2017Landscape and Urban PlanningOpen access

Trip and parking generation at transit-oriented developments: Five US case studies

Reid Ewing, Guang Tian, Torrey Lyons, Kathryn Terzano

Open full text 94 citations

Abstract

Guidelines for trip and parking generation in the United States come mainly from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). However, their trip and parking manuals focus on suburban locations with limited transit and pedestrian access. This study aims to determine how many fewer vehicle trips are generated at transit-oriented developments (TODs), and how much less parking is required at TODs, than ITE guidelines would suggest. Our sample of TODs is small, which limits our ability to generalize. However, the five cases selected for this study are more or less exemplary of the D variables, at least in comparison with US norms. They are characterized by land-use diversity and pedestrian-friendly designs. They minimize distance to transit, literally abutting transit stations. They have varying measures of destination accessibility to the rest of the region via transit. Three have progressive parking policies, which fall under the heading of demand management. Two have high residential densities, and one has a high intensity of commercial development. Simply put, our case study TODs create significantly less demand for parking and driving than do conventional suburban developments. With one exception, peak parking demand in these TODs is less than one half the parking supply guideline in the ITE Parking Generation manual. Also, with one exception, vehicle trip generation rates are about half or less of what is predicted in the ITE Trip Generation Manual. Automobile mode shares are as low as one quarter of all trips, with the remainder being mostly transit and walk trips.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Guidelines for trip and parking generation in the United States come mainly from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). However, their trip and parking manuals focus on suburban locations with limited transit and pedestrian access. This study aims to determine how many fewer vehicle trips are generated at transit-oriented developments (TODs), and how much less parking is required at TODs, than ITE guidelines would suggest. Our sample of TODs is small, which limits our ability to generalize. However, the five cases selected for this study are more or less exemplary of the D variables, at least in comparison with US norms. They are characterized by land-use diversity and pedestrian-friendly designs. They minimize distance to transit, literally abutting transit stations. They have varying measures of destination accessibility to the rest of the region via transit. Three have progressive parking policies, which fall under the heading of demand management. Two have high residential densities, and one has a high intensity of commercial development. Simply put, our case study TODs create significantly less demand for parking and driving than do conventional suburban developments. With one exception, peak parking demand in these TODs is less than one half the parking supply guideline in the ITE Parking Generation manual. Also, with one exception, vehicle trip generation rates are about half or less of what is predicted in the ITE Trip Generation Manual. Automobile mode shares are as low as one quarter of all trips, with the remainder being mostly transit and walk trips.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 94 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Guidelines for trip and parking generation in the United States come mainly from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). However, their trip and parking manuals focus on suburban locations with limited transit and pedestrian access. This study aims to determine how many fewer vehicle trips are generated at transit-oriented developments (TODs), and how much less parking is required at TODs, than ITE guidelines would suggest. Our sample of TODs is small, which limits our ability to generalize. However, the five cases selected for this study are more or less exemplary of the D variables, at least in comparison with US norms. They are characterized by land-use diversity and pedestrian-friendly designs. They minimize distance to transit, literally abutting transit stations. They have varying measures of destination accessibility to the rest of the region via transit. Three have progressive parking policies, which fall under the heading of demand management. Two have high residential densities, and one has a high intensity of commercial development. Simply put, our case study TODs create significantly less demand for parking and driving than do conventional suburban developments. With one exception, peak parking demand in these TODs is less than one half the parking supply guideline in the ITE Parking Generation manual. Also, with one exception, vehicle trip generation rates are about half or less of what is predicted in the ITE Trip Generation Manual. Automobile mode shares are as low as one quarter of all trips, with the remainder being mostly transit and walk trips.

Key concepts: Transport engineering, Trip generation, TRIPS architecture, Pedestrian, Transit (satellite), Transit-oriented development, Business, Public transport

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Trip and parking generation at transit-oriented developments: Five US case studies — Research Paper | ScholarLens