Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZoning Analysis 0 Aspen Heights College Station Zoning Traffic Impact Analysis Trip Generation Addendum Submitted: March 2015 Prepared by: .. �k....OF tE a Bleyl & Associates .0- 5•'' sl , 1722 Broadmoor, Suite 210 % • * $ Bryan, Texas 77802 DAVID L. BESLY i Tel. (979) 268-1125 i , ii y 81873 e• 0 Bleyl & Associates Job Number: 11505 �4°,F•l%FNSE9••'��`�r Firm No. 678 ,k+t'o....... A�ti�Q�n I 3/19 /a©i5- Aspen Heights College Station Zoning Traffic Impact Analysis Trip Generation Addendum AUTHORIZATION Bleyl & Associates has prepared this report under the terms of a private agreement executed between Aspen Heights and Bleyl & Associates. PURPOSE OF ADDENDUM This Addendum was prepared to compare the effect of alternate trip generation methods on the results of the analysis as requested by the City of College Station. This addendum compare trip generation and distribution for the proposed site using ITE Land Use 220 on a per dwelling unit basis, ITE Land Use 220 on a per person basis, and ITE Land Use 220 on a per person basis with a 30% reduction for provision of Transit service either from the Texas A&M Bus system or a private service provided by the Developer. IMPACT DETERMINATION PROPOSED TRIP GENERATION Trip generation for the proposed development was prepared based in accordance with the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition as shown in Table 1 below. Table 1: Proposed Trip Generation Land Use 220-Apartment ITE Trip Generation, 9th Edition Dwelling Units 233 Trips Average l Period Rate Average Fitted Entering Exiting Average Weekday 6.65 1550 1540 775 775 AM Peak Hour 0.51 120 120 24 96 PM Peak Hour 0.62 140 150 98 52 Calculations were performed for both the average rate and the fitted curve given in the manual and rounded up to the nearest 10 trips. The higher of the two methods was then used to determine the number of entering and existing trips from the development. At the request of the City of College Station, trip generation was also calculated using the independent variable of persons. To determine the number of persons in the development, we made the assumption that each bedroom had one occupant, which is common for student housing developments in the area. The result of the alternate trip generation is shown in Table 2. Bled &Associates F-678 PAGE 1 OF 3 Aspen Heights College Station Zoning Traffic Impact Analysis Trip Generation Addendum Table 2: Alternate Trip Generation Land Use 220-Apartment ITE Trip Generation, 9th Edition Persons (bedrooms) 797 Trips } C — - Average gEntering 9 Period Rate Average Fitted Exitin Average Weekday 3.31 2640 2700 1350 1350 AM Peak Hour 0.28 220 220 106 114 PM Peak Hour 0.40 F 320 310 189 131 The project Developer has been in discussion with Texas A&M University to extend the Cotton Bowl bus service which currently terminates at Holleman and Market Street to the proposed project approximately '/2 mile south on Holleman. In addition, the developer has, in previous developments, offered residents regularly scheduled shuttle service and intends to provide this option if an agreement with Texas A&M cannot be reached. Generally accepted values indicate an approximately 30% reduction in peak hour trips for developments serviced by regularly scheduled transit routes, Table 3 shows the alternate trip generation with a reduction for transit service Table 3: Alternate Trip Generation,with a reduction for transit Land Use 220-Apartment ITE Trip Generation, 9th Edition Persons (bedrooms) 797 Trips Period Average Average Fitted Entering Exiting Rate AM Peak Hour 0.20 160 160 77 83 PM Peak Hour 0.28 230 230 136 94 EXISTING TRIP GENERATION As a rural property being used for agricultural purposes, the existing property has an essentially zero existing trip generation. Bley1 & Associates F-678 PAGE 2 OF 3 Aspen Heights College Station Zoning Traffic Impact Analysis Trip Generation Addendum NET INCREASED TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT With an existing trip generation of zero the net increased trip generation is the same as that shown in Tables 1 - 3. Once the trip generation from the site is determined, these trips were distributed to the existing and proposed street network based on the traffic counts conducted in the field in 2014 and 2015 and engineering judgment. The result of the proposed trip distribution is shown in Table 4 below. Table 4: Proposed Trip Distribution Distribution Location I Direction AM Peak PM Peak FM 2818/East 35% 35% FM 2818/West 35% 35% Holleman Dr./North 10% 10% Holleman Dr. /South 15% 15% Dowling Rd. /South 5% 5% Table 5 summarizes the trips using the FM 2818 intersection with Holleman for each trip generation scenario. Table 5: Site Trips at Holleman and FM 2818 Site Background Adjacent %of peak I Trip Generation Trips Trips Site Trips Total Trips Hour Trips Per Dwelling Unit—AM 91 3525 344 J 3950 2.30% Per Dwelling Unit—PM 117 3941 377 4435 2.64% Per Person—AM 171 3525 344 4040 4.23% Per Person—PM 250 3941 377 4568 5.47% Per Person 123 3525 344 3992 3.08% with Transit-AM Per Person l with Transit-PM 180 3941 377 4498 4.00% As can be seen from Table 5, while the alternate trip generation does result in an increase in the number of trips using the Holleman at FM 2818 Intersection, the AM peak hour is less than 5% of the intersection trips, while in the PM peak hour the alternate trip generation is 5.47% of the intersection trips but the modification for bus service reduces this to 4.00% of the intersection trips. Bleyl & Associates F-678 PAGE 3 OF 3