts (TMC's) Manual Turning Movement Counts (TMC's) were taken at the intersections identified below. These turning movement counts were performed on Tuesday, May 23 rd , 2017 during the typical weekday's AM peak period of 7:00 AM to 9:00 AM and PM peak period of 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM. Subsequently, the AM and PM peak hour volumes were determined and adjusted for seasonal variations by using the Peak Season Conversion Factor (PSCF) as requested by the City's traffic engineering consultant. The appropriate traffic data adjustment is the Seasonal Factor (SF) and not the Peak Season Conversion Factor (PSCF) as indicated by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), which is the agency responsible for developing the adjustment factors and their respective uses. FDOT has stated to us the following: "Unless you are feeding your data into and urban model, use the Seasonal Factors to turn your counts into AADT estimates. " Traffic counts and operational characteristics were gathered at the following intersections: • SW 72 nd Street (Sunset Drive) & SW 59 th Place • SW 72 nd Street (Sunset Drive) & SW 61 5t Avenue • SW 7 lSt Street & SW 61 5t Avenue • SW 71 5t Street & SW 59 th Place Figures 3 and 4 are graphical representations of the seasonally adjusted existing AM and PM peak hour TMC's, respectively. Appendix D contains the raw traffic data. Operational Analysis -Intersection Level of Service (LOS) The turning movement counts shown in Figures 3 and 4 were utilized to perform an operational analysis for each intersection during the AM and PM peak hour. This analysis includes the traffic operational characteristics (i.e . lane geometry, traffic control, signal timing , etc.) at the time data collection took place and follows the latest Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 6th Edition) methodology. The analysis revealed that all the studied intersections are operating at overall LOS A during the AM and PM peak hour. Table 2 summarizes the LOS results and vehicle Page I 14 Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc . 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact Study delay. Appendix E contains other outputs such as volume to capacity ratio (VIC) and 95th Percentile Queue. Figure 3: Existing Seasonally Adjusted TMC's (2017) -AM Peak Hour Page I 15 Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact Study Figure 4: Existing Seasonally Adjusted TMC's (2017) -PM Peak Hour Table 2: Existing Condition LOS & Delay (Intersections) -AM & PM Peak Hour SW 72 Street (SR 986) & SW 59 Place SW 72 Street (SR 986) & SW 61 Avenue 0.2 SB B 10 .1 A 1.1 SB c 16.6 2.2 WB A 9.3 A 5.8 WB B 10 .2 0.4 EB B 10 .3 A 1.2 EB B 14.0 Notes : • Critical A pproach for lWSC . Page 16 Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact Study Project Traffic This section describes the analysis for estimating the traffic associated with the subject project. The trip generation analysis conforms with the methodology described in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition. Trip Generation The trip generation characteristics for the subject project were obtained from lYE's Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition. The trip generation analysis was performed for a typical weekday's AM and PM peak hour. The following land uses, as identified by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), most closely resemble the subject project. These land uses (LU) are as follows: Existing: • LU 710: General Office with 13,670 Square Feet (SF) • LU 912: Drive-In Bank with 2 Drive-in Lanes (6,701 SF) Proposed: • LU 220: Apartment with 203 Dwelling Units • LU 826: Specialty Retail with 2,441 Square Feet • LU 931: Quality Restaurant with 3,678 Square Feet Based on the trip generation calculations, the subject project will generate 69 net vehicle trips (-5 trips -in & 74 trips -out) during the AM peak hour and 98 net vehicle trips (80 trips-in & 18 trips-out) in the PM peak hour. Additionally, the trip analysis for the Daily Condition resulted in 1,827 gross trips. Note, these vehicle trips are likely to be reduced based on the rate and extent of pass-by, internalization, transit and pedestrian/bicycle, since neither of these adjustments were utilized in the analysis as a conservative approach. Tables 3 and 4 summarize the trip generation results for the AM and PM peak hour, respectively. Appendix A contains the supporting documentation. Page I 17 Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 6075 Sunset Drive Table 3: Trip Generation -AM Peak Hour LAND USE (LU) UNITS Existing Genera I Offi ce Drive-In Bank 13.670 Th.Sq.Ft. Existing Trips Proposed Apartment Specialty Retail * Quality Restaurant External Trips (Proposed Trips) 2 Drive-in Lanes 6.701 Th .Sq.Ft. 203 D.U . 2.441 Th.Sq.Ft. 3.678 Th.Sq.Ft. Net External Trips (Proposed Trips -Existing Trips) ITELU CODE 710 912 912 220 826 931 ITE TRIP GENERATION RATE I EQUATION 1.56 9.29 12.08 0 .51 T=0.49(X)+3.73 0.96 0.81 Notes: rTE Trip Generation, 9th Edition & ITE Trip Generation Handbook , 3rd Edition . IN 18 11 46 29 21 21 2 24 -5 Traffic Impact Study AM PEAK HOUR TRIPS OUT 3 8 35 11 83 83 85 74 TOTAL 21 19 81 40 104 103 2 3 109 69 * Since rTE does not prOl.1de AM data for Specialty Retail (LU 826), ITE's rate for LU 820 (Shopping Center) was used to estimate the AM peak hour trips . Results utilized in the analysis . Table 4: Trip Generation -PM Peak Hour ITELU ITETRIP PM PEAK HOUR TRIPS LAND USE (LU) UNITS GENERATION CODE RATE I EQUATION IN OUT TOTAL Existing General Office 13 .670 Th .Sq.Ft. 710 1.49 3 17 20 Drive-In Bank 2 Drive-in Lanes 912 33 .24 _32 34 66 6.701 Th.Sq.Ft. 912 24.30 81 82 163 Existing Trips 35 51 86 Proposed Apartment 203 D.U. 220 0.62 82 44 126 ----1- T=.55(X)+17.65 84 45 129 Specialty Retail 2.441 Th.Sq.Ft. 826 2.71 3 4 7 --~ -1-T=2.40(X)+21.48 12 15 27 Quality Restaurant 3.678 Th.Sq.Ft. 931 7.49 19 9 28 External Trips (Proposed Trips) 115 69 184 Net External Trips (Proposed Trips -Existing Trips) 80 18 98 Notes: rTE Trip Generation, 9th Edition & rTE Trip Generation Handbook , 3rd Edition . Results utilized in the analysis . Trip Distribution The subject project is located within the Traffic Analysis lone (TAl) 1118 as assigned by the Metropolitan Planning Organization's (MPO) on the Miami-Dade Transportation Plan (to the Year 2040) Directional Trips Distribution Report, October 2014, As such, the trip distribution was performed consistent with the trip distribution percentages of TAl 1118 - ~ Page I 18 Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact study and by interpolating between the 2010 and 2040 TAZ data for the projected design year of 2019. Figure 5 depicts the TAZ map while the directional trip distribution percentages are outlined in Table 5. Appendix B contains the supporting documentation. Figure 5: Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) Map 1035 1022 1111 1021 1112 1020 1019 1113 i 1017 1015 7 1008 1014 1128 1127 1 1132 Table 5: Directional Trip Distribution Percentages DIRECTION NNE 17.40 21.40 18.60 ENE 16.30 15.00 15.91 ESE 1.80 2 .00 1.86 SSE 3.50 3.10 3 .38 SSW 16 .90 14 .20 16.09 WSW 21 .50 17.80 20.39 WNW 9.00 11 .30 9.69 NNW 13 .70 15 .30 14.18 Page I 19 Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc . 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact Study Trip Assignment The net vehicle trips generated by the subject project have been further distributed into the four quadrants. Table 6 includes the trip distribution percentages and the corresponding trip assignments to the North, South, East and West. Lastly, Figures 6 and 7 depict the net vehicle trips assigned to the most impacted intersections and the project's driveways for the AM and PM peak hour, respectively. Note, the negative trips (decrease in trips) were not utilized in the analysis as a conservative approach. Table 6: Directional Trip Assignment DIRECTION DISTRIBUTION AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR IN OUT TOTAL IN OUT TOTAL NORTH 32 .78% -2 24 22 26 5 31 EAST 17 .77% -1 13 12 14 3 17 SOUTH 19.47% -1 15 14 16 4 20 WEST 30 .08% -1 22 21 24 6 30 100.00% -5 74 69 80 18 98 Page I 20 Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact Study Figure 6: Site Traffic (Project Net Trips) -AM Peak Hour Page I 21 Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact Study Figure 7: Site Traffic (Project Net Trips) -PM Peak Hour Page I 22 Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact Study Proposed Future Condition (2019) This section of the report describes the traffic parameters utilized to develop the future peak hour volumes and to evaluate the future condition with project in 2019 (projected build-out year). Background Traffic Growth Using available traffic data from the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT Count Stations 8252, 8253 & 8299), regression analyses were performed to determine the background traffic growth within the project's vicinity. The highest growth rate yielded a reasonable 1.06 percent and therefore, it was utilized to estimate the background traffic volumes for the project build-out year of 2019 . Appendix C c ontains the supporting documentation . Committed Development In the addition to the background growth rate, the future traffic volumes include committed development trips within the study area . As provided by the City of South Miami, the c ommitted trips for the 6201 Sunset Drive project and TREO SOMI Station were accounted for in the analysis. Appendix D contains the supporting docu mentation . Future Traffic Volumes -AM & PM Peak Hour The existing seasonally adjusted turning movement counts were augmented with a compounded background growth rate of 1.06 percent, committed trips and the project net trips . The resulting traffic volumes represent the proposed future condition with project in 2019 (Build Condition). The calculations for the specific movements are contained in Appendix D. Figures 8 and 9 depict the future AM and PM peak hour volumes with project, respectively . Operational Analysis -Intersection LOS The future traffic volumes with project (Build Condition 2019) were evaluated to determine the Level of Service at each intersection within the study area . As a result, the operational analysis revealed that all the studied intersections will maintain the existing LOS A for the AM peak hour and will operate at LOS B or better during the PM peak hour. Note, the critical approach for each intersection with a two-way stop control (TWSC) yielded acceptable L9S E or better. Lastly, the project's driveways were also evaluated and resulted in LOS A. Table 7 summarizes the LOS results while Appendix E includes the Synchro software sheets with other outputs such as queue lengths and volume to capacity (v/c) ratio. Page I 23 Ri c hard Garcia & As sociates, In c . 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact Study Figure 8: Future Condition with Project Trips (2019) -AM Peak Hour Page I 24 Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact study Figure 9: Future Condition with Project Trips (2019) -PM Peak Hour Table 7: Future Condition LOS & Delay (Intersections) -AM & PM Peak Hour 72 Street (SR 986) & SW 59 Place 72 Street (SR 986) & SW 61 Avenue 0.4 SB B 10.6 A 1.3 SB C 18.9 71 Street & SW 61 Avenue 2.9 WB A 9.5 A 6 .1 WB B 11.0 71 Street & SW 59 Place A 0.7 EB B 13 .7 A 1.5 EB C 15.1 61 Avenue & Driveway 1 (DW1) Two-Way A 1.7 WB A 9 .0 A 2 .0 WB A 9.4 Stop 61 Avenue & Driveway 2 (DW2) Two-Way A 0 .8 WB A 9 .0 A 1.2 WB A 9 .2 Stop SW 71 Street & Dri..eway 3 (DW3) Two-Way A 4.4 NB A 8.9 A 2 .1 NB A 9 .5 Stop Notes : • Critical Approach for lWSC. ~~ Page I 25 Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact study Trip Generation Comparison Proposed Deve lopment vs. "As-of-Right" Development The proposed development is comprised of rental apartments (203 units), retail (2,441 SF) and restaurant (3,678 SF) whereas could be developed as a medical office building with 205,260 square feet "As-of-Right." As shown in Table 8 below, the proposed development will generate at least 76 percent less traffic than the medical office building ("As -of-R ight" development) during the a typical weekday's Daily Condition, AM and PM peak hour. Therefore, it is fair to conclude that the traffic impacts for the proposed development are sign ificantly less than the "As-of-Right" development. Appendix F contains the supporting documentation. Table 8: Trip Generation Comparison UNITS ITELU ITE TRP GENERATION RATE I EQUATlON TOTAL TRI'S LAND USE (LU) CODE AM PM DAILY AM PM DAILY ""'-d [)eVOIOPlllll1t Rates EquaUon Rates Equa~on Rates Equation Rates ~ation Rates ~aUon Rates ~ Apartmert 203D.U. 220 0.51 T=OA9(X)+3 .73 0.62 T=.55(X)+17.65 6.65 T=6.06(X)+123 .56 104 103 126 129 1,350 1,354 Specially Rela;1 • 2.441 Th.Sq.Fl 826 0.96 No Eqn Available 2.71 T=2AO(X)+21A8 44.32 T=42.78(X)+37.66 2 7 27 108 143 Quality Resla .... rt 3.678 Th.Sq.Fl 931 0.81 No Eqn Available 7A9 No Eqn Available 89.95 No Eqn Available 3 28 331 External Trips (Proposed Trips) 109 160 1,789 _-RIght [)evol_nt Medical Office BLiId;rg 205260 Th.Sq.Fl 720 2.39 No Eqn Available 3.57 Lr(T)=0.90(X)+1 .53 36.13 T=40 .B9(X)-214 .97 491 733 557 7,416 8,178 Percent Difference ('I.) (Proposed Development Trips II As-of-Right Development Trips) -78% -78% -76% .. Since ITE does nol prO'o4de AM data Dr Spec ialty Retail (LV 826), 1TE's rate or LV 820 (ShoppuYJ Ce nter) was used to es timate the AM peak hour tnps . Additionally, traffic counts were taken at the Valencia South Miami Condominium located at 6001 SW 70 th Street. The purpose of these counts was to gather "Local" trip generation data of a similar site located in a similar urban setting. The Valencia South Miami site is comprised of 301 residences (i.e. dwelling units) and was built in 2004. Therefore, it is of a similar size, use and meets the requirements of ITE Trip Generation Manual for data collection. The results of the Valencia South Miami counts indicate it generates 73 AM peak hour trips and 68 PM peak hour trips. This relates to a trip generation rate of 0.243 during the AM Peak and 0.226 during the PM peak. As compared to the published data by ITE , used in our analysis, the Valencia South Miami generates 52 percent fewer trips in the AM Peak and 63 percent fewer trips in the PM peak_ Likewise, it can be concluded that our analysis uses a conservative approach to the traffic generated; and, it is highly likely that our project will have approximately 30 percent less traffic than Valencia South Miami. Page I 26 Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact Study Conclusion In conclusion, the studied intersections have an existing overall LOS A while the critical approach at each intersection resulted in LOS D or better. The operational analysis for the future condition revealed that all the studied intersections will operate at overall LOS B or better during the peak hours while the critical approa c h at each intersection resulted in LOS E or better. Therefore , off-site traffic mitigation measures are not needed or recommended at this time . Lastly, it is fair to conclude that sufficient roadway c a pacity exists to support the subject project. Page I 27 Ric ha rd Garcia & Associates , In c. 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact Study Appendix A: Trip Generation Appendix I A Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. LAND USE (LU) Existing General Office Drive-In Bank Existing Trips Proposed n<=lrtmont Specialty Retail * Quality Restaurant External Trips (Proposed Trips) UNITS 13.670 Th.Sq.Ft. 2 Drive-in Lanes 6.701 Th.Sq.Ft. 203 D.U. 2.441 Th.Sq.Ft. 3.678 Th.Sq.Ft. Net External Trips (Proposed Trips -Existing Trips) TABLE: A1 TRIP GENERATION ANALYSIS AM PEAK HOUR Project Name: 6075 Sunset Drive rtE LU CODE 710 912 912 220 826 931 ITE TRIP G§NERATIQi RATE I EQUATION 1.56 9.29 12.08 0.51 T=O.49(X)+3.73 0.96 0.81 22% -7% Notes: ITE Trip Generation. 9th Edition & ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 3rd Edition, 24 78% I 85 I -5 107% I 74 I * Since ITE does not provide AM data for Specialty Retail (LU 826). ITE's rate for LU 820 (Shopping Center) was used to estimate the AM peak hour trips. 109 69 LAND USE (LU) UNITS Existing General Office 13 .670 Th.Sq.Ft. TABLE :A2 TRIP GENERATION ANALYSIS PM PEAK HOUR Project Name: 6075 Sunset Drive ITE TRIP GENEJt6. TION t -- ITE LU CODE RATE I EQWAflON % 710 1.49 7"; 1j % -, ~-. IP!i~~~!~I9Itf~~I~! , __ ~ ~ ~ - IN % OUT TOTAL 83~Qi " -""" ~ :::.i ,2@J. -I~ 17 ~ ~o{ .-r·, -"'" r.1I I. -3'~ li I ' ' ,c I Drive-In Bank J. iIf~),% j "§1 1 %~ -: .ij'@ ..., 2 Drive-in Lanes 912 33 .24 t i ",,-~,,-~' l~ 3~ .~I \1' L _ ~ .,..:tII-'OI,I .. ;r,...'~..:r-_ ~ ~. _. "" -'"' -. 6.701 Th.Sq.Ft. 912 24.30 50% 81 50% 82 163 Existing Trips 41% 35 59% 51 86 Proposed Apartment 203 D.U. 220 0.62 65% 82 35% 44 126 T=.55(X)+17.65 r ~5i'o/t L ';t;j<o, !!. AlB,at 1 ;.~; wi%? -i I 1 ~A" ,~ ,Ql J l '~) SI ", [ .~12:~1 I Specialty Retail 2.441 Th.Sq.Ft. 826 2.71 44% 3 56% 4 7 ~ 1lJif0' , -'I 1§~Wc' ':\ .. ~ --rr r:~~ , T=2.40(X)+21.48 1'2Z 1 1 ~ , ~.~OI I ~ , ,,~,o Quality Restaurant I. ,@~o/6' 1{~} ~ ~-9J IL .~} 1 ;~;"""'i ( 3.678 Th .Sq .Ft. 931 7.49 • J@Q o / .~~t _ iii!. External Trips (Proposed Trips) 63% 115 38% 69 184 Net External Trips (Proposed Trips -Existing Trips) 82% 80 18% 18 98 TABLE :A3 TRIP GENERATION ANALYSIS DAIL Y COND ITION Project Name: 6075 Sunset Drive rtE LU fTE TRip GENERAtI0N, DA~LYT~IPS LAND USE (LU) UNITS CODE RATE 1 EtlUATION TOTAL Existing General Office 13.670 Th.Sq.Ft. 710 11.03 ., So.o/o. . ~ [~.~ Drive-In Bank " .-::!II:'" ~ 2 Drive-in Lanes 912 139.25 I §C!lM": .:' t;:;~ ~,3~ "::-.J c?"~ .... 6.701 Th.Sq.Ft. 912 24.30 50% 81 I 50% I 82 I 163 Existing Trips 50% 215 I 50% I 215 I 430 Proposed Apartment 203 D.U. 220 6.65 50% "I.... 675 50% .I. 675 .I. _~350 = ].-1 ." _.~ T=6.06(X)+123.S6 pecialty Retail 2.441 Th.Sq.Ft. 826 44.32 T=42.78(X)+37.66 Quality Restaurant 3.678 Th.Sq.Ft. 931 89.95 External Trips (Proposed Trips) Net External Trips (Proposed Trips -Existing Trips) 699 1,397 Apartment (220) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday Number of Studies: 88 Avg. Number of Dwelling Units: 210 Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 6.65 1.27 -12.50 3.07 Data Plot and Equation III -g w a. ~ ~ .c GI > GI Cl j D t- 7.000 ,--------------------------------., 6,000 5.000 4,000 .. 3,000 x 2,000 "'x' '.' 1.000 a 100 200 X Ac:tual Data PolnlS , . . . ", , , , ..... ',' ...... ",' ... ~~,"~' ... . 300 ),,/ . ,,' . , • '.' • ',i" ,~", . , ",... . x ",~", . x: , : x x: ",I x x 400 500 600 700 800 900 x '" Number of Dwelling Units ---FItted CUrve ------Average Rate 1000 Fitted Curve Equation: T = 6.06(X) .. 123.56 R2 =0.87 Trip Generation, 9th Edition • Institute of T~sportalion Engineers 333 q 334 : L Apartment (220) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Number of Studies: 78 Avg. Number of Dwelling Units: 235 Directional Distribution: 20% entering, 80% exiting Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.51 0.10 1.02 0.73 Data Plot and Equation 700.---------------------------------------------------------~ · . . . . . . . 600 ............ ---.-" ----.-" ............ : ... -.. , ...... '."'" . '.' ..... '.' , " >/;>< ... ,'. x 500 .....•... -.. --:. -. ----: ---... -:. --.... : ... -. -: ....... : .. --. . " . . ~~ 400 .......................................... --........ , ..... ;<.-- . . . . . . ,'~/,"'. _. , ........ , ..... . . . x . " " . . . .. ;'.. 300 · .... ·• ...... ··-· .... · .. x .... ··· .... -:,',,';'~ -..... ,-......... -.... -.. ---...... - x· ·x 200 x · . >X~ xx . · .. .. 100 ...... ; ... x.~ ' .. ·x·. ~ ... -.. : .. ~ ... ~ ...... ; ....... : ... , .. -: ..... " ....... : ..... . x: .. -. . . x a 100 200 X Actual Data Points 300 400 soo GOO x = Number of Dwelling Units --Fitted Curve Rtted Curve Equation: T = O.49(X) + 3.73 Trip Generation, 9th Edition • Institute of Transportation Engineers 700 800 900 1000 1100 ------Average Rata Apartment (220) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Dwelling Units On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Tra~lc, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Number of Studies: 90 Avg. Number of Dwelling Units: 233 Directional Distribution: 65% entering, 35% exiting Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 0.62 0.10 1.64 0.82 Data Plot and Equation 700~--------------------------------------------------------~ , , . . . . , . ...,~ ... , , ~ ~ , 600 •••• ',' ••••• '._ ••• <1, .......... : •••••• '.' ••••• '.' ••••• ':' ~:;;; •• " •••• ,',',( .' ",'" 500 ...... : ...... -: ...... -: ...... ':' . ~ ... : ....... : ...•... ~~~~»~ ...... . . , ...•... ' ...•... ' ..••••• ' .............. , , •• .,,~:~': ••••.• 0', ••.••• ' .............. . 400 ..... . . . . ,~~/. . . . x:r< x : ,'.-;:," . . . . ~,' 300 •.....•.....• " ...................... ,( •..... :.x ..... : ....... : ....... : ... ····:·····. . : x : ,,' . . : x : ,,. ... :x ~ ,,': )( . . . . . x . ~. x . . . . . 200 ...... ; ....... : ...... -:.,'-x·~·:-·:··~:······;······ .; ...... -: ....... ;. ...... : ...... . x· : xXX >< ; x x . ·x x x: ... . 100 ..... ~ .)1(. ~x;.~ .... ~ ....... : .. ~ .... : ....... ; ....... : ....... :-..... -: ............. . , x: x' . . . . x· x o 100 200 300 X Actual Data Polnta 400 500 600 x = Number of Dwelling Units --RUed Curve 700 soo 900 1000 1100 ------Average Rate Fitted CUrve Equation: T = O.55(X) + 17.65 Trip Generation. 9th Edition • Institute ofTransportation Engineers 335 ~.". General Office Building (710) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area On a: Weekday Number of Studies: 79 Average 1000 Sq. Feet GFA: 197 Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 11.03 3.58 -28.80 6.15 Data Plot and Equation, III 'tI c: W Q. j!: Q) u :2 Q) > Q) CI' I!! Q) ~ n I- 15.COO 14.000 13,000 12,ODO 11.000 10,000 : 9.000 " !,g"COO 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 0 . . . . " .• -••••• )C ................ ~'. . : ,,' · . . . . . . . . . . " ..... : ..... : ..... : ...... ~ ...... : ...... : ..... ': ...... : ..... ': ...... ~ ..... ~ .. ',"'~~"'" '/ · . . . . . . . . , ',' . .... I .•... J ••••• J •••••• ' ••••• 0" •••• 0' •••••• ' •••••• ', ••••• ' •••••• ' ••••• ,A •..•••• ',' •• · . . . . . . . . .,. . . " . '/ .•• I ••••• , ••••• I ••••• ', ••••• ', ••••• ', •••• 0' ••••• 0' ••••• ,' •••••• JiC ••••• "' ••••• , ••••• · . . . . . . , . .." . . , . , • •••• : •..•. ! . •• • ....... .', •• -•• ' •••••• ' ....... ' •• , .... '. 0 .... ',"::' . ~ .. -0 . __ 0 _ o. 0 .... ~ . _ .•. : : : : : : : ; ,,': : : : , ..•. ; 0 00 .. ~ 0 0 o. _: 00 .... ~, .. _. _:0 0 0 , .. :0 _ .. x.: .. 0., .~,.'~: .• :0 ...... : ... 0 .. ~ _.0.0; ,'. • o· 0 . 0 .. 0:' , ... ',' .. : ... 0 .. o. 0 .... o •• · . -.. : . -... : 0 ..... : .. _ ... : 0 .. 0 _ .: 0 0 • _. " . . , .-,'': • •••• : 0 _ ••• ~ ••• 0 •• : •••••• : 0 0 •••• : 0 • 0 ••• ~ ..... ",(~ • ':' _ 0 ••• :. • •• .. ••••• :' ••••• :' ...... : ••••• , '. • 0 • -, ; •• , •• ~ , •••• ~ -••••• :, ••••• : •• , .... :-•• : 0 ox. , . •• • .,' -• , • • • 0 ..... ; ..... ;, ..... ~ ... ,~. ~>/~.~ .: .... x·:· .. ·· .: ....... : ...... : ...... ; ..... ; .... . ..... ; ... x,;, '" . ;.x /:~ , ... ~ ...... ~, ..... ~ .. , ... ~, ..... ~ ...... : ...... ; ..... ; .... . • 0 .' x' . , 0 • 0 • • · xx ,</ :x . x. . . . . . . • ••••••••••• 0. ';' ............ '0' ., •• -.-••• 0.:. 'x' 0 '.' •••• '0' -" •• 01' •••••••••• 0 •••••• x· x x: . , , . . .. . ., .................. 0 ........ 0" ••••••••• 0 '0' 0' ............................ 0 . . .., . X· ...•....••... , . -... , .................. , ' , .... , ••.• -..... -.•...•...•••..... :*. '..,..... 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 SOD 1000 1100 1200 1300 x = 1000 Sq, Feet Gross Floor Area X Actual Data Points --Fitted Curve ------Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.76 Ln(X) + 3.68 Trip Gsnsration, 9th Edition. Institute of Transportation Engineers 1259 '.1 I I I , 1 , I General Office Building (710) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area On a: Weekday, A.M. Peak Hour Number of Studies: 218 Average 1000 Sq. Feet GFA: 222 Directional Distribution: 88% entering, 12% exiting Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 1.56 0.60 5.98 1.40 Data Plot and Equation 4.000 ..,..------------------------------, ~ " , , , , , 3.000 , ................ , .......... ,......... ' ..... :>/.: .. , 2,000 ......................... : .. »,.'. x , . , , ,~x ",,,, : ,'S: , 1,000 ......... x ..... ,.,~ . x ,vx,' X ~,' x x x , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . ....... _ .... _ .. . x o~~---~----~------~-----~-----~------~ o 1000 2000 3000 x '" 1 000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area X Actual Data Points --Fitted Curve ----_. Average Rate FiHed Curve Equation: Lnm = 0.80 Ln(X) + 1.57 1260 Trip Generation. 9th Edition -Institute of Transportation Engineers - General Office Building (710) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area On a: Weekday, P.M. Peak Hour Number of Studies: 236 Average 1000 Sq. Feet GFA: 215 Directional Distribution: 17% entering. 83% exiting Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 1.49 0.49 6.39 1.37 Data Plot and Equation I/) '0 C W 0. ~ CD U :2 CD :::- CD 01 I'd ... CD ~ II I- 4,000.------------------------------, 3,000 2,000 1,000 , ,- , , , , . "" x .,- •••••••••••••••••••••••••• ' ••••• _ •••••••••••••• _ •••••• JI' ••••• _ ................... . · /// , , , , , , ,- , , , •••••••••••••••••••••••••• -'" -••• p ••••••••• · "" x )(/ ,- , : .. ,' /(' · x . . . . . . . . . . . . x· .... .,{ .. ......................... -..... ", ........................ . X/ ~ , x x x o~~-----~----~-----~------~-----~------~ a 1000 2000 3000 x = 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Roor Area X Actual Data Points --Fitted Curve ------Average Rate Fitted Curve Eq,;,atlon: T = 1.12(X) + 78.45 R2= 0.82 Trip Generation, 9th Edition elnstitute ofTransportalion Engineers 1261 it ,! 2 Specialty Retail Center (826) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area On a: Weekday Number of Studies: 4 Average 1000 Sq. Feet GLA: 25 Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 44.32 21.30 -64.21 15.52 Data Plot and Equation caution· Use Carefully· Small Sample Size 2,100 2,000 ................... ; .................... ; .................... ; ..... ~ ............ . 1,900 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• ' ......................... -.I ............. . , . : ,,,' 1,800 · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .: .................... : .................... : ,.~' ............... . · ,f . " . 1,700 • ••• -•• -•••••••••• "0 ••••••••••••••••••• ' ••••••••• _ •••••• , .,' ••••• __ •••••••••••• · . "", . II) 1,600 "2 1,500 w a. .1: 1,400 I- · . . ••••••• _0 •••••• _ •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• '-•••••• _ ••••••••••••••••••••• ,. ~ : it"";' : ••••••••••••••••• -." -0 •••••••• 00 ... " •• 0". Oof'!'-" 0.0 •••• 0 ........ ·.0· •••• _ ••••••••• · . . j 1,300 · . ...... _ ••••••••• , ••••• " •• " •••• , •••••• , ',_ 0 •••••• _., ••••••• _ ', ••• ,., ••• , ......... 0 Q) > 1,200 Q) ••• 0 ••••• 0 ••• ' •• , •• ' ••••• , ••••••• _ • _., ,' ••• _., ••••••• 0 •••••• '" ••••••• 0 ••••••••• ~ 1,100 Q) · . . •••••••••••••••••• _,_ •••••• -0 •••••••••••••••••••••• _ •• 0 ................ , ..... __ • 0 > 0:{ 1,000 II · ........ x' ....... -: ................... : .................... :-................. . I- 900 0" _. 0 ••••••••••••• , ••••••••••••••• , ••••• 0 ••• ' ••• '0 _ .......................... , x . . . · , . 800 • •••• , , • , ••••• ~ 0'. " ••• , , •••••• , , • _ ••• '.' •••••••••• _ •• _ •••• ',' ••• _ • , •• ___ • , , •••• ~' .... . . 700 • •• , •••••• ,.,-: • -• • • •• ~ •••••• , ••••••••• , ••• ' •••• 0 ... , ' ••••• , ••••• ' ••••• , , ............ . · . . 600 .• " ..• _0.· .. ··,.· ' ... ,.,., .••••••.••••• ,' •••.••.• " .• , ...... ' .................... -• 500 ......................... x·············:-· ...... " '" ....... :-................. . · . . 400 10 20 30 40 50 x .. 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area X Actual Dala Points --fitted Curve ------AverageRate Fitted Curve Equation: T = 42.78(X) + 37_66 Trip Generation, 9th Edition -Institute of Transportation Engineers 1579 Shopping Center (820) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Number of Studies: 104 Average 1000 Sq. Feet GLA: 310 Directional Distribution: 62% entering, 38% exiting Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation --------.----~~--~~~--~ 0.96 0.10 9.05 1.31 Data Plot and Equation 1,500 -r-----------------------------~ 1,400 1.300 1,200 1,100 1,000 900 700 ... : .... : .... : . X ... ': .... ; ., 600 x X x: :x .... :>C .•.. : . !<. 500 .. . . 400 " .,' ... '.'. 300 200 100 ·:x . x: x: ." .,," .... x. ~.)\C ... : ........ x: .. . ".'~ .... :,,' x : ,' . . ,.". ,,~' ;~,,. . ,'. - ," X' .. :·x·:· X' .. ?< . . . ", ... " .. ~ . ", ........ . o 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 BOO 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 X Actual Data Points x '" 1 000 Sq. Feel Gross Leasable Area --Fitted Curve FItted Curve equation: Ln(T) = 0.S1 Ln(X) + 2.24 1562 Trip Generation, 9th Edition • Institute of Transportation Engineers -----. Average Rate 1580 L Specialty Retail Center (826) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Number of Studies: 5 Average 1000 Sq. Feet GLA: 69 Directional Distribution: 44% entering, 56% exiting Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 2.71 2.03 5.16 1.83 Data Plot and Equation caution -Use carefully -Small Sample Size 600.-----------------------------------------------------~ . ,->/ x '0 /0 500 00000 .. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.000 .•...• ,' ••... , ......•...•••••• ,'!' ••• , •.••.•.•....•.....••.•... 400 0000000 _ •• 000000 •• 000.0000:000000 •• 0 •• /0' 00 300 ......................... .:. ",', 200 .............. .. , , , , 100 0 0 • ox 0 0 0 ;,. 0 0 , x ,-, 'I/!' o o , ,. x :,' /: " . 100 , , , , , , , ,/ ,,' . 200 X Actual Data Poln1s x .. 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Leasable Area --Fitted Curve Fitted Curve Equation: T = 2.40(X) + 21.48 Trip Generation, 9th Edltlon • Institute of Transportation Engineers ------Average Rate 300 .. Drive-in Bank (912) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Drive-In Lanes On a: Weekday Number of Studies: 2 Avg. Number of Drive-in Lanes: 2 Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting Trip Generation per Drive-in Lane Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 139.25 130.00 -148.50 Data Plot and Equation Csutlon -Use carefully -Small Sample Size 300~------------------------------------------------------~ 290 ...... ......... ...... , .. . 280 ...........................................•.................................• 270 ....................... , ........... '.' " .... , .......•.................... ' .. ~O~--------------------------~~--------------------------~ 2 X D Number of Drive-in lanes X Actual Data Points ------Average Rate FiUed Curve Equ~tlon: Not given Trip Generation. 9th Edition elnstitute of Transportation Engineers 1851 .... ! " I' . I I i' ! I l 1852 Drive-in Bank (912) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Drive-in Lanes On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Number of Studies: 18 Avg. Number of Drive-in Lanes: 4 Directional Distribution: 60% entering, 40% exiting Trip Generation per Drive-in Lane Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 9.29 4.33 -45.00 6.03 Data Plot and Equation 100~-------------------------------------------------------' III "0 c: W a. "C I- CD :E .r: ~ CD CI !!! ~ « b I- 90 ' , , , , , , ,-, , , , , , , .. , , , , , , , , ,', , , , , , , , ., , .. , , , , . , , , ' , , , ...... .... . .". .. ..- /' , 80 ' ... ,., ,',",.,. ,,'.,' ,,"',' ...... "., .,,' " ,., " . " , .' ..... "..' ... ' ..... . : ; ... ' 70 ,""., ':'., ... " .:' , ,"., , . : .....••.•.•••....... i', .". ... ' '" . " , " 60 , ...... ' ........ ,', ................. : ............. ,,,":, .... . , , ~ , ,>", . x 50 ........ : .......... : ......... : ..... , .. :.~;'-' .... : ........ : ......... : ... . x"",'':' 40 .•......•• . ~ . ____ /,:/' .•• ~ .•...... • ......•.•........ 30 " , , , '.' . , , , , , ~;. ';" , , , , . ~' , , , , ' , , , ' , , , , , , , , " "'.' " " ,.,' ',' ,... . )( : "" ~ , 20 ".,',' . "," , , , ' , ,~ , , , , , . , ", ' , , , . , , •.. , , , , , , • ' , , ' , , ',,' ",'" "" , , , , , , , '.' , , , , , , , ,'~ . x " . 10 ~ , . , . , , ,-, , , , , , ' .. ' o I 2 X Actual Data Points 3 Fitted Curve Equation: Not given 4 5 6 7 8 9 x = Number of Drive-in Lanes ----_. Average Rate Trip Generation, 9th Edition • Institute of Transportation Engineers 10 ; Drive-in Bank (912) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Drive-in Lanes On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Number of Studies: 85 Avg. Number of Drive-in Lanes: 3 Directional Distribution: 49% entering. 51 % exiting Trip Generation per Drive-In Lane Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 33.24 3.00 -176.00 24.48 Data Plot and Equation Ul 't:) I:: W .e. ~ GI ~ GI > Q) C) !!! Q) ~ H I- 400.-----------------------------------------------------~ "",,,, . . . . . . . " 300 ··················:········x········:········:······ ... : ......... : ....... ~.~"':( ...... . 200 100 . . " . ,~ . ~~ >~ ,," ,/ . ~' ~ ,~' " ... , . •••••••• ; ••••••••• : ••••••••• : •••••••• ~ ............. ~~~~ ••••• : ••••••••• : ••••••••• : ••••• 0 •• x " ... .;' , /. -' . . ,- x " . " -,' : : ",'''M x : : : : . . ~". . . . . . ... '" .1 ....... , .. <~ .... ~ ........ : ........ : ........ : ......... : ......... : ....... . ~ ,/ ~ ~. . " " ,'- ,'!~ ,/' x x O+-~--~~~~--~-T--~~--~~I--~--~I~--~~--~~--~ 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 x =' Number of Drive-in Lanes X Actual Data Points ------AverageRate Fitted Curve Equation: Not given Trip Generation, 9th Edition. Institute of Transportation Engineers 1853 Quality Restaurant (931 ) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area On a: Weekday Number of Studies: 15 Average 1000 Sq. Feet GFA: 9 Directional Distribution: 50% entering, 50% exiting Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 89.95 33.41 -139.80 36.81 Data Plot and Equation !Il "0 C UJ .9-.= (]) (3 :c (]) > (]) OJ til W ~ II f- 1,600 ,----------------------------------, -x 1,500 1,400 ....... -',' -;,." x: 1,300 x 1,200 1,100 - 1,000 ... ,~ . , 900 x 800 x 700 /" ,'" X 600 - ,'. 500 _ ; ~.r ••• __ 400 300 X X" 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 x = 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area X Actual Data Points ------Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not given Trip Generation, 9th Edition. Institute of Transportation Engineers 1865 Quality Restaurant (931 ) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Number of Studies: 11 Average 1000 Sq. Feet GFA: 9 Directional Distribution: Not available Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area Average Rate Range of Rates 0.81 0.25 1.60 Data Plot and Equation Standard Deviation 0.93 13.--------------------------------------------------------~ I/) "0 c: W Co ~ G) "0 £ ~ (!) Ol e! (!) ~ II t- 12 11 ...... " .. 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 x· 2 I 4 5 X Actual Data Points I 6 ·x· . x· . x I 7 8 ;' .... 9 10 11 x = 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area Fitted Curve Equation: Not given 1866 Trip Generation, 9th Edition. Institute ofTransportation Engineers , ./ . ~ ;~oI'.,: ... ,.,,/< x· 12 13 14 15 16 ------Average Rate R2 = **** L Quality Restaurant (931) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m~ Number of Studies: 24 Average 1000 Sq. Feet GFA: 9 Directional Distribution: 67% entering, 33% exiting Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 7.49 2.42 -18.64 4.89 Data Plot and Equation til 'C C W a. ~ QI '0 :c m > CI.l ~ m ~ 1\ I- 160.------------------------·-X--------------------------------~ . . . , 150 ............................... '" ...... ·x ............... . 140 ". -. -. ~ . -. . . -." . . . . . ." . . . -. .. . . . . . -'. -. . . -. -. -. -", . . . . -.' . . . . . . .. . . . -. .'. . -. . . . . 130 ••••• 1_ ••••• '. _ ••••• ',. . . . ... , ............. : ...... : .. ·x·· .: ...... : ....... : ..... . 120 ...... : ...... : ...... : ....... : ...... : ....... : ...... : ...... : .............. : ........... ~> x: x: ~~ 110 ............. : ...... : ....... : ...... : ...... ' ...... : ...... : ....... : ...... ' ... ;. ... ---::: ..... . .~~ . . . . ~,..... . 100 ...... ' ...... : ...... : ....... : ...... : ....... ' ...... ; ...... ' ...... -:~-,A-: .. : ...... ' ..... . ~~ · . . . , . . . ,. ...... --: . . 90 ............. ; ...... : ............. : ............. : .... ~.;" ............. ; ............ . ~~ :,. ...... 80 .?<. ........ , ...... : ....... : ...... : ...... : .. '':'~'~:'"'' .: ....... : ...... : ...... :-.... . : x ...... :.-....... x · . ·x . . ~~. . . . . . 70 ............. : ..................... ;;~.~ ........... : .. ····:·x············,············· ~~ · : ~. :/. . . . . . . 60 ..... '.' ..... ' ...... '.' .... ~.~.,. ...... , ..... ':' ..... , ..... '.' ..... '.' ..... , ..... ':' .... . 50 ...... : ... X" :~>~.~,.~(~x .. ~ ...... : ...... : .... 'x:' --. --:--... .-:--' --.:-------: .... .. ~~ 40 ...... :.~",~~ . ; .. x· .. : ....... : ..... ·x· .... '.' ..... : ...... : ....... : ...... , ...... : ..... . 30 . . ~~.~.~.: ...... : ...... : ...... ~ ...... ~x ..... : ...... ;~ ..... : ....... : ...... ~ ...... : ..... . x: 20 .................................................................................... . 10+--~~Tl~~~I,--r~--~~-r~~I--~~I--~~I--~"--~'I--~;-~~ 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 x = 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area X Actual Data Points -----.. Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not given Trip Generation, 9th Edition. Institute of Transportation Engineers 1867 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact study Appendix B: Trip Distribution / Assignment Appendix I B Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 6075 Sunset Drive Project Net Trips -AM Peak Hour 'DIRECTION NNE ENE ESE ",.(,': .SSE :SSW 1'-, ., WSW Vt(NW NNW TOTAL TABLE :A4 Cardinal Distribution AM Peak Hour Traffic Analysis Zone (TAl) 1118 Project Name: 6075 Sunset Drive DISTRIBU1f11:;lN (%) DESIGN YEAR 18.60 15.91 1.86 3.38 16.09 20.39 9.69 14 .18 100.00 22 -1 DIRECTION DISTRIBU:rION NORTH 32.78% EAST 17.77% SOUTH 19.47% WEST 30.08% 100.00% -2 24 AM PEAK HOUR NET TRIPS 15 -1 14 @ IN -2 -1 -1 -1 -5 AM PEAK HOUR OUT TOTAL 24 22 13 12 15 14 22 21 74 69 -1 13 Note: Directional percentages circled are rounded . 0 TABLE: M·l Cardinal Distribution AM Peak Hour Traffic Analysis Zone (T AZ) 1118 Project Name: 6075 Sunset Drive DIRECTION IN OUT TOTAL NNE 17.40 21.40 18.60 -1 14 13 ENE 16 .30 15.00 15.91 -1 12 11 E!)E 1.80 2.00 1.86 0 1 1 SSE 3.50 3.10 3.38 0 3 3 SSW 16.90 14.20 16.09 -1 12 11 WSW 21.50 17 .80 20.39 -1 15 14 WNW 9.00 11 .30 9.69 0 7 7 NNW 13.70 15.30 14 .18 -1 10 9 Based on Miami-Dade Transportation Plan (to the Year 2040) Directional Trip Distribution Report, October 2014 . Since the current data is only available for the model years 2010 and 2040 , the eight (8) cardinal directions were interpolated to the design year of 2019. DIRECTION NNE ENE ESE SSE SSW WSW WNW NNW TOTAL AM PEAK HOUR TRIPS: PERCENT: DISTRIBUTION % 18 .60 15.91 1.86 3.38 16.09 20.39 9.69 14 .18 100.00 IN -5 -7.25% INGRESS CALCULATED -0.930 -0.796 -0.093 -0.169 -0.805 -1.020 -0.485 -0.709 -5.005 TABLE :A4·2 OU T 74 107.25% USED -1 -1 0 0 ·1 -1 0 -1 -5 TOTAL 69 (Calculated) EGRESS CALCULATED 13.764 11 .773 1.376 2.501 11.907 15 .089 7.171 10.493 74.074 TOTAL USED 14 13 12 11 1 1 3 3 12 11 15 14 7 7 10 9 74 69 6075 Sunset Drive Project Net Trips -PM Peak Hour 18.60 15.91 1.86 3.38 16.09 20.39 9.69 14.18 TOTAL 100.00 6 24 TABLE :A5 Cardinal Distribution PM Peak Hour Traffic Analysis Zone (T AZ) 1118 Project Name: 6075 Sunset Drive NORTH 32 .78% EAST 17 .77% SOUTH 19.47% WEST 30.08% 100.00% 26 5 PM PEAK HOUR NET TRIPS 4 16 26 14 16 24 80 TOTAL 5 31 3 17 4 20 6 30 18 98 ~ Directional percentages circled are rounded. 0 TABLE: AS-I Cardinal Distribution PM Peak Hour Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) 1118 Project Name: 6075 Sunset Drive IN OUT TOTAL 17.40 21.40 18.60 15 3 18 16.30 15.00 15 .91 13 3 16 1.80 2.00 1.86 1 0 1 3.50 3.10 ~.38 3 1 4 16.90 14 .20 16 .09 13 3 16 21 .50 17.80 20.39 16 4 20 9.00 11 .30 9.69 8 2 10 13.70 15.30 14.18 11 2 13 Note: Based on Miami·Dade Transportation Plan (to the Year 2040) Directional Trip Distribution Report, October 2014. Since the current data is only available for the model years 2010 and 2040, the eight (8) cardinal directions were interpotated to the design year of 2019. DIRECTION NNE ENE ESE SSE SSW WSW WNW NNW TOTAL PM PEAK HOUR GROSS TRIPS: PERCENT: DISTRIBUTION % 18.60 15.91 1.86 3.38 16.09 20.39 9.69 14.18 100.00 IN 80 8.1.:63.% INGRESS CALCULATED 14.880 12.728 1.488 2.704 12.872 16.312 7.752 11.344 80.080 TABLE:A5-2 OUT 18 1Ii:710/0 USED T5 13 1 3 13 16 8 11 .80 TOTAL 98 (~~fc~I~~e~j EGRESS CALCULATED 3.411 2.918 0.341 0.620 2.951 3.740 1.777 2.601 18.358 TOTAL USED 3 18 3 . 16 0 1 1 4 3 16 4 ' 20 2 10 2-13 18 98 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ZONE (TAZ) 1035 1021 1112 '1004 '1'1 11 11.10 1023 1005 'f017 \-1007 1015 I 1016 I 1008 J 1014 I / \ \ 11 28· \ 1 12~ 1 I 1127 / 1131 1013 ,"'-.J\ •• ~-I r== It 1010 ! \ 1 11@? I - 11 32 MOBILITY OPTIONS - 2· 040 Midl'l'li-Di:Jde , Trar'lsportatibh Plan '-EYES ON THE FUTURE MIAMI-DADE METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION MIAMI.-DADE 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan Directior.1al Trip Dis'firibution Report October 23/2014 Miami-Dade 2010 Directional DistrlbQtion Sl:Immary OrlglnT~ Cardinal Directions 'County Reglptlal Wsw Total TA~ TAZ NNE ENE ESE SSE SSW WNW NN'II{ " l.'l]S ' 400~\ TRI~S ),70 19S . ~O , '9i>' ; ~97'1 " 3WJ l~o\ ;4~ JLl¥.zlJJ -.~ 110S 400S PERCENT 15.6 li.3 0.6 S.6 23.0 21.5 S.1 14.3 11'Q9 • '409.?; "PUPS " ,449 302-' 1'201 ,53'1 , ~'t: 1~i!J t'~· L.......r~?'l, ,~ ~~ 1109 4009 PERCENT 25.6 17.2 6.S 3.0 16.4 S.O 10.0 12.9 - '40101 TRIPS r 1110 :~90 ( 414 215 ' 1'82'1 :3~~ 3(f2~ zwli ,a52j .~f7.,1'6~ 1110 4010 PERCENT 21.7 15.2 7.9 6.7 14.7 ILl 9.7 13.0 l!lfl '.: , '461'{~ ~.P'S~ , ., ,~7'l 7".,.; , j~5 ' : ~82J I ,~ _ _'l46 ~ ~ '5?~~1 ~ t4~$'1 ""~~ " ,,~-~J -1111 4011 , PERCENT 12.6 20.7 4.9 10.2 12.4 12.3 14.S 122 1"1.~2 , _ . '4012' . <;,,, "1508 1 ' :475'\: ,217 21£~ I jlrp~ (40~1 ,~2~jil E' ~4.1 ~~~ , .TRIJl,[ ~Jj' I" - 1112 4012 PERCENT 17.7 16.6 7.6 7.4 11.0 14.1 9.5 16.2 .liF13~ , 4,9'l3': '~PS' __ I k256l , "265~ 11 -'l(y~q "ll09 _ I\lt~ 9.¥1 1~ ~1.1!.~ '~9m 1113 4013 PERCENT 21.3 , 22.1 5.9 8.7 9.1 10.0 ,7.S 15.2 r ",t m'1 ~1 40l-4; TRlp-~r ,. ,39'7 1 '~83 ) I -133 Jr~~l ,lt~ .~8 ? ~2 ~1[( ~ JJ~ 1114 4014 PER,CENT -21.1 20.4 7.1 7.3 10.3 9.9 11.8 12.1 " n J5 " '4Oi~\ \42&1 37'" : . TRlfS ,194'1 Y@lr .j4i~ ~~I t ,;3s~ •. 33S~ ~"-~.~~ 1115 401S PERCENT 15.7 13.9 7.2 5.9 15.2 15;6 14.2 . 12.5 .. 11'16 u ~t6_ .~) 2151 25~'! 47 ' -~~l' -1il~~ 1 if! 49 if .;L!i'§§il 4..~ ~M~ 1116 4016 PERCENT 16.0 18.9 3.5 7.8 11.5 10:1 12.5 19.7 I'll?' -401t TiuPs 4~ 492 ' . U3 9g {61()~ . -4J~ \~33~ i2Ql mA.~[~l 11i7 4017 PEReENT 16.2 15.1 3.7 3 :1 19.9 14.7 11.1 16.4 1118~ • 401~J TRIBS·: ' .1;032; '965 107"' 2q.7 11 .;f(Qoo j Il,~ii :~53 3j " {8.Q~il !i§,~Sj 1118 40i8 PERCENT 17.4 16.3 1.8 3.5 16.9 21.5 9.0 13.7 --401f 'tRlP5. \il~1 8'44 10~ ll'~~1 il!;§.OO' i ik~Jlr§2.2J ~Qi I rc~ J2':~~ UJ9, '- 1119 4019 PERCENT 17.2 11.7 1.5 1.7 20.7 23.5 10.7 13.0 Ll2(), , ~02Q: "rR:IPS • 2.1n 1.044 ' 254' '1'79'1 _ 1.~z;l t, :2t~'I I ~ ~1;\74~~1 :' {l~9~ .lrQJ9~3" ~,>ll~ _1 1120 4020 PERCENT 19.9 9.5 2.3 1.6 13.4 22.3 15.7 15.2 40~l, -l.1'~l i 1~9 J 1~1:9ll ~1?8]li ~~ ~ I~ 78~3531 U2·k ;J'RJI!S ' J lA14j 174 : 1121 4021 PERCENT 16.9 13.7 2.1 1.S 14.3 22.2, 10.3 IS.7 1\1~ ,492~': rruFS 510 i79 ' 50 27j,~ ~~JJ56~ r .2f8'O~ ItJ..5~~ ~o Zj JJt. '''1 .!!.&.!OJ 1122 4022 PERCENT 5.9 3.2 0.6 3.2 36.5 32.5 13 .4 4.7 4oi3 ' TRIi>.~ 262 - Il23 118 H J.?9\ - 2621 (,72 <..2'1611 . J:.37,5 J 75 1123 4023 PERCENT 19.1 8.6 0.8 5.5 18.8 19.1 12.5 15.7 TRIPS: "7.14 198. 55~ - 3?2; 5"2-:3_ 1124 4024 10 202 , fl'7PJ r2,60~ 1124 4024 PERCENT 27.4 7.6 0.4 2.1 12.7 20.1 19.3 10.4 1125 4025 TRIPS. 1.74 ~OO 31 6? 45 98., 'l5~! 1J.~..8 \ _ '7,~i' 1125 4025 PERCENT 22.0 12.6 3.9 8.0 5.7 12.4 19.2 16.2 112<i 4cii6 TRIPS 9.w , 260 0 7~ 168 '&.~Q. 498i ~a"t, " 3',58~, 1126 4026 PERCENT 26.4 7.3 0.0 2.2 13.1 23.7 13.9 13.5 1127 · 402'7 ,TRIFS 496 179 20 ~O" )jS '5.~~j 30~j ;$O7~ '11 T~'~2§, 1127 4027 PERCENT 21.3 7.7 0.9 0.9 10.5 23.8 13.2 21.8 1128 4028 TRIPS 1,055 362 30 33 , 335; 1920 ' .520 , ' 7Yil . ,~l 9 @ ---581 MOBILITY OPT IONS Miami-Dade 2040 pir;'~,tion~d DistributiQA SUpO:fJlgry ' Origin TAZ Cardinal plrectlons County Regional NNE ENE ESE SSW .wSW WNW NNW :rotal TAZ "fAZ SSE I .1;1'08 i008 'tRIPS 584 " 497 94~ @9~ 1!6Q)1 -~3?r. -~ ~J!~ ~ ~Z@! 26 , l~ 1108 4008 PERCENT 21.6 18.4 0.9 3.5 15.8 17.0 12.4 10.6 1169: 4009: TRIPS, ·,'36V 263 61 1881 ~(f' ~F S~5' r20~~ ~;P I W "lii g90'i 1109 4009 PERCENT 21.7 15.6 3.6 5.2 16.0 11.0 12.4 14.6 1110 4010 , TRIPS 684 649 l... _ 96 lS~lj ,:~Ji l 3102 ~87!J '4-2~ 3.~, 1110 4010 PERCENT 21.4 20.3 3.0 5.7 14.5 9.S 12.1 13.2 - nll 4011 TRIPS' 5§6) 958 1 136 ' 303~ 1§2'111 ~()11 r4~54 ~ ""'-~ ~$I 1111 4011 PERCENT 14.0 23.7 3.4 7.5 12.9 ILl 11.7 15.9 11l1ij . , 461'4 ; tl1)iUl~S -''-~= ~~7ID I ~ 6Z6} .. 72:4: " 1rs8~ ~ l s2i1 ~fiml J.,Q~1 cawo ~"l 1112 4012 PERCENT i3,9 19.8 6.6 5.5 M.6 12.7 12.2 14.7 1.11:3' '4013 'TRIPS -tia3 i ii '·77 ~~ 9, ~ ~ljl ~@ ·it"42~ ii;~ 1113 4013 PERCENT 15.3 20.5 5.0 6.2 17;0 9.2 11.0 15,.9 I ll lf4 . 4Of4 . I iJ1RIPS~., ~ 2(j8~ " .,.'300' ;59 , 117d ~6 il3'9 2201 ao2l1 ~~~~I 1114 4014 PERCENT 13.5 19.5 3.8 7.6 12.7 9.0 14.3 19.6 ut~ JlRi?s . :437 ~2 '1[3' 4.015 1671 ~iI ~7~ k . ~95JJ .~(~ U hg4 1115 4015 PERCENT 16.1 14.8 4.2 6.i 17.0 14.6 10.9 16.3 l(~l~~ 4916. ;l1@PS 1,28..0] ~36 1'221 9S~ ,.J2~ ,~,~~~~ . l!l)~ .. '3~ "J~2l 1116 4016 PERCENT 16.0 13.5 7.0 5.4 15.5 15.2 9.9 17.6 1:111-7 40il7l, ~§ , lilSl:j ,:8Q6 ' . • 23S1 1'4j'J J~99ll -~.~ ;327 . (SElj\) ~ t~2~j l 1117 4017 PERCENT 16.6 17.8 5.2 3.2 17,7 13.6 7.2 lS.8 1,1\18 nc~18 TlUPS' lolita . ~ 194 1,482 , 3P?' ~f40z11 li,~53 -l"~ r 5:l~~ '~8 1118 4018 PERCENT 21.4 15.0 2.0 3.1 14.2 17.8 11.3 15.3 11~§' ~ ~ ~Pl.9. if<R]PS 1 :6311~ 963 126. 127 -~7.sg, !,~~ '7l!~1 1~ .2,§J3'J 1119 4019 PERCENT 21.5 12.7 1.7 1.6 16.5 21.7 9.4 15.0 1l~0 ~920 1 '1;'1UR~' "~l265 1,520 2:J..8 , 15'15 1 ,,) 2~~ '31074 1. }I,8~J ~O2~ 1 1!)~ 1120 4020 PERCENT 23.1 10.8 1.5 1.1 14,2 21.7 13.3 14.3 .Il,f 'l 40211 'T:m,P§ 1 180~~ :l:19~' 184 11l6~ ~.8[?~ ~l~IJ]1 1 la80~ r l~ l~ ~Qf2.5P.1 1121 4021 PERCENT 17.1 13.4 1.7 1.7 17.2 2219 8.3 17.7 1.1~i2 4922 · T!:UPS , 677 356 90 l'2§J &,243 . ~,1~~ 8421 '!1~ $:91(9) 1122 4022 PERCENT 9.8 5.2 1.3 1.8 32.4 31.4 12.2 6.0 1123 4023 TRIPS 54~' 3_86 28 25. _ 4~f [5§~., 307' ,3~5 2/687 -~'.: .... 1123 4023 PERCENT 20.3 14.4 1.0 0.9 16.1 22.3 11.4 13.6 1124' 4024 TRIPS 670 296 14 4~j ~' 122 5J 7 525 A25 I !2l98~ ,~ ll24 4024 PERCENT 22.5 9.9 0.5 1.5 16.5 17.3 17.6 14.2 1125.1 '40,25 1 I TRIPS 1'56 1 77 8 l!8~ . 92 2'411; 239 1~'8j 19~9 1125 4025 PERCENT 15.9 7.9 0.8 1.8 9.4 24.6 24.4 15.1 11:26 4026 TRIPS 1,198, 379 8 77 : ~6S 1,071 537 , ~83t.1 1i ~767' 1126 4026 PERCENT 25.1 8.0 0.2 1.6 14.0 22.5 11.3 17.5 1127 4027 TRIPS 737 208 '8 1 ,311 5:43 283 ' 456 2;547 1127 4027 PERCENT 28.9 8.2 0.3 0.0 12.2 21.3 ILl 17.9 ll28 4028 TRIPS 1,352 484 54 25 309 1,020 631 :974 , 4;~49, ---1341 MOBILITY OPTIONS 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact Study Appendix C: Growth Rate & Adjustment Factor Appendix Ie Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. Traffic Trends -V2.0 County: Station #: Highway: 20000 ·,,------------------------------------------------, 18000 >; 16000 It! c ~ 14000 "0 ~ 12000 0 !E 10000 E I- .?!-8000 -; c CI) Cl 6000 ~ CI) 4000 ~ 2000 0 2012 -.Observed Count -Fitted Curve -Log. (Fitted Curve) 2017 2022 2027 2032 Year ** Annual Trend Increase: Trend R·squared: Trend Annua l Historic Growth Rate: Trend Growth Rate (2016 to Design Year): Printed: 2013 2014 2015 2016 Miami (87) 8299 CR-959 & SR-959 15300 15200 15090 16200 *Axle-Adjusted 15300 15400 15600 15700 FLORIDA DEPAR'l'HENT OF TRANSPORTATION TRANSPOR'l'ATION STATISTICS OFFICE 2016 HISTORICAL AADr REPORT COONTY: 87 -HIAHl-DADE SITE: 8299 -OR-9S9 , SR-959, 200' NORTH OF SUNSET DR YEAR 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 AAD'I' DIRECTION 1 DIRECTION 2 +K FACTOR D FJ\CTOR T FACTOR ---------------------------------------------.-_ ..... 16200 C N 8000 S 8200 9.00 56.10 13.50 15000 T N 6700 S 8300 9.00 57.40 13.70 15200 S N 6800 S 8400 9.00 59.30 17.40 15300 F N 6800 S 8500 9.00 58.90 16.20 15300 C N 6800 S 8500 9.00 59.70 16.00 MDT FLIIGS: C D COMPUTED; E D MANUAL ESTIMATE; F D FIRST YEAR ESTIMATE S .. SECOND YEAR BSTIMATE: T .. THIRD YEAR ESTIMATE; R .. fOURTH YEAR ESTIMATE V .. FIFTH YEAR ESTIMATE; 6 a SIXTH YEAR ESTIMATE: X .. IlNlCNOWN ·K FJ\CTOIl: STARTING WITH YEAR 2011 IS STJ\IIDI\RDK, PRIOR YEMS ARE K30 VALUES 9000 8000 >; 7000 111 C iii Q) 6000 :§ .c Q) ~ 5000 u !E ~ 4000 I- :i!t ·iii c 3000 Q) Cl E 2000 Q) ~ 1000 0 Traffic Trends -V2.0 SW 59TH PLACE --100' SOUTH OF SW 71 STREET i 2011 _Observed Count -Fitted Curve --Log. (Fitted Curve) 2016 2021 2026 Year Trend R-squared: Compounded Annual Historic Growth Rate: Compounded Growth Rate (2016 to Design Year): Printed: 79.39% -3.27% -1.41% 5-Jun-17 County: Station #: Highway: I I 2031 I ;O1~ 2013 2014 2015 2016 Miami (87) 8252 SW 59TH PLACE u'"'vv 8400 7400 7400 7300 7200 * Axle-Adjusted '-'''"'vv 8000 7700 7500 7300 7200 COUNTY: 87 -HIilKI-DADE FLORIDA DElIAR'l'KElft' OF TRANSl'ORTATION TRANSPORT~ION STATISTICS OFFICE 2016 HISTORICAL MDT REPORT SITE: 8252 -SW 59TH lILACE, 100' SOI1'l'H OF SN 71 STREET YEAR MDT DIRECTION 1 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 -------- 7200 'I' 7300 S 7400 F 7400 C 8400 C 8300 C ------------N 4400 N 4500 N 4600 N 4600 N 5500 N 5500 DIRECTION 2 *X FACTOR --------------------. S 2800 9.00 S 2800 9.00 S 2800 9.00 S 2800 9.00 S 2900 g.OO S 2800 9.00 J) FACTOR -.. _----- 56.10 57.40 59.30 58.90 59.70 58.20 J\ADT FLAGS: C .. COKPIJ'l'ED; E -IWIWU. ESTIMATE; F .. FIRST YEAR ESTIMATE T FACTOR ------- 3.30 5.30 1.80 1.80 1.80 14.70 S -SBCOND YEAR ES'fDlATE; T .. 'fIIIRD YEAR ESTIMATE; R .. FOUR'll! YEAR ESTIMATE V .. FInS YEAR ESTIMATB; 6.. SIXTH YEAR ESTIMATE; X .. UNKNOWN *X FAC'l'OR: STARTING WITH YEAR 2011 IS STANDARDX. PRIOR YEIIRS ARB KJO VALUES >; C\J c -I/) CII :£ .J: Q) G u !E E I- Z. 'iii c Q) Cl E Q) ~ Traffic Trends -V2.0 County: Station #: Highway: 12000 -r-------------------------, 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 o 2011 _ Observed Count -Atted Curve -Log. (Fitted Curve) 2016 2021 2026 Year Trend R-squared: Compounded Annual Historic Growth Rate: Compounded Growth Rate (2016 to Design Year): Printed: m 62.23% -0.79% 0.00% 2031 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Miami (87) 8253 SW70TH ST 10300 10100 10100 10000 9800 * Axle·Adjusted 10200 10100 10000 10(l)00 9900 FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TMNSPORTATION TRANSPORTArION STATISTICS OFFICE 2016 HISTORICAL AADT REPORT COUNTY: 87 -MIJIHI-DADE SITE: YEAR 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 8253 -Stl 70TH ST, 100' EAST OF COHHERCE Al\DT DIRECTION 1 DIRECTION 2 OK FACTOR D FACTOR T FACTOR ---------------------------------------------------------9800 T E 5900 t1 3900 9.00 56.10 3.30 10000 S E 6000 If 4000 9.00 57.40 5.30 10100 F E 6100 If 4000 9.00 59.30 7.50 10100 C E 6100 W 4000 9.00 58.90 16.20 10300 F E 7500 W 2800 9.00 59.70 16.00 10200 C E 7400 w 2800 9.00 58.20 14.70 AlIDT FLAGS: C a COHPOTED, E: a HANUAL ESTIMATE, F -FIRST YEAR ESTIMATE S -SECOND YEAR ESTIMA'l'E, '1' -THIRD YEAR UTIMA'l'E, R .. FOURTH YEAR U'rIMATE V a FIFTH YEAR ESTIMATE, 6" SIXTH YEAR ESTIMATE, X .. UHIQI01IJI OK FACTOR: STARTING WITH YEAR 2011 IS STAHDARDK, PIUOR YEARS ARE 100 VALUE:S 2016 PEAK SEASON FACTOR CATEGORY REPORT -REPORT TYPE: ALL CATEGORY: 8701 MIAMI-DADE SOUTH WEEK DATES SF MOCF: 0.99 PSCF ====================================================c=e_======================== 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 * 8 * 9 *10 *11 *12 *13 *14 *15 *16 *17 *18 *19 *20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 SO 51 52 53 01/01/2016 -01/02/2016 01/03/2016 -01/09/2016 01/10/2016 -01/16/2016 01/17/2016 -01/23/2016 01/24/2016 -01/30/2016 01/31/2016 -02/06/2016 02/07/2016 -02/13/2016 02/14/2016 -02/20/2016 02/21/2016 -02/27/2016 02/28/2016 -03/05/2016 03/06/2016 -03/12/2016 03/13/2016 -03/19/2016 03/20/2016 -03/26/2016 03/27/2016 -04/02/2016 04/03/2016 -04/09/2016 04/10/2016 -04/16/2016 04/17/2016 -04/23/2016 04/24/2016 -04/30/2016 05/01/2016 -05/07/2016 05/08/2016 -05/14/2016 05 15 ~2.016 -05 21 2016 05-,22 201.6 -0·5 28 2'016 OS 29 2016 -06 04 2016 06/05/2016 -06/11/2016 06/12/2016 -06/18/2016 06/19/2016 -06/25/2016 06/26/2016 -07/02/2016 07/03/2016 -07/09/2016 07/10/2016 -07/16/2016 07/17/2016 -07/23/2016 07/24/2016 -07/30/2016 07/31/2016 -08/06/2016 08/07/2016 -08/13/2016 08/14/2Q16 -08/20/2016 0'8/21/2016 -08/27/2016 08/28/2016 -09/03/2016 09/04/2016 -09/10/2016 09/11/2016 -09/17/2016 09/18/2016 -09/24/2016 09/25/2016 -10/01/2016 10/02/2016 -10/08/2016 10/09/2016 -10/15/2016 10/16/2016 -10/22/2016 10/23/2016 _. 10/29/2016 10/30/2016 -11/05/2016 11/06/2016 -11/12/2016 11/13/2016 -11/19/2016 11/20/2016 -11/26/2016 11/27/2016 -12/03/2016 12/04/2016 -12/10/2016 12/11/2016 -12/17/2016 12/18/2016 -12/24/2016 12/25/2016 -12/31/2016 * PEAK SEASON 21-FEB-2017 10:54:35 0.99 1. 00 1. 02 1. 01 1. 01 1. 00 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.99 0 .99 0.99 0.98 0.98 0.98 0.99 0.99 0.99 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 01 1. 02 1. 02 1. 03 1. 03 1. 02 1. 02 1. 01 1. 01 1. 01 1.02 1. 02 1. 03 1. 02 1. 01 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 01 1. 00 1. 00 0.99 0 .99 1. 00 1.02 1. 00 1. 01 1. 03 1. 02 1. 02 1. 01 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 1. 00 1. 00 1. 00 0.99 0.99 0.99 1. 00 1. 00 1.00 D F 1. 01 J5e. Al,,-(~ 's ~i~:~~I ~* ()5f"o G{\J ~", AN C.-ITli\S ~V'~WEJ2 1.01 A<) "p-F Q..v6 S rc;b ~"'1 1.01 ~ 1. 02 1. 03 1.03 1.04 1.04 1.03 1.03 1. 02 1.02 1.02 1. 03 1. 03 1. 04 1. 03 1. 02 1. 01 1. 01 1. 01 1. 01 1. 01 1. 01 1. 02 1. 01 1. 01 1. 00 1. 00 1. 01 1. 03 830UPD 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact study Appendix D: Traffic Counts tTMe's) & Committed Developments Appendix I D Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. TABLE:A6 INTERSECTION APPROACH VOLUMES· AM PEAK HOUR Project Name: 6075 Sunset Drive ci 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Z Z 0 AM PEAK BACKGROUND PROPOSED SITE PROPOSED t= DATE GROWTH @ 1.06% FUTURE TRAFFIC 0 INTERSECTION AM PEAK SEASONAllY COMMITIED FUTURE TRAFFIC w APPROACH MOVEMENT OF PHF PSCF FOR PROJECT TRAFFICW/O (PROJECT CI) NAME HRCOUNT ADJUSTED TRIPS WI PROJECT a: COUNT (EXISTING) BUilD-OUT OF 2019 PROJECT NET TRIPS) (VPH) (2019) w (2 YEAR GROWTH) (2019) (VPH) I-~ SBR 129 1.01 130 3 0 133 5 138 SOUTHBOUND SBT 0 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 SBl 0 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 129 ..... 130 3 0 133 5 138 WBR 77 (; 1.01 78 2 0 79 0 79 WBT 429 N 1.01 433 9 28 471 0 471 WESTBOUND WBl 0 M 1.01 0 0 0 0 N 0 0 SW 72 Street (SR 986) TOTAL 506 >. <') 511 11 28 550 0 550 1 <II I() & SW 59 Place NBR 0 :!: m 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NBT 0 ~ 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 NORTHBOUND <II NBl 0 .., 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" TOTAL 0 CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 EBR 0 ~ 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 EASTBOUND EBT 503 1.01 508 11 72 591 0 591 EBl 49B 1.01 503 11 0 514 0 514 TOTAL 1.001 1011 22 72 1105 0 1105 TOTAL 1636 1652 35 100 1788 5 1793 SBR 26 1.01 26 1 0 27 32 59 SOUTHBOUND SBT 0 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 SBl 0 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 26 ..... 26 1 0 27 32 59 WBR 18 (; 1.01 18 0 0 19 0 19 WBT 474 N 1.01 479 10 28 517 5 522 WESTBOUND WBl 0 M 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 N SW 72 Street (SR 986) TOTAL 492 >. ; 497 11 28 536 5 541 2 <II & SW 61 Avenue NBR 0 ~ m 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 c::i NBT 0 ~ 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 NORTHBOUND <II NBl 0 .., 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" TOTAL 0 CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 ::l EBR 0 I-1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 EASTBOUND EBT 988 1.01 998 21 72 1,091 0 1,091 EBl 0 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 988 998 21 72 1091 0 1091 TOTAL 1506 1521 32 100 1653 37 1690 ©Richard Garcia and Associates, Inc., 2008 11/6/2017 ci Z Z 0 i= u w CI) 0:: w I-~ 3 4 Notes: TABLE:A8 INTERSECTION APPROACH VOLUMES· AM PEAK HOUR 1 2 INTERSECTION APPROACH NAME SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND SW 71 Street & SW 61 Avenue NORTHBOUND EASTBOUND TOTAL SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND SW 71 Street &SW59 Place NORTHBOUND EASTBOUND TOTAL 1 Intersection Name 2 Intersection Approach 3 Intersection Approach Movement 4 TMC data provided by RGA, Inc. 5 Date of Count 6 Peak Hour Factor 3 MOVEMENT SBR SBT SBl TOTAL WBR WBT WBl TOTAL NBR NBT NBl TOTAL EBR EBT EBl TOTAL SBR SBT SBl TOTAL WBR WBT WBl TOTAL NBR NBT NBl TOTAL EBR EBT EBl TOTAL 7 Peak Season Conversion Faclor (PSCF) obtained from FDOT ©Richard Garcia and ASSOCiates, Inc., 2008 Project Name: 6075 Sunset Drive 4 5 8 7 8 9 10 11 AM PEAK BACKGROUND PROPOSED DATE GROWTH @ 1.06% FUTURE AM PEAK SEASONAllY COMMITIED OF PHF PSCF FOR PROJECT TRAFFICW/O HRCOUNT ADJUSTED TRIPS 0 81 19 100 7 0 13 20 13 13 0 26 0 0 0 0 146 10 81 0 91 0 0 0 0 0 599 36 635 4 0 1 5 731 COUNT BUllD-OUT OF 2019 (EXISTING) (2 YEAR GROWTH) 1.01 0 0 0 1.01 82 2 0 1.01 19 0 0 101 2 0 ,.. 1.01 7 0 0 0 N 1.01 0 0 0 M 1.01 13 0 0 N ~ 0 20 0 0 It) :E ,.. 1.01 13 0 0 c:i ~ 1.01 13 0 0 <11 '0 1.01 0 0 0 U> Q) 26 1 0 :::> I-1.01 0 0 0 1.01 0 0 0 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 147 3 0 1.01 10 0 0 1.01 82 2 0 1.01 0 0 0 92 2 0 ,.. 0 1.01 0 0 0 N 1.01 0 0 0 M 1.01 0 0 0 N >. It) 0 0 0 111 0 :E en 1.01 0 0 0 c:i ~ 1.01 605 13 0 111 i 1.01 36 1 0 Q) 641 14 0 :::> I-1.01 4 0 0 1.01 0 0 0 1.01 1 0 0 5 0 0 L..... 738 16 0 8 Seasonally Adjusted TMC = Count· SF (Existing Condition). 9 A 1.06 percent background growth was utilized with a project build-out of 2019. 10 Committed Development Trips 11 Proposed Traffic wlo Project ~ Seasonally Adjusted TMC + Backgound + Committed 12 Project Net Trips. 13 Tolal Traffic = Net Traffic wlo Project + Sile Traffic (Proposed Condition with Project) PROJECT (2019) 0 84 20 103 7 0 13 21 13 13 0 27 0 0 0 0 151 10 84 0 94 0 0 0 0 0 618 37 655 4 0 1 5 754 12 13 SITE PROPOSED TRAFFIC FUTURE TRAFFIC (PROJECT NET TRIPS) \III/PROJECT (VPH) (2019) (VPH) 0 0 0 84 0 20 0 103 10 17 0 0 12 25 22 43 0 13 14 27 0 0 14 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 187 0 10 0 84 0 0 0 94 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 618 0 37 0 655 5 9 0 0 13 14 18 23 18 772 1116/2017 TABLE:A7 INTERSECTION APPROACH VOLUMES -PM PEAK HOUR Project Name: 6075 Sunset Drive 0 1 2 3 • 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Z Z 0 PM PEAK BACKGROUND PROPOSED SITE PROPOSED i= DATE GROWTH @ 1.06% FUTURE TRAFFIC 0 INTERSECTION PM PEAK SEASONAllY COMMITIED FUTURE TRAFFIC w APPROACH MOVEMENT OF PHF PSCF FOR PROJECT TRAFFICW/O (PROJECT (/) NAME HRCOUNT ADJUSTED TRIPS WI PROJECT a::: COUNT (EXISTING) BUilD-OUT OF 2019 PROJECT NET TRIPS) (VPH) (2019) w (2 YEAR GROWTH) (2019) (VPH) I- ~ SBR 482 1.01 487 10 0 497 1 498 SOUTHBOUND SBT 0 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 SBl 0 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 482 487 10 0 497 1 498 WBR 34 ..... 1.01 34 1 0 35 12 0 47 WBT 654 N 1.01 661 14 74 749 16 765 WESTBOUND WBl 0 M 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 N SW 72 Street (SR 986) TOTAL 688 >-0 695 15 74 784 28 812 1 II) I/') &SW 59 Place NBR 0 ~ O! 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 NBT 0 >; 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 NORTHBOUND II) NBl 0 'C 1.01 0 0 0 !II 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 GI 0 0 0 0 0 0 ::I EBR 0 I-1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 , EASTBOUND EBT 519 1.01 524 11 42 577 0 577 EBl 284 1.01 287 6 0 293 12 305 , TOTAL 803 811 17 42 870 12 882 TOTAL 1973 1993 42 116 2151 41 2,192 SBR 142 1.01 143 3 0 146 9 155 SOUTHBOUND SBT 0 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 SBl 0 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 142 143 3 0 146 9 155 WBR 15 ..... 1.01 15 0 0 15 16 31 0 WBT 1.086 N 1.01 1097 23 74 1.194 1 1.195 WESTBOUND WBl 0 M 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 N SW 72 Street (SR 986) TOTAL 1101 >-co 1112 24 74 1210 17 1227 II) I/') 2 & SW 61 Avenue NBR 0 ~ m 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 c:i NBT 0 >; 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 NORTHBOUND II) NBl 0 ~ 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 GI 0 0 0 0 0 0 ::I EBR 0 I-1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 EASTBOUND EBT 818 1.01 826 18 42 886 12 898 EBl 0 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 818 826 18 42 886 12 898 TOTAL 2,061 2,082 .--~---116 2,242 38 2,280 ©Richard Garcia and Associates. Inc .• 2008 11/612017 0 Z Z 0 i= u w UJ Il: w I-~ 3 4 Notes: TABLE:A7 INTERSECTION APPROACH VOLUMES -PM PEAK HOUR 1 2 INTERSECTION NAME APPROACH SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND SW 71 Street & SW 61 Avenue NORTHBOUND EASTBOUND TOTAL SOUTHBOUND WESTBOUND SW 71 Street & SW59 Place NORTHBOUND EASTBOUND TOTAL 1 Intersection Name 2 Intersection Approach 3 Intersection Approach Movement 4 TMC data provided by RGA, Inc. 5 Date of Count 6 Peak Hour Factor 3 MOVEMENT SBR SBT SBL TOTAL WBR WBT WBL TOTAL NBR NBT NBL TOTAL EBR EBT EBL TOTAL SBR SBT SBL TOTAL WBR WBT WBL TOTAL NBR NBT NBL TOTAL EBR EBT EBL TOTAL 7 Peak Season Conversion Factor (PSCF) obtained from FOOT ©Richard Garcia and Associates, Inc., 2008 Project Name: 6075 Sunset Drive 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 PM PEAK BACKGROUND PROPOSED DATE GROWTH @ 1.06% FUTURE PM PEAK SEASONALLY COMMITTED HRCOUNT OF PHF PSCF ADJUSTED FOR PROJECT TRIPS TRAFFICW/O 0 57 20 77 50 0 79 129 10 36 0 46 0 0 0 0 252 53 417 0 470 0 0 0 0 0 281 27 308 36 0 21 57 835 COUNT BUILD-OUT OF 2019 (EXISTING) (2 YEAR GROWTH) 1.01 0 0 0 1.01 58 1 0 1.01 20 0 0 78 2 0 r-. 1.01 51 1 0 0 N 1.01 0 0 0 ..; 1.01 80 2 0 N >. 5il 130 3 0 III ~ r-. 1.01 10 0 0 0 >. 1.01 36 1 0 III 't:I 1.01 0 0 0 :II 46 1 0 ::l I-1.01 0 0 0 1.01 0 0 0 1.01 0 0 0 0 0 0 255 5 0 1.01 54 1 0 1.01 421 9 0 1.01 0 0 0 475 10 0 r-. 1.01 0 0 0 0 N 1.01 0 0 0 ..; 1.01 0 0 0 C\I ~ r-. 0 0 0 co ~ co 1.01 0 0 0 0 >: 1.01 284 6 0 1\1 '0 1.01 27 1 0 .. III 311 7 0 ::l I-1.01 36 1 0 1.01 0 0 0 1.01 21 0 0 58 1 0 843 18 0 8 Seasonally Adjusted TMC = Count· SF (Existing Condition). 9 A 1.06 percent background growth was utilized with a project build-out of 2019. 10 Committed Development Trips 11 Proposed Traffic wlo Project = Seasonally Adjusted TMC + Backgound + Committed 12 Project Net Trips. 13 Tolal Traffic = Net Traffic wlo Project + Site Traffic (Proposed Condition with Project) PROJECT (2019) 0 59 21 79 52 0 81 133 10 37 0 47 0 0 0 0 260 55 430 0 485 0 0 0 0 0 290 28 318 37 0 22 59 861 12 13 SITE PROPOSED TRAFFIC FUTURE TRAFFIC (PROJECT WI PROJECT NET TRIPS) (VPH) (2019) (VPH) 0 0 17 76 13 34 30 109 1 53 0 0 13 94 14 147 0 10 5 42 0 0 5 52 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 49 309 10 65 0 430 0 0 10 495 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 290 24 52 24 342 1 38 0 0 2 24 3 62 37 898 11/6/2017 I SW59 PL Southbound Richard Garci a. & Associates , Inc. 8065 NW 98 Street Hialeah Gardens, FL 33016 Phone: 305-362-0677 Fax: 305-675-6474 Groups Printed-Cars -Trucks SW72ST SW59PL Westbound Northbound File Name : SW 72 St_SW 59 PI_AM Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/23/2017 Page No : 1 SW72ST Eastbound I Start Time Rlchl I Thru I Left I Peds I .... T .... RighI I Thru I Left I Peds I .. ,. T.", RighI I Thru I Left I Peds I .... T .... Righi I Thru I Left I Peds I .... Total Inl. Tel>l I 07:00AM 18 07:15AM 28 07:30AM 19 07:45AM 23 Total 88 08:00AM 20 08 :15 AM' 48 08:30 AM 35 08:45AM 26 Total 129 GmndTolal 217 Apprch % 100 Total % 6.7 Cars 215 % Cars 99.1 Trucks 2 % Trucks 0.9 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 8 77 28 7 74 19 17 86 23 13 89 88 45 326 20 17 102 48 21 94 35 17 113 26 22 120 129 77 429 217 122 755 13.4 83 6.7 3.8 23.4 215 118 743 99.1 96.7 98.4 2 4 12 0.9 3.3 1.6 COM ~iiJ" "' .... ~ .... -1 00 01: n :Q0 "' .. N"C .. Il. 0 8 0 3 0 1 0 5 0 17 o 5 o 5 o 4 o 2 o 16 0 33 0 3.6 0 1 0 33 0 100 0 0 0 0 93 84 104 107 388 124 120 134 144 522 910 28.2 894 98.2 16 1.8 T North 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51231201707 :00 AM 51231201708:45 AM Cars Trucks g g Out Total 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 o o o o o 2 100 0.1 2 100 0 0 U :;r +-;1 2 r-+~ -0 III 0 0 0 2 2 o o o o o 2 0.1 2 100 0 0 .... .... h) .... "'A'" ill .... :;;! "'.., 000 Q..., .. .., ol:l 0 141 168 2 311 422 0 130 157 1 288 400 0 106 124 3 233 356 0 114 134 1 249 381 0 491 583 7 1081 1559 o 143 122 2 267 411 o 134 133 3 270 438 o ~04 116 3 223 , 392 o 122 127 10 259 429 o 503 498 18 1019 1670 0 994 1081 25 2100 3229 0 47.3 51.5 1.2 0 30.8 33.5 0.8 65 0 972 1068 25 2065 3176 0 97.8 .98.8 100 98 .3 98.4 0 22 13 0 35 53 0 2.2 1.2 0 1.7 1.6 I~I~~I~ 08:00AM 20 0 0 0 20 08:15AM 48 0 0 0 48 08:30AM 35 0 0 0 35 08:45AM 26 0 0 0 26 Tolal Volume 129 0 0 0 129 0.4 AIlo. Tolal PHF .672 .000 .000 .000 .672 ~ \ It"" Sill -~ {!- ~=J' .. ~ ~~-+ I- 0:;: h ClIo. -'0 .. a. Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 8065 NW 98 Street 17 102 21 94 17 113 22 120 77 429 .875 .894 Hialeah Gardens, FL 33016 Phone: 305-362-0677 Fax: 305-675-6474 0 5 124 0 0 0 0 5 120 0 0 0 0 4 134 0 0 0 0 2 144 0 0 0 0 16 522 0 0 0 .000 .800 .906 .000 .000 .000 Oul In ~ OIID 129 704 129 0 0 0 'hi Thru Left Peds 1 4 Peak Hour Data i North Peak Hour Begins at 08:00 AM Cars Trucks , .. X· ",', 1 01 0 01 01 1 I c::::=ru 0 c::::=ru Oul In Tolal 0 0 0 0 0 .000 File Name : SW 72 St_SW 59 PI_AM Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/23/2017 Page No : 2 0 0 143 122 2 267 411 0 0 134 133 3 270 438 0 0 104 116 3 223 392 0 0 122 127 10 259 429 0 0 503 49B 1B 1019 1670 .000 .000 .879 .936 .450 .944 .953 U ::1''''1 -"'I ~~ ~ 4-::r .... 2N '" r-+"S!. -0 [iJol 'U :g,~ SiD Ut-In", I SW61 AVE Southbound Richard Garcia & Assoc iates, Inc. 8065 NW 98 Street Hialeah Gardens, FL 33016 Phone: 305-362-0677 Fax: 305-675-6474 Groups Prlnted-Cars -Trucks SW72ST SW61 AVE Westbound Northbound File Name Site Code Start Date Page No : SW 72 St_SW 61 Ave_AM : 00000000 : 5/23/2017 : 1 SW72ST Eastbound I Start Time Riohl I Thru 1 Leftl Peds] ....... T .... Righi I Thru I Left I Peds I .... T .... Righi I Thru I Left I Peds I _, .... Righi I Thru I Left I Peds I _ T .... Int TctIIIl 07 !00AM 3 07:15 AM 8 07:30AM 2 07:45AM 10 Tolal 23 08:00AM 4 08:15AM 5 08:30AM 7 08:45AM 10 Tolal 26 Grand Total 49 Apprch 0/0 100 TolalO/O 1.6 Cars 48 0/0 Cars 98 Trucks 1 % Trucks 2 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 93 8 5 96 2 6 97 10 4 106 23 15 392 4 6 115 5 1 131 7 7 122 10 10 123 26 24 491 49 39 883 4.2 94.6 1.6 1.3 29.4 48 39 868 98 100 98.3 1 0 15 2 0 1.7 00 o=j .3 I::;N g~---+ ~M NI- 00 01;; n ~o <c .. "0 CD 11. 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 94 0 101 2 105 1 111 4 411 1 122 6 138 o 129 o 133 7 522 11 933 1.2 0.4 31 11 918 100 98.4 0 15 0 1.6 T North 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 51231201707 :00 I'M 5/2312017 OB :45 I'M Cars Trucks g g QUI Tolal 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 u 3: +-~ r +~ "11 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" cooco &l ..... ::J: '" UII" 000 ~ ..... ....... ..... 0 ..... 0 285 0 287 0 232 0 243 0 1047 o 260 o 259 o 226 o 217 o 962 0 2009 0 99.2 0 66.8 0 1977 0 98.4 0 32 0 1.6 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 287 384 3 290 399 2 234 341 2 245 . 366 9 1056 1490 1 261 387 2' 261 404 1 227 363 3 220 363 7 969 1517 16 2025 3007 0.8 0.5 67.3 16 1993 2959 100 98 .4 98.4 0 32 48 0 1.6 1.6 07:45AM 10 0 0 a 10 08:00AM 4 0 0 0 4 08:15AM 5 0 0 0 5 08:30AM 7 0 0 0 7 TOIaI Volume 26 0 0 0 26 % App. Total PRF .650 .000 .000 .000 .650 Richard Garcia & A ssociates , Inc. 8065 NW 98 Street 4 106 6 115 1 131 7 122 18 474 .643 .905 Hialeah Gardens, FL 33016 Phone: 305-362-0677 Fax: 305-675-6474 a 1 111 0 0 a a 1 122 a 0 0 a 6 138 a 0 0 0 0 129 a 0 0 0 8 500 0 0 0 .000 .333 .906 .000 .000 .000 0 0 0 0 0 .000 File Name: SW 72 St_SW 61 Ave_AM Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/23/2017 Page No : 2 a 0 243 0 2 245 366 a 0 260 0 1 261 387 a 0 259 0 2 261 404 a 0 226 0 1 227 363 0 0 988 0 6 994 1520 .000 .000 .950 .000 .750 .952 .941 I 1 Start Time 07:00AM 07:15AM 07:30AM 07:45AM Total 08:00AM 08:15AM 08:30AM 08:45AM Tolal Grand Total Apprch % Total % Cars % Cars Trucks % Trucks SW61 AVE Southbound Richard Garc ia & Associates , Inc. 8065 NW 98 Street Hialeah Gardens, FL 33016 Phone: 305-362-0677 Fax: 305-675-6474 Groups Printed-Cars -Trucks SW71 ST SW61 AVE Westbound Northbound File Name Site Code Start Date Page No : SW 71 St_SW 61 Ave_AM : 00000000 : 5/23/2017 : 1 SW71 ST Eastbound Right I Thru I Left I Peds I All .. 1"" RightJ_ Thruj Left 1 Peds 1 All •• Tow RighI 1 Thru 1 Left 1 Peds 1 .... f .... Right 1 Thru 1 Left 1 Peds 1 .... T ... , 'nt.T""1 0 10 1 0 11 4 0 11 3 0 14 1 0 15 1 0 16 0 0 20 2 0 22 3 0 56 7 0 63 8 o 14 4 o 18 2 o 19 1 3 23 1 o 23 5 o 28 2 o 25 9 o 34 2 o 81 19 3 103 7 0 137 26 3 166 15 0 82.5 15 .7 1.8 36.6 0 54.S 10.4 1.2 66.4 6 0 136 26 3 165 14 0 99.3 100 100 99.4 93.3 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0.7 0 0 0.6 6.7 s[JJ 00 O~j {! ~ 00 0" .l:--' I- 00 0:;: n <'>0 "' .. "0 ~ 0 1 0 6 0 1 0 2 0 10 o 3 o 5 o 1 o 4 o 13 0 23 0 56.1 0 9.2 0 23 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 3 o o o o o 3 7.3 1.2 3 100 0 0 5 0 1 0 9 0 1 0 2 1 4 0 5 1 3 0 21 2 9 0 5 3 2 0 6 2 2 0 3 5 2 0 6 3 7 0 20 13 13 0 41 15 22 0 37.5 55 0 16.4 6 8.8 0 40 15 22 0 97.6 100 100 0 1 0 0 0 2.4 0 0 0 T North 51231201707:00 tw. 51231201708:45 tw. Cars Trucks ~ ~ Out ~ rn Tolal 1 0 0 1 2 o 1 o o 3 7.5 1.2 3 100 0 0 u ;;r .-;1 2 ,... +~ l 2 1 5 5 13 5 5 7 10 27 40 16 40 100 0 0 ...... "' ....... 000 ~o~ .. ", 0'" 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~~ "'0'" [;Q~ co o:dir t\)~-a.- 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 3 o o o o o 3 100 1.2 3 100 0 0 0 18 2 26 0 23 1 33 3 100 o 28 o 34 o 38 o 50 o 150 3 250 1.2 3 248 100 99.2 0 2 0 0.8 SW61 AVE 08:00AM 0 14 4 0 18 08:15AM 0 19 1 3 23 08:30AM 0 23 5 0 28 08:45AM 0 25 9 0 34 Total Votume 0 81 19 3 103 % ADD. Total PHF .000 .810 .528 .250 .757 ~.,lctA s~ c"iiJ {? .... C.E .... ---' cl: n COl a: n. Richard Garci a & A ss ociates, Inc. 8065 NW 98 Street 2 1 2 2 7 .875 Hialeah Gardens, FL 33016 Phone: 305-362-0677 Fax: 305-675-6474 SW71 ST 0 3 0 5 3 2 0 0 5 0 6 2 2 0 0 1 0 3 5 2 0 0 4 0 6 3 7 0 0 13 0 20 13 13 0 .000 .650 .000 .833 .650 .464 .000 Out In Total C1Q] 103 ~ 0 81 3 :rt TIvu left Peds 1 4 Peak Hour Data T North Peak Hour Begins at 08:00 AM cars Trucks ~ i r+ Left Thru RI hi Peds o 13 13 1 ~ 27 Cllil Out In Total 0 1 0 0 1 .250 File Name Site Code Start Date Page No 5 0 5 0 7 0 10 0 27 0 .675 .000 :; .f"" = w 1J CD Co "'c : SW 71 St_SW 61 Ave_AM : 00000000 : 5/23/2017 : 2 0 0 0 0 28 0 0 0 0 34 0 0 0 0 38 0 0 0 0 50 0 0 0 O· 150 .000 .000 .000 .000 .750 ~~ ~i I I Start TIme 07:00AM 07:15AM 07:30AM 07:45AM To\al 08:00AM 08:15AM 08:30AM 08:45AM Total Grand Total Apprch % Total % Cars % Cars Trucks % Trucks SW59PL Southbound Richard Garcia: & Ass.oc i ates , Inc . 8065 NW 98 Street Hialeah Gardens, FL 33016 Phone: 305-362-0677 Fax: 305 -675-6474 G roups r nte • ars· True s PI d C k SW71 ST SW59PL Westbound Northbound File Name Site Code Start Date Page No : SW 71 St_SW 59 PLAM : 00000000 : 5/23/2017 : 1 SW71 ST Eastbound RJght I T1iru I Left I Pods I _ T .. ~ Rlaht I Thru I Left J Peds I _ T .... Righi I Thru I Left I Peds I _ T .... Rlaht I Thru I Left I Peds I ."p, T .... Int. TObi I 2 17 2 28 4 16 2 20 10 81 4 19 4 46 5 28 8 21 21 114 31 195 13.7 86.3 2.1 13.5 31 194 100 99.5 0 1 0 0.5 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MI~OI~1 ~... y- 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 30 20 22 91 23 50 33 29 135 226 15.7 225 99 .6 1 0.4 ~o ~ "".J" ~ 00 0", 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .2-' f- ~o "'-~.c n ~O ~'" " .. Cl. 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 o o o o o 3 100 0.2 3 100 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 o o o o o 3 0.2 3 100 0 0 i North 0 170 0 166 0 118 0 145 0 599 o 124 o 128 o 111 o 112 o 475 0 1074 0 90.3 0 74.5 0 1060 0 98.7 0 14 0 1.3 51231201707 :00 /JM 512312017 08:45 /JM Cars Trucks I ~I Out 1138T 15 1397 Total 8 3 10 15 36 15 22 11 30 78 114 9.6 7.9 114 100 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 o o o o o 1 0.1 0.1 1 100 0 0 179 169 128 160 636 139 150 122 142 553 1189 82.5 1175 98.8 14 1.2 U :=:0 00 4--;1 e 000 ,... ~~ 000 "0 8. "'<.> 0 ... 2 1 0 1 4 2 4 o 3 9 13 54 .2 0.9 13 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Uool~ [JJ~ t.)ow§i 0 0 0 1 1 2 o 3 4 9 10 41 .7 0.7 10 100 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 1 o o o 1 4.2 0.1 1 100 0 0 2 1 0 2 5 5 .4 3 7 19 24 1.7 24 100 0 0 200 203 148 184 735 167 204 158 178 707 1442 1427 99 15 1 07:00AM 2 17 0 0 19 07:15 AM 2 28 0 0 30 07:30AM 4 16 0 0 20 07:45AM 2 20 0 0 22 Total Volume 10 81 0 0 91 'lIt ·Aoo. Total PHF .625 .723 .000 .000 .758 g~ ~ li...1 ~ ... ~-+ "'1: n OUI '" ~ Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 8065 NW 98 Street 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .000 .000 Hialeah Gardens, FL 33016 Phone: 305-362-0677 Fax: 305-675-6474 0 0 0 0 170 8 0 3 3 0 166 3 0 0 0 0 118 10 0 0 0 0 145 15 0 3 3 0 599 36 .000 .250 .250 .000 .881 .600 Oul In Total C§QQ] 91 cmJ 10 81 o 0 Left Peds 4 Peak Hour Data T North Peak Hour Begins al 07:00 MI Cars Trucks .., T r+ Left Thru RI hI Peds 36599 01 c::]ID 636 c::::zm Out In Tolal 1 0 0 0 1 .250 File Name : SW 71 SCSW 59 PLAM Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/23/2017 Page No : 2 179 2 0 0 0 2 200 169 1 0 0 0 1 203 128 0 ci 0 0 0 148 160 1 0 1 0 2 184 636 4 0 1 0 5 735 .888 .500 .000 .250 .000 .625 .905 U ~~ ;1:0 .-:;1 20 r-+~ -0 Dg ~ Q. wI!!. III ... I SW59PL Southbound Richard Garcia & Associates , Inc. 8065 NW 98 Street Hialeah Gardens, FL 33016 Phone: 305-362-0677 Fax: 305-675-6474 G roups rlnte -ars· rucks P d C T SW72ST SW59PL Westbound Northbound File Name : SW 72 St_SW 59 PLPM Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/23/2017 Page No : 1 SW72ST Eastbound I Start TIme ~ght I Thru I Left I Peds I _ T .... RighI I Thru I Left I Peds I __ T ..... RIQht I Thru I Left I Peds I AmI. TOIIl RiQhI I Thru I Left I Peds I kID. lobi Int.ToIaIl 04:00PM 93 04:15PM 105 04:30 PM 101 04:45 PM 112 Total 411 05:00 PM 124 05:15 PM 118 05:30 PM 128 05:45 PM 114 Total 484 Grand Total 895 Apprch % 100 Tolal% 23.2 Cars 890 0/0 Cars 99.4 Trucks 5 % Trucks 0.6 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 93 5 163 0 105 11 162 0 101 11 178 0 112 10 177 0 411 37 680 o 124 6 152 o 118 12 161 o 128 6 164 o 114 10 146 o 484 34 623 0 895 71 1303 0 5 92.6 0 23.2 1.8 33.8 0 890 69 1288 0 99.4 97.2 98.8 0 5 2 15 0 0.6 2.8 1.2 0 2 170 0 7 180 0 2 191 0 3 190 0 14 731 o 3 161 o 5 178 o 1 171 o ·10 166 o 19 676 0 33 1407 0 2.3 0 0.9 36.5 0 33 1390 0 100 98.8 0 0 17 0 0 1.2 T North 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5I23J2017 04:00 PM 5I23J2017 05:45 PM Cars Trucks g g Out Total 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3 o o o o o 3 100 0.1 3 100 0 0 u ;r .-:;1 2 r-+~ 0 3 0 0 3 o o o o o 3 0.1 3 100 0 0 .... en .... NUl i~~ '" ""'" QQQ l ",1:1 01:1 0 96 62 1 159 422 0 104 79 8 191 479 0 106 68 4 178 470 0 123 55 3 181 483 0 429 264 16 709 1854 o 110 70 4 184 469 o 147 81 2 230 526 o 139 78 4 221 520 o 138 59 5 202 482 o 534 288 15 837 1997 0 963 552 31 1546 3851 0 62.3 35.7 2 0 25 14.3 0.8 40.1 0 954 546 31 1531 3814 0 99.1 98.9 100 99 99 0 9 6 0 15 37 0 0.9 1.1 0 1 1 [iJ~ "'Ul~ 04:45PM 112 a a a 112 05:00PM 124 a a 0 124 05:15 PM 118 0 a 0 118 05:30PM 128 0 a a 128 Tolal Volume 482 0 0 0 482 % AOD. Total PHF .941 .000 .000 .000 .941 s~ ~~ .... -..1' ~j ~~--. .... 0:;: f+ "'on -'0 .. Q, Richard G~rcia & Associates , Inc. 80.65 NW 98 Street 10 177 6 152 12 161 6 164 34 654 .708 .924 Hialeah Gardens, FL 330.16 Phone: 30.5-362-0.677 Fax: 30.5-675-6474 a 3 190 a a a 0 3 161 0 0 0 0 5 178 0 0 a 0 1 171 0 0 a 0 12 700 0 0 0 .000 .600 .921 .000 .000 .000 Out In Tolal D1ID 482 ~ 482 0 o 0 Left' Peds 4 Peak Hour Data i NDrth Peak Hour Begins al 04:45 PM Cars Truclcs '" Th2:hl "." I 01 0 01 01 1 1 c:::::ID 0 c:::::ID Out In Tolal a a a a 0 .000 Rle Name : SW 72 SCSW 59 PI_PM Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/23/2017 Page No : 2 a a 123 55 3 181 483 a a 110 70 4 184 469 0 0 147 81 2 230 526 0 a 139 78 4 221 520 0 0 519 264 13 816 1998 .000 .000 .883 .877 .B13 .B87 .950 U ~o .. ~ ... s '" .-:;1", 2~ Ii' .r-=o ~~ 'V :!. ... ~ii "'-"'N I SW61 AVE Southbound Richard Garcia & As!?ociates , Inc . 8065 NW 98 Street Hialeah Gardens, FL 33016 Phone: 305-362-0677 Fax: 305-675-6474 G roups Pit d C T k rna -ars -ruc s SW72ST SW61 AVE Westbound Northbound File Name : SW 72 St_SW 61 Ave_PM Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/23/2017 Page No : 1 SW72ST Eastbound I Start Tlma RighI I Thru I Left I Peds I _.Tda! RighI I Thru I Left I Peds I .... T .... Rlahl I Thru I Left I Peds I _ T .... Right I Thru I Left I Peds I .... T .... Int Total I 04:00PM 35 04:15 PM 45 04:30 PM 30 04:45PM 36 Total ' 146 05:00PM 48 05:15 PM 46 05:30PM 26 05:45PM 22 Total 142 Grand Total 288 Apprch 0/0 100 Tota l 0/0 7.3 Cars 288 0/0 Cars 100 Trucks 0 0/0 Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35 9 257 0 45 9 266 0 30 2 254 0 36 5 250 0 146 25 1027 o 48 4 271 0463280 o 26 4 275 o 22 4 260 o 142 15 1086 0 288 40 2113 0 1.8 97.3 0 7.3 1 53.5 0 288 40 2093 0 100 100 99.1 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0.9 NO N~j ..J ...... !:?2-+ in- ~ ~t: 00 0;;: n "'0 ..... --.., .. Q. 0 2 268 0 4 279 0 1 257 0 1 256 0 8 1060 o 2 277 o 3 286 o 1 280 o 4 268 o 10 1111 0 18 2171 0 0.8 0 0.5 54.9 0 18 2151 0 100 99.1 0 0 20 0 0 0.9 T North 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 512312017 04:00 PM 51231201705:45 PM CalS Trucks g g Out Tolal 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 til E?: .-;! 2 ~~ 'tI '" 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 .... .... 000 N N ... 0 ,algJ 000 0. ... 0= "CD 0 162 0 181 0 161 0 151 0 655 o 214 o 210 o 181 o 213 o 818 0 1473 0 98.7 0 37.3 0 1457 0 98.9 0 16 0 1.1 ~o c:i~Eis ij);;l Ao~~e: 0 0 0 2 2 o o o o o 2 0.1 0.1 2 100 0 0 7 169 472 0 181 505 0 161 448 3 156 448 10 667 1873 1 215 540 o 210 542 4 185 491 2 215 505 7 825 2078 17 1492 3951 1.1 0.4 37.8 17 1476 3915 100 98 .9 99.1 0 16 36 0 1.1 0.9 05:00 PM 48 0 0 0 48 05:15 PM 46 0 0 0 46 05:30PM 26 0 0 0 26 05:45PM 22 0 0 0 22 Total Volume 142 0 0 0 142 % App. Total 100 0 0 0 PHF .740 .000 .000 .000 .740 ~ z,q,A s~ o~J ~~ -' '" .-2--. "'r= oJ: n--~ :::ON ..... 0.-"0 If Richard Garcia & Assoc.iat~, Inc. 8065 NW 98 Street 4 271 3 280 4 275 4 260 15 1086 1.4 97.7 .938 .970 Hialeah Gardens, FL 33016 Phone: 305-362-0677 Fax: 305-675-6474 0 2 277 0 0 0 0 3 286 0 0 0 0 1 280 0 0 0 0 4 268 0 0 0 0 10 1111 0 0 0 0 0.9 0 0 0 .000 .625 .971 .000 .000 .000 Out Total c::::IID c:mJ 142 0 0 0 :1ht Thru Left Peds 1 '-+ Peak Hour Data T North Peak Hour Begins at 05:00 PM Cars Trucks ~ T r Left Thru . hi Peds 0 0 0 0 c::ru 0 c::ru Out In Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 .000 Fi le Name : SW 72 St_SW 61 Ave _P M Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/23/2017 Page No : 2 0 0 214 0 1 215 540 0 0 210 0 0 210 542 0 0 181 0 4 185 491 0 0 213 0 2 215 505 0 0 818 0 7 825 2078 0 99.2 0 0.8 .000 .000 .956 .000 .438 .959 .958 U ~o :J'--UI _s co .-;;iE 2g: ,.. +!!. -0 ~~ "0 co lSlii 0._ "'-"0 I I 'Start Time 04:00 PM 04:15 PM 04:30 PM 04:45 PM Total 05:00PM 05:15PM 05:30PM 05:45PM Total Grand Total Apprch % Total % Cars % Cars Trucks % Trucks SW61 AVE Southbound Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc . 8065 NW 98 Street Hialeah Gardens, FL 33016 Phone: 305-362-0677 Fax: 305-675-6474 G roups Prlnted-Cars -Trucks SW71 ST SW61 AVE Westbound Northbound File Name: SW 71 St_SW 61 Ave_PM Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/23/2017 Page No : 1 SW71 ST Eastbound RlllhU Thru L Left I Peds I AGo. T .... Right I Thru I Left I Peds I AGo , T .... Right I Thru I Left I Peds I '-Tacil Right I Thrul Left I Peds I All .. T .... InL Tolal I 0 11 1 0 21 1 0 12 3 0 12 3 0 56 8 o 14 6 o 20 0 o 12 7 o 11 7 o 57 20 0 113 28 0 78.5 19.4 0 24.8 6.1 0 113 28 0 100 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 o 1 o o 3 2.1 0.7 3 100 0 0 -[j] .. ~ ~ ~ 12 5 22 6 16 6 16 0 66 17 20 22 21 11 19 8 18 9 78 50 144 67 31.3 31.6 14.7 144 67 100 100 0 0 0 0 00 °iiJ' -' 00 0", ,;:-. l- ;:0 ;:~ Q, 0 14 0 19 4 13 0 19 1 26 5 5 0 12 0 18 0 5 0 19 1 20 2 6 0 64 2 83 11 29 o 28 o 50 4 14 o 20 1 32 1 8 o 17 o 25 3 11 o 14 1 24 2 3 o 79 2 131 10 36 0 143 4 214 21 65 0 66.8 1.9 24.1 74.7 0 31.4 0.9 46.9 4.6 14.3 0 143 4 214 21 64 0 100 100 100 100 98.5 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1.5 T North 51231201704:00 PM 512312017 05:45 PM Cars Trucks 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 o o o o o 1 1.1 0.2 1 100 0 0 U ;;r +--;1 e! .... +~ -0 co 17 10 5 9 41 18 9 14 5 46 87 19.1 86 98.9 1 1.1 '" '" "'0'" 000 .... .. .... ..,0.., go .. 0 .... 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~~ !DOUI lfilo fil~ 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 o o 2 7 9 11 100 2.4 11 100 0 0 0 48 0 58 0 39 2 47 2 192 o 88 o 62 2 60 7 54 9 264 11 456 2.4 11 455 100 99.8 0 1 0 0.2 05:00 PM 0 14 6 0 20 05:15 PM 0 20 0 1 21 05:30 PM 0 12 7 0 19 05:45 PM 0 11 7 0 18 Total Volume 0 57 20 1 78 % AOD.Tolal PHF .000 .713 .714 .250 .929 ]~ 0~.J' {: ..J O 2 F-' 0:.: h "'III " ~ Richard Garcia & Ass.oeiates, Inc. 8065 NW 98 Street 22 0 11 0 8 0 9 0 50 0 .568 .000 Hialeah Gardens, FL 33016 Phone: 305-362-0677 Fax: 305-675-6474 28 0 50 4 14 0 20 1 32 1 8 0 17 0 25 3 11 0 14 1 24 2 3 0 79 2 131 10 36 0 .705 .500 .655 .625 .643 .000 Peak Hour Data T North Peak Hour Begins at 05:00 PM ~ T r+ Left Thru Ri hi Ped$ o 36 10 0 CTIID 46 ~ Oul In Tolal 0 0 0 0 0 .000 File Name: SW 71 St_SW 61 Ave_PM Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/23/2017 Page No : 2 18 0 0 0 0 0 88 9 0 0 0 0 0 62 14 0 0 0 2 2 60 5 0 0 0 7 7 54 46 0 0 0 9 9 264 .639 .000 .000 .000 .321 .321 .750 U g~ ::rUl -0 4-;1 20 ... +l?:i<! ~ ~g ~!!!. c. "'I\) I I Start 11me 04:00 PM ' 04:15 PM 04:30 PM 04:45 PM Total 05:00 PM 05:15 PM 05:30PM 05:45PM Total Grand Total Apprch % Total % Cars % Cars Trucks % Trucks SW59 PL Southbound Richard Garc ia & Associates , Inc. 8065 NW 98 Street Hialeah Gardens, FL 33016 Phone: 305-362-0677 Fax: 305-675-6474 G roups P' d C rlnte • T ks ars-rue SW71 ST SW59PL Westbound Northbound File Name: SW 71 St_SW 59 PLPM Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/23/2017 Page No : 1 SW71 ST Eastbound Right I Thru I L.!l(t I Peds I App. T .... Right I Thru I Left I Peds I App. T .... Righi I Thru I Left I Peds I App. T .... RIQht I Thru I Left I Peds I ~ •. TDIII 'Int. TOlD! I 4 90 11 105 14 99 13 98 42 392 16 111 12 107 12 101 5 103 45 422 87 814 9.7 90.3 5.4 50.4 87 811 100 99.6 0 3 0 0.4 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 mEl ;eN N 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 94 116 113 111 434 127 119 113 108 467 901 55.8 898 99.7 3 0.3 MO ~~j .... ...J 00 0::1 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 l:--+ t- filo fill: h NO N .. .., at n. 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 0 4 1 o o o 1 5 100 0.3 5 100 0 0 1 2 1 0 4 1 o o o 5 0.3 5 100 0 0 T North 0 64 10 0 66 13 0 68 5 0 62 4 0 260 32 o 71 7 o 69 10 o 79 6 o 63 6 o 282 29 0 542 61 0 89.9 10.1 0 33.6 3.8 0 534 61 0 98.5 100 0 8 0 0 1.5 0 51231201704:00 PM 51231201705:45 PM Cars Trucks ~ b:m Out 1 1466 1 11 14n Tolal 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 u 74 79 73 66 292 78 79 85 69 311 603 37.4 595 98.7 8 1.3 '"c cc +-;1 2 000 ,.. +~ 000 ~ "'01 001 5 9 7 6 27 19 7 4 3 33 60 57.1 3.7 60 100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o o o o o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 lolocl~ [lJ~ UlOUli: 8 4 5 2 19 10 4 5 5. 24 43 41 2.7 43 100 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 o o o 2 1.9 0.1 2 100 0 0 13 14 12 8 47 30 11 9 8 58 105 6.5 105 100 0 0 182 211 199 185 777 236 209 207 185 837 1614 1603 99.3 11 0.7 04:45 PM 13 98 0 0 111 05:00 PM 16 111 0 0 127 05:15 PM 12 107 0 0 119 05:30. PM 12 101 0 0 113 Total Volume 53 417 0 0 470 °4 ADD. Total PHF .828 .939 .000 .000 .925 -~ N=.J' .. .., ~~ ~ O 2 z::---. I- :!l., n ~UI 't:I If Richard Garcia & Associates , Inc. 8065 NW 98 Street 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .000 .000 Hialeah Gardens, FL 33016 Phone: 305-362-0677 Fax: 305-675-6474 0 0 0 0 62 4 0 1 1 0 71 7 0 0 0 0 69 10 0 0 0 0 79 6 0 1 1 0 281 27 .000 .250 .250 .000 .889 .675 Out In Total ~ 470 c:mJ 5 417 o 0 Left Peds 4 Peak Hour Data T North Peak Hour Begins at 04 :45 PM Cars Trucks ~ T ~ Left Thru Ri ht Peds 27 281 0 0 ~ 308 c::1IDJ Out In Total 0 0 0 0 0 .000 File Name Site Code Start Date Page No : SW 71 St_SW 59 PI_PM : 00000000 : 5/23/2017 :2 66 6 0 2 0 8 185 78 19 0 10 1 30 236 79 7 0 4 0 11 209 85 4 0 5 0 9 207 308 36 0 21 1 58 837 .906 .474 .000 .525 .250 .483 .887 U ~~ :to .-;1 Co !; +=0 D~ -a III Do UI .... Summary of Multi-Use Trip Generation Average weekday Driveway Volumes (unadjusted for lnternal TT.ips) ,."-:'·I .~- C,·.:i -.;-oject: Proposed Uses :.ase: Description: ~~ __ ~ 24 Hour Two-Way Open Date : Analysis Date : AM Pk Hour PM Pk ITE: Land Use Volume Enter Exit Enter 720: Medical-Dental Office Building 1346 37.245 Th.Sq .Ft. GFA [Rj 7J.0: General Office Building 119 J. 0 . 74 7 Th. Sq . Ft . GFA [R] 826: Specialty Retail Center 419 9.458 Th .Sq.Ft·. GFA [R] . Total Driveway Volume 1884 Total Peak Hour Pass-By Trips Total Peak Hour Vol. Added to Adjacent Streets l~~·l). Note: A zero indicates no data available. \~.' .' "'~urce: Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, 2012 TRIP GENERATION 2013, TRAFFICWARE, LtC '-.;.' 70 19 37 15 2 3 0 0 11 0 0 0 85 21 51 Hour Exit 96 13 15 0 1.24 --------, ------, --.--- ~w ~K\ ~\"T\O~ ATTACHMENT C -TRIP GENERATION ANALYSIS Noles: 1. 2. Bosed on Appendix E orrTETrtp Generation fMnUlI (AtIlIchment CI LANIiAN IItG~ff~.,( {·h'M..,·\Ct~'4.I. oil ""10ft> .. 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact study Appendix E: Level of Service (LOS) Appendix I E Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. TABLE:A8 Level of Service (LOS) Summary -AM & PM Peak Hour Project Name: 6075 Sl:Inset Drive Intersection Control IT: SW 72 Street (SR 986) & SW 59 Place "'<VI-' I I SW 72 Street (SR 986) & SW 61 Avenue Two-Way A 0.2 SB I B I 10.1 I A I 1.1 II SB I C I 16.6 Stop TUII"L'I\t"'3\1 A 2.2 WB A 9.3 A 5.8 I we I B I 10.2 0.4 EB B 10.3 A 1.2 EB B 14.0 72 Street (SR 986) & SW 59 Place \J\vtJ 72 Street (SR 986) & SW 61 Avenue Two-Way I Stop A I 0.4 II SB I B I 10.6 I A I 1.3 II SB I C I 18.9 71 Street & SW 61 Avenue Two-Way A 2 .9 I WB I : I 9.5 I : I 6.1 I WB I : I 11.0 Stop 71 Street & SW 59 Place Two-Way A 0.7 EB 13.7 1.5 EB 15.1 Stop 61 Avenue & Driveway 1 (DW1) Two-Way A 1.7 I WB I : I 9.0 I : I 2.0 ~ I A I 9.4 Stop 61 Avenue & Driveway 2 (DW2) Two-Way A 0.8 WB 9.0 1.2 I A I 9.2 Stop 71 Street & Driveway 3 (DW3 Tw~.-Way I A I 4.4 II NB I A I 8.9 I A I 2.1 II NB I A I 9.5 Notes: * Critical Approach for TWSC. 6075 Sunset Drive Existing Condition -AM Peak Hour HCM 6th TWSC 1: SW 72 St & SW 59 PI I~ , ", -; : 6075 Sunset Drive Existing Condition -AM Peak Hour ---------------------------------------------------------------------.-~---- Int Delay, s/veh 4.6 Heayy Vehicle s, % IfmtF-low ~';-:(~~' __ --~ : _._ -I,;' .-. __ ~~_~-______________ ~ _ _ _ _ _____ . __________________ _ 538 o o -269 2.22 -3.32 n028 (i) ;]29 0 Q 1028 -~29 -0.188 -rtU B (i)tP HCM 6th TWSC 2: SW 72 St & SW 61 Ave ! '"~i ;. ~ ,,-' r I 6075 Sunset Drive Existing Condition -AM Peak Hour -~ ---_. --------------------------.---~------------- Int Delay, s/veh 0.2 Lane Configurations ;; ;tt 'f' irraffic Val "eAth () 998 479 26 0 998 479 26 (!) 0 0 Ii) Free Stop -Na/ile 0 () 0 0 0 0 94 94 94 94 94 2 2 2 2 2 2 () H1S2 510 19 Ii) 28 o o -265 .94 -3.32 o o 733 o o -733 OM Ganrrol IDel y. .... s:...---"O'---__ -'0:...-___ ---'~:.;.()).:..:.1 ___________ ___'~ _______ ~ HCM LOS B -7133 -0.038 -~O.1 B Ii).rt HCM 6th TWSC 3: SW 61 Ave & SW 71 St 111"'" ; ,"': ~ 6075 Sunset Drive Existing Condition -AM Peak Hour --_.---.-------------~~--------------------.. ------------------ In! Delay, s/veh 2.2 '--, , -' . _~I _ _ ______ ' _ _ __ • .L ~.' _ _ \.. _ _ _ ___ ~ _ _ •• _._ __ _ _ _ o o 34 o -4.12 -2.218 -Hi7:8 il 90 1QSQ 790 980 Stage 2 '~~ ."-::-:( ., 1,'1->r; _~\7: ----------------------------_. ---_. --- € m0ntrolIDela s !!l.a III t 4 HCMLOS A HCM 6th TWSC 4: SW 59 PI & SW 71 St I,' ---: ,- 6075 Sunset Drive Existing Condition -AM Peak Hou r ---. ----~~ --~ -------------~---------------. ---------- Int Delay, s/veh 0.4 ~ t ~ 3S SQl5 82 ~I!l 36 605 82 10 0 0 () Ql Free Free Free Free -Nene -None 100 0 0 0 0 91 91 91 91 9 2 2 2 2 2 4 4I!l 6S5 00 1 ~ ~; ___ ~. :___ --_' __ -I _ _ ._ ~ __ ' _ _ _ __ _ _ ___ _ __ 96 101 o o 32S 9SG 149~ 326 90 a C0ntrel Dela s 10.3 0.4 o HCMLOS __ ~B ________________ ~ __________________________________ ~ -326 96 -0.003 0.005 -16.1 8.8 C A o 0 6075 Sunset Drive Existing Condition -PM Peak Hour HCM 6th TWSC 1: SW 72 St _& SW 59 PI 6075 Sunset Drive Existing Condition -PM Peak Hour 1~1;:~'=~~_'_________ ___ ___ _____ ___ __ ______ __ _ __ _ _____ _ _ In! Delay, s/veh 9.1 G be troll.!) a. S HCMLOS o 95 95 2 2 3192 S52 732 o 4 o 95 2 513 -366 -6.94 30 .1 D ·3 -0.812 ~~~~~~----~~------------~30~.J~----------------~------------------' D 8.3 HCM 6th TWSC 2: SW 72 St & SW 61 Ave 6075 Sunset Drive Existing Condition -PM Peak Hour [;1,:-:,_':_______ __ __ _ _ _ ____________________________________ _ Int Delay, s/veh 1.1 15 0 143 Stop Stop -NQ e o -3.32 o 458 o o -458 •• , :'-.: j , ---------- eM Cofitrolli)ela s o o HCMLOS 18.6 C 5 -0.325 -16. C 1.4 HCM 6th TWSC 3: SW 61 Ave & SW 71 St f,' ,'-, , . 6075 Sunset Drive Existing Condition -PM Peak Hour -------~-~ ---. -------------------------------~---~---._------------ Int Delay, s/veh 5.8 -----4 58 10 58 0 Ii) Stop Free Free Free Free -one -None -None 0 0 0 0 5 75 75 75 175 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 vrntRow 68 48 ~3 27 77 _,I: ',_._.,., _ -':1. ____ ~:. -: _ _______ _ __ _ ___ _ ____ _ _ __ ~ __ ~ ______ _ 55 o o 61 o -2.218 -1542 10 ~2 -1542 eM C0I1ti"ol Dela s 10.2 o 1.9 HCM LOS B HCM 6th TWSC 4: SW 59 PI & SW 71 St r:" -." -: i' 6075 Sunset Drive Existing Condition -PM Peak Hour ------------~-----~ ---------------~------------------------------ Int Delay, s/veh 1.2 o o 89 89 2 2 4'73 n 3(i)7 568 034 307 589 692 ~ I -:: ,': ~ ~ _ -------------- HGMCe E> a s o HCM LOS B (i) -31il7 58 0.029 -0.077 0.071 8.6 -1'1 .7 11.8 A C B 0.1 (i).2 0.2 6075 Sunset Drive Future Condition wI Project -AM Peak Hour HCM 6th TWSC 1 : SW 72 St & SW 59 PI Int Delay, s/veh 4]':- -fl 07 -i/lUi'l -0.205 -11.4 B 0.8 6075 Sunset Drive Future Condition wI Project -AM Peak Hour HCM 6th TWSC 2: SW 72 St & SW 61 Ave 6075 Sunset Drive Future Condition wI Project -AM Peak Hour ," .: '_': ~ -------------------- Int Delay. s/veh 0.4 I • , _ _ '. -~ \ _ I::' _ ___ _ _ _ , ;':, ~' ~ r:~f.'\,·: :: \"r~I' , ~l \ --------------'. -------- a. s v HCM Lane VIC Ratio OM Gantrol mela 5 HCM Lane LOS GM 96th %tile Q(veh o o 09 -0.089 -1 B !!l.3 HCM 6th TWSC 3: SW 61 Ave & SW 71 St Int Delay, s/veh 2.9 Grade, % eaktH aur Factar Heavy Vehicles, % tFIGW 23 3.51 8 3.31 8 ffi ~Q2.s 977 863 762 102-5 762 968 863 75 75 2 2 17 27 -1553 SIi) -0.066 0.017 9.5 7,4 0 A A A 0.2 0.1 6075 Sunset Drive Future Condition wI Project -AM Peak Hour HCM 6th TWSC 4: SW 59 PI & SW 71 St ,.., .':-~ -: :~.' .., . . '" ' \ 6075 Sunset Drive Future Condition wi Project -AM Peak Hour ,-, ------_ .. _-------_.----------------------------------~ -- Int Delay, s/veh 0.7 ~M €On I Dela s 13.11 0.4 HCM LOS B o 958 0.01 8.8 A o HCM 6th TWSC 5: SW 61 Ave & D/W1 r,·, -" :',.-; . . 6075 Sunset Drive Future Condition wi Project -AM Peak Hour ---.---~---~ ---_. ~ -------------. ------------------------.- Int Delay, s/veh 1.7 Grade, % . eak Mour Factor Heavy Vehicle s, % wmtR lew GM ~ntto l Ill elay', s HCMLOS 2 2 9 A o 0.2 -926 ~6 96 -0.033 0.002 9 7.3 0 A A A 0.1 0 .. HCM 6th TWSC 6: SW 61 Ave & DIW2 Int Delay, slveh 0.8 28 o 2 2 2 2 e e 92 92 2 2 2 2 o 29 -9iJil ~§84 o 6075 Sunset Drive Future Condition wI Project -AM Peak Hour :.-:;.;~:.:..:..:....:..:...;...:....:=..::~ _____ --..:.0.014 O':.;;00;.;.1_-.".. __ ~ _____ ---. ________ ----, 9 1.3 Q A A A HCM 6th TWSC 7: DIW3 & SW 71 St In! Delay, s/veh 4.4 OM Centrol Dela s HCM LOS o (i) o 36 -4.12 -d§7§ ~.9 o 64 3~ 8.9 A 6075 Sunset Drive Future Condition wI Project -AM Peak Hour 6075 Sunset Drive Future Condition wI Project -PM Peak Hour HCM 6th TWSC 1: SW 72 St & SW 59 PI 6075 Sunset Drive Future Condition wI Project · PM Peak Hour ~ti'i:::":"~O'"i''' '~'~_'_~____ _ ______________ _ _ _______________ ' ______________ _ Int Delay, s/veh 12.1 854 o o · 427 • 6.94 • 3.32 '§7t Ei ~~~~~~ __ ~ ______________ • 571 6 GM onrrelIDela s 4.11- HCMLOS o A5.5 E ----------------~~--------~~~----~" -0.91 -45 .5 E HCM 6th TWSC 2: SW 72 St & SW 61 Ave In! Delay, s/veh 1.3 96 2 a o o a 0 96 96 2 2 a 16 U -639 -6.94 -3.32 a 9 o 6075 Sunset Drive Future Condition wI Project -PM Peak Hour HCM 6th TWSC 3 : SW 61 Ave & SW 71 St Int Delay, s/veh 6.1 42 10 0 0 Free Free NElRe 0 e 0 75 2 2 125 13 34 e Free - Free one 0 0 5 2 10 ~ 6075 Sunset Drive Future Condition wI Project -PM Peak Hour ~~~~~~ ____ ~ ______ .~0 ___ 0 __ ~69 __ ~O~ __________________________________ ~ 2 -2.218 -53 -53 -0.247 0.03 ~ ~ 7.4 (!) B A A 1 @.1 ------~--------------...., HCM 6th TWSC 4: SW 59 PI & SW 71 St Int Delay, s/veh 1.5 HCM LOS 556 o o 6075 Sunset Drive Future Condition wi Project -PM Peak Hour HCM 6th TWSC 5 : SW 61 Ave & DIW1 Int De lay, s/v eh 2 Free Free -None o 92 2 6075 Sunset Drive Future Condition wI Project -PM Peak Hour 24 0 0 34 0 ~~~-~----~~~------~--~--~------------------~------------------~ ~~~~ _____ -=~-=~ _______ -~4.~~2~ ______________________________________ ~ HCM LOS A HCM 6th TWSC 6: SW 61 Ave & DIW2 Int Delay, s/veh 1.2 25 o o 27 -It.rt2 (j) o 92 2 o (j) A 6075 Sunset Drive Future Condition wI Project -PM Peak Hour HCM 6th TWSC 7: DIW3 & SW 71 St Int De lay, s/veh 2.1 6075 Sunset Drive Future Condition wI Project -PM Peak Hour '.:-;,,',-Ji'iJb"i;:"·'.'r,';·:,-;';'fV:f.ti;or.::1::-~}:;' rJI "'" . ,'iT .,,-1 ' .. / .. ! '.. " • ;' '-,' ""' •. ' .-\'±J ~~'-.!.....~I_:::_"~.I __ ._,_. __ ~'_' __ ,_. __ ~ __ ~. ___ ' _' ___ _ r,.:;;.:..:.;.;.;.;;;;:.'l_:....;.,;;.;.;;..;..;;.;. __ .... O_-...;;..O _..;.;48~ ° 38 -2.218 -S59 LAND USE (LU) UNITS ITELU CODE Propo sed Devel opment Apartment 203 D.U. 220 Specialty Retail • 2.441 Th.Sq.Ft. 826 Quality Restaurant 3.678 Th .S q.Ft. 931 As-of-Rlght Development Medical Office Building 205 .260 Th.Sq.Ft. 720 TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON (Proposed Development ~ As-of-Right Development) Project Name: 6075 Sunset Drive ITE TRIP GENERATIQN RATE I EQUATION ~ . '~AM:~~si .~l. .PNL . DAILY Rates Equation Rates Equation Rates Equation 0.51 T=0.49(X)+3.73 0.62 T=.55(X)+17.65 6.65 T=6.06(X)+123.56 0.96 No Eqn Available 2.71 T=2.40(X)+ 21.48· 44.32 T=42.78(X)+37.66 0.81 No Eqn Available 7.49 No Eqn Available '89.95 No Eqn Available External Trips (Proposed Trips) 2.39 No Eqn Available 3.57 Ln(T)=0.90(X)+1.53 36.13 T=40.89(X}-214.97 Percent Difference (%) (Proposed Development Trips l!2 As-of-Rlghl Development TrIps) • Since tTE does not provide AM data (or Specially Retail (LU 826). ITE's rate (or LU 820 (Shopping Center) was used to estimate the AM peak hour trips. TOTAL T RIPS , "'~f---·".J PM DAILY ~ Rates Equation Rates Eq uation Rates Equation 104 103 126 129 1,350 1,354 2 -7 27 108 143 3 -28 -331 - 109 -160 -1,789 - 491 -733 557 7,416 8,178 -78% . ·78% . ·76% . • Medical-Dental Office Building (720) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area On a: Weekday Number of Studies: 10 Average 1000 Sq. Feet GFA: 45 Directional Distribution: 50% entering. 50% exiting Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 36.13 23.16 -50.51 10.18 Data Plot and Equation 5,000 -r-----------------------------, (/) "0 c: W Q, ~ ~ u :E Q) > ~ Q) ~ II I- 4,000 • • • • • .'. • • • • • I • • • • • • '. • • • • • .'. • • • • • ~ • • • • • .'. • • • • • , • · . .. .. . ,' ........ ,. . . x " . 3,000" //_/'~~',/ 2,000 ..... .: ...... ; ...... : ....... : ... ·x·:· ;,/< ..... , ........... . -, · . .~;"" ~ . . . . ••• t , ••••• ,", 1,000 ...... : ...... ~. >/.~ ... x .. ;. x .... : ...... : ... . .... , ..... ,,_ ......... . o . ' ".'. · ' ~ "" ( 10 20 X Actual Data Points 30 40 50 60 70 x = 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area --Fitted CUrve Fitted Curve Equation: T = 4O.89(X) -214.97 80 90 100 110 ------Average Rate R2 =0.90 1294 Trip Generation, 9th Edition • Institute of Transportation Engineers 120 2 Medical-Dental Office Building (720) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m. Number of Studies: 23 Average 1000 Sq. Feet GFA: 41 Directional Distribution: 79% entering. 21% exiting Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 2.39 0.85 -4.79 1.89 Data Plot and Equation 300~----------------------------------------------------' X· ;~", .. , .,' . "",. :.,'" /. .. ~ .. 200 ... , .... '" ., .. " .: ....... : ...... ; ...... : ... ~ .. ; ...... : .. /: .. : ...... : ............ . · . . . . . . . .. . . . x ./ ... < ;.>-/ ~ >it • . ,,:,,~' :x ; ............ ", .. ", · . . . ",,''': ~ . . . . . 100 ..... '.' ..... ' ..•••. ':' .. ,~i""'""""'" "," . " . , , : .. " " " "." , .. " . '.' " .. , , .. ' .. , " ".' " . " . , x . /x· , x x: x ~ ..... , . , . . x x : x,/~ "/ ... ~ ... X : x · ,- ~ ... "", x x· O+-~-r~-'~~--~~~'-~-'~ _____ I~~T-.~-r~~--~r-~ o 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 x = 1000 Sq, Feet Gross Floor Area X Actual Data Polnta ------Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Not given Trip Generation. 9th Edition -Institute of Transportation Engineers 1295 6 Medical-Dental Office Building (720) Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area On a: Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m. Number of Studies: 43 Average 1000 Sq. Feet GFA: 31 Directional Distribution: 28% entering, 72% exiting Trip Generation per 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation 3.57 0.97 8.B6 2.47 Data Plot and Equation C/I -g UJ .@- l- I\) 13 :E I\) > II) 01 ~ ~ II I- 400.--------------------------,~.~X~-------------------",---. ,/'/' ,;~' , . • ...,' )!C ;",' " . 300 .. . .. " . ••••• 0 ........ I ••• _. ,', •••••• ', ............ ,' •••••• l ••••• "0 • ., ••• ", ••••• \. :, ... ' ,,"" : ...... '" x ,~,.,. oX , . ...... ' . :"",' /. :X 200 . . . . . ". ••••• '.' ••••• ~ ............. ',' ••••• : •• ;.oil' • ',' •• x : ...... '" .: ..... ,; ...... : ..... . x : ",,: 100 . x ....... '" X .,/~' . x . x : . " x . . ,~' x X . . . . . . . ...... ~ ... ~.~ ~ '}<'~" XX' .: ...... : 0 0.0 .. :00.0. 0 ~ _ 00000:. 000.0.:.00000' 0000000. 0 0 -.. A' X: x: x :X x 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 X Aclual Data Polnls x .. 1000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area --Fitted Curve ------Average Rata Atted Curve Equation: Ln(T) = 0.90 Ln(X) + 1.53 1296 Trip Generation, 9th Edition. Institute of Transportation Engineers Valencia Miami (I) \. 305-726-2100 (tel:305-726-2100) Slnfo@ValenciaMiami.com (mailto:lnfo@ValenciaMiami.com) About Valencia Condominium Location: 6001 SW70th Street. South Miami. FL 33143 Year Built: 2004 Designer: Ed Monarchik Description: Residential. Retail Type: Mixed-Use Building Floors: 6 floors Units: 301 residences Bedrooms: 1-4 bedrooms Unit Square Foot: 524 -1.164 SF Amenities: Temperature Controlled Pool. Fitness Center. Billiards. Internet Cafe. 24 hour Security. Business Center & Covered Parking. I L StarlTIme 07:00AM 07:15AM 07:30AM 07:45AM Total 08:00AM 08:15AM 08:30AM 08:45AM Total Grand Total Apprch% Total % cars % cars Trucks % Trucks ~ool' {jj ~aloorl Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 8065 NW 98 Street Hialeah Gardens, FL 33016 Phone: 305-362-0677 Fax:305-67S-6474 G PI ed-C roups r nt 81'& • T ks rue TRIPS IN 2 3 3 4 12 10 5 7 5 27 39 100 36.4 39 100 0 0 I Apll. Total 2 3 3 4 12 10 5 7 5 27 39 36.4 39 100 0 0 Out I~IN TOIaI g~~ Thtu 1 T North 512312017 07:00 ~ 512312017 08:45 ~ Cats Trucka T Thru g~~ 68 107 Out ml~ Ollr TOIaI File Name : Valencia Bld9.-AM Pk Period Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 512312017 Page No : 1 TRIPS OUT 5 2 7 12 26 8 17 10 7 42 68 100 63.6 68 100 0 0 I ApP. Total 5 2 7 12 26 8 17 10 7 42 68 63.6 68 100 0 0 lolool~~ CJJ~ D 000 Int Total I 7 5 10 16 38 18 22 17 12 69 107 107 100 a 0 Start Time Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 8065 NW 98 Street Hialeah Gardens, FL 33016 Phone: 305-362-0677 Fax: 305-675-6474 TRIPS IN File Name Site Code Start Date Page No TRIPS c!)UT Peak Hour Analysis From 07:00 AM to 08 :45 AM -Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 07:45 AM 07:45AM 4 4 12 08:00AM 10 10 8 08:15 AM 5 5 17 08:30AM 7 7 10 Total Volume 26 26 47 % App. Total 100 100 PHF .650 .650 .691 Out IHTn~IN Total c:::m~c:ru 26 Thill 1 Peak Hour Data ~~ T ~ North s~ I Peak Hour Begins at 07:45 AM I ~8~ Cars TlUCks T Thill ~ ~ 47 c:ru Out TRIP~ OUT Total : Valencia Bldg_AM Pk Period : 00000000 : 5/23/2017 :2 In!. Tolal 12 16 8 18 17 22 10 17 47 73 .691 .830 ~~» ~= ~i I I Start Tune 04:00PM 04:15PM 04:30PM 04:45PM Tolal 05:00PM 05:15PM 05:30PM 05:45PM Tolal Grand Total Apprch% Total % Cars %Cers Trucks % Trucks mloolol ~ sUj <8LJj Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. 8065 NW 98 Street Hialeah Gardens, FL 33016 Phone: 305M362M06n Fax: 305M67~647 4 roups nnte • us· rue G p. de T ks TRIPS IN 8 3 11 4 26 10 12 7 8 37 63 100 50 63 100 0 0 I App. Total 8 3 11 4 26 10 12 7 8 37 63 50 63 100 0 0 g~~ TIuu L T Not1h 51231201704:00 PM 512312017 05:45 PM Cars Trucks i Thru 9~~ TRIPRnUT File Name : Valencia Bldg_PM Pk Period Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/23/2017 Page No : 1 TRIPS OUT 17 4 6 5 32 9 7 5 10 31 63 100 SO 63 100 0 0 I ADD. Tolal 17 4 6 5 32 9 7 5 10 31 63 50 63 100 0 a [D, [J= ~~ oool!! Int Tolalj 25 7 17 9 58 19 19 12 18 68 126 126 100 0 0 Richatd Garcia & Assoc i ates , Inc. 8065 NW 98 Street Start Time Hialeah Gardens, FL 33016 Phone: 305-362-0677 Fax: 305 -675-6474 1J"RIPS IN Peak Hour Analysis From 04:00 PM to 05:45 PM -Peak 1 of 1 Peak Hour for Entire Intersection Begins at 05:00 PM 05:00 PM 10 10 05:15 PM 12 12 05:30 PM 7 7 05:45 PM 8 8 . Total Volume 37 37 % App . Total 100 PHF .771 .n1 Out I Klj: IN Total C]1)~oru 37 Thru L Peak Hour Data ~~ i {:. North ~~ I :a~ Hour Begins at 05 :00 PM I <8~ Trucks i Thru ~ c:::m 31 c:::§[J Out TRIP~ nllT Total File Name : Valencia Bldg _PM Pk Period Site Code : 00000000 Start Date : 5/23/2017 Page No : 2 TRIPS OUT Int. Total 9 9 19 7 7 19 5 5 12 10 10 18 31 31 68 100 .775 .775 .895 ~R~ ~~ ~~ Q§i 6075 Sunset Drive Traffic Impact study Appendix G: Site Plan Appendix I G Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. \ \-r ~ \ ~ 1--, l g ~.! tl l Si ----... --LO _._jJ.-LJ--l ,L--.----.l f L '--1 r--_..:::: ..... -SW..;rO .. H :~-••••••••• -r;:::::: .~, i-' "--,;;-1 I' 7001 ~ :-1m ' \ i i i ~ 6110 '. g § I I I ------1 '7019 I \ . 7031 . \ ~_.. : 5959 . I \ J W l ""'--*([:::1 ~! ...J ~ .. II ~ 7051 -l 7090 t •• -•• --:-i:J~ l ISO 7171 >1 TOOO ·MU ' -r--<' :..;:.: , __ 6161 ~---t---.-.--i -1 L . ~I 6075 I ~, I I ';;;-1 \ '0.' ., I ~[ J1 -TOOo-Ji.S ,J sw 7 ~N;-ST---\ r-·_·_·_· __ • __ ·_···_·_·, ~~-.r---'-1 "-"'~ r--' T .. ! S I i I 6180 I I i1 ! I \ I I 5950 ,./ ZON ING II'JFO HMAllotl PRIlJECINoIME: PRorERJY ADDRESS CURRElIT ZIMIG PRorosEOZtl!II!IG LOT lET ARf}. LOr,OCCUPATIOII ' -' .. LOIAI .. b.Il<I1$!y(Resil8lliilQ c. Lot CoWeRQ8 d.OpmS_ BUIUlItIG SflBACK' .. .- I . froltt S.W. 72NO smm I,IAtOR SJRmli b.Site S.W.6ISTAVEIlIE MlNOII Smm}1 ,-Site S.W. nSI SlRm MlIOl SlRm}1 d.11_S!de BUlIlIlG HBlIITL iLMilHer1\l b. Mat Ht;gIIt c.. MJIl wif1 Bonus d._'-1(F..ct fAll<llG ", RESIAlJWIl City of South Miami-Zoning Map 1 JDlthg spx:e: pl!' 100 Sf at Pinon An:a 1 partitg spat:e per 300 SF of Non-Paton NC3 CDW.IEJlaA L One ~c:e per 300 sq.l SUiJ-lOJAL RESIOWllAL 2 p.Yt;,g"""""..-DoolI;'g 1.\11.' I adIliional_ p:Dino ""'" '" ....., 10 0I00I&Icj tnts 'PAlOOIlG 11£00:110115 MIXEOUS£ rAC10R 100Al PARI<IIIl IOIALliC PARKilli (n<lldal n lobi) "'p .. I3b~2082 f_~.Code M~inum loo<&Ig BOIf). eA/l(ll6'1HAKDOWII • 5""" '. Ground 1m! 5ealnd~1m! Th..., PirtiIQ lm! fourtlPir1lnalf'ltl /n tennedille_QlMf Site Map 6075 SlmSfllJlr.£ 6075 SUNSflIJIM, 1000 MlJ.4 & 1000 MIl-S TOOOt.UJ.S Ill. 192 SF /1.611 AC. J AEOUII8l .. " c-' __ 1'ROVIlEll •• -'_ ~RBMRKS 70 .192 SF 11.611 AC. IVA 203U1111S NO MAX. IVA B.403SF. .- ~' ... 1-04 FloDl!: None 5-8 Floors.: 20'~' 20'-6' ~-6' 1'-10' 0'-6' S'-6' 0'-6' Nr 2Sbrie> -4S",ie:s 8S"'b 8SDb 100-6' 100-6' 1,45 2/IOD .2SSPAC£S 15 SPACES 1.226 /lOD -S SPAC<S SSPACES 2,441 /3OD -9SPACES 9 SPACES 39SPAC1'S 203. 2 ~ <106 SPACES '5«_0_ct'0II 203/10 -21 SPACES JOD P.S. -39 P.S .• 264 SPACI'S 264 P.S./ 2031N1S e t.J JODP.s./203lM1S -'-'9 466SPAC1'S' oFF-smm: 303 SPACI'S OH·Smm: II SPACES • Partmg Roll"on 8 8 lLOAOflIG SPACI'S (Om 20D _0 l.\1:b) 3 ~ 101Al PARKtIG ~~r;-"'=lREloW1l<S . 64 I .:0 I 10 10 50 :IlJ IIOHlIS On. (I) "'lIlionollIoorotlesid",mluse On. 111 "'dilion:ol IIoor ZONING CHART AREA SCHEDUL£ (L£ASEABL£ -RETAIL) 1II1''IYPI RESTAURANT RETAR. lEASEABlE TOTAL AIIIII1If 2 1111'11' 3,878 SF 2."1 SF 8.119 SF AREA SCHEDULE (L£ASEASL£ -UNITS) 1II1''IYPI .... AMOIIT 1111''''' II' 1111'l1li A lBR 102 738 SF 50% B 2BR 72 1.0nSF 35lt. C 38R 8 1.433 SF ." SlUIlIO ST 1. 568 SF 7l' lOWNHOME 1H 7 931 SF 3l' UNlTlOTAL 203 lOOlCo AREA SCHEDUL£ (GROSS BUILDING) UVB GROUND FlOOR 2N01.£VEL 3RIl1.£VEL 3RIl1.£VEL PARKlNG 41HLEVa 41H I.£VEL PARKlNG 51H1.£VEL MEZZANNE LEVaPARKlNG 51HLEVa 71HLEVa 81HLEVa TOTALGROSS UOIIlIU 57.399 SF 81.842 SF 27.925 SF 28.088 SF 27.925 SF 26.088 SF 64.IiMSF 22.721 SF 37,278 SF 37.261 SF 37.399 SF 418,240 SF ,iJ ~i ,I" I I '! Parking Study 6075 Sunset Drive South Miami, Florida November 8th , 2017 6075 Sunset Drive Parking Study I, Carlos X. Valentin, P.E. # 78422, certify that I currently hold an active Professional Engineers License in the State of Florida and am competent through education and experience to provide engineering services in the civil and traffic engineering disciplines contained in this report. In addition, the firm Richard Garcia & Associates, Inc. holds a Certificate of Authorization # 9592 in the State of Florida. I further certify that this report was prepared by me or under my responsible charge as defined in Chapter 61 G 15-18.001 F.A.C. and that all statements, conclusions and recommendations made herein are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and ability. Project Description: Project Location: 6075 Sunset Drive -Parking Study 6075 Sunset Drive South Miami, Florida ~~=====-.==~= RICHARD GARCiA & ASSOCiATES, ~NC. Page 6075 Sunset Drive Parking Study 1 AlalE Of CONTENTS Engineer's Certification ........................................................................................... 1 Executive Summary ................................................................................................ 3 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 4 Project Location / Description ......................................................................................... 4 ITE Parking Generation ........................................................................................... 7 Conclusion ............................................................................................................... 8 LIST Of fiGURES Figure 1: Project Location Map ........................................................................................... 4 Figure 2: Site Plan (Ground Level) .......................................... ' ............................................. 5 Figure 3: Parking Garage ..................................................................................................... 6 UST Of TABLES Table 1: Weekday & Weekend Parking Demand ............................................................ 7 APPENDICES Appendix 1: ITE Parking Generation Analysis Appendix 2: Site Plan RICHARD GARCIA & ASSOCIATES, INC. Page 2 6075 Sunset Drive Parking Study The purpose of this study is to ascertain the parking demand for the 6075 Sunset Drive mixed-use project. The subject site is located on the northeast corner of SW 72 nd street (Sunset Drive) and SW 61 st Avenue in the City of South Miami, Florida. This site has a drive-in bank (6,701 square feet) with two (2) drive-in lanes and 13,670 square feet of office. The existing building will be demolished while the proposed redevelopment consists of rental apartments with 203 units, 2A41 square feet of retail and a restaurant with 3,678 square feet. Moreover, this redevelopment will provide 303 parking spaces within the site and 11 on-street parking spaces. The parking generation analysis was performed using published data from the ITE Parking Generation Manual, 4th Edition. This manual is based on actual parking demand studies submitted to ITE and is typically used by planners, transportation professionals and others to estimate the parking demand of a proposed development. The following land uses, as identified by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parking Generation, most closely resemble the subject project's various uses. These land uses (LU) are as follows: o LU 221: Low/Mid-Rise Apartment o LU 820: Specialty Retail (Shopping Center) o LU 931: Qualii'y Restaurant The parking demand for the subject project was calculated for the weekday and weekend condition. Based on the ITE parking generation analysis, the proposed redevelopment will required 289 parking spaces for the weekday condition and 277 parking spaces for the weekend condition. When compared to the 303 parking spaces provided within the site, the subject project is expected to have a surplus of 14 parking spaces during the weekday condition and 26 spaces during the weekend. In conclusion, the 303 parking spaces provided within the site are sufficient to satisfy the projected parking demand for both the weekday and weekend condition. ~~A==== iRlCHARD GARCIA &. ASSOCiATES, ~I\!C. Page 3 6075 Sunset Drive Parking Study The objective of this study is to ascertain the parking demand for the subject project. As such, the parking required for each land use was calculated using published data from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parking Generation 4th Edition as requested by the City of South Miami traffic engineering consultant during a development phase review. Project location / Description The subject site is located on the northeast corner of SW 72 nd Street (Sunset Drive) and SW 61 51 Avenue in the City of South Miami, Florida. This site has a drive-in bank (6,701 square feet) with two (2) drive-in lanes and 13,670 square feet of office. The existing building will be demolished while the proposed redevelopment consists of rental apartments with 203 units, 2,441 square feet of retail and a restaurant with 3,678 square feet. Moreover, this redevelopment will provide 303 parking spaces within the site and 11 on-street parking spaces. Figure 1 depicts an aerial of the project's location. Figure 2 is a site plan showing the parking spaces at ground level while Figure 3 shows the proposed parking garage. Figure 1: Project Location Map RICHARD GARCIA'& ASSOCIATES, INC. Page 4 6075 Sunset Drive figure 2: Site Plan (Ground level) ~ I J r-----.:..:. -------~--. I I I I Parking Study i,'dl ~~A====== RiCHARD GARCIA ill ASSOC~ATES, ~NC. Page 5 6075 Sunset Drive figure 3: Parking Garage .1'" ""'. !fI."J ------~- 4th Floor I 0, ! 2nd Floor Parking study 3rd Floor _==-=.-=-i--t=-=-===-R~A===~~== RICHARD GARCIA «1 ASSOCIATES, iNC. Page 6 6075 Sunset Drive Parking Study The parking generation analysis was performed using published data from the ITE Parking Generation McmuaL 4th Edition. This manual IS based on actual parking demand studies submitted to ITE and is typically used by planners, transportation professionals and others to estimate the parking demand of a proposed development. The following land uses, as identified by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parking Generation, most closely resemble the subject project's various uses. These land uses (LU) are as follows: o LU 221: Low/Mid-Rise Apartment o LU 820: Specialty Retail (Shopping Cent8l') o LU 931: Quality Restaurant The parking demand for the subject project was calculated for the weekday and weekend condition. Based on the ITE parking generation analysis, the proposed redevelopment will required 289 parking spaces for the weekday condition and 277 parking spaces for the weekend condition. When compared to the 303 parking spaces provided within the site, the subject project is expected to have a surplus of 14 parking spaces during the weekday condition and 26 spaces during the weekend. Table 1 below summarizes the ITE Parking Generation results for both the weekday and weekend condition. Table 1: Weekday & Weekend Parking Demand rrE rrE Parking Rate Parking Required Land Use Land Use Units Code (LUe) Weekday Weekend Weekday Weekend Apartment 221 203 D.U. 1.20 1.03 243.60 209.09 Retail 820 2.441 Th.SqH 2.55 2.87 6.22 7.01 Restaurant 931 3678 Th.Sq.Ft. 10.60 16.40 38.99 60.32 Total Parking Spaces Required 288.81 276.41 Total Parking Spaces Required (Rounded) 289 277 Notes: [lJ ITE parking rates obtained from the Institute ofTransportation Engineers (ITEJ Parking Generation, 4th Edition. ~~A==== RICHA.RD GA.RCIA 8: ASSOCIATES, ih!C. Page 7 6075 Sunset Drive Parking Study In conclusion, the ITE Parking Generation analysis for the subject project yielded a parking demand of 289 parking spaces for the weekday condition and 277 spaces for the weekend condition. Therefore, the 303 parking spaces provided within the site are sufficient to satisfy the projected parking demand for both the weekday and weekend condition. RICHARD GARCIA 8. ASSOCIATES, ijNC. Page 8 6075 Sunset Drive Parking Study Appendix 1: irE Parking Generation Analysis RICHARD GARCIA & ASSOCIATES, INC. Appendix -1 - ITE Land Use Land Use Code (LUC) Apartment 221 Retail 820 Restaurant 931 Notes: TABLE: Al ITE Parking Genration Project Name: 6075 Sunset Drive ITE Parking Rate Units Weekday Weekend 203 D.U. 1.20 1.03 2.441 Th.Sq.Ft. 2.55 2.87 3.678 Th.Sq.Ft. 10.60 16.40 Total Parking Spaces Required Total Parking Spaces Required (Rounded) [l]ITE parking rates obtained from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Parking Generation, 4th Edition. Parking Required Weekday Weekend 243.60 209.09 6.22 7.01 38.99 60.32 288.81 276.41 289 277 land Use: 221 low/Mkij=lRjse Apartment Average Peak Period Parking Demand vs. Dwelling Units On a: Weekday location: Urban 1::Stiltlstic"",.(/·'·;;"?:L •. ' "';:;':"~".":;';,'.'."',; .\::.:>~ :.~ i~:·;·:i/. '.'; ',;.:' '<'PeakP~iiodcD~rriand;':::,:f;;';':" Peak Period 10:00 p,m-5:00 am. Number of Study Sites 40 Average Size of Study Sites 70 dwelling units Average Peak Period Parking Demand 1.20 vehicles per dwell ina unit Standard Deviation 0.42 Coefficient of Variation 35% 95% Confidence Interval 1.07-133 vehicles per dwelling unit Range 0.66-2.50 vehicles p_er dwellmgunit 85th Percentile 1.61 vehicles per dwellinQ unit 33rd Percentile 0.93 vehicles per dwelling unit Weekday Urban Peak Per~od Parking Demand fJ) 700 (!) 600 u P = 0.92x + 4 R2 = 0.96 .r::. 500 ~ 400 "0 (!) 300 ~ b 200 ro a. II 100 a. 0 0 200 400 600 )( = Dwelling Units " Actual Data Points --Fitted Curve ----Average Rate ~A'~"'=':.,...~"'.':.:"'=..r.-~='=~'~.:7"""'>""\(~~ i..df~ ~''''''''''''~'''T~",'''_ .. (".~_':r='~""" .. ~A:::. .... 'I.U~.r:-=.~~ Institute of Transportation Engineers """" "".!'. Parking Generation, 4th Edition -'''-[ 54] "e'" '("'~w\~'i"~ ,,",,1'>!<""''''J.«''',r.· .,.~~,,,...;,~..,.,,,<,~~.~" ,."/;; 1 [ , land Use: 221 low/M ~d=R~§e Apartment Average Peak Period Parking Demand vs. Dwelling Units On a: Saturday Location: Urban '$ta'tistiC{»,i:i :\l'/c~s ,<", , ,< ':,,', Peak Pei"iodI)ei)1;:ln&:>/,:'" Peak Period No clear peak period emerged from the data; likely to fall between 10:00 pm, and 600 am, Number of Study Sites 8 Average Size of Study Sites 147 dwelling units Average Peak Period Parking Demand 1,03 vehicles per dwellinq unit Standard Deviation 019 Coefficient of Variation 19% Range 0,80-143 vehicles per dwellinq unit 85th Percentile 1,14 vehicles per dwelling unit 33rd Percentile 093 vehicles per dwelling unit Saturday Urban Peak Period Parking Demand 500 r:-~ ----'-~----,~--~~,-----,' <> 400 ~_04_x ______ _ I R2 = 0.99 300 I 200 100 O 1,=,,----,---I' ----,,-----'-'--,-----'~--""l-'---- o 100 200 300 400 500 x = Dwelling Units ~ Actual Data Points --Fitted Curve/Average Rate Institute of Transportation Engineers [ 55) Parking Generation, 4th Edition ~ : i! ;1 " v p~.~~.c=.====================================================~=====================~ I land l1lSte: 820 Shopp~ng Ctentetr Average Peak Period Parking Demand vs. 1,000 sq. ft. GlA On a: Non-Friday Weekday (Non-December) IS'[i1 .,' <\tic',··;·:· .....;.....>;:;.,; .... 'E.< .:' ..... ,.\:. ;peakJ)~ricidDernahd;.··.··/c~::.> .. ,:' Peak Period 11 :00-300 p.m.; 6:00-7:00 p.m. Number of Study Sites 24 Average Size of Study Sites 357,700 sq. ft. GLA Average Peak Period Parking Demand 2.55 vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft. GLA Standard Deviation 0.93 Coefficient of Variation 37% Range 133-558 vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft. GLA 85th Percentile 3.16 vehicles per 1,000 sq ft. GLA 33rd Percentile 2.20 vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft GLA Non=Friday Weekday Non=December Peak Period Parking Demand 8,000 I 7000 P = 1.59x + 138 6:000 ~2 = 0.98 5,000 -----......- 4,000 ------=""'------=--=------i 3,000 2,000 ... -"".'." 1,000 o o 1,000 2,000 3,000 x = i ,000 sq. ft. GLA <> Actual Data Points --Fitted Curve ...... -Average Rate _~==~~.._.:u=."..J".=' ...... ~-"'''''''''''-............. ~.r-~ ~yP'."._ .. _"' ........... ""'''''''==~=--~~~l--'' ........ -=~' _"~ __ Institute of Transportation Engineers "", /¢d Parking Generation, 4th Edition '""'" [235 ]/" """~.o:...'~.""~~"""~~'_J4"'~ ,~ .. ., ~ ___ ,._.?'+! ~-~~========================'=,-==========================~~ v--r-- I r land Use: 820 Shopping Center Average Peak Period Parking Demand VS. 1,000 sq. ft. GlA On a: Saturday (Non-December) Demand Standard Deviation Coefficient of Variation 95% Confidence Interval Ran e 85th Percentile 33rd Percentile If) 12,000 (j) 10,000 (,,) .b 8,000 Q) > "C 6,000 Q) ~ 4,000 !-ro a. 2,000 II a.. 0 Saturday NOUl=December Peak Period Parking Demand P = 3.38x -116 -------------, --~------~------l------- 1,000 2,000 3,000 x = 1,000 sq. ft. GLA 4,000 <> Actual Data Points ~-Fitted Curve ----Average Rate I I I I i I I I ! j' I' I j ! I r land Use: 931 QlUJal~~ty Restzn-Elfant Average Peak Period Parking Demand VS. 1,000 sq. ft. GFA On a: Non~Friday Weekday Peak Period 7:00-9:00 p.m. Number of Study Sites 5 Average Size of Study Sites 7,000 sq ft GFA Average Peak Period Parking Demand 1060 vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft. GFA Standard Deviation 4.23 Coefficient of Variation 40% Range 5.46-15.35 vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft. GFA 85th Percentile 14.20 vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft. GFA 33rd Percentile 8.40 vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft. GFA Non=Friday Weekday Peak Period Parking Demand 140 J ...... -............. -....... ----............. --..................... -......... .. 120 P=13.89x-17 100 I R2 = 0.67 80 60 I 40 +. __ ....... 20 I I 0 1 o 2 4 6 8 x = 1,000 sq. ft GFA 10 ¢ Actual Data Points --Fitted Curve -.. -Average Rate ~-,~-~~~~-=-~~ ~~'~.=.~'.'~==~,..---- Institute of Transportation Engineers -"''''", .p""" Parking Generation, 4th Edition "'''''''' [309] ""~. ':,='!I}'-=~""";;;'=<::'=;:-;O:-~'.# i i \ I I,,;"'-~~"~' ~--------------------------- If L I J I 1 I' I I' 1 land Use: 931 Qua~~ty Restaurant Average Peak Period Parking Demand vs. 1,000 sq. ft. GFA On a: Saturday 1:,'statlstj'c::'(:C\'c,t~·;~:;-'·'i;;"·Y>:::':::·'>'::"~',:"::,:::} ;';;>:; , ." Peak"'Peri6d'Oemahd,'>' Peak Period 7:00-9:00 p,m, Number of Study Sites 10 Average Size of Study Sites 5,500 sq, ft. GFA ...... : .. ~: .. ~. Average Peak Period Parking Demand 1640 vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft. GFA Standard Deviation Coefficient of Variation Range 85th Percentile 33rd Percentile 570 35% 8.77-2656 vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft. GFA 22.70 vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft. GFA 14.90 vehicles per 1,000 sq. ft. GFA Saturday Peak Period Parking Demand IJ) 160 0,) 140 u 120 .s:::. (]) 100 > r nn ________ • ___ '_(>_' .. ____ ~ ______ ~-.- "0 80 0,) ~ 60 L- et'! 40 a. II 20 c... 0 ~ r ___ , _____ ,--$>--~-9----r---'--___ . ___ <>_. . •... +---"----1--- o 2 4 6 8 10 x = 1,000 sq. ft. GFA ~ Actual Data Points ~~~~I.~""""""",. .... .,...",..~.' .... 'fI7 ........... "''''~,." ~.x:""""_"f'-J,J'--..<M"""."''''''''_~'!\.~...,.-,.''''''='''-..<:.I'"=~'~ Institute of Transportation Engineers ">,-.. .t!'''/' Parking Generation, 4th Edition --"" [311 J .",.",," ~~"'tvo"« ..... ,.,. .... ",.,.._ .... ",,.,.;..n .. ",,",,,, 6075 Sunset Drive Parking Study Appendix 2: Site Plan RICHARD GARCIA & ASSOCIATES, INC. Appendix -2 - ;' "', L6 i -\ $ _~J-=-L~1j-~ _I I L~ __ -=-=--=-~:-~=_J fL_-- '.:::-:;1 --I F~r-~"-'-=::1 ..... ~:~·r0u.,"H:s'-·-:-~-·I-·~-·~-i1-:::--= I en _"'-19 g I I 7031 ::;; -70 5959· , i I I u;! 6110 --i cl,\ 1\ I OJ 7000 .-Ii: -. I ----!'t-~~ , iJ! I I ~ .... ,~-.... ,-_____ ;; ---..:, :.+:''':L~ l' ----1 -l 6161 b. --:n+-----I --j-1 '"' i ,;,; 1-'1 t f....~! '"' Ii [ij \ -TODb-~-5-J~ sw 7~~-;;----L.L 1-1·,·,·_·,·,·,·,·_·_·'·'·'1 ... -~-n r~1:;-\fi\ i r--------T~l 5950/--7/" -. I g ! ,,/ 150 City of South Miami-Zoning Map Site Map z1J~JK((.r,-~HjBrVl]fU0f\C;~1 ,,~)f ~ ',~"'f :1~~1,~~::~ l~._ :'~ ~:'}',~ ~~ 'r' ~~:hl'~r.~ :f~;~~:.";.":tf,~1 ~~'$:1'::;J/~F"~f~~ f~.l:~llf?)~\ii~,~~~*~~:~;tt~~~'-:~lz!i0t PROJECT NAME: 5075 SUNSET DRIVE PROPERTY ADDRESS 6075 SUNSET DRIVE CURRENT ZONING TOOO MU-4 & TODD MU-5 PROPOSED ZONING TODD MU-5 LOT NET AREA 70,192 SF IL611 AC. LOT OCCUPATION REQUIRED . PROVIDED RHMRKS , a.Lolllrea 70.192 SF /1.611 AC. h. Densily (Rllsldenlial) NtA Z03 UNITS c. Lo! CoyeraQe NO MAX. d. Open Spa", N/A 8.403 SF. BUILDING SETBACK a.Fron! s.w. nNO S11mr {MAJOR STREE1J! H Floors: None. S-BFlools' 20'·0' 20·-D" b Side S.W. 61ST AVENVE IMINOR SmEED O-D" 1'-10' c.Side s.w. liST STREET MINOR STREET) O'-D" 5'·0' d.lnteriorSide O·-D" 3'·6' BUILDING HEIGHT ... -l---a. Min. Heighl 2 Stories b. Max. Hei!Jht 1\ Stories a Siories c Max. wilh Bonus 6 Slorias d. Max Hei ht(Feat) 100'-0·' 100'·0' PARKING . _.,- RESTAURANT. 1 parking space per 100 SF 01 Palron Area 2.451 1 100 ~ 25 SPACES 25 SPACES 1 parking space prf 300 SF of Non-Patron Are~ 1.226 /300 ~ 5 SPACES 5 SPACES COMMERCIAL One spa~ per 300 sQJt 2.441 1 300 ~ 9 SPACES 9 SPACES SUB-TOTAL 39 SPACES RESIDENTIAL 2 parking spacespe(Oweliing Uni!.· 203 ~ 2 0; 406 SPACES 'See Patking Reduction \ additional visitor parking space for every 10 Dwellin~ Units 2031 10 ~ 21 SPACES _._--_.-'PARKING REOUCTI6NS'---'----,-------, --303 P.S. -39 p.S. -26~ SPACES j 264 PS /203l1MTS ~ 1.3 MIXED USE FACTOR 303 P.S./203 UNITS -UG OFF-STREET: J03 SPACES TOTAL PARKING 456 SPACES' ON-STREET: 11 SPACES TOTAL He PARKING (lnclllded in Total) I As er !able 206.2 Flofid3 Accesslbilly Code 8 8 Minimum Loading Ber!h5 3 LOADING SPACES (OVer 200 mvel1i[l~ U"i!s) 3 PARI<ING·BREAKOOWN PROVIDED !~~:~~ ~~~:ng l~el ------~----~-.---~ ~~ Thiitt Parkin9TPVii/·------.~~---~ .~--------~--~ 70 Fourth Parkng Level 70 InlermedialePillkina lavel 59 TOTAL PAR~NG 303 BONUS One(l) addilional floor orr~idenlial use One II) addilionailioor ZONING CHART " Parking Reduclion REMARKS Ii g: ~: I', <' 8' ~ I I W ~l > ~ I OC I! 0 " r f-: ., W~ "' Wi I: z ,. ~ g, W t ~ ~. ~ Ii 0 Ii ID Ii ~i I' e, I, ~: I, ~, .-.. _-; I I I I I I I I .L I I I I I I I I I I I I I I L _________ ~ ______________ _ '.: -;' .. .'. : ". .... ' f:tic£ 'k'Ivi'irI~ Hii:i6s _31\/8dJ:3SNnS ~Wj9 . C <U 0: o o IT: D C ~ C3 .. ~ .-J W cu .-J o Z N r:..:..:..=.:..:..:=r:,,:-=:,,:,:,,=~r=-,::,,::,,:::::,,::,,:,r:":'':'':=-l::::=~h--i'O'813S·cRi I IL __ -.... -__ ~"'""."" I' ! 5i3;iil3S.6'i5~ -___ ¥~~~~~~;;J.;~~~':;;'::;;.!.\;:'~!"'lnAJ;;"'" ~I ~I ~I ~I z :'5 CL 0: o o ---' LL o 0: OJ --:-!lf813S'M I I ----~------~--.~---~-~--------------------~------------ I ':il ~I z ~I ~I ~I I ········31\1C:lcllBSNnS9Lo9 , "/,//'/' E 3" "" .... , / ffi~ )( 1510 /// ' .... , ///// ""'" z 5 "- IT: o o ...J LL I f- '" r~ __ ...,;_-.J-I---~:--r'o'ru3S.0-:O I I u..--.,--__ ::.1 __ _ )j::W813s.o-,o Tompkins. Jane Ad From: Sent: To: Cc: da Juan Calderon <jcalderon@caltrangroup.com> Wednesday, November IS, 2017 3:52 PM ines.marrero@hklaw.com 9& .. rgarcia@rgatraffic.com; cvalentin@rgatraffic.com; Tompkins, Jane; JCFreyre@altadevelopers.com; Ignacio Serra Ita k&&ll Subject: RE: Revised Traffic Study for Alta Developers Project at 6075 Sunset Dr. in South Miami Good afternoon, We completed the review of the revised Traffic Impact Study for 6075 Sunset Drive The revised report addressed all comments provided by Caltran Engineering Group on the letter dated October 9, 2017. Regarding the LOS analysis and results using the HCM 6th version, even though the HeM 6th version has not been officially implemented by FOOT, we tested those results and compare them against HCM 2010. The LOS results are the same on both versions. Therefore, the HCM 6th results provided by RGA are acceptable. I also reviewed the parking study for 6075 Sunset Drive and it is also acceptable. Thank you, Juan S. Calderon, P.E., PTOE CALTRAN Engineering'Group, Inc. 79ci NW 107 Avenue, Suite 200 Miami, FL 33172 Tel. (786) 456-7700 Cell. (786) 449-5093 Fax (786) 513-0711 www.caltrangroup.com ~ . • Ji. From: ines.marrero@hklaw.com [mailto:ines.marrero@hklaw.com] Sent: Thursday, November 9,2017 1:53 PM To: Juan Calderon Cc: rgarcia@rgatraffic.com; cvalentin@rgatraffic.com; JTompkins@southmiamifl.gov; JCFreyre@altadevelopers.com Subject: Revised Traffic Study for Alta Developers Project at 6075 Sunset Dr. in South Miami Good afternoon, Juan, My firm represents Alta Developers, the applicant to the City of South Miami for approvals for a mixed use commercial/residential project at 6075 Sunset Drive. We are in receipt of your comments to the initial traffic study prepared by Richard Garcia & Associates, the transportation consultant for the project. Attached in response to your comments dated October 9,2017, is a revised Traffic Study for your review and consideration. Your comments also requested a parking study. I will forward the Parking Study under separate email to ensure that you receive it. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or Messrs. Garcia and Valentin at RGA. Thanks, Ines Ines Marrero-Priegues I Holland & Knight Partner Holland & Knight LLP 701 Brickell Avenue, Suite 3300 I Miami, FL 33131 Phone 305.789.7776 I Fax 305.789.7799 ines.marrero@hklaw.com I www.hklaw.com Add to address book I View professional biography NOTE: This e-mail is from a law firm, Holland & Knight LLP ("H&K"), and is intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. If you believe you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender Immediately, delete the e-mail from your computer and do not copy or disclose it to anyone else. If you are not an existing client of H&K, do not construe anything in this e-mail to make you a client unless it contains a specific statement to that effect and do not disclose anything to H&K in reply that you expect it to hold in confidence. If you properly received this e-mail as a client, co-counselor retained expert of H&K, you should maintain its contents in confidence in order to preserve the attorney-client or work product privilege that may be available to protect confidentiality. 2 Exhibit A ~-------------------------------.--------------_.----------------------------.-------------------------------------------------._--------------- Notification Letter Rezoning~ Special Exception and Variance Application Address of Application Property: 6075 Sunset Drive South Miami, Florida Applicant: , Alta Developers, LLC (Developer) Sunset-Miami Investment, Inc. (Owner) You are hereby notified that an application has been submitted 'by the above to the City of South Miami for Rezoning of the Property from TODD MU-5 and TODD MU-4 to TODD MU-S. The current zoning map designation of the Property is illustrated below: The Applicant has also submitted plans for a mixed use multi-familty residential project that requires approval of a Special Exception pursuant to Section 20-8.9 of the Land Development Code, for developments of more than 40,000 square feet or exceeding 4 stories in height and an application for Variance of the offstreet parking requirements in the TODD district. The requests will be considered by the Planning Board and the City Commission. The City's Planning and Zoning Department, at 6130 Sunset Drive, South Miami, will have on file all documents, plans and supporting materials pertaining to this application. In addition, the City's Planning and Zoning Department will prepare and mail the required notices of public hearing in accordance with the City's Land Development Code. AFFIDAVIT Before me, the undersigned, this day personally appeared J[ltlles M:atJrJreJr«:ll- Pdegues, who being by me first duly sworn, upon oath, deposes and says: 1. I am an authorized legal representative of Alta Developers, LLC, Applicant, with express authorization from SUNSET-MIAMI INVESTMENTS INC., Owner, of that property at 6075 Sunset Drive, South Miami (the "Application Property"). 2. In my capacity as land use attorney and authorized representative, I supervised and hereby certify that a Notification Letter of Application for the Proposed Rezoning, Special Exception and Variance application for 6075 Sunset Drive, South Miami, Florida in the form attached herewith as Exhibit "A" and herein incorporated by reference, was mailed, via U.S. mail to all the addresses enumerated in the ownership list attached as Exhibit liB", the property owners within 500 feet of the Application Property, except for the property owners of abutting or contiguous properties, identified and enumerated as such in Exhibit "C", to which the Notification Letter was mailed via Certified US Mail. Further Affiant sayeth not. STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE ines Ma:rl!."e -Pdlgues;Esq. title: Attorney for Applicant Alta Developers, LLC The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this I:; day of August, 2017, by Ines Marrero-Priegues, who is personally known to me and who did (did not) take an oath. Notary Public State of Florida Commission No.: _________ _ My Commission Expires: ______ _ SEAL: ,11 111 ." ,.~\'I\Y. fst:-. TIA WlWAMS :./J;.\,;;. MY COMMISSION' FF 233301 \i·~·W EXPIRES: June 15, 2019 ·'·'.f.iif.,f<.~·· Bonded Thru Notary Public UndeJ'Mit.ffi NOTIUCE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI Planning and Zoning Department 6130 Sunset Drive; South Miami, Florida 33143 Phone: (305) 663-6326; Fax #: (305) 668-7335 On Tuesday, December 12, 2017 at 7:00 P.M., the City of South Miami's Planning Board will conduct public hearings in the City Commission Chambers at the above address on the following items: NOTE: Location ~~ap applies to all items below 1. PB-17 -032 Applicant: Alta Developers, LLC sw 11S:....:.T_S_T~--r-_~1 l -ll 0..\ :Cl \i\ :;)75 10 \ .. ~. , I \ SW72NDST An Ordinance amending the Official Zoning Map; amending the designation of the northern portion ofthe property located at 6075 SW nnd Street, from "TODD (MU- 4)" to "TODD (MU-5)". 2. PB-17 -033 Applicant: Alta Developers, LLC A Resolution approving a Special Exception so as to allow a project within the TODD (MU-5) of more than four (4) stories and more than 40,000 square feet for the property located at 6075 SW 72 nd Street. 3. PB-17-034 Applicant: Alta Developers, LLC A Resolution relating to a variance application to reduce the amount of required . parking spaces for a mixed-use building located at 6075 SW nnd Street. MIAMI DAILY BUSINESS REVIEW Published Daily except Saturday, Sunday and Legal Holidays Miami, Miami-Dade County, Florida STATE OF FLORIDA COUNTY OF MIAMI-DADE: Before the undersigned authority personally appeared MARIA MESA, who on oath says that he or she is the LEGAL CLERK, Legal Notices of the Miami Daily Business Review flk/a Miami Review, a daily (except Saturday, Sunday and Legal Holidays) newspaper, published at Miami in Miami -Dade County, Florida; that the attached copy of advertisement, being a Legal Advertisement of Notice in the matter of NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI -PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT -DEC. 12,2017 in the XXXX Court, was published in said newspaper 'In the issues of 1210112017 Affiant further says that the said Miami Daily Business Review is a newspaper published at Miami, in said Miami-Dade County, Florida and that the said newspaper has heretofo're been continuously published in said Miami -Dade County, Florida each day (except Saturday, Sunday and Legal Holidays) and has been entered as second class mail matter at the post office in Miami in said Miami-Dade County, Florida, for a period of one year next preceding the first publication of the attached copy of advertisement; and affiant further says that he or she has neither paid nor promised any MARIA MESA personally known to me August 8, 2017 City of South Miami Planning & Zoning Department 6130 Sunset Drive South Miami FL 33143 RE: Property Owners List within 500 feet of: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: All of Tract A, less the East 118 feet of the North 129.07 feet, in Block 1 and Lot 3, in Block 1, of "ROSSWOOD", according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 13 at Page 62 of the Public Records of Miami-Dade County, Florida. FOLIO: 09-4025-011-0010 LOCATION: 6075 Sunset Drive, South Miami, FL 33143 PREPARED FOR: HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP ORDER: 170808 Total number of property owners without repetition: 294 This is to certify that the attached ownership list, map and mailing matrix is a complete and accurate representation of the real estate property and property owners within 500 feet of the subject property listed above. This reflects the most current records on the file in Miami-Dade County Property Appraiser's Office. Sincerely, THE ZONING SPECIALISTS GROUP, INC. /r-I~ 4 y u Jose F. Lopez, P.S.M. #3086 7729 NW 146th Street • Miami Lakes, FL 33016 Phone: 305828-1210 www.thezoningspecialistsgroup.com 1 T RADIUS MAP OF: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: All of Tract A, less the East 118 feet of the North 129.07 feet, in Block 1 and Lot 3, in Block 1, of II ROSSWOODII, according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 13 at Page 62 of the Public Records of Miami-Dade County, Florida. !FOLIO: 09-4025-011-0010 lOCATION: 6075 Sunset Drive, South Miami, FL 33143 PREPARED !FOR: HOllAND & KNiGHT llP ORDER: 170808 DATE: August 8,2017 N w E s SCALE: 1":;;: 150' The ZOIl1l~lng Spec~a~ists Grol!lfPj ~IrnCa 11'2.9 NW 146th Street Miami lakes Fl 33016 Ph: (305)828~1210 www.the:zollllillllgspeciaiistsgmlllp.com i HEREBY CERTiFY: That all the properties shown herein are lying within a 500-foot radius from all boundary lines of the subject property. NOTE: BY:~I~------~-'~~~r~-~-~9"~~--- J SE F. LOPEZ, P.S.I\Il. Professional Surveyor & Mapper No. 3086, State of Florida. NOT VALID UNLESS SEALED WITH THE SIGNING SURVEYOR'S SEAL ... -........ -~) t 010 O?·!~O-25-027IJ roo 040 610 070 830 1 \ -I C'? 40-36-0250 820 210 810 920 " \ I \ L I j r·o •o .--- o • 09·40"0·0820 100 090 r1 \ __ .. r·9-40-2s.G 110 _ 070 \ J' !-' o Iii ;:; S U) 09·40.25-079Q 001 020 0!).40·25-0000 , -' \ i 01)."0·25-0000 \ ~\ I sw '0 5T C9--.c1O-36-02SO 090"'r L-- 001 080 I , i I t \ 09-40-25-0760 080 \ I 070 I j \ .1. SW 70TH ST 09.-4-O~;25.0760 010 020 SW 72ND 8T 070 060 010 C9 >-f().. 26--02£U 030 August 8, 2017 City of South Miami Planning & Zoning Department 6130 Sunset Drive South Miami FL33143 RE: Abutting Property Owners list of: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: All of Tract A, less the East 118 feet of the North 129.07 feet, in Block 1 and Lot 3, in Block 1, of "ROSSWOOD", according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 13 at Page 62 of the Public Records of Miami-Dade County, Florida. FOLIO: 09-4025-011-0010 LOCATION: 6075 Sunset Drive, South Miami, FL 33143 PREPARED FOR: HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP ORDER: 170808 TOTAL NO. OF LABElS WITHOUT REPETITION: 18 This is to certify that the attached ownership list, map and mailing matrix is a complete and accurate representation of the real estate property and property owners abutting the subject property listed above. This reflects the most current records on the file in Miami-Dade County Tax Assessor's Office. Condominium Associations are part of this list in lieu of individual condominium unit owners. Sincerely, THE ZONING SPECIALISTS GROUP, INC. lord:::Z. P~6 7729 NW 146th Street· Miami Lakes, FL 33016 Phone: 305 828-1210 www.thezoningspecialistsgroup.com BUTTING PR PERTIES MAP OF: lEGAL DESCRIPTION: All of Tract A, less the East 118 feet of the North 129.07 feet, in Block 1 and Lot 3, in Block 1, of II ROSSWOOD", according to the Plat thereof, as recorded in Plat Book 13 at Page 62 of the Public Records of Miami-Dade County, Florida. FOliO: 09-4025-011-0010 LOCATION: 6075 Sunset Drive, South Miami, FL 33143 PREPARED FOR: HOLLAND & KNIGHT llP ORDER: 170808 DATE: August 8, 2017 • NOTE: s SCALE: 1":;:: 150' The Zoning Specialists Group, Inc . 7729 NW 146th Street Miami Lakes FL 33016 Ph: (305)828-1210 www.thezoningspecialistsgroup.com ! 0 ~~ {7.:';;;'?,:;~ BY: ~~~ ________ ~,~~ __ ~,~~ __ J<5SE F. LOPEl, P.S.M. Professional Surveyor & Mapper No, 3086, State of Florida, NOT VALID UNLESS SEALED WITH THE SIGNING SURVEYOR'S SEAL 870 890 920 \ sw 70TH S1 \ \ ---'~ lb. -==/=-,==-=-=~~-I \ '00 0" \ / \ ~ 'rl' 09-40-25-07((1 150 ~ ---,---.-'" 21]0 \ \ ( \ ~ ~ ~ ~ 100 l09-40-25-0250 \ ~ \ \ ~ 010 ~ ~ \ \ ~ I i \ \ ~ ~ 010 \ \ \ \ l ~ \ \' \ \' 0940·25-0270 I 1\ .' --'-.-.-.--' -" .-----J \ \ .. ' -,.\ \ -.. _---,_.----~ 1\ II \---=-..... 1\ i 040 Ir \11\ \ ~ L. ...... ---------" -.--~ O~40·25·0500 ~ \ II \1 1\""""'\ ~ 001 \ ~Ui:J.40\2.;'0760 ,-' ," -, ~ \ 630 1\ \ "' f\:. '-.-o~.:;~~;o:oo\ ~ \ ~ I , \ 780 ~ \ \1\ ... i \ i ~ "'.-, ...... '- ~ ~,. .. " ., .' f, ~ 5W 72ND S1 B -21'-10 -r ---------..- '\ w 7 5T ' 5' I . 610 09-40-25-0760 010 020 SW 72ND ST I. sW n'lD 51 _' % _____ . __ =="' SW -,2ND 5T SW 72ND 5T ~==---'i''--... ~. -~.:: ...... ~-=,~==~=-===-~ .. -.-" -.. -,..",.. .-.. ,,,- 'O~~?\T~~T Pi . I \ \ J :.. \t"-u\ !-' $1 '" ~' oeD \ 170 -.~ .. ,-_._-\ 09 40·36-0250 .. _ . __ ~~:~ .. "._ ... -_J.-. 010 , ~ i ,. \ \\ / 100 ,. ;1,'11 --\'''~''-''-"' oro /1.1--. 070 180' Ii \ CI9·4IJ.36·0240 ·1 -' --.: ... _~wrt~~::~JJ~=- ===-="1F'-==---===-------I, f-· , ........ . ..\ ': \. om 'I . . m" . ···1\1 ./ 030 'I _...l "SW74nl'ST ... === SW 74TH 5T r===-- I CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI PLANNING BOARD Regular Meeting Minutes Tuesday, December 12,2017 CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS 07:00 P.M. The City of South Miami Code of Ordinances, Section SA-5, requires that all lobbyists, as defined in that section, must register with the City Clerk before engaging in any lobbying activities and in most cases pay an annual fee oj $500.00 and an additional $100 for each additional issue. This applies to all persons who are retained with or without compensation to influence any action, decision, recommendation of someone with the city, including the city manager, city attorney, department heads, city personnel, or members of the city commission or members oj any city board, concerning a matter that could foreseeably be address by the city commission or a city board. There are some exceptions and exemptions. The following are not considered to be lobbyist: a representative of a principal at a quasi-judicial hearing, experts who present scientific or technical information at public meetings, representatives of a neighborhood association without compensation and representatives of a not-for-profit community based organization for the purpose of requesting a grant who seek to influence without special compensation. Individuals who wish to view or listen to the meeting in its entirety, audio and video versions of the meeting can be found on the city's website (www.southmiamifl.gov). I. Call to Order Action: Mr. Basu called the meeting to order at 7:02 P.M. II. Roll Call Board Members Present Constituting a Quorum: Mr. Subrata Basu (Chairman), Dr. Velma Palmer (Vice Chairwoman), Mr. Lee Jacobs, Dr. Sally Philips, Mr. Gary Robinson, Ms. Aracely Alicea. Board Members Absent: Mr. Larry Melow. City Staff Present: Ms. Jane Tompkins (Planning Director) and Mr. Marcus Lightfoot (Senior Planner/Zoning Administrator). City Staff Absent: None City Attorney: Mr. Thomas Pepe III. Administrative Matters • Ms. Tompkins updated the Board on the Land Development Code/Comprehensive Plan Rewrite project. 1 • Ms. Tompkins requested to take Item PB-17-035 out of order so that it could be heard first. The Board had no objections to taking PB-17-035 out of order so that it could be heard first. IV. Public Hearings The Board chose to read all the items for PB-17-032 through PB-17-034 into the record first. 1. PB-17-032 Applicant: Alta Developers, LLC An Ordinance amending the Official Zoning Map; amending the designation of the northern portion of the property located at 6075 SW nnd Street, from "TODD (MU-4)" to "TODD (MU- S)". Mr. Robinson read PB-17-032 into the record. 2. PB-17-033 Applicant: Alta Developers, LLC A Resolution approving a Special Exception so as to allow a project within the TODD (MU-5) of more than four (4) stories and more than 40,000 square feet for the property located at 6075 SW nnd Street. Ms. Alicea read PB-17-033 into the record. 3. PB-17-034 Applicant: Alta Developers, LLC A Resolution relating to a variance application to reduce the amount of required parking spaces for a mixed-use building located at 6075 SW nnd Street. Dr. Palmer read PB-17-034 into the record. Applicant: Henry Pino, owner of Alta Developers, LLC, represented by Ines Marrero (Attorney), Robert Behar (Architect), and Kelly Ann Hults (Landscape Architect) Mr. Pepe swore in all those individuals who will be testifying on PB-17-032 through PB-17-034. Dr. Palmer informed the Board that Mr. Scott Rosenbaum wanted to speak to her but she never made an appointment to do so. Ms. Tompkins presented the staff report for PB-17-032 through PB-17-034. Ms. Marrero presented the project to the Board. She then introduced Robert Behar, the architect of record. Mr. Behar presented the architecture of the project to the Board. Ms. Marrero then continued her presentation of the project. 2 The Chairman opened the floor to public comments on PB-17-032 -PB-17-034. • Henry Pino -Support -Sworn in by City Attorney • Antoinette Fischer -Oppose -Sworn in by City Attorney The Chairman closed the floor to public comments on PB-17-032 -PB-17-034. Dr. Philips asked if there are any elevators in the building, to which Mr. Behar stated yes. Dr. Philips then asked if bike racks can be placed inside for residents to use. Mr. Behar responded that bike racks will be placed inside the building for use by the residents. A separate rack will be available for patrons to the retail establishments. Dr. Philips asked if there will be solar panels in the project. Mr. Behar stated that solar panels are typically used for single family projects, not multi-family residential projects. He then added that everything will be done to ensure that the proposed building will be green. Dr. Philips asked how many of the units in the building will be affordable or work force housing. Mr. Pino responded that the current zoning on the property does not require that there be any affordable or workforce housing. He then stated that in an effort to keep the rate down on the rents, the mix of units is geared towards smaller units. There would be approximately 116 units that are 1 and 2 bedroom units of the 203 total units. Dr. Philips then asked what the rate would be, to which Mr. Pino responded that the rate would be approximately $1,300 -$1,500. Ms. Alicea asked if the green building certification be a commitment in the development agreement, to which Mr. Behar stated yes. She then asked if there will be a dedicated driveway for Uber/Lyft pickups so that traffic isn't affected, to which Mr. Behar stated yes. Last, Ms. Alicea asked if there will be any type of green/cool roof used for the project. Mr. Behar stated yes. The project has a landscape architect that will assist in designing those aspects of the project. Dr. Palmer stated that this project falls within the South Miami Community Redevelopment Agency (SMCRA) area. She then asked if the CRA was consulted on this project, to which Ms. Marrero stated no. She then added that the project will contribute to the tax base for the area. Dr. Palmer asked how the project will satisfy the parking deficit. Ms. Marrero stated that the excess parking would not be needed, allowing people who could not afford private transportation the ability t6 live in a development that is near public transportation. Dr. Palmer asked what the LDC stated regarding parking for a studio apartment and if it can be reduced. Ms. Tompkins stated that the LDC requires 2 spaces per unit. It does not require a lower standard for a studio apartment. Dr. Palmer stated that the hardship demonstrated by the applicant in the variance application is a self-imposed hardship. Dr. Palmer then stated that she would like to see a project that involves the SMCRA and addresses affordable housing. 3 Mr. Robinson stated that appears that this project is using spot zoning, which is illegal in most areas. He then asked if spot zoning was legal in South Miami, to which Mr. Pepe stated no. Mr. Lee asked Mr. Pepe if this property was in the SMCRA area. Mr. Pepe responded that it is not in the jurisdiction of the SMCRA but it is in their area. Mr. Lee asked if this large-scale development was included in the SMCRA plan, to which Mr. Pepe stated yes. One of the goals in the SMCRA plan is to eliminate slum and blight, which is something that this project will do. It will also increase the tax base and provide for services that normally wouldn't be provided. Mr. Lee asked what the procedure would be for adding projects such as this to the SMCRA plan. Mr. Pepe responded that the plan would need to be amended at the County level. Mr. Lee asked if this project would be reviewed by the SMCRA Board, to which Mr. Pepe stated no. The SMCRA Board does not have jurisdiction over the zoning of any ofthe properties within its boundaries. Mr. Basu then explained what the SMCRA Plan entails. Ms. Marrero added that this project is not seeking any type of funding from the SMCRA so it does not need to be reviewed by them. Mr. Lee asked what the total square footage of the project was, including both retail and residential. Mr. Behar stated that the total square footage is approximately 225,000 square feet of FAR. Mr. Basu added that the total square footage is 416,240 square feet, to which Mr. Behar added that the square footage mentioned by Mr. Basu includes the parking areas. Mr. Lee stated that parking in the downtown area is a real problem. He then stated that parking for the project could be used more creatively. Both Ms. Marrero and Mr. Behar then held a discussion on parking with the Board. Mr. Basu stated that a building with a lower amount of parking makes the units more affordable, which is the basis for a transit oriented development district. Mr. Basu then initiated a discussion on affordable housing. Mr. Pino stated that some municipalities start a fund for affordable housing in the community. He then stated that his issue is that affordable housing makes it difficult to obtain bank loans. Mr. Basu then stated that he would like to see the developer give back to the community as part of this project. Dr. Philips stated that there is over 13,000 square feet of roof space, which is plenty of room for solar panels. The panels could be used to power the common areas in the building. By doing so, the electricity costs could be lowered and allow those savings to be passed on the residents. Mr. Behar stated that he would consider having solar panels installed on the building. Mr. Basu asked questions regarding the townhouses that are a part of the project. Mr. Behar gave a brief presentation on the design of the townhouse portion of the project. Mr. Basu asked questions about the landscaping for the project. Ms. Kelly Ann Hults, the landscape architect for the project came to the podium to speak. Mr. Basu stated that there are several specimen trees listed for removal, but the tree mitigation may not be adequate. 4 Ms. Tompkins stated that the City Arborist has reviewed the proposed plan and determined that it met the requirements of the LDC. They can pay into the City's Tree Trust fund in lieu of pia nting the trees. Mr. Basu asked the applicant if the planters on the deck area be designed so that it is a seating area. Mr. Behar responded that he will consider having that feature added. Dr. Philips asked if the dog park is a sunken area, to which Mr. Behar gave an explanation as to how the area will be utilized. Because changes need to be made to the project, Dr. Palmer asked how the items should be handled. Ms. Tompkins explained how the Board's comments and issues will be addressed. Mr. Lee asked if there is anything the LDC that distinguishes a tree from a specimen tree, to which Ms. Tompkins stated yes. Ms. Tompkins then explained how the LDC differentiates between a regular tree and specimen tree. Dr. Philips asked if there will be trees underneath the awnings. Mr. Behar gave an explanation on the height of the awnings and the size of trees that will be used in the project. Items PB-17-032 through PB-17-034 were tabled by the Board. No motion or vote was taken. Motion: Mr. Robinson moved to take PB-17-032 off the table. The motion was seconded by Dr. Philips. No Vote was held for this motion. Motion: Mr. Robinson moved to approve PB-17-032. The motion was seconded by Mr. Jacobs. Vote: Yes 4, No 2 (Palmer, Jacobs) Mr. Robinson: Yes Ms. Alicea: Yes Mr. Basu: Yes Dr. Palmer: No Mr. Jacobs: No Dr. Philips: Yes Motion: Mr. Robinson moved to take PB-17-033 off the table. The motion was seconded by Mr. Basu. Vote: Yes 6, No 0 (None) Mr. Robinson: Yes Ms. Alicea: Yes Mr. Basu: Yes Dr. Palmer: Yes Mr. Jacobs: Yes Dr. Philips: Yes 5 Dr. Philips stated that people with disabilities will have a hard time entering and leaving the townhouses. Mr. Behar stated that the townhouses can either be lowered at the time of construction, add hand rails, or add a lift. Mr. Basu stated that the project will have to comply with the Florida Building Code requirements for ADA accessibility. Motion: Dr. Philips moved to amend PB-17-033 to include the following conditions: 1. Revisiting the landscape mitigation so that it complies with the LDC; 2. The applicant considers a minimum of 4 units as affordable housing via covenant; and 3. Staff's conditions 1-21. The motion was seconded by Mr. Robinson. Vote: Yes 6, No 0 (None) Mr. Robinson: Yes Ms. Alicea: Yes Mr. Basu: Yes Dr. Palmer: Yes Mr. Jacobs: yes Dr. Philips: Yes The Board voted on Item PB-17-033 as a whole. Vote: Yes 4, No 2 (Jacobs, Palmer) Dr. Philips: Yes Mr. Jacobs: No Dr. Palmer: No Mr. Basu: Yes Ms. Alicea: Yes Mr. Robinson: Yes Motion: Mr. Robinson moved to take PB-17-034 off the table. The motion was seconded by Dr. Palmer. Vote: Yes 6, No 0 (None) Mr. Robinson: Yes Ms. Alicea: Yes Mr. Basu: Yes Dr. Palmer: Yes Mr. Jacobs: Yes Dr. Philips: Yes Motion: Mr. Robinson moved to approved PB-17-034. The motion was seconded by Dr. Philips. Vote: Yes 4, No 2 (Palmer, Jacobs) Mr. Robinson: Yes Ms. Alicea: Yes 6 Mr. Basu: Yes Dr. Palmer: No Mr. Jacobs: No Dr. Philips: Yes 4. PB-17-035 Applicant: TMJ HG, LLC A Resolution relating to a Special Use application to permit a General Restaurant use at 5966 S. Dixie Highway. Mr. Lightfoot read the title for PB-17-03S into the record. Applicant: David Billskoog Mr. Lightfoot presented the staff report for PB-17-03S. Mr. Billskoog presented the project to the Board. The Chairman opened the floor to public comments on PB-17-035. None at this Time The Chairman dosed the floor to public comments on PB-17-035. Dr. Philips asked if the shaded area on the plans the only part that is the restaurant. Mr. Billskoog stated yes. Mr. Robinson asked if the restaurant will have outdoor seating, to which Mr. Billskoog stated that he was not sure. Mr. Lightfoot added that a separate outdoor seating application will be reviewed by staff and approved administratively. Mr. Basu stated that he would like to see a floor plan for any future restaurant special use applications. Motion: Mr. Robinson moved to approve PB-17-03S. The motion was seconded by Ms. Alicea. Vote: Yes 6, No 0 (None) Mr. Robinson: Yes Ms. Alicea: Yes Mr. Basu: Yes Dr. Palmer: Yes Mr. Jacobs: Yes Dr. Philips: Yes V. Public Comments/New Business The Chairperson opened the floor for public comments and any new business. 7 Public Comments Section • Antionette Fischer She stated that she has issues with the Board performing group votes instead of roll call votes being held on items. She then gave constructive criticism on how the Board should be managed. • Vice Mayor Bob Welsh Motion: Mr. Robinson moved to invite Vice Mayor Welsh to be allowed to address the Board. The motion was seconded by Dr. Philips. Vote: Yes 6, No 0 (None) Mr. Robinson: Yes Ms. Alicea: Yes Mr. Basu: Yes Dr. Palmer: Yes Mr. Jacobs: Yes Dr. Philips: Yes Mr. Welsh stated that at the SMCRA Board meeting, a resolution was put forth asking the City Commission to fix the zoning for the area in the CRA area that is zoned MO. He then stated that he will be working on legislation that will require affordable housing for new residential projects and asked the Board if they would send him their ideas. The Board then held a discussion on affordable housing. New Business Section • Dr. Palmer stated that she has issues with the process of tabling items. Mr. Pepe gave an explanation why items are tabled. • Ms. Alicea asked if a workshop on parliamentary procedures be held for the Board. Mr. Pepe suggested that Ms. Alicea ask the clerk to schedule an ethics seminar with Miami-Dade County. The Chairman closed the floor for new business. VI. Approval of the Minutes 1. Planning Board Regular Meeting Minutes of November 14, 2017: Motion: Dr. Palmer moved to approve the minutes with changes. The motion was seconded by Mr. Jacobs. Vote: Yes 6, No 0 (None) Mr. Robinson: Yes 8 Ms. Alicea: Yes Mr. Basu: Yes Dr. Palmer: Yes Mr. Jacobs: Yes Dr. Philips: Yes VII. Future Meeting Date: A) Regular Meeting -January 9, 2018 VIII. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned at 9:16 P.M. 9 I ) ] ] J LJ [ [ I [ J [ ] l 1 l J L 1 J , I J J J DEVELOPERS 6075 SUNSET DRIVE SOUTH MIAMI, FL 33143 J J J J ( J L ) J J J '" 9 I I I I I I I I I -----·---1 I I I I I "'I 9 1 I I I I I -I I I I I I "'1 9 1 I I I I I I .------. __ . "I I I I I ",I 5 1 --,I I I I I I ----. -------I I I I I BLOCK 3 LOT I I LOT 15 PlAT ~~GE 62 LOT 14 --___________________ L ____________ l _______ _ #6075 TRACT A BLOCK 1 AOSSWOOO P.B. 13, PG, 62 i' :> ... ' .... f ,--/'~' ~ " " ~~. /~~ "-'''"''':-''--' A PAV(W(Nl " ,,~ 1 STORY BUILDING I I LOT 13 I LOT 12 I LOT 11 _ ____________ L ____________ l ______ _ z '" "'L'ATE lIER" 1 STORY BUILDING (NOT LOCATED) J SOUTIi UN( OF TRACT -A", BLOCK I, p.e. 13, PC. 62 ------.------ I- a: < 0 W C-O :> Ci < CD :::l en I-0 z 0 Z --~ "T -~ "'--"1> I I I I I I .'W '<13 I t;~_ g~ I .m :: ! ~ I I I I -"f'-l LOCATION SKETCH SCALE : 1" _ 300' GRAPHIC SCALE .. " t ! ( IW FE!T 1 I lDab ... 20 fl LEGAL DE SCRI PTION: LEGEND ~"1' .. CATOI WoSIN (:·_CAn:tl~ .... [I' 0-.... "" [t<)-UQur POLl @ "WATER WmR ~ _PTtRVN..Vf. ... UIlJIYPO..£ U -_ "O'''FM:H'rOfWofl 131 -,"""",,-, [:I:d .. stwtR/(l.I.S YALVE: e .. ClfANOUI ®-MU C)"OR.AJI .. "' .. CAAOCD.£VA.JX»; -ofIt-.. o.tRIiUO UTUTY WIllE -1--~lH<FV«:£. --IH-" \.MIlD .ICC£S$ ItiQrt-Or-"*",Y I.M = .. O.~·CUR9 =-","- It.. _£l.£YAlIOH tN ... IJMRT $N(. -SWTAR1 TYI'. -Tl'PIColI. C.V ... CHIrIN lH( FEHer mAl ... Al..UIoIINW PJU,f. .. ~ENTR£r£.ROfC[IoIOHuI.I£M P.8. -P\AJIIOOII fie. E?2-COtOIE1r c:J-t.sPIW.fPA\UIENT IVW .. A:CtIT-or:-WAY ~ .. cootA l.,1l<I£ www.ca ll sun shin e.c om All 01 Tract A, len tho Eost 118 feet of the North 129.07 feol . in Block I, and lot 3, in Block I, of Ron'irood. according to the Plot thereol, recorded In Plot Blook 13, at Page 62, In the Public: Records of Miami-Dade Counly, Florida, less the South 2!1 l eet 01 said Block I. SURVEYOR'S NOTES : -Thill lite Ilea In Section 25, Township 54 South, Range <40 EOlt, City of South !.I iomi, lo4iorni -Oode County, Florida . -All documents are recorded in the Public Records 01 t.l iomi-Oode County, Florida. unless otherwist noled. -lands ahown hereon were NOT obstrocted for restrictions, ealcmcn!l! and/or righls-ol-way of records. -Bearings hereon ore relerred to on assumed value 01 NO(),OI·~·E for the Cost right-aI-way line 01 S.W. 6111 Ayenue, and evidenced by one (1) 3/<4" Pipe (No 1.0.) and one {I} Nail &. Disk (l83653). -Elevoliona shown hereon are reloliye to the Notional Gcodelic Vertical Dalum 01 1929. based on Miami-Dade Counly Benchmark ·SOUTH t.i!M4I ", E1cyo l ion +13.30, locol ed on July 104, 2017 01 the inlcr'scction of S.W. nod Stlcet and S.W. 59l h Ayenue. -lands shown hcreon are located within 00 area hCN"ing a Zone Ollsignotion X by the redcral [mergeocy l.I aooyemerlt Agency (FEI,I.A), on F'lood Insurance Rotc l.4ap No. 12086C0458L, for CommunIty No. 120658, do led Septllmber II , 2009, and Indell mop rcyi~ed September 11. 2009, and I~ relaUye to the NQ\lonol Geoolllic Verticot Datum of 1929. -Dimensionl Indicated hereon ore field meolured by elftctronic measurement, unlCI!1 olherwise noted. -Londs ,hawn hereon contoining 70,192 sqUQre fllel, or 1.61 1 ac:res, more or leIS. -All horizontal conlrol measurements orc within a precIsion of 1: 1 0,000. -Thill mop il intended to be disployttd 01 t hc graphic: scolll shollln hereon ar smollor. -Root overhang not located "'nlen otherwise ~hown. -Underg'ouod improy emenl~ ond/I)r underground e/'lcroochrnentl not shown. unless olhe,..,..!se IndicQted. -TlIe oppro.imole loca tioo of all utilitie8 showo hereon were determined !rom As-Built plonl and/or nn-site locolions and ShQuld be Yerified before construction. -legal descriptian shown herllon based on Spec;QI Warranty Deed recordr.xl In a.R.B. 15850, Pagil 11 39. (md 01) c:loims 0' to owncr.lhip ore mode or implied. -Folio No. 09-4025-011 -0010, per Miomi-Oode Couoly Property Appraiser', Website . SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATiO N: I hereby c:ertily thai t hi~ "Boundury &. lopoqrophic SUNey· wo, ,"ode under my rnponsible chor'ile on July 27, 2017. end meeh the applicable coon as set forlh in the norida AdminilftretiYe CadI:!. pursuant to Section 472.017, Florida Stotullllf. 'NQIY,)/idw'lhOUl 11M! 'lgIlaIureand the ongmal,aiied aealoIlFlondalloentedSuIW)'OIandMappe(" FORTIN, LEAVY , SKILES, IN C .. LB3653 l hl,Dro.ingl. tile Pr09«t~ of Fortin, lMNy. SlUH, Inc. oN!i.on lowln..onent of~lnottoto. Rcproduud In Whole orin Port .ilhoul tr..E><pr-.'o\'RI'Tl[N Ptm'li • ....,o'SGme.. 5 I '" ci ~ cj ~ ~q ~ "" ~ ~ ~ ~~ffiH ~~r:f ~~~h r.I.l ~ ~ _~ ~ ~ ~ -~IP~ :so~l~ ffi 1\ ~ ~ ~O P1 ~~~H o~§u ~U ... -.. >-UJ > « a: 0 :::> a: 0 (f) ---' u.. U ~ I z W ::J a.. > 0 <.) « CI w a: 0 0 « C) f-9 0 w ~ C/) « a.. z ~ 0 :J I-C/) ~ L!') « ~ I"-~ 0 I CD I->-::J 0 a: (fJ « u.. CI 0 Z ~ :::> t5 0 tIl Bc:lllo-'~=--------i I" '" 20' ~-- GEM CAD No. 170675 Plotted 7/3 1/17 1:47 Re f. Ihrg. 20000-101 Field Book 645-18 & FW. SHT. ALL Job No.--- 170075 Owg. No. 20 17-124 Sh eet , 0_'_'_ ~ . '- Cf) =i m lJ I o d (j) ::0 » lJ I Cf) n "'0 I .... 0 ........ <0 o I\) A ~ '. -t :~ m J,: "'0 ,;, :I: 0 .... 0 " ~ " :I: VI ........ c ,. 0 :;: _ 0 6 ~ w -co ... r~ ........ ,......., ........ ........ r.....o -..... ....... (J1 c.v O'l .j::. -....J <Xl 6075 SUNSET DRIVE SOUTH MIAMI, FL 33143 02017 BEHAR FONT PARTNERS, PA lliE DESIGN AND DRAvVtNGS FOR THIS PROJECT ARE PROPERTY OF THIS ARCHITECT AND ARE PROTECTED UNDER THE COPYRIGHT PROTECTION ACT. I\) '" o ~ i > :r fJ, to> '" (J) \'J r r "--~ '-- " ~ ~ ~ ~- ::c !~ I ~ '" (:) m z .:. 0 ~ t m '" <> 0 z "" -Gl CO ... r---c c "'-...... ~ - f < \ \ \ f f ,< ~ £ f f \ < f 6075 SUNSET DRIVE SOUTH MIAMI. FL 33143 0 2017 BEHAR FONT PARTNERS, P A THE DESIGN AND DRAWINGS FOR THIS PROJECT ARE PROPERTY OF THIS ARCHITeCT AND ARE PROTECTED UNDER THE COPYRIGHT PROTECTION ACT . f ~ !!l » '" ~ '" ~ r ...... '--'--I..- '" E c ,- '" c' ::0 ~ I ~ :0 ~ m Z 0 -.... m "" ;., :0 6 c Z '"' -" '" "" ~ ---........ ,......, --...... ....... ...... - 6075 SUNSET DRIVE SOUTH MIAMI, FL 33143 0 2017 BEHAR FONT PARTNERS, P A THE DESIGN AND DRA'MNGS FOR THlS PROJECT ARE PROPERTY OF THIS ARCHITECT AND ARE PROTECTED UNDER THE COP'1RIGHT PROTECTION N:;T r :0 f ~ ill » :0 e; ~ (j) ~ r ...... ...... I.-. ~~ 8 " > :: ~. :AI ~~ I -lo. '" i-.J m z :.. 0 ~ t m '" <> 0 z w ~ " 0> ... ---....... ...... - 6075 SUNSET DRIVE SOUTH MIAMI, FL 33 143 02017 BEHAR FONT PARTNERS, P A THE DESIGN AND DRAWINGS FOR nns PROJECT ARE PROPERTY OF 11"115 ARCHrreCT AND ARE PROTECTED UNDER THE COPYRIGHT PROTECTION N;T. '" o f ! ~ :p ~ '" !i! (f) ~ r L----~ --.. I... ..... ,...,. ..... ..... ...... o.....w '" 6075 SUNSET DRIVE I I '" SOUTH MIAMI, FL 33143 en ~ r ::: ~ '" C 2017 BEHAR FONT PARTNERS, P A THE DESIGN AND ORA'MNGS FOR THlS PROJECT ARE PROPERTY OF THIS ARCHITECT AND ARE PROTECTED UNDER THE COPVRIGHT PROTECTION /4C.T. --'--L '-- " ~ ?~ ~ C' f~ ~': i:. ' ;;0 ~ I ..... '" ~ m z .:. 0 ~ t m '" 6 0 Z '" -C) co ... '""-..... -'-" '-" ...... 6075 SUNSET DRIVE SOUTH MIAMI, FL 33143 02017 BEHAR FONT PARTNERS. PA THE DESIGN AND ORAWNGS FOR THIS PROJECT ARE PROPERTY OF THIS ARCHITECT AND ARE PROTECTED UNDER THE COPYRIGHT PROTECTlONACT. '" i ~ !!( > ~ '" '" ~ en !l) r L-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ --0.....1 -... 6075 SUNSET DRIVE SOUTH MIAMI, FL 33143 C 2017 BEHAR FONT PARTNERS, P A THE DESIGN AND ORA'MNGS FOR THIS PROJECT ARE PROPERTY OF THIS ARCHrTECT ANO ARE PROTECTED UNDER THE COPYRIGHT PROTECTION N:.T. :0 o ~ ~ III ~ ~ ~ (J) ~ r ---L ~ m ~ "'Tl ::0 I ~ 16 I ~ I&; -; i "'Tl ::0 0 ~ z 0 ::0 -; I ~ m (f) -; r""' ""'- ;I ,..... ... '-- .,i!:..~ I ~. I...,; ~ I-I..ioi < m ~ "'Tl ::0 0 ~ (f) 0 C -; I m » (f) -; 6075 SUNSET DR IVE (J) SOUTH MIAMI , FL 33143 I); r 0 2017 BEHAR FONT PARTNERS. P A THE DESIGN ANO ORAI/IIINGS FOR THIS PROJECT ARE PROPERTY OF THIS ARCHfTECT AND ARE PROTECTED UNDER THE COPYRIGHT PROTECTION ACT. ..... '!'f""\--...-.=~ f" ] J J J J J J J J J J \ r l $ \ ~ \ ~ \ fJ \ \ ~ J i \ ----n_ --l f ~ LO , . -1 .. sw -10;r;H.s;r-._·_·_·_·_·, ..J -------.--I 7001 ~ , I ~ 6110 ~ 8 I 150 I ;0 v' I (J) 7019 5959 I 7031 ~ ~ , I Ol 7000 ~ I 1 01 L 1 -------6075 6193 6101 I I I .---1 , -TODD-MU 5 W 72ND 5T -f-·-·-~· .. -·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·I I I I I ... r-1'l 1--618-0 ----rr\ \ -~ \ ~ 5950 / City of South Miami-Zoning Map Site Map ZONING INFORMATION PROJECT NAME: PROPERTY ADDRESS CURRENT ZONING PROPOSED ZONING LOT NET AREA LOT OCCUPATION a. Lot Area b. Density (Residential) c. Lot Coverage d. Open Space BUILDING SETBACK a. Front SW. 72ND STREET (MAJOR STREET) b. Side S.W. 61ST AVENUE (MINOR STREET) c. Side S.W. 71ST STREET (MINOR STREED d. Interior Side BUILDING HEIGHT a. Min. Height b. Max. Height c. Max with Bonus d. Max. Heigh t (Feel) PARKING RESTAURANT 1 parking space per 100 SF of Patron Area 1 parking space per 300 SF of Non-Patron Area COMMERCIAL One space per 300 sq.ft. SUB-TOTAL RESIDENTIAL 2 parking spaces per Dwelling Unit.' 1 additional visitor parking space for every 10 Dwelling Units 'PARKING REDUCTIONS MIXED USE FACTOR TOTAL PARKING TOTAL HC PARKING (Included in Total) As per table 208.2 Flo rida Accessibilly Code Minimum Loading Berths PARKING BREAKDOWN Ground Level Second Parking Level Third Parking Level Fourth Parkng Level Intermediate Parking Level BONUS ALLOCATIONS (Article VIII 20-8.10) ACTION For every one (1) floor of residential use Develop Full Frontage w/ Street DesiQn as part of Pedestrian Walkwav Svslem 6075 SUNSET DRIVE 6075 SUNSET DRIVE TODD MU-4 & TODD MU-5 TODD MU-5 SEAL : 70,192 SF /1.611 AC. .. REQUIRED PROVIDED REMARKS 70,192 SF /1.611 AC. N/A 203 UNITS NO MAX. N/A 8,403 SF. ROBERT BEHAR AR No. 14339 1-4 Floors: None , 5-8 Floors : 20 '-0 ' 20'-0' 0'-0 " 1'-10" O'-{)" 5'-0" 0'-0" 3'-6" ~ t5 1= 2 Stories 4 Stories 8 Stories I 8 Stories 'r ~ 100'-0' 100'-0 ' & u * -'" l'l 2,452/100 = 25 SPACES 25 SPACES 1,226/300 = 5 SPACES 5 SPACES 5 0 ~ ~ 0 It 2,441 /300 = g SPACES g SPACES 39 SPACES 203 x 2 = 406 SPACES 'See Parking Reduction 203 / 10 = 21 SPACES ---303 P.S . -39 PS = 264 SPACES 264 P.S . /203 UNITS = 1.3 303 P.S. / 203 UNITS = 1.49 W w '" '" > ~ t; 0::: ~ 0 Ii ~ .... ~ i'; W it ~ en ~ * Z~ It ll! :::> '" en I 466 SPACES' OFF-STREET : 303 SPACES • Parking Reduction ON-STREET: 11 SPACES LO ~ ...... ~ 0 (0 ~ ~ 0 8 8 ~ z \1 3 LOAD ING SPACES (Over 200 dwelling Units) 3 * * ~ PROVIDED REMARKS 64 40 70 70 t1 I ~ ~ III 59 ~ TOTAL PARKING 303 " BONUS One (1) additional floor of residential use One (II additional flo or ZONING CHART I J J J J J J J J 1 j J AREA SCHEDULE (LEASEABLE -RETAIL) UNIT TYPE AMOUNT UNIT SF SEAL RESTAURANT 3,678 SF BET~ _______________ J ________________ ~~41~ _______ _ LEASEABLE TOTAL 2 6,119 SF Roberto Behar AR14339 AREA SCHEDULE (LEASEABLE -UNITS) UNIT TYPE Nota AMOUNT UNIT AVa SF UNIT Mil A 1BR 102 738 SF 50% B 2BR 72 1,077 SF 35% C 3BR 8 1,433 SF 4% STUDIO ST 14 566 SF 7% TOWNHOME TH 7 931 SF 3% UNIT TOTAL 203 100% AREA SCHEDULE (GROSS BUILDING) LEVEL aROUIREA GROUND FLOOR 57,399 SF 2ND LEVEL 61,642 SF 3RD LEVEL 27,925 SF 3RD LEVEL PARKING 26,068 SF 4TH LEVEL 27,925 SF 4TH LEVEL PARKING 26,068 SF 5TH LEVEL 54,554 SF MEZZANINE LEVEL PARKING 22,721 SF 6TH LEVEL 37,276 SF 7TH LEVEL 37,261 SF 8TH LEVEL 37,399 SF TOTAL GROSS 416,240 SF 1 j J J [ J J J U J J J 1 r -----~n_~ _._n_= .. =~ ________________________ ~ ________________ _ I I I I I I I I I t I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I VdlBILIlY jO'X 1() I I I I I I I I I I I I ;:i I <Ii I I I VISIBILIlY 1QX 10' I I I I I I I i ELEC.ROOM ~+~.j \IF>=~Ciiii~~ i I RESTAURANT ~I LOBBY SW. 72ND STR EET SUNSET DR IVE ~ ! ~I SEAL Roberto Behar AR14339 ~ z 0 G w ~ 'r S! ~ 0 0 ~ <r l!l z ::> 0 ~ <r .. W ~ 0 > :( t; 0::: ~ :r ~ 0 Q !l: ;;; ~ I-M ~ ..J 0 W u. I:: <r C/) ~ ~ 0 :;!; g: Z ::i: ~ :::> :r: ~ I- C/) :::> 0 g: 10 (/) ~ l- I'--<r ~ 0 ~ (0 z ~ 2i 0 :( z ~ ~ -: .. '" I ~ i ~ 0 1 1 I J J J 1 J j • j \~ \ \ -- i'i l iii l ~I ~I I I I ~ I I ;~ ! I -I "I<;- I ,~ I I ,~ I ,. ,..,. " ... "" " .. Sw. 71ST STREET =1= 40 PARKING SPACES $ElEV 'I"I !1 o O' "'..-"..- I-' r--: 10 ;I,a -". o o M_ ",~ 1-;1 ~'" 18 ·(t 10 ,., ,., "" ~I~F In = ~ = = = u o o n 7.60> 0 UNIT1 5" UNIT 24 ~hi i.~ !it PRIVATE .~~ ..... -', ..... TERRACE UNIT 14 UNIT 15 o '\4tii.\j:~r==1J==-li :~ l ~i!Ii1i;::=;:;=;;=;;;;;~~~L PRIVATE, ~~\ ~ ~ PRIVATE TERRACE 'l\~\ ~ ., TERRACE ~====~="==~1~~~~ ~~~~F==~====~ PRIVATE. ~ >-t 1-~ ;PRIVATE TERRACE ~"~ DOG PARK ~Tfj TERRACE -~~-"'"" E[Z~~~ TERRACE ~ ..... PRIVATElL PRIVATE UNIT 18 TE RRACE TERRACE t ~_..J;:!=fV1~ . ~==;r=\,,==U=N=--==1T:21:===:::!~P~~1"LI !!,.i'~IS~~'i ... ::~:::=U:N=IT=,=,=1d9==u_ /"==== ~1l=~UNIT11 0 PRIVATE TERRACE ~~ r'#tll' "'" b UNIT 16 ~ I = UNIT 17 ] o UNIT 23 ~ I 0 10 UNIT 2 ~ UNIT22 -0 .II a r UNIT 3 UNIT21 .II UNIT 13 o UNIT 12 o l "~. t} ~ \.l UNITS UNIT 7 UNIT 9 M UNIT 5 UNIT 6 UNIT 10 -- I I o I I I J--------PROPERTY LINE 235 .SCY I -----------------------.-------------------yJ ~I "'I ~I S W. 72ND STREET SUNSET DRIVE ~I ~I ~I SEAL Roberto Beh ar AR 14339 J j 1 ] J U tJ J J 01 0 1 ~I sw 71ST STREET ~I )jj l )jj l ~I ~I Q:O~ETI!AQ<+----______________ PROPE RJYb!NE236 .3l?' --______ --____ ---_____ -1° "y:Q:S_~BAC~ I STAJR*3 \~ \! \ \ : p=J ~. l ~, I ~ ~ I UI---- I ~ '" ! ~ IYI---- I ~ '" : ~ .,. I ~ '" 181---- I ~ >~ ! ~ ~, I 1J=1 15 I ~ 1'"" ,0 I~ 1<1. I UNIT 1 993 SF :== =10 == == 0 = (ru;~.i1i'r9 0 i7 UNrr24 507 SF UNrr23 656 SfJ r O UN rr 2 ( o r 993 SF UNrr3 994 SF h UNrr22 V 620 SF S-A~r. =10 F= = 0 = j>a ~ I"" =1= F= 70 PARKING SPACES sw 72ND STR EET SUNSET DRIVE r- =·0 = UNrr17 657 SF UNrr18 673 SF UNrr16 \ 656SF '- ( c. I UN IT 12 993 SF :: ~ : '" I : '" I I -----lB I '" I I ==iHI '" I I ------''--11 I '" i I I i ------lU i UNrr14 990 SF o o o I I ~ SEAL Roberto Beh ar AR 14339 j ] 1 1 J J J u u • J \ iJ l ~I ~I ~I I I I I ~ I o o o r UNIT 1 993 SF UNIT 2 993 SF UNIT 3 994 SF o .,. ! --- o '- F UNIT 24 507 SF --.. UNIT 21 I-' 636 SF c- D o \ o \ \ n S.w. 71ST STREET = = = r-o o ~ o =I~ o ,- o o 59 PARKING SPACES $ t.1ttlZMlr18Le...elP;]rkn'!ji ElEV. t 43 . r:t o o \ / \ I \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ OPEN TO / \ BELOW / \ / \ / \ / \/ /\ I \ I \ / \ / \ I \ I \ I \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / / / I o I.... [ o = o UNIT 17 657 SF UNIT1S 673SF o o UNIT16 r- 658 SF' " [ L. '" ! I rn-----,-I ". I I ----il ' ." ~ I .n ~ : .~ ! ! ." ~ I I r! T - I UNIT 14 990 SF I b UNIT 13 996 SF UNIT 12 993 SF o o o o ~ UNIT 20 ~ ~ ==-UNIT 19 G 729 SF [8: ~ 730 SF f~ 11 UNIT 4 ~<>J}, 1~SF J\b====~:=:~ ;~=.i:===="""f1Q,~'~I~~~F~1 1 UNIT 11 :..J I ~ 619 SF ~ = ~~==;r==~=j ===~~"=""',,;;;;;;:i;;;:';'~;;;'B;;"~;')==F ====J=rF =-.::::J=====~"d!rL L/'=t,=!~=61=6=SF=O=.l=",IJi'i'~! ~ T UNITS 1,02 1 SF UNIT 6 765 SF UNITS 1,0 13SF UNIT9 765 SF I I I -.." -; -I l{::::::::~~~=--....!,..~~=J~~~ ! -_t.;;~ I + ': _:ir:9:IDElAC~ 'k-"<" I L \ -.,It ~ -= 1 -==j~li<:iv E5THLEVEL I 1---·-----~---------~---J ; iJ~ --------. -. ----------. --_PR O!E~TY_Ll_NE ~llO -----.-------------------J ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ S W. 72ND STREET SUNSET DRIVE SEAL Roberto Behar AR14339 } 1 J J J J l J l J J J J Q:O:J1 EJ:!lAf!< i'i l ~I ~I b 6 S.w. 71ST STREET STAIR 13 I _---~---C:::J c:::J ---'--- b"..,=====u b POOL d C:::J c:::J : _-----------0 -[ [-0--------__ ._ ~======~ L _________________ ~ PRIVATE TERRACE UNfTl 1,329 SF o o UNfT 4 993 SF UNfT5 994 SF UNfT7 1,0'21 SF UNfT8 765 SF \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / "OPENTO / \ BELOW / \ / \ / \ / J< / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ / \ UNfT9 1,013 SF COMMON AREA 1,345 SF UNfT20 6SOSF UNfT11 765 SF UNfT 17 650 SF UNfT16 996 SF o UNfT 15 996SF 0 o I --r I ----------~ S.w. 72ND STREET SUNSET DRIVE ~I ~I ~I EB~~T':":A~"':': "::l~~~:":~"::l~~:::L:..:P--=O:::..O=L.,::D:..:E::..:C::..:K:...:.-._ SEAL Ro berto Behar AR14339 LO "'" o <0 J J J 1 lJ l 1 [ J L j UNIT 1 l ,329SF UNIT 3 649 SF UNIT 4 993 SF UNIT 31 1,000 SF SW. 71ST STREET ~ PROPERTY LINE 235.80' UNIT 19 68BSF UNIT21 509 SF UNIT 22 G58SF ~~~W UNIT 18 1,329 SF UNIT 17 650 SF 0 UNIT 15 996 SF 0 0 0 UNIT 13 616 SF 0 13 1 ~I ~I ~I --l -O':Q: SQB51S.. I 1m I~ "" I§ I~ w 1"'-a 12: --J ~I ~I ~I 'r § SEAL Roberto Behar AR14339 ~ z 0 ~ ll' I: ~ t 0 " w '" '" ~ z " 0 ~ ~ 0 ll' W ~ 0 > ~ ~ 0:: :z: ~ " '" 0 "' M ~ l-t") to .....J W u.. ~ ~ il' oo 0 « '" .. Z ~ ~ :::J :r: I l- (/) :::J 0 lO (/) !!l i!' ...... '" [t 0 l3 c.o z ~ 0 ~ z ~ w :z: ... ~ .,; '" ~ I;; it !z :r ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ » , ~ 0 ..... L C :.: '-~ ..... ;....."'-' ....... ~ ) \ lL o / ~ _-'-------_~ ____ 7 ~~ L \l: __ ::0 o o 11 -0 s;: Z " 0 0 ." ." ~ Z 0 ~ m 0 ~ _ 0 .... 6 ~ '"' -co ... ~ ·I~ : s ~ i"~ ~'ii ~ a 6/1'.,0" 13r.,.:... PROPERTY LINE 297.5 7' 6075 SUNSET DRIVE SOUTH MIAMI, FL 33143 0 2017 BEHAR FONT PARTNERS, PA THE DESIGN AND DRAWINGS FOR THIS PROJ ECT ARE PROPERTY OF THIS ARCHITECT AND ARE PROTECTED UNDER THE COPYRIGHT PROTECnON ACT. ~ I' 'I!' --, II I II Ii ' II Ii 110 0 II 1\ \ \ \ ~ I ~ I Jf \ 1& 4 00 0 00 \ ~ '" o ~ ~ " :;. ~ ~ !i [ W j 0.0.00.0. ~ If=-J I (f) !i! r I I ~ I 2 m J J J J J j J J J 1 j --------._--- SOUTH ELEVATION SCAlE : 1/16' -I'.Q' NORTH ELEVATION SCAlE: 1/16' -I'.Q' _l,!}I!-'j.~ -L~~1~ ~ Roof Ar£li \~Z. ~ ~. __ ~~c,-_~~~~~~'~ ___ R09F~~~ ~-M'-1 --rn~iiiiirl ----L~v;'-4~ ~ ----L~~1~~ Leve l 5-Fifth Level -----P~~!~~ Level 4-Fourth Level -----P~~1-~ SEAL Roberto Behar AR14339 ~ i5 t3 !5 II: .. 1< !II § ~ Iii 11 " 0 t !5 if W ~ > ~ ~ 0::: :r; <") ~ 0 """ ~ ~ r-..J ~ W u. ~ C/) ~ * ~ II: Z .. ~ ~ ::::> :x: ~ I- C/) :::l ~ 0 I.() (J) ~ I"-~ 0 I CO ~ ~ '" ~ ~ .: .. ui II: i 1< ~ ~ '" ~ il 0 ._-------_._- ) J J J J 1 J L J J 1 -x- EAST ELE VATION SCALE : 1/16'. 1'-0- ~I ::J I il ______ !tL _______________ _ ______ L'!YeI5 6\ 52'-0"'3' Level ~ F11Ih Level --------P~1J!~ Level 4-Fourth Level ________ pa~!_~ ~I ::J 1 il ----~----- r=~.=...;==-:::..;:---": -l ROOJArct!i~~~ ~ r---.---------,-----------·~~~~~------'--""7-'---~I • .._:=== _ --.-1 _ ROOFEl.J1I:L~ I 9Z-O" I -----t------ ----1----- _~ ____ I ___ - I -===r- ~ ;~1-5-----L - Level ~ Fifth Level I ~43'-o. ~"'.!!!!l _I---- Level 4-Fourth Level I ~~-8" __ Pa1!<iIJL -- I .... .J£yeL3 Par1<lng _ -j--~ __ .. "" 'V 24'-4 ' I' WEST ELEVAT ION SCALE : 1/16' -1'-0' ~~~~~::lt. _ -+ _ -L~-4~ ~ I -~ ---~~l-~ ___ I ___ Ll!Yel~, I 63'.:0" '-" ----1 ---L1f2'"!o~ ~ I ~==:;i;iiii;J",,!i ---1_--~~." ,. I 39'-8' \J' SEAl. Roberto Behar AR14339 ti " ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ > " t; 0:: M ~ 0 v " ...-~ M I-M l'i ..J W U. ~ CJ) ~ c{ Z ~ ~ :J J: I ~ CJ) ::) 0 LO en .. ~ I'-~ 0 ~ (0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :Q I ~ ! III ~ re 0 1 i J 1 J J J J J _ FLOORS BY RIGHT _ (1) ADDITIONAL FLOOR FOR EVERY (1) FLOOR OF RESIDENTIAL USE (1) ADDITIONAL FLOOR WI DEVELOPMENT OF FULL FRONTAGE WI STREET DESIGN AS PART OF PEDESTRIAN WALI<MIAY SYSTEM __ I --__ L~~,:~~ ~ __ L ___ L!!.v.~ 72 ':a"'J' I --t--__ L!!.v.16~~6\ 63'::o"'J .-j-----L~~':~8~' ~ t--__ L!!.ve I 3_~ 27'~ Diagramatic Section SCALE : 1/1 6" ~ 1'·0" SEA L Roberto Bel1ar AR14339 w > 0:: ,....~ ....... ;;; I-~ wu.. C/)~ Z~ ::>~ C/)o LO I'-o c.o (/) ] j J u u u I J l J I J k j FLUID APPLIED WATERPROOFING MEMBRANE (VULKEM 350 /351 R SANDED TO REJECTION TO ACCEPT srucco APPUCA nON) APPLIED BENEATH GLAZING SYSTEM TREMPROOF 6100 HOT APPLIED WATERPROQFII>JG SYSTEM WITH DRAINAGE MAT AS PAATOF ASSEMBLY CONC . WAll SEPARATION FABRI C 2" POLLUTION CONTROL MEDIA . 6" MIN . LAYER OF CRUSHED GRAVEl UNDER FILTER FABRI C STRUCTURAL lIGHlWElGHT CONC . TOPPING ON PRE-FABRICATED DRAINAGE COMPOSITE ON HOT FlUID APPLIED WA TERPROQFING MEMBRANE r"POOlDEc-K -l L ______________ ._1 '. 5/8" PAINTED SMOOTH STUCCO WlTH ON CONC . '. 4'-PVC PERFORATED FLUID APPLIED WATERPROOFING MEMBRANE (VULKEM 350 /351 R SANDED TO REJECTION TO ACCEPT STUCCO APPUCA nON) APPUED BENEATH GlAZING SYSTEM TREMPAOOF 6100 HOT APPLIED · WATERPROOFING SYSTEM IfoIlTH DRAIN AGE MAT AS PART OF ASSEMBLY CONC WALL SEPARATION FABRIC . 2' POlLUll0N CONlROL MEDIA 6" MIN . LAYER OF CRUSHED GRAVel UNDER FIL TEA FABR IC STRUCTURAL lIGHlWElGHT CONC . TOPPING ON PRE·FABRICATED DRAIN AGE COMPOSITE ON HOT FLUID APPLIED WATERPROOFING MEMBRANE -I FABRIC OVER DRAINAGE ROCK -WRN UP & WRAP AROUI>JD STRAINER BENTONITE WATERSTOP CONT . TURN WATERPROOFING UP \ S'MIN . o PLANTER DET. AT 5TH ~~~~=~'O" 5/S' PAINTED SMOOTH -SWCCO WITH ON CONC WALL ·2" MULCH LAYER " . " . 4'-PVC PERFORATED (2) PLANTER DET. AT 2ND ~~~~~o. HOPE ROOT BARRIER BOARD WITH TERM IN ATION BAR PRE·FABRICATED DRAINAGE COMPOSITE ON TORCH APPLIED 2·Pl Y BITIJMEN MEMBRANE ." .. 4'-PVC PERFORATED FILTER FABRIC OVER DRAINAGE ROCK - WRN UP & WRAPAROUND STRAINER 2" POLLu n ON CONTROL MEDIA. SEPARAll0N FABRIC . 6" MII~. LAYER OF CRUSHED GRAVEL -UNDER FIL TEA FABAIC BEN TONITE WATEASTOP CON T. TURN WATERPROOFING UP WNl. S' MIN . PRECAST CONC . PAVERS ON LI GHT WEIGH T CONCRETE OVER LIQUID APPLIED WATERPROOFING L._ Sl<RUe I LIHAL UGHTWE IGHT CONC. TOPPING ON PRE·FABRICATED DRAINAGE COMPOSITE Ol~ UOUID APPLIED WA TEA PROOANG PLANTER DETAILS FIF TH LEVEL (RECREATIONAL) SCALE : N.T.S . SEAL : L_~_:.....:..:.....~. _____ _ W > 0::: Cl ~ I- W u' CJ) ,. " ::; Z I ':; :::::> a VI CJ) LO ,..... 0 (!) DATE 09·20·20 17 PRO JECT NO 17·038 DRAW)NG NAME SHEET NO A-4.0 ~ z 0 " " ~ I ~ ill ~ 0 1! " 1! ~ ~ a ;[ i ~ ~ ~ ~ 2; it ~ t; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 z i ~ ~ ~ ~. ffi ~ ~ !Z f2 a: m ~ 0 .. 1/ s. W. 71st STREET ----(KATHERINE STREET·p,e. 13, PG. 62)---------- (50· PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAy) \ IIIIII--r-m 1- 6n 6 n 6 _ __.J_.1_ 'I """ " .., S. V:/.. (!u~~~ D~l~EET ---- (PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY) -------------'---I -l TREE DISPOSITION PLAN Scale: 1"=20'-0" &~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ T~ ~ij:knName ~~:;:~~:~~~~;;;; DB~J~~t~&-H~!$~J!!L' sp_~_~ ~£p11!!~ ~~"" ~_ ~ 2 live Oak Quercus vir iniana 5 16 13 133 Good Remain Live Oak Quercus virginiana '* 16 38 Good Remain 4 live Oak Quercus vir iniana 16 64 Good Remain ~'i ._-~--.-.--~;~~---------""--"'--'1-'~ .,.-+s.-. ---+--""""-----.--.~~ --"'-~--'*---._-::~ _....2....~~~_Q~~ ... ----Quercus~_'!£...... ___ . ___ -~ --r--~,.o;6:·-----"-~--. ------~,3643 ------"N--"---.----RRe,mm-~,nn"-'"-- 8 live Oak Quercus v[(9/nlana 6;5 13 .. 9 Uve Oak Quercus v}(giniona 6 16 10 79 N Good Remain 10 live Oak Quercus v!!Hjniana 1 16 18 254 N Gpod Remain 11 Umbrella Tree Schill/era actinoph ffa 14,10,11 35 20 n/a -Invasive Gbod Remove 12 Umbrella Tree Sch!ll.'era oCfin.£ILh 110 9,h 35 15 n/a -Invasive Good Remove 13 Umbrella Tree 5che 'flero octin!!E...h I/o 5,~,9 35 20 n/a -Invasive Gbod Remove _-----1,45 -·-~umm.:bbrree',I'!'.aTT'!r-eeee--.. ~~~1!!? .-------9,7,5,13_. ___ .. ~ 3 35 5 --+----.-2205""---. n/a -Inva~~~. ___ --.. -------.!!N~-Good Remove Sch!llJero actin!!£.h 110 7,12,7,12,6,7,7 n/a -Invasive Good Remove 16 Umbrella Tree Sche 'jlera odinoph 110 7,10,10 35 15 n/a -Invasive Good Remove ____ .!2..___ SjgnaturE.~~. ~Jusi~~._. ____ . ____ .m._.!!L~~ __ "" __ .}Q m ___ .. ~_3_0_. _____ ?!#. r-----~----*~~ ___ .. ___ Remove __ . 18 Sabal Palm Sobal a/merta 25 10 79 N Fair Remove 19 Sabal Palm Saba/palmetto 1l 25 10 79 Good Remove 20 Sabal Palm Saba/palmetto 10 25 10 79 Good Remove 21 Sabal Palm Saba/palmetto 9 25 10 79 Good Remove 22 23 Umbrella Tree Umbrella Tree Scheff/era actina h //0 Schefflera octinoph 110 . _____ ... )§ ____ Sabal Palm._. __ . m • Saba/palmetto .:--_ 27 rv'Iahogan Swietenia mohogom 28 Mahogany Swietenia mohoganl 29 Mahogal.!'L Swietenia mahogani 30 Mah()gany Swieten/o moh(Jgoni 31 Maho8itny Swietenia mahagoni 32 MahC!.~~!!i-Swletenfa mah!1Jl(jni U,S 5 25 15 n/a -Invasive Good 11,8 25 15 n/a -Invasive Good Remove Remove lO~3-?E~~-ks----... -. ~~ ~-.. ------*-~~: ~ ~:::jfr;~-·----~ -::'i:c:"i;d~_-t::"':~"':~::'-- __ ._~_._._ ~_ . __ ~ ____ ~_..JL __ .. _ .. _ .. _______ ~ ... _______ ._~_~_ §,.~~d IS 25 2S 491 N Pbor Remove 26 40 40 1256 PPor Remove 28 40 45 1590 Gbod Remove 18 40 30 707 Y Fair Remove .. --.. -~---.-.--~-~ :~ -~ . ------~ -------f----~----::~~~:-- 33 Mah~.8-'~nY Swletenla mohgi!9ni 14.27 30 35 962 F~jr Remove 34 Mah~ Swietenia moh~n; 33 30 28 615 Fair Remove 35 Mah~ Swietenia mah~nl 3~ 30 40 1256 Felr Remove .----T,--~~-~~~-~-. ::~;;:::k~ .mm m~~._ .. -----¥s-m-~-__i2-.--------~ _._"m __ +_.~ ~ .. -.--~~~~- 38 Pygmy Date Palm Phoenix roebelenii 4,4.4 10 12 113 N Good Remove 39 Mahogany Swletenia mah~ni 26 30 40 1256 Y Fair Remove 40 Sabal Palm Sabal a/metto 16 15 15 177 :F~.ir Remove 41 Sabal Palm Sabol afmetto 14 15 10 79 Gbod Remove 42 Mahogany Swietenla mohogon! 20,lt-,22 30 30 707 Pl>or Remove -.~--~ -._-.-~~~y._._._ ~~~~~~--.. ~~~~-~~!~~.!.~-•• '-"'Ts"-'---.~*.~ -..... -----*~ .. __ . .-l! .-.-.-..... ~~I;···-··---~-.. ---- 4S Mahojany' Swietenia moh0.9.oni 161619 ___ ?_f!_ .. _. _J~ ... ____ ._._ .. _~ .. ~~ Y Poor Remove ---~~~~r;p~e ... -... ~ ~0j;ra'----.. -........ ~~---. 10 15 177 "·--·--··N---~ .. -R~~~;;-'- 47 Mahogan Swietenio mohogonl 10,9,13 20 18 254 Y ppor Remove 48 Umbrella Tree Schf!lJlero octino h /fa 3,4,7,3,7 25 12 nla -lnvas1ve Fair Remove 49 Sabal Palm Saba.1palmetto 1;2. 8 8 50 hlr Remove ~. Sabal Palm Saba/palmetto 18 . __ .~_!Q._~ f-----------.-.!Q ._. ___ lJ ------··-~y···-EFa.','rr--·~··-.-~R-,emmoo.:~- 51 "-' Mahl?_8.an Swletenla mahq.g-~~/·-·----·-16,iliw-· 22 26 531 HO 52 Sabal Palm SabC1.[pafmetto 14 U 10 79 N Good Remove Phor Remove 55 Mahoga!2t.. Swietenia mahagoni 30 15 47 1734 Poor Remove Total Can~ Removed= 19432.B2 Total Specimen Can~Removed= 15521 Total Specimen Canopv to be Mi!!Lated total canoDv removed multi lied by 2)= 31042 Total Number of Shade Tree 1 500 It replacement canopv oer tree reQuired for mitigation 10 OR ,.,. __ .. __ ,.,._1. ....... L_ ..... ... L ................ L SYMBOL LEGEND (~l Tree to Remove &~~v'-'-~/v-v-v-v-v-v-""""~ 8 Tree to Remain cn J IL~~ 1-:::1 _~ s~h :::te iii zzh~ S2~~~f __ t:::l!, ~QgH 19J W > 0::: z 0 ..J :5 u. !l. I-:E z W 0 « E C/) :E CI) 0 Z J: !l. I-CI) :::> ::> 25 C/) 0 w en w I.() a:: I- "-0 (0 J Revisions: Date: By, JJ.ArCmynrq 1IJU01L J<YL Seal: Lie. , lAOOOO889 : Member. A.S.LA I I Drawing: Tree DlsposItlon Plan I I Date: 1011012017 NORTH I Scale: See Left i Drawn by. TGW I Sheet No.: I ~ i I TD-1 I I ! Cad Id.: 2017-060 ! [ /,\ --v-,,-~--~""'.] 9 STREET TREES --- REQUIRED, ADDITIONAL 1 TREE TO COUNT TOWARDS lOT TREE REQUIREMENTS ~;--"--~ UJ ~ I- (f) ..-- CD S (f) LOBBY 1 343SF -< RE1AIL -........r-.. V--~-"v" :::-v-:::-v---~~..-'--........,----v---v---_......r_--'V~~__V~-- . i SI&' . i:~~~ il~i;.I:[ •. j~!::i.,'vv-l " r·······0~c .. 8····~~~~N~;;~T~j~:~~:;:"::j --........... --""'--/>.......-.../'....-/-.....-/'-...,./, ___ A........-/'......~/'_., __ ~~./'......._....A... __ -'"'-.,_~~/' .... _/"'-_~ . ./'-....... __ "'--./'-......../'..........~..._/"'__....~_""--..~c~_A...._/'--~~ /" FIRST FLOOR LANDSCAPE PLAN Scale: 1 "=20'-0" SHEET INDEX: L-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN L-2 LANDSCAPE PLAN L-3 LANDSCAPE PLAN L-4 LANDSCAPE PLAN TD-1 TREE DISPOSITION PLAN /,\ ;~M~~:r~~~~;M~~;~ • 33,897 SF OF TREE CANOPY BEING j REMOVED FROM SITE REQUIRING 1 TREE PER 500 SF = 70 TREES MITIGATION THROUGH TREE PLACEMENT CANNOT BE MET ON SITE SO A PAYMENT INTO THE TREE FUND , WILL BE MADE OF $35 592 04 ~ ""--""--~~-".......A.._.A... ""'-...A... .............. --'"'-........ .A....~ .... LANDSCAPE LEGEND Information Required to be Permanently Affixed to Plan Zoning Distnct: TODD MU·5 OPEN SPACE A Square Feet of open space reqwed. as indicated on site plan Net lot area::; sf:r:~%= sf B Square Feet of parklng 101 open space required as Indicated on Slteplan Nel Lot Area....1&!!. acres 70192 S f REQUIRED PROVIDED No outslde/ground-levelparkJngspaces~:r:tOsf per parking spaces = N/A ~ C Totalsl of landscaped open space required by Chapter 33 A+B= ~ ~ LAWN AREA CALCULATION A ~ total s f of landscaped open space reqUired by Chapter 33 8 Ma:r:IrTMJmlawn~ea(sod)permitted=~%:r:~sf = TREES A No treesrequrred per net lot acre Less e:r:lstlng nuiTDer of trees meeting minimum requrrements ~trees:r:netlotacres= B % Palms Allowed No trees requlred)( 30% = Palms = 21 Palms as Street Trees = 1 1 C % Natives Reqlllfed No trees prOVided x 50% :; D Street trees (maximum average spacing of 30' 0 C ) /,\-'-'" _35 (38~~ ~-( 31 -V.~ ~~I Palms to Not Count Towards MI: R, ~-__ 22 __ J'--.-,./'--.- ~llnearfeetalong72ndStreet= __ 8__ __8· __ ~llnearfeetalong61stAve= __ 9__ __9 __ ~llnearfeetalong71stStreet= __ 7__ __7 __ Total Street Trees= __ 24__ __24 __ E Street trees located directly beneath power hnes (maximum average spacing of25'oc) __ hnear feet along streel/25 = ~ ~ F Tolal Trees ReqUIred A + 0 + E =.......§L Tota/Trees SHRUBS A No trees required )( 10 = No of shrubs allowed 8 No shrubs allowed x 50% = No of native shrubs required __ 59__ __6_2_· _ ~~ ~ _4_0' __ ~~./'-- SEE LANDSCAPE ·EXISTING TREES TO COUNT TOWARDS REQUIREMENT PER SECTION 20-4 5 F 4c LANDSCAPE LIST ,------------------------------------------------------------- o 6 o 12 o 4 6 2 9 o 6 9 6 8 :_~~j;l~.r:'~~. !~.~~~.~. SPANISH STOPPER ~I.~.~~~~_~~~_ ~~_~!p_i_~~~ .. JAPANESE BLUEBERRY ·!lex cassine DAHOON HaLLY D--' ~!9~~~!nj~E~!"ll~!!'_ JAPANESE PRIVET Phoenix sylvestris SILVER DATE PALM TREES ···i64~~~atalsTREETTREEI ·Sabal palmetto [STREET TREE] SABALPALM' ·Ouercus virginiana .!~_!~~~I __ !~~_~J LIVE OAK ·~_~_~r~~.~ vi~_~jniana [~_T~!=ET TR!=E] LIVE OAK Veilchia monlgomeryana 'Double' DOUBLE MONTciOMERYPALM V_~.i.~?_~i_~ ~?~.~~~~_~~~~_~._!~ip.!=' TRIPLE MONTGOMERY PALM .... 1.0:.HTX 4'SPR,.2:'. CAL F.G., FULL TO BASE 12'·14· HT .• STANDARD, 2" CAL ... I F.G. ... tQ:J:IJ. X~' ~PR. 2" CAL. F.G. _t9_'Jn·)sJ.Q:.~F~R" .. ?.': ~~~. MULTI TRUNK, F.G. 10' C.T. F.G. 20' D.A. HT. MIN -jA.~Jc.ijEpjj:r~ 20' OA HT., 6' GW, SMOOTH .. ·":G., MATCHED HTS. , f~HT. X 20' SPR, 12" CAL. T2'110:S SPlt2" CAL. F.G. 20' OA HT. MIN .. DOUBLE F.G .. STAGGERED. 20' OA HT. MIN., TRIPLE F.G., STAGGERED. .. SHRUBS AND GROUNDCOVERS SYMB~L QUAN. c({' 202 CI/,\ 88 FM HP PN SV ZP LAWN 763 141 163 652 9 As ReqUired PROPOSED MATERIAL _~I~~i_~ __ ~~~!~!~ .. SMALL LEAF ClUSIA ·_~.~~y~~~.~.I.a.~~~_!~~_~~ __ ·_~~_~ .. !!p' RED TIP COCOPLUM Ficus mjcroc~.~~~ '~~~.~~ Is~and' GREEN ISLAND FICUS ·H~~~~~~ p.a~~n~ '~~~p.acl' DWARF FIRE BUSH ·.':'~X~~~~.~.,~~~.osa WILD COFFEE Schefflera arboricola 'Trinette' --------------....... , VARIEGATED SCHEFFLERA ~~-~-~!~ I?~-~jl.~ COONTIE ~.!e~~I~J,!h~~ ~~~u.r:a.~~~l!m 'Floralam' ST. AUGUSTINE GRASS • DENOTES NATIVE SPECIES .. DESCRIPTION 24" HT. X 24" SPR 124·' O.C . 3 GAL 24" HT. X 24" SPR./24" D.C. 3 GAL 15" HT. X 15"SPR.' 15" D.C. .... :iGAL ...... 18" HT.X 18"SPR. {18" D.C 3 GAL 24" HT. X 24" SPR./24" D.C. 3 GAL. 18" HT. X 18" SPR./18" D.C. 3 GAL .. 18" HT. X 18" SPR. 3 GAL. . ..... SOLID EVEN SOD NORTH ~~ ill > 0:: o I- ill CI) Z ::> CI) LO I"-o CD Revisions' Seal' Uc. II LAOOO0889 Member AS L.A ~ « ~ I I- ::l o (j) z ::s [L UJ [L t§ 00 Cl z ::s 0:: o 9 LL I- 00 0:: u:: Dale: By: ~.l!,;.)).. DraWing First Floor Landscape Plan Date 08108(2017 Scale See Left Drawn by TGW Sheet No L-1 Cad Id 2017-060 0-0 SETBACK SW 71STSTREET PI30Ps~TY ~INJ 236 35 -----------. _._._. ------------....... . ff'";;;;;''''''','';;';''''''''' ;i";~"';;;';;''''''!'''''''''"_-... ''''!' .... ..,.... ... ''''' ..• "",my"",'."""," "'""".......... 'DO'" "","";";;.x;:,;;;;;:.;.nni,,,",;;on:;;;:m;;;;;;.n;uy>;;,,,· . ,,, "1 i ., "i i" ;; '1' . ~ :-.. • UN 12 993 SF \. .•. 11 .... _---, • l~. ! Ii :_~ UNIT 6 765SF 40 PARKING SPACES • 1 UNIT 7 1 (113SF • PROPERTY LINE 235 8'~' S W 72N:;STREE I SUNSET DRIVE UNIT 8 1,(i13SF SECOND FLOOR LANDSCAPE PLAN Scale: 1"=20'-0" ...... c.~.Jlc ......... = •• • UNI19 765 SF UNIT 13 99(· SF UNIT 10 1 010 SF G o 00 SETBACK SYMBOL -I:lU.N'l. OLL 10 0 6 0 12 () 4 $ 6 $/i 2 ~ 9 0 6 () 9 !0) 6 {jJb 8 SYMB~L aU!\N. CGt 202 CI Li\ 88 FM 763 HP 141 PN 163 SV 652 ZP 9 LAWN As ReqUired LANDSCAPE LIST . _~~_l!_G~~!~_-.~~~~~~ ... SPANISH STOPPER .. ~!~~.~~~~~~_~ __ ~~~~p.~~~.~ ... JAPANESE BLUEBERRY *Uex cassine .......... _._----_._--------------. DAHOON HOLLY _~_i_G~~~!:l_'!l ~p..i?'.l.i~.~~ JAPANESE PRIVET Phoenix sylvestris SILVER DATE PALM TREES *Roystonea elata J~!_~_~~_!_!_~._~E ... ] .. B9y,efE.A(M . *Sabat palmetto (STREET TREE] -SABAi--PALM -. .. ~9~_c:~~~~_~~g.j.'.l.t.~.~~ J~,!:~_~~!_ ,!:R_~~J . LIVE OAK __ ~9~~~~~~_Y.~~Q!~j~_na _ t~!~_~~_!.T~.~E] LIVE OAK Veitchia montgomeryana 'Double' DOUBLEMONTGOMERYPACM EiiCRlP1lQIi- la'HT, X 4'.SPR,. 2." CAL F.G., FULL TO BASE ..... 12'·14' HT .• STANDARD, 2" CAL F.G. .10' . .HT·.X.4"SPR·2".C;!\!,. F.G. 10' liT, X 10' SPR.,.2" CAL MULTI TRUNK, F.G. 10'CT F.G. 20' OA HT. MIN. FA . .Mi\Ji;Jif.p}jj~ 20' OA HT." 6' GW" SMOOTH F.G., MATCHED HTS. m.' .~2~HT. X 20' SPR, 12" CAL. . .. I T2"lfTl(5 sprt 2~CAL." F.G. 1:0' OA HTyl.N,DOUBLE F.G., STAGGERED. ... ~~!~_~~.j~ .~~~~_~_~~_~ry_~.r:!~_:.-~.ip.I.~~_ 20' O.A. HT. MIN., TRIPLE TRIPLE MONTGOMERY PALM F.G" STAGGERED. SHRUBSANDGROUNDCOVERS PROPOSED MATERIAL DESCRIPTION Clusia guttifera SMALL LEAF CLUSIA ~~~.IJ~_~~~!~_~.~~.~~~~~.:~~~}ip· RED TIP COCOPLUM ~~~~~_~_j_~~_~~~~p..~_.:~~~_~.~ __ I.~_~~_~~: GREEN ISLAND FICUS _~~~~_~_I!_~ P~~~~.~ -,.~~.~pact· DWARF FIREBUSH ~.~_~y.~~_~~~ -~.~~~~!:I .. WLDCOFFEE ~~~~.~_~_~~.~_~~?~i_~_~J_a -'.!~~.~.~e· VARIEGATED SCHEFFLERA . __ ~.?~~i.~.~~!!1na CDONTIE _~~~~_~!~p~~~~.~~.~~.~~~~~l:l_~_:E!~r~~~~.' ST. AUGUSTINE GRASS 24" HT. X 24~ SPR./24~ C.C. 3 GAL. 24" HT. X 24" SPR./24" O.C 3GAC" 15" HT. X 15" SPR 115" O.C. 3GAC 18" HT. X 18" SPR.' 18" C.C ...... 3 GAL. 24" HT. X 24" SPR./24" O.C. 3 GAL. 18" HT. X 18" SPR/18" D.C. 3GAL.· . 16"HT.X16"SPR. 3 GAL. SOLID EVEN SOD • DENOTES NATIVE SPECIES NORTH ~~ w > 0:: 0 I- W (J) Z :::> (J) LO I'- 0 (0 Revisions: Seal Uc. 1/ LA0000889 Member AS L.A CJ)o. ~ .... ::> ~ ...JO ~ :::::>0:: E :::t:(!) ~ E ~ 8 ~ c ~f ~~ ~"§; H z ::5 CL w ...J CL U. <{ u ~ (J) Cl <t: z ~ ::5 I 0:: I-a => a ...J 0 u. C/) Cl z a u w (J) Dale By: ~~ DraWing Second Floor landscape Plan Date 08108/2017 Scale See Left Drawn by TGW Sheet No L-2 Cad Id 2017-060 UNIT 7 1.021 S~ UN'i E 76ssr UNli9 1013SF /\ FIFTH FLOOR LANDSCAPE PLAN Scale: 1 "=20'-0" UNIT 10 1013SF UNli11 765SF COMMON Al'iEA 1,345SF U!'JIT 19 1329SF ", 't:' o 6 o 12 o 4 * 6 ~9 8 6 () 9 !D 6 8 LANDSCAPE LIST ~-~~-~.~.~~~.-!.?-~~-~~-- SPANISH STOPPER ~I.~~~~~.'P~~ ~~_~p!_e_~s JAPANESE BLUEBERRY 'lIex cassine ~!g~.~.~~_I)).l~.p'~~!~!J~ JAPANESE PRIVET Phoenix sylvestris silVER bATE PALM TREES "Royslonea elata {STREET TREE] Ri5YAC~ALM ·Sabal palmetto (STREET TREE] SABiiLpiiLM ~~~~~_?t!~.~~~~i~!~~_~_ r~!~~~T .!~~~I LIVE OAK _~_9.~~~.~.~ __ ~~~~!~!~~_~__ !~!~~_~T.'!!3~~L. LIVE OAK Veitchia montgomeryana 'Double' DOUBLE MONTGOMERY PALM ~~~~~~~_~_~~!~_~_~~ry~"~_~ ::rr!p'I.~' 10'HTX4'SPR,.2."C.AL F.G., FULL TO BASE 12'-14' HT., STANDARD, 2" CAL. I· F.G. 1.Q~HL X ~r§p.R-_·_ ?~' q~ .. F.G. 10'1:fT.)( 10'SP~., 2~ CAL. MULTI TRUNK, F .G. 10' C.T. F.G. 20' O.A. HT. MIN. ... J.G., MA .CHED IlTS .. 20' O.A. HT .• 6' GW, SMOOTH FG,MATCHEDHTS .. 32' HT. X 20' SPR., 12" CAL. .. F:G. F.G. 20' O.A. HT. MIN., DOUBLE F.G., STAGGERED. 20' O.A. HT. MIN" TRIPLE ..... ..... @) ~~~-L ____ -L~T~R~IP~LE~M~O~NT~G~O~M~E~R~Y~P~AL~M~ ________________ ~F~.G~.~,S~T~A~G~G~E~RE~D~. ______ ___ SYMB9,!-QUAN CG 202 CI6\ 88 FM ( 763 HP 141 PN 163 SV 652 ZP 9 LAWN As ReqUired SHRUBS AND GROUNDCOVERS PROPOSED MATERIAL Clusia guttifera \_ .... _- SMALL LEAF CLUSIA __ :~~ry,~_~~~~~~.l:'.?..i.c.~.~.~.~~_~_~.:rip' RED TIP COCOPLUM _~~~~.~!:~.c:'.~~~_~_-'~~::~ __ I_~I_~_~~: GREEN ISLAND FICUS :~_~~.~!!~.P.~.~:~~_::ompact' DWARF FIREBUSH ~_~~~~~"':l"~~~.~~.~~~a IMLD COFFEE ~.~~.~~~~.':l .. ~~.':l.~~~!~_::!"~i_'.1_":!!~: __ _ VARIEGATED SCHEFFLERA ~~~.~!~.p_umila COONTIE _?!~.~_~~~p.~.~~ ~_.s_~_~_':l_~~_~~_':l~ _:~!~! ~~~m' ST. AUGUSTINE GRASS DESCRIPTION 24" HT. X 24" SPR./24" D.C. 3 GAL. 24" HT. X 24" SPR./24" O.C. .... 3GAC. ..... 15" HT. X 15" SPR./15" D.C. 3 GAL. 18" HT. X 18" SPR./18" O.C. . 3 GAL. 24" HT. X24" SPR./24" O.C 3 GAL 18" HT. X 18" SPR./18" O.C. 3 GAL 16" HT. X 16" SPR. 3 GAL SOLIO EVEN SOD • DENOTES NATIVE SPECIES NORTH ~~ w > 0::: 0 I- W en Z ::> en LO "" a CD ReVIsions JI""':'''"'~'''' Seal Uc. tI LAOOOU889 MEmber ASlA ..J U. ~ « ~ I f-::> 0 If) z « ..J c.. UJ c.. « u (f) 0 z :5 e:: 0 0 ..J u.. I I-u.. u:: Date By. ~J.!1i!:. DraWing Frith Floor Landscape Plan Date 08108/2017 Scale See Left Drawn by TGW Sheet No L-3 Cad Id 2017-060 7.:<. ]:.f! PT PI'~E WOOClST.o.KEOR"" PLANTING DETAIL AT BUMP OUT DONOT OJT CENTRIIlLEADER TH.N BR"-"ICHES BY ~%. RETAI~. NA TURII~ SHAPE OF PLAN1 PAlin AU CU1S OVER 1!r DIAMETER IM1H TREE PAINl ~. BLACK Vl£LLINGTO!1 1/2 v~c:t ~ 'NYLONTAPE ~/~/ ~~~~JRLAP FROM ToP or / .. / / 3-MULCH LAYER GRADE '/1,' / / . / 2 LAYER OF NEW TOPSOIL , <;/··~I:~~'~R;'2·~aPT PI',£ WOOD STAKE OR .,' RE·8AR 2.0- LONG POSITION TO SECUREL Y STABiLlZE1REE THIN BRANCHES BY ~5% RETAlrJ NII1URAL SI{/\PE OF h.ANT -PAINT ALL WTS alER 4 DIA IMTHTREEPAII'T.DQ NOT QJT CENTRAL LEArER TREES OF &AII'E SPECIES TO BE "".A T(.HED ItJ GRo.VTH O,ARACTER GUY V.lRE· .12 OOUB~E STRAND TW,STEO· VPM' TWCE ARDlmo TREE TRUN" WlTH TWO-PLY RUBBER HOSE AT ALL POIIHSOF CONTAC1 ATTACH WRE TO STMfS 4'EARTHBERM" 3 MULCH LAYER /" GRADE "A" 2 lAYEROfNEWTOPSOIL/ BIIC!(FILLSOlc ... EXISTlI~G SUBSOIL ,.- REMOVE BURLAP FROM TOP OF ROOT BALL ~"III,IMUM 2 .:'" ) 6 f 1 PINE I'\QOO STAKES OR'5 RE·8AR TWO PER TREE·POSITIO"TO SECliRELYSTABILtzETREE SMALL TREE PLANTING DETAIL TYPICAL TREE GUYING DETAIL BLACK V'£LlIl,GTON j WDENVlONTAPf TRUNK, / . BRACERS ~.//: C:ROSSMEt/BER A C '" PLANT MATERIALSKALL NOT BE PRU"EDPRiOR TO INSTAUATION DlSTANCE-lOCEmERlINE WLlVARYACCORolNGTO SPECIESA~mHABlTAT OF GROWTH SO THAT MATURE PLMlTS'MLl NOT OVER LAP DlSTAtlCEBEn-.£ENPl..ANTS SHOULDBEF.o.RENOUGHTOAlloW PLANTS TO RE1o.CH MATURE S'ZE WlTHOUTINTERFERINGVIHH GROWTHQFADJAC(r.(TPl..Am MATERIALS ":,TRUCTURAL' SOl! ROOTME.t:.UM AS PRo',lID€D BY ATLAS UtlDffiHAADSCAP£UP10 BUILDII~G OR ROAD p"L.o.rm~m SOl! AS COMPACTED FILL TO PER SPECS STA8'LlZETREE ", FOOTPAD WFI.AP(5)LAYERSOF BUpRo~:r ~ ~~~~~~ " 2 X 4" CROSSMEMBERS NAI~ED TO BRACES :·;··(7·~';";vm· • BRACERS IN -X" : SHAPE NAILED : TDGElHER(we <leta,' ~t>ove) n-ROOT n<.I.l """ ~~ ~~j ~~LBii~:~;J~~~~ \ UNIFORMTY 3" MUL01ASSPEClFIE.O OVER AU PLANTING BEDS \ EXISTING SUBSOiL ... olno SIDEW.o.LK STRUCTURES TH'IC4L ClIR!lM10GUTT[R STRUCTURAL SOIL I SIDEWALK DETAIL FOR SMALL TREES AND PALMS CURVED TRUNK PALM PLANTING DETAIL TYPICAL SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL TYPICAL CONTAINER SPACING DETAIL PLANTING NOTES: -All plant material is to be Florida Number 1 or better pursuant to the Florida Department of Agriculture's Grades and Standards for Nursery Plants. -All plants are to be top dressed with a minimum 3" layer of Melaleuca mulch, Eucalyptus mulch or equaL -Planting plans shall take precedence over plant list in case of discrepancies. -No changes are to be made without the prior consent of the Landscape Architect and Owner-Additions and or deletions to the plant material must be approved by the project engineer- -Landscape Contractor is responsible for providing their own square footage takeoffs and field verification for 100% sad coverage for all areas specified, -All landscape areas are to be provided with automatic sprinkler system which provide 100% coverage, and 50% overlap. -All trees in lawn areas are to receive a 24" diameter mulched saucer at the base of the trunk. SOD NOTES: -Sad is to be grade "A" weed free. -All areas marked "LAWN" shall be solid sodded with St. Augustine 'Floratam' solid sad. See limit on plan. All areas marked 'Bahia Grass' shall be solid sodded with Paspalum. -Provide a 2" deep blanket of planting soil as described in planting notes this sheet. Prior to planting, remove stones, sticks, etc. from the sub soil surface. Excavate existing non-conforming soil as required so that the finish grade of sad is flush with adjacent pavement or top of curb as well as adjacent sad in the case of sad patching, -Place sad on moistened soil, with edges tightly butted, in staggered rows at right angles to slopes, -Keep edge of sad bed a minimum of 18" away from groundcover beds and 24" away from edge of shrub beds and 36" away from trees, measured from center of plant. -Sad Shall be watered immediatley after installation to uniformily wet the soil to at least 2" below the bottom of the sad strips. -Excavate and remove excess soil so top of sad is flush with top of curb or adjacent pavement or adjacent existing sad, GENERAL NOTES: (312'.4'.61'1 PIN£WX>OCLEATS IMREWITH GALVANIZED MfTAL STRAP AS SUPPORT FOR VIOOD BRACERS u:JNOT NAIL ElRACESTOTHE TRUNK (3)2x4-P1PlrJ£ ,',oO:,BRIICEC! 120 DEGREES APART PA'ln TO MATCH 1Rul''< COlOR '~ IF REQUIRED "1-"'"--,,t"" ~Noi~··.i.L(. i;.i.LM·S 'MTH A ; C"LE"A"R TRUNK HE-IGHT OF :6 FEETORMOREARETO ! r:'.E ~T~~.EO STRAIGHT TRUNK PALM PLANTING DETAIL ~·N(!7:E I~~ MaS·j CA~S· TRIANGULAR ~ACING is PREFERRED : ; USE SQUIIRE SPACII;G ON"Y If, Sf/jiLL RECTIUIlEARAREAS ' t t t t t ... + + .~ .. t. t • t . , . SQUARE SPACING MULCH EDGI~~G • ALL PLANl BEDSADJACEN110 SODAREA~ Sf-tI,LLRECEIVEA 3 DEEP LAYEROFM-JLDi \ ~ •. O':.t. ' t . df TRIANGULAR SPACING sp,,"crrK;A.S fERP!W TYPICAL GROUNDCOVER PLANTING DETAIL ~:J1SC""'EfPO"'H"SDRAVI"NG :/ m'SD~AVI"NGISCON5T~'-'CTEDUS"<C, l""YE~5 WH'CH CA" ~E TUR"W 0" O~ OFf,o.SREQU'RED JDUETO&ElllE"'EN1AlllAEES SHOUlD I!~ RE T£~S,D~IED "'-TE', PlANTI~'G iffi"""""'<"'''''''i C'RCU"',E~E"':'E "' I01!': D • .o.IJE1E~~~lI~'E~ 1 !. -Trees are to be planted within parking islands after soil is brought up to grade. Deeply set root balls are not acceptable, -Planting soil for topsoil and backfill shall be 50/50 mix, nematode free. Planting soil for annual beds to be comprised of 50% Canadian peat moss, 25% salt free coarse sand and 25% Aerolite. -The Landscape Contractor is to locate and verify all underground and overhead utilities prior to beginning work. ::":,:~~~,,,,.,,o,,,,,, '."'.'"') Contact proper utility companies and / or General Contractor prior to digging for field verification, The Owner and the ",,, .. ,,.,,,,~_,,.,, Landscape Architect shaH not be responsible for any damages to utility or irrigation lines (see Roadway Plans for ~:~.~·~:~::~;'~:'.:'''::<v more utility notes). -Landscape Contractor IS to venfy all current draWings and check for discrepancies and bnng to the attention of the ~/i. \/'-/ -Tree and shrub pits will be supplemented with "Agriform Pells", 21 gram size with a 20-10-5 analysis, or substitute application accepted by Landscape Architect. Deliver in manufacturers standard containers showing weight, analysis and name of manufacturer. Landscape Architect pnor to commencing With the work C'" :::: ::::i::d:I::::r~ni:~:n~::~:~r::t~v:~f~: :::~:::~y ::~::i::O:nS~ :i::::::~I:,ge:~:::I::t~or~ to be brought to ~ , ~, ' . v ~.~ the attention of the Landscape Architect for clarification prior to installation. lj,_~=:L::':A'=~LA~:: G~:~:DA"~_~,~ .. ~ ~_-"' _~-"-~.-'.~ .A-.-"-."-_~ .A-_-", -"'---"' -",--~.A--A.. _ JI ena. ~ ~ I-:l ~ ..JO :::>0:: E J:(!) ~ ~ Zz ~ --~~ ~ ~ i I w > 0:: 0 ....J (f) ...J LL ~ I-~ W UJ « 0 en ~ UJ (L Z I <t U ::> f-(f) :J 0 en 0 z (f) ::s LO "'" 0 (0 .B. £ Revisions' Date By, ""',''"""",,,,. ~..l.l..i.rL Seal UC 11 tAOOOO889 ME'mber ASLA DraWing Landscape Details Date 0810912017 Scale NTS Drawn by TW Sheet No L-4 Cad ld 2017-080