Regional and County Government Actions


TDM Encyclopedia

Victoria Transport Policy Institute


Updated 15 April 2015

This chapter identifies TDM policies and programs suitable for implementation by regional and county governments.



Regional and county governments, including regional organizations such as port authorities and Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), are responsible for planning, developing and operating transportation facilities and services between cities. Because they are responsible for transportation on major urban corridors and for addressing multiple problems such as congestion, accidents and air pollution, TDM solutions tend to be particularly appropriate for regional organizations.


Regional governments tend to be concerned with medium-distance (10-100 mile) travel on major urban corridors and so are responsible for planning and operating major urban highway and transit programs.


Regional governments provide the coordination required for effective TDM among various stakeholders, including various levels of government, jurisdictions within a region, industries, businesses, and special interest groups. For example, efforts to shift regional trips from automobile to ridesharing and public transit requires a combination of Transit Service Improvements, HOV Priority on major roadways, Walking and Cycling Improvements at destinations, and Commuter Financial Incentives.


Regional governments can support TDM implementation in the following ways:








Best TDM Strategies

The following strategies are particularly suitable for implementation by regional governments and organizations. For more detailed information see the TDM Summary Table.


Asset Management

Policies and programs to preserve the value of assets such as roadways and parking facilities.


Bus Rapid Transit

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) systems provide high quality bus service on busy urban corridors.


Change Management

Ways to build support for institutional change.


Freight Transportation Management

Strategies for improving the efficiency of freight and commercial transport.


Funding Options

Describes various ways to fund transportation programs and evaluates the degree to which they support TDM objectives.


HOV Priority

Strategies that give transit and rideshare vehicles priority over other traffic.


Institutional Reforms

Creating organizations that support efficient transport.


Least-Cost Planning

Creating an unbiased framework for transport planning.


Light Rail Transit

Light Rail Transit systems provide convenient local transit service on busy urban corridors.


Location Efficient Development

Development that maximizes multi-modal accessibility.


Operations and Management

Programs that encourage more efficient use of existing roadway systems.



Providing convenient parking at transit and rideshare stations.


Regulatory Reform

Policy changes to encourage competition, innovation, diversity and efficiency in transport services.



Encouraging carpooling and vanpooling.


Road Pricing

Congestion pricing, value pricing, road tolls and HOT lanes.


Smart Growth

Land use practices to create more efficient and livable communities.


Smart Growth Reforms

Policy and planning reforms that encourage Smart Growth.


TDM Programs

Developing an institutional framework for implementing TDM.


Transit Improvements

Strategies for improving public transit services.


Transit Station Improvements

Improve public transit stops and stations so they are more convenient, comfortable and attractive.


Transit Oriented Development

Using transit stations as a catalyst for creating livable communities.


Transportation Management Associations

Member-controlled organizations that provide transportation services in a particular area.


Transportation Model Improvements

Discusses ways to improve transport models.



Examples and Case Studies


Puget Sound Regional Council (

The Puget Sound Regional Council provides information on various financial incentives and regulations to support Smart Growth land use development, and examples of successful developments that reflect Smart Growth principles. The financial incentives and regulations they recommend include:

·         Modify zoning and development regulations.

·         Tailor regulatory mechanisms to the station area.

·         Simplify the Permit Review Process.

·         Tax Increment Financing.

·         Tax Incentive Zones for Transit.

·         Multi-Family Tax Abatement.

·         Location Efficient Mortgages.



Greater Vancouver Regional Strategic Plan (

The Livable Region Strategic Plan (LRSP) produced by the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) provides a regional growth strategy. It was adopted by the GVRD Board with formal support of all municipalities and recognized by the B.C. provincial government in 1996. The primary goal of the plan is to help maintain regional livability and protect the environment in the face of anticipated growth. It is used by all levels of government to guide and coordinate land use and transportation decisions. The LRSP is linked to local community plans through a Regional Context Statement. Other agencies, the private sector and residents also use the plan to understand and contribute to Greater Vancouver's vision for its future development.



Sacramento Smart Planning

 “With Gas Over $4, Cities Explore Whether It’s Smart to Be Dense: Sacramento’s ‘Blueprint’ for Growth Draws National Attention,” by Ana Campoy, Wall Street Journal, 7 July 2008; at


SACRAMENTO, Calif. – Gasoline was less than $2 a gallon when Mike McKeever brought his gospel of bikes, light rail and tightly packed neighborhoods to this state synonymous with cars, freeways and suburban sprawl. "The development industry was very concerned," says Mr. McKeever, head of Sacramento's regional planning agency. "The environmental community was openly negative," concerned that it was "just more talk, talk."


Seven years later, with gasoline hurtling past $4 a gallon, Sacramento has become one of the nation's most-watched experiments in whether urban planning can help solve everything from high fuel prices to the housing bust to global warming. "They're really the model," says Steve Winkelman, a transportation expert at the Center for Clean Air Policy.


For decades, backers of "smart-growth" planning principles have preached the benefit of clustering the places where people live more closely with the businesses where they work and shop. Less travel would mean less fuel consumption and less air pollution. Several communities built from scratch upon those principles, such as Celebration in Florida, sprouted across the country. But they were often isolated experiments, connected to their surroundings mainly by car. So, as gasoline remained cheap, the rest of the country continued its inexorable march toward bigger houses and longer commutes. Now, smart-growth fans see a chance to reverse that. "Expensive oil is going to transform the American culture as radically as cheap oil did," predicts David Mogavero, a Sacramento-based architect and smart-growth proponent.


Sacramento, yoked to the car and mired in one of the lousiest housing markets in the country -- offers an intriguing laboratory for that idea. Four years ago, just as oil was gaining momentum in its torrid climb to $140 a barrel and beyond, the six-county region adopted a plan for growth through 2050 that roped off some areas from development while concentrating growth more densely in others, emphasizing keeping jobs near homes.


The local governments in the area aren't compelled to follow the so-called Blueprint, but the plan –  backed by a strange-bedfellows coalition of ordinary citizens, politicians, developers and environmentalists – shows signs of working, nonetheless.


"To me, the simplest way to test whether local governments are mainstreaming Blueprint growth principles is to look at...what is getting built," says Mr. McKeever. "The evidence there is pretty clear." Between 2004 and 2007, the number of projects with apartments, condominiums and town houses for sale in the region increased by 533%, while the number of subdivisions with homes on lots bigger than 5,500 square feet fell by 21%, according to housing-research firm Hanley Wood Market Intelligence.


Things were different during the 1990s, as new single-family homes crept out to fill the abundant open spaces far from downtown. Traffic exploded, rising 66% from 1990 to 2003. In 2000, the American Lung Association ranked Sacramento 11th for the worst air pollution among U.S. cities – though, with about 1.4 million people, it was 28th in population.


Facing the threat of losing its federal transportation funding because of its poor air quality, the Sacramento Area Council of Governments hired Mr. McKeever in 2001 to lead the region's cleanup effort. He brought with him an eclectic environmental résumé: He'd run a business that used a door-size fan to test homes for leaks of precious heated or cooled air; he'd become an expert in siting houses so they got the most sun possible, saving on electricity; and he'd become a planning consultant, helping Portland, Ore., create a walking city with compact neighborhoods connected by buses, streetcars and light rail.


When Mr. McKeever arrived in California, gasoline was relatively cheap and developers comfortable in building subdivisions the way they always had. He knew he would need to be able to paint a detailed, realistic picture of what life in the area would be like in 2050 if the traditional pattern of plopping one house on one acre of ground far from the owners' jobs continued.


Buildings' Impact

His staff collected information on all 750,000 pieces of property in the region, such as the number of housing units, people employed there, and return-on-investment rates generated by various building projects. They plugged those numbers into a database to be used with computer software Mr. McKeever helped develop to calculate the impact different kinds of buildings have on traffic, job growth and pollution.


In 2003, he took the computer model on the road to workshop after workshop. This wasn't the typical public hearing where officials sit in a row and take questions from the crowd. Instead, the more than 5,000 people who attended got a chance to use the computer program to play planner for a day, tweaking the mix of buildings to see what would happen. "It sounds hokey," says the typically earnest Mr. McKeever, "but it's about making democracy work."


Wary Developers

Developers were wary. The higher density was tantalizing, but they weren't sure how to get financing and permits, how to build and market the new communities.

"My first big policy direction was, 'You need to go stop this Blueprint thing at all costs,'" recalls Dennis Rogers, a lobbyist with the North State Building Industry Association.

Mr. McKeever persevered. He conducted shuttle diplomacy of sorts, gliding between meetings with developers and environmentalists in a golf-cart-like neighborhood electric vehicle.


Gradually, the builders began to accept Mr. McKeever's argument that adding town houses, condos and apartments to the mix of single-family homes would expose them to more markets and protect them from a downturn in any particular one. At the same time, residents were becoming more open to alternatives to the typical suburban house thanks to what they were learning at the workshops. "The building industry is one of the most customer-driven that you can find," says Marcus Lo Duca, a lawyer who has represented builders for 20 years. "You have to adjust what you do to meet what home buyers want."


Dave Morris, an area developer, became a convert when he attended a workshop where officials presented their forecast of what the region would look like in 50 years if it kept growing in the same way. On a big screen in front of hundreds of people, they flashed traffic and air-quality figures that showed "you would commute faster on a bicycle," says Mr. Morris. The quality of life for communities without jobs nearby would nose dive. "It was really an eye-opener," says Mr. Morris, 60 years old.


At the time, he was building two gated communities with single-family homes on one-acre lots. Mr. Morris is now working on a 171-loft project that will include shops and offices in downtown Woodland, a small city northwest of Sacramento near the university town of Davis. The site is near a courthouse, one of the main employers in town, as well as restaurants and coffee shops. It has access to public transit that can take residents to downtown Sacramento. The public library is just a few blocks away. "I see gas prices making people take the Blueprint seriously," he says. "It's kind of like not worrying about fast food till the doctor tells you that you have a bad heart."


No. 1 Concern

A poll earlier this year by California State University, Sacramento, found that high gasoline prices were the No. 1 concern in the area and that 12% of respondents had changed jobs or moved in the past year to shorten their commute to work. Matt Overmyer moved to a new compact development in Roseville, a city northeast of Sacramento. It now takes him 15 minutes to get to his job as a manager of a Lowe's home-improvement store, compared with the 45 minutes he drove from Folsom, a nearby town he describes as "suburbia at its finest."


Mr. Overmyer's new neighborhood sits at the western-most edge of Roseville, where cattle grazed not long ago. But unlike many of the typical suburban developments that sprouted on farmland surrounding Sacramento in previous years, his is designed around a "village square" with restaurants and shops. Once it's built out, it will be just a couple of blocks away from Mr. Overmyer's home. A school, which his 19-month-old daughter will attend once she's old enough, has already been built less than half a mile away.


Mr. Overmyer, 30 years old, now bikes to the grocery store, something he never did in Folsom. Because the houses in his new neighborhood are close together and share a back alley, he also interacts a lot more with his neighbors. "My social life now consists of four neighbors up and down the street," he says. Before, he and his wife had to drive at least a few miles to see friends.

Mr. Overmyer says he's enjoying spending less time behind the wheel and "the bigger sense of community." He's also pleased to see that the houses around him are already selling for more than what he paid for his last year.


While the Blueprint is still only a guide and local governments have the final word on development, many have begun incorporating its principles into their local laws, giving them real teeth. In Rancho Cordova, a city east of Sacramento that has adopted a Blueprint-friendly development plan, residents in densely packed town homes and small houses can walk to work at nearby office parks. The light-rail line built to commute to Sacramento now serves as a tram for local residents.


"We're a suburb that wants to become a city," says Linda Budge, Rancho's mayor.

In the spring, the regional-planning agency's board took another major step by approving a $42 billion transportation plan designed to mesh with the Blueprint. Together, both are projected by 2035 to reduce the amount of driving per household by 8% and global-warming emissions per household by 12% from their 2005 levels.


Now, California's Transportation Department is offering grants to help other areas in the state create their own Blueprints. Two environmental groups have co-sponsored a bill in the state legislature encouraging other areas to follow Sacramento's example. Think tanks such as the Center for Clean Air Policy are lobbying to include Blueprint methods in the federal transportation bill, which is up for reauthorization next year.


Placer Vineyards

But Mr. McKeever, who became his agency's director in 2004, still has battles to fight every day. Take, for example, Placer Vineyards, a 14,132-unit proposed housing development. It's in a good Blueprint location, close to both Sacramento and the city of Roseville, a big job center. But the proposal doesn't meet the Blueprint standard of an average 10 housing units per acre, which would translate into a 21,631-unit project. That's the necessary density to accommodate its projected future population growth within the Blueprint's boundaries.


"If you don't build those 7,000 units there," Mr. McKeever says, "they will go somewhere else," potentially onto land that the plan called for remaining undeveloped. Mr. McKeever negotiated with the project's developers to present two plans to the Placer County Board of Supervisors for approval -- the original plan, and the Blueprint version. But the board chose the developer's less-dense, original plan. "I felt like they were pushing those 7,000 units on me," says county Supervisor F.C. "Rocky" Rockholm.


Mr. Rockholm, one of the 32 government officials who sit on the regional planning board, voted for the Blueprint, but he argues that the denser version is wrong for the site, now just farmland dotted with cows and yellow mustard flowers. Area residents were concerned about the traffic the denser development would generate. Aside from the density issue, Mr. Rockholm says, Placer Vineyards will be Blueprint-compliant, with a bus transit center and trails and bike paths connecting homes to parks and schools, he says.


But without density, counters Terry Davis of the area Sierra Club chapter, smart growth doesn't work. His group joined the local Audubon Society to file a lawsuit against Placer County and the developers, charging them with destroying natural land with plans that "unnecessarily promote urban sprawl." The parties are in settlement talks.


Plans for Streetcar

Even projects that fully comply with the Blueprint have their problems. Mark Friedman, a local developer, is working on a mixed-use development across the Sacramento River from the California State Capitol, the heart of downtown. In his loftlike office, a retrofitted former Pontiac-dealership, Mr. Friedman points to a sleek architectural model to show how a streetcar would connect apartments, office buildings and retail, making cars unnecessary.


Except that without building housing first, there won't be enough people to justify the state and local money that will help finance a streetcar. And without the streetcar, the carless project doesn't work. "It's a chicken-and-egg situation," says Mr. Friedman.

Building in the heart of the city costs more than creating subdivisions in empty land on city outskirts, says Mr. Friedman. But with the rising price of gasoline driving up the cost of commuting, he and other developers are finding healthy demand for their city projects at a time when suburban sales are slumping.


Even though the area's housing market has been wracked by price drops of 25% in the last year and one of the highest foreclosure rates in the country, Mr. Friedman says he already has sold nine of 28 town houses near downtown that he recently completed, and three more are under contract, "which is not bad considering the dismal state of the Sacramento real-estate market."

Mr. Morris, the developer, says the housing downturn is hurting the places that have the "dumbest growth. Smart growth works when the rest of it doesn't."



Regional Transportation Planning

The Washington State Growth Management Act requires each Regional Transportation Planning Organization (RTPO) to develop a regional transportation plan based on a least cost planning methodology that identifies the most cost-effective transportation facilities, services and programs for their region. Regional Transportation Plans adopted after July 1, 1995 should incrementally incorporate least-cost planning methodologies as they are updated. All RTPs developed or updated and adopted after July 1, 2000 must be based upon a least-cost planning methodology.



Houston HOV Lanes (

Houston, Texas has 105 miles of HOV lanes. They move 96-228% more people per lane than general access lanes, and account for 5% of the travel by the workforce. HOV lanes can be used by buses, carpools, vanpools and motorcycles. On weekday mornings, HOV lane traffic moves toward Downtown (inbound). On weekday afternoons and evenings, HOV lane traffic moves away from Downtown (outbound). On the Katy HOV lane, minimum occupancy increases to three persons from 6:45 a.m. to 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. to 6 p.m. weekdays; a minimum of three passengers per vehicle also is required on the Northwest HOV lane from 6:45 to 8 a.m. At other times, the minimum occupancy requirement is two. QuickRide, a pilot program started in January 1998, allows carpools with two people per vehicle to use the Katy HOV during weekday peak periods for a fee. QuickRide commuters are tracked and billed using a transponder attached to their windshields.



Transit Connectivity (MTC, 2006)

The San Francisco Regional Metropolitan Transportation Commission has developed a transit connectivity plan designed to improve service quality and ridership by improving the following features:

·         Information and wayfinding. This includes regional transit information (a single contact for all types of public transport services), improved maps in and around stations, and accurate real-time bus and train arrival information (including dynamic signs at stations, websites and telephone system).

·         Schedule coordination. Improved schedule coordination between different modes and lines, including timed-transfer and pulsed networks.

·         Fare integration. Integrated fares, so one type of pass, rate structure and transfer policy applies to all public transportation services throughout a region.

·         Last-mile improvements. This refers to the ease of access to transit stops and hubs, including shuttle services, bicycle and pedestrian access, and parking for automobiles and bicycles.

·         Hub (transit stop and station) amenities. These include reduction of walking distances (between train and bus platforms and other services), enhanced comfort, weather protection, restrooms, improved security, and improved cleanliness.



To help implement these improvements the regional transportation planning agency established a Transit Connectivity Working Group comprised of representatives from transit agencies, cities, counties, congestion management agencies, business associations, and other stakeholders which provides technical advice and support.



Central Okanagan TDM Program (

In 1998 the Central Okanagan Regional District in partnership with the City of Kelowna, Westbank First Nation and the Province of British Columbia developed a regional TDM program. The formal agreement stated that the Regional District create a TDM function and contracts the City of Kelowna to provide the service.  This initiative was in response to statistics which showed the Central Okanagan being the most auto dependent regional district in BC. In 1998, 68% of the residents of the City of Kelowna drove to work in a single occupancy automobile, for the suburban areas the number was 85%.


Regional TDM programs and policy are coordinated by the TDM working group inn the City of Kelowna’s Transportation Division. The working group consisting of 2.5 staff members is charged with initiating programs to influence travel choices toward sustainable modes and help defer the public costs of new road infrastructure. The program has set definite targets peak period trip reduction and overall mode shift. Some of the key initiatives of the program are:



Plan-It Calgary

Plan-It Calgary is a comprehensive regional transportation and land use planning process that includes extensive consultation and research to identify policies and planning practices that can help achieve sustainability objectives. The following studies were commissioned for this project:


Public Opinion Research


Plan It Calgary Research


Plan It Calgary publications



Freight Transport Management Incentives (Holguin-Veras, et al. 2010)

A major study for the U.S. Department of Transportation used Global Positioning System (GPS) technology to more efficiently manage urban truck traffic. This project:


The researchers concluded that this project demonstrates that remote sensing technology can help manage freight transport in ways that are supported by both the freight industry and transportation agencies.



MetroLinx (

In 2006 the Government of Ontario established the Greater Toronto Transportation Authority (GTTA), with a brand name of Metrolinx, was given the mandate to develop and implement an integrated regional multi-modal transportation plan, an Investment Strategy and capital plan, a transit vehicle purchasing co-operative, and programs such as BikeLinx and the Smart Commute Initiative. The Big Move document defines the Regional Transportation Plan’s vision, goals and objectives, strategies, priority actions and supporting policies for creating a seamless, coordinated, efficient, equitable and user-centred regional transport system, as well as an investment strategy to finance the these projects and services.



Montgomery County Traffic Impact Assessment (

In 2007 the Montgomery County Council adopted a unique area-wide transportation test, called Policy Area Mobility Review (PAMR), as a growth management tool. PAMR supplements the Local Area Transportation Review process (a fairly standard transportation impact analysis of nearby intersections). PAMR signals a shift in Montgomery County from measuring traffic capacity to assessing mobility. It has two components:

·         Relative Arterial Mobility (RAM), the ratio between forecasted congested travel times and free-flow travel times.

·         Relative Transit Mobility (RTM), the relative speed by which journey-to-work trips can be made via transit travel as compared to auto travel


PAMR uses the regional metropolitan planning organization travel demand model to forecast conditions for a horizon year that includes previously approved development (the “pipeline”) countywide and regional growth and transportation projects funded in the next four fiscal years. The RTM and transit level of service (LOS) is established for each zone (called policy areas). The area’s arterial LOS requirements are based on the forecasted transit LOS and the RAM. For areas with adequate RAM, applicants need take no action under PAMR. For policy areas where relative arterial mobility is insufficient applicants must support the following mitigation actions:

1. Participate in a trip reduction program.

2. Provide off-site non-automobile facilities such as sidewalks or bike racks.

3. Provide and operate transit services.

4. Construct off-site roadway segments.



Auckland Transport Governance and Funding (

In 2003 the New Zealand Government began establishing the Auckland Regional Transport Authority (ARTA), which will have responsibility for all Auckland area transport, including rail, bus, ferry, pedestrian and cycle transport. ARTA will be responsible for:

·         Operational planning of integrated road and passenger transport infrastructure and services for the region, including consultation as appropriate with Transfund, Transit, TrackCo and territorial authorities, and travel demand management programs.

·         Funding of Auckland transport projects and services including contracting of passenger transport services.

·         Implementation of operational plans.

·         Funding all roads other than state highways, including c0-funding of all local roads in conjunction with territorial authorities.


This new authority will be accountable to the Auckland Regional Council (ARC). The ARC will continue to have statutory responsibility for the Auckland Regional Growth Strategy, Auckland Regional Land Transport Strategy and the Auckland Regional Policy Statement.


The ARTA will receive government and local money to implement the plan and will contract with Auckland transport companies. It will be run by a board, the members of which will appointed by a panel representing the ARC and the seven Auckland city councils. The ARC will have a majority on this panel. Another body, tentatively called Auckland Regional Holdings, is proposed to govern other regional infrastructure, such as the assets of Infrastructure Auckland. The government will provide a number of new funding options to support regional transportation improvements, including additional fuel taxes, and possibly road tolls and parking levies.



References And Resources For More Information


ACCESS - Eurocities for a New Mobility Culture (
a local authority network aiming to promote a new mobility culture throughout Europe, in order to combat congestion, improve air quality

Best Practices & Local Leadership Programme (
United Nations Human Settlements Programme(UN-HABITAT)

Booz-Allen & Hamilton (2001), Organizing for Regional Transportation Operations: An Executive Guide, Federation Highway Administration and Institute of Transportation Engineers (


Bremen Initiative Best Practice Resources (


Shaunna K. Burbidge (2010), “Merging Long Range Transportation Planning With Public Health: A Case Study From Utah's Wasatch Front,” Preventive Medicine, Vol. 50, Supplement 1, January 2010, pp. S6-S8; at


Ana Campoy (2008), “With Gas Over $4, Cities Explore Whether It’s Smart to Be Dense: Sacramento’s ‘Blueprint’ for Growth Draws National Attention,” Wall Street Journal, 7 July 2008; at


CCAP (2005), Transportation Emissions Guidebook: Land Use, Transit & Travel Demand Management, Center for Clean Air Policy ( This guidebook helps users assess the air pollution, energy use, and greenhouse gas emissions benefits of a variety of transportation and land use policies. Includes policy overviews, success stories and links to key models and resources.


COST, Best Practice For Sustainable Urban Infrastructures, COST Program (

ELTIS Case Study Database (
European Local Transport Information Service.

Ethan N. Elkind (2009), Removing The Roadblocks: How to Make Sustainable Development Happen Now, UC Berkeley School of Law’s Center for Law, Energy & the Environment ( and UCLA School of Law’s Environmental Law Center; at


EURONET/ICLEI Consortium (


European Database on Good Practice in Urban Management and Sustainability (, is designed to help local authorities to work towards sustainability by disseminating good practice and policy, facilitating the exchange of experience, and raising awareness about how cities and towns can be managed in more sustainable ways.


European Local Transport Information Service (ELTIS) ( is an on-line guide to over 400 transportation measures, policies and practices in Europe.

Search its extensive database via keywords or “transport concepts.” Abstracts link to full documents and web links.


European Program for Mobility Management Examples ( describes various European transportation demand management programs.


FHWA (2000), Toolbox for Regional Policy Analysis; Distribution of Impacts Case Studies, Federal Highway Administration ( 


FHWA (2006), Managing Travel Demand: Applying European Perspectives to U.S. Practice, National Cooperative Highway Research Program; Federal Highway Administration (; available at


Michael Grant, Jocelyn Bauer, Terence Plaskon and John Mason (2010),

Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: An Objectives-Driven, Performance-Based Approach – Guidebook, Office of Operations, US Department of Transportation (; at


Jose Holguin-Veras, et al. (2010), Integrative Freight Demand Management In The New York City Metropolitan Area, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute for the USDOT (; at


ICLEI (International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives) Case Studies, (, Case Reference & Cities Database (, and European Good Practice Information Service “Local Sustainability” ( Extensive information on best practices by local governments and agencies, including many involving transportation and land use policies. Examples are from all over the globe and include replication aspects.


IPS, Model Cities: Urban Best Practices (, Urban Redevelopment Authority, Singapore and The Institute of Policy Studies, 263 pages, ISBN 981-04-2446-9

Todd Litman (2004), Evaluating Mobility Management Strategies for Reducing Transportation Emissions in the Fraser River Basin, Victoria Transport Policy Institute (; at; spreadsheet at


Todd Litman (2008), Recommendations for Improving LEED Transportation and Parking Credits, VTPI (; at


METRO (2008), Daily Vehicle Miles of Travel (DVMT)/Person for Portland and the US, Oregon Metro (; at


MetroLinx (2008), The Big Move, Greater Toronto Transportation Authority and Ontario Ministry of Transportation (; at


MTE, Online Best Practices Database and Case Studies Database, Moving On the Economy ( is an ever-expanding searchable inventory of sustainable transportation economic success stories.


NALGEP (2005), Clean Communities on the Move: A Partnership-Driven Approach to Clean Air and Smart Transportation, National Association of Local Government Environmental Professionals (NALGEP), (


National Association of Regional Councils ( is a professional organization that support community planning. It provides a variety of resources related to regional transportation planning.


NCS, Climate Protection Manual For Mayors, Natural Capital Solutions (, provides case studies, best practices, cost/benefit analyses, legislation, technical descriptions and contacts to facilitate local energy conservation and emission reduction planning and program implementation.

OECD (2000), Environmentally Sustainable Transport (EST) Best Practice Competition, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development ( Includes 18 transportation best practices case studies.


OECD (2015), The Metropolitan Century: Understanding Urbanisation and its Consequences, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (; at


OUM (2001), TDM Success Stories, Office of Urban Mobility, Washington State Department of Transportation (

SMILE - Sustainable Urban Transport Policies and Initiatives ( 170 successful and replicable European practices for sustainable mobility.

PennDOT (2007), The Transportation and Land Use Toolkit: A Planning Guide for Linking Transportation to Land Use and Economic Development, Pennsylvania Dept. of Transportation, PUB 616 (3-07); at (


Plan-It Calgary is an example of a comprehensive regional transportation and land use planning process that includes extensive consultation and research to identify policies and planning practices that can help achieve sustainability objectives.


STPP (2006), A Guide to Transportation Opportunities in You Community, Surface Transportation Policy Partnership (; at


Strategic Policy Options for Sustainable Development Database (, Research on Innovative and Strategic Policy Options (RISPO) by the Institute for Global Environmental Studies provides information, recommended best practices and case studies on a wide range of sustainable policies and strategies.


Frederik Strompen, Todd Litman and Daniel Bongardt (2012), Reducing Carbon Emissions through TDM Strategies - A Review of International Examples, Transportation Demand Management in Biejing ( GIZ and the Beijing Transportation Research Centre; at; direct link at; summary at


Stockholm Partnerships for Sustainable Cities ( is a competition among public and private sectors seeking innovative and inspiring urban sustainability projects from all over the world. 


Galina Tachieva (2010), Sprawl Repair Manual, Island Press ( 


TELLUS - Bringing CIVITAS Onto the Road (, European Union. Describes projects to demonstrate that integrated urban transport policies can help reduce urban traffic problems.


Tonkin & Taylor Ltd (2008), Incorporating Sustainable Land Transport into District Plans: Discussion Document and Best Practice Guidance, Research Report 362, New Zealand Transport Agency (; at


Transit Benefit Ordinance ( Website provides specific information on how municipal governments can encourage or require employers to offer transit benefits and other incentives for more efficient commuting.


Transport Research Knowledge Centre ( provides information on European transport research programmes that support sustainable mobility.


Transport Toolkit ( by the Transport Working Group as part of the Low Emission Development Strategies Global Partnership helps planners and decision-makers access various information resources that can help identify the most effective tools to build and implement low emission transportation strategies. 


UITP, Mobility in Cities Database (


USCM, Best Practices Database ( U.S. Conference of Mayors.


USDOT (2010), Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: The Building Blocks of a Model Transportation Plan Incorporating Operations - A Desk Reference, Planning for Operations, US Department of Transportation (; at


USEPA (2002), Transportation Control Measures Program Information Directory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ( This is an on-line searchable database with approximately 120 case studies of programs that reduce transportation pollution emissions.


USEPA (2002), Smart Moves: Transportation and Smart Growth Best Practices ( U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. This competition profiles state and local efforts to promote smart growth principles in transportation projects.


USEPA, Gateway to International Best Practices and Innovations, EPA National Center for Environmental Innovation (

David Van Hattum (2003), Expanding Commuter Options in the Twin Cities: Practical and Cost-Effective Steps To Reduce Congestion By Optimizing Travel Demand Management (TDM) Strategies, Minnesota Office of Environmental Assistance (, Downtown Minneapolis TMO ( and 494 Commuter Services (


WBCSD, Sustainable Mobility Project, World Business Council on Sustainable Development ( includes 200 mobility case studies with brief descriptions and internet links.


WCEL (2004), Smart Bylaws Guide, West Coast Environmental Law Foundation ( This comprehensive guide describes smart growth practices, provides technical standards and model bylaws that can be tailored to specific municipal circumstances, and includes numerous case studies.


WHO, Healthy City Network (

WHO (2004), Case Studies On Sustainable Development, World Health Organization (

This Encyclopedia is produced by the Victoria Transport Policy Institute to help improve understanding of Transportation Demand Management. It is an ongoing project. Please send us your comments and suggestions for improvement.




Encyclopedia Homepage

Send Comments


Victoria Transport Policy Institute

1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC,  V8V 3R7,  CANADA

Phone & Fax 250-360-1560

“Efficiency - Equity - Clarity”