Borrowing Residential Trip Generation Rates
Publication: Journal of Transportation Engineering
Volume 132, Issue 2
Abstract
Residential trip generation rates are a fundamental component of transportation planning. To investigate discrepancies in these rates, residential trip generation rates for nine suburban neighborhoods were computed using four different methods: (1) ground counts conducted at the neighborhoods, (2) household surveys distributed to the neighborhoods, (3) application of national trip generation rates published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), and (4) rates derived from the trip generation component of regional urban travel demand models for the neighborhoods. Agencies generally use one of these rates, and by determining all four for the same set of neighborhoods in a controlled study, one can ascertain the extent to which these rates are likely transferable. Rates based on the first three methods were not significantly different. For developments composed solely of single-family detached homes, the average residential trip generation rate was 10.8 based on the site-specific ground counts, 9.2 based on site-specific household surveys, and 9.6 based on ITE’s trip generation rates. However, rates based on the fourth method were significantly different, with a mean rate of 6.4. The greatest differences occurred when the long-range regional model used person trips that were converted to vehicle trips rather than estimating vehicle trips directly. Although the summary statistics presented in this paper will not surprise transportation planners, they illustrate two caveats for balancing data collection costs and need for site-specific information. First, a subtle change in how some rates are calculated limits their utility elsewhere. Second, even when equivalent methods for determining rates are used for similar neighborhoods, differences will occur because of the large and random variation inherent in trip generation. Borrowing rates may indeed be tolerable, but only if one gives the full range of rates possible from this probabilistic process rather than just the expected mean rate. Both caveats are treatable provided they are explicitly addressed through uncertainty analysis or adjustments for expected bias.
Get full access to this article
View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.
Acknowledgments
The writers are grateful to the many persons who provided assistance with this paper and the study upon which it draws: J. Wade of the Albemarle County Planning Department; T. Vest of the City of Charlottesville Planning Department; F. Khaja of the Fairfax County Department of Planning; C. Draper of the Loudoun County Planning Department; E. Azimi, U. Bellinger, C. Bilinski, D. Claud, E. Stringfield, and W. Mann of the Virginia Department of Transportation; K. Tew, R. Pierce, and R. Moore of the Hampton Roads Planning District Commission; and L. Evans, J. Fang, O. Hijaz, E. Johnson, J. Labrie, S. Martin, K. Mossman, K. Peacock, K. Spence, D. Thomas, J. Van Doren, and L. Woodson of the Virginia Transportation Research Council.
References
Berry, F. R. (2003). “Letters to the Editor.” ITE J., 10.
Federal Highway Administration (FHwA). (2002). “NHI Course No. 152054: Introduction to urban travel demand forecasting.” Publication No. FHWA-NHI-02-040, FHwA, Washington, D.C., 5–25.
Horowitz, A. J. (1990). “Subarea focusing with combined models of spatial interaction and equilibrium assignment.” Transportation Research Record 1285. Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1–8.
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). (1992). Transportation planning handbook, J. Edwards, ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J.
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). (1997). Trip generation handbook, 6th Ed., ITE, Washington, D.C.
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). (2001). Trip generation handbook, ITE, Washington, D.C.
Kumar, A., and Levinson, D. (1993). “Specifying, estimating, and validating a new trip generation model: Case study in Montgomery County, Maryland.” Transportation Research Record 1413, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 107–113.
Montgomery, D. C. (2001). Introduction to statistical quality control, 4th Ed., Wiley, New York.
Reid, F. A. (1982). “Critique of ITE trip generation rates and an alternative basis for estimating new area traffic.” Transportation Research Record 874, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 1–5.
Transportation Research Board (TRB). (2000). Highway capacity manual, National Research Council, Washington, D.C.
Ulmer, J. M., Goswami, A. K., Miller, J. S., and Hoel, L. A. (2003). Residential trip generation: Ground counts versus surveys, Virginia Transportation Research Council, Charlottesville, Va.
Winslow, K. B., Bladikas, B. K., Hausman, K. J., and Spasovic, L. N. (1995). “Introduction of information feedback loop to enhance urban transportation modeling system.” Transportation Research Record 1493, Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 81–90.
Information & Authors
Information
Published In
Journal of Transportation Engineering
Volume 132 • Issue 2 • February 2006
Pages: 105 - 113
Copyright
© 2006 ASCE.
History
Received: Jul 19, 2004
Accepted: Jun 20, 2005
Published online: Feb 1, 2006
Published in print: Feb 2006
Authors
Metrics & Citations
Metrics
Citations
Download citation
If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.