Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 103
The predominant reason given for stopping was to get fuel for the vehicle. This activity accounted
for 45 percent of the stops on the way to work and 63 percent of the stops on the way home from
work. In approximate order of decreasing prevalence, other reasons given were: going to the bank
(23 percent of trips to work and 50 percent of trips from work), visiting the dry cleaners (19 per-
cent to and 31 percent from), getting something to eat (16 percent to and 20 percent from), shop-
ping (12 percent to and 56 percent from), work-related activity (10 percent to and 13 percent from),
child care (10 percent to and 10 percent from), taking a child to or from school (10 percent to and
6 percent from), visiting a doctor (6 percent to and 14 percent from), transporting another person
including carpool (7 percent to and 7 percent from), exercise (2 percent to and 11 percent from),
and entertainment (1 percent to and 9 percent from) (Davidson, 1991).
The data were also manipulated to examine patterns in the way trips were grouped into chains and
correspondence between morning and evening stops. For example, it was noted that the purposes
which most often occurred on both the trip to work and the trip home were child care (91 percent),
dropping off children (80 percent), stopping to eat (33 percent), and stopping at the dry cleaners
(33 percent). It was also discovered that for those commuters who stopped for gas on the way to
work (45 percent), 21 percent would also stop to eat, 16 percent would visit a dry cleaner, 16 per-
cent would stop at the bank, and 12 percent would attend to child care.
This latter type of assessment begins to suggest strategies for successful TDM efforts. For exam-
ple, if a drive-alone commuter were to shift to a vanpool, the need to stop for fuel could be virtu-
ally eliminated. However, to make the shift more permanent, it would be necessary to find a way
to provide better access to banking, dry cleaners, and eating establishments on or near the site.
Employees' expressed preferences for on- or near-site services included: post office (32 percent),
restaurant (31 percent), general retail (25 percent), snack bar (20 percent), exercise facility (19 per-
cent), convenience store (18 percent), dry cleaners (11 percent), and medical care (10 percent). The
conclusion drawn by the study was that while linked trips had a negative effect on TDM efforts, a
better mix of land uses or the delivery of services to employer sites might go a long way toward
reducing auto dependency and making TDM more effective (Davidson, 1991).
RELATED INFORMATION AND IMPACTS
Synergy and Complementarity
The body of empirical information compiled on TDM programs makes it fairly evident that the
effectiveness of these programs depends on several key factors:
· Marketing, information, and promotional strategies are clearly important catalysts in success-
ful TDM programs by raising awareness, knowledge of, and interest in commute alternatives.
However, ultimately a TDM program has to offer the commuter an attractive alternative to
driving alone, in which instance the marketing and promotion is essential in ensuring that the
employee understands the advantages of the choice. However, if competitive alternatives are
not provided, simply trying to convince the commuter that driving is wrong and some other
approach is more acceptable will be ineffective and short-lived in changing behavior.
· Driving alone has many strong advantages for the commuter, including schedule management,
travel time, and even out-of-pocket cost in many cases. Travel demand research tells us that
travel time and cost are primary determinants in the choice among modes. If a traveler cannot
19-103
