TASK 2: GENERAL REGIONAL NEEDS AND

EXISTING APPROACH SUMMARY

Summary Memo

03/07/2016

1

This General Needs and Existing Approach Summary captures the compilation and preparation

of the current state of practice for Transportation Demand Management (TDM) in the Northern

Virginia region. It documents variations among projects and programming across a region

encompassing a population of 2.4 million where more than half of all residents work outside the

county or city where they live. This memorandum highlights findings from regional and

jurisdictional plans, needs assessments, and more specifically explores the process and thinking

that helped shape priorities and perceived limitations of current and planned TDM activities and

projects.

Background:

Greater efficiency of the Northern Virginia transportation system can be achieved by providing

travelers with effective choices to improve access to destinations and travel reliability. This is

the main objective of TDM initiatives, which range from carpool and vanpool formation,

telework, commuter trip planning, and promotion of transit and other higher occupancy travel

modes.

TDM services are provided in Northern Virginia through a partnership between Department of

Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT), Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), MPOs,

TMAs, and city and county local governments. See Exhibit 1 for a list of the identified TDM

and TMAs1 operating in the Northern Virginia area.

Exhibit 1. Local TDM Providers in Northern Virginia

Most outreach and programmatic efforts are localized to target the constituency of each

jurisdiction, with the following notable exceptions:

1 TMAs are non-profit organizations that provide TDM services in a particular area, such as a commercial/business

district, airport or town center. They are generally operated as public-private partnerships and provide a variety of

services that encourage more efficient use of transportation and parking resources to the businesses, workers,

customers and residents of the TMA’s service area.

LOCAL AGENCY NAME

Arlington County Commuter Assistance Program

City of Alexandria Local Motion

Dulles Area Transportation Association

Fairfax County Ride Sources

Loudoun County Commuter Services

MWCOG Commuter Connections

Northern Virginia Regional Commission

Potomac Rappahannock Transportation Commission (PRTC)

Tysons Partnership Transportation Management Association

2

Telework!VA, a program administered by the Virginia Department of Rail and Public

Transportation, offers resources to employers, employees and TDM programs on how to

establish and manage a telework program to reduce or eliminate commuting time by

working from home or some other remote workplace, and how to take advantage of

Virginia’s telework tax credit administered by the Virginia Department of Taxation.

Commuter Connections is a regional network of transportation organizations

coordinated by the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. The primary

service is a ride matching database to facilitate formation of carpools/vanpools, but other

services include a regional Guaranteed Ride Home program, bicycle to work information,

park-and-ride lot and HOV lane information, telecommute/telework program assistance,

InfoExpress commuter information kiosks, web based commuter information services

and employer services.

The 2013 State of the Commute (SOC) Survey has been conducted five times since 2001.

Produced at three-year intervals, it provides results that are used to document trends in

awareness, attitudes and regional commute behavior. The SOC analysis is focused

primarily on the region as a whole (11 independent cities and counties), with some results

analyzed by geographic sub-regions. The primary sub-area categorization consists of

Inner Core (City of Alexandria, Arlington County), Middle Ring (Fairfax County) and

Outer Ring (Loudoun and Prince William County). See Exhibit 2.

Exhibit 2. Inner Core, Middle Ring and Outer Ring Jurisdictions

3

Current commuting statistics from the most recent SOC (2013) are presented in Exhibit 3 below.

Exhibit 3. Mode Choice and Travel Distance/Time from Regional (VA/MD) State of the

Commute Survey in 2013

4

5

The programs and services that comprise each locality’s TDM approach has changed over time

and has come to reflect the needs of both the private market and the public sector. Much of the

work of TDM agencies involves behavior change – encouraging travelers to make informed

decisions regarding the use of transit, vanpool or carpool options. To that effect, they are

engaged in a great deal of marketing and promotion for these alternative travel modes.

The last regional vision plan for TDM, the Super NoVa Transit & TDM Vision Plan (2012)

noted that the successes of corridor- and area-based strategies in places like Arlington,

Alexandria, and Tyson’s Corner, as well as along the I-66 and I-95 corridors have the potential to

become more regional in scope and models for other areas and corridors in the region. Other

regional and statewide participants in setting TDM priorities and practice in Northern Virginia

include:

The Northern Virginia Transportation Authority (NVTA) controls a vast budget for

transportation projects all over Northern Virginia. It is responsible for long-range

transportation planning, policies and priorities for regional transportation initiatives and

execution of performance-based ranking methodology for projects based upon the ability

to improve travel times, reduce delays, connect regional activity centers, improve safety,

improve air quality, and move the most people in the most cost-effective manner.

The Northern Virginia Transportation Commission (NVTC) is primarily responsible

for administering a tax surcharge to fund Virginia's share of the Washington Metro

system (Metrobus and Metrorail) from member jurisdictions. This includes the City of

Alexandria, Arlington County, Fairfax County, City of Fairfax, City of Falls Church, and

Loudoun County. It provides funding advocacy for high-quality, high-capacity transit in

the region. Together with the Potomac and Rappahannock Transportation Commission,

NVTC operates the Virginia Railway Express (VRE) commuter rail system.

The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) conducts long-range multimodal

planning, owns/maintains a network of regional and statewide park and ride facilities, and

has been active in the benchmarking of active transportation modes. It provides the

implementation of High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lanes to encourage carpooling and

contributes funding to the Telework!VA program to provide incentives for employers to

set up telework programs.

Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT) provides technical and

financial support to local transit and commuter service agencies through annual grant

programs, consumer research, training and marketing assistance. The local transit and

commuter services agencies, with DRPT’s technical and financial support, implement

programs at the regional and local level. DRPT also established standards for commuter

services program evaluation and reporting.

Mobility Lab is funded by Arlington County Commuter Services (ACCS), the U.S.

Department of Transportation, VDOT, and the DRPT to primarily measure the impacts of

6

ACCS, quantify how TDM initiatives are working, and translate innovative practices

throughout the region and beyond.

As the region grows, solutions to transportation challenges become increasingly more

multijurisdictional and sophisticated. Planning at a broader scale will become increasingly

important so that relatively scarce resources can be used to create the greatest benefit.

Northern Virginia Capacity and Mobility Challenges:

Built out with core capacity limitations

Northern Virginia accounted for nearly three-fifths of the state’s population growth over the past

few years. The lack of funding and space to significantly add more roadway capacity may lead to

increasing levels of congestion unless travel demands are addressed. Capacity constraints for

time-competitive alternative transit modes also require capital intensive solutions. Despite

robust transit systems operating in many parts of the center of the region, significant capacity

constraints exist and threaten the ability for these systems to expand and meet current and future

transit demand. Specific capacity constraints that threaten the ability of existing transit systems

in the center of the region to expand and absorb future travel demand2:

Capacity at transfer stations

Line capacity on critical system links

Inadequate fleet size

Aging fleet

Aging and undersized infrastructure

Inadequate mid-day transit vehicle storage

Capacity of both highway and transit mobility modes during peak commuting times, travel speed

and reliability in key corridors threatens the travel “dependability” that commuters noted was

most important in their travel choices.3

2 SuperNOVA Transit/TDM Vision Plan Summary (2012) 3 Dulles Corridor Metrorail Project Impact Research (2006)

7

Entrenched habits with no real growth in alternative mode usage

The percentage of weekly trips made by transit modes declined from 2010 to 2013, but the

transit share of 17.3% was approximately the same as the transit share for 2001 (17.0%), 2004

(16.8%), and 2007 (17.7%). Thus, transit share has shown no growth since 2001. Likewise, the

shares of weekly commute trips made by carpool/vanpool and bike/walk have remained

essentially constant during this same time period.4

Many commuters are long-time users of their mode, but commuters continue to shift among

modes. On average, commuters who drive alone to work have used this mode an average of 10.6

years and only 22% of drive alone commuters started using this mode within the past three years.

By contrast, 34% of bus riders, 39% of bike/walk commuters, and 46% of carpoolers started

using these modes within the past three years.

A sizeable portion of commuters who use alternative transportation modes drive alone for part of

the trip. Nearly three in ten (29%) of survey respondents who used an alternative mode drive

alone to a park & ride lot, train station, carpool pickup location, or some other transfer point.

Therefore, regardless of modal choices, the highway network capacity for both short and long

distance commute factors will dictate many of the priorities identified in this summary report.

New exurbanites predicted to expand in spite of perceived demographic shifts

The millennial generation has been identified as a driver for significant changes in the choice for

compact land use and desire for alternative transportation choices. There remains, however,

other studies that predict these changes are temporary and brought about by factors such as

constrained income/indebtedness rather than a long-standing desire to shift habits. Saturated

housing markets in Northern Virginia are pointing to an undiminishing trend for much more

distant settlement habits, into localities such as Stafford and Spotsylvania Counties and the City

of Winchester. Over the coming years, an increasing number of people settling these exurbs will

also be millennials, and the generation that follows.

The Washington Post recently noted:

“The prevailing wisdom about millennials is that they’re wedded to

urban-style living—even in the suburbs—with craft breweries and yoga

studios on every other corner and a Trader Joe’s within walking

distance. But in Washington, many of the youngest homebuyers are

hewing to the same patterns their parents did, according to Lisa

Sturtevant, executive director of Washington’s Center for Housing

Policy, the research arm of the nonprofit National Housing Conference.

‘The suburbs are ripe for a rebirth,’ Sturtevant says. ‘Despite everything

you hear about cities, people want a single-family home.’5

4 2013 State of the Commute, National Capital TPB, MWCOG 5 Washington Post, “The Fastest Growing Suburbs of Washington in Counties You’ve Never Heard Of”, April 2015

8

See Exhibit 3 below for anticipated 2040 population changes behind these statements.

Virginia counties, such as Frederick, Spotsylvania, and Stafford, are expected to have the most growth over the next 35 years. Data from US Census Bureau, UVA Cooper Center, and Maryland Department of Planning.

The prevalence of non-work trips – not a focus of traditional TDM

The current challenge, and central objective of this study, is that many commuters now make

some of their work trips as part of a trip chain—dropping off children, conducting household

errands, and picking up necessities on their way to and from work. These varied patterns increase

the efficiency of overall travel but also have the effect of increasing the number of non-work-

related trips occurring in the peak period. These trip chains further challenge traditional TDM

approaches by limiting the use of carpooling or transit modes, as workers need the flexibility to

pick up their children from school if they fall ill, for example. The time, distance and location of

commuter demand depend on a combination of factors, including housing choice, the

availability, convenience and cost of different modes of transportation and the flexibility that a

job offers an employee to work at home or at different times of the day.

9

Decentralization of federal employment - worksites not suitable for traditional TDM

Parts of the region are still challenged by the after effects of the Base Realignment and Closure

Commission (BRAC) recommendations. BRAC, refers to a federal government program to

close excess military installations and realign them in a way that reduces costs and increases

efficiency. More than 350 installations – including related office space – have been closed under

the program. What has often resulted is that higher cost lease space (i.e. Crystal City, Arlington)

within close proximity to transit and multimodal connections has been vacated in favor of

relocation to more distant and auto-dependent facilities (Mark Center, Alexandria and Ft.

Belvoir, Fairfax County). These shifting in travel habits resulted in the receiving localities

facing significant shortfalls in the capacity of current infrastructure to support the additional

military and civilian jobs.

For example, the section of US 1 between Ft. Belvoir and Quantico Marine Corps Base receives

approximately 50,000 – 70,000 vehicle trips each weekday (see below). Fairfax County also is

widening U.S. 1 at Ft. Belvoir between Telegraph Road and Mount Vernon Memorial Highway.

The ability of jurisdictions to get private development to pay for traffic impact and mitigation

measures ahead of development is not applicable to BRAC. Traffic mitigation measures have

been more reactionary, due to the more complex federal involvement and limited funding

contributions, rather than occurring before or even concurrent with the increased activity at the

development site.

Source: WTOP/Ari Ashe (2013)

10

Inventory of Short and Long-Term Plans for Accommodating Future Travel Demand:

Input into the needs assessment of this study has been gathered from the short and long-term

plans identified in Exhibit 4.

Exhibit 4. Major Short/Long-Term Plans for Accommodating Future Travel Demand/Needs

Plan highlights include:

Information from the Super NoVa region’s four metropolitan planning organizations (MPO)

models indicates that there will be substantial increases in traffic in already busy corridors and

significant new travel patterns that are not well-served by transit and have limited TDM options

today. Large increases in reverse-commuting, demand along major radial corridors, short trips in

the traditionally-defined center of the region, and circumferential demand along major routes

will challenge the transportation system. – Super NoVa TDM

Anticipated population and employment growth is expected to result in higher demand for public

transportation services and viable mobility options in lieu of driving. – DRPT Statewide Plan

The decline in carpooling witnessed between 2000 and 2010 may be slowed or even reversed in

future years as a result of recent innovations in car sharing, ridesharing and transportation

network companies. The challenge is how to integrate these services into the existing

transportation network. Virginia’s local, regional and statewide transportation agencies have a

NAME SPONSOR DATE PLAN HORIZON

Evaluation and Rating of Significant Projects in

Northern VirginiaVDOT 2015 Long-Term

SuperNoVa Transit/TDM Action Plan DRPT 2014 Long-Term

Statewide Public Transportation and TDM Plan DRPT 2014 Long-Term

Washington Metropolitan Region TDM Resource

Guide and Strategic Marketing PlanMWCOG 2014 Short-Term

2035 Virginia Surface Transportation Plan OIPI 2013 Long-Term

State of the Commute MWCOG 2013 Short-Term

Fairfax Area Transportation Options for Older Adults

and People with DisabilitiesFairfax County 2013 Short-Term

Park & RideLot Inventory and Usage Study VDOT 2013 Short-Term

Arlington TDM Strategic Plan FY2013-FY2040 Arlington County 2013 Long-Term

Applicant Database Placement Survey Report -

Northern Virginia Commuter Assistance ProgramsDRPT 2013 Short-Term

TransAction 2040 NVTA 2012 Long-Term

Local Motion Long-Range TDM Plan City of Alexandria 2011 Long-Term

Long-Range TDM Plan DATA 2011 Long-Term

Long-Range TDM Plan Fairfax County 2011 Long-Term

I-95 Corridor Transit and TDM Plan DRPT 2011 Long-Term

TDM Plan Arlington County 2010 Long-Term

Long-Range TDM Plan Loudoun County 2010 Long-Term

Long-Range TDM Plan PRTC 2010 Long-Term

I-66 Transit/TDM Study DRPT 2009 Long-Term

I-95/I-395 Transit/TDM Study DRPT 2008 Long-Term

11

role in supporting these services by establishing policies and regulations to ensure public safety.

The cost to government of such actions is likely to be low. Where some shared services such as

bike sharing are subsidized by government, cost-benefit analyses can help establish whether such

support is good public policy. – VTrans 2040.

Fairfax County and the City of Alexandria are two examples of localities that have fully

integrated TDM initiatives into the land development process. Fairfax County requires

developers to include various TDM elements in order for their development plans to be

approved. Basic program requirements include designating an on-site transportation coordinator,

providing a Guaranteed Ride Home program, distributing information on travel choices, offering

transit incentives, and providing bicycle amenities and carpool/vanpool preferred parking.

Fairfax County also requires regular monitoring and reporting of the performance of these TDM

initiatives to ensure they are reducing travel demand. – DRPT Multimodal Design Guidelines

Mobility Priorities: Regionally ranked (VA/MD) priority commute corridors and their share of current drive alone

and carpool/vanpool participation were included in the State of the Commute Survey for 2013, as

listed in Exhibit 5.

Exhibit 5. Primary Northern Virginia Roadways Used to Get to Work

Mobility priorities have been identified in terms of the Northern Virginia Transportation

Authority (NVTA) FY2014 project solicitation and FY 2015-2016 project selection and funding

program. The summary presented in Exhibit 6 represents submitted projects from local agencies

which have been identified as regionally significant. Exhibit 7 presents a map of various

projects6.

6 Evaluation and Rating of Significant Projects in Northern Virginia, VDOT 2015

PRIMARY ROADWAY Drive alone

Use a carpool/

vanpool

Capital Beltway (I-495) 11% 8%

I-395 Shirley Highway 7% 17%

I-66 Outside the Beltway 6% 4%

Leesburg Pike - Route 7 6% 5%

I-95 6% 17%

Dulles Toll Road 5% 2%

US Route 50 - Lee Jackson Highway 5% 3%

I-66 Inside the Beltway 5% 7%

Route 28 - Sulley Road 4% 1%

Fairfax County Parkway 4% 3%

George Washington Parkway 3% 4%

12

Exhibit 6. Submitted and NVTA Recommended Regionally Significant Projects

AGENCY PROJECT TITLE NVTA

Alexandria Potomac Yard Metro Station l

Alexandria King Street VRE Station Tunnel l

Alexandria Braddock Road HOV

Alexandria West End Transitway l

Alexandria Duke Street Signal Priority l

Alexandria Real-Time Adaptive Control and Data Management l

Alexandria Shelters and Real-Time Transit Information for DASH/WAMATA l

Alexandria DASH Bus Expansion l

Arlington Metrorail Courthouse Second Elevator

Arlington Rosslyn-Ballston Streetcar

Arlington Boundary Channel Interchange l

Arlington Crystal City Multimodal Center l

Arlington Crystal City Streetcar

Arlington Columbia Pike Multi-Modal Project l

Arlington Glebe Road Corridor ITS l

Arlington Ballston-MU Metrorail Station West Entrance l

Arlington Blue/Silver Line Mitigation (Bus) l

Arlington RT 244 (Columbia Pike) Improvements - S. Gate to Pentagon l

City of Fairfax Kamp Washington Intersection Improvements (RT 50, RT 29, RT 236)

City of Fairfax US 29/50 and Route 123 Intersection

City of Fairfax Kamp Washington Intersection Improvements (Jermantown/RT 50) l

City of Fairfax Chain Bridge Road Widening

City of Fairfax Jermantown / Route 50 Roadway Improvements l

City of Fairfax CUE 35-foot transit buses l

City of Manassas RT 28 Bypass Study - Godwin Dr. l

City of Manassas RT 28 Widening South to City Limits l

Fairfax Innovation Center Metrorail Station Garage l

Fairfax RT 7 Bridge over Dulles Toll Road l

Fairfax Old Centreville Rd/ Compton Rd

Fairfax RT 28 Widening (Dulles Toll Road to US 50) l

Fairfax RT 28 McLearan

Fairfax Rolling Road Widening Project (Old Keene Mill to F-S Parkway) l

Fairfax Stone Rd/New Braddock Rd/I-66

Fairfax RT 29 Legato to Shirley Gate

Fairfax RT 123/50 Intersection l

Fairfax Franconia/Van Dorn Intersection

Fairfax West Ox Bus Garage l

Fairfax Connector Bus Service Expansion l

Fairfax RT 28 Widening (PW County Line to RT 29) l

Fairfax Frying Pan Road Widening (VA 28 to VA 657)

Fairfax Fairfax County Parkway Widening (multiple locations) l

Fairfax US 29 Widening (Union Mill to Buckley's Gate Drive)

Fairfax Frontier Drive Extension & Braided Ramps l

Fairfax US 1 Widening (Mt. Vernon Highway to Napper Road) l

Fairfax Widen RT 1 Brady's Hill Rd. to RT 234 l

l FY 2014 or FY 2015-2016 Project Recommendation

13

Exhibit 6 (continued). Submitted and NVTA Recommended Regionally Significant Projects

AGENCY PROJECT TITLE NVTA

Falls Church East Falls Church Bridge l

Falls Church Pedestrian Access/Multimodal Improvements l

Falls Church Washington and Old Dominion Trail Project

Herndon East Eldon Street Improvement Project l

Herndon Herndon Parkway and Van Buren l

Herndon Herndon Metrorail Accessibility

Leesburg Edwards Ferry Road at RT 15 Leesburg Bypass l

Leesburg RT 7 (East Market Street)/Battlefield Parkway Interchange l

Loudoun Loudoun County Bus Acquisition l

Loudoun RT 7/Battlefield Parkway Interchange

Loudoun Belmont Ridge Rd to Gloucester to Hay l

Loudoun Potomac River Crossing

Loudoun VA Route 607 - US 50 to Creighton Rd l

Loudoun Belmont Ridge Rd (VA 659) Turo Parish Road to Croson Ln l

Loudoun Leesburg Park and Ride l

Manassas City RT 28 Old Centervillw to Liberia

NVRC Potomac Fast Ferry (Alexandria and Washinton D.C.)

NVTC RT7 Alternatives Analysis l

Prince William BiCounty Parkway

Prince William Intersection of 28 and I-66

Prince William RT 28 from Fitzwater to Linton Hall l

Prince William US-1 Fetherstone to Mary's Way l

Prince William Widening of Balls Ford Rd and RT 15 between RT 29 and I-66

Prince William Grid of Complete Streets for North Woodbridge redevelopment

Prince William RT 234 Bypass to Linton Hall Road

Prince William Route 15 Widening (RT 29 to RT 55)

Prince William Route 1 Widening (Featherstone Road to Marys Way)

PRTC Western Bus Maintenance and Storage Facility l

PRTC New Gainsville Service l

Regional Widen RT 15 from I-66 to VA-7

Town of Dumfries Widen Route 1 (Brady Hill to RT 234)

VRE Planned VRE extension to Gainesville/Haymarket

VRE Crystal City 2nd Platfrom/Expansion l

VRE Lorton 2nd Platform l

VRE Rail service to Ft. Belvoir

VRE Rippon platform expansion l

VRE Manassas Park Station Parking Expansion l

VRE Franconia-Springfield Platform Improvements l

VRE Slaters Lane Crossover l

VRE Rolling Stock Purchase l

WMATA Interlocking girders

WMATA New Metrorail (Blue Line) Potomac Crossing

WMATA Buses along VA236 l

WMATA 8-car train power upgrades l

WMATA Bus Infrastructure Improvements

l FY 2014 or FY 2015-2016 Project Recommendation

14

Exhibit 6. Project Map for Select Recommendations

Source: VDOT (2015)

Evaluation and Rating of Significant Projects in Northern Virginia (pg. 4-5)

15

In terms of policy, this report highlights two additional priorities that seek to shape the built

environment and compliment similar TDM objectives:

Proffers - Developing TDM participation ordinances that require ongoing financial contributions

(proffers) from the developer, include enforceable penalties, and generally entail submission of a

TDM plan prior to the occupancy of the development. The enforcement mechanism used to

assure compliance with TDM requirements can be relatively complex. All TDM requirements

for a site are enshrined in a site-specific proffer, which is a legally binding document. All current

and future property owners are held to the requirements outlined in the proffer. The proffer

language requires developments to establish TDM accounts into which funds are annually

deposited for the implementation of TDM strategies and programs.

Monitoring is typically done in two ways: (1), by physical counts of vehicles at predetermined

points on or at the edges of development sites, and (2), through sample surveys of people who

live on, work at, or in some cases visit a site. Representative physical counts allow direct

comparisons of actual observations against desired values, e.g. PM peak hour actual against

program PM peak goal. Sample survey results give indications of trends, e.g.

increasing/decreasing use of carpools or shuttles, and also give information on such items as

preferences, e.g. which of several possible incentives might be best for persuading people to ride

the bus rather than drive. Programs at development sites make use of both these forms of

measurement to produce reports of past performance (for example on an annual or quarterly

basis) and form the basis of plans for future program operations (for example, introduction of a

new incentive package or tactic).

Requirements may be jurisdiction-wide or as in Fairfax County, apply only to developments

within certain geographic areas that are noted for their congestion, density, or growth. Most new

development projects within such geographic areas, regardless of whether they are residential or

commercial, must comply with established TDM requirements. Fairfax County has established

trip reduction goals based on ITE vehicle trip generation rates, a site’s distance from a rail

station, and the amount of surrounding development. Vehicle trip reduction goals range from 25

to 65 percent of ITE rates. The closer a site is to a rail station and the greater the amount of

nearby development, the greater the vehicle trip reduction goal. Alexandria uses a similar

system. Arlington’s TDM policy focuses on workplace commuter travel and looks to reduce

peak hour work travel by achieving a reduction of single occupant vehicle trips. TDM measures

are required for use permits if the developer wants an exception to the zoning code such as

reduced parking, even if there is no increase in density.

16

Street/Network Connectivity – Both VDOT and DRPT guidance emphasize the importance of

street connectivity and route directness. The VDOT Secondary Street Acceptance Requirements

(SSAR) was originally the result of legislation introduced and unanimously adopted during the

2007 session of the Virginia General Assembly. The policy and design standards contained

within the SSAR are intended to ensure that streets accepted into the state system of highways

for public maintenance provide adequate benefit to the public and help to increase the efficiency

of the state’s street network. The SSAR serves as a vital component in the planning, design, and

delivery of a street network which will promote livability, a more efficient transportation

network, and the creation of more transportation choices. Additional transportation connections

between adjacent developments will allow local trips to take place on local streets and reduce the

burden on the regional transportation network. DRPT Multimodal System Design Guidelines

reference the ITE/CNU Guidebook Designing Walkable Urban Thoroughfares: A Context

Sensitive Approach for additional reference on the concept of network connectivity and

illustrations of various indices and targets for desirable connectivity.

Many local jurisdictions further advance connectivity via active transportation safety

improvements, often contributing to sidewalk and stormwater management improvements. The

Northern Virginia Regional Bikeway and Trail Network Study Update (2015) has documented -

significant strides in bicycle planning, design, and construction since an initial baseline

conducted in 2003. The study documents the completion of bicycle studies and plans at the

jurisdictional level to enhance connectivity for cyclists and pedestrians. The study noted that

approximately 20% of the 2003 Proposed Network has been constructed, representing nearly108

miles of bicycle facilities.

Implementation of these

connectivity initiatives may

be jurisdiction-wide or

tailored to specific

geographies, such as critical

connections close to schools

and public transportation. A

larger scale example of a

broad-based connectivity

improvement plan is

represented by Tyson’s

Corner in Fairfax County

(see Exhibit 7). For this

example, access and

connectivity projects on a

wide scale were identified to

incorporate new Metrorail

Stations and be

transformative toward

fostering a future multi-

modal destination.

Exhibit 7. Tysons Metrorail Station Access Improvement

Projects

17

Perceived Limitations: Limitations to TDM efforts may be due to focus on particular types of trips (such as commuting

only), cover a limited geographic scope, or are limited to strategies that can be implemented by a

particular government agency. This section explores other institutional limitations identified

through literature review and outreach to stakeholders.

Brand identity and awareness of services

The region expends considerable resources on marketing and communication related to transit

and transportation demand management yet it lacks a coordinated marketing agency or even

comprehensive strategy. Each transit service in the region has its own brand, identity, naming

strategy, and description. Also multiple customer markets have distinct transportation needs and

some programs heavily favor one group versus another. These groups include:

Residents - want travel choices; community access; safe, green, and stress-free

commuting

Employers – want a diverse, dependable system to attract and retain skilled workforce

Visitors – want to get to hotels and tourist sites

Retail – want ease of access for customer base

Pass-Through Commuters/Travelers – relevant to inner ring localities only

Most local jurisdiction services are known to at least a quarter of their target populations.

Awareness ranged from 11% to 56%, as indicated from the State of the Commute 2013 survey

(see Exhibit 8). Furthermore, about a quarter of respondents were aware of a regional

Guaranteed Ride Home program. Awareness varied by mode, with train riders much more likely

than other commuters to know about GRH.

Exhibit 8. Heard of/Used Local Commute Assistance Program

18

Other limitations to awareness include the diversity of languages and cultures in the Northern

Virginia region, especially in light of the emphasis of TDM programs on outreach and

educational services. The dissemination of information to sub-population groups also appeared

alongside other challenges identified in a recent Fairfax County survey of aging, low income and

disabled populations and their mobility challenges:

Many are not aware of free travel training programs, fare discounts, or taxi subsidies that

could help them increase their independence.

A significant number restricted driving to avoid rush hours, inclement weather, and

driving after dark – all limiting full freedom of mobility.

Up to nineteen percent of MetroAccess customers have been denied a MetroAccess trip

because comparable bus or rail service was not running at the day/time of the requested

trip.

Inaccessible bus stops, unsafe pedestrian crossings, and limited service prevented older

adults and people with disabilities from using public transit.

Despite a modest awareness of the specifics of local TDM programs, most sources concurred

that it is a valued resource that improved the functionality of the transportation network and

supported various County missions (access, mobility, economic development, community

planning, citizen satisfaction, etc.).

Skewed representation in program participation

The limitation in reaching all groups may be further compounded by the fact that there is skewed

public representation on advisory boards. Of those that do participate, there is high population

turnover in the region. For Arlington County, it has been identified that every five years the

County turns over 50% of its population base. Limitations are identified in reaching young

professionals, residents who rent, and immigrants who might have language difficulties.

Furthermore there is a need to explore the interests of non-commute travel populations, such as

youth, seniors, immigrants, young professionals, “transient” groups, and students. The growth in

minority population segments is also creating new customers. Achieving participation and

communicating effectively with these other population groups is seen as a limitation on

understanding and identifying transportation needs and providing relevant and meaningful

transportation services.

Skewed representation impairs a good understanding of who the jurisdiction’s transportation

system serves today, who they will be or should be serving in the future, and what these

customer groups want and need. Often viewed as a lacking component of market planning, is the

need to have a plan in place to identify these groups and define the needed engagement necessary

to understand and develop inclusive transportation services.

19

Institutional and environmental factors

Stakeholders and documentation reveal realistic expectations for the degree to which TDM

programs can influence change in community-level goals. Specifically, the degree of success is

often contingent upon a dense urban form, inner/core location within the region, extensive road

and transit infrastructure, and a pedestrian and bicycle-friendly environment. Specific areas

consistently cited include:

The Built Environment

The local built environment is identified as a significant limitation for adoption of other

multimodal strategies. For pedestrians, sidewalks are often not connected and those that

exist may not provide a direct route to destinations. Pedestrian crossings of major roads

can be dangerous or non-existent. Many office buildings were developed with only

motorized access in mind. Pedestrian and bicycle connections to the street are usually via

these motorized access routes, not the more direct routes. These direct bike and

pedestrian connections to the street are sometimes prevented due to landscaping or

fencing.

Outreach to Employers Internal employer barriers present limitations to expanding employer-based TDM

engagement. Employers commonly perceive that strategies yield minimal benefits, that

their employees lack participation interest, and that upper management will not provide

support for employer trip reduction programs. Other barriers include:

The office’s distance to public transit

Potential regulatory or legal barriers

Potential conflicts with organization operations

High cost to the organization

Equity issues across types of employees

Potential paperwork requirements

The importance of employers and property managers as “wholesale” customers has not

fully been realized. In many cases these entities serve as bulk distribution outlets for

information materials to multiply TDM outreach efforts, but they could provide

additional insight into understanding the travel market and mobility needs of those they

represent. Lack of full engagement from the employer community represents lost

persuasive motivators that can influence travelers’ mode choice decisions, potential

sponsorship for the cost of non-SOV travel incentives, and a channel for implementing

other TDM services at the worksite.

Parking

It is generally acknowledged that parking conditions at a work site have a major

underlying effect on the success of TDM programs. Where parking supply is limited and

where users pay directly for parking costs, commuters can make more informed decisions

about when to travel, how often to drive and what other modes to choose. These effects

are similar for non-work trips as well.

20

Feedback mechanisms

TDM efforts need to feature monitoring and evaluation components to obtain and interpret

feedback on program operations. The feedback is provided to program management to enable

verification of satisfactory operation or to detect gaps between desired and actual program

results. Management can act on resultant gaps to achieve or to regain program success.

Limitations identified also include the ability to internally measure the effectiveness of

individual TDM program components. This shortcoming makes it difficult to understand and

make adjustments at the programmatic level to the individual elements of a comprehensive TDM

plan based upon the regional outcomes such overall trip reduction, commute time savings, and

placement rate for rideshares.

Measures that are not targeted often relate more to gauging the success of the transportation

system, and only indirectly, TDM services. Finally, with few notable exceptions, there has been

very limited follow-up and monitoring of the results of project derived TDMP adherence and

assessment of compliance with initially specified conditions for development approval.

Trip Modeling and Project Prioritization Short-Falls

Recent demographic shifts for the millennial generation have shown a preference for pedestrian-

friendly urban communities and are more committed to using public transportation. As travel

preferences from these demographic groups shift from highway modes, there will be challenges

in adapting the current project prioritization process to reflect the growing importance of projects

that accommodate this demand. For example, when NVTA is required to prioritize projects that

reduce road congestion, they must run proposed projects through a less-than-perfect VDOT

computer model to rate its ability to reduce congestion. The biggest issue is simply that current

models do not recognize short distance trips, which are the exact type of trip that generational

preferences and transit-oriented development may produce more of. So when a transit or

pedestrian project makes it possible for thousands of people to walk two blocks instead of drive

five miles, the model doesn't always show it as reducing congestion.

Funding and coordinated vision

Funding is cited by agencies at all levels as the biggest challenge to addressing capacity

constraints. With the failure to pass the Federal Marketplace Fairness Act (Internet Tax), the

result has been the Commonwealth’s gas tax increased by 1.6% per gallon, but these funds will

be primarily toward road maintenance. Even with variable pricing and tolling as a means of

travel demand management, the Commonwealth simply does not have the necessary funds –

even with federal assistance – to build highways and then toll them to pay for their maintenance

or other transportation improvements. While private partnerships have brought other projects to

fruition in the past (i.e. I-95/I-495), changing travel patterns and reductions in vehicular travel

have led to toll revenue falling short of investor expectations.

21

Priorities also can seem uncoordinated across agencies and jurisdictions. These priorities range

from air quality conformity, increased use of public transit and other SOV alternatives, and

greater vitality of regional activity centers, however these approaches are not perceived to be

approached equally in the various TDM programs.

Ridematch/trip planning sophistication

Agencies indicated that a more effective matching service would allow for interactive

origin/destination and scheduling between screened applicants. Placement surveys show that

ridematch respondents indicated that a significant proportion of likely candidates in actuality

turned out to not have compatible schedules or destinations. The analysis notes that while

compatibility is an individual standard, the results suggest the software might not capture

individual preference in matching with as much precision as some commuters would like.

It was also noted that while significant in key areas, the BRAC (military/civilian) travel is

especially difficult to accommodate with standard TDM approaches. The lack of internal

circulation/shuttle systems, inability for taxi or guaranteed ride home providers to gain access,

and difficulty obtaining and coordinating ride match data from multiple agencies were identified.

Suggested Priority Areas:

Literature review suggests that in general, priorities should be expected to vary based upon

Northern Virginia geography, noting that:

Inner ring — Promote a car-free lifestyle with multimodal options for all trips at all times

of the day

Middle ring — Promote a car-light lifestyle by having TDM focus on providing programs

and services to offer non single-occupant auto options for work trips as well as some high

volume non-work trips

Outer ring — Focus TDM programs and services on providing access to employment and

essential services

Specific items discovered during stakeholder interaction and within background documentation

includes the following summary of priority areas and suggested new projects/programs to

enhance mobility and reduce travel demand in the region:

Make resources easier for the public to access and understand

Improve access to the existing transit system and other transportation services for traditionally

disadvantaged groups in order to create more and better travel options for all people. This could

include providing important transit system information in multiple languages and formats to

make sure that all riders can use the transportation system with confidence. Specific initiatives

suggested include:

22

Deliver transit and TDM information in multiple languages and accessible formats.

Develop and implement a plan to determine the unmet transportation needs of special

population groups.

Possible expansion of Transportation Planning Board Reach a Ride program.

Adopt regional brand with links to jurisdictional programs – See Exhibit 9, example

from Denver Way to Go (Ride Amigos) website.

Exhibit 9. Regional Brand Example

Coordinate regional TDM plans and programs

Make targeted roadway improvements that provide congestion relief for drivers in key locations

throughout the region. This also includes continuation of small scale transit connectivity projects

– i.e. Metroway, especially at locations with highest cross-jurisdictional travel demand. Other

coordination priorities identified include:

Carpool staging to address overcrowding at regional park and ride lots

Develop guidance on regional parking pricing and supply.

Work with VRE and member governments on the prospective adoption of a station

access policy that encourages carpooling and other shared ride modes of access.

Relationship building among Millitary, Chambers of Commerce and Planning Staff

23

Incident management and dynamic trip planning

Giving commuters more information about travel conditions and travel options helps them plan

their trip and make adjustments to their travel mode, departure time, and route to avoid long

delays. Travelers might decide to drive another route if their usual route is delayed; or they may

choose to walk, bike, or take the bus to avoid the headache. Specific initiatives suggested

include:

Provide comprehensive, open-source travel information and data for transit and TDM

Coordinate traffic signals and construction schedules

Provide travelers with more real-time traffic information

Respond to and clear traffic accidents more quickly

Support dynamic Ridesharing/“instant carpooling” as a service to facilitate ride matching

for a single trip on short notice.

Continued emphasis on incentive programs

Providing financial incentives to commuters to use alternative modes is a common element of

managing transportation demand. There is desire for expansion of these incentives, however,

limited effort has been made to understand how different ways of providing financial incentives

affect commuter mode choice. In addition to further testing the effectiveness, the following

initiatives were highlighted and new approaches suggested for future prioritization:

Expand utilization of Best Workplaces for Commuters

Expansion of mode based cash incentives (i.e. ‘Pool Rewards – carpool, Smart Benefits

Plus 50 – transit)

Uber/Lift fallback (perhaps offered as an incentive similar to GRH (i.e. subsidize the

service, during peak travel times/recurring usage)

Show return on investment

Development of performance measures and establishment of valid methodologies and procedures

to assess impacts therefore requires special attention for TDM programs. This priority calls for

the continuation of incorporating best practice and efforts from local institutions such as

Mobility Labs, to quantify the cost/benefit of TDM investments to help justify results. Cost

effectiveness measures to show the level of effort associated with various TDM actions could

include:

Cost per rideshare application

Cost per employer sign up

Cost per VMT reduced

Cost per carpool formed

24

Ridematching enhancements

With most workers crossing jurisdictional boundaries to travel to and from work, expanding with

more regional TDM programs by building on the successes of the local programs should be a

high priority. Specific ridematch enhancements include:

Through regional and statewide partnerships, improve the user-friendliness of the online

ridematching database and results reporting

Study and evaluate needs, emerging technologies, and cost effectiveness for

improvements to the Commuter Connections regional ridematching and/or Virginia

statewide ridematching system and database that would result in a super-regional

ridematching system and database

Create a regional or statewide program to better support new vanpools and retain existing

vanpools

Expand Guaranteed Ride Home

Provide and support an array of transportation options for short trips within Activity

Centers

Provide and support an array of transportation options for short trips within Activity Centers that

especially make walking a viable transportation choice for more people in more places by

making it safer, easier, and more convenient. Specific initiatives suggested include:

Expand pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure in Activity Centers to make non-motorized

transportation safer and more efficient

Provide bus services that offer short range connections within Activity Centers

Promote street connectivity in Activity Centers to provide quicker access to more

destinations and to diffuse localized congestion.

25

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT STAKEHOLDER INPUT INTO THE PREPARATION OF THIS REPORT PROVIDED BY:

Sharon Affinito Commuter Service Specialist Loudoun County Transit/Commuter Services

Fatemeh Allahdoust

Transportation Planning Manager VDOT Northern Virginia Planning

Chris Arabia Manager of Mobility Programs Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transit

Walter Daniel Planner Fairfax County Ride Sources

Bobbi Greenberg Bureau Chief Arlington County Commuter Assistance Program

David Koch

Regional Planner Northern Virginia Transportation Commission (NVTC)

Liz McAdory TDM Program Manager VDOT

Gabriel Ortiz Transportation Demand Management Coordinator

City of Alexandria

Nick Ramfos Director MWCOG Commuter Connections

Peggy Tadej Regional BRAC Coordinator Northern Virginia Regional Commission