fhwa top survey virginia november 2005
Post on 31-Dec-2015
214 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
WWW.NWRG.COM
FHWA TOP SurveyVirginia
November 2005
WWW.NWRG.COM
Project Overview
Page 3
TOP Survey Objectives
Understand the needs and expectations of travelers of nation’s / state’s / local region’s transportation system
Measure the extent to which the existing transportation system meets those needs
Update previous measures and provide new baseline measures for emerging issues
Establish national and other benchmark data for participating states
Identify travelers’ priorities for system improvement
Page 4
Virginia Objectives
Establish key benchmarks for system performance
Provide specific measures for travelers’ perceptions of:
– Safety and changes in safety while driving
– Management of transportation improvement projects
– Interest in public participation and traveler information
Page 5
Research Approach – TOP Survey
Interviews completed with more than 1,250 users of the state’s transportation system– 18 years of age and older– Had at least some recent experience traveling on the
system defined to include . . . Roads Public transportation Pedestrian walkways / sidewalks Bikeways
Telephone survey methodology– Projectable to the general population– Includes listed & unlisted numbers
No cell phones
Page 6
Sampling
Stratified by four transportation regions
– Margin of error associated with a survey of this size is plus or minus about 2.8 percentage points
– Within each region (n = 300), error is plus or minus 5.6 percentage points
Survey length – 23 minutes
– High response rates – 27 percent
– High cooperation rates – nearly 60 percent of those contacted agreed to complete the survey
Page 7
Benchmarking
The TOP Survey provides the unique opportunity to reliably benchmark Virginia’s data against a national sample
Four levels of benchmarking data available
– National
– Census Region – South
– Census Division – South Atlantic
– Peer States Florida, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, Pennsylvania,
Texas, Washington
WWW.NWRG.COM
Key Findings: Travel
Page 9
Modes of Transportation Used
Virginia is a state on the move, using the entire public transportation system
– Virtually everyone in Virginia has access to a car that they use daily– Use of public transportation is somewhat limited, except in Northern
Virginia where nearly half (46%) use public transportation
% Using Mode
(last year)
# of Users(millions)
Days / Week Use
Personal Vehicle 96% 5.1 6.3
Walk 48 2.6 2.8
Bicycle 30 1.6 1.2
Public Transportation 23 1.2 1.3
Page 10
Miles Driven Annually
On average, Virginia travelers drive 13,558 miles annually (excluding “none”) – slightly more than the national average
– This equates to more than 67.1 billion miles traveled annually
4%
11%
17%
28%
18%
13%
8%
0%
10%
20%
30%
None Less than5,000 miles
5,000 to9,999 miles
10,000 to14,999miles
15,000 to19,999miles
20,000 to29,999miles
More than30,000miles
Miles Driven Annually
Median (excluding "none") = 13,558
Page 11
Types / Frequency of Regional Travel
People use their local transportation system for many purposes
– While the most frequent trips are commute trips, the number of non-commute trips is more than twice that of commute trips
% Take Tripin Past Week
# of Days / Week
Estimated # of Trips (millions)
Commute to Work 65% 5.1 35.1
Commute to School 10 3.6 3.8
Take Children to School 24 3.7 9.4
Business Errands 42 3.2 14.2
Shopping / Personal Errands 96 3.0 30.6
Recreation / Entertainment 81 2.0 17.2
Visiting Friends / Family 75 2.1 16.8
Medical Appointments 23 1.0 2.4
Total Commute Trips 38.9
Total Non-Commute Trips 90.7
Total Trips 129.6
Page 12
Long Distance / Extended Travel
More than four out of five (82%) travelers took at least one trip outside their local region in the past year
– On average, those traveling outside their region take three to four trips per year – equating to an additional 33.3 million trips
Have Not Taken Trip Outside
Region18%
Taken Trip Outside Region of
More Than 50 Miles82%
Average Number of Extended Trips = 4
WWW.NWRG.COM
Characteristics of a High-Quality Transportation System
Page 14
Important System Characteristics
All aspects of the system are important – that is, all have a mean above the mid-point on the scale
By far the most important system characteristic is highway and roadway safety
Also important:– Being able to travel easily– Efforts to reduce delays from traffic congestion and
improve traffic flow– Bridge conditions– Pavement conditions– Planning
Page 15
Important System Characteristics (con’t)
% Extremely Important Mean *
Highway / roadway safety 73% 9.32
General mobility 56 8.89
Efforts to reduce delays from congestion 55 8.71
Bridge conditions 55 8.66
Efforts to improve traffic flow 53 8.59
Pavement conditions 51 8.55
Planning for future transportation needs 52 8.51
Setup of work zones for safety and traffic flow
42 8.25
Management of work zones to reduce delays / congestion
43 8.20
* Mean based on 11-point scale where “10” means “extremely important” and “0” means “not at all important.”
Page 16
Important System Characteristics (con’t)
% Extremely Important Mean *
Pedestrian safety and mobility 48 8.14
Maintenance response times 38 8.04
Consideration of the environment 36 7.88
Amenities such as rest areas, etc. 30 7.49
Traveler information 29 7.16
Visual appeal / appearance 22 6.98
Bicycle safety and mobility 24 6.01
* Mean based on 11-point scale where “10” means “extremely important” and “0” means “not at all important.”
Page 17
What’s Important – Benchmark
Virginia South Atlantic
Peer States
Overall Importance 8.09 8.43 8.33
Highway / roadway safety 9.32 9.23 9.25
General mobility 8.89 9.00 8.83
Efforts to reduce delays from congestion 8.71 8.65 8.56
Bridge conditions 8.66 8.89 8.83
Efforts to improve traffic flow 8.59 8.80 8.68
Pavement conditions 8.55 8.48 8.66
Planning for future transportation needs 8.51 8.77 8.71
Setup of work zones 8.25 8.47 8.46
Page 18
What’s Important – Benchmark
Virginia South Atlantic
Peer States
Management of work zones to reduce delays / congestion
8.20 8.46 8.21
Pedestrian safety and mobility 8.14 8.63 8.61
Maintenance response times 8.04 8.19 8.25
Consideration of the environment 7.88 8.23 8.18
Amenities such as rest areas, etc. 7.49 8.04 7.87
Traveler information 7.16 7.87 7.73
Visual appeal / appearance 6.98 7.73 7.45
Bicycle safety and mobility 6.01 7.36 7.07
WWW.NWRG.COM
Key Findings: System Quality
Page 20
Overall Quality
Less than half (49%) of Virginia travelers are satisfied with the state’s transportation system – Satisfaction is only moderate and a significant number are
neutral and dissatisfiedExtremely Satisfied
(10)6%
Satisfied (7-9)43%
Dissatisfied (0 - 3)13%
In the Middle (4-6)38%
Mean = 6.03 (based on 11-point scale where "10" means
"extremely satisfied" and "0" means "extremely dissatisfied")
Page 21
Overall Quality – Benchmarked
Virginia is similar to other states in the South but travelers in Virginia are less satisfied than travelers in their peer states
13% 11% 10% 7%
38%35% 39%
35%
43% 48% 47%52%
6% 5% 4% 5%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Virginia South South Atlantic Peer States
HighlySatisfied
Satisfied
Neutral
Dissatisfied
Page 22
Grading the System Infrastructure
Overall, Virginia’s system gets a C plus (C+) grade – overall mean of 2.32
– Like satisfaction this is somewhat below the national average overall as well as for states in the South
The system gets the highest grade for the conditions of its bridges and visual appeal
And its lowest grades for:
– Bicyclist and pedestrian safety and mobility
– Transportation planning
– Efforts to improve traffic flow / reduce traffic congestion
Page 23
Infrastructure Grades – Above Average
% A % A / B Net Mean
Overall Grade 2.32
Bridge conditions 16% 63% 2.68
Visual appeal 16 62 2.68
Amenities 16 57 2.56
Programs to improve safety 11 53 2.48
Setup of work zones for safety / traffic flow 13 54 2.48
Traveler information 12 50 2.45
Consideration of the environment 13 36 2.38
Page 24
Infrastructure Grades – Below Average
% A % A / B (Net)
Mean
Overall Grade 2.32
Maintenance response times 9 45% 2.29
Pavement conditions 10 44 2.26
Efforts to reduce delays from road work 6 38 2.13
Efforts to reduce congestion / improve traffic flow
6 38 2.11
Transportation planning 8 26 2.10
Pedestrian safety and mobility 10 38 2.07
Bicycle safety and mobility 8 25 1.71
Page 25
Infrastructure Grades by Region
Two regions receive below-average ratings.
Region Mean Grade
Statewide 2.32 C plus
Southwest 2.42 C plus
Northern Virginia 2.36 C plus
Central 2.28 C plus
Hampton Roads 2.21 C plus
Grade scale from 0 = “F / Fail” to 4 = “A / Excellent”. Midpoint = 2.0
Page 26
Potential Issues by Region
Hampton Roads– Efforts to reduce congestion & improve traffic flow
– Efforts to reduce delays from road work
– Transportation planning
– Pavement conditions
– Maintenance response times
– Setup of work zones to maximize safety and traffic flow
– Consideration of the environment
– Amenities
– Visual appeal
Page 27
Potential Issues by Region
Central
– Bicycle and pedestrian safety and mobility
– Transportation planning
– Pavement conditions
– Maintenance response times
Northern Virginia
– Transportation planning
– Efforts to reduce congestion and improve traffic flow
Page 28
Infrastructure Grades – Benchmark
Virginia South Atlantic
Peer States
Overall Grade 2.32 2.36 2.49
Bridge conditions 2.68 2.79 2.81
Visual appeal 2.68 2.67 2.77
Amenities 2.56 2.71 2.77
Programs to improve safety 2.48 2.36 2.56
Setup of work zones 2.48 2.33 2.49
Roadway safety (general) 2.45 2.34 2.53
Traveler information 2.45 2.63 2.76
Consideration of the environment 2.38 2.28 2.46
Page 29
Infrastructure Grades – Benchmark
Virginia South Atlantic
Peer States
Overall Grade 2.32 2.36 2.49
Maintenance response times 2.29 2.43 2.52
Pavement conditions 2.26 2.35 2.41
Efforts to reduce delays from road work 2.13 2.34 2.47
Efforts to reduce congestion / improve traffic flow
2.11 2.28 2.41
Transportation planning 2.10 2.20 2.25
Pedestrian safety and mobility 2.07 2.05 2.28
Bicycle safety and mobility 1.71 1.68 2.49
Page 30
Safety
Virginians feel that roads are becoming less safe
Strongly Agree Roads are More Dangerous
46%
Somewhat Agree Roads are More
Dangerous25%
Neutral / Disagree Roads are More
Dangerous29%
Page 31
Reasons for Concerns About Safety
Congestion and concerns about other drivers are the primary reasons Virginia travelers feel less safe
7%
8%
9%
12%
16%
25%
40%
56%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Narrow Lanes
Drunk Drivers
Number of Trucks
Construction Zones
Hazardous Road Conditions
Others Driving Too Fast
Others Driving Too Recklessly
Road Congestion
% of Respondents
WWW.NWRG.COM
Target Improvement Opportunities
Page 33
Explanation of Quadrants
Combined importance and quality– Maintain / leverage strengths– Address / place resources toward weaknesses /
potential weaknesses
Importance
Low High
Performance
High Priority 4:Secondary Strengths:Maintain Current Level
of Service
Priority 1:Primary Strengths:Maintain / Improve
Current Level of Service
Low Priority 3:Potential Weaknesses:Improve if Resources
are Available
Priority 2:Critical Weaknesses:Target Improvement
Efforts Here
Page 34
Target Improvement Areas
Improving traffic flowReducing delays from congestion
Delays from road work Planning for transportation needs
Pavement conditions
Bicycle safety & mobility
Maintenance response times
Visual appeal
Traveler information
Pedestrian safety & mobility
Setup of work zones for safety and traffic flow
Programs to improve safety
Overall safety
Bridge conditions
Consideration of the environment
Highway amenities
-1
0
1
-1 0 1
CRITICAL WEAKNESSES
PRIMARY STRENGTHSSECONDARY STRENGTHS
POTENTIAL WEAKNESSES
HighestImportanc
LowerImportance
Highest Performance
Lowest Performance
Page 35
Target Improvement Opportunities
Statewide– Pedestrian safety and mobility
North– Reducing congestion and improving traffic flow– Planning for future transportation needs– Reducing delays from road work
Hampton Roads– Planning for future transportation needs– Pavement conditions– Maintenance response times– Reducing congestion and improving traffic flow– Reducing delays from road work
Page 36
Target Improvement Opportunities
Central– Pavement conditions– Reducing congestion and improving traffic flow– Reducing delays from road work
Southwest– Pavement conditions– Planning for future transportation needs– Consideration of the environment
Page 37
Potential Improvements
Virginians would like to see more construction completed at night or during other off-peak hours
Strategies Strongly Agree Mean
Construction at night 63% 4.33
Improve / expand existing public transportation
48 4.13
Expand existing highways 49 4.04
Offer new public transportation 48 4.01
Build / expand pedestrian walkways 45 4.00
Provide better quality traffic information 39 3.98
Build / expand park-and-ride system 33 3.84Mean based on 5-point scale where “5” means “strongly agree” and “1” means “strongly disagree.”
Page 38
Options to Reduce Congestion
Virginians are most likely to support programs that reduce the number of vehicles on the roads
Strategies Use Mean
Encourage telecommuting 34% 7.54
Increase availability of public transportation 33 7.39
Provide incentives for carpooling 31 7.33
Increase availability of HOV lanes 22 6.43
Implement toll road alternatives 13 4.97
Increase parking rates 12 4.28Mean based on 1-point scale where “10” means “use to great extent” and “0” means “do not use at all.”
Page 39
Transportation / Traveler Information
Travelers feel they have adequate access to transportation news
But they are interested in getting more – 63% say they are interested in getting information on
transportation and travel They feel they have greatest access to
– Road advisories– Traffic congestion updates
They feel they have the least information transportation plans and updates
Mainstream media continues to be the primary source for information on transportation
WWW.NWRG.COM
Planning for the Future
Page 41
Value for Tax Dollars
Virginians have mixed opinion as to whether they are getting their money’s worth on what is spent to build and maintain the state’s transportation system
9%
24%
36%
33%
7%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%
Strongly Disagree (0)
Disagee (1 - 3)
In the Middle (4-6)
Agree (7 - 9)
Strongly Agree (10)
Agree / Disagree Getting Money's Worth for Tax Dollars
Mean = 5.34(based on 11-point scale where "10" = "strongly
agree" and "0" = "strongly disagree")
Page 42
Value for Tax Dollars by Overall Quality
Those satisfied with the quality of the system are more likely to feel they are getting good value for their tax dollars.
37%
6%3% 3%
38%
55%
18%
4%
14%
30%
51%
27%
11% 9%
28%
66%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Extremely Satisfied(10)
Satisfied (7-9) Neutral (4-6) Dissatisfied (0-3)
Strongly Agree -- Receive Value (10) Agree -- Receive Value (7-9)
Neutral (4-6) Disagree -- Receive Value (0-3)
Page 43
Support for Projects
Virginians generally support additional transportation projects – notably those to build or expand public transportation services.
Build / Expand
Public Transportation
PedestrianWalkways
More Roads
Bike Lanes
% Extremely Likely 27% 25% 21% 20%
% Likely 36 34 38 29
% In the Middle 25 27 26 31
% Not Likely 11 14 15 20
Mean * 7.07(BCD)
6.77(AD)
6.59(AD)
6.06(ABC)
Mean based on 11-point scale where “10” = “extremely likely to support” and “0” = “not at all likely to support.”
Page 44
Support for Projects by Region
In general, travelers in Northern Virginia are more likely to support all projects – but notably those that promote the use of alternative modes
North Hampton Roads
Southwest Central
Mean *
Overall Support 7.15 6.66 6.19 6.11
Public Transportation 7.98 6.90 6.61 6.11
Pedestrian Walkways 7.21 6.65 6.53 6.40
Roadways 7.03 6.67 6.19 6.14
Bike Lanes 6.39 6.41 5.41 5.77
Mean based on 11-point scale where “10” = “extremely likely to support” and “0” = “not at all likely to support.”
Page 45
Support for Projects by System Quality
Those who are extremely satisfied with the current system are more likely to support future transportation projects
33%
8% 6%11%
31%
56%
46%
54%
23%
31%
40%
33%
13%
5%8%
12%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Extremely Satisfied Satisfied (7-9) Neutral (4-6) Dissatisfied (0-3)
Strongly Support Projects (10) Somewhat Support Projects (7-9)
Neutral (4-6) Do Not Support Projects (0-3)
Page 46
Support for Projects by Current Value
Those who feel they are getting good value for their tax dollars are more likely to support future transportation projects
30%
8% 6%11%
38%
65%
44% 45%
24% 25%
43%
29%
8%3%
6%
16%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Strongly Agree --Receive Value (10)
Agree -- ReceiveValue (7-9)
Neutral (4-6) Disagree -- ReceiveValue (0-3)
Strongly Support Projects (10) Somewhat Support Projects (7-9)
Neutral (4-6) Do Not Support Projects (0-3)
Page 47
Interest in Being Involved in Planning
Virginians feel it is somewhat important for citizens to be involved in prioritizing transportation projects
Extremely Important (10)16%
Important (7-9)29%
Not Important (0 - 3)17%
In the Middle (4-6)38%
Mean = 6.06 (based on 11-point scale where "10" means
"extremely important and "0" means "not at all important")
Page 48
Preferred Means to Provide Input
While most Virginians prefer providing input through surveys and/or elections, one out of three express interest in public meetings
22%
33%
37%
47%
52%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Telephone surveys
Public meetings
Web surveys
Mail surveys
Voting / Elections
% of Respondents
WWW.NWRG.COM
Project Management
Page 50
Attitudes Toward System Management
Two out of three Virginians feel projects are not completed on time
– Even more feel that projects are not completed within the budget
67%79%
31%21%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Completed On Time Completed On Budget
Yes
No
Page 51
Project Completion Rates by Region
Hampton Roads travelers are the most likely to feel that projects are not completed on time
67%82%
66% 61% 61%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Statewide HamptonRoads
Central North Southwest
% Feel Projects Not Completed on Time
Page 52
Project Completion Rates by Region
Hampton Roads travelers also feel the state has gotten worse in terms of completing projects on time
14%
23%
8%
14%
9%
0%
10%
20%
30%
Statewide HamptonRoads
Central North Southwest
% Feel State has Gotten Worse in Schedule Management
Page 53
Budget Management by Region
There are no differences by regions in terms of Virginians’ attitudes toward budget management
79% 81% 81% 78% 77%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Statewide HamptonRoads
Central North Southwest
% Feel Projects Not Completed within Budget
Page 54
Improvements in System Management
Virginians see some improvement in the management of project schedules
– They feel that the management of project budgets has gotten worse
37%52%
46%36%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Schedule Management Budget Management
GottenBetter
GottenWorse
Page 55
Improvements in Project Completion Rates by Region
Hampton Roads travelers feel the state has gotten much worse in terms of completing projects on time
14%
23%
8%
14%
9%
0%
10%
20%
30%
Statewide HamptonRoads
Central North Southwest
% Feel State has Gotten Much Worse in Schedule Management
Page 56
Improvements in Budget Management by Region
Hampton Roads travelers also feel the state has gotten much worse in terms of completing projects within budget
17%
26%
14%18%
10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
Statewide HamptonRoads
Central North Southwest
% Feel State has Gotten Much Worse in Budget Management
Page 57
Satisfaction with Opportunity to Express Concerns
Virginians feel that they have the opportunity to express concerns regarding problems with transportation projects
Neutral5%
Very Dissatisfied15%
Somewhat Satisfied
42%
Somewhat Dissatisfied
24%
Very Satisfied14%
WWW.NWRG.COM
Key Take-Aways
Page 59
Key Take-Aways
Virginians are moderately satisfied with the state’s transportation system
But– Virginia’s systems ranks below key benchmark statistics
nationwide and in the south– And there are clear areas for improvement
System strengths include– Bridge conditions– Setup of work zones for safety and traffic flow
Setup of work zones for safety and traffic flow is a critical weakness in Southwest Virginia
– Highway safety Safety is a potential problem in both Southwest Virginia and in
Hampton Roads
Page 60
Key Take-Aways
Critical weaknesses include– Pavement conditions– Planning for future transportation needs– Pedestrian safety and mobility (Central)– Improving traffic flow (Central, North, Hampton
Roads)– Reducing congestion (North, Hampton Roads)– It is clear that travelers distinguish between
efforts to improve traffic flow – i.e., general movement of traffic – versus efforts to reduce congestion
Page 61
Key Take-Aways
Potential Weaknesses– Bicycle safety and mobility
A greater issue for those who are attempting to bicycle
Has interrelated consequences for other system characteristics
– Maintenance response times A greater problem in the North where maintenance
response times directly impact congestion and traffic flow
Page 62
Key Take-Aways
There is relatively strong support for additional transportation projects– Notably for expanded / improved public
transportation services– But support is highly related to
Current satisfaction with the system The extent to which travelers feel they are getting
value for the tax dollars that are currently being expended
Virginia needs to do a better job of communicating its successes
Page 63
Key Take-Aways
Despite Virginia’s efforts, travelers still feel that transportation improvement projects are not completed on time and they cost more than budget– Moreover, the majority do not feel there has
been much in the way of improvementsVirginia needs to
– Continue is focus on better project management systems
Notably in Hampton Roads region– More widely communicate its successes
WWW.NWRG.COM
Q&A / Discussion
top related