Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill
Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
FINAL REPORT
Prepared For:
The California Department of Transportation ( Caltrans)
Headquarters Divisions of Transportation Planning
and Research & Innovation
Prepared By:
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc.
In Association With:
Economic & Planning Systems
Gene Bregman & Associates
June 15, 2009
Economic &
Planning Sys tems
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page i
Abstract
This report presents the results of the second phase of a two phase research
project undertaken by the California Department of Transportation ( Caltrans)
to study travel characteristics of infill development in California’s metropolitan
areas. This research was guided by goals to establish a database of empirical
trip generation studies for various types of infill development, to standardize a
data collection and analysis methodology, and to coordinate this research
with the Institute of Transportation Engineers ( ITE) with an objective to
integrate the findings into a future ITE publication. The specific objectives of
the second phase of this research were to:
􀂊 Develop trip generation rates for common infill land use categories in
urban areas of California,
􀂊 Use methodology established in Phase 1 and continue to build a
California urban infill land use trip generation database, and
􀂊 Supplement ITE trip generation data.
The first phase of this research project was considered a pilot study for the
collection of trip generation data for urban infill land uses. The second phase
is intended to collect and report additional trip generation data for an
expanded set of urban infill land uses. The ultimate goal of this effort is to
eventually gain acceptance and adoption of this data by the Institute of
Transportation Engineers ( ITE) in assessing the traffic impacts of various land
use development projects located in urban infill areas as part of planning
efforts, traffic impacts studies, traffic impact mitigation programs, and
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA).
Data collection was indefinitely postponed in early 2009 because of concerns
that the economic downturn affects the validity of the trip generation data.
Furthermore, a limited amount of data was collected in the second phase of
this project due to the inherent difficulty and relatively high cost associated
with collecting data in complex urban settings. However, the study has been
successful in developing and testing data collection methods, identifying
challenges related to collecting data for urban infill sites and devising
strategies to address these challenges, establishing the beginnings of an
urban infill trip generation database, and deriving initial findings based on the
limited data that was collected. The lessons learned through this undertaking
have strengthened the knowledge and techniques for continuing data
collection in future research efforts.
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page ii
Acknowledgements
Project Management and Consultant Team
This project was initiated and funded by the California Department of
Transportation ( Caltrans) using State Planning and Research Program funds
provided by the Headquarters Division of Research and Innovation. Ms. Terry
Parker, a Senior Planner with the Office of Community Planning in Caltrans
Headquarters Division of Transportation Planning, provided oversight of this
effort.
The consultant team responsible for implementing this study included:
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc.
James M. Daisa, P. E., Project Manager
Ali Mustafa, EIT, Project Analyst
Marc Mizuta, P. E., PTOE, Project Engineer
Luke Schwartz, EIT, Project Analyst
Leo Espelet, P. E., Project Engineer
Diana Turlik, EIT Project Analyst
Daniel Carley, EIT, Project Analyst
Jennifer Jackson, Project Analyst
Cindy Dalen- Slade, Graphic Design
Bruce Friedman, P. E., Technical Editor
Economic & Planning Systems, Inc.
Walter Keiser, Principal
Edward A. Sullivan, III, Senior Technical Associate
Gene Bregman & Associates
Gene Bregman, President
The methodology and information summarized in this report has greatly
benefited from input and oversight provided by members of the Technical
Advisory Committee, who have generously donated their time and talents
since 2005.
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page iii
Members of the Phase 2 Technical Advisory Committee
􀂊 AC Transit, Nathan Landau, Senior Planner
􀂊 Caltrans ( Headquarters, Traffic Operations Division), Marc Birnbaum,
Supervising Senior Transportation Planner
􀂊 Caltrans ( District 3), Nadarajah Suthahar, Transportation Engineer
􀂊 Caltrans ( District 4), Beth Thomas, Senior Transportation Planner
􀂊 Bay Area Rapid Transit ( BART), Kenya Wheeler, Senior Transportation
Planner
􀂊 San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, Peter Albert, Senior
Planning Manager
􀂊 Association of Bay Area Governments ( ABAG), Christy Riviere, Senior
Planner
􀂊 Metropolitan Transportation Commission ( MTC), Rupinder Singh,
Associate Transportation Planner
􀂊 San Diego Association of Governments ( SANDAG), Alex Estrella, Trip
Generation Coordinator
􀂊 San Joaquin Council of Governments ( SJCOG), Sam Kaur, Associate
Regional Planner
􀂊 City of San Diego, Shahriar Ammi, Associate Traffic Engineer
􀂊 San Francisco County Transportation Authority, Michael Schwartz,
Transportation Planner
Sources of funding for this study are the Federal Highway Administration
( FHWA) State Research and Planning Program and the State of California,
Department of Transportation, Division of Research and Innovation.
DISCLAIMER
The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are
responsible for the facts and the accuracy of data presented herein. The
contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the State of
California or the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not
constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract .......................................................................................................................... i
Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................... ii
Project Management and Consultant Team ........................................................................ ii
Members of the Phase 2 Technical Advisory Committee .................................................. iii
1 Introduction ........................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Problem Statement ............................................................................................................ 2
1.2 Purpose of the Study .......................................................................................................... 3
1.3 Study Outcomes ................................................................................................................. 3
2 Overview of Phase 1 Study ................................................................................... 4
3 Data Collection ..................................................................................................... 6
3.1 Identification and Selection of Study Sites..................................................................... 6
3.1.1 Defining Urban Infill .................................................................................................... 6
3.1.2 Selected Land Uses .................................................................................................... 8
3.1.3 Site Selection Criteria ............................................................................................... 14
3.1.4 Site Selection Approach ......................................................................................... 17
3.2 Overview of Selected Data Collection Methodology .............................................. 17
3.3 Overview of Surveyed Sites ............................................................................................. 18
3.4 Site Overview by Land Use.............................................................................................. 18
3.4.1 Residential Land Use Categories ........................................................................... 19
3.4.2 Non- Residential Categories.................................................................................... 23
4 Preliminary Findings ............................................................................................ 31
4.1 Overview of Derived Trip Generation Rates by Land Use ........................................ 31
4.2 Comparison with ITE Trip Generation Rates ................................................................. 31
4.2.1 Residential Land Uses .............................................................................................. 31
4.2.2 Non- Residential Land Uses ...................................................................................... 34
4.2.3 Non- Prioritized Land Uses ........................................................................................ 37
4.2.4 Urban University Town Trip Generation – UC Berkeley Sites .............................. 38
4.3 Mode of Travel by Land Use ........................................................................................... 41
5 Summary and Conclusion .................................................................................. 45
5.1 Key Conclusions ................................................................................................................ 45
5.2 Recommendations ........................................................................................................... 45
5.2.1 Recommendations for Improving Study Methodology .................................... 45
5.2.2 Recommendations for Future Research Efforts .................................................. 46
6 Bibliography......................................................................................................... 48
7 Appendices ......................................................................................................... 49
A. Site Data Summaries ........................................................................................................ 50
B. Excerpt from Scope of Work for Phase 2 – Detailed Survey Methodology ........... 70
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page v
C. Intercept Survey Questionnaires .................................................................................... 75
D. Summary of Study Challenges ....................................................................................... 49
E. Summary of Study Costs .................................................................................................. 86
F. Summary of Comments Received from ITE Trip Generation Subcommittee
Review of Phase 1 Final Report...................................................................................... 94
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: List of Land Uses and Descriptions for California Urban Infill Trip Generation
Research ............................................................................................................................... ............. 11
Table 2: Comparison of Observed and ITE Trip Rates ( For Residential Land Uses) ............... 32
Table 3: Comparison of Observed and ITE Trip Rates ( For Non- Residential Land Uses) ...... 35
Table 4: Comparison of Observed and ITE Trip Rates ( For Non- Prioritized Land Use
Categories) ............................................................................................................................... ......... 38
Table 5: Comparison of Observed and ITE Trip Rates ( For Sites Near UC Berkeley) ............. 39
Table 6: Comparison of Mode of Travel by Land Use ( For Residential Land Uses) ............... 41
Table 7: Comparison of Mode of Travel by Land Use ( For Non- Residential Land Uses) ...... 43
Table 8: Comparison of Mode of Travel by Land Use ( For Sites Near UC Berkeley) ............. 44
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Location of Surveyed Sites in California ........................................................................ 27
Figure 2: Comparison Between Surveyed Trip Results and ITE Standard Trip Estimates For All
Residential Land Use Categories - AM Peak Hour ...................................................................... 33
Figure 3: Comparison Between Surveyed Trip Results and ITE Standard Trip Estimates For All
Residential Land Use Categories - PM Peak Hour ....................................................................... 33
Figure 4: Comparison Between Derived Trip Rates and ITE Trip Estimates - General Office
Use - AM Peak Hour ........................................................................................................................... 36
Figure 5: Comparison Between Derived Trip Rates and ITE Trip Estimates - General Office
Use - PM Peak Hour ........................................................................................................................... 36
Figure 6: Comparison Between Derived Trip Rates and ITE Trip Estimates – Berkeley
Residential Uses - AM Peak Hour .................................................................................................... 40
Figure 7: Comparison Between Derived Trip Rates and ITE Trip Estimates – Berkeley
Residential Uses - PM Peak Hour ..................................................................................................... 40
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 1
1 Introduction
Infill development is defined as new development and redevelopment projects
located on vacant or underutilized land within existing developed areas. Infill
development is one strategy for revitalizing declining city and suburban cores
and town centers. It promotes efficient and cost- effective use of existing
infrastructure and services ( such as streets, transit, and utilities), and expands
opportunities for housing, recreation, and economic growth.
During local land use review and development permitting processes, public
agencies commonly require estimates of vehicle travel impacts associated with
proposed land use projects, assessments of their potential contribution to traffic
congestion, and identification of appropriate mitigation strategies. These
strategies often include mitigation fees, private developer contributions, special
tax assessment districts, and specific
infrastructure improvements.
In preparing traffic and transportation impact
analyses, professionals often rely on the
Institute of Transportation Engineers’ ( ITE)
published trip- generation rates for various
types of land uses. However, ITE data
typically reflects isolated suburban
development usually lacking availability and
proximity of transit service, and the ITE study
sites are located such that they are difficult
to access by walking or bicycling. As a result,
the use of ITE trip- generation rates for
proposed urban infill development projects
served by transit and having good
pedestrian access could significantly over-predict
vehicular traffic impacts.
The use of trip generation data goes beyond
traffic impact analysis. It also has significant
economic and environmental consequences. Trip generation rates are used in
the development and application of traffic impact fees and are a major
determinant in the approval of development projects and parking provisions. The
use of auto- oriented suburban traffic generation data for assessing urban infill
projects can produce an inherent inequity in the approval process resulting in a
potential disincentive for developers to take on the increased challenges of infill
development.
Benefits of Infill
Development
􀂊 Provides housing
opportunities closer to jobs
􀂊 Encourages community
revitalization
􀂊 Reduces suburban sprawl
􀂊 Makes better use of
existing infrastructure
􀂊 Encourages walking and
the use of transit
􀂊 Reduces need for
automobile ownership
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 2
All of these consequences can result in a slower pace of infill development,
higher costs, and delay and/ or even rejection of otherwise beneficial infill
projects stalling economic development, housing provisions, and job growth
within existing urban and suburban areas.
It is clear that further research is needed to better understand the trip generation
characteristics of infill development. Recently there have been a number of
research projects to determine the travel characteristics of infill, transit- oriented,
and mixed- use development. The most significant conclusion that can be drawn
from this body of information is that despite being a profession that studies the
effect of land use on transportation, transportation professionals do not yet fully
understand how much traffic and other forms of travel ( such as walking, biking
and transit) is generated by these types of developments in higher- density urban
and suburban settings.
1.1 Problem Statement
The Institute of Transportation Engineers ( ITE) trip generation rates are the primary
source for travel demand analysis of new development throughout the United
States, and are relied upon for conducting California Environmental Quality Act
( CEQA), National Environmental Policy Act ( NEPA) and local agency
development impact analyses. These rates were intentionally based on surveys of
isolated suburban development with little or no pedestrian, bicycle, or transit
accessibility for convenience of data collection. Despite the vast amount of data
collected by ITE over the past decades, these trip generation rates may not be
sufficient to guide the approval of proposed developments in urban infill areas
because the sources of the rates do not reflect variations in density, diversity
( land use mix), site design, and the multimodal transportation systems of our
larger metropolitan areas, which are critical factors in travel demand. 1 In
metropolitan areas, vehicle trip generation is affected by multiple factors
including:
􀂊 Proximity to transit
􀂊 Density of development
􀂊 Mix of land use types
􀂊 The pedestrian environment
􀂊 Cost of parking and availability
􀂊 Traveler demographics such as income and auto ownership
1 Land Use and Site Design - Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes. ( Washington
D. C., Transportation Research Board ( TRB) Transit Cooperative Research Program ( TCRP) Report 95:
Chapter 15 ( 2003)
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 3
Because the ITE trip generation rates do not account for the variations in these
factors, a significant challenge has been created resulting in sometimes
speculative adjustments to estimate urban and multimodal travel demand. The
increased interest in land use typologies such as “ mixed- use” and “ transit-oriented”
development has led to particular challenges and debate when it
comes to travel demand analysis. Transportation and land use planners and
engineers are seeking credible empirical trip generation and mode share data to
more accurately assess the impacts and benefits of new development in our
complex urban land use and transportation systems, and in order to provide
adequate multi- modal infrastructure and services.
1.2 Purpose of the Study
This research was undertaken by the California Department of Transportation
( Caltrans) in 2004 to address the need for better and more accurate data
regarding travel characteristics of infill development in California’s metropolitan
areas. Specifically, the primary objectives of this study are to:
􀂊 Develop trip generation rates for common infill land use categories in
urban areas of California,
􀂊 Establish a California urban infill land use trip generation database,
and
􀂊 Supplement ITE trip generation data.
1.3 Study Outcomes
This research is intended to provide empirical trip generation data for use in
transportation planning and traffic engineering studies for urban infill areas in
California. This study also provides the foundation for subsequent research by
others to further build a comprehensive urban infill trip generation database.
The most applicable outcome of this study is the production of an initial set of
quantitative information on travel characteristics of urban infill land uses for traffic
impact studies and environmental assessments in this state. This research is
intended to establish a standardized data collection and analysis methodology,
which will hopefully result in consistent information gathering in the future.
One of the goals of this study was to collaborate closely with ITE so that the
resulting methodology and data, combined with the addition of national
empirical data, eventually can potentially be integrated into a future addition of
Trip Generation or other ITE publications, such as the Trip Generation Handbook.
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 4
The methodology and data produced by this study can support transportation
planning and assessment for the following types of land uses located in urban infill
areas of California ( and potentially elsewhere):
􀂊 Commercial and office developments,
􀂊 High density housing, and
􀂊 Mixed- use and transit- oriented developments.
The initial goal for Phase 2 of this study was to add additional data in order to
reach a target of 50 total survey sites ( 10 land uses; 5 sites each). However, a
limited amount of data was collected in the second phase of the study, primarily
due to the suspension of the project. The research was discontinued due to
several challenges, such as the potential unreliability of collecting travel data
during an economic downturn, as well as the inherent difficulty and relatively
high cost associated with collecting trip generation data in urban settings.
The study has been successful in developing and testing data collection
methods, identifying challenges related to collecting data for urban infill sites,
and devising strategies to address these challenges. The lessons learned will
strengthen the knowledge and techniques for continuing data collection in future
research efforts.
2 Overview of Phase 1 Study
In 2004, Caltrans undertook the first phase of this research project to address the
need for better and more accurate data relating to travel characteristics of infill
development in California’s urban areas. The two primary objectives of Phase 1
were to:
􀂊 Develop a methodology for identifying and describing urban infill
locations and for collecting trip generation rate data in urban infill
areas of California, and
􀂊 Establish a preliminary database of trip generation rates for common
infill land use categories in urban areas of California.
The Phase 1 research resulted in the development of a detailed methodology for
defining and identifying urban infill areas, selecting study sites, as well as a
recommended approach for collecting trip generation data. The Phase 1
Technical Advisory Committee ( TAC) selected the following ten land use types,
which are consistent with ITE’s Trip Generation, 8th Edition land use definitions and
represent common forms of urban infill development:
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 5
􀂊 Mid- rise apartment ( 223)
􀂊 Mid- rise residential condominium/ townhouse ( 230)
􀂊 High- rise residential condominium/ townhouse ( 232)
􀂊 Multiplex movie theater ( 445)
􀂊 Health/ fitness club ( 492)
􀂊 Daycare center ( 565)
􀂊 General office building ( 710)
􀂊 Shopping center ( 820)
􀂊 Supermarket ( 850)
􀂊 High- turnover sit- down restaurant ( 932)
Trip generation rates for the 19 sites surveyed in Phase 1 were derived by
developing and utilizing a data collection methodology that uses the
combination of intercept surveys and counts of people entering and existing
individual buildings. The total vehicle trips generated by a site were determined
by applying applicable mode shares ( derived from intercept surveys) to the
highest hour of pedestrian counts ( entering and leaving buildings) for the morning
( 7: 00 – 9: 00 a. m.) or afternoon ( 4: 00 – 6: 00 p. m.) peak weekday periods.
An overall finding based on the data collected and evaluated from 13 sites in
Phase 1 was that certain land use categories have lower trip generation
characteristics for the morning and afternoon peaks in urban infill contexts
compared to published ITE trip generation rates.
A detailed presentation of the methodologies and findings that were established
in Phase 1 of the study are presented in Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land
Uses in California, Phase 1: Data Collection Methodology and Pilot Application
( Phase I Final Report), which is available via a Caltrans website2.
2 Association of Bay Area Governments, Kimley- Horn and Associates, and Economic & Planning
Systems. Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California, Phase 1: Data Collection
Methodology and Pilot Application, Final Report.: California Department of Transportation,
Headquarters Divisions of Transportation Planning and Research & Innovation, 2008. Website:
http:// www. dot. ca. gov/ newtech/ researchreports/ reports/ 2008/ ca_ infill_ trip_ rates-phase_
1_ final_ report_ appendices_ 4- 24- 08. pdf
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 6
3 Data Collection
This chapter discusses the site identification, selection, and data collection methods
adopted for the second phase of this study. It includes an explanation of the site
selection criteria and provides a revised list of land use categories selected by the
Phase 2 TAC for study. Finally, this chapter provides an overview of all of the infill
study sites surveyed to date.
3.1 Identification and Selection of Study Sites
As an initial step in the measurement of trip generation from urban infill
development, it is necessary to define what constitutes “ urban infill” and where
such development presently exists. This section defines the term “ urban infill” and
provides an overview of a methodology for identifying Urban Infill Areas ( UIAs). A
more thorough discussion of the definition of urban infill and , the site selection
criteria used in this study is found in the Phase 1 Final Reports Appendix A ( Working
Paper # 1 Selection of Urban infill Study Sites) ( see footnote # 2).
3.1.1 Defining Urban Infill
The term infill is commonly used to describe the development of vacant or under-utilized
land in areas surrounded by existing development. The collective term
“ urban infill” usually describes the redevelopment of areas within cities. Although
transit proximity is not explicitly included in the common definitions, many
practitioners believe that access to transit, transit- oriented development ( TOD)
and mixed- use development are typically associated with urban infill
development.
Site selection criteria for Phases 1 and 2 of this study included transit proximity. In
Phase 1, the transit proximity criteria specified that a study site must be within 1/ 3
mile of an existing or future rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a
bus or rail transit service, an intersection of at least two major bus routes, or within
300 feet of a bus rapid transit corridor. The transit service shall have maximum
scheduled headways of 15 minutes for at least five hours per day. It is acceptable
to use the collective headways of multiple routes as long as the routes serve the
same corridor for a considerable length of the corridor. This criterion pertains to
corridors where people can use any route to reach any point within a significant
length of the corridor. The transit proximity criterion is derived from California
Government Code Section 65088.4, defining urban infill opportunity zones.
The Phase 1 transit proximity criterion was retained in Phase 2 with the exception
of the distance criteria for a bus rapid transit corridor. This criterion was expanded
from 300 feet to 1,200 feet. This change reflects the more extensive use of
branded bus rapid transit systems with similarities to rail transit including high
amenity stations, dedicated travel lanes, and very high frequency service. The
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 7
rail- like characteristics of bus rapid transit systems influences the distance patrons
will walk to the service. This change was further supported during the Phase 1 site
selection process where infill sites meeting all of the criteria except distance to
bus rapid transit were rejected. This change in criteria was approved by the TAC.
As introduced in Phase 1 of this study, Urban Infill Areas ( UIAs) are defined through
the use of area types, as defined in ITE’s Parking Generation, 3rd Edition3, and
Context Zones, as described in the Proposed Recommended Practice for
Context Sensitive Solutions in Designing Major Urban Thoroughfares for Walkable
Communities4. The area types referenced in this study provide characteristics that
are familiar and intuitive to experienced land use and transportation planners
and are described as follows:
􀂊 Central Business District ( CBD) is the downtown area for a city. CBD
characteristics include good transit service, parking garages, shared
parking, an extensive pedestrian sidewalk network, multi- storied
buildings, priced parking, and a wide range of land uses ( including
mixed- use sites).
􀂊 Central City Not Downtown ( CND) is the area outside the downtown
area of a larger city. This area has greater land use density than
suburban sites, but is substantially less dense than the CBD. The intent
of this area designation is for the places around large central cities ( for
example, Seattle, San Francisco, Oakland, Atlanta, and Washington,
DC) where travel characteristics are likely to be unlike suburban
conditions.
􀂊 Suburban Center ( SBC) areas are those downtown areas of suburbs
that have developed CBD characteristics, but are not the central city
of a metropolitan region. These activity centers have characteristics
that may include good transit service, a mix of surface and structured
parking, connected streets, a connected pedestrian network, and a
mix of land uses. Examples include the downtown areas of Bellevue,
WA; Las Colinas, TX; and Walnut Creek, CA.
Context Zones are development intensity- based descriptions that range from the
most rural or undeveloped area to the most urban or developed area. For
purposes of this study, the following Context Zone types are used in parallel or as
alternatives to the more traditional CBD, CND, and SBC Area types to
characterize UIAs:
3 McCourt, Ransford S. Parking Generation, 3rd Edition. Washington, DC, USA: Institute of
Transportation Engineers, 2004.
4 Daisa, James M., et. al. Context Sensitive Solutions in Designing Major Urban Thoroughfares for
Walkable Communities: An ITE Proposed Recommended Practice. Washington, DC, USA: Institute
of Transportation Engineers, 2005.
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 8
􀂊 General Urban ( CZ- 4): Denser and primarily residential urban fabric.
Mixed- use sites usually confined to corner locations. Characterized by
a wide range of building types: single, side yard, and row houses.
Setbacks and landscaping are variable. Streets typically define
medium- sized blocks. Typical land uses: medium density residential
and home occupations; limited commercial and lodging. Typical
buildings: houses and outbuildings, side yard houses, townhouses,
live/ work units, corner stores, and inns.
􀂊 Urban Center ( CZ- 5): “ Main Street” land uses, characterized by
building types that accommodate retail, offices, row houses, and
apartments. Typically has a compact network of streets, with wide
sidewalks, uniform street tree planting and buildings set close to the
frontages. Typical land uses: medium intensity residential and
commercial uses, ( i. e., retail, offices, lodging, civic facilities). Typical
buildings: townhouses, apartment houses, live- work units, shop- front
buildings and office buildings, hotels, churches, and schools.
􀂊 Urban Core ( CZ- 6): “ Downtown” land uses, characterized by the
tallest buildings, in the greatest variety, and unique civic buildings in
particular. It is the least naturalistic zone type in which street trees are
uniformly planted and sometimes absent. Typical land uses: high
intensity residential and commercial: retail and offices, lodging, civic
buildings. Typical buildings: high and medium- rise apartment and
office buildings, hotels, townhouses, live- work units, shop fronts,
churches, and civic buildings.
3.1.2 Selected Land Uses
Concurrent to the identification of the appropriate UIAs is the need to define
appropriate land use types for selecting representative infill sites. This research
was intended to produce trip generation data for at least ten infill land uses,
including residential, office, shopping areas, restaurants, and other
commercial land uses typical of urbanized areas. The land use selection
criteria discussed and approved by the TAC members during Phase 1
includes:
1. Common urban land use types that are consistent with ITE
categories ( Trip Generation [ 7th ed.]) 5 and generally reflect a range
of uses within residential, office, and retail categories.
2. Land use types where there is a demand for empirical trip
generation data based on professional knowledge and frequent
applications for development review.
5 ITE’s Trip Generation, 8th Edition has since been released. For this reason, the analysis summary in
later sections of this report compares the collected trip generation data to Trip Generation, 8th
Edition trip rates.
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 9
3. Land use types where there is a reasonable propensity for shifting
drivers to another mode if the use is located in an urban area. For
example, it may be likely that a significant number of patrons would
shift significantly from autos to transit or walking if a restaurant was
located in an urban infill area versus a suburban area.
4. Land use types that are considered beneficial to the revitalization of
urban areas, and for which current trip generation data may act as
a barrier to development approval. These may include types that
are considered transit oriented, high- density residential, and urban
retail uses.
Because parking availability and costs are often of crucial importance to the
types and modes of trips generated by urban infill sites, consideration in
choosing candidate uses was also given for those types already represented
in ITE’s Parking Generation. Preferences were given in the initial selection to
higher- density residential types, and to nonresidential land uses that are of
recurring interest in infill development impact analyses
The following 10 land use types, arranged in order, by the ITE land use code in
parentheses, were selected by the TAC for Phase 2 of this research:
􀂊 High- rise apartment ( 222)
􀂊 Mid- rise apartment ( 223)
􀂊 Mid- rise residential condominium/ townhouse ( 230)
􀂊 High- rise residential condominium/ townhouse ( 232)
􀂊 Hotel ( 310)
􀂊 General office building ( 710)
􀂊 Shopping center ( 820) / Specialty Retail ( 814)
􀂊 Pharmacy / Drugstore without drive- through window ( 880)
􀂊 Quality ( sit- down) restaurant ( 931)
􀂊 Fast- food restaurant without drive- through window6 ( 933)
6 When the TAC selected the ten priority land uses, ITE Trip Generation, 7th Edition was the most
recent edition available, and land use code 933 included sub categories for Coffee Shop, Bread
and Bagel Shop. Since then, Trip Generation, 8th Edition has become available. In the 8th Edition,
the Coffee Shop and Bread/ Bagel subcategories have been removed from land use code 933;
therefore, in this report, the trip generation for Coffee Shop and Bakery/ Café sites will be
compared to ITE land use code 936 ( Coffee/ Donut Shop w/ o Drive- Through) and 939
( Bread/ Donut/ Bagel Shop w/ o Drive- Through).
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 10
The majority of these land uses are consistent with the list of preferred land use
types selected for Phase 1 of the study; however, the following Phase 1 study
land uses were removed by the TAC for Phase 2:
􀂊 Multiplex movie theater ( 445)
􀂊 Health/ fitness club ( 492)
􀂊 Daycare center ( 565)
􀂊 Supermarket ( 850)
􀂊 High- turnover sit- down restaurant ( 932)
Table 1 lists the Phase 2 land uses and provides their descriptions as published
in ITE Trip Generation ( 8th Edition). In addition to the ITE description, Table 1
presents qualifications or recommendations specific to this urban infill trip
generation study, if applicable. There are qualifiers/ recommendations for
three of the categories:
􀂊 Residential condominium/ townhouse ( 230) – This is a general category
of residential use without a definition of the height of the building. The
ITE data included low and high- rise buildings. For purposes of this study,
this category is limited to buildings of between three and 10 stories.
􀂊 High- rise residential condominium/ townhouse ( 232) – This category
represents buildings of three or more stories in height. For purposes of
this study, this category is limited to high- rise buildings greater than 10
stories.
􀂊 Specialty retail ( 814) / Shopping center ( 820) – Specialty Retail and
Shopping Center represent common suburban and urban land uses.
Specialty retail and shopping center categories are frequently used in
Traffic Impact Studies for urban retail uses when there is a lack of
definition of the exact land use ( i. e. ground floor retail in a mixed- use
building). For this reason, both retail uses are included as preferred
study land use types.
In addition to the above qualifiers, most of the land uses include qualifiers that
allow the site to be part of a mixed- use development, or integrated into a
larger complex. This qualifier reflects the change in data collection
methodology from traffic counts to intercept surveys. The data collection
process is discussed in the Phase 1 Final Report ( see footnote # 2), and
additional detail is provided in Appendix B of this Phase 2 report.
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 11
Table 1: List of Land Uses and Descriptions for California Urban Infill Trip Generation Research
Land Use
Group
ITE LU
ITE Land Use Type ITE Description
Additional Qualifiers for
Code Trip Generation Study
Residential 222 High- Rise Apartment
High- rise apartments are apartments ( rental dwelling
units) in rental buildings that have more than 10 levels
( floors).
No additional qualifiers
Residential 223 Mid- Rise Apartment
Mid- rise apartments are apartments ( rental dwelling
units) in rental buildings that have between three and
10 levels ( floors).
No additional qualifiers
Residential 230 Mid- Rise Residential
Condominium/ Townhouse
Residential condominiums/ townhouses are defined as
ownership units that have at least one other owned
unit within the same building structure. Both
condominiums and townhouses are included in this
land use. The studies of this land use did not identify
whether the condominiums/ townhouses were low- rise
or high- rise.
The ITE description does not
specify number of floors in this
category. This category is
limited to buildings of
between three and 10 stories.
Residential 232 High- Rise Residential
Condominium/ Townhouse
High- rise residential condominiums/ townhouses are
units located in buildings that have three or more
levels ( floors). Both condominiums and townhouses are
included in this land use.
To distinguish from the mid- rise
category, the high- rise
category is limited to buildings
greater than 10 stories.
Services 310 Hotel
Hotels are places of lodging that provide sleeping
accommodations and supporting facilities such as
restaurants, cocktail lounges, meeting and banquet
rooms or convention facilities, limited recreational
facilities ( pool, fitness room) and/ or other retail and
service shops.
No additional qualifiers
Office 710 General Office Building
A general office building houses multiple tenants. It is a
location where affairs of businesses, commercial or
industrial organizations, or professional persons or firms
are conducted. An office building or buildings may
contain a mixture of tenants including professional
services; insurance companies; investment brokers;
and tenant services, such as a bank or savings and
loan institution, a restaurant or cafeteria, and service
retail facilities.
No additional qualifiers
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 12
Land Use
Group
ITE LU
ITE Land Use Type ITE Description
Additional Qualifiers for
Code Trip Generation Study
Retail
814 /
820 Specialty Retail /
Shopping Center [ a]
Specialty retail is generally small strip shopping centers
that contain a variety of retail shops and specialize in
quality apparel; hard goods; and services such as real
estate offices, dance studios, florists and small
restaurants. [ b]
A shopping center is an integrated group of
commercial establishments that is planned,
developed, owned, and managed as a unit. A
shopping center's composition is related to its market
area in terms of size, location, and type of store. A
shopping center also provides on- site parking facilities
sufficient to serve its own parking demands. [ c]
Selection of shopping centers
limited to " Neighborhood" and
" Community" center
classifications as defined by
ITE ( see definitions below).
Additionally, retail land uses
can range from small urban
shopping centers ( less than
190,000 square feet) to
individual businesses within
buildings.
Retail 880
Pharmacy / Drugstore
( without drive- through
window)
A Pharmacy/ Drugstore are retail facilities that primarily
sell prescription and non- prescription drugs. These
facilities may also sell cosmetics, toiletries,
medications, stationery, personal care products,
limited food products, and general merchandise.
This land use may be part of a
mixed- use building.
Services 931 Quality ( Sit- Down)
Restaurant
This land use consists of sit- down, full- service eating
establishments with turnover rates of approximately
one hour or longer. Quality restaurants generally do
not serve breakfast; some do not serve lunch; all serve
dinner. This type of restaurant usually requires
reservations and is generally not part of a chain.
This land use may be part of a
mixed- use building.
Services
933 /
936 /
939 [ d]
Fast- Food Restaurant
( without drive- through
window)
This land use is characterized by a large carryout
clientele; long hours of service ( some are open for
breakfast, all are open for lunch and dinner, some are
open late at night or 24 hours); and high turnover rates
for eat- in customers. These limited- service eating
establishments do not provide table service and
patrons generally order at a cash register and pay
before they eat.
This land use may be part of a
mixed- use building.
[ a] In the 6th Edition of Trip Generation, ITE discontinued the distinction in trip generation rate by size of shopping center. A study published in the ITE
Journal found that while the trip generation rate did vary by size of center, the regression equations published in the manual did not accurately
reflect the variation in trip generation by size of center. See " Trip Generation Characteristics of Shopping Centers", ITE Journal, June 1996.
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 13
Land Use
Group
ITE LU
ITE Land Use Type ITE Description
Additional Qualifiers for
Code Trip Generation Study
[ b] Specialty Retail and Shopping Center represent common suburban and urban land uses. Specialty retail and shopping center categories are
frequently used in Traffic Impact Studies for urban retail uses when there is a lack of definition of the exact land use ( i. e. ground retail in a mixed- use
building). For this reason, both retail uses are included as preferred study land uses.
[ c] Additional description in ITE Trip Generation ( 7th Edition): Shopping Centers, including neighborhood centers, community centers, regional
centers and super regional centers, were surveyed for this land use. Some of these centers contained non- merchandising facilities, such as office
buildings, movie theaters, restaurants, post offices, banks, health clubs, and recreational facilities ( e. g., ice skating rinks). The centers ranged in size
from 1,700 to 2.2 million square feet of gross leasable area ( GLA).
Definitions:
Neighborhood Shopping
Center
Provides for the sale of convenience goods ( foods, drugs and sundries) and personal services ( such as laundry and
dry cleaning, barbering, and shoe repairing) for day- to- day living needs of the immediate neighborhood. It is built
around a supermarket as the principal tenant. In theory, the neighborhood center has a typical gross leasable area
of 50,000 square feet; in practice it may range in size from 30,000 to 100,000 square feet.
Community Center
Provides a wider range of facilities for the sale of soft lines ( wearing apparel for men, women, and children) and hard
lines ( hardware and appliances), in addition to convenience goods and personal services. It is built around a junior
department store, variety store, or discount department store as the major tenant, in addition to a supermarket. In
theory, its typical size is 150,000 square feet of gross leasable area, but in practice it may range in size from 100,000 to
450,000 square feet.
[ d] When the TAC selected the ten priority land uses in Phase 2, ITE Trip Generation, 7th Edition was the most recent edition available, and land use
code 933 included sub categories for Coffee Shop, Bread and Bagel Shop. Since then, Trip Generation, 8th Edition has become available. In the 8th
Edition, the Coffee Shop and Bread/ Bagel subcategories have been removed from land use code 933; therefore, in this report, Coffee Shop and
Bakery/ Café sites will be compared to ITE land use code 936 ( Coffee/ Donut Shop w/ o Drive- Through Window) and 939 ( Bread/ Donut/ Bagel Shop w/ o
Drive- Through). The definitions for land use codes 936 and 939 are as follow:
Coffee/ Donut Shop w/ o Drive- Through Window ( ITE 936): This land use includes single- tenant coffee and donut restaurants without drive- through
windows. Freshly brewed coffee and a variety of coffee related accessories are the primary retail products sold at these sites. They may also sell other
refreshment items such as donuts, bagels, muffins, cakes, sandwiches, wraps, salads, and other hot and cold beverages. The coffee and donut shops
contained in this land use typically hold long store hours ( over 15 hours) with an early morning opening. Table service is not provided.
Bread/ Donut/ Bagel Shop w/ o Drive- Through Window ( ITE 939): This land use includes single tenant bread, donut and bagel shops without drive-through
windows. The sites surveyed specialize in producing and selling a variety of breads, donuts and bagels as the primary products sold. Some
sites offer a breakfast menu. They may also sell other refreshment items such as coffee, tea, soda, or other hot or cold beverages. Limited indoor
seating is generally available at the sites surveyed.
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase1: Data Collection Methodology and Pilot Application
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 14
3.1.3 Site Selection Criteria
Working with the TAC, the following specific criteria were established and utilized
to select study sites within UIAs for Phase 1 and 2 of the study:
Urban Infill Area Criteria
1. A candidate site must be located either:
a. within a Central Business District ( CBD), Central City, Not
Downtown ( CND), or Suburban Center ( SBC) Area, as
defined by the ITE; or
b. within a General Urban ( CZ- 4), Urban Center ( CZ- 5), or
Urban Core ( CZ- 6) Context Zone, as defined in the
Proposed Recommended Practice for Context Sensitive
Solutions in Designing Major Urban Thoroughfares for
Walkable Communities, and must also meet the other
criteria defined below.
Transit Proximity Criteria
2. The site must be within 1/ 3 mile of a site with an existing or future
rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail
transit service, an intersection of at least two major bus routes, or
within 1,200 feet of a bus rapid transit corridor7. Transit service
must have maximum scheduled headways of 15 minutes for at
least five hours per day to qualify. It is acceptable to use the
collective headways of multiple routes as long as the routes
serve the same corridor for a considerable distance. This criteria
was based on existing California statute8 defining “ infill
opportunity zones”.
Vacant Developable Land Criteria
3. The site must be within a UIA that contains no more than 10
percent Vacant Developable Land. Vacant Developable Land
as defined excludes water bodies, public rights- of- way, land
designated for conservation and public recreation, and any
other land designated by local governments’ policies or
7 Note that for Phase 1 of this study, the site selection criteria relating to transit proximity required
that a site be located within 300 feet of a bus rapid transit corridor. This distance was increased to
1,200 feet for Phase 2 based on direction from the TAC.
8 California Senate Bill ( SB) 1636 ( Figueroa) sponsored by the Surface Transportation Policy Project
and signed in to law on September 12, 2002, and California Government Code Section 65088.1.
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 15
comprehensive plans as unavailable for development. However,
parking lots on land designated and/ or zoned as developable
under current policy qualify as Vacant Developable Land.
Population ( Residential) and Employment Density Criteria
The site must be located within a UIA that meets one or more of the following
density criteria:
4. Where residential land uses comprise at least 60 percent of
developed land, average residential density shall be at least
10.0 dwelling units per gross acre9 of residentially developed
land, or
5. Where nonresidential land uses comprise at least 60 percent of
developed land, average nonresidential density shall be a floor
area ratio ( FAR) of at least 1.0 and/ or an employment density of
at least 35.0 jobs per gross acre of nonresidential developed
land, or
6. Where neither residential nor nonresidential uses comprise more
than 60 percent of developed land, both residential and
nonresidential uses must meet the density and intensity criteria
prescribed above.
Additional Criteria
Other qualitative criteria to be considered in the selection of sites include:
􀂊 The maturity of the site. Newly constructed buildings are poor
candidates for data collection, as they may not have developed
stable travel characteristics or tenancy.
􀂊 Destination retail. Large destination retail shopping centers attract
traffic from a larger market area than typical infill development, and
often attract tourist traffic. This type of land use is considered a special
generator and is not the subject of this study.
􀂊 Practicality of collecting data. The ability to cost- effectively collect
travel data is critical. Very large and complex sites ( such as multiple
office towers and large mixed- use centers) with multiple entrances on
multiple levels, skywalk connections to adjacent buildings, and large
9 Gross acres is the total area including land used for public or private street, alleys, easements,
open space, and other such uses. In contrast, net acres is the amount of land remaining after
necessary deductions have been made for streets, open space, utility easements, access
corridors, or other necessary dedications.
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 16
plazas, are difficult to survey and to verify that all trips have been
captured.
􀂊 Ability to gain permission. The property owner/ manager must provide
permission to conduct intercept surveys at the site. Not only is this a
courtesy to the owner/ manager, but is necessary to be able to obtain
independent variable data such as building size, number of units,
number of employees ( if available) and level of occupancy.
􀂊 Located within a walkable district. Although implied by the definition
of an UIA and proximity to transit, the site must be located in a district
that is walkable ( see definition in Phase 1 Final Report). No quantitative
measurable criteria are applied to walkability, therefore, it is
qualitatively determined through observation.
􀂊 Exclude below market rate housing. The selection of study sites
excludes housing development projects that, in their entirety, are
categorized as below market rate ( BMR) or “ affordable”. Studies show
that BMR housing generally attracts households with lower incomes
and lower auto ownership, two factors which influence trip
generation. This type of development was excluded to avoid
confounding the affect of housing in urban infill areas. However,
housing projects with a portion of the units categorized as BMR could
be included in the study.
To assist in the identification of candidate sites, the study team used a map-based
or GIS approach using digital map layers and socioeconomic data
that are available nationwide from Federal agencies and information
centers. Population and employment density was mapped for the entire state
identifying, at the 2000 Census Block Group level; those block groups which
had residential development densities of at least 10 dwelling units per land
acre, or, employment densities of at least 35 jobs per land acre. Additionally,
digital map layers of California fixed- route bus services and fixed- rail transit
routes were integrated into the mapping. Transit route headways are not
included in the available map layers and therefore identification of the
minimum service criterion was performed manually.
A digital map with layers showing areas of California with population densities
of at least 10 dwelling units per land acre and/ or employment densities of at
least 35 jobs per land acre is available online via the following link:
http:// www. epsys. com/ CA_ Urban_ Infillbeta. html
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 17
3.1.3.1 Geographic Distribution of Sites
The collection of data is intended to represent infill development in any of
California’s metropolitan regions. For the purposes of this study, the state was
divided into the following four metropolitan areas:
􀂊 San Francisco Bay Area ( including Santa Cruz/ Monterey Bay area)
􀂊 Sacramento Area
􀂊 Los Angeles Area
􀂊 San Diego Area
In general, the data collection effort intended to survey 50% of the study sites
in Northern California and 50% of the study sites in Southern California regions.
These metropolitan regions contain concentrations of census block groups
that meet the study’s minimum density for housing and employment. The
Phase 1 report contains a more detailed description of the statewide
distribution of the site selection process.
3.1.4 Site Selection Approach
A number of methods were used to identify and select sites. The candidate study
sites were identified by using any of the following approaches:
􀂊 Identification using aerial photography or inspection
􀂊 Identification by TAC members
􀂊 Identification by contacting developers
􀂊 Identification by contacting organizations and associations
Further details regarding the effectiveness and challenges of each approach are
included In the Phase 1 Final Report.
3.2 Overview of Selected Data Collection Methodology
For this study, data collection used a random sampling methodology,
implemented as a combination of intercept surveys and pedestrian counts at
study buildings. The surveys collected travel information from users of the selected
sites, which was then used in conjunction with the pedestrian counts to derive
automobile trip generation rates for the time periods under study. The intercept
surveys were designed to collect the following travel data:
􀂊 The primary means of travel to the surveyed site on the day of survey
􀂊 Information on the primary destination of the site user to identify
whether their trip is a primary trip, a pass- by trip, or a linked trip
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 18
􀂊 The number of visits to the site in a typical week, and whether the
respondents reside at, work at, or are visiting the site
􀂊 The approximate time it took to reach the site
􀂊 For mixed- use sites, whether the individual visited multiple uses on the
site
In addition to travel data, the surveys asks optional questions to collect
demographic data for future cross referencing such as zip code of residence,
gender, age, number of vehicles owned, occupation, salary range, and number
of people in the household. Example intercept survey questionnaires are included
in the Appendix.
A detailed discussion of the data collection methodology and analysis, including
data requirements, personnel requirements, time periods of data collection and
sample intercept survey questionnaires, are included in the Phase 1 Final Report,
and in the Appendix to this report.
3.3 Overview of Surveyed Sites
This section provides an overview of the surveyed sites from the initial Phase 1 pilot
study through Phase 2. Although the initial goal of the study was to provide at
least five ( 5) data points for each of the 10 prioritized land uses, this goal was not
achieved due to difficulties in obtaining permission to survey sites and the
subsequent suspension of data collection efforts in Fall 2008 because of the
economic recession. To date, a cumulative total of 27 sites have been surveyed.
Five ( 5) of these study sites are located in the City of San Francisco, 12 are
located in the City of Berkeley, two ( 2) are located in the City of Oakland, four ( 4)
are located in the City of San Diego, three ( 3) are located in the City of Los
Angeles, one ( 1) is located in the City of Santa Monica and one ( 1) is located in
the City of Pasadena. This section provides a description of the sites and their
surroundings.
3.4 Site Overview by Land Use
The following section describes the surveyed land uses with the prioritized list
established by the TAC for Phase 2. Subsequent sections summarize the surveys of
the non- prioritized land uses. The study sites surveyed are divided into the
residential and non- residential land use categories. Note that the study phase in
which each site was surveyed is noted in parenthesis ( i. e. Phase 1, Phase 2). The
Appendix contains a detailed site description of each surveyed site.
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 19
3.4.1 Residential Land Use Categories
The residential land use category included high- rise apartments, mid- rise
apartments, mid- rise residential condominiums/ townhouses and high- rise
residential condominium/ townhouses. A brief description of the residential
sites surveyed to date is provided below.
High- Rise Apartments
One high- rise apartment site was surveyed. The site is located in the City of
San Francisco. The site is a mixed- use building containing commercial
businesses, offices and residential uses.
1. 1390 Market Street ( Phase 2): This high- rise apartment building is
located at 1390 Market Street, San Francisco, California. The building is
29 stories and has a total of 443 dwelling units— 331 studio units, 96 1-
bedroom units and 16 2- bedroom units. The first 12 floors contain office
space with a ground floor portion containing a post office, office
supply store and coffee shop; however, only the residential portion of
the site was surveyed. At the time of the surveys, the building manager
indicated that the residential occupancy was 95%. There are a total of
408 parking spaces at this site— 120 parking spaces are reserved for
the residential occupants and 288 spaces are provided for the office
and retail users. The site location meets both the non- residential and
residential density requirements. The Civic Center BART Station is
located within 3 blocks ( 0.35 miles) of the study site, which is a little
over the1/ 3 of a mile transit proximity criteria; however, San Francisco
Municipal Transportation Agency ( SFMTA, MUNI) Routes 9, F, 71, 76, 47,
49, 21 and 19 operate within 1,200 feet of the site providing 15 minute
headways for five hours of the day. Several of these routes serve as a
connection to the Civic Center BART Station.
Mid- Rise Apartments
Six mid- rise apartment study sites are located in the City of Berkeley, two sites
in the Los Angeles area, one site in the City of Santa Monica, and one site in
the City of Pasadena. It should be noted that all of the Berkeley sites were
owned by the same development company. Because the six Berkeley sites
were 50% occupied by residents with either student or staff affiliations with the
University of California at Berkeley, only one of the sites was included in the
overall analysis of mid- rise apartments. All six sites were separately evaluated
as an example of university- related private housing.
1390 Market Street
San Francisco, CA
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 20
All of the mid- rise apartment sites are rental apartments. Most of the sites are
mixed- use buildings containing commercial businesses on the ground floor.
Residential and commercial uses were surveyed separately.
2. 2111 University Avenue, Berkeley, CA ( Phase 1): This
building has a total of 44 dwelling units and 3,000 square
feet of ground floor commercial use. The ground floor
commercial is a copy/ printing shop. At the time of the
survey, the building manager indicated that the residential
and the commercial occupancy was 100%. A total of 30
parking spaces are provided within the building. The site
location meets both the non- residential and residential
density requirements. The Downtown Berkeley BART Station
is located within 2.5 blocks ( 0.17 miles) of the study site,
within 1/ 3 of a mile thereby meeting the transit proximity
criteria. AC Transit Routes 51 and 52L are within 300 feet of
the site providing 15 minute headways for five hours of the
day.
3. 2116 Allston Way, Berkeley, CA ( Phase 1): This building has
a total of 99 dwelling units and 12,000 square feet of
ground floor commercial use. The ground floor commercial
is a drinking establishment that provides live entertainment.
At the time of the survey, the building manager indicated
that the residential occupancy was 99% and the
commercial occupancy was 100%. A total of 40 parking
spaces are provided within the building. The site location
meets the non- residential density requirement. The
Downtown Berkeley BART Station is located within 1 block
( 300 feet) of the study site, meeting the transit proximity
criteria. AC Transit Routes 1, 1R, 18, 51, and 52L are within
300 feet of the site providing 15- minute headways for five
hours of the day.
4. 1370 University Avenue, Berkeley, CA ( Phase 1): This
building has a total of 71 dwelling units and 8,000 square
feet of ground floor commercial use. The ground floor
commercial is comprised of a sign shop, a piano school, a
book store, and a bakery/ café. None of these uses, except
the café, are among the selected land use categories for
this study. The cafe was surveyed. At the time of the survey,
the building manager indicated that the residential and
the commercial occupancy was 100%. A total of 62
parking spaces are provided within the building. The site
2111 University Avenue
Berkeley, CA
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 21
location meets the residential density requirement. The
Downtown Berkeley BART Station is located about 8 blocks
( 0.89 miles) away from the study site ( more than the 1/ 3
mile criteria), but AC Transit Routes 51 and 52L are within
300 feet of the site providing 15 minute headways for five
hours of the day, and connect to the BART Station.
5. 2004 University Avenue, Berkeley, CA ( Phase 1): This
building has a total of 35 dwelling units and 2,400 square
feet of ground floor commercial use. The ground floor
commercial is a retail flower shop. At the time of the survey,
the building manager indicated that the residential
occupancy was 97% and the commercial occupancy was
100%. A total of five parking spaces are provided within the
building. The site location meets both the non- residential
and residential density requirements. The Downtown
Berkeley BART Station is located within 2 blocks ( 0.17 miles)
of the study site, meeting the transit proximity criteria. AC
Transit Routes 51 and 52 are within 300 feet of the site
providing 15 minute headways for five hours of the day.
6. 1910 Oxford Street, Berkeley, CA ( Phase 1): This building has a total of
56 dwelling units and 4,500 square feet of ground floor commercial
use. The ground floor commercial use is a non- chain coffee shop. At
the time of the survey, the building manager indicated that the
residential and the commercial occupancy was 100%. A total of 36
parking spaces are provided within the building. The site location
meets both the non- residential and residential density requirements.
The Downtown Berkeley BART Station is located within 4 blocks ( 0.28
miles) of the study site, meeting the transit proximity criteria. AC Transit
Route 52L is within 300 feet of the site providing 15 minute headways
for five hours of the day.
7. 2110 Haste Street, Berkeley, CA ( Phase 1): This building has a total of
100 dwelling units and 10,000 square feet of ground floor commercial
use. This building has three ground floor commercial units, of which
only one commercial unit was occupied. The occupied ground floor
commercial use was an architectural design firm and was not
surveyed. At the time of the survey, the building manager indicated
that the residential occupancy was 100%. A total of 63 parking spaces
are provided within the building. The site location meets both the non-residential
and residential density requirements. The Downtown
Berkeley BART Station is located within six blocks ( 0.36 miles) of the
2004 University Avenue,
Berkeley, CA
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 22
study site, a little over the 1/ 3 mile transit proximity criteria. However,
AC Transit Route 18 is within 300 feet of the site providing 15 minute
headways for five hours of the day, and connects to the BART Station.
AC Transit Routes 1, 1R, and 51 are 600 feet from the study site and
these routes also connect to the BART Station.
8. 2000 Main Street, Santa Monica, CA ( Phase 2): This site has a total of
133 dwelling units and several suites of ground floor commercial use.
The building has five ground floor commercial units, of which only two
units were occupied. The occupied ground floor commercial included
a hair/ beauty salon and a deli/ wine and cheese shop; however, these
sites were not surveyed. At the time of the survey, the building
manager indicated that the residential occupancy was
approximately 93%. A total of 262 parking spaces are provided for
residents ( including 37 guest spaces) and 44 spaces are provided for
retail users. The resident parking area in separated from the
guest/ retail parking by a security gate. The site meets the residential
density requirement. The Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation
Authority ( MTA) Metro Rapid Line 704 stops less than 1,200 feet from
the site providing no- greater- than 15 minute headways for five hours
of the day and connects to Downtown Los Angeles.
9. 25 South Oak Knoll, Pasadena, CA ( Phase 2): This building has a total
of 120 dwelling units and 1,800 square feet of ground floor commercial
use. One of the commercial units is a bank and the other was
unoccupied. Neither of the commercial units was surveyed. At the
time of the survey, the residential occupancy at the site was 95%. A
total of 220 residential parking spaces are provided at the site, along
with 10 guest parking spaces and 50 retail parking spaces. The
residential parking is separated by security gate from the retail/ guest
parking area. The site meets the employment density requirement.
MTA Metro Rapid Line 780 stops less than 1,200 feet from the site
providing no- greater- than 15 minute headways for five hours of the
day. This route serves as a connection to Hollywood and the West Los
Angeles Transit Center.
The following two mid- rise and high- rise condominium/ townhouse sites are
located in downtown San Diego. They include a mix of rental and owner
occupied units.
Mid- Rise Residential Condominiums/ Townhouses
10. 101 Market Street, San Diego, CA ( Phase 1): This site is located at 101
Market Street in downtown San Diego, California. The building has 4
floors, a total of 149 dwelling units and 1,250 square feet of ground
25 South Oak Knoll
Pasadena, CA
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 23
floor commercial use. The ground commercial use is a national chain
coffee shop. At the time of the survey, the building manager
indicated that the residential and commercial occupancy was 100%.
A total of 183 parking spaces are provided within the building. The site
location meets the non- residential density requirement. The site is
within 1/ 3 of a mile of the San Diego Trolley Gold Route and meets the
transit proximity criteria. The site is also within 300 feet of San Diego
Metropolitan Transit System ( SDMTS) Route 11 which provides 15
minute headways for five hours of the day.
High- Rise Residential Condominiums/ Townhouses
11. 505 Front Street, San Diego, CA ( Phase 1): This site is located at 505
Front Street in downtown San Diego, California. This building has 25
floors, a total of 211 dwelling units. There is no ground floor commercial
associated with this building. At the time of the survey, the building
manager indicated that the residential occupancy was 100%. A total
of 415 parking spaces are provided within the building. The site is
within 1/ 3 of a mile from the San Diego Trolley Gold Route and meets
the transit proximity criteria. The site is also within 300 feet of SDMTS
Route 11 which provides 15 minute headways for 5 hours of the day.
3.4.2 Non- Residential Categories
The non- residential land use categories surveyed in the study include
general office building, specialty retail/ shopping center, fast- food
restaurant ( without drive- through window), quality restaurant, and drinking
place. Brief descriptions of the sites surveyed under each of the different
non- residential land use categories are provided below. Note that several
of the non- residential sites were located at the ground level of the
residential survey sites. For this reason, the descriptions for these sites are
included in the Residential Categories section above.
General Office Building
12. 626 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA ( Phase 1): This site is located at
626 Wilshire Boulevard in downtown Los Angeles, California. This
building has a total of 138,542 gross leasable square feet of office use
and 11,380 square feet of retail use on the ground floor. The retail use
includes a credit union bank, a wine & spirit shop, and a cellular
phone store. Surveys were not conducted for the retail uses. At the
time of the survey, the building manager indicated that the
commercial occupancy was approximately 98%. A total of 136
parking spaces are provided in two parking levels within the building.
The site location meets the non- residential density requirement. The
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 24
site is located within 1/ 3 mile of the existing Metro Rail Station at 7th
Street/ Flower Street. It is also within 300 feet of multiple MTA Transit
Routes and Metro Rapid Lines which provide 15 minute headways for
5 hours of the day.
13. 1388 Sutter Street, San Francisco, CA ( Phase 1): This is a 120,000 square
foot ( gross leasable area) office building with a wide variety of tenants
comprising primarily professional and service activities. The building
was 100% occupied at the time of the survey. The building is located
less than one block from Van Ness Avenue, a major transportation and
transit corridor. The Civic Center BART Station is located within eight
blocks of the office building, too distant to meet the transit proximity
criteria. However, MUNI Routes 2 and 3 are within 300 feet of the site
each providing 10 minute headways for four hours a day. The office
building has an attached public parking garage, which charges
market rates, about $ 21.00 per day. The location of the office building
meets both the nonresidential and residential density requirements.
The surrounding land uses include a mix of commercial, retail, and
residential.
14. 10351 Santa Monica Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA ( Phase 2): This is a
101,495 square foot ( gross leasable area) office building with a wide
variety of tenants comprising primarily professional and service
activities, including law offices, architectural firms, a non- profit
organization and entertainment- related businesses. A 9,500 square
foot restaurant is located at the ground floor of the building with an
entrance/ exit separate from the office uses. The restaurant was not
surveyed in this study. The building was 89% occupied at the time of
the survey. A total of 283 parking spaces are provided for the
building’s tenants and visitors. The project management indicated
that of the 283 parking spaces, 250 spaces are provided in the site’s
parking garage for monthly tenant parking, 21 spaces are provided in
the garage for public parking and 12 spaces are provided offsite. The
site location meets the non- residential and residential density
requirements. The site is located along Santa Monica Boulevard, a
major transportation and transit corridor. The site is located within 1,200
feet of MTA Transit Route 4 and Metro Rapid Line 704, which provide
15 minute headways for 5 hours of the day.
15. 12301 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA ( Phase 2): This is a 105,977
square foot ( gross leasable area) office building with a variety of
tenants, including law offices, medical and insurance offices,
entertainment- related businesses, education- related businesses and
banking offices. A 6,405 square foot bank is located at the ground
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 25
floor of the building; however, bank tenants, customers and visitors
were excluded from the surveys. At the time of the surveys, the
commercial occupancy of the building was 80%. A total of 180
monthly parking spaces are provided at the building’s parking
garage. The site location meets the non- residential and residential
density requirements. The site is located along Wilshire Boulevard, a
major transportation and transit corridor. The site is located within 1,200
feet of Metro Rapid Lines 720 and 790, which provide 15 minute
headways for 5 hours of the day.
Specialty Retail / Shopping Center
16. Chain Clothing Store ( Phase 1): This site contains two clothing stores
located in the Oakland City Center at 1333 Broadway. The two stores
operate as a single retail store occupying 11,000 square feet. The
surrounding area primarily consists of high- rise office buildings with
ground floor retail and apartment/ condominium buildings. This site is
situated directly above the City Center/ 12th Street BART Station, and
directly along AC Transit’s Routes 14 and 15, both with less than 15
minute headways for more than five hours a day. This location is within
a UIA that meets the requirements for both the non- residential and
residential density requirements.
Quality Restaurant
17. Italian Cuisine Restaurant: This locally owned, non- chain restaurant is
located at 337 3rd Street, San Francisco, California. The site occupies
approximately 3,000 square feet and serves gourmet pizza and Italian
cuisine. The site is located adjacent to MUNI Bus Transit Routes 9X, 10,
30 and 45, which operate at less than 15 minute headways, thereby
fulfilling the transit proximity criteria. The site is situated at the ground
level of a mid- rise apartment building along with several other
commercial uses. The surrounding area is mostly high to moderate rise,
mixed- use, commercial office, and residential buildings meeting the
residential and non- residential density criteria. There is a parking
garage located nearby that serves the adjacent residential complex
and provides additional monthly and hourly public parking. The
parking garage does not contain any dedicated parking for the
restaurant; however, there is on- street metered parking located
directly in front of the site.
18. Asian Cuisine Restaurant: This locally owned non- chain restaurant is
located at 311 3rd Street, San Francisco, California. The site occupies a
6,000 square- foot space and serves Asian cuisine in an upscale lounge
setting. The site is located adjacent to MUNI Bus Transit Routes 9X, 10,
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 26
30 and 45, which operate at less than 15- minute headways, thereby
fulfilling the transit proximity criteria. The site is situated at the ground
level of a mid- rise apartment building along with several other
commercial uses. The surrounding area is mostly high to moderate rise,
mixed- use, commercial office, and residential buildings meeting the
residential and non- residential density criteria. There is a parking
garage located nearby that serves the adjacent residential complex
and provides additional monthly and hourly public parking. The
parking garage does not contain any dedicated parking for the
restaurant; however, there is on- street metered parking located
directly in front of the site.
The locations of the surveyed sites are shown in Figure 1 ( on the following
pages). A detailed one- page summary for each of the studied sites can
be found in the Appendix, which provide an overview of the site’s
characteristics ( floor area, number of units, number of parking spaces), a
site description and photograph, an indicator of the site’s surrounding UIA,
how the site surroundings meet the selection criteria, a qualitative
measure of the surrounding pedestrian environment, and a summary of
the site’s trip generation and mode share data.
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase1: Data Collection Methodology and Pilot Application
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 27
Figure 1: Location of Surveyed Sites in California
San Francisco Sites
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 28
Figure 1: Location of Surveyed Sites in California
Berkeley Sites
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 29
Figure 1: Location of Surveyed Sites in California
Los Angeles Area Sites
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 30
Figure 1: Location of Surveyed Sites in California
San Diego Area Sites
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase1: Data Collection Methodology and Pilot Application
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 31
4 Preliminary Findings
4.1 Overview of Derived Trip Generation Rates by Land Use
The trip generation rates for the sites surveyed to date from both Phase 1 and
Phase 2 ( the observed rates) were derived by estimating the number of vehicle
trips ( from surveys and pedestrian counts) and dividing these trips by the gross
leasable square footage of the building or number of dwelling units. Vehicle trips
are the sum of all vehicle related trips ( drove alone, passenger, and taxi), and are
estimated by applying the applicable mode shares ( derived from intercept
surveys) to the highest hour of pedestrian counts in either the morning ( 7: 00 – 9: 00
a. m.), midday10 ( 11: 00 a. m. – 3: 00 p. m.) or afternoon ( 4: 00 – 6: 00 p. m.) peak
weekday periods. It should be noted that data from alternate study periods,
such as Saturday peak hours, would also be valuable for certain land use types
such as retail. However, weekday peak hours were used in this study because
they are the most commonly used analysis periods for traffic impact studies in
California.
Although not enough data was collected to establish a statistically valid finding,
a preliminary finding for the limited data collected to date is that the observed
trip generation rates for the surveyed sites under different land use categories are
generally lower during the morning and afternoon peak hours than ITE trip
generation rates for comparable land uses. A few exceptions include the mid- rise
apartment site in Pasadena, the mid- rise condominiums/ townhouses site in San
Diego, the Chain Clothing Store in San Francisco and the supermarket in San
Diego, which had observed trip generation rates that were equal to or higher
than ITE average rates for at least one peak study period. It should be noted that
all of the sites that had observed trip rates that were slightly higher than ITE rates
were within the ITE range of rates for their respective land use categories.
4.2 Comparison with ITE Trip Generation Rates
4.2.1 Residential Land Uses
Table 2 compares the observed and ITE vehicle trip generation rates for
residential land use categories. It is important to note that this comparison is
based on a small number of sites and surveys ( only one site for some categories)
and is intended as the beginning of a more comprehensive database.
It is important to note that a large proportion of the residents surveyed at the
Berkeley sites are affiliated with the University of California at Berkeley as either
10 For retail and restaurant uses, the midday survey covers a period from 10: 00 a. m. to 3: 00 p. m.,
depending on the hours of operation for the site.
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 32
students or employees ( about 50%). Due to the proximity of the sites to the
University, the non- auto mode share may be higher than if the sites were not
located near the University. This does not invalidate the data and, in fact, may be
representative of typical university town urban infill development. However, in an
effort to ensure diversity in the type and location of sites studied, only one of the
Berkeley mid- rise apartment sites is included in the residential land use analysis
summary and averages presented in Table 2. The findings from the remaining
Berkeley mid- rise apartment sites are presented in a later section as a
representation of urban university town residential trip generation.
Table 2: Comparison of Observed and ITE Trip Rates
( For Residential Land Uses)
Land Use Location
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Observed
Trip Rate
Avg. ITE
Trip Rate
( ITE Code)
%
Diff.
Observed
Trip Rate
Avg. ITE
Trip Rate
( ITE Code)
%
Diff.
Residential Land Use
Mid- Rise
Apartments Berkeley 0.04
0.30
( 223)
0.28
0.39
( 223)
Mid- Rise
Apartments
Santa
Monica 0.25 0.25
Mid- Rise
Apartments Pasadena 0.34 0.32
Weighted Average of Mid- Rise
Apartment Sites 0.22 - 27% 0.28 - 28%
High- Rise
Apartments
San
Francisco 0.05 0.30
( 222) - 83% 0.07 0.35
( 222) - 0.80
Mid- Rise Residential
Condominiums/
Townhouses
San Diego 0.46 0.44
( 230) 5% 0.41 0.52
( 230) - 21%
High- Rise
Condominiums/
Townhouses
San Diego 0.10 0.34
( 232) - 71% 0.17 0.38
( 232) - 55%
Weighted Average of All
Residential Sites 0.17 0.32
Notes:
Average ITE trip rates from Trip Generation, 8th Edition, 2008.
ITE average trip rate for ‘ Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic’ was used for comparison, except where noted.
Weighted average is computed by dividing the total number of auto trips from all sites by the total number of
units in all sites.
Figure 2 and Figure 3 provide scatter plots comparing the observed residential
trip rates to ITE trip rates for the AM and the PM peak hours. Further details on the
mode of travel observed at these survey sites are presented in the following
section.
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 33
Figure 2: Comparison Between Surveyed Trip Results and ITE Standard Trip
Estimates For All Residential Land Use Categories - AM Peak Hour
Figure 3: Comparison Between Surveyed Trip Results and ITE Standard Trip
Estimates For All Residential Land Use Categories - PM Peak Hour
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375 400 425 450
Average Vehicle Trips
Number of Dwelling Units
Surveyed AM Trips
ITE Standard AM Trips
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 325 350 375 400 425 450
Average Vehicle Trips
Number of Dwelling Units
Surveyed PM Trips
ITE Standard PM Trips
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 34
For residential land use categories, the observed vehicle trip generation rates
were lower than ITE trip rates at all locations surveyed during the AM and the PM
peak hours, with the exception of the mid- rise apartment site in Pasadena and
the mid- rise condominiums/ townhomes site in San Diego, where the observed AM
peak hour trip rates were slightly higher than the standard ITE trip rates. For the
surveyed sites in San Francisco and Berkeley, the observed trip rates were
significantly lower when compared to ITE trip rates. The observed trip generation
rates for the mid- rise apartment site in Berkeley was 28 percent ( PM peak) to 87
percent ( AM peak) lower than ITE average rates, while the high- rise apartment
site in San Francisco was 80 percent ( PM peak) to 83 percent ( AM peak) lower
than ITE average rates. Additionally, the weighted average trip rate of the three
mid- rise apartment sites was observed to be 27 percent to 28 percent lower than
ITE average rates.
The observed trip rates for the San Diego sites may be representative of typical
urban infill residential sites, but also representative of higher- end development
with a mix of moderate to high- income owners and renters, and sites with
relatively high parking ratios. Since the two San Diego residential sites are within
different ITE land use categories, the weighted average trip rate was not
calculated. However, the weighted average of all the residential sites is lower
than the ITE average rates for any residential category.
4.2.2 Non- Residential Land Uses
For the non- residential land use categories surveyed, the derived urban infill trip
rates were lower than published ITE trip rates at all the locations surveyed during
the AM and the PM peak hours, except for the Retail Clothing Store and the Asian
Cuisine quality restaurant. For the Retail Clothing Store, the observed trip
generation rate was slightly higher than the ITE rate during the PM peak hour. The
retail site was not open during the AM peak hour. Therefore, it was surveyed
during the midday peak; however, the observed midday trip rate could not be
compared to an ITE average trip rate because ITE Trip Generation does not
provide an average trip rate for the “ weekday peak hour of the generator” for
shopping centers. The observed trip generation rates for the Asian Cuisine quality
restaurant were lower than the ITE average rate for the AM peak hour; however,
the observed PM peak hour trip rate was higher than the equivalent ITE rate.
Table 3 compares the observed and ITE vehicle trip generation rates for non-residential
sites. Figure 4 and Figure 5 provide scatter plots comparing the trip
generation of the four office buildings surveyed during Phase 1 and Phase 2 using
the observed and ITE average rates and ITE equations for the AM and PM peak
hours.
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 35
Table 3: Comparison of Observed and ITE Trip Rates
( For Non- Residential Land Uses)
Land Use Location
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Observed
Trip Rate
ITE Trip
Rate % Diff. Observed
Trip Rate
ITE Trip
Rate % Diff.
Non- Residential Land Use
General Office
Building
San
Francisco 1.21
1.55
( ITE 710)
0.92
1.49
( ITE 710)
General Office
Building
Los
Angeles 0.81 0.62
General Office
Building
Los
Angeles 0.28 0.50
General Office
Building
Los
Angeles 0.60 0.95
Weighted Average of Office
Sites 0.78 - 50% 0.74 - 50%
Retail Clothing
Store1,4 Oakland 12.03 N/ A2 N/ A 4.01 3.73
( ITE 820) 8%
Florist4 Berkeley 0.83 1.00
( ITE 820) - 17% 2.92 3.73
( ITE 820) - 22%
Bakery & Cafe5 Berkeley 5.21 70.22
( ITE 939) - 93% 8.46 28.00
( ITE 939) - 70%
Coffee Shop6 San
Diego 50.80 117.23
( ITE 936) - 57% 8.77 40.57
( ITE 936) - 78%
Quality
Restaurant
San
Francisco 4.56
5.573
( ITE 931)
4.20
7.49
( ITE 931)
Quality
Restaurant
San
Francisco 1.75 8.29
Weighted Average of Quality
Restaurant Sites 3.62 - 35% 5.56 - 26%
Notes:
ITE trip rates from Trip Generation manual, 8th Edition, 2008.
ITE average trip rate for ‘ Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic’ was used for comparison, except where noted.
1 The clothing store was not open during the AM peak hour. This rate is the midday rate representing the PM peak
hour of the generator as defined by ITE.
2 ITE Trip Generation does not provide a weekday rate for “ peak hour of the generator” for shopping centers.
However, the trip generation manual provides rates for “ apparel store” ( Code 870). The ITE average PM peak hour
rate for this land use is 3.83 trips per 1,000 SF, and 4.20 trips for the PM peak hour of the generator. Therefore, the
observed rates for the clothing store, when compared to ITE’s apparel store category, provides a close match with
the PM peak hour and a significantly higher rate when compared to ITE’s peak hour of the generator.
3 The quality restaurants were closed during the AM peak hour. Therefore, the restaurants were surveyed during the
midday period ( 11: 30AM- 2: 00PM). For comparative purposes, the ITE 931 rate for the AM peak hour of the
generator is shown above.
4 ITE Trip Generation does not provide specific trip generation rates for each of the different types of retail land uses
included in this study; therefore, the TAC chose to compare all forms of retail to ITE Trip Generation’s Shopping
Center land use category ( Code 820).
5 Compared to ITE’s bread/ donut/ bagel shop category under land use code 939 ( Bread/ Donut/ Bagel Shop
without Drive- Through Window).
6 Compared to ITE’s coffee/ donut shop category under land use code 936 ( Coffee/ Donut Shop without Drive-
Through Window).
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 36
Figure 4: Comparison Between Derived Trip Rates and ITE Trip Estimates -
General Office Use - AM Peak Hour
Figure 5: Comparison Between Derived Trip Rates and ITE Trip Estimates -
General Office Use - PM Peak Hour
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
225
250
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200
Average Vehicle Trips
1,000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area
Surveyed AM Trips
ITE Standard AM Trips
ITE Equation Rates
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
225
250
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200
Average Vehicle Trips
1,000 Sq. Feet Gross Floor Area
Surveyed PM Trips
ITE Standard PM Trips
ITE Equation Rates
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 37
4.2.3 Non- Prioritized Land Uses
Several additional non- residential sites were surveyed, but were not included in
the list of ten priority land uses selected by the TAC for Phase 2 of the research
and, therefore, were not included in the analysis presented above. Several of
these non- prioritized sites were located in the ground floor commercial portion
the residential sites; therefore, these locations were surveyed along with the
residential component of the site for future reference. Other sites, such as the
Supermarket and Health/ Fitness Club, were consistent with the ten priority land
use categories for Phase 1 of the study, but were replaced by other preferred
land uses types for Phase 2 by the TAC. In this section, the observed trip
generation rates for these non- prioritized land use categories are compared to ITE
average trip rates for similar land use categories.
Of the three non- prioritized sites that were surveyed, two of the three sites have
observed trip generation rates that are lower than the ITE average rates. The only
non- prioritized site that had higher observed trip rates than the equivalent ITE
average rates was the supermarket, which had higher observed trip rates for the
AM and PM peak hours. Table 4: summarizes the comparison of trips rates for
non- prioritized land uses.
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 38
Table 4: Comparison of Observed and ITE Trip Rates
( For Non- Prioritized Land Use Categories)
Commercial
Land Use Location
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Derived
Trip
Rate
ITE Trip
Rate
( ITE
Code)
% Diff.
Derived
Trip
Rate
ITE Trip Rate
( ITE Code) % Diff.
Non- Residential Land Use ( not selected for this study)
Drinking
Place1 Berkeley N/ A 0.00
( ITE 925) N/ A 0.14 11.34
( ITE 925) - 98.8%
Supermarket San
Diego 4.66 3.59
( ITE 850) 29.8% 10.82 10.50
( ITE 850) 3.1%
Health/ Fitness
Club Oakland 1.19 1.38
( ITE 492) - 13.8% 1.21 3.53
( ITE 492) - 65.7%
Notes:
ITE average trip rates from Trip Generation, 8th Edition, 2008.
ITE average trip rate for ‘ Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic’ was used for comparison.
1 The drinking place was closed for AM peak hour. Compared to ITE land use 925 ( Drinking Place).
4.2.4 Urban University Town Trip Generation – UC Berkeley Sites
As noted previously, a large proportion of the residents surveyed at the Berkeley
residential sites are affiliated with the University of California at Berkeley as either
students or employees ( about 50%). Due to the proximity of the sites to the
University, the non- auto mode share may be higher than if the sites were not
located near the University. This does not invalidate the data and, in fact, may be
representative of university town urban infill development. The findings from all of
the surveyed Berkeley sites are provided in this section as a representation of the
trip generation characteristics of residential and non- residential land uses in an
urban university town setting.
Table 5 compares the observed and ITE vehicle trip generation rates for sites near
the University of California at Berkeley. The observed trip generation rates were
lower than the ITE average rates for all of the sites, except for the copy/ printing
shop, which had a slightly higher observed trip rate during the PM peak hour. The
mid- rise apartment sites had significantly lower observed trip generation rates
than the ITE average rates. The weighted average rate for the mid- rise apartment
sites was 67% lower for the AM peak and 59% lower for the PM peak hour.
These findings are indicative of the travel characteristics of land uses in close
proximity to the University, as well as the relatively low parking ratio provided at
each of the six Berkeley sites ( see Appendix for details).
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 39
Table 5: Comparison of Observed and ITE Trip Rates
( For Sites Near UC Berkeley)
Figure 6 and Figure 7 provide scatter plots comparing the trip generation of the
six mid- rise apartment sites in Berkeley surveyed during the study using the
observed and ITE average rates for the AM and PM peak hours, respectively.
Land Use Location
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Observed
Trip Rate
ITE Trip
Rate
( ITE
Code)
% Diff. Observed
Trip Rate
ITE Trip
Rate
( ITE
Code)
% Diff.
Residential Land Use
Mid- Rise Apartments1 Berkeley 0.00
0.30
( ITE 223)
- 100% 0.04
0.39
( ITE 223)
- 89.7%
Mid- Rise Apartments Berkeley 0.04 - 86.7% 0.28 - 28.2%
Mid- Rise Apartments Berkeley 0.22 - 26.7% 0.17 - 56.4%
Mid- Rise Apartments Berkeley 0.05 - 83.3% 0.15 - 61.5%
Mid- Rise Apartments Berkeley 0.07 - 76.7% 0.09 - 76.9%
Mid- Rise Apartments Berkeley 0.13 - 56.7% 0.13 - 66.7%
Weighted Average of Berkeley
Mid- Rise Apartment Sites 0.10 - 66.7% 0.16 - 59.0%
Non- Residential Land Use
Bakery & Cafe Berkeley 5.21 70.223
( ITE 939) - 92.6% 8.46 28.003
( ITE 939) - 69.8%
Coffee Shop Berkeley 17.89 117.234
( ITE 936) - 84.7% 7.85 40.574
( ITE 936) - 80.7%
Copy/ Printing Shop2 Berkeley N/ A 1.00
( ITE 820) N/ A 4.00 3.73
( ITE 820) 7.2%
Flower Shop Berkeley 0.83 1.00
( ITE 820) - 17.0% 2.92 3.73
( ITE 820) - 21.7%
Notes:
ITE trip rates from Trip Generation manual, 8th Edition, 2008.
ITE average trip rate for ‘ Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic’ was used for comparison.
1 Intercept survey indicated no AM peak hour automobile trips.
2 The copy/ printing shop is closed during the AM peak hour.
3 Compared to ITE’s bread/ donut/ bagel shop category under land use code 939 ( Brea/ Donut/ Bagel
Shop without Drive- Through Window).
4 Compared to ITE’s coffee/ donut shop category under land use code 936 ( Coffee/ Donut Shop
without Drive- Through Window).
Weighted average is computed by dividing the total number of auto trips from all sites by the total
number of units in all sites.
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 40
Figure 6: Comparison Between Derived Trip Rates and ITE Trip Estimates –
Berkeley Residential Uses - AM Peak Hour
Figure 7: Comparison Between Derived Trip Rates and ITE Trip Estimates –
Berkeley Residential Uses - PM Peak Hour
0
10
20
30
40
50
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200
Average Vehicle Trips
Number of Dwelling Units
Surveyed AM Trips
ITE Standard AM Trips
0
10
20
30
40
50
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 175 200
Average Vehicle Trips
Number of Dwelling Units
Surveyed PM Trips
ITE Standard PM Trips
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 41
4.3 Mode of Travel by Land Use
Table 6 summarizes the observed mode of travel by residential land use during
the AM and the PM peak hour. The weighted average of percent auto trips for all
of the residential sites is approximately 51% in the AM peak hour and 47% in the
PM peak hour, which indicates a near- equal split between auto and
transit/ walk/ bicycle mode share for the combined uses. Again, it should be noted
that only one of the Berkeley mid- rise apartment sites is included in the residential
land use mode split summary presented in Table 6. The findings from the
remaining Berkeley mid- rise apartment sites are presented in a later section as a
representation of urban university town residential mode split.
Table 6: Comparison of Mode of Travel by Land Use
( For Residential Land Uses)
Land Use Location
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
%
Auto
Trips
%
Transit
Trips
% Walk /
Bicycle
Trips
% Auto
Trips
%
Transit
Trips
% Walk /
Bicycle
Trips
Residential Land Use
Mid- Rise Apartments Berkeley 20% 7% 73% 24% 5% 71%
Mid- Rise Apartments Santa
Monica 84% 0% 16% 62% 3% 35%
Mid- Rise Apartments Pasadena 85% 9% 6% 85% 5% 10%
Weighted Average of Mid- Rise
Apartment Sites 67% 5% 28% 60% 4% 36%
High- Rise Apartments San
Francisco 14% 61% 25% 17% 49% 34%
High- Rise Residential
Condominiums /
Townhouses
San Diego 77% 3% 20% 73% 7% 20%
Mid- Rise Residential
Condominiums /
Townhouses
San Diego 85% 2% 13% 69% 0% 31%
Weighted Average of Residential
Sites 51% 26% 23% 47% 21% 32%
For the residential land uses surveyed within the San Francisco Bay Area, the
percentage of auto trips is relatively low compared to the percentage of non-auto
trips. For example, the Berkeley mid- rise site in Table 6 has approximately 73
percent walk/ bicycle trips in the AM peak hour and approximately 71 percent
walk/ bicycle trips in the PM peak hour. Also, the high- rise apartment site in the
City of San Francisco has a combined transit and walk/ bicycle mode share of
approximately 86 percent for the AM peak hour and 83 percent for the PM peak
hour. Note that for the transit mode share the San Francisco high- rise apartment
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 42
site significantly skews the weighted average ( 49 percent to 67 percent transit) for
all of the residential sites. The other sites surveyed have a transit mode share
ranging from 2 percent to 9 percent.
In comparison, the two mid- rise apartment sites located in the Los Angeles region
have significantly higher percent auto trips compared to transit and walk/ bicycle
modes. This may reflect a greater propensity for auto usage in the Los Angeles
region, or it may indicate that residents of these areas commute to locations
outside of their locality.
The two residential sites located in downtown San Diego have a higher
percentage of auto trips than transit and walk/ bicycle trips, indicating that these
residents may commute to areas outside of downtown. However, both San Diego
sites have a relatively high walk/ bike mode of travel, indicating that the location
of these sites is conducive to walking and biking for daily errands. Furthermore,
the San Diego site residents are more affluent than other sites surveyed ( based on
the optional survey question on income) and the sites have a relatively high
parking ratio. While more data is needed to draw any definitive conclusions,
these sites may be examples of “ self- selective” upscale urban housing where
auto travel remains the predominant mode of travel.
Table 7 presents the observed mode of travel by non- residential land use during
the AM and PM peak hours. For the non- residential land uses the following key
observations can be made:
􀂊 While the three office building sites in the Los Angeles region show that
auto trips are the predominant mode of travel ( 92 percent to 95
percent in the AM and 77 percent to 94 percent in the PM peak hour),
the observed trip generation rates are significantly lower than the ITE
average rates. This would indicate that this building generates fewer
person trips per 1,000 square feet of built space than a comparably
sized building in a suburban environment. This may be due to a lower
employee density and an indication that employee density should be
identified at future office building sites. However, it should be noted
that the transit mode share is very high in the PM peak hour
( approximately 23 percent) for the first office building listed in
downtown Los Angeles ( 626 Wilshire Boulevard). Of the 23 percent
transit mode share, 16 percent is represented by train/ trolley users,
which is reasonable considering the proximity of the nearby Metro Rail
Station at 7th Street/ Flower Street. A few possible explanations for the
relatively high transit mode share percent for the PM peak hour
compared to the AM peak hour include:
o The random sampling did not pick up transit users equally in
the morning and afternoon. Transit users generally have a set
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 43
schedule based on bus and train arrival/ departure times, while
auto users are free to arrive or leave per their own schedule.
Transit users arriving in the morning may have chosen not to
participate in the survey because they were late for work.
o Transit users may arrive earlier or later than the morning peak
period surveyed. If this is the case, this pattern would only be
captured in a daily survey.
o Afternoon surveys captured a relatively large grouping of
transit users, which could possibly be related to train schedules.
Table 7: Comparison of Mode of Travel by Land Use
( For Non- Residential Land Uses)
Land Use Location
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
%
Auto
Trips
%
Transit
Trips
% Walk /
Bicycle
Trips
% Auto
Trips
%
Transit
Trips
% Walk /
Bicycle
Trips
Non- Residential Land Use
General Office
Building
San
Francisco 69% 16% 15% 56% 31% 13%
General Office
Building Los Angeles 95% 4% 1% 77% 23% 0%
General Office
Building Los Angeles 92% 5% 3% 94% 6% 0%
General Office
Building Los Angeles 94% 4% 2% 93% 2% 5%
Weighted Average for Office Sites 86% 8% 6% 77% 18% 5%
Retail Clothing Store Oakland n/ a1 n/ a1 n/ a1 36% 52% 12%
Flower Shop Berkeley 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0%
Bakery & Cafe Berkeley 33% 11% 56% 57% 10% 33%
Coffee Shop San Diego 50% 13% 37% 17% 0% 83%
Quality Restaurant2 San
Francisco 34% 8% 58% 60% 0% 40%
Quality Restaurant2 San
Francisco 50% 0% 50% 57% 22% 21%
Notes:
1 The clothing store was not open during the AM peak hour; therefore, data was collected during the midday
period. For this reason, the mode split is provided for the PM peak hour only.
2 The quality restaurants were not open during the AM peak hour; therefore, data was collected during the
midday period.
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 44
􀂊 The quality restaurants that were surveyed in San Francisco show a
walk/ bicycle mode share of 50 percent or more for midday peak
hour. This indicates that during lunch, people who live or work in the
area tend to walk or ride bikes to their lunch destinations.
Table 8 presents the observed mode of travel by residential and non- residential
land use for the sites surveyed near the University of California at Berkeley during
the AM and PM peak hours. This is presented as a representation of the mode
share distribution for an urban university town.
Table 8: Comparison of Mode of Travel by Land Use
( For Sites Near UC Berkeley)
Name Location
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
%
Auto
Trips
%
Transit
Trips
% Walk /
Bicycle
Trips
%
Auto
Trips
%
Transit
Trips
% Walk /
Bicycle
Trips
Residential Land Use
Mid- Rise Apartments1 Berkeley 0% 11% 89% 7% 27% 66%
Mid- Rise Apartments Berkeley 20% 7% 73% 24% 5% 71%
Mid- Rise Apartments Berkeley 57% 29% 14% 35% 30% 35%
Mid- Rise Apartments Berkeley 25% 50% 25% 17% 9% 74%
Mid- Rise Apartments Berkeley 21% 17% 62% 20% 7% 73%
Mid- Rise Apartments Berkeley 44% 22% 34% 24% 14% 62%
Weighted Average of All Mid- Rise
Apartment Sites 31% 20% 49% 23% 15% 62%
Non- Residential Land Use
Bakery & Cafe Berkeley 33% 11% 56% 57% 10% 33%
Coffee Shop Berkeley 64% 0% 36% 35% 8% 57%
Copy/ Printing Shop Berkeley n/ a2 n/ a2 n/ a2 38% 0% 62%
Flower Shop Berkeley 100% 0% 0% 100% 0% 0%
Weighted Average of All Non- Residential
Sites 58% 5% 37% 53% 6% 41%
Notes:
1 Intercept survey indicated no AM peak hour automobile trips.
2 The Copy/ Printing Shop was closed during the AM period.
Weighted average is computed by dividing the total number of auto trips from all sites by the total number of units in
all sites.
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 45
5 Summary and Conclusion
This chapter provides preliminary conclusions based on this research completed thus
far. Despite the fact that the research project failed to meet its overall data
collection goals, the data that was obtained provides some insight into the
differences in travel patterns between urban infill and conventional suburban sites
and establishes the beginning of an urban infill trip generation database. The study
has been successful in identifying and testing data collection methods and
determining ways to address challenges, such as promoting participation in the
research. The lessons learned in this study have strengthened the knowledge and
techniques for continuing data collection in future efforts. A detailed discussion of
the challenges encountered in this study is presented in Appendix D.
5.1 Key Conclusions
The preliminary data collected and evaluated to date from 27 sites indicate that
the observed trip generation rates are generally lower ( in some cases
significantly) when compared to ITE trip generation rates, although some
individual sites show trip rates equal to or higher than ITE rates. More data points
are required for the full set of selected land uses to substantiate this preliminary
conclusion and to establish statistical correlations between urban contexts and
trip generation characteristics.
5.2 Recommendations
5.2.1 Recommendations for Improving Study Methodology
The methodologies used in this study could be improved in the following ways:
􀂊 In this study, the gross leasable area ( GLA) was used to derive the
observed trip generation rates for general office building sites.
Because ITE trip rates are based on gross square- footage ( GSF), the
observed trip rates presented in this study are essentially conservative
when compared to ITE rates. Gross leasable area was used for this
study for the reason that it is typically easier for building property
managers to provide compared to GSF; however, it is recommended
that GSF be used for future efforts to increase the comparability of the
analysis results11.
􀂊 During the site surveys, the inbound and outbound trips were recorded
separately for the pedestrian counts, but the intercept surveys did not
differentiate between inbound and outbound trips during each peak
11 GLA – Total floor area available to tenants,
GSF – Total floor area of a building.
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 46
hour. In order to serve as a more valuable reference during data
analysis, the intercept survey questionnaires should note the direction
of each trip, as well as the precise time the interview was conducted.
􀂊 For sites with multiple entrances ( i. e. main lobby entrance, garage
entrance), there may be distinctly different travel characteristics at
each entrance. For example, an office building may have a particular
entrance located near a transit station, or a garage entrance that is
only accessible via automobile. For sites of this type, it is
recommended that the mode split and trip generation be analyzed
for each specific entrance, then used to develop a weighted
average.
􀂊 For several of the sites surveyed in Phase 2 of this study, the intercept
survey questionnaires included a question regarding where the
traveler parked ( if traveling by automobile, did they park on- site, off-site,
etc.). This information proved to be particularly useful when
evaluating the survey data. It is recommended that future studies
include a question of this type in the intercept survey questionnaire.
􀂊 During the intercept surveys, surveyors were asked to note the time
and location for each completed travel questionnaire; however, this
information was often omitted during the survey process. For future
studies, it is recommended that the survey supervisors ensure that the
surveyors fill in as many of the questionnaire inputs as practicable.
5.2.2 Recommendations for Future Research Efforts
Subsequent research should include the following:
􀂊 Continue data collection with the goal of developing a larger
database that includes at least five data points for up to ten land use
categories. This will provide enough data to perform a reasonable
statistical analysis and to correlate the data for those categories.
􀂊 Conduct a pilot study to test a method of collecting average daily
traffic data using intercept surveys. Optimally, the pilot study would
locate a site with an isolated parking facility that would allow
validation of the method using automatic machine counts. This same
pilot study could be used to validate the observed peak hour trip
generation rates.
􀂊 Once a larger database has been established, select sites for
validation of trip rates. While difficult to find in urban settings, an ideal
validation site would have a parking garage exclusive to tenants and
visitors where traffic can be counted automatically and compared to
traffic estimates derived from the surveys.
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 47
􀂊 Use the optional demographic data to cross- reference trip generation
to income, auto ownership, and other socio- economic factors.
􀂊 Develop additional indicators correlating trip generation rates to
urban infill site characteristics, such as distance to the Central Business
District, walking environment, residential densities, number of on- site
parking spaces, and distance to transit.
􀂊 Explore alternative incentives to explore which ( if any) are most
successful in motivating property managers/ owners to provide
permission to survey developments. A few incentives that could be
offered include:
o Access to the site’s or study’s data and results
o Copy of the final report
o To “ look at any traffic/ parking problems” the developer may
be having
o To collect a little extra data that may be of interest to the
developer/ manager
o Cash, prizes or other similar options
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 48
6 Bibliography
Land Use and Site Design - Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes. Washington D. C.:
Transportation Research Board ( TRB) Transit Cooperative Research Program ( TCRP), Report 95.
Association of Bay Area Governments, Kimley- Horn and Associates, and Economic & Planning
Systems. Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California, Phase 1: Data Collection
Methodology and Pilot Application, Final Report. California Department of Transportation,
Headquarters Divisions of Transportation Planning and Research & Innovation, 2008 Sacramento,
California, USA: . Website:
http:// www. dot. ca. gov/ newtech/ researchreports/ reports/ 2008/ ca_ infill_ trip_ rates-phase_
1_ final_ report_ appendices_ 4- 24- 08. pdf
Census 2000 Urban and Rural Classification website: www. census. gov/ geo/ www/ ua/ 1ua_ 2k. html.
Daisa, James M., Proposed Recommended Practice in Designing Major Urban Thoroughfares for
Walkable Communities, Washington D. C., Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2006.
Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Handbook, Second Edition, Washington D. C.:
Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2004.
Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation, 8th Edition, Washington D. C.: Institute of
Transportation Engineers, 2008.
Smith, Mary S. Shared Parking, Second Edition, Washington D. C.: ULI- The Urban Land Institute and
the International Council of Shopping Centers, 2005.
Parking Generation, 3rd Edition. Washington D. C.: Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2004.
Terry Parker, G. B. Arrington, Topaz Faulkner, Janet Smith- Heimer, Ron Golem, Daniel Mayer, et. al.
Statewide Transit- Oriented Development Study – Factors for Success in California, Sacramento:
California Department of Transportation, 2002.
Guide for the Preparation of Traffic Impact Studies. Sacramento: California Department of
Transportation, 2002.
California Senate Bill ( SB) 1636 ( Figueroa) sponsored by the Surface Transportation Policy Project
and signed in to law on September 12, 2002, and California Government Code Section 65088.1.
Final Report
Trip- Generation Rates for Urban Infill Land Uses in California
Phase 2: Data Collection
June 15, 2009
Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc. Page 49
7 Appendices
A. Site Data Summaries
B. Excerpt from Scope of Work for Phase 2 – Detailed Survey Methodology
C. Intercept Survey Questionnaires
D. Summary of Study Challenges
E. Summary of Study Costs
F. Summary of Comments Received from ITE Trip Generation Subcommittee Review
of Phase 1 Final Report
Appendix A
Site Data Summaries
50
Land Use Type: Retail / Chain Clothing Store
Site Characteristics:
Studios Units: 0 D. U
1 Bedroom Units: 0 D. U
2 Bedrooms Units: 0 D. U
3 + Bedrooms Units: 0 D. U
Total 0 D. U
Ground Floor Commercial: 11,000 Sq. Ft.
Residential Occupancy: 0%
Commercial Occupancy: 100.00%
Number of parking spaces: 0
Number of spaces per 1,000 square feet: 0.00
Density of Site: N/ A units/ acre
Site Description:
Meets Residential Criteria: No Area Type: CBD
Meets Employment Criteria: Yes Transect / Context Zone Type: Urban Core ( T/ CZ- 6)
Meets Transit Proximity Criteria: Yes
Predominant Land Use within 0.5 miles: Non- Residential Distance from CBD: Within CBD
Connectivity Index ( Measure of Walking Environment): High Residential Density ( within 0.5mile):
% of blocks within 0.5 miles with sidewalks: 100% Employment Density ( within 0.5 mile):
Survey Date: June 1, 2006.
91.22 workers/ gross land acre
Site Name: Chain Clothing Store
Site Location: 1333 Broadway, Oakland, CA
Quantity
13.17 units/ gross land acre
ITE Land Use Codes: ITE 820 Shopping Center
In Out Total In Out Total
ITE Trip Rate
Directional Distribution
Surveyed Trip Rate
Directional Distribution
Surveyed Mode Split Auto Auto
Transit Transit
Walk/ Bicycle Walk/ Bicycle
In Out Total In Out Total
ITE Trip Rate 0.63 0.37 1.00 1.79 1.94 3.73
Directional Distribution 63% 37% 100% 48% 52% 100%
Surveyed Trip Rate 5.92 6.17 12.09 1.96 2.05 4.01
Directional Distribution 49% 51% 100% 49% 51% 100%
Surveyed Mode Split Auto - Auto 40%
Transit - Transit 48%
Walk/ Bicycle - Walk/ Bicycle 12%
Residential Trip Rate Comparison AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Note: Observed AM peak hour trip generation is the midday rate representing the PM peak hour of the generator. ITE Trip Generation does not
provide a weekday rate for " peak hour of the generator" for shopping centers; therefore, no ITE comparison rate is provided for midday peak.
AM Peak - % Trips PM Peak - % Trips
Commercial Trip Rate Comparison AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
AM Peak - % Trips PM Peak - % Trips
51
Land Use Type: Office Building
Site Characteristics:
Studios Units: 0 D. U
1 Bedroom Units: 0 D. U
2 Bedrooms Units: 0 D. U
3 + Bedrooms Units: 0 D. U
Total 0 D. U
Ground Floor Commercial: 120,000 Sq. Ft.
Residential Occupancy: 0%
Commercial Occupancy: 100.00%
Number of parking spaces: N/ A
Number of spaces per 1,000 square feet: N/ A
Density of Site: N/ A units/ acre
Site Description:
Meets Residential Criteria: Yes Area Type: CBD
Meets Employment Criteria: Yes Transect / Context Zone Type: Urban Core ( T/ CZ- 6)
Meets Transit Proximity Criteria: Yes
Predominant Land Use within 0.5 miles: Non- Residential Distance from CBD: Within CBD
Connectivity Index ( Measure of Walking Environment): High Residential Density ( within 0.5mile):
% of blocks within 0.5 miles with sidewalks: 100% Employment Density ( within 0.5 mile):
Survey Date: May 31, 2006.
ITE Land Use Codes: ITE 710 General Office Building
In Out Total In Out Total
ITE Trip Rate
Directional Distribution
Surveyed Trip Rate
Directional Distribution
Surveyed Mode Split Auto Auto
Transit Transit
Walk/ Bicycle Walk/ Bicycle
In Out Total In Out Total
ITE Trip Rate 1.36 0.19 1.55 0.25 1.24 1.49
Directional Distribution 88% 12% 100% 17% 83% 100%
Surveyed Trip Rate 0.94 0.27 1.21 0.14 0.78 0.92
Directional Distribution 78% 22% 100% 15% 85% 100%
Surveyed Mode Split Auto 61% Auto 53%
Transit 16% Transit 31%
Walk/ Bicycle