Site-Specific Transportation Demand Management: Case of Seattle’s Transportation Management Program,1988

Abstract

A central theme of U.S. transportation planning policies is to reduce single-occupancy vehicle (SOV) trips and promote transit and non-motorized transportation by coordinating land-use planning and transportation demand management (TDM) programs. Cities often implement TDM programs by intervening with new development during the municipal permit review process. Seattle’s Transportation Management Program (TMP) under a joint Director’s Rule (DR) requires a commitment from developers to adopt select strategies from six TDM element categories: program management, physical improvements, bicycle/walking programs, employer-based incentives, transit and car/vanpooling, and parking management. TMP targets new developments and requires some TDM elements, recommends others, and leaves the rest to negotiation. The result is an individualized TMP agreement that is site-specific, reflecting both city policy and developer needs. This case study presents a qualitative analysis of the guiding eight DRs and 41 site-specific TMP agreements in Seattle’s Downtown and South Lake Union (SLU) area since 1988. Overall, a content analysis of TMP documents reveals that the average number of elements adopted in an agreement falls short of requirements set by DRs (34%–61%). Major findings include developer preference toward non-traditional TDM measures such as physical improvement of frontage and urban design features, as well as parking management. High-occupancy vehicle (HOV) elements showed higher adoption rates (59%–63%) over biking/walking programs (< 1%). It is concluded that future TDM policies could benefit if future research includes examining the effectiveness of the range of management options stemming from the real estate trends toward green buildings, tenants’ values in sustainability, and city policy to reduce automobile trips.

Keywords

Planning and analysis Transportation demand management Transportation planning policy and processes

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Davidson

Role of Site Amenities as Transportation Demand Management Measures. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1995. 1496: 184–190.

Mierzejewski

E. A.

Transportation-Demand Management for Quality Development. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, Vol. 117, No. 3, 1991, pp. 77–84. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9488(1991)117:3(77).

De Gruyter

Rose

Currie

Rye

Vand de Graaf

Travel Plans for New Developments: A Global Review. Transport Reviews, Vol. 38, No. 1, 2018, pp. 142–161.

Yeates

Enoch

M. P.

Travel Plans from the Developer Perspective. Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers: Urban Design and Planning, Vol. 166, No. 5, 2013, pp. 262–273.

Rye

Green

Young

Ison

Using the Land-Use Planning Process to Secure Travel Plans: An Assessment of Progress in England to Date. Journal of Transport Geography, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 235–243.

Cervero

The Built Environment and Travel: Evidence from the United States. European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research, Vol. 3, No. 2, 2003, pp. 119–137. https://doi.org/10.18757/ejtir.2003.3.2.3683.

Cooper

Donegan

Ryley

Smyth

Granzow

Densification and Urban Compaction: Reinforcing the Drive for Sustainability. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2002. 1817: 102–109. https://doi.org/10.3141/1817-13.

Ewing

Cervero

Travel and the Built Environment: A Synthesis. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2001. 1780: 87–114. https://doi.org/10.3141/1780-10.

Kenworthy

J. R.

Laube

F. B.

Patterns of Automobile Dependence in Cities: An International Overview of Key Physical and Economic Dimensions with Some Implications for Urban Policy. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 33, No. 7–8, 1999, pp. 691–723. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0965-8564(99)00006-3.

10.

Litman

Steele

W. R.

Land Use Impacts on Transport How Land Use Factors Affect Travel Behavior. Victoria Transport Policy Institute, Victoria, BC, Canada 2019. https://www.vtpi.org/landtravel.pdf. Accessed December 4, 2019.

11.

Selmi

D. P.

The Contract Transformation in Land Use Regulation. Stanford Law Review, Vol. 63, No. 3, 2011, pp. 591–646.

12.

Fuerst

McAllister

Green Noise or Green Value? Measuring the Effects of Environmental Certification on Office Values. Real Estate Economics, Vol. 39, No. 1, 2011, pp. 45–69. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6229.2010.00286.x.

13.

van de Wetering

Sustainability in Real Estate Markets. In Sustainable Futures in the Built Environment to 2050: A Foresight Approach to Construction and Development, ( Dixon

Connaughto

Green

, eds.), John Wiley & Sons Ltd, Chichester, 2017, pp. 50–71. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119063834.ch3.

14.

Ferguson

Transportation Demand Management Planning, Development, and Implementation. Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 56, No. 4, 1990, pp. 442–456. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944369008975448.

15.

Meyer

M. D.

Demand Management as an Element of Transportation Policy: Using Carrots and Sticks to Influence Travel Behavior. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 33, No. 7–8, 1999, pp. 575–599. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0965-8564(99)00008-7.

16.

Barcik

Bylinko

Transportation Demand Management as a Tool of Transport Policy. Transport Problems, Vol. 13, No. 2, 2018, pp. 121–131. https://doi.org/10.20858/tp.2018.13.2.12.

17.

Davis

Parkin

Active Travel: Its Fall and Rise. Part 2: The Human Eperience. In The Routledge Handbook of Planning for Health and Well-being ( Burgess

Grant

, eds.), Routledge, Abingdon, 2015, pp. 108–120.

18.

Nelson

A. C.

Allen

If You Build Them, Commuters Will Use Them: Association between Bicycle Facilities and Bicycle Commuting. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 1997. 1578: 79–83. https://doi.org/10.3141/1578-10.

19.

Pucher

Dill

Handy

Infrastructure, Programs, and Policies to Increase Bicycling: An International Review. Preventive Medicine, Vol. 50, 2009, pp. S106–S125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2009.07.028.

20.

Wardman

Tight

Page

Factors Influencing the Propensity to Cycle to Work. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Vol. 41, No. 4, 2007, pp. 339–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2006.09.011.

21.

Litman

Transportation Market Distortions. Berkeley Planning Journal, Vol. 19, No. 1, 2006, pp. 19–36. https://doi.org/10.5070/bp319111487.

22.

O’Fallon

Sullivan

Hensher

D. A.

Constraints Affecting Mode Choices by Morning Car Commuters. Transport Policy, Vol. 11, No. 1, 2004, pp. 17–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0967-070X(03)00015-5.

23.

Shoup

D. C.

Willson

R. W.

Org

UC Berkeley Earlier Faculty Research Title Employer-Paid Parking: The Problem and Proposed Solutions Permalink. https://Escholarship.Org/Uc/Item/2x6240jr Publication Date. 1992.

24.

McCahill

Garrick

Atkinson-Palombo

The Fiscal and Travel Consequences of Parking Requirements. In Parking and the City ( Shoup

, ed.), Routledge, New York, 2018, pp. 125–132.

25.

Kitamura

Mokhtarian

P. L.

Pendyala

R. M.

Goulias

An Evaluation of Telecommuting As a Trip Reduction Measure Working Paper. No. 5. University of California Transportation Center, 1991.

26.

Aevaz

2018 ACS Survey: While Most Americans’ Commuting Trends Are Unchanged, Teleworking Continues to Grow, and Driving Alone Dips in Some Major Cities. Eno Center for Transportation. https://www.enotrans.org/article/2018-acs-survey-while-most-americans-commuting-trends-are-unchanged-teleworking-continues-to-grow-and-driving-alone-dips-in-some-major-cities/. Accessed March 26, 2021.

27.

City of Seattle. Director’s Rules. Seattle.gov. http://web6.seattle.gov/dpd/dirrulesviewer/. Accessed February 20, 2020.

28.

Eichholts

Quigley

Doing Well by Doing Good? Green Office Buildings. The American Economic Review, Vol. 100, No. 5, 2010, pp. 2492–2509.

29.

Alternative Transportation. U.S. Green Building Council. https://www.usgbc.org/credits/existing-buildings-schools-existing-buildings-retail-existing-buildings-data-centers-exis-41. Accessed March 28, 2021.

Site-Specific Transportation Demand Management: Case of Seattle’s Transportation Management Program,1988–2015

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References