TDM Talk

15 percent of commuters account for 39 percent of aggregate time spent commuting

2011-02-17T14:17:00.008-05:00

Average commuting times can distort the picture of commuting in America. Are excessive commuting times really a problem for all?

According to data from the 2009 American Community Survey, 15.2% of U.S. workers 16 years and over who did not work at home and have at least a 45 minute journey to work account for 38.7% of the aggregate travel time to work.

At the other end of the scale, 59.0% of U.S. workers 16 years and over who did not work at home and have no more than a 24 minute journey to work account for only 29.7% of the aggregate travel time to work. In fact, nearly 3 in 10 commuters have less than 15 minute commute trips and account for less than one-tenth of time spent by all workers commuting.

There will be variations, of course, at metropolitan and local levels.

For example, some areas like the Miami-Fort Lauderdale MSA, show similar results to the national average. They have 15.8% of Florida commuters with at least a 45 minute journey to work account but tally 35.0% of the aggregate travel time to work. In addition, 50.9% of Miami-Ft. Lauderdale commuters have no more than a 24 minute journey to work and account for only 26.6% of the aggregate travel time to work.

In the Metropolitan Washington MSA, 29.5% of commuters have at least a 45 minute journey to work account for 54.3% of the aggregate travel time to work. And 39.4% of Metro Washington workers who have no more than a 24 minute journey to work account for only 16.3% of the aggregate travel time to work.

Of course, travel time is affected by many factors, including the extent of use of options other than driving alone. Our next post will look at the relative effiency of moving people (e.g., private vehicle trips per 100 commuters).

Changing the Car Culture Down Under

2010-07-22T09:27:00.004-04:00

Changing the Car Culture Down Under - Australia Entices Commuters Off the Roads One Household at a Time With Educational Marketing Push, Elaborate Bike-Ped Infrastructure highlights how the personalized approach to influencing travel behavior is making a significant impact in Australia.

This article serves as a reminder that while it is easy to become infatuated with the latest technological solutions to congestion, it is the one-on-one assistance that continues to demonstrate its effectiveness in changing travel behavior. It really isn't a new lesson. For example, Personalized Approach for Ridesharing Projects: Experience of Share-A-Ride in Silver Spring showed that coaching commuters was a very effective means of changing behavior.

These travel behavior changes are more than just moving drive alone commuters to carpools but include approaches for adjusting time of travel (e.g., discounts on the shoulder of the peak in Ft. Myers) or routes - even without mode shift. For example, FHWA Congestion Pricing - A Primer reports that "In Ft. Myers, Florida, a 50 percent discount on the toll was offered on the Midpoint and Cape Coral bridges for a short period of time before and after the rush hours. Survey data revealed that, among those eligible for the discount, there was an increase in traffic of as much as 20 percent during the discount period before the morning rush hours, with corresponding drops in the rush hour itself."

Focusing on the Retention of Carpoolers and Transit Riders

2010-05-26T12:44:00.003-04:00

I just returned from annual meeting of the Southeast chapter of Association for Commuter Transportation in Sarasota, FL where I heard several interesting presentations about "new" approaches to reducing vehicle trips and vehicle miles of travel. Rick Steele with NuRide demonstrated their incentive-based approach. NuRide offers commuters the choice of a wide range of rewards provided by local and national businesses to commuters who use travel options other than driving alone and record their trips. An added benefit - the value of these donated rewards are used by some communities as local match for funding purposes.

This apparent win-win focus is on rewarding people to increase "loyalty" and frequency of those commuters who use of options other than driving alone. Another outcome from this approach is increased word-of-mouth advertising to increase participation.

While many TDM agencies seem to focus most of their resources on trying to convert the "drive alone" commuter, approaches like NuRide reflect an understanding that it should be less expensive to retain existing customers (and increase "purchasing" behavior) than attract new customers and pay for performance (the more you do, the more points you earn). Given the erosion of the regular use of transit and carpooling over the years, one wonders how many more people would have remained in those modes if more attention (and resources) were placed on retaining existing transit riders, carpoolers, etc. Still, it isn't too late to start.

Double taxation risk for out-of-state teleworkers - FederalTimes.com

2010-05-17T09:52:00.000-04:00

In her letter on May 17 to FederalTimes.com, Nicole Belson Goluboff, author of "The Law of Telecommuting" and "Telecommuting for Lawyers" and member of the advisory board of the Telework Coalition (www.TelCoa.org) discusses double taxation risk for some out-of-state teleworkers.

Clearly, this is an obstacle for expanding the use of telework. HR 2600 Telecommuters Tax Fairness Act of 2009 would prohibit "a state from imposing an income tax on the compensation of a nonresident individual for any period in which such individual is not physically present in or working in such state or from deeming such nonresident individual to be present in or working in such state on the grounds that: (1) such individual is present at or working at home for convenience; or (2) such individual's work at home fails any convenience of the employer test or any similar test." For the status of this bill, search THOMAS on "Telecommuters Tax Fairness Act of 2009".

TDM has failed us; Bury it

2010-02-11T20:26:00.001-05:00

As a marketing guy and a wordsmith, I enjoy these types of “telework vs. telecommute” discussions. From my POV, it’s our job to use words and language that will engage our target audiences… not the jargon of our technical peers.

Case in point is the old debate on “Transportation Demand Management”. After all these decades I would guess that less than a few percent of commuters have any idea what it means. The term has failed to serve our community of TDM evangelists. It’s a losing phrase and it’s time to bury TDM.

Commuter Choice and Commuter Options have been suggested and tried for years, but neither of these have taken off.

I would like to get the debate restarted by suggesting:

Green Transportation Options
Green Transportation Strategies
Green Transportation Alternatives
Green Commuting

Respectfully,

Denis Eirikis
President
Clear Light Communications Inc.

Strategic Marketing: The Truth About Gender and Generational Commuting Trends - and Its Consequences

2009-05-28T14:38:00.004-04:00

On May 27, 2009, the National Center for Transit Research's National TDM and Telework Clearinghouse at the University of South Florida
(www.nctr.usf.edu/clearinghouse) and the Association for Commuter Transportation (http://www.actweb.org/) held a netconference entitled "Strategic Marketing: The Truth About Gender and Generational Commuting Trends - and Its Consequences."

The on-demand streaming media recording and copies of the slides are now available online at
http://www.nctr.usf.edu/clearinghouse/netconference/netgendermarketing.htm

Summary: While traffic may be standing still, changes in gender and generational commuting trends are not. These changes will provide significant marketing challenges and opportunities for the transportation demand management (TDM) and public transportation communities. A recent ACT survey found that nearly nine in ten members agreed that it is important to customize TDM marketing messages for each generation but very few do. This session provides information to improve understanding of those gender and generational trends as TDM and transit agencies develop strategic marketing plans.

Speakers:

Dr. Randall Crane, UCLA, presented Does Gender Matter? Changes, Choices and Consequences for Transportation Policy. He reviewed the broad demographics of travel demand and identified which demographics will influence demand the most - and the least. Dr. Crane discussed why gender travel patterns change, how these changes are influencing demand and what the implications are for influencing travel behavior. He briefly discussed what transportation agencies can do to plan for these changes.

John W. Martin, Southeastern Institute of Research & The Boomer Project, presented Using A Generational Lens to Advance Non-Drive Alone Alternatives in America. John presented an overview of the four generations of commuters: Silent, Boomers, Gen Xers, and Millennials (Gen Ys) - and shared an easy way to understand their differences and what motivates them to rideshare. John's presentation concluded with recent findings of a survey that examined the willingness and propensity of the various generations for using alternatives to driving alone.

This 76 minute netconference was moderated by Donna Smallwood, MassRides/URS

Strategic Marketing: The Truth About Gender and Generational Commuting Trends – and Its Consequences

2009-04-14T10:05:00.004-04:00

On Wednesday, May 27, the National TDM and Telework Clearinghouse at the National Center for Transit Research and the Association for Commuter Transportation will be holding a netconference entitled, Strategic Marketing: The Truth About Gender and Generational Commuting Trends – and Its Consequences.

While traffic may be standing still, changes in gender and generational commuting trends are not. These changes will provide significant marketing challenges and opportunities for the transportation demand management and public transportation communities. A recent ACT survey found that nearly nine in ten members agreed that it is important to customize TDM marketing messages for each generation but very few do. This session will help you understand those gender and generational trends as you develop your long-range plan and your strategic marketing approaches.

The netconference will feature:

Dr. Randall Crane, UCLA, will present Does Gender Matter? Changes, Choices and Consequences for Transportation Policy. He will review the broad demographics of travel demand and identify which demographics will influence demand the most – and the least. Dr. Crane will discuss why gender travel patterns change, how these changes are influencing demand and what the implications will be for influencing travel behavior. He will identify what transportation agencies can do to plan for these changes.

John W. Martin, Southeastern Institute of Research & The Boomer Project, will present Using A Generational Lens to Advance Non-Drive Alone Alternatives in America. John will present an overview of the four generations of commuters: Silent, Boomers, Gen Xers, and Millennials (Gen Ys) - and share an easy way to understand their differences and what motivates them to rideshare. John’s presentation will conclude with best practice examples and practical tips on how to tailor TDM services and communication campaigns to most effectively resonate with each generation.

The recording of the event will be available on May 28 at www.nctr.usf.edu/clearinghouse/netconferencing.htm. Over 25 other previously recorded netconferences are available for on-demand viewing at that same location

More on bicycle commute benefit

2008-10-10T13:11:00.005-04:00

The success of extending the qualifed transportation fringe benefit to bicycle commuters (sec. 126 of the bill and sec. 132(f) of the Code) will be partially determined by how many people can use it. So how many did Congress think would use it? We haven't found a reference to a specific estimate of the demand but the Joint Committee on Taxation scored the bill (i.e., estimated impact on revenues) at ~$1 million per year for 10 years. http://www.jct.gov/x-78-08.pdf The methodology JCT used isn't public but if one were to assume $1,000,000 of foregone tax revenue from people claiming the $240 maximum and having an average effective tax rate of 15% then about 28,000 commuters might expect to use the benefit (this excludes the payroll taxes that employers would not have to pay on the $240, too).

The number of commuters might be much higher if the average claim was much less. Of course, participation depends on how many companies make the subsidized bicycle commuting benefit available to employees. Bureau of Labor Statistics reports about 5% of workers have access to subsidized commuting. At the same time, the recently release 2007 American Community Survey found about 0.5% of commuters or over 664,000 usually bicycle to work.

The question then turns to are there particular socio-economic groups who will benefit more from this benefit? ACS 2007 shows that 77% of the bicycle commuters are male so one could argue this proposal could benefit more males than females. The Census' American Factfinder combines the number of people bicycle commuting with taxis, motorcycles and other means for most of the socio-demographic comparisons (e.g., race, income, etc.) so we are unable to tease out the socio-economic factors for only bicyclists. Additional work the ACS PUMS dataset might be able to parse the data for bicycle commuters.

Finally, there are other unique aspects in the bill that extended the qualified transportation fringe benefit to bicycle commuters. For example, the bicycle benefit can not be combined with transit, commuter highway vehicle and parking benefits. Also, unlike other Section 132(f) qualified transportation fringe benefits, the $20 maximum tax free amount for bicycle commuters is not indexed for inflation.

Source: http://www.house.gov/jct/x-75-08.pdf

Qualified Transportation Fringe Benefits for Bicycle Commuters

2008-10-06T14:12:00.000-04:00

Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 : H.R. 1424 (bailout) bill signed into law by President Bush includes expanding qualified transportation fringe benefits (Section 132(f) ) to allow employers to reimburse employees with up to $20.00 per month for bicycle commuters.

For most employees, those who ride transit or commuter highway vehicles (e.g., vanpool) can receive up to $115.00 per month tax free. They can also receive $220.00 per month tax free for qualified parking. IRS will be developing guidance to provide implementation details/parameters.
We should expect to see IRS guidance on how this will be implemented but we can look to the existing guidance http://www.irs.treas.gov/pub/irs-regs/td8933.pdf to hazard a guess.

Cavaet – I’m no tax expert, yada yada so don’t use the following for implementation. It could be food for thought if IRS seeks public input on guidance.

First, it isn’t a tax deduction for individual commuters. Like the rest of Section 132(f), employers are permitted (not required) to allow employees to seek reimbursement of up to $240 per year (assuming they regularly bike to work for all 12 months). I would assume the employer can offer no reimbursement for bicycle commuters if they offer parking and/or transit subsidies. Or they can choose to offer less than $20 per month, too. You’d have to assume that the individual will have submit some receipts for reimbursement. Where the line is drawn as to what is reimbursable will have to be decided – e.g., bike helmets, lights, tires, routine maintenance, baseball cards for spokes (just kidding), etc.

Clearly, terms like “regularly uses” and “substantial portion” need to be clarified. It now says: `(I) regularly uses the bicycle for a substantial portion of the travel between the employee's residence and place of employment. While qualified transportation fringe benefits for commuter highway vehicles (e.g., vanpools) have a 80% use for commuting requirement, transit does not.

As a “reimbursement program”, employers will not be able to pre-pay. Current guidance says “A payment made before the date an expense has been incurred or paid is not a reimbursement.” This may mean that a person who purchases a bike in January with the intent to use it for commuting for the next 12 months, he or she may not get the full reimbursement amount (e.g., $240) in the first month.

It is interesting to note that to receive the bicycle commuter benenfit the individual can not "receive any benefit described in subparagraph (A), (B), or (C) of paragraph (1)" so it excludes people who are already receiving a transit, commuter highway vehicle or parking benefit. I interpret this as meaning that the employee has to choose one or the other (transit/commuter highway vehicle/parking benefit OR bicycle benefit). This clause is in contrast to the current law that allows employees to combine parking and transit tax free amounts (e.g., cost of parking at a rail station and the rail fare). It wouldn’t appear that the new bicycle benefit will be an additional sweetener for a bike-to-bus or bike-on-bus programs if transit subsidies are provided.

Another point - the monthly transit/vanpool and parking limits are subject to cost of living increases (increase in $5 increments if the cost of living is high enough). While this has caused parking to increase more than transit based on the current level, this also would mean that bicycle limits are unlikely to change (the $20 per month basis is too low for the $5 increment to kick in automatically).

You can find the full bill (HR 1424) at http://thomas.loc.gov/
See IRS' Taxable Fringe Benefit Guide http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-tege/fringe_benefit_fslg.pdf for more information about Qualified Transportation Fringe Benefits (Section 132(f)).

You may also be interested in IRS' ruling in 2006 about when and how employer-provided transportation benefits provided through smartcards, debit or credit cards, or other electronic media are excluded from gross income under §§ 132(a)(5) and 132(f) of the Internal Revenue Code and from wages for employment tax purposes. See http://www.irs.gov/irb/2006-47_IRB/ar05.html

Journal of Public Transportation

2008-04-29T14:02:00.001-04:00

There are several TDM-related articles in the recently released issue of the Journal of Public Transportation (Volume 11 Issue No. 1)

The journal is published by the National Center for Transit Research (http://www.nctr.usf.edu/) at the University of South Florida.

You can download individual articles at www.nctr.usf.edu/jpt/jptv11n1.htm or go to http://www.nctr.usf.edu/jpt/journalfulltext.htm to obtain a copy of the entire issue (you can access prior issues from the same link).

Below are abstracts of the articles in this issue.

Qualitative Research to Assess Interest in Public Transportation for Work Commute
Kerstin Carr, University of Regensburg

Given the need for reducing single occupancy vehicle commutes, this article presents a case study of employer-based research. Using conjoint analysis as a qualitative research method, factors that potentially influence people’s choices to drive alone to work were studied at a major company in Columbus, Ohio. Such factors included reasons for driving alone, satisfaction with commute, perceptions toward transportation modes, importance of transportation attributes, and likelihood to switch if certain Transportation Demand Management measures were implemented. Target groups were formed by using simple regression and cluster analysis of a stated-ranking question regarding transportation attributes.

Managing Limited Access Highways for High Performance: Costs, Benefits, and Revenues
Patrick DeCorla-Souza, Federal Highway Administration

Managed lanes are a set of lanes where highway operations strategies are actively applied in response to changing conditions. High-Occupancy/Toll (HOT) and Express Toll lanes are examples of managed lanes. The transportation operations concept discussed in this article involves conversion of existing freeways (all lanes) into premium-service free-flowing highways that provide fast, frequent, and inexpensive express bus service and charge all private vehicles a variable toll—except for authorized buses and certified ridesharing vehicles. The toll would vary by level of demand and would be set high enough to guarantee that excessive demand will not cause a breakdown of traffic flow. This article discusses the advantages of this concept. It introduces a new sketch-planning tool that provides estimates of costs, benefits, and revenues from applying the concept on a highway network in a prototypical large metropolitan area. The estimates suggest that implementing the concept can provide significant net social benefits. It may also generate sufficient new toll revenue to pay for all costs for implementation and operation, including new express bus and park-and-ride services that would complement the pricing scheme.

Demand Responsive Route Design: GIS Application to Link Downtowns with Expansion Areas
Mintesnot Gebeyehu and Shin-ei Takano, Hokkaido University Sapporo, Japan

The movement of residential locations to suburban areas to obtain cheaper land results in increasing mobility and infrastructure problems. One of the important infrastructures is transportation, which determines the level of accessibility of people and commodities from one place to another. Therefore, Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures are important in providing an optimal transit route to increase accessibility of public transportations. In the past, several researchers have developed various TDM programs, including public transport improvement as a strategy to encourage a more transit-oriented society. This study attempts to create a methodology of identifying bus links between urban centers and newly developed urban expansion areas using Geographical Information Systems by considering reduction of route overlapping. A TAZ-based analysis is undertaken to identify the demand responsive bus routes, which maximize population coverage, minimize travel time, and reduce duplicating routes.

Does Government Structure Matter? A Comparative Analysis of Urban Bus Transit Efficiency
Suzanne Leland and Olga Smirnova, University of North Carolina at Charlotte

As public transit becomes more and more important to our economy, it is imperative that we understand which governing system achieves optimal efficiency. Following up on the work of Perry and Babitsky (1986), we quantitatively test whether certain forms of public governance are more efficient administrators of bus service. We utilize 2004 data from the National Transit Association database and control for federal funding, whether services are contracted out, region, population density, whether the system has a fixed guideway, the presence of local dedicated funding, and the ratio of local to federal funding. We find that special-purpose governments are more likely than general-purpose governments (cities and counties) to operate more efficiently. We also discovered that governments that contract out for some or all of their bus services are also more likely to be efficient than those public agencies that directly operate all of their services.

Encouraging Sustainable Campus Travel: Self-Reported Impacts of a University TravelSmart Initiative
Geoff Rose, Monash University

At the start of the 2004 and 2005 academic years, a voluntary travel behavior change program targeted incoming first-year students at the Clayton Campus of Monash University in Melbourne, Australia. Analysis of before and after travel surveys identified a significant effect in terms of reducing single occupant commuting and increasing public transport use. Nearly one in four of the students who participated in the TravelSmart initiative indicated it had influenced them to the extent of thinking about using, trying, or regularly using alternatives to solo driving to campus. The information provided about public transport services was the most valued element of the program. A range of barriers to further behavior change are identified to overcome a number of those impediments and thereby increase the use of environmentally friendly modes for commuting to campus.

Faith-Based Organizations: A Potential Partner in Rural Transportation
Tom Seekins, Steve Bridges, Annesa Santa, Daniel J. Denis, and Andrea Hartsell, University of Montana

Disability advocates frequently suggest that faith-based organizations (FBO) may be potential providers of transportation for people with disabilities living in rural communities. We conducted a national survey of rural FBOs in the United States to explore their capacity and interest in being involved in local transportation. We randomly selected 716 FBOs located within 15 miles of a rural center for independent living. Forty percent (N = 288) of these responded to our mailed survey. Responding faith communities averaged 300 worshiping adults with an average of 9.5 percent being judged to have a significant disability. Overall, respondents indicated they were neither willing nor unwilling to become involved in providing transportation to either the general public or to people with disabilities. Nevertheless, 32 percent of respondents said they would be willing or very willing to do so. Respondents reported that their congregations owned a total of 146 vehicles, 18.5 percent of which were judged to be accessible. Results are discussed in terms of the need to understand faith communities and their orientation to community service.

TDM sessions at 2008 Transportation Research Board

2008-01-03T10:11:00.000-05:00

Transportation Research Board (www.trb.org) 87th Annual Meeting will be held in Washington DC on January 13-17, 2008. There are many sessions related to transportation demend management (TDM) and a long list of papers. Links below take you to abstracts for each paper that was sponsored by the Transportation Demand Management Committee. There are other TDM-related sessions on topics such as high occupancy toll facilities, telework, carsharing, etc. Please go to TRB's Interactive Program http://www.trb.org/am/ip/ to find the sessions that appeal to your interests.

Poster Session 253 Transportation Demand Management and Parking Strategies: New Tools and Approaches
Monday, January 14, 2008, 9:30 AM - 12:00 PM, Hilton

Lori Diggins, LDA Consulting, presiding
Sponsored by: Transportation Demand Management Committee (ABE50)

Vehicle Occupancy Trends in Florida: Evidence from Traffic Accident Records (08-3089) - C11 Albert Gan, Florida International University and Kaiyu Liu, Florida International University
Estimating Societal Benefits and Costs of Transportation Demand Management (08-2651) - C9 Sisinnio Concas, University of South Florida and Philip L. Winters, University of South Florida
Macrolevel Collision Prediction Models to Evaluate Road Safety Effects of Mobility Management Strategies: New Empirical Tools to Promote Sustainable Development (08-2385) - C7 Gordon Richard Lovegrove, University of British Columbia, Canada and Todd Alexander Litman, Victoria Transport Policy Institute, Canada
Park and Bike: New Multimodal Concept for Congested Areas (08-0411) - C5 Ilona Bos, University of Nijmegen, NetherlandsArnoud van de Vrugt, Keypoint Consultancy, Netherlands
Modeling Car Park Choice in Urban Areas and Managing Demand for Parking (08-1191) - D6 Narasimha Chandrasekhar Balijepalli, University of Leeds, United Kingdom, Simon Shepherd, University of Leeds, United Kingdom, and Anthony May, University of Leeds, United Kingdom
Modeling Parking Choice Behavior in Business Areas (08-1539) - D4Peter J.H.J. Van der Waerden, Eindhoven University of Technology, NetherlandsAloys Borgers, Eindhoven University of Technology, NetherlandsHarry J .P. Timmermans, Eindhoven University of Technology, Netherlands
Effects of Parking Policy on Travel Demand in Bangkok’s Commercial District (08-1679) - D8 Saksith Chalermpong, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand, and Kittiphum Kittiwangchai, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand
Using Land Use Planning Process to Secure Travel Plans: Assessment of Progress in England (08-0962) - D2 Tom Rye, Napier University, United Kingdom, Emma Young, Wirral Metropolitan Borough Council, United Kingdom, and Stephen Ison, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
Role of Public Transport as Transportation Demand Management Measure (08-0909) - C3 Stephen Ison, Loughborough University, United Kingdom and Tom Rye, Napier University, United Kingdom

Transportation Demand Management Committee

Monday, January 14, 2008, 1:30 PM - 5:30 PM, Hilton

Lori Diggins, LDA Consulting, presiding
Sponsored by: Transportation Demand Management Committee (ABE50)

View Committee Scope and Roster
Current Practices in France (P08-0771)Robert Clavel, French Ministry of Transport

Parking Management Subcommittee, ABE50(1)
Monday, January 14, 2008, 7:30 PM - 9:30 PM, Hilton
Tom Rye, Napier University, United Kingdom, presiding
Sponsored by: Transportation Demand Management Committee (ABE50)

Session 707 Revisiting Traditional TDM Strategies and Breaking New TDM Ground Wednesday, January 16, 2008, 2:30 PM - 4:00 PM, Hilton
Lori Diggins, LDA Consulting, presiding
Sponsored by: Transportation Demand Management Committee (ABE50)

An Empirical Analysis of Compressed Work Week Choices (08-2137) Liren Zhou, University of South Florida and Philip L. Winters, University of South Florida
Employee Transportation Benefits in High Transit Mode Share Areas: a University Case Study (08-0916) David Block-Schachter, Massachusetts Institute of Technology and John Attanucci, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Four Challenges of Incorporating Transportation Demand Management into the Land Development Process (08-2535) Sara Jane Hendricks, University of South Florida
Park and Ride: Lessons from the UK Experience (08-0730) Stuart Daniel Meek, Loughborough University, United Kingdom, Stephen Ison, Loughborough University, United Kingdom, Marcus Paul Enoch, Loughborough University, United Kingdom

Session 729 Driver Response to Urban Parking Parameters

Wednesday, January 16, 2008, 4:30 PM - 6:00 PM, Hilton

Philip L. Winters, University of South Florida, presiding
Sponsored by: Transportation Demand Management Committee (ABE50) and the New Public Transportation Systems and Technology Committee (AP020)

Reassessing On-Street Parking (08-2926)Wesley Marshall, University of Connecticut, Norman Garrick, University of Connecticut, and Gilbert Hansen, University of Connecticut
Social Experiment of Cooperative Dynamic Park-and-Ride in Japan (08-2224)Kunihiro Sakamoto, Saitama University, Japan
Evaluating Urban Parking Policies with Agent-Based Model of Driver Parking Behavior (08-0341)Karel Martens, Radboud University Nijmegen, Netherlands, Itzhak Benenson, Tel Aviv University, Israel, and Slava Birfir, Tel Aviv University, Israel
Smart Parking Linked to Transit: Lessons Learned from the San Francisco Bay Area Field Test (08-3027) Susan A. Shaheen, University of California, Berkeley, and Charlene R. Kemmerer, University of California, Berkeley

TDM responses to I-35W Bridge Collapse

2007-08-03T11:06:00.000-04:00

With the tragic collapse of the I-35W bridge in Minneapolis comes the need to adjust travel behaviors and patterns. It begs the question if transportation demand management (TDM) programs have specific plans in place for similar emergency responses. If so, what are they? Respond by clicking on the comments URL below.

Carpoolers - Coming to Your TV

2007-07-16T21:04:00.000-04:00

Carpoolers a new ABC pilot due out this fall will be about a group of suburban guys in their carpool to work. View the trailers According to the promo, 'These men are the Carpoolers; four guys, living different versions of the modern suburban family life who obsess, dream, and strategize as they rocket their way up and down the carpool lane every day."

Certainly, this pilot provides the vehicle (pun intended) to bring the pros and cons of carpooling together. It might offer an opportunity for the TDM community to suggest storylines or back stories. For example, always-late carpool member finally left at work and having to use an emergency ride home program.

What story lines do you suggest?

TDM sessions at 2007 Transportation Research Board

2007-01-14T14:31:00.000-05:00

Transportation Research Board (www.trb.org) annual meeting in next week in Washington DC, has a couple of sessions related to transportation demend management (TDM) and a long list of papers. Links below take you to abstracts for each paper.

Poster Session 553 New International Research in Transportation Demand and Parking Management
Tuesday, January 23, 2007, 2:30 PM - 5:00 PM, Hilton
Eric N. Schreffler, Consultant, presiding
Sponsored by: Transportation Demand Management Committee (ABE50)

Note: The increasing interest in strategies to manage transportation systems has prompted growing research into the effectiveness of various parking management and transportation demand management measures. This session provides exposure to various initiatives in managing transport and promoting more sustainable travel options, including parking guidance and information, employer commute management, bicycle and pedestrian improvements, and managed lanes.

Evaluating Parking Management Benefits (07-1581) - H3 Todd Alexander Litman, Victoria Transport Policy Institute, Canada
Switching Process of Parking Pricing Principle: From Duration-Based to Rights-Based (07-1053) - H5Chih-Peng Chu, National Dong Hwa University, Taiwan, Jyh-Fa Tsai, Soochow University, Taiwan
Examining Incentives and Preferential Treatment of Carpools in Managed Lane Facilities: A State-of-the-Practice Review (07-2880) - H7 David H. Ungemah, Texas Transportation Institute, Mark W. Burris, Texas A&M University, Ginger D. Goodin, Texas Transportation Institute, Casey Toycen, Texas Transportation Institute,
Employer Perception of Employer-Based Trip Reduction Benefits and Strategy Implementation (07-0676) - H9Kai Zuehlke, Georgia Institute of Technology, Randall Guensler, Georgia Institute of Technology
Potential to Attract Drivers Out of Their Cars in Dense Urban Areas (07-2124) - H11Andres Monzon, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Spain
Analysis of Effects on Workplace Mobility Management Targeting Commuter Transport (07-2729) - J2Ayako Taniguchi, University of Tsukuba, JapanSatoshi Fujii, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan
Setting Up Local Travel Plan Groups: The Future of Workplace Travel Planning in Urban Conurbations? Examples from London (07-2164) - J4 Sophie Tyler, University of Westminster, United Kingdom, Marcus Paul Enoch, Loughborough University, United Kingdom, Lian Zhang, Loughborough University, United Kingdom
Commute Travel: How Does Proximity Influence Mode Choice? GIS Analysis of a Large Urban University (07-3234) - J6 Jane Gould, University of California, Los Angeles, Jiangping Zhou, University of California, Los Angeles
Testing the Effectiveness of Bicycle and Pedestrian Access Improvements in Reducing Commute Vehicle Trips (07-3174) - J8 William R. Loudon, DKS Associates, Sarah Kavage, Lawrence Frank & Co, Mandi Roberts, OTAK Inc
Use and Impact of Maximum Parking Standards in Scotland (07-2527) - J10Tom Rye, Napier University, United KingdomStephen Ison, Loughborough University, United Kingdom

Session 614 The New and the Old in Transportation Demand Management Initiatives: Reducing Car Use Through Personalized Travel Information and Carpooling
Tuesday, January 23, 2007, 7:30 PM - 9:30 PM, Hilton
Marcel Rommerts, European Commission, Belgium, presiding
Sponsored by: Transportation Demand Management Committee (ABE50)

Note: One traditional transportation demand management strategy is the promotion of carpooling. This session investigates who carpools and the implications of trip chaining on carpooling. Of growing interest are initiatives to provide improved information on travel choices, including advice tailored to individualized travels. Research on the effectiveness and implications of these strategies to reduce congestion, air pollution, and energy use are explored.

Travel Choice Adaptation Through Information Provision: Insights from Literature Review (07-0149)Caspar Chorus, Eindhoven University of Technology, NetherlandsEric Molin, Delft University of Technology, Netherlands, Bert van Wee, Delft University of Technology, Netherlands
Mobility Management in Japan: ITS Development and Meta-Analysis of Travel Feedback Programs (07-2657)Ayako Taniguchi, University of Tsukuba, Japan, Satoshi Fujii, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan, Haruna Suzuki, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Japan
Successfully Changing Individual Travel Behavior Applying Community-Based Social Marketing to Travel Choice (07-3098)Carol Cooper, King County Metro Transit
Who Chooses to Carpool and Why: Examination of Texas Carpoolers (07-1369)Jianling Li, University of Texas, Arlington, Patrick M. Embry, University of Texas, Arlington, Stephen Mattingly, University of Texas, Arlington, Kaveh Farokhi Sadabadi, University of Texas, Arlington, Isaradatta Rasmidatta, University of Texas, Arlington, Mark W. Burris, Texas A&M University
Impact of Carpooling on Trip-Chaining Behavior and Emission Reductions (07-3281)Sisinnio Concas, University of South Florida, Philip L. Winters, University of South Florida

There are numerous other sessions that would interest many in the TDM community (e.g., value pricing, HOV, telecommunications and travel behavior, etc.)

Go to http://www.trb.org/meeting/ for more information.

Promises Unfulfilled or Ignored

2007-01-14T13:48:00.000-05:00

Last week, the National Center of Transit Research (www.nctr.usf.edu) released a 17 minute streaming presentation on the project, Incorporating TDM into the Land Development Process at http://streaming.cutr.usf.edu/ramgen/streamingfiles/NCTR/576-11.rm (RealPlayer required). It provides a good overview of the opportunities and challenges of including trip reduction strategies as part of the land development process. Senior researcher Sara Hendricks talks about the need to take a long term view, including staffing and funding, if TDM requirements as part of the land development process are to have the best chance of fulfilling its promise to reduce vehicle trips.

Even when communities do extract vehicle trip reduction commitments from developers doesn't mean implementation is guaranteed without follow-up and enforcement. It was recently driven home (pun intended) with a recent Washington Post article. The article notes that "when the owners of Tycon Tower, the high-rise office complex adjacent to Tysons Corner Center mall, sought Fairfax's permission to expand in 1998, they agreed to give a 50 percent discount on the building's parking garage to car- and vanpools to help limit traffic around Tysons. But eight years later, garage parking at the tower costs the same across the board. The building's property manager, Mikele Torgler, with Quadrangle Management Corp., said she was aware of the requirement but is unsure why it is being ignored. 'I wasn't here in 1998,' she said. 'I need to check into it.' "

We'd suggest the localities need to "check into it", too. Where did they fail?

How to Bring Parking Charges to Offices

2006-10-20T15:16:00.000-04:00

Paid parking at offices reduces commute trips by 23%, producing very large traffic and CO2 reduction. This is a very effective policy that is not popular. Are there "clever policy tricks" to bring this about? Can we help cities "jump in together" with small steps, making this policy more palatable? Could cities synchronize their actions to reduce risk? Here is a web page with details of such a proposal: http://www.cities21.org/paidParking.htm

An example of cities "jumping in together" is provided: "Interesting example in the Twin Cities. This was always said about changing bars and restaurants to non-smoking. Every time any city council member proposed it, they were shouted down by people who said, "But people will go somewhere else and all our businesses will lose out." Then one December day the city of Bloomington (largest suburb) passed a smoking ban. The following month St. Paul did the same, then Minneapolis right after. It turns out they had been in agreement all along about who would go first and who would follow next."

What do you think?

True Cost of Driving

2006-09-26T17:55:00.000-04:00

In light of today's (Sept. 26, 2006) post on the true cost of driving, consider this editorial. In my opinion, the true cost of driving cannot be calculated without taking into account the need to secure access to oil. US domestic oil discovery peaked in 1930. US domestic oil production peaked in 1970. In 1994, the US began importing more oil than we could produce. Each year since 1994, the US has had to import more oil and spend more money to secure the supply of oil. Andy Singer, a great editorial cartoonist, just came out with a new one depicting how transportation policy begets energy policy begets foreign policy.

What is your take on things?

Explain Relationship of Increasing Efficiency and Keeping Traffic Moving and Win $1,000

2006-08-31T12:08:00.000-04:00

Every one knows what traffic congestion is. Transportation engineers know that efficiency improvements can make a big difference in traffic flow. They simply have a problem communicating this concept to the public (and politicians).

Well, one State Dept of Transportation official has challenged the transportation profession - or anyone else - to solve this communication problem.

Washington State Department of Transportation Secretary Doug MacDonald has challenged transportation professionals to think of a better way to communicate to the general public the relationship between maximizing the use of existing system capacity, increasing efficiency, and keeping highway traffic moving.

As a follow-up to his challenge, Secretary MacDonald has made a personal donation of $1,000 to be awarded to the person or group that submits the best idea. Entries are due by October 6, 2006 and should be submitted to Washington DOT's special e-mail address: Dougmacdonaldchallenge@wsdot.wa.gov

Please e-mail any questions concerning the contest to that e-mail address.

The contest winner and honorable mentions will be showcased in a Transportation Research Board poster session to be scheduled during the 2007 TRB Annual Meeting in Washington, D.C.

The contest winner will be awarded the $1,000 check to start off the new year with considerable flair.

To download the contest flyer and for further information, please consult the TRB Congestion Pricing Committee's website at:
http://www.trb-pricing.org/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=7&page=1

Portland Prepares Peak Oil Briefing Book

2006-07-28T11:13:00.000-04:00

In May 2006, Portland City Council created a Peak Oil Task Force to develop recommendations on appropriate responses to uncertainties in the supply and affordability of oil. The Task Force is intended to identify key short-term and long-term vulnerabilities and develop recommendations for addressing these. Twelve citizens were appointed to the Task Force in June, and the Task Force is expected to provide recommendations to City Council in early 2007.

Changes in the availability of affordable petroleum products may have significant impacts on transportation, housing, food, and other life-essential products and services. Click here for a set of background materials [94 page PDF] intended to provide an overview of the peak oil issue, excerpts of relevant Portland policy and planning documents, and a number of related resources.

For more information: Click here

Simmons: "We are past energy peak"

2006-06-27T10:44:00.000-04:00

TDM Talk

On June 20, 2006, Matthew Simmons of Simmons and Company International gave a presentation to the Department of Defense entitled, "The Energy Crisis Has Arrived." In this presentation, Simmons declared that world energy production has peaked and stated that he believes Middle East oil production will decline by 50 percent in the next 12 years.

Click here for powerpoint slides from presentation

By the Numbers: Gas Prices and Cutting America's Oil Addiction

2006-05-04T09:39:00.000-04:00

Below are some interesting figures gathered by the Sierra Club that I thought that the TDM Community might find useful.

WASHINGTON - May 3 -

GAS PRICES

$2.92… Average retail price for regular gasoline, up 69 cents from a year ago. [1]

$2,873…Amount average family of four spent on gasoline in 2005[2]

$73.75…Price per barrel of crude oil on the New York Mercantile Exchange[3]

RECORD PROFITS

$8.4 billion…ExxonMobil’s first-quarter profits in 2006

$4 billion…ChevronTexaco’s first-quarter profits in 2006, up 49% from 2005

$3.29 billion…ConocoPhillip’s first-quarter profits in 2006

$15.7 billion…Combined first-quarter profits of ExxonMobil, ChevroTexaco and ConocoPhillips

$63.8 billion…combined 2005 profits of ExxonMobil ($36.1 billion), Chevron ($14.1 billion)and ConnocoPhillips ($13.5 billion). [4]

HANDOUTS TO AMERICANS VERSUS BIG OIL

$30 million…Amount the top 10 oil companies spent on lobbying in 2005[5]

$80 billion…in subsidies and tax loopholes to the oil and gas and other polluting energy industries in the energy law signed in 2005. [6]

OIL DEPENDENCE

25% …Percentage of world oil production consumed by the United States.

3% …Percentage of world’s oil reserves located in the United States. [7]

ARCTIC REFUGE AND AMERICA’S COASTS

1 cent…Amount of savings for consumers at the pump if we drill for oil in the Arctic Refuge.[8]

20 years…When consumers would see the penny savings.[9]

47 days…Amount of oil from opening up parts of Lease Sale 181 in the Gulf of Mexico to drilling

REAL SOLUTIONS

4 million…The number of barrels of oil per day that the United States would save if fuel economy standards were raised to 40 miles per gallon within 20 years. [10]

$2,200…Amount that the average driver would save at the gas pump over the lifetime of a vehicle if fuel economy standards were raised to 40 miles per gallon over the next 10 years, a conservative estimate based on lower gas prices. [11]

POLL NUMBERS

71…Percentage of Americans who disapprove of the way President Bush is handling energy policy[12]

82%…Percentage of Americans who don’t think President Bush has a clear plan for keeping gas prices down [13]

[1] Dept. of Energy's Weekly U.S. Retail Gasoline Prices
[2] Consumer Expenditure Survey from Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Energy Information Administration

[3] http://www.bloomberg.com/energy/
[4] U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission data

[5] http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/03/business/media/03oil.html

[6] Taxpayers for Common Sense – www.taxpayer.net

[7] Energy Information Administration (EIA) – www.eia.doe.gov
[8] http://www.tws.org/Library/Documents/upload/PennyaGallon20yrs1.pdf
[9] ibid

[10] Friedman et al. "Drilling In Detroit: Tapping Automaker Ingenuity to Build Safe and Efficient

Automobiles." Union of Concerned Scientists & Center for Auto Safety. June 2001.

[11] ibid

[12] http://www.usatoday.com/news/polls/tables/live/2006-05-01-poll.htm
[13] http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/05/01/opinion/polls/main1567675.shtml

Carpool Incentives - What works? What is appropriate?

2006-04-12T17:40:00.000-04:00

Marge Gasnick, with the Mid-America Regional Council (MPO in Kansas City),
posted a request to the TRANSP-TDM listserv today. She was seeking feedback on providing incentives and rewards to retain carpoolers. She was considering "reimbursing them for some of the upkeep on their vehicle, the types of things that help reduce the emissions produced by the vehicle - e.g., oil changes, tuneups, tires, etc."

This has stimulated a variety of responses from other listserv subscribers about what is an effective incentive AND what is appropriate use of taxpayers' dollars.

For example, does "Advertising TDM by giving away gasoline as the reward for energy conservation sends a confused message," as Dennis Eirikis, President of ClearLight Communications, suggests? (Dennis' full post here)

Brenda Williams with the Regional Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada replied "Some may say that using taxpayer dollars for a spa treatment and a massage [to build on the stress reduction of commute options] is improper and unnecessary no matter what our TDM program message is or no matter how our regions are impacted by certain marketing messages. Sometimes what works in one region will not work in another, but the only way to determine the effectiveness of any marketing strategy is to try it after careful investigation of your regional culture." (Brenda's full post here)

These listserv postings come after a similar discussion I had recently on the acceptable use of purchasing movie tickets (from a private company) as part of a Refer a Friend program to enroll more members into the Emergency Ride Home program. Drawing the line as to what is acceptable may also be a "cultural" issue (as well as a legal one). For example, while movie tickets were deemed acceptable, purchasing scratch off tickets for the State's lottery were not deemed acceptable.(Even though the promo opportunities are endless. :) “Carpooling will save you some serious scratch” or “Scratch off one reason for not being able to carpool – E..R..H..” or “Carpooling is no gamble; you are guaranteed a ride home” :) )

I'm not arguing about the decision, simply raising the flag that what may seem acceptable to some, might not be to all.

Finally, testing what works is always a good idea. Offer a variety of incentives, for example, and let the individual select. Or try "gas cards" in one market but "movie tickets" in another and see what happens. Look for effectiveness in achieving your objectives (not just measuring demand for a particular incentive). See which incentive did the best job in what you set out to achieve with the program such as reduce turnover rates in vanpools, etc.

And, by all means, share your results with the rest of us.

Public Transit and TDM Response to Pandemic Influenza

2006-03-30T10:38:00.000-05:00

Researchers at the Center for Urban Transportation Research have begun to investigate and seek funding to study the impact of pandemic flu on public transit as well as the potential role of public transit and TDM agencies in such an emergency.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), it is not a matter of if, but a matter of when a pandemic flu strikes the United States. Currently, federal and state governments are developing plans to respond to a pandemic flu. At this point, the Department of Health and Human Services’ (HSS) National Plan only contains a statement referring to the closure of public transportation as a community containment measure.

Health departments and emergency operations centers at the local level will bear the burden of response to a pandemic. The proposed research will develop an action plan for transit agencies to provide resources and assistance in coordination with local emergency responders. This action plan also would help transit agencies safeguard staff, prepare for workforce disruptions due to mass illness, develop contingency systems to maintain essential or altered service during quarantine and mitigate the impact of shut downs. The research will also look at how TDM agencies and organization can help employers prepare response plans that may heavily rely on telecommuting and the maintenance of the communication infrastructure.

Since a pandemic could occur at any time, it is important to provide a useful products as soon as possible followed by products that provide more specific planning strategies. For transit agencies, the first product will be a Transit Agency Checklist, modeled after the checklists designed by the HHS and CDC for families and business. The final product will be a detailed guidebook for transit agencies to customize their own Pandemic Flu Action Plan. On the TDM side, CUTR will look into developing a toolkit that TDM professionals can use to help employers develop a response plan.

We are very interested to hear from others concerning TDM's potential role in responding to a pandemic or how they plan to become involved in the local prepartation process.

CHRIS HAGELIN

Peak Oil and the Army Corp of Engineers

2006-03-24T14:29:00.000-05:00

According to a September 2005 report by the Army Corp of Engineers entitled "Energy Trends and Implications for U.S. Army Installations, "world oil production is at or near its peak and current world demand exceeds supply."

The Army Corp of Engineers goes on to say:

"The supply of oil will remain fairly stable in the very near term, but oil prices will steadily increase as world production approaches its peak. The doubling of oil prices in the past couple of years is not an anomaly, but a picture of the future. Peak oil is at hand with low availability growth for the next 5 to 10 years. Once worldwide petroleum production peaks, geopolitics and market economics will result in even more significant price increases and security risks. To guess where this is all going to take us is would be too speculative. Oil wars are certainly not out of the question. Disruption of world oil markets may also affect world natural gas markets as much of the natural gas reserves are collocated with the oil reserves."

The document can be found via the Association for the Study of Peak Oil at:

http://www.peakoil.net/Articles2005/Westervelt_EnergyTrends__TN.pdf

What this says to me is that the idea of peak oil is gaining greater credibility and already part of the working assumption of the US Army.

And as I have been saying for the last couple years, the TDM community needs to jump on this and makes sure that TDM is one of the first strategies that federal decision-makers think of in terms of how this nation responds to mitigate the impact of peak oil. The question is what is the best way to promote TDM as one of the most cost effective ways of not only dealing with congestion, but also America's oil dependence. What are your thoughts?

CHRIS HAGELIN, CUTR

Linking TDM, Oil Dependence and National Security: The Time to Act is Now.

2006-02-07T15:15:00.000-05:00

As I presented at the 2005 ACT Conference and in prior papers, it is my strong belief that the TDM community needs to address the link between oil dependence and national security and position TDM as one of the primary strategies to reduce oil consumption and improve national security.

Since Bush Administration has publically acknowledged America's addiction to oil in the recent State of the Union address, it is time for the TDM community to act. We need to convince policy-makers from local governments all the way to the White House that TDM is one of the most cost-effective means for reducing oil demand by reducing vehicle trips and miles, shifting trips from peak hours to reduce traffic congestion, and eliminating trips all together.

America can no longer afford to spend our precious resources on trying to build our way out of congestion or militarily securing access to oil. We need to change the course and invest in a multifaceted approach that employs not only TDM but also improved fuel efficiency standards, changes to land development codes and practices, increased investment in transit, and a massive investment in the research and development of alternative/sustainable/renewable energy resources.

If you would like to learn more about the link between TDM, oil and national security, a streaming video presentation on my research that uses Real Player, is now available:
here

I would also recommend watching the documentary, "End of Suburbia" (www.endofsuburbia.com), visiting the Association for the Study of Peak Oil at www.peakoil.net or reading Matthew Simmons' "Twilight in the Desert".

For the visitors to TDM Blog, my question for you is how can we effectively market TDM as vital to national security? Is an appeal to patriotic nature of ridesharing or bicycle commuting overreaching?

Thanks for listening,
CHRIS HAGELIN

Are the declines in carpooling significant?

2006-01-12T13:16:00.000-05:00

Use of commute alternatives continues to fall according to new State of the Region report released by Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) released on January 5, 2006. SCAG reports that "Between 2000 and 2004, carpooling share of work trips dropped by almost 3 percent with corresponding increases in drive-alone commuting."

Using the data from the American Community Survey for 2004 for some select MSAs, it appears that LA isn't alone. However, only three other of the MSAs shown below had a statistically significant change (decrease) from 2003. Three MSAs appeared to show INCREASES in carpooling - Salt Lake City, San Diego and Tampa Bay MSAs - but those changes also are not statistically significant. An * indicates that the estimate is significantly different (at a 90% confidence level) than the estimate from the most current year. The bottom line is that communities should use care when examining these changes from one year to the next. Long term trends may be more revealing.

It would be interesting to compare changes in travel behavior based on the investments made in those options. But that's a topic for another post.

GMC Pad - a response to long commutes and high housing prices

2006-01-08T20:44:00.000-05:00

Thinking out of the box or just moving it? Instead of moving the commuter to work, move the commuter AND his home to work. Autoblog reports that General Motors' GMC Pad , winner of the California Design Challenge, is an "urban loft with mobility, or a modern alternative for those priced out of Southern California’s escalating housing market.” Talk about taking your work home with you. The Pad is "where you live, where you work, or merely where you want to be. Whether located in walking distance from your job @ TBWA\Chiat\Day, spending a couple evenings along PCH, or wintering at Mammoth, with the GMC PAD, home is where you want it. And commuting is what other people do." With the PAD, your LA Adventure is your next stop. It’s where you live, where you work, or merely where you want to be. Whether located in walking distance from your job @ TBWA\Chiat\Day, spending a couple evenings along PCH, or wintering at Mammoth, with the GMC PAD, home is where you want it. And commuting is what other people do."

Looks like the solution is to throw everything AND the kitchen sink at improving the commute. "The Pad also features onboard fuel and water supplies that can last weeks or even months thanks to onboard resource management technology, and while you’re waiting for the water to run out you have Direct TV, OnStar, XM, and Satellite Wi-Fi to keep you company."

Will the Pad qualify for Household Only Vehicle lanes?

TDM in 2005 - What's Ahead in '06?

2005-12-23T21:46:00.000-05:00

In 2005, we saw gas prices rise (and fall) with an increase in the demand for ridesharing services at many of the country's largest TDM programs.

We saw the passage - finally - of SAFETEA-LU which is loaded with opportunities for TDM programs (and some challenges).

In late 2005, the IRS increased the qualified transportation fringe benefit for only parking, making the gap between parking and transit/vanpool even wider. The tax free limit for parking increases by $5 per month to $205 but transit and vanpooling remain at $105.

So what do you think is in store for 2006?

Universal name for TDM

2005-11-16T13:28:00.000-05:00

What are your favorite "consumer names" for TDM? Many agencies have adopted their own name for TDM but there is no name that is universally used, so our profession effectively does not have a name of what we do! :-0 A group of TDM professionals in the Seattle area plan to select one name for TDM and agree to all use it.

Here are examples of TDM names used by specific groups. I welcome your suggestions.

Travel Options
Transportation Options
Transportation Choices
Healthy Transport
Active Transportation
SmartTravel
Trip Reduction

We hope the one name would catch on in our region and beyond resulting in a word which is universally recognized and understood by the public. Please note that selecting one name for TDM will not replace the names of any individual TDM modes and programs such as Home Free Guarantee, carsharing, Flexcar, Rideshareonline, In Motion, Wheel Options, etc. In fact, if all these modes and programs can describe themselves with the same TDM term, they will all benefit from the promotion of all the other TDM programs.

When you think about it, it's amazing that we don't have a universally accepted name for what we do. What do you say when people ask you what you do? You don't have simple word like banker, engineer, finance analyst, etc. Imagine if the word "recycling" were not universally used, and every city and company called it something different. This nameless concept would seem marginal, and when someone heard about a program to sort garbage and reduce waste they would not immediately identify it as part of the countless recycling programs which collectively have a major impact.

Please let me know if you'd like to be more closely involved in this effort. thanks!

David Allen, MCP
Senior Planner, Seattle Dept. of Transportation (SDOT)

Take the One Less Car Challenge www.seattle.gov/waytogo/
Save money. Reduce stress. Be part of the solution!

TDM Talk

2005-11-08T16:57:00.000-05:00

The conventional wisdom in the TDM arena is that incentives are good as well as necessary. We spend quite a bit of time coming up with new ways to provide incentives to help commuters find a different way of getting to and from work.

And, the field is not too hot on disincentives although there will always be advocates for pushing on that approach.

There is old evidence that making the commute a completely level playing field (i.e. no free parking, no transit passes, no discounts for carpools, no subsidies for vanpools ... in an area where parking comes with a cost) yields about the same drive alone rate as does providing incentives for ridesharing and transit. The "old" ARCO vs. Bank of America example is the prime candidate for this example.

Another argument about offering incentives is that if the incentives stop, commuters go back to however they were commuting before.

Give-aways, raffles, drawings, and promotions are frequently used and are regularly criticized for leading to "higher numbers" but not much real result. Effectiveness depends on who was recruited, what information was provided, and many other factors.

The question of this blog: Do you advocate the provision of incentives to cause a reduction in drive alone commuting? Why or why not? The question and answer may seem obvious but after talking with many states, MPOs, local governments, and others around the country, the issue is not universally obvious.

What is your best argument (either way)?

-- Tad

Taking a swim in a very big pond

2005-10-14T08:17:00.000-04:00

It is no secret that most state DOTs view themselves as in somewhat of a funding crisis. With congestion on the rise, rising fuel costs placing political pressure to temporarily suspend gas taxes, and long term concerns of fuel tax revenue decline, many states have encouraged the development of alternative financing programs. Some illustrative examples of the type of program developments that have occurred in the past year include:

The Trans-Texas Corridor, a privately financed mega-corridor system in Texas including toll lanes, truck lanes, high speed rail, and utility pipelines.
Oregon's Innovative Partnerships Program, encouraging the development of network tolling, HOT lanes, or other toll alternatives on three mega projects of statewide importance.
Chicago Skyway concession agreement, whereby an investment group receives a 99 year agreement to toll the Chicago Skyway (with annual toll increases) in exchange for a present-term transfer of $1.8B to the City of Chicago.

Arguably, the glue that holds all of these programs together is tolling. Other states that are advancing toll programs include California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Texas, and Virginia. Not everything is rosy in the world of tolling, though. Significant political opposition has been raised in every state where tolling has been proposed -- a quick review of the Texas Toll Party shows what life can be like facing public opposition to tolling.

Despite political opposition, it is clear that these states and others will continue to advance toll projects to address perceived financing shortfalls. The question for TDM professionals is the role we play in these projects. Let's be clear -- this is a big money, big influence environment. Project costs usually are articulated in B's, not M's or T's. TDM does not bring any significant money to the table. What we do bring includes partnerships with developers, chambers, and employers and existing mechanisms for outreach to commuters. What other roles can we play? How do we advance considerations for carpools, vanpools, and buses in toll facilities, when so much pressure will be placed to maximize revenues? Are there appropriate carpool and vanpool considerations that do not involve toll discounts or waivers?

In short, how can we swim in the big pond?

Where is matching going?

2005-10-13T17:42:00.000-04:00

Rideshare matching, while an important function in most metropolitan areas, isn't seen as all that important by some. Databases are small in most areas. Placement rates are debated. And, over the past few years, additional matching services and capabilities have arrived. Witness Craig's List, erideshare, and more.

It is likely that no matching system in place 15 years ago is in operation today. No vendor of ridematching systems operating then is offering a matching system or service today as far as I know. (This statement is probably true for a shorter time than suggested here.) What may be in place in 5, 10, or 15 years is unknowable but history would tell us there will be high turnover, new services, and faded services.

However, one person matched could mean over 400 vehicle trips eliminated for the following year. The databases can be mined for more results than are typically sought. Spending $200 (or so) in public funds on one placement isn't all that expensive in that light.

Where is the matching function going? Are we going to see lots of small matching systems with capabilities spread even thinner? Are we going to see integration of matching capabilities?

And what of less-than-matchable outcomes? (telecommuting, walking, bicycling, changed work hours, etc.) How should we be treating those in on-line services in the future?

-- Tad

Sustainable Housing and the Global Oil Peak

2005-10-06T15:33:00.000-04:00

I'm posting the following question from Stuart Rose that was posed to the TRANSP-TDM listserv today and has generated some additional discussion about whether or when the global peak in oil will be reached.

"I'm currently completing development of a prototype cluster of sustainable houses. The houses provide their own power, water, hot water, etc. It's not that difficult. However, since this effort began, about five years ago, the definition of what "sustainable" includes has expanded. The next generation of these houses will need to take the form of small communities that are totally self-reliant ... for power, water, wastewater treatment, solid waste management ... and even food.

My guess is, we hit Global Peak Oil in 2000, when Saudi peaked. We're already experiencing all the early signs of what will be a post-oil economy ... and world. Within 3-5 years, semis will likely be virtually gone from highways. Transportation will need to shift, to respond to development of many small communities - much like the pre-industrial revolution hamlets, except with most of modern technology.

The best way, on the surface, to connect smaller communities with a larger one would be rapid transit. Then, hi-speed rail between major cities. And probably only air for trips over 1,000 miles or so. But I'm not a multimodal transportation planner.

My questions:

1. What criteria determine when different modes are justified? Population numbers? Density? Distance?

2. How would these modes be funded? Government seems fairly inept at managing a rail system; ours is one of the worst in the world. How to determine what role is best for private companies and what for government?

3. As these small communities evolve, they could connect via electric car or bus to small towns, of perhaps 8,000 to 80,000 or more. Would counties simply somehow maintain small roads for that connectivity?

4. Do you know of one or two resource people who might be able to describe how such a pattern would - or would not - be justified? initiated? funded? managed?

In planning for these small sustainable communities, I also have to think about their context - connectedness to other communities.

Thanks for whatever help you might be able to provide."

Stuart W. Rose, Ph.D.
Garden Atriums

2005-09-30T16:44:00.000-04:00

H.R.3893 - Gasoline for America's Security Act of 2005

There are several sections of H.R.3893 (beginning with Section 301) that could move from encouraging people to save energy to actually helping save energy by funding the groups that help people form carpools and vanpools (and, yes, household carpools count).

This bill was introduced this week by Congressman Barton (R-TX) and says "The Secretary [of Energy] may make grants to State and local governments for carpooling or vanpooling projects. The Secretary may make such a grant only if at least 50 percent of the costs of the project will be provided by the State or local government."

I could see these funds being used to allow state and local governments to cope with surges in demand (e.g., add staff to increase service hours, expand Internet ridematching efforts, acquire additional vehicles for vanpooling, increase outreach to employers to enroll more of them in programs such as Best Workplaces of Commuters(tm)).

2005-09-29T10:38:00.000-04:00

President Bush Directs Executive Departments and Agencies to Conserve Energy, including Carpool, Telecommute, and Transit

President Bush sent a memo to heads of executive departments and agencies that included the following, "All agencies should conserve fuel so we can reduce overall demand and allow extra supplies to be directed towards the hurricane relief effort. In particular[emphasis added], agencies should temporarily curtail non-essential travel and other activities that use gasoline or diesel fuel, and encourage employees to carpool, telecommute, and use public transportation to reduce fuel use."

Furthermore, agencies have to report back through the Secretary of Energy, within 30 days, on the fuel conservation actions taken.

Will the agencies do anything new related to commuting options, especially OUTSIDE the National Capital Region? Most of the commute benefit programs are aimed only to federal agencies "within the Beltway".

Will it be smoke and mirrors? Reporting what is already being done?

At the same time, will TDM agencies use this memo to open doors/enhance relationships with federal agencies in their areas?

I guess we'll see in 30 days.

2005-09-28T11:28:00.000-04:00

Do we have any examples of "affinity" marketing for carpooling, vanpooling, transit, and related modes? What marketing campaigns have focused on ties with groups, interests, causes, etc.? What was done, what did it cost, and what results were achieved?

Is there any evaluation (quantitative, before and after, not purely anecdotal) which examines similarities, differences, effectiveness, etc. between information campaigns, incentive campaigns, affinity campaigns, and other approaches?

-- Tad

2005-09-22T22:34:00.000-04:00

TDM and Hurricane Recovery

Transportation issues are the story after Hurricane Katrina's evacuation failures and 2 mph travel speeds on major Interstates as Hurricane Rita bears down on Texas/LA. Who would have thought Americans now know what "contraflow" means. What's next? "Demand Management"?

Even as people begin to hunker down (a term that we Floridians came to know last year), we need to look at transportation needs when these cities begin recovering. Certainly, transit will be an option but we need to demand that communities look at the likeliehood of dispersed home and work locations. We also assume that gas supplies (and prices) may be effected in the short term. We need to look NOW.

More to the point, why aren't transportation demand management agencies being brought into the discussion? And will TDM programs be prepared to help? Do they have an emergency preparedness plan?

Clearly, the devastation that has and will occur will increase demands for TDM programs and services like carpools and vanpools (and telework). Many people may have to live in temporary housing further away from work; perhaps very far away. Many will have vehicles that are inoperable due to water damage (or the fact that their vehicle was last seen sitting on the roof of a building). Their employers may have had to relocate, too. While telework may work for some, not all jobs are teleworkable (is that a word?).

So ... what can we do now? Certainly, ridematching programs and 800 telephone numbers don't require a local presence. TDM agencies on the West Coast could help expand service hours, for example. Online ridematching systems could be implemented.

Will we need temporary protections for employers that promote ridesharing in states that don't already have that protection? Will the feds revise Section 132(f) to allow employers to provide tax free qualified transportation fringe benefits to employees for carpooling and biking, too (like transit and vanpools)? Are emergency ride home programs sufficent? Will FEMA funds be available to help TDM agencies reach out to commuters and employers?

There are many questions to be answered (and apparently fingers to be pointed) to get America moving again. We need to start answering them today.

Clearinghouse enters with world of blogs

2005-08-08T10:57:00.000-04:00

The National TDM and Telework Clearinghouseat the National Center for Transit Research located at the University of South Florida created the popular TRANSP-TDM listserv to facilitate the exchange of information about transportation demand management nearly 7 years ago. Since then 800 subscribers have joined.

At the suggestion of one of the subscribers, we are venturing into the world of blogs to continue to enhance the exchange of ideas and opinions.

However, we will continue to support the listserv, too.