Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutR-2002-077 RESOLUTION NO. 2002-077 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF DANIA BEACH, FLORIDA, APPROVING THE SITE PLAN REQUEST SUBMITTED BY SHELLEY EICHNER OF CALVIN GIORDANO AND ASSOCIATES REPRESENTING CHARLES D. ROBBINS, MANAGER OF MKN ASSOCIATES AND THE HALLIDAY FAMILY'S GRIFFIN LAKE MOBILE HOME PARK, FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2300 GRIFFIN RD., DANIA BEACH; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS; FURTHER, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Section 8.4 of Article 1 of Chapter 8 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Dania Beach, Florida, states that a site plan is required as a condition to the issuance of a building permit; and WHEREAS, Shelley Eichner of Calvin Giordano and Associates representing Charles D. Robbins, Manager of MKN Associates and the Halliday Family's Griffin Lake Mobile Home Park has applied for site plan approval for the proposed construction of a 427 unit townhome community on 35.58 gross acres generally located west of Ravenswood Road, south of Griffin Road, north of SW 51 Court, and east of SW 24th Avenue, Dania Beach; and WHEREAS, the Planning &Zoning Board on April 17, 2002, recommended that the City Commission grant the site plan request(SP-11-02), based upon the criteria set forth in Section 8.4 of Article 1 of Chapter 8 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Dania Beach; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DANIA BEACH, FLORIDA: Section 1. That that certain application (SP-11-02)for site plan approval, a copy of which is attached and made a part of this Resolution as Exhibit"A" is approved, subject to the following conditions: 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2002 -077 a) Approval of the final traffic circulation plan by Fire Rescue prior to issuance of any building permits; b) Wall along the south lot line and wall and fence along the west lot line to be installed before issuance of the first certificate of occupancy (excluding model units). c) Resolution of garbage collection issues: Laurence Leeds, Growth Management Director, shall verify the size of the dumpster(garbage provider to provide documentation to satisfaction of Public Works/Utilities Director that six cubic yard dumpsters can be accessed from garbage vehicles), distance for dumpsters shall be placed on Site Plan and posted in the Sales Office to notify residents of the walking distance from each unit, and applicant shall pay a garbage franchise fee prior to issuance of a building permit. d) Applicant to provide a northbound left turn lane from Ravenswood road into the project containing at least 100 feet in length and completed prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy. e) Applicant to add trees in front of the linear townhouse units. f) Space a Royal Palm in each of the clusters of the Crepe Myrtles every 100 feet along Griffin Road and Ravenswood Road, if permitted, for continuity with the Bass Pro Shops development. It is further noted that the original Site Plan is maintained in the office of the Growth Management Department of the City of Dania Beach. 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2002 -077 Section 2. That based upon the criteria set forth in Section 8-4(p) of Article 1 of Chapter 8, of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Dania Beach, all site plan approvals shall automatically expire and become null and void unless building permits are obtained on or before 18 months from the date of this resolution. Section 3. That all resolutions or parts of resolutions in conflict with this resolution are repealed to the extent of such conflict. Section 4. That this resolution shall be in force and take effect immediately upon its passage and adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED THIS 28T" DAY OF MAY, 2 02. O ERT H. CHUNN, JR. MA OR-COMMISSIONER • ATTEST: ROLL CALL: COMMISSIONER BERTINO - YES COMMISSIONER MCELYEA - YES CHARLENE JOHN N COMMISSIONER MIKES - YES CITY CLERK VICE-MAYOR FLURY - YES MAYOR CHUNN -YES APPROVED AS TO FORM AND CORRECTNESS: BY: /-\---,\, mk T OM S . ANSBRO CITY ATTORNEY • 3 RESOLUTION NO. 2002 -077 City of Dania Beach EXHIBIT 1"A"" I placation for Site Plan Approval � 100 W. Dania Beach Blvd. 2,002 Dania Beach, FL 33004 Date (954)924-3645 Phone (954)922-2687 Fax Application SP- 2 The undersigned petitions the Growth Management Department and/or the City Commission of the City of Dania Beach to consider site plan approval on the parcel(s)of land described in this application. NAME OF APPLICANT: Wt k N T ^) V f7-5 LL L. G` '`�f ADDRESS OF APPLICANT: G0Rl-(4i aaL�r, MI�tMI Qrir� c.0 APPLICANT PHONE & FAX: Pt-�. 3oS-Sr44- of 441 FAQ 3 S_ �6y_ 95) L PROPERTY INTEREST OF APPLICANT (Please provide documentation): , `jl-t-- nAe NAME AND ADDRESS�OF'PROPERTY OWN R (proof 9of ownership and if not the applican - authorization letter to apply as representative): 1—Q f e k ao5T31'1J ,&A1'1L2n-K11 35 4/?- 11++n r JAD rL ADDRESS TAX FOLIO NUMBER AND LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY (Attach legal description if necessary): 7,36D (g,r,:f!ek 4,00-3 Z®ID041 RECORDED PLAT NAME: 'W•Su�VI y t to ✓1 C2-'32 t� EXISTING LAND USE DESIGNATION: L EXISTING ZONING:T I ' I A LOT SIZE: ACREAGE 3S• 4M SO. FT. 33-(P t•1�t DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: 0. LIST ANY SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS, VARIANCES, REZONINGS ETC. THAT MAY BE REQURIED TO SUPPORT THIS APPLICATION: t 1 A- ittt` b 2 ! v,n ANY OTHER INFORM(AT((I��ON IN SUPPORT OF THIS APPLICATION: CLVLa \ SI NOTE: ALL SIGNATURES MUST BE NOTARIZED BY ORDER OF DANIA BEACH CITY COMMISSION sSworn to and subscri d beforp me Signature of Petitioner this yam- day of ` ��Z M)<,o T IU v sis�r`-s. �-� C Notary Publi tate of dam-) S''.1 N LR c"P-p-m z R-I M IAa,IACAcA Ft- Printed Name of Notary Street Address, City State & Zip CIAL NOTARY - Commission Expires G OFF ARttY M Seal: NOTARY PUBLICSTATE I09_h,9jW umber OFFICIAL NOTARY S'-,kL COMMISSION NO.CC933,6056 MARILYN R DIXON MY COMMISSION EXP.MA, :1?004 COMMISSION NO.CC93W56 WHEt REMMC 11ER4 NER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, PLEASE FILL THE FOLLOWING: This is to certify that I am the owner of subject lands described above in the PETITION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL and that I have authorized MY-14 T;iJetS s UX to make and file the aforesaid PETITION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL. Sworn to and subscribed before me Signature of Petitiene� this /5 d f /r .-y is aced tt19Lf-/0,9) `f74/-7ij-Y s 6�eiFply 11019 100Q 7 G/eA r P c State of ( rLoa I nA ) P/ .�► d., �L _R3 3 Print ame of Notary Street Address, City State &Zip Commission MY COMMISSIDN#DD 041910 4 5'i� (� Y.g " 7 D o? Seal: , 7B�'�Th. EXPIRES:NovembeP'v.r13,2M Telephone Number U.'.i . Site Plan Fees are calculated as follows: Residential- $275.00 Base Fee,plus$8.80 per unit for the first 100 units,plus$4.40 for each unit In excess of 100 units. Non-Residential/Hotel-Motel-$275.00 Base Fee,plus$1.10 per 100 sq.ft.for the first 10,000 sq.ft. plus 0.55 per 100 sq.ft for that portion in excess of 10,000 sq.ft. Major revision for residential or non-residential and hotel/motel site plan-Yz of site plan fee. In addition, a retainer is required for administrative and advertising costs-(As per Ch.28,Article 9.60.Recovery of costs...) Minimum fee required Is$5,000.00 plus the application fee for Pion- - famil and and Site Plan Revisions imum fee wired is 000.00 plus the application fee for Du sidentlal O ki I AGENDA REQUEST FORM Ah CITY OF DANIA BEACH AU 0 AGENDA ITEM NO. 1. DATE OF COMMISSION MEETING: MAY 28, 2002 2. DESCRIPTION OF AGENDA ITEM: PUBLIC HEARING—SP-11-02—SITE PLAN GRIFFIN LAKES 3. COMMISSION ACTION BEING REQUESTED: ADOPT RESOLUTION 4. SUMMARY EXPLANATION & BACKGROUND: SITE PLAN REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT A 427 UNIT TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT 5. ATTACHED EXHIBITS AND ADDITIONAL BACKUP MATERIALS (PLEASE LIST): Staff Report May 20, 2002 Letter from Tinter Associates, Inc. April 11, 2002 Letter from Tinter Associates, Inc. Letter from Applicant May 21, 2002 Letter from Calvin, Giordano &Associates, Inc. re: Griffin Lakes dumpsters May 10, 2002 Letter from Calvin, Giordano & Associates, Inc. re: Traffic Impact Study May 10, 2002 Letter from Calvin, Giordano &Associates, Inc. re: Site Plan Comments Review sheets Fire Marshal, Public Works / Utilities Director Resolution Site Plan Application Site Plans 6. FOR PURCHASING REQUESTS ONLY: Dept: Amount: $ 7. REVIEWED AND APPROVED FOR ADDITION ON AGENDA: Planning and Zoning Advisory Board approved this request at their April 17,2002 regular meeting. Submitted by: Laurence G. Leeds,AICP, Director Date May 23, 2002 Growth Management Department City Manager Date • i CITY OF DANIA BEACH GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT ®' STAFF REPORT TO: Ivan Pato, City Manager FROM: Laurence Leeds, AICP, Director Growth Management Department DATE: May 28, 2002 City Commission Meeting APPLICANT: Charles D. Robbins, Manager of MKN Investors, LLC and Halliday Family's Griffin Lake Mobile Home Park REQUEST: SP-11-02: Site Plan Review Request to Construct a 427 Unit Townhouse Development (Second Public Hearing) LOCATION: West of Ravenswood Road, south of Griffin Road, east of SW 24th Avenue, and North of SW 51St Court ! PROPERTY SIZE: 35.58 gross acres (33.62 net acres) SITE PLAN The revised site plan shows 427 townhouse units, a pool and club house, two tot lots, and a passive park open space area in the south central portion of the site. This is in addition to private and/or community courtyard open space adjacent to the townhouse units. The two building types include traditional "linear" townhouse units as well as "new urbanism" back-to-back units. The project contains a mix of two and three bedroom units. The architecture is Mediterranean style. Staff has requested applicant confirm there will be no four bedroom units. The parking code requires 2.20 parking spaces per townhouse unit, for a total of 929 spaces. The site plan provides 2.24 spaces per townhouse unit, for a total of 955 dwelling units. No�garages are indicated. Minimum parking space size is 9' x 18'. This includes a two foot overhang over the adjacent seven foot wide sidewalk, leaving a five foot clear pedestrian walkway. 1 LANDSCAPING The city landscape consultant indicates the applicant has complied with all landscape requirements, including tree preservation, relocation, and mitigation. Pervious area, including lakes, equals 40%. With regard to perimeter landscape treatment, the applicant exceeds the required landscaping along the south (mobile home park) and west (single family) lot lines. GRIFFIN LAKES CC SITE PLAN STAFF REPORT 5-28-02.DOC 1 of 4 Typical building landscape plans are indicated on Sheets L-9, L-10, and L-11. As • indicated on Sheets L-9 and L-11, shade or palm trees are provided in front of the back-to-back townhouse units. As indicated on Sheet L-10, no trees are provided in front of the linear townhouse units. The developer has indicated he will address this issue at the city commission public hearing. BUILDING SETBACKS The site plan meets or exceeds R-M building setbacks as indicated below. Building Setbacks Required Proposed Setback Setback Ravenswood Road Street and 25 feet 25 feet— 84 feet Griffin Road Street and 25 feet 72 feet South Rear and 15 feet 25 - 95 feet West Rear and 15 feet 24' 7d Building elevations are indicated on sheets A-3 and A-6. Staff has requested color elevations for the City Commission meeting. PERIMETER BUFFERS • Six foot recast screen walls are provided in the following areas: P p g 1) Along the south lot line to insulate abutting residential development from the townhouse parking areas. 2) Along the north portion of the west lot line to insulate abutting residential development from the townhouse parking areas. 3) Adjacent to the undeveloped commercial out parcel (zoned B-2) located at the southwest corner of Griffin and Ravenswood Road. 4) Along the south portion of the east lot line (Ravenswood Road) to insulate the townhouse development from Ravenswood Road. i 5) Along the north lot line (Griffin Road) to insulate the townhouse development from Griffin Road. A six foot split rail fence with columns is provided adjacent to the waterway entry feature on Ravenswood Road. A six foot shadowbox fence is provided along the west lot line where the rear yards of town houses abut the rear yards of adjacent single family development on SW 24th Avenue. GRIFFIN LAKES CC SITE PLAN STAFF REPORT 5-28-02.DOC 2 of 4 The applicant indicates the adjoining single family homeowners requested the shadowbox fence in this location. Details showing the split rail fence, shadowbox fence, and pre-cast walls are shown on Sheet SP-6. SANITATION Most townhouse communities in Dania Beach are provided curbside service twice- a-week by the City. The developer of this project has chosen to use a private garbage hauler and proposes 16 dumpsters located throughout project. Each enclosure can accommodate a "front loaded" four cubic yard or six cubic yard dumpster. Four cubic yard dumpsters are the largest available units on wheels. However, the use of 4 CY units would require three pickups a week. The use of the 6 CY units would provide additional capacity such that two pickups a week would be sufficient. The 6 CY units are not available with wheels and cannot be rolled in and out of enclosures by maintenance staff. As such, the enclosures must be large enough for the sanitation trucks to raise and lower the 6 CY units without damaging the Eenclosure. Staff has requested comments from Public Works/Utilities Director Mike Sheridan on this issue. • The enclosures are located a minimum of 10 feet from any lot line and at least 25 from any townhouse unit. The enclosures are also oriented to permit fully mechanically assisted pick-up by front end loading trucks. Also, the enclosures are angled and recessed off the driveways so that gates do not open into obstructing traffic. Staff may recommend minor design changes at time of building permit. Dumpster enclosures should generally be located no further than 150 to 200 feet from a dwelling unit. Due to the size of this project, the typical distance is closer to 200 feet. For a number of townhouse units (particularly in the central and westerly portion of the project), residents will have to walk over 300 feet to the closest dumpster. This issue was noted in our initial review and while two additional dumpster were added, many residents will still have to walk over 300 feet to the nearest dumpster. Staff has asked the developer to present some alternative solutions at the City Commission public hearing. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Access to the property is from Ravenswood Road with a single entrance aligned with the Bas Pro traffic signal at Gulfstream Way. The site plan shows two inbound lanes and two outbound lanes. Inbound vehicle stacking distance exceeds 160 feet. GRIFFIN LAKES CC SITE PLAN STAFF REPORT 5-28-02.DOC 3of4 An emergency fire-rescue access gate is indicated on Griffin Road. This gate will most likely be locked and utilized only if both the inbound and outbound traffic lanes are blocked at Ravenswood Road and Gulfstream Way. Due to the size of this project, staff has requested traffic analysis by Tinter Associates, Inc, Transportation Engineers. Tinter Associates' follow-up letter (dated May 20, 2002) indicates the following: 1. The revised site plan provides sufficient inbound vehicular stacking space. 2. Proposed turn lane improvements at the intersection of Ravenswood Road and Gulfstream Way (entrance to Bass Pro) and right turn improvements at the intersection of Griffin Road and Ravenswood Road will be sufficient to mitigate project traffic impacts. 3. Northbound deft turn lane from Ravenswood Road into the project shall be at least 100 feet in length. PLANNING AND ZONING ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION 1 Approval, subject to the following: 1) Approval of final traffic circulation plan by Fire-Rescue prior to issuance ® any building permits. 2) Wall along the south lot line and wall and fence along the west lot line to be installed before issuance the first certificate of occupancy (excluding model units). i 3) Resolution of garbage collection issues (size of dumpster, distance to dumpster). 4) Applicant to provide a northbound left turn lane from Ravenswood Road into the project containing at least 100 feet in length. 5) Applicant to add trees in front of the linear townhouse units. GRIFFIN LAKES CC SITE PLAN STAFF REPORT 5-28-02.DOC 4of4 Tinter Associates, Inc. o Transportation Engineers 3303 West Commercial Bled.• Ste 201• Ft.Lauderdale,FL 33309•(954)484-3633•Fax(954)484-9612• wFtiw.tinter.com May 20, 2002 Mr. Laurence Leeds, AICP Growth Management Director City of Dania Beach 100 West Dania Beach Boulevard Dania Beach, Florida 33004 RE: GRIFFIN LAKES TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY REVIEW TINTER ASSOCIATES PROJECT NO. 02-2041 Dear Mr. Leeds: At your direction, the firm of Tinter Associates, Inc. had performed a review of the April 1, 2002 traffic impact study prepared by Calvin, Giordano &Associates, Inc. (CGA) for Griffin Lakes, a proposed 437- . unit residential townhouse development. Our review comments were outlined in a letter to you dated April 11, 2002. CGA has responded to our review comments in their letter to you dated May 10, 2002. Our firm has reviewed the supplemental data and analysis provided by CGA in that letter. Key points of our original review comments are summarized as follows: "Existing"traffic data used was from 1999. Our firm requested that more current data be obtained, and should significant differences exist between the current and the 1999 data, capacity analysis should be re-performed. Additionally,we requested clarification regarding inconsistencies between traffic volumes shown in tables and corresponding volumes shown in figures. Seasonal adjustment factors used were also noted to be higher than those that corresponded to analyzed traffic data. © Our firm remarked that background growth factors used in the CGA study were not consistent with those identified by our office's review of Broward County's Traffic Review and Impact Planning System (TRIPS)data. TRIPS was the noted source of background traffic growth factors used in the I CGA study. j ® Our office noted that the trip generation calculations outlined in Table 2 of the CGA report l considered various sources, and that in some instances trip rates were used while in other instances, formulae were employed. Our office requested clarification regarding the use of different sources for trip generation calculations. Our office also noted that the 90-percent northerly/1 0-percent southerly trip distribution used for the CGA analysis was possibly overstating distribution to and from the north. Further information was requested to support the use of those trip distribution values. ® o The SIGNAL module of TEAPAC was used to analyze operation of the intersection of Griffin Road and Anglers Avenue while HCS2000 was used to analyze operation of the intersection of Anglers City of Dania Beach May 20, 2002 Page 2 Avenue and Gulfstream Way. Rationale was requested for the use of the different programs. Our firm also had questions relative to the right-turn overlap settings and peak-hour factors (PHF's) used in the signalized intersection capacity analyses. Our firm requested a queuing analysis be performed to identify maximum peak-hour queues expected at the entry gates to ensure that adequate stacking will be provided. In response to our comments, CGA collected data at the studied intersections on Wednesday,April 24 and Thursday,April 25, 2002. Insomuch as the data reflected significant differences in the 1999 data previously used, CGA re-performed the analysis using the new data. They also incorporated appropriate seasonal adjustment and background growth factors for this analysis. Additionally, upon coordinating with our firm, CGA revised trip distribution for Griffin Lakes project traffic to reflect a northerly distribution of 70 percent and a southerly distribution of 30 percent. The revised analysis for both intersections was performed using the SIGNAL2000 module of TEAPAC. This analysis incorporated use of the program's default PHF of 0.90. The results of the revised analysis for the intersection of Griffin Road and Anglers Avenue show that implementing signal timing modifications and right-turn overlap phasing at the intersection will significantly reduce vehicular delay at the intersection. Results of the analysis for the intersection of Anglers Avenue and Gulfstream Way show that the turning movements directly impacted by the Griffin Lake development will operate at an acceptable level of service through the buildout year. • Tinter Associates, Inc. reviewed the newly collected data as well as the revised input variables employed by CGA. We find that the data and input variables are appropriate for use. As stated in CGA's letter, certain considerations of their study methodology are likely to provide conservative analysis results. The signalized intersection capacity analysis results identified in CGA's letter and summarized above are consistent with those obtained by our firm after running the SIGNAL2000 program. CGA performed a queuing analysis for conditions at the project's proposed guardhouse using a queue model considering a bell-shaped arrival distribution pattern. The loading type assumed for their analysis was the "most aggressive" of the three bell curves discussed. Average service times considered for their analysis were 15 seconds per vehicle for the residents' entry lane and 45 seconds per vehicle for the visitors' entrance lane. Guests were assumed to comprise 30 percent of trips; obviously therefore, residents were assumed to comprise 70 percent of trips. The aforementioned assumptions are deemed reasonable and in fact are likely to provide conservative study findings. The results of the queuing analysis indicate maximum P.M. peak-hour queue lengths of 81 feet and 103 feet for residents and visitors lanes, respectively. As a check of the CGA queuing analysis, our firm performed a queue analysis employing an alternate study methodology. In particular, formulae used for our analysis were provided by the Institute of Transportation Engineers publication known as"Transportation and Land Development." Our analysis considered the same assumptions as the CGA analysis relative to resident and visitor traffic volumes and service times. . Table 1, copy attached, summarizes our queuing analysis calculations. The results of our analysis indicate that the maximum resident queues beyond the service vehicle will be 3.21 vehicles for the visitor lane and 2.07 vehicles for the resident lane. Considering the service vehicles and assuming a Tinter Associates, Inc. o Transportation Engineers City of Dania Beach May 20, 2002 Page 3 per vehicle length of 25 feet consistent with the CGA analysis methodology, the maximum expected peak-hour queues will be 105 feet for the visitor lane and 77 feet for the resident lane. These values are consistent with the values identified by the CGA analysis, namely 103 feet for the visitor lane and 81 feet for the resident lane. As such, we concur with the CGA findings that the 160 feet of storage to be provided for the resident and visitor entrance lanes at Griffin Lakes will be adequate to accommodate the anticipated queues associated at the proposed guardhouse. In closing, the supplemental analysis and data outlined in the CGA May 10, 2002 letter adequately addresses all questions and comments outlined in Tinter Associates'April 11, 2002 correspondence. The turn-lane improvements at the intersection of Anglers Avenue and Gulfstream Way and the right- turn overlap improvements at the intersection of Griffin Road and Anglers Avenue to be implemented by the developer will sufficiently mitigate project traffic impacts. Based on the SIGNAL2000 analysis results,this firm recommends that the northbound left-turn lane along Anglers Avenue at the proposed Griffin Lakes provide a minimum of 100 feet of storage to accommodate queuing for four vehicles. suggest that the Broward County Traffic Engineering Division be notified of the aforementioned improvements associated with Griffin Lakes. Should you have questions or comments regarding my findings, please do not hesitate to contact me directly. Sincerely, • Andrew G. Sebo, P.E., PTOE Vice President W A02files\02-2041\02-2041.002 xc: Eric S. Penfield, P.E. Tinter Associates, Inc. © Transportation Engineers ® TABLE 1 GRIFFIN LAKES PM Peak-Hour Queuing Analysis Worksheet VISITOR TRAFFIC: VISITOR: 45 VEH. SVC. TIME: 45 SEC. P 0 : 0.05 5% 1. Q = 60 Min./Hr. / 0.75 Min./Svc.)= 80 Svc./Hr. 2. q = 45 Veh./Hr. 3. p = 45Veh./Hr. / 60Svc./Hr. 0.5625 4. M = ff In 0.05 -In 0.5625 /In 0.5625 -1 = 3.21 Vehicles RESIDENT TRAFFIC: RES: 115 VEH. SVC. TIME: 15 SEC. P 0 : 0.05 5% 1. Q 60 Min./Hr. / 0.25 Min./Svc.)= 240 Svc./Hr. 2. q — 115 Veh./Hr. 3. p = 115Veh./Hr. / 240Svc./Hr. 0.4792 4. M = In 0.05 -In 0.4792 /In O.4792 -1 = 2.07 Vehicles Q = mean average service rate q = mean average arrival rate p = coefficient of utilization M = queue storage required Tinter Associates, Inc. 1 Tinter Associates, inc. o transportation Engineers T , 3303 West Commercial Blvd.9 Ste 2010 Ft.Lauderdale.FL 33309•(954)484-3633-Fax(954)484-9612. w w.tinter.com April 11, 2002 Mr. Laurence Leeds, AICP v Growth Management Director City of Dania Beach 100 West Dania Beach Boulevard Dania Beach, Florida 33004 I RE: GRIFFIN LAKES TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY REVIEW TINTER ASSOCIATES PROJECT NO. 02-2041 Dear Mr. Leeds: At your direction, the firm of Tinter Associates, Inc. has performed a review of the April 1, 2002 traffic impact study prepared by Calvin, Giordano&Associates,Inc. (CGA)for Griffin Lakes,a proposed 437- unit residential townhouse development. The project is to be developed on property located at the southwest comer of the intersection of Griffin Road and Anglers Avenue(a.k.a. Ravenswood Road),in the City of Dania Beach, Florida. Currently, a 239-unit mobile-home park occupies the property. Access for the townhouse development will be provided at a single location along Anglers Avenue,to create the west leg of the traffic-signal-controlled intersection of Anglers Avenue and Gulfstream Way. Currently, access for the mobile-home park is located at several driveways along Griffin Road. To date, our firm has reviewed the site plan for this project as well as the CGA traffic study and available Broward County traffic data relevant to the traffic study. Further, Tinter Associates'staff has performed several field reviews of the site and surrounding area, reviews of aerial photography and other pertinent materials. Based on our firm's work efforts thus far, we offer the following-comments. 'Existing'traffic conditions for the study were predicated on data coiiected in 1999. it is recommended that peak-hour turning movement counts be collected at the intersections of Griffin Road and Anglers Avenue and Anglers Avenue and Gulfstream Way in order to validate the use of the three-year-old data. As the weekday P.M. peak hour constitutes the critical peak period at the intersection of Griffin Road and Anglers Avenue, data need only be collected during that period. Should the data show that traffic volumes or patterns have significantly changed, the analysis should be revised to consider current traffic volume data. I will gladly coordinate with CGA staff upon their receipt of the new data to make a determination as to whether the 1999 data is acceptable for use, or if the study should be revised. Table 3A of the CGA report idertfes existing.turning mov ifr�in tn , Road and Anglers Avenue. It appears that existing left-turn volumes at all approaches to the intersection for all study periods do not match the corresponding volumes in the turning volume diagrams in Appendix B. All other approach volumes do match. CGA should provide an explanation for this. City of Dania Beach April 11, 2002 Page 2 Table 3B summarizes turning movement volumes for the intersection of Anglers Avenue and Gulfstream Way. These volumes were derived from 24-hour roadway tube counts. CGA should provide the 24-hour data for all approach movements in a single spreadsheet, thereby allowing the peak periods to be ascertainable. In the Existing Traffic Conditions section of the CGA report, use of an FDOT seasonal adjustment factor of 18 percent was identified. However, review of the traffic volumes in Tables 3A and 4A indicate that an eight-percent factor was used. Our office reviewed FDOT's most recent Weekly Volume Factors Report to determine the appropriate seasonal adjustment factorto be used for data collected in Central Broward County during the second week of October. That review showed a factor of six percent. CGA should provide clarification on this item. Also in the Existing Traffic Conditions section of the CGA report, it is stated that both studied intersections operate acceptably under existing peak-season conditions with the exception of certain movements. We concur with that opinion for the intersection of Anglers Avenue and Gulfstream Way; however, overall intersection operation for Griffin Road and Anglers Avenue is shown to be at Level of Service(LOS)'F'for existing peak-season conditions,with three of the four approaches also operating at LOS T.' In the Future Background Traffic section of the CGA report, it is noted that a 16 percent background traffic growth factor was applied to existing volumes, based on data obtained from Broward County's Traffic Review and Impact Planning System(TRIPS). Our office's review of current TRIPS data shows that committed development traffic for the noted TRIPS segments average 25 percent of existing volumes, rather than the 16 percent value that was used. Furthermore, the 16 percent factor was applied to the 1999 data. Additionally,the CGA report did not provide an estimated buildout year. For the above reasons, our office cannot render a finding as to the appropriateness of the background growth factor used in the CGA report. Table 2 of the CGA report outlines trip generation volumes for the proposed townhouse development. The table shows that various rates and formulae were used in the estimation of site trips, but the report does not discuss the justification in the use of the different rates. No trip credit was taken for the existing mobile-home park so the net site-traffic increase attributable to this project could not be ascertained from Table 2 of the CGA report. It is assumed that the various trip generation rates and formulae were selected for the CGA study to assess potential worst-case conditions. Our firm prepared a table, a copy of which is attached, summarizing trip generation calculations for the proposed townhouse development and the existing mobile-home park. Formulae from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE)Trip Generation Report, 6t'Edition were used in the estimation of site trips. Our table shows that the CGA trip generation estimates are conservative. The CGA report assumes a traffic distribution of 90 percent to and from the north and 10 percent to and from the south along Anglers Avenue, predicated on turning volumes at the intersection of Anglers Avenue and Gulfstream Way. Due to the close proximity of Gulfstream Way to Griffin Road, which interchanges with 1-95, it is not unreasonable to expected distriibbution'yt+o be skewed to and from'the �TM _ � �VI a ke j- A-. VGIJC-ilA on volumes for the north access location for the Sportsman's Park site, although Sportsman's Park also has access to Tigertail Boulevard located to the south of the site. Furthermore,trip distribution for the proposed residential project and Sportsman's Park may vary as the residential developments (trip producers) and non-residential developments (trip attractors) often exhibit differing trip distribution Tinter Associates, Inc. 9 Transportation Engineers City of Dania Beach April 11, 2002 Page 3 characteristics. It should be noted that, based on the CGA trip generation volume and the 90-percent distribution from the north, the P.M. peak-hour southbound right-turn volume entering the site will be 148 vehicles per hour(VPH). That volume exceeds the peak-hour right-turn volume-threshold noted in Broward County's Land Development Code requiring the construction of a deceleration lane. CGA should provide justification in use of the trip distribution (i.e. TRIPS analysis, manual gravity model, etc.) or revise trip distribution and site-related turning volumes at the project's driveway. The CGA report provides signalized intersection analysis worksheets in the Appendix E. Although the text of the report does not discuss the analysis programs, it is evident that the intersection of Griffin Road and Anglers Avenue was analyzed using the SIGNAL module of TEAPAC,while the intersection of Anglers Avenue and Gulfstream Way appears to have been analyzed using HCS2000. Either program is acceptable; however, CGA should provide the rationale for using the two different programs. The signalized intersection capacity analysis was performed for"existing traffic"and"future total traffic with right-turn overlap improvements" scenarios. This limited analysis does not provide our office a basis for which to identify the actual impact of project traffic and the need for improvements if any. The signalized intersection capacity analysis should be supplemented with"future background traffic"and "future total traffic(no improvements)" analysis scenarios. Additionally, the analysis employs a peak- hour factor(PHF)of 0.95 for all movements at both intersections. This PHF is neither the program's default PHF nor the field measured PHF. Either the default or field measured PHF's should be used. The site plan shows that the entry to Griffin Lakes will be gate-controlled, but the CGA report does not address this matter. A queuing analysis should be performed to identify the maximum peak-hour queues expected at the entry gates in order to ensure that adequate stacking will be provided. Without the information and analysis discussed above, our firm cannot conclusively assess traffic impacts associated with the proposed development. As such, our firm requests that the analysis be revised to address the above comments. I will gladly make myself available to CGA staff should they have any questions or comments relative to the items identified herein. Our firm will be prepared to provide an expeditious review upon receipt of the supplemental information and revised analysis. Should you have questions or comments regarding my findings, please do not hesitate to contact me directly. Sincerely, / Andrew G. Sebo, P.E., PTOE Vice President W:102fi les%02-2041102-2041.001 xc: Eric S. Penfield, P.E. Tinter Associates, Inc. ® Transportation Engineers U x Lp ov rn F- � x o � W 2 F- LL XQa .- �v � XQa r� � � X W a (°'ovN X.W W � r� o w � � W < � W � � W Q< ) htnN F- F- F-- F- WLLp � � rn ww2 WW = rn wWS ZQj �Lo � ZLL Q > N ZQa Cl) co F- wa rn � N w w W w w w U U U U >Qw Qw Quw- QU- WN .- W c0 tp QO M-- j N eM- ~ Q j N co U F5 F- F- H Z Z Z W o o w f- o o w w F- ~ o o UX OO UX c00 UX co c0 UX Of� W W to to W W co r- W w ch Cl) W W IT IT a a a a F- F- F- F U H ,o o U tw- o o W W o o W W o 0 � Z tntA W Z .� N ofZ (D wz Mto W W w W W W W W a. a a a V' c0 00 Q) N W co 0) aW N N a W � O W � N F- N 0 � F- 0 - � �-- O p d F- 04 V Q + O Q +.. + Q + t Q IP N + fq0 FrZ X � Dz XX � Z XX F- Z ` 5z W 1- F- O c + W O O c c O O c c + c vi IW_- JQ oX ~ YQ rnr- F_ YF- � � F- OO XN W CD 04 W Qw °° � Q (r r� tn Qw ccgCR = � 00ODD .., J Q w O N w W 00 W W 00 Y N V Co Z Z z u 6 a z u u a z a u W Z o � y _ W w � � F- F- � w dW a (n fa- t�i C) 0E- u 0 - F- F- d J Q J J a: Q J J J � a � ~ z z z Z .�. g0 � Op C') C') O p cr) ra'i Op (Y) r°i 0p r ic') J W 'IT N J W IT N J W IT N -1 W N W N W N_ W N W N_ W U w U w U_ w m Cl) Cl) coo .0 N N N Cl) J J Z J fW � W z Z Z Z O O O O _.. Co Co Co t0 p N N Q Q p N O Z ? O Zj Q Z ? Q Z ? (n QJ fn QJ m OJ U Q � p O p O p Y N O p p ZQ -<p .z p ZQ Q p ZQ G U w U L U W TI a g U W d Z L U w a wa > O = g Q o _ } Q � W g Q 0 O WWw a O wWw a O www i O wWw } w 0 J Z W W 0 z w W 0 J Z Y W p J Z a- F- <n m F- d P (n m F- Q F- (n m H Q Q w o w g Q w O W Q W O w W Q W O W o U z Q U 2z n U w z a U cr2z LETTER FROM APPLICANT R U D EN 200 EAST BROWARD BOULEVARD MCCLI]SKY FORT LAUDERDALE,FLORIDA 33301 SMITH POST OFFICE BOX 1900 S CH USTER & FORT LAUDERDALE,FLORIDA 33302 R U S S E LL, RA. (954)527-2476 ° FAX:(954)333-4076 BONNfE.MISKEL@RUDEN.COM May 7, 2002 VIA FACSIMILE AND HAND DELIVERY Mr. Laurence Leeds Director of Growth Management City of Dania Beach 100 West Beach Boulevard Dania, FL 33004 Re: Griffin Lakes Development Dear Larry: As you requested, this letter will confirm certain information relating to the applications for the above referenced project. First, my client will be including the following disclosures within each purchase contract: the B-2 commercial zoning of the parcel to the northeast; the Broward County Aviation Department contact for information concerning the status of the airport and runway expansion; the estimated monthly and yearly payments relating to the CDD District assessment; and the private nature of the roadways and common areas within the property and the private association's obligation to maintain those areas. Further, a deed restriction will be recorded against the property relating to developers marketing the property as a for sale product to be conveyed either in fee simple or condominium, and the limitation of site design as a two story townhouse type dwelling unit project not to exceed 12 units per gross acre as is reflected in the Site Plan submittal under consideration. That deed restriction will be prepared and submitted to you and to the City Attorney prior to the May 14, 2002 City Commission meeting. Finally, my client has agreed to contribute an additional $250,000 towards parks and recreation in addition to any park funding requirement pursuant to Chapter 19, Article VI of the ��iy tivnr. vv e win be haM 10 mass my of-! e iwfbw raiivn �n�intd herd�r tff fatty a3 the May 141h City Commission meeting. FTL:884736:1 FORT LAUDERDALE aMIAMI a NAPLES a PORT ST.LUCIEBSARASOTAaST.PETERSBURGaTALLAHASSEEaTAMPAaWEST PALM BEACH Mr. Laurence Leeds May 7, 2002 Page 2 I also wanted to remind you that verbally we revised our rezoning application from a request for RM-2 to R-M zoning. Please make appropriate note to our application of that revision. If you need additional information, please call. Sincerely, RUDEN, McCLOSKY, SMITE, SCHUSTER& RUSSELL, P.A. �1i�vc-gip Bonnie L. Miskel BLM/bab i cc: Mr. James Carr(via fax) Chuck Robbins, Esq. (via fax) FT1:884736:1 05/21/02 TUE 14:12 FAX 954 9218807 CALVIN GIORDANO 0 002 Calvin, Giordano Associates, Inc. Engineers Surveyors Planners May 21,2002 Mr. Larry Leeds, Growth Management Director CITY OF DANIA BEACH 100 West Dania Boulevard Dania, Florida 33004 RE: Griffin Lakes Dumpsters Dear Larry: Based on our meeting today with Richard Sagredo of Waste Management, sixteen dumpsters, each container capacity being 6 cubic yards, is sufficient to serve the 427 townhouses in.Griffin Lakes. The private hauler will pick up the solid waste twice per week. According to Waste Management, the average unit produces 1.5 to 2 cubic yards of solid waste per month. At an average 1.75 cy per unit, the following demand would result 427 x 1.75 = 747.25 cy per month: Therefore, the following formula is applicable: No. of dum sters x Size x No. pickups/week x Weeks per month 16 6 cy 2 4.33 Total solid waste hauled per month: 831,36 cy i According to Waste Management, the 4 cy dumpster is the standard size and is the only size that has wheels, however this size is also the easiest for a resident to move and leave out of it's proper location. Therefore the larger size dumpster is going to be more secured. The 6 yard dumpster comes in several designs(angled lids, etc) and will be picked up and returned to it's proper location(within.an,inch or two). Mr. Sagredo has reviewed our site plan and acknowledges that the enclosures will fit even an 8 cubic yard container and that the approaches to each dumpster is sufficient and unobstructed. Sincerely, Calvin, iord & ssociates Reply to: ❑ 1800 Eller Drive Suite 600 Fort Lauderdale,Florida 33316 (954)921.7781 Ho old n, CP (954)921-8807(ax Director of Planning 560 Nrillage Boulevard W,uite 340 West Palm Beach,Florida 33409 (561)684.6161 (561).6S4.6360(ix. Calvin, Giordano & Associates, Inc. Engineers.Surveyors Planners May 10, 2002 Mr. Lawrence Leeds, AICP Growth Management Director City of Dania Beach ' 100 West Dania Beach Boulevard Dania Bea'h,'FL 33004 . RE: Pro_posed "Griffin Lakes Traffic Impact Study Response to Comments Dear Mr.,Leeds: Calvin,.Giordano &-Associates, Inc.`is responding to comments dated April 11, 2002 from the City of Dania y Beach's traffic engineering consultant regarding the traffic . , impact analysis submitted for the "Griffin Lakes'° redevelopment project. The site is 'located in:the,southwest coiner,of the intersection of Griffin,Road'and Ravenswood i Road/Anglers Avenue. We appreciate the insightful, thorough. review and believe that the following sufficiently.addresses'each comment and/or ' stion;received. "Existing7 traffic conditions for the study were predicated on data;collected zn,,1999. It is recommended that.peak hour turning ,movement counts be :. collected at the intersections of ;Griffin 'Road and Anglers Avenue and Anglers Avenue and.Gulfstream.Way in order to valuiate'the use,of the three r year old,data As he weekday P M peak hour constrtutes the.erihcal peak'. ' period at the intersechon of Griffan'Road and'Anglers Avenue, data need only, be:collected.dunng that period.',Should the data show that traffic volumes or.. atterizs have, si nc cantl �chan ed' the ,anal sls should be revised .to g.,.. • y g . y consuier. current traffic volume data. 1 will gladly coordinate with GA staff upon their receipt of the new data to make a'determandtion as to whether the 1999 data,is acceptable for use; or:if the study should be revised. -Reply Pursuant:_to the above recommendation; CGA sfaff:collected"PM peak hour..turning . 0.1806 Eller Drive movement data for the intersection•o ,Griffin Road and Anglers'-Avenue/Ravenswood Suite 600. - .. Fort Lauderdale,Florida 33316 Road and;Anglers Avenue and Gulfstream Way on Wednesday,:Apri1..24,.2002, and R(959)921 77si day; Ap12500 eve ohed atwiurs w > ' hle some of the turning .(954)921 8807 fax movement volumes iremamed similaz to those recorded in 1999, sufficient differences V.560 Village Boulevard exist to warrant revising ;the analysis. :with the 2002 ,data .:This conclusion .was 0 Suite 340 discussed with the City's araffic engineering consultant who concurred. . West Palm Beach Florida 33409. (561)684b1614. I.. (561)684=6360 fax i • r c _ - - Mr. Lawrence Leeds. May 10,"2002 Page 2 of 7 2." Table 3A of the CGA.re ort identifies.existing turning movement volumes for the intersection of Griffin _Road, and Anglers Avenue. It.appears that existing left-turn volumes at' all approaches to.the intersection for all study periods do not match the corresponding volumes in the turning volume diagrams in Appendix_B. All other approaches do match. .CGA should provide an.explanation for this. Because it was determined that 2002 PM peak-hour turning movement data will be used as the basis for,the.revised analysis, this error in Table 3A has been corrected and is based on the data attached. 3.-.•Table 3B summarizes turning.movement.volunies for the intersection"of Anglers Avenue and Gulfstream,Way ' T,hese, volumes .were.,derived from 24-hour_roadway tube,counts::; ,CGA 'should.provide the.24=hour"data for all.approach`movements in a"single spreadsheet, thereby allowing the peak:p'eriods to be ascertainable Due to the inclusion of 2002�PM peak hour turning movement data, Table 3B has been revised to reflect the;'data•recently collected.:,This;collection effort was:performed manually from 4:30 PM to " '6:30 PM, and graphically depicted in the-attached support documentation. 4 In the "Existing Traffic`Conditions".section of;ahe:CGA report, :use of an FDOT seasonal adjustment factor,of48 .percent was.:identified However, ;review of.the traffic._volumes"in: Tables 3A and 4A.indicate that.'an eight percent factor"was used. Our office reviewed FDOT's most recent.Weekly Volume Factors Report to determine the oppropruite:seasonal adjustment ,. ,#actor..to be .used for data collected in Central.'Broward County during.,the second week of October 'That review showed a factor of six percent. :CGA should provule:clarification,on th :item , inc 2002 PM peak Hour data collected�, lpril`24`� and April 25`� yvill be utilized for the revised { analysis in place:of the;data collected m October. 1999;^different seasonal adjustment factors must be applied_ Coordination=with FDOT.;revealed.that the.'mo�t recently calculated seasonal.adjustment factor -for,,Centml Broward County on ,Apnl 24`}' and 25` is 0:99 A copy of the',2001,:Weekly " Volume Factors report is attached :This factor was apphed.to the raw:data collected m Tables 3A and 3B,which are alsoattached for review ti 5 Also in the-"Existing Traffic Conditions" section j. the CGA report, it is stated that both studied intersections operate acceptably under,:existing peak season conditions with the.' sxcfdin mov_em Anglers: nf Avenue and:Gul stream`Wa 'however overall intersection,;operation for Griffin Road.and . f , y, . , Anglers Avenue is shown to`be at;a Level of;Service (LOS) `F',for ezistzng peak season conditions, with three of the four approaches alsooperahng at LOS `F' Additional analysis of'the two intersections using the recently collected 2002 PM .peak"hour data indicates that the intersectlori of.Anglers Avenue and Gulfstream Way currently operates at:LOS".B._ However, the•intersection of Gnffin Road and'Anglers Avenue operates at LOS F, with an overall: intersection delay of.,�112 seconds .per vehicle ` The;:viwestbound `approach,is the only"approach to operate below an acceptable level of service, operating at an estimated LOS F with between 175.and 200_,seconds:".of delay`per vehicle ;Tables 1 and.2'are attached sumrriarizing the traffic operations analysis .for the`:Gnffin Road/Anglers Avenue erse&i6Wlnd.:Arigiers `Avenue/Gulfstream :Way -in tersection, respectively f �%S y..' .r�� ,. .�`. L. � -.?.tii�'?,r-y,...x.;a e �- .5 i_.t>+5.. �.r.-..er,'�i, � r , '='.•',, s Mr.Lawrence Leeds' May 10, 2002 Page 3 of 7 • 6. In the "Future Background Traffic"section .of the'-CGA report, it,is noted that a 16 percent background,growth factor was applied to existing volumes, based 'on data obtained from Broward County's,Traffic Review and Impact Planning Systems (TRIPS). Our office's review' of current TRIPS data shows that committed development traffic.for the noted TRIPS segments.average 25 percent of exiting volumes, rather than the 16 percent value that was -used. Furthermore, the 16 percent factor was applied to the 1999 data. Additionally, the CGA report did not provide an estimated buildout year. For the above reasons, our office cannot render a finding as,to.the\appropriateness of the background growth factor used in the CGA - report. CGA-acknowledges the disparity in committed development traffic. based:on current TRIPS data. Since 2002 PM peak hour:turning movement data will be utilized for the revised analysis,'CGA incorporated the recommended 25 percent factor-to account for background growth traffic in Tables 3A and:3B. ''This more conservative factor was applied to the seasonally'adjusted .2002 turning, movement data. The anticipated buildout year for the Griffin Lakes project'is 2006.- While it is unlikely that the full extent of committed development traffic estimated from TRIPS data will;berealized,in such a,short timeframe;the 25 percent factor was used in order to analyze a worst-case scenario assuming that all. of the committed'deveiopment.trips`anticipated are present at buildout 7 Table 2 of the CGA report outlanes trap generation 'volumes for the proposed townhouse development.;: The.table.shows that various:rates"and formulae were,.usedin he estimation of _ site trips, but the report,does'not discuss-the usti cation in the use o the di erent rates.: No 7 fi f ff trip credit was Ltaken for the; existing mobile-home park so the net site-traffic increase ` attributable<to this`' ro ect could not be ascertained om Table 2-o the CGA re ort It;is P J, f P; assumed that the variouslnp generation rates and formulae were selected fo�the CGA study to assess potentuzl:worst-case conditions ` Our f rm..prepared a table, a copy. of which is j attached, sumindrizcng trip generation calculations for`the:proposed townhouse development and the Existing mobile home park ;Formulae from the;lnstrtute of,Transportation Engineers f „(ITE) Tnn Generation Report 6`h Edition .were used to the estimation of site rips , Our table _ . shows that'the,CGA tnpgenerahon estimates are conservative. CGA mcoporated Broward County§ PM peak hour trap generation rate of a aypical.weekday aiid I ITE Tnp;;Generanon Manual; 6 :Edition; formulas and rates for daily;'AM peak flour of�a typical weekday,and the peak;hour of a Saturday: This was necessary since Broward:County;only_provides trap;'generation:information for PM.peak hours;'and our analysis evaluated the traffic,operations of the:intersections 6U Griffin Road and Anglers Avenue and Anglers. Avenue,and Gulfstream Way during the AM, eak'hour, PM. p ak hour, and he eak hour on`Saturda ..due, unusual tri - P Pe.:. P Y P generating characteristics of Sportsman Park t We.generally concur with'.the City!s traffic engineering consultant regarding the estimated net trips to be generated by th,e'.t' fthbuse development, if rthe existing mobile-home park,is included in the analysis Per the attached tri generation,table:noted above, the resultin number of net daily. tri s Pg g Y P jgenerated by the.site is estimated to be 1,198 traps f � 1 r k t s+ I - Mr. Lawrence Leeds May 10, W02., Page 4 of 7 • However •the traffic o erations anal sis of the two intersections studied must be evaluated based on p.. y the total number of trips traveling through the,intersections. .Analysis-of the net new.trips generated by the site would skew the operarional analysis by.not_accounting'for,the total number of turning movements occurring at the intersection. Finally; the,only access to/from the proposed townhouse development is expected to be via the,driveway connection to Anglers Avenue, opposite Gulfstream -Way. This access configuration is significantly different than what is currently present. The mobile- home park currently has multiple access connections to Griffin Road west of Anglers Avenue, where . a.substantial majority of,all trips to/from the mobile-home park originates. By.restricting access-to Griffin Road,'traffic.patterns significantly change.resulting iri a dramatic increase in the number of outbound left turns and inbound right turns.during peak hours at the intersection of Anglers Avenue ; and Gulfstream Way, and an increase in westbound,deft turns ,,and northbound 'right turns at the intersection of Griffin`Road'and Anglers Avenue. As':a result; we:believe it is most appropriate to analyie'the intersections:based on the gross number of.trips generated by the townhouse development 'iri addifion .to the.existing turning movements volumes .plus background growth. We acknowledge that this represents.%a very.-conservative.. estimate, but'our analysis indicates-that:with some minor.improvements in signal timing at both intersections (as well as right=turn overlap phasing for the intersection,of Griffin Road and Anglers Avenue;:and a.-southbound right turn lane; northbound left turn'1.lane, and a'southbound,through lane 'at the intersection of-Anglers Avenue and Gulfstream-Way), eacii intersection will;operate at an I improved levels'of service for those movements directly impacted by the townhouse development._. In addition, the,operation of the remaining turning movements will not.be degraded: Based on this' .. , . conclusion, it can be safely stated that the mtersectioris will operate at an improvedCievei:of service for all development'scenarios given the recommended improvements. 8 The CGA report 'assumes a traffic distribution of 90.percent to and from the,noH an; I0 - Percent;to and om the south alon An lers A"venue"predicate on turncn volumes at the .fi .. ^ g..: �,P g i . .AvueaGti W 'Due , o e close'-proximity ofntersection ofAngrs fr Gulfstream Way to Griffin Road, which interchanges'with 19s;,'it zs not unreasonable to expected[sicJ distribution to be.skewed to and from the north: However, the distribution may overestrmate ahe northerly oriented site traffic because--it is based'on volumes for the north: " r access location for Sportsman's Park sne; although `Sportsman's'•Park'.d&s ':has access ,to 1 Tigertaal Boulevard located:to`the\south of the site Furthermore, trip,dr tribution,for the,' Proposed,residentuil project and Sportsman's park may vary as the residentacil developments`: i (trip producers) and non.resulentral developments (trip attractors) often 16 hib' -differing,trip distribution characteristics It should be noted alica based on'the CGA.trip generation:volume:. Wand the 90 percent distribution from the north,,-the P.M peak-hour southb'ound right turn _:volume entering the site will be 148 vehicles per hour (VPH).:. That volume exceeds the peak hour right turn volume:threshold noted'an Broward County's' Land-.Development Code requiring-the'construction of a deceleration lane;, CGA should,provide justification in use of ahe trip distribution (L 'TRIPS analysis;manuahgravity model,`'etc.) or revise trip distribution ;and site related tummg volumes at the project's driveway < r CGA concurs that the 90 percent_assignment to the north.may overestimate the_pro�ect's turning r; movement volumes After: discussions ".with,the':.City's traffic:;engineering consultant,'the,.tnp distribution was revised to reflect an:orttiefly.assignment of 70 percent and'a southerly assignment of 30.percent on Anglers:Avenue at the projects,driveway connection; as graphically depicted'in the . attached.Figure;l d Mr. Lawrence Leeds "May 10, 2002 Page S of 7 Based on..this revised.trip distribution, the,peak-hour right turn volume threshold would still be, exceeded,thereby,requiring a southbound right-turn lane at the intersection of Anglers Avenue and Gulfstreain Way. This improvement is understood to be required and has been incorporated into the revised analysis. 9. The CGA report provides signalized intersection analysis worksheets in the Appendix.E. Although the text of the report does not discuss the analysis.programs, it is evident that the intersection of Griffin Road and Anglers Avenue,was analyzed using the SIGNAL module of TEAPAC. However; the intersection of Anglers Avenue and Gulfstream'Way appears to"have. been analyzed.using hICS2000 "Either.program is.acceptable; however'CGA;should provide the rationale.for using two different programs. SIGNAL2000 of the TEAPAC series of;:traffic;engineering,programs faithfully replicates results from the Highway Capacity;Manual 2000 However;'in an effort-to`minimize future confusion; the attached revised analysis-using the 2002 PM peak hour data was performed using SIGNAL2000 for both intersections and all scenarios requested. 10,:The signalized intersection capacity analysis was performed'for "existcng traffic"and `future" total;traffic with right turn overlap`improvements" scenarios."This limited analysis does not provide our office a basis.' asis for which to identify the actual-impact of project traffic and the need for improvements if any The signalized intersection capacity ,analysis should be �� » is su 1 ente' with -Lure back round,tra c and ture 'tofal"tra c no zm rovements PP; g ffi (. . P ) analysis scenarios. Additionally, the`analysis employs a peak-hour.factor (PHF) of 0.95 for all movements at both intersections. This PHF is neither the progrdms'."defaailt.PHF:nor the ,field measured PHF Either the default or field measured PHF's should be used CGA has`provided the addtional_analysis requested, which was based m';part on the -recently { , collected 2002 turning,movement_volumes, and`are attached for review The results,of the analysis are summanzed,in Tables- and 2,'wluch are"also attached. Thedefault PHF of SIGNAL2000 is":0 90,and was implemented as`requested 11 The site plan:shows that the entry to Gnf n Lakes will'be gate controlled' but the CGA report _ does not address this matter ' A queuing analysis should be :performed to idenlzfy _the, yrzaxzrizum peak hour queues expected at the entry gates zn order to ensure that adequate stacking will`:provided`- CGA erformed is ueum analysis, as re uested for the weekda PM" eak hour which re resents P q. g q Y- P P . the peak`hour with the:mosf inbound volume The proposed guardhouse, with approximately,160 feet-of hi ullar storari�k available into the develo me glers Avenue/Ravenswood Road, will include g P g a security„g d,to c g p nt Residents will.utilize an automated lane, managed by an inn gate, which opens'and closes rapidly to minimize delay Typically,nearly,90 - percent of the PM peak hour trips generated by..a multi family residential development are made by residents, while'onl: 10 percent are made by;guests: Since a secunty guard must check guests • " manually, the trine associated with`guests:entering`the development is significantly greater than for residents _. who dse an;-automated gate arm Therefore, in`:an effort to. eonservatwely account' for variable guest arnvals during the PM peak hour m the analysis, it was assumed,that guests make 30 1 Mr. Lawrence Leeds '_May 10, 2002 Page 6 of 7 percent of all PM peak hour triP s. BaseduP� on the trip generation analysis submitted in the traffic impact study for the 437-unit Griffin Lakes development, approximately 164 inbound PM peak hour trips will.be generated. Given,that 30 percent of these trips are guests to the site, it can be concluded that 49 inbound PM peak hour trips are guests and that the remaining 1,15 inbound PM peak hour trips are residents. CGA utilized a queue model that incorporates vehicular demand, available storage, arrival distributions,service time through the gate, and vehicle type to determine the extent of the queue and if;the storage.is sufficient to accommodate that.queue. Within the model 'it is conservatively assumed that the.entire peak,hour volume will arrive,to enter,the site'wia the gate during a 207minute period of the P-M peak.hour.'The..intensity of the inbound demand during this 20-minute period, as a function o`f time, closely resembles,a bell-curve. The three .types of arrival'distributions 'that-are utilized by':the model ("least :aggressive",.."moderately aggressive", and "most,aggressive") are variations::in the,°degree to which the bell-shaped curve.is peaked:, The .'less 'aggressive loading -exhibits more of the classic bell shape peaking, while the most aggressive loading pattern ishighly ,. peaked (loadings are,highly concentrated within a shorter,timeframe), Field observations tend to support-that most',residential'arrival patterns exhibit, more of,the least aggressive or moderately aggressive curves, rather than the most,aggressive curve. The more aggressive curves,.which increase the concentration of arrivals over'a shorter and shorter.,time,period,,are used to, assess the sensitivity of the estimated'queue-to the more intense vehicle arrival patterns. Intuitively, the use:of -the'inore aggressive airivaLpatterns provides a more conservative queue length estimation. It was also conservatively assu med that the automated gate would detain residents for;an average .of 15 seconds per vehicle, while the;,average guest would be detained for.45,seconds while the'security,; guard verified-their access to:the development. It should be noted that these service times in reality actually vary for each vehicle;however they represent times that are conservative with few examples I� of vehicles waiting loner to be serviced at the gate Results df the queuing analysis for`the.guests-=and residents Jane indicate.that the resident'lane will' I experience a maximum queue.of 81:feet`during`the PM peak hour Guests, who must check with the security guard pnor to Inter ng the site, will generate;a maximum queue-,of 103 feet during the PM peak hour; thereby maintaining a 57.foot;buffer distance from Anglers�Avenue%Ravenswood Road. The*analysis sheets are:attached for reviewF. l Based on` he most conservative inbound PM peak hour volume conservatively high estimate of i r guests eriterin�the site' 20 iriinute'penod'of activ' i y'dunng the peak liour with a large concentration of arrival during an even shorter period withm'the 20 minutes and conservative estimate of service, times for`the 'gate ii can be concluded' that 460 feet of`storage fore resident 'and guest lanes entering briffin,Lakes:will be adequate to accommodate the anticipated queues associated with,the guardhouse and ate _ t' • f� 1 Mr.Lawrence Leeds May 10, 2002 Page 7 of 7 In summary, additional recent PM peak hour traffic data was collected at the intersections of Griffin P _ Road and Anglers Avenue, and Anglers. Avenue and Gulfstreain. Way. This data was seasonally adjusted and background growth was accounted for based on recent TRIPS data. Finally,-project traffic was added to these intersection turning movement volumes to represent the estimated .2006. buildout volumes, based,on a revised trip distribution indicating that 70 percent of the project trips are oriented to the north and Griffin Road, while the remaining 30 percent travel to/from the south. Intersection capacity analyses was performed for both intersections for the Existing Traffic Conditions, Future -Traffic Conditions with Background Growth; Future Total Traffic Conditions with No Improvements;'and Future Total Traffic Conditions with Improvements and are summarized in Table 1. Results of the future_total traffic.conditions analysis indicate that without signal timing or,turn lane improvements,the intersection of Griffin"Road and'Anglers Avenue will operate� a Level of Service F with delay exceeding�230 ;seconds per vehicle Implemenfing signal timing modifications, including right-turn overlap,phases for'Anglers,Avenue, will reduce delay nearly threefold :to approximately.82 seconds per vehicle. It should be noted that while.specific.turning,movements continue to operate at a failing LOS,,the turning movements directly impacted by:the Griffin Lakes development experience a significant decrease in delay with the proposed improvements: - t 'Analysis'of.the intersection of Anglers.Avenue and Gulfstream Way; summarized in Table 2,.for the future conditions.without-improvements reveals that-the intersection will operate at LOS D+ with delay of approximately 40 seconds per vehicle ;VBy implementing necessary' improvements such as modified signal timings; additional ;southbound right=turn and through lanes, and a single northbound, eft turn `lane, the traffic operations;performance of the'intersection improves to LOS C with delay reduced:to approximately 32.seconds per vehicle _;Overall;the turning'movements directly impacted by the Griffin Lakes `development at the.intersection -of Anglers Avenue :and:Gulfstreain Way will operate at .an acceptable level of_service through the buildout year.' Finally, a queuing analysis was-performed to,assess;the adequacy of.the storage provided leading"to the` iguardhouse for inbound site onented.traffic'volume Based on our analysis Jihe 4604eet of storage available resident and guests of<Griffin Lakes is more than sufficient and the-queue will not impact Anglers Avenue/Ravenswood Road We believe that the`above responses satisfactonly address the comments received regarding the Griffin Lakes traffic study ;With the improvements'identified above, the impacts associated with the-project are mitigated Should you have any questions regarding the information'contained herein, please, do not iesitate'to contact me r' Sincerely, CAI.VIN,GIORDANO &ASS0C1ATVS,1NC °Eric S Penfield,:P.E, Senior Transportation Engineer cc Scott Brunner,P E , Calvin, Giordano& Associates - i ' CATraffic Reports101-2220 Griffin LakesUti LEEDS response 051002 doc. a i a � z w 0 � x U � C N o � w C (CIA Q `p :d m w ® m 1Qd02I QOOMSNgAV-d gf NHAd S2I3ADW a ° 3a O M REEMOREMEMMEM N O N J L O O U) 0'0 U LL w O LL to Z Q J O O D..a ..2 V 'DR co co v 0 Cl) w .- a, O) p n. N _a) co ri v co Ci n ui vo CO co r F g p mm cD mvn m �nv dp _ n z - Q. O U ULL uj tL a CO a Q wUm wLL 00 W wC0 f- J Qr J LL J L Co n 0 LL LL U LL !L a N. Z 0- Ua CD 0 ry ? com ? CjnO � mmO0 ri m mmIO Cl)m mNO_ N z Z Q LU KS D Z` Z w LL o WJ it O LL � O tL u. W UC CUU Z LL ~ Q CCa Y m Z Q L O lu C T c) O Y H 2O o LL w U u Q WZWg Q Z LL m MLL oz Q WLL W U zl11 � Fp¢ Qzrnvm min .- 0 c N o) Q � Zpm mC') c m) 0 S N W O a J Y z Q V c_aa LL LL m, LLDU tLLL OUW � Q UUp O � J S L N L O) o o O o LL + v LL c N n J Qcm L p p (a m 0 .- n 0 m 0 (O O m � O O: C o Z N P7 cm V O C7 N I- In co of N CL fl co I- CM CO NN m c7 V N N M !"' m E QQ O E n $ m op wUU LLLL UUa +UU ' .... ...... ..... J...('� '� '7 2 U Z' C m N u c C m O v m w U E m N m O m Q Ol W -i w c 41 s > p c: 2t .c= � Q �� `t p�V 2t y w oLL-� w ZZ � � O () Z x Q m N O .. ___..... NCO O o U + U U U U ~ z CL OJ U = W Q W (n O L Q � V V n (O r (D N N co C.) �..O' :C, 41 fn N m cm N M N Cl) Cl)N N M 00 O_ O U U LL LL j( m mU U8 0� QO Q D. J L ca: Oz `OUQ' p LL m U t H W n J 0: Q � � t 0. :O U EU: N N OD ^ OD f7 aD O M 0 (n �_ 0 N N mN N � vfO � nntO 00. �- n �. >Q o z z Z W LL n W J U � ¢ ,� oO wU Uw mmm wa ¢ Q _ � H U CIS E— z U LL (n Q _ LL z Q U L N � oY } HU aO z o m ci v: a Jwg a � u , Q (n z o (n L Q Cc FL Y z * w w LL ,WL o �.. N f Z � ~ Z.. O U. Q Q OD N Q m n O� Q Q w Q Z O. a� (a Z� Nm Z � � � �Z N W. co w Q Q N w Y', 7 U) J U Z Hm' � �(n' m J C3 � (a oo zz cio zmm omz v p Z � s Q In o O z o m Inm c N d JCIS Q Z m co o Q ca [d Q Q UO 1� Q Q O C �` O d 0 N Cl) t2 (n7 •� `E U ¢ aa) �3 N N Z as g ~ D 0- .. (n C Q Q + Q + + Q O ` M W � � � � � UU � mm oaZ m C C o 0 V N S] F ul p L m G1 N m O m Q _Oi Lrn_ W n ,- 6 O Q m U ] U r n c m O/y� c Q. x 2 t �, - r C m E c0C o pO .. 'o z 7 O) L L O) CC O O) L C O L J : Z'd J H L J (n J H L J f .(0 CD m 2� J LO O _� U O o w ($ z U) O (� Z C) f 1 i / 2 / / � � % ��( ��< ( LO$ \ R o o rl- Aii ¥ wc o ��( q \ \ oo \ W <I - - - � W 2-( c n # o ¥ \ \ \ % 2 # / cn Ir ( ( f \ R n q / 2 ��\ .> } % / / \ _ \ q q a m D � o :( 2 < � \ \ / / LL ( .LU \ f % $ AL x $ o d _ \ m m CD m a - 2 to < 0 i i ( o w # w © E > b 2 } m m % E k O / 2 0 CL _ \ . w m . nnc c ■ \m c o o o c ■ 2 : cm cm cmN § ° 2 } E Q } CL Q 2 - C) � - W } o o = m 2 u 2 Co ( d f \ q N It q Co K � 6 ■ 0 m, O k \ � - ¢ : N m Cl) k ca . k becc k O � � k k2 � \ % R o a k k r ' Q _ m F q / w 2 - 0 IL �7 § a E 0 2c2d ( o o E m c § t W � _ o � � m � o d 0 . > � § � � 0 0 ��( \ o 0 0 0 \ \ ��( } 00000 0 ��( ��( 7 0000 \ \ � � \m o q q » o / : � t J / % % oo ƒ \ # It n £ uj ( 0 0 0 Co $ % W u \ q o co 00& & \ / � t C) Lo ( 2 COuj � 'N o0000 0 � a Cc 2 i » a a km < U- (D ( C) o = e c 2 § cn & \ # # n m 0 U) LL k n a m 0 } o 0 0 0 e@ j k : \ R ono o_ &Q w ( % $ 0) G (D k d o ■ � W § : a m O 2 \ g o G q o CO ■ R cn : & & q m 2 2 mU. Q © @ $ t LL \ / v / = o a R co q R / o R_ � � x ■ � 6 _ ui © O w ou 2 LL: $ C4 co 0 . k § cn to § 0 E ® � cc 0 b °— � % � $ m � � k j . j APPENDIX A QUEUING ANALYSIS I i N O O N m O O N ELO U V F y N 3 V LO m a) T a Z ) a�(ino a)Emmv In O O - cm co :E.0 O >,e t 0) N' 5 >Q pU 5c c E ei E N O F E nmoo_ � N `m .. U_ c� c � o _ C L >i m c e a) a1 m U1« (0 Q)V V O N(0 O c ��-• Q) O O.m U E C � C a) O N co(0 V N O O 3 -N O >'e 00 O O 2 m .� N J O a J¢ 0 0000 000 00 o a o`o a) N -' o c� Q a a N I ui c (D E UIll aW NZE 'T� 'T 3 3ca o00000000oQCl) CL c > C) F � d _ U) J Ict a) > in m oo (O N rnrn goow"trnrno Q w E r o .O U L = > ro w O Q w °/ w E >Orr F Q>,Oc?0 Y a j W y d ur a) = a) a) p L O m a� m r- ce)m w vo 0 0o voocoZO o N v V(n m O cli E2 mO z -eOJn E_ Z (L ¢U-pmQ aF0 a w F- m d o 0 o L o X¢ w F > rn 3 �— o0 o 0)= o 0 o c= ¢ ma o 0 c C) W m `maa) 0000000000 p o `a �� co n � ¢O� N j > in U m O ) F y u) O m ¢ v C L o rn m U W (O (O a c- N N 7(�a j r N)O� �n 10N ro } Y N Q) m J U J Q g ra ZI 3 C U 0 O a) a) a) y p) Of If) Q a) C y N e c P7 er > m �' 4)) a) Nv o (ao ff �L m a) E N�o10U) )'LO0 a) N' a y > 0 o a) o a c N N h m a) ) ( o>J C7 C7 a F C7¢ to x a) 0 0 0 0 0 0 4)N N- Co a) Z C N V OOOT V V7 a0 N N � a) U � .` E � � rr rr � .- r Qf"c or 0 7ON V c0 SON 4(0a0 !7 W T3 >F C7T Q Z O m V > O a) -j Q Q F W Inc C) y rn? 7 c O J U U •• (� a 2 a Z m N A a) U caul Q o ca U L -� N U Z y o U R O_ ca y o a) o 0 Va H in 7 N -gyp C d o ca O > > ca E m m £ �U cc a ao (n F a FF- C) g d s .2 e (J 0 '0 / \ \ LOU) # t�\p a)» &� ! ® o§ � � o Cl) co - 2 > cn E\ . � two , ; 4 ££ c ° \{ $-e $\ o koCL G £ EcCd c a § °3§ A# o — _ A-1 o 000000000 � i # kG ) R � c FE E �)} a) G » 2 } 0 "0E ao0000000o S \ > > �> «�� 0�� § � k - � §T ° -2 �m r n> 2 � & \ oo » = 2 � k w u >0 /\/k/f� 2 � 14 ce/ §GS# a° ° k 2 RR ± A r o ¥\ _paC U) i ui \ \ / ��� � ? a a±a / \p) mkk @ M CC ) w [ >1 aaa 2 . cis CU / 02 § § 2f ) R k\ )§ ) )�2t -� m � � �� - ; Q 3-Wri ou � �CD \/ mm r�e « ]{a') 0w000000 00a0ml G § L � W § \k - ;) / k k 2E ror m0oms � m - - �C\j co co U) �\ a«k \ \ \� \f \ \k mom �� 5 D - � Sa§ az a> o o -C ° 6R _ � § / A k \ _ \ �� / � @m io m � CD ` < / ® CU` - � m � § o � D � ui .\ k \} k \� m > � 2 : _ a 0 m CLB2 2 § ) / \ } i f § . � APPENI9IX B INTERSECTION CAPACITY ANALYSIS GRIFFIN LAKES - 437 TOWNHOUSES 04/30/02 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR - Existing 2002 Traffic Data 16:40:25 GULFSTREAM WAY AT RAVENSWOOD ROAD/ANGLERS AVENUE SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 1.01.00] - Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages: Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.42 Vehicle Delay 19.0 Level of Service B ------------------------------------- Sq 21 I Phase 1 1 Phase 2 I Phase 3 I **/** ------------------------------------- + * I + I A + *> + v v v North * +>I l * + I ------------------------------------- G/C=0.125 G/C=0.438 I G/C=0.250 G= 10.0" G= 35.0" G= 20.0" I Y+R= 5.0" I Y+R= 5.0" I Y+R= 5.0" OFF= 0.0% OFF=18.8% OFF=68.8% ------------------------------------- C= 80 sec G= 65.0 sec = 81.3% Y=15.0 sec = 18.8% Ped= 0.0 sec = 0.0% -------------------------------------------------------------------- I Lane Width/ I g/C I Service Rate Adj I I ECM I L I Queue I I Group I Lanesl Reqd Used I @C (vph) @E IVolumel v/c I Delay I S IModel 11 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- N Approach 17.8 B I TH 112/1 10.355 10.625 11133 11164 I 548 10.471 I 9.3 I A 1306 ftI I LT 124/2 10.141 10.125 I 172 I 429 I 233 10.543 I 37.7 I *D+I 133 fti i ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S Approach 15.2 B I RT 112/1 10.169 10.438 I 607 I 693 I 118 10.170 I 14.2 I B+I 82 ftI I TH 124/2 10.208 10.438 11467 11548 I 520 10.336 I 15.4 I *B 1195 fti ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- E Approach 31.2 C I---RT---I-12/1 10.236 10.250 I 259 I 396 I -233 10.588 I 32.7 I *C 1225 ftl I LT 112/1 10.111 10.250 I 298 I 442 I 44 10.100 I 23.5 I C+I 40 ftI ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- i GRIFFIN LAKES - 437 TOWNHOUSES 04/30/02 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR - Existing 2002 Traffic Data 16:40:42 GULFSTREAM WAY AT RAVENSWOOD ROAD/ANGLERS AVENUE SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 1.01.001 - Summary of Parameter Values Intersection Parameters METROAREA NONCBD SIMULATION PERIOD 15 LEVELOFSERVICE C S NODELOCATION 0 0 QUEUEMODELS 1 90 25 40 Approach Parameters APPLABELS N E S W GRADES 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 PEDLEVELS 0 0 0 0 BIKEVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 PARKINGSIDES NONE NONE NONE NONE PARRVOLUMES 20 20 20 20 BUSVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 RIGHTTURNONREDS 0 0 0 0 UPSTREAMVC 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement Parameters MOVLABELS RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT VOLUMES 0 493 210 210 0 40 106 468 0 0 0 0 WIDTHS 0.0 12.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 12.0 12.0 24.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 LANES 0 1 2 1 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 GROUPTYPES NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM UTILIZATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TRUCKPERCENTS 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 PEAKHOURFACTORS 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 ARRIVALTYPES 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ACTUATIONS NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO REQCLEARANCES 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 MINIMUMS 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 STARTUPLOST 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 ENDGAIN 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 STORAGE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 INITIALQUEUE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ IDEALSATFLOWS 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 FACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 DELAYFACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 NSTOPFACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 i SATURATIONFLOWS 0 1863 3433 1583 0 1770 1583 3539 0 0 0 0 Phasing Parameters SEQUENCES 21 PERMISSIVES NO YES NO NO LEADLAGS NONE NONE OVERLAPS NO NO NO NO OFFSET 0.00 1 CYCLES 80 80 30 PEDTIME 0.0 0 GREENTIMES 10.00 35.00 20.00 YELLOWTIMES 5.00 5.00 5.00 CRITICALS 3 8 4 ® EXCESS 0 GRIFFIN LAKES - 437 TOWNHOUSES 04/30/02 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR - Future Traffic with Background Growth 16:41:53 GULFSTREAM WAY AT RAVENSWOOD ROAD/ANGLERS AVENUE SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 1.01.001 - Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages: Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.53 Vehicle Delay 21.4 Level of Service C+ ------------------------------------- Sq 21 1 Phase 1 1 Phase 2 1 Phase 3 1 **/** ------------------------------------- + * I + + * 1 + I **** I / I � I + *> I + I I I I v I v I ++++1 I I I I v l North I I +>I I l * + I I I * + I I I G/C=0.125 I G/C=0.438 I G/C=0.250 1 G= 10.0" 1 G= 35.0-- ( G= 20.0" 1 Y+R= 5.0" I Y+R= 5.0" l Y+R= 5.0" 1 OFF= 0.0% 1 OFF=18.8% I OFF=68.8% 1 ------------------------------------- C= 80 sec G= 65.0 sec = 81.3% Y=15.0 sec = 18.8% Ped= 0.0 sec = 0.0% ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Lane (Width/ I g/C I Service Ratel Adj I I HCM I L I Queue I I Group I Lanesl Reqd Used I @C (vph) @E 1Volumel v/c I Delay I S IModel 11 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- { N-Approach20=3===C=====_____ I TH 1 12/1 10.417 10.625 1 1133 1 1164 1 684 10.588 1 11.1 1 B+1 420 fti I LT 1 24/2 10.157 10.125 1 172 1 429 1 292 10.681 1 41.9 I *D+l 174 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S Approach 16.0 B I RT 1 12/1 10.187 10.438 1 607 1 693 1 148 10.214 1 14.7 1 B+1 104 ftI I TH 1 24/2 10.239 10.438 1 1467 1 1548 1 650 10.420 1 16.3 I *B 1 250 ftI ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- E Approach 36.7 D+ I RT 1 12/1 10.269 10.250 1 259 1 396 1 292 10.737 1 39.2 I *D+l 301 ftl I LT 1 12/1 10.120 10.250 1 298 1 442 1 56 10.127 1 23.8 1 C+1 51 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- GRIFFIN LAKES - 437 TOWNHOUSES 04/30/02 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR - Future Traffic with Background Growth 16:42:01 GULFSTREAM WAY AT RAVENSWOOD ROAD/ANGLERS AVENUE SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 1.01.001 - Summary of Parameter Values Intersection Parameters METROAREA NONCBD SIMULATION PERIOD 15 LEVELOFSERVICE C S NODELOCATION 0 0 QUEUEMODELS 1 90 25 40 Approach Parameters APPLABELS N E S W GRADES 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 PEDLEVELS 0 0 0 0 BIKEVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 PARKINGSIDES NONE NONE NONE NONE PARKVOLUMES 20 20 20 20 BUSVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 RIGHTTURNONREDS 0 0 0 0 UPSTREAMVC 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement Parameters MOVLABELS RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT VOLUMES 0 616 263 263 0 50 133 585 0 0 0 0 WIDTHS 0.0 12.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 12.0 12.0 24.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ® LANES 0 1 2 1 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 GROUPTYPES NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM UTILIZATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TRUCKPERCENTS 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 PEAKHOURFACTORS 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 ARRIVALTYPES 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ACTUATIONS NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO REQCLEARANCES 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 MINIMUMS 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 STARTUPLOST 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 ENDGAIN 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 STORAGE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 INITIALQUEUE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 :. IDEALSATFLOWS 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 FACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 DELAYFACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 NSTOPFACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 SATURATIONFLOWS 0 1863 3433 1583 0 1770 1583 3539 0 0 0 0 _ Phasing Parameters SEQUENCES 21 PERMISSIVES NO YES NO NO LEADLAGS NONE NONE OVERLAPS NO NO NO NO OFFSET 0.00 1 CYCLES 80 80 30 PEDTIME 0.0 0 GREENTIMES 10.00 35.00 20.00 YELLOWTIMES 5.00 5.00 5.00 CRITICALS 3 8 4 EXCESS 0 GRIFFIN LAKES - 437 TOWNHOUSES 05/01/02 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR - Future Total Traffic with No Improveme 09:48:39 GULFSTREAM WAY AT RAVENSWOOD ROAD/ANGLERS AVENUE • SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver, 1.01.00] - Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages: Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.57 Vehicle Delay 40.8 Level of Service D+ ------------------------------------- Sq 21 I Phase 1 I Phase 2 I Phase 3 I **/** ------------------------------------- + + * I + + I A + + * + + **** / I \ I <+ + *> I <+ + <++++I v v " ++++ ++++ v North <+ * +> I ++++> + + I ++++ + * + I v ------------------------------------- I G/C=0.125 G/C=0.438 G/C=0.250 G= 10.0" G= 35.0" G= 20.0" I Y+R= 5.0" I Y+R= 5.0-1 Y+R= 5.0" OFF= 0.0% OFF=18.8% OFF=68.8% ------------------------------------- C= 80 sec G= 65.0 sec = 81.3% Y=15.0 sec = 18.8% Ped= 0.0 sec = 0.0% ------------------------------------------------- ------------------ • 1 Lane (Width/ I g/C I Service Rate Adi I I HCM I L I Queue I I Group I Lanese Reqd Used I @C (vph) @E IVolumel v/c I Delay I S IModel lI ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- N Approach 31.6 -C I RT 112/1 10.175 10.625 1 953 I 990 I 128 10.129 I 6.4 I A I 63 ftI I TH 1 24/2 10.247 10.625 12212 12212 1 684 10.309 I 7.3 I A 1187 ftI I LT 124/2 I0.190 10.125 I 172 I 429 I 428 10.998 I 77.9 I *E 1340 fti ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S Approach 16.0 B I RT 112/1 10.192 10.438 I 607 I 693 I 156 10.225 I 14.8 I B+I 110 ftl I TH 124/2 I0.239 10.438 11467 11548 I 650 I0.420 I 16.3 i *B 1250 ftI I LT 112/1 10.198 10.438 I 245 I 319 I 54 10.169 I 14.8 I B+I 40 ftI ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- E Approach 103.8 F IRT+TH 1 12/1 10.352 I0.250 I 259 I 396 I 447 11.129 1115.1 I F 1746 ftl I LT 112/1 10.144 I0.250 I 216 I 344 I 64 10.186 I 24.8 I C+1 59 ftI ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- W Approach 48.8 D • IRT+TH 112/1 I0.103 I0.250 I 261 1 398 I 28 I0.070 I 23.2 I C+I 26 ftl I LT 112/1 10.336 I0.250 I 34 I 76 I 63 10.677 I 60.2 I E+I 77 ftI ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- i i ,GRIFFIN LAKES - 437 TOWNHOUSES 05/01/02 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR - Future Total Traffic with No Improveme 09:49:13 GULFSTREAM WAY AT RAVENSWOOD ROAD/ANGLERS AVENUE �SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 1.01.00] - Summary of Parameter Values Intersection Parameters METROAREA NONCBD SIMULATION PERIOD 15 LEVELOFSERVICE C S NODELOCATION 0 0 QUEUEMODELS 1 90 25 40 Approach Parameters APPLABELS N E S W GRADES 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 PEDLEVELS 0 0 0 0 BIKEVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 PARKINGSIDES NONE NONE NONE NONE PARKVOLUMES 20 20 20 20 BUSVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 RIGHTTURNONREDS 0 0 0 0 UPSTREAMVC 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement Parameters MOVLABELS RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT VOLUMES 115 616 385 401 1 58 140 585 49 24 1 57 WIDTHS 12.0 24.0 24.0 0.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 12.0 12.0 LANES 1 2 2 0 1 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 GROUPTYPES NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM UTILIZATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TRUCKPERCENTS 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 PEAKHOURFACTORS 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 ARRIVALTYPES 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ACTUATIONS NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO REQCLEARANCES 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 MINIMUMS 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 STARTUPLOST 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 ENDGAIN 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 STORAGE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 INITIALQUEUE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IDEALSATFLOWS 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 FACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 DELAYFACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 NSTOPFACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 SATURATIONFLOWS 1583 3539 3433 0 1584 1377 1583 3539 729 0 1593 373 Phasing Parameters SEQUENCES 21 PERMISSIVES NO YES NO NO LEADLAGS NONE NONE OVERLAPS NO NO NO NO OFFSET 0.00 1 CYCLES 80 80 30 PEDTIME 0.0 0 GREENTIMES 10.00 35.00 20.00 YELLOWTIMES 5.00 5.00 5.00 CRITICALS 3 8 4 EXCESS 0 GRIFFIN LAKES - 437 TOWNHOUSES 05/01/02 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR - Future Total Traffic with Improvements 09:46:21 GULFSTREAM WAY AT RAVENSWOOD ROAD/ANGLERS AVENUE SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 1.01.00] - Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages: Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.65 Vehicle Delay 31.6 Level of Service C ------------------------------------- Sq 41 1 Phase 1 I Phase 2 1 Phase 3 1 **/** ------------------------------------- * I + * I ^ I / I� I *> <+ I I I ^ I ++++ v I North <+ + +>I++++> + + + + ++++ + + + v ------------------------------------- G/C=0.196 G/C=0.254 G/C=0.362 G= 15.7-1 G= 20.3-1 G= 29.0-1 Y+R= 5.0-- Y+R= 5.0-- Y+R= 5.0-- OFF= 0.0% OFF=25.8% OFF=57.5% ------------------------------------- C= 80 sec G= 65.0 sec = 81.3% Y=15.0 sec = 18.8% Ped= 0.0 sec = 0.0% -------------------------------------------------------------------- Lane Width/ I g/C I service Rate Adj I I ACM I L I Queue I I Group I Lanesl Reqd Used I @C (vph) @E jVolumej v/c I Delay I S IModel 11 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- N Approach 33.0 C 1 RT 1 12/1 10.175 10.254 1 267 1 403 1 128 10.318 1 26.3 1 C+1 117 ftj I TH 1 24/2 10.247 10.254 1 715 1 900 1 684 10.760 1 33.6 J *C 1 379 ftj I LT 1 24/2 10.190 10.196 ( 451 1 673 1 428 10.636 1 34.1 J *C 1 228 ftj ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S Approach 31.1 C I RT 1 12/1 10.192 10.254 1 267 1 403 1 156 10.387 1 27.5 1 C+I 143 ftl I TH ( 24/2 10.239 10.254 1 715 1 900 1 650 10.722 1 32.2 1 C 1 350 ftj I LT 1 12/1 10.119 10.196 1 190 1 347 1 54 10.156 1 27.6 1 C 1 52 ftj ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- E Approach 30.8 C IRT+TH 1 12/1 10.352 10.362 1 467 1 574 1 447 10.779 1 32.7 J *C 1 434 ftj LT 1 12/1 10.144 10.362 1 396 1 499 1 64 10.128 J 17.6 1 B 1 50 ftj ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- W Approach 20.6 C+ • IRT+TH 1 12/1 10.103 10.362 1 470 1 577 1 28 10.049 1 16.7 1 B 1 22 ftj I LT 1 12/1 10.254 10.362 1 127 1 194 1 63 10.313 1 22.4 1 C+1 56 ftj ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ,GRIFFIN LAKES - 437 TOWNHOUSES 05/01/02 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR - Future Total Traffic with Improvements 09:47:27 GULFSTREAM WAY AT RAVENSWOOD ROAD/ANGLERS AVENUE ® SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 1.01.001 - Summary of Parameter Values Intersection Parameters METROAREA NONCBD SIMULATION PERIOD 15 LEVELOFSERVICE C S NODELOCATION 0 0 QUEUEMODELS 1 90 25 40 Approach Parameters APPLABELS N E S W GRADES 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 PEDLEVELS 0 0 0 0 BIKEVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 PARKINGSIDES NONE NONE NONE NONE PARKVOLUMES 20 20 20 20 BUSVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 RIGHTTURNONREDS 0 0 0 0 UPSTREAMVC 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement Parameters MOVLABELS RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT VOLUMES 115 616 385 401 1 58 140 585 49 24 1 57 WIDTHS 12.0 24.0 24.0 0.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 12.0 12.0 ® LANES 1 2 2 0 1 1 1 2 1 0 1 1 GROUPTYPES NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM UTILIZATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TRUCKPERCENTS 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 PEAKHOURFACTORS 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 ARRIVALTYPES 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ACTUATIONS NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO REQCLE RANCES 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 MINIMUMS 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 STARTUPLOST 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 ENDGAIN 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 STORAGE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 INITIALQUEUE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IDEALSATFLOWS 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 FACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 DELAYFACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 NSTOPFACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 SATURATIONFLOWS 1583 3539 3433 0 1584 1377 1583 3539 1770 0 1593 555 Phasing Parameters SEQUENCES 41 PERMISSIVES NO YES NO YES LEADLAGS NONE NONE OVERLAPS NO NO NO NO OFFSET 0.00 1 CYCLES 80 80 30 PEDTIME 0.0 0 GREENTIMES 15.67 20.34 28.98 YELLOWTIMES 5.00 5.00 5.00 CRITICALS 3 2 5 EXCESS 0 GRIFFIN LAKES - 437 TOWNHOUSES 04/30/02 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR - Existing 2002 Traffic Data 15:35:43 GRIFFIN ROAD AT RAVENSWOOD ROAD SIGNAL2000 TEAPAC[Ver 1.01.001 - Capacity Analysis Summer xY Intersection Averages: Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.92 Vehicle Delay 112.0 Level of Service F ------------------------------------------------------------- Sq 54 I Phase l I Phase 2 I Phase 3 I Phase 4 I Phase 5 I **/** ----------------=-------------------------------------------- * ( + * + I + + + I A * + * + + + + **** *> <+ * +> � <+ + +> I v I v ^ (++++ v*** � North <+ I <+ + +>I ++++> + + + + v ------------------------------------------------------------- G/C=0.064 I G/C=0.045 G/C=0.255 I G/C=0.082 I G/C=0.309 G= 7.0" G= 5.0" G= 28.0" I G= 9.0" G= 34.0" I Y+R= 7.0" Y+R= 0.0" I Y+R= 7.0" I Y+R= 7.0" I Y+R= 6.0" OFF= 0.0% OFF=12.7% OFF=17.3% OFF=49.1% OFF=63.6% ------------------------------------------------------------- C=110 sec G= 83.0 sec = 75.5% Y=27.0 sec = 24.5% Ped= 0.0 sec = 0.0% ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Lane Width/ I g/C I Service Rate Ada I I ECM I L I Queue I I Group I Lanesl Regd Used I @C (vph) @E IVolumel v/c I Delay I S IModel lI ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- i N Approach 28.3 C I RT 112/1 10.278 I0.300 I 286 I 475 I 237 10.499 I 32.5 I C 1276 ftl I TH 124/2 10.227 I0.300 I 696 11062 I 198 10.186 1 28.6 I *C 1111 fti I LT 112/1 I0.061 I0.109 I 435 I 539 I 331 10.614 I 25.0 I *C+I 364 ftI ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- i S Approach 39.4 D+ --------------------------------------------------------------- -- I RT 112/1 10.313 10.255 I 172 I 395 I 314 10.779 I 47.6 1 D 1428 fti I TH 124/2 10.221 10.255 I 416 I 901 I 152 10.169 I 32.0 I C I 90 ftI i I LT 112/1 I0.058 I0.064 I 273 I 410 I 260 10.634 I 33.8 I C 1320 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I I E Approach 196.4 F IRT+TH 136/3 10.457 I0.309 11003 11542 12082 I1.350 1200.0 I *F I2153 ftI I LT 124/2 10.246 I0.082 I 1 I 254 I 341 11.214 1174.7 I *F 1445 ftI ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- W Approach 36.7 D+ I RT 112/1 10.283 I0.309 I 251 I 489 I 189 10.387 I 32.1 I C 1214 ftI I TH 136/3 10.291 I0.309 11026 11572 I 863 10.549 I 33.0 I C 1376 ftI I LT 112/1 10.232 I0.082 I 1 I 120 I 113 10.779 I 72.8 I *E 1180 ftI ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- , GRIFFIN LAKES - 437 TOWNHOUSES 04/30/02 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR - Existing 2002 Traffic Data 15:45:05 GRIFFIN ROAD AT RAVENSWOOD ROAD SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 1.01.00] - Summary of Parameter Values Intersection Parameters METROAREA NONCBD SIMULATION PERIOD 15 LEVELOFSERVICE C S NODELOCATION 0 0 QUEUEMODELS 1 90 25 40 Approach Parameters APPLABELS N E S W GRADES 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 PEDLEVELS 0 0 0 0 BIKEVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 PARKINGSIDES NONE NONE NONE NONE PARKVOLUMES 20 20 20 20 BUSVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 RIGHTTURNONREDS 0 0 0 0 UPSTREAMVC 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement Parameters MOVLABELS RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT VOLUMES 213 178 298 238 1636 307 283 137 234 170 777 102 WIDTHS 12.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 36.0 24.0 12.0 24.0 12.0 12.0 36.0 12.0 LANES 1 2 1 0 3 2 1 2 1 1 3 1 • GROUPTYPES NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM UTILIZATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TRUCKPERCENTS 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 PEAKHOURFACTORS 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 ARRIVALTYPES 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ACTUATIONS YES YES YES NO NO YES YES YES YES NO NO YES REQCLEARANCES 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 MINIMUMS 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 STARTUPLOST 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 ENDGAIN 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 STORAGE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 INITIALQUEUE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IDEALSATFLOWS 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 FACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 DELAYFACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 NSTOPFACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 SATURATIONFLOWS 1583 3539 1770 0 4989 3433 1583 3539 1770 1583 5085 1770 Phasing Parameters SEQUENCES 54 PERMISSIVES YES NO YES NO LEADLAGS NONE NONE OVERLAPS NO NO NO NO OFFSET 0.00 1 CYCLES 110 110 30 PEDTIME 0.0 0 GREENTIMES 7.00 5.00 28.00 9.00 34.00 YELLOWTIMES 7.00 0.00 7.00 7.00 6.00 CRITICALS 3 2 12 6 5 EXCESS 0 i 3 GRIFFIN LAKES - 437 TOWNHOUSES 04/30/02 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR - Future Traffic with Background Growth 15:48:04 GRIFFIN ROAD AT RAVENSWOOD ROAD SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 1.01.001 - Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages: Degree of Saturation (v/c) 1.15 Vehicle Delay 187.1 Level of Service F ------------------------------------------------------------- Sq 54 1 Phase 1 I Phase 2 1 Phase 3 1 Phase 4 1 Phase 5 1 **/** ------------------------------------------------------------- * + * + + + + * + * + + + + **** *> � <+ * +> <+ + +> **** I I 1 v I v ^ ++++ v North <+ I <+ + +>1 ++++> I + + + ++++ I v I ------------------------------------------------------------- I G/C=0.064 I G/C=0.045 G/C=0.255 I G/C=0.082 I G/C=0.309 1 G= 7.0" G= 5.0" G= 28.0" G= 9.0" G= 34.0" I Y+R= 7.0" I Y+R= 0.0" I Y+R= 7.0" I Y+R= 7.0" I Y+R= 6.0" OFF= 0.0% OFF=12.7% OFF=17.3% OFF=49.1% OFF=63.6% ------------------------------------------------------------- C=110 sec G= 83.0 sec = 75.5% Y=27.0 sec = 24.5% Ped= 0.0 sec = 0.0% ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Lane (Width/ I g/C I Service Rate Adj I I HCM I L I Queue I I Group I Lanesl Regd Used I @C (vph) @E (Volume v/c I Delay I S (Model 11 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- N Approach 33.6 C 1 RT 1 12/1 10.305 10.300 1 286 1 475 1 296 10.623 1 35.7 1 D+1 361 ft1 I TH 1 24/2 10.233 10.300 1 696 1 1062 1 248 10.234 1 29.1 1 *C 1 140 fti 1 LT 1 12/1 10.109 10.109 1 416 1 516 1 414 10.802 1 34.8 1 *C 1 525 ft1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S Approach 57.3 E+ I RT 1 12/1 10.351 10.255 1 172 1 395 1 393 10.975 1 78.8 1 E 1 641 ftI I TH 1 24/2 ,10.226 10.255 1 416 1 901 1 190 10.211 1 32.4 1 C 1 113 ft1 I LT 1 12/1 10.094 10.064 1 265 1 396 1 326 10.821 1 45.9 1 D 1 451 fti ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- E Approach 343.6 F ----- ------------------------------ ---------------------------------------- IRT+TH 1 36/3 10.541 10.309 1 1003 1 1542 1 2603 11.688 1 350.5 I *F 13256 ftI I LT 1 24/2 10.258 10.082 1 1 1 254 1 427 11.520 1 301.7 I *F 1 686 ftI ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- W Approach 43.6 D+ 1 RT 1 12/1 10.303 10.309 1 251 1 489 1 237 10.485 1 34.3 1 C 1 273 ft1 I TH 1 36/3 10.315 10.309 1 1026 1 1572 1 1079 10.686 1 35.8 1 D+1 510 ft1 I LT 1 12/1 10.240 10.082 1 1 1 120 1 142 10.979 1 118.7 1 *F 1 267 ft1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .GRIFFIN LAKES - 437 TOWNHOUSES 04/30/02 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR - Future Traffic with Background Growth 15:48:13 GRIFFIN ROAD AT RAVENSWOOD ROAD SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 1.01.001 - Summary of Parameter Values Intersection Parameters METROAREA NONCBD SIMULATION PERIOD 15 LEVELOFSERVICE C S NODELOCATION 0 0 QUEUEMODELS 1 90 25 40 Approach Parameters APPLABELS N E S W GRADES 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 PEDLEVELS 0 0 0 0 BIKEVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 PARKINGSIDES NONE NONE NONE NONE PARRVOLUMES 20 20 20 20 BUSVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 RIGHTTURNONREDS 0 0 0 0 UPSTREAMVC 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement Parameters MOVLABELS RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT VOLUMES 266 223 373 298 2045 384 354 171 293 213 971 128 WIDTHS 12.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 36.0 24.0 12.0 24.0 12.0 12.0 36.0 12.0 LANES 1 2 1 0 3 2 1 2 1 1 3 1 GROUPTYPES NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM UTILIZATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TRUCKPERCENTS 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 PEAKHOURFACTORS 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 j ARRIVALTYPES 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ACTUATIONS YES YES YES NO NO YES YES YES YES NO NO YES REQCLEARANCES 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 MINIMUMS 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 STARTUPLOST 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 ENDGAIN 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 STORAGE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 INITIALQUEUE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IDEALSATFLOWS 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 FACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 DELAYFACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 NSTOPFACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 SATURATIONFLOWS 1583 3539 1770 0 4988 3433 1583 3539 1770 1583 5085 1770 Phasing Parameters SEQUENCES , 54 PERMISSIVES YES NO YES NO LEADLAGS NONE NONE OVERLAPS NO NO NO NO OFFSET 0.00 1 CYCLES 110 110 30 PEDTIME 0.0 0 GREENTIMES 7.00 5.00 28.00 9.00 34.00 YELLOWTIMES 7.00 0.00 7.00 7.00 6.00 CRITICALS 3 2 12 6 5 EXCESS 0 . GRIFFIN LAKES - 437 TOWNHOUSES 04/30/02 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR - Future Total Traffic with No Improveme 15:50:43 GRIFFIN ROAD AT RAVENSWOOD ROAD ® SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 1.01.001 - Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages: Degree of Saturation (v/c) 1.27 vehicle Delay 231.8 Level of Service F ------------------------------------------------------------- Sq 54 1 Phase 1 1 Phase 2 1 Phase 3 1 Phase 4 1 Phase 5 1 **/** ------------------------------------------------------------- * + * + + + + * + * + + + + **** *> � <+ * +> <+ + +> v v- 1 " ++++ v North <+ <+ + +> 1 ++++> + + + + v ------------------------------------------------------------- I G/C=0.064 i G/C=0.045 G/C=0.255 l G/C=0.082 I G/C=0.309 G= 7.0" G= 5.0" G= 28.0" G= 9.0" ( G= 34.0" Y+R= 7.0" I Y+R= 0.0" l Y+R= 7.0" I Y+R= 7.0" I Y+R= 6.0" ` OFF= 0.0% OFF=12.7% OFF=17.3% OFF=49.1% OFF=63.6% ------------------------------------------------------------- C=110 sec G= 83.0 sec = 75.5% Y=27.0 sec = 24.5% Ped= 0.0 sec = 0.0% ---------•---------------------------------------------------------------------- i Lane (Width/ I g/C I Service Rate Adj I I HCM I L I Queue I I Group I Lanesl Reqd Used I @C (vph) @E 1Volumel v/c I Delay I S IModel 11 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- N Approach 33.8 C I RT 1 12/1 10.305 10.300 1 286 1 475 1 296 10.623 1 35.7 1 D+1 361 ftI i TH 1 24/2 10.234 10.300 1 696 1 1062 1 254 10.239 1 29.2 I *C 1 144 ftl I LT 1 12/1 10.110 10.109 1 412 1 512 1 414 10.809 1 35.4 I *D+l 528 fti ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S Approach 145.9 F --- - - - - - ------------------------------------ I RT -1 12/1 10.437 10.255 1 172 1 395 1 568 11.409 1 239.5 1 F 11452 ft1 I TH 1 24/2 10.226 10.255 1 416 1 901 1 196 10.218 1 32.5 1 C 1 117 fti I LT 1 12/1 10.112 10.064 1 263 1 394 1 362 10.916 1 60.3 1 E+1 549 ft1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- E Approach 407.3 F ----------------------------------------------- - - ------ ------- --- -- IRT+TH 1 36/3 10.541 10.309 1 1003 1 1542 1 2603 11.688 1 350.5 1 *F 13256 ftI I LT 1 24/2 10.294 10.082 1 1 1 254 1 641 12.281 1 638.2 I *F 11275 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- W Approach 43.8 D+ ------------------------------------------------------------------- • 1 RT 1 12/1 10.321 10.309 1 251 1 489 1 279 10.571 1 36.6 1 D+1 330 ft1 I TH 1 36/3 10.315 10.309 1 1026 1 1572 1 1079 10.686 1 35.8 1 D+1 510 ftI I LT 1 12/1 10.240 10.082 1 1 1 120 1 142 10.979 1 118.7 I *F 1 267 ft1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- GRIFFIN LAKES - 437 TOWNHOUSES 04/30/02 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR - Future Total Traffic with No Improveme 15:50:56 GRIFFIN ROAD AT RAVENSWOOD ROAD SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 1.01.00] - Summary of Parameter Values Intersection Parameters METROAREA NONCBD SIMULATION PERIOD 15 LEVELOFSERVICE C S NODELOCATION 0 0 QUEUEMODELS 1 90 25 40 Approach Parameters APPLABELS N E S W GRADES 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 PEDLEVELS 0 0 0 0 BIKEVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 PARKINGSIDES NONE NONE NONE NONE PARRVOLUME S 20 20 20 20 BUSVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 RIGHTTURNONREDS 0 0 0 0 UPSTREAMVC 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement Parameters MOVLABELS RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT VOLUMES 266 229 373 298 2045 577 511 176 326 251 971 128 WIDTHS 12.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 36.0 24.0 12.0 24.0 12.0 12.0 36.0 12.0 LANES 1 2 1 0 3 2 1 2 1 1 3 1 GROUPTYPES NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM UTILIZATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TRUCKPERCENTS 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 PEAKHOURFACTORS 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 ARRIVALTYPES 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ACTUATIONS YES YES YES NO NO YES YES YES YES NO NO YES j REQCLEARANCES 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 6.0 MINIMUMS 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 STARTUPLOST 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 ENDGAIN 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 STORAGE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 INITIALQUEUE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IDEALSATFLOWS 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 FACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 DELAYFACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 NSTOPFACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 SATURATIONFLOWS 1583 3539 1770 0 4988 3433 1583 3539 1770 1583 5085 1770 Phasing Parameters SEQUENCES 54 PERMISSIVES YES NO YES NO LEADLAGS NONE NONE OVERLAPS NO NO NO NO OFFSET 0.00 1 CYCLES 110 110 30 PEDTIME 0.0 0 GREENTIMES 7.00 5.00 28.00 9.00 34.00 YELLOWTIMES 7.00 0.00 7.00 7.00 6.00 CRITICALS 3 2 12 6 5 EXCESS 0 i .. GRIFFIN LAKES - 437 TOWNHOUSES 04/30/02 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR - Future Total Traffic with Improvements 16:15:42 GRIFFIN ROAD AT RAVENSWOOD ROAD 0 SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 1.01.00] Capacity Analysis Summary Intersection Averages: Degree of Saturation (v/c) 0.94 Vehicle Delay 81.9 Level of Service F ------------------------------------------------------------- Sq 45 1 Phase l I Phase 2 1 Phase 3 1 Phase 4 1 Phase 5 1 **/** ------------------------------------------------------------- * + * + + * + * + + *> <+ * +> <+ <++++j v A ++++� **** 1 1 **** v ( v North <+ I <+ + +>1 +>I +>I ++++> I 1 1++++ + I + + + + I + I ++++ I 1 v + + + + + 1 + l v ------------------------------------------------------------- G/C=0.178 I G/C=0.109 1 G/C=0.102 1 G/C=0.100 G/C=0.329 G= 19.6" G= 12.0" G= 11.2" G= 11.0" G= 36.2" 1 Y+R= 5.0" 1 Y+R= 5.0" I Y+R= 5.0" 1 Y+R= 0.0" l Y+R= 5.0" OFF= 0.0% OFF=22.4% OFF=37.8% OFF=52.5% OFF=62.5% ------------------------------------------------------------- C=110 sec G= 90.0 sec = 81.8% Y=20.0 sec = 18.2% Ped= 0.'0 sec = 0.0% ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Lane Width/ I g/C I Service Rate Adj I I HCM I L I Queue I Group I Lanesl Reqd Used I @C (vph) @E lVolumel v/c I Delay I S IModel 11 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- N Approach 55.0 D I RT 1 12/1 10.305 10.256 1 178 1 399 1 296 10.729 1 43.9 1 D+1 392 ftl I TH 1 24/2 10.234 10.109 1 1 1 364 1 254 10.658 1 51.1 1 *D 1 197 ftI I LT 1 12/1 10.231 10.178 1 306 1 433 1 414 10.956 1 65.2 I *E+l 649 fti ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- S Approach 62.8 E+ I---RT---1-12/1 10.437 10.356 1 405 1 564 1 568 11.007 1 75.1 1 E 1 919 ft1 I TH 1 24/2 10.226 10.109 1 1 1 364 1 196 10.508 1 47.3 1 D 1 145 ftl I LT 1 12/1 10.216 10.178 1 287 1 407 1 362 10.889 1 52.0 1 D 1 529 ft1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- E Approach 119.1 F IRT+TH 1 36/3 10.541 10.429 1 1903 1 2140 1 2603 11.216 1 133.3 l *F 12384 ftI I LT 1 24/2 10.294 10.202 1 1 1 693 1 641 10.925 1 61.4 I *E+l 537 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- W Approach 33.2 C --------------------------------------- ----------- --------------------------- 1 RT 1 12/1 10.321 10.553 1 781 1 875 1 279 10.319 1 14.3 1 B+1 220 ft1 I TH 1 36/3 10.315 10.329 1 1196 1 1674 1 1079 10.645 1 33.3 1 C 1 487 fti i I LT 1 12/1 10.240 10.102 1 1 1 155 1 142 10.789 1 68.8 1 *E 1 221 ftl ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .GRIFFIN LAKES - 437 TOWNHOUSES 04/30/02 WEEKDAY PM PEAK HOUR - Future Total Traffic with Improvements 16:16:45 GRIFFIN ROAD AT RAVENSWOOD ROAD SIGNAL2000/TEAPAC[Ver 1.01.00] - Summary of Parameter Values Intersection Parameters METROAREA NONCBD SIMULATION PERIOD, 15 LEVELOFSERVICE C S NODELOCATION 0 0 QUEUEMODELS 1 90 25 40 Approach Parameters APPLABELS N E S W GRADES 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 PEDLEVELS 0 0 0 0 BIKEVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 PARKINGSIDES NONE NONE NONE NONE PARKVOLUMES 20 20 20 20 BUSVOLUMES 0 0 0 0 RIGHTTURNONREDS 0 0 0 0 UPSTREAMVC 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Movement Parameters MOVLABELS RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT RT TH LT VOLUMES 266 229 373 298 2045 577 511 176 326 251 971 128 WIDTHS 12.0 24.0 12.0 0.0 36.0 24.0 12.0 24.0 12.0 12.0 36.0 12.0 LANES 1 2 1 0 3 2 1 2 1 1 3 1 GROUPTYPES NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM NORM UTILIZATIONS 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TRUCKPERCENTS 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 PEAKHOURFACTORS 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 ARRIVALTYPES 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ACTUATIONS YES YES YES NO NO YES YES YES YES NO NO YES REQCLEARANCES 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 MINIMUMS 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 14.0 STARTUPLOST 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 ENDGAIN 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 STORAGE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 INITIALQUEUE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IDEALSATFLOWS 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 1900 FACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 DELAYFACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 NSTOPFACTORS 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 SATURATIONFLOWS 1583 3539 1770 0 4988 3433 1583 3539 1770 1583 5085 1770 Phasing Parameters SEQUENCES 45 PERMISSIVES YES NO YES NO LEADLAGS NONE NONE OVERLAPS YES NO YES YES OFFSET 0.00 1 CYCLES 110 110 30 PEDTIME 0.0 0 GREENTIMES 19.60 12.00 11.20 11.00 36.20 YELLOWTIMES 5.00 5.00 5.00 0.00 5.00 CRITICALS 3 2 12 6 5 • EXCESS 0 APPENDIX C TRAFFIC DATA AND SEASONAL ADJUSTMENT FACTORS O O O Oz� 2222,, b C7 � C7 A w o C7 � Q' a sL sss esI (a `.. N soy es(D o W a, SZL LOB LLL (D 96 9l(D F-1 S l l ZS9 6E L (9 (7 N 9 L l SZ(9 bid O 4Z l Z6S 69l (V m rn v o 9l L 6Z(V 1 �c2�2: 1 anuanV sJa12uV A)40 388 66 a N N B)68 402 88 o U m a O C)35 383 84 D)31 345 59 � A W^I a I � O O C C to c n o U � 8 � °ca' o t 0 a � N N z O z W 0 M O r m w w r w �D x m a F Q a S O a Da F � m d, W � 3 , O � O U '7 N 01 M N N r-i 0 0 0 Ol Ol D\ Ol O O O O O O O O O O ri ri N M V' N d' M N �-i rl rl �-1 N N .-1 ri O O Ol D\ Ol O� m m r lD N m O M M W M Ol O O O O O O O M M M M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Q\ Ol T 01 Ol Ol Ol O\ Ol O1 O O m O O O .--1 ri ri ri r-I '-I H O O O 0 A* H H fi 14 11 H .--1 f-4 H '-7 ri r-I r-I r-I ri H 'i ri r1 11 fi ri rl .-1 ri ri O O O O O O O O O O 3 � O N U O ro 0 0 to W W W ^ U (`] �-I O r O N H O m r ID N N N N lD r m m M M O O O O O H N N M V' V' V M M M N r M H M ID VW N O O M M m m m m r Ol -1 N O Q Ol O O O O m m ON 01 01 m m m 01 ON Ol m Ol m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C. 0 0 0 0 0 0 H O O O O O O m m Ol Ol Ol Cl ON Ol 0 0 r1 D U m O o .-t r-1 r-1 r-1 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -1 ,-1 .1 ri o 0 0 0 0 0 a aj p d F ry a w a � m o N 'D m M J-1 S4 04 w Ul FC W O O a m O U N r w V' N H m r N w w r r m O N Vv ID m m H M d' w m 01 m m m O1 al m W m m 0 N -41 N V' N H m m w d' M H O m m r w N V' }4 O m 0 Cl m m m m m m m m m m m m m ON m m O O o 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 H r/ r1 r1 f-1 ri ri O O C. O O O O Ol m Ol m m m kD W Q4 m Po }J O O O O O O 0 O 00 O•0 O O O O O O 0 -1r-4 -1 11 H r-1 14 r-1 H H r'1 r-1 ri ri r-4 ri r-4 ri H H r-4 r-I ri ri fi ri r-4 r-1 ri O O O O O O O a 3 o �4 � O 1v v Q ro a U >4 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 p o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 yJ Q 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U W N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N (+� 0 0 m N N N N N O1 N V' H m N 0 m N N N 0 H O r M or- V' 0 m N N O\ N N Ol N N 0 H M O r W N m d' H WON 01 lD M O . Q 0 0 .-1 N N O rl r1 N O r1 .-1 N O O ri N N O ri N N O .i ri N O O '-I N N O .-1 rl N O O .-/ N M O r-1 N N O .�-1 .-1 N O O r1 N M M v a \ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ E CQ f-1 H r-I rl r-I N N N N M M M M d' d' d' d' V' N N N N t0 w 1D to r r r r r m m m m T D\ D\ Ol O\ O O O O .-i Ii 'A r-I N N N N N N Lf ID U OD 16 O O O O O O O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Cl o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 00 r O O O O O Cl O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .- r-I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O o O O O o o O O O O N N N ry N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N r Q1 41 \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\`\\\\\\\ \\\ C N i~ H N m w M O w M O r N N m w N m to M O r V' H m V' H m N N m w M O 1D M O r M O r V' H m N N m N N 0) w f) O r C H C 0 0 0 .--1 N M O H N N O H H N O O 'A N M O � N N O 11 H N O O 11 N M O ri N N O 'A 11 N O O -1 N N O ri -1 N O rl r-1 N M [ O \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\1---\\\\\\\\\\\\I---\\\I-----\\\\\\\\\\\\\ U ri r1 f-/ r1 fi ri N N N N M M M M V d' V V V N N N N tD W 1D W r r r r r m m m m O1 Ol 01 m O O O O O r-1 r1 rl 'A N N N (V N S O O O O O O O O O Cl O O O O O O O O o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 rl H ri H fi ri r-4 r-4 fi rl H ri ri H U X � V N .-i N M V N %D r m 0) O H N M V' N 1D r m a) o H N M IT N %D r m O\ 0 'A ry M V N %D (^ m M 0 H N M d' N %D r m O\ 0 H N M V 0 ',� ri 'i H H H H 11 H fi H N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M M V' V' V' V' C V d' V' V' V' m 0 N N N (` B. ;w Calvin, Giordano & Associates, Inc. Engineers Surveyors Planners May 10, 2002 Q Mr. Larry Leeds CITY OF DANIA BEACH MAY 13 2002 100 W. Dania Boulevard Dania, Florida 33004 Re: Griffin Lakes Staff Comments Dear Mr. Leeds:" Below please'find out`response to City Staff comments: 1) All buildings should,be numbered for easier review of the site plan. Buildings have been nulmered. 2) The rear and side building elevations identified on sheet A-3 should be enhanced with color banding and/or additional architectural.treatments The architectural elevations have been: 'modified with, additional banding: . iovided in the 'western.'Additional dumpster containers shall be p western. and - northern::portions of ;the development Applicant shall consider relocating 'dumpsters away "from the lake. Applicant shall provide 1 documentation from the Pub lic•Works/Utilities Director confirming.that sufficient trash receptacles have been provided A dunzpster :.has been added along the. -West. perimeter to reduce distance for rescdents to wal/� Addztional pla�zt matereal`has -been added to screen the dumpsters adjacent to.the Lake i The letter from public works has been requested: 4) Applicant to consider :providing :one additional tote lot within ;the development A passive.pa has been included to the Southend of the eoirirn fill ities. x o 5);-Applicant shall .reduce.the number :dwelling units from '.436.to '427 ! _ 0 lsoo Eller Drive dwellin units consistent with RM zoning., Suite 600. g - g Fort Lauderdale,Florida 33316. This has been done. "(954)921-7781: (954)921=8807 fax 6) Applicant shall ` address„ items" identified m Attachment B 560 village Boulevard (Landscape/Vegetation Review) of this staff report. Suite 340 , Ackno fv[eded. �. West Palm Beach,Florida 33409 g i (561)684.6161 } (561)684=6360 7) Applicant shall meet with Broward Sheriff-s Office Community Policing Unit to ® investigate the.appropriateness of installing a_security pedestrian access gate on Griffin Road. If deemed. appropriate by BSO, applicant proposes 'to provide. gate in conjunction with an emergency access opening for the fire dept. Applicant has requested an approved emergency_access design from the fire department. 8) Applicant to pay a park impact fee equal to pursuant to Article VI, Chapter 19 of the City Code. This fee shall be paid prior to issuance of any building permits. Acknowledged. 9) Applicant to consider paying additional voluntary park,fee in connection with the assignment".of the 72 flexibility units; fee to` be :paid at the dime of site plan, approval by the Cit Commission. Agreed. . j 10)Applicant to set.:aside sufficient land for, a third tot lot within the townhouse development. Additional area has been provided at the south end of community for a passive park. 11 Applicant to provide additional data See attachment C: to'evaluate traffic impact of.-the proposed'development, including but not limited to, sufficient inbound ,vehiciilar,,statking' . space, ,pedestrian access':ao the Tri-Rail _Station,. physical improvements to .the public road .right=of--way, and construction."of sidewalks g . alon. Ravenswood and"Griffin Roads. ; Supplemental data:has been given to Tinter"addressing fhe issues raised in'their: April`ll, 2002 letter to'Mr. Leeds. 12)Applicant to amend zoning petition from RM 2 to RM Applicant has agreed to RM via letter from applicant's attorney'; ,13)Applicant to consider voluntarily deed=restricting property to allow only two story,townhouse umts;.(sold m£ee=simple or condominium) at a maximum of 12 units per acre. Agreed. 14)Applicant to provide information regarding the;Comrriuruty Development District Applicant has.submitted CDD docicane�zts for City Itevtefv 'Approval of CDD schedailed for 572802 Site Plan Review . The buffer adjacent to Griffin Road is rioted as`approximately 8 feet where 10 feet is required II'provided here. The dedicated right-of-way will remain green space for some time, but it is a possibility that the green area will be reduced from 15 feet to 10 feet and 3 feet in the northeast corner of the site: Northeast corner is adjacent to the 'existing .turn lane and the additional 5" dedication should not apply to this area. It is possible the western lake could have the dumpsters moved to the east and swap some of the parking presently,situated east of the dumpsters: With the requirement that the dumpster locations not be within 25 of buildings, the moving of the dumpsters .at the lake would result:in some locations -occurring . within 25'of buildings. -LandscapeNe�etatiO Review I) Label the.proposed wall, decorative fence shadow box fence, and linear unit fence separators on thelaridscaping plans:"Additionally,provide a note 6' the plans that the height of he fences/walls shall be measured from the adjacent sidewalks. These elements have--been labeled 2). Provide: detailed,:elevations of,the 'proposed wall and, shadow box ,fences, including,:but not limited to colors,banding, cap and any design elements, including those portions of the screen wall facing to Ravenswood and Griffin Roads. An elevation, details and colors have'been added. 3)', Provide, a minimum 6' high wall around the adjacent existing commercial property at approximately`12�inches of the property line for the:width of the footer. A 6'Iziglz wall has,been added 4 Provide a minimum 10' wide perimeter landscape--buffer along Guff n Road Additionally;the proposed minimum:6' tall.decorative.wall will require a'hedge_on ' the outside and trees both sides as indicated in comment#5. :There`�s a,co for enough space on either side of the wall for the planting of trees m these areas, as 5' is �. - \ being dedicated to_Broward County ui this area (Consider an alternating wall design) ' An alternating wall design'ha's been included,Yo meander trees on:each side of the 5) `Provide a denser lan scapeperimeter buffer-consisting of two rows of.staggered trees(each row 40'-off center)'to create a minimum'- of one tree;,ever'20 linear feet. or:eve twee linear eet has been added and trees have been staggered _ - ... ®ne tree for ever h' - f I 6) :Provide'the red pervious-area of 515,365 square feet for the:requi trees of 1 tree and 8..shrubs per.2,500 square feet The pervious area has-been revised and L tree an .8-shrubs per 2,500 square'feet have.been:provided 7 Provide-an enhancement to the entrance road area with flowering shrubs and,.a vine`on e::proposed trellis.` Additional flowering»iaterial'an vines.have' .been added. 8) Provide. the proposed and existing site lighting, overhead utility lines and perimeter sidewalks,on the landscaping plan. Indicate if,the existing perimeter and exterior overhead lines are'to remain. " The-site lighting plan has been incorporated, and the other elements have been noted. 9) Provide the minimum required D.B.H. and spread on all proposed trees. These specifications have been added to the plant list. 10)Please be;advised that an irrigation plan;must be submitted for approval at time of building plans. This note is-indicated on the plans 11)_Provide' an alternative to:the proposed 2' wide ,grass area vehicle overhang between the`.'sidewalk aiid the.parking area. The 2'overhang no longer sod, but included,as part of the 7'.concrete walk. 12)Please provide,documentation that the existing ground elevation around the,drip.. line of the preserved trees will not be changed. ,.This';:may be.;accomplished by providing spot elevations at the,base of the existing ttees. Additionally, provide;,the ' required tree,protection retail on the laridscapc,plans A note has been added to the-plans and,ttee protection detail included. 13),NOTE ON,PLAN. Provide minimum 8 weeks on the roof pruning. This note has-been modified to read 8 weeks, not 6 weeks 1.4)Provide',a note on the and plans_that an onsite meeting shall be required between the,srte'contractor and the City of Dania:Beach`before a site clearing per is approved to identify the existing trees to remain and proposed trees°to be relocated This'note has been added 15)Provide -a note on the landscaping plans that tree removaUrelocation, clearing/grubbmg permits and bonding will;be required:'Additionally,provide a note on the landscape':plans'that'the proposed_tree professional:.must provide a written " method/schedule for tree relocation and submit;it for approval to alie City of Dama Beach;mcluding qualifications/references before the trees.can be root pruned ,. -This.note lias'beeiz added l6) Provide a revised plan to preserve/relocate all I he trees/palms deemed valuable by th '.C4.of Dania Beach and mitigate the trees of lesser values :Additionally, the;City of Dania''Beach Public-Works Department shall inspect the proposed ,trees :to be :'removed to verify".if;they can utilize any of them TI:u'issue has been coordinated with theCity's` ands cape.inspector A preservation/relocation plan I:as been prepared and;is submitted.weth the revised site plan 17)Indicate the time frame of the installation of the perimeter landscaping, fences and walls. Additionally, is a sales trailer and model trap being proposed? If so, provide a landscaping plan for them. The wall and fence adjacent to the residential properties shall be constructed in the early stages of the project. The model trap planting shall be provided prior to the first building permit. 18)Document procedure for protecting existing trees from mobile home relocation occurring prior to.site plan approval. City tree preservation,flyers identifying procedures=will'be developed and taken to each current resident.: The.owner will post'this flyer in the office as well. 19)Provide 'details .on the proposed widening of.Ravenswood Road and if it will effect the sidewalk-location or add landscape medians in'the road., This.issue;shall be;coordinated with Broward County Traffic Engineering 20)Pervious area(40%minimum) shall-be clarified. The tabular:sufnmary was previously revised and faxed to the City for, approval. This revised summary:is included-on the revised'site plan submitted on May 10, . 2002. Sincerely, ..Shelley Eichner,'AICP, CITY OF DANIA BEACH ROUTING SHEET 100 W. Dania Beach Blvd. Dania Beach, FL 33004 Phone: (954) 924-3645 Fax: (954) 922-2687 Date: April 4, 2002 Folio#: Project Name: GRIFFIN LAKES Project No, SP-11-02 VIA: MAIL PICKUP IN-HOUSE X PLEASE REVIEW THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT FOR COMMENTS TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR'S STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD AND CITY COMMISSION. PLEASE LOG YOUR TIME SPENT AND COMMENTS ON THE ATTACHED REPORTING SHEET. THANK YOU. FIRE MARSHAL: Ed Tarmey ❑ UTILITIES DIRECTOR: Bud Palm ❑ LANDSCAPING CONSULTANT: Bill Tesauro APPROVED AS SUBMITTED: [ ] DENIED: [ ] APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS: [ ] List conditions: Signature Print Name Date Route Sheet Form doc CITY OF DANIA BEACH ROUTING SHEET 100 W. Dania Beach Blvd. Dania Beach, FL 33004 Phone: (954) 924-3645 Fax: (954)922-2687 Date: March 18, 2002 Folio#: 50-42-32-01-0040 & 50-42-32-01-0070 Project Name: Griffin Lakes Project No. PL-09-02/R7--10-02/SP-11-02 VIA: MAIL PICKUP IN-HOUSE X PLEASE REVIEW THE ABOVE REFERENCED PROJECT FOR COMMENTS TO BE INCORPORATED IN THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR'S STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD AND CITY COMMISSION. PLEASE LOG YOUR TIME SPENT AND COMMENTS ON THE ATTACHED REPORTING SHEET. THANK YOU. ❑ FIRE MARSHAL: Ed Tarmey UTILITIES DIRECTOR: Bud Palm ❑ LANDSCAPING CONSULTANT: Bill Tesauro APPROVED AS SUBMITTED: ( ] DENIED: ( ] APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS: ( ] List conditions: Sign ure Le Lc. A T Pz/_ -I Print Name Z� Date Route Sheet Form.doc