STUDENT SUPPLEMENT

Supplementary Student Information

Innovative Bicycle Treatments Web Seminar
The supplementary student information includes:
• Transportation Impact Analyses for Site Development Student Supplement
1. Purpose/Overview
2. Initiation of Transportation Impact Assessment
3. Context and Framework
4. Non-Site Traffic
5. Traffic Generation
6. Distribution and Assignment
7. Analysis
8. Site Access and Off-site Improvements
9. On-Site Planning
10. Report
Site Transportation Impact Study Report-sample table of contents
Figures and Tables for a Site Transportation Impact Study Report
• Standard ITE Metric Conversions
• Short biography of the author’s background and experience
• ITE Bookstore order form

We hope that you find this material useful.

 Transportation Impact Analyses for Site Development
Student Supplement

1. Purpose/Overview

Many of the illustrations and tables in the student supplement are drawn from a
draft version of the ITE proposed recommended practice, Transportation Impact
Analyses for Site Development (TIASD), as are various sections of text. The
complete TIASD text is approximately 130 pages in length and provides
substantially more guidance than does this student supplement. For a complete
and final version of the proposed recommended practice, refer to the ITE TIASD.

This document serves as a supplement to the ITE Web Seminar -- Transportation Planning: Site
Impact Analysis. The seminar addresses:
• The role of transportation impact analysis (TIA) in the site development process
• The steps required to perform a TIA
• The key characteristics of a development when undertaking a TIA
• Typical analysis tools for a TIA
• The scope of the report to document TIA findings

The scope of this student supplement is tailored to the transportation professional with less than
five years of experience in performing or reviewing transportation impact analyses.

The presentation (and the material in this student supplement) generally follow the outline of the
ITE proposed recommended practice, Transportation Impact Analyses for Site Development
(TIASD). The TIASD document is expected to be published and available for use in spring 2006.

Many of the illustrations and tables in the student supplement are drawn from a draft version of
the ITE proposed recommended practice, TIASD, as are various sections of text. The complete
TIASD text is approximately 130 pages in length and provides substantially more guidance than
does this student supplement. For a complete and final version of the proposed recommended
practice, refer to the ITE TIASD (to be released in spring 2006).

The purpose of a transportation impact analysis for site development is to identify both short-
and long-range site access and off-site improvement needs. The information produced by the
analysis will (1) assist developers and property owners in making critical decisions and (2)
enable public agencies to correctly assess impacts and identify needs associated with a
proposed development.

Transportation should be a major consideration in planning for new or expanding developments,

starting in the early planning stages, including site selection. Formal studies may not be needed
until specific development planning begins. Under normal circumstances, there are several
stages in the development process at which transportation impact studies are potentially
appropriate:

2
 ƒ Zoning and rezoning application
ƒ Land subdivision application
ƒ Project planning request
ƒ Site plan review/approval
ƒ Access permits
ƒ Environmental assessment
ƒ Building permit application
ƒ Formation of special purpose district
ƒ Development agreements (phased agreement, proffers, etc.)
ƒ Amendments to comprehensive plans
ƒ Annexations

The following figure provides a flowchart of the overall transportation impact analysis process. It
sets the broader context, showing how the transportation impact analysis fits into the overall
development of the site plan and the transportation-related needs for the site.

3
Overview of the Transportation Impact Analysis Process

Development Plan

Area Land Use Area Transportation System

Development Horizon Access Road

Year(s) Characteristics

Existing Traffic Volumes &

Site Traffic Generation
Operations

Access Design Site Traffic Directional Planned Transportation

Criteria Distribution Improvements

Parking and On-Site Traffic Volume Growth

Access Plan Selection
Circulation Rate

Future Non-Site Traffic Background

Site Traffic Assignments
Volumes and Operations Development

Future Roadway Traffic Volumes (Composite)

Capacity Analysis
•Existing Conditions
•Future Background Conditions (w/o site)
•Total Future Conditions (w/ site)

Transportation Needs
•Re-Assess Access Needs
Review and Permitting
•Re-Assess Planned Transportation
Improvements

The figure is adapted from Transportation and Land Development, published by ITE in 2002 (Vergil G.
Stover and Frank J. Koepke).

4
2. Initiation of a Transportation Impact Assessment

The first step of the TIASD process is to determine how extensive the transportation study
should be. Both those conducting the study and those reviewing the study share responsibility
for this process. In many jurisdictions, the TIA requirements are well established. In most
jurisdictions, however, at least several of the study components require the use of engineering
judgment. The following series of questions is a sample of issues to consider when determining
the appropriate magnitude of scope and level of detail for transportation impact analyses:1

• What components of a full site transportation impact study are needed to address issues
associated with the site, proposed development and the nearby transportation system?
• How detailed an analysis is needed for the trip generation forecast? Should standard
equations and rates be used, or is a special study needed? Should modal split be
considered? Should pass-by and/or captured traffic be analyzed? Is an internal/external
analysis warranted and, if so, how detailed should it be?
• How large should the study area be? What is the area of influence of the project?
• Are traffic counts needed? Which days and hours should be counted?
• How should adjacent developments be considered in the study? How should area-wide
growth estimates and future traffic assignments be used?
• How should planned or programmed transportation improvements be accounted for?
• Should the various stages of multi-phased development be analyzed individually? Which
horizon years should be used?
• Which traffic distribution and assignment methods should be used? How detailed should
traffic distribution and assignment be?
• Which roadway sections and which intersections and driveways should be analyzed? What
proposed roadway and transit improvements should be considered?
• Which capacity analysis technique should be used? How many iterations of capacity
analysis should be performed?
• To what extent will non-auto modes of travel, such as walking, bicycling and transit, be
affected? Will the site generate sufficient non-auto traffic to warrant off-site improvements?
Will the automobile traffic generated by the site adversely affect the level of service for non-
auto modes?
• Are other analyses needed, such as crash analyses, sight distance analyses, weaving
analyses, gap analyses and queuing analyses?
• What types of improvements should be considered?
• How detailed should the recommendations be? How should improvement phasing and
timing be addressed?
• What are potential funding sources to implement the recommendations?

The study preparer, prior to initiating work, should meet with the study reviewer to discuss all
these needs and assumptions. In situations where several agencies must approve a
development or are responsible for affected transportation systems (e.g., city or county
departments of public works and state departments of transportation), the study preparer should
contact all agencies to determine issues to be addressed, study scope, etc. (i.e., merely talking
to one agency reviewer in this situation will not be sufficient). This will foster improved
coordination and reduce the potential for revisions to the study.
1
Most of these questions are addressed either later in this chapter or in subsequent chapters of this
student supplement.

5
As the study process nears its conclusion, it is important for the study preparer to review
analysis results and proposed improvements with agency reviewers before writing the study
report. Preparers and reviewers should be in general agreement before the report is submitted
for formal review to (1) ensure the maximum likelihood of agency approval and (2) to avoid the
need to rework parts of the study.

TIA Study Threshold

Quantitative thresholds for requiring a site transportation impact study (or for requiring different
levels of studies) are typically established by each agency based on local needs, issues and
policies. The threshold level may vary among agencies in response to local conditions and
priorities. The most commonly reported threshold is whenever a proposed development will
generate 100 or more added (new) peak-direction trips to or from the site during the adjacent
roadway’s peak hours or the development’s peak hour. But threshold values ranging as low as
50 peak hour vehicles and as high as 300 peak hour vehicles have also been reported. Other
measures can be useful as well, such as the number of acres, number of dwelling units, building
gross square footage (GSF), etc.

Study Area
In large part, the contents and extent of a transportation impact study depend on the location
and size of the proposed development and the conditions prevailing in the surrounding area.
Large developments proposed in congested areas or in areas with poor access obviously
require more extensive transportation analysis, whereas smaller sites may only require a
minimal analysis of traffic on-site and at immediately adjacent intersections. One key
component to the determination of the extent of the study area is how the study will be used
(i.e., for internal planning, for site plan review, or for rezoning).

The TIASD study area should include at least all site access points and major intersections
(signalized and unsignalized) adjacent to the site. Depending on the development size, the first
signalized intersection on each street serving the site could also be analyzed, if it is within a
specific locally determined distance of the site (e.g., 0.25 mile or 0.5 mile). The following table
provides additional potential guidelines for determining study area limits based on the size, type
and trip-producing characteristics of several land uses. The figure on the following page
illustrates a typical site study area map.

6
 Potential Study Area Limits for Transportation Impact Analyses

Development Study Area

Fast-food restaurant Adjacent intersection if corner location

Service station with or without fast-food counter Adjacent intersection if corner location

Mini-mart or convenience grocery with or without

gas pumps 660 ft. from access drive

Other development with fewer than 200 trips

during any peak hour 1000 ft. from access drive
Shopping center less than 70,000 sq. ft. All signalized intersections and access drives within
or 0.5 miles from a property line of the site and all
Development with peak-hour trips between 200 major unsignalized intersections and access drives
and 500 during peak hour within 0.25 miles
Shopping center between 70,000 and 100,000 All signalized and major unsignalized intersections
sq. ft. GLA and freeway ramps within 1 mile of a property line of
or the site
Office or industrial park with between 300 and
500 employees
or
Well-balanced, mixed-use development with
more than 500 peak-hour trips
Shopping center greater than 100,000 sq. ft. GLA All signalized intersections and freeway ramps
or within 2 miles of a property line and all major
Office or industrial park with more than 500 unsignalized access (streets and driveways) within
employees 1 mile of a property line of the site
or
All other developments with more than 500 peak-
hour trips
Transit station 0.5-mile radius
SOURCE: Adapted from Transportation and Land Development, published by ITE in 2002 (Vergil G.
Stover and Frank J. Koepke) and from Barbara M. Schroeder, P.E.
GLA = gross leasable area

7
Site Study Area – sample illustration

SOURCE: Street Smarts, Duluth, GA, USA.

8
3. Context and Framework

Existing Conditions
At the outset of a study, the existing conditions in and around the site under investigation should
be characterized, and the area to be affected by the development should be described. The
characterization should represent current conditions (the information should be no more than 1
year old). These baseline data will provide a foundation for assessing the land use and
transportation implication of changes over time.

Horizon Year
The selection of horizon year(s) for which study results are to be characterized may be directly
related to any of the following issues:

ƒ Opening date of the development, or date of build-out and full occupancy

ƒ Development phasing (for this and other projects)
ƒ Local plan horizons
ƒ A capital improvement program planning horizon (5 to 10 years to cover two program
increments)
ƒ Major transportation system changes
ƒ Other planned significant regional land use changes

The first three criteria could be considered for small development projects (fewer than 500 peak-
hour trips); the latter three could be considered for moderately sized development projects
(between 500 and 1,000 peak-hour trips). For large development projects (greater than 1,000
peak-hour trips), consider multiple horizon years, such as the anticipated opening years of each
major phase, the anticipated year of complete build-out and occupancy, the adopted
transportation plan horizon year and some timeframe after the opening date (e.g., 5 years) if
completed by then and there is no significant increase (i.e., less than 15 percent) in trip
generation from adopted plan or area transportation forecasts.

Site Peak Hour(s)

The overall purpose of most TIASD is to show what effect the project will have on the
transportation system. In general, the critical traffic time period for a given project is directly
associated with the peaking characteristics of both the project-related travel and the area
transportation system. The analyst should generally evaluate the impact of site traffic on off-site
facilities during the adjacent street peak hour. But access points need to be designed for both
adjacent street peak and for site peak hour.

The peaking characteristics of the adjacent street and highway system can be determined
through analyses of traffic count data. In many cases, the data are available from secondary
sources; in other cases, the data will need to be collected. The peak periods are generally the
weekday morning (7–9 a.m.) and evening (4–6 p.m.) peak hours, although local area
characteristics occasionally result in other peaks (for example, at major shopping or recreational
centers). Care should be taken to consider potential changes in peaking characteristics over
time, particularly in growing areas.

9
Consideration may also need to be given to weekend and other typically off-peak traffic. Some
uses, such as retail, special events and recreational facilities, generate their peak traffic on
evenings or weekends, and other uses can be relatively inactive during the normal weekday.

Background Study Area Data

All pertinent transportation and land development information, both short- and long-range,
prepared in the past 5 years or considered to be current by the local transportation and land
development officials, should be reviewed. The value of this information may be assessed by
comparing the assumptions that will be the basis for the current study (such as land use, growth
and densities) and recognizing any significant roadway and development changes that differ
from the original studies. The data may then be used as the basis for the background traffic.
The traffic-related data frequently include some or all of the following:

ƒ Peak period (site and street peaks) turning movement counts (in good weather, usually
excluding Mondays and Fridays, when school is in session; otherwise, summer counts
are acceptable, but may need to be “seasonally” adjusted)
ƒ Vehicle classification counts (including trucks, buses and cars)
ƒ Adjustment factors to relate count data to design period, such as weekday and seasonal
adjustment factors, as well as the design-hour (K) factor and the directional distribution
(D) factor
ƒ Machine counts to verify peaking characteristics

The data for traffic control devices typically include the following:

ƒ Primary traffic control devices

ƒ Traffic signs (especially regulatory ones) and pavement markings
ƒ Signal operations, phasing and timing

Data related to roadway and proximity usually include:

ƒ Roadway configurations, geometric features (curves and grades) and lane usage
numbers and types of lanes
ƒ Availability and location of sidewalks and marked and unmarked crosswalk locations
ƒ Location of both on-street and off-street bicycle facilities
ƒ Parking regulations
ƒ Street lighting
ƒ Driveways (locations, types and traffic control) serving sites across from, or adjacent to
site
ƒ Transit stop locations
ƒ Adjacent land use

Other data may be needed, depending on the characteristics of both the proposed project and
the area in which it will be developed, including the following:

ƒ Posted speed limits

ƒ Prevailing operating speeds (particularly the 85th-percentile speed), if significantly
different than speed limits
ƒ Lane widths
ƒ Grades on approaches to intersections
ƒ Amount of right-turn-on-red activity

10
 ƒ Pavement conditions, including shoulders
ƒ Street utility information (including luminaire locations)
ƒ Travel times
ƒ Pedestrian volumes and movements
ƒ Sidewalk and greenway widths, crosswalk lengths, block lengths and pedestrian
numbers and flow rates
ƒ Bikeway types, bikeway widths and bicyclist numbers, speeds and flow rates
ƒ Bus stop locations and types, existing bus stop amenities (i.e., shelters, type of
scheduling and routing information), bus scheduling (frequency), type/size of vehicles
and existing bus occupancy
ƒ Rail transit information (i.e., frequency of service for peak- and off-peak periods, number
of cars in train), if near site
ƒ Parking availability
ƒ Sight distances
ƒ Safety hazards and vertical and lateral clearances
ƒ Right-of-way data (may be as simple as a right-of-way line or as detailed as easements,
property lines, fixed objects, etc.)

The background data should be documented in tables and figures (such as the turning
movement volumes shown in the following figure).

11
Existing Street Peak Hour Volumes – sample illustration

66 ( (171)

2 0 ( 56)
85 ( 58)

67 ( 5)
)

71)
2 04

6
53 (
1
2 03
507 (343) 2 48 63 (
6
4 (9) 233 (166) 421 2 )
(
206 26 ( (151) 34 32 ( 303)
1 149 (200) 2 3 0)
246 (77) 3 40)
383 (421) (20 (32
28 ( 0 ) 0
2 (6) 21) 5 (1 )
6)
11 (7)
8 (5)

35 ( 7)
123 (21)
9 (2 )

63 ( 3)
(95

50)
2)

1
3
13 (
71
Sheridan

Blv d

Sutton

Rd
2

3
1 y
w
Grove Pk Ray Rd

Site
Wood Pkwy

LEGEND

AM (PM) TMC XX (YY)

Turning Movements
Future Roadway
NORTH

SOURCE: Street Smarts, Duluth, GA, USA.

If there are indications that hazardous or high crash locations are within the study area,
information on crash experience (preferably for 3 years) should be gathered to identify specific
existing conditions. Locations of adjacent and nearby driveways serving other land uses should
be identified.

Information on land use and demographics should likewise be compiled. Examples of the data
to collect include the following:

• Current land use, densities and occupancy in vicinity of site

• Comprehensive land use plan
• Zoning in vicinity
• Absorption rates by type of development

12
• Current and future population and employment within the study area by census tract or
transportation analysis zone (as needed for use in site traffic distribution)

After defining the study area with local transportation and other reviewing officials, the preparer
should review any major land use or transportation system changes that have occurred or that
are anticipated to occur within the study area during the study period. The data listed below
should provide sufficient information to assess these changes:

• Approved development projects and planned completion dates, densities and land use types
• Anticipated development on other undeveloped parcels
• Planned thoroughfares in the study area and local streets in vicinity of site, including
improvements

4. Non-Site Traffic

Estimates of non-site traffic are required to complete the analysis of horizon-year conditions.
These estimates characterize the “base” conditions—that is, without the subject site being
developed (or redeveloped). The figure on the following page shows the interrelationships of
transportation system data and transportation demand data for existing, background and “total
future” (i.e., with project site) traffic conditions.

13
Interrelationships of Transportation System and Demand Data

Existing Transportation System Data

•Transportation Network (Number of Lanes,
Facility Type, Area Type)
•Transit Service Data (Routes, Headways, etc.)
•Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities
EXISTING •Traffic Control Data (Signals, Signing, etc.)
TRAFFIC
CONDITIONS Existing Transportation Demand Data
•Traffic Volumes and Turning Movement Counts
•Traffic Characteristics
•Transit Service Ridership
•Pedestrian and Bicycle Usage

Background Transportation System Data

•Planned and Programmed Transportation
Improvements
•Other Committed Improvements
BACKGROUND
TRAFFIC
CONDITIONS Background Transportation Demand Data
•Growth Rate Data and Methodology
•Estimated Non-Project Related Growth by
Phase
•Projected Increases in Transit, Pedestrians, and
Bicycles

Site Transportation System Data

•Site Access Design
•Other Site Related Transportation
TOTAL FUTURE Improvements
TRAFFIC
CONDITIONS Site Transportation Demand Data
•Site Vehicle Trips
•Site Transit Trips
•Site Pedestrian and Bicycle Trips

SOURCES: Florida Department of Transportation, 1997; Street Smarts, Duluth, GA, USA.

Components
Non-site traffic consists of two components:

ƒ Through traffic, consisting of all movements through the study area, without either an
origin or a destination in the study area (sometimes referred to as “background growth”)
ƒ Traffic generated by all other developments in the study area, with an origin and/or a
destination in the study area (sometimes referred to as “background development” or
“pipeline development”)

The latter category is particularly important because existing developments can generate traffic
that will have an impact on the site being studied and because the conditions associated with
nearby developments can be affected by traffic generated by the new site.

Methodology
There are three principal methods of projecting non-site traffic:

14
 ƒ Build-up method, using specific developments
ƒ Trends or growth rate method
ƒ Use of area or sub-area transportation plan or modeled volumes

Each has its appropriate use, and each is based on data that may be available or generated as
part of the site transportation impact study.

Build-Up Method
The concept consists of projecting peak-hour traffic to be generated by approved and
anticipated (based on generalized market absorption rates, as discussed with the review
agency) developments in the study area (background development); assigning it to the
projected street system; and adding in through traffic with both trip ends outside the study area
(background growth). Care should be taken to account for trips already made on the area street
system, to avoid double counting. An eight-step process is typically used:

1. Assess impacts of committed system improvements during forecast period.

2. Identify study area development within forecast period (background development).
3. Estimate trip generation.
4. Estimate directional distribution.
5. Assign traffic.
6. Estimate growth in through traffic (background growth).
7. Sum study area and through traffic.
8. Check for logic of results and adjust as necessary.

Growth Rate
Use of growth rates is one of the simpler approaches to use. It is based on the assumption that
recent growth rates in traffic volumes will continue through the study target year or will change
predictably.

However, the growth rate method is often insensitive to localized changes. It should not be used
in cases where other extensive nearby development will occur during the study period or where
growth rates are unstable. Sizable errors could develop. Furthermore, growth in average daily
traffic does not always parallel growth in peak-hour traffic, and most historical data are for
average daily traffic. This method should also not be used where substantial transportation
system changes (i.e., transportation infrastructure changes) will alter traffic patterns within the
study area, unless an accurate redistribution step is included.

The impact of transportation system changes (i.e., changes to the transportation infrastructure)
must be estimated. These changes, whether they are relatively minor or major, can sufficiently
affect the estimated traffic volumes at a particular location to affect link or intersection levels of
service.

15
Use of Area Transportation Model
Projected traffic volumes from transportation planning studies are particularly applicable to
studies of very large projects with areawide or regional impacts and in situations where the
projections have local credibility and where network detail is consistent with that needed for site
transportation analysis in the study area. This approach will also be useful for large projects in
highly congested corridors where major diversions of through traffic may result. The planning
models allow re-assignment of through trips to alternative routes around areas with the added
congestion of a proposed development. Travel model forecasts should be used only where
credible demographic forecasts have been or can be quickly projected for the horizon year.

When using this method, great care should be taken to ensure a high level of confidence in the
conversion of average weekday traffic volumes to directional peak-hour volumes, complete with
turning movements. One should approach the development of turning movements from model
outputs with extreme caution.

Under some circumstances, it may be desirable or necessary to use a combination of the above
methods. The technique(s) used should be mutually acceptable to both the study preparer and
the reviewing agency.

5. Traffic Generation

One of the more critical elements of site impact studies is estimating the amount of traffic to be
generated by a proposed development. This is usually done by using either trip generation rates
or trip generation equations. Whether to use equation or rate depends on the quality of data on
which the rates and equations are based. The ITE Trip Generation Handbook provides
guidance on how to select between rates and equations when both are available.

Most development proposals will be accompanied by an estimate of the number of development

units being proposed. However, in some cases, particularly early in the development process,
only land area may be known. Trip generation rates and equations by land area generally
produce trip estimates of low accuracy. As a result, it is highly desirable to make an accurate
estimate of the likely development units that will occur. Both the prospective developer and the
review agency should concur if development units are to be based on land area quantities and
density assumptions.

Many state, regional and local agencies have their own trip generation data collected from sites
within their boundaries. Appropriate agencies should be contacted to determine if such a
database exists. Data collected from local sites are likely to be more representative of other
developments within the area than are national data.

The most widely used source of national trip generation data is Trip Generation. The information
in this report is almost solely derived from suburban sites. Data are provided in vehicle trips, not
person trips. Trip generation for downtowns, other business districts and areas with significant
transit usage requires more study of local conditions or different study data altogether. The user
should not assume that ITE vehicle trips are equivalent to person trips.

16
Data included in Trip Generation were obtained from actual driveway counts of vehicular traffic
entering and exiting a site. The seventh edition of Trip Generation contains about 4,250 data
sets from individual trip generation studies.

The Trip Generation Handbook provides principles, procedures and guidelines for estimating
trip generation. It describes how to select both the independent variables and the time of day to
analyze. If new trip generation data must be collected, it describes how such a study should be
undertaken. It also explains how pass-by trips should be handled when dealing with certain
types of retail and service land uses. Finally, it helps define what a mixed-use, or multi-use,
development is and how best to consider the internal trip capture aspects of such sites.

Trips generated by a development may consist of three different classifications of trip types:

Primary - made for the sole purpose of visiting a specific destination and the main reason for
the trip. Such trips go from the origin to the development or generator and then return to the
origin.
Pass-by - made as intermediate stops on the way from an origin to a primary trip destination
without a route diversion. Pass-by trips are commonly made to retail-type developments such as
shopping centers, restaurants, banks, etc., that are located adjacent to busy streets and attract
motorists who are currently traveling in the traffic stream. Such land uses attract a portion of
their trips from the adjacent street traffic and are not considered new traffic added to the system.
However, this traffic is considered new traffic at the site of driveways.
Diverted-link - attracted from the traffic volume on roadways within the vicinity of the site but
require a diversion from that roadway to another roadway to gain access to the site.

The three trip types are illustrated in the following figure.

17
Relationship of Primary Trips, Pass-by Trips and Diverted Linked Trips

Origin

Origin/Destination

Primary Trips
(via area and
adjacent streets)

Driveway

Origin/Destination Diverted
Linked Trips
(via adjacent
SITE streets)

Driveway

(via driveway only)

Destination Origin

Pass-By Trips
(on adjacent streets)

Destination

Legend
Trips Prior to Development
Trips After Development
SOURCE: ITE Trip Generation Handbook, 2002

A table should be provided in the study report showing the categories and quantities of land
uses, with the corresponding trip generation rates or equations and resulting number of trips.
The reasons for choosing to use either the rate or equation should be documented in table
footnotes or in the report text. For large developments that will be phased in over time, the table
should also provide trip generation expected at the end of each significant phase. Accurate trip
generation estimates are also dependent on selection of the proper land use category,
appropriate independent variables (development units to which trip generation is sensitive) and
statistically stable trip generation rates or equations. The Trip Generation Handbook provides
more information to aid the study preparer and reviewers.

18
6. Distribution and Assignment

After an estimate of the total traffic into and out of the site has been completed, that traffic must
be distributed and assigned to the roadway system. The trip distribution step produces
estimates of trip origins and destinations (as illustrated in the figure below). The assignment
step produces estimates of the amount of site traffic that will use each access route between the
origins and destinations.

Site Traffic Distribution – sample illustration

16.1%
3.1%
26.5%

I nd
us
tria
l 17.2%
Blv
d
North

iv e
Dr
way
New ton

Park

ll
Bu
Ne
wt

13.1%
on

Pkwy

34 SITE
Gr

Blvd
ey

10.2%
Tra
il

7.7%
Road

INTERSTATE

y
85
Br

dd
o

Bu
ad
St
re
et

3.0%
3.1%

LEGEND

XX% Distribution
NORTH

SOURCE: Street Smarts, Duluth, GA, USA.

19
Trip Distribution
The directions from which traffic will access the site can vary depending on many factors,
including:

ƒ Type of proposed development and the area from which it will attract traffic
ƒ Competing developments (if applicable)
ƒ Size of the proposed development
ƒ Surrounding land uses and population
ƒ Conditions on the surrounding street system

The three most commonly acceptable methods for estimating trip distribution are by analogy, by
model and by surrogate data.

An analogy method can be used in determining trip distribution if a similar existing development
is located near the proposed development. Data for the existing site can be collected by
counting driveway and intersection turning movements, conducting a license plate origin-
destination survey or a driver response survey, summarizing employee home zip codes (for
employment centers), or using other methods defining distribution of travelers to and from the
site. The trip distribution can be estimated for the proposed site based on data collected from
the analogous site, as long as it is deemed accurate and defensible.

A gravity model or other locally acceptable trip distribution model can be used to estimate site
trip distribution. The gravity model is based on the likelihood that the number of trips between
two zones is proportional to the magnitude of each zone, and inversely proportional to the
distance between the two zones. Trip distribution using a gravity model can be done by
computer or manually.

The origins and distributions of destinations can be developed when an adequate

socioeconomic, demographic database of usable detail by zones or other sub-areas is available
for the population or employment distribution representative of the study target year. In most
cases, population can be used as the basis for estimating distribution of office, retail and
entertainment trips; employment is a reasonable surrogate for residential trips; and other trips
can be similarly distributed using logical surrogates.

Regardless of whether a model or a manual procedure is used, it is important that trip lengths
be considered, particularly for large study areas. Many trips will be completed within a few miles
of the site. Unless a gravity model is used to account for trip lengths, a trip length frequency
distribution curve or trip time frequency distribution curve should be utilized. Such curves are
frequently available by trip purpose from local transportation planning agencies. See the figure
on the following page for an example based on national data.

20
Trip Length Frequency Distribution Curve – sample illustration

80%

70%

60%
Percent of All Trips
50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

Shopping/Errands
0%
Go to Work
5 miles or less

6 to 10 miles

All Trip Purposes

11 to 15 miles

16 to 20 miles

21 to 30 miles

31 miles or more
Travel Distance (miles)

All Trip Purposes Go to Work Shopping/Errands

SOURCE: National Household Travel Survey, 2001, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, U.S. Department
of Transportation.

Trip Assignment
Trip assignment involves determining the amount of traffic that will use certain routes on the
roadway network. The product of the trip assignment process is total project-generated trips, by
direction and turning movement, on each segment of the study area roadway network.

Trip assignment should be made considering logical routings, available roadway capacities, left
turns at critical intersections and projected (and perceived) relative travel times. Multiple paths
should often be assigned between origins and destinations to achieve realistic estimates, rather
than assigning all of the trips to the route with the shortest travel time. Pass-by trips are diverted
from adjacent street flows and return in the same direction.

The figure on the next page shows an example of site traffic. This site traffic would be added to
the non-site peak hour traffic to obtain the estimated total future peak-hour traffic (an example of
which is shown two figures below). Upon completion of the initial site traffic assignment, the
results should be reviewed to see if the volumes appear logical given the characteristics of the
road system and trip distribution. Adjustments should be made if the initial results do not appear
to be logical or reasonable.

21
Site Traffic – sample illustration

32 )
9 0)
9 (29)
8 (19)

11 (
32 (
40 (56)
5 (15) 5 (1 25 (
5 7
19 ( 20 ( ) 33 (
3 7) 5 (1 1)
1 2 8) 2 58 ) 3 5)
28 (77)
36 (106)
78 (87)
33 (37)
13 (8)

36 ( 26)
58 ( 6)

2 2)
71 )
8)
5

19 (
40 (

13 (
Sheridan

Blvd
y
Pkw

Sutton

Rd
2
Wood

3
1 y
w
Grov e Pk Ray Rd

Site
Wood Pkwy

High Pkwy

West Dr

LEGEND

AM (PM) TMC XX (YY)

NORTH Turning Movements

SOURCE: Street Smarts, Duluth, GA, USA.

22
Total Peak Hour Traffic (Build Condition) – sample illustration

120 (178)
104 (322)
)

)
224 (340)
219 (330)
140 (270)

3 8 ( 8)
(309

12 0
)
10 4
5
55 (
21 1
57 (325)

75 (
990 (1027) 260 79 (
7
54 (89) 710 (173) 101 8)
5
2 06 56 ( (1130) 3 101 (1459
1 20 )
1 625 (200) 2 ) 756 4 (77) 3 (17
5)
(121 (144
51 ( 0) 1
198 (490)
9 5) 5 (1 )
7)
725 (1245)
305 (417)
205 (416)
78 (80)

239 (365)

75 ( 4)
237 (112)

20 0 7 2)
3 1 ( 1)

5)
3 6)

2
(20

25 (

(20
16 8
Sheridan

Blvd
y
Pkw

Sutton

Rd
2
Wood

3
1 y
w
Grov e Pk Ray Rd

Site
Wood Pkwy

High Pkwy

West Dr

LEGEND

AM (PM) TMC XX (YY)

NORTH Turning Movements

SOURCE: Street Smarts, Duluth, GA, USA.

23
7. Analysis

Which capacity analysis technique should be used? How many iterations of This
capacity analysis should be performed? To what extent will non-auto modes of
travel, such as walking, bicycling and transit, be affected? Will the site generate
sufficient non-auto traffic to warrant off-site improvements? Will the automobile
traffic generated by the site adversely affect the level of service for non-auto
modes? Are other analyses needed, such as crash analyses, sight distance
analyses, weaving analyses, gap analyses and queuing analyses? What types of
improvements should be considered? How detailed should the recommendations
be? How should improvement phasing and timing be addressed?
chapter reviews the types of analyses that should be employed and how they yield conclusions
and recommendations. The objective of these analyses is to obtain a clearer understanding of
both the transportation-related implications of the project and the improvements necessary to
ensure acceptable operating conditions.

Virtually all site traffic analyses will require capacity analyses. All should include a site
reconnaissance to identify other possible concerns or opportunities.
The requiring agency's reviewers will also identify other
analyses to be performed. In many cases, the local agency will expect conditions with the
proposed development to be in the normally acceptable range (as locally defined) or be
improved to at least the existing performance levels. In some cases, indirectly related issues
may have to be addressed due to local demands.

Capacity Analysis
The standard used to evaluate traffic operating conditions of the transportation system is
referred to as the level of service (LOS). This is a qualitative assessment of the quantitative
effect of factors such as speed, volume of traffic, geometric features, traffic interruptions, delays
and freedom to maneuver. Operating conditions are categorized as LOS “A” through LOS “F,”
with A generally representing the most favorable driving conditions and F representing the least
favorable. The figure on the next page provides an example of the desired output from a level of
service/capacity analysis.

24
Projected a.m. and p.m. Peak-Hour Levels of Service – sample illustration

Ind
us B (D)
tria
l D (D)
Blv 3 2 1
d B (D)

North
4 D (D)
iv e
Dr

w ay
5 B (D)
New ton

Park
ll
Bu
Ne
wt

C (D)
on

8
Pkwy
Blvd

34 D (D) 9 SITE
Gr
ey

B (C) 10

D (D) 11
Tra
il

Road
7 C (D)
INTERSTATE

y
85
Br ee

dd
oa t

Bu
St

d
r

6
es
t

C (D)

LEGEND
X (X) AM (PM) Peak Hour LOS
NORTH

SOURCE: Street Smarts, Duluth, GA, USA

The most commonly used LOS analysis procedure is detailed in the Highway Capacity Manual
(HCM). Application of the HCM techniques requires the use of additional factors (i.e., peak-hour
factor, saturation flow), which may vary from one location to another.

Non-site and site conditions should be compared to determine:

• Where levels of service are affected
• Whether they reach the level where mitigation is required
• The need to fully examine the results to determine the cause of the deterioration
This comparison can sometimes form the crux of the whole report. Existing problems (i.e. prior
to the addition of the site) with levels of service will also need to be addressed.

Safety
The initial review of existing data within a study area should include recent (within 3 years)
crash experience. This review should identify locations where transportation safety should be

25
given extra consideration. High crash locations (based on number, rate and severity) on
roadways serving the study site should be analyzed. Thresholds for acceptable crash rates
vary, but any intersection with more than one crash per million entering vehicles may be worthy
of additional analysis. The same is true for intersections in the jurisdiction that are in the top 10
percent in terms of number of crashes. The local agency’s input is vital in identifying such
locations.

The site plan should be reviewed to ensure that the internal circulation system and external
access points are designed to improve pedestrian safety and to minimize vehicle/pedestrian
conflicts. Locations for transit stops and their associated pedestrian flows to building access
points require a thorough assessment to ensure safety. Similarly, pedestrian flows to and from
parking facilities need careful consideration during site planning, which often requires detailed
information on the project’s use and layout.

Non-Motorized and Transit Needs

Consideration of transit, pedestrian and bicyclist needs should be made for every site
development. In cases where non-motorized or transit travel is expected to remain low, the
consideration may be made qualitatively, as safe and efficient site access will provide sufficient
capacity for the anticipated demand. Quantitative analyses of levels of service for transit,
pedestrians and bicyclists should be performed if the site development is in an area where the
demand for non-motorized/transit travel already approaches or exceeds system capacity or the
site development itself is expected to generate high levels of non-motorized/transit travel.
Examples of such development may include downtown sites, sports or cultural arenas,
educational facilities, transit stations/stops and any other development that relies on off-site
parking.

Quantitative trip generation, distribution and assignment for pedestrians, bicyclists and transit
users are typically developed using site-specific information regarding the proposed site
operations. For routine retail/office/residential development sites, mode share factors can be
applied to the site’s vehicle occupancy and vehicular trip generation estimates to obtain
estimates for pedestrian, bicycle and transit use. Vehicle occupancy and modal share factors
may be available from the local jurisdiction, the transit agency, or the metropolitan planning
organization, or can be obtained from 2000 U.S. Census journey-to-work reports. Trip
distribution and assignment can then be determined using available destination information, a
field review of logical desire lines and/or market surveys, if available. In addition, existing or
proposed transit station/stop locations will help define where such modes will interface with the
site, and where pedestrian activity related to transit can be expected. Existing and proposed
bicycle facilities in the vicinity of the site can also help in the determination of where bicycle trip
distributions and assignments are most likely to occur.

Quality of Service
Recent editions of HCM have recognized that the LOS provided to non-auto travelers, such as
pedestrians, bicyclists and transit users, cannot be purely defined as a function of volume and
capacity. The capacity-based approaches discussed above assist in defining operational
parameters and determining some LOS considerations for these modes. However, bicycle
facility, transit service and sidewalk capacity are not typically issues in most jurisdictions.
Recent research on this topic has focused on the factors affecting these types of travelers’

26
perception of safety and convenience of a route, and how these factors affect a traveler’s
decision to use these non-auto modes.

It is apparent that there are a number of primary measures for each mode that determine the
LOS (or, perhaps, more appropriately, QOS) that is provided to the user. While determining
LOS for vehicles is relatively straightforward, methodologies for determining LOS for other
modes are less developed. As an alternative, non-auto modes of travel can be assessed for the
QOS they provide. The table on the next page summarizes the basic considerations to be
included in establishing QOS. QOS by mode should be discussed between the preparer and
reviewer and quantified to the extent possible with the overall objective of maintaining an
acceptable QOS for all modes.

Possible Framework for Establishing Quality of Service

Mode Potential Quality of Service Considerations

Presence, connectivity and width of sidewalks

Lateral separation from traffic
Barriers and buffers from traffic
Crossing opportunities on arterial and collector roadways
Pedestrian
Delays at intersections
Driveway frequency and volumes
Visitor experience (national/state/local parks or at other types of
recreational or entertainment venues)

Presence of a dedicated facility

Network connectivity
Number and width of travel lanes adjacent to the route
Bicycle
Volume and speed of traffic
Percentage of trucks and buses encountered
Pavement condition

Frequency and hours of service

Reliability of service
Transit
Passenger loads
Travel times

Corridor travel times

Automobile Intersection delay
Queue length

27
Transportation Demand Management

A variety of techniques can be used to reduce site traffic generation or to spread the traffic over
a longer period of time during the day. Each of these techniques has the potential for reducing
site traffic during peak hours or in total at certain types of development and under certain
conditions.
Several transportation demand management (TDM) techniques that can reduce peak-hour
traffic are listed in the table on the next page. These techniques are divided into two groups:

• Physical actions or developer commitments to provide services that can be determined at

the time of the development approval
• Non-physical actions or in-kind commitments by the developer that will allow credits for trip
generation reduction
Each of these techniques can be effective under the right circumstances; yet, many are totally
ineffective under inappropriate conditions.

28
 Sample TDM Techniques with Potential to Reduce Site Traffic Generation

Types of Trips Affected

Techniquea
Office Retail Industrial Residential Lodging Event

Physical Actions
Parking availability
reduced below normal
demand level or T, P - T, P T, P T, P T, P
substantial increase in
parking costs
Quality pedestrian
environment on site (mixed- T, P, M T, P, M T, M T, P, M T, P, M T, P, M
use developments only)
Building amenities (bicycle
lockers, showers,
automated teller machine,
parking garage dimensions
T, P, M - T, P, M T, P, M - -
to accommodate vanpools,
wiring for ease of telework)
Non-Physical Actions
Transit service to areas of
trip origins
T, P T, PM T, P T, P T, P T, P
Carpool, vanpool programs
(ridematching, preferential
parking, subsidies,
T, P T, PM T, P T, P - T, P
promotion)
Modified work schedules
P - P P - -
(4/40, staggered, flex)
Telecommute options T, P - - T, P - -
Internal shuttle
transportation to/within T, M T, M - T, M T, P -
development site
Transit subsidy T, P - T, P T, P - -
On-site transportation
coordinator or information T, P T, P T, P T, P T, P T, P
center
a
Other techniques may be applicable either separately or in combination with others. To be effective,
each measure must be designed to generate and sustain use of alternatives to the single-occupant
automobile.
T = daily trips
P = peak-hour trips
PM = p.m. peak-hour trips
M = midday trips

29
Formulation of Mitigation Alternatives
When the analyses indicate that the transportation impacts generated by a development will not
degrade operations to below the agency’s or jurisdiction’s adopted LOS/QOS requirement, no
traffic mitigation will be required. If, however, the TIA identifies LOS/QOS deficiencies,
improvements in access, geometry, or operations or changes in the proposed development
must be investigated. It is important to assess a range of mitigation options that are viable,
efficient and economical for the developer and that are also compatible with local criteria and
practices and acceptable to the community.

When formulating mitigation options, the preparer should consider the following guidance:

ƒ Focus on low-cost improvements first (adding a turn lane is often less expensive than an
additional through lane).
ƒ Select simple, practical solutions rather than complex ones (optimized signal timing or
minor phasing modifications can sometimes create significant improvement).
ƒ Recognize right-of-way limitations (dedicating or buying land can be expensive but is
usually less expensive than buying buildings or businesses).
ƒ Consider topography (severe topography comes with its own constraints and costs).
ƒ Consider non-physical actions, such as TDM strategies, that can reduce trip making.
ƒ Consider options that might encourage/enhance use of alternative modes, such as
sidewalks, bicycle lanes, or modification of a bus route in the vicinity so that it serves the
site directly.
ƒ Consider the character and quality of life the community is trying to foster (which a
sidewalk might enhance but a road widening might degrade).
ƒ Maintain consistency with the local jurisdiction’s transportation policies and programs
and with their criteria for maintaining peak-hour LOS/QOS standards.

8. Site Access and Off-Site Improvements

Study recommendations and conclusions are intended to provide safe and efficient movement
of traffic to and from, within and past, the proposed development, while minimizing the impact to
non-site trips. Other objectives may also be mutually identified.

Recommendations for improvements should include both off-site and on-site locations and
should reflect scheduled and recommended roadway network improvements, as well as
additional developments in and near the site. The timing of all of these elements is important. It
is not unusual, particularly for large or phased developments, to present recommendations that
involve improvements to be implemented in stages over a period of years.

30
Access Management
Adverse impacts to roadways adjacent to the site can often be minimized through the
application of sound access management principles. Such techniques also tend to improve, if
not optimize, operations on the site’s access driveways. The result is safer and more efficient
operation of both adjacent roadways and site access driveways.

Whether designing site access driveways or off-site intersection improvements, there are a
number of basic design objectives that should be taken into consideration (Access Management
Manual prepared by the Transportation Research Board):
ƒ Preserve the functional intent of the existing roadways.
ƒ Minimize the difference in speed between turning vehicles and through vehicles.
ƒ Eliminate encroachment of turning vehicles on adjacent lanes.
ƒ Use a combination of throat width and return radii at entry and exit points that will
safely and efficiently accommodate the selected design vehicle.
ƒ Provide adequate sight distance.
ƒ Provide sufficient storage within mainline turn lanes and site driveways to prevent
spillover into mainline through lanes and internal conflicts and congestion.
ƒ Minimize the number of conflict points in intersections.
ƒ Design for the peak-hour volumes (as a minimum).

What types of improvements should be considered? How detailed should the

recommendations be? How should improvement phasing and timing be addressed?

Network Improvements
Off-site improvements can consist of modification, expansion and, in some cases, addition of
roadway facilities in the immediate vicinity of the proposed development. The scope of these
improvements should be consistent with the local jurisdiction's criteria for maintaining peak-hour
LOS standards. They should address specific site and through traffic needs consistent with local
objectives, and they should be compatible with long-term improvement plans. These
improvements should ensure that non-site traffic flow is not negatively impacted.

Some examples of potential intersection improvements are:

• Add a general use lane.
• Add a turning lane.
• Add a bypass lane (to bypass turning vehicles).
• Construct/improve acceleration and/or deceleration lanes.
• Improve intersection channelization.
• Ensure adequate storage lane lengths.
• Add sidewalks/bicycle lanes, pedestrian/bicycle crossings and/or median refuge or other
pedestrian curb treatment.
• Re-align an intersection approach.
• Improve sight distance.
• Modify traffic signal phasing and/or timing.
• Add a traffic signal.
• Improve traffic signal progression.
• Convert the intersection to a modern roundabout.

31
• Provide transit/emergency vehicle priority treatment.
• Construct an interchange at an existing intersection location.

Some examples of roadway segment improvements are:

• Add general use lanes.
• Add an auxiliary lane.
• Add a high-occupancy vehicle lane.
• Add or improve shoulder areas.
• Add bicycle lanes/sidewalks.
• Implement access management.
• Add a continuous two-way left-turn lane.
• Add a median and control median openings.
• Improve traffic signal progression.
• Implement intelligent transportation system (ITS) techniques.
• Construct an interchange at an existing intersection location.

The figures on the following pages illustrate how recommended improvements could be
illustrated under existing, future background traffic only and future conditions with the project,
respectively.

32
Recommended Improvements for Existing Conditions – sample illustration

1 20

d 1
Roa

bb
We
2
Site 2

Road

l
Hil
P
STO
STO

Ridge 3
P

Drive

3
STOP

STOP

124
STOP
R arr

STOP
d
oa
F

LEGEND

STOP
Existing Stop Sign Control

Existing or Previously Recommended Traffic Signal Control

Existing or Previously Recommended

Lane Configuration
NORTH
Proposed Lane Configuration

SOURCE: Street Smarts, Duluth, GA, USA.

Recommended Improvements for Future Background Conditions – sample illustration

1 20

d 1
R oa

bb
We
2
Site 2

Road

l
Hil

3
Ridge
Drive
STOP

STOP

3
STOP

124 STOP

LEGEND
R arr
d
oa
F

STOP
Existing Stop Sign Control

Existing or Previously Recommended Traffic Signal Control

Existing or Previously Recommended

Lane Configuration

Proposed Lane Configuration

NORTH
Proposed Traffic Signal Control

SOURCE: Street Smarts, Duluth, GA, USA.

33
Recommended Improvements for Future with Project Conditions - sample illustration

STO
P
1 4
20
d 1
R oa

bb
We 4
2
SITE 5 2

Rd

l
Hil

Ridge
Dr ive
S TO
P

124 LEGEND
Existing or Previously Recommended STOP
Stop Sign Control
R arr
d

5
F
oa

Existing or Previously Recommended Traffic Signal Control

Existing or Previously Recommended

Lane Configuration

Proposed Lane Configuration

NORTH
Proposed Traffic Signal

Proposed Stop Sign Control STOP

SOURCE: Street Smarts, Duluth, GA, USA.

34
Implementation of Recommended Improvements
It is important to view recommendations for improvements within appropriate time perspectives.
Recommendations should be sensitive to the following issues: (1) timing of short-term and long-
term network improvements that are already planned, scheduled and/or funded; (2) time
schedules of adjacent developments; (3) size and timing of individual phases of development;
(4) right-of-way needs and availability of additional right-of-way within appropriate time frames;
(5) local priorities for transportation improvements and funding; (6) cost-effectiveness of
implementing improvements at a given stage of development; and (7) necessary lead time for
additional design and construction.

Summary
Off-site improvements should enable the site and adjacent transportation system to function
acceptably, according to agency criteria and developer requirements for the site. This will
require technical analyses responsive to the localized conditions that exist and that will result.
However, there also needs to be communication between preparer and reviewer so that project
approval can be obtained without any reworking of study analyses. In some cases, a
combination of public and private actions may be necessary to ensure that future non-site and
site traffic are accommodated by the transportation system.

If the site access and adjacent transportation system cannot be improved to adequately
accommodate the proposed development, the building program for the development may need
to be changed. This may consist of one or more of the following:
• Reduce the size/scope of development or phase the development to match the
implementation of roadway improvements
• Change the type or magnitude of site land uses
• Modify the site plan
• Provide more non-personal vehicle travel options
• Relocate development to a different site

9. On-Site Planning

An integral part of an overall transportation impact study relates to basic site planning principles.
It is extremely important that off-site roadway improvements be fully integrated with on-site
recommendations.

Internal design will have a direct bearing on the adequacy of site access points. The
identification of access points between the site and the external roadway system, and
subsequent recommendations concerning the design of those access points, is directly related
to both the directional distribution of site traffic and the internal circulation system configuration.
It is clear that driveway traffic volumes of varying sizes need to be accommodated on site, in
terms both of providing sufficient capacity and queuing space and of distributing automobiles to
and from parking spaces, pick-up/drop-off points and drive-through lanes. An integrated system
should deliver vehicles from the external roadway system in a manner that is easily understood
by typical drivers and that maximizes efficiency, accommodates anticipated traffic patterns and
ensures public safety. Pedestrian linkages should conveniently and safely connect transit stops
and parking facilities with building entrances as well as other key origins and destinations,
where possible. Similar linkages should be provided between buildings.

35
Vehicle Queuing Storage
Provision for appropriate vehicular exit queuing should be made at all access drives to a
development. For small developments, parking areas and access points should be designed so
that drivers waiting to exit align their vehicles perpendicular to the off-site roadway system. For
large developments, queuing areas should be sufficient so that vehicles stored at exits do not
block internal circulation and so that drivers enter a signalized intersection at minimum
headways to achieve maximum flow rates. The queue storage just inside a parking facility
should be sufficient to allow vehicles to enter the parking facility and come to a complete stop (if
necessary due to the type of traffic control) without blocking or hampering internal circulation
and without causing traffic to back up on the off-site roadway. The amount of queuing length to
be provided at entrance drives has a direct relationship with the amount of traffic anticipated to
enter the parking area from the off-site roadway system, the peaking characteristics of that flow
and the type of traffic control at the entrance drive. The area between the street and the external
circulation road or aisle at high-volume entrances should provide sufficient queuing capacity to
accommodate inbound traffic surges without causing queues to form on the external roadway
system.

Internal Vehicle Circulation

Internal circulation is the means by which vehicular traffic is delivered between entry points and
such internal destinations as parking areas, pick-up/drop-off points and service areas. Internal
circulation roadways should permit access between all areas in a manner clearly
understandable to the driver. These roads should be striped and signed in a manner consistent
with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices and be designed to safely and efficiently
deliver vehicles to their respective destinations.

Traffic Calming and Speed Control

Traffic calming/speed control is a tool that can be applied both on site and off site. Traffic
calming is used to mitigate existing problems; speed control is used as a philosophy to guide
the design of new facilities. The basic premise of traffic calming/ speed control is that speeds
should be appropriate to the character of the area through which the roadway travels.

Some forms of speed control include:

ƒ Reduced roadway widths

ƒ Curb extensions or median islands to reduce crossing distances and exposure time
at primary pedestrian routes
ƒ Textured or coloured pavement/concrete at key conflict areas
ƒ Traffic circles or roundabouts
ƒ Bicycle lanes and
ƒ On-street parking during off-peak periods to slow traffic

36
Service and Delivery Vehicles
Service and delivery vehicles require separate criteria for movement to and from the site:

• Vehicle turning paths should be sufficient to accommodate both the largest vehicles
anticipated to travel on the site and a locally required design vehicle (often an emergency
vehicle).
• Access points anticipated to be used by service vehicles should have turning paths sufficient
to allow service vehicles to enter and exit the site without encroaching upon opposing lanes
or curbed areas.
• There should be sufficient separation between external and internal circulation roads so
large vehicles can be queued on entry or exit without blocking access to parking spaces or
internal roadway circulation systems.
• Service vehicle routes between access points and loading facilities should be designated
and signed as such. This will:
• Ensure adequate turning paths for service vehicles moving through the site
• Identify those areas on site that need heavy duty pavement and
• Provide the service vehicle driver with the most direct route to the loading dock
• The number of loading berths provided should be sufficient to accommodate anticipated
service and delivery activity.

Parking
Adequate parking should be provided to meet site-generated demands and be consistent with
applicable local policies, which may be included in traffic demand management programs.

Parking is addressed in numerous documents. Specific dimensions, parking angles and parking
ratio requirements are all issues addressed in detail in publications such as Parking Handbook
for Small Communities (ITE, National Trust for Historic Preservation), Parking Generation (ITE),
Dimensions of Parking (Urban Land Institute (ULI), National Parking Association) and Shared
Parking (ULI).

10. Report
The purpose of a site transportation impact study is to assess the effects that a particular
development will have on the surrounding transportation network, to determine what provisions
are needed for safe and efficient site access and traffic flow and to address other related issues.

The purpose of a site transportation impact study report is to document the purpose,
procedures, assumptions, findings, conclusions and recommendations of the study. There are
two common uses for these reports:

• to provide developers or designers with recommendations on site selection, site

transportation planning and transportation impacts

• to assist public agencies in reviewing the attributes of proposed developments in

conjunction with requests for annexation, land subdivision, zoning changes, building
permits, or other development reviews, and to establish or negotiate mitigation requirements
where off-site impacts require improvements beyond those otherwise needed

37
Such reports are also used by public agencies as the basis of levying impact fees or assessing
developer contributions to roadway facility improvements. The report will stand as the written
record of the study and will be the basis for the traffic/transportation-related approval of the
development proposal. It should be complete, yet concise, to ensure adequate understanding of
the intent and the recommendations.
The report outline shown in the table on the next page provides a framework for site
transportation impact study reports. Some studies will be easily documented using this outline;
however, additional sections may be warranted because of specific issues to be addressed,
local study requirements and results of the study. Likewise, inapplicable sections listed in the
outline may be omitted from the report.
Also shown on the following pages in table form is a list of potential illustrations and tables
suggested for inclusion in each report as applicable to study issues and needs. In some cases,
additional figures or tables may be needed to assist the reader in understanding the information
contained in the study.

38
 Site Transportation Impact Study Report - sample table of contents

As a guide for the organization of the report, the following sample table of contents is offered:

I. Introduction and Summary

A. Purpose of report and study objectives
B. Executive summary
1. Site location and study area
2. Development description
3. Types of studies undertaken (impacts, signal warrant, site access, etc.)
4. Principal findings
5. Conclusions
6. Recommendations

II. Proposed Development (Site and Nearby)

A. Off-site (or background) development
B. Description of on site development
1. Land use and intensity
2. Location
3. Site plan
4. Zoning
5. Phasing and timing

III. Existing Area Conditions

A. Study area
1. Area of influence
2. Area of significant transportation impact (may also be part of Chapter IV)
B. Study area land use
1. Existing land uses
2. Existing zoning
3. Anticipated future development
C. Site accessibility
1. Area roadway system
a. existing
b. future
2. Traffic volumes and conditions
3. Transit service
4. Pedestrians and bicyclists
5. Existing relevant transportation system management programs
6. Other, as applicable

IV. Projected Traffic

A. Site traffic (each horizon year)
1. Trip generation
2. Trip distribution
3. Modal split
4. Trip assignment
B. Through traffic (each horizon year)
1. Method of projection
2. Non-site traffic for anticipated development in study area
a. method of projections
b. trip generation
c. trip distribution
d. modal split
e. trip assignment

39
 3. Through traffic
4. Estimated volumes
C. Total traffic (each horizon year)

V. Transportation Analysis
A. Site access
B. Capacity and level of service
1. Existing conditions
2. Background conditions (existing plus growth) (for each horizon year)
3. Total traffic (existing, background, and site) (for each horizon year)
C. Transportation safety
D. Traffic signals
E. Site circulation and parking

VI. Improvement Analysis

A. Improvements to accommodate existing traffic
B. Improvements to accommodate background traffic
C. Additional improvements to accommodate site traffic
D. Alternative improvements
E. Status of improvements already funded, programmed, or planned
F. Evaluation

VII. Findings
A. Site accessibility
B. Transportation impacts
C. Need for any improvements
D. Compliance with applicable local codes

VIII. Recommendations
A. Site access/circulation plan
B. Roadway improvements
1. On-site
2. Off-site
3. Phasing, if appropriate
C. Transit, pedestrians and bicycles
D. Transportation system management / transportation demand management Actions
1. Off-site
2. On-site operational
3. On-site
E. Other

IX. Conclusions

40
 Figures and Tables for a Site Transportation Impact Study Report

Item Title Description

Figure A Site location Area map showing site location

Figure B Study area Map showing area of influence

Existing roadway system serving site. Should show all

major streets, minor streets adjacent to site and site
Existing boundaries. Show also transit, bicycle and major
Figure C
transportation system pedestrian routes, if applicable, along with right-of-
way widths and signal locations. In some cases, may
be combined with Figure A.

Existing and
Map at same scale as Figure G showing existing and
Figure D anticipated area
anticipated land uses/developments in study area.
development

Recent or existing daily volumes on roads in study

Current daily traffic
Figure E area. May be combined with Figure B or E. Include
volumes
existing moving lanes if not shown in Figure B.

Current peak-hour turning volumes at each location

critical to site volume access or serving major traffic
Existing peak-hour
Figure F volumes through study area. May be combined with
turning volumes
Figure D. Also existing moving lanes if not shown in
Figure B.

Area transportation system map showing

programmed and applicable planned roadway, transit,
Anticipated
Figure G bikeway and pedestrian-way improvements affecting
transportation system
site access or traffic flow through the study area. May
be combined with Figure B.

Map or table showing (by percentages) the portion of

Table A or Directional site traffic approaching and departing the area on
Figure H distribution of traffic each roadway; may differ by land use within multi-use
development.

41
 Estimated peak hour (and daily if required) trips to be
Estimated site traffic generated by each major component of the proposed
Table B
generation development; must be shown separately for inbound
and outbound directions.

Map of anticipated study area roadway network

Figure I Site traffic showing peak-hour turning volumes generated by site
development.

Estimated trip
Trips generated by off-site development within study
Table C generation for non-
area. Similar to Table B.
site development

Map similar to Figure G showing peak-hour turning

Estimated non-site
Figure J volumes generated by off-site development within
traffic
study area plus through horizon year traffic.

Estimated total future Map similar to Figure G showing sum of traffic from
Figure K
traffic Figures H and I.

Levels of service computed for critical intersections in

Figure L or Projected levels of
study area. Include existing, horizon year non-site and
Table D service
total horizon year (with site development) conditions.

Map showing recommended off-site transportation

improvements, site access points and on-site
circulation and parking features, as appropriate. May
Figure M or Recommended
require more than one figure. Table will describe
Table E improvements
improvements by location and type. If phasing of
improvements is to be stipulated, this should also be
shown on these or a separate figure or table.

Checklist showing the required/optional elements of a

Figure N or transportation impact analysis report, whether or not
Study checklist
Table F they have been incorporated and their locations in the
report.

Note: Additional figures and tables may be needed for studies with additional complexities, issues, or
study years.

42
 Standard ITE Metric Conversions

During the service life of this document, use of the metric system in the United States is expected to
expand. The following common factors represent the appropriate magnitude of conversion. This is
because the quantities given in U.S. Customary units in the text, tables or figures, represent a precision
level that in practice typically does not exceed two significant figures. In making conversions, it is
important to not falsely imply a greater accuracy in the product than existed in the original dimension or
quantity. However, certain applications such as surveying, structures, curve offset calculations, and so
forth, may require great precision. Conversions for such purposes are given in parentheses.

Length
1 inch = 25 mm (millimeters—25.4)
1 inch = 2.5 cm (centimeters—2.54)
1 foot = 0.3 m (meters—0.3048)
1 yard = 0.91 m (0.914)
1 mile = 1.6 km (kilometers—1.61)

Volume
1 cubic inch = 16 cm3 (16.39)
1 cubic foot = 0.028 m3 (0.02831)
1 cubic yard = 0.77 m3 (0.7645)
1 quart = 0.95 L (liter—0.9463)
1 gallon = 3.8 L (3.785)

Speed
foot/sec. = 0.3 m/s (0.3048)
miles/hour = 1.6 km/h (1.609)

Temperature
To convert °F (Fahrenheit) to °C (Celsius), subtract 32 and divide by 1.8.

Area
1 square inch = 6.5 cm2 (6.452)
1 square foot = 0.09 m2 (0.0929)
1 square yard = 0.84 m2 (0.836)
1 acre = 0.4 ha (hectares—0.405)

Mass
1 ounce = 28 gm (gram—28.34)
1 pound = 0.45 kg (kilograms—0.454)
1 ton = 900 kg (907)

Light
1 footcandle = 11 lux (lumens per m2—10.8)
1 footlambert = 3.4 cd/m2 (candelas per m2—3.426)

For other units refer to the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), 100 Barr Harbor Drive, West
Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, USA, Standard for Metric Practices E 380.
Julie M. Doyle, P.E., PTOE, Senior Transportation Engineer, Street Smarts, Inc.,
Duluth, GA, USA

Julie Doyle is Senior Transportation Engineer with over thirteen years of technical and
managerial experience gained through working in the private sector for national
consulting firms in Florida and Georgia, including over eleven years at Street Smarts.
She is a graduate of the Georgia Institute of Technology, where she received both her
Bachelor’s and Master’s Degrees in Civil Engineering. Her experience includes project
management and technical work for traffic impact studies, traffic signal warrant analyses,
development of regional impact analyses, trip generation studies, data collection projects,
corridor studies, access analyses, parking studies, pedestrian studies, traffic calming
studies, commercial vehicle studies, traffic engineering studies, traffic signal systems,
intelligent transportation systems analyses, and expert witness testimony.

She has worked on over 200 traffic impact studies during her career. In 2004, she
worked as an engineer to update the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) 3rd best-
selling publication, the Traffic Access and Impact Studies for Site Development, 1991
(TAISSD). The updated publication is called the Transportation Impact Analysis for Site
Development (TIASD). The TIASD incorporates new methodologies for assessing
transportation impact, including new analysis tools, changes in standards, and increased
emphasis on alternate modes of transportation and the development of measures of
effectiveness and means to evaluate them.
William Eugene Baumgaertner, P.E., Principal Traffic Engineer,
Street Smarts, Inc., Raleigh, NC, USA

Mr. Baumgaertner is a Program Manager, a Senior Project Manager, and a Principle Traffic
Engineer, with over thirty-five years of technical and managerial experience gained through
working in both the public and private sectors. He has worked for both state and county
government in Maryland, and for national consulting firms in North Carolina, Georgia,
Maryland, Virginia, Washington, DC, and Puerto Rico. Mr. Baumgaertner has a Bachelors of
Science in Civil Engineering and a Masters of Science in Traffic Engineering / Transportation
Planning from the University of Maryland. He is a Registered Professional Engineer in a
number of states, including North Carolina and Maryland. Mr. Baumgaertner is a Fellow of the
Institute of Transportation Engineers.

Mr. Baumgaertner has extensive experience in managing and performing traffic impact analyses
(TIA’s). He has actively participated in many hundreds of such studies. His experience ranges
from small, single-use sites, to large multi-use sites, and even multiple sites representing a loose
alliance or "club" of adjacent property owners/land developers. He has performed traffic impact
analysis for both private sector and public sector clients. The services that he provides such
clients not only includes technically correct studies and reports, but also includes consultation
and tactical planning, negotiation with review agencies and other outside parties, professional
presentations, and expert testimony in the re-zoning and subdivision review processes.

Mr. Baumgaertner has also performed many dozens of DRI TIA’s. In the greater Atlanta
Metropolitan Region, in some other areas of Georgia, and throughout Florida, large
developments must undergo special, more intensive scrutiny in order to be approved.
Developments of Regional Impact (DRI’s) prepared under the guidelines of the Georgia
Regional Transportation Authority (GRTA) typically require an extensive Traffic Impact
Analysis (with larger Study Areas, more detailed analyses, and more documentation), and other
supporting documentation.

In 2004, Mr. Baumgaertner was Project Manager of a project for the Institute of Transportation
Engineers to update and expand ITE’s Traffic Access and Impact Studies for Site Development,
an ITE Recommended Practice, and the third best-selling of all of ITE’s publications. This
project involved a literature review of some 75 documents, representing guidelines from U.S.
and Canadian states and provinces, regions, districts, MPO’s, counties and cities, to identify the
state-of-the-practice as it stood in 2004. The project also involved, with the help of a large and
keenly interested ITE Review Committee, updating the current Recommended Practice, and
adding sections related to the opportunities for use of simulation software, for multi-modal
analyses, and methods of mitigation (including Transportation Demand Management). The new
Recommended Practice is titled Transportation Impact Analysis for Site Development.