Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes Handbook, Third Edition: Chapter 19, Employer and Institutional TDM Strategies (2010) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 1-173
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 1... ...
Programs can include supportive actions, special transportation services, financial incentives, or alternative work arrangements. TDM programs can also involve parking management and regular transit service enhancements; however, these topics are for the most part discussed in other chapters within this TCRP Report 95 "Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes" Handbook (see below)
|
From page 2... ...
lane update within Chapter 2 under "Traveler Response by Type of HOV Application" -- "Response to HOV Facility Exempt Vehicle and Value Pricing Programs." • Operational-level transit service enhancements are addressed in Chapter 9, "Transit Scheduling and Frequency"; Chapter 10, "Bus Routing and Coverage"; and -- to the extent express bus can be considered an operational-level strategy -- in Chapter 4, "Busways, BRT and Express Bus." • "Vanpools and Buspools" is the sole subject of Chapter 5. • Transit promotion and pricing, including travel pass partnership programs, are topics of Chapter 11, "Transit Information and Promotion," and Chapter 12, "Transit Pricing and Fares." • Parking strategies, especially important to TDM, are covered in two chapters -- Chapter 13, "Parking Pricing and Fees," and Chapter 18, "Parking Management and Supply." • Land use and non-motorized travel considerations are addressed in Chapter 15, "Land Use and Site Design"; Chapter 16, "Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities"; and Chapter 17, "Transit Oriented Development." Beyond what is contained within the chapters of TCRP Report 95, resources that cover the broader scope of TDM are identified in the "Additional Resources" section.
|
From page 3... ...
These measures, which serve to raise awareness, provide information, remove impediments, and encourage use of travel alternatives, generally do not involve any financial inducement or physical service offerings. Examples include: transportation coordinators; on-site transit information and/or pass sales; rideshare matching services; preferential parking for carpools or vanpools; provision of bike lockers, showers, and/or changing facilities; and guaranteed ride home.
|
From page 4... ...
While a guaranteed ride home may be seldom used, it is felt to be important in reducing reliance on a personal vehicle at the workplace and thus lessening the need to drive alone. Preferential Parking.
|
From page 5... ...
Fare subsidies are a particular type of vanpool assistance measure, and these are discussed under "Financial Incentives or Disincentives" below. While this chapter discusses the role of vanpools in travel demand management programs, Chapter 5, "Vanpools and Buspools," provides detailed information on vanpools as a travel alternative.
|
From page 6... ...
Alternative Work Arrangements Alternative work arrangement actions are strategies that modify the time of travel or frequency of travel. They include flexible or staggered work hours, compressed work weeks (CWW)
|
From page 7... ...
As with CWW or staggered work hours, employees who telecommute generally do so on a fixed schedule that they negotiate with their employer. Analytical Considerations Attempting to quantify the impact of TDM strategies on traveler behavior brings several critical analytical considerations to light.
|
From page 8... ...
Either trip rate expression (and also AVR) may be used to compute vehicle trip reduction (VTR)
|
From page 9... ...
• The second is a more recent effort by the University of South Florida's Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR) , done under its National Center for Transit Research, which has attempted to develop a Worksite Trip Reduction Model using data from the California (Regulation XV)
|
From page 10... ...
The authors of Chapter 19 have had access to this unpublished technical information, and the TCRP Report 95 team received support for using these Project B-4 data and findings in developing this third edition Handbook. 3 Slightly different methods were used by the three studies to establish a baseline against which to gauge the given program's presumed vehicle trip reduction (VTR)
|
From page 11... ...
This approach is used to examine each of the four basic TDM strategy groupings: employer support, transportation services, financial incentives, and alternative work arrangements. This 82-program sample becomes the basis or starting point for the analysis in each of the program areas.
|
From page 12... ...
In the mostly exemplary 82-program sample of employers, the sites with high transit availability had an average program-level vehicle trip reduction (VTR) of 26 percent, compared with 12 percent where transit availability was low.
|
From page 13... ...
In the 82-program sample, those employers who featured transit subsidies in their TDM programs had an average VTR of 21 percent, versus 14 percent for those who did not. Carpool subsidies, per se, 19-13 4 All VTR findings reported from the 82-program sample examination include the effects of not only the TDM strategy being discussed (with or without employer transportation services in this case)
|
From page 14... ...
Alternative Work Arrangements Alternative work arrangements constitute the final major category of TDM strategies. They include flexible work hours, staggered work hours, compressed work weeks (CWW)
|
From page 15... ...
It is not known to what extent the gradual adoption of flexible work hours in recent years may have reduced the remaining potential for peak spreading by shifting the baseline starting point for concentrated alternative work arrangements programs. Site-Specific and System-Level Impacts Site-specific impacts are the focus of this chapter, but it is important to understand the relationship with area-wide, regional, and system-level impacts of employer TDM programs.
|
From page 16... ...
By comparing the vehicle trip rate of the employer with the TDM program relative to the vehicle trip rate measured either before implementation or as some other control rate representing background conditions, one may interpret the change or difference in trip rate as a vehicle trip reduction (VTR) attributable to the TDM program.
|
From page 17... ...
Frequently, low utilization of alternative modes for commuting or of alternative work arrangements such as telecommuting or CWW is a result of low awareness and poor information. Several studies have shown that even in an employment setting where 19-17
|
From page 18... ...
This is the first of a number of tables of this genre. In these tables, vehicle trip reduction strategies are cross-classified, either with each other or with ambient conditions such as transit availability.
|
From page 19... ...
." This indicates that out of the 82-program sample, 10 programs have been found to be characterized both by a high level of employer support actions in their TDM programs and location in areas of high transit availability. The simple average VTR of these 10 programs has been calculated to be 28.4 percent.
|
From page 20... ...
(65) Compressed Work Week Yes 19.7% 21.5% 8.3% 19.5% (15)
|
From page 21... ...
The difference between high and low transit availability sites with high support is 28.4 percent versus 15.9 percent VTR, while the same comparison for medium-support sites is 28.2 percent versus 13.6 percent, and for low support it is 24.3 percent versus 8.6 percent. Interestingly, though, the implementation of higher-level support programs when transit service is limited seems to have more of a benefit -- while the difference between low- and high-support programs when transit availability is high is only 4.1 percentage points5 (24.3 percent versus 28.4 percent)
|
From page 22... ...
, or guaranteed ride home (36 percent)
|
From page 23... ...
. Guaranteed Ride Home.
|
From page 24... ...
The most common support measures observed were marketing, rideshare matching, guaranteed ride home, and facilities and amenities such as bike racks, showers, and changing areas (CUTR, 2004)
|
From page 25... ...
No. of Programs Bike Incentives 5.4% 25 Bike/Walk Facilities 5.0 77 Preferential Parking 5.5 61 Carpool Matching 4.9 47 Carpool Incentives 4.3 23 Guaranteed Ride Home 5.8 74 Prizes, Rewards 5.5 75 Flexible Schedules for Alternative Mode Use 9.0 5 Transit Support Incentives 3.4 21 Information Measures 4.7 239 All (Programs with "Marketing and Support" Strategies Only)
|
From page 26... ...
. Response to Employer Transportation Services It is relatively uncommon for employers or institutions in the United States to become involved in the physical transportation of their employees, and more likely that they will simply encourage them to use alternatives that are available in the marketplace.
|
From page 27... ...
The last two columns summarize and compare the programs of all employers providing services with those who did not. Finally, trip reduction impacts are presented in relation to such elements as transit availability, restricted parking, parking fees, level of support program, modal subsidies, and the alternative work arrangements of telecommuting and CWW.
|
From page 28... ...
. The best-performing programs in this low transit availability category are the six that provided use of company vehicles, averaging 21.8 percent VTR.
|
From page 29... ...
(40) Compressed Work Week Yes 20.5% 22.2% 15.4% 24.2% 23.0% 16.2% (3)
|
From page 30... ...
Programs in this high transit availability category have an average VTR of 28.8 percent, which is quite high but still only 5.2 percentage points greater than those programs that had high transit availability but did not offer additional transportation services. Restricted Parking.
|
From page 31... ...
It is also important to point out that overall evidence on the mode choice effects of telecommuting is mixed, as suggested by the examples provided under "Response to Alternative Work Arrangements" -- "Additional Research Evidence on Alternative Work Arrangements" -- "Telecommuting." Compressed Work Weeks. A slightly less ambiguous result is produced in combination with CWW, another alternative work hours strategy, even though the same 82-program sample data limitations apply.
|
From page 32... ...
Table 19-5 lists a number of employers from the 82-program sample that achieved fairly substantial vehicle trip reductions in conjunction with providing one or more transportation services. Of course, there are many other aspects of these particular exemplary programs that may have led to their performance, such as parking conditions, financial incentives, and employer support, and these characteristics are also summarized in the table.
|
From page 33... ...
Prof./Office 400 Sub CBD Medium Medium CV R, P, D T, C, A 38.9% Bellevue City Hall Gov't. 650 Office Park Medium Medium CV R, P, D T, V, A 30.0% Wm.
|
From page 34... ...
Although they are not purely employer-provided transit services, there are many examples where cooperative efforts have been made to institute shuttle services to either close a gap in existing service, formalize a connection with regional transit, or improve internal circulation and thus reduce auto dependency. Table 19-6 lists ten such services that were staged as demonstration projects under the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority's regional TDM program.
|
From page 35... ...
. b Vehicle Trips Reduced (round trips)
|
From page 36... ...
. Each of these listed sites achieved a notable vehicle trip reduction, although it would appear that parking conditions, transit availability, and financial incentives also played a significant role in each program's performance.
|
From page 37... ...
TCRP Report 108, "Car-Sharing: Where and How It Succeeds," presents examples of employers in the Seattle, Washington, CBD and CBD fringe area who have successfully incorporated car-sharing strategies into their TDM programs (Nelson\Nygaard and Westat, 2005) : • The Seattle Times has used car-sharing to reduce parking demand following sale of several of its surface parking lots.
|
From page 38... ...
3. Work-based day users, employees of the participating employers at Stanford Research Park, who were able to use the vehicles for personal and business trips during the day under a subscription package to employers of $300/month per vehicle.
|
From page 39... ...
Transportation Brokerage. For lack of a better term, there are occasions when either an area-wide organization or a large employer takes on the role of transportation broker, in which it attempts to provide for the transportation needs of commuters in an environment where alternatives to driving are very limited.
|
From page 40... ...
The dramatic mode shifts and parking demand reductions that occurred are shown in Table 19-8 below for pre-program, program without monetary incentives, and program with monetary incentives (Wegmann, Chatterjee, and Stokey, 1979) : 19-40 Table 19-8 Impacts on Mode Share of the TVA Transportation Brokerage Program After Program (Context and Implementation Stages)
|
From page 41... ...
. • Travel allowances (also includes parking "cash-out")
|
From page 42... ...
Programs with transit subsidies have the third largest impact in terms of VTR, with such programs exhibiting an average VTR of 20.6 percent, 7.5 percentage points higher than the 13.1 percent VTR in those programs not offering transit fare subsidies. The VTRs associated with vanpool subsidies in Table 19-9 suggest a curious inverse relationship, wherein programs that offered subsidies show up as less effective than those that did not (15.3 percent VTR versus 17.2 percent VTR)
|
From page 43... ...
(31) HOV Parking Discounts 26.9% 36.2% 38.9% n/a 28.9% 29.0% 25.7% (16)
|
From page 44... ...
together with restricted parking averages 27.6 percent VTR, while restricted parking overall and priced parking overall both average 24.6 percent. • Parking fees with HOV parking discounts averages 25.8 percent VTR, slightly greater than parking pricing overall (24.6 percent)
|
From page 45... ...
19-45 Table 19-10 Vehicle Trip Reduction Percentages Related to Monetary Incentives in the Case of Programs Without Restricted or Priced Parking VTR by Type of Employer Incentive Offered (Sample Size) Other Incentive Vanpool Subsidy Carpool Subsidy Bike/Walk Subsidy Travel Allowance Other Monetary All Transit Subsidy 8.7% 12.1% 12.1% 18.3% 18.5% 13.5% (8)
|
From page 46... ...
(82) 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% 26.0% (21)
|
From page 47... ...
This is certainly the case with regard to parking pricing, HOV parking discounts, and transit subsidies, and is true in most cases for carpool and bike/walk subsidies, travel allowances, and other monetary incentives. In the case of parking pricing, the effect on VTR seems to be almost independent of level of support, with low support programs registering a 22.8 percent VTR compared to 24.4 percent for high support programs, and both substantially higher than the equivalent programs without parking pricing (9.6 percent and 12.5 percent, respectively)
|
From page 48... ...
The same situation is evident for HOV parking discounts in combination with services and for transit subsidies with services. The various combinations appear to yield a much larger impact than either the monetary strategy or the transportation services strategy acting independently.
|
From page 49... ...
$25/mo. VP 5.6% Cedars Sinai Hospital Yes Yes Yes 12.6% CH2M Hill - Bellevue Yes $56/mo.
|
From page 50... ...
23.0% Pacific Pipeline Yes $24/mo. 15.1% Pasadena City Hall Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes 18.5% Puget Sound Blood Center Yes Yes $25/mo.
|
From page 51... ...
$60/mo. 47.4% State Farm Insurance Paid to not park 30.4% Swedish Hospital Yes $44/mo.
|
From page 52... ...
Sites in Table 19-12 that employed HOV parking discounts include: Atlantic Richfield Company -- Los Angeles (34.5 percent VTR) , Bellevue City Hall (30.0 percent)
|
From page 53... ...
Over time, the scope and amount of the alternative mode tax benefits have been steadily expanded. A major change occurred in conjunction with the Energy Policy Act of 1992 that raised the monthly employee taxfree transit subsidy limit to $60, included vanpools as an eligible mode, put a first-time ceiling on employer-provided parking of $155/month, and provided for inflation indexing.
|
From page 54... ...
Individual program examples featuring transit subsidies as their principal financial incentive measure have been selected from the tabulation for listing in Table 19-13. (This comparison is different from the Table 19-12 subsample because it takes transit availability into account.)
|
From page 55... ...
Low Transit Availability (VTR) Restricted/Priced Parking Free Parking Free Parking AT&T Silver Spring (24.0%)
|
From page 56... ...
Transit subsidies are clearly the most common alternate mode subsidies, in large part because of the favorable tax treatment they receive. Extension of comparable tax treatment to vanpools has increased the attractiveness of subsidy incentives to that mode, although most of these programs are already implicitly subsidized through the employer-provided vanpool program.
|
From page 57... ...
Table 19-14 makes it clear that the mode shifts obtained for the vanpool, express bus, and other alternative modes, as well as the net effect on driving alone, were larger for the addition of incentives than for the original provision of transportation services. Only carpooling and regular bus ridership were largely insensitive to the incentives, perhaps because other alternative modes became more attractive.
|
From page 58... ...
It is instructive to examine them with regard to how their program success may be related to the measures they applied: • Southern California Gas (47.4 percent VTR) , offered a $50/month Travel Allowance in conjunction with parking fees and HOV parking discounts.
|
From page 59... ...
Parking charges and alternate mode travel allowances were counted as additive HOV incentives, whereas a general travel allowance was assumed to decrease the HOV incentive of a parking charge. In other words, if an employer had both a parking charge and a general travel allowance, the allowance is subtracted from the parking charge to get the net HOV incentive value.
|
From page 60... ...
Other interesting approaches include the Puget Sound Blood Center, which offered one day of free parking to qualifying alternate mode users; Ventura County and State Farm Insurance, who paid employees for not driving (similar to parking cash-out) ; and US West in Bellevue, which offered equipment rebates for bike commuters.
|
From page 61... ...
. Response to Alternative Work Arrangements Alternative work arrangement actions are strategies that modify the time at which travel occurs or the frequency of travel.
|
From page 62... ...
• Telecommuting, also known as telework, allows the employee to work from home some number of days per week or month, usually by virtue of an electronic connection that keeps the employee in continuous real-time contact with the work site. A less common alternative is where the employee works from a special satellite "telework" center.9 Alternative Work Arrangements Insights from the 82-Program Sample A key question regarding alternative work schedule strategies is whether or not they are supportive of TDM strategies that encourage use of alternative modes and thereby reduce vehicle trip rates and, if not, whether their introduction leads to a net reduction or gain in vehicle trips.
|
From page 63... ...
The data limitations lead to an understatement of overall CWW and telecommute vehicle trip travel savings, but they do directly shed light on the issue of variable work hours effects on alternative mode use. Overall Effect of Alternative Work Arrangement Strategies.
|
From page 64... ...
Alternative Work Arrangements in Relation to Transit Availability. Flexible hours seem to have their positive impact only when applied in the presence of medium or low transit availability.
|
From page 65... ...
(82) Transit Availability High 25.8% 26.4% 27.2% 25.7% 27.4% 25.1% 26.4% 25.9% 26.0% (16)
|
From page 66... ...
Flexible Hours Staggered Hours Compressed Work Week Telecommuting Other Conditions or Programs With W/out With W/out With W/out With W/out All Incentives Restricted Parking 28.5% 19.2% 19.2% 25.4% 29.1% 22.5% 26.5% 24.3% 24.6% (20)
|
From page 67... ...
The top portion of the second page of Table 19-16 highlights the effects of alternative work hours strategies when combined with restricted parking, parking fees, and HOV parking discounts. Of the 35 programs with restricted parking, 20 also featured flexible hours, five had staggered hours, 11 offered CWW, and five had telecommute programs.
|
From page 68... ...
(One might well surmise that the reason for the significantly enhanced performance of these particular four programs is something more than just inclusion of a staggered work hours strategy.) Reviewing the table, flexible hours programs exhibit a higher calculated VTR when combined with staggered hours (27.2 versus 19.5 percent VTR)
|
From page 69... ...
Faced with a local traffic management ordinance requiring a reduction not only in vehicle trips, but also in the number of those trips occurring in the peak hour, flextime was found to be very effective in shifting employee arrival times to less congested periods. A survey of 14,800 employees 2 years after the opening of Bishop Ranch showed an increase from 8 percent to 17 percent in the percentage of employees starting work before 7:00 AM.
|
From page 70... ...
Those involved in the experiment included employees previously on staggered hours and also those on a normal work schedule. The basic 5-day work week remained unchanged for flexible hours program participants.
|
From page 71... ...
31% 8:45-9:00 35% 4:30-4:45 After (Flexible Hours) 18% 8:45-9:00 25% 4:30-4:45 Floor "B" Before (Staggered Hours)
|
From page 72... ...
Staggered Work Hours. The state of Hawaii, as a demonstration project to determine whether spreading arrival times of downtown workers would relieve peak-period congestion, changed official office hours for state, city, and county employees from 7:45 AM–4:30 PM to 8:30 AM–5:15 PM for a test period covering February 22 through March 18, 1988.
|
From page 73... ...
An important consideration in any variable work hours program, be it flexible/staggered work hours or CWW, is that a sufficiently high percentage of the employment base needs to participate in the program. If peak-spreading and congestion reduction are the primary objectives (as opposed to mode shifts and vehicle trip reduction)
|
From page 74... ...
, Ventura County tested a variable work hours program consisting of flextime and both 9/80 and 4/40 work weeks. Commuter Transportation Services, Inc.
|
From page 75... ...
Out of 2,766 workers, 24.6 percent were employees reporting at least 1 day of teleworking in the last 2 months, 7.0 percent were home-based-business workers, and 68.4 percent were non-teleworking employees. Table 19-19 provides a telecommuting frequency analysis derived using a final frequency analysis sample of 499 telecommuters (Walls, Safirova, and Jiang, 2007)
|
From page 76... ...
Beginning in 1990, the Washington State Energy Office staged a 2-year Telecommuting Demonstration project in the Puget Sound area involving 25 public and private organizations and 280 participants. In structuring the monitoring and evaluation of the experi19-76 Table 19-19 Telecommuting Frequency Analysis of 2002 Southern California Workers Telecommuting at Least Once in Two Months Days Telecommuted in the Previous Week Number of Telecommuters As a Percentage of Telecommuters As a Pct.
|
From page 77... ...
Telecommuting was estimated to have reduced average commute VMT per telecommuter on telecommute days by 36 miles, netting out to 29 miles after accounting for mode shifts. In the special case of the telework center, travel data indicated that vehicle trips did not decrease for these participants, since they still had to commute to the center.
|
From page 78... ...
These estimates suggest that a telecommute day only eliminates a vehicle trip 76 percent of the time (82 percent drive alone less 6 percent actually commuting)
|
From page 79... ...
Lifestyle and life cycle impacts also seem to be more evident than in the response to more conventional transportation system changes, either because they are in fact more important in the case of responses to TDM or perhaps because they simply have received more attention given the shorter-term focus and more individualized nature of TDM actions. This subsection starts with examining the role of tripmaker economic utility decisions and then proceeds through other layers of influences including barrier effects, interactions of the employer and employee, special considerations involved in alternative work arrangements, and employee awareness of available program elements.
|
From page 80... ...
Parking pricing impacts the cost equation by enhancing the out-of-pocket cost advantage of alternative modes. The companion strategy (or phenomenon, as the case may be)
|
From page 81... ...
Guaranteed ride home is the strategy geared to addressing situations where alternative modes can't themselves meet such off-schedule needs. A factor that has characterized a number of the most successful worksite TDM programs, but is very hard to propagate on a multi-employer basis, is a deeply supportive company culture.
|
From page 82... ...
It is hypothesized that the program may have been operating in a "supersaturated" mode in response to not only the 1970s energy crises but also a very special corporate enthusiasm and ethic. For a full discussion of this example, see Chapter 5, "Vanpools and Buspools," under "Response to Vanpool and Buspool Programs" -- "Employer Sponsored Vanpool Programs" -- "Outstanding Employer Vanpool Programs." Alternative Work Arrangements Considerations Variable work hours arrangements are somewhat unique among TDM strategies in that the trip timing decision process of the individual employee comes into full play when employees are given the discretion to choose their own work times, as with flextime.
|
From page 83... ...
If anything, children under 6 are a neutral or positive indicator, while older children (along with household distractions) are a neutral or negative indicator.
|
From page 84... ...
• As might be expected, job suitability for telecommuting is a positive indicator, whereas the converse is a negative indicator, along with workplace misunderstanding and lack of manager support. Individual perception of a need for office discipline or desirability of face-toface-communication or social interaction with co-workers is a negative indicator.
|
From page 85... ...
19-85 Table 19-21 Average Levels of Employee Awareness of Offered TDM Strategies in Los Angeles and Sacramento Programs TDM Strategy Percent Awareness a TDM Strategy Percent Awareness a Bike Racks 55% Company Vanpool Vehicles 67% Showers, Lockers, Changing 38 Guaranteed Ride Home 36 Facilities Rideshare Matching 70 Bus Pass Discount 17 Rideshare Prizes 64 Bus Pass Sales On-Site 41 Transportation Coordinator 45 Carpool Preferential Parking 77 Transportation Fairs 15 Note: a Calculated as the number of employees who reported having each strategy, divided by the number of employees whose employer reported providing the strategy. Each calculation excludes employees whose employer did not report providing the measure.
|
From page 86... ...
However, most often the simplest programs -- those with few measures but including monetary incentives and perhaps one or more transportation services -- had the most demonstrable impact on travel behavior and vehicle trip reduction (VTR) (Comsis, 1993b)
|
From page 87... ...
Most regulatory programs have required provision of certain basic measures, especially marketing and promotion, information on alternatives, rideshare matching, an employee transportation coordinator (ETC) , guaranteed ride home, bike racks, and preferential carpool parking.
|
From page 88... ...
from the 82-program sample, Appendix Table 19-A. b Young and Luo (1995)
|
From page 89... ...
. In terms of net behavior change, however, Table 19-23 provides some insight on the measured impact of the programs on choice of commute method (including both mode and alternative work arrangements)
|
From page 90... ...
Pt. Change Drive Alone 73.5% 67.2% - 6.3% 80.6% 73.0% - 7.6% 79.5% 74.1% - 5.4% Carpool 15.5 21.4 + 5.9 12.8 17.7 + 3.9 Vanpool 1.2 1.9 + 0.7 0.5 1.9 + 1.4 9.9 9.8 - 0.1 Transit 4.0 4.3 + 0.3 2.6 3.5 + 0.9 7.1 11.1 + 4.0 Walk/Bike 3.0 3.0 0.0 2.8 3.7 + 0.9 3.1 2.9 - 0.2 Compressed Work Week 1.3 1.9 + 0.6 n/a n/a n/a 1.3 1.7 + 0.4 Telecommute 1.4 0.3 - 1.1 0.0 0.3 + 0.3 0.2 0.5 + 0.3 Sources: a Young and Luo (1995)
|
From page 91... ...
Tables 19-24 and 19-25 explore this question on the basis of two characteristics, type of employer and employer size, once again drawing upon the 82-program sample as described in Appendix Table 19-A.11 This investigation only attempts to chart the types of strategies which may be more common to particular types of employers, and does not address the implications of these strategy preferences on outcome, namely vehicle trip reduction. Earlier sections have examined the relative effectiveness of various types of strategies versus others.
|
From page 92... ...
It would appear, though, that office, utility, government, universities, and other institutions are somewhat more likely to offer these strategies with high frequency compared to commercial, manufacturing, and medical types of employers. Interestingly, utilities and universities are the most likely to have limited parking and to charge for that parking, while commercial, manufacturing, government, and other institutions are more likely to have ample parking and to provide it without charge.12 The offering of preferential parking appears to coincide with the restricted/priced parking that more frequently occurs with utilities, universities, and other institutions, possibly because these are also generally large employers with large parking facilities, where offering close-in parking for HOVs could actually be a meaningful incentive.
|
From page 93... ...
Info. Center/ETC 80.0% 50.0% 64.3% 70.0% 87.5% 50.0% 100.0% 100.0% 74.4% Rideshare Matching 60.0 50.0 64.3 80.0 87.5 50.0 100.0 85.7 68.3 Guaranteed Ride 60.0 62.5 57.1 100.0 37.5 66.7 75.0 57.1 63.4 On-Site Pass Sales 20.0 12.5 21.4 10.0 25.0 0.0 25.0 42.9 19.5 Fairs/Promotions 12.0 12.5 35.7 40.0 0.0 0.0 25.0 57.1 22.0 On-Site Services 8.0 0.0 14.3 10.0 12.5 0.0 0.0 14.3 8.5 Preferential Parking 28.0% 37.5% 64.3% 40.0% 62.5% 16.7% 75.0% 71.4% 45.1% Bike Racks/Showers 36.0 50.0 50.0 90.0 37.5 33.3 100.0 57.1 51.2 Company Vehicles 12.0 12.5 14.3 20.0 12.5 0.0 0.0 14.3 12.2 Vanpool Program 32.0 12.5 42.9 0.0 37.5 16.7 75.0 0.0 26.8 Transit Services 8.0 12.5 14.3 0.0 0.0 50.0 75.0 14.3 14.6 Restricted Parking 56.0% 25.0% 14.3% 30.0% 87.5% 66.7% 100.0% 28.6% 46.3% Parking Fees 52.0 25.0 0.0 30.0 62.5 50.0 75.0 42.9 39.0 HOV Parking Discounts 36.0 12.5 0.0 30.0 37.5 16.7 25.0 0.0 22.0 Transit Subsidies 80.0 50.0 35.7 70.0 75.0 83.3 50.0 71.4 65.9 Trnsp.
|
From page 94... ...
; and telecommuting. Strategies where size of employer does not obviously correlate with higher frequency of offering include information center/ETC, guaranteed ride home, use of company vehicles, transit subsidies, HOV parking discounts, flextime, and CWW.
|
From page 95... ...
Info Center/ETC 50.0% 76.5% 57.1% 76.9% 74.4% Rideshare Matching 0.0 58.8 71.4 79.5 68.3 Guaranteed Ride 0.0 76.5 57.1 56.4 63.4 On-Site Pass Sales 50.0 8.8 14.3 28.2 19.5 Fairs/Promotions 50.0 8.8 14.3 33.3 22.0 On-Site Services 0.0 11.8 0.0 7.7 8.5 Preferential Parking 0.0 29.4 28.6 64.1 45.1 Bike Racks/Showers 100.0 44.1 14.3 61.5 51.2 Company Vehicles 0.0 14.7 14.3 10.3 12.2 Vanpool Program 0.0 8.8 0.0 48.7 26.8 Transit Services 0.0 2.9 14.3 25.6 14.6 Restricted Parking 0.0 32.4 42.9 61.5 46.3 Parking Fees 0.0 35.3 42.9 43.6 39.0 HOV Parking Discounts 0.0 20.6 42.9 20.5 22.0 Transit Subsidies 0.0 64.7 71.4 69.2 65.9 Transp. Allow./Cash-Out 0.0 17.6 0.0 12.8 13.4 Other-Mode Subsidies 0.0 29.4 57.1 51.3 41.5 Other Monetary Incentives 0.0 11.8 0.0 20.5 14.6 Flextime 0.0 64.7 28.6 56.4 56.1 Staggered Hours 0.0 2.9 0.0 12.8 7.3 Compressed Work Week 0.0 41.2 14.3 43.6 39.0 Telecommuting 0.0 11.8 14.3 25.6 18.3 Sources: Derived (see Appendix Table 19-A)
|
From page 96... ...
> 1,000 (584) Preferential Parking Areas 27 64 197 252 436 Ongoing Transit Subsidies 31 57 146 217 326 Prize Drawings, Raffles 27 47 153 208 295 Bike Racks 24 50 130 178 250 Regional Rideshare Matching 21 43 107 142 218 Transit Information/Racks 14 27 89 133 210 Guaranteed Ride Home 17 33 79 117 207 Flextime for Ridesharers 12 21 78 134 197 Employer Rideshare Matching 14 30 84 129 181 Ongoing Carpool Subsidies 7 29 97 138 180 New Hire Orientation 18 26 67 118 166 Commuter Info Center 9 14 74 110 157 Employee Benefits and Services 20 31 73 105 151 Showers and Lockers 10 26 58 78 149 Marketing Elements - Other 11 20 84 118 147 On-Site Services 13 19 49 69 120 Bike to Work Subsidies 6 20 64 91 114 Ongoing Vanpool Subsidies 2 8 46 50 113 Walk to Work Subsidies 13 28 65 92 109 4/40 Work Schedule 3 11 37 74 108 Company Owned/Leased Vans 3 5 35 64 108 Commuter Fairs 4 7 36 65 87 Use of Company Vehicles 2 10 27 43 82 Company Recognition 11 17 44 48 70 Work At Home 3 5 27 33 68 On-Site Auto Services 22 24 34 41 59 Direct Financial Incentives 6 10 25 29 55 9/80 Work Schedule 1 7 11 37 41 Additional Time Off with Pay 3 13 21 19 39 Subsidized Rideshare Parking 1 5 7 28 3/36 Work Schedule 1 4 10 13 23 Facility Improvements 4 8 4 10 18 Parking Management Strategies 2 5 12 13 17 Passenger Loading Areas 1 1 2 3 17 Parking Fees for Drive Alones 4 9 13 Childcare Services 4 2 3 11 Work at Satellite Center 1 7 5 Transportation Allowance 1 2 5 Source: Drawn from SCAQMD Regulation XV Database as published in JHK & Associates (1992)
|
From page 97... ...
Passenger Loading Areas 4,364 31 53,178 10 21 Showers and Lockers 15,886 16 198,945 1 15 Marketing Elements - Other 22,935 13 65,785 5 8 Direct Financial Incentives 3,304 33 5,390 26 7 On-Site Auto Services 5,181 27 9,856 21 6 Additional Time Off with Pay 2,883 35 4,168 30 5 New Hire Orientation 14,405 17 27,662 14 3 Company Recognition 16,674 15 31,697 12 3 Guaranteed Ride Home 32,877 9 61,430 6 3 Parking Fees for Drive Alones 3,010 34 3,362 32 2 Transportation Allowance 950 37 1,824 36 1 Work At Home 2,417 36 1,858 35 1 Parking Management Strategies 4,477 29 4,812 28 1 Commuter Fairs 13,331 18 23,861 17 1 Work at Satellite Center 603 38 32 38 0 Prize Drawings, Raffles 38,090 8 55,236 8 0 Commuter Info Center 57,027 4 80,675 4 0 Regional Rideshare Matching 72,579 3 87,658 3 0 Walk to Work Subsidies 4,411 30 3,477 31 -1 Bike Racks 5,921 24 5,399 25 -1 3/36 Work Schedule 10,414 19 15,083 20 -1 On-Site Services 179,412 1 97,734 2 -1 Bike to Work Subsidies 3,876 32 2,839 34 -2 Subsidized Rideshare Parking 5,466 25 4,872 27 -2 9/80 Work Schedule 6,994 22 6,223 24 -2 Facility Improvements 7,506 21 6,965 23 -2 Ongoing Vanpool Subsidies 7,823 20 8,266 22 -2 Preferential Parking Areas 41,809 7 53,398 9 -2 Employer Rideshare Matching 56,667 5 56,102 7 -2 Employee Benefits and Services 23,444 12 25,213 15 -3 Transit Information/Racks 28,603 10 31,610 13 -3 4/40 Work Schedule 19,120 14 20,085 18 -4 Ongoing Carpool Subsidies 27,339 11 24,940 16 -5 Flextime for Ridesharers 46,003 6 37,193 11 -5 Introductory Transit Subsidies 5,927 23 4,767 29 -6 Company Owned/Leased Vans 5,256 26 3,323 33 -7 Childcare Services 4,751 28 1,344 37 -9 Ongoing Transit Subsidies 95,461 2 19,116 19 -17 Source: Drawn from SCAQMD Regulation XV Database as published in JHK & Associates (1992)
|
From page 98... ...
These SCAQMD-regulated employer shifts in strategy, with their failure to take on or even stick with much in the way of financial incentives and disincentives or transportation services, held trip reduction to modest levels. Employment sites involved for the longest time period achieved, in 3-plus years, slightly over a 7 percent average reduction in journey-to-work vehicle trips per employee.
|
From page 99... ...
Flexible work schedule shares (telecommuting and CWW) also declined, from 3.8 to 3.1 percent.
|
From page 100... ...
. Overall, the findings suggest that for drive alone, carpool/vanpool, and flexible work schedules, the impact of the TDM financial incentives is measurably more important on changing share than any of the land use measures.
|
From page 101... ...
Without 2.4% 2.7% 2.4% 2.8% 3.4% 1.8% 2.2% 2.7% 2.7% 2.0% With 4.0% 1.9% 3.0% 2.4% 3.8% 2.1% 2.9% 2.7% 2.9% 2.3% AVR Without 1.218 1.229 1.224 1.223 1.225 1.222 1.206 1.230 1.211 1.285 With 1.230 1.271 1.230 1.286 1.229 1.272 1.229 1.263 1.235 1.337 Source: Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
|
From page 102... ...
Multi-task commute trips are commonplace, and often hard to accomplish when not driving alone. When trying to entice the drive-alone commuter into a wholesale shift to an alternative mode, much depends on how essential these intermediate stops are to the household, how frequently they are made, and whether or not there are options at the home or work end of the commute trip that can satisfy the same needs.
|
From page 103... ...
The predominant reason given for stopping was to get fuel for the vehicle. This activity accounted for 45 percent of the stops on the way to work and 63 percent of the stops on the way home from work.
|
From page 104... ...
• Strategies must be appropriate to the travel environment in which they are applied; for example, widespread offering of transit subsidies may not mean much if the level or quality of transit service is poor. • The effect of individual strategies is enhanced if they are combined with other strategies which are known to be "synergistic." For example, providing transportation services is likely to have greater impact if the offering is paired with financial incentives such as user subsidies, and providing carpool matching services and HOV reserved spaces is more likely to be effective if employees driving to the worksite are not guaranteed free parking.
|
From page 105... ...
It offers an integrated rideshare program that provides regional rideshare matching as well as information on other alternative modes to all who receive a matchlist, a guaranteed ride home program in which it runs a regional emergency ride service for participating employers across the region, a telework resource center through which it provides information and assistance to commuters and employers to further in-home and satellite center telework programs, and a network of information kiosks in many locations to provide transit route and schedule information, maps, and rideshare information. Sometimes TDM program development information and technical assistance is provided by the public transit agency, through a special regional ridesharing organization, or through TMAs.
|
From page 106... ...
, as well as carpool matching, vanpool program management, and telecommute program assistance. To make these programs as effective as possible, Metro worked extensively with local communities, TMAs, and with individual employers to design the programs and ensure maximum flow of information down to commuters (Comsis, 1991)
|
From page 107... ...
The first group of variables in the table represents the travel time and cost variables typically at the heart of mode choice models. The modeling analyst compared the coefficients for in-vehicle time, transit out-of-vehicle time, auto operating cost, transit fare, and parking cost with the estimates from ten other metropolitan area travel models and found them to be satisfactorily comparable in both relative and absolute magnitude.
|
From page 108... ...
ETC and Rideshare Matching 0.0777 c 0.0777 c Preferential Rideshare Parking 0.1214 b 0.1214 b Transit Info Center and Pass Sales 1.083 Bike Racks or Showers/Lockers 0.4056 b Guaranteed Ride Home 0.4476 0.4476 0.4476 0.4476 Modal Subsidy 0.0125 0.0125 0.0125 Prizes, Meals, Awards 0.0826 d 0.0826 d 0.0826 d Use of Company Vehicles 0.7861 0.7861 Company-provided Vans 2.586 Notes: Unless otherwise noted, all coefficients are significant at 95 percent confidence level. a Value constrained to 1.5 times IVT coefficient.
|
From page 109... ...
, as does the offering of preferential parking. Predictably, maintaining a transit information center and offering on-site transit pass sales has a fairly solid positive influence on choice of transit, while offering bike racks or showers/ lockers has a moderately positive effect on the decision to bike or walk.
|
From page 110... ...
With the regulatory program data, the conceptual framework must be limited to analyzing changes in aggregate employer vehicle trip rate in relation only to the identified strategies in the trip reduction plan.
|
From page 111... ...
: • Facilities and Amenities: Passenger loading areas, facility improvements, preferential parking areas, bike racks and lockers, showers, and changing facilities. • Guaranteed Ride Home: TMA provided program, company vehicle use, emergency guaranteed ride, rental car guaranteed trip, and taxi guaranteed trip.
|
From page 112... ...
To do this, the model was run parametrically, with different baseline conditions in terms of starting transit mode share and starting vehicle trip rate level.13 Results are presented in Table 19-32, organized according to starting ranges of transit mode shares and vehicle trip rates (CUTR, 2004)
|
From page 113... ...
Work Week Flex. Work Hours TeleWork Parking Management Total Cases 1 X X X X X X X X 1,036 2 X X X X X X X X X 689 3 X X X X X X X 554 4 X X X X X X X 503 5 X X X X X X 466 6 X X X X X X X 337 7 X X X X X X X 304 8 X X X X X X X X X 290 9 X X X X X X 267 10 X X X X X X 264 11 X X X X X X 234 12 X X X X X 233 13 X X X X X X X X 232 14 X X X X X X X 228 15 X X X X X 223 16 X X X X X X X X X X 211 17 X X X X X X X 205 18 X X X X X X X X 184 19 X X X X X X X X 157 20 X X X X X X 147 21 X X X X X X X X 134 22 X X X X X X X 125 23 X X X 124 24 X X X X X X X 124 25 X X X X X X X X X 117 26 X X X X X X X X 117 (continued on next page)
|
From page 114... ...
Work Week Flex. Work Hours TeleWork Parking Management Total Cases 27 X X X X 116 28 X X X X X X X X X 115 29 X X X X X X 113 30 X X X X X X X X 111 31 X X X X X X 111 32 X X X X X X 108 33 X X X X X X 107 34 X X X X X X X X X 106 35 X X X X X X X 106 36 X X X X X X 105 37 X X X X X X 101 38 X X X X X X X X X X 96 39 X X X X X X X X X X X 96 40 X X X X 92 41 X X X X X 89 42 X X X X X X X 86 43 X X X X X X X 81 44 X X X X X X X X X 81 45 X X X X X 80 46 X X X X X X 78 47 X X X X X X X X X 78 48 X X X X X 78 49 X X X X X X X X X 78 50 X X X X X 76 Total 50 46 46 44 39 33 30 23 16 13 8 1 9,793 Source: CUTR (2004)
|
From page 115... ...
19-115 Table 19-32 CUTR Worksite Trip Reduction Model -- Estimates of Vehicle Trip Rate Reductions for the 50 Most Common Employer TDM Program Packages Starting Transit Shares (shown as percentage ranges) and Starting Vehicle Trip Rates (in italics as ranges)
|
From page 116... ...
and Starting Vehicle Trip Rates (in italics as ranges) Transit Share = 0 - 5% 5 - 15% 15 - 25% 25 - 35% 35 - 45% Package Number 100-90 90-80 80-70 70-60 60-50 100-90 90-80 80-70 70-60 60-50 80-70 70-60 60-50 70-60 60-50 60-50 27 -5.1 -2.7 -0.4 1.5 2.9 0.5 -2.8 -0.7 2.2 0.7 1.0 2.3 28 -4.4 -0.6 1.8 3.1 8.8 -1.1 0.2 2.7 -0.3 29 -6.9 -3.7 -1.2 -4.8 3.0 -3.6 -0.9 2.3 0.4 -0.8 -0.2 -2.4 -2.0 -1.6 30 -3.2 -1.6 0.9 3.7 2.0 -0.2 -1.3 3.0 -0.9 -0.3 31 -4.3 -2.0 0.0 1.2 4.2 -1.2 1.7 1.8 4.3 -1.1 0.4 3.2 -1.4 2.1 -0.9 32 -4.8 -3.3 -1.2 0.5 -1.6 -1.4 1.9 3.3 -3.6 -0.9 -2.6 33 -5.3 -4.1 -0.9 0.5 -3.7 0.1 0.6 4.1 -5.1 0.1 -0.2 34 -1.7 0.3 2.7 -0.4 1.1 2.5 35 -6.5 -2.9 0.1 0.3 -2.6 -0.9 1.6 4.8 -1.0 -0.8 3.8 -1.7 36 -5.9 -3.5 -1.4 0.1 1.3 -7.6 -3.8 -0.3 -1.1 0.5 -1.6 1.1 37 -4.8 -2.9 -0.5 2.3 -3.5 1.6 3.8 38 -3.1 0.1 2.4 4.9 5.3 0.8 3.4 39 -3.5 -1.0 2.1 1.0 -0.9 1.4 3.6 2.1 40 -5.1 -2.1 -0.9 0.9 2.8 -2.9 -2.5 0.9 0.3 41 -6.1 -2.4 1.0 3.2 2.5 -1.4 0.9 3.1 4.6 3.0 2.1 3.2 42 -2.9 -0.5 2.5 4.1 4.6 -2.9 2.0 0.8 43 -2.7 0.7 2.9 0.9 2.5 2.5 2.7 44 -5.3 -2.1 -0.6 1.5 -3.7 0.5 0.0 45 -2.8 0.3 0.8 6.4 -0.5 0.1 1.2 0.0 1.1 1.0 46 -3.0 -1.5 1.3 -1.8 -1.8 1.1 8.0 2.0 47 -2.6 -1.6 0.7 2.6 2.2 -1.1 -0.4 -2.2 -3.5 48 -4.4 -3.1 -0.9 -2.4 -3.6 -2.8 -1.7 -1.6 -3.7 -4.6 49 -5.5 -2.4 0.7 2.0 -3.5 -1.9 1.7 5.2 -1.2 -1.7 0.3 -1.5 50 -6.5 -3.9 -1.9 1.0 2.1 -4.9 -4.4 -1.5 0.3 1.9 -1.1 -0.4 Note: The vehicle trip rates shown as ranges, and also the trip rate change estimates, are in units of average vehicle trips per 100 employees.
|
From page 117... ...
In other words, given the same set of TDM strategies, employers whose starting vehicle trip rate is already down in the 80-70 vehicle trips per 100 employees range will see less additional trip reduction than an employer whose starting vehicle trip rate is in the 100-90 range. The same is more-or-less true of higher starting transit mode shares, as it would appear that many of these strategies may appeal more to potential carpool/ vanpool users than to potential transit users, and may even begin to lure some employees away from transit.
|
From page 118... ...
3.1% 1.0% 1.3% 2.6% -1.5% 3.0% 2.3% 0.1% 1.3% -1.3% 1.3% Commuter Tax Benefit Incentives 6.8% 3.6% 4.3% 2.7% 2.4% 4.7% 4.4% 4.2% 7.0% 2.6% 2.4% 5.0% Notes: Hypothetical employer of 100 employees, with starting employee mode shares of 86 percent drive alone, 10 percent rideshare, 2 percent transit, and 2 percent bike or walk (90.6 Vehicle Trips per 100 Employees)
|
From page 119... ...
, CWW with facilities and amenities (5.7 percent versus 3.8 percent and 4.1 percent individually) , parking management with facilities and amenities (4.2 percent VTR versus 3.0 percent and 4.1 percent individually)
|
From page 120... ...
. United Kingdom experience with travel plan employer participation rates is included in the "Site- Versus System-Level Impacts" subsection which follows.
|
From page 121... ...
Examples of broader agency-implemented programs are wide-area transit improvements and regional rideshare matching programs. Indeed, a number of important objectives associated with TDM apply at the site level, including employee and through-traffic congestion mitigation at site access points, site traffic pollutant emissions reduction, parking facility needs reduction, and employee benefits.
|
From page 122... ...
Evaluating degree of site-level impact dilution by non-participating employers requires associating employer subgroups with their average employer participation rates (Comsis and ITE, 1993)
|
From page 123... ...
Empirical voluntary employer participation rates have been reported in the aggregate for the United Kingdom. Termed "level of travel plan take-up," the observed rates apply to all degrees of travel plan scope and intensity.
|
From page 124... ...
The number of firms subsidizing transit passes (56) was also 20 percent of the number of firms with variable work hours programs (285)
|
From page 125... ...
Drive-alone rate reductions somewhat overstate vehicle trip reductions, since the carpooling alternative diminishes but does not fully erase vehicle trips. Nonetheless, they are a useful indicator.
|
From page 126... ...
In their earlier plans, 69 percent of employers offered direct financial subsidies for alternative modes. This investment in vehicle trip reduction declined, however, to 53 percent in the last plans of the 5-year evaluation period.
|
From page 127... ...
In the fully empirical study, dissipation as one moves outward from the involved employment area -- primarily through intermixing with other travel (Stages 3 and 4 dissipation) -- was measured in the early 1970s for the introduction of variable work hours for Canadian government workers in Ottawa, Canada.
|
From page 128... ...
The included strategies were alternative work schedules, employer TDM support strategies, travel cost changes, and flexible work hours. The estimated VTR average for the employers with CTR programs was between 11.3 and 14.2 percent.
|
From page 129... ...
; Commuter Transportation Services 19-129 17 The original estimates included effects of workplace-based variable work hours programs and facility-based TSM measures such as freeway metering/bypass lanes and HOV lanes. These effects are not included here for clarity of presentation.
|
From page 130... ...
The lesson taken from this analysis was that employer TDM programs that incorporate financial incentives and disincentives -- most particularly including the availability and price of parking -- are not only the most effective in reducing vehicle trips, but have the lowest cost per employee and per trip reduced of all programs. Indeed, as just presented, the net costs per trip and per employee were each found to be negative on average (Comsis and ITE, 1993)
|
From page 131... ...
Incentive programs realize a cost of $0.37 per trip, lower than the others, while service/incentive programs cost $1.35 per trip. The average direct cost per daily vehicle trip reduced is $0.75 for all programs, a surprisingly 19-131 Table 19-36 Cost-Effectiveness of Four Types of TDM Programs Annual Cost per Employee Cost per Daily Trip Reduced Type Program Number VTR Direct Net Direct a Net a Support 6 -1.4% b $13.92 $13.92 $0.62 $0.62 Services 5 8.5% $29.16 $29.16 $1.49 $1.49 Incentives 27 16.3% $13.46 -$111.47 $0.37 -$1.36 Services and Incentives 11 24.5% $92.94 -$24.77 $1.35 -$0.63 All 49 15.3% $32.96 -$62.30 $0.75 -$0.78 Notes: a Computed only for programs with a positive trip reduction.
|
From page 132... ...
The Seattle I-5 corridor TDM-impact analysis described in the previous subsection estimated that study area peak period ramp volumes would average about 4 percent higher without the existing CTR programs. Traffic flow theory and observation indicate that it is the last few percentage points of traffic growth that can move congestion from slowed traffic to traffic essentially at a standstill, and vehicle trip reduction should have the opposite effect, unless counterbalanced by induced traffic.
|
From page 133... ...
to mitigate pollution impacts. In a Transportation Research Board study of the benefits of the U.S.
|
From page 134... ...
strong conclusions about relative cost-effectiveness, since the impact is substantially controlled by the scale (cost) of the project.
|
From page 135... ...
19-135 Table 19-37 Comparative Travel, Emissions, and Cost-Effectiveness of Transportation Control Measures -- Three California Programs Travel Impacts Emissions Impacts (Lbs.) Cost per Travel Impact Project Category VTR VMTR HC/ROG NOx CO PM-10 Cost per VTR Cost per VMTR Cost per Emissions Reduction (per Lb.)
|
From page 136... ...
, the cost spread is wide, and it places a respectable fourth out of 19 for 19-136 Table 19-38 Emissions Reduction Cost-Effectiveness of TDM and Other CMAQ-Funded Strategies CMAQ Strategy Median Cost per Ton CMAQ Strategy Median Cost per Ton Inspection and maintenance $4,500 Modal subsidies and vouchers $125,400 Regional rideshare programs $18,500 Park-and-ride (transit and rideshare) $127,500 Charges and fees $27,900 Bicycle/pedestrian programs $206,600 Vanpool programs $30,400 New transit capital systems/vehicles $208,000 Miscellaneous TDM $34,100 Shuttles, feeder, paratransit $214,700 Traffic signalization $35,200 Freeway/incident management $240,900 Alternative fuel vehicles $53,000 HOV facilities $316,200 Employer trip reduction $56,900 Alternative fuel buses $355,700 Conventional fuel bus replacement $63,200 Telework $743,200 Conventional transit service upgrades $64,600 Note: Effectiveness measure is median cost per ton of emissions reduced (VOCs + NOx)
|
From page 137... ...
; and alternative work arrangements (variable work hours, compressed work weeks, and telecommuting)
|
From page 138... ...
. Center for Urban Transportation Research Resources The National Center for Transit Research at the Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR)
|
From page 139... ...
The Washington State DOT Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) Program 2005 annual report notes that employee drive-alone rates, vehicle trips, and VMT to CTR worksites have decreased significantly.
|
From page 140... ...
, and is used to estimate the impact on mode split, vehicle trip rate, and VMT for each origin-destination pairing. The revised trip tables may then be returned to the four-step (or other)
|
From page 141... ...
. The research behind the development of this model was presented earlier in the "Related Information and Impacts" section under "Modeling Studies," along with the more recent Worksite Trip Reduction Model developed by CUTR.20 Another fairly recent model, again with a single-employer focus, is the U.S.
|
From page 142... ...
In terms of vehicle trip reduction (VTR) , vehicle trips per 100 workers increased from 77.4 to 79.3 during the period, indicating that vehicle trips actually increased by 2.5 percent.
|
From page 143... ...
The shifts of the group that attended resulted in a vehicle trip reduction of 7.5 percent, while the shifts of those who did not attend resulted in a vehicle trip increase of 4.2 percent. The question to be asked is whether the Transportation Day strategy was responsible for the switch, or whether the persons interested enough to attend the event were more highly disposed to considering and seeking an alternative mode.
|
From page 144... ...
Specific goals included maintaining 1983 traffic volumes to and from campus during peak periods and limiting on-campus parking supply to 12,300 spaces, while ensuring that spillover into the surrounding neighborhoods would not result. Subsequently, in the course of developing of a 1989 General Physical Development Plan for the campus, university officials realized that growth plans would result in a significant increase in vehicle trips, along with a loss of about 1,700 surface 19-144
|
From page 145... ...
The pass provides holders unlimited rides on any of the regional or local transit services, reduced carpool and free vanpool parking, vanpool subsidies (up to $40 monthly) , discounted "occasional" parking permits, ridematching services, local merchant discounts (including bicycle equipment and services)
|
From page 146... ...
The 62 percent is what has been used, for consistency, in the various analyses involving the 82-program sample. However, the newer 31 or 32 percent VTR estimate, made with benefit of before-andafter survey data, is clearly the more applicable/reliable.
|
From page 147... ...
Staggered Work Hours in Manhattan -- New York, New York Situation. This case study is adapted from the Second Edition "Traveler Response to Transportation System Changes" Handbook because of its particular relevance to addressing transit usage peaks and associated crowding such as were occurring in mid-2008 in response to $4.00/gallon gasoline prices.
|
From page 148... ...
. An unknown in considering programs such as this is the extent to which gradual adoption of flexible work hours in recent years may have reduced the remaining potential for alternative work arrangements peak spreading by shifting the baseline starting point.
|
From page 149... ...
The LDPP included six major elements: (1) transit service improvements, including three direct express bus routes to the Lloyd District business core; (2)
|
From page 150... ...
Sources: Bianco, M J., "Effective Transportation Demand Management: Combining Parking Pricing, Transit Incentives, and Transportation Management in a Commercial District of Portland, Oregon." Transportation Research Record 1711 (2000)
|
From page 151... ...
was established and HOV marketing, vanpool incentive, and guaranteed ride home (GRH) programs were tested, enhanced, and incorporated into the overall program.
|
From page 152... ...
The primary measure of downtown Bellevue TDM impact available over a 20-plus-year time period is downtown employee commute mode shares. Those presented under "Results" in Table 19-40 have been obtained from periodic survey efforts which, in contrast to the more frequent CTR reportings, cover essentially all downtown Bellevue employers rather than just those large enough to be under CTR reporting requirements.
|
From page 153... ...
The procedures documentation for 1996 was not available. Mode shares for 2000-2005 were based on worker reporting of modes used for each commute during the previous week.
|
From page 154... ...
Downtown Bellevue passenger alightings on King County routes grew to 2,219 in 2007. A possible contributing factor (and example of exogenous influences)
|
From page 155... ...
The major post-1996 jump in all-day parking fees and its correspondence with the sharpest transit ridership and transit share increases, and the sharpest drive-alone share decrease, gives added credence to the apparent importance of parking-related employer TDM actions along with the public transit improvements in achieving vehicle trip reduction. Table 19-42 gives only a hint of parking price plateauing in the 2002–2006 period.
|
From page 156... ...
. • Puget Sound Regional Council, "Parking Trends for the Central Puget Sound Region, 1996–2002." Puget Sound Trends (February 2003)
|
From page 157... ...
Unpublished research findings and associated data files, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC (1994)
|
From page 158... ...
M., and Anderson, S M., "Effects of Variable Work Hour Programs on Ridesharing and Organizational Effectiveness: A Case Study, Ventura County." Transportation Research Record 1321 (1991)
|
From page 159... ...
. ICF Consulting, Center for Urban Transportation Research, Nelson\Nygaard, and ESTC, "Strategies for Increasing the Effectiveness of Commuter Benefits Programs." TCRP Report 90, Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC (2003)
|
From page 160... ...
J., "Examination of 11 Guaranteed Ride Home Programs Nationwide." Transportation Research Record 1321 (1991)
|
From page 161... ...
. Puget Sound Regional Council, "Parking Trends for the Central Puget Sound Region, 1996–2002." Puget Sound Trends.
|
From page 162... ...
Maricopa County [Arizona] Trip Reduction Program.
|
From page 163... ...
L., "Empirical Analysis of Compressed Workweek Choices." Transportation Research Record 2046 (2008)
|
From page 164... ...
It may be inferred that "Campus" and "Office Park" settings are essentially suburban. The "Near Transit" column gives the transit availability, either "High," "Medium," or "Low." "Transit availability" is a simplified transit accessibility measure where higher transit availability infers service by more scheduled buses/trains on more transit routes.
|
From page 165... ...
1 Med Inst Deerfield, IL Exurban 1,000 Low Rideshare Matching, Guaranteed Ride Home None Adequate, Free Up to $60/mo Alternate Mode Subsidies Compressed Work Week; Telecommuting 0.93 0.90 3.3% Bellevue City Hall, WA 1 Local Govt. Bellevue, WA Office Park 650 Med ETCs; Transit Info Center; On - site Pass Sales; Preferential Parking; Guaranteed Ride Home Use of City Vehicles for Commuting if 3+ Employees Restricted, Priced; HOV Discounts Alternate Mode Subsidies; Annual Pass for Transit or Vanpool Flextime 0.63 0.90 -30.0% Boeing Corp (Seattle, WA)
|
From page 166... ...
; Telecommuting 0.60 0.85 -29.4% City of Pleasanton, CA 1 Local Govt. Pleasanton, CA Office Park 360 Low ETCs; Rideshare Matching; Guaranteed Ride Home; Bike Racks & Lockers; Promotions; Preferential Parking None Adequate, Free 25% Bus & Vanpool Subsidy; $1/day Cash-Out Policy; Raffles Flextime; Compressed Work Week 0.84 0.89 -5.6%
|
From page 167... ...
1 Financial Svcs Riverwoods, IL Office Park 1,700 Low ETC; Transit Info Center; Rideshare Matching; Showers & Changing Facilities; TMA Membership; Guaranteed Ride Home None Adequate, Free Alternate Mode Subsidies Flextime 0.88 0.93 -5.4% GEICO (Friendship Hts, MD) 1 Insurance Bethesda, MD Sub CBD 2,100 High ETC; Preferential Parking Vanpool Program; Contract Transit Service Restricted, Priced Alternate Mode Subsidies Flextime; Staggered Work Hours; Compressed Work Week 0.61 0.71 -14.1% Georgia Power (Atlanta, GA)
|
From page 168... ...
Tampa, FL CBD 2,050 Med ETC & Bike Coordinator; Rideshare Matching; Guaranteed Ride Home; Bike Racks; Pedestrian Enhancements; Vanpool Promotion; TMA Membership None Adequate, Free 50% Transit Subsidy None 0.85 0.88 -3.4% Hughes Aircraft (Tucson, AZ) 1 Manu - facturing Tucson, AZ Exurban 5,000 Low ETCs; Rideshare Matching; On-site Pass Sales; Bike Racks and Showers; Guaranteed Ride Home; Preferential Parking Vanpools; Subsidized Bus Service Plentiful, Free None Flextime 0.75 0.87 -13.8% IT Corp.
|
From page 169... ...
1 Scientific Silver Spring, MD Sub CBD 5,000 High ETC; On-site Pass Sales; Preferential Parking; Guaranteed Ride Home None Restricted, Priced Transit Subsidies Flextime; Staggered Hours; Compressed Work Week 0.48 0.75 -36.0% National Optical Observatory (Tucson, AZ) 1 Scientific Tucson, AZ Campus 250 Low Alternate Mode Information; On-site Pass Sales; Rideshare Matching; Showers & Change Facilities None Adequate, Free 50% Transit Subsidy Flextime; Compressed Work Week 0.50 0.83 -39.8% Nike (Beaverton, OR)
|
From page 170... ...
3 Food Proc Mesa, AZ Suburban 229 Low Part-time ETC; Rideshare Postings; Bike Racks & Showers; Preferrential HOV Parking None Adequate, Free None Compressed Work Week 0.74 0.91 -18.7% San Diego Trust & Savings 2 Financial Svcs San Diego, CA CBD 500 High Ridematching None Restricted, Priced; Subsidized for SOV and HOV (progressive by occupancy) $60/mo Transit Subsidy Flextime (limited)
|
From page 171... ...
1 Hotel Woodland Hills, CA Office Park 165 Low Preferential Parking; Bike Racks & Showers None Adequate, Free $15/mo Alternate Mode Subsidy Flextime; Compressed Work Week 0.49 0.87 -43.7% (continued on next page)
|
From page 172... ...
1 Hospital Takoma Park, MD Campus 1,800 Med ETC; Preferential Parking None Restricted but Free 50% Transit Subsidy Staggered Work Hours (shifts) ; Compressed Work Week 0.80 0.71 12.7% Wm.
|
From page 173... ...
Ch. 11 – Transit Information and Promotion (2003)
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.