3. Application of TDM to Policy Issues

CHAPTER ACRONYM LIST
ATM	Active Traffic Management
BRT	Bus Rapid Transit
CIVITAS	CIty-VITAlity-Sustainability
CMAQ	Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality
CMP	Congestion Management Program
C-TIP	Cross-town Improvement Project
CUT	Chassis Utilization Tracking
DOT	Department of Transportation
DRG	Dynamic Route Guidance
EPA	Environmental Protection Agency
EWGCC	East-West Gateway Coordination Council
FHWA	Federal Highway Administration
GIS	Geographic Information System
HOT	High Occupancy Toll
HOV	High Occupancy Vehicle
HUD	Housing and Urban Development
IMEX	Intermodal Move Exchange
ITB	Influencing Travel Behavior
ITS	Intelligent Transportation Systems
LOS	Level of Service
MPO	Metropolitan Planning Organization
NOX	Oxides of Nitrogen
RTTM	Real-time Traffic Monitoring
SOV	Single Occupancy Vehicle
TCM	Transportation Control Measures
TDM	Travel Demand Management
TERM	Transportation Emission Reduction Measure
TIGER	Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery
TIP	Transportation Improvement Program
TOD	Transit Oriented Development
TMA	Transportation Management Associations
TSM	Transportation Systems Management
TSMO	Transportation Systems Mgmt/Ops
VHT	Vehicle Hours Travelled
VMT	Vehicle Miles Travelled
VOC	Volatile Organic Compound
VTPI	Victoria [British Columbia, Canada] Transport Policy Institute
VTR	Vehicle Trip Reduction
WDU	Wireless Drayage Updating

This chapter provides the reader with a discussion of an expanded role for demand management in addressing a wide range of public policy issues. The goal of this chapter is to show how TDM can play a role in various typical policy objectives that are of concern today to state DOTs and MPOs. As the discussion of the policy issues will illustrate, the role of TDM extends beyond just air quality considerations. In fact, TDM can be a core function to achieve various other regional goals. The following seven policy issues will be described in this chapter:

• Improvements in Regional Mobility and Accessibility.
• Congestion Reduction, System Reliability and Safety.
• Air Quality.
• Economic Development.
• Land-Use Planning.
• Goods Movement and Freight.
• Quality of Life/Livability/Health.

The relationship between TDM and various policy objectives at each planning level is shown in Table 3.1. In some cases, the fit is better, such as with land use, which is most effectively dealt with at the local level where local police powers allow for zoning and development approval. Other issues, such as air quality, are better handled at a higher level, such as the metropolitan or state levels.

For each policy objective, the following information is presented:

• The role of TDM in addressing the policy objective.
• Potential TDM strategies that might address the policy objective.
• Key performance measures.
• Means to integrate TDM into the planning process.
• Key best practice planning examples.
• Key available resources.

Table 3.1: Ability of TDM to Address Policy Objectives

Policy Goals	Planning Levels State Level Planning	Planning Levels Metropolitan/ Regional Planning	Planning Levels Corridor Planning	Planning Levels Local/Municipal Planning
Regional Mobility/Accessibility	Good	Excellent	Good	Fair
Congestion Reduction/System Reliability/Safety	Fair	Excellent	Excellent	Good
Air Quality/Environment	Good	Excellent	Fair	Good
Economic Development	Fair	Good	Fair	Good
Land Use/Transportation	Good	Excellent	Good	Excellent
Goods Movement/Freight	Fair	Good	Good	Good
Quality of Life/Livability/Health	Fair	Good	Fair	Excellent

Most regions have already begun taking steps across the board to incorporate TDM to address their policy issues. Depending on the region, and the policy objective, TDM approaches are either included at an ad-hoc level, defined level, or optimized level. Table 3.2 provides a broad description of the TDM inclusion/capability levels for all the policy objectives. Typically, agencies would fall at different levels for different policy objectives.

The intent of each of these sections is to provide a summary-level detail (a short "factsheet" format) for considering TDM for each policy objective. In general, the sections are written toward approaching a more defined approach to including TDM and where possible, optimized approaches. The factsheets are at a high level of detail and the reader is encouraged to focus on the key resources in each section for in-depth reading, and examples on the role of TDM for each policy objective.

Table 3.2: Levels of TDM Inclusion/Capability to Address Policy Issues

Objective	Level 1 – Ad Hoc	Level 2 – Defined	Level 3 – Optimized
Mobility	Public transit viewed as primary travel alternative	Expanded travel choices set as goal	Accessibility to destinations and services no longer connotes necessity to travel
Congestion	TDM considered after capacity enhancements and modal improvements	TDM strategies are considered during key parts of planning process with respect to congestion	TDM "philosophy" integrated into congestion management approach
Air Quality/ Environment	"Clean" aspects of modes and programs considered	Single-occupancy VMT reduction used as primary objective in plan	TDM linked to long-term air quality improvement
Economic Development	TDM not seen as a economic development driver	Expanded travel choices linked to economic development goals	TDM viewed as means to decouple economic and VMT growth
Land Use/ Transportation	Expected reductions in VMT removed from trip generation step	Planning process includes land use scenarios that support more travel choices	Concurrency adopted as means to assure adequate facilities and services in place
Goods Movement/ Freight	No link perceived between TDM and freight	Peak pricing/Off-peak deliveries viewed as demand management	TDM principles fully integrated into freight planning
Quality of Life/ Livability/Health	Bike/Walk added to travel choices	Non-traditional objectives added to plan (e.g., satisfaction)	"Quality of life" objectives equal travel efficiency

How Can Demand Management Address Mobility and Accessibility?
The application of TDM in the planning process and its long-term implementation can have a significant impact on addressing mobility and accessibility policy goals for a region. Within the context of this document, mobility can be considered the ability for transportation system users to maneuver within and utilize the various components of the system virtually unimpeded. The term accessibility can then be considered the ability of users to gain access to various destinations in the region by using the transportation system, be it highway, transit, bike, or walk. Ultimately, this represents access to the things we need to live, even without the need to travel.

The major factors driving urban mobility needs and activities include three closely linked factors of land use, transportation supply, and transportation demand (Figure 3.1). A change in one leads to changes in others. As such, regions considering mitigating their urban mobility challenges need to include a multi-pronged approach involving activities in all three factors including:

• Improvements to sustainable travel options that build the capacity and quality of transportation infrastructure and services.
• More supportive land use practices that reduce the distances between origins and destinations and make transit, walking, and cycling more practical.
• The use of TDM to shape other key factors that influence personal travel decisions, such as attitudes and prices.²²

Each TDM strategy that works to influence travel choices and behavior – be it location, time, mode, route, or lane – can help reduce the strain on the overburdened system to enhance mobility and accessibility for travelers. The TDM strategies that work to meet regional mobility and accessibility goals are also strongly related to helping meet various other policy goals, such as congestion, economic development, and livability. Additional information on how TDM addresses those policies is discussed in later sections of this chapter.

Potential TDM Strategies to Address Mobility and Accessibility
A number of TDM strategies that cover the spectrum of options can work to improve regional mobility and accessibility. Broadly, the following four types of initiatives that support TDM are available to transportation planners:

• Traveler choices (e.g., mode, location, time, route choice).
• Incentives (e.g., financial inducement to use an alternative mode or stay off of a congested roadway).
• Information (e.g., real-time information about each choice).
• Enablers (e.g., new partnerships, regulations to support choices).

In many cases, improving mobility involves expanding and improving the range and quality of available travel choices. These choices may be short-term on a day-to-day or an hour-to-hour basis. In recent years, as urban mobility and accessibility needs change, TDM is applied at various application settings, and at various scales, as shown in Figure 3.2, developed for Transport Canada.

Some of the strategies that work to address regional mobility and accessibility are not always considered typical TDM strategies by planning agencies. However, when TDM is framed as providing choices, these strategies influence various travel behaviors. For example, categories such as arterial management, freeway management, work zone management, and similar strategies that help manage the demand once it is on the network are not necessarily thought of as TDM strategies. Many agencies see these operational strategies as separate from more traditional TDM strategies such as carpool matching, car sharing, and telework programs. However, they all aim to provide choices to the traveler, as discussed in Chapter 2. The notion of choices and the integrated set of strategies to provide seamless choices to the traveler are the marks of a true implementation of TDM as a mobility and accessibility measure.

Key Performance Measures
The Victoria Transport Policy Institute, in studying the means to evaluate accessibility in transportation planning, has provided the following descriptions of mobility and accessibility and the measures used to evaluate them:²³

Table 3.3: Transportation Evaluation Perspectives

	Vehicle Travel	Mobility	Accessibility
Definition of Transportation	Vehicle travel	Person and goods movement	Ability to obtain goods, services and activities
Measurement Units	Vehicle miles	Person-miles and ton-miles	Trips, generalized costs
Modes Considered	Automobile and truck	Automobile, truck and transit	Automobile, truck, transit, cycling and walking
Common Indicators	Vehicle traffic volumes and speeds, roadway level of service, costs per vehicle-mile, parking convenience	Travel distance and speeds, road and transit level of service, cost per person-mile, travel convenience	Quality of available transportation choices, distribution of destinations, cost per tip

As Table 3.3 shows, the focus on mobility or accessibility leads to different performance measures than if the focus were solely on vehicle travel. While mobility can be measured by the variety and use of various travel options (i.e., mode choice, mode shift, or relative travel times), accessibility is measured in terms of the proximity of activities to one another or the ability to access activities without a vehicle or with minimal miles.

Integrating TDM into the Planning Process to Address Mobility and Accessibility
The first step to including TDM into the planning process to help meet the regional mobility and accessibility policy goal is identifying those strategies that have goals and objectives that are in alignment with the policy. It is imperative that an agency develop a matrix of regional goals and relevant TDM strategies to help identify specific solutions that can be put forth as feasible options in the planning process.²⁴ These form the basic backbone of TDM by which an agency can influence the planning process. For example, an agency can take the following steps to advance TDM for regional mobility and accessibility:

• Incorporate TDM strategies and related objectives into general planning factors within the transportation planning process.
• Ensure that congestion management systems incorporate those TDM strategies that enhance regional mobility and accessibility so that they work in concert with other strategies to maximize the efficiency potential for the transportation system.
• Incorporate the TDM strategies for regional mobility and accessibility as potential solutions in major investment studies (MIS) to help address the factors influencing project solutions while efficiently and effectively meeting the needs of the community.
• Ensure that TDM strategies that address mobility and accessibility are part of the public involvement dialogue to gain the broad support of the community.

Once specific TDM strategies to enhance regional mobility and accessibility are incorporated into the transportation plan, it is important that agencies generate a list of high-level planning considerations related to specific strategies. These considerations can ensure proper attention to critical factors that can derail projects in the implementation phase. Such pitfalls can reduce the appeal of these TDM strategies and limit their potential use. Such considerations might include operational flexibility, decision-making needs, traffic control devices, enforcement, evaluation, monitoring, interoperability, marketing, legal and institutional issues, support facilities and services, and analysis tools and techniques.²⁵ While these considerations appear very specific and may be too detailed for the regional plan, the general consideration of these issues at the planning level ensures that they are included within the context of the overall network and can help ensure their successful implementation.

Best Practice Planning Example
An illustrative example showing the use of TDM in regional transportation systems management and operations to improve mobility and accessibility comes from Portland, Oregon. Metro, the Portland-area MPO, has developed a ten-year Regional Transportation System Management and Operations (TSMO) Plan.²⁶ In its vision statement, the MPO asserts that it will "strive to become a nationally recognized leader for innovative management and operations of its [regional transportation] system." The plan begins with a series of goals and objectives that direct the plan's specific TSMO investments, and a series of principles and aims that guide its implementation. This action-centric plan is structured around two distinct elements, regional investments and corridor investments. Metro defines TDM as strategies that increase use of travel options, decrease pollution and congestion, and increase mobility. The TSMO Plan, developed as part of the recently completed Regional Transportation Plan update, includes TDM and TSM/ITS strategies in the document. TDM strategies are coordinated with other system management strategies to maximize the impact on the region.

Regional investments are organized around four functional areas (including TDM), with several specific projects for each area (shown in Table 3.4). Detailed information for each project includes its goal/objective, priority, timeframe, capital cost, operation and maintenance cost, and the potential lead agency. In addition to the region-wide activities presented above, the plan divides the region into several unique corridors and identifies several projects that will be applied within each. For each corridor, the plan articulates current corridor conditions, assesses where the corridor stands in terms of current TSMO strategies, and presents a list of the regional multimodal traffic management, traveler information, and travel demand management strategies planned over the 10-year horizon of the plan.

Table 3.4: Portland TSMO Strategies

Multimodal Traffic Management	Travel Demand Management
Operate and Maintain Regional ITS Communications Network	Collaborative Marketing
Active Traffic Management (Regional Concept of Transportation Operations)	Employer Services
Transit Priority Treatment Performance Measurement	Rideshare Services
Region-wide Access Management Strategies	Measurement
Enhance Regional Traffic Signal System	Regional TSMO program
Implement Freight Data Collection System	Parking Management Pilot Program
Congestion Pricing/High Occupancy Toll Lanes	Smartcard fare system regional concept of operations
Active Traffic Management Pilot Project	Smartcard fare system pilot project
Next Generation Transit Signal Priority System	Youth transit pass program
24-hour Transportation Operations Coverage	Regional incentive/disincentive system
Automated Speed Enforcement

Traveler Information	Incident Management
Portland, OR Regional Transportation Data Archive Listing Enhancements	Incident Management
Multi-modal traveler data and tools	Expand Incident Management Teams/Training
Park & Ride Traveler Information	Integrate Voice and Data Networks
TripCheck Travel Information Portal Enhancement	Emergency Responders GIS System Upgrades
Arterial Performance Measure	Dynamic Routing and Preemption Pilot Project
Transit Performance Measurement System

KEY RESOURCES EcoMobility Application Guide, Transport Canada, 2008. Litman, Todd, Evaluating Accessibility for Transportation Planning – Measuring People's Ability To Reach Desired Goods and Activities, VTPI, April 2011. M. Grant, et al. Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: An Objectives-Driven Performance-Based Approach. FHWA-HOP-10-026. SAIC and ICF International, Inc., 2010. M. Grant, et al. Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety and Multimodal Planning. FHWA-HOP-10-028. ICF International Inc. and Delcan, Inc., 2010. Oregon Metro, Portland METRO TSMO Plan, June 2010, http://library.oregonmetro.gov/files//regional_tsmo_refinement_plan_june2010_final.pdf. P. Worth, et al. Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: The Building Blocks of a Model Transportation Plan Incorporating Operations – A Desk Reference. FHWA-HOP-10-027. SAIC, Kittelson and Associates, Inc., and ICF International, Inc., 2010. Transport Canada, Urban Transportation Showcase Program, (www.tc.gc.ca/utsp) T. Shaw. Performance Measures of Operational Effectiveness for Highway Segments and Systems: A Synthesis of Practice. NCHRP Synthesis 311. PBS&J, 2003.

How Can Demand Management Address Congestion?
Applying TDM in the planning process can play a pivotal role in helping agencies address their goals to reduce transportation system congestion, improve system reliability, and improve safety. Within the context of this document, congestion is the condition of the transportation system where demand exceeds available capacity, whether on a regular basis (recurrent) or as a result of unplanned events, such as incidents, emergencies, construction, or special events (non-recurrent). Enhanced travel choices, as defined in Chapter 2, can serve to address congestion in two ways. First, mode and location shift can reduce the total number of vehicles using the roadway system (reduce overall travel demand). Secondly, route and time choice can influence the temporal and spatial concentrations of congestion (by redistributing demand). The term "system reliability" can be considered the consistency or dependability of the transportation system, as measured from day to day and/or across different times of the day.²⁷ Congestion and reliability are directly linked, since the primary cause of reliability erosion is congestion.

Congestion is an ever-increasing reality in today's communities, and not just in large metropolitan areas. Many urban corridors in most large cities have been expanded to the extent feasible from subsequent widening projects, leaving few options to improving performance and efficiency other than TDM. Each TDM strategy that works to influence travel choices, and minimize recurrent and non-recurrent congestion, can help reduce the strain on the overburdened system. This is accomplished by reducing VMT, shifting travel outside the peak periods, and eliminating the need to travel – contributing to reductions in delay or VHT. The end result can be a reduction in congestion and an improvement in system reliability for travelers. TDM can also help provide travelers with reliable options that might not have been available before. The TDM strategies that work to meet the policy goals of congestion reduction and reliability improvement are also strongly related to helping meet regional mobility and accessibility, safety, and goods movement goals. Additional information on how TDM addresses those policies is discussed in other sections of this document, except for potential safety benefits, which are discussed later in this section.

Demand-side strategies are designed to better balance people's need to travel a particular route at a particular time with the capacity of available facilities to efficiently handle this demand.

Fundamentally, congestion is an expression of the inability to manage demand and efficiently use capacity as shown in Figure 3.3, the WSDOT "rice" experiment.²⁸ The rice experiment was an attempt to demonstrate the linkage between travel demand and system capacity. As a fixed amount of rice is forced through a funnel with a fixed opening, the resulting back-up in the funnel is reminiscent of a traffic bottleneck. As the rate of the rice entering the funnel is managed, the back-ups are avoided, increasing the ability of the funnel to transfer the rice through the system.

Potential TDM Strategies to Address Congestion, Reliability, and Safety
There are several approaches to managing demand to mitigate congestion that have been implemented world-wide and in the U. S. Broadly, they can be categorized into four measures as shown below. Examples for each measure category, based on experience with demand management in Europe, can be found in the FHWA Report "Managing Travel Demand: Applying European Perspectives to U. S. Practice."²⁹

• Financial/Pricing Measures (e.g., congestion pricing, VMT fees).
• Physical Measures (e.g., location-specific auto restrictions).
• Operational Measures (e.g., dynamic route information).
• Institutional Measures (e.g., sustainable travel planning).

Financial/Pricing Measures – By acknowledging the economic principles of supply and demand, congestion pricing channels discretionary rush-hour highway travel to other transportation modes or to off-peak periods, thereby taking advantage of the fact that the majority of rush-hour drivers on a typical urban highway are not commuters. By removing a fraction (even as small as 5%) of the vehicles from a congested roadway, pricing enables the system to flow, allowing more cars to move through the same physical space more efficiently.³⁰

More details on congestion pricing can be found in the primer series developed by FHWA³¹ or the FHWA Office of Innovative Program Delivery webpage on Road Pricing, which includes a discussion on the four types of pricing mechanisms with related key case studies.³²

While congestion pricing is one financial measure and a "stick," other financial measures offer "carrots" to travelers with the promise to mitigate congestion. These financial measures range from the Atlanta Cash for Commuters program³³ vanpool start-up subsidies, carpool "trial" incentives, bicycle loan programs, travel allowances/parking cash-out, commuter tax benefits, and employer tax incentives. Another example includes the rush-hour avoidance schemes in the Netherlands, where travelers are paid to stay off congested roads at specific peak times.³⁴

Rush Hour Avoidance Incentive – The Hague, The Netherlands A research project, Rush Hour Avoidance (or spitsmijden in Dutch) involving the Dutch Ministry of Transport, several universities, consultants, and Bereik! was implemented in 2006. This involved piloting an incentive program to induce travelers to avoid the A12 motorway between Zoetermeer and The Hague during the rush hour period of 7:30 – 9:30 am. Participants were offered a financial incentive of about $4 per day (€3) to avoid traveling on the facility during these times (or, alternatively, offered a chance to win a smartphone). Cars were fitted with transponders to record where and when participants traveled. The proportion of participants traveling during the peak congested hours was halved during the experiment. While some of those who avoided the peak hours shifted to carpools, transit and cycling (the opening of a new rail service in the corridor was delayed), the greatest proportion simply shifted the hours they traveled, most to before 7:30 a. m. The success of the experiment is now being replicated on another stretch of the A12 to Gouda and even used by public transit operators to shift riders outside the overburdened peak period.

Physical Measures – These measures emphasize how strategic infrastructure improvements can influence travel demand and auto use. These may range from automobile access controls on specific streets (like Broadway in New York City, 16th Street Mall in Denver) to wider access control zones, as in Rome and most Italian cities).

These measures work by restricting automobile use in certain key facilities, such as centers of historic or economic interest. Park and Ride lots are another example of physical measures that entice mode shifts to transit (especially when coupled with real-time traveler information). In fact, parking measures and an overall parking management strategy that includes reconsideration of parking supply using techniques such as parking maximums (vs. minimums), parking caps, shared parking, preferential parking, satellite parking and shuttle, and on-street parking are often overlooked by regions but hold promise in mitigating congestion.

Other physical measures deal with providing high-occupancy vehicle lanes, bus-only lanes, rush-hour lanes, using the shoulder for travel ("hard shoulder"), carsharing, and biking/pedestrian facilities. Figure 3.4 is an example of access-restricted lanes near Heathrow, London.

Operational Measures – These include traveler information, HOV to HOT conversions, parking information, and ATM. ATM requires that the full range of available operational strategies be considered, including the various ways these strategies can be integrated together and among existing infrastructure, to actively manage the transportation system so as to achieve system performance goals. Operational strategies include speed harmonization, incident management, queue warning, dynamic rerouting and traveler information, temporary shoulder use, and speed enforcement.

Institutional Measures – These include measures such as new partnerships, travel planning, coordination, and national policies on TDM. While traditionally considered "soft measures," they still have a vital role to play. Since the organizations that plan and manage demand management strategies are most often different from those managing traffic in a given corridor or area, new partnerships may be needed to proactively integrate the two concepts into one program or, at least, into a new coordination mechanism.

Individually, measures under these four categories have been implemented widely. However, increasingly it is becoming obvious that that the entire toolbox of strategies is needed to achieve the sustainability objectives. For example, the UK Highways Agency's Influencing Travel Behavior (ITB) program aims at "tackling congestion by providing access to information that enables people to make smarter travel choices."³⁵ Figure 3.5, from the UK Highways Agency, shows the levels of coordination and suite of strategies currently in consideration for influencing travel behavior.

TDM and Reliability – Making All Trips More Reliable (Regardless of Mode)
While most definitions of trip reliability focus on the variability of average passenger vehicle travel times, the concept of reliability needs to be applied to all travel modes. As such, reliability may focus not only on travel time, but also on the quality and day-to-day consistency of travel modes, be they public transit, vanpooling, bicycling, walking, etc. Some states and regions have adopted multi-modal performance measures in the form of levels of service (LOS) for car, transit, and non-motorized modes, so as to equally assess the efficacy of each mode in meeting user needs.

TDM strategies that enhance travel reliability for all modes include those associated with real-time multi-modal traveler information, and those providing preferential treatment for HOV (HOV/HOT lanes) and transit vehicles (priority treatment). One primary benefit of HOT systems is an assurance of reliable travel times for HOV and SOV modes through the use of pricing.

TDM and Safety – An Emerging Connection
In general, there is an accepted correlation between reduced congestion and improved safety, especially in terms of accidents and injuries. Making the link between the potential safety benefits of TDM and its inclusion in transportation plans is something that agencies who are looking to mainstream might consider doing. According to research summarized in the Victoria [British Columbia, Canada] Transport Policy Institute (VTPI) On-line TDM Encyclopedia, TDM strategies can affect safety and health in several ways, as summarized below.³⁶

• TDM strategies that reduce total personal travel can provide large safety benefits. Each 1% reduction in motor vehicle travel typically reduces total crashes and casualties by 1.4% to 1.8%. Examples: Distance-Based Charges.
• Pay-As-You-Drive (PAYD) vehicle insurance reduces total vehicle mileage and gives higher-risk drivers an extra incentive to reduce their mileage, and so can be particularly effective at reducing road risk. Each 1% reduction in mileage due to PAYD insurance is likely to reduce crash costs by 1.5-2. 0%.
• Strategies that reduce traffic speeds and traffic conflicts can reduce per-mile crash frequency and severity. Examples: Traffic Calming and Access Management.
• Strategies that reduce traffic congestion tend to reduce crash frequency but increase severity, because crashes occur at higher speeds. As a result, TDM strategies that shift automobile travel time, route, or destination but do not reduce total vehicle travel probably do little to increase road safety. Examples: Flextime, Telework, Congestion Pricing, and Parking Management.
• Strategies that shift travel from driving to transit and ridesharing tend to provide medium to large road safety benefits. Examples: Commute Trip Reduction Programs, Transit Improvements, Shuttle Services and Ridesharing.
• Strategies that shift automobile travel to non-motorized modes may increase per-mile risk for the people who change mode, but this can be offset by reduced risk to other road users, reduced trip length, and health benefits from aerobic exercise. Examples: Pedestrian Improvements, Bicycle Improvements, Non-motorized Transport Encouragement, and Universal Design.
• Strategies that create more accessible land use patterns and more balanced transportation systems may increase crash rates per lane mile (due to increased traffic density and congestion) but tend to reduce per capita fatalities and increased aerobic health. Examples: Smart Growth, Location Efficient Development, New Urbanism, Transit Oriented Development, and Clustering.
• Strategies that limit automobile traffic in an area may increase safety if they reduce total vehicle mileage, but may reduce safety if they simply shift traffic to other roadways. Examples: Vehicle Restrictions, Car-Free Planning, and Traffic Calming.
• Some TDM strategies directly improve personal security or promote safety. Examples: Security Concerns, Non-Motorized Transport Encouragement, Campus Transport Management. As stated above, TDM measures that reduce VHT will impact delay and subsequently address congestion. Indeed, VMT, perhaps the most common performance measure associated with TDM evaluation, can be converted to delay impacts using some simplifying assumptions regarding average speed. Likewise, there is a direct correlation between VMT and key safety measures, including crashes and fatalities. Therefore, VMT and VHT are the key measures for assessing the role of TDM in addressing congestion, reliability, and safety.

Key Performance Measures related to the effectiveness of TDM in addressing congestion, reliability and safety, include:

• Vehicle trip reduction (VTR) (needed to derive VMT reduction).
• Vehicle miles of reduction (needed to derive delay reduction and safety impacts).
• VHT.
• Average travel times.
• Vehicle hours of delay.
• Travel time reliability.
• Ratio of travel times on all travel options to one another (e.g., transit/highway travel times).

The collection of data needed to calculate these performance measures is generally available from highway counts used to measure volumes and speeds. Travel time reliability is largely based on the variability of average travel times. Additionally, VTR and VMT reduction can be estimated based on mode and location shift (often using average trip lengths).

Integrating TDM into Planning for Congestion Reduction. The critical approach to including TDM in the planning process to help meet the congestion reduction and reliability improvement policy goals is identifying those strategies that have goals and objectives that are in alignment with the policies. It is imperative that an agency develop a matrix of regional goals and relevant TDM strategies to help identify specific solutions that can be put forth as feasible options in the planning process. These form the framework of TDM by which an agency can influence the planning process and ensure that policies are met with appropriate strategies.

But beyond the matching of TDM strategies to key regional goals and objectives, demand management, in its ultimate planning form, can be mainstreamed in several ways. First, demand-side strategies can be treated as equal to supply-side strategies in addressing congestion. Second, TDM initiatives can become major funding categories in and of themselves, with significant TDM projects developed for the TIP (rather than as enhancement to capital projects). Planners can acknowledge that reducing overall demand for SOVs is worth pursuing as a goal to address congestion, environmental, and energy objectives. Finally, decision-makers need to understand that congestion is not a "necessary evil" with economic growth – that traffic growth and economic growth can be "decoupled" and that areas that aggressively tackle congestion and even reduce overall traffic demand will be economically stronger in the long run.

An example of integrating TDM into the Congestion Management Process (CMP) is included in Chapter 4. The example below focuses on the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority CMP planning effort.

Best Practice Planning Example
The CMP provides a good example of the role TDM can play in key transportation planning efforts. One specific CMP that fully integrates TDM was implemented by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority. The 2010 CMP³⁷ is a biennial plan that is required by state law, but also intended to meet federal requirements for the CMP. Additionally, the LA CMP is designed to link transportation, land use, and air quality considerations into a combined focus on congestion. As such, the CMP seeks to conform to the regional transportation plan and the region's air quality plan, each prepared by other agencies, but in close cooperation.

The LA CMP has several required elements, including: highway and roadway system monitoring, multi-modal system performance analysis, the TDM Program, and the Land Use Analysis Program. The program also includes implementation requirements for local jurisdictions aimed at bringing land use and transportation decisions in line. In fact, the CMP has been in existence for 18 years and includes a City requirement to adopt TDM ordinances to reduce the transportation impacts of new development. Local conformance with the requirements of the CMP is tied to distribution of state gas tax revenues.

TDM plays several integral roles within the CMP. Overall, TDM is stated as a means to maximize the efficiency of the roadway system. First, specific requirements are placed on new developments via local TDM trip reduction ordinances. Second, a major part of the CMP is the definition of roadway performance (LOS) deficiencies (roads operating below policy-determined LOS) and the recommendation that local jurisdictions (and regional entities) use TDM as a mitigation strategy to address these localized deficiencies. The CMP enumerates many regional, local, and public/private TDM initiatives, such as: ridesharing requirements from the air district, TDM, vanpool and transit incentive programs, supporting projects (HOT lanes, etc. ), public/private partnerships (TMAs) and Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) support for local initiatives (such as the "Call for Projects," which has funded 215 TDM projects since 1993 worth $162 million).

KEY RESOURCES FHWA, Congestion Pricing: A Primer – Overview, FHWA-HOP-08-039, 2008 - https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/congestionpricing/index.htm. FHWA, Integrating Active Traffic and Travel Demand Management: A Holistic Approach to Congestion Management, prepared by ESTC for the International Technology Scanning Program, FHWA-PL-11-011, 2011, http://international.fhwa.dot.gov/pubs/pl11011/pl11011.pdf. FHWA, Managing Travel Demand: Applying European Perspectives to U. S. Practice, FHWA Technology Scanning Program, FHWA-PL-06-015, May 2006. http://international.fhwa.dot.gov/traveldemand/ FHWA, Office of Innovative Program Delivery, "Road Pricing Defined" https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ipd/revenue/road_pricing/defined/index.htm. Focus on Congestion Relief Website, Federal Highway Administration, https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/congestion/index.htm. Georgia DOT, Cash for Commuters, Survey Key Finding - 2009, Center for Transportation and the Environment, 2009, (http://www.dot.state.ga.us/informationcenter/programs/environment/airquality/Documents/reports/ CAC_Cash_for_Commuters_FINAL_2009.pdf). FHWA Value Pricing Pilot Program Publications and Other Resources, https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/tolling_pricing/value_pricing/publications.htm J. Skolnik et al. Planning Special Events – Economic Role and Congestion Effects. FHWA-HOP-08-022. Jack Faucett and Associates and Dunn Engineering Associates, 2008. Los Angeles County MTA, 2010 Congestion Management Program, 2010. NCHRP Synthesis 311, http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_syn_311.pdf. Road Weather Management Program Website, Federal Highway Administration, https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/weather/index.asp. S. Latoski et al. Managing Travel for Planned Special Events Handbook. FHWA-OP-04-010. Dunn Engineering Associates, 2003. T. Litman and S. Fitroy, Safe Travels: Evaluating Mobility Management Traffic Safety Impacts, paper presented at 85th Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting, updated February 18, 2011, http://www.vtpi.org/safetrav.pdf. Traffic Congestion and Reliability: Trends and Advanced Strategies for Congestion Mitigation. Cambridge Systematics and Texas Transportation Institute, 2005. Traffic Congestion and Reliability: Linking Solutions to Problems. Cambridge Systematics and Texas Transportation Institute, 2004. Travel Time Reliability: Making it There on Time, All The Time. FHWA-HOP-06-070. Texas Transportation Institute and Cambridge Systematics, 2006. VTPI, Evaluating Safety and Health Impacts: TDM Impacts on Traffic Safety, Personal Security and Public Health, in TDM Encyclopedia, updated June 17, 2011, http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm58.htm UK Highways Agency, http://www.highways.gov.uk/knowledge/9611.aspx Washington State Department of Transportation - The $1,000 Doug MacDonald Challenge - http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Traffic/Congestion/Rice/Default.htm

How Can Demand Management Address Air Quality and Environment?
TDM is often associated with efforts to address air quality goals by seeking to reduce automobile travel, a significant source of many regulated pollutants (cars account for the lion's share of CO₂ emissions within the transport sector). Environmental protection, and air pollution in particular, are often a priority goal within transportation plans, as a result of the following issues. First, environmental protection is a fundamental health and safety issue for urbanized areas. Second, state and federal regulations place standards on key pollutants as to the maximum concentration that is allowable. Third, and perhaps most importantly, federal planning regulations require that a region's transportation plan conform to the mobile emission budget estimated in the State (air quality) Implementation Plan. In other words, transportation projects that are shown to jeopardize the region's air quality attainment status, or plan for achieving it, should not be undertaken. "Conformity" was an issue mentioned earlier in the context of an expanded definition of TDM as going beyond employer ridesharing and its use in conformity analysis.

The role of TDM as an air quality strategy was solidified in 1990 with the passage of the federal Clean Air Act Amendments, which named several TDM strategies as Transportation Control Measures (TCMs). In fact, at one point, traditional TDM, called Employee Commute Options programs, were mandated among the ten urban areas with the highest ozone levels. As the air quality issue has been subsumed within the broader discussion on climate change, demand management has been forwarded as an effective strategy for its ability to reduce car use.

How does TDM address air quality policy objectives? First and foremost, TDM strategies often aim to generate the same result, the reduction of VMT, or reduced car use. Air pollution is emitted from the tailpipe, and a reduction in the amount of travel in a region equates to a reduction in emissions. VMT reduction can be accomplished in many ways. Reducing the growth in overall VMT may require long-term land use policies and economic factors that drive travel demand. However, in the shorter term, VMT reduction can be accomplished by reducing the amount of travel individuals make each week, via mode shift, trip elimination, or trip chaining.

Emissions are not only a function of the amount (distance) of car use, but also of car use in general. A proportion of emissions are generated by simply starting a car (cold start emissions). Therefore, TDM strategies that promote mode shift not only reduce the amount of car travel but cold start emissions, as travelers switch to higher occupancy or car-free modes. For this reason, when evaluating the effectiveness of TDM strategies in addressing air quality goals, it is important to measure both VMT reductions as well as the preferred mode to which drive-alone modes are transferred. For example, if a commuter shifts to taking the train to work, but drives to the station, the VMT reduction should be for the rail portion only and not the entire commute distance.

Potential TDM Strategies to Address Air Quality and Environment
Some of the key TDM strategies to directly address air quality objectives include:

• Shifting travelers to higher occupancy modes through incentives, pricing, and transit benefits.
• Shifting travelers to zero emission modes (bike, walk).
• Encouraging travelers to chain trips together to reduce "cold starts" and VMT.
• Working with major traffic generators (employers, schools, business parks, event venues, airports) to induce mode shift to cleaner modes.
• Starting programs to encourage smarter trip planning to avoid unnecessary starts and stops.³⁸
• Starting programs to provide smoother traffic flow such as active traffic management.
• Encouraging the use of clean vehicles for alternative mode travel (e.g., buses and vans) or for all travel (e.g., allowing very clean vehicles into HOV lanes).
• Alternative work arrangements (such as compressed work weeks and telecommuting) to eliminate commute trips one or more days per week.

Whereas the role of TDM in meeting other policy objectives involves the smarter use of the car (e.g., efforts to encourage time or route choices for more efficient operation of highways to reduce congestion), the focus of TDM strategies to address air quality is grounded in the desire to reduce car use as measured in reduced VMT.

Key Performance Measures
A majority of TDM impact assessments on vehicle emissions require estimation of changes in VMT. In order to derive VMT reduction, measurement of both travel behavior change and trip distance is required. This might require traveler surveys to assess prior mode and even trip distance. Therefore, performance measures related to air quality include:

• Mode shift.
• Vehicle trip reduction.
• VMT reduction.
• Emission reduction (including any pollutants that are included in policy objectives, such as CO₂ related to climate change goals.
• Cost per ton of emissions reduced.

Integrating TDM into the Planning Process to Address Air Quality and Environment
One important key to integrating TDM into the planning process is to move beyond viewing TDM as primarily a mitigation or conformity measure. If TDM is seen as more supportive of cleaner, healthier travel, then the reasons for including TDM in transportation plans will be much broader. In general terms, TDM has been viewed as a means to address unmet demand that cannot be accommodated with new or improved capacity. When TDM is viewed as an integral part of a sustainable transportation system, rather than as a short-term "fix" to unmet demand, then the range of strategies employed and policy objectives addressed will be much broader. Climate change action plans, as new types of plans, may become an increasingly popular means to consider TDM strategies.

It is likewise important to evaluate TDM strategies on a comparative cost effectiveness basis so that they can be evaluated on par with efficiency and capacity measures. For example, TDM strategies might be evaluated based on VMT reduction, whereas efficiency and capacity measures might be evaluated on improvements to speed or reductions in delay. Therefore, VMT reduction would need to translate to delay reduction, or conversely, supply-side strategies evaluated in terms of mobility or other criteria not traditionally used. This is especially critical when performing evaluation for funding purposes. TDM projects and programs, often funded with CMAQ funds, are selected among a variety of projects for their cost effectiveness. This is further discussed in Chapter 5.

Best Practice Planning Example
The Washington D.C. Metropolitan region uses TDM strategies to help meet air quality targets. In keeping with the region's air quality plan and to meet conformity requirements, the Constrained Region Transportation Plan (and TIP) includes a number of strategies called Transportation Emission Reduction Measures (TERMs). TERMs have been included in the region's plans since 1995 and are aimed at addressing the region's ozone emission targets, namely two ozone precursors: VOCs (Volatile Organic Compounds) and NO_x (Oxides of Nitrogen) and more recently PM_2.5 (fine particulate matter). Four types of TERMs have been included, some related to improving traffic flow, and others related to clean heavy duty vehicle engines (trucks, school buses, etc.).³⁹

One set of TERMs is related to commuter travel. Five TERMs, related to TDM, are designated for implementation by the regional TDM program, Commuter Connections. The five traditional TDM TERMs, (for the planning and evaluation period 2006-2008) were:

• Teleworking.
• Guaranteed Ride Home.
• Employer Outreach.
• Mass Marketing.
• Information Kiosks.

A sixth TDM element, the Commuter Operations Center, is also included as it represents the basic information and ride-matching services of the Commuter Connections program. An independent, triennial evaluation of these TERMs compared measured results to targets for each of the five TERMs. The evaluation was largely based on user surveys of participants (such as guaranteed ride home) or modeled results (such as employer outreach). The evaluation derived the number of commuters participating and, based on their observed or estimated mode shift, the daily trip reduction (trips), VMT reduction (miles), NO_x reduction (tons), and VOC reduction (tons). For the evaluation ending in 2008, the results of evaluating the five TDM TERMs, plus the Commuter Operations Center, resulted in the following comparison of results to stated objectives (Table 3.5):

Table 3.5: Washington DC Evaluation of TDM TERM Measures⁴⁰

	Daily Vehicle Trips Reduced	Daily VMT Reduced	Daily NOx Reduced (tons)	Daily VOC Reduced (tons)
2008 Goal	111,372	2,209,154	1.121	0.667
Measured Results	117,600	2,453,895	1.139	0.639

The daily NO_x and VOC reduction is crucial to conformity, and this evaluation revealed that the TDM program met its targets for trip and VMT reduction and NO_x emission reduction, but fell slightly short of its VOC target.

Future TERMs, studied as part of the 2009 long-range plan and related conformity analyses, include some additional TDM-related TERMs, for example, voluntary parking cash-out or required parking impact fees, in addition to expanded carsharing, bike station, and vanpool subsidy programs. Therefore, TDM measures are an important part of the Washington D.C. region's air quality strategy and are an integral part of its transportation plan.

KEY RESOURCES Arizona DOT, Alternative Modes as an Air Quality Mitigation Strategy, prepared by ESTC, FHWA-AZ-04-566, 2004, http://www.azdot.gov/TPD/ATRC/publications/project_reports/PDF/AZ566.pdf Auto Alliance – www.ecodrivingUSA.com Cambridge Systematics Inc, Moving Cooler: An Analysis of Transportation Strategies for Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Washington D.C.: Urban Land Institute, 2009. FHWA, Integrating Climate Change into the Transportation Planning Process, prepared by ICF International, July 2008, https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep/climatechange/climatechange.pdf. MWCOG, Commuter Connections Transportation Emission Reduction Measures Analysis Report FY2006 – FY2008, 2009, http://www.mwcog.org/uploads/pub-documents/xldWVw20090223160744.pdf. TRB, Special Report 264 -The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program: Assessing 10 Years Experience, 2002. USDOT, Transportation's Role in Reducing U. S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Vol. 1 Synthesis Report, Report to Congress, April 2010, http://ntl.bts.gov/lib/32000/32700/32779/DOT_Climate_Change_Report_-_April_2010_-_Volume_1_and_2.pdf

How Can Demand Management Address Economic Development?
Some economists view congestion as a sign of a healthy, growing economy, the demand for travel outpacing the supply of road capacity. However, gridlock results in millions of hours of wasted time for travelers stuck in traffic, which could be used more productively. Efforts to manage demand are sometimes viewed as being counter to economic growth because some strategies, especially mandates and disincentives, are viewed as constraining growth.

However, in the light of sustainability, managing demand is key to long-term economic viability and urban vitality. Economic development is one of the three key sustainability components, the others being environmental stewardship and social inclusion. Ultimately, the crucial question remains: "Can transportation growth be decoupled from economic growth?"

Put another way, can economic growth occur without a concomitant increase in VMT growth, especially growth of SOV use? Those subscribing to the concept of sustainable transportation believe that it can, and demand management is the key to this decoupling.⁴¹ One international panel on sustainable transport suggested that two of the key means for decoupling transport and economic growth are related to influencing modal choices and addressing quality of life issues through trip substitution (e.g., e-commerce).⁴²

One broad misconception is that TDM counters economic development by restricting mobility and accessibility through prescriptive measures aimed at modulating how, when, and where workers and shoppers can travel. This misconception may be derived from perceptions held in the 1990s that regulations requiring employer involvement in commuter TDM was a liability to business and not a means to broaden worker options and address societal objectives. Although their number has declined, some policy-makers still view TDM as counter to laissez faire economic development policies. A more contemporary view involves expanding and improving travel choices as favorable toward addressing economic development goals. In this view, travelers truly desire more options to meet their increasingly complicated daily routines. But another view is emerging as well, suggesting that transport growth and economic growth do not need to be directly linked, as commonly held. In other words, some areas are seeking to reduce VMT while at the same time growing their economic base. This "decoupling" can only be accomplished by the concomitant growth in travel demand, from new employment and business, being accommodated by means other than driving alone.

Potential TDM Strategies to Address Economic Development
TDM is founded in the notion of expanding travel choices to increase the mobility of travelers and accessibility to goods and services needed to make a city work. Generally effective, available travel options, such as public transit, shared ride, non-motorized, or even trip substitution strategies, are key characteristics of a vibrant, livable city in which people want to live and work. Likewise, measures that improve travel time reliability support economic development as journeys are more predictable and wasted time in congested conditions is minimized.

In the short term, TDM tends to work best in a growing economy. A competitive economic situation creates motivation for TDM stakeholders (such as employers and developers) to support travel choices and incentives to recruit tenants and employees. Likewise, in a growing economy, tax revenue and private investment are more readily available to implement innovative TDM strategies. Of course, demand management has been applied in all economic conditions, since it is often used to mitigate localized access, parking, and other issues at existing employment sites and major travel generators, such as sporting events. In the long run, cities that embrace and operate sustainable transportation systems are the places most likely to remain economically strong and attract new business and capital. TDM is a key component of such sustainable transportation systems.

At the most basic level, a TDM strategy that enhances or expands travel options is supportive of economic development. However, strategies that improve mobility and accessibility are also compatible with growing urban economies as they allow people to reach their destinations. Ultimately, strategies that reduce congestion are good for economic development in the long run. Of course, TDM strategies that enhance goods movement are vital to economic competitiveness. Several strategies that support economic development include:

• Improved travel options, such as: public transit, carpooling, vanpooling, bicycle, walk, etc.
• "Last mile" services, such as shuttles, carsharing, bike facilities, pedestrian connectivity, etc.
• Commute management consulting services to employers and developers to ease commuting and increase the ability to recruit and retain tenants and employees.
• Strategies related to congestion relief and mobility/accessibility goals (see above).
• Strategies that improve travel time reliability for one or all modes. These are beneficial to passenger and freight transport and the businesses that create demand on the system. Reliable travel times minimize uncertainty in travel and support economic development goals.

Key Performance Measures
Measuring the impact of TDM on economic development is difficult because direct causality between transport measures and economic impacts are difficult to establish. However, if we define one goal of TDM in addressing economic development to be the expansion and use of travel options, then common performance measures might include:

• Growth in utilization of all travel options.
• Per capita use of principal travel options (e.g., annual transit rides per capita).
• Mode shift to non-SOV travel options.
• Leads to reduced household vehicle expenditures, thereby increasing employment opportunities. A recent study found that $1 million in reduced fuel expenditures equates to a net increase in 4.5 jobs.⁴³
• Rate of change in VMT in relation to change in economic indicators.
• As such, data needed to derive these performance measures largely involves tracking mode shares, utilization, and VMT, which may require the type of household travel surveys normally conducted for transportation planning and modeling.

Integrating TDM into the Planning Process to Address Economic Development
Integrating TDM into regional plans and policies related to economic development may require a shift in thinking as much as a set of planning guidelines. First, policy-makers and other elected officials need to discard old ideas about the direct relationship between economic growth and travel or traffic growth. Sustainable transportation planning and smart land use principles can contribute to the ability to grow a region's economy without concomitant growth in traffic and congestion. One key to this new understanding is recognizing that there is a fundamental difference between travel demand (people) and traffic demand (cars), as outlined in Chapter 2. The Lund example described in the next section revealed that growth in travel demand can be accommodated with new and improved travel choices that do not rely on the drive-alone automobile traveling at peak periods. While the choices may vary from Europe to the U.S., based on city characteristics, the notion of providing alternatives to SOVs still holds.

The second, and related, shift in thinking is the notion that sustainability is the key to future economic prosperity. Regions that embrace sustainable transport principles that allow for economic development without compromising environmental stewardship or social justice are taking a longer-term view of transportation planning. Sustainable transport systems seek to address the needs of today's travelers without compromising the ability to meet the needs of future generations. In the U.S., climate change action plans are one form of sustainable urban transport planning. Some specific suggestions on how to successfully implement TDM initiatives while continuing to grow the local economy are suggested by those evaluating the Lund experience. They point to the need to:

• Educate all residents about sustainable transportation.
• Develop a wide range of travel options for various travel markets.
• Involve politicians and opinion leaders very early and throughout the planning process.
• Carefully evaluate and report experience.

Best Practice Planning Examples
A solid example of TDM serving economic development policy objectives would be provided from any example that documented a reduction in VMT, or in the rate of growth of VMT, during a period of economic growth. In another sense, a city or area that realized a reduction in congestion or in the growth in delay or travel times, during a period of economic growth, might illustrate the ability of TDM to complement economic development. Two examples are presented below: Lund, Sweden, and Arlington, Virginia.

The opposite has also been observed on several occasions when economic downturns have been accompanied by a reduction in congestion or VMT, as was the case in the so-called "dot com" boom and bust in the San Francisco Bay Area. Similarly, in periods of economic downturn, transportation capacity improvements are often funded as part of stimulus programs, as seen in both the original Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 and much more recently the TIGER (Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery) Grant stimulus program from U.S. DOT.

Lund, Sweden
As posited at the beginning of this discussion, can transport growth be decoupled from economic growth? A well-documented example comes from the city of Lund in Sweden.⁴⁴ Lund is a city in southwestern Sweden with over 100,000 inhabitants and a major university. It is located within the Õresund region that was formed in the early 2000s as a result of a new bridge spanning from the Copenhagen, Denmark, region to southwestern Sweden.

During the period from 2003 to 2006, the Õresund region enjoyed tremendous economic growth, more so on the Swedish side, where Lund is located. At about the same time, however, many cities in the region were developing and adopting sustainable transportation plans to allow for growth in a more environmentally and socially inclusive manner. In 1997, the City of Lund adopted the Lund Environmentally-friendly Transport Plan (Lundamats being the Swedish acronym). The objective of Lundamats was to cap traffic levels at 1995 levels for the life of the plan's first phase (through 2004). Lundamats had five major components:

1. Introduction of sustainable transport planning.
2. Recognition of Lund as a bicycle city (the city center was closed to traffic in 1971) (Figure 3.6 above).
3. Extension of public transit integrated with better land use policies.
4. Promotion of environmentally friendly car traffic (cleaner, higher occupancy, linked trips).
5. Reduction of employer-generated car traffic.

The integrated set of strategies implemented under the first phase of Lundamats included BRT, bicycle support, schools, trip reduction, employer trip reduction, and overall mobility consulting to citizens, visitors, schools, and businesses. A careful evaluation of Lundamats revealed that 15% of all residents had changed their travel behavior to use their car less. Overall, not only were traffic volumes maintained at 1995 levels for the ten year plan horizon (set at 100 on the y axis in Figure 3.7), but traveler surveys showed that per capita VMT was reduced by 2 percent during that period (red line – Linjar (Car) in Figure 3-6). New travel demand was met through the increased use of transit and bicycling.

This is a very important finding because Lund was not only able to reduce the rate of growth in VMT, during this period of high economic growth, but the demand management efforts were instrumental in realizing a net reduction in car travel or VMT. As seen in Figure 3.7, growth in person travel demand was accommodated by bicycle and public transit modes, the focus of the sustainable travel strategies funded and implemented within Lundamats. Therefore, Lund was able to "decouple" traffic and economic growth by offering new and enhanced travel choices and incentives and teaching residents why and how to use them.

Arlington, Virginia
Arlington is an urban county next to Washington, D.C with over 210,000 residents, and 43.6 million square feet of office space organized around a series of transit-oriented urban villages. By the 1970s, Arlington was a stagnant suburb, with a declining population. Construction of the Metrorail began a spurt in Transit-oriented development (TOD), which in turn inspired economic growth that has continued today. Through commitments to transit and TDM, the county has been able keep the traffic on arterial roads flat from 1996-2011 while experiencing dramatic increases in transit usage during a period of explosive economic growth. The factors of success identified by the county include:

• High-density, mixed use development clustered around transit service.
• High quality transit service – regional and local.
• Excellent walking environment.
• Safe, visible bike routes and trails.
• HOV lanes.
• Complete Streets/Supportive Traffic management.
• Parking management (right supply, price).
• Demand Management – creating a culture of balanced options, less car dependence.

KEY RESOURCES FHWA, "Managing Travel Demand: Applying European Perspectives to U. S. Practice," Report No. FHWA-PL-06-015, May 2006 Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Road Travel Demand, Meeting the Challenge, OECD, Paris, 2002. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), The Economic and Social Impacts of Electronic Commerce, OECD, Paris, 1999.

How Can Demand Management Address Land Use Planning?
In the long run, the ability to manage travel demand will be greatly enhanced by efforts to perform smarter land use planning that minimizes low-density development and provides greater opportunities for using alternative travel options – such as public transport, bicycling, walking – or avoiding SOV travel altogether.

TDM should be integrated into land use plans that seek to reduce our reliance on the car and shorten trip distances. TDM is instrumental in not only promoting more travel choices, but by creating programs and policies that educate, encourage, and support these more sustainable modes. Therefore, TDM needs to be an integral part of plans to integrate land use and transportation, often considered within the concept of smarter growth or sustainable growth.⁴⁵ Growth can either be "accommodated" with sufficient new transportation supply (which is increasingly unfeasible) or "managed" so as to minimize negative impacts of congestion, low-density development, energy, and environmental issues.

The land use-transportation interaction issue is becoming central to many transportation plans as policy-makers recognize the impact of land use decisions on the long-run effectiveness and efficiency of the transportation system. However, the role of TDM in bridging the connection between land use decisions and transportation investment is becoming more evident. While many land use decisions create longer trip distances due to the separation of uses and affordable housing locations, TDM seeks to reduce VMT by promoting options to long-distance drive-alone commutes and other trips. The treatment of TDM within the land use-transportation policy arena can differ from one agency to the next. Understanding these different approaches might assist the reader in determining the means to improve the connection in the planning process.

Differences in the treatment of TDM within the land use-transportation sphere occur within the strategy evaluation phase of the planning process. For example, some plans develop a target for VMT reduction that is desired from TDM and simply remove this travel from the trip generation step of the modeling process. In other words, without carefully determining the estimated impact of various TDM strategies, the planning process simply adopts a policy target for TDM effectiveness. A more rationalized planning approach directly embeds TDM into future land use scenarios that involve more travel choices and land use policies that support them (and vice versa). Finally, when TDM is mainstreamed into the planning process, land use decisions are predicated on the concept of concurrency, where transportation solutions are defined and realized before certain development can occur.

Potential TDM Strategies to Address Land Use Planning
TDM has a long history of mitigating the traffic impacts of new developments. TDM is often integrated into the site planning process for new developments so as to reduce trip generation and parking needs. This assures that, at a minimum, the site design features are supportive of trip reduction strategies, such as having parking structures able to accommodate vanpools, sidewalks connected to bus stops, secure bicycle parking, and on-site showers/lockers for those using active commuting modes.

One powerful tool within the area of land use policy is parking. Parking has a profound impact on travel behavior. Free parking provides a large, hidden subsidy to the automobile and works against efforts to shift travelers into more sustainable modes. Parking policy, in terms of parking price, parking supply, and parking management, can be a significant lever in determining how, when, and where someone travels. One major inducement for developers to include TDM strategies in their site plans is the ability to reduce the amount of required parking.

In between the long-term planning objectives of land use/transportation integration and the short-term site design planning role for TDM, demand management strategies play a role in specific initiatives to create places with viable travel options, such as TOD. TODs seek to create mixed use developments around transit stations or hubs, and this in turn not only improves access to transit, but encourages bicycling and walking as average trip distances may be shorter for many travel needs.

Overall, the impact of land use and design on travel behavior has been summarized in Transportation Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Report 95 – Chapter 15 (Land Use and Site Design):⁴⁶

Where development is compact, land uses are compatible and intermingled, and there is good transit access and pedestrian interconnection, it appears that average trip lengths are shorter, greater use is made of transit and non-motorized travel modes, and household vehicle trip generation and particularly household VMT are less.

Additional information on how land use and the built environment affect travel behavior is available from a seminal meta-analysis conducted by Ewing and Cervero⁴⁷ of known studies on the impact of land use characteristics and its spatial proximity to transportation systems and services.

Incorporating TDM into the Land Development Process is the subject of a comprehensive guidebook created by the Center for Urban Transportation Research at the University of South Florida. This guidebook includes an enumeration of the TDM strategies and supporting actions related to land development. As shown in Table 3.6, it is organized by the various ways of influencing travel behavior, such as mode shift, pricing, regulation, or the means to impact the trip-making, in terms of distance, time of day, etc.

3.6: Range of TDM Strategies Potentially Addressed in the Land Development Process⁴⁸

Means of Influencing Travel Behavior	TDM Strategy (Examples)	Supporting Action (Land Development Process)
Trip Length
Reduce quantity of vehicle miles	Transit oriented development Proximate commuting by allowing employees to relocate job to the branch office nearest their homes	Clustering related land uses and providing more direct access (comprehensive plans and land development regulations) Providing incentives to employers
Mode
Increase efficiency of system to carry more people in the same number of vehicles	Developing land support of alternative modes, such as transit oriented development Limited parking supply Offering alternative modes, such as transit, vanpooling, carpooling, bicycling, walking Carsharing	Locating land development to take advantage of existing underutilized transportation services such as transit routes Providing on-site amenities, such as lockers, showers, bicycle parking and preferential carpool parking (land development regulations) Providing support services such as marketing, ridematching and guaranteed ride home Providing transportation services and physical transportation facilities off-site Shared parking
Route
Bypass congestion	Transit oriented development Providing route alternatives High occupancy vehicle lanes	Providing a grid system, street connectivity, and destinations within easy walking distance (comprehensive plans and land development regulations) Implementing Advanced Traveler Information Systems
Regulation
Mandate specific traffic management actions or outcomes by local ordinance	State growth management provisions Concurrency Trip reduction ordinances Zoning ordinances Subdivision ordinances Parking ordinances High occupancy vehicle lanes	Carried out primarily by land developers, property managers, employers, neighborhood associations
Cost
Establish incentives and disincentives	Parking pricing Transit subsidies Parking cash-out High occupancy toll lanes Commuter tax benefits	Tax benefit program assistance
Frequency
Reduce number of trips over given time period	Providing on-site amenities Compressed work week Telework	Providing physical facilities, such as employee cafeteria, fitness center, bank Providing technical support to employers
Time of day/day of week
Move trips to less congested periods or avoid vehicle trip completely	Compressed work week Staggered work hours Telework Flex time	Unbundling parking from employment site leases Providing technical support to employers

The strategies listed in Table 3.6 include traditional TDM measures, such as the promotion of alternative commute modes, but also strategies related to parking, design and the physical attributes of developments that reduce car-dependency. TDM strategies that support longer-term policies of land use and transportation interaction are similar to the list provided here in that they support the three basic components of smart land use – the three "Ds": density, diversity, and site design. Density objectives create demand for shared ride modes, such as transit and carpooling. Diversity creates access to activities that may shorten trip length, thereby creating more demand for bicycling and walking. One study added two more "Ds" in destination accessibility (access by various modes) and distance (to transit, shopping, and activity centers).⁴⁹ Of course, site design, as mentioned above, can work to reduce our reliance on the car by creating livable, walkable, and safe spaces, including streets.

Key Performance Measures
The discussion of potential strategies to address TDM and land use directly suggests several key performance measures, including:

• Vehicle trip reduction.
• VMT reduction.
• Person throughput on key facilities or corridors.
• Trip generation rates by land use.
• Distance of key trip generators to transit.

Perhaps the key to evaluating the role of TDM in addressing the land use-transportation interaction issue is assessing the quality, availability, and utilization of various non-SOV modes by land use or by destination.

Integrating TDM into the Planning Process to Address Land Use Planning Land use planning can involve a slightly different set of plans and actors than those policies and plans focused solely on the transportation system. Whereas integrating land use and transportation, or smart growth, is often a key goal of regional transportation plans, issues may arise at other planning levels. These other planning processes might include:

• Statewide land use and growth plans, including developments of regional impact.
• Regional land use or smart growth plans.
• Regional or state economic development plans.
• Regional transit plans that might incorporate TODs.
• Municipal general plan updates.
• Municipal zoning regulations.

Incorporating TDM into the site development process is most often handled at the municipal level and requires a well-documented process, requirements, and schedule, given that the TDM strategies are included within a larger site planning and approval process. Having said that, most TDM measures are negotiated as part of this process, requiring that all parties have access to technical resources on what strategies are most cost effective and applicable to a given need.

Best Practice Planning Examples
Examples that document the effectiveness of smart land use policies are still relatively rare, as few comprehensive initiatives have been implemented and even fewer evaluated. However, some studies have sought to assess travel behavior in transit-oriented neighborhoods. Additionally, there is some evidence from specific TOD projects. Finally, additional information exists on the impact of integrating TDM into the development site plan review process.

• In Lund, Sweden (see subsection on Economic Development above), the city's sustainable urban transport plan included the integration of BRT and integrated land use policies. The Lundalink BRT system was built beyond the urbanized area to encourage new development that would be less reliant on the automobile. The City of Lund purchased much of the land adjacent to the BRT route and is only approving less car-dependent developments.⁵⁰
• TCRP Report 95, Chapter 15 on land use, compared commute mode shares before and after four new light rail stations and related transit-oriented developments were opened in the Portland, Oregon, region. The comparison shows that the car share was reduced in three of the four areas, whereas train use was up in all cases and the bus share increased in three of four areas. Interestingly, the bike and walk share was reduced or remained the same in two of the four locations. In fact, the increase in the non-motorized share in the Lloyd District, near downtown Portland, appears to have come from reduced bus use.⁵¹
• One recent study of new office developments that have incorporated TDM strategies comes from the Twin Cities region in Minnesota. A study of six office developments that implemented TDM programs in order to reduce parking requirements was summarized in a 2010 report. The office sites ranged from 200 to 2,300 employees and most provided incentives for commuting by transit or carpooling, including preferential parking spaces for carpools and vanpools. The study revealed that trip generation was reduced by 27% to 37% and parking demand was reduced 11% to 21%.⁵²

KEY RESOURCES Center for Clean Air Policy, Cost Effective GHG Reductions through Smart Growth and Improved Transportation Choices, 2009, http://www.ccap.org/docs/resources/677/CCAP%20Smart%20Growth%20-$%20per%20ton%20CO2%20(June%202009)%20FINAL%202.pdf Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR) "Incorporating TDM into the Land Development Process", FDOT -BD549-12, 2005 (http://www.nctr.usf.edu/pdf/576-11. pdf). FHWA, "Managing Travel Demand: Applying European Perspectives to U. S. Practice," Report No. FHWA-PL-06-015, May 2006TCRP Report 95, Chapter 17, "Transit Oriented Development: Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes," 2007. Reid Ewing and Robert Cervero, "Travel and the Built Environment: A Meta Analysis," Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 76, Issue 3, June 2010. Spack Consulting, "TDM: An Analysis of the Effectiveness of TDM Plans in Reducing Traffic and Parking in the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area," January 2010. Todd Litman and Rowan Steele, Land Use Impacts on Transport: How Land Use Factors Affect Travel Behavior, Victoria Transport Policy Institute, March 2011. TCRP Report 95, Chapter 15, "Land Use and Site Design: Traveler Response to Transportation System

How Can Demand Management Address Goods Movement and Freight?
The need to enhance goods movement and freight in regions is often a vital policy imperative for planners from an economic competitiveness standpoint. More than other policy issues, the ability to move freight efficiently in, around, and out of the region has direct implications to regional economies. While congestion relief for commuters and accessibility to destinations is important for economic competiveness, congestion in freight transportation has more direct ramifications to the economy. The value added by freight transportation to the national gross domestic product (GDP) is substantial. Coupled with extraordinary growth in foreign trade, spurred by globalization of supply chains and containerization, the amount of goods moving through the country has exploded, placing unique stresses not only on the gateways themselves but also to the transportation networks that support them.

Freight congestion is a fairly recent phenomenon because the interstates, together with the existing rail, water, and pipeline systems, provided adequate surface freight capacity from the 1960s through the 1980s. Deregulation in the 1970s changed the face of freight transportation in the country, removing modal and jurisdictional barriers for carriers.

While the impacts of congestion on freight logistics cannot be understated, the impacts of freight traffic on regional mobility are also a concern to planners. In some sections of the country and on specific road segments, truck traffic is a significant contributor to congestion (examples include traffic around ports, multimodal terminals, and border crossings). The challenge in terms of policy is to minimize shipper and freight costs while also minimizing the external impacts due to freight transportation (infrastructure damage, air quality impacts, congestion, etc). TDM can play a vital role in mitigating the interaction between trucks and cars by both managing the demand for goods movement during peak congested periods and by reducing overall personal vehicle demand when and where goods movement is a priority.

The link between TDM and goods movement is just being realized, with most planning agencies having yet to make the connection. The greatest step forward in integrating TDM into the planning process to address freight and goods movement would entail a simple realization that a link does exist. As agencies become more attuned to the potential for addressing goods movement issues with TDM, planning agencies might seek pilot projects to better manage the time and location of trucks on the transportation system. However, the ultimate form of integration may come in the form of mainstreaming TDM as a principal means to reduce overall vehicular demand, or the spatial and temporal distribution of that demand to better manage the flow of people and goods in an integrated system.

Potential TDM Strategies to Address Goods Movement and Freight
TDM strategies that remove bottlenecks in general transport also benefit freight transportation. However, specific approaches that incorporate technology to manage freight transportation and supply chain management are still emerging. Among the various freight related strategies listed in the Online TDM Encyclopedia, the following potential ideas for freight transportation management may be of interest and under the purview of regional transportation planners:⁵³

• Improve rail and marine transportation infrastructure and services to make these modes more competitive with trucking.
• Organize regional delivery systems so fewer vehicle trips are needed to distribute goods (e.g., using common carriers that consolidate loads, rather than company fleets).
• Use smaller vehicles and human powered transport, particularly for distribution in urban areas.
• Implement fleet management programs that reduce vehicle mileage, use optimal sized vehicles for each trip, and ensure that fleet vehicles are maintained and operated in ways that reduce external costs (congestion, pollution, crash risk, etc.).
• Change freight delivery times to reduce congestion.
• Create pricing and tax policies that encourage efficient freight transport.

Some of these strategies have been combined, such as using pricing to influence freight delivery times, as evidenced in the Port of LA/Long Beach's PierPass program that assesses a fee to trucks that enter or exit the port facilities during peak hours in order to reduce congestion and concomitant emissions on I-710 through central LA.⁵⁴ Similarly, the 2011 Virginia Tax Incentives for Port Users program address congestion in Richmond by incentivizing the transfer of goods and containers through barge and rail.⁵⁵

Key Performance Measures
As the connection between freight and demand management is fairly new, a common or recommended set of performance measures has not been developed. However, most of the TDM measures designed to reduce the impedance of freight movement on overall traffic flow are as follows:

• Mode shift of goods from truck to rail or individual to consolidated deliveries.
• Time shift of goods movement to off-peak hours.
• Route shift of goods movement to less congested facilities.

Integrating TDM into the Planning Process to Address Goods Movement and Freight
Including TDM into the planning process to help meet regional goods movement policy involves identifying those strategies that have goals and objectives that work to meet that policy. It is imperative that an agency develop a framework of regional goals and relevant TDM strategies to help identify specific solutions that can be put forth as feasible options in the planning process.⁵⁶ These form the platform of TDM by which an agency can influence the planning process. For example, an agency can take the following steps to advance TDM for goods movement:

• Seek ways to apply demand management to goods movement, such as real-time information, eco-driving, peak period pricing, mode shift, etc.
• Incorporate the strategies and related objectives of TDM that help address a goods movement policy into the general planning factors in the transportation planning process.
• Ensure that congestion management processes incorporate those TDM strategies that work to improve goods movement so that they work in concert with other strategies to maximize the efficiency potential for the transportation system.
• Incorporate TDM strategies that support goods movement enhancement as potential solutions in Major Investment Studies (MIS) to help address the factors influencing project solutions while efficiently and effectively meeting the needs of the community.
• Ensure that goods movement TDM strategies are part of the public involvement dialogue to gain the broad support of the community.

Once specific TDM strategies to address goods movement are incorporated into the transportation plan, it is important that agencies generate a list of high-level planning considerations related to these specific strategies. These considerations can ensure proper attention to critical factors that can create challenges in the implementation phase. Such challenges can reduce the potential success of these TDM strategies by limiting their implementation to meet a goods movement policy. Such considerations might include geometric design and cross-section, operational flexibility, decision-making needs, traffic control devices, enforcement, evaluation, monitoring, interoperability, marketing, legal and institutional issues, support facilities and services, and analysis tools and techniques. While these considerations appear very specific and may be too detailed for the regional plan, the general consideration of these issues at the planning level ensures that they are included within the context of the overall network and can help ensure their successful implementation.

Self-Sustaining Urban Freight Traffic Management System in New York City In a quest to find ways to encourage off-hour deliveries in New York City, the U.S. DOT's Commercial Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Technology Applications Program funded a project to design and develop a self-sustaining urban freight traffic management system for the New York City metro area. The project focused exclusively on urban deliveries, representing the bulk of freight traffic in urban areas. These urban deliveries are the target for freight demand management programs aimed at reducing the congestion they produce. In comparison to other segments of the freight industry, these deliveries typically have longer delivery tours, may incur tolls in cordon areas, and tend to have smaller shipment sizes. The project is two-fold – including system design and pilot testing. It integrates remote sensing technology, freight demand management, traffic simulation, and policy. The project combines the revenue generation power of time-of-day pricing, with tax deductions to receivers willing to accept off-peak deliveries, and global positioning system (GPS)-based traffic monitoring, to induce a shift of truck traffic to the off-hours. Project results indicate that (1) financial incentives to receivers will be effective in inducing a shift of carriers to the off-hours; (2) the switch of truck traffic to the off-hours brings about substantial economic benefits, according to traffic simulations; (3) on average, a truck traveling in the off-hours achieves speeds of about 8 miles per hour, while in the regular hours they typically fall below 3 miles per hour, as measured by GPS devices on participant vehicles; and (4) there are substantial reductions in service times during the off-hours. The project is one of the first in the world to successfully integrate the use of remote sensing technology (GPS enabled cell phones) as part of a system to reduce truck traffic in the congested hours of the day, through the use of incentives to receivers. Source: U.S. DOT, Integrative Freight Demand Management in the New York City Metropolitan Area, (http://transp.rpi.edu/~usdotp/OHD_FINAL_REPORT.pdf)

Best Practice Planning Examples
One region that has made progress in linking freight planning with transportation planning and programming is the St. Louis regional MPO known as the East-West Gateway Coordinating Council (EWGCC). East-West Gateway has developed a framework to illustrate how freight planning activities fit within regional transportation planning processes and the development of critical planning documents. The creation of this framework has helped clearly illustrate the importance of freight issues in the overall process and helps ensure that critical freight transportation projects are not overlooked when projects are prioritized and funds are allocated. This planning framework could serve as a model to further integrate TDM into the transportation planning process in conjunction with goods movement.

Specific initiatives in the U.S., such as the Cross-Town Improvement Project (C-TIP) in the Kansas City region, are based on the concept of "freight travel demand management." The C-TIP is designed to coordinate cross-town traffic to reduce empty moves between terminals, bringing together traffic management systems with freight operations in order to manage freight demands on the highway system. The C-TIP project grew to incorporate all of the information and guidance strategies below:⁵⁷

• Intermodal Move Exchange (IMEX) - facilitate the exchange of load data and availability information between railroads, terminal operators, and trucking companies. The primary function will be to allow collaboration on defining pickup and delivery schedules and locations that maximize the potential for linking moves, and eliminating bobtail and empty moves.
• Chassis Utilization Tracking (CUT) - provide a means for chassis owners and users to accurately account for asset use, which is crucial for the allotment of fees, and to maintain the proper balance of chassis to support cross-town and other container deliveries.
• Real-Time Traffic Monitoring (RTTM) - provide a means for up-to-the-minute information regarding roadway conditions, travel speeds, and predicted travel times to be captured and passed along to the trucking community. Using a combination of traditional roadway sensors, traffic probes (i.e., vehicles that report their progress while traveling on the roadways), and third party providers, RTTM will provide the traffic information necessary for drivers and dispatchers to make informed decisions regarding routing and departure times.
• Dynamic Route Guidance (DRG) - the DRG engine of RTTM will utilize inputs from RTTM and a Geographic Information System (GIS) source, along with simulation tools, to act as an intelligence tool to provide real-time visual routing around congested areas.
• Wireless Drayage Updating (WDU) - provide a means to wirelessly and inexpensively exchange information with drivers regarding trip assignments, traffic congestion information, trip status, and location information through a truck-mounted driver interface device (T-MDID).

In Europe, the multi-city CIVITAS (CIty-VITAlity-Sustainability) initiative is specifically focused on identifying and testing strategies for urban commercial transport. With the wide variety of local conditions to account for, a broad spectrum of strategies and measures (47 in all) were tested in 20 European cities.⁵⁸ Three main categories of goods movement strategies were identified:

• Intelligent use of vehicles approach – combines three strategic areas: distribution, fleet management, and car sharing. More than one third of the measures in the cities aimed to reduce the number of vehicles in circulation, number of supply trips, mileage and transport related air pollutant emissions, and noise by establishing distribution schemes and centers.
• Vehicle technology approach – introducing clean vehicles and clean fleets.
• Incentives approach – incentives or restrictions related measures to solve special problems, such as loading, unloading, access, and parking of the commercial transport.

Evaluation studies concluded that the measures showed great promise and were relatively successful where fully implemented. However, private sector and user opposition to the measures inhibited their full implementation and testing. In Toulouse and La Rochelle, France, electric delivery vehicles were used in the pedestrian zone, reducing CO₂ by 58%. In Burgos, Spain, new regulations on deliveries within a "clean zone" reduced the number of delivery vehicles by almost half (from 480 to 260 per day).⁵⁹

KEY RESOURCES Cambridge Systematics, Inc., Prime Focus, LLC, and K. Heanue, 2007. Cross-town Improvement Project Website, (http://www.ctip-us.com/contact.htm) FGM-AMOR, CIVITAS II: 2005-2009 Final Brochure, prepared for European Commission and CIVITAS GUARD, September 2010 (www.civitas.eu). FHWA, Port Peak Pricing Program Evaluation, FHWA-HOP-09-014, 2009, https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop09014/sect2.htm Focus on Congestion Relief Website, Federal Highway Administration, https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/congestion/index.htm. Guidebook for Integration Freight into Transportation Planning and Project Selection Processes. NCHRP Report 594. Hans-Joachim Becker, Diana Runge, Urte Schwedler, Michael Abrahamm, Commercial Transport in European Cities: How do European cities meet the challenges of commercial transport? Experiences and case studies from the CIVITAS Programme of the European Commission, Berlin, July 2008, available at http://www.civitas-initiative.org/docs1/IVP_21.pdf ISSN 1613-1258 J. Skolnik et al. Planning Special Events – Economic Role and Congestion Effects. FHWA-HOP-08-022. Jack Faucett and Associates and Dunn Engineering Associates, 2008. M. Grant, et al. Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: An Objectives-Driven Performance-Based Approach. FHWA-HOP-10-026. SAIC and ICF International, Inc., 2010. M. Grant , et al. Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety and Multimodal Planning. FHWA-HOP-10-028. ICF International Inc. and Delcan, Inc., 2010. NCHRP Synthesis 311, Performance Measures of Operational Effectiveness for Highway Segments and Systems, 2003 P. Worth, et al. Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: The Building Blocks of a Model Transportation Plan Incorporating Operations – A Desk Reference. FHWA-HOP-10-027. SAIC, Kittelson and Associates, Inc., and ICF International, Inc., 2010. Road Weather Management Program Website, Federal Highway Administration, https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/weather/index.asp. S. Latoski et al. Managing Travel for Planned Special Events Handbook. FHWA-OP-04-010. Dunn Engineering Associates, 2003. USDOT, Integrative Freight Demand Management in the New York City Metropolitan Area, (http://transp.rpi.edu/~usdotp/OHD_FINAL_REPORT.pdf) Victoria Transportation Policy Institute (VPTI), Online TDM Encyclopedia, updated 2010, http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/htm. Virginia Tax Incentives Fact Sheet provided by Barbara Nelson from the Richmond MPO (11/17/2011)

How Can Demand Management Address Quality of Life, Livability, and Health?
A policy objective that is of growing interest is quality of life. While often rather subjective, the sum total of the experience of living in a place, including the transportation system, affects its citizens' perceived quality of life. Availability of a range of quality, affordable travel choices can be part of this sense of good quality of urban living. This concept of quality of life is currently being realized through the notion of livability.

As it relates to transportation systems and services, livability seeks to maximize the positive benefits of mobility, accessibility, and economic development while minimizing the negative side effects, such as environmental, safety, and social concerns. It also recognizes the potential health benefits of certain travel options, especially bicycling and walking, which is part of quality of life. The FHWA Livability Initiative is part of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)/DOT/Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Partnership for Sustainable Communities.⁶⁰ This connection points to the relationship between sustainable transportation and livable communities. Communities that have good, well-used travel choices equally available to all citizens are considered more livable than communities totally dependent on the single-occupant auto. Communities with a high use of walking and bicycling and that are well connected by transit will likely have healthier citizens and residents who rate the quality of life in their towns as high.

FHWA's definition of livability underscores the role of TDM:

Livability is about tying the quality and location of transportation facilities to broader opportunities such as access to good jobs, affordable housing, quality schools, and safe streets. This includes addressing safety and capacity issues on all roads through better planning and design, maximizing and expanding new technologies such as ITS and the use of quiet pavements, using Travel Demand Management approaches to system planning and operations, etc.⁶¹

One link between livability and sustainability is found within this definition. Again, sustainability includes three key components: economic, environmental, and social. This social component is founded in the notion that the transportation system should be inclusive of all segments of society, akin to the desire for environmental justice. By defining livability as founded in opportunities, access, affordability, quality, and safety, FHWA is making the case for sustainable transportation.

The HUD/DOT/EPA Partnership for Sustainable Communities has set forth six principles for livable communities, the first of which is directly related to providing more transportation choices. That principle is to "develop safe, reliable, and economical transportation choices to decrease household transportation costs, reduce our nation's dependence on foreign oil, improve air quality, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and promote public health."⁶²

VTPI defines livability as "the subset of sustainability goals" that directly affect communities, such as:

• Local economic development.
• Environmental quality.
• Equity.
• Affordability.
• Public safety and health.
• Community cohesion (positive interaction among neighbors).⁶³

Livability, and its related concepts of quality of life, healthy transportation, and sustainable travel, are a rapidly emerging set of policy objectives in many transportation plans. While the health and well-being of citizens is an overriding goal of many plans, the integration of TDM as a means to achieve this is relatively new.

Planning agencies generally start by defining livability in terms of improved bicycle and pedestrian options. However, when TDM becomes more rationalized in the planning process, the concept of livability requires new performance measures, such as user satisfaction of the new travel options. Finally, when TDM integration is mainstreamed, concepts such as livability become as important as traditional objectives, such as system efficiency and congestion relief.

Potential TDM Strategies to Address Quality of Life, Livability, and Health
Beyond desiring a broader range of travel choices, many demand management strategies directly enhance livability and quality of life as they afford travelers with the ability to balance various personal and family needs. Flexible work schedules, telecommuting, and compressed work weeks afford commuters flexibility with when and where they work. Bicycle and walk facilities allow residents a healthier means of traveling shorter distances. Quality public transit and vanpooling allow commuters the ability to avoid the stress of driving to work. Sustainable transportation affords communities the ability to address larger climate change concerns and a feeling that they can "do their part." Finally, given the role of TDM and safety, discussed elsewhere in this chapter, a sense of enhanced safety is also associated with livability. This may involve travel options that are perceived as attractive, convenient, and safe. But it also means that conflicts between vehicles and active modes (bike and walk) are minimized so that travelers can feel confident and safe in using these modes. For example, one of the main reasons that so few school age children walk or ride a bike to school is parental fear that these modes are not safe in the face of growing, localized traffic congestion.

Livability, and its connection to sustainability, can be supported by most TDM strategies as demand management seeks to mitigate many of the negative impacts of traffic congestion, increase a sense of safety, and reduce our reliance on the single-occupant automobile. TDM strategies that seem to be particularly well suited to fulfill livability goals include:

• Bicycle and walk facilities, especially with neighborhood connectivity and continuity.
• Programs to encourage active transportation modes and educate travelers on their benefits.
• Neighborhood focused initiatives, including individualized marketing, and school pool programs (neighborhood children walking to school together).
• Alternative work arrangement strategies, such as telecommuting, flextime, and compressed work weeks that give travelers flexibility to balance work and home schedules.
• Reliable and actionable real-time, multimodal traveler information that allows travelers to minimize uncertainty in their travel planning and avoid the most congested time periods and locations.

Key Performance Measures
Measures intended to evaluate the effectiveness of TDM in meeting livability objectives can be somewhat subjective, as quality of life and livability are perceived states of being. However, certain indicators can point to how well travel choices and the TDM measures are contributing to these perceptions, such as:

• Awareness of transportation services and mobility options.
• Satisfaction with travel options and incentives to use them.
• Utilization of travel options.
• Proportion of daily travel taken with non-motorized modes.

Many of these indicators require the direct surveying of target markets to which the travel options are intended. At least on a pilot basis, these efforts should be relatively straightforward and low cost.

Integrating TDM into the Planning Process to Address Quality of Life, Livability, and Health Integrating TDM into planning processes aimed at improving livability is a relatively new challenge for the U.S. However, it is gaining in importance as sustainability and "green living" take hold in areas across the nation. TDM aimed at improving livability is supported by recent national initiatives, such as those demonstrated through the HUD/DOT/EPA partnership and the FHWA Livability Initiative. As stated earlier, livability can mean different things to different people.

It may come down to a great "customer" focus for our transportation system. Do we treat the users of the transportation system as customers to be served or vehicles to be moved? The British Highways Agency (equivalent to FHWA) has assumed a mission that better focused on the customer by seeking to serve "safer journeys, informed travelers and reliable journeys."⁶⁴ These are all precepts of a more livable, sustainable society as defined by the MetroPlan Orlando 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan, which incorporates alternative land use (see box).

A planning process that better incorporates customer or user views may be a good start in this direction. The scenario-based planning process, which seeks to define alternative futures rather than alternative transportation systems, is supportive of this approach. General population surveys that seek to understand values important to travelers may have value in gauging how transport fits into everyday life, since travel is a derived demand.

Having said this, planning processes that elevate TDM, namely transit and active transportation modes, to equals with road capacity solutions, will tend to support policy objectives related to livability.

Best Practice Planning Examples
The FHWA's Livability Initiative website referenced previously provides many case examples of cities and regions that are planning for more livable communities within the context of a sustainable transportation system. The case studies vary in strategies adopted, geographic location, and size of the city, region, or state to adopt strategies that support livability. A few highlights from these case studies include:

• "Reclaiming Streets" projects have been implemented in several large cities, including New York, Washington D.C., and San Francisco, where road space is being converted to bicycle lanes and pedestrian areas. In St. Louis, a Great Streets competition selected 3-4 urban streets for redesign. This is in keeping with the Complete Streets movement that embraces all users (e.g., pedestrians, bicycles, cars, delivery vehicles).
• The City of Raleigh, North Carolina, is making livability a foundation of its 2030 transportation element of the city's general plan. Raleigh's Transportation Plan contains policies that will create a well-connected, multi-modal transportation network, support increased densities, help walking become more practical for short trips, support bicycling for both short- and long-distance trips, improve transit to serve frequented destinations, conserve energy resources, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution, and do so while maintaining vehicular access and circulation.
• Many urban areas are seeking to better integrate land use/transportation decisions, and this can lead to more livable communities that enjoy a broad set of travel options and have access to services and amenities that require less reliance on cars. These case studies are discussed in the section on land use.

Orlando 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan Incorporates Alternative Land Use Between March 2006 and August 2007, more than 20,000 Central Floridians answered the question "How Shall We Grow?" as part of a public input process involving community meetings, presentations, and surveys. The result was a shared community vision for growth in Central Florida. Citizens and local leaders identified several principles to guide future transportation decisions, including: preserve open space; provide transportation choices; and foster distinct, attractive places to live. A study commissioned for the 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan compared a transportation plan shaped using the principles from "How Shall We Grow?" versus a plan that solely relies on trend land use patterns in the three-county area. The "How Shall We Grow?" alternative land use, which creates density along designated corridors, generated fewer VMT, fewer VHT, and significant air quality benefits when compared to the trend land use. The alternative land use also increased the role of transit in Central Florida's future transportation system by better connecting land use and transportation in the region. Noting the impact of the alternative land use identified during the planning process, the MetroPlan Orlando Board opted to develop the 2040 Long Range Transportation Plan using the principles of "How Shall We Grow?" versus the trend land use. (Source: MetroPlan Orlando (http://www.metroplanorlando.com/files/view/2040_lrtp_scope_of_services.pdf)

KEY RESOURCES FHWA – Livability Initiative - https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/livability/ HUD/DOT/EPA Partnership for Sustainable Community, EPA webpage, http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/partnership/index.html, 2010 MetroPlan Orlando (http://www.metroplanorlando.com/files/view/2040_lrtp_scope_of_services.pdf) VTPI monograph: Sustainability and Livability: Summary of Definitions, Goals, Objectives, and Performance Indicators, July 2010 Highways Agency, www.highways.gov.uk/

²² Transport Canada, Urban Transportation Showcase Program, (www.tc.gc.ca/utsp)
²³ Litman, Todd, Evaluating Accessibility for Transportation Planning - Measuring People's Ability To Reach Desired Goods and Activities, VTPI, April 2011.
²⁴ M. Grant, et al. Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety and Multimodal Planning. FHWA-HOP-10-028. ICF International Inc. and Delcan, Inc., 2010.
²⁵ P. Worth, et al. Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: The Building Blocks of a Model Transportation Plan Incorporating Operations – A Desk Reference. FHWA-HOP-10-027. SAIC, Kittelson and Associates, Inc., and ICF International, Inc., 2010.
²⁶ Oregon Metro, Portland METRO TSMO Plan, June 2010, http://library.oregonmetro.gov/files//regional_tsmo_refinement_plan_june2010_final.pdf.
²⁷ Travel Time Reliability: Making it There on Time, All The Time. FHWA-HOP-06-070. Texas Transportation Institute and Cambridge Systematics, 2006.
²⁸ Washington State Department of Transportation - The $1,000 Doug MacDonald Challenge - http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Traffic/Congestion/Rice/Default.htm
²⁹ FHWA, Managing Travel Demand: Applying European Perspectives to U. S. Practice, FHWA Technology Scanning Program, FHWA-PL-06-015, May 2006. http://international.fhwa.dot.gov/traveldemand/
³⁰ FHWA, Congestion Pricing: A Primer - Overview, FHWA-HOP-08-039, 2008 – https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/congestionpricing/index.htm.
³¹ FHWA, Value Pricing Pilot Program Publications and Other Resources – https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/tolling_pricing/value_pricing/publications.htm
³² FHWA, Office of Innovative Program Delivery, "Road Pricing Defined" https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ipd/revenue/road_pricing/defined/index.htm.
³³ Georgia DOT, Cash for Commuters, Survey Key Finding – 2009, Center for Transportation and the Environment, 2009, (http://www.dot.state.ga.us/informationcenter/programs/environment/airquality/Documents/reports/CAC_Cash_for_Commuters_FINAL_2009.pdf
³⁴ FHWA, Integrating Active Traffic and Travel Demand Management, A holistic approach to congestion management, FHWA-PL-11-011, 2011, January
³⁵ UK Highways Agency, http://www.highways.gov.uk/knowledge/9611.aspx
³⁶ VTPI, Evaluating Safety and Health Impacts: TDM Impacts on Traffic Safety, Personal Security and Public Health, in TDM Encyclopedia, updated June 17, 2011, http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm58.htm
³⁷ Los Angeles County MTA, 2010 Congestion Management Program, 2010.
³⁸ Auto Alliance - www.ecodrivingUSA.com
³⁹ MWCOG, Commuter Connections Transportation Emission Reduction Measures Analysis Report FY2006 – FY2008, 2009,
http://www.mwcog.org/uploads/pub-documents/xldWVw20090223160744.pdf
⁴⁰ MWCOG, Commuter Connections Transportation Emission Reduction Measures Analysis Report FY2006 – FY2008, 2009,
http://www.mwcog.org/uploads/pub-documents/xldWVw20090223160744.pdf
⁴¹ OCED, Road Travel Demand, Meeting the Challenge, OECD, Paris, 2002.
⁴² Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), The Economic and Social Impacts of Electronic Commerce, OECD, Paris, 1999.
⁴³ Todd Litman, Evaluating Transportation Economic Development Impacts, Victoria Transport Policy Institute, 2009, p. 43 (http://www.vtpi.org/econ_dev.pdf.)
⁴⁴ FHWA, "Managing Travel Demand: Applying European Perspectives to U. S. Practice," Report No. FHWA-PL-06-015, May 2006
⁴⁵ Jennings, H., TDM: The Software that Supports the TOD Hardware, Arlington Commuter Services, October 2011
⁴⁶ TCRP Report 95, Chapter 15, "Land Use and Site Design: Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes," 2003.
⁴⁷ Reid Ewing and Robert Cervero, "Travel and the Built Environment: A Meta Analysis," Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 76, Issue 3, June 2010.
⁴⁸ Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR) "Incorporating TDM into the Land Development Process", FDOT –BD549-12, 2005 (http://www.nctr.usf.edu/pdf/576-11.pdf)
⁴⁹ Reid Ewing and Robert Cervero, "Travel and the Built Environment: A Meta Analysis," Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 76, Issue 3, June 2010.
⁵⁰ FHWA, "Managing Travel Demand: Applying European Perspectives to U.S. Practice," Report No. FHWA-PL-06-015, May 2006
⁵¹ TCRP Report 95, Chapter 15, "Land Use and Site Design: Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes," 2003
⁵² Spack Consulting, "TDM: An Analysis of the Effectiveness of TDM Plans in Reducing Traffic and Parking in the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area," January 2010.
⁵³ FGM-AMOR, CIVITAS II: 2005-2009 Final Brochure, prepared for European Commission and CIVITAS GUARD, September 2010 (www.civitas.eu).
⁵⁴ Hans-Joachim Becker, Diana Runge, Urte Schwedler, Michael Abrahamm, Commercial Transport in European Cities: How do European cities meet the challenges of commercial transport? Experiences and case studies from the CIVITAS Programme of the European Commission, Berlin, July 2008, available at http://www.civitas-initiative.org/docs1/IVP_21.pdf ISSN 1613-1258
⁵⁵ Virginia Tax Incentives Fact Sheet provided by Barbara Nelson from the Richmond MPO (11/17/2011)
⁵⁶ P. Worth, et al. Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: The Building Blocks of a Model Transportation Plan Incorporating Operations – A Desk Reference. FHWA-HOP-10-027. SAIC, Kittelson and Associates, Inc., and ICF International, Inc., 2010.
⁵⁷ Cross-town Improvement Project, (http://www.ctip-us.com/contact.htm)
⁵⁸ FGM-AMOR, CIVITAS II: 2005-2009 Final Brochure, prepared for European Commission and CIVITAS GUARD, September 2010 (www.civitas.eu).
⁵⁹ Hans-Joachim Becker, Diana Runge, Urte Schwedler, Michael Abrahamm , Commercial Transport in European Cities: How do European cities meet the challenges of commercial transport? Experiences and case studies from the CIVITAS Programme of the European Commission, Berlin, July 2008, available at http://www.civitas-initiative.org/docs1/IVP_21.pdf ISSN 1613-1258
⁶⁰ HUD/DOT/EPA Partnership for Sustainable Community, EPA webpage, http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/partnership/index.html. 2010
⁶¹ VTPI monograph: Sustainability and Livability: Summary of Definitions, Goals, Objectives, and Performance Indicators, July 2010
⁶² HUD/DOT/EPA Partnership for Sustainable Community, EPA webpage, http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/partnership/index.html. 2010
⁶³ VTPI monograph: Sustainability and Livability: Summary of Definitions, Goals, Objectives, and Performance Indicators, July 2010
⁶⁴ Highways Agency, www.highways.gov.uk/

---

PDF files can be viewed with the Acrobat® Reader®.