Traffic Addendum Letter
March 17, 2023
Tracy Bono, PE City Engineer City of Ammon
2135 South Ammon Road Ammon, Idaho 83406
Dear Tracy, The purpose of this letter is to propose some additional land and development to the Riviera Park Development. This development was part of the October 2022 Traffic Impact Study that included approximately 59 acres of residential and retail (approximately 2,030 feet of property fronting 25th E). Figure One shows the Conceptual Site Plan from the October 2022 TIS. This letter will address the potential to include another 13.3 acres of retail and office to the north of the property (approximately 420 feet more of frontage along 25th E for a total 2,450 feet of frontage). This letter is being completed as an addendum to the original study, solely for the purpose of addressing the traffic at the relocated Access A from the original study. Figure Two shows a schematic site plan that
includes the additional property. The additional property is bordered with a yellow line. The additional north property would include the following new land uses:
• Lot 1 – 4,900 Square Foot Office
• Lot 2 – 55,200 (27,600 Square Foot Office per Floor)
• Lot 3 – 57,400 (28,700 Square Foot Office per Floor)
• Lot 4 – 56,400 (28,200 Square Foot Office per Floor)
• Lot 5 - 16,320 Square Foot Office
• Lot 6 – Two Fast Food Pads (2,900 each)
The traffic counts and background projections for this addendum are based on the original TIS. Access A
is planned to be moved to be opposite 24th N. Traffic counts will be estimated for this existing leg of the intersection that services mostly industrial land uses. The proposed development will be the critical minor street in terms of highway capacity analysis, so estimates are acceptable for now. At some point, the original TIS will likely need to be updated in full to capture comments to the original and to address the updated site plan. Figure Three shows the 2037 background plus total site generated traffic from the original TIS (Figure Twelve). The northbound/southbound through movements will be used as 2037 background traffic for Access A in this addendum letter.
Figure Two Riviera Park Development - Addendum LetterConceptual Site Plan with Additional - March 2023
GFE
D
C
A
Figure Three Riviera Park Development - Addendum Letter
2037 PM Background Traffic from Fig. 12 of 10/22 TIS
(1134)
(1076)
A
(25)
(25)
(25)
(25)
Trip Generation The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation (Eleventh Edition) handbook was used to estimate trips for the addendum area land uses. For the purposes of this addendum letter the projected traffic will be added to the 2037 Background Traffic from the TIS. This buildout analysis will show if mitigation is needed at Access A. Primary Trips Primary trips represent those trips which are not already passing by the site. These trips could be
direct trips to the site from another location or diverted trips from other streets in the area. Pass-by Trips Pass-by trips were not considered in the addendum as they would have only affected the fast food restaurant trips and because they are only significant at other intersections where the traffic is already present. Therefore, it was not necessary to estimate pass-by traffic when considering only Access A. Internal Traffic With this diversity of development, there is a high likelihood that some internal traffic and trip duplication occurs. For example, trips from a fuel center to the restaurant should not be double counted, because they are internal to the site. ITE has found that in such developments, these internal
trips can reduce external traffic by as much as 40 percent. For this project, it was assumed that 20 percent of the trips are internal to the site. With the amount of additional development, particularly office space proposed, a final update of the original TIS might need to consider a higher internal
percentage. Tables One and Two show the Friday PM peak hour trips generated.
Riviera Park Development – North Property Addendum Letter Table One PM Peak Hour Trip Generation
Facility ITE Land Use
1,000 SF Trip Rate Trips Internal Trip %
External Trips
Lot 1 –
Med/Dental Office 720 4.9 3.93 19 20% 15
Lot 2 – Office 710 55.2 1.44 80 20% 64
*Lot 3 – Office 710 57.4 1.44 83 20% 66
*Lot 4 – Office 710 56.4 1.44 81 20% 65
Lot 5 – Med/Dental Office 720 16.32 3.93 64 20% 51
Lot 6 –
Fast Food w/ Drive 934 2.90 33.03 96 20% 77
Lot 6 – Fast Food w/ Drive 934 2.90 33.03 96 20% 77
**Apartments from Original TIS 220 245 0.51 125 20% 100
New Trips 519 415
Subtotal to use Access A 480 384
*Lots 3 and 4 are closer to Accesses C and D, so they are shown for total new trip generation purposes, but not for trips that utilize Access A. **Some of the Apartments from the original traffic study will also use Access A. It was estimated that 7 of the 11 apartment buildings are closer to Access A.
Riviera Park Development – North Property Addendum Letter Table Two PM Peak Hour Trip Generation
Facility External Trips PM In % PM Out %
Primary Inbound Trips
Primary Outbound Trips
Lot 1 – Med/Dental Office 15 30% 70% 5 10
Lot 2 – Office 64 17% 83% 11 53
*Lot 3 – Office 66 17% 83% 11 55
*Lot 4 – Office 65 17% 83% 11 54
Lot 5 – Med/Dental Office 51 30% 70% 15 36
Lot 6 – Fast Food w/ Drive 77 52% 48% 40 38
Lot 6 – Fast Food w/ Drive 77 52% 48% 40 38
**Apartments from
Original TIS 100 63% 37% 63 37
New Trips 415 133 284
Subtotal to use Access A 384 174 212
*Lots 3 and 4 are closer to Accesses C and D, so they are shown for total new trip generation purposes, but not for trips that utilize Access A. **Some of the Apartments from the original traffic study will also use Access A. It was estimated that 7 of the 11 apartment buildings are closer to Access A.
Tables Three and Four show the Saturday peak hour trips generated.
Riviera Park Development – North Property Addendum Letter Table Three Saturday Peak Hour Trip Generation
Facility ITE Land Use
1,000 SF Trip Rate Trips Internal Trip %
External Trips
Lot 1 – Med/Dental Office 720 4.9 3.02 15 20% 12
Lot 2 – Office 710 55.2 0.53 29 20% 23
*Lot 3 – Office 710 57.4 0.53 30 20% 24
*Lot 4 – Office 710 56.4 0.53 30 20% 24
Lot 5 – Med/Dental Office 720 16.32 3.02 49 20% 39
Lot 6 – Fast Food w/ Drive 934 2.90 55.25 160 20% 128
Lot 6 – Fast Food w/ Drive 934 2.90 55.25 160 20% 128
**Apartments from Original TIS 220 245 0.41 100 20% 80
New Trips 463 378
Subtotal to use Access
A 513 410
*Lots 3 and 4 are closer to Accesses C and D, so they are shown for total new trip generation purposes, but not for trips that utilize Access A. **Some of the Apartments from the original traffic study will also use Access A. It was estimated that 7 of the 11 apartment buildings are closer to Access A.
Riviera Park Development – North Property Addendum Letter Table Four Saturday Peak Hour Trip Generation
Facility External Trips Sat. In % Sat. Out %
Primary Inbound Trips
Primary Outbound Trips
Lot 1 – Med/Dental Office 12 57% 43% 7 5
Lot 2 – Office 23 54% 46% 12 11
*Lot 3 – Office 24 54% 46% 13 11
*Lot 4 – Office 24 54% 46% 13 11
Lot 5 – Med/Dental Office 39 57% 43% 22 17
Lot 6 – Fast Food w/ Drive 128 51% 49% 65 63
Lot 6 – Fast Food w/ Drive 128 51% 49% 65 63
**Apartments from
Original TIS 80 50% 50% 40 40
New Trips 378 197 181
Subtotal to use Access A 410 211 199
*Lots 3 and 4 are closer to Accesses C and D, so they are shown for total new trip generation purposes, but not for trips that utilize Access A. **Some of the Apartments from the original traffic study will also use Access A. It was estimated that 7 of the 11 apartment buildings are closer to Access A.
Origin/Destination and Trip Distribution Assumptions
Primary Trips The PM peak hour was used as comparisons and to analyze mitigation in the original traffic impact study.
This was because the Saturday peak did not have as much pass-by data and there would be pass-by traffic that wasn’t being properly accounted. Similarly, this addendum will only consider the PM Peak Hour. It is felt that the Saturday peak may be overstated as most of the office space will be closed.
Origin/Destination assumptions are shown below. As this part of the development is nearing the halfway point between Lincoln Road and Iona Road, some of the eastbound and westbound traffic was assumed to go north first to Iona Road:
• South – 65% o Direction at 25th E and Lincoln
West - 20%
South - 15%
East – 30%
• North – 35% o Direction at 25th E and Iona
North – 15%
East – 10%
West – 10%
Figure Four shows the projected site generated traffic from the addendum at Access A. Figure Five shows the projected site generated from the addendum plus the 2037 northbound/southbound through movements from the original TIS Figure Eleven (Figure Four plus Figure Three from this addendum). It should be noted in Figure Four and Five that the access C and D will align with the existing access. The schematic site shown in the exhibit does not have them aligning.
Figure Four Riviera Park Development - Addendum Letter
Site Generated from the Addendum to Access A
(138)
(74)
(61)
(113)
A
Figure Five Riviera Park Development - Addendum Letter
Site Generated from the Addendum Plus 2037 Background
(138)
(74)
(61)
(1134)
(113)
(1076)
A
(25)
(25)
(25)
(25)
Table Five shows the Delay / LOS Evaluation for the 25th East and Access A. This access was analyzed as
a full access.
Riviera Park Development – North Property Addendum Letter Table Five Peak Period Intersection Analysis – 25th East and Access A Delay/LOS Evaluation Delay / LOS (in sec) PM 2037 Site Generated Addendum Plus Background from Original Study – Stop Controlled
PM 2037 Site Generated Addendum Plus Background from Original Study – Roundabout Controlled
EB Left */F 11.1/B
EB Right 13.9/B N/A
WB Left */F 15.7/C
WB Right 15.5/C N/A
NB Left 11.7/B 8.4/A
SB Left 12.5/B 9.7/A
*This indicates that delay is greater than 100 seconds. At this level, the delay calculation becomes unstable and comparisons are not valid. The above table shows that the proposed additional development would create too much additional traffic for Access A if it were stop controlled only. Therefore, the analysis was repeated with the assumption that the mitigation would be a roundabout similar to Access D in the original TIS. A roundabout would operate at acceptable levels-of-service. This would also be true for projected Saturday traffic. The
roundabout mitigation also makes the actual counts at 24th N (opposite Access A) inconsequential as the roundabout has plenty of excess capacity and 24th N will not generate more traffic with the current level of development. The analysis shows that queues with the roundabout are less than one car length, so there are not queuing issues with the roundabout.
Access Management Discussion Access spacing requirements are based on the Bonneville Metropolitan Planning Organization (BMPO) Access Management Plan. Both 25th East and Lincoln Road are considered Principal Arterials in this plan. For Principal Arterials, Signalized Intersection Spacing (or roundabouts) was suggested to be at least
1,760 feet apart. Access A would be approximately 1700 feet from Access D and approximately 2,960 feet from Iona Road. While the spacing for Access A is just short of the standard, it should be considered as it is necessary to support the development in this area.
Conclusions/Recommendations The above addendum letter shows that with the proposed additional development that a roundabout would be required as mitigation at Access A. With the roundabout, the development would have more than enough traffic capacity. With the mitigation proposed in the original TIS, there was additional capacity at the other intersections in the study. It is recommended that this parcel can be approved for zoning and that as the development
plans become more solid that the original TIS is updated to reflect the final plans for the center.
3/20/23
Land Use: 220
Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise)
Description
Low-rise multifamily housing includes apartments, townhouses, and condominiums located within
the same building with at least three other dwelling units and that have two or three floors (levels).
Various configurations fit this description, including walkup apartment, mansion apartment, and
stacked townhouse.
• A walkup apartment typically is two or three floors in height with dwelling units that are accessed
by a single or multiple entrances with stairways and hallways.
• A mansion apartment is a single structure that contains several apartments within what appears
to be a single-family dwelling unit.
• A fourplex is a single two-story structure with two matching dwelling units on the ground and
second floors. Access to the individual units is typically internal to the structure and provided
through a central entry and stairway.
• A stacked townhouse is designed to match the external appearance of a townhouse. But, unlike
a townhouse dwelling unit that only shares walls with an adjoining unit, the stacked townhouse
units share both floors and walls. Access to the individual units is typically internal to the
structure and provided through a central entry and stairway.
Multifamily housing (mid-rise) (Land Use 221), multifamily housing (high-rise) (Land Use 222),
affordable housing (Land Use 223), and off-campus student apartment (low-rise) (Land Use 225)
are related land uses.
Land Use Subcategory
Data are presented for two subcategories for this land use: (1) not close to rail transit and (2)
close to rail transit. A site is considered close to rail transit if the walking distance between the
residential site entrance and the closest rail transit station entrance is ½ mile or less.
Additional Data
For the three sites for which both the number of residents and the number of occupied dwelling
units were available, there were an average of 2.72 residents per occupied dwelling unit.
For the two sites for which the numbers of both total dwelling units and occupied dwelling units
were available, an average of 96.2 percent of the total dwelling units were occupied.
The technical appendices provide supporting information on time-of-day distributions for this
land use. The appendices can be accessed through either the ITETripGen web app or the trip
252 Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition • Volume 3
generation resource page on the ITE website (https://www.ite.org/technical-resources/topics/trip-
and-parking-generation/).
For the three sites for which data were provided for both occupied dwelling units and residents,
there was an average of 2.72 residents per occupied dwelling unit.
It is expected that the number of bedrooms and number of residents are likely correlated to the
trips generated by a residential site. To assist in future analysis, trip generation studies of all
multifamily housing should attempt to obtain information on occupancy rate and on the mix of
residential unit sizes (i.e., number of units by number of bedrooms at the site complex).
The sites were surveyed in the 1980s, the 1990s, the 2000s, the 2010s, and the 2020s in British
Columbia (CAN), California, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Maine, Maryland,
Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, Ontario (CAN), Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina,
South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, and Washington.
Source Numbers
188, 204, 237, 300, 305, 306, 320, 321, 357, 390, 412, 525, 530, 579, 583, 638, 864, 866, 896, 901,
903, 904, 936, 939, 944, 946, 947, 948, 963, 964, 966, 967, 1012, 1013, 1014, 1036, 1047, 1056,
1071, 1076
253General Urban/Suburban and Rural (Land Uses 000–399)
Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise)Not Close to Rail Transit (220)
Vehicle Trip Ends vs:Dwelling Units
On a:Weekday,
Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,
One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m.
Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban
Number of Studies:59
Avg.Num.of Dwelling Units:241
Directional Distribution:63%entering,37%exiting
Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
0.51 0.08 -1.04 0.15
Data Plot and Equation
0 1000 20000
100
200
300
400
500
Average RateStudySiteFittedCurve
Fitted Curve Equation:T =0.43(X)+20.55 R²=0.84
X =Number of Dwelling UnitsT = Trips Ends256 Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition • Volume 3
Multifamily Housing (Low-Rise)Not Close to Rail Transit (220)
Vehicle Trip Ends vs:Dwelling Units
On a:Saturday,Peak Hour of Generator
Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban
Number of Studies:1
Avg.Num.of Dwelling Units:282
Directional Distribution:Not Available
Vehicle Trip Generation per Dwelling Unit
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
0.41 0.41 -0.41 ***
Data Plot and Equation Caution –Small Sample Size
0 100 200 3000
100
200
Average RateStudySite
Fitted Curve Equation:Not Given R²=***
X =Number of Dwelling UnitsT = Trips Ends260 Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition • Volume 3
707
Land Use: 710
General Office Building
Description
A general office building is a location where affairs of businesses, commercial or industrial
organizations, or professional persons or firms are conducted. An office building houses multiple
tenants that can include, as examples, professional services, insurance companies, investment
brokers, a banking institution, a restaurant, or other service retailers. A general office building
with a gross floor area of 10,000 square feet or less is classified as a small office building (Land
Use 712). Corporate headquarters building (Land Use 714), single tenant office building (Land
Use 715), medical-dental office building (Land Use 720), office park (Land Use 750), research and
development center (Land Use 760), and business park (Land Use 770) are additional related uses.
Additional Data
If two or more general office buildings are in close physical proximity (within a close walk) and
function as a unit (perhaps with a shared parking facility and common or complementary tenants),
the total gross floor area or employment of the paired office buildings can be used for calculating
the site trip generation. If the individual buildings are isolated or not functionally related to one
another, trip generation should be calculated for each building separately.
For study sites with reported gross floor area and employees, an average employee density of
3.3 employees per 1,000 square feet GFA (or roughly 300 square feet per employee) has been
consistent through the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s. No sites counted in the 2010s reported both GFA
and employees.
The average building occupancy varies considerably within the studies for which occupancy data
were provided. The reported occupied gross floor area was 88 percent for general urban/suburban
sites and 96 percent for the center city core and dense multi-use urban sites.
The technical appendices provide supporting information on time-of-day distributions for this
land use. The appendices can be accessed through either the ITETripGen web app or the trip
generation resource page on the ITE website (https://www.ite.org/technical-resources/topics/trip-
and-parking-generation/).
The average numbers of person trips per vehicle trip at the eight center city core sites at which
both person trip and vehicle trip data were collected are as follows:
• 2.8 during Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, one hour between 7 and 9 a.m.
• 2.9 during Weekday, AM Peak Hour of Generator
• 2.9 during Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, one hour between 4 and 6 p.m.
• 3.0 during Weekday, PM Peak Hour of Generator
General Urban/Suburban and Rural (Land Uses 400–799)
The average numbers of person trips per vehicle trip at the 18 dense multi-use urban sites at
which both person trip and vehicle trip data were collected are as follows:
• 1.5 during Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, one hour between 7 and 9 a.m.
• 1.5 during Weekday, AM Peak Hour of Generator
• 1.5 during Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, one hour between 4 and 6 p.m.
• 1.5 during Weekday, PM Peak Hour of Generator
The average numbers of person trips per vehicle trip at the 23 general urban/suburban sites at
which both person trip and vehicle trip data were collected are as follows:
• 1.3 during Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, one hour between 7 and 9 a.m.
• 1.3 during Weekday, AM Peak Hour of Generator
• 1.3 during Weekday, Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, one hour between 4 and 6 p.m.
• 1.4 during Weekday, PM Peak Hour of Generator
The sites were surveyed in the 1980s, the 1990s, the 2000s, the 2010s, and the 2020s in Alberta
(CAN), California, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine,
Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York,
Ontario (CAN)Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and Washington.
Source Numbers
161, 175, 183, 184, 185, 207, 212, 217, 247, 253, 257, 260, 262, 273, 279, 297, 298, 300, 301, 302,
303, 304, 321, 322, 323, 324, 327, 404, 407, 408, 419, 423, 562, 734, 850, 859, 862, 867, 869, 883,
884, 890, 891, 904, 940, 944, 946, 964, 965, 972, 1009, 1030, 1058, 1061
708 Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition • Volume 4
General Office Building(710)
Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq.Ft.GFA
On a:Weekday,
Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,
One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m.
Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban
Number of Studies:232
Avg.1000 Sq.Ft.GFA:199
Directional Distribution:17%entering,83%exiting
Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq.Ft.GFA
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
1.44 0.26 -6.20 0.60
Data Plot and Equation
0 1000 20000
1000
2000
Average RateStudySiteFittedCurve
Fitted Curve Equation:Ln(T)=0.83 Ln(X)+1.29 R²=0.77
X =1000 Sq.Ft.GFAT = Trips Ends711General Urban/Suburban and Rural (Land Uses 400–799)
General Office Building(710)
Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq.Ft.GFA
On a:Saturday,Peak Hour of Generator
Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban
Number of Studies:3
Avg.1000 Sq.Ft.GFA:82
Directional Distribution:54%entering,46%exiting
Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq.Ft.GFA
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
0.53 0.30 -1.57 0.52
Data Plot and Equation
0 100 2000
20
40
60
Average RateStudySite
Fitted Curve Equation:Not Given R²=***
X =1000 Sq.Ft.GFAT = Trips Ends713General Urban/Suburban and Rural (Land Uses 400–799)
Land Use: 720
Medical-Dental Office Building
Description
A medical-dental office building is a facility that provides diagnoses and outpatient care on a
routine basis but is unable to provide prolonged in-house medical and surgical care. One or more
private physicians or dentists generally operate this type of facility. General office building (Land
Use 710) and clinic (Land Use 630) are related uses.
Land Use Subcategory
Analysis of medical-dental office building data found that trip generation rates are measurably
different for sites located within or adjacent to a hospital campus and sites that are stand-alone.
Data plots are presented for these two land use subcategories.
Additional Data
The technical appendices provide supporting information on time-of-day distributions for this
land use. The appendices can be accessed through either the ITETripGen web app or the trip
generation resource page on the ITE website (https://www.ite.org/technical-resources/topics/trip-
and-parking-generation/).
The sites were surveyed in the 1980s, the 1990s, the 2000s, and the 2010s in Alberta (CAN),
California, Connecticut, Kentucky, Maryland, Minnesota, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Oregon,
Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin.
Source Numbers
104, 109, 120, 157, 184, 209, 211, 253, 287, 294, 295, 304, 357, 384, 404, 407, 423, 444, 509, 601,
715, 867, 879, 901, 902, 908, 959, 972
760 Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition • Volume 4
Medical-Dental Office Building -Stand-Alone(720)
Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq.Ft.GFA
On a:Weekday,
Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,
One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m.
Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban
Number of Studies:30
Avg.1000 Sq.Ft.GFA:23
Directional Distribution:30%entering,70%exiting
Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq.Ft.GFA
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
3.93 0.62 -8.86 1.86
Data Plot and Equation
0 20 40 60 80 1000
200
400
600
Average RateStudySiteFittedCurve
Fitted Curve Equation:T =4.07(X)-3.17 R²=0.77
X =1000 Sq.Ft.GFAT = Trips Ends763General Urban/Suburban and Rural (Land Uses 400–799)
Medical-Dental Office Building -Stand-Alone(720)
Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq.Ft.GFA
On a:Saturday,Peak Hour of Generator
Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban
Number of Studies:2
Avg.1000 Sq.Ft.GFA:34
Directional Distribution:57%entering,43%exiting
Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq.Ft.GFA
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
3.02 1.33 -4.02 ***
Data Plot and Equation Caution –Small Sample Size
0 10 20 30 40 500
100
200
Average RateStudySite
Fitted Curve Equation:Not Given R²=***
X =1000 Sq.Ft.GFAT = Trips Ends767General Urban/Suburban and Rural (Land Uses 400–799)
Land Use: 934
Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window
Description
This land use includes any fast-food restaurant with a drive-through window. This type of
restaurant is characterized by a large drive-through and large carry-out clientele, long hours of
service (some are open for breakfast, all are open for lunch and dinner, some are open late at
night or 24 hours a day) and high turnover rates for eat-in customers. The restaurant does not
provide table service. A patron generally orders from a menu board and pays before receiving the
meal. A typical duration of stay for an eat-in patron is less than 30 minutes. Fast casual restaurant
(Land Use 930), high-turnover (sit-down) restaurant (Land Use 932), fast-food restaurant without
drive-through window (Land Use 933), and fast-food restaurant with drive-through window and no
indoor seating (Land Use 935) are related uses.
Additional Data
Users should exercise caution when applying statistics during the AM peak periods, as the sites
contained in the database for this land use may or may not be open for breakfast. In cases where
it was confirmed that the sites were not open for breakfast, data for the AM peak hour of the
adjacent street traffic were removed from the database.
If the restaurant has outdoor seating, its area is not included in the overall gross floor area. For
a restaurant that has significant outdoor seating, the number of seats may be more reliable than
GFA as an independent variable on which to establish a trip generation rate.
The technical appendices provide supporting information on time-of-day distributions for this
land use. The appendices can be accessed through either the ITETripGen web app or the trip
generation resource page on the ITE website (https://www.ite.org/technical-resources/topics/trip-
and-parking-generation/).
The sites were surveyed in the 1980s, the 1990s, the 2000s, and the 2010s in Alaska, Alberta
(CAN), California, Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota,
Montana, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South
Dakota, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin.
Source Numbers
163, 164, 168, 180, 181, 241, 245, 278, 294, 300, 301, 319, 338, 340, 342, 358, 389, 438, 502, 552,
577, 583, 584, 617, 640, 641, 704, 715, 728, 810, 866, 867, 869, 885, 886, 927, 935, 962, 977, 1050,
1053, 1054
724 Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition • Volume 5
Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window(934)
Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq.Ft.GFA
On a:Weekday,
Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,
One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m.
Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban
Number of Studies:190
Avg.1000 Sq.Ft.GFA:3
Directional Distribution:52%entering,48%exiting
Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq.Ft.GFA
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
33.03 8.77 -117.22 17.59
Data Plot and Equation
0 2 4 6 8 100
100
200
300
400
Average RateStudySite
Fitted Curve Equation:Not Given R²=***
X =1000 Sq.Ft.GFAT = Trips Ends727General Urban/Suburban and Rural (Land Uses 800–999)
Fast-Food Restaurant with Drive-Through Window(934)
Vehicle Trip Ends vs:1000 Sq.Ft.GFA
On a:Saturday,Peak Hour of Generator
Setting/Location:General Urban/Suburban
Number of Studies:53
Avg.1000 Sq.Ft.GFA:4
Directional Distribution:51%entering,49%exiting
Vehicle Trip Generation per 1000 Sq.Ft.GFA
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
55.25 11.25 -122.92 24.62
Data Plot and Equation
0 2 4 6 80
100
200
300
400
Average RateStudySite
Fitted Curve Equation:Not Given R²=***
X =1000 Sq.Ft.GFAT = Trips Ends731General Urban/Suburban and Rural (Land Uses 800–999)
HCM 6th TWSC
30: 25th East & Access A 03/19/2023
Mitigation 2032 PM with Site Traffic 9:00 pm 02/28/2022 Baseline Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 107.9
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 25 0 25 138 0 74 25 1076 113 61 1134 25
Future Vol, veh/h 25 0 25 138 0 74 25 1076 113 61 1134 25
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 100 - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 94 92 94 92 94 94 94 94 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 27 0 27 147 0 79 27 1145 120 65 1206 27
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 1977 2669 617 1992 2622 633 1233 0 0 1265 0 0
Stage 1 1350 1350 - 1259 1259 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 627 1319 - 733 1363 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 7.54 6.54 6.94 7.54 6.54 6.94 4.14 - - 4.14 - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.54 5.54 - 6.54 5.54 - - - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.52 4.02 3.32 3.52 4.02 3.32 2.22 - - 2.22 - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 37 22 433 ~ 36 24 422 561 - - 545 - -
Stage 1 159 217 - 181 240 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 438 225 - 378 214 - - - - - - -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver ~ 26 18 433 ~ 30 20 422 561 - - 545 - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver ~ 26 18 - ~ 30 20 - - - - - - -
Stage 1 151 191 - 172 228 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 339 214 - 312 189 - - - - - - -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 211.5 $ 1318.2 0.2 0.6
HCM LOS F F
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1 EBLn2WBLn1WBLn2 SBL SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 561 - - 26 433 30 422 545 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.048 - - 1.045 0.063 4.894 0.187 0.119 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 11.7 - - $ 409 13.9$ 2016.8 15.5 12.5 - -
HCM Lane LOS B - - F B F C B - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.2 - - 3.3 0.2 17.7 0.7 0.4 - -
Notes
~: Volume exceeds capacity $: Delay exceeds 300s +: Computation Not Defined *: All major volume in platoon
HCM 6th Roundabout
30: 25th East & Access A 03/19/2023
Mitigation 2032 PM with Site Traffic 9:00 pm 02/28/2022 Baseline Synchro 11 Report
Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 9.7
Intersection LOS A
Approach EB WB NB SB
Entry Lanes 1 1 2 2
Conflicting Circle Lanes 2 2 2 2
Adj Approach Flow, veh/h 54 226 1292 1298
Demand Flow Rate, veh/h 56 231 1318 1324
Vehicles Circulating, veh/h 1446 1224 94 178
Vehicles Exiting, veh/h 56 188 1408 1277
Ped Vol Crossing Leg, #/h 0 0 0 0
Ped Cap Adj 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000
Approach Delay, s/veh 11.1 15.7 8.5 9.8
Approach LOS B C A A
Lane Left Left Left Right Left Right
Designated Moves LTR LTR LT TR LT TR
Assumed Moves LTR LTR LT TR LT TR
RT Channelized
Lane Util 1.000 1.000 0.470 0.530 0.470 0.530
Follow-Up Headway, s 2.535 2.535 2.667 2.535 2.667 2.535
Critical Headway, s 4.328 4.328 4.645 4.328 4.645 4.328
Entry Flow, veh/h 56 231 619 699 622 702
Cap Entry Lane, veh/h 415 502 1238 1311 1146 1221
Entry HV Adj Factor 0.964 0.978 0.981 0.980 0.981 0.980
Flow Entry, veh/h 54 226 607 685 610 688
Cap Entry, veh/h 401 491 1215 1284 1124 1196
V/C Ratio 0.135 0.460 0.500 0.533 0.543 0.575
Control Delay, s/veh 11.1 15.7 8.4 8.6 9.7 9.9
LOS B C A A A A
95th %tile Queue, veh 0 2 3 3 3 4