Trip Generation Rates for Transportation Impact Analyses of Infill Developments (2013) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 47-91
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 48... ...
3 5 Chapter 1 Introduction 6 Chapter 2 Overview of the Trip Generation Methodology for Infill Development 8 Chapter 3 Application of the Household Travel Survey Method 8 3.1 Background and Source of Surveys 9 3.2 Practitioner Need for Broad Applicability 9 3.3 Required Data for the Household Travel Survey Method 10 3.4 Linked-Trip Data 10 3.5 Geographic Units of Urban Area Data 12 Chapter 4 Example Adjustment Factors Using San Francisco Bay Area Travel Survey Data 12 4.1 Household Travel Survey Data 12 4.2 Defining General Urban and Urban Center Context 14 4.3 Weighting and Expansion of Survey Data 15 4.4 Estimated Mode Share by Land Use 15 4.5 Estimated Vehicle Occupancy by Land Use 16 4.6 Use of Local Travel Demand Model to Derive Adjustment Factors 17 Chapter 5 Selection of a Household Travel Survey as a Case Study 17 5.1 Criteria for Selecting a Metropolitan Area with a Suitable Household Travel Survey 17 5.2 Selection of a Metropolitan Area 18 5.3 Sufficiency of the Dataset 18 5.4 Next Steps in the Process 19 Chapter 6 Analysis of Household Travel Survey Data 19 6.1 GIS Analysis 19 6.2 Household Travel Survey Analysis 22 Chapter 7 Selection of Candidate Sites for Cordon Counts 22 7.1 Selecting Urban Infill Sites for Cordon Counts 23 7.2 Summary of the Data Collection Procedures 24 Appendix A Overview of Household Travel Surveys Assessed for Case Study 25 Appendix B Detailed Mode Share Tables for San Francisco Bay Area Example C o n t e n t s
|
From page 49... ...
4 27 Appendix C Example Output Tables for San Francisco Bay Area Infill Area Mode Share and Vehicle Occupancy Adjustment Factors 30 Appendix D Detailed Mode Share Tables for the Washington, D.C., Case Study 32 Appendix E Output Tables for Washington, D.C., Infill Area Mode Share and Vehicle Occupancy Adjustment Factors 35 Appendix F Prioritization of Candidate Sites for Cordon Counts 37 Appendix G Example Data Summaries for Candidate Sites 45 Notes and Citations to Supplemental Technical Report
|
From page 50... ...
5 This technical report supplements NCHRP Report 758: Trip Generation Rates for Transportation Impact Analyses of Infill Developments. It is a consolidation of interim reports prepared during the development of the recommended methodology for estimating vehicular trip generation of infill development.
|
From page 51... ...
6The following overview of the methodology is paraphrased from Chapter 3 of the report. The research team selected an approach for estimating the trip generation of infill development categorized as "ITE rate adjustment based on empirical data," as described in the main body of the report.
|
From page 52... ...
7 Note: TIAs = transportation impact analyses. Figure 2.1.
|
From page 53... ...
8The following description of the use of the household travel survey method is paraphrased from Chapter 3 and 4 of the report. Infill adjustment factors may be derived for sites proposed within metropolitan areas that have current HTS data.
|
From page 54... ...
9 surveys provide some useful information, they are not representative at the scale of the region, city, or urbanized area. In fact, according to the Travel Survey Manual:2 "It has long been determined by most metropolitan regions that data collected in one region has little relevance to another region.
|
From page 55... ...
10 multiple variables from the four categories of data: household, person, vehicle, and travel/activity. Linked-trip data are made up of individual trip records, each of which represents one person's travel for an activity by the primary mode of travel.
|
From page 56... ...
11 • Super-districts (34)
|
From page 57... ...
12 This chapter provides a detailed example of how mode split and vehicle occupancy adjustment factors are derived from household travel survey data. As described in the previous chapter, the investigators selected the household travel survey data from the 2000 BATS.
|
From page 59... ...
14 edge of the buffer ring covered more the 1⁄3 of the TAZs area. In metropolitan areas where GIS layers of transit routes and stops are not available, the exercise of selecting transit proximate TAZs is performed manually.
|
From page 60... ...
15 gating the data to represent context, land use type, weekday peak time periods, and proximity to transit. 4.4 Estimated Mode Share by Land Use The trip records for each land use category were aggregated by mode to determine mode share percentages for bike, walk, bus, rail, car, and other.
|
From page 61... ...
16 convert between person trips and vehicle trips in the proposed methodology. Appendix B of this technical report displays the mode splits and vehicle occupancy by land use for (1)
|
From page 62... ...
17 This chapter summarizes the development of a case study to extract adjustment factor data from a household travel survey. This information was originally submitted to NCHRP in a technical memorandum5 for this study.
|
From page 63... ...
18 system that operates within urban and suburban areas, and local governments promote infill and transit-oriented developments around transit stations. The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority operates and maintains Metrorail and Metrobus, the major rail and bus transit systems in the area.
|
From page 64... ...
19 This chapter describes how the research team distilled household travel survey data for the Washington, D.C., case study selected in Chapter 5 to segregate trips and mode share to and from TAZs that met the criteria for the four primary land use categories being studied (residential, restaurant, retail, and office)
|
From page 65... ...
20 The Washington, D.C., HTS is activity-based and not placebased, so the type of land use at the origin or destination of the trip needs to be inferred from the trip purpose description provided in the trip records. Survey participants selected from 13 different predetermined trip purposes (or activities)
|
From page 66... ...
21 and vehicle occupancy. Employee-related trips are captured in the "work" trip purpose.
|
From page 67... ...
22 This chapter describes the process for collecting the empirical data for validating the Washington, D.C., case study. The process of selecting the candidate sites is summarized in the following: • Finalize cordon count procedures.
|
From page 68... ...
23 were, as required, supplemented with public database searches to determine required land use attributes (i.e., gross square feet, number of employees, residential units)
|
From page 69... ...
24 Atlanta (Atlanta Regional Commission) • Most recent survey completed in 2002.
|
From page 70... ...
25 S U P P L E M E N T A L T E C H N I C A L R E P O R T A P P E N D I X B Detailed Mode Share Tables for San Francisco Bay Area Example
|
From page 72... ...
27 S U P P L E M E N T A L T E C H N I C A L R E P O R T A P P E N D I X C Example Output Tables for San Francisco Bay Area Infill Area Mode Share and Vehicle Occupancy Adjustment Factors Example Daily Output Tables for San Francisco Bay Area Infill Area Mode Split and Vehicle Occupancy Adjustments to ITE Trip Generation Rates/Equations Land Use Context Criteria Type of Transit (Max 15-min Headway) Proximity Mode Share (All Trips)
|
From page 73... ...
28 Example a.m. Peak Hour Output Tables for San Francisco Bay Area Infill Area Mode Share and Vehicle Occupancy Adjustments to ITE Trip Generation Rates/Equations Land Use Context Criteria Type of Transit (Max 15-min Headway)
|
From page 74... ...
29 Land Use Context Average Vehicle Occupancy Residential General urban/ urban center (30–70 emp/gross acre) (10–40 DUs/gross acre)
|
From page 75... ...
30 S U P P L E M E N T A L T E C H N I C A L R E P O R T A P P E N D I X D Detailed Mode Share Tables for the Washington, D.C., Case Study
|
From page 76... ...
31 Household Travel Survey Linked Trip Analysis Mode Split Summary by Scenario DC Area Eat Out DC Area Residential DC Area Shopping DC Area Work Transit 250 3.1% Transit 4438 7.0% Transit 844 3.0% Transit 3665 13.7% Auto Driver 3970 49.3% Auto Driver 38514 61.0% Auto Driver 17684 62.6% Auto Driver 18553 69.4% Auto Passenger 2242 27.9% Auto Passenger 13003 20.6% Auto Passenger 6068 21.5% Auto Passenger 1352 5.1% Walk 1464 18.2% Walk 4078 6.5% Walk 3434 12.2% Walk 2634 9.8% Bike 38 0.5% Bike 382 0.6% Bike 92 0.3% Bike 216 0.8% Other 83 1.0% Other 2692 4.3% Other 141 0.5% Other 322 1.2% Total Trip Records 8047 Total Trip Records 63107 Total Trip Records 28263 Total Trip Records 26742 Vehicle Occupancy 1.66 Vehicle Occupancy 1.35 Vehicle Occupancy 1.40 Vehicle Occupancy 1.13 Urban Rail Eat Out Urban Rail Residential Urban Rail Shopping Urban Rail Work Transit 120 8.8% Transit 1856 22.5% Transit 372 9.7% Transit 1515 28.5% Auto Driver 391 28.6% Auto Driver 3735 45.4% Auto Driver 1571 40.8% Auto Driver 2285 43.0% Auto Passenger 218 16.0% Auto Passenger 1068 13.0% Auto Passenger 458 11.9% Auto Passenger 236 4.4% Walk 584 42.8% Walk 1290 15.7% Walk 1364 35.4% Walk 1069 20.1% Bike 15 1.1% Bike 137 1.7% Bike 38 1.0% Bike 98 1.8% Other 37 2.7% Other 146 1.8% Other 45 1.2% Other 108 2.0% Total Trip Records 1365 Total Trip Records 8232 Total Trip Records 3848 Total Trip Records 5311 Vehicle Occupancy 1.66 Vehicle Occupancy 1.30 Vehicle Occupancy 1.34 Vehicle Occupancy 1.15 Urban Rail Eat Out Urban Rail Residential Urban Rail Shopping Urban Rail Work Transit 6 12.2% Transit 653 32.5% Transit 44 19.7% Transit 569 38.8% Auto Driver 17 34.7% Auto Driver 848 42.2% Auto Driver 89 39.9% Auto Driver 641 43.7% Auto Passenger 7 14.3% Auto Passenger 213 10.6% Auto Passenger 10 4.5% Auto Passenger 59 4.0% Walk 19 38.8% Walk 219 10.9% Walk 78 35.0% Walk 141 9.6% Bike 0 0.0% Bike 40 2.0% Bike 1 0.4% Bike 34 2.3% Other 0 0.0% Other 38 1.9% Other 1 0.4% Other 22 1.5% Total Trip Records 49 Total Trip Records 2011 Total Trip Records 223 Total Trip Records 1466 Vehicle Occupancy 1.35 Vehicle Occupancy 1.30 Vehicle Occupancy 1.16 Vehicle Occupancy 1.15 Urban Rail Eat Out Urban Rail Residential Urban Rail Shopping Urban Rail Work Transit 23 16.1% Transit 506 27.7% Transit 107 16.5% Transit 478 35.6% Auto Driver 48 33.6% Auto Driver 776 42.4% Auto Driver 292 45.0% Auto Driver 610 45.4% Auto Passenger 36 25.2% Auto Passenger 243 13.3% Auto Passenger 95 14.6% Auto Passenger 67 5.0% Walk 32 22.4% Walk 257 14.0% Walk 142 21.9% Walk 140 10.4% Bike 0 0.0% Bike 32 1.7% Bike 6 0.9% Bike 28 2.1% Other 4 2.8% Other 16 0.9% Other 7 1.1% Other 21 1.6% Total Trip Records 143 Total Trip Records 1830 Total Trip Records 649 Total Trip Records 1344 Vehicle Occupancy 1.69 Vehicle Occupancy 1.34 Vehicle Occupancy 1.36 Vehicle Occupancy 1.17 Urban Bus Eat Out Urban Bus Residential Urban Bus Shopping Urban Bus Work Transit 138 7.5% Transit 2288 18.8% Transit 441 8.1% Transit 1815 24.4% Auto Driver 646 34.9% Auto Driver 6177 50.8% Auto Driver 2591 47.5% Auto Driver 3809 51.2% Auto Passenger 337 18.2% Auto Passenger 1620 13.3% Auto Passenger 720 13.2% Auto Passenger 342 4.6% Walk 674 36.4% Walk 1634 13.4% Walk 1605 29.4% Walk 1222 16.4% Bike 17 0.9% Bike 174 1.4% Bike 43 0.8% Bike 125 1.7% Other 40 2.2% Other 266 2.2% Other 56 1.0% Other 128 1.7% Total Trip Records 1852 Total Trip Records 12159 Total Trip Records 5456 Total Trip Records 7441 Vehicle Occupancy 1.62 Vehicle Occupancy 1.28 Vehicle Occupancy 1.33 Vehicle Occupancy 1.13 Urban Bus Eat Out Urban Bus Residential Urban Bus Shopping Urban Bus Work Transit 8 10.4% Transit 806 27.3% Transit 50 15.4% Transit 698 33.4% Auto Driver 33 42.9% Auto Driver 1398 47.3% Auto Driver 154 47.5% Auto Driver 1074 51.5% Auto Passenger 13 16.9% Auto Passenger 330 11.2% Auto Passenger 22 6.8% Auto Passenger 82 3.9% Walk 22 28.6% Walk 282 9.5% Walk 94 29.0% Walk 161 7.7% Bike 1 1.3% Bike 53 1.8% Bike 2 0.6% Bike 44 2.1% Other 0 0.0% Other 87 2.9% Other 2 0.6% Other 28 1.3% Total Trip Records 77 Total Trip Records 2956 Total Trip Records 324 Total Trip Records 2087 Vehicle Occupancy 1.36 Vehicle Occupancy 1.27 Vehicle Occupancy 1.20 Vehicle Occupancy 1.13 Urban Bus Eat Out Urban Bus Residential Urban Bus Shopping Urban Bus Work Transit 29 13.8% Transit 631 24.0% Transit 126 13.5% Transit 585 31.0% Auto Driver 89 42.4% Auto Driver 1255 47.8% Auto Driver 481 51.4% Auto Driver 992 52.5% Auto Passenger 51 24.3% Auto Passenger 358 13.6% Auto Passenger 142 15.2% Auto Passenger 93 4.9% Walk 37 17.6% Walk 312 11.9% Walk 172 18.4% Walk 161 8.5% Bike 0 0.0% Bike 40 1.5% Bike 6 0.6% Bike 36 1.9% Other 4 1.9% Other 32 1.2% Other 8 0.9% Other 23 1.2% Total Trip Records 210 Total Trip Records 2628 Total Trip Records 935 Total Trip Records 1890 Vehicle Occupancy 1.71 Vehicle Occupancy 1.32 Vehicle Occupancy 1.36 Vehicle Occupancy 1.16 Pr ox to Hi gh Fr eq .B us St op Ge ne ra lU rb an Da ily Pr ox to Hi gh Fr eq .B us St op Ge ne ra lU rb an AM Pe ak Pr ox to Hi gh Fr eq .B us St op Ge ne ra lU rb an PM Pe ak Ge ne ra lU rb an AM Pe ak Pr ox im ity to Ra ilS ta o n Ge ne ra lU rb an PM Pe ak W as hi ng to n DC Ar ea Pr ox im ity to Ra ilS ta tio n Ge ne ra lU rb an Da ily Pr ox im ity to Ra ilS ta o n
|
From page 77... ...
32 S U P P L E M E N T A L T E C H N I C A L R E P O R T A P P E N D I X E Output Tables for Washington, D.C., Infill Area Mode Share and Vehicle Occupancy Adjustment Factors Washington, D.C., Household Travel Survey Linked-Trip Analysis Output Tables for Infill Area Mode Split and Vehicle Occupancy Adjustments to ITE Trip Generation Rates/Equations Land Use Context/Area Type Transit Mode Available (<15-min Headway) Transit Proximity Mode Share Percent by Transit Percent by Nonmotorized Rail <½ mile 28.5% 22.0% Residential General urban/urban center Bus <¼ mile 18.8% 14.9% Rail <½ mile 22.5% 17.3% Restaurant Bus <¼ mile 7.5% 37.3% Rail <½ mile 8.8% 43.9% Retail Bus <¼ mile 8.1% 30.2% Rail <½ mile 9.7% 36.4% Office/work Bus <¼ mile 24.4% 18.1% Table A
|
From page 78... ...
33 Washington, D.C., Household Travel Survey Linked-Trip Analysis Output Tables for Infill Area Mode Split and Vehicle Occupancy Adjustments to ITE Trip Generation Rates/Equations Land Use Context/Area Type Transit Mode Available (<15-min Headway) Transit Proximity Mode Share Percent by Transit Percent by Nonmotorized Rail <½ mile 38.8% 11.9% Residential General urban/urban center Bus <¼ mile 27.3% 11.3% Rail <½ mile 32.5% 12.9% Restaurant Bus <¼ mile 10.4% 29.9% Rail <½ mile 12.2% 38.8% Retail Bus <¼ mile 15.4% 29.6% Rail <½ mile 19.7% 35.4% Office/work Bus <¼ mile 33.4% 9.8% Table A
|
From page 79... ...
34 Land Use Context/Area Type A (Bus)
|
From page 80... ...
35 S U P P L E M E N T A L T E C H N I C A L R E P O R T A P P E N D I X F Prioritization of Candidate Sites for Cordon Counts
|
From page 82... ...
37 S U P P L E M E N T A L T E C H N I C A L R E P O R T A P P E N D I X G Example Data Summaries for Candidate Sites
|
From page 90... ...
45 1. Institute of Transportation Engineers.
|
From page 91... ...
Abbreviations and acronyms used without definitions in TRB publications: A4A Airlines for America AAAE American Association of Airport Executives AASHO American Association of State Highway Officials AASHTO American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials ACI–NA Airports Council International–North America ACRP Airport Cooperative Research Program ADA Americans with Disabilities Act APTA American Public Transportation Association ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials ATA American Trucking Associations CTAA Community Transportation Association of America CTBSSP Commercial Truck and Bus Safety Synthesis Program DHS Department of Homeland Security DOE Department of Energy EPA Environmental Protection Agency FAA Federal Aviation Administration FHWA Federal Highway Administration FMCSA Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration FRA Federal Railroad Administration FTA Federal Transit Administration HMCRP Hazardous Materials Cooperative Research Program IEEE Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers MAP-21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (2012) NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASAO National Association of State Aviation Officials NCFRP National Cooperative Freight Research Program NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research Program NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NTSB National Transportation Safety Board PHMSA Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration RITA Research and Innovative Technology Administration SAE Society of Automotive Engineers SAFETEA-LU Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (2005)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.