|
<br />.
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />General Observations
<br />
<br />Overall, the Coalition growth scenario shows a more effi-
<br />cient pattern of tripmaking which is evidenced by the de-
<br />crease in trips per capita for all trip types. Findings that fur-
<br />ther support this conclusion are summarized below.
<br />
<br />Trip Generation
<br />. In the Coalition growth scenario, trips made within the sub-
<br />region grow at roughly twice the rate of total trip growth.
<br />This finding indicates that mixed-use centers have a posi-
<br />tive impact on trip capture and may form the basis for new
<br />and enhanced transit service strategies within the Coali-
<br />tion.
<br />
<br />. While the Coalition growth scenario generates more trips
<br />because of higher densities, new trip production is occur-
<br />ring at a slower overall rate of growth than under the con-
<br />ventional scenario.
<br />
<br />Mode Choice
<br />. There is a 23% to 33% increase in transit trips over the
<br />conventional scenario in both 2.5b and 2.5c. This increase
<br />is likely due to a 10 percent increase in the number of
<br />dwelling units within a short walk (1/3 mile) to transit
<br />and the enhanced transit service of Coalition Growth
<br />Scenario 2.5c. Mixed-use centers contribute to the in-
<br />crease in dwelling units near roadway networks.
<br />
<br />Vehicle Miles Traveled and Average Trip Length
<br />. The Coalition growth scenario shows increased use of arte-
<br />rials and collectors over the conventional scenario. This in-
<br />creased use is consistent with the increase in trips internal
<br />to the subregion and with increased connectivity provided
<br />by links added to the minor arterial network.
<br />
<br />. Using standard travel demand calculations, the Coalition
<br />growth scenario generates a 25% increase in automobile
<br />ownership over the conventional scenario, yet only an 11.5%
<br />increase in VMT per capita. The average trip length within
<br />the subregion is 3.5 miles, while in/ out average commute
<br />length is 11 miles.
<br />
<br />. It is likely that the reduced rate of growth is attributable to
<br />"trip capture" within the subregion. This is accomplished
<br />by increasing mixed-use developments, which offer subre-
<br />gional residents close proximity to work, shopping, and lei-
<br />sure activities.
<br />
<br />Trip Ends Per Capita by Scenario
<br />
<br />10%
<br />
<br />
<br />""
<br />c
<br />ti 5%
<br />';;(
<br />W
<br />E 0%
<br />.g
<br />OJ
<br />0> -5%.
<br />C
<br />'"
<br />.<:
<br />U -10%
<br />
<br />
<br />Intemalto 465,086 661,456 793,952 797,078
<br />Intemal
<br />Intemalto 321,003 372,411 411,422 410,503
<br />External
<br />External 302,223 437,185 432,433 431,966
<br />lolntemal
<br />Total 1,088,312 1,471,052 1,637,807 1,639,547
<br />Subarea
<br />
<br />Subarea Trips by Mode
<br />
<br />
<br />Apto
<br />
<br />844,416 1,120,380 1,192,564 1,190,760
<br />
<br />Transit
<br />
<br />11,353 19,944 24,532 26,613
<br />
<br />Walk
<br />
<br />23735
<br />
<br />23635
<br />
<br />Total
<br />
<br />855,769 1,140,324 1,240,831 1,241,008
<br />
<br /> VMT in Subarea
<br /> Generated by Subarea
<br />Freeways 55.2% 48.7% 51.7% 50.9%
<br />Arterials 80.1% 75.8% 77.3% 76.7%
<br />Collectors 83.9% 96.2% 93.6% 93.8%
<br />
<br />
<br />Vehicle Trip End Statistics
<br />Trip Ends 5,81 6.37 5,73 5.63
<br />PerCaptla
<br />"P
<br />EndsPel' 1.90 1,81 1.79 1.77
<br />Ca "13
<br />NHBTrip
<br />Ef'ldsPer 3.91 4,56 3.94 3,87
<br />C.
<br />NHBTrip
<br />E""'''''' 6,75 5,84 5.55 5.45
<br />Em 0 ee
<br /> 17
<br />
<br />
|