Integrating Demand Management 

into the Transportation Planning Process:

A Desk Reference

August 2012

FHWA-HOP-12-035

U.S. Department of Transportation

Federal Highway Administration
Notice

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in 

the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of the 

information contained in this document. 

The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trademarks or manufacturers’ 

names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the objective of the 

document. 

Quality Assurance Statement

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides high-quality information to serve Government, 

industry, and the public in a manner that promotes public understanding. Standards and 

policies are used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of its information. 

FHWA periodically reviews quality issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure continuous 

quality improvement. 
TDM | 11

1. Report No. 

FHWA-HOP-12-035

2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. 

4. Title and Subtitle

INTEGRATING DEMAND MANAGEMENT INTO THE TRANSPORTATION 

PLANNING PROCESS: A DESK REFERENCE

5. Report Date

August 31, 2012

6. Performing Organization Code

TG826468

7. Author(s)

Deepak Gopalakrishna (Battelle), Eric Schreffler (ESTC), Don Vary 

(Wilbur Smith Associates), David Friedenfeld (Wilbur Smith Associates), 

Beverly Kuhn (Texas Transportation Institute), Casey Dusza (Texas Transportation Institute), Rachel Klein (Battelle), Alexandra Rosas (Battelle)

8. Performing Organization Report No. 

9. Performing Organization Name and Address

Battelle, 505 King Avenue, Columbus, Ohio

ESTC, San Diego CA

Wilbur Smith, Fairfax, VA

Texas Transportation Institute, Austin, TX

10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address

Federal Highway Administration

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20590

13. Type of Report and Period Covered

Technical Report 2009-2012

15. Supplementary Notes

Project performed under contract to Battelle for the Federal Highway Administration Office of Operations

COTR- Barry Zimmer

16. Abstract

The document has been developed to serve as a desk reference on integrating demand management into the transportation planning process. The desk reference is organized around two fundamental aspects of transportation planning – policy objectives and scope of the planning effort. The report discusses how demand management relates to 

seven key policy objectives that are often included in transportation plans, such as congestion and air quality. It then 

discusses how demand management might be integrated into four levels of transportation planning from the state 

down to the local level. The report also includes information on tools available for evaluating demand management 

measures and on the known effectiveness of these measures. 

17. Key Words

Demand Management, Planning 

Process

19. Security Classif. (of this 

report) Unclassified

20. Security Classif. (of this page) 

Unclassified

21. No. of 

Pages 193

22. Price

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72)

11. Contract or Grant No. 

DTFH61-06-D-0007

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

HOTM

18. Distribution Statement

No restrictions. 
TDM | 11

 Table of Contents Page

INTRODUCTION TO DESK REFERENCE.....................................................................................................................1

1.1 Organization of the Desk Reference.....................................................................................................................4

1.2 Use of the Desk Reference...................................................................................................................................6

THE EVOLVING ROLE OF DEMAND MANAGEMENT...........................................................................................9

2.1 A New Focus on Travel Choices for Reliable Travel............................................................................................10

2.2 A Vital Tenet of a Sustainable Transportation System.........................................................................................15

2.3 Technology and Connectivity Driven...................................................................................................................17

2.4 Economics of TDM..............................................................................................................................................17

APPLICATION OF TDM TO POLICY ISSUES..................................................................................................... 22

3.1 Improvements in Regional Mobility and Accessibility........................................................................................ .24

3.2 Congestion Reduction, System Reliability, and Safety....................................................................................... 29

3.3 Air Quality and Environment................................................................................................................................37

3.4 Economic Development......................................................................................................................................40

3.5 Land Use/Transportation Integration...................................................................................................................45

3.6 Goods Movement and Freight............................................................................................................................50

3.7 Quality of Life, Livability, and Health................................................................................................................... 56

INTEGRATION OF TDM INTO THE PLANNING PROCESS—CONTEXT............................................................62

4.1 Integration of TDM into the Activities in the Transportation Planning Process................................................... 63

INTEGRATION OF TDM AT THE STATEWIDE PLANNING LEVEL.....................................................................65

5.1 What Plans Should TDM be Included In?............................................................................................................66

5.2 What Is Your Capability with TDM at the State Planning Level?......................................................................... 67

5.3 Actions to Move Statewide Planning Process from Level 1 (Ad-Hoc) to Level 2 (Defined)................................71

5.4 Actions to Move Statewide Planning Process from Level 2 (Defined) to Level 3 (Optimized)...........................78

5.5 Best Practice Examples: State-Level TDM Integration...................................................................................... 83

INTEGRATION OF TDM AT THE METROPOLITAN PLANNING LEVEL............................................................. 87

6.1 What Plans Should TDM be Included In?............................................................................................................89

6.2 What Is Your Capability with TDM at the Metropolitan Planning Level?..............................................................90

6.3 Actions to Move Metropolitan Planning Process from Level 1 to Level 2...........................................................93

6.4 Actions to Move Metropolitan Planning Process from Level 2 to Level 3..........................................................101

6.5 Best Practice Examples: Metropolitan-Level TDM Integration........................................................................ 106

INTEGRATION OF TDM AT THE CORRIDOR PLANNING LEVEL....................................................................109

7.1 What Plans Should TDM be Included In?..........................................................................................................110

7.2 What Is Your Capability with TDM at the Corridor Planning Level?...................................................................112

7.3 Actions to Move Corridor Planning Process from Level 1 to Level 2................................................................115

7.4 Actions to Move Corridor Planning Process from Level 2 to Level 3................................................................119

7.5 Best Practice Examples: Corridor-Level TDM Integration................................................................................124

INTEGRATION OF TDM AT THE LOCAL PLANNING LEVEL............................................................................127

8.1 What Plans Should TDM be Included In?..........................................................................................................128

8.2 What Is Your Capability with TDM at the Local Planning Level?........................................................................128

8.3 Actions to Move Local Planning Process from Level 1 to Level 2.....................................................................131

8.4 Actions to Move Local Planning Process from Level 2 to Level 3....................................................................136

8.5 Best Practice Examples: Local-Level TDM Integration....................................................................................141

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

TDM | v
TOOLS AND TECHNIQUES FOR EVALUATING TDM...................................................................................... 146

9.1 Forecasting Potential TDM Impacts................................................................................................................. 147

9.2 Measuring Actual TDM Impacts.......................................................................................................................151

9.3 Cost Effectiveness............................................................................................................................................154

KNOWN EFFECTIVENESS OF TDM STRATEGIES......................................................................................... 157

10.1 Overview........................................................................................................................................................... 157

10.2 Travel Impacts................................................................................................................................................. 160

10.3 Traffic and Network Impacts........................................................................................................................... 164

10.4 Environmental Impacts.................................................................................................................................... 166

10.5 Other Impacts.................................................................................................................................................. 169

10.6 Summary of TDM Effectiveness – Relative Impact on Policy Objectives........................................................ 169

TRANSITIONING FROM PLANNING TO IMPLEMENTATION......................................................................... 175

11.1 State Level....................................................................................................................................................... 175

11.2 Metropolitan Level........................................................................................................................................... 177

11.3 Corridor Level................................................................................................................................................... 178

11.4 Local Level........................................................................................................................................................178

11.5 Funding of TDM Programs...............................................................................................................................179

List of Tables

Table 1.1: FHWA Resource Documents.......................................................................................................................... 3

Table 1.2: Potential Uses of Desk Reference.................................................................................................................. 7

Table 2.1: Traffic Management and TDM Strategies Influencing Choices...................................................................... 14

Table 3.1: Ability of TDM to Address Policy Objectives.................................................................................................. 23

Table 3.2: Levels of TDM Inclusion/Capability to Address Policy Issues........................................................................ 23

Table 3.3: Transportation Evaluation Perspectives......................................................................................................... 26

Table 3.4: Portland TSMO Strategies.............................................................................................................................. 28

Table 3.5: Washington DC Evaluation of TDM TERM Measures.................................................................................... 39

Table 3.6: Range of TDM Strategies Potentially Addressed in the Land Development Process................................... 47

Table 5.1: Statewide Planning......................................................................................................................................... 67

Table 5.2: State-level Self-Assessment Matrix................................................................................................................ 69

Table 5.3: List of Actions and Associated Level of Difficulty to Move Statewide Planning Process 

 from Level 1 to Level 2................................................................................................................................... 72

Table 5.4: List of Actions and Associated Level of Difficulty to Move Statewide Planning Process 

 from Level 2 to Level 3................................................................................................................................... 79

Table 6.1: Metropolitan Planning.................................................................................................................................... 89

Table 6.2: Metropolitan Planning Self-Assessment Matrix............................................................................................. 91

Table 6.3: List of Actions and Associated Level of Difficulty to Move Metropolitan Planning Process 

 from Level 1 to Level 2.................................................................................................................................. 94

Table 6.4: List of Actions and Associated Level of Difficulty to Move Metropolitan Planning Process 

 from Level 2 to Level 3..................................................................................................................................102

Table 7.1: Corridor Planning.......................................................................................................................................... 111

Table 7.2: Integrating TDM into the Corridor Planning Process: An Overview.............................................................. 113

Table 7.3: List of Actions and Associated Level of Difficulty to Move Corridor Planning Process 

 from Level 1 to Level 2..................................................................................................................................116

Table 7.4: List of Actions and Associated Level of Difficulty to Move Corridor Planning Process 

 from Level 2 to Level 3..................................................................................................................................120

Table 8.1: Local Planning...............................................................................................................................................128

Table 8.2: Integrating TDM into the Local Planning Process: An Overview...................................................................129

9

10

11

TDM | vi 
TDM | 11

Table 8.3: List of Actions and Associated Level of Difficulty to Move Local Planning Process 

 from Level 1 to Level 2............................................................................................................................. 132

Table 8.4: List of Actions and Associated Level of Difficulty to Move Local Planning Process 

 from Level 2 to Level 3..............................................................................................................................137

Table 9.1: Comparative Assessment of TDM Models............................................................................................... 150

Table 9.2: Mobility-Related Performance Measures in Current Practice ..................................................................151

Table 10.1: National Evidence on TDM Program Impacts.......................................................................................... 160

Table 10.2: Vehicle Trip Reduction Percentages Related to Monetary Incentives and Other Site 

 Programs or Conditions........................................................................................................................... 162

Table 10.3: Travel Impact Summary – Car Free Areas............................................................................................... 164

Table 10.4: General Emissions Impacts of TDM Strategies .......................................................................................167

Table 10.5: CMAQ Project Category Cost Effectiveness ........................................................................................... 168

Table 10.6: TDM Strategies and Their Relative Effectiveness in Addressing Key Policy Objectives......................... 171

List of Figures

Figure 1.1: Desk Reference Structure.............................................................................................................................4

Figure 1.2: Capability Levels and Actions Inform the Structure of the Desk Reference.................................................5

Figure 2.1: Travel Demand Management – A Philosophy of Choices.......................................................................... 12

Figure 3.1: Factors in Urban Mobility............................................................................................................................ 24

Figure 3.2: TDM Applications and Markets for Urban Mobility..................................................................................... 25

Figure 3.3: WSDOT “Rice” Experiment.........................................................................................................................30

Figure 3.4: Access-Restricted Lanes near Heathrow, London.....................................................................................32

Figure 3.5: Influencing Travel Behavior Process Flow Chart........................................................................................ 33

Figure 3.6: Bicycle Parking in Lund, Sweden............................................................................................................... 42

Figure 3.7: Reduction in VMT during a Period of Economic Growth in Lund, Sweden................................................ 44

Figure 5.1: TravelWise TDM Program Solutions........................................................................................................... 73

Figure 5.2: Florida State Multi-Modal LOS Standards................................................................................................. 75

Figure 5.3: HOV Use during I-25 Construction............................................................................................................. 76

Figure 5.4: Georgia DOT TDM Program Coordination................................................................................................. 85

Figure 6.1: Regional TDM Strategic Plan..................................................................................................................... 95

Figure 6.2: Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments Organizational Structure........................................... 96

Figure 6.3: An Objectives-Driven, Performance-Based Approach to Planning for Operations....................................98

Figure 6.4: Delaware Valley Livability Report Card....................................................................................................... 99

Figure 6.5: Oregon Metro Regional 10 Year TSMO Plan Cost....................................................................................105

Figure 7.1: Denver T-Rex I-25/225 Reconstruction......................................................................................................124

Figure 8.1: Mode Shift from Lloyd District TDM Program (1997-2004)...................................................................... 139

Figure 8.2: City of Redmond TDM Online Incentive Calendar.................................................................................... 142

Figure 9.1: Max-SUMO Assessment Levels................................................................................................................153

Figure 10.1: Florida State Multi-Modal LOS Standards.................................................................................................165

TDM | vii
TDM | viii 

Acknowledgments

This report describes approaches for integrating demand management into the planning process at various levels 

for addressing different policy objectives. The report also documents known effectiveness, modeling, and evaluation 

approaches for demand management strategies to enable transportation professionals to effectively include demand 

management into their planning and operational “tool box.”

The authors would like to acknowledge the role and contributions of the many reviewers of this desk reference, who 

have enthusiastically supported this effort with their time, effort, and ideas for improving the document. We also 

gratefully acknowledge the direction and guidance provided by the DOT steering team for this project including 

Robin Smith, Reginald Arkell, Jim Hunt, Ralph Volpe, Rick Backlund, Patrick DeCorla-Souza, David Luskin, and Jeff 

Spencer. 

The report benefitted from review workshops held in Chicago, Richmond, Salt Lake City, Dallas, and Orlando. The 

authors are grateful to all those who attended and provided comments and follow-up materials. Specifically, we 

would also like to thanks Phil Winters and Sisinnio Concas from the Center for Urban Transportation Research, 

University of South Florida, for their technical review of relevant portions of the document. 

Finally, Egan Smith and Wayne Berman have provided their ongoing support for this project with a clear guiding 

vision of demand management and its role in the planning process. 
TDM | 11

Acronym List 

AASHTO The American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials

ATDM Active Transportation and Demand Management

ATM Active Traffic Management

BCA Benefit/Cost Analysis

BRT Bus Rapid Transit

CBD Central Business District

CCRPC Champaign County Regional Planning Commission

CIVITAS CIty-VITAlity-Sustainability

CMAQ Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality

CMP Congestion Management Program/Plan/Process

CTE Center for Transportation and the Environment

C-TIP Cross-town Improvement Project

CTR Commute Trip Reduction

CUT Chassis Utilization Tracking

CUTR Center for Urban Transportation Research

CUUATS Champaign Urbana Urbanized Area Transportation Study (Illinois)

DOT Department of Transportation

DRG Dynamic Route Guidance

DRI Developments of Regional Impact

DRPT Department of Rail and Public Transportation

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

EPOMM European Platform on Mobility Management

EWGCC East-West Gateway Coordination Council

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

FTA Federal Transit Administration

GDP Gross Domestic Product

GHG Greenhouse Gas

GIS Geographic Information System

GPS Global Positioning System

GRH Guaranteed Ride Home

GTEC Growth and Transportation Efficiency Center

HERO Highway Emergency Response Operations

HOT High Occupancy Toll

HOV High Occupancy Vehicle

HUD Housing and Urban Development

ICM Integrated Corridor Management

IDM Integrated Demand Management

IMEX Intermodal Move Exchange

ITB Influencing Travel Behavior

ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers

ITS Intelligent Transportation System

TDM | ix

ACRONYM LIST
TDM | x 

JARC Jobs Access Reverse Commute

JPO Joint Program Office 

LOS Level of Service

LRTP Long-range Transportation Plan

METRIC Mobility Enhancement and Trip Reduction Index to aid in Comparison

MIM Missoula in Motion (Montana)

MIS Major Investment Studies

MOE Measures of Effectiveness

MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization

MTA Metropolitan Transit/Transportation Authority

MTC Metropolitan Transportation Commission

MTP Metropolitan Transportation Planning 

MWCOG Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards

NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research Program

NCTR National Center for Transit Research

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

NOx Oxides of Nitrogen

NTD National Transit Database

O/D Origin/Destination

PAYD Pay-As-You-Drive

R-TRIP Redmond (WA) Trip Resource and Incentive Program

RTTM Real-time Traffic Monitoring

SANDAG San Diego Association of Governments

SHSP Strategic Highway Safety Plan

SLRTP Statewide Long-Range Transportation Plans

SMART Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Time-bound

SOV Single Occupancy Vehicle

STIP State(wide) Transportation Improvement Plan/Program

STP Surface Transportation Program

TCM Transportation Control Measures

TCRP Transportation Cooperative Research Program 

TCSP Transportation Community and System Preservation Program

TDM Transportation or Travel Demand Management

TEEM TDM Effectiveness Evaluation Model

TEL Tolled Express Lane

TERMS Transportation Emission Reduction Measures

TIGER Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery

TIP Transportation Improvement Program

TMA Transportation Management Area

TMA Transportation Management Associations

TMC Transportation Management Center
TDM | 11

TMD Transportation Management District

T-MDID Truck-Mounted Driver Interface Device

TOD Transit Oriented Development

TRIMMS Trip Reduction Impacts of Mobility Management Systems

TRPP Trip Reduction Performance Program

TSM Transportation/Travel Systems Management

TSMO Transportation Systems Management and Operations

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

WSDOT Washington State DOT

WTRM Worksite Trip Reduction Model

ACRONYM LIST

TDM | xi
1. Introduction to Desk Reference

TDM | 1 

T

ravel Demand Management (TDM) has been included in many transportation plans over the past 

three decades as a means to address key policy objectives, including: energy conservation, 

environmental protection, and congestion reduction. For the purpose of this desk reference, TDM is 

synonymous and used interchangeably with the terms “Transportation Demand Management” or simply 

“demand management,” and is defined a set of strategies aimed at maximizing traveler choices. 

Many recent transportation plans appropriately place TDM very high in policy-level discussions. TDM 

is seen as a vital part of an approach to plan, design, and operate “smarter” and “more efficient” 

transportation systems in a region. For example, the Washington State Department of Transportation 

(DOT) plan for fighting congestion, Moving Washington, includes managing demand as one of three 

equal pillars of their approach. 

"We can reduce congestion by focusing on three key strategies: 

strategically adding road capacity, operating the system we have more 

efficiently, and providing choices that help manage transportation demand.” 

Source: Washington State Department of Transportation, “Moving Washington – A Program to Fight Congestion,” 

http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/movingWashington/, May 2, 2011

In addition to policy objectives, TDM strategies are usually listed within the set of projects that are found 

toward the end of most transportation plans or as part of the Transportation Improvement Program 

(TIP). Here, in many of the transportation plans, these projects are often concentrated on traditional 

commuter ridesharing concepts, such as the funding of ridesharing programs, vanpool subsidies, or 

telecommuting assistance, which primarily strive toward long-term trip reductions for air quality goals. 

However, the broader concept of demand management often gets lost in the middle, between high-level 

policy statements at the beginning of the planning process and specific projects that conclude most 

plans. In the heart of most transportation plans, TDM is not viewed as a vital, day-to-day operational 

philosophy on how to manage and operate a transportation system to address a wide variety of 

transportation issues such as mobility, accessibility, land-use, and livability. 

While traditional TDM strategies such as ridesharing, vanpool, and telecommuting programs are still 

vital and serve large sections of the population, new opportunities to manage travel demand have 

emerged in recent years with the advent of technology (and more importantly connectivity) to the 

transportation arena. Personal technology and communication advances show promise in making 

personal travel decisions more dynamic and fluid. In parallel, transportation systems management is 

progressing toward a more “active” management of the system, recognizing the role of influencing the 

traveler early in the trip making process on a day-to-day basis. Together, these developments create new 

opportunities for demand management. 
TDM | 11

1 USDOT/RITA, Joint ITS Program Office, Integrated Corridor Management, http://www.its.dot.gov/icms/index.htm. 

TDM | 2

In fact, currently, our day-to-day efforts to manage and operate the transportation system are all about 

managing demand, since we cannot expand capacity in the very short run. For example, advanced 

traveler information is fundamentally a demand management strategy to help travelers learn of 

bottlenecks, slowdowns, and incidents so that they might avoid them by traveling a different route or at 

a different time. Acknowledging that most of what we do to operate our transportation system today is 

demand management goes a long way toward understanding the need to better integrate TDM into the 

transportation planning process. 

Many federal, state, and local initiatives are seeking to better integrate TDM into transportation projects 

and overall solutions to congestion, environmental and energy concerns, and livability issues. For example, 

the U.S. DOT is supporting the concept of Integrated Corridor Management (ICM), which includes mode 

shift as a primary measure of improving 

the efficiency and person throughput of 

congested corridors.1 The premise of 

ICM is that transportation corridors often 

contain unused capacity in the form of 

parallel routes, the non-peak direction on 

freeways and arterials, single-occupant 

vehicles, and transit services that could 

be managed through information to the 

travelers to help reduce congestion. By 

“load balancing” across facilities and 

managing the corridor as an asset, travel 

times and travel time reliability are improved 

(or maintained) for the individual traveler while the overall corridor throughput increases. Early deployments 

and demonstrations in Dallas and San Diego provide real-world case studies of demand management at a 

corridor level. 

Another major DOT program that highlights the role of demand management is the Urban Partnership 

Agreements/Congestion Reduction Demonstration Program. Demand management through pricing, 

traditional TDM, and transit improvements are three of the four pillars of this program. Cities involved in the 

program include Seattle, Minneapolis, Miami, Atlanta, San Francisco, and Los Angeles. Each of the cities 

is implementing a package of solutions aimed at managing demand across key facilities in their region. 

Similarly, TDM planning processes around the country are evolving as well. New approaches to planning 

for operations try to move away from “project-based” decision making to focus on “outcomes-based” 

planning. Under this approach, regional performance outcomes—operations objectives—are developed. 

Planning and investment decisions are made utilizing performance measures, and relying on data 

to determine the most effective strategies for meeting operations objectives. A performance-based, 

objectives-driven approach to planning for operations is based on the concept that “what gets measured 

gets managed.” Investments are made with a focus on their contribution to meeting regionally agreedupon objectives. By implementing this approach, resources are allocated more effectively to meet 

performance objectives, resulting in improved transportation system performance. 

With these programs and others, demand management is clearly evolving to encompass policy objectives 

other than just air quality conformity, including congestion, livability, and even goods movement. It is 

important that TDM be considered early, often, and effectively in the planning process. This document 

has been developed to serve as a desk reference on integrating this new, broader vision of TDM into the 

transportation planning process. 

INTRODUCTION

Source: DfT and the Highway Agency
TDM | 3 

The purpose of the desk reference is to provide the reader with a better understanding of where, how, 

and when to integrate TDM into the evolving performance-based transportation planning process. The 

importance of the planning process in helping provide a clear vision, goals and objectives, approach, and 

funding for demand management (as well as other transportation improvements) cannot be overstated. 

As such, this report complements and supports several other important Federal Highway Administration 

(FHWA) guidance documents on the transportation planning process, including guidance that discusses 

the role of TDM in the planning process. Table 1.1 provides bibliographic information on each FHWA 

reference. The web address for each report can be found at the end of this chapter. These documents 

provide guidance on how the planning process can be adapted for operations using an objective-driven 

approach at state and metropolitan levels. 

While this report provides ample examples and illustrations, and discusses the known effectiveness 

of TDM strategies, the desk reference is not intended as a technical resource on TDM effectiveness or 

implementation for a given strategy or set of strategies. The desk reference does point the user to other 

resources and reports that are better suited to that purpose. Key resources are provided at the end of 

each section. 

Title Report Number Date

The Transportation Planning Process: Key Issues – A Briefing 

Book for Transportation Decision-makers, Officials and Staff

FHWA-HEP-07-039 2007

An Interim Guidebook on the Congestion Management Process 

in Metropolitan Transportation Planning

FHWA-HOP-08-008 2008

Advanced Metropolitan Planning for Operations: An Objectivesdriven, Performance-based Approach – A GuidebookFHWA-HOP-10-026 2010

Advanced Metropolitan Planning for Operations: The Building 

Blocks of a Model Transportation Plan Incorporating Operations 

– A Desk Reference

FHWA-HOP-10-027 2010

Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety and 

Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual

FHWA-HOP-10-028 2010

Table 1.1: FHWA Resource Documents
TDM | 11

1.1 Organization of the Desk Reference

The desk reference is fundamentally organized around two aspects of transportation planning – policy 

objectives and scope of the planning effort. The report discusses how TDM relates to seven key policy 

objectives that are often included in transportation plans, such as congestion and air quality. It then 

discusses how TDM might be integrated into four levels of transportation planning from the state down to 

the local level. Acknowledging that readers will have differing levels of experience and skills when it comes 

to TDM and the planning process, the desk reference includes discussion of various levels of capabilities 

to help the reader determine the most targeted guidance for their situation. The report also includes 

information on tools available for evaluating TDM measures and on the known effectiveness of these 

measures. Figure 1.1 provides a cross-walk of the major sections in the document.

Integration into the planning process implies consideration of TDM at various steps starting with the 

highest level of strategy and visioning to more specific goal setting all the way to the incorporation into 

specific plans and conducting performance evaluations. 

It is important to recognize that agencies are currently integrating TDM to the best of their abilities in their 

plans. The organization and the content of the desk reference are driven by the principle that there is no 

“one size fits all” solution to integrating TDM. In essence, integrating TDM into the planning process is 

about capability maturity across the various planning activities that occur at an agency. Leveraging existing 

research into the capability maturity model developed for The American Association of State Highway 

Transportation Officials (AASHTO),2

 the desk reference strives to provide agencies a model to self-identify/

assess their capability and identify the desired actions to improve their processes. The premise behind the 

model is that any process goes through evolutions as it is improved. By utilizing the same model and the 

same assessment approach, organizations can benchmark how their process rates against their peers 

and identify specific steps that they can take to move along the capability continuum. 

Regional Mobility

Accessibility

Congestion

Reduction/System

Reliability

Air Quality

Environment

Economic

Development

Land Use/

Transportation

Goods Movement/

Freight

Livability

Good

Fair

Good

Good

Good

Fair

Fair

Excellent

Excellent

Excellent

Good

Excellent

Good

Good

Good

Excellent

Fair

Fair

Good

Good

Fair

Fair

Good

Good

Good

Excellent

Good

Excellent

Applicabilty and Potential of TDM to Policy Objectives at Various Planning Levels

State Level Metropolitan/ Corridor Planning Local/Municipal

Separate sections dealing with

integration of TDM into each level of

planning

Individual “fact sheets”

dealing with the role of 

demand management in

each policy objective

Other supporting

chapters:

• Making the case for

 TDM

• Known effectiveness

 of TDM strategies

• Evaluation tools and

 techniques

Figure 1.1: Desk Reference Structure

Source: Battelle

2 AASHTO, System Management and Operations Guidance, 2011, http://aashtosomguidance.org/

TDM | 4

INTRODUCTION

Objective

Planning Regional Planning Planning
1

2

3

4

Etc. 

Planning Steps

Capability Levels

Ad-Hoc Defined Optimized

Actions

Future State

Current State

TDM | 5

For each of the planning levels, three levels of capability are identified:

• Ad-Hoc: TDM is mostly an afterthought. At this level of capability, successful outcomes are largely 

through individual efforts or projects. Steps/Processes/Activities have not been formalized and shared 

across the agency or the region. 

• Defined: At this level, there is recognition that TDM is important to achieving the planning goals. Overall, 

TDM is considered in the toolbox of approaches and can be applied repeatedly, but gaps remain in how 

TDM tools are planned and applied. 

• Optimized: At this level, TDM is a vital tenet of the process and permeates all the steps. Continuous 

monitoring and performance ensure that TDM tools are correctly characterized and planned in combination with other strategies for all possible policy objectives and application settings. 

The goal of integration is to move agencies along the capability continuum (from ad-hoc to defined and 

from defined to optimized) in the planning process by identifying specific actions as illustrated in 

Figure 1.2. 

Topically, this desk reference is organized as follows:

•	Chapter 2 presents a definition of TDM that is broader than traditional commuter ridesharing, encompassing many travel choices, including: mode, location, route, and time of day. As such, this 

definition of TDM includes many strategies that are not always thought of as TDM, such as road pricing, 

traveler information, and measures aimed at improving the operational efficiency of existing facilities. In 

essence, it presents TDM as an operational philosophy that seeks to balance demand reduction strategies with smart capacity enhancements as part of a more holistic approach to urban transportation. It 

also includes sections on the role of technology in this expanded definition of TDM and on the economics 

of TDM, to assist planners and implementers in understanding the benefits and cost effectiveness 

of TDM. 

•	Chapter 3 discusses the role of TDM in addressing seven key policy objectives, including: mobility/

accessibility, congestion/reliability/safety, environment/air quality, economic development, goods movement, land use integration, and quality of life/livability/health. By including objectives related to economic 

vitality, the environment, and livability, these policy areas also encompass the basic components of 

sustainable urban transportation. For each policy area, the general relationship to TDM is discussed, 

specific TDM strategies to address each objective are offered, performance measures are enumerated, 

case studies and examples are provided, and advice on how to integrate TDM into the planning process 

is provided. 

Figure 1.2: Capability Levels and Actions Inform the Structure of the Desk Reference

Source: Battelle
TDM | 11

•	Chapter 4 presents the need for and experience with integrating TDM into the transportation planning process at various levels. This chapter also introduces the various planning steps involved in the 

objective-driven performance planning process and identifies how they fit with TDM. This chapter also 

discusses the linkages between the various planning levels. 

•	Chapter 5 discusses integration at the statewide planning level. This complements a recent National 

Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) study on the role of state DOTs in implementing 

TDM programs.3 

•	Chapter 6 focuses on integration into the metropolitan transportation planning process, including congestion management and long-range planning. 

•	Chapter 7 presents guidance on how to integrate TDM into corridor planning processes for a given 

facility. 

•	Chapter 8 discusses the integration of TDM into the local or municipal planning process. 

In each case, the guidance is based not only on experience to date (with examples and illustrations), but 

also on how TDM integration might be improved, based on the role that TDM could play in the planning 

process to make it more effective in addressing key policy needs. 

•	Chapter 9 provides an overview of the tools and techniques available to evaluate TDM during the planning process. This includes the ability to forecast the estimated impacts of various TDM strategies in 

different applications as well as the need to establish performance-based planning objectives for TDM. 

Finally, some discussion of the ability to perform benefit/cost analysis on TDM is provided. 

•	Chapter 10 presents an overview of the known effectiveness of various TDM strategies in terms of fulfilling key performance objectives, such as vehicle miles traveled (VMT) reduction, mode shift, congestion relief, and emissions reduction. Acknowledging that our understanding of TDM effectiveness is still 

evolving, the centerpiece of this chapter is a matrix conveying the relative effectiveness of various TDM 

strategies to address the seven policy objectives enumerated in Chapter 3. 

•	Chapter 11 provides a set of specific implementation steps that could be undertaken at each planning 

level to better integrate TDM into the planning process. It also includes some information on funding 

sources for TDM programs and projects. 

The desk reference includes examples, case studies, and best practices to support the information in 

each section. These are presented in colored text boxes throughout the reference. Selected resources are 

also identified at the end of each section. 

1.2 Use of the Desk Reference

The intended users of this desk reference are transportation planning professionals who are seeking 

information on the role of TDM in meeting specific needs they face in their planning efforts. Users 

can pick and choose the sections that are most related to their issue at hand (see Table 1.2 below). The 

report was purposely organized in a manner that would allow for this targeted use. This does imply a 

certain degree of repetition of terms and references in each section. Table 1.2 provides some directions 

on use of this document. 

3

NCHRP, State Department of Transportation Role in the Implementation of Transportation Demand Management Programs, Research Results 

Digest 348, ICF International, July 2010, http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rrd_348.pdf. 

TDM | 6

INTRODUCTION
Table 1.2: Potential Uses of Desk Reference

Purpose for Desk Reference Use / Questions Start with:

What is the contemporary view and role of demand management in Chapter 2

transportation planning?

Where can I find examples on the roles for TDM in specific policy Chapter 3 

issues that I have to address in my plans?

3.1 Regional Mobility and Accessibility

Where can I find references/citations on TDM applications for spe- 3.2 Congestion/System Reliability/

cific goals, locations? Safety

3.3 Environment/Air Quality

3.4 Economic Development

3.5 Land-Use Integration

3.6 Goods movement/freight

3.7 Quality of Life/Livability/Health

How does TDM fit into the general planning process? Chapter 4

I am a state DOT planner. How do I start including TDM in my plans? Chapter 5

I work in a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) and am up- Chapter 6

dating my metropolitan plans. What steps should I take for including 

TDM?

I work in an MPO and am coordinating with local jurisdictions on Chapter 7 and 8

TDM for local settings and corridors. Whom should I talk to and 

what steps should I take?

How do I select strategies and evaluate TDM? Chapter 9

How effective have these strategies been elsewhere? Chapter 10

What steps can my agency take to better support and implement Chapter 11

TDM?

TDM | 7 
TDM | 11 TDM | 11

Washington State Department of Transportation, “Moving Washington – A Program to Fight Congestion,” http://

www.wsdot.wa.gov/movingWashington/, May 2, 2011. 

USDOT/RITA, Joint ITS Program Office, Integrated Corridor Management, http://www.its.dot.gov/icms/index.htm. 

NCHRP, State Department of Transportation Role in the Implementation of Transportation Demand Management 

Programs, Research Results Digest 348, ICF International, July 2010, http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/

nchrp_rrd_348.pdf. 

FHWA, Advanced Metropolitan Planning for Operations: An Objectives-driven, Performance–based Approach – 

A Guidebook , SAIC, FHWA-HOP-10-026, 2010, http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop10026/index.

htm. 

FHWA, Advanced Metropolitan Planning for Operations: The Building Blocks of a Model Transportation Plan 

Incorporating Operations – A Desk Reference, SAIC, FHWA-HOP-10-027, 2010, http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/

publications/fhwahop10027/index.htm. 

FHWA, Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety and Multimodal Planning: A Reference 

Manual, ICF International, FHWA-HOP-10-028, 2010, http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop10027/

index.htm. 

FHWA, An Interim Guidebook on the Congestion Management Process in Metropolitan Transportation Planning, 

Cambridge Systematics, Inc, FHWA-HOP-08-008, 2008, http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/statewide/manual/

index.cfm. 

FHWA, The Transportation Planning Process: Key Issues – A Briefing Book for Transportation Decision-makers, 

Officials and Staff, Transportation Planning Capacity Building Program, FHWA-HEP-07-039, 2007, http://www.

planning.dot.gov/documents/BriefingBook/BBook.htm. 

TDM | 8

KEY RESOURCES

INTRODUCTION
TDM | 9 

Few question the need to manage 

travel demand these days as 

growth in travel continues to exceed 

our ability to accommodate it with new 

capacity. The most recent edition of The 

Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE’s) 

Traffic Engineering Handbook concludes: 

“With a growing understanding of the 

effects of demand and congestion beyond 

the right of way, operating agencies, 

policy makers and the public may employ 

techniques which may minimize financial, 

emotional, environmental and physical 

costs on the individual and on society.”4

Around the nation, agencies are getting 

smarter in how they manage existing 

infrastructure and in deciding when strategic 

capacity enhancements should be made in 

certain situations. For example, many of the 

capacity enhancements being 

made are incorporating TDM as a key 

component, be it high occupancy vehicle (HOV) or high-occupancy toll (HOT) lanes or other more 

operational components like ramp metering or bus rapid transit (BRT). 

When considering past urban transportation planning practices, planners attempted to “predict and 

provide” or estimate future travel demand based on population and employment projections. Utilizing this 

information, they worked to build enough capacity to meet this estimated demand. Costs, environmental 

concerns, time requirements, and various other factors have contributed to our inability to “build our way 

out” of the congestion problem. However, TDM has the potential to reduce overall travel demand for 

single-occupancy vehicle (SOV) use, when implemented sustainably and successfully, thus reducing or 

delaying the total need for capacity expansion. As such, TDM needs to be considered throughout the 

planning process, certainly well before project selection so that tradeoffs between demand reduction 

and supply expansion can be carefully assessed. Given the potential for lower costs – decreased 

environmental and energy impact – and the ability to expand travel choices, TDM may be the preferred 

solution in many instances. The Swedish Road Administration has institutionalized this process by 

adopting the “four-stage principle” that requires planners to consider demand management and mode 

shifting before considering efficiency measures, systems management, or minor road improvements, and 

new investment or major reconstruction as a last resort.5

2. The Evolving Role of Demand 

Management

ATM Active Traffic Management

BRT Bus Rapid Transit

CMAQ Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality

DOT Department of Transportation

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

HOT High Occupancy Toll

HOV High Occupancy Vehicle

ITE Institute of Transportation Engineers

ITS-JPO The Intelligent Transportation Systems Joint

 Program Office

SOV Single Occupancy Vehicle

TDM Travel Demand Management

TRIMMS Trip Reduction Impacts of Mobility 

 Management Systems

TSM Transportation Systems Management

VHT Vehicle Hours Travelled

VMT Vehicle Miles Travelled

4

ITE, Traffic Engineering Handbook: 6th Edition, edited by Walter Kraft, 2009. 

5

FHWA, “Managing Travel Demand: Applying European Perspectives to U.S. Practice,” Report No. FHWA-PL-06-015, May 2006. 

CHAPTER ACRONYM LIST
TDM | 10 TDM | 11 TDM | 11

This chapter provides a discussion of a new, broad definition for TDM and how it fits into today’s 

management and operation of the transportation system. A new framework is presented on traveler 

choices within the context of TDM, suggesting that the concept goes well beyond mode choice. The 

chapter discusses how TDM can be a vital part of efforts to create a more sustainable transportation 

system. The contemporary view of TDM is also enhanced with advances in technology, making possible 

dynamic, immediate, and real-time choices. Finally, the economics of TDM are discussed to suggest the 

significant return on investment that can result from TDM. 

2.1 A New Focus on Travel Choices for Reliable Travel

Traditionally, TDM has been narrowly defined as commuter ridesharing and its planning application 

restricted to air quality mitigation (conformity analysis), development mitigation (reducing trip generation 

rates and parking needs), or efforts to increase multi-modalism in transportation plans. At the heart of 

traditional ridesharing are measures to induce commuters to shift to higher occupant modes: carpooling, 

vanpooling, and transit. It also includes non-motorized modes or active transportation modes, such 

as bicycling and walking. Finally, traditional ridesharing also includes strategies to move commuters 

outside the peak congestion periods through work arrangements, such as flextime, telecommuting, 

and compressed work schedules. Traditional rideshare will continue to play a significant role in the 

contemporary view of TDM as it seeks to influence travel at the most congested places and times. 

Extensive guidance and documentation are available on best practices for implementing effective 

ridesharing programs, including the U.S. DOT’s Ridesharing Options Analysis and Practitioner’s Toolkit.6

 

A more contemporary definition of TDM consists of maximizing travel choices, as stated in the definition 

provided in an FHWA report on TDM: 

Managing demand is about providing travelers, regardless of whether they drive alone, with travel 

choices, such as work location, route, time of travel and mode. In the broadest sense, demand 

management is defined as providing travelers with effective choices to improve travel reliability.7

This definition of TDM, emerging from an international scan of practices in Europe, incorporates many 

strategies heretofore not considered within the realm of TDM, such as road pricing, operational strategies 

that shift travelers’ route and time (such as advanced traveler information), and strategies that influence 

which lane travelers use on a given facility. Contemporary TDM recognizes that improvements to 

transportation system reliability come not only from system capacity expansion and improvements, but 

also from travel and TDM. 

In a sense, the contemporary definition of TDM is probably closer to the concept of transportation systems 

management (TSM). The availability of choices not only reduces overall demand (VMT) but seeks to 

redistribute demand by making efficiency improvements to the road system, thereby potentially reducing 

vehicle hours traveled (VHT). As a result, the contemporary definition of TDM encompasses a variety of 

established solutions, including: traditional ridesharing, road pricing, and TSM. 

Another key aspect of the definition includes choices for all travel and not just commuting. This may mean 

providing choices for school travel, special events, specific locations (such as national parks, historical 

cores), shopping or leisure travel, and highway reconstruction efforts. 

6

USDOT, Volpe Center, Ridesharing Option Analysis and Practitioner’s Toolkit, prepared for FHWA, 2010, http://www.planning.dot.gov/documents/RidesharingOptions_Toolkit.pdf. 

7

FHWA, Mitigating Traffic Congestion—The Role of Demand-Side Strategies, prepared by ACT, Report No. FHWA-HOP-05-001, October 2004. 

M A K I N G T H E C A S E 
TDM | 11 

Similarly, this definition applies not only to the individual traveler but also to freight. For example, time 

choice is the key to the Pier Pass program in Los Angeles.8 To address congestion/air quality issues and 

encourage off-peak truck travel near facilities and I-710, peak period access and egress to port facilities 

is priced. In this case, location choice is the key to freight consolidation strategies aimed at keeping 

larger trucks out of the urban core. This has been demonstrated in Europe (using clean vehicles to make 

deliveries to city center stores).9 Alternately, mode choice was one reason for network-wide truck tolls in 

Germany, which induced a moderate shift to rail, as well as helping to maintain the road system. 

Finally, TDM has always been about forming new partnerships 

with government agencies that support TDM. Most commonly, 

this partnership involves the private sector, such as employers, 

developers, or business organizations seeking cooperative 

means to serve commuters. Partnerships have also been 

formed with special interest groups, such as environmental 

groups, seeking to promote TDM as a strategy to meet mutual 

goals. More recently, partnerships are forming with private 

entities that are developing new tools for dynamic demand 

management, using social media and new technologies. Finally, 

partnerships are being formed with grassroots organizations 

aimed at improving the quality of life in a given area and seeking 

to promote more and healthier travel options. The benefits 

of these partnerships are many, including resources, policy 

support, technical assistance, and implementation aid. The 

adjacent quote by the Utah DOT TravelWise Coordinator, Angelo 

Papastamos, highlights the benefits of TDM partnerships. 

A view of contemporary TDM strategies using this notion 

of choices is illustrated in the following trip-chain graphic 

(Figure 2.1). At the heart of the conceptual framework is the 

need to understand the difference between TDM and traffic 

management. Figure 2.1 shows the need to integrate travel 

demand and traffic management into a larger framework of travel choices and congestion reduction 

techniques. These choices begin with consideration of overall travel demand and work their way through 

traffic demand and network demand. The set of strategies shown on the right side of the figure are not 

exhaustive and are meant to show the kinds of strategies that focus on traffic management, TDM, or both. 

However, the key to the conceptual framework is to show differences between types of demands and how 

offering choices can influence these demands. Each set of demands and choices is discussed below, 

based on guidance provided by FHWA on integrating TDM and Active Traffic Management.10

8

PierPASS, available at http://pierpass.org/

9

Commercial Transport in European Cities: How do European cities meet the challenges of commercial transport? Experiences and case studies 

from the CIVTAS Programme of the European Commission, Hans-Joachim Becker, Diana Runge, Urte Schwedler, Michael Abrahamm, Berlin, 

July 2008, available at http://www.civitas-initiative.org/docs1/IVP_21.pdf, ISSN 1613-1258

10FHWA, 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

“Travel demand management, 

or as we call it in Utah 

“TravelWise,” has allowed the 

Utah Department of Transportation to partner with other state 

agencies, businesses and large 

employers, transit providers, 

local governments and others involved in planning for our region 

in a proactive manner. In Utah, 

we have found that if we all do a 

little, we can do a lot to reduce 

traffic congestion, improve our 

environment, and reduce energy 

needs; all while strengthening 

Utah’s economy.”

Angelo Papastamos, P.E. 

Utah DOT TravelWise

Coordinator
TDM | 11

Mode and

Destination

Choice

Route and 

Time Choice Lane Choice Travel 

Demand

Traffic 

Demand

Network 

Demand

Toolbox

of Strategies

TDM | 11

Stage One – Travel Demand and Mode and Destination Choices

This overall demand can be modulated by influencing traveler choices about whether to travel, which 

mode to use (car or other mode), and where to travel (the destination). Many techniques can be applied 

at this stage of the framework to reduce overall travel demand by car. This might include incentives to use 

higher occupancy modes (e.g., carpool, vanpool, transit) or nonmotorized modes (bicycle, walk). It might also include programs 

to encourage working or shopping from home (addressing 

whether to travel) or to reduce trip lengths or overall VMT (by 

combining trips or shopping or working closer to home). Of 

course, congestion pricing has been proven to be an effective 

means to reduce travel demand by inducing mode shift and 

reducing overall peak travel.11 Congestion pricing can come 

in the form of cordon pricing, such as the pricing schemes in 

London and Stockholm, or as a fee on all or targeted vehicle 

usage. Small changes in demand can have significant impacts. 

This stage involves influencing travel demand before the 

decision to drive (particularly alone) is made. Measures to 

influence travel mode and destination have the ability to reduce 

overall traffic volumes on the highway network, and when 

properly targeted, can reduce traffic volumes on key congested 

facilities during critical times of the day. The success of TDM initiatives, implemented during and as an 

integral part of highway reconstruction projects, provides solid evidence of the ability to manage travel 

demand to reduce overall traffic volumes. 

Stage Two – Traffic Demand and Route and Time Choice

Once the vehicle trip demand by car is determined, traffic may be influenced through measures that 

affect time and route choice (i.e., real-time traveler information) before reaching a congested corridor and/

or time period. Choices provided in this stage aim to change the time of day of travel to avoid the most 

congested periods or to seek alternate routes that might be less congested. This set of choices can also 

reduce the volume of vehicles using and impacting congested facilities – thus improving operational 

Figure 2.1: Travel Demand Management – A Philosophy of Choices

Source: FHWA – Integrating Active Traffic and Travel Demand Management

TDM | 12

11FHWA, Congestion Pricing: A Primer – Overview, FHWA-HOP-08-039, 2008, http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop08039/cp_prim1_00.htm

M A K I N G T H E C A S E 

“In our work, we have the opportunity to speak with commuters directly about their commute 

choices. Research indicates 

that for commuters, TDM is a 

key component of the overall 

range of options they review. 

Although they might not know 

the meaning of 'TDM,' they recognize its benefits!” 

Karen S. Smith, Senior Vice

President of Research

Strategy
TDM | 13 

efficiency. Congestion pricing can also influence the time of day or route that a commuter or other traveler 

chooses. Most HOT lane projects in the U.S. increase the price of using the facility based on time of day 

and/or congestion levels. This has the impact of moving travelers to the edges of the peak period or even 

creating a route or mode shift to parallel facilities or to public transit or other less costly modes, such as 

carpooling (as mentioned earlier). 

Stage Three – Network Demand and Lane Choice

Once a traveler makes the decision to travel on a given facility, network demand has been determined. In 

this case the final choice that can be influenced is the lane that travelers use on a given facility (and how 

each lane is used). At this point, the system operator heavily influences traveler choices on a given facility. 

This concept of influencing lane choice is rather new to the U.S., but is at the core of new operational 

concepts, such as Active Traffic Management (ATM).12 Two examples of ATM include the use of the 

hard shoulder and dynamic lane controls. In several European countries, the hard shoulder is being used 

during congested periods as a travel lane, with safety issues being addressed with active monitoring and 

incident management. When implementing ATM, lane speeds are also reduced to maintain safe operation 

of the facility. In this manner, strategic capacity is added when, and only when, needed. Lane choice 

can also be actively managed during incidents, by slowing cars upstream and moving them into lanes 

unaffected by the incident. The use of overhead speed and information displays, coupled with real-time 

monitoring, helps accomplish this by showing motorists the reason for the slowing of traffic upstream.13 

HOV and HOT lanes offer users the choice to experience reliable travel times in exchange for increased 

occupancy or paying a fee on a given facility. HOT lanes offer choices and do not force anyone to change 

their travel behavior. 

Traditionally, many of these strategies are considered TSM, as they serve as an important element in 

ensuring that choices are sustained throughout the trip chain to ensure a reliable movement of goods and 

people. 

Can managing demand have a real, noticeable impact on the highway system?

Consider the situation when relatively minor changes in daily urban activity can have a significant 

impact on traffic. Some observers point to the situation where government worker vacations (e.g., 

federal employees in Washington D.C.) or holiday schedules in some states (e.g., unique state 

holidays in California and elsewhere) can have a profound effect on recurring, peak period congestion. This suggests that as little as a 10% reduction in demand can eliminate recurring congestion 

in some circumstances (DeCorla-Souza, 2006). 

Due to the short-term nature of these reductions, sufficient time is not available to restore equilibrium (when those who have used other travel choices move back to driving alone during the 

peak period). This suggests that strategies to “dynamically” manage demand may be effective in 

managing traffic while not allowing induced demand to refill freed capacity. In the longer run, efforts 

to manage demand need to address issues of induced demand and route diversion that might 

threaten to refill unused capacity. However, an overall demand-oriented approach would seek to 

reduce overall demand and modify behavior in ways that do not presume travel time minimization 

as the principal motivator for all drivers. 

12FHWA, “Active Traffic Management: The next step in congestion management,” Report No, FHWA-PL-07-012, July 2007.

13FHWA, “Managing Travel Demand: Applying European Perspectives to U. S. Practice,” Report No. FHWA-PL-06-015, May 2006. 

14 ITE, Traffic Engineering Handbook: 6th Edition, edited by Walter Kraft, 2009. 
TDM | 11 TDM | 14

Technique Traveler Choices

Affected

Arterial Management – The management of traffic signals, dynamic and fixed lane management 

along surface streets including speed management, pedestrian and bicycle interaction with 

vehicles, vehicle priority coordination, and coordination with other techniques such as traveler 

information, electronic payment, or incident management. 

R, M, L

Freeway Management – The management of lanes along freeway and associated ramps interfacing with the arterials including speed management, and coordination with other techniques 

such as traveler information, electronic payment, or incident management. 

R, M, L

Transit Management – Transit service available to a site, personal security, route and scheduling 

information, and coordination with traveler information services. 

R, M, T, OD

Incident Management – The detection, response, and recovery from events that are non-recurring, providing information to response personnel and the public, minimizing the impacts on 

traffic flow, and optimizing the safety of the public and responders. 

R, L, T, OD

Emergency Management – Hazardous material routing and security management, routing, coordination of emergency response service providers, and information dissemination and coordination. 

R, M

Road Pricing and Electronic Payment – Payment services and systems associated with toll facility operations, variable pricing, VMT fees, parking facilities, and transit services. 

R, M, L, T, OD

Traveler Information – Pre-trip, Near Pre-Trip, and en-Route information provided to the traveler 

via roadside, in-vehicle or personal communication devices on the current travel conditions, trip 

planning services, tourism, special events, and parking information. 

R, M, L, T, OD

Roadway Operations and Maintenance – The management of work zones and route closures 

through the use of traveler information, lane and speed management systems, and enforcement 

and response service providers. 

R, L, T, OD

Road Weather Management – Planning for and responding to weather events impacting traffic 

operations and roadway conditions, information distribution to travelers and response personnel, and operations of facility under inclement conditions. 

R, M, L, T, OD

Commercial Vehicle Operations – Clearance and screening of commercial carriers to optimize 

flow of goods and services while optimizing safety and efficiency through the use of roadside 

and in-vehicle technology. 

R, L, T

Intermodal Freight – Integrated operations of freight transported by multiple modes both internationally and domestically. 

R, M, L, T, OD

Parking Management – Parking information, variable pricing, routing to available parking. M, T, OD

Quality Pedestrian Movement – Availability of pedestrian facilities that are integrated within the 

overall transportation network and accommodate or even promote non-motorized travel. 

R, M, T, OD

Amenities On-Site – Bicycle locks, showers, automated teller machines, vanpool or carpool 

parking, local shuttle service, infrastructure for teleworking. 

M, T, OD

Ridematching Program – Carpools, vanpool programs, preferred parking, transit or parking 

subsidies. 

R, M, L, T, OD

Alternative Work Schedules – Four 10-hour days per week, staggered hours, flexible hours. R, M, L, T, OD

Telecommuting Options – Work environment that supports employer-employee relationship from 

remote sites with consideration of accessibility, accountability, and productivity. 

R, M, T, OD

Travel Plans – Worksite, school, or event plans that incorporate travel demand and traffic management strategies to reduce the negative impacts of car use to the site. 

M, T, L, OD

On-Site Travel Coordinator – Staff and services focused on travel services and demand management strategies. 

R, M, T, OD

Table 2.1 provides a comprehensive toolkit listing from the ITE Traffic Engineering Handbook on traffic 

management, TDM strategies, and key travel choices: Route (R), Mode (M), Location (L), Time (T), or 

origin/destination (OD).14 

Table 2.1: Traffic Management and TDM Strategies Influencing Choices

M A K I N G T H E C A S E 
TDM | 15 

2.2 A Vital Tenet of a Sustainable Transportation System

As illustrated by this conceptual framework and discussion of choices, TDM is less about certain 

management strategies and more of an operational philosophy that seeks a holistic approach to urban 

transportation -- one that better balances demand and supply solutions, one that seeks to make better 

use of existing capacity, and one that seeks to do so in a more sustainable manner. One study describes 

this broader conceptualization of TDM as follows:

But travel demand management is a much broader concept than that assigned to 

mobility management or ridesharing. Implicit in the use of the term is the assumption 

that it is accompanied by the implementation of sustainable mobility, introduction of full 

cost pricing and organizational or structural measures to ensure a broad range of 

complementary interventions work effectively together to realize the benefits of sustainable 

transport. It is the unifying philosophy of TDM, not specific measures associated with it, 

that underpins the policy objective of a more sustainable system of transport. Perhaps this 

philosophy is better understood simply as ‘urban transport management’ – i.e. obtaining a 

more appropriate balance in favour of needs over wants. Put simply, where transport used 

to be supplied to accommodate travel demand, travel must now be managed to use the 

available transport supply most efficiently.15 

Transportation systems can be better managed and characterized by

• Expanding the supply and availability of (more sustainable) alternatives.

• Integrating demand-side strategies into operational efficiency initiatives.

• Controlling demand for the use of unsustainable modes.

• Providing incentives and rewards for undertaking sustainable travel habits.

• Imposing full-cost pricing on the use of the automobile. 

TDM has many opportunities to promote sustainable transportation. Broadly, by offering choices, TDM 

becomes a value proposition for areas to reduce their dependence on SOV travel. 

15Colin Black and Eric Schreffler, “Understanding TDM and its Role in the Delivery of Sustainable Urban Transport “ Transportation Research 

Record 2163, pp. 81-88, 2010. 
TDM | 11 TDM | 16

Potential Opportunities for TDM to promote sustainability:

• TDM reduces the need for new or wider roads

By persuading people to drive less often, to closer destinations, outside of rush hours or using 

less busy routes, TDM can reduce the demand for new road infrastructure. 

• TDM makes personal travel decisions more efficient

Many drivers make travel decisions based on poor information and a lack of experience with 

non-automobile options. TDM improves their awareness and understanding of options, and their 

willingness to try them. 

• TDM maximizes return on infrastructure spending

Studies have shown that good information can significantly increase ridership on new transit 

infrastructure and services. Likewise, reducing overall travel demand on highways adds to the 

effective lifespan of strategic capacity improvements. 

• TDM makes the most of our current assets

It saves people money and time by helping them make efficient travel decisions. It improves 

health by promoting physical activity and less-polluting modes. It benefits employers by increasing productivity, reducing parking costs, and helping to attract and retain workers. It promotes 

economic development by reducing congestion and enhancing worker mobility. 

• TDM is a versatile and dynamic management tool

TDM measures can be customized for specific audiences (e.g., business park commuters), 

destinations (e.g., major hospitals), travel modes (e.g., cyclists), travel corridors (e.g., a busy 

highway), trip purposes (e.g., school) or specific timeframes (e.g., major events). TDM strategies 

can be delivered in months, rather than years. 

• TDM initiatives have multimodal benefits

It recognizes that people see alternatives to driving as a “suite” of options. Non-drivers tend 

to be public transport users, carpoolers, pedestrians, or cyclists at different times, for different 

reasons. TDM expands travel choices within this suite of options. 

• TDM works at the scale of individuals, but has huge power across a community

If every person who drives to work in a community decided to leave their car at home just one 

day a month, the 5% reduction in commuter traffic could significantly ease daily congestion. 

M A K I N G T H E C A S E 
TDM | 17 

2.3 Technology and Connectivity Driven

Contemporary TDM is also characterized by a heavy reliance on technology and communication systems. 

Personal and social connectivity through communications is rapidly changing the way we travel and why 

we travel. The world of traffic management has changed in response primarily to the explosion of the 

scope and the capability of communication technologies enabling a previously unimaginable level of 

connectivity. Broadly, the Intelligent Transportation Systems Joint Program Office (ITS-JPO) has defined 

connectivity as an important theme in their strategic plan for 2010-2014: 

[Connectivity is] a concept that is rapidly changing our daily habits: real-time information 

gives us the power to make decisions and act on opportunities, provides us with details 

needed to understand our fast-paced world, and brings us an awareness of how our 

systems work. The start of the 21st century introduced advanced wireless technologies to 

our lives, and already they are having a dramatic impact on our connections to family, friends, 

and the social and entertainment worlds. These technologies are proliferating throughout 

the business, political, and educational arenas, changing our relationship to information and 

creating an awareness of situations that previously would have gone unnoticed. 

These technologies are redefining how we access knowledge; for the realm of 

transportation, this means unprecedented awareness about what is happening to and 

throughout our transportation system at all times.16

For TDM, this has meant that existing approaches can now be enhanced and provided using new 

technologies and tools. Some non-exhaustive examples of the linkage between technology and TDM 

include the following: 

• Advanced travel time information can now impact trip decisions in a much more comprehensive manner 

using new media (such as Facebook and Twitter), new sources of data (vehicle probes, crowd sourcing) 

leading to new information (comparative travel times, predicted travel times, real-time parking availabilities).

• Dynamic ridesharing approaches are starting to emerge, taking into account social networks.

• Personalized travel information via SmartPhones allows for better pre-trip planning by integrating realtime information from various traffic and transit systems. 

• New mobility applications such as connection protection greatly increase the traveler’s choices. 

TDM has always been a user-driven industry. With these new tools and technologies, contemporary TDM 

can expand the scope, functionality, and application markets for a majority of market strategies to a 

greatly increased user population. 

2.4 Economics of TDM

One issue that arises for planners seeking to integrate TDM into the planning process is how to “sell” 

TDM, since the use of non-SOV travel options is largely perceived as inconvenient and inferior. A first 

response might involve the realization that many travelers want more choices that have the potential to be 

faster, cheaper, and of higher quality than driving alone. 

Cost often wins the debate for TDM, as TDM strategies offer the following benefits in terms of costs and 

cost effectiveness:

• TDM offers travelers lower cost options to driving alone.

• TDM allows considerable cost savings for travelers over time.

16ITS-JPO (2010), ITS Strategic Plan, 2010-2014: Transforming transportation through connectivity, retrieved from http://www.its.dot.gov/strategic_plan2010_2014/index.htm.
TDM | 11 TDM | 18

• TDM strategies are generally low cost as compared to capital projects, or can reduce the overall cost 

of integrated projects.

• TDM is a cost-effective means to meet key policy objectives.

• TDM strategies have very favorable benefit to cost ratios. 

The first two points are fairly well accepted, that by sharing rides, riding transit, bicycling, and walking, 

travelers can save money over driving alone, even when considering only the perceived out of pocket 

costs of operating a vehicle. Over time, these savings can add up and most regional commute 

management websites include a “commute cost calculator” to show commuters prospective savings. 

However, the latter three points deserve additional discussion. 

TDM Strategies are Low Cost for Meeting Mobility Solutions 

In general, the budgeted amounts allocated for TDM are 

considerably less than more capital-intensive and operational 

projects. For example, the TDM portion of the T-REX highway 

reconstruction and light rail project in the Denver region was 

$3 million of a total $1.67 billion project. But the key question is 

whether TDM strategies fulfill mobility and accessibility needs 

commensurate with the money invested. 

One program evaluation of the rideshare program in Los Angeles County17 compared the cost 

effectiveness of the rideshare program to rail improvements planned for the region, both intended to 

enhance mobility options in the region. The cost per trip reduced and the cost per person placed into 

the rideshare program were compared to forecasts of the cost per new rider on a proposed light rail 

extension. The cost per trip reduced was $2.80 for the rideshare program and the cost per person 

placed into a new ridesharing arrangement was $0.82 per day. The comparative cost per new light rail 

rider per day was $6.94 to $7.77 in capital costs and $2.66 to $2.99 in operating costs. 

TDM Strategies are Comparatively Cost Effective in Meeting Policy Objectives

Similarly, TDM strategies have been shown to be a cost effective means of meeting key policy 

objectives. One study of projects funded by the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) 

program (reported in detail in Chapter 10) concluded that TDM measures were among the most cost 

effective in reducing automobile emissions. The analysis showed that as a group, traffic flow projects 

received 33% of all funds, but resulted in a cost per pound of emissions reduced of $42.70. Rideshare 

programs accounted for only 4% of all funds, yet reduced a pound of emissions for $10.25. Likewise, 

miscellaneous TDM programs accounted for 3% of all CMAQ funds but reduced a pound of emissions 

for $7.66.18

Other studies tie cost effectiveness solely to the value of a vehicle trip reduced, as that used by 

Washington State DOT (WSDOT) to select TDM projects for funding. WSDOT sets the value of a trip 

reduced at a maximum of $460.00, equal to that possible using tolling. Therefore, any TDM project that 

removes a vehicle trip for less than that is considered cost-effective. As such, WSDOT approved 17 TDM 

projects in 2006 valued at $1.3 million to purchase 3,831 daily vehicle trips, at a cost of $339.00 per trip 

removed. 

17LDA Consulting. LACMTA Rideshare Evaluation Project: Task 7 –Comparative Cost Effectiveness. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, April 2002. 

18Transportation Research Board. The Congestion Mitigation Air Quality Improvement Program: Assessing Ten Years of Experience. Special 

Report 264. National Academies, 2002. 

“Nothing is more cost effective 

than TDM. ”

Harold W. Barley – Executive 

Director, MetroPlan Orlando

M A K I N G T H E C A S E 
TDM | 19 

TDM Strategies Generate Good Benefit/Cost Ratios

Several research projects have developed methodologies to calculate the costs and benefits of TDM in 

order to allow for objective project selection and evaluation. In seeking to create evaluation procedures for 

TDM that would produce values comparable to road projects, the New Zealand government developed a 

procedure that included the following benefits and costs when evaluating TDM measures:19

• Travel time saving.

• Vehicle operating costs.

• Parking costs.

• Health benefits of cycling and walking.

• Public transit fares.

• Congestion reduction.

• Walking and cycling costs.

• Accident costs.

• Public transportation costs (if expanded).

• Externality costs. 

Applying such a methodology to an individualized marketing program in South Perth, Australia, resulted in 

Benefit to Cost Ratios of 13:1 (and 15:1 when factoring in reduced accidents).20

Similarly, the Trip Reduction Impacts of Mobility Management Systems (TRIMMS) model (see Chapter 9) 

developed at the Center for Urban Transportation Research includes a module to calculate the benefit/

cost ratios for TDM strategies using a similar approach. The TRIMMS model allows for the estimation 

of trip reduction impacts for TDM strategies applied to a given situation and from that, the ability to 

calculate the value of the trips reduced and the benefit to cost ratio. One exemplary test of the model for 

a commute-trip transit fare reduction shows the net value of each vehicle trip reduced to $645.00 and a 

peak period benefit/cost ratio of 2.8.21

19Maunsell, P.R.a.B.A.H., Travel Behaviour Change Evaluation Procedures- A Technical Report. 2004, Transfund New Zeland/EECA: Melbourne, 

Australia

20Office, A.G., Evaluation of 26 Australian TravelSmart Projects in the ACT, South Australia, Queensland, Victoria, and Western Australia. 2006, 

Department of Environment and Heritage: Canberra, Australia. 

21National Center for Transit Research, Economics of TDM: Comparative Cost Effectiveness and Public Investment, NCTR 77704, March 2007. 
TDM | 11 TDM | 20

Colin Black and Eric Schreffler, “Understanding TDM and its Role in the Delivery of Sustainable Urban Transport" 

Transportation Research Record 2163, pp. 81-88, 2010. 

Commercial Transport in European Cities: How do European cities meet the challenges of commercial 

transport? Experiences and case studies from the CIVTAS Programme of the European Commission, HansJoachim Becker, Diana Runge, Urte Schwedler, Michael Abrahamm, Berlin, July 2008, available at http://www. 

civitas-initiative.org/docs1/IVP_21.pdf, ISSN 1613-1258

DeCorla-Souza, “Improving Metropolitan Transportation Efficiency with FAST Miles,” Journal of Public Transit 

Research, Vol. 9, No 1, 2006. 

FHWA, “Active Traffic Management: The next step in congestion management,” Report No, FHWA-PL-07-012, 

July 2007

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, Congestion Pricing: A Primer – Overview, FHWA-HOP-08-039, 2008, http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/

publications/fhwahop08039/cp_prim1_00.htm

FHWA, Office of Innovative Program Delivery, “Road Pricing Defined: VMT Fees,” http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ipd/

revenue/road_pricing/defined/vmt.htm

FHWA, Mitigating Traffic Congestion—The Role of Demand-Side Strategies, prepared by ACT, Report No. 

FHWA-HOP-05-001, October 2004. 

FHWA, “Managing Travel Demand: Applying European Perspectives to U. S. Practice,” Report No. FHWAPL-06-015, May 2006. 

LDA Consulting. LACMTA Rideshare Evaluation Project: Task 7 –Comparative Cost Effectiveness. Los Angeles 

County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, April 2002. 

Maunsell, P. R. a. B. A. H. , Travel Behaviour Change Evaluation Procedures- A Technical Report. 2004, Transfund 

New Zeland/EECA: Melbourne, Australia. 

National Center for Transit Research, Economics of TDM: Comparative Cost Effectiveness and Public 

Investment, NCTR 77704, March 2007. 

Office, A. G. , Evaluation of 26 Australian TravelSmart Projects in the ACT, South Australia, Queensland, Victoria, 

and Western Australia. 2006, Department of Environment and Heritage: Canberra, Australia. 

Transportation Research Board. The Congestion Mitigation Air Quality Improvement Program: Assessing Ten 

Years of Experience. Special Report 264. National Academies, 2002. 

ITS-JPO (2010), ITS Strategic Plan, 2010-2014: Transforming transportation through connectivity, retrieved from 

http://www.its.dot.gov/strategic_plan2010_2014/index.htm 

ITE, Traffic Engineering Handbook: 6th Edition, edited by Walter Kraft, 2009. 

USDOT, Volpe Center, Ridesharing Option Analysis and Practitioner’s Toolkit, prepared for FHWA, 2010, http://

www.planning.dot.gov/documents/RidesharingOptions_Toolkit.pdf. 

KEY RESOURCES

M A K I N G T H E C A S E 
TDM | 21 

Improvements in Regional Mobility and Accessibility

Congestion Reduction, System Reliability, and Safety

Air Quality and Environment

Land Use/Transportation Integration

Goods Movement and Freight

Economic Development 

Quality of Life, Livability, and Health

Application of TDM to Policy Issues
TDM | 11 TDM | 22

T

his 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. 

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

CHAPTER ACRONYM LIST

3. Application of TDM to Policy Issues

P O L I C Y I S S U E S 
TDM | 23 

Objective Level 1 – Ad Hoc Level 2 - Defined Level 3 – Optimized

Mobility

Public transit viewed as primary travel alternativeExpanded 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

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 indepth reading, and examples on the role of TDM for each policy objective. 

Planning Levels

Policy Goals

State Level 

Planning

Metropolitan/ 

Regional Planning

Corridor 

Planning

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

Table 3.1: Ability of TDM to Address Policy Objectives

Table 3.2: Levels of TDM Inclusion/Capability to Address Policy Issues
TDM | 11 TDM | 11

22 Transport Canada, Urban Transportation Showcase Program, (www.tc.gc.ca/utsp)

TDM | 24

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:

Transportation

and Land Use

System Transportation

Supply

Land Use

Transportation

Demand

Transportation

Demand Management

Traffic Options

Sustainable 

Support the

Land Use 

Practices

Figure 3.1: Factors in Urban Mobility

Source: EcoMobility Application Guide, Transport 

Canada, 2008

3.1 Improvements in Regional Mobility and Accessibility

P O L I C Y I S S U E S 
TDM | 25 

• 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. 

Whether?

Substitutes

Telework

Teleconferencing

Online shopping

Trip chaining

Why?

Purpose

Work

School

Shopping

Recreation

When?

Time

Weekday Peak Hr

Weekday off Peak

Evening

Weekend

Where?

Destination

Street

Neighborhood

Community

City

How?

Mode

Walking

Cycling

Public Transit

Car/driver/passenger

Transportation Demand

Transportation Demand Management (TDM)

Figure 3.2: TDM Applications and Markets for Urban Mobility

Source: EcoMobility Application Guide, Transport Canada, 2008
TDM | 11 TDM | 26

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

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. 

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 vehiclemile, 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 trip

Table 3.3: Transportation Evaluation Perspectives

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. 

P O L I C Y I S S U E S 
TDM | 27 

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, decisionmaking 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. 

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. 
TDM | 11 TDM | 28

• Operate and Maintain Regional ITS Communications Network

• Active Traffic Management (Regional Concept of 

Transportation Operations)

• Transit Priority Treatment Performance Measurement

• Region-Wide Access Management Strategies

• Enhance Regional Traffic Signal System

• Implement Freight Data Collection System

• Congestion Pricing/HOT Lanes

• Active Traffic Management Pilot Project

• Next Generation Transit Signal Priority System

• 24-Hour Transportation Operations Coverage

• Automated Speed Enforcement

Multimodal Traffic Management

Traveler Information

Travel Demand Management

Incident Management

Table 3.4: Portland TSMO Strategies

• Portland, OR Regional Transportation Data Archive 

Listing Enhancements

• Multi-modal traveler data and tools

• Park & Ride Traveler Information

• TripCheck Travel Information Portal Enhancement

• Arterial Performance Measure

• Transit Performance Measurement System

• Collaborative Marketing

• Employer Services

• Rideshare Services

• Measurement

• Regional TSMO Program

• Parking Management Pilot Program

• Smartcard Fare System Regional Concept of 

Operations

• Smartcard Fare System Pilot Project

• Youth Transit Pass Program

• Regional Incentive/Disincentive System

• Incident Management

• Expand Incident Management Teams/Training

• Integrate Voice and Data Networks

• Emergency Responders GIS System Upgrades

• Dynamic Routing and Preemption Pilot Project

P O L I C Y I S S U E S 
TDM | 29 

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, 

3.2 Congestion Reduction, System Reliability, and Safety

27 Travel Time Reliability: Making it There on Time, All The Time. FHWA-HOP-06-070. Texas Transportation Institute and Cambridge Systematics, 

2006. 

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. FHWAHOP-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. 

KEY RESOURCES
TDM | 11 TDM | 30

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 worldwide 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 

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 - http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/congestionpricing/index.htm. 

Figure 3.3: WSDOT “Rice” Experiment

Source: WSDOT Department of Transportation

P O L I C Y I S S U E S 
TDM | 31 

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 

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). 

31 FHWA, Value Pricing Pilot Program Publications and Other Resources – http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/tolling_pricing/value_pricing/publications.htm

32 FHWA, Office of Innovative Program Delivery, “Road Pricing Defined” http://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 

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. 
TDM | 11 TDM | 32

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. 

35 UK Highways Agency, http://www.highways.gov.uk/knowledge/9611.aspx

 Figure 3.4: Access-Restricted Lanes near Heathrow, 

London

Source: Alastair Duff and BAA

POLICY ISSUES
Tackling current congestion

Identifying congestion hotspots

Engage with regional stakeholders

Analyze existing infrastructure

Carry out travel surveys

Consider Opportunities

Avoiding future congestion

Engage with the planning process

Ecourage sustainable development

through the planning process

“Smart Travel Choices”

Access Mangement

Travel Plans

Web-Site Travel Info

Car Sharing Lanes

Car Share

Personalized Travel Plans

Traffic information

Car Clubs

Park and Ride

Walking

Cycling

Public Transport

Web-Based Trip Planning

Bus Priority Lanes

Integrated Set of Strategies

Reduced Congestion

TDM | 33 

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 multimodal 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

Figure 3.5: Influencing Travel Behavior Process Flow Chart

Source: UK Highways Agency

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 
TDM | 11 TDM | 34

• 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: DistanceBased 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, CarFree 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). 

P O L I C Y I S S U E S 
TDM | 35 

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: 

37 Los Angeles County MTA, 2010 Congestion Management Program, 2010. 
TDM | 11 TDM | 36

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). 

FHWA, Congestion Pricing: A Primer – Overview, FHWA-HOP-08-039, 2008 - http://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” http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ipd/revenue/

road_pricing/defined/index.htm. 

Focus on Congestion Relief Website, Federal Highway Administration, http://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, http://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, http://www.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

KEY RESOURCES

P O L I C Y I S S U E S 
TDM | 37 

3.3 Air Quality and Environment

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 longterm 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.
TDM | 11 TDM | 38

• 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. 

38 Auto Alliance – www.ecodrivingUSA.com

P O L I C Y I S S U E S 
TDM | 39 

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 NOx (Oxides of Nitrogen) and more recently PM2.5 (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), NOx

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):

The daily NOx and VOC reduction is crucial to conformity, and this evaluation revealed that the TDM 

program met its targets for trip and VMT reduction and NOx 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. 

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

Table 3.5: Washington DC Evaluation of TDM TERM Measures40

39MWCOG, Commuter Connections Transportation Emission Reduction Measures Analysis Report FY2006 – FY2008, 2009, 

http://www.mwcog.org/uploads/pub-documents/xldWVw20090223160744.pdf

40MWCOG, Commuter Connections Transportation Emission Reduction Measures Analysis Report FY2006 – FY2008, 2009, 

http://www.mwcog.org/uploads/pub-documents/xldWVw20090223160744.pdf
TDM | 11 TDM | 40

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, http://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

3.4 Economic Development

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 

41OCED, Road Travel Demand, Meeting the Challenge, OECD, Paris, 2002. 

KEY RESOURCES

P O L I C Y I S S U E S 
TDM | 41 

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. 

42Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), The Economic and Social Impacts of Electronic Commerce, OECD, Paris, 1999. 
TDM | 11 TDM | 42

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 

Figure 3.6: Bicycle Parking in Lund, Sweden

Source: Schreffler

43Todd Litman, Evaluating Transportation Economic Development Impacts, Victoria Transport Policy Institute, 2009, p. 43 (http://www.vtpi.org/

econ_dev.pdf. )

P O L I C Y I S S U E S 
TDM | 43 

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 

44FHWA, “Managing Travel Demand: Applying European Perspectives to U. S. Practice,” Report No. FHWA-PL-06-015, May 2006
TDM | 11

130 

120 

110 

100 

90 

80 

70 

60

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

Traffic in Lund 95-04, index 1995=100

Bicycle

Car

Public transport

Linjar (Bicycle)

Linjar (Public 

transport)

Linjar (Car)

Figure 3.7: Reduction in VMT during a Period of Economic Growth in Lund, Sweden

Source: Trivector Traffic AB

TDM | 44

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 Transitoriented 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. 

P O L I C Y I S S U E S 
TDM | 45 

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 policymakers 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 

3.5 Land Use/Transportation Integration 

FHWA, “Managing Travel Demand: Applying European Perspectives to U. S. Practice,” Report No. FHWAPL-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. 

45Jennings, H., TDM: The Software that Supports the TOD Hardware, Arlington Commuter Services, October 2011

KEY RESOURCES
TDM | 11 TDM | 46

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. 

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 

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. 

P O L I C Y I S S U E S 
TDM | 47 

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

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

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)
TDM | 11 TDM | 48

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. 

 

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

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. 

P O L I C Y I S S U E S 

MEANS OF 

INFLUENCING TRAVEL 

BEHAVIOR TDM STRATEGY (EXAMPLES)

SUPPORTING ACTION (LAND DEVELOPMENT 

PROCESS)
TDM | 49 

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

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. 
TDM | 11 TDM | 50

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%20

CO2%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. FHWAPL-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 

Changes,” 2003. 

KEY RESOURCES

P O L I C Y I S S U E S 

3.6 Goods Movement and Freight 

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. 
TDM | 51 

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 

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)
TDM | 11 TDM | 52

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. 

P O L I C Y I S S U E S 

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, ecodriving, 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. 
TDM | 53 

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. 

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)
TDM | 11 TDM | 54

• 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

57Cross-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

P O L I C Y I S S U E S 
TDM | 55 

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, http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/

fhwahop09014/sect2.htm

Focus on Congestion Relief Website, Federal Highway Administration, http://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. FHWAHOP-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, http://www.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)

KEY RESOURCES
TDM | 11 TDM | 56

3.7 Quality of Life, Livability, and Health 

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

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

P O L I C Y I S S U E S 
TDM | 57 

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.

63 VTPI monograph: Sustainability and Livability: Summary of Definitions, Goals, Objectives, and Performance Indicators, July 2010
TDM | 11 TDM | 58

• 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). 

64Highways Agency, www.highways.gov.uk/

P O L I C Y I S S U E S 
TDM | 59 

• 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 wellconnected, 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. 

FHWA – Livability Initiative - http://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/

KEY RESOURCES

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)
TDM | 11 TDM | 60

P O L I C Y I S S U E S 
TDM | 11 

Integration of TDM into the Planning Process

Statewide Planning

Metropolitan Planning

Corridor Planning

Local Planning

Context

TDM | 61
TDM | 11 TDM | 62

Chapter 3 dealt with the role and the opportunity 

of TDM to address some of the typical policy 

issues faced by planning agencies. While 

understanding the role at a policy level is critical, 

understanding how it fits into the transportation 

planning process is the primary focus of the desk 

reference. That focus on the transportation planning 

process can be accomplished in two ways. First, 

TDM integration could be conceptualized and 

illustrated by using a generalized description of 

transportation planning process. This would help 

planners understand the need to integrate TDM at 

each step of the process. The second way to discuss 

the integration of TDM in the planning process is to 

describe how it might be accomplished at various 

planning levels, be it local, state, regional, or corridor levels. The advantage here is that the planning 

context is more “real world” when discussed within actual organizations who work within various 

geographic and political scopes. 

The next four chapters will seek to provide guidance on where and how state DOTs, MPOs, and other 

local agencies should integrate TDM as part of their planning processes. Four levels of planning are 

discussed in this chapter:

• Statewide planning – e.g., system planning, policy direction, statewide TDM programs. This primarily 

falls under the purview of the state DOT. 

• Metropolitan planning – e.g., long-range regional transportation plans, congestion management 

process activities undertaken by metropolitan-level planning organizations. 

• Corridor planning – e.g., MIS, congestion management processes performed as part of specific corridor 

planning. 

• Local planning – e.g., land use planning activities conducted at the local level by city planning 

organizations. 

Each geographic level has unique opportunities to link TDM into the myriad activities typically undertaken 

as part of the planning scope. But regardless of the geographic or agency level, successful integration 

of TDM depends on developing an organizational mindset, if not a mission, that plans and implements 

policies and infrastructure investments in a modally and functionally coordinated way. The primary goal of 

these policies and investments must be to improve system efficiency and contribute to sustainability. This 

may require transportation agencies to collaborate more fully within and outside their regions, divisions, 

departments, and districts. 

In general, recent federal planning guidance suggests that if plans are developed using an “objectivesdriven, performance-based” process,65 then TDM cannot get ”lost in the process.” The basic premise of 

this planning process is that:

4. Integration of TDM Into the 

Planning Process–Context

65 FHWA, Advanced Metropolitan Planning for Operations: An Objectives-driven, Performance-Based Approach – A Guidebook, FHWA-HOP-10-026, 2010. 

P L A N N I N G – C O N T E X T 

DOT Department of Transportation

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization

SMART Specific, Measurable, Achievable, 

 Realistic, and Time-bound

SOV Single Occupant Vehicle

TDM Travel Demand Management

TIP Transportation Improvement Program

VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled

CHAPTER ACRONYM LIST
TDM | 63 

• goals and measurable objectives that advance operational performance outcomes of the 

transportation system are defined, then 

• performance measures are used to track progress toward objectives, and 

• TDM strategies are selected to meet the measurable objectives. 

The objectives-driven process seeks solutions to fulfill key policy objectives rather than working 

backwards from desired projects that seek to match up to broad goals and objectives. In the objectivesdriven, performance-based approach, planners and implementers work together to find workable 

measures to meet agreed-upon objectives. The performance-based process dictates that demonstrated 

accomplishments toward meeting key objectives be documented and included or expanded in future 

plans. To sum up, this approach focuses on objectives first and foremost and is consistent with the 

integration of TDM into the planning process, because TDM benefits cross many policy objectives, as 

shown in Chapter 3. 

However, before discussing TDM integration within the context of planning levels, this chapter describes 

TDM integration concepts within a generalized transportation planning process. 

Four opportunities identified in other recent FHWA guidance on including operations in statewide planning 

are of particular interest to TDM integration and should serve as key suggestions for the generalized 

planning process and the various planning levels described below:66

• Develop Multidisciplinary Teams/Initiatives.

• Use an Objectives-Driven, Performance-Based Approach.

• Use a Strategic Business Plan to Focus on Integration of Operations, Safety, and Planning.

• Foster Multimodal Coordination. 

The first two opportunities in particular reflect themes that recur frequently in opportunities described in 

subsequent sections of this document. Establishing multidisciplinary teams and a performance-based 

approach to planning at all levels will result in the setting of realistic and measurable objectives as well as 

improved and focused data collection and evaluation. The last two opportunities relate to the agency’s 

strategic focus and structure. In all cases, if these themes are pervasive within the agency, it will benefit 

decision-making at all levels, not only for TDM.

4.1 Integration of TDM into the Activities in the Transportation 

Planning Process

The approach to integrating TDM does not require the development of a new process. Nor does it need to 

be a cumbersome add-on to an agency’s already full plate of planning processes. In fact, the organization 

and structure of Chapters 5 through 8 steers clear of suggesting any new requirements or processes. 

Rather, it focuses on identifying how better TDM can play a role in the existing activities carried out under 

the transportation planning process by states, MPOs, and local agencies. 

To this end, it is important to identify the key planning activities that are universal across planning levels 

and agencies. As part of a national transportation planning capacity building program, FHWA published 

a briefing book for decision-makers describing the transportation planning process.67 Using the briefing 

book and further developments in planning for operations as guidance, the following six activities within 

the transportation planning process are fairly representative and universal across all the agencies. 

Activity 1 – Regional Vision and Goals

Agencies typically are driven by strategic vision and goals. Integrating TDM at the vision setting stage can 

include establishing goals such as enhancing travel choices or other long-term goals to manage demand 

66 FHWA, Statewide Opportunities for Integrating Operations, Safety and Multimodal Planning: A Reference Manual, 2010 

67 FHWA, The Transportation Planning Process: Key Issues - A Briefing Book for Transportation Decision-makers, Officials, and Staff, FHWAHEP-07-039, September 2007. 
TDM | 11 TDM | 64

in tandem with other synergistic elements such as network efficiency and land use. An overall vision that 

calls for a sustainable transportation system and livable communities will also necessarily draw upon TDM 

approaches as well. 

For TDM, the simplest step is to introduce the concept of managing demand as a high-level goal of 

the agency. In the metropolitan transportation planning process, goals stem from the values inherent 

in the region’s vision. The goals may be created during the development or update of the metropolitan 

transportation plan or in anticipation of the next update cycle. 

Increasingly, TDM is making its way into agency mission statements, and ranges from being included in 

supportive objectives to being a primary policy statement. For example, the Pinellas County Florida 2035 

Long Range Transportation Plan contains a rich list of 14 policies to support its TDM-related objective 

to “reduce traffic congestion and positively impact air quality by decreasing the use of single occupant 

vehicles (SOV) at peak hours.” These policies range from developing VMT reduction goals to encouraging 

use and promotion of TDM strategies. The introduction of TDM at this stage can then initiate more indepth planning related to defining specific objectives to help ensure TDM’s success. 

Activity 2 - Setting Objectives for TDM 

Objective setting is a vital part of an agency’s planning process. As the planning process evolves 

toward an objective-based approach to planning rather than a project-based approach, demand 

management- related objectives can start to drive the planning process. Working with stakeholders in the 

region, planners can develop a small number of demand management-related SMART68 objectives that 

accurately reflect what the region would like to achieve and that stakeholders believe can be achieved 

within a certain time frame. These objectives may start out vague and then grow in specificity as the 

iterative process to define and refine the objectives advances. 

Activity 3 - Definition of Performance Measures

Performance measures are driven by objectives. TDM performance measures are wide and varied 

depending on the objective. Chapter 3 provides more details on the key performance measures available 

for TDM for various objectives. 

Activity 4 - Assessment and Selection of Strategies and Programs to Support Objectives

A plan that fully integrates TDM will include a balance of demand and supply side solutions for 

consideration. At this stage, TDM should not be an “add on” to all other strategies. In fact, TDM strategies 

should be afforded the same rigor and consideration as all other solution strategies, using specialized 

TDM models and protocols as necessary. TDM performance measures developed during the previous 

activity allow for direct comparison with other solutions in a meaningful way. 

Activity 5 - Integration of Strategies into Plans and Funding Programs

By this activity, TDM, if broadly defined as suggested in Chapter 2, will be integrated throughout 

the plan, and not confined to a single section or citation. In fact, TDM will constitute an overriding 

philosophy for mobility and accessibility rather than a means simply to mitigate certain negative aspects 

of the transportation system. The generation of projects and activities to be included in transportation 

programming documents will include more options than traditional commuter ridesharing with TDM 

broadly defined as a program/set of strategies to provide enhanced travel choices. 

Activity 6 - Monitoring and Evaluation of Progress toward Objectives 

Integration actions in this activity ensure that TDM performance is measured in terms that relate to the 

operation of the transportation system, such as delay and person throughput. TDM cost effectiveness 

is compared on an equal basis with other capital and operational strategies. TDM effectiveness and 

performance are reported to decision-makers in a meaningful and understandable manner. 

P L A N N I N G – C O N T E X T 

68 SMART – Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, and Timebound
TDM | 65 

State DOTs maintain and operate large and 

complex infrastructure systems. State DOTs 

typically control the high-capacity, high-speed 

components of the state’s highway system that provide 

connectivity, accessibility, and mobility between centers 

of activity and with the rest of the nation, especially 

along key trade routes and corridors. Most DOTs are 

responsible for planning, constructing, and operating 

all of the interstate system and most of the major 

arterial systems in their states. DOTs have an interest in 

maintaining system mobility, reducing congestion, and 

addressing policy issues in the most efficient and costeffective way possible and thus have a stake in initiating 

and partnering in TDM policies and programs. 

The circumstances within which states can embrace 

TDM more fully have never been more compelling. 

Financial challenges are forcing agencies that had 

spent the past few decades growing their transportation 

systems to re-think their expansion plans toward 

preservation and efficiency – to squeeze every last bit of 

capacity out of their existing systems. 

The state can assume a great variety of roles to 

establish, develop, and enhance the effectiveness of 

traditional TDM. Potential roles range from coordination 

to grant provision to direct operation of TDM programs. 

Clearly, the state’s resources, its size, and economic 

complexity are factors that will point the way toward the 

most appropriate practices to institute. To be effective at 

any level of commitment, though, TDM needs to be in 

the “fabric” of the decision-making process. 

A state DOT’s everyday decisions and activities impact 

highway demand significantly, whether or not the state 

agency has a formal TDM program. These activities 

may not be organized within a single decision-making 

structure, because a DOT’s operations, planning, 

and policy functions have evolved as separate and 

independent procedures. It is highly likely that state 

transportation agencies can take cost-effective steps 

to recognize, harness, and amplify the demand 

CBD Central Business District

CMAQ Congestion Mitigation and Air 

Quality

CTR Commute Trip Reduction

CUTR Center for Urban Transportation 

 Research

DOT Department of Transportation

DRI Developments of Regional Impact

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

GHG Greenhouse Gas

GTEC Growth and Transportation 

Efficiency Center

HERO Highway Emergency Response 

Operations

HOT High Occupancy Toll

HOV High Occupancy Vehicle

ITS Intelligent Transportation Systems

LOS Level of Service

LRTP Long-range Transportation Plan

METRIC Mobility Enhancement and 

Trip Reduction Index to aid in 

Comparison

MPO Metropolitan Planning 

 Organization

NTD National Transit Database

SHSP Strategic Highway Safety Plan

SLRTP Statewide Long-Range 

Transportation Plans

SMART Smart, Measurable, Achievable, 

Realistic, and Time-bound

SOV Single Occupancy Vehicle

STP Surface Transportation Program

TDM Travel Demand Management

TEL Tolled Express Lane

VHT Vehicle Hours Travelled

VMT Vehicle Miles Travelled

VTR Vehicle Trip Reduction

CHAPTER ACRONYM LIST

5. Integration of TDM at the Statewide 

Planning Level 
TDM | 11

management activities they are already engaged in, by strengthening departmental linkages as a low-cost 

way to build the foundation of a TDM initiative. 

A scan of statewide plans found that several had adopted a “capacity-last” policy or had set or reached 

absolute limits on the amount of highway capacity that they would provide in certain corridors or 

subareas. Others, in response to a policy decision to limit the transportation sector’s contribution to 

global warming or to support statewide energy conservation policies, had set VMT growth limits or had 

set targets for an absolute reduction in VMT, relative to current levels. Both of these policy directions are 

quite compatible with the introduction or expansion or TDM strategies into statewide plans. 

5.1 What Plans Should TDM be Included In?

Federal requirements for the development of statewide plans are generally less prescriptive than those 

for MPO plans. Therefore, very few states develop plans that follow the traditional planning procedures 

most commonly found in their metropolitan-level counterparts. Moreover, state DOTs have far greater 

responsibility for system preservation and operations over multiple modes and have a limited role in 

land-use planning. Typically, statewide transportation plans reflect these differences in policy orientations, 

requirements, and responsibilities.69 In general, statewide plans are policy-based and include 

discussions on the plan’s purpose, its visions, goals and guiding principles, transportation trends and 

needs, the issue of transportation financing, and recommended actions. Statewide plans generally fall 

into one of three categories: 1) policy-focused plans, which articulate goals, objectives, and the desired 

level of future funding levels/allocation among expansion, preservation, and operations functions; 2) 

corridor-based plans, which describe desired investments and policies to meet statewide corridor-level 

strategic needs; and 3) project-based plans, which provide a list of prioritized potential individual projects 

for implementation.70 

A wide variety of statewide transportation plans and planning processes could include TDM as an integral 

element, as enumerated in Table 5.1:

TDM | 66

States operate facilities that are vital to the well-being of residents and businesses, and states have a stake in 

managing demand on their system. 

States can assume a variety of appropriate roles, from coordination and grant provision to direct operation. 

To be effective, TDM should be in the “fabric” of the decision-making process concerning mobility. 

The statewide management and/or coordination of TDM activities offers several benefits: 1) it helps to 

ensure a strong level of performance accountability; 2) it promotes higher levels of program visibility through 

marketing efforts that have a pervasive and consistent theme and message, and 3) it promotes efficiency by 

reducing or eliminating duplication of effort. 

69 A Framework for TDM in the Transportation Planning Process – Technical Memorandum: State of the Practice Review – Appendix C – Integrating Travel 

Demand Management in the Statewide Transportation Planning Process: Draft, March 22, 2010, pg. C-1

70 A Framework for TDM in the Transportation Planning Process – Technical Memorandum: State of the Practice Review – Appendix C – Integrating Travel 

Demand Management in the Statewide Transportation Planning Process: Draft, March 22, 2010, pg. C-1

KEY TAKEAWAYS

P L A N N I N G – S T A T E W I D E 
TDM | 67 

Type of Plan How to Integrate TDM/Role of TDM

Statewide Long-Range 

Transportation Plans 

(SLRTP)

•	 Adopt a “capacity-last” policy setting limits on the amount of highway capacity a state 

will provide in certain corridors or subareas. 

•	 Set VMT growth limits or targets for an absolute reduction in VMT, relative to current 

levels (in support of energy conservation policies). 

Land Use Policies and 

Plans

•	 Work with regional and local governments to assess the need for TDM to mitigate the 

impacts of large-scale developments (Developments of Regional Impacts [DRIs]) on 

adjacent highways. 

•	 Initiate “smart growth” programs to provide technical and policy guidance in local land 

use and zoning decisions that align a state’s ability and intention to provide state system 

highway capacity with a locality’s need and desire for land development or redevelopment. 

Tolling, Pricing, and Taxing Policy•	 Implement variably priced HOT facilities that allocate capacity based upon market 

demand. These pricing strategies help state DOTs better manage demand and achieve 

better performance of their system. 

•	 Note: Some states feel that equity issues and other consequences associated with such 

pricing measures require additional study and understanding prior to committing to their 

implementation. 

Freight Plans •	 Identify, sign, and map key truck routes on roadway segments and corridors that have 

the appropriate functional and alignment characteristics (e.g., turning radii, adequate 

shoulders) to accommodate single and multiple-unit vehicles in the traffic stream. 

•	 Identify locations at which low-cost improvements can improve traffic flow and throughput significantly with little or no additions to capacity. 

Operations and ITS 

Plans

•	 Operate variable signing and other infrastructure control mechanisms to permit flexible 

system management in peak and off-peak periods of demand by, for example, changing 

hours of operation, permitting one or two way operation, changing vehicle occupancy 

requirements, etc. 

Construction and Development Plans•	 Employ variable message signing, flexible signal timing and public relations campaigns 

for high-impact capital projects to alert motorists of construction activities, allowing them 

the opportunity to reroute their trip or to change their travel times. 

•	 Form partnerships (highway and transit providers) to increase transit service opportunities, and to mitigate congestion in construction zones. 

Multimodal Plans (various state DOT plans that

deal with multimodal

issues including new 

infrastructure projects)

•	 Operate statewide TDM programs and perform planning that includes the means to 

integrate TDM activities with other state functions. 

•	 Incorporate telecommunication technologies that have the potential to improve the efficiency of the transportation system, relieve congestion, decrease energy consumption, 

and improve air quality by reducing the need to travel. 

Table 5.1: Statewide Planning 

5.2 What Is Your Capability with TDM at the State Planning Level? 

This desk reference will be utilizing the guidance based on different levels of existing experience with 

TDM and transportation planning. Table 5.2 provides examples of how existing state DOTs might integrate 

TDM into their planning processes. This should assist users in determining the nature and location of 

key guidance within this section that is most applicable to their state. Three levels of TDM integration are 

presented: ad hoc, defined, and optimized. These levels correspond to the Institutional Capability Maturity 

Model proposed by FHWA in its Guide for Improving Capability for Systems Operation and Management.71

71 SHRP II, Guide for Improving Capability for Systems Operation and Management, TRB, prepared by Parsons Brinkerhoff, Report S2-L06-RR-2, 2011. 
TDM | 11 TDM | 68

State DOTs with minimal experience in integrating TDM (ad hoc level) into their plans and policies might 

only include TDM when suggested by outside interests or when TDM might be required to mitigate the 

immediate impacts of a specific project (such as highway reconstruction projects). At the next level 

(defined), a state DOT might include TDM in most plans and policies as a means to increase travel 

choices and meet certain policy objectives, such as clean air or congestion reduction. Finally, when 

TDM becomes optimized (level 3), TDM is a key strategic element in most or all statewide plans and 

policies and is viewed as a primary means to efficiently operate the transportation system and meet most 

statewide policy objectives. 

Table 5.2 provides specific examples of how a state DOT might work to integrate demand management 

into statewide transportation planning efforts at different levels of capability. 

This matrix is intended to assist the reader in determining where his or her organization fits in terms of the 

capability levels described above. Once the reader has determined the appropriate capability level and 

identified the critical step on which the agency is focused, specific actions to move from one level to the 

next are suggested in the next section. 

In terms of developing goals and objectives, most DOTs have the same fundamental mission: to provide 

a safe, efficient, cost-effective, and reliable transportation system for both people and goods that supports 

economic development, improves the quality of life, and is sensitive to the environment.72 Nearly all states 

clearly articulate that they will shift their focus from constructing new facilities to meet current and future 

demand to one of managing demand and improving the efficiency of existing supply. To justify this shift 

in focus, many plans educate the public on the benefits of TDM and why the state is pursuing such 

strategies. Most states identify a wide range of options that will improve system efficiency by reducing 

demand. Strategies include maximizing the efficient use of the existing system, coordinating land use 

and transportation planning, encouraging sustainable development patterns, promoting and increasing 

transportation choices for people and freight, enhancing transit and rail service, deploying advanced 

technology, and various forms of pricing.73 Using that mission and rationale as a touchstone, states 

should develop explicit, specific goals and SMART objectives for TDM. 

Performance-based planning serves an important function for communicating and coordinating between 

a DOT’s decision makers, policymakers, and the public and for assessing progress toward achieving 

the goals and objectives outlined above. Combined with data and analysis tools, performance measures 

serve an important role in helping to provide a basis for prioritizing investments. When coordinated 

with planned operations activities such as the implementation of ITS infrastructure and TDM programs, 

the data collection efforts required for performance measures can be supported with limited additional 

cost. These performance measures can then be utilized in other documents as well as regional and 

corridor planning efforts. TDM performance measures can suffer from two issues. First, TDM is more 

often measured in terms of “output” (e.g., how many carpools were formed or employers registered) 

than “outcome” (e.g., system impacts such as VMT reduction, delay reduction, or increases in person 

throughput.) Second, TDM performance measures are often not readily translatable to metrics used by 

highway planners. For example, VMT can be converted to delay reduction with some simple assumptions, 

but VMT reduction, in and of itself, is really only a surrogate, suggestive of other impacts, (delay, 

emissions, etc.) Specific TDM performance measures are enumerated and discussed in Chapter 3. 

72 A Framework for TDM in the Transportation Planning Process – Technical Memorandum: State of the Practice Review – Appendix C – Integrating 

Travel Demand Management in the Statewide Transportation Planning Process: Draft, March 22, 2010, pg. C-3

73 A Framework for TDM in the Transportation Planning Process – Technical Memorandum: State of the Practice Review – Appendix C – Integrating 

Travel Demand Management in the Statewide Transportation Planning Process: Draft, March 22, 2010, pg. C-2

P L A N N I N G – S T A T E W I D E 
TDM | 69 

Table 5.2: State-level Self-Assessment Matrix

Planning 

Activities

Level 1

Ad-Hoc

Level 2

Defined

Level 3

Optimized

1. Establishing 

Vision and Goals

•	 TDM is acknowledged as part of the vision in 

the State but no true commitment in terms of remaining steps

•	 No consensus around the concept of demand management as a policy option

•	 No high-level political or decision-maker support for the idea

•	 State has created a policy statement and 

identified their role on TDM

•	 Treated as substantial goal of the planning 

efforts

•	 Political support emerging on this topic•	 State plays an important role in TDM Coalition/Stakeholder building

•	 Demand management is treated on par 

with supply-side solutions

•	 Buy-in to TDM as an operational philosophy to meet multiple priorities of the 

region

•	 Success in crafting enabling policies, 

legislations and ordinances

•	 Long-term strategy for TDM identified

2. Setting Objectives for 

TDM

•	 Minimal to no role for TDM in planning objectives

•	 Primarily linked to one or two objectives such 

as conformity

•	 Not developed using a “SMART” approach•	 No linkage to strategies identification and 

selection

•	 Multiple objectives for TDM identified for a 

diverse set of State needs

•	 Some objectives are “SMART” •	 Still a strong disconnect between objectives and strategies identification

•	 All objectives are SMART and based on 

real-world information

•	 Objectives drives the strategy identification •	 Consensus around objectives

3.Definition of 

Performance Measures

•	 State role in TDM performance measurement is minimal to none •	 State develops framework and consistent performance reporting for TDM for various 

levels within State

•	 Fulfillment of statewide objectives are 

based on clear performance measurement 

4. Assessment 

and Selection of Strategies and Programs to Support Objectives

•	 No rigorous analysis/modeling of potential 

for TDM strategies to meet objectives

•	 Typically, at this stage, TDM strategies are 

not considered

•	 Selection of any TDM strategy is ad-hoc and 

limited to existing approaches or constituencies. Public Transit is seen as the primary 

alternative

•	 TDM does not drive any of the alternative 

analysis scenarios

•	 TDM is a integral part of many alternatives•	 Some off-model analysis/modeling of TDM 

strategies and impacts on par with operational strategies

•	 All travel choices are assessed including 

active transportation, ridesharing etc

•	 TDM strategies typically still are standalone and not fully integrated with other 

programs/projects/strategies

•	 Demand management considered before 

supply side alternatives. A demand-management scenario identified

•	 Developed a rationalized means of assessing TDM strategies•	 TDM strategy decisions are based on 

benefit-cost analysis
TDM | 11 TDM | 70 5.Integration of Strategies into Plans and Funding Programs •	Resulting projects/programs do not link back to objectives •	The level of detail for TDM projects is signifi- cantly lesser than that for other projects, e.g., signal timing improvements •	Tend to support traditional TDM efforts such as ride-sharing etc. •	TDM is better integrated into larger and capital projects •	Greater level of detail for TDM projects •	Pilot programs or experimental approach- es included for TDM •	Dedicated program/funding identified •	TDM projects as fleshed out as other projects in the plan •	Dedicated and sustained program and funding •	Fewer pilots and more mainstreaming of TDM 6.Monitoring and Evalua- tion of Prog- ress Toward Objectives •	Limited to no role for State in evaluation •	Support tools and framework for TDM evaluation •	Follow a standardized approach to TDM evaluation

P L A N N I N G – S T A T E W I D E 

Planning 

Activities

Level 1

Ad-Hoc

Level 2

Defined

Level 3

Optimized
TDM | 71 

Agencies should collect data and develop a tracking system to evaluate progress in relation to these 

measures. Performance measure tracking can also be used to identify deficiencies, which can feed into 

regional, corridor, and sub-area planning. Monitoring impact of TDM strategies in reducing travel demand 

is as important as assessing the impact of capacity enhancements in accommodating unmet demand. 

While there are no standard TDM effectiveness approaches, Chapter 5 provides some techniques to 

collect and evaluate TDM performance. 

Integrating planning and programming are essential to ensuring that the SLRTP and other statewide 

plans are realistic in their assessments of available resources and that they result in the identification of 

implemented projects that support goals and objectives. Programming at the statewide level in order 

to produce the STIP requires the careful balancing of projects identified to meet system needs with the 

appropriate funding resource. In terms of TDM funding, one sign of a successful integration of TDM 

into the statewide planning process will be the specific programming of resources in order to fund TDM 

efforts that are expected to address specific objectives and meet quantifiable targets. 

Goals and objectives identified in the SLRTP, Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP), and other planning 

documents should lead to development of policies, strategies, programs, and investments that support 

attainment of objectives. Currently, there is little documentation within long range transportation plans 

(LRTPs) that explains how, or if, various TDM projects are specifically evaluated and prioritized. Some 

MPOs award “bonus” points if a given project supports or explicitly includes elements of demand 

management. By linking the strategies to the objectives, states have a more clear rationale and 

expectation of TDM projects and programs. 

What follows are specific actions that could enable state DOTs to move from Level 1 (ad hoc integration) 

to Level 2 (defined) and from Level 2 to Level 3 (TDM as an optimized part of the planning process). 

5.3 Actions to Move Statewide Planning Process from Level 1 (AdHoc) to Level 2 (Defined) 

Several specific actions can be suggested to move a state DOT’s planning process from Level 1 (ad 

hoc integration of demand management) to Level 2 (defined integration). For each action, a rationale is 

provided, an explanation of how to implement the action, and examples are provided where available. 

Table 5.3 highlights the relative ease or difficulty of implementing the actions. 

Action 1 – Develop a TDM policy statement and define a specific role/organizational structure 

for TDM

Rationale and Explanation – Development of an overall statewide policy statement on TDM will assist 

with most planning efforts by establishing the overall role of TDM in meeting statewide goals. A policy 

statement legitimizes the inclusion of TDM in plans by setting an overall vision and allowing planners and 

policy makers to reference a higher level of policy direction. A statewide TDM policy might be developed 

as part of a transportation visioning exercise, a plan development process, or as a stand-alone exercise 

to develop strategic direction for TDM. In addition, TDM often gets lost in the organizational chart of 

a state DOT, sometimes with no true “home.” It is important that TDM, if it is to be integrated into the 

planning process, have a clear organizational home. This is to establish clear roles for who is to develop, 

consult on, and approve TDM strategies and the lines of communication during the process. 

Example – A good example of a TDM policy statement that has been in place for over 5 years is provided 

by NJDOT. NJDOT’s overall policy for TDM is to “develop new strategies, incentives, and pilot programs 

to reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and improve air quality, and to expand the state’s park-and-ride 

system to encourage more multimodal trips.” The policy statement was developed to guide existing 

TDM efforts and help develop a new statewide TDM strategic plan. This policy statement helps NJDOT 
TDM | 11 TDM | 72 Integration Actions Policy Support Ease of Implementation Cost Time Requirement Overall Establishing Vision and Goals 1 Develop a TDM policy statement and define a specific role/ organizational structure for TDM Moderate Moderate Low Moderate Moderate 2 Establish leadership position among key internal and external stakeholders for consensus building on TDM Moderate Difficult Moderate Moderate Moderate Setting Objectives for TDM 3 Develop SMART objectives for TDM Low Low Low Low Low Definition of Performance Measures 4 Identify concrete performance measures for TDM beyond air quality and conformity Low Moderate Low Moderate Low 5 Create a report card or dashboard for TDM performance Low Low Low Low Low Assessment and Selection of Strategies and Programs to Support Objectives 6 Draw upon existing tools to improve TDM modeling and analysis Low Low Low Low Low 7 Integrate TDM into obvious projects such as reconstruction and mega projects Moderate Low Difficult Difficult Moderate

8 Take advantage of existing programs to further TDM strategies Low Low Low Low Low

Integration of Strategies into Plans and Funding Programs

9 Incorporate TDM into all other possible plans for illustrating the linkages of TDM to other activities Moderate Low Low Moderate Moderate

10 Broaden the availability of eligible funding beyond CMAQ Moderate Moderate Low Low Moderate

Monitoring and Evaluation of Progress Toward Objectives

11 Provide technical assistance on TDM performance evaluation and monitoring tools Low Low Low Low Low

Table 5.3: List of Actions and Associated Level of Difficulty to Move Statewide Planning Process from Level 1 to Level 2

P L A N N I N G – S T A T E W I D E 
TDM | 73 

 

make decisions about which TDM strategies to include in their planning and programming efforts. NJDOT 

funds about $10 million of TDM activities, largely through a network of Transportation Management 

Associations (TMAs). The policy also includes a clear performance measure in VMT reduction.74

In the Atlanta region, the Georgia DOT (GDOT) brokered a “TDM Framework” to establish roles and 

responsibilities for the various partners in TDM, including GDOT, the Atlanta Regional Commission, the 

Clean Air Campaign, area TMAs, TDM service providers (e.g., vanpooling), and program evaluators. 

Action 2 – Establish leadership position among key internal and external stakeholders for 

consensus building on TDM

Rationale and Explanation – When integrating TDM into the planning process, it is important for it to have 

a clear organizational home. This placement establishes clear roles for who is to develop, consult on, and 

approve TDM strategies and the lines of communication during the process. 

Example: In Utah, the Utah DOT (UDOT) established a 

statewide TDM program (TravelWise - Figure 5-1) and strategic

Environment

Improve

Air Quality

Energy

Reduce

Consumption

Transportation

Reduce 

Congestion

plan by convening key stakeholders at the state, regional, 

and local levels, including service providers, policy-makers, 

and planning agencies. This was intended to establish a 

leadership role for UDOT and address the governor’s policy 

on energy conservation. 

A statement from the governor, on the TravelWise Utah 

website75 underscores the goals of the program:

“An efficient transportation system supports Utah’s 

economy and enhances our quality of life. We can each 

help make the transportation system a little more efficient 

with TravelWise, ultimately reducing energy use, reducing 

traffic congestion and improving air quality. We’re not 

asking one person to do everything, we’re asking 

everyone to do something. As individuals, businesses 

and organizations embrace and implement TravelWise 

strategies, our roadways will function more efficiently 

and all Utahns will benefit. ”

Action 3 – Developing SMART objectives for TDM

Rationale and Explanation – As with many transportation-related policies, objective setting often results 

in rather vague targets. In TDM, appropriate objectives areas might be: offer more travel choices, reduce 

congestion, improve air quality, or assist commuters. Using a SMART objective setting process, TDM 

goals and objectives should be made as precise as possible. This requires a more involved planning 

process to reach consensus, especially with regards to measurable targets, but it allows for a more robust 

planning and evaluation process that in turn allows for better monitoring of objective attainment, strategy 

correction, and funding decision-making. 

Example – The Washington State 2006 Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Efficiency Act continued a state 

mandate that goes back to 1991.76 Cities and counties are able to set their own specific goals and 

targets for employee commute trip reduction, as long as they met the minimum state targets of a 10% 

reduction in single occupant commute trips by 2011 to address congestion and a 13% reduction in VMT 

74 NCHRP, State DOT Role in the Implementation of TDM Programs, Research Results Digest 348, based on NCHRP 20-65, July 2010. 

75 http://travelwise.utah.gov/

76 http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/01C32E8B-4273-482A-9F09-86083556AFFF/0/6566SPL.pdf

Figure 5.1: TravelWise TDM Program 

Solutions

Source: Utah DOT
TDM | 11 TDM | 74

to address greenhouse gas emissions. In the first three years of the program, 154 million VMT have 

been reduced at over 1,000 worksites representing over a half a million commuters. This is estimated to 

have reduced highway delay by 8% in the Central Puget Sound region and almost 70,000 metric tons 

of greenhouse gases (GHG) statewide. While the state legislation behind the CTR Efficiency Act was a 

major policy effort, the need for and ability to set quantifiable targets was fairly straightforward. 

Action 4 – Identify concrete performance measures for TDM beyond air quality and conformity

Rationale and Explanation – TDM has largely been used as a means to achieve conformity between 

transportation and air quality plans. As such, VMT reduction, which can easily be transformed into 

emission reduction, has been the primary performance measure. As TDM is used to address other 

policy objectives (congestion, livability, land use, and economic development), additional performance 

measures will need to be developed. For example, the meta-analysis of how land use influences travel 

provides weighted average travel elasticities of VMT, transit use, and walking with respect to the built 

environment variables.77 These variables include: density (population, employment, commercial floor 

area ratio); diversity (land use mix [Entropy Index], jobs-housing balance); design (street connectivity 

indexes [e.g. intersection densities, % of 4-way intersections, link/node ratios, etc.]) ; destination 

accessibility (access by mode); and distance to transit, shopping, central business district (CBD). The 

effect of these strategies is cumulative. While the effect of any one on VMT reduction and mode shift is 

small/moderate, the combined effects from improving upon several of these can be substantial. 

Additional identified performance measures include: traditional National Transit Database (NTD) 

statistics; emissions; household transportation costs; housing and transportation affordability index; and 

Dissimilarity Index (level of racial integration). Other quality of life indicators such as per capita income, 

Wealth Index, and Gross Regional Product could also be included given the economic benefits of 

improving modal balance. For example, $1 million in reduced fuel expenditures equates to a net increase 

in 4.5 jobs.78

Example – The State of Florida has developed and adopted multi-modal LOS standards for comparison 

among and between modes and projects. FDOT’s Quality/Level of Service Handbook of 2009 (Figure 5.2) 

provides a methodology and analysis tools to develop and use multimodal performance measures for 

car, transit, bike, and walk travel for a given urban corridor.79

Action 5 – Create a report card or dashboard for TDM performance

Rationale and Explanation – TDM is seldom reported to policy-makers and the public in an accessible 

and user-friendly manner. The development of a report card or dashboard for reporting TDM performance 

can help in this regard. This requires the timely collection of overall TDM performance in meeting stated 

objectives and the means to report them in a simple manner. Some states and regions have developed 

report cards, state of the commute reports, and TDM dashboards. 

Example – The Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT) has developed a multi-modal 

dashboard to report on performance of the commonwealth’s multimodal system, including: 

• Transit ridership.

• Transit efficiency.

• Energy efficiency.

• TDM.

• Amtrak.

• Freight rail. 

77 Reid Ewing and Robert Cervero, “Travel and Built Environment: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 767, Issue 3, June 2010. 

78 Todd Litman, Evaluating Transportation Economic Development Impacts, Victoria Transport Policy Institute, 2009, p. 43 (http://www.vtpi.org/econ_dev.pdf. )

79 http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/sm/los/default.htm

P L A N N I N G – S T A T E W I D E 
TDM | 75 

TDM performance reports will be available on the statewide dashboard soon.80

Additionally, the process for creating a TDM report card has been developed by several sources, 

including the METRIC (Mobility Enhancement and Trip Reduction Index to aid in Comparison) process 

that allows for benchmarking of a state or region’s TDM efforts, based on over 100 criteria.81

Action 6 – Draw upon existing tools to improve TDM modeling and analysis

Rationale and Explanation – TDM analysis can often be very piecemeal and based on anecdotal 

evidence, rules of thumb, and sketch planning techniques, at best. However, several tools are available 

to assist with the evaluation of TDM strategies as part of the planning, alternatives analysis, and project 

selection process. Utilizing these tools largely requires the time and commitment to learn about them in 

advance of the planning process. 

Example – Chapter 9 includes a description of several existing tools aimed at allowing for the 

quantification of TDM impacts for various strategies and packages of strategies. This includes the FHWA 

TDM Evaluation Model and the TRIMMS available from the Center for Urban Transportation Research 

(CUTR; see more discussion in Section 9.1 on Tools and Techniques for Evaluating TDM). 

Action 7 – Integrate TDM into obvious projects such as reconstruction and mega projects

Rationale and Explanation – TDM can be integrated into large-scale highway projects as a mitigation 

strategy or even as a means for reducing overall vehicle volumes. The most obvious projects are 

highway reconstruction projects, where TDM can be called upon to provide travel alternatives during 

80 http://www.drpt.virginia.gov/dashboard/pages/Reports.aspx?id=3

81 Black and Schreffler, Understanding TDM and its Role in Delivery of Sustainable Urban Transport, Transportation Research Record 2163, 2010. 

Figure 5.2: Florida State Multi-Modal LOS Standards

Source: Florida DOT
TDM | 11 TDM | 76

highly congested construction periods. This allows new and existing TDM strategies to be applied 

to larger travel markets and exposes travelers to new options that they might continue to use after 

reconstruction is complete. 

Example – The Colorado DOT (CDOT) employed TDM as part of the reconstruction of I-25/225 in the 

Denver region, which included the building of a new light rail segment (Figure 5.3). TDM was promoted, 

as part of the public information campaign, to increase the use of transit, vanpooling, and carpooling 

utilizing a temporary HOV lane.82 CDOT project managers cited the existence of TDM as reducing their 

overall risk on the project and providing travelers with enhanced options that market research studies 

show travelers very much appreciated (even if they did not use them). CDOT worked closely with FHWA 

and local agencies to identify a preferred alternative, which included the following elements:

• General Purpose Lanes.

• Tolled Express Lanes (TEL).

• Upgraded Interchanges.

• Express Bus Service/Stations.

• Commuter Rail Service/Stations.

• Commuter Bus Service/Stations.

• Congestion Management Improvements.83

Figure 5.3: HOV Use during I-25 Construction

Source: Colorado Department of Transportation 

Top: Before Construction

Middle: During Construction Showing Temporary HOV Lane Created by Restriping

Bottom: Post Construction - New Capacity Including Light Rail

P L A N N I N G – S T A T E W I D E 

82 FHWA, Mitigating Traffic Congestion, the Role of Demand-Side Strategies, FHWA-HOP-05-001, October 2004. 

83 Colorado DOT – Fact Sheet: North I-25 Environmental Impact Statement, August 2011, http://www.coloradodot.info/projects/north-i-25-eis/Final-EIS/

documents/NorthI25FactSheet.pdf
TDM | 77 

Action 8 – Take advantage of existing programs to further TDM strategies

Rationale and Explanation – TDM strategies should not be considered nor implemented in a vacuum or 

by themselves. TDM can enhance many other types of strategies aimed at meeting mutual policy objectives. For example, smart land use strategies can create the demand for more travel choices, especially 

for shorter trips, such as bicycling and walking. Therefore, TDM should take advantage of other programs 

and initiatives, including those related to transit improvements, HOV systems, and ITS strategies. 

Example – Tennessee’s 25-year Transportation Plan views TDM as a complement to ITS as stated in the 

plan itself:

“TDM can be considered as transportation system support “software” as a parallel strategy to 

ITS as “hardware” because it focuses on managing travel demand to make better and most 

cost-effective use of transportation capacity through strategies oriented to influencing and 

incentivizing travel decisions on making trips: the need to travel, when to travel, where to 

travel in fulfilling the trip purpose, what mode to take, whether to travel with others, what path 

to follow, so on."84 

Action 9 – Incorporate TDM in all other possible plans illustrating the linkages of TDM to other 

activities

Rationale and Explanation – As shown in Table 5.1 previously, TDM can be incorporate into many planning efforts conducted by state DOTs (and other agencies, such as air quality). It is important to establish 

TDM as an integral means of planning, managing, and operating the transportation system. As such TDM 

should be utilized, or at least considered, in all planning efforts that seek to more efficiently and effectively 

operate the transportation system in order to achieve policy goals, such as mobility. 

Example – Table 5.1 enumerates a number of plans that could incorporated TDM, many of which go beyond the highway system and vehicle travel (land use, freight, tolling/taxing, etc.). 

Action 10 – Broaden the availability of eligible funding beyond CMAQ

Rationale and Explanation – CMAQ is the most prevalent source of funding for TDM, at the state, regional, 

and even local level. TDM is one of the few strategies that can address both congestion mitigation and 

air quality simultaneously. However, as TDM rises in importance as a solution strategy for a myriad of 

policy objectives, additional funding sources will likely be needed. Making the case for funding TDM with 

traditional highway funds will be the hurdle to be overcome. However, as TDM becomes accepted as a rational approach to maximizing the efficiency of highway management and operations, this barrier should 

be lowered. One obvious source of federal funding is the dedication of Surface Transportation Program 

(STP) funds to TDM. Additionally, state funding sources, such as gas tax set-asides or other funds, could 

be used as well. 

Example – The Oregon DOT operates its “Flexible Fund Program” using STP funds.85 Through the Flexible Fund Program, MPOs and other agencies submit applications for projects that improve modal connectivity, mobility, the environment, and access. Projects likely to be funded include transit, bicycle and 

pedestrian, TDM, and the planning, research, and project development that supports those projects as 

well as related programs and services. In 2011 ODOT set aside $21 million in STP funding for this program to fund multimodal and non-highway transportation projects. 

Action 11 – Provide technical assistance on TDM performance evaluation and monitoring tools

Rationale and Explanation – States can play a key role is developing and supporting standardized methodologies and related tools to monitor and evaluate TDM program and strategies. This allows for comparisons over time and across regions and programs in order to provide accountability for funding decisions 

based on the fulfillment of stated TDM objectives. 

84 Tennessee Long-Range Transportation Plan, January 2006, available at http://www.tdot.state.tn.us/plango/pdfs/tup.pdf 

85 Oregon DOT Proposed Flexible Funds Grant Awards, available at http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/TD/TP/FlexFunds.shtml
TDM | 11

TDM | 78

P L A N N I N G – S T A T E W I D E 

Action 1 – Involve public in TDM visioning

Rationale and Explanation – Creating a broad consensus on the need for and benefits of TDM should 

involve input from travelers themselves, since much of TDM is about enhancing travel choices to improve 

the quality of life for citizens. In order to involve the traveling public, many states (as well as regions and 

municipalities) are adopting visioning exercises as part of their long-range transportation plan updates. 

This seeks to gain insight on the choices that travelers want and the kind of urban form they desire. This, 

in turn, provides rich information with which to craft TDM strategies and their role in addressing key policy 

objectives. 

Example – Several states and regions have used visioning exercises as part of their long-range 

transportation plan update process. Many of these processes are entitled “Envision,” including Envision 

Utah (Salt Lake Valley) and Envision Missoula. In the case of Missoula, three scenarios were extensively 

discussed with the public, including: a “business as usual” case, a focus on growth to suburban 

satellites, and then a “focus inward” scenario to concentrate development and improve travel choices, 

especially in an “in-town mobility district.” This last scenario involved improved transit, bike, and walk 

facilities and services to improve access combined with increased density to manage travel demand.87

Action 2 – Develop supporting regulations and policies

Rationale and Explanation – State DOTs can support TDM planning and implementation through the 

development of regulations and policies that enhance the implementation and effectiveness of TDM. 

This might include land use policies that support increased densities to support alternative modes. 

Regulations on employers and new development have been adopted by many states to provide regions 

with this ability (such as the Washington State CTR law mentioned above). Such regulations and policies 

provide the mandates that allow regions and cities to bring key players to the TDM arena and increase the 

effectiveness of TDM efforts. 

Example – Some states are also using TDM in mitigating the impacts of new development, a role more 

commonly assumed by local government. The Massachusetts Office of Transportation Planning’s Public/

Private Development Unit coordinates state DOT review of private development projects that require 

certain state approvals, such as highway access permits for new or modified access to state highway. 

As stated in the Commonwealth’s 2006 LRTP, “the Office of Transportation Planning is developing a 

monitoring system to verify implementation of transportation demand management programs, as well 

as a follow-up evaluation once projects are built.” By encouraging developers to incorporate bicycle 

and pedestrian facilities into their site development plans, MassDOT is ensuring that project site 

designs accommodate walking and bicycling, consistent with the principles of its award-winning Project 

86 http://www3.cutr.usf.edu/tdm/projects/208-01.htm 

87 ftp://www.co.missoula.mt.us/opgftp/Transportation/TTACAttach/2008/OctMtg/EMSLAFinalRpt.pdf

Example – As mentioned earlier, the California Air Resources Board provides assistance to agencies 

throughout the state on the methods to evaluate TDM efforts. The State of Florida has developed a standardized methodology for evaluation of commuter assistance programs that are partially funded by the 

state. The use of the Commuter Assistance Program Evaluation Manual is required for continued funding.86

5.4 Actions to Move Statewide Planning Process from Level 2 

(Defined) to Level 3 (Optimized)

Several specific actions can be suggested to move a state DOT’s planning process from Level 2 (defined 

integration of demand management) to Level 3 (optimized integration). Table 5.4 highlights the relative ease 

or difficulty of each action in moving from Level 2 to Level 3. 
TDM | 79 

Integration Actions Policy Support Ease of Implementation Cost Time Requirement Overall

Establishing Vision and Goals

1 Involve public in TDM visioning Low Low Low Low Low

2 Develop supporting regulations and policies Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate3 Train all levels of management on TDM Difficult Difficult Low Moderate Difficult

4 Create incentive-based approaches for TDM Low Low Moderate Moderate Low

Setting Objectives for TDM

5 Define SMART TDM-related objectives for a variety of policy issues Moderate Moderate Low Moderate Moderate

Definition of Performance Measures

6 Develop performance measures that express TDM effective- ness in operational terms Low Moderate Low Moderate Moderate

Assessment and Selection of Strategies and Programs to Support Objectives

7 Develop procedures for considering demand management strategies prior to other, more capital intensive alternatives Difficult Moderate Low Moderate Moderate

8 Develop new tools/approaches to incorporate all travel choices into the analysis approach Low Low Moderate Moderate Low

Integration of Strategies into Plans and Funding Programs

9 Develop capability to include TDM in all projects in appropriate 

manner

Moderate Moderate Low Moderate Moderate

Monitoring and Evaluation of Progress Toward Objectives

10 Adopt or develop a standardized approach to reporting TDM performance Low Low Low Low Low

Table 5.4: List of Actions and Associated Level of Difficulty to Move Statewide Planning Process from Level 2 to Level 3
TDM | 11 TDM | 80

Development & Design Guide.88 Project proponents are also required to work with the local/regional transit 

authority to determine the viability of public transportation at their site and, if feasible, make provisions to 

make public transit available. 

Action 3 – Train all levels of management on TDM

Rationale and Explanation – Even if top policy support is gained for integrating TDM into the planning 

(and implementation) process, TDM will not be fully accommodated if planners, project managers, and 

department administrators are not educated on the benefits and impacts of TDM. Staff training may be 

required to make sure all involved in the planning (and implementation) process are up to speed on TDM, 

especially the broadened definition offered in this desk reference. Training could include in-house education 

by staff specializing in TDM, the use of external trainers, or participation in professional organizations and 

conferences that focus on TDM. 

Example – Two states that have developed an extensive in-house knowledge base on TDM are Washington 

State and Colorado. Washington State DOT’s Public Transportation Division assists cities with their CTR 

requirements, informs the public, supports transportation providers, contains a research library, and serves 

as an in-house resource for all travel choices. As stated on the WSDOT Public Transportation Division’s 

webpage:89

More than ever, people in Washington are choosing to share a ride, catch a bus, ride 

a bicycle and use other efficient transportation choices to get around with driving alone 

less often. Our bottom line: make a measurable, meaningful difference for individuals, 

communities, the economy and environment. 

Likewise, Colorado DOT has developed tools to assist its planners and project managers, as well as local 

government and business, with TDM implementation. Their TDM Toolkit and the TDM Corridor Projects 

Study offer a complete list of strategies with TDM successes throughout Colorado and the U.S.90

Action 4 – Create Incentive-based Approaches for TDM

Rationale and Explanation – As discussed in Chapter 6, incentives are a key component of the most 

effective TDM strategies. State DOTs can champion the need for and form of such incentives. This may 

require the need for substantial buy-in from decision-makers to provide the funding and support enabling 

legislation. Some decision-makers view incentives as “as paying people to do what they should be doing” 

rather than viewing incentives as short-term measures to induce a longer-term behavior change that 

supports multiple policy objectives. 

Example – In 2011, the Virginia General Assembly approved new tax credit legislation aimed at encouraging 

private sector telework. Teleworking is considered, by the General Assembly, to be an effective congestion 

management strategy to reduce highway traffic. It has also been shown to improve employee productivity, 

retention, and satisfaction. The purpose of the Telework Tax Credit is to remove auto trips by eliminating 

commute trips to and from work. Only employees who travel to an office in Virginia qualify. The legislation 

provides for a tax credit (for new teleworkers) of up to $1,200 per employee and up to $50,000 per 

organization for eligible telework expenses incurred during taxable years 2012 and 2013. Additional 

legislation is required to continue this tax credit after 2013. Any business subject to Virginia income tax is 

eligible to apply for the tax credit. This is done through approval by the Virginia Department of Taxation. 

Employees must telework at least once a week in order for expenses incurred under the telework agreement 

to be eligible.91

88 Massachusetts DOT, Project Development & Design Guide, available at http://www.mhd.state.ma.us/default.asp?pgid=content/

designguide&sid=about 

89 http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Transit/overview.htm

90 CDOT, Colorado 2035 Statewide Transportation Plan, Travel Demand Management Technical Report, March 2008. 

91 http://www. teleworkva. org/go/for-managers/telework-tax-credit/

P L A N N I N G – S T A T E W I D E 
TDM | 81 

Action 5 – Define SMART TDM-related objectives for a variety of policy issues

Rationale and Explanation – Once TDM is recognized as a means to address many policy objectives, 

specific objectives, beyond congestion or air quality, can be set. This includes areas heretofore not 

commonly associated with TDM, such as goods movement, livability, and land use. This will require 

careful selection of SMART objectives that are meaningful and measurable in areas that have not 

historically involved a connection with TDM. While some guidance is emerging, such as with livability and 

TDM, connections with other policy objectives are quite new. However, for TDM to realize its full potential, 

such objective-setting exercises will be needed. One key role for state DOTs is not only to encourage a 

connection between TDM and key policy objectives (and exemplified below with land use) but also to 

develop sample performance objectives that can be used in order to realize the full benefits of TDM. 

Example – In the case of land use, most state DOTs can only play a role of encouraging local jurisdictions 

to make better land use-transportation decisions and set concomitant requirements. For example, 

Colorado DOT’s long-range plan states that the DOT is working on leadership opportunities that 

coordinate transportation and land use planning to minimize impacts and manage demand on the state 

highway system. Likewise, the Ohio DOT’s plan encourages local governments with land use authority 

to implement land use policies that promote or facilitate the use of alternative modes, park-and-ride lots, 

carpooling, and other TDM concepts. 

Action 6 – Develop performance measures that express TDM effectiveness in operational terms

Rationale and Explanation – The most prevalent performance measures for TDM are either output based 

(e.g., number of carpools formed) or outcome based (e.g., resulting VMT reduction). However, these 

metrics are sometimes foreign to other transportation planners, engineers, and especially policy-makers. 

There is a need to translate TDM effectiveness into terms that traditional transportation planners and 

engineers can better understand, such as reductions in delay, increase in person throughput, and 

reductions in needed lane miles. While one might argue that performance measures that are expressed 

in terms of the utilization of sustainable modes or increases in quality of life indices are just as important, 

TDM will be partially judged by those focused on the efficient operation of the road system. 

Example – Using VMT reduction, volumes, and speeds, estimates of reduction in delay can be derived. 

Going one step further, the CUTR has developed a methodology that merges mode shift data with 

a highway micro-simulation model to graphically show how employer trip reduction programs can 

reduce delay for a given highway segment.92 This research was originally conducted using CTR data 

from the Seattle region as applied to a portion of I-5 through downtown Seattle. The methodology and 

recommended approach are contained in a report entitled “Impact of Employer-based Programs on 

Transit System Ridership and Transportation System Performance.”93

Action 7 – Develop procedures for considering demand management strategies prior to other, 

more capital intensive alternatives

Rationale and Explanation – While federal planning guidance suggests that alternatives be considered 

before options that accommodate the SOV, state DOTs may wish to consider structuring this philosophy 

in the planning process by requiring that specific corridor planning efforts first prove why TDM cannot be 

a primary solution before considering options that add capacity, or even efficiency improvements. This 

would require a fundamental change in thinking that involves viewing TDM not as a short-term mitigation 

strategy, but as a long-term approach to reducing overall vehicle demand. 

92 http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/sm/los/default.shtm

93 http://www.nctr.usf.edu/abstracts/abs77605.htm
TDM | 11 TDM | 82

Example – One example of the full institutionalization of TDM into the planning process comes from 

Sweden. In 2002, the Swedish National Roads Administration adopted the “four stage principle,” which 

requires planners and engineers to evaluate options in the following order:

• Measures that affect the demand for transport and the choice of mode.

• Measures that foster the more efficient use of the existing road network.

• Measures that promote improvements to existing roads.

• Measures that make new investments in road capacity or major rebuilding. 

Planners are, therefore, required to consider and rule of demand management before they can consider 

infrastructure improvements.94

Action 8 – Develop new tools/approaches to incorporate all travel choices into the analysis 

approach

Rationale and Explanation – Moving from the defined approach to a more optimized integration of TDM 

may require the development of tailored and specialized analytic tools to evaluate the effectiveness of 

TDM strategies in addressing key policy objectives. While many “off the shelf” tools now exist, in order 

to analyze the full set of TDM strategies and their impact across a myriad of objectives, specialized tools 

may be required. This might include new, tailored means of using the traditional four-step travel models 

or newer activity-based models. It might also involve other new tools, such as the micro-simulation tool, 

developed by CUTR and mentioned in Action 7 above, which uses employer TDM data and CORSIM 

(Corridor Simulation, sponsored by FHWA). 

Example – The traditional four-step travel demand modeling process can be used to evaluate TDM 

strategies that can be analyzed in terms of time and cost variables. However, many off-model tools 

have been developed to analyze congestion pricing strategies, bicycle and walk strategies, and other 

strategies that cannot be expressed in terms of time and cost indicators. A good discussion of the 

means to incorporate TDM into regional travel demand models is provided by CUTR in a report entitled 

“Incorporating Assumptions for TDM Impacts in a Regional Travel Demand Model,” which was developed 

for WSDOT and included a specific TDM Assessment Procedure that uses the CUTR TRIMMS model and 

processes resulting TDM impacts through trip tables.95

Action 9 – Develop capability to include TDM in ALL projects in an appropriate manner

Rationale and Explanation – Once TDM becomes optimized and managing demand becomes an overall 

philosophy of how to manage and operate the transportation system, then TDM strategies will become a 

part of most if not all projects. This requires a strong capability at the management and technical levels to 

assure that TDM is appropriately considered for all projects, both in the long-range planning process as 

well as individual project-level planning. 

Example – The Colorado DOT has developed a means for moving from broad statewide plans to specific 

solutions. Increasingly, Colorado’s long-range transportation plan is assuming a more corridor-centric 

look. The 2035 statewide plan includes “corridor visions,” which discuss various proposed strategies 

aimed at meeting each corridor’s unique transportation goals. Taken together, the corridor vision 

establishes an integrated, system-wide vision that balances local and statewide transportation goals and 

strategies.96

94 FHWA, Managing Travel Demand – Applying European Perspectives to U.S. Practice, FHWA-PL-06-015, May 2006. 

95 WSDOT, Incorporating Assumptions for TDM Impacts in a Regional Travel Demand Model, prepared by CUTR, report WA-RD-746. 1, March 2010. 

96 www.coloradodot.info/content/programs/planning/2035CVCD/index.html

P L A N N I N G – S T A T E W I D E 
TDM | 83 

Action 10 – Adopt or develop a standardized approach to reporting TDM performance 

Rationale and Explanation – In order to provide an effective feedback loop to the objective setting and 

strategy selection process, standardized TDM evaluation methodologies are required. This might involve 

developing a tailored approach for a given state DOT or adopting a widely accepted methodology. Such 

methodology development or adoption should be vetted with TDM professionals and researchers to 

assure that it is understandable, rigorous, and usable. 

Example – The MAX-SUMO monitoring and evaluation approach developed in Europe is easily adaptable 

to the U.S. experience for many TDM strategies. The methodology is described in Chapter 9. 

5.5 Best Practice Examples: State-Level TDM Integration 

WSDOT is recognized for having one of the most comprehensive DOT-supported TDM programs in the 

nation. Since the early 1990s, the Washington State Legislature has enacted an evolving set of laws that 

spell out statewide TDM initiatives and the DOTs role in implementing them. One of the most significant 

pieces of legislation is the 2006 CTR Efficiency Act, which enhanced a 1991 law by requiring county and 

local governments in congested regions to develop and implement plans for employers to reduce SOV 

trips. WSDOT supports the Act and other TDM initiatives in the following ways:

• A state-level policy framework, called Moving Washington, has been adopted to guide decision-making. 

It has three principal tenets: operate efficiently, manage demand, and add capacity strategically. The 

DOT policy is aimed at aligning the objectives of all its partners to assure a reliable, sustainable, and 

responsible transportation system. 

• A 2005 University of Washington study of the role of TDM at the state DOT concluded that “it is in WSDOT’s strategic interest to employ TDM measures to increase existing system capacity during congested times and to minimize the need to build new roadway lanes.”97

• Through the CTR program, WSDOT provides formula funding to local governments to work with employers that implement trip reduction programs in their jurisdictions. Local governments review employer 

programs, provide training and networking, and coordinate measurement surveys at worksites. 

• WSDOT offers technical assistance and over 18 years of trip reduction performance data to agencies 

and companies to help implement trip reduction programs. Technical assistance includes training, support with data collection and analysis, providing policy and planning guidance to networks of partners, 

and documenting best practices. 

• WSDOT provides technical assistance to Transportation Management Area-like regions called Growth 

and Transportation Efficiency Centers (GTECs), sub-areas areas of dense, mixed-use development. 

GTECs complement the CTR program (which targets larger employers) by focusing on providing trip 

reduction options for smaller employers, students, and residents. 

• WSDOT operates an extensive HOV system and has initiated a HOT lane pilot program. Approximately 

225 lane-miles of a planned 320-mile freeway HOV system have been built. WSDOT works closely with 

local agencies and construction project teams to find low-cost ways to minimize the risk of constructionrelated traffic backups, including traveler information, contractor incentives, and programs that boost 

people’s use of carpools, vanpools, telework, and buses. 

97 Washington State Transportation Center, “WSDOT’s Role in TDM: Strategic Interests, Structure, and Responsibilities,“ Report No. WA-RD-616. 1, July 

2005. 

Washington State
TDM | 11 TDM | 84

• WSDOT invests in local efforts to manage congestion through regional mobility grants. These grants 

fund a variety of capital and operating investments, including new buses, park and ride lots, bus lanes, 

and new transit services. More than $100 million has been invested since 2005. 

• WSDOT provides capital assistance for the state’s 20 transit agencies that operate vanpool programs 

across the state. Washington state vanpooling represents the largest public vanpool fleet in North 

America, with more than 2,400 daily vanpools and 20,000 daily riders in June 2010. WSDOT is developing RideshareOnline.com and other electronic commute management tools to strengthen local trip 

reduction and ridesharing programs by enhancing accountability, supporting performance measurement, and securing additional resources through partnerships. 

• WSDOT supports the Lake Washington Urban Partnership Agreement, which provides federal funds 

to help WSDOT, King County, and the Puget Sound Regional Council manage congestion through a 

combination of tolling, transit service, trip reduction, and Smarter Highways technology. 

GDOT’s TDM program is a response to high levels of congestion, limited opportunities for additional 

roadway expansion, and serious air quality conformity challenges. Georgia DOT coordinates statewide 

TDM services, which are funded through federal CMAQ, state, and local funds, through partnerships 

with contractors and other public agencies. Figure 5.4 illustrates the organization of the Georgia program. GDOT provides support for local TDM programs as well as part of the statewide coordinated 

approach. 

• GDOT’s TDM support is conducted through its Air Quality Branch within the Office of Planning. The 

Branch has hired separate contractors with statewide and regional responsibility for specific functions, 

including ride-matching, guaranteed ride home, statewide and local employer services, and statewide 

marketing and coordination. 

• GDOT supports TDM through federal CMAQ funds matched with GDOT’s state funds and funds from 

other state agencies (Environmental Protection, Natural Resources) and with in-kind support from the 

Georgia Clean Air Campaign. 

• GDOT has pledged $20 million (including the match) over the next 3 years to support TDM at the 

statewide level. This level of support reflects a commitment from the highest levels of the organization 

to manage congestion by managing demand. This level of support also reflects GDOT’s recognition 

that reducing peak demand can produce maintenance and operations benefits. 

• GDOT provides funding support for The Clean Air Campaign, a private non-profit organization that 

offers TDM incentive programs, public awareness campaigns, and employer and commuter outreach 

services statewide, especially in areas not served by TMAs. The Campaign has found an effective 

marketing strategy in communicating the monetary savings of using commute options. 

• GDOT contracts with the Atlanta Regional Commission (the Atlanta region’s MPO) to manage the 

operation of the Atlanta region’s TMAs. The region’s TMAs encourage the use of non-SOV commute 

options through promotion of statewide incentive programs and transportation services and statewide 

marketing campaigns. GDOT notes that managing the TMAs by contract through a single contractor 

has improved accountability and increased the effectiveness of the local programs. 

Georgia DOT

P L A N N I N G – S T A T E W I D E 
TDM | 85 

Figure 5.4: Georgia DOT TDM Program Coordination

Source: Georgia DOT

FHWA

Clean Air 

Campaign GDOT Program 

Management

Atlanta Regional 

Commission 

RideSmart, GRM, 

ESO Mgmt TMAs

• The Center for Transportation and the Environment, based out of Atlanta, monitors TDM performance in 

the state. In 2009, GDOT provided grants to support the center’s evaluation efforts. 

• GDOT operates over 90 miles of HOV lanes and 96 park and ride lots throughout the state. 

• The Department funds highway emergency response operations (HERO) through CMAQ grants and offers incentives to clear crashes quickly. The Department’s communications office publishes a report on 

incident response performance annually. 
TDM | 11 TDM | 86

A Framework for TDM in the Transportation Planning Process – Technical Memorandum: State of the Practice 

Review – Appendix C – Integrating Travel Demand Management in the Statewide Transportation Planning 

Process: Draft, March 22, 2010

Black and Schreffler, Understanding TDM and its Role in Delivery of Sustainable Urban Transport, Transportation 

Research Record 2163, 2010. 

Colorado DOT – www.coloradodot.info/content/programs/planning/2035CVCD/index.html

CDOT, Colorado 2035 Statewide Transportation Plan, Travel Demand Management Technical Report, March 

2008. 

Colorado DOT – Fact Sheet: North I-25 Environmental Impact Statement, August 2011, http://www.coloradodot.

info/projects/north-i-25-eis/Final-EIS/documents/NorthI25FactSheet.pdf

FHWA, Managing Travel Demand – Applying European Perspectives to U. S. Practice, FHWA-PL-06-015, May 

2006. 

FHWA, Mitigating Traffic Congestion, the Role of Demand-Side Strategies, FHWA-HOP-05-001, October 2004. 

http://www.teleworkva.org/go/for-managers/telework-tax-credit/

http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Transit/overview.htm

ftp://www.co.missoula.mt.us/opgftp/Transportation/TTACAttach/2008/OctMtg/EMSLAFinalRpt.pdf

http://www3.cutr.usf.edu/tdm/projects/208-01.htm

http://www.drpt.virginia.gov/dashboard/pages/Reports.aspx?id=3

http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/sm/los/default.htm

http://www.arb.ca.gov/planning/tsaq/eval/eval.htm

http://travelwise.utah.gov

NCHRP, State DOT Role in the Implementation of TDM Programs, Research Results Digest 348, based on 

NCHRP 20-65, July 2010

SHRP II, Guide for Improving Capability for Systems Operation and Management, TRB, prepared by Parsons 

Brinkerhoff, Report S2-L06-RR-2, 2011. 

Washington State Transportation Center, “WSDOT’s Role in TDM: Strategic Interests, Structure, and 

Responsibilities, “Report No. WA-RD-616.1, July 2005. 

WSDOT, Incorporating Assumptions for TDM Impacts in a Regional Travel Demand Model, prepared by CUTR, 

report WA-RD-746.1, March 2010. 

KEY RESOURCES

P L A N N I N G – S T A T E W I D E 
TDM | 87 

MPOs throughout the United States 

are responsible for carrying out a 

continuing, comprehensive, and 

coordinated transportation planning process. 

This is true for all MPOs, no matter the size 

of the region or number of staff. However, 

the extent to which an MPO can effectively 

shepherd such a process is often a function 

of resources. While all MPOs need to develop 

the same prescribed plans and programs, the 

depth of the processes to develop these plans 

and programs can vary widely. This section 

offers guidance for MPOs at various levels of 

“TDM-enabled” planning to effectively integrate 

TDM into their planning processes. 

While the size of an MPO does not necessarily 

correspond to the level of penetration of TDM, 

there is typically a close correlation. Generally 

speaking, the larger the MPO’s population, 

the more likely it is that TDM has become a 

significant element of the planning process, 

likely due to the presence of traffic congestion, 

air pollution, etc. The challenge, then, is to 

both motivate smaller MPOs to integrate TDM 

into their planning processes and present 

recommendations and guidance to the larger 

MPOs to broaden and deepen TDM-based 

planning. 

Regardless of their size, MPOs can play an 

important role in planning for TDM at the 

regional level. By encompassing a wide 

variety of local jurisdictions, MPOs can take 

a more “holistic” view of TDM, unhindered 

by jurisdictional boundaries. MPOs that most 

comprehensively incorporate TDM in their 

transportation planning processes are those 

that encompass local jurisdictions that have 

developed laws requiring some form of TDM 

measures.98 For example, Washington’s CTR 

Efficiency Act of 2006 requires each MPO to 

CBD Central Business District

CCRCP Champaign County Regional Planning 

Commission

CMAQ Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality

CMP Congestion Management Process

CUTR Center for Urban Transportation 

Research

CUUATS Champaign Urbana Urbanized Area 

Transportation Study (Illinois)

DOT Department of Transportation

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

HOT High Occupancy Toll

HOV High Occupancy Vehicle

JARC Jobs Access Reverse Commute

METRIC Mobility Enhancement and Trip 

Reduction Index to aid in Comparison

MIM Missoula in Motion (Montana)

MOE Measure of Effectiveness

MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization

MTP Metropolitan Transportation Planning

MWCOG Metropolitan Washington Council of 

Government

SANDAG San Diego Association of 

Governments

SLRTP Statewide Long-Range Transportation 

Plans

SOV Single Occupancy Vehicle

STP Surface Transportation Program

TDM Travel Demand Management

TERM Transportation Emission Reduction 

Measure

TIP Transportation Improvement Program

TMA Transportation Management Area

TRIMMS Trip Reduction Impacts of Mobility 

Management Systems

TSM Transportation Systems Management

TSM&O Transportation Systems Management 

and Operations

VMT Vehicle Miles Travelled

CHAPTER ACRONYM LIST

6. Integration of TDM at the 

Metropolitan Planning Level
TDM | 11 TDM | 88

prepare and periodically update their regional transportation strategies to effectively address alternative 

transportation modes and demand management measures in regional corridors.99 In addition, highly 

populated MPOs have structured their MTP around a series of core issues and strategies, with TDM 

included. For example, the Houston-Galveston Area Council’s 2035 Regional Transportation Plan 

highlighted demand management for peak-period travel as a major strategy to achieve its goal of a better 

quality of life through mobility, better access, and a healthier environment.100

MPOs can also steer valuable resources to TDM initiatives in the form of federal funding for support, 

implementation, and operation of a variety of TDM programs. Already MPOs that are designated as TMAs 

must consider TDM strategies as part of their federally mandated Congestion Management Process. While 

most MPOs extend their purview to cover only planning, support, and funding for TDM, an increasing 

number of MPOs are becoming TDM implementers. Many regional TDM programs are operated by MPOs, 

given their regional scope and because many TDM programs are funded with CMAQ dollars and the 

CMAQ funding process is overseen by MPOs in most areas. 

98 A Framework for TDM in the Transportation Planning Process – Technical Memorandum: State of the Practice Review – Appendix C – Integrating 

Travel Demand Management in the Statewide Transportation Planning Process: Draft, March 22, 2010, pg. B-4

99 Washington State Department of Transportation Commute Trip Reduction Laws & Program Requirements, http://www. wsdot. wa. gov/Transit/CTR/

law. htm

100 2035 Houston-Galveston Regional Transportation Plan – Executive Summary, October 26, 2009, http://www. h-gac. com/taq/plan/documents/2035_

final/2035%20RTP%20ExSum%202007-10-26%20REVISED. pdf

P L A N N I N G – M E T R O P O L I T A N 

How can MPOs advance TDM initiatives as a comprehensive part of addressing urban mobility challenges?

• Coordinate planning for TDM activities at local, regional, and state levels

• Incorporate TDM goals and objectives in long-range plans

• Embrace TDM as both a short-term operations and long-term sustainability strategy

• Build awareness and motivation among member jurisdictions that have not pursued TDM

• Encourage communities that support TDM to take specific action

• Challenge communities that have taken TDM action to ratchet up their efforts

• Set aside funding for TDM initiatives

• Develop TDM-specific performance measures to evaluate project-specific and system wide performance

KEY TAKEAWAYS
TDM | 89 

6.1 What Plans Should TDM be Included In? 

Within the long-range, regional transportation planning process, TDM can be incorporated into a number 

of formal MPO-adopted plans as highlighted in Table 6.1. 

Type of Plan How to Integrate TDM/Role of TDM

Metropolitan 

Transportation Plans

•	 Large MPOs: Make TDM a cornerstone of their long-range plans.

•	 Medium-sized MPOs: Set aside funding for TDM initiatives.

•	 Small MPOs: Explore TDM-based approaches and gauge the interest of member jurisdictions. 

•	 Envision that TDM projects can reduce, or at least postpone, the need for capital-intensive projects that increase roadway capacity.

Congestion Management 

Processes

•	 MPOs designated as TMAs can demonstrate, as part of their CMP process, that demand 

management programs have been given due consideration prior to recommending projects that add general purpose capacity to a given roadway corridor.

•	 Provide a way to analyze TDM and operational strategies for construction projects in 

non-attainment zones that result in an increase of SOV travel. Travel demand reduction 

and operational management strategies should be incorporated into the SOV project or 

committed to by the State and MPO for implementation. 

•	 Define specific TDM and Travel System Management (TSM) strategies for a region’s 

most congested facilities, and prioritize potential TDM and TSM strategies for each facility.

TDM-Specific Plans •	 Develop TDM-specific strategic plans to help guide (1) long-range pursuit of TDM initiatives or (2) shorter-term operation of in-house TDM operations. 

•	 TDM-focused Task Forces/Working Groups – To further refine TDM-related initiatives, 

organize specific TDM committees, task forces, or advisory boards to help guide the 

overall planning process related to TDM. 

•	 Articulate regional TDM goals by (1) recommending TDM activities to meet these goals, 

(2) guiding investments in TDM activities, (3) defining an administrative structure to 

oversee the regional TDM program, and (4) establishing evaluation measures. 

Table 6.1: Metropolitan Planning

While long-range transportation plans are mandated by federal regulations, the Congestion Management 

Process specifically requires consideration of TDM strategies to address congestion as cited below:

“The transportation planning process in a TMA shall address congestion management through 

a process that provides for safe and effective integrated management and operation of the 

multimodal transportation system, based on a cooperatively developed and implemented 

metropolitan-wide strategy, of new and existing transportation facilities eligible for funding under 

title 23 U. S. C. and title 49 U. S. C. Chapter 53 through the use of travel demand reduction and 

operational management strategies.” – Statewide Transportation Planning; Metropolitan 

Transportation Planning; Final Rule: 23 CFR § 450. 320(a)
TDM | 11 TDM | 90

The Congestion Management Process, defined within the federal transportation planning regulations, is 

designed to evaluate, recommend, implement, and monitor a variety of solutions to roadway congestion, 

and is the way that many MPOs introduce TDM into their transportation planning processes.101 For 

example, the South Western Region MPO in Stamford, CT, assesses candidate projects individually within 

its Congestion Management Process based on their potential to: reduce peak-period in person trips, 

reduce peak-period VMT, measure shift from SOV to alternative modes, measure shift from SOV to HOV, 

measure systems/operational efficiency improvement, and desired capacity increases.102

Pursuant to the Clean Air Act, all federally funded construction projects, in TMAs designated as nonattainment for ozone or carbon monoxide, that result in an increase of SOV travel must be reflected 

in the CMP process. Furthermore, the CMP should provide a means to analyze TDM and operational 

management strategies for such projects. Only if the analysis demonstrates that such strategies cannot 

fully satisfy the need for additional SOV capacity can the project use federal funds. Even still, all identified 

reasonable travel demand reduction and operational management strategies must be incorporated into 

the SOV project or committed to by the State and MPO for implementation. 

6.2 What Is Your Capability with TDM at the Metropolitan Planning 

Level? 

This desk reference will be utilizing the guidance based on different levels of existing experience with TDM 

and transportation planning. Table 6.2 provides examples of how existing MPOs might integrate TDM into 

their planning processes. This should assist users in determining the nature and location of key guidance 

within this section. Three levels of TDM integration are presented: ad hoc, defined, and optimized. 

These levels correspond to the Institutional Capability Maturity Model proposed by FHWA in its Guide for 

Improving Capability for Systems Operation and Management.103

MPOs with minimal experience in integrating TDM (ad hoc level) into their plans and policies might only 

be exploring the concept of TDM or seeking to use it to improve livability since there might be need to 

address congestion or air quality. At the next level (defined), an MPO might include TDM in most plans 

and policies as a means to increase travel choices and meet certain policy objectives, such as clean air 

or congestion reduction. In this case, TDM is likely one element of the overall plan. Finally, when TDM 

becomes optimized (Level 3), TDM may become a central focus of the entire plan if the MPO’s policy 

board adopts an overall “philosophy” of managing demand and encouraging sustainable transport. 

Table 6-2 provides specific examples of how an MPO might work to integrate demand management 

into regional transportation planning efforts. This matrix is intended to assist the reader in determining 

where his or her organization fits in terms of the capability levels described above. Once the reader has 

determined the appropriate capability level and identified the critical step on which the agency is focused, 

specific actions to move from one level to the next are suggested in the next section. 

101 A Framework for TDM in the Transportation Planning Process – Technical Memorandum: State of the Practice Review – Appendix B – Integrating 

Travel Demand Management in the Metropolitan Transportation Planning Process: Draft, March 22, 2010, pg. B-13

102 South Western Regional Planning Agency (SWRPA) – Congestion Management Process, http://www.swrpa.org/default.aspx?Transport=171

103 SHRP II, Guide for Improving Capability for Systems Operation and Management, TRB, prepared by Parsons Brinkerhoff, Report S2-L06-RR-2, 2011. 

P L A N N I N G – M E T R O P O L I T A N 
TDM | 91 

Table 6.2: Metropolitan Planning Self-Assessment Matrix

Planning Activities Level 1 Ad-Hoc Level 2 Defined Level 3 Optimized

Establishing Vision and Goals

•	 TDM is acknowledged as part of the 

vision in the state but no true commitment in terms of remaining steps

•	 Varied understanding of the concept of demand management as a 

policy option

•	 Limited high-level political or 

decision-maker support for the idea

•	 Primary role of MPOs is to fund 

limited TDM activities

•	 TDM is a part of the vision statement for the metropolitan 

region

•	 Enhanced understanding of TDM concepts and strategies at staff levels

•	 Treated as substantial goal of the planning efforts•	 Political support emerging on this topic•	 Many roles (funding, coalition building, operations) 

becoming realistic for MPOs in the area of demand management

•	 TDM is an equal and long-term strategy in the 

metropolitan vision with capacity expansion and operations

•	 TDM permeates through the entire strategic planning and decision-making process•	 Existence of strong political champions and 

decision-makers for TDM

•	 MPO becomes a hub for various TDM roles (funding, operations, coalitions)

Setting Objectives for TDM •	 Minimal role for TDM in planning 

objectives or in the CMP 

•	 Primarily linked to one or two objectives such as conformity•	 Not developed using a “SMART” 

approach

•	 No linkage to strategies identification and selection

•	 Multiple objectives for TDM identified for a diverse set of 

State needs including congestion, air quality, and landuse strategy

•	 Some objectives are “SMART” •	 Still a strong disconnect between objectives and strategies identification•	 CMP includes specific TDM objectives

•	 TDM objectives additionally include broader considerations of regional mobility, accessibility, economic 

development

•	 All objectives are SMART and drive strategy identification and selection•	 Specific long-term objectives set for TDM

Definition of Performance Measures

•	 TDM not linked to MPO efforts at 

performance-based planning and management

•	 Outcome measures for TDM limited 

to trip and VMT reductions

•	 TMD is linked to performance-based planning and 

management 

•	 Performance measures begin to define TDM “outcomes,” at a metro level including:

o Mode splito Vehicle throughouto Rideshare rateso Air quality

•	 Performance measures developed for most objectives. •	 Performance measures include fully developed TDM 

“outcomes” 

o Reduction in congestiono Increase in alternative mode useo Increased person throughput
TDM | 11 TDM |92

Local/MunicipalPlanning

Assessment and Selection of Strategies and Programs to Support Objectives

•	 TDM Assessment not based on 

rigorous modeling/evaluation especially when compared to other alternatives

•	 TDM does not drive any of the alternative analysis scenarios•	 Specific strategies for TDM do not 

completely address broader TDM objectives and goals

•	 Selection of any TDM strategy is 

ad-hoc and limited to existing approaches or constituencies. Public transit or traditional ridesharing is seen as the primary alternative

•	 TDM is a integral part of many alternatives•	 Assess some TDM strategies by incorporating cost and 

time impacts into traditional travel demand models

•	 Also perform off-model analysis/modeling of TDM 

strategies as necessary

•	 All travel choices are assessed including active transportation, ridesharing etc. •	 TDM strategies typically still are stand-alone and not 

fully integrated with other programs/projects/strategies

•	 Demand management considered before supply 

side alternatives. A demand-management scenario identified

•	 Developed a rationalized means of assessing TDM 

strategies

•	 TDM strategy decisions are based on benefit-cost 

analysis 

•	 Strategies and programs reflect the broad vision 

for TDM

•	 TDM is not only a separate project/program but 

also is integral to most of the projects developed by the MPOs. 

Integration of Strategies into Plans and Funding Programs 

•	 Resulting projects/programs do not 

link back to objectives

•	 The level of detail for TDM projects 

is significantly lesser than that for other projects, e.g., signal timing improvements

•	 Tend to support traditional TDM efforts such as ridesharing etc

•	 TDM is better integrated into larger and capital projects •	 Greater level of detail for TDM projects•	 Pilot programs or experimental approaches included 

for TDM

•	 Dedicated program/funding identified

•	 TDM projects as fleshed out as other projects in 

the plan

•	 Dedicated and sustained program and funding•	 Fewer pilots and more mainstreaming of TDM

Monitoring and Evaluation of Progress Toward Objectives

•	 Evaluation methods for TDM are different from operational strategies

•	 Planners are monitoring awareness levels through surveys, focus 

groups, and workshops, among relevant stakeholders and the public

•	 Formal methodology is in place to evaluate performance metrics•	 TDM and system performance are reported in a similar 

way (e.g., delay)

•	 MPOs start to perform evaluation of TDM effectiveness 

at regional, city and local levels. 

•	 Performance measurement includes quantitative 

and qualitative methods

•	 Conduct evaluation of comparative cost effectiveness of TDM to other capital and operating strategies

P L A N N I N G – M E T R O P O L I T A N 

Planning Activities Level 1 Ad-Hoc Level 2 Defined Level 3 Optimized
TDM | 93 

The foundation of most metropolitan transportation plans is a series of goals, objectives, strategies, and/

or policies that guide the overall planning process. TDM can be incorporated into these strategic planning 

elements, and range from being included in supportive objectives to being a primary policy statement. 

To be more effective, however, MPOs should elevate their role in TDM beyond the platitudes of simple 

“support” and “encouragement,” and move toward planning for specific project implementation, and 

perhaps more importantly toward including TDM as an effective response to key urban policy issues. 

Large MPOs can make TDM a cornerstone of their long-range plans and develop specific TDM plans; 

medium-sized MPOs set aside funding for TDM initiatives; while small MPOs can begin the task of 

exploring TDM-based approaches and gauge the interest of their member jurisdictions. 

Regardless of size, all MPOs are struggling with the issue of limited financial resources for transportation 

infrastructure projects. In addition to this funding gap, other issues such as recent rises in fuel prices 

and growing concerns about the environment, energy consumption, air quality, and overall livability and 

sustainability are the primary factors that drive MPOs to consider the benefits of TDM strategies as a part 

of a balanced, multimodal approach within their transportation planning processes. 

A variety of TDM strategies have been developed that complement capacity expansion projects and offer 

other ways to make the transportation system more efficient and more flexible, while minimizing negative 

community impacts. Most transportation planners understand that the days of adding capacity as the 

sole strategy for addressing their regional transportation needs are gone and that strategies that focus 

on changing travel behavior to mitigate traffic congestion are needed, especially within the Congestion 

Management Process. In fact, some MPOs go as far as to state that TDM strategies will be just as critical, 

if not more so, to improve the efficiency of the transportation system as strategies to increase capacity. 

Clearly, however, there is no one-size-fits-all approach to TDM; and, even in areas where TDM has made 

significant inroads, TDM is not a panacea. Rather, it is envisioned that TDM projects can reduce, or at 

least postpone, the need for capital-intensive projects that increase roadway capacity. 

6.3 Actions to Move Metropolitan Planning Process from Level 1 to 

Level 2

Table 6.3 lists several specific actions to move an MPO’s planning process from Level 1 (ad hoc 

integration of demand management) to Level 2 (defined integration). For each action, a rationale for the 

action, an explanation of how to implement the action, examples where available, and an indication of the 

relative ease or difficulty of implementing each action is below. 
TDM | 11 TDM | 11 TDM | 94 Integration Actions Policy Support Ease of Implementation Cost Time Requirement Overall Establishing Vision and Goals 1 Develop TDM long-range strategic plan Low Moderate Low Moderate Low 2 Establish a regional TDM Committee Moderate Moderate Low Low Low 3 Create/support local ordinances, guidance and policy development for TDM Moderate Difficult Moderate Moderate Moderate Setting Objectives for TDM 4 Adopt an objectives-driven, performance-based planning process to include TDM Moderate Moderate Low Low Moderate 5 Review the role of TDM in the CMP process Low Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Definition of Performance Measures 6 Identify concrete performance measures for TDM beyond air quality and conformity Moderate Moderate Low Moderate Moderate 7 Establish the link between TDM and quality of life Moderate Moderate Low Moderate Moderate 8 Create a report card or dashboard for TDM performance Low Low Low Low Low Assessment and Selection of Strategies and Programs to Support Objectives

9 Assess the current capabilities of the travel demand modeling process to evaluate TDM Low Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate10 Incorporate TDM and travel choices into existing visualization tools and processes Low Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate

Integration of Strategies into Plans and Funding Programs

11 Broaden the availability of eligible funding beyond CMAQ Moderate Moderate Low Low Moderate

Monitoring and Evaluation of Progress Toward Objectives

12 Strengthen TDM performance evaluation and monitoring methods and tools Low Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate

Table 6.3: List of Actions and Associated Level of Difficulty to Move Metropolitan Planning Process from Level 1 to Level 2

P L A N N I N G – M E T R O P O L I T A N 
TDM | 95 

Action 1 – Develop TDM Long-Range Strategic Plan

Rationale and Explanation – In order for TDM to bridge the gap between broad policy statements and 

specific strategies and projects being included in the TIP, it is important to have a stand-alone plan for 

TDM in the region. Many regions have developed 5-year TDM Strategic Plans to guide the development 

of TDM services, organizational structure, and funding beyond the TIP. This becomes a sort of Transit 

Development Plan for TDM. 

Example – To further articulate regional TDM goals, 

recommend TDM activities to meet these goals, 

guide investments in TDM activities, define an 

administrative structure to oversee the regional 

TDM program, and establish evaluation measures, 

the Denver Regional Council of Governments has 

published a regional TDM Strategic Plan (Figure 

6.1). The plan “identifies TDM as a key strategy for 

meeting the goal of providing safe, environmentally 

sensitive and efficient mobility choices for the region’s 

residents and visitors. Providing viable travel options 

and supporting infrastructure simultaneously opens 

roadway capacity, increases transit system efficiency, 

and decreases auto travel. Expanded travel options 

allow individuals to select from various modes to 

meet travel needs, make trips during less congested 

times, and avoid some auto trips altogether.” The 

TDM plan clearly identifies the location emphasis 

of the TDM efforts. While the plan states that TDM 

promotional efforts will occur throughout the region 

and incentives will be available in all areas, it notes 

that efforts will also be targeted toward certain areas 

such as: 1) CBDs of larger cities, 2) High-employment 

concentrations, 3) Along highway corridors with bus/ 

HOV lanes, and 4) Adjacent to rapid transit stations 

and high-transit service locations. In addition, specific 

goals and actions are identified in the plan and funding 

sources identified for achieving the actions. 

Action 2 –Establish a regional TDM Committee with local champions

Rationale and Explanation – TDM is often spread across the organizational chart of MPOs, including longrange planning, regional ridesharing, congestion management, etc. TDM, if it is to be integrated into the 

planning process, needs clear policy direction and this can come from a dedicated TDM committee. Such 

a committee can provide direction to MPO staff, assist with the allocation of regional funds, and provide 

a focal point for all TDM coordinating activities in the region. TDM can be a difficult concept for many 

traditional transportation professionals and remains largely unknown to many policy-makers that advise 

MPOs. As such, finding one or more champions to help forward the concept and underscore its benefits 

may be crucial. Such a champion needs to be a trusted peer. In the case of an MPO governing board, this 

might be an elected official from one member jurisdiction that has solid experience with TDM in his/her 

town. In the case of area transportation planners who might be working on plans that should incorporate 

TDM, it could be a trusted professional that can explain the “philosophy” and specifics of TDM to other 

professionals. It is important to establish key leadership positions within and outside of the MPO in order 

to foster consensus-building and to move TDM initiatives through the planning process. 

Figure 6.1: Regional TDM Strategic Plan

Source: Denver Regional Council of Governments
TDM | 11

Aviation Technical

Subcommittee

TDM Evaluation 

Group Direction and 

Review of Regional 

TDM Evaluation 

Methodology

Travel Management

Subcommittee

Travel Forecasting

Subcommittee

Aviation Technical

Subcommittee

Bike to Work Steering Committee 

Organizes Bike To 

Work Day

Car Free Day

Steering Committee

Organizes Car 

Free Day

Commuter Connections Ridematching

Committee

Technical Review of

TDM Ridesharing

Sofware Systems

Employer Outreach 

Committee 

Input and Review of 

Employer Outreach 

Efforts

Regional TDM 

Marketing Group 

Coordination of 

Regional Advertising 

and Marketing 

Campaigns

Commuter Connections Subcommittee 

Technical Review of 

Regional TDM 

Programs

Transportation 

Planning 

Board

TPB Technical

Committee

State TDM Work 

Group 

Administrative & 

Programmatic 

Oversight

TDM | 11 TDM | 96

Example – The regional TDM program in the Greater Washington D.C. metro area, Commuter 

Connections, is housed within the MPO, the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG). 

As shown in Figure 6-2, the MPO has established a State TDM Work Group that reports directly to the 

Transportation Policy Board and consists of state DOT representatives who fund the region TDM program. 

Below the State TDM Work Group is a Commuter Connections Subcommittee, responsible for the 

planning and operation of the TDM program. In addition, many MPOs rely on TDM champions to forward 

the concept and its benefits. In San Diego, the role of a champion was clearly present in determining 

the successful implementation of the I-15 HOT lanes. (A local mayor, who sat on the MPO board, was 

seeking support for high-capacity transit service in the I-15 corridor. The means to fund such service were 

identified as toll revenues from converting HOV to HOT lanes. When the local mayor was elected to the 

state senate, he sponsored the legislation to allow tolling on I-15, thus creating the opportunity for one of 

the first HOT lanes in the U.S. )

Figure 6.2: Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments Organizational Structure

Source: MWCOG

Action 3 –Create/support local ordinances, guidance and policy development for TDM

Rationale and Explanation – MPOs can provide a leadership role in fostering TDM initiatives at the local 

level in several ways. First, MPOs are generally comprised of local member jurisdictions, thus creating 

a good forum for discussing the merits of TDM and its integration into the planning process. Second, 

MPOs may have broader expertise in planning than some local jurisdictions, thus creating an opportunity 

to provide technical assistance. Finally, many MPOs have created model regulations, ordinances, and 

planning guidelines designed to maximize the impacts of TDM on new development. The effectiveness 

of TDM model ordinances is less in getting cities to adopt them, but more to encourage them to 

aggressively apply the requirements during the site plan review process. 

Example – The Congestion Management Program (CMP) for Los Angeles County requires that all 89 cities 

within the county adopt a TDM ordinance. The CMP TDM ordinance focuses on designing “TDM-friendly” 

facilities as part of new development and is realized through the site plan review process. TDM-friendly 

P L A N N I N G – M E T R O P O L I T A N 
TDM | 97 

facilities refer to building design elements that support use of travel modes other than driving alone. 

Examples include: bicycle parking, preferred parking for carpools and vanpools, and direct building 

access from the street for pedestrians. The CMP document provides a model local TDM ordinance and 

requirements.104 

Action 4 – Adopt an objectives-driven, performance-based planning process to include TDM

Rationale and Explanation –Truly integrating TDM into operations requires shifting from a project-based 

approach focused on addressing problems to an objectives-driven, performance-based approach. Such 

an approach has been promoted by FHWA.105 This approach recognizes that what is measured matters 

in decision-making, and setting specific, measurable performance objectives will facilitate incorporating 

operations strategies into the MTP. An objectives-driven, performance-based approach, therefore, is 

recommended as a means to meet federal transportation planning requirements for including “operational 

and management strategies to improve the performance of existing transportation facilities” in the MTP 

and promoting “efficient system management and operation.”106

Example – The Champaign Urbana Urbanized Area Transportation Study (CUUATS) in Illinois serves as 

the transportation-focused arm of region’s MPO, the Champaign County Regional Planning Commission 

(CCRPC). CUUATS has adopted an objectives-driven, performance-based approach to metropolitan 

transportation planning that is evident throughout its recent plan, Choices 2035.107 Through the 

development of Choices 2035, CUUATS and its planning partners defined 12 regional goals, several 

of which tie directly to improving TSM&O. Specific objectives were identified to support each of the 12 

regional goals. For each objective, measures of effectiveness to track progress toward the objective and 

recommended actions were identified. For example, one goal related to access and mobility set a specific 

target of reducing average peak travel times by 1.5 minutes. The plan identified performance measures 

that included travel time, level of service, and congestion levels. It also identified specific strategies 

aimed at meeting this objective, to include alternative modes, car-sharing, and pedestrian and bicycle 

improvements. The plan includes an evaluation of whether the prior plan objectives were met using 

established measures of effectiveness (MOEs). CUUATS has witnessed a number of positive outcomes 

as a result of instituting this approach to planning, including increased public engagement, a greater level 

of government accountability, and a safer, more bike-friendly community. 

Action 5 – Review the role of TDM in the CMP

Rationale and Explanation – TDM can be a significant focus of the Congestion Management Process. As 

noted earlier in this section, travel demand reduction is an integral part of regional congestion reduction. 

However, experience shows that TDM, especially as defined in this guidance, varies in its importance 

in CMP planning efforts. It is important to review the local CMP to assess how well TDM is currently 

integrated as a set of solution strategies and to find opportunities for better integration. 

Example – The objective-driven, performance-based approach, as defined in Action 4, provides an 

excellent template for MPOs to follow in integrating TDM in an effective manner into the CMP process. 

Figure 6.3 is from “An Objectives-Driven, Performance-Based Approach to Planning for Operations” and 

presents the traditional flow of the long-range planning process. The figure shows how objectives can be 

defined for congestion management as part of the CMP. 

104 Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, 2010 Congestion Management Program, Appendix C, 2010, http://www.metro.net/projects_studies/cmp/images/CMP_Final_2010.pdf

105 FHWA, Advanced Metropolitan Planning for Operations: An Objectives-driven, Performance –based Approach – A Guidebook, FHWA Report No, 

HOP-10-026, 2010. /

106 “Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU),” Section 6001(i), 2005. 

107 Champaign-Urbana Urbanized Area Transportation Study Long Range Transportation Plan, available at http://www.ccrpc.org/transportation/lrtp2/
TDM | 11 TDM | 98

Regional goals and motivation

Operational Objectives

Systematic process to develop and

select M&O Strategies to meet objectives

Metropolitan transportation plan

Transportation improvement program and

other funding programs

CMP	uses	this	approach

with	a	focus	on	congestion

Define performance measures

Determine operations needs

Identify M & O strategies

Evaluate M & O strategies

M & O Strategies Select	M&O	strategies	for	the	plan

Implementation

Figure 6.3: An Objectives-Driven, Performance-Based Approach to Planning for Operations

Source: U.S. DOT, FHWA

The approach is iterative, with monitoring and evaluating used to refine and adjust operations objectives 

over time. In addition, developing operations objectives and selecting TDM strategies is often an iterative 

process. Congestion objectives may be somewhat vague when first drafted and become more specific as 

financial constraints are clarified and baseline performance data are gathered. Selecting TDM strategies 

to meet the operations objectives also may be refined as financial constraints are applied. Coordinating 

and collaborating among planners and operators is a critical component of the approach, which supports 

developing agreed-upon regional operations objectives, identifying strategies, and monitoring and 

evaluating system performance. 

Action 6 – Identify concrete performance measures for TDM beyond air quality and conformity

Rationale and Explanation – TDM has largely been used as a means to achieve conformity beyond 

transportation and air quality plans. As such, VMT reduction, which can easily be transformed into 

emission reduction, has been the primary performance measure. As TDM is used to address other policy 

objectives (e.g., congestion, livability, land use, economic development) new performance measures will 

need to be developed. While many of these will have a link to existing performance measures (mode shift, 

VMT, etc.), new performance measures will evolve. 

Example – The Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission, serving the greater Philadelphia area, 

has developed a set of livability performance indicators and included them in a livability report card that is 

shown in Figure 6.4.108

P L A N N I N G – M E T R O P O L I T A N 

108 EPA report, EPA 231-K-10-004 (August 2011) http://www.epa.gov/dced/pdf/Sustainable_Transpo_Performance.pdf
TDM | 99 

What	We	Track How	is	the	DVRPC	Region	Performing? Trend

TR 1: Have vehicle crashes 

and fatalities declined?

Between 2001 and 2005, the DVRPC region experience 

an 18 percent decrease in fatalities per million VMT and 

less than 1 percent decrease in all crashes per million 

VMT. However, the overall number of crashes rose 4. 6 

percent during this same time period. 

TR 2: Is congestion getting 

worse?

Congestion appears to be stable – neither improving nor 

worsening, though VMT has increased. 

TR 3: Is transit ridership 

increasing?

While transit ridership has experienced some fluctuation, 

it has increased in the last 5 years. 

TR 4: Has the number of 

deficient bridges in need of 

rehabilitation or replacement 

decreased?

The number of bridges identified as structurally deficient 

in the DVRPC region has remained steady, but remains 

twice as high as the acceptable level set by FHWA in its 

current strategic plan. 

TR 5: Are roads better maintained?The region saw a slight increase in road miles considered to be deficient, mostly due to NJDOT’s stricter 

standards. 

TR 6: Are fewer people driving 

to work alone?

The number of people driving to work by themselves 

continues to increase and is now 73 percent of all commuters. 

TR 7: Are people driving less? There are more cars and more drivers driving more miles 

every year in the region. The region appears to be more 

auto-dependent. 

Figure 6.4: Delaware Valley Livability Report Card

Source: EPA

Action 7 – Establish the link between TDM and quality of life

Rationale and Explanation – Perhaps the newest policy objective to be linked to TDM is quality of life, and 

its related objectives, livability and health. If TDM is all about travel choices, not just for commuting, and 

these choices are healthier (bike, walk), safer (carpool, vanpool), and less stressful (transit and telework), 

then they contribute to the overall quality of life of those using these more sustainable modes. 

Example – The TSM&O Plan, developed by Oregon Metro, seeks to integrate TDM and roadway 

management and operations strategies in key corridors in the Portland area. The TSM&O Plan includes 

four key goals: Reliability, Safety and Security, Quality of Life, and Traveler Information. Therefore, quality 

of life is a major desired outcome of the plan, and a set of objectives is enumerated that revolve around 

expanded travel choices and their positive impacts on the community.109

Action 8 – Create a report card or dashboard for TDM performance

Rationale and Explanation – TDM is seldom reported to policy-makers and the public in an accessible 

and user-friendly manner. The development of a report card or dashboard for reporting TDM performance 

can help in this regard. This requires the timely collection of overall TDM performance in meeting stated 

objectives and the means to report them in a simple manner. Some states and regions have developed 

report cards, state of the commute reports, and TDM dashboards. 

Example – The University of Virginia’s Parking and Transportation program runs a campus-wide TDM 

program, including carpooling, car-sharing, parking management, etc. The university reports on the 

impacts of its TDM program as part of its overall College Sustainability Report Card.110

109 http://library.oregonmetro. gov/files//regional_tsmo_refinement_plan_june2010_final.pdf

110 http://www.virginia.edu/parking/TDM/

Green = Good Red = Bad
TDM | 100 TDM | 11 TDM | 11

Additionally, the process for creating a TDM report card has been developed by several sources, including 

the METRIC process that allows for benchmarking of a state or region’s TDM efforts, based on over 100 

criteria.111

Action 9 – Assess the current capabilities of the travel demand modeling process to evaluate 

TDM 

Rationale and Explanation – Current travel demand models can help evaluate some TDM strategies, those 

that can be expressed in terms of time and cost, but off-model tools are more often needed to assess a 

fuller range of TDM strategies. It is important to review the region’s travel demand modeling process in 

light of the growing role of TDM strategies to determine whether changes to the four-step process might be 

needed or post-processor tools added to the process. 

Example – Chapter 9 includes a description of several existing tools aimed at allowing for the quantification 

of TDM impacts for various strategies and packages of strategies. This includes the FHWA TDM Evaluation 

Model and the TRIMMS available from the CUTR (see more discussion in Section 9 on Tools and 

Techniques for Evaluating TDM). The CUTR has developed guidance entitled “Incorporating Assumptions 

for TDM Impacts in a Regional Travel Demand Model” for the State of Washington, which provides a very 

good discussion of these issues.112

Action 10 – Incorporate TDM and travel choices into existing visualization tools and processes

Rationale and Explanation – TDM is most often evaluated in terms of mode shift, vehicle trip, and VMT 

reduction. However, these measures can be less meaningful to policy makers and traffic engineers who 

think in terms of traffic flow, speeds, and delay. Therefore, it is crucial to translate TDM impacts into terms 

that others can better understand. For example, with some simplifying assumptions, VMT reduction can be 

translated into improvements in delay. As will be shown in the next section on corridor-level planning, this 

translation of TDM to congestion relief can be visualized using existing tools, such as CORSIM. 

Example – The Arlington County Commuter Services program carefully measures the impact of TDM 

services provided in terms of removing cars from the Virginia region’s highways. The program estimates 

that it removes 40,000 SOVs per day from area roads and this is compared to the capacity of area 

highways of 4,000 – 6,000 cars during the peak period, concluding that the TDM program reduces the 

need for multiple lanes of highway to meet traffic demand.113

Action 11 – Broaden the availability of eligible funding beyond CMAQ

Rationale and Explanation – CMAQ is the most prevalent source of funding for TDM, at the state, regional, 

and even local level. TDM is one of the few strategies that can address both congestion mitigation and 

air quality simultaneously. However, as TDM rises in importance as a solution strategy for a myriad of 

policy objectives, additional funding sources will likely be needed. Making the case for funding TDM with 

traditional highway funds will be the hurdle to be overcome. However, as TDM becomes accepted as a 

rational approach to maximizing the efficiency of highway management and operations, this barrier should 

be lowered. One obvious source of federal funding is the dedication of STP funds to TDM. Additionally, 

regional funding sources, such as county-level dedicated sales tax funds, have been used as well. 

Example – The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) operates the regional TDM program 

under its Smart Mobility Services program. Funding for FY 2012 was just over $6 million, two-thirds of which 

supports vanpool incentives. While the vast majority of the funding comes from CMAQ, funding for bicycle 

111 Black and Schreffler, Understanding TDM and its Role in Delivery of Sustainable Urban Transport, Transportation Research Record 2163, 2010. 

112 WSDOT, “Incorporating Assumptions for TDM Impacts in a Regional Travel Demand Model” prepared by CUTR, Report No. WA-RD-746.1, March 

2010. 

113 Jennings, H., TDM: The Software that Supports the TOD Hardware, Arlington Commuter Services, October 2011.

P L A N N I N G – M E T R O P O L I T A N 
TDM | 101 

outreach programs to employers is also funded through federal JARC (Jobs Access Reverse Commute) – 

New Freedom funds and regional TransNet sales tax revenue. 

Action 12 – Strengthen TDM performance evaluation and monitoring methods and tools

Rationale and Explanation – MPOs perform much of the analysis and evaluation related to TDM as part of 

the planning process and project evaluation efforts linked to funding requirements. MPOs have developed 

and supported standardized methodologies and related tools to monitor and evaluate TDM programs and 

strategies. This allows for comparisons over time and across regions and programs in order to provide 

accountability for funding decisions based on the fulfillment of stated TDM objectives. 

Example – MWCOG’s Commuter Connections program has been a pioneer in developing, refining, and 

maintaining rigorous and consistent methodologies for evaluating TDM strategies implemented and 

supported by the MPO and its partners. This evaluation process, the TERM Evaluation, is conducted 

on a triennial basis and is based on an approved Evaluation Framework adopted by an evaluation 

subcommittee of the aforementioned Commuter Connections subcommittee.114

6.4 Actions to Move Metropolitan Planning Process from Level 2 to 

Level 3 

Several specific actions can be suggested to move an MPO’s planning process from Level 2 (defined 

integration of demand management) to Level 3 (optimized integration). Table 6-4 highlights the relative 

ease or difficulty in moving from Level 2 to Level 3. 

Action 1 – Perform a TDM visioning exercise with a broad set of travel choices

Rationale and Explanation – Creating a broad consensus on the need for and benefits of TDM, and the 

travel choices it represents, should involve input from travelers themselves, since much of TDM is about 

enhancing travel choices to improve the quality of life for citizens. In order to involve the traveling public, 

many states (as well as regions and municipalities) are adopting visioning exercises as part of their longrange transportation plan updates. This seeks to gain insight on the choices that travelers want and the 

kind of urban form they desire. This, in turn, provides rich information with which to craft TDM strategies 

and their role in addressing key policy objectives. 

Example – Several states and regions have used visioning exercises as part of their long-range 

transportation plan update process. Many of these processes are entitled “Envision,” including Envision 

Utah (Salt Lake valley) and Envision Missoula (see Best Practice case study below). In the case of 

Missoula, three scenarios were extensively discussed with the public, including: a “business as usual” 

case, a focus on growth to suburban satellites, and then a “focus inward” scenario to concentrate 

development and improve travel choices, especially in an “in-town mobility district.” This last scenario 

involved improved transit, bike and walk facilities and services to improve access combined with 

increased density to manage travel demand. 115

Action 2 – Create incentive-based approaches for TDM and obtain buy-in for funding 

Rationale and Explanation – As discussed in Chapter 6, incentives are a key component of the most 

effective TDM strategies. MPOs can champion the need for and form of such incentives. This may 

require substantial buy-in from decision-makers to provide the funding and support enabling legislation. 

Some decision-makers view incentives as “as paying people to do what they should be doing” rather 

114 MWCOG, Transportation Emission Reduction Measure (TERM)

115 ftp://www.co.missoula.mt.us/opgftp/Transportation/TTACAttach/2008/OctMtg/EMSLAFinalRpt.pdf
TDM | 102 TDM | 11 Integration Actions Policy Support Ease of Implementation Cost Time Requirement Overall Establishing Vision and Goals 1 Perform a TDM visioning exercise with a broad set of travel choices Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate 2 Create incentive-based approaches for TDM and obtain buy-in for funding Difficult Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Definition of Performance Measures 3 Develop performance measures that express TDM effectiveness in operational terms Low Moderate Low Moderate Moderate 4 Explore role of TDM in improving health and safety and develop objectives accordingly Moderate Moderate Low Moderate Moderate Assessment and Selection of Strategies and Programs to Support Objectives 5 Develop procedures for considering demand management strategies prior to other, more capital intensive alternatives Difficult Moderate Low Moderate Moderate 6 Develop new tools/approaches to incorporate all travel choices into the analysis process Low Low Moderate Moderate Low Integration of Strategies into Plans and Funding Programs 7 Develop capability to include TDM in all projects in an appropriate manner Moderate Moderate Low Moderate Moderate

Monitoring and Evaluation of Progress Toward Objectives

8 Adopt or develop a standardized approach to reporting TDM performance Low Low Moderate Moderate Low

Table 6.4: List of Actions and Associated Level of Difficulty to Move Metropolitan Planning Process from Level 2 to Level 3

P L A N N I N G – M E T R O P O L I T A N 
TDM | 103 

than viewing incentives as short-term measures to induce a longer-term behavior change that supports 

multiple policy objectives. However, MPOs have substantial control over the allocation of federal funding, 

namely CMAQ, which has been used for these programs. 

Example – The County Transportation Commissions in Los Angeles, Riverside, and San Bernardino 

Counties have been funding financial incentive programs for commuters for almost 20 years. Funds are 

provided by federal and county sources. The programs involve the offer of a financial incentive for eligible 

commuters to switch from driving alone to an alternative mode. After the direct financial incentive has 

ended (usually after 90 days), commuters who continue in an alternative mode are eligible for “club” type 

awards and drawings. Evaluations of these incentive programs have shown them to be very cost effective 

in reducing VMT and as such, decision-making bodies at each of these agencies continue to support the 

programs. 

Action 3 – Develop performance measures that express TDM effectiveness in operational terms

Rationale and Explanation – The most prevalent performance measures for TDM are either output based 

(e.g., number of carpools formed) or outcome based (e.g., resulting VMT reduction). However, these 

metrics are sometimes foreign to other transportation planners, engineers, and especially policy-makers. 

There is a need to translate TDM effectiveness into terms that traditional transportation planners and 

engineers can better understand, such as reductions in delay, increase in person throughput, and 

reductions in needed lane miles. While one might argue that performance measures that are expressed 

in terms of the utilization of sustainable modes or increases in quality of life indices are just as important, 

TDM will be partially judged by those focused on the efficient operation of the road system. 

Example – Using VMT reduction, volumes and speeds, estimates of reduction in delay can be derived. 

Going one step further, the CUTR has developed a methodology that merges mode shift data with a 

highway micro-simulation model to graphically show how employer trip reduction programs can reduce 

delay for a given highway segment.116 This research was originally conducted using CTR data from 

the Seattle region as applied to a portion of I-5 through downtown Seattle. The report titled “Impact of 

Employer-based Programs on Transit System Ridership and Transportation System Performance”117 

shows the deterioration of travel speeds in the absence of the VMT reductions caused by employer TDM 

programs. More information is provided in the following chapter on corridor-level planning.

Action 4 – Explore role of TDM in improving health and safety and develop objectives 

accordingly

Rationale and Explanation – Two broad policy objectives that can be addressed with TDM include 

personal health and safety. MPOs, with mandates broader than transportation, can help elevate the role 

of TDM in addressing health and safety. Growing evidence (as shown in Chapter 3) suggests that users 

of alternative modes are healthier (in terms of fitness and stress) and that these modes can be safer than 

driving alone, especially in light of growing concern about distracted driving. Clearly, TDM’s role in air 

quality is ultimately focused on health concerns. 

Example – The Whatcom Council of Governments in Bellingham, WA, has incorporated health and safety 

into the TDM activities within its long-range transportation plan. The 2007 Whatcom Transportation Plan 

includes 13 key goals, related to: public information and education, safety, access, environmental 

justice, connectivity, freight mobility, con gestion and mobility, TDM, alternative forms of transportation, 

land use, health, public participation, and other modes. The inclusion of safety and health, within a 

116 http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/sm/los/default.shtm

117 http://www.nctr.usf.edu/abstracts/abs77605.htm
TDM | 104 TDM | 11

plan so focused on sustainable travel modes, illustrates the importance of these two emerging policy 

objectives.118 

Action 5 – Develop procedures for considering demand management strategies prior to other, 

more capital-intensive alternatives

Rationale and Explanation – While federal planning guidance suggests that alternatives be considered 

before options that accommodate the SOV, state MPOs may wish to consider structuring this philosophy 

in the planning process by requiring that specific corridor planning efforts first prove why TDM cannot be 

a primary solution before considering options that add capacity, or even efficiency improvements. This 

would require a fundamental change in thinking that involves viewing TDM not as a short-term mitigation 

strategy, but as a long-term approach to reducing overall vehicle demand. 

Example – For its 2025 Long Range Transportation Plan, the Brevard MPO (FL) performed a five-level 

strategy screening process for ten regionally significant corridors in Brevard County to identify potential 

projects and strategies for further consideration. This process evaluated the potential application 

of numerous transportation and land use strategies for each corridor according to the following five 

prioritized strategy tiers:

1. Actions that decrease the need for trip making (such as growth management strategies, creation

 of activity centers, congestion pricing, and some transportation demand strategies).

2. Actions that place trips into transit or other non-automobile modes (such as public transportation

 capital and operating improvements, parking management, and other strategies).

3. Actions that encourage the use of HOV lanes.

4. Actions that optimize the roadway network’s operation for SOV trips and for all other trips using. 

 highway facilities/modes (traffic signalization modifications, intelligent transportation systems, 

 etc.).

5. Actions that increase the capacity of the roadway network for SOV trips by adding general-

 purpose lanes. 

Action 6 – Develop new tools/approaches to incorporate all travel choices into the analysis 

process

Rationale and Explanation – Moving from the defined approach to a more optimized integration of TDM 

may require the development of tailored and specialized analytic tools to evaluate the effectiveness of 

TDM strategies in addressing key policy objectives. While many “off the shelf” tools now exist, in order 

to analyze the full set of TDM strategies and their impact across a myriad of objectives, specialized tools 

may be required. This might include new, tailored means of using the traditional four-step travel models 

or newer activity-based models. It might also involve other new tools, such as the micro-simulation tool, 

developed by CUTR and discussed in the next section that uses employer TDM data and CORSIM. 

Example – The traditional four-step travel demand modeling process can be used to evaluate TDM 

strategies that can be analyzed in terms of time and cost variables. However, many off-model tools 

have been developed to analyze congestion pricing strategies, bicycle and walk strategies, and other 

strategies that cannot be expressed in terms of time and cost indicators. As mentioned above, a good 

discussion of the means to incorporate TDM into regional travel demand models is provided by CUTR in 

a report entitled “Incorporating Assumptions for TDM Impacts in a Regional Travel Demand Model.” This 

approach, which was developed for WSDOT, includes a specific TDM Assessment Procedure that uses 

the CUTR TRIMMS model and processes resulting TDM impacts through standard trip tables.119 In fact, 

118 Whatcom COG, Whatcom Transportation Plan: A Combined Metropolitan and Regional Plan, June 25, 2007. 

119 WSDOT, Incorporating Assumptions for TDM Impacts in a Regional Travel Demand Model, prepared by CUTR, report WA-RD-746. 1, March 2010. 

P L A N N I N G – M E T R O P O L I T A N 
TSM Capital

$327

TDM O&M

$298

TSM O&M

$74

TDM Capital

$23

Figure 6.5: Oregon Metro Regional 10 Year TSMO Plan Cost

Source: Oregon Metro Joint Policy Advisory Committee on Transportation 

TDM | 105 

the use of the TRIMMS model itself (discussed in Chapter 9) to perform cost/benefit analysis for TDM 

strategies could represent a significant movement toward mainstreaming TDM integration. 

Action 7 – Develop capability to include TDM in ALL projects in an appropriate manner

Rationale and Explanation – Once TDM becomes optimized and managing demand becomes an overall 

philosophy of how to manage and operate the transportation system, then TDM strategies will become a 

part of most if not all projects. This requires a strong capability at the management and technical levels to 

assure that TDM is appropriately considered for all projects, both in the long-range planning process as 

well as individual project-level planning. 

Example – The Oregon Metro’s Regional Transportation Systems Management and Operations Plan 

includes four sets of strategies targeted at key corridors. These include capital and operating projects 

in four key areas: multimodal traffic management, traveler information, traffic incident management, and 

TDM.120 The funding for TDM, as shown in Figure 6.5, is almost 45% of total 10-year funding for these 

corridor-level strategies and projects. 

 

120 http://library.oregonmetro.gov/files//executive_summary_june2010_final.pdf

Total 10 Year TSMO Plan Cost in Millions
TDM | 106 TDM | 11

Action 8 – Adopt or develop a standardized approach to reporting TDM performance

Rationale and Explanation – In order to provide an effective feedback loop to the objective setting and 

strategy selection process, standardized TDM evaluation methodologies are required. This might involve 

developing a tailored approach for a given MPO or adopting a widely accepted methodology. Such 

methodology development or adoption should be vetted with TDM professionals and researchers to 

assure that it is understandable, rigorous, and usable. 

Example – The MAX-SUMO monitoring and evaluation approach developed in Europe is easily adaptable 

to the U.S. experience for many TDM strategies. The methodology is described in Chapter 9. 

6.5 Best Practice Examples: Metropolitan-Level TDM Integration

A cornerstone of the 2008 Missoula MPO’s Metropolitan Transportation Plan was a visioning process 

(“Envision Missoula”), which included a set of future scenarios that “represent different concepts of what 

Missoula might be like with a population of 200,000.” Two of the three scenarios sought to manage 

travel demand by refocusing growth in either multiple town centers or a single concentrated downtown 

area. The purpose of the scenarios is to “explore the potential benefits of managing travel demand by 

concentrating activity in a highly walkable and transit-friendly downtown area.” The upshot of the scenario 

planning and evaluation is that the plan includes a mix of transit, bicycle/pedestrian, and other TDMrelated projects. 

Underlying the visioning efforts, the MPO’s Transportation Technical Advisory Committee formed a TDM 

subcommittee called “Missoula in Motion” (MIM). The work of this entity is funded with federal CMAQ 

funds, supported by cash and in-kind services. MIM’s preliminary TDM efforts focused on outreach, 

education, and marketing to both employers and the public at large. As MIM has evolved, it has codified 

its approach to introducing and implementing TDM activities in Missoula within the following five steps:

1. Coordinate the efforts of all agencies involved in TDM in Missoula through the MIM Steering 

 Committee.

2. Work with employers to establish and maintain programs that reduce work-related trips.

3. Create and implement an on-going, broad-based public education campaign to make people 

 aware of their options and encourage them to reduce the number of miles they drive.

4. Provide, enhance, and market certain TDM services to give Missoulians more convenient and 

 affordable alternatives to driving alone.

5. Evaluate the program to determine its impact and ensure that resources are being used 

 effectively. 

Another effective component to the MPO’s TDM efforts is its annual “TDM Congress,” a working TDM 

dinner event to which boards, policy-makers, and representatives from business and community groups 

are invited. During the event, participants brainstorm TDM strategies and priorities for the region and 

discuss methods of both supporting and advancing these strategies. 

The work of the Missoula MPO and its MIM subcommittee provide an excellent example of a small, 

relatively isolated metropolitan area that has not only recognized the need to explicitly incorporate TDM 

into its long-range transportation planning processes but also taken the steps necessary to develop 

specific TDM projects and programs in order to meet its future regional transportation needs. 

P L A N N I N G – M E T R O P O L I T A N 

Missoula, Montana (less than 200,000

population)

Missoula
TDM | 107 

To further articulate regional TDM goals, recommend TDM activities to meet these goals, guide 

investments in TDM activities, define an administrative structure to oversee the regional TDM program, 

and establish evaluation measures, the Denver Regional Council of Governments has published a 

regional TDM Strategic Plan.121 The plan “identifies TDM as a key strategy for meeting the goal of 

providing “safe, environmentally sensitive and efficient mobility choices” for the region’s residents and 

visitors. Providing viable travel options and supporting infrastructure simultaneously opens roadway 

capacity, increases transit system efficiency, and decreases auto travel. Expanded travel options allow 

individuals to select from various modes to meet travel needs, make trips during less congested times, 

and avoid some auto trips altogether. 

• The plan identified a very broad and ambitious rationale for TDM, encompassing the notion of choices. 

• Reducing vehicle use and congestion will lead to lower levels of pollution. When traffic flow is improved, 

vehicle idling times are minimized and engine efficiency is improved, which means less pollution. 

• Efficient land-use patterns that mix residential and commercial uses, have moderate or high densities, 

provide good access to transit stops, and provide an interconnected pedestrian and bicycle network 

can decrease SOV trips. 

• Reducing the need for new and expanded transportation facilities will lower infrastructure costs. 

• Less SOV use allows local governments and private businesses to build fewer parking spaces. 

• More travel-mode options and faster travel times can improve regional access to jobs and services. 

• Making walking and bicycling more feasible and attractive can improve community health. 

• Providing the elderly with convenient options like walking, bicycling, transit, and ridesharing helps them 

remain independent and productive. Currently 12 percent of the region’s population is age 60 or older; 

this number will increase to more than 22 percent by 2030. 

• People who cannot drive will have better access to jobs, health services, education, and other daily 

needs. 

Perhaps uniquely, the TDM plan clearly identifies the location emphasis of the TDM efforts. While the plan 

states that TDM promotional efforts will occur throughout the region and incentives will be available in all 

areas, it notes that efforts will also be targeted toward certain areas such as:

• CBDs of larger cities

• High-employment concentrations

• Along highway corridors with bus/ HOV lanes

• Adjacent to rapid transit stations and high-transit service locations. 

In addition, specific goals and actions are identified in the plan and funding sources are identified for 

achieving the actions. 

121 Denver Regional Council of Governments Regional Travel Demand Management Strategic Plan, available at http://www.drcog.org/documents/

RegionalTDMPlanFinal.PDF

Denver (More than 1,000,000 population) Denver
TDM | 108 TDM | 11

2035 Houston-Galveston Regional Transportation Plan – Executive Summary, October 26, 2009, http://www. 

h-gac.com/taq/plan/documents/2035_final/2035%20RTP%20ExSum%202007-10-26%20REVISED. pdf

A Framework for TDM in the Transportation Planning Process – Technical Memorandum: State of the Practice 

Review – Appendix B – Integrating Travel Demand Management in the Metropolitan Transportation Planning 

Process: Draft, March 22, 2010

Black and Schreffler, Understanding TDM and its Role in Delivery of Sustainable Urban Transport, Transportation 

Research Record 2163, 2010. 

FHWA, Advanced Metropolitan Planning for Operations: An Objectives-driven, Performance –based Approach – 

A Guidebook, FHWA Report No, HOP-10-026, 2010.

Fraser Basin Council, “TDM – A Small and Medium Sized Communities Toolkit,” 2009. 

http://library.oregonmetro.gov/files//executive_summary_june2010_final.pdf

http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/sm/los/default.shtm

http://www.nctr.usf.edu/abstracts/abs77605.htm

ftp://www.co.missoula.mt.us/opgftp/Transportation/TTACAttach/2008/OctMtg/EMSLAFinalRpt.pdf

http://dc.streetsblog.org/2011/08/17/epa-publishes-guide-to-performance-measures-for-livability/

http://library.oregonmetro.gov/files//regional_tsmo_refinement_plan_june2010_final.pdf

http://www.virginia.edu/parking/TDM/

Jennings, H. , TDM: The Software that Supports the TOD Hardware, Arlington Commuter Services, October 

2011

 “Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU),” Section 

6001(i), 2005

SHRP II, Guide for Improving Capability for Systems Operation and Management, TRB, prepared by Parsons 

Brinkerhoff, Report S2-L06-RR-2, 2011. 

Washington State Department of Transportation(WSDOT) Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Laws & Program 

Requirements, http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Transit/CTR/law.htm

WSDOT, Incorporating Assumptions for TDM Impacts in a Regional Travel Demand Model, prepared by CUTR, 

report WA-RD-746. 1, March 2010. 

Whatcom COG, Whatcom Transportation Plan: A Combined Metropolitan and Regional Plan, June 25, 2007. 

KEY RESOURCES

P L A N N I N G – M E T R O P O L I T A N 
TDM | 109 

7. Integration of TDM at the Corridor 

Planning Level

While TDM has historically been focused on 

mitigating traffic at localized trip generators 

(e.g., large employment sites, new 

developments, etc.), it is increasingly being applied to 

congested corridors, including interregional corridors 

that cross county and state boundaries. This is 

because TDM has focused on the commuter travel 

market, which, in turn, is associated with peak period 

congestion on key highway facilities. In fact, one of 

the nation’s first ride-matching services was offered 

by a radio station attempting to find solutions to traffic 

congestion on Boston’s Southeast Expressway and 

other key facilities in 1973. Today, TDM is part of an 

overall scheme to better and more efficiently manage 

the operations of congested highways. TDM in highway 

operations is needed because, on a day-to-day basis, 

the operators of our highway systems cannot add 

capacity to meet changing conditions, but they work to 

manage the daily demands placed on our highways. 

This can be accomplished by offering travelers more 

and better travel choices. 

Managing how many vehicles are on a given facility at 

any one time, via demand management techniques, 

can influence the effective capacity of the roadway 

and maintain traffic flow. This is the premise of the now 

popular “rice experiment” promoted by Washington 

State DOT.122 The rice experiment showed that by 

modulating the rate at which vehicles entered the 

system (in the experiment, rice through a funnel), travel 

times can be increased or at least made more reliable. 

At a smaller scale, this is the function of ramp metering. 

However, if travelers can shift their travel time, location, 

route or mode, fewer total vehicles may be using the 

facility during peak, congested periods. 

CHAPTER ACRONYM LIST

ATDM Active Transportation and Demand

Management

CMP Congestion Management Program

CTR Commute Trip Reduction

CUTR Center for Urban Transportation 

Research

DOT Department of Transportation

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

GHG Greenhouse Gas

HOT High Occupancy Toll

HOV High Occupancy Vehicle

IDM Integrated Demand Management

ITS Intelligent Transportation Systems

LOS Level of Service

MIS Major Investment Studies

MPO Metropolitan Planning 

Organization

NCHRP National Cooperative Highway 

Research Program

SMART Specific, Measurable, Achievable, 

Realistic, and Time-bound

SOV Single Occupancy Vehicle

TDM Travel Demand Management

TIP Transportation Improvement 

Program

TMA Transportation Management Area

TMC Transportation Management 

Center

TRIMMSTrip Reduction Impacts of Mobility 

Management Systems

TSM Transportation Systems 

Management

TSM&O Transportation Systems 

Management and Operations

VMT Ve hicle Miles Travelled

VTR Vehicle Trip Reduction

122 Washington State Department of Transportation Rice Experiment, available at http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Traffic/Congestion/Rice/Default.htm
TDM | 110 TDM | 11

From a planning standpoint, TDM needs to be integrated into the planning process to maximize the ability 

to reduce peak period demand. This is most relevant when considering major improvements to a corridor, 

so that the benefits of the improvements can be extended by lowering overall demand levels. This 

might involve strategies to price the facility, provide preferential treatment for HOVs, integrate traditional 

TDM programs for adjacent employment centers and other major traffic generators, improve facilities/

operations of facilities parallel to the new corridor, or manage access to the corridor or land development 

adjacent to the corridor. But it is also important to explicitly consider TDM strategies, linked to a corridor, 

when planning for the ongoing operations of a facility with the goal of maximizing efficiency. This might be 

as simple as including all travel choices in the traveler information provided or linking regional ridesharing 

providers to the TMC. 

Integrating Demand- and Supply-side Strategies in a given corridor can:

• Influence travel before choices are made and make more efficient use of existing facilities. 

• Improve reliability and system performance. A small change in demand can have great benefits. 

(Improved traffic flow on a federal or state holiday is an example.)

• Prolong the need for capacity expansion, lengthen the life of new investments, and/or make managed facilities more efficient and effective. 

• Provide a set of strategies that are relatively low cost and easy to implement. 

• Foster new public/private partnerships to manage system. 

• Mitigate some of the negative impacts of traffic, including environmental and energy-related. 

KEY TAKEAWAYS

7.1 What Plans Should TDM be Included in? 

The integration of TDM into corridor planning efforts is quite broad and can involve organizations at 

the state, regional, and local level. Some interregional corridor planning activities can even cross state 

boundaries. Some of the corridor-level plans that might involve TDM integration are enumerated in Table 

7.1. 

P L A N N I N G – C O R R I D O R 
TDM | 111 

Table 7.1: Corridor Planning 

Type of Plan How to Integrate TDM/Role of TDM

Major Investment 

Studies

•	 States and regions looking at significant improvements that might add capacity in a given corridor can integrate TDM into planning activities through efforts 

such as MIS. 

•	 Plans include a TDM or Transit/TDM scenario aimed at assessing the effectiveness of mode choice measures in meeting growing travel demands via trip 

reduction strategies. 

New Smart Capacity 

Project Plans

•	 Integrate demand management in a holistic manner, to create “smarter” capacity improvements, such as managed lanes. 

Reconstruction Plans •	 Add enhanced travel options (such as vanpooling and special bus service) 

and incentives to use them (special discounts or financial rewards). 

•	 Expand the nature and number of travel options provided through enhanced 

travel information services. 

•	 Implement temporary demand management infrastructure, such as HOV 

lanes, during construction.

Congestion 

Management Process 

(CMP)

•	 Address system deficiencies that might with relatively short-term, low cost 

solutions, including TDM.

•	 Convene TDM/CMP Task Force to formulate TDM strategies that can address 

key bottlenecks on congested facilities.

Integrated Corridor 

Management Plans 

(ICM)

•	 Inform traveler of approaching congestion and the availability of parallel transit 

service with parking availability to instigate in-route mode shift. 

HOV/HOT System Plans •	 Plans, such as HOT corridor studies in Virginia, have integrated TDM and transit supportive measures into the plans in order to maximize the efficiency and 

person throughput of the enhanced facility. 

Interregional Corridor 

Plans

•	 Incorporate discussions on interregional travel which crosses state lines and 

requires special planning activities through special collaboration.

Corridor TDM Program 

Plans

•	 Develop plan for relieving congestion in corridors to make travel easier for 

commuters.

•	 Identify better travel choices that help to foster responsible economic growth.

There are two significant decisions related to integrating TDM into the corridor planning process – timing 

of the integration and scope or breadth of the TDM strategies considered. 

In terms of timing, TDM strategies, and the general philosophy of balancing demand and supply 

solutions, should be considered at the start of the corridor planning process. Too often, TDM is 

considered almost an afterthought – a means to mitigate potential impacts of highway construction or as 

part of a list of supportive measures that are not truly integrated into the future operation of the facility. 

Regarding scope, TDM strategies are often considered in a narrow or piecemeal fashion. The full set of 

TDM strategies, or travel choices, need to be included in corridor planning efforts. In some cases, the 

only “alternative” mode considered is transit and in other cases only traditional commuter-based TDM 

is considered. Time, location, and route choices should be considered in addition to mode choice. The 

Congestion Management Process is one framework that should help address this deficiency in the 

link between demand management and corridor solutions. As another example of this disconnect, the 

synergistic benefits of packaging TDM strategies are sometimes overlooked. For example, efforts to plan 

HOT lanes assess the impact of pricing on behavior change and facility operations, but often do not 

include provisions to support HOV services to achieve maximum throughput of the HOT facility. 
TDM | 112 TDM | 11

Finally, involving all key stakeholders in the corridor planning process is important as well. These potential 

stakeholders are enumerated below, but critical participation is needed from those who will ultimately 

operate the facility and related services. This includes participation from day-to-day operators and service 

providers, such as the TMC, other traveler information providers, and service providers, such as transit 

operators, vanpool providers, and bicycle user groups. 

7.2 What Is Your Capability with TDM at the Corridor Planning Level?

This desk reference will be utilizing the guidance based on different levels of existing experience with TDM 

and transportation planning. Table 7.2 provides examples of how planning agencies might integrate TDM 

into their corridor planning processes. This should assist users in determining the nature and location of 

key guidance within this section. Three levels of TDM integration are presented: ad hoc, defined, and 

optimized. As explained earlier in this document, these levels correspond to the Institutional Capability 

Maturity Model proposed by FHWA in its Guide for Improving Capability for Systems Operation and 

Management.123

Agencies with minimal experience in integrating TDM (ad hoc level) into their corridor plans and policies 

might only be viewing TDM as a mitigation strategy during reconstruction or seeking to use it to improve 

livability since there might be need to address congestion or air quality. At the next level (defined), an 

MPO might include TDM in most plans and policies as a means to increase travel choices and meet 

certain policy objectives, such as clean air or congestion reduction. In this case, TDM is likely one element 

of the overall plan. Finally, when TDM becomes optimized (Level 3), TDM may become a central focus 

of the entire plan if the MPO’s policy board adopts an overall “philosophy” of managing demand and 

encouraging sustainable transport. 

Table 7.2 provides specific examples of how an MPO might work to integrate demand management into 

regional transportation planning efforts at different levels of capability. This matrix is intended to assist the 

reader in determining where his or her organization fits in terms of the capability levels described above. 

Once the reader has determined his/her capability level and identified the critical step on which he/she is 

focused, specific actions to move from one level to the next are suggested in the next section. 

123 SHRP II, Guide for Improving Capability for Systems Operation and Management, TRB, prepared by Parsons Brinkerhoff, Report S2-L06-RR-2, 2011. 

P L A N N I N G – C O R R I D O R 
TDM | 113 

Planning Activities Level 1 Ad-hoc Level 2 Defined Level 3 Optimized

Establishing Vision and Goals

•	 TDM largely not perceived as a corridor solution•	 TDM goals are not well aligned with corridor 

goals

•	 TDM goals are often seen an afterthought to corridor operational measures 

•	 TDM is viewed as a means to fulfill 

corridor level goals

•	 Focused primarily on commute applications•	 Not explicitly connected to overall corridor performance

•	 Goals embrace a broader definition of TDM and are fullyintegrated with corridor operational goals •	 Emphasis on person throughput rather than vehicle 

throughput

•	 Goals go beyond commute trip and include other application markets•	 TDM is seen as the key strategy to enhance corridor 

operations by reducing overall single occupant vehicle demand

Setting Objectives for TDM

•	 TDM objectives focus primarily on marketing and 

educating the public on the benefits of transportation alternatives available in the corridor

•	 Primary use of TDM objectives for short-term or 

time limited congestion mitigation activities

•	 Not developed using a “SMART approach”

•	 Objectives for TDM are based on 

long-term benefits to the corridor in terms of congestion

•	 Some objectives are “SMART”•	 TDM objectives are stand-alone and 

not clearly linked to overall corridor performance

•	 Objectives for TDM are based on long-term benefits to the 

corridor not only in terms of congestion but also for other priorities like mobility, access to destinations, economic development etc

•	 All objectives are “SMART” and based on real-world 

information

•	 TDM objectives are integrated into overall regional objectives for corridor performance

Definition of Performance Measures •	 TDM performance measures are primarily ori- ented around ”outputs,” including: 

o Awareness of modeso TDM serviceso Related benefits

•	 TDM performance measures linked to public 

awareness and satisfaction

•	 Performance measures begin to 

define TDM corridor-level “outcomes,” including:

o Mode splito Vehicle throughouto Rideshare rateso VMTo Air quality

•	 Performance measures include fully developed TDM 

corridor-level “outcomes” 

o Reduction in congestiono Increase in alternative mode useo Increased person throughput

Table 7.2: Integrating TDM into the Corridor Planning Process: An Overview
TDM | 114 TDM | 11 Assessment and Selec- tion of Strategies and Programs to Support Objectives •	 No rigorous analysis/modeling of potential for TDM strategies to meet objectives •	 Typically, at this stage, TDM strategies are not considered and do not drive any alternate scenarios •	 Strategies and programs that do get included (mostly commuter-based): o Marketing and education of all modal op- tions and benefits o Promotion of active transportation o Establishment of short term TDM programs o Establishment of TMAs •	 TDM is an integral part of many alternatives •	 Some off-model analysis/modeling of TDM •	 Strategies and programs that do get included may include: o Incentives for alternative modes and programs o Improvements to alternative modes o Partnerships with corridor busi- nesses to provide employer services •	 Developed a rationalized means of assessment of TDM strategies on corridor performance •	 Strategies and programs that may get included: o Enhanced linkages with ITS and Traffic Operations o Parking management as a core component of de- mand management o Use of technology to support more fluid travel behav- ior (multi-modal comparative travel times, real-time parking information etc.) Integration of Strate- gies into Plans and Funding Programs •	 Level of detail for TDM projects is significantly less than other projects •	 Tend to support traditional projects such as ride- sharing •	 Greater level of detail for TDM projects •	 TDM becomes integral part of corridor short-term solutions especially during reconstruction •	 TDM projects are as fleshed out as other projects •	 TDM continues to be part of long-term corridor manage- ment and operations Monitoring and Evalua- tion of Progress Toward Objectives •	 Evaluation methods for TDM are different from operational strategies

•	 Planners are monitoring awareness levels 

through surveys, focus groups, and workshops, among relevant stakeholders and the public

•	 Formal methodology is in place to 

evaluate performance metrics

•	 TDM and system performance are 

reported in a similar way (e. g., delay)

•	 Performance measurement includes quantitative and 

qualitative methods

•	 Evaluate comparative cost effectiveness of TDM to other 

capital and operating strategies

P L A N N I N G – C O R R I D O R 

Planning Activities Level 1 Ad-hoc Level 2 Defined Level 3 Optimized
TDM | 115 

7.3 Actions to Move Corridor Planning Process from Level 1 to 

Level 2

Several specific actions can be suggested to move an agency’s corridor planning process from 

Level 1 (ad hoc integration of demand management) to Level 2 (defined integration). For each action, 

a rationale is provided, an explanation of how to implement the action, and examples are given where 

available. Table 7.3 indicates the relative ease or difficulty of implementing each action. 

Action 1 – Establish guidance on how to and benefits of integrating TDM into corridor planning 

at the very beginning

Rationale and Explanation – TDM needs to be integrated early into the corridor planning process in order 

to realize its full benefits. Too often, TDM is an afterthought or only included as a mitigation strategy 

during reconstruction projects. 

Example – Most guidance related to integrating TDM into corridor planning comes from highway 

reconstruction efforts. NCHRP Synthesis 273, Project Development Methodologies for Reconstruction 

of Urban Freeways and Expressways, provides guidance on the role of TDM in mitigating the traffic 

impacts of reconstruction.124 

Action 2 – Determine organizational and inter-organizational responsibilities for TDM in 

corridor planning

Rationale and Explanation – TDM is often spread across the organizational chart of responsible agencies, 

including long-range planning, corridor planning, regional ridesharing, congestion management, 

etc. Corridor planning can be isolated from TDM operations, even when undertaken with in the same 

organization. It is important that roles be clearly defined in advance of specific corridor planning efforts, 

such as MIS. 

Example – When plans were developed to make operational improvements on the SR 520 corridor 

in the Puget Sound, TDM strategies were included from the beginning. Improvements include active 

traffic management, tolling, transit improvements, bicycle facilities, as well as vanpool and telecommute 

promotion among area employers and TDM agents. This was due, in part, to the fact that Washington 

State DOT has a very active TDM program and that TDM implementation agents, such as Seattle Metro 

and area TMAs, were involved from the beginning. 

Action 3 – Developing SMART objectives for TDM

Rationale and Explanation – As with many transportation-related policies, objective setting often results 

in rather vague targets. In TDM, appropriate objectives might be to: offer more travel choices, reduce 

congestion, improve air quality, or assist commuters. Using a SMART objective setting process, TDM 

goals and objectives should be as precise as possible. This requires a more involved planning process 

to reach consensus, especially with regards to measurable targets, but it allows for a more robust 

planning and evaluation process that allows for better monitoring of objective attainment, strategy 

correction, and funding decision-making. The objectives from many corridor improvements are based 

on reducing travel times and increasing the efficiency of the facility to move vehicles in an unimpeded 

manner. However, by including TDM strategies in corridor plans, partially to mitigate the negative impacts 

of traffic, other objectives can be more fully addressed, including mobility, accessibility, economic 

development, and livability. 

124 NCHRP, Project Development Methodologies for Reconstruction of Urban Freeways and Expressways, Synthesis 273, 1999. 
TDM | 116 TDM | 11 Integration Actions Policy Support Ease of Implementation Cost Time Requirement Overall Establishing Vision and Goals 1 Establish guidance on how to and benefits of integrating TDM into corridor planning at the very beginning Low Low Low Moderate Low 2 Determine organizational and inter-organizational responsibili- ties for TDM in corridor planning Low Moderate Low Moderate Low Setting Objectives for TDM 3 Develop SMART objectives for TDM Low Low Low Low Low Definition of Performance Measures 4 Identify concrete performance measures for TDM Moderate Moderate Low Low Moderate 5 Create means to translate TDM performance metrics into highway operations metrics Moderate Moderate Low Moderate Moderate Assessment and Selection of Strategies and Programs to Support Objectives 6 Draw upon existing tools to improve TDM modeling and analysis Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate 7 Integrate TDM into all scenarios for corridor Improvements Moderate Low Low Low Low

8 Seek means to include traditional ridesharing and incentives into corridor plans Moderate Low Low Low Low

Integration of Strategies into Plans and Funding Program

9 Include TDM elements in overall corridor project funding Moderate Moderate Low Low Moderate

Monitoring and Evaluation of Progress Toward Objectives

10 Strengthen TDM performance evaluation and monitoring methods and means to report impacts Low Moderate Low Moderate Moderate

Table 7.3: List of Actions and Associated Level of Difficulty to Move Corridor Planning Process from Level 1 to Level 2

P L A N N I N G – C O R R I D O R 
TDM | 117 

Example – The Washington State 2006 CTR Efficiency Act continued a state mandate that goes back to 

1991. Cities and counties are able to set their own specific goals and targets for employee commute trip 

reduction, as long as they met the minimum state targets of a 10% reduction in single occupant commute 

trips by 2011 to address congestion and a 13% reduction in VMT to address GHG emissions. In the first 

three years of the program, 154 million VMT have been reduced at over 1,000 worksites representing over 

a half a million commuters. This is estimated to have reduced highway delay by 8% in the Central Puget 

Sound region and almost 70,000 metric tons of GHG statewide. While the state legislation behind the 

CTR Efficiency Act was a major policy effort, the need for and ability to set quantifiable targets was fairly 

straightforward. Another example involves the 1996 Boulder, Colorado, Transportation Management Plan, 

which identified 10 multimodal corridors and improvements for all modes of travel along them. As these 

corridors carried a majority of the trips in the community and linked important activity and commercial 

centers, maximizing their efficient trip-carrying ability required improving the relationship between the 

multimodal transportation system, land use, and design along these corridors. 

Action 4 – Identify concrete performance measures for TDM

Rationale and Explanation – TDM has largely been used as a means to achieve conformity between 

transportation and air quality plans. As such, VMT reduction, which can easily be transformed into 

emission reduction, has been the primary performance measures. As TDM is used to address other policy 

objectives (congestion, livability, land use, economic development), new performance measures will need 

to be developed. While many of these will have a link to existing performance measures (mode shift, VMT, 

etc.), new performance measures will evolve. 

Example – The State of Florida has developed and adopted multi-modal LOS standards for comparison 

among and between modes and projects. FDOT’s Quality/Level of Service Handbook of 2009 provides 

a methodology and analysis tools to develop and use multimodal performance measures for car, transit, 

bike, and walk travel for a given urban corridor.125

Action 5 – Create means to translate TDM performance metrics into highway operations metrics

Rationale and Explanation – Many of the performance measures used to measure highway operations 

and congestion are not the same measures used to gauge TDM program performance. This can create a 

dilemma as each discipline (TDM and highway operations) seeks to understand the impact of TDM on a 

particular highway. Indicators linked to congestion in a given corridor include:

• Travel time reliability.

• Delay (including vehicle hours of travel).

• LOS. 

Performance indicators more appropriate to TDM include:

• VTR.

• VMT reduction.

• Person throughput (HOV use).

• Mode shift.

• Transit service reliability. 

The measure that likely comes closest to linking the two disciplines is person throughput. Knowing vehicle 

occupancy, including transit, can help planners understand the efficiency of the facility in moving travelers, 

not vehicles. 

125 http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/sm/los/default.shtm
TDM | 118 TDM | 11

Example – The example shown in the action described below illustrates one means of translating 

TDM effectiveness, in terms of mode shift, to reductions in delay. In this case, the mode shift impacts 

documented for the CTR law among employers in downtown Seattle are graphically shown as changes 

in travel time on I-5. 

Action 6 – Draw upon existing tools to improve TDM modeling and analysis

Rationale and Explanation – TDM analysis can often be very piecemeal and based on anecdotal 

evidence, rules of thumb, and sketch planning techniques, at best. However, several tools are available 

to assist with the evaluation of TDM strategies as part of the planning, alternatives analysis, and project 

selection process. Utilizing these tools largely requires the time and commitment to learn about the use 

of the tools in advance of the planning process. 

Example – Chapter 9 includes a description of several tools aimed at allowing for the quantification of 

TDM impacts for various strategies and packages of strategies. This includes the FHWA TDM Evaluation 

Model and the TRIMMS available from the CUTR (see more discussion in Section 9 on Tools and 

Techniques for Evaluating TDM). 

However, in terms of tools to evaluate the impact of TDM on corridor operations, CUTR has developed 

a means to graphically display the temporal and spatial distribution of trip reduction, due to TDM, on a 

given facility, using CORSIM. 

Action 7 – Integrate TDM into all Scenarios for Corridor Improvements

Rationale and Explanation – Corridor analyses, such as those included in MIS, generally involve the 

assessment of several alternatives. While TDM tends to be included in one alternative (the “TDM” or 

“TSM/TDM” or “TDM/Transit” alternative), it is important to include TDM in all alternatives, especially if 

one is to subscribe to the synergistic effects of TDM when integrated into management and operational 

strategies or as a means to reduce or redistribute demand. 

Example – A paper summarizing the use of TDM in MIS conducted by the North Central Texas Council 

of Governments concluded that TDM and TSM can effectively complement major transportation 

investments. These strategies promote the use of transit and alternative commute modes, as well as 

improves transportation system performance. Both TDM and TSM strategies are relatively low-cost, 

quick-implementation transportation programs and projects, which should not be overshadowed by 

proposed major transportation improvement(s). Since an MIS is an intensive and comprehensive study 

of transportation alternatives in a travel corridor, this study process provides an excellent opportunity to 

explore the implementation of these low-cost, quick-deployment transportation strategies.126 

Action 8 – Seek means to include traditional ridesharing and incentives into corridor plans

Rationale and Explanation – One of the most common types of corridor improvements included in plans 

involves technology enhancements and ITS. As such, many TDM improvements included in these plans 

are linked to technology, such as dynamic ridesharing and other traveler information enhancements. 

However, traditional TDM, such as carpool and vanpool promotion, telecommuting, and financial 

incentives for using alternative modes, can also be an important ingredient in corridor solutions. 

Example – During the 2002 reconstruction of U.S. 101 over the Cuesta Grade in San Luis Obispo 

County, CA, several demand management strategies were implemented to mitigate the impact of the 

roadwork on commuters. These measures included additional peak period bus service in the corridor, 

vanpool subsidies, and subsidized fuel cards for carpools. An evaluation of the impact of the demand 

126 L. Dantas, Incorporating TDM and TSM in Major Investment Studies – The Dallas- Ft. Worth Metropolitan Area Experience, presented at ACT International Conference, 2000. 

P L A N N I N G – C O R R I D O R 
TDM | 119 

management program concluded that the combination of measures eliminated 310 cars per day from the 

facility and about 8,000 miles of vehicle travel by raising overall vehicle occupancy from 1.206 to 1.266. 

The daily cost to take each car off the road was estimated at $7.50. These reductions contributed to an 

overall perception by the traveling public that the reconstruction project was less disruptive than originally 

feared.127

Action 9 – Include TDM elements in overall corridor project funding

Rationale and Explanation – In order to fully integrate TDM into corridor projects, adequate funding is 

required and should be addressed at the programming phase of planning. TDM is often an afterthought 

as a mitigation strategy without adequate resources being dedicated. 

Example – The Colorado DOT included a comprehensive TDM program in its T-REX project to reconstruct 

I-25/I-225 and expand light rail. TDM funding was included in the public involvement budget, with 

specific funds for targeted traveler information, transit and vanpool incentives, and local coordination and 

outreach. 

Action 10 – Strengthen TDM performance evaluation and monitoring methods and means to 

report impacts

Rationale and Explanation – Agencies that manage highway facilities collect considerable information on 

operations (volumes, travel times, etc.) but often do not evaluate the impact of TDM or alternative mode 

initiatives on those operations. New and better methods are required to translate highway operations and 

TDM effectiveness data into common metrics, such as reductions of VMT and delay. 

Example – The evaluation of HOT lane projects often includes data that relate TDM to highway operations, 

such as vehicle occupancy, person throughput, alternative mode utilization, etc. 

7.4 Actions to Move Corridor Planning Process from Level 2 to 

Level 3

Several specific actions can be suggested to move a corridor’s planning process from Level 2 (defined 

integration of demand management) to Level 3 (optimized integration). Table 7.4 highlights the relative 

ease or difficulty for each action in moving from Level 2 to Level 3.

Action 1 – Determine range of travel markets that can be influenced by TDM

Rationale and Explanation – While the journey to work is likely the most influential travel purpose for most 

corridors, other travel markets can heavily influence the timing and location of traffic congestion and 

general traffic patterns. Large-scale generators, such as universities, airports, and event centers can 

influence traffic and may require a very different set of TDM strategies to address, given differences in 

operating hours, type of vehicles, and other characteristics. 

Example – An FHWA guidance document entitled “Mitigating Traffic Congestion: The Role of 

Demand-side Strategies” enumerates many travel markets or applications for TDM, beyond traditional 

commuters.128 These venues include: schools and universities, recreation and tourism, special events, 

hospitals, and airports. 

127 http://international.fhwa.dot.gov/pubs/pl11011/pl11011.pdf

128 FHWA “Mitigating Traffic Congestion: The Role of Demand-Side Strategies,” available at http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/mitig_traf_cong/

mitig_traf_cong.pdf
TDM | 120 TDM | 11 Integration Actions Policy Support Ease of Implementation Cost Time Requirement Overall Establishing Vision and Goals 1 Determine range of travel markets that can be influenced by TDM Low Low Low Low Low 2 Determine whether TDM is an overall operating philosophy or mitigation strategy Difficult Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate 3 Train corridor project managers on TDM Low Moderate Low Moderate Moderate 4 Develop new partnerships in key corridors Low Moderate Low Moderate Moderate Setting Objectives for TDM 5 Set longer term objectives for TDM Difficult Moderate Moderate Moderate Difficult Definition of Performance Measures 6 Develop corridor performance measures tied to person throughput Moderate Moderate Low Moderate Moderate Assessment and Selection of Strategies and Programs to Support Objectives 7 Develop procedures for considering demand management strategies prior to other, more capital intensive alternatives Difficult Moderate Low Moderate Moderate 8 Use TDM as a means to reduce need to expand road capacity Difficult Difficult Low Moderate Difficult

9 Develop new tools/approaches to incorporate all travel Choices into the analysis process Low Low Moderate Moderate Low10 Include active demand management to integrate TDM into cor- ridor solutions Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate

Integration of Strategies into Plans and Funding Programs

11 Include TDM as a key element to reducing overall, long-term demand Difficult Difficult Low Moderate Difficult

Monitoring and Evaluation of Progress Toward Objectives

12 Adopt or develop a standardized approach to reporting TDM performance Low Low Moderate Moderate Low

Table 7.4: List of Actions and Associated Level of Difficulty to Move Corridor Planning Process from Level 2 to Level 3

P L A N N I N G – C O R R I D O R 
TDM | 121 

Action 2 – Determine whether TDM is an overall operating philosophy or mitigation strategy

Rationale and Explanation – Agencies that adopt an overriding philosophy of TDM, rather than limit it as a 

mitigation strategy, are obviously more apt to integrate TDM strategies into all or most aspects of corridor 

planning and operations. Today, using real-time travel information, much of what TMCs do is manage 

demand by seeking to reduce or influence traffic at the most congested places and times. Once an 

agency adopts a philosophy of maximizing travel choices rather than minimizing auto travel times, TDM 

will become a much larger part of the way facilities are planned and managed. 

Example – FHWA is developing a new program entitled “Active Transportation and Demand Management” 

(ATDM), which is defined as the dynamic management, control, and influence of travel demand, traffic 

demand, and traffic flow of transportation facilities. Through the use of available tools and assets, traffic 

flow is managed and behavior influenced in real time to achieve operational objectives. ATDM is not a 

set of specific strategies; rather it is an over-arching philosophy for managing a facility through demand 

management and dynamic traffic management. 

Action 3 – Train corridor project managers on TDM

Rationale and Explanation – In keeping with the objective to provide guidance on corridor TDM planning, 

it would be helpful to offer specific training to project managers that oversee corridor improvements on 

the fundamentals of TDM. Some planners cite a disconnect between TDM integration into corridor plans 

and the occasional lack of execution by project managers. In other words, if project managers do not fully 

understand the how and why of TDM implementation, even the best plans may not be realized. 

Example – As noted in the state-level section of this document, Colorado DOT has developed tools 

to assist its planners and project managers, as well as local government and business, with TDM 

implementation, including The TDM Toolkit and the TDM Corridor Projects Study (see T-REX example 

above), which offer a complete list of strategies with TDM successes throughout Colorado and the U.S.129 

However, sometimes the skill mix and training of project managers can work to restrict innovations, such 

as TDM. In fact, the Dutch Ministry of Transport has implemented a program to broaden the types of 

professionals who are assigned as major infrastructure project managers, retaining not only engineers, 

but economists, psychologists, social scientists, and anthropologists. 

Action 4 – Develop new partnerships in key corridors

Rationale and Explanation – Travel corridors and highway facilities cross jurisdictional boundaries. 

Therefore, unique partnerships are needed to coordinate planning efforts among public and private 

interests. These partnerships will include the facility operator (often the state DOT), localities in the 

corridor, and planning agencies, as well as private interests, such as large employers or developers. 

Example – Corridor coalitions have been used extensively for urban segments (U.S. Highway 169 Corridor 

Coalition) and interregional efforts (I-95 Corridor Coalition). These efforts bring all levels of government 

as well as the private sector to the table to plan and implement corridor improvements. The U.S. Highway 

169 Corridor Coalition’s mission is “Working together to enhance safety, reduce congestion and maximize 

economic development along the U.S. Highway 169 interregional corridor. ” This includes freight, intercity, 

and commuter travel. 

Action 5 – Set longer term objectives for TDM

Rationale and Explanation – TDM is often viewed as a short-term, stop gap measure to mitigate traffic 

during reconstruction, during major events, or until capacity enhancements can be made. However, 

if TDM is recognized as a means to reduce overall demand on a facility, longer term benefits can be 

realized. Thus, longer term objectives can be set for TDM, presumably for the entire life of a long-range 

plan or the life of a highway improvement or expansion. 

129 CDOT, Colorado 2035 Statewide Transportation Plan, Travel Demand Management Technical Report, March 2008. 
TDM | 122 TDM | 11

Example – The UK Department for Transport developed a concept entitled “Integrated Demand 

Management” (IDM), originally designed to incorporate demand management into comprehensive corridor 

improvement plans and projects. The IDM concept is being applied to the reconstruction and widening of 

the M25 motorway around London. The Highways Agency describes IDM as “a holistic approach based 

upon making best use of the existing road-space and locking in the benefits of widening. ” The philosophy 

behind IDM is to maximize the efficiency of the facility using ATM and to maximize the effective life of the 

improvement by reducing overall demand for its use. 

Action 6 – Develop corridor performance measures tied to person throughput

Rationale and Explanation – Common practice still focuses corridor performance on vehicle movement 

measures (travel time, level of service) and not person movement. Corridor plans that seek to maximize 

travel choices should also include related performance measures, such as person throughput, vehicle 

occupancy (including transit), and overall accessibility. As one observer put it, ”Higher person throughput 

can extend the effectiveness of the managed lane facility, thereby yielding a better return on investment and 

greater life-cycle performance of the system. This can only be achieved by positively affecting the balance of 

modes towards high-occupancy vehicles, particularly multi-person carpools, vanpools, and transit.”130

Example – The HOT lane demonstration project on I-15 in Salt Lake City, UT, revealed that the Express Lane 

(open to carpools, vanpools, buses, motorcycles, and paying solo drivers) carried almost twice as many 

persons as the average general purposes lane during the PM peak period.131

Action 7 – Develop procedures for considering demand management strategies prior to other, 

more capital intensive alternatives

Rationale and Explanation – While federal planning guidance suggests that alternatives be considered before 

options that accommodate the SOV, state DOTs may wish to consider structuring this philosophy in the 

planning process by requiring that specific corridor planning efforts first prove why TDM cannot be a primary 

solution before considering options that add capacity, or even efficiency improvements. This would require 

a fundamental change in thinking that involves viewing TDM not as a short-term mitigation strategy, but as a 

long-term approach to reducing overall vehicle demand. 

Example – One example of the full institutionalization of TDM into the planning process comes from Sweden. 

In 2002, the Swedish National Roads Administration adopted the “four stage principle“ that requires planners 

and engineers to evaluate options in the following order:

1. Measures that affect the demand for transport and the choice of mode.

2. Measures that affect the more efficient use of the existing road network.

3. Measures that make improvements to existing roads.

4. Measures that make new investments in road capacity or major rebuilding. 

Planners are, therefore, required to consider and rule out demand management before they can consider 

infrastructure improvements.132

Action 8 – Use TDM as a means to reduce need or delay to expand road capacity

Rationale and Explanation – If the broader benefits of TDM are accepted, namely reducing overall demand, 

the need for capacity expansion may not just be delayed, it might even be eliminated. Agencies that plan 

corridor improvements are not likely to accept the prospect of eliminating the need for one or more lanes 

of expansion unless evidence is available to show that TDM can reduce traffic. However, many cities are 

adopting the concept of “road diets” to reduce space for automobiles and increase that for bicycles and 

pedestrians. 

130 http://david.ungemah.com/commentary-menu/24-tdmreviewmanagedlanes.html

131 University of Utah Transportation Lab, “I-15 Express Lanes Evaluation – Final Report” UTL-1106-89, November 26, 2007. 

132 FHWA, Managing Travel Demand – Applying European Perspectives to U.S. Practice, FHWA-PL-06-015, May 2006. 

P L A N N I N G – C O R R I D O R 
TDM | 123 

Example – In a few cities, the TDM philosophy is fully embraced and the result is an overall reduction in 

car travel. In Lund, Sweden,133 and Arlington, Virginia,134 reductions in VMT and vehicle volumes have been 

observed and documented in line with implementation of aggressive TDM programs. Arlington County, 

Virginia, has documented a reduction (12-16%) in traffic levels on several key arterials concurrent with 

considerable growth in public transport ridership (38%) and demand management success with area 

employers and institutions. 

Action 9 – Develop new tools/approaches to incorporate all travel choices into the analysis 

process

Rationale and Explanation – Moving from the defined approach to a more optimized integration of TDM 

may require the development of tailored and specialized analytic tools to evaluate the effectiveness of 

TDM strategies in addressing key policy objectives. While many “off the shelf” tools now exist, in order 

to analyze the full set of TDM strategies and their impact across a myriad of objectives, specialized tools 

may be required. This might include new, tailored means of using the traditional four-step travel models 

or newer activity-based models. It might also involve other new tools, such as the micro-simulation 

tool, developed by CUTR and discussed earlier in this document, which uses employer TDM data and 

CORSIM. 

Example – The traditional four-step travel demand modeling process can be used to evaluate TDM 

strategies that can be analyzed in terms of time and cost variables. However, many off-model tools 

have been developed to analyze congestion pricing strategies, bicycle and walk strategies, and other 

strategies that cannot be expressed in terms of time and cost indicators. As mentioned above, a good 

discussion of the means to incorporate TDM into regional travel demand models is provided by CUTR in 

a report entitled “Incorporating Assumptions for TDM Impacts in a Regional Travel Demand Model.” This 

approach, which was developed for WSDOT, includes a specific TDM Assessment Procedure that uses 

the CUTR TRIMMS model and processes resulting TDM impacts through standard trip tables.135 In fact, 

the use of the TRIMMS model itself (discussed in Chapter 9) to perform cost/benefit analysis for TDM 

strategies could represent a significant movement toward mainstreaming TDM integration. 

Action 10 – Include active demand management to integrate TDM into corridor solutions

Rationale and Explanation – As mentioned above, many of the solution strategies used in corridors rely on 

technology enhancements to move vehicles and data more efficiently. TDM, which is partially dependent 

on information to influence mode choice, has made many advances in this area over the past 10 years, 

with the advent of dynamic ridesharing initiatives and instant ridematching. The ability to integrate these 

TDM technology advancements into corridor plans will create better travel choices for a variety of modes. 

Example – The ATDM program, being developed by FHWA, provides examples of four types of “active 

demand management” strategies to complete active traffic and active parking management. These active 

demand management strategies include: dynamic ridesharing, on-demand transit, dynamic pricing, and 

predictive traveler information.136

Action 11 – Include TDM as a key element to reducing overall, long-term demand

Rationale and Explanation – If TDM is accepted, as suggested in Actions 6 and 10, as a means to reduce 

overall vehicle demand, then the nature and size of corridor projects that flow from the planning process 

to programming could be rather different. Not only might capital projects be more modest in scope, but 

TDM programs may take a much larger part of the TIP, in order to fund the necessary efforts to promote, 

encourage, and maintain the use of sustainable travel options. 

133 FHWA, “Managing Travel Demand: Applying European Perspectives to U.S. Practice,” Report No. FHWA-PL-06-015, May 2006.

134Jennings, H., TDM: The Software that Supports the TOD Hardware, Arlington Commuter Services, October 2011.

135 WSDOT, Incorporating Assumptions for TDM Impacts in a Regional Travel Demand Model, prepared by CUTR, report WA-RD-746. 1, March 2010. 

136 FHWA, “ATDM Program Brief: An Introduction to Active Transportation and Demand Management", 2011. 
TDM | 124 TDM | 11

Example – As cited in the last section on metropolitan-level planning, the TSM&O plan in the Portland 

region devotes almost as much funding to TDM as to capital and efficiency improvements. 

Action 12 – Adopt or develop a standardized approach to reporting TDM performance 

Rationale and Explanation – In order to provide an effective feedback loop to the objective setting and 

strategy selection process, standardized TDM evaluation methodologies are required. This might involve 

developing a tailored approach for a given MPO or adopting a widely accepted methodology. Such 

methodology development or adoption should be vetted with TDM professionals and researchers to 

assure that it is understandable, rigorous, and usable. 

Example – The MAX-SUMO monitoring and evaluation approach developed in Europe is easily adaptable 

to the U.S. experience for many TDM strategies. The methodology is described in Chapter 9. 

7.5 Best Practice Examples: Corridor-Level TDM Integration

Two types of best practice examples are provided here – one focused on TDM and highway 

reconstruction in Colorado and another focused on planning for TDM and innovative corridor operations 

(HOT lanes) in Virginia. 

Figure 7.1: Denver T-Rex I-25/225 Reconstruction

Source: Colorado DOT

137 FHWA, Mitigating Traffic Congestion: The Role of Demand-side Strategies, FHWA-HOP-05-001, 2004 

P L A N N I N G – C O R R I D O R 

TDM and Highway Reconstruction

TDM strategies are increasingly being integrated into highway reconstruction projects and therefore are 

an integral part of the planning process. One of the most comprehensive examples comes from the 

T-Rex project in the Denver area (Figure 7-1), the reconstruction of I-25/225 and extension of light rail 

(completed in 2007).137 During reconstruction, a temporary HOV lane was added to provide a travel time 

advantage to carpools, vanpools, and buses. TDM was built into the public outreach component of the 
TDM | 125 

138 VDRPT, 1-95/I-395 Transit/TDM Study: Final Report, 2008, available at http://www.drpt.virginia.gov/studies/files/I95_I395_Transit_Final.pdf

TDM and HOT Lane Planning

Many HOT lane projects have provided new or improved transit services as an alternative to paying the 

toll. However, the conversion of an HOV facility to HOT operations (priced use of excess capacity by drive 

alone travelers) should consider means to maintain or grow HOV use in order to maximize the operational 

efficiency and person throughput of the facility. Some plans have been largely based on the assumption 

that HOV will recognize the benefits of free travel in the HOT lane and continue to share rides. However, in 

some cases, the vehicle occupancy level is being raised to 3+ occupancy in order to create capacity to 

sell, creating the need to maintain existing HOV levels so as not to create new drive alone modes. 

The Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation undertook a planning process to assess the 

most cost effective use of HOT lane revenue for transit and TDM in order to maintain and enhance HOV 

utilization as part of planning for the I-95/I-395 HOT lane project in northern Virginia, from Arlington to 

south of Fredericksburg.138 An I-95/I-395 Transit/TDM Technical Advisory Committee was created to 

study, analyze, and plan for the best mix of transit and TDM strategies to maintain and grow alternative 

modes use while introducing HOT lane operations. Two stated objectives for the planning effort were to:

• Preserve transit and HOV ridership while implementing the HOT lanes by providing improvements that 

help maintain current market share for transit, carpools, and vanpools.

• Utilize new HOT lane features to attract new transit and HOV riders by using a corridor management approach to improve existing service and serve new markets. 

This is a departure from some plans, which largely assume HOV use to be constant and seek ways to 

capitalize on unused capacity, by seeking ways to grow HOV and transit use within the context of HOT 

lane operations. The plan outlines many new and enhanced transit services and many enhanced TDM 

measures, including: capital assistance for vanpools, enhanced Guaranteed Ride Home programs, 

financial incentives for vanpools and carpools, rideshare program operational support, TDM program 

marketing support, and telework program assistance. 

project at an early stage. Some $3 million was dedicated to TDM to support the following:

• Support and expansion of a TMA in the corridor.

• Integration of TDM information into a project traveler information website.

• Subsidized transit passes, available from TMA.

• Subsidized vanpools for new vanpool groups in corridor.

Colorado DOT noted that the TDM activities reduced the risks associated with the reconstruction project 

and that follow-up surveys showed that travelers were very supportive of the TDM strategies. CDOT now 

plans to build TDM into all major reconstruction projects as a matter of procedure. 
TDM | 126 TDM | 11

CDOT, Colorado 2035 Statewide Transportation Plan, Travel Demand Management Technical Report, March 

2008. 

FHWA, “ATDM Program Brief: An Introduction to Active Transportation and Demand Management, 2011. 

FHWA, Managing Travel Demand – Applying European Perspectives to U. S. Practice, FHWA-PL-06-015, May 

2006. 

http://david.ungemah.com/commentary-menu/24-tdmreviewmanagedlanes.html

http://international.fhwa.dot.gov/pubs/pl11011/pl11011.pdf

http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/sm/los/default. shtmhttp://international.fhwa.dot.gov/traveldemand/

t1_p08.cfm#netherlands

L. Dantas, Incorporating TDM and TSM in Major Investment Studies – The Dallas- Ft. Worth Metropolitan Area 

Experience, presented at ACT International Conference, 2000. 

NCHRP, Project Development Methodologies for Reconstruction of Urban Freeways and Expressways, Synthesis 

273, 1999

SHRP II, Guide for Improving Capability for Systems Operation and Management, TRB, prepared by Parsons 

Brinkerhoff, Report S2-L06-RR-2, 2011. 

University of Utah Transportation Lab, “I-15 Express Lanes Evaluation – Final Report” UTL-1106-89, November 

26, 2007. 

WSDOT, Incorporating Assumptions for TDM Impacts in a Regional Travel Demand Model, prepared by CUTR, 

report WA-RD-746.1, March 2010. 

KEY RESOURCES

P L A N N I N G – C O R R I D O R 
TDM | 127 

CMAQ Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality

CTR Commute Trip Reduction

CUTR Center for Urban Transportation 

Research

DOT Department of Transportation

EPOMM European Platform on Mobility 

Management

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

HOT High Occupancy Toll

HOV High Occupancy Vehicle SMART 

Smart, Measurable, Achievable, 

Realistic, and Time-bound

SOV Single Occupancy Vehicle

TDM Travel Demand Management

TOD Transit Oriented Development

TSM Transportation Systems Management

VMT Vehicle Miles Travelled

VTR Vehicle Trip Reduction

CHAPTER ACRONYM LIST

8. Integration of TDM at the Local 

Planning Level

Travel demand management is very often 

implemented at the local level, especially as 

it relates to site-level programs (employment 

sites, new developments, sporting venues). 

Local planning is generally associated with 

municipal governments, (i.e., city planning 

activities), but sometimes TDM is planned at a 

local level outside the institutional framework 

of city government (e.g., TMAs or sub-regional 

planning activities). Municipalities play a very 

important part in TDM planning, because 

they are often the key actors in program 

implementation. For example, municipal land 

use and parking policies are very important 

mechanisms for influencing demand. As corridorlevel transportation management strategies 

are developed, effects on parallel arterials and 

city streets are vital considerations. Finally, the 

implementation of some specific TDM strategies, 

such as bicycle and walk infrastructure, transit 

signal prioritization, carsharing, and parking 

management, are within the purview, plans, and 

budgets of municipalities. 

Some of the most successful TDM programs are planned and implemented in high-growth cities. The 

negotiating leverage of these cities to mitigate the traffic impacts of this growth via TDM is key. Finally, 

some of the most innovative demand management strategies have been implemented by cities, namely 

cordon pricing (London and Stockholm), demand-based parking pricing (Redwood City, CA), growth 

management (Portland, OR), and pedestrian/bicycle prioritization (New York City). 

What is the appropriate role for municipalities in integrating TDM into the planning process?

• Use a site plan review process to incorporate TDM into new developments.

• Participate in regional committees and planning efforts that include TDM.

• Build upon control of cities over parking management as a TDM measure.

• Focus on community-level planning for bike and walk initiative tied to livability.

• Cities are the focus of sustainable transportation and climate change action plans.

KEY TAKEAWAYS
TDM | 128 TDM | 11

8.1 What Plans Should TDM be Included In?

The integration of TDM into local planning practices can occur as part of a wide variety of local planning 

activities, as enumerated in Table 8.1. 

Type of Plan How to Integrate TDM/Role of TDM

General Plan Circulation 

Elements

•	 Include recommendations on TDM in the circulation element of the general plan as a 

strategy to make local arterials operate more efficiently. 

•	 Include TDM as a complement to parking management activities. 

•	 Include TDM mitigation requirements for new developments when outlining land use 

and zoning policies.

Site Development Review 

Process

•	 Codify the role of TDM in the site plan review process via trip reduction ordinances or 

more informal, negotiated processes. 

TMA or TDM Plans •	 Elicit TDM planning under the auspices of localized TDM implementing agents, such 

as Transportation Management Associations (TMAs) or Transportation Management 

Districts (TMDs). 

Municipal TDM Plans •	 Develop citywide TDM plans to focus the TDM –specific activities of the municipality. 

May include a description of current city activities, how these fit into state and regional 

plans and efforts, and a set of specific implementation objectives for the next several 

years. 

Climate Action Plans •	 Develop action plans to address climate change, since the reduction of car use is often 

a key strategy in climate action plans, TDM often plays a central role. 

•	 Include ways that cities and citizenry can operate greener and cleaner (low energy solutions, clean municipal fleets). 

Sustainable Urban 

Transport Plans

•	 Make TDM the centerpiece by developing transportation solutions that are grounded in 

sustainability. Plan places travel choices, environmental mitigation, and social inclusion 

as the top of the plan’s goals and objectives. 

Future Applications •	 Elevate the importance of TDM to a stand-alone planning activity in order to coordinate 

all related activities at the municipal level. Municipal TDM plans should seek to go 

beyond traditional TDM (often the focus of site-level mitigation strategies) to include the 

broad spectrum of travel demand influencing efforts, including parking pricing, neighborhood marketing, special event planning, cordon pricing, preferential treatments on 

arterials. 

TDM is often used as a mitigation strategy to minimize the impacts of new traffic generated by new or 

expanded development. Many cities have codified the role of TDM in the site plan review process via 

trip reduction ordinances or more informal, negotiated processes. Some cities have codified the review 

process into a Transportation Management Plan requirement for new, major trip generators (e.g., San 

Francisco, Seattle). Trip reduction requirements are often supported by regional plans and policies that 

promote good practice and model ordinances. Major development areas sometimes prompt a specific 

plan for a planned unit development or major employment center. To ensure that integrated strategies are 

developed for the entire area, these plans often include a comprehensive TDM element to mitigate traffic 

impacts and “build” TDM into the travel choices for future tenants and visitors. 

8.2 What Is Your Capability with TDM at the Local Planning Level?

This desk reference will be utilizing the guidance based on different levels of existing experience with 

TDM and transportation planning. Table 8.2 provides examples of how local planning agencies might 

integrate TDM into their corridor or regional planning processes. This should assist users in determining 

the nature and location of key guidance within this section. Three levels of TDM integration are presented: 

ad hoc, defined, and optimized. As explained earlier in this desk reference, these levels correspond to the 

Table 8.1: Local Planning 

P L A N N I N G – L O C A L 
TDM | 129 

Planning Activities Level 1 Ad-hoc Level 2 Defined Level 3 Optimized

Establishing Vision and Goals

•	 Minimal or no role envisioned by 

City decision-makers for TDM (primarily seen as a regional problem)

•	 TDM is largely associated with site development•	 Emphasis on bike/ped, public transit solutions•	 Parking solutions/policies are beginning to 

be considered

•	 City begins to react to grass-roots advocacy 

for increased use of sustainable modes

•	 TDM goals linked to non-traditional objectives 

such as livability and health

•	 Emphasis on all choices, all modes•	 Parking supply and pricing rationalized in the City•	 Effective land-use integration creates demand for 

sustainable modes

•	 Leadership and commitment by City decisionmakers drives TDM approaches

Setting Objectives for TDM •	 Specific TDM objectives tied to traffic mitigation for new site development

•	 Broader TDM objectives focus 

primarily on TDM program branding, marketing and educating the 

across City agencies and the public on the benefits of transportation 

alternatives available throughout the City 

•	 Objectives are not developed using 

the "SMART” approach

•	 Specific objectives include the incorporation of TDM-friendly TOD design and facility 

improvements; and the development of strategic City-wide partnerships

•	 Some objectives are SMART

•	 Objectives include an emphasis on reliable 

choices and long-term traveler behavior changes

•	 TDM objectives are viewed as vital to economic 

growth

•	 All objectives are SMART

Definition of Performance Measures

•	 TDM performance measures are 

primarily oriented around ”outputs,” including: 

o Awareness of modeso TDM serviceso Resident satisfaction

•	 Performance measures begin to define TDM 

local-level “outcomes,” including:

o Business impactso Mode splito Vehicle throughout generation rateso Rideshare rateso VMTo Air quality

•	 Performance measures include fully developed 

TDM local-level “outcomes” 

o Reduction in congestiono Increase in alternative mode useo Enhanced livability/quality of life/health

Table 8.2: Integrating TDM into the Local Planning Process: An Overview
TDM | 130 TDM | 11

P L A N N I N G – L O C A L 

Assessment and Selection of Strategies and Programs to Support Objectives

•	 Assessments based on peer 

reviews, special studies and local experience 

•	 TDM less likely to be called out as 

unique element in plans

•	 Strategies are very localized both in 

scope and analysis

•	 Strategies and programs include:

o Utilization of existing resources 

to implement alternatives or services that are relatively common

o Marketing and education of all 

modal options and benefits

o Promotion of active transportation

•	 Use of sketch planning tools to estimate 

impacts of strategies

•	 Strategy scope and analysis are more 

activity-center oriented

•	 Strategies and programs include:

o Improvements to alternative modeso Incentives for alternative modes o Codify developer requirements and 

rationale

•	 Specialized tools and models used for TDM 

assessment

•	 TDM considered a city-wide effort and increasing 

acquiring regional/inter jurisdictional flavor 

•	 Strategies and programs include (moving beyond 

current experiences): 

o Implementation of TDM-supportive site 

design

o Establishment of alternative work 

schedules

o Coordination of employer serviceso Creation of specialized transit services

Integration of Strategies into Plans and Funding Programs 

•	 Short-term, ad-hoc projects 

included in plans with no dedicated source of funding

•	 Typically bike/walk projects are 

included

•	 Establishment of a city-wide TDM marketing fund which is used for projects including 

pilots

•	 Plans go beyond site development process 

with respect to TDM strategies

•	 TDM is included as a foundational strategy in the 

plans for sustainability

•	 Plans include long-term programs with dedicated 

funding

Monitoring and Evaluation of Progress Toward Objectives

•	 Typically self-reporting among 

developers and employers

•	 City plays active role in monitoring and 

evaluation including establishing reporting structures, collecting and monitoring specific data elements such as parking

•	 Monitoring and evaluation is consistent with region 

and standardized

•	 Data is used for objective-setting and decisionmaking

Planning Activities Level 1 Ad-hoc Level 2 Defined Level 3 Optimized
TDM | 131 

In general, TDM is being integrated into existing plans and planning processes. TDM is often mentioned 

in General Plans or Comprehensive Plans for cities as part their routine updating process. This is where 

the relationship between land use, parking, and TDM can be defined and exploited. As such, no new 

or specialized planning process needs to be developed. However, in the case of stand-alone TDM or 

climate action plans, a process may need to be established for the review and approval of the new 

plan. This may even require the appointment of new committees and advisory bodies. Some plans are 

developed through unique public/private partnerships, such as the plans directing the activities of TMAs 

or the development of a Transportation Management Plan for major developments or trip generators 

(e.g., hospitals, special event venues, stadia, etc.). It is also important that municipal TDM planning 

efforts be coordinated with regional or corridor-level TDM planning. Municipal programs (e.g., parking) 

and policies (e.g., site review) can be very important aspects of broader TDM strategies at the corridor 

or metropolitan level. Cities with active TDM policies and plans can encourage neighboring cities within 

their region to integrate TDM into their plans. Municipal efforts to manage demand can also be important 

mechanisms for realizing objectives with other metropolitan area plans, such as the Congestion 

Management Process. 

Other processes can be somewhat less formal, such as the role of TDM in the site review process. Many 

cities that allow and encourage TDM as a mitigation strategy do so via trip reduction or TDM ordinances 

that set the ground rules for negotiated or regulated TDM planning activities. As such, TDM plans are 

not developed until requested by city review staff or as proffered by developers. One lesson from many 

years of experience with this process is the need for well-established and documented guidelines. 

Developers and their agents are more willing to plan and implement meaningful TDM strategies when the 

process for developing these measures is transparent and fair. The process for developing TDM plans 

as part of the development review process can also be aided by other tools, such as the TDM planning 

simulation workshop process developed in Europe, part of the guidance on TDM and land use within the 

European Platform on Mobility Management (EPOMM).140

8.3 Actions to Move Local Planning Process from Level 1 to Level 2

Several specific actions can be suggested to move an agency’s local planning process from Level 1 (ad 

hoc integration of demand management) to Level 2 (defined integration). For each action, the rationale, 

an explanation, and examples are provided where available. Table 8.3 indicates the relative ease or 

difficulty of implementing each action. 

139 SHRP II, Guide for Improving Capability for Systems Operation and Management, TRB, prepared by Parsons Brinkerhoff, Report S2-L06-RR-2, 2011. 

140 European Platform on Mobility Management (http://www.epomm.eu/index.phtml?ID1=2180&id=2180)

Institutional Capability Maturity Model proposed by FHWA in its Guide for Improving Capability for Systems 

Operation and Management.139

Municipalities and local agencies with minimal experience in integrating TDM (ad hoc level) into their 

plans and policies might only be viewing TDM as a mitigation strategy for addressing the impact of traffic 

generated by new development. Moving to the next level (defined), a city might include TDM in most plans 

and policies as a means to increase travel choices and meet certain policy objectives, such as circulation 

or livability. In this case, TDM is likely one element of the overall general plan. Finally, when TDM becomes 

optimized (Level 3), TDM may become a central focus of sustainability or climate change plans if the city 

council adopts an overall “philosophy” of managing demand and encouraging sustainable transport. 

Table 8-2 provides specific examples of how localities might work to integrate demand management 

into regional transportation planning efforts. This matrix is intended to assist the reader in determining 

where his or her organization fits in terms of the capability levels described above. Once the reader has 

determined his/her agency’s capability level and identified the critical step on which the agency is focused, 

specific actions to move from one level to the next are suggested in the next section. 
TDM | 132 TDM | 11

P L A N N I N G – L O C A L 

Integration Actions Policy Support Ease of Implementation Cost Time Requirement Overall

Establishing Vision and Goals

1 Solicit broad stakeholder input into role of TDM in local plans and policies Low Low Low Moderate Low2 Educate local traffic commission and city council staff on TDM Low Low Low Low Low

Setting Objectives for TDM

3 Develop SMART objectives for TDM Low Low Low Low Low

4 Integrate TDM into TOD, Smart Growth and Complete Streets Initiative Moderate Moderate Low Low Moderate

Definition of Performance Measures

5 Shift TDM performance measures from outputs to outcomes Low Moderate Low Low Low

Assessment and Selection of Strategies and Programs to Support Objectives

6 Draw upon existing tools to improve TDM modeling and analysis Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate7 Assess impact of TDM beyond specific sites Moderate Low Low Low Low

Integration of Strategies into Plans and Funding Programs

8 Update plan review process and requirements for new developments Moderate Moderate Low Low Moderate9 Establish a TDM fund, providing improved travel choices and related services with city assuming a larger role Moderate Moderate Moderate Low Moderate

Monitoring and Evaluation of Progress Toward Objectives

10 Strengthen TDM performance evaluation and monitoring methods and means to report impacts Moderate Moderate Low Low Moderate

Table 8.3: List of Actions and Associated Level of Difficulty to Move Local Planning Process from Level 1 to Level 2
TDM | 133 

Action 1 – Solicit broad stakeholder input into role of TDM in local plans and policies

Rationale and Explanation – The key individuals involved in municipal TDM planning go well beyond 

city staff. The individuals involved in TDM planning will somewhat depend on how novel or routine TDM 

planning is and specific issues that might require the involvement of certain interests. The range of 

stakeholders might include:

• City staff, including: traffic, streets and/or transportation staff, planning and development review staff, 

city council staff, city manager, and specialized departments, such as parking, transit, or environment. 

• Transportation service operators, including: all transit service providers operating within the city, shuttle 

services, vanpool operators, carsharing companies, bike stations, etc. 

• Developers, including their planning contractors and on-site tenant services providers. 

• Employers, including those fulfilling trip reduction mandates, those at sites subject to traffic mitigation as 

well as other large and enlightened employers (including the city as an employer). 

• Business organizations, such as: chambers of commerce, business and industry councils, and TMAs. 

• Advocacy groups, including environmental groups, bicycle and walking advocates, and transit user 

groups. 

• Commute management organizations – providers of ridesharing and other TDM services, sometimes 

housed and/or funded by regional planning organizations but sometimes housed within municipal governments. 

• Owners and operators of other transportation facilities (e.g., transit stations, freight operators). 

Example – The Heathrow Transport Forum (UK) was formed to address growing traffic and access issues 

around the expanding airport. As part of a surface access strategy required by the national government, the 

Forum was comprised of adjacent municipalities, airport employers and operators, transportation providers, and other interests. The Forum was instrumental in developing a package of TDM strategies for airport 

employees that were available to area residents as well.141 

Action 2 – Educate local traffic commission and city council staff on TDM

Rationale and Explanation – TDM may be a rather foreign concept to those involved in local decisionmaking, given a traditional focus on streets and intersections. It will be important to educate decisionmakers about the benefits of supporting and implementing TDM as a means to address specific local 

transportation and quality of life objectives. 

Example – Many local planning and municipal organizations offer training and technical assistance on 

various initiatives, such as TDM. For example, the League of California Cities offers sessions on TDM 

planning as part of its various conferences and workshops. 

Action 3 – Developing SMART objectives for TDM

Rationale and Explanation – As with many transportation-related policies, objective setting often results 

in rather vague targets. In TDM, appropriate objectives might be to: offer more travel choices, reduce 

congestion, improve air quality, or assist commuters. Using a SMART objective setting process, TDM goals 

and objectives should be as precise as possible. This requires a more involved planning process to reach 

consensus, especially with regards to measurable targets, but it allows for a more robust planning and 

evaluation process that allows for better monitoring of objective attainment, strategy correction, and funding 

decision-making. 

141 http://international.fhwa.dot.gov/traveldemand/pl06015.pdf
TDM | 134 TDM | 11

P L A N N I N G – L O C A L 

Example – The Washington State 2006 CTR Efficiency Act continued a state mandate that goes back to 

1991. Cities and counties are able to set their own specific goals and targets for employee commute trip 

reduction, as long as they met the minimum state targets of a 10% reduction in single occupant commute 

trips by 2011 to address congestion and a 13% reduction in VMT to address GHG emissions. In the first 

three years of the program, 154 million VMT have been reduced at over 1,000 worksites, representing 

over a half a million commuters. This is estimated to have reduced highway delay by 8% in the Central 

Puget Sound region and almost 70,000 metric tons of GHG statewide. While the state legislation behind 

the CTR Efficiency Act was a major policy effort, the need for and ability to set quantifiable targets was 

fairly straightforward. 

Action 4 – Integrate TDM into TOD, smart growth, and complete streets initiatives

Rationale and Explanation – Many of the local initiatives to promote travel choices focus on concepts 

such as transit-oriented development, smart growth, and complete streets, designed to make transit 

use, bicycling, and walking more attractive to reduce VMT. However, most of these initiatives are oriented 

toward land use policies and design. TDM can be integrated into these initiatives in order to promote the 

use of these sustainable modes and provide incentives to use them. 

Example – Planning for transit improvements and transit-oriented development in the Dulles Corridor 

(Virginia/DC) includes aggressive employer-based TDM, parking management, and trip reduction 

requirements for new large-scale commercial developments. 

Action 5 – TDM performance measures shift from outputs to outcomes

Rationale and Explanation – Many of the precepts included in the regional TDM planning process, in terms 

of the objectives-driven, performance-based approach to transportation planning, apply at the municipal 

level as well.142 For example, the need to be outcome-based is very important to TDM. Many TDM efforts 

are judged on outputs (what services were delivered, what information was provided?) rather than on 

outcomes (did residents change travel behavior resulting in a measurable reduction in VMT?). Even so, 

some of the specific objectives within this recommended approach cite the number of local communities 

who will plan and implement key demand management strategies (e.g., shared parking policies) and look 

to city staff as a source of performance data. 

Example – The NYSDOT has developed new guidance for local TDM programs to develop outcomebased performance measures and related program objectives therein. 

Action 6 – Draw upon existing tools to improve TDM modeling and analysis

Rationale and Explanation – TDM analysis can often be very piecemeal and based on anecdotal evidence, 

rules of thumb, and sketch planning techniques, at best. However, several tools are available to assist 

with the evaluation of TDM strategies as part of the planning, alternatives analysis, and project selection 

process. Utilizing these tools largely requires the time and commitment to learn about the use of the tools 

in advance of the planning process. 

Example – Chapter 9 includes a description of several existing tools aimed at allowing for the 

quantification of TDM impacts for various strategies and packages of strategies. This includes the FHWA 

TDM Evaluation Model and the TRIMMS available from the CUTR (see more discussion in Section 9 on 

Tools and Techniques for Evaluating TDM). 

142 FHWA, Advanced Metropolitan Planning for Operations: An Objectives-driven, Performance-based Approach: A Guidebook, 2011. 
TDM | 135 

Action 7 – Assess impact of TDM beyond specific sites

Rationale and Explanation – TDM is widely viewed as most effective at the site-specific level. However, for 

TDM to be accepted as a means to address a broad set of objectives, the impacts of TDM on subareas, 

corridors, and city-wide need to be assessed. This can be accomplished by either aggregating sitespecific (e.g., employer or developer) impacts or measuring effectiveness on a broader level (such as 

resident travel surveys, etc.). 

Example – The Washington State CTR law requires worksites in urbanized counties to reduce vehicle trips 

and VMT. Standardized surveys, data collection, and analysis allow CTR results to be reported by city and 

county. 

Action 8 – Update plan review process and requirements for new developments

Rationale and Explanation – Beginning in the 1980s, many growing suburban cities enacted regulations 

that sought to mitigate the impact of new development on localized traffic. These ordinances 

directed planners to review site development plans with the intent of requiring TDM measures at new 

developments in order to mitigate vehicle trip generation. Many of these mandates are still in force, but 

a lack of staff continuity, changing conditions, and inconsistent or weak enforcement have minimized 

the lasting impact of these requirements. Cities could update their TDM ordinances in order to maximize 

effectiveness and applicability. 

Example – Several cities have recently updated their TDM ordinances, including Pasadena, California, 

and Fairfax, Virginia. In both cases, TDM requirements were modified to reflect empirical evidence on 

effectiveness of various TDM strategies and enhanced reporting and enforcement. 

Action 9 – City assumes larger role by establishing a TDM fund, providing improved travel 

choices and related services

Rationale and Explanation – Cities can assist with TDM implementation by establishing a TDM fund that 

could pay for innovative strategies and pilot studies, and serve as matching funds for private funds. In 

some cases, these funds can be supported by local sales tax initiatives and developer impact fees. In 

addition, cities are in a good position to expand the set of travel choices available to residents, workers, 

and visitors. This is especially true of “last mile” solutions to get commuters to and from their destinations. 

This might include: bike paths, connected sidewalks, shuttle services, telework assistance, etc. 

Example – The City of Rockville, Maryland, maintains a TDM fund that generates about $200,000 per year, 

from a transportation improvement fee levied on new development. The fund supports activities included 

in the city’s transportation demand management plan.143 Many cities have assisted with or provided 

carsharing services, such as CityCarShare in Berkeley, California. 

Action 10 – Strengthen TDM performance evaluation and monitoring methods and means to 

report impacts

Rationale and Explanation – Two areas where performance evaluation and reporting can be strengthened 

at the local level include self-monitoring and reporting to decision-makers. Many trip reduction 

requirements, on employers and developers, involve the self-reporting of program effectiveness. This 

can result in inaccurate, incomplete, or non-existent data being collected from the trip generators that are 

subject to these requirements. New methods for automated reporting of commuter behavior (see example 

from Redmond, Washington in section 8.5) can help avoid some of the issues with required surveying. 

Reporting of TDM results to city policy-makers is often lacking, or it may not be couched in terms that 

decision-makers can understand. 

143 http://www. rockvillemd. gov/transportation/plans. html
TDM | 136 TDM | 11

P L A N N I N G – L O C A L 

Example – Many TDM programs are monitoring travel behavior change through the use of commuter 

calendars, completed by commuters themselves and validated by supervisors. Many of these automated 

calendars are used to qualify users for incentives and giveaways. 

8.4 Actions to Move Local Planning Process from Level 2 to Level 3

Several specific actions can be suggested to move an agency’s local planning process from Level 2 

(defined integration of demand management) to Level 3 (optimized integration). Table 8.4 highlights the 

relative ease or difficulty of implementing each action in moving from Level 2 to Level 3. 

Action 1 – TDM becomes a primary means to improve livability, health, and quality of life

Rationale and Explanation – TDM has become a very common response to air quality and congestion 

issues and is growing in popularity as a means to address land use and freight issues. However, TDM 

can become much more humanized as a means to improve residents’ quality of life, including livability 

and health. Cities that link TDM and enhanced travel choices to citizens’ health and quality of life have the 

potential of creating a very personalized appeal for TDM. 

Example – Many cities cite the health benefits of walking and bicycling in their efforts to promote cityprovided facilities and programs. However, a growing number of TDM programs are citing the health 

benefits of all sustainable modes, in terms of reduced stress and improved personal safety (lower risk of 

accidents). 

Action 2 – Include TDM in efforts to integrate land use and transportation

Rationale and Explanation – As mentioned earlier, many efforts to integrate land use and transportation 

involve design improvements, such as transit-oriented development and sidewalk continuity. However, in 

order to make the travel choices enhanced through these design features more effective, TDM programs 

can provide the soft promotional support that induces drivers to switch to these more sustainable modes. 

Therefore, cities could better integrate TDM into their smart growth policies to make enhanced travel 

options utilized to the maximum extent. 

Example – Land use plans and policies seek to balance the desire for growth while minimizing its 

negative consequences. As such, TDM is a valuable and well-used tool for reducing traffic generated 

by new development. While some TDM plans for new development are based on desired mode split or 

proportion of projected vehicle trips reduced, some (as seen in the City of Irvine, CA, example below in 

section 8.5) are simply based on setting a cap on trip generation and monitoring of compliance. TDM 

strategies included in traffic mitigation plans are often based on the known or expected impacts of various 

strategies, but require periodic monitoring to assess whether agreed-upon targets are met. 

Action 3 – TDM becomes key part of city’s sustainability initiative

Rationale and Explanation – Many cities have developed sustainability policies, initiatives, programs, or 

even departments. TDM can become a key part of this initiative by providing a means for cities to improve 

the environment and maintain economic competitiveness while not compromising social inclusion. Cities 

can form a TDM subcommittee of its sustainability initiative. In fact, when TDM becomes a cornerstone of 

sustainability, a key goal of TDM is to develop and implement reliable travel choices. 

Example – The City of San Francisco’s Sustainability Plan includes a transportation element. The plan 

defines a sustainable transportation system as one in which people’s needs and desires for access 

to jobs, commerce, recreation, culture, and home are accommodated using a minimum of resources. 

Applying principles of sustainability to transportation is anticipated to reduce pollution generated 

by gasoline-powered engines, noise, traffic congestion, land devaluation, low density development, 

economic segregation, and injury to drivers, pedestrians, and cyclists. In addition, the costs of 
TDM | 137 

Integration Actions Policy Support Ease of Implementation Cost Time Requirement Overall

Establishing Vision and Goals

1 TDM becomes a primary means to improve livability, health, and quality of life Difficult Moderate Low Low Moderate2 Include TDM in efforts to integrate land use and transportation Difficult Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate3 TDM becomes key part of city’s sustainability initiative Low Moderate Low Moderate Moderate

Setting Objectives for TDM

4 TDM not viewed as counter to economic development goals Difficult Moderate Moderate Moderate Difficult

Definition of Performance Measures

5 TDM performance measures are linked to sustainability and livability Moderate Moderate Low Low Moderate6 Develop objectives and performance measures that include influence of parking Moderate Moderate Low Low Moderate

Assessment and Selection of Strategies and Programs to Support Objectives

7 Assess impact of local TDM activities on corridor and region Low Moderate Low Moderate Moderate

8 Develop new tools/approaches to incorporate all travel choices into the analysis process Low Low Moderate Moderate Low

Integration of Strategies into Plans and Funding Programs

9 Develop long-term funding strategy for TDM Difficult Difficult Low Moderate Difficult

Monitoring and Evaluation of Progress Toward Objectives

10 Adopt or develop a standardized approach to reporting TDM performance Low Low Moderate Moderate Low

Table 8.4: List of Actions and Associated Level of Difficulty to Move Local Planning Process from Level 2 to Level 3
TDM | 138 TDM | 11

P L A N N I N G – L O C A L 

commuting, shipping, housing, and goods also will be reduced. Ultimately, the plan foresees that 

“in a sustainable San Francisco, almost all trips to and within the City will be on public transit, foot or 

bicycle.”144

Action 4 – TDM not viewed as counter to economic development goals

Rationale and Explanation – TDM can be consistent with economic development goals by seeking to 

enhance mobility and accessibility, reduce congestion, and address air quality. If TDM is viewed as 

broadening travel choices, and not as strictly a means to inhibit car use, TDM can be part of a long-term 

strategy to make a city more attractive to development. This is in keeping with the definition of sustainable 

transportation discussed above. 

Example – The City of Lund, Sweden, implemented a more environmentally friendly transport plan in the 

mid-1990s that included bus rapid transit, TDM, and bicycle improvements. The goal was to maintain 

vehicle traffic levels at 1995 levels while allowing the city to grow. This was accomplished through the 

success of the plan and fact that travel demand growth was accommodated on alternative modes, rather 

than by driving.145

Action 5 – TDM performance measures are linked to sustainability and livability

Rationale and Explanation – In terms of setting objectives and measuring performance, many of the same 

objectives and performance measures used in regional plans will apply to municipal TDM plans and 

policies, especially those related to the core metrics related to vehicle trip, VMT, emissions, and energy 

reduction. However, cities possess some specific areas of influence, namely parking, land use, arterial 

management, and bicycle/pedestrian programs that may dictate the types of objectives and performance 

measures included in municipal plans. Going one step further, performance measures should be 

developed for new objectives, such as livability, and many of these measures may be somewhat 

subjective (e.g., residents’ perceptions about quality of life and travel choices) as well as quantitative 

(utilization of travel options by various disadvantaged user groups). 

Action 6 – Develop objectives and performance measures that include influence of parking

Rationale and Explanation – First, with respect to parking, parking management can include the 

management of parking supply, price, and demand. Specific objectives related to parking include:

• Parking supply caps.

• Off-street parking standard maximums.

• Establishment of parking districts and targeted functioning. 

• On-street parking pricing policies. 

• Relationship between parking and mode choice (e.g., transit use).

• Parking utilization (turnover, cruising, occupancy).

• Parking information. 

Many of these strategies can serve to manage travel demand by discouraging car use at certain times of 

day, in certain areas, or overall. Parking management has been shown to influence mode shift, especially 

transit use. From this, specific performance measures can be established to gauge the success of parking management policies and strategies in influencing travel demand. Most parking data are observed 

(occupancy, turnover, etc.) and this is a good source for assessing the temporal and spatial characteris144 http://www.sustainable-city.org/Plan/Transit/intro.htm

145 http://international.fhwa.dot.gov/traveldemand/pl06015.pdf
60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Bikes

Transit

Drive Alone

Percentage	Mode	Share

Year

Value	-	Changes	in	Commuter	Choice

1% 1% 2% 2%

Bikes

Transit

Drive Alone

5% 4% 4%

A Seven Year History

3%

60%

51% 53%

50% 49%

46%

43% 41%

41%

39%

43%

36% 36%

38% 35%

21%

TDM | 139 

tics of parking use, but in order to get at mode shift, surveys of parkers or travelers are needed to assess 

how and why behavior changed. 

Example – Parking policies, in conjunction with a comprehensive TDM program, in the Lloyd District near 

downtown Portland, OR, have resulted in a reduction of the drive-alone rate and an increase in transit use 

by 20 percentage points, as shown in Figure 8.1.146

Figure 8.1: Mode Shift from Lloyd District TDM Program (1997-2004)

Source: WSDOT, 2004

Action 7 – Assess impact of local TDM activities on corridor and region

Rationale and Explanation – As mentioned earlier, while TDM impacts are most often tied to very sitespecific program results, the ability to assess the wider impacts of TDM will be important to its broader 

acceptance. Cities can assess the temporal distribution of trips reduced from employer and developer trip 

reduction programs on area highways and on the region as a whole. 

Example – Using VMT reduction, volumes and speeds, estimates of reduction in delay can be derived. 

Going one step further, the CUTR has developed a methodology that merges mode shift data with a 

highway micro-simulation model to graphically show how employer trip reduction programs can reduce 

delay for a given highway segment.147 This research and examples of the graphic displays are shown 

earlier in this document. 

146 Lloyd District TMA, Lloyd District Partnerships Plan: A Case Study in Transportation Efficiency, accessed at http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/

F9571913-97CC-4891-8B0E-8F2685F914AF/0/Lloyd_District_Parking_management.pdf)

147 http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/sm/los/default.shtm
TDM | 140 TDM | 11

P L A N N I N G – L O C A L 

Action 8 – Develop new tools/approaches to incorporate all travel choices into the analysis 

process

Rationale and Explanation – Moving from the defined approach to a more optimized integration of TDM 

may require the development of tailored and specialized analytic tools to evaluate the effectiveness of 

TDM strategies in addressing key policy objectives. While many “off the shelf” tools now exist, in order 

to analyze the full set of TDM strategies and their impact across a myriad of objectives, specialized tools 

may be required. This might include new, tailored means of using the traditional four-step travel models 

or newer activity based models. It might also involve other new tools, such as the micro-simulation 

tool, developed by CUTR and discussed in earlier in this section, which uses employer TDM data and 

CORSIM. 

Example – The traditional four-step travel demand modeling process can be used to evaluate TDM 

strategies that can be analyzed in terms of time and cost variables. However, many off-model tools 

have been developed to analyze congestion pricing strategies, bicycle and walk strategies, and other 

strategies that cannot be expressed in terms of time and cost indicators. As mentioned above, a good 

discussion of the means to incorporate TDM into regional travel demand models is provided by CUTR in 

a report entitled “Incorporating Assumptions for TDM Impacts in a Regional Travel Demand Model.” This 

approach, which was developed for WSDOT, includes a specific TDM Assessment Procedure that uses 

the CUTR TRIMMS model and processes resulting TDM impacts through standard trip tables.148 In fact, 

the use of the TRIMMS model itself to perform cost/benefit analysis for TDM strategies could represent a 

significant movement toward mainstreaming TDM integration. 

Action 9 – Develop long-term funding strategy for TDM

Rationale and Explanation – If TDM is to be part of a longer-term strategy to reduce overall vehicle 

demand, then programs and projects need assurances that resources will be in place to fund them. 

Developer impact fees can be highly variable based on economic conditions. While many TDM programs 

are funded out of federal CMAQ funds, these funds have a distinct time limit (3 years). However, some 

TDM programs, especially in California, are partially funded through county sales taxes. 

Example – Many counties in California have a voter-approved 1⁄2 to 1 cent sales tax dedicated to 

transportation. Most of these funding programs include a broad set of roadway, transit, and TDM 

projects. The TransNet 20-year program in San Diego provides funding for transit and bicycle facilities. 

Measure M in Riverside County helps pay for TDM services and incentives. 

Action 10 – Adopt or develop a standardized approach to reporting TDM performance 

Rationale and Explanation – In order to provide an effective feedback loop to the objective setting and 

strategy selection process, standardized TDM evaluation methodologies are required. This might involve 

developing a tailored approach for a given MPO or adopting a widely accepted methodology. Such 

methodology development or adoption should be vetted with TDM professionals and researchers to 

assure that it is understandable, rigorous, and usable. 

Example – The MAX-SUMO monitoring and evaluation approach developed in Europe is easily adaptable 

to the U. S. experience for many TDM strategies. The methodology is described in Section 9 and 

graphically depicted in Figure 9.1. 

148 WSDOT, Incorporating Assumptions for TDM Impacts in a Regional Travel Demand Model, prepared by CUTR, report WA-RD-746. 1, March 2010. 
TDM | 141 

8.5 Best Practice Examples: Local Level TDM Integration 

Two examples of municipal or local TDM planning efforts and results are provided here: Irvine, 

California and Redmond, Washington. The Irvine case relates to the planning of TDM measures for 

new developments. The Redmond case involves the role of the city in both offering TDM services and 

managing demand at new or expanding developments. 

The Irvine Spectrum is a very large commercial and retail development in Orange County in southern 

California. It is a 5,000 acre business park and high-density development, which is now home to over 

3,600 companies employing in excess of 65,000 people. In 1986, the Irvine Company gained final 

development approval by the City of Irvine following an extensive consultative process and development 

of a transportation management plan. Transportation management goals and use provisions were 

assigned to the development permit. Planning requirements and goals were established in meeting the 

City of Irvine’s vision for successful development mitigation. Several demands were placed upon the 

developer including the establishment of a multi-modal transportation system including rail, bus, carand vanpooling, and preferential parking within the development. These permit provisions established 

goals and requirements for land use design that considered and planned for alternative transportation 

modes. Additionally, the development was permitted with trip generation targets and assigned permitted 

future growth planning goals. A TMA, Spectrumotion, was chartered to provide ongoing management 

of the transportation plan for the development and its tenants. The Spectrumotion TMA is charged 

with implementing the planning requirements through transportation goal attainment, alternative mode 

promotion and program development, and follow-up surveys and evaluations. The Irvine Company is 

responsible for permit compliance; it raises funding through tenant assessments to pay for programs and 

improvements. 

Tenant employee travel behavior and trip counts are made on a regular basis to assess fulfillment of the 

mitigation targets, especially on trip generation. There are five sectors within the Spectrum development. 

Spectrum 1, 3, 4, and 5 are covered by the permit. Each sector represents a phase of development, and 

the trip reduction requirements are different for each, both in terms of targets, and also performance 

measures. Some use average vehicle ridership; others use a trip limit per usable square footage. Key 

findings conclude that mode shift is occurring as planned and goals established in the growth and 

planning projections are being met. The permit trip generation caps have never been exceeded and are 

well within established limits. 149 

The City of Redmond, Washington, near Seattle, has used TDM as a key strategy to address municipal 

policies for over 20 years. The stated mission of TDM is to “improve mobility and achieve greater 

efficiency on the arterial system by offering and promoting alternatives to single occupant vehicle travel." 

The City’s TDM program is the principal means to achieve the mode split goals established in the overall 

city Master Plan. The city assists employers located within its boundaries to comply with the state CTR 

149 MAX, Integrating Land Use and Mobility Management, Case Study 28: Irvine, 2010 - http://www. epomm. eu/docs/mmtools/conference/C28_IrvineBusinessPark. doc

Irvine, California Irvine

Redmond Redmond, Washington
TDM | 142 TDM | 11 TDM | 11

P L A N N I N G – L O C A L 

law, as well as state mandates on environmental protection and growth management. Redmond also 

helped found and fund the Greater Redmond TMA, which represents most of the city’s large employers 

and developers and is now self-sufficient through membership dues. Redmond requires Transportation 

Management Programs of new and expanding development sites and sets targets based on parking 

allowances and the proportion of commuters who travel using alternative modes. These requirements 

also mandate specific supportive physical improvements at development sites, including preferential 

parking for carpools and vanpools, bicycle lockers and racks, employee showers and lockers, on-site 

connectivity to transit stops, and internal sidewalks and trails. 

One unique feature of Redmond’s TDM efforts, as described in the TDM element of the Master Plan, is 

R-TRIP (Redmond Trip Resource and Incentive Program). R-TRIP is aimed at reducing congesting and 

improving air quality by offering incentives to those who agree to use commute alternatives. It is open 

to anyone who lives or works in Redmond and offers a one-time financial incentive (cash, bus pass, or 

vanpool incentives) for those who participate and then a chance at prize drawings thereafter. Commuters 

keep track of their daily travel on the on-line incentive calendar (www.gortrip.com) shown in Figure 8.2. 

Figure 8.2: City of Redmond TDM Online Incentive Calendar

Source: www.gortrip.com

The results of Redmond’s TDM efforts are reported in the 2005 Transportation Master Plan TDM element 

and state that the R-TRIP program reduced over 2 million miles of travel in 2004 (more recent figures are 

several times that amount annually) and that employers complying with state CTR mandates had removed 

19,000 peak period trips from roads in and around Redmond.150 The TDM element of the Redmond 

Master Plan called for four new or expanded strategies: 

•	Continued implementation of TDM programs as a transportation mobility tool.

•	Development of residential TDM programs to achieve mode share goals.

•	Development of long-term strategy for marketing TDM, especially multi-modalism.

•	Development of a new TDM demonstration project each biennium to test and evaluate new concepts.

150 City of Redmond, Redmond Transportation Master Plan, 5f. Demand Management, 2005, available at http://www.redmond.gov/cms/one.

aspx?portalId=169&pageId=26754

27 28 29 30 1 2 3

4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11 12 13 14 15 16 17

18 19 20 21 22 23 24

25 26 27 28 29 30 31

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thur Fri Sat

October

My average one-way daily commute is: 15. 7 miles

VANPOOL - DRIVE

VANPOOL - RIDE

BIKE

WALK

BUS/TRANSIT

TELECOMMUTE

FLEX DAY OFF

CARPOOL 

RIDE CR

CARPOOL 

DRIVE

DRIVE

ALONE

DID NOT COMMUTE 
TDM | 143 

FHWA, Advanced Metropolitan Planning for Operations: An Objectives-driven, Performance-based Approach: 

A Guidebook, 2011). 

http://www.dot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/sm/los/default. shtm http://www.sustainable-city.org/Plan/Transit/

intro.htm

http://international.fhwa.dot.gov/traveldemand/pl06015.pdf

http://www.rockvillemd.gov/transportation/plans.html

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/livability/case_studies/guidebook/livabilitygb10.pdf

http://www.worldcarfree.net/wcfd/

http://international.fhwa.dot.gov/traveldemand/pl06015.pdf

Lloyd District TMA, Lloyd District Partnerships Plan: A Case Study in Transportation Efficiency, accessed at 

http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/NR/rdonlyres/F9571913-97CC-4891-8B0E-8F2685F914AF/0/Lloyd_District_Parking_

management.pdf)

MaxLUPO (http://www.epomm.eu/index.phtml?ID1=2180&id=2180)

SHRP II, Guide for Improving Capability for Systems Operation and Management, TRB, prepared by Parsons 

Brinkerhoff, Report S2-L06-RR-2, 2011. 

WSDOT, Incorporating Assumptions for TDM Impacts in a Regional Travel Demand Model, prepared by CUTR, 

report WA-RD-746.1, March 2010. 

KEY RESOURCES
TDM | 144 TDM | 11

P L A N N I N G – L O C A L 
TDM | 145 

TDM Evaluation, Effectiveness, Evaluation, 

and Implementation

Known Effectiveness of TDM Strategies

Transitioning from Planning to Implementation

Tools and Techniques for Evaluating TDM
TDM | 11

A major thrust of this desk reference is the 

need to better integrate TDM into the 

transportation planning process and, 

as discussed in Chapter 2, this involves the 

adoption of a new way of thinking about TDM 

as more than ridesharing. It also requires the 

consideration of TDM throughout the planning 

process. However, once TDM is appropriately 

positioned within the planning process, the 

technical work remains to select the most 

effective strategies for addressing specific 

policy objectives. Evaluation is the process of 

assessing and selecting strategies for inclusion 

in the plan and ultimately for implementation. 

There are two critical types of evaluation 

important to the planning process: a priori 

forecasting of estimated impacts and ex post 

facto measurement of actual results so as to 

measure progress against stated objectives. 

Forecasting is a well established part of the 

transportation planning process, and this chapter provides some guidance on tools for use in predicting 

the potential impact of TDM. However, the need for monitoring and evaluation, after the fact, is growing in 

importance within the objectives-driven, performance-based planning process. 

FHWA guidance on the objectives-driven, performance-based planning process for operations cites the 

following benefits of monitoring and evaluation to help transportation planners and other stakeholders:

• Better understand the effectiveness of transportation strategies and investments so transportation planners and operators can work together to devise more effective investment strategies to meet regional 

objectives.151

• Fine-tune the implementation of ongoing operational programs.

• Provide assistance in calibrating and refining planning tools and models, such as regional travel demand models, so that relationships and traveler responses are properly reflected.

• Spur greater collaboration between planners and operations managers in collecting and monitoring 

data, which can yield benefits in terms of both developing and refining operations objectives and performance measures as well as in identifying successful strategies. 

TDM | 146 TDM | 11

BCA Benefit/Cost Analysis

DOT Department of Transportation

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

HOT High Occupancy Toll

HOV High Occupancy Vehicle

LOS Level of Service

NCTR National Center for Transit Research

SOV Single Occupancy Vehicle

TDM Travel Demand Management

TEEM TDM Effectiveness Evaluation Model

TOD Transit Oriented Development

TRIMMS Trip Reduction Impacts of Mobility 

Management Systems

TRPP Trip Reduction Performance Program

TSM Transportation Systems Management

VMT Vehicle Miles Travelled

VTR Vehicle Trip Reduction

WTRM Worksite Trip Reduction Model

CHAPTER ACRONYM LIST

9 Tools and Techniques for Evaluating 

TDM 

151 FHWA, Advanced Metropolitan Planning for Operations: An Objectives-driven, Performance –based Approach – A Guidebook , SAIC, FHWAHOP-10-026, 2010, http://www. ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop10026/index.htm

EVALUATION
TDM | 147 

The ability to accurately monitor and evaluate TDM strategies will also allow for more knowledge on TDM 

effectiveness, as will be discussed in the next chapter. The careful measurement of impacts of TDM 

strategies will create a more informed knowledge base from which to develop more effective future plans. 

The remainder of this chapter provides guidance and resources on three topics related to TDM 

evaluation: modeling of TDM impacts, evaluation of actual results, and the role of cost effectiveness 

analysis. 

9.1 Forecasting Potential TDM Impacts

As TDM becomes more recognized by planners and policy-makers for its growing importance as a 

meaningful set of solution strategies, the need to rigorously and carefully forecast impacts becomes 

greater. Once objectives are set for transportation system performance and related elements, strategies 

need to be selected that will address and work to fulfill these objectives. Assessing the potential impact 

of TDM strategies in reducing travel demand is as important as assessing the impact of capacity 

enhancements in accommodating unmet demand. A clear distinction needs to be made at the outset 

– there might be significant differences in approach, rigor and methods, and resource requirements to 

evaluate the short-term impacts of a single, site-specific TDM measure (e.g., for funding selection) versus 

the long-term forecasting of a set of TDM strategies applied to a whole region. 

There are two general practiced approaches to estimating the potential impacts of TDM strategies: 

sketch planning and modeling. Sketch planning involves the use of simple factors – elasticities, 

comparative case study findings, and more qualitative approaches to assess the potential impacts of 

TDM – for a package of TDM strategies or individual strategies. One example of sketch planning involves 

the meta-analysis of how land use influences travel. This comparison provides weighted average travel 

elasticities of VMT, transit use, and walking with respect to the built environment variables (although none 

is greater than 0.39 and most are less – meaning that a 10 percent shift in land use characteristics will be 

expected to lead to a 4 percent reduction in VMT and alternative mode use).152 These variables include: 

density (population, employment, commercial FAR); diversity [land use mix (Entropy Index), jobs-housing 

balance]; design [street connectivity indexes (e.g. intersection densities, % of 4-way intersections, 

link/node ratios, etc.)]; destination accessibility (access by mode); and distance to transit, shopping, 

CBD. The effects of these simple factors are cumulative. While the effect of any one on VMT reduction 

and mode shift is small/moderate, the combined effects from improving upon several of these can be 

substantial. This may be a very appropriate approach for screening TDM measures and for comparing the 

relative impact of TDM to other solutions. For example, sketch planning might be used to represent the 

general benefits of emphasizing TDM within a regional transportation plan for screening purposes. 

However, caution should be taken when using single case studies or “rules of thumb” when evaluating 

TDM strategies, especially packages of strategies and longer-term planning horizons. Pointing to a 

single case example and transferring the results to another city and application is not a sound means to 

estimate the potential impact of a given TDM strategy. Likewise, using generalized rules of thumb, such 

as assuming that TDM can reduce vehicle trips by 10 to 15 percent, can lead to unrealistic expectations 

especially if policies and funding are insufficient to support that change. While some very focused, 

site-specific TDM programs, by aggressively using financial incentives, disincentives, and parking 

management, can reduce trips by much more than 15 percent, the ability to realize this impact over a 

larger base of travelers, trip generators, and geographic areas is doubtful without substantial changes in 

policies, resources, and background conditions. 

152 Reid Ewing and Robert Cervero, “Travel and Built Environment: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 767, Issue 3, 

June 2010. 
TDM | 148 TDM | 11 TDM | 11

Many transportation planning processes use some form of modeling to predict future outcomes 

of alternative plan elements. The four-step transportation modeling process: trip generation, trip 

distribution, mode choice, and trip assignment is a common approach that has been used for many 

years. Unfortunately, it is not well-suited to evaluate many TDM strategies. Common transportation 

models boil strategy attributes down to cost and time variables. In general, many TDM strategies cannot 

be adequately described in those terms (see discussion of TRIMMS model below). Also, in the mode 

choice step, the primary modes considered are car driver, car passenger, and transit rider. The ability to 

assess strategies to increase car occupancy and strategies that promote active transportation (bike and 

walk) and alternative work arrangements (telecommuting, compressed work weeks) is severely limited 

with traditional travel demand models. 

One common means for evaluating TDM strategies is to assume a reduction in overall “off the top” travel 

demand through the collective effectiveness of TDM measures and reducing trip generation by some 

percentage. While such an approach might be viable and adequate for representing the general benefits 

of TDM in a transportation plan, especially at regional levels, this approach is not suitable to evaluate 

specific TDM strategies and their interaction with smart capacity enhancements. For such applications, 

several “off-model” tools have been developed to systematically evaluate the effectiveness of TDM 

strategies with resulting outputs (vehicle trip, VMT, mode shift) results fed back into travel models in order 

to adjust each step in the process, especially mode choice and trip assignment. While some focus on 

TDM measures, others deal with related issues, such as the impact of land use or growth management 

measures to reduce VMT, as in the case of the scenario-based model developed by Bartholomew and 

Ewing153 and related tools such as the Southern California Association of Governments Sustainability 

Tool.154

Four TDM-specific models have been developed and used in various parts of the U.S.: 

• EPA COMMUTER Model.

• TDM Effectiveness Evaluation Model (TEEM).

• Worksite Trip Reduction Model (WTRM).

• Trip Reduction Impacts of Mobility Management Strategies (TRIMMS). 

These models have been developed for two purposes: to predict the impact of TDM measures on 

commuters and other travelers based on 1) employer-provided TDM measures and 2) governmentprovided incentives for alternative mode usage. While the models have been developed for the commuter 

target group, they have also been used for other target groups, such as schools, tourists, or any group 

where a set of baseline mode shares are available. They have been developed for use at the site-specific 

level, but have also been used to evaluate corridor and regional plans. Each is briefly discussed below. 

COMMUTER Model – The EPA COMMUTER Model is the oldest and most widely used model for 

planners to forecast the impact of various TDM programs, implemented by employers or by government 

entities in the form of incentives (public transport service improvements) or disincentives (parking 

charges). The COMMUTER Model v.2.0 evolved from the FHWA TEEM. As such, the model is over 20 

years old and has been used extensively by all levels of government and private employers in the U.S. 

The logit component of the model provides a pivot point tool to predict mode shift changes resulting from 

measures that change the time and/or cost of travel for a given mode choice. This feature also allows 

considering interactive effects. This means that TDM strategies do not just shift travelers from driving 

153 Keith Bartholomew and Reid Ewing, “Land Use-Transportation Scenarios and Future Vehicle and Land Consumption: A Meta-Analysis, Journal of 

the American Planning Association, October 2008

154 SCAG Sustainability Tool, http://www.scag.ca.gov/modeling/mtf/presentations/012710/mtf012710_SustainabilityToolDev.pdf, 2010.

EVALUATION
alone, but they can draw travelers from other alternative modes as is the case in the real world. The 

employer support program component is based on the professional judgment of the model developers, 

and is in the form of average modal share changes from supportive activities for those modes (such as 

guaranteed ride home services for those who ride public transport). A reliance on professional judgment 

is a distinct weakness of the COMMUTER Model.155

TDM Effectiveness Evaluation Model - TEEM is a post-processor spreadsheet-based model, which 

includes price and service point elasticities of demand to estimate potential changes in vehicle trips from 

these measures. TEEM was developed for WSDOT for use in predicting the impact of TDM measures 

and land use policies applied to activity centers in a corridor of planned highway reconstruction. TEEM 

also provides some guidance on how to assemble and evaluate packages of measures, to assure 

that counterproductive measures are not evaluated equally and that the net impact of these packages 

is not necessarily additive. An elasticity-based spreadsheet model is a simple and user-friendly tool, 

but can mask real complexities of some strategy interactions and does require specification of the 

starting conditions. Elasticity-based models estimate the impact of various measures and sum the 

impacts. Multimodal logit-based models (such as that in the COMMUTER Model) can account for some 

interactions between measures. For example, some measures will draw travelers from other sustainable 

modes, not just driving alone. A new bicycle program might draw people off of public transport as well as 

out of their cars. Interactive predictive models shift travelers from all modes based on newly introduced 

TDM measures.156

Worksite Trip Reduction Model - the WTRM, released in 2004, was developed for the Florida 

Department of Transportation and U.S. DOT under the National Center for Transit Research (NCTR) 

at the University of South Florida. This model has the greatest articulation of separate measures for 

consideration in predicting the impact of various packages of TDM measures. It includes over 100 

individual measures with some logical groupings for some of the analyses and reporting functions. The 

WTRM is based on a very large database of thousands of worksite travel plans, from Southern California, 

Tucson (AZ), and Seattle. Using a neural network formulation, WTRM analyzes time series data from 

required worksite reports to develop average changes in the vehicle trip rate (cars per 100 employees). 

The model is wholly experiential and based on conditions with low public transport shares (0-10%), 

modest carpool shares (10-20%), and high drive alone shares (70-90%), perhaps appropriate for areas 

with high starting drive alone shares.157 Merging datasets improved the model. For example, the neural 

network model built with equally sampled data from the three areas performed better for Los Angeles than 

the model built with only data from Los Angeles. 

Trip Reduction Impacts of Mobility Management Strategies, or TRIMMS, first released in 2007 with 

version 3.0 released in 2012, was developed under NCTR and builds upon previous model development 

experience to create a hybrid model that combines the features of both the WTRM and TEEM models. 

The TRIMMS model documentation includes a comparison with the EPA COMMUTER Model and WTRM, 

building upon their strengths. TRIMMS uses constant elasticity of substitution trip demand functions to 

evaluate “harder” measures (that can be expressed in cost or time) and the cross-sectional benchmarking 

results of the WTRM for “softer” support and informational measures. TRIMMS was developed for a 

single worksite or a subarea with a predefined travel market. The newer version of the model (TRIMMS II) 

focuses on municipal and regional decision-making and allows estimating the impact of land use controls 

on transit ridership levels. These strategies include land use policy changes affecting gross population 

density and retail establishment density levels, transit station accessibility improvements, and transit155 The Commuter Model v 2.0 and related guidance documents can be accessed at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/stateresources/policy/pag_transp. 

htm#cp

156 Information on the TEEM Model and its application in the Seattle region can be found at: http://www.dksassociates.com/admin/paperfile/

WSDOT%20TEEM.pdf

157 Information on the WTRM model can be found at http://www.nctr.usf.edu/pdf/473-14. pdf and the model at http://www.nctr.usf.edu/worksite/ 

TDM | 149 
TDM | 11

oriented development initiatives. One unique function of the TRIMMS model is the ability to evaluate a full 

range of societal benefits (beyond VMT and emissions) against program costs. As such, the effectiveness 

and costs of various measures and packages of measures can be evaluated. The outputs from the 

TRIMMS Model are more extensive than those of the other models, including: change in mode shares, 

change in social externalities (i.e., the impact of car use on the environment, congestion, safety, etc.), 

program benefit/cost ratio, and detailed emission impacts by pollutant.158

In comparing the four predictive models, as shown in the Table 9.1 below, the TRIMMS model may have 

the greatest applicability for use in the transportation planning process and the range of TDM strategies 

to be tested. As stated above, TRIMMS combines the power of demand elasticities to predict the 

impacts of “harder” measures with the experiential richness of a cross-sectional analysis of actual TDM 

implementation results. TRIMMS has the added feature of a cost effectiveness and benefit/cost estimation 

module. The model inputs are not too onerous, but do provide an adequate baseline for predictive 

purposes. The TRIMMS 3.0 Model estimates a wide range of emission pollutants and incorporates a new 

module that evaluates the impact of land use strategies on transit patronage. TRIMMS uses the emission 

inventory of the Environmental Protection Agency Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator (MOVES2010a)159

This model enables users to conduct cost-benefit assessments for many strategies aimed at reducing 

emissions without the cost and expertise required by more sophisticated models. It also benefits from 

improved user-friendliness, unlike the COMMUTER Model, which can be rather cumbersome to use.

TDM/

MODEL

Source of Model 

Development Data Basis of Change Special Features

EPA 

COMMUTER 

Model 

Informed professional 

judgment – Delphi 

Logit model 

coefficients 

Accounts for interactive 

effects

TDM 

Effectiveness 

Evaluation 

Model (TEEM)



Based on case study 

data

 Point elasticities, price and 

service



Model structure useful; 

guidance on how to combine measures

Worksite Trip 

Reduction 

Model (WTRM)

 Multi-year, obligatory 

employer travel plan 

data 

Neural 

network and 

experimental

Data based on 

thousands of 

employer trip 

reduction plans



Enumeration of a large 

number of employer TDM 

strategies and interactive 

effects. Has many strategies 

but provides only changes 

to vehicle trip reduction 

rates at the worksite

Trip 

Reduction 

Impacts 

of Mobility 

Management 

Strategies 

(TRIMMS)



Based in cross sectional 

case studies

 Point 

elasticities, 

price and 

service and 

experiential 

data



Model structure useful 

– focus on benefits and 

costs- Includes many strategies – focus on benefits 

and costs- good hybrid 

approach 

Table 9.1: Comparative Assessment of TDM Models

TDM | 150

EVALUATION

Note - Dark circles in the table are better than light circles. 

158 Information on the TRIMMS model can be found at http://www.trimms.com

159 US Environmental Protection Agency, MOVES (Motor Vehicle Emission Simulator, available at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/models/

moves/index.htm
TDM | 151 

9.2 Measuring Actual TDM Impacts

Why evaluate TDM strategies after they are implemented? Of course, funders and program managers 

want to know how their programs and projects are doing. Evaluation is a sound management practice. In 

some cases, contracts require monitoring for performance-based provisions of the funding agreements. 

But evaluation should also be seen as an integral part of the planning process. 

As stated earlier, it is important that TDM strategies within transportation plans be geared to address 

specific policy objectives, as enumerated in Chapter 3. With each objective, specific performance 

measures should be developed, monitored, assessed, and reported in order to determine the level of 

fulfillment achieved. This is at the heart of the objectives-driven, performance-based planning for operations 

process. Developing a well-conceived, balanced set of multiple performance measures for assessing 

the ability of TDM to fulfill specific policy objectives and to assess the comparative contribution of TDM 

to meeting transportation plan goals is very important. Monitoring and evaluation need to be built into 

the planning process as a concrete feedback loop to inform the overall effectiveness of TDM (and other 

measures) in addressing plan objectives. 

Therefore, developing and tracking pertinent performance measures is a key to an enlightened planning 

process. A range of performance measures can be enumerated when considering TDM in light of the 

broader definition used in this report. For example, the following set of mobility-related performance 

measures was developed for a statewide TDM planning process for the Utah DOT160 (Table 9.2). 

Type of Measure Examples Intended Use

Traffic operations measures Percent of highway system operating at LOS D or better

Vehicle-hours of travel spent under 

congested conditions

Total vehicle-hours of delay; hours 

of delay per person

Measure ability to move vehicles at 

expected speeds on the highway 

system

Mobility measures Average travel time between point 

A and B

Average speed of travel across 

corridor

Travel time index (ratio of travel time 

in the peak period to travel time at 

free-flow conditions)

Measure speed of movement 

through a corridor or between key 

destinations

Reliability measures 95th percentile travel time – for general purpose & HOV (Seattle)

Planning time index (ratio of highest 

peak travel time in a month to offpeak travel time)

Measure ability of highway system 

users to reach destinations within 

an expected time

Table 9.2: Mobility-Related Performance Measures in Current Practice 

Source: (Cambridge Systematics, 2009)

160 Cambridge Systematics, “Best Practices in Multimodal Congestion and Mobility Performance Measures,” prepared for Utah DOT, Technical Memo 

dated June 17, 2009.
TDM | 152 TDM | 11 TDM | 11

Type of Measure Examples Intended Use

VMT reduction or mode share 

targets

Statewide VMT reduction target 

(Washington State)

Local VMT reduction targets 

(Oregon – Transportation Planning 

Rule)

Mode share targets (Seattle, Oregon)

Reduce environmental impacts associated with transportation

Related to extent to which mobility objectives are met by non-SOV 

modes 

Multi-modal levels of service Bicycle, pedestrian, and transit LOS 

measures (Florida)

Pedestrian and bicycle indicators 

(Boulder)

Measure quality of service for each 

mode; roll up into an area-wide 

rating 

Accessibility measures Destinations (jobs, services, etc. ) 

within X minutes travel time of the 

average resident, by mode (San 

Francisco, Columbus)

Measure system-wide accessibility; compare by mode, population 

group, etc. 

Customer-focused measures Awareness of and satisfaction with 

transportation services and mobility 

options (European Union)

Measure ability of transportation 

alternatives to meet travel needs

The specification and use of TDM-related performance measures, such as those enumerated in the 

table above, can inform broader performance measures, including those not directly related to the 

transportation system, such as: livability; economic development or gross regional product; other 

economic benefits such as household transportation spending; per capita income; health measures, such 

as obesity and asthma rates; and safety measures, such as crashes and injuries. TDM performance could 

also impact the performance of other parts of the transportation system, such as transit ridership and auto 

ownership. 

Measures specific to more traditional TDM can be found within the FHWA guidance report “The Building 

Blocks of a Model Transportation Plan Incorporating Operations.” That report provides sample 

performance objectives for: employer trip reduction programs, commuter shuttle service, carpool/vanpool 

programs, walking/bicycling initiatives, parking management, and marketing. It also provides excerpts 

from a model transportation plan that incorporates operations, including TDM.161 

Once performance measures are selected, the focus shifts on how to monitor and measure fulfillment. 

Monitoring TDM performance is often rather different from highway or even transit operations, where the 

primary data collection method is direct observation. Counting cars and transit riders along spatial and 

temporal dimensions is a key focus of performance monitoring for these strategies. However, TDM is all 

about choices and, therefore, the need exists to monitor the acceptance and use of travel choices and to 

measure a shift in behavior to a more sustainable mode. This often requires user surveys to assess not 

only how travelers are behaving, but whether this amounts to a shift from another travel pattern and even 

why the shift was made (what was the impetus or incentive). Finally, evaluation should be objective, often 

suggesting that a third party conduct the evaluation given the somewhat more interpretive nature of TDM 

behavioral data. 

161 FHWA, Advanced Metropolitan Planning for Operations: The Building Blocks of a Model Transportation Plan Incorporating Operations – A Desk 

Reference, SAIC, FHWA-HOP-10-027, 2010, http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop10027/index.htm 

EVALUATION
TDM | 153 

A standardized methodology for evaluating TDM strategies does not yet exist in the U.S. However, 

Canadian and European transportation interests have developed common methods and approaches 

and these can help inform planners and other transportation professionals in planning for evaluation. 

The Transport Canada-funded Canadian Guidelines for the Measurement of TDM Initiatives162 and 

the European Commission-funded Max-SUMO guidelines163 are based on a similar approach and 

set of assessment levels. The Max-SUMO process, developed as part of the MAX project,164 offers a 

structured approach to evaluating TDM strategies from user awareness and acceptance, through mode 

shift, through to calculated system impacts. These assessment levels are illustrated in Figure 9.1. The 

approach is focused on implementation of a new TDM program or service or incentive to a given target 

travel market. The Max-SUMO reference also provides guidance on setting objectives and on data 

collection and monitoring. 

162 HDR/iTRANS, Canadian Guidelines for the Measurement of TDM Initiatives , prepared for Transport Canada, March 2009, http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/

programs/environment-urban-guidelines-practitioners-tdmguide2009-1-1675.htm 

163 ILS, et al, MAX Work Package B Final Report, Successful Travel Awareness Campaigns and Mobility Management Strategies, funded by European 

Commission, 6th Framework Program, November 2009, http://www.epomm.eu/index.phtml?ID1=2359&id=2359

164 The MAX-project ran from 2006 to 2009 and was the largest research project on Mobility Management within the EU’s sixth framework programme. 

The MAX consortium, of 28 partners, served to extend, standardise and improve Mobility Management – it did so in the fields of quality management, 

campaigns, evaluation, modeling and land use planning. http://www.max-success.eu/ 

Figure 9.1: Max-SUMO Assessment Levels 

Source: EPOMM

Finally, once evaluation results are compiled, the findings should be presented in terms that both policymakers and other transportation professionals can understand. Each transportation discipline has its 

own language, terminology, and abbreviations, and TDM is no exception. For example, policy-makers 

and even transportation engineers do not necessarily understand the concept of vehicle trip reduction 

because it is rather abstract. It is better to convey TDM findings in terms to which other transportation 

planners can relate, for example reporting vehicle trip reduction as the number of cars removed from 

Assessment Levels

Outputs & activities

Awareness of 

mobility services

Usage of mobiltity 

Services

Satisfaction with 

mobility services 

provided

Acceptance of 

individual mobility 

behavior

Experimental 

individual mobility 

behavior

Satisfaction with 

mobility option 

offered

Permanent Individual 

travel behavior

System impact

A

B

C

D

Services Provided Mobility option offered Effects

E

F

G

H 

Mobility 

Management

Mobility 

Management

System impact System impact

New 

Travel Option

I 
TDM | 154 TDM | 11 TDM | 11

a particular road or corridor or the equivalent reduction in delay or increase in person throughput. In 

fact, TDM is the only transportation solution set that focuses on the “trip not taken” rather than on the 

accommodation of vehicles. As such, TDM cost effectiveness can compare the cost of removing vehicles 

from the road as compared to accommodating travel via transit, rail, paratransit, and road capacity 

improvements. 

9.3 Cost Effectiveness

Given that the transportation planning process is often fiscally constrained and the analysis of strategies 

ultimately involves an assessment of costs and funding opportunities, it is important to evaluate the cost 

effectiveness of TDM strategies. The analysis can take three forms: cost effectiveness, comparative cost 

effectiveness, and benefit/cost analysis. 

Cost effectiveness is fairly straightforward and involves dividing total program or project costs by 

total impacts or outcomes, for example, the cost per mile of travel reduced or cost per ton of emissions 

reduced. A recent evaluation of three “Sustainable Travel Towns” in the U.K. assessed total VMT reduction 

as a result of the various TDM programs implemented in all the cities and assessed these total findings 

against the total public investment in TDM.165 This provides an indication of the cost of an intended 

program outcome. The resulting cost effectiveness measure was that the sustainable transportation 

efforts resulted in reducing the cost for a mile of travel by about 4 pence (US$0.06). This provides an 

indication of the cost effectiveness of the program, which resulted in overall decreases in per capita car 

use and shifts to bike, walk, and public transit. The evaluation also revealed that the per capita cost of the 

program was about US$15 per resident, a measure of program inputs rather than program outcome. 

Comparative cost effectiveness takes this analysis to the next level to help policy-makers and planners 

understand the relative value of TDM strategies versus other solution strategies. For example, one 

evaluation of the ridesharing program in Los Angeles County166 concluded that the program maintained a 

commuter in a ridesharing mode, or the equivalent, removed a car from the regional highway system, for 

about $1 per day. When compared to other mobility and congestion relief strategies implemented by the 

agency, TDM was seen to be comparatively cost effective. For example, the cost effectiveness analysis 

concluded that the operation and maintenance of a new light rail line in LA was going to cost about $2.50 

per new daily rider. Therefore, TDM was viewed as a more cost effective means to remove cars from the 

highway system than the new light rail system. These findings were used in planning and programming 

decisions by the agency. Ultimately, comparative cost effectiveness can be a powerful tool to show the 

cost of removing a car through demand management versus the cost of accommodating that car with 

capacity improvements or expansion. 

Another example of basing program decisions on comparative cost effectiveness is provided by the 

State of Washington’s Trip Reduction Performance Program (TRPP).167 The legislature created TRPP 

in 2003 as a way for the state to fund organizations that implement sustainable, cost-effective projects 

that increase the capacity of the transportation system by reducing the number of drive-alone trips and 

VMT for commute purposes. TRPP funds are awarded on a competitive basis to entrepreneurs, private 

employers, public agencies, nonprofit organizations, developers, and property managers who provide 

financial incentives to commuters for using alternatives to driving alone. The purpose of the program is 

to create a trip reduction “market” in which WSDOT takes “bids” from organizations to reduce commute 

trips. WSDOT sets a cap on the price it is willing to pay per trip reduced over the course of a year. The 

program is different from a standard grant program in that the final award for a contractor is dependent on 

165 Department for Transport, The Effects of Smarter Choice Programmes in the Sustainable Travel Towns: Summary Report, February 2010

166 LDA Consulting, LA Ridesharing Evaluation: Cost Effectiveness Analysis, prepared for Los Angeles County MTA, 2005 

167 http://www.ecy.wa.gov/climatechange/2008CATdocs/IWG/tran/tran_VMT05_TRPPbriefing_V07.pdf

EVALUATION
TDM | 155 

the performance of a project. Contractors are eligible for financial bonuses (up to a cap) if their projects 

exceed their goals. 

Finally, transportation projects are often justified with Benefit/Cost Analysis (BCA). This analysis monetizes 

the potential benefits of a project or program and compares them to program costs. A B/C ratio greater 

than 1.0 reveals that the benefits outweigh the costs. The difficulty in this analysis is monetizing costs and 

benefits. On the cost side, like any transportation project, TDM often involves many types of costs: some 

are capital, but many TDM costs are staffing, incentives, marketing, and other operational costs. However, 

many TDM programs/services are not fully allocating the costs by project or activity, which can distort 

results. Also, many TDM costs are borne by the private sector, such as employer and developer efforts. 

But as with any BCA, the difficulty comes in trying to monetize societal benefits, such as congestion relief 

(often expressed as time savings), safety improvements (expressed as crash reduction and injury cost 

savings), environmental improvement (also expressed as health cost savings), etc. However, with all the 

drawbacks of accurately estimating costs, BCA is a powerful and well recognized tool that is available to 

the TDM community. In fact, given the relatively modest costs in relation to benefits, TDM programs often 

have a very good B/C ratio. BCA has already been incorporated into the TRIMMS Model (v. 3. 0). TRIMMS 

includes monetized benefits, by region of the U.S., for the following: congestion, air and noise pollution, 

climate change, fuel consumption, and health and safety. The TRIMMS model, using TDM cost data and 

derived impact estimates from the model, can generate B/C ratios for TDM packages of TDM strategies 

and uses Monte Carlo simulation to reflect the uncertainty in various inputs. 
TDM | 156 TDM | 11

Cambridge Systematics, “Best Practices in Multimodal Congestion and Mobility Performance Measures,” 

prepared for Utah DOT, Technical Memo dated June 17, 2009. 

SAIC, with ICF and KAI, “Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: An Objectives-Driven, PerformanceBased Approach - A Guidebook, prepared for FHWA, Report No. FHWA-HOP-10-026, February 2010. 

SAIC, with ICF and KAI, “Advancing Metropolitan Planning for Operations: The Building Blocks of a Model 

Transportation Plan Incorporating Operations - A Desk Reference, final draft prepared for FHWA, Report No. 

FHWA-HOP-10-027, April 2010. 

HDR/iTRANS, Canadian Guidelines for the Measurement of TDM Initiatives , prepared for Transport 

Canada, March 2009, http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/programs/environment-urban-guidelines-practitionerstdmguide2009-1-1675.htm

Concas, Sisinnio, “TRIMMS Aims to Quantify Net Social Benefits of Vehicle Trip Reduction” in FLOW, Vol. 3, No. 

2, Newsletter of National Center for Transit Research, March 2010. 

ILS, et al, MAX Work Package B Final Report, Successful Travel Awareness Campaigns and Mobility 

Management Strategies, funded by European Commission, 6th Framework Program, November 2009, http://

www.epomm.eu/index.phtml?ID1=2359&id=2359

LDA Consulting, LA Ridesharing Evaluation: Cost Effectiveness Analysis, prepared for Los Angeles County MTA, 

2005 

Reid Ewing and Robert Cervero, “Travel and Built Environment: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of the American 

Planning Association, Vol. 767, Issue 3, June 2010. 

Keith Bartholomew and Reid Ewing, “Land Use-Transportation Scenarios and Future Vehicle and Land 

Consumption: A Meta-Analysis, Journal of the American Planning Association, October 2008. 

SCAG Sustainability Sketch Planning Tool, http://www.scag.ca.gov/modeling/mtf/presentations/012710/

mtf012710_SustainabilityToolDev.pdf, 2010

Sisinnio Concas and Philip L. Winters. Estimating Costs and Benefits of Emissions Reduction Strategies 

for Transit by Extending the TRIMMS Model” final report prepared for Florida Department of Transportation, 

funded by National Center for Transit Research. January 2012. http://www.nctr.usf.edu/wp-content/

uploads/2012/02/77932-final.pdf

KEY RESOURCES

EVALUATION
TDM | 157 

10 Known Effectiveness of TDM 

Strategies 

I

n selecting TDM strategies to address 

key public policy objectives, it is useful for 

planners to know how effective they might be. 

While the previous chapters provide guidance 

and references on emerging approaches to 

evaluate and model TDM effectiveness, the 

empirical evidence on TDM effectiveness is 

somewhat sporadic and incomplete. It is also 

difficult to compare across all measures, as 

the performance measures and method of 

evaluation vary from one measure to the next. 

Studies often lack controls, and significant 

exogenous variables such as the price of 

gasoline and unemployment rates affect travel 

behavior changes. With those caveats, some 

rigorous and thoughtful evaluations have been 

undertaken, and this chapter presents some 

of known impacts of demand management 

strategies. Much of this effectiveness 

research focuses on air quality benefits given 

the application of TDM to conformity and 

environmental issues over the past 20 years. 

After presenting some of the published findings 

on TDM effectiveness for all policy objectives, this chapter concludes with a master table of policy 

objectives and TDM measures that indicate the relative effectiveness of the strategies in measurably 

fulfilling the objectives. 

10.1 Overview

Before presenting some of the key references on TDM effectiveness, some general comments can be 

made about TDM effectiveness:

• One Size Does Not Fit All – TDM effectiveness is highly dependent on the application setting, complementary strategies, nature of the travel market segment being targeted, and even the “vigor” with 

which TDM is implemented and promoted. Unlike many physical improvements, TDM strategies require 

some amount of education and outreach. This is all to say that the transferability of TDM strategy effectiveness is highly dependent on local conditions. Some of the more subjective evaluation findings 

on why a given TDM initiative was more successful in one location over another are issues such as the 

presence of a local champion, a history of alternative transportation, and the appropriate selection of a 

CMAQ Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality

DOT Department of Transportation

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

GHG Greenhouse Gas

HOT High Occupancy Toll

HOV High Occupancy Vehicle

LOS Level of Service

SMART Smart, Measurable, Achievable, 

Realistic, and Time-bound

SOV Single Occupancy Vehicle

TCRP Transportation Cooperative Research 

Program

TMD Travel Demand Management

TOD Transit Oriented Development

TSM Transportation Systems Management

VMT Vehicle Miles Travelled

VTR Vehicle Trip Reduction

VTRM Worksite Trip Reduction Model

CHAPTER ACRONYM LIST
TDM | 158 TDM | 11

target market of travelers. So, to use another cliché, there is “no one recipe for success” when it comes 

to TDM effectiveness. There are “ingredients” such as parking pricing that are correlated to program 

success. However, correlation does not prove causality. 

• TDM Impacts are Largely Localized – TDM effectiveness is most readily measured at a localized 

level, and this appears to be where the greatest impacts can be found. TDM is applied to specific worksites, developments, employment centers, venues, or activity centers. Localities with well-defined travel 

markets tend to produce the most readily available and significant impacts. When the impact of TDM at 

a broader geographic level is sought, say at the corridor, city-wide, or regional level, the localized nature 

of TDM effectiveness diffuses the results at a broader scale. One study of implementing mandatory trip 

reduction programs in the Twin Cities, with strong parking management in a mixed use setting, showed 

that the programs would reduce vehicle trips by 8 to 27 percent at affected worksites translating to 

only a 2 percent peak period traffic reduction on the adjacent interstate.168 However, small changes in 

demand (total demand or the spatial or temporal distribution of travel demand) can significantly affect 

traffic flow in congested locations and times. Likewise, the benefits of demand management accrue to 

both those who switch to sustainable modes as well as all travelers, including solo drivers (in terms of 

reduced delay, improved air quality, safety, etc.).

• Travelers Respond to Their Wallets - Most evaluation studies point to the overwhelming effectiveness of financial incentives and disincentives to manage demand. At one level, this makes sense as 

price influences demand in a classic microeconomic analysis. Cordon pricing in London and Stockholm 

have reduced traffic volumes entering the city center by as much as 20%.169 Parking pricing is another 

widely accepted demand management technique. Adding or increasing parking charges at worksites 

can produce dramatic mode shifts, as reported in Shoup’s seminal reference, The High Cost of Free 

Parking.170 However, these examples relate to key disincentives to car use. In the U.S., TDM programs 

focused on modest financial incentives have been highly effective in inducing a shift to more sustainable modes. These incentive programs are often in the form of “Try-It-You’ll-Like-It” inducements. For 

example, the Atlanta Clean Air Campaign’s Cash for Commuters offers drive-alone commuters a daily 

cash incentive ($3/day) for using an alternative mode (carpool, vanpool, transit, bike, walk) for up to 90 

days. An independent evaluation showed that the incentive caused 1,800 commuters to switch modes, 

resulting in 1,300 fewer vehicle trips and 30,000 VMT on the region’s highways. More importantly, over 

70% of incentive recipients continued their new commute mode after the subsidy lapsed, and half were 

still using a non-drive alone mode one year later.171 In the Netherlands, congestion management efforts 

have resorted to paying commuters to stay off backed-up highways during the peak, so-called Rush 

Hour Avoidance.172 Financial levers, even modest amounts, can influence travel behavior in a very 

significant manner. 

• Parking Influences Travel Choices - Parking management is another widely accepted strategy to effectively change travel behavior, especially mode shift, time shift, and location shift. Parking pricing was 

mentioned above, but parking supply management can be effective as well. If parking is tight, meaning that all cars cannot be accommodated if everyone drives alone, commuters will adapt by sharing 

rides, shifting to transit, or even bicycling or walking if the distance allows. One study of developer TDM 

requirements revealed an 11-21% reduction in parking demand among worksites with aggressive TDM 

programs.173 Travel demand can be influenced by time of day and short- vs. long-term parking rates to 

reduce travel, including cruising for parking, during congested periods. 

168 TCRP, Report 95 – Chapter 19 – Employer and Institutional TDM Strategies: Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes, 2010. 

169 FHWA, “Managing Travel Demand: Applying European Perspectives to U. S. Practice,” Report No. FHWA-PL-06-015, May 2006.

170 Shoup, Donald, The High Cost of Free Parking, Planners Press, 2005. 

171 Center for Transportation and Environment (CTE),The Clean Air Campaign, Cash for Commuters Program, Report on April 2004 Follow-up Surveys, 

2004, http://www.dot.state.ga.us/informationcenter/programs/environment/airquality/Documents/pdfs/clean_air_campaign_cash_for_commuters_program_report_on_april_2004_follow_up_surveys.pdf. 

172 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.

173 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.

C O S T- E F F E C T I V E N E S S 
TDM | 159 

• Packaging is Key - TDM strategies are most effective when packaged into logical, complementary 

packages to realize synergistic effects. On the other hand, some strategies do not complement one 

another. One example of an unintended consequence from traditional TDM is flex-time and carpooling. 

Some employers who implement flex-time strategies as an employee perk or to address congestion at 

parking entrances have found that this can also serve to discourage ridesharing arrangements, which 

tend to do better with set work hours. At the same time, flexibility could reduce the peak period volumes and improve flow without changing mode split. Looking at some newer strategies, such as HOT 

lanes, efficiency improvements can also work to discourage some ridesharing arrangements. HOT lane 

projects which need to raise vehicle occupancy requirements from 2+ to 3+ in order to create sufficient capacity to sell may serve to break apart existing two-person carpools who choose to drive alone 

in the mixed flow lanes rather than pay a toll or find another rider. 

But complementary measures can lead to greater results than strategies implemented alone. The effect 

of many TDM strategies is multiplicative: the impact of any one measure on VMT reduction or mode shift 

might be modest, but the combined effects from improving upon several, complementary measures 

can be substantial. For example, systems management improvements, such as ramp metering, can 

be complemented with provisions for HOV bypass lanes, employer trip reduction programs in the 

corridor, and traveler information that includes HOV time savings among the traffic statistics provided. 

One study concluded that employer TDM programs that combined incentives and improved commute 

alternatives experienced an average trip reduction of almost 25%, where those implementing incentives 

alone realized a 16.4% reduction and alternatives alone 8.5%.174 As one international TDM study put 

it: “Experience throughout the OECD region has shown that... packaged, complementary solutions are 

usually more effective than a single measure.”175

• TDM is Not a Solution to All Transportation Problems – TDM can be highly effective at a relatively 

low cost (as compared to capacity enhancements) when applied in the right place, at the right time for 

the right travel market. However, TDM, in and of itself, is not adequate to solve congestion, air quality, 

energy, and other urban woes. Too often the expectations are unstated or disconnected from allocated 

resources and incompatible policies (e.g., developers are required to build a minimum number of parking spaces, often offered for free to employees and customers, that serves to generate even more driving).176 As mentioned above, TDM is most effective, or at least most measurable, at the localized level. 

The impact of TDM at a corridor or regional level is very hard to evaluate. Modeling and simulation, 

such as that done using employer trip reduction data to show the likely impact of TDM on I-5 in Seattle, 

suggests that aggressive and relatively widespread TDM programs at a local level can have a measurable and significant impact on a corridor.177 However, it is very difficult to measure empirically given issues of multiple influences, externalities, and causality. This clearly points to the need to carefully marry 

TDM strategies to smart infrastructure enhancements, such as ATM. When efficiency improvements are 

combined with efforts to reduce peak demand, the greatest impacts should be realized. 

The remainder of this chapter provides evidence of TDM effectiveness in terms of two primary areas 

of performance: travel impacts (mode shift) and environmental (emissions) impacts. Other impacts, 

including traffic and safety impacts and impacts related to goods movement, economic development, 

and livability, are touched upon. The known impacts reported are related back to the policy objectives 

discussed in Chapter 3 where possible. The chapter concludes with a comprehensive matrix of TDM 

strategies and their relative effectiveness in addressing key urban policy objectives. 

174 TCRP, Project B-4, Estimating the Cost Effectiveness of Employer-based Trip Reduction Programs, unpublished technical memorandum, 1995. 

175 OECD, Road Travel Demand, Meeting the Challenge, 2002. 

176 http://shoup.bol.ucla.edu/TruthInTransportationPlanning.pdf

177 CUTR, Impacts of Employer-based Programs on Transit Ridership and Transportation Systems Performance, prepared for Florida DOT, FDOT-BD549-

WO25, May 2007, http://www.nctr.usf.edu/pdf/77605.pdf
TDM | 160 TDM | 11

10.2 Travel Impacts

TDM originated from commuter-based programs aimed at shifting commuters from drive alone travel 

choices to other modes. These mode shift impacts address several policy measures, namely congestion 

relief, accessibility improvement, air pollution mitigation, and smarter land use decisions. The principal 

means for evaluating TDM, and therefore the core performance measures, are related to travel impacts, 

especially changes in the use of drive-alone vehicles. At the core of these performance measures is a 

basic quantification or estimation of changes in travel behavior: changes reflecting adoption of new travel 

choices. This focuses the core performance measures on:

• Mode shift (change in % use of each travel mode).

• VTR (reduction in the number of vehicles used by travelers adopting other choices).

• VMT Reduction (reduction in the amount of travel represented by shift in travel mode or location). 

From these performance measures, especially VMT reduction, a host of other performance indicators can 

be derived, especially those related to emissions (environmental) and energy use. Table 10.1 shows estimated ranges of TDM program effectiveness by type of program or strategy and level of transit service, 

as developed for site-specific TDM programs in Fairfax County, VA.178 In this table, “high” transit service 

corresponds to rail, “moderate” to peak-period bus headways of 20 minutes or less, and “low” to other 

conditions. These estimates of net mode shift were developed for the Fairfax County Department of Transportation, based on an assessment of various literature sources combined with professional judgment, in 

order to provide TDM planners with a basic understanding of the potential for mitigating trip generation, 

and therefore added traffic, from new developments. 

Other guidance has gone further than this simple table. One of the earliest FHWA guidance documents 

on TDM provided dozens of effectiveness look-up tables derived from the FHWA predecessor to the 

COMMUTER Model. The 1993 report, “Implementing Effective TDM Measures: Inventory of Measures 

and Synthesis of Experience,”179 provided charts showing the corresponding VTR for various employer 

TDM strategies applied to various starting conditions (as is the case with the transit conditions in Table 

10.1). 

TDM Program or Strategy High Transit Moderate 

Transit Low Transit

Support, Promotion, Information 3-5% 1-3% <1%

Alternative Commute Services 5-10% 5-10% 1-3%

Financial Incentives 10-20% 5-15% 1-5%

Combined Strategies

With Free Parking 15-20% 10-15% 3-7%

With Paid Parking 25-30% 15-20% N/A

Table 10.1: National Evidence on TDM Program Impacts

Vehicle Trip Reduction from Background Conditions

Source: Cambridge Systematics, 2010 (Fairfax County, VA)

178 Cambridge Systematics, Inc, Increasing the Integration of TDM into the Land Use and Development Process, prepared for Fairfax County Department of Transportation, draft final report, May 2010. 

179 FHWA, “Implementing Effective TDM Measures: Inventory of Measures and Synthesis of Experience” DOT-T-94-02, September 1993, http://ntl.bts.

gov/DOCS/474.html

C O S T- E F F E C T I V E N E S S 
TDM | 161 

A recent TCRP report on “Employer and Institutional TDM Strategies,” published as one of a series of reports on Traveler Responses to Transportation System Changes,180 provides an update to this knowledge 

base on trip reduction impacts of TDM strategies. This report includes a broad set of TDM strategies, 

including financial incentives and disincentives, service provision (shuttle buses and vanpools), support 

strategies for bike and walk commuting, alternative work arrangements (compressed work weeks, telecommuting), and institutional arrangements for implementing TDM programs. The report analyzed TDM 

impact data from 82 employer programs where sufficient (before and after) and rigorous (unbiased data 

collection) data existed. The TCRP report corroborates some of the information in Table 10.1 by revealing 

that worksites with good transit availability realized a vehicle trip reduction (VTR) rate of 26% versus 12% 

at worksites without good transit. Some other comparative findings showed that:

• The existence of aggressive employer support programs (e.g. , guaranteed ride home) results in a 4-5% 

VTR in and of itself.

• The offer of alternative commuting services (e.g. , shuttle bus, vanpool) resulted in an average VTR of 

22% as compared to 14% among worksites with the offer of these services.

• The existence of financial incentives and disincentives produced VTR results in the range of 23-30%. 

The TCRP report provides many look-up tables displaying the results of the 82-worksite analysis showing 

average VTR in the presence or absence of key TDM strategies and support elements. For example, Table 

10.2 shows the relative effectiveness of combining financial incentives with other key employer program 

attributes, such as transit availability and support services. The case studies used in the analysis shown 

in the table are considered “top performers” and do not represent “average” impacts among all worksites 

implementing similar TDM measures. As such, these findings should be considered upper bounds of 

potential impacts. 

Likewise, the WTRM development project examined 1,671 distinct incentive plan combinations in total, 

and out of these, 50 combinations are implemented by at least 75 records. And these 50 distinct incentive 

plan combinations have been implemented by 9,866 records in total. A series of look-up tables for these 

top 50 plan combinations vary based on starting VTR that show the ACTUAL changes report, WTRM predicted value, and the number of plans that fit that profile.181

180 TCRP, Report 95 – Chapter 19 – Employer and Institutional TDM Strategies: Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes, 2010. 

181 See Chapter 5. Worksite Trip Reduction Model Report http://www.nctr.usf.edu/pdf/473-14.pdf
TDM | 162 TDM | 11 Table 10.2: Vehicle Trip Reduction Percentages Related to Monetary Incentives and Other Site Programs or Conditions Source:TCRP, 2010

C O S T- E F F E C T I V E N E S S 

VTR by Type of Incentive Offered (Sample Size)

Other

Conditions

Parking 

Pricing

HOV 

Discounts

Transit 

Subsidy

Vanpool 

Subsidy

Carpool 

Subsidy

Bike/Walk 

Subsidy

Travel 

Allowance

Other

Monetary All

With W/out With W/out With W/out With W/out With W/out With w/o With W/out With w/o

All 24. 6% 12.3% 25.7% 13.8% 20.6% 13.1% 15.3% 17.2% 23.0% 16.6% 18.2% 16.9% 19.3% 16.0% 23.1% 16.1% 16. 9%

Transit Availability

High 27.0% 18.9% 26.4% 25.1% 27.4% 22.5% 26.2% 25. 9% n/a 26.0% n/a 26.0% 20.3% 26.8% 38.2% 24.9% 26%

Medium 13.7% 8.0% 19.0% 9.6% 11.2% 13.6% 10.5% 13.5% 20.5% 10.5% 12.1% 12.1% 19.6% 7.7 15.0% 11.5% 12.1%

Low 47.4% 12.9% 47.7% 12.9% 20.3% 10.5% 10.5% 14.4% 30.4% 13.3% 30.4% 13.3% 17.6% 12.1 22.0% 12.3% 13.8%

Level of Support

High 24.4% 12.5% 23.7% 16.6% 22.8% 15.7% 14.9% 19.6% n/a 19.0% n/a 19.0% 20.7% 18.1% 17.3 19.5% 19.0%

Medium 27.3% 12.9% 31.9% 13.1% 20.4% 11.7% 11.5% 17.1% 27.1% 14.8% 18.2% 15.7% 20.9% 14.3% 33.1 13.6% 15.9%

Low 22.8% 9.6% 24.0% 10.2% 17.8% 10.0% 44.2% 13.2% 10.5% 15.3% n/a 15.0% 13.6% 15.6% n/a 15.0% 15.0%

Transportation Services

Transit 35.3% 2.6% 35.3% 2.6% 35.3% 2.6% n/a 18.9% n/a 18.9% n/a 18.9% 21.1% 16.7% 42.4 11.1% 18.9%

Vanpool 34.1% 10.7% 34.1% 10.7% 25.0% 17.0% 23.1% 20.3% n/a 21.3% n/a 21.3% 30.7% 17.8% 13.8 22.1% 21.3%

Both 23.6% 16.1% 38.0% 14.5% 30.2% 9.3% 16.0% 19.3% 42.4% 16.4% n/a 18.8% 3.4% 20.0% n/a 18.8% 18.8%

Co. Veh’s 36.6% 14.6% 34.8% 18.9% 34.4% 7.6% 16.4% 27.5% 38.9% 23.2% n/a 26.2% 40.0% 15.9% 20.7 23.8% 24.6%

No Serv’s 18.2% 11.3% 15.6% 13.1% 13.1% 14.2% 5.8% 14.3% 17.7% 13.4% 18.2% 13.3% 13.5% 13.7% 19.2 12.5% 16.3%
TDM | 163 

One other means to induce a mode shift involves physical restrictions on the automobile, namely closing 

roads or areas of high pedestrian use to cars. Several European cities have closed their core central 

district to car traffic, at least on Saturdays (shopping days). This involves establishment of peripheral 

parking areas and good transit, bicycle, and pedestrian access. In South America, the Ciclovia concept 

has taken root and involves closing major thoroughfares on Sundays, allowing families to walk and bike. 

Such auto restrictions have created significant mode shift impacts. For example:

• In central Bremen, Germany, 58% of all shopping trips are made by bus and 22% of all trips in the downtown are made by bike.182 

• In Rome, a Limited Traffic Zone, substantially limiting the number of cars into the historic center, has reduced traffic levels by almost 20 percent and increased public transit use by 5%. Such traffic restriction 

zones now exist in most Italian cities.183

• In Hasselt, Belgium, rather than build a third ring road, the mayor closed the second ring road, made it 

a bike/pedestrian way, and made transit free. Transit use increased 8 fold after the car restrictions and 

transit improvements were put in place.184

• Transit malls in the U.S., have increased downtown transit use, such as in Denver where the 16th St. 

transit mall serves 63,000 daily riders while the street is responsible for 6% of Denver’s business tax 

revenue.185

• Several studies of limiting cars in shopping districts, in the UK and San Francisco, have revealed an 

interesting finding – patrons who walk to shopping districts spend more, on average, than car users.186

While many pedestrian streets were created in the 1970s (such as Boston’s Downtown Crossing), they 

are experiencing a resurgence in places like New York City (recently banning cars from Times and Herald 

Squares) and San Francisco (currently closing streets in Golden Gate Park on Sundays and contemplating closing Market Street to cars). The VTPI TDM Encyclopedia187 summarizes the likely impacts of carfree treatments in Table 10.3, differentiating the impacts based on size of the application area (e.g., one or 

two streets versus a whole district). 

Finally, one other recent innovation is social marketing campaign to induce travel behavior change. 

TravelSmart Australia, a community and government based program encouraging the use of alternative 

modes, took a comprehensive community based social marketing approach to Adelaide in Western 

Australia. They compared participant behavior with non-participants and discovered that participants 

decreased in distance traveled over the study period at a rate of 10.4 km per household per day (18% 

reduction) and decreased car travel by 36 km. At the same time, non-participants actually reported an 

increase in distance traveled over the study period of 14 km on weekdays and an increase in car travel of 

4.5 km on weekends.188 Such measures, also called Travel Blending and Individualized Marketing, have 

also been tested in Japan, Germany, and the U.S. 

182 OECD, Road Travel Demand, Meeting the Challenge, 2002. 

183 FHWA, “Managing Travel Demand: Applying European Perspectives to U. S. Practice,” Report No. FHWA-PL-06-015, May 2006

184 VTPI, Online TDM Encyclopedia, updated 2010, http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm118.htm and /tdm6.htm

185 21st Century Urban Solutions, Last Lessons from the Centennial State, updated September 3, 2009

186 Accent Marketing & Research, Town Centres Survey, 2003-04, prepared for Transport for London 2004. and Elizabeth M Bent, Modal Choices and 

Spending Patterns of Travelers to Downtown San Francisco: Impacts of Congestion Pricing on Retail Trade, San Francisco County Transportation Authority, 2008

187 VTPI, Online TDM Encyclopedia, updated 2010, http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm118.htm and /tdm6.htm

188 http://www.sa.gov.au/upload/franchise/Transport,%20travel%20and%20motoring/TravelSMART/TravelSMART_Households_in_the_West.pdf
TDM | 164 TDM | 11

Objective Small Area Large Area

Reduces total traffic 

Reduces peak period traffic 1 2

Shifts peak to off-peak periods 0 0

Shifts automobile travel to alternative modes 1 2

Improves access, reduces the need for travel 1 2

Increased ridesharing 1 2

Increased public transit 2 2

Increased cycling 2 2

Increased walking 3 2

Increased telework 0 0

Reduced freight traffic 0 1

Table 10.3: Travel Impact Summary – Car Free Areas

Source: VTPI, 2010

10.3 Traffic and Network Impacts

Of course, mode shift, trip reduction, and VMT reduction do not indicate the impact on the road system. 

Obviously, fewer cars and less travel contribute to highway performance, but the correlation is not 

always clear. Performance indicators for TDM’s role in highway operations need to be related to highway 

performance, such as:

•	LOS.

•	Vehicle Hours of Travel.

•	Delay.

•	Travel time reliability.

•	Person throughput.

LOS indicators have been developed for other travel choices (such as transit and bicycle LOS or HOV

travel time reliability). The Florida DOT has adopted a multimodal Quality/LOS system for four modes: 

car, bus, bike, and walk.189 Figure 10.1 provides a simple, visual representation of what the various LOS

might look like, based on work developed by Florida DOT. 

189 Florida DOT, FDOT Quality/LOS Handbook, 2009

C O S T- E F F E C T I V E N E S S 

Rating- From 3 (very beneficial) to –3 (very harmful). A 0 indicates no

impact or mixed impacts.

1 2
TDM | 165 

Figure 10.1: Florida State Multi-Modal LOS Standards

Source: Florida DOT

The direct traffic impacts of demand management are amply demonstrated in three areas: pricing-related 

strategies including managed lanes, real-time traveler information, and active traffic management. 

Congestion pricing benefits drivers and businesses by reducing delays and stress, by increasing 

the predictability of trip times, and by allowing for more deliveries per hour for businesses. Pricing, 

in combination with transit services, provides bus riders with travel-time savings equivalent to those 

for drivers and reduces waiting time for express bus riders due to more frequent service. Introduction 

of pricing in central London and Stockholm has resulted in significant shifts of commuters to transit, 

particularly buses. Bus-related delays in central London dropped by 50 percent after the introduction of 

the pricing scheme. There was a 7 percent increase in bus riders. In Stockholm, 200 new buses were put 

into service in August 2005, several months in advance of the pricing trial, which began in January 2006. 

After the pricing scheme was implemented, daily public transportation use, compared with the same 

month in 2005, was up by 40,000 riders daily. Ridership on inner-city bus routes rose 9 percent compared 

with a year earlier. On the State Route 91 priced lanes in Orange County, California, traffic during rush 

hours moves at over 60 mph, whereas the traffic in adjacent lanes crawls at average speeds of 15 mph or 

less. Commuters on the priced express lanes thus save as much as half an hour each way on the 10-mile 

trip, or as much as an hour a day.190

190 FHWA, Congestion Pricing: A Primer – Overview, FHWA-HOP-08-039, 2008
TDM | 166 TDM | 11

As has been noted in Chapters 2 and 3, real-time traveler information is transforming the way 

transportation professionals can manage travel demand with technology and new dissemination 

mechanisms enabling short-term, spur-of-the-moment decisions made just before a trip takes place or 

even en-route. Individual benefits from traveler information are well-documented and range from avoiding 

congestion to reducing uncertainty and stress, saving time, and improving travel safety.191 These benefits 

are the direct effect of providing travelers with choices about the time, route, mode, and destination of 

travel. The value of these services is often gauged by the increased participation in and usage of these 

services. Nationally, the growth of 511 systems (both in number and in use) and traffic information 

websites is a well-documented phenomenon. Surveys of travelers and users of such systems show 

changes in behavior at an individual level; however, system-level impacts due to traveler choices have 

been evaluated through several simulation models. 

10.4 Environmental Impacts

In addition to our knowledge on TDM effectiveness being focused on employer trip reduction programs, 

other evaluation results come from environmental studies. This is to be expected given the role of TDM 

in emission-reduction programs and conformity analyses. TDM impacts on reducing emissions not only 

address environmental policies, but can contribute to other policies, such as livability, sustainability, and 

even economic development (in the long run). The evaluation of TDM tends to assess TDM in terms of 

VMT reduction and convert these findings into emissions reductions via per-mile emission factors. VMT 

reductions can also be converted to energy impacts by applying energy consumption (miles per gallon) 

factors to travel reductions. 

A recent study analyzed a host of GHG emission reduction strategies to assess the ability of 

transportation strategies to address climate change. That study corroborated many of the conclusions 

already noted in this chapter. Regarding packaging, the study concluded that “an integrated, multistrategy approach that combines techniques such as travel activity, local and regional pricing, 

and operational and efficiency strategies can contribute to significant GHG reductions” and that 

“implementing various ’bundles‘ of transportation efficiency strategies could achieve annual GHG 

emission reductions of up to 24 percent less than expected Baseline levels in 2050, by changing 

current transportation systems and operations, travel behavior, land use patterns, and public policy and 

regulations.”192

Moving Cooler193 noted that the strategies that contribute the most to GHG reductions are:

• Local and regional pricing and regulatory strategies that increase the cost of single-occupancy vehicle 

travel.

• Regulatory strategies that reduce and enforce speed limits.

• Educational strategies to encourage eco-driving behavior that achieves better fuel efficiency.

• Land use and smart growth strategies that reduce travel distances.

• Multimodal strategies that expand travel options. 

This last finding, on multimodalism, is critical in that it confirms the importance of providing more travel 

options as a cornerstone to TDM and sustainable travel in general, and it is also cited in the Urban Mobility Index reporting, prepared by the Texas Transportation Institute. 

191 RITA, ITS Benefits Database, Traveler Information, http://www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/SingleTax?OpenForm&Query=Traveler+Inform

ation

192 Urban Land Institute (ULI), Moving Cooler _An Analysis of Transportation Strategies for Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions : Executive Summary 

prepared by Cambridge Systematics for Moving Cooler Steering Committee, June 2009. http://movingcooler. info/Library/Documents/Moving%20 189 

Cooler%20Executive%20Summary.pdf

193 Moving Coller: An Analysis of Transportation Strategies to Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions, available at http://www.movingcooler.info/

C O S T- E F F E C T I V E N E S S 
TDM | 167 

TDM strategies can impact emissions in more ways than simply reducing VMT. One FHWA study of the 

ability of transportation strategies to impact multiple pollutants (Table 10.4) to shows how TDM strategies 

reduce emissions (e.g., VMT, trip, speed, idling reductions, time shift, or shift in fleet mix or fuels) for 

various pollutants.194 While the table does not provide estimates on the amount of emission reduction 

that might be expected, it serves as useful guidance on precisely how TDM strategies influence air quality 

and can assist planners in understanding the relationship between specific TDM strategies and air quality. 

Strategy 

Category of Primary Effect General Pollutant Effect

Reduce 

VMT

Reduce 

vehicle

trips

Shift

travel 

time

Reduce 

idling

Change

speeds 

Change

vehicle

stock or 

fuels

PM2.5PM10 CO NOx VOCs SOx NH3

1. Park-and-Ride 

Facilities √ -       

2. HOV Lanes √ √ √       

3. Ridesharing √ +       

4. Vanpools √ +       

5. Bicycle/Pedestrian √ √       

6. Transit Service 

Enhancement √ √   

7. Transit Marketing, Information 

and Amenities

√ √       

8. Transit Pricing √ √       

9. Parking Pricing/Management √ √       

10. Road Pricing √ √ +    

11. VMT Pricing √ √       

12. Fuel Pricing √ √ √       

13. Employerbased TDM 

Programs

√ √ +    

14. Non-Employer-based TDM √ √ +    

15. Land-Use 

Strategies √ √ √    

Table 10.4: General Emissions Impacts of TDM Strategies 

Source: FHWA, 2006

194 FHWA, Multi-Pollutant Emissions Benefits of Transportation Strategies - Summary of Findings, 2006. 

* * * *

* * *

* * *

* * *

√=primary effect; +=may be a notable effect, but not in all cases; -=may have the opposite effect, in some 

cases =decrease; *=generally decreases, but possibility of an increase; /=varies; =increase; 

N=no change/not quantified 
TDM | 11

Finally, as stated in Chapter 9, one of the most powerful evaluation findings that can be developed will 

show the relative cost effectiveness of TDM versus other projects or programs intended to meet the same 

policy objective. One study that provided an insight into the cost effectiveness of many TDM strategies 

was TRB Special Report 264.195 The 2002 report states that TDM strategies represented a significant 

proportion of the projects funded by CMAQ, and an analysis was performed among projects with 

quantifiable, reported impacts to show the relative cost per ton of pollution reduced by various categories 

of emission-reducing projects. The results, shown in Table 10.5, reveal that TDM related strategies were 

among the most cost effective. Among the top 10 strategies, the most cost effective alternative mode 

strategies are:

• Regional ridesharing programs (including carpool matching).

• Pricing programs (including parking pricing and congestion pricing).

• Vanpool programs.

• Miscellaneous TDM programs (efforts to promote alternative modes).

• Conventional transit service improvements (new lines, more frequency).

• Employer trip reduction. 

Telework, a common TDM strategy, was rated at the bottom of the list, as the least cost effective, due to 

the fact that the CMAQ analysis was evaluating public sector programs to promote telecommuting and 

that the programs evaluated largely consisted of telework centers, which can be costly in terms of capital 

and operating expenses, not the cost effectiveness of telecommute arrangements themselves. This type 

TDM | 168

195 Transportation Research Board, The Congestion Mitigation Air Quality Improvement Program: Assessing Ten Years of Experience, Special Report 

264, National Academies, 2002. 

Table 10.5: CMAQ Project Category Cost Effectiveness 

Source: TRB, 2002

Inspection and maintenance 

Regional rideshare programs 

Charges and fees 

Vanpool programs 

Miscellaneous TDM 

Conventional fuel bus replacement 

Alternative fuel vehicles 

Traffic signalization 

Employer trip reduction 

Conventional transit service upgrades 

Park-and-ride lots (rideshare and transit) 

Modal subsidies and vouchers 

New transit capital systems/vehicles 

Bicycle and pedestrian programs 

Shuttles, feeders, and paratransit 

Freeway/incident management 

Alternative fuel buses 

HOV facilities 

Telework 

CMAQ Strategy

$0.95/lb. 

$3.70/lb. 

$5.15/lb. 

$5.25/lb. 

$6.25/lb. 

$8.05/lb. 

$8.09/lb. 

$10.05/lb. 

$11.35/lb. 

$12.30/lb. 

$21.50/lb. 

$23.30/lb. 

$33.20/lb. 

$42.05/lb. 

$43.75/lb. 

$51.20/lb. 

$63.20/lb. 

$88.10/lb. 

$125.90/lb. 

C O S T- E F F E C T I V E N E S S 

Cost Per Pound of 

Emissions Reduced
TDM | 169 

of analysis provides powerful evidence of the effectiveness and cost of TDM in meeting environmental 

objectives. 

10.5 Other Impacts

The sections above have discussed the documented impacts of TDM on travel behavior, traffic, and air 

quality. Clearly, this report suggests that TDM can have a positive impact on other policy objectives, such 

as goods movement, land use, livability, and economic development. Unfortunately, very little empirical 

research exists documenting the impact of TDM strategies toward these policies in a comprehensive, 

systematic, and comparative manner. As such, individual case studies and experiential information from 

earlier in the desk reference is summarized below:

• Goods movement - Two strategies have been discussed in this report: consolidated deliveries and 

pricing. Consolidated deliveries has been shown to reduce the number of delivery vehicles, in places 

like Burgos, Spain, but other impacts have not been documented, such as congestion reduction.196 A 

delivery scheme in two French cities, using electric vehicles, reduced related CO2 by 58%. Pricing, on 

the other hand, has been proven to be quite effective. Truck tolling in Germany has resulted in a small 

shift from truck to rail and a reduction in empty deadheading trips. Peak period fees (Pier Pass) at the 

Port of Los Angeles have reduced congestion in the terminal areas and have reduced midday truck 

volumes on I-710.197 

•	Land use – TDM is often used as a mitigation strategy to reduce the additional trips generated by new 

development, and success cases revealing trip reductions on the order of 10-25% are fairly abundant. 

Land use and design issues, as a longer-term strategy, have the potential to increase non-automobile 

modes, as revealed in comparisons of the mode split between towns with and without good bike, pedestrian, and transit infrastructure. 

•	Livability – Measuring the impact of TDM on livability can be a subjective process. But livability might 

be seen as the product of several other effective roles for TDM, namely reduced congestion, increased 

safety, improved environment, and healthy economic conditions. Mostly, livability can be associated 

with increased travel choices, a fundamental purpose of demand management. 

•	Economic Development – In mitigating the negative impacts associated with growth (congestion, air 

pollution, energy consumption, reduced safety), TDM can improve the attractiveness of a region or city 

to prosper economically. As seen in cases such as Lund, Sweden, and the Sustainable Travel Town 

pilots in the U.K., economic growth can be decoupled from traffic growth. In Lund, the region grew substantially (population and employment) during a period when TDM was being implemented, reducing 

VMT by 1-2% overall. The growth in travel demand was met by increases in transit use and bicycling.198

10.6 Summary of TDM Effectiveness – Relative Impact on Policy 

Objectives

The preceding sections have summarized some of the research on the known effectiveness of TDM 

strategies. The available impact information is largely based on the VTR impacts of employer-based TDM 

strategies and the emission reduction impacts based on the application of TDM to address air quality 

policy objectives. The impact of TDM on all the policy objectives enumerated in Chapter 3 have been 

196 FGM-AMOR, CIVITAS II: 2005-2009 Final Brochure, prepared for European Commission and CIVITAS GUARD, September 2010 (www.civitas.eu)

197 FHWA, Port Peak Pricing Program Evaluation, FHWA-HOP-09-014, 2009, http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop09014/sect2.htm

198 FHWA, “Managing Travel Demand: Applying European Perspectives to U. S. Practice,” Report No. FHWA-PL-06-015, May 2006 and Transport for 

Quality of Life, et al., The Effects of Smarter Choice Programmes in the Sustainable Travel Towns – Summary Report, prepared for UK Department for 

Transport, February 2010. 
TDM | 170 TDM | 11

touched upon in this chapter, However, this is an incomplete picture of the impact of the wide variety 

of TDM strategies included in this desk reference. Empirical evidence, in a form and amount sufficient 

to warrant comparative analysis, is not available for many strategies, beyond individual case studies. 

Likewise, impacts are often not expressed in comparative terms to allow for the evaluation of one type of 

TDM strategy against another. 

However, policy-makers and planners make decisions every day as to which TDM strategies to apply 

to a given project, problem, or policy objective. In order to assist in this process, the authors of this 

desk reference have produced a “master table” (Table 10.6) showing the relative effectiveness of some 

32 TDM strategies in six categories (traditional employer TDM, land use, transit, parking, pricing, and 

systems management) as applied to the seven policy objectives discussed in Chapter 3. The key word 

here is “relative” as we are attempting to show whether a given TDM strategy will influence a particular 

policy objective in a significant way or simply contribute in a modest manner. Clearly, attached to each 

policy objective are a number of performance measures that would be used to measure effectiveness. 

In very general terms, highly effective equates to a greater than 10 percent reduction in travel among the 

target population; moderately effective to a 2 to 10 percent reduction in travel; and nominally effective 

up to a 2 percent reduction in travel (acknowledging that small reductions can have significant impacts 

on congested facilities). As implied, many strategies have not yet been evaluated in terms of their 

impact on a given policy objective. For example, we do not know the impact of HOT lanes on economic 

development, given the relatively new nature of this measure. We believe that these strategies will have a 

positive impact on addressing key policy objectives, but empirical evidence is not available from which to 

make a relative assessment. 

These relative ratings are based on the professional judgment of the authors of this report and are based 

on a review of available studies on TDM effectiveness and the authors’ extensive experience with TDM 

evaluation. If used properly (as an initial screening tool to select TDM strategies to address particular 

policy objectives before further, more detailed analysis and modeling), this matrix can be a useful first 

step. 

C O S T- E F F E C T I V E N E S S 
TDM | 171 

Traditional TDM Land Use/Active Transportation Transit Parking Pricing Systems Management

STRATEGIES

HOV/HOT/Managed Lanes

Employer Trip Reduction Programs

Alternative Work Arrangements

School-based Trip Reduction

Event-based Trip Reduction

Recreation-based Trip Reduction

Car-Sharing

Vanpool Programs

Developer Trip Reduction

Land Use Strategies

Car-free or Access-Restricted Zones

Bicycle Facilities and Programs

Pedestrian Facilities and Continuity

Transit Service Improvements

Transit Prioritization/BRT

Transit Fare Discounts

Parking Information

Parking Supply Management

Parking Pricing

Cordon Pricing

Congestion Pricing

General Financial Incentives

VMT Tax

Ramp Metering

Integrated Corridor Management

Traveler Information 

Eco-Driving

POLICY OBJECTIVESMobility                           N

Congestion Relief                           

Air Quality                           

Economic Development                        N   

Land Use Interaction  N                      N N N 

Goods Movement    N   N  N N        N         

Livability                         N  

Table 10.6: TDM Strategies and Their Relative Effectiveness in Addressing Key Policy Objectives

KEY:  = highly effective;  = moderately effective;  = nominally effective;  = likely effective (but still undocumented); N = not applicable;  =minimal to no impacts
TDM | 172 TDM | 11

Cost per Pound of 

Emissions Reduced

TCRP, Report 95 – Chapter 19 – Employer and Institutional TDM Strategies: Traveler Response to Transportation 

System Changes, 2010. 

FHWA, Congestion Pricing: A Primer – Overview, FHWA-HOP-08-039, 2008

FHWA, Mitigating Traffic Congestion—The Role of Demand-Side Strategies, prepared by ACT, Report No. 

FHWA-HOP-05-001, October 2004. 

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, Active Traffic Management: The Next Step in Congestion Management, FHWA-PL-07-012, 2007

FHWA, Multi-Pollutant Emissions Benefits of Transportation Strategies, prepared by ICF International, FHWAHEP-07-004, 2006, http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/air_quality/conformity/research/mpe_benefits/

FHWA, “Managing Travel Demand: Applying European Perspectives to U. S. Practice,” Report No. FHWAPL-06-015, May 2006

Center for Transportation and Environment (CTE),The Clean Air Campaign, Cash for Commuters Program, 

Report on April 2004 Follow-up Surveys, 2004, http://www.dot.state.ga.us/informationcenter/programs/

environment/airquality/Documents/pdfs/clean_air_campaign_cash_for_commuters_program_report_on_

april_2004_follow_up_surveys.pdf

Shoup, Donald, The High Cost of Free Parking, Planners Press, 2005. 

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

Urban Land Institute (ULI), Moving Cooler _An Analysis of Transportation Strategies for Reducing Greenhouse 

Gas Emissions : Executive Summary prepared by Cambridge Systematics for Moving Cooler Steering 

Committee, June 2009. http://movingcooler. info/Library/Documents/Moving%20Cooler%20Executive%20

Summary. pdf

OECD, Road Travel Demand, Meeting the Challenge, 2002. 

TCRP, Project B-4, Estimating the Cost Effectiveness of Employer-based Trip Reduction Programs, unpublished 

technical memorandum, 1995. 

FHWA, “Implementing Effective TDM Measures: Inventory of Measures and Synthesis of Experience” 

DOT-T-94-02, September 1993, http://ntl.bts.gov/DOCS/474.html

CUTR, Impacts of Employer-based Programs on Transit Ridership and Transportation Systems Performance, 

prepared for Florida DOT, FDOT-BD549-WO25, May 2007, http://www.nctr.usf.edu/pdf/77605.pdf

Cambridge Systematics, Inc, Increasing the Integration of TDM into the Land Use and Development Process, 

prepared for Fairfax County Department of Transportation, draft final report, May 2010. 

VTPI, Online TDM Encyclopedia, updated 2010, http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm118. htm and /tdm6.htm

Accent Marketing & Research, Town Centres Survey, 2003-04, prepared for Transport for London 2004. 

KEY RESOURCES

C O S T- E F F E C T I V E N E S S 
TDM | 173 

Elizabeth M Bent, Modal Choices and Spending Patterns of Travelers to Downtown San Francisco: 

Impacts of Congestion Pricing on Retail Trade, San Francisco County Transportation Authority, 2008

21st Century Urban Solutions, Last Lessons from the Centennial State, updated September 3, 2009, 

Florida DOT “Examples of LOS by Mode for Urban Roadways” in FDOT Quality/LOS Handbook, 

2009, http://wwwdot.state.fl.us/planning/systems/sm/los/pdfs/2009FDOTQLOS_Handbook.pdf

RITA, ITS Benefits Database, Traveler Information, http://www. itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost. nsf/

SingleTax?OpenForm&Query=Traveler+Information

TRB, Special Report 264, The Congestion Mitigation Air Quality Improvement Program: Assessing 

Ten Years of Experience, 2002

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, http://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/

publications/fhwahop09014/sect2.htm

Transport for Quality of Life, et al., The Effects of Smarter Choice Programmes in the Sustainable 

Travel Towns – Summary Report, prepared for UK Department for Transport, February 2010. 

KEY RESOURCES CONTINUED
TDM | 174 TDM | 11

C O S T- E F F E C T I V E N E S S 
TDM | 175 

11 Transitioning from Planning to 

Implementation 

This chapter examines TDM programs 

nationwide to identify examples of successful 

implementation and support of demand 

management programs by state DOTs, MPOs, 

and TMAs, corridor-level projects, and local 

planning organizations. It concludes with a 

discussion of how TDM programs are funded, 

focused largely on federal sources. 

11.1 State Level 

Based on an extensive outreach effort in 

executing NCHRP Project 20-65 Task 24, 

“State Department of Transportation Role in 

the Implementation of Transportation Demand 

Management Programs,” a nationwide survey of 

state DOTs was conducted to identify national 

trends regarding the extent of their involvement 

in TDM and related activities. Over 90 percent 

of responding state DOTs indicated that their 

agencies play a role in TDM.199 The most 

commonly identified roles were the use of TDM 

on project-level activities and providing funding/

technical assistance to local organizations 

focused on TDM. However, state DOTs can 

play many different roles in implementing TDM 

services. Some potential roles are listed below:

• Administering TDM Services – Through this 

role, state DOTs focus on various programmatic TDM activities, such as encouraging 

alternative modes by offering assistance to 

employers in setting up worksite programs, 

maintaining ridematching databases, offering 

transit incentives, and providing a Guaranteed 

Ride Home (GRH) program. An example of 

this type of involvement is the Virginia DOT’s 

efforts to support teleworking by providing 

funds to the Telework!VA program, a public/

199 National Highway Cooperative Research Program, “State Department of Transportation Role in the Implementation of Transportation Demand Management Programs,” Project 20-65 Task 24, July 2010.

CMAQ Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality

CTE Center for Transportation and the 

Environment

DOT Department of Transportation

DRPT Department of Rail and Public 

Transportation

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

FTA Federal Transit Administration

GRH Guaranteed Ride Home

HOT High Occupancy Toll

HOV High Occupancy Vehicle

ITS Intelligent Transportation Systems

LOS Level of Service

MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization

MTC Metropolitan Transportation 

Commission

MAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards

NCHRP National Cooperative Highway Research 

Program

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

SOV Single Occupancy Vehicle

STP Surface Transportation Program

TCM Transportation Control Measures

TCSP Transportation Community and System 

Preservation Program 

TDM Travel Demand Management

TMA Transportation Management 

Association

TMD Transportation Management District 

TOD Transit Oriented Development

TSM Transportation Systems Management

VMT Vehicle Miles Travelled

VTR Vehicle Trip Reduction

WTRM Worksite Trip Reduction Model

CHAPTER ACRONYM LIST
TDM | 176 TDM | 11

private partnership founded by the DRPT to reduce 

traffic congestion, improve air quality, and facilitate 

better transportation through technology.200 With 

help from Virginia DOT’s funds, Telework!VA provides 

telework training and financial incentives for Virginia 

businesses to establish or expand telework programs 

for their employees. 

•	Conducting Marketing – This role focuses on providing a statewide level of support for changing travel 

behaviors through informed decision-making and 

public education on TDM. The most effective TDM 

marketing programs involve a variety of partners 

within a community, including public officials, community organizations, and individuals who support 

alternative modes. Utah DOT (UDOT) launched a 

$1.5 million program known as TravelWise – a set of

strategies that encourage Utahns to use alternatives 

to driving alone, thereby reducing energy consumption, reducing traffic congestion, and improving air 

quality. Several of these strategies include alternative 

work schedules, active transportation, ridesharing, 

and teleworking. Through a cooperative relationship 

with eight TMAs, New Jersey DOT (NJDOT) manages 

a TDM program focused on strategies, incentives, 

and pilot programs developed to reduce VMT and 

improve air quality.201 NJDOT TDM strategies include 

rideshare marketing, rideshare incentives and support services, transit incentives and support services, 

transit service improvements, and park and ride lot 

expansion.202 

•	Funding Investments in Travel Options – State DOTs

also focus on the provision and direct support for 

alternative mode infrastructure, including carsharing, 

park-and-ride facilities, bicycle/pedestrian improvements, and HOV lanes.203 These types of TDM 

program activities identify investment needs and 

define the most effective infrastructure improvements. For example, Massachusetts DOT’s (MassDOT)

travel options program, MassRides, partners with 300 elementary and middle schools to deliver the Safe 

Routes to School program to educate the community on the transportation, safety, and health benefits 

of walking/bicycling to school. In addition, MassRides is specifically working with 40 schools to identify

infrastructure improvements such as crosswalks, pedestrian traffic signals, school speed zones, and 

sidewalk connections. Many of these identified infrastructure improvements will be funded through the 

federal Safe Routes to School program.204 

200 Virginia DOT – Telework!VA, http://www.teleworkva.org/, accessed 01/13/2012

201 Utah DOT – TravelWise, http://www.travelwise.utah.gov/index.php, accessed 01/14/2012

202 New Jersey DOT Traffic Mitigation Guidelines - http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/eng/documents/TMG/TMG.shtm#s36, accessed 01/14/2012

203 National Highway Cooperative Research Program, “State Department of Transportation Role in the Implementation of Transportation Demand Management Programs,” Project 20-65 Task 24, July 2010

204 Massachusetts DOT Remarks to the Association for Commuter Transportation – http://www.massdot.state.ma.us/Portals/0/Downloads/infoCenter/

remarks/ACT_061010.pdf, accessed 01/13/2012

IMPLEMENTATION

Telework!VA Tax Legislation

In 2011, the Virginia General Assembly

approved new tax credit legislation aimed 

at encouraging private sector telework. 

Defined as “a work arrangement where an

employee is allowed to perform normal work 

duties at a location other than their central 

work location” teleworking is considered, 

by the General Assembly, to be an effective 

congestion management strategy to reduce 

highway traffic. It’s also been shown to

improve employee productivity, retention, 

and satisfaction.

The purpose of the Telework Tax Credit is to

remove auto trips by eliminating commute 

trips to and from work. Only employees 

who travel to an office in Virginia qualify. 

The legislation provides for a tax credit 

(for new teleworkers) of up to $1,200 per 

employee and up to $50,000 per organization for eligible telework expenses incurred 

during taxable years 2012 and 2013. Additional legislation is required to continue this 

tax credit after 2013. Any business subject

to Virginia income tax is eligible to apply for 

the tax credit. This is done through approval by the Virginia Department of Taxation. 

Employees must telework at least once a 

week in order for expenses incurred under 

the telework agreement to be eligible. 

(Source: Virginia’s Telework!VA webpage

(http://www.teleworkva.org/go/for-managers/telework-tax-credit/))
TDM | 177 

• Integrating TDM into Internal Business Practices – Another way for state DOTs to be promoters of TDM 

is to provide commuter options programs for their employees. Arizona DOT (ADOT) participates in a Trip 

Reduction Program by offering incentives and programs, through Capitol Rideshare, to encourage state 

employees to reduce travel.205 Capitol Rideshare incentives include commuter club discounts, preferential rideshare parking permits, emergency ride home benefits, transit subsidy program, and a vanpool 

education program.206

• Establishing Cooperative Relationships – State DOTs may establish cooperative relationships to ensure 

coordination toward common goals. Through its new TravelWise program, UDOT is identifying strategies to optimize the existing statewide transportation system.207 As the state does not have TMAs, it is 

instead focusing on partnerships with community organizations, private businesses, and government 

offices, to build its network and expand its TDM services, along with the Utah Transit Authority (UTA).208 

In 2010 the TravelWise Program, in coordination with CommuterLink and Express Lanes, reached out to 

Utah companies to encourage more efficient commuting and work-related travel. This coordinated effort 

allows UDOT’s programs to work together to maximize the transportation system.209

11.2 Metropolitan Level

Metropolitan transportation planning provides the information, tools, and public input needed for 

improving transportation system performance. TDM strategies are part of a toolbox of actions available 

to those involved in MPOs for solving transportation problems. Currently, most MPOs provide an overall 

coordination role in planning and programming funds for projects and operations. However, MPOs can 

play many different roles in implementing TDM services. Some potential roles are listed below:

• Developing/Promoting Alternative Transportation Programs – MPOs and TMAs may develop/promote 

alternative transportation programs that support their members’ and communities’ concerns regarding 

access and congestion, environmental/sustainability goals, economic development, and land use planning. Commuter Connections – a program of the National Capital Region (NCR) Transportation Planning 

Board, the region’s designated MPO at the MWCOG – provides commuter services and information to 

area residents and employers in order to reduce traffic congestion and emissions caused by SOVs.210 

Core value-added services provided by Commuter Connections for NCR residents include the GRH 

program, Rideshare Tuesday, Telework Week, and Employer Services.211

• Providing Technical Assistance – MPOs may provide technical assistance/feedback in reviewing TMA 

work plans. TMAs are public/private partnerships, focused on an employment center or other geographic area, formed to provide collaborative TDM services to member employers and others. MPOs may 

also provide input on TDM activities they would like the TMA to pursue. For example, the New Jersey 

Transportation Planning Authority (NJTPA) is encouraging the TMAs in its service area to undertake antiidling activities in their work plan.212 

• Leveraging Public and Private Funds – TMAs also work together to gain funding from public and private 

entities to increase the use of various TDM activities, thereby reducing traffic congestion and improving air quality. MassCommute – a group of 11 private, non-profit business associations in Massachu205 Arizona DOT Multimodal Planning Air Quality Planning – http://mpd.azdot.gov/mpd/air_quality/hpa.asp, accessed 01/14/2012

206 Arizona DOT Capitol Rideshare – http://capitolrideshare.com/files/services.htm, accessed 01/12/2012

207 Utah DOT – TravelWise, http://www.udot.utah.gov/main/f?p=100:pg:0::::T,V:2375,50746, accessed 01/14/2012

208 National Highway Cooperative Research Program, “State Department of Transportation Role in the Implementation of Transportation Demand Management Programs,” Project 20-65 Task 24, July 2010

209 Utah DOT – TravelWise, http://www.udot.utah.gov/main/f?p=100:pg:0::::T,V:2375,50746, accessed 01/14/2012

210 Commuter Connections: Washington Metropolitan Region Transportation Demand Management Resource Guide and Strategic Marketing Plan – 

http://www.mwcog.org/commuter2/pdf/publication/SMP-FY12-Final-Report-December20,%202011.pdf, accessed 01/16/2012

211 Commuter Connections - http://www.mwcog.org/commuter2/commuter/index.html, accessed 01/16/2012

212 National Highway Cooperative Research Program, “State Department of Transportation Role in the Implementation of Transportation Demand Management Programs,” Project 20-65 Task 24, July 2010
TDM | 178 TDM | 11

213 MassCommute – http://www.masscommute.com/masscommute_mission.htm, accessed 01/13/2012

214 National Highway Cooperative Research Program, “State Department of Transportation Role in the Implementation of Transportation Demand Management Programs,” Project 20-65 Task 24, July 2010

215 San Francisco Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission: Planning: Intelligent Transportation Systems: Bay Area ITS Architecture – http://

www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/ITS/, accessed 01/16/2012

216 California DOT State Route 4 Corridor System Management Plan Appendices – http://www. dot. ca. gov/dist4/systemplanning/docs/csmp/SR4_

CSMP_appedices. pdf, accessed 01/16/2012 

217 Transportation Demand Management and Corridor Planning: A Guidebook for Houston Area Planners, Engineers and Policy Makers – http://www. 

commutesolutionshouston. org/resources/TDM_and_Corridor_Planning. pdf, accessed 01/14/2012

218 Transportation Demand Management and Corridor Planning: A Guidebook for Houston Area Planners, Engineers and Policy Makers – http://www. 

commutesolutionshouston. org/resources/TDM_and_Corridor_Planning. pdf, accessed 01/14/2012

219 LOCAL MOTION: A Long Range TDM Plan for Local Motion – http://alexandriava. gov/localmotion/info/default. aspx?id=45180, accessed 

01/15/2012

setts – works together to leverage public and private funds to increase the use of ridesharing and other 

commuting alternatives.213 In addition, NJTPA provided funding to the TMAs, through its local CMAQ 

Mobility Initiative, to conduct an online survey for a bus study.214

• Integrating TDM into Operations – Similar to State DOTs, MPOs may consider integrating demand management into operations. The San Francisco Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) 

created the Regional ITS Plan as a roadmap for transportation systems integration in the Bay Area over 

the next 10 years.215 One ITS project initiated by the MTC involves a comprehensive phone and web 

source for up-to-the-minute Bay Area traffic, transit, rideshare, and bicycling information, known as the 

Bay Area 511 Program (511). 511 unites several traveler information programs into a one-stop resource 

on traffic conditions, incidents and driving times.216 

11.3 Corridor Level

Effective corridor improvement projects seek to maximize the efficient use and capacity of a roadway 

and/or transit corridor. As such, transportation management strategies have been integrated as effective 

components to promote alternative modes, increase vehicle occupancy, reduce travel distances, and 

ease peak hour congestion.217 TDM elements have played a key role in corridor projects. 

• Construction Mitigation – Major corridor infrastructure projects often take many years to complete and 

affect transportation capacity and access to adjacent businesses. TDM programs applied at this level 

provide critical mitigation strategies to reduce the negative impacts of construction. The HoustonGalveston Area Council seeks to integrate transportation management programs by providing traveler 

information regarding construction activities, working with corridor employees and other businesses 

to develop access alternatives, and coordinating with transit agencies to adjust existing transportation 

facilities and services. 

• Employer-Based Programs – Extensive employer-based TDM efforts may be conducted for an entire corridor, in order to reduce SOV commuting and VMT to worksites. WSDOT initiated an extensive 

employer-based program on the I-405 Corridor in the Seattle area. Efforts included telework, alternative 

work arrangements, tax credits, parking cash-out incentives, and an expansion of the CTR program.218 

11.4 Local Level

A quantifiable and results-driven local TDM program can achieve greater transparency to its stakeholders, provide a clearer linkage to related strategies and initiatives, strengthen its role as a significant player 

within an integrated approach between land use and transportation, and offer a better return on investment to funding partners.219 Implementing TDM at the local level involves TDM programming initiatives, 

strategies, and policies in short-, mid-, and long-term time frames. 

• Administering full-service TDM Programs – Local TDM programs have broadened their scope of activities from a narrow focus on marketing a single mode into full-service programs that promote all 

non-drive modes of transportation. The City of Alexandria (VA) TDM program, LocalMotion, promotes 

IMPLEMENTATION
TDM | 179 

a range of tools and resources for accessing destinations throughout the city. This expanded range of 

services affirms the program’s commitment to improving mobility.220 

• Monitoring Developer Programs – Many cities place requirements on new developments to mitigate trip 

generation through TDM and other trip reduction measures. City staff review site development plans, 

place TDM conditions, and then work to help implement and monitor the programs’ success in meeting 

its trip reduction targets. In some cases, future phases of development are conditioned on meeting and 

documenting these reductions. 

• Building Strategic Partnerships – Local TDM programs are coordinating with leading local companies to 

promote their employer-based programs, for those not currently participating, or to support their recruitment and retention efforts, for those participating. The LocalMotion program continually coordinates 

with the Local Chamber of Commerce, Alexandria Economic Development Partnership (AEDP), Small 

Business Association, and Society of Human Resource Management (SHRM) to gain feedback and 

promote their programs. 

• Developing Youth Programs – Local programs integrate demand management into youth programs, 

encouraging children to learn about public transportation. The Potomac and Rappahannock Transportation Commission (PRTC) has implemented two programs, the Preschool and Elementary Student 

Program and the Teen Summer Pass Program, with a third program currently in development, the 

Middle School Program. The Preschool and Elementary Student Program involves a Safe Bus Adventure 

Program where children are taught about bus safety rules and the benefits of using transit.221 The Teen 

Summer Pass Program provides those ages 13-19 with unlimited Omnilink rides all summer for a onetime cost of $30.222 

11.5 Funding of TDM Programs

For states and MPOs that plan, administer, and deliver core TDM services, various federal, state, 

metropolitan, and private funding programs are available for TDM program implementation. 

Federal funds have been a main source for TDM programs. A 2006 study of nine regional TDM programs 

conducted by the Center for Transportation and the Environment (CTE) found that over two-thirds of 

TDM funding came from federal sources. The most significant of these federal sources are CMAQ, the 

STP; and the Transportation, Community and System Preservation Program. All require the participation 

of DOTs and in many cases, MPOs, with a default funding match requirement of 80%. The 2006 study 

by CTE also found that state (16 percent) and local (18 percent) funding are also significant alternative 

sources of TDM funding for states and MPOs. 

Another funding source is the STP, which provides flexible funding that may be used by states and 

localities for projects on any Federal-aid highway, including the National Highway System. Carpool, 

pedestrian, bicycle, and safety projects may be implemented with STP funding on roads of any functional 

classification, under the provisions of 23 U.S.C. 133(c). Similar to the CMAQ program, STP is considered 

a “flexible fund” where a state DOT can direct dollars to non-highway modes and the associated nonDOT agency, typically a public transit agency. As an example, the Oregon Department of Transportation 

operates its “Flexible Funding Program” through STP funds. Through the Flexible Fund program, MPOs 

and other agencies submit applications for projects that improve modal connectivity, mobility, the 

environment, and access. 

220 LOCAL MOTION: A Long Range TDM Plan for Local Motion – http://alexandriava.gov/localmotion/info/default.aspx?id=45180, accessed 01/15/2012 

221 Potomac and Rappahannock Transportation Commission Preschool and Elementary Student Program – http://www.prtctransit.org/special-programs/

youth-programs/kids-programs.php, accessed 01/16/2012

222 Potomac and Rappahannock Commission Teen Summer Pass Program – http://www.prtctransit.org/special-programs/youth-programs/teen-programs.php, accessed 01/16/2012
TDM | 180 TDM | 11

As it relates to TDM, Federal/State Planning Research (SPR) funds may be used to plan for TDM; monitor 

and analyze the effectiveness of TDM; and integrate/mainstream TDM and related activities into general 

transportation plans and programs. For example, SPR funds may be utilized for a “before and after” study 

of a new TDM program, known as a “state of the commute” report, which tallies regional TDM usage 

and effectiveness, and/or SPR funds may be used for a commuter survey to assess potential future TDM 

strategies. 

However, non-federal funding sources are playing an increasingly significant funding role in providing 

leverage for matching federal funds, especially in areas currently ineligible for federal funds or where 

federal funds are unavailable. Such non-federal funds might include:

• State transportation funds and grants.

• Local sales tax funds (dedicated to transportation).

• Local general fund sources.

• Developer impact fees.

• Special grants (e.g., smart growth, livability).

• Parking revenue sources.

For example, at a state level, the Virginia DRPT Transportation Efficiency Improvement Fund (TEIF) 

Program supports new and/or expanded transportation services and facilities that reduce demand for 

SOVs and initiatives at the state, regional, and community level.223 Eligible grant recipients include the 

following public transportation agencies: local and state government, transportation district commissions, 

public service corporations, planning district commissions, private corporations, and TMAs. The TEIF 

Program includes projects in all categories of public transportation and TDM are eligible, including: 

parking management, employee benefits, improved public transportation facility access, flexible work 

hours, and telecommuting. Program emphasis areas include services that reduce VMT by SOV; involve 

the public sector and enhance economic development; support modal connectivity; increase AVR; 

and utilize advanced technology to improve productivity and quality of public transportation and TDM 

services.224 

At a city level, the establishment and funding of Transit Management Organizations and Transportation 

Management Districts is one way to incorporate TDM programs. For example, The Warner Center Transit 

Management Organization (TMO) was established in the late 1980s between the City of Los Angeles 

and the Warner Center developer, as it is the third largest urban center in the city, housing millions of 

square feet of commercial office space, apartments, and condominiums.225 Through the purchase of the 

land, the primary developer agreed to include an additional $5 million contribution to a trust fund for the 

creation and support of a TMO. Subsequently, for every commuter that a new developer’s office space 

will attract, the developer must pay $3,500 into the trust fund. As such, the TMO receives $85,000 from 

the trust fund to spend on transportation improvements, such as widened roads, additional traffic lights, 

additional freeway lanes, and improved public transit. 

Similarly, The North Bethesda TMD was established in 1994 to address traffic and air quality issues in 

Montgomery County, Maryland.226 In proposing the TMD’s creation, the county identified public parking 

223 Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT), “Public Transportation and Commuter Assistance Grant Program Application Guidance,” November 2008, pg. 34

224 Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT), “Public Transportation and Commuter Assistance Grant Program Application Guidance,” November 2008, pg. 34

225 Network Tele-Seminar, “Innovative Funding Sources for Transportation Demand Management and Best Workplaces for Commuters,” http://www. 

bestworkplaces. org/pdf/networkts_6-8-04. pdf, pg. 4

226 Network Tele-Seminar, “Innovative Funding Sources for Transportation Demand Management and Best Workplaces for Commuters,” http://www. 

bestworkplaces. org/pdf/networkts_6-8-04. pdf, pg. 1

IMPLEMENTATION
TDM | 181 

charges—parking meter payments, parking violation fines, and monthly permits for public parking lots – 

as the best sources of revenue to support the program. As such, the county installed more than 800 new 

parking meters in areas identified by a number of factors, including the area’s composition of business 

(retail vs. office space) and the prevailing parking rates in nearby private garages. The county’s goal was 

to determine an effective placement strategy and rate schedule. Since 1996, the county’s parking meters 

have generated gross revenues of over $240,000 per year, parking fines have generated $123,000 per 

year, and monthly parking permit sales have earned the county $230,000 per year.227 

227 Network Tele-Seminar, “Innovative Funding Sources for Transportation Demand Management and Best Workplaces for Commuters,” http://www.

bestworkplaces.org/pdf/networkts_6-8-04.pdf, pg. 2
TDM | 182 TDM | 11

Arizona DOT Capitol Rideshare – http://capitolrideshare.com/files/services.htm, accessed 01/12/2012

Arizona DOT Multimodal Planning Air Quality Planning – http://mpd.azdot.gov/mpd/air_quality/hpa.asp, 

accessed 01/14/2012

California DOT State Route 4 Corridor System Management Plan Appendices – http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist4/

systemplanning/docs/csmp/SR4_CSMP_appedices.pdf, accessed 01/16/2012

Commuter Connections: Washington Metropolitan Region Transportation Demand Management Resource 

Guide and Strategic Marketing Plan – http://www.mwcog.org/commuter2/pdf/publication/SMP-FY12-FinalReport-December20,%202011.pdf, accessed 01/16/2012

Commuter Connections - http://www.mwcog.org/commuter2/commuter/index.html, accessed 01/16/2012

LOCAL MOTION: A Long Range TDM Plan for Local Motion – http://alexandriava.gov/localmotion/info/default.

aspx?id=45180, accessed 01/15/2012

Massachusetts DOT Remarks to the Association for Commuter Transportation – http://www.massdot.state.

ma.us/Portals/0/Downloads/infoCenter/remarks/ACT_061010.pdf, accessed 01/13/2012

MassCommute – http://www.masscommute.com/masscommute_mission.htm, accessed 01/13/2012

National Highway Cooperative Research Program, “State Department of Transportation Role in the 

Implementation of Transportation Demand Management Programs,” Project 20-65 Task 24, July 2010

New Jersey DOT Traffic Mitigation Guidelines - http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/eng/documents/TMG/TMG.

shtm#s36, accessed 01/14/2012

Potomac and Rappahannock Transportation Commission Preschool and Elementary Student Program – http://

www.prtctransit.org/special-programs/youth-programs/kids-programs.php, accessed 01/16/2012

Potomac and Rappahannock Commission Teen Summer Pass Program – http://www.prtctransit.org/specialprograms/youth-programs/teen-programs.php, accessed 01/16/2012

San Francisco Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission: Planning: Intelligent Transportation Systems: 

Bay Area ITS Architecture – http://www.mtc.ca.gov/planning/ITS/, accessed 01/16/2012

Transportation Demand Management and Corridor Planning: A Guidebook for Houston Area Planners, Engineers 

and Policy Makers – http://www.commutesolutionshouston.org/resources/TDM_and_Corridor_Planning.pdf, 

accessed 01/14/2012

Utah DOT – TravelWise, http://www.udot.utah.gov/main/f?p=100:pg:0::::T,V:2375,50746, accessed 01/14/2012

Utah DOT – TravelWise, http://www.udot.utah.gov/main/f?p=100:pg:0::::T,V:2375,50746, accessed 01/14/2012

Virginia DOT – Telework!VA, http://www.teleworkva.org/, accessed 01/13/2012.

KEY RESOURCES

IMPLEMENTATION
TDM | 11
U. S. Department of Transportation

Federal Highway Administration

Office of Operations (HOP)

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20590

Phone: 202-366-6726

Fax: 202-366-3225

Office of Operations Web Site

www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov

August 2012

FHWA-HOP-12-035