BTS Navigation Bar

NTL Menu


Transporation Demand Management - Description and Review of Alternative Policies for the WDOT - Wisconsin TransLinks 21




Click HERE for graphic.




MISSION STATEMENT
TRANSLINKS 21-
Wisconsin's 21st century transportation plan-will outline a
comprehensive transportation system that moves people and goods
efficiently, strengthens our economy, protects our environment, and
supports our quality of life.  Working with DOT, the public will
identify Wisconsin's transportation needs-and help to make
tomorrow's choices.

Tommy G. Thompson,
Governor

Charles H. Thompson,
Secretary



                                     DESCRIPTION AND REVIEW OF ALTERNATIVE
                                   TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT POLICIES
                                FOR THE WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION


                                                 January, 1994



                                                ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This report was prepared by the Wisconsin Department of
Transportation, Division of Planning and Budget.  The report was
written by Darren Schoer of the Bureau of Strategic Planning, Urban
Transportation Strategies Section.  Significant input was provided
by the following people: Sandra Beaupre, Chief of.the Urban
Transportation Strategies Section; Ken Leonard, Director of the
Bureau of Strategic Planning; Doug Dalton, Chief of the Urban
System Planning Section; Joe Crossett of the Environmental
Strategies Section; David Trowbridge of the Urban System Planning
Section; Susan Hill of the Division of Transportation Assistance;
Dale Darrow of the Division of Highways District 2 Office; Tom
Walker, Executive Assistant to Secretary Thompson; and Roger
Schrantz, Administrator of the Division of Planning and Budget. 
Additional input was provided by the Urban Mobility Strategies
Team; Lisa Binkley, Sarah Jo Peterson, and Stephen Wisnefski of the
Urban Transportation Strategies Section; and the District Directors
and planning staff of the Department's Highway District Offices.



 
                               TABLE OF CONTENTS

I.      INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
        Introduction to TRANSLINKS 21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
        Introduction to TDM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
        Federal Legislation Related to TDM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
        Current WisDOT Involvement in TDM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

II.     GOALS AND OTHER EVALUATION FACTORS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
        A. TRANSLINKS 21 Goals and Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
        B. Additional Descriptive Factors for Policy Alternatives . . 6

III.    INTRODUCTION TO TDM POLICY ALTERNATIVES . . . . . . . . . . . 9
        A. Identification of TDM Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
        B. Inter-relationship and Applicability of TDM Measures . . . 9
        C. Development of TDM Policy Alternatives . . . . . . . . . . 10
        D. Areas of Application for TDM: Wisconsin's Metropolitan . . 10
IV.     DESCRIPTION AND REVIEW OF TDM POLICY ALTERNATIVES . . . . . . 11
        A. Policy Alternative 1: TDM as a local responsibility. . . . 11
        1.      Policy Statement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
        2.      Policy Description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
        3.      Potential Strategies and Actions to Implement
                Policy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
        4.      Review of Policy Alternative. . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

        B. Policy Alternative 2: Limited state role in TDM. . . . . . 14
        1.      Policy Statement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
        2.      Policy Description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
        3.      Potential Strategies and Actions to Implement Policy. 15
        4.      Review of Policy Alternative. . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

        C. Policy Alternative 3: Proactive state role in TDM. . . . . 17
        1.      Policy Statement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
        2.      Policy Description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
        3.      Potential Strategies and Actions to Implement
                Policy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
        4.      Review of Policy Alternative. . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

        D. Policy Alternative 4: Expanded state role in TDM . . . . . 21
        1.      Policy Statement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
        2.      Policy Description. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
        3.      Potential Strategies and Actions to Implement
                Policy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
        4.      Review of Policy Alternative. . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

V.      SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

        APPENDICES:
        Appendix A: Wisconsin State Statute 85.24
        Appendix B: Identification and Description of TDM Measures

 



Click HERE for graphic.



Besides traffic congestion, the increase in motor vehicle travel
has contributed to a decline in air quality in some counties in
eastern Wisconsin.  Emissions from motor vehicles, as well as
pollution from other Wisconsin sources, and emissions transported
into the region from areas outside the state have made the region
encompassing Milwaukee County and five adjacent counties one of the
nine smoggiest areas of the country, according to the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).  In addition, five other
counties in eastern Wisconsin are classified by EPA as lesser
violators of federal air quality standards.

One of several means that has been developed to partially address
these congestion and air quality issues is the concept of
Transportation Demand Management (TDM).  TDM is the use of
incentives, disincentives, and market devices to shift travel into
non-motorized or higher-occupancy modes, reduce or eliminate the
need to travel, and/or shift travel onto less congested routes.  In
some- cases, TDM is also used to refer to the provision or
expansion of alternatives to SOV travel, such as transit,
bicycling, and walking.

TDM is closely related to Transportation System Management (TSM), a
forerunner to TDM.  However, unlike TDM, TSM does not try to
significantly alter individuals existing travel behavior.  Instead,
TSM tries to accommodate existing travel behavior through means
such as traffic engineering technique$, and strategies such as
incident management.

TDM is also connected with Transportation Control Measures (TCMs),
a term contained in federal air quality legislation.  TCMs consist
of both TDM and TSM techniques, as well as several other strategies
that are uniquely related to air quality improvement (such as buy-
outs of older vehicles).

        Federal Legislation Related to TDM
In recent years, TDM, TSM, and TCMs have all been targeted in
federal legislation as potentially important pieces of the overall
strategy to address congestion and air quality issues.  Two
recently passed pieces of federal legislation, the Intermodal
Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA), and the
Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA), have reinforced the
importance of TDM and related activities in a multimodal
transportation system.

        Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991
        (ISTEA)
The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991
(ISTEA) reaffirmed the government's commitment to move out of the
interstate age and into an era of more balanced investment in
transportation.  ISTEA proposes broadening the scope of how
transportation decisions are made by emphasizing diversity and
integration of modes and preservation of existing systems over
construction of new facilities, especially roads.  The legislation
also places a great deal of importance on planning and public
participation at both the metropolitan and state levels.

A key component in ISTEA, related to TDM, is the required
development of a congestion management system (CMS) by each state. 
As part of the CMS, WisDOT must identify areas of Wisconsin where
traffic congestion is occurring, or where the potential for
congestion exists.  After these areas have been identified, WisDOT
will work with metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), local

                                                       2



 communities, transit operators, and others to develop and
implement the CMS.  The CMS may include a number of different
strategies to address traffic congestion, including TDM measures.

The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA)
The 1990 Clean Air legislation is the most recent of several
packages of amendments that have been made to the Clean Air Act,
which established air quality standards for the United States. 
Under the 1990 amendments, areas that fail to meet these
standards -- called nonattainment areas -- are required to take
certain steps to reduce the amount of air pollution.  The number of
mandated requirements for transportation, industry, and area
sources is dependent upon the severity of the pollution problem in
each area.

Six counties in southeastern Wisconsin -- Kenosha, Milwaukee,
Ozaukee, Racine, Washington, and Waukesha -- have been designated
as "severe" non-attainment areas under the CAAA.  In addition, five
other counties in eastern Wisconsin -- Door, Kewaunee, Manitowoc,
Sheboygan, and Walworth - are considered to have lesser air quality
violations under the CAAA.

In the six-county southeastern Wisconsin metropolitan area, the
CAAA mandates the consideration of TDM strategies as one way to
address transportation-related air pollution.  This includes the
Employee Commute Options (ECO) program, which affects all companies
within the severe non-attainment area that employ 100 or more
workers at a single site.  Each of these companies must develop a
plan that outlines how they will achieve a 25 percent reduction in
the number of motor vehicle commute trips made by their employees
during peak travel periods.

Current WisDOT Involvement in TDM
WisDOT was involved in TSM and TDM activities on a limited basis
during the 1970's, but it was not until 1981 that the Department
became officially designated as 'the lead state agency in ride-
sharing activities" by Section 85.24 of the Wisconsin State
Statutes (see Appendix A for a full summary of the law).  As a
result of Section 85.24, which has since been broadened to include
all transportation demand management activities, WisDOT has
undertaken several TDM-related activities, including:

       The TDM Grant Program: Established in 1992, the TDM Grant
        Program has distributed $150,000 each of the last two years to
        public and private entities to develop and implement
        innovative TDM-related projects in areas experiencing
        significant congestion or air quality problems.  Over the last
        two years, grants have been awarded to develop the following:
          A vanpool demonstration project in southeastern
           Wisconsin.
          A transit link between the Milwaukee and Waukesha transit
           systems.
          A joint TDM demonstration program in Madison involving
           the University of Wisconsin and two other major Dane County
           employers.
          A transportation management association in Racine to work
           with major employers in the area to reduce drive-alone vehicle
           travel.
          A parking management and guaranteed ride home program in
           downtown Milwaukee.
          A marketing campaign for express bus service in
           southeastern Wisconsin.

                                                       3



        Funding for the program has been extended through the 1993-
        1995 biennium and has been increased to $300,000 annually.

        The Wisconsin Rideshare Van Loan Program: Using Federal
        Highway Administration (FHWA) federal-aid funds, WisDOT has
        established a revolving account to provide interestfree loans
        to cover up to 75 percent of the purchase price of a van for
        an employer, provided that the van is used exclusively for
        ridesharing purposes and that a 25 percent local match is
        provided.  Participants are also eligible for an annual $500
        grant to offset administrative costs.  Current available
        funding for the program is approximately $150,000.

        Southeastern Wisconsin Ridesharing Program: Through its
        Division of Highways-District 2 office in Waukesha, WisDOT
        provides the regional ridematching service in southeastern
        Wisconsin.  The District 2 office is currently in the process
        of upgrading the existing ridesharing service through the
        purchase of new computer equipment and the development of new
        ridematching software.

        Congestion Mitigation and AirQuality (CMAQ) Grants: As part of
        ISTEA, WisDOT annually receives several million dollars to
        fund transportation-related programs aimed at reducing
        congestion and improving air quality in those Wisconsin
        counties that are in violation of federal air quality
        standards.  Each year WisDOT works cooperatively with state
        and regional agencies in awarding CMAQ funds to public and
        private applicants that fulfill the program requirements.

        Park-and-Ride Lots: In several areas of Wisconsin, WisDOT has
        assisted in the development of Park-and-Ride lots.  Generally,
        WisDOT provides the land for the lots, covers the costs
        associated with constructing the lots, and in some cases
        maintains the lots.

In addition to the WisDOT programs outlined above, other State of
Wisconsin agencies are also involved in TDM activities.  The
largest of these is the State Vanpool Program, operated by the
Department of Administration (DOA) through its Group Transportation
Services office.  The program, which primarily serves Madison area
employees, is funded entirely through the monthly fees that users
pay for the service.  Currently, there are approximately 70 vans
active in the program, with the vast majority having Madison as
their primary destination.  In the near future, however, the
program will be expanded into southeastern Wisconsin.

                                                       4


        II. GOALS AND OTHER EVALUATION FACTORS

Each of the policy alternatives developed for this issue paper is
evaluated using two sets of factors.  The first set is related to
the overall goals and values of TRANSLINKS 21, while the second set
is related to the feasibility of adopting and/or implementing each
of the policy alternatives.  Brief descriptions of each of these
factors are provided below.

TRANSLINKS 21 Goals and Values

Basic Transportation Goals
Each of the policy alternatives presented in this paper is
described in relation to its ability to promote each of the
following TRANSLINKS 21 goals:

1.      Mobility.  Improving mobility means improving the ability to
        travel or move goods using any feasible mode of
        transportation.  Mobility is improved in a variety of ways
        including reduced travel times, greater reliability, and
        making destinations more accessible by multiple modes of
        transportation.  Actions that improve mobility may do so
        through such methods as decreasing the time it takes for
        commuters to travel between home and work.

2.      Choice.  Choice means that, whenever feasible, people have
        more than one option available to efficiently meet their
        travel needs.  Actions designed to make multiple
        transportation modes available, affordable, and timely can
        broaden travelers' transportation mode choices.

3.      Connectivity.  Transportation systems that conveniently and
        reliably connect travel between a wide range of transportation
        modes improve connectivity.  Actions designed to make modal
        transfer points readily available and convenient improve
        transportation connectivity.

4.      Safety.  Wisconsin has one of the safest transportation
        systems in the country, but TRANSLINKS 21 seeks to make the
        state's transportation system even safer.  Actions that will
        improve transportation safety include those designed to
        improve visibility for travelers and those designed to
        minimize conflict between travelers using different modes such
        as pedestrians and automobiles.

5 .     Efficiency.  An efficient transportation system is one that
        minimizes individual, private sector, and public sector costs,
        in the broadest sense of the term -- in actual dollars saved
        or spent, time saved or lost, use or conservation of natural
        resources, and other costs.

        Basic Values: The Concept of Livable Communities
        In an urban context, the three values of TRANSLINKS 21 --
        environmental responsibility, economic development, and equity
        -- are important and necessary components in the attempt to
        create livable communities.  In the development of alternative
        departmental policies, strategies,

                                                       5



        and actions the five basic transportation goals are interpreted 
        in ways that promote livable communities.

Livable communities are defined in TRANSLINKS 21 as places where
people live in an environment that supports their health and their
economic and social well-being.  Maintaining clean air, water, and
other community natural resources such as parks and open space are
important environmental responsibilities in Wisconsin communities. 
Transportation systems and services have a number of significant
impacts on the environmental health of a community.

Economic development is critical to both individuals and the
community as a whole.  An economically vital community is one in
which individuals have access to a range of viable employment
opportunities.  Economic vitality also means being economically
competitive with a diverse and adaptable economic base. 
Modernizing Wisconsin's transportation system -especially the
highway system -- has been and will continue to be an important
contributor to urban areas' and the state's economic well-being. 
Transportation systems that are efficient and multimodal can
promote the economic vitality of a community.

Equity is an important facet of social well-being.  Equity implies
that public resources are distributed in a just manner, and
services and amenities are physically accessible.  Equity also
implies that individuals and groups have the opportunity to
participate in public decisions affecting their community. 
Transportation systems that provide mobility and modal choice to
the broad range of residents and people working in a community
enhance the community's transportation equity.

A continuing balance among the three values -- environmental
responsibility, economic development, and equity -- is important to
maintain the long-term livability of Wisconsin's communities.

        Additional Descriptive Factors for Policy Afternatives

        1.      Political viability is the projected acceptability of a
        policy alternative to public officials at the state and local
        level, to a variety of interest groups both public and
        private, and to the general public.  A policy that is
        significantly different than the status quo may be less
        politically viable to some interest groups than a policy that
        changes the status quo incrementally.  However, to other
        interest groups incremental changes may be less acceptable
        than more substantial changes.  A policy that responds to the
        needs of a variety of interest groups may be more politically
        viable than one that is structured in response to the
        interests of only one group.

        2.      Financial feasibility is the projected ability of a
        policy alternative to be fully funded and therefore
        implemented.  Policies that are capital intensive or have
        significant long-term operational costs may be less
        financially feasible than a policy that does not require
        additional capital or has smaller long-term operating costs. 
        Policies that require new

                                                       6



        funding sources or rely on unpopular funding sources, such as
        the property tax, may also lack financial feasibility.

        3.      Administrative Operability measures the ability to
        actually implement the proposed policy within the current
        administrative context.        A policy that requires
        additional staff resources or significant monitoring efforts
        may be less administratively operable than a policy that
        requires existing or lower levels of staff resources or
        minimal monitoring.

        4.      Technical feasibility refers to the ability to perform or
        provide the technical activities or data required to implement
        a policy.  Policies that need complex data or sophisticated
        computer modeling may be less technically feasible than a
        policy requiring data that are more easy to obtain.

         5.     Legality of a policy alternative describes the
        relationship between the proposed policy and existing laws. 
        In some cases statutory changes may be necessary to implement
        a policy.

        6.      Flexibility refers to a policy' s ability to be
        interpreted in a variety of ways depending on the needs or
        specific conditions of the agency applying the policy.  A
        flexible policy may be structured in such a way that it can be
        applied slightly differently by various. affected agencies,
        while a less flexible policy would require more consistent
        approaches regardless of the differences between those
        agencies using the policy.  Flexible policies may have the
        benefit of being able to adapt to various situations; more
        rigid policies may have the benefit of greater consistency and
        predictability in outcome.

                                                       7



Click HERE for graphic.

                                                       9



will be applied in the same manner in every situation. 
Consideration of this fact and recognition of the inter-
relationship between TDM measures must be acknowledged when
reviewing each of the TDM policy alternatives discussed below.

Development of TDM Policy Alternatives
Four policy alternatives have been developed regarding the role
that WisDOT could play in TDM in Wisconsin.  The policy
alternatives address what an appropriate level of involvement in
TDM for WisDOT would be, the degree to which WisDOT would commit
resources to TDM, and the level of prioritization that TDM should
receive in relation to TSM and facility expansion.  Included in the
discussion of each policy alternative is a policy statement, a
general description of the alternative, followed by examples of
specific strategies and actions which could be taken to implement
the alternative.  Each alternative is then reviewed in terms of
each ,,of the evaluation and descriptive factors discussed earlier.

The policy alternatives have been arranged in such a manner that a
range of different strategies and actions are covered, beginning
with the lowest level of WisDOT involvement in Policy Alternative 1
and finishing with a quite high degree of WisDOT and State
involvement in Policy Alternative 4. It is important to note that
these alternatives are not necessarily mutually exclusive from one
another, and that the strategies and actions that are discussed
could be repackaged to develop different policy alternatives.

Areas of Application for TDM Wisconsin's Metropolitan Areas
The four policy alternatives that have been developed cover a broad
range of TDM strategies.  Although some of these strategies may be
implemented in rural and small urban areas, TDM is most often
applied in metropolitan areas (population of 50,000 or more), that
may include several towns, cities, and/or counties within their
boundaries.  In Wisconsin there are 11 regions of the state that
are classified as metropolitan areas.  For the purpose of this
paper, these 11 regions have been divided into the following four
categories:

Small Metropolitan Areas (population of 50,000 to 99,999,999)            
       La Crosse
       St. Croix/Pierce Counties (part of Minneapolis-St.  Paul
        metropolitan area)
       Superior (part of Duluth-Superior metropolitan area)

Mid-Sized Metropolitan Areas (population) of 100,000 to 299,999)
       Eau Claire                              Green Bay
       Janesville-Beloit                       Sheboygan
       Wausau
   
 Large Metropolitan Areas (population of 300,000 to 999,999)
       Appleton-Oshkosh-Neenah              Madison

Very    Large Metropolitan Areas (population of 1 million or more)  
       Southeastern Wisconsin (Milwaukee and surrounding counties)

                                                      10



        IV.  DESCRIPTION AND REVIEW OF TDM POLICY ALTERNATIVES

        ALTERNATIVE 1: TDM as a local responsibility

Policy Statement
"WisDOT views TDM as a local responsibility and will rely on local
entities and the private sector to decide where, how, and when TDM
should be implemented in each of Wisconsin's metropolitan areas."

Policy Description
WisDOT would take a "hands-off" approach to TDM whenever possible,
leaving the responsibility for implementing and funding TDM
activities to local entities and the private sector.  WisDOT would
view its role in metropolitan areas to be limited to using traffic
engineering and other traditional methods to improve the movement
of individuals and goods in such areas.  It would be left up to
individual communities to determine the extent to which TDM-related
measures,would be used.

WisDOT would refrain from pursuing further state funding for TDM,
but would continue to seek federal funding that would be
distributed to local entities with as few provisions as possible. 
The limited state and federal funding that would be available would
be targeted to those areas where TDM is required by federal
legislation such as ISTEA and the CAAA.

In addition, WisDOT would seek to reduce its existing involvement
in TDM, and would also encourage the reduction of other direct
state involvement in TDM.  WisDOT would seek to transfer its
existing TDM programs and services to local public agencies and/or.
the private sector, and WisDOT would encourage that a similar
policy be adopted by other state agencies.

Potential Strategies and Actions to Implement Policy 
Seek to reduce WisDOT involvement in TDM.
        	       Phase out or restructure existing TDM Grant program.
        	       Phase out Wisconsin Rideshare Van Loan program or
                transfer program to local public agencies.
        	       Transfer Division of Highways-District 2
                ridesharing/ridematching program to a local or regional
                entity.
        	       Transfer development and maintenance of park-and-ride
                lots to local public agencies.
Encourage other state agencies to reduce their involvement in TDM.
        	       Encourage DOA to seek local agencies or private providers
                to operate the State Vanpool program.

        Review of Policy Alternative

        Impacts on TRANSLINKS 21 Goals
In terms of each of the TRANSLINKS 21 goals, the impacts of Policy
Alternative I would be dependent on the degree to which local
public entities and the private sector chose to step

                                                      11



 forward to replace and expand upon the TDM-related services and
assistance currently provided by WisDOT and other state agencies. 
Given existing economic conditions, it is probable that local
entities would not be able to do much more than maintain existing
programs.  Because of the fairly limited scope of these programs,
Policy Alternative I would probably result in little or no change
from existing conditions in most of Wisconsin's metropolitan areas.

Assuming that existing WisDOT and state programs would be
maintained by local and/or private entities, current levels of
choice and connectivity would probably remain unchanged.  Likewise,
impacts on safety under Policy Alternative I would likely be
minimal.

In most metropolitan areas of the state, mobility could be
maintained through a combination of local TDM efforts, capacity
expansion, and traditional traffic engineering techniques (such as
signalization improvements).  However, in southeastern Wisconsin,
which is subject to federally imposed limits on capacity expansion,
it is possible that some loss in mobility could occur under Policy
Alternative 1.

Finally, if it can be assumed that.local agencies and the private
sector are in the best position to evaluate the viability and need
for TDM in their respective regions, Policy Alternative I would
likely contribute to efficiency improvements in the distribution
and use of resources dedicated to TDM.

Impacts on TRANSLINKS 21 Values
As with the TRANSLINKS 21 goals, the impacts of Policy Alternative
1 on the TRANSLINKS 21 values would be dependent on the degree to
which local public entities and the private sector would be
involved in TDM.  Again, if it is assumed that the limited TDM
efforts of WisDOT and the State are maintained in whole or part by
local entities, Policy Alternative I would likely result in little
or no change from existing conditions.

In terms of environmental responsibility, Policy Alternative I
would probably not help Wisconsin attain federally-mandated air
quality standards.  In addition, the policy alternative would
likely do little to directly attempt to slow the continued growth
in trips and VMT in Wisconsin's metropolitan areas.  It can be
argued that this growth in travel and the corresponding need for
increased capacity contributes to detrimental impacts on the
environment, in terms of reduced air and water quality,. loss of
natural habitat, and expanded use of land resources.

Economic development impacts of the policy alternative would likely
vary across the state's metropolitan areas.  In those areas where
congestion problems could be addressed through a combination of
strategies,. including capacity expansion, Policy Alternative I
could contribute to a favorable economic climate.  However, in
those areas where capacity expansion is limited by federal law
(i.e. southeastern Wisconsin), or is not viable due to local
conditions, congestion problems could worsen under Policy
Alternative 1, thus contributing to negative impacts on economic
development.  Negative impacts of congestion include costly delays
in the movement of goods and people, as well as a reduction in the
overall quality of life.  Each of these factors makes it more
difficult for existing firms to do business, and makes the affected
area less attractive to potential new employers.

                                                      12



 In terms of equity, since there would likely be little change in
existing conditions, inequities that already exist in the system
would continue.  Thus, those who do not have adequate access to
some services, amenities, and employment opportunities under
current conditions would likely continue to have limited access
under Policy Alternative 1.

        Feasibility of Adopting and Implementing Policy

Political Viability - At the local level, the reaction to such a
policy would likely be mixed.  Small metropolitan areas that have
been involved in TDM on only a limited basis in the past and that
do not perceive a congestion problem now or in the near future
would likely have little or no reaction to the policy.  However,
some mid-sized metropolitan areas could have a negative reaction to
the policy, since these areas would likely receive little or none
of the federal funding that the state would disburse.

Reaction to the policy in the state's largest metropolitan areas
would likely be mixed.  On the one hand, such areas would probably
receive the vast majority of federal funding disbursed by the state
with minimal strings attached.  However, the buffer role which the
State currently plays would no longer exist, and would instead
likely be thrust upon metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs). 
It is possible that both the MPOs and the localities they serve
would resist such a transfer of responsibilities, especially if
additional resources were not allocated to them.  Likewise, in
areas where there is a perceived congestion problem, there could be
a negative reaction to WisDOT and the State stepping back from
their current commitments to TDM.

From the perspective of the general public, there would probably be
little reaction, since the policy alternative would likely result
in only minimal changes from existing conditions.  However, there
could be opposition to the policy alternative from segments of the
population which would prefer to see a more extensive commitment to
TDM from WisDOT and the State.

Financial Feasibility, Administrative Operability, and Technical
Feasibility - From a fairly narrow perspective, WisDOT would
benefit financially under Policy Alternative I to the extent that
existing personnel and technical needs related to TDM would be
largely reduced or eliminated.  Related to this shift in resources
would be a corresponding reduction in administrative needs at the
state level, since most responsibilities would shift to local
agencies and the private sector.

At the local level it is unknown whether public agencies and the
private sector could, or would be willing to, take over TDM
responsibilities.  It is questionable whether local agencies in all
but Wisconsin's largest metropolitan areas have the technical
capability to effectively implement TDM without WisDOT involvement. 
Perhaps more importantly, it is possible that local communities in
Wisconsin would not be willing to commit the resources necessary to
implement TDM, given the economic constraints which many local
agencies are currently working under.

                                                      13



 In addition, under Policy Alternative 1, WisDOT would likely
reduce the degree, to which it provides coordination and oversight
of multiple programs.  Unless a strong regional force were to take
over this role, the potential for inconsistent and ineffective
programs would be increased.

Legality - Current state statutes would need to be revised under
Policy Alternative 1, because state law currently designates WisDOT
as the lead state agency in TDM activities.  In addition, given the
requirements of the CAAA, it is questionable whether WisDOT could
limit its TDM involvement in southeastern Wisconsin to the extent
outlined in Policy Alternative 1.

Flexibility - From WisDOT's perspective, such a policy would be
fairly rigid, in that WisDOT would have little or no involvement in
how TDM is implemented at the local level.  However, at the local
level, there is the potential for maximum flexibility, given that
local agencies and the private sector would be allowed to use
available TDM resources as they see fit.

Conclusion
With the exception of southeastern Wisconsin (where federal
legislation requires TDM), and possibly Dane County (the fastest
growing metropolitan area in the state), it is likely that Policy
Alternative 1 would result in little being done in TDM in the
short-term.  Local entities in other metropolitan areas of the
state may choose to experiment with TDM to a limited degree, but
capacity expansion and traffic engineering techniques would likely
continue to be the primary means of addressing congestion problems
in these areas.

        ALTERNATIVE 2 : Limited state role in TDM

Policy Statement
"WisDOT views TDM as primarily a local responsibility, but
recognizes a limited role for itself through the provision of
technical assistance and a minimal commitment of resources to local
entities and the private sector.  WisDOT supports the concept of
addressing traffic congestion problems primarily through TSM
measures and facility expansion, except in those areas where such
actions are restricted by federal legislation."

Policy Description
Policy Alternative 2 is similar to Policy Alternative 1, in that
WisDOT would view funding and implementing TDM as primarily a local
responsibility.  However, unlike Policy Alternative 1, WisDOT would
see a role for itself in the research and evaluation, and to a
limited extent, promotion of TDM.  This would include providing a
limited amount of funding and technical assistance to local
agencies, developers, and employers to develop and implement
innovative TDM programs.  Because the primary role of such funding
would be to assist in the evaluation and promotion of TDM in a
Wisconsin environment, WisDOT would have an active role in
determining how and where such funding would be provided.  Priority
for such assistance would be given to areas where TDM is required
by federal legislation.  However, a limited amount of assistance
would be available to other areas if an adequate need were
demonstrated.

                                                      14



 In addition, WisDOT would review and evaluate its existing
involvement in TDM and determine if any services currently provided
by WisDOT would be better handled by another entity.  WisDOT would
encourage that a similar review be performed by other state
agencies as well.

Potential Strategies and Actions to Implement Policy
 Pursue increased TDM-related research in Wisconsin and the Midwest.
  o  Develop a joint research program between WisDOT and one
     or more state universities. o Work with surrounding
     states to develop coordinated and cooperative research
     efforts. 
 Maintain or moderately increase resources to existing WisDOT TDM
  financial assistance programs.
  o  Maintain or moderately expand TDM Grant program.
  o  Maintain or moderately expand Wisconsin Rideshare Van
     Loan program.
 Transfer direct WisDOT TDM responsibilities to local governments
  or the private sector.
  o  Transfer Division of Highways-District 2
     ridesharing/ridematching program to a local or regional entity.
 Maintain or moderately increase existing WisDOT financial
  assistance programs that support/promote transportation
  alternatives to the single-occupant vehicle.
  o   Operating and capital assistance to transit providers.
  o   Bicycle and pedestrian assistance.
  o   Park-and-Ride lots

Review of Policy Alternative

Impacts on TRANSLINKS 21 Goals
Policy Alternative 2 would essentially maintain the existing
situation, with some slight alterations that could moderately
increase the use of TDM measures in some situations.  In most
metropolitan areas of Wisconsin, present levels of mobility would
be maintained through a combination of TDM, capacity expansion, and
traffic engineering techniques.  However, in southeastern
Wisconsin, where there-are federally-imposed restrictions on
capacity expansion, implementing Policy Alternative 2 could result
in increased traffic congestion and a reduction in mobility.

Policy Alternative 2 would also probably lead to marginal increases
in choice and connectivity through the provision of new programs
and the moderate expansion of existing programs.  However, it is
unlikely that such programs would be extensive enough to have any
measurable impact in slowing VMT growth.

No significant changes in the safety of the existing transportation
system would likely occur, despite the probable continued increase
in VMT and motor vehicle trips.  Trends from the past 30 years show
that even as VMT and trips have increased (while use of other modes
has decreased), fatality rates on Wisconsin roadways have declined.

Finally, in most metropolitan areas, Policy Alternative 2 would not
impose any significant new costs on WisDOT or the state, nor would
any new costs be imposed on individuals or the private sector.  In
addition, individual metropolitan areas would maintain a high
degree of flexibility in

                                                      15



determining the extent to which TDM would be implemented in their
areas.  This combination of low costs and localized decision-making
would likely contribute to an efficient use of scarce resources.

Impacts on TRANSLINKS 21 Values
In terms of environmental responsibility, Policy Alternative 2
would probably not be extensive enough to help those areas of
Wisconsin that suffer from air quality problems meet federal
standards.  In addition, it is unlikely that the policy alternative
would result in a measurable reduction in the growth in VMT and
motor vehicle trips.  It can be argued that such travel growth
contributes to detrimental impacts on the environment, in terms of
reduced air and water quality, loss of natural habitat, and
expanded use of land resources.

In most metropolitan areas of the state, Policy Alternative 2 would
have little or no impact on economic development, since congestion
problems would be managed through a combination of capacity
expansion, TDM, and traffic engineering techniques.  However, in
southeastern Wisconsin, where there are federally-mandated
limitations on capacity expansion, Policy Alternative 2 would
likely not be extensive enough to address congestion problems. 
Such congestion problems could hinder economic development in the
region, due to increased costs of moving goods and a reduced
quality of life.

As in Policy Alternative 1, the impacts of Policy Alternative 2 on
equity would likely be minimal,, since the existing situation would
be expected to remain largely unchanged.

Feasibility of Adopting and Implementing Policy

Political Viability - Since there would be little change from
existing conditions under Policy Alternative 2, it is likely that
such a policy would be acceptable to most parties.  However, the
environmental community may view the policy as not being
progressive enough.  It may also be possible that some entities in
Wisconsin's larger metropolitan areas would prefer to see WisDOT
take a more active role in TDM, and would encourage greater State
involvement in TDM.

Financial Feasibility, Administrative Technical Feasibility -
Policy Alternative 2 would likely require only minimal financial,
administrative, and technical changes from existing levels. 
Therefore, it is unlikely that there would be significant
opposition to the policy on these grounds.  There would likely need
to be a moderate increase in the provision of TDM-related resources
at the State level, primarily to improve existing methods of
monitoring and evaluating TDM programs.  In addition,
administratively, there would need to be some increased commitment
of resources to improve coordination with other State of Wisconsin
agencies, local entities, and neighboring states.
Legality - Policy Alternative 2 would likely be legal under
existing state statutes, and would require few changes in state
law.

                                                      16



Flexibility - WisDOT would have greater control in determining how
and in what cases TDM resources would be allocated, increasing its
flexibility.  However this same control would limit flexibility at
the local level.

Conclusion
Policy Alternative 2 would be a cautious and pragmatic approach to
implementing TDM, keeping State involvement at a moderate level
while further exploring the potential of TDM in a Wisconsin
environment.  The potential risk of this approach is that there may
be a realization at a later point that there is a need to go much
further.  Such a realization could result in greater future
financial and social costs that could have been mitigated had
action been taken sooner.

ALTERNATIVE 3: Proactive state role in TDM

Policy Statement

"WisDOT views TDM as a joint responsibility with local entities and
the private sector, and will become more directly involved in
providing TDM services and supporting local and private sector
involvement in TDM.  To the extent that it is feasible and
practical, WisDOT supports the concept of addressing traffic
congestion problems through both TSM and TDM measures before
addressing such problems through facility expansion."

Policy Description

As under Policy Alternative 2, WisDOT would pursue a research and
technical assistance role in TDM.  However, WisDOT would also
become more proactive in its direct involvement in and support of
TDM.  WisDOT would aggressively pursue greater state and federal
resources for TDM programs throughout the state, and would play a
significant role in deciding where and how such resources would be
used.  A portion of these resources would be used to directly
support the expansion of existing WisDOT programs and the
development of new programs.  Although priority in the use of these
resources would be given to areas where TDM is required by federal
legislation, an effort would be made to use a portion of such
resources in other areas of the state as well, provided a present
or future need were evident.  In addition to expanding its existing
TDM programs and developing new programs, WisDOT would also
encourage other state agencies to pursue similar policies to
encourage TDM.

Potential Strategies and Actions to implement Policy
 Increase scope and size of existing WisDOT TDM financial
assistance programs.
        	       Expand TDM Grant program.
        	       Expand Wisconsin Rideshare Van Loan program.

Significantly increase existing WisDOT financial assistance
programs that support/promote transportation alternatives to the
single-occupant vehicle.

        	       Operating and capital assistance to transit
                providers.
        	       Bicycle and pedestrian assistance.
        	       Park-and-Ride lots
        	       Seek and promote greater direct WisDOT involvement
                in TDM at the local and regional level.
        	       Expand existing Division of Highways-District TDM    
                involvement

                                                       17



  Develop new WisDOT technical assistance programs to support
   promote transportation alternatives to the single-occupant vehicle.
   o Develop a Commuter Assistance Program (CAP) network, made up of
     a State CAP and several regional CAPS.
 Increase WisDOT commitment to new technologies to support/promote
  transportation alternatives to the single-occupant vehicle.
  o  Promote development of HOV facilities.
  o  Promote new transit technologies such as light rail and busways.
 Pursue increased TDM-related research in Wisconsin and the Midwest.
  o  Develop a joint research program between WisDOT and
     one or more state universities. 
  o  Work with surrounding states to develop coordinated and
     cooperative research efforts.
 Encourage joint efforts among private entities and between the 
  private and public sectors to develop TDM programs.
  o  Transportation Management Associations (TMAS)
 Encourage enhanced local land use efforts to support/promote
  transportation alternatives to the single-occupant vehicle.
  o  Develop model trip reduction ordinances for use by local agencies. 
  o  Develop model site design guidelines for use by local agencies.
 Encourage enhanced intergovernmental coordination at the regional
level.
  o Regional Transportation Authorities
 Establish the State as a leader in employer-based TDM programs.
  o Institute progressive TDM programs at WisDOT work sites throughout 
    the state.
  o Encourage other state agencies to institute progressive TDM programs 
    at work sites throughout the state.
 Work with other state agencies to develop.programs to encourage
  TDM programs.
  o Provide tax benefits for employers to implement TDM measures.
  o Establish state-operated satellite offices/telework centers in 
    urban and rural areas in cooperation with local and private 
    sector entities.

Review of Policy Alternative

Impacts on TRANSLINKS 21 Goals
Policy Alternative 3 would likely lead to at least some
improvements in choice by bolstering existing alternatives to the
automobile and creating new transportation options.  Safety could
also be enhanced through improvements to transit, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities.

With the state taking a more active role in determining where and
how TDM investments are made, Policy Alternative 3 would also
likely result in some improvements in connectivity and
coordination.  Also contributing to improved connectivity would be
an increase in the service areas of existing alternative modes and
the development of new modes, resulting in increased opportunities
to link multiple modes.

There are two viewpoints on what the impacts of Policy Alternative
3 would be on mobility and efficiency.  One viewpoint is that the
largely incentive-based strategies in Policy Alternative 3 would
result in a significant increase in the number of users of
transportation alternatives

                                                      18



 (transit, bicycling, walking, etc.). In addition, some highway
users would shift their travel to times other than peak periods or
would have the option of not traveling at all because of TDM
measures such as alternative work schedules and telecommuting.  As
a result of such strategies, growth in traffic volumes would be
slowed, and the need for capacity expansion could be delayed or
eliminated.  Assuming the savings from these measures would be
greater than the costs, there would be gains in efficiency. 
Improvements in mobility would occur for both users of
transportation alternatives (who would gain through service and
facility improvements), and those who would continue to use the
highway system (who would gain through improved traffic flow and a
higher level of service).

Another viewpoint is that the largely incentive-based strategies of
Policy Alternative 3 would result in only marginal changes in
travel behavior.  Under this scenario, growth in VMT and trips
would continue at their current pace, and the need for capacity
expansion would not be significantly altered.  Thus significant new
costs would have to be absorbed (expanding 'alternative modes,
setting up new programs, etc.) without an offsetting amount of
savings.  This could be considered an inefficient use of resources. 
If the policy included limitations on capacity expansion as a
response to congestion, some loss of mobility could also occur.

Impacts on TRANSLINKS 21 Values
If it is assumed that Policy Alternative 3 could limit the growth
in VMT and trips and control congestion, it could have a positive
impact in terms of environmental responsibility.  A slowdown. in
the growth in VMT and vehicle trips could contribute to improved
air and water quality, preservation of land resources, and
preservation of natural habitat.  Reduced congestion could also
contribute to economic development.  Existing businesses would be
able to move their goods more efficiently, and more individuals
would be able to reach employment opportunities with limited
difficulty.  Such factors would enhance the attractiveness of urban
areas, which could attract new businesses, thus increasing
employment opportunities.

However, if it is assumed that Policy Alternative 3 would have
little impact on existing travel conditions, it would have at best
a neutral impact on environmental responsibility and economic
development.  It is possible that it could have a negative impact
on both values, if the strategies used were not effective in
controlling congestion.

Policy Alternative 3 could lead to a more equitable environment. 
Assuming an increase in the number of travel options users would
have to choose from, employment opportunities could be expanded for
individuals throughout urban areas.  In addition, many individuals
would have greater access to services and amenities than is
currently the case, thus further improving the equity of the
overall system.

        Feasibility of Adopting and Implementing Policy

Political Viability - Depending on the level at which WisDOT chose
to become directly involved in TDM and the communities involved,
there would be the potential for conflict with local agencies and
the private sector.  However, it is possible that in those
metropolitan areas where there are congestion and/or air quality
problems, greater WisDOT involvement in providing and

                                                      19



 coordinating TDM activities would be welcomed.  There would,
however, likely be opposition from rural and smaller urban areas
that do not have congestion or air quality problems.  Such areas
may view Policy Alternative 3 as serving only the interests of the
state's larger metropolitan areas at their expense.

These areas would likely be joined in their opposition by other
groups such as developers, highway construction interest groups,
and automobile-user interest groups.  Developers would probably
perceive a threat of increased regulation, while highway
construction and automobile-user interest groups would both oppose
the potential diversion of funds from highway uses.  It can be
argued that since a majority of funding for transportation comes
from user fees paid by drivers, it would be unfair to shift
significant amounts of such funding away from the users and toward
alternative modes.  If congestion problems worsened as a result of
the policy alternative, the general public would also likely oppose
the policy.  However, initially it is likely that there would be
little reaction from the general public to the policy.

Proponents of Policy Alternative 3 would include users of
alternative transportation modes and the environmental community. 
However, there would likely also be some sentiment among such
groups that the alternative is not extensive enough, and that
regulatory and pricing mechanisms are also needed (see Policy
Alternative 4).

Financial Feasibility, Administrative Operability, Technical
Feasibility - Under Policy Alternative 3, resources would be needed
to increase funding for alternative modes of transportation and
programs to encourage their use, and to provide increased staff and
other technical resources to oversee such programs.  If the policy
resulted in cost savings by delaying the need for capacity
expansion, it is possible that such savings could offset the added
expenses of the program.  However, if the policy did not result in
a substantial change in travel behavior, it would require a
significant new source of revenues or a major reallocation of
existing funds at WisDOT to be effectively implemented.

Legality - Policy Alternative 3 would likely require modifications
to existing state statutes.  For "ample, providing tax incentives
to individuals and employers to encourage TDM would probably
require changes in state law.

Flexibility - The State's flexibility in determining how and where
TDM resources could be provided would be maximized under Policy
Alternative 3. However, in order to effectively implement the
policy, significant organizational and financial changes would be
required.  If such changes were made, they would likely be
difficult and costly to reverse, limiting the flexibility of the
policy.  Local flexibility would be limited under the alternative
in terms of local agencies' ability to use resources as they
wished, since the state would play a decisive role in the
allocation of TDM resources.

        Conclusion
Policy Alternative 3 would require significant changes in the way
WisDOT approaches congestion problems.  In southeastern Wisconsin,
such changes are mandated by federal requirements contained in the
Clean Air Act Amendments.  However, the applicability of such

                                                        20



 a policy in other metropolitan areas of the state is uncertain. 
In metropolitan areas where current congestion problems are limited
and future growth is expected to be slow or moderate, such a policy
may not lead to the most efficient use of resources.  There are
also questions about the potential effectiveness of such a policy
in Wisconsin's larger and more rapidly growing metropolitan areas. 
Such questions stem in part from a relative lack of experience and
research into broad applications of voluntary and incentive-based
TDM measures, particularly within Wisconsin and the Midwest.

        ALTERNATIVE 4: Expanded state role in TDM

        Policy Statement
"WisDOT views TDM as both a state and local responsibility and will
seek a maximum commitment to TDM at both levels, including the use
of broad regulatory and pricing mechanisms.  WisDOT supports the
concept of addressing traffic congestion problems through TSM and
TDM measures (including pricing and regulatory mechanisms) before
addressing such problems through facility expansion."

        Policy Description
As under Policy Alternative 3, WisDOT would pursue a more direct
and proactive level of involvement in TDM.  However, WisDOT would
also seek the use of regulatory and pricing mechanisms to reduce
SOV travel, alter the time that travel occurs, and/or alter the
mode of travel that is used.  WisDOT, other state agencies, and
local entities would likely share in the responsibility for
implementing and enforcing the regulatory and pricing measures that
would be used.

        Potential Strategies and Actions to Implement Policy
 Pursue all strategies and actions discussed under Policy Alterna-
  tive 3.
 Develop trip reduction laws for the largest, most congested
  metropolitan areas of the state.
 Pursue controls on SOV travel in congested areas.
  o Pursue the institution of congestion tolls on congested facilities.
  o Pursue the institution of areawide pricing measures in congested 
    zones of urban areas. 
  o Pursue the institution of mandatory no-drive days in congested 
    regions.
 Increase fees associated with automobile use and dedicate
  additional funds to TDM programs and providing transportation
  alternatives to the SOV.
  o  License and registration fees.
  o  Fuel taxes.
  o  General tolls.
  o  Regional parking pricing.
 Pursue truck management strategies in congested areas. 
  o  Night shipping/receiving requirements.
  o  Peak period freeway truck ban.
                                                      21



 Pursue statewide land use regulations that support/promote
  transportation alternatives to the single-occupant vehicle (SOV).
  o  Require developments exceeding certain employment, size, and/or 
     trip generation thresholds to create or join Transportation
     Management Association.
  o  Require developments exceeding certain employment, size, and/or 
     trip generation thresholds to use site design techniques that 
     encourage the use of transportation alternatives to the SOV.
 Pursue enhanced intergovernmental coordination at the regional
  level.
  o Regional Transportation Authorities

        Review of Policy Alternative

Impacts on TRANSLINKS 21 Goals
The impacts of Policy Alternative 4 on the goals of TRANSLINKS 21
would be dependent on which types of regulatory and pricing
mechanisms were implemented.  However, regardless of the measures
used, the results would likely be mixed.

In terms of mobility and efficiency, congestion pricing measures
and increases in broad-based fees (such as fuel taxes) could be
detrimental to those motor vehicle users unable to absorb the
increased costs associated with these measures.  Such users may be
forced to either choose not to make a trip or to make the trip at a
less convenient time or using a less convenient mode.@ However, for
those users who could absorb the increased costs, mobility and
efficiency could be enhanced if the pricing mechanisms resulted in
less congested facilities.

It is possible that pricing measures and fee increases could
contribute to improvements in both choice and connectivity.  This
would be the case if a portion of the revenues collected were
dedicated to increasing the availability of alternatives to the
automobile.  However, to the extent that pricing mechanisms limit
motor vehicle use, it can also be argued that choice would be
limited for some individuals.  Other types of strategies included
in Policy Alternative 4 also limit choice, including no-drive days
and limitations on shippers, such as truck bans on freeways during
peak periods.

Policy Alternative 4 could promote safety by improving and
increasing the availability of facilities for users of alternative
modes such as bicycling and walking.  Improved facilities could
decrease the number of conflicts between motor vehicles and other
modes.  In addition, to the extent that Policy Alternative 4 could
limit traffic congestion, safety improvements could result from
smoother traffic flow.

Impacts on TRANSLINKS 21 Values
To the extent that VMT and trips would be reduced, Policy
Alternative 4 could have a positive impact in terms of
environmental responsibility.  Such a policy could enhance air
quality, and lead to preservation of land resources, water
resources, and natural habitat.

The economic development impacts of Policy Alternative 4 would be
decidedly mixed.  The reduced congestion which could result from
Policy Alternative 4 could mean significant savings

                                                      22



to businesses in their ability to move goods more efficiently. 
However, if regulatory requirements significantly increased costs,
it could hinder economic development by making the affected areas
less attractive to businesses and others.

The equity impacts of Policy Alternative 4 are closely related to
the "TRANSLINKS 21 Goals" discussion above.  Several groups would
benefit under the measures included in Policy Alternative 4,
including:

       Users who were previously using alternative modes, and
        would gain an improved level of service due to increased
        resources being committed to alternative modes.
       Users who would gain access to previously unavailable
        alternative modes.
       Users who would be able to shift to an alternative mode
        without a significant loss in time and convenience.

However, those who could benefit from Policy Alternative 4 would be
at least partially offset by those who would have their options
limited under several of the potential strategies contained in
Policy Alternative 4. In some cases, the measures included in
Policy Alternative 4 could result in users being forced to travel
using a less efficient mode, during a less convenient time, and/or
along a less convenient route.

        Feasibility of Adopting and Implementing Policy

Political Viability - Significant opposition to any of the
potential measures under PolicyAlternative 4 could occur at both
the state and local level, although the degree of opposition would
vary depending on the locations where measures were required, and
the degree to which such measures already exist.

Changes in existing programs, such as increasing fuel taxes or
raising vehicle fees, would be less difficult than imposing new
regulations.  However, even with existing programs, instituting
large enough changes to effectively alter travel behavior may be
very difficult to accomplish politically.  In addition, any efforts
to even minimally increase such fees and apply them to alternative
modes of transportation would face stiff opposition from rural
constituencies, highway construction interest groups, and
automobile-user interest groups.

Instituting congestion pricing mechanisms could also be politically
difficult to implement. cities and individuals directly subject to
such measures would probably uniformly oppose them, while even
those not directly affected by such measures may oppose the concept
primarily for equity reasons.  As with tax and fee increases, any
proposed pricing mechanisms that involved applying funds to
transportation alternatives would likely be opposed by a number of
groups.
Strong support for any of the potential measures under Policy
Alternative 4 would be likely from the environmental community, and
groups which would benefit directly from the policy such as transit
operators.

                                                      23



 Financial Feasibility.  Administrative Operability, and Technical
Feasibility - To the extent that it incorporates strategies
outlined under Policy Alternative 3, Policy Alternative 4 would
require a significant commitment of resources, as well as a
significant change in existing administrative conditions.  These
requirements would be further expanded under Policy Alternative 4,
with the level of expansion dependent on the specific mix of
strategies that were chosen and the techniques used to implement
them.

Fuel tax and vehicle fee increases would require the smallest
increase in resources to implement, since the framework (including
the necessary technical resources) is already largely in place. 
Regulatory measures, such as trip reduction laws or increased land
use regulations could require a significant new commitment of
resources primarily for monitoring, enforcement, and evaluation
purposes.  Likewise, pricing mechanisms would have similar
requirements, and could potentially include the need for
sophisticated technical expertise.

However, despite the imposing costs of some of these measures,
there would also be new sources of revenue to offset them if
pricing, tolling and/or vehicle fee increases were among the
measures implemented.  If properly designed, pricing mechanisms
would be able to cover the costs directly attributable to them.

Legality - Policy Alternative 4 would require additions to existing
state statutes.  For example, toll roads would need to be legalized
before congestion pricing measures could be pursued.

Flexibility - The flexibility of Policy Alternative 4 would be
dependent on the types of TDM measures that were ultimately
implemented, the locations where they were required, and the degree
to which WisDOT or other state agencies controlled their
implementation.

Conclusion
If Policy Alternative 4 were to be implemented there would likely
be significant up-front costs, in both financial and political
terms.  The stringency of the strategies outlined in the
alternative, as well as the fundamental changes in existing
conditions and policies associated with it, would make Policy
Alternative 4 the most controversial and difficult alternative to
implement.

Consideration of pricing and regulatory mechanisms, such as those
outlined in Policy Alternative 4, is required under the Clean Air
Act Amendments to relieve congestion and air quality problems in
southeastern Wisconsin.  However, given the controversial nature of
many aspects of the alternative, it is uncertain how feasible such
measures would be in other metropolitan areas of the state that are
not subject to clean air requirements and do not experience the
same degree of traffic congestion.  This is particularly true of
smaller metropolitan areas and those areas where only moderate
growth is occurring.

                                                      24



        V. SUMMARY

To date, the role of TDM in Wisconsin's transportation system has
been largely undefined, primarily because until recently there has
been little perceived need for it.  Unlike in California and
several eastern states, the transportation-related problems that
TDM tries to address have either not existed in Wisconsin until the
very recent past or have been handled through other means. 
However, in today's environment, TDM is one of several options that
must at least be considered in Wisconsin.

However, one hindrance in determining the role of TDM in
Wisconsin's transportation system is the limited amount of
information available regarding the effectiveness of TDM in a
Wisconsin environment, and in some cases (such as congestion
pricing), an American environment.  In part because of this
uncertainty, there is a degree of risk associated with each of the
four policy alternatives that have been developed as part of this
paper.

Both Policy Alternative 1 and Policy Alternative 2 are fairly
conservative approaches to WisDOT involvement in TDM.  Policy
Alternative I acknowledges WisDOT's uncertainty about TDM, and
seeks to minimize the Department's involvement in it, relying
instead on local agencies and the private sector to organize, fund,
and implement TDM activities.  In Policy Alternative 2, WisDOT
recognizes the relative lack of experience with TDM in Wisconsin
and seeks to alleviate this problem by becoming moderately involved
in encouraging its use.

The risk of both these alternatives is that neither would likely
provide definitive evidence regarding the effectiveness of TDM, nor
would either likely slow the increase in VMT, and corresponding
increases in traffic congestion, air pollution, and energy
consumption.  It is possible that focusing only on short-term cost
reductions today could result in greater future financial, social,
and environmental costs that could have been mitigated had action
been taken sooner.

Policy Alternative 3 and Policy Alternative 4 are much more
aggressive approaches to WisDOT involvement in TDM, as both call
for a high degree of commitment to TDM.  Policy Alternative 3 would
require a significant commitment of resources to bolster existing
TDM efforts, create new programs, and expand the availability of
transportation alternatives, such as transit, bicycling, and
walking.  Policy Alternative 4 builds on Policy Alternative 3 by
adding the consideration and use of pricing and regulatory measures
to implement TDM.

There are significant risks associated with both these
alternatives, primarily related to the scale of the activities that
would be required to implement either of them.  The potential
exists for either a dramatic success or a disastrous failure under
both alternatives.  On the one hand, the strategies and actions
associated with these two alternatives could significantly alter
existing travel behavior and result in reduced congestion, improved
air quality, and decreased fuel consumption.  On the other hand, it
is possible that a significant amount of resources could be
allocated to TDM and related activities without a corresponding
impact on existing problems.

                                                      25



 Depending on the perspective that it is viewed from, TDM could be
a panacea to many of today's transportation problems or it could
provide only limited relief in a minimal number of situations.  In
actuality, the role of TDM in today's transportation environment
probably lies somewhere between these two extremes the challenge
facing Wisconsin and its decease is to determine where.

                                                      26



        APPENDIX A: WISCONSIN STATE STATUTE 85.24

85.24   Demand management and ride-sharing program. (1) Purpose. 
The purpose of this section is to promote the conservation of
energy, reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality and enhance
the efficient use of existing transportation systems by planning
and promoting demand management and ride-sharing programs and
providing technical and financial assistance to public and private
organizations for the development and implementation of demand
management and ride-sharing programs.

        (2)     Definitions.  In this section:

        (a)     "Demand management" means policies and programs designed
        to reduce the number of automobile trips, especially during
        peak hours of traffic congestion, including policies and
        programs designed to do any of the following:

        1.      Promote the reduction of unnecessary single-
                occupancy automobile trips.

        2.      Promote alternatives to automobile travel, such as
                biking and wailing.

        3.      Encourage the use of high-occupancy modes of travel,
                such as ride sharing and all forms of public
                transportation.

        4.      Increase the convenience of alternatives to
                single-occupancy automobile trips, such as
                appropriate land-use planning and preferential
                parking privileges for car and van pools.

        (b)     "Ride sharing" means the use of a single motor
                vehicle by 2 or more persons for the purpose of
                commuting to and from their places of
                employment or attendance at postsecondary
                institutions, and includes commuting by means
                of a car pool or a van pool.

        (3)     Administration. (a) The department shall be the
                lead state agency in demand management and
                ride-sharing activities and shall have all
                powers necessary to develop and implement a
                state demand management and ride-sharing
                assistance program which shall include the
                coordination of demand management and ride-
                sharing activities in this state, the promotion
                and marketing of demand management and ride-
                sharing activities, the dissemination of
                technical information, the provision of
                technical and financial assistance to public
                and private organizations for the planning,
                development and implementation of demand
                management and ride-sharing programs, and the
                development and distribution of computer and
                manual ride-matching systems.

        (b)     The department may apply for and receive
                federal grants on its own behalf or as
                requested on behalf of other private and public
                organizations.

        (c)     The department may administer a program for the
                distribution of any federal funds for ride
                sharing and demand management that are made
                available to the state.

                                                      A-i



        (d)     The department may award grants from the
                appropriation under s.  20.395 (1) (bs) to
                public and private organizations for the
                development and implementation of demand
                management and ride-sharing programs.  As a
                condition of obtaining a grant under this
                paragraph, a public or private organization may
                be required to provide matching funds at any
                percentage.  The department shall give priority
                in the awarding of grants to those programs
                that provide the greatest reduction in
                automobile trips, especially during peak hours
                of traffic congestion.  The department shall
                have all powers necessary and convenient to
                implement this paragraph, including the
                following powers:

        1.      To promulgate, by rule, procedures and criteria
                for the review and award of grants under this
                paragraph.
        2.      To receive and review applications for grants
                and to prescribe the form, nature and extent of
                the information which shall be contained in
                applications.

        3.      To audit and inspect the records of grant recipients.

        4.      To require reports from grant recipients as needed.
                History: 1981 c. 20; 1991 a. 39.

                                                     A-ii



 APPENDIX B: IDENTIFICATION/DESCRIPTION OF TDM MEASURES

In order to further define the types of activities that are
considered to be TDM-related, this appendix identifies and
describes several specific TDM measures.  Each measure has been
classified within one of three categories: o Alternative
Transportation Modes o Alternative Work Schedules and Sites 9
Incentives and Disincentives

In addition, a fourth section discusses Transportation Management
Associations, organizations which are created to integrate and
coordinate TDM measures.

ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION MODES

Transit
Although transit is discussed in greater detail in the Transit
Issue Paper, it is important to at least briefly note the critical
role that transit plays in the context of TDM.  In efforts to
reduce single-occupant vehicle (SOV) travel, adequate provision of
transit service is essential.  In Wisconsin, such service currently
is limited primarily to traditional fixed-route bus service. 
However, it is likely that over the next three decades there will
be an expansion into more specialized areas, such as express
services, subscription services, and vanpooling.  In addition, new
technologies such as light rail and alternative fuel vehicles may
also be introduced and utilized.  It is anticipated that such
changes will be critical to the continued viability of transit a
vital component of TDM.

Ridesharing
The concept behind ridesharing is fairly straightforward; reduce
the number of vehicles on the road by shifting drivers of single-
occupant vehicles into multi-occupant vehicles.  In part because of
this, ridesharing is the most widely utilized and most commonly
recognized of all the TDM measures.  The two oldest and most common
forms of ridesharing are carpooling and vanpooling, while
sedanpooling is a more recent addition to the ridesharing family
that combines characteristics of its older predecessors.  The
following are brief descriptions of each:

       Carpooling: An informal arrangement between at least two
        individuals to share driving duties and/or costs, using
        the participants' private vehicles.  The pools can be
        arranged independently or with the assistance of a
        ridematching service.
       Sedanpooling: A more formal type of carpooling that uses
        a vehicle other than the participants' private
        automobiles.  The vehicles instead are most often
        provided by an employer, a Transportation Management
        Association, a private contractor, or a public agency. 
        Often the provider also assists in the creation of the
        pools and the administration of the program, although in
        some cases the two tasks are handled by separate
        entities.
       Vanpooling: Similar to sedanpooling, except 7-to-15
        passenger vans are used instead of automobiles.  In
        general, vanpools are only used for longer commute trips
        due to time, cost, and convenience factors.

                                                      B-i



Walking and Bicycling
Two of the most basic transportation modes which TDM measures
attempt to encourage are bicycling and walking.  Because a detailed
discussion of techniques that can be used to improve the existing
bicycling and pedestrian network can be found in the MPO Planning
Guidelines for bicycles and pedestrians, discussion here will be
limited.  Among the techniques included in the MPO Planning
Guidelines are:
       Providing wide curb lanes for bicyclists.
       Providing designated bike lanes (with appropriate
        striping and signing).
       Providing off-road bicycle paths.
       Providing sidewalks on both sides of arterial and
        collector streets.
       Providing marked crosswalks.
       Installing traffic control devices allowing pedestrians
        to safely cross at intersections.
       Installing bicycle-sensitive loop detectors to enable
        bicyclists to trip traffic signals.
       Providing facilities to allow pedestrians and bicyclists
        to bypass natural and man-made barriers.

In addition to these types of measures, which are primarily the
responsibility of local government agencies, there are also several
TDM measures that developers and employers may control.  These
include:
       The provision of sidewalks around sites.
       The provision of showers and locker rooms on-site.
       The provision of adequate bicycle storage facilities on-
        site.

Ridematching
Although it is not an alternative transportation mode, ridematching
is included in this category because of its close relationship to
transit and ridesharing.  Ridematching is a service that assists
individuals in the creation or expansion of carpools and vanpools,
and also provides information on vanpool and transit routes, and
the location of park-and-ride lots.  Such a service can be limited
to a specific employer or an individual site, or it can be
organized through a regional ridematching provider.  The actual
service can be as simple as a bulletin board or as complex as a
GIS-based computer system.

Land Use Techniques
Although not an alternative mode, land use techniques are mentioned
in this category because of their importance in encouraging the use
of alternative modes.  Land use techniques that enhance the
viability of alternative modes center primarily around zoning
requirements to encourage high-density, mixed-use development that
is easily accessible to transit, and provides quality bicycle,
pedestrian, and transit links between homes, shops, and jobs.  A
more detailed discussion of land use issues is included in the Land
Use Issue Paper.

                                                     B-ii



        ALTERNATIVE WORK Schedules 

Telecommuting

Telecommuting is a work and transportation alternative that allows
employees to work at a location other than their conventional
office, in order to reduce or eliminate their normal commute.  The
most common alternative site is the employee's home, although in
some cases "satellite" work offices are also used.  Although
research on telecommuting to date has been fairly limited, some
general statements about the measure can be made, including:
       Depending upon the work being performed, the technology
        necessary for telecommuting may be only a telephone, or
        it may involve more complex equipment, including a
        computer.
       Additional costs associated with telecommuting from an
        employee's home may be covered entirely by the employer,
        entirely by the employee, or jointly between the two. 
        Costs may include computer hardware and software,
        additional phone lines, and utility costs.
       Telecommuting is most often applied on a part-time basis,
        with the majority of participants only telecommuting one
        or two days per week.

Alternative Work Schedules

Alternative work schedules (AWS) is a TDM technique that seeks to
relieve congestion and air quality problems by altering the hours
an employee reports to and leaves the worksite, and/or the days on
which (s)he reports to the worksite.  The types of AWS are:
       Flextime: Employees are allowed to set their own workday
        start and finish times, provided that they work an agreed
        upon number of hours.  Generally, employees are required
        to be at work during a "core" period each day (for
        example, between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m.). -                          
       Compressed Work Week: Employees work more hours per day,
        but work fewer days per week.  The most common programs
        involve employees working four 10-hour days in a oneweek
        period, or working 80 hours in nine days during a two-
        week period.

       Staggered Work Hours: Employees' work times are staggered
        in such a way that their arrival and departure times are
        spread over a longer period of time.

                INCENTIVES AND DISINCENTIVES

                Parking Management

The availability and cost of parking are key factors underlying
travelers' choice of travel mode.  In short, if parking is
expensive and scarce, individuals will be more likely to select
alternative modes of transportation such as transit and
ridesharing.  A range of methods to alter parking supply and costs
involving both the public and private sector are available. 
Measures that can be used by government agencies include:

       Establishing differential parking fees at public parking
        facilities, based upon the number of vehicle occupants,
        with single-occupant vehicles (SOVS) paying the highest
        fee.
       Reserving the most desirable parking locations at public
        parking facilities for highoccupancy vehicles (HOVs).
       Installing on-street parking controls (meters, timed
        zones, neighborhood preferential parking).
       Imposing parking pricing through regional regulations.

                                                     B-iii



       Placing controls on the amount of parking built and
        operated in an area.
       Altering parking codes to discourage oversupplying
        parking.

Measures that can be used by developers, employers, and
Transportation Management Associations include:

       Eliminating, reducing, or "cashing out" employer-provided
        parking subsidies.
       Establishing differential parking fees at sites, based
        upon the number of vehicle occupants, with single-
        occupant vehicles (SOVS) paying the highest                              fee.
       Reserving the most desirable parking locations at sites
        for high-occupancy vehicles (HOVs).
       Giving HOVs priority in constrained parking situations.
       Eliminating "early bird" or monthly discounts favoring
        long-term commuter parking

Transportation Allowances and Other Financial Incentives
In order to encourage the use of transportation alternatives to the
SOV, a number of different incentives are available.  The majority
of such incentives are usually provided by employers and
developers, however there are several incentives that can be
provided by public agencies.  Employer-based incentives include the
following: 
       General Transportation Allowances: Employer provides each
        employee with a fixed amount of money to cover their
        transportation costs, regardless of the commute mode
        which is selected.  Parking fees are generally increased
        in combination with the allowance in one of two ways:
        	       Parking fees are increased by an amount
                equivalent to the allowance.  In this way,
                individuals are provided with an incentive to
                use a transportation alternative, yet they are
                still not penalized for driving.
        	       Parking fees are increased by an amount greater
                than the allowance.  In this way, individuals
                are penalized for driving, while users of
                alternatives are not.  Often the excess revenue
                which is collected from SOVs is used to help
                fund the allowance program.
       Targeted Transportation Allowances: Employer provides
        those employees who travel by selected modes with a set
        amount of money to cover their transportation costs.  The
        most frequently used allowance is a free or reduced-cost
        transit pass, although in some cases the allowance is
        broadened to include carpooling, vanpooling, bicycling,
        and/or walking.
       New Vanpooler Benefits: In order to attract new
        vanpoolers, employers cover all or part of the vanpool
        fares for the first 1-6 months of usage.
       Miscellaneous Financial Incentives: Employer provides
        those employees who travel by selected modes with
        incentives which, although they are not a direct payment,
        still provide a financial benefit to users of alternative
        modes.  Examples include:
        	       Allowing the use of fleet vehicles for ridesharing.
        	       Providing free or discounted fuel for pooling vehicles.
        	       Providing free or discounted maintenance and repair
                for pooling vehicles.
        	       Providing free or discounted equipment for users of
                alternative modes.  For example,providing bicyclists
                with a helmet.
        	       Awarding additional vacation time to users of
                alternative transportation modes.

                                                     B-iv



 Financial incentives under the control of public agencies include:

       Transit Fare Incentives: A local agency provides
        employers with the opportunity to purchase transit passes
        at reduced fees, which the employers then provide to
        their employees for a free or reduced price.
       New Vanpooler Benefits: In order to attract new
        vanpoolers, a local agency pays for all or part of the
        vanpool fares for the first 1-6 months of usage.

HOV Facilities/Park-and-Ride Lots
HOV facilities serve as an incentive to use buses, carpools, and
vanpools by providing travel time savings to its users.  Typically,
an HOV lane is available to buses and vehicles with 2 or 3-plus
occupants, although in some cases it is limited to buses only. 
Such facilities are generally oriented to serve the major downtown
core of a metropolitan area along radial corridors, and are focused
on downtown-oriented work trips.  In many cases the facilities are
in operation only during the morning and afternoon peak periods.

Park-and-Ride lots are often developed in conjunction with HOV
facilities, although they are also used in areas that do not have a
designated HOV facility.  In general, park-and-ride lots are
developed to serve as a collection point for individuals using HOV
modes such as transit, vanpooling, and carpooling.

No-Drive Days
The concept behind no-drive day programs is fairly simple - reduce
congestion and air pollution problems by restricting the number of
vehicles that are allowed to use the roadways.  Although mandatory
no-drive days have been established in several foreign cities,
including Athens and Mexico City, only voluntary no-drive days have
been tried in the United States, most notably in Phoenix and
Denver.

Generally, such programs are aimed at private automobile users and
are tied to their license plate numbers.  For example, individuals
whose plate numbers end with the numbers one and two are asked not
to drive alone on Mondays, those whose plate numbers end with three
and four are asked not to drive alone on Tuesday, and so on.

Pricing Measures
Pricing measures related to TDM can be classified under one of the
following three categories:
       General Tolls: Flat fees that users of a transportation
        facility are charged regardless of the time of day that
        the facility is used.  The same fee is enforced
        throughout the day.
       Congestion Tolls: Variable fees that users of a specific
        transportation facility are charged that are dependent
        upon the time of day that the facility is used. 
        Generally, congestion tolls are set at a relatively high
        level during peak periods, and are set at a very low rate
        (or eliminated altogether) during off-peak periods.
       Areawide Pricing Measures: Congestion tolls that motor
        vehicle users are charged for entering a congested zone,
        regardless of the facility that is utilized.

Of these measures, only general tolls have been used extensively to
date.  Numerous areas of the United States have general toll
facilities (i.e. Illinois East-West Tollway, Pennsylvania

                                                      B-v



 Turnpike, Chicago Skyway, etc.), however the primary reason for
using tolls on such facilities is not to manage transportation
demand.  Instead, the major impetus for using tolls to date has
been to provide another means to finance a facility that otherwise
may not have been built.

Congestion tolls and areawide pricing measures have been studied
and proposed for implementation in several areas of the United
States over the past 25 years.  However neither has ever been
implemented primarily because of political barriers and public
opposition.

Trip Reduction Ordinances
Trip reduction ordinances (TROS) are local, regional, or state
regulations requiring developer and employer participation in the
implementation of TDM.  TROs can be applied based on a variety of
different criteria, including number of employees, size of
development, type of development, and motor vehicle trip
generation.

In most cases, the key component of the TRO is the creation and
implementation of a TDM plan.  Generally, TDM plans must include a
description of what measures will be used to meet the requirements
of the TRO, and a timetable for implementing the TDM program.  Once
an initial plan has been developed, it is then reviewed and updated
on a regular basis by a regulatory agency.  If the review shows the
plan is not meeting the requirements of the TRO, further action is
often required.

The enforcement of TROs can vary widely, from no penalties at all
(in voluntary programs) to a scale of fines for failing to meet the
requirements of the TRO.  Generally, fines are not assessed if an
entity fails to meet trip reduction requirements.  In most cases,
punitive action is taken only if an entity fails to make a good-
faith effort to meet the requirements of a TRO.

Complementary Incentives
Although the measures described above are generally regarded as the
most effective means of encouraging the use of transportation
alternatives, several other TDM measures are also often identified
as playing a complementary role, primarily by addressing the
reasons individuals frequently give for using SOVS.  These measures
include:
       Providing fleet vehicles for at-work trips, in order to
        offset the need to drive a personal vehicle to work for
        work-related use during the day.
       Providing shuttle service between multiple sites of an
        individual employer, to offset the need for a personal
        vehicle to make at-work trips between sites.
       Providing on-site day care, to offset the need for a
        vehicle to pick up and drop off children before and after
        work.
       Providing mid-day shuttle service to nearby activity
        centers, to offset the need for a vehicle to run errands
        or go to lunch over the noon hour.
       Establishing a guaranteed ride home program, to offset
        the need for a vehicle should an employee need to leave
        work during the day in the case of an emergency or should
        they need to work overtime.

All of these complementary measures are in most cases primarily the
responsibility of an individual employer or a Transportation
Management Association.

                                                     B-vi



Control of Truck Movements
Trucks can be major contributors to congestion and air pollution
problems in urban areas, particularly during peak travel periods. 
Because of this, methods of controlling and directing truck
movements are often explored as one means to address congestion and
air quality problems.  Such methods include TSM techniques such as
incident management programs, adjustments in sign placement, and
variable message signs.  In addition, other techniques that have
been explored but not implemented in other parts of the country
include:
       Requirements that businesses do most of their shipping and
        receiving at night when there is generally excess capacity
        available.
       Bans on truck travel on freeways during peak periods.

        TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATIONS
Transportation Management Associations (TMAS) are organizations
that are made up of clusters of employers in close proximity to one
another.  In most cases, they are formed to assist members in
planning and implementing TDM measures, and to provide the private
sector with an organized means of providing input into public
sector planning, decision-making, and project development.  The
central assumption behind TMAs is that individual employers will be
able to create more effective TDM programs by pooling their
resources with other employers than they would be able to in
isolation.  TMAs are especially beneficial to their smaller members
who are able to offer their employees more transportation options
than they would be able to in isolation.

        Among the services provided by TMAs to their members are:
       Ridematching;
       Vanpools;
       Guaranteed Ride Home programs;
       Coordination of alternative work schedules;
       Shuttle services between work sites and commercial areas, and;
       Promotion and marketing of TDM strategies.

                                                     B-vii


TRANSLINKS 21



FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THIS TOPIC, CONTACT:

SANDRA BEAUPRE
CHIEF, URBAN TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIES SECTION
WISCONSIN DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 7913
MADISON, WI 53707-7913
608/266-1585

FOR ADDITIONAL COPIES, CALL:
OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, 608/266/3581


(tdm.html)
Jump To Top