Transportation Management Programs
An Institutional Framework for Implementing TDM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Victoria Transport Policy Institute
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Updated 23 March 2016
This chapter discusses different types of transportation management programs, how they are organized and funded, and their role in implementing TDM strategies.
A TDM Program is an institutional framework for implementing a set of TDM strategies. Such a program has stated goals, objectives, a budget, staff, and a clear relationship with stakeholders. It may be a division within a transportation or transit agency, an independent government agency, or a public/private partnership. Below are possible responsibilities of a TDM Program:
· Coordinates TDM Planning, Evaluation and Data Collection.
· Implements Marketing programs.
· Responds to problems and complaints.
· Provides Ridematching, Shuttle Services, Pedestrian and Cycle Promotion, and Special Event Transportation Management services.
· Provides Parking Management, Parking Pricing and parking brokerage services. Coordinates arrangements for Shared Parking.
· Supports Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements, Freight Transportation Management and Security Improvements that encourage use of alternative modes.
· Coordinates activities with other organizations, such as Transportation Management Associations, Commute Trip Reduction Programs and Institutional Reforms.
· Supports integrated transportation and land use Planning to improve Accessibility and reduce vehicle travel (Access Management, Smart Growth and Location Efficient Planning).
TDM Programs insure that specific strategies are complementary and coordinated, for maximum effectiveness. For example, Transit Improvements, Pedestrian Improvements, and Parking Pricing can have far greater travel impacts and consumer benefits when implemented as a coordinated program. A general rule is that TDM Programs should include a balance of improved travel choice and incentives to reduce automobile travel.
TDM Programs should generally be ongoing so they provide continual support and encouragement, and respond to future opportunities and changes in individual’s travel needs and preferences. Travel patterns tend to reflect churning (continual turnover and change, sometimes due to specific events, such as changes in employment or home location); for example, during a given year some people naturally shift from automobile to public transit, while others shift from public transit to automobile due to changes in their circumstances and preference. TDM Programs should take these natural changes into account, providing encouragement for shifts toward more efficient travel patterns.
TDM Programs are usually established and Funded by local, regional or state/provincial governments, often within existing transportation agencies, or through grant programs. It may be organized as a division within a transportation or transit agency, as an independent government agency, or as a partnership between government and other community organizations, such as a chamber of commerce (called a Transportation Management Association).
Some governments make special efforts to implement TDM programs within their own agencies as a way to demonstrate leadership and as an opportunity to develop tools and experience that can be transferred to non-government organizations. For examples see the Greening Government guide at www.greeninggovernment.gc.ca, Federal House In Order “Commute and Business Travel” emission reduction program information at www.fhio.gc.ca/commuting/commuting.htm, and Skinner and Cohen, 1996.
A well managed and properly supported TDM Program can affect a significant portion of total travel. Comprehensive TDM Programs can achieve cost-effective reductions of 20-40% in motor vehicle travel compared with no TDM efforts, although most programs have smaller effects because they focus on particular types of trips (such as commuting), cover a limited geographic scope, or are limited to strategies that can be implemented by a particular government agency. Travel reductions of 10-30% are more realistic for TDM Programs implemented by local or regional governments.
Elasticities and Trip Reduction Tables describe the travel impacts of pricing strategies. Well-managed Commute Trip Reduction programs can reduce vehicle trips to a particular worksite by 15-30% (Comsis Corp., 1993), or more if implemented with regional TDM strategies such as road pricing and major transit improvements. Commute trips represent only about 30% of total personal vehicle travel (50-80% of travel on congested urban highways). Other types of trips can also be reduced using appropriate TDM strategies. For example, School Transport Management can also achieve 15-30% trip reductions. Land use management strategies such as Access Management, Smart Growth and Location Efficient Planning can reduce per capita vehicle travel by 20-50% in a specific area.
Table 1 Travel Impact Summary
|
Travel Impact |
Rating |
Comments |
|
Reduces total traffic. |
2 |
Implements specific TDM strategies. |
|
Reduces peak period traffic. |
2 |
" |
|
Shifts peak to off-peak periods. |
2 |
" |
|
Shifts automobile travel to alternative modes. |
2 |
" |
|
Improves access, reduces the need for travel. |
2 |
" |
|
Increased ridesharing. |
2 |
" |
|
Increased public transit. |
2 |
" |
|
Increased cycling. |
2 |
" |
|
Increased walking. |
2 |
" |
|
Increased Telework. |
2 |
" |
|
Reduced freight traffic. |
2 |
" |
Rating from 3 (very beneficial) to –3 (very harmful). A 0 indicates no impact or mixed impacts.
TDM Programs can provide many benefits, including reduced traffic congestion, increased mobility, road and parking cost savings, consumer savings, increased transport choice, reduced traffic crashes, environmental protection, more efficient land use, more livable communities and increased equity. By providing coordination, TDM Programs can increase the effectiveness of individual TDM strategies.
Costs include program expenses and any negative impacts of disincentives to driving. Some TDM strategies, such as Parking Pricing and Road Pricing, involve increased user charges, but these are economic transfers, not true resource costs, so their overall cost to consumers depends on how revenues are used (see Evaluating TDM). For example, parking fees may simply substitute for taxes or other indirect consumer payments to fund parking facilities.
Table 2 Benefit Summary
|
Objective |
Rating |
Comments |
|
Congestion Reduction |
2 |
Reduces automobile travel. |
|
Road & Parking Savings |
2 |
Reduces automobile travel. |
|
Consumer Savings |
2 |
Improves automobile affordability. |
|
Transport Choice |
2 |
Increases transportation choices. |
|
Road Safety |
2 |
Reduces automobile travel. |
|
Environmental Protection |
2 |
Reduces automobile travel. |
|
Efficient Land Use |
2 |
Reduces automobile travel, benefits urban residents. |
|
Community Livability |
2 |
Reduces automobile travel. |
Rating from 3 (very beneficial) to –3 (very harmful). A 0 indicates no impact or mixed impacts.
TDM Programs can have a wide range of equity impacts, depending on program design and the conditions in which it is implemented. Although TDM Programs usually require subsidies, these are often less than subsidies currently provided for automobile travel. For example, TDM Programs may simply substitute for current public expenditures on parking and roadway expansion.
TDM Programs can help achieve equity objectives. They can correct market distortions that currently favor driving over other travel modes. For example, they can reduce parking subsidies, or provide non-drivers with comparable benefits. Similarly, Road Pricing can charge motorists directly for road and congestion costs, as opposed to indirect funding that results in cross-subsidies from residents who drive less than average to those who drive more than average.
Most TDM Programs increase vertical equity by improving mobility options for non-drivers. Many also provide financial savings to non-drivers (such as Parking Cash Out and Transit Fare Discounts), which tend to benefit lower-income people most. TDM Programs can significantly improve Basic Mobility by improving and coordinating travel alternatives. Of course, these benefits vary depending on circumstances.
Table 3 Equity Summary
|
Criteria |
Rating |
Comments |
|
Treats everybody equally. |
0 |
Varied and mixed. |
|
Individuals bear the costs they impose. |
2 |
TDM Programs may require subsidies, but these are generally less than subsidies for driving. Many TDM strategies reduce transportation subsidies overall. |
|
Progressive with respect to income. |
2 |
TDM Programs tend to increase transport choice and potential savings to lower-income households. |
|
Benefits transportation disadvantaged. |
3 |
TDM strategies often increase transport choice and savings to non-drivers. |
|
Improves basic mobility. |
3 |
TDM strategies often improve basic transport options. |
Rating from 3 (very beneficial) to –3 (very harmful). A 0 indicates no impact or mixed impacts.
TDM Programs are appropriate in almost any geographic area, although benefits tend to be greatest in large and growing urban areas where transportation problems are greatest. Comprehensive TDM Programs are appropriate for implementation at the local, regional and state/provincial level. Business organizations, individual businesses, developers and campus managers can also implement TDM Programs.
Table 4 Application Summary
|
Geographic |
Rating |
Organization |
Rating |
|
Large urban region. |
3 |
Federal government. |
2 |
|
High-density, urban. |
3 |
State/provincial government. |
3 |
|
Medium-density, urban/suburban. |
3 |
Regional government. |
3 |
|
Town. |
3 |
Municipal/local government. |
3 |
|
Low-density, rural. |
3 |
Business Associations/TMA. |
3 |
|
Commercial center. |
3 |
Individual business. |
2 |
|
Residential neighborhood. |
3 |
Developer. |
2 |
|
Resort/recreation area. |
3 |
Neighborhood association. |
2 |
|
|
|
Campus. |
2 |
Ratings range from 0 (not appropriate) to 3 (very appropriate).
TDM Program
TDM Programs support most other TDM strategies. Many TDM strategies cannot be implemented or will be ineffective if they are not part of a comprehensive TDM Program that provides coordination and support. Commute Trip Reduction, Transportation Management Associations, Tourist Transport Management and Campus Transport Management are specific types of TDM Program. Least Cost Planning, Institutional Reform, Contingency-Based Planning and Regulatory Reform can be implemented in conjunction with TDM Programs. It is important to incorporate Performance Evaluation and participant Surveys into TDM Programs.
TDM Programs depend on governments for implementation, funding and enforcement. Their effectiveness depends on support from local businesses and residents, and from other levels of government. Transportation professionals, motorists, environmentalists, taxpayer organizations, public safety officials, transit supporters, and neighborhood organizations all have reasons to support comprehensive TDM Programs.
Common barriers include existing planning and funding practices that favor capacity expansion over demand management (even when it is more cost effective and beneficial overall), institutional opposition to change, political opposition to change, and resistance from special interest groups that benefit from existing inefficiencies. Some anti-government groups oppose TDM Programs on the grounds that they represent government intrusion into private activities.
A number of organizations and publications listed below provide information on TDM Program planning and implementation. Best practices include:
· Make TDM Programs comprehensive, including as many transportation improvements and incentives as appropriate for a particular situation.
· Include both positive and negative incentives. TDM Programs tend to be most effective when they improve consumers’ travel choices and provide incentives to use alternatives to driving when possible.
· Apply Contingency-Based Planning by identifying the solutions that will be deployed if needed to address future problems.
· Do not limit TDM Programs to commute trips.
· Integrate transportation and land use planning as part of a comprehensive TDM Programs.
· Involve stakeholders in TDM Program planning and implementation, including transportation and land use planning agencies, transit providers, businesses, residents and employees.
· Be sensitive to equity concerns, by applying incentives equally (for example, by applying Parking Pricing to administrators as well as staff), and by providing positive incentives that balance negative incentives.
· Establish stable program Funding.
· Produce an annual “State of the Commute” report, which describes TDM programs and resources, travel trends, and comparisons with other communities.
|
An elderly man is dying of a painful illness at home in his bed. He smelled the aroma of his favorite chocolate chip cookies wafting up the stairs.
He gathered his remaining strength, and lifted himself from the bed. Leaning against the wall, he slowly made his way out of the bedroom, and with even greater effort descended the stairs, gripping the railing with both hands. With labored breath, he leaned against the door frame, gazing into the kitchen.
Were it not for death’s agony, he would have thought himself already in heaven: there, spread out on newspapers on the kitchen table were literally hundreds of his favorite chocolate chip cookies. Was it heaven? Or was it one final act of heroic love from his devoted wife, seeing to it that he left this world a happy man?
Mustering his last energy, he crawls toward the table, landing on his knees in a rumpled posture. His parched lips parted, the wondrous taste of the cookie already in his mouth from anticipation, seemingly bring him back to life.
The withered and shaking hand made its way to a cookie at the edge of the table. Wack! It was smacked with a spatula by his wife.
“Stay out of those,” she said, “they’re for the funeral.” |
The Community Transportation Action Program (CTAP) was launched in August 1996 as a joint venture of five Ontario ministries: Transportation, Education and Training, Citizenship, Culture and Recreation, Community and Social Services, and Health.
CTAP's mandate was to provide transitional support to communities interested in restructuring and coordinating their local transportation services. CTAP supported the development of innovative, local transportation services.
In the past, exclusive relationships existed between users and providers of transportation. For example, school boards would typically contract school bus operators to provide transportation; municipalities would provide or contract public transit services; social service agencies would use volunteers and/or agency vans; and health facilities would primarily use ambulances. Improved coordination of transportation resources can result in less duplication, less inefficiency and fewer gaps in service. It also breaks down barriers between client groups, thus providing a wider range of vehicles to meet users' needs in a more flexible and cost-effective manner.
For example, in some communities, rather than sitting idle, school buses are being used between morning and afternoon student runs to transport seniors and persons with disabilities. In a remote northern Ontario community, the Board of Education has contracted with the local Meals on Wheels to transport disabled students to school in its van. This provides an economical solution for the school board and helps to offset the cost of the van for Meals on Wheels.
Mobility management in Camden has been
driven by the Council’s Green Transport Strategy Taking Steps for a People
Friendly Camden, adopted in November 1997. Three initiatives of the Green
Transport Strategy were monitored by the MOST project – Camden Direct, Camden
Green Travel Network and Camden Clear Zones.
The objective of Camden Direct is to promote public transport services, as well
as to reduce the need to travel. Target groups are local people, council staff,
tourists and other visitors. The objective of the Camden Green Travel Network
is to reduce the impact of motor vehicles and related pollution through the
development of a mobility management network and encourage local employers to
develop green travel plans. The objective of Camden Clear Zones is to develop
traffic free areas and low emission zones. Target groups are local residents,
local employers and visitors to the area.
The objectives of the mobility management services have been met with a high
degree of success. The usage of the Camden Direct mobility centre has risen
since its inception in March 2000, with over 6,000 ticket sales during its
first 12 months of operation and this increased to approximately 7,000 public
transport ticket sales in the second year of operation. The Camden Green Travel
Network has 24 members covering 35 separate addresses and the initiative was
relaunched at the end of 2002 with a new website and additional staffing to
further increase its effectiveness. Mobility plans at 18 of these addressed
will be enforceable via planning agreements made under local regulations, while
the other 17 plans are being developed voluntarily. The Camden Clear Zones
project has several initiatives, e.g. traffic calming measures have been
implemented on an area by area basis, participation in the Car Free Day enabled
measurements on noise, air quality and traffic volumes to be made, which were
used to support longer-term proposals for traffic management measures.
Camden’s experiences shows that mobility management initiatives are most
likely to be effective when they are integrated as part of wider green
transport strategies, and are most effective when implemented in partnership
with other stakeholders. In addition, Camden has found that new mobility
management initiatives can take some time to develop, hence the role of the
mobility coordinator is important to enable such initiatives to progress, while
collaborating with internal and external partners. Dedicated staff resources are
also required to maintain the momentum and progress of these mobility
management initiatives.
Travel Smart is a community-based program in Western Australia that encourages people to use alternatives to traveling in their private car. It provides coordination and resources for local governments, employers, employees, businesses, schools, community organizations and individuals to help reduce automobile travel. The Transport Strategy for the Perth Metropolitan area has a target of reducing in car trips by one-third by 2029 (from 4.7 million to 3.1 million trips per day). Travel Smart includes a variety of community-based activities to encourage walking, cycling, ridesharing and public transit.
The Space Coast Area Transit agency in Southern Florida has programs encourage the use of a variety of alternative modes. It supports car/vanpool matching, fixed route bus service, employer parking incentive programs, developing Park-n-Ride locations, telecommuting options, the vanpool program, alternative work scheduling, bicycle commuting, pedestrian commuting, or combination of the above elements. The agency helps develop individualized Transportation Demand Management programs for individual business. It highlights the following benefits:
· Employer benefits: Reduced federal taxes, reduced parking demand, employee recruitment and retainment, positive public relations and increased employee productivity.
· Customer benefits: Reduced commuting costs, less wasted time and reduced stress.
· Community benefits: Improved air quality, reduced peak period traffic congestion, quality of life issues, reduced energy consumption and less land used for parking facilities.
Darlington, Peterborough and Worcester are typical medium-sized English towns. Following a competition, they were designated Sustainable Travel Towns, and so were able to invest £15 million in measures to reduce car use from 2004 to 2009. Baseline surveys in 2004 showed strong public support for more sustainable transport policies. Each town developed its own programme, including personal travel plans, walking and cycling promotion, public transport marketing, plus workplace and school travel plans.
Detailed travel surveys were performed in 2004 and 2008 and compared with data from comparable size towns from the National Travel Survey (NTS) and traffic counts from the National Road Traffic Estimates (NRTE). The analyses gave the following results:
· Car use: Car driver trips declined 9% per person, and car driver distance by 5%~7% for the three towns. This compares with a decline of about 1% in other medium-sized urban areas over the same period.
· Bus use: Bus trips per person grew substantially, by 10%~22%, compared with a national fall of 0.5% in medium-sized towns. The bus growth primarily occurred in Peterborough and Worcester, with a less positive trend in Darlington (in part due to the nature of competition between two operators in that town).
· Cycling: The number of cycle trips per person grew substantially in all three towns, by 26%~30%. Darlington (which was also a Cycling Demonstration Town) showed the greatest growth. Meanwhile, cycle trips declined in medium-sized towns elsewhere.
· Walking: The number of walking trips per person grew substantially, by 10%~13%, compared to a national decline in similar towns.
· While the reduction in the number of car trips per head was proportionately greatest for short trips, the biggest reduction in car distance travelled (hence traffic) was from medium-length and longer trips.
· There were indications of complex behaviour change, involving transfers between modes, changes of destinations and changes in trip numbers, not all of which can be fully analysed with the available data.
· The biggest reduction in car driver distance came from changes to leisure trips, then shopping and work-related business. This pattern was consistent with the relatively low emphasis on work-trips in the interventions chosen.
· The biggest falls in car driver mode share appear to have been among groups either at a point of change in their lives (at college, looking for work, or recently retired) or on a reduced income. There was a smaller per head reduction in car trips by those in full-time work, though this still constituted 40% of the total reduction.
Assessment of Success
Overall, the Smarter Choice Programmes in the towns contributed positively to objectives of supporting economic growth, reducing carbon emissions, increasing health, promoting equality of opportunity, and improving quality of life.
The programme costs averaged £11 annually per person per year or about 4 pence per car kilometre removed. Considering just congestion reduction benefits, this indicates a 4.5 benefit/cost ratio. Including environmental, consumer-benefit and health effects using Department for Transport values would approximately double this benefit value. This provides sufficient evidence to justify substantial expansion of Smarter Choice Programmes.
GreenTRIP is the Traffic Reduction + Innovative Parking certification program for new residential and mixed use developments. GreenTRIP certification rewards projects that apply strategies to reduce traffic and greenhouse gas emissions. GreenTRIP expands the definition of green building to include robust transportation standards for how people get to and from green buildings. TransForm uses tailored traffic reduction programs that apply the most appropriate strategies to help make projects more financially feasible.
The state of Oregon has a Employee Commute Options (ECO) program requires employers with more than 100 employees in the Portland area to make a good faith effort to encourage employees to reduce automobile commute trips, with a target of a 10% reduction over three years. Employers to fail to make such an effort may be fined.
Kelowna is a growing city with a current population of about 100,000 residents, located in the Okanagan Valley of central British Columbia. Funding constraints, and concerns about the environmental, economic and community impacts of continually expanding roadway capacity, have prompted regional government agencies to favour mobility strategies which provide more balance between transportation and other important objectives. The City of Kelowna’s Official Community Plan and Transportation Plan stress adherence to land use policies that support transit, cycling and walking. These policies support development of town centres in which higher densities and a mix of complementary land uses. The City’s Transportation Plan also stresses the development of other modes of travel and emphasizes TDM solutions. The government agencies share the desire to follow a more balanced strategy of not only supplying transportation infrastructure but also managing demand.
The overall goal of the Central Okanagan TDM program is to reduce peak period automobile traffic in the region by 12% by the year 2013 relative to trend growth in traffic volumes. In 1998, the Regional District, City of Kelowna and the Province together developed a business plan for an expanded TDM program in the Region. The Regional District and City of Kelowna have since formed a partnership to implement the program, with the Regional District taking on Regional TDM as a new function and then contracting with the City for their staff to provide the service.
GreenTRIP is an innovative certification program that rewards residential infill projects that apply comprehensive transport management strategies to reduce traffic, energy consumption and pollution emissions. Designed to complement LEED certification, which focuses on building design, GreenTRIP measures how connected a community is and what resources and incentives are provided to help use alternative transport modes, including walking, cycling, ridesharing, public transit and carsharing.
GreenTRIP certifies developments located in walkable neighborhoods near high quality public transit services that apply traffic-reducing strategies such as unbundled parking, carshare memberships, and discounted transit passes. These amenities tend to pay for themselves by reducing development parking costs, increasing housing affordability, as well as providing community benefits by reducing traffic problems and environmental impacts, helping to create more livable communities.
GreenTRIP offers third-party certification using transparent and flexible evaluation system that gives public officials and consumers confidence that developments will provide outstanding transportation performance. GreenTRIP partners with developers and local officials to ensure that new developments support community goals for creating more affordable and accessible housing. The organization works with developers to identify and implement the set of strategies that are appropriate in a particular situation, and helps explain their benefits at public hearings.
GreenTRIP Brochure (www.transformca.org/files/greentrip_brochure.pdf)
The Buffalo Niagara Medical Campus (BNMC) is a consortium of nine healthcare, research and educational institutions located on 120 acres in downtown Buffalo, NY. BNMC is the fastest rowing employment center in Western New York (WNY) with 12,000 people working and studying on the BNMC today and 17,000 people projected by the end of 2016. In late March of 2012, the BNMC was in the midst of much change, having just added over 2 million square feet of new development to the Campus and adding an additional 3,500 people to the employee population (going from 8,500 to 12,000) in just one year. In response, the BNMC had constructed a 2,036 space parking garage at the cost of $34 million to the institutions. During the early planning phases for this parking garage in the year 2010, BNMC conducted a comprehensive parking and transportation study which estimates long term parking demands and vehicular trip distributions. This study indicated that the planned future growth of the Campus would bring about considerable parking deficits and quickly require major capital investments in parking and transportation improvements.
In March 2012 BNMC entered into an agreement with the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) for the establishment and first year activities of a BNMC Transportation Management Association (TMA). The TMA was to be a membership organization that worked towards the development of a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) toolkit – or a set of strategies, policies, and programs designed to reduce the number of single occupant vehicles (SOV’s) and to promote the use of alternative transportation modes among workers at the BNMC.
This program includes a variety of policies and services, including more efficient parking pricing, improved walking, cycling (including bike parking), ridesharing, transit services, guaranteed ride home programs, and various incentives and contests. A key to the program’s success has been a comprehensive approach to employee outreach through a combination of marketing and organizing. While the BNMC uses a number of more traditional marketing tools – such as newsletters, brochures, webpages and videos – the unique aspect of the BNMC’s marketing campaign has been the use of actual employees and alternative commuters to carry the message. The “champions” (referred to as GO Getters) of over 100 employees are featured regularly in all the forms of media mentioned above. In addition, regular meetings are held with the GO Getters to receive feedback on the GO BNMC programs and learn more about the issues.
Although the program is young, preliminary results are encouraging. During its first year the drive-alone mode share declined approximately 5%. One of the largest factors in this shift has been the increased cost of parking passed on to the employee and the discontinuation of employer subsidies. Simultaneously, the BNMC has taken a comprehensive approach by developing and marketing a set of unique alternative transportation programs and providing the necessary supporting transportation infrastructure.
Arlington County, Virginia in the heart of the Washington, DC region, provides a case study of an integrated approach to transportation and development using these principles that have transformed the county. In 1970 Arlington was a declining older
suburb, but the County leaders fought to have new Metrorail stations and create transit-oriented development. This began Arlington’s renaissance. Between 1980 and 2013, Arlington has accommodated 38% population growth and 35% employment growth. Today it is a thriving community of 213,000 residents and a major employment center of 229,000 jobs. Its 39 million square feet of private office space is more than that of downtown Denver, CO; Los Angeles, CA; or Seattle, WA. This growth has been
accomplished with virtually no increase in road infrastructure and no increase in vehicular traffic.
In an article titled, “Providing Travel Choices for Vibrant Streets,” published in the ITE Journal, Howard M. Jennings (2014) describes how Arlington, Virginia uses transportation demand management strategies to significantly reduce automobile trip generation, resulting in vehicle traffic to decline on major arterials despite major growth in residents and jobs.
Arlington’s TDM programs is based on a three-pronged strategy:
1. Walkable, Mixed-Use “Urban Villages.” The County land use plan concentrates most commercial, retail, and multi-family development in high-density clusters around
underground Metrorail stations or surface transit bus nodes unified by highly walkable pedestrian open spaces.
2. Balanced Array of Transportation Resources. The County is served not only by a network of expressways and urban arterials, but also a full complement of mode options, including HOV lanes, subway and commuter rail, bus transit, bike trails and routes, and walking infrastructure. These options and a serious commitment to Complete Streets help commuters and residents naturally employ alternatives to driving.
3. TDM: Information, Encouragement, and Incentives. The final layer is the TDM services provided through Arlington County Commuter Services (ACCS) that make it easy for people to know about and use the transportation options available to them.
The Arlington County Commuter Services (ACCS) program provides various services for employers, residential complexes, and developers using a professional sales force which educates them about the business-friendly programs available to their employees and building occupants. These sales agents work with a liaison in the business to help set up internal marketing and incentive programs (e.g. the Federal tax-free transit benefit) to
entice trial and usage of alternatives to driving and to help balance parking subsidies that are oft en offered. The Employer Services program is responsible for approximately 60 percent of the daily trip shifting. Other services include a series of CommuterStores
and a call center providing personal information and assistance, sophisticated websites, online transit fare sales, bike and walking programs, carsharing, Capital Bikeshare, and a comprehensive electronic and traditional marketing program.
The County supports a Mobility Lab (www.mobilitylab.org ) a transportation think tank that focuses on advancing the practice of transportation demand management by communicating best practices, collaboration with individuals and organizations to develop innovative solutions, and developing technologies that make transportation more user-friendly through direct development, encouraging open source developments, nurturing new start-ups, and supporting a group of transportation technology enthusiasts with monthly “hack” meetings.
Results:
Arlington’s goal is for population and employment to grow 19% and 33% respectively by 2030 while keeping traffic within 5% of 2005 levels and avoid increasing roads capacity. This will require reducing automobile commute mode shares from 60% to 40% by 2030.
The TravelSmart program in Kamloops, British Columbia, promotes changes in travel behaviour and encourages sustainable community development in order to minimize demands on the municipal transportation system. Kamloops’ population, which is expected to increase from 85,000 to 120,000 by 2020, is placing increased demands on the city's transportation system and causing growing concern about quality of life amongst residents. Launched in January 1997, TravelSmart includes these ongoing initiatives:
Land use integration: Recognizing the strong links between transportation and land use, the city's official plan was revised to minimize the demand for car travel by influencing growth patterns. The plan now favours a compact form of development, situating accommodation close to employment and community services, and increasing density of the central area.
Less expensive road structure alternatives: To avoid expensive improvements to road networks, the city has slowed or halted development in some areas and identified underutilized arterial corridors for access to the downtown core. Rather than building bypasses over the busy highway that runs through town, the city encourages residents to use alternatives to the highway.
Improved public transit: A comprehensive travel plan was developed to improve the level of service and provide alternatives to the single occupant vehicle. Some improvements include increased frequency of service to outlying communities and the use of smaller buses that feed into the main system.
Promoting bicycle use: The Kamloops Bicycle Plan identifies $6 million worth of additional cycle routes and initiatives for businesses to provide "end of trip" facilities to cyclists, such as showers and bike racks.
Promotional programs: Transportation alternatives, such as carpooling, biking and walking, are promoted through workshops and seminars in workplaces; the "Safe Routes to School" program in schools; "Go Green" billboards on commuter streets; and door-to-door neighborhood education by city staff. The plan recognizes the need for an ongoing awareness campaign and community involvement to sustain TravelSmart.
Total project planning costs $300,000, of which $245,000 was funded by the city and $55,000 by the province. The full program is funded through city's general revenue, development cost charges, the B.C. Transportation Financing Authority, specific developers and BC Transit.
TravelSmart will be updated every five years as one component of "Kamplan", the city's growth management strategy.
After three years of operation, the program has improved air quality and reduced planned road expenditures by 75 per cent. Economic and environmental benefits:
· Anticipated road expenditures were reduced from $120 million to $14 million.
· Annual energy consumption is expected to decline from 128 to 125 gigajoules per capita.
· Carbon monoxide is expected to decline from 116 to 111 kg/capita/year, and carbon dioxide from 7,200 to 7,000 kg/capita/year.
ACT (2001), Transportation Demand Management Tool Kit, Association for Commuter Transportation (www.actweb.org).
ACT (2001), TMA Handbook, Association for Commuter Transportation (www.actweb.org); at www.nctr.usf.edu/clearinghouse/pdf/tma_handbook_final.pdf.
Association for Commuter Transportation (www.actweb.org) is a non-profit organization supporting TDM Programs.
BC Transit (2003), Travel Options Manual, BC Transit (www.transitbc.com); at www.transitbc.com/traveloptions/manual/Travel%20Options%20Manual.pdf.
Andrea Broaddus, Todd Litman and Gopinath Menon (2009), Training Document On "Transportation Demand Management, Sustainable Urban Transport Project (www.sutp.org) and GTZ (www.gtz.de).
Sally Cairns, et al (2004), Smarter Choices - Changing the Way We Travel, UK Department for Transport (www.dft.gov.uk). This comprehensive study provides detailed evaluation of the potential travel impacts and costs of various mobility management strategies and programs.
City of Cambridge, Parking And Transportation Demand Management Planning (http://bpc.iserver.net/codes/cbridge).
Cambridge Systematics (1994), Effects of Land Use and Travel Demand Management Strategies on Commuting Behavior, USDOT (http://ntl.bts.gov/DOCS/landuse.html), DOT-T-95-06.
Center for Urban Transportation Research (www.nctr.usf.edu/clearinghouse) provides TDM materials and classes and publishes TMA Clearinghouse Quarterly.
Commuter Choice Program (www.epa.gov/oms/traq) provides information, materials and incentives for developing employee commute trip reduction programs.
Commuter Check (www.commutercheck.com) works with transit agencies to provide transit vouchers as tax-exempt employee benefit.
Comsis Corporation (1993), Implementing Effective Travel Demand Management Measures: Inventory of Measures and Synthesis of Experience, USDOT and Institute of Transportation Engineers (www.ite.org).
Comsis Corporation (1994), A Guidance Manual for Implementing Effective Employer-based Travel Demand Management Programs, FHWA and FTA (www.bts.gov/ntl/DOCS/474.html).
DETR (2001), Take-up and Effectiveness of Travel Plans and Travel Awareness Campaigns, Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions (www.local-transport.detr.gov.uk).
Dr. Marcus Enoch, Lian Zhang and David Morris (2005), Organisational Structures for Implementing Travel Plans: A Review, Loughborough University, OPTIMUM 2, (www.optimum2.org/downloads/report31505.pdf).
Marcus Enoch (2012), Sustainable Transport, Mobility Management and Travel Plans, Ashgate (www.ashgate.com); at www.ashgate.com/isbn/9780754679394.
Reid Ewing (1993), “TDM, Growth Management, and the Other Four Out of Five Trips,” Transportation Quarterly, Vol. 47, No. 3, Summer 1993, pp. 343-366.
Reid Ewing (1997), Transportation and Land Use Innovations; When You Can’t Build Your Way Out of Congestion, Planners Press (www.planning.com).
European Platform On Mobility Management (www.epomm.org) provides resources for transportation demand management planning and program development.
FBC (2009), Transportation Demand Management: A Small and Mid-Size Communities Toolkit, Fraser Basin Council (www.fraserbasin.bc.ca); at www.fraserbasin.bc.ca/programs/documents/FBC_TDM_toolkit_web.pdf.
FCM (2008), Improving Travel Options with Transportation Demand Management (TDM), Centre for Sustainable Community Development, Federation of Canadian Municipalities (www.sustainablecommunities.fcm.ca); at www.sustainablecommunities.fcm.ca/files/Capacity_Building_Transportation/TransportationDemandManagement-e.pdf.
Erik Ferguson (2001), TDM and Public Policy, Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. (www.ashgate.com).
FHIO (2002), Federal House In Order – Reducing Greenhouse Gases Together, Government of Canada (www.fhio-ifppe.gc.ca).
GIZ (2015), Urban Mobility Plans: National Approaches and Local Practices, GIZ (www.giz.de/transport); at http://bit.ly/1TZCSiA.
GSA (2002), Federal Agency Transportation Management Program, General Services Administration, National Capital Region (www.ncpc.gov); at www.ncpc.gov/publications_press/transport/transportation.pdf.
ICF Incorporated (1997), Opportunities to Improve Air Quality Through Transportation Pricing Programs, USEPA (www.epa.gov/omswww/market.htm).
Information and Publicity Helping the Objective of Reducing Motorized Mobility (INPHORMM) (www.wmin.ac.uk/Env/UDP/phorm/inphormm.htm) is an organization that supports TDM marketing efforts.
International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (www.iclei.org) provides tools to help communities become healthier and more environmentally responsible.
Institute of Transportation Engineers (www.ite.org) has extensive technical resources on TDM, transportation planning and traffic calming.
It All Adds Up to Cleaner Air (www.italladdsup.gov) is a public information program sponsored by The Alliance for Clean Air and Transportation, a coalition of government and private organizations to raise awareness of the connection between transportation choices, traffic congestion, and air quality.
Howard M. Jennings Jr. (2014), “Providing Travel Choices for Vibrant Streets: Transportation Demand Management in Arlington, Virginia, USA,” ITE Journal, Vol. 84, No. 4, pp. 24-28; at http://tinyurl.com/mx8uptg.
Konsult: Knowledgebase on Sustainable Urban Land Use and Transport (www.elsevier.com/gej-ng/29/29/konsult) provides up-to-date information on the performance of a wide range of urban transport policy instruments.
Rich Kuzmyak, Jay Evans, and Dick Pratt (2010), “Employer and Institutional TDM Strategies,” Chapter 19, Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes, Report 95 series, Transit Cooperative Research Program, Transportation Research Board (www.trb.org); at www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/162432.aspx and to the B-12A website at http://144.171.11.40/cmsfeed/TRBNetProjectDisplay.asp?ProjectID=1034.
Todd Litman (1998), Guide to Calculating TDM Benefits, VTPI (www.vtpi.org).
Todd Litman (2006), Socially-Optimal Transport Prices and Markets, VTPI (www.vtpi.org).
Andrew Macbeth and Megan Fowler (2008), Transport Network Optimisation: Think-Piece, New Zealand Transport Agency (http://www.landtransport.govt.nz); at http://www.landtransport.govt.nz/sustainable-transport/docs/transport-network-optimisation.pdf.
Hugh McClintock (2001), Comprehensive Transportation Planning Bibliography, Institute of Urban Planning, University of Nottingham, U.K (www.nottingham.ac.uk/sbe/planbiblios/bibs). Provides comprehensive references and links for transportation and land use planning.
A.D. May (1999), Making the Links: Car Use and Traffic Management Measures in the Policy Package, University of Leeds, UK. OECD, ECMT, Workshop on Managing Car Use for Sustainable Urban Travel (www.oecd.org/cem/UrbTrav/Workshops/Carscities/May.pdf).
MetroPool (www.metropool.com) delivers transportation demand management employers and commuters in the Connecticut and New York regions.
Michael D. Meyer (1999), “Demand Management as an Element of Transportation Policy: Using Carrots and Sticks to Influence Travel Behavior,” Transportation Research Record A, Vol. 33, No. 7/8, Sept./Nov., 1999, pp. 575-599.
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), (www.nalgep.org).
National Bicycle and Pedestrian Clearinghouse (www.bikefed.org) provides resources related to non-motorized transport planning and promotion.
National TDM and Telework Clearinghouse (www.nctr.usf.edu/clearinghouse) provides current information and resources on Transportation Demand Management and Telework programs.
National Transportation Library (www.bts.gov/NTS) has resources, some of which are available to download, and others that can be ordered.
Noxon Associates (2008), The Case For TDM In Canada: Transportation Demand Management Initiatives And Their Benefits – A Handbook For Practitioners, Association for Commuter Transportation of Canada (www.actcanada.com); at www.actcanada.com/EN/Downloads/Case%20for%20TDM%20in%20Canada%20FINAL%20October%202008.pdf.
Noxon Associates (2009), Canadian Guidelines for the Measurement of Transportation Demand Management Initiatives, Transport Canada (www.tc.gc.ca/urban); at www.tc.gc.ca/media/documents/programs/cgmtdmi.pdf.
Noxon Associates (2011), Transportation Demand Management for Canadian Communities: A Guide to Understanding, Planning and Delivering TDM Programs, Transport Canada (www.tc.gc.ca/urban); at www.noxonassociates.com/guide.html.
OECD (2002), Road Travel Demand: Meeting the Challenge, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (www.oecd.org).
Pleasanton (1997), TSM Program (www.sustainable.doe.gov/codes/pleasnt1.htm).
PROSPECTS (2003), Transport Strategy: A Decisionmakers Guidebook, Konsult, Institute for Transport Studies, University of Leeds (www.konsult.leeds.ac.uk); at www.konsult.leeds.ac.uk/public/level1/sec00/index.htm.
Road Traffic Reduction Act 1997, Her Majesty’s Stationary Office (www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1997/1997054.htm).
SANDAG (2012), Integrating Transportation Demand Management Into the Planning and Development Process: A Reference for Cities, iCommute (www.icommutesd.com), San Diego Regional Planning and HNTB; at www.icommutesd.com/documents/TDMStudy_May2012_webversion_000.pdf.
Eric N. Schreffler, Deepak Gopalakrishna, Egan Smith and Wayne Berman (2012), “Integrating Demand Management Into the Transport Planning Process,” ITE Journal (www.ite.org), Vol. 82/1, pp. 38-41; at www.ite.org/membersonly/itejournal/pdf/2012/JB12AA38.pdf.
Nancy Skinner and Stuart Cohen (1996), Commuting in the Greenhouse; Automobile Trip Reduction Programs for Municipal Employees, International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (www.iclei.org).
Lynn Sloman, Sally Cairns, Carey Newson, Jillian Anable, Alison Pridmore and Phil Goodwin (2010), The Effects of Smarter Choice Programmes in the Sustainable Travel Towns: Summary Report, Report to the Department for Transport (www.dft.gov.uk); at www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/sustainable/smarterchoices/smarterchoiceprogrammes/pdf/summaryreport.pdf.
SPACK Consulting (2010), Travel Demand Management: An Analysis Of The Effectiveness Of TDM Plans In Reducing Traffic And Parking In The Minneapolis-St. Paul Metropolitan Area; Spack Consulting (www.mikeontraffic.com); at http://mikeontraffic.typepad.com/files/travel-demand-management-effectiveness-report.pdf.
STELLA: Sustainable Transport in Europe And Links And Liaisons With America (www.stellaproject.org) is sponsored by the European Commission’s 5th Framework Programme for Research and Development based on common issues in Transatlantic transport research.
Frederik Strompen, Todd Litman and Daniel Bongardt (2012), Reducing Carbon Emissions through TDM Strategies - A Review of International Examples, Transportation Demand Management in Biejing (http://tdm-beijing.org/index.php) GIZ and the Beijing Transportation Research Centre; at http://tdm-beijing.org/index.php?option=com_flexicontent&view=category&cid=12&Itemid=9&lang=en; direct link at http://tdm-beijing.org/files/International_Review.pdf; summary at http://tdm-beijing.org/files/International_Review_Executive_Summary.pdf.
Joseph D. Tario and Ellwood Hanrahan (2013), Advancing Transportation Demand Management Strategies at the Buffalo Niagara Medical Campus, Buffalo Niagara Medical Campus (www.bnmc.org), New York State Energy Research and Development Authority and New York State Department of Transportation; www.bnmc.org/wp-content/uploads/BNMC-NYSERDA-Agreement-25730-Final-Report-11-14-13.pdf
TDM Resource Center (1996), Transportation Demand Management; A Guide to Including TDM Strategies in Major Investment Studies and in Planning for Other Transportation Projects, Office of Urban Mobility, WSDOT (www.wsdot.wa.gov).
Transportation Demand Management Resource Centre (www.transportcanada.ca/programs/environment/UTSP/TDMResources.htm) is a program by Transport Canada to support TDM program development.
Transportation Association of Canada (www.tac-atc.ca) provides a variety of resources related to transportation planning and TDM.
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Database (www.tc.gc.ca/programs/environment/UTSP/tdm.htm) by Transport Canada, contains profiles and results for transportation management projects that foster energy efficiency, sustainable development, accessibility and increased productivity by influencing urban travel behaviours.
Transportation Planet (www.transportationplanet.com) seeks to educate viewers about the importance of balanced transportation using images of various transportation activities and services.
TravelSmart (www.travelsmart.transport.wa.gov.au) is a community-based program that encourages people to use alternatives to travelling in their private car.
TravelWise Website (www.travelwise.org.uk) provides advice and resources for TravelWise, Safe Routes and Travel Plan professionals.
USEPA (1998), Trip Reduction Ordinances, Transportation and Air Quality TCM Technical Overviews, US Environmental Protection Agency (www.epa.gov/oms/transp/publicat/pub_tech.htm).
USEPA (2002), Transportation Control Measures Program Information Directory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (www.epa.gov); at http://yosemite.epa.gov/aa/tcmsitei.nsf. This on-line searchable database has more than 120 records on programs that reduce transportation pollution emissions.
USEPA (2001), Directory of Air Quality Economic Incentive Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (www.epa.gov); at http://yosemite.epa.gov/aa/programs.nsf.
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 (www.moea.state.mn.us), Downtown Minneapolis TMO (www.mplstmo.org/TDMguidebook.htm) and 494 Commuter Services (www.494corridor.org).
Victoria Transport Policy Institute (www.vtpi.org) provides resources for planning and evaluating TDM, bicycling and walking programs.
Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) website has information on Transportation Demand Management at (www.wsdot.wa.gov/tdm).
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.
Victoria Transport Policy Institute
www.vtpi.org info@vtpi.org
1250 Rudlin Street, Victoria, BC, V8V 3R7, CANADA
Phone & Fax 250-360-1560
#42