EVALUATION OF PROCEDURES TO ESTIMATE TRIP GENERATION FOR GENERALIZED LAND USES. Cyrus Stevenson Kump Dr. Michael J. Demetsky, Matthew C.

1 Research Report No. UVACTS-14-5-100 Date: May 3, 2006 EVALUATION OF PROCEDURES TO ESTIMATE TRIP GENERATION FOR GENERALIZED LAND USES By: Cyrus Stevenson Kump Dr. Michael J. Demetsky, Matthew C. Grimes May 3, 2006

2 A Research Project Report For the Mid-Atlantic Universities Transportation Center (MAUTC) A U.S. DOT University Transportation Center Dr. Michael J. Demetsky Department of Civil Engineering Email: mjd@virginia.edu Center for Transportation Studies at the University of Virginia produces outstanding transportation professionals, innovative research results and provides important public service. The Center for Transportation Studies is committed to academic excellence, multi-disciplinary research and to developing state-of-the-art facilities. Through a partnership with the Virginia Department of Transportation s (VDOT) Research Council (VTRC), CTS faculty hold joint appointments, VTRC research scientists teach specialized courses, and graduate student work is supported through a Graduate Research Assistantship Program. CTS receives substantial financial support from two federal University Transportation Center Grants: the Mid-Atlantic Universities Transportation Center (MAUTC), and through the National ITS Implementation Research Center (ITS Center). Other related research activities of the faculty include funding through FHWA, NSF, US Department of Transportation, VDOT, other governmental agencies and private companies. Disclaimer: The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and the accuracy of the information presented herein. This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation, University Transportation Centers Program, in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof. CTS Website http://cts.virginia.edu Center for Transportation Studies University of Virginia 351 McCormick Road, P.O. Box 400742 Charlottesville, VA 22904-4742 434.924.6362

1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient s Catalog No. UVACTS-14-5-100 (UVA-2004-03) 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date: May 3, 2006 EVALUATION OF PROCEDURES TO ESTIMATE TRIP 3 GENERATION FOR GENERALIZED LAND USES 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) Cyrus Stevenson Kump, Dr. Michael J. Demetsky, Matthew C. Grimes 8. Performing Organization Report No. 9. Performing Organization and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Center for Transportation Studies University of Virginia 11. Contract or Grant No. PO Box 400742 Charlottesville, VA 22904-7472 12. Sponsoring Agencies' Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered Office of University Programs, Research Innovation and Technology Administration Final Report US Department of Transportation 400 Seventh Street, SW Washington DC 20590-0001 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 15. Supplementary Notes 16. Abstract When planning for new growth and development, one of the challenges that local officials face is determining how much traffic will be generated by a given land use or parcel, given that all that is known is the current zoning or potential rezoning of the land. Suppose a parcel of land is zoned commercial for a particular county in Virginia, any number of detailed land uses is permitted under that zoning. Each of these detailed land uses will generate a very different number of vehicle trips per day and can dramatically affect the transportation network in the future. If the specific land use is unknown, the analyst must determine a generalized land use for the study. A generalized land use is chosen based on the local zoning ordinance s permissible land uses and also the prevailing mix of land uses within recently developed areas under that same zoning classification in similar locales with similar site size and access characteristics. Real estate databases such as Computer Assisted Mass Appraisal (CAMA) can greatly help the analyst choose the best possible generalized land uses and determine the development quantities because the database includes information such as zoning, acreage, and building square footage of each parcel within the study area. The purpose of this study is to investigate the procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses by validating the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) method described in Chapter 6 of the ITE Trip Generation Handbook. The methodology must have a reasonable degree of accuracy and be computationally feasible given available real estate databases such as the CAMA database. The procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses will be validated by comparing the estimated trip generation for generalized land uses to the observed trip generation for the current land uses. The trip generation from the current uses is obtained from collecting field traffic data and also by using the 7 th Edition ITE Trip Generation Informational Report. Guidelines for localities to use Chapter 6 in the ITE Trip Generation Handbook to estimate trip ends early in the planning process using generalized land uses, given various types of zoning, are an essential output of this project. The procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses is a simple procedure for planners to follow in the early development stages in order to help them get a general idea of the possible number of trips a development can generate. This procedure will help planners to quickly evaluate the extent of possible needed roadway improvements to account for increased traffic from the development, such as changing a two-lane roadway to a four-lane roadway or implementing a signal. 17 Key Words 18. Distribution Statement Trip generation, generalized land use No restrictions. This document is available to the public. 19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified 94 N/A

4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This project could not have been accomplished without the help of many people. I would first like to thank my advisor, Dr. Michael J. Demetsky, who, in addition to being Chair of the Department of Civil Engineering, agreed to be my advisor during my course of study at the University. I would like to thank him very much for all of the guidance throughout this project and for all of the help and support he gave me during my graduate school experience. I would like to thank the Mid-Atlantic Universities Transportation Center for their funding throughout this project. I would also like to thank the Virginia Transportation Research Council and its staff for the use of their outstanding facility and for all of their guidance and encouragement during my time at the University. I would especially like to thank Mr. Matt Grimes who helped to guide this project and was always available to answer any questions. Mr. Lewis Woodson was an enormous help in gathering the proper equipment for collecting field data, and he was always willing to have important discussions. I would finally like to thank my fellow transportation graduate students and the staff at the University of Virginia School of Engineering and Applied Sciences. All of these people helped me to get through the tough of times and the challenges I faced with the school work, this project, and getting enough Rolling Stones tickets. All of you have made my experience at the University one which I shall cherish and look back on with fond memories.

5 ABSTRACT When planning for new growth and development, one of the challenges that local officials face is determining how much traffic will be generated by a given land use or parcel, given that all that is known is the current zoning or potential rezoning of the land. Suppose a parcel of land is zoned commercial for a particular county in Virginia, any number of detailed land uses is permitted under that zoning. Each of these detailed land uses will generate a very different number of vehicle trips per day and can dramatically affect the transportation network in the future. If the specific land use is unknown, the analyst must determine a generalized land use for the study. A generalized land use is chosen based on the local zoning ordinance s permissible land uses and also the prevailing mix of land uses within recently developed areas under that same zoning classification in similar locales with similar site size and access characteristics. Real estate databases such as Computer Assisted Mass Appraisal (CAMA) can greatly help the analyst choose the best possible generalized land uses and determine the development quantities because the database includes information such as zoning, acreage, and building square footage of each parcel within the study area. The purpose of this study is to investigate the procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses by validating the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) method described in Chapter 6 of the ITE Trip Generation Handbook. The methodology must have a reasonable degree of accuracy and be computationally feasible given available real estate databases such as the CAMA database. The procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses will be validated by comparing the estimated trip generation for generalized land uses to the observed trip generation for

6 the current land uses. The trip generation from the current uses is obtained from collecting field traffic data and also by using the 7 th Edition ITE Trip Generation Informational Report. Guidelines for localities to use Chapter 6 in the ITE Trip Generation Handbook to estimate trip ends early in the planning process using generalized land uses, given various types of zoning, are an essential output of this project. The procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses is a simple procedure for planners to follow in the early development stages in order to help them get a general idea of the possible number of trips a development can generate. This procedure will help planners to quickly evaluate the extent of possible needed roadway improvements to account for increased traffic from the development, such as changing a two-lane roadway to a four-lane roadway or implementing a signal.

7 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements 4 Abstract 5 Table of Contents 7 List of Tables 9 List of Figures 11 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 12 1.1 Background 12 1.2 Problem Statement 14 1.3 Purpose and Scope 15 1.4 Study Objectives 15 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 16 2.1 Trip Generation Definition 17 2.2 Trip Generation in Transportation Planning 18 2.3 Estimating Trip Generation 19 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 22 3.1 Data Collection 22 3.1.1 Site Identification for Field Data Collection 22 3.1.2 Field Data Collection 24 3.1.2.1 Preliminary Site Visits 24 3.1.2.2 Data Collection 26 3.1.3 Obtaining Parcel Data 26 3.2 Estimating Trip Generation for Generalized Land Uses 28 3.2.1 Determining the Potential Mix of Land Uses 29 3.2.2 Estimation of Development Quantity 29 3.2.3 Estimation of Trip Generation 31 3.3 Trip Generation for Current Land Uses 36 3.4 Local Field Trip Data 37 3.5 Summary 38 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS 39 4.1 Estimating Trip Generation for Generalized Land Uses Analysis 40 4.1.1 Rio East Professional Park (S-1) 40 4.1.2 Stoney Ridge Road (S-2) 42 4.1.3 Branchlands Boulevard (S-3) 44 4.1.4 Premier Circle (S-4) 45 4.1.5 Fontaine Research Park (S-5) 47 4.1.6 Hunters Way (S-6) 49 4.1.7 Earhart Street (S-7) 51 4.1.8 Cedars Court (S-8) 52 4.1.9 Summary 54 4.2 Trip Generation for Current Land Uses Analysis 55

8 4.2.1 Rio East Professional Park (S-1) 56 4.2.2 Stoney Ridge Road (S-2) 57 4.2.3 Branchlands Boulevard (S-3) 58 4.2.4 Premier Circle (S-4) 59 4.2.5 Fontaine Research Park (S-5) 60 4.2.6 Hunters Way (S-6) 61 4.2.7 Earhart Street (S-7) 62 4.2.8 Cedars Court (S-8) 63 4.2.9 Summary 64 4.3 Field Data Analysis 65 4.4 Evaluation of Procedures to Estimation Trip Generation for Generalize Land 68 Uses CHAPTER 5: GUIDELINES FOR STATE AND LOCAL PLANNERS 73 5.1 Determine Potential Mix of Land Uses 74 5.2 Estimate the Appropriate Development Quantity 74 5.3 Estimate Trips Generated by the Total Site 76 5.4 Test a Range of Possible Scenarios 77 5.5 Summary 78 CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS 79 CHAPTER 7: RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY 83 REFERENCES 85 APPENDIX A TAX MAPS 86

9 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 3.1 Potential land uses for site S-1 29 3.2 Acreage, FAR, and Density calculations for S-1 30 3.3 Estimated trips for Scenario 1 from site S-1 35 3.4 Estimated trips for Scenario 2 from site S-1 36 3.5 Estimated trips generated by current land uses from site S-1 37 3.6 Current trip field counts from site S-1 38 4.1 Total trips estimated for site S-1 in Scenario 1 41 4.2 Total trips estimated for site S-1 in Scenario 2 42 4.3 Total trips estimated for site S-2 in Scenario 1 43 4.4 Total trips estimated for site S-2 in Scenario 2 44 4.5 Total trips estimated for site S-3 in Scenario 1 45 4.6 Total trips estimated for site S-3 in Scenario 2 45 4.7 Total trips estimated for site S-4 in Scenario 1 46 4.8 Total trips estimated for site S-4 in Scenario 2 47 4.9 Total trips estimated for site S-5 in Scenario 1 48 4.10 Total trips estimated for site S-5 in Scenario 2 49 4.11 Total trips estimated for site S-6 in Scenario 1 50 4.12 Total trips estimated for site S-6 in Scenario 2 51 4.13 Total trips estimated for site S-7 in Scenario 1 52 4.14 Total trips estimated for site S-7 in Scenario 2 52 4.15 Total trips estimated for site S-8 in Scenario 1 53

10 4.16 Total trips estimated for site S-8 in Scenario 2 54 4.17 Total trips estimated for Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 55 4.18 Estimated trips generated by current land uses at site S-1 57 4.19 Estimated trips generated by current land uses at site S-2 58 4.20 Estimated trips generated by current land uses at site S-3 59 4.21 Estimated trips generated by current land uses at site S-4 60 4.22 Estimated trips generated by current land uses at site S-5 61 4.23 Estimated trips generated by current land uses at site S-6 62 4.24 Estimated trips generated by current land uses at site S-7 62 4.25 Estimated trips generated by current land uses at site S-8 63 4.26 Total trips estimated for current land uses 64 4.27 Current traffic field counts from each site 66 4.28 Total trips estimated for current land uses and actual traffic counts 68 4.29 Total trip count comparison for all the sites 70 4.30 Comparison between the avg. FAR and the FAR for the current land uses 71

11 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 3.1 Potential land uses for site S-1 24 3.2 Acreage, FAR, and Density calculations for S-1 32

12 Chapter 1: Introduction The issue of growth is increasingly important in many American communities, as civic leaders and citizens alike work to find ways to ensure viable, long-term economic prosperity while preserving historic community character. Communities are beginning to consider innovative ideas for meeting the needs of their residents, whether for transportation, housing, shopping, or recreation. Better coordination between transportation and land use is one way to allow communities to plan more comprehensively for housing, for commercial and retail uses, and for other public services, all in the context of accessible transportation. This can mean the installation of a new public transit line, the construction of bicycle or pedestrian paths, or the redesign of a much-used roadway, depending on the needs of the individual community 1. Land use and transportation planning involves the evaluation and selection of transportation facilities to serve present and future land uses. For example, the construction of new supermarkets, shopping centers, restaurants, office space, and residential development will require the creation or expansion of roads and other transportation services. An inventory and analysis of existing conditions provides information and the basis to develop forecasting tools for both the short and long term land use/transportation planning process. 1.1 BACKGROUND Zoning ordinances according to the Code of Virginia Title 15.2 Chapter 22 are land use regulations and restrictions used by cities and counties throughout Virginia to help localities improve the public health, safety, convenience, and welfare of its

13 citizens 2,3. In Virginia, the way in which a parcel of land may be developed is determined by the type of zoning with which land is designated. For example, if a parcel is zoned commercial, one may construct a restaurant, an office building, or a retailshopping store under most zoning codes. However, if it is zoned low-density residential, under the same zoning codes, the owner of the land may build a single family home or a duplex. The specific ways in which the land may be used (restaurant, office building, retail shopping store, single family dwelling unit, or duplex) are called detailed or specific land uses. When planning for new growth and development, one of the challenges that local officials face is determining how much traffic will be generated by a given land use or parcel, given that all the local official possibly knows is the current zoning of the land. Suppose a parcel of land is zoned commercial, for a particular county in Virginia, any number of detailed land uses is permitted under that zoning. Each of these detailed land uses will generate a very different number of vehicle trips per day and can dramatically affect the transportation network in the future. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) provides a Trip Generation Informational Report 4 which includes rates, equations, and data plots for specific land use categories that are used in estimating trip ends for development proposals and for specific land uses that are known before a re-zoning or site plan is approved. However, in the earlier planning stages of development, the specific land use may not be known, yet there is still a need to develop an approximate estimate of future trip generation. In this case, the analyst knows nothing more than the proposed zoning classification of the parcel or

14 land in question; that is, there is not a site plan available, hence, the precise quantity of possible development and the traffic generated is unknown. If the specific land use is unknown, the analyst must determine a generalized land use for the study. A generalized land use is chosen based on the local zoning ordinance s permissible land uses and also the prevailing mix of land uses within recently developed areas under that same zoning classification, in similar locales with similar site size and access characteristics. Real estate databases such as Computer Assisted Mass Appraisal (CAMA) and the Virginia Mass Appraisal Network (VamaNet) can greatly help the analyst choose the best possible generalized land uses because they include the acreage and building square footage of each parcel within the study area. 1.2 PROBLEM STATEMENT The accuracy of estimating trip generation for generalized land use techniques, described in Chapter 6 of the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 5 is not known. That is, using the recommended process to estimate trips early in the planning process relies on an estimation of potential land use mix and density for the site, and will not necessarily be what actually evolves. No guidelines currently exist to help engineers and planners estimate trip generation for the generalized land uses. 1.3 PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of this study is to investigate the trip generation process for generalized land uses by validating the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) method described in Chapter 6 of the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 5. The methodology

15 must have a reasonable degree of accuracy and be computationally feasible given available real estate databases such as CAMA and VamaNet. The procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses will be validated by comparing the estimated trip generation to the observed trip generation from the current land uses. The trip generation from the current uses will be obtained from collecting field traffic data and also by using the 7 th Edition ITE Trip Generation Informational Report 4. Guidelines for localities to estimate trip ends early in the planning process using generalized land uses, given various types of zoning, are an essential output of this project. This study is limited to sites in the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County, Virginia, which are two of 141 localities in Virginia that maintain their own database. The chosen sites to be investigated were mixed use sites and were also selected based on the feasibility of collecting actual ground counts (one or two entrances/exits) on the site to help validate the procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses. 1.4 STUDY OBJECTIVES The specific objectives of this study are as follows: 1. To examine the literature and learn from the results of past studies conducted on land use and trip generation. 2. To develop a methodology for determining a potential land use mix for the chosen sites based on the permissible uses found in the zoning ordinances. 3. To examine the existing development densities and land use mix in the area of the test sites to determine adequate floor-area-ratios (FARs).

16 4. To examine and use the estimation of the trip generation procedure described in Chapter 6 of the ITE Trip Generation Handbook. 5. To collect and analyze traffic field data to help validate the procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses. 6. To develop planning guidelines for state and local planners throughout Virginia for using the procedure to estimate trip generation for generalized land uses.

17 Chapter 2: Literature Review The first step in this study was to examine all of the literature available on estimating trip generation. During this step, a thorough search and review of available documents, publications, and reports involving estimating trip generation and generalized land use was conducted. A computerized search was performed using the Transportation Research Information Services (TRIS) database. A manual literature search was conducted at the Virginia Transportation Research Council (VTRC) and the University of Virginia libraries. It was found when doing this search that there is very little existing literature on estimating trip generation which applies to the problem at hand. The results of the literature review are summarized under the following four topics: 1. Trip generation definition 2. Trip generation in transportation planning 3. Estimating trip generation 2.1 TRIP GENERATION DEFINITION Trip generation is the first step of the conventional four-step travel-demand forecasting process. The purpose of trip generation estimation as seen in the NCHRP Report 365 is to determine the number of persons or vehicle trips entering or exiting an area of analysis 6. Trip generation is functionally related to land use, in terms of the density, location of activities, and character of the use. Typically, automobile ownership, income, household size, density, and type of development are the specific factors that influence the number of trips. Other factors that may also influence the number of trips in a region is the availability of public transportation and the quality of the current

18 transportation system. The best trip generation techniques thus far use disaggregate socioeconomic data, such as households classified by vehicle ownership, family size, or income level (low, medium, or high) 6. As seen in the NCHRP Report 365, trip generation parameters are presented in two formats, vehicle-trip generation rates and cross-classification trip production and attraction rates. The first format using vehicle-trip generation rates is commonly used for site-impact analysis and for estimation of vehicle-trips from special generators. The source for these rates used in the NCHRP Report 365 can be found in the 5 th Edition ITE Trip Generation Informational Report 7. The current edition of these rates is the 7 th Edition ITE Trip Generation Informational Report 4. This informational report includes information on trip rates during weekdays, weekends, morning and evening peak periods, and also background traffic on adjacent streets during the morning and evening peak periods. The second format of trip generation parameters is the cross-classification trip production and attraction rates, which are typically used in travel-demand models. These rates are daily person trips that include the trip purpose 6. This project is going to focus on the first format using vehicle-trip generation rates. 2.2 TRIP GENERATION IN TRANSPORTATION PLANNING Trip generation is important in a number of phases of transportation planning and traffic engineering studies. The studies where trip generation is necessary include: Regional studies that consider a range of land uses and related social and economic characteristics.

19 Regional transportation alternatives studies and development of long-range transportation plans. Short-range and long-range plans that evaluate transportation needs along a corridor or a specific sub-area. Impact studies that assess the effect of new development such as a shopping center, residential development, or industrial park (also known as site impact analysis) 6. The different types of studies listed above for trip generation information have resulted in a wide range of various levels of trip generation data collection. Site-specific vehicle trip rates are presented for impact studies where land uses are known for small areas and vehicle rates are needed to assess the impact of the development. However, the use of person trips is preferred for the other types of studies where the trip generation estimation is being studied at the regional level 6. 2.3 ESTIMATING TRIP GENERATION Trip generation provides a wide range of information on the relationships between vehicle trip generation and site characteristics. A major challenge in estimating trip generation is for the analyst to make reasonable and responsible trip estimates for the development in question. The ITE Trip Generation Informational Report provides various types of data for many different land uses. Data found in the report includes: data plots, weighted average rates, standard deviations, best fit curves, and regression equations 4, all of which can be used to help the analyst best estimate trip generation for various studies. The Institute of Transportation Engineers has developed a Trip

20 Generation Handbook that provides guidance in the interpretation of this data and recommends a step-by-step procedure for developing a trip generation estimate using Trip Generation data from the Trip Generation Informational Report 5. The 7 th Edition ITE Trip Generation Informational Report is based on more than 4,250 trip generation studies submitted to ITE by public agencies, developers, consulting firms and associations 8. Some of the studies date as far back as the early 1960s, but ITE analysts have shown that there is no significant difference between the mean trip rates of the older data and the newer data, thus allowing the sample sizes of the given land uses to remain maximized 8. In the 7 th Edition ITE Trip Generation Informational Report, variations in trip generation characteristics for specific land uses are reflected in the range of rates, standard deviation, and coefficient of determination (R 2 ) value. These variations, as noted in the Trip Generation User s Guide, may be due to a small sample size, individual marketing of the site, economic conditions of the business market, geographic location of the sites studied, or unique characteristics of the specific site 8. The Trip Generation Informational Report supplies engineers and transportation planners with such a wide range of statistical information for the varying land uses, that it has become a very valuable tool in smaller trip generation studies (impact studies). Even though most engineers and planners use the Trip Generation Informational Report to help develop their trip generation studies, some planners believe the information can be misleading. In an article by Donald Shoup, Roughly Right or Precisely Wrong, he discusses how the precision of the statistical information provided with the trip generation rates can be misleading to transportation planners because precision implies

21 certainty 9. In this article Shoup emphasizes both the precision and the statistical insignificance (low number of studies, low R 2 value, etc.) in the trip generation rates at fast food restaurants and raises the question of how many other land uses are statistically insignificant 9. Estimating Trip Generation for Generalized Land Uses, is Chapter 6 of the ITE Trip Generation Handbook. This section, developed by Brian Bochner, is based on his own experiences and approaches that were accepted by other agencies when this section was being developed. According to Mr. Bochner, no additional sources or references were found or cited in this section of the ITE Trip Generation Handbook. Instead, the development of Chapter 6 is original work 10. There are no studies that have been found which show the use of this procedure described in Chapter 6 of the ITE Trip Generation Handbook or its effectiveness at providing reasonable and accurate trip generation forecasts.

22 Chapter 3: Methodology The procedure developed for conducting this study consists of four main steps. Each step plays a significant role in validating the trip generation estimation procedure for generalized land uses described in Chapter 6 of the ITE Trip Generation Handbook. The four steps include: Data Collection Estimating Trip Generation for Generalized Land Uses Trip Generation for Current Land Uses, using the ITE trip tables Local Field Trip Data Throughout this Chapter, data obtained from the first site, Rio East Professional Park (S-1) on Rio Road East, will be used to illustrate the process. The data from the other seven sites can be found in Chapter 4, Results. 3.1 DATA COLLECTION The first step was to collect data for each parcel within each of the study sites. The data collection process for each parcel consisted of a variety of information. Site identification Field data (i.e. arrival and departure traffic counts) Parcel data 3.1.1 Site Identification for field data collection The study site identification was accomplished using aerial photos from VDOT s GIS Integrator. The sites chosen for study needed to have a good mix of land uses. The

23 layouts of the sites also needed to consist of only one or two entrance and exit points due to a limited number of traffic counters (Two Jamar TRAX I Traffic Counter/Classifier) for this project. This limited the search for possible study sites because most areas that consist of multiple land uses have multiple entrance and exit locations. The sites selected for study are found throughout the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County, Virginia. All of the sites selected are located in urban and suburban environments except for one, Hunters Way, which is located in a more rural environment. The traffic flow at all of the sites varies due to the number of land uses (parcels), type of parcel, and the size of the parcel. Data was obtained for eight total sites, which are listed below. 1. Rio East Professional Park, Rio Road East (S-1) 2. Stoney Ridge Industrial Park, Stoney Ridge Road (S-2) 3. Branchland Boulevard, US 29 North (S-3) 4. Premier Circle, US 29 North (S-4) 5. Fontaine Research Park, US 29 South (S-5) 6. Hunter s Way, US 250 East (S-6) 7. Earhart Street, US 29 North (S-7) 8. Cedar Court, Barracks Road (S-8) The abbreviations in parentheses will be used throughout this report to refer to each specific site. Figure 1 below is a map showing the area where all of the sites are located in the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County, Virginia. Each site is made up of groups of parcels of land, each having varying land uses.

24 4 3 1 87 5 6 2 Figure 3.1 Map of the study sites in the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County. 3.1.2 Field Data Collection 3.1.2.1 Preliminary Site Visits After the sites were identified for study, a preliminary site visit was made to each site in order to determine the feasibility of collecting field data. It was necessary to determine the number of entrance and exit points in order to capture every vehicle entering and leaving the site. The traffic conditions and the physical characteristics of

25 each site were observed in order to determine if it was safe to collect data at the selected site. During the preliminary visit the current land uses at each site were documented. The adjacent and surrounding land uses were also noted. The following roadway access information for each site was collected during the preliminary visit to ensure accurate collection of traffic information: Number of lanes Lane and shoulder widths Distance to adjacent intersections Locations of stop signs and traffic signals Turning lanes Posted speed limits An important observation during the preliminary site visits was the recording of the current land uses at each site. This step was very important to assure that the collected data from the CAMA database and each property search was concurrent with the current land use at the site. This will also help in the selection of an appropriate ITE land use code. Some of the sites selected were not fully mature sites, where there were some parcels that had not yet been developed (vacant land) or there were some parcels with vacant building structures located on them (an abandoned structure or structure on the market to be sold). As a result, parcels located within the eight chosen sites that are currently either vacated (undeveloped) land or uninhabited building structures were not considered as part of this study, nor used in the analysis calculations.

26 3.1.2.2 Data Collection Data collection procedures were very similar for each study site. A TRAX I Traffic Counter/Classifier, which is capable of collecting many types of various traffic information was used to collect volume and time-of-day data. Data was collected for seven of the eight sites for a full 72 hours (Tuesday Thursday) to obtain three complete days of midweek 24 hour volume information. Due to construction near the eighth site (S-8) only one day of traffic data was collected. The counters were placed at a distance away from entrance/exit points to avoid slow moving vehicles where the counter may not record the presence of a vehicle. The location and placement of each of the counters varied according to the configuration of the roadway at each site. Two different road tube layouts for the TRAX I were used to adequately collect the volume information given the varying geometry of each site. 3.1.3 Obtaining Parcel Data The individual parcel data for each land use was obtained mostly through the Computer Assisted Mass Appraisal (CAMA) database used by the county Assessors Office in Albemarle County. Parcel data for the City of Charlottesville was obtained from a GIS shapefile. Both sets of data obtained from Albemarle County and the City of Charlottesville were accomplished with the assistance of VTRC staff members and planners in the area. During the data collection of parcel information, it was found that the parcel information within the databases was not 100 percent complete because the database is continually changing and being upgraded to include changes in parcel information.

27 An on-line property search for parcels not included in the database was done to find missing information of parcels of chosen sites being studied. The first step in gathering the parcel information was to locate tax maps of each of the sites to find how exactly the site was divided into individual parcels (see Appendix A for Tax Maps). A spreadsheet of the following information was then compiled for each parcel located within each study area. Name of Parcel Address Parcel Number Tax Map Number Acres Gross Floor Area Zoning Land Use Code Description of Parcel From the Albemarle County and the City of Charlottesville databases, the average Floor-Area-Ratio (FAR) for each zoning classification in the County and City was identified and recorded for use in the estimation procedure. The 7 th Edition ITE Trip Generation Informational Report 4 tables were also used to get weekday data for different ITE Land Use Codes for use throughout this project.

28 3.2 ESTIMATING TRIP GENERATION FOR GENERALIZED LAND USES The 7 th Edition ITE Trip Generation Informational Report 4 provides tables with the weighted average trip generation rates, regression equations, and data plots for specific land uses (152 total categories in the 7 th Edition). These are suitable for use in estimating trip generation for development proposals with known specific land uses which may apply to site plan approval or special use permits. In the early land development stages, however, there may be situations where there is a need for an approximate estimate of future trip generation given that the proposed specific land use is not yet identified. In this case the analyst/planner knows nothing more than the zoning classification or the expected zoning of the land in question; therefore, there would not be a site plan. Consequently, the precise development quantity may not be recognized. The estimation procedure for this project closely follows the procedure outlined in Chapter 6 of the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 5. The procedure described in Chapter 6 consists of three basic steps to the recommended estimation process. 1. Determine the potential mix (or mixes) of land uses in the site 2. Estimate the quantity of development (e.g., gross square footage, dwelling units, acres) 3. Estimate the number of trips generated by each individual land use and for the total site

29 3.2.1 Determining the Potential Mix of Land Uses The fitting trip generation estimate should reflect, to the extent possible, the specific uses within the known zoning classification. The specific uses for each site were best determined by knowing the specific ITE land use classifications acceptable or existing locally within the particular zoning classification. In order to determine the potential land uses which could be placed on each site, it was important to first read the zoning ordinance that applied to each site. Once a list of potential land uses for each site was complete, it was necessary to select specific possible uses for the site based on existing land uses within recently developed areas under the same zoning classification, preferably with similar site size and access characteristics. From this step, nine potential uses were used for site S-1 as seen in Table 3.1 below. Zoning Land Use Land Use Code PDMC 710 General Office Building PDMC 710 General Office Building PDMC 714 Corporate Headquarters Building PDMC 715 Single Tenant Office Building PDMC 715 Single Tenant Office Building PDMC 715 Single Tenant Office Building PDMC 720 Medical-Dental Office Building PDMC 720 Medical-Dental Office Building PDMC 720 Medical-Dental Office Building Table 3.1 Potential land uses for site S-1. 3.2.2 Estimation of Development Quantity Typical development densities (GSF/Acre, DU/acre, or similar ratio) should be obtained for the chosen land uses. Even though typical development densities can be found in national publications, this project uses local densities of land uses under similar zoning classifications. Typical development densities may vary in different parts of a

30 region; therefore, it was critical to be as locally accurate as possible in terms of density. The local typical densities were found from the average floor-area-ratio (FAR) for every type of land use within each zoning classification. For example, site S-1 had a zoning classification of Planned Development Mixed Commercial (PDMC) and the coinciding average FAR value for every site in Albemarle County with similar zoning (PDMC) is 0.247. This FAR information for each land use was found using the CAMA database. Below is Table 3.2, which shows the acreage, FAR, and densities for site S-1. Rio East Professional Park Land Use Sq Ft Area (A) FAR Density (D) Land Use Code Acres (KSF/acre) General Office Building 710 10000 0.465 0.247 21.516 General Office Building 710 8000 0.744 0.247 10.758 Corporate HQ Building 714 19700 0.916 0.247 21.516 Single Tenant Office Building 715 6000 0.558 0.247 10.758 Single Tenant Office Building 715 12000 0.558 0.247 21.516 Single Tenant Office Building 715 7000 0.651 0.247 10.758 Medical-Dental Office Building 720 10000 0.930 0.247 10.758 Medical-Dental Office Building 720 8000 0.744 0.247 10.758 Medical-Dental Office Building 720 10000 0.930 0.247 10.758 Total Estimation 6.493 0.247 14.344 Current Acreage Available at the Site 6.493 Table 3.2 Acreage, FAR, and Density calculations for S-1. The density (D) is then calculated using equation (3.1) below, where the floorarea-ratio (FAR) is 0.247, the 43,560 square feet is the conversion for one square acre, and the Stories is the number of stories in the building (2 stories for this example shown below). The equation below will solve for density as ksf/acre for the parcel. The result for this example can be seen in the first row (General Office Building) in Table 3.2 above. 43560 D = FARx xstories 1000 (3.1)

31 43560 D = 0.247 x2 1000 D = 21.516 ksf / acre The area (A) found as acreage is also calculated using an equation. For each parcel within the site, an estimated square footage for the building to be placed on the parcel must be estimated. The estimated building square footage (SF) for the first land use (parcel) in Table 3.2 above for site S-1 is 10,000 SF. The FAR value and the number of stories in the building remain the same (0.247 and 2 stories). The area equation (3.2) is as follows: A = SF / FAR / 43560 / Stories (3.2) A = 10000/ 0.247/ 43560/ 2 A = 0.465 Acres 3.2.3 Estimation of Trip Generation During this step of the project, two different scenarios consisting of varying land uses and varying development quantities were tested for estimating trip generation. If there is a strong level of uncertainty regarding the possible land use mix and the development density for the site, it is wise for the planner to test a wider range of scenarios with varying land use mixes and densities to get a better understanding of the range of possible trips that may be generated by the site. The estimation of trip generation relies heavily on the rates that are chosen following the recommended procedure (average rates or equations) for the estimation of

32 trip generation equation. The trip generation rates should be developed in the smallest development units possible, such as GSF instead of acres. For this project, the gross square footage (GSF) was estimated and used for each parcel in determining the trips generated. The recommended procedure described in the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 5 (Figure 3.2) was used to select adequate average rates and equations for each parcel. For this project either the equation or the average rate was used even though the figure shows that it may be necessary to sometimes collect local data for a particular parcel. Figure 3.2 Recommended procedure for selecting between average rate and equation.

33 The trip generation estimate in terms of total trip ends (T) per parcel is obtained by multiplying the trip generation rate (R) times the weighted density (D) times the area (A) as seen in equation 3.3 below. T = ( RxDxA) (3.3) The product of density (D) and area (A) in the above equation is simply the number of development units that match the independent variable for the assumed trip generation rate, based either on the weighted average rate or the regression equation. For example, in the site S-1 for the first parcel (General Office Building) of Scenario 1, the following data was used: Density => 21.516 ksf/acre Acreage => 0.465 acres, chosen square footage = 10,000 SF Rate => Ln(T) = 0.77 Ln(x) + 3.65 The density and acreage were found using equations 3.1 and 3.2, and the rate was selected based on the recommended procedure in Figure 3.2 given that the parcel was a General Office Building (land use code 710). The recommended procedure suggests that the regression equation be used as the trip generation rate. Therefore, the trip generation estimate using the regression equation as a rate for this parcel is as follows: T = RxDxA T T = exp = exp ( 0.77Ln( DxA) + 3.65) ( 0.77Ln( 21.516x0.465) + 3.65) T = 227 trips

34 Another example of this trip generation estimate procedure is one which uses the weighted average rate as rate (R). This example can be found in the fourth parcel, Single Tenant Office Building (land use code 715) from Scenario 1 of site S-1. The given information for this estimate is as follows: Density => 10.758 ksf/acre Acreage => 0.558 acres, chosen square footage = 6,000 SF Rate => 11.57, weighted average T = RxDxA T = 11.57x10.758x0.558 T = 69 trips The trip generation estimate (T) for each of the eight individual sites is obtained by summing the product of the rate, density, and acres of individual land uses using equation 3.4 below, where i corresponds to individual land uses or developments within the site. T i i i i (3.4) = ( R xd xa ) Using the above equation, the total estimate of trips was calculated for each site. The total trips estimated following this procedure used both average trip rates and also the regression equation from each land use code chosen for a typical weekday. The total trips calculated represent the total daily trips. Other total trips calculated included the use of the lowest trip rate, median trip rate, and highest trip rate. Two different scenarios consisting of varying land uses and development quantities were tested during this step of estimating trip generation. Scenario 1 included:

35 2 General Office Buildings (1 story and 2 story) 1 Corporate Headquarters Building (2 story) 3 Single Tenant Office Buildings (2 are 1 story and a 2 story) 3 Medial-Dental Office Buildings (all 1 story) While Scenario 2 included: 2 General Office Buildings (1 story and 2 story) 1 Corporate Headquarters Building (2 story) 1 Day Care Center (1 story) 2 Single Tenant Office Buildings (both are 1 story) 1 High-Turnover (Sit-Down) Restaurant (1 story) 2 Medial-Dental Office Buildings (both are 1 story) Mini-Warehouse (1 story) The following tables show the calculated trips generated for both Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 for site S-1. These land uses in these scenarios are not the same as what actually exists at each site. Rio East Professional Park Land Use Total Trips Total Trips Total Trips Total Trips Land Use Code Eq./Avg. Lowest Rate Median Rate Highest Rate General Office Building 710 227 36 162 288 General Office Building 710 191 29 130 230 Corporate HQ Building 714 168 116 180 244 Single Tenant Office Building 715 69 32 123 214 Single Tenant Office Building 715 139 64 246 428 Single Tenant Office Building 715 81 37 144 250 Medical-Dental Office Building 720 361 232 368 505 Medical-Dental Office Building 720 289 185 295 404 Medical-Dental Office Building 720 361 232 368 505 Total Estimation 1886 962 2015 3069 Table 3.3 Estimated Trips for Scenario 1 from site S-1.

36 Rio East Professional Park Land Use Total Trips Total Trips Total Trips Total Trips Land Use Code Eq./Avg. Lowest Rate Median Rate Highest Rate General Office Building 710 261 43 194 346 General Office Building 710 227 36 162 288 Corporate HQ Building 714 134 92 143 195 Day Care Centers 565 396 286 458 630 Single Tenant Office Building 715 58 27 103 178 Single Tenant Office Building 715 81 37 144 250 High-Turnover Restaurant 932 890 515 1118 1722 Medical-Dental Office Building 720 181 116 184 253 Medical-Dental Office Building 720 181 116 184 253 Mini-Warehouse 151 30 15 33 52 Total Estimation 2438 1281 2724 4166 Table 3.4 Estimated Trips for Scenario 2 at from site S-1. In the two tables above are the estimated trips generated from applying the two different scenarios (varying land use mixes and densities) to site S-1. The Trip Equation/Average column represents the estimated trips generated following the recommended procedure outlined in the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 5 for selecting the most appropriate trip generation rate using either the average rate or equation. The Trip Lowest Rate, Trip Median Rate, and Trip Highest Rate columns represent the trips generated using the range of rates shown in the ITE Trip Generation Informational Report 5 for each land use. 3.3 TRIP GENERATION FOR CURRENT LAND USES The estimated trip generation for current land uses also follows the recommended procedure for selecting between trip generation average rates and equations. For each of the current land uses, an ITE land use code, which most adequately represents the land use, is used to determine the trip generation for each parcel. Using the existing building square footage found for each parcel, the appropriate ITE land use code, and following the recommended procedure for selecting a rate, the estimated trips for each of the 52 trip

37 generating land uses in all eight sites was found. Table 3.5 below shows the estimated trips generated by the current land uses for site S-1. Rio East Professional Park Parcel No Sq Ft Land Use Code ITE Land Use Code Equation/Rates Trips 124C0 10548344 Office Building (710) General Office Building Ln(T) = 0.77 LN(X) + 3.64 236 124B1 5184 344 Office Building (710) General Office Building Ln(T) = 0.77 LN(X) + 3.65 137 124B1 2455 344 Office Building (720) Medical-Dental Office Building 36.13 89 124B2 5760 344 Office Building (710) General Office Building Ln(T) = 0.77 LN(X) + 3.65 148 124B3 4422 341 Medical Office (630) Clinic 31.45 139 124B4 3218 341 Medical Office (720) Medical-Dental Office Building 36.13 116 124B5 2711 341 Medical Office (720) Medical-Dental Office Building 36.13 98 124B6 3119 341 Medical Office (720) Medical-Dental Office Building 36.13 113 124B7 3018 341 Medical Office (720) Medical-Dental Office Building 36.13 109 124B8 3628 341 Medical Office (720) Medical-Dental Office Building 36.13 131 124A1 5218 341 Medical Office (630) Clinic 31.45 164 Total Trips for the Current Land Uses on the Parcel 1480 Table 3.5 Estimated trips generated by current land uses from site S-1. By following the recommended procedure, it was sometimes suggested to collect local data for a given parcel; however, the most adequate equation or average rate was used throughout this study. Using the 52 current land uses located within the eight total sites, ITE land use codes were found for all but three of the current land uses. The three land uses (parcels) which had no ITE land use code of close resemblance was a Lifecare Medical Transport business, a Hobbies and Collectibles shop, and a Hair Salon & Spa business. For these three land uses, each site was observed very closely to predict the actual trips generated for each of the parcels. 3.4 LOCAL FIELD TRIP DATA Traffic counts were collected for each of the eight sites. The data was collected for three days during the middle of the week for a typical trip count (Tuesday,

38 Wednesday, or Thursday) and then an average trip count was calculated for the three days. The trips were collected using a TRAX I Traffic Counter/Classifier. Two different tube layouts were use to collect the necessary data given the geometries of the sites. Table 3.6 below shows the actual traffic counts for the Rio East Professional Park site (S- 1). Actual 24-hour field Traffic Counts on a Weekday Site Location Date Recorded Entering Trips Exiting Trips Total Trips Average Trips Rio East Professional Park 8/9/2005 972 962 1934 Rio East Professional Park 9/14/2005 891 887 1778 1828 Rio East Professional Park 9/15/2005 891 882 1773 Table 3.6 Current trip field counts from site S-1. The collection of actual traffic field counts for arriving and departing vehicles for each site will help to validate the procedure used for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses. 3.5 SUMMARY The methodology for this project closely follows the procedure for Estimating Trip Generation for Generalized Land Uses described in Chapter 6 of the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 5. The procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses used in this methodology was applied to all eight sites, and the estimated total trips were then calculated assuming the sites were either undeveloped land or going to be totally redeveloped. When the estimation procedure was completed, the trip generation for current uses and the traffic field counts for each site were then collected to help in testing the accuracy of this estimation procedure. The results and evaluations of this methodology can be seen in the following chapter of this report.

39 Chapter 4: Results The results of this study are divided into the following categories: Estimating Trip Generation for Generalized Land Uses Analysis Trip Generation for Current Land Uses Analysis Local Field Trip Data Analysis Evaluation of Procedure to Estimate Trip Generation for Generalized Land Uses The first section will discuss the results found from using the procedure to estimate trip generation for generalized land uses. It will examine the two scenarios chosen for each of the eight sites as well as the varying land use mixes and densities to show the effects on the number of trips generated. The second section will discuss the current land uses that exist at each site and analyze the number of trips that should be generated according to the average rates and equations in the 7 th Edition ITE Trip Generation Informational Report 4 and the given parcel data (land use, building square footage, etc.). Also, any possible assumptions or predictions that may have been made during the analysis of each site will be discussed. The third section will review the results from the field data collected from each site. This section will include field observations from each site and analyze the collected vehicle trip counts for the existing land uses (parcels). The fourth section of this chapter will provide an overall analysis and evaluation of the procedure to estimate trip generation for generalized land uses using the results from the previous three sections. This analysis and evaluation will use the collected results to validate the estimation procedure used.

40 4.1 ESTIMATING TRIP GENERATION FOR GENERALIZED LAND USES ANALYSIS When analyzing the procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses, as described in Section 3.2 of this report, it is necessary to review each of the eight sites individually. Throughout this section, all of the assumptions made for Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 for each site are discussed. The two scenarios again represent the varying range of possible land use mixes and densities for each of the sites. The tables throughout this section will include information used for the estimation of trip generation. This information includes: Selected land uses based on permissible uses (within known zoning classification) Estimated square footage of each of the selected parcels Calculated Area (acres) for each parcel Average FAR for the particular zoning classification Calculated Density (GSF/acre) for each parcel Total estimated trips using either the average rates or equations 4.1.1 Rio East Professional Park (S-1) The Rio East Professional Park site is located in Albemarle County north of the City of Charlottesville, adjacent to Rio Road. The site is 6.493 acres and is zoned Planned Development Mixed Commercial (PDMC), having a corresponding average FAR of 0.247 for all other parcels with similar zoning. Similar land uses were selected for each of the two scenarios. Scenario 1 consists of nine office building land uses, while Scenario 2 consists of seven office buildings, one daycare center, one high-turnover

41 restaurant, and a mini-warehouse. Each of the selected land uses for both scenarios has varying estimated square footages of the buildings to be placed on them. Based on the estimated building square footage, the calculated area (acreage) and the density can be seen in Table 4.1 and Table 4.2 below. The calculated density varies due to the story height. Three land uses in the first scenario are two stories, while only two land uses in the second scenario are two stories. All others are one story land uses. The total estimated trips generated, seen in the tables below, were calculated using either the recommended average rate or the equation found from following the diagram in Figure 3.1, taken from the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 5. The total estimated trips generated in Scenario 1 are 1,886 trips and the total estimated trips generated for Scenario 2 are 2,438 trips. The trips generated in both scenarios were very similar; however, the increased trips generated in Scenario 2 were due to the addition of the day care center and the high-turnover restaurant. The following tables provide the estimated trip generation for both Scenario 1 and 2 of the Rio East Professional Park site (S-1). Rio East Professional Park Land Use Sq Ft Area (A) FAR Density (D) Total Trips Land Use Code Acres (KSF/acre) Eq./Avg. General Office Building 710 10000 0.465 0.247 21.516 227 General Office Building 710 8000 0.744 0.247 10.758 191 Corporate HQ Building 714 19700 0.916 0.247 21.516 168 Single Tenant Office Building 715 6000 0.558 0.247 10.758 69 Single Tenant Office Building 715 12000 0.558 0.247 21.516 139 Single Tenant Office Building 715 7000 0.651 0.247 10.758 81 Medical-Dental Office Building 720 10000 0.930 0.247 10.758 361 Medical-Dental Office Building 720 8000 0.744 0.247 10.758 289 Medical-Dental Office Building 720 10000 0.930 0.247 10.758 361 Total Estimation 6.493 0.247 14.344 1886 Current Acreage Available at the Site 6.493 Table 4.1 Total trips estimated for site S-1 in Scenario 1

42 Rio East Professional Park Land Use Sq Ft Area (A) FAR Density (D) Total Trips Land Use Code Acres (KSF/acre) Eq./Avg. General Office Building 710 12000 0.558 0.247 21.516 261 General Office Building 710 10000 0.930 0.247 10.758 227 Corporate HQ Building 714 15700 0.730 0.247 21.516 134 Day Care Centers 565 5000 0.465 0.247 10.758 396 Single Tenant Office Building 715 5000 0.465 0.247 10.758 58 Single Tenant Office Building 715 7000 0.651 0.247 10.758 81 High-Turnover Restaurant 932 7000 0.651 0.247 10.758 890 Medical-Dental Office Building 720 5000 0.465 0.247 10.758 181 Medical-Dental Office Building 720 5000 0.465 0.247 10.758 181 Mini-Warehouse 151 12000 1.115 0.247 10.758 30 Total Estimation 6.493 0.247 12.909 2438 Current Acreage Available at the Site 6.493 Table 4.2 Total trips estimated for site S-1 in Scenario 2 4.1.2 Stoney Ridge Road (S-2) The Stoney Ridge Road site is located in Albemarle County south of the City of Charlottesville, off of the Avon Street Extension. The site is 27.590 acres and is zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD), having a corresponding average FAR of 0.140 for all other parcels with similar zoning. Similar land uses were selected for each of the two scenarios. Scenario 1 consists of one manufacturing land use, two warehousing land uses, one day care center, four office building land uses, and one building materials and lumber store. Scenario 2 consists of one manufacturing land use, one warehousing land uses, one residential condominium/townhouse complex (30 units), five office building land uses, and one building materials and lumber store. Each of the selected land uses for both scenarios has varying estimated square footages of the buildings to be placed on them. Based on the estimated building square footage, the calculated area (acreage) and the density can be seen in Table 4.3 and Table 4.4 below for each parcel. The calculated density varies due to the story height. Only one of the land uses in the first scenario is

43 two stories, while in the second scenario there are two land uses, which are two stories. All others are one story land uses. The total estimated trips generated, seen in the tables below, were calculated using either the recommended average rate or the equation found from following the diagram in Figure 3.1, taken from the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 5. The total estimated trips generated in Scenario 1 are 1,662 trips and the total estimated trips generated for Scenario 2 are 1,493 trips. The trips generated in both scenarios were fairly similar, given the varying land uses and building square footages. The following tables provide the estimated trip generation for both Scenario 1 and 2 of the Stoney Ridge Road site (S-2). Stoney Ridge Road Land Use Sq Ft Area (A) FAR Density (D) Total Trips Land Use Code Acres (KSF/acre) Eq./Avg. Manufacturing 140 35000 5.747 0.140 6.090 115 Warehousing 150 30000 4.926 0.140 6.090 461 Warehousing 150 41010 6.734 0.140 6.090 501 Day Care Centers 565 5000 0.821 0.140 6.090 396 General Office Building 710 4000 0.657 0.140 6.090 112 General Office Building 710 6000 0.985 0.140 6.090 153 Corporate HQ Building 714 20000 1.642 0.140 12.179 170 Single Tenant Office Building 715 25000 4.105 0.140 6.090 289 Building Mat. & Lumber Store 812 12000 1.971 0.140 6.090 542 Total Estimation 27.590 0.140 6.766 1662 Current Acreage Available at the Site 27.590 Table 4.3 Total trips estimated for site S-2 in Scenario 1

44 Stoney Ridge Road Land Use Sq Ft Area (A) FAR Density (D) Total Trips Land Use Code Acres (KSF/acre) Eq./Avg. Manufacturing 140 40510 6.652 0.140 6.090 136 Warehousing 150 35000 5.747 0.140 6.090 479 Residential Condo/Town. 230 30000 4.926 0.140 6.090 231 Corporate HQ Building 714 13000 1.067 0.140 12.179 112 General Office Building 710 6000 0.985 0.140 6.090 153 General Office Building 710 7000 1.149 0.140 6.090 172 Corporate HQ Building 714 20000 1.642 0.140 12.179 170 Single Tenant Office Building 715 18000 2.956 0.140 6.090 208 Building Mat. & Lumber Store 812 15000 2.463 0.140 6.090 677 Total Estimation 27.590 0.140 7.443 1493 Current Acreage Available at the Site 27.590 Table 4.4 Total trips estimated for site S-2 in Scenario 2 4.1.3 Branchlands Boulevard (S-3) The Branchlands Boulevard site is located in Albemarle County north of the City of Charlottesville, adjacent to US Route 29. The site is 9.074 acres and is zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD), having a corresponding average FAR of 0.140 for all other parcels with similar zoning. Varying land uses were selected for each of the two scenarios. Scenario 1 consists of one motel land use, one specialty retail center land use, and one high-turnover restaurant land use, while Scenario 2 consists of one office building land use, one supermarket land use, one high turnover restaurant land use and one hotel land use. Each of the selected land uses for both scenarios has varying estimated square footages of the buildings to be placed on them. Based on the estimated building square footage, the calculated area (acreage) and the density can be seen in Table 4.5 and Table 4.6 below for each parcel within the site. The calculated density varies due to the story height. Two of the land uses in the first scenario are two stories, while in the second scenario there is one land use, which is three stories, and one land use that is only two stories. All others are one story land uses.

45 The total estimated trips generated, seen in the tables below, were calculated using either the recommended average rate or the equation found from following the diagram in Figure 3.1, taken from the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 5. The total estimated trips generated in Scenario 1 are 3,059 trips and the total estimated trips generated for Scenario 2 are 3,426 trips. The trips generated in both scenarios were similar, given the varying land uses and building square footages. The following tables provide the estimated trip generation for both Scenario 1 and 2 of the Branchlands Boulevard site (S-3). Branchlands Boulevard Land Use Sq Ft Area (A) FAR Density (D) Total Trips Land Use Code Acres (KSF/acre) Eq./Avg. Motel 320 55000 4.516 0.140 12.179 329 Specialty Retail Center 814 41510 3.408 0.140 12.179 1840 High-Turnover Restaurant 932 7000 1.149 0.140 6.090 890 Total Estimation 9.074 0.140 10.149 3059 Current Acreage Available at the Site 9.074 Table 4.5 Total trips estimated for site S-3 in Scenario 1 Branchlands Boulevard Land Use Sq Ft Area (A) FAR Density (D) Total Trips Land Use Code Acres (KSF/acre) Eq./Avg. General Office Building 710 36850 3.026 0.140 12.179 618 Supermarket 850 20000 3.284 0.140 6.090 2045 High-Turnover Restaurant 932 6000 0.985 0.140 6.090 763 Hotel 310 32500 1.779 0.140 18.269 266 Total Estimation 9.074 0.140 10.657 3426 Current Acreage Available at the Site 9.074 Table 4.6 Total trips estimated for site S-3 in Scenario 2 4.1.4 Premier Circle (S-4) The Premier Circle site is located in Albemarle County north of the City of Charlottesville, adjacent to US Route 29. The site is 6.350 acres and is zoned

46 Commercial (C1), having a corresponding average FAR of 0.216 for all other parcels with similar zoning. Varying land uses were selected for each of the two scenarios. Scenario 1 consists of one motel land use, one specialty retail center land use, and one high turnover restaurant land use, while Scenario 2 consisted of two office building land uses, one new car sales land use, and one high turnover restaurant land use. Each of the selected land uses for both scenarios has varying estimated square footages of the buildings to be placed on them. Based on the estimated building square footage, the calculated area (acreage) and the density can be seen in Table 4.7 and Table 4.8 below for each parcel within the site. The calculated density varies due to the story height. There is one land use in both the first and second scenarios that is two stories. All others are one story land uses. The total estimated trips generated, seen in the tables below, were calculated using either the recommended average rate or the equation found from following the diagram in Figure 3.1, taken from the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 5. The total estimated trips generated in Scenario 1 are 2,253 trips and the total estimated trips generated for Scenario 2 are 2,166 trips. The trips generated in both scenarios were extremely similar for this site, given the varying land uses and building square footages. The following tables provide the estimated trip generation for both Scenario 1 and 2 of the Premier Circle site (S-4). Premier Circle Land Use Sq Ft Area (A) FAR Density (D) Total Trips Land Use Code Acres (KSF/acre) Eq./Avg. Motel 320 55000 2.925 0.216 18.804 329 Specialty Retail Center 814 26200 2.787 0.216 9.402 1161 High-Turnover Restaurant 932 6000 0.638 0.216 9.402 763 Total Estimation 6.350 0.216 12.536 2253 Current Acreage Available at the Site 6.350 Table 4.7 Total trips estimated for site S-4 in Scenario 1

47 Premier Circle Land Use Sq Ft Area (A) FAR Density (D) Total Trips Land Use Code Acres (KSF/acre) Eq./Avg. Corporate HQ Building 714 35000 1.861 0.216 18.804 293 General Office Building 710 15000 1.595 0.216 9.402 310 New Car Sales 841 20200 2.149 0.216 9.402 673 High-Turnover Restaurant 932 7000 0.745 0.216 9.402 890 Total Estimation 6.350 0.216 11.752 2166 Current Acreage Available at the Site 6.350 Table 4.8 Total trips estimated for site S-4 in Scenario 2 4.1.5 Fontaine Research Park (S-5) The Fontaine Research Park site is located in Albemarle County west of the City of Charlottesville, adjacent to the Business US Route 29. The site is 67.803 acres and is zoned Commercial Office (CO), having a corresponding average FAR of 0.172 for all other parcels with similar zoning. Similar land uses were selected for each of the two scenarios. Scenario 1 consists of one hotel land use, one day care center land use, one hospital land use, and seven office building land uses. Scenario 2 on the other hand consists of two hotel land uses, one day care center land use, one hospital land use, two office building land uses, and one warehouse land use. Each of the selected land uses for both scenarios has varying estimated square footages of the buildings to be placed on them. Based on the estimated building square footage, the calculated area (acreage) and the density can be seen in Table 4.9 and Table 4.10 below for each parcel within the site. The calculated density varies due to the story height and each of the scenarios has a wide range of story heights (1-4 stories) selected for this particular site as seen in the tables below. The total estimated trips generated, seen in the tables below, were calculated using either the recommended average rate or the equation found from following the

48 diagram in Figure 3.1, taken from the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 5. The total estimated trips generated in Scenario 1 are 13,934 trips and the total estimated trips generated for Scenario 2 are 11,860 trips. The trips generated in both scenarios are similar; however, the warehousing land use in the second scenario had a big effect causing a lower number of trips generated because a warehouse takes up a large land area and is not a larger trip generating land use. Another noticeable difference in the two scenarios is that the first scenario has four more office building land uses (parcels) than the second scenario. The following tables provide the estimated trip generation for both Scenario 1 and 2 of the Fontaine Research Park (S-5). Fontaine Research Park Land Use Sq Ft Area (A) FAR Density (D) Total Trips Land Use Code Acres (KSF/acre) Eq./Avg. Hotel 310 150000 6.679 0.172 22.460 1226 Day Care Centers 565 5000 0.668 0.172 7.487 396 Hospital 610 120000 4.007 0.172 29.946 3411 General Office Building 710 195000 6.512 0.172 29.946 2231 General Office Building 710 50000 6.679 0.172 7.487 782 Corporate HQ Building 714 180000 12.021 0.172 14.973 1432 Single Tenant Office Building 715 38000 5.076 0.172 7.487 440 Single Tenant Office Building 715 50000 6.679 0.172 7.487 579 Medical-Dental Office Building 720 45860 6.126 0.172 7.487 1657 Research & Develop. Center 760 200000 13.357 0.172 14.973 1780 Total Estimation 67.803 0.172 14.973 13934 Current Acreage Available at the Site 67.803 Table 4.9 Total trips estimated for site S-5 in Scenario 1

49 Fontaine Research Park Land Use Sq Ft Area (A) FAR Density (D) Total Trips Land Use Code Acres (KSF/acre) Eq./Avg. Hotel 310 150000 6.679 0.172 22.460 1226 Day Care Centers 565 10000 1.336 0.172 7.487 793 Hospital 610 200000 13.357 0.172 14.973 4211 Hotel 310 180000 12.021 0.172 14.973 1471 General Office Building 710 187830 8.363 0.172 22.460 2168 Corporate HQ Building 714 150000 10.018 0.172 14.973 1200 Warehousing 150 120000 16.029 0.172 7.487 792 Total Estimation 67.803 0.172 14.973 11860 Current Acreage Available at the Site 67.803 Table 4.10 Total trips estimated for site S-5 in Scenario 2 4.1.6 Hunters Way (S-6) The Hunters Way site is located in Albemarle County east of the City of Charlottesville, adjacent to the US Route 250. The site is 38.659 acres, where 4.083 acres of the site is zoned Highway Commercial (HC) and the rest of the site is zoned Light Industrial (LI). The corresponding average FAR (0.172) for the Light Industrial zoning category was selected to be used for the entire site because a large majority of the site is zoned Light Industrial. Similar land uses were selected for each of the two scenarios. Scenario 1 consists of two warehousing land uses, one mini-warehouse land use, and five office building land uses. Scenario 2 on the other hand consists of two warehousing land uses, three office building land uses, one mini-warehouse land use, and one low-rise apartment complex (124 units). Each of the selected land uses for both scenarios has varying estimated square footages of the buildings to be placed on them. Based on the estimated building square footage, the calculated area (acreage) and the density can be seen in Table 4.11 and Table 4.12 below for each parcel within the site. The calculated density varies due to the story height. In the first scenario there is one

50 three-story building and two two-story buildings, whereas in the second scenario there is only one two-story building. The total estimated trips generated, seen in the tables below, were calculated using either the recommended average rate or the equation found from following the diagram in Figure 3.1, taken from the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 5. The total estimated trips generated in Scenario 1 are 3,838 trips and the total estimated trips generated for Scenario 2 are 3,211 trips. The trips generated in both scenarios were similar; however, the larger amount of office building square footage in the first scenario caused the number of trips generated to be roughly 600 trips more than the second scenario. The following tables provide the estimated trip generation for both Scenario 1 and 2 of the Hunters Way (S-6). Hunters Way Land Use Sq Ft Area (A) FAR Density (D) Total Trips Land Use Code Acres (KSF/acre) Eq./Avg. Warehousing 150 130000 17.380 0.172 7.480 829 Warehousing 150 20000 2.674 0.172 7.480 424 Mini-Warehouse 151 55830 7.464 0.172 7.480 140 General Office Building 710 25000 1.671 0.172 14.960 852 General Office Building 710 18000 2.406 0.172 7.480 459 Single Tenant Office Building 715 40000 1.783 0.172 22.440 463 Single Tenant Office Building 715 23000 3.075 0.172 7.480 266 Research & Develop. Center 760 33000 2.206 0.172 14.960 406 Total Estimation 38.659 0.172 11.220 3838 Current Acreage Available at the Site 38.659 Table 4.11 Total trips estimated for site S-6 in Scenario 1

51 Hunters Way Land Use Sq Ft Area (A) FAR Density (D) Total Trips Land Use Code Acres (KSF/acre) Eq./Avg. Warehousing 150 50000 6.685 0.172 7.480 534 Warehousing 150 27000 3.610 0.172 7.480 450 Corporate HQ Building 714 50000 6.685 0.172 7.480 414 Mini-Warehouse 151 70000 9.358 0.172 7.480 175 General Office Building 710 10165 1.359 0.172 7.480 229 General Office Building 710 20000 2.674 0.172 7.480 386 Low-Rise Apartment 221 124000 8.289 0.172 14.960 1022 Total Estimation 38.659 0.172 8.548 3211 Current Acreage Available at the Site 38.659 Table 4.12 Total trips estimated for site S-6 in Scenario 2 4.1.7 Earhart Street (S-7) The Earhart Street site is located in the City of Charlottesville, adjacent to US Route 29. The site is 1.460 acres and is zoned Mixed Use Corridor (MUC), having a corresponding average FAR of 0.306 for all other parcels with similar zoning. Varying land uses were selected for each of the two scenarios. Scenario 1 consists of two office building land uses, while Scenario 2 consists of one mini-warehouse land use and one office building land use. Each of the selected land uses for both scenarios has varying estimated square footages of the buildings to be placed on them. Based on the estimated building square footage, the calculated area (acreage) and the density can be seen in Table 4.13 and Table 4.14 below for each parcel within the site. The total estimated trips generated, seen in the tables below, were calculated using either the recommended average rate or the equation found from following the diagram in Figure 3.1, taken from the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 5. The total estimated trips generated in Scenario 1 are 336 trips and the total estimated trips generated for Scenario 2 are 279 trips. The trips generated in both scenarios were fairly similar, given the varying land uses and building square footages. The following tables

52 provide the estimated trip generation for both Scenario 1 and 2 of the Earhart Street site (S-7). Earhart Street Land Use Sq Ft Area (A) FAR Density (D) Total Trips Land Use Code Acres (KSF/acre) Eq./Avg. General Office Building 710 10000 0.749 0.306 13.343 227 Single Tenant Office Building 715 9480 0.711 0.306 13.343 110 Total Estimation 1.460 0.306 13.343 336 Current Acreage Available at the Site 1.460 Table 4.13 Total trips estimated for site S-7 in Scenario 1 Earhart Street Land Use Sq Ft Area (A) FAR Density (D) Total Trips Land Use Code Acres (KSF/acre) Eq./Avg. Mini-Warehouse 151 7500 0.562 0.306 13.343 19 General Office Building 710 11980 0.898 0.306 13.343 260 Total Estimation 1.460 0.306 13.343 279 Current Acreage Available at the Site 1.460 Table 4.14 Total trips estimated for site S-7 in Scenario 2 4.1.8 Cedars Court (S-8) The Cedars Court site is located in the City of Charlottesville, adjacent to Barracks Road. The site is 9.162 acres and is zoned Mixed Use Corridor (MUC), having a corresponding average FAR of 0.306 for all other parcels with similar zoning. Varying land uses were selected for each of the two scenarios. Scenario 1 consists of one miniwarehouse land use, one residential condominium/townhouse complex (96 units), and three office building land uses. Scenario 2 consists of one low-rise apartment complex (124 units) and two office building land uses. Each of the selected land uses for both scenarios has varying estimated square footages of the buildings to be placed on them. Based on the estimated building square footage, the calculated area (acreage) and the density can be seen in Table 4.15 and Table 4.16 below for each parcel within the site.

53 The calculated density varies slightly in the second scenario due to the story height (twostory) of the low-rise apartment complex. The total estimated trips generated, seen in the tables below, were calculated using either the recommended average rate or the equation found from following the diagram in Figure 3.1, taken from the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 5. The total estimated trips generated in Scenario 1 are 1491 trips and the total estimated trips generated for Scenario 2 are 1858 trips. When looking at the trips generated for this site, the total trips generated in each scenario are not as closely related. One cause of this may be due to the low-rise apartments having a slightly higher density in the second scenario, producing a larger number of trips. The following tables provide the estimated trip generation for both Scenario 1 and 2 of the Cedars Court site (S-8). Cedars Court Land Use Sq Ft Area (A) FAR Density (D) Total Trips Land Use Code Acres (KSF/acre) Eq./Avg. Mini-Warehouse 151 30000 2.248 0.306 13.343 75 Residential Condo/Town. 230 25000 1.874 0.306 13.343 198 General Office Building 710 15000 1.124 0.306 13.343 310 Corporate HQ Building 714 35250 2.642 0.306 13.343 295 Medical-Dental Office Building 720 17000 1.274 0.306 13.343 614 Total Estimation 9.162 0.306 13.343 1491 Current Acreage Available at the Site 9.162 Table 4.15 Total trips estimated for site S-8 in Scenario 1 Cedars Court Land Use Sq Ft Area (A) FAR Density (D) Total Trips Land Use Code Acres (KSF/acre) Eq./Avg. Low-Rise Apartment 221 96000 3.597 0.306 26.685 879 General Office Building 710 48000 3.597 0.306 13.343 758 Corporate HQ Building 714 26250 1.967 0.306 13.343 221 Total Estimation 9.162 0.306 17.790 1858 Current Acreage Available at the Site 9.162 Table 4.16 Total trips estimated for site S-8 in Scenario 2

54 4.1.9 Summary The procedure used for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses analysis was similar for each of the eight sites. The choice of potential land uses is a key component in this procedure. The selection of potential land uses for each site were chosen from those land uses available in the ITE Trip Generation Informational Report which most adequately reflected the specific uses within the known zoning classification. Using the local FAR values of each zoning classification to calculate the area and density of each land use at every site allows the site to be evaluated in a manner consistent with the local trends. In Table 4.17 below, the total estimated trips for Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 for each study site can be seen. Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 represent varying potential land uses and development densities, which can be placed on the site. The percent difference shown in the table is the percent difference between the total estimated trips for Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 for each site. The percent difference in the total trips estimated for each site is due mostly to the selected land uses to be placed on the site within the two different scenarios. The selected land uses to be placed on the site and their corresponding trip generation rates have the greatest effect on the total estimated trips for each site.

55 Estimation Procedure Percent Site Name Site Area Total Trips Total Trips Difference Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Rio East Professional Park 6.493 1886 2438 22.64 Stoney Ridge Road 27.590 1662 1493 11.32 Branchlands Boulevard 9.074 3059 3426 10.71 Premier Circle 6.350 2253 2166 4.02 Fontaine Research Park 67.803 13934 11860 17.49 Hunters Way 38.659 3838 3211 19.53 Earhart Street 1.460 336 279 20.43 Cedars Court 9.162 1491 1858 19.75 Table 4.17 Total trips estimated for Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 The procedure used for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses proved to be a simple estimation procedure to attain total vehicle trip counts for each site. Using the two different scenarios allowed for a range of potential land uses and densities to be analyzed. In looking at the percent difference between the two scenarios, one can see that the estimated trips for each scenario are very similar. 4.2 TRIP GENERATION FOR CURRENT LAND USES ANALYSIS This section examines and analyzes the number of trips that should be generated according to the 7 th Edition ITE Trip Generation Informational Report 4 and the given parcel data (land use, building square feet, etc.). When evaluating the trip generation of the current uses, an ITE land use code, which most adequately represents the land use, was selected and the most appropriate rate (average rate or equation) was used to determine the trip generation for each parcel. Each of the eight sites is analyzed individually to account for any assumptions that may have been made. Parcels within some of the sites that were either undeveloped (vacant land) or had uninhabited structures (empty buildings) on them, were not used in the analysis of this study. The tables

56 throughout this section will include information used for the estimation of trip generation for the current land uses. This information includes: Parcel number (according to Tax Map) The current square footage of the structure on the parcel The current land use code (according to local assessor) Corresponding ITE land use code The selected average rate or equation used to estimated trip generation The total estimated trips generated by the current uses 4.2.1 Rio East Professional Park (S-1) The Rio East Professional Park site currently consists of 11 structures (land uses) located within the site that are trip generating. The current land uses in the site are outlined in Table 4.18 below. Using the current land use codes and conducting a site visit, a corresponding ITE land use code, which most closely represents the land use, was found for each parcel within the site. The total estimated trips generated, seen in the tables below, were calculated using either the recommended average rate or the equation found from following the diagram in Figure 3.1, taken from the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 5. The total trips generated from the 11 current land uses at the Rio East Professional Park site are 1,480 trips.

57 Parcel No Sq Ft Land Use Code ITE Land Use Code Equation/Rates Trips 124C0 10548 344 Office Building (710) General Office Building Ln(T) = 0.77 LN(X) + 3.65 236 124B1 5184 344 Office Building (710) General Office Building Ln(T) = 0.77 LN(X) + 3.65 137 124B1 2455 344 Office Building (720) Medical-Dental Office Building 36.13 89 124B2 5760 344 Office Building (710) General Office Building Ln(T) = 0.77 LN(X) + 3.65 148 124B3 4422 341 Medical Office (630) Clinic 31.45 139 124B4 3218 341 Medical Office (720) Medical-Dental Office Building 36.13 116 124B5 2711 341 Medical Office (720) Medical-Dental Office Building 36.13 98 124B6 3119 341 Medical Office (720) Medical-Dental Office Building 36.13 113 124B7 3018 341 Medical Office (720) Medical-Dental Office Building 36.13 109 124B8 3628 341 Medical Office (720) Medical-Dental Office Building 36.13 131 124A1 5218 341 Medical Office (630) Clinic 31.45 164 Total Trips for the Current Land Uses on the Parcel 1480 Table 4.18 Estimated trips generated by current land uses at site (S-1) 4.2.2 Stoney Ridge Road (S-2) The Stoney Ridge Road site currently consists of eight structures (land uses) located within the site that are trip generating. The current land uses in the site are outlined in Table 4.19 below. Using the current land use codes and conducting a site visit, a corresponding ITE land use code, which most closely represents the land use, was found for each parcel within the site except for one. The current land use that did not have a similar ITE land use code was a Lifecare Medical Transport business. Without a corresponding ITE land use code for this land use, the land use was closely observed to make a very accurate prediction of the total number of trips the land use generates (66 trips). For the other seven sites, the total estimated trips generated, seen in the tables below, were calculated using either the recommended average rate or the equation found from following the diagram in Figure 3.1, taken from the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 5. The land use that seemed to produce an overestimation of trips for the site is the warehousing land use. Both warehousing land uses within this site produced a high number of estimated trips for that particular land use. This high estimate of trips

58 generated was likely do to the equation rate being too conservative. The total trips generated from the eight current land uses at the Stoney Ridge Road site are 2,032 trips. Parcel No Sq Ft Land Use Code ITE Land Use Code Equation/Rates Trips 76M1-13 15360 322 Fire Station (Staff) No ITE land use code exists 66 76M1-14 5888 426 Day Care Center (565) Day Care Center 79.26 467 356 Classroom (Elem/2nd 76M1-15 14407 Schools) (520) Elementary School Ln(T) = 0.99 LN(X) + 2.59 187 (812) Building Materials and 76M1-16 4040 353 Retail Store Lumber Store 45.16 182 76M1-16 30000 406 Storage Warehouse (150) Warehousing T = 3.68(X) + 350.27 461 (715) Single Tenant Office 76M1-17 7064 344 Office Building Building 11.57 82 76M1-17 40920 407 Dist. Warehouse (150) Warehousing T = 3.68(X) + 350.27 501 76M1-20 7500 344 Office Building (715) Single Tenant Office Building 11.57 87 Total Trips for the Current Land Uses on the Parcel 2032 Table 4.19 Estimated trips generated by current land uses at site (S-2) 4.2.3 Branchlands Boulevard (S-3) The Branchlands Boulevard site currently consists of three structures (land uses) located within the site that are trip generating. The current land uses in the site are outlined in Table 4.20 below. Using the current land use codes and conducting a site visit, a corresponding ITE land use code, which most closely represents the land use, was found for each parcel within the site. The total estimated trips generated, seen in the tables below, were calculated using either the recommended average rate or the equation found from following the diagram in Figure 3.1, taken from the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 5. The supermarket land use in this site has a high estimated trip total and the rate from the ITE Trip Generation Informational Report does not adequately portray this site. The location of this particular land use is between many other supermarket land uses that are likely more desirable. This land use also has pedestrian trips from apartment

59 complexes located near the land use, where the use of a vehicle is not necessary; therefore, the vehicle trip rate for this land use is lower than what is shown in the ITE Trip Generation Informational Report. The total trips generated from the three current land uses at the Branchlands Boulevard site are 4,431 trips. Parcel No Sq Ft Land Use Code ITE Land Use Code Equation/Rates Trips 61Z-3-11 36512353 Retail Store (850) Supermarket 102.24 3733 61Z-3-11B 4946 350 Restaurant (932) High-Turnover (Sit- Down) Restaurant 127.15 629 61Z-3-11C 121 595 Hotel, Limited Service (312) Business Hotel 0.57 69 Total Trips for the Current Land Uses on the Parcel 4431 Table 4.20 Estimated trips generated by current land uses at site (S-3) 4.2.4 Premier Circle (S-4) The Premier Circle site currently consists of five land uses located within the site that are trip generating. The current land uses in the site are outlined in Table 4.21 below. Using the current land use codes and conducting a site visit, a corresponding ITE land use code, which most closely represents the land use, was found for each land use within the site except for one. The current land use that did not have a similar ITE land use code was a Hobbies and Collectibles shop. Without a corresponding ITE land use code for this land use, the land use was closely observed to make a very accurate prediction of the total number of trips the land use generates (20 trips). For the other four land uses, the total estimated trips generated, seen in the tables below, were calculated using either the recommended average rate or the equation found from following the diagram in Figure 3.1, taken from the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 5. The estimated trips generated by the two motel land uses in this site are slightly overestimated by the rates in the ITE Trip Generation Informational Report. These two land uses have poor

60 accessibility to them and they are outdated, older land uses. The total trips generated from the five current land uses at the Premier Circle site are 1,323 trips. Parcel No Sq Ft Land Use Code ITE Land Use Code Equation/Rates Trips 61M-6 115 343 Motel (320) Motel Ln(T) = 0.92 LN(X) + 2.11 649 61M-4 46 595 Hotel, Limited Service (320) Motel Ln(T) = 0.97 LN(X) + 2.31 409 61M-3 9000 344 Office Building (710) General Office Building Ln(T) = 0.77 LN(X) + 3.65 209 61M-2 7224 353 Retail Store (890) Furniture Store 5.06 37 61M-2 2450 353 Retail Store No land use code exists 20 1323 Table 4.21 Estimated trips generated by current land uses at site (S-4) 4.2.5 Fontaine Research Park (S-5) The Fontaine Research Park site currently consists of nine structures (land uses) located within the site that are trip generating. The current land uses in the site are outlined in Table 4.22 below. Using the current land use codes and conducting a site visit, a corresponding ITE land use code, which most closely represents the land use, was found for each parcel within this site. The total estimated trips generated, seen in the tables below, were calculated using either the recommended average rate or the equation found from following the diagram in Figure 3.1, taken from the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 5. For this site, the average rate for the clinic land use is questionable do to the low number of data points (only 2 studies) that were used in calculating the average rate. Also, the equation rate for the medical-dental office buildings slightly overestimates the trips generated by these land uses because they are not as patient based as the rate in the ITE Trip Generation Informational Report would imply, therefore having a lower rate of vehicle trips generated by these land uses in the site. The total trips generated from the nine current land uses at the Fontaine Research Park site are 12,262 trips.

61 Parcel No Sq Ft Land Use Code ITE Land Use Code Equation/Rates Trips 76-17A 36928 344 Office Building (710) General Office Building Ln(T) = 0.77 LN(X) + 3.65 619 76-17A 49840 344 Office Building (710) General Office Building Ln(T) = 0.77 LN(X) + 3.65 780 76-17B1 72160 344 Office Building (710) General Office Building Ln(T) = 0.77 LN(X) + 3.65 1038 (720) Medical-Dental Office 76-17B2 60000 341 Medical Office Building T = 40.89(X) - 214.97 2238 76-17B3 60000 344 Office Building (710) General Office Building Ln(T) = 0.77 LN(X) + 3.65 900 76-17B6 44607 341 Medical Office (720) Medical-Dental Office Building T = 40.89(X) - 214.97 1609 76-17B7 60380 331 Hospital (630) Clinic 31.45 1899 76-17B8 49141 496 Laboratories (760) Research and Development Center Ln(T) = 0.82 LN(X) + 3.14 563 (720) Medical-Dental Office 76-17BW 69204 341 Medical Office Building T = 40.89(X) - 214.97 2615 Total Trips for the Current Land Uses on the Parcel 12262 Table 4.22 Estimated trips generated by current land uses at site (S-5) 4.2.6 Hunters Way (S-6) The Hunters Way site currently consists of nine structures (land uses) located within the site that are trip generating. The current land uses in the site are outlined in Table 4.23 below. Using the current land use codes and conducting a site visit, a corresponding ITE land use code, which most closely represents the land use, was found for each parcel within this site. The total estimated trips generated, seen in the tables below, were calculated using either the recommended average rate or the equation found from following the diagram in Figure 3.1, taken from the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 5. The total trips generated from the nine current land uses at the Hunters Way site are 1,590 trips.

62 Parcel No Sq Ft Land Use Code ITE Land Use Code Equation/Rates Trips (715) Single Tenant Office 78-49B0 2022 344 Office Building Building 11.57 23 78-49B1 2250 344 Office Building (715) Single Tenant Office Building 11.57 26 78-49C0 7685 344 Office Building (710) General Office Building Ln(T) = 0.77 LN(X) + 3.65 185 (720) Medical-Dental 79-4C0 5774 341 Medical Office Office Building T = 40.89(X) - 214.97 21 79-4D0 44366 407 Dist. Warehouse (150) Warehousing T = 3.68(X) + 350.27 514 79-4L0 5800 386 Mini-Warehouse (151) Mini-Warehouse 2.5 15 525 Mini-Warehouse, Hi (710) General Office 79-4M0 9900 Rise Building Ln(T) = 0.77 LN(X) + 3.65 225 79-4N0 6000 386 Mini-Warehouse (150) Warehousing T = 3.68(X) + 350.27 372 (710) General Office 79-4N0 9000 406 Storage Warehouse Building Ln(T) = 0.77 LN(X) + 3.65 209 Total Trips for the Current Land Uses on the Parcel 1590 Table 4.23 Estimated trips generated by current land uses at he Hunters Way site (S-6) 4.2.7 Earhart Street (S-7) The Earhart Street site currently consists of three structures (land uses) located within the site that are trip generating. The current land uses in the site are outlined in Table 4.24 below. Using the current land use codes and conducting a site visit, a corresponding ITE land use code, which most closely represents the land use, was found for each parcel within the site. The total estimated trips generated, seen in the tables below, were calculated using either the recommended average rate or the equation found from following the diagram in Figure 3.1, taken from the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 5. The total trips generated from the three current land uses at the Earhart Street site are 421 trips. Parcel No Sq Ft Land Use Code ITE Land Use Code Equation/Rates Trips G 356 Classroom (Elem/2nd 4620 Schools) (565) Day Care Center 79.26 366 G 4766 353 Retail Store (714) Corporate Headquarters Building Ln(T) = 0.60 LN(X) + 4.32 42 G 5000 406 Storage Warehouse (151) Mini-Warehouse 2.5 13 Total Trips for the Current Land Uses on the Parcel 421 Table 4.24 Estimated trips generated by current land uses at site (S-7)

63 4.2.8 Cedars Court (S-8) The Premier Circle site currently consists of five land uses located within the site that are trip generating. The current land uses in the site are outlined in Table 4.25 below. Using the current land use codes and conducting a site visit, a corresponding ITE land use code, which most closely represents the land use, was found for each land use within the site except for one. The current land use that did not have a similar ITE land use code was a Hair Salon & Spa business. Without a corresponding ITE land use code for this land use, the land use was closely observed to make a very accurate prediction of the total number of trips the land use generates (44 trips). For the other four land uses, the total estimated trips generated, seen in the tables below, were calculated using either the recommended average rate or the equation found from following the diagram in Figure 3.1, taken from the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 5. The total trips generated from the five current land uses at the Cedars Court site are 1,311 trips. Parcel No Sq Ft Land Use Code ITE Land Use Code Equation/Rates Trips B 47106 424 Group Care Home (254) Assisted Living 2.66 125 K 1999 223 Commercial No land use code exists 44 G-1 5150 341 Medical Office (720) Medical-Dental Office Building 36.13 186 A-1A, A- 1B, A-2, A- 35388 344 Office Building (710) General Office Building Ln(T) = 0.77 LN(X) + 3.65 600 3B, PT 1 I, J 50 Condominium (230) Residential Condominium/Townhouse Table 4.25 Estimated trips generated by current land uses at site (S-8) Ln(T) = 0.85 LN(X) + 2.55 356 Total Trips for the Current Land Uses on the Parcel 1311 4.2.9 Summary When evaluating the trip generation of the current uses, the selection of an ITE land use code which most adequately represents the land use and the most appropriate

64 rate (average rate or equation) used to determine the trip generation for each parcel was a very important step in this section. Land use codes for all but three of the land uses in this study were found in the 7 th Edition ITE Trip Generation Informational Report 4. Using the given parcel data (land use, building square feet, etc.) and appropriate trip generation average rate or equation, the estimated trip generation for the current land uses was easily attainable. Table 4.26 below shows the total trips estimated for each site given the current land uses. Total trips using the Site Name Site Area ITE Tables for the Current Land Uses Rio East Professional Park 6.493 1480 Stoney Ridge Road 27.590 2032 Branchlands Boulevard 9.074 4431 Premier Circle 6.350 1323 Fontaine Research Park 67.803 12262 Hunters Way 38.659 1590 Earhart Street 1.460 421 Cedars Court 9.162 1311 Table 4.26 Total trips estimated for the Current Land Uses There were many observations when evaluating the trip generation for the current land uses by using the information from the ITE Trip Generation Informational Report. For some of the current land uses analyzed, even though an appropriate ITE land use code was found to meet the descriptions of the current land use, the current land use in some cases may not be operating at its full potential. Hence, the estimation of trip generation for some of the current land uses may be slightly overestimated for a variety of reasons. Some reasons for trip generation overestimating concerns are:

65 1. Location of the site (possibly along a major corridor) 2. Accessibility characteristics (can the site be easily accessed from all directions, signal, or right turn-in and right turn-out) 3. Is the site fully developed (do undeveloped or vacant parcels have an effect on the trip generation for current land uses) 4. The accuracy of the rates selected in the ITE Trip Generation Informational Report 4.3 FIELD DATA ANALYSIS Traffic counts were collected for each of the eight sites. The data was collected for three days during the middle of the week for a typical trip count (Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday) and then an average was taken of the three days. Only one day of data could be collected at Cedars Court due to a construction project that began shortly after the first day of data collection. Table 4.27 below shows the actual trip counts for entering and exiting trips for each site and the day that the data was collected. As seen in the table, the entering and exiting trip counts were summed to get the total trips per day for each site. The average trips of the three days was then calculated and determined to be the actual trip count for a typical weekday for each site.

66 Location Date Entering Exiting Total Average Rio East Professional Park 8/9/2005 972 962 1934 Rio East Professional Park 9/14/2005 891 887 1778 1828 Rio East Professional Park 9/15/2005 891 882 1773 Stoney Ridge Road 8/9/2005 545 542 1087 Stoney Ridge Road 9/20/2005 793 754 1547 1391 Stoney Ridge Road 9/21/2005 804 735 1539 Branchlands Boulevard 8/30/2005 1355 1489 2844 Branchlands Boulevard 9/27/2005 1562 1331 2893 2985 Branchlands Boulevard 9/28/2005 1685 1534 3219 Premier Circle 10/4/2005 343 321 664 Premier Circle 10/5/2004 368 331 699 794 Premier Circle 10/6/2005 536 484 1020 Fontaine Research Park 10/11/2005 2995 3339 6334 Fontaine Research Park 10/12/2005 3065 3302 6367 6212 Fontaine Research Park 10/13/2005 2840 3095 5935 Hunters Way 10/11/2005 789 804 1593 Hunters Way 10/12/2005 779 760 1539 1551 Hunters Way 10/13/2005 758 762 1520 Earhart Street 8/24/2005 161 165 326 Earhart Street 9/14/2005 157 163 320 334 Earhart Street 9/15/2005 173 182 355 Cedars Court 8/24/2005 749 693 1442 1442 Table 4.27 Current traffic field counts from each site When analyzing the field data on a day-to-day basis for each site, there are a few factors that come into play, which may have had an effect on the actual traffic counts. The two main factors that can be seen in the field data above in Table 4.27 are the date (time of year) in which the data was collected and the second factor being the difference in land use types within each site (affecting the entering and exiting counts). When looking at the first factor, late summer to early fall is the time of year in which the data was collected. Data was collected for three of the sites (Premier Circle, Fontaine Research Park, and Hunters Way) for 72 consecutive hours (Tuesday- Thursday). Four of the other sites (Rio East Professional Park, Stoney Ridge Road, Branchlands Boulevard, and Earhart Street) had counts that were collected for one day in the month of August and then two more days later in September. The collection of data

67 for these four sites may have been affected by the 3-5 week period between data collection. One possible reason for inconsistency is that children are starting school around that time period (August-September). In two of the sites where the data varies (Rio East Professional Park and Stoney Ridge Road), it is very possible that a discrepancy is due to the time period and the fact that children are beginning school. The Rio East Professional Park shows that the trip data collected during the one day in August is much higher than those days later in September. In that site there are land uses such as Medical and Dental office buildings, which are hypothetically more active when the school year is approaching, increasing the trips to and from the site. The other site, Stoney Ridge Road includes land uses such as a day care center and a very small private school. The data from this site shows a great increase in total trips from the two time periods (August and September) when data was collected. The two different time periods for each of these sites could possibly have been affected by the starting of school and coincidently could have had a minor effect on the average three-day trip count. When looking at the second factor, the varying land uses in each site had an effect on the difference of entering and exiting trips. Hypothetically, an analyst would assume that the entering and exiting trips for a 24-hour count at each site would be similar on a daily basis; however, due to some of the land uses within each site, this proves to be not true. Two sites in particular are Branchlands Boulevard and Premier Circle, where both sites have hotel land uses located within them. Other land uses that may cause differences in the number of trips entering and exiting are warehouses, supermarkets, and assisted living housing.

68 The three-day average trip counts seen in Table 4.27 for each site will be used as a basis to validate the estimation procedure. The actual trip counts collected in the field most accurately portray the current traffic conditions of each site and the total number of trips entering and exiting the site. 4.4 EVALUATION OF PROCEDURES TO ESTIMATE TRIP GENERATION FOR GENERALIZED LAND USES When evaluating the procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses, the results from the estimated trip generation for current land uses and the actual traffic counts for each site are going to be used to help validate the estimation procedure and the procedure s accuracy. When validating the procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses, it is important to first compare the total estimated trips generated by the current land uses and the average traffic field counts. Table 4.28 below shows a comparison between the total estimated trips generated by the current land uses according to the rates and equations provided in the ITE Trip Generation Informational Report and the average traffic field counts for each site. The table also shows the percent difference between the two trip counts. Average Total trips using the Percent Site Name Site Area Traffic Counts ITE Tables for the Difference from the Field Current Land Uses Rio East Professional Park 6.493 1828 1480-19.04 Stoney Ridge Road 27.590 1391 2032 46.08 Branchlands Boulevard 9.074 2985 4431 48.44 Premier Circle 6.350 794 1323 66.62 Fontaine Research Park 67.803 6212 12262 97.39 Hunters Way 38.659 1551 1590 2.51 Earhart Street 1.460 334 421 26.05 Cedars Court 9.162 1442 1311-9.08 Table 4.28 Total trips estimated for current land uses and actual traffic counts

69 As seen in Table 4.28, four of the sites have percent differences of 45% or greater when looking at the two trip counts. The total estimated trips for the current land uses in these four sites seem to be greatly overestimated, compared to the number of trips the land uses actually produce. This can be for a variety of reasons such as the location of the site (urban or suburban), the land uses within the site (some less desirable), and the access characteristics of the site. Not only is the overestimation of trips for these sites possibly a result of the varied characteristics of the land uses themselves, but also it is possible that the rates used in calculating the estimation of trips generated for the current land uses from the ITE Trip Generation Informational Report do not adequately portray all of the current land uses within the site. Consequently, overestimating the trips generated by the current land uses may have occurred because a rate from an inadequate land use code was used. When comparing estimation of trip generation for generalized land uses with the estimated trips for the current land uses and the actual traffic counts for each site as seen in Table 4.29 below, it is evident that the total trips from the estimation procedure for generalized land uses and the total trips estimated from the current land uses greatly vary for each site. As seen in Table 4.29, no pattern can be established between the two sets of trip generation data. This variance between the two estimated trip counts is mostly a result of the difference in the selected potential land uses used in the procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses and the land uses that currently exist along with the corresponding trip generation rate used for each land use. As seen in Table 4.29 below, the Stoney Ridge Road site, the Branchlands Boulevard site, and the Earhart Street site are the only sites in this study where the

70 estimated trips generated for generalized land uses in both scenarios is less than the estimated trips generated by the current land uses (i.e. applying the ITE Trip Generation rates to the current land uses). For all of the other sites, the trips generated by the estimation procedure for generalized land uses was much greater than those trips generated by the current land uses. This shows that the selected potential land uses to be placed on the site in the procedure to estimate trip generation for generalized land uses has a great affect on the total trips to be estimated for the site. Estimation Procedure Total trips using the Average Site Name Total Trips Total Trips ITE Tables for the Traffic Counts Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Current Land Uses From the Field Rio East Professional Park 1886 2438 1480 1828 Stoney Ridge Road 1662 1493 2032 1391 Branchlands Boulevard 3059 3426 4431 2985 Premier Circle 2253 2166 1323 794 Fontaine Research Park 13934 11860 12262 6212 Hunters Way 3838 3211 1590 1551 Earhart Street 336 279 421 334 Cedars Court 1491 1858 1311 1442 Table 4.29 Total trip count comparison for all of the sites Another difference between the estimated trip generation for generalized land uses and the land uses that currently exist is the FAR value. When comparing the average FAR values of the different zoning classifications, which were used in calculating the density and area in the estimating trip generation Equation 3.3 and the FAR values of the current site under the site s existing conditions, the FAR values are significantly different. This difference in FAR values shows that the quantity of development (density) calculated in the procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses is overestimating the development for the chosen sites. As seen in

71 the Table 4.30 below, the average FAR value for all of the sites is greater than the FAR value of the current land uses for each site. In six of the eight sites, the average FAR value used in the procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses is 34% or greater. Using the average FAR value to calculate the density and area in the procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses may have caused the estimated trips generated to be overestimated because the density of each site is overestimated when compared to the density of the current land uses that exist at each site. Using the average FAR in terms of zoning in this procedure is not a very valid method in determining the most accurate portrayal of local density. Using the average FAR in terms of zoning allows for a wide range of varying potential land uses found within the zoning ordinance that will have the same FAR for each potential land use selected. An example of this would be applying the same average FAR value to a general office building and a retail store because they have the same zoning, even though in actuality, a general office building typically has a higher FAR value than a retail store. Site Name Zoning Avg. FAR value FAR value of Existing % County/City Land Uses Difference Rio East Professional Park PDMC 0.247 0.174 41.94 Stoney Ridge Road PUD 0.140 0.104 34.42 Branchlands Boulevard PUD 0.140 0.082 70.49 Premier Circle C1 0.216 0.204 5.80 Fontaine Research Park CO 0.172 0.170 1.10 Hunters Way LI 0.172 0.055 212.21 Earhart Street MUC 0.306 0.226 35.53 Cedars Court MUC 0.306 0.225 36.14 Table 4.30 Comparison between the avg. FAR and the FAR of the current land uses Another cause in the variance between the total estimated trips for generalized land uses and the total trips estimated for the current land uses and the actual trip counts

72 from the field is the total size (acreage) of the site. As the site size increases, there is a greater chance of similar (high or low trip generating) land uses to be found on the site. The bigger the site, the wider the range of possible estimated trips generated and the less accurate the estimation procedure for calculation purposes. In evaluating the procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses, a number of variables were found, which had an effect on the total estimated trips generated for each site. These variables include the zoning, the selected potential land uses, the average FAR values, the total size of the site, and the location of the site. Another variable that should be considered but is hard to quantify, is the time between the start of the procedure and the actual finished development. As time passes, the local characteristics (data) used in the estimation procedure may change. The accuracy of this procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses is documented in the conclusion of this report.

73 Chapter 5: Guidelines for State and Local Planners Based on the information obtained in this study, the following guidelines can be applied by state and local planners to help them use the procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses. Steps in this procedure include: 1. Determine the potential mix of land uses in the selected site 2. Estimate the appropriate development quantity 3. Estimate trips generated by the total site 4. Test a range of possible scenarios 5.1 DETERMINE POTENTIAL MIX OF LAND USES A fitting trip generation estimate for a site should reflect, to the extent possible, the specific land uses within the known zoning classification of the local zoning ordinance. Potential land uses for a site are best determined by knowing which specific ITE land use codes or classifications found in the ITE Trip Generation Informational Report are acceptable given a particular zoning classification. It is very important for the planner to first read the local zoning ordinance that applies to the chosen site of study. A list of all potential land uses found in the ITE Trip Generation Information Report for the site that are acceptable land uses according to the expected zoning classification should then be developed. Once this list of potential land uses is complete, it is necessary for the analyst to review this list with other suitable local public officials. Specific land uses for the site should then be chosen based on the current surrounding land uses in the area. It is also important for the analyst, when selecting specific land uses for the site, to observe

74 existing land uses within recently developed areas under the same zoning classification, preferably with similar site size and access characteristics. 5.2 ESTIMATE THE APPROPRIATE DEVELOPMENT QUANTITY When analysts are estimating typical development densities, GSF/acre, DU/acre, or a similar ratio should be obtained for the chosen land uses in the site. Even though typical development densities can be found in national publications, it is very important to use local densities found in the area where the site is located. Typical development densities may vary in different parts of a region; therefore, it is critical to be as locally accurate as possible in terms of density. Real estate databases used by different appraisers such as the Computer Assisted Mass Appraisal (CAMA) can help analysts to find the local densities of an area because this database includes information such as building square footage, land area (acreage), zoning classification, etc. The local typical densities can be estimated from the average floor-area-ratio (FAR) value for all land uses with a similar zoning classification (city or county). An example of this is a site having a zoning classification of Planned Development Mixed Commercial (PDMC) and the coinciding average FAR value for every site in that particular county with similar zoning (PDMC) is 0.247. In order to get a more specific FAR value for the site, if needed, the analyst may use the CAMA database to search for sites that are similar in site size, access characteristics, location, etc. Analysts may also use the CAMA database to find local average FAR values in terms of land use for the potential land uses selected to be place on the site.

75 The density can then be calculated using Equation 5.1 below, where the floorarea-ratio (FAR) is 0.247, the 43,560 square feet is the conversion for one square acre, and the Stories is the number of stories in the building. The equation below will then solve for density as ksf/acre for the land use. 43560 D = FARx xstories 1000 (5.1) Another step involved with estimating an appropriate development quantity is calculating the appropriate area needed for each land use within the site. The area (A) for each land use is found as acreage and can also be calculated using an equation. For each selected land use within the site, the analyst must estimate an appropriate square footage of the land use (building/structure) to be placed on the site. Using an average FAR value that more adequately reflects the land use will produce more accurate trip generation results. Using the appropriate average FAR value, the analyst can use the same FAR value to determine the acreage needed for a given land use using Equation 5.2 below. The equation includes the estimated square footage of the structure of the land use, the average FAR value, and the number of stories in the structure. A = SF / FAR / 43560 / Stories (5.2) For example, if an estimated square footage of a structure located on a land use is 10,000 SF, the average FAR value for the particular zoning classification is 0.247, and the building structure is only one story, then the estimated area needed for this land use is 0.929 acres.

76 5.3 ESTIMATE TRIPS GENERATED BY THE TOTAL SITE The estimation of trip generation relies heavily on the rates that are chosen following the recommended procedure (refer to Figure 3.2) for the estimation of trip generation equation (Equation 5.3). For most all studies, either the equation or the average rate should be used as a trip generation rate even though the figure shows that the analyst may need to collect local data for a particular parcel, which may not be possible for the analyst. The trip generation rates should be developed in the most disaggregate level possible, such as gross square footage (GSF) instead of acres. Given that a majority of the studies in the ITE Trip Generation Informational Report are done with the gross square footage (GSF) as the independent variable, this is a good development unit to get the best results with a wide range of land uses. The analyst should be cautioned when selecting the most appropriate rate to be used and should be observant to the number of studies conducted, R 2 value, and standard deviation of the potential land use to ensure a more accurate trip generation estimate. The trip generation estimate in terms of total trip ends (T) per parcel or land use in a site is obtained by multiplying the trip generation rate (R) times the weighted density (D) times the area (A) as seen in Equation 5.3 below. T = ( RxDxA) (5.3) The product of density (D) and area (A) in the above equation is simply the number of development units that match the independent variable for the assumed trip generation rate, based either on the weighted average rate or the regression equation.

77 The trip generation estimate (T) for the total site can then be obtained by summing the product of the rate, density, and acres of individual land uses using Equation 5.4 below, where i corresponds to the individual land uses within the site. T i i i i (5.4) = ( R xd xa ) site. Using the above equation, the total estimated trips can be calculated for the total 5.4 TEST A RANGE OF POSSIBLE SCENARIOS During the final step of the procedure to estimate trip generation for generalized land uses, it is important for the analyst to possibly test a range of scenarios to include many of the development possibilities for the study. Differing scenarios consist of varying land use mixes and varying development quantities to be used in estimating trip generation for the site. If there is a strong level of uncertainty regarding the possible land use mix and the development density for the site, it is wise for the planner to test a wider range of scenarios with varying land use mixes and densities to get a better understanding of the range of possible trips that may be generated by the site. From the range of scenarios the planner can then evaluate the extent of possible needed roadway improvements to account for increased traffic from the development, such as changing a two-lane roadway to a four-lane roadway or implementing a signal.

78 5.5 SUMMARY This procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses is an improved procedure to use for general planning and land use applications in order to help planners understand quickly the possible trip generation impact of a particular site without doing a detailed traffic impact analysis. The procedure used in this methodology differs from that found in Chapter 6 of the ITE Trip Generation Handbook by using the CAMA databases to help in determining local densities. The usefulness of the CAMA database to find and determine local FAR values is an enormous help to the analyst in following this procedure and improving the accuracy of the estimation. The results from using this procedure produce very general estimates and are not appropriate for use in more detailed traffic impact analysis studies, which are necessary during later stages of development.

79 Chapter 6: Conclusions Based on the results found in this study, several conclusions can be made from following the procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses. The methodology used in this project closely follows the methodology described in Chapter 6 of the ITE Trip Generation Handbook for Estimating Trip Generation for Generalized Land Uses. The most significant improvement to the methodology used in the ITE Trip Generation Handbook is using the CAMA database in determining average FAR values to help in calculating development quantities based on local densities. In the procedure described in Chapter 6, there is no clear way of identifying appropriate development quantities, which accurately portray the typical local development densities. The use of the CAMA database to find FAR values was an attempt to improve and simplify the procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses. The accuracy of this procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses greatly depends on the accuracy of each and every variable (rate, density, and area) within the trip generation Equation 5.3. Below are a number of factors, which have an effect on the accuracy of the variables used in the estimation equation. By improving the accuracy of each variable, the accuracy of the entire process for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses will be improved. The following points are formed from the results found in this project and discuss the issues involved with each variable while making suggestions to improve the accuracy of each variable. 1. Issue: The selected potential land uses to be used in estimating trip generation for generalized land uses in any scenario may not be what is actually developed and built at the site, hence altering the number of trips generated.

80 Solution: This procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses is a trip generation guessing procedure for general planning. Selecting and applying land uses to a particular site does not mean that those land uses are actually going to be built and developed on the site; therefore, the selected land uses are possibilities. Selecting the best possible potential land uses to be developed on the site, from the permissible land uses found in the zoning ordinance, can best be determined by discussing the land use possibilities with local planners, developers, political leaders, and the land owner. Local planners will be able to best determine the potential land uses by directly following the development vision of the community. Although this procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses is not 100% accurate, it is better than having no information to help in the early planning stages of a project. 2. Issue: Using the average FAR values found from the CAMA database in terms of each zoning classification for each site was the approach used when this project began; however, it is not an accurate way of portraying the local density. Applying the same average FAR value in terms of zoning to a wide range of various land uses, does not accurately portray each land use because it assumes that all of the land uses (whether a warehouse, a general office building, a retail store, a hotel, a restaurant, etc.) will have the same FAR. Solution: Using the CAMA database is a very useful tool in determining local average FAR values. It is extremely important to determine the FAR values as accurately as possible, where the average FAR value adequately portrays the land use. One way to improve upon the accuracy of the average FAR value is to use the CAMA

81 database to determine average FAR values that reflect each individual land use. For example, instead of using the average FAR value from a zoning code, such as PDMC as seen in this project, the analyst should find and use an average FAR value that reflects a warehouse or office building land use. Using an average FAR value that more adequately reflects the land use will produce more accurate trip generation results. 3. Issue: The trip generation rates found in the ITE Trip Generation Informational Report used in the calculation may be inaccurate for a variety of reasons such as a land use having a low number of studies, low R 2 value, or good standard deviation. Land uses that are used that represent poor statistical information will provide rates that are likely to be inaccurate, leaving much room for variation in the trip generation estimate. Solution: Select potential land uses from the ITE Trip Generation Informational Report that have very good statistical information so that the trip generation rate used will be valid. When selecting potential land uses, the analyst should select land uses that have many data points and high R 2 values. Following the recommended procedure for selecting between trip generation average rates and equations is an excellent method to use; however, when the analyst observes the potential land use in the ITE Trip Generation Informational Report, if the land use has a very low number of studies or low R 2 value (if any R 2 value), that land use should not be used in the trip generation estimation because the statistical information for that land use does not support and validate the accuracy of the trip generation rate of the land use.

82 In the beginning and throughout this project, the purpose of the methodology was to validate the procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses. In the process, this procedure was found to be difficult to validate because each of the selected sites included in the study had many differences. The sites studied varied by the zoning of the site, land uses on the site, the total size (acres) of the site, the location of the site (urban or suburban area), the proximity to similar sized corridors, and the accessibility characteristics. All of these variations led to results that could not conclusively validate the procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses. The only real way to validate an estimation procedure such as this is to test it with sites that are extremely similar, and such sites are difficult, if not impossible to find. Finding sites that are characteristically 100% similar in zoning, site size, current land uses, accessibility, proximity to similar sized highways, and location (urban or suburban area), however will greatly reduce the variations between testing sites, thus validating this procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses.

83 Chapter 7: Recommendations for Further Study Based on the results found in this study, there are several areas of research where further investigation is needed: 1. Test Chapter 6 in the ITE Trip Generation Handbook by developing more scenarios to be applied to each site. Having more scenarios will improve the average total trip count in the procedure for estimating trip generation for generalized land uses. 2. Test Chapter 6 in the ITE Trip Generation Handbook further by studying sites that are more closely related characteristically. Using sites that consist of similar land uses, site size, accessibility from other major roadways, and location (urban or suburban) will help to keep some consistency between the study sites. Sites should also be selected that are fully developed and consist of relatively newer land uses. Selecting sites to study that are more comparable to one another will help to ensure that the total estimated trips generated by the current land uses will be more closely related because similar trip generation rates will be used. 3. Test Chapter 6 in the ITE Trip Generation Handbook further by selecting sites to study that consist of more than one or two entrance and exit points. These entrance and exit points will improve the accessibility to the site, thus possibly increasing the actual traffic field counts for the current uses. 4. Analyze regional, state, and national trends in floor-area-ratios (FAR) and determine if parcels with similar zoning and location (e.g. primary highway) are similar. 5. Improve the accuracy of the average FAR value used in calculating area and density for study sites in the context of zoning categories and average FAR values found from

84 each by using the average FAR values of the parcels found in similar surroundings as the study site (e.g. on a primary highway) and not the entire zoning category throughout the county or city. Land uses with similar zoning categories across a region, may have very different FAR values; therefore, using the FAR values of the surrounding parcels of the study area, even if the zoning classification varies, will most adequately represent the local densities of the study area. 6. Attempt to refine the appropriate ITE land use code selection. Find a way to link the information in the CAMA database (such as zoning, land use, square footage, acreage, etc.) to specific ITE land use codes supplied in the ITE Trip Generation Informational Report. 7. Simplify the ITE recommended procedure for selecting between trip generation average rates and equations to eliminate the suggestion of collecting local data and choosing the line at the cluster. Improving the recommended procedure may include a suggestion for the analyst to select a different potential land use because there is insufficient statistical information (low number of studies, low R 2 value, or standard deviation) in the selected land use. If the analyst selects a land use with inadequate statistical information, the recommended procedure should direct the analyst to choose a different potential land use. More reported studies in the ITE Trip Generation Informational Report may be needed.

85 References 1. The Scan Team. Land Use and Transportation Coordination: Lessons Learned from Domestic Scan Tour Report. 2003. http://www.planning.dot.gov/documents/ DomesticScan /domscan603.htm. 2. Virginia Code. Ann. 15.2-2200, available at http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+co h+15.2-2200+401359. 3. Albemarle County Code. Chapter 18 Zoning. 2006. http://www.albemarle.org/upl oad/images/forms_center/departments/county_attorney/forms/albemarle_county_ Code_Ch18_Zoning01_Authority_Purpose.pdf. 4. Trip Generation. Seventh Edition. Volume 2 and 3. Washington, D.C.: Institute of Transportation Engineers. 2003. 5. Trip Generation Handbook: An ITE Recommended Practice. Washington, D.C.: Institute of Transportation Engineers. 2001. 6. Martin, William A. and McGuckin, Nancy A., Travel Estimation Techniques for Urban Planning. NCHRP Report 365, Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Washington, D.C. 1998. 7. Trip Generation. Fifth Edition. Washington, D.C.: Institute of Transportation Engineers. 1991. 8. Trip Generation. Seventh Edition. User s Guide, Volume 1. Washington, D.C.: Institute of Transportation Engineers. 2003. 9. Shoup, Donald, Roughly Right of Precisely Wrong. Access: Number 20, University of California Transportation Center. 2002. http://www.uctc.net/access/ access20.pdf. 10. Bochner, Brian. Email. 27 March 2006.

86 APPENDIX A Tax Maps

87 Rio East Professional Park The parcels listed below include all of the parcels used for data collection within this site. 124C Alltel Office Building 124B1 Geraty Investments LLC Office Building 124B2 Rio East LLC C/O Workman Office Building 124B3 RGMJ LLC Medical Office Building 124B4 Medical Office Building 124B5 Don Johnsbert Properties LLC Medical Office Building 124B6 Danel Enterprises L C Medical Office Building 124B7 Sugar Mountain LLC Medical Office Building 124B8 Refined Redneck LLC Medical Office Building 124A1 MD Development Medical Office Building The parcels which are currently undeveloped (vacant) within the site that was not used in this study include the following: 61-124A Rio East Land Trust Vacant Commercial

88 Stoney Ridge Road The parcels listed below include all of the parcels used for data collection within this site. 76M1-13 Executive Properties LLC Fire Station 76M1-14 Day Care Center 76M1-15 Peabody School Classroom (Elem/2 nd Schools) 76M1-16 Stoney Ridge Road LLC Retail Store, Storage Warehouse 76M1-17 FedEx Office Building, Dist Warehouse 76M1-20 Paper Company Office Building The parcels which are currently undeveloped (vacant) within the site that were not used in this study include the following: 76M1-11 Vacant Industrial 76M1-12 Vacant Industrial

89 Branchlands Boulevard The parcels listed below include all of the parcels used for data collection within this site. 61Z-3-11 Foodlion Retail Store 61Z-3-11B Applebee s Restaurant 61Z-3-11C Fairfield Inn Hotel, Limited

90 Premier Circle The parcels listed below include all of the parcels used for data collection within this site. 61M-2 Retail Store 61M-3 Offices Building 61M-4 Royal Inn Motel Hotel, Limited 61M-6 Red Carpet Inn Motel

91 Fontaine Research Park The parcels listed below include all of the parcels used for data collection within this site. 76-17A Division of Natural Resources & State Police 76-17B1 and 76-17BX are the same parcel Office Building 76-17B2 Medical Office Building 76-17B3 Office Building 76-17B6 Medical Office Building 76-17B7 Hospital 76-17B8 Laboratories 76-17BW Medical Office Building The parcels which are currently undeveloped (vacant) within the site that were not used in this study include the following: 76-17B Vacant Office Lot 76-17B4 Vacant Residential Lot 76-17B5 Vacant Residential Lot 76-18 Vacant Residential Lot 76-19 Vacant Residential Lot